Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 2001/05/29
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA May 29, 2001 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers Public Services Building 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista ~~f? ~ '~~~~ ........ """'-- """'--........ CllY OF CHULA VISTA City Council City Manager Patty Davis David D. Rowlands, Jr. Stephen C. Padilla City Attorney Jerry R. Rindone John M. Kaheny Mary Salas City Clerk Shirley A. Horton, Mayor Susan Bigelow ********** The City Council meets regularly on the first calendar Tuesday at 4:00 p.m. and on the second, third and fourth calendar Tuesdays at 6:00 p.m. Regular meetings may be viewed at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays on Cox Cable Channel 24 or Chula Vista Cable Channel 47 ********** AGENDA May 29, 2001 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and Mayor Horton. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY . PRESENTATION BY MARY 10 BUETTNER OF THE CHULA VISTA COORDINATING COUNCIL REGARDING SURVEY RESULTS FROM THE ADOPT-A-BLOCK SURVEY CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 through 11) The Council will enact the staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar by one motion, without discussion, unless a Councilmember, a member of the public, or City staff requests that an item be removed for discussion. lfyou 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 after Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of May 8 and May 15, 2001. Staffrecommendation: Council approve the minutes. 2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter of resignation from Jeffrey Scott, member of the Human Relations Commission. Staff recommendation: The resignation be accepted with regret and the City Clerk be directed to post the vacancy in conformance with Maddy Act requirements. 3A. REPORT REGARDING PROPOSAL TO INSTALL UNINTERRUPTIBLE POWER SUPPLY (UPS) SYSTEMS AT APPROXIMATELY 55 TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERSECTIONS B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $500,000 FROM THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL FUND TO A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT TF-293, TRAFFIC SIGNAL REVITALIZATION PROJECT (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) The San Diego Region has recently experienced rolling blackouts from energy providers, and more blackouts are expected this summer. In order to provide for the safety and welfare ofthe traveling public, the City ofChula Vista proposes to install back-up battery power supply and Light Emitting Diode (L.E.D.) traffic signal indications for vehicular and pedestrian traffic at certain critical intersections. (Director of Public Works) Staffrecommendation: Council accept the report and adopt the resolution. 4. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002 SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS FOR CITY OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS 1 THROUGH 9, 11, 15, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 31 AND 33, BAY BOULEVARD, AND TOWN CENTRE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS AND EASTLAKE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1, DECLARING THE INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS AND SETTING JUNE 19, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AND JULY 24, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AS THE DATES AND TIMES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS The City administers twenty-five open space districts established over the last thirty years. The districts provide the mechanism to finance the maintenance of common open space areas (canyons, trails, medians, etc.) associated with and benefiting from that particular development. As part of this process, a levy of an annual assessment is necessary to enable the City to collect funds for proposed open space maintenance. Adoption of this resolution will begin the process for Fiscal Year 2001/2002. The City Engineer has prepared and filed reports on assessments for all existing open space districts. The above resolution approves the reports, and sets the dates for public hearings to consider the levy of assessments and collection of funds. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002 SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS FOR CITY OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10, DECLARING THE INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS, AND SETTING JUNE 19,2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AND JULY 24, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AS THE DATES AND TIMES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS Based upon the advice of the City Attorney, agenda items five and six have been separated from agenda item four due to conflict of interest concerns. One Council member owns property subject to the proposed assessment in this district. Council should note that agenda item four gives all background information and details on open space districts in general which is applicable to this item, but does not include specific information on Open Space District 10. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. Page 2 - Council Agenda OS/29/01 6. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002 SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS FOR CITY OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 14, DECLARING THE INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS, AND SETTING JUNE 19,2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AND JULY 24, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AS THE DATES AND TIMES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS Based upon the advice of the City Attorney, agenda items five and six have been separated from agenda item four due to conflict of interest concerns. One Council member owns property subject to the proposed assessment in this district. Council should note that agenda item four gives all background information and details on open space districts in general which is applicable to this item, but does not include specific information on Open Space District 14. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 7 A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A FINAL "B" MAP FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 96-04, OTAY RANCH SPA ONE, VILLAGE 5, NEIGHBORHOOD R-25; ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THE ASSIGNABLE AND IRREVOCABLE GENERAL UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT AND THE WALL EASEMENT GRANTED ON SAID MAP; APPROVING A "B" MAP SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT; AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR VILLAGE 5, NEIGHBORHOOD R-25 OF THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT Adoption of the resolutions will approve the Final "B" Map for Neighborhood R-25 of Otay Ranch Village 5 (CVT 96-04) and associated agreements. Continental Residential, Inc. is the current owner and developer of this property. On April 20, 1999, Council approved the agreement for financing and construction of Olympic Parkway and related roadway improvements. The approval of the subject final map complies with the development thresholds established by the Olympic Parkway agreement. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions. 8. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RATIFYING CITY STAFF'S ACTION ON THE CHANGE ORDERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS FACILITY AND CORPORATION YARD, AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PROCESS UP TO AN ADDITIONAL $250,000 FOR CHANGE ORDERS Page 3 - Council Agenda OS/29/01 On September 26, 2000, Council amended Policy No. 574-01, authorizing the City Manager to approve all change orders pertaining to the corporation yard project with a single change order value not exceeding $50,000, and a cumulative value of up to $250,000. The policy permits the City Manager to exceed the limits if delay of the approval would cause a delay in the "critical path" schedule of the project. Adoption of this resolution will ratify staff's recent approval of emergency change orders associated with the construction of the Corporation Yard project, valued at $386,236, and will authorize staff to process up to an additional $250,000 in change orders, in accordance with the policy and subsequent amendments. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 9. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REJECTING BIDS, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH TRANS CORE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM - PHASE II (CIP-TF237), AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT The City has received State approval to utilize federal funds under the Federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, Congestion Mitigation Air Quality program in order to upgrade the City's traffic control system to a state-of-the-art flexible timing adaptive traffic control system. On June 19, 1999, City staff proceeded with advertising for the implementation of the adaptive system for competitive bidding, and on August 11, 1999, staff received sealed bids from two electrical contractors. The first bid was very high and the second bid was non-responsive; therefore, staff recommended the rejection of the two bids and the re-advertisement for proposals, and on March 25, 2000, staff proceeded with the advertisement of Requests For Proposals to implement the adaptive system. On May 24, 2000, City staff received proposals from three firms to develop and implement the adaptive system. The firms were Transcore, Bi Tran Systems, Inc. and P.B. Farradyne. (Director of Public Works) Staffrecommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 10. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2000/2001 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $239,000 TO ADMINISTRATION FOR RECYCLING AND CONSERVATION EDUCATION PROGRAMS, BASED ON UNANTICIPATED REVENUES (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) The Solid Waste Disposal and Recycling agreement between the City and Pacific Waste Services establishes a plan to share any potential net revenue from the sale of recyclables. Pacific Waste Services recently sent the City a check for approximately $239,000 as its share of the recyclables for calendar year 2000. (Special Operations Manager) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 11. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AWARDING A RECORDS DIGITIZATION SERVICES CONTRACT TO WESTERN MICROGRAPHICS SYSTEMS, INc. AS THE LOWEST TOTAL BID FOR REQUESTED SERVICES Page 4 - Council Agenda OS/29/01 In April 1999, the City Clerk's Office received approval to begin a migration of the City's records archiving to a digital database, accessible by Laserfiche software. Until this conversion began, the Department of Planning and Building archived records as rolled plans, boxed paper, microfilm, microfiche, and aperture cards. The requested digitization services will assist this department, and any other City departments, in archiving permanent City records in one medium, in a format compatible with City Clerk records retention standards. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons speaking during Oral Communications 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 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. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. 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. 12. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY ORDINANCES 1670, 2507, AND 2509; AND AMENDING CHAPTERS X (BUILDING AND HOUSING), XIV (PLANNING), AND XV (FIRE) OF THE CITY'S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE On April 17, 2001, Ordinance 2832, amending the City's Master Fee Schedule was adopted by Council to take effect 60 days thereafter. On April 3, 2001, Council adopted Urgency Ordinance 2831-A, the first in a series of three 30-day urgency ordinances necessary for immediate implementation of those categories of fees proposed for overall reduction. This urgency ordinance will continue the fee changes imposed by Urgency Ordinance 2831-A for an additional 30 days. The fee changes proposed in this urgency ordinance are identical to those previously adopted. These fee changes are supported by both the Building Industry Association and the Board of Appeals and Advisors. (Director of Planning and BuildinglDirector of Budget and Analysis) Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the following ordinance: URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VSTA AMENDING ORDINANCE 1670 RELATING TO SIGN PERMIT AND PLAN REVIEW FEES; AND AMENDING ORDINANCES 2507 AND 2509 RELATING TO PLAN REVIEW FEES FOR BUILDING AND MECHANICAL WORK RESPECTNEL Y; AND AMENDING CHAPTERS X (BUILDING AND HOUSING), XIV (PLANNING), AND XV (FIRE) OF THE CITY'S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) Page 5 - Council Agenda OS/29/0 I BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 13. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION EXTENDING AN INVITATION TO CEBU CITY, PHILIPPINES TO BECOME A SISTER CITY Chula Vista and other communities in the United States have been requested by Sister Cities International to affiliate with cities in other nations of similar characteristics and mutual interest. The City of Chula Vista through its Council, does recognize and endorse this program with the hope that it will lead to a lasting friendship between the people of Chula Vista and Cebu City, Philippines. (Fire Chief) International Friendship Commission recommendation: Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXTENDING AN INVITATION TO CEBU CITY, PHILIPPINES TO BECOME A SISTER CITY ACTION ITEMS The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussion and deliberation by the Council, staff, or members of the public. The items will be considered individually by the Council, and staff recommendations may, in certain cases, be presented in the alternative. 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. 14. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2000/2001 BUDGET FOR THE PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO APPROPRIATE $157,500 FROM THE AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND FOR TRANSIT PLANNING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE At its April 26, 2001 Budget Workshop, the Metropolitan Transit Development Board of Directors (MTDB) endorsed a Fiscal Year 2002 work program that would include a long- range transit program and a short to mid-range transit program for the South San Diego Bay area, including the City of Chula Vista. The funding plan for this effort includes a partnership between the MTDB and the City to promote integrated transit and land use planning through joint efforts and shared resources. In addition, this request includes funds that would be used for the City to secure expert policy and technical advisor services in carrying out these transit programs and related efforts. (Director of Planning and Building) Staffrecommendation: Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2000/2001 BUDGET FOR THE PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO APPROPRIATE $157,500 FROM THE AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND FOR TRANSIT PLANNING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) Page 6 - Council Agenda OS/29/01 15. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF A MILLS ACT PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ENTER INTO SAID MILLS ACT CONTRACTS WITH THE OWNERS OF QUALIFYING HISTORIC SITES On January 23, 2001, Council reviewed information presented by the Planning Department regarding the pros and cons of establishing a Mills Act Property Tax Abatement Program in the City of Chula Vista. Council directed staff to return with a liberal policy implementing a program which would encourage owners of historic properties to be eligible for Mills Act contracts. (Director of Planning and Building) Staffrecommendation: Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING A COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF A MILLS ACT PROPERTY TAX AGREEMENT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ENTER INTO SAID MILLS ACT CONTRACTS WITH THE OWNERS OF QUALIFYING HISTORIC SITES 16. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF AN URGENCY ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AS A MUNICIPAL UTILITY AND A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN At the April 24, 2001 City Council meeting, (following the April 17 Council Workshop), staff presented a report summarizing the findings and recommendations for a City Energy Strategy and Action Plan ("Strategy"). The findings and recommendations were based upon staff analysis of an energy management options report prepared by the City's consultant, MRW and Associates. Council accepted the report and directed staff to return with the implementing resolution adopting the Strategy. One major staff recommendation which emerged as part of the overall energy strategy was for the City to take the initial steps necessary to more specifically assess the costs and benefits of forming and operating as a municipal utility. The first initial step in this process is to present for Council consideration an ordinance establishing the City as a municipal utility. (Director of Community Development) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the following resolution and urgency ordinance, and place the ordinance on first reading: A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN B. URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AS A MUNICIPAL UTILITY (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) C. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AS A MUNICIPAL UTILITY Page 7 - Council Agenda OS/29/01 17. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPOINT AN AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE CIVILIAN REVIEW COMPONENT OF THE COMMUNITY RIGHTS AND ENHANCEMENT PLAN FOR CHULA VISTA At the April 17, 2001 Council meeting, Mr. Virgil Pina proposed a Community Rights and Enhancement Program for Chula Vista. The program was referred to staff for review and analysis. (City Manager/City Attorney/Chief of PolicelDirector of Human Resources) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPOINT AN AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE CIVILIAN REVIEW COMPONENT OF THE COMMUNITY RIGHTS AND ENHANCEMENT PLAN FOR CHULA VISTA ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR OTHER BUSINESS 18. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS A. Scheduling of meetings. 19. MAYOR'S REPORTS A. Ratification of appointment to the Commission on Aging - Steve Palma. B. Ratification of appointment to the Board of Ethics - Rudy Ramirez. 20. COUNCIL COMMENTS CLOSED SESSION 21. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) . Tuchscher Development Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Chula Vista (case no. GIC 758620) . Hanson Aggregates Pacific Southwest, Inc. v. Clancy Constructors (case no. GIS 006205) . Loretz v. City ofChula Vista (case no. 726517) Page 8 - Council Agenda OS/29/01 22. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING INITIATION OF LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(C) . One Case ADJOURNMENT to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on May 31,2001, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, and thence to the Regular Meeting of June 5, 2001, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Page 9 - Council Agenda OS/29/01 05/09/2001 09: 03 FAX 858 715 5900 WAWANESA INS I4J 002/002 May 9, 2001 Attn: Lorraine City Clerks Office City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Ave Chula Vista CA 91910 Jeff Scott 3483 Newton Avenue San Diego CA 92113 (619) 544-1827 Dear Lorraine, Per your request I am writino;¡ to inform your office that upon expiration of my term June 30,2001 I will no longer be with the r uman Relations Commission. Secondly, I recently moved to the San Diego area, which I believe would make me ineligible to continue as a member of thH HRC anyway. Please update your records with my new address above, in case your office wishes to send me any correspondence or updates. If I move back back to the Chula Vista are" in the future, I will look into servinng the City again. My best regards and wjshe~. to the Mayor/Councii and other commission members I have enjoyed serving the city these past four years. ~ Jeffrey Scott Cc.', """""\ 4:>"'- /L<:>\Jo.~"'-' \ :I~,,-e. :5"-4\_V'<., 24 ~u~ Community Development Department INFORMATION --=- II!! - City Of Chula Vista ~-:: 276 Fourth Avenue CllY OF Chula Vista, Ca 91910 MEMO CHUIA VISTA 619.691.5047 - 619.476.531 0 Fax cvcomdev@ci.chula-vista.ca.us TO: The Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers VIA: David D. Rowlands, Jr., City Manager FROM: Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development.£]. DATE: May 29, 2001 RE: COMMUNITY ENERGY FORUM We have just received the following information from Norma Cazares, President of the South Bay Forum. The South Bay Forum, a community political action organization, will present the first Community Energy Forum on Thursday, May 31, 2001, from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Chula Vista City Council Chambers. Co-sponsors for this event include: the MAAC Project, the Mexican-American Business & Professionals Association (MABPA), the Filipino American Political Action Committee (PAPAC) and the Environmental Health Coalition. The purpose of the Community Energy Forum is to inform citizens and call the public to action on current electrical energy issues affecting families, businesses and schools in our community. Relevant speakers and elected officials will be present. A question and answer open forum will conclude the event. This is an opportunity for the community to voice concerns, ask questions and participate in grass-roots remedial action. Confirmed speakers include: Loretta Lynch, President, California Public Utilities Commission (PUG); Michael Shames, Executive Director, Utility Consumers Action Network (UCAN); Michael J. Aguirre, Attorney; and Scott Horsley, Report, KPBS-TV. Elected officials from San Diego, Chula Vista, National City and Imperial Beach, along with U.S. Congressmen and County Supervisors, have been invited to attend. For additional information, contact Rudy Ramirez at (619) 425-5434 or 575-8600. ~!~ -~- ~ OIY Of (HUlA VISTA May 29, 2001 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Michael Meacham, Special Operations Manager VIA: David D. Rowlands, J~ity Manager SUBJECT: Update- Otay Mesa Power Plant Petition by Save Our Bay Attached for your information is a letter of petition from William B. Claycomb, President of Save Our Bay Inc. Save Our Bay has previously filed as an "Intervener" in the review process for the proposed 510 megawatt. natural gas fired, power generating facility. Save Our Bay has used their standing to draw attention to their concerns regarding the Plant. Save Our Bay's primary concerns are consistent with comments staff and Council have made regarding this facility and other facilities recently proposed for the South Bay region. Staff has expressed concerns regarding the cumulalive effect of so many pollution generating fossil fuel power plants being sited in South Bay and border region and the reliance, if not dependence, by the region on fossil fuels. Staff has asked Ihe California Energy Commission if anyone has addressed the potential cumulative effects of these facilities and whether or not there has been a failure to address the potential environmental injustice of proposing so many plants in one part of the region without having a comprehensive plan for the entire region. Mr. Claycomb is a regular attendee at City Council meetings, a strong advocate for Ihe environment and a particularly strong advocate for photovoltaic (solar) power and other forms of renewable energy. Save Our Bay and Mr. Claycomb originally asked PG&E 10 provide up to $9 million dollars in funds to support the installation at City of Chula Vista facilities and has recently reduced that request to $3 million. PG&E received a great deal of positive attention for developing a creative new program that used mobile emissions credits to offset the pollution that would be generated by the new plant. Included in that mitigation was funding to assist the local cruise line and a trash collection company to convert their diesel engines to more environmentally efficient fuel sources such as "LNG," liquid natural gas. While PG&E and the participants should be applauded for their creative efforts, the vast majority of these new facilities will operate outside of the South Bay. Staff was also informed on Monday that the California Energy Commission will meet and potentially make its final finding regarding the permit tomorrow, Wednesday, May 30, 2001. Staff intends to support the intent and spirit of Save Our Bay and Mr. Claycomb's efforts unless directed otherwise by Council. Attachment 1 I k,ow '0 "fe depo.ito,y of <he "itimo" pow". of <he ood"y b"' <he peopl, <horn,,'m, ." if .. fhi,k <hem mot "ltgh"," orno"gh f' '"h, <h," oo,itol wm . . ,mo ."",Uorn. fh' "mo'y '0 rn. fok,itf"rn'homb"ffo"f"mfh," "m,Uorn. Thorn.. "ffmorn ","mb" ". "" 409 Palm Ave" Suite 100, Imperial Beach, CA 91932-1121 Tel: (6191429 7946 May 24, 2001 TO: Sharon Segner for Otay Mesa Generating Company, FAX 713 371 7215 FROM: SAVE OUR BAY, INC. by William E. Claycomb, President SUBJECT: otay Mesa Generating Project California Energy Commission DOCKET NO. 99-AFC-5, PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ENERGY COMMISSION DECISION dated May 10, 2001, by SAVE OUR BAY, INC. by William E. Claycomb, President SAVE OUR BAY INC. will withdraw subject PETITION if the Otay Mesa Generating Project will deposit a check for three million dollars ($3,000,000) with the Treasurer of the City of Chula Vista to be expended to construct photovoltaic solar collectors on rooftops in the City of Chula Vista to partially offset the detrimentral effects of global warming due to greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide) emissions by the Otay Mesa Generating Plant. ~{/ Z. (ò ~ &mJ- cc: STATE OF CALIFORNIA, State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission Attn: Roberta E. Mendonca, PUBLIC ADVISER COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT , Item ~ Meeting Date 5/29/01 ITEM TITLE: Report on proposal to install Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) Systems at approximately 55 traffic signal intersections. Resolution Appropriating $500,000 from the Traffic Signal Fund to a new CIP Project TF-293, Traffic Signal Revitalization Project. ~ SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works REVIEWED BY: City Manager ¡;) (4/5ths Vote: Yes l No ~ The San Diego Region has recently experienced rolling blackouts from energy providers, and more blackouts are expected this summer. In order to provide for the safety and welfare of the traveling public, the City of Chula Vista proposes to install back-up battery power supply and Light Emitting Diode (LED) traffic signal indications for vehicular and pedestrian traffic at certain critical intersections. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution appropriating $500,000 from the Fund to a new CIP Project TF-293, Traffic Signal Revitalization Project. BOARDS/COMMISSION: Not Applicable. DISCUSSION: Many cities in the San Diego Region have recently taken action to install UPS and LED equipment as a result of recent power outages. The City of Chula Vista now requires UPS and LED equipment as well as Video Detection and EVPE (emergency vehicle preemption equipment) on all new traffic signals. However, nearly all of our existing signals are not equipped with the UPS. The City has already converted all of the red vehicular signal indications to LED's and has a current project TF-291 to convert all of the existing green indications to LED's. Since the yellow indications are displayed for a time period of only 3 to 5 seconds, those indications have not received a high priority for replacement. However, to provide full traffic signal operation utilizing the UPS equipment during power failures, all traffic signal indications including the pedestrian modules must be LED lights in order to maximize the operating time. To provide only red flash operation during power failures, only the red lights need to be LED indications. This project proposes to have certain critical intersections with full signal operation while other locations will provide red flash operation. A map and a priority list, identifying those critical intersections, are provided with this report. Within the priority list, those traffic signals with high speed and high volume approaches and/or are located near schools will receive the highest priority for full traffic signal operation. Intersections along an arterial with minor side streets may be considered for yellow/red flash operation if safety factors, such as sight visibility, are 3 - J Page 2, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 favorable. Locations with low speed and low volumes near schools will operate at all-red flash operation. The detailed estimated cost for this project is as follows: . UPS Clary Battery Backup Units (55 Intersections @ $3,985) $219,175.00 . Amber LED (880 @ $74.50 ea.) $ 65,560.00 . Standard LED Pedestrian Modules (440 @ $166.45 ea.) $ 73,238.00 . Conversion of Programmable Signal Head (10 @ $650 ea.) $ 6,500.00 . Contract to Install (660 hours @ $501hr.) $ 33,000.00 . Tax and Handling Charges (2:1O%) $ 38,527.00 Subtotal Estimated Costs $436,000.00 . Contingencies (2:5%) $ 22,000.00 . Inspection and Administration (2:10%) $ 42,000.00 Total Estimated Costs $500,000.00 Staff anticipates the installation of UPS equipment and LED indications at approximately 55 intersections. If staff receives better bid prices than what the detailed estimate shows, then the City will be in a position to utilize the excess funds in order to convert more intersections to UPS operatJon. The City will save project administration costs by participating in another public agency's current purchasing procedures, as recommended by our Purchasing Agent. This process is allowed under Council Resolution 6132 and the Municipal Code Section 2.56.140, which authorize the Purchasing Agent to participate in cooperative bids with other governmental agenCies. The City will also be able to save costs associated with advertising the installation work for competitive bids. Per the City Charter, Section 1009, "Contracts on Public Works", if the cost of a public works project is under $50,000, but is more than the sum of $25,000, the City Council may let said contract without advertising for bids after the City Manager or their designee have secured competitive prices from interested contractors. Staff anticipates that the installation costs will not exceed $33,000; therefore, no advertising for contract to install the equipment is necessary. FISCAL IMPACT: Based on projected traffic signal fee revenues, coupled with the completion and closing of several Traffic Signal Fee funded projects with remaining available balances, funds are available within the Traffic Signal Fee Fund to accomplish this project. Future maintenance costs should be minimal and will be comprised of routine checking of battery reserves as part of the regular schedule of maintenance for the entire traffic signal. Attaclunents: I) Priority list for the critical intersections 2) Traffic signal map identifying the critical intersections 3) Project cost estimate H:IHOMElENGINEERIAGENDA IUPS-LED upgrades _ma.doc -3 ,<.\TT ACHMENT ~ TENT A TIVE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LIST FOR UPS EQUIPMENT UPGRADES (TF-293) (LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER) I) North Fourth Avenue and Brisbane Street 2) Fourth Avenue and "C" Street 3) Fourth Avenue and "D" Street 4) Fourth Avenue and "E" Street 5) Fourth Avenue and "F" Street 6) Fourth Avenue and "G" Street 7) Fourth Avenue and "H" Street 8) Fourth Avenue and "I" Street 9) Fourth Avenue and"]" Street 10) Fourth Avenue and "K" Street II) Fourth Avenue and "L" Street 12) East "H" Street and Corral Canyon RdiRutgers Avenue 13) East "H" Street and Auburn Avenue 14) East "H" Street and Otay Lakes Road 15) East "H" Street and Southwestern College North Entrance 16) East "H" Street and Buena Vista Way 17) East "H" Street and Paseo Ranchero 18) East "H" Street and Terra Del Ray 19) East "H" Street and Kmart Driveway Entrance 20) East "H" Street and Paseo Del Rey 21) East "H" Street and Del Rey Blvd. 22) East "H" Street and Terra Nova Drive 23) East "H" Street and Hidden Vista Drive 24) "H" Street and Hilltop Drive 25) "H" Street and Third Avenue 26) "H" Street and Fifth Avenue 27) "H" Street and Broadway 28) "H" Street and Woodlawn Ave 29) Telegraph Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road 30) Telegraph Canyon Road and Buena Vista Way 31) Telegraph Canyon Road and Paseo Ranchero 32) Telegraph Canyon Road and Paseo Ladera 33) Telegraph Canyon Road and Medical Center Drive 34) Telegraph Canyon Road and Paseo Del Rey 35) Telegraph Canyon Road and Crest Drive 36) Telegraph Canyon Road and Concorde Way 37) Telegraph Canyon Road and Halecrest 38) East "L" Street and Nacion Avenue 39) Otay Lakes Road and Bonita Road 40) Otay Lakes Road and Allen School Lane/Camino Elevado H: \H OME\EN G INEER \ TRAFFI C\MAJED\ TF293.DOC -3-3 TENT A TIVE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LIST FOR UPS EQUIPMENT UPGRADES (TF-293) (LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER) 41) Otay Lakes Road and Camino Del Cerro Grande 42) Otay Lakes Road and A venida Del Rey/Ridgeview Drive 43) Otay Lakes Road and Ridgeback Road/Canyon Drive 44) Otay Lakes Road and Bonita Vista High Entrance 45) Otay Lakes Road and Southwestern College East Entrance/Gotham Street 46) Bonita Road and Allen School Road 47) Bonita Road and Willow Street 48) Bonita Road and Plaza Bonita Road/Lynnwood Drive Alternate Intersections 49) Bonita Road and Bonita Glen Drive 50) "E" Street and Flower Street 51) "E" Street and Third Avenue 52) "E" Street and Broadway 53) "E" Street and Woodlawn 54) Palomar Street and Orange Avenue 55) Palomar Street and Broadway 56) Palomar Street and Trolley Shopping Center 57) Palomar Street and Murrel Drive 58) Palomar Street and Industrial Blvd. 59) Main Street and Broadway 60) Melrose and Orange 61) East "H" and EastJake Drive 62) Otay Lakes Road and EastJake Parkway 63) Eastlake Parkway and Greensgate Drive 64) Otay Lakes Road and Village Center Drive 65) Otay Lakes Road and St. Claire/Santa Paula 66) Otay Lakes Road and Rutgers Avenue 67) La Media and East Palomar Street 68) Price Club Entrance and Tierra Del Rey 69) Paseo Del Rey and Plaza Court 70) "E" Street and First Avenue 71) "E" Street and Second Avenue 72) "E" Street and Fifth Avenue 73) "F" Street and Broadway 74) "G" Street and Broadway 75) "H" Street and First Avenue 76) "H" Street and Second Avenue 77) "I" Street and Broadway 78) "J" Street and Broadway 79) "K" Street and Broadway H: \II 0 ME\ENGINEER \ TRAFFI C\MAJED\ TF293.DOC 3-Y TENTATIVE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LIST FOR UPS EQUIPMENT UPGRADES (TF-293) (LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER) Alternate Intersections 80) "L" Street and Fifth Avenue 81) Moss Street and Broadway 82) Naples Street and Broadway 83) Oxford Street and Broadway 84) Second Avenue and Palomar Street 85) Third Avenue and Palomar Street 86) Fourth Avenue and Palomar Street 87) Fifth Avenue and Palomar Street H: \H OMEIEN GINEER \ TRAFFIC\MAJED\ TF293.DOC 3-5 Petition to and, for the Council of the City of Chula Vista advising you of a probable Financial Liability caused by an accident waiting to happen. We the undersigned, mends and neighbors of The Rosebank Elementary School located at Corte Maria Ave. and Flower Street. Request the City of Chula Vista be aware of a Potential Financial Ris~ effected by a preventable future accident induced by a blind curve, upon entering or exiting E Steet onto Corte Maria Ave. Creating a daily risk for the school children and their parents carrying them to and ITom the Rosebank Elementary School, and also for the local taxpaying residents. These Risks must be addressed immediately. Name Address Citv State Zin Ph# l u ~ I. 2. 3. 4. S. ) r / / 1 '-- L (¡r/ 0-1(/ 6. 7. ' 8. /--fA . <; ,;2/0:::¿ 9. ~~a-f-ur¡ ::5 1°. l7 11. 12. \3. 14. IS. 16. 17. 18. 19. 2O. 21. 22. 23 24. 25. --~,. An ACHMENi.~ ~ 37Y:JS ON .. ~ -----===I-ll-=-- ~ ~ ,.. ,.. t-- ,... ~ ¡;¡. ;;La? D- D- D-3 f:"'3 ~<1 <1: f-,- (f) > >-- f- U .~ '" ~ ~ '" ~ s'~,'" 0 ~ '" 'iJ, i """", 0 ~"""~o%~ '" '" '" "'" '" " '" ~ 0 3--l"~ ATTACHMEN1 .~ ENGINEERING ESTIMA TE PREPARED BY: JCM CHECKED BY: MA FILE NUMBER: TF-293 SHEET 1 OF 1 PROJECT: FY 01/02 TRAFFIC SIGNAL REVITALIZATION PROJECT ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE NO. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL U~~. ~~,B""p UP". (M'"'~'M)~"- j...'~......... ,,~oo~' ',"500 2 Amber LEDs (approx. 16/intersection) 880 - I each I $74.50 $65,560.00 ~ ~;;;l~~:~~~~)=~-i];::: ~~=~:¡!:¡!~ 6 Tax and Handling Charges (+/- 10%) - - -n- --!- _lurllP sum -- $38,527.00 $38,527.00 - -- -_u- -- -- - -- --I ---- J~~~;~~:L':""~'== i -=- ; .=--nf::: TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $500,000.00 3-7 RESOLUTION NO. 2001- - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $500,000 FROM THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL FUND TO A NEW CIP PROJECT TF-293, TRAFFIC SIGNAL REVIT ALIZA TION PROJECT WHEREAS, the San Diego Region has recently experienced rolling blackouts from energy providers, and more blackouts are expected this summer; and WHEREAS, in order to provide for the safety and welfare of the traveling public, the City of Chula Vista proposes to install back-up battery power supply and Light Emitting Diode (L.E.D.) traffic signal indications for vehicular and pedestrian traffic at certain critical intersections; and WHEREAS, the detailed estimated cost for this project is as follows: . UPS Clary Battery Backup Units (55 Intersections @ $3,985) $219,175.00 . Amber L.E.D. (880 @ $74.50 ea.) $ 65,560.00 . Standard L.E.D. Pedestrian Modules (440 @ $166.45 ea.) $ 73,238.00 . Conversion of Programmable Signal Head (10 @ $650 ea.) $ 6,500.00 . Contract to Install (660 hours @ $50/hr.) $ 33,000.00 . Tax and Handling Charges (:+:10%) $ 38,527.00 Subtotal Estimated Costs $436,000.00 . Contingencies (:+:5%) $ 22,000.00 . Inspection and Administration (:+:10%) $ 42,000.00 Total Estimated Costs $500,000.00 WHEREAS, staff anticipates the installation of UPS equipment and L.E.D. indications at approximately 55 intersections and if a better bid price is received, the City will be in a position to utilize the excess funds in order to convert more intersections to UPS operation. WHEREAS, the City will save project administration costs by participating in another public agency's current purchasing procedures, as recommended by our Purchasing Agent, and allowed under Council Resolution 6132 and the Municipal Code Section 2.56.140, which authorize the Purchasing Agent to participate in cooperative bids with other governmental agencies; and WHEREAS, the City will also be able to save costs associated with advertising the installation work for competitive bids and anticipates that the installation costs will not exceed $33,000; therefore, no advertising for contract to install the equipment is necessary. :3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby appropriate $500,000 from the Traffic Signal Fund to a new CIP Project TF- 293, Traffic Signal Revitalization Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to solicit informal bids for the installation of the UPS equipment and L.E.D signal indications. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works J\attnmcy'mo\Tmflic Signal Revitalization 3 2 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date 5/29/01 ITEM TITLE: Resolution approving the Engineer's Reports fort\1e FY 2001/2002 spread of assessments for Open Space Districts 1 through 9,11,15,17,18,20,23,24,26, 3 I and 33, Bay Boulevard and Town Centre Maintenance Districts and Eastlake Maintenance District No.1, declaring the intention to levy ¡md collect assessments and setting June 19,2001 at 6:00p.m. and July 24, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. as the dates and times for public hearings re~ t\1ese assessments. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works REVIEWED BY: City Manager ({¡) (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No~ The City administers 25 Open Space Districts established over the last thirty years. The Districts provide the mechanism to finance the maintenance of common Open Space areas (canyons, trails, medians, etc.) associated with and benefiting from that particular development. As part of this process, a levy of an annual assessment is necessary to enable the City to collect funds for proposed Open Space maintenance. Tonight's action begins the process for FY 200112002. The City Engineer has prepared and filed reports on assessments for all existing Open Space Districts. The above resolution approves the reports and sets the dates for public hearings to consider the levy of assessments and collection of funds. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: I) Adopt the resolution approving the reports, directing the City Clerk to publish the Resolutions of Intention pursuant to Government Code 6063, and setting the dates of the public hearings on the assessments for June 19,2001 at 6:00 p.m. and July 24,2001 at 6:00 p.m.; and 2) Direct staff to notice the property owners pursuant to State Codes. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A DISCUSSION: This agenda statement is the yearly resolution of intention to assess property owners for Open Space maintenance within the City. Table 1 contains the names and locations ofthe Districts. Table 2 relates the present year's assessment to the proposed assessment and collectible for FY 2001/2002. Following Table 2, there is general information that applies to all Districts. Each District is then analyzed individually. That is followed by a description of the noticing that is required. As a final note, Council should be advised that two individual agenda items contain the same information on Open Space Districts 10 and 14, which were separated from this agenda item due to conflict of interest concerns relating to two Council Members. if - / Page 2, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 Background Pursuant to Article 4, Chapter I, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, also known as the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" and the City ofChula Vista Municipal Code, Chapter 17.07--Open Space Districts, the City Engineer has prepared and filed annual reports for all existing Open Space Districts. The name and location of each Open Space District is shown in the following table. TABLE 1 Open Space Districts Within the City of Chula Vista OSD# Name Location I EI Rancho del Rev Units 1-4 Between East H SI. & Telegraph Canvon Rd., East of Pas eo Ranchero 2 Lark Haven South and East ofLoma Verde Park 3 Rancho Robinhood Units I & 2 South of Allen School Lane 4 Bonita Rid.e Camino Elevado 5 Southbav Villas North end of Crest Dr. 6 HilltoD Vista Camino Vista Rd. 7 Zenith Units 2, 3, and 4 North & South of Palomar, East ofl-805 8 Rancho Robinhood Unit 3 Surrey Dr. 9 EI Rancho del Rev Paseo del Rev, North of Telegraph Canvon Rd. 10 EI Rancho del Rev 6, Casa del Rev West of Pas eo Ranchero, between H & J Sts. 11 Hidden Vista Villa.e East H SI., East ofl-805 14 Bonita Long Canvon North of East H SI., between Otav Lakes Rd. & Corral Canyon Rd. 15 Bonita Haciendas Canyon Dr., East of Otav Lakes Rd. 17 Bel Air Rid.e Northeast of Paseo Ladera & East J SI. 18 Rancho del Sur East end of East Nanles SI. 20 Rancho del Rev North of East H SI., West ofOtav Lakes Rd 23 Otav Rio Business Park West of Herita.e/Otav Vallev Rd., South ofOtav Rio Rd. 24 Canvon View Homes Rutgers Ave., South of East H St. 26 Park Bonita West of the intersection orE St. & Bonita Rd. 31 Telegraph Canvon Estates North ofOtav Lakes Rd., West ofSR-125 33 Broadwav Business Home Villa.e West side of Broadway, between J & K Sts. Bav Boulevard Maintenance District Bav Blvd., between E & F Sts. Town Centre Maintenance District Third Ave., between E & G Sts Eastlake Maintenance District #1 Alon. East H SI. and Otav Lakes Rd., adiacent to SR-125 These reports were prepared by the City Engineer or under his direction and are presented to Council for approval in order to proceed with public hearings set for June 19,2001 at 6:00 p.m. and July 24,2001 at 6:00 p.m. in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. The reports cover Districts listed in Table I. Staff proposes for FY 2001/2002 that the assessment be kept within that amount previously approved, increasing the FY 2000/2001 assessment by an inflation factor. In all cases, staff has set each collectible lower than the proposed assessment for each District. Per the City's Municipal Code, the inflation factor is the lesser of (a) the January to January San Diego Metropolitan Area All Urban Consumer Price Index (CPJ) published by the United States Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, or (b) the change in the estimated California fourth quarter per capita personal income as contained in the Governor's budget published in January of each calendar year. Since the Bureau of Labor Statistics no longer publishes bimonthly data for San Diego, we compared the CPI for the second half of 1999 to the second half of 2000. This CPI increase was 6.8%. The change in the estimated California fourth quarter personal income was Lf-2 Page 3, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 6.98%. Therefore, staff used the All Urban Consumer Price Index (CPr) increase, which was the lesser of the two figures. Assessment increases equal to or less than the CPI are not subject to majority protest. Only assessment increases over the CPI are subject to majority protest. These increases are also exempt from the provisions of Proposition 218. Assessments & Collectibles Ordinance 263 I also made the distinction between the assessment and the amount the City may collect against that assessment (collectible). The assessments for FY 2001/2002 are proposed at FY 2000/2001 amounts increased by the inflation factor (CPI) pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.07.035. The collectibles, on the other hand, are equal to or less than the proposed assessments based on the budget, reserve requirement, savings and fund balances, including interest earnings and prior years' savings. Under staff's recommendation, none ofthe increases on the Open Space Districts are subject to a majority protest. The proposed assessments and collectibles for FY 2001/2002 are as follows: TABLE 2 Prior FY'S vs. FY 2001/2002 Assessment/Collectible FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01102 FY 01/02 OSD#/Zone AssmntJ Collection! AssmntJ FY 00/01 AssmntJ Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU As8m! +CPI(2) EDU EDU I $93.86 $47.00 $96.25 $102.80 $102.80 $102.00 $67,503 2 43.55 35.00 44.66 47.70 47.70 47.00 11,703 3 298.10 288.00 305.67 326.46 326.46 291.00 36,957 4 314.86 235.00 322.86 344.81 344.81 236.00 49,560 5 307.04 180.00 314.84 336.25 336.25 216.00 26,352 6 151.84 76.00 155.69 166.28 166.28 111.00 17,982 7 106.07 89.00 108.76 116.16 116.16 97.00 10,088 8 484.56 362.00 496.86 530.65 530.65 402.00 44,220 9 137.32 134.00 140.81 150.39 150.39 148.00 56,832 11 93.78 61.00 96.16 102.70 102.70 102.00 134,745 15 289.22 221.00 296.56 316.73 316.73 276.00 15,732 17 138.44 43.00 141.96 151.61 151.61 38.00 1,748 18 327.14 223.00 335.45 358.26 358.26 264.00 114,840 20 (Zones are below) - Zone I DB 50.56 0.00 51.84 55.37 55.37 16.92 (3) Zone 2 RC 3.84 3.93 3.94 4.21 4.21 4.15 (3) Zone3H 5.47 4.27 5.61 5.99 5.99 4.35 (3) Zone 4 BC 20.37 20.84 20.88 22.30 22.30 20.59 (3) Zone 5 I 307.21 310.59 315.00 336.42 336.42 310.32 (3) Zone 6 II 236.04 134.29 242.03 258.49 258.49 153.78 3 Zone 7 III 145.70 149.36 149.40 159.56 159.56 149.10 (3) Zone 8 NDB 33.59 0.00 34.44 36.78 36.78 36.78 (3) Zone 9 TCC 26.68 13.23 27.35 29.21 29.21 29.19 (3) 23 374.03 94.00 383.53 409.61 409.61 175.00 15,605 24 560.49 448.00 574.72 613.80 613.80 519.00 20,760 26 439.90 229.00 451.07 481.74 481.74 411.00 7,809 31 454.41 1.00 465.95 497.63 497.63 374.00 129,030 33 1,123.03 0.00 1,151.55 1,229.86 1,229.86 0.00 0 Lf-;] Page 4, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01102 FY 01102 FY 01102 OSD#/Zone AssmntJ Collection! AssmntJ FY 00/01 AssmntJ Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmt +Cp¡(2' EDU EDU Bav Boulevard") 815.33 845.07 845.07 902.53 902.53 773.71 4,944 Town Centre(S) 0.095222 0.034804 0.098688 0.105399 0.105399 0.082934 42,513 ELMO #1 (Zones are below) - - - - - Zone A Eastlake ¡ 10.40 10.28 10.67 11.40 11.40 4.03 '0) Zone B Greens 17.01 8.40 17.44 18.63 18.63 5.18 (0) Zone C OTC 140.90 1.35 144.47 154.29 154.29 1.39 (6, Zone D Salt Creek 187.91 176.97 192.68 205.78 205.78 70.39 (6) Zone E TC Channel 26.79 0.00 27.47 29.34 29.34 27.08 (6) "'Represented average residential assessment in SPA I. (2Jpy 2001/2002 assessment maybe set at or below this cap without being subject to a majority protest. (3~evenue for all zones included in overall District 20 amount. ("Bay Boulevard rates based on acreage for FY 1999/2000, 2000/2001 and 200112002. (S'Town Centre rates based on lot square footage for FY 1999/2000, 2000/2001 and 2001/2002. (6)Revenue for all zones included in overall Eastlake Maintenance District amount. In general, most budgets have increased due to adjustments in utilities and contract services. The increase in water is due to projected rate increases and the increase in contract services is due to a CPI clause on contracts. Savings from prior years are proposed to be used to supplement the property owners collections to provide the revenue needed for FY 2001/2002 maintenance while retaining reserves between 50%-65% (City Code allows reserves between 50%-100%). Staff typically does not retain reserves above 65% in consideration of property owners' requests to return as much excess funds as practical. However, where maintaining a 65% reserve could result in future steep rate increases and/or the need to ballot property owners for an increase in the assessment amount (i.e., the budget is higher than the collectible), staff recommends maintaining a higher reserve. For those Districts where the reserve still exceeds 50-65%, staff recommends using the savings to offset some ofthe assessments to give lower collectibles. This practice should help avoid reserves in excess of 100% in future years, thereby avoiding processing refund checks. Staff generally tries to keep the assessments within the CPI amount allowed by the Municipal Code each year. The following summarizes the major changes for each District. Pursuant to the ordinance, staffhas made a distinction between the assessment and collectible amount; the assessment, estimated cost and collection will become the same number whenever an increase in assessment is necessary. The proposed assessment per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) for FY 2001/2002 represents, in all cases, the prior year's assessment with an inflation factor of 6.8%. The assessment per EDU is the figure to be mailed to the property owners and the collectible is the amount to be collected, which is affected by reserves, savings, etc. The collectible per EDU reflects impacts of reserve requirements, ending fund balances and savings. For a detailed outline, see Attachment B. FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01102 FY 01/02 OSDI AssmntJ Collection! AssmntJ FY 00/01 Assmntl Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CP¡ EDU EDU El Rancho del Rey Units 1-4 $93.86 $47.00 $96.25 $102.80 $102.80 $102.00 $67,503 Lf-Lf Page 5, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 200012001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $1 02.00 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU), which is less than the assessment of$1O2.80 per EDU. The budget for this district is $81.38 per EDU. The reserve under this recommendation will be 50%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $8,708 for staff services from the Open Space District Fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis ora net assessment of$67,330 and a total of661.79 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 OSD2 Assmnt/ Collection! Assmnt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt/ Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Lark Haven $43.55 $35.00 $44.66 $47.70 $47.70 $47.00 $11,703 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of$47.00 per EDU, which is less than tI1e assessment of$47.70 per EDU. Since the budget per EDU of$47.92 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 65%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $2,352 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of$1 1,622 and a total of249.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. Because the budget exceeds the proposed assessment, Public Works (including Open Space staff) will review the District's budget and reserve in future years in an attempt to lower the budget and determine whether there are additional savings. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 OSD3 Assmnt/ Collection! Assmnt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt! Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Rancho Robinhood Units I & 2 $298.10 $288.00 $305.67 $326.46 $326.46 $291.00 $36,957 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 200012001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of$291.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$326.46 per EDu. Since the budget per EDU of$346.85 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting tI1e reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 97%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $7,221 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of$36,935 and a total of 127.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. Because the budget exceeds the proposed assessment, Public Works (including Open Space staff) will review the District's budget and reserve in future years in an attempt to lower the budget and determine whether there are additional savings. Lf-fÇ; Page 6, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01102 FY 01102 FY 01/02 OSD4 Assmnt/ Collection! Assmnt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt/ Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Bonita Rjdge $314.86 $235.00 $322.86 $344.81 $344.81 $236.00 $49,560 Staffrecommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of 6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $236.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$344.81 perEDD. Since the budget per EDU of $304.61 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 69%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $ I 0,24 I for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of $49,630 and a total of210.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01102 FY 01102 OSD5 Assmnt/ Collection! Assmnt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt/ Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Southbay Villas $307.04 $180.00 $314.84 $336.25 $336.25 $216.00 $26,352 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of$216.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$336.25 per EDD. Since the budget per EDU of $279.57 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 60%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $5,714 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of$26,317 and a total of 122.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01102 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 OSD6 Assmnt/ Collection! Assmnt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt/ Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Hilltop Vista $151.84 $76.00 $155.69 $166.28 $166.28 $111.00 $17,982 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $ 111.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$166.28 per EDU. The budget for this district is $104.72 per EDU. The reserve under this recommendation will be 65%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $3,115 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of$18,016 and a total of 162.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. Lf-b Page 7, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01102 FY 01/02 FY 01102 OSD7 Assmnl! Collection! Assmnl! FY 00/01 Assmnl! Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Zenith Units 2, 3, & 4 $106.07 $89.00 $108.76 $116.16 $116.16 $97.00 $10,088 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of$97.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$116.16 per EDD. Since the budget per EDU of$1O7.80 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 75%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $2,243 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of $1 0,053 and a total of 104.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01102 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 OSD8 Assmnl! Collection! Assmnl! FY 00/01 AssmnV Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Rancho Robinhood Unit 3 $484.56 $362.00 $496.86 $530.65 $530.65 $402.00 $44,220 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase CPI of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of$402.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$530.65 per EDD. Since the budget per EDU of$435.94 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. The reserve under this recommendation will be 50%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $7,813 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of $44,1 75 and a total of 110.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01102 FY 01102 OSD9 Assmnl! Collection! Assmnl! FY 00/01 Assmnl! Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU El Rancho del Rey Units $137.32 $134.00 $140.81 $150.39 $150.39 $148.00 $56,832 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of$148.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$150.39 per EDD. Since the budget per EDU of$165.33 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 72%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $10,168 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of $56,844 and a total of384.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. Because the budget exceeds the proposed assessment, Public Works (including Open Space staff) will review the District's budget and reserve in future years in an attempt to lower the budget and determine whether there are additional savings. fJ --7 Page 8, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01102 FY 01/02 FY 01102 OSD II Assmntl Collection! Assmntl FY 00/01 Assmntl Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Hidden Vista Village $93.78 $61.00 $96.16 $102.70 $102.70 $102.00 $134,745 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $1 02.00 per EDU, which is equal to the assessment of$1O2.70 per EDD. The budget for this district is $94.75 per EDU. The reserve under this recommendation will be 38%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $19,519 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis ofa net assessment of$134,636 and a total of 1,321.03 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. Because the reserve amount for this District is less than 50%, due to a fund balance smaller than previous years ($38,094), Public Works (including Open Space staff) will review the District's budget, fund balance and reserve in future years in an attempt to adjust the budget and/or fund balance and determine whether there are additional savings. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01102 FY 01102 OSD 15 Assmntl Collection! Assmntl FY 00/01 Assmntl Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Bonita Haciendas $289.22 $221.00 $296.56 $316.73 $316.73 $276.00 $15,732 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of 6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $276.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$316.73 per EDD. Since the budget per EDU of$300.16 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 60%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $3,137 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of$15,750 and a total of 57.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01102 FY 01102 FY 01102 OSD 17 Assmntl Collection! Assmntl FY 00/01 Assmntl Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Bel Air Ridge $138.44 $43.00 $141.96 $151.61 $151.61 $38.00 $1,748 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $38.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$151.61 per EDU. Since the budget per EDU of$95.02 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 95%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $1,206 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated based on a net assessment of$I,726 and a total of 46.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. Lf-9 Page 9, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 OSD 18 Assmnt/ Collection! Assmnt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt/ Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Rancho del Sur $327.14 $223.00 $335.45 $358.26 $358.26 $264.00 $114,840 Staffrecommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of 6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $264.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$358.26 per EDU. Since the budget per EDU of$281.29 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 65%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $19,093 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis ora net assessment of$115,040 and a total of 435.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed OSD 20 FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 Rancho del Rey Assmnt/ Collection! Assmnt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt/ Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Zone 1- Desiltinv Basin $50.56 $0.00 $51.84 $55.37 $55.37 $16.92 3 Zone 2 - Rice Canvon 3.84 3.93 3.94 4.21 4.21 4.15 3 Zone3-HSt. 5.47 4.27 5.61 5.99 5.99 4.35 3 Zone 4 - Business Centre 20.37 20.84 20.88 22.30 22.30 20.59 3 Zone5-SPAI 307.21 310.59 315.00 336.42 336.42 310.32 3 Zone 6 - SPA II 236.04 134.29 242.03 258.49 258.49 153.78 ) Zone 7 - SPA III 145.70 149.36 149.40 159.56 159.56 149.10 3 Zone 8 - North Desiltin~ Basin 33.59 0.00 34.44 36.78 36.78 36.78 3 Zone 9 - Telegraph Canyon Channel 26.68 13.23 27.35 29.21 29.21 29.19 (3) (3)Revenue for all zones included in overall District 20 amount. Rancho del Rey is a phased development of three Sectional Planning Areas (SPA). SPA I is almost completely developed, SPA II and SPA ill homes are under construction. This District was established in 1989 encompassing all three areas with the understanding that the Open Space improvements would be constructed in phases. Because this is a large District and not all of the items to be maintained have a benefit to the entire District, OSD 20 is made up of several zones as indicated above. Every property within the District is in more than one zone. TABLE 3 OSD 20 Typical Combined Assessment (FY200l/2002) SPA I (Zones I or 8, 2, 3, & 5) $356 SPA 1¡¡Zones I or 8, 2, 3, & 6\ $325 SPA III (Zones 1 or 9, 3, & 7) $177 Business CentrelZones 1,2, 3, & 4\ . . Industrial (Der acre\ $1,008 . Commercial (per acre) $1,268 Staff recommends that the assessments remain the same for each zone as FY 2000/2001 plus a CPI of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. In each of these zones, staff recommends a collectible which is equal Lf-1 Page 10, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 to or below the proposed assessment. The reserves for each zone vary depending upon the budgets, reserves and amortized costs (see budget worksheet). The reserve requirement for this District is acceptable, pursuant to City Municipal Code. The General Fund will be reimbursed $162,958 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. Zone 8 was established in July 1994 for the maintenance of a desilting basin and access road located at the downstream end of the Bonita Drainage Basin. Maintenance work included replacement of the access road every eight years. The developer was required to maintain the basin for five years, after which it was assumed that the City would maintain fue basin using funds collected through this zone. Although the City has not yet accepted this facility, the road needs to be rebuilt. Staff recommends that the City charge the maximum rate in this zone in order to build up a reserve to pay for this work. During Fiscal Year 2000/2001 the Telegraph Canyon Channel was accepted for maintenance by the City after all required approvals were obtained. Maintenance costs are included in OSD 20 Zone 9, Eastlake Maintenance District No.1 Zone E, and OSD 31. Reserves accumulated in these districts for channel maintenance will be used to pay for a portion of the maintenance costs. FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01102 FY 01102 OSD 23 Assmntl Collection! Assmntl FY 00/01 Assmntl Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Olay Rio Business Park $374.03 $94.00 $383.53 $409.61 $409.61 $175.00 $15,605 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of$175.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$409.61 per EDu. The budget for this district is $152.83 per EDU. The reserve under this recommendation will be 55%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $ 2,609 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis ofa net assessment of$15,625 and a total of 89. I 7 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. Additional landscape improvements that would benefit properties in this District are being added along Otay Valley Road. Staff is preparing an Engineer's Report and separate documentation for Council approval, which would amend the District to include maintenance of these improvements starting in FY 200112002. The above rates are for previously existing improvements only. FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01102 FY 01/02 FY 01102 OSD 24 Assmntl Collection! Assmntl FY 00/01 Assmntl Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Canyon View Homes $560.49 $448.00 $574.72 $613.80 $613.80 $519.00 $20,760 Note: OSD 24 consists of 40 townhomes sharing in the cost of adjacent large, landscaped slopes. Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 200012001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of$519.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of$613.80 per EDU. Since the budget per EDU of$570.10 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available to do this 4--f[) Page 11, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under tJùs recommendation will be 50%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $4,000 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of $20,754 and a total of 40.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 OSD 26 Assmntl Collection! Assmntl FY 00/01 Assmntl Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Park Bonita $439.90 $229.00 $451.07 $481.74 $481.74 $411.00 $7,809 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of 6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $411.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of $481.74 per EDU. The budget for this district is $375.00 per EDU. The reserve under this recommendation will be 50%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $ I ,623 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of $7,800 and a total of 19.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 OSD31 Assmntl Collection! Assmntl FY 00/01 Assmntl Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Telegraph Canyon Estates $454.41 $1.00 $465.95 $497.63 $497.63 $374.00 $129,030 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $374.00 per EDU, which is less than the assessment of $497.63 per EDU. The budget for this district is $326.49 per EDu. The reserve under this recommendation will be 36%. Staff recommends increase to a minimum 50% reserve over a two-year period. The General Fund will be reimbursed $17,620 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on fue basis ora net assessment of$129,193 and a total of345.00 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. From FY 1994/1995 through FY 1999/2000, a minimal amount of improvements were turned over to the City for maintenance. For FY 1994/1995 through FY 2000/2001, the City collected a minimal amount per EDU due to an excess of available funds. However, in October 2000 a group of tennis courts was turned over to the City for maintenance. After being large enough in fue past to more than offset any expenditures, this fiscal year the fund balance has shrunk to a much smaller figure ($23,996.00). Thus, staff is requesting the collectible of$374.00 per EDU, which is needed to maintain a 50% reserve. Additionally, a portion of Telegraph Canyon Channel maintenance must be added for FY 2001/2002. FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 OSD 33 Assmntl Collection! Assmntl FY 00/01 Assmnt! Collection! Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI EDU EDU Broadway Business Home Villa2e $1,123.ü3 $0.00 $1,151.55 $1,229.86 $1,229.86 $0.00 $0 No funds collected since inception. 4 -I I Page 12, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of 6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. The budget per EDU is $0.00, therefore, staff recommends a collectible of $0.00 per EDu. The reserve under this recommendation will be 0%, since no construction is anticipated to be completed during FY 2001/2002. Community Development has requested, since FY 1996/1997, that no funds be collected because no construction has been done on this project. Staff is currently in negotiations with a new developer who plans to construct a multi-use multiple family and commercial development in this area. Staff may recommend collecting revenue for FY 2002/2003 because funds may be needed to do required Open Space maintenance if construction is completed as anticipated in the summer of 2002. FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01102 FY 01/02 Assmnt/ Collection! Assmnt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt/ Collection! Revenue Bay Boulevard Acre Acre Acre Assmnt +CPI Acre Acre Maintenance District $815.336 $845.07 $845.û7 $902.53 $902.53 $773.71 $4,944 This District was reestablished in FY 1999/2000 on the basis of acreage. Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of approximately 6.8%, as permitted in the Engineer's Report for this District. Staffalso recommends a collectible of$773.71 per acre, which is less than to the assessment of $902.53 per acre. Since the budget of $2,482. 166 per acre exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up fue difference. Funds are available because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 100%. Staff recommends a 100% reserve because fue budget is more than double the assessment amount. These reserves will be needed if the fund balance decreases in future years. The General Fund will be reimbursed $9,575 for staff services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis ofa net assessment of$4,944 and a total acreage amount of6.39, as shown in Attachment B. Since the budget amount exceeds the proposed assessment staff will review the District's budget and reserve in future years in an attempt to lower the budget and to determine whether there are additional savings. There is also a possibility that a ballot process may need to be conducted next year to increase the assessment amount. FY 01102 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01102 FY 01/02 FY 01102 Assmnt/ Collection! Assmnt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt/ Collection! Revenue Town Centre So. Ft. So. Ft. So. Ft. Assmnt +CPI Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Maintenance District $0.095222 $0.034804 $0.098688 $0.105399 $0.105399 $0.082934 $42,513 This District was reestablished in FY 1999/2000 on the basis of parcel square footage. Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of approximately 6.8%, as permitted in the Engineer's Report for this District. Staff also recommends a collectible of $0.082934 per square footage, which is less than the assessment of $0.1 05399 per square footage. Since the budget of$O. I 1 per square footage exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the difference. Funds are available because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 65%. The General Fund will be reimbursed $25,896 for staff If -( 2- Page 13, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 services from the OSD fund for FY 2001/2002. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of$42,513 and a total square footage amount of512,612, as shown in Attachment B. At the request of property and business owners in this District, the City's consultant is preparing the documentation needed to establish a Property-based Business lmprovement District (PBID). It is anticipated that staff will go to Council in June with the Notice of Intent and at the end of July to hold a public hearing, tabulate the ballots and form the PBID. If the ballot initiative passes, the PBID will take over the existing maintenance district as of January 1, 2002. Since it is not known for certain whether the PBID will be approved by the property owners, it is still necessary to obtain Council approval for the existing District. FY 01102 Proposed Proposed Eastlake FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01102 FY 01102 Maintenance Assmntl Collection! Assmntl FY 00/01 Assmntl Collection! Revenue District #1 EDD EDD EDD Assmnt +CPI EDD EDD Otay Lakes Road(l) - - - - - (3) Zone A - Eastlake 1 $10.40 $10.28' $10.67 $11.40 $11.40 $4.03 (3) Zone B - Eastlake Greens 17.01 8.40 17.44 18.63 18.63 5.18 (3) Zone C - Olympic Training Center 140.90 1.35 144.47 154.29 154.29 1.39 (3) Zone D - Salt Creek I 187.91 176.97 192.68 205.78 205.78 70.39 (3) Zone E - Telegraph Canyon Channel(2) 26.79 0.00 27.47 29.34 29.34 27.08 (3) (1)All areas share in the cost of Otay Lakes Road medians and off-site parkways. {2IPortions of Eastlake I BC and Eastlake Greens are in benefit area. (3)Revenue for all zones included in overall Eastlake Maintenance District amount. Costs vary by parcel due to the various zones, land uses and attributed traffic generation factors within ELMD 1. Staff recommends that the assessment for each of the areas remain the same as FY 2000/200 I plus an increase of6.8% as set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff recommends an annual collectible, as shown in the table, which is below the assessment amount for each zone. The reserve for Zone E, which is being assessed for the first time, is at 55%. Due to a large fund balance, the rates for all other zones were substantially decreased. A 100% reserve was used for Zones A, B and D to minimize future increases. OIvmpic Training Center On December 17, 1996, City Council, by Resolution 18528, approved an agreement to allow the ARCO Olympic Training Center to continue maintenance ofWueste Road landscape improvements. Incorporated in this agreement are safeguards to ensure maintenance is performed to City standards. There are indemnity provisions for both parties for use of paths along Wueste Road. However, OTC turned over to the City maintenance of a median on Olympic Parkway. Staff recommends setting the collectible for Zone C at $1.39 per EDu. OTC is currently maintaining Wueste Road slopes through a landscape maintenance firm that performs services within the Training Center at a price lower than a typical City solicited price. Landscape maintenance firms sometimes subsidize the maintenance of high visibility areas to take advantage of publicity opportunities such sites can provide. The proposed assessment was developed on the basis of the City maintaining all Wueste Road landscape improvements. Maintenance of an infiltration basin located at Wueste Road and Olympic Parkway is also included in Zone C. According to the January 16, 1996 maintenance agreement signed by the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego, the U. S. Olympic Committee, and Eastlake, the maintenance costs of this basin would be included in Zone C after a three-year maintenance period by Eastlake and acceptance by the City. The maintenance if -/:3 Page 14, Item- Meeting Date 5/29/01 period has expired; however, Eastlake intends to. divert flows from other developments into tlùs basin. Since it would not be appropriate to have Zone C pay all maintenance costs under these circumstances, City staff has deferred acceptance of the basin until a new maintenance agreement can be executed. Notice The public hearings will be noticed pursuant to Government Code 6063 which requires that notice be published in a newspaper of general circulation (the Star-News) at least 10 days before the second public hearing. Staff will mail notice of the hearings to property owners in all Open Space Districts. The notice will inform the resident of his /her District, the current year assessment, the CPI adjustment and the proposed assessment for FY 2001/2002. Approximately 14,000 properties will receive notices. Plans, specifications, and assessment rolls are on file in the Public WorkslEngineering office. FISCAL IMPACT: Public Works (including Open Space staff), Data Processing and Finance generate staff costs associated with the Open Space program. Contractual costs ($838,565) are outlined in Attachment B. These costs are recovered thmugh the OSD collectible, causing no net fiscal impact. The total General Fund reimbursement for City staff services from the above listed OSD funds for FY 2001/2002 is estimated to be $366,153. Attachments: A District Maps B Cost Summary HIHOMElENGINEERIAGENDA 105OU.A I FYO 1-02. TOM.do, 0725-30-0$0 ()() O"'W"'~ '-I-Ii{ Rancho del Rey Open Space District No. 20 Amortized Costs ~nount Accumulated for FY: 90-91, 9'1-92, 92-93, 93-94, 94-95, 95-96, 96-97, FY 01-92 Zone Description 97-98, 98-99, 99-90, 00-0t, An~ount Work description 1 Desilting Basin $134,818.00 $0.00 Desilt[ng basin maintenance (every 5 yearn) at East H Street $33,500.00 $0.00 Stabilization structures maintenance (every 3 yearn) $3,649.00 Misce{laneous 2 Rice Canyon $0.00 $0.00 Staging Area - A.C. overlay and stripe (every 5 years) Trail area $813.00 $228.00 Staging area maintenance (30 year period) $0.00 $0.00 Miscellaneous 3 East H Street $0.00 $0.00 4 SPA 1 Phase 1 $44,022.00 $4,002.0(~ ',4onumentation replacement (30 year period) (Business Center) 5 SPA 1 Phases 2-6 $396,827.00 $34,617.0C Theme wall and monument replacement (30 year) 6 SPA 2 $0.00 7 ;SPA 3 $0.00 $0.0£ 8 3es[Iting Basin $0.00 $4,574.00 Access Road/gabion structure not yet accepted by City at Glen Abbey 9 ]'elegraph Cyn Channel $4,332.00 $0.00 Amortized amount to be used SPA 3 area) [or current maintenance $617,961.00 $43,421.00 Notes: 1. Zone 1 - $26,320 (5 yrs) & $6,700 (# yrs) for desilting basin & stabilization structures not collected beyond 5 yrs per Code; Zone 2 - $873 (5 yrs) for AC not collected. 2. Zone 2 & 3 - Amortized cost for walls not determined. 3. Zones 6 & 7 - Theme wall/monumentation to be added. 4. Zone 8 - New gabion structure and access road are to be periodically maintained. Reserves are to be accumulated prior to anticipated acceptance in FY 2002/2003. 5. Zone 9 - See TC spreadsheet for cost breakdown on channel. h:\home\engineer~agenda\OSD 20 amortized costs.xls ~/._.~./~, RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CNULA VISTA APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORTS FOR THE FY 2001/2002 SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS FOR OPEN SPACE DISTRICTS 1 THROUGH 9, 11, 15, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 31 AND 33, BAY BOULEVARD AND TOWN CENTRE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS AND EASTLAKE MAINTENAi~CE DISTRICT NO. 1, DECLARING THE INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS AND SETTING JUNE 19, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AND JULY 24, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AS THE DATES AND TIMES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, also known as "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" and Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 17.07, the City Engineer has prepared and filed the annual reports for all existing Open Space Maintenance Districts in the City; and WHEREAS, these reports were prepared by the City Engineer or under his direction and are presented to Council for approval in order to proceed with the public hearings set for June 19, 2001 and July 24, 2001 in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. The reports cover the following districts: 1. Open Space District Nos. 1 through 9, 11, 15, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 31 and 33. 2. Bay Boulevard and Town Centre Maintenance Districts and Eastlake Maintenance District No. 1. WHEREAS, the proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2001- 2002 are as follows: 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the city of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Engineer's reports for the FY 2001-2002 spread of assessments for City Open Space Districts 1 through 9, 11, 15, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 31 and 33, Bay Boulevard and Town Centre Maintenance Districts and Eastlake District No. 1, and declare its intention to levy and collect assessments. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby set June 19, 2001 and July 24, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City of Chula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California as the dates and times for the public hearings on said assessments. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to publish the Resolutions of Intention pursuant to Government Code Section 6063. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt, Director of Jo~ Kaheny, Ci¥~/=ttorney~ Public Works J: \At t orney\RESO~OSASSMEN, doc TABLE 2 Prior FY'S vs. FY 2001/2002 Assessment/Collectible FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01/02 FY 01/02 OSD#/Zone AssmntJ Collectio~]~ Assnmt/ FY 00/01 Assmnt/ Collection/ Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmt +CPI(2) EDU EDU 1 $93.86 $47.00 $96.25 $102.80 $102.80 $102.00 $67,503 2 43.55 35.00 44.66 47.70 47.70 47.00 11,703 3 298.10 288.00 305.67 326.46 326.46 291.00 36,957 4 314.86 235.00 322.86 344.81 344.81 236.00 49,560 5 307.04 180.00 314.84 336.25 336.25 216.00 26,352 6 151.84 76.00 155.69 166.28 166.28 111.00 17,982 7 106.07 89.00 108.76 116.16 116.16 97.00 10,088 8 484.56 362.00 496.86 530.65 530.65 402.00 44,220 9 137.32 134.00 140.81 150.39 150.39 148.00 56,832 11 93.78 61.00 96.16 102.70 102.70 102.00 134,745 15 289.22 221.00 296.56 316.73 316.73 276.00 15,732 17 138.44 43.00 141.96 151.61 151.61 38.00: 1,748 18 327.14 223.00 335.45 358.26 358.26 264.00 114,840 20 (Zones are below) Zone I DB 50.56 0.00 51.84 55.37 55.37 16.92 Zone 2 RC 3.84 3.93 3.94 4.21 4.21 4.15 (3: Zone 3 H 5.47 4.27 5.61 5.99 5.99 4.35 (3), Zone 4 BC 20~37: 20.84 20.88 22.30 22.30 20.59 Ill Zone 5 I 307.21 310.59 315.00 336.42 336.42 310.32 {31 Zone 6 11 236.04 134.29 242.03 258.49 258.49 153.78 Zone 7 Ill 145.70 149.36 149.40 159.56 159.56 149A0 Zone 8 NDB 33.59 0.00 34.44 36.78 36.78 36.78 Zone 9 TCC 26.68 13.23 27.35 29.21 29.21 29.19 23 374.03 94.00 383.53 409.6l 409.61 175.00 15,605 24 560.49 448.00 574.72 613.80 613.80 519~00 20,760 26 439.90 229.00 451.07 481.74 481.74 411.00 7,809 31 454.41 1.00 465.95 497.63 497.63 374.00 129,030 33 1,123.03 0.00 1,151.55 1,229.86 1,229.86 0.00 0 Bay Boulevard® 815.33 845.07 845.07 902.53 91)2.53 773.71 4,944 TownCentre® 0.095222 0.034804 0.098688 0.105399 0.105399 0.082934 42,513 ELMD #l (Zones are below) Zone A Eastlake 1 10.40 10.28 10.67 11.40 11.40 4.03 Zone B Greens 17.01 8.40 17.44 18.63 18.63 5.18 Zone C OTC 140.90 1.35 144.47 154.29 154.29 1.39 Zone D Salt Creek 187.91 176.97, 192.68 205.78 205.78 70.39 Zone E TC Channel 26.79 0.00 27.47 29.34 29.34 27.08 I~lRepresented average residential assessment in SPA 1. 2001/2002 assessment may be set at or below this cap without being subject to a majority protest. 13~Revenue for all zones included in overall District 20 amount. Boulevard rates based on acreage for FY 1999/2000, 2000/2001 and 2001/2002. (~/Town Centre rates based on lot square footage for FY 1999/2000, 2000/2001 and 2001/2002. ~'Revenue for all zones included in overall Eastlake Maintenance District amount. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~i Meeting Date 5/29/01 ITEM TITLE: Resolution approving the Engineer's Report for the FY 2001/2002 spread of assessments for Open Space District 10, declaring the intention to levy and collect assessments and setting June 19, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. and July 24, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. as the dates and times for public hearings regarding these assessments. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works~/ (~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~,fl (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No X__~) Based upon the advice of the City Attorney, agenda items and have been separated from agenda item due to conflict of interest concerns. One Council member owns property subject to the proposed assessment in this District. Council should note that agenda item gives all background information and details on Open Space Districts in general which is applicable to this item, but does not include specific information on Open Space District 10. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1) Adopt the resolution approving the Report, directing the City Clerk to publish the Resolution of Intention pursuant to Government Code 6063, setting the dates of the public heatings on the assessments for June 19, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. and July 24, 2001 at 6:00 p.m., and 2) Direct staff to notice the property owners pursuant to State Codes. DISCUSSION: This agenda item is the yearly resolution to assess for open space maintenance within Open Space District 10, located along East J Street west of Paseo Ranchero (see Attachment A). Table 1 relates the present year's assessment to the proposed assessment for Fiscal Year 2001/2002. Agenda item of tonight's agenda contains all the general information regarding Open Space Districts. TABLE 1 PRIOR FY'S VS. FY 2001/2002 ASSESSMENT/COLLECTIBLE FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY 99/00 FY00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY01/02 FY01/02 FY01/02 Open SpaceDistrict 10 AssmntY Collection/ Assmnt/ FY00/01 Assmnt/ Collection/ Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmnt +CPI(t) EDU EDU El Rancho del Rey 6 & Casa del Rey $92.67 $88.00 $95.02 $101.48 $101.48 $94.00 $61,887 (t)FY 2001/2002 assessment may be set at or below this cap without being subject to a majority protest. Staffrecommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of 6.8% as set forth in the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $94.00 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU), which is less than the assessment of $101.48 per EDU. Since the budget per EDU of $98.05 exceeds the collectible amount, staff recommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the Page 2, Item __ Meeting Date 5/29/01 difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 76%. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of $61,791 and a total of 658.37 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. Because this District was formed as a result of a 100% petition by the landowners and the assessment is not being raised above the CPI, as provided for in assessment formula, this District is exempt from the provision of Proposition 218. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff costs associated with the Open Space program are generated by Public Works (including Open Space staff), Data Processing and Finance. Contractual costs are $30,920 as shown in Attachment B. These costs are recovered through the Open Space District collectible, causing no net fiscal impact. The General Fund will be reimbursed $10,330 from the Open Space District fund for City staff services for FY 2001/2002. Attachments: A District Map B Estimate of Cost H:~}IOME~ENGINEER~AGENDA\OSD I 0A 1 FY01-02.TOM.doc 0725-30 OSD 10 .5& RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE FY 2001-2002 SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS FOR CITY OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10, DECLARING THE INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS AND SETTING JUNE 19, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AND JULY 24, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AS THE DATES AND TIMES FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, also known as "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" and Chula vista Municipal Code Chapter 17.07, the City Engineer has prepared and filed the annual reports for all existing Open Space Maintenance Districts in the City; and WHEREAS, these reports were prepared by the City Engineer or under his direction and are presented to Council for approval in order to proceed with the public hearings set for June 19 and July 24, 2001, in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. The report covers Open Space District No. 10; and WHEREAS, the proposed assessment for Fiscal Year 2001- 2002 is as follows: TABLE 1 PRIOR FY'S VS. FY 2001/2002 ASSESSMENT/COLLECTIBLE FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01 CAP: FY01/02 FY01/02 FY01/02 Assmt/ Collection/ Assmt/ FY 00/01 Assmt/ Collection/ Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmt + EDU EDU CPI/~l Open Space District No. 10 El Rancho del Rey 6 & $92.67 $88.00 $95.02 $101.48 $101.48 $94.00 $61,887 Casa del Rey :' FY 2001/2002 assessment may be set at or below this cap without being subject to a majority protest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby approve the Engineer's Report to declare its intention to levy and collect assessments for the FY 2001-2002 for the spread of assessments for City Open Space Maintenance District 10, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby set June 19, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. and July 24, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, city of Chula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula vista, California as the dates and times for the public hearings on said assessment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to publish said assessment pursuant to Government Code Section 6063. Presented by Approved as to form by JohnPublic P'worksLippitt' Director of y Kaheny, C'~ Attorney j: \at torney\osl0 . engineers report COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item · ' Meeting Date 5/29/01 ITEM TITLE: Resolution approving the Engineer's Report £or the FY 2001/2002 spread of assessments £or Open Space District 14, declaring the intention to levy and collect assessments and setting June 19, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. and July 24, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. as the dates and times for public hearings regarding these assessments. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works~/~t]~/ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No X_~ Based upon the advice of the City Attorney, agenda items and have been separated from agenda item due to conflict of interest concems. One Council member owns property subject to the proposed assessment in this District. Council should note that agenda item gives all background information and details on Open Space Districts in general which is applicable to this item, but does not include specific information on Open Space District 14. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1) Adopt the resolution approving the Report, directing the City Clerk to publish the Resolution of Intention pursuant to Government Code 6063, setting the dates of the public heatings on the assessments for June 19, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. and July 24, 2001 at 6:00 p.m., and 2) Direct staff to notice the property owners pursuant to State Codes. DISCUSSION: This agenda item is the yearly resolution to assess for open space maintenance within Open Space District 14, located along the north and south of Country Vistas Lane (see Attachment A). Table 1 relates the present year's assessment to the proposed assessment for Fiscal Year 2001/2002. Agenda item of tonight's agenda contains all the general information regarding Open Space Districts. TABLE 1 PRIOR FY'S VS. FY 2001/2002 ASSESSMENT/COLLECTIBLE FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY99/00 FY00/01 FY00/01 CAP: FY 01/02 FY 01/02 FY01/02 Open Space District 14 AssmntY Collection/Assmnt/ FY 00/01 AssnmtJ Collection/Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assrnnt +CPI(I) EDU EDU Bonita Long Canyon $301.46 $293.00 $309.11 $330.13 $330.13 $304.00 $265,501 °)FY 2001/2002 assessment may be set at or below this cap without being subject to a majority protest. Staff recommends that the assessment remain the same as FY 2000/2001 plus an increase of 6.8% as set forth in the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Staff also recommends a collectible of $304.00 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU), which is less than the assessment o£$330.13 per EDU. Since the budget per EDU of $320.40 exceeds the collectible amount, staffrecommends utilizing the fund balance to make up the Page 2, Item __ Meeting Date 5/29/01 difference. Funds are available to do this because of prior years' savings and by adjusting the reserve balance. The reserve under this recommendation will be 65%. These figures were calculated on the basis of a net assessment of $265,437 and a total of 873.36 EDU's, as shown in Attachment B. Because this District was formed as a result of a 100% petition by the landowners and the assessment is not being raised above the CPI, as provided for in assessment formula, this District is exempt fi.om the provision of Proposition 218. FISCAL IMPACT: Staffcosts associated with the Open Space program are generated by Public Works (including Open Space staff), Data Processing and Finance. Contractual costs are $115,130 as shown in Attachment B. These costs are recovered through the Open Space District collectible, causing no net fiscal impact. The General Fund will be reimbursed $42,966 fi-om the Open Space District fund for City staff services for FY 2001/2002. Attachments: A District Map B Estimate of Cost H:x, HOME~ENGINEER~AGENDA\OSD 14A 1FYO 1-02.TOM.doc 0725~30 OSD 14 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE FY 2001-2002 SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS FOR CITY OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 14, DECLARING THE INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS AND SETTING JUNE 19, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AND JULY 24, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M. AS THE DATES AND TIMES FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, also known as "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" and Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 17.07, the City Engineer has prepared and filed the annual reports for all existing Open Space Maintenance Districts in the City; and WHEREAS, these reports were prepared by the City Engineer or under his direction and are presented to Council for approval in order to proceed with the public hearings set for June 19 and July 24, 2001, in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. The report covers Open Space District No. 14; and WHEREAS, the proposed assessment for Fiscal Year 2001- 2002 is as follows: TABLE 1 PRIOR FY'S VS. FY 2001/2002 ASSESSMENT/COLLECTIBLE FY 01/02 Proposed Proposed FY99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/0l CAP: FY01/02 FY01/02 FY01/02 Assmt/ Collection/ Assmt/ FY 00/01 Assmt/ Collection/ Revenue EDU EDU EDU Assmt + EDU EDU CPIm Open Space District No. 14 Bonita Long Canyon $301.46 $293.00 $309.11 $330.13 $330.13 $304.00 $265,501 ~) FY 2001/2002 assessment may be set at or below this cap without being subject to a majority protest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Engineer's Report to declare its intention to levy and collect assessments for the FY 2001-2002 for the spread of assessments for City Open Space Maintenance District 14, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby set June 19, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. and July 24, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, City of Chula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula vista, California as the dates and times for the public hearings on said assessment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to publish said assessment pursuant to Government Code Section 6063. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt, Director of ah Public Works ~torney J: \At torney\ reso~osl4 ~engineers report 2 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Page 1, Item Meeting Date~ ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving a Final "B" Map for Chula Vista Tract No. 96-04, Otay Ranch SPA One, Village 5, Neighborhood R-25; accepting on behalf of the City of Chula Vista the assignable and irrevocable general utility and access easement and the wall easement granted on said map; approving a "B" Map Subdivision Improvement Agreement; and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement. Resolution Approving the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Village 5 Neighborhood R-25 of the Otay Ranch Project and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~/~t/ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~) (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X ) Tonight, Council will consider the approval of the Final "B" Map for Neighborhood R-25 of Otay Ranch Village 5 (CVT 96-04) and associated agreements. Continental Residential, Inc. is the current owner and developer of this property. On April 20, 1999, Council approved the "Agreement for Financing and Construction of Olympic Parkway and Related Roadway Improvements". The approval of the subject Final Map complies with the development thresholds established by the Olympic Parkway Agreement. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the following: 1) Resolution approving a Final "B" Map for Village 5 Neighborhood R-25 of the Otay Ranch Project and associated Subdivision Improvement Agreement, and 2) Resolution approving the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement Village 5 Neighborhood R-25 of the Otay Ranch Project. DISCUSSION: On November 19, 1996, by Resolution No. 18398, Council approved the tentative map for Otay Ranch, Village 1 and a portion of Village 5 (CVT 96-04). On January 23, 2001, by Resolution Nos. 2001-018, Council approved the Otay Ranch Village Five "A" Map No. 3 (Map No. 14147). The Final "A" Map created the "superblock" lot corresponding to Neighborhood R-25. Tonight, Council will consider approving the Final "B" Map and associated agreements for this map. Final Maps and Subdivision Improvement Agreements The land to be subdivided by the subject Final "B" Map is generally located south of Otay Lakes Road across from the Telegraph Canyon Estates subdivision and west of Phase 1 of Village 5. The Final "B" Map consists of the following: Page 2, Item Meeting Date: 5/29/01 Number of Single Family Number of Private Streets Total Final Map Acreage Units & Open Space 56 9 15.189 The private open space lots and the private streets will all be maintained by a Homeowner's Association· A plat and location map of the subdivision is attached herewith as Attachment 1. Staff has determined that the proposed map and associated agreements comply with all conditions of approval of the Tentative Map and recommends approval by Council. Approval of the subject map constitutes acceptance by the City of all assignable and irrevocable general access and utility easements and the wall easement granted on the map. The fees and/or cash deposits which are specific to the Final "B" Map have been collected in satisfaction of the various Tentative Map conditions of approval and Code requirements. The Developer has also executed a Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA) for the map and has provided bonds to guarantee construction of the required onsite public improvements and to guarantee the subdivision monumentation. The SIA is on file in the office of the City Clerk. The construction and bonding of all off-site street improvements serving the subject map has been addressed in the Olympic Parkway Agreement. Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement The Developer has also executed a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SSIA), · encompassing the proposed map, to satisfy Conditions I, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 27, 31, 36, 50, 52, 65, 83, 84(e), 90, 103, 104, 108, 120, 128, 130, 131, 132, 133, 136, 137, 138, 140 and 152 of Resolution No. 18398. All the conditions are addressed using typical language used in previous agreements. Staff has reviewed the SSIA and determined that it satisfies all the applicable tentative map conditions for final map approval and recommends Council approval. Environmental Review The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the Final Map and has determined that it is in substantial conformance with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) Program EIR 90-01, SPA One EIR 95-01, subsequent amended SPA One Plan EIR 97-03 and other related environmental documents and that the Final Map will not result in any new environmental effects that were not previously identified, nor would the Final "B" Map result in a substantial increase in severity in any impacts previously identified. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed agreements and has approved them as to form. The Developer's disclosure statement is attached as Attachment 2. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The Developer has paid all costs associated with the Final "B" Map and agreements. Page 3, Item Meeting Date: 5/29/01 Attachments: Attachment 1: Plat - Chula Vista Tract 96-04, Otay Ranch SPA One, Village 5, Neighborhood R-25 Attachment 2: Developer's Disclosure Statement H:\HOME\ENGINEER\LANDDEV\OTAYRNCH\A 113V5 R25-mae.doc File No. 0600-80-ORI84F 7-3 HRR-26~2001 12:12 HUNSf~£R & ~GGOC~TEG SD 858 558 4500 P.03/04 Pu~uam m Cotmcil Policy 101-01, prior to ~y station upon matters which will rcclu~C dJ~z~tiouazy action by thc Council pla,ming Commission md ell othe~ o~cia! bo~Jcs oft~c City, a ~tatement of disclost~e of ~ertain ownership or Etoanci~1 intcz'eata, pa~qmmt~, or campaig~ conm'bution$ for · City of Chula Vista election muat be iil~. Tim following information must bc disclosed: I. List the t~mnca of all pcrsons having a ~,,e~al inter~t in thc property that is thc subject of the applicatic~ er the contract, c.g_, owner, applicant, contnmtor, ~ulaco~t~actor, matcrial supplier. 2. If any person* idcntificcl pursuant to ( D abovc is e oorpora~on or paxtn~hip. 'list thc taunts ~f all individuals with · :glO00 invcstmem;in th~ business (corpor~tio~/parme~ship) ~ntity. ~y pcrst~* ideatificd ~m~suam t~ (1) above ia a'~T~on-profit org~mlz~:ion or mx~g list the nara~ of any person ~.eVing ns director of thc non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary o~ truator of the trust. Please identify cvc~ pc~on, izmlnding any ~g, ~1o~, ~ts, or ~t c~ ~u ~ ~m~ ~ ~t ~u ~f~ the Ci~ in ~i~ MAR-26-2001 12:15 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES SD 858 558 4508 P.04/04 $, }las shy pcfson' associated vd~h this con~mct had any fln~.cial d,.~lm.os -with au of/~cial~ of--die City of Chula ¥ista as it relates to this co~trae; wimi- th~ past 11 munths? Y~_ No.~_ If Yes, briefly desmlhe the natm'e of the financial interest the official** may hsvc in this contract 6. Have you made a contribution of marc than $250 within th~ past twelve (12) months to a ~ummt ~nembcrofthcChulaV/staOityCotmcil?Yes__._._No ~. IfYcs, whiahC, onncilmcrabcr'~ 7. Have you or any rocmb~r of y~ur governing board (i.c. ~tc Board of Dir~ctoxs/F_.xecutives, non-profit Board of Dilators made contributions totaling ma~c th~ $1,000 over tl~ past iota' (4) years to a curr~ member of th~ Chula Vista City Council? Yes. No x,/ If Yes, which Council member? 8. Have you provided more than $300 (or an item of ~,'quivaleut vain~) to an official** of thc Citlt of Chula Vista in the past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a sonr~ of incorrlc, money to retirealesaldcbt, giIt, loar~ct~.)¥e..,s _ No ~ IfYes, which official** and what was the nature of item provided? t 4 -S ,,, Print or ~l~/-~,,~ o f eonu, ac;tor/Al~li~ aul: * Person is del, ned as: a~ individual, film, co-pa~mership, joint venture, aasOcialion, aociat club, i~{-aicrnal organization, corporatior~ estate, trllS~ receivem, syndic-ate, any oth~ county, city, municipality, dishict, Or othc~ political s~ibdivision,.~r ~ other ~roup or combin~tiun ac-ming as a remit. ** Official includes, bllt is not limitad ora board, commission, or cornulitiec o~the City, employe~, ur staff voembcrs. H:~-I OME~NOINEEK~MIN~CONTRACT~DISCL USE.DOC TOTAL P.04 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CRULA VISTA APPROVING A FINAL "B" MAP FOR CHULA VISTA TP, ACT NO. 96-04, OTAY R3kNCH SPA ONE, VILLAGE 5, NEIGHBORHOOD R-25; ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THE ASSIGNId3LE AND IRREVOCABLE GENERAL UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT AND WALL EASEMENT GRANTED ON SAID MAP; APPROVING A ~'B" MAP SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby finds that certain map survey entitled Chula Vista TRACT No. 96-04 OTAY RANCH SPA ONE, VILLAGE 5, NEIGHBORHOOD R-25, and more particularly described as follows: Being a subdivision of Lot 2 of Chula Vista Tract 96-04 of Otay Ranch Village 5 "A" Map No. 3, as shown on Map No. 14147, in the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on February 20, 2001. Area: 15.189 Acres No. of Lots: 65 Numbered Lots: 56 Lettered Lots: 9 is made in the manner and form prescribed by law and conforms to the surrounding surveys; and that said map and subdivision of land shown thereon is hereby approved and accepted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby accepts on behalf of the public the Assignable and Irrevocable General Utility and Access Easement and the wall easement, all as shown on said map within this subdivision. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to endorse upon said map the action of said Council; that said Council has approved said subdivision map; and that the wall easement and Assignable and Irrevocable General Utility and Access Easement, as granted thereon 1 -/ and shown on said map within said subdivision, are accepted on behalf of the City of Chula Vista as herein above stated. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit said map to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Diego. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that that certain Subdivision Improvement Agreement dated the __ day of 2001, for the completion of improvements in said subdivision, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista be and is hereby authorized to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt Joh~Y~. Kaheny Director of Public Works City Attorney J: \Attorney\RESO~OtayRanchVlg5 .R-25 2 Recording Requested by CITY CLERK When Recorded, Mail to CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, Ca. 91910 No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance to a public agency of less than a fee interest for which no cash consideration has been paid or received. Declarant SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 2001, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and CONTINENTAL HOMES, INC. , 2237 Faraday Avenue, Suite 100, Carlsbad, CA 92008, hereinafter called "Subdivider" with reference to the facts set forth below, which Recitals constitute a part of this Agreement; RECITALS: WHEREAS, Subdivider is about to present to the City Council of the City of Chula Vista for approval and recordation, a final subdivision map of a proposed subdivision, to be known as OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 5 R-25, pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and in compliance with the provisions of Title 18 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision map; and WHEREAS, the Code provides that before said map is finally approved by the Council of the City of Chula Vista, Subdivider must have either installed and completed all of the public improvements and/or land development work required by the Code to be installed in subdivisions before final maps of subdivisions are approved by the Council for purpose of recording in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, or, as an alternative thereto, Subdivider shall enter into an agreement with City, secured by an approved improvement security to insure the performance of said work pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, agreeing to install and complete, free of liens at Subdivider's own expense, all of the public improvements and/or land development work required in said subdivision within a definite period of time prescribed by said Council; and WHEREAS, Subdivider is willing in consideration of the approval and recordation of said map by the Council, to enter into this agreement wherein it is provided that Subdivider will install and complete, at Subdivider's own expense, all the public improvement work required by City in connection with the proposed subdivision and will deliver to City improvement securities as approved by the City Attorney; and WHEREAS, a tentative map of said subdivision has heretofore been approved, subject to certain requirements and conditions, as contained in Resolution No. 18398, approved on the 19th day of November, 1996 ("Tentative Map Resolution"); and WHEREAS, complete plans and specifications for the construction, installation and completion of said public improvement work have been prepared and submitted to the City Engineer, as shown on Drawings Nos. 00155-01 through 00155-07, on file in the office of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, an estimate of the cost of constructing said public improvements according to said plans and specifications has been submitted and approved by the City in the amount of EIGHT HUNDRED NINETY-FIVE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($895,600.00). NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Subdivider, for itself and his successors in interest, an obligation the burden of which encumbers and runs with the land, agrees to comply with all of the terms, conditions and requirements of the Tentative Map Resolution; to do and perform or cause to be done and performed, at its own expense, without cost to City, in a good and workmanlike manner, under the direction and to the satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, all of the public improvement and/or land development work required to be done in and adjoining said subdivision, including the improvements described in the above Recitals ("Improvement Work"); and will furnish the necessary materials therefor, all in strict conformity and in accordance with the plans and specifications, which documents have heretofore been filed in the office of the City Engineer and as described in the above Recitals this reference are incorporated herein and made a part hereof. 2. It is expressly understood and agreed that all monuments have been or will be installed within thirty (30) days after the completion and acceptance of the Improvement Work, and that Subdivider has installed or will install temporary street name signs if permanent street name signs have not been installed. 3. It is expressly understood and agreed that Subdivider will cause all necessary materials to be furnished and all Improvement Work required under the provisions of this contract to be done on or before the second anniversary date of Council approval of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. 4. It is understood and agreed that Subdivider will perform said Improvement Work as set forth hereinabove, or that portion of said Improvement Work serving any buildings or structures ready for occupancy in said subdivision, prior to the issuance of any certificate of clearance for utility connections for said buildings or structures in said subdivision, and such certificate shall not be issued until the City Engineer has certified in writing the completion of said public improvements or the portion thereof serving said building or structures approved by the City; provided, however, that the improvement security shall not be required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. 5. It is expressly understood and agreed to by Subdivider that, in the performance of said Improvement Work, Subdivider will conform to and abide by all of the provisions of the ordinances of the City of Chula Vista, and the laws of the State of California applicable to said work. 6. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the city of Chula Vista, simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of FOUR HUNDRED FORTY-SEVEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($447,800.00) which security shall guarantee the faithful performance of this contract by Subdivider and is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof. 7. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the -3- City of Chula Vista simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of FOUR HUNDRED FORTY-SEVEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($447,800.00) to secure the payment of material and labor in connection with the installation of said public improvements, which security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof and the bond amounts as contained in Exhibit "B", and made a part hereof. 8. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the City of Chula vista, simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of THIRTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($13,000.00) to secure the installation of monuments, which security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "C" and made a part hereof. 9. It is further agreed that if the Improvement Work is not completed within the time agreed herein, the sums provided by said improvement securities may be used by City for the completion of the Improvement Work within said subdivision in accordance with such specifications herein contained or referred, or at the option of the City, as are approved by the City Council at the time of engaging the work to be performed. Upon certification of completion by the City Engineer and acceptance of said work by City, and after certification by the Director of Finance that all costs hereof are fully paid, the whole amount, or any part thereof not required for payment thereof, may be released to Subdivider or its successors in interest, pursuant to the terms of the improvement security. Subdivider agrees to pay to the City any difference between the total costs incurred to perform the work, including design and administration of construction (including a reasonable allocation of overhead), and any proceeds from the improvement security. 10. It is also expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto that in no case will the City of Chula Vista, or any department, board or officer thereof, be liable for any portion of the costs and expenses of the work aforesaid, nor shall any officer, his sureties or bondsmen, be liable for the payment of any sum or sums for said work or any materials furnished therefor, except to the limits established by the approved improvement security in accordance with the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the provisions of Title 18 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. -4- 11. It is further understood and agreed by Subdivider that any engineering costs (including plan checking, inspection, materials furnished and other incidental expenses) incurred by City in connection with the approval of the Improvement Work plans and installation of Improvement Work hereinabove provided for, and the cost of street signs and street trees as required by City and approved by the City Engineer shall be paid by Subdivider, and that Subdivider shall deposit, prior to recordation of the Final Map, with City a sum of money sufficient to cover said cost. 12. It is understood and agreed that until such time as all Improvement Work is fully completed and accepted by City, Subdivider will be responsible for the care, maintenance of, and any damage to, the streets, alleys, easements, water and sewer lines within the proposed subdivision. It is further understood and agreed that Subdivider shall guarantee all public improvements for a period of one year from date of final acceptance and correct any and all defects or deficiencies arising during said period as a result of the acts or omission of Subdivider, its agents or employees in the performance of this agreement, and that upon acceptance of the work by City, Subdivider shall grant to City, by appropriate conveyance, the public improvements constructed pursuant to this agreement; provided, however, that said acceptance shall not constitute a waiver of defects by City as set forth hereinabove. 13. It is understood and agreed that City, as indemnitee, or any officer or employee thereof, shall not be liable for any injury to person or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to this agreement. Subdivider further agrees to protect and hold the City, its officers and employees, harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of or arising out of acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to this agreement; provided, however, that the approved improvement security shall not be required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such indemnification and agreement to hold harmless shall extend to damages to adjacent or downstream properties or the taking of property from owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as a result of the construction of said subdivision and the public improvements as provided herein. It shall also extend to damages resulting from diversion of waters, change in the volume of flow, modification of the velocity of the water, erosion or siltation, or the modification of the point of discharge as the result of the construction and maintenance of drainage systems. The approval of plans providing for any or all of these conditions shall not constitute the assumption by City of any responsibility for such damage or taking, nor shall City, by said approval, be an insurer or surety for the construction of the subdivision pursuant to said approved improvement plans. The provisions of this paragraph shall become effective upon the execution of this agreement and shall remain in full force and effect for ten (10) years following the acceptance by the City of the improvements. 14. Subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning a subdivision, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the State of California. 15. Assignability. Upon request of the Subdivider, any or all on-site duties and obligations set forth herein may be assigned to Subdivider's successor in interest if the City Manager in his/her sole discretion determines that such an assignment will not adversely affect the City's interest. The City Manager in his/her sole discretion may, if such assignment is requested, permit a substitution of securities by the successor in interest in place and stead of the original securities described herein so long as such substituted securities meet the criteria for security as set forth elsewhere in this Agreement. Such assignment will be in a form approved by the City Attorney. -6- SIGNATURE PAGE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT OTAY P~AINCH VILLAGE 5 R-25 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set forth. THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONTINENTAL HOMES, INC. Mayor of the City of Chula ~r~ vista -- ' .~/,&/l~o~ ~l'~ ATTEST City Clerk Approved as to form by torney ~/ (Attach Notary Acknowledgment) -7- State of California ) ) SS. County of San Diego ) On April 25, 2001 before me, Toni Carter, Notary Public, personally appeared Greg Hastings, of Continental Residential, Inc., personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit "A" Improvement Security - Faithful Performance Form: Bond Amount: $447,800.00 Exhibit "B" Improvement Security - Material and Labor: Form: Bond Amount: $447,800.00 Exhibit "C" Improvement Security - Monuments: Form: Bond Amount: $13,000.00 Securities approved as to form and amount by ' ~ ~ J (J City Attorney~' Improvement Completion Date: Two (2) years from date of City Council approval of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. H: ~home~ at t orney~ sia ~ORV5R 25 -8- RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR VILLAGE 5, NEIGHBORHOOD R-25 OF THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the developer has executed a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement to satisfy remaining conditions of City Council Resolution No. 18398. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Village 5, Neighborhood R-25 of Chula Vista Tract No. 96-04, Otay Ranch SPA One, 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 to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City of Chula Vista. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt {'2~'~;~p~ ~ ~/ d~'~ ~h~n~. ~K~ahleny ~ ~/~ Director of Public Works City Attorney [j:/~A~FORNEY~RESO\ssia OR R-25 (May 16,200~ (1:23PM)] RECORDiNG REQUEST BY: ) ) City Clerk ) ) WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: ) ) CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) 276 Fourth Avenue ) ChulaVista, CA 91910 ) ) No transfer tax is due as this is a ) conveyance to a public agency of ) less than a fee interest for which ) no cash consideration has been paid ) or received. ) ) ) ) Developer ) Above Space for Recorders Use VILLAGE 5 NEIGHBORHOOD R-25 OF THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT (Conditions 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 27, 31,36, 50, 52, 65, 83, 84(e), 90, 103, 104, 108, 120, 128, 130, 131,132, 133,136, 137, 138, 140 and 152 of Resolution No. 18398 and Conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 27, 31, 36, 50, 52, 65, 83, 84(e), 90, 103, 104, 108, 119, 127, 129, 130, 131,132, 135,136, 137, 139 and 151 of Resolution No. 18613) This Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("Agreement") is made this day of _, 2001, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, California ("City" or "Grantee" for recording purposes only) and OTAY PROJECT, L.P., a California limited partnership and CONTINENTAL RESIDENTIAL INC., a California corporation, (collectively referred hereafter as "Developer" or "Grantor"), with reference to the facts set forth below, which recitals constitute a part of this Agreement: RECITALS A. This Agreement concerns and affects certain real property located in Chula Vista, California, more particularly described on Attachment "A" and attached hereto and incorporated H:\HOME\ENGINEER\LANDDEV\0TAYRNC~SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme doc heroin ("Property"). The Property is part of a project commonly known as Village 5 of the Otay Ranch Project. For purposes of this Agreement the term "Project" shall also mean "Property". B. Developer has requested a final map for Neighborhood R-25 and is described on · Attachment "A" and shown on Attachment "A-1" hereto. City is willing, on the premises, security, terms and conditions herein contained to approve the final map for which Developer has applied as being in substantial conformance with the Tentative Subdivision Map described in this Agreement. Developer understands that subsequent final maps may be subject to the same or other security, terms and conditions contained herein. C. Developer and/or Developer's predecessor in interest has applied for and the City has approved a Tentative Subdivision Map commonly referred to as Chula Vista Tract 96-04 ("Tentative Subdivision Map") for the subdivision of the Property. D. TheCityhasadoptedResolutionNos. 18398and 18613 ("Resolutions")pursuantto which it has approved the Tentative Subdivision Map subject to certain conditions as more particularly described in the Resolutions. E. On April 20, 1999, the City Council, pursuant to Resolution No. 19410 approved an agreement between the City, Developer and a third party entitled "Agreement for Financing and Construction of Olympic Parkway and Related Parkway Improvements ("Olympic Parkway Agreement"). F. On January 23,2001, the City Council, pursuant to Resolution 2001-019, approved the Village 5 "A" Map No. 3 of the Otay Ranch Project Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SSIA No. 3"), of which this Final Map is a subsequent subdivision off G. The followi ng defined terms shall have the meaning set forth herein, unless otherwise specifically indicated: a. For purposes of this Agreement, "Final Map" means the final map for R-25 of the Otay Ranch Village 5 SPA One. b. "Commencing Construction" means when a construction permit or other such approval has been obtained from the City or a construction contract has been awarded for the improvement, whichever occurs first. c. "Complete Construction" means when construction on said improvement has been completed and the City accepts the improvement d. "Guest Builder" means those entities obtaining any interest in the Property or a portion of the Property, after the Final Map has been recorded. H:\HOME\ENGINEERkLANDDEV~OTAYP~NCHkSSIA Vill 5 R25~tme.doc e. "PFFP" means the SPA One Public Facilities Financing Plan adopted by Resolution No. 18286 as may be amended from time to time. f. "Owner" or "Developer" means the person, persons or entity having a legal or an equitable interest in the property or parts thereof and includes Owner's, successors-in-interest or assignors of any Property. This includes Otay Project, L.P. and any and all owners of real property within the boundaries of the Property, and all signators to this Agreement including: i. Otay Project, L.P. ii. Continental Residential Inc. g. "Otay Ranch Parks Agreement" means the agreement pertaining to the construction of parks in Otay Ranch SPA One, McMillin Lomas Verdes and Otay Ranch adopted by Resolution No. 19636 as may be amended from time to time. h. "Parks Master Plan" means the City-wide Parks Master Plan, subject to future City Council approval. i. "SPA One Plan" means the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area Plan as adopted by the City Council on June 4, 1996 pursuant to Resolution No. 18286 and amended on February 16, 1999 by Resolution No. 19376. NOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for the mutual covenants, terms and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as set forth below. 1. Performance Obligation. Otay Project, L.P. a signator to this Agreement, represents to the City that it is acting as the master developer for this Project and expressly assumes performance of the obligations set forth in paragraphs 8 and 10 of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, all parties to this Agreement acknowledge and agree that all such obligations remain a covenant running with the land as set forth more particularly in paragraph 2 below. The City in its sole discretion will make a good faith effort to execute on bonds securing the obligations contained herein to the extent necessary to complete any unfulfilled obligations of the master developer. 2. Agreement Applicable to Subsequent Owners. a. Agreement Binding Upon Successors. 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, as described on Attachment "A", until released by the mutual consent of the parties. b. Agreement Runs with the Land. The burden of the covenants contained in this Agreement ("Burden") is for the benefit of the Property and the City, its successors and assigns and H:~HOME\ENGINEER\LANDDEV\OTAyRlqCH~SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme.doc any successor in interest thereto. City is deemed the beneficiary of such covenants for and in its own right and for the purposes of protecting the interest of the 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. If such covenants are breached, the City shall have the right to exercise all rights and remedies and to maintain any actions or suits at law or in equity or other proper proceedings to enforce the curing of such breach to which it or any other beneficiaries of this Agreement and the covenants may be entitled. c. Developer Release on Guest Builder Assignments. If Developer assigns any portion of the Project to a Guest Builder, Developer may request to be released from Developer's obligations under this Agreement, that are expressly assumed by the Guest Builder. Developer must obtain the written consent of the City to such release. Such assignment to the Guest Builder shall, however, be subject to this Agreement and the Burden of this Agreement shall remain a covenant running with the land. The City shall not withhold its consent to any such request for a release so long as the assignee acknowledges that the Burden of the Agreement runs with the land, assumes the obligations of the Developer under this Agreement, and demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City, its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement as it relates to the portion of the Project which is being acquired by the Assignee. d. Partial Release of Developer's Assignees. If Developer assigns any portion of the Project subject to the Burden of this Agreement, upon request by the Developer or its assignee, the City shall release the assignee of the Burden of this Agreement as to such assigned portion if such portion has complied with the requirements of this Agreement to the satisfaction of the City and such partial release will not, in the opinion of the City, jeopardize the likelihood that the remainder of the Burden will not be completed. e. Release of Individual Lots. Upon the occurrence of any of the following events, Developer shall, upon receipt of the prior written consent of the City Manager (or Manager's designee), have the right to release any lot(s) from Developer's obligation under this Agreement: i. The execution of a purchase agreement for the sale of a residential lot to a buyer of an individual housing unit; ii. The conveyance of a lot to a Homeowner's Association; The City shall not withhold its consent to such release so long as the City finds in good faith that such release will not jeopardize the City's assurance that the obligations set forth in this Agreement will be performed. At the request of the Developer, the City Manager (or Manager's designee) shall execute an instrument drafted by Developer in a recordable form acceptable to the City Manager (or Managers designee) which confirms the release of such lot or parcel from the encumbrance of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, at the close of an individual homeowner's escrow or t~:~HOME\ENGINEER~LA~DDEV~OTAYP~NCH~SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme.doc conveyance to a homeowner's association of any lot or parcel encumbered by this Agreement, such lot or parcel shall be automatically released from the encumbrance hereofi 3. Condition No. 1 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No. I of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer hereby agrees, to comply with the requirements and guidelines of the Otay Ranch SPA One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan; SPA One Public Facilities Financing Plan ("PFFP"); Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) Ranch Wide Affordable Housing Plan; SPA One Affordable Housing Plan; and the GDP Non- Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, as may be amended from time to time, and shall remain in compliance with and implement the terms, conditions and provisions of said documents. 4. Condition No. 2 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No. 2 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer hereby agrees, to all of the terms, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Developer as to any or all of the Property. 5. Condition No. 3 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No. 3 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees that if any of the terms, covenants or conditions contained within the Resolution shall fail to occur or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to deny the issuance of building permits for the Project, deny, or further condition the subsequent approvals that are derived from the approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Developer shall be notified ten (10) days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by the City and shall be given the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the City within a reasonable period of time. 6. Condition No. 4 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No. 4 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees to indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City harmless ~¥om and against any and all claims, liabilities and costs, including attorney's fees, arising from challenges to the Environmental Impact Report for the Project and/or any or all entitlements and approvals issued by the City in connection with the Project. 7. Condition No. 5 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No. 5 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer hereby agrees, that Developer shall comply with all the applicable SPA conditions of approval. 8. Condition No. 8 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No. 8 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer hereby agrees, that Developer shall comply with the terms of the Conveyance Agreement, adopted by Resolution No. 18416 by the City Council on October 22, 1996 ("Conveyance Agreement"). H:~HOME~ENGINEER~LANDDEV~OTAYRNC~I~SSIA Vill 5 R2S tm~ doc' 9. Condition No. 9 - (CEQA). In partial satisfaction of Condition No. 9 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, the Developer agrees to implement alt applicable mitigation measures identified in EIR 95-0l, subsequent EIR 97-03, the CEQA Findings of Fact for this Project (on file in the City Clerk's Office as Document No. C096-056 and Resolution No. 18286) and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (on file in the City Clerk's Office as Document No. C096-057 and Resolution Nos. 18284 and 18285). 10. Condition No. 10 - (Conveyance). In satisfaction of Condition No. 10 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer agrees to comply with all applicable requirements of the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (RMP) as approved by City Council, Resolution No. 18416, on June 4, 1996 and as may be amended from time to time by the City. Prior to approval of the Final Map, Developer agrees to convey open space land in accordance with the Phase 2 RMP approved by Resolution No. 18416, for all applicable streets, alleys, residential lots, open space lots, paseos, parks and slope areas as shown on the Final Map. 11. Condition No. 14 - (Signage). In satisfaction of Condition No. 14 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613 Developer agrees that any proposed monumentation/signage shall be consistent with the Village Design Plan and shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning prior to approval of the Final Map. 12. Condition No. 15 - (Landscaping). In satisfaction of Condition No. 15 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees that in addition to the requirements outlined in the City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual, privately maintained slopes in excess of 25 feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated to soften their appearance as follows: One 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 square feet of slope area, one 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 square feet of slope area, and appropriate groundcover. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary the slope plane. Landscape and irrigation plans for private slopes shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to approval of the Final Map. 13. Condition No. 16 - (Wall Plan). In satisfaction of Condition No. 16 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees that a comprehensive wall plan indicating color, materials, height and location shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Plauning prior to approval of the Final Map. Materials and colors used shall be compatible and all walls located in corner side- yards or rear yards facing public or private streets or pedestrian connections shall be constructed of a decorative masonry and/or wrought iron material. 14. Condition ]No. 17 - (View Fencing). In satisfaction of Condition No. 17 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees that lots backing or siding onto pedestrian paseos or parks shall be provided with view fencing, such as three feet of wrought iron on top of a three foot masonry wall, subject to approval by the Fire Marshal and the Director of Planning. 15. Condition No. 18 - (GDP). In satisfaction of Condition No. 18 of Resolution Nos. H:\HOMEkENGINEER\LkNDDEV~OTAYP~NCH~SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme doc 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees that in the event the Developer proposes an amendment to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan to reduce density within the Village Cores at some time in the future, the provision of additional alley product shall be analyzed and considered concurrently with said amendment. 16. Condition No. 27 - (Street Trees). In satisfaction of Condition No. 27 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer, upon request of the Directors of Parks and Recreation and Public Works, shall plant trees within all street parkways which have been selected from the revised list of appropriate tree species described in the Village Design Plan and the street tree master plan which shall be approved by the Directors of Parks and Recreation and Public Works. The Developer shall provide root control methods per the requirements of the Director of Parks and Recreation and a deep watering irrigation system for the trees. An irrigation system shall be provided from each individual lot to the adjacent parkway with the exception of parkways in privately owned streets which shall be irrigated as part of the Homeowners Association's irrigation system. Developer shall submit to and obtain the approval of the Directors of Parks and Recreation and Public Works of a separate street tree improvement plan which shall include, but is not limited to, the final selection of trees, the location of trees within the parkway, and in relation t,o xvater laterals, sewer laterals, dry utilities, driveways, inlets and pedestrian ramps, prior to or concurrent with the second submittal of the civil improvement plans. Developer acknowledges and agrees that the City may withhold the issuance of building permits for the Project if the street tree improvement plan is not submitted as agreed hereinabove. 17. Condition No. 31 - (ADA Standards). In satisfaction of Condition No. 31 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees that in the event the Federal Government adopts ADA standards for street rights-of-way which are in conflict with the standards and approvals contained herein, all such approvals conflicting with those standards shall be updated to reflect those standards. Unless otherwise required be federal law, City ADA standards may be considered vested, as determined by Federal Regulations, only after construction has commenced. 18. Condition No. 36 - (Setbacks). In satisfaction of Condition No. 36 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees to provide a twenty foot setback on driveways from property line to garage and sectional roll-up type garage doors at all properties fronting on streets where cul- de-sacs are 150 feet or less in length except as provided for in the Planned Community District Regulations or approved by the City Engineer and the Director of Planning. 19. Condition No. 50 - (NPDES). In satisfaction of Condition No. 50 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees to comply with all the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and the Clean Water Program. 20. Condition No. 52 - (As-Built Plans). In satisfaction of Condition No. 52 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer shall submit "as-built" improvement and storm drain plans in DXF file format to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. H:\HOME\ENGINEER~LANDDEV~OTAyRlgCH~SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme doc 21. Condition No. 65 - (Landscape Plans). In satisfaction of Condition No. 65 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer shall prepare and obtain approval by the City Engineer, Director of Planning and Director of Parks and Recreation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan and landscape/irrigation plans as part of the grading plans. 22. Condition No. 83 - (Parks). In satisfaction of Condition No. 83 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees that: a. Prior to the approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall pay PAD fees for the Community Park based upon a formula of 1 acre per 1,000 residents, until such time as a tm-key thcility has been accepted by the Director of Parks and Recreation. Said mm-key facility is subject to the reimbursement mechanism set forth below. b. The first Otay Ranch Community Park, to satisfy SPA One demand, shall be located in Village 2 as identified in the GDP. c. The Applicant shall identify the relocation, if any, of the Village 20tay Ranch Community Park prior to issuance of the building permit for the 1,150th dwelling unit of the SPA One Plan. Said relocation may require an amendment to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan. d. Notwithstanding that the community park requirement (1 acre/1,000residents) shallbe satisfied through the payment of PAD fees, the Applicant shall commence construction of the first phase of the Community Park prior to issuance of the building permit for the 2,650th dwelling unit of the SPA One Plan. The first phase of construction shall include, but not be limited to, improvements such as a graded site with utilities provided to the property line and an all weather access road acceptable to the Fire Department. e. The Applicant shall commence construction of the second phase of the Community Park prior to issuance of the building permit tbr the 3,000th dwelling unit of the SPA One Plan. Second phase improvements shall include recreational amenities as identified in the Park Master Plan. f. The Community Park shall be ready for acceptance by the Director of Parks and Recreation for maintenance prior to issuance of the building permit for the 3,900th dwelling unit of the SPA One Plan. g. Ifthe Director of Parks and Recreation determines that it is not feasible for the Applicant to commence construction of the first phase improvements of the community park prior to issuance of the building permit for the 2,650th unit of the SPA One Plan, then the Director of Parks and Recreation shall have the option to utilize the PAD fees for said improvements, or to construct another park facility, east of the 1-805 Freeway within an acceptable service radius of SPA One, as set forth in the GDP. H:~HOME~ENGINEER~LANDDEV~OTAyRlqCH~SSIA Vill 5 R25 ~me.doc h. The Applicant shall provide a maintenance period of 9-12 months in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Department policy. i. The Applicant shall receive reimbursement of PAD fees, proportionate to what has been constructed, excluding the cost of construction of the all weather access road, for the community park should they deliver a turn-key facility to the City in accordance with the Community Park Master Plan. 23. Condition No. 84(e) - (Transit Right of Way). In partial satisfaction of Condition No. 84(e) of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer hereby agrees that landscape and irrigation plans for the right of way shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation in conjunction with the landscape plans for East Palomar Street. 24. Condition No. 90 - (No Protest of Maintenance District or Assessment District). In satisfaction of Condition No. 90 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer hereby agrees not to protest the formation of or the inclusion in, a maintenance district, including a community facility district or a benefit zone, for the maintenance of landscaped medians and scenic corridors along streets within and adjacent to the subject subdivision. This agreement to not protest the inclusion of these public improvements shall not be deemed a waiver of the right to challenge the amount of any assessment, which may be imposed due to the addition of these new improvements and shall not interfere with the right of any person to vote in a secret ballot election. 25. Condition No. 103 - (Agreements/Financial). In satisfaction of Condition No. 103 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees to the lbllowing: a. That the City may withhold building permits for the subject subdivision if any one of the following occurs: i. Regional development threshold limits set by the adopted East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan have been reached. ii. Traffic volumes, levels of service, public utilities and/or services exceed the threshold standards in the then effective Growth Management Ordinance. iii. The Developer does not comply with the terms of the Reserve Fund Program. b. That the City may withhold building permits for any of the phases of development identified in the Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) for Otay Ranch SPA One Plan if the required facilities, as identified in the PFFP or as amended by the Annual Monitoring Program, have not been completed. H:~HOME\ENGINEER\LANDDEV~OTAYR]qCH~SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme doc e. Defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City, including approval by its Planning Commission, City Council or any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard to this subdivision provided the City promptly notifies the Subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and on the further condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense. d. Hold the City harmless from any liability for erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting from this project. e. Ensure that all franchised cable television companies ("Cable Company") are permitted equal opportunity to place conduit and provide cable television service to each lot on public streets within the subdivision. Restrict access to the conduit to only those franchised cable television companies who are, and remain in compliance with, all of the terms and conditions of the franchise and which are in further compliance with all other rules, regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or may from time to time be issued by the City of Chula Vista. That the City may withhold the issuance of building permits for the Project, should the Developer be determined by the City to be in breach of any the terms of the Tentative Map conditions or any supplemental agreement. The City shall provide the Developer of notice of such determination and allow the Developer reasonable time to cure such breach. 26. Condition No. 104- (Congestion Management Program). In satisfaction of Condition No. 104 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, the Developer agrees to participate, on a fair share basis, in any deficiency plan or financial program adopted by SANDAG to comply with the Congestion Management Program (CMP) and agrees to not protest formation of any future regional hnpact fee program or facilities benefit district to finance the construction of regional facilities described in the Otay Ranch GDP and Otay Ranch SPA One PFFP. This agreement to not protest the inclusion of these public improvements shall not be deemed a waiver of the right to challenge the amount of any fee which may be imposed due to these new improvements and shall not interfere with the right of any person to vote in a secret ballot election. 27. Condition No. 108 - (Insurance). In satisfaction of Condition No. 108 of Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613, Developer agrees to ensure that all insurance companies are given equal opportunity to provide a Cooperative Homeowner's Insurance Program. 28. Condition Nos. 119/120 - (Growth Management Ordinance). In satisfaction of Condition No. 119 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No. 120 of Resolution No. 18398, the Developer agrees, upon the request of the City, to the following: a. Fund the preparation of an annual report monitoring the development of Otay Ranch H:\HOME~ENGINEER~LANDDEV~OTAYP~NCH~SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme.doc as described in Chapter 9, "Growth Management" of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan. The annual report will analyze the supply of, and demand, for public facilities and services governed by the thresholds. b. Prepare a five (5) year development phasing forecast identifying targeted submittal dates for future discretionary applications (SPAs and tentative maps), projected construction dates, corresponding public facility needs per the adopted threshold standards, and identifying financing options for necessary facilities as described in Chapter 9, "Growth Management" of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan. 29. Condition No. 127/128 - (PFFP). In satisfaction of Condition No. 127 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No. 128 of Resolntion No. 18398, Developer agrees to adhere to the PFFP and any amendments thereto, approved by the City Council, including but not limited to the SPA and Tentative Subdivision Map improvements installed in accordance with said Plan or as required to meet threshold standards adopted by the City. Developer and City acknowledge that the PFFP identifies a facility phasing plan based upon a set of assumptions concerning the location and rate of development within and outside of the project area. Throughout the build-out of SPA One, actual development may differ from the assumptions contained in the PFFP (i.e., the development of EastLake III). Developer understands that neither the PFFP nor any other SPA One document grant the Developer an entitlement to develop as assumed in the PFFP, or limit the SPA One's facility improvement requirements to those identified in the PFFP. Developer acknowledges that compliance with the City's threshold standards, based on actual development patterns and updated forecasts in reliance on changing entitlements and market conditions, shall govern SPA One development patterns and the facility improvement requirements to serve said development. In addition, the sequence in which improvements are constructed shall correspond to any future Eastem Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan or amendment to the Growth Management Program and Ordinance adopted by the City. Developer understands and agrees that the City Engineer may modify the sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant such a revision. Developer agrees that concurrent with the approval of the first map approved after a Public Facility Financing Plan has been approved for the EastLake II1 GDP Area, the Developer shall update, at Developer's sole expense and subject to a Reimbursement Agreement, the SPA One PFFP and agrees that the City Engineer may change the timing of construction of the public facilities, including without limitation, the nature, sizing, extent and timing for the construction of public facilities caused by SPA One, shall become a condition for all subsequent SPA One entitlements, including tentative and final maps. 30. Condition Nos. 129/130 - (Utilities). In satisfaction of Condition No. 129 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No. 130 of Resolution No. 18398, Developer agrees to underground all utilities within the subdivision in accordance with thc Municipal Code requirements. 31. Condition Nos. 130/131 - (Fees). In satisfaction of Condition No. 130 of ResolutionNo. 18613 and Condition No. 131 Resolution No. 18398, Developer shall pay all applicable fees, in H:~HOME~ENGINEER~LANDDEV~OTAyR2qCH\SSIA Viii 5 R25 tme.doc accordance with the City Code and Council Policy, including: a. The Transportation and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. b. Signal Participation Fees. c. All applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to sewer colmection fees. d. Interim SR 125 impact fee. e. Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin DIF. Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin DIF. g. Telegraph Canyon Basin Drainage DIF. h. Reimbursement District for Telegraph Canyon Road Phase 2 Undergrounding. i. Otay Ranch Reserve Fund fee. j. Pedestrian Bridges DIF. 32. Condition No. 131/132 - (Code Requirements). In satisfaction of Condition No. 131 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No. 132 of Resolution No. 18398, Developer agrees to comply with all relevant Federal, State, and Local regulations, including the Clean Water Act. The Developer shall be responsible for providing all required testing and documentation to demonstrate said compliance as required by the City Engineer. 33. Condition No. 132/133 - (Disclosure of Special Taxes). In satisfaction of Condition No. 132 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No. 133 of Resolution No. 18398, Developer agrees to ensure that prospective purchasers sign a "Notice of Special Taxes and Assessments" pursuant to Municipal Code Section 5.46.020 regarding projected taxes and assessments. Developer shall submit disclosure forms for approval by the City Engineer prior to subsequent "B" Map approvals. 34. Condition No. 135/136 - (Landscape Manual). In satisfaction of Condition No. 135 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No. 136 of Resolution No. 18398, Developer agrees to comply with all aspects of the City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual. 35. Condition No. 136/137 - (Code Requirements). In satisfaction of Condition No. 136 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No. 137 of Resolution No. 18398, Developer agrees to comply with Chapter 19.09 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Growth Management) as may be amended from time to time by the City. Said chapter includes but is not limited to: threshold standards H:\HOME\ENGINEER\LANDDEV\OTAYRNCH~SSIA Vill 5 R2S~tme.doc (19.09.04), public facilities finance plan implementation (19.09.090), and public facilities finance plan amendment procedures (19.09.100). Developer further acknowledges and agrees that the City is presently in the process of amending its Growth Management Ordinance to add a proposed Section 19.09.105, to establish provisions necessary to ensure compliance with adopted threshold standards (particularly traffic) prior to construction of State Route 125. Said provisions will require the demonstration, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, of sufficient street system capacity to accommodate a proposed development as a prerequisite to final map approval for that development, and the Developer hereby agrees to comply with adopted amendments to the Growth Management Ordinance. 36. Condition No. 137/138 - (Code Requirements). In satisfaction of Condition No. 137 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No. 138 of Resolution No. 18398, Developer agrees that upon submittal of building plans for small lot single family (5,000 square feet or less as defined in the City of Chula Vista Design Manual) residential development, plans shall clearly indicate that 750 square feet of private open space will be provided. 37. Condition No. 139/140 - (Planned Community District). In satisfaction of Condition No. 139 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No. 140 of Resolution No. 18398, Developer agrees that all proposed development shall be consistent with the Otay Ranch SPA One Planned Community District Regulations. 38. Condition No. 151/152 - (MHOA). In satisfaction of Condition No. 151 of Resolution No. 18613 and Condition No 152 of Resolution No. 18398, Developer agrees that future property owners will be notified during escrow, by a document to be initialed by the owners, and approved by the City Engineer and Director of Planning, of the maintenance responsibilities of the MHOA and their estimated annual cost. 39. Assignability. Upon request of the Developer, any or all on-site duties and obligations set forth herein may be assigned to Subdivider's successor in interest if the City Manager in his/her sole discretion determines that such an assignment will not adversely affect the City's interest. The City Manager in his/her sole discretion may, if such assignment is requested, permit a substitution of securities by the successor in interest in place and stead of the original securities described herein, so long as such substituted securities meet the criteria for security as set forth elsewhere in this Agreement. Such assigmnent will be in a form approved by the City Attorney. 40. Satisfaction of Conditions. City agrees that the execution of this Agreement constitutes satisfaction or partial satisfaction as indicated above of Developer's obligation of.' Conditions 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 27, 31,36, 50, 52, 65, 83, 84(e),90, 103, 104, 108, 120, 128, 130, 131,132, 133,136, 137, 138, 140 and 152 of ResolutionNo. 18398 and Conditions 1,2,3,4,5,8,9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 27, 31, 36, 50, 52, 65, 83, 84(e), 90, 103,104, 108, 119, 127, 129, 130, 131, 132, 135, 136, 137, 139 and 151 of Resolution No. 18613. Developer further understands and agrees that some of the provisions herein may be required to be performed or accomplished prior to the H:~HOME\ENGINEER~LANDDEV~OTAYRNCH\SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme.doc approval of other final maps in SPA One, as may be appropriate. 41. Unfulfilled Conditions. Developer hereby agrees, unless otherwise conditioned, that Developer shall comply with all unfulfilled conditions of approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map, established by Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613 and shall remain in compliance with and implement the terms, conditions and provisions therein. 42. Recording. This Agreement, or an abstract hereof shall be recorded simultaneously with the recordation of the Final Map. 43. Building Permits. Developer and Guest Builders understand and agree that the City may withhold the issuance of building permits for the Project, should the Developer be determined by the City to be in breach of any of the terms of this Agreement. The City shall provide the Developer of notice of such determination and allow the Developer with reasonable time to cure said breach. 44. Miscellaneous. a. Notices. Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement or by law, any and all notices required or permitted by this Agreement or by law to be served on or delivered to either party shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served, delivered, and received when personally delivered to the party to whom it is directed, or in lieu thereof, when three (3) business days have elapsed following deposit in the U.S. mail, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, first-class postage prepaid, addressed to the address indicated in this Agreement. C1TY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Attn: Director of Public Works Developer: Otay Project, L.P. 350 W. Ash St., Suite 730 San Diego, CA 92101 Attn: Chuck Cater Fax (619) 234-4088 Continental Residential, Inc. 2237 Faraday Ave., Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Attn: Don MacKay Fax (760) 931-0237 H:~HOME~ENGINEER~L~NDDEV~OTAyP~NCH~SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme.doc A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided in this paragraph. b. Captions. Captions in this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference and do not define, describe or limit the scope or intent of this Agreement or any of its terms. c. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter hereof. Any prior oral or written representations, agreements, understandings, and/or statements shall be of no force and effect. This Agreement is not intended to supersede or amend any other agreement between the parties unless expressly noted. d. Preparation of Agreement. No inference, assumption pr presumption shall be drawn from the fact that a party or his attorney prepared and/or drafted this Agreement. It shall be conclusively presumed that both parties participated equally in the preparation and/or drafting this Agreement. e. Recitals; Attachments. Any recitals and Attachments set forth above are incorporated by reference into this Agreement. fi Attorney's Fees. If either party commences litigation for the judicial interpretation, reformation, enibrcement or rescission hereof; the prevailing party will be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to reasonable attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be the party who is awarded substantially the relief sought. g. Olympic Parkway Agreement. The parties do not intend by this Agreement to modify or amend in any way the Olympic Parkway Agreement. To the extent of any inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Olympic Parkway Agreement with regard to obligations specifically set forth in the Olympic Parkway Agreement, the Olympic Parkway Agreement shall control. 45. Previous Agreement. The Developer acknowledges that nothing in this Agreement shall supercede, nullify or otherwise negatively impact the terms of the SSIA No. 3. This Agreement affirms and reflects the terms, conditions and provisions of the SSIA No. 3 and the Tentative Map 96-04 conditions applicable specifically to the Final Map for the Property. 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set forth. [Next 2 Pages Are Signature Pages] H:~HOME~ENGINEER~LANDDEV~OTAYRNCII~SSIA Vill 5 R25 tme.doc [PAGE ONE OF TWO SIGNATURE PAGES TO THE VILLAGE 5 NEIGHBORHOOD R-25 OF THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT] CITY OF CHULA VISTA DEVELOPER: OTAY PROJECT, L.P., a California limited partnership Mayor By: Otay Project, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Otay Ranch Development, LLC, a Delaware limited~b/ility(~ho rized Member Attest: By: ~ Its: 0oc~ ~O0~/ Susan Bigelow City Clerk Approved as to Form: Sc~. ~t~ny City Attorney H:\~OME\ENGINEER~LANDDEV\OTAYRNCH~SSIA Vill 5 R25~tme.doc 04/05/01 THU 09:55 FAX 619 6gl $171 CIIIJLA VISTA ENGINEERING ~002 [PAGE TWO OF T%VO SIGNATURE PAGES TO THE VILLAGE 5 NEIGHBORHOOD R-25 OF THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT] Continental Homes, Inq., a California corporation CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California SS. County of ~','~ On ¢'/~/¢/ , before me, ,~,'~¢~ · Date -- Name and Title of O~cer (e g '~ne Doe, Notar~ Public') personally appeared ~,'¢u¢.-,~ Name(s) of Signer(s) 41~rsonally known to me i; proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence MARC LUCIANO LOVATO [ to be the person(e)- whose name(s-) is/arc Commission#12~,04~[ subscribed to the within instrument and Notch- Public - Cotifomlo ~ acknowledged to me that he/ere/they-executed Son Diego Courtly ~' the same in his/h.e~t,helr authorized ,MyComm. E~/n~Al~'13,2004[-- capacity(Le~, and that by his/h-e~itheif signature(~ on the instrument the person(s)., or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Place Notary Seal Above -~ of Notary PubIic OPTIONAL Though the information below ¢s not fequ~red by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: ~,~/,4 .~7~,~- ~' Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: - - - ~.. Individual Top of [humb here Corporate Officer -- Title(s): Partner-- ILimited General Attorney in Fact I Trustee Guardian or Conservator Other: Signer Is Representing: State of California ) ) SS. County of San Diego ) On April 10, 2001 before me, Toni Carter, Notary Public, personally appeared Greg Hastings, of Continental Residential, Inc., personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in. his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. i-.~- - -T~ff~t~ - - [ WITlX~ SS my hand and official seal. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment "A" Legal description of Property. Attachment "A- 1" Plat of Property ATTACHMENT "A" ALL OF LOT 2 OF CHULA VISTA TRACT 96-04 OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 5 "A" MAP NO. 3, IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 14147 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER ON FEBRUARY 20, 2001. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date: May 29, 2001 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Ratifying City staff's action on the change orders, associated with the construction of the Public Works Operations Facility and Corporation Yard, listed on Attachment A and authorizing staffto process up to an additional $250,000 in change orders SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~'~/ (4/5tbs Vote: Yes __ No X ) On September 26, 2000, the City Council amended Policy #574-01 authorizing the City Manager to approve all change orders pertaining to the Corporation Yard project with a single change order value not exceeding $50,000 and a cumulative value of up to $250,000. The policy permits the City Manager to exceed the limits i£delay of the approval would cause a delay in the "Critical Path" schedule of the project. Approval of tonight's resolution will ratify staff's recent approval of emergency change orders (Attachment A) associated with the construction of the Corporation Yard project and valued at $386,236. Tonight's action will also authorize staff to process up to an additional $250,000 in change orders in accordance with the policy and subsequent amendments. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1) Ratify City staff's action on the change orders associated with the construction of the Public Works Operations Facility and Corporation Yard, and 2) Authorize staffto process up to an additional $250,000 in change orders. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS APPROVAL: Not applicable DISCUSSION: Status Report The following is a brief status report on the progress of the Corporation Yard project: · Household Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility (HHWD): All work associated with the household hazardous waste disposal facility is substantially complete. The facility will be open to the public starting in June. While contemplated in the original construction budget, staff was able to obtain a grant for construction of the HHWD facility thereby reducing costs by $175,000. · Public Fueling Facility: The retaining wall at the public fleet access fueling is complete and the grading is also complete at this area. · City Fueling Facility: All grading, underground utilities and footing structures are complete at the fueling facility. The specialty contractor has confirmed delivery of all conventional fueling equipment. All compressed natural gas compressors, storage tanks and associated Page 2, Item Meeting Date: 5/29/2001 CNG facility equipment has been released for fabrication, delivery and installation. Highland Partnership has released the CNG facility on site service line for design by San Diego Gas and Electric. · Wash Facility: The bus wash concrete footings, slab on grade, pits, and steel roof deck are complete. Highland has received the brush wash equipment and the 'Touch-less' wash equipment will be delivered during the week of May 28th. · Administration Building: All metal stud framing and most of thc drywall has been completed in the administration building. Window framing and glazing is nearing completion. Mechanical, electrical, plumbing and door installation work continues. Installation of the "Cool Roof' system, pan of the "Green Program" is substantially complete. The wall lockers and most of the lighting fixtures have been delivered. The suspended ceiling materials have been delivered. · Shops: In shops area A (existing building), the mezzanine is complcted~ all metal stud framing and most of the drywall has been completed. In shops area B (added building), all sub floor plumbing and electrical has been completed and the reflective finished concrete slab on grade has been poured. All equipment for these areas has been confirmed and delivery dates provided by the specialty contractor~ · Maintenance Building: All maintenance building shell footings have been completed. Exterior and interior masonry walls are approximately 80% complete. The two vehicle inspection pits are substantially complete. All sub grade structures are complete for the in-ground vehicle lifts. Footings for the mezzanine are completed and the structural steel has been fabricated and delivered. The structural steel trusses for area A (southwest part) of the maintenance building are fabricated. The specialty contractor has confirmed the delivery date for the vertical reciprocating lifts. All contractor furnished/contractor installed equipment for this building has been confirmed by the specialty contractors and delivery dates established. · Central Receiving: The "Cool Roof' for the central receiving building is substantially complete. The specialty contractor has confirmed the vertical reciprocating lift delivery date and all framing has been readied for installation of the lift. · Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program: The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is fully implemented, continually monitored and corrections made as necessary. · Service Utilities: All fire service underground water lines, backflow preventers, Fire Department connectors and associated position indicator valves have been installed. The permanent power and San Diego Gas and Electric switchgear and associated Page 3, Item __ Meeting Date: 5/29/2001 equipment have been released for fabrication, delivery and installation. The house and compressed natural gas service meters have been released for fabrication, delivery and installation. Change Orders On September 26, 2000, the City Council amended Council Policy #574-01 authorizing the City Manager to approve change orders pertaining to this job with a single change order value not exceeding $50,000 and a cumulative value of up to $250,000. In addition, Council Policy on change orders authorized the City Manager and Director of Public Works to approve change orders exceeding $50,000 or beyond the $250,000 if delay of the approval would cause a delay in the "critical path" schedule of the project. On March 6, 2001, the City Council ratified the approval of all change orders up to March 6 totaling $300,384 and authorized staff to process up to an additional $250,000 in change orders. On April 3, 2001, the City Council separately approved two change orders for the "Cool Roof' system and the unanticipated grading work, both valued at a total of $360,294. Approval of this resolution will ratify staff's actions on change orders since Mamh 6 (Attachment A) valued at $386,236. Following tonight's action, the cumulative value of all change orders approved by Council to date will be $1,046,914 (Attachment B). Tonight's action will also authorize staff to process up to an additional $250,000 in change orders in accordance with the policy and subsequent amendments. The current cumulative use of contingency funds by category is shown below. The original budget of $1,073,186 for contingencies will be exceeded, however, the overall construction budget enjoys a sufficient balance that will cover the higher contingencies. With tonight's authorization of $250,000, the new contingencies budget will be $1,296,914. Staff believes the approved change orders to date have mitigating circumstances that are explained by the following: I. Energy Savings and Utility Items of Additional Scope initiated by City ($476,304): This category covers items to date that have been initiated by the City during the construction phase. These items maximize the energy savings of the facility and support the City's "Green Program" as well as enhance the overall facility's utility. These additional items include: · A "Cool Roof' system throughout the facility for long-term energy savings. · Hi-efficiency Skylights designed and manufactured by a local Chula Vista firm, Hi-Lite Company, providing increased natural lighting witlfin the buildings thereby reducing electrical consumption for overhead artificial lighting. · Household Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility improvements include the addition of a shade canopy with solar electric generating panels (photovoltaic panels). In each case, City and Highland staff evaluated and analyzed the necessity of such enhancements to assure cost effectiveness and long-term benefits. Page 4, Item __ Meeting Date: 5/29/2001 2. Regulatory Requirements ($114,847): This category covers the costs of compliance with code and other agency requirements that surfaced during the construction phase. This category includes the relocation of fire hydrants and adding new firewater service lines per Fire Department requirements as well as the addition of project site erosion controls in support of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP). 3. Soils Issues ($205,278): This category covers the additional soil export/import and compaction costs to date. The soils engineer, AMEC, conducted a more detailed exploration and analysis of the site during the construction phase. As a result of their findings, AMEC required that more extensive measures be undertaken throughout the site. The proposed change order is partially a result of such measures. Also, the grading contractor encountered some difficulties during the grading work related primarily to the stability of the hillside and the presence of poor soils conditions. As a result, approximately 35,000 tons of expansive soil was required to be exported to the neighboring landfill site and more suitable soil material imported from other sites. Staff and the landfill representatives have agreed to allow the future ultimate height of the landfill to increase by nine inches over the entire landfill. This action is allowed within the original CEQA approvals for the landfill and requires no formal action by Council. As a result, the landfill will relieve the City of all tipping fees and charges totaling approximately $1.2M. 4. Cost Benefit and Value Engineering (Savings of $126,640): During the course of the construction phase the project/construction management team (City staff and Highland) looks for ways to improve upon the design details outlined in the plans and specifications. Value Engineering and Cost Benefit items to date include changing the employee lockers from the specified special plastic to a "quiet metal" locker and maximizing savings of various construction/design issues. 5. Design Clarifications ($229,413): The change orders covered under this category were needed as a result of inadequate plan coordination between the many consultants responsible for preparing the different sections of these plans. This category covers those design details to date that are clarified and/or revised during the construction phase that also required trade contractor change orders. Examples include, SDG&E underground permanent electrical service, electrical revisions to the initial design and trade work clarifications. The project/construction management team has been instrumental in saving money in this category through exceilent communications among the trade contractors by successfully implementing many design clarifications without the need for change orders. 6. Field Conditions, General Requirements, and Administrative Contract Adjustments ($72,115): Page 5, Item __ Meeting Date: 5/29/2001 During the bid process, City and Highland staffs were unable to fully identify all the specific bid packages covered by the plans and specifications. This is mainly due to the enormous size of the project and the complex nature of the work. These items would have cost the City approximately the same amount of money had they been nicluded during the bidding phase. During the course of construction a number of building and infi-astructure field conditions were discovered but not originally identified thoroughly on the plans. Such incidents are normally encountered during the construction of a project when having to work around existing conditions. This category covers those field conditions associated with remodeling an existing facility, temporary electrical power pole and site distribution, general requirement scopes of work, to date, normally performed by the general contractor such as miscellaneous labor, carpentry, as well as the administrative contract adjustments for the performance and payment bonds for two contracts. FISCAL IMPACT: Per enclosed Attachment A, the total value of the change orders approved since the third set of change orders report is $386,236. The cumulative total value of all change orders approved to date is $1,046,914 (Attachment B). The original budget of $1,073,186 for contingencies will be exceeded, however, the overall construction budget enjoys a sufficient balance that will cover the higher contingencies. With tonight's authorization of $250,000, the new contingencies budget will be $1,296,914. Attachments: A Summary of change orders processed since City Council meeting of March 6, 2001 B Summary of all change orders to date Photos of Corporation Yard site Site Map File: 0735-10-GG131 C:SWINDOWS\TEMPORARY INTERNET FILES\OLK4261\CORPYARDCO3A113A.SMN3.DOC ATTACHMENT A Subcontract Change Order Summary, Grouped by Status Chula Vista Corp Yard Project# 092 Highland Partnership, Inc 1800 Maxwell Road Tel: 619-397-0367 Fax: 619-397-0389 Chula Vista, CA 91910 CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 002 09201000-02 4/12/01 General Requirements - Adds GARDNER 4/26/01 4/26/01 0 49,000 002 09202110-02 4/3/01 HVAC Demo & Cleanup DEMKO 4/18/01 4120101 0 1,294 002 09206100-01 4/3/01 Framing Hardware Change HELIX CON 4/18t01 4/23/01 0 617 003 09206100-01 4/3/01 Roof Framing Clarification HELIX CON 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 1,565 004 09206100-01 4/3/01 Mechanical Curb Framing @ HELIX CON 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 1,091 Admin 001 09207600-01 3/27/01 Expansion Joint @ New Admin CSM 4/5101 4/11/01 0 760 Construction 002 09207600-01 4/13/01 Change in Skylight Specification CSM 4/26/01 4/26/01 0 63,130 003 09207600-01 4/20/01 HHWD Facility Canopies CSM 0 90,900 008 9202660-01 3/6/01 Location & Excavation of 3" SHERWOQ4/17/01 4/23/01 0 1,355 Waterline @ Bus Wash D 009 9202660-01 3/6/01 Move Tie-ins for Fire Hydrant SHERWOO 3/26/01 0 4,108 Run @ Bus Wash D Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 1 Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description 09~;omp ID NTP Executed Days ApprAmt 010 9202660-01 4/3/01 HHWF Fire Service SHERWOO 4/17/01 4/23/01 0 17,250 011 92~2660-01 4/6/01 Un_marked Existing Utilities HE~ERW00 4/1~/01 4/23/01 0 6,462 012 9202660-01 4/11/01 Building ~IE RWOO 4/17/0i 4/23/01 0 ~0,713 Fire Service @ Administration D 013 9202660-01 4/17/01 D-27 Split Storm Drain Into (2) sBERwoo 4/18/0i 4/23/0t 0 i,2~5 3" ~ Admin D 004 9202685-01 2/16/01 SDG&ETemporary Power SATURN 0 6,696 005 9202685-01 2/27/01 U/G Permanent Electric Per SATURN 3/2/01 0 16,031 SDG&E 006 9202685-01 3/27/01 Revised Site Lighting SATURN 3/28/01 4/11/01 0 15,993 003 9203200-01 1/16/01 Step Bars @ Wash BIdg Plumbing PCS 0 434 004 9203200-01 2/27/01 Added Step Bars @ Wash Bldg PCS 312/01 4/11/01 0 1,368 Plumbing 005 9203200-01 3/6/01 Premium Time For Rebar @ PCS 3/14/01 0 1,143 Maint Bldg Footings 006 9203200-01 3/27/01 HHW Facility Canopy Pedestals PCS 4/5/01 4/9/01 0 780 Rebar 007 9203200-01 3/27/01 Public Access CNG Rebar PCS 4/5/01 4/10/01 0 (137) 005 9203300-01 4/10/01 HHWD Footing Bust SOLPAC 0 (170) 006 9203300-01 4/30/01 HHWD Facility Structural SOLPAC 0 47,293 Concrete 002 9204150-01 2/16/01 Admin Bldg Grout @ E Wall FABER 3/2/01 0 450 004 9204150-01 3/27/01 Maint Bid CIP Wall CMU FABER 4/5/01 4/17/01 0 4,203 Modifications 005 9204150-01 3/27/01 Public Access CNG CMU Change FABER 4/5/01 4/17/01 0 137 007 9204150-01 4/11/01 Deletion of Materials Bunkers FABER 4/18/01 0 (34,830) 008 9204150-01 4/17/01 HHWD Facility Masonry Overtime FABER 4/18/01 0 1,288 001 9211132-01 4/11/01 Delete Projection Screen in SPECIFIED 4/18/01 4/27/01 0 (2,016) Rm145 Admin 001 9215000-01 4/17/01 VariableFrequencyDrivesforAH LGSMTL 4/18/01 4/24/01 0 7,544 -1 Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 2 Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # 092 Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 007 9215400-01 2/27/01 Cap Severed House Water 3" MHP 3/20/01 0 275 008 9215400-01 4/3/01 Plumbing Connections @ Pit MHP 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 1,303 Waterproofing 009 9215400-01 4/3/01 OF/CI Specialty Sinks @ Admin MHP 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 11,548 010 9215400-01 4/16/01 House Gas Leak Repair MHP 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 870 003 9216000-01 4/18/01 4kW Grid Tied Photo voltaic HELIX 0 45,060 Power System ELEC 005 9216000-01 4/27/01 Revised Light Fixtures HELIX 0 11,193 ELED 008 9216000-01 5/1/01 Add Light Fixture Rm S122 HELIX 0 300 ELEC AGGREGATE TOTAL OF APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS SINCE MARCH 6, 2001: $386,236.00* 002 09201050-02 5/14/01 Extra Survey ACCULINE 0 780 004 09205120-01 3/27/01 Revised Operable Partitian @ C&S DOC 0 10,938 Admin 001 09208110-01 2/16/01 Door Security Hardware Changes BRADY CO 0 31,282 002 09208110-01 5/14/01 Rework Hollow Metal Frames @ BRADY CO 0 718 Admin 003 9201050-02 4/27/01 Supplemental Authorization #3 AGRA 0 22,985 014 9202660-01 4/27/01 A-4 Catch Basin @ Bus Parking SHERWOO 0 5,936 007 9202685-01 5/14/01 6" HP Gas Line For CNG ~ATuRN 0 41,252 008 9203200-01 4/6/01 Material Storage Bins - Rebar PCS 4/26/01 5/3/01 0 (1,469) Deletion 009 9203200~01 4/11/01 CREDIT For Double Charge PCS 4/18/01 5/11/01 0 (434) 010 9203200-01 5/14/01 Added Rebar ~ Pit#1 Footings PCS 0 541 011 9203200-01 5/14/01 Structural Reinforcement PCS 0 203 0ve~time @ Maint BIdg 012 9203200-01 5/14/01 SOG @ HHWD Facility PCS 0 1,102 003 9203300-01 4/3/01 Revised Site Lighting Plan SOLPAC 0 (2,500) ~l~ndards 003 9204150-01 2/16/01 HC Modification to Door FABER 0 127 Openings @ Admin 006 9204150-01 4/6/01 HHWD Facility Footing CMU FABER 4/26/01 5/8/01 0 170 Change 002 9206402-01 1/16/01 Casework Plan Changes - Admin MVC 0 6,470 & Maint 001 9209255-01 4/3/01 Shops Bldg MS Framing Change WRCHAVEZ 0 360 001 9211145-01 3/5/01 Washer Truck, Touchless ROSS 0 (100,813) WHITE 002 9214451-01 4/11/01 Enclosures In Lieu of Wall @ Vert MCKINLEY 4/18/01 5/7/01 0 1,253 Lifts Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 3 Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # 092 Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 002 9215000-01 5/1/01 Stub-up Chilled Water Pipes @ LGSMTL 0 1,896 Chille~ Y~r~d 011 9218400-01 5/11/01 Maintenance Bldg Vent Value MHP 0 (4,651) Engineering 012 9215400-01 5/14/01 HHWD Facility Pumbing, Storm MHP 0 1,990 & Waste 001 9216000-01 4/16/01 Electrical Plan Clarification HELIX 0 (19,970) Changes ELEC 002 9216000-01 4/16/01 Added Admin Bldg Electrical HELIX 0 4,320 Recepticals ELEC 004 9216000-01 4/24/01 Add Duct Detector @ Admin A HELIX 0 521 ELEC 006 9216000-01 4/27/01 Remote Disptay Panel HELIX 0 867 ELEC 007 9216000-01 4/24/01 Copier Circuit @ Admin HELIX 0 1,000 ELEC 003 9202660-01 1/26/01 Hot & Chilled Water System SHERWOO 0 43,333 Changes D 002 09205120-01 1/4/01 Operable Partition @ Admin C&S DOC 0 14,000 003 9202685-01 1/3/01 Additional Site Lighting SATURN 0 17,470 004 9203300-01 4/11/01 HHWD Facili[y Footing Bust SOLPAC 0 0 003 9215400-01 12/27/00 Shop Bldg "B" Added Fixtures - MHP 12/27/00 0 1,535 Plumbing FJ Willed Change Order of $143,989.00 and Roejack Roofing Change Order of $216,305.00 not included in this total. Council approved on April 3, 2001. H:\SHARED\ENGINEER\PDM\Projects\Corporation Yard\City Council\SubcontractCOreport2,rff Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 4 ATTACHMENT B Subcontract Change Order Summary, Grouped by Status Chula Vi"ta Corp Y~rd Project# 092 Highland Partnership, Inc 1800 Maxwell Road Tel: 619-397-0367 Fax: 619-397-0389 ChulaVista, CA 91910 CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 001 09201000-02 11/29/00 Demo Shops Canopy GARDNER 11/29/00 11/29/00 0 18,975 002 09201000-02 4/12/01 General Requirements- Adds GARDNER 4/26/01 4/26/01 0 49,000 001 09201050-02 11/27/00 Restake Slope - Maint Bldg ACCULINE 11/21/00 0 2,480 001 09202110-01 11/16/00 Hard Demolition - Wall Sawcutting CEMENT 0 42,248 CUT 001 09202110-02 1/16/01 Demo of Specified HVAC DEMKO 3/1/01 0 1,122 Ductwork 002 09202110-02 4/3/01 HVAC Demo & Cleanup DEMKO 4118101 4/20/01 0 1,294 001 09202211-01 11/29/00 Tamp Access Road - Slope Gao FJWILLERT 10/25/00 0 1,263 002 09202211-01 1129101 Grading Changes Associated FJWlLLERT 415101 0 143,989 With Revised Soils 001 09205120-01 12/5/00 Payment & Performance Bond ForC&S DOC 12/5/00 0 14,040 Structural Steel, Aluminum Storefront & Glazing 003 09205120-01 1/23/01 Delete PIP Trench Drain Angle C&S DOC 3/14/01 0 (1,822) Steel 001 09206100-01 11/6/00 Structural Eng Change GLBs to HELIX CON 12/11/00 0 4,237 Paralam 002 09206100-01 4/3/01 Framing Hardware Change HELIX CON 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 617 003 09206100-01 4/3/01 Roof Framing Clarification HELIX CON 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 1,565 004 09206100-01 4/3/01 Mechanical Curb Framing @ HELIX CON 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 1,091 Admin 001 09207500-01 12/19/00 CoolRoof@ExistingAdmin, ROEJACK 4/11/01 4/19/01 0 216,305 Shops & ~e~r~i Receiving 001 09207600-01 3/27/01 Expansion Joint @ New Admin CSM 4/5/01 4/11/01 0 760 Construction 002 09207600-01 4/13/01 Change in Skylight Specification CSM 4/26/01 4/26/01 0 63,130 003 09207600-01 4/20/01 HHWD Facility Canopies CSM 0 90,900 001 9201050-02 11/6/00 Additional Geotechnical AGRA 10/26/00 10/26/00 0 20,490 Investigation 002 9201050-02 2/7/01 Supplimental Geotechnical AGRA 3/13/01 0 25,295 Authorization 001 9202520-01 12/5/00 Payment & Performance Bond SOLPAC 12/5/00 0 2,820 001 SHERWOO 11/28/00 12/5/00 0 13,801 002 9202660-01 1/18/01 Relocate Type F Box ~HF:RW00 0 906 004 9202660-01 1/26/01 Fire Test Pit Manhole Covers I~Hr:RWOO 0 1,979 005 9202660-01 1/26/01 Added A-4 Cleanout, Various ~FIr:RWOO 0 10,055 Slurry D 006 9202660-01 2/7/01 Added Fire Hydrant Lateral @ SHERWOO 0 24,764 New Shops D 007 9202660-01 2/7/01 Clean Existing Storm Drain SHERWOO 0 4,260 008 9202660-01 3/6/01 Location & Excavation of 3" ~HERWOO 4/17/01 4/23/01 0 1,355 Waterline @ Bus Wash D 009 9202660-01 3/6/01 Move Tie-ins for Fire Hydrant SHERWOO 3/26/01 0 4,108 D Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 1 £ Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description 09~:omp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt Ru~ Bus WaSh 010 9202660-01 4/3/01 HHWF Fire Service SHERWOO 4/17/01 4/23/01 0 17,250 011 9202660-01 4/6/01 Unmarked Existing Utilities ~HERWo0 4/17/01 4/~3/01 ~ 6,462 9202660-01 4~1~0~ Building ~/ERWOO4/17/0~ 4/23/01 0 012 Fire S~rw~e ~drn[n~t~atidh D 10~713 013 9202660-01 4/17/01 D-27 Split Storm Drain Into (2) SHERWOO 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 1,235 3" @ Admin D 001 9202685-01 11/27/00 Credit for Excess Trench Spoils SATURN 1/26/01 0 (2,040) 002 9202685-01 12/27/00 Tamp Power - Maint, Wash & SATURN 12/27/00 12/27/00 0 5,873 Central Stores 004 9202685-01 2/16/01 SDG&E Temporary Power SATURN 0 6,696 005 9202685-01 2/27/01 U/G Permanent Electric Per SATURN 3/2/01 0 16,031 SDG&E 006 9202685-01 3/27/01 Revised Site Lighting SATURN 3/28/01 4/11/01 0 15,993 001 9202900-01 1/3/01 Erosion Control - Bonded Fiber BENCHMAR1/3/01 1/31101 0 33,670 Matrix 001 9203200-01 1/3/01 Added Rebar @ Admin A PCS 2/5/01 0 4,246 Stepped Footing 002 9203200-01 1/3/01 Structural Plan Revisions - Rebar PCS 2/5/01 0 4,949 003 9203200-01 1/15/01 Step Bars @ Wash Bldg Plumbing PCS 0 434 004 9203200-01 2/27/01 Added Step Bars @ Wash Bldg PCS 3/2/01 4/11/01 0 1,368 Plumbing 005 9203200-01 3/6/01 Premium Time For Rebar @ PCS 3/14/01 0 1,143 Maint Bldg Footings 006 9203200-01 3/27/01 HHW Facility Canopy Pedestals PCS 4/5/01 4/9/01 0 780 Rebar 007 9203200-01 3127/01 Public Access CNG Rebar PCS 4/5/01 4/10/01 0 (137) 001 9203300-01 12/18/00 Struc Concrete @ Admin B SOLPAC 12/15/00 12/15/00 0 918 O~rtime 002 9203300-01 12/27/00 Change CIP to Precast Trench SOLPAC 12/27/00 0 12,500 Drain 005 9203300-01 4/10/01 HHWD Footing Bust SOLPAC 0 (170) 006 9203300-01 4/30/01 HHWD Facility Structural SOLPAC 0 47,293 Concrete 001 9204150-01 11/6/00 CMU Changes @ Admin Bldg FABER 11/6/00 0 21,446 002 9204150-01 2/16/01 Admin BIdg Grout @ E Waft FABER 3/2/01 0 450 004 9204150-01 3/27/01 Maint Bid ClP Wall CMU FABER 4/5/01 4/17/01 0 4,203 Modifications 005 9204150-01 3/27/01 Public Access CNG CMU Change FABER 4/5/01 4/17/01 0 137 007 9204150-01 4/11/01 Deletion of Materials Bunkers FABER 4/18/01 0 (34,830) 008 9204150-01 4/17/01 HHWD Facility Masonry Overtime FABER 4/18/01 0 1,288 001 9206402-01 1/4/01 Stainless Steel Cladding & MVC 0 26,961 Casework 001 9207100-01 12/27/00 Waterproofing @ Interior of Test SADDLEBA 12/14/00 0 5,989 Tank CK 001 9210000-01 10/31/00 Change Phenolic to Republic DCA 0 (75,597)* Quiet 001 9211132-01 4/11/01 Delete Projection Screen in SPECIFIED 4/18/01 4/27/01 0 (9,016) Rm145 Admin 001 9214451-01 11/17/00 Lift #1 Gate Change MCKINLEY 11/17/00 0 576 001 9215000-01 4/17/01 Variable Frequency Drives forAH LGSMTL 4/18/01 4/24/01 0 7,544 -1 001 9215400-01 11/3/00 For Construction Plan Changes- MHP 11/6/00 12/5/00 0 4,684 Plumbing 002 9215400-01 12/26/00 Design Change to Precast Tench MHP 1/25/01 0 (12,375) Drains Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 2 Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # 092 Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 004 9215400-01 1/3/01 A~ded Floor Drains- Wash Bldg MHP 1/25/01 0 2,505 005 9215400-01 1/3/01 Temp Waste & Water Hookup City MHP 1/25/01 0 1,070 Trailer 006 9215400-01 1/16/01 Repair/Reroute 3" Waterline @ MHP 2/26/01 0 2,500 Wash Bldg 007 9215400-01 2/27/01 Cap Severed House Water 3" MHP 3/20/01 0 275 Line 008 9215400-01 4/3/01 Plumbing Connections @ Pit MHP 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 1,303 Waterproofing 009 9215400-01 4/3/01 OF/CI Specialty Sinks @ Admin MHP 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 11,548 010 9215400-01 4/16/01 House Gas Leak Repair MHP 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 870 003 9216000-01 4/18/01 4kW Grid Tied Photo voltaic HELIX 0 45,060 Power System ELE~ 005 9216000-01 4/27/01 Revised Light Fixtures HELIX 0 11,193 ELEC 008 9216000-01 5/1/01 Add Light Fixture Rm S122 HELIX 0 300 ELEc AGGREGATE TOTAL OF APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS TO DATE: $971,317.00' 002 09201050-02 5/14/01 Extra Survey ACCULINE 0 780 004 09205120-01 3/27/01 Revised Operable Partitian @ C&S DOC 0 10,938 Admin 001 09208110-01 2/16t01 Door Security Hardware Changes BRADY CO 0 31,282 002 09208110-01 5/14/01 Rework Hollow Metal Frames @ BRADY CO 0 718 Admin 003 9201050-02 4/27/01 Supplemental Authorization #3 AGRA 0 22,985 014 9202660-01 4/27/01 A-4 Catch Basin @ Bus Parking SHERWOO 0 5,936 007 9202685-01 5/14/01 6" HP Gas Line For CNG I~ATURN 0 41,252 008 9203200-01 416/01 Material Storage Bins - Rebar PCS 4/26/01 5/3/01 0 (1,469) Deletion 009 9203200-01 4/11/01 CREDIT For Double Charge PCS 4/18/01 5/11/01 0 (434) 010 9203200-01 5/14/01 Added Rebar @ Pit#1 Footings PCS 0 541 011 9203200-01 5/14/01 Structural Reinforcement PCS 0 203 Overtime @ Maint Bldg 012 9203200-01 5/14/01 SOG @ HHWD Facility PCS 0 1,102 003 9203300-01 4/3/01 Revised Site Lighting Plan SOLPAC 0 (2,500) Standards 003 9204150-01 2/16/01 HC Modification to Door FABER 0 127 Openings ~ Admin 006 9204150-01 4/6/01 HHWD Facility Footing CMU FABER 4/26/01 5/8/01 0 170 Change 002 9206402-01 1/16/01 Casework Plan Changes-Admin MVC 0 6,470 & Maint 001 9209255-01 4/3/01 Shops Bldg MS Framing Change WRCHAVEZ 0 360 001 9211145-01 3/5/01 Washer Truck, Touchless ROSS 0 (100,813) WHITE 002 9214451-01 4/11/01 Enclosures In Lieu of Wall @ Vert MCKINLEY 4/18/01 5/7/01 0 1,253 LiftS Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 3 Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # 092 Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 002 9215000-01 5/1/01 Stub-up Chilled Water Pipes @ LGSMTL 0 1,896 Chiller Yard 011 9215400-01 5/11/01 Maintenance BIdg Vent Value MHP 0 (4,651) Engineering 012 9215400-01 5/14/01 HHWD Facility Pumbing, Storm MHP 0 1,990 & waste 001 9216000-01 4/16/01 Electrical Plan Clarification HELIX 0 (19,970) chang~ ELEC 002 9216000-01 4/16/01 Added Admin Bldg Electrical HELIX 0 4,320 Recapticals ELEC 004 9216000-01 4/24/01 Add Duct Detector @ Admin A HELIX 0 521 ELEC 006 9216000-01 4127101 Remote Display Panel HELIX 0 867 ELEC 007 9216000-01 4/24/01 Copier Circuit @ Admin HELIX 0 1,000 ELEC 003 9202660-01 1/26/01 Hot & Chilled Water System SHERWOO 0 43,333 Chan~ D 002 09205120-01 1/4/01 Operable Partition @ Admin C&S DOC 0 14,000 003 9202685-01 1/3/01 Additional Site Lighting SATURN 0 17,470 004 9203300-01 4/11/01 HHWD Facility Footing Bust SOLPAC 0 0 003 9215400-01 12/27/00 Shop Bldg "B" Added Fixtures - MHP 12/27/00 0 1,535 Plumbing *Daryl Griffis Acoustics deduct of $75,597 will not be accounted for under the change order cumulative limit of $250,000.00 approved by City Council on September 26, 2000. Therefore, the cumulative value of all change orders approved to date is $1,046,914.00. H:\SHARED\ENGINEER\PDM\Projects\Corporation Yard\City Council\SubcontractCOreport. rtf Prolog Manager Pdnted on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 4 Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # 092 Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 002 9215000-01 5/1/01 Stub-up Chilled Water Pipes @ LGSMTL 0 1,896 Chill~ Yard - 011 9216400-01 5/11/01 Maintenance Bldg Vent Value MHP 0 (4,651) Engineering 012 9215400-01 5/14/01 HHWD Facility Pumbing, Storm MHP 0 1,990 & Waste 001 9216000-01 4/16/01 Electrical Plan Clarification HELIX 0 (19,970) Chang~ ELEC 002 9216000-01 4/16/01 Added Admin Bldg Electrical HELIX 0 4,320 Recepticals ELEC 004 9216000-01 4/24/01 Add Duct Detector @ Admin A HELIX 0 521 ELEC 006 9216000-01 4/27/01 Remote Display Panel HELIX 0 867 ELEC 007 9216000-01 4/24/01 Copier Circuit @ Admin HELIX 0 1,000 ELEC 003 9202660-01 1/26/01 Hot & Chilled Water System SHERWOO 0 43,333 Changes D 002 09205120-01 1/4/01 Operable Partition @ Admin C&S DOC 0 14,000 003 9202685-01 1/3/01 Additional Site Lighting SATURN 0 17,470 004 9203300-01 4/11/01 HHWD Facility Footing Bust SOLPAC 0 0 003 9215400-01 12/27/00 Shop Bldg "B" Added Fixtures - MHP 12/27/00 0 1,535 Plumbing *Daryl Griffis Acoustics deduct of $75,597 will not be accounted for under the change order cumulative limit of $250,000.00 approved by City Council on September 26, 2000. Therefore, the cumulative value of all change orders approved to date is $1,046,914.00. Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 4 NEW CORPORATION YARD FACILITY HHW AREA NEW CORPORATION YARD FACILITY CNG FACILITY NEW CORPORATIN YARD FACILITY SITE VIEW OF MAINTENANCE BUILDING NEW CORPORATION YARD FACILITY SHOPS BUILDING NEW CORPORATION YARD FACILITY MAINTENANCE BUILDING NEW CORPORATION YARD FACILITY INTERIOR OF ADMINISTRATION BUILDING RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUI~CIL OF THE CITY OF CHILL3% VISTA RATIFYING CITY STAFF'S ACTION ON THE CHANGE ORDERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PLrBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS FACILITY AND CORPORATION YARD LISTED ON ATTACHMENT A, AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PROCESS UP TO AN ~-DDITIONAL $250,000 FOR CHANGE ORDERS WI{EREAS, On Septen~0er 26, 2000, the City Council amended Policy #574- 01 authorizing the City Manager to approve all change orders pertaining to the Corporation Yard project with a single change order value not exceeding $50,000 and a cumulative value of up to $250,000; and WHEREAS, the policy permits the City Manager to exceed the limits if delay of the approval would cause a delay in the "critical Path" schedule of the project; and WHEREAS, approval of this resolution will ratify staff's recent approval of emergency change orders (Attachment A) associated with the construction of the Corporation Yard project and valued at $386,236; and WHEREAS, staff is authorized to process up to an additional $250,000 in change orders in accordance with the policy and subsequent amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ratify City staff's action on the change orders associated with the construction of the Public Works Operations Facility and Corporation Yard listed on Attachment A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set forth in full. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is hereby authorized to process up to an additional $250,000 for change order approval in accordance with the policy outlined above. Presented by Approved as to form by Director of Public Works Ci~Attorney [J:~ATTORNEY~RESO~CorpYardl0 (May 22, 2001 (10:26D~4)] ATTACHMENT A Highland , Subcontract Chan e Order Summary, Grouped by Status Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # 092 Highland Partnership, Inc 1800 Maxwell Road Tel: 619-397-0367 Fax: 619-397-0389 Chum Vista, CA 91910 CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 002 09201000-02 4/12/01 General Requirements - Adds GARDNER 4/26/01 4/26/01 0 49,000 002 09202110-02 4/3/01 HVAC Demo & Cleanup DEMKO 4/18/01 4/20/01 0 1,294 002 09206100-01 4/3/01 Framing Hardware Change HELIX CON 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 617 003 09206100-01 4/3/01 Roof Framing Clarification HELIX CON 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 1,565 004 09206100-01 4/3/01 Mechanical Curb Framing @ HELIX CON 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 1,091 Admin 001 09207600-01 3/27/01 Expansion Joint @ New Admin CSM 4/5/01 4/11/01 0 760 Construction 002 09207600-01 4/13/01 Change in Skylight Specification CSM 4/26/01 4/26/01 0 63,130 003 09207600-01 4/20/01 HHWD Facility Canopies CSM 0 90,900 008 9202660-01 3/6/01 Location & Excavation of 3" SHERWOO4/17/01 4/23/01 0 1,355 Waterline @ Bus Wash D 009 9202660-01 3/6/01 Move Tie-ins for Fire Hydrant SHERW©O 3/26/01 0 4,108 Run @ Bus Wash D Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 1 Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description 09~omp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Arnt 010 9202660-01 4/3/01 HHWF Fire Service SHERWOO 4/17/01 4/23/01 0 17,250 011 9202660-01 4/6/01 Unmarked Existing Utilities ~FIERW00 4ii~i0i 4123/01 0 6,462 9202660-01 4/11/01 Building 5~H~RWOO 4/17/01 4/23/01 0 10,713 012 Fire Service @ Administration D 013 9202660-01 4/17/01 D-27 split Storm Drain Into (2) SHERW00 4i1~i01 4/23/0i 0 1,235 3" @ Admin D 004 9202685-01 2/16/01 SDG&E Temporary Power SATURN 0 6,696 005 9202685-01 2/27/01 U/G Permanent Electric Per SATURN 3/2/01 0 16,031 SDG&E 006 9202685~01 3/27/01 Revised Site Lighting SATURN 3/28/01 4/11/01 0 15,993 003 9203200-01 1/16/01 Step Bars @ Wash Btdg Plumbing PCS 0 434 004 9203200-01 2/27/01 Added Step Bars @ Wash Bldg PCS 3/2/01 4/11/01 0 1,368 Plumbing 005 9203200-01 3/6/01 Premium Time For Rebar @ PCS 3/14/01 0 1,143 Maint Bldg Footings 006 9203200-01 3/27/01 HHW Facility Canopy Pedestals PCS 4/5/01 4/9/01 0 780 Rebar 007 9203200-01 3/27/01 Public Access CNG Rebar PCS 4/5/01 4/10/01 0 (137) 005 9203300-01 4/10/01 HHWD Footing Bust SOLPAC 0 (170) 006 9203300-01 4/30/01 HHWD Facility Structural SOLPAC 0 47,293 Concrete 002 9204150-01 2/16/01 Admin Bldg Grout @ E Wall FADER 3/2/01 0 450 004 9204150-01 3/27/01 Maint Bid C~P Wall CMU FADER 4/5/01 4/17/01 0 4,203 Modifications 005 9204150-01 3/27/01 PublicAccess CNG CMU Change FADER 4/5/01 4/17/01 0 137 007 9204150-01 4/11/01 Deletion of Materials Bunkers FADER 4/18/01 0 (34,830) 008 9204150-01 4/17/01 HHWD Facility Masonry Overtime FADER 4/18/01 0 1,288 001 9211132-01 4/11/01 Delete Projection Screen in SPECIFIED 4/18/01 4/27/01 0 (2,016) Rm145 Admin 001 9215000-01 4/17/01 Variable Frequency Drives for AH LGSMTL 4/18/01 4/24/01 0 7,544 Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 2 Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # 092 Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 007 9215400-01 2/27/01 Cap Severed House Water 3" MHP 3/20/01 0 275 008 9215400-01 4/3/01 Plumbing Connections @ Pit MHP 4/16/01 4/23/01 0 1,303 Waterproofing 009 9215400-01 4/3/01 OF/CI Specialty Sinks @ Admin MHP 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 11,548 010 9215400-01 4/16/01 House Gas Leak Repair MHP 4/18/01 4/23/01 0 870 003 9216000-01 4/18/01 4kW Grid Tied Photo voltaic HELIX 0 45,050 Power System ELEC 005 9216000-01 4/27/01 Revised LightFixtures HELIX 0 11,193 ELEC 008 9216000-01 5/1/01 Add LightFixture Rm S122 HELIX 0 300 ELEC AGGREGATE TOTAL OF APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS SINCE MARCH 6, 2001: $386,236.00' 002 09201050-02 5/14/01 Extra Survey ACCULINE 0 780 004 09205120-01 3/27/01 Revised Operable Partitian @ C&S DOC 0 10,938 Admin 001 09208110-01 2/16/01 Door Security Hardware Changes BRADY CO 0 31,282 002 09208110-01 5/14/01 Rework Hollow Metal Frames @ BRADY CO 0 718 Admin 003 9201050-02 4/27/01 Supplemental Authorization #3 AGRA 0 22,985 014 9202660-01 4/27/01 A-4 Catch Basin @ Bus Parking SHERWOO 0 5,936 007 9202685-01 5/14/01 6" HP Gas Line For CNG ~ATURN 0 41,252 008 9203200-01 4/6/01 Material Storage Bins - Rebar PCS 4/26/01 5/3/01 0 (1,469) Deletion 009 9203200-01 4/11/01 CREDIT For Double Charge PCS 4/18/01 5/11/01 0 (434) 010 9203200-01 5/14/01 Added Rebar @ Pit #1 Footings PCS 0 541 011 9203200-01 5/14/01 Structural Reinforcement PCS 0 203 Overtime @ Maint Bldg 012 9203200-01 5/14/01 SOG @ HHWD Facility PCS 0 1,102 003 9203300-01 4/3/01 Revised Site Lighting Plan SOLPAC 0 (2,500) Standards 003 9204150-01 2/16/01 HO Modification to Door FABER 0 127 Openings @ Admin 006 9204150-01 4/6/01 HHWD Facility Footing CMU FABER 4/26/01 5/8/01 0 170 Change 002 9206402-01 1/10/01 Casework Plan Changes - Admin MVC 0 6,470 & Maint 001 9209255-01 4/3/01 Shops Bldg MS Framing Change WRCHAVEZ 0 360 001 9211145-01 3/5/01 Washer Truck, Touchless ROSS 0 (100,813) WHITE 002 9214451-01 4/11/01 Enclosures In Lieu of Wall @ Veal MCKINLEY 4/18/01 5/7/01 0 1,253 Lifts Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page3 Chula Vista Corp Yard Project # 092 Highland Partnership, Inc CO No Con No Date Description Comp ID NTP Executed Days Appr Amt 002' 9215000-01 5/1/01 Stub-up Chilled Water Pipes @ LGSMTL 0 1,896 Ch[fief Yard 011 9215400-01 5/11/01 Maintenance Bldg Vent Value MHP 0 (4,651) Engineering 012 9215400-01 5/14/01 HHWD Facility Pumbing, Storm MHP 0 1,990 & Waste 001 9216000-01 4/16/01 Electrical Plan Clarification HELIX 0 (19,970) Changes ELEC 002 9216000-01 4/16/01 Added Admin Bldg Electrical HELIX 0 4,320 Recepticals ELEC 004 9216000-01 4/24/01 Add Duct Detector @ Admin A HELIX 0 521 ELEC 006 9216000-01 4/27101 Remote Display Panel HELIX 0 867 ELEC 007 9216000-01 4/24/01 Copier Circuit @ Admin HELIX 0 1,000 ELEC 003 9202660-01 1/26/01 Hot & Chilled Water System SHERWOO 0 43,333 Changes D 002 09205120-01 1/4/01 Operable Partition @ Admin C&S DOC 0 14,000 003 9202685-01 1/3/01 Additional Site Lighting SATURN 0 17,470 004 9203300-01 4/11/01 HHWD Facility Footing Bust SOLPAC 0 0 003 9215400-01 12/27/00 Shop Bldg "B" Added Fixtures - MHP 12/27/00 0 1,535 Plumbing FJ Willed Change Order of $143,969.00 and Roejack Roofing Change Order of $216,305.00 not included in this total. Council approved on April 3, 2001. Prolog Manager Printed on: 5/16/01 chula vista Page 4 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~ Meeting Date 05/29/01 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Rejecting bids, Approving an Agreement with Transcor¢ for the implementation of the Adaptive Traffic Control System Phase II (CIP-TF237), and Authorizing the Mayor to execute said Agreement. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works~ ~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~'* (4/Sths Vote: Yes No X) The City of Chula Vista has received State approval to utilize federal funds under the Federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) program in order to upgrade the City's traffic control system to a state of the art flexible timing Adaptive Traffic Control system. On June 19, 1999, City staff proceeded with advertising for the implementation of the adaptive system for competitive bidding, and on August 11, 1999, staff received sealed bids from two (2) electrical contractors. The first bid was very high and the second bid was non-responsive; therefore, staff recommended the rejection of the two bids and the re- advertisement for proposals, and on March 25, 2000, staff proceeded with the advertisement for Requests For Proposals (RFP) to implement the adaptive system. On May 24, 2000, City staff received proposals from three (3) firms to develop and implement the adaptive system. The firms were Transcore, Bi Tran Systems, Inc. and P.B. Farradyne. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve resolution rejecting bids from Medland Controls, Inc. and T & M Electric, dba Perry Electric, approving an agreement with Transcore for the implementation of the Adaptive Traffic Control System Phase II (CIP-TF237), and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The proposed adaptive traffic control is a dynamic system that uses real time, electronically collected, traffic volume data. The adaptive traffic control system continuously measures traffic demands on all approaches to signalized intersections and transmits this information to a master controller which, in turn, electronically adjusts the timing of affected signals. The timing and coordination of traffic signals is performed continuously, thereby responding to ever changing traffic flow conditions. The adaptive traffic control system is considered to be the state of the art in coordinating and optimizing the sequence of timing traffic signal system networks. Implementation of the new Adaptive Traffic Control System was planned to take place in three phases for a total cost of approximately $2,000,000.00. Page 2, Item Meeting Date 05/29/01 Phase I The first phase of the project was awarded to DKS Associates by Resolution 18106 of the City Council on November 14, 1995. This Phase, which cost $200,000.00, was a system design study. It provided a listing and specifications of the required computer software and hardware. Additionally, this phase provided construction drawings for modifying 10 adjacent signalized intersections along the East "H" Street and Otay Lakes Road corridors. DKS Associates recently completed this phase of the project. Phase II Phase II consists of implementation of the adaptive system at the following ten intersections: 1) East "H" Street/Paseo Ranchero. 2) East "H" Street/Buena Vista way. 3) East "H" Street/Southwestern College. 4) East "H" Street/Otay Lakes Road. 5) Otay Lakes Road/Ridgeback road. 6) Otay Lakes Road/Bonita Vista High School. 7) Otay Lakes Road/Gotham Street. 8) Otay Lakes Road/Telegraph Canyon Road. 9) East "H" Street/Bonita Vista High School (optional). 10) East "H" Street/Auburn Avenue (optional). This phase includes construction engineering, purchase of traffic control equipment and software, installation of vehicle detection and modification of traffic signals. Approximately $700,000.00 of CMAQ funding is needed to implement this phase of the project. The City's request for CMAQ funding for this phase was approved by SANDAG. DKS Associates will be performing the construction engineering for Phase 1I of this project per an amendment to the Agreement with the City of Chula Vista, approved by Resolution 19554 on July 27, 1999. On June 19, 1999, City staff proceeded with advertising for the implementation of the adaptive system for competitive bidding, and on August 11, 1999, staff received sealed bids from two (2) electrical contractors to implement construction of phase II of the Adaptive Traffic Control System. The bids received were as follows: Contractor Bid Amount 1. Medland Controls, Inc. $810,913.27 2. T & M Electric, dba Peny Electric Incomplete bid Page 3, Item Meeting Date 05/29/01 The low bid amount was 56% higher than the engineer's cost estimate of $520,000.00. The engineer's cost estimate was obtained from DKS Associates staffthat used average unit prices from similar projects constructed by other municipalities. After receiving the two bids, one of which was very high and the other was non-responsive, staff informed the two bidders that their bids would be rejected. Furthermore, staff reviewed the entire bid process and concluded that, since much of the work was ora traffic engineering and software nature, the most appropriate way to implement the project construction was to advertise for Request For Proposals (RFP). This would be mainly done to encourage all highly qualified traffic adaptive software consultants to participate in the process as primary contractors performing all work stages and providing direct quality control instead of being sub-contractors performing only a portion of the work under the previous competitive process where the software-inexperienced general contractor is faced with the quality control task. As a result, on March 25, 2000, staff proceeded with the advertisement of an RFP to implement the adaptive system. This was done after consulting with San Diego Traffic Engineering Council (SANTEC) and Caitrans and obtaining their approval. In addition, staff contacted and sent complete project documents to eleven (11) qualified finns. On May 24, 2000, City staff received proposals from the following firms to develop and implement the adaptive system: Firm Name Proposal Cost 1) TransCore $328,538.00 2) Bi Tran Systems $374,000.00 3) P.B. Farradyne $489,559.00 In accordance with Council Policy, a City Manager's Consultant Selection Committee was appointed to interview firms, evaluate proposals and recommend the selection of a successful firm. After interviewing all three firms, and taking in consideration system costs, system development and implementation proposal and the results from the interview process, it was apparent that the most qualified firm to perform the implementation of the adaptive system was TransCore. Their staff demonstrated their ability to deliver and install a proven adaptive system on time and within budget. They also demonstrated a more thorough knowledge of the City's existing system and understanding of our objectives in comparison with the other consultants. The scope of work, for TransCore, involves the installation of Sydney Coordinated Adaptive Traffic System (SCATS) software and hardware in the City's traffic central communication system, the conversion of the existing 170E controllers to SCATS controllers by replacing the CPU and PROM boards, the installation o f City-furnished video detection equipment, the utilization of telephone line drops for communication purposes and providing training and technical support. Page 4, Item Meeting Date 05/29/01 The total cost to implement phase II of the project is $700,000.00, which includes TransCore's costs/fees of $328,538.00. This also includes DKS & Associates' construction engineering costs of $120,000.00, as approved by Council Resointion 19554. Other associated costs include $140,000.00 for the future selection and purchase of video detection equipment that is compatible with the SCATS software, $50,000.00 for administration and $61,462.00 for contingencies. The current appropriated City funds are sufficient to cover this phase of the work. Program Supplement Agreement No. 008 Rev.1 between the City and the State assured State reimbursement to the City for all costs associated with this phase upon following appropriate invoicing procedures set forth by CalTrans Local Assistance Office. Award of contract procedures for this phase of work follows the approval from the Department of Transportation (Caltrans), since Pre-Award audits are required for all engineering and design related services contracts, greater than $100,000, financed with State or Federal-aid highway funds. The Pre-Award audit review and approval for this phase takes place at Caltrans' headquarters in Sacramento. On April 25, 2001, staff received approval from CalTrans for the Pre-Award audit. After completion of this phase, staff will evaluate the project's budget in anticipation of leftover grant monies. In such event, staffmay take full advantage of the grant and utilize such monies to add one, or more, intersection to the adaptive system. Phase Phase III, which consists of the installation of vehicle detectors and signal modifications at the remaining signalized locations along the rest of the major roadways throughout the City, will be evaluated upon completion of Phase II. The cost to implement this last phase is estimated to be $1,100,000.00. The City's request for additional CMAQ funding for phase three may not receive approval from the San Diego Traffic Engineering Council (SANTEC), since there is shortage in future anticipated funds. However, a request for additional funds will be dependent on successful operation of the adaptive traffic control system. FISCAL IMPACT: None, since funding in the amount of $700,000.00 will be provided by CalTrans under the CMAQ Federal Grant program. DKS Associates consulting firm, under the direction of Traffic Engineering staff, will perform the construction engineering for this project. All associated staff time and consultant services will be charged against the project and reimbursed by the State under the provisions of the CMAQ Federal grant. Attachment: Contract Agreement between TransCore and the City of Chula Vista Prepared by: Majed Al-Ghafry H 5HOMEXENGINEER~AGENDAWF237_Transcore.ma. DOC Parties and Recital Page(s) Agreement between City of Chula Vista And TransCore ITS, Inc. For Engineering, Design And Implementation Consulting Services This a~eement is made and entered into this ~ 2001 for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is othenvise specified in Exhibit A, Para~aph 1, is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such the City of Chula Vista (City), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, para~aph 3, and the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, para~aph 4, as Transcore ITS (Consultant) shall be referred to as TransCom, whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are set for[h on Exhibit A, paragraph 6 (Consultant), and is made with reference to the following facts: Recitals Whereas, the City of Chula Vista has advertised for Request for Qualifications for a Consultant to develop and implement an Adaptive Traffic Control System for the Pilot project of ten (10) intersections. The project is Federal-Aid funded using Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds and. Whereas, after receiving three proposals and interviewing the three qualified system firms, the City has selected TransCore as the most qualified and experienced firm with which to enter into an a~eement with to fulfill the requirements of this contract; and, Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City within the time frames herein provided ail in accordance with the terms and conditions of this A~eement; 05/09/01 Page 1 Obligatory Provisions Pages Now, Therefore, be it resolved that the City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. Consultant's Duties A. General Duties Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties". B. Scope of Work and Schedule In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled "Scope of Work and Schedule", consistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8. and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8~ within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this agreement. The General Dmies and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the sole option of the City, operate ro tem~inate this Agreement. C. Reductions in Scope of Work City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction. D. Additional Services In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the "Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (A), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All invoices shall be paid Net 30 days from invoice date. Late payments are subject to a 1.5% per month interest charge. 05/09/01 Page 2 E. Standard of Care Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. F. Insurance Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and Subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by the following insurance coverage's, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A", Class "V" or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City: Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9. Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names City as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City in the same manner as members of the general public CCross-liability Coverage"). Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Para~aph 9, unless Errors and On'fissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. G. Proof of Insurance Coverage. (1) Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured. (2) Policy Endorsements Required. In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager. 05/09/01 Page 3 H. Security for Performance. (1) Performance Bond. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the City a performance bond by a surety and in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (2) Letter of Credit. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19. indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting to the bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit". in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (3) Other Security In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then Consultant shall provide to the City such other security therein listed in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney. I. Business License Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply with Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 2. Duties of the City A. Consultation and Cooperation City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access upon reasonable notice and proper purposes to its office facilities, project pertaining files and records by Consultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City agrees to provide the 05/09/01 Page 4 information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance of this agreement. B. Compensation Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall compensate Consultant for ali services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Para~aph 12. All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be charged upon making such payment. 3. Administration of Contract Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine administration of this agreement. 4. Term. This Agreement shall terminate on February i, 2002, unless extended by mutual consent. 5. Liquidated Damages The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14. It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in performance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay. Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of the time specified for the completion of Deliverables 6-10, the Consultant shall pay to the City, or have 05/09/01 Page 5 withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate") up to ten (10) percent of the total Contract Price. Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control, other than delays caused by the City, sh ~.!1 be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the effect of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work. 6. Financial Interests of Consultant A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer. If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC filer", Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15 of Exhibit A. or if none are specific& then as determined by the City Attorney. B. Decline to Participate. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement. C. Search to Determine Economic Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this agreement. D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FI'PC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act. 05/09/01 Page 6 E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney if Consultant learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder. F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests. Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents and Subconsultants("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, ParaHaph 15. Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement. Consultant promises to advise City of an), such promise that may be made dunng the Term of this Agreement. or for 12 months thereafter. Consultant aHees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this AHeement, or for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this AHeement, except with the written permission of City. 7. Hold Harmless Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of the negligent or willful con duct of the Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, reasonable attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. 05/09/01 Page 7 8. Termination of Agreement for Cause If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive .just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach excluding special, consequential or economic damages. Prior to a termination for default, Consultant shall be given the opportunity to commence cure within fifteen (15)) days after receipt of written notice to cure a default. In the event the Consultant fails to complete such cure within such period with the exercise of diligent efforts to complete the cure, up to a maximum of sixty (60) days, the city shall have the right to terminate this agreement as stated in the previous paragraph. 9. Errors and Omissions In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. 10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished and unfinished documents and other materials described herein above shall, at the option of the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein. 11. Assignability The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City. City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the 05/09/01 Page 8 Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the Subconsultants identified thereat as "Permitted Su~-~'o~snltants". 12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material Excluding Software. All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties, excluding software, produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have unre- stricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement. TransCore provided software will be in accordance with the most current SCATS license and End User Agreement and warranty. 13. Independent Contractor Citx is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent comraemr with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services required under this Agreement. City maintains the right on]y to reject or accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard thereto. 14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures No suit or arbitration shall be brought, arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same. Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. 05/09/01 Page 9 15. Miscellaneous A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City ? 5~1c~:~ ~pecifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever. B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals are licensed real estate brokers or salespersons. C. Notices Ail notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of the designated parties. D. Entire Agreement This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. For purposes of interpretation, the following is the Order of Precedence: a. The Contract Agreement; b. The Approved Design Documents, Deliverables 2&3 c. TransCore's Proposal; d. Addendum(s) to the RFP; e. The RFP E. Capacity of Parties Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. 05/09/01 Page 10 F. Governing Law/Venue This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. G. Warranties All software warranties shall be as stated in the SCATS Software Licence [End-User] Agreement. (a) TransCore warrants the system provided under the contract will be of good quality and materials in accordance with the Detail Design Document. In the event of an incident requiring maintenance outside of the normal preventive, predictive, and corrective requirements set forth herein, including but not limited to force majeure, vandalism, theft, or accidents, TransCore will perform such work on a time and materials basis, as agreed by both parties. (b) TransCore specifically disclaims, and the City waives, any other express guarantees or wan-anties. (c) This Agreement does not cover service, maintenance or repair attributable to unauthorized attempt by the City to repair or maintain the equipment, to catastrophe, fault or negligence of the City, improper use or misuse of the equipment by the City or causes external to the equipment, such as, but not limited to, power failure, air conditioning failure or loss incurred in transportation. With respect to any such loss or damage, TransCore will submit to the City a description of the work to be done and request the City's consent to restore the equipment to normal operating conditions at TransCore's prevailing rates for labor and materials. If the City does not agree to have the TransCore restore the equipment to normal operating condition, TransCore shall have the right to terminate its obligations under this Agreement. H. Limitation of Liability Any claim under warranty must be made within the time specified in the applicable warranty clause. I. Limitation on Dissemination of TransCore Commercial Work Product TransCore and Customer expressly exclude any and all third parties from the benefits of this Agreement. In the event that the customer furnishes any TransCore work product to a person who is not a party to this Agreement, Customer agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless TransCore from and against all claims, damages, losses, costs and expenses (including attorney's fees) of actions brought by third parties, and arising out of or relating to such third party's use or distribution of, or reliance upon, the Contractor's work product. 05/09/01 Page 11 J. Document Review and Approval Any drawing, report, manual or other data submitted for the City's review shall be approved or disapproved within fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt. If the item is disapproved then the City will provide detailed comments that define the nature and extent of the deficiency and the type of remedial action expected. If the City does not approve or disapprove within fourteen (14) calendar days or if the City's comments are not received within the fourteen (14) day period, then TransCore's schedule will be extended commensurately. This agreement provides for submission of one (1) draft, for comments, and one (1) final submittal of the documents and manuals. If the City requires additional submittals, equitable adjustments to the schedule and/or price will be handled through change orders to this Agreement. Such approval as detailed above can encompass portions of a submittal and result in partial approvals to maintain program schedules. K. Design Document Process If after 120 days of contract award, and before start of work TransCore and the City fail to reach mutual agreement on the Design Documents, deliverables 2&3. either party may terminate the contract without obligation or liability to the other party. L. Record Retention 11_. For the purpose of determining compliance with Public Contract Code 10115, et seq. and Title 21, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 21, Section 2500 et seq., when applicable, and other matters connected with the performance of the contract pursuant to Government Code 8548.7, the Contractor, subcontractors, City and the State shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of the contract, including but not limited to, the costs of administering the contract. All parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during the contract period and for three years from the date of final payment under the contract. The State, the State Auditor, FHWA or any duly authorized representative of the Federal govemment shall have access to any books, records, and documents of the Contractor that are pertinent to the contract for audits examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and copies thereof shall be furnished if requested. 2. The application of the audit provisions herein to the fixed price (Lump Sum ) items herein are not for the purposes of price adjustment to such fixed price items, nor shall Contractor's cost information for such items be required to be reported. The State the State Auditor, FHWA or any duly authorized representative of the Federal government may, however, examine unpriced records related to such work for the purposes of verifying performance. 05/09/01 Page 12 M. Cost Principles and Administrative Requirements 1. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 48 Chapter 1, Pan 31 shall be used to determine the allowability of the individual items of cost, excluding fixed price, lump sum items. 2. The contractor agrees to comply with federal procedures in accordance with CFR 49, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. 3. Any costs for which payments have been made to the contractor, which are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under CFR 48, Chapter 1 Part 31, are subject to repayment by the contractor to the City of Chula Vista, the State and the Federal Government, excluding fixed price, lump sum items. 4. Any subcontract, entered into as a result of this contract, shall contain all of the provisions of this Article. N. Subcontracting 1. The Contractor shall perform the work contemplated with resources available within its own organization and no portion of the work pertinent to this contract shall be subcontracted without written authorization by the State's or City, except that which is expressly identified in the Contractor's Cost Proposal. 2. Any subcontract in excess of $25,000, entered into as a result of this contract, shall contain all the provisions stipulated in this contract to be applicable to subcontractors. 3. Any substitution of subcontractors must be approved in writing by the State's or City's Contract Manager. 4. Any subcontract, entered into as a result of this contract, shall contain all of the provisions of this Article. 05/09/01 Page 13 Signature Page to Agreement between City of Chula Vista and TRANSCORE ITS, INC. for Development and Implementation of an Adaptive Traffic Control System for the City of Chula Vista IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms: Dated: ., 2001 City of Chula Vista by:. Shirley Horton, Mayor Attest: Susan Bigelow, City Clerk Approved as to form: John M. Kaheny, City Attorney Dated: TRANSCORE ITS, Inc. [name of person, title] Exhibit List to Agreement ( x ) Exhibit A. Agreement between City Chula Vista and Transcore ( x ) Exhibit B. Transcore Work Plan ( x ) Exhibit C. RTA's SCATS Software Licence [End-User] Agreement 05/09/01 Page 14 Exhibit A to Agreement between City of Chula Vista and TRANSCORE ITS, Inc. 1. Effective Date of Agreement: ~ 2001 2. City-Related Entity: ( X ) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California ( ) Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of California ( ) Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a ( ) Other: . a [insert business form] ("City") 3. Place of Business for City: City of Chula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista. CA 91910 4. Consultant: TRANSCORE ITS. Inc. 5. Business Form of Consultant: ( ) Sole Proprietorship ( ) Partnership X(~ Corporation 6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant: 300 S Harbor Blvd. Suite 516 Anahiem, CA 92805 Phone (714) 758-0019 FAX (714) 758-9423 7. General Duties as described in Exhibit B. 8. Scope of Work and Schedule: 05/09/01 Page 15 A. Detailed Scope of Work: See attached Exhibit B (Transcom Work plan and schedule) P_ D~c rot Commer~ cment of Consultant Services: ( ) Same as Effective Date of Agreement (X) Other: City issuance of Notice to Proceed C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables: Deliverable No. 1: Project Schedule 15 days after award of contract Deliverable No. 2: Detailed system design report 30 days after notice to proceed Deliverable No. 3: System Detection Design Report 30 days after notice to proceed Deliverable No. 4: Three Fixed workstations and two laptops. 95 days after notice to proceed Deliverable No. 5: Complete operational SCAT adaptive traffic control system for ten intersections 40 days after completion and acceptance of project construction Deliverable No. 6: Training course outline, training materials and training 30 days prior to start of training as shown on the schedule Deliverable No 7: Svstem operational support Begins at initial Software acceptance and continues for one year. Deliverable No. 8: Documentation During contract as required Deliverable No. 9: Test procedures 30 days prior to the planned date of testing. Deliverable No. 10: Test procedures, controller programs and testing 05/09/01 Page 16 As per schedule date D. Date for completion of ail Consultant services: 40 days after completion and acceptance of project Construction 9. Insurance Requirements: (x) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance (x) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000. (x) Commemial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000. (x) Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General Liability coverage). (x) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General Liability coverage). 10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant: See TransCore Work Plan (Exhibit B) 11. Compensation: A. Hourly Rate Arrangement For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay Consultant for the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the rates or amounts set forth in the Rate Schedule hem in below according to the following terms and conditions: (1) (x) Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of said Maximum Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform all of the Defined Services herein required of Consultant for $327,864.19 including all Materials, and other "reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation"). (2) ( ~ Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials Arrangement At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to ("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to any additional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and approved 05/09/01 Page 17 by the City. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing additional Services at Consultant's own cost and expense. Rate Schedulen Category of Employee of Consultant Name Hourly Rate Project Manager Michael E.Kmeger $138.57 Sr. Systems Engineer Neil Gross $116.69 Systems Engineer $ 61.71 Admin Assistant $ 39.27 (X.~l) Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services rendered after February 1, 2001. 12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of services herein required, City shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below: (x) SCATS License, lump sum $86,228.00 (x) Equipment costs, not to exceed $47.237.00 (x) Travel. not to exceed $13.404.00 ( ) Extended 2 year Warranty lump sum (Not included) 13. Contract Administrators: For TransCore: Christine K. Faschini, CPA, CPCM 9480 Carroll Park Drive San Diego, CA 92121 858-826-4036 FAX: 858-826-4324 christine.faschini @transcore.com 14. Liquidated Damages Rate: (X} $250.00 per day. Commencing 10 days after the Client Bum-in of SCATS--completion of deliverable 5. 15. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code: 05/09/01 Page 18 (X_~ Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer. ( ) FPPC Filer ( ) Category No. 1. Investments and sources of income. ( ) Category No. 2. Interests in real property. ( ) Category No. 3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income subject to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department. ( ) Category No. 4. Investments in business entities and sources of income which engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property. ( ) Category No. 5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. ( ) Category No. 6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials, machineD, or equipment ( ) CategoD' No. 7. Business positions. ( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any: 16 ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman 17. Permitted Subconsultants: 15. Bill Processing: A. Consultant's billing to be submitted for the following 05/09/01 Page 19 period of time: (x) Monthly ( ) Quarterly ( ) Other: B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing: (x) First of the Month ( ) 15th Day of each Month ( ) End of the Month ( ) Other: C. City's Account Number: 16. Security for Performance ( ) Performance Bond, $ ( ) Letter of Credit, $ ( ) Other Security: Type: Amount: $ (x) Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City shall be entitled to retain, at their option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or "Retention Amount" until the City determines that the Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred: (x) Retention Percentage: 10% ( ) Retention Amount: $ Retention Release Event: 1st Retention release. Completion of Design Reports-Deliverable No.3 2and Retention release. SCATS License/Equipment/Documentation. Deliverable No. 3rd Retention release Software AcceptanceTestin_o. Deliverable No. 7 4th Retention releases. Completion of SCATS Bum-in by Client. Deliverable Nofi 05/09/01 Page 20 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF T~E CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REJECTING BIDS, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH TP~NSCORE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM PHASE II (CIP-TF237), AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, on August 11~ 1999, the following two sealed bids to implement construction of Phase II of the Adaptive Traffic Control System were received: Contractor Bid Amount 1. Medland Controls, Inc. $810,913.27 2. T & M Electric, dba Per~ Electric Incomplete bid WHEREAS, the low bid amount was 56% higher than the engineer's cost estimate of $520,000.00, which estimate was obtained from DKS Associates staff that used average unit prices from similar projects constructed by other municipalities; and WHEREAS, after receiving the two bids, one of which was very high and the other was non-responsive, staff concluded that the best and most cost effective way to implement the project was to reject bids and advertise for Request For Proposals (RFP) to encourage all highly qualified adaptive software consultants to submit and present their proposals as the primary firm performing the work instead of being the sub-contractor and performing only a portion of the work under the previous competitive process; and WHEREAS, On March 25, 2000, staff proceeded with the advertisement for Requests For Proposals (RFP) to implement the adaptive system after consulting with San Diego Traffic Engineering Council (SANTEC) and Caltrans and o~taining their approval; and WHEREAS, on May 24, 2000, City staff received proposals from three (3) firms to develop and implement the adaptive system: Transcore, Bi Tran Systems, Inc. and P.B. Farradyne; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Council Policy, a City Manager's Consultant Selection Committee was . appointed to 1 interview, evaluate and recommend the selection of a successful firm; and WHEREAS, after interviewing all three firms, and taking in consideration system costs, system development and implementation proposal and the results from the interview process, it was apparent that the most qualified firm to perform the implementation of the adaptive system was Transcore whose staff demonstrated their ability to deliver and install a proven adaptive system on time and within budget; and WHEREAS, they also demonstrated a more thorough knowledge of the City's existing system and understanding of our objectives in comparison with the other consultants. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby reject bids from Medland Controls, Inc. and T & M Electric, dba Perry Electric. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve an Agreement with Transcore for the implementation of the Adaptive Traffic Control System Phase II (CIP-TF237) . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Mayor of the City of Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt Jo~fn FF. Ka~e~.y Director of Public Works City Attorney Parties and Recital Page(s) Agreement between City of Chula Vista And TransCore ITS, Inc. For Engineering, Design And Implementation Consulting Services This agreement is made and entered into this ~ 2001 for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 1, is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such the City of Chula Vista (City), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Transcore ITS (Consultant) shall be referred to as TransCore, whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 6 (Consultant), and is made with reference to the following facts: Recitals Whereas, the City of Chula Vista has advertised for Request for Qualifications for a Consultant to develop and implement an Adaptive Traffic Control System for the Pilot project of ten (10) intersections. The project is Federal-Aid funded using Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds and, Whereas, after receiving three proposals and interviewing the three qualified system firms, the City has selected TransCore as the most qualified and experienced firm with which to enter into an agreement with to fulfill the requirements of this contract; and, Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; 05/09/01 Page 1 E. Standard of Care Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. F. Insurance Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and Subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by the following insurance coverage's, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A", Class "V" or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City: Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9. Conunercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names City as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City in the same manner as members of the general public CCross-liability Coverage"). Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. G. Proof of Insurance Coverage. (1) Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured. (2) Policy Endorsements Required. In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager. 05/09/01 Page 3 information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance of this agreement. B. Compensation Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12. All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be charged upon making such payment. 3. Administration of Contract Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine administration of this agreement. 4. Term. This Agreement shall terminate on February 1, 2002, unless extended by mutual consent. 5. Liquidated Damages The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14. It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in performance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay. Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of the time specified for the completion of Deliverables 6-10, the Consultant shall pay to the City, or have 05/09/01 Page 5 E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney if Consultant learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder. F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests. Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents and Subconsultants("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15. Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter. Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. 7. Hold Harmless Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of the negligent or willful conduct of the Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, reasonable attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. 05/09/01 Page 7 Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the Subconsultants identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants". 12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material Excluding Software. All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties, excluding software, produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have unre- stricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement. TransCore provided software will be in accordance with the most current SCATS license and End User Agreement and warranty. 13. Independent Contractor City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard thereto. 14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures No suit or arbitration shall be brought, arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same. Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. 05/09/01 Page 9 F. Governing Law/Venue This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. G. Warranties All software warranties shall be as stated in the SCATS Software Licence [End-User] Agreement. (a) TransCore warrants the system provided under the contract will be of good quality and materials in accordance with the Detail Design Document. In the event of an incident requiring maintenance outside of the normal preventive, predictive, and corrective requirements set forth herein, including but not limited to force majeure, vandalism, theft, or accidents, TransCore will perform such work on a time and materials basis, as agreed by both parties. (b) TransCore specifically disclaims, and the City waives, any other express guarantees or warranties. (c) This Agreement does not cover service, maintenance or repair attributable to unauthorized attempt by the City to repair or maintain the equipment, to catastrophe, fault or. negligence of the City, improper use or misuse of the equipment by the City or causes external to the equipment, such as, but not limited to, power failure, air conditioning failure or loss incurred in transportation. With respect to any such loss or damage, TransCore will submit to the City a description of the work to be done and request the City's consent to restore the equipment to normal operating conditions at TransCore's prevailing rates for labor and materials. If the City does not agree to have the TransCore restore the equipment to normal operating condition, TransCore shall have the right to terminate its obligations under this Agreement. H. Limitation of Liability Any claim under warranty must be made within the time specified in the applicable warranty clause. L Limitation on Dissemination of TransCore Commercial Work Product TransCore and Customer expressly exclude any and all third parties from the benefits of this Agreement. In the event that the customer furnishes any TransCore work product to a person who is not a party to this Agreement, Customer agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless TransCore from and against all claims, damages, losses, costs and expenses (including attorney's fees) of actions brought by third parties, and arising out of or relating to such third party's use or distribution of, or reliance upon, the Contractor's work product. 05/09/01 Page 11 M. Cost Principles and Administrative Requirements 1. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 48 Chapter 1, Part 31 shall be used to determine thc allowability of the individual items of cost, excluding fixed price, lump sum items. 2. The contractor agrees to comply with federal procedures in accordance with CFR 49, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. 3. Any costs for which payments have been made to the contractor, which are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under CFR 48, Chapter 1 Part 31, are subject to repayment by the contractor to the City of Chula Vista, the State and the Federal Government, excluding fixed price, lump sum items. 4. Any subcontract, entered into as a result of this contract, shall contain all of the provisions of this Article. N. Subcontracting 1. The Contractor shall perform the work contemplated with resources available within its own organization and no portion of the work pertinent to this contract shall be subcontracted without written authorization by the State's or City, except that which is expressly identified in the Contractor's Cost Proposal. 2. Any subcontract in excess of $25,000, entered into as a result of this contract, shall contain all the provisions stipulated in this contract to be applicable to subcontractors. 3. Any substitution of subcontractors must be approved in writing by the State's or City's Contract Manager. 4. Any subcontract, entered into as a result of this contract, shall contain all of the provisions of this Article. 05/09/01 Page 13 Exhibit A to Agreement between City of Chula Vista and TRANSCORE ITS, Inc. 1. Effective Date of Agreement: ~ 2001 2. City-Related Entity: ( X ) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California ( ) Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of California ( ) Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a ( ) Other: , a [insert business form] ("City") 3. Place of Business for City: City of Chula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 4. Consultant: TRANSCORE ITS. Inc. 5. Business Form of Consultant: ( ) Sole Proprietorship ( ) Partnership (X) Corporation 6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant: 300 S Harbor Blvd. Suite 516 Anahiem, CA 92805 Phone (714) 758-0019 FAX (714) 758-9423 7. General Duties as described in Exhibit B. 8. Scope of Work and Schedule: 05/09/01 Page 15 As per schedule date D. Date for completion of all Consultant services: 40 days after completion and acceptance of project Construction 9. Insurance Requirements: (x) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance (x) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000. (x) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000. (x) Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General Liability coverage). (x) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General Liability coverage). 10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant: See TransCore Work Plan (Exhibit B) 11. Compensation: A. Hourly Rate Arrangement For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay Consultant for the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the rates or amounts set forth in the Rate Schedule here in below according to the following terms and conditions: (1) (x) Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of said Maximum Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform all of the Defined Services herein required of Consultant for $327,864.19 including all Materials, and other "reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation"). (2) ( ) Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials Arrangement At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to ("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to any additional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and approved 05/09/01 Page 17 (X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer. ( ) FPPC Filer ( ) Category No. 1. Investments and soumes of income. ( ) Category No. 2. Interests in real property. ( ) Category No. 3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income subject to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department. ( ) Category No. 4. Investments in business entities and sources of income which engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property. ( ) Category No. 5. Investments in business entities and soumes of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. ( ) Category No. 6. Investments in business entities and soumes of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment ( ) Category No. 7. Business positions. ( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any: 16. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman 17. Permitted Subconsultants: 15. Bill Processing: A. Consultant's billing to be submitted for the following 05/09/01 Page 19 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REJECTING BIDS, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH TP~ANSCORE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM PN-ASE II (CIP-TF237), AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, on August 11, 1999, the following two sealed bids to implement construction of Phase II of the Adaptive Traffic Control System were received: Contractor Bid Amount h Medland Controls, Inc. $810,913.27 2. T & M Electric, dba Perry Electric Incomplete bid WHEREAS, the low bid amount was 56% higher than the engineer's cost estimate of $520,000.00, which estimate was obtained from DKS Associates staff that used average unit prices from similar projects constructed by other municipalities; and WHEREAS, after receiving the two bids, one of which was very high and the other was non-responsive, staff concluded that the best and most cost effective way to implement the project was to reject bids and advertise for Request For Proposals (RFP) to encourage all highly qualified adaptive software consultants to submit and present their proposals as the primary firm performing the work instead of being the sub-contractor and performing only a portion of the work under the previous competitive process; and WHEREAS, On March 25, 2000, staff proceeded with the advertisement for Requests For Proposals (RFP) to implement the adaptive system after consulting with San Diego Traffic Engineering Council (SAi~TEC) and Caltrans and o~taining their approval; and WHEREAS, on May 24, 2000, City staff received proposals from three (3) firms to develop and implement the adaptive system: Transcore, Bi Tran Systems, Inc. and P.B. Farradyne; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Council Policy, a City Manager's Consultant Selection Committee was . appointed to 1 interview, evaluate and recommend the selection of a successful firm; and WHEREAS, after interviewing all three firms, and taking in consideration system costs, system development and 'implementation proposal and the results from the interview process, it was apparent that the most qualified firm to perform the implementation of the adaptive system was Transcore whose staff demonstrated their ability to deliver and install a proven adaptive system on time and within budget; and WHEREAS, they also demonstrated a more thorough knowledge of the City's existing system and understanding of our objectives in comparison with the other consultants. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby reject bids from Medland Controls, Inc. and T & M Electric, dba Perry Electric. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve an Agreement with Transcore for the implementation of the Adaptive Traffic Control System Phase II (CIP-TF237) . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt Jovan 9y'.' Ka]~e~y Director of Public Works City Attorne~ Council Agenda Statement Item No Meeting Date Tuesday, May 29, 2001 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Budget by Appropriating $239,000 to Administration for Recycling and Conservation Education Programs based on unanticipated revenues. SUBMITTED BY: Special Operations Manager~4~-~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~ (4/Sths Vote Yes X No ) BACKGROUND: The Solid Waste Disposal and Recycling Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Pacific Waste Services (Pacific) establishes a plan to share any potential net revenue from the sale of recyclables above the franchise agent's then stated costs plus, a reasonable profit. Under the agreement Pacific Waste Services receives 40% of the net revenue from the sale of recyclables and the City receives 60% to implement the "Recycling Education Program." The agreement also states that Pacific will receive 60% and the City will receive 40% in any year that the California Integrated Waste Management Board certifies that Chula Vista has reached the 50% mandated recycling goal. Pacific recently sent the City a check for approximately $239,000 as its share of the sale of recyclables for calendar year 2000. Recycling markets are down and costs have increased this year, staff does not expect to have substantial revenue from this source next year. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution and appropriate funds for the Recycling and Conservation Education Program under the Special Operations Program in Administration. BOARD AND COMMISION RECOMMENDATION: The City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element contains a detailed list of goals and objectives for the City's Recycling Education Program and that Element was revie;ved and approved by the Resource Conservation Commission prior to submittal and approval by the State. DISCUSSION: The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 subjects cities to a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day for failure to make a "good faith effort," to divert 25% of the City's total waste generation from landfills by 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. The City diverted approximately 36% of its waste stream in 1995 and was diverting approximately 42% of its annual waste stream by 1998. Despite the new programs implemented by staff and the increased efforts by residents and businesses to participate in those programs the diversion rate calculated by the state has declined to 37% for the year 2000. Page 2 ]item No Meeting Date 5/29/01 Staff attributes the decline reported by the State to growth in the City and economy, an increase in non- recycled construction waste and some anomalies in the state's diversion formula, which may not accurately reflect the City's efforts and actual diversion. Chula Vista is not the only City in the state or region to see a decline in diversion rates at the same time that quantifiable recycling programs demonstrate increased diversion. That "good faith effort" expected by the State begins with implementing the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE). The SRRE is a ten-year plan approved by the Resource Conservation Commission and Council prior to being submitted and approved by the State in 1990. The curbside, multi-family and commercial recycling programs were a major part of the commitment the City made to the state as part of the SRRE. Many of the new programs developed and implemented have not had the time to mature and become as common a practice or habit as curbside recycling has for most households. One of the programs proposed as part of our agreement with Laidlaw and then Pacific was a transition to "volume based," or "pay as you through," residential and small generator trash rate schedule. City Staff and Pacific Waste Services have been unable to reach an agreement on program and rate structure and that program has not been implemented. Additionally, the City has also chosen to emphasize education, environmental benefits, market development, and potential savings rather than pursue enforcement and fines as a means of gaining compliance. However, Recycling Rangers may need to use the existing fines as an enforcement tool of last resort with some generators to gain compliance and demonstrate to the State that the City is executing its SRRE in "good faith." The $239,000 in recycling revenue is unanticipated revenue. All or a portion of the funds could be returned to residents and small business ratepayers in the form of a one-time payment of approximately $6 or 50¢ per household per month for a year. Program Recommendations Staff recommends that Council direct the Special Operations program to invest these funds in programs that assist residents and small businesses meet the State mandated 50% diversion goal and whenever possible expand the energy conservation assistance previously approved by Council. Approximately $60,000 previously approved by Council is already being used to provide solid waste diversion information and energy audits to (300) three hundred homes and (10) ten businesses by June 1, 2001. The City has hired and trained three interns that are working with the City Recycling Specialists to promote increased recycling participation, install compact fluorescents at no cost to participants and assist them with immediate participation in the energy rebate programs for everything from dual glazed windows, refrigerators and pool filter motors to insulation and programmable thermostats. Staff received requests for assistance from 500 households in the first public notice for assistance and requests continue to come in almost daily. Page 3 Item No Meeting Date 5/29/01 Staffis requesting additional support to reach up to an additional 1,000 households and expand the program to include matching rebates or energy planners (valued at up to $50) for refrigerators or similarly equipped large household appliances. Staff is requesting that a portion of the funds be used for wages to expand and continue the intern efforts. Staff has worked with a contractor that has performed lighting audits and lighting conservation equipment at approximately ten businesses. Staff is also requesting that some of the funds requested be used to assist up to 25 additional businesses this summer and increase the matching funds from $1,000 to up to $2,500 per small business. Interns also work with the Recycling Specialists and businesses to implement solid waste plans and access additional commercial energy conservation rebates. Staff has contacted the San Diego Energy Office, San Diego Gas and Electric and the California Energy Commission to coordinate with their efforts, and insure that the City's program maximize the benefit available to Chula Vista ratepayers. However, Staff is also focusing on making these programs as convenient as possible for the public to participate in before rolling blackouts become a more frequent reality, and before summer rate increases have their full impact on businesses and residents. Staff is recommending that the funds not expended in the energy and solid waste audit and assistance program be invested in services and supplies that will help improve participation in the City's commercial, multi-family and residential recycling programs. Additionally, Staff intends to develop incentives that will specifically address the increase in construction debris. Staff is also recommending that a portion of the funds be used to promote local business participation in the new Chula Vista Recycling Market Development Zone Program. Commercial and industrial generators of paper products, concrete/asphalt, and yard waste have the greatest potential for contributing to the City's annual diversion goal. Staff proposes to fund pilot programs to encourage developers and major office complexes to implement corrugated cardboard, concrete and asphalt recycling programs. Staff is also recommending that a portion of the funds be allocated to assist property managers, homeowner associations and tenant groups with public education and incentives to promote participation in their existing multi-family programs, particularly mixed paper. Mixed paper, concrete/asphalt and green waste are components of the commercial waste stream that the City will need to increase diversion in order to meet the state mandated recycling goals. Additionally, subject to availability of funds, staff is recommending that a portion of the funds be used to assist Chula Vista manufacturers access the low interest loans and other benefits associated with the Recycling Market Development Zone (RMDZ). The RMDZ is a state program that provides low interest loans to businesses that can use funds to increase the recycled feedstock used in the manufacture of their products or demonstrate the potential to reduce the amount of waste produced during their manufacturing process. FISCAL IMPACT: There will be no impact to the general fund. The recommended program and expenditures will be fully funded by the unanticipated revenue from recycling, which has already been received by the City. Funds may not be fully expended until the end of the next fiscal year. Solid Waste and Recycling Budget for Unanticipated Revenue Org Key Funds 05810/Obi ect Requested Total Funds Available $239,000 Hourly Wages & Benefits 6005 Interns 33,200 6222 Pars 1,300 6231 Medicare 500 Total Requested 35,000 6401 Other Contractual Services Lighting and Energy Conservation Contracts Pacific Waste Services; Commercial Recycling Services Total Requested 91,000 6531 Printing & Binding; Recycling and Conservation Guides, inserts & Printed Materials 20,000 6801 Office Supplies 500 6883 Other Commodities Lighting, energy efficient equipment & rebates Recycling Containers, container identification stickers Total Requested 92,500 Total Funds Requested $239,000 RESOLUTION NO. 2001- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENT)ING THE FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATiNG $239,000 TO ADMINISTRATION FOR RECYCLING AND CONSERVATION EDUCATION PROGRAMS BASED ON UNANTICIPATED REVENUES WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Disposal and Recycling Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Pacific Waste Services establishes a plan to share any potential net revenue fi'om the sale of recyclables above the franchise agents then stated costs plus a reasonable profit; and WHEREAS, under the agreement, the City receives 60% and Pacific Waste Services receives 40% of the net revenue from the processing and sale of recyclables; and WHEREAS, the agreement also states that Pacific will receive 60% and the City will receive 40% when the California Integrated Waste Management Board deems the City as having reached the 50% mandated; and WHEREAS, Pacific Waste Services recently sent the City a check for approximately $239,000 as its share of the sale ofrecyclables for calendar year 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby amend the Fiscal Year 2000-2001 budget by appropriating $239,000 to Administration for Recycling and Conservation Education Programs based on unanticipated revenues. ?resented by Approved as to form by Michael Meacham J~. K~t~neny/~''-~- ~ Special Operations Manager ~t~ Attorney .Ig,altomcy\reso\Recycling Education Appropriation COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item: Meeting Date 5/29/2001 ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista awarding a record digitization services contract to Western Micrographics Systems, Inc. as the lowest total bid for requested services. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning arid Building/~ Purchasing Age~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~-~ {1v (4/Sths Vote: Yes No X ) In April 1999, the City Clerk's Office received approval to begin a migration of the City's records archiving to a digital database, accessible by a newly acquired Laserfiche® software. Until this conversion began, the Deparnnent of Planning and Building archived records as rolled plans, boxed paper, microfilm, microfiche and aperture cards. The requested digitization services will assist this department, and any other City departments, to archive permanent City records in one medium, in a format compatible with City Clerk records retention standards. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council award the record digitization services contract to Western Micrographics Systems, Inc., the lowest total bid for the requested services. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A DISCUSSION: Background Some City departments are responsible for the retention of permanent public records, and Planning and Building is one such department. The department currently has rolled plans stored in the Parkway Gym, boxed records stored in the Corporation Yard, and boxed records archived off-site with storage contractors. In the Public Services Building, the department has both rolled and folded plans, files in cabinets, microfilm, microfiche and aperture cards. Obtaining access to records on multiple media and in multiple locations is not an efficient use of staff time, and provides inconsistent timeframes for public research. In April 1999, the City Clerk received approval to begin a Citywide transition to a digitized archival database, accessible by Laserfiche® software. Once records are archived in digital format, document research can be conducted from a computer terminal linked to the database. Apart from the benefits of uniform formatting, the existing state of archived paper documents will be recorded at the time the documents are digitized, halting a further loss of quality from deterioration. //-/ Page 2, Item Meeting Date 05/29/01 Consultant Selection Process On February 9, 2001, the City's Purchasing Agent advertised a Notice to Bidders for Records Digitizing and Management Services. On February 27 the Purchasing Agent convened a mandatory pre-bid meeting for potential bidders, and an optional walk-through for vendors to assess the condition and organization of the records to be digitized was conducted. On March 2 Addendum No. 1 to the Notice to Bidders was issued to clarify issues raised in the pre-bid meeting, and provide an option for microfilming services for the archived records in Parkway Gym, should that medium prove to be substantially less cost that digitizing. The City received five bids, and the total bid calculations are based on types and numbers of documents detailed in the bid package. The cost comparison is shown below: Western Micrographics Systems $ 78,993 Document Imaging Service Corp 96,087 RCI Image Systems 190,586 FicheNet 216,798 Mobile Micrographics only bid on microfilming Western Micrographics Systems was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Since their bid for digitizing the archives in Parkway Gym was lower than the microfilming cost bid by Mobile Micrographics, the microfilming option was eliminated since it is not compatible with Laserfiche ® software. Staff evaluated a product sample and conducted reference checks, both to their satisfaction. In addition, Western Micrographics Systems has performed satisfactory work for the City in the past. Conclusion Based on the lowest total bid for the requested records digitization services, staff recommends awarding this services contract to Western Micrographics Systems, Inc. The initial term of the contract is one year, renewable in five subsequent one-year intervals based on mutual consent. While the Department of Planning and Building is initiating this service contract, use of this vendor is intended for the benefit of any City department requiring such services. FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for this contract is included in the FY 2000-01 budget for the Planning and Building Department. M:\City Clerk\MicrographicsA 113.doc RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AWARDING A RECORDS DIGITIZATION SERVICES CONTRACT TO WESTERN MICROGRAPHICS SYSTEMS, INC. AS THE LOWEST TOTAL BID FOR REQUESTED SERVICES WHEREAS, the City Clerk has endorsed Citywide usage of Laserfiche ® software to access archived public records; and WHEREAS, Laserfiche ® software accesses only records that have been converted to digital format; and WHEREAS, The Department of Planning and Building requires digitization services to convert public records for Laserfiche ® access; and WHEREAS, Western Micrographics Systems, Inc. submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the requested services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby award a records digitization services contract to Western Micrographics Systems,- Inc. as the lowest total bid for requested services. Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter John M. Kaheny Planning and Building Director City Attorney M:\City ClerkLMicrographicsReso.doc COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date 05129101 ITEM TITLE: A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY ORDINANCES 1670, 2507, AND 2509; AND AMENDING CHAPTERS X (BUILDING AND HOUSING), (PLANNING), AND XV (FIRE) OF THE CITY'S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE. AN URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE 1670 RELATING TO SIGN PERMIT AND PLAN REVIEW FEES;..AND AMENDING ORDINANCES 2507 AND 2509 RELATING TO PLAN REVIEW FEES FOR BUILDING AND MECHANICAL WORK RESPECTIVELY; AND AMENDING CHAPTERS X (BUILDING AND HOUSING), XIV (PLANNING), AND XV (FIRE) OF THE CITY'S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building Director of Budget and Analysis ~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes X No__) On April 3, 2001, Ordinance 2832 amending the City's Master Fee Schedule was approved by Council after its first reading and adopted by Council after its second reading of April 17, 2001 to take effect 60 days thereafter. On April 3, 2001, Council also approved Urgency Ordinance 2831-A, the first in a series of three 30-day urgency ordinances necessary for immediate implementation of those categories of fees proposed for overall reduction. The present urgency ordinance will continue the fee changes imposed by Urgency Ordinance 2831-A for an additional 30-days. The fee changes proposed in the present urgency ordinance are identical to those previously adopted in Urgency Ordinance 2831- A and are detailed in Attachment A of this document. For convenience, the fee changes proposed in Ordinance 2832 are included as Attachment B. These fee changes are supported by both the Building Industry Association (Attachment C) and the Board of Appeals and Advisors (Attachment D). RECOMMENDATION: That City Council adopt an urgency ordinance amending ordinances 1670, 2507, and 2509, resulting in changes to sections 15.52.020, 15.08.050, and 15.16.050 of the Municipal Code as indicated in Attachment E, and amending Chapters X (Building and Housing), XIV (Planning), and XV (Fire) of the City's Master Fee Page 2, Item Meeting Date 05129101 Schedule as indicated in Attachment A, effective for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of adoption. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: City staff initially presented the methodology and results of the building fee study to the Chula Vista Board of Appeals and Advisors at their December 12, 2000 meeting. City staff incorporated the Board's suggestions into the study and made a second presentation to the Board at their March 12, 2001 meeting. As indicated in the minutes from this meeting (included as Attachment D), the Board unanimously supported the proposed fee changes. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the action will not have a physical effect on the environment andis an ongoing project of the City and is therefore exempt from CEQA under Section 15261 (Ongoing Projects). DISCUSSION: The first step in the process of analyzing the costs of providing building-related services and the fees charged for these services was to identify the total costs (both direct and indirect) of providing building-related services. The direct costs associated with providing building-related services primarily consisted of the salaries, benefits and supplies and services related to direct service providing staff (i.e. Plans Examiners, Building Inspectors, Development Service Technicians). The indirect costs associated with providing building-related services primarily consisted of the proportional shares of the salaries, benefits, and supplies and services related to departmental management and citywide support services. Examples of indirect costs include departmental management and clerical support, information services, personnel, and payroll. Since indirect costs represent a substantial portion of overall costs, staff felt it prudent to update the City's indirect cost allocation prior to undertaking the fee study. This was particularly important because the quantity, composition, and compensation of city staff changed significantly during the prior fiscal year. Updating the City's indirect cost allocation improved the accuracy of the allocation of City and Departmental support services and their associated costs to the various building- related services. Completing the indirect cost allocation required the contributions of numerous city staff and included extensive interviews with key personnel from each department and an in depth review of all departmental budgets. The indirect cost allocation was used in conjunction with direct cost data collected during interviews with personnel from the Divisions of Building, Engineering, Planning and Fire Prevention to determine the total costs of providing plan review, building and ancillary inspections, permit processing, Page 3, Item Meeting Date 05129101 permit issuance, and plan maintenance services. It was determined that costs related to plan review were incurred by each of these divisions while costs related to building inspection and permit processing were confined to the divisions of Building and Engineering. The second step in the process was to collect data regarding types of building activities (e.g. new construction, additions, tenant improvements), permit volume for each activity, and the relative time to complete each building-related service. These data were collected from staff interviews and the Permits Plus database. Since many permit fees are based upon building valuation, it was necessary to further demarcate permit volume for several valuation ranges. This required making adjustments to the building 'valuations recorded by Permits Plus because the existing fees are based upon building valuations derived from tables published by Building Standards in 1993 and the proposed fees are based upon building valuations derived from tables published in the most recent edition of Building Standards. This procedure effectively'eliminated the impact of changing the basis for building valuation to the most recent set of Building Standards tables and insured that any changes in permit fees resulting from this study would be strictly representative of changes in total costs and the allocation of total costs to the various building activities. Next, total costs were allocated to the various building activities based upon permit volume and the relative time required to complete each service. Since the building services provided for any given permit potentially extend a year or more beyond the time of issuance, it was decided to base costs on the current year's budget and to base levels of service on the prior year's actual permit volume. This methodology was chosen for two reasons. First, it insures that resource levels will always be sufficient to complete services in a timely manner. Second, it allows for simple, fair, and consistent annual adjustments to the building fee schedule because overcharging or undercharging during any given year is compensated for by the following year's fee update. For example, if permit volume were to temporarily drop then the adjustment mechanism would increase fees in the subsequent year because total costs would now be spread over a smaller number of permits. The opposite effect would occur if permit volume were to increase substantially. If increases or decreases in permit volume were deemed permanent then staffing levels would be adjusted accordingly resulting in fairly constant fees over the long run. Finally, the cost data were matched with the permit volume data to arrive at fees for each type of service and activity. To facilitate the transition to the proposed fee schedule an effort was made to retain the structure of the current fee schedule as much as possible while concurrently simplifying it by eliminating redundant fees. For example, under the existing fee schedule the total permit fee charged for a typical tract home includes building plan review fees, site plan and architectural review fees, building permit fees, permit issuance fees, unit fees based upon the number of plumbing, mechanical, and electrical fixtures, Page 4, Item Meeting Date 05129/01 plan maintenance fees, and Certificate of Occupancy fees. Under the proposed fee schedule the fee for the same permit would be comprised of a plan review fee and a permit processing/inspection fee. Maintaining the existing fee structure while simplifying the fee schedule significantly reduces the cost of redesigning the Permits Plus System to conform to the proposed fee schedule. Two types of fees are being proposed as a result of this study: fiat fees and valuation-based fees. Flat fees are proposed for any services where the level of .effort required did not vary significantly enough to warrant disparate fees. Valuation-based fees were only proposed when a nexus existed ~oetween a building's valuation and service costs. Basing certain fees on building valuation helped to improve equity among fee payers because building valuation accurately reflects design complexity, materials, square footage, and other features that affect the level of staff effort required. Using fiat and valuation- based fees instead of charging on an houdy full cost recovery basis helped reduce record keeping costs and resulted in lower fees overall. However, it is important to note that the use of fiat and valuation-based fees may require annual review and possible annual adjustments when permit volume or costs change significantly. For valuation-based fees, the valuation ranges were chosen to group together similar types of permits. Table 1 lists the valuation ranges being proposed and the most common types of permits in each range. Table 1: Proposed Valuation Ranges Total Valuation Most Common Permit Types $1 to $2,000 Masonry Walls, Roofing, City Standard Plans $2,001 to $100,000 Additions to Single Family Residences and Tenant Improvements $100,001 to $300,000 New Single Family Tract Homes $300,001 to $500,000 New Single Family Custom Homes and New Apartments / Condominiums $500,001 to $1,000,000 New Commercial Construction $1,000,001 and up New Commercial Construction and New Apartments / Condominiums The proposed changes to the City's existing Master Fee Schedule are presented in Attachment A of this document. While the City's general policy has been to charge permit fees commensurate with the full cost of the services provided, some situations warrant modifying this policy in order to maintain public safety. Staff and the Board of Appeals and Advisors supports a policy that would provide a financial incentive to individuals that need to replace or repair equipment and/or materials that are essential to the maintenance of safe and habitable residences. Page 5, Item Meeting Date 05/29101 By subsidizing the cost of certain minor residential permits such as water heaters, fumace replacements, gas line repairs, and the resetting of gas and electric meters, the City will be encouraging applicants to ensure that their repair work is being done in a safe and reliable manner, which will enhance safety for not only the individual residence but also the surrounding neighborhood. It is also appropriate to recognize that some homeowners will cite the cost of the permit as justification for not obtaining the required permits. When this occurs it creates life safety issues for users of the structures as well as the immediate neighborhood and burdens the City's Code Enforcement Section with a duty to pursue correction of the violation. The cost associated with pursuing a code enforcement complaint exceeds the cost of the proposed subsidy for these types of minor permits. The types of permits being proposed for subsidy are only those for which homeowners have very limited control over the timing of the need for such repairs. Other minor residential permits, such as patio covers, air conditioning systems and room additions, are not being recommended for subsidy because they do not constitute work that must be performed to maintain the safety and habitability of a structure and are elective actions. Staff is proposing that fees for these types of permits be charged at 50% of the actual costs. The impact on the City's FY 2001 general fund resulting from this action is estimated at $50,000 assuming that permit volume continues at its FY 2000 level. Key Findings 1. Since the current policy of charging separate plan review fees for the Divisions of Planning, Building, Engineering, and Fire Prevention is cumbersome, A single fee schedule for plan review should be adopted that accurately captures the total costs incurred by these four divisions. 2. The amount of time required to review patio cover, masonry wall, carport, and deck plans conforming to city standards were not found to increase with building valuation. Therefore, A fiat fee for the review of all plans conforming to city standards should be adopted. 3. The amount of time required to review of repetitive home plans (i.e. plans identical to previously approved model home plans) was not found to increase with building valuation. However, the process of tracking previously approved model home plans, identifying plans that are potentially repetitive, and verifying that a plan is indeed identical to a previously approved model plan is a cumbersome and time consuming process. Therefore, Page 6, Item Meeting Date 05129/01 A program allowing for a state licensed architect to provide authentication of repetitive plans should be implemented and a fiat fee for the review of all authenticated repetitive plans should be adopted. 4. To ensure resource levels will always be sufficient to complete services which have been paid for in a timely manner and to ensure that fees are maintained at an equitable level, Fees for building-related services should be adjusted based on the current year's budgeted costs, the prior year's permit volume,' and the most recently published Building Standards valuation tables. This adjustment mechanism may require increasin.q or decreasing fees in future years to keep pace with temporary swin.qs in development activity. '' 5. The separate unit fee schedules for electrical, .plumbing, and mechanical permits were found to be of little benefit when used in conjunction with building permits. In addition, they were found to be a hindrance to providing quick and accurate fee estimates. Therefore, The unit fee schedules should be eliminated and the costs associated with providing these services incorporated in the building permit fee. 6. To increase the likelihood that potentially dangerous residential repairs are performed in a safe and reliable manner and to reduce potential code enforcement costs, Permits for residential repairs that generally preclude a homeowner from planning for the expense of the repair (i.e. water heater replacements) should be subsidized at 50% of the actual costs of providing these services. 7. Interviews with personnel in the Division of Fire Prevention indicated a substantial amount of Fire Prevention staff time is being committed at no charge to the review and inspection of fire suppression and preventions systems. Therefore, Fees should be implemented to cover the costs associated with the plan review and inspection of sprinkler systems, hydrant installations, fire alarm systems, and hood suppression systems. Page 7, Item Meeting Date 05/29/01 Impact of Proposed Chan.qes on Fee Payers Adoption of the proposed changes to the Master Fee Schedule would affect numerous parties including large tract housing developers, building contractors, and individual home owners. In particular: · Permit fees for minor items such as water heater replacements and the addition of air conditioning units would increase but would still generally be lower than the average fee charged by other San Diego County jurisdictions. · The costs for permits to construct small structures such as patio covers, room additions, and masonry walls would rise slightly. · Developers of tract housing would pay somewhat higher fees for model home permits but substantially lower fees for each repetitive home in the tract. Thus, the permitting costs for a tract development under the proposed fee schedule would be mu~;h lower than the costs under the existing fee schedule. · The permit fees for custom homes and large commercial projects would generally (but not uniformly) increase slightly. Attachment F lists a sampling of typical permits and compares the fees charged under the current and proposed Chula Vista fee schedules. These fees are also compared to an average of the fees charged by several other jurisdictions within San Diego County. The proposed fees for model and custom homes would be the highest of the five jurisdictions in the comparison. However, the proposed fees for repetitive homes and tract home developments would be the lowest in the County. For most other types of permits the proposed fees are faidy consistent with those being charged by other San Diego County jurisdictions. Ur.qency The increased volume of building permits coupled with improved operational efficiency by the divisions of Planning, Building, Engineering, and Fire Prevention have caused the revenues collected from the provision of building-related services to become out of line with the associated costs. Correcting this imbalance is in the direct interest of public welfare and it is therefore essential that the changes to the City's Master Fee Schedule and Municipal Code proposed in Urgency Ordinance 2831-A (adopted by Council April 3, 2001) remain in effect until Ordinance 2832 (adopted by Council April 17, 2001) becomes effective. Fiscal Impact The fees recommended in this report are designed to recover the full cost of providing all building permit, inspection and plan checking services with the exception of certain minor residential permits for the replacement or repair of Page 8, Item Meeting Date 05/29101 equipment and/or materials that are essential to the maintenance of safe and habitable residences, which are being proposed at 50% of full cost recovery. The net cost to the General Fund of setting these fees at 50% of full cost recovery is estimated at $50,000 annually. When compared to the current fees, implementation of the recommended fee changes in this study is estimated to result in an overall fee and revenue reduction of approximately $1-1.4 million annually. There is no budgetary impact this fiscal year as budgeted revenues from these fees were estimated extremely conservatively pending the results of the fee study. The reduction in General Fund revenue for future years will be incorporated during the budgeting process. This amount is only approximate because the actual annual impact on the City's General Fund is dependent upon future permit activity, which is highly contingent upon unpredictable business cycles. The actual annual reduction in revenue may be higher or lower depending upon the acti~al annual permit volume realized in future years. Acknowledgements This study and the resultant recommendations could not have been achieved without the cooperation and efforts of staff from the Planning and Building, Public Works, and Fire Departments. The following individuals deserve a special thanks for their assistance in providing data and input, often within very tight time constraints: Sohaib AI-Agha, Beverly Blessent, Greg Bottorff, Lou EI-Khazen, Jim Geering, Jack Griffin, George Krempl, Bob McSeveney, Gordon Murdoch, Norm Ostapinski, Bob Powell, Brad Remp, Jim Sandoval, Steve Stingl, Ed Thomas, Ed Van Eenoo, and Karen Wooten. ATTACHMENT A: CHANGES TO THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE (URGENCY ORDINANCE) CHAPTERX C. COMBINATION BUILDING~ PLUMBING~ MECHANICAL~ AND ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEE 1. With the exception of those pen'nits specifically listed in sections E through I of this chapter, all fees for processing and inspecting building. plumbing, mechanical, and electrical pe~nits shall be collected in accordance with the fee schedule below. TOTAL VALUATION COMBINATION INSPECTION / PERMIT PROCESSING FEE $1.00 ~<aaan ..... 0 $76.00 to ....... $2,000.00 ¢~ ~ '~ ............. $76.00 for the first ....... $2,000.00 plus $2,001 to $100,000 $2.00 $7.00 for each additional $ ! 00.00 $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, ' ' ¢'~ nna na to and ~ncluding ._, ...... $100,000.00 ,.,vv..vve* ~ aa +~.,, *-~,v~v.~¢*< nna na ...... $762.00 for the first .~_, .... 00 $100,000.00 plus $100,001 to $300,000 $9.00 $4.25 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and ~ncluding ,~, ...... $300,000.00 ~-~, ........... , ............. $1,612.00 for the first .~_~, .... 00 $300,000.00 $300,001 to $500,000 plus $~.50 $3.75 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and tncluding .......... $500,00O.00 $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00~,.,~.~,.e"~ a~a qn $2,362.00 for the first $500,000.00 plus SE.00 $2.75 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $1,000,001.00 and up~,~¢= ~n.~ra $3,737.00 for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $2.00 $1.85 for each additional $1,000.00 or fi-action thereof Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building andH ..... .... ;~g 2. u,.,a.~;.. Combination Plan Review Fee a. A flat fee of $92.25 shall be collected for the review of city standard plans. b. A flat fee of $36.50 shall be collected for each repetitive plan review. c. Fees for non-repetitive plan review shall be collected in accordance with the following fee schedule. TOTAL VALUATION NON-REPETITIVE PLAN REVIEW FEE $1 to $2,000 $196.50 $2,001 to $100,000 $196.50 for the first $2,000 plus $10.50 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000 $100,001 to $300,000 $1,225.50 for the first $100,000 plus $5.25 for each additional $1,000 or fi.action thereof, to and including $300,000 $300,001 to $500,000 $2,275.50 for the first $300,000 plus $4.25 for each additional $1,000 or fi.action thereof, to and including $500,000 $500,001 to $1,000,000 $3,125.50 for the first $500,000 plus $3.50 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000 $1,000,001 and up $4,875.50 for the first $1,000,000 plus $2.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof SEE ALSO TABLE (S) ON FOLLOWING PAGE (S) Master Fee Schedule Part II ~ Development Chapter X - Building a.':~ Hr. using Other Inspections and Fees: 7. App!ioatie.'~: ::q::':~.n?~ a~ditiena! plan rca'iow tc di=ab!~d ac:e:: :ha!! pay ~ a~ifiana! ! 9% far 12. Cegifcat: cf Occupancy izzuaace $70 Master Fee Schedule Part H - Development Chapter X - Building =-:~ Heu:ing D. DETERMINATION OF VALUE The determination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of this master fee schedule or of the building code has been made by the building official. The value to be used in computing the building permit and building plan review fees shall be the total value of all construction work for which the permit is issued, as well as all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, hearing, air conditioning, elevators, fire-extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment (SEE ,~t?ENrDLF~S). E. ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES Fees for processing and inspecting electrical permits shall be as follows: 1. For issuing each permit $15.00 For issuing each supplemental permif $ 4.50 SYSTEM FEE SCHEDULE (Note: The following do not include permit-ixsuing feeO New Residential Buildings - The following fees shall include all wiring and electrical equipment in or on each building, or other electrical equipment on the same premises constructed at the same time. For new multifamily residential buildings (apartments and .03 condominiums) having three or more living units not including the area of garages, carports and other noncommercial automobile storage areas constructed at the same time, per square foot. For new single- and two-family residential buildings not .035 including the area of garages, carports and other minor accessory buildings constructed at the same time, per square foot. For other types of residential occupancies and alternations, additions and modifications to existing residential buildings, use the UNIT FEE SCHEDULE. Private Swimming Pools For new private, residential, in-ground, swimming pools for 30.00 single-family and multifamily occupancies including a complete system of necessary branch cimnit wiring, bonding, grounding, underwater lighting, water pumping and other similar electrical equipment directly related to the operation of a swimming pool, each For other types of swimming pools, therapeutic whirlpools, spas and alterations to existing swimming pools, use the UNIT FEE SCHEDULE. Carnivals and Circuses - Carnivals, circuses, or other traveling shows or exhibitions utilizing transportable-type rides, booths, displays and attractions. Master Fee Schedule Part 1I - Development Chapter X - Building mhd Heusing For electric generators and electrically driven rides, each 15.00 For mechanically driven rides and walk-through attractions of 4.50 displays having electric lighting, each For a system of area and booth lighting, each 4.50 For permanently installed rides, booths, displays and attractions, use UNIT FEE SCHEDULE. Temporary Power Service For a temporary service power pole or pedestal including all pole 15.00 or pedestal-mounted receptacle outlets and appurtenances, each For a temporary distribution system and temporary lighting and 7.50 receptacle outlets for construction'sites, decorative light, Christmas tree sales lots, firework stands, etc., each UNIT FEE SCHEDULE (Note: The following do not include ?ermit issuingfee..) Receptacle, Switch and Lighting Outlets For receptacle, switch, lighting or other outlets at which current is used or controlled, except services, feeders and meters. First 20, each .75 Additional outlets, each .45 NOTE: For multioutlet assemblies, each 5feet or fraction thereof may be considered as one outlet. Lighting Fixtures For lighting fixtures, sockets or other lamp-holding devices First 20, each .75 Additional fixtures, each .45 For pole or platform-mounted lighting fixtures, each .75 For theatrical-type lighting fixtures or assemblies, each .75 Residential Appliances For fixed residential appliances or receptacle outlets for same, including wall-mounted electric ovens; counted-mounted cooking tops; electric ranges, self-contained room, console, or through-wall air conditioners; space heaters; food waste grinders; dishwashers; washing machines; water heaters; clothes dryers; or other motor- operated appliances not exceeding one horsepower (HP) in rating, each 3.00 NOTE: For other types of air conditioners and other motor~driven appliances having larger electrical ratings, see Power Apparatus. Nonresidential Appliances For residential appliances and self-contained factory-wired, nonresidential appliances not exceeding one horsepower (HP), kilowatt (KW), or kilovolt-ampere (KVA), in rating including medical and dental devices; food, beverage, and ice cream cabinets; illuminated show cases; drimking fountains; vending machines; laundry machines; or other similar types of equipment, Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building ~.~nd Hzuzing each [ 3.00 Power Apparatus For motors, generators, transformers, rectifiers, synchronous converters, capacitors, industrial heating, air conditioners and heat pumps, cooking or baking equipment and other apparatus, as follows: Rating in horsepower (HP), kilowatts (KW), kilovolt- amperes (KVA), or kilovolt-amperes-reactive (KVAR): Up to and including 1, each 3.00 Over 1 and not over 10, each 7.50 Over 10 and not over 50, each 15.00 Over 50 and not over I00, each 30.00 Over 100, each 45.00 NOTE: 1. For equipment or appliances having more than one motor, transformer, heater, etc., the sum oJ~the combined ratings may be used. 2. These fees include all switches, circuit breakers, contractors, thermostats, relays and other directly related control equipment. Busways For trolley and plug-in type busways, each 100 feet or fraction thereof, 4.50 NOTE: An additional fee will be required for lightingfixtures, motors and other appliances that are connected to Signs, Outline Lighting and Marquees For signs, outline lighting systems or marquees supplied fi.om one 15.00 branch circuit, each For additional branch circuits within the same sign, outline 3.00 lighting system or marquee, each Services For services of 600 volts or less and not over 200 amperes in 18.50 rating, each For services of 600 volts or less and over 200 amperes to 1000 37.50 amperes in rating, each For services over 600 volts or over 1000 amperes in rating, each 75.00 Miscellaneous Apparatus, Conduits and Conductors For electrical apparatus, conduits and conductors for which a 11.00 permit is required but for which no fee is herein set forth NOTE: ThCs fee is not applicable when a fee is paid for one or more services, outlets, fixtures, appliances, power apparatus, busways, signs or other equipment. These electrical permit fees only apply to individual permits. They do not apply when a combination permit fee has been collected under section C of this chapter. Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building an~ H~us!ng G. MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES Fees for processing and inspecting mechanical permits shall be as follows: A. For the issuance of this permit 15.00 B. For issuing each supplemental permit 4.50 C. For the installation or relocation of each forced air or 9.00 gravity type furnace/burner, including ducts and vents attached to such appliance, up to and including 100,000 Btu's D. For the installation or relocation of each forced air or 11.00 gravity type furnace/burner, including ducts and vents E. For the installation or relocation of each floor furnace, 9.00 including vent F. For the installation or relocation of each suspended 9.00 heater, recessed wall heater or floor mounted unit heater G. For the installation, relocation or replacement of each 4.50 appliance vent installed and not included in an application H. For the repair of, alteration of, or addition to each heating 9.00 appliance, refrigeration unit, comfort cooling unit, absorption unit, or evaporative cooling system, including installation of controls regulated by this Code I. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or 9.00 compressor up to and including three horsepower, or each absorption system up to and including 100,000 Btu's J. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or 16.50 compressor over three horsepower to and including 15 horsepower, or each absorption system over 100,000 Btu's to and including 500,000 Btu's ] K. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or 22.50 compressor over 15 horsepower, or each absorption system over 500,000 Btu's to and including 1,000,000 Btu's L. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or 33.50 compressor over 30 horsepower to and including 50 horsepower, or for each absorption system over 1,000,000 Btu's and including 1,750,000 Btu's M. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or 56.00 refi-igeration compressor over 50 horsepower, or each absorption system over 1,750,000 Btu's N. For each air handling unit to and including 10,000 cubic 6.50 feet per minute, including ducts attached thereto : O. For each air handling unit over 10,000 cubic feet per 11.00 Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building ~ u~,,~;~ ~ minute P. For each evaporative cooler other than portable tTpe 6.50 Q. For each ventilation fan connected to a single duct 4.50 R. For each ventilation system which is not a portion of any 6.50 heating or air conditioning system authorized by a permit S. For the installation of each hood which is served by 6.50 mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for each hood T. For the installation of relocation of each domestic type 11.00 incinerator U. For the installation or relocation of each commercial or 45.00 industrial type incinerator V. For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by 6.50 this Code but not classed in other appliance categories, or for which no other fee is listed in this Code W. In addition, in situations similar to those listed under the subsection titled "Other Inspection and Fees" of Section X.C. (Building Permits), the fee shall be the same X. For the plan review of mechanical work 25% of total mechanical permit fee These mechanical permit fees only apply to individual permits. They do not apply when a combination permit fee has been collected under section C of this chapter. Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building H. PLUMBING PERMIT FEES Fees for processing and inspecting plumbing permits shall be as follows: A. For issuing each permit 20.00 B. For issuing each supplemental permit 10.00 C. For each plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap 7.00 (including water, drainage piping and backfiow protection therefore) D. For each building sewer and each trailer park sewer 15.00 E. Rainwater system - per drain (inside building) 7.00 F. For each cesspool 25.00 G. For each private sewage disposal system 40.00 H. For each water heater and/or vent 7.00 I. For each gas piping system of one (t).:to five (5) outlets 5.00 J. For each additional gas piping system outlet, per outlet 1.00 K. For each additional waste pretreatment interceptor including its 7.00 trap and vent, excepting kitchen type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps L. For installation, alteration or repair of water piping and/or water 7.00 treating equipment M. For each repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping, each 3.50 fixture 7.00 N. For each lawn sprinkler system on any one meter, including 7.00 backflow protection devices therefore O. For atmospheric-type vacuum breakers not included in N. above 5.00 (1) to (5) P. Over (5), each 1.00 Q. For each backflow protective device other than atmospheric type vacuum breakers: 2-inch diameter and smaller 7.00 over 2-inch diameter 15.00 R. In addition, in situations similar to those listed under the subsection titled "Other Inspection and Fees" of Section X.C. (Building Permits), the fee shall be the same These plumbing permit fees only apply to individual permits. They do not apply when a combination permit fee has been collected under section C of this chapter. Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building CHAPTER XIV Plnnnin~ PL~2q P~V!EW ,*~ND INS?ECT!@N E. SIGNS e. Commuz..,; ..................~.. 109.00 Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X2¢ X1V - O~er Feez planning CHAPTER XV Fire Department Fees B. PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTION Fees for the plan review, plan re-submittal, consultation, inspection, and re- inspection of fire suppression systems, hydrant placements, and fire alarm systems shall be collected in accordance with the following fee schedule. Activity Fee Fire Sprinkler System $640 Tenant Improvement Fire Sprinkler System $275 Fire Hydrant Installation $275 Fire Alarm System $185 Hood Fire Suppression Systems $135 Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter ~ I XV - v ........ Fire ATTACHMENT B: CHANGES TO THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE (REGULAR ORDINANCE) CHAPTER X Budding ............ ~ C. COMBINATION BUILDING~ PLUMBING~ MECHANICAL~ AND ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEE 1. With the exception of those permits specifically listed in sections E through I of this chapter, all fees for processing and inspecting building, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical permits shall be collected in accordance with the fee schedule below. TOTAL VALUATION COMBINATION INSPECTION / PERMIT PROCESSING FEE $1.00 to $500.00 $2,000.00 $!5.00 $76.00 cn~ c,n *~ nan tm $15.00 $76.00 for the first $500.00 $2,000.00 plus $2,001 to $100,000 $2.90 $7.00 for each additional $!0O.OO $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including~.-,uvv.vv¢'~ nan nt~ $100,000.00 ¢~ at, nn ,^ ¢~c nnn an eno an $762 00 fo th fit $2 990 99 $100 000 00 pl ..~, ........ ~..~, ...... ~ ...... r e rs , . , . us $I 00,001 to $300,000 $9.00 $4.25 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 $300,000.00 $ ......... ,~.~ ~.~ v,~.v~¢cn aaa ~,-~-.~¢~ aa $1,612.00 for the first .......... $300,000.00 $300,001 to $500,000 plus $5.50 $3.75 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including ~., .... 00 $500,000.O0 $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 ,._, ...... $2,362.00 for the first $500,000.00 plus $2.00 $2.75 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $1,000,001.00 and up $2,529.50 $3,737.00 for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $2.00 $1.85 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building 2. ~ .Combination Plan Review Fee of th: building pe_--mit fee. a. A flat fee of $92.25 shall be collected for the review of city standard plans. b. A flat fee of $36.50 shall be collected for each repetitive plan review. c. Fees for non-repetitive plan review shall be collected in accordance with the following fee schedule. TOTAL VALUATION NON-REPETITIVE PLAN REVIEW FEE $1 to $2,000 $196.50 $2,001 to $100,000 $196.50 for the first $2,000 plus $10.50 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000 $100,001 to $300,000 $1,225.50 for the first $100,000 plus $5.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $300,00O $300,001 to $500,000 $2,275.50 for the first $300,000 plus $4.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000 $500,001 to $1,000,000 $3,125.50 for the first $500,000 plus $3.50 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000 $1,000,001 and up $4,875.50 for the first $1,000,000 plus $2.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof SEE ALSO TABLE (S) ON FOLLOWING PAGE (S) Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building a::~ Heuzing Other Inspections and Fees: confi .rm :enfe..~r=n.~e ::'i~ Ca!if~ia A~2r2:~a~':e Cede Title 2~. req'.::.rernent: fer Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building and He'.es!rig /~- ~. D. DETERMINATION OF VALUE The determination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of this master fee schedule or of the building code has been made by the building official. The value to be used in computing the building permit and building plan review fees shall be the total value of all construction work for which the permit is issued, as well as all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, hearing, air conditioning, elevators, fire-extinguishing systems and any other permanent e,auym,.,,. ~ .............. E. ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES Fees for processing and inspecting electrical permits shall be as follows: ...... 03 or ......... t~ ............... -~ .................... ~, Master Fcc Schedule Pa~t II - Development Chapter X - Building ;nd Hex:Lng ~ , .~5 ~ 3.00 Master Fee Schedule Pa~ II - Development Chapter X - Building and Housing Ov:r ! ~"~ ~+ ..... ~n ~h 7.50 bo usod, ...... of, ' ' ' :ach Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building TYPE OF PERMIT FEE For the installation, relocation, replacement, or alteration of each: Temporary power pole $117.25 Temporary or permanent service pedestal $101.75 Temporary lighting system $I01.75 Temporary power on a permanent base $66.00 CATV electrical meter enclosure with or without gas $110.50 New electric meter (see below for resetting fee) $135.25 Upgrade of existing electrical service $110.50 For each resetting of an electric meter* $86.00 For each overhead to underground conversion $86.00 Miscellaneous wiring/conduit (including mechanical apparatus) $86.00 * The fee for residential repairs or replacements shall be 50% of the stated fee. These electrical permit fees only apply to individual permits. They do not apply when a combination permit fee has been collected under section C of this chapter. G. MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES Fees for processing and inspecting mechanical permits shall be as follows: attach.ed to .... ~, ~; ....... +~ ~,~ ;~.,,~;~ ~ an ant, lnot ..................... ~, ....... j Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building and HcuzL':g Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building ......... ~,~ ~a~,,o;~ /-~.-- ~7 TYPE OF PERMIT FEE For the installation, relocation, replacement, or alteration of each: Forced air or gravity type furnace/burner (FALl) including ducts and $83.75 vents* Floor furnace including vent* $83.75 Suspended heater $83.75 Recessed wall heater* $83.75 Floor mounted heater* $83.75 Appliance vent $83.75 Commercial boiler $83.75 Commercial refrigeration compressor $83.75 Commercial absorption system $83.75 Commercial air handling unit including ducts $83.75 Commercial evaporative cooler (other than the portable type) $83.75 Commercial ventilation system that is not a portion of any heating or $83.75 air conditioning system Hood that is served by mechanical exhaust including ducts $83.75 Commercial incinerator $83.75 Cooling or air conditioning unit $104.00 For each repair, alteration, or addition to an existing heating appliance, $83.75 refrigeration unit, cooling or air conditioning unit, absorption unit, or evaporative cooling system * The fee for residential repairs or replacements shall be 50% of the stated fee. These mechanical permit fees only apply to individual permits. They do not apply when a combination permit fee has been collected under section C of this chapter. Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X - Building and H. PLUMBING PERMIT FEES Fees for processing and inspecting plumbing permits shall be as follows: ...... t, ...................... ,~ ............. ,r:, ,., ..,~, ¢,~* .... 7.00 .................. v ......... / ........... ,., ........... , .......... ,,::, ..w over 2 inch dianu, eter -t-5:00 Master Fee Schedule Part II ~ Development Chapter X - Building TYPE OF PERMIT FEE For the installation, replacement, relocation, or alteration of each: Water heater and/or vent* $68.25 Water piping system $106.00 Sewer lateral $61.50 Trap, drain, and/or vent $72.50 Building sewer or trailer park sewer $72.50 Commercial rainwater system $72.50 Private sewage disposal system $72.50 Gas piping system* $72.50 New Gas meter (see below for resetting fee) $72.50 Commercial waste pretreatment interceptor including its trap and $72.50: vent, excepting kitchen type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps Water treating equipment $72.50 For each resetting ora gas meter* $72.50 * The fee for residential repairs or replacements shall be 50% of the stated fee. These plumbing permit fees only apply to individual permits. They do not apply when a combination permit fee has been collected under section C of this chapter. Master Fee Schedule Part 1I - Development Chapter X - Building ?2x~ H:~Lng CHAPTER XIV Planning ~ ~,¢n ~.,,;1,~; ..... 1,,~+;~. ~rcn $259 C. E. SIGNS d. T:mpcr~D' rea! e~tate 100.00 Master Fee Schedule Part II - Development Chapter X2g X1V - @~:r F::: Planning CHAPTER XV Fire Department Fees B. PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTION Fees for the plan review, plan re-submittal, consultation, inspection, and re- inspection of fire suppression systems, hydrant placements, and fire alarm systems shall be collected in accordance with the following fee schedule. ActiviW, Fee Fire Sprinkler System $640 Tenant Improvement Fire Sprinkler System $275 Fire Hydrant Installation $275 Fire Alarm System $185 Hood Fire Suppression Systems $135. Master Fee Schedule Part I! - Development Chapter XX, q XV - O~:r Fee: Fir~e ATiACHKENT C: BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION LETTER DF ENDORSEHENI BUILDING ~DU~RY X~OC~ON OF S~ D~GO COUNt' ~.~.=~ F:~ 27, 2001 P~IDENT C~k V~ CA PI ~lO MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF APPE. ALS AND ADVISORS CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA March 12, 2001 Conference Room No. I 5:15 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman O'Neill, Vice-Chairman Monaghan, Board Members Compton, Kaya, Reno, and Triplette MEI,4:~ERS ABSENT: None CITY STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Director Romp, Deputy Building Official Murdoch, Plan Check Engineer EI-Khazen, Administrative Off]se Assistant Michel, Director of Budget and Analysis Fruchter, and Senior Management Analyst Van EenoD CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Chairman O'Neill called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. ROLL CALL: lvlembers present constituted a quorum. 1. DECLARATION OF EXCUSED/UNEXCUSED ABSENTEEISM: N/A 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MSUC Triplette/Compton (5-0) to approve the minutes December 11,2000. S. rqEW BUSINESS: A. Formal ApprovaI of New Fees Assistant Director Romp stated that although the agenda says "Fo, mai approval of new fees," the fo,,-nal approval would be from the Ci~ Council, and the request is the formal recommendation and authorization to take the new fee schedule to the Ci~ Council. The draft of the Council Agenda Statement was included in Agenda package. Chairman O'Neill asked a question regarding recovery of Fire Depa~ment fees in regards to non-recurring fees and annualized inspections. The question was answered by Asst. Director Romp and Director Fruchter. Board Member Compton questioned how money being taken out of the general fund would be repl~ced. Director Fruchter stated that the budget for next year reflec~ the level of fees being recommended. It balances the cost of revenue. Appeals & Advisors -2- March 12, 2DO1 /-, brief discussion was held on simplifying the process for getting similar type permits, such as water heaters. Chairman O'Neill asked if there were additional questions. After heating none, a motion was made to recommend that City Council adopt the new fee schedule. MSUC Romo/O'Neill (6-0) to make recommendation to City Council to adopt the new fee schedule. 4. CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS/REPORT: ' Chairman O'Neill wanted to commend the Buitding Division for enlisting the help of one of the PhotoVoltaic producers/'installers to write specifications on a book on PhotoVoltaic Systems. 5. 3UILDING OFFICIAL'S COMMENTS/REPORT: A. Asst. Director Romp informed the Board that he was unable to attend the CALBO conference. Sue Gray, Code Enforcement/Permits Manager, did attend in Brad's place. She has put together a notebook on the kinds of things that are 9oing on at the State level. Energy Standards have been adopted and will have an impa~ on us. Effective date for new construction is June 1, 2001, except for phases that are under construction. Effective date for those are January 1,2002. 5. COMIviUN1CATIONS (PUBLIC REMARKS[WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE): None 7. ',DJOURNMENT: Chain-nan O'Neill adjourned the meeting at 5:40 p.m. te the regular meeting scheduled for April 9, 2001. BRAD P, EMP, C.B.O. ASST. DIR. OF PLAI'I'NING & BUILDING/BUILDING OFFICIAL S--CR=-TARY TO T'HE BOAP,D OF APP--_.ALS AND ADVISORS MINUTES T,~,~N BY: SECF~."WARY PLANNING & BUILDING DEPAP, qRdi£NT ATTACHMENT E: REQUIRED CHANGES TO ORDINANCE NOS. 1670, 2507, AND 2509 ORDINANCE NO. 1670 Section 15.52.020. ORDINANCE NO. 2507 Section 15.08.050. Section 304(c) Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required to be submitted by Section 302(b), a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review shall be ccvv ~.v.~v...~ ~, +h~,.,~ bu!!d!.q.~ ~. .... ........ ~* ~"~ as she':m specified in the Master Fee Schedule. ORDINANCE NO. 2509 Section 15.16.050. Section 304(c) Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required to be submitted by Section 302 (b), a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. The plan review fees for mechanical work shall be ~.,_~. * ....... + ,-,¢ *h,, *~*~ f~,ecmit-fee as set-feAh specified in the master Fee Schedule of the City of Chula Vista. The p!a.q c,,,-,~,,,, ,~n,~-~ .,,,,~ o,~ ~,, o,~,~,~,,,, te the perm!t fees. ORDINANCE NO. 2831-C URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING ORDINANCE 1670 RELATING TO SIGN PERMIT AND PLAN REVIEW FEES; AMENDING ORDINANCES 2507 AND 2509 RELATING TO PLAN REVIEW FEES FOR BUILDING AND MECHANICAL WORK RESPECTIVELY; AND AMENDING CHAPTERS X (BUILDING AND HOUSING), XIV (PLANNING), AND XV (FIRE) OF THE CITY'S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, as a result of a comprehensive review of all fees relating to building, permitting, inspection and plan check services, staff has recommended proposed fee changes; and WHEREAS, the proposed fee schedule has been developed based on current operations, development volume, and service provision costs and spreads these costs equitably to those receiving these City services; and WHEREAS, the proposed changes are supported by the Building Industry Association and the Board of Appeals and Advisors; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an ordinance on April 10, 2001, increasing certain permit and plan review and other fees within the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66017(a), the fees increased by that ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its adoption; and WHEREAS, projects in the City which will impact various building activities will be applying for various permits during the interim period before the revised fees becomes effective; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 66017(b) authorizes the City to adopt an interim fee as an urgency measure upon making a finding describing the current and immediate threat to the public health, welfare, and safety; and WHEREAS, said interim measure will be effective for thirty (30) days and may be extended twice for additional thirty (30) day periods upon subsequent action by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the action will not have a physical effect on the environment and is an ongoing project of the City and is therefore exempt from CEQA under Section 15261 (Ongoing Projects); and WHEREAS, state law requires said urgency ordinance to be adopted by a four-fifths vote. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows: Ordinance 2831-C Page 2 SECTION 1. Findings The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it, including the methodology and results of the building fee study, that certain amendments to Ordinance 1670 relating to sign permit and plan review fees and ordinances 2507 and 2509 relating to plan review fees for building and mechanical work and Chapters X and, XIV and XV of the City's Master Fee Schedule are necessary in order to assure that fees related to building permitting, inspections and plan check services provided by the City are actually based on current operations, development volume and service provision costs and that such costs are applied equitably to those receiving City services; and The City Council finds that the legislative findings and determinations set forth in Ordinances 1670, 2507 and 2509 continue to be true and correct; and The City Council finds that the amount of the amended fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the City services. SECTION 2: Finding of Urgency That the City Council of the City of Chula Vista finds that it is necessary that its revised fees for permits and related fees go into effect immediately in order that all projects in the City pay only their fair share of the cost of permit and plan review and related fees which relate to the services provided by the City. Immediate implementation of this fee is necessary due to the current and immediate threat to public welfare, which will result should there be a continuation of an imbalance in the collection of fees for City services. The City Council finds that the prospect of an unbalanced collection constitutes a current immediate threat to the public health, welfare and safety justifying the immediate revision of these fees. SECTION 3. Ordinance 1670 is hereby amended by repealing Section 15.52.020 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. SECTION 4: Ordinance 2507 is hereby amended by amending Section 15.08.050 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code as follows: Section 15.08.050. Section 304(c) Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required to be submitted by Section 302(b), a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review shall be as specified in the Master Fee Schedule. SECTION 5: Ordinance No. 2509 is hereby amended by amending Section 15.16.050 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code as follows: Ordinance 2831-C Page 3 Section 15.16.050. Section 304(c) Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required to be submitted by Section 302(b), a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. The plan review fees for mechanical work shall be as specified in the Master Fee Schedule of the City of Chula Vista SECTION 6: Chapters X (Building and Housing), XIV (Planning) and XV (Fire) of the City's Master Fee Schedule are hereby amended as set forth in Attachment A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. SECTION 7: All remaining provisions of the Ordinances amended herein shall remain in full force and effect until and unless specifically repealed or amended. SECTION 8. Expiration of this ordinance This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect 30 days after its adoption. SECTION 9: Time limit for protest and judicial action Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside void or annul this ordinance shall be brought within the time period as established by law. In accordance with Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), the ninety-day approval period in which parties may protest begins upon the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 10: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon four-fifths vote. Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter Jj~ M. Kaheny ~ Planning and Building Director ./4~ity Attorney COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM /--~ MEETING DATE 5/29/2001 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving extending an invitation to Cebu City, Philippines to become a Sister City SUBMITTED BY: James B. Hardiman, Fire Chief/~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~. (4/5tbs Vote: Yes:__ No X) BACKGROUND: The Sister City concept inaugurated by the President of the United States in 1966 to establish greater friendship and understanding between the people of the United States and other nations through the medium of direct personal contact. All succeeding U. S. Presidents have endorsed this program, to be conducted for the broad purpose of the exchanges of ideas and people between the citizens of the United States and the peoples of other nations. To implement this program, Chula Vista and other communities in the United States have been requested by Sister Cities International to affiliate with cities in other nations of similar characteristics and mutual interest. The City of Chula Vista through its Council, does recognize and endorse this program with the hope that it will lead to a lasting friendship between the people of Chula Vista and Cebu City, Philippines. RECOMMENDATION: The International Friendship Commission recommends that this Council on behalf of the people of the City of Chula Vista extend an invitation to the government and the people of Cebu City, Philippines to participate with Chula Vista as its Sister City for the purposes of creating greater mutual understanding between the peoples of our two great cities and nations. That the Mayor be authorized to act as official representative of Chula Vista to carry out this program. BOARD/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: To become Sister City with Cebu City, Philippines. DISCUSSION: In the first part of 1999, Oscar Garcia, member of the International Friendship Commission approached the membership concerning becoming a sister city with Cebu City, Philippines. The Chair, Fran Larson asked Mr. Garcia to talk to the Mayor about these matters and Mayor Horton agreed with Mr. Garcia. Mayor Horton asked Mr. Garcia to follow the appropriate process and make it happen. Page 2, Item Mr. Gamia came back to the commission for their approval and started correspondence between the two cities. Cebu City contacted Sister Cities International and applied for membership to become Chula Vista's Sister City. Cebu City has sent the International Friendship Commission a copy of their Resolution to become our Sister City. A delegation from Cebu City, Philippines, will be traveling to Chula Vista the first part of June, 2001. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VIST,4 EXTENDING AN INVITATION TO CEBU CITY, PHILIPPINES TO BECOME ,4 SISTER CITY WHEREAS, the Sister City concept inaugurated by the President of the United States in 1966 to establish greater friendship and understanding between the people of the United States and other nations through the medium of direct personal contact; and WHEREAS, all succeeding U. S. Presidents have endorsed said program, to be conducted for the broad purpose of the exchanges of ideas and people between the citizens of the United States of America and the peoples of other nations; and WHEREAS, to implement this program, Chula Vista and other communities in the United States have been requested by Sister Cities International to affiliate with cities in other nations of similar characteristics and mutual interest; and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista through its Council, does recognize and endorse this program with the hope that it will lead to a lasting friendship between the people of Chula Vista and Cebu City, Philippines. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista as follows: SECTION 1. That this Council on behalf of the people of the City of Chula Vista does hereby extend an invitation to the government and the people of Cebu City, Philippines to participate with Chula Vista as its Sister City for the purposes of creating greater mutual understanding between the peoples of our two great cities and nations. SECTION 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to act as official representative of Chula Vista to carry out this program. SECTION 3. That copies of this Resolution be sent to the Mayor and Council of Cebu City, Philippines, and Sister Cities International in Washington, D. C. Presented by Approved as to form by James Hardiman //Jo~M. Kaheny Fire Chief (~ity Attorney J:\attorney\reso\cebu cji3, COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM: /~ MEETING DATE: 5/29/2001 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2000-2001 budget for the Planning and Building Department to appropriate $157,500 from the available fund balance of the General Fund for transit planning in conjunction with the General Plan Update SUBMITTED BY: /~'~///~ Director of Planning and Building Director of Public Worksff/~ ~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager {~) (4/5ths Vote: Yes X.. No ) At its April 26, 2001 Budget Workshop, the Metropolitan Transit Development Board of Directors endorsed a FY 02 planning work program that would include a long-range transit program and a short to mid-range transit program for the South San Diego Bay area, including the City of Chula Vista. The funding plan for this effort includes a partnership between the Metropolitan Transit Development Board and the City to promote integrated transit and land use planning through joint efforts and shared resoumes. At this time, we are requesting Council appropriation of funding to support these joint planning efforts. In addition, we are requesting funding that would be used for the City to secure expert policy and technical advisor services in carrying out these transit programs and related efforts. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council amend the FY 2000-2001 budget to appropriate $157,500 from the available fund balance of the General Fund to: 1) Fund the City's share of a joint transit planning program with the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB), and 2) Obtain expert policy and technical advisor services for transit planning. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable DISCUSSION: Proactive steps supporting a transit planning program are especially timely for Chula Vista and the South San Diego Bay area because: The City is in the early stages of its General Plan Update, and future land use distribution strategy will be interwoven with decisions regarding transit routes and stations; Page 2, Item No. __ Meeting Date: 5/29/01 · While at different stages in the process, the City of San Diego, San Diego County and the City of Chula Vista are all in the midst of updating their general plans at the same time, presenting a unique opportunity for cooperative and complementary efforts; · The Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) recently adopted a "Transit First" vision that includes higher speed regional services in the South Bay area; · The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is working closely with local governments in the region to implement the Region2020 Growth Management Strategy, which emphasizes "smart growth" principles and the links between transportation and land use; · Otay Ranch development embodies "smart growth" concepts and has reserved right-of-way for extension 6f light rail service, but focused planning studies are needed to connect with existing lines; · Alternative transit approaches and technologies are being identified and used that can potentially meet service objectives much sooner and at a considerably lower cost than conventional approaches; and · Obtaining funding assistance is competitive, and Chula Vista can strengthen the priority afforded to the South Bay area through joint efforts and shared resources. Background Studies conducted for the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in 1991 and the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) in 1993 evaluated the feasibility of expanding rail transit service in the South Bay area and produced a South Bay Public Transportation Plan. The Transportation Plan included a South Bay Conceptual Transit Network. A brief overview of the proposed South Bay Light Rail Extension, including a map showing the proposed line, is attached. The City of Chula Vista has worked actively with developers to preserve right-of-way for a future light rail line in Otay Ranch and to promote land use patterns in the vicinity of the line that would support transit service. Plans for the portions of the line located outside of Otay Ranch and for how the line would function are not as well defined, however. Understanding the future alignment and function of the line, as well as long-range plans for other transit facilities and their relationship to the regional transit system, is critical to extending transit service and to completing the City's General Plan Update. TransitWorks is the long-range transportation strategy developed and adopted by MTDB. It identifies four types of transit service: "Yellow Car" for long trips, "Red Car" for medium trips, "Blue Car" for short trips and "Green Car" for neighborhood trips. Page 4, Item No. __ Meeting Date: 5/29/01 commit any funding to it. The overall program would include extensive coordination with these entities, as well as SANDAG, Caltrans, the City of National City, California Transportation Ventures, private sector land developers and others. A broad community outreach program would also be part of the program. Expert Policy and Technical Advisory Services for Transit Staff is also requesting authorization of funding that will allow the City to obtain expert policy and technical advice for transit planning. We intend to enter into an agreement with The Mission Group, which specializes in alternative transit approaches and technologies that are responsive to market conditions and can be implemented more quickly and at a lower cost than conventional systems. Mr. Alan Hoffman, the Principal of the firm, has consulted to the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) in preparing its TransitWorks strategy, as well as the recently adopted Transit First vision for the future transportation system. He has also served as consultant to the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in developing the Transit Element of the Regional Transportation Plan and is working with the City of San Diego on the Planning Framework Element of their General Plan. He is also working on a Riverside County-wide Transit/Land Use Strategy that incorporates a "transit oasis" approach to provide responsive, cost effective transit service in areas with lower densities than most urban areas. Expert advice would be provided to assist the City in carrying out the long-rgnge and short to mid-range transit program components, including assisting evaluation of alternative transit technologies and routings, and working with City staff to review land use plans to identify opportunities for fixed transit infrastructure and new land use opportunities to extend the reach and effectiveness of transit investments. Another component of this effort would be technical and policy advice on bus routing and service strategy, including express bus opportunities that might be introduced over the very short-term to divert peak hour traffic from roadways approaching capacity thresholds as part of a City Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program. This would be one part of a broader TDM Program that could include a variety of different types of measures. FISCAL IMPACT: MTDB and the City of Chula Vista are proposing a funding partnership to carry out the transit planning work program. The estimated budget for the transit planning program is summarized below. Longer-Range Transit Planning Program: MTDB $100,000 City of Chula Vista 50,000 Total Budget $150,000 Short to Mid-Range Transit Planning Program: MTDB (Bus Study) $110,000 Page 3, Item No. __ Meeting Date: 5/29/01 Councilman Jerry Rindone, the City's represemative on the MTD Board of Directors, has aggressively championed accelerated efforts to enhance transit service in the South Bay area. Through meetings involving City of Chula Vista, MTDB and SANDAG representatives, a scope of work for a Chula Vista Transit Planning Program was devised to address extension of long-range light rail transit, a short to mid-range transit program, a funding plan, and coordination. Transit Planning Program At its April 26, 2001 Budget Workshop, the MTD Board of Directors endorsed a FY 02 planning work program that would include the following clements for thc South Bay area. · A long-range transit program would update and refine the adopted 1993 light rail alignment and station sites with the intent that these refinements would be applicable to a variety of potential transit technologies. While the alignment and stations are well defined in the Otay Ranch community, more planning and engineering feasibility analyses are needed outside Otay Ranch between the existing San Diego Trolley "Blue Line" and northern Otay Ranch, and between southern Otay Ranch and the international border. This effort would support the City's General Plan Update by identifying transit hubs and right-of-way requirements for transit-supportive land use planning. The study would also evaluate the possibility of other light rail or alternative transit routes in the City's planning area. The work would be phased to focus first on the transit alignment north of Otay Ranch, followed by a similar refinement south of Otay Ranch to be coordinated with the County of San Diego's General Plan Update. · A short to mid-range transit program would be prepared for the established and developing areas of Chula Vista (e.g., Otay Ranch, Rolling Hills Ranch, EastLake, Sunbow and San Miguel Ranch). This would include a local bus service and capital plan for Chula Vista Transit that would fold into MTDB's Short-Range Transit Plan and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) over the next several years. On December 14, 2000, the MTD Board of Directors approved a $1 I0,000 study in the FY 02 MTDB C1P for a short-term bus transit service improvement plan. In addition to this bus service study, the short to mid-range transit program would also include a Transit First element that could lead toward earlier implementation of corridor transit service than would be possible using light rail. This would include consideration of the right-of-way already reserved in Otay Ranch for light rail transit, and also evaluate other potential services along major travel corridors such as H Street in Chula Vista. Short-term "Yellow" and "Red Car" service in the South Bay could be a candidate for a Transit First pilot project being pursued by MTDB for early implementation. The earlier short to mid-range transit program elements would be integral phases of the eventual long-range transit program. South Bay transit needs are competing for funding with proposed projects in several other areas, and financial participation by the City of Chula Vista can serve as an i~npetus for progress. Because the line extensions in the South Bay subregion also include the Otay Mesa and East Otay Mesa area, San Diego County and the City of San Diego were asked to participate financially. While these jurisdictions support the effort, they have not been able to Page 5, Item No. __ Meeting Date: 5/29/01 MTDB (Yellow/Red Car) 125,000 City of Chula Vista 75,000 Total Budget $310,000 Another portion ($32,500) of the overall appropriation of funds the City Council is requested to make would be to obtain policy and technical advisory services to the City of Chula Vista for transit planning. Thus, the total amount requested to be authorized by the City Council is $157,500, to be transferred from the General Fund balance for FY 2000-2001. The Planning and Building Department will also be coordinating with Budget and Analysis to identify non-General Fund revenues to offset some of the costs. Once an agreement is prepared with the Metropolitan Transit Development Board for administration of the funding requested for the joint transit planning program, it will be brought back to the City Council for approval. H:CityClerk\CCAgendaStatementTransit Planning5 -29-01 ,doc Miles . i Mexico ~ [~ernati MTDB South Bay ~ ~ s~. ~o 0 Ligh~ Rail Transit Proposed Light Rail ePar['and-Ride/RailStation Transit Extension ~ ~ ~ Adopted Rail alignmen~ For Planning Put.se SAN DIEGO TROLLEY PROPOSED SOUTH BAY LRT EXTENSIONS PROJECT STATUS The Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) approved the Otay Ranch Transit'w~y Alignment for planning purposes in Mamh 1993. MTDB is currently examining new alignments and variations scum of Otay Mesa Road and east of SR 125 and continues to develop strategies to better coordinate land-use and ff'&nsportation planning in the immediate vicinity. Ultimate construction is dependent on the development of Otay R~'"c~ and Olay Mesa and the availability of capital and operating funds. ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS Limits Bounded by SR 54 to the north, SR 125 to the east, the International Border to the so~ and the San Diego Trolley Blue Line to the west. Connections with Would extend east from the Blue Line 24th Street Station via the Otay Ranch Segmen[ ~'~d east from the Blue Line otherBus & Rail Iris Avenue Station via the Olay Mesa Segment. The Olay Ranch Segment would con~ue south along SR 126 to Service connect with the Olay Mesa Segment at the Otay Mesa Transit Ceeter at Otay Mesa Ro~a. Route Length Otay Ranch Segment - 16.6 miles Qtay Mesa Segment * 13.2 miles ACCESS Stops A total of seventeen potential station sites, thirteen along the Otay Ranch Segment to -~erve the following general locations: Sweetwater River, Plaza Bonita, H Street/Terra Nova, Paseo Del Ray, Otay R~ch Villages 1, 5, 6, and 9, Olay Ranch Transit Center, Olay Ranch Eastern Urban Center, Lonestar Road, Olay Mes~ Transit Center, and Olay Mesa Border Crossing. Three potential station sites along Olay Mesa Segment to serve Caliente Boulevard, Brown Field and La Media Road. Ridership Serves virtually all major traffic generators within the corridors including National Ci~, Eonita. Chula Vista, Rancho San Miguel, Eastlake, Olay Ranch, Olay Mesa, San Ysidro, Brown Field, and East Olay Mesa Parking Park-and-ride lots could be provided at eight potential stations. Bus Service Buses would serve designated stations; schedules coordinated at major transfer points. Fare Collection Self*service, barrier-free; roving fare inspectors to check tlders for payment. Bicycle Racks and/or lockers to be provided at designated stations. Disabled Wheelchair liffs provided on all vehicles; tactile mats to assist visually impaired boarding ~[ ¢~atlons. OPERATING PLAN Vehicles Electhcally-propelled, articulated light rail transit vehicles; trains of up to four cars. Average Speed 25-30 mph. Maximum Speed 50 mph. Frequency 15-minute service during most of the day; 7.5-minute peak service in the future. Operating Agency Operation by San Diego Trolley, Inc., a subsidiary owned by MTDB. FINANCIAL PROGRAM Projected Costs Approximately $1.0 billion in 2000 dollars, depending on the final alignment. Funding Financing for the South Bay LRT Extensions would depend on a mix of federal, state, and local funds. Additional funding may come from Benefit Assessment Districts, contributions from Olay Ranch. aha NAFTA (North Amedcan Free Trade Agreement). November 2000 1255 Imperial Avenue, Suite 1000, San Diego, CA 92101-7490 (619) 231-1466 Metropolitan Transit Development Board is Coordinator of the Metropolitan Transit System and the [~ Taxicab Administration Subsidiary Corporations:r~'lSan Diego Transit Corporation, ~ San Diego Trolley, Inc. and ~ San Diego & Arizona Eastern Rallwa,/Company RESOLUTION NO. 2001- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001 BUDGET FOR THE PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO APPROPRIATE $157,500 FROM THE AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND FOR TRANSIT PLANNING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE WHEREAS, focused planning studies are needed to advance critical transit projects in the City of Chula Vista and the South Bay area; and WHEREAS, these studies are needed to identify specific routes, station locations, service characteristics and appropriate technologies; and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista is embarking on a comprehensive General Plan Update that will address the important connections between transit and land use density and intensity, and identify opportunities for transit-supportive development; and WHEREAS, working together with the Metropolitan Transit Development Board and other key interests will expand available resources and enhance the potential for success; and WHEREAS, this effort will also benefit from specialized expertise to advise the City regarding alternative transit approaches and technologies that are responsive to market conditions and can be implemented more quickly and at a lower cost than conventional systems; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2000-2001 budget to hereby appropriate $157,500 from the available fund balance of the General Fund to fund a joint transit planning program with the Metropolitan Transit Development Board and to fund expert policy and technical advisory service for transit Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter John M. Kaheny Planning and Building Director City Attorney H:\CityClerk\Transit Planning COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item //~' Meeting Date 5/29/01 ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION ADOPTiNG A COUNCIL POLICY REGARDiNG IMPLEMENTATION OF A MILLS ACT PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZiNG THE CITY TO ENTER iNTO SAID MILLS ACT CONTRACTS WITH THE OWNERS OF QUALiFYING HISTORIC SITES SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building J//~/ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes No X) This report is in response to action taken by the City Council at its meeting of January 23, 2001, when staff was directed to return with a policy and program which would allow owners of historic properties to enter into Mills Act contracts with the City. These contracts would provide a property tax reduction for the owners, the savings from which could be used to preserve and maintain their historic properties. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the attached policy. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission considered this proposal on May 14, 200l and had the following comments: 1.) Commercial properties should be eligible for Mills Act contracts both Citywide and within Redevelopment Areas. 2.) Prior to review and approval of a Mills Act contract for any one of the 46 currently designated sites, staff should verify that the properties have not been significantly altered. If staff determines they have been substantially altered, the sites should be reviewed by the RCC to determine if they still qualify for designation, prior to approval of the Mills Act contract. 3.) Mills Act contracts should specifically have a condition added that states: "no permit for the demolition, substantial alteration or removal of any building, structure or site shall be issued without first referring the matter to the Resource Conservation Commission." 4.) The City's historical site survey should be updated (including the Montgomery area of the City which was not a part of the original survey completed in 1985.) Page 2, Item Meeting Date 5/29/01 City staff met with interested owners of historic homes the week of May 21, and their comments will be conveyed to the Council as part of the oral presentation. DISCUSSION: Background On January 23, 2001 City Council reviewed information presented by the Planning and Building Department regarding the pros and cons of establishing a Mills Act Property Tax Abatement Program in the City of Chula Vista. (See Attachment 1). Council directed staff to return with a policy implementing a program which would enable interested owners of historic properties to apply for Mills Act contracts. The proposed process and Council policy have been prepared in response to that direction. (See Attachment 1). Staff believes that utilizing a formally adopted policy is the most expeditious way to further the City Council goals of providing financial incentives to historic property owners. Analysis Planning staff has further reviewed Section 2.32.070 and 2.32.090 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code which discusses the authority of the Resource Conservation Commission (RCC). This section gives RCC the authority to recommend historic site designation to the City Council. The Code (2.32.070(C)) also gives RCC the authority to offer financial incentives to homeowners as follows: "Explore means for the protection, retention and preservation of any historical site, including, but not limited to, appropriate legislation and financing, such as the establishment of a private funding organization or individual, local, state or federal assistance." Staff therefore concluded that a new historic preservation ordinance is not necessary in order to carry out the goals of the Mills Act program. Additionally, both the General Plan and the Growth Management Program support the goals of historic preservation. The General Plan includes a policy (Objective 15 under Goal 3, Housing and Community Character of the Land Use Element) to "Preserve and reinforce existing residential neighborhoods throughout the City. Focus preservation and code enforcement efforts at older neighborhoods such as Central Chula Vista and Montgomery." Additionally the Growth Management Program, (Objective 4, Community Character and Identity) encourages a sense of community character and identity by: "Promoting and encouraging a range of special events.., that honor the City's ethnic diversity, history and future."; and "Preserving the urban form and character of existing neighborhoods..." Also, this section states that it is the policy of Chula Vista to: "Implement strategies to encourage owner-residency in existing single family neighborhoods and promote the preservation of stable, existing single family homes." Proposed Policy In formulating the policy (Attachment 8) staff took all of the above information into consideration as well as input from other cities, the RCC, the Community Development Page 3, Item Meeting Date 5/29/01 Department, concerned homeowners, and the State Office of Historic Preservation. The local government has the option to choose which properties are suitable for the incentive by evaluating various factors, such as the significance of the building to the community, development pressure on the site and/or the need for rehabilitation. The use of Mills Act contracts allows the City to provide financial incentives on a case-by-case basis, which could assist property owners in their maintenance and preservation of qualifying historic sites. In order for a property to be eligible for a Mills Act contract, it must he either listed on the National Register of Historic Places, located in a National Register or local historic district, or listed on a state, county or city official register. (CA Govt Code 50280.1). (See Attachment 3). A survey of approximately 400 homes was completed in 1985 by a consultant retained by the City. The boundaries of the survey were Trousdale Drive on the north, Hilltop Drive on the east, I-5 on the west and L Street on the south. Out of those homes surveyed there were 46 sites that were determined to have met established criteria (Attachment 4) and have officially been designated by the City of Chula as historic sites. (See attachment 5). These criteria were published in the "Chula Vista Booklet of Historic Sites" which was approved by the City Council on May 22, 1979. The process to officially designate a site is stated in Section 2.32.070 of the Municipal Code. This is considered to be the first tier in a two-tier system of historic preservation existing in the City. The second tier is the Historic Site Permit which is discussed in Section 2.32.090 of the Municipal Code. The Historic Site permit establishes a process for review of all demolitions and substantial alterations to sites which have obtained the Historic Site Permit. There were very few property owners who chose to obtain a Historic Site Permit since it offered ~m incentives, only restrictions. Currently, there are only 4 sites in the City that have the historic site permit placed on them. Mills Act contracts, unlike the Historic Site permit would not have the effect of blocking or stalling demolition, but could provide the financial incentive necessary for homeowners to restore and maintain their homes that seemed to be the intent of the Historic Site Permit process. A schedule of potential improvements for the length of the 10-year, annually renewing contract has been recommended to be required with each contract. The attached proposed policy has been primarily based on discussions with the City of San Diego, with added input from the California Office of Historic Preservation and from other cities which are actively processing Mills Act contracts. (A draft prototype contract which reflects the policy is currently being prepared.) This policy (attached) contains provisions which would include: 1. A schedule of potential improvements over the life of the contract has been included as a submittal requirement and could be included in the contract on a case-by-case basis. This is required by many cities that were surveyed and staff believes it is an equitable exchange for the property tax break that will be received by the homeowners. The list is essentially proposed by the owner and reflects their priorities. Page 4, Item Meeting Date 5/29/01 2. Minimum property maintenance guidelines have been included. Other cities as well as the California Preservation Foundation believe these to be necessary in order to ensure that properties are adequately maintained. This could also be included as an attachment to the contract. Process The decision to apply for a Mills Act contract is completely voluntary. The process would be as follows: 1. The property owner should first obtain historic site designation through the process described in Section 232.070(A) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. This requires review and recommendation by the RCC and ultimate approval by the City Council. As noted above there are currently 46 sites which currently have this designation and would be eligible to apply immediately for a Mills Act Contract. 2. Fill out application (See Attachment 6) and meet with staff to determine list of potential improvements to property over the next 10 years. 3. Staff, City Attorney and Owner to prepare contract which will be reviewed by RCC and recommendation to City Council. 4. Review and approval of contract by City Council as a consent item. The City Manager will be authorized by the City Council to sign contracts. 5. City Clerk to record the agreement with County Clerk and notify the County Assessor within 20 days of contract approval. Agreements must be recorded by December 31, 2001 to be eligible for tax credit in the year 2002. Conclusion Staff believes that the proposed policy and the outlined program will adequately address the needs of interested homeowners by allowing them to complete Mills Act contracts for taxx year 2002, provide for the inclusion of additional designated properties in the future, and protect, preserve and maintain the City's historical resources. The City will be additionally protected since Mills Act contracts will require homeowners to comply with all of the City's environmental requirements. Staff is in agreement with the recommendation of the Resource Conservation Commission as it relates to inclusion of properties within Redevelopment Areas and has included a provision in the policy that allows for review and comment by the Community Development Department. That department has agreed to that approach as well. Staff is also in agreement that all those properties that were inventoried in 1985 should be sent notices indicating that they should contact the Planning and Building Department if they would be interested in pursuing a Mills Act contract on their property. Page 5, Item Meeting Date 5/29/01 Regarding the update of the Historic resources survey completed in 1985 and the inclusion of the Montgomery area in that survey, staff believes that only a historic preservation consultant would be able to handle this task. Staff has contacted a local consultant who has worked with the City in the past regarding historic preservation issues and he has indicated that to conduct a Citywide survey would be a significant amount. If the City Council supports such an effort, staff should be directed to obtain the necessary approvals from Council to enter into the contract and to approve the expenditure. FISCAL IMPACT Implementation of the proposed Mills Act policy would have a minimal fiscal impact on the City, resulting from reduction in property tax revenues and tax increment revenues in redevelopment areas, as well as costs associated with processing of Mills Act contracts. A better estimate can be made once interested owners are determined and an accepted listing of possible qualified properties is compiled. At this point the City believes that the fiscal impact will be minimal. The City only receives $0.147 of each property tax dollar. Staff believes there will be no significant loss as a result of implementing the Mills Act program. Further, according to several studies, in the legislation's 25-year history, the reduction in property tax revenue to local jurisdictions has been minimal. However, any further expansion of the City's historic preservation program would require substantial staff resources beyond those that currently exist. If it is Council's direction tu pursue a more comprehensive program, then staff should be directed to return to Council with a proposed budget and staffing request to manage the program. Attachments 1. Jan 23, 2001 City Council report and minutes 2. Resource Conservation Minutes from May 14, 2001 3. Mills Act State Legislation 4. Criteria for Historic Site Designation 5. Current List of Historic Sites 6. Draft Application Form 7. Kesolution adopting Council Policy 8. Proposed Council Policy J:\Plman[ng~BEV~Historic Preservation\MILLS ACT AGENDA STATEMENT.doc COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMEI~ Item: Meetlno~ Date: 1/23/01 ITEM TITLE: Report: Response to Council request regarding enactment of thc Mills Act in Chula Vista SUBMITFED BY: Direaor of P. lann~ng and Bullding//~/_ REVIEWED BY: CityMauager~/ (adSthsVote: Yes NoX) This is a response to the Council's request of I)ec. cmber 7, 1999 to fitrther research specific implications of ;,~?tanenfing the Mills Act in Chula Vista. Since that rime, staff has done research and has met with the Resource Conservation Commission and other interested citizens to evaluate methods by which the Mills Act could be implemented in the City. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider the adoption of an ordinance that would allow it to enter into M/lis Act agreements to help provide an economic incentive to property owners .of designmed historic properties to preserve, restore and rehabilitate said properties and direct staff to draft such an ordinance. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A DISCUSSION: Background.' The Mills Act is legislation rbat gives local jurisdictions the power to enter into covaxacrual agreements with private property owners of qualified historic properties. It was designed to encourage the preservation, maintenance, and restoration o£ designamd historic properties through property tax incemives. This leghlation permits a city to implement an ordinance, which will allow for reassessm~nt of proporty taxes through an established formula. Each city may establish its own guidelines for requimme~s and eligibility for this historic designation benefit and has complete discretion over the provisions of the Agreement The Mills Act (California Govc,,,,,,ent Code Sections 50280-50290), is named after former State Senator .lathes Mills. Through tiffs legislation the State of California authorizes cities and counties to enter into voluntsry conitacts, ['or a mi~imunl term of ten years, with the owners of qtmlified historic properties. The owner will receive a reduction in property taxes for actively maintaining the historical integrity of his/her property. This reduction in property taxes is to encore'age owners to spend more money rehabilitating their homes. If the owner does not comply with the conditions of the agreement hedshe may be penal/zed for 'breach of contract" which is equal to 12.5% of the home's current market value. The County Assessor's Office determines the new "assessed value~ using an income based method with the final assessment being the lesser Page 2, Item: Meeliag Date: 1/23/01 of:. market value, Proposition 13 value, or the income based value. This state legislation identifies a historic propezW as a property that is recognized ancl listed on any offic'~ federal, state, cotmty, city register or local survey 1L~6n~s that the local jurisdictional governing body recogni?es. The agreement is applicable to any owaer-ocoupied or income producing ~qualified' historic property. There is complete city/county discretion with each city establishing its own guidelines for requirements and elig~aility. The legislation stat~ lhat a city or county may enter into such contract, however it is not required that the city/county do so. Under the Iraditional method of d~tetj,,ining property taxes, properties are reassessed when sold. However, since the Mills Act contracts nm with the property, subsequent owners may realize greater tax benefits. The assessed property value typically increases when property is sold which can be a significant marketing feature for the property in terms of future sales and is comidered an important historic preservation incentive because the property will be maintained. The initial Mills Act contract term is ten years. Each year on the anniversary, of the contract's effective date an aclclltional year is added to the contract term. If either party (property owner or the City) does not want to renew, a notice of non-renewal mast be submitted to the other party in a timely manner. Effectively the actual term of the contract is at least ten years, but may be indefiuite as it is automatically nnmmlly renewed. Analysis: Prior to any action the Council requested more infomtion regarding the following: 1.) The number of homes likely to qualify for historic significance designation The legislation identifies a historic property as a property, that is recognized and listed on any official federal, slate, county, city register, or local survey listing that the local jurisdictional governing body reco~izes. The Chula Vista Historical Society conducted an historic survey in 1985 and listed 44 homes and 37 sites of historical interest; these may all potentially qualify for the Mills Act. 2.) The mount of ~,m,ual property tax losses A bettor estimate can be made once interested owners are determined and an accepted Ikqring of possible qualified properties is compiled. At this point the City believes that the fiscal ;.,tact will be minimal. The City only receives $0.147 of each property tax dollar. Staff believes there will be no significant loss as a result of implementing the Mills Act program. Further, according to several studies, in the legislation's 25-year history, the reduction in properly tax revenue to local jurisdictions has been minimal. 3.) The amount of staff tlme needed to aamlnlqtex the program each year Each local jurisdiction in San Diego County that has adopted Mills Act agreements agree that once the initial start up efforts are complete, staff time needed to administer the program each year is minimal. However, initial start tip wilt entail writing the ordinance, Page 3, Item: Meeting Date: 1/23/01 developing procedures, developing forms, and the like, This may require subsmnNsl staff time. San Diego County juriscllctiom, as well as others across California that have ;,,~lemented thc us~ of Mills Act agreements, view the financial i ,affects as minimal compared to the ultimat~ benefits that are received by the entire coam~unity through maintenance and preservation of historic prol~rties. 4.) What type of criteria are applied in determining whether or not a site is his~fi~lly si~,nifie~nt? To 8~t~, preservation efforts, have ~ pursued primarily by the City's historical society. Three members of the Society conducted an historic survey in 1985, indgpendent of the city and developed criteria for historic designation (see attached). These standards are the only established local criteria the City of Chula Vista has at this time, however, they have not been officially adopted by the City. These criteria may be reviewed and revised if necessary when the pro~oram is established. 5.) The degree of success experienced by San Diego, La Mesa, Escondido, and Coronado in encouraging historic preservation as a result of M311~ Act contracts Currently, four cities in San Diego County have adopted the use of Mills Act agreements. Escondido, La Mesa, and San Diego have all had great success v~ith the program and consider the Mills Act agreement one of the best preservation tools that have to offer. Coronado just recently adopted the ordinance, but have worked out a program that they feel will work om great for the city. 6.) The extent to which Redevelopment Project areas would be impacted At this time, staff is not sure of the extent to which the Redevelopment areas will be impacted. It is likely, though, that the fiscal impact will be greater in these areas. This issue will be further evalnntecl in conjunction with preparing a Mills Act Ordinance, and cla~ ~llning its applicability to redevelopment areas. Conclusion: Mills Act agreements can be a useful preservation tool ff complemental with zonin~ ordin~rw'.~:s and land use policies that protect historic, resources as well. For a Mills Act pi'ogram to be successful in Chula Vista, a pre~ise stamment of preservation goals and policies, including a specific agend~ for fi~mre action to accomplish those goals will be necessary. This would be the next step for staff to pursue, should the Council determine to enact the MRIs Act. Execution of a Mills Act agreement may result in reduced property tax revenue to the City. A portion of thig reduction in revenue can be supplemented via application fees and issuance of permits for work performed under the agreement. In the legislation's 2.5-year history the reduction in property tax revenue to Iocal jurisdictions has been mlnimnl. In maldn~ the detorminnfion to proceed further, Council may wish to consider the following j~dvantages and dJsadvamn~es of the program: Page 4, Item: Meeting Date: 1/23/01 Advantages and Disadvantages of the program: 1 .) Advantages: Lower property tax assessment for historic property owners Poss~le selling point to a potential buyer because the property tax assessment under the agreement runs with the land. No supplemental tax bill. upon sale of the home or with any furore improvements. Buyers are looking to purchase properties that are under such an agreement because of the set property tax value. May help stabilize and improve the economic value of an area. For all intents and purposes (i.e. secondary financing) the property will be appraised at full market value Incentive to protect the irreplaceable historic resources. May help foster civic pride and enhance culture and aesthetics with in the City. Helps preserve historic sm~-ures Possible revenue source to the city via application fees and ismance of permits for work performed under the agrcement. Due to specific contractual obligations and high financial penalty for ~breach of contract', most often only owners with a strong commim~ent to preserve and restore their property volunteer to enter the agreement. 2.) Disadvantages: Requires initial set up and on going oversight by the City. The longer the owner ha~ owned the property the less the reduction property taxes will be under the Mills Act program. The newer the ox~mer the greater the reduction in property taxes then the greater negative financial impact to the city because the newer property tax rate would have been greamr. Long-term contracts with heavy penalties to the owners for default. Regulatory burdens on the City and strict obligations to the owners that must be complied with for a successful preservation program. (Requires long-term commitment from all parties of the contract). FISCAL IBfPACT: Implementation of a Mills Act ordinance by the City could have a negative fiscal impact due to reduction ia property tax revenue and tax increment revenues in redevelopment areas; however, preliminary analysis indicates that this impact would be minimal. Additional staff time may be Page 5, Item: Meeting Date: 1/23/01 required to avmally start up the program~ but once established staff time required for administration of the program will be l~inimal, (h:/home./planning/lynnene/a 113format I .doc) Attachment LOCAL CRITERL~: , Criter~ for City of ChuL~ Vist~ l~storicsd Slt~ Regi~tr~fiou: · BEARS A RELATIONSHIP TO OVER. AT J. HER1TAGE ON A LOCAL, STATE, OR NATIONAL BASIS. TillS MISSION OF SAN DIEGO, FOR EXAMPLE, IS LOCAL BUT IS ALSO PART OF A STATEWIDE SYSTEM ~ THAT IS RECOGNIZED NATIONALLY. · RELATES TO A HISTORIC PERSONAGE WHO PLAYED AN IMPORTANT ROLE HISTORICALLY~ ON A LOCAL, STATE, OR NATIONAL BASIS. HOWEVER, TI-IE INDIVIDUAL NEED NOT BE KNOWN NATIONALLY, AS LONG AS IT WAS SOMEONE WHO MADE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIB~ON ON A LOCAL BASIS. IDEALLY, THIS INCLUDES A SITE WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL LIVED OR WHERE A NOTEWORTHY HISTORICAL CONTRIBUTION OR ACHEIVEMENT TOOK PLACE. · MAY BE A SITE WHERE AN IMPORTANT EVENT TOOK PLACE. THIS WOULD BE AN EVENT SYMBOLIC OF A PHASE OF HISTORY THAT COULD REACH TI-IE NATIONAL LEVEL. TI-IE SITE OF SIGNING OF A HISTORIC DOCUMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, WiLL SATISFY THIS CRITERION. · THE SITE SHOULD HAVE DISTINGLrlSHING ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE IDENTIFIABLE. THIS INCLUDES STRUCTURES OF A PARTICULAR ARCHITECTURAL STYLE RECOGNIZABLE TODAY. o THE SITE MAY BE ARCHAEOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT IN ITS ASSOCIATION WITH PRE-HISTORY OF THE AREA. A SITE DEMONSTRATING EXISTENCE OF AN ANCIENT COMMUNITY (INDIANS INDIGENOUS TO THE AREA, FOR EXAMPLE) COULD SATISFY THIS CRITERION. · ~ INteGRITY. THIS IS WHERE TH~ Sl'r~ CONTINUES TO HAVE EVIDENCE OF THE ORIGINAL FEATURES. ENOUGH OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE OR TIiE SITE IS INTACT TO BE DISTTNGUISHABLE AS HAVING HISTORICAL VALUE. Attachment 1 I~STORIC DESIGNATION ELIGI~EL1TY CPd ~ I~RIA FOR BUrI.~INGS/HOMES: An t~stofical resource mus~ be significant at the local, state, or national level, under one or more of the following criteria for designation on either the State or National Register. CALIFORNIA REGISTER · IT IS ASSOCIATED WITH EVENTS THAT HAVE MADE A SIGNIFICANT CON1v, IBUTION TO ~ BROAD PA't-~NS OF LOCAL OR REGIONAL FIISTORY, OR THE CUL~ORAL HERITAGE OF CALIFORNIA OR TH~ UNITED STATES. IT IS ASSOCIATED W1TH THE LIVES OF PERSONS IMPORTANT TO LOCAL, CALIFORNIA, OR NATIONAL Il]TORY · 1T"EIVIBODIES THE DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF A TYPE, PERIOD, REGION, OR IM]ETHOD OR CONSTRUCTION OR REPRESENTS THE WORK OF A MASTER, OR POSSESSES HIGH A.RTISTIC VALUES. · IT HAS YIELDED, OR HAS THE POTENTIAL TO YIELD, /2N~ORMATION IMPORTANT TO TH~ PREHISTORY OR HISTORY OF THE LOCAL AREA, CALIFOP,_NrlA, OR THE NATION. NAT~[ONAL REGISTER · IT IS ASSOCIA'fI22D WITH EVENTS THAT HAVE MADE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO THE BROAD PA't-I'gRNS OF OUR HISTORY. · IT IS ASSOCIATED WITH TI-IE LIVES OF PERSONS SIGNIFICANT IN OUR NATION'S PAST. · EMBODIES TH~ DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF A TYPE, PERIOD, OR METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION OR THAT REPRF~ENT THE WORK OF A MASTER, OR THAT POSSESS HIGH ARTISTIC VALUES, OR REPRESENT A SIGNIFICANT AND DISTINGUISHABLE ENTITY WHOSE COMPONENTS MAY LACK INDIVIDUAL DISTINCTION. · HAVE YIELDED OR M. AY BE LIKELY TO YIELD, INFORMATION IMPORTANT IN PREHISTORY OR HISTORY. Attachment 2 AGENDA STATEM~,.NT Item Meeting Date 12/7/99 ITEM TITLE: Resolution directing city staff to research and prepare a recommendation for Council consideration regardh~g enac'anent of the Mills Act in Chula Vista SUBMITI'JgD BY: Mary Salas, Deputy Mayor REVIEWED BY: N/A (4/5tbs Vote: Yes__ No X ) The MiLls Act, Statutes of 1977, provides incentives to encourage the preservation, maintermuce and restoration of designated historic properties. Adoption of this resolution · ~'ill direct stuff to research and prepare a recommendation for Council consideration regarding enactment of the Mills Act in Chula Vis'm- RECOMMENDATION: That the City' Council adopt the resolution. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOM3,IENDATION: N/A DISCUSSION: Background In 1977, State Senator James R. Mills carded legislation which was designed to provide incentives to encourage the preservation of historic properties. The legislation, subseqtmrrtly named "The Mills Act", reduces property tax assessments on qualifying properties. The intent of the legislation was to provide individual cities with a means of encouraging the owners of historic properties to restore or maintain the sit~. By reducing the property tax assessment, and thereby the mount of taxes paid each year, the property owner may have the means to beR~ restore or maintain, the property. As of this writing, the cities of San Diego, Escondido and La Mesa have adopted ordinances which allow propezty owners in those cities to apply for reduced assessments. The City of Coronado is in the process of preparing and adopting an ordinance as well. Attachment 2 P~g¢ 2, lt~m __ December 7, 1999 Among the three cities which have an ordinance ill place, approximately 150 properties have applied for, and received, the property tax benefit. The preservation group "Save Our Heritage Orgnni:,afion" (SOHO) has approached Chula Vista with the request that we, too, adopt an ordinance which would offer property owners in Chula Vista the benefits of the Mills Act. Prior to such an action, the Council would need such information as: · The number of homes likely to qualify for historic significance designation · The mount of annual property tax losses · The amount of stafffime needed to admlni~ter the program each year · What type of criteria are applied m determining whether or not a site is historically significant · The extent to which Redevelopment Project areas be impacted · The degree of success experienced by San Diego, La Mesa and Escondido in encouraging historic preservation as a result of Mills Act contracts The purpose of this agenda item, therefore, is to request Council support to direct staff to carry out such an investigation and report back to the City Council with a recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the adoption of this resolution. Following staff investigation of the benefits and/or drawbacks of this program, the City Council will then determine whether or not to pursue adoption of an ordinance which would activate the Mills Act in Chula Vista. Attachments: 1. Letter from property owners who support Mills Act implementation in Chula Vista e:\.., t 999'~genda-~*:-~,ents\MillsAct CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) - Mayor Horton stat~ that it was ber unc~s~an~in~ tha~ once dispatch was notified of a lift failure on a bus, the current contrac~r, San Diego Transit, had 30 minutes to respond with alternative tr~l~Ott. Sbe w~ ~ ofth~ ~mde. pstalldln~ that all bus drivers we:m given sex~sitlvity and a~iced that any instances of ~macceptable b~haviot b~ reporl~d to th~ Mayor's Office. Coun¢ilmember Salas stat~d that the City has a responsibility to provide thc same level of service to all citizeaxs of Chnla Vista and suggested that the Council consider subsidi~'inE fares so that vehe~Ichsir passengers can utilize I-tandytraas if the regular buses are not Colmgilmemb~r padilla expressed flxt.~[t~tion ~ th~ bus problems had been going on for suck a long period of time, and he asked staff to report on what steps are being taken to correct the problems. He assured the clfzens that the Council would do im utmost to correct any problems. ACTION: Mayor Horton moved to refer the item to staff. The motion carried 5-0. ORAL COM~-U3qICATIONS Ed Nabosky spoke regardinE two lanes that were shut down prior to 8:00 mm. on January 23, 2001, in Otay Ranch, creating a 200-car backap along westbound Telegraph Canyon Road. He stated that it was lCs undvn~tanding that lanes would not be shut clown before 9:00 a_m. or after 3:00 p.m. City Manager Rowlands responded that Otay Water District w~s doing some consauction in that urea, that ~lr. Nabosk-y was co~ that lane closures were to occur only after 9:00 am., and that staff would check into the matter, ACTION ITEMS 4. REPORT RESPONDING TO COUNCIL REGARDING ENACTMENT OF THE MILLS ACT IN CHULA VISTA The report is in response to Council's request of December 7, 1999 to further reseamh the specific implications of implementing the Mills Act in Chnla Vista. Since that time, staff has done research and met with the Resource Conservation Commission and other interested citizens to evaina~e methods by which the lvIill~ Act could be implemented in the City. (Director of Plsmnlng and Building) Senior Plannex Blcss~nt, provided an overview of the Mills Act provisions, which encourage the preseawafion, maintenance, and restoration of designated historic protx~ty through property tax incenfive~ and allow for a re, assessment of property taxes throngh a Stato-msnd~tod forl~ula. Coone~ember S~la~ mentioned that a 1985 survey of eligible homes did not include the Montgomery m~, which was subsequently annexed to the City. Sh~ asked ff the most rec~t survey did inclnd~ th~ urea. Staff Intern Lopez responded that of 135 homes surveyed, some of them m~y be located in the Montgomery an~ Page 4- Cotmm] Mimaes /~- -/~ 01/23/01 ACTION ITEMS (Continued) Couneilmember Rindone asked whether aay of the fou~ cities using the program had experienced any breach ia ~iiln Act couh~c-ts~ Staff respondexl that ia Eseondldo, there were a couple of homeowners who did not follow all tbe e~mblished guideLines bra most participating homeowners ate committed to the program. Cotmcilmember Rindone a~:kex:l staff to report oa the circumntances surroundlnE the Escondido problem wben the ordinance is bronght back for ~iatr°d~642 Second Avenue, owner of a historical Victorian home, stated that her home requires~fftinual upkeep and that she would appreciate.any assistance the City could provide. "-~ghe--n'~de~t that the Mills Act program would benefit the community by preserving historic ~-homes. .. ~.~ 0~/N~a~cy Parks, 124 Hilltop Drive, owner of a Dutch colonial revival home, also asked for City sistance with the continual upkeep of the property. Louise Torio, 657 20t~ Street, San Diego, stated that she l~s seen an increase in value and investments in areas where the Mills Act has been established. Ms. Torio urged the Council to support the program and suggested that a liberal tom be incorporated into the lang~mge of the ordinance. 0~adamela Beasoussan, 616 Second Avenue, owner of a histodc property, spoke ia support of npfing the Mill~ Act ordillanee. Perm' W~Second Avenue, a volunteer with the Chula Vista Hedtage Museum, spoke in support(of the~rogram, which would assist ia preserving the existing orchard homes that are a part of C~aOffVista's history. icholas Gist~o, 21 F Street, owner of a home built in 1896, encouraged the Council to implement the Mill~ Act program Mayor Horton ~at_~l that she valued the preservation of these historic homes and hoped that the policy to be brought fomrard would not be too restrictive so as to encourage people to upply for Councilroeml~ Salas thanked the community who came om irt support of the program and slat~ llmt the Mill.q Act would encourage furore generations to continue the preservation of Chula Vista's heritage. ACTION: Co~meilmember Salas moved to a.ecept the report and direct staff to dra~ an Ordimmce. The motion carried 5-0. P~ge5 - Council Minutes /~--/b 01/23/01 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 2 and 16, 2001 The appropriate Commissioners were not present to approve the April 2, 2001 minutes. The minutes were deferred until the next meeting. MSC (Bull/l'. Thomas)for approval of the April 16, 2001 minutes. Vote: (5- 0-0-1 ) with Diaz absent. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. OLD BUSINESS 1. Update of Mills Act Mr. Jim SandoYal (Assistant Planning Director) indicated that staff was directed by City Council to bring them a vehicle that would allow property owners who own historic homes to have an opportunity to participate in the financial benefits that the Mills Act provides. The way the current Ordinance is, the RCC is the body that is responsible for making recommendations as to what structures should go on that list of recognized structures in the City. That is a role that staff would expect RCC to continue to perform, and for that reason staff wants to keep P, CC in the loop on this item and bring it to the RCC before staff takes the matter to the City Council on May 29, 2001. Ms. Beverly Blessent (Principal Planner) handed out Section 2.32.070 and 2.32.090 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, a list of recommended property maintenance guidelines and a draft application form. The code section gives RCC the authority to develop a policy to enter into contracts with owners of currently designated homes. The City Attorney is reviewing a draft contract, which has been based on the City of San Diego model. What staff has got so far are a draft resolution and a draft Council policy. Staff feels that a policy is going to give them the vehicle that they need to get these contracts done in an expeditious way. Staff will be meeting with property owners before May 29. Commissioner Bensoussan asked Ms. Blessent to run through the resolution. Ms. Blessent complied. Commissioner S. Thomas asked if the functional process is basically contract negotiations where the agreements are more like site-specific? Mr. Sandoval indicated that the agreements are general in nature and more than anything else a financing mechanism and not that site-specific. RCC Minutes -4- DRAFT May 14,2001 Commissioner Bensoussan pointed out that a lot of municipalities allow businesses to take advantage of the Mills Act. If businesses are excluded from the contract it could have an adverse affect. Ms. Blessent did not have an answer to that question, but staff knows it is out there as an issue. Commissioner S. Thomas asked who actually enters into these agreements? Mr. Sandoval indicated that it would be the City Council with the City Manager having the authorization to sign the contracts. Commissioner Bensoussan thought the RCC might want to immediately review the 40 already designated properties and make a recommendation to staff as to whether those properties have kept their integrity to such a degree that they would qualify for the Mills Act. Councilperson Mary Salas mentioned at a Council meeting how the Montgomery area was not considered in the list of historic resources inventory that was done in 1985 or 1986. That list of 150 or so properties is not comprehensive today. Chair Burrascano asked if staff was going to send notices to those that are registered or those that are on the original inventory list? Mr. Sandoval stated that the application forms would be available the next day after Council approval. Mr. Jim McVeigh (644 Second Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910) asked if by entering into the Mills Act he would fall under the historic designation and the restrictions under Municipal Code 2.32.090? Ms. Blessent responded in the negative. It would actually be 2.32.070, A. and F. Vice-Chair Bull stated that he would prefer to have demolition permits be discretionary when it comes to historic buildings. Commissioner Bensoussan thought the way it works in San Diego is that, if a property has been historically designated and someone goes to apply for demolition permit, then that immediately gets a process going whereby it is kicked over to the historic site board for their recommendation. She would very much like to see that in Chula Vista. By what we are doing today, it sounds like even if they had a Mills Act contract we still could not prevent demolition, although they would be subject to penalties for violating their contract. Mr. McVeigh had no problem with the Mills Act. Staff ought to move forward with it. His concern was that if we go through this and it dies here and you get a handful of people under Mills Act, it is still not a full-fledged historic preservation entered by the City. MSC (BulI/T. Thomas) to support adoption of the resolution implementing the Mills Act throughout the City, including all redevelopment areas, and DRAFT DRAFT RCC Minutes - 5 - May 14, 2001 further recommend that properties with Mills Act contracts shall have no permit issued for the demolition, substantial alteration of site without first referring the matter to the Resource Conservation Commission. Vote: (5- 0-0-1) with Diaz absent. Chair Burrascano wanted to request that the City perform an inventory of the Montgomery area and that notification of the availability of Mills Act be sent to all of those that are on the current inventory. MSC (Burrascano/T. Thomas) requesting the City Council either conduct an inventory of the Montgomery area or perform research to exam the previous analysis of that area through other County organizations and that the notification about the Mills Act be sent to all those on the inventory that currently exists. Amendment the motion to include the western area of Chula Vista including the Montgomery area. Vote: (5-0-0-1) with Diaz absent. DRAFT CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE MILLS ACT ARTICLE 12 HISTORICAL PROPERTY CONTRACTS (With notes - as presented to California Preservation Foundation Workshop) Section: 50280. Rcs~icfion of use of property;, application of own~ 50281.1. QualL~ed historical propcrty 50281. Requfi~ provisions of conu'act 50281.1 Conu'a~t fcc 50282. Renewal; nora-eacwal; notice; protesg rex:ord~fion; effect 50284. Cancellation; g~unds 50285. Cancellation; notice; hearing 50286. Cancellation; f~; payment 50287. Action to enfome contract; parties 50288. Acquisition of property by eminent domain; cancellation of contract; inappficabili~y to detca~nation of value- 50289. A~nnexafion by city of propers., under conwact to county.; rights and duties of 50290. Consultation with state comm~gion City Counoit (or Board of Supervisors In unincorporated srses) ms), contrsct with owner to restrict use of historic property to carry out the purpose of this article and f Section 439 of Revenue and 'fax Code (to preserve qualified hlst~rical property). k § ~28~. P~stricflon of use of pru~_rl~, appllct~on of owner ~%_ Upon the appl/~fion of au ow-act or the agent of ~n owner of ~ny ~,~ll*-~l h/~tori~l ~ iefined in Section 502~0.1, .file leg/slat/ye bo~ of · c/tT: cotmty, or c/ty ~ county m~y ,eo~tra~t w~th ~ the owner or ai~nt to r?met the ~e of .the p?perLT in · lrm:~er wh/eh the leg/~l~t:/ve body. deem~ reasonable to ~ out tt~e purpoae~ of ta~ ar~cle ~cl oi ~ 1.9 (comment/rig of Clmptor $ of P~'t 2 of Divi~n I of the Revenue a_ud 'l~.zfion Co~e. The contrazt s½~ll meet the requirements of 5ec~o~ ~0~R1 ~ ~ (3.mended by ~tata.19~5, c. /k~,5, § 1.~.) IT~'t otical Note The 1~7 amendment substituted "Ar~- Former ~ 50280, added by Ststs.lg?2, ~ie 1.9 (commencing ~itb Sect/on 439) of 1°-,~.~, p. 2,376, § 1, was renumbered Chapter 3" /or "&t:icle T (commencing ~0279~ and a~eocled by S:ats.1979, c. · r/th Sect/on 1161) of Chap:er 5". 373, p. 1317, ~ 157. Fo~ns ~[ealth and Euv/ronment ~;~25.5(8). C~'~. Health and F..~ronment ~§ 61 et § ~80.1. Qualified ~ not ~empt ~m ~ ~fion nd w~ m~ ei~ of ~e fo~ register is ~y sight sufficient to Contract can ~) ~em ~pp~m~ ~ wn~ s~ ~e ~ folio~ restoration, go~ of ~e ~ent of rehab. * · · Allow exam- ) (2) For ~e ~c ~ of ~e ~5or ~d ~ of ~ p~ by ~e us~sor. ~e determine corn- ~e~e ~e o~e~s piiance with ~ For it ~ ~ b~i u~n, and ~m m ~e ~nefit of, ~ sum~ ~ ~t of ~e o~. A /o~er who en~ Contract remains I.~e~d~ by S~m.l~, ~ ~5, ~ ~.) in effect upo. H~o~~ Note change of Fee may be f ~1.1. ~n~ f~ Always ~0 years f ~ ~new~ ao~ew~ from expiratlo~.~ (~) ~ ~n~ served, m ~ ~ of ance of period, s~ ~ County Recorder ~fion~ ~ within 20 days h~ of~ lected or not rehabbed as agreed. (~d~ by S~i~, c ~, ~ T.) Pubtlc hearing ' ) § 50285. cs~eeustiou; notice-; hearing 1o cancel con- No contract shall be canceled under Section 50284 until a_ftm' the tract. legislative body has given notice of, and has held, a public hearing on the matter. Notice of the hearing shall be malted to the last known address of each owner of property within the historic zone and shall be published pursuant to Section 6061. (Added by Star..1972, c. 1442, p. 3161, § 1.) Cancellation ) § 50286. c ucen tib i fee ; payment because of If a contract is canceled under Section 50284, the owner shall breach of contract means pay a cancellation fee of 12~/_. percent of the full value of the proper- payment by :y at the time of cancellation, as determined by the county assessor owner cf 12-1/2% without regard to any restriction on such property imposed pursuant of ~Jll/ value at ;o this article. The cancellatiomfee shall be paid to the Controller, at time of cancel- lotion, such time and in such manner as the Controller shall prescribe, and shall be deposited in the State General Fund. (Added by Stat~.1972, c. 1442, p. 3161, § 1. Amended by Stats.1978, c. 1207, p. 3374, § 5, operative Jan. 1, 1951.) Hislorlcml Note The 1976 amendment changed the can- 1978 amendment of th/s Boo,ion inoper- celkation fee from ~J percent of the as- ative unless Senate Const~ Amend..~o. seased value to 13¥., percent of the full 197T-75 is approved by the voters, became va~ue, opers~/ve Ja~ 1, 1981, u S.C-~- No, 60 council or · ) § 50287. ~cfion to enforce cont:rsct; landowner may bring action In .~s an altematJve to c~ncellation nf the contract for breach of court to enforce any condition, the county, city, or any landowner,may bring any ac- contract, tion in court necessary to er:force a contract including, but not limit- ecl to, an action to enforce the contract by spec~ic perlormance or in- (Added by Stat~.1972, c. 1442, p. 3161, § 1.) § 50288. Acquisition of property by eminent domain; c~nceLl~ tion of eontra~zt; inapplJ~bLllty to determination of ,~iue In the event that property subject to contract under this article is acquired in whole or in part by eminent domain or other acqutsi- No breach of tion by any entity authorized to exercise the power of eminent do- contract lee If ~ main, and the acquisition is determined by the legislative body to property acquired frustrate the purpose of the contract, such contract shall be canceled by arnltmnt domain. Value and no fee shall be imposed under Section 50285. Such contract shall of property so be deemed null and void/or all purposes of determining the value of a~qulrad Is not the property so acquired, determined by the contract. (Added by Stats.1972, c. 1442, p. 3161, § 1. Amended by St~ts.1974, c. 544, p. 1252, § Histmicad Note ~Phe 1974 amendment amended the see- tion without change. Library Releren~es Em/nenr Doma/~ ¢:=17. CJ.S. Em~uent Domain ~ 64. tn annexed § S0289. A-nexafion by city oi property under contract to court- areas, cities t-y; rights and duties of eit~ inherit con- tracts mede In the event that property restricted by a contract with a county with county, under this article is annexed to a city, the city shall succeed to ali rights, duties, and powers of the county under such contract, (Added by Staks.19?2, c. 1442, p. 3161, § 1.) State Historical § 502~. Consulter. ion wt~ ~ ~n Commission advises. (~ ~ 5~m.19~, ~ ~, ~ 8.) Libr~-'y Reterenees Health and ]~nvironment ~:~2.5.5. 88 to ~, ~, 1~, 110, 115 to ~, C J.g. H~ ~d ~viro~t ~[ 61 to ~ ~. 1~ 1~. 1~, 1~ to 1~, ~, ~, 71 to 73, 78 to ~, ~ to ~, 1~, 1~ to Crilu~a for City of Chub ¥-~t= Historical Situ Reg~tr~tion: · BEARS A 1~ ~-ATIONSHIP TO OVEKA1.1 - }{ERITAGE ON A LOCAi., STATE, OR NATIONAL BASIS. TI:[IS MISSION OF SAN DUR. GO, FOR EXAMPI,F,. IS LOCAL BUT IS ALSO PART OF A STATEWIDE SYSTEM - THAT IS RECOGNIZED NATION.~ I J .Y. · RELAt bS TO A Fflffl'ORiC PERSONAGE WHO PLAYED AN IM1'ORTANT ROLE FfisTORICALLY,2 ON A LOCAL, STATE, OR NATIONAL BASIS. HOWEVER, TH]E INDIVIDUAL NEED NOT BE ICNOWN NATIONA'[.I.Y, AS LONG AS IT WAS SOMEONE WHO MADE A SIGNIF'ICANT CONTRIBUTION ON A LOCAL BASIS. IDEALLY, THIS INCLUDF_~ A Sli~ ~ T~ INDIVIDUAL LIVED OR WI-IERE A NOTEWORTHY I-llSTORICAL CONTRIBUTION OR ACH~IVEMENT TOOK PLACE. · MAY BE A SITE WI--IERE AN LMPORTANT EVENT TOOK PLACE. THIS WOULD BE AN EV~'T SYMBOLIC OF A PHASE OF HISTORY THAT COULD REACH TFIE NATIONAL LEVEL. TId]E SITE OF ~ SIGNING OF A HISTORIC DOCUMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, WILL SATISFY THIS CRITERJON. ~ · THE SITE SHOULD HAVE DISTINGUISHING ARCHTYECTUR_AL CHARAutka~ISTICS THAT ARE IY)ENTIFIABLE. TH~ INCLUDES STRUCTURES OF A PARTICULAR ARCHITE~ STYLE R.EC~LE TODAY. · THE SITE MAY BE 7~_KCHAEOLOGICAI J ,Y SIGNYFICANT LN iTS ASSOCIATION WITH PRE-HISTORY OF THE AREA. A SITE DEMONSTRATING EXISTENCE OF AN ANCI]ENT COMM-GNYI~ (INDIANS INDIGENOUS TO THE AREA. FOR EXAMPLE) COULD SATISFY THIS CRITEKION. · HAS INTEGRITY. THIS IS WHERE THE SITE CO~ TO HAVE EVIDENCE OF THE ORIGINAL FEATUR_ES. ENOUGH OF T!~ ORIGINAL STRUCTURE OR Tfl~ SiTE IS INTACT TO BE DISTINGUISHABLE AS HAVING HISTORICAL VALUE. DESIGNATED HISTORIC SITES Site # Address Historic Common RCC CC Site Name Name Recom. ~App. Permit 1 699 E St. Site of Greg 7/28/87 N Rogers House 2 3 North James Bulmer Bulmer House 7/28/87 N Second Ave. House 3 210 Alfred Haines Handel 7/28/87 N Davidson House Cordrey House Street 4 666 Third Our House Orchard House 7/28/87 N Ave. 5 276 F Street First 7/28/87 N Congregational Church 6 525 F Street James Johnson James Johnson 7/28/87 N House House 7 669 Del Mar George El Nido 7/28/87 N Ave. Worthington House 8 671 Fourth William Seaman Haines 7/28/87 N Ave Haines House House 9 21 F Street Reginald Augusta 7/28/87 N Vaughn House Starkley House 10 613 Second ByronBronson Byron Bronson 7/28/87 N Ave. House House 11 640 Fit'rh Engebretson- Stafford House 7/28/87 N Avenue Stafford House 12 357 G Street ChulaVista 5/7/84 5/22/84 N Women's Club 13 264 1 Street Clara Smith Four Seasons 7/28/86 7/28/87 N House Day Care (M) Center 14 617 Del Mar Frances Fisher Glen Roberts 7/28/86 7/28/87 N House House (M) 15 630 Del Mar George Rife Rosemary 7/28/86 7/28/87 N House Bullen House (M) 16 30 F Street Herbert Bryant Michael 8/4/86 7/28/87 N House Carson House 17 50 F Street Herman Hotel William Smith 8/4/86 7/28/87 N Carriage House House 18 54 F Street W.J.S. William 8/4/86 7/28/87 N Browne House Browne House 19 88 L Street San Diego San Diego 8/4/86 7/28/87 N Country Club Country Club 20 62 Cook Hazel Goes Hazel Goes 8/4/86 7/28/87 N Court Cook House Cook House 21 89 Country Theodore Theodore 8/4/86 7/28/87 ~ N Club Drive Thurston Thurston House House 22 344 Hilltop Dupree-Gould Gould House 8/4/86 7/28/87 N House 23 170 Cypress L.G. Spring Ruth 8/18/86 7/28/87 N House ' Weatherbie (M) House 24 34 Davidson CarlBoltz MaryBoltz 8/18/86 7/28/87 N House House 25 124 Hilltop Leo Christy Leo Christy 8/18/86 7/28/87 N House House (M) 26 151 Landis Albert Barker Abraham 8/18/86 7/28/87 N House Eitzen House (M) 27 209 D Street Nancy Jobes Marcos Carver 8/18/86 7/28/87 N House House 28 503 G Street Kindergarten Old 8/18/86 * N Building Kindergarten Building 29 511 G Street San Diego Insectary 8/18/86 7/28/87 N County Building Insectary 30 44 North Edward Marcella 8/18/86 7/28/87 N Second Ave Gillette House Darling House 31 301-5 Third Melville Block Security Trust 8/18/86 7/28/87 N Avenue Bank Building 32 410 Church Elmer RexBudel 8/25/86 7/28/87 N Mikkelson House House 33 665 Del Mar Mary Miller Mary Miller 8/25/86 * N House House 34 374 8/25/86 7/28/87 N Roosevelt St. 35 155 G Street Mrs. B.K. The Boarding 8/25/86 7/28/87 N Maude House House 36 33 I Street Robert Mueller Celia Flynn 8/25/86 7/28/87 N House House 37 379 J Street Evelyn Haines Theodore 8/25/86 7/28/87 N House Curtis House 38 435 First William William Smith 8/25/86 7/28/87 N Avenue Sallmon House House 39 320 Second Allison Allison 8/25/86 7/28/87 N Avenue Crockett Crockett House House 40 10 Second Lucious Lucious 8/18/86 7/28/87 N Avenue Wright House Wright House 41 614 Second Nadine Davies Lee Butch 7/28/86 7/28/87 Y Avenue House House 42 616 Second Greg Rogers Crreg Rogers 7/28/86 7/28/87 Y Avenue House House 43 642 Second Garrettson- Frank House 7/28/86 7/28/87 N (Y) Avenue Frank House ?? 44 644 Second Jennie JeanMcall 7/28/86 7/28/87 ** Avenue MacDonald House House 45 311 D Street Frank Damren Margaret (?????) House Cameron House 46 Rohr Manor 8/25/86 7/28/87 Y * Owners submitted letters to City Council at the 7/28/87 meeting requesting no designation. ** The Historical Site Permit was originally imposed by City Council on 7/28/87, but was later removed by City Council on 12/20/94 by request of property owner. · ~,~,~xl f~.. CITY OF CI-ILFLA VISTA ~ PLANNING & BUILDING DEPAP-.TM~ENT DRAFT MT[,LS ACT ow c~ 276 Fourth Avenue OqlJlA VIS-iA Chula Vista, CA 91910 APPLICATION FORM APPLICANT/OWNER INFORMATION Case ~ Applicant/Owner Name: Date Submitted: Applicant/Owner Address: Phone: Secondar¢ Owner Nome: Owner Address: Phone: OWNER APPROVAL IS REQURIED NAME: NAME: SIGNATURE: SIGNATURE:: DATE: DATE: [ ] PROPERTY 12NFORMATION Proper'h/Address: Assessor's Parcel Number (Required): Zone: HqSTORIC/LANDMARK INFORMATION I Is the site designated as Historic? tf yes, where? Local State National Date of Designation: ts the site on the Local Register Listing? If yes, Date of Listing: I PROPOSED STRUCTUREfIMPROVEMENT I The goal of the Mills Act Program is to encourage the use, maintenance, and restoration of historical properties and retain their characteristics as properties of historical significance. Please list improvements, either specific or general, that you/the owner intend to cam/out to achieve/maintain the goal of the Mills Act Program. (A~ach a separate sheet if necessa~/) DRAF'T MILLS ACT APPLICATION FORM Page 2 Submittal Requirements 1. Copy of Grant Deed 2. Copy of Preliminary Title Report, including complete Legal Description (wr~en within last six months] 3. Documentation of monthly rental amount or the amount that the properly can reasonably be expected to yield. 4. Interest rate of existing loan. 5. Pictures of the exterior of the property (front, back, and both sides] 6. Documentation of monthly maintenance costs (includes landscaping, trash, exterior painting, etc.) Processing Procedure Once the completed application and ~ submiffal requirements are submitted, the Planning staff will review the information for completeness. Once the application is reviewed and determined complete, a staff mernber~,., scheduJe an~appointment for an on-site inspection. / Once a request is approved by staff, a contract will be drawn up and executed by all parfie~I It will then be forwarded to the CounN Recorders office for recordation. The recorded copy,lMII be returned to the Ci~/ o! Chula Vista for submission to the Counh/ Tax Assessors office/for final RESOLUTION NO. 2001- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING A COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF A MILLS ACT PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM AND AUTHORiZING THE CITY TO ENTER INTO SAID MILLS ACT CONTRACTS WITH THE OWNERS OF QUALIFYING HISTORIC SITES WHEREAS, The Mills Act is State legislation which enables local jurisdictions to enter into contractual agreements with property owners of qualified historic properties and was designed to encourage preservation, maintenance and restoration of designated historic properties; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Mills Act legislation, entering into an agreement may result in substantial property tax savings for those owners of historic sites through the use of an alternative method for determining the assessed value of his or her property; and, WHEREAS, such property tax savings could serve as a monetary incentive for owners of historic properties to maintain, preserve and rehabilitate their property for the benefit of the public today and for future generations; and WHEREAS, on January 23, 2001, Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance and Council Policy regarding the Mills Act that would have a liberal tone, thus encouraging participation by homeowners; and WHEREAS, the attached policy is presented in response to that directive and an ordinance will be prepared at a later date if it is still determined to be necessary by the Council. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby adopt Council Policy No. 440-01 regarding implementation of a Mills Act Property Tax Abatement Program, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. Presented by: Approved as to form by: '~' t~ Bob Leiter, AICP i Director of Planning and Building H:\City Clerk\Mills Act Policy PROPOSED COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUBJECT: Mills Act Property Tax POLICY EFFECTIVE Abatement Program NUMBER DATE PAGE 5/30/01 ADOPTED BY: Resolution DATED: 5/29/01 BACKGROUND In November 1999, Councilperson Salas was contacted by a group of historic homeowners who were interested in pursuing the Mills Act in the City of Chula Vista. The item was referred to City staff who reported to the City Council on December 7, 1999 and noted several potential issues with enactment of the Mills Act in the City.. The item was then referred to the Planning Department who reported to City Council on January 23, 2001 regarding comments on the noted issues. At that meeting, Council directed staff to return to them with a liberal policy which would encourage participation in this tax abatement program by the historic homeowners. PURPOSE To provide financial assistance in the form of property tax relief to owners of qualifying historic properties through the Mills Act Tax Abatement Program. After a Mills Act contract has been executed, the county assessor values the property according to the capitalization of income method, whereby the property's potential income is divided by a pre-determined capitalization rate to determine the new assessed property value. The program encourages preservation and maintenance of the City's limited historic resources. .POLICY 1. It is the policy of the City of Chula Vista to foster and encourage the preservation, maintenance, rehabilitation and restoration of historically designated properties through the Mills Act program. 2. All qualifying historic sites shall be eligible for Mills Act Agreements, in conformance with this City Council Policy and State law requirements, and shall be evaluated on a case by case basis. 3. Contracts shall be voluntary and flexible. 4. Contracts shall contain at a minimum, the mandatory conditions required by state law. 5. Contracts shall be reviewed by the Resource Conservation Commission and recommended for approval by the City Council. 6. Contracts shall include a program for potential improvements over the life of the contract and shall be reviewed periodically for compliance. All improvements shall be in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. 7. No permit for the demolition, substantial alteration or removal of any building, structure or site shall be issued without first referring the matter to the Resource Conservation Commission. 8. Minimum maintenance guidelines as provided for in the contract should be maintained at all times during the term of the agreement. Minimum maintenance guidelines are suggested as follows: a. Owner should make every attempt to preserve and maintain the regulated characteristics of historical significance of the Historic Site, and, where necessary, restore and rehabilitate the property, in accordance with the rules and regulations published by the Secretary of the Interior. b. Owner should maintain all buildings, structures, yards and other improvements in a manner which does not detract from the appearance of the immediate neighborhood. The following conditions are highly discouraged: i. Dilapidated, deteriorating, or unrepaired structures, such as: fences, roofs, doors, walls and windows; ii. Scrap lumber, junk, trash or debris; iii.Abandoned, discarded or unused objects or equipment, such as automobiles, automobile parts, furniture, stoves, refrigerators, cans, containers, or similar items;; iv. Any device, decoration, design, structure or vegetation which is unsightly by reason of its height, condition, or its inappropriate location. 9. Contracts shall be drafted in a form approved by the City Attorney. 10. The Community Development Department shall be provided the opportunity to review and comment on all Mills Act applications for commercial properties located within Redevelopment Areas. These proposed contracts shall be reviewed for potential negative financial consequences to the Redevelopment Area. J:LPlanning~BEV~Historic Preservation\COUNCIL POLICY. doc CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: 05/29/01 ITEM TITLE: REPORT ON THE CITY'S STRATEGIC ENERGY PLAN A. RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN B. URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AS A MUNICIPAl. UTILITY 4/STHS VOTE REQUIRED C. ORDINANCE OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AS A MUNICIPAL UTILITY SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ~ REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER 4/5THS VOTE: YES ~ NO ~ BACKGROUND At the April 24 City Council meeting, (following an April 17 City Council Workshop), staff presented a report summarizing the findings and recommendations for a City Energy Strategy and Adion Plan ("Strategy"). The findings and recommendations were based upon staff analysis of an energy management options report prepared by the City's consultant, MRW and Associates. Council accepfed the report and direded staff to return with the implementing resolution adopting the Strategy. One major staff recommendation which emerged as part of the overall energy strategy, was for the City of Chula Vista to take the initial steps necessary to more specifically assess the costs and benefits of forming and operating as a municipal utility. The first initial step in this process is to present for Council consideration an ordinance establishing the City as a municipal utility. This report serves to present the Strategy and municipal utility ordinance for Council approval. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Urgency Ordinance declaring the City of Chula Vista a municipal utility; place the regular form of the ordinance on first reading; and adopt the resolution approving the City of Chub Vista Energy Strategy and Action Plan. ! PAGE 2, ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: 05/29/00 BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION As indicated, the City Council previously accepted the report on energy management options and staff's recommendations on a broad-based Strategy. The eight (8) major components of the strategy are outlined below along with the assigned staff that will be responsibJe for managing and supporting each component within the specified timeframes. The Strategy document that will be used for distribution is attached. Eneray Stratecly The overall Energy Strategy has been summarized into the eight major components provided below. 1. Monitor the energy market and legal restrictions and; be prepared to enter into an Electrical Services Contract with an Energy Services Provider (ESP) or power generator as allowed by law. · Subject to removal of existing legal restrictions, seek Council authorization to negotiate contrad within the following parameters: · Pledge up to City's entire load (14MW) · Term: Shortest time possible, but not to exceed 3 years · Price: Establish a maximum fixed price beneath which staff has the authority to negotiate · Give authority to explore different pricing mechanisms and energy derivatives Staffing: Lead: City Manager's Office - Administration Support: Administration - Special Operations Administration - Legislative Timeframe: Ongoing Update: None PAGE 3, ITEM NO.: /~ MEETING DATE: 05/29/00 2. Pursue Distributed Generation and "district' generation~ opportunities for specific facilities and technologies. · Solicit site specific proposals for: a) City Facilities (New Corporation Yard; Civic Center/Police Facility; Library and Recreation facilities) b) Economic Development Opportunities (Goodrich Co.; Maxwell Road site; LandBank site) · Pursue Solar Energy and Distribution Generation Grant Program offered through California Energy Commission (CEC) and other sources · Monitor CPUC proceedings and encourage decisions that facilitate the program Staffing: (City facilities) Lead: Administration- Special Operations Support: Public Works - Operations Administration - Special Operations Administration - Legislative (Econ. Dev.) Lend: Community Development - Administration Support: Administration - Special Operations Timeframe: Six (6) months for City facilities Ongoing for Economic Development opportunities due to general real estate development uncertainties. Update: Staff has met with a number of alternative energy and fossil fuel generation agencies to scope the feasibility of energy generation at City facilities. Staff has used CA Integrated Waste Management Funds and City Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) funds to install one small residential sized solar panel at the new HHW facility located at the Corp. Yard. 3. Partner with a third-party to build and operate power generation facilities. · Monitor discussions and negotiations between the Port District and their operating contractor (Duke Energy) and continue positive and proactive negotiations with them regarding terms for the redevelopment of the South Bay Plant Initial areas for investigation and analysis include but may not necessarily be limited to: · Project description and scoping · Site planning; issue definition "Distributed Generation" refers to small power generation units (generally up to 30 MW) located at or near load centers that could include multiple end users through "over the fence" transactions. Technologies include simple cycle gas turbines, fuel cells and photovoltaics. "District" Generation refers to the efficient cogeneration and distribution of hot water, steam or cold water between consumers as an alternative to electricity or gas fired hot water or air conditioning services to a number of businesses. PAGE 4, ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: 05/29/00 · Shared risks and benefits Staffing: Lead: City Manager's Office - Administration Support: Community Development - Administration Administration - Special Operations Timeframe: Ongoing Update Staff will continue to meet with the Port District and Duke on an as needed basis and will keep Council updated as significant developments occur. 4. Develop an emissions offsets program based on mobile sources · Work with air quality officials to realize the benefits of any City investment in alternative fuel vehicles · Work with future generators and the APCD to ensure any mitigation funds generated are invested locally · Develop portfolio of potential offset projects to make available to new generation sources requiring offsets Staffing: Lead: Administration - Special Operations Support: None Timeframe: Six (6) months Update: Staff is now inserting language in all of its comments regarding South Bay facilities that mitigation funds be spent locally. Staff will develop a list of potential projects and priorities over the next fiscal year while making preliminary contacts with the APCD and institutions that may need offset mitigation projects. S. Take initial steps to more specifically assess the costs and benefits of forming and operating as a Municipal Utility to own/operate all or portions of the local distribution system · Present ordinance to declare City a Municipal Utility · Commence negotiations with SDG&E to identify mutually beneficial partnerships · After formal Council approval of a consultant contract, conduct preliminary appraisal and pre-feasibility consultant services necessary to evaluate rough facility acquisition costs and other related studies that will provide a business model to test the economics of City ownership and operation (estimated $50,000). The pre-feasibility analysis is the first ma[or step necessary to begin the formal process of establishing an integrated municipal utility. · Coordinate any effort on this strategy with other jurisdictions PAGE 5, ITEM NO.: / MEETING DATE: 05/29/00 Staffing: Lead: City Manager's Office - Administration Support: Community Development - Administration Administration - Special Operations Timeframe: Consultant selection - three (3) months Pre-feasibility analysis completed - six (6) months Update: Ordinance proposed. RFQ should be distributed by July 1, 2001. 6. Become a municipal "aggregator''2 and acquire electricity at negotiated rates for City facilities and participating residents/business customers · Support legislation that preserves consumer choices and authorizes "opt out" aggregation programs and be prepared to further analyze the potential risk and benefits of pursuing such a program Staffing: Lead: City Manager's Office - Administration Support: Administration - Special Operations Administration - Legislative Timeframe: Ongoing Update: Staff and the Ciys legislative advocate have continued to monitor and comment on legislation that supports or erodes the City's ability to participate in the market at its discretion. Staff has also worked with the California League of Cities which has taken a lead on some of this legislation as it progresses. 7. Continue / expand energy conservation projects for City facilities and promote energy efficient and renewable energy programs for businesses and residents Staff has prepared a separate Information Memo for the May 29, 2001 agenda packet updating the Council on actions staff have taken and are planning to take to implement the broad-based recommendations provided below. City Facilities · Provide additional energy design, management and funding support to the City Facilities Project Team. 2 Municipal aggregation allows a municipality to procure electric power on behalf of their residents and businesses under the presumption that consolidating or pooling numerous individual purchasers into a single purchasing "load" will command more favorable rates on the energy commodity market. PAGE 6, ITEM NO.: / ~ MEETING DATE: 05/29/00 · Coordinate grant and other funding sources to implement energy savings and alternative energy for City facilites. · Establish a process that encourages the City's design and build partners to present energy conservation and alternative energy options that exceed title 24 standards, and where appropriate, install comparable energy conservation measures in existing City facilities. · Coordinate efforts with energy service providers, the San Diego Regional Energy Office, the California Energy Commission and other agencies to take advantage of public facility programs and obtain energy conservation certifications for new and remodeled facilities. · Establish a modified work schedule for City employees, such as a 9/80 schedule. (Not recommended at this time.) NOTE: As indicated in the memo, staff is not requesting that Council take action to implement a 9/80 work schedule as part of the effort to reduce energy consumption during peak summer demand. Staff has concluded that the schedule needed to generate the energy benefits needed to meet the ten percent (10%) conservation goal would be too disruptive to public services. Additionally, there is not enough time to provide families with sufficient notice to adjust to the changes that would need to occur to the planning and promotion that has gone into summer programs for seniors, children and other potentially dependent members of the community that rely on those public services. Staff believes strongly that there is merit in the 9/80 plan from conservation and other important perspectives but more planning is needed to fully take advantage of those benefits and minimize the potential impacts to service. Staff will work with all City departments and Council to develop alternative energy conservation measures to replace the energy savings that are needed to meet the State recommended goals that would have accrued under 9/80 plan. Residents and Businesses · Distribute free energy saving retrofits for existing residences. · Develop matching fund programs to assist local businesses with energy retrofits. · Analyze available options to provide incentives to businesses that utilize renewable sources of energy (ke. solar panels, wind power, distributive, etc.) City matching funds Grants or Iow interest loans (Sec. 108, CDBG, CEC Solar Energy Grant Program) Rebates (in padnership with SDG&E) Free publicity · Identify and support state and federal grant opportunities that encourage businesses to fudher develop or bring-to-market new energy-related technologies (i.e. wave technology, fuel cell, etc.) · Provide public education, information and assistance to residents and businesses so they may take advantage of rebate, loan and grant programs that assist energy conservation. This could include developing an Energy Conservation Resource Guide. PAGE 7, ITEM NO.: /~*/ MEETING DATE: .05/29/0Q · Include energy resource information on the City's website with links to relevant energy assistance websites (i.e.U.S. Dept. of Energy, SDG&E Small Business Services, San Diego Regional Energy Office, etc.) · Condud business outreach workshops inviting guest speakers from various consulting groups and service organizations/agendas to provide information on energy conservation, renewable/sustainable sources of energy, and government programs that provide funding/rebates to suppod these eforts. · Partner with of her service/community organizations to broadcast energy saving resources and tips fo businesses via newsleHers, information pamphlets and websites and coordinate efforts with the Planning Depadment. · Continue to utilize MRW fo assist companies with contract negotiations as well as with general energy-related inquiries. Staffing: Lead: Administration - Special Operations Support: Community Development- Economic Development Timeframe: Ongoing Update: See Council Information Memo - May 29, 2001 8. DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A LEGISLATIVE STRATEGY THAT FACILITATES THE CITY'S OVERALL ENERGY PLAN Add a new category to the City's existing Legislative Program that embodies the City's goals in such key areas as environmental protection, electrical supply costs, transmission reliability, natural gas supply and availability, photovoltaic and other alternative power sources and power plant siting. This category would include the following: Support measures that: 1. Assist the City and its energy consumers improve supply/demand conditions and enhance conservation measures. 2. Preserve local options to control and fund the supply and distribution of energy (including the formation of a municipal utility district) or that fund conservation programs. 3. Enhance the Cib/s ability to enter into distributed generation agreements without having to pay stranded transmission or distribution charges. 4. Impose "fair and reasonable" wholesale price caps. 5. Repeal the provision in AB1X that suspends customer choice, and pass a favorable bill for customer choice (SB 27X or a similar one). 6. Make municipal aggregation programs available on an "opt-out" basis. 7. Allow public agencies (not just municipal utilities) such as the City to participate in state power supply programs. 8. Encourage use of real time metering. PAGE 8, ITEM NO.: / ~ MEETING DATE: 05/29/00 9. Increase incentives for photovoltaic and other alternative energy sources. Oppose measures that: 1. Impinge on or restrict the City's ability to exercise land use review/control with respect to the generation or transmission of power. 2. Erode the City's ability to acquire/generate power from alternative sources, operate as a municipal utility, or enter into aggregation and/or distributed generation arrangements. Staffing: Lead: Administration - Legislative Administration - Special Operations Support: Community Development- Economic Development Timeframe: Ongoing Update: Staff will continue fo monitor the special legislative session(s) and provide support or opposition to those proposals that fall within the parameter of these legislative guidelines. The first extraordinary session was brought to a close on May 15 to allow non-urgency bills, such as the bond sale, to go into effect as soon as possible. A second extra-ordinary session has been convened and those bills that were introduced in the first extra- ordinary session will be re-submitted for consideration by the legislature. All bills from the initial session not signed by the Governor are deemed to be dead and must be resubmitted. Municipal Utility Ordinance One major staff recommendation is for the City to take the initial steps necessary to assess the cost and benefits of forming and operating as a municipal utility. The first step is for the City to adopt an ordinance establishing the City as a municipal utility. The proposed ordinance is presented for Council's approval. The City's authority to form a municipal utility derives from ArticJe XI, Section 9 of the California Constitution. This Sedion provides that 'a municipal corporation may establish purchase and operate public works to furnish its inhabitants with light, water, power, heat, transportation, or means of communication." This authority is carried out at the local level through Section 200 of the City Charter. Section 200 generally provides for the City's exercise of power and control over all "municipal affairs". City Council approval of the proposed ordinance would have the effect of establishing a municipal utility for the City of Chula Vista. It would also have the effect of setting up the framework for future City Council actions that could implement some or all of the utility's authority to actually deliver utility services. The types of utility services authorized include water, transportation, telecommunications, eledricity, natural gas, and related services. Potential service areas include areas within and outside the City's boundaries. Partnerships with other public or PAGE 9, ITEM NO.: /~ MEETING DATE: 05/29/0Q private utilities are also contemplated. At this time, however, the ordinance does not pre-commit the City to any particular utility service or service area. The ultimate structure of the municipal utility entity, the kinds of facilities it controls, and the kinds of utility services it delivers would all need to be the subject of future City Council action. In the meantime, the City Council will oversee and direct the City's municipal utility activities. Per Council direction, staff's initial focus will be on assessing the feasibility of becoming involved in the generation and distribution of electricity, natural gas, and related energy products. As the City Council may direct, staff will also be pursuing other forms of utilih/services. The City does have some limited experience with municipal utility formation. Back in 1982 the City established itself as "Municipal Solar Utility" in order to facilitate the delivery of federal and state tax credits to investors in solar energy facilities. This utility has been dormant for some time and does not appear to have been used to great effect. The City's establishment of itself as a municipal utility is categorically exempt from CFQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15320. FISCAL IMPACT Adoption of the proposed resolution and ordinance does not have an immediate and direct fiscal impact other than the significant staff time necessary to implement the proposed adions as identified in both the staff report and Strategy. After receipt of proposals for the consultant services necessary to conduct preliminary appraisal and pre-feasibility studies for acquisition of necessary electrical facilities to consider becoming a municipal utility, staff will return to Council requesting an appropriation and approval of the necessary agreements and contracts. ATTACHMENTS A- Energy Strategy and Action Plan B - Executive Summary C- Information Memo dated 5/24/01 regarding Update on the implementation of Energy Conservation Measures J:\COMMDEV~STAFF.REP\Energy Strategy and Municipal Utilih/Ord..doc ATTACHMENT 1 CI'IY OF CHULA VISI'A 276 Fourth Avenuo Chula Vista, CA 91910 (BLANK PAGE) in light of the State's energy crisis, the City Relative to the supply side, it is important of Chula Vista secured the services of to note that there are a significant number MRW and Associates to provide an of new plants, both major power plants and assessment of energy management options smaller peaker plants, in various stages of which may allow the City to gain a measure development and approval that will make a of control over the City's demand and tremendous difference on supply statewide supply of energy as well as the financial over the next several years. The California costs of the City's energy use over time. Energy Commission (CEC) is currently MRW provided broad general reporting that it has in its application options/recommendations with staff process, 13 projects expected to deliver a recommending a variety of action items to net capacity amount of 6,187 MW of new implement or advance them to the extent power supply. This includes the 510 MW possible or feasible. The MRW report along Otay Mesa plant. Additionally, CEC reports with the staff analysis, formed the basis for that there are currently 29 peaker plant this adopted City of Chula Vista Energy applications statewide being processed Strategy and Action Plan ("Energy under the Governor's emergency siting Strategy"). Included as Exhibit A, is the authority. These peakers are expected to staff prepared Executive Summary of the deliver a total of 3,219 MW of peak load MRW report. Included as Exhibit B, is the generation capacity including the Otay final Assessment of Chula Vista's Energy Mesa Larkspur project (90 MW) and the Management Options report prepared by proposed second peaker on Main Street in MRW. Chula Vista (57 MW). However, these plants will be primarily utilizing natural gas The Energy Strategy consists of eight (8) and therefore further taxing the limited broad-based efforts that collectively seek to take proactive steps to advance the supply of natural gas to the State and San interests of the City of Chula Vista and its Diego region (Section 2.6 of report). Long- residents and businesses in the areas of term supply issues need to address natural energy conservation, supply, and gas supply, and in the process, could pave the way for greater market potential for procurement. The broad-based efforts renewable energy sources. include individual short-term action plans and the assigned staff responsible for It is important to note that the Energy implementing them. Strategy does not contain an easy or quick solution to the energy crisis for Chula Vista. Staff's recommendations attempt to make If such a solution exists, it lies in the hands progress, to the extent the City can, on of state and federal authorities, not the both the demand and supply sides of the energy market. Certainly the City has the City. The Energy Strategy does include ability to immediately affect the demand however, the best-known options at this time to respond to the unique opportunities side to a much greater degree than the and needs for Chula Vista. It is hoped that supply side; particularly in the short run. The recommendations reflect the City's through these efforts, as well as future efforts that may emerge, the City can commitment to expand our strong record in energy conservation and the promotion and prevent energy from being a limiting factor in the economic future and sustainable use of renewable energy sources, growth of our community, Energy Strategy and Action Plan Page 1 I1. Monitor the energy market and legal restrictions and; be prepared to enter into an Electrical Services Contract with an Energy Services Provider (ESP) or power generator as allowed by law. Rationale · AB1X currently prohibits direct energy purchases for as long as the state has outstanding long-term contracts. This law needs clarification, and may be overturned, but for now, has squelched this market opportunity. · There is some risk that if market conditions improve in the next 1-3 years, a long-term commitment to an ESP will burden the City with higher cost electricity. · Subject to removal of existing legal restrictions, seek Council authorization to negotiate contract within the following parameters: Pledge up to City's entire load (14MW) Term: Shortest time possible, but not to exceed 3 years Price: Establish a maximum fixed price beneath which staff has the authority to negotiate Give authority to explore different pricing mechanisms and energy derivatives Staffing: Lead: City Manager's Office - Administration Support: Administration - Special Operations Administration - Legislative Timeframe: Ongoing Energy Strategy and Action Plan /~ ~ t,~ Page 2 2. Pursue Distributed Generation and "district" generation~ opportunities for specific facilities and technologies. Rationale · Distributed generation can be used as a source of energy at peak periods when power is most expensive. · Some types of distributed generation offer significant environmental benefits to the local area. · Because distributed generation can be accomplished with a Iow capital investment (relative to large-scale power plants), the financial risk to the City of this option is more manageable than pursuing the development of a City- financed power plant. · Current and proposed funding and incentive programs that are available for distributed generation projects enhance the attractiveness of this option vis-~- vis other options. In particular, the Legislature's Special Session could lead to new funding for distributed generation and potentially an easing of regulatory and market barriers to distributed generation. · Distributed generation can power just City facilities, or, depending upon capacity and location, could be utilized with adjacent industrial sites in an "over- the-fence" transaction. The City also should identify potential landfill gas resources and explore development of those resources, as has been done in the County at the Miramar, Sycamore and Otay landfills that use landfill methane gas to manufacture energy. In a hypothetical application of distributed generation at the Chula Vista Police Department, a best-case scenario for distributed generation provides power to the Police Department at about 7-8 cents per kWh at historical natural gas prices and 11-13 cents per kWh at current elevated prices. _Note: In terms of downside risk, there is some risk the CPUC will rule in favor of the utilities' position on distribution stranded costs or other issues that could limit the financial attractiveness of distributed generation. ~ "Distributed Generation" refers to small power generation units (generally up to 30 MW) located at or near Icad centers that could include multiple end users through "over the fence" transactions. Technologies include simple cycle gas turbines, fuel cells and photovoltaics. "District" generation refers to the efficient use of hot water, steam or cold water between entities to reduce consumption of electricity or gas. Energy Strategy and Action Plan Page 3 · Solicit site specific proposals for: o) City Facilities (New Corporation Yard; Civic Center/Police Facility; Library and Recreation facilities) I~) Economic Development Opportunities (Goodrich Co.; Maxwell Road site; LandBank site) · Pursue Solar Energy and Distribution Generation Grant Program offered through California Energy Commission (CEC) and other sources · Monitor CPUC proceedings and encourage decisions that facilitate the program Staffing: (City facilities) Lead: Administration - Special Operations Support: Public Works - Operations Administration - Special Operations Administration - Legislative {Econ. Dev.) Lead: Community Development - Administration Support: Administration - Special Operations Timeframe: Six (6) months for City facilities Ongoing for Economic Development opportunities due to general real estate development uncertainties. Energy Strategy and Action Plan Page 4 3. Partner with a third-party to build and operate power generation facilities. Rationale · The City has an excellent opportunity to pursue this option with Duke Energy as part of the modernization of the South Bay plant. · A partnership can be structured in numerous ways to share the risks and benefits of development and operation, and to leverage what each party brings to the table. For example, in consideration for facilitating the redevelopment of the South Bay plant, the City could obtain rights to receive a dedicated share of the plant's capacity, a share of plant revenues, and/or other public benefits such as Bayfront infrastructure, City facility energy projects, etc. · Proposed legislation may expedite the licensing and permitting process for new power plants (primarily peaking plants) and for the repowering of existing power plants. Because this legislation will likely have sunset provisions (i.e., dates upon which they expire), the next one to three years may provide an ideal window to push through the development and siting of a power plant. · Competing legislation may reduce the attractiveness of owning or sharing in the development of a power plant. For example, legislation, if passed, may require the owner of a power plant to sell its electricity only to in-state customers, limiting the potential market for the plant's output (legislation pushing for this "California First" policy has been softened in latest versions and now is framed in terms of price parity for California vis-a-vis out of state customers). A more draconian measure proposed in new legislation would make any owner of a power generation facility a public utility subject to the jurisdiction of the CPUC (although the legal validity of such legislation is uncertain). · California's electricity market structure is still in a state of flux and there is considerable uncertainty as to how the market will operate in the future. This regulatory uncertainty is significant. · Monitor discussions and negotiations between the Port District and their operating contractor (Duke Energy) and continue positive and proactive negotiations with them regarding terms for the redevelopment of the South Bay Plant Initial areas for investigation and analysis include but may not necessarily be limited to: · Project description and scoping · Site planning; issue definition · Shared risks and benefits Energy Strategy and Action Plan Page 5 Staffing: Lead: City Manager's Office - Administration Support: Community Development - Administration Administration - Special Operations Timeframe: Ongoing Page 6 Energy Strategy and Action Plan /~,_~/~ J4. Develop an emissions offsets based on mobile program sources Rationale · Some City Conservation programs could be utilized to obtain emission offset credits from conversion of diesel/gasoline-powered vehicles to Natural Gas power. These could be sold or utilized to facilitate local alternative sources of power generation or fund the conversion of City fleet vehicles to cleaner air vehicles. · Work with air quality officials to realize the benefits of any City investment in alternative fuel vehicles · Work with future generators and the APCD to ensure any mitigation funds generated are invested locally · Develop portfolio of potential offset projects to make available to new generation sources requiring offsets Staffing: Lead: Administration - Special Operations Support: None Timeframe: Six (6) months Energy Strategy and Action Plan /~ / ~ Page7 5. Take initial steps to more specifically assess the costs and~ benefits of forming and operating as a Municipal Utility to I own/operate all or portions of the local distribution system Rationale · A municipal utility has preferential access to cheap federal hydropower (but there is a "waiting list" for access to this power) and potentially other alternative power supply sources. It does not pay federal income taxes, and it has access to tax- exempt debt to finance capital projects. · A municipal utility may be able to provide distribution services at a lower cost than the incumbent utility. Note, however, distribution costs are not the primary driver of current high power costs. · By operating the distribution system the City would have the ability to structure rates in a manner that rewards conservation, encourages the use of off-peak power, and provides the City with control over how and where "public benefit," conservation funds are invested. · With the structure of California's electricity market in flux, the outlook for a municipal utility is uncertain. It is unclear at this stage whether municipal utilities, particularly ones yet to be established, will be able to buy power from DWR. If they cannot, a City utility would have to procure power on the open market. Lassen Municipal Utilities District is the most recent example in California of a formation of a new municipal utility. LMUD now faces significant rate increases due to power procurement decisions that, with hindsight, were ill advised. SMUD also is planning to raise its electricity rates; however, this will be the first rate increase in ten years and rates will still be lower than PG&E's electricity rates before this recent round of PUC approved rate increases. · Present ordinance to declare City a Municipal Utility · Commence negotiations with SDG&E to identify mutually beneficial partnerships · After formal Council approval of a consultant contract, conduct preliminary appraisal and pre-feasibiJity consultant services necessary to evaluate rough facility acquisition costs and other related studies that will provide a business model to test the economics of City ownership and operation (estimated $50,000). The pre-feasibility analysis is the first major step necessary to begin the formal process of establishing an integrated municipal utility. · Coordinate any effort on this strategy with other jurisdictions Staffing: Lead: City Manager's Office - Administration Support: Community Development - Administration Administration - Special Operations Timeframe: Consultant selection - three (3) months Pre-feasibility analysis completed - six (6) months Energy Strategy and Action Plan Page 8 6. Become a municipal "aggregator"2 and acquire electricity at negotiated rates for City facilities and participating residents/business customers Rationale · Municipal aggregation offers the potential for lower electricity costs and certain non-price benefits as minimal initial capital investment. · The City of Palm Springs saved customers in its aggregation program $88,000 in only two years. (The program has since been suspended.) · Current law requires procedures whereby local residents and businesses must affirmatively "opt in" to an aggregation plan. This dramatically reduces participation, and therefore the benefits of aggregation. However, there is legislation currently under discussion to change this provision and allow municipal aggregation programs to be done on an "opt-out" basis. If there is a change in the law, this option is more promising in terms of the potential benefits such a program could provide to Chula Vista's residents and businesses. · Although the risk to the City under this option is less than the above two options, municipal aggregation is likely to yield very minimal benefits while burdening the City with administrative and contractual responsibilities. · Support legislation that preserves consumer choices and authorizes "opt out" aggregation programs and be prepared to further analyze the potential risk and benefits of pursuing such a program Staffing: Lead: City Manager's Office - Administration Support: Administration - Special Operations Administration - Legislative Timeframe: Ongoing 2 Municipal aggregation allows a municipality to procure electric power on behalf of their residents and businesses under the presumption that consolidating or pooling numerous individual purchasers into a single purchasing "load" will command more favorable rates on the energy commodity market. Energy Strategy and Action Plan ~. Page 9 /4. 7. Continue / expand energy conservation projects for City facilities and promote energy efficient and renewable energy programs for businesses and residents Rationale · The City has a good record of implementing conservation programs in City facilities. Current high prices of electricity and improved conservation technologies make the paybacks on energy efficiency facilities even more attractive. Therefore, capital investments in this area face minimal risk and should yield near-term paybacks and they have the added benefit of complementing the City's CO2 reduction plan. · Energy efficient facilities will reduce consumption and therefore reduce relative ongoing energy costs regardless of the outcome of market reforms and other state or federal actions. Legislative initiatives will make millions of dollars of funding available to lower the financial costs of energy conservation. Again, funding assistance reduces the City's risk of pursuing energy efficiency options. Over $500 million in funding was pledged under AB 1890 to reinvigorate the renewable energy industry in California. So far, over $162 million has been paid for the development of 500 MW of new renewable resources, while customers have received about $47 million in bill credits through October 2000 for buying power from renewable energy providers. · Making information on the power crisis readily available and supporting energy conservation or other energy management efforts may be a critical factor in convincing businesses where energy costs are a large component of an operating budget to remain located in Chula Vista. It will also help businesses remain competitive over the short run. High energy consumption businesses include high- tech and bio-tech manufacturers, refrigerated food wholesale and retailers, precision machine shops and aerospace parts manufacturers. · Increased state funding for promotion of conservation options is likely to become available. The City is in a good position to assist residents in availing themselves of these funds. · Conservation represents the lowest risk to the investor, and the highest benefit to the region and the environment. Every kilowatt saved or produced by an alternative source is a reduction on demand pressures that should result in lower costs for others. Conservation and alternative energy are also most productive during peak hours when they are needed most. · Conservation and alternative energy have the added benefit of being good for the environment and complement the City's commitment to climate protection. · An array of proactive energy programs could be critical in assisting business attraction and retention activities. City Facilities · Provide additional energy design, management and funding support to the City Facilities Projed Team. Energy Strategy and Action Plan Page 10 · Coordinate grant and other funding sources to implement energy savings. · Establish a process that encourages the City's design and build padners to present energy options that exceed title 24 standards, and where appropriate, install comparable energy conservation measures in existing City facilities. · Coordinate efforts with energy service providers, the San Diego Regional Energy Office, the California Energy Commission and other agencies to take advantage of public facility programs and obtain energy conservation certifications for new and remodeled facilities. · Establish a modified work schedule for City employees, such as a 9/80 schedule. (Not recommended at this time.) NOTE: As indicated in the memo, staff is not requesting that Council take action to implement a 9/80 work schedule as part of the effort to reduce energy consumption during peak summer demand. Staff has concluded that the schedule needed to generate the energy benefits needed to meet the ten percent (10%) conservation goal would be too disruptive to public services. Additionally, there is not enough time to allow families sufficient time to adjust to the changes that would need to occur to the planning and promotion that has gone into summer programs for seniors, children and other potentially dependent members of the community that rely on those public services. Staff believes strongly that there is merit in the 9/80 plan from conservation and other important perspectives but more planning is needed to fully take advantage of those benefits and minimize the potential impacts to service. Staff will work with all City departments and Council to develop alternative energy conservation measures to replace the energy savings that are needed to meet the State recommended goals that would have accrued under 9/80 plan. Residents and Businesses · Distribute free energy saving retrofits for existing residences. · Develop matching fund programs to assist local businesses with energy retrofits. · Analyze available options to provide incentives to businesses that utilize renewable sources of energy (i.e. solar panels, wind power, distributive, etc.) ~ City matching funds ~ Grants or Iow interest loans (Sec. 108, CDBG, CEC Solar Energy Grant Program) ~ Rebates (in padnership with SDG&E) ~ Free publicity · Identify and support state and federal grant opportunities that encourage businesses to further develop or bring-to-market new energy-related technologies (i.e. wave technology, fuel cell, etc.) · Provide public education, information and assistance to residents and businesses so they may take advantage of rebate, loan and grant programs that assist energy conservation. This could include developing an Energy Conservation Resource Guide. · Include energy resource information on the City's website with links to relevant energy assistance websites (i.e.U.S. Dept. of Energy, SDG&E Small Business Services, San Diego Regional Energy Office, etc.) · Conduct business outreach workshops inviting guest speakers from various consulting groups and service organizations/agencies to provide information on energy Energy Strategy and Action Plan Page 1 1 conservation, renewable/sustainable sources of energy, and government programs that provide funding/rebates to support these efforts. · Partner with other service/communiS, organizations to broadcast energy saving resources and tips to businesses via newsletters, information pamphlets and websites and coordinate efforts with the Planning Department. · Continue to utilize MRW to assist companies with contract negotiations as well as with general energy-related inquiries. Staffing: Lead: Administration - Special Operations Support: Community Development - Economic Development Timeframe: Ongoing Energy Strategy and Action Plan //~ ~2~ Page 12 8. DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A LEGISLATIVE STRATEGY THAT I FACILITATES THE CITY'S OVERALL ENERGY PLAN Rationale · Energy supply and cost issues will be dramatically affected by federal and state actions. Issues such as electricity supply costs, transmission reliability, natural gas supply/reliability, municipal utility operations, distributed energy, aggregation, environmental protection, power plant siting, direct energy procurement, and aggregation are all subjects of current Legislation. Favorable state laws couild enhance and facilitate numerous City Energy Plan Options. Add a new category to the City's existing Legislative Program that embodies the City's goals in such key areas as environmental protection, electrical supply costs, transmissin reliability, natural gas supply and availability and power plant siting. This category would include the following: Support measures that: 1. Assist the City and its energy consumers improve supply/demand conditions and enhance conservation measures. 2. Preserve local options to control and fund the supply and distribution of energy (including the formation of a municipal utility district) or that fund conservation programs. 3. Enhance the City's ability to enter into distributed generation agreements without having to pay stranded transmission or distribution charges. 4. Impose "fair and reasonable" wholesale price caps. 5. Repeal the provision in AB1X that suspends customer choice, and pass a favorable bill for customer choice (SB 27X or a similar one). 6. Make municipal aggregation programs available on an "opt-out" basis. 7. Allow public agencies (not just municipal utilities) such as the City to participate in state power supply programs. 8. Encourage use of real time metering. 9. Increase incentives for photovoltaic and other alternative energy sources. Oppose measures that: 1. Impinge on or restrict the City's ability to exercise land use review/control with respect to the generation or transmission of power. 2. Erode the City's ability to acquire/generate power from alternative sources, operate as a municipal utility, or enter into aggregation and/or distributed generation arrangements. Energy Strategy and Action Plan /~_~ ~ ~ Page 13 Staffing: Lead: Administration - Legislative Administration - Special Operations Support: Community Development - Economic Development Timeframe: Ongoing Energy Strategy and Action Plan //4~- ~-d Page 14 ATTACHMENT 2 MRW Assessment of Chula Vista's Energy Management Options [April 5, 2001] Purpose of the Reoort 1. In light of the State's energy crisis, the City of Chula Vista secured the services of MRW and Associates to provide an assessment of energy management options which may allow the City to gain a measure of control over the City's demand and supply of energy as well as the financial costs of the City's energy use over time. 2. The report is to provide a historical perspective and analysis of California's deregulation of the electricity market (first approved in 1996), and the dramatic developments in California's power and natural gas markets. A better understanding of the events leading up to the energy crisis will help the City of Chula Vista take a proactive approach to managing energy costs and supply. 3. Based on this understanding, present a portfolio of options that help to: (a) insulate the City, its residents, and its businesses from unfair or unreasonable energy costs, (b) ensure the reliability of electricity supply, and (c) reduce adverse environmental impacts of energy production and use. 4. Assemble the best options into the City's own Energy Action Plan. Identify the steps needed to implement the plan. Begin to identify and evaluate specific projects that have the potential to create unique opportunities and advantages for the residents and businesses of Chula Vista. Parameters of the Reuort 1. Electricity is the Focus Electricity supply and cost is the primary focus of the report. Natural gas is a secondary focus albeit an important one. Environmental impacts were considered, but were not the driving factor. 2. Taraet Beneficiaries City-owned and operated facilities. The City currently uses 14 MWhrs of electricity per year. 40% of that is used during off peak hours by street lights. The City's energy bill during year 2000 was $1.622 million. The February 2001 bill was 8267,000 ($161,000 with a balancing account amount of 8106,000). At the average rate of $267,000 per month, the City's energy bill for 2001 would double to $3.2 million. Residents. City residents currently use an average of 287.8 MWhrs of electricity per year. The City is projecting that new housing developments will add more than 2,000 units in each of the next two years. This represents an incremental demand for electricity of 11.8 million kWh, or 4% of Chula Vista's current residential demand. Businesses, both current and future. City businesses currently use an average of 405 MWhrs of electricity per year (commercial businesses use 304 MWhrs and industrial businesses use 101 MWhrs). Chula Vista is home to a number of manufacturing facilities where energy costs are a substantial component of overall costs. Providing these manufacturers with the means to manage energy costs will provide an incentive for the manufacturers to remain in Chula Vista, expand their operations and create new jobs. Energy incentive programs could also help attract new businesses to the City. 3. Timeframe for Benefits to be Derived from Enerav Plan Actions · Short Term: Benefits could be realized within the next 12 months and thereafter. Medium Term: Benefits could be realized within the next 1 to 3 years. · Long Term: Benefits could be realized within the next 3 to 7 years. Executive Summary Page I Portfolio of Options Consistent with the above-described purposes and parameters, MRW developed a portfolio of 12 options to help the City better manage its energy needs and costs. THESE OPTIONS ARE EXPLAINED AND DISCUSSED IN GREATER DETAIL STARTING AT PAGE 7 AND ARE NOT ALL RECOMMENDED TO BE PURSUED AT THIS TIME. Additionally, each of the options listed below include specific tasks to implement. Based on an assessment of the benefits and risks of these options, the current market situation, and the implementation time frame for each option, MRW grouped the options into the following categories: HIGHLY RECOMMENDED [Options with Low or Manageable Risk and Potential for Short-Term Payoff]: · Continue/expand energy conservation projects in existing and future City facilities. · Continue/expand and promote energy efficiency and renewable energy programs for businesses and residents as well as provide community education. · Monitor the market and legal restrictions and be prepared to enter into a contract with an Energy Service Provider (as permitted by law).* Develop and implement a legislative strategy that facilitates the City's overall Energy Plan. · Continue/expand efforts to implement the Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Reduction Plan and GreenStar Building Incentive Program (Staff generated; not in MRW Report). PROMISING [Options that Offer Significant Benefits but with Increased Risk and/or Medium Term Payoff]: · Pursue distributed generation opportunities for both City facilities and economic development opportunities. · Monitor the market and legal restrictions and be prepared to enter into a bilateral agreement with a power generator. · Partner with a third party to build and operate power generation facilities. · Develop an emissions offsets program based on mobile sources (as permitted by law). * HIGHER RISK: [Options that Require Large Capital Outlays and/or Carry Significant Business Risks and have a Longer- Term Payof~ · Finance, own, and operate large-scale power plant to meet a portion of the City's demand for electricity. [Not recommended] · Form a municipal distribution utility to own and operate all or portions of local distribution system. · Become a municipal "aggregator" and acquire electricity at negotiated rates for the City, and include residents and businesses (as permitted by law).' * The passage of AB1X and the withdrawal of major ESPs from the market make these options effectively unavailable at this time. However, proposed competing legislation and different interpretations of AB1X may reverse this situation. Legislation will be needed to clarify relationship between ABlX prohibitions and aggregation provisions. "Opt out" legislation would make this option much more attractive. Executive Summary /~ '~ 7 Page 2 A Timeline of Key Events in California Electric Industry Restructuring and Energy Crisis Prior to Retail electricity customers purchased "bundled" transmission, distribution and Deregulation generation services from monopoly utility companies. Bundled prices were regulated by the CPUC on a "cost plus" basis. The average retail price for bundled electricity during the 90's prior to deregulation was 9,5¢ per kWh. 1996 Governor Wilson signed AB 1890, putting California on course for deregulation. Theory of law is to reduce energy costs to consumers by unbundling energy services and offering access to alternative energy providers. The Independent System Operators (ISO) is created to operate (but not own) the state's transmission system. The Power Exchange (PX) is created to provide a transparent spot market for power purchases. Investor owned utilities are required to sell some of their power generation facilities and purchase their power from the PX. Power is to be sold at the highest "clearing" price bid into the market. 1997 The Public Utility Commission approves a request by San Diego Gas and Electric to sell natural gas to Mexico to power the Rosarito generating facility. 1998 On April 1 the California Power Exchange began wholesale trading of electricity. initially, power prices were reasonable, if not Iow. During the first two years of operation, the PX market averaged $29 per MWh (2.9 cents per kWh). Utilities begin to divest themselves of generating assets, 1999 On July 1 the rate freeze is lifted in SDG&E's serwce territory. SDG&E is the first to enter into the deregulated marketplace due to its rapid recovery of its "stranded costs" (i.e., its unrecovered, pre-deregulation capital investment). Recovery of stranded costs comes from sales proceeds well above its book value for its power plants and stranded asset charges (CTCs) passed through to ratepayers. As a result, customers' rates begin to reflect the wholesale power prices paid by SDG&E, including the volatile PX market prices. Note: The rate freeze is not lifted for Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) and Southern California Edison ("SCE") customers setting up a situation where they cannot pass on volatile wholesale prices to customers. 2000 May SDG&E customers' bills double from an average residential bill of $49 to $100 as the utility passes on high wholesale costs to consumers. The ISO declares the first of 36 Stage Two alerts, when power reserves drop below 5 percent. 2000 June Rolling "blackouts" in San Francisco affect hundreds of thousands of customers. Insufficient power supplies due to several Northern California power plants shut down for maintenance cause the blackouts. 2000 SDG&E customers' bills have tripled. Wholesale electricity prices during the August months of May through September 2000 increased dramatically in the PX and ISO markets. In June 2000 prices were 411% higher than in June 1999, increasing from 923 per MWhto $122 per MWh. (2.3¢ per kWh to 12.2¢ per kWh.) Executive Summary / ~ ~ Page 3 2000 High wholesale prices prompt Gov. Gray Davis to call for an investigation into August "possible manipulation in the wholesale electricity marketplace". 2000 The CPUC approves a 6.5C/kWh rate ceiling plan for SDG&E residential and September small business customers retroactive to June 1, 2000. (This action by the CPUC was preceded by the passage of AB 265, which set the 6.5 cents/kWh ceiling but needed to be implemented through a CPUC proceeding.) Larger businesses (with usage above 100 KW) continue to be susceptible to volatile wholesale prices. Electricity charges above 6.5 cents are not forgiven, but tracked in "balancing accounts" for later payment. No provision is made for the source of repayment. September 26: Davis signs two bills stemming from power crisis in San Diego. One would spread energy price increase for San Diego customers over several years, the other speeds up the approval process for new power plants. 2000 Electricity and natural gas prices for the California markets reached record highs. December Spot market prices for natural gas at the California border climbed to over $72 per MMBtu at one point on December 11, compared to prices of $2 to $3 in 1998 and 1999. December 7: For the first time, the ISO declares a Stage Three emergency when power reserves fall below 1.5 percent. Officials say conservation efforts averted rolling blackouts throughout the state. December 16: Based on an investigation into the electric markets in the western United States, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) orders a number of changes to the California electric market. These include: (a) $150 per MWh "soft" price cap on wholesale electricity to remain in place until at least April 30, 2001; (b) an end to the utilities' obligation to buy and sell electricity in the PX market; (c) a "benchmark price" of $74 per MWh for five-year contracts; and (d} an order that the ISO governing board be replaced with a non-stakeholder board. December 26: Southern California Edison sues FERC, alleging the government body failed to ensure that wholesale electricity is sold at "just and reasonable rates". The South Bay and Carlsbad generating plants experienced 13 days of natural gas "curtailment," and were forced to run on fuel oil or shutdown. Power generators begin to refuse to sell power into the California ISO/PX system on credit due to the increasing questionable credit worthiness of PG&E and SCE. In response, federal authorities require generators to sell their excess power into California if requested by the ISO. 2001 SCE and PG&E declare that they are teetering on the verge of bankruptcy. January Because SCE and PG&E are unable to pass along to customers their full cost of procuring power; they have seen their financial condition worsen every month since the summer of 2000. In response, Governor Davis declares a state of emergency. Emergency legislation allows the state Department of Water Resources to buy and sell electricity up to a $400 million limit. This authority expired on February 15, but is later extended. January 2: Davis joins SCE's suit against FERC, filing a friend-of-the court brief. He says the commission "has failed in its responsibility to protect Californians from what the agency itself describes as a dysfunctional market for electricity". January 4: PUC votes 5-0 to approve rate hikes for PG&E and SCE. The increases are 9 percent for homes, and between 7 percent and 15 percent for businesses. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 4 2001 Governor Davis signs into law ABIX authorizing the Department of Water February 1 Resources to begin buying power to serve California. Governor Davis sets a target of ~69 /MWh for a portfolio of long-term contracts. To date the electricity contract information has been kept confidential by the Governor's office. Multiple bills (discussed in the legislative update) are prepared to address the crisis. Governor Davis is negotiating the possible state acquisition of the utilities' transmission assets in an effort to restore the financial condition of the utilities. Governor Davis signed into law AB 1X authorizing the Department of Water Resources to begin buying power to serve California. Governor Davis set a target of $69/MWh for a portfolio of long-term contracts. AB lX also suspended direct access for California's retail electricity customers. The Legislature worked through a review of multiple bills (discussed in the legislative update) to address the crisis. Governor Davis attempted to negotiate the possible state acquisition of the utilities' transmission assets in an effort to restore the financial condition of the utilities. The Governor reached a tentative deal with SCE. Under the terms of the deal with SCE, the state reportedly will pay about $2.7 billion, or 2.3 times book value, for the IOU's transmission assets. In return for the infusion of cash from the state, SCE is agreeing to a lO-year contract at cost- plus rates for power from some of its assets. SCE also will be required to drop a federal lawsuit in which it sought to back-bill customers for past procurement costs. 2001 Qualified Facility (QF) owners and operators shut down plants totaling about March 3,000 MW because they have not been paid by the utilities for several months for energy deliveries. QF's include dozens of small and medium sized power generators that use wind, solar, co-generation and other sources to produce power. Due in part to the shut down of QF plants, rotating blackouts affected customers in both southern and northern California on March 19 and 20. FERC ordered power suppliers to refund $69 million, ruling that power suppliers overcharged Californians by that amount in January. FERC found that overcharges for power sold in February totaled $55 million. CaI-ISO filed a report with FERC alleging power suppliers overcharged by $6.2 billion for power delivered to California customers over the period May through November 2000. March 27: The CPUC ordered a three-cent per kWh increase in electric retail rates for Southern California Edison and PG&E customers. 2001 April April $: In a televised statewide address, Governor Davis dropped his opposition to increases in electricity rates and called on the state's residents to continue conserving power. The Governor outlined a proposal for increasing electricity rates that is similar to the CPUC's March decision, The Governor also said the only long-term solution to the crisis is to build more power plants. The Legislature approved a package of legislation that will make available $1.1 billion for energy conservation programs, April 6: PG&E (the regulated utility) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection after failing to come to an agreement with Governor Davis on a state takeover of its transmission assets. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 5 Market Outlook Next I to ~2 Months · The outlook for wholesale electricity prices in the short term is extremely uncertain. General market fundamentals point toward continued high and volatile prices during this time frame. · Some 2,368 MW of new generation is scheduled to come on line by the end of 2001, but whether this along with increased conservation will be sufficient to fend off shortages is unknown (shortages appear increasingly likely to occur). · The vast majority of the proposed new power generation is dependent on natural gas. Increased cost for natural gas has driven up the cost of producing electricity and is expected to do so until new delivery capacity is added or conservation and alternative fuel sources reduce the demand sufficiently below supply to reverse the price trends. · Current efforts by the State of California (DWR) to secure wholesale power through long- term contracts may help to stabilize wholesale electricity prices and provide power at rates well below current wholesale spot market prices. · Retail rates for SDG&E customers could rise if the CPUC authorizes a 2.3 cents/kWh rate surcharge requested in January by SDG&E. The request is still pending with the CPUC. SDG&E requested the increase in order to begin "buying down" the approximately $600 million in the balancing account. Next 1 to 3 Years · Wholesale electricity prices should begin to level off, however prices are likely to remain much higher than in 1998-1999. Price stability should result from State's procurement of longer-term contracts. Higher prices will result in part from higher input costs and in part from possible supply constraints, particularly if hydroelectric resources remain Iow. · San Diego area customers may be in for a potential rate shock as a result of the accrual of large amounts of deferred power costs by the California utilities. SDG&E's rate stabilization plan is set to end in 2002. It is unclear what the CPUC or the Legislature will do if SDG&E has an uncollected balance of purchased power costs - a likely though not certain outcome. Generally speaking, it could be expected that consumers will have a balancing account of about 50% of their total annual bill. · SDG&E's regulated distribution rates will be reviewed in 2003. This could lead to yet another increase in electricity rates. 3 to 7 Years Out · Wholesale electricity prices should further stabilize and begin declining as new sources of electricity supply and natural gas capacity come on line and demand response continues to take hold. Unless new power plants are located within SDG&E's service territory with adequate natural gas to supply them, transmission constraints in the San Diego area could limit the cost and reliability benefits to the region of new sources of electric supply being added to the state's grid. Constraints on the natural gas distribution system also could contribute to prices remaining high or a tight supply - demand situation. The proposed development of the Otay Mesa plant (500 MW with potential expansion to 1,000 MW) could provide approximately half of the power the region currently needs to import during peak loads, however the plant's sole source of fuel is natural gas and that could have an impact on the South Bay and Carlsbad plants ability to receive natural gas. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 6 Highly Recommended Options [Options with I~w or Manmgeuble 1. CONTINUE/~PAND ENERGY CONSERVATION PROJE~S FOR CI~ FACILITIES. [O~ION 4, REPO~ PP. 64] ~ Rationale · The City has a good record of implementing conservation programs in City facilities. Current high prices of electricity and improved conservation technologies make the paybacks on energy efficiency facilities even more a~ractive. Therefore, capital investments in this area face minimal risk and should yield near-term paybacks and they have the added benefit of complementing the City's CO2 reduction plan. · Energy efficient facilities will reduce consumptio~ and therefore reduce relative ongoing energy costs regardless of the outcome of market reforms and other state or federal actions. · Legislative initiatives will make millions of dollars of funding available to lower the financial costs of energy conservation. Again, funding assistance reduces the City's risk of pursuing energy efficiency options. Over ~500 million in funding was pledged under AB 1890 to reinvigorate the renewable energy industry in California. So far, over ~162 million has been paid for the development of 500 MW of new renewable resources, while customers have received about ~47 million in bill credits through October 2000 for buying power from renewable energy providers. B. Ne~ StePs Background: Since 1993, the City's energy efficiency efforts have saved 3.7 MW of electricity and has resulted in cumulative savings of $1.15 million. The City's combined capital cost for these efforts is approximately 5900,000 with about ~110,000 in incentives from SDG&E. In Spring 2001, after installation of Green LED traffic signal lights, the City will have saved 4.7 MW of electricity with annual savings of $700,O00/yr at slightly below current market prices (savings based on average cost of ~. 15/kWw-hr for electricity including transmission/distribution). · Provide additional energy design, management and funding support to the City Facilities Project Team. · Coordinate grant and other funding sources to implement energy savings. Install additional energy savings measures in future buildings and design and install, where appropriate, retrofits in existing City facilities. Coordinate efforts with energy service providers, the San Diego Regional Energy Office, the California Energy Commission and other agencies to take advantage of public facility programs and obtain energy conservation certifications for new and remodeled facilities. · Establish a modified work schedule for City employees, such as a 9/80 schedule. Under a 9/80 schedule employees, with the exception of emergency services department employees, will work 9 hours a day and have every other Friday off. City services will be extended by one-hour per day on the 9 hour work days and City buildings and services will shutdown on Fridays that employees have off. One viable schedule could be from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with a one-hour lunch or from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with a half-hour lunch. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 7 C. Fiscal Im.~act Fiscal impact will be primarily from staff time in Special Operations and some capital investment in retrofits. Some staff time may be eligible for offset by grants and/or SDG&E incentives. Staff costs could also be recovered through avoided costs from energy savings. The modified work schedule could render potential savings of up to 1 MW of City's annual non-street light electricity usage or a cost savings of up to $150,000/year based on average cost of $.15/kw-hr for electricity including transmission/distribution. The City can maximize savings from a modified work schedule by shifting as much of the workday from on-peak period (11:00 a.m to 6 p.m..) where electricity charges are highest to semi-peak period (6:00 p.m. to 11 a.m.) where charges are lower. 2. CONTINUE/EXPAND AND PROMOTE ENERGY EFFICIENT AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAMS FOR BUSINESSES AND RESIDENTS AS WELL AS PROVIDE COMMUNITY EDUCATION. [OPTION 5, REPORT PP. 67] A. Rationale · Making information on the power crisis readily available and supporting energy conservation or other energy management efforts may be a critical factor in convincing businesses where energy costs are a large component of an operating budget to remain located in Chula Vista. It will also help businesses remain competitive over the short run. High energy consumption businesses include high- tech and bio-tech manufacturers, refrigerated food wholesale and retailers, precision machine shops and aerospace parts manufacturers. · Increased state funding for promotion of conservation options is likely to become available. The City is in a good position to assist residents in availing themselves of these funds. · Conservation represents the lowest risk to the investor, and the highest benefit to the region and the environment, Every kilowatt saved or produced by an alternative source is a reduction on demand pressures that should result in lower costs for others. Conservation and alternative energy are also most productive during peak hours when they are needed most. Conservation and alternative energy have the added benefit of being good for the environment and complement the City's commitment to climate protection. · An array of proactive energy programs could be critical in assisting business attraction and retention activities. Note: The benefits of such programs may be difficult to measure in strict cost- benefit terms. Note: Special Operations is in the process of distributing up to $100.00 of Compact Flourescent Lights (CFL) to 300 homes in the City (a total of 500+ homes have signed up leaving a waiting list of about 200 residents). The CFLs are being distributed and installed by two trained Energy Administrative Interns who will also conduct energy and solid waste audits to identify additional conservation opportunities and to additional resource information. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 8 B. Next Steps: · Distribute free energy saving retrofits for existing residences. · Develop matching fund programs to assist local businesses with energy retrofits. Note: Special Operations is in the process of soliciting small businesses with 10 employees or less to participate in a matching fund program that will provide up to $1,000 for energy efficient lighting retrofit. The retrofit will be conducted by a licensed contractor who will conduct an energy audit and provide a proposal to the City and business for prior approval. · Analyze available options to provide incentives to businesses that utilize renewable sources of energy {i.e. solar panels, wind power, distributive, etc.) ~ City matching funds ~ Grants or Iow interest loans (Sec. 108, CDBG, CEC Solar Energy Grant Program) ~ Rebates (in partnership with SDG&E) ~ Free publicity · Identify and support state and federal grant opportunities that encourage businesses to further develop or bring-to-market new energy-related technologies {i.e. wave technology, fuel cell, etc.) · Work with local retailers to market and distribute energy saving options. · Provide public education, information and assistance to residents and businesses so they may take advantage of rebate, loan and grant programs that assist energy conservation. This could include developing an Energy Conservation and Resource Guide. Include energy resource information on the City's website with links to relevant energy assistance websites (i.e.U.S. Dept. of Energy, SDG&E Small Business Services, San Diego Regional Energy Office, etc.) · Conduct business outreach workshops inviting guest speakers from various consulting groups and service organizations/agencies to provide information on energy conservation, renewable/sustainable sources of energy, and government programs that provide funding/rebates to support these efforts. · Partner with other service/community organizations to broadcast energy saving resources and tips to businesses via newsletters, information pamphlets and websites and coordinate efforts with the Planning Department. · Continue to utilize MRW to assist companies with contract negotiations as well as with general energy-related inquiries. C. Fiscal Impact Fiscal impact is primarily from substantial staff time from Special Operations, Community Development and Public Information. The first phase of retrofits for 300 homes and ten businesses have already been approved by Council. Additional costs could include the Energy Conservation and Resource Guide as well as consultant services from MRW to assist companies with individual contract negotiations (ranged from $500 to $1,000 per company). Existing funds are available for MRW services. The resource guide is estimated to cost about $1.00 per printed copy. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 9 3. MONITOR THE MARKET AND LEGAL RESTRICTIONS AND BE PREPARED TO ENTER INTO AN ELECTRICAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH AN ENERGY SERVICES PROVIDER (AS PERMII'rED BY LAW). [OPTION 6. REPORT PP. 71] A. Rationale: · About 55% of the City government's power purchases are bought at market rates. As a result, the March 2001 bill for electric/gas service was 9303,688.40 (includes 9106,004.50 electricity balancing account and 9197,684.00 for electricity/gas. A contract with an ESP might provide electricity more cheaply than taking service from SDG&E. B. Risks to Consider: · ABIX currently prohibits direct energy purchases for as long as the state has outstanding long-term contracts. This law needs clarification, and may be overturned, but for now, has squelched this market opportunity. There is some risk that if market conditions improve in the next 1-3 years, a long- term commitment to an ESP will burden the City with higher cost electricity. C. Next Stens: Seek Council authorization to execute contracts within the following parameters: · Pledge up to City's entire load (14MW). · The contract term should be for the shortest time possible, but not to exceed three years. · Establish a per kilowatt ceiling price under which staff has the authority to negotiate.. Note: Direct energy purchases may be subject to legal restrictions under ABlX; any contract will require legal validation or escape clauses. D. Fiscal Imnact Staff time, primarily from City Manager's office, Community Development and City Attorney. 4. DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A LEGISLATIVE STRATEGY THAT FACILITATES THE CITY'S OVERALL ENERGY PLAN. (STAFF GENERATED; NOT SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO IN MRW REPORT) A. Rationale: Issues such as electricity supply costs, transmission reliability, natural gas supply/reliability, municipal utility operations, distributed energy, aggregation, environmental protection, power plant siting, direct energy procurement, and aggregation are all subjects of current Legislation. Favorable state laws could enhance and facilitate numerous City Energy Plan Options. B. Next Stens: Add a new category to the City's existing Legislative Program that embodies the City's goals in such key areas as environmental protection, electrical supply costs, transmissin reliability, natural gas supply and availability and power plant siting. This category would include the following: Support measures that: Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 10 1. Assist the City and its energy consumers improve supply/demand conditions and enhance conservation measures. 2. Preserve local options to control and fund the supply and distribution of energy (including the formation of a municipal utility district) or that fund conservation programs. 3. Enhance the City's ability to enter into distributed generation agreements without having to pay stranded transmission or distribution charges. 4. Impose "fair and reasonable" wholesale price caps. 5. Repeal the provision in ABlX that suspends customer choice, and pass a favorable bill for customer choice (SB 27X or a similar one). 6. Make municipal aggregation programs available on an "opt-out" basis. 7. Allow public agencies (not just municipal utilities) such as the City to participate in state power supply programs. 8. Encourage use of real time metering. Oppose measures that: 1. Impinge on or restrict the City's ability to exercme land use review/control with respect to the generation or transmission of power. 2. Erode the City's ability to acquire/generate power from alternative sources, operate as a municipal utility, or enter into aggregation and/or distributed generation arrangements. C. Fiscal Im,~act Staff time, primarily from City Manager's office and Community Development. 5. CONTINUE/EXPAND EFFORTS TO IMPLEMENT THE CARBON DIOXIDE (CO2) REDUCTION PLAN AND GREENSTAR BUILDING INCENTIVE PROGRAM. (STAFF GENERATED; NOT INCLUDED IN MRW REPORT). A. Rationale: The City recently adopted the Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Reduction Plan establishing 20 Action Measures to promote energy savings and emissions reduction. Implementation of the CO2 Plan allows the City to move forward with energy efficient land use and construction level programs. B. Next StePs: 1. Implement applicable measures in C02 Plan under three tiers; Citywide General Plan Level, Site Planning (Sectional Planning Area) Plan Level and Individual Project (Building Permit) Level. · Study the feasibility of ¢itywide land use measures as part of the General Plan Update. Evaluate possible locations for mixed use and higher density development near transit and major activity centers · Develop and implement "Sustainable Development" concepts in new SPA Plans through updating guidelines for preparation of Air Quality Improvement Plans (AQIP's) as a part of SPA Plan review · Develop and implement construction-level conservation measures in conjunction with energy efficient building programs that are at least 20% more energy efficient than current Title 24 Energy Code requirements. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 11 2. Implement the GreenStar Building Incentive Program and promote energy efficient building practices. Identify air quality/energy conservation measures for implementation in new developments. 3. Conduct a "pilot study" through use of a consultant to establish a set of site planning and construction indicators (energy features and calculating methods), and to develop a customized computer model for use in analyzing development projects relative to air quality improvement and energy conservation. 4. Develop formal guidelines for the preparation of AQIP's based on the "pilot study" results and determine any necessary amendments to the Growth Management Ordinance. 5. Coordinate with the local development community and actively promote participation in available energy efficient building programs such as ComfortWise and Home Energy Partnership (HEP), and develop incentives to encourage this participation. 6. Remain actively involved with the statewide Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) to provide oversight for the development and implementation of energy efficient building programs and related incentives. C. Fiscal Imoact Staff time primarily from the Planning and Building Department. The "Pilot Study" ($58,000) will be funded from an existing EPA grant. Executive Summary - Tl~ursda¥, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 12 Promising Options in~reased risk und/or medium term puyeff~ 1, PURSUE DISTRIBUTED GENERATION OPPORTUNITIES FOR BOTH CITY FACILITIES AND PRIVATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES. [OPTION 3, REPORT PP. 56] 'Distributad generation" refers te small power generation units (generally up to 30 megawatts) that are located near consumer or targeted load centers. Technologies include simple cycle gas turbines, microturbines, fuel cells and photovoltaics. A. Rationale: · Distributed generation can be used as a source of energy at peak periods when power is most expensive. · Some types of distributed generation offer significant environmental benefits to the local area. · Because distributed generation can be accomplished with a Iow capital investment (relative to large-scale power plants), the financial risk to the City of this option is more manageable than pursuing the development of a City-financed power plant. · Current and proposed funding and incentive programs that are available for distributed generation projects enhance the attractiveness of this option vis-a-vis other options. In particular, the Legislature's Special Session could lead to new funding for distributed generation and potentially an easing of regulatory and market barriers to distributed generation. · Distributed generation can power just City facilities, or, depending upon capacity and location, could be utilized with adjacent industrial sites in an "over-the-fence" transaction. The City also should identify potential landfill gas resources and explore development of those resources, as has been done in the County at the Miramar, Sycamore and Otay landfills that use landfill methane gas to manufacture energy. In a hypothetical application of distributed generation at the Chula Vista Police Department, a best-case scenario for distributed generation provides power to the Police Department at about 7-8 cents per kWh at historical natural gas prices and 11-13 cents per kWh at current elevated prices. Note: In terms of downside risk, there is some risk the CPUC will rule in favor of the utilities' position on distribution stranded costs or other issues that could limit the financial attractiveness of distributed generation. B. Ngxt Stet)s: 1. Solicit proposals for distributed generation projects at selected City facilities as well as for potential private economic development opportunities. Staff will solicit development proposals for specific generation facilities/technologies on City-owned facilities that produce peak or full load generation at or below current market rates. City Facilities · Respondents are to identify favorable sites and preferred technologies as well as cost estimates. Potential City sites identified by staff include (a) the new Corporation Yard on Maxwell Road; (b) the Civic Center Expansion/Police Facility; and (c) various library and recreation centers. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 13 Economic Development Opportunities · Staff will evaluate potential business development and retention opportunities and solicit development proposals for Distributed Generation and/or other developer/economic development "over the fence" transactions. · Potential Economic Development Opportunities include (a) Maxwell Road site (northern portion) (synergy with the landfill, Corporation Yard, Energy Way redevelopment potential); (b) LandBank site (northwest corner - synergy with Corporation Yard, landfill, LandBank and Auto Park redevelopment); and (c) BFGoodrich site (new BFG campus development/Co~Generation opportunity). 2. Pursue the Solar Energy and Distributed Generation Grant Program offered through the CEC. Program offers rebates and/or other financial incentives for residential, business, and government users who purchase and install solar energy and distributed generation facilities. 3. Monitor CPUC proceedings and encourage decisions that facilitate the program. C. Fiscal Imoact Staff time primarily from City Manager's office, Community Development and City Attorney's office. Depending on the outcome of some preliminary investigations by staff, there may be the need to secure the services of specialized legal, financial and/or energy consultants as various economic development proposals emerge. 2. MONITOR THE MARKET AND LEGAL RESTRICTIONS AND BE PREPARED TO ENTER INTO A BILATERAL AGREEMENT WITH A POWER GENERATOR. [OPTION 7, REPORT PP. 74] A. Rationale: · In effect, acting as its own ESP, the City could choose to purchase power directly from a power supplier and obtain a longer-term access to electricity at a fixed or hedged price. Note: As with the ESP contract, described above, pursuing this option at this time could lead to the City locking itself into a power supply contract at a price that will be above market prices in a more stable electricity market. B. Next Steos: Seek Council authorization to execute contracts within the following parameters: 1. Pledge up to City's entire load (14 MW). 2. The contract term should be for the shortest time possible, but not to exceed three years. 3. Authorize staff to negotiate an agreement up to but not to exceed a specified ceiling price. Note: Direct energy purchases may be subject to legal restrictions under AB1X; any contract will require legal validation or escape clauses. C. Fiscal Impact Staff time primarily from City Manager's office, City Attorney and Community Development. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 14 3. PARTNER WITH A THIRD PARTY TO BUILD AND OPERATE POWER GENERATION FACILITIES. [OPTION 2, REPORT PP. 53] A. Rq~tionale: · The City has an excellent opportunity to pursue this option with Duke Energy as part of the modernization of the South Bay plant. · A partnership can be structured in numerous ways to share the risks and benefits of development and operation, and to leverage what each party brings to the table. For example, in consideration for facilitating the redevelopment of the South Bay plant, the City could obtain rights to receive a dedicated share of the plant's capacity, a share of plant revenues, and/or other public benefits such as Bayfront infrastructure, City facility energy projects, etc. · Proposed legislation may expedite the licensing and permitting process for new power plants (primarily peaking plants) and for the repowering of existing power plants. Because this legislation will likely have sunset provisions (i.e., dates upon which they expire), the next one to three years may provide an ideal window to push through the development and siting of a power plant. B. Risks to Consider: · Competing legislation may reduce the attractiveness of owning or sharing in the development of a power plant. For example, legislation, if passed, may require the owner of a power plant to sell its electricity only to in-state customers, limiting the potential market for the plant's output (legislation pushing for this "California First" policy has been softened in latest versions and now is framed in terms of price parity for California vis-G-vis out of state customers). A more draconian measure proposed in new legislation would make any owner of a power generation facility a public utility subject to the jurisdiction of the CPUC (although the legal validity of such legislation is uncertain). · California's electricity market structure is still in a state of flux and there is considerable uncertainty es to how the market will operate in the future. This regulatory uncertainty is significant. C. Next Ste,~s: · Continue negotiations with Duke Energy and the Port District regarding the terms for redevelopment of the South Bay Plant. Basic premise is to derive public benefit in consideration of City facilitation of plant development. D. Fiscal Imnact Staff time from City Manager's office, City Attorney's office and Community Development. As discussions advance, there may be the need to secure additional outside legal, financial and/or energy consultant services. 4. DEVELOP AN EMISSIONS OFFSETS PROGRAM BASED ON MOBILE SOURCES (AS PERMITTED BY LAW). [OPTION 10, REPORT PP. 83] New power generators must obtain emissions offset credits (CNG vehicles) or other conservation projects from the APCD to mitigate increased NOX pollutants. A. Rationale: · Some City conservation programs could be utilized to obtain emission offset credits from conversion of diesel/gasoline-powered vehicles to Natural Gas power. These Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 15 could be sold or utilized to facilitate local alternative sources of power generation or fund the conversion of City fleet vehicles to cleaner air vehicles. B. Next Steps: · City staff should work with air quality officials to realize benefits of any City investment in alternative fuel vehicles (e.g. CNG buses) to allow the City to provide the value of those reductions to potential partners. · City staff can also work with future generators and the APCD to ensure that any mitigation funds generated are invested locally. · Develop portfolio of potential offset projects to make available to new generation sources requiring offsets. C. Fiscal Imoact Staff time from Special Operations. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 16 Higher Risk Options [Optlon~ that requlre large capltal outlays and/or carry ~ignlficanf bu~Jne~ rJ~l~ and have a longer term p~e~r herlzen$] 1. FINANCE, OWN, AND OPERATE A LARGE-SCALE POWER PLANT TO MEET A PORYION OF THE CITY'S DEMAND FOR ELECTRICITY. [OPTION 1, REPORT PP. 49] A. Rationale: B. Risks to Consider: The initial capital investment is estimated to range from $50 to $90 million and the plant could generate electricity for 10 to 12 cents per kWh at current natural gas prices (not including local distribution or transmission costs). · There are almost no examples of a municipally owned large-scale power plant except as part of a municipal utility. · Siting, building, and operating a large-scaPe power plant require specialized expertise and the negotiation of numerous regulatory hurdles. · A long-term market outlook suggests wholesale power prices will decline; this would put at risk the plant's financial viability. C. Next Steas: · In light of these risks, this option is not recommended at this time. This option may be revisited in the future if other options fail to achieve desired results. 2. FORM A MUNICIPAL DISTRIBUTION UTILITY TO OWN AND OPERATE ALL OR PORTIONS OF THE LOCAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM. [OPTION 9, REPORT PP. 77] The formation of a municipal utility could entail anything from the mere declaration of municipal utility status (akin to what San Marcos did recently), all the way up to ownership and operation of some portion of, or all of, a power generation and distribution system to serve some or all of the City's actual gas and electricity needs. To be able to control the delivery of power to any substantial segment of the population, the City would need to control or own some substantial portion of the distribution system. A. Rationale: · A municipal utility has preferential access to cheap federal hydropower (but there is a "waiting list" for access to this power) and potentially other alternative power supply sources. It does not pay federal income taxes, and it has access to tax- exempt debt to finance capital projects. · A municipal utility may be able to provide distribution services at a lower cost than the incumbent utility. Note, however, distribution costs are not the primary driver of current high power costs. · By operating the distribution system the City would have the ability to structure rates in a manner that rewards conservation, encourages the use of off-peak power, and provides the City with control over how and where "public benefit," conservation funds are invested. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001,9:19 AM Page 17 · With the structure of California's electricity market in flux, the outlook for a municipal utility is uncertain. It is unclear at this stage whether municipal utilities, particularly ones yet to be established, will be able to buy power from DWR. If they cannot, a City utility would have to procure power on the open market. · Lassen Municipal Utilities District is the most recent example in California of a formation of a new municipal utility. LMUD now faces significant rate increases due to power procurement decisions that, with hindsight, were ill advised. SMUD also is planning to raise its electricity rates; however, this will be the first rate increase in ten years and rates will still be lower than PG&E's electricity rates before this recent round of PUC approved rate increases. C. Next Steos: · Commence negotiations with SDG&E for mutual beneficial partnerships. Conduct preliminary appraisal and pre-feasibility consultant services necessary to evaluate rough costs to acquire existing SDG&E facilities (or build new facilities) and evaluate legal/regulatory issues/obstacles. If approved by Council, issue an RFP for services to valuate SDG&E facilities. · Consider resolution to declare City a Municipal Utility (effective immediately with no real tangible benefits). · Coordinate any effort on this strategy with the efforts of other local jurisdictions. D. Fiscal Im,,act Staff time primarily from City Attorney, City Manager, and Community Development. Additionally, it is currently anticipated that the preliminary appraisal and feasibility consultant services would cost approximately $40,000 to $50,000. If after the pre- feasibility phase is completed, and the City elects to proceed, it is anticipated that the final phase would cost up to $250,000 that would produce a condemnation quality appraisal including severance issues analyzed and valuated. 3. BECOME A MUNICIPAL "AGGREGATOR" AND ACQUIRE ELECTRICITY AT NEGOTIATED RATES FOR THE CITY, AND INCLUDE RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES (AS PERMITTED BY LAW). [OPTION 8, REPORT PP. 74] A. Rationale: · Municipal aggregation offers the potential for lower electricity costs and certain non-price benefits at minimal initial capital investment. · The City of Palm Springs saved customers in its aggregation program 888,000 in only two years. (The program has since been suspended.) · Current law requires procedures whereby local residents and businesses must affirmatively "opt in" to an aggregation plan. This dramatically reduces participation, and therefore the benefits of aggregation. However, there is legislation currently under discussion to change this provision and allow municipal aggregation programs to be done on an "opt-out" basis. If there is a change in the law, this option is more promising in terms of the potential benefits such a program could provide to Chula Vista's residents and businesses. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 18 · Although the risk to the City under this option is less than the above two options, municipal aggregation is likely to yield very minimal benefits while burdening the City with administrative and dontractual responsibilities. C. Next Ste~s: · Support legislation that preserves consumer choices and authorizes "opt out" municipal aggregation programs. Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 19 Summary of Major Action Items 1. Retrofit new and existing City facilities while also distributing retrofits to residents. 2. Pursue modified work schedule for City employees. 3. Continue/expand energy conservation projects for City facilities and promote energy efficient and renewable energy programs for businesses and residents. 4. Continue to monitor the market and negotiate with ESP's and Duke as the law allows - execute deal within specified parameters if obtainable. 5. Continue to monitor the legislative process and implement the Legislative Strategy. 6. Implement the CO2 Reduction Plan through efforts on three tiers: the Citywide General Plan Update, Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plans/Site Planning, and Building Construction (GreenStar Program). 7. Implement the GreenStar Building Incentive Program. 8. Conduct a "pilot study" through use of a consultant to establish a set of site planning and construction indicators, and to develop a computer model for use in analyzing development projects relative to air quality improvement and energy conservation. 9. Solicit proposals for Distributed Generation projects at selected City facilities and evaluate potential economic development "over the fence" transaction opportunities. lO. Pursue the CEC Solar Energy and Distributed Generation Grant Program for both City facilities and other economic development opportunities. 11.Negotiate (in cooperation with the Port District) public benefits with Duke Energy as new plant is entitled. 12. Develop an Emissions Offsets Program based on mobile sources (as permitted by law). 13. Negotiate with SDG&E for mutually beneficial opportunities. 14. Prepare Request for Proposals for consultant services to perform preliminary appraisal and pre-feasibility studies to valuate SDG&E facilities and analyze legal/ regulatory environment for municipalization. Estimated cost to $50,000. 15. Present resolution for declaring the City a Municipal Utility. Next Steps 1. Based on Council direction at workshop, proceed with Major Action Items. 2. Determine overall Energy Strategy, staffing and management plan and more refined general implementation costs. 3. Present Energy Strategy and Action Plan to Council for formal adoption in June 2001, and report on progress made on the Major Action Items. J:\COMM DEV~HAY NES\EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.doc Executive Summary - Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:19 AM Page 20 ATTACHMENT 3 12HI. JlA VIS~ May 24, 2001 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Michael Meacham, Special Operations Manager ~ VIA: David D. Rowlands, J ' J' SUBJECT: Update Regarding the Implementation of Energy Conservation Measures for City Facilities, Residences and Businesses as Contemplated in the Energy Strategy and Action Plan The Governor has asked all electricity consumers in the state to reduce their energy consumption by another 10% this summer and has offered San Diego consumers a 20% rebate incentive payable in October if they reduce consumption by 15% throughout the summer. Without these reductions in energy use, the state is projected to experience an estimated 35 to 50 days of rolling black outs. With or without these reductions, Chula Vista businesses and residents are faced with the threat of significant increases in energy costs. The following programs are designed primarily to assist the City in doing its part at City facilities to reduce its energy consumption while continuing public services. Secondarily, the report outlines the City's efforts to educate residents and businesses about the need for energy conservation and assist them with their efforts. Staff is not requesting that Council take action at this time to implement a 9/80 work schedule as part of the effort to reduce energy consumption during peak summer demand. Staff has concluded that the schedule rgquired to generate the energy benefits needed to meet the (10%)ten pement conservation goal would be too disruptive to public services. Additionally, there is not enough notice to allow families sufficient time to adjust to the changes that would need to occur to the planning and promotion that has gone into summer programs for seniors, children and other potentially dependent members of the community that rely on those public services. Staff believes strongly that there is merit in the 9/80 plan from conservation and other important perspectives, however more planning is needed to fully take advantage of those benefits and minimize the potential impacts to service. Staff will continue to work with all City Departments and Council to identify conservation measures that could produce the significant reductions in energy use that could have accrued through the 9/80 plan. Staff will implement a number of measures that have the potential to reduce energy consumption during the state's greatest annual energy use period; June 1,2001 to 1 September 30, 2001. The following further describes those items, which Council has seen in draft form in the Energy Report and an Information Memorandum of April 24, 2001. Emergency Summer Energy Policy - City Facilities · The programs will be effective from June 1 through September 30, 2001 · All employees are authorized and encouraged to dress in a professionally casual manner and asked to bring sweaters for early morning or colder days · Air conditioners will be set at 74 degrees and heating will be turned off to "pre- cool," for the warmer times of day? Thermostats may not be adjusted. · All staff will be reminded that they are to eliminate any personal energy devices connected to City service in their workspace such as refrigerators, fountains, television sets, microwave ovens, clock radios, fans and other devices unless the devices are battery operated or authorized by a physician. · Staff will be expected to turn off electronic items such as monitors, printers and calculators when not in use and when leaving their workstation for more than (10) minutes. · Staff will be asked to work under natural light whenever possible without health or safety risk and to turn off task or office lights whenever leaving their work area for more than 10 minutes. · All computers, copy machines, printers and non-essential faxes shall be turned off at the end of each workday. Staff will be asked to pay particular attention to the last day before the weekend. · Each division will be asked to assign one person to check all workstations to verify that all electronic equipment is turned off at the end of each day. · The City will replace any refrigerators in City facilities that are six or more years of age or have broken door seals with new energy star certified models. · Staff has cleaned the coils of all other refrigerators to assure they are operating as efficiently as possible and energy planner devices will be added to those models. · Conservation Staff will conduct a preliminary audit of any ou~[door building lighting and interior lighting that has not been retrofit. Whenever possible, simple day/night sensors and compact fluorescents will be installed. · The City is applying for a grant to conduct a comprehensive energy audit of all City facilities. If awarded, the audit will be conducted as soon as possible and in conjunction with the San Diego Energy Office Rebuild America Program. Staff will then return to Council with an analysis of the payback periods for each project, recommendations and a request for authorization to implement the program. · Recreation will be authorized to increase rates assessed adult leagues and activities to recover the full cost of lights used for those activities. Lights will not go on until after 6 p.m., the "peak" period. Emergency Summer Energy Assistance - Residences and Small Businesses Staff's efforts are designed to assist residents and small businesses reduce their electricity costs and usage which further helps to prevent rolling blackouts. Staffwill implement the following conservation measures between June 1 and September 30, 2001. Direct Conservation Measures A separate item on this evening's agenda request authorization to use additional unanticipated revenues from the sale of recyclables from calendar year 2000 to expand conservation programs. The funds will allow Staff to expand the program from 300 households and 10 businesses to serve up to 1,500 additional households and 25 additional businesses with further program modifications to increase recycling participation and energy conservation. · Residents o At the time this report was circulated, Staff had installed free compact fluorescents and provided energy rebate assistance to approximately 200 homes through the door-to-door program and expects to meet the 300 home goal by June 1, 2001. o With City Council approval, staff will serve up to an additional 1,500 residences by the end of the summer. o The funds will also allow staff to continue to assist those residents with their participation in local and state energy efficient rebate programs. o Staff is working with SDG&E to assist Iow-income residents with their participation in the SDG&E's Direct Assistance Program that will fund full cost of window, lighting, insulation and appliance upgrades. o The SDG&E's Light Bulb Exchange Program for senior citizens and Iow- income residents has exhausted current funding. SDG&E has per[ormed three events in Chula Vista and is working with staff to complete at least one final event for Congregational Towers. Staff will pursue additional events for Chula Vista agencies as future funds become available. · Small Businesses o Staff has completed proposals for six Chula Vista businesses and expects to complete ten businesses by June 1,2001. With Council approval of the increased budget request staff will increase the match per business from $1,000 to $2,500 per business and reach an additional 25 businesses by the end of summer. City and businesS funds could then be matched by SDG&E for a potential value of up to $10,000 in energy saving equipment per business. · Business and Residential Steps o Staffwill continue to assist residents and small businesses interested in installing alternative energy sources. o Staff will continue to work with the Planning & Building Department, as well as, regional and State agencies to facilitate the identification of sound alternative energy equipment and installation practices. Additional Conservation Actions Printed Information Staff has developed and distributed an informational brochure to all businesses outlining the Governor's executive order regarding after hours lighting through the May commemial refuse bill mailing. The attached brochure was developed with the support of the Police Department, Public Information, Code Enfomement, Community Development Department, and Special Operations Programs (see attached). Staff has also distributed energy conservation information to residents through flyers inserted in previous refuse billing insert and to businesses through direct contact and service club meetings. Staff is developing an "Energy Resource Conservation Guide" to enable residents and small businesses to implement electricity conservation measures by providing: conservation tips, information on local retailer of energy efficient products and appliances, qualified energy efficiency contractors, and to provide assistance and information on installing alternative energy sources such as solar photovoltaic systems and provide bill assistance information. Staff plans to have the guide completed and ready to be mailed with the June 2001 residential and small businesses refuse bills that will reach residents by June 30, 2001. Staff will work with the San Diego Regional Energy Office, San Diego Gas & Electric, the California Conservation Corps and other agencies and jurisdictions in developing the guide and other service materials and programs. Long Term Actions to Address Energy Efficiency at City Facilities · Staff intends to pursue grants and non-general fund sources to provide additional energy design, management and funding support to the City Facilities Project Team. · Staff will incoporate options for energy savings measures that exceed Title XXIV and alternative energy generation in future buildings and design for Council review. Staff will also devleop recommendations to install, where appropriate, comparable retrofits in existing City facilities. · Staff will pursue additional grants and non-general fund revenue sources to enhance the cost-effectiveness of conservation measures and reduce "payback," periods. · Staff will coordinate the alternative energy and conservation design efforts with energy service providers, the San Diego Regional Energy Office, the California Energy Commission and other agencies to take advantage of public facility programs and obtain energy conservation certifications for new and remodeled facilities. The implementation of this program has not resulted in an impact to the general fund except that certain conservation measures may produce savings in the City's monthly energy costs. The action items completed in this report were funded by Special Operations Program Conservation funds, grants and other non-general fund sources approved by Council. Future energy conservation projects will be brought to Council with funding recommendations for their review and approval prior to their implementation. Mtm:e nergypolicy.su mmerpolicy-casflnal COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN WHEREAS, in light of the State's energy crisis, the City of Chula Vista hired MRW & Associates to assess energy management options which may allow the City to gain a measure of control over the City's demand and supply of energy as well as the financial costs of the City's energy use over time; and WHEREAS, MRW, in its final report dated February 23, 2001, provided an overview of the energy crisis and broad-based recommendations the City could pursue; and WHEREAS, staff then recommended an Energy Strategy and Action Plan which is comprised of eight (8) specific components that collectively seek to advance the interests of the City of Chula Vista and its residents and businesses in the areas of energy conservation, supply and procurement for the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, City Council held a workshop on April 17 to consider the draft recommendations and provided input to staff; and WHEREAS, City Council at their April 24 meeting accepted the report and directed staff to return with an implementing resolution to formally adopt the Energy Strategy. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it hereby approve the City of Chula Vista Energy Strategy and Action Plan. Presented by Approved as to form by Chris Salomone J ..J~. n Director of Community Development (~,~rney ~'~,..,._.h J:\COMMDEV~RESOS\Energy Strategy & Action Plan.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AS A MUNICIPAL UTILITY WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista (the ~City"), a municipal corporation and charter city, is authorized pursuant to Article XI, Section 9(a) of the California Constitution and Section 200 of the City Charter to establish, purchase and operate public works to furnish its inhabitants with utility services including light, power, heat, transportation, or means of communications; and WHEREAS, the deregulation of the electricity market, increased demand for energy, inadequate supply of natural gas and other fuel sources, a 'deteriorating transmission and distribution system, inadequate or poorly implemented federal and state energy regulations, and a volatile energy commodities market has led to a state-wide energy crisis characterized by soaring energy costs and unreliable energy supplies; and WHEREAS, this energy crisis threatens the public health, safety and general welfare of businesses and residents throughout the state, including businesses and residents in and around the City of Chula vista; and WHEREAS, the City has studied, reviewed and analyzed the current status of the energy crisis and has consulted with various experts to identify the prospective benefits of establishing a municipally owned utility; and WHEREAS, as a result of deregulation of the electric utility industry in California, the City has identified numerous potential benefits that would derive from providing a municipally owned utility, included but not limited to (a) a municipal utility has preferential access to low-priced federal power and potentially other alternative power supply sources; (b) a municipal utility does not pay federal income taxes, and it has access to tax-exempt debt to finance capital projects; (c) a municipal utility may be able to provide distribution and other energy related services to City facilities, businesses and/or residents more reliably and at a lower cost than the incumbent utilities under the existing energy delivery system; (d) by operating the distribution system itself the City would have the ability to structure fair and reasonable utility rates in a manner that rewards conservation, provides for the use of alternative/renewable power sources, encourages the use of off-peak power, and provides the City with control over how and where "public benefit" conservation funds are invested; and WHEREAS, the City is also concerned with the rising costs, threats to reliability, and potential environmental impacts related to the various other utility services necessary to the City, its businesses and residents; and WHEREAS, City Council has found and determined that the creation of a municipal utility could enhance utility system reliability, lower utility rates and otherwise provide utility services that significantly enhance the quality of life and provide significant benefits to the citizens, businesses and environment of the City; and WHEREAS, the City's establishment of itself as a municipal utility is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15320. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION I: The above findings and determinations are hereby adopted as true and correct. SECTION II: The City of Chula Vista hereby establishes itself as a municipal utility ("Municipal Utility"). The Municipal Utility is authorized to provide electricity, natural gas, alternative forms of energy, water, telecommunications, transportation and related utility services ("Utility Services") to governmental facilities, businesses, organizations, and residents located within and around the City of Chula Vista. Additional City Council approval shall be required before the Municipal Utility actually provides one or more utility services. SECTION III: The City Council shall be the governing board for the Municipal Utility acting in accordance with its existing rules and procedures. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to take all necessary steps to implement the authority of the Municipal Authority as directed and approved from time to time by the City Council. The City Manager or his designee is further authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to provide for the implementation, operation and maintenance of City Council approved Municipal Utility activities including, but not limited to, determining the level of additional staffing required, if any, identifying outsourcing needs, negotiating agreements with consultants, special counsel, underwriter(s) and/or financial advisors in connection with regulatory, legal or financial matters. SECTION IV: This ordinance in no way precommits the City to providing one or more of the defined Utility Services or to acquiring, voluntarily or otherwise, some or all of the incumbent utility facilities. City staff is hereby authorized and directed to explore partnership opportunities with the incumbent utility providers and with other public agencies in the region which may themselves be pursuing public utility options. SECTION V: This ordinance is necessary as an emergency measure for preserving the public peace, health, safety and general welfare in light of the gravity of the state's energy crisis and the need to take immediate action to respond to this crisis. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance, which shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its first reading and adoption if passed by a four-fifth's vote of the City Council. Presented by Chris Salomone Director of Community ~ity A~torney[ Development J:\attorney\municipality utility ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AS A MUNICIPAL UTILITY WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista (the ~City"), a municipal corporation and charter city, is authorized pursuant to Article XI, Section 9(a) of the California Constitution and Section 200 of the City Charter to establish, purchase and operate public works to furnish its inhabitants with utility services including light, power, heat, transportation, or means of communications; and WHEREAS, the deregulation of the electricity market, increased demand for energy, inadequate supply of natural gas and other fuel sources, a deteriorating transmission and distribution system, inadequate or poorly implemented federal and state energy regulations, and a volatile energy commodities market has led to a state-wide energy crisis characterized by soaring energy costs and unreliable energy supplies; and WHEREAS, this energy crisis threatens the public health, safety and general welfare of businesses and residents throughout the state, including businesses and residents in and around the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, the City has studied, reviewed and analyzed the current status of the energy crisis and has consulted with various experts to identify the prospective benefits of establishing a municipally owned utility; and WHEREAS, as a result of deregulation of the electric utility industry in California, the city has identified numerous potential benefits that would derive from providing a municipally owned utility, included but not limited to (a) a municipal utility has preferential access to low-priced federal power and potentially other alternative power supply sources; (b) a municipal utility does not pay federal income taxes, and it has access to tax-exempt debt to finance capital projects; (c) a municipal utility may be able to provide distribution and other energy related services to City facilities, businesses and/or residents more reliably and at a lower cost than the incumbent utilities under the existing energy delivery system; (d) by operating the distribution system itself the City would have the ability to structure fair and reasonable utility rates in a manner that rewards conservation, provides for the use of alternative/renewable power sources, encourages the use of off-peak power, and provides the City with control over how and where "public benefit" conservation funds are invested; and W~EREAS, the City is also concerned with the rising costs, threats to reliability, and potential environmental impacts related to the various other utility services necessary to the City, its businesses and residents; and WHEREAS, City Council has found and determined that the creation of a municipal utility could enhance utility system reliability, lower utility rates and otherwise provide utility services that significantly enhance the quality of life and provide significant benefits to the citizens, businesses and environment of the City; and WHEREAS, the City's establishment of itself as a municipal utility is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15320. NOW, THEREFORE, the city Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION Is The above findings and determinations are hereby adopted as true and correct. SECTION II: The City of Chula Vista hereby establishes itself as a municipal utility ("Municipal Utility"). The Municipal Utility is authorized to provide electricity, natural gas, alternative forms of energy, water, telecommunications, transportation and related utility services ("Utility Services") to governmental facilities, businesses, organizations, and residents located within and around the City of Chula Vista. Additional City Council approval shall be required before the Municipal Utility actually provides one or more utility services. SECTION III: The City Council shall be the governing board for the Municipal Utility acting in accordance with its existing rules and procedures. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to take all necessary steps to implement the authority of the Municipal Authority as directed and approved from time to time by the City Council. The City Manager or his designee is further authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to provide for the implementation, operation and maintenance of City Council approved Municipal Utility activities including, but not limited to, determining the level of additional staffing required, if any, identifying outsourcing needs, negotiating agreements with consultants, special counsel, underwriter(s) and/or financial advisors in connection with regulatory, legal or financial matters. SECTION IV: This ordinance in no way precommits the City to providing one or more of the defined Utility Services or to acquiring, voluntarily or otherwise, some or all of the incumbent utility facilities. City staff is hereby authorized and directed to explore partnership opportunities with the incumbent utility providers and with other public agencies in the region which may themselves be pursuing public utility options. SECTION V: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its second reading and adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by Chris Salomone DevelopmentDirect°r of Community ~y ~orne~ / J:\attorney\municipality utility (regular) May 29, 2001 Richard Sommerville, Director San Diego Air Pollution Control District 9150 Chesapeake Drive San Diego, CA 92123 Cc to Governor Gray Davis California Energy Commission California Air Resources Board (CARB) U.S. Protection Agency And Green Team Concerns regarding the siting of the PG&E Distributed Generation 44 MW and RAMCO 57 MW peaker power plants on Main Street in Chula xr~sta Dear Mr. Sommerville: We the undersigned are writing on behalf of our members in the Mexican American Business and Professional Association, The MAAC Project, South Bay Forum, Mexican American Political Association, Association of Latino Administrators, National Latino Peace Officers Assodation, San Diego La Raza Lawyers, Chicano Federation, Lafina/o Unity Coalition, American Hispanic CPA's, Hispanic Coalition of Education, Latin Business Owners of America and Adelita PAC to express our concerns regarding the siting of the PG&E and RAMCO peaker plants on Main Street in Chula Vista, a highly populated residential community. The Governor's executive order and exemption from CEQA for power plants did not necessarily or intentionally declare that multiple plants for a region be built in a single part of the region or a single air shed. At approximately the same time, the Governor and CEC have developed the Environmental Justice Roundiable. South Bay residents have been more than willing to do their fair share to site regional fadlities that contribute to the sustainable economic growth of the region. The South Bay has historically hosted more than its share of regional facilities such as landfills, medical waste bum facilities, rendering plants, auto wrecking yards, cement batch plants, gravel operations, and bum ash disposal sites to name a few. May 24, 2001 Richard Sommerville 2 Re: Siting of Peaker Power plans in Chula Vists Should the CEC approve yet an additional poaker of 57 megawatts (which exceeds the traditional 49.5 megawatt standard) the state and regional agencies would have approved the equivalent of four peaker plants, a 510-megawatt gas fired plant and an existing plant of approximately 700 megawatts in the same air shed without considering cumulative effects of criteria air pollutants in an area, which already is subject to much of the regions particulate, SO2 emissions. In addition to the cumulative impact of the plants planned operation the addition of the equivalent of four peaker plants could use approximately twice as much natural gas as the proposed 510-megawatt plant. The region's air quality has already been seriously impacted by thirteen days of natural gas cut, ailment that caused the existing South Bay plant to run on more polluting fuel oil. This peaknr plant and the other three already approved for the region · of those plants (LARKSPUR) were have not demons~ated a reliable clean fuel source. Two approved as duel fuel in part because the CEC recognized fuel is an issue. However they are doing so at the expense of the air quality for tens of thousands of families that live, work, and go to school within site of these plants and well within its air shed. Furthermore, the waiver of CEQA and the expedited process have created a situation where the CEC is putting less effort into notice of a second power plant that the local jurisdiction puts into siting a wireless cell site. Five new plants have been approved in the South Bay, a sub-region with a large working class and minority population and to our knowledge not a single plant has been approved in the rest of the County. The CEC recently approved more than $12 million dollars in mobile credit mitigation for the Otay Mesa Generating Plant of which a portion applied to mmine motors well outside the immediate area and most applied to ~rash ~rucks, which provide almost all of their service to east County and North County and will not benefit the immediate South Bay community directly. The State is also acting with the understanding that several new large plants with lower air emission standards are being built just across the border in Mexico with federal approval for .... directly in the path of prevailing winds that will gas pipelines from Texas. These faeflmes lie potentially transfer air impacts of these facilities to the South Bay region. The CEC and its Roundtable need to look at the cumulative impacts on the community before this site is approved. These activities dearly demonstrate a pattern of environmental racism and a disregard for the people living and working in the South Bay. Residents having the least political dour to speak out against projects that bring harmful risks to their families are having h~Tardous and polluting facilities located in their neighbothoods- In addition, information on the negative impacts of these projects to the neighborhood is not being disseminated. How can people make informed decisions without full disclosure and accurate and timely information? Supply hysteria rather titan giving priority to sound and reasonable solutions to this energy crisis are fueling the fast tracking of these peaker plants. Richard Sommerville May 24, 2001 Re: Siting of Peaker Power plans in Chula Vista 3 State-wide concerns The Governor of the State of California's primary strategy to avert rolling blackouts this summer discourages us. He has pursued encouraging the building of numerous peaker plants in California and the fast ~acking of larger power plants, which results in the suspension of environmental review and laws. We can appreciate the importance of avoiding the public health and economic costs associated with blackouts, but we do not believe the Governor's strategy gives priOrity to appropriate solutions. When the first indications of an energy crisis were evident last year, the Governor should have realized that demand-side management was the best and possibly only realistic way to avert rolling blackouts this summer. This potential is illustrated by the fact that had conservation and efficiency projects brought before the legislature been passed immediately, California could have saved over 6000 MW according to a staff analysis prepared for the Assembly Subcommittee on Electrical Energy Oversight on March 5, 2001. Had the Governor used his executive authority to pursue conservation and efficiency improvements to the maximum extent feasible, the 5000 projected peak shortfall this summer probably could have been met through demand-side management. A strategy of demand-side management, reducing our state's dependence on these generators was, and continues to be, preferable. Increasing our dependence on energy suppliers, and the unethical profit gouging perpetrated by them, through the building of more plants that compromise public health should notbe a consideration. Evidence of generators withholding power from the grid to drive up prices gives us little confidence that building more plants will result in plentiful energy supplies at times of peak demand. To resolve the energy crisis, the Governor, through the newly created State Power Authority and through other means, should pursue demand-side management. He should encourage the use of renewables more, not less, aggressively than he has encouraged our state to increase its dependence on fossil-fuel plants run by companies of questionable integrity. Local Concerns We are concerned about the cumulative impacts of generating projects in the South Bay vicinity. The San Diego region is already subject to serious constraints in natural gas supplies, resulting in curtailments of nalural gas to the South Bay power plant run by Duke Energy. These constraints have forced the plant to bum fuel oil on several occasions over the past year. The approximately 400 MW of new natural-gas burning projects likely to be built within the next half a year in San Diego and the existing natural-gas burning generation running at higher than normal levels make the burning of fuel oil this summer at the South Bay plant a virtual certainty. This action would be without the constraiats of pollution limits. We also wonder why the turbine being installed in the peaker project is being reu-ofitted in 2002? Will the SDAPCD/CEC/CARB require specific site and turbine tests? Richard Sommerville May 24, 2001 Re: Siting of Peaker Power plans in Chula Vista 4 We the residents of the South Bay have a right to know the potential combined impacts on our health of the approved and proposed peaker projects in their area and burning of fuel oil at the Sou~h Bay plant. We strongly urge the San Diego Air Pollution Control District to perform an assessment of the combined impacts of the Larkspur 90MW facility, the proposed PG&E, RAMCO, and CalPEAK projects, and fuel oil-burning at the South Bay plant on air quality in the South Bay and Olay Mesa areas. We thank you for listening to our concerns. We would appreciate your consideration of our request for additional assessment of what the combined impacts on our health would result from the approved and proposed peaker projects in their area and the burning of fuel oil at the South Bay plant. Sincerely, MEXICAN AMERICAN BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION Josie Lopez-Calderon, President MAAC PROJECT Roger CaTares, presidenffChief Executive Officer Norma Cazares, Presid~.~ MEXICAN AMERICAN POLITICAL ASSOCIATION Susanna Valencia, President ASSOCIATION OF LATINO ADMINISTRATORS Bernie Calderon Richard Sommerville May 24, 2001 Re: Siting of Pealer Power plans in Chula Vista 5 NATIONAL LATINO PEACE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION David Ardilla, President, San Diego Chapter SAN DIEGO LA RAZA LAWYERS Raymond G. Aragon, President Ray Uzeta, Executive Director LATINA/O UNITY COALITION Guadalupe Corona, Co-Chair AMERICAN HISPANIC CPA'S Carmen Herrera-Balvaneda, Immediate past President HISPANIC COALITION OF EDUCATION Olivia Puentes-Reynolds, Co-Chair LATIN BUSINESS OWNERS OF AMERICA Dav~ Sa~,.ehez, Chairman ,~ Chief Executive Officer Delia Talamantez, President Council Agenda Statement Item t ~ Meeting Date 5129101 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to appoint an Ad Hoc Committee on the Civilian Review Component of the Community Rights and Enhancement Plan for Chula Vista SUBMITTED BY: City Manage~'/~z~. City AttorneyC//'.,~-~. ~ Chief of Police ~ Director of Human Resoume t~L~ (415ths Vote: Yes__ No X ) At the April 17, 2001 Council meeting, Mr. Virgil Pina's Community Rights and Enhancement Program was referred to staff for review and analysis. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution recommending that the City Manager appoint an Ad Hoc Committee on the Civilian Review Component of the Community Rights and Enhancement Plan. DISCUSSION: Mr. Virgil Pina has proposed a 5-point Community Rights and Enhancement Plan for Chula Vista. The issues covered in this plan are the City's recruitment and hiring processes; the City's procurement of goods and services; the nature of the Police Department's traffic stops; and the creation of a civilian oversite commission for the Police Department. The 5 points are discussed below: 1. CITY PERSONNEL HIRING REPORT Every two years, in accordance with Federal guidelines, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's form (EEO-4) is completed by Human Resources. The attached report, Exhibit A, from the Director of Human Resources, provides information of our most recent EEO-4 report. The City is sensitive that our workforce should reflect the community; however, proper standards and qualifications are our first priority. Our commitment to diversity can be seen by the 63% increase in non- caucasian employees from 1993, from 27% to 44%; it should be noted that in the last three years, 47% of the 63% occurred. Mr. Pina has a specific concern with the number of caucasians in managerial positions. The City has experienced little turn-over in these positions. In fact, 67% of Executive Managers have at least 10 years of tenure with the City. We have instituted a "Mentoring Program" to assist in nurturing and developing interested employees wishing to advance within the City structure. The program is providing learning opportunities to all employees in specific skills by matching them with employees who have demonstrated success in those same skills. Hopefully, many of our future managers will be generated from this program. 2. MINORITY PAPERJOBANNOUNCEMENTADVERTISTING We already do extensive employment outreach to the minority community. The attached report, Exhibit ^, outlines our efforts in this area. 3. CONTRACTS REPORT Mr. Pina wants a biannual public report on the amount of City contracts awarded to minority owned businesses. While such a report could be prepared, under Proposition 209 it is illegal to give race or gender preference in awarding public contracts. The attached report, Exhibit B, from the City Attorney, explains the legal ramifications of such an action. 4. DATA ON TRAFFIC STOPS Mr. Pina wants a biannual report relative to the Police Department's traffic stops of minorities giving statistical information. We agree that such data should be captured. In fact, last year the Chief of Police told Mr. Pina that such reporting would begin this year. The attached report, Exhibit C. from the Chief of Police, explains the nature of the program and states that the program was instituted May 1,2001. 5. INDEPENDENT CIVIL REVIEW BOARD Mr. Pina wants to implement a Civilian Review Board for police practices. The attached reports from the Chief of Police, Exhibit D, and the City Attorney, Exhibit B, provide historical and legal information on such Boards. In addition, the attached letter from Supervisor Greg Cox, Exhibit E, to Mr. Pina states: "As a matter of public record, you should know that my office has never received a single complaint about Chula Vista Police mishandling our constituents." /-7-2- 2 While the attached reports do not support recommending the formation of such a Board at this time, a community perception has been raised that merits additional review of the issue. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Manager appoint an Ad Hoc Committee on the Civilian Review Component of the Community Rights and Enhancement Plan for Chula Vista. The tasks of the Committee would be: 1. Familiarizing themselves with the nature and intent of the request for a civilian review board; 2. Familiarizing themselves with police department policies and procedures, by participating in a citizen's academy and "ride- alongs"; 3. Reviewing the procedures currently used to investigate allegations of police misconduct; 4. Reviewing police academy and in-service training on ethics and police conduct; 5. Reviewing citizen complaint policies, procedures, educational material, historical statistics on the types of citizen complaints; and 6. Submitting an initial report on the status of their work by October 1,2001. FISCAL IMPACT: Based upon the recommendation, there will be no cost at this time. However, if a Civilian Review Board was ever constituted, the cost could be in excess of $500,000. Attachments: Exhibit A (Report from Director of Human Resources dated 5/14/01 ) Exhibit B (Report City Attorney dated 5/18/01) Exhibit C (Report from Police Chief dated 5/22/01 ) Exhibit D (Report from Police Chief Regarding Traffic and Pedestrial Stop Statistics) Exhibit E (Letter from Supervisor Greg Cox dated 5/2/01 ) Exhibit A MEMO Date: 5/14/01 To: David D. Rowlands, Jr., City Manager From: Candy Emerson, Director of Human Resource~.~ RE: Information for Virgil Pina Attached, please find our most recent EEO information requested by Mr. Pina. This data is collected every two years in accordance with Federal guidelines and it is provided in the format specified by the Federal government. I have provided this information to Mr. Pina within the last two years and have met with him once to discuss the City's hiring practices. At that time, he congratulated HR staff on our outreach recruiting efforts and said he was impressed and pleased at the diversity he saw in the staffof the HR Department. As we have discussed, we continue to expand our outreach recruitment as part of our effort to increase the diversity of our workforce. For cost and logistical reasons, we do not always advertise positions for which we are recruiting in newspapers or magazines. However, we often utilize local publications to assist us in getting the word out to minority groups. Publications we have utilized in the most recent past include Voice and Viewpoint, La Prensa, El Sol, Black Careers Now and Hispanic Hotline. We have also found success in attending various recruitment events held in the County. Within the past two years, the management level HR staff (Personnel Analyst and above) have participated in the following: Southwestern Community: Law Enforcement Career Day and various law enforcement classes; General Career Day. Grossmont Community College: Annual Career Day Maximus (Welfare Reform Division): A minimum of two job fairs each year and workshops in Impedal Beach, San Diego and Chula Vista. Sweetwater Unified School District: Job fairs and workshops at most of the schools in the district; assisted in developing the ROP Fire Science Curriculum at Castle Park and Southwest High - both with high Hispanic representation. San Diego City College: Annual Career Fair and participation at the Centre City Skill Center Southern Califomia Military Bases: Presentations at 32® Street Naval Base, Miramar and Camp Pendleton several times each year. San Diego State University: Career Day and Law Enforcement Career Day. California State University - Long Beach: Career Day and Law Enforcement Career Day. Southern California Police Academies: Rio Hondo, Southwestern, Miramar, Palomar, Long Beach, Fullerton. Employment Development Department (EDD): Presentations at least twice a year in Chula Vista and San Diego. Our most recent and creative recruiting tools have been automation-based. We now provide bilingual services in our automated telephone messages as well as at the Human Resources front counter. We utilize the City's website for recruitment advertising and the Internet has proved helpful with Monster, JobTrak, Gov. Jobs. com and others. Perhaps the most time-intensive and long-range are our efforts in the school systems within our community. Each of the analysts, the Assistant Director and I speak regularly to middle school, high school, adult school and ROP classes. We hope to help develop an interest in working for the City at an early age by highlighting not only the tangible benefits, but also the diversity of the workforce as a benefit. Along those lines, Cleve Jacobs was instrumental in taking fire science to the high school level. He is actively working on a plan to do the same with law enforcement. These programs, with minority instructors and role models are extremely effective in eady recruitment for public safety jobs. With respect to recruiting minorities to fill senior manager positions, we have used Richard Garcia in the Director of Parks and Recreation to assist in recruiting Hispanic applicants. Since this is his area of specialty, we expected many qualified applicants. However, after a lengthy search, we found ourselves with no viable candidates interested in the position. While recruiters such as Mr. Garcia will always be a possibility, we have had as much success utilizing the same recruitment techniques and tools. Other areas in which the City has been pro-active in improving our diversity have been the Mentodng Program and the Diversity Committee. The Mentoring Program provides mentoring services to any interested employee wishing to advance within the City structure. The fledgling diversity committee lead by the Assistant Director is in the very eady stages of developing a diversity program. Though both programs are still in the development stage, they show promise in adding one more dimension to our efforts to diversity. Over the past five years, we have added to our budget in Printing and Postage to develop brochures highlighting what the City has to offer prospective candidates and then making sure that they reach the minority communities. It is our opinion and commitment that if we provide a positive working environment with good pay and benefits and treat all employees with equality and respect, we will continue to attract a diverse, well-qualified workforce. Attachment: 1999 EEO-4 Report Employee EEO Listing City-wide Total As of 02/23/2001 % of Total Employees Caucasian 805 55.9805% African-American 73 5.0765% Asian-Pacific Islander 63 4.3811% Hispanic 310 21.5577% American Indian/Alaska Native 106 7.3713% Filipino 51 3.5466% Other 8 .5563% Multicultural 22 1.5300% Total 1438 100% Total employees = 947 permanent and 491 hourly employees. Employee EEO Listing City-wide Total As of 02/23/2001 Female % of Total Emp. Caucasian 318 22.11% African-American 25 01.74% Asian-Pacific Islander 33 02.30% Hispanic 129 08.97% American Indian/Alaska Native 47 03.27% Filipino 27 01.88% Other 2 00.0014% Multicultural 9 00.0063% Female Total 590 41,03% Male Caucasian 487 33.87% African-American 48 03.34% Asian-Pacific Islander 30 02.09% Hispanic 181 12.59% American Indian/Alaska Native 59 04.10% Filipino 24 01.67% Other 6 00.42% Multicultural 13 00.90% Male Total 848 58.97% Total Em ployees: 1438 100.00% Employee EEO Listing As of 2/23/2001 Mana.qement % of Managers Caucasian 73.58% African-American 5.03% Asian-Pacific Islander 5.03% Hispanic 9.43% American Indian/Alaska Native 3.78% Filipino 1.26% Multicultural 1.89% * Includes Executive, Senior, and Mid Management Employee Listing Name Hire Date Position Daniel Beintema 11/01/91 Executive Director of NIC Andrew Campbell 08/01/00 Director of Parks & Recreation Candace Emerson 02/07/75 Director of Human Resources Richard Emerson 01/13/92 Chief of Police Cheryl Fruchter 07/06/87 Director of Budget and Analysis James Hardiman 07/01/71 Fire Chief George Krempl 02/20/84 Assistant City Manager Robert Leiter 01/26/98 Director of Plannin9 & Bldg John Lippitt 06/23/75 Director of Public Works Ann Moore 04/03/95 Sr. Asst. City Attorney Sidney Morris 08/19/77 Assistant City Manager David Palmer 11/07/88 Deputy City Manager Robert Powell 06/20/94 Deputy City Manager Christopher Salomone 01/08/90 Director of Community Development Louis Vignapiano 09/10/90 Director of Mgmt & Infor Services / 7 1o All Employee EEO Comparison % Of Total Employees 200'1 1998 1993 1985 1980 Caucasian 55.98 69,59 73.2 80.5 81.09 African-American 5.08 4.60 4.1 2.1 2.61 Asian-Pacific Islander 4.38 5.29 4.5 4.3 3.48 Hispanic 21.56 18.09 17,38 12.4 12.17 American Indian/Alaska Native 7.37 2.43 .8 0.7 0.65 Filipino 3.55 --* --* --* --* Other .56 --* --* --* --* Multicultural 1.53 --* --* --* --* Management EEO Comparison % Of Managers 2001 1998 1993 1985 1980 Caucasian 73.58 77.38 82.97 90.70 84.91 African-American 5.03 4.46 ...... Asian-Pacific Islander 5.03 5.98 6.70 4.65 9.43 Hispanic 9.43 9.04 8.21 4.65 5.66 American Indian/Alaska Native 3.78 2.82 .80 .... Filipino 1.26 --* --* --* --* Other .... * --* --* --* Multicultural 1.89 --* -* --* --* * The federal government has revised reporting categories over the years. These statistical categories did not exist in these years. All numbers are approximate because management positions are in both Officials/Administrators and Professionals categories on EEO4 reports. I'7-fl Employee EEO Listing By Bargaining Unit As of 02/23/2001 Bargaining Unit CATY Male Caucasion 1 TOTAL 1 CATY Bargaining Uuit Total: 1 Bargaining Unit CCLK Female Caucasion 1 TOTAL 1 CCLK Bargaining Unit Total: 1 Bargaining Unit CL Female Caucasion 1 Hispanic 1 TOTAL 2 Male Caucasion 1 Hispanic 1 TOTAL 2 CL Bargaining Unit Total: 4 Bargaining Unit CMGR Male Caucasion 1 TOTAL 1 CMGR Bargaining Unit Total: 1 Bargaining Unit CONF Female Ruu: 02/2312001 {15:43:$9) Uscrld: edward¢ Employce_EEO_By_Barg Report: Employee EEOby Barg Unit Page: 1 Employee EEO Listing By Bargaining Unit As of 02/23/2001 Caucas~on 17 Asian-Pacific Islander 1 Hispanic 6 American Indian/Alaska Native 2 TOTAL 26 CONF Bargaining Unit Total: 26 Bargaining Unit CVEA Female Caucasion 110 African-American 13 Asian-Pacific Islander 13 Hispanic 39 American Indian/Alaska Native 13 Filipino 8 Multicultural 4 TOTAL 200 Male Caucasion 127 African-American 18 Asian-Pacific Islander 9 Hispanic 75 American Indian/Alaska Native 19 Filipino 7 Other 1 Multicultural 2 TOTAL 258 CVEA Bargaining Unit Total: 458 Bargaining Unit EXEC Female Caucasion 2 Run: 02/23/2001 (15:43:59) Userld: edwardc 17-~/~ Employee_EEO_By_Barg Report: Employee EEO by Barg Unit Page: 2 Employee EEO Listing By Bargaining Unit As of 02/23/2001 Asian-Pacific Islander 1 TOTAL 3 Male Caucasion 12 TOTAL 12 EXEC Bargaining Unit Total: 15 Bargaining Unit IAFF Female Caucasion 3 Asian-Pacific Islander 1 TOTAL 4 Male Caucasion 5 6 Hispanic 10 American Indian/Alaska Native 2 TOTAL 68 IAFF Bargaining Unit Total: 72 Bargaining Unit MM Female Caucasion 35 African-American 3 Asian-Pacific Islander 2 Hispanic 3 American Indian/Alaska Native 1 Filipino 1 Multiculmral 1 TOTAL 46 Male Caucasion 49 African-American 5 Asian-Pacific Islander 3 Report: Employee EEO by Barg Unit ( /' [[ Page: 3 Employee EEO Listing By Bargaining Unit As of 02/23/2001 Hispamc 10 American Indian/Alaska Native 4 Filipino 1 Multicultural 2 TOTAL 74 MM Bargaining Unit Total: 120 Bargaining Unit MY Fern ale Caucasion 1 TOTAL 1 MY Bargaining Unit Total: 1 Bargaining Unit POA Female Caucasion 15 African-American 2 Asian-Pacific Islander 1 Hispanic 3 Filipino 1 TOTAL 22 Male Caucasion 118 African-American 7 Asian-Pacific Islander 7 Hispanic 27 American Indian/Alaska Native 12 Filipino 3 TOTAL 174 POA Bargaining Unit Total: 196 Run: 02/23/2001 (15:43:59) Userld: edward¢ / '~--[~-'~ Employee_EEO_By_Barg Report: Employee EEObyBarg Unit Page: 4 Employee EEO Listing By Bargaining Unit As of 02/23/2001 Bargaining Unit SM Female Caucasion 7 Asian-Pacific Islander 2 Hispanic 1 American Indian/Alaska Native 1 TOTAL 11 Male Caucasion 14 Hispanic 1 TOTAL 15 SM Bargaining Unit Total: 26 Bargaining Unit TEP Female Caucasion 5 TOTAL 5 Male Caucasion 1 TOTAL 1 TEP Bargaining Unit Total: 6 Bargaining Unit UCHR Female Caucasion 116 African-American 7 Asian-Pacific Islander 12 Hispanic 76 American Indian/Alaska Native 30 Filipino 17 Other 2 Multiculmral 4 TOTAL 264 Run: 02/23/2001 (15:43:59) Userld: edwardc ~--~-'0/ ~ ~'~ Employee_EEO_By_Barg Report: Employee EEO by Barg Unit [/ ~ [(¢I~ Page: 5 Employee EEO Listing By Bargaining Unit As of 02/23/2001 Male Caucasion 95 African-American 17 Asian-Pacific Islander 9 Hispanic 48 American Indian/Alaska Native 22 Filipino 12 Other 5 Multicultural 9 TOTAL 217 UCHR Bargaining Unit Total: 481 Bargaining Unit WCE Female Caucasion 5 TOTAL 5 Male Caucasion 12 African-American 1 Asian-Pacific Islander 2 Hispanic 9 Filipino 1 TOTAL 25 WCE Bargaining Unit Total: 30 Total Employees: 1438 Run: 02/23/2001 (15:43:59) Userld: edwardc t.~t[ Employee_EEO_By_Barg Report: Employee EEOby Barg Unit Page: 6 Employee EEO Listing CITYWIDE Barg Unit: ALL As of 02/23/2001 Total Dept EE's: 231 l 17000 PARKS AND RECREATION ] Female Caucasion 8 61.5 % Hispanic 5 38.5 % Gender Total: 13 Male Caucasion 17 89.5 % Hispanic 1 5.3 % American Indian/Alaska Native 1 5.3 % Gender Total: 19 Total Dept EE's: 32 18000 LIBRARY [ Female Caucasion 38 73.1% Asian-Pacific Islander 1 1.9 % Hispanic 9 17.3 % American Indian/Alaska Native 4 7.7 % Gender Total: 52 Male Caucasion 7 50.0 % African-American 1 7.1% Asian-Pacific Islander 1 7.1% Hispanic 5 35.7 % Gender Total: 14 I '71~ Report: Employee EEO Cirywide Page: 7 Employee EEO Listing CITYWIDE Barg Unit: ALL AS of 02/23/2001 Total Dept EE's: 66 24100 PARKING METER ] Fem ale Caucasion 1 100.0 % Gender Total: 1 Male Caucasion 3 100.0 % Gender Total: 3 Total Dept EE's: 4 39100 CENTRAL GARAGE FUND I ' Female Caucasion 1 lOO.O % Gender Total: 1 Male Caucasion 6 75.0 % Hispanic 1 12.5 % Filipino 1 12.5 % Gender Total: 8 Total Dc'pt EE's: 9 42100 BAYFRONT CONSERVANCY TRUST ] Female Caucasion 2 66.7 % Asian-Pacific Islander 1 33.3 % Gender Total: 3 Male Run: 02/23/2001 (15:44:34) Userld: edwardc / 7 ~,/~ Employee_EEO_CITYWIDE Report: Employee EEO Citywide ' ~/ Page: 8 Employee EEO Listing CITYWIDE Barg Unit: ALL As of 02/23/2001 Caucasion 2 50.0 % Hispanic 2 50.0 % Gender Total: 4 Total Dept EE's: 7 Grand TotalEE's: 947 ['7 Run: 02/23/2001 (15:44:34) Userld: edwardc ~' ~ EmpIoyee_EEO_CITYWIDE Report: Employee EEO Citywide Page: 9 Exhibit B Cl'lY o~: CHUIA ¥1SIA OFFICE OF THE CITY A'rrORNEY DATE: May 18, 2001 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: John M. Kaheny, City Attorne ~,~ SUBJECT: Community Rights and Action Plan MEMORANDUM OF LAW INTRODUCTION Mr. Virgil Pina has proposed that the City of Chula Vista (City) enact his "Community Rights and Enhancement Plan", (the Plan) a copy of which is attached to this memorandum of law. The Plan is scheduled for a discussion at the May 29, 2001 City Council meeting. In anticipation of that discussion, the Council has asked this office to review two elements of the Plan for any legal impediments. The first element is a proposal for the City to publish a biannual community report on the amount of City contracts awarded to minority owned businesses. The second element consists of the implementation of a Civilian Review Board for Police Practices. ANALYSIS Biannual Community Report Mr. Pina's request for a biannual report relative to the amount of City contracts awarded to minority businesses lacks specificity as to its intent, content and implementation. He does indicate that the report he envisions would give a comparison and statistical analysis regarding the amount of City funds awarded by the City to minority as compared to non-minority owned businesses. Clearly, in order to publish such a report, the City would have to require contractors to disclose the ethnic make-up of the ownership 17- / 276 FOURTH AVENUE · CHULA V~STA · CALIFORNIA 91010 · (619) 69'1-5037 · FAX (619~ 409-5823 Honorable Mayor and Council May 18, 2001 Page 2 of the company and presumably that of their sub-contractors as well. Currently the City participates in the U. S. Department of Transportation's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program, 49 CFR 26. That program is coordinated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Companies desiring to qualify as a disadvantaged business (DBE) must be certified by Caltrans. Minority firms are presumed to be eligible for DBE status. The City must use good faith efforts to encourage the utilization of DBEs as a condition of receiving federal funds. There is no public reporting requirement in this program except that the City must certify that a good faith effort has been made prior to the award of a contract. The City does not currently compile long term statistics on the number of minority owned businesses that participate in The City's DBE program as such a report is not mandated by the federal DBE program. There is also no requirement under state law to compile such information. A concern does exist that requiring individuals to supply such information to the City may in fact violate state law. in November of 1996, the voters approved Proposition 209 amending Article I of the California Constitution by adding Section 31, which states in part: (a) The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting... (e) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting action, which must be taken to establish or maintain eligibility for any federal program, where ineligibility would result in a loss of federal funds to the state. The City's DBE program clearly falls within the exception found in paragraph (e) of Section 31. However the mere act of compiling statistical data on the ethnic background of contractors may fall within the provisions of paragraph (a) of Section 31. Proposition 209 was recently interpreted by the California Supreme Court in Hi-Voltage Wire Works v. City of San Jose 24 Cal.4th 537, (2000). In that CITY OF CHULA VISTA Honorable Mayor and Council May 18, 2001 Page 3 case, a taxpayer and a general contracting firm brought suit against the City of San Jose challenging the constitutionality of a program that required contractors bidding on city projects to utilize a specified percentage of minority and women subcontractors or to document efforts to include minority and women subcontractors in their bids. The California Supreme Court held that the program violated the State Constitution. The Court did state that an outreach program could be implemented without adverse result as long as it's criteria was not based on race or sex. The Plan does not refer to anything except the compilation of a statistical analysis and nothing in the Hi Voltage case specifically precludes such an effort. However, the case does make it extremely difficult for a city to mandate that contractors disclose minority or majority status in the contracting process. The City's hands would also be tied if it tried to certify or verify the minority status of contractors. Voluntary disclosure, while perhaps legal, would not lend itself to an accurate statistical analysis. The Plan sets forth no purpose for the compilation of data regarding minority status. Certainly any program based on a motivation to give preference in anyway to minority contractors would run into extreme difficulty passing constitutional muster after Hi-Voltage. If the City did attempt to collect data concerning the ethic background of contractors for projects not covered by the DBE Program, it would place itself in a rather precarious legal position unless it could give an ethnically neutral explanation for the gathering of the information. As Mr. Pina has yet to explain the purpose of his proposal, we are unable at this time to further evaluate his proposal. Civilian Review Board for Police Practices Mr. Pina has also suggested the establishment of a "Civilian Review Board for Police Practices" (board). His concept envisions a board with full subpoena power and its own investigative body. The board is to be fully funded by the City and will have the authority to review all police reports, documents and complaints made by any and all persons against the City of Chula Vista's Police Department. The board will be comprised of residents of the City and will meet at least once a month. The members are to be appointed by the City Council. I-7 -2¢ CiTY OF CHULA VISTA Honorable Mayor and Council May 18, 2001 Page 4 It is unclear at present exactly what the scope and structure of the proposed board is to be. Police review boards have existed in many different forms for many years. The Administration of Complaints by Civilians Against the Police, 77 Harv. L. Rev. 499. (1964). In California for example, Berkeley, Sacramento, the City of San Diego, the County of San Diego, the City of Oakland, and several other cities have a form of a civilian police review board. However, as can be seen by Appendix A, each board is structured and empowered differently. (Appendix A is courtesy of Wendy P. Rouder and was prepared for the City Attorneys' Department of the League of California Cities, May 2001. It compares the boards of five different cities). The basis for the variety of structures can be found in the history of the creation of each board. Police review boards have generally been created to resolve unique local issues concerning police community relations in much larger cities. At the present time, citizen complaints and lawsuits against members of the Chula Vista Police department are minimal for a City this size. Without a specific detailed proposal to examine, a complete legal analysis is impossible. Generally speaking, the more independent and powerful a proposed board is, the more legal issues to resolve. However, based on what has been initially described by Mr. Pina, there are certain issues which may be addressed in the absence of a more concrete proposal. If the City desires to create a police review board, it may do so within the restrictions imposed by the Charter of the City of Chula Vista and California law. Obviously the City may propose an amendment to the voters to override any impediment in the Charter in the creation of such a board. The provisions of state law that affect peace officer records and the procedural rights of peace officers will of course need to be protected and cannot be unilaterally changed by the City as they are a matter of statewide concern. Baggett v. Gates 32 Cal.3d 128 (1982) The first impediment to the enactment of Mr. Pina's board is Section 305 of the Charter of the City of Chula Vista. That section limits the Council's role in the administration of the City. In addition, Charter Section 507 gives the Police Chief plenary authority, subject to the Civil Service provisions of the Charter, over the discipline of members of the Police Department. That CITY OF CHULA VISTA Honorable Mayor and Council May l 8, 2001 Page 5 being the case, the Council could still appoint a purely advisory board by ordinance to advise the Council on police community relations, but it would have no independent investigative power. In addition, California Penal Code Sections 832.5, 832.7 and 832.8 protect the confidentiality of police personnel records. These sections impede a board's ability to disclose the results of its findings in any particular matter. Although Section 603 of the Charter currently authorizes advisory boards to issue subpoenas, such power would probably be ineffectual in light of these statutes. As the establishment of a police review board is a matter of legislative policy, the City need not meet and confer with the Chula Vista Police Officers Association (CVPOA) over its authority to create such a board. However, depending upon the nature and scope of the board, the City may be required to meet and confer with the CVPOA over certain impacts the establishment of the Board may have on the procedural rights of its members under the California Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights. Government Code Section 3300 et. sec. For example, if the proposed board has the ability to make findings of misconduct against an officer, the officer must have the right to an administrative appeal from such a finding. Caloca v. County of San Diego 72 Cal. App. 4th 1209 (1999). As the current Memorandum of Understanding with CVPOA is silent on this subject, the implementation of such an appeal process will need to be negotiated in order to avoid protracted litigation. CONCLUSION A more detailed legal analysis of the Plan is not practical because Mr. Pina has not yet articulated many of the elements necessary for such an analysis. While his concepts certainly raise substantial legal questions, there are currently too many variables and missing elements to permit a prudent and complete legal opinion at this time. JMK:lgk Attachment cc: City Manager CITY OF CHULA VISTA Community Rights and Enhancement Plan l'he Cmmmmil.~ Righls arid Eohanccme~lt Plan contains the ['oltowmg 5 items ol' t Cit-/Pcr.'~nnel Itirin~. Retmrl, A biannual pnblic reporl relative to thc Ctt~ of Chula Vi~a's cu~enl hiril~g stafsti~ aod pracOc~ Io i~cludc file number oF *minority permns i~t Ci[~ Department Hz~ and ManagerNl ~siaons, 2 ~inorit}' Pap~/,~0!) Announcement Adve~ising Fair and Imlmsl cfforB to recruit mmorilJ~ inLo all positloa levels. This is to be a~lish~ by thc regular rise o[job anUoun~mentffadvenising in 2 or tltore local ~nalofily publications. Aftd the man,toD' use of at l~ one min~ily inlen'iewer Io be ~resell[ [Br all Cily i~enqews. 3. Cit5r Contracts Rcp~. A bigmmal public report to Ihe co~n~nunay relati~ m fl~c ~ount of City co~tracls awatfl~ ~o minorif~ owned businesses. This report will give a colnpa~son and s~ttlstical al~[ysis regarding Ibc amoum of city fimds awaffied to mi~mfity, as comp~ed to nonrmi~only own~ busi nesscs 4. Dat~ m~ Traffic Stops. A biammal report relative [o lhc Chun Vista Police Depar~um~l's ~ra~c stop~ of mmori¢cs Thi~ re,ri will gi~e fl~e public slalisfical infora~ttio~ relaiivc to ~ffic gops ~ade by the Clmta Visla Pohce De~mellt. It mil c~u~n tim manor of alt minur~ies ~o~ by tile dep~c~l ~e per, ired mason for their stop and dimlose whether or aot lhe l~rson¢) were ~ze~ed~ All ma~s checkpoi m slops ma~e ~' thc Foli~ Dep~tmcnl will be exempt from this requkement howeve~ lhc Police DeparUnem will witltiu 48 ho~l~ dBclose file number of mJnorilies arrest~ or who~ ~s were illt~tuded at Ihese am~ checkpoints. 5. InOelmndt~t Cidlian Revi~ Board. ~e implementation of a Civilian Review Board lbr Police Pra~ices. Such bmrd will have ~fl su~oena ~we~' ~d ils own Jm,e~i~tfive ~y. The re,sew ~oard will ~ fully fimde~ by ~he City of ChaCo Vista m~d will have ~mthori~ to review afl police mporls, dooumcnB, ~lnfl complain~ made By any and all ~mons ~in~ Ihe oily of Chula vista Poli~ Depanmem The Review Board will be comprised o1: msidems of the city & Chula Vista ~d will ~ schooled to mee~ on no !ess th~ a one time per momh b~mis. 'Dm members of O~e police review board wiB ~ appo~nt~ by the Clmla Vista Cily Cmmcil. *The term ~ refers lo racial minori[~ in ~115 of the above ileitis APPENDIX A cOMPARISON OF FEATURES OF ENABLING LEGISLATION OR REGULATIONS CREATING CITIZEN POLICE REVIEW IN VARIOUS JURISDICTIONS ISSUE SELECT CALIFORNIA JURISDICTIONS Berkeley Sacramentoz6 City of San Oakland San Diego Diego County: Auditor, Board, Commission Auditor Board Board Board or Commission ~ # of members on Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes the Board Term of member Yes N/A Yes Yes ' Yes Who appoints Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes Residency of Yes N/A No Yes ! Yes member Member is non Yes N/A No Yes Yes employee of City Non-employee of Silent N/A No Yes Yes City law enforcement agency Manner of filling Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes vacancies Member as Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes Chair/how long serves & when election occurs Addresses Yes N/A Yes No Yes compensation of members Time and place Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes and notice of meeting set - Sacramento follows the auditor model which was established by the City Manager issuing a "Purpose, Authority and Procedures" Statement, 27 Applies to the sworn members of the County Sheriff's Department and custodial officers working for the County Probation Department. APPENDIX A Berkeley Sacramento City of San Die§t Oakland San Diego Count~ Quorum Yes N/A Y~s Yes Yes · ~rovision Power to make Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes policy recommendations Power to receive Yes Yes ! No (complaint Yes Yes (against sheriffs complaints referred to and custodial) against police police department Power to receive No No No Yes No complaints against employees in other agency departments Power to advise No No Yes Yes Yes on type of discipline Responsible for Yes Yes No Yes Yes investigation of complaints Responsible for No Yes Yes No N/A monitoring (investigation police internal file review) investigation Power to review No Yes Yes No (by N/A internal affairs negotiat- file ed agree- ment) Mandating Yes No No No No complaints filed with any department be forward to the Board 175 APPENDIX A Berkele', Sacramento City of San Diego Oakland San Diego County Subpoena power Yes Silent No Yes Yes To adopt its own Yes No No Yes Yes rules for its own operating procedures Complaint Yes investigation procedures Timeliness of Yes Yes No Yes Yes Complaint Establish who Yes No No Yes Yes can file a complaint Timelines for Yes No No No I Yes completing investigation Timelines for Yes No No No No commencing a hearing Special Provision Yes No No No No for Complaints in Litigation Provides for Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes documents as public or confidential Mandates law No Yes Yes Yes No (only through enforcement subpoena) agency cooperate Incorporation of Yes No Yes Yes No (only Lybarger) PSO.Bill of Rights Provisions for the Yes Yes No Yes No interviewing Law Enforcement Authority of No No No No No Staff to Dismiss a Complaint Establish board No No No Yes Yes staffing 28 By ordinance all the boards or commissions in th/s appendix are authorized to establish their own investigation and hearing procedures 176 / - APPENDIX A Berkeley Sacramento City of San Diego Oakland San Diego County Specify types of No Yes No Yes Yes issues that may be reviewed29 Provisions for Yes N/A No Yes Yes board dismissing complaint Provides for No No No No No hearing by Hearing Officer Provides for Yes N/A Yes (file review Yes Yes Hearing by Full by full board) Board Provides for Yes q/A Yes (file review No Yes hearing by board by subcommittee subcommittee) Addresses Yes X!/A Yes Yes Yes absenc& or recusal of board members fi"om hearing Active role of No N/A N/A Yes Yes staff in presenting evidence Addresses roles Yes No ' No Yes Yes of evidence Addresses right Yes No No Yes Yes to cross examine Provision for Yes ~ N/A No No No continuances Provision for Yes N/A No Yes Yes wimess oath Role for board Upon No No Yes Yes counsel request Written findings Yes No Yes Yes Yes required Burden of proof Yes N/A No Yes Yes standard set 29 All citizen review board ordinances examined for this study limited jurisdiction to law enforcement conduct as alleged in a complaint by a civilian. None allowed complaints by one officer against another. Exhibit ¢ DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM CHULA VISTA POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE: May 22, 2001 ~o~ ~ve ~. ~o~.~.~s. ~r.. o.~ ~an~r~ FROM: Richard Emerson, Chief of Police ~J~ SUBJECT: Civilian Review Boards & Traffic Stops Please see attached material on Civilian Review Boards and Traffic Stops. RE/amh Attachment Civilian Review Boards Number of Civilian Review Boards in Existence According to the most recent count (1997), there are 94 civilian review boards (CRBs) nationally. CRBs are much more frequently found in larger cities, particularly those with populations over 350,000. While 75% of the 50 largest U.S. cities have CRBs, only 25% of mid-sized cities (the 50th to 100th largest cities) have civilian review. For comparison purposes, Chula Vista is approximately the 115th largest city in the country. In California, only 14%, of the 85 municipalities with more than 100 sworn officers (typically serving populations of more than over 100,000 people) have CRBsI. None of the six California police agencies comparable in size to Chnla Vista (serving populations between 150,000 and 200,000) have CRBs. Types of Civilian Oversight2 There are four main types of oversight systems, and many hybrid systems comprised of various components of the following main types: · (1) Civilians investigate allegations of police misconduct and recommend findings to the chief or sheriff. · (2) Police officers investigate allegations and develop findings; civilians review and recommend that the chief or sheriff approve or reject the findings · (3) Complainants may appeal findings established by police or sheriff's department to civilians, who review them and then recommend their own findings to the chief or sheriff · (4) An auditor investigates the process by which the police or sheriff's department accepts and investigations complaints and reports on the thoroughness and fairness of the process to the department and the public. Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1997. Citizen Review of Police: Approaches & Implementation, National Institute of Justice, 2001. Advantages and Disadvantages of CRBs Civilian review boards have both advantages and disadvantages. Based on a review of a wide range of literature incorporating a variety of perspectives, the following list was developed: Advantages of CRBs · They can increase the complainant's satisfaction with the complaint process, because CRBs offer complainants an opportunity to be heard before their peers. However, civilian oversight can also decrease the complainant's satisfaction because the CRB investigative process can take a relatively long time, depending on the backlog or efficiency of the board. CRBs are one way to improve the image of the police department with the community, if the image is a negative one. · Some cities have found that CRBs can improve internal investigations. This effect is most likely to occur if internal affairs investigators are not particularly skilled or carry high caseloads. In Chula Vista, two investigators handle a relatively low number of intemai affairs investigations. Both have extensive experience with complex investigation, having served as homicide investigatom. · CRBs can result in helpful policy recommendations. Disadvantages of CRBs · CRBs can lead to conflict between officers and the oversight board. In Chula Vista, the Police Officers' Association has expressed opposition to the creation of a CRB. The establishment ora CRB would likely polarize the two entities. · It is unclear whether other Chula Vista organizations with a stake in the issue support civilian review. For example, although the Human Relations Commission has discussed issues related to the topic of a civilian review board, the Commission has not made any endorsement as a body regarding a CRB. · There have been no independent evaluations of CRBs; as a result, their effectiveness is unproven. However, it has been demonstrated that CRBs tend to sustain about the same number of cases as intemai investigators do - on average 10% (Landau, 1996). Because the outcomes of internal investigations and external oversight boards are so similar, it is unclear whether the additional layer of bureaucracy of civilian oversight outweighs any benefits a CRB might provide. · Many studies indicate that CRBs are more lenient than police administration in imposing discipline (Kerstetter, 1985). In addition, residents in communities with various forms of civilian review were "no more confident or satisfied with how 2 the civilian review board handled their complaints compared to police internal affairs units (Griswold, 1994)."3 · "In spite of best practices...police oversight systems have not been able to effectively reduce the police conduct they are purportedly established to prevent (Marentes, 1998)4. · CRBs have limited authority - they do not have the power to discipline officers; as a result, they do not impact the conduct of officers the way that police managers do. Further, CRBs tend to focus on the conduct of officers rather than supervisors, who have a great deal of influence over officer conduct. The CRB investigative process can take a relatively long time, leading to less satisfaction with the complaint process. For example, the Boston civilian review board has only been able to process about 10 complaints a year; the New York City CRB averages a backlog of 2,000 cases at any given time; and Washington, DC, eventually disbanded their CRB in 1994 when its backlog reached 900 cases. In San Francisco, where the CRB has 30 full-time staff, and a budget of more than $2 million, most cases take less than a year to complete, but some take longer. In comparison, the average time it takes to completely investigate a complaint in Chula Vista is 2.5 months, although close to half of all complaints are completed between 30 and 60 days of being filed. · CRBs tend to address problems after the fact, whereas internal controls tend to prevent problems from occurring in the first place. · Establishing a CRB requires a review of the legal issues that affect how and under what cimumstances a CRB can be created. [See attached document from Marty Mayer.] · CRBs can be expensive. Costs can exceed $500,000 per year, and even many of the best-funded CRBs are considered to be under budgeted. Cost of CRBs It is generally agreed upon that at least one paid staff person is necessary for a CRB to function, regardless of the type of CRB that is implemented. Type 1 oversight systems, which involve highly trained civilian investigators, tend to be the most expensive. For example, the Minneapolis civilian review board budget is $470,000 year, which funds one executive director, three civilian investigators, and three support staff. All seven board members are also paid a small stipend. In Berkeley, California (pop. 108,000), the total yearly budget of the Police Review Commission (PRC) in 1997 was $277,255. The four full-time staff members of the PRC investigated 42 complaints that yearfi Types 2 and 3, in which civilians review findings or appeals of findings, tend to be the least expensive because they depend largely on volunteer support. However, a volunteer Final Report of the Austin Police Oversight Focus Group (POFG), 1998. Ibid. Citizen Review of Police: Approaches & Implementation, NIJ, 2001. 3 entity would need at least one permanent staff member to function; consequently, the cost of this form of civilian review would start at approximately $100,000. Type 4 oversight systems, which involve an auditor or monitor, tend to be moderately expensive, as at least one highly skilled staff person must be hired. In addition to the staff and operating costs of civilian review boards, CRBs require a significant level of city staff support, particularly if the CRB relies on volunteers to accomplish much of its work. This city staff time effectively adds to the cost of a CRB, while also reducing the amount of time staff can spend working on city projects (e.g. less time would be spent on internal affairs investigations, if the IA sergeant staffed the CRB). Why do Cities Establish CRBs? There are several main reasons why cities typically establish CRBs. The table below summarizes these reasons: · The city has experienced a high · No such incidents pending in Chula profile incident of alleged police Vista; no history of such incidents. misconduct, and/or has a history of such incidents. · There is a lack of trust between the · In two separate and independently community and the police administered surveys, 92% and department. 93% of residents indicated they were satisfied with the performance of the police department (1997, 2000). · There is a perception that residents · 87% of the people who came into are not treated fairly by police contact with the police - including officers, those who were cited or arrested -- said they were treated fairly. · There is an actual or perceived lack · The police department has clear of internal controls -- such as clear policies on the use of force, which policies on use of force -- that is routinely tracked; a policy on less reduce the likelihood of police lethal options and $50,000 of less misconduct, lethal equipment; training in these policies, as well as on diversity and human relations; and, strict recruit screening procedures to weed out applicants with a propensity for violent behavior. Through the 4 screening procedure, the department also can identify those individuals with extremely high integrity and respect for the law. · In some other police departments, · The Chula Vista police department there are actual or pemeived does not dissuade people from difficulties filing complaints. Police making complaints. Complaints are personnel actively or subtly assigned a supervisor to investigate discourage complaints, them. Since the 1990s, we have made available to the public brochures that ensure they understand their right to make a complaint and know how to go about doing so. Based on the above matrix, the primary conditions that tend to precede the establishment of a CRB in other cities do not exist in Chula Vista. The police department has an excellent relationship with the community, as evidenced by the resPonses to the 1997 and 2000 citizen surveys. In addition: · We have established the Community Relations Unit, which will continue to enhance efforts to increase communication between police personnel and members of the community. The Community Relations Unit is currently in the process of identifying key stakeholders in public safety issues affecting Chula Vista, with the aim of bringing these stakeholders together to share their perspectives with members of the department. The Community Relations Unit will also continue to attend numerous public events to maintain strong outreach efforts. · The police department operates a citizens' academy, which enables any member of the community to learn more about the inner workings of the police department. The citizens' academy is an intensive 12-week training session taught by sworn officers that covers a range of topics, including law enforcement ethics, the complaint process, patrol procedures, pursuit driving, defensive tactics/firearms, and criminal investigations. Altogether, citizens participate in more than 30 hours of instruction. We also enjoy the support of a large number of community volunteers, ranging from Senior Volunteer Patrol Program who number nearly 60 people, to the Citizens' Adversity Support Team, which also boasts more than 50 volunteers. · Finally, we are also in the process of trying to install video cameras in every patrol car. Use of these types of cameras preserves a visual and auditory record of police-community contacts. By recording both the actions of police and members of the community during encounters, the cameras promote police accountability and ensure that complaints regarding recorded incidents are genuine. Currently, five patrol cars are equipped with cameras, and another two will have cameras 5 shortly. Unfortunately, the cameras are costly. Equipping the remaining police cars will cost an estimated $215,000. All officers are also issued micro cassette recorders for report writing, but the cassettes enable encounters with the public to be taped. In addition, five video cameras have been installed in the holding cell area of the police department building. Each of the four cells has a camera, as does the fingerprint station. Citizen Complaints in Chula Vista A review of the number of citizen complaints received by the police department over the past five years indicates that Chula Vista has an extremely low complaint rate. Each year, the department received a number of inquiries regarding police actions, policies, or other topics. More often than not, people making these inquiries wanted to know whether law, policy or procedure supported a particular action taken by an officer or a civilian. During the past five years, a total of sixty-seven people who made such inquiries chose to take their questions or concerns through the formal complaints process. · On average, the department received only 13.4 formal complaints per year. By any standard, this is an extremely low number of complaints, particularly considering that each year police personnel have more than 75,000 official contacts (calls for service and traffic/pedestrian stops) with the public, and arrest nearly 5,000 people. To put this number of complaints in a national context, the charts on the next page contrast Chula Vista's complaint rate with those of other municipalities throughout the country and in California that have chosen to post their rates on the Internet. 6 /'7 Canton, OH Springfield, MO Boise, ID Chula Vista 1999 Population 78,000 141,000 168,000 164,000 UCR Crime 906 82 46 43 Index Rate (Per 1,000 Residents) 1999 Citizen 586 42 112 13 Complaints Complaint Rate .74 .30 .67 (Per 1,000 Residents) 1999 Population 1999 UCR Index Crime Rate (Per 1,000 Residents) 1999 Citizen Complaints Complaint Rate (Per 1,000 Residents) Has a CRB? 6 1997 data from website ? Based on 1997~1998 Annual Report 7 As the table on the prior page illustrates, other agencies, such as Fresno, that have low complaint rates approaching Chula Vista's apparently do not see the need for a civilian review board. Many communities with CRBs, such as Boise, ID, which has an ombudsman form of review, still have relatively high complaint rates. Fully 16 of the 67 complaints received over the past five years were sustained. This translates into a 24% rate of sustaining complaints, which is more than twice the average rate of 10% for both CRBs and police departments. As mentioned earlier, the Chula Vista Police Department takes complaints very seriously and is not hesitant to sustain complaints and mete out discipline for violations. · Of all complaints received during the past 5 years, 15 fell into the category of "duty performance." This category typically includes allegations that an officer failed to take a report on an incident, for example. In addition, 38 complaints fell into the category of "personal conduct" of an officer or civilian member of the police department. Personal conduct complaints typically allege an unprofessional or discourteous manner. The remaining 14 complaints fell into the category of "use of force/arrest." Use of force complaints can range from a person believing that they should not have been handcuffed to a person being pushed or shoved, or otherwise subjected to force. · Figures on claims and lawsuits filed against the police department over the past five years reinforce the assertion that the number of complaints is low and their nature is minor. During this time period, the city has not been ordered by any court to make payment for physical injuries resulting from police department actions. Summary · The current relationship between the police department and community is exceptionally positive. · The strong outreach efforts made by the police department ensure two-way communication. · The department has strong internal controls, such as clear policies., procedures, training, and recruit screening procedures, in place. · Few complaints are filed against the Chula Vista Police Department each year. · A CRB might confer minimal benefits (that could be obtained in other ways), but would have many disadvantages. · The costs entailed in establishing a functioning civilian review board would be significant. Based on the data presented in this report, there is no need for a civilian review board in Chula Vista. However, a community perception has been raised that may call for additional review of the issue. Staff recommends that the City Manager appoint a committee -- the Ad Hoc Committee on the Civilian Review Component of the 8 Community Enhancement Plan -- to further study the issue of civilian review. Members of the committee would be tasked with familiarizing themselves with the nature and intent of the request for a civilian review board; and, with police department policies and procedures, by participating in a citizens' academy and ride- alongs. Committee members would also review the procedures currently used to investigate allegations of police misconduct; and, police academy and in-service training on ethics and police conduct. Further, they would review citizen complaint policies, procedures and educational material. The committee would submit an initial report on the status of its work by October 1,2001. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council accept this report on civilian review boards. 9 CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS: AN OVERVIEW By: Martin J. Mayer and J. Scoff Tiedemann A civilian review board is typically a panel of appointed citizens which is formed to review citizen complaints against police officers. It is also a means of community participation in setting and reviewing police department policies, practices, and procedures. The following is intended as an overview of some of the issues surrounding the creation and functioning of a civilian review board. I. BACKGROUND Civilian review boards were first implemented in large cities like Washington D.C., Philadelphia, Minneapolis, Rochester, and New York in'the late-1950's and early 1960's in an effort to improve relations between police and the communities which they served. Police unions were widely opposed to the establishment of civilian review boards and were successful in eliminating civilian oversight in New York and Philadelphia in the mid-1960's. Civilian review boards however experienced renewed popularity in the 1970's in cities like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, and Milwaukee. By 1994 there were more than 66 civilian review boards in cities across the nation. According to a recent law review article, the majority of large cities now have civilian review boards in place and a growing number of small cities are adopting the procedure as well. There are, according to academics who have studied civilian review boards in cities across the nation, four classes of civilian review boards.~ Generally, what distinguishes the different classes of civilian review boards is the degree of independence the board has from the police department. It should be noted however that almost all civilian review boards have one feature in common: they only have authority to make recommendations. "Class one" boards are most prevalent in large cities. A "class one" board has the greatest amount of independence. ^ "class one" board is comprised largely of non-peace officers and handles the complaint process from start to finish, including investigating complaints. ~ A civilian review board need not fit neatly into any of the following four classes; the description of such :lasses is merely intended to provide an overview of the types of civilian review boards in place in cities both in and out 3f California. 227 A good example of a "class one" board is the Office of Civilian Complaints (O.C.C.) in San Francisco. The O.C.C. has the authority not only to investigate police conduct that violates any law or department policy but also to hold hearings to investigate department policies and practices. Such hearings may result in a recommendation by the O.C.C. to change, revoke, or write new department policies. In the 1990's, the O.C.C. has had a hand in developing department policies on high-speed pursuits and crowd control. A "class two" board by comparison is less independent. A "class two" board is not necessarily composed entirely of non-peace officers. A "class two" board does not investigate complaints itself, but rather reviews internal investigations prepared by peace officers and makes recommendations to a law enforcement executive based on those reports. A "class three" board may consist of as few as two civilian members. In the case of a "class three" board, the police department investigates and reviews citizen complaints and internal affairs recommends some action to the chief law enforcement executive. Appeals may be made to the board which may in turn recommend a different outcome to the chief. Finally, a "class four" board has the least amount of independence. A "class four" board merely serves to review the police department's internal complaint review procedures and to recommend changes in those procedures where necessary. Examples of "class four" boards may be found in San Jose and Seattle. As might be expected, there is both support for and criticism of the establishment of civilian review boards. Proponents have suggested that civilian review boards are the most effective means of combating racism and the use of excessive force in law enforcement. There is a perception that internal mechanisms fail to adequately identify and discipline officers guilty of misconduct. Critics on the other hand complain that civilian review boards, whether due to inadequate funding or a limited grant of overview authority, lack sufficient independence to conduct investigations. Critics also complain that civilian review boards become bogged down in individual grievances and petty politics and spend too little time on department policies. They do not, in other words, do the job they are intended to do. Critics argue in addition that civilian review boards lack credibility with police. Indeed, in its review of the Los Angeles Police Department, the Christopher Commission indicated that establishment of a civilian review board would greatly increase the risk of an "us against them" attitude on the part of police officers. I1. IS A CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD IS AN OPTION IN YOUR CITY? In deciding whether to establish a civilian review board in your city, a logical first step is determining whether a civilian review board may lawfully be established. The answer to that question depends upon how your city government is organized. 228 A: GENERAL LAW CITIES General law cities lack the legal authority to establish a civilian review board. According to the California Supreme Court, "ia] general law city has only those powers expressly conferred upon it by the Legislature, together with such powers as are 'necessarily incident to those expressly granted or essential to the declared object and purposes of the municipal corporation.' The powers of such city are strictly construed, so that any 'fair, reasonable doubt concerning the exercise of a power is resolved against the corporation.'" Irwin v. City of Manhattan Beach, 65 Cal.2d 13, 20-21 (1966), citing, Hurst v. City of Burlingame, 207 Cal. 134, 138. No statute specifically authorizes a general law city to establish a civilian review board. However, Article 11, section 7 of the California Constitution does authorize a city to make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations that do not conflict with the general laws. Along similar lines, Government Code § 37100 states that the city council may pass ordinances "not in conflict with the Constitution and laws of the State or the United States." Thus, the critical issue is whether establishment of a civilian review board by a general law city conflicts with the general laws. The police department in a general law city is under the control of the chief of police. Government Code § 38630.2 It logically follows that the chief of police is authorized to supervise the conduct of members of the police department and that the chief's supervisory powers include the investigation of citizen complaints against members of the department. For example, Berkeley Police Ass'n v. City of Berkeley, 76 CaI.App.3d 931 (1977), involved the interpretation of a charter provision which gave a city manager control over all of the departments in the city. The California Court of Appeal interpreted that charter provision to give to the city manager the authority to investigate citizen complaints against police officers. While that case involved a charter provision, it seems most probable that a court would interpret Government Code § 38630 the same way: if the chief of police is given "control" of the police department, then the chief of police has authority to investigate citizen complaints against police officers.3 2 In contrast, the organization, maintenance, and operation of a police and fire department by a ;hartered city is a municipal affair and, as such, is not subject to the control of the legislature. Thus, .~overnment Code § 38630 does not apply to a charter city. Brown v. City of Berkeley, 57 CaI.App.3d 223, .)36 (1976). 3 Specifically, the Court of Appeal stated: "Article VII, section 28~ of the Berkeley City Charter confers he power on the city manager 'To exemise control over all departments, divisions and bureaus of the City .~overnment and over all the.., employees thereof.' [Citation omitted]. This clearly includes the power to nvestiRate complaints aqainst police officers, as well as to discipline, or remove them." [Emphasis added]. 229 Having established that Government Code § 38630 gives the chief of police control of the police department, one might ask whether a city may nonetheless transfer at least some of the chief's duties to another officer or body, like a civilian review board. Government Code § 34004 states: Where any duty is imposed upon a municipal officer by any law of this State or any rule or regulation adopted under the authority of any such law the governing body of a city may, by ordinance, impose such duty or a portion thereof upon such other officer of such city as is charged under charter of that city, or by applicable general law with the performance of duties of the same character in that city. A copy of any such ordinance as adopted shall be filed with the state officer or agency which has charge of the matter to which such duty pertains. Under Government Code § 34004, a general law city may transfer certain duties of one officer to another officer provided he or she is charged by the general law with the performance of similar duties. However, no other officer in a general law city has duties similar to the chief of police with respect to supervision of police operations and the investigation of citizen complaints. Those duties are unique to the chief of police. Moreover, Government Code § 34004 does not authorize the creation of new officers (e.g. a civilian review board); it merely authorizes the transfer of certain duties to existing officers. Therefore, Government Code § 34004 does not appear to authorize the creation of a civilian review board in a general law city. Thus, it is questionable whether a general law city may legitimately establish a civilian review board with authority to investigate citizen complaints. To do so would appear be contrary to the general law, specifically, Government Code § 38630 and thus outside the authority of the city under Article 11, section 7 of the California Constitution and Government Code § 37100.4 B: CHARTER CITIES The authority of charter cities to create civilian review boards is well established. Several cases have upheld the authority of charter counties and cities to establish civilian review boards, but those cases involve charter cities and charter counties. That is due to the fact that charter cities and counties have much broader authority to establish the powers and duties of local government officials than do general law cities. See, e.g., Dibb v. County of San Diego, 8 Cal.4th 1200, 1215 (1994) ("'a county charter may provide for powers and duties of county officers 4 For a contrary view, see 71 Ops.caLAttY.Gen. 1 (1988) in which the California Attorney general stated: '~he ;onstitutional provisions and statutes cited above [including Government Code § 34004 would appear to provide ample authority for the electorate or legislative body of a California city [including general law cities] to provide in the city :hatter or by city ordinance that the city manager, an assistant city manager or a citizens' review board has authority o investigate citizens' complaints against police officers or that they have authority to advise, impose or review fiscipline imposed on police officers for misconduct alleged in such complaints." It should be noted however that the Oregoing statement is the equivalent of dicta in a court opinion. It was not in answer to the question posed to the ~,ttorney General and the analysis was cursory. 23O although such powers and duties, as fixed by the charter, may differ from and be in conflict with the powers and duties of such officers as provided by the general laws of the state'"). To start, Article 11, section 5(b) of the California Constitution states in pertinent part: "[i]t shall be competent in all city charters to provide, in addition to those provisions allowable by this Constitution, and by the laws of the State for.., the constitution, regulation and government of the city police force." Thus, in the case of a charter city, in direct contrast to a general law city, the city charter determines who has control of the police department, whether exclusive or limited. In Brown v. Berkeley, 57 Cal.App.3d 223 (1976), a taxpayer filed a lawsuit challenging the validity of an initiative ordinance adopted by the voters of the city to establish, and grant certain designated powers to, a police review commission. The plaintiff claimed that the ordinance conflicted with the city charter. The city charter, in accordance with California Constitution, article 11, section 5, gave the city council the power to "organize and maintain" the police department. Thus, the Court of Appeal held that the establishment of a police review commission was proper. 'q'he words 'organize and maintain' connote the power of the council to have an ongoing involvement in the formation of the policies, practices, and procedures of the police department. The fundamental nature of the ordinance [establishing the police review commission] is directly aimed at inquiring into and investigating the policies, practices and procedures of the police department. Under the charter sections, it is clearly within the council's power to inquire into said police department practices, procedures and policies and make recommendations concerning same." Id. at 233. The Court of Appeal did determine that the ordinance was in conflict with the city charter to the limited extent it empowered the commission to recommend specific action and/or disciplinary action as to individual officers. To do so, the Court of Appeal determined, would usurp the powers and functions of the city manager under the charter. Implicit in the Court of Appeal's holding in Brown v. Berkeley, supra, was a determination that a charter city possessed authority to establish a civilian review board. Likewise, in Dibb v. County of San Diego, 8 Cal.4th 1200, a taxpayer filed a lawsuit challenging an initiative ordinance establishing a civilian review board. The taxpayer claimed that there was no authority for establishment of such a board. The California Supreme Court upheld the ordinance. According to the Supreme Court, Government Code 31000.1 [applicable to counties, but not cities] authorized the establishment of a civilian review board. That section provides: "[t]he board of supervisors may appoint commissions or committees of citizens to study problems of general or special interest to the board and to make reports and recommendations to the board. The members of such commissions need not be specially trained or experienced with respect to the matters to be studied..." The Supreme Court also held that the civilian review board was authorized by Government Code § 25303, requiring a county board of supervisors to supervise the conduct of all county officers. "We conclude that under section 25303, the board of 231 Having established that Government Code § 38630 gives the chief of police control of the police department, one might ask whether a city may nonetheless transfer at least some of the chief's duties to another officer or body, like a civilian review board. Government Code § 34004 states: Where any duty is imposed upon a municipal officer by any law of this State or any rule or regulation adopted under the authority of any such law the governing body of a city may, by ordinance, impose such duty or a portion thereof upon such other officer of such city as is charged under charter of that city, or by applicable general law with the performance of duties of the same character in that city. A copy of any such ordinance as adopted shall be filed with the state officer or agency which has charge of the matter to which such duty pertains. Under Government Code § 34004, a general law city may transfer certain duties of one officer to another officer provided he or she is charged by the general law with the performance of similar duties. However, no other officer in a general law city has duties similar to the chief of police with respect to supervision of police operations and the investigation of citizen complaints. Those duties are unique to the chief of police. Moreover, Government Code § 34004 does not authorize the creation of new officers (e.g. a civilian review board); it merely authorizes the transfer of certain duties to existing officers. Therefore, Government Code § 34004 does not appear to authorize the creation of a civilian review board in a general law city. Thus, it is questionable whether a general law city may legitimately establish a civilian review board with authority to investigate citizen complaints. To do so would appear be contrary to the general law, specifically, Government Code § 38630 and thus outside the authority of the city under Article 11, section 7 of the California Constitution and Government Code § 37100.4 B: CHARTER CITIES The authority of charter cities to create civilian review boards is well established. Several cases have upheld the authority of charter counties and cities to establish civilian review boards, but those cases involve charter cities and charter counties. That is due to the fact that charter cities and counties have much broader authority to establish the powers and duties of local government officials than do general law cities. See, e.g., Dibb v. County of San Diego, 8 Cal.4th 1200, 1215 (1994) ("'a county charter may provide for powers and duties of county officers 4 For a contrary view, see 71 Ops. CaI.Atty. Gen. 1 (1988) in which the California Attomey general stated: "the ;onstitutional provisions and statutes cited above [including Government Code § 34004 would appear to provide ample authority for the electorate or legislative body of a Califomia city [including general law cities] to provide in the city :hatter or by city ordinance that the city manager, an assistant city manager or a citizens' review board has authority :o investigate citizens' complaints against police officers or that they have authority to advise, impose or review :liscipline imposed on police officers for misconduct alleged in such complaints." It should be noted however that the Ioregoing statement is the equivalent of dicta in a court opinion. It was not in answer to the question posed to the Attorney General and the analysis was cursory. 230 supervisors has a statutory duty to supervise the conduct of all county officers. [Citation omitted]. Moreover, section 31000.1 permits the board of supervisors to establish a commission of citizens to study and report on matters within the board's 'general or special interest.' It follows that the creation and existence of the CLERB is authorized by statute." Id. at 1210. In light of Dibb, if the authority of a charier city to establish a civilian review board were ever challenged, it appears that a court would determine that a charter city has such authority under the California Constitution, article 11, section 5. Indeed, in Dibb, the Supreme Court stated that the "home rule" afforded to a charter city is, "substantially more expansive [than that afforded to a county]." Dibb, supra, 8 Cal.4t~ at 1207. That does not mean however that any charter city may establish a civilian review board. A charter city may only establish a civilian review board if to do so is not contrary to the city's charter. As was the case in Brown v. City of Berkeley, supra, in which portions of the ordinance establishing a civilian review board conflicted with the city charter, a civilian review board ordinance which conflicts with the city charter will be overturned. Thus, if a city charter gives exclusive control of the police department to the chief of police, then a court would very likely overturn an ordinance establishing a civilian review board. After all, the charter of a municipality is its constitution. See, Coming Up, Inc. V. City and County of San Francisco, 830 F.Suppo 1302 (N.D. Cal. 1993). III. ISSUES THAT MAY ARISE ONCE A CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD IS ESTABLISHED A: COLLECTIVE BARGAINING An issue that may be raised before or shortly after the establishment of a civilian review board is the obligation of the city to meet and confer with the police officers association on the subject.5 The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, Government Code § 3500, et seq., obligates public employers to meet and confer in good faith with employee associations concerning wages and hours, and other terms and conditions of employment. Government Code § 3505. A police officers association may argue that establishment of a civilian review board is a term and condition of employment concerning which the city must meet and confer in good faith. However, the city's duty to meet and confer in good faith is limited to matters within the "scope of representation," defined by Government Code § 3504 as: s The mere fact that the decision whether to establish a civilian review board will be decided by the voters is not necessarily determinative of the city's obligation to meet and confer under the Meyers-Milias-Bmwn Ac[ See, ~eople ex rel. Seal Beach Police Officers Association v. City of Seal Beach, 36 Cal.3d 591 (1984) (if the topic of a ;harter amendment is a subject of collective bargaining, the city must meet and confer in good faith with the association )efore the amendment is submitted to voters). 232 all matters relating to employment conditions and employer-employee relations, including, but not limited to, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, except, however, that the scope of representation shall not include consideration of the mer'~s, necessity, or organization of any service or activity provided by law or executive order. See, e.g., International Assn. of Fire Fighters Union v. City of Pleasanton, 56 CaI.App.3d 959,966 (1976). Penal Code § 832.5(a) provides: "[e]ach department or agency in this state that employs peace officers shall establish a procedure to investigate citizens' complaints against the personnel of these departments or agencies, and shall make a written description of the procedure available to the public." Penal Code § 832.5 leaves it to the discretion of the city to determine the form the required procedure will take, including who will receive and who will investigate complaints. The Attorney General has stated in a written opinion furthermore that while many citizen complaints are often handled internally by police, "nothing in section 832.5 restricts the required procedure to the personnel of the police department. We see no reason why the required procedure could not involve the city manager, an assistant city manager or a citizens' review board." Establishment of a civilian review board involves the organization or reorganization of government; it is nothing less than the creation of a government body. Thus, establishment of a civilian review board should not be considered a subject concerning the which the city has an obligation to meet and confer in good faith with the police officers association. In Berkeley Police Association v. City of Berkeley, 78 CaI.App.3d 931 (1977), for example, the police officers association filed a lawsuit to enjoin implementation of a procedure announced by the chief of police whereby a member of the city's civilian review board would attend department hearings on citizen complaints and a department representative would attend board meetings to present the department's position and to provide information from department investigations. The association claimed that the department had established new policies regarding the investigation of citizen complaints against police officers without first having met or conferred with the association. The Court of Appeal held that the department did not have a duty under the Meyers-Milias Brown Act to meet and confer with the police officers association concerning the pol!cies announced by the chief because the policies did not fall within the scope of representation. According to the Court of Appeal, the policies announced by the chief concerned a matter of police-community relations and thus constituted "management level decisions which are not properly within the scope of union representation and collective bargaining." Id. at 937. 'q'o require public officials to meet and confer with their employees regarding fundamental policy decisions such as those here presented, would place an intolerable burden upon fair and efficient administration of state and local government." Id. 233 The establishment of a civilian review board involves a change in the structure of city government, not a change in the terms and conditions of employment. Thus, the city is not obligated to meet and confer with the police officers' association prior to implementing a civilian review board. B: SUBPOENA POWERS OF THE BOARD A civilian review board lacks real independence to conduct investigations and hearings if it lacks the authority to issue subpoenas compelling the attendance of witnesses and/or the production of documents. Thus, an issue may arise concerning the subpoena powers of a civilian review board. In Dibb v. County of San Diego, supra, 8 Cal.4th 1200 (1994), the California Supreme Court add ressed the subpoena power of a civilian review board in a charter county. The Supreme Court held that a civilian review board in a charter county may be granted the power to issue subpoenas. Citing to Article 11, section 4(e) of the California Constitution, the Supreme Court indicated that a county charter shall provide for the powers and duties of governing bodies and county officers. Thus, the Supreme Court held: "to the extent the power to issue subpoenas is properly grounded on the county's authority to provide for the "powers and duties" of its local officers and the operation of its local government, it is within the competence of the charter." Id. at 1009. Article 11, section 5 of the California Constitution pertaining to charter cities states: "[i]t shall be competent in any city charter to provide that the city governed thereunder may make and enforce all ordinances and regulations in respect to municipal affairs..." According to the Supreme Court in Dibb, the authority granted to charter cities is greater than the authority granted to charter counties under Article 11, section 4(e) of California Constitution. Logic dictates that if a charter county may grant subpoena powers to a civilian review board, then a charter city, which has greater authority under the California Constitution, may certainly give a civilian review board subpoena powers. The Supreme Court did indicate in Dibb, however, that if a person or entity disobeyed a subpoena issued by the board, the board was powerless to punish contempt. According to the Supreme Court, only a court may adjudicate and punish contempt. A civilian review board must proceed in court to enforce a subpoena under the court's contempt power. Id. at 1217~ 1218. In sum, a civilian review board may be authorized to issue subpoenas but is powerless to enforce it subpoenas and instead must seek the assistance of the court in enforcing its subpoenas. 234 C: REVIEW OF PEACE OFFICER PERSONNEL RECORDS Review of citizen complaints necessarily entails review of peace officer personnel records.6 Under Penal Code § 832.7 however peace officer personnel records are confidential and may only be disclosed pursuant to Evidence Code § 1043, et seq. The issue may arise therefore whether a civilian review board must comply with the procedures set forth at Evidence Code § 1043, et seq. in order to be able to review peace officer personnel records, including citizen complaints made pursuant to Penal Code § 832.5. This issue was addressed by the Attorney General in a written opinion in 1988. The question posed to the Attorney General was: Does a city manager, an assistant city manager, or citizens' review board have a right to inspect citizens' complaints against city police officers on file in the internal affairs division of the police department? In that opinion, the Attorney General interpreted Penal Code § 832.7 to include two exceptions to the required showing of good cause and materiality upon noticed motion that are not expressly stated in the statute: 1 ) giving access to citizen complaints to that individual or body, including a civilian review board, designated by a city to investigate citizen complaints and 2) giving access to that individual or body designated by the city to advise, impose or review discipline upon a police officer for misconduct revealed by the investigation of a citizen complaint. The Attorney General stated: Where a statute confers powers or duties in general terms, all powers and duties incidental and necessary to make such legislation effective are included by implication. [Citation omitted]. The requirement in section 832.5 that citizens' complaints be investigated necessarily requires that those designated to do the investigating will have access to the complaints. On this basis we interpret section 832.7 to include a third exception to the requirement of confidentiality by necessary implication giving access to the citizens' complaints to those designated in the departmental procedure established pursuant to section 832.5 to investigate such complaints. The Attorney General further stated with respect to the ability to review citizens' complaints in making decisions concerning discipline: The Legislature contemplated that when police misconduct was discovered in such investigations, appropriate disciplinary action would be taken against the errant officer. The purpose of the statute 6 Citizen complaints are, as a matter of law, part of a peace officer's personnel records. Penal Code § ~32.5(c). 235 is to "investigate and remedy wrongdoing". (Citation omitted). To accomplish the purpose of remedying wrongdoing those having the authority to discipline police officers for their misconduct must have access to the citizens' complaints and the information produced by their investigation, all of which is made confidential by section 832.7. Not only is this information essential to those who actually impose have the duty or authority to advise or review such discipline. We therefore interpret section 832.7 to include a fourth exception to the requirement of confidentiality by necessary implication giving access to the citizens' complaints to those who have the duty or authority to advise, impose or review discipline upon a police officer for misconduct revealed by the investigation of the citizens' complaint. Moreover, a motion under Evidence Code § 1043 is not required where a government agency and its attorney conduct a limited review of peace officer personnel files within the custody and control of the agency for some relevant purpose. In Michael v. Gates, 38 Cal.App.4th 737 (1995), the Court of Appeal held that there is no disclosure for purposes of Evidence Code § 1043 in such cases. In Michael, a retired officer sued his former employer for having disclosed his personnel files to a deputy city attorney without making an Evidence Code § 1043 discovery motion. The retired officer was an expert witness in a civil suit against the city and the deputy city attorney reviewed the former employee's file to determine whether there were any materials therein that he could use to impeach the former officer. Thus, it would appear that a civilian review board is exempt from the requirements of Evidence Code § 1043 provided it is empowered to investigate citizen complaints and/or impose or make recommendations concerning appropriate discipline. Nonetheless, it is importantto note that a civilian review board with the authority to review citizen complaints is required by Penal Code § 832.7 to maintain the confidentiality of such complaints and is precluded from disclosing the contents thereof to members of the public. D: LEGAL REPRESENTATION OF THE BOARD A civilian review board may at some point require legal advice. The members of a civilian review board may have little or no experience in police matters and may have even less experience in the laws related to police. Very likely, the city attorney will be called upon to advise the board on legal matters. Under such circumstances there exists the possibility for a conflict of interest. Consider the situation in which a civilian review board is conducting a disciplinary hearing and a member of the city attorney's office is advising the board at the same time that another member of the city attorney's office is representing 'the department in the hearing. A civilian review board is expected to be an independent and impartial body. The independence and impartiality of the board may be challenged however if members of the same 236 office are both advising the board and representing the department in a matter. One of the primary purposes for establishing a civilian review board is to lend legitimacy to, and to increase public confidence in, investigations into police misconduct. If the same attorneys are advising the board and the department there may be a perception that the board lacks independence from the department. Thus, a great deal of consideration must be given to who will advise the board and who will represent the department in matters before the board to avoid the perception of a conflict of interest. E: PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS BILL OF RIGHTS Depending upon the role a civilian review board is to fill, some board actions may trigger the Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights ACt, codified at Government Code § 3300, et seq. "The act is concerned primarily with affording individual police officers certain procedural rights during the course of proceedings which might lead to the imposition of penalties against them." [Citations omitted]. White v. County of Sacramento, 31 Cal.3d 676, 681 (1982). An issue may be raised whether the Procedural Bill of Rights is applicable only to internal investigations or whether it is applicable to investigations by external bodies like a civilian review board. Government Code § 3303, the heart of the Procedural Bill of Rights ACt, indicates that the protections afforded therein are triggered upon "interrogation by his or her commanding officer, or any other member of the employing public safety department." No case has addressed the issue whether a civilian review board must afford an officer the protections established by the Procedural Bill of Rights ACt. However, it seems likely that a court would interpret the Procedural Bill of Rights Act to apply to investigations by a civilian review board. In City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (Labio), 57 CaI.App.4th, a city appealed an order of the trial court suppressing statements made by an officer to a lieutenant within the department. The statements were suppressed by the trial court because the officer had been interrogated without being afforded the protections set forth in Government Code § 3303. One argument made by the city for the admissibility of the statements was that the officer had not been interrogated by a member of the internal affairs division and that the Act was only intended to apply to interrogations by members of an internal affairs division. The Court of Appeal rejected that contention. The Court of Appeal held that the contention was contrary to the language of the code, but "[m]ore fundamentally, the City's position is contrary to the legislative purpose of the Act to protect police officers from abuse or arbitrary treatment. [Citations omitted]. If an officer under investigation for a violation of law or department rules could be interrogated by his commanding officer outside the procedural protections of the Act, the protections afforded to police officers in the Act would be eviscerated." [Emphasis added]. What is important about this case is that the Court of Appeal interpreted the Act in light of the intent of the legislature to 237 establish greater protections for peace officers and did not interpret the Act as restrictive in nature. It would appear that the same logic applied by the Court of Appeal in Labio requires that a civilian review board afford police officers the protections established by the Procedural Bill of Rights. If members of the same employing agency, who are not members of the police department, are permitted to interrogate a police officer without affording the officer the protections of Government Code § 3303, the protections afforded to police officers in the Act would likewise be eviscerated. If that were the case, public entities could easily side-step the requirements of the Act. It seems much more likely that a court would interpret the Act to require any member of the public entity that employs an officer, whether a member of the police department or a civilian review board, to afford the officer the procedural safeguards set forth in the Act, including those set forth at Government Code § 3303. IV. CONCLUSION A civilian review board is a means of external review of citizen complaints against police officers. It is also a means of community participation in setting and reviewing police department policies, practices, and procedures. Once a civilian review board is established (provided that one may lawfully be established), a number of issues may arise including: 1) whether it is a subject of collective bargaining, 2) whether the board may issue subpoenas, 3) whether the board may have access to peace officer personnel files without complying with Evidence Code § 1043, 4) who will provide legal advice to the board, and 5) whether a civilian review board is bound bythe Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights Act. JONES & MAYER, located in Fullerton, limits its practice to representing cities, counties and the State as legal advisor to their police and shedff's departments. Mr. Mayer was, for 10 years, the State Chairman of CPOA's Police Legal Advisors Committee. He currently serves as counsel to the California Police Chiefs Association, the California State Shedf~s Association and the Califomia Peace Officers' Association. Mr. J. Scott Tiedemann joined Mayer & Coble in 1997 as a litigator. He has handled previously, and currently, administrative matters as well as court actions in both state and federal courts.] JST:MJMImar A:~/IJM-MDF Book 2001.wpd 238 I IVt=HIL;L,'= ~51 UP / I-.I. UPEDESTRIAN CONTACT / F.I. I~VEHICLE STOP / F.I. [-IPEDESTRIAN CONTACT / F.I. DATE / / TIME DATE / / TIME AGE -- I-IMALE [-IFEMALE AGE __ [-IMALE I-]FEMALE RACE RACE I-~WHITE r-IHtSPANIC C'IAFRICAN-AMERICAN [-IWHITE ~'-IHISPANIC I--IAFRICAN-AMERICAN i--IASIAN / PACIFIC ISLANDER / AMERICAN INDIAN i--IASlAN / PACIFIC ISLANDER / AMERICAN INDIAN RACE KNOWN PRIOR TO CONTACT? I--lYES I'-~NO RACE KNOWN PRIOR TO, CONTACT? [-iYES I--}NO RESIDENCY RESIDENCY r~U.S.: ZIP r-IMEXICO I-IOTHER I-IU.S.: ZIP I-IMEXICO I'-IOTHER VEHICLE I VEHICLE YR PLATES: I-ICA ~--IMEXICO r-~OTHER YR PLATES: I-ICA I-'IMEXICO I--~OTHER BEAT BEAT [-Ill r-il2 i-t13 i'-H4 i--ill I--I12 I-'113 I--I14 r-121 r-122 1-123 [-124 [-121 i-122 1-123 1-124 1-131 1-132 I-lOUT OF CITY r-131 1-132 I-lOUT OF CITY PRIMARY REASON FOR CONTACT PRIMARY REASON FOR CONTACT i--~MOVING VIOLATION r-IMUNI / H&S CODE I-]MOVING VIOLATION [-]MUNI / H&S CODE i'~EQUIPMENT VIOLATION r-IRADIO CALL r-]EQUIPMENT VIOLATION I'-IP, ADIO CALL I--IPEDESTRIAN VIOLAT~ON ~-'~CITIZEN CONTACT r-IPEDESTRIAN VIOLATION ~]CITIZEN CONTACT I-]BOL / BULLETIN I-~CONSENSUAL r-IBOL / BULLETIN I~CONSENSUAL I-]OTHER i--IOTHER i'-IVEHICLE STOP / F.I. ~'-~PEDESTRIAN CONTACT / F.I. I--}VEHICLE STOP / F.I. ['-IPEDESTRIAN CONTACT / F.L DATE __/__/__ TIME DATE / / TIME AGE I-'IMALE [-'IFEMALE AGE __ I'-~ MALE I-3FEMALE RACE RACE I--IWHITE r-]HISPANIC I--IAFRICAN-AMERICAN ~-IWHITE r-]HISPANIC F-IAFRICAN-AMERICAN ~]ASIAN / PACIFIC ISLANDER / AMERICAN iNDIAN i--IASIAN / PACIFIC ISLANDER /AMERtCAN INDIAN RACE KNOWN PRIOR TO CONTACT? I~YES r-]NO RACE KNOWN PRIOR TO CONTACT? i--iYES [-INO RESIDENCY RESIDENCY i~U,S,: ZIP r-IMEXICO I-]OTHER I--IU.S.: ZIP [-IMEXICO I--IOTHER VEHICLE VEHICLE YR PLATES: i--ICA ~-IMEXICO I--IOTHER YR PLATES: r-ICA I--IMEXICO r-iOTHER BEAT BEAT I"]11 r-112 [-113 1-114 I-Ill c112 1-113 1-114 i-121 ~122 1-123 [-]24 [-121 i-122 F-123 i-i24 [-131 1-132 r-lOUT OF CITY 1-131 1--132 i--lOUT OF CITY PRIMARY REASON FOR CONTACT PRIMARY REASON FOR CONTACT I'qMOVING VIOLATION r'qMUNI / H&S CODE I-)MOVING VIOLATION F"IMUNI / H&S CODE i'"~EQUIPMENT VIOLATION I-3RADIO CALL I'"IEQUIPMENT VIOLATION [-IRADIO CALL I--IPEDESTRIAN VIOLATION I-'IClTIZEN CONTACT I'-IPEDESTRIAN VIOLATION i--~CITiZEN CONTACT I-IBOL / BULLETIN f-ICONSENSUAL i--IBOL / BULLETIN i--lCONSENSUAL i'-~OTHER i--IOTHER /7 ACTION TAKEN (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ACTION TAKEN (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): I-IVERBAL WARNING I-IF.I. I--IVERBAL WARNING I-IF,I. I--IWRITrEN WARNING I-)ARREST I--IWRITFEN WARNING [-IARREST i--tClTATION I--IOTHER i--ICITATION i--IOTHER SEARCH? I-]NO I-lYES [-]VEHICLE SEARCH? F-INO I--lYES [-IVEHICLE i--IPED, i--IDRIVER [-IPED. DDRIVER i--IPAT-DOWN I--IPASSENGER E]PAT-DOWN I--IPASSENGER BASIS FORSEARCH (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): BASIS FORSEARCH (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): I-ICONSENT I--ICONTRABAND VISIBLE I-ICONSENT DCONTRABAND VISIBLE i--14TM WAIVER r-IODOR OF CONTRABAND [-]4TM WAIVER I-]ODOR OF CONTRABAND I-IINVENTORY i--IINClDENT TO ARREST r-IINVENTORY DtNCIDENT TO ARREST ~-ICANINE ALERT I--~OTHER E~]CANINE ALERT [-IOTHER OBTAINED CONSENT SEARCH FORM? I--lYES I--]NO OBTAINED CONSENT SEARCH FORM? i--lYES I--INO CONTRABAND FOUND? I--lYES r-lNO CONTRABAND FOUND? i--lYES f-INO PROPERTY SEIZED? I-lYES I-1NO PROPERTY SEIZED? I--lYES r-INO REPORTING OFFICER REPORTING OFFICER i--IWHITE I'-IMALE i--IWHITE F-IMALE [-IHISPANIC I--IFEMALE i--IHISPANIC [-1 FEMALE [-IAFRICAN-AMERICAN ~-IAFRICAN-AMERICAN r-]ASiAN/PACIFIC ISLANDEPJAMERICAN INDIAN [-IASIAN/PAClFIC ISLaNDER/AMERICAN INDIAN ACTION TAKEN (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ACTION TAKEN (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): DVERBAL WARNING I--]F.I. I--IVERBAL WARNING I-1WRITTEN WARNING i--IARREST I--IWRITTEN WARNING f-IARREST E]CITATION I-1OTHER r-ICITATION r-]OTHER SEARCH? I--]NO [-]YES I--IVEHICLE SEARCH? I-~NO r-lYES I--IVEHICLE I--IPED. r-]DRIVER i--IPED, i--IDRIVER I--IPAT-DOWN i--IPASSENGER I-IPAT-DOWN I--IPASSENGER BASIS FOR SEARCH (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): BASIS FOR SEARCH (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): DCONSENT r-ICONTRABAND VISIBLE E]CONSENT [-1CONTRABAND VISIBLE E~]4TM WAIVER i--IODOR OF CONTRABAND i--~4TM WAIVER r-IODOR OF CONTRABAND 1-11NVENTORY i--IINCIDENT TO ARREST I--IINVENTORY {--IINCIOENT TO ARREST E]CANINE ALERT I--IOTHER [-~CANINE ALERT I-'IOTHER OBTAINED CONSENT SEARCH FORM? I-lYES I--INO OBTAINED CONSENT SEARCH FORM? I--lYES I--INO CONTRABAND FOUND? I-lYES [-INO CONTRABAND FOUND? r-lYES I--INO PROPERTY SEIZED? I--lYES r-lNO PROPERTY SEIZED? i--lYES E]NO REPORTING OFFICER REPORTING OFFICER i--IWHITE r-IMALE I--tWHITE [--IMALE r-IHISPANIC I--~FEMALE I--IHISPANIC I--IFEMALE i~iAFRICAN-AMERICAN I--IAFRICAN-AMERICAN I--IASlAN/PACIF1C ISLANDERJAMERICAN INDIAN r~ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER/AMERICAN INDIAN Exhibit b Traffic and Pedestrian Stop Statistics Background The issue of racial profiling in the case of traffic stops has received national attention since it became known in the mid-1990s that several state police agencies regularly stopped drivers based solely on their race. These traffic stop efforts stemmed from Operation Pipeline, a Drug Enforcement Agency initiative begun in 1984. Operation Pipeline targeted drug violators and, at least indirectly, encouraged traffic stops of minorities who fit the "profile" of drug couriers. In New Jersey, for example, the state police had been specifically targeting Columbian and African-American men, by disproportionately stopping them and searching their cars for drugs. As a result of racial profiling conducted by the New Jersey State Police, that agency has recently entered into a consent decree with the U.S. Department of Justice that effectively ends the practice of profiling. Although there have been no allegations that racial profiling for traffic stops occurs in Chula Vista, the police department has chosen to collect data on stops because the issue is one of importance for any community. The decision to collect data on stops is also in line with previous proactive efforts by the department to conduct self-assessments and learn more about issues facing the community. In 1998, the police department undertook an extensive study of both residential burglary and graffiti - two issues of great concern to Chula Vista residents, as evidenced by the 1997 Citizen Survey. Both initiatives involved collecting a significant amount of data and analyzing this information, which enabled the police department to develop effective responses to these problems. Data Collection Efforts by the Chula Vista Police Department The Chula Vista Police Department began collecting data on both vehicle and pedestrian stops on May 1, 2001. Data is collected through the use of 4"-by-5" yellow cards [see attachment] that include more than 20 questions about the stops. The yellow contact card is modeled after the card used by the San Diego Police Department (SDPD), with the addition of questions on the age of the vehicle, if applicable, and whether the person stopped is a resident of Chula Vista~ Like the SDPD card, the Chula Vista version also captures the age and race/ethnicity of the driver or person stopped; the primary reason for the contact; the beat in which it occurred; the basis for a search, if applicable; and, whether contraband was found. In preparation for this data collection effort, police department staff discussed the new policy with patrol officers at roll calls. The purpose of these discussions was twofold: to review the national nature and history of the issue of racial profiling and traffic stops; and to obtain officer input regarding the data gathering effort. Prior to the May 1, 2001, implementation date, the contact cards and guidelines for data collection were issued to patrol personnel. In several months, department staff will return to roll calls to obtain 10 additional feedback on the use of the contact cards. Particular attention will be given to eliciting suggestions on additional data elements that should be collected or any other proposed modifications to the contact Card. Plans for Data Analysis The department plans to do an initial analysis of the traffic and pedestrian stop data in November, after six months of data has been collected. In conducting an analysis of the data, it will be critical to identify an appropriate comparison population that will provide an accurate indicator of whether persons of any race or ethnicity are being disproportionately stopped. For example, the demographics of the residential population of Chula Vista changes rapidly due to the construction boom in the Eastern portion of the city. Between 1999 and 2000, the gap between the percentage of Chula Vista residents who were Hispanic and those who were non-Hispanic whites doubled from 0.9% to 1.8%. Obtaining a true breakdown of the driving population in Chula Vista also poses several challenges. Although Caucasian residents over the age of 65 comprise 7.3% of Chula Vista residents, many drive less frequently than their younger counterparts of any race or ethnicity, particularly during the hours when stops become more frequent, typically nighttime. As a result, the percent of the driving population in the city that is Hispanic during the peak stop hours may be larger than the actual resident population of the city. This seemed to be the case during a recent DUI checkpoint effort. The checkpoint was conducted on December 8, 2000, a Friday night, at the 500 block of Broadway, from 9 p.m. to 2 a.m. All drivers at the checkpoint had an equal chance of being selected; five in a row were stopped, then the next five were not, etc. Of the 390 cars that were stopped, 59% were Hispanic; 9% were African-American; 20% were white; 9% were Asian; and 2% were other races. As this data demonstrates, both the timing and location ora stop can dramatically change the driving population demographics. Other factors can also increase the actual percentage of the driving population that is Hispanic, such as the number of drivers who are temporarily in the city for work or personal reasons, but reside in Mexico. Attachments: "Civilian Review Boards: An Overview," Chula Vista Police Department: Discipline/Due Process, Mayer, Martin and J. S. Tiedemann, 2001. Letter to Mr. Virgil Pina dated May 2, 2001, from Greg Cox, Supervisor, First District, San Diego County Board of Supervisors. Chula Vista Contact Cards, 2001. "SDPD Reports Racial Skew in Traffic Stops," San Diego Union-Tribune, May 12, 2001. 11 Exhibit GREG COX SUPERVISOR, FIRST DISTRICT SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS May2,2001 Mr. Virgil Pina 654 Sea Vale Street Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Mr. Pina: This is the third letter I have written to you in reference to your on-going request to my office that I write a letter to the Chula Vista City Council in support of your proposal for a "Community Rights and Enhancement Plan for Chula Vista." My staffhas also explained my position to you in a number of phone calls. Please allow me to again state my position; it is not subject to change. My supervisorial district includes five incorporated cities. As a county supervisor I would not suggest to any officials of those cities whether they should or should not adopt any particular plan brought to their attention by a resident of their city. If there is a groundswell of support in a city for adopting a particular plan, I imagine that the elected officials of that city would be in support of it. Without a lot of local community support in a city for a particular proposal, I doubt that it would carry much weight for enactment into public policy. In either case, it is a matter between the residents of the city and their elected civic officials. That is my position on any issues like this one. It is my understanding that inherent in your proposal is civilian review of the Chula Vista Police Department. As a matter of public record you should know that my office has never received a single complaint about Chula Vista Police mishandling our constituents. My staffreceives hundreds of constituent calls regularly bom Latinos and people of every ethnicity. Your personal calls have been the only ones that regularly reference police conduct. I appreciate your keeping me apprised of your interests as a community activist. As I have told you before, I applaud your stated goal of increasing a spirit of understanding and respect among Chula Vistans. I will not, however, take an official position on the particular plan you want to be adopted as policy by the Chula Vista city council. That decision is entirely theirs to make. Supervisor, First District COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER · 1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, ROOM 335 · SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-2470 · (61fl) 531-5511 Fax (619) 235-0644 www. gregcex.com · Email: greg~cox@co.san~Jiego.ca.us ~) Printed on recycled paper RESOLUTION NO. 2001- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPOINT AN AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE CIVILIAN REVIEW COMPONENT OF THE COMMUNITY RIGHTS AND ENHANCEMENT PLAN FOR CHULA VISTA WHEREAS, at the April 17, 2001 City Council meeting, Virgil Pina proposed a 5-point Community Rights and Enhancement Plan for Chula Vista consisting of: · City Personnel Hiring Report · Minority Paper Job Announcement Advertising · Contracts Report · Data on Traffic Stops · Independent Civilian Review Board WHEREAS, it is recommended that the City Manager appoint an Ad Hoc Committee on the Civilian Review Component of the Community Rights and Enhancement Plan for Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, the tasks of the Committee would be: 1. Familiarizing themselves with the nature and intent of the request for a civilian review board; and 2. Familiarizing themselves with police department policies and procedures by participating in a citizen's academy and "ride-alongs"; 3. Reviewing the procedures currently used to investigate allegations of police misconduct; 4. Reviewing police academy and in-service training on ethics and police conduct; 5. Reviewing citizen complaint policies, procedures, educational material, and historical statistics on the types of citizen complaints; and 6. Submitting an initial report on the status of their work by October 1, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby 'authorize the City Manager to appoint an Ad Hoc Committee on the Civilian Review Component of the Community Rights and Enhancement Plan for Chula Vista. Presented by Approved as to form by David D. Rowlands, Jr. John ~y[ Kaheny / ~) City Manager C~ty/Attorney ~ Community Rights and Enhancement Plan For Chula Vista The Community Rights and Enhancement Plan is a community focused proposal to the City of Chula Vista. The plan's focus and goal is to improve equal opportunity and better community relations within the city of Chula Vista. The plan calls for basic efforts to improve public information and to increase a spirit of openness with the community. This increased openness will be accomplished by the implementation of biannual public reports by the City of Chula Vista. The City's biannual reports will disclose the City of Chula Vista's record on nfinority contracts and awards, and hiring of minority individuals. The plan also requests efforts for improved police to community relations. This to be accomplished by the implementation of a biannual report from the City of Chula Vista to the public giving clear statistical information relative to police traffic stops of minorities. Also, in an effort to improve a mutual spirit of understanding and respect between the Chula Vista Police Department and the community, a request is made for the existence of an Independent Civilian Review Board for Police Practices. Community Rights and Enhancement Plan The Cmmnunity Rights and Enhancement Plan contains the following 5 items of request... 1. City Personnel Hirin~ Relmrt. A biannual public report relative to the City of Chula Vista's current hiring statistics and practices to include the manber of *minority persons in City Department Head and Managerial positions. 2. Minority Paper Job Announcement Advertising. Fair and honest efforts to recrmt minorities into all position levels. This is to be accomplished by the regular use of job announcements/advertising in 2 or more local ~rfinority publications. And the urandatory use of at least one minority interviewer to be present for all City interviews. 3. City Contracts Report. A biannual public report to the commumty relal/ve to the an~otmt of City contracts awarded to rainonty owned businesses. This report witl give a comparison and statistical analysis regarding lhe amount of city funds awarded to minority, as compared to non-minority owned businesses. 4. Data on Traffic Stops. A biammal report relative to the Chula Vista Police Department's traffic stops of minorities. This report will give the public statistical information relative to traffic stops made by the Chula Vista Police Department. It will contain the number of all minorities stopped by the department the perceived reason for their stop and disclose whether or not the person(s) were arrested. All mass checkpoint stops made by the Police Department will be exempt from tliis requirement however the Police Department will within 48 hours disclose the number of minorities arrested or whose cars were impounded at these mass checkpoints. 5. lndependent Civilian Review Board. The implemeutation of a Civilian Review Board for Police Practices. Such board will have full subpoena power and its own investigative body. The review board will be fully funded by the City of Chula Vista and will have authority to review all police reports, documents, and complaints made by any and all persons against the city of Chala Vista Police Department The Re'dew Board will be comprised of residents of lhe cig,- of Ch,fla Vista and will be scheduled to ineet on no less than a one time per month basis. The members of the police review board will be appointed by the Chula Vista City Council. *The lenn minority refers to racial minority in all 5 of the above items~ CHICANO tED O£ N DIEGO COLINTY, CENTRAL OFFICE: 610 22ND STREET, SAN DIEGO, CA 92102 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 620116, SAN DIEGO. CA 92162 (619) 236-1228 FAX (619) 236-8964 March 8, 2001 ~' ~/If) ~"/07 The Honorable Jerry Rindone ~d J~///O,~' C/~'y' ~,,,v'~'// Chula Vista City Council 276 - 4th Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Councilman Rindone: I am writing to you to seek your support for the CommunityRights and Enhancement Plan for Chula V sta, wh ch has been presented to y~:~by Virgil Piha, Chairman of the Chula Vista Human Relations Commission. The five elements of the plan are sound and basic to-;increasing employment and contracting opportunities for minorities as well as improving relations between the police department and Chula Vista's growing diverse population. Other communities have successfully implern'ented similar plans, so it can be done if the political will exists. We would appreciate your support for the Community Rights and Enhancement Plan when it comes before City Council. Sincerely, President/CEO cc: Virgil Pifia David Valladolid, Chicano Federation Board of Directors Joe Cordero, Chicano Federation Board of Directors NCLR ~, r~nC~,V. CO~VClLO~ FUNDED IN PART BY COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO of Sa~DegoC,<~lty South Bay Forum 45 El Rancho Vista Chula Vista, CA. 91910 (619) 422-0432 March 23,200t Mayor Shirley ltorton & City Council Menlbers City ot'Chala Vista 276 4"~ Avenue Chula Vista, CA. 91910 Dear Mayor Itorton and City Council Members, This correspondence is ill the tbrm of a letter o1' support lbr ~he ('ommunily Rightx and Enhancement Planfi)r ('hula Vista, which is beiag recomm{.nded by oue ol'the members of the llmnan Relations Co~nmission. The South Bay Forum invited Mr. Virgil Pifia to our January general meeting at which time lie, as a private local resideat, introduced the concept o;' the plan to the membership. After discussion, it was unanimously agreed to support this plan lbr the City ol'Chula Vista. This plan would align the City with other significant :zities that have these plans ill place, encouraging a comnfitment to improved e~nployment opportunities and community relations. 11' we can be o1' lhrther assistance in ensta'ing that all parts ol this plan are considered and implemented, please do nol hesitate to contact mc at the above mtmber. Sincerely, Norma A. Cazarcs, President Cc: City of ChulaVistalluman Relations Commission LATINO LATINO BUILDERS 3911 PACIFIC HIGHWAY 0214 SAN DIEGO, CA 92110 Phone (619) 295-3397 Fax (619) 2954399 April 4, 2001 Mrs. Shirley Horton Mayor of Chula Vista 276 4a~ Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Mayor Horton: It is my hope that we can count on your support for the Community Rights and Enhancement Plan for Chula Vista, which Virgil Pina, Chairman of the Chula Vista Human Relations Commission has presented to you. We strongly believe that this plan will help boost employment and contracting opportunities for minor/ties. Also, this plan will help establish and improve relations with several community departments such as redevelopment agencies to provide economic and business opportunity as well as to be inclusive of Chula Vista's diverse community. In the past, other communities have been successful with this type of plan and with your support, we are sure it will work for everyone. Again, thank you for your time and patience and we would appreciate your help when the Community Rights and Enhancement Plan for Chula Vista comes up before the City Council. SiTly, //ose O. Mirelcs ~ ax~cnu°t iBv eUi 'Ddie;eSc t o r City of Chula Vista Top 20 Compensated Managers March 28, 2001 Name Title Annual Salary 1. Dave Rowlands City Manager 177,359 2. John Kaheny City Attorney 160,009 3. Sid Morris Asst. City Manager 146,891 4. George Krempl Assst. City Manager 146,891 5. Rick Emerson Chief of Police 141,957 6. Bob Powell Deputy City Manager 139,902 7. David Palmer Deputy City Manager - OD 135,409 8. Ann Moore Sr. Asst. City Attorney 133,454 9. Jim Hardiman Fire Chief 132,464 10. John Lippitt Dir. of Public Works 127,310 11. Andy Campbell Dir. of Parks & Recreation 123,782 12. Bob Leiter Dh'. of Planning & Building 123,366 13. Chris Salomone Dir. of Comm. Development 123,366 14. Candy Emerson Dir. of Human Resources 121,656 15. Louie Vignapiano Dir. of MIS 118,950 16. Jim Zoll Asst. Chief of Police 116,572 17. Glen Googins Asst. City Attorney 116,329 18. Doug Perry Asst. Fire Chief 110,386 19. Dave Byers Dep. Dir. PW - OPS 106,093 20. Cliff Swanson Dep. Dk. PW- ENGR 106,093 May 7th, 2001 MEMO TO: City Clerk FROM: Pa,ty Wesp 0 '~///~ 5UB,TECT: RATIFZCAT~ON OF APPO'rNTMENT At the request of Mayor Horton, would you please calendar the following item under Mayor's Report for the next regular Council meeting: Ratification of Appointment to the Commission on Aging STEVE PALMA As you may recall, Steve served two full terms on our Parks & Recreation Commission. Thank You. cc: Mayor Shirley Horton Alice Kemp Armando Buelna Patricio 5alvacion May 17th, 2001 MEMO TO: City Clerk ' FROM: Patty Wesp ~ SUB,TECT: RATI. FT. CATI. ON OF APPOINTMENT The Presidin9 ~Tudge has completed his review of the current applications on file with respect to our Board of Ethics. To that end, would you please schedule the following ratification for the next regular City Council meeting: I~udy Ramirez Thank You. cc: Mayor Shirley Horton Armando Buelna Patricia 5alvacion Tu~day, May 29, 2001 Re: [CAPPcoord] Chuia Vista P~ker ~atus - S~day Page: 1 night Subject: Re: [CAPPcoord] Chula Vista Peaker Status - Sunday night Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:02:32 From: "ii~ bell" <JimB~lob@hotmail.com> Reply-To: CAPPcoord@ yahoo erouvs.com To: CAPPcoord@vahooerouDs.com Why peaker plants won't help solve the energy crisis. 1. Unless a peaker plant is used to supply energy to a single operation like a factory and the factory disconnects from the grid when the peaker plant is operating, any energy produced will be purchased at wholesale by the ISO (Independent System Operators)for somewhere between $.30 and $3 per kwhr. Currently our bills are capped at 6.5 cents per kwhr, but the difference between what we are paying and the wholesale cost will have to be paid by someone. My guess is that we will pay it in higher taxes and reduced services. 2. Our current leaders are running scared and opportunists abound. The reason that so many people are eager to invest in peaker plants is because they want to get in on the same gravy train the big energy extractors and generators have us on now. If they were only getting the capped rate for the kwhrs they produce, my guess is that the investments would quickly dry up. Conscious or unconscious, peaker plants are just another rip-off scheme to suck more wealth out of our local economies. 3. What's the solution? In my view, the fastest and surest way to get us out of our energy jam, is to invest in making our buildings and infrastructure as energy efficient as is cost-effectively possible and developing our region's renewable energy resources. Efficiency improvements are especially valuable because a kwhr saved cannot be exported. Plus, once an efficiency measure is in place, its their for the life of a building. Adding insulation to a building and installing double glazed windows keeps saving energy as long as the building is in use. Even efficiency items that periodically require replacement would still have to be replaced if they were energy wasters. Although solar cells (photovoltaic cells) are first on my list as the work horse of our region's energy future, our region is so rich in renewable energy resources that, in addition to direct solar, we have the luxury of several other renewable energy choices. How will we finance efficiency improvements and renewable energy development? I'll be sending the answer to this question shortly. Stay tuned. Peace, Jim JOINT COUNCIL/AGENCY/AUTHORITY ITEM NO. 3 Otay Ranch Company Heritage Town Center Maior Deal Points 1) Financial Subsidy Project costs: $ 30,903,950 Bonds/Tax Credit: $ 24,787,933 Developer: $ 1,71 6,016 ($1,200,000 developer fee and $516,016 cash) Agency: $ 4,400,000 ¢$10,000 to $35, a00 per unit) 2) City Development Fees a) Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PDIF) ($709,478) i) Deferred for 10 Years b) Waiver of Residential Construction Tax ($73,075) c) Waiver of Park Fee ($355,466 for land and improvements) i) Dedication of 1.8 acres of land for future park 3) Affordable Housing Credits a) 271 affordable units built i) 26 built in excess of 242 unit requirement (does not include units for on- site staff) b) Extra credit for large bedrooms and extended term of affordability i) 268 units x 0.2 credit (55 year term) --53.6 unit credit ii) 54 Three Bdrm units x 0.5 credit =27 unit credit iii) 12 Four Bdrm units x 1.0 credit =:12 unit-credit iv) Total I ~ Credit =92.6 units c) Satisfies Millage Six obligation (69 dus) and a portion of future ORC obli JOINT COUNCIL/AGENCY/AUTHORITY ITEM NO. 3 Otay Ranch Company Heritage Town Center Major Deal Points 1) Financial Subsidy Project costs: $ 30,903,950 Bonds/Tax Credit: $ 24,787,933 Developer: $ 1,716,016 ($1,200,000 developer fee and $516,016 cash) Agency: $ 4,400,000 ¢$10, o00 to $35,800 per unit) 2) City Development Fees a) Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PDIF) ($709,478) i) Deferred for 10 Years b) Waiver of Residential Construction Tax ($73,075) c) Waiver of Park Fee ($355,466 for land and improvements) i) Dedication of 1.8 acres of land for future park 3) Affordable Housing Credits a) 271 affordable units built i) 26 built in excess of 242 unit requirement (does not include units for on- site staff) b) Extra credit for large bedrooms and extended term of affordability i) 268 units x 0.2 credit (55 year term) = 53.6 unit credit ii) 54 Three Bdrm units x 0.5 credit --27 unit credit iii) 12 Four Bdrm units x 1.0 credit =12 unit credit. iv) Total Credit =92.6 units c) Satisfies ~/'i"~l~a~e Six obligation (69 dus) and a portion of future ORC obli ~ 409 Palm Ave., Suite 100, Imperial Beach, CA 91932-1127 Tel: (619)429 7946 May 24, 2001 TO: Sharon Segner for Otay Mesa Generating Company, FAX 713 371 7215 FROM: SAVE OUR BAY, INC. by William E. Claycomb, President SUBJECT: Otay Mesa Generating Project California Energy Commission DOCKET NO. 99-AFC-5, PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ENERGY COMMISSION DECISION dated May 10, 2001, by SAVE OUR BAY, INC. by William E. Claycomb, President SAVE OUR BAY INC. will withdraw subject PETITION if the Otay Mesa Generating Project will deposit a check for three million dollars ($3,000,000) with the Treasurer of the City of Chula Vista to be expended to construct photovoltaic solar collectors on rooftops in the City of Chula Vista to partially offset the detrimentral effects of global warming due to greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide) emissions by the Otay Mesa Generating Plant.~'~"/jj~~ cc: STATE OF CALIFORNIA, State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission Attn: Roberta E. Mendonca, PUBLIC ADVISER