Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-08-04 PacketCITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 August 4, 2010 6:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS 4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Minutes of 7/21/10 6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Notification Of Purchase Of An Automotive Brake Lathe From Snap-On Industrial In The Amount Of $8,223.15. b. Award Purchase Of 4,500 Feet Of 750 KCM EPR Cable For The Electric Utility Department For The Total Amount Of $26,347.95. (EUD) C. Award Purchase Of 13,500 Feet Of 4/0 STR EPR Cable For The Electric Utility Department For The Total Amount Of $30,821.93. (EUD) d. Approve Plans And Specifications For Manhole Rehabilitation & Sewer Pipe Relining 2010 And Direct Staff To Advertise For Bids e. Update Report On Local Emergency Declaration Regarding Drought And Water Shortage Status f. Update Report Regarding Status Of Water Emergency Conditions Necessitating Emergency Resolution To Expedite Construction Of Oak Manor Drive Water Well 8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM) a. Denial Of Building Code Appeal Filed By Steven Johnson On Behalf Of The Mendocino County Savings Bank (Main Street Apartments) 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Discussion And Possible Direction To Staff Regarding Mobile Home Park Rent Stabilization b. Discussion and Possible Adoption of Marine Life Protection Act Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) C. Report To Council On Status Of Annexation Of The Brush Street Triangle (Contd. From 7/21/10) 11. NEW BUSINESS a. Designation Of Voting Delegate And Alternates For 2010 League of California Cities Annual Conference September 15-17, 2010 b. Award Of Contract For The Electrical Installation Of Musco Sports Cluster Green System And Site Utility Infrastructure At Anton Stadium, Specification No. 10-07. 12. COUNCIL REPORTS 13. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS SB1159 Drug/Pharmacy Ordinance 14. CLOSED SESSION - Closed Session may be held at any time during the meeting a. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1) - Significant exposure to litigation (1 case) b. Conference with Real Property Negotiators (§54956.8) Property: APN 180-080-57, 58, 59, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, and 180-110-08, 09, 10 Negotiator: Jane Chambers, City Manager Negotiating Parties: Ukiah Redevelopment Agency and Northwest Atlantic (Costco) Under Negotiation: Price & Terms 15. ADJOURNMENT Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend. The City complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at the front counter at the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482, during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda. Dated this 30th day of July, 2010. JoAnne Currie, City Clerk Item 5a CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 July 21, 2010 6:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on July 21, 2010, the notice for which being legally noticed on July 17, 2010. Mayor Thomas called the meeting to order at 6:07 pm. Roll was taken with the following Councilmembers present: Landis, Crane, Rodin (arriving 6:24 pm), Baldwin (arriving 6:09 pm), and Mayor Thomas. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager Chambers, Assistant City Manager Sangiacomo, City Attorney Rapport, Finance Director Elton, Director of Planning and Community Development Stump, Senior Planner Jordan, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Eriksen, Community Services Supervisor Merz, Building Official Willoughby, Project and Grant Administrator Mills, and City Clerk Currie. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PPESENTATIONS 4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION 7. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S Landis/Baldwin to approve the Consent Calendar items 7a-7o: a. Report of Disbursements for Month of June 2010 b. Approve Plans and Specifications for Neighborhood Enhancement on Clara Avenue Phase 1, Specification No. 10-12 and Direct Staff to Advertise for Bids C. Adoption of Resolution Setting the Limitation on City Expenditures for Fiscal Year 2010-2011 d. Adoption of Policy Resolution Establishing Advances Made from the Sewer Operating Revenue to the Sewer Connection Fee Fund Are Loans and Are Intended to be Repaid, With Interest, from Future Connection Fees e. Reporfto Council of the Expenditure of $8,394.38 to Vanguard Instruments C/O Tarbell Associates for the Purchase of a Vanguard Relay Tester and Shipping Case for the Electric Utility. Department (EUD) f. Update Report Regarding Status of Water Emergency Conditions Necessitating Emergency Resolution to Expedite Construction of Oak Manor Drive Water Well g. Update Report on Local Emergency Declaration Regarding Drought and Water Shortage Status h. Approval of Notice of Completion for Environmental Drilling - Ukiah Corporation Yard Specification No. 10-05 CC 8/4/10 Page 1 of 6 i. Receive Report of the Acquisition of Premarks from Flint Trading in the Amount of $5,264.32 j. Award Acquisition of Ozone Sparge System for the Corporation Yard to Piper Environmental Group, Inc. in the Amount of $46,950 k. Grease Interceptor/Grease Trap Ordinance Compliance Status 1. Amend Contract with SHN Consulting Engineers & Geologists, Inc. for Construction Management Services for the Civic Center Roof Renovation in an Amount Not to Exceed $80,000 and Corresponding Budget Amendment M. Approval of Notice of Completion for the Civic Center Roof Renovation Project, Specification No. 09-15 and Corresponding Budget Amendment n. Award Acquisition of Dual-Phase Extraction System for the Corporation Yard to EnviroSupply & Service, Inc., in the Amount of $107,591.81 o. Authorization for the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute a Lease Agreement With Visit Mendocino County and the Arts Council of Mendocino County for a Portion of the Ukiah Railroad Depot Located at 309 East Perkins Street and Approval of Corresponding Budget Amendments for Revenue Collected on the Lease Motion carried by the following roll call vote AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas. NOES: Councilmember Crane. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. 8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Charlie Seltzer, Mendocino County Community Health, requesting an item be added to a future agenda. Mr. Seltzer is requesting the City of Ukiah consider adopting an ordinance to sign on to SB 1159, which allows pharmacies within the local jurisdiction to sell syringes without a prescription. Mendocino County has already signed on to SIB 1159. Libby Guthrie. Director of Mendocino County AIDS Viral Hepatitis Network, spoke in support of the adoption of an ordinance for SB 1159. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM) a. Conduct Public Hearing: Adoption of Water Service Rate Adjustments for Five-Year Period FY 2010-2014 6:18:57 PM City Manager Chambers and Finance Director Elton presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Adoption of Water Rate adjustments for five-year period FY 2010-2014. Public Hearing Opened 6:19 pm Public speaking in support of the item: Alan Jamison 6:45:36 PM. Public speaking in opposition of the item: Marlene Werra 6:40:43 PM; Tom Simmons 6:41:08 PM; Sonia Anzilotti 6:50:36 PM; Janis Kosleug 6:52:21 PM; John Brady 6:55:55 PM; Armando Cuevas 6:57:32 PM; Mark Oswell 6:58:48 PM; Steve Lahardo 7:00:54 PM; James Freese 7:02:06 PM; Marsha DePriest 7:04:54 PM; Bill Courtney 7:10:43 PM; Carol Rosenberg 7:11:44 PM; Joe Chiles 7:13:55 PM; John Chocholak 7:21:41 PM; Joan Rainville 7:24:02 PM; Betty Hook 7:29:36 PM; John Jensen 7:33:34 PM. Councilmember Rodin left the dais 7:16 pm CC 8/4/10 Page 2 of 6 Councilmember Rodin returned to the dais 7:17 pm Public speaking to the item: Paul Trouette, Fish and Game Commissioner, Mendocino County Td district 7:08:44 PM. Public Hearing Closed 7:33 pm City Council requested the CARES program be agendized. M/S Crane/Landis to approve the Recommended Action. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Recessed 8:13 pm Reconvened 8:24 pm b. Conduct Public Hearing: Adoption of Sewer (Wastewater) Service Rate Adjustments for Five-Year Period FY 2010-2014 8:24:48 PM City Manager Chambers and Finance Director Elton presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Adoption of Wastewater Rate adjustments for 5-year period FY 2010-2014. Public Hearing Opened 8:25 pm Public speaking to the item: Carol Rosenberg 8:42:08 PM. Public Hearing Closed 8:48 pm M/S Baldwin/Rodin to approve the Recommended Action. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C. Conduct Public Hearing: Consideration and Action on an Appeal Filed by Councilmember Baldwin of the Planning Commission's Conditional Approval of the Pacific Outfitter's Mural Permit 8:49:48 PM Director of Planning and Community Development Stump and Senior Planner Jordan presented the item. Recommended Action(s): 1) Conduct a public hearing and 2) Support the Planning Commission's unanimous (4-0) approval of Pacific Outfitter's Mural Permit by denying the appeal. Public Hearing Opened 9:11 pm Public speaking in support of the item: Carol Rosenberg 9:12:06 PM; Brad Smith 9:13:00 PM; Korla Bushbacher 9:21:07 PM; Laura Fog 9:24:22 PM; John McCowen, former City of Ukiah Planning Commission member 9:26:27 PM; Ann Kelly, founding curator of the Hudson Museum 9:28:12 PM; Scott Ostrom 9:30:12 PM; Chris Ostrom 9:33:35 PM; Paul Trouette, Fish and Game Commissioner, Mendocino County 3rd district, requested to go on record, "If we are going to equate homicide with hunters we need to equate homicide with beef producers and on and on down the list." 9:37:10 PM Public Hearing Closed 9:39 pm CC 8/4/10 Page 3 of 6 M/S Crane/Landis to approve the Recommended Action. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Report to Council on Status of Annexation of the Brush Street Triangle 9:47:46 PM Continued to August 4, 2010. b. Consider Award of Contract for Remediation System Installation - Ukiah Corporation Yard, Specification No. 10-06 Director of Public Works/City Engineer Eriksen presented the item. Recommended Action(s): City Council decide (1) whether to accept the bid from Lee Howard Construction in the amount "of $105,636.90 and award the contract for Remediation System Installation - Ukiah Corporation Yard Specification No.10-06 with authorization of `$10,563.69 for potential change orders and make findings to justify waiving the bid irregularities; (2) reject the Howard bid and award the bid to ICS Nor Cal of Oakland with a bid of $111,525.08 and award the contract for Remediation System Installation - Ukiah Corporation Yard Specification No.10-06 with authorization of $11,152.51 for potential change orders, or (3) reject all bids and direct staff to rebid the project. M/S Crane/Baldwin to approve the Recommended Action number 1. Public Comment Opened 10:02 pm Public Speaking to the item: Lee Howard, Lee Howard Construction Inc.; Goody Seif, owner of ICS NorCal 10:08:41 PM; and John McCowen 10:10:52 PM. Public Comment Closed 10:15 pm Motion failed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane and Baldwin. NOES: Councilmembers Landis and Rodin and Mayor Thomas. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. M/S Crane/Rodin to approve Recommended Action number 3, reject all bids and direct staff to rebid the project. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C. Discuss the Ukiah Municipal Pools Project and Provide Direction to Staff on the,Scope of Work for the Renovation Plan 10:23:34 PM Community Services Supervisor Merz, Project and Grant Administrator Mills, and Assistant City Manager Sangiacomo presented the item. Don Alameda, Alameda Architecture, was available to answer questions. Recommended Action(s): Provide staff with direction on the scope of work for the Ukiah pools renovation plan. CC 8/4/10 Page 4 of 6 Public Comment Opened 10:44 pm Public Speaking to the item: Pinky Kushner and Ross Mayfield 10:50:21 PM. Public Comment Closed 11:00 pm MIS Rodin/Landis to approve the renovation of the small pool which is option two of the staff report. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 11. NEW BUSINESS a. Adoption of Resolution Creating Rules for and Establishing a Building Code Board of Appeals 11:02:18 PM Director of Planning and Community Development Stump and Building Official Willoughby presented the item. Recommended Action(s): 1) Adopt the Resolution approving the Rules for and the establishment of the building code board of appeals. MIS Crane/Rodin to approve the Recommended Action. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Council members Landis, Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. b. Award Professional Services Agreement to SHN Consulting Engineers & Geologists, Inc. for Engineering and Technical Services for the Fish Hatchery Road Repair Project, Specification No. 08-1411:03:17 PM Director of Public Works/City Engineer Eriksen presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Award professional services agreement to SHN Consulting Engineers & Geologists, Inc. for engineering and technical services for the Fish Hatchery Road Repair Project, Specification No. 08-14. MIS Landis/Rodin to approve the Recommended Action. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Councilmember Crane left the daisl 1:08 pm c. Approve Plans and Specifications No. 10-13 for Gobbi Street Riverside Park Grading Project 11:08:58 PM Councilmember Crane returned to the dais 11:11 pm Community Services Supervisor Merz presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Approve plans and specifications no. 10-13 for Gobbi Street Riverside Park Grading Project. MIS Rodin/Landis to approve the Recommended Action. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 12. COUNCIL REPORTS CC 8/4/10 Page 5 of 6 Councilmember Baldwin and Landis will be attending the Russian River Flood Control's survey/tour of the Coyote Dam. Councilmembers Crane and Rodin met with the County Supervisors McCowen and Smith, two members of the tax sharing committee, regarding a possible Mendocino County ballot measure to impose a half cent sales tax county wide which will include the cities. This is a possible future meeting item. 11:14:22 PM 11:18:55 PM Mayor Thomas reported on his attendance to a July 21, 2010, Library Advisory Board meeting and reports the library system is in jeopardy because of budget cuts and the city should be aware of this issue. Councilmember Rodin reported that the Public Advisory Committee will be touring potential courthouse sites August 9, 2010. 11:19:58 PM 13. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 14. CLOSED SESSION - Closed Session may beheld at any time during the meeting a. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1) - Significant exposure to litigation (1 case) Not heard b. Conference with Real Property Negotiators (§54956.8) Property: APN 180-080-57, 58, 59, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, and 180-110-08, 09, 10 Negotiator: Jane Chambers, City Manager Negotiating Parties: Ukiah Redevelopment Agency and Northwest Atlantic (Costco) Under Negotiation: Price & Terms Not heard 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:20 pm. JoAnne M. Currie, City Clerk CC 8/4/10 Page 6 of 6 Ci~~ of 7Jk~aF ITEM NO.: 7a MEETING DATE: August 4, 2010 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION OF PURCHASE OF AN AUTOMOTIVE BRAKE LATHE FROM SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,223.15. Background: Ukiah Police Department vehicles are maintained by city mechanics. Police vehicles are driven on average over 30,000 miles a year, and a brake refurbishing is required every 9,000 miles because of the high use, extreme conditions and need to keep vehicles high speed pursuit ready. In the past, brake drum and rotor resurfacing was contracted out, which increased servicing costs. To reduce costs, a brake drum and rotor resurfacing lathe was purchased so that resurfacing work can be done within the City facility. Discussion: Included in the FY 09/10 Police Budget is the purchase of vehicle maintenance equipment including a brake resurfacing lathe. Staff prepared a request for bids and in May of this year, requests for quotes were returned from three vendors (Ammco Coats - $10,927.60, Mile-X Equipment - $9,381.86,) and Snap-On Industrial provided the lowest quote in the amount of $8,223.15. Staff evaluated the Snap-On Industrial quote to ensure it met specifications and awarded the bid for the automotive brake lathe in the amount of $8,223.15, from account 105.2001.303.000. In compliance with Section 1522 of the Ukiah City Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting an acquisition costing $5,000 or more, but less than $10,000. Fiscal Impact: Not Applicable Budget Amendment Required Budgeted FY 09/10 F-1 New Appropriation F-1 F Amount Budgeted Source of Funds (title and Account Number Addtl. Appropriation Requested $8,223.15 Vehicle Maintenance and Repair 105.2001.303.000 None Recommended Action(s): No action required; notification of purchase of an automotive brake lathe from Snap-On Industrial, in the amount of $8,223.15, from account 105.2001.303.000. Alternative Council Option(s): N/A Citizens advised: Requested by: Chris Dewey, Director of Public Safety Prepared by: Chris Dewey, Director of Public Safety Coordinated with: Jane Chambers, City Manager Attachments: Approved: e Chambers, City Manager ITEM NO.. MEETING DATE: City oJ" Ukft?.fa AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 7b August 4, 2010 SUBJECT: AWARD PURCHASE OF 4,500 FEET OF 750 KCM EPR CABLE FOR THE ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPARTMENT FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $26,347.95. (EUD) Submitted for the City Council's consideration and action is Staff's recommendation that the purchase of 4,500 feet of 750 KCM EPR Cable be awarded to The Okonite Company in the amount of $26,347.95. On July 13, 2010, Bid Requests were sent to twenty-five companies. Seven companies responded with quotes. A bid tabulation of the seven responding bidders is attached to this summary report for Council's review. This cable is needed for the Airport Park Improvement Project and has been budgeted for in the 2010/2011 budget year in account 800.3728.930.001. Fiscal Impact: Budgeted FY 10/11 New Appropriation Not Applicable Budget Amendment Required 1_x I F-1 F Amount Budgeted Source of Funds (title and Account Number $90,000 Distribution System Improvements 800.3728.930.001 Recommended Action(s): Award purchase of 4,500 feet of 750 KCM EPR cable for the Electric Utility Department for the total amount of $26,347.95. (EUD) Alternative Council Option(s): Reject all bids and provide direction to Staff. Citizens advised: N/A Requested by: Colin Murphey, Electric Supervisor Prepared by: Mary Williamson, Purchasing Assistant Coordinated with: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor Attachments: Bid Tabulation Approved: J Chambers, City Manager ATTACHMENT In LO O M LO LO a7 rl~ O O 7 N N + M 00 ~ i (0 O CO M 0 0 - 1.9 M O I L 00 CO O M R co I- rn r- m L 00 O O O O O O W U O O O O O ~ O O O O O O N N N M O r cl~ M 1Y CO r N ~ N O M M ~ EF} EA Efl lf} 61. EA EA co M ~ 4LO CE L6 c LO V L6 ti L6 r (6 C. O W a L' a V .ni. Y) V! Z O, W x. O, 0~ ~ a s, E d; / d ,A O O O O O O O L♦ LO O O O O LO d O O V) d d O Za cu ca. E U U (j (a o. • ~ m E E T ) _ • L y~ (D (D E 2 a) ) (D N 4) O U a C7 Y d U (n Z O N CO LO LO F - CL 0 City &J* Ukiah ITEM NO.: 7c MEETING DATE. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT August 4, 2010 SUBJECT: AWARD PURCHASE OF 13,500 FEET OF 4/0 STR EPR CABLE FOR THE ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPARTMENT FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $30,821.93. (EUD) Submitted for the City Council's consideration and action is Staff's recommendation that the purchase of 13,500 feet of 4/0 STR EPR Cable be awarded to Maydwell & Hartzell in the amount of $30,821.93. On July 8, 2010, Bid Requests were sent to twenty-five companies. Eight companies responded with quotes. A bid tabulation of the eight responding bidders is attached to this summary report for Council's review. This cable is needed for several scheduled jobs which include Oak Manor Drive reconductor, Anton Stadium and Redwood Empire Fairgrounds as well as for back-up stock for the Electric Utility Department. Thismaterial will- be charged _to_inventory-account-#800.131.002-and then charged out to- the-appropriate accounts as used. Fiscal Impact: F-1 Budgeted FY 10/11 17 New Appropriation Not Applicable Amount Budgeted ted Source of Funds (title and Account Number Inventory Purchases Stores 800.131.002 Budget Amendment Required Addit. Appropriation Recommended Action(s): Award purchase of 13,500 feet of 4/0 str EPR cable for the Electric Utility Department for the total amount of $30,821.93. (EUD) Alternative Council Option(s): Reject all bids and provide direction to Staff. Citizens advised: N/A Requested by: Colin Murphey, Electric Supervisor Prepared by: Mary Williamson, Purchasing Assistant Coordinated with: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor Attachments: Bid Tabulation Approved: J e Chambers, City Manager ¢,TTA 00 00 to 00 0) LO M LO ~ C N It M ~ M M a + V ' 00 00 ( O h cc O O O b 'IT 0 (D CF) 00 ti O 61). Cl) ~ ~ ~ ~ o O o o O o 0 0 O O O O O O O O t: LL O O O O C J O O O Lq O O O CN (D OD L6 (D 0) 0 IT r Cl) N Cl) V r V ' W 'Q r- C14 C14 C14 r- C\l Cl) LO LO ~ 0 ~ C14 ~ N V> ~ O ' LO M M r 0 _ O. C O M a ( 0 (V CV (V N S (M M O [I a a 0 N` v N 3 ~ . M' N C K W Z W i O at o . n d, > o. a o _ c? O M O O 00 N M M M M C r r r 7 r O ~ f6 T `\H U Q a r ~ 2 V U U U Q _ a E m m m rn w C: E co D U _lz l U Y 7 7 O C C 0- 0 Z N M V to O r co H 0 City OV- Ukiah ITEM NO.: 7d MEETING DATE: AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT August 4, 2010 SUBJECT: APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR MANHOLE REHABILITATION & SEWER PIPE RELINING 2010 AND DIRECT STAFF TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS Summary: Per section 22039 of the Public Contracts Code, staff is requesting Council's approval of plans and specifications for Manhole Rehabilitation & Sewer Pipe Relining 2010, Specification No. 10-11. The total Engineer's Estimate for this project is approximately $600,000. Background: Staff brings this project forward in response to ground water infiltration of the sanitary sewer system. This project has been budgeted for the last several years in the 614 Sewer Capital Projects account, and is now being addressed. The plans and specifications for the project are available for City Council and public review at the Ukiah Civic-Center-Engineering-Department,, 300-Seminary-Avenue Ukiah, California.--in-addition-the the plans and specifications have been posted to the City's website for review at the following web address - http://Www.cityofukiah.comlpageserver/?page=purchasing main#395 Fiscal Impact: Not Applicable Budget Amendment Required ❑X Budgeted FY 10/11 ❑ New Appropriation 1-1 Amount Budgeted Source of Funds (title and Account Number Addtl. Appropriation Requested $968,695 614 (City System Capital 614.3510.810 Improvements) Recommended Action(s): 1. Approve plans and specifications for Manhole Rehabilitation & Sewer Pipe Relining 2010 Specification. No. 10-11. 2. Direct staff to advertise for bids. Alternative Council Option(s): N/A Citizens advised: n/a Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Prepared by: Alan Hasty, Assistant Civil Engineer Coordinated with: Jane Chambers, City Manager; Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Attachments: 1 - Cover sheet - specifications Approved: J154 Chambers, City Manager Attachment # i CITY OF UKIAH MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SPECIAL PROVISIONS Ill FOR P' t{i~ MANHOLE REHABILITATION & SEWER PIP~AR KING 2010 111111 , - - Specification-No.10 - - E'-- Jill, '11411, t ~~1~~11`~ iEIII. I I I'...:. ,q 41 CITY OF UKIAH q; GARMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 111 111;1d° ;l. 00 Seminary Avenue 11 1 Is ,1101ah, California 95482-5400 11. j fl_# E~1tl€ Bids Open: Date p.m. Office of City Clerk ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: city a,/" Ukiah. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 7e 8/04/2010 SUBJECT: UPDATE REPORT ON LOCAL EMERGENCY DECLARATION REGARDING DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE STATUS Summary: In drought conditions, the City may declare a local emergency under the California Emergency Services Act ("ESA"). In addition, the City Council under the Ukiah City Code may declare a Water Shortage Emergency as a Stage I, If or III emergency. At its meeting of April 15, 2009, the City Council adopted a RESOLUTION DECLARING A LOCAL EMERGENCY UNDER THE STATE EMERGENCY SERVICES ACT AND A STAGE I WATER SHORTAGE EMERGENCY UNDER SECTION 3602 THE UKIAH CITY CODE. (Attachment #1). The resolution contains recitals setting forth the drought conditions and the response to those conditions by - the State, Mendocino County,-the Sonoma County Water Agency and the State Water Resources Board which the resolution seeks to address. Please refer to those recitals for details. Subsequent to adoption of the resolution, City staff has responded further to the water shortage emergency by replying to the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) regarding actions that the City of Ukiah has taken, and will be taking, to address water conservation. Attachment #2 is a copy of that letter. The letter outlined actions that the City is taking, responded to SCWA's request for water use information, and included an outline of the City of Ukiah's water conservation program for 2009. As a result of the drought, the City Council has considered many different aspects of the water shortage issue. Under Council's direction, staff has implemented a series of water conservation and education measures. In addition, the City has a full time staff position dedicated to implementing these measures. Water demand has decreased by 20.8% from the 2008 quantities and 19.0% as compared to the 2004 quantities. Staff assumes that this is as a result of our conservation efforts. This will affect our revenues and staff is working on solutions for this issue as we analyze the fee study that is currently being prepared by an outside consulting firm. Developments from the SWRCB On May 28, 2009, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) issued an amendment to Order WR 2009-0027-DWR, Order WR 2009-0034-EXEC. The amended order conditionally approves Sonoma County Water Agency's (SCWA) petition to reduce the flow in the Russian River from July 6 through October 2, 2009 Continued on r)aae 2 Recommended Action: 1. City Council receive the status report on water shortage emergency Alternative Council Option(s): N/A Citizens advised: N/A Requested by: Jane Chambers, City Manager Prepared by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works and City Engineer Coordinated with: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works and City Engineer Attachments: Attachment 1 - Resolution Attachment 2 - Letter to SCWA Approved: M.~. Ja Chambers, City Manager Subject: Drought and Water Shortage Status Meeting Date: August 4, 2010 Page 2 of 2 to 25 cubic feet per second (cfs) for the upper Russian River and 35 cfs for the lower Russian River if during the period from April 1 through June 30 total inflow to Lake Mendocino is less than or equal to 25,000 acre- feet. The amended order confirms a water conservation goal for Mendocino County of 50% (compared to 2004) from April 6, 2009 until the expiration of this order (October 2, 2009), "By May 6, 2009, SCWA shall submit a plan to the State Water Resources Control Board to obtain the cooperation and participation of agricultural and municipal Russian River water user to reach a water conservation goal of 25 percent in Sonoma County and 50 percent in Mendocino County for the period of April 6, 2009 until the expiration of this order (October 2, 2009). The amended order modified the original order issued on April 6, 2009. From July 6 through October 2, 2009, minimum in-stream flow shall remain at or above 25 cfs, if Lake Mendocino storage is less than 65,630 acre feet on July 1, 2009 (instead of total inflow to Lake Mendocino less than or equal to 25,000 acre-feet). On_October 27,_2009 the County of Mendocino _Water Agency__discussed _the_current water storage situation in the Ukiah Valley. The discussion led to the consideration of repealing the County emergency order for all water purveyors to limit water usage by 50%. The Agency was not comfortable with the language in the repealing order as prepared by staff and requested staff to bring the order back for adoption at the next regularly scheduled meeting. On November 3, 2009 the County of Mendocino retracted the 50% conservation requirement. However, the Board of Supervisors recommended that each water district strive to achieve 25% conservation on a voluntary basis. The City of Ukiah in the coming weeks must consider how to address this voluntary request by the County of Mendocino. Uadated Staff Actions Staff has continually monitored this issue in response to the City Council concerns about this emergency and the length of time that it has been in effect. On December 16, 2009 City Council repealed the mandatory water rationing, however, Stage I voluntary rationing is still in place. The lake storage has been steady since the middle of January and is now 100,842 acre-feet. The south boat ramp is currently submerged by approximately three feet. However, the state is predicting a dry year so staff recommends the continuation of the voluntary conservation measures. It should be noted that the construction of the Oak Manor Well (well #8) is proceeding at a fast pace and it is anticipated that this well will be on line by the middle of summer. Regional Issues City Staff is also monitoring the Draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan Water Supply Assessment report. Many of the local valley water purveyors are concerned with this report. It is hoped and presumed that the Board of Supervisors will direct county staff to address some of the issues that have been submitted. The Request for Proposal (RFP) for the master plan for reclaimed water has been drafted and reviewed by the City Council.. Staff has been meeting with stake holders for this system, as directed by Council. Staff has incorporated comments from all stakeholders and is taking the draft RFP to the City Council on August 4, 2010 for the Council's approval. ATTACHMENT__ RESOLUTION NO. 2009-17 RESOLUTION OF TEM CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIA.H DECLARING A LOCAL EMERGENCY PURSUANT TO THE EMERGENCY SERVICES ACT AND A STAGE I WATER EMERGENCY UNDER SECTION 3602 OF Tn E UI CITY CODE WH REA.S, 1. Lake Mendocino and the Russian River are one current source of water for the City of Ukiah and the primary source flf 'water for other domestic and agricultural users of water in Mendocino and Sonoma Counties; and 2. Average rainfall through March for the area contributing run-off to Lake Mendocino is 42 inches and the rainfall total through March 2009 is 23 inches and - - 1-Mere have been below average rainfall and reduced-stowage in Lake Mendocino in 2004, 2007 and 2008; and 4. Average rainfall for April - June is 4.8 inches; and • 5. Even average rainfall for the remainder of the rainy season cannot compensate for the extremely low rainfall this year, and 6. Lake Mendocino held approximately 53,000 acre feet on April 1, 2009, with a Lake level of 727.63 feet; and 7. The average Lake storage in April is 84,448 acre feet, the Lake storage in April 2007 was 66,617 acre feet and the average Lake storage in October is 55,854 acre feet, more water at the end of the dry summer season than is currently stored in the Lake; and 8. The historically love water storage level in Lake Mendocino this year is part of a statewide water shortage caused by inadequate rainfall which has prompted Governor Schwarzenegger to declare a statewide emergency under the Emergency Services Act due to these drought conditions; and 9. Mendocino County has declared a local emergency due to drought conditions under the Emergency Services Act; and 10. On April 6, 2009, the State Water Resources. Control Board ("SWRCB") has approved an Urgency Change Petition filed by the Sonoma County Water Agency SCWA") to reduce in-stream flows in the Russian River to 75 efs from April 6-June 30, 2009 and to as low as 25 efs for the period July 1-October 2, 2009, if cumulative total inflow to Lake Mendocino is equal to or less than 25,000 acre feet for the period April 1-June 30,2009; and 11. The order approving temporary changes to the minimum in-stream flows required by the appropriative rights permits issued to SCWA is subject to several conditions, including a condition requiring the SCWA to submit a plan by May 6, 2009, to the SWRCB to "obtain the cooperation and participation of agricultural and municipal Russian River water users to reach a water conservation goal of 25 percent in Sonoma County and 50 percent in Mendocino County for the period of Apffl 6, 2009 until the expiration of this order (October 2, 2009)"and 12. A local emergency under the California Emergency Services Act (Government Code §8550 et seq.) is defined in Section 8558(c) as the duly proclaimed existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the territorial limits of the City caused by such conditions as drought which are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of individual local governments and which require the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat; and 13. The historically low rainfall and water storage in Lake Mendocino qualifies as a local emergency under the statutory definition; and 14. In a declared local emergency, local agencies may provide'mutual aid as needed pursuant to agreements or resolutions, state agencies may provide mutual aid to local agencies pursuant to agreement or at the direction ofthe Governor, costs incurred by the City in providing mutual aid pursuant to agreements or resolution constitute a charge against the state, when approved by the Governor in accordance with adopted,regulatons, and the City Council may promulgate orders and regulations for the duration of the emergency to provide protection for life and property (see Government Code 8631-86-34); and : l 15. In a declared local emergency, the City Council must review the state of the emergency . ' not less than every 21 days after first declaring the emergency; and 16. Under Uldah City Code Section 3602, the City Council may by resolution declare a water emergency, specify the degree of emergency and place into effect the appropriate provisions of Division 4, Chapter 1, Article 11 of the Ukiah City Code pertaining to a Water Shortage Emergency; and 17. In a Stage I water emergency the Mayor shall issue a proclamation urging citizens to institute such water conservation measures on a voluntary basis as may. be required to reduce water demand to coincide with available supply; and 18. The City Council has already authorized the development of a groundwater well on an emergency basis to provide the City with an additional water source this summer that does not rely on the Russian River or water stored in Lake Mendocino; and 19. Stage I and Ill water emergencies impose various mandatory conservation measmes on City residents, including a prohibition on `nonessential water use' in a Stage H water emergency and a limit on the daily use of water by different classes of water user in a Stage III emergency; and 20. The City can declare 'a Stage II or Stage II emergency, if voluntary measures or less sever mandatory measures does not achieve an adequate reduction in the use of Russian River water or in water use generally to meet the available supply; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Uldah hereby: 1. Declares a local emergency due to drought under the Emergency Service Act. 2. Declares a Stage I Water Storage Emergency under Ukiah City Code Section 3602. 3. Directs the City Manager: a. to identify and encourage the use as a Russian River water user of voluntary measures to reach a water conservation goal of 50 percent for the period of April 6, 2009 to October 2, 2009 {"Conger vation Period"), and to report back to the City Council at each City Council meeting field during that same time period on the measures identified, the means used to encourage their use, the amount of water use reduction, and the status of the emergency conditions; b. to notify the City Council, if the City Manager determines that a Stage I Water Emergency is not reducing water use to match the available supply and to recommend a Stage H or M emergency, if necessary to achieve that level of water use; c. at City Council meetings during the Comervation Period to recommend: temporary rules or orders to supplement or modify mandatory conservation measures in a Stage II or M Water Storage Emergency to reduce water use to the available supply and to achieve the conservation goals in Order WR 2009-0027-DWR issued by the Divisions of Water Rights of the State Water Resources Control Board c. to work with other local governments in the County, including the incorporated cities and county water districts, to preserve as much water as possible for use during the dry summer months and for the fall return of Chinook Salmon to the Russian River; and d. to coordinate mutual aid efforts to address the local emergency between and among political subdivisions in Mendocino and Sonoma Counties and state agencies. PASSED AND ADOPTED on April 15, 2009, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Landis, NOES: Done ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ATTEST; L' d _ ro ity Clerk Thomas, Crane, Rodin, and Mayor Baldwin A~a re-"~ Philip E. aldwin,-Mayor April 28, 2009 Lynn Florey Sonoma County Water Agency Principal Program Specialist P.O. Box 11628 . Santa Rosa, CA 95406 Dear Ms. Florey; This letter is written in response to your letter dated April 17, 2009. 1 do not know when your letter was received by the City of Ukiah, but it arrived' at our water treatment plant rather than in my office at City Hall. The letter was just brought to my attention late yesterday. I-had: been expecting a request to respond to Sonoma County Water Agency for information related to the State Water Resources Control Board's ruling, and, therefore, am making an effort to meet your deadline of today's date. In future, it would be helpful if you could copy and/or address critical dated correspondence about these current drought conditions directly Jo my office, as that will assist us in malting timely replies. Attached, please find the diversion volumes information requested in your letter. You will see that overall annual water use since 2004 has been reduced by 11.4%. Water use in the months of April through October has been reduced since.2004 by 13%. Diversion volume during the months April through October has also been reduced, for some 25% between 2004 and 2007, and 16% between 2004 and 2008 use. Reduced use over the last few years is a result of the City's commitment to institute conservation measures in both the irrigation and domestic use of water in our community. Attached please find the City of Ukiab's Water Conservation Program which outlines current activities the City is taking to address water conservation. With regard to immediate drought related conditions, here are some technical and rate related factors that the City of Ukiah must deal with as the summer and high irrigation use time approaches: The City's water supply is obtained from a Ranney collector well and Wells 43 and 44. The Ranney and Well #3 draw water from an alluvial zone along the Russian River. The pumping capacity of both the Ranney collector and Well #3 are affected by the amount of flow in the river. If that water is not available during this summer, the only source of water available as of this date will be Well 44, which is percolated groundwater. • On February 27, 2009 Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a water shortage. On February 26, 2009, the City received a letter from Victoria A. 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 Phone# 707/463.6200 Fax# 707/463-6204 Web Address: www.ollyofLikiah.com City staff is actively seeking stimulus funding for a system to deliver recycled water.from the City's wastewater treatment plant. At the current time, it is anticipated that the wastewater treatment plant could begin to produce recycled water by August of 209. A distribution system is under design and plans will be developed within the next few months, Funding for this important resource delivery project will be explored from all possible resources, as the City fully recognizes the value of using recycled water to lower the demand for surface water in our area. Although a recycled water distribution system cannot be in place for this summer, the City will pursue developing' this resource. With regard to efforts to identify and prevent water waste and unreasonable use: Typical water waster penalties` include, in the order implemented: 1. Educational letter or visit 2, Educational visit and warning 3. Citation - 4.--Installation of flow-restrictor and possible fine - - 5. Shutoff and reconnection fee The City will identify water wasters through monitoring the water meters and citizen reports. In closing, please review all aspects of the attached conservation measures and water use detail in addressing the four questions of your letter, in addition to the specific issues addressed in the above bullet points.. Please call me at 707- 463- 6213 if you have questions regarding this information. Sincerely, are A. C ambers City Manager: Attachments: 1. City of Ukiah Water Use 2. City of Ukiah Water Conservation Program 1009 City of Uldah Water Use Annual Water Use MG 2008 1192.968 -11.4% 2008/2004 2007 1219.964 -9.3% 2007/2004 2006 1248.424 -7.2% 2006/2004 2005 1223.542 -9.1% 2005/2004 2004 1345,744 Water Use (MG) 2004 2007 2{108 2009 2007/2004 2008/2004 April 96.743 87.507 87.865 -10% -9% May 145.402 121.506 132.345 -16% -9% June 152.897 149.782 143.469 -8% -12% July _185.876 164.473 158.899 -12% -15% August 179.326 162.859 157.056 -9% -12% Sept. 156.798 134.481 130,508 -14% -17% Qct. 109.224 83.777 91324 -2395 -16% Total MG 1036.266 904.385 901.866 -13% -13% ac-ft 3180 2775 2768 Diversion Volume (MG) 2004 2007 2008 2009 2007/2004 2008/2004 April 57,046 27.598 62.754 -52% 10% May 112.803 72.833 111.365 -35% -1% June 129.493 109.976 102.115 -15% -21% July 131.935 105.631 109.09 -2096 -17% August 126.768 104.658 101.593 -17% -20% Sept, 117.755 88.134 85.313 -25% -28% Oct. 96.734 72.864 73,465 -25% -24% Total MG 772.534 581.694 645.695 -25% -16% ac-ft 2371 1785 1982 The City of Ukiah Water Conservation Program 2009 The unpredictability of its water supplies and ever Increasing demand on California's complex water resources have resulted In a coordinated effort by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), water utilities, environmental organizations, and other interested groups to develop a list of urban water conservation demand management measures (DMM) for conserving water. This consensus building.effort resulted in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California, as amended September 16, 1999, among parties, which formalizes an agreement to implement these DMMs and makes a cooperative effort to reduce the consumption of California's water resources. The MOU is administered by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC). The DMMs as defined in the;MOU are generally recognized as standard definitions of water conservation measures. 1. CUIWCC Demand Management Measures Implemented The existing conservation The City of Ukiah has had a water conservation program in place since the late 1970's. During the past five years, the City has expanded Its program and public outreach: The City reduced the amount of water it used by over 93% In 2007 and 11.4% in 2008 compared to 2004. Currently, the City's conservation program includes the following DM Ms: DMM 1. Water survey programs for single-family residential and multi-famlly residential connections, The City tests customer meters upon request and.instructs customers in how to use their water meter to determine If there is a leak on the demand side of the meter. The City provides toilet leak detectlontablets to customers. DMM 3, System water' audits, leak detection, and repair. The City performs leak detection and repair on an ongoing basis. The City, also, calculates system water losses annually and reports this Information to DWR. DMM 4. Metering with commodity rates for all new connections and retrofit of existing connections. The City water distribution system is fully metered. The City is currently replacing old meters In the system. The new meters will provide a more accurate reading of water use within the City. The City recently went through a rate re-structuring that is believed will reduce water uses in the future. DMM S. Large landscape conservation programs and incentives. The City's Planning Department reviews all landscape plans proposed for new developments Included in the City's Municipal Code is a requirement for all landscape planting to be "those which grow well in Ukiah's climate without extensive irrigation." City staff reviews the water use of its top 5 water users and holds meetings with them on a regular basis to discuss landscape conservation programs. DMM 7. Public information programs. The C. believes public awareness of water conservation issues Is an important factor in ensuring a reliable water supply. The City promotes public awareness of water conservation through occasional bill stuffers, distribution of the Consumer Confidence Report, radio broadcasts, newspaper articles, the City of Ukiah's "Activity and Recreation Guide", distribution of brochures and additional Information at local expositions and fairs, and on the City website advertised to the community on a banner across a City thoroughfare. The City also provides free'of charge water conservation yard signs to encourage minimal use of water for lawn irrigation, Water conservation Information and assistance is routinely provided to the public by the water utility maintenance-staff and meter readers while In the field. Field staff receives conservation training to better assist customers and promote conservatlon. Door hangers are used to remind customers of°Ukiah's Voluntary Water Conservation program measures and to provide notice of problems with outdoor water use. DMM 8. School education programs. City staff presents information on water conservation to elementary school children in the classroom. The City offers local schools tours of Its water treatment plant and also provides educational materials; Four science classes on public water supply at the high school are offered ;once ' a year. DMM 9. Conservation programs for commercial, industrial, and institutional accounts The City has only two industrial customers: Maverick Industries and Red Tail Ale Brewery. The City surveys the water usage of these industries. Any new commercial, industrial, or institutional developments will be reviewed by the City Planning Department and must meet all requirements of the Municipal Code. DMM 'i`i. Conservation pricing. In 2005, the City Increased and re-structured its water rates to encourage more conservation. The City has simplified Its. rate structure by eliminating rate codes and classifying customers according to their meter size. The new rate structure Incorporates the American `Water Works Association (AWWA) demand capacity guidelines so that price Increases across meter size in proportion to the potential demand a customer can place on the water system. DMM 12, Conservation Coordinator. The City's Conservation Coordinator Is essential to sustaining and Improving Ukiah's ongoing water conservation program. The conservation coordinator Is responsible for implementing and monitoring the ;City's water conservation activities. In practice, the City's water conservation program includes the efforts of the Conservation Coordinator and all staff. DMM 13. Water waste prohibition. The City has adopted regulations that state in part: "Where negligent or wasteful use of water exists on a customer's premises ...the City may discontinue the service..." (City Municipal Code Article 7, Section 3671). The City first sends customers a letter calling their attention to the wasteful practice and asking for correction. if the condition is not corrected within five days after the written notice, service may be discontinued if necessary. DMM 14. Residential ULFT replacement programs. Since October 1992, the sale of toilets using more than 1.6 gallons per flush has been prohibited by State and Federal regulations. These regulations are enforced in the City. 11. Additional Water Conservation `Measures in addition to the DMMs, the City has also taken the foilawing actions;- 1. Installation offive waterless urinals in the Ukiah Civic Center to support and promote the use of waterless urinals In all City facilities and In the publio sector. The use of these urinals has received very positive feedback from Facilities staff who would like to Install these in the Ukiah Valley Conference Center. 2. Cooperative water conservation programs have been developed between the City and the Mendocino County Water Agency, the Russian River Public Water Agencies, and the Sonoma County Water Agency. 3. The Ukiah City Council. adopted the Ahwahnee Water Principles on April 4, 2007. The principles contain ideas for protecting and enhancing water quality, improving water availability, making more efficient use of water, and conserving water as a scarce resource. The Principles suggest a process for improving decision-making` as it impacts water-related issues. The City Council reviewed the Principles and determined the Ideas and suggestions promote the Council's stated goats. Ill. Future Water Conservation Activities The City has recently undertaken a rate and revenue study of its water utility. A tiered inclining block rate structure and excess use charge are being evaluated to-encourage water conservation. The City has submitted a pre-application to the State Water Resourbes Control Board State Revolving Fund to construct a recycled water system, The City's Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project Is scheduled to be completed by June 20013. After the project is completed, the plant will be capable of producing 2 million gallons per day (MGD) in the summer and up to 7.5 MGD In the winter of Title 22 unrestricted use recycled water. Other immediate and long-term conservation measures Include: ■ installation of waterless urinals and dual flush toilets in all City buildings (immediate) ■ Sign the California Urban Water Conservation Council's Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban. Water Conservation and implement the 14 best management practices (long term) Water efficiency standards for new single-family development (long term) • Water: efflclent landscaping (long term)' • water waste ordinance prohibiting; (immediate) 1, gutterfiooding 2, carwash fundraisers 3. non-recycling decorative water fountains 4, breaks or leaks jr! the water delivery system Incentives far Retrofits (long term) 1. low Now shower heads 2. toilet displacement devices 3, toilet flappers 4. faucet aerators s. high efficiency washing machines 6. ultra-low flow toilets City of Ukiah ITEM NO.. MEETING DATE: AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 7f August 4, 2010 SUBJECT: UPDATE REPORT REGARDING STATUS OF WATER EMERGENCY CONDITIONS NECESSITATING EMERGENCY RESOLUTION TO EXPEDITE CONSTRUCTION OF OAK MANOR DRIVE WATER WELL Background: On March 4, 2009, at a regular meeting of the Ukiah City Council, an emergency resolution was adopted to expedite the construction of a water well at Oak Manor Drive in Oak Manor Park to the east of the tennis courts. Pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 22050(b)(1), the City Council delegated authority to the City Manager to order action pursuant to subparagraph (a)(1) of that section and directed the City Manager to undertake all steps necessary to have the well constructed without going through a formal competitive bidding process. Pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 22050(b)(3), adoption of this resolution requires the City Manager to report back to the City Council at its next regular meeting setting forth the reasons justifying why the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from the formal competitive solicitation for bids for the well and why the action is necessary to respond to the emergency. Discussion: The reasons for the emergency were set forth in Resolution No.2009-12. These reasons continue to exist: 1) the State of Emergency declared by the Governor of California due to drought conditions, 2) recommendation to municipalities from Victoria Whitney, Deputy Director for Water Rights for the State of California Water Resources Control Board, that drought conditions may necessitate suspension of surface water rights this summer and to secure groundwater sources, 3) the time required to drill, develop, and construct a temporary connection from a new groundwater well into the City's water distribution system is not sufficient to comply with the noticing requirements of the Public Contracts Code formal bidding process. The date of the bid opening for construction of the Gobbi Street well head and pump house was June 18, 2009. The contractor mobilized their equipment on site on July 13. Substantial completion of this project was November 10t". The time required from the bid opening to substantial completion of the Gobbi Street well head and pump house was approximately five months. Continued on Page 2 Recommended Action(s): Receive the report. Alternative Council Option(s): Reject recommended action(s) and provide staff with alternate direction. Citizens advised: n/a Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Prepared by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Coordinated with: Jane Chambers, City Manager Attachments: Approved: e Chambers, City Manager In the December 16, 2009 Agenda Summary Report, Item 7d, a best case schedule was developed assuming the Oak Manor well head and pump house bid in December 2009 and construction started no later than January. With this schedule it was possible the Oak Manor well (Well #8) would have been completed, in May 2010. This completion date assumed a shortened bid period and no delays due to weather or other circumstances. Bids were issued on January 8, 2010. The revised schedule includes the January bid date and a 30 day noticing period with bids due February 9t". The lowest, qualifying bid was submitted by Wipf Construction in the amount of $377,000 and was approved by Council on February 17t". Construction began April 26, 2010. On the July 28th inspection the well house structure is completed and so is the site work. The landscaping contractor is working to repair areas of the park that were damaged during construction. The electrical equipment for running the pump is in and the public works staff is coordinating with the City's electrical department for power. ITEM NO.: 9a MEETING DATE: August 4, 2010 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DENIAL OF BUILDING CODE APPEAL FILED BY STEVEN JOHNSON ON BEHALF OF THE MENDOCINO COUNTY SAVINGS BANK (MAIN STREET APARTMENTS) SUMMARY: A Building Code appeal has been filed by the property owners of the Main Street Apartment complex on South Main Streets. They are objecting to a determination made by the City Building Official and have requested that this determination be overturned. While the City Council recently adopted a Resolution creating rules and procedures for establishing a Building Code Appeals Board, the actual Board has not yet been formally appointed by the City Council. In the absence of a local Building Code Appeals Board, the City Council can act as the body to consider and act on the appeal. This Agenda item is seeking the City Council's consideration and action on the appeal filed by Mr. Steven Johnson, Attorney for the Savings Bank of Mendocino County, owners of the Main Street Apartments (see Attachment 1) BACKGROUND: A building permit was issued on September 22, 2006, for the conversion of apartments into townhomes at the Main Street Apartment Complex on South Main Street. The project moved slowly and on November 25, 2008, at the request of the applicants, a final inspection was performed by the Building Official for 21 of the 38 units. On May 25, 2010, applications for building permits to convert two additional units (units 32 and 33) from apartments to townhomes were submitted to the City by a contractor on behalf of the property owners. Continued on Page 2 Recommended Action(s): 1) Deny the appeal filed by Steven Johnson Alternative Council Option(s): Support the Appeal filed by Steven Johnson Citizens advised Steven Johnson, Appellant Requested by: David Willoughby, Building Official Prepared by: David Willoughby, Building Official Coordinated with: Jane Chambers, City Manager, David Rapport, City Attorney, and Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development 1)Appeal Letter and exhibits A, B and C to David Willoughby from Steven Johnson, dated July 12, 2010 2) Plan check comment letter to Steve Woodbury dated June 9, 2010 Attachments: 3)Letter to Steven Johnson from David Willoughby, dated June 22, 2010 4)Letter to David Willoughby from Steven Johnson, dated June 28, 2010 5)Email to Steven Johnson from David Willoughby, dated July 7, 2010 Approved: C~~cy Ja Chambers, City Manager 7 Building Plan Check: A building plan check was performed and plan check comments were generated and provided to the applicant (Attachment 2). Since the original permit was issued, the California Building Codes have changed and these changes add additional costs to the conversion of the units. The property owner does not want to incur these additional costs and has filed an appeal contending that the original permit was finalized in error and should be reinstated, thus avoiding the new Building Code requirements. The appellant objects to the Building Official's requirement for them to obtain new building permits for the conversion of the remaining 17 apartments into townhomes. The appellant believes that the original permit covered all 38 units and it should be reinstated. A series of meetings, letters and emails followed attempting to resolve the differences between appellant and Staff; however an agreement was not reached. THE ISSUE: The original project consisted of creating a subdivision with each apartment being converted to a condominium townhouse on a separate parcel. Each of these townhome units/parcels should have been assigned a separate address and Staff should have required a separate Building Permit for each. As with any subdivision, each separate parcel of land and the home built upon it requires a separate permit. However, a single Building Permit was issued for the project, which in hindsight was an error. This complicated the situation when the applicant stopped work after the completion of unit 21, and indicated to Staff that he did not anticipate performing additional work for an extended period of time. Section 3030 of the City Code amended Section 105.5 of the 2007 California Building Code as follows: "Every permit issued by the building official under the provisions of this code shall expire by limitation and become null and void unless a required inspection is received and signed off within 180 days after its issuance or within 180 days of the last received and signed off inspection. The building official is authorized to grant in writing one or more extensions of time for periods not more than 180 days each. The extension shall be requested in writing by the permittee prior to the permit expiration and justifiable cause demonstrated. If a permit expires, the permittee may apply to reinstate the permit subject to a fee established from time to time by resolution of the city council." Permit Reinstatement: The Building Official determined that the most prudent way to address the situation was to finalize the Building Permit and to require the applicant to apply for new permits when he was ready to commence with the project. The Building Official was not willing to grant any extensions of the Building Permit for the following reasons: 1. The original permit was issued in error by not requiring a permit for each separate unit; and 2. The value of the project was understated and, therefore, the fees charged were low (there were approximately 30 inspections performed for a cost of $1121.39 or $37.36 per inspection, which did not pay for the time the Building Official spent inspecting the project, and the project was far from completed. The original permit was issued on September 22, 2006, pursuant to the 2001 California Building Code. The permit expired on March 22, 2007, because no inspections were performed within 180 days of issuance. The permit was reinstated on August 20, 2007, and regular inspections 2 were made until the project stalled on November 25, 2008. Since the 2007 California Building Code was adopted by the City on January 1, 2008, the Building Official was not willing to reinstate the permit, if it expired again for the same reasons as stated above. Therefore on November 25, 2008, with the knowledge of the owner/applicant, the Building Official, finalized the permit for the conversion of 21 units to townhomes, and signed both the applicant's and the City's copies of the Permit, noting on the City's copy that the scope of the permit was limited to units 1 through 21. When the original permit for the conversion of the apartments to townhomes was submitted on August 22, 2006 the 2001 California Codes were in effect. Currently the 2007 California Codes are in effect. With the updating of the California Codes from 2001 to 2007 two requirements have changed which affect this project. They include: 1. Bathroom fans are now required in all bathrooms which contain showers or bathtubs whether or not windows open to the outside are present (in the previous code fans were only required if a window of 1.5 square feet open to the outside was not present). 2. Stair treads and risers are now required to be a minimum of 10" wide and a maximum of 7 3/" high respectively (this has changed from a minimum of 9" wide and a maximum of 8" high respectively). NEW PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND COSTS: 2 of the remaining 17 units left to convert to townhomes have a building permit application already submitted with the City. The other 15 units will need applications submitted. Plans have been submitted for the conversion of the apartments to townhomes. These plans have been reviewed and written comments have been sent to the applicant. Once the plans are revised to address plan check comments and resubmitted to the City another plan check will be performed. If all of the items on the plan check comment letter were sufficiently addressed, then a permit will be ready to issue. Once the revised plans are submitted to the City they will be reviewed within one week. The Building Official told the applicant that one set of plans will suffice for the remaining 17 units. The permit fees will be based on the job cost for converting the apartments into townhomes and any additional plumbing, mechanical and electrical work done. Since only one plan review will be performed for the project, then the plan check fee will be reduced accordingly. Based on the job cost listed for the 2 permits applied for already ($17,000 each) the fees for each permit will be approximately as follows: Building permit = $309 Plan check = $87 (normally $201) Electrical = $38 Mechanical = $42 SMPT, GPF, BSA = $75 Total = $551 RECOMMENDATION: Deny the appeal Fiscal Impact: Not applicable 3 Attachment # ( ~ CHARLES B. MANNON JAMEs F. KING STEPHEN F. JOHNSON Hand Delivered David Willoughby City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 MANNON, KING & JOHNSON ATTORNEYS AT LANv SAVINGS BANK BUILDING, SUITE 304 200 NORTH SCHOOL STREET P.O. Box 419 UKIAH, CALIroRNIA 95482 TELEPHONE: 707468-9151 FACSIMILE: 707.468-0284 steve@mkjlex.com June 12, 2010 Re: 541 South Main Street Building Permit # 13558 Dear Mr. Willoughby: As you likely are aware, Mr. Rapport has agreed that the City Council is the governing body that should hear the Saving Bank of Mendocino County's appeal to your decision to deny it an extension of time to complete construction wider Building Permit ##13558 ("the Permit"). I am writing to you at Mr. Rapport's direction to request an immediate hearing before the Ukiah City Council' pursuant to California Building Code Section 108.8.3 and to outline Savings Bank's reasons for appealing your decision. Steven Woodbury originally applied for a building permit on August 22, 2006, so that he could complete the changes required by the City as a condition of the City's prior approval of his request to convert 38 apartments located at 541 South Main Street from R-1 occupancy to town homes R-3 occupancy. Specifically, as a condition to the approval of the conversion of the 38 apartments to town homes, the City required that the common walls between the separate units be modified and "1 hour firewalls" be installed along with some other upgrades that were required by the 2001 Building Code. ("the Project"). The Permit was approved following the City's review and approval of stamped plans prepared by Thomas Alan Hunt, a registered' engineer ("Plans"). The Plans specifically include and address all 38 units that were required to be modified as a condition of City's prior approval of the conversion. The Permit was issued by the City on September 22, 2006, and a copy of the Permit that was provided to Steven Woodbury is attached as Exhibit A. The Permit 7--- David. Willoughby July 12, 2010 Page 2 provided to Mr.. Woodbury states the "Description of Work" as "Change Occupancy From R-1 to R-3 Install Firewalls." Exhibit A does not state that the Permit is for less than the 38 units that were required to be modified. A copy of the Permit that was recently provided to the Savings Bank by the City out of its building permit file is attached as Exhibit B. The Permit which is attached as Exhibit B. is exactly the same as Exhibit A, except it also states "Units 1-21" in the section titled "Description of Work'.. The terms "Units 1-21" written on Exhibit B do not appear to have been written with the same `pen as the other portion of the Description of Work. Mr. Woodbury has informed the Savings Bank that he requested a building permit for the modification of all of the units and did not request that the Project be completed in phases. Contrary to City's position, Mr. Woodbury is positive that the Penilit that he was issued was for all 38 units. Mr. Woodbury's opinion is substantiated by the fact that it would have been highly unlikely for the California Department of Real Estate to approve the conversion if Woodbury's building permit did not encompass all of the units. Mr. Woodbury's position is also consistent with the letter that you wrote to him on September 22, 2006, which stated that "[a] Building Permit has been issued to change the apartments from R-1 occupancy to Town homes an R-3 occupancy. Once the work has been completed as indicated on the plans, the buildings will comply with the requirements of the 2001 California Building Code for R=3 occupancies." A copy of your letter is attached as Exhibit C. Exhibit C clearly appears to address all of the units and does not state that the Permit was being issued for anything less than all of the units. This letter also appears to be consistent with the Plans, the Permit issued to Mr. Woodbury, and Mr. Woodbury's recollection of the scope of the Permit. We raise the discrepancies between the two "Descriptions of Work" because your letter dated June 22, 2010, states that you will not extend the Permit to complete the conversion because you signed the Permit as "complete". A careful review of the second page of Exhibit A reflects that each of the units appear to have had a "final" inspection. The final inspection of the writ that you made on November 25, 2008, was no different than the other units that you "f paled" on previous occasions. All indications are that the Permit that was provided to Mr. Woodbury was for all the units and designation of the Permit as "complete" was in error. The fact of the matter is that Mr. Woodbury and the Savings Bank have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process of obtaining the City and California Department of Real Estates approval of the conversion of the apartments to town homes. /13 David Willoughby July 12, 2010 Page 3 The conversion was dependent upon obtaining a building permit to install new firewalls, which was granted by the City. Mr. Woodbury, the Savings Bank and its predecessor in interest, Bank of Willits, relied upon the City's representations in the Permit and other correspondence to their apparent detriment. The City's claim that the Permit was for less than all of the units has forced the Savings Bank and Mr. Woodbury to suspend their conversion of the units, which has resulted in serious delay and damages. The Savings Bank intended to begin work in March 2010, but the conversion process has been halted by this Permit issue. The City's denial of the Savings Bank's request for an extension of the Permit has prevented the conversion of the remaining units and seriously impacted its ability to sell units during the summer months, which is prime "selling season" for houses. Savings Bank presently has only one converted unit available for sale and it should be sold out in the near future. Based upon my discussions with you and local contractors, architects and engineers, the City always provides extensions of a building permit upon expiration after a nominal fee is paid. These same individuals have also stated that building permits which are reinstated are completed according the approved plans, and the City does not require updated plans to complete reinstated permits. Savings Bank believed that it. would be treated in the same manner as other applicants and its Permit would be reinstated in accordance with common practice. The City's failure to reinstate the Permit is unjustifiably increasing the cost of the conversion process. Savings Bank requests that City Council reinstate the existing Permit, thereby allowing it to complete' the conversion of the. remaining apartments in accordance with the approved Plans and the Permit issued to Mr. Woodbury, It is improper for theCity to rely on an altered permit and wrong for it to apply different "permit reinstatement rules" as a means of denying Savings Bank request to extend the time to complete construction under the Permit. Reinstatement of expired building permits is the Department of Planning and Building's conumon practice and the Savings Bank's Permit should be reinstated like those of other applicants. Sinly y` S. phel F Johnson encl. cc: David Rapport Charley Stump Client 1 _ 4- I HIBMA ' ~Qll S~RfI~IAF~iXAVC Y ~t v llk , BUILDtNG.',P~t l11T p'f(tAfi 6739 3x.~ ° I ~ ~ cn ~Zl 3..n n _O~ ro y Q l „ ~ i T r>• j I. ~ ~ i..,.L P tic n0 1~~ 1 v 4 0 ~ ivf ~ h • ~ tit ~ O ~l ~n; 1 p 2 - V i r y r-. m I I _o Jt~ ~S~ O ~ } 1 F O ~ -r~ t r ~ A._ `^'ti. > ~.t D a m -L. s W7ai r~7[ r rt 1 p, , I t ~ ' I J`L t1c ~~~r•1',y. j ➢ 1~. z~ 1-x rf 7 - _ b l ' r 'C t_ O~ { ~ j ~ C " 'ti._ IA V f~'ni Z Y ~ ^~i~ , j n ~ y t r t G ? F «ri~~f~" ~ :yam t`5n:': ~ v° G? ~~`y, ~4 .r~.0 h' 37 C xfn ! ' ~ 1 f : ' ~ y . < LL ".»'f'M ~`"4 ~ -f .•7r n,3 I ; N~ 1 • r 'y v K ➢ L ~ CI x7 ~I tNG1 m~'y~f pa{~Il y~ , iV~ EI mik, ~C.~ l ~ ~ _ x r~ T. h u. _ . : ( .1.' y I{ • rry 1 ; N y i'•£ n r L7 a : f , i ~'y z~~ 1 Q - Q 3ff = v Zv D Z ~ U v 'Q r ny ao r r m~ Z yzP~ ~ C3 ~ _ • t ~ . f .~,`L tIJL'~~ ~i 1 r~ + t ~ t tt^"~'17 3 ~o- ytiaF777 cy1 . '1N~ 7^'Q , G Ian ~ ~ ~1'iy, zQ = 4 t•~. l S _ aa{{p~~p~..~,~.. A 0 ~ .f-.YC;P1/ YY Lirl:Tl ^I 1 •'1~{~jl. '.S. ~~~~~'f Y'iu~ ~ ~ I yl LI OO i i yM~ 1'.~ p.L .r ~a...~ ;"q `y y~, ~S. Jy, F8„; ~ G .(ryj K 2 yy~ p yyr~i ~ V 1 °.1 03'•~~ "-SOA x v i , 21 9x'- zaaT Z~ 2r^ m{ rn nD Y \11 E~ 4 lJ~ e Ir al s Qg iy qn n lop - liva' p°x>?. o>~ n wz ~ F > fl c z:u~f to O: . i kJ4 . . ~ Lt rte a ~rn , Jl k T n ~om :E91a < z r,{ a µ ~y S,. t n ff 1 fO ~ •3~,V~ :76 y . A m O D p,2 h » ' C h \ f+6 - l C'I ~ ~ ~Y 6,{ m r^ a ~ -a y ,p oq oo ~ . A TI•Zs " v v o > z= wm o~•, ~ ~1 3~ r ~ (r+ 7C J!z ~ ` ~ 1~71~ Q, N dC{ { I rtFr ' om, nv {ro-:O.m,J~"•'t l,i S ' { l r L~ 1 1 4 D ; y trL N .i N'+ A F.. F ~G' rfn T ~ . ~m~ ,Y ' . -'(S . O H~ ~n' `Si 'M la ~i Slyyl z .71~ , § "ri ({y T n(~ ~ ' yy ~ f 'fi ~ O~r(. yc LA'- <v b t2 ~ ~ m 1> m~- ~ y z• . et• p a < ti a i ~ ~ Z --OT Y, D- QCJ.v_y..~ J'?t`~ ~D 1~~.4. i a S~ ~ Z7 3,--~ } '[i f ~ t S~. P 21'1: ' ~ ~ ~ Yy ' • ~ ~ ! ! ~ ' pGf 1 ~ ~ ~ i p'7. y~1 ~ '.i'~• 1'4 Q ~ Y` l b ~ - L 1 a ~J L''' Gh. '~j. ~J`-/~ ;Ip yn •-.?-r;•. ^'ti'< QtA m.? t ~ ~ ~ i f y> D 's ki }•IZr"'''. ii r T 4 ,4Y F: ~'-b yY ~ O. 4 '`f i^.t~n Oi~ 1 - Lqn:1.211 A bb y 'h O x ~ p~ ( ~y 5 .l +.Y W.~.. { (at ~ d,~; I P ~ «t ; 5 4.i~ CP~ ~ r '~j3v1~x;S~.~ar•a.~ M K v 'p I~t I " S`~s I. • I Q J 1 ' TO Ll " ' ' ~ ~ Z~ y YVA.- I^/. C'(.Y {Y r'• 7( Y t In LO Z PI . . A . Y i , 4L~~.~ Ir4..., f : t CA'. y ~ ~ ~ , ~'"y ;.'T7 W Cj7. r _4 O~ 4 " 4~ ~ ~7i r•Ty1 O , ~►S s+ ~ C7 ( 1 c 7 CAI I t _ 1 i a 1 A, m . T~ t lh- Vrt~' (D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (/f ~ ~ W i Y ~ X11 •7 C 1+, R•_ro Q.Q," # . 1 1' i. in :~.rn cn. v ca ni ?~'7U ti rr. c a ~o' •.,.,,4 1 :tea. ; Fri t ~V r~• 1 , 9.7 ti 1Y~ C\ . TYPEGF1NSFECTION I a natF INSP. REMARKS FOUNDATION INSPECTION Tree Protection Setbacks Prior to Trenching Erosion Control Measures (Public Works) LIFER Ground' Important Notes: It is the Permittee's Trenches/Forms/Rebar responsibility to arrange for inspections during Concrete Block construction and upon' completion. Under-floor - Electrical 24 hours notification required for all inspections.. Under-floor- Mechanical Under-floor- Plumbing Under-floor - Framing DO NOT COVER WORK UNTIL ABOVE IT EMS HAVE BEEN SIG NED OFF FRAMING INSPECTION /T ~~~f~ '7yo" lp . °~J• ' i~ G G o Rough Electrical v ~ ✓/+~/~y Rough Mechanical Rough Plumbing Rough Framing Siding/O.S. Lath Roo[ Sheathing DO NOT COVER WORK UNTIL ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN SIGNED OFF WALLBOARD INSPECTION , ~lZl fU7 ~(~u¢,1 ~x Ei-rtntltt uG~ I'( t3vDCZrS SS Sheet Rock IN or)Vje4-- 5r-V,AO-'-:s r~l6CF' .cam I'wc`r9rf1 36"IJau21 Firewail . . Ai 1~( Fti a 7 % 4 , ~ DO NOT COVER WORK UNTIL ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN SIG NED OFF PUBLIC WORKS DEFT. Subgrede 44-11 fJcP a 6 7 Base Aggregate ' Drainage structures Final Paving Misc. Site Concrete Formwork / -t~7 Ta~2cllt E~~'x b :PLANNING DEFT. INSPECTION Parking/Hardscape ,Z1 V- lrz Pre-Landscaping/ Lighting y~l~ ~1ftJrr L!~ Signage 4-:1" / 'da- f~pC i' tee. DO NOT COVER WORK UNTIL ABOVE IT EMS HAVE BEEN SIGNED OFF yc FINAL INSPECTION f~7e!rJr.[>i!e/~ It»:.•'/' `r ~ ' ~ ~ Roofing ~ . Electrical All Mechanical 1 Plumbing I- 109-, It 1~r2 y✓J,sl) ~ + ~~.r'r 17 v,t. 1 /l Building j ,t r I ,f _ ~3 r`( l~J t l LV~'/ L c 'c rY Gas Piping Test ,j-l+7l.r~ t t s ll7" ~a t f c~ ater Piping Test Building Sever 4e-Pi 17- . /G+~Y J f r" 6 Electrical Tum-On . ~ ,;y l f/1 ~r rwSryoy{~C,7H[ W a"" Y iit di/'- 4N✓ / ,,r~ I~ 4•e r'~ 1e?' l Gas Turn-On - . ~ / _ j7,,~f.~Gs~r G.e~A'L-'~t" / t`' sw► + Insulation Certificate +-ZlJ-!~'tPS-L • ~ Post-Construction Elevation Certificate TS / } ~fiCC. 'xr / j- /-i%~L% ' % Public Works Encroachment Permit Fire Department Z4i~L. /T ~Ti:li Planning Department ',ytGt' /7- 1 ' Lam" ~,1(M ~J,.~ .r~i~tir!,~ tj ~rr~ ;'xs •tuy~ r ;j 'J ~ t.~.^". 1-7 4c ADDITIONAL INSPECTIONS SHEET I r, .3, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone 707-463-6200 Fax 707-463-6204 wtivw.cityofiikiab.com 7 xI~r rr YY~~ may, ry 1 PAP~ra r„ Isr r , k; F Tf1 CE1~ VIC, 1 ~I ~vnrt F- V r F , rjhh6u 5 /-7 /-/a MY of ithiah INSPEiCTOR COPY 300. SEMINARY AVE.. UKIAH, CA 95482 ou Hn-A An* e-l'Jn APPLICATION F.OR. BUILDING PERMIT 1. . _ - - . n 4 x y." p to r~- - gym: N G) xm M m ~ 2:9 0 41. =Cv vx oCO Mao a.-yom. 'a OR Z! u_ 7 i v ~ r- 61 Z .S Om 70 ~ ' 3 m N OG C7- ~ O W •a A~ D Z D • •i ~m ry P Dr-1 rt"f~ C D. ;N p. ~ M u,z,~~.xt~n .per N~tpC >ms DAVi Oxin C > C C i~ -~r ~ 9 D OD D ~ Ord-.. ~ m m (AZ 0 ~i y..' p y. S z. m D m LI n ~C_•n m- n A Y Z. i u D ~n ZsZ..an ~°ry21a y >z a o111 m x nYir ~f11 mT ~Z 2 a ~z Z ~O : .a " 'Z ~ z ~m QF wz C~ zr m^~^ O ~ mo , ~ rnf r z . n D, vp , n 0 1 Gim m (A 47 m.Z1 t n 13c) Am 9;0 ;v 7CT ~ lY y . ' '!1 mxVFii O ~ y Z °S ~°ao❑ pN~~ t❑ l _ $ m ❑ m . ;...1 x _ n. 0- y~m^ ZZp.Ag? v'- i zr a nw ~Z Qp o 0 7n y x ysp~, an 0" G F svOo ZoZ =UZ ~ZX Oc Mm. 'M _ n = Z b a SA y17 of ~ -10 ~ m ifM p 'pp xNom AfM ~ ° om OpTm va >T o-„ I o r~ 0m ° nz ml s • 0 r O Z > m in ZO 02 z Cpa Z,n+z ap m •{~11 Nk~~'n_= " = ~ m. M. \ Cm DzT 10 oO ZZ 7r moa ipaa... X ~ 0 Z p v'HO'O°y " Z? A ° (J^ 1~ ` R~ y T. Y G 2n 9 nuiy m .3 n a N.=..y A~.pv mo OxP.~ 2 NZ . ~'0. ti S ~ ~~11 V ed y :u ~O ~i Z 0 \ tar [ 0+ r~11 Z,~~ Z 3 Ym A 9z~r~ ONC..•g O : ac xT= D O m Z. Zrn ~ VY . ^Ix x 3~ _ P - Xc 'tlm~ DD ~za l°n{1 pONN H m0 cc) >TK a Say w CJ A D x~ I a< = oxf Sm a ~m D T s Q Aa ( : ~I~i m iA~z c„DO= m DZA A°va..$D z" A A M m r C 'A n n i I I- Z 0D n.3.. r_ eo 1 T 1 T INZ . z m My N Z OJU=mN Kann D:? a f :J Z aoo $7O=~ t~ ( M A 0- p tA~~ Z ti » -t vm _ vi ❑ D c w D a Z $f S OZ '35 i D +3 ~y: (A C m fcn TnA u n H 00 a 0x z N 22 ^OC O =pn$O 041 G1Oni = x On 1 m h~ w ` C7 Z t .=i fl m fx=,>r Apf.~oA >1 Az y. . V - (fl C P 1 O O O ~ C mi m Sy M ri0 0^ n ati z o ~OZ Zxxsn omw~ . N yy O S a. Elm- ' -i r i•'Q 2 l Cz..D OCnyOzZNm ~ c° AZ Z2.•rpa, >p 0 D N D. tf~~ is D i V VV ~+i" T 'C. t n A N £ 8 91 1 I°z ~i /`J 0OZ Mbcsm°yyr=a o Y -n zrA Nn Op=f NpZ:m:lcp~ .'Q'_0 mxp o . O < e~ N V} v. O m y~ H . -Z Q ~ N. m min a 2r~. . a `c ~ 71 W,. rn _~1V W "O Z o ` ' n_ 9 f0 m C7 m A m _ p ro , a -`Dp I m y C rt" a N l 0 (D -n m (D (D D ~ N. A N U ` Q Q ~ Q ~ Q Q~ N ~ •Gr► *i m CD yn tr fD ° %„A w m (D Z n 0 v o ' O c; o 0\ 4- S0.1 N ~~p ❑ ❑ C9 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑N R191 o CM cn m ro o Q to n 3 m cn o ip Fn- L~ n m an ro rn y O C7 I t I` m rrr `O n Z Wl C C n A ~ ~ I t I•~~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ m (e7. 3' O C'..Qe" m w ro i^`~ n L 1 .-I -0 C ~ . p ` • V jA`~`i '4 .y ~ Y m a a 4 a ti EX H F:~ ~ ~ T September 22, 2006 Steve Woodbury C 541 S Main St. #13 Uldah, CA 95482 Tear Mr. Woodbury: A Building Pm-mithas been issued to change the apartments from an R-1 occupancy to Town homes an, R-3 occupancy. Once the work has been completed as indicated on the plans, the buildings will comply with the requirements of the 2001 California Building Code for R-3 occupancies. If you have any further questions feelfree.to contact me at (707) 467-5718. Sincerely, David Willoughby Building Inspector City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone 707-463-6200 Fax 707-463-6204 www.cityofuldah.com June 09, 2010 Steve Woodbury 551 S. Main Street #18 Ukiah. CA 95482 RE: #A-7587,7588 551 S. Main St., #32, #33 Affach -nt f# Z- i t.. i~ riS ~I r 'lie City' of Ukiah has reviewed the documents submitted for the above referenced project for conformance to the City's adopted building codes. Attached are the comments from various departments that need to be addressed prior to re-submittal. Please submit three complete corrected, plan sets, two wet stamped and signed. If you have questions please call me at (707) 463-6203. 6 ~n Katrina M. Ballard Development Permit Coordinator 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 Phone# 707/463-6200 Fax# 707/463-.6204 Web Address: www.cityofultiah.com Affachment # 3; _ I June 9,_201`0 Steve Woodbury 551 S. Main St. #18 Ukiah; CA 95482 Subject: Application #A-7587 and 88 Site Address 551 S. Main St. 932 and 33 Dear Mr. Woodbury: Thank you for your recent permit application. Please note that these comments are only in regards to the building departments plan review, there may be other comments generated by other departments and you will want to incorporate all the corrections in your next submittal. We have begun the review process and find that the following additional inf6rinationwill be needed: Please provide: plan sheets that show the floor plans and include the electrical, mechanical and plumbing requirements for the conversion of the R-2 occupancy to an R-3 occupancy. These include but are not limited to the following: a. 110V with battery backup smoke detectors in each bedroom, the hallway giving access, the top of the stairs and each floor of the dwelling unit. b. All bedroom electrical outlets protected by an ARC Fault breaker (includes the receptacles, lights, smoke detectors, etc). c. 2 dedicated 20A small appliance, circuits in the kitchen. d. 1 dedicated 20A circuit to bathroom receptacles. e. 1 dedicated'20A circuit to the washing machine' receptacle., f. All receptacles above the kitchen counter, in bathrooms, garages, and outside are GFCI protected. g. All lighting and switching meets the 2009 California Energy Code' (florescent light fixtures or various switching requirements). h. Exhaust fans installed in all bathrooms. i. Stair treads and risers 10" min and 73/4" maximum respectively. j. Hand rail at stairways between 34 to 38" above the nose of the tread and returned to the wall or posts at the top and bottom. k. Emergency egress window size and maximum eight requirements are shown (minimum 5.7 sq. ft. and minimum 44" from floor to opening). 1. 1.6 gal. flush toilets. 2. Indicate the following information on the cover sheet of the plans: a. That the purpose.of this permit is to convert the apartments (R-2 occupancy) to townhomes (R-3 occupancy). b. The code edition that the plans are complying with (2007 CBC, CMC, CPC, CEC and the 2008 California Energy Code). c. Which units these plans apply to (i.e. lot 21 through lot 38). 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone 707-463-6200 Fax 707-463-6204 www.cityofukiah.com 3 ~ PLEASE PROVIDE ALL INFORMATION ON RE SUBMITTED BUILDING DOCUMENTS. Upon receipt of this information, we can continue with the plan check. PLEASE RESPOND TO THE ABOVE ITEMS BY MARKING ON THE MARGIN WHERE THE CORRECTION CAN BE FOUND AND RETURNING THE LIST OR A COPY OF IT WITH YOUR RESUBMITTAL. Note: If your permit is not obtained within 180 days from the initial plan check submittal date, your application will expire and new fees will be assessed. Sincerely, David Wil Building C 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone 707-463-6200 Fax 707-463=6204 tvww.cityofukiah.com AlPachment # June 22, 2010 C Steve Johnson Atty 200 N. School St. Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Mr. Johnson: I have consulted with the City Attorney, regarding the above-referenced building permit, and have concluded that the permit has expired pursuant to California Building Code Section 105.5. If the Bank of Willits wants to convert additional units to townhouses for sale, it must apply for a new permit which would be issued pursuant to the 7007 edition of the California Building Code: At the completion of the conversion of 20 apartments in the 40 unit complex, I "finaled" the permit on November 25, 2008, with the knowledge of Steve Woodbury to whom the permit was issued. No further work has been performed under the permit since that date. Under Section 105.5, a building permit becomes invalid if work authorized by the permit is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after the work is commenced. No work authorized by the permit has been performed for more than 18 months. As we discussed at the meeting, as the City's building official I have discretion to extend the time for periods of no more than 180 days, but I would decline to exercise that authority, if the Bank of Willits were to apply for an extension. I have granted extensions in the past, even if the application is filed after the permit expired, but I have not done that where, as here, I have signed the permit as complete. If you have any questions in connection with applying for a building permit to convert more units to townhouses, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely David Willoughby Building Official 3 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone 707-463-6200 Fax 707-463-6204 www.cityofulciah.com Atiat:;ht1r ent # CHARLES B. MANNON JAMES F. KING STEPHEN F. JOHNSON MANNON, KING & JOHNSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW SAVINGS BANK BUILDING, SUITl3 304 200 NORTH SCHOOL STREET P.O. Box 419 UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 TELEPHONE; 707-46$-9151 FACSIMILE; 707-468=0284 stcvc@mkjlex.com June 28; 2010 David Willoughby City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: 541 South Main Street Building Permit # 13558 Dear Mr. Willoughby: In response to your letter dated Julie 22,2010,we formally request an extension of time to complete construction under Building Permit #13558, which was issued to address changes required to convert the apartments located at 541 South Main Street from R-1 occupancy to town homes R-3 occupancy. Your letter states that you will not provide us with an extension of time to complete the conversion under the existing building permit, if this remains your position, then we hereby request an immediate hearing before the City of Ukiah's "Housing Appeals Board"pursuant'to California Building Code Section 108.8.3. Thank you. Sincerely, St 'lien F. ohnson cc: Client Attachment # David Willoughby From: David Willoughby Sent Wednesday, July 07, 2010 12:34 PM To: Steve Johnson (steve@mkjlex.com) Subject: 541 S. Main' St. Hi Steve, As I mentioned earlier, I am not able to `reinstate a permit that has already been finaled. I am in the process of establishing an appeals board for the City of Ukiah. The council will adopt rules for the appeals board July 21, 2010 and will most likely appoint members to the board on August 18, 2010. Once this happens a hearing can be scheduled. Thanks, David DAVib WILLOUGHE3y, BUILDING OFFICIAL Office 707-467-5718 Fax 707-463-6204 ci ~~i limn ~>lil~r %?'z-i (~i~fGrl<i~rh.con7 LAW OFFICES SANTA ROSA w SAN FRANCISCO 4 EYw, IL-JL 600 BICENTENNIAL WAY, SUITE 300 SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA 95403 TELEPHONE (707) 524-4200 William A. Gillis FACSIMILE (707) 523-4610 Wgillis@lanaban.com 707 524-4220 May 30, 2006 VIA FA CSIMILE (70 7 462-3 776) & FIRST CLASS MAIL Jill Davis, Main Street Garden Town Homes 541 South Main Street, #13 Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: Main Street Garden Townhouses DRE File 124561SA-F00 Dear Jill: ■y~■ PROUD MEMBER OF • • • ✓ I WLEGAL& W- W.'..C Pursuant to our telephone conference today, please provide me with the following the additional information and documents requested by the DRE. ~i The following items are listed in the order they appear in the letter from Mary Libra. 2. Details on: a) retaining some of the townhouses for leasing; b) using the office and storage spaces, including any agreement with the HOA for payment of rent and expenses (utilities, etc.) 4. Items of renovation handled in Helsing letter. Will renovations be completed prior to close of escrow? If the renovations are not completed.by then, we will need to submit escrow instructions to deal with that issue. 7. How will.storage be divided.among the 38 units? 9 Provide building inspection reports or a statement from the City that the buildings confon~~wto the burldirig codes. LL~~ Lp V The following items are listed in the order they appear in the letter from Georgina Bixby. 6. Current preliminary title report. 14. Confirm City is to provide water. 17. Letter from Mendocino Flood Control Agency regarding flood and drainage condition. JOB 23. Purchase Contract. The sales contract we submitted appears to be complete. I have a call in to DRE to clarify what they want and will let you know if we need to provide another contract. 33. Transfer Disclosure Statement. Your real estate agent can provide this. ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 10a August 4, 2010 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING MOBILE HOME PARK RENT STABILIZATION SUMMARY: Last May, the City Council continued its discussion regarding mobile home park rent stabilization. After the discussion, which included public comment, the Council took action to direct staff to investigate the costs and allocation of staff time to implement a mobile home park rent stabilization ordinance. The Council further directed that this information be presented during the 2010-2011 budget review and adoption process. In early June, The City Attorney provided the City Council and City Manager with an analysis of three different mobile home park rent control ordinances to assist in the process of determining the potential cost of implementation. During the budget review process in June, staff provided the Council with an estimate of the cost to implement an ordinance ($30,000 to $46,000), and with a potential funding source (Redevelopment Housing Funds). The Council also received information concerning the potential benefits and pitfalls of implementing a mobile home park rent stabilization ordinance. Direction was provided to staff to return with a discussion of the existing tools the City uses to promote and provide affordable housing, and how these tools could potentially be used to contribute to the protection of the vulnerable mobile home park population. This Agenda Summary Report includes information provided by the City Attorney on June 2, 2010 (Attachment 1), the April 25, 2010 letter from Councilmember Baldwin (Attachment 2); a table showing the history (1991-2004) of the Redevelopment Agency 20% Housing set-a-side program (Attachment 3), a table showing the affordable housing units constructed or approved between 1991-2006 (Attachment 4); a summary of the mobile home park survey conducted late last year, and applicable draft policies and programs contained in the draft updated General Plan Housing Element. Continued on Paae 2 Recommended Action(s): Discuss mobile home park rent stabilization and provide direction to Staff. Alternative Council Option(s): Provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizens advised: Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Jane Chambers, City Manager, and David Rapport, City Attorney Attachments: 1.June 2, 2010 Agenda Summary Report from the City Attorney 2.April 25, 2010 letter from Councilmember Baldwin 3.Table of Redevelopment Agency 20% Housing Set-a-Side Program 1991-2004 4.Table of Affordable Housing Units Constructed 1991-2006 Approved: J Chambers, City Manager THE SURVEYS: The surveys were prepared in both English and Spanish and sent to each mobile home resident in the City. 357 surveys were mailed to mobile home park residents and 135 were returned (38%). Of those residents that responded, the majority: 1. Were female 2. Lived alone 3. Were 62 years old or older 4. Had an annual income of between $11,750 (extremely low) to $19,950 (very low). 5. Paid approximately $8,000 annually for rental space and utilities 6. Had concerns about a lack of mobile home park maintenance, increasing costs (utilities, rents), and a lack of social activities. 7. Were basically satisfied with living in their mobile home park. The Table on page 2 provides a more detailed look at the general themes of the responses. Attachment number 1 provides a detailed summary of the surveys received from each mobile home park. Survey Information Themes Mobile Home Number of Age of Income Monthly/Annual Approximate Satisfaction Park Units and Residents Levels Rent Cost of living in Park Responses Space and Unit Utilities Month/Annual Modern MHP 26/7 Majority Over Extremely low $650/$7,800 $200/$2,400 Satisfied 62 Very Low (space and unit) Low Majority Male Shad Grove 40/1 - - - - - Harold's 60/13 Majority Over Extremely low $390-$470 $250/$3,000 Very Satisfied Square 62 Very Low (space only) Low Majority $4,680 - $5,640 Female Rancho Del 96/23 Majority Over Extremely low $400-$480 $270/$3,240 Satisfied Ray 62 Very Low (space only) Low Majority $4,800 - $5,760 Female Manor Oaks 137/35 Majority Over Extremely low $430-$470 $270/$3,240 Satisfied 62 Very Low (space only) Low Majority $5,160 - $5,640 Female No Park 38 Surveys Majority Over Extremely low $400-$470 $250/$3,000 Satisfied Name Noted Received 62 Very Low (space only) Low Majority $4,800 - $5,640 Female INCOME NOTES: The majority of residents who responded were in the extremely low to very low income category. Extremely Low = $11,250 (1 person household) Very Low = $19,550 (1 person household) Low = $31,250 (1 person household) Moderate = $39,050 (1 person household) 2 DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT: The surveys and public testimony during the City Council's discussions regarding mobile home park rent stabilization have provided a considerable amount of valuable information for the update of the General Plan Housing Element. We now know that we have a significant senior population with extremely low and very low incomes living in our mobile home parks. We now know that many of the seniors are living alone and many residents have lived in the parks for 15 to 40 years. While many of the residents expressed concerns about rising costs, the majority are satisfied with living in the parks. Based on the information that has been gathered, it is clear that there is a greater need for affordable senior housing than previously believed, and that the senior citizen population is a significant Special Needs Group. This has may led to a stronger emphasis on creating more opportunities for affordable senior housing production in the updated Housing Element, particularly for seniors with extremely low and very low incomes. It also had led to a stronger program to preserve the existing housing stock available to all citizens with extremely low and very low incomes. Applicable Policies/Programs contained in the draft updated General Plan Housing Element: 1. Consider measures that would preserv%onserve existing mobile home parks such as a mobile home rehabilitation program, conversion to ownership program, infrastructure improvement incentives, rent stabilization, etc. 2. Continue to consider and explore HOME grant, CDBG and other funding sources to facilitate housing affordable to extremely low, very low and low income households. 3. As Staff resources allow, be aggressive in pursuing State and Federal funding for extremely low, very low, and moderate income housing developments, particularly for those with special needs, such as senior citizens. 4. Allow senior housing projects to be developed with parking requirements less stringent than those specified in the Zoning Ordinance, where found to be consistent with maintaining the character of the surrounding neighborhood, 5 Provide density bonuses to projects that provide a required percentage of total units affordable to extremely low, very-low and low-income households and for units meeting the special housing needs identified in this Element, 6. Identify and support programs that address the housing needs of special needs groups and work with local organizations that can address their housing needs, EXISTING TOOLS: Priority could be given to the General Plan Housing Element policies and programs aimed at preserving mobile home parks and creating opportunities for additional affordable senior housing units in the community. Funding could come from a variety of sources including the Redevelopment Agency 20% set-a-side funds, HOME grants, CDBG funding, etc. CONCLUSION: The City Council has conducted a number of public discussions concerning mobile home park rent stabilization, and through a survey, has determined that there are a significant number of mobile home park tenants that are vulnerable to rent increases. The Council has expressed a desire to protect the vulnerable mobile home park tenants in the community, and has reviewed different mobile home park rent stabilization ordinances adopted by other communities, as well as other informative information on the topic. Staff has provided the Council with an estimate of the cost of implementing a rent stabilization ordinance and has identified a potential funding source. Staff has also provided the Council with language from the draft updated General Plan Housing Element that pertains to mobile home parks and special needs populations, such as senior citizens in the community. RECOMMENDATION: Discuss mobile home park rent stabilization and provide direction to Staff. Attachment # ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 10a June 2, 2010 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING MOBILEHOME RENT STABILIZATION ORDINANCE Background: At its meeting on May 5, 2010, the City Council instructed the City Manager to provide estimates of the costs to adopt and implement a mobilehome park rent stabilization program for the City. The City Attorney was instructed to review ordinances from other jurisdictions, including the Santa Rosa ordinance, and provide a range of options with enough detail so that the City Manager could estimate the cost of the different options and the City Council could decide which, if any, of the options it would want to adopt. This information is to be reported to the City Council during its consideration of the City budget for the 2010-11 fiscal year. The City Attorney has identified three ordinances which provide different approaches to mobilehome rent stabilization or control: (1) the Santa Rosa ordinance (attachment 1); (2) the proposed ordinance and model mobilehome rental agreement, considered, but not adopted, in Lake County (attachment 2); and (3) the City of Merced ordinance (attachment 3). In this ASR, the three ordinances are described in enough detail to assist the City Manager in her cost estimates. Discussion: The attached ordinances represent three distinct approaches to mobilehome rental control and appear somewhat typical of the approaches taken statewide to mobilehome rent control. 1. The Santa Rosa Ordinance. a. Summary of ordinance. This ordinance establishes a base rent for mobilehome parks and controls the allowable increases in the base rent. In Santa Rosa the base rent is the rent that was charged in each park as of September 1, 1993. In Ukiah that would probably be the date, when the ordinance is introduced, adopted or becomes effective. Recommended Action(s): Discuss Options for an Ordinance and Provide Direction to Staff as to Further Steps, as Appropriate. Alternative Council Option(s): Citizens advised: n/a Requested by: City Council Prepared by: David J. Rapport, City Attorney Coordinated with: Jane Chambers, City Manager Attachments: 1- Santa Rosa Ordinance 2- Lake County Draft Ordinance and Draft Lease Supplement 3-Merced Ordinance 4- UC Berkeley article on effects of Mobilehome Rent Control 5- History of rent control in Escondido Approved: Jane Chambers, City Manager ASR - Rent Control Page 2 The ordinance allows a mobilehome park to increase the rent each year by 100 percent of the consumer price index for the most recent 12-month period ending in August. The 12-month period in Ukiah would depend on the date when the base rent is fixed. The ordinance caps the CPI increase at 6%, but if the the CPI increases by more than 6% for two consecutive years, the Mobilehome Rent Control Clerk (Clerk)' is directed to review the maximum rent increase and recommend an amendment to the ordinance adjusting the cap, "if appropriate." The Ordinance also allows a mobilehome park owner to pass-through to the mobilehome space tenant the following cost increases: (1) government mandated expenses, such as, but not limited to, government mandated capital expenditures, and increases in fees and taxes (except the annual 2% increase in property taxes); (2) utility charges (although water, gas and electric utilities that are not separately metered must be included as additional rent rather than passed-through as a separate charge); (3) capital improvements, including design and financing costs; and (4) capital replacement costs, including design and financing costs. Capital improvements are improvements that are amortized and depreciated under the Internal Revenue Code. Capital replacements are capital expenditures as defined in the IRC. Maintenance expenses cannot be passed through. The ordinance gives, as an example, an asphalt overlay, which is a capital replacement, and a slurry seal which is not. All of the pass-throughs must be listed as charges which are separate from base rent and the park owner must disclose how the pass-through was calculated within a reasonable time upon request of a tenant. The ordinance specifies different procedures for imposing or protesting the different pass- throughs. The park owner can immediately pass-through the government mandated expense, but the tenants of 50 percent of the spaces or 50 spaces, whichever is less, can file a petition with the Clerk protesting the pass-through within 30 days after the park owner gives notice of the increase. The protest is heard by an Arbitrator who can reduce or disallow the increase based on criteria set forth in the ordinance. Ninety days before a park owner can pass-through capital improvements or replacements, he or she must give to each affected tenant and file with the Clerk a notice of the dollar amount of the increase, the percentage of the increase, how the increase was calculated, the spaces affected, the effective date, and that any tenant may request from the Clerk a petition for review of the proposed increase. The ordinance contains a detailed arbitration procedure for conducting this review. The ordinance also allows a park owner to seek a "fair return" rent increase, if he can show that the CPI increase does not provide a fair return on the park owner's investment, using a method which is spelled out in the ordinance. He must make that showing through the arbitration procedure. The arbitration procedure is formal to insure due process. The ordinance specifies a meet and confer process to resolve petitions and protests and failing that the formal arbitration procedure. 1 In Santa Rosa, this is the Director of Planning and Redevelopment or his or her designee. In Ukiah, it could be an existing City official (e.g., City Manager, Director of Planning and Community Development, etc.) who could delegate the duties to another City employee or contractor. l-3 ASR - Rent Control Page 3 Under the arbitration rules in the ordinance, the Clerk gives written notice to the applicant or petitioner and the park owner when an application or petition is referred for arbitration. The Clerk maintains a list of qualified arbitrators. The Clerk presents the parties a list of three. Each party can challenge one. The remaining arbitrator conducts the arbitration. The Clerk sets the date for the arbitration and gives the parties notice of the time, date and place. The Clerk provides the clerical services in support of the arbitration and is empowered to issue subpoenas upon the request of a party who wants to compel the attendance of witnesses at the arbitration hearing or the production of documents and other evidence. When the arbitrator renders his or her decision, after conducting the hearing in accordance with the rules in the ordinance, he or she also submits a bill for his or her services to the Clerk who pays the bill from the ordinance administrative fund. The arbitrator may impose the fee on either party to the arbitration, if he or she finds that the party's position in the arbitration was frivolous. Significantly, the ordinance does prohibit rent increases, when a mobilehome is sold in place. This is the practice challenged in Guggenheim v. City of Goleta, the case which is currently pending in the Ninth Circuit federal court of appeal. The economic impact of this and other features of mobilehome rent control ordinances are also discussed in the attached economic analysis, entitled, "The Curious Institution of Mobile Home Rent Control: An Analysis of Mobile Home Parks in California" (2006), by Carl Mason and John M. Quigley, University of California, Berkeley, published in Working Papers, Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy, Institute of Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley. (Attachment 4.) Also attached for the City Council's consideration is a history of mobilehome rent control in the City of Escondido prepared by the City, which provides some useful insight into the effects of mobilehome rent control. (Attachment 5.) A park owner is required to provide a written disclosure to any person proposing to purchase a mobilehome in place stating the current and proposed base rent, a copy of the ordinance, and advise the tenant that he or she is exempt from rent control if he or she signs a lease with a term of more than one year as required by Cal. Civil Code §798.17. The form of the notice must be approved by the Clerk. The park owner must retain a copy of the disclosure signed by the prospective mobilehome owner which the Clerk may inspect upon request. If a mobilehome park charges rent in excess of the amount allowed under the ordinance, the tenant can refuse to pay the excess and assert the ordinance violation as a defense in a legal action filed by the landlord to collect the excess rent. The costs of administering the ordinance are paid by an annual fee established by City Council resolution, which is charged against the total number of of mobilehome spaces in the City which are subject to rent control. The park owner is liable for the fee based on the number of spaces in his or her park and may pass through to his or her tenants 50% of the fee. The fee is due on a date established by the City Council but may be paid in quarterly installments by the park owners. b. Administrative costs. The costs to administer the ordinance include the costs of a Clerk to perform all of the functions assigned to the Clerk under the ordinance, including assessing and collecting ordinance administration fees, accounting for ordinance administrative funds, proposing fees for City Council approval and preparing resolutions adopting the fees, processing petitions protesting government ASR - Rent Control Page 4 mandate, capital improvement and capital replacement pass throughs, processing fair return applications by park owners, accepting, recording and maintaining documents required to be filed with the Clerk, performing the Clerk's duties in conducting arbitrations, including developing and maintaining a list of qualified arbitrators, giving notices to parties, proposing arbitrators to the parties, reviewing and determining whether applications or petitions are complete or contain the requisite number of bona fide signatures, developing and maintaining the administrative record in all arbitrations, developing forms required by the ordinance such as petition, notice and disclosure forms, maintaining a list of affected mobilehome park owners, providing copies of documents upon request, and assisting in the enforcement of the ordinance. Direct and indirect overhead to cover clerical time to assist the Clerk, office equipment, space cost, supplies, similar costs. City Attorney legal fees to advise the Clerk. The costs of each arbitrator who must be a licensed attorney or CPA who has completed a formal course of training on arbitration; a membership in the American Arbitration Association with expertise in rental dispute arbitration; or service as a California judge. The hourly rates for arbitrators with these qualifications could range from $250-$500/ hour. Some allowance should be included for litigation expenses and attorneys fees to defend challenges to the ordinance or to an arbitrator's decision. All of the decisions by arbitrators in arbitrations conducted under the ordinance will be subject to judicial review. (See, e.g., the article from the May 19 Press Democrat concerning the recent settlement of two law suits challenging abitration decisions under the Petaluma mobilehome rent control ordinance. Attachment 5.) The City Attorney recommends budgeting a significant amount initially for litigation expenses, because a "facial" challenge to a rent control ordinance, like the one in the Goleta case, must be filed within a two year statute of limitations which begins to run from the date the ordinance is adopted. Therefore, if a challenge to the ordinance itself is going to be filed, it will most likely be filed within the first two years after the ordinance is adopted. 2. Lake County draft ordinance. a. Summary of ordinance. The Lake County ordinance (attachment 2) is similar to the Santa Rosa ordinance in that it establishes a base rent and then controls increases based on CPI increases and pass-throughs. The primary differences are that the Lake County draft ordinance uses a Hearing Board rather than a professional arbitrator. It calls the Clerk an Administrator, but the duties of the Administrator are similar. The unique feature of the Lake County draft ordinance is that it offers mobilehome park owners the option of exempting the entire park from the rent control ordinance, if the park owner simply offers its tenants a five year lease in a form approved by the Board of Supervisors under the ordinance or an equivalent lease with the same or better protections as determined by the Administrator. The draft lease supplement is part of Attachment 2. The park is exempt whether any tenant agrees to enter the lease supplement or not. Once the park is exempt, the rent control features of the lease are enforced as contractual obligations of the parties to the agreement. The City is not involved. The administrative and enforcement costs are imposed on and under the control of the parties to the lease. ASR - Rent Control Page 5 This feature of the ordinance is different than the exemption from rent control in Civil Code Section 798.17. That statute exempts any lease between a park owner and a tenant with a term greater than 12 months from any otherwise applicable rent control ordinance. This statutory exemption in the mobilehome park residency law only applies to specific leases that are actually entered by the park owner and individual tenants. Unless longer term leases are actually entered by every tenant in a mobilehome park, the statute, unlike the ordinance, would not exempt an entire park from the rent control ordinance. b. Administrative costs. The City would continue to incur the administrative costs of the ordinance as to any mobilehome parks that did not offer the lease to their tenants. In addition, the Administrator would have to review and approve any lease supplements proposed by a mobilehome park owner as an equal or better option to the standard form lease supplement. The other costs would be similar to the costs of administering the Santa Rosa ordinance, but would be imposed on a smaller number of spaces, if any of the parks offered the form lease to their tenants, because the fee only applies to spaces which are not exempt from the ordinance. 3. Merced ordinance. a. Summary of ordinance. The Merced ordinance (attachment 3) does not establish a base rent and regulate increases to the base rent. The ordinance is called the Mobile Home Rent Review Ordinance. It establishes a Rent Review Commission, consisting of seven (7) members appointed by the City Council: two park tenants, two park owners, three city residents who have no connection or financial interest in mobilehome parks. The Commission conducts investigations and hearings upon petitions from mobilehome park tenants objecting to a rent increase within the past six months. The petition must be signed by tenants representing 51 % or more of the physically occupied spaces in mobilehome parks with 25 or more spaces. The Commission is empowered to order a reduction in any proposed rent increase that it determines is so great as to be unconscionable or an unreasonable increase. Pursuant to findings of an unconscionable or unreasonable rent increase, the Commission can require the mobile home park owner, operator or manager to: (1) Reduce the rental charge to a rate to be determined by the Commission; (2) Continue the rental charge as it existed under the former lease or rental agreement, written or implied; or (3) Increase the rental charge to a rate set by the commission or to the rate requested by the park owner. Any rental increases which have been collected by a mobilehome park owner pursuant to an increase which is later determined by the Commission to have been excessive shall be returned to the tenants with sixty (60) days after such determination. In evaluating the rent increase, the Commission shall consider the increased operating costs to the owner attributable to, and including but not limited to, increases in utility rates and property taxes, insurance, advertising, governmental assessments, capital improvements, incidental ASR - Rent Control Page 6 services, normal repair and maintenance, minor upgrading of amenities and services, or the deletion of amenities or services, plus a fair rate of return on investment. The ordinance contains sanctions for park owners who threaten or take punitive action against tenants who sign petitions. The Commission decisions are final for the City. There is no appeal to the City Council. The ordinance covers administrative costs by charging a fee to petitioners and park owners who participate in a hearing before the Commission. The fee is set in the ordinance at $300 for the petitioner and $300 for the park owner. b. Administrative costs. There are relatively few on-going administrative costs. Most of the costs are incurred in connection with the filing of a petition and conducting a hearing and defending a decision if there is a legal challenge. There would have to be a City employee or Commission clerk who administers the process of advertising for Commission appointments, provides meeting space and support services to the Commission in conducting hearings, adopting regulations and making semi-annual reports to the City Council. The employee would have to certify the signatures on petitions, provide notice of hearings to parties and commissioners, maintain Commission records, keep and prepare administrative records of commission hearings and collect and account for hearing fees. There would have to be some legal advice to the Commission Clerk and the Commission. There would be legal expenses in defending a Commission decision. The fees charged to the parties to a hearing would have to exceed $300 to cover these expenses. ❑ Budgeted FY 09/10 ❑ New Appropriation F-I Not Applicable ❑ Budget Amendment Required Amount Budgeted Source of Funds (title and Account Number Addtl. Appropriation Requested Item: 10a Date: 5/5/10 Attachment # 2 April 25, 2010 Fellow Councilmembers, In March of 2008, numerous residents of City of Ukiah mobilehome parks petitioned our City Council to enact park rent stabilization. A month later, after hearing lengthy public comment, the majority of this Coun- cil decided it had insufficient evidence to ask staff to draft an ordinance and, instead, moved to commission a survey of park tenants to gain additional evidence. On November 18, 2009, the City Council considered the results of that survey showing most respondents on fixed incomes with rental payments comprising an inordinate percentage of those incomes. Although discussions have taken place among tenants, park owners, and their representatives during the past several years, only Council consideration of rent stabilization has inspired' any interest in long term leases. Undoubtedly there will once again be a call for Council efforts to bring all parties together to gain voluntary long term leases. However, without our ability to measure the fairness of such a lease against the standards of a rent stabilization ordinance, park owners remain in a position to dictate the terms. And even if such leases were relatively fair in their first term, without the existence of a City ordinance there is no way that individual tenants will be seeking lease renewal on a level playing field. Having invested heavily in purchasing homes which are far from mobile, park residents obviously; approach the landlord without the leverage of apartment tenants. If our response on this occasion is simply to assign a team to mediate, using the Council bully pulpit and an occasional mention of an ordinance, we must expect that without Council's or City staff's regular involvement down the road tenants will again end up with the. perilously short end of the stick. The County of Sonoma, and every city in that county implemented mobilehome park rent controls more, than a decade ago. I suggest we follow their lead and instruct our City Attorney to bring us a draft modeled on the 1993 Santa Rosa ordinance, which has been revised numerous times since then to assure efficiency and fairness for all concerned. The idealsof the Golden Rule and the Declaration of Independence encourage decisive Council action in defense of Ukiahans who have paid their dues and now need our help. oPhil Baldwin Attachment # / r O O N r 0 1 O Z N 0 O C O 0 3 N N Q C 0 O a LO vv v ~ v C o C -a a C C N ~ M v C vv C C T ' N C 7 O C C 7 7 C 7 a O 3 0 7 7 .0 L•A 3 7 3 L C a E LL N LLLL LL LL ~ LLLL C LL L.LLL M 0 O o v C N N L L N N L L U o rn o L T o 0 T o ~ U o T o U O C L c O o T T U U L Q v3•• = C = Cu Cu 0 0= M M (D 0 C 0 N M It a) C C a) a) C 0 p U C 0 N C C M C C 0 0 (6 4) -a C 0 C C a) a) 0 F; O M O TTM O O O TT O o i' U T 0 O L L L L LA L -a Cu p rna) C N O rna) O . 3 v E E E E O E ° L L a) 0 E E 0 M M E a) a) E E 0 o N U 0 C C 0 C C W 0 C W W W W 0 M M 0 W W L W W W E C o E Y E E ° E E E C E o E E E E E E p o L T= MLL T 33n 33 o k ( a3 o0 ~k 0 a= o E o J= a~a) 41) 00 4= 4= 00 a o 0 4= 00 J= V CO 4) a 0 2 0 CO Cu 0 a 72 M Cu C O L D CO C C O O O O LOO C O M t~ z 4; O C C O O O L L Q CL C O C C O O Q. 0 E T E t CL CL 0 t CL CL 0 0 (a o- M 0 M M M M A C C M M LQ M (a CO M Q 0 a) a) n L 0 a) 0 a L L 0 0 U O L 0 U U .2 .O U O N 0 U 0 O 0 0 M` i 0 U 0 0 U O U U O O 'a •r acv .per m r° ia a; R ~00 Tam oo M m~ .0 o Ca (D 4) _ D O 0 7 C C M C C C C C C C C C C C C C p C C 0 0 C C C v v C C C C C C C O ~ (D r_ C J D ~ ~Z JJ M JJ C7 C9 C9 ~ (9C9 C9 C9(9c9N C9 C9 sF-F- C9UL C900 09 C9 c9 c9 c9 c9 c9 = N C CO C C t C x 3 w . 7 O E 0 N v j X U X C N 3 M 0 M - 04 O X M 3 Q C O 0 Q L a) (n +L. IF c 0) U , •0 0 0 (D ~ v a ~ (0 a "Nr r_ E « v CO U a a N 0 Cc n C N i a N N o a3i c Lo LL c = o 3 0 2 0 a - v o 0 c 0 a v_ v_ M a) v a v_ 0 U) a X Q N C E a r I Q 'C 4) 42 O 0~ 7 E 4) d d 2! ~ a N CO N . " " M E ..N. D O a lu E C 0 .2 Q i v c N M a Q E E u > U (a O E C E E (6 ~ Q L M O N Q 7 0 E 0 ~ 'S 0 :a C O L N O 04 M N N a) 'y d p.0 (n N N E ~ N N 0 N 2 N • N-- ( V ® +M+ v T T 0) L ^ n O p 0 C Cu . (a O Cu 3 C O .C U Q U Cn t a) O C a1 C . U 'V J a) LA C C N p , N 'V .'C-. O L rn m C C -a C O C O U r (.9 U E N (q t: a1 C a) E Q ¢ t U v C . 3 m O _ t N U L] •N •U c L O 0 _ _ V/ N C L 0 p Q a) Q " _ O 0 0 _ Q 41 ' C is p p C M N a~ 0 N ' O L O p L C O 7 O 0 Cu C 0 a) W O 'a U L M Q C v- N M O 0 0 v- 3 7 O t 7 O C • C M E 0 t 0 0 E E 0 0 U L O a) (n p a c 3 7 E a) 0 o E E r ? o 3 C O a C d ' 3 Q E M m ' 7 o C Q ~ , N O M J> 'C ID - 0 N 7 J 'a C V) 4) U . M N 0 M 0 0 U Q) O N Cr- LL r. N 0 0 0 U U . LL 0 C 7 M U N C O C i- E M O N ' C N M L E m a O o a , C> C C M 0 a C N a) U C C E C N "a C V) C C 0 C N N Q T a M O CO Q C L M O N N U U C (a C O M U C9 0 CO 0 0)t x N OL N N N O N M I.; 0_ M M O L 0 C U (Q o M 0 N 0 M O N ~L 0 to ~ .N ' 0 N> R ~ N O Y U O N > „V)_, 0 0 C E Q L 0 'C O yQ M L u) 'a E U a) 'C M O M O' -T E 2 O a) E O C M (n M U 0 0 . , - M M L L a) N U Z M U 0 0 J C ~ , E w M O S L ;a N a) E O C Q p U O L a) O ~ 3 U 0 o p 0 E fl- O L Q. CO N N 0 C U M U -a L Q Q- N M M 0 t a) Q M C- Q. to M D O N .C M _C X 0 C Y ~ M 'a 'a O O C 4) O C ,F C Q. o ~ _ t C O -0 -0 O T .C S V) 0 a C N Q 0 (n N O .C ~ T O o ~ 0 L E „O 0 ~ - C9 C a v- 7 N S N 3 T > ~ c > a) c 0 = 3 (n Z 0 E E 0 0 o Z ~ U C ~ o E E 0 U ' c 0 05 (n a) E , 0 3 v 02 Ln 0 0 w fn C E > N 0 a L (6 o p 0 M U 0 0 'C U A) L U F -0 L a C N 3 3 0 0 E 0 ) L O U o 'a 3 3 0 0 0 o ' 2' Ln 0 > C M o U L O L C d O C O 2) U O 2 C C9 ai U s M M i N S U Q M M 0 M 0 E 0 E yc6 v- O 0 v- rn 'a c L p v- 0 N U O C C O 0 E M M C 0 O E O L O U y N v- C a L N = C y 0 rn E O LL 2 N L O O E - v '0 L O v- C M rn t 7 0 L 0 Q E M O C .C U o L 0 E C x 0 0 E L 0 L 0 a n_ 0 Cu v E 3 3 V a E c O 0 C CO p E o > 0 L a) .Q 3 3 L M .a a > M 0 L L n L 3 v Q 0 0 E a 0 0 C9 Z E 0 0 L 0 o r = a a o L O a rno o L Q° 0 0 L Q~ 0 V ' (La L II;.N C LL os S .2 i a. o L E Q L L O E,° Y _ U L w M U V N M C LO vR O T N O n- C U M O 0 T 0 L W O N a) m L O ` O E O 1- a) 0 3 a C C • a) 2 O y O_ a) N M N V) a) N a) C r- a) m U) N 0 0) O w o w w O 2 O M w O WL a) 0 0 y I. 2 M M O w E N E > 'C O a) 0 4" 0 3 g 'C0 ,O M> 0 = o t C> o t N U s U O N a) C> a) N v- v- O O C> 0 c M N - a) C ,0 v- t O O U N ~ N U CC CC C N N N L > CC C> 0 N N . L t U r M C M Cu U C a) M M U Q C -a 0 O M a•N Q C U 'a 0 a) M L p 'a 3 M 7 O 7 0 > 0 -a 7 a) L 7 0 O O L L m 0 C M a 7 p t1 C O C 0 E O p p a a L L O O 0 0 E 3 O O a 3 a O O O C V 0 a 3 7 p O O C 7 O LY O J O J - fn O L O L (I. L C O 7 a- W JQ.Q. L 0 Sa_ » D L 24_U 0 WW p L x (LLLLY 2 >=ww 2? MM1: L 4 0 C e O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O N O O t- O o O o O O O 0 o o O O o w O O O O O o O o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O d) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 000 O O O 00 O O 3 w+ 0 0 0 O O O O o 0 o L- LO O O LO O LO N Q O 00 O O lO - 0 0 o LO LO 0 0 O O LO O O LO 0 0 0 lO O O O O O O M E O LO LO 00 M -Ln U7 Ln M (O - O (fl LO 69 O 00 'l' M (O 69? LO O 0) 00 0 N r t, CO 64 64 o O O L- N O LO EP> 6% V N (00 N N < M 69 69 'T N N 00 O N M LO N O 0 N M O O V O N N 00 M 69 69 69 M 64 64 (0 64 64 00 69 N 69 64 6% V M 00 6% 6% 6% 6% 64 69 ( 6% c 6% 6% 64 69 69 64 69 64 64 69 64 64 64 64 69 69 _ 4? Q - - - O w A'a 02 a U D a UU DO Q USQ a UU DDU2a UU DD0 0 0 UU DOS w-2 U UU DDQ P U ac I o 0 UL( 00 U DMQ. Q. U UU DDa LLU 0 M _ fn 2 . (n 22 . (n . _ (nOLL (n _ 22OLL (n 22U U . ln 22LL 0 0 U _ 22(n ~ U L UU 0 ~ UU U) SLL C) 22(n (nU LL LL LL LL U _ LL U _ LL C) 0 = S LL _ 0 0 z D 0 0 LL m 2 OZ > DD _ LL LL U ' 'LL S LL Q O R' LL'w LL'~ LL' Q' LL'LL' ~ > ~ Q Q Q O lO d) h O) 0) 0) 0) O CO O 00 O) 0) O CO O o O O O N 0) O O O LA O O O O O N O 0 et O O Z M r M W d W M d) W d) m r O O) O W N O) O O O :4 0 N 0 Q O _C4 N N r W W W N W N W\ r =0 O N ? G O N O N a O N N r. 4 O zz N CO O N Q' V o LO ~ ~ Ln CO r V d' ~ O (0 ~ : z z ~Y 00 xF E x 0 0 N ti d .Q O Z UAL LL LL LL > U) T U N C C C C (4 co = (D a) (D 0 T 0 a i W W W W C C E E E E E v N ° E cu a V o 0 _ C .2 .2 (D :3 0 0 (D U U U U -0 0 7 -0 a O .2 .2 O V 0 0 0 (6 m (6 i N C O c : 0 O C (LE C C C C 0 0 0 0 C C 0 0 C C 0 0 C 0 C (L6 J C a) O 0 (`6 E ` C C C C 'C J 0 c`E (LE c`E (`E N C7 U' (9 (7 (9 (9 (9 c9 (9. 0 (D a ) m (D W N 000000 0 3 c x O1 O 04 N a) E ° N m '9 a) 3 a) x in T 0~ N cin in N E E cE "M '2 20 O LL O O C LL y 7 O (6 LL O LL E cu U O CL c 0 `a0 ~ u0 ns (E° 2 c 0 m ~ ` a) N O -°N 3 3 N C a ca 04 (n !6 'C C' ca a3 > cE N = U U of O O L a 7 LL LL .C 0 ° t . m 4) 00) 0 v1 c O (7 O t L 0 0 0 -0 'O C O N C') C ca 0 r10 . O Z5 N 0 O) (E U) 0 4- N 0 L t N i a) O a) O N rnaS~ a) O Ea aa) ) O a) L ° a~ a) E v,OE2 E E a~ 3 E 00Z R ° E Eo o ° E E 0 o r E 0 o E) > 0) N O O L 3_c 'C (n .C CU TO L O UE ` 2 ° U) U O c . 0 it T 0- a 00 C ~C Q c a) io Z c (D c Q D c a) a) O c E (D (D E 0 w c o 4) `o `oa "o ~ <n r x T C C M 0 i -E o o ° ° C C C M E> C" V) W n E (D = o" E- O O 0 0 :a a) o a) a) a) a) ° E C EZ L a) 0 a) a) E CL 0 a 2 a) o m tla~ - a) o o 4)(U vv ac c CL CL- o." oa 0.' E " " o a) ) ' ~ . 0 aa) N Ofo- O40- N N C) .o- O 40 ~o V)a ve 40- ~o 0 N N a) I N a O L D 0) > C = i O C O) O) a C C ~ C rn rn rn- N C C C :p N D a) m 'N N •N U O O v1 a) .N , , N N U N V) N a) N N 0 o 0 0 0 0 - o O o 0 0 0 0 o a) 0 0 = a = a = > = a = _ _ _ > _ _ = _ w _ _ = y o o o~ooo oao 0 oo 00 00 00 0 0 0 0 000o 0ooo oo(0vom oovaoaoao G C- 00000 00 00 0 0 T O O O O O O M rN o E o V ffl m06 NO MM 64 EA 64 Mm (flN EiT om UO'IT Vl m b4 C u) OUD(O OO Oh00 NV> - M O O Un N NN mNwNMM (A 661 V3 ffl Q _ ~ ~ ~ M 09. W~ fR Q U C) o d U a a o o U U a a U oaU o o a U Q p)0 D u- LLUU Z) D ULL LL U 0LL Z) D UULL 0 Q? as a a' as U) Q LL O m Z'C 'd' O 00 N O N U~ p O p N O O N M o C o M Un 0 c o d N O co C NN N NN N A A 4- 2 0) co s. U o NC'4 b O N~ r O N N O NO O N N~ 0 co 000N V co U) V N 00 O) N d O O N M N V3 V3 64 ~ 64 U 2 U C ~ O ~ r O O a c ` n 0 0 U .T cu t c - a) n otS W o aa)) Z U ~ U~ N ~ i c a U ; rn 0 Q N 3 T = U a) m ~ E LD 0. o _ = .E 2 a) W ~ E > N E N ) E (j(jU ~of C c a c of O 31 OY ZwZ~Z) LO LO O O (O O U O Z (mo~M fA fH fA U D .4 U C 3 = ~ M N E N N Q U c a) E ° CL 0 o ( _ n 0) 1 0 I a) W ( 0 N N (3) LO fA T V) VT C aLL E L E N = ~ ~ C T O o O E 0 U o 0 0 0 = U C U 0 O S a1 N O E U N . o m E a r c a C O a) - F (n z a Z ti = 3 - Z- M Cl) cli IT 00 N (A) E 0 a z 00 E x Affachment # AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS CONSTRUCTED OR APPROVED 1991 TO 2006 Name . . Year ! Units . . : Zoning/ Densi , Type of Unit & Within Redevelopment Du/acre . Affordability Status . . . I Agency : .I..................................... 11989-1995 I . . . . , . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 apartments: Low/ . . . . . . . . . Ukiah Terrace I Approv PD/R-3 Moderate Income (UP 89-74) Yes ed 41 May 2007.• Tax Credit Apartments 1989 28 Certificates application to (Mulberry St) affordability ....Preserve RCHDC- PD/R-3 Yes 1990 35 (UP 90-21) Marlene Estates 28 ....1.................................................. ~ Creekside Court , : 1992 38 PD/R-3 38 Low/Moderate Income Yes 28 (UP 92-40) (Mulberry St) I RCHDC- Jack . . . . 1992 30 . . 463-0300 _ No Simpson Apts I j . Senior Apartments . Bush 1051 N........................................................... I RCHDC - I PD/R-3 Single Family Units: i Yes 1 Cleveland Lane 1993 15 28 Low/Moderate Sweat equity Cleveland Lane ' (MS 94-07) 1996 - 2003 > 119 . .....i .I............................................................................................? CDC . . . ; 1996 7 R3 Apartments - Low Income: Yes College Court : : 28 kiah RDA funds of Gobbi RCHDC ! 1996 11 PD/R3 Single Family Units: Sweat IS THIS q j . . i e equity Low Income MARLENE EST? i 1 RCHDC 1997 1 16 I . . r R3 ! 28 Apartments - Low Income Yes Gibson St i i j . . Single Family Units: Sweat I RCHDC 1997 26 PD/R3 equity - Low Income: Rural Yes i 1 28 Development Title 2, Ukiah RDA Mulberry St ' j I funds ' RCHDC North Pine Street 2000 10 I R3 28 Apartments - Low Income: HUD 202 funds, Ukiah RDA funds Yes N Bush/ N Pine i St/Gibson St . 1 Danco Builders i R3 Apartments - 11 Low/Very Yes Summercreek 2002 64 ; 28 Low Income: Tax Credit Orchard/Gobbi Villa9a . Certificates, Ukiah RDA funds - 200 1996 3 I 134 1 Total Raitt/Holmes 1 2004 1 5 R 3 Apartments - Low Income I 28 i _ . . 2007.• Approved, not May C-1 = yet constructed (#up o4-o8) Yes O'Bergin 2005 I 44 j I 28 Apartments/Efficiency Units (751 S State St) Low Income (private, no - income monitoring ) 412- ! Shimizo 2005 ! PD/R-3 12 . 1 . I Single Family Dwellings - No (Bush St, north of 28 Moderate Income Low Gap Road) Ford Street I . R-3 .....1 Apartments: Low Income .......i Yes 2006 I Project . g 28 Transitional Housing . (Ford St) 2004 - 2006 . 69 i TOTAL ...._t........ < Approved, not yet E RCHDC: R-3 constructed j Yes 2007 Clara Court 32 i 28 ' Apartments - 32 Low I ! (Clara Court) Income (includes 8 density pts): Ukiah RDA funds bonus a .............................................f......................................._....... oved not et A I RCHDC: Apple ! R-3 , y ppr 'constructed ' Yes 2007 Avenue ! 12 28 Townhouses - 6 Low/6 I (Apple Avenue) Very Low: Sweat equity, ! ( USDA-502, Ukiah RDA funds 2007 I ! 44 : . . RCHDC: Rural Communities Housing Development Corp.; . CDC Community Develop ment Commission of Mendocino County Source: City of Ukiah Planning and Community Development Department, May 2007 FAIR RATE OF RETURN (Time-Warner 1988189-New York, NY (The Fortune Directories) In California, a fair rate of return only ;applies to the `mobilehome park owner. AS PER TIME WARNER figures as of 1989; Petroleum refining .............................3.9 % Mining, crude-oil production .................9.6 % Tobacco ...........................................5.4 % Food 5.4% Chemicals ........................................6.6 % Metals ..............................................4.6 % Beverages ........................................8.1 % Soaps, cosmetics ................................4.2 % Forest products .7.1 % Building materials ..3.9 % Pharmaceuticals 13.0 % Publishing, printing .............................6.4 % Computers (incl. Office quip) ..5.9 % Rubber & Plastics Products ...................4.8 % Aerospace ........................................3.2 % Metal Products ..6.2 % Motor Vehicle & Parts . 3.0% Industrial & Farm Equip .3.8 % Scientific, Photographic Equip ..5.1 % Transportation Equip ...........................3.0 %u Electronics . ..4.2 % Furniture ...4.6 % Textiles ...1.9 %u Apparel ...4.4 % Lets now look at what Mobilehome Parks make::'- NOI AS A % OF RECEIPTS..... `Rancho Verde Mobilehome Park; 1985.. "..,:.S.S .77 0 1989....31.$9 %o 1990....35.28 % August 4, 2010 City of Ukiah P.O. Box 2860 Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear City Council Members & City Manager Jane Chambers: We again are asking why there is a rent control ordinance on the agenda. Based upon the last months utility bill of 7/28/10 my tenants will have to pay an additional $518.00 per month for sewer based on Februarys usage. But if you look on the bill 2 months before and the 2 months after the February usage the monthly water usage was considerably lower. When talking to the utilities department they said that they had to use the month of February because they used it for everybody else and it wouldn't be fair. Our question is this why should we pay for something that is the highest in 5 months of usage? It appears that we are paying for something that we are not utilizing. We are asking the City Manager and Council to look into this before you pass a rent control ordinance. Also the utilities department gave me a monthly usage for sewer of 357 units. Even with the 357 units it is still higher in water units from December thru April. If the 357 units stand our tenants will have to pay and additional $13.63 each per month for sewer and this is before the increase next year. Let's look at the water bill based upon 7/28/10. If we calculate the new water rates based upon this months bill our tenants would have to pay an additional $8.52 each. If you add the $13.63 and the $8.52 it comes to $22.15 per month for each tenant. This is an approximate 6% increase per month in what we have to charge our tenants just to collect for what is due the City of Ukiah. We have not raised our rent in over a year. Our question is this why doesn't the City have some kind of program to help out our low income tenants that is not just for electricity but for water and sewer also? Again we would like you to look into what Shady Grove Mobil Home Park is being charged for their sewer rate before you pass a Rent Control Ordinance. Sincerely, Bruce & Judy Hatch i 300 Seminary Ave., 707/463-6228 P.O.,Box'2860, Ukiah, Ca 95482-2860 CUSTOMER 'NO. BILL OAT•E, 67581--9 7/28/10 72. 4©q ALL BILLS ARE DUE AND PAYABLE UPON RECEIPT Per Municipal Code Section 40334;3514 & 3707, 10C PLEASE ENTER AMOUNT OF PAYMENT SHADY GROVE MOBILE PARK BRUCE & JUDY HATCH Voluntary Contribution to Ukiah CARES •4020 BURKE HILL DR is enclosed, ,in the amount of $ UK I AH CA 95482-•-9310 See details in Financial Assistance information on back. Please write customer number on check and make payable to: CITY OF UKIAH Please bring this entire statement when paying in person CUSTOMER NO. 67581-9 PROPERTY NO. 35-60500 CUSTOMER NAME SHADY GROVE MOBILE PARK SERVICE LOCATION 778 S. STATE ST. RATE BILL DATE SERVICE PERIOD BILLING METER READINGS MULTI, COD E. , . FROM TO DAYS PREVIOUS PRESENT PLIER USAGE r.?- - AMOUNT .fit , _ ;-1 ' E5 W2% 7/28/10 7/28/10 6/15- 7713 28 28 4100 876 4224 1370 1 .0 134 494 30.60 663.16 CALIFORNIA TAX SURCHARGE. 000 22 STREET LIGHTS 2.00 0 C I W SEWER-MOB I L-WATER 2, 123. 80, PVT LTNG, SCH. 2 21.30... BUTS=-TOTAL CURRENT CHARGES 2, 840 92 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 2,840.92 NEW CASHIER:COUNTER HOURS: MONDAY:,THRU THURSDAY: 8:00 AM TO 5:00 PM FRIDAY HOURS: 8:00 AM TO 1:00 PM "EASY PAY" CUSTOMERS -DO NOT PAY- Summa ,:of charges . AUTO DEBIT WILL OCCUR 15 DAYS FROM BILL DATE a PREVIOUS '%t ; , PAYMENTS ` „ LAST; BALANCE ';TOTAL 4 , , ; `RECEIVED; PAYMENT DATE VOWBALANCE FORWARD CURRENT CHARGES ' 2,707.:29 2, 707. 29- 7/ 15/2010 2,840. 92 2, 844 92 ELEC. MTR# 1146 WATER'.MTR# 93946125 NOTE:. ANY PREVIOUS BALANCE IS:,CONSIDERED PAST DUE AND IS NOW,DUE•AND PAYABLE..,: , SERVICE,TO NUMBER ELECTRIC AVG KW t+, r. WATER OF DAYS I USAGE HOURS PER DAY USAGE AVG. GAL: PER DAY =:V/ Ulf 8/18/09 lie 29 C:11V 230 If B 452 11690 9/18/09 31 267 9 537 12992 10/.0/09 32 333 10 468 10969 11/18/09 29 260 9 59 9284 12/16/09 26 249 9 '44 9214 1/14/10 29 294 10 9026 2/17/10 34 278 8 8934 3/18/10 29 260 9 2 8586 4/16/10 29 278 10 47 8974 5/17/10 31 281 9 296 9581 6/15/10 29 281 10 '389 10060 7/13/10 28 134 5 ;494 13''3" ' WHAT THE RESIDENTIAL BASELINE ALLOWANCE MEANS TO YOU Based on i'UC (Public Utility Commission) recommdndations, the City of Ukiah has established "Baseline Rates" for all residential accounts. All electric usage within the bas0itie allowance is billed at the rate of $.1204*. All usage above the baseline is billed at the rate of $.15321+. Baseline usage allowances are adjusted to compensate for winter and slimmer' , demands, This adjustment usually occurs in November and May of each year, + (Rates and Fees are subject td change)' The Modesto Bee I Most Modesto mobile home parks accept rent control Ig t~~~ Page 1 of 2 The Modesto Bee modbee.com P Print This Article Posted on Thu, Sep. 27, 2007 Most Modesto mobile home parks accept rent control By ADAM ASHTON aashfona_modbee.com last updated: September 27, 2007 07:58:37 AM One of Modesto's nine mobile home parks decided not to go along with a voluntary lease program that could have spared it from the city's new rent control law. Rents at Coralwood mobile home park off McHenry Avenue could be subject to the rent control ordinance within two weeks because its owner disagreed with the terms of the voluntary agreements. The ordinance, which the City Council approved Aug. 14, calls for all rents to roll back to their April 30 level in parks that do not offer the Modesto- approved leases. The council Tuesday signed off on a memorandum of understanding that exempts the other eight mobile home parks because they were willing to sign an agreement that: Limits their rent increases to 7 percent a year. Allows them to increase rent on a space by 15 percent if a tenant moves out. Gives residents a choice of five-, seven- and 1o-year leases. Modesto's rent control ordinance has stricter terms, limiting rent increases to 6 percent a year and 1o percent when someone leaves a space. The eight parks worked out the terms of the agreement over the summer after the council signaled its intent to pursue rent control in April The council this week also agreed to launch a rent subsidy program that would be funded by contributions from the mobile home parks and matching contributions from the city's Redevelopment Agency. It could give mobile home residents three months' worth of their rent and mortgage payments each year. Peter Underhill, regional vice president for Coralwood owner Equity LifeStyle Properties, said Modesto declined to work with an offer to avoid rent control that his company made. "We had a very reasonable agreement that was submitted, but evidently the City Council members chose not to negotiate with ELS," he said. Equity LifeStyle was not willing to sign an agreement under the threat of rent control, Underhill said. ELS has written the city letters saying it opposes rent control, and particularly the rent rollback. Underhill said he is evaluating the company's options. The company has sued cities to prevent rent control. Councilman Will O'Bryant said the city rejected ELS' offer because of clauses the company wrote that would have allowed it to nullify the agreement at any time. "That's very threatening to senior citizens," O'Bryant said. Coralwood's fee increases have driven the discussion on rent control since 2004, when the company started a series of sharp rent increases designed to bring them on par with a broader real estate market. Its average monthly rent, $677, is about $14o a month more than the rent in the next most expensive park. Underhill said about half of the park's residents are paying what the company considers market rents, which are $775 a month; the rest pay a lesser amount. The company has slowed its rent increases and offered to create a hardship program, but the council said those measures were insufficient because they were overly burdensome on residents. Bee staff writer Adam Ashton can be reached at aashton@modbee.com or 578-2366. http://www.modbee.coml2007/09l271v-print/78185/most-modesto-mobile-home-parks.html 8/4/2010 The Modesto Bee I Most Modesto mobile home parks accept rent control Page 2 of 2 This article is protected by copyright and should not be printed or distributed for anything except personal use. Copyright © 2010, The Modesto Bee, 1325 H St., Modesto, CA 95354 Phone: (209) 578-2000. http://www.modbee.coml2007/09/27/v-printl781851most-modesto-mobile-home-parks.html 8/4/2010 Rent Control - Modesto I00" Page 1 of 1 9-q . 0 Rent Control - Modesto (Editor's comments:. The following articles detail what was accomplished, the time-line and action taken by leader Sally Studer and a handful of dedicated residents. It DOES NOT show the heart-ache, sleepless nights, and hundreds of hours of hard work. It has been a roller-coaster ride for Sally and her small group, but it shows what can accomplish for the good of all. (By the way, this selfless effort DOES NOT help Sally or some of the others of her group, as they DO NOT live in the City of Modesto - Sally is resigned to losing her home - this is heartbreaking!) And I want to personally thank Sandy Cissell for her efforts to keep me appraised of happenings in Modesto. Congratulations to all from CoMO-CAL! You have set a standard for all residents looking to get rent control for their area! The City of Modesto now has a MOU and Rent Control Ordinance Modesto formed a "stakeholders" committee consisting of a Vedder Park owner, a WMA Representative, 3 park residents (advocates), our attorney Bruce Stanton and the City Attorney. The first meeting was held on May 2nd, 2007. After several meetings with compromises made by all concerned parties, the terms of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) and a rent control ordinance were agreed to then the City voted to enact both. Both documents were written with few changes, the same documents can be used by the other Jurisdictions in the County. If any park owner violates the terms of the MOU, the park will be transferred to the much more restrictive ordinance, verification of compliance is required. A Committee consisting of three park residents and three park owners will meet on an ongoing basis to deal with MRL violations and other issues in the parks. Sally's Story My small park sold in November, 2003 and by 2005 nearly 50% of the residents had lost their homes due to escalating space rents. In August 2005 a friend and I wrote a petition and questionnaire and began walking parks to distribute them. I contacted residents who had responded to attend a meeting at my house. Lynda and a work crew from her park were among those who came. Within a month more parks were walked and our 151 official meeting was held. By Feburary 2006, after distributing over 4500 Petitions and Questionaires throughout the county, data was compiled showing rapid rent increases in several parks. The next month that data was presented to the Board of Supervisors and ALL city councils. It has been a full time job for Lynda and me. Other residents helped when and where they could. Sandy came on board in December 2006 and Ray March 2007. We now have a team of 5 with a variety of talents, including our treasurer Gloria. Frank contacted me when an article appeared in our local paper, and he and others associated with. CoMO-CAL immediately became a vital resource. What is required to improve living standards for park residents is knowledge, organization and dedication and that is being accomplished through CoMO-CAL. Our heartfelt thanks for all the help you've given us, Sincerely, Sally Studer Stanislaus Mobilehome Owners Advocacy (Editor's Note: Thanks Sally for the kind words. Our group is all about networking! It works!) Last Updated on Monday, 01 March 2010 11:36 http://www.comocal.org/about-como-callaccomplishments/rent-control-modesto.html?tmpl.. 8/4/2010 8-4t-16 CITY OF MODESTO MOBILE HOME RENT STABILIZATION ORDINANCE (Modesto Ordinance 4-19.01) CITY APPROVED LONG TERM LEASE AGREEMENT (Modesto Ordinance 4-19.05(c) THIS AGREEMENT WILL BE EXEMPT FROM ANY ORDINANCE, RULE, REGULATION OR INITIATIVE MEASURE ADOPTED BY ANY LOCAL GOVERMENTAL ENTITY WHICH ESTABLISHES A MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAT A LANDLORD MAY CHARGE A TENANT FOR RENT. INSERT PARK NAME Manufactured Home Community (hereinafter "Park") and those persons (collectively, "Resident") listed on the last page of this document (hereinafter "Supplement") agree to the terms and conditions set forth herein which amend and supplement the currently existing Rental Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") for Homesite previously entered into by and between the parties. The parties hereto agree and acknowledge that the terms of this Supplement are intended to incorporate and include any and all provisions relating to base rent charges of the Park, and that in the event of any conflict between this Supplement and any other agreement, lease or other tenancy documents executed by the parties hereto, the terms of this Supplement shall be controlling. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Resident acknowledges and agrees that this Supplement modifies the provisions of the Agreement regarding the payment of rent, the manner in which rent increases are computed, and the term of the Agreement. All other provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect subject to the following modifications: 1. SPECIFIC INFORMATION. 1.1 Term. The tenancy created under the Agreement shall be changed from a month to- month tenancy to the period designated below (unless sooner terminated in accordance with the terms of this Supplement, the Agreement, the California Civil Code or other applicable law). 0 Five years (60 months) and shall commence on and end on , Seven years (84 months) and shall commence on and end on , 0 Ten years (120 months) and shall commence on and end on , 1.2 Initial Base Rent: per month. 1 C:\Documents and Settings\Owner.Mail-Gateway\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK220\Long Term Lease Agreement - Final (2).doc 1.3 Anniversary Date: ("Anniversary Date"). 1.4 Lease Options Offered. Resident shall be offered each of the above options, and may elect to choose any of the above at Resident's sole election. By signing his/her/their initials below, Resident acknowledges that each of the above options has been offered and that Resident has voluntarily and with full knowledge and consent picked the lease term option set forth above. Resident: Resident: Resident: Resident: 1.5 Renewal or Extension of Term. No renewal or extension of the term . of this Supplement shall occur in the absence of agreement and approval in a new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to be agreed to by Park. 2. Rent. Resident shall pay Base Rent in advance to Park on the first day of each month, without deduction, offset, eliminated abatement or rebate. 2.1 First Anniversary Date. The initial Base Rent specified in paragraph 1.2 shall remain in effect until the first Anniversary Date, whereupon the Cost of Living adjustments shall commence pursuant to paragraph 2.2 below. 2.2 Cost of Living Adjustments. Commencing with the first Anniversary Date and on each Anniversary date thereafter, the Base Rent then in effect shall be increased by an amount equal to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the San Francisco- Oakland-San Jose California region (1982-84=100), as published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (hereinafter the "CPI increase"), during the twelve (12) month period ending at least one (1) month (but not more than four (4) months) prior to the month in which notice of the increase is given. Such CPI increase shall be made upon ninety (90) days' prior written notice. However, the CPI increase shall not be less than three percent (3%) or greater than seven percent (7%) of the existing base rent. In the event the foregoing Consumer Price Index is discontinued or revised, another governmental index then in existence shall be selected by Park and used to obtain substantially the same result. This Supplement shall not alter or effect the anniversary date for any rent increase which Park has customarily used for Resident's space, or prevent Park from increasing rents on any chosen date with proper notice. Nor shall it affect the amount of any rent increase which has been properly noticed and is set to take effect on or prior to September 15, 2007. Any rent increase which is or has been noticed to take effect on any date from and after September 15, 2007, shall not exceed the amounts authorized in this Supplement. 2.3 Formula Adjustments To Base Rent. At any time after the initial twelve (12) months of this Agreement, the Base Rent then in effect shall be subject to formula adjustments. 2.3.1 Notice and Verification. A formula adjustment to Base Rent can be made only after the giving of at least ninety (90) days' prior written notice. If a formula adjustment had been made for any of the items listed in subparagraph 2.3.4 below, then no additional increase for such item shall be implemented for the twelve. (12) months from the date of the previous noticed increase. The Park shall provide Resident with written proof or justification for each formula adjustment to rent, including bills, notices, purchases orders, check copies or other documents evidencing any cost increases, allocations or C:\Documents and Settings\Owner.Mail-Gateway\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK220\Long Term Lease Agreement - Final (2).doc calculations. The ninety (90) days written notice shall confirm that such written documentation shall be readily available for inspection by Resident upon request in the Park office during normal business hours during the ninety (90) days' notice period. A copy of the written documentation shall be provided to the Resident upon request. 2.3.2 Comparison Period. For each formula adjustment set forth below, the "Comparison Period" is the twelve (12) month period ending at least one (1) month (but not more than four (4) months) prior to the month in which the rent increase notice is given or, at the election of the Park, the twelve (12) month period ending in December of the year prior to the month in which the rent increase notice is given. The "Base Period" is the twelve (12) month period immediately preceding the Comparison Period. 2.3.3 Annualized. If the amount for any item subject to the formula adjustments listed in subparagraph 2.3.4 has been instituted or increased at any time during the Comparison Period, such amounts may, at the election of Park, be annualized and be considered on a full twelve (12) month basis for the Comparison period. 2.3.4 Length of Charge. Those formula adjustments described herein shall be separately stated on any monthly or periodic billing to Resident. If the formula adjustment has a limited duration or is amortized for a specific period, the expiration date shall be stated on the initial notice, and on each subsequent monthly billing to Resident while the amount is being billed. 2.3.5 Formula Adjustments are as follows: (a) Property Taxes. If the cost of property taxes for the Comparison Period exceeds the cost of property taxes for the Base period by more than the most recently utilized CPI increase percentage, the Base Rent then in effect shall be increased by excess cost, divided by twelve (12) and divided by the number of spaces in the Park. Property taxes includes, without limitation, general and special real estate taxes, personal property taxes, ad valorem taxes, bonds, fees, user fees, charges, surcharges, and assessments (including, without limitation, any taxes, assessments or charges for or on offsite or onsite improvements, or any assessments or charges in lieu of real property taxes), any tax or excise on rents or any such other tax, however described, which is levied or assessed against Park as a direct substitution in whole or in part for any real property taxes. Notwithstanding the above, no increase in the cost of property taxes as defined herein may be charged to Resident where such increase results from a sale, transfer or change of ownership that does not constitute a bona fide, good faith sale or transfer of Park's property or assets to a third party for reasonable consideration. (b) Government Required Services. If the costs for Government Required Services on an item-by-item basis for the Comparison Period exceed the cost for any one or more Government Required Services during the Base Period by more than the most recently utilized CPI increase percentage, the Base Rent then in effect shall be increased by the excess cost, divided by twelve (12) and divided by the number of spaces in the Park. The term "Government Required services" includes, without limitation, any existing, new, additional or changed service or facility which Park is required by the government to provide, or which is economically imprudent not to provide due to governmental regulation, fees, bonds, charges and other related costs and expenses for water, sewer, 3 C:\Documents and Settings\Owner.Mail-Gateway\LocaI Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK220\Long Term Lease Agreement - Final (2).doc hook-up to municipal sewer or local water company, trash pick-up and trash bin rental and utilities provided by Park. Utilities separately billed to Residents are excluded from this definition. (c) Capital Improvements and Capital Replacements. The Base Rent then in effect shall be increased by an amount equal to the total cost of Capital Improvements and Capital Replacements made by Park during the Comparison Period, amortized over a five (5) year period, divided .by twelve (12) and divided by the number of spaces in the Park. Capital Improvements and Replacements are estimated to have a useful life of at least one (1) year, and Park shall be entitled to receive interest on the unamortized balances calculated by utilizing an interest factor equivalent to the Bank Prime Rate as of the date the Improvement or Replacement is paid plus one (1) percent. (i) Capital Improvement Defined. The term "Capital Improvement" refers to anything with a cost in excess of five thousand dollars ($5,000) and that is new and does not currently exist in the Park, such as the construction of a new swimming pool where none existed before. (ii) Capital Replacement Defined. The term "Capital Replacement" refers to replacement of any existing thing in the Park so long as the replacement cost exceeds five thousand dollars ($5,000). Examples of Capital Replacement are: a new roof to replace the old roof on the existing clubhouse; and a replacement air conditioner for the clubhouse. Examples of repairs which are Capital Replacements, but which are excluded from the formula adjustment are: ordinary upkeep, e.g., repairing the clubhouse roof or repairing the air conditioner, maintaining landscaping and ordinary expenses which may be deducted as ordinary business expenses in accordance with the Internal Revenue Service regulations and federal tax case law. Until or unless allowed by applicable law, no repairs to gas or electric systems may be charged to Resident pursuant to this section. (iii) Approval. No individual capital improvement which would cost more than $50,000 and which would result in an increase to the Base Rent then in effect shall be made without the approval of the Park and the approval, by written ballot, of a majority (more than 50%) of Residents (one vote per Homesite). The Park shall provide the residents with thirty (30) days advance written notice of its intent to install any Capital Improvement which would cost more than $50,000 and which would result in an increase to the Base Rent then in effect, along with a written ballot, so as to afford Resident a reasonable amount of time to consider the merits of the Capital Improvement and to cast a written ballot to approve/disapprove of the Capital Improvement. The balloting period shall expire at the end of the thirty (30) day period, and all ballots must be returned to Park within said period in order to be valid. In the event that a capital improvement is proposed. by the Park, but is not approved by a majority of Residents, then Resident's rent shall not be increased for such capital improvement. (d) Insurance. If the costs for the insurance to the Park during the Comparison Period exceed the costs for insurance during the Base Rent Period by more than the most recently utilized CPI increase percentage, the Base Rent then in effect shall be increased by the amount of the excess cost, divided by twelve (12) and divided by the number of spaces in the Park. The term "insurance" includes all amounts paid by the Park for insurance with respect to the Park, including, without limitation, insurance for any loss, damage, or injury to property or person, including fire, earthquake, flood, vandalism, burglary, or theft, or workers' compensation insurance. 4 C:\Documents and Settings\Owner.Mail-Gateway\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK220\Long Term Lease Agreement - Final (2).doc 2.3.5 Increases Comprise Rent. The Base Rent increases in paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3 comprise rent. No delay in the exercise of any right of Park to institute or increase any formula adjustment to base Rent listed hereinabove shall be construed as a waiver or shall impair any right of Park to institute or increase such formula adjustment. 2.3.6 No Rent Increase at End of Term. No rent increase may be noticed, sought or collected from Resident during, or at the end of the term hereof, other than as set forth above 3. TERMINATION BY RESIDENT. Resident may elect to terminate the Agreement and this Supplement on sixty (60) days' prior written notice to Park if one of the following occurs: 3.1 Removal of Mobilehome. All persons occupying the Homesite rented to Resident by the Agreement and this Supplement terminate their tenancy as to said Homesite and remove Resident's Mobilehome, appurtenances and accessory structures from the Park. In such event, the Homesite shall revert to Park's control, and Park may lease or rent the Homesite to any party on any terms Park chooses. 3.2 Sale of Mobilehome. All persons occupying the Homesite rented to Resident by the Agreement and this Supplement terminate their tenancy as to said Homesite and sell Resident's mobilehome to another party who has been approved by Park for tenancy in the Park in accordance with the terms set forth in the paragraph entitled "Approval of Purchaser". In such event, the Agreement and this Supplement may be assigned to the purchaser in accordance with the terms of this Supplement. 4. APPROVAL OF PURCHASER. Resident may sell Resident's Mobilehome at any time pursuant to the Mobilehome Residency Law and other applicable law. If the prospective purchaser of.the Mobilehome intends for the Mobilehome to remain in the Park, said purchaser must do the following before occupying the Mobilehome: (a) complete an application for tenancy (which may include a fee for obtaining a credit report); (b) be accepted by Park; and (c) execute an assignment of resident's interest in the Agreement and this Supplement or a new rental agreement, the Park's Rules and Regulations, and other residency documents. If the purchaser fails to execute an assignment or a new agreement, such purchaser shall have no rights of tenancy. The residency documents signed by the prospective purchaser may be different in their terms and provisions than such residency documents now in effect. 5. ASSUMPTION OF AGREEMENT. - Upon the sale of Resident's Mobilehome, Resident shall assign and the purchaser shall assume Resident's interest in the Agreement and this Supplement. Park retains the option, upon such assumption and transfer, to increase the adjusted Base Rent (the Base rent then in effect for the month immediately preceding the effective date of the assumption or transfer) by an amount not exceeding fifteen percent (15%) of the existing space rent paid by the mobilehome seller or seventy- five dollars 75.00), whichever is greater. Said increase shall be in addition to any other rental adjustments provided for in the Supplement. No increase under this paragraph 5 shall occur more frequently than once in any four (4) year period for Resident's mobilehome space, regardless of the number of transfers which occur within any given four (4) year period. 6. EXTENSION OR RENEWAL. As long as this Agreement is in full force and effect and Resident is not in default of any term or condition hereof, resident and/or Park shall have the right to renew the Agreement and this Supplement for an additional term of sixty (60) months by giving written notice to the 5 C:\Documents and Settings\Owner.Mail-Gateway\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK220\Long Term Lease Agreement - Final (2).doc other party of such election at least six (6) months (but not more than nine (9) months) prior to the expiration of the initial term. Upon receipt of such notice, the other party shall have sixty (60) days to provide written notice of that party's acceptance. In the event that no notice of election to renew is given by either Resident or Park, or in the event that the responding party does not provide such written notice of acceptance, then this Supplement shall end pursuant to paragraph I.I. In the event that Park and Resident agree to a renewal, the beginning Base Rent shall be the Base Rent in effect for the month immediately preceding the commencement of the renewal term, subject to adjustment pursuant to paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3. 7. MEGAN'S LAW DISCLOSURE. NOTICE. Pursuant to Section 290.46 of the Penal Code, information about specified sex offenders is made available to the public via an internet website maintained by the Department of Justice at www.meganslaw.ca.gov. Depending on the offender's criminal history, this information will include either the address at which the offender resides or the community of residence and ZIP code in which he or she resides. 8. PRIOR AGREEMENTS. This Supplement supersedes all prior agreements regarding the terms of tenancy referenced herein. In the event of a conflict between the terms of the Agreement and the terms of this Supplement, the terms of this Supplement shall control. 9. ACKNOWLEDGEMNTS. Resident represents, acknowledges and agrees as follows: 9.1 Personal Residence. Resident is entering into this Supplement for the personal and actual residence of resident. 9.2 Acceptance Period. Resident has thirty (30) calendar days from and after the date Park submits this Supplement to Resident to accept or reject it. 9.3 Cancellation Period. Resident may cancel this Supplement within seventy-two (72) hours after executing it, by delivering a written notice to the Park stating Resident's election to cancel. THE PERSONS whose signatures appear below have reviewed, understand, and agree to be bound by this Supplement. INSERT PARK NAME Dated: By: Authorized Agent RESIDENTS Dated: Signature Printed Name 6 C:\Documents and Settings\Owner.Mail-Gateway\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK220\Long Term Lease Agreement - Final (2).doc Dated: Signature Printed Name C:\Documents and Settings\Owner.Mail-Gateway\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK220\Long Term Lease Agreement - Final (2).doc ITEM NO.. MEETING DATE: city aJ,- Ukiah, AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 10b August 4, 2010 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF MARINE LIFE PROTECTION ACT MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (MOA) Background: The following information has been provided by Dr. Jeanine Pfeiffer, of UC Davis, working with Jere Melo of the Ft. Bragg City Council: The Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (MLPAI) process determines our County's constituents' and visitors' future ocean access and use. Marine protected areas set up by the MLPAI process (concluding in October 2010) determine where people can fish or harvest marine resources for commercial, recreational, subsistence, cultural, or ceremonial reasons. A historical decision is being made for our region, and most of our constituents remain unaware, uninformed, and uninvolved in the process. Our County and Cities are particularly economically vulnerable to losing access to coastal and marine resources, especially for residents who depend on fishing or harvesting for their livelihoods or household welfare, for any businesses related to commercial or sport fishing, and for any "gateway/enroute" or tourism-related businesses along Routes 1, 101 and 128, including restaurants, shops, gas stations, wineries, hotels, motels, marinas, campgrounds, etc. Decisions made by MLPAI will impact our local governance, including tax revenues from impacted businesses, the future provision of harbor services and businesses (that would be lost if our harbors continue to decline); increasing the need for welfare services for residents who derive part of their subsistence from fishing and harvesting; increasing the number of citizens subject to fines and arrest; and challenging the sovereignty of our tribes and tribal communities. Recent closures in the southern portion of Mendocino County by the MLPAI process resulted in the Kashia Pomo losing access to ancestral ceremonial areas at Stewart's Point, restricted and prohibited access for commercial and sport fishing in 20 square miles below Pt. Arena, and an effort shift by commercial and recreational fishermen and seaweed harvesters into the northern portion of our County. Continued on Page 2 Recommended Action(s): Discuss and approve adoption of Marine Life Protection Act MOA Alternative Council Option(s): Do not approve MOA and direct staff as to any further steps, as necessary Citizens advised: Requested by: Jere Melo, Ft Bragg City Council; and Dr. Jeanine Pfeiffer, U.C. Davis Prepared by: Jane Chambers, City Manager Coordinated with: Attachments: 1) North Coast Local Agency Coastal Coordination Committee Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), 2) Draft Mendocino Co Board of Supervisors Letter, 3) Ft. Bragg Citv Council Letter of Mav 10. 2010 ppr A d: j an hambers, City Manager 7 Subject: Discussion/Possible Adoption Of Marine Life Protection Act Memorandum Of Agreement (MOA) Meeting Date: August 4, 2010 Page 2 of 2 The MLPAI process, which ostensibly is based on public participation, in actuality has so many barriers to effective public input (insufficient time for public comment and stakeholder deliberation, inadequate meeting agenda notice, unavailability of meeting materials, etc.) that our residents feel frustrated, thwarted, and shut out. Governing bodies in Mendocino County (the County Board of Supervisors, Ft. Bragg and Pt. Arena City Councils) have passed resolutions and sent a series of letters of concern to the MLPAI and the Secretary of the California Natural Resources Agency regarding inadequate public participation. To develop a unified response to confront this externally-imposed process, a North Coast Local Agency Coastal Coordination Committee has been formed. Mendocino, Humboldt and Del Norte Counties, 6 City Councils, 6 Tribes and Tribal Communities and 4 Harbor Districts have signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) attached, to send representatives to this Coordination Committee. We recommend that Ukiah and Willits Cities also sign on to this MOA, as an effective and time-efficient way to stay looped into the MLPAI information process and protect local constituent and governance concerns. We also recommend all City Councils schedule updated monthly reports on the MLPAI process for August, September, and early October 2010, as the final decisions will be made at the end of October 2010. Attached is a copy of recent letters by the Ft. Bragg City Council (an identical version was signed by the Pt. Arena City Council) and the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors. As the County's "rapid response team," Jim Martin and I are here to assist you with any questions, concerns, meeting materials, or additional documentation. We are in constant contact with Ft. Bragg and Pt. Arena City Councils, with coordinators in Humboldt and Del Norte Counties, and with Assembly Chesbro and Congressman Thompson staff. Discussion: City Council may want to discuss impacts of participating in the MOA. Fiscal Impact: Appears that City Council can participate in the MOA without incurring direct financial cost at this time ❑ Budgeted FY 09/10 ❑ New Appropriation I-XI Not Applicable ❑ Budget Amendment Required Amount Budgeted Source of Funds (title and Account Number Addit. Appropriation Requested ATTACHMENT L NORTH COAST LOCAL AGENCY COASTAL COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT This Memorandum of Agreement is entered into by and between the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District; County of Humboldt; County of Del Norte; County of Mendocino; City of Eureka; City of Arcata; City of Trinidad; City of Crescent City; City of Fort Bragg; Yurok Tribe; Wiyot Tribe, Table Bluff Rancherla; Trinidad Rancheria; Smith River Rancheria (Totowa Dee-ni); Elk Valley Rancheria; Shelter Cove Resort Improvement District No. 1; Crescent City Harbor District and Noyo Harbor District; hereinafter collectively referred to as "North Coast Local Agencies". WHEREAS, the North Coast Local Agencies are presently the most active public entities concerned with regional coastal issues along the Mendocino, Humboldt and Del Norte County coastline; and WHEREAS, upcoming regional coastal planning issues facing the North Coast Local Agencies include, but are not limited to, the State of California's Marine Life Protection Act Initiative and its proposed design and impacts to fisheries and the fishing communities on the north coast; regional coastal sediment management; ocean energy; marine highway; and coordination of ocean observing systems; and WHEREAS, the North Coast Local Agencies each have plans and development strategies for their jurisdiction along the Del Norte, Humboldt and Mendocino County coastlines; and WHEREAS, the North Coast Local Agencies have powers, duties, and experience to contribute to regional coastal issues within the Del Norte, Humboldt and Mendocino County coastlines; and WHEREAS, the North Coast Local Agencies all desire to coordinate efforts to achieve the highest degree of success in regional scientific research; planning; resource management; commercial, recreational and subsistence fisheries; and economic development. NOW,. THEREFORE, the parties do agree as follows: 1. To support the creation of the "North Coast Local Agency Coastal Coordination Committee" hereinafter referred to as "North Coast Committee." 2. To designate two people to represent their agency on the North Coast Committee. Agency representatives are to be appointed by the Agency, and can include agency Board or Council members, agency staff, technical consultants or members of the public. Each member agency shall have the ability to place any terms or conditions on their appointment process and each member agency shall have the ability to extend or replace their representatives at any time. 3. That the purpose of the North Coast Committee is to coordinate local public agency responses to upcoming regional coastal issues affecting the coastline of Mendocino, Humboldt and Del Norte Counties. Neither the North Coast Committee, nor a local agency's representatives to the committee, shall have the power or authority to create any legal obligation on the part of a member agency. 4. That upcoming regional planning issues include, but are not limited to the State of California's Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (Ml-PA) and its proposed design and impacts to fisheries and the fishing communities on the north coast; regional coastal sediment management; coordination of ocean observing systems; ocean energy; marine highway and other regional issues that are deemed of interest by the North Coast Committee. 5. That by virtue of being on the North Coast Committee, the members of the North Coast Committee are also members of the North Coast Local Interest Marine Protected Area Work Group. 6. North Coast Committee member agencies will cover their own expense to participate on the North Coast Committee. 7. The term of this agreement is three (3) years. This agreement may be extended for up to three (3) additional years by mutual agreement of the North Coast Committee. Any member agency may have the option to withdraw at any time. DATE: (Name) (Title) (Organization) NORTH COAST LOCAL AGENCY COASTAL COORDINATION COMMITTEE AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE CONTACT INFORMATION AGENCY: AGENCY CONTACT Name: Title: Mailing Address: Email Address: Phone - Office: Cal: AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE #1 Name: Mailing Address: Email Address: Phone- Office: Cal: AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE #2 Name: Mailing Address: Email Address: Phone- Office: Cal: PLEASE FILL IN ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION FOR YOUR AGENCY AND RETURN TO DAVID HULL AT dhull@portofhumboldtbay.org ArAM"M CARMi J. ANCtr:€.0 thiefExtxutivc Officer Clerk of the bard TAINIMI WESE ,SKY Senior Deputy' Clerk of the Board COUNTY OF MENDOCINO BOARD O SUPERVISORS CONTACT INFORMATIO 501 Low Cap Road • Room 1090 Ukiah, Califumia 95482 T€il.t's P€ ION€:: (707) 4634221 PAX: (707) 463-7237 Email. bot,f&o.mendocino.ca.uss Web: %-ww.co.mcndocino.ca.uvbos June 15, 2010 Mr. Lester A, Snow, Secretary California Natural Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street; Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: Lack of Meaningful Public Involvement in Marine Life Protection Act initiative Process Dear Mr. Snow: On behalf of the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors (Board) 1 would like to express the Board's grave concerns regarding the manner in which the public has been allowed to participate or not - in the ongoing. Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (MLl'Al) process. Coutityr constituents continue to express considerable frustration over the barriers that thwart public access to various MLPAI meetings pertaining to the North Coast Study Region. While we were pleased to hear that MLPAI Executive Director Ken Wiseman reportedly pledged greater openness with respect to public access and participation in the, MLl'AI process, and that the public meeting nodes established by the MLPA Vream in Fort. Bragg, Eureka, and Crescent City are working well we remain concerned by the constant stream of negative reports by county constituents. Specific issues include: (i) limited advance notice of public meetings, (ii) lack of handouts and other written materials in support of agenda items, (iii) the absence of written meeting agendas, minutes, or MarineMap print-outs from prior meetings, (iv) past prohibitions on videotaping meetings; (v) the lack of meaningful dialogue and joint fact- finding exercises between the public and the Science Advisory 't'eam, (vi) non-public deliberations and private meetings of the Blue Ribbon Task Force, and most notably (vii) the lack of time provided for stakeholder deliberation and public comment at public meetings. Simply stated, our constituents feel shut out of the MLPAI process, or worse, as it they are being used to provide a perception that public involvement is encouraged and valued, when in actual practice it is not. 'I`he ultimate success of the MLPAI and the continuing conservation of any marine protection !ones established through the MLPAI process relies heavily on local community support and involvement. To achieve long-term ecological, cultural, and socio-economic goals for the North Coast Study Region it is imperative the public be afforded. a heightened role in the MLPA1 process. We respectfully urge the California Natural Resources Agency to enhance public access and participation in the MLPAI process by improving public access to MLPAl meetings, informational materials, and providing increased opportunities for meaningful stakeholder deliberations and public comment throughout the MLPAI process. Sincerely, Carre Brown, Chair Mendocino County Board of Supervisors THF: BOARD OED SUPFRVISORS C ARRE BROWN JOI€N MCCOWE N JOHN PINCHES 1Ct:NDAIA. SSIITI€ J.17AVI1) (,'OL AX First District Second District Third District fourth District lFifth District ATTACHMENT CITY OF FORT BRAGG Incorporated August 5, 1889 416 N. Franklin St. Fort Bragg, CA 95437 Phone: (707) 961-2823 Fax: (707) 961-2802 http://city.fortbragg.com May 10, 2010 Honorable Cindy Gustafson, Chair MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force California Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 SUBJECT: Increasing the effectiveness of the North Coast Regional Stakeholder Group (NCRSG) Dear Ms. Gustafson and BRTF Members: The North Coast Regional Stakeholder Group (NCRSG) has met three times thus far (February - Eureka; March - Crescent City; April - Fort Bragg), and we understand there will be three more meetings prior to the end of the MLPA process in this Study Region. According to the Charge and Draft Ground Rules (prepared January 2010) for the NCRSG, the group is to strive for broad-based and cross-interest of support of proposals, and to achieve a high level of agreement in developing and advancing alternative proposals for marine protected areas. As you are aware, prior to the formation of the NCRSG, a broad-based, cross-interest group of representatives met as a Tri-County Working Group (now known as the North Coast Local Interest Group) achieved considerable consensus regarding potential MPA arrays for this region. To our dismay, we hear from a number of RSG members and constituents that the consensus achieved in these meetings is being jeopardized by the newly adopted NCRSG format. Instead of building on what went on before (e.g., the hundreds of meeting hours in the Tri- County Working Group, the Mendocino Ocean Community Alliance, and individual and group consultations), in the words of one seasoned meeting attendee and NCRSG member, "it seemed like the working groups went backward." NCRSG members also reported how hard it was to spend additional time trying to "catch up" on what happened in the separate working group sessions, especially when neither session was recorded or reported on comprehensively. The group's division also makes it difficult for the concerns of tribes and tribal communities in the North Coast and North Central Coast Study Regions to be adequately addressed. NCRSG members, local experts, tribes and tribal community representatives, and the general public are finding it very hard to follow and participate in the process when the NCRSG is divided into two separate groups meeting in separate rooms during the work sessions. Simultaneous observers in both rooms witnessed time being wasted when the same issues were discussed in separate groups without having the relevant experts present (e.g., only 1 seaweed harvester, only 1 geologist, only 1 sea urchin processor, only 1 tribal representative from the southern part of the study region, only 1 game warden, or only 1 State parks representative present in the discussion); which then required the groups to revisit the issues when the experts were present. We request the MLPA I-Team revisit the NCRSG meeting strategy, to enable a single-group meeting format which is more conducive to building consensus. Temporary break-out groups can assemble, at the request of NCRSG members, if certain issues require fleshing out with a subset of RSG members who then bring the sub-group's consensus to the larger group. We wish to speak to one other issue mentioned in the Charge and Draft Ground Rules: that of information gathering and sharing. The document states that: "MLPA Initiative, DFG, and State Parks staff intend to create multiple opportunities for data sharing and joint fact-finding within the NCRSG. Joint fact-finding refers to a process where: stakeholders are able to provide their knowledge and identify information sources, needs, and questions for analysis; deliberations of scientific advisors are transparent; data are pooled to support better informed recommendations; and a serious effort is made of identify and narrow sources of scientific disagreement." One of the most deep-seated issues that has been repeatedly been addressed by our constituents, and has yet to be effectively addressed by the MLPA process, involves the disconnect between the formally-recognized (and largely externally-based) Science Advisory Team and the experiential knowledge base held by coastal residents, especially our more senior experts. The most active MOCA members have logged hundreds, thousands, or even tens-of-thousands of person-hours in State waters and along our coastlines. These experts include conservationists and educators who have been actively involved in resource and species conservation issues for decades; multi-generational commercial and recreational fishermen who possess intimate knowledge of our coastline, seaweed harvesters who cooperatively developed sustainable practices (e.g., the Seaweed Stewardship Alliance), and tribal and tribal community representatives whose ancestral ties stretch back for millennia. Currently the near shore (0-30 m) data - especially for rocky and kelp habitat - used in Marine Map is based on proxies and extrapolations. A number of our NCRSG members have expressed concern about the continued discrediting of local knowledge as "anecdotal" (versus the prominence given to academic/scientific data) and the lack of effort put into ground- truthing shallow habitats where we have missing data along the coastline. NCRSG members have repeatedly offered their expertise, time, and equipment to collect critical habitat data, and did so again during the most recent meeting. We request that the SAT work directly with NCRSG members and local constituents to develop a rapid response plan to address key data deficiencies in the North Coast Study Region, and for that data to be made available prior to the completion of Round Two of the MLPA process. We welcome the opportunity to speak further with you about these issues. We thank you for your consideration. of these requests. Sincerely, Doug H merstrom Dave Turner Mayor Vice Mayor Meg Courtney Dan Gje a ere Melo Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember Cc: League of California Cities Ukiah Field Rep Kathy Kelley Governor Schwarzenegger Senator Pat Wiggins Assembly Member Wes Chesbro T)rrn 10b 8/4/2010 Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (MLPAI) Process: Update for August 2010 Goals of the County's Outreach Team 1. Translate a very complex process into something everyone can understand and participate in. 2. Build individual and institutional capacity and community networks to strengthen our collective ability to respond to future challenges. 3. Provide technical expertise and serve as "process watchdogs" to support effective constituent participation; especially for residents with limited time, internet access, or advanced scientific backgrounds. Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (MLPAI) Process: Update for August 2010 Goals 4. Provide regular updates to community leaders, local governing bodies, State and National representatives and the media. 5. Hold monthly meetings for constituents to meet with Regional Stakeholder Group members, discuss array options, voice concerns and agree to solutions. 6. Help our communities plan ahead: what will happen after the marine protected areas are designated in our region? How can we participate in the monitoring and evaluation programs? 8/4/2010 Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (MLPAI) Process: Update for August 2010 a. Mendocino Ocean Community Alliance (MOCA) ouNr..li spent 100s of meeting hours vetting potential Nov. '09- marine protected areas (MPA) with >120 locals; Jan. '10 b. MOCA representatives coordinated with regional reps in Tri-County Working Group to develop consensus proposal ("external array"). c. MOCA External Array ("B") submitted using MarineMap to MLPA I-Team on Feb. 1, 2010. (Five other arrays submitted from Mendocino County; three build from the MOCA array; two others are submitted by individuals/small groups.) Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (MLPAI) Process: Update for August 2010 a. 31 Regional Stakeholder Group (RSG) members began with 8 external arrays (4 virtually Feb. '10- identical) evaluated by SAT; July '10 b. RSG met formally six times as unified and separate groups; vetted many more ideas (mostly offline); c. Continued struggle over tribal concerns and inefficient use of meeting time resulted in lack of significant progress. 3 8/4/2010 p/Receive updates from the,County's MLPA Program Outreach Team I` ❑ Sign the Regional Coast MOA ❑ Participate in the August 12th Teleconference ❑ Attend the August 30-31 RSG meeting in Eureka ❑'Pass a resolution supporting a community-based consensus array u Participate in the September Regional Coast MOA meeting SEPTEMBER t,, [_i Program update from the Outreach Team at City Council meetings ❑ Send letter(s) to the California Natural Resources Agency OCTOBER 5 ITEM NO.. MEETING DATE: City q ' Uk ah AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 10c August 4, 2010 SUBJECT: REPORT TO COUNCIL ON STATUS OF ANNEXATION OF THE BRUSH STREET TRIANGLE (Contd. from 7/21/1.0) Background: Staff has been working with the owners of property with the Brush Street Triangle regarding annexation to the City of Ukiah. Annexation of this area has been a topic of discussion for many years, and therefore, the purpose of this report is to clarify the current status of the subject for the City Council, owners, and the public. The City Council, to staff's knowledge, last took action on this topic on January 3, 2007. The City had received a letter from Jack L. Cox, one of the property owners involved, in which the City of Ukiah was encouraged to consider initiating annexation into the city. A Preliminary Annexation request had already been made by the owners to the City in April 2005. At that time, fees were paid by the property owners for processing of an annexation request. Although there was staff work completed on the request, processing of the request was stalled at the point decisions were necessary about proceeding with an EIR document. The owners received a letter from the City regarding the EIR, but staff and owners did not take further steps at the time. At a subsequent meeting in January 2007, the City Council received a report from City staff outlining the steps that would be necessary for the City of Ukiah to initiate the annexation, and staff stated at the time, that typically, property owners would themselves request the annexation, rather than asking the City to undertake the process. The minutes from the meeting indicate that the Council members concurred that the City should take a leadership role (but the minutes do not state what that role would be) and move forward with a regional approach for annexation. A joint Board of Supervisors/City Council and County Planning Department/City Planning Commission meeting was scheduled for January 10, 2007 at which the topic was to be discussed. Subsequent minutes from the Board of Supervisors do not reflect any discussion or decisions regarding annexation. The owners of the property again approached the City of Ukiah in Fall, 2009. They wanted the City to re- new the annexation process begun in 2005. Although the process had stalled, the owners assert both their initial request, and fees paid to process that request, remain valid. Continued on page 2 Recommended Action(s): Receive report Alternative Council Option(s): Citizens advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Jane Chambers, City Manager Coordinated with: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Attachments: Annexation Project Schedule A ved: - App - K , r a Chambers, City Manager Significant barriers exist to the straightforward processing of the owners' request. These must be removed before the request can be fully processed. City staff, working with the assistance of a temporary employee, has sorted out all of the steps necessary to complete an annexation, including a pre-application meeting with LAFCO. This work has resulted in a detailed timeline showing all steps necessary to achieve the requested annexation over a 48 week project schedule between July 2010 and June 2011. Discussion: In addition to many procedural steps on outstanding processes required by LAFCO and other agencies, the City will need to take the following steps to process the annexation: (1) Calculate City Fees, (2) prepare an application, (3) prepare maps and legal description of the Brush Street Triangle, (4) Council action on an Annexation Resolution, and (5) City fees paid for annexation application and CEQA process. The timeline shows these activities taking place in November 2010. Between now and then, City staff will be working to make recommendations to the City Council on how best to proceed with the annexation of this property, and what, if any, additional fees and CEQA review will be required, of either the owners and/or the City of Ukiah. It is staff's intention at this time to recommend that the owners be given credit for the fees paid in 2005 for the annexation process, and that credit applied to any further costs associated with the annexation that may be required of the owners. The Council will be asked at a later date to determine if the annexation should proceed at the request of the City of Ukiah, or be made by the property owners. Staff anticipates that this issue will be clarified as several of the other outstanding annexation related issues are addressed. The property owners have requested to be present when this item is presented to the City Council, and may wish to speak to the Council regarding their annexation request and future steps. Fiscal Impact: Budgeted FY 10/11 F-1 New Appropriation 7 7 Not Applicable Budget Amendment Required Amount Budgeted Source of Funds (title and Account Number Addit. Appropriation Requested Annexation Project Schedule /A0 IAt--I, IAII..A-% Annexation Project Schedule /A0 IAI...I. IAA_A...A Jul 2010 Au st Septe mber Octo4m November December J Ua lyr- 20 11 F eb Maroh - ''A ' I May Tasks Lead Plan Start Plan Hebb 7/5 7 /12 7/19 7/16 812 8/9 8116 8/23 8/30 916 9/13 9/20 9/27 10/4 10/11 1011 8 10/25 11/1 11 B As 11122 1'1129 l2/fi ]7113 1212 0 1227 113 1110 1/17 1124 1/31 217 2/14 22 1 2128 317 3/14 3121 3/28 4/4 4111 4/18 4125 5@ 519 SII 6 5/2 3 5130 1 ANNEXATIONSCBEDULE LI' Annexation &TaxShirin Cemmetee 1.1.1- Review Property &SalesTaxData Electeds 17-Jul-tO 30-Jul-10 1.12 Negotiate Property Tax including RDAs Elected, 2-Aug-l0 245 70 1.13 ` Negotiate Sales Tax 61e ads 27•S 10 290G-10. 1.1.4: Present. ptionstoBoard&Council Jane/Carmel . I-Nov40 30-Nov-10- 1.1.5 'Adoption vfMasterTaxSharing Agreement by Board & Council Electeds 1-Dec-10 31-Der•10. L' L L 1 L LA FCO' complete all UVAP MSRs Frank 5-Jul-10 .3-Jan-11: i . JI M ] H ILL Review Annexation andS01Application fm Completeness Frank 18-Feb-11 21-Feb-1I Calculate Few on Brush Street Triangle & SO[ Frank 21•Feb-1 I 21-Feb-11 Referral to Affected Agencies Frank 22-Fet,41 ' 24-Mar ] I' M @ City/County 'Adopted TaxExchange Resolution Frank 18-Mar- 11 20•Ma-It . . . . . . . . Commission Public Hearing Frank 4-Apr- I I 4-A -11 . Ad 'onofRexclutionofDeterminstions Frank 4-Apr-1l 9-May-ll Ifnwisgaary,ProtestHearing (Waive?) Frank 2-May-1I YMay-11 File CarS6cates of Completion with County R..Acr Frank 6-Jun-1 I 6-Jurrll FIIc Boun 'Chan es with SEE and Assessor Freak b Jun•I I 6 Jun•I L ; Fotwaid p`:end8elasTdxReaolutiontaAuditdr: , per Frank '6-Jun+ll 64urr-ll. Coaaty of Mendocido Plant,ins & BuBding - GIS Property Tax and Geographic l.ayerstoMuniServices Patrick. Ildun-10 -28-Jun-10 Release UVAPDra6Plan forReview Nash 2-Aug-10 3-S 10 d Release UVAPEIRandDraft Plan ReleaaedforComment riming Commission Review ofDraft UVAP&ZoninAlternatives Nash Nash 1-Nov-10 "I-Nov-10 15-Dec-10' '31-Dec-10 BondkovsetyofDraft UVAP&ZoningAlternatives Nash 3-Jan-II 28-Feb11 Boud'AdopflonofUVAPFinalDraft Nash 2-May-11 31-May-11 County of Mendocino CEO & County Counsel RelaioManiScrvicesfor Property and Sales Tax Audit Carmel II•Jun-10 11-Jun-10 UmRMssterTamSharing A em forAnnexetion Ihan atidSales TaxResolution(s) Jeanine/Dave Jeanine/Dave :2-Aug-10. I-Nov-10 30-Nov-10-. 30-Nov-10' AdoptionbfMaslerTaxBhern AgeementbyBoard Carmel 1-Ike-10' 3l-Dec40 County of Mendocino Auditor-Controller/MuntServices Complete Property Tax and Sales Tax AnalysesS01/OVAP Mary 25-Jun-10 16-Jul-10' Receive Property and Soles Tax Resolution % : Meredith `.6•Jun-lI 6-Juo-11 Forward Tex Resolution and Master Tay Share Agreement toSBE I . Meredith :6-Ju11-11 10-Jun•11 Create or AdjustTRA's Meredith 6jun-11 City of Uklab Planning h Public Works & City Attorney ProvideinyueededDate to MuniServices Charley 1-Jul-10 16-Jul-10 ` GethnPze-Zarin Information onSOlforApplication Pr are SOl of Application Calculate City FecsonBrush Street Triangle Charley Charley Charley 6-Sep-10 I.Oct-10 1-Nov-10 3f)-Sep-10; '29-flet•ID - 5-Nov-10. Prep aroBrushStreetTriangleA Application Prepare Maps andLagelDescriptions ofSOl P ara Maps & LlDescri ions of Brush Street Triangle Charley Charley/Tim/Dave Chart /rimlDave I-Nov-10 1-Nov-10 -!-Dec-10 30-Nov-)O 30-Nov-10 :31-Deo-10, _ are&CimulaleNegative Declaretion/CEQAonA lications : Charley -.3•Jam11 17-Feb-11. SubinlasiouofA IlcetioaforS01&BnuhStreetTriangle Charley 18-FebII I8-Feb11" City of Uklrtk Manager &.City Attorney . Counc DGcctiveonBrushStreetTriangle Annexation Draft Master .TuSharing 'A ementfmArm'exetion Jane Dave/Jeanine 54ol•10 2-Aug-10 30-Jul•10` 30-Nov-10 Annexation A"7icationResolution byCouncil Jane 1-Nov-10 15-Nav=10 Dreg Property and Sales TaxResolutian(s) Adoption of Master Tax Sharing Agreement by Council - Dave/Jeanine. lane I-Nov-10` -l'-Dec-10 30.Nov-10, 31-Dec-10. MunlSerrkes for C1 of Ukiah Finance ]Department p - Com lete Piu cttyTaxand Sales Tax Analyses CiLimits g e Mary 25-Jun-10 16-Jul-10 Forward Tex Resolution and Master Tax Share A ementtoSBE Mary 6-Jun-l I " I0-JUn•I1, Brush Street Triangle Prop" Owners AOend Council, Board and LAFCO Meetings Pa City Fees for Annexation A "liwtien7CEQA Owners Owners 19-Jul-10' 8-Nov-10 2 May1I I2-Now10 Ps LAFCOProcessin"FccsforAmtexationo/SBE Clvners 22•Feb11 25•Febll;; Annexation Timeline Drafted by Zarka 7/112010 ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE. C y OV'u-kfarr, AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 11a August 4, 2010 SUBJECT: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES FOR 2010 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE - SEPTEMBER 15-17,2010 The League of California Cities 2010 Annual Conference is scheduled for September 15-17, 2010 in San Diego. On Friday, September 17, 3:00 p.m., the League holds its Annual Business meeting where membership considers and takes action on resolutions that establish League policy. The League is requesting the City Council designate a voting delegate and, if desired, up to two voting delegate alternates to participate in this meeting. Staff is requesting Council designate a voting delegate and alternate(s) for the 2010 League Annual Conference, if desired, and authorize the City Manager to submit the Voting Delegate/Alternate Form (Attachment 1) on their behalf. Fiscal Impact: Budgeted FY 09/10 New Appropriation FX1 Not Applicable Budget Amendment Required Amount Budgeted Source of Funds (title and Account Number Addit. Appropriation Requested Recommended Action(s): Designate a voting delegate and alternate(s) for the 2010 League Annual Conference and authorize the City Manager to submit the Voting Delegate/Alternate Form (Attachment 1) on their behalf. Alternative Council Option(s): Take no action. Citizens advised: N/A Requested by: League of California Cities Prepared by: Linda Brown, Administrative Assistant Coordinated with: Jane Chambers, City Manager Attachments: Letter from League of California Cities dated June 4, 2010, & Voting Delegate/Alternates Form Approved: Lz'~3~r J Chambers, City Manager 20010, Voting Procedures for ATTACHMENT I 1400 K STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 PH: (916) 658-8200 Fx: (916) 658-8240 ~o EAIGUE CALFORNIA CITIES W W W. CACITIES.ORG Council Action Advised by August 20, 2010 June 4, 2010 TO: Mayors, City Managers and City Clerks RE: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES League of California Cities Annual Conference - September'15-17 - San Diego The League's 2010 Annual Conference is scheduled for September 15-17 in San Diego. An important part of the Annual Conference is the'Annual Business Meeting (at the closing General Assembly), scheduled for 3:00 p.m., Friday, September 17 at the San Diego Convention Center. At this meeting, the League membership considers and takes action on resolutions that establish League policy. In order to, vote at the Annual Business Meeting, your city council must designate a voting delegate. Your city may also appoint up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote in the event that the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity. Please take care when selecting your city's delegates, as travel and attendance could be an issue for those who observe Yom Kippur. Please complete the attached Voting Delegate form and return it to the League's office no later than Friday, August 20, 2010. This will allow us time to establish voting delegate/alternates' records prior to the conference. Please note the following procedures that are intended to ensure the integrity of the voting process at the Annual Business Meeting. • Action by Council Required. Consistent with League bylaws, a city's voting delegate and up to two alternates must be designated by the city council. When completing the attached Voting Delegate form, please attach either a copy of the council resolution that reflects the council action taken or have your city clerk or mayor sign the form affirming that the names provided are those selected by the city council. Please note that designating the voting delegate and alternates must be done bey council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor or city manager alone. Conference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternates must be registered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. In order to cast a vote, at least one person must be present at the Business Meeting and in possession of the voting delegate card. Voting delegates and alternates need to pick up their conference badges before signing in and picking up -more- 6 Q "9, M A 1400 K Street, Suite 400 • Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240 OF CALIFORNIA www.cacities.org IVIES Annual Conference Voting Procedures 2010 Annual Conference One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to League policy. 2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Annual Conference, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the Voting Delegate Form provided to the League Credentials Committee. 3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the Voting Delegate Desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the Voting Delegate Desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the Business Meeting. 4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city's voting card by providing a signature to the Credentials Committee at the Voting Delegate Desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution. 5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in his or her possession the city's voting card and be registered with the Credentials Committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate or alternate. 6. Voting Area at Business Meeting. At the Business Meeting, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission will be limited to those individuals with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate or alternate.. 7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the Credentials Committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the Business Meeting. S LEAGUE OF CALIFOPNIA IVIES CITY: 2010 ANNUAL CONFERENCE VOTING DELEGATE/ALTERNATE FORM Please complete this form and return it to the League office by Friday, August 20, 2010. Forms not sent by this deadline may be submitted to the Voting Delegate Desk located in the Annual Conference Registration Area: Your city council may designate one voting delegate and up to two alternates. In order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting (General Assembly), voting delegates and alternates must be designated by your city council. Please attach the council resolution as proof of designation. As an alternative, the Mayor or City Clerk may sign this form, affirming that the designation reflects the action taken by the council. Please note: Voting delegates and alternates will be seated in a separate area at the Annual Business Meeting. Admission to this designated area will be limited to individuals (voting delegates and alternates) who are identified with a special sticker on their conference badge. This sticker can be obtained only at the Voting Delegate Desk. L VOTING DELEGATE Name: Title: 2. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE Name: 3. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE Name: Title: Title: PLEASE ATTACH COUNCIL RESOLUTION DESIGNATING VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES. OR ATTEST: I affirm that the information provided reflects action by the city council to designate the voting delegate and alternate(s): Name: E-mail Mayor or City Clerk Phone: (circle one) (signature) Date: Please complete and return by Friday, August 20 to: League of California Cities ATTN: Mary McCullough 1400 K Street Sacramento, CA 95814 FAX: (916) 658-8240 E-mail: mccullom@cacities.org (916) 658-8247 V otingDelega teLetter 10. doc City nJ' uk ah. ITEM NO.: llb MEETING DATE: AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT August 4, 2010 SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION OF MUSCO SPORTS CLUSTER GREEN SYSTEM AND SITE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE AT ANTON STADIUM, SPECIFICATION NO. 10-07. Background: This project is for the installation of the Musco Sports Cluster Green System and site utility infrastructure at Anton Stadium. Discussion: The City distributed plans and specifications to builder's exchanges for the Electrical Installation of Musco Sports Cluster Green System and Site Utility Infrastructure at Anton Stadium, Specification No. 10-07. The City publicly advertised this project on June 20 and June 27, 2010, in the Ukiah Daily Journal. A copy of the Notice to Bidders was sent to 149 contractors including all licensed Class A and Class B contractors on the City's 2010 Qualified Contractors List. In addition, the plans and specifications were posted on the City's website. Sealed bids were received and opened by the City Clerk on July 20, 2010. Please refer to Attachment #1 for the complete summary of bid results. The bids were structured with both a base bid, and one additive bid item. As per the instructions in the specification, the lowest bid is the bid with the lowest base bid, without consideration of the price for the additive bid item. So the apparent low bidder is Sierra National Construction. After review of Sierra's bid, it was discovered that its bid had the following irregularities: 1. Sierra did not fill-in the unit prices both in words and in figures, and only wrote the dollar amount in the extended amount column. 2. Sierra acknowledged Addendums 2 and 3, but it did not acknowledge Addendums 1 and 2. 3. Sierra did not include the "Non-Collusion Affidavit" in its bid. (Please see Attachment #2 for a copy of that form.) Under the competitive bidding statutes the City Council has complete discretion to reject a bid which does not conform to the bidding instructions. The City Council is under no obligation to waive a failure of a bid to comply with the bidding instructions. However, the City Council has discretion to waive an irregularity in the bid which is not strictly responsive but which substantially conforms to the advertisement . . if the variance cannot have affected the amount of the bid or given a bidder an advantage or benefit not allowed other bidders or, in other words, if the variance is inconsequential."' (Konica Business Machines U.S.A., Inc. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 206 Cal. App. 3d 449, 454; see Pub. Contract Code, § 22038 [the city must award a contract, required to be competitively bid, to the lowest responsible bidder].) Recommended Action(s): Decline to waive the irregularities in the Sierra bid and award the bid to the next lowest bidder, Ferranti Construction, in the amount of $213,757.00. Alternative Council Option(s): Waive, the irregularity in the Sierra bid and award the bid to Sierra in the amount of $206,200.00. Citizens advised: N/A Requested by: Sage Sangiacomo, Assistant City Manager Prepared by: Mary Horger, Purchasing and Guy Mills, Project Manager/Grand Admin. Coordinated with: Jane Chambers, City Manager, David J. Rapport, City Attorney Attachments: Attachment #1 - Bid Tabulation, Attachment #2 - Copy of Non-Collusion Affidavit form Approved: - ty Chambers, City Manager Whether in a given case a bid varies materially or only inconsequentially from the bid notice is a factual determination for the agency, to which the courts will defer if supported by substantial evidence. (Ghilotti Construction Company v. City of Richmond (1996) 45 Cal.AppAth 897, 903. See, also, MCM Construction, Inc. v. County of San Francisco (CA 1 1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 359, 374-375.) The following analyzes the three bid irregularities in the Sierra bid under the above standard. 1. Failure to use numbers as well as words in the Bid Schedule when listing unit and total prices. Sierra stated the amount of unit prices and total prices in numbers, but not in words. The requirement to do both is an attempt to avoid mistakes in entering bid amounts and was adopted for the City's benefit. As long as the numbers are written clearly and the bidder does not claim a clerical error in entering the numbers, the failure to write the amounts in both words and numbers does not provide a competitive advantage and does not affect the amount of the bid. For these reasons, the City Council has the authority to waive this irregularity. 2. Failure to acknowledge addenda 1 and 2. This irregularity would give Sierra an unfair advantage, if the failure to acknowledge the addenda would make it unclear whether its bid included the information in the two addenda. The failure to acknowledge receipt of the two addenda does not create this uncertainty, however, because in Specification 10-07, p. 2, the instructions to bidders states: The failure of any bidder to receive or examine any form, instrument, addendum, or other document, and acquaint himself with conditions there existing, shall in no way relieve the bidder from any obligation with respect to his or her proposal or to the contract. (Emphasis added.) Thus, failure to acknowledge receipt of an addendum does not relieve the bidder of the obligation to perform the work in accordance with addenda duly issued prior to bid opening. As a result, this bid irregularity does not give Sierra an advantage over other bidders who acknowledged receipt of these addenda and does not affect the amount of Sierra's bid or the scope of work it must perform for the amount bid. The City Council has discretion to waive this irregularity. 3. Failure to include the "Non-Collusion Affidavit" in its bid. The non-collusion affidavit is a statement made under oath before a notary public by the bidder: "that he or she has not, either directly or indirectly, entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free competitive bidding in connection with such contract." The statement is sought as assurance that there has been no effort among bidders to rig the bid to their advantage. However, the non-collusion affidavit is not the only assurance contained in the bid documents. Section 1.08 in the bidding instructions warns bidders as follows: 1-08. Disqualification of Bidders. More than one bid from an individual business, partnership, corporation or association, under the same or different names, will not be considered. Reasonable grounds for believing that any bidder is financially interested in more than one bid for the work will cause the rejection of all bids in which he or she is so interested. If there is reason to believe that collusion exists among the bidders, none of the participants in such collusion will be considered. Bids in which the prices obviously are unbalanced may be rejected. (Emphasis added.) Moreover, the bid proposal, signed by the bidder, represents as follows: The undersigned, as bidder, declares that he or she has examined thoroughly all of the contract documents herein contained, that this proposal is made without collusion with any other person, firm or corporation and that all laws and ordinances relating to the interest of public officers in this contract have been complied with in every respect. (Emphasis added.) As a result of these redundant assurances against collusion among bidders, all of the bidders have affirmatively represented that they have not so colluded and have acknowledged that if the City has reason to believe that two or more bidders have colluded to rig the bids, those bids will not be considered. The advantage in failing to complete the non-collusion affidavit is that Sierra has not submitted a sworn statement, while the other bidders have. Under Penal Code §118, any person who willfully and contrary to the oath, states as true any material matter which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of perjury. Under Penal Code §126 perjury is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three or four years. Given the potential punishment for perjury, it cannot be said that failure to file the notarized non-collusion affidavit is a trivial irregularity that does not give Sierra an advantage over the other bidders who filed the required form. Those compliant bidders run a much greater risk than Sierra, if they willfully misrepresent that they have not colluded with other bidders in restraint of free competitive bidding. For this reason, the City Council may lack the discretion to waive this irregularity. It is then staff's recommendation that the Council decline to waive the irregularities in the Sierra bid and award both the base bid and the additive bid item to the next lowest bidder, Ferranti Construction, in the amount of $213,757.00. However, if the Council chooses the alternative Council option, to waiver the irregularity in the low bid and award the bid to Sierra National Construction, staff requests that, due to the amount bid for the additive bid item, only the base bid be awarded in the amount of $206,200.00. Fiscal Impact. ❑x Budgeted FY 10/11 Amount Budgeted $150,000 $ 75,000 New Appropriation Source of Funds (title and Electric Utility-Pub. Benefit Anton Stadium Grant Not Applicable 1-1 Budget Amendment Required Account Number Addit. Appropriation Requested 806.3765.250.005 140.6050.800.008 AITAOMW a 0 0 0 o~o 0 o 0 o 0 0 O 0 0 E 0 0 O o a a o O o . 966 o ' o 'd d i o c o c E HINS N N M1 A 7 N OMf E P n l~0 C IM1Y1 Y ` ~l N N O l0 vi v 1n N N lp N r-: n O1 M N u i m I eI .n N S Lj OO o°o 4u o c°o °o °o °o °o 12 L" , ON. N 1111 p p OH11N(i1 Y01 N p P f0`1 nM1l G1 _ p: to 3: yj m • O M 4 IA N 7 `J ('!1 in 2. p~ lL a p lp7p~ L c{ tL H n e u ry $ 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 P S S g 0 d l ? t O O m ~ 17 N 0 o 0. trj 00o d N volO O I h N 101 N 0 OM1 O 1/7 ` OM1O r1 H Lq ~ ~ Ol D6 e1`•1 N N ~ ` 1 1 N c C 1!11 y 11! C ~ M 'n L 'n ut 6 in LA UY ~/f ~ F d O d ~ i M o U a ' c ooo o o o o S o SSSS doo S B 8 o ° ro O N O 0 O O 0 D g a ~y, Z 171 C N O H 1 1 1 O1 V11 71 M1 P - I!~ C N 01 . F n 3 M H H H - H ` Y ~L Z g F Do 0 ooo W ONIO 0 0o1y M+ o o -1 0 0 .~•i . o o o o p0000 -i N01 V01 • D p0 CO o 0 1O~ 8 ~ 0 0 (n 0. 0 in a p0~, 10 X E 7 11'1 i+1 m t o 'm -im Hv1 n ch tD E n 1 7 O N 1 ~ / ~ NN V1 W si W n U4.dti e•/ 01 M 00 N ~ m H 11 1 2. M y, O u 4: ~ a 0 0 0 ooc ~ c 0 S 0 0 0 o go ° 0 O a o u; ti ~ ~ e 0] ~ H O~iO 7 17 W 1 p o ~ ~NM ° ~ M M 00 R •g M ~ C m C H ~ , l.M j O GO M1 OlM oo O v I' i 7 M t Na1 . v l f1 ' rl H. v~ 1 r vl c~ m , p m c 0 q : vi v } - y r O. 7 7 a 0 0 0 0 P pp 0 0 0 o O s p O O U! ' ' 'M mm° o'ou oi 1 a 1 g f'o E. aai rnu l nl to olo o_ uI H E n I~ oO mN q m LR 14 %n N 7 M N ~~j o 1 a 0 P O N ni V010 j o 0 o 0000 lz 1 S 1 a 0 0 ..T 0 u C o l! o Y M1lnm oo a HH r mm a1 1 n opl n MI n 77 7 0 0 a v s + i. . 49 m O. Y 1 a rl l H 1M 7 10 N 7' N N N' , ! c 9 N ,.y SS 5. O 0. O . .7 7. . ti, 0 o o 00 C o o O 0 o 0 0 0 o o 0000 o 0 0 O 0 G .d, O Q O O O C E 5 ~ Q ooo Sg o oooo 4u ry e 8 o8 N L, n ` 1HN Q ~ N MNm W a N N ` N N N 7 b ~ c " I ul v, iV 'n 1n °c S o ~ oao oo oo d o 0 o00 0 o a $ o 9 z o o o oo0000 0 0 o w ; N O OOO O 0 5 C v i i N _ O Vol; t n v~ u v$ d °o c`3 o o 8 o °o a o o 00 m o ti E i a m~ o of 1 ~ ' d d a M H O . i M1 E ' N 1e N n m V v m M1M1RI ~ %D H r i M1 l m Oi V o a n> X 888 85 8 8 oS 8 8 a 8 o _ - ,C K O .O S NN00 00 W 0 N R 111 M0 M0 m o Ul 1 0101 M N N 7 Oo N p~j v fl p co 'O . 1D m H 1 n t M1 rl' Oi ~ +7 Ur A - M C HHH H H N HHH H H 1 . ~ H z x> d 7 L S 2 O 9 w C3 C M x LS. = I m d SZO Q U J J~LJ 1 3-1~`~ _ ° W ~ _ 1n zaO U W W ~ 1u p O ~ h-S~ -~z aJ~ u vW i aOC C O ~ wd m u ~i _ a 3~ _ I O u W O ti r O H a Z zm9 k _ Wa, O W W ~ a ~ o _ ' ' `a `a L' B, ~ be d = = = z ~ a O 0 c ~ t ~ O tG u 5 a 8 L: w ° m z O u z w ` LL a m mmo H m v1 .o e d TE Q u Q h ' i m m 3 ATTACHMENT ? NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT Note: Bidder shall execute the affidavit on this page prior to submitting his or her bid. To City Council, City of Ukiah: The undersigned in submitting a bid for performing INSTALLATION OF MUSCO SPORTS CLUSTER GREEN LIGHTING SYSTEM AND SITE UTLITY INFRASTRUCTURE AT ANTON STADIUM by contract, being duly sworn, deposes and says: that he or she has not, either directly or indirectly, entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free competitive bidding in connection with such contract. Signature(s) of Bidder Business Name: Business Address: Place of Residence: NOTARIZATION Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 20 Notary Public in and for the County of State of California. My Commission Expires , 20 6-11-10 T~evn t2 LEAGUE . ° OF CALIFORNIA CITIES Save the Date.!: REDWOOD EMPIRE DIVISION MEMBER CITIES DELNORTECOUNTY CRGSCENTChy REDWOOD E1NIP'IRE DIVISION HUMBOLDT COUNTY GENERAL MEMBERSHIP ARCATA MEETING EURExA EUREKA FERNDALE MOD L Proudly hosted by the City of Fort Bragg TRWDAD C.V. Starr Community Center LAKE COUNTY 300 S. Lincoln Street, Fort Bragg California CLEARLAKS, L uMPORT Friday August 27 1 2010 1WENDO0IVO COUNTY FORTBRAGG PonvTARENA SCHEDULE OF EVENTS UIaAH WILLITS SONOMACOUNTY 2:00 p.m. Division Business Meeting and Special Presentation CLOVERDALE Star Community Center, 300 S. Lincoln Street DIVISION OFFICERS 5:00 p.m. Walking Tour of Oceanfront Former Mill Site 6:00 p.m. Social Dinner PRESIDENT JOYCE OVERTON North Coast Brewery, 455 N. Main Street COUNCIL MEMBER CTlYOFCT.F.ARL4KF With Special Guest Fn?sT VICE-PRESIDENT DouGHAmmmmom MAYOR Congressman lie Thompson 07yoFFORTBRAGG and featuring a presentation by SECOND VICE-PRESIDENT MAMWHEETLEY COUNQILMEMBER C=oFARCATA Gregory A. Giusti Advisor, University of California Cooperative Extension. PASTPRESMENT MrKEDUNKER COUNCILMEMBER Mr. Giusti will be discussing his work on invasive species in the Redwood Empire CITYoF&oDELL Region and how Lake County has worked aggressively to address these issues DIVISIONDIRECTOR VACANT STAFF Questions? or to RSVP Please contact Nancy Hall Bennett at (415) 302-2032/ nbennettnae.cacities.org REGIONAL PUBLICAMAIRS MANAGER NANCYHALL BENNETr