Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1999-03-17 Packet
ITEM 3a CITY OF UKIAH EMPLOYEES OF THE YEAR 1998-99 In addition to receiving the highest level of praise from their departments, both of this year's Employees of the Year came very highly recommended and obtained multiple nominations from all over the City. A common thread spoken throughout the nomination forms for these two individuals were words such as "reliable", "dedicated", "enthusiastic", and "willing to go the extra mile". Dave Burnham, Sr. Equipment Mechanic, Garage Dave has been with the City of Ukiah since September 4, 1979. He was selected as an Employee of the Year based upon his dedication and his expertise in maintaining the Public Works equipment and taking a pro-active approach to his job. Because the equipment we use is so important, the great job that Dave does makes our jobs that much easier. Dave is a very reliable employee who dedicates himself to continuously providing equipment in good working condition. He has a knack for finding and fixing problems before a breakdown occurs and is well respected for his knowledge and expertise. When Dave makes a recommendation or decision, his supervisors and co-workers know they can count on it being the fight thing to do. It is well known that Dave played a huge role in the transition period of the City Garage. During that time Dave was literally a one-man repair and maintenance shop for all Public Works equipment. As always, Dave stepped up to the challenge and continued to provide his same superior quality of work. Willing to work any hours necessary, Dave makes sure that our essential equipment is ready when we need it. Chris Dewey, Ukiah Police Department Chris Dewey was nominated for Employee of the Year for his dedication, leadership abilities, and the positive impact he has had throughout the City. Chris was hired as a Police Officer on October 1, 1990 and promoted to his current rank of Sergeant on November 19, 1995. During this past year, Chris was called on to manage the installation of the new public safety dispatch center and department records management system. To help out with funding, Chris received state and federal grants for the project. This renovation of the dispatch center and change to a new computer system was, and is, a major project which has consumed most of Chris' time. Chief Williams noted that without Chris, this project wouldn't have been nearly as successful. The tremendous benefits of this system will be enjoyed by the entire Police Department and our citizens for many years to come. In addition to this project, Chris has continued his excellence in supervising the safety dispatchers, SWAT, department scheduling for patrol and dispatch, firearms, and driving instructor and activities. Additionally, Chris was praised by other City Departments across the board for his dedication, willingness to work together, and his professionalism. Employees enjoy working with Chris because of his enthusiasm and his willingness to go the extra mile. Chris continually demonstrates the highest level of enthusiasm, willingness to accept responsibility and sees things through to completion. He represents the department favorably with members of the public and is an excellent ambassador for the City. PROCLAMATION tVttEREAS, Mentoring is a proven policy for helping vulnerable youth; and IVttEREAS, Mentored youth earn higher grades, sMp fewer classes and fewer days of school, and feel more competent to do their school work; and WHEREAS, Mentored youth are 46percent less likely to initiate drug use during the period that Mentoring is occurring; and WHEREAS, given the effectiveness of mentoring in helping young people, the State of California set a goal of recruiting, training, and placing 250,000 mentors by the year 2000; and WHEREAS, The Mentoring Alliance membership consists of 13 different mentoring organizations, all of which share one common problem - they have far more · · children who need mentors than they have mentors to serve them. NOW, TItEREFORE, I, Jim Mastin, Mayor of the City of UMah, on behalf of my fellow City Councilmembers, Kristy Kelly, Phillip Ashiku, Phil Baldwh~, and Kathy Libby, do hereby proclaim April 11-17, 1999 as UKIAH MENTOR WEEK to increase public awareness of the need for mentors and the benefits of mentoring to both youth and adult participants and call on the citizens and businesses of UMah to support and encourage mentoring activities through gifts of time and resources. Jim Mastin, Mayor 3b MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Wednesday, March 3, 1999 The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on March 3, 1999, the notice for which had been legally noticed and posted, at 6:33 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were present: Councilmembers Libby, Baldwin, Kelly, and Mayor Mastin. Councilmember Ashiku arrived at 6:36 p.m. Staff present: ..~sistant City , :.:.:.;.:.:.:.. Manager Fled, City Manager Horsley, City Attorney Rapport, Pl~.!ng..:~!~ctor Sawyer, Senior Planner Stump, and City Clerk Ulvila. ..?:iiiiiiiii?~iiiii??~iiii::::~?:i? ....................... ' .'i!!i~i!i':'.'!ii!iiiii!!!!ii!!ii!!!ii':'.'ii':~i!i!':~i::.. .:::::::::- 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ....................................... ...,-.....-.,-';":?' ..... :::? ~?~ii~i~[[~i~i~!i!~i~i~i~i~i~ii~i~i~i~i~~.~.~.~:~.~:~:~:~:~ Councilmember Kelly led the Pledge of Allegian~i? ....... .::?:iiiiiii? ....... "::~::iii~i~i~?~i~i~ii~i~i~ii;iii~i~iiii~iiiiii~: ....... ............. -.:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:-:-:.:.:.:-:-:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:-:.., .,~.:.:-:-:.:.:-:*: ........ .:.:.:.:.:. ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. i.:[i!~::i??:ii ...... !:i:i:! .................... :::::::::::: .................. ::::::::::::::::::::: ~i:'~i~i.:.:~i~i~i~i~i ........ ?::~i~i~! ........ ~:i::iliiiii~i::iiiii~ii?:iii::iiiii::i!iiiiiii::ili? EMERGENCY REGULAR ~ESSlON AND CLOSEB?i~SSiON ITEMS .... =============================================== Mayor Mastin advised that the need to take immediat.~ili~~iii~rose after the agenda was prepared in accordance with G.C.§54954.2(6)(~::)?~,.i:!iiii!ii~::O:;perty Negotiator, G.C. {}54956.8, Property: A.P. Nos. 002-232-01 and 002-~'82-0::{iiii~ii~~::.:North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA), Negotiator: Candace Horslev::.:..'~::~i~nder Ne~{~~i::::~Price and Terms of ?::::~?- .......... ..:.:....:.- .,.,.......,...... · :.:.:.:.: .:,:.:.: .:.:.: .:.:.:.: .:.:.:.: .:,:.:.:. ............... .;;::::::.. .,.......,...- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: MIS Kelly/Libby to add Emergency It~:;'l Ob t~::ii~h~:;ili~ii~'ssion and Item 14c to the Closed Session for the above refer~ed ..... em::~enc~:'i~~i::'carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember.~!i~!~y, Ba!~in, Kelly~ii~and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. · .'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.' ..:::::;:::: .::;:::::: ABSTAIN- None. ABSENT: ~i~. .:~iiii?? · .-.-.-.-.-.-.'.'.- ,:::::::::::::::, ..::::::::::.' .~ii!iliiiiiiii[i::' ============================== ....... '.-.-.-.-.-.-- ========================== ..;.::::::::::::::.' Councilm.~ber Ash~k~ii~[...r..:.!~ at 6:~iii~i~i~i~i~i~i~iiiii?~i~ii 3.a PR~~ATIO~?~i~~'?i~.'.-...13.199'§"as Girl Scout Week in Ukiah ==================================================== - .... ~::~::::::,~::i::~ii~::~::i~i~i~::i!~i~i::i~i:-. .................................. : ............ Mayor Mas~ii~ii~e proc-:~~::~:....des~gnat~ng March 7-13, 1999, as Girl Scout Week Kathy ~'0, Girl SE~iiiii~!::..ce Unit Director, thanked Council on behalf of the Konocti Girl ~'uts and Ukia'~iiii~i~iiiii~ut Troops. She noted that the Girl Scouts in attendance ran, g'~::'~n age from kin~'i~ffen through high school. The proclamation recognizes their s~ibe to the commu:..~]ty of Ukiah. .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: ..::::::::::, .:.:.:.:.:.: ~.i.'.~iii~ayor Kel.!:~ii~vised that she is a former Girl Scout. She gave a brief summary of {~.i.~i~p~.f.:iii~:~'City Council to the Girl Scouts present, noting that the Mayor speaks ~i:!~i:~~i~i~i{~. The City provides many services to the community by the Fire, Police, str~:~-~i~:~:~a~:~l· Electric Departments, as well as other services. She invited the Girl Scouts to return to City Hall and learn more about the City's function. 3b. PROCLAMATION: March 14-20, 1999 as Community Concert Week Mayor Mastin read the proclamation designating March 14-20, 1999, as Community Concert Week. March 3, 1999 Page I Dr. Jeff Rice, and his young daughter, accepted the Proclamation on behalf of the Community Concert Group, their Board and subscribers, and thanked Council for their support. 4a. APPROVAL/CORRECTION OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February_ 17. 1999 MIS Baldwin/Ashiku to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 17, 1999 as presented, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, Kelly, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSTAIN' None. ABSENT: None. ........ ........ ,:iii~ ........ ~¢iiiiii::!~ .... :.:.:.:.:.:. ..:.':::::::::'. ;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:....:.:.:.:.:.:.- 5. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION .... ~iii~ ......~::iiii?~i~i~iiiiii?~?~iiii?~?~?~:~:i~iii?~iii!i Mayor Mastin reviewed the appeal process. ..:~¢ii~?~!iii~?~ii~i~?:::~~- '::~:~::iiiiliiiiiiiiiiililiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii?~i%~ .... · .'.'.'.'.'.','.-.'-' :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .......... . .... :.:.:.:.:c.:.:.' ;.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:-:.:-:.:.:.:-:.:-:.:.. .:.:.:.:.:.:.:- ..::i:!:~:!:i::" "::~:~:!:~:~:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:i:!:~:!:!:E:!::.-':-.- ::::::::::" ....... . .'.'.'.'.'.' · ==================================================== ..::::::::-' · ............ .............. .-.-.-.-.-.- 6. CON~ENT CALENDAR ;i::}::}iii!::}~' .................................. ::?;:;;?' .... :::-:::::::::::::::::::;:;::::::::?:::::?::::::::?::-:::::;:;: ..... ....:.:.:.:.:.,. :::::::::::::: ..::::::::::-' · =============================================================================== ": ""'"":"':'"'"":~i'-.-':i'-.::i:i:.-"-.::~:i:i:.-':i:i:i:.-':.-'::" MIS Kelly/Baldwin to approve Items a-g of the Cdi~nt Cali~=hdar as fCiti~..:~ .... :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ..:.:.:.:.:.. a. Rejected Claim for Damages Received From ~".:~i!ilE~onds and Ka{~i~i":~cMinn and Referred to Joint Powers Authority, Redwo~iiii~!~i~:Municipal Insurance Fund; b. Adopted Ordinance No. 1016, Amending Divisi.~ii:;.1':?~~[?:::~, Article 5, Section 350 of the Ukiah Municipal Code Regarding City Ci~rk Cdi~~:t...:i~..n; c. Approved Correction of City Council Minu:t...~.i~i?:~...:.O. ctobei~::~iiiii~ii~i?. d. Adopted Resolution No. 99-34, Waiv...j~i.i.i~.iii.~aY Nd:t~t~0n ...... Requirement for Establishing a County Facility in the...:~i~::,*:'P:~~ii~::Gov..~F~ment Code §25351; e. Received Report of Acquisition ..~[i?:::Comp~'~:~i~iii~ii.!i?!ii~tex aicrosystems In the Amount of $ 7,619.04; ::¢ii?:' .::~iii?~' ...... "::::ii~i~i~i~i~i~ii~i~i~i~iiii::i~........,...._... .... f. Approved Contract for the..::~aratig~?:::~:'0f a Si..J~' ..... Design Study for Gobbi Street Riverside Park and an Ass~J~d a .u.:..~t Ame.0..~ent; ...... ..... g. Authorized City Manage.~i~ii~i~' Exec~i~i. Cert!~i~tion of Local Approval for Project Sanctu~ ........ Use of F e~!?i.~merge~i:i~!~iii~rant Funds. .......... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .................... ========================================= ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. -.-.-...-,..-.......-...-.............-.....-... ,'.-.-.-.-.-.-.---.'.-.-.---.-. . :':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':'. . ............... .................................., . ........................ ===================================== The m(~t-:~i!i~.e,b~::~ii~!~igg roll ~ll'vote: AYES: Councilmembers Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, K~i~i~]iiii~iiii~ayor M~i~ii?,iiiiiN,QES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. "::ii!i!iii!iiiiiiiiii':~!i!iiiiiiiii!i~i!i!i!i!:::: "::i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:M::.... ====================================================== .... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .... · ........................................... .. ........-...,.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-...-.-.-...-.-...., ======================================= 7. AUDIEN~iEi!i~JjE.N..,TS O'Ni',iNON-AGENDA ITEMS ========================= ......... "":~::i:i,¢i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i'"i:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:!:!::-. "::iiF No comments :::::ye::::::::;;:::::::::::::?::::?;:::: 9. U~J=INISHED a;:~::iiiii~nsideration o.~i.i.!~0;mpensating The Planning Commission With A Monthly ;¢?~ii~?~tipend and/or ~reasing Their Annual Training Budget ~~i. ng Direc~ii?;Sawyer ........ advised that on February 3, 1999, the City Council was ~~~:;~~:which related to the compensation of other communities relative to the §~~ii~~"by the Planning Commission. At that time, Council considered a stipend anEJ"'~ii~ii~J~reased training budget as a way of showing its appreciation to the Planning Commission, and as a way of paying them for all their hard work and dedication to the community. The matter was referred to staff to provide Council with additional information. He took the matter back to the Planning Commission and the Commission developed some guiding criteria for the Council to consider. The Commission concluded that both a small stipend and an increased training budget seemed justified. They felt an annual cap, for March 3, 1999 Page 2 both training and compensation, should be $5,500. The stipend would be based on $20 per Commissioner, per meeting. It would assume an 18 meeting year, amounting to $1,800. The remaining funds of $3,700 would be the increased training budget. He discussed the matter with the City Manager and they concluded that the request for an increased training budget is very much justified. He reminded Council that the Planning Department budget was reduced significantly two years ago due to budget restraints and the Planning Commission has not been able to attend as many training sessions and seminars as they would like. He advised that he is opposed to the stipend because it involves a matter of fairness to the other committees and commission..s...~i!~t the City maintains. He pointed out, however, that the Planning Commissio.:~::~prob~' works more hours than the other committees and commissions..He rec~:~'d that Council increase the training budget to $5,000, allowing th.::~i{i~!:.annin~ii!i?ii~~i:..ssion to attend conferences and training sessions throughout the yea~!i!~:their dis~i~iiiii~ not appro.~ :':'::- :::::'* ..:;i::::;:::;" =================================================== .':':':':': the stipend proposal. He felt that the Planning reasonable in their recommendation to Council, andii~..,t the~::::~: worth :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ',:,:.x,:,:.:.:,:,:-:,:.:,;,x-:,:*x.:.x,. "::!:i:~:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:!:!:i:!:!:!:!:!:!:i:!:!::.. Judy Pruden, 203 Hortense, Planning Commission.::~]~~:.n.,,advised that she takes exception to a portion of the Staff Report related te..;ii~e "~!~!~!i:~::!ssue. She discussed the Planning Commission's obligations to ad..h....:~:!o the B~iii~?onflict of Interest Disclosure, and other legal matters related t..o::~i~~i~g Plan~i~?~i~:i~mission meetings. She felt that the Planning Commission is ..n:..~i]]~::::~ii~mittee~?:~i~d commissions of the City because they have legal review an..d.~ii~'ake I~}~j~[o.:~Sii~hat affect the entire City. She thought that $20 is not much .:~P~'eque§.~ili~:r t~iii!i~!i~i:i~::'a stipend, noting that the Commissioner's make financial ~ifices ~il:e.......... servi~::flS:6,,..,. City. ................... · x.:.:-~ .............. ;.x.:o:.:., ...... ,.,.,,,~...?.,....,. ,.,.,.,.,.,.,. .,x,x,~ Motion Baldwin to approv.~?~ili!~:h incr.~e in t.~?'training budget for the Planning Commission, in addition .to ~?~i~'tipend .~}~i~.0..:::::~i?:::~onth, with a cap of $6,000 for both .-:::., ,.::i:i:i;!:!::::-, !Si:i:!:' :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ..::!:i:i:i:i:i:i:~:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i::.. ======================================================= ====================== '::iii:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:!:!:!:!:i:!:i:~:~:i:~:::~ "~':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':" Motion '~8!!~i!::lack 0'~;ii!~iii~~",...'~ .... ":':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':'. '-:-:-:.:-:-:-:-:- x-:-:-:-:.:-:-:.:-:.:.:,:.:-x.. ................................................ .......................... · .:-:-:-x-;-:-x-:.:.x.:-:.;-:.:.;.:-:.:-:-.. ..-.............-...-...-.-,-.-.-.-.-.-.-,....-....., · · ,x,:.:,:.:,:,:,:-:,:,:.:,:,:,:.:-:,x-:-:*:,:, ',:-x,:,:,x,x-:,:-x,:.:-x,x,:.:,:.:.:,:.:. · "~'::i:i:i:i:i:i::':'::i:i:i:i::'::i:!~;:':'i:i::-. · "::i:i:i:i:!:i:!:!:i:!'"!::'::i:i:~!:i::" Councllrnern6~::!~i~:dlscu~::ii~' prior service on the Planning Commission, noting that he ..:.~p~e:is:i'af~iiiii~iiiiii~.rd ~rk and efforts of the Planning Commission and is suppo~·'of allocati'~i~i~al funds for training of the Commissioners. However, he did ..~'"'{~Support a stip~iiiiiii!i!~ discussed the $5,000 proposed training budget being a sig..~!ificant portion of:i~Ax":~?:P~venue..................., to the General Fund. The training budget can be di!~ssed ........... further d~.ihg the budget sessions at a later date. He was supportive of ~~ting an addit!.~'l $833, which is the prorated share of the proposed $5,000 annual ~~. budget,..t~'~rds Planning Commission training for the remainder of the fiscal year :::i:i:i:!:i:!:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:i::,......i:i:i::.. ........ ~.:::.::i:i:!:i:i: :P" Ei~{~i~ii~i~:ing opportunities available. He felt that the decisions that the Planning C~i~ii~:?~akes are important and it is equally important that they be adequately trained. Planning Director Sawyer advised that there are many opportunities available for training on planning issues throughout the year. He felt that the addition of $833 towards training for the remainder of this Fiscal Year would provide a number of training opportunities for March 3, 1999 Page 3 the Commissioners. He noted that some of the seminars are held in Southern California cities, and therefore, travel allowances are a consideration. He felt that the current budgeted amount of $2,500, in addition to $833, would provide a credible amount of training for the remainder of the current fiscal year. Councilmember Libby advised that she appreciates the time and work that the Planning Commission donates to the City and is supportive of training for the Commissioners. Council approved a budget of $2,500 to Commissioners to attend the Planning Institute, however, she has not seen much interest in the Commissioners wanting to ~d. In fact, as of their last meeting, only one Planning Commissioner had voic~:..an !.:~est. She felt that the remainder of the training budget, $1,250, be app.[0priate~i.~i~~'"training for the remainder of this fiscal year with the types of traini~!i~.eing:~i::!~iii~iiii~......e. Commission's discretion. She would like to see the expenses qua.::~d and r..~~iii~:r...::..e ................................ data on ..t....~: matter in order to allow Council to make the ap~'priate ~'~§io~iiiii~i~ii?~i!~.e ~:~:bt sessions for the next fiscal year. ~'i',',:i'i',',i',:i'i',~,:i:i'i;?:¢::,~,,,?ii¢'':' ..... "?:i'i:i:i::i:::i~:i:i::i::ii:i:ii? City Manager Horsley discussed that matter of I~!!~iii~::~:~eminars, notir~'~"that some seminars are held in nearby cities, such as Santa.::~iii~i:ii~:..Francisco, which would require a day trip, in addition to registration costs.-:~iS~miri:~?~i~i?~[,e held in cities farther away, such as Sacramento or Santa Barbara, w...o...u..[.d., requir~:~ii~iiii~~ght stay in addition to registration costs and travel expenses:~:?;iii~ii~iiii~::..ssed t~ii?iiii~:~ance of placing a spending cap on training funds and adv....i~:-~iii~~::~..rainin:~;!!6pportunities arise, she will confer with Planning Director Sawy:~?~nd m~ii~~~tions to the Commission ...... .:.:,:.: regarding availability. -,..-.-.-. :.:,:.:.:.:...:.:.:... .-...-.-.. . :-:,:-:-.. ::::, Planning Director Sawyer advi~ii~hat th~ii...:Planning~6mmission intends to use the funds which have been budgeted fo~iii~:ir use..~.!the re.:~i~der of the fiscal year. He reported that the fou..r..:?lanning Co~:!~ners w~i!~?:~e~'iously attended the Planners Institute felt that it-~uld...................,....,,..., be re.~~.for the~ili~iiii~d this year due to learning opportunities receiv~iiii?~!i~i?:other'::~~i~i~ince I~i'§f~:~tending the Institute. All of the Planning Commis'~i~!!~ ent~~:i~Ut training opportunities during the remaining of the fiscal year. Fl~i~il!?~..ntinue t'~iii~ii~e Commission when training opportunities become ................................................... available .... ~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~ .... · . ============================================================= ..:.:,:.:.:.:-:,:.:.:-:.:-:.:-:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.~. MIS K~i~'Baldwin';~i~{i.iiiii~d on increasing the annual Planning Commission training budg~:: ...... to $5,000 per~iii~?~iii."the prorated share of $833 be added to the budget for the re~tning of this fisca...!iii~e~:'r for training purposes. ......... ......... .-:-:.:-:-:, ~:~:..r Mastin ad~]~d ....... that he is supportive of an increase in the budget for training ~~.S, ho~..e....:~F, he expressed his concern with a stipend· He felt the City should ~~~ii?iii~missioners for expenses related to mileage, phone calls, etc. He d'~~~i~iG'nteerism and expressed his concern that all commissions and committees of the City be treated equally· He felt that the Planning Commission may require more training than other committees of the City, however, all committees contribute an amount of time each month for the betterment of the community· He was of the opinion that other committees and commissions of the City may need training as well. When looking at a stipend, all commissions and committees should be taken into consideration· March 3, 1999 Page 4 Councilmember Libby advised that a stipend is contrary to the spirit of volunteerism and that all committees and commissions of the City should be treated equally. It would be difficult to give to one and not another. Councilmember Baldwin felt a stipend is a statement of the commitment by the City to high quality planning and is an important message to send to the community. When the Planning Commission does a good job, fewer planning matters will come to the City Council for consideration. He supported training for the Planning Commissioners and felt it would allow them to make quality decisions and become less depend.~.t-.-:.upon Staff recommendations. He felt it would be an important gesture of th~?:~City'..~i.!~'mmitment to planning if Council would consider the matter of a stipe,.:? in th~i~.{.'~[~iiii? ..................... .... .....,,-.,.-......, :.:o:-:,:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. '""'"'"'"'""'"'"' "':':'!;!;i;i;!",~!;!;i;!;!;!;!'.~Y"!;!;!;!7'-:.. · .... Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYE~iiii[ibby, Ba.!.~!~iii~~u, Kelly, a...~ Mayor Uastin. NOES: None. ABSTAIN' None. A.~ENT: 8, PUaLIC H EARING ~ili::iiiiiii'ililiiii~iii?~iiii~iiiiili~![~iii~.:.:'' "::%iiii?~!~i~iii~i'i~:ii? .... 8a. Planning Department Fee Schedule Arnend~!!!~..Dernolition Permit Review Planning Director Sawyer advised that on Decem:~:~!iiiiiii~:~iiii:[:...h. e City Council adopted an ordinance which requires discretionary review of..:ii~erta[~i~~:!i:.t::~,n permits associated with potentially significant historical, architec....[~!~ii::i? cultd:~iiiii~~[ces.....,,......,........,......,,..... Discretionary review of such permits require that the City.:~~ii~!ronme'~!ii~View pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (C .E..,.~):i:::::~i~i~s tha.t.:ii~6ch projects be publicly noticed for a hearing before the City C~il. Th~ ":~i~E.~.s.~ money in terms of staff time, newspaper noticing, and filing f...~S, and.,.:~iii~:"keelS!~i~" City policy relative to other planning and building permits, it ~!~ be a~i~able t~i?i~'bover these costs by charging a fee to process relevant demo!:i~!~::i:,i~ermi:~iii~pplicati~§.............. ........... He recommended the Planning Department Fee Schedule b~i?i~ende~:~ii~i;.inclu.d.....:~iii~:' .................... minimal fee of $225 for processing discretional.. Demolition..~.r.~!~S. This.;ii~!~i?:~t~:~ demolition permits akin to the lesser of the fe~i~~ement.s.::.~iiii~~. Minor S~i:~:lopment Permits and Minor Use Permits, which i~iii~i~~!~ set":6~ii~i~::::~..:Counci"i::~:~'~ion at $225. He reported that the Planning Departm6:~t.::iiii~~~s on~::i~iii~!?!~:....rnolition Permit applications per year. .... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ...... "::!:i:!:i:i:i:!:!:!:!:i:!:!:!:!:!:i:i:i::' 7:10 p.m.-.~ii~ii~P.g ~::::?~i::!::![!i!i:i::::::::~:~:.:~::::::i:iii~iii~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!ii::~ "::i!?' ....... · .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.;,:.:.:.:.:.:.;.. ...... No co~'ents were r'~~iii~i?:~:- .....,.,.,.. .,.,....... .................. ,.::::::::::::,' ;:::::::::.' '.::::::: ,ub. .?in, C o.od. ,,.-.-.-o-.,,,.....- ,.:.:.:.:.:. :-:,:-:-:.:-:-:-:.:-; ............ , ............ ..:,:,:.:,:.. ..,.,.,.....,.,.,.,.,... ................... ~i!i~:aldwin/Kell~i~::'approve Resolution establishing fees to process Demolition Permits ~!~!~:~.~:i:~:S~~ary review and approval. ~~~~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~~~~~~~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~~~~~:~:~:~~~:~:~~~~~~~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .:.:,:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:,:,:,:.:.:.:,:,:,:.:.:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:.:,:,, ==================================================================== C~:~il~i~ber Libby advised that one of the reasons why she voted against the Demolition Ordinance was because of anticipated ~ncreases in costs. She advised that it wasn't until she read an article in the newspaper yesterday that she became aware that the fee is being increased from $45 to $225 for the permit. She discussed whether to charge the applicant $225 or to absorb the cost in the General Fund. She inquired if there is a bare minimum that could be charged to lower the fee to the applicant. March 3, 1999 Page 5 Planning Director Sawyer advised that in 1996 when the fee schedule was revised, there was a decision made by staff and the City Council that the City would only be recovering a portion of its costs on any given planning permit. The fee of $225, which is similar to a Site Development Permit, and based upon results of the fee study derived in 1996, would imply that $225 would recoup only a portion of the total costs. He reported that, when comparing the City's fees to other agencies, such as the County of Mendocino, the City's fees are very Iow and the City has become developer friendly with regard to fee amounts. Previous demolition permits were simply a Building Permit that was ministerial in nature except for unique projects, such as St. Mary's Church. These permits allowe......~ii~e Building Inspector to follow the process of his job and did not include other:~::~nce.r:...~:?t~hat relate to discretionary review which involve the Planning Depart.~ent. A..,~iii~:~, there was no fee for a discretionary permit or planning fee, however, ..t~i::mini~i~!~i~ge for a Building :::::::::::::::::::::::::: .... ::i:!:i:i:!:i:!:!:!:::i:i:!:!:~:~:i:~:i:i::.....:.. Permit is $45. The Building Inspector would make su.r....~i~:~t the bui.i..d!~i~..e., down saf~ and that nearby properties were not damaged. Councilmember Ashiku expressed his concerniiiiii~i?:i~ii!i~)roposed R~i~~:?~would burden citizens with additional expenses, even tH~!iii~i..r home may not qualify as historical under the Ordinance. He felt it is a publi.~iii~~i.~.:..have historical structures ....... .:.:.:.:.:,:,...:...;,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.;.. protected by a Resolution, however, he was opp~:~l to'::~!~!~ii~:.e public at bay for the demolition of a structure that did not qualify as...:~[~..t.~rical. ~ii~iii~iii~he opinion that two projects per year would not financially impa~:~:~iii~i~[pg Dep:~~t'. It was his opinion ================================================ :::::i:::::i'"i:: ~.. ":::::::: :'" that demolition of structures, which are.::~t::~::~fst~!i~ii~::.natur~?:i~hould not have to pay $225 and be processed in the same w~::as tho~::::ii~iii~i.r::e~ii~dditional process due to ..::i:i:i:i::' ..::i:!:i::' "::!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:i:i:i:!:i:i:!:i:i..:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:~:i::" their historical significance. ..?? .... ..?::? ....... ~::i~iii??~iii??~iii?~iii??? .... ..... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .......... . :':':': ....['i'i'i': ......... .................. ..:.:.:.:.: ........,. Councilmember Baldwin dis~~:the ........... m....~er. ...... of go..:~i'nment subsidies, and felt that the ..:.:.:.:,:.:.:...:.:.- ....... . ..... City should recoup it's costs fr~ii~'n individual to c~.~....~ensate for staff's time in processing · :-:-:.:-:-;-:- ;.:.;.:.:.;,........., . ....... . ............ .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ;;;. :::::::::::::- ;.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.. . ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. the perm it...::?:~i~ ........ ?:::iiii?~iiii':::~::.. ??i:' :ii~?~iii!!~i[iii~i[~i~i~iiiii~iiiii~i~i~ii~ii?::'' ..:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.. ..:.:.:.:.:.;,:.:.:,:.:.:.:.-.-.-...-.-.. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ................. ========================================= City ................................................ ..,ppo~::::I ............................................... :a.t the 'O~:~ance process requires the application to be reviewed"~ii~iii~olitiO~::ii~i~i~i~:..ommittee first, and they make a recommendation to the City Cou~!iiiiiiii~ii~::~om~i~iii~mmended ..................... that the building did not have historical significance:.:::~iii~~ii;:~f CEQ~iii~iew and other requirements would be substantially less. Th~ii~:[d:~i!!iii~iiii~i:,c. ing"~quirements, which would cost approximately $50. He propo.~:'a two-step':::~iii~:e, by, if the Committee recommended the structure was not histq~lly significant,'!iii~iii~)licant would be charged a minimum fee to cover the basic co~?'however, if the ~rfi~ittee.:.:.:.:.: recommended the structure was historically significant, t~iiithe applicant w~id pay the higher fee for the full process. He noted that currently, i~?!~.i.~ilding is 50...~i~i's old or older, the process requires a public hearing. ~~~ii~i~ed concerning the City Attorney's analysis of a proposed two-tiered fee s~~!~i!~Oemolition Permits. There was also discussion concerning CEQA guidelines and environmental review of demolition permits for structures over 50 years old which are considered historically significant. An hourly rate was also proposed, but it was noted that it would require a large accounting task to determine rates. City Attomey Rapport recommended not continuing this Public Hearing because if a new March 3, 1999 Page 6 schedule is proposed, a new report would need to be available for 10 days prior to the hearing. He recommended staff reschedule the matter on a future agenda. MIS Baldwin/Kelly to withdraw the motion. Planning Director Sawyer advised that a new proposed fee schedule would be sent to those who have expressed an interest in the matter. Further discussion followed concerning the public's concern with the incr.:.e.'.:'.'.'ased cost of fees, historical projects, and the difficulty of not burdening the gen~..r...:....al p~ii~::With various permit requirements. Differentiating between a histori.~lly sig~i~...~ii~'ructure and an older structure without historical significance was a c~.e. rn of~::~t-'.-iii~i~h..c, ilmembers. .... ........................ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:'to sta an~?to Consensus of Council was to refer the matter b ~::i y~is ................ develop a tiered fee schedule for Demolition Per~.. cons.i.d~:~:ing hist~i~ii~~nt structures versus those that are not historically si~!:~~!i;i! 10. NEW BUSINESS .-::i:i:!:i::" "::i:i:i:i:i:i:~:~:!:~:i:i:i::.:.:.:.:.:..-.:.:.:,, a. Discussion and Possible Recommend~ii~n;~::::i~ili'~iiiilProoosed Mendocino County Water Ac~encv Manaaer Positi.om:~ City Manager Horsley-rep(~rted that at ..~::::ii~~~. on J~i~iiiiiiii~i~!i?~998, the Board of Supervisors asked staff to assess the me~ii~i~~~iDg the .~:~docino County Water Agency and establishing a position t~iiii~al wi~.!~~i.~!~:ment issues. The Water Agency is staffed by one full-time hy~logist..::~o w~~iii~'inly on water quality issues throughout the County. Due to t .h...:~iiii~ny to.~ which.~:~e......., come before the City Council and the Board of Supervisors ~i::iffie pa....~?i~ew Yea:~i!~'it was felt that a position could be created to assist with experti.~i?~nd pr~'i~e ana!y~i~§ for many of these situations. The position w0.~!:d also provi~i~:rtise to.~ii~~i:'"~reas which are looking for alternative water so..~~i?:~::Curren:..fl...~?~i~unty, t iii B ?And the Water District rely heavily on the Sonom:~i?~i~i~iii~~y W~iiiiiiiii?i~::n..cy foi~ ........... '[heir expertise. She discussed recent recomm~:~[~iii~y the'::~::~~iiii~ounty Water Agency regarding the Potter Valley · -.-.-.-.-.,...-.-.-.-.-.-.......-.-.-.....-.-... ================================================= . Project. She'::B~~. the j I~::::i~i~n for the position and noted that workshops have :'::i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:~i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:!:i::, · · ===================================== · been held tg~i~Y~iiilP...:~!~c ~np~iil...ofl th~s position. County Administrative Analyst Sue Goodri~~~:~i~?ii~ili~i.:t...y' wit'~'copies of minutes of these public meetings as well as corre~hdence and~i!i~~ts ....................... generated since the December Board meeting. She disc. S:ed.............. ....... the Mendoci~i~i~:nty.... Inland Water and Power Commission (IWPC), noting it is ......... ~:'first time in its hi~rY::'that all water agencies in the valley have worked cooperatively t~her on these wa~'r issues. The IWPC has hired an attorney to represent all of the :ii:i:i::.:.::ii!ii!i!ii. ..::i:i:i:i::' ~~ies on the PQ..tt.~i~ Valley Project. The new position could provide expertise and assist ~ii~e of the.:ii~'ter issues of the IWPC. C~!!~'ber Baldwin advised that the largest controversy regarding the new position is whether or not they will spend most of their time searching for new sources of water, and very little time concerning the quality of the water in reservoirs and rivers. He felt the position should be concerned with both the quality as well as the quantity of water sources. Consensus of Council was supportive of the Mendocino County Water Agency General March 3, 1999 Page 7 Manager position where quality is as important as the quantity of water. 11. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Libby had nothing to report. Councilmember Baldwin had nothing to report. Councilmember Ashiku reported on the status of the RFP for LAFCO's new Executive Officer. He noted the interview scheduled has been set, a decision shou.!~!iilbe made by .::::::::::::::-' April 14, 1999, then referred to the Board of Supervisors. .~ili!~ ....... ~.:~ ..:.':.:!:i:i:i:i:: .... Councilmember Kelly reported attending the weekly~i::~ting~i'i~~i;g the joint grant application between the Mendocino County Mental H~::~nd Sh~i~iii~rtments. purpose of the grant is to create a mechanism ~reby m~'ily':~iiiiii~~..r.s evaluated for the influence of their mental healt~ii!~atus ~:"be put "~iii~iii~~ of intensive case management so that they do not c~i~iii~%un afoul of they have a mental illness. Police Chief Williams ha~::iii~i?i!~::..olved in assisti'~'~' to design the training component of the grant program. ..::?:::i~?:?:~i~?:?:i~i~?:?:i~i~?:?:i~i~?:i::i~i~?:?:i?:~ .... .... ~!?:i::i[ili::i::i::~ii::!::!::~i~??:~::~::~i~i~i~i~i~ ..... Mayor Mastin had nothing to report. ..::~i~::::ii?~i~i}i?iiiiii?iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~ii::i~ ..... ..::~?:ii}~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!iii?iiiii? 12. CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR RE~~iiiiiiiiiiii!ii!iii!ii!!i!iii~ii!::~ .... i::??' City Manager Uorsley reported that t~iii~FP f~ili~ili~~at-:i~'n of the final closure and post maintenance closure of the lap,fill has :~he o~!!i!ii!i!i!ii~iiiiiii?ii:!iiii? -':'. :':':':':' ..::iiiiii~:" :::::::::: ...-..........,..... ..:.:.:.:., ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ,..,...... ..:.:.:.:. .-.-.-.-.-,-.-.-.-.-.-.- ::::::::::.- .-.-.-.-. Staff met with Community ~iiii?~i~h M~ay and.....i:~i~}iia memo was distributed to the Councilmembers concerning t~ii~sults ~}~.at meeti~g. Staff is working towards bringing back a lea~., agreement..:..t.~::~C~'ncil by:i~~iiii~?:ii~"999. ........ ======================================= ...........,.......................................... ======================= .....-.-.-.-.......-.,.-.....,.......,... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: · .:,:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:,:.:.;.:.:.:.. .-..,-.,,-,,.,.....,...,...,.....,...,........ :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;,:.:.:.:,:.;.;.:,;.:.-. ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ,.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.; ,...............................,.. She re~i~t. Cou~ii~~..Baldwi~:::h:~s asked for a discussion of the City's primary ====================================================== ====================================================== distributi0fi::?:~~::~.,and th$::ii~~ii~.at is underground verses overhead. She distributed -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.'.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.'.'.-. ..:.:.:.;.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.. the report to":~~iiiii~iii?:~ .... ..,..-.-,,.-.....-,-...-.-.-.-.-.-...-.-.-.-.-...-.-.-...-...-.-...,.-.., ~.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ~~~ .,:.:.;.:.:.. Timeline::~:§'"'h'~q~i~i.~ived~'for the completion of the garbage transfer station. She met w.......i?:EBA Wast~~!~!i~s and Ukiah Solid Waste today regarding the timelines. The.:~iilSave ....... been wor~!~i!i~ilh the Mendocino County Planing staff and have done an ex~i:lent job. Both s~' arid Mayor Mastin will be attending a meeting with interested .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: p........'~i~s this week to::d~gcuss...,..,,. ...... the possible extension of the closure date of the landfill to .O.'.'~ber..,....,,....,......,......,..................,......,..... 2000. ~::'timeline shows a closure date of September '10, 2000, but with ~!~::.:....d..e!.a...y~ii~i[fi~is estimated that the date could be extended to October 2000. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: "::i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:!:!:!:i:i:i:!:i:!::'"' 10b~i~iii?~i~iDi~'Ssion and Possible Action Concerning- Property: A.P. Nos. 002-232-01 and 002-282-01 Owner: North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) Bruce Richard, MTA General Manager, advised that the Ukiah Transit Station Project is currently on a course for closing a deal which would remove it from the foreclosure efforts of the City of Willits. He reported that there is no guarantee that their arrangement with March 3, 1999 Page 8 Willits will be completed or closed, noting that the City of Ukiah and MTA have no control over the matter. Circumstances beyond their control could cause them to loose the property to some other buyer, and therefore, close the opportunity to build the Transit Center. The proposal he submitted to Council for consideration in Closed Session would avoid that possibility and could put the City of Ukiah and MTA in some control for some investment of City money. He advised that MTA's current arrangement is that they would contribute $70,000 and receive a first deed of trust for the property. 7:52 p.m. - Recessed. 8:00 p.m. - Reconvened :i!ii:: .... .:.:+:.:.:.:.:,. ..:.:.:.:.:,:- ..:.:.:.:.:.:+:.:.:., .,:.:.:.:.:.:.- ..!:i:!:!:!:!:i:!:!:i:i:i:i::....::i:!:i:i:F' ii::! .-i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:!:i:i:!:i:!:i:i:i::" ..:: ::. ============================================= ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.; .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ============================ ==================================================== .-;-:-:-;-;-:-:.:-;-:-:-' ..:.:.:,:,:.:.:.:,:.-:.:.;.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,:.:.;.:.;.:.:.:.:.:,:,. .;::::::::::;:::-' ,.:::::::::::::' ,.:.;.;.:.:..;, .i:!:i~:i:i:: ;.:.:.;-;.:.; 13. CLOSED SESSION ......................................................................... ..::iiiiiiiiii:.'-' ================================================ 8:00 p.m. - Adjourned to Closed Session. ..::~:-.::,' .... ::?:::::::::::::?::::::::::::::?:?::::::?:?::a::?:?..:::: ........ .;:::::::;:;:::- '.:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.;-;-:-:.:.;-. .,....~..... · ::;:::::::::: ;;:::::':'; .... "::i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i::,:i:i':::i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i'::',~:::: ....... :;::!:..-':/iii!:/::' :,;,:.:,:,;.:. ..:,:.:.:.:.- ....................................... ::::::::::::::::::::: ..::::::::::.' ,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:....:.:.:....:.:.:.:. · a. C.C. §54956.9 (3)l.c)- Conference ~i,~l Counsel .... **?:ili~i~i!iiiii::iiiii!i!ii!~!i? ...... Anticipated Litigation, 1 matter .... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ...... No action taken. ~::~?::?:iiiiiiiii!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~iiiiii::iiii?:~:: .... · .;.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.;.:.;.:.:.:.:.;..~ :.:.. ............ -.;.;.:.;.;.:.:.;.;.;.;.;.:.;.;.:.;.;.:.:.;.;.;.:.. ..:.:,:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.. b. G.C. ~$4~$$.8 -Conference With:~Real ProD~iiii~~tiator Negotiating Parties: City ~i~i~i~'h~:'::~i?i~~.ocin..~?:;~'Ounty Under Negotiation' T~:s and.::~6'nditi~ii~iiiiii?~i?:~ .... ..... · -::::::::" i:i:i:i:i" '" No action taken. .::?:iiii~iiii?~i~i?i~iiii!i~' .:?:::ii?: .~i~i~iii?' .........-................ :.:.:.:.:.:. . .... ........... ......,... :...........,,:.:.:.;.:: .-:-:-:-:-: .................. .;.:.:.:.:.. ;.:.:.:.'.'.'.'.'.'.. ....... c. G.C.§54956.8 -:~:nferer~iilwith R~':"~i' Prol)erty Negotiator .... ?:::i,~::. Property: ~i~**::.~:i ;.:+ :-;.:-;-:-:.:-:-:.:.:.;.;.;+:.;.;-;.:.;.:.:.;-. .... ~iiii~iii~i~i~i~iii~?~ii~..wner: ~ili~a. st Rail~iii~ority (NCPA) ..:.:.:.;.;.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.;.:.:...:.:...:.;.. ..:.:.:o:.:.:.:.:.:.:.....:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. · $ Si:i: :i:i: $i:i:i:i:i:i:i: ......... ' ........ii:i:i:' .....i ............. :"" .: ...... ................................. Ne. ot~ato~.~:::..~~e Horsi'~:~ ...... ================================================ ===================================================== .... ~?:!iiiiiiii!~~. Nego~'t-'i~iii!~ice and Terms of Payment .... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ...... No action tal~iiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiii!ii!!iiiii~}?~?:,~ .... '-::~::::i!ii?:i::ii?:iiiiii?:i::ii?:ii?:i::i!i::?::~ .... · .........................-...-.......-.....-.... ..:.:.;.:.;.;.:.:.;.:.;.;.:.;.:.:.. ....:.;.;.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:,:.;.;.:.:.;.;.;.;.:.;.:.;.;.:.:.:.. ..,....................,. ........................................... .:.:.:.; · ,.. 10b. Di~'~siofi::~iiii~Ssible'Action Concernina· ................................ ..~:~!i~0perty: A.P:::iiiN~!!i!!~2-232-01 and 002-282-01 .:~::..::i}?0wner: North ~~?Railroad Authority (NCRA) N:~!ii~tion taken. .:~::iii!iiiiii?' ':" .......... ..:.:.:.:.:, '""""""'"'"' -:::::::::;:' .......... ..i:i:i:i:i:: :.:.:.:.:.;.:,;.;.;.;.:.; ~i~:!i!:!:!:!}!i}:~::.A D J O U R ........ ........ NME ........ N T ~~iiii~i~::ii~ii~her business the meeting was adjourned at 10:02 p.m. =================================== .... Marie Ulvila, City Clerk March 3, 1999 Page 9 4b MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Wednesday, March 10, 1999 The Ukiah City Council met at a Special Meeting on March 10, 1999, the notice for which had been legally noticed and posted, at 12:03 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were present: Councilmembers Libby, Ashiku, Kelly, and Mayor Mastin. Councilmember absent: Baldwin. Staff present: City Managei~ii~rsley,.~:::~:~:~:~::.. City Attorney Rapport, and City Clerk Ulvila................ 12:04 p.m. - Adjourned to Closed Session. 12:23 p.m. - Reconvened. 2. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS .-,.,....,,-..,.,-,.,... =================================================== ..:...... ::::::::::::::::::::: ===================================================== · ,..~.,.,,.-..,.========================================================= ..:::~:::-' ;:::::::::::::-' .............................................................. ,.....,.... ;::::::::::::' ..:::::'~::::::' ==================================================== ..:::::::::' :::::::::::::.;~::::::::::~ ================================================= :.:.:,:.:.:.:. ..:.:.:.:.:..- =========================================================================== · ~,~::::::::::. ..::::::::::-' ===================================================================== :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,. .-.-.-.-.-.- ................................. .................. .......... ............+:':':':" ":~:!:i:i:!:i~:!:!:i~:i:!:i~:i:!:!~:i:i:~:i~:!~:" :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. .......,..,. · .,~...,..,,...,.,,.,..,.............................. ..:.~:::::::-' ============================================== ,,...~ .,-........,~....,......,... ,..,.~..... ..:.>:,:.:,:.;,~ >:.:.;.> ~:,:.;<.. :.:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:,:,:.:.:,:,. -.........-.........-....... ~:!:!:i:!:i:i:i:i:i~:i:i:!:!:i:i:!:!:!:!:!::.. ' ............ a. Property: A.P. No. 002-232-01 and 002-282-0~i~::::i!ililililiiiiiiiliiiiii!iiiiiiiiiiiili?~i?:::~ .... Owner: North Coast Railroad Authority ~N~~::~::iiii~!~}~i~i~i~}~?~i}!~::::i~:~ .... No action taken. 3.a G.C.~54956.8- Conference with Realiiii~~iiiNeaoti~':'~iii? .... Under Negotiation: Price ~i~i~erms.:~ Paymeffi ...-...................... ..:.:.:.:.:.. ;.:-:-:.: · ...... -----::::::::::. .............. :.:.:.:.:.:. . .... No action taken. .............. · :.:...:.:.:.:.: ::::::::::::::::::...:.:.:.:.:.:. ........ ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ,.............- .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. ....... ....................... .........-...... .:~!~.. i!iiiiii?~" .i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i .................. i:i:!.--.':!:!:! .... lhere ~i~!~:i:~:::.~urthe~.ii:~i~..the m:$~i::~as adjourned at 12:24 p.m. "::i:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:!:!:!:i::-. "::i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:i:!:i:i:i:!:i:!:!:!:!::.. · ...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ..~.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.~ .................................................. .........~.o...................................... ........-.-.........-.-...-...-.-.......-......... ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. .................................................. ......................... · .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ..:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:-:.:-.. ................................................ .................................................... ================================================== ====================================================== ":':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':'- · "::!:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i::.:.. · .;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:.:-:-:.:.:-:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:... . .......................... · .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;. -.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:. -.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. , .................................-............... . ....................................................... ....:.:.:.:.:.:+:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:-:.:-:-:.:-:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. · ...:.: .:.:.:.: .: .:.:.:...: .:.:.: .:.:.:.: .: .:-:.: .: .:-:.: .: .:.:.: .: .:.:.., . ....................................................................,......... ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. .............?.... ...... ..........,....._._.................................. .................................. Marie ~!~i¥~';' City Ci~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii?~iii?:~ .... -.,............................,-.....-.-.-.-,-.-.-.-, ,.,.....,.., ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ..... ....,..,., ..::::::::::.' ............ ............. ............ .....-.-...... .............. .... ..... .:::::::::::::: ........... ..:::::::::::::: .:::::::::. ................ .......... .................. ........... .................. .......... .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:, .-.-.-...-.- ........... ....-.-.. ..................., ............ ..................... ..-...-.-.. ;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.; ..:.:.:.:.:. ........................ .......... ............ ========================== ............ ........................... ............ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ..::::::::::::. .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. ..:.:.:.:.:.:.. · .-.-.-.-...-.-.-...-.-.-.-.-.-.. ..:;::.:.:.:.:.: :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ........ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ..;.:::::::::::::::' .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ....:.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.~.. :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. ·.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:..-.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:... -.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. · ....................................................... ?.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.>. ================================= March 10, 1999 Page 1 of I ITEM NO. 6a DATE March 17, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 1999 Payments made during the month of February 1999, are summarized on the attached Report of Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the attached Schedules of Bills, representing the four (4) individual payment cycles within the month. Accounts Payable check numbers: 13130-13230, 13231-13333, 13474-13558, 13686-13785' Payroll check numbers: 13126-13129, 13334-13460, 13461-13473, 13559-13681 Direct Deposit numbers: 4632-4801 Void check numbers: 13682-13685 This report is submitted in accordance with Ukiah City Code Division 1, Chapter 7, Article 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Report of Disbursements for the month of February 1999. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Gordon Elton, Director of Finance Coordinated with: Kim Sechrest, Accounts Payable Specialist Attachments: Report of Disbursements Candace Horsley, Cit anager AGENDA.WPD/krs CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 1999 Demand Payments approved: Check No. 13130-13230, 13231-13333, 13474-13558, 13686-13785 FUNDS: 1 O0 General Fund $115,964.70 660 110 Special General Fund 661 141 Museum Grants 665 142 National Science Foundation $589.00 670 143 N.E.H.1. Museum Grant 675 150 Civic Center Fund 678 204 Federal Asset Seizure Grants $1,632.76 679 205 Sup Law Enforce. Srv. Fd (SLESF) $1,764.84 695 206 Community Oriented Policing $5,254.84 696 220 Parking Dist. #10per & Maint $1,094.18 697 250 Special Revenue Fund 698 260 Downtown Business Improvement 800 300 Gas Tax Fund (2106) 801 303 Gas Tax Fund (2105) $55,326.69 805 332 Federal Emerg. Shelter Grant $11,853.28 806 333 Comm. Development Block Grant $2,080.00 820 410 Conference Center Fund $7,532.92 900 550 Lake Mendocino Bond 910 575 Garage $1,144.22 920 600 Airport $22,461.96 940 610 Sewer Service Fund 950 611 Sewer Construction Fund 960 612 City/District Sewer $117,973.29 962 615 City/Dist Sewer Replace 965 652 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund 966 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund Sanitary Disposal Replace Refuse/Debris Control U.S.W. Billing & Collections Contracted Dispatch Services Public Safety Dispatch MESA (Mendo Emerg Srv Auth) Golf Warehouse/Stores Billing Enterprise Fund Fixed Asset Fund Electric Electric Revenue Fund Street Lighting Fund Public Benefits Charges Water Special Deposit Trust Worker's Comp. Fund Liability Fund Payroll Posting Fund General Service (Accts Recv) Community Redev. Agency Redev. Housing Fund Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund Redevelopment Debt Svc. PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 13126-13129, 13334-13460 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 4632 - 4716 PAYROLL PERIOD 1/24/1999 - 2/6/1999 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 13461-13473, 13559-13681 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 4717 - 4801 PAYROLL PERIOD 2/7/1999 - 2/20/1999 VOID CHECKS NUMBERS 13682-13685 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS TOTAL PAYROLL VENDOR DEDUCTION CHECKS TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT TOTAL PAYMENTS $16,840.03 $1,400.14 $131,274.34 $1,244.59 $7,628.45 $2,906.99 $356.85 $12,784.37 82,305.03 $324,129.30 $9,086.50 $31,839.35 ($653.11) $3,406.00 $149,761.63 $305.68 $61,385.40 $1 6,000.00 $91.44 $1,116,765.66 $69,183.30 $180,249.83 $184,596.08 $1,550,794.87 CERTIFICATION OF CITY CLERK This register of Payroll and Demand Payments was duly approved by the City Council on City Clerk APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER I have examined this Register and approve same. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds. City Manager Director of Finance O~ Ho rj · o > I oo Ou~ O"~:~IOkDOOU")O'~IOL.C}OOOL~k.O[""-O0000000 ~ O000("~l~'--It'""O~'-~k'O~d;)r"'"t'"'"O'~O'~O'~O"~OO40'~:~LO~'D 0 0 :~ ~' ~ > H H ~0~ OO O3O3 O3O3 OO OO OO OO OO OO OO OO O3O3 OO OO ~O~~~ O~~OOO OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOO OOO OOO OOO OOO O3O3O3 OOO OOO O O O O ~O~ OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OO OOOOO OOOOO o O oo OO oo . 121 ~00 ~0~ o O0 oo H 0 0 ooo o OOO o ooo o .. . o00~~ 0o0000~ HH~ HH UUU UU 000~00 UUU~UU ~~ IlO UUUHHHUHH~ HHH~H~0 ~ooo~oo~ U U UU ~OOO~OO~ ~oooo~oo~ ~ooo~oo~ ~o~ooo~oo~ ~ oo~ooo~ ooo ooo ooo ooo OOO o 0 o 0 r.-I ooooo OOOOO ooooo OOOOO ~o0 oo~oo o~~ HHH H ~ ~ ~ O N HHHOO ~ o m ~ mmm~ ~ 0 ~ HHO H OOOo OOOo ~Oo ~0~ 0 0 Oo U~ ,~o o Om HO L~O H H o o~ H coco O0 (;DO NH oo O0 oo OO OO 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 oo oo oo ~~~~0 0o00o0000o00 0oo0o00o0o00 00o00000o0o0 o0oo0oo0o00o o0o oo0 0o0 o00 ~0 ~0 ~0 o0o oo0 -H 0 0 0 0 OO oo oo O0 0 o o · o · 0 0 o · 0 0 o 0 · o · 0 0 o 0 · o · 0 oo oo OO · · oo oo oo ~0 ~0 mmn ~0000~0000 000000000000 000000000000 ~~00~~00 0000~00~00 0000~000000 0000000000~ 00~~0000~ · '~ ~ ~HH~~ U U U U U 000 000 000 000 · , o o 0 Oo U~ O~ ~:o H00 o U o~ H on~ H U ~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ U ~o~0~0~0~ ~OUUUUUUUUU~ ~H~H~H~HNH o ~UUU HHHH 000 mOOR o o o o o o o ooooooo ooooooo ooooooo ooooooo 0000000 0000000 o~~~o~ oooooooooooo oooooooooooo oooooooooooo oooooooooooo HHHHHHHHHHHH UUUU UUUUUUUU 00oo00ooo0oo oo0oo0ooo00o O 0 oo~o oooo oooo o~o~ ~oo~ ~o~ 0 ~ ~'~0 0 ~ ~ o o o · o · o · o Ol o ~D · I 0 0 o o oo oo oo ~O OO 2~2~O 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000~00 ~0~0~ 00~00~0 OO~~ OO~OO~O OO~~ NHHHHHH ~uom~oo ~HHH~HH~ ~OOOO~ ~O~OO~ 0~0~000000 000000000000 000000000000 OO~OOO~OO~O ~OO~O~~ ~~OO~~O ~OOO~OOOOO~ ~O~~OOOO~ OOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOO U ~ H~ ~H~H~ H~H ~ m ~0 m o o Oo u% 0 ~O ~HHHH H~ OH O~ H~ H ~0 ¢:::~ HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHH ~HHHHHHH O UUUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHH 000000000000 ~OOOOOOOOOOOO ~~~0~~ 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 000000000000000 000000000000000 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 0 000000 0 0 ~ 0 O0 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 0 O0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 000000 000000 000000 000000 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 o 0 000000000000000 0 000000000000000 0 000000000000000 0 000~0~0~0~~ ~ ~000000~~~ ~ 00~~~000~0 ~ ~0~~000000~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~H~HHH~H H H ~0~ ~~00~0 ~ ~0 H 00 ~ 0~0000 0 000000 0 000000 0 0000~0 ~ 0~0~00 ~ 000~0 0 0000 UUUU ~ ~~ H UUUU ~ HH~~R ~ O O O ~q 0 · o · o o 0 0 o o o o o ~;~ Oo U~ U~ ~:o HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 000000000000000 ~000000000000000 HHHHH 00000 UUUUU 00000 I IX:i-] ~0 ~0 0 ~U H ~l~ O~C~ 0~1~ 000 000 000 000 O0 O0 oo OO oo OO oo ~0~~~ 0ooo0o00o 00000o00o 00o00o00o 00o00o 00o000~ ~~o~ o0ooo0~oo o0ooo0ooo oo000oo0o 00ooo0ooo o0000o000 0~~ 0000o 00000 ~0o~ o0000 ~o0 o00o0 0~~ oo00o 00oo0 oo00o 0 0 u~ o 0 o o 0 00o 000 0oo ooo mmmo ~o UUU~ oo oo oo oo 0 o o o 0 U o o o 0 000000000 000000000 000000000 000000~0~ 0000000~0 ~0~0~0 00~0~00~ 00~0~0000 HHHHHH ~ ~~H~H HH H UO 0~000 00000 00000 000~0 00000 00000 ~~0~0~0~ ~00~ 000000000~ 0~00~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 Oo 0 0~ HH~ H U 0~ H~ U ~ ~ o H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ UO0O~ ~ I~oo o HHH OO H~U H~ ~ HI~ OO 0~ ~0 r4H ~u U o 0E~ o oo o2: i 0000000 0000000 0000000 O0 O0 O0 O0 0~0~ 0~0~ O0 O0 ~U~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 o~~ OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ~OO~ OOOOO ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo OOOOO ooooo 1401.01.0 OOO OOO OOO ~~O~ OOOOOO oooooo OOOOOO oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo o 0 U OOOOOOO OOOOOOO ooooooo O~OOOOO ~O~O~ o~oo~oo OO OO I I o O o o ,0 r-I U H D..]H U O O O U · ~OOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ~OOO OO~ OOOOO OO~ HH HHHHH ~ 0 OO~O~ ~O~ ~ OOO OOO OOO ooo ooo ooo UUU OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO 000000 illlli o o :~ Oo o 0~ ~HHHHH ~HHHHH~ ~r~ 0 O~ ZO H~ O~ o~ H H HHHH HHHH 0000 HHHH ~;o o H~ o U~ t~ ~0 E-~H Hl~ o~ OH o00 000 00o ~-~ 0oo 000 000 00o o0o 000 ~~o~ o0000o0 oo000o0 0oo000o oo00oo0 ooo00oo UUUUUUU ooo00oo ooo00oo 0oo00o00o00o00o0 00o00o000o0oo0oo oo0oo0oo0oo00o00 oo ooooooooo0oo00oo oo00oo000oo0oo00 0oo0ooo00o000oo0 oo OO O0 o~0 O0 oo OO oo OO oo oo o 0 oo0 0oo o00 mO OOHO 000000 000000 000000 000000 ~~00. 0000~ ~0~0~ 00000~ 0000~ ........ 00~00000000 O0 00~00000000 O0 00~00000000 O0 · ........... . ~~~~00~00 0 0000000000000000 B HHXXHHHHHH~DDHH ~ HH B U U U U U O U U ,---t 0'~ oo OO · . OO · · oo O0 0 o o oo OO U o~o o 0 Oo 0 Om O > > 0 OL~ ~H UUUUUUU ~HHHHHHH ~o0ooooo o o~ o H H H H H H H ~HDHDHDHDHDHD HD ~H~H~H~H~H~H=H~H o O3O3 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0~0~0 000 000 I.~ LO LO 000 ~.--I ~--I ~--.I I I ~1 ~1 ~-.,I LO LO I.r) 000 000 ~t ~1 ~1 000 HHHH 0000 0000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 o 0 U 0oo · · 0000 o000 0ooo Ii ~oo 000~000000000000000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 ~0~0~00~~0~0~ 00~000~0~000~00~000 ~~~0~00~00~~ ~000000~000~00~~00 0000000000~00~0000 0000000000~~~00~ U ~ o~ ~ ~ o~ H~ ~ Hm m H ~ 0~~ OHHHH H~~ 0HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH UUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 ~00~0 000 000 000 I 0 0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 o o 0000000000~000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 ~000~~0~00~ 00~~00000~0~0 0~~00~0~0~0 0000~00000~00~0 0000~00~0~00~0 HHHHHUHUHHHHHH o00 0o0 ooo 0. oo0 0oo ooo ... 000 ooo 000 ~0 ~0~0 o0~ ~~ o000 ~oo~ ~o~ ~1o OO oo oo o~o ~0 oo oo O0 · oo HH o 0 o ~;~ Oo ~:o 0 ~;u Ot~ UUUUUUUUOOUUUUUUU 00000000000000000 UUUUUUUUUUUUUUU MU OH oo U~ o~ o H o o O~ m~o 0 i O0 O0 UU oo OO OO ~0 lO 0 0 o o 0 0 oo O0 O0 ~-~ ~-~ O0 oo oo oo oo OO oo OO ~~0~~ o00o0000o00 o0oo0o00o0o o00o00o0o00 o00oo00o00o oo0ooo0oooo o00oo00o00o o00ooo0oo0o oo oo O0 o4o4 oo oo oo O0 0 o oo ~ 0 ~ o o ~ UH o 44~ ~ P~O H ~O o oo ~ o m o U ~ ~ ooo o o ~ ~ ~ OOO O ~ ~ ~ ~oo ~ ~ ~ 00o ~ ~ ~ oo0 ~ ~ O0 oo oo ~oo000o~0o0 o0ooo0ooooo 0oo0oo00oo0 O~OOO~OOO~O OOOOO~OOO~ o~o~~O~ OOO~OO~OO~O ooo~oo~oo~ H 0 ~~H~ B HHH i~i~ ~0~0~0~0~ ~0~0~0~ 0 O0 0 0 O0 0 0 O0 0 HH oo oo · 0 o 0 Oo 0 0o3 HHHHHHHHHHH 000000000 UUUUUUUUUUU o U r.,.-] ~ o i 0 ~0 0 0 0 0 ~0~0 O0 O0 UU 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU o0oo0oooooo00o000 {,~,~ ,~ OO oo oo o 0 U o o 0 0 · 0 o oo O0 oo · o~'~ 0~0000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 0~000~0~000000 ~000~~0~0~~ ~~0~0000~0~ ~oo00~o0~~00~o~ 0000000000~00000 0000000000~~0~ 0 · o · 0 o · 0 0 u o ~ ~ H~H O0 O0 O0 O0 HH 0 o o o Oo 0 O~ O~ Om O~ E~ 0 E~ o O H UOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU ~ ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH~ 0 ~ ooooooooooooooooo o0ooo0ooooooooooo ~ i OO oo OO H o o o ooo oo ~ o o 0 ooo oo U o 0 0 o00 oo 0 o o 0 0 o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o'~ t-I o,1 00 ~ OD OD OD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t--I t--I t-.I ~1 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 ~ o o oo ~0 o o 0 O0 ~o ~ o o o oo oo ~ ~ ~ o oo o~ 0 o ~ ~ O~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ OO ~ o ~ o ~oo oo ~ 0 o 0 ~ OO 0 0 0 o o o o o o 0 o 0 o o o · 0 0 ~0 0 0 CD C) 04 ~ kD 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~0~ 000 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~~ 000 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~o~ goo ~ ~ ® ® ~ ~ 0 o 0 U 0 0 O~ ~o I-IO U . 0 > I 0o o 0 :~o O~ u~ u~ ~:o 0 ~ ~ 0 ZZO ~ H ~0~ H O0 O0 O0 O0 0000 0000 0000 0000 HHHH IIII 0000 0000 0000 0000 o0oo ~0~ ~ ~ ~ o0~~ ~ ~ ~ oo000o O0 0 oo oo0000 O0 o oo HHHHHH UUUUUU UUUUUU ~ UU o000oo O0 oooooo oo ~o Om oo O0 oo ~1 oo0 oo0 oo0 o0o 0oo ooo 0 0 0 o 0 U ooo 000 ooo 000~ ~. 000~ 0000 ~0 0000 U ~~0 HHH~ ~~0 ~0 ~ 00000~ O~ 0 ~oo~o® ~ ~ o~o~ OO ~ oo~o~o oo o o0~~ oo 0 H ~ ~HHH ~HHHH~ ~ mO ~mO ~ ~--I '~'1 000 0 O0 000 0 O0 000 0 O0 (;~ ,~10 0 ,:;c, c, oc; c, c, O0 ,~--t 0 ('~ ~ oo ~ ~ O m~ 0 ~0 ~]~0 ,.,-,~o,-,5 o ~ o :~o O~ ~:o o ~oo o~ I i OH H H 0 0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 ~u~ O0 O0 O0 oo oo OO OO oo oo o 0 0 o o o o o 0 U o O o · o O · o H H oo oo oo o ~ o 0 0 · o ¢~ O~l · oo o ~; · 0 U ~o o~ 2:r~o · 0 0 0 · o o !o OO O0 O0 · o m o ~o o o 0 O · o o 0 H H O 000 000 0 ~ ~ 0 000 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~o 0 O~ ~0 H Om O~ 0 o OO O0 oo OO ~:o0 ~ 0~ H H%% ~00 ~B O0 ~mm muu ~oo ~ u o ~ i 0000 0000 0000 000 ~ooo 000o 0000 0000 0oo0 ooo 000 oo0 oo O0 O0 O0 oo oo ~.-I ~.-I ,~o00 00ooo o0000 ooooo oo0o0 o00oo 0~~~o o00ooo0o00o 0oo000ooo00 00oooo00ooo 00ooo00000o IIIIit11111 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000 o 0 0ooo 00oo oooo 00oo 000o 0~ o~ o U H~ ~~0 mmm~ ooo ooo ooo ooo ooo ~mo o o o oo U H H mO 0000 0000 0000 00000 0~00 00000 Hi oo oo m ~0o~o ~ooo~ 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000 0000~00~00 00000~00000 00~00~00~ 00000000000 o ~o 0 ,,---i U% 0 ~o Or~ U H OOO HHH ~H HU ~l,-q i o HO 5 H~ o~ ~oo ~o o ~ i~ ~o~ UUO o UUUUUUUUUU 00000000000 I ['-.- L"-- O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 0 0 ~0 o o ~0 ~0 ~o ooo oo0 ooo ooo ooo o 0 ~0 o ~o o 0 o 0 c~ o~ O0 oo · o~0~0 ~0o~0 o o ~00~0 o o r'" 0 r"- 0 ~ ~00 ~m HH ~o H L~ 0 U H ~q 0 or~ UUU HHH Ommm ~000 o i ~0 O0 O0 O0 000 000 ooo ~~0~~ ~~00000 0000~~ 000000000 000000000 UUUUUUUUU 000000000 000000000 O0 O0 O0 ~0~ 0~ 0000 0000 0000 0000 o 0 000 o0o ooo ooo ~0 O o o · o o~ oooooooo ~~~o ~~O~OO, OOOO~O~ 0~~0~ OOOOOOOO~ OOOOOOOO~ 0"~ 0'~ OO OO I o OOOO O OO~ 0 OOOO O~OO O ~OOO 0 0000 % uu 0 ~ HH ° o ::::) o O~ O~ Z o 0t~ ~O 0 HU E~ ~H i HHHHHHHHHH ~ ~UUUUUUUUU IHHHHHHHHH ~ ~ooooooooo H r~ 0 0 o H0~ O~ ~ 0~ i 0000 0000 ooo ooo 0000 o'~ O 00 ~-I ~--I ~-I OOO ooo ooo ooo ~~~o~ OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO ooooooooooo ooooooooooo ooooooooooo o 0 oooo oooo OOOO oooo ~O~ ~OO OOOO 00~ HHHH HHHH 00000 ~o~o ooo ooo ooo OOO HHH~ O O O O · O O o I OO~O OOOO OOOO ~O mo o~oo o~ooo O~O~ ~~o ooo ooo ooo HH~ OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOO~O OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO O ::::) o 0~ ,<o 0 O~ ~ 0 ~~U 0~~ H000H o :::)~ H HHH OMHH i 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 H ~~~~~~~~a~ 000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 O0 0 0 0 0 U o 0 000000000000000000000000 ~0~0~00~0~0~000~~ 000~0~~00~000~0~0~00 ~0~0~~0~0~0~~ 000000000~00~0~0~~000 0000000000~0~~~0~ 000000000000000000000000 ~O~OOOOOOO~O~OO ~OO~OOOOOOOOOOOOO ~OO~OOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOO~OOO~OOOOOO O~OO~O~OO~OO~ ~~~OOO~~O OOOOOO~OOO~OOOOOO ~O~~~O~OO~ 0 o o o H o :~o O~ ~:o UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~000000000000000000000000 UUUUUUUUU UUUUUUU oooooooooooooooo ~o U 00000 0 0 0 O0 O0 00000 0 0 0 O0 O0 ~ ooooo ~ X o U ooooo ~ ~ ~ ~UUUU ~ ~ ~ 00000 0 0 0 U 00000 0 0 0 oo oo oo OO oo ~~o~m~ ~~0000o 00o00o00o 00000o00o UUUUUUUUU ooo00oo0o oooooo0oo O0 OO O0 (~0 (]0 (]0 o oo o o oo o 0000o ~ ~ 0 · ~ ~~ 0 o ~ 'H HHHHH H HHHHH ~ ~ O H H O0 · I I oo O0 0 o 0 o · o · o ~00000000 0 O0 0 000000000 0 O0 0 000000000 0 O0 0 ooo~ooo~o o ~ ~ ooo~ooooo ~ ~o ~ OOO~O~ O OO ~ H ~HHH~H ~ ~ mO~mm~mO ~ 0 ~ OZ Z ~ ~ m ~ ~ 000 mmmmmmmm ~ OuoooOoO ~ HHHHHHHH b~ ~00000000 ~ ~HH~HHHHH 000 ~H H HHH ~ 0HH ~H H ~00~ 0000 0000 0~ 00~ 0~ ~0~ 0~ 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 IliI 0000 O0 O0 UU O0 O0 0 0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 ~0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u~ 0 0 0 0 0 U o o o000 0000 o000 00oo 000o 0~0o mmmmO o00o o00o o000 o0oo ~00 00~ 00~ mm~mo o o · · o :~ oo oo oo ~ 0 o o 0 · o o :~o O~ U ~ o ffi O~ ~ -0000 ~ H U ~UUUU ~ ~OOOO ~ ~oo U mu 0 o H O~ O0 O0 O0 O0 UU UU o000 oooo oooo ~o~ 0ooo0 oooo0 ooo0o oooo0 oo OO oo oo 0000 0000 0000 0000 0 0 oo OO ~o 000o oooo 00oo oooo 0~ ~ooo ~00 0ooo 0~oo ~00 ~UU mm ~ 00000 00000 00000 00000 000~ ~0~ 00~00 ~00 HHHHH o 0 o · o 0 o 0 · · o 0 o o o H~O U~ oooo 000o oooo oooo 0~0 ~00~ ooo0 o~o HHHH o 0~ u~ 0 Om ~UUUU HHHH HHHHH ~ ~U U ~ ~ U H~ ~HHHHH ~H 0 ~ ~ 00000 0 ~ ~ c) oo ooo ~u~ oo oo ooo ooo oo oo oooo oooo ~ ~m IIII u ~o ~ o~ ~-~ 0,3 o o o 0 u ooo ooo o o o · o o~o o ,o 0o ooo ooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo ~~0 o ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ muo ~ H B ~ H ~ O~ ~ ,~H~ 0~ g ~ m E~ o o O~ E~o HO U · o > I oo 0 U~ Uc, q 0 u ~ 01.¢)0000'~1-¢")L0['"-"-000000 E-I kDk.Of"'-['"'--[""-.O"~O'~O'~OCNlOO4',~LO 0 H o o o o o o ~o~ oo~o ooooo ooooo ooooo 00000 00000 00000 O0 O0 O0 O0 0~ ~0 O0 O0 0 O0 ~l~ ~ O0 0 O0 000 000 000 000 O0 000 000 0 0 U 0 ~0 ~ 0 (~0 (~0 0 0 0000~ 0 O~ O0 ~ 00000 0 O0 O0 O0 00000 0 O0 O0 O0 ooooo ~ ~o oo ~o 0~0~ ~ ~ -- ~0 ~. ~00~0 0 O0 ~ ~ 00~ ~oo~o d dd ~ d~ ooo UUUU~ om ~o oooo~ UUUU oo0000 0oo0~ o 00o ~ ~ o 000 ~ oo~ U 00~ ~0 UU~ O~ HHHHHH H~ i O0 u~u~ O0 O0 00000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000 0 0 U U H~O ~o 000000000000oooooo000000000oo 0000000000000000oooo000000000 o000000000000000o00ooo0000o00 00000000000000000000oo0000000 ~~~~~0~0~00~o~ooo~ 00000000~0000~0~~0~000~0 oooooooooooooooooooooo~o~~ 00000000000000oooooo~~~ 00000000000000000000000000000 U~ o O~ i o iq ~o ~0 HO ~b flH HO ~ ~ ~0 o~ H 000 000 000 000 000 ~1~ 000 0000 0000 0000 0000 o o 0 ~o~ ooo 000 0oo ooo 000 OO O0 O0 OO oo O0 0 o o o o o o 0 oo0 oo0 000 ~0 000 ~0 oooo 0000 0ooo 00~0 ~0~ oooo oo~o HHZH mm~mo LO LO 0 0 ~l ~0 00~ 000 000 mm o 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U~ 0 0~ H H 0o0 mmm H~ 0~ H~ Um~ I~HH E~ U~ 0 0~ ~/~H H~-] O~ I:~H NH NH ~HHH 000 H000 t~O ~0~~ 00000oo 000000o 0000000 00000oo 0000000 0000000 0000000 o~o oo O0 ~0 o3o3 oo oo oo oo ~0 ~0~ oo oo 000o00 o00o00 000000 o000o0 00o000 0oooo0 00000o 0000oo oo oo O0 O0 oo 0 0 0 E~ 0 o 0 0 o o H ~ 0 0000000 0000000 0000000 ~000~00 o~o0~ ~000000 ~000~ HHU HH ~mm~HmmO 0~00~ 0~000~0~ 0~0~ 0 0 0 · 0 0 · o HHO oo O0 O0 oo o mm ~0~0 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 HHHHNH HHHHHH0 UUUUUU~ O0 O0 O0 · O0 o O~ HHHHHHH 0000000 . UUUUUUU ~ o H OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O O OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OO OO OO OO o 0 U OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOO~OOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO HHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHH H HHHHHH~HHHHHHHHHHH H H HUHHHHHHHHHHH~ H O · o OOOOOOOOOO~OOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO O~OOO~~O~OO ~~O~O~O~ OOOOOOOO~OOOOO OOOOO~OOO~~ OOOO~OOO~OOOOO OOOOO~OO~OOOOO OO OO OO U~ o ~u 0t~ Om H ~ H~HH~H~ OE~ ~o o2: mo HHHHHHH HHHH XXX~XXXXXXXXXX 00000000000000 ~UUUUUUUUUUUUUU 0 ~00 ~00 H~E~ Ot~u~ ~HH H ~0~~ 000000 000000 000000 O0 O0 O0 UUUUUU ~ 000000 O0 000000 O0 ~0~ 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 0 0000000000 0 0 0000000000 0 0 0000000000 0 0 ~ 0000000000 ~ ~ 0000000000 0 0 ~~~~ 0 0 0000000000 0 0 0000000000 0 0 0 O 00o0o0 ~ 0ooooo O0 ~ 0ooooo oo 0 ~~0~ ~ 000~0 O0 ~ ooo~oo ~ mmmm~mo ~o ~ ~ 00~ HO ..o 00000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 ~~ ~ o O ~~ ~ O O H 0 ~Hm 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 H ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ H 0 0000000000 ~ 0 0000000000 0 0 0000000000 0 o oooooo~oo o H HHHHHHHHHH ~ o o H~ ~ ~00 ~ ~ ~ ~000000 ~ ~000000 0~ ~ H H~~ ~MH ~ O~ 0~~ 0 O~ ~ ~HHHHMM 000000 i o H~ 0 o r.~i o o~ H .O D HHHHHHHHHH ~ ODDDDDDDDDD UUUUUUUUUU H ~HHHHHHHHHH ~ ~0000000000 ~ o o o o o 0 oooo HHHH O ~ ~ ~~ O O O OOOO O O O OOOO O0 oo O0 oo oo O0 ~O~~~O OOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOO 0000000000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOO ~.-t ~--I ,-I OOO OOO OOO OOO o 0 OOOO O~O~ OOOO 0000 · H · I I U~U~0 ~0~0 ~ ~ o · · · o O0 0 OOo ooo 000000000~000 0000000000000 0000000000000 0000000000000 ~000~~0~ 00~~00000~0 O~~O~O~O~O .........~... OOOO~OOOO~O~O OOOO~O~O~O~O UU UUU UUHHHHHUHOHHH HH~~H~H~~ 0oo ooo 00o · . ~0 U% o Ot~ H~ U~ HH o~ 0000000000000 UUUUUUUUUUU HHH OO OO OO OO oo OOOO OOOO oooo ooo~ OOOO OOOO OO ~O O00 O~ OO OO OO OO OO OO O O O O O ~.-I ~t 0 000 000 00o ooo OOO ~l OOO OOO OOO OOO ooo o 0 U oo OO oo oo o OO O oo O ~o~ oo~o oooo ~o UH~ ~O~ ..H~ oo~ o o 0 mo Oh ~.-~o oo OO oo ~ ooo o OOO o OOO 0 ~00 ~ ~OO H~ ~o o ~ ~ mooo o 0 o00o o~o~ ooo ooo OOO .0 ~o HHH~ H ~ ~~ .o ~ ~000 O~ ~ ~H ~~0 H~ 0 ~ m 000 m ~% ~u i~ ~~ ~ o o~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~o > ~ ~ ~ %0 OH o H~ ~OOO OHHH H c~ 0 c~ o o o 0 o ooo ooo 0o0 ~l~ 000 O0 oo O0 O0 O0 O0 o 000o o oo00 o 0000 oo oo O0 O~ O0 oo o 0 oo o~ o~ ~oo oo~ ooo ooo ~UU U ooo ~HH~ 0~ 0~ 0 0 0 o · o · o 0 o 0 0 o O0 oo oo 0 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0~00 ~0~0 0 0~0~ 0 0~0~ 0000 0 0000 O0 O0 O0 ~0 o 0~~ H~~ 0000 H~ I~H ~DH ~oo o 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 o~ ~o Ho u o > oo o u ~ ~ ~ ~H ~HH~B ~H 0 H OO OO OO OO OO OO ~O~~~ O~~O~OOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO O~~~~ OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OO OO OO OO OO OOO OOO OOO OO OO OO O30O O3O3 OO OO NH OO OO 0 0 u O~OOO~~ O~OOOOOOOOO O~OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO ~OO~O~~ O~O~OOOOOO OO~O~OOOOOO H HHHHHHHHH 000000~ ~ ~HHHHHH o:ooo RRRRR u~uuu ~ OOOOOOOOOOOo OOOOO~OOOOO~ OO OO OO 0 03O00 ~O~ OOO OOO OOO mmmO 0 o o o · oo oo oo 0 o o Om ~ ~ O O O~ uO O U HHHHHHHHH~H~ 0 U~ ~0 u HD H~ ~0 0 ~0 0t~ Om ~.]H U~ HI:I4 ~0 H O0 0 0 00000 0 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 O0 0 0 00000 0 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 O0 0 0 00000 0 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 00000 OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO 00000 0 0 U OO O O OOO O O OO O O OOO O O OO O O OOO O O oo ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~®~.o o ~ O ~ OOO~ O 0 ~ ~ H H HHHmH ~ Hi ~ ~ ~~ ~ HH~ ~ ~ ~~O~ H ~O ~ OOo ~ ~ ~O ~ OOo O ~ ooo ~ ~o ~ ~ 00000 00000 00000 00000 0~0 ~ooo~ ~o~o~ oooo~ 00000 UUUUU ~HHHHH 0000 E~o HO U · o I 0 00ooooooooooo0000ooo000oooo000oo0000oo00oo000o 0000o0000000o0oo0000oo0000ooo000ooo00oo00oo000 00o000o0000000ooo000oo00000oo0000oo00ooo00oo00 00000000000ooo000000o000000oooo000ooo00ooo00oo oooooooooooo000oooo0000oooo00000o0000000000o00 ooooooooo0oo0ooooo0000ooo0000ooo0000ooo00oo000 000000000oooo00000oooo0000oooo0000ooo00o0000oo oooooooo00o0oooooo00ooooo000oooo000ooo0ooooooo 0 0 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0~~0~0~00~0~0~~~~~0~00~~000~~ ~0~00~00~0~000~0~00000000~0000~0~0000~0~00 0000~0~0~0~0~000~000000000000000000~0~0~~000 000~0~0~0000~00000000000000000~0~~0~ 0000000000000000000000000000000000 U% 0o4 ~:o 0 O~ 0 UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 00000000000000000000000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 0000000000000000000000 H ~ ~~O O OO O OO O OOOO~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O OOOOO O OO O OO O OOOOO O OO O OO OO HH OO OO ~00~ O OOO ~ ~l ~l OOO O OOO O OOO O OOO O OOO OOO ~l~ OOO o o ~ OOOO O ~ O O OOOO O O O ~ O OOOO O O O ~ ~ oooo ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~~ o o~ ~ 0 0~0~ o O~ 0 ~ ~ ~~0 ~ ~0 0 ~ ~ momoo o o~ o ~ o ~o~oo ~ oo o U H O U ~ ~ ~ H H ~ ~H ~~H ~ ~H ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~o ~ ~o ~ 0 ~ O~O~ H H~ OO OOO O OO OOO O OO OOO O O~ OOO ~ O~ ~O~ ~ O~ OOO O o U o ~o o ~ ~ 0 H HH~ ~~ ~ ooo OOO OOO ~oo ooooo ooooo 000~ ~00 O O 0 ~q · o o NH mm 0 ~ U H U~ H~ ~HHH ~ ~0~O . ooo. o O HU :~H o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0o ~ O O O O O OOOOO 00000 00000 0 0 ~0~0 000 000 000 000 000 o 0 U 0 0 ~ 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 0 00000 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 00000 ~ ~ o o ~ o ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 00000 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ooooo ~ o O ~ o o ~~ ~ ~ ~ HNHHH o o × o o ~ ~ m ~~ ~ m 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ b ~ ~ HHHHH~ u H H 0 ~ R ~~ o 0 o · o o o o o · · o o o H H O 000 000 000 .. oo~ mm 0 o ooo ooo ... ~11~ ~0 000 ~0 U o~ ~H H o ~o H~ 0 ~000 ~HHH i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~0~~~ 000000000000 000000000000 IIIIIIIIIIII 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 0000000 0000000 DDDDDDD 0000000 0000000 0000000 0 0 U 000~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 OOOOOOO~OOOO ~OOO~OO~O~ OO~O~O~O~ 000000~0~00 OOOO~O~~O HHHHHHH~HHHH o 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 ~00~0 ~O~OO~ OOOOOOO 0000000 HHHHHHH HHHHHHH I HHHHHHHHHHHH HN ~HHHHHHHHHHHH U~ ~ oHHHHHHHHHHHH ~R ~ DDDDDDDDDDDD OB ~ · ~UUUUUUU HHHHHHHH i 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 ~o~o ~-~ O0 O0 oo oo oo oo oo O0 OO 0000 0000 0000 0000 00000000000000000~ 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 00~0~0000~~~ ~0~00~~00000~ 00~0~~000~~ HHHHH HHHHHHH ~ HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH~H0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 ~ kO O0 ~0 0 ~ 0~0 O~ 0 0 00~ ~ 0 0 I%1 ~ ~ H H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H HMO ~ ~ ~ H H ~ OO · · oo ~oo ~o ~o ooo ~00~0 · · · o o 0 o u~ · 000o oooo o000 oooo ~0o 00~ 0o~ OO O HH H mmHmO U% ,<o ~UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH U U ~ ooo ~ HI~ o~ ~H ~o H~~ -0000 ~OOOO 0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 00~ 0 O0 O0 0 00~ 0000 0 O0 O0 0 000 0000 0 O0 O0 0 000 ~~ m ~ oo 0000 0 O0 O0 0 0000 0 O0 O0 0 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 0~ 0000 0000 0000 0000 o 0 U ooo0 o oo ~ 0000 o O0 0 00oo 0 oo o ~~ ~ ~o o oo00 o ~ ~ oooo ~ oo ~ 0000 0 O0 O0 U UUUU ooooo ~ o~o HHHH~ ~ BB~ ~ ~~ZHH~ H ~ ~ HH ~ 00 ~ oo oo OO oo · oo · ~0 ~o~o · o ooooooo 0 0000000 0 0000000 oooo0oo~ oooooooo U ~ HHHHHHH~ ~ mmmmmmm oooo oo00 o000 oooo 0o0o OOOO~ OOOO 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 O0 000 O0 000 O0 000 O0 000 0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 o 0 U o 0000000000000 0000 0000000000000 0000 0000000000000 0000 ~000000000000 ~000 ~~0~0~00.0~ 0~0000~0~0~~00 ~0000~0~00~~~ 000000000~~000 00000000000~~0~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 ~ 0~ ~ 0~ O0 ~00 ~ 00~ 000 0~ 0~ 00~ o o o · o · o · o o o 0 o · ,o ¢q · oo oo oo HHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHH ~UUUU~UUUUUUUUUUUUU ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~O000UO000000000000 0 H~ ~0H ~ U ~HH 0~ NH ~0~ O~ O~ Om o i O0 O0 u~ O0 O0 00000000000000 00000000000000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHH 00000000000000 00000000000000 0 0 o~ 0000 0000 xxx~ ~bx xxx¢ 0000 0000 o 0 0 0ooo o0oo ~00 oo0o oooo ~oo 000o ooo0 o 0 U o 121 OO O0 oo · oo oo OO HH o 000000~0000000 00000000000000 00000000000000 00000~0~000000 00000000000~0~ 0~~0000~0~ 00000000000000 00000000000000 ~ X X H ~ ~ ~ ~HHHH 0 ~ OXmmm m~ ~0~0 o o o I U oo00 oo00 oooo ooo0 oooo ooo0 o 00000 00000 0 0 0 · · 0~oo 000o oo00 0000 0~0 ~00~ 0~0~ 0~0~ U H o OHm~ 00000 00000 H U ~ ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~.. ~ ~ ~oooooooooooooo ~ m 0 ~ mUUUUUUUUUUUUUU ~ H U UU~ I O~ ~ O 0>~ ~mmmmmmmmmmmmmm HI~ Ot~ H o~ mm o o I~o H~~ ~UUUU H~~ i OOOO OOOOOOO O OO OOOO OOOOOOO O OO O ~ ~ H ~~ HHHHHHH ~ ~ ~0 O ~0 O ,ri O OOO OOO ooo OOO o"~ o'~ OO OO oo OO oo OO OO ~-I~ oo o 0 ~ mmmm ooooooo ~ oo o oooo ~~~ o ~ ~Offi ~ ~o m~mmmmmO ~ mOo 0 H ~ ~ H ~i~ ooo ooo ooo ooo oo oo · oo ~o oo o 0 o I HHHHHHH ~ ~ ~ ~HHHHHHH H ~ ~ ~ o~~ ~ooooooo ou~ou ~% ~U HHHH HHHHHHH ~ ~ ~ooo ~HHH 000 HO~O r~ o > H00 00 O~ H ~m o i E~O HO 0 · I 0 I.~ 0 o o'~ 0 ,ri o 0 0 U ~ o i 0 o 0 0 u O~ Ho rj · o > I oo Ou~ ~u oo _fi o .,....-.I 0 m ~] o r-fl 0 r~ · i O0 O0 O0 O0 O~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 m ~ ~o ~ oo oo 0 oo ~ ~ ~o ~ oo oo ~o ~o ~o ~ oo oo oo oo oo ~ oo oo oo ~o oo HH ~H H~ U U U U U ~ 000 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~ o ~ ~o ~o ~ ~ r~O 0 '~'~o oo ~ o~ o ~ oo o ~ ~oo ~ H·· U~ ~ oo ~ o~ ~oo oo ~ ~ ~ ~o uo~ ~ ~,, ~oo ~ i~ O~ 0 %0% 0% 00% 0~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~0 ~0 ~o ~ u 0 ~ HO [~ 0 · ~ 0 0 0 ITEM NO. 6b DATE: MARCH 17, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DENIAL OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM CARRIE REDDING AND ALICE WOODARD, AND REFERRAL TO THE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND The claim from Carrie Redding was received by the City of Ukiah on February 23, 1999 and alleges damages related to a power outage on February 15, 1999 at 112 Ford St. The claim from Alice Woodard was received by the City of Ukiah on March 5, 1999 and alleges damages related to a power surge on February 19, 1999 at 123 Barbara St. Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council deny the claims as stated and refer them to Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Deny Claims for Damages received from Carrie Redding and Alice Woodard; and Refer Them to the Joint Powers Authority, REMIF. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Yes Claimant Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim of Carrie Redding, pages 1-2. 2. Claim of Alice Woodard, pages 3-5. Candace Horsley, Ci~y~anager mfh:asrcc99 0303CLAIM F~ai×' :,0, TC7~'.636204 NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAI THE CITY OF UKIAH, This claim must be presented, as Pr~cribed by Parts 3 and4 of Division 3.6, of $~afe of California, by [he claim;hr or by a person acting on hi.~/her behalf. RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO: cFrYOF UKJAH Afl:n: City Clerk 300 Seminary Avenue 1, . CITY OF UKIAH CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT CLAIMANT'$ N,~ ME: CLAIMANT'$ A ~DRE$S: Z~.~ Coae Wed< Phone N~mb er PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THiS CL41M SHOULD 8E SENT (if different from above~: _~r~e . _._.~-~ ~ ~ s ~. . ~ c ,/ ~__ . -- Telephone Z~p Code Nurnfler/$~,ree( en¢l,'or ~$t Office 5, PLACE OF ACCiD~T OR OCCURRENCE: ~ ~ ~' ~ ~'{ ~ : ) ~t~ ~ 6. GENERAL DESCRIPWON OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE (A~ach additional page(s), if more space Is needed: . ~ ~(~-~ .~..~,~_ ~o~ A~ ~ ~a ~ ~'~~ ~ot~ ~~ ~;7'., 7. NAME(S), if known, OF ANY . ( ~ ' IN~ THE )~URY OR LOSe: PUBIC EMPLOYE. S ~LLEGEDLY CAUS ~ · i WITNESS(ES), if known (optionall): b. Acidr~$$ Telephone 9~ DOCTOt~(S)/HOSP/TAL(S), if any, WHERE CLAIMANT WAS TREA?ED: Name Acidness b. FEB 2 3 ]999 CITY OF UKIAH CITY CLERK'S DEP/~RTMENT _[-- FEB-22-99 MC~I 08'5~ 10. 11. 12. CITY OF 2iKi~H Fg:~; ~IO, YO746362.0a ?, 03 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDEBTEDNESS, CBLIG_.~ TION, INJUR~ DAMAGE OR ~OSS =c far a~ i~ may b~e k~own at the time of pmse~tah'on of the claim' STATE THE AMOUNT C~IMED ff it total~ less than Jan thousand do/ia~ ¢10,000) as of the date of pm=entatic¢ of the c,'a/,m, ¢nctuding fha e~dmafeE amouct of any p~cfive inju~, Carnage or i¢~, inse~r a~ ~ may be ,r-hewn at the ti~ of ~he Cm~ent~5on of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed (for computation use ~12 beloW. H~wevcr, if the amount claime¢ exceed~ ten thousand d~/la~ ($ f O, 000~, no dcllar amoun~ ~half ~ included, but you mus~ J~dica te whet~er the jud~diction over the claim would be in Municipal or 3u~dor Coup. ~ Applicable Jud~¢i~'o~ ....... THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED a. Damages InCurred to dale: Expenses for medicalX~ospital care: Loss of earning=: Special damages lo¢ b. E~'timated prospective damages es far ea known: Futur~ expenses for me(t/caf and Future loss of eamin~,Ts: Other prospective ~pec/al damages: P."e~pective general i ,, , laG/on for dea.h or for inju~, to the per$(:n ,or fo personal property or growing crcp~ shall be pre~ente¢l not later than I $ix (6) calendar mocth~ or 182 day~ after the accr',~a/ of the cause of action, whichever i$ lon_~er. Claims retatin l to any other causes of action shall be presented not fa~er than eno (1) year after ac'cruel of t~e ca,se of action, g Received in the Office of the Cih/ Clerk thi~ ~ day of ~'~~~~.,G¢.. NOTE: This form of'claim Is for your convenience only. Any other type of form maybe useE if de..slred, as long as it sat~qe.~ ~e requ¢/'ement5 of the Government Code. The use of ~i$ form is not intended tn any way lo advise you of your legal rfgh~ or to interpret any law. If'you are in doubt regarding your legal rfgh~ or ~he Interpretation cf any iow, you should seek leg;~f counsel of y~ur choice at your own expense. NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST THE CiTY OF UKIAH, CALIFOR This claim must be presented, as prescrfbed by Parts 3 and 4 of Diw'sion 3.6, of Title State of California, by the claimant or by a person acting on his/her behaff. RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO: 1. CLAIMANT'S NAME: . CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS: · Government Code MAR 5 CiTY OF UKIAH Attn: City Clerk 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 CiTY OF UKIAH CITYCLERK'S DEPARTMENT Number/Street and/or Post Office Box City State Zip COde Home Phone Number Work Phone Number 3. PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE SENT (if different from above): Name _.~~~~ Number/Street and/or Post Office Box Telephone e City State zip Code DATE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: ~, PLACE OF ACCIDENT. OR OCCURRENCE: . /",~_.~ ~-~,~Z.~,~-..~ ~' GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE (A~ach additional pa~e(,), ~ more ,', · ', , * ~ ' ' ;. C.. ' ' _ . ~. · . ~.. .'~ . . e NAME(S), ff known, OF ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEE(S) ALLEGEDLY CAUSING THE INJURY OR LOSS: Se HITTNESS(ES), ff known (optional): Name Address ,._ . Telephone be e DOCTOR(S)/HOSPITAL(S), if any, WHERE CLAIMANT WAS TREATED: Name Address a. b. Telephone 10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDEBTEDNESS, OBLIGATION, INJURY, DAMAGE OR '[.OSS so far as it may be known at the time of presentation of the claim: . ...;~ ... , ~ , ; · . STATE THE'AMO'UI~ CLAIMED if it totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of .... p~sentation o~th~ claim., including the estimated amount of any prOspective injury, dame e or loss insofar ..as :if maybe"~Row, at thb time of the presentation of the claim, together with the bas,s of cg~ ....... n of the'* ' ' ....... amount 'claimed~ ~for~cJmputation mputai~ use #12 below). However, if the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10, 000), no dollar amount shall be included, but you must indicate whether the ju#sdiction over the claim would be in Municipal or Supe/for Court. 12. Amount Claimed or Applicable Jurisdicb'on THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED I$ AS FOLLOWS: a. Damages incurred to date: Expenses for medical/hospital care: Loss of earnings: Special damages for. .,. General damages: b. Estimated prospective damages as far as known: Future expenses for medical and hospital care: '~ Future loss of earnings: "' Other prOspective special damages: PrOspective general d~mages: · $ $ $ $ This claim must be signed by the claimant orby some person on his/her behalf. A claim relating to a cause of action h~r death or for injury, to ~e person or to personal prOperly' or grOwing crOps shaft be presented not later than si~ (~) calendar months or 1~2 days after the accrual o~ the cause of action, whichever is longer. ¢laims relating to any other._.~. , _causes of action shall be presented not later than one (1) year after accrual of the cause of action. Received in the Office of the City Clerk this ~-~ .J~ d'~aY of NOTE: This form of claim is for your convenience only. Any other type of form maybe used if desired, as long as it satisfies the requirements of the Government Code. The use of this form is not intended in any way to advise you of your legal rights or to interpret any law. ff you are in doubt regarding your legal rights or the interpretab'on of any law, you should seek legal counsel of your choice at your own expense. Rev. 3/18t98 [. CRAWFORD'S VCR REPAIR 1128 SOUTH STATE STREET UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 FREE ESTIMATE Telephone (707) 468-137_1..._ 1,2 ~ --c~._~ 70765 O SERVICe: I O WILL ~ALL I / WARRANTY ~ j DAT~ PUfq~H&.~EO , I OAT, I A O~ i · ........ L.LL:..~~:z~,.._..x~;dZ::_~! ~m~r / ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ I~' -' ~ ~- ................................ , / ~ ..~-_ /~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ADORESS . ! DATE ~ROMIS~D ~oUEST/C EOU S~ ~ ~ J I~ ~ I THE DE.SITED ~OPERTY ~mS ~ tS ~OT AFTER NOTIFICATION ANV ITEM 1.EFT OVER 30 /f,--r~ I DAYS WILL BE SOLD FOR"SE,,,.RVICES RENDEREDJ ! : :-- NO EXCE IONS ...... '--.. !;i!!?'!:i!!!!~s';:~':':~: - "~ .......... ..................................... ..... ~:. ..... I E~TIM~TED CH4RGES INCLUDE SERVICE CALL, SHOP ~BOR, REMOVAL, RE-INSTAL~TION AND PARTS, IF U~N CLOSER SHOP ANALYSIS ADOITIONAL REPAIRS ARE NEEDED. YOU WILL BE CONTACTED FOR AUTHORI~TI~ TO CO~R ~DITI~AL C~RGES. . RECEIVED .Y 4//., TECHNICIAN ./-b-' .--' C .'¢7/z' / ."/[//~:!i!;.:ii::i~rAL:. ':-::i::l ~ /' ,,.'~' ? , ,n. / '--/ . !:i::-::i:;i.ii::.i:i:ii:i:.::_:.:: :.:-:.': '.:.' E, ylSED ESTIMATE ITIME &OATE CALLED j 8Y WHOM / I NOTE: l! equt;ment ts re~urne(l at customer reclUeSt t3etore authonzed servK:e ~ pedormed, a d~agnos~ an~/handling cha~e or estimate tee of $ ///- " will ~ made 30 DAY LABOR. 30 DAY 'PARTS ;: . t . . · GUARANTEED O.N ALL WORK PERFORMED ITEM NO. 6c DATE: March 17. 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION TO COUNCIL REGARDING THE PURCHASE OFA CHLORINATOR FROM HOPKINS TECHNICAL PRODUCTS FOR THE SUM OF $7,802.29 Included in the 98/99 Wastewater Treatment Plant Budget, Account No. 612.3580.800, is $9,000 to replace a chlorinator that is no longer serviceable. Requests for Quotations through the informal bid process were sent to four suppliers. Bids were received by the Purchasing Department on February 26, 1999. Hopkins Technical Products, Inc. submitted the only bid for the sum of $7,802.29. A Purchase Order has been issued to Hopkins Technical Products Inc. for this amount. Based on our purchasing policies, we are giving the City Council the required notification of this action. There are no local suppliers of this type of equipment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report regarding the purchase of a chlorinator from Hopkins Technical Products, Inc. for the sum of $7,802.29 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Prepared by: George Borecky, Water/Sewer Operations Superintendent Coordinated with' Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None Candace nager Horsley, Cit! Ma ITEM NO. DATE: MARCH 17, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR ADDITIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION TRAINING At its March 3, 1999 meeting the City council recommended an increase in future Planning Department budgets to accommodate additional Planning Commission training and directed that a prorated amount be included in the current fiscal year. A budget amendment to reflect its action is required. As noted in the March 3rd Agenda Summary Report by the Planning Director the prorated dollar amount for the remainder of this year is $833. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Amendment to the 1998/99 Budget increasing account 100.1501.160.000 by $833 for additional Planning Commissioner training. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine modifications to budget amendment are necessary, identify changes, and approve revised amendment. 2. Determine budget amendment is not necessary and take no action. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: NA Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Office~ Michael F. Bob Sawyer, Planning Director, Gordon Elton, Director of Finance, and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Budget Amendment worksheets, pages 1-3. APPROVED:~ City ~a[~.~_ _~ nager Candace Horsley, mfh:asrcc99 0317B^ LU o ~ '6~ x x x~ x x x x x O0 0 g g ogg go oogooogg g ggoo ~** ..... oo . oo o . . . o . . o o 0,0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~l~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ _.~0 ~ ~ 00~ E ~m ~,~ ~ .m . . .~ o. ~ ~m~© mo~ m~ ~ OO~o ~ 000~000~0000000~0~~ ~000~0000000 000~00000 0000000 ~ 000000000~0000~ 0 0 0 0000000 O0000000000 O00000 O00000~ 000 ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ OI~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~J~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0,0 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 = ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ O~l~ ~0000000000 ~ ~ ~ m~ ~0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ 0 ~ 00000!0000000000 ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 000 ~ OOO© 0 m · 0 0 o I I J I I I : I I I ~ 0 I I I I I I J I I I J I I J J I I I I ~ 000 0 000 0 0000 0 ~ ~00 0 0 0 - I~ 0 GENERAL FUND//100 Budgeted amounts: Beginning fund balance 7/1/98 Revenue budgeted Expenses budgeted Transfers In/(Out), at net Loans to other funds Budgeted ending fund balance 6/30/99 $ 1,245,621 $ 6,695,385 $ (6,810,226) $ (364,856) $ 765,924 Adjustments made durinq the fiscal year: Date Proposed Account No. 7/1/98 Change in beginning fund balance per audit $ 378,793 8/5/98 Additional MESA cost, not budgeted 100.1990.260.000 $ (1,586) 9/2/98 Transfer funds for Perkins St reconstruction 100.283.250 $ ? (81,504) 10/7/98 Replacement computer for Engineering 100.3001.800.000 $ (2,200) 10/7/98 Transfer from Disposal Site for Engineering computer 100.281.660 $ 2,200 10/21/98 Video camera & tripod - Police Dept 100.2001.800.000 $ (1,000) 11/18/98 Civic Center generator repairs 100.1915.302.000 $ (3,125) 12/2/98 Welcome to Ukiah signs 100.1945.651.000 $ (4,000) 12/16/98 Replace Council Chambers sound system 100.1915.800.000 $ (8,000) 1/20/99 MOU & Personnel changes Various depts $ (159,299) 1/20/99 Transfer to COPS Grants Fund for MOU increases 100.283.206 $ (4,766) 1/20/99 Increase employee recognition dinner 100.1001.690.003 $ (350) 1/20/99 Computer software & printers 100.1501.690.000 $ (1,318) 1/20/99 Computer replacements 100.1501.800.000 $ (8,400) 1/20/99 Prior year booking fees 100.2001.500.001 $ ? (20,000) 1/20/99 Emergency services reimbursable employee costs 100.2151.XXX.000 $ (2,500) 1/20/99 Emergency services reimbursable supplies 100.2121.690.000 $ (1,500) 1/20/99 Overtime expenses - Perkins St. reconstruction project 100.3001.115.000 $ (1,939) 1/20/99 Reimb. from Gas Tax Fund #303 - Perkins St project 100.3001.699.000 $ 1,939 1/20/99 North Fire Station repairs 100.2101.301.003 $ (4,254) 1/20/99 Transfer from Fund #250 - M©U costs 100.281.250 $ 100,000 1/20/99 Transfer from Fund #250 - Assist City Mgr 100.281.250 $ 50,000 1/20/99 Computer equipment - Assist City Mgr 100.1201.800.000 $ (2,268) 2/17/99 Increase City Clerk compensation 100.1101.110-156 $ (434) 3/17/99 Property Tax Administration Fee 100.1990.346.000 $ (3,485) 3/17/99 Planning Dept Training for Planning Commission 100.1501.160.000 $ (833) Revised Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 6/30/99 $ 986,095 RESERV99.XLS 3/11/99 Page 1 Funds 100; 110; 115; 130; 131 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 8a DATE: MARCH 17, 1999 REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING LANDFILL HOURS OF OPERATIONS AVAILABLE TO THE NEW SERVICE AREA HAULERS (SOLID WASTES OF WlLLITS, INC., AND FORT BRAGG DISPOSAL) Submitted for the City Council's consideration are requests from representatives of Solid Wastes of Willits, Inc., and Fort Bragg Disposal for modifications to the landfill hours. The requested modifications would permit their waste hauling vehicles access to the landfill at the same morning hours currently offered to the franchised waste haulers who serve the old service area. The franchised or permitted waste haulers who serve the landfill's new service area are prohibited entry into the landfill until 8:00 a.m., Tuesday through Friday, and on days following those holidays on which the landfill is closed. Franchised waste haulers who serve the landfill's old service area are permitted access into the landfill beginning at 7:00 a.m., Tuesday through Friday and at 6:00 a.m. on days following those holidays which are observed at the landfill. On Mondays, the landfill is opened to commercial waste haulers beginning at 8:00 a.m. without restrictions on any service area. CONTINUED ON PAGE 2. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Open item to public comment and consider modifications to the landfill hours which would permit access beginning at 7:00 a.m. on Tuesday through Friday and at 6:00 a.m. on days following designated haulers to all commercial waste haulers regardless of the service area they serve. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Determine other appropriate modifications to the landfill hours which affect the commercial waste haulers serving the new service area. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Vichy Springs Resort and Vichy Springs Subdivision. Solid Wastes of Willits and Fort Bragg Disposal. Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer ~__.,~- Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Letter of request from Solid Wastes of Willits dated January 22, 1999. 2. Letter of request from Fort Bragg Disposal dated January 19, 1999. 3. Agenda Summary Report dated October 7, 1998, Public Hearing to Consider Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. 4. Chapter II of SEIR pertaining to Noise. 5. Letter of Concern from Vichy Springs Resort dated October 7, 1998. 6. Notice of Determination for SEIR. 7. Section 1, Noise, of Draft EIR, dated July 15, 1999. 8. Summary Sheets from EIR regarding noise. 9. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. 10. Letter of Request from City of Fort Bragg dated Mary 21, 1997. 11. Letter of request from Fort Bragg Disposal dated May 5, 1997. C~nda-ce Homley, C nager Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Landfill Hours of Operations Available to the New Service Area Haulers (Solid Wastes of Willits, Inc., and Fort Bragg Disposal March 17, 1999 Page 2 The old service area comprises the City of Ukiah and the County environs of Ukiah Valley, Redwood Valley, Potter Valley, and Boonville. The new service area encompasses the cities of Willits and Fort Bragg and the adjacent County environs including Caspar, Albion, Laytonville, and Covelo. The current landfill hours are as follows: Regular Business Hours (open to the public) Tuesday through Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Commercial Hauler Hours Mondays Tuesdays through Fridays (old service area) Tuesdays through Fridays (new service area) Saturdays Days after holidays (old service area) Days after holidays (new service area) 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 6:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Staff Maintenance Houm Mondays Tuesdays through Saturdays 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. There are nine holidays on which the is landfill closed, and therefore, there are only nine days out of the year when the landfill opens its gate at 6:00 a.m. to those commercial waste haulers who serve the old service area. BACKGROUND Subsequent to the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the revised Solid Waste Facilities Permit (SWFP), and prior to the closure of the Willits landfill, it came to the attention of those waste haulers who would soon be diverting their collected waste to the Ukiah landfill that a morning hour restriction of 8:00 a.m. had been established for haulers serving those areas within Mendocino County designated as the new service area. Upon this discovery, the City of Ukiah staff were petitioned by written requests to remove the morning hour restriction and to allow Solid Wastes of Willits and Fort Bragg Disposal access to the landfill during the same time period that was extended to the commercial haulers serving the old service area. The restricted morning hour of 8:00 a.m. for new landfill customers was included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) associated with the SWFP EIR. Although this mitigation measure was included in the MMRP for the purpose of reducing truck traffic noise during the morning period, the Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Landfill Hours of Operations Available to the New Service Area Haulers (Solid Wastes of Willits, Inc., and Fort Bragg Disposal March 17, 1999 Page 3 8:00 a.m. time restriction was not included as a mitigation measure in the EIR document. Noise concerns were discussed in Section I of Part IV of the EIR. In this section it is noted that the "residents at the Vichy Springs Resort cited haul truck noise levels as a primary noise source which they considered annoying. Primarily, excessive travel speed along Vichy Springs Road and early morning operations were the major factors which annoyed residents (Page IV.81)." It was considered in the findings that "based upon the projected future traffic noise levels, it is not anticipated that existing residences will be exposed to exterior noise levels in excess of 60dB Ldn at the outdoor activity areas. In addition, it is not anticipated that project related traffic will increase existing noise levels by more than 0.1dB Ldn (Page IV. 85)." It was also concluded in the EIR that "as a means of mitigating early morning truck traffic noise, it is recommended that truck traffic noise be restricted to operations between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. (Page IV.88)." The 8:00 a.m. restriction included in the MMRP was a concession made by staff and the consultant without verifying with future landfill users if the restriction placed unreasonable hardships on their operations. The City agreed to revisit the time restriction and hired ESA to reanalyze the noise impacts resulting from a change in truck mix, as well as a 7:00 a.m. gate opening for the new service area commercial waste haulers. On October 8, 1998, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) addressing changes in the daily maximum waste intake, waste truck types, landfill hours, and an alternative access road to the landfill was presented to the City Council for consideration. If adopted, permit modifications in the permitted maximum daily waste input and the time restriction for new commercial waste haulers would be applied for. The SEIR concluded that there were no significant environmental effects anticipated as a result of the proposed permit modifications. Because it was believed that the change in the permitted morning hours for the new commercial waste haulers was not a contentious issue, the representatives for the waste haulers were not encouraged to attend the public hearing set for the adoption of the SEIR. Although the City Council approved the SEIR and adopted the necessary findings, it elected not to change the morning hours available to the commercial waste haulers serving the new service area. In their letters of January 19, 1999 and January 27, 1999, Sherry Robison with Fort Bragg Disposal and Gerald Ward with Solid Wastes of Willits have requested the City Council to reconsider their earlier decision regarding the morning hours available to them. As expressed in their letters, not having access to the landfill before 8:00 a.m. continues to create hardships for roll-off deliveries, and to the commercial and residential waste collection activities on days following holidays. The representatives will be present at the March 17, 1999 City Council meeting to present their requests. Staff believes it appropriate to mention that since 1993 the landfill hours available to the commercial waste haulers for early morning disposal have been modified and reduced in Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Landfill Hours of Operations Available to the New Service Area Haulers (Solid Wastes of Willits, Inc., and Fort Bragg Disposal March 17, 1999 Page 4 consideration of the neighbors to the landfill. Resolution 93-44 established early morning disposal hours for commercial haulers beginning at 5:00 a.m. on Tuesday and days following holidays, and at 6:30 a.m. on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. The 5:00 a.m. opening was applicable for 52 Tuesdays and perhaps 3 or 4 days following the 9 holidays observed at the landfill. Resolution 95-8 (1994) modified early morning disposal hours to 6:00 a.m. for Tuesdays and days following holidays, and 7:00 a.m. for Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays. The adoption of Resolution 98-18 on July 16, 1997, modified early morning disposal hours to 6:00 a.m. for only those days following designated holidays recognized at the landfill. The opening hour for Tuesdays (if not a day following a holiday) was changed from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. The recent removal of the cattle guard in front of the landfill entrance by City forces has further mitigated a continual noise nuisance created by landfill traffic. It is believed that the City continues to be sensitive to the early morning noise concerns, but it also seeks a balance of the needs of all parties. Staff recognizes the noise concerns expressed by the Vichy Springs Resort owners, as well as the homeowners within the Vichy Springs subdivision, however, staff also supports the request for the change in landfill hours. Staff does not take exception to the hardships expressed by the haulers. Staff wishes to express their appreciation to Solid Wastes of Willits, Fort Bragg Disposal, and to the County of Mendocino for their continued patronage at the landfill. Their use of the City's landfill has assisted the City in meeting its present and future financial commitments relating to the landfill operation and its eventual closure. R:I~.ANDFILL AHOURS WlLLITS SOLID WASTES IV~NDOCINO SOLID WASTF_~ BI(~WASTE COMPOSTING SOLID WASTES RECYCLING CENTER WlLLITS. LAYTONVlLLE COVELO. REDWCX)D VALLEY Solid Wastes of Willits, Inc. Post Office Box 1425 · Willits, California 95490 January 22, 1999 Rick Kennedy Public Works Director City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: Landfill Hours Dear Rick, I just recently had a discussion with. Sherry Robison, from Fort Bragg Disposal about the Ukiah landfill and the recent decision by the Ukiah City Council's not to allow access to the landfill before 8:00 am. Sherry told me she was not aware of the meeting of October 7,' 1998 where the Council voted to keep the hours the same. As you know, I was aware of the meeting,', b.ut you and I felt that I need not be present because the issue of arriving a hour~eadier at the landfill should not be a problem. Unfortunately this was not the case.. ~, - The;(!ssue.?.of;not allowing access to'the landfill before 8:00 am continues to create ~!h~r~dshlP .to OUr roll-off (industrial) ddvers and Fort Bragg Disposal. On any give~;:'aay, °t~r roll-off driver will have to dump 3 to. 4 boxes. With open hours of only 8:00 am to 3:30 pm, doe$'i:hot.allow us ample time to complete our route schedules. In "most cases, through ,the summer time, we have to keep full boxes on the truck br in the yard because 0f thiS tight Schedule. ... We don't believe allowing us.:'access an hour earlier in the morning will contribute to any hardship on neighboring properties. Already refuse haulers in the Ukiah area can use the landfill at 7:00 am. Since our commercial and residential trucks typically dump only once per day, not having access before 7:00 am is not an issue. Only after a holiday would it be convenient to have access before 8:00 am for all of our trucks. What I am suggesting is access to the landfill at 7:00 am for just our roll-off trucks, (3 sometimes 4 trucks) be allowed. Days following a holiday would increase the need ONE-STOP RECYCLING & DISPOSAL TOO! (707) 459-4845. 800-MY GARBAGE (694-2722) · FAX: (707) 459-0175 to dump as many as 8 to 9 trucks, but this only occurs a few times a year. In discussing this issue with Fort Bragg Disposal, it appears they only need to dump one or two trucks at 7:00 am per day. I would like to request a headng before the Ukiah. City Council so that Fort Bragg Disposal and myself can appeal to the Council our concerns and ask for a reconsideration. If l need to provide any additional information or pursue a different process, please contact me at your earliest convenience. I look forward to your reply. . Sincerely yours, /~) Gerald W. Ward ' President/CEO GWW/jw Fort Bragg Disposal RO. Box 2720 ~ Fort Bragg, California 95437 707/964-9172 A Waste Management Company January 19, 1999 City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 J AN 2 5 1999 CITY OF UKIAH DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS RE: Ukiah Landfill Time Dear Mr. Seanor: It has come to my attention that the City of Ukiah recently held a meeting considering the opening of the Landfill at 7:00 AM for Solid Waste of Willits and Fort Bragg Disposal. I also understand it was denied. If Fort Bragg Disposal had been aware this meeting was taking place, possibly we could have attended or sent a letter expressing our need for the earlier entry. The driver that is leaving from Fort Bragg, leaves in the dark, and now that winter is here returns in the dark. The roads are icy, and Highway 20 is dangerous. As I understand, the landfill does not want to accept refuse after 2:00 PM from°6s, and in the summer, when my driver has other jobs to do besides haul over the hill, he is entering after that time. Please reconsider for at least one of the trucks to enter at 7:00 AM with the Ukiah refuse haulers. It would also help lessen the congestion at 8:00 AM, when the other trucks are entering and particularly on Tuesdays when the public traffic is so heavy at 8:00 AM. Thank you for your consideration. //~~~cerely, / ~SM~e~~. Robison ~ ur r lc~nager --- a division of Empire Waste Management AGENDA ITEM NO. 8b DATE: October 7. 1998 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CERTIFICATION OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTION OF APPROPRIATE FINDINGS, AND APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT FOR THE CITY'S PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO ITS SOLID WASTE FACILITIES PERMIT FOR THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILL LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF VlCHY SPRINGS ROAD i. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ii. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION MAKING CEQA FINDINGS The City of Ukiah proposes to modify its 1996 Solid Waste Facilities Permit (Permit) for its Municipal Solid Waste Landfill to allow the acceptance of a daily peak or maximum of 295 tons CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 · RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Certify the SEIR prepared by ESA and dated June 1998 as complete and in conformance with the requirements set forth in CEQA and adopt the resolution making such certification. 2. Adopt the resolution making findings pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 in connection with the decision to submit an application to the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) and the California Integrated Waste Management Board to amend the Solid Waste Facilities Permit for the City of Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site. 3. Approve the revised "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision." Approve the Project and direct Staff to implement the Project by submitting an Application to the LEA for Modification to the Landfill's Solid Waste Facility Permit. . ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine modifications are necessary and adopt revised resolutions. 2. Determine that the modifications to the' Permit are not in the best interest of the City and take no action. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: 1. . . . Public Hearing Noticed and Response to Comments Addendum submitted to commentators to the SDEIR. Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer /)j/_ Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager Resolution certifying the City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, June 1998, as adequate and complete. Resolution making Findings pursuant to Public Resources Code and California Environmental Quality Act in connection to the Decision to submit an Application to amend the Solid Waste Facilities Permit. Revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision. Notice of DSEIR Availability. Letter of requests for early morning access from Fort Bragg Disposal, Solid Waste of Willits, and County of Mendocino. APPROVED' ~~')~ ~~~,~ Can~ace Horsley, CitTy M~nager Public Hearing to Consider Certification of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Adoption of Appropriate Findings, and Approval of the Project for the City's Proposed Modification to its Solid Waste Facilities Permit for the Ukiah Municipal Solid Waste Landfill located at the Terminus of Vichy Springs Road October 7, 1998 Page 2 of refuse per day instead of the current permitted daily maximum of 190 tons of refuse per day. The current permitted daily average of 190 tons per day would remain the same. The proposed permit modifications would also amend a condition of the Landfill operations allowing commercial garbage trucks from the new service area (Willits and Fort Bragg) access to the Landfill between the morning hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. as is currently available to the commercial garbage vehicles servicing the old service area (City of Ukiah, Ukiah Valley, Redwood Valley, Potter Valley, and Boonville). The proposed permit modifications noted above, along with the permit modifications described in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared by the company of Eric Jay Toll, dated July 15, 1994, and as described in the Addendum to the EIR prepared by Environmental Science Associates (ESA) and dated January 22, 1997, are defined as the Project. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires governmental entities who are considering a Project to make informed project decisions which consider the potential environmental consequences that may result by reason of Project implementation. Consequently, the Ukiah City Council on May 6, 1998, authorized the preparation of a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR) for the purpose of identifying and analyzing any environmental consequences that may result by reason of the implementation of the proposed permit modifications not previously addressed in the certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and adopted amendment to the EIR. The DSEIR was prepared by the Consulting Firm of ESA and was circulated for a 45 day public review and comment period beginning on June 29, 1998, and ending on August 12, 1998. The 45 day review period began with the date that the Notice of Availability was posted at the Mendocino County Clerk's Office. A Response to Comments Addendum was prepared with the assistance of ESA and this document provides responses to all comments received during the public review and comment period. Previous environmental documentation prepared for the Project in accordance with CEQA includes the following: City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Draft Environmental Impact Report (including appendices), prepared by The Company of Eric Jay Toll, ACIP, Inc., for the City of Ukiah Department of Public Works, dated July 1 5, 1994. City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report, prepared by The Company of Eric Jay Toll, ACIP, Inc., for the City of Ukiah Department of Public Works, dated May 1, 1995. City of Ukiah Landfill Revision Environmental Impact Report Response to Comments Addendum, prepared by Environmental Science Associates, for the City of Ukiah Department of Public Works, dated January 18, 1996. City of Ukiah Permit Revision Environmental Impact Report Addendum CFin~l), prepared by Environmental Science Associates for the City of Ukiah Department of Public Works, dated January 22, 1997. The original Environmental Impact Report was prepared to address the potential adverse 'Public Hearing to Consider Certification of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Adoption of Appropriate Findings, and Approval of the Project for the City's Proposed Modification to its Solid Waste Facilities Permit for the Ukiah Municipal Solid Waste Landfill located at the Terminus of Vichy Springs Road October 7, 1998 Page 3 environmental effects associated with increasing the Landfill's permitted daily average from 50 tons per day to 190 tons per day and the permitted peak or daily maximum amount of refuse to 295 tons per day. Subsequent to Certification of the EIR by the City Council on February 7, 1996, but prior to the public hearing conducted by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) Permit Committee for the purpose of making a recommendation concerning the City's application for a revised Solid Waste Facilities Permit (SWFP), CIWMB staff notified City Staff that the Draft EIR did not assess the noise effects associated with the proposed daily maximum capacity of 295 tons per day. In response, the City revised its permit application to request both a daily average and daily peak capacity of 190 tons per day. On July 30, 1996, the CIWMB concurred with the issuance of the proposed revised SWFP and the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) issued the revised SWFP on August 8, 1996. On September 2, 1997, the Cities of Willits and Fort Bragg, and adjacent unincorporated County areas began directing their waste stream to Ukiah's Landfill. The resulting increase in disposed waste has caused the City to occasionally exceed its permitted maximum daily tonnage. The City has elected to augment the noise analysis performed for the original EIR to include an updated assessment of noise impacts resulting from the daily maximum disposal of 295 tons per day. If the City Council certifies the SDEIR and approves the project, City Staff will then request a permit revision from the LEA to bring the maximum permitted capacity at the Landfill to the level initially proposed in the EIR. At the time the Draft EIR was prepared, the Landfill was accepting a daily average of 98 tons as allowed pursuant to the provisions of a Stipulated Agreement with the LEA. The then current daily average input was used as the baseline to describe the existing environmental setting in the Draft EIR and against which the comparison of potential project impacts were made. Many commentators to the Draft EIR opined that the City should have used the 1979 permitted daily capacity of 50 tons per day as the baseline to which comparisons were to be made, arguing that the Stipulated Agreement between the LEA and the City which established the average daily capacity of 98 tons per day was not a proper permit and could not legally supplant or alter the 1979 Solid Waste Facilities Permit baseline of §0 tons per day. AS determined by the Mendocino County Superior Court in Case No. 74102 (Ashoff vs. City of Ukiah), the use of the baseline of 98 tons per day in the Final EIR and Addendum to the EIR was proper. Although not legally required, the City also used the hypothetical conditions estimated to result from a disposal rate of 50 tons per day (TPD) to provide an additional description of the noise impacts from increasing the peak or maximum capacity from 190 tons per day to 295 tons per day in the analyses and evaluations presented in the Supplemental EIR, dated June 1998. As stated in the Supplemental Draft EIR dated May 1, 1995, the City would study access designs to the Landfill that would bypass or avoid the Vichy Springs Resort. The City was to complete its analysis by January, 1996, and determine whether a new entrance road could be constructed prior to the Landfill's closure. City Staff elected to include in the DSEIR an evaluation of an alternative entrance road to the Landfill with the intention of reducing noise effects at the Vichy Springs Resort and at residences in the vicinity of the Landfill. Staff also elected to revisit the previous analysis associated with changing the mix of waste haul trucks as previously addressed in the Addendum to the EIR. Summarizing, the SEIR presently submitted for the Cou'ncil's consideration and certification includes the following analysis and evaluation: Public Hearing to Consider Certification of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Adoption of Appropriate Findings, and Approval of the Project for the City's Proposed Modification to its Solid Waste Facilities Permit for the Ukiah Municipal Solid Waste Landfill located at the Terminus of Vichy Springs Road October 7, 1998 Page 4 Evaluation of the potential noise levels associated with a peak daily waste disposal rate of 295 tons, a comparison of those levels with baseline noise associated with both §0 TPD and 98 TPD, and an assessment of any potential impacts associated with the incremental increase; Measurement and analysis of a potential noise effects related to the change in distribution of waste haul truck types that was identified in the previous Addendum to the EIR; Analysis of the incremental increase in noise levels (and potential impacts) associated with operation of landfill equipment if the permitted peak disposal capacity is increased to 295 TPD; for a. ll truck del · Evaluation of potential noise levels and other environmental impacts associated with creation of a new landfill entrance along the southwesterly property line of the adjacent Ukiah Rifle and Pistol Club property. The SEIR concludes that there are no significant environmental effects anticipated as a result of the proposed permit modifications. In particular, project related increases in truck traffic and associated noise levels along Vichy Springs Road are less than significant and increased noises in the vicinity of the working caused by the increase in the operation of heavy equipment by reason of the project would be less than significant. The SEIR concludes that the new entrance alternative could reduce noise impacts at the adjacent Vichy Springs Resort that would be associated with the Project, however, the noise analysis demonstrates that noise impacts by reason of the Project would be less than significant. It is also concluded in the DSEIR that the new entrance alternative could cause noise impacts that would be greater for the residents of the Vichy Springs Subdivision and could be potentially significant. The new entrance alternative would also impact biological resources, slope, stability, and downstream water quality. Staff estimates that a 22 foot wide paved road with three foot gravel shoulders with a structural section that could adequately support commercial garbage trucks would cost $465,000. Considering the remaining life of the Landfill of one year and seven months (projected closure of May 1, 2000), the alternative entrance road is cost prohibitive. It is recommended that the City reject this alternative access road from further consideration. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public testimony as to why the Project should or should not be approved and implemented and whether or not the Project SEIR complies with the requirements set forth in CEQA. Staff believes that the Project SDEIR complies with the requirements of CEQA and that it adequately evaluates the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project. After taking public testimony, concluding Council's review of the SEIR, and completing its deliberation of the issues, Staff requests that the City Council take those actions listed in the recommended action section of the report. CHAPTER II NOISE A. SETTING INTRODUCTION TO NOISE PRINCIPLES AND DESCRIPTORS The following information is provided as a general introduction to noise principles and descriptors. Similar background information (that was organized differently) was provided in the Draft EIR for the Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision published July 15, 1994. Environmental noise is usually measured in A-weighted decibels (dBA).~ In general, a change of three dBA is a noticeable change and a change of 10 dBA is perceived as a doubling of noise. Some representative noise sources and their corresponding noise levels in dBA are shown in Figure II-1. Environmental noise typically fluctuates over time, and different types of noise descriptors are used to account for this variability. Typical noise descriptors include the energy- equivalent noise level (Leq),2 the day-night average noise level (Ldn), and the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The Ldn and CNEL are commonly used in establishing noise exposure guidelines for specific land uses. The noise experienced at a receptor depends on the distance between the source and the receptor, the presence or absence of noise barriers and other shielding features, and the amount of noise attenuation (lessening) provided by the intervening terrain. For line sources, such as motor or vehicular traffic, noise decreases by about 3.0 to 4.5 dBA for every doubling of the distance from the roadway. For point or stationary sources, such as electric motors, a noise reduction of 6.0 to 7.5 dBA is experienced for each doubling of the distance from the source. Sensitivity to noise also varies according to the individual, the time of day (noise between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. is in effect "penalized" to reflect greater sensitivity), and type of noise. A decibel (dB) is a logarithmic unit of sound energy intensity. Sound waves exert a sound pressure (commonly called "sound level"), measured in decibels. An A-weighted decibel (dBA) is a decibel corrected for the variation in frequency response of the typical human ear at commonly-encountered noise levels. The highest dBA recorded in a given period of time is known as the maximum noise level (Lmax). All of the noise levels reported herein are "A-weighted" unless stated otherwise. Leq, the energy equivalent noise level (or "average" noise level), is the equivalent steady-state continuous noise level which, in a stated period of time, contains the same acoustical energy as the time-varying sound level actually measured during the same period. Din, the day-night average noise level, is a weighted 24-hour average noise level. With the Lan descriptor, noise levels between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. are adjusted upward by ten dBA to take into account the greater annoyance of nighttime noise as compared to daytime noise. The CNEL is calculated in a similar way, but an additional 5 dBA are added to the noise levels in the evening hours between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. Ukiah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II-1 Environmental Science Associates II. NOISE NOISE REGULATIONS, PLANS, AND POLICIES Noise is regulated in the project area through implementation of the Noise Element of the Mendocino County General Plan. The Noise Element identifies comPatible noise environments for different types of land uses in the County (Mendocino County, 1993). Table II-1 contains the noise/land use compatibility guidelines identified in the Noise Element. For residential land uses, the normally acceptable noise level is in the range of 50 to 60 Lan, and the conditionally acceptable range is 55 to 70 Ldn. For lodging such as Vichy Springs Resort, the normally acceptable noise level is up to 65 Lan and the conditionally acceptable range is 60 to 70 Ldn. Table II-2 is also from the County Noise Element and it provides correction factors to actual measured or calculated noise values. These factors adjust for specific circumstances. For this project, correction factors would offset one another since the applicable factors relate to the rural environment in the project vicinity (+5) and considerable previous experience with landfill noise (-5). Therefore, the measured and calculated noise levels included in this Draft SEIR will be not be adjusted for the purpose of comparing the values with the compatibility guidelines shown in Table II-1. SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Some land uses are considered more sensitive to ambient noise levels than others, due to the amount of noise exposure (in terms of both duration and insulation from noise), and the types of activities involved. Residences, motels and hotels, schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, nursing homes, auditoriums, and parks and other outdoor recreation areas generally are more sensitive to noise than are commercial and agricultural land uses. Noise-sensitive land uses in the project vicinity include Vichy Springs Resort and Vichy Springs subdivision, which are located along Vichy Springs Road and El Dorado Estates, which is located northwest of the landfill. EXISTING NOISE SOURCES AND LEVELS HA UL TRUCK NOISE To evaluate haul truck noise, a series of noise measurements were taken in October 1997 along Vichy Springs Road, the haul route to the landfill. The measurements included three concurrent long-term measurements and one short-term measurement. Concurrently with the long-term measurements, City staff documented waste deliveries to the landfill to provide the basis for correlating disposal rates with truck noise along the haul route (Vichy Springs Road). The information provided by City staff is included in the Appendix to this Draft SEIR. Table II-3 summarizes the results of those measurements and the associated landfill truck activity during the measurement days. The short-term measurement was conducted to provide the basis for correlating maximum noise levels with different types of vehicles. Additional noise figures are provided in the Appendix to this Draft SEIR. Uldah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II-3 Environmental Science Associates II. NOISE TABLE II-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS FOR COMMUNITY EXTERIOR NOISE ENVIRONMENTS Land Use Category Community Noise Exposure, Ldn Normally Conditionally Normally Clearly Acceptablea Acceptableb Unacceptablec Unacceptabled Residential-Low Density Single Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes Residential -- Multi-Family Transient Lodging m Motels, Hotels Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheatres Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries Office Buildings, Business, Commercial and Professional Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture up to 60 55 to 70 70 to 75 above 75 up to 65 60 to 70 70 to 75 above 75 up to 65 60 to 70 70 to 80 above 75 up to 70 60 to 70 70 to 80 above 80 N/A up to 70 N/A above 65 N/A up to 75 N/A above 70 up to 70 N/A 67 to 75 above 72 up to 75 N/A 70 to 80 above 80 up to 70 68 to 78 above 75 N/A up to 75 70 to 80 above 75 N/A a Normally Acceptable: b Conditionally Acceptable: c Normally Unacceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based on the assumption the any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice. New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. d Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. SOURCE: County of Mendocino, Noise Element of the County General Plan, 1993. Ukiah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR 1I-4 Enviroamental Science Associates II. NOISE TABLE 11-2 CORRECTIONS TO BE ADDED TO THE MEASURED COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVEL (CNEL) TO OBTAIN NORMALIZED CNEL Type of Correction Description Amount of Correction to Be Added to Measured CNEL Seasonal Correction Summer (or year-round operation). Winter only (or windows always closed). 0 -5 Correction for Outdoor Residual Level Quiet suburban or rural community (remote from large cities and from industrial activity and trucking). Quiet suburban or rural community (not located near industrial activity). Urban residential community (not immediately adjacent tq heavily traveled roads and industrial areas). Noisy urban residential community (near relatively busy roads or industrial areas). Very noisy urban residential community. + 10 +5 -5 -10 Correction for Previous Exposure and Community Attitudes No prior experience with intruding noise. Community has had some previous exposure to intruding noise but little effort is being made to control the noise. This correction may also be applied in a situation where the community has not been exposed to the noise previously, but the people are aware that bona fide efforts are being made to control the noise. Community has had considerable previous exposure to the intruding noise and the noise maker's relations with the community are good. Community aware that operation causing noise is very necessary and it will not continue indefinitely. This correction can be applied for an operation of limited duration and under emergency circumstances. +5 0 -5 - 10 Pure Tone or Impulse No pure tone or impulsive character. Pure tone or impulsive character present. 0 +5 SOURCE: County of Mendocino, Noise Element of the County General Plan, 1993. Ukiah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II-5 Environmental Science Associates .~~ II. NOISE TABLE II-3 NOISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS AND ASSOCIATED LANDFILL TRUCK ACTIVITY Day Day-Night Noise Level (Ldn)a No. of Waste Site A Site B Site C Trucksb Deliveredb October 28 56.7 54.2 54.2 47 238 tons October 29 55.2 53.6 54.0 41 202 tons October 30 55.8 54.0 54.3 34 209 tons Noise levels were measured at a distance of approximately 50 feet from Vichy Springs Road using Metrosonics dB-308 model sound level meters. The number of truck deliveries listed in this table include medium and heavy trucks but not pick-up trucks. The total amount of waste delivered on a given day includes the waste from all types of vehicles. This information was provided in a letter sent by Richard J. Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works, City of Ukiah, to Paul Miller, Environmental Science Associates, dated November 26, 1997. SOURCE: Environmen® Science Associates. The long-term measurements were each taken approximately 50 feet from Vichy Springs Road and provide three full days of hourly noise data (October 28 through October 30, 1997). The three measurement locations are referred to herein as Sites A, B, and C and are shown in Figure II-2. Site A corresponds to a location along the hilly segment of Vichy Springs Road near the landfill entrance. Site B corresponds to a location directly across from Vichy Springs Resort. Site C corresponds to a location on the gun club property approximately one mile from the landfill and captures both residential and landfill traffic. As shown in Table II-3, noise levels are 1 to 2 decibels dBA higher at Site A relative to Sites B and C due to the higher-than-normal truck noise associated with climbing the relatively steep grade at the entrance to the landfill and due to equipment noise associated with disposal activities at the landfill itself. Hourly average noise levels at 50 feet from Vichy Springs Road at Sites B and C, which are more representative than Site A of the noise that land use development adjacent to that road experience, typically range from 50 to 60 Leq when the landfill is open and are approximately 54 Ldn with a daily disposal rate of 200 to 230 tons. An additional noise measurement was taken near Site A on May 26, 1998, a day when the landfill received approximately 250 tons of refuse. The measured 24-hour noise level was 56.8 Ldn OPERA TIONS A T TtlE LANDFILL Observations were made of operations at the landfill on Tuesday May 26, 1998 to determine the noise effects of landfill equipment on a peak day following a holiday. The landfill received about 250 tons of refuse on this day. Noise measurements indicated that during one-minute Ukiah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II-6 Environmental Science Associates ® 2000 I Feet Noise Measurement Location SOURCE: USGS U 'idah Quadrangle, Environmental Science Associates Ukiah Landfill Draft Stq~l~lenlental EIR / 980245 · Figure II-2 Noise Measurement Locations II. NOISE intervals, the noise level from the working face of the landfill varied from 50 dBA to 80 dBA at a distance of approximately 100 feet from the refuse pile. Also, on this day, concurrent measurements of the noise from the working face were made during a 15-minute period when the landfill CAT 826C compactor and CAT DSN bulldozer were both in simultaneous operation. Noise analysts were 'unable to hear any of this operational noise at' the west boundary of the landfill (where the levels were below 40 dBA) and could only faintly hear the noise of the back- up beepers from the equipment at noise monitoring Site A (described above); which is near the landfill entrance gate. The 24-hour average noise level at a distance of approximately 100 feet from the working face was approximately 65.5 Ldn. B. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The purpose of the impact analysis is two-fold: 1) to evaluate the noise impact associated with a peak-day disposal rate of 295 tons per day relative to baseline noise levels and 2) to evaluate the noise impact of deleting one of the measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) adopted under the California Environmental Quality Act for the 1996 revision to the City's Solid Waste Facilities Permit. The mitigation measure to be deleted is the requirement that new commercial haul trucks from Willits and Fort Bragg not arrive at the landfill before 8 a.m. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA A project may be deemed to have a significant effect on the environment if it would increase substantially the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas (Governor's Office of Planning and Research, 1997). To identify areas subject to substantial increases in noise, two different types of significance thresholds are typically used. One type is a criterion based on a specific noise standard, and the other type is a criterion based on the relative change in noise. With respect to applicable noise standards, noise levels may be considered significant if the project results in noise levels which exceed applicable compatibility guidelines set forth in the Mendocino County Noise Element by 0.5 Ldn or more. These compatibility guidelines are shown in Tables II-1 and 1I-2 (e.g., 60 Ldn for single-family residential development and 65 Ldn for multi-family residential and transient lodging uses). With respect to relative changes in noise levels, increases in noise of 5 Ldn or more may be considered significant at noise-sensitive locations where the ambient noise level (i.e., without the project) is less than 60 Ldn; increases of 3 Ldn or more may be considered significant where the ambient noise level is between 60 and 65 Ldn; and increases of 1.5 Ldn or more may be considered significant where the ambient noise level exceeds 65 Ldn. Impact II-1: Project-related increases in truck traffic would increase the noise level along Vichy Springs Road. (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT) The Final EIR for the City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision (Final EIR) estimates that the increase in noise along Vichy Springs Road from increased truck traffic would be less than Ukiah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II-8 Environmental Science Associates II. NOISE 5 dBA and that the resultant noise level would be less than the applicable compatibility criteria (Environmental Science Associates, 1996). Based on those estimates, the Final EIR characterizes the noise impact along Vichy Springs Road as less-than-significant. Even though the impact is characterized as "less than significant," the Final EIR identified the following mitigation measure: "Transfer truck delivering refuse to the landfill from new service areas would be required, through contract provisions, to arrive a the landfill after 8:00 a.m." This measure was included in the MMRP developed for the project and is referred to herein as the MMRP measure. Since publication of the Final EIR, the City has adopted resolutions that further restrict when refuse can be delivered to the landfill. Resolution No. 98-06 (adopted in July 1997) establishes the days and hours of operation for the landfill. Under this resolution, the landfill remains closed until 7:00 a.m. on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays. On Mondays and Saturdays, the landfill is closed until 8:00 a.m.; the landfill is closed on Sundays. An exception to the normal schedule is on days following designated holidays when the landfill opens at 6:00 a.m. Another exception relates to the MMRP mitigation measure that restricts refuse truck deliveries from new service areas to the period after 8:00 a.m. The City. re-affirmed the continued applicability of the MMRP measure through Resolution 98-18, which was adOpted in December 1997. To assess the relative change in roadside noise levels, six scenarios have been identified for analysis. The first scenario assumes a disposal rate of 50 tons per day without the time restrictions that have been developed through the CEQA process or by separate City resolution. (As noted in Section I-C of this report, this scenario is analyzed for informational purposes only, and is not used for purposes of assessing the significance of noise impacts.) The second scenario is similar to the first except that the assumed disposal rate is 98 tons per day. The third scenario has two variants; both assume a disposal rate of 190 tons per day while one of the variants includes the current MMRP time restriction while the other variant does not include that restriction. The fourth scenario has two variants, similar to the third scenario, except that the assumed disposal rate is 295 tons per day. Table II-4 summarizes the roadside noise levels estimated for these various scenarios. The method used to develop the estimates shown in Table II-4 involved extrapolations from noise measurement data taken along Vichy Springs Road. The estimate for noise associated with 50 tons per day is based on a noise measurement made at 50 feet from Vichy Springs Road in November 1993 and described in the City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Draft EIR (The Company of Eric Jay Toll, 1994). It is assumed that the November 1993 measurement reflects a disposal rate of 98 tons per day, which was typical of the disposal rates during that period. The measured value was 52.1 Ldn. To estimate the Lcln associated with 50 tons per day (roughly one- half of the disposal rate measured in 1993), the measured hourly Leq values for those hours affected by landfill truck noise were reduced by 2.9 dBA. (A reduction of one-half of a given noise source corresponds to a 3-dBA reduction in noise. Accordingly, the appropriate noise reduction for a change in the waste disposal rate from 98 TPD to 50 TPD would be approximately 2.9 dBA.) The estimated value for 50 tons per day is therefore 49.2 Ldn. Ukiah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II'9 Environmental Science Associates 7 II. NOISE TABLE 11-4 ESTIMATED POTENTIAL NOISE EFFECT OF ACCOMMODATING A PEAK DAILY DISPOSAL RATE OF 295 TONS AND DELETING MMRP MEASURE Time Restriction Estimated Change Change versus Scenario in Effect Ldn versus 50 TPD Baselinea 50 Tons Delivered Not Applicable 49.2 +0.0 -2.9 98 Tons Delivered Not Applicable 52.1 +2.9 +0.0 190 Tons Delivered Yes 52.2 +3.0 +0.1 190 Tons Delivered No 53.2 +4.0 +1.1 295 Tons Delivered Yes 55.2 +6.0 +3.1 295 Tons Delivered No 55.7 +6.5 +3.6 a In this context, "baseline" is defined as the scenario with a daily disposal rate of 98 tons. SOURCE: Environmental Science Associates The method used to estimate noise levels associated with trucks at disposal rates of 190 tons per day and 295 tons per day involved adjusting the hourly noise levels measured at Site B in October 1997. The measurements taken in October 1997 differ from those taken in 1993 in that the more recent measurements reflect the time restrictions imposed on landfill operations under Resolution No. 98-06, which did not apply when the 1993 measurements were taken. The hourly noise levels measured at Site B correspond to a day (October 28, 1997) when the landfill accepted approximately 238 tons of waste which was delivered by 47 trucks (not including pick- up trucks). The number of trucks and associated hourly noise levels were adjusted downwards to reflect 190 tons and upwards to reflect 295 tons using an assumed average load of 3.75 tons per truck. During the critical pre-7:00 a.m. period, the 190-ton scenario assumes two truck passby events, and the 295-ton scenario assumes four such events. The method used to evaluate the deletion of the 8:00 a.m. time restriction involved shifting hourly truck volumes and associated hourly noise levels towards the 7:00 a.m. hour. The number of trucks that would be affected was assumed to be six based on information provided by the haulers for the cities of Willits and Fort Bragg, which have expressed their interest in being allowed to dump prior to 8:00 a.m. Of these six trucks, it is assumed that two would access Vichy Springs Road prior to 7:00 a.m. since the short-term noise measurement indicated that some trucks access that road prior to 7:00 a.m. under existing conditions. It is noted that if all of these trucks were to access Vichy Springs Road after 7:00 a.m., e.g., by modifying the time restriction to 7:15 a.m. rather than deleting it entirely, the effect on Ldn noise levels would be zero. This is because, in terms of the Ldn noise descriptor, there is no difference between noise Ukiah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II-10 Environmental Science Associates II. NOISE generated between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and the same noise generated, e.g., between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. In contrast, noise generated prior to 7:00 a.m. has a disproportionate effect on Ldn values. (Mathematically, the Ldn descriptor treats one truck passby event prior to 7:00 a.m. as equivalent to 10 truck passby events after 7:00 a.m.) The noise impact analysis did not further examine the effects of the 6:00 a.m. starting time that occurs on days following holidays because this only occurs approximately nine times per year, and the effect of a small number of trucks arriving before 7:00 a.m. has been considered in the analyses in this Supplemental EIR. The project examined in this Supplemental EIR is already a worst-case scenario because the 295-TPD disposal rate examined would only occur infrequently, on peak days. Furthermore, the 6:00 a.m. starting time is permitted in the City's existing SWFP, and the proposed project does not include a revision to these hours. (And, as noted in the Introduction, the City's original operating permit for the landfill permitted a 5:00 a.m. starting time both following holidays and every Tuesday.) As noted in the previous paragraph, the noise analysis for new service areas at 7:00 a.m. analyzed trucks from new service areas arriving between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. Although it was assumed that they would arrive just before 7:00 a.m., the mathematical treatment in the Ldn is the same for trucks .arriving at any time between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. Based on the results shown in Table 11-4, the potential effect of accommodating a disposal rate of 295 tons per day would be an increase in roadside noise values of approximately 3.1 Ldn relative to the 98 tons per day disposal rate baseline scenario. With elimination of the MMRP measure, the increase would be approximately 3.6 Ldn rather than 3.1 Ldn. The resulting noise level associated with the maximum increase in waste disposal over the baseline of 98 TPD would therefore be below the 5-Ldn significance threshold and would also be considered "normally acceptable" under the County's noise compatibility guidelines. Thus noise from waste haul trucks would not be a significant effect of the project. Mitigation Measure II-l: None required. Impact II-2: Noise from operation of heavy-duty equipment at the landfill would increase noise in the vicinity of the working face. (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT) The Final EIR for the City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision (Final EIR) estimates that the project-related increase in hourly average noise levels at noise-sensitive uses in the vicinity from operation of heavy equipment at the landfill would be approximately 1 dBA and that the resultant noise level would be less than the applicable compatibility criteria (Environmental Science Associates, 1996). Based on those estimates, the Final EIR characterizes the noise impact at Vichy Springs Resort from equipment operation as less-than-significant. Increases in the daily amount of waste accepted at the landfill does not necessarily translate into increases in noise during any given hour but does translate into increases in the amount of time Uldah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II-11 Environmental Science Associates II. NOISE equipment would be in use over the course of the work day. Therefore, the effect of an increase in the daily disposal rate is characterized more accurately in terms of changes in Loin rather than in terms of changes in hourly average noise levels (i.e., Leq). As a consequence, the significance criterion used herein to evaluate landfill equipment noise is the Ldn-based criterion used to evaluate landfill truck noise along Vichy Springs Road. Noise measurements taken at the landfill's "working face" indicate that landfill equipment noise generates approximately 65.5 Ldn at a distance of 100 feet on a day when the disposal rate is 250 tons per day. Using that measurement as a reference value with which to estimate noise levels at other disposal rates leads to the following estimates for landfill equipment noise at 100 feet from the working face: Disposal Rate Estimated Ldn at 100 feet' 50 tons per day 58.6 98 tons per day 61.6 190 tons per day 64.4 295 tons per day 66.3 Assuming an attenuation rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance and topographic shielding of Vichy Springs Resort of 5 dBA, the noise from landfill equipment would be approximately 35 Ldn at Vichy Springs Resort, assuming a disposal rate of 295 tons per day.3 This estimate accounts for distance attenuation based on the location of the working face as of May 1998 and for topographic shielding. In the future, the working face is expected to head in an easterly direction. At the location where the working face would be closest to Vichy Springs Resort, landfill equipment noise would be approximately 40 Ldn, once again assuming a disposal rate of 295 tons per day. Viewed in isolation, landfill equipment noise level at 295 tons per day would be approximately 7 Ldn higher than landfill equipment noise at 50 tons per day; however, when viewed in context with other noise sources (particularly truck traffic on Vichy Springs Road), the incremental contribution from landfill equipment noise would be negligible. For example, the combination of 40 Ldn, which would be the maximum landfill equipment contribution to noise levels at Vichy Springs Resort, with 54 Ldn, which would be the maximum truck noise impact along Vichy Springs Road (with implementation of identified mitigation), results in an overall noise level of 54.2 Loin. Thus, noise from landfill equipment would not be a significant effect of the project. Mitigation Measure II-2: None required. The assumption of 5 dBA reduction from topographic shielding is probably much lower than that actually provided by the hills in the project vicinity. Observations made near the landfill entrance in May 1998 revealed that landfill equipment noise was inaudible with the exception of barely-perceptible noise from back-up beepers. Landfill equipment noise at Vichy Springs Report would be even lower than that observed at the landfill entrance. Ukiah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II-12 Environmental Science Associates II. NOISE REFERENCES - Noise The Company of Eric Jay Toll, City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Draft EIR, prepared for the City of Ukiah, July 1994. Environmental Science Associates, City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Environmental Impact Report, Response to Comments Addendum, prepared for the City of Ukiah, January 1996. Governor's Office of Planning and Research, CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act Statutes and GuMelines, May 1997. Mendocino County, Mendocino County General Plan, 1993. Ukiah Landfill Draft Supplemental EIR II-13 Environmental Science Associates RESORT October 7, 1998 City Council City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, Ca. 95482 Vtchy Springs Resort & Inn B605 Vtchy Springs Road, Uklah, Ca_Iff, Telephone (707) 462-9515 · Fax (707 OCT 7 1998 CITY OF UKIAH CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT REF: Serious Concern Over Early AM Noise (6, 7 and 8 AM) Dear City Council Members: I wish to bring to your attention the proposed expansion of landfill operations and changing the hours of operation for the convenience of new trash haulers will furt. her impact negatively the benign historic tourism business at Vichy Springs. What is the legitimate reason to expand these hours and causing further disruption to Vichy Springs? One of the major conditions of the city's previous EIR and permit ( for the problem of noise generated by the expanded and doubling of the landfill operation) was to mitigate noise at the resort for sleeping guests. This required the "new" dump haulers to arrive after 8:00 AM. Any earlier arrivals will further impact the resort business and will further destroy our relationship with first time guests who may never return. There is no justification to change this in the current SEIR. Our request is ibr you not to approve the expansion of hours. If you do implement the new hours we ask that the city utilize the alternate road as is described in the SEIR which would address many of our problems with the dump operation. I attach a letter and information that further addresses these and other concerns. Sincerely, Gilbert Ashoff Proprietor RESORT ViclW Springs Resort & hm 2605 Vichy Springs Road, Uktah, California 95482 Telephone (707) 462-9515 · Fax (707) 462,9516 October 7, 1998' City Council of Ukiah Dear Council Members: I wish to protest this expansion of the hours of the landfill on two bases. Very simply the hours were established by the prior E.I.R to mitigate the additional noise caused by the previous expansion of the landfill. We already have many complaints from our guests because of the additional 7 a.m. and sometimes earlier arrivals of trucks at your dump. The second is as a neighbor the city should have some obligation to conduct its business in a forthright manner. This request is simply for the convenience of one your haulers. This hauler has been doing just fine with things the way they are. Please le/tve it alone. We do not want to have to seek legal protection for our guests and our business as we have had to in the past years. Please send the EIR back to your staff and have them prepare an economic profile on the alternative road (your staff.has told me this has never been done simply a "cursory study as to cuts and fills and that it all worked" but they never heard from the public works director again.) I have outlined the defects I have noticed in the EIR. We are a noise sensitive Country Inn Operation, not a motel on a freeway. The city has contint,ally added noise to the point where we are explaining to our guests the problems we have with the city. For once it would be nice for the city to be a considerate neighbor. It will not hurt your hauler economically to leave it status quo. It will hurt our historic business economically if you allow your hauler to arrive before 8 a.m. more guests will choose not to return. I refer to my letter of August 9, 1998 where numerous items either went unanswered or were not answered completely. DD 1. I reiterate the changes in hours will substantially change the noise effects on Vichy Springs. This is why this was put in your previous application to the state and the expansion permit was granted on that basis. A judge upheld this as valid if I recall though we protested. DD4. The noise analysis is faulty because it does not recognize that the city is already causing Vichy Springs to have problems that will be made much worse by more trucks arriving and more subsequent CAT operations at 7 a.m. and earlier. DD5. Where are the cost estimates? Where are the potentially significant impacts identified and addressed? This study is deficient as the alternative appears to have not been thoroughly examined. City s.t,.affhas informed me they did studies of the road construction and all appeared O.K.. They never heard from the director again. This study does not appear in ttlis EIR nor do the effects and their analysis. This dump has cut and filled at will everywhere else on the site. What possible difference could a short road make? On page 111-5 it is mentioned a hydrologist has not looked at this alternative. W~.y not? DD8. Specific~tlly a limit was put on new haulers to prevent additional noise at Vichy Springs Resort and to try'to disthbute this noise to later in the A.M. Please realize our guests are not all awake at 7 a.m.. This is a Country Resort and Inn not a Business Motel. DD. The truck haul noise has never been of the magnitude it is now (since 1955). The city has constantly increased and made earlier the noise to the point of causing the resort economic damage. This added increase is not necessary for the city to operate. It is simply for the convenience of the hauler. The plus 10 to obviate a quiet country setting certainly applies to Vichy Springs. This draf~ SE1R is, as usual, rigged for the city, by the city. This is a defect in the SEIR. DD 12. I repeat Vichy Springs is a remote Country Inn not a motel by the freeway. It is mis- classified in the SEIR. This is another defect. DD14. CEQA requires state Historic Sites be protected and not sacrificed to accommodate the convenience of a garbage hailer. Enough said. DDI5. I repeat the existing noise is not "less than significant" and the proposed noise will only exacerbate the problem. Please be reasonable and leave the hours the way they are. Please do not force us to once again attempt to get a judge to protect our business. We are not protesting the expanded overall receipt of garbage just the early morning hours and of receipt of same and that the alternative road was not fully in investigated and presented to the council as is required by the CEQA. Sincerely, Gilbert Ashoff Proprietor 300 S~.~,., ~VE., UKIAH, C_~ 95482-5400 · Al)MIN. 707/463-6200 · PUBUC SAJ:ETY 463-6242/6274 · · FAX # 707/463-6204 · October 16, 1998 RE: NOTICE OF DETERMINATION FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL PERMIT REVISION SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SEIR) Dear Interested Party: Enclosed for your use and information is a copy of the Notice of Determination filed with the Office of Planning and Research, and the Mendocino County Clerk pertaining to the recent certification of the referenced Supplemental Environmental Impact Report by the City Council on October 7, 1998. Also enclosed are copies of the certifying resolution and resolution making the findings. The City Council directed Staff to submit an application for a revision to the 1996 Solid Waste Facilities Permit increasing the maximum daily limit of 190 tons to 295 tons. The City Council elected not to change the morning hours available to the commercial garbage haulers who serve the new service area (Willits and Fort Bragg) even though it was determined in the certified SEIR that there would be no significant noise impacts if the hauler for the new service area was allowed access to the Landfill beginning at 7:00 a.m. Tuesday through Friday as is currently available to the garbage haulers serving the old service area. Sincerely, Director of Public Works/City'Engineer cc; Candace Horsley, City Manager David J. Rapport, City Attorney RHK:kk R: ! ~_AND FILL LSHARPE.ND M.E.M.O.R.A.N.D.U.M DATE: October 16, 1998 TO: Landfill File FROM' Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer RE: NOTICE OF DETERMINATION FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL PERMIT REVISION SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT On October 15, 1998, the referenced Notice of Determination was filed with the Mendocino County Clerk and a copy was mailed to the Office of Planning and Research. Copies of the Determination along with copies of the certifying resolution and the resolution making findings were mailed to the following organizations and individuals on October 16, 1998. . Department of Public Health, Division of Environmental Health, County of Mendocino. 2. California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region. 3. Gilbert Ashoff, Vichy Springs Resort. 4. Mr. and Mrs. R. Sharpe. 5. Emil M. Koledin. RHK:kk R:I~LANDFILL MDETERMINATION.NOTICE Notice of Determip ;on To.' X Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 From: City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 X County Clerk County of Mendocino Courthouse Ukiah, California 95482 Subject: 1998-E0101 Recorded at the request of CITY OF UKIAH 10/15/1998 02:54P Fee: 0.00 No of Pages:O OFFICIAL RECORDS Mendocino County, CA Marsha Young Wharf f, Clerk-Recorder Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code Project Title: City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 93102051 Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works (707) 463-6280 State Clearinghouse Number Lead Agency Area Code/Telephone/Extension (If Submitted to Clearinghouse) (Contact Person) 3 miles southeast of Ukiah at the end of Vichy Springs Road, Mendocino County Project Location (include County) Project Description: Authorization to file an application for an amendment to the 1996 Solid Waste Facilities Permit No. 23-AA-019 for the City of Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site with the Local Enforcement Agency, Mendocino County Department of Public Health. Amendment would change the permitted daily peak capacity from 190 TPD to 295 TPD. The daily average capacity of 190 TPD will remain the same This is to advise that the .City of Ukiah has approved the above described project on October 7, 1998. (Lead Agency) (Date) and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1. The project [ will X will not] have a significant effect on the environment. 2. X An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEOA. m A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEOA. 3. Mitigation measures [ were X were not] made a condition of approval of the project. 4. A Statement of Overriding Considerations [ was X was not] adopted for this project. 5. Findings [ X were were not] made pursuant t~ the provisions of CEOA. This is to certify that the Final Supplement EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval are available to the General Public at: All CEQA documents are available at the City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah California, 95482. Signature (Public Agency) Date received for filing at OPR: //~'?/~'-/~Z~Public Works Director/City Engineer (D~e) / (Title) 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1~. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 99-19 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH CERTIFYING FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR A REVISION TO THE SOLID WASTE FACILITIES PERMIT FOR THE UKIAH LANDFILL AS ADEQUATE AND COMPLETE WHEREAS, . . . . In conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines), the City has circulated a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR) for proposed revisions to the Solid Waste Facilities Permit issued on August 8, 1996, for the City of Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site. The SDEIR was prepared by Environmental Science Associates (ESA) and it is dated June 1998; and The DSEIR was circulated to all interested public entities and private persons and made available for public review and comment as required by CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines; and The DSEIR has become the Final Subsequent Impact Report (FSEIR) which includes the Response to Comments Addendum prepared by ESA and dated September 16, 1998; and The FSEIR has incorporated by reference previously prepared environmental documentation in support of the project which are the "City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Draft Environmental Impact Report" prepared by The Company of Eric J. Toll, AICP, Inc., dated July 15, 1994, "City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report" prepared by the Company of Eric Jay Toll, AICP, Inc., dated May 1, 1995, "City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Environmental Impact Response to Comments Addendum", prepared by Environmental Science Associates dated January 18, 1996, and "City of Ukiah Landfill Permit Revision Environmental Impact Report Addendum (Final)", prepared Resolution No. 99-19 Page I of 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 25 by Environmental Science Associates, dated January 22, 1997; and 5. After the public comment period and in connection with the noticed public hearing on the Project and the SEIR, the City received additional comments after the public comment period had expired; and 6. The City Council has chosen to consider those comments ,and the responses thereto; and . Under applicable provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, no changes to the project or additional information requires recirculation of the SEIR or FSEIR; and The City Council finds that the SEIR for the proposed revisions to the Solid Waste Facilities Permit issued August 8, 1996, for the Ukiah Landfill adequately discusses the potential environmental impacts by reason of Project Implementation and it fully complies with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines; and . The City Council has fully and independently reviewed, considered, and analyzed the contents of the SEIR prior to approving the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the SEIR is hereby certified as adequate and complete, and adopted as the Final SEIR for the proposed revisions to the Solid Waste Facilities Permit for the Ukiah Landfill. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Chavez. ~ ~ ' ~h~eridan Malone, Mayor / ATTEST: . / Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ~ ~1~ ~/1~ ~ ~ Resolution No. 99-19 Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 99-20 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21081 AND CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ("CEQA") GUIDELINES SECTION 15091 IN CONNECTION WITH THE DECISION TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE LOCAL ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND THE CALI FORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD TO AMEND THE SOLID WASTE FACILITIES PERMIT FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE AT THE END OF VICHY SPRINGS ROAD IN MENDOCINO COUNTY. WHEREAS: 1. The City Council has certified as adequate and complete a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ("SEIR") for proposed amendments to the Solid Waste Facilities Permit for the City of Ukiah solid waste disposal site. The SEIR consists of a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, dated June 1998 ("SDEIR"), and a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, including a response to comments, dated September 16, 1998 ("FSEIR"); and 2. The proposed waste facilities permit amendments would increase the permitted maximum daily limit on refuse deposited in the landfill from 190 tons to 295 tons on any particular day. (This amendment .will be identified herein as "the Project" or "the Proposed Change"); and 3. The SEIR also evaluates the potential environmental effects and the feasibility of constructing a new landfill entrance along the southwesterly property line of the adjacent Ukiah Rifle S:\U\Resos98\LNDFLL.seir.wpd October 13, 1998 i and Pistol Club property ("the New Landfill Entrance alternative"); and 4. The New Landfill Entrance alternative was a proposal which the City agreed to consider as a potential mitigation, when it evaluated the environmental impacts of the last amendments to its Solid Waste Facilities permit approved by the California Integrated Waste Management Board ("CIWMB") on July 30 ,1996 ("Previous Amendments"); and · 5. In evaluating the environmental effects of the Previous Amendments the City prepared and circulated in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and its implementing regulations environmental documents ("Previous Environmental Documents") which are described and discussed in the RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21081 AND CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ("CEQA") GUIDELINES SECTION 15091 IN CONNECTION WITH THE DECISION TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE LOCAL ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD TO AMEND THE SOLID WASTE FACILITIES PERMIT FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE AT THE END OF VICHY SPRINGS ROAD IN MENDOCINO COUNTY adopted on February 7, 1996 ("Previous Findings"); and 6. The Previous Environmental Documents evaluated all environmental effects of increasing the peak daily disposal rate at the landfill from 190 to 295 tOns, except for associated noise S:\U\Resos98\LNDFLL.seir.wpd October 13, 1998 impacts, which are specifically evaluated in the SEIR; and 7. The SEIR has determined that the Proposed Change will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and 8. The SEIR has determined that while the New Landfill Access Road alternative could reduce noise impacts at the adjacent Vichy Springs Resort, the noise impacts associated with the Proposed Change is insignificant. Moreover, the New Landfill Access Road alternative would produce potentially significant noise impacts on the residents of the Vichy Springs Subdivision and would have other potentially significant adverse impacts particularly on biological resources, slope stability and downstream water quality. Finally, the SEIR determined that the cost of constructing the New Landfill Access Road is excessive in relation to the time it could be used and its environmental benefits, making the alternative infeasible; and 9. The City Council has determined to approve the Project; and 10. The City Council has based its decision on the record which includes those items identified in ~ublic Resources Code Section 21167.6(e), including, but not limited to, the SEIR, the Previous Environmental Documents, the documents described in paragraph 7 of the Previous Findings, and the entire landfill files; and 11. The record of proceedings upon which this decision is based, including the Landfill file, is maintained in the office of the Public Works Director/City Engineer, Civic Center, 300 Seminary S:\U\Resos98\LNDFLL.setr.wpd October 13, 1998 Avenue, Ukiah, CA. 95482, as the custodian of the record, and is available for public inspection upon request of the Public Works Director/City Engineer or his designee; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah finds as follows. 1. The EIR was prepared and made available for public review and comment in full compliance with the procedures set forth in CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. 2. Both the SEIR and the Project were considered by the City Council at a public meeting on October 7, 1998. 3. The City Council has considered all documents submitted during the public comment period for the SEIR and all testimony presented during its meeting as well as the SEIR, Agenda Summary prepared for the October 7, 1998, City Council meeting, and the Landfill File. The Agenda Summary is incorporated herein by reference. The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed this resolution and the SEIR. 4. The Project is described in the DSEIR at pp. I-7 to I-8. This description is incorporated herein by reference. 5. The SEIR evaluated the impacts of the Project itself as well as its impacts in combination with impacts from past, present and probable future projects. The SEIR determined that the noise impacts from the project are less than significant. Those findings are incorporated herein by reference. No measures are proposed or required to mitigate these less than significant effects. 6. The Previous Environmental Documents and the Previous S:\U\Resos98\LNDFLL.seir.wpd October 13, 1998 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: S:\U\Resos98\LNDFLL.seir.wpd October 13, 1998 Findings determined that impacts other than noise impacts from the Project are insignificant as mitigated. The discussion of those 'impacts, the mitigations and the mitigation monitoring program in the Previous Environmental Documents, including the mitigation monitoring plan as amended on January 15, 1997, and the Previous Findings are incorporated herein by reference. 7. For the reasons stated in paragraph 8 of the Recitals to this Resolution, the New Landfill Entrance alternative is rejected as infeasible and not a preferred alternative. (See SDEIR at pp. III-1 to III-11, which is incorporated herein.) The discussion of other alternatives in the Previous Findings are incorporated herein. 8. The Proposed Change have no effect on the City Council's previous finding of overriding consideration and no findings of overriding consideration are required for the Proposed Change, because they will have less than significant effects, including less than significant effects on historic resources. 9. Based on these Findings, the City Council hereby authorizes the Public Works Director to submit an application to the LEA and CIWMB and take all necessary steps to implement the Project. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October 1998 by the following roll call vote: Council Members Kelly, Mastin and Mayor Malone Council Member Ashiku Council Member C havez ~eridan Maldne/layor 5 /o ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ~ of Ukiah, California Certifie~ To Be A True and Exact Copy S: \U\Resos98\LNDFLL. seir.wpd October 13, 1998 City of Uklah 'D Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report July 15, 1994 State Clearinghouse Number. SCH#93102051 DRAFT EIR Page IV. 78 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects -:- Noise I. NOISE 1. Introduction TfaHE LANDFILL OPERATION is adjacent to undeveloped range land and is in close proximity to single mily dwellings and the Vichy Springs Resort and Spa. Access to the existing landfill is along Vichy Springs Road. Typical operations at the Ukiah Landfill include haul trucks delivering waste to the landfill; the waste being dumped at a designated disposal area; a rubber tired loader pushing refuse off the pad in the winter, and a track loader or the D8N pushing refuse off the pad during normal operational periods; a Case front-end loader being used for spreading waste; a CAT 627B scraper stockpiling cover dirt adjacent to the landfill's working face; a CAT 826C compactor rolling over and compact- ing the covered waste; the DSN applying cover material, ripping and pushing the scraper when needed. Operations at the borrow area include a CAT D8N bulldozer which is used for ripping material and pushing the scraper; the scraper excavates the ripped material and transports the material to the disposal site. Major noise sources associated with the landfill operations include truck traffic along local roadways, and on-site operations associated with heavy equipment. Throughout this document various descrip- tors of noise levels will be used. Noise Appendix A provides detailed definitions for each of the descriptors. Explanation 4 summarizes the most common terms used in the environmental impact report. 2. Setting a. Ambient Noise Levels To quantify existing noise levels at the project site, and in the vicinity of the project site, BBA conducted two sets of continuous 24-hour noise level measurements, and three sets of short-term noise level measurements on Novem- Explanation 4: Noise definitions Ldn: Ldn is a composite 24-hour average noise level. This descriptor applies a + I 0 dB penalty to noise levels which occur during the nighttime period (I Opm to 7am). This descriptor is typically considered to provide good correlation for annoyance due to transportation related noise sources (i.e. roadway traffic, aircraft operations, and to a lesser extent railroad operations). The Ldn descriptor is the foundation for evaluating noise impacts in the Mendocino County General Plan Noise Element. Ldn may not be the most appropriate descriptor for evaluating noise impacts associated with on-site activities at the Ukiah Landfill. The landfill is open to the public approximately 9 hours per day. If one applies the Ldn descriptor, the noise levels due to landfill operations will be averaged over 24 hours, and the potential impact or potential for annoyance will be artificially discounted. Therefore, throughout this report, only noise impacts associated with roadway traffic will be evaluated using the Ldn descriptor. Laq: Leq is also an average noise level. The/eq, or average sound level, can be calculated for any time period. Unlike the Ldn, it does not apply a penalty to noise events during the nighttime period. For the purposes of this report, as described later, the Leq, or average sound level, for a one-hour period will be used for ev_aluating noise levels associated with on-site activities at the landfill. Ls0:Ls0 is the noise level which is exceeded 5096 of the time. For instance, an Ls0 of 60 dB fundamentally states that a noise level of 60 dB is exceeded 5096 of the time during the measurement period. The Ls0 sound level typically represents an average nois~level, while discounting occasional louder noise events of short duration. Lm~x: The Lmax is the maximum noise level recorded during the noise measurement period. ber 16-17, 1993 (See Figure 21 on page IV-79 for location of monitoring sites, and Figure 22 on page IV-82 for 24-hour results). Noise measurement equipment consisted of Larson Davis Laboratories (LDL) Models 700B and 870B precision integrating sound level meters, and a B&K Type 2218 precision integrating sound level meter. The equipment was calibrated in the field to ensure accuracy of the measurements. Envi~0nmenlal Impacl Repofl p~epared by The Company of Eric Jay ToH AlCe, Inc. · 1050 East William- Suite 407 * Carson City, Nevada 89701 · 702 · 883' 8987 City of Uklah -I' Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report July I S, 1994 State Clearinghouse Number. SCH#93102051 DRAFT EIR Pa~e IV. 79 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects .:- Noise VICI'P( SPRINGS · ..,. ,,, '\ RESORT NOISE MEASUREMENT LOOATI, Continuom 24-hour Locatior& I'1 Short-term Ambient NoLse Hiul Truck Locltions O Located in El Dorado Estate~ ouuide figure boundm7 ~ Figure 2 1: Noise monitoring sites Envif0nmental Impacl Report prepared byTbe Compaa1~ of Erie Jal, Toll AlC~', lac. · 1050 F.a~t Will;am- Suite 407 ® Ca.on City, Nevada 8970! · 702 · 883' 8987 City of Uklah 4' Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report July I 5, 1994 State Clearinghouse Number. SCH#93102051 DRAFT EIR Pa~e IV. 80 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects -:- Noise The results of the continuous 24-hour measurement are shown graphically in Figure 22. The measured average daytime Leq values at the continuous monitoring sites ranged between 30 and 60 dB, and the measured average nighttime Leq values at the continuous monitoring sites ranged between 26 and 52 dB. ~lT~e measured Ldn at Site I was 52.7 dB, and the measured Ldn at Site 2 was 52.1 dB. The results of the short-term noise measurements are shown in Table 35. ___A Wes__tboundaryo_flandfill__,~__settlin__gponds____. !4:0__0 ~.0 "~'~ III B El Dorado Estates. Corner of Ridgeview and Fawnwood. 146:~ ~'~ C El Dorado Estates. Corner of El Doardo and Ridgeview. :561~) ~90'53 The continuous 24-hour noise level monitor at Site 1 was located approximately 450 feet from the borrow area, and approximately 500 feet from the disposal area. During the noise monitoring period, measured noise levels at Site I were dominated by roadway truck traffic, and on- site operations between the hours of 6:00 am and 5:00 pm. Measured noise levels between the hours of 5:00 pm and 6:00 am were primarily due to wind, aircraft overflights, and distant roadway traffic. The continuous noise level monitor at Site 2 was located approximately 50 feet from Vichy Springs Road, on the property of Vichy Springs Resort. During the noise monitoring period, measured noise levels at Site 2 were dominated by roadway truck traffic between the hours of 6:00 am and 4:00 pm. Measured noise levels between the hours of 4:00 pm and 6:00 am were due to wind, local roadway traffic, people talking and parking lot activities at the Vichy Springs Resort. The dominant noise sources at the short-term monitoring site labeled "Site A" were associated with on-site heavy equipment (Refer to Table 34). The dominant noise sources at the short-term monitoring sites labeled Site '~B' and "C"in the E1 Dorado Estates subdivision were due to local roadway traffic and activities occurring within the subdivision. Activities associated with the landfill operation were not audible at Sites "B" and "C" during the noise measurements. b. Traffic Noise Traffic on Vichy Springs Road contributes to the area noise environment. BBA employs the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) for the prediction of traffic noise levels. The FHWA model is the analytical method currently favored for traffic noise prediction by most state and local agencies, including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The model is based upon the CALVENO noise emission factors for automobiles, medium trucks and heavy trucks, with consideration given to vehicle volume, speed, roadway configuration, distance to the receiver, and the acoustical characteristics of the site. The FHWA model was developed to predict hourly Leq values for free- flowing traffic conditions, and is considered to be accurate within 1.5 dB. To predict Ldn values, it is necessary to determine the day/night distribution of traffic and adjust the traffic volume input data to yield an equivalent hourly traffic volume. Envir0nmenlal Impacl Reporl piepa~ed byThe Compaa? of Eric .lay Toll *1c1', lac. · 1050 Fast William. Suite 407 * Car~on City, Nevada 89701 * 702 · 883- 8987 City of Uklah -I' Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report July 15, 1994 State Clearinshouse Number. SCH#93102051 DRAFT EIR Pa~e IV. 81 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects *:- Noise Existing and future traffic data used for estimating traffic noise levels was provided by Anderson Transportation Engineers. The day/night traffic split data used in the analysis was based upon continuous 24-hour noise level measurements conducted at Site #2, and BBA file data. Truck mix percentages were based upon data provided by Anderson Transportation Engi- neers and BBA file data. Noise Appendix B contains the as- sumptions used in the traffic noise modeling. The results of the traffic noise modeling for existing conditions are shown in Table 35. Vichy Sprinffs Rd. Resort Entrance - Landfill 50. I Resort Entrance - Redemeyer Rd. 55.3 Redemeyer Rd. - Russian River 57.9 Redemeyer Rd. North of Vi~h,y Springs Rd., 56.8 · IO 23 34 28 22 49 72 61 c. Haul Truck Noise · Residents at the Vichy Springs Resort cited haul truck noise levels ;as a primary noise source which they considered annoying. Primarily, excessive travel speed along Vichy Springs Road, and early morning operations were the major factors which annoyed residents. 36: Summary of measured haul of measured haul truck noise Too dark outside to identify the vehicle and operator. $Truck not associated with landfill operation: Noise levels due to haul trucks along Vichy Springs Road were also measured along Vichy Springs Road. Originally, BBA conducted noise level measurements of individual truck passbys on November 16-17, 1993. Noise level measurements were conducted at the continuous monitoring Site #2. During the 24-hour period, approximately 65 truck passbys were measured. Noise levels due to truck passbys ranged between 70 and 85 dB SEL at a distance of 50 feet from the roadway. [nvii0nmental Impacl Rep0fl prepared byThe Company of Eric Jay Toll .Icl', lac. * 1050 E~t William' Suite 40'/· Canon City, Nevada 89701 · 702 · 883. 8987 City of Ukiah 4' Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report July 15, 1994 State Clearin~qhouse Number. SCH#9310205 DRAFT EIR PaRe IV. 82 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects .:- Noise 8o Measured Hourly Noise Levels November 16-17, 1993 Site 1 ,Sound Level. dB 70 60 6O 40 3O 20 ' 4pm 5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I 0 7 8 gpm 10 11 12 I 2 3am 4 5 8 7 8 gain 10 11 12 1 2 3 )m Time of D~y L keq --'--Lmax L50 ~ I I I Ldn - 52.7 dB Ld · 64.2 dB Ln * 37.3 dB 80 Measured Hourly Noise Levels November 16-17, 1993 Site 2 Sound Level. dB 70 60 50 40 30 20 3pm 4 5 O Ldn - 62.1 dB Ld - 51.7 dB Ln - 42.5 dB I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I ! I I I I 7 8pm 9 10 11 12 1 2am 3 4 5 6 7 8am 9 10 11 12 1 2pm Time of Day I~ Leq ' Lmax. --"'-' L50 i '1 Figure 22: lqeasured hourly noise levels Envil0nmental Impacl Report pfepa[ed by The Compao? of [?tie Ja? Toll kILT, loc. · 1050 East WiJLiam · Suite 407 * Carson City, Nevada 89701 · 702 · 883' 8987 City of Uklah .1' Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report July' IS, 1994 State Clearinshouse Number. SCH#93102051 DRAFT EIR Page IV. 83 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects .:- Noise Based upon concern raised by a local resident regarding the possibility of truck drivers purposely driving slower, due to know]edge that the noise study was being conducted, BBA conducted follow-up truck noise measurements on December 7, 1993. Noise leve! measurements were conducted ut two separate locations as shown on Figure 21. Equipment used for the noise level measurements included two LDL Model 820B precision integrating sound level meters. The equipment was programmed to collect single events exceeding 60 dB for a duration of more than 3 seconds. During the noise level measurements, detailed notes regarding time of event, truck operator and direction of travel were recorded, and were correlated with measured noise levels at each monitoring location. During the second measurement period, haul-truck traffic noise measurements began at approximately 5:00 am and continued until approximately 11:30 am. The purpose of the truck traffic noise level measurements was to describe typical noise exposure due to haul-truck operations. Table 36 provides a summary of truck traffic noise levels during the measurement period on December 7, 1993. 3. Existing Landfill Operation Noise Levels Existing landfill operations can occur anywhere throughout the project site. Currently, the main operations occur as described on Figure 21. However, at any time, the covering of waste can occur closer to the west end of the landfill, which may cause noise levels in the E1 Dorado Estates subdivision to be higher than those which were measured during the ambient noise survey. Therefore, BBA conducted noise level measurements associated with heavy equipment at the landfill, to assist in modeling potential existing noise levels associated with the landfill operations. Table 37 shows measured noise levels for various pieces of equipment operating at the landfill based upon noise level measurements conducted at the landfill, and upon BBA file data for similar pieces of equipment. Scraper and dozer 200 62.5 8.5.0 68.0 @ Excavation site Belly scraper @ . Excavation Site Scraper, Compactor, Haul Truck @ Dump Site Bulldozer Compactor 5O 5O 4O 200 77.1 69.5 74.4 99.9 95.1 78.3 86.0 74.5 82.0 68.0 e Methodology To determine the noise impacts associated with the existing landfill operations, BBA used the Environmental Noise Model (ENM). The ENM is capable of projecting the locations of noise contours for multiple noise sources, accounting for natural topography, ground type, atmospheric conditions, and noise source directionality. Inputs to the ENM were obtained from topographic maps of the area, the Envi[onmental Impacl Repo[I p~ep~ed byTbe Co,,,paay of Erie Ja? Toll Alee, lac. · 1050 East William- Suite 407 · Carson City, Nevada 89701 * 702 · 883' 8987 City of Ukiah 4' Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report July I $, 1994 State Clearinghouse Number. SCH#93102051 DRAFT EIR Pa~e IV- 8~, IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects 4- Noise existing topography for the landfill, existing operations at the landfill, and the measured equipment noise levels associated with the landfill operations. ~ To allow comparison of the modeled landfill operations noise levels to an hourly Leq noise level standard, inputs to the model were prepared in terms of the hourly average sound level (Leq) due to equipment operations. Two scenarios were evaluated for existing conditions. The first scenario includes operations at the east end of the landfill, as they currently occur. The second scenario assumes that dumping and compacting operations occur at the west end of the landfill. Noise Appendix Figure 3 shows the results of the ENM calculations for landfill heavy equipment operations as they currently exist. The results indicate that some residential uses to the east would be exposed tn heavy equipment hourly noise levels between 30 and 35 dB Leq. Based upon the analysis, the worst case noise levels would occur at the Vichy Springs Resort. Noise Appendix Figure 4 shows the results of the ENM calculations for landfill heavy equipment operations assuming that the existing waste disposal and compacting occur at the west end of the of the landfill. The results indicate that some residential uses to the west would be exposed to heavy equipment hourly noise levels between 35 and 40 dB Leq. Based upon the analysis, the worst case noise levels would occur at the E1 Dorado Estates subdivision. 4. Impacts a. Thresholds The significance of noise impacts may be determined by comparison of overall noise levels to applicable federal, state or local noise level standards, and by the expected change in ambient noise levels which will occur as a result of the project. The overall noise levels may be considered significant if the project results in noise levels which exceed applicable noise standards by 0.5 dB or more. The Mendocino County Noise Element establishes an acceptable land use compatibility criterion of 60 dB Ixin for exterior noise levels in the outdoor activity areas of new single family residential developments. An exterior noise level 65 dB Ldn is considered acceptable for multi-family residential and transient lodging uses. Expected reactions to changes in ambient noise levels have been reported by Egan and others for persons who are exposed to noise sources that are quantified by metrics that define short-term exposure such as the hourly average (Leq). The Leq descriptor is typically used to describe noise impacts due to industrial operations, machinery and other sources that are not transportation-related. According to Egan and others, an increase of at least 3 dB is usually required before people will perceive a change in noise levels, and an increase of 5 dB is required before the change will be clearly noticeable (See Table 38) The common practice has been to assume that a minimally perceptible increase of 3 dB rel~resents a significant increase in ambient noise levels. For the purposes of this report~, noise impacts associated with on-site activities at the landfill will be evaluated using the hourly Leq descriptor. Envi~0nmenlallmpaclRe~flp~epa~ed byThe Coml, an? of EricJa? Toll.~, lac.' 1050 East Willi,m~-Suite 407. CarsonCity, Nevada 89701.~88~87 City of Uklah -I' Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report July 15. 1994 State Clearinghouse Number. SCH~93102051 DRAFT EIR Pa~e IV. 85 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects .~' Noise II I Imperceptible (Except for Tones:) "~ II ] :: 3 JUst Barely perceptible 2.0 II I ': 6 Clearly Noticeable 't.0 II I ,o ^~ou, TwiCe (or Half') as Loud '10.0 II / tArchi~ectur~ Acoustics, Fl. David E~an, 1988. / I Table 39 is based upon recommendations recently (August 1992) made by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) to provide guidance in the assessment of changes in ambient noise levels resulting from aircraft operations. Their recommendations are based upon studies that relate aircraft noise levels to the percentage of per- sons highly annoyed by the noise. 39: Significance of changes in cumulative noise Although the FICON recommendations : : exposurest were specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts, it has been as- sumed for this analysis that they ar~ applicable to all sources of noise that < 60 dB +S.0 dB or more are described in terms of cumulative noise exposure, such as the Ldn. This 60-65 dB + 3.0 dB or more metric is generally applied to transpor- >65 dB + 1.5 dB or more ration noise sources, and define noise Intera~ency Committee on Noise (FICON) as applied by Brown- exposure in terms of average noise Inc. exposure during a 24-hour period, with a penalty added to noise that occurs during the nighttime period. For the purposes of this report, noise impacts associated with the roadway traffic, including truck traffic, will be evaluated using the Ldn descriptor. b. Traffic Noise Impacts To determine future traffic noise levels with and without the change in allowable daily tonnage, BBA once again employed the FHWA model. Table 40 shows the predicted future traffic noise levels along area roadways. c. Findings Based upon the projected future traffic noise leve]~, it is not anticipated that existing residences will be exposed to exterior noise levels in excess of 60 dB Ldn at the outdoor activity areas. In addktion, it is not anticipated that project related traffic will increase existing noise levels by more than 0.1 dB Ldn. It is anticipated that early morning truck traffic noise along Vichy Springs Road will continue to be a source of annoyance and complaints. 5. Alternatives a. Methodology BBA once again used the ENM to assess future noise levels associated with operations at the landfill. Each of the scenarios assumes that equipment will be operating at the final elevations depicted in the closure plan. This assumes a worst case with the minimum amount of shielding of equipment from Envir0nmenlal Impacl Repod prepared by The Come-,a, of Eric J,? Toll AiC']', lac.. 1050 Ea, t Willi-.',. · Suite 407. Car~on City, Nevada 89701. ?02' 883 '~Z' ~ City of Ukiah '1" Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report Jul), I $, 1994 State Clearir~house Number. SCF!#93102051 DRAFT EIR Page IV- 86 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects -'.- Noise local topography. Locations of the equipment for the two scenarios are similar to those evaluated under existing conditions. The first scenario assumes that a scraper and bulldozer are operating in the '%orrow area" near the east end of the landfill. It was assumed that the bulldozer, scraper and compactor are operating near the southeast end of the landfill, and near the highest elevation of the landfill. The second scenario assumes that the bulldozer, scraper and compactor are operating at the southwest end of the landfill. It was assumed that the scraper and bulldozer continue to operate in the 'q~orrow area" to east. b. Findings Noise Appendix Figure 5 shows the results of the ENM modeling for the f~ture operations, with the waste disposal site located at the southeast portion of the landfill. The results indicate that daytime hourly noise levels near the Vichy Springs Resort will range between 30 and 35 dB Leq, and the noise levels at the nearest residents of the E1 Dorado Estates will range between 30 and 35 dB Leq. Future noise levels due to landfill operations are expected to increase over predicted existing noise levels by approximately 2-3 dB Leq. The predicted noise levels shown in Appendix Figure 5 do not account for the request for an increase in tonnage of waste to be accepted at the Ukiah Landfill. The final elevations on the closure plan are identical to those developed under the existing permit. Noise level data for equipment were based upon noise levels associated with existing operations. Noise Appendix Figure 6 shows the results of the ENM modeling for the future operations, with the waste disposal site located at the southwest portion of the landfill. The results indicate that the daytime hourly noise levels near the Vichy Springs Resort will range between 25 and 30 dB Leq, and the noise levels at the nearest residences of the E1 Dorado Estates will range between 35 and 40 dB Leq. Future noise levels due to landfill operations are expected to increase over predicted existing noise levels by approximately 2-3 dB Leq. The predicted noise levels shown in Noise Appendix Figure 6 do not account for the request for an increase in tonnage of waste to be accepted at the Ukiah Landfill. The final elevations on the closure plan are identical to those developed under the existing permit. Noise level data for equipment were based upon noise levels associated with existing operations. Environmental Impacl Report prepared by The Compaay of E~ic Ja? Toll *ICe, lee. · IO50 East William' Suite 407 · Cat,on City, Nevada 89701 · 702 · 8~3' 8987 City of Uklah -I' Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report DRAFT EIR July 15, 1994 State Clearinj[house Number. SCH#93102051 Pa~e IV · 87 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects ~.- Noise Fable 40: Comparison of noise levels _ · + .> .> Roadway/Segment Vichy Springs Road Resort Entrance - Landfill 50.1 50.2 Resort Entrance - Redemeyer Road 55.3 55.3 59.3 59.3 Redemeyer Road - Russian River 57.9 57.9 60.3 60.3 Rederneyer Road North of Vichy Spr'in'g's Road '' Vichy Springs Road Resort Entrance - Landfill 10 10 Resort Entrance - Redemeyer Road 23 23 42 42 Redemeyer Road - Russian River 34 34 48 48 Rederneyer Road North of Vichy Springs Road Vichy Springs Road Resort Entrance - Landfill ' 22 22 Resort Entrance - Redemeyer Road 49 49 89 89 Redemeyer Road - Russian River 72 73 104 104 Redemeyer Road North of Vichy Springs Road 61 I 61 I 62 I 62 I 6. Future Landfill Operations With Project Noise Levels a. Methodolo~ To determine noise impacts associated with future landfill operations, it is anticipated that overall heavy equipment operations during a typical hour will need to increase commensurate with the increase in daily tonnage accepted at the landfill. Based upon the increase in daily tonnage of waste from the existing 98 tons per day59 to the anticipated 190 tons per day, the following formula can be used to calculate the increase in noise levels: Leq = 10 log 190/98, dB, where Leq is the increase in hourly noise levels based upon 10 times the logarithm of future tonnage (190 tons) divided by existing tonnage (98 tons). Based upon this calculation, the increase in landfill noise levels associated with future heavy equipment operations will be just over 1 dB Leq. Similarly, if the tonnage is increased to 150 tons per 59/Noise levels were projected from the current ambient data because the model for creating a difference between the 50 tons per day and the 98 tons per day does not product meaingful comparisons. Mitigation is based on the end result -- the projected noise levels at receptors following approval of the project, not the "difference" in noise. Envir0nmenlal Impacl Rep0fl prepared by The ComFan? of E~ic Ja? Toll Alee, Inc. · 1050 East WiLliam' Suite 407 · Carson City, Nevada 89701 · 702 · 883' 8987 City of Ukiah '1' Landfill Permit Change Environmental Impact Report ~ul), I $. 1994 Staze Clearinl[house Number. SC1-1#93102051 DRAFT EIR Pa~e IV* 88 IV. Analysis of potentially significant environmental effects -:- Noise day, the average increase in noise is less than I dB Leq. The existing noise level when measured from acceptable standards and the projected future noise levels are not empirically significant. Implementing the proposed mitigation measure will keep noise levels within acceptable technical standards during the daytime hours of 7:00 am to 7:00 pm. However, although noise may be within acceptable technical standards, some persons may still find the impact to be significant by subjective judgement. b. Findings Based upon the analysis ofheavy equipment operations at the ],~ndfill, it is not anticipated that an increase in tonnage of waste accepted at the landfill will have a measurable significant noise impact. 7. Mitigation Measures Based upon the analysis, it is not anticipated that future noise levels associated with the increase in tonnage of waste will create a significant noise impact. However, it is anticipated that annoyance and noise complaints due to early morning trUck operations along Vichy Springs Road will continue to occur. As a means of mitigating early morning truck traffic noise, it is recommended that truck traffic is restricted to operations between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Envif0nmenlal Impact Report prepared byThe Company of Eric .lay Toll AICT, Inc. * 1050 East William · Suite 407 ° Carson City, Nevada 8970! * 702 · 883' 8987 E o o o ~. Z Z Z < CY < o __l 0 Z 0 0 m m m~. ~ ~ * I',1RY-22-1997 12:23 May 21, 1997 CITY OF FORT BRRGG ?0? 961 2802 CITY OF FORT BRAGG Incorporated.4ugu,ts, ~859 4 i 6 N, Franklin St. Fort Bragg, CA 95437 FAX 707-961-2802 F'.01/02 Candace Horsley City Manager City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 There are two items regarding use of the Ukiah Landfill site. The first is that Gordon Logan has advised me that the Willits site will accept waste until August 31st. The City of Fort Bragg will use their landfill until it is closed. Secondly, we have received the attached letter from Sherry Robison, Office Manager for Fort Bragg Disposal, regarding their concerns on the permitted time that Fort Bragg Disposal is allowed into the Ukiah Landfill. She has raised some very valid issues regarding the travel time, worst terrain to travel, and the fact that they have a twelve hour limit in which to make two trips. Your assistance in working out this matter would be greatly appreciated. JIM:ps Enclosure E21 UkiahLandflll.doc/Interim/ps Respectfully, damesq. Murphey City Administrator ADMINISTRATION/ENGINEERiNG (707) 961-2823 FINANCE/WATER WORKS (707) 961-2825 ECONOMIC/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (707) 961-2828 / / :22-1997 12:25 eagg Dispnsal 2720 Bragg, California 95437 ,7/964-9172 May 5, 1997 CITY OF FORT BRAGG Mr. 'Jirn Murphy Interim. City. Manager 4 !6 N. Franklin St. Fort Bragg, CA 95437 707 961 2802 P.02/02 A Waste Management Company RE: Ukiah Landfill Hours Dear Mr. Murphy: I have concerns on the permitted time Fort Bragg Disposal is allowed into the Ukiah Landfill. Tuesday - Friday, EWM-Ukiah and the City of Ukiah's hauler are able to dump at 7:00 am. In past conversations with Rick Kennedy, he has stated that Fort Bragg Disposal and Willits Solid Waste were permitted to enter at 8:00 am. As the hauler that has to travel the longest distance and over the worst terrain, Fort Bragg Disposal should be able to enter at 7:00 am with the rest of the haulers which have relatively no distance to travel. The later in the day we have to travel over Highway 20, the heavier the traffic is the longer it will take to make the round trip to the landfill. Your assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated. From our time studies, we know making the trip to Ukiah makes the day approximately 1 1/2 hours longer. We have a twelve hour limit to make the two trips in. Sincerely, a division of Empire Waste Management ~'~"/~¢~",~///~~,~"' ~ /'/' TOTAL F'. £= / AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 8b DATE: MARCH 17, 1999 REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING AMENDING CITY OF UKIAH PURCHASING POLICY WITH LOCAL PREFERENCE Councilmember Libby requested that the City Council consider amending the City's Purchasing Policy to provide a 5% preference for local vendors. Currently the City Code prescribes that a purchase be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, except in cases of personal and professional contracts which have their own listed criteria. The discussion, analysis, and summary of this issue will be presented in the order of: Summary of City Purchasing Procedures, Evaluation of the purchasing activities for 1998, Legal Issues and associated comments from the City Attorney, Discussion of relevant issues regarding bidder preferences, and Conclusion. (Continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss matter of local preference in purchasing and provide direction to staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine this matter is not to be considered and remove it from the agenda. 2. Determine this matter requires additional information prior to consideration and direct that the item be placed on a specific future agenda. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Councilmember Kathy Libby Candace Horsley, City Manager, Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer, David Rapport, City Attorney N/A 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Councilmember Libby's memorandum received March 11,1999 Bid/PO Award Analysis Other City Purchasing Preference Ordinances February 3, 1999 Agenda Item 8c Letter received February 17, 1999 APPROVED: ~;~~'~) .. Candace Horsley, City Mtnager 4:Can:Asrpref.5 Summary of City Purchasino Procedures The City Code §1522 distinguishes between the following types of contracts: 1. Rental or purchase of supplies and equipment 2. Public Works contracts 3. Personal service contracts It also provides different procedures for contracts in each category depending on the amount of the contract. All contracts of less than $1,000 can be awarded without soliciting proposals. Rental or purchase contracts for supplies or equipment (unless classified as a Public Works contract) are awarded using the same procedure, regardless of the amount. Contracts up to $5,000 can be awarded without City Council prior approval. Contracts between $5,000 and $10,000 can be awarded without prior approval as long as the Council at its next meeting receives a report on the purchase. Contracts above $10,000 require prior Council approval. The procedure requires at least three bids solicited in writing or by telephone. The bids may be submitted by mail, person, or fax. They do not need to be sealed, but the purchasing officer is prohibited from disclosing the contents until the time for considering all bids. The purchasing officer is supposed to award the bid to the least expensive source, if all sources are equally qualified. Public Works contracts between $1,000 and $10,000 may be awarded by the purchasing officer without prior council approval, if the project is budgeted, although a report must be filed at the Council's next meeting if the contract is for more than $5,000. Contracts over $10,000 require prior Council approval. The procedures are similar to the procedures for supply contracts up to $25,000. Above $25,000, the contracts are subject to the informal or formal procedures required by the Public Contracts Code. Personal service contracts between $1,000 and $10,000 can be awarded without Council approval, if the funds have been budgeted and are available, although a report must be filed at the next Council meeting for contracts over $5,000. Contracts over $10,000 require prior Council approval. The procedures are similar to those for supply contracts, except Requests for Proposals (RFPs) rather than bids are solicited and there is no requirement that the contents be submitted in a sealed envelope or that the contents not be disclosed. Potential contractors can be interviewed and the contract need not be awarded the lowest bidder. Other factors, such as qualifications, can be considered. Evaluation Staff has completed a comprehensive analysis of the purchasing activities for 1998 to evaluate the possible results of implementing a 5% local preference as requested by Councilmember Libby. Of the 961 purchase orders issued in the last calendar year, 492, totalling $1,477,113, were identified as "bids" which would present a "competitive" situation. Not included in this figure are Public Works projects over $25,000 which must be awarded to the "lowest responsible bidder" per state statute and personal service contracts which are not awarded on cost alone. A summary of the study's results is presented here and the data sheets are attached (the term local vendor includes businesses in either the City of Ukiah and County of Mendocino). Of the 492 "bids" analyzed, 295 (59.96%) representing $908,260 or 61.49% of the total value had no local vendors bidding and thus no local consideration could be made. There were no qualified local vendors for the product or services requested for the majority of these cases (211 ). The remaining 197 (40.04%) "bids" included either City or County vendors and totalled $568,86, or 38.51% of the total dollar value. These bids were awarded to either City, County, or outside area vendors and thus a local preference would be applicable. Of these 197 bids, 129 worth $418,820 (73.62%), were awarded to either a City or County vendor. City vendors received 63 of the awards and $132,415 of the value. It should also be noted that $462,973 was spent in local vendor "Open" purchase orders resulting in 85.46% of the applicable expenditures being made to City and County businesses. The remaining 68 bids ($150,035) were awarded to out of area vendors. Of these last 68 bid situations, a local preference of 5% would have resulted in 16 local vendors receiving the award (nine County vendors and seven City vendors). This represents 3.25% of the total number of bids and 2.09% of the total value. With respect to those bids with local vendors (129), local preference would have accounted for 8.02% of the number and 5.43% of the value. · The nine "5% preference bids" by County vendors totalled $5,689.85, which would have cost the City $152.68 more than was paid. · The seven "5% preference bids" by City vendors totalled $25,177, which would have cost the City $945.12 more than was paid. Implementation of a local preference would require additional staff time to analyze each bid and the amount of cost is dependent upon the number of bid requests in which local vendors do not win the bid outright. The staff costs for 1998 would have been approximately $300. In addition to the several City and County ordinances provided by Councilmember Libby, Staff contacted 17 municipalities to secure other applicable code provisions related to local preference in purchasing practices. Of the 12 cities who responded, 5 have code provisions for such a preference. In each case the preference was restricted to businesses with a City business license while most also required a physical presence within the City limits. The preference percentage amounts are one, three, and five. Excerpts of other City purchasing preference codes are attached for the Council's information. Legal Issues As previously indicated to the Council, where state law requires awarding a contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, a city cannot provide a preference for local contractors. Any such preference that results in the award of the contract to other than the lowest bidder would violate the statutory requirement. However, public bidding laws must be interpreted narrowly, and may not be extended beyond the specific provisions enacted by the Legislature. (Associated Builders v. Contra Costa Water, supra, 37 CaI.App.4th at 471, quoting Domar Electric, Inc.. v. City of Los Angeles (1994) 9 Cal.4th 161,173 [36 CaI.Rptr. 2d 521].) Where public bidding is not required by statute, the city is free to procure goods or services by competitive bidding, open market purchase, use of its own employees or any combination. The statutory and City Code procurement requirements for supplies, equipment and services are generally as follows. Public Works contracts are contracts for the erection, improvement, painting, or repair of public buildings and works; work in or about streams, embankments, or other work for protection against overflow; street or sewer work (except for maintenance or repair); and furnishing supplies or materials for any such project, including maintenance or repair of streets or sewers. (Public Contracts Code {}20161.) Whether awarded by informal bid (projects between $25,000 and $75,000) or formal bid (projects above $75,000), Public Works contracts must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. (Public Contracts Code §§ 22038, 20162.) A local business bid preference for those contracts would violate state law. Without getting into a detailed analysis, the City Attorney's opinion is that a preference for local businesses would not violate the Commerce, the Privileges and Immunities, or the Equal Protection Clauses of the United States Constitution,1 if the City makes adequate findings, when it adopts the ordinance establishing the preference. Possible findings to support the ordinance include the following: 1. The City of Ukiah has an interest in encouraging businesses to locate within City limits in order to promote the economic development of the City. In order to improve the economic viability of the City's commercial districts, the City must do what it can to encourage the rental and purchase of commercial buildings within the City. Businesses located in the City also tend to hire local City residents who, in turn, spend their salaries in the City, providing sales tax and other economic benefits to the City and its local economy. (Actual commercial vacancy rates would be determined and included in the findings.) 1Art. I, Section 8, Clause 3: Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1; equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. 2. Businesses inside the City which seek to enter contracts with the City operate at a competitive disadvantage as compared to businesses located in areas closer to major urban centers south of Ukiah. Local businesses sell to a much smaller market making their costs of doing business a larger percentage of their gross income than businesses located in larger markets. In addition, shipping costs to Ukiah are generally higher than to these other markets. 3. The public interest would best be served by encouraging businesses to locate and remain in Ukiah through the provision of a minimal "good faith" preference to local businesses in the awarding of City contracts. The growth and development of local businesses will have a significant positive impact on the economic health of the City. 4. A higher percentage of out-of-city businesses escape liability for business license fees than businesses with fixed places of business in the City. This provides a further competitive advantage to out-of-city businesses which a minimal preference for City businesses will help overcome. 5. This small preference for City businesses which seek to contract with the City will help mitigate some of the disadvantages local businesses suffer but would not erect any commercial barriers around the City or "balkanize" our local economy. Already, businesses in other areas, such as Lake County, enjoy a local preference when submitting bids to their local jurisdictions. Discussion Should the City Council wish to consider a Purchasing Preference Policy, the following issues are presented for discussion and direction to staff: 1. Possible advantages. A Local Preference Policy is usually adopted to promote local business activity which may result in increased jobs and increased sales tax revenue, thus benefiting the economic base of the City and continued health of local vendors. This would also help to maintain, if not strengthen, the current labor force, thereby preserving and fostering the City's economic and social vitality. 2. Possible Disadvantages, City residents will be paying a higher price for goods and services for those bid awards which are selected under the Preference Policy. The City saves money every year through its Purchasing Policies which encourages vendors to be as competitive as possible. A local preference might also discourage bidding by other vendors in surrounding counties who will not be eligible for the preference percentage. 3. Definition of Local Business. The City Attorney has offered the following definition for Council's consideration, which he feels will adequately meet the City's needs. "Local business" means a business firm with fixed offices or distribution points located within the boundaries of the City of Ukiah and with a current fully paid business license with a City of Ukiah business street address. Staff recommends that if a Preference Policy is established, local businesses which fall under this 5 definition register with the City so there will not be a continuing duplication of effort on staff's part to determine whether a business is local or not with each purchase order and bid. 4. Percenta~aes. There are varying rates of preference given by cities surveyed as indicated in the attached ordinances from other cities. The percentages most commonly used are 1%, 3%, and 5%. Cities that use a 1% preference based their decision on the fact that they receive 1% sales tax in return for the preference. Staff also recommends that a cap be set for any award of bid under the Preference Policy. A $1,000 cap would control the larger bids that have the potential to have a much higher cost to the taxpayers. A cap would help keep total additional bid purchase costs under constraint. 5. Jurisdiction Boundaries. Council discussed the possibility of extending a Preference Policy to the County area, the thought being that the vendors who abut our City limits also shop within the City limits. Alternatively, vendors outside the City limits do not provide sales or property tax to the City's General Fund, and if the local jurisdiction also passes a Preference Policy, the vendors just outside the City limits would have a double advantage over City vendors. 6. T_..~ZC,_Q.f_~. Several categories of bids that would not apply to a Preference Policy include Public Works contracts, professional services contracts, and possibly certain grant situations where state and federal grantors that require the bid procedures be completely competitive. In addition, Council needs to consider at what level of bidding they would choose to include in a Preference Policy, whether for formal sealed bids or all purchasing contracts that require a purchase order. Conclusion Staff has attempted to objectively assess the various aspects of a Preference Policy and have attempted to provide information that will assist Council in their discussion and decision. Staff requests Council's direction on proceeding with further evaluation or to draft an ordinance based on Council's determination of the various issues presented. FROM: SUBJECT: KATHY LIBBY, CITY COUNCIL MEMBER 1998 PURCHASE ORDER AND BID ANALYSIS Analysis of the research compiled by Mike Harris and Nora Kennedy, in my'opinion confirms a local bidding ordinance is in the best interest of Ukiah. Based on the data produced, we need to reach out to local businesses and attempt to build bridges with those who are not participating in the City's bidding process. (295 of 492 bids in 1998) We must strive to achieve the ultimate goal, which is to keep more money spent through the bidding process at home. With a multiplier effect of 4-5 times, this will strengthen our local economy and will ease needs to increase fees and rates to finance government. Research shows 60% of bids do not have a local bidder. It is stated this is due in part to specialized products. 72% of the dollars from these bids are leaving the area. Analysis shows there is also a distressing lack of participation by local vendors. Research shows of 492 bids, 211 bids are marked "no qualified local bidder". I am some what confused by this because the first report listed 114 "no qualified local bidders". I am confident a portion of this number applies for specialized items. A figure however of 211 is very high and deserves a hard look. Is it possible we have local vendors but have not identified them or they are not participating? I find it hard to rationalize that 43% of our bids go out of town because we do not have "qualified local vendors". We should and must bring this 43% figure down to a respectable level. I believe we have enough technology in our home area where this percentage is not justified. As previously stated, 60% of the bids do not have a local vendor. 72% of Ukiah's taxpayer dollars from these bids are leaving the area, and are supporting other communities. These percentages are not reasonable figures. An intent of a local ordinance is to reverse these trends. The figures provided in this research are a portion of the money spent by the City of UKiah. None the less, these figures confirm that approximately 1.1 million City dollars are leaving the area through this governmental process. We have some control over this money. It seems only fair to the community we do what we can to distribute a greater amount of the money in the local area. In 1998 492 purchase orders of 966 written were deemed competitive bids. These 492 bids total $1,477,113.13 with local bidders receiving 199 bids for an amount of $418,620.38. Itemized below are the amounts of 15 bids lost, who would have qualified under the 5% preference (information taken from the 1998 research). These bids all went out of town. Bid difference: 1.) 2.) 3.) 4.) 5.) 6.) 7.) 8.) 5.69 (bid $615.00) 35.80 (bid $917.80) 10.) 7.58 (bid $256.00) 11.) 834.21 (bid $19,747.75) 12.) 11.30 (bid $330.00) 13.) 30.00 (bid $1,880.00) 14.) 15.31 (bid $663.60) 15.) .75 (bid $81.25) 9.) $18.00 (bid $900) 63 04 (bid $2,156) 21.99 (bid $816) 7.20 (bid $312) 15.00 (bid $375) 20.00 (bid $460) 8.90 (bid $284) Money should not go out of the area for 756 or the few dollars listed in several of the bids above. The research shows that of the 492 bids, on 295 occasions local bidders did not participate. Of the 197 vendors who participated in City bids, 68 did not get the bids. With a 5% preference, 15 additional vendors would have been awarded these bids. Of the remaining 53 vendors, 17 local vendors were close to the 5% preference bY a range of less than 1% to 7%, all within proximity Of the 5%. Another 12 local vendor were within 15%. There is definitely an opportunity to keep these bids in the local area. There were 35 local bids returned "no bid". There were 34 local bidders who did not respond to the request for quote. Local bidders seem to be making a statement and I believe with this preference we will acknowledge we hear them. This is an opportunity to build bridges with local businesses and with the community. We can keep more money at home and we should do it. History provided by this research cannot quantify the effect of a 5% local ordinance for future years. A safe conclusion is it would increase business enthusiasm and participation which would result in more taxpayer money kept in the local area, which is the primary objective of the ordinance. As an aside, I am very appreciative of staffs hard work and thoroughness. They were efficient to provide a list of those with an open P.O. Those on the list are not effected by the bidding process or a local preference. I am gratified the open purchase order process is in place for some local businesses and I want to thank staff for the information provided. I would like to make reference to the aged computers Mike Harris and Nora Kennedy used to put together this research. They took 492 bids and made available as much information as possible about those bids. I am aware much of this research had to be compiled by hand. Thank you to Mike Harris and Nora Kennedy for the tremendous job in putting together research on the City of Ukiah's bidding history for the 1998 year. I appreciate your efforts. · . ~ ,, . , . ~.~ . · · :'il. .. ~,.~ , . · . · . . .. ; ., ., .. .... v.. .(. . . .,. ,.,' ,. ... ..,,'. . ~ 0 0 0 ~ 8 m m~ mm m ~ mmm mU~._ ~i~ 8mm ~ mm ~=2J J JJ J J o o ~ ~ o ~:~ o o o o o~ o o ~ o o o I~ o ~ <~z zo ~ z <;~zzz z o:zz<~ z ...... = o~ o ~o o ooo o~ ~o oo ~ -- ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ ~ § I ~ ' ~0 ~00~00~0~~0~0~'~;0~~0000~00 ~0~ Z .: Z Z --'~ Z 0 0 -- -, o, ......... ~ 14') 0 0 ~ O~ ~ ~ o ~i ~ ~' WWWWW°°°°°~°°°:°°~°~° I 0 ..... 0 I ~i z ~~ ~ ~ '- ~ o o~o o o o o~ ~~ ZZ Z: g- ~o, g ~ - __'- o~ ~ ~ o~ ~ ww~ ._ a~aa ~ - o o oo oo ~= ~ ~8 [ 8 z~ ,~ ~~=ooz zz ~8~z ~- __ 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ ..............................................~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....... ~ ................. oom .qqq ......... ~ ~ z - z .............. : 000~ 0 000 ~00:000 0 0000 Oi~O 0 0000000 .... ~~"i~"~ ~ .... ~ '~' ~........ -- ° ° ° ~ i~ ~ ~: ~ ~ iZ Z ZZ ZZ ° g ~ ~z~Izzzzi~ z~zoz3zmzz 0 0 0 ,-- ...... -- -- ~ ~ ~ o~ __ o o ~ o o ~ o ~ ~ o --~ - > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ o .~ ~ o ~ -- o ~ ~ o1~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ , zz -- ~ oooo~ooo~ooo~ooooo,o~ooo~ooo~ooo~ooo~o , (D 0 (iD .............. (:3 0 iO0000000 O0 0:00000:0000~00 0 ~ __ 0 0 0 0 ~ ~1~ ~:z z z ~ aao~g~ aa~a a~aa 8 88~ a a~aaaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0:'~ 0 0 0~ ~~ ~i~ zooozz~ zzzz~ z z~zzzm ~ - O0 0 OJO 0 0 0 ~ o o _ ~ zm ~ o~ ~ g ~ o ~_ o ~ _o o 0 0000 000 000 00~000 000000~ O00000j~O0 o o o oo-o oooooo: oo oooo ,oo oooo o -- ~ ~ z ,z z~ ~ o o ~i~ ~ o o Z Z ~ ~ ~ Z Z _ __ .......... .m m~ m ~ ~ mmO m · -- o · - m o o mo o! o oo § § §~E o I~ zz z~ ~i~zo gz ~~o~z,~ zz~ Z -- 0 ~0 ~'0 000 ~0~0 O~ ~ 0~000 0 ,~ ~ ~0 0 O~ ~0 000 ~0~ O~ ~ 0~000 0 ~ ~ O0 __ ~ o o o °~ ........ ~ o o ~ o ~ o o ~ o ......... 0~000~000000~0~000~~0~000000~~0 -- -- - ~ zgo ~ ~g Io ~°i~ Z ~ OooOiOooO0 000 000 00o0 01000o 000 000 000 CITY S~HT~q ROSFI PURCH. ?ID? $43 3?23 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA AMENDING SECTION 3-08 OF T~. SANTA ROSA CODE PEOPLE OF THE CITY SANTA ROSA DO ENACT A~ FOLLOWS: Section_l. Santa Rosa City Code Section 3-08.120B.l.h is amended to read as follows: "h. Award of Purchase or Contract. Purchases or contracts shall be awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. In determining the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, the following shall be taken into consideration: i. The quality, suitability, and efficiency of the item; ii. The total or life cycle cost of the equipment; iii. The delivery, discount terms, and all other conditions submitted in the bid; iv. The reputation of the equipment, the service reputation of the bidder, and all other information and data required to prove the responsibility of the supplier. v. A one percent (1%) preference shall be'granted to local bidders, exceL= that amount of the preference shall not exceed five-thousand dollars ($5,000). 'Local Bidder' is defined as a business entity with it principal place of business located within the city limits of the City of Santa Rosa. To qualify for the preference, local bidders must submit proof of the address of its principal place of business and a co~y. of a current City Business License with their bid. This provision shall only apply to bids where written bids are solicited, and shall not apply when conducting verbal quotations. These provisions shall not apply to bids that are intended to be in cooperation with other jurisdictions. These provision may be waived by the Purchasing Agent when the conditions of Federal State or private grant monies prohibit." ' Sectiqn 2. This ordinance shall take effect on the 31St day following'its adoption. DULY PASSED IN COUNCIL this AYES: 'NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST APPROVED Assistant' City Clerk Mayor {}1500 {}1501 CHAPTER 6 PURCHASING AUTHORITY ARTICLE 1. GENERAL SECTION: § 1500: §1501: §1502: § 1503: §1504: §1505: §1506: §1507: §1508: §1509: §1510: Adoption of Purchasing System Centralized Purchasing Department Purchasing Officer Exemptions from Centralized Purchasing Estimates of Requirements Requisitions Purchase Orders Encumbrance of Funds Unauthorized Purchases Prohibition of Interest Gifts and Rebates §1500: ADOPTION OF PURCHASING SYSTEM: In order to establish efficient procedures for the purchase of supplies and equipment, to secure for the City supplies and equipment at the lowest possible cost commensurate with quality needed, to exercise positive financial control over purchases, to clearly define authority for the purchasing function and to assure the quality of purchases, a purchasing system is hereby adopted. (Ord. 6677, §2, adopted 1975) §1501: CENTRALIZED PURCHASING DEPARTMENT: There is hereby created a centralized Purchasing Department in which is vested authority for the purchase of supplies and equipment. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) 1. Ord. 514 repealed in its entirety by Ord. 667, adopted 1975. 1051 03/12/99 FRI 10:21 FAX 916 538 2468 CITY OF OROVILLE-ADNIN. ' CITY OF OROVILLE · Policies and Procedures ~002 NUMBER: 17 I Sb-BJECm. Bidding on City Contracts Materials, Etc. f ' , DATE' 10-15-84 I SEC TI ON. city Council , Purpose: '~ To establish a policy and procedure for the award of bids for · the purchase of materials, supplies and contract °work. Policy: Contracts for furnishing materials, supplies or contract work to the City shall be let to the lowest responsible bidder following advertising for bids as required by the Charter. The City Council may reject any and all bids presented, and may re-advertise, in its disc'retion. The City shall not refuse to grant a contract to lowest responsible bidder solely on the grounds that his place of business is not located within the City. Contracts shall be awarded without favoritism and no pre- ference shall be granted to bidders solely on the ground that their places of business ar~ located within the City, however, a credit may be granted to a local bidder in an amount equal to any sales pr use tax be entitled by virtue of the contract] Exceptions: None unless authorized by the City:Council. INITIATED BY: City Council t APPROVED BY: City Council 10-15-84 -- ,, _ _ MAR. 11 '99 (TMU) 12:21 CITY OF CMICO 5~05954825 PACE. 2/2 B. l~j~ all bids for any rufon whmoevor md may re-ndvertise for nomv bids; or C. Waive minor irrc~arilies in any bid received. O'rior c~xa ~2.]os (Ord. ~9, Od. ~3~2 i~)) 3,20.060 Award of contract. Controls shall be awardod by the purGhu~ officer to the lowest respomible bidder exczpt ss follows: A. If two or more bids reogved are for the same toud amomu or unit pri~c, qualil)' and ~'v~ betas ~ and mnh~, ~' m m, sole discretion ofth~ puroh~dnS o~i~r th~ publiG interest will not pem~ the dele), of re-sdvertisins for bids, then the l,U~hdn8 officer may accept the lowest bid mede by nesod~on with the ~o bidden followins the bid OlMning; end B. Sellers, vendors, supplier% mi contrac~rs o£ supplies end equipment who ~ places of business locaMd within the limits of the city shll be siren preteren~ if ~ a determination pursua~ to ~e fixes~ thc purcbfinS ofli~ ,n~ sales mx r~venues r~',~cd by it in .wardin8 a bid to a seller, vmdor, supplier or co~r of supplios arid oquipme~ who matntahs a place of business Ioo~ed wiflin (Prior oodo i2. to9 (Oral 669, Or~ 1332 Il, Ord. 1404 3.20.0T0 Requiring bond of successfM bidder. The purchsb~ officer shall have authofi~ to require as a condition to cxoouti~ a oontraot for or on bohalt' of the oity, a performance bond or a labor and mateflg bond, or both, in suoh amoum u tho purohsin8 of Roer shall determine reasonably ne~e~ to protect tho beat htMrosts of the ~ity. Tho form and amounts of such bond or bonds, if the nme bc required, shll be tieing,ed in the nod~ invitin8 bids. (P, Jor codo 12. IX0 (Or~ 669)) 3-11 -99 THU 12:34 PH Chapter 2.93 BIDDER PREFERENCE Sections: 2,93.010 2.93,020 2.93.030 2.93.040 2,93,050 2.93.060 2.93.070 Findings, Definitions. Requirements of preference in the award of city cnnL,'act~. Exemptions and limitations. Enforcement and penalties. Administrative re~u~ations~re-quaim~tlon. 2.93.010 Purpose. Thc purpose of this chapter shall be to afford certain local businesses a preference in the awarding of City contracts in order to encourage and assist businesses to locate and remain in Naps. (Onl, No. 094-039, £nactr, d, 12/06/94) 2.93.020 Findings. The City finds: A. It serves the interests and general welfare of the City of Naps to encourage and assist businesses to locate and remain in the City, and thereby preserve and foster the City's economic and social vitality. B. It is in many cases difficult or impossible for businesses located in the City to compe[e with non-local businesses for City and other comracts. This competitive disadvantage results in many businesses leaving or choosing not to locate in Naps, and thus further results in the deterioration of the local tax base and labor force, and in some local persom and families having to leave Naps in order to secure work. C. By affording local businesses a preference in the award of City contracts, businesses will bc cncoura§ed to locate and remain in the City, and as a result th~ City's interests and general welfare will be served. D. The City's voters have amended the Naps City Charter, Section 101, to authorize the FhX NO, P, O1 ~.~------ 2.93.010 City Council to adopt an ordinance granting local business preference In the award of City contract~. (0~. No. 094-039, Enacted, 12/06/94) 2,93.030 Definitlom, As used in this chapter: A. "Business" shall mean any person, firm Or entity of any kind seeking or bidding on any City contract. B. "Local business" shall mean any business which has or maintains it~ primary office, distribution point or place of business within the County of Naps, and which is shown by the records maintained by the City's Finance Department as having secured a City of Naps business license. C. "Preference" shall mean the reduction factor applied to the bid and/or estimate of a loc'Il business pursuant to this chapter. D. "Reduction factor" shall mean the amount by which any bid or estimate submitted by a local busings for a City contract shall be deemed by the City to be reduced a~ a preference for a local business in the City's award of a City contract and/or selection of a City contractor. (Cai, No. 094-039, ]ff~act~l, 12/'06/94; Ord. No, Amended, 01/09196) 2.93,040 Requirements of preference in the award of city contracts. In evaluating any bid and/or estimate prior to awarding or entering into any City contract for which competitive bidding is required pursuant to Section 101 of the City Charter, or in otherwise selecting a contractor for any other City contract for which the City selects a business for a City contract on the basis of a comparison of the price of bids or estimate.s, the City shall provide each local business with a preference of a three percent (3%) reduction faclor. Application of the reductmn~tor in the award of the contract and/or selection of the contractor shall not actually reduce the amount ultimately paid by the City to the successful bidder and/or selected contractor. (Or~. No. 094-039, En~ctea, t2/06/94) ~oSt-it* Fax Note 7671 - ! #of Fax # li~R-11-99 THU 12:34 PI'I F~X NO, P, 02 2.93.050 2.93.0S0 Exemptions and limitatiom. A. The provisions and requiremep~s of this chapter shall not require the City to award any City contract under any of the following circumstances: 1. Where, for reasons other than price or the amount of a bid or estimate, the City detcrmlnes that a bid is unresponsive and/or, that the person, entity or business seelflng the City contract is unqualified and/or is not responsible; 2, Where application of this chapter would violate or be prohibited by any applicable state or federal law; 3, To contracts with any single or sole source supplier of any good of service; 4. To any City contract which for any reason does not either require competitive bidding or otherwise involve a comparison of the price of bids or estimates, (04. No. 094-039, £m~xl. 2.93.060 Enforcement and penalties. A. Any person, entity or business who or which has made an intentional misstatement or misrepresentation in order to obtain a preference under this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and also shall be subject to ali other penalties and remedies available to the City, B. Any person, entity or business damaged or aggrieved' by such mi~tatement or misrepresentation shall have a private right of action against the person, entity or business which made the misstatement or misrepresentation. In any such action, the aggrieved panT, shall be entided to treble damages and attorneys fees. " C. Any person, entity or business which makes such misstatement or misrepresentation may, in the City's discretion, be deemed unqualified to bid on or receive any City contract for a period of one year following the discovery of the misstatement or misrepresentation, D, A finding by the City of such misstatement or misrepresentation shall be regarded as a basis for determining that the person, entity or business is not responsible or competent for present and furore City contracts. (o~d. No. 094039, Emoted, 19./06~94) 2,93,070 Administrative regulatiom/Pre-quallflcation. The City Manager shall be authorized to adopt regulations for the implementation of this chapter. The City Manager also may adopt and periodically amend a list of businesses which may be pre-qualified for local business preference under this chapter. (Ord. No. 09:5-034, Enacted, 12/0~/91~) 56 ~a~-11-99 11:24A P.10 1-9-9 Solicitation Of Quotations: The Purchasing Officer shall solicit quotations by written, fax, or other such standards of business communications to selected prospective vendors as he may deem appropriate. Quotations shall be submitted to the Purchasing Officer who shall keep a record of all quotations submitted in competition thereon. Such records shall be open to public inspection during business hours. Records of such open market orders or purchases may be disposed of by the Purchasing Officer in the manner provided by law. (Ord. 634-95, 6-20-1995) 1.9-10: THRESHOLD LEVEL FOR BIDDING: Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, all thresholds for open market and formal bid procedures for the purchase of goods and services and for the sale of personal property shall be in accordance with California law governing general law cities and with administrative policies and procedures of the City. (Ord. 634-95, 6-20-1995) 1-9-11: INSPECTION AND TESTING: The City department receiving or using goods and/or services purchased pursuant to this Chapter shall inspect all goods delivered and all services performed to ascertain their conformity with the plans and/or specifications set forth in the contract. All deficiencies in such goods or services shall be forthwith reported to the Purchasing Officer. The City retains the right to require chemical and physical tests of material samples submitted with bids and samples of goods delivered to ascertain their quality and conformance to specifications~. (Ord. 634-95, 6-20-1995) 1-9-12: PREFE .... (A) Grant Of Bid Preference: In awarding bids pursuant to Section 1-9-7 of this Chapter, the City Council may, at its discretion, grant qualified local vendors a bidding preference of three percent (3%). Such preference, however, shall not exceed the aggregate sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) for any contract awarded under this Chapter. (B) Definition: For purposes of this Section, a "local vendor" shall be defined as any individual, partnership or corporation which regularly 1. For State authority see Gov. C. § 54201 et seq. City of Taft Na~-ll-99 11:24A P.11 1-9-12 1-9-15 maintains a place of business and an Inventory of merchandise for sale within the corporate limit of the City. (Ord. 634-95, 6-20-1995) 1-9-13: PREFERENCE FOR RECYCLED CONTENT: In awarding bids pursuant to Section 1-9-7 of this Chapter, the Purchasing Officer may, at his discretion, grant a bidding preference in accordance with administrative policy and procedure for any contract awarded under this Chapter for items which are either recycled, recyclable, reusable or provide waste minimization. Such preference shall be in accordance with performance, price, delivery, and other requirement and are deemed equivalent or acceptable by the Purchasing Officer. (Ord. 634-95, 6-20- 995) 1-9-14: SURPLUS SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT: (A) Ail departments shall submit reports Identifying all supplies and equipment which are no longer used or which have become obsolete or wom out beyond reasonable repair at such time and in such manner as prescribed by the Purchasing Officer, The Purchasing Officer shall have the authority to sell such supplies and equipment at fair market value or at public auction or to exchange them for, or as a trade-in on, new supplies or equipment. Should surplus supplies and/or equipment have negligible market value, the Purchasing Officer may sell such items for salvage value or may donate, recycle or otherwise dispose of same. The amount received for any property sold pursuant to this Chapter shall be deposited in the appropriate fund as determined by the Finance Department. (Ord. 634-95, 6-20-1995) 1-9-15: t~EFUNDS: The Purchasing Officer or the head of the Finance Department, with approval of the City Manager, may authorize refunds for business licenses, building permits, zoning permits, sewer service fees, refuse disposal fees and other amounts collected by the City in error. All such refunds shall be granted in accordance with applicable policies and procedures of the City, if any, (Ord. 634-95, 6-20-1995) 83/11/1999 18:17 7878231135 CITY OF SEBASTOPOL PAGE 82 ORDINANC£ NO. 930 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL SETTING PURCHASING AND DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS MATERIALS PROCEDUKES The City Council of the City of Sebastopol does ordain as follows: A Purchasing system is hereby adopted in order to establish efficient procedures for the acquisition of supplies, services and equipment at the lowest possible cost commensurate with quality needed, to exercise positive financial control over purchases, to clearly define authority for the purchasing function and to assure the quality of purchases. Pureha~in_e officer powers and duties. The City Manager is designated as the purchasing authority for the city. He/she may delegate the duties of purchasing to any other City employee. The purchasing officer shall have the authority tO: A. Unless otherwise provided by law, purchase or contract for supplies, services, equipment, and professional services by any ~sing department in accordance with the purchasing procedures prescribed herein, such administrative policies as the City Manager shall adopt for thc internal management and operation of' the purchasing system and such other rules and regulations as shall be prescaibed by the City Council; B. Negotiate and recommend execution of contracts for the purchase of supplies, service and equipment; C. Act to procure for the City the needed quality in supplies, services and equipment at least expense to the City; D. Discourage uniform bidding and endeavor to obtain as full and open competition as possible on all purchases; 1~. Prepare and recommend to the City Council rules governing the purchase of supplies, services and equipment for the city; F. Prepare and recommend to the City Council revisions and amendments to the purchasing rules; 83/11/1999 18:17 7878231135 CITY OF SEBASTOPOL PAGE 83 G, Keep informed of current developments in the field of purchasing, prices, market conditions and new products; H. Prescribe and maintain such forms as reasonably necessary for the operation of the ordinance codified in this chapter and other rules and regulations; I. Supervise the inspection of all supplies, services and equipment purchased to ensure conformance with specifications; $. Maintain a bidders list, vendors' catalog file and records needed for the efficient operation of the purchasing system; K. Join with other governmental agencies in joint purchasing endeavors where the purchasing procedures conform to the ordinance and state law, ~ A_t~ements with other ~overnmental a~enci_~.q The purchasing officer may authorize in writing any City department to purchase or contract for specified supplies, services and equipment. He/she shall ensure that such purchases or contracts by other governmental agencies are made in conformance with the procedures established by law and that such purchases or contracts by City depaxl'ments are made in coni'ormallce with this ordinance. ~ Encumb~nce of funds - Conditionq~. Except in cas~ of mnergency, the purchasing officer shall not issue any purchase order for supplies, services or equipment unless there exists an unencumbered appropriation against which the purctmse is to be charged. Purchase orders. Purchase of supplies, services and equipment in the amount specified in this ordinance shall be made only by purchase order. ~ Blddin_~ proe_edur~s - When required. Purchases of supplies, services, equipment shall be by bid procedures pursuant to Section 7 and Section 8. Bidding may be dispensed with only when an emergency requires that an order be placed with the nearest available source of supply, when the amount involved is less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), when the commodi~ can be obtained from only one vendor, when consultant work is sought for the purpose of evaluating a priv,~te development proposal such as for an environmental document, or when professional services are required which are a subsequent use of an existing agreement Contemplating such services. 03/11/1999 10:17 ?0?8231135 CITY OF SEBASTOPOL PAGE 04 Public,wo~k~ eontract~ and mn_ior aenuisition~ Purchases and contracts for supplies, services, equipment in an amount exceeding the limits set forth in Section 8 and those associated with a public project in accordance with the California Public Contracts Code, shall be by written contract with the lowest responsible bidder, pursuant to the procedure described in this section: A, Notice Inviting Bids. Notices inviting bids shall include a general description of the articles to be purcb, a~d or sold, shall state where bid blanks and specifications may be secured, and the time and place for opening bids. 1. Published Notice. Notice inviting bids shall be published at least ten days before the date of opening the bids. Notice shall be published at least once. However, in cases of public proj~ts covered by the Public Contracts Code, notice shall be published according to that code. 2. Bidder's List. The purchasing officer may also solicit sealed bids fi-om all responsible prospective suppliers whose names are on the bidders' list or who have requested their names to be added thereto. B. Bidde~"s Security. All bids presented in cormection with a public project as defined in the Public Contracts Code shall be accompanied by bidder's security in the form and amount prescribed by that code, which security shall be dealt with as prescribed therein. In the case of all other major acquisitions, when determined necessa~3t by the purchasing officer, bidder's security may be prescribed in the public notices inviting bids. In all cases, bidders shall be entitled to a return of bid security provided that a successful bidder shall forfeit his/her bid security upon refusal or failure to execute the contract within ten days after the notice of award of contract has been mailed, unless the City is respons~le for the delay. The City Council may, on refusal or failure of the successful bidder to execute the contract, award it to the next lowest responsible bidder. If the City Council awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any, shall be returned to the lowest bidder. C, Bid Opening Procedure, Sealed bids shall be submitted to the purchasing officer and shall be identified as bids on the envelope, Bids shall be opened in public at the time and place stated in the public notice, A tabulation of all bids received shall be stated in the public notice. A tabulation of all bids received shall be open for public inspection during regular bus/ness hours for a period of not less than five calendar days alter the bid opening, D. Rejection of Bids. In its discretion, the City Council may reject any and all bids presented and re-advertise for bids. E, Award of Contracts. Contracts shall be awarded by the City Council to the lowest 83/11/1999 18:17 7878231135 CITY OF SEBASTOPOL .. PAGE responsible bidder except as othengise provided herein. F. Tie Bids. If two or more bids received are for the same amount or unit price, quality and servicc being equal, and if the public interest will not permit the delay of'. re-advertising for bids, the City Council may acccpt the one it chooses or accept the lowest bid made by negotiation with thc tie bidders or may utilize a public drawing. O. Performance Bonds. The purchasing officer shall have authority to require a performance bond before entering a contract in such amount as he finds reasonably necessary to protect the best interest of the city. If the purchasing officer requires a performance bond, the form and amount of the bond shall be described in the notice inviting bids. Open market purchnses: Procedure, Purchases of supplies, equipment, and contractual scrvice may be made by the purchasing officcr in the open market without observing the procedure prescribed by Section 7 where the estimated value, exclusive of sales tax and freight, does not exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000). Purcha~s estimated to exceed the above values shall be made in accordance with the procedure prescribed by Section 7. However, comra~s and purchases covered by the Public Contracts Code shall be let to bid in accordance with the provision~ ofthat code. 1. 1Vfmimum Number of Bids. Open market purchases shall, wherever possible, be bazed on et least three bids, and shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. 2. Notice Inviting Bids. The purchasing officer shall solicit bids by written roquest~ to prospective vendors, by telephone, and by public notice posted on a public 3. Written Bids, Sealed written bids shall be submitted to the purchasing officer who shall keep a record of all open market orders end bids as public records after the submission of bids or the placing of orders. ~ Loc,ti Business Biddin~ Allowtncc The City Council finds that businesses located withi~ the City of' Sebastopol suffer from a competitive disadvantage as compared to others in the region by reason of the distance to major interstate highways and regional commercial centers. Thcref'ore, upon the completion of the procedures required within Section 8, the determination shall be made relative to "Local Busilless" status. This detern~r~tion shall be made by thc City Manager or his/her designee. Should a bid from a qualifying local business be within the established "Cost Limitation" and "Bidding Allowance," the requesting purchaser may request the approval of the City Manager, or his/her designee, to authorize the purchase from the local business. 83/11/1999 18:17 7878231135 CITY OF SEBASTOPOL PAGE 86 This policy shall not be extended as a guarantee ofpurchase from local businesses. It shall be at the discretion of the City Manager to determine that the requested purchase meets the standards and quality of similar and like bids. "Local Business Status" shall be defined as a business maimainin$ a site address within the corporate City limits and which possesses a valid City business licexase. "Bidding Allowance" shall be defined as an allowance up to but not exceeding $% ofthe bid or cost. "Cost Limitation" shall be defined as purchase/bid price for services, supplies and contracts not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000). Pu _rehase a_nnroval - R~snonsibility designated. The responsibility for the inspection, testing and acceptance of all supplies, equipment and contractual services performed shall rest with the department head concerned. Sale or release of surnlus Cttv eouinment and mateviah. In order to establish a fair and business-like procedure for the sale or disposal of surplus City property, the following procedures are hereby established. A. Prior to release of surplus equipmem or matedals. 1. Department heads may recommend that property, no longer useable or needed in their opinion, be disposed of. No City property shall be disposed of without prior approval of the Finance Officer and all sales, trades or disposal shall be conducted by the Finance O~cer. 2. The estimated value of goods to be disposed of shall be set by the Finance Ot~cer in consultation with the appropriate department head and shall be submitted to the City Manager for approval, 3, Prior to such disposal, Finance Officer shall assure that no other City departments need or can use said equipment or materials, and that no reasonable trade or sale with other public agencies can be made. B. Procedure for release of surplus equipment or materials. 1. The Finance Director may accept advantageous trade-in allowances for City personal property which has a scrap value of less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) and which has been determined by the Finance Director to be not further required for public use. 2. The Finance Director may direct sale or otherwise sell or dispose of any 83/11/1999 18:17 7878231135 CITY OF SEBASTOPOL PAGE 87 personal property belonging to the City not required for public usc, subject to such re$ulaIions as may be provided by the City Council. He shall pay the proceeds into the City treasury for use of the City. Where the properly is exchanged or traded in he shall secure its value in behalf of the City, 3, Notices of sale shall be posted for r~ot less than five business days preceding the day of' sale in the city hall. 4. In thc disposition of any personal property pursuant to this policy, the Finance Director may purchase advertising space and may advertise the proposed saw or other dispositiou of the person~l property in such newspapers, magazines, and other periodicals as in his/her judgement will best publicize thc proposed sale or other disposition to those persons most likely to bid for or purchase the personal property. 5. Sale or disposition of real property may be on a competitive sealed bid basis, after the Finance Dir~,ctor has submitted a recommendation to the City Council as to the release and poss~le competitive sale of' said real property. C. City Employees 1. City Employees are eligible to submit competitive bids for any property offered for sale under tiffs policy. Whenever a City employee is the highest bidder, the City Manager shall determine whether the sale has been properly conducted and shall make a recommendation thereon to the City Council for final award of the sale. 1~ COUNC~ DULY PASSED this 2lsd: day of__ May . .1996. V077NGAY]~: _.5_ Councilmelnbers Crump, Levy, Magnie, Roventini & Mayor Foley VOTING NO: 0 ABSENT: 0 · Attest: City Clerk c :\wpwIN60~WPDOC ~CITEMS~R/RC t40 RD.4~6 Bidders List means a curren-~ fi~.e of 707 253 1012 P.82 articles for each ~aceNory cf commodities for County use. sources of~_ supply cf repecitlve!y ~.urchased (g) Responsible Bid means an offer, subm!zted by a responsible bidder in ink or t.vpewricten form, Co furnish supplies, materials, equipment or ~ontrac[ual services in conformity wi~h the specifications, delivery ~erms and conditions, and o~her 9 I0 11 12 13 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 27 requirements included in the invitation for bids. (h) Responsible Bidder means a bidder who respcnsibie bid; who has furnished, wken re.cues=ed, information and da~a to prove ~hat his financial resources, production cr facilities, service reputation and experience are ade~.-ua.~=~ =o make sa=isfac~or-F delivery of ~he supplies, ,na=eria!s, or equi_umen= sa~isfy any provisicns of this article. (i) Irresponsible Bidder means a bidder or Prospective bidder who fails .~o furnish, u.~cn written reques~, procF cf his responsibility; who has, at' a vendor or con~rac-.or wich the County, repeatedly made slow cr urisauisfac~ory deliveries; or who has violated, or attempced to violate, the contract ta_~ms, of a bid, a contrac:, or the provisions of this arcic!e. (j) Local Vendor means a ffrm.~or indlvldua! who r=.~u!ar!y maintains a place cf business and transacts business in and . _~: - , _. . .. mai~.tains an inventor-/ cr mercnandlse for sale in, or is 'icensed by, cr pays busln~$$ ~axes ".c, ~he C-~un~v cf Lake. · (k) Emergenc? means when a breakdown tn machine.-,./ cr assent-ia! service ccrurs; cr when un_=orese~n clruums~ances arise, 707 283 1012 1 2 4 6 7 10 11 12 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 27 (c) In keeping with the County's in~erest in promoting local businesses, an RFQ shall be sent tc at least one local~venQor,' if there is one who can provide the required goods or services. 40.3 Purchase orders or contracts shall be awarded by the Purchasing Agen=, or Assistant Purchasing Aqenc, tD ~he lowest responsible bidder, as determined be!ow. (a) In de=ermining one b~dder to whom the bid will be awarded, =he Purchasing Agenc, or Assistant Purchasing Agent, shall consider the b~dder's price, =he qua!i~y of produc= o~,,._u==-~= and its conformity with the County's needs, the delivery and discount ~erms · and condicions cf the bid, ~he service reputation of ~he bidder and o~ner informa=ion and dace required to prove responsibility..When the Councy is required to Uay shippinq charge~ for an item or items, said charges shall be considered a part c~ :he bld price in de~erm, ining the lowest respcn~ib!e bid. (b) In addition to cna foregoing cricer~_a, ~-;= the bid , _1 . .. , submits-ed by a responsible it. ca! vendor is r.~t grea~er than !05% of ,, the apparent_ __r]°w_ bid and all o~h~r_ _ criteri_a belng e~uai,_preference_ sba~ ~ ... ~.- be_given to the re~Dc.nsl~ie local vendor. However, in nc = the preference exceed $, case shall ~he amcunu c~ {c) If more than one bi~ is for =he same =czal a:nounc or unit price {a.~:-~ considerinc =he u% =~-ference kereinabov~: and ~ ~ une public inuerest wii~ nc-_ =e_~it the delay o~ ~advo - ~ - - ~" · S for bids the Purchasing Agen~ or Assisuan~ ~uruhas ..... = .~?en~, may awar~ the connrac- -o cne o= ~.h~. bidders bv draw:n? icus /// 12 ?0? 263 1012 P.03 1 (c) In keeping with the County's interest in promoting %ccal 2 businesses, an RFQ shall be sent tc at least one l¢cal ~;endor, if 3 there is cne who can prcvide the required goods or services. 4 40.3 Purchase orders or contracts shall be awarded by the 5 Purchasing A_~ent, or Assiscant Purchasing A?ent, to ~?.e lowest 6 responsible bidder, as decermzned belcw. 7 (a) In determining :ne bi~der to whom the bid will be awarded, ~ :ke Purchasing Agent, or Assistant Purchasing Awen:, shall ccnsider ~ the bidder's price, :he quali~y of produc: offered and its 10 conformity with the Ccun'~y's needs, the delivery and discount terms ll and conditions cf the bid, ~he service reputaticn of ~ke'bidder and %2 o~ner information and da:a re:faired to prcve responsibility..When ~ the County is required %c _ray shippinq charges for an item or 1~- items, said charges shall be ccnsidered a part cf :he bid price in 15 determ, inin_~ the lowest respcn~ik!e bid. 16 (b) In additicn to tnt foregoin~ criteria, ~ ~he bid ~7 submit=ed by a responsible ~_cca! vendor is net crea-.er than !05% of 18 the apparent low bid and ail other crite, r_i_a he,nc e~ual,_~reference 19 sba~ ~ ... '-- be. given to the res~cns"_mle local ven~cr. Hcwever, in nc 20 case shall the amcunn cf the preference exceed $%,000. 21 22 25 26I /// 27t //; (c) If more than one bid is fcr the same ~ctal amoun~ or unit price (a~:-~ considerinc ~ke 5% ~-=e~-~ ., -- - ~ ......... hereinabove~ and ~ ~ne public interest will ncz ~e--nv, it the delay of r~adve~-{s!ng for bids the Purchasing Acen~ or Assissant ~urzhasin_ - - _ .~en , may awar~ the con~ract -o one o= -%* =~X~ers by drawzn? icn$ ~n ~ublic. 12 confo~i~y with the specifications, ~he delive~ and discount terms and conditions cf the bid, the service reputation of the bidder, and o~her information and data re~ired to prove his responsibility. When %he Counsy is re~ired to pay shipD, ing charges for an item cr items, sald charges shall be considered a part of the bid price in de%e~ining .the lowes= responsible bid. (b) In addition to the foreccing criteria, if the b~d submitted by a responsible local vendor is not greater than 105% o: , _ ., the apparent low bid and al! other criteria being e~a!, preference 10 shall be given =o the responsible local verdor. Kowever, in no c~se 11 shall the amount cf the preference exceed S!,000. 12 (c) If more ~han one bid is for the same total amount or unit I3 price (after considerin~ the 5% preference kerainabove) , and if the 1% public in~eres~ will not pe_~mit ~he delay of readver~isin~ for 15 bids, the Board cf Supervisors may award the contract ~o one of ~he 16 bidders by drawin~ iczs in pub!Lc. 17 4!.4 If the successful bidder doe~ nc~ enter in~o a con~ract 18 within fifteen (!$) days after mailin~ of Notice of 'Award cf 19 ccn~ract, he shall fcrfei~ in cash, an amount equivalent to the 20 amoun~ cf any ~urety which accompanied his bid, unless the Coun-~y 21 is responsible for ~he delay. 23 24 25 26 27 41.5 A copy of ~ach si~ed contract shall be filed wi~h %he County Auditor. Section 2-42. Emergency Purchases. 42.~ if the need for an emergency purchase occurs du~;-c regular ~usine~s hours or a-, an}, o'~her time, 5he using agency may ou~chase dlrec~'./ the ccmmcditv cr csmmcdi-~= - - . _s re~.~-cired, if ~he 15 TOTAL p. 84 -25'99iMON) 12.07 SHASTA CO. PURGH.~S~N 7EL 530 225 5344 0 P. 002 3.04.0~ (Ord. 96-1 § I, 1996: Ord. 93-12 (part), 1993; Ord. 91-11 § 1, 1991' Ord. 91-9 (part), 1991: Ord. a94-345 § 2, 1989: prior code § 170]) 3.1bl.030 Requirement for formal sealed bi~. A. If the cost of a purchase of relar~d items commonly sold by a class of vendors would or could cnceed twent),-five thousand dollars, a formal sea,lcd bid shall be solicit- ed by mailing a written invitation lo known v~ndors, or by posting the invitation on a public bulletin board in the office of th~ purchasing agent, or by publishing the invi.. ration or a sunuxuey of it in a news~per of general circulation in the count. The award of formal sealed bids which exceed fifty thousand dollars requires Mvance approval by the board of supervisors. B. If de~ailed specifications are required for any bid, the invitation shall include those sl~-eifications or indicam where they may be obtained. F. ach invitalion shall spec- ify the time and place where the bids will be opened. Each invita:ion ~all include the following statement: A bidder who attempts to influence the bid process by interfering of colluding with other bidders, or with any County officer, employee or agent, or who devi- ates from the bid process as set forth in ~his invitation may be disqualifiea at any time from further panizspation in this bid. C. Bid or performance bonds may be required at the discretion of the purchasing agent. (Ord. 96-! § 2, 1996; Ord. 93-12 (part). 1993; Ord. 91-9 (prat), 1991: Ord. 494-345 § 3, 1989: prior code § 1'702) (Shasta C~ly 4-96} 56 3.04.040 Exclusion of bids and bidders. A. If any bidder fails or refuses to fur- nish ax: purchasing agent with any informa. tion required to determine the bidder's re- sponsibility as a bidder, the bid shall not be considered by the pmchasing agent. B. A bid that is not responsive to an invitation, or any specifu:ations made a part of an invitalion, shall not be considered by tt~ purchasing agent C. The purchasing agent may remove from the lis~ of prospective bidders rh~ name of any person who fails or refuses to submi~ bids in response to at leas~ two con- secmive requests for bids on commodities of a class furnished by the person. D. Thc purchasing agent may excluc/e from bidding any person who has failed to meet prior contractual requirements related to pm:chases made by r3.e county. (Ord. 49.~-3.45 § 4, 1959: prior code § I703) 3.~,045 Local prel'ercnce. A.~. A five-l~ercent preference not to ex~ceed ten thousand dollars shall~ to qualified local bidcle~'on all formal sealed bids except as to those~ which state law requires to be gran~d to the lowest res~ponsible bidder. B. To qualify for local bidder prefer- ence, a local bidder must either submit a copy of a eurr~nt city business license, issued by a city within the geographical boundaries of the county of Shasta, or com- plete and sign a declaration under penalty of perjury, stating that as of the da~e the re. quest for bids was issued, the business as listed on the bid was physically maintained and operated at a fined office or other busi- ness pternises located within the geograph- ical limits of the county, and providing such d.~N.-25'99iMON} 12'07 SHASTA GO. PURGH.~S;N TEL 530 225 5344 0 P. 002 3.O4.0~ (Ord. 96-1 § I, 1996: Ord. 93-12 (pa.n), 1993; Old. 91-11 § 1, 1991' Ord. 91-9 (pan), 1991' Ord. 494-345 § 2, 1989; prior code § 1701) 3.04,030 Requirement for formal sealed bids. A. If the cost of a purchase of rdated items commonly sold by a class of vendors would or could ext..ced twenty-five thousand dollars, a fon'nal sealed bid shall be solicit- ed by mailing a written invitation ~o known vendors, or by posting the invitation on a public, bulletin boaxd in the office of th-.. purchasing agent, or by publishing the invi-. ration or a summary of it ia a newspaper of general circulation ia the coun .ty. The award of formal sealed bids which exceed fifty thousand doUan requires advance approval by the board of supervisors. B. If detailed specifications are required for any bid, the invitation sh~ll include those specifications or indicate where they may be obtainexl. F. ach invitation shall spec- ify the time and place where the bids wi/i be opened. Each invitation shall include the following statement: A bidder who attempts to influence the bid process by interfering ca' colluding with other bidders, or with any County officer, employee or agent, or who devi- ates from the bid process as set forth in this invitation may be disqualified at any time from further partic4pation in this bid. C. Bid or performance bonds may be required at the discretion of the purchasing agent. (Ord. 96-1 § 2, 1996; Ord. 93-12 (part), 1993; Ord. 91-9 (part), 1991: Ord. 494-345 § 3, 1989: prior code § 1702) 4-96} 56 3.04.040 Exclusion of bids and bidders. A. if any bidder fails er refuses to fur- nish the purchasing agent with any informa- tion required to determine the bidder's sponsibility as a bidder, the bid shall not be considered by the puxchasing agent. B. A bid that is no! responsive to an invitation, or any specifmations made a part of an invitaioa, shall not be considered by the purchasing agent. C The purchasing agent may remove from the lisl of prospective bidders the name of any person who fails or refuses to submit bids in respons~ to at least two con- secutive rezlUeStS for bids on co--ties of a class furnished by the person. D. The purchasing agent may exclude from bidding any person who has failed to mcat prior eontractua] requirements related to pu~¢hase, s made by the county. (Ord. 49,$-345 § 4, 1989: prior code § 1703) 3.04.045 Local prefercnce. A= A five-pe~cnt preference not to exceed ten thousand dollars shall~antcd to qualif'~! local bidden'on all formal sealed bids except as to thos~~ which state law requires Io be granted to the lowest res~ponsible bidder. B. To qualify for local bidder pref~- ence, a local bidder must either submit a copy of a current city business license, issued by a city within the geographical boundaries of the county of Shasta, or com- plete and sign a declaration under penalty of l~rjury, stating that as of the date the request for bids was issued, the business as listed on the bid was physically maintained and operated at a fir, ed off'me or other busi- ness premises located within the geograph- ical limits of the county, and providing such -25' 99 [.:~10~i1 12.08 SHASTA (;0, PUR(3HA!31N TEL$30 225 5344 0 P. 004 other information as may be requested. (Ord. 96-1 § 3, 1996; Ord. 91-10 § 1, 1991) 3,0d.050 Deposition of bids. A. Formal sealed bids sh~l be opened and awarded by or under the direction of the purchasing agent, unless the invitation to bid or the board of supervisors directs otherwise. B. Except as provided for ha Section 3.04.0~5, formal sealed bids shall be award- ed to the lowest responsibie bidder meeting all bid specifications. Bids shall be opened at the time and place specif'md in the invita. tion or as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible. The purchasing agent may reject any bid for failure of ihe bid to respond to the invitation, i~eluding any specifications, for which the bid is submined. The purchas- ing agent may provide a wri~n explanation to any bidder whose bid has been rejected, upon written request from the bidder for ~uch an explanation. The purchasing agent may reject ali bids submitted in response to a particular invitation. The purchasing agent ,may waive any minor deviation from the specifications applicable to any bid or any minor technical error in any bid and may award the bid in spite of such a deviation or error, if the pun:basing agent determines the award of the bid to be in the best interests of the county. C. Each bid or the full details of each bid shall be kept on file by the purchasing agent and available for public inspection, together with the name of the successful bidder, for thirty days after a bid is awaxded. (Ord. 9~- IO § 2, 1991: prior code § 1704) 3.04.060 Cooperative purchases. The purchasing agent may purchase any 57 3.04.O~5 materials, equipment or supplies available under a General Services Administration conu~t, a state of California comract, or a.ny other cooperative contract available to the county, if the purchase can be made at lower cost than the purchasing agent can secure through competitive procurement. (Prior code § 1705) 3,04.070 Cost avoidance. The purchasing agent shall consolidate and schedule orders whenever possible to rake advantage of savings fxom discounts for quantity purchases, favorable market conditions, bulk shipment or any other c. ir- cumstance which may avoid unnecessary expenditure of public funds. However, a purchase may not be divided into smaller units to evade the competitive procurement requirements of this chapter. (Prior code § 1~06) 3.04,080 Multi-year purchases. No purchase shall be made il' the. pur- chase agreement, by its terms, requires the expenditure of funds not appropriated when the agreement is made, unless the approval of the board of supervisors is first obtained. This section does not apply to any multi- year purchase, agreement when: (g) the county may terminate its obligations under the agreement if the. board of supervisors, in its sole discretion, detemfines not to appropriate funds for the purchase for any fiscal year during the t~rm of t~ agree- meat: or (B) the count), does no~ guarantee in the agreement to purchase any minimum quantity of the matter subject to the con- tract. ('Prior code § 170'/) dAN.-25'991MON) 12'07 SHASTA GO. PURGHASIPi ?EL'530 225 5344 0 P. O0$ 3.04.0~5 issued by a city within the g¢ograpl~ical boundaries of thc county of Shasta, or com- plete and sign a decimation uader of ~rj~. ~afing ~at r~u~t for bi~ w~ issued, lis~d on ~e bid was physi~lly m~athned and operated g a fixed offi ~ ~ o~et busi- ne~ pm~s located wi~n ~e geog~h- ical li~ts of~e county, ~d provi~ng such 56-1 ,{1502 §1502 {}1502: PURCHASING OFFICER: The City Manager shall be the City Purchasing Officer unless by action of the City Council a new classified position is created and an appointment is made to such position in compliance with City Ord. 508. The duties of Purchasing Officer may be combined with or assigned to any other office or position. The Purchasing Officer shall have the authority to: Be C. De Ee F. H. U. K. Purchase or contract for supplies and equipment required by any using agency in accordance with purchasing procedures prescribed by this ordinance, such administrative regulations as the Purchasing Officer shall adopt for the internal management and operation of the Purchasing Department and such other rules and regulations as shall be prescribed by the City Council. Negotiate and recommend execution of contracts for the purchase of supplies and equipment. Act to procure for the City the needed quality in supplies and equipment at least expense to the City. Discourage uniform bidding and endeavor to obtain as full and open competition as possible on all purchases. Prepare and recommend to the City Council rules governing the purchase of supplies and equipment for the City. Prepare and recommend to the City Council revisions and amendments to the purchasing rules. Keep informed of current developments in the field of purchasing, prices, market conditions and new products. Prescribe and maintain such forms as reasonably necessary to the operation of this ordinance and other rules and regulations. Supervise the inspection of all supplies and equipment purchased to insure conformance with specifications. Recommend the transfer of surplus or unused supplies and equipment between departments as needed. Maintain a Bidders' List, vendors' catalog file and records needed for the efficient operation of the Purchasing Department. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) 1052 §1503 §1508 §1503: EXEMPTIONS FROM CENTRALIZED PURCHASING: The Purchasing Officer, with approval of the City Council, may authorize in writing, any department to purchase specified supplies and equipment independently of the Purchasing Department; but he shall require that such purchases shall be made in conformity with the procedures established by this ordinance, and shall further require periodic reports from the departments on the purchases made under such written authorization. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1504: ESTIMATES OF REQUIREMENTS: All departments shall file detailed estimates of their requirements in supplies and equipment in such manner, at such time, and for such future periods as the Purchasing Officer shall prescribe. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1505: REQUISITIONS: Departments shall submit requests for supplies and equipment to the Purchasing Officer by standard requisition forms, or by other means as may be established by the Purchasing Rules and Regulations. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1506: PURCHASE ORDERS: Purchases of supplies and equipment shall be made only by purchase orders. Except as otherwise provided herein, no purchase order shall be issued unless the prior approval of the Purchasing Officer or his designated representative has been obtained. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1507: ENCUMBRANCE OF FUNDS: Except in cases of emergency or in cases where specific authority has been first obtained from the City Manager, the Purchasing Officer shall not issue any purchase order for the supplies or equipment unless there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account against which said purchase is to be charged. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1508: UNAUTHORIZED PURCHASES: Except as herein provided, it shall be unlawful for any City officer or officers to order the purchase of any supplies or make any contract within the purview of this ordinance other than through the Purchasing Department, and any purchase ordered or contract made contrary to the provisions hereof shall not be approved by the City Council, and the City shall not be bound thereby. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) 1053 §1520 CHAPTER 6 PURCHASING AUTHORITY ARTICLE 2. BIDDING PROCEDURES §1521 SECTION' §1520' §1521' §1522: Competitive Bidding Required Formal Contract Procedure Open Market and Contractual Services Procedure §1520' COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIRED: All purchases of, and contracts for supplies, and all sales of personal property which has become obsolete and unusable shall, except as specifically provided herein, be based wherever possible on competitive bids. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1521: FORMAL CONTRACT PROCEDURE: Except as otherwise provided herein, purchases of supplies and equipment of an estimated value greater than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), or such greater figure as may be from time to time set by the legislature by amendment to Section 37902 of the Government Code of California, or by other applicable provisions, shall be by written contract with the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to the procedure hereinafter prescribed. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975; amd. by Ord. 766, §1, adopted 1981) A. Notice Inviting Bids: Notices inviting bids shall include a general description of the articles to be purchased, shall state where bid blanks and specifications may be secured, and the time and place for opening bids. 1. Published Notice: Notices inviting bids shall be published at least (10) days before the date of opening of the bids. Notices shall be published at least once 1055 §1509 §1510 §1509' PROHIBITION OF INTEREST: No purchase order or contract within the purview of this Chapter in which the Council, Purchasing Officer or any other officer or employee of the City, in which to their knowledge they are financially interested, directly or indirectly, shall be issued, except the Council shall have the authority to waive compliance with this Section when it finds such action to be in the best interests of the City. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1510- GIFTS AND REBATES: The agent and every officer and employee of the City are expressly prohibited from accepting, directly or indirectly, from any person, company, firm or corporation to which any purchase order or contract is, or might be awarded, any rebate, gift, money or anything of value whatsoever, except where given for the use and benefit of the City. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) 1 O54 §1521 §1521 E) F. G. H. 2. Whether the bidder can perform the contract, or provide the service promptly or within the time specified, without delay or interference; 3. The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the bidder; 4. The previous and existing compliance by the bidder with laws and ordinance relating to the contract of service; 5. The quality of performance of previous contracts of service; 6. The sufficiency of financial resources and ability of bidder to perform the contract or provide the service; 7. The quality, availability and adaptability of' the supplies, or contractual services to the particular use required; 8. The ability of the bidder to provide future maintenance and service for the use of the subject of the contract; 9. The number and scope of conditions attached to the bid. Award to Other Than Low Bidder: When the award is not given to the lowest bidder, a full and complete statement of the reasons for placing the order elsewhere shall be prepared by the agent and filed with the other papers relating to the transaction. Tie Bids: If two (2) or more bids received are for the same total amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, and if the public interest will not permit the delay of re-advertising for bids, the City CounCil may in its discretion accept the one it chooses or accept the lowest bid made by and after negotiation with the tie bidders at the time of the bid opening. Performance Bonds: The City Council shall have authority to require a performance bond before entering a contract in such amount as it shall find reasonably necessary to protect the best interests of the City. If the City Council requires a pedormance bond, the form and amount of the bond shall be described in the notice inviting bids. Bidders in Default to City: The agent shall not accept the bid of a contractor or supplier who is in default on the payment of taxes, licenses or other monies due the City. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) 1057 §1521 Al) C. De E. Be §1521 in a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City, or if there is none, it shall be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City that have been designated by ordinance as the places for posting public notices. 2. Bidders' List: The Purchasing Officer shall also solicit sealed bids from all responsible prospective suppliers whose names are on the Bidders' List or who have made written request that their names be added thereto. Bidder's Security: When deemed necessary by the Purchasing Officer, bidder's security may be prescribed in the public notices inviting bids. Bidders shall be entitled to return of bid security; provided, however, that a successful bidder shall forfeit his bid security upon his refusal or failure to execute the contract within ten (10) days after the notice of award of contract has been mailed, unless in the latter event the City is solely responsible for the delay in executing the contract. The City Council may, on refusal or 'failure of the successful bidder to execute the contract, award it to the next lowest responsible bidder. If the City Council awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City to the contract price differential between the lowest bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any, shall be returned to the lowest bidder. If the City Council rejects all bids presented and re-advertises, due to a refusal of the lowest bidder to enter into a contract, the amount of the lowest bidder's security may be used to offset the cost of receiving new bids with the surplus, if any, being returned to the lowest bidder. Bid Opening Procedure- Sealed bids shall be submitted to the City Clerk and shall be identified as "bids" on the envelope. Bids shall be opened in public at the time and place stated in the public notices. A tabulation of all bids received shall be open for public inspection during regular business hours for a period of not less than thirty (30) calendar days after the bid opening. Rejection of Bids- In its discretion, the City Council may reject any and all bids presented and re-advertise for 'bids pursuant to the procedure hereinabove prescribed. Lowest Responsible Bidder: Contracts shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. In determining "lowest responsible bidder", in addition to price, the City Council shall consider: 1. The ability, capacity and skill of the bidder to perform the contract or provide the service required; 1056 §1522 §1522 A2d) maintain a permanent public record for a period of one year of the quotes sought and received, the bid selected and the reason for the selection. Be Ce 3. Rental or Purchase of Supplies and Equipment Costing Between Five Thousand Dollars and Ten Thousand Dollars: The Purchasing Officer may rent or purchase supplies and equipment costing between five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) and ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) in accordance with the provisions of subsection A2; provided, that by the close of the City Council agenda for the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting, the Purchasing Officer shall file a report with the City Council setting forth a description of the items purchased, the bids received, and the reason for the selection made. Rental or Purchase Of Supplies and Equipment Requiring Prior City Council Approval: The rental or purchase of supplies and equipment costing more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) must be approved in advance by the City Council. Purchases of supplies and equipment costing more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) shall be awarded in accordance with the procedures specified in subsection A2 or as authorized in sections 1521, 1540 and Public Contracts Code section 22032, as amended, or any successor provision of State law. Contracts for Service: Contracts for services shall be classified as public works contracts and personal services contracts. "Public works contract" means a contract for maintenance, repair, construction or improvement of real or personal property, involving the use of labor e. nd skilled trades, and which may, but need not, include the cost of materials and equipment in the contract price. Public works contract does not include construction project management services provided by a licensed architect, registered engineer, or licensed general contractor provided to the City under a separate agreement pertaining solely to the provision of such services. "Personal services contract" means a contract for professional services, such as accounting, architectural, engineering, legal, personnel, administrative, environmental, construction management, computer programming or similar services, and in which the provision of materials is incidental to the provision of professional services and comprises less than ten percent (10%) of the contract price. 1. Public Works Contracts: a. Contracts Within the Authority of the Purchasing Officer: The Purchasing Officer shall have authority to enter a public works contract costing more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) but no more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), including labor, equipment, materials, overhead and profit, if the 1059 §1522 {}1522: A. §1522 OPEN MARKET AND CONTRACTUAL SERVICES PROCEDURE. Purchases Within the Authority of the Purchasing Officer: Rentals or purchases of supplies, equipment or contractual services of an estimated value of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) or less may be made by the Purchasing Officer in the open market by using the procedure set forth in this Section. 1. Rental or Purchases of One Thousand Dollars or Less: The Purchasing Officer shall have authority to issue a purchase order or enter a contract, including a rental agreement for supplies, equipment or contractual services costing one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or less without a written solicitation of formal bids, if the purchase is included within an approved fund account and an unencumbered appropriation exists in the fund against which the purchase may be charged. Whenever possible, the Purchasing Officer shall solicit at least three (3) quotes by telephone. Supplies and equipment shall be rented or purchased and contractual services shall be purchased from the least expensive source, if the Purchasing Officer is satisfied that all sources are equally qualified and suited to the City's needs. The Purchasing Officer shall maintain a permanent public record for a period of one year of the quotes sought and received, the bid selected and the reason for the selection. 2. Rental or Purchase of Supplies and Equipment Costing More Than One Thousand Dollars But Less Than Five Thousand Dollars' The Purchasing Officer may rent or purchase supplies and equipment costing more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) but less than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), if the purchase is included within an approved fund account and an unencumbered appropriation exists in the fund against which the purchase may be charged, using the following procedures: a. Minimum Number of Bids: Open market purchases shall, wherever possible, be based on at least three (3) bids. b. Notice Inviting Bids: The Purchasing Officer shall solicit bids by written requests to prospective vendors and/or by telephone. c. Written or Telephonic Bids: Written bids shall be submitted to the Purchasing Officer by personal delivery, telefacimile ("FAX"), by mail or other means. The Purchasing Officer shall not disclose the contents of any bid, whether submitted by phone, FAX, mail or other means, until the time appointed to open or consider all submitted bids. d. Award of Bid: Supplies and equipment shall be rented or purchased from the least expensive source, if the Purchasing Officer is satisfied that all sources are equally qualified and suited to the City's needs. The PurChasing Officer shall 1058 03/12/99 10:35 ~'707 441 4138 CITY OF E~q~EKA ~003/004 RESOLUTION NO. 95-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TKE _CITY Ol ESTABLISHING A 5% LO~ P~FE~CE FOR ~ P~~E. O~ ~R~S, S~PLIES ~ EQUIP~ WHEP. EAS, the City Council of the City of Eureka interested in providing an incentive to local businesses on any materials, supplies, and equipment purchases by bid of the City; WHE~, the City Charter of the City of Eureka allows a local preference of up to 5% on purchase of materials, supplies, and equipment to firms or individuals who regularly maintain a place of business and transact business in, or maintain an inventory of merchandise for sale in the City; WHEREAS, the economy of the City needs the stimulation of the local economy that encouragement of local business tkrough a 5% local preference can provide; W~E~, the City Charter provides that the City Manager shall purchase or contract for the equipment, materials, supplies, and services required by the City, for which expenditures~ have been authorized in the budget or by other action of the city Council; WHEREAS, the City Charter pro~ides that the Cotmcil shall es~abllsh by ordinance or by resolutxon the conditions ~lnder which purchases shall be only after competitive bidding; WIIER~,AS, the ordinances of the City adopted by City Councils and codified in the Municipal Code do not now provide for a local preference; NOW, T~n~REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Eureka hereby: 1. Establishes in the bidding procedures for materials, supplies, and equipment a 5% preference to firms or individuals who regularly maintain a place of 03/12/99 10'36 '~707 441 4138 CITY OF EUREKA ~004/004 Resolution No. 5_=9~=/0 Page 2 business and transact business in, or maintain an inventory of merchandise for sale in the City. 2. That the preference be limited on the amount of local preference to he allowed to $5,000.00 for any single, cumulative bid. 3. That the procedures so established be communicated to all departments of the City and to be included in all bid documents for materials, supplies, and equipment purchases. Passed, approved and adopted by the Council of the City of Eureka, County of Humboldt, State of California on the 6th day of june, 1995, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCI~ERS COUNCI~ERS COUmCILMEMBERS COUNCI~ERS WARNES, 140P, THEN, MCKELLAR, HADSEN NONE JAGER NONE ~ ~ NANCY FL~MMIN~ ~ ATTEST: Cxty Cie.r/ SALLY G0~Z APPROVED A~ TO FORM: Clty A(torney DAVID TRANBEEG APPROVED AS TO ADMINISTRATION: City M~an~erT / ~ 03/12/99 10:~$ ~707 441 4138 CITY OF EUREKA ~002/004 SECTION 705. BUDGET TRANSFERS. At any meeting after the adoption of the budget, ~ Council may amend or supplement the budget by motion so as to authorize the uamfer ofu~-~ed balances appropriated for or~ depatl:ment to ,fl~ther department, or to appropriate available funds not included in the budget; and may authorize the City Manager to transfer funds between purposes within departments. SECTION 706. ASSESSMENT. The Council sl~all provide by ordinance for thc assessment of property for the purpose of taxation, either under the direction of the City Manager or by agreement with the County of Humboldt in the manner provided by law. SECTION 707. TAX COLLECTION. The Council shall provide by ordinancc or resolution for the collection of all taxes aad other revenues due the City, either under the direction of the City Manager or City Clerk or by agreement with the County of Humboldt, the Stair of California, or any other agency ~:gularly engaged in the collection of a given tax or other revenue. SECTION 708. GENERAL REVENUES. Thc Council may, by ordinance or resolution, provide for any tax, license or permit fee, service charge or other kind of revenue authorized by this Charter or by thc Constitution or general laws of the State, and not prohibited by the Charter or by the Constitution. ~//SECTION ?09. PUR~~G. The City Manager sh.~ll purchase or contract for the equipment, materials, supplies and services required by the city, for which expenditures have been authorized in the budget or by other action of the Council. The Council shall establish by ordinance or resolution the conditions under which purchases shall be made only after competkivc bidding, shall specif~ these ,~nounts and conditions undcr which Council approval is required for specific items of purchase, and sl~ll prescribe conditions under which all bids may be rcjcctcd and new bids invited. In the case of materials, supplies and equipment, a preference of not to exceed five percent may be allowed to firms or individuals who regularly maintain a placc of business and transact business in, or maintain an inventory of merchandise for sale in the city. AGENDA ITEM NO. 8c DATE: February. 3. 1999 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING AMENDING CITY OF UKIAH PURCHASING POLICY Councilmember Kathy Libby has requested that a discussion take place regarding amending the City's Purchasing Policy to allow a preference for qualified local vendors in our Purchasing Policy. She has submitted written comments and documents for your review from other cities and counties that currently have this policy in place. The current City of Ukiah Purchasing Procedures are included in the packet for your convenience. City Attorney Rapport will also be providing additional information at the City Council meeting for the Council's consideration relative to pertinent legal issues surrounding this matter. RECOMMENDED ACTION: After Council discussion, direct staff relative to drafting an Ordinance Revising the City of Ukiah's Purchasing Policy. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine that no changes are required at this time to City Purchasing Policy. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Attachments: N/A Kathy Libby, Councilmember Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Councilmember Libby's Documentation, as follows: a. b. . c. Memorandum and Background Lake County's Purchasing Ordinance No. 2406 Section of Shasta County's Municipal Code relating to its local preference policy City of Redding information regarding its local preference policy City of Ukiah Purchasing Procedures 4/Can:ASRPurch. Pol Candace Horsley, City~lanager ATTACHMENT I AGENDA ITEM Subject: Give a 5% preference not to exceed five thousand dollars to qualified local vendors in Mendocino County on all City bids. The City of Ukiah's present purchasing rules do not allow a preference for local vendors. Other counties and cities in California allow this preference. The purpose of a preference is to benefit local businesses and the citizens of Ukiah. Any revenue lost due to a preference rule will be small when compared to the many thousands of extra dollars kept in the community. Keeping as much money at home as possible decreases the need to increase rates and fees to finance government. Money kept in the City increases employment, increases tax revenue, and increases the circulation of money throughout the community. Under the current system, when an out of county bidder gets the bid, the money leaves the area and is gone for good. This money benefits the area of the winning bidder, which may be Santa Rosa, the Southern part of the state, or even out of state. A 5% preference will encourage local vendors to better support the City. It will ultimately increase revenue for the city and will ease the financial burden for Ukiah citizens. Options Accept as is Accept with alterations Deny Enclosed : Local preference ordinance for Lake and Shasta County and local preference policy from City of Redding for reference. 2 3 5 7 12 15 ~6 19 ~OARD OF SUP~RVI$0RS, COU~I~. OF LAKE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ORDINANCE NO. 2406 A~10RDiNANC~__ ._AM.E~rD.ING ARTICLE X OF CKA.=TER ~ .OF THE bAK~ CO[D~TY COD_E_ (-=5-RCHA~ SiN_C-_ ORD!N~2~Cp; The Board of Supervisors c: uhe CountF of Laka ordains as ~ollows: ~CecZion !. Article X of Chapter 2 cf ~he Lake County Code is hereby amended =o read as follows: "A.RT I CiE K. _u D~R Cbl~S i.NG Section 2.33. Declara~-ion and Purpose. 33.1 Pursuan~ =o Arti:!e 7 c= Chapter 5 of Par= 2 of Division 2 of Title 3 cf the Governmen~ Code, the pu---~.ose cf =his article is tO esuablish policies and procedures governinc k_ prccuremen~ of supplies, ma=erla!s, e~aipmen=, and con=fac=ual se~ices. Sec=ion 2-3%. Defi~itions. 3a i ~ used in this arsic!e, the ~ ~ -' ,o. lowing words and phrases ~hall have ~he following meanings. (a) Agency and Using Agency ~eans any of the d~par~men=s, offices, or c~her organizauiena! unit~ Df County Government. and any special ~isurict whose affairs and funds ar=. under the 20 II supe'~";~'si°n and cuntrci of ~he _Ucard of Su:e.~-viscr$ and ~or which 21 - - the Board of Supervisors is ~he ex-officio gcvernin~ (b) Agency he~d means ~he head cf an established depar=men~ 23 ef County governmen~ or any of uhe specia' dis=r~cts Fovern~d by ~he ~oard cf Supervisors whcse i'i:les tnc!'~d~ suuer';~sicn cf 25 deDarumen~'s c~ ~is-ri'-u's day ~ dav ooe~5icns and wkc has 27 'D J ~. t , ~. , =qx-25-~ aa~ :].2:24 ~ ~' ....... I oF, PI~t:"IaGE:dENT 787 253 1812 P.02 6 ? 9 17 ~9 2O 22 23 24 27 (f) Bidders List means a current file of sources or, supply cf articles for eack category cf commodities repetitively purchased for County use. (g) Responsible Bid means an offer, subm~_.: ted by a r~sponsible bidder in ink or ~.vpewri~ten form, ~o furnish supplies, mat,rials, equipment or --cntracm~al services in conformity with the specifications, delivery ~erms and conditions, and o~her requirements included in the invitation for bids. (h) Responsible gi~der means a bidder who ~'~hm±~s a responsible bid; who has furnished, when re.cues~e~, information and da~a ~o prove ~ka~ kis f~nancial resources, production cr facilities, service repu~a~icn and experience are ade~.-ua.:=. ~o make satisfactory delive_~y_ of ~he suppl±es, ,ma~eria!s, or e~uipm, en~ satisfy any provisicns of ~his arzicle. (i) Irresponsible Bidder means a bidder or prospect:ye bidder who fails .~o furnish, u.~cn written request, proof cf responsibility; who has, as a vendc~ or con:rac-.or wi~h the County, · repeatedly made slow' cr unsa[;s~ac~ory deliveries; or who has violated, or attempted ~o violate, ~ke con~rac~ terms, conditions of a bid, a contract, or the provisions of ~his ar~ic!e. (j) Local Vendor means a f~rm or indLvidua~ who r=.~u!ar!v .- -. maintains a place of business and ~r~nsac~s business in, and- i i --_ : r: _~, ~ - _--__at - · ma~-ntains an inven~-.; cr merchandise for sale in, or is '_icense~ sy, cr pays business taxes -.$, mhe Cmunmy cf Lake. (k) Emergency means wk~_n a breakdown ~- mach±nery mr in an essen~-i&! sez-zic~ ccrurs; cr when ur. foresee- ~:~-'-'ms:ances arise, 3 J'AN-25-1993 12:25 ~ISK ;qq~t~G£~l£~iT 787 263 1812 2 3 4 S 6 7 22 24 25 26 (c) In keeping with the County's interest in promoting local businesses an RFQ shall be sent tc at least one local venoor, if There is one who can provide the required goods or services. 40.3 Purchase orders or contracts shall be awarded by the Purchasing Agent, or Assistant Purchasing Agent, cD the lowest responsible bidder, as determined be!ow. (a) In de=ermining =ne bidder to whom the bid will be awarded, the Purchasing ADen=, or Assistant Purchasing Agent, shall consider the bidder's price ~he quali~y of produc~ o~~._u and its conformity with the County's needs, the delivery and discount =erms and conditions cf the bid, ~he service reputation o~ the'bidder and other information and data r~-c~uired to Drove responslb~ - .~ity. .When The Counuy is required to Uay' shippinq charges for an item or items said charges shall be considered a part c~ he bld price in determining ~he lowest responsible bid. {b) In addition to =ne foregoing trivetS_a, ~_ ~he bid submit".ed by a respons:bie iota! vendor is ntt grea=er than !05% of ,, the apparent= _!ow bid and ali o~h~r criteria be=nD e_~ua! ureference shall be.given to the responsible local vendor. How,vet, in nc case shall ~he amcunu cf the preference exceed {c) If more than one bid is for the same =ocai a:nounc or unit price {a~'-~ consider~nc ~ke c% ~-=erence kereinabove~ and '~ public inuerest will ncz =e-~it the delay of r~advertising ~or bids the Purchasing Auen~ o_ Assissan= ~uruhasin~ ' _ .~en=, may awar~ the conarac- ~o one o= ,k, =idders by draw-nD lc~s :n public. / / / /~/ /' 12 .1'AN-25-1999 12:25 RI~_-S~< H~IAGE~EWT ?~? 263 1012 P. 04 3 4 5 7 13 17 18 23 24 25 27 conformity with the specifications, ~he deiive~F and discount terms and conditions cf the bid, ~he service reputation of the bidder, and other infcrma~'2on and data required tc prove his responsibility. When :he Coun'_y is required ~o pay shipping char_ces for an item cr items, said char~es shall be considered a part of the bid price in dete_~m, ining .the lowest responsible bid. (b) In addition to the fore?cin~ criteria if the bid ii,...-."' ......... -' submitted by a responsible tocal vendor is net ~reater than !05% of the apparent low bid and al! other criteria beinq eqIua!, preference shall be qiven ~o the responsible local vendor. Kowever, in no c~se shall the amoun~ cf the ~reference exceed S1 000 (c) If more than one bid is for the same total amoun~ or uni~ price (al%er considerlnw the 5% preference ker~=inabove) , and if the public in~eres~ will not pe_~nit ~he delay of readvertisin~ for bids, the Board cf Supervisors ~ay award the contract ~o one of bidders by drawin~ lots in pub!lc. 41.4 If the successful bidder doe~ nc~ enter into a con~ract within f~fteen (15) day~ after mailin~ of .~otice of 'Award cf ccn~ract, he shall fcrfei~ in ca~h, an amcu~.t equivalent to the amoun~ of any ~urety which accompanied his bid, unless the Coun-~y is responsible for the delay. 4%.5 A copy of =_ach si?ned contract shall be filed wi~h County Auditor. Sectio~ 2-42. Fnm_~r~ency 42.~ if [he need for an emerqenclz purchase occurs durin? recular ~uslne_~s hour_= or a: any o,he_ _i...e, -_he usin_c aqency may purchase direc-~!-; t[~.e commodity cr csmmcdz-~es re~cired, rf 15 TOTAL P.04 d.~N.-25'99iMON) 12'07 SHASTA C0. PURGH.~SiN TEL 550 225 5344 0 P. 002 3.O4.09,O (Ord. 96-1 § 1, 1996: Ord. 93-12 (part), 1993; Ord. 91-11 § 1, 1991: Ord. 91-9 (par0, 1991: Ord. 494-345 § 2, 1989: prior code § 1701) 3.O4.030 Requirement for formal sealed bids. A. If the cost of a purchase of related items commonly sold by a class of veadors would or could eseeecl twenty-five thousand dollars, a formal sealed bid shall be solicit- ecl by mailing a wriuen invi~ion to vendors, or by posting the invRaxion on public, bulletin board Jn the office of the, purchasing agent, or by publishing the invi.. ration or a sunutuiry of it in a newslm~r of genera/circulation in the count. The award of formal sea/ed bids which exceed fifty thousand dollars requires advance approval by the board of supervisors. B. If derailed specifications are requirezt for any bid, the invitation shall include those specifications or indicat~ where they may be obtained. F, ach invitation shaJl spec- ify the time and pIace where thc bids will be opened. Each invitation shall include the following statement: A bidder who attempts to influence the bid process by interfering or colluding with other biders, or with any County officer, employee or ascnt, or who devi- ates from the bid process as set forth in this invitation may be disqualifiea at ~y rime from further particdparion in ~is bid. C. Bid or performance bonds may be required at the discretion of the purchasing agent. (Ord. 96-1 § 2, 1996; Ord. 93-12 (part), 1993; Ord. 9 I-9 (pta't), 1991: Ord. 494-345 § 3, 1989: prior code § 1702) 56 3.04.1)40 Exclusion of bids and bidders, A. If any bidder fails or refuses to fur- nish thc purchasing agent with any informa- tion required ~o determine thc bidder's re- sponsibility as a bidder, the bid shall not be considered by the purchasing :,gent. B. A bid that is not responsive to an invitation, or any specifications made a p~ax of an invi~ion, shall not be considered by thc purchasing agent. C. Thc purchasing agent may remove from thc lis! of prospective bidders the name of any person who fails or refuses to submit bids in respons~ to at least two con- securive requests for bids on corrunoditics of a class furnished by the person. D. Thc purchasing agent may exclude from bidding any person who has failed to meet prior contractual requirements related to purchas~ made by the county, (Ord. 49~-345 § 4, 1989: prior code § 1703) 3.0,t,t)45 Local prefcrcnce. A. A fiv-'-percent preference not to exceed ten thousand dollars shall be granted to qualifm:! local bidders on all formal scaled bids, except as to those contracts which state law requires to be granted to the lowest responsibl~ bidder. B. To qualify for local bidder prefex- cnce, a local bidder must either submit a copy of a currant city business license, issued by a city within the g~ograpl~ical boundaries of thc county of Shasta, or com- plete and sign a declaration under penalty of p~rjury, sating that as of the date th~ request for bids was issued, t~e business as listed on the bid was physically rn~ntain~d and operated at a fized office or other busi- ness pzemis~s located within the geogmph- i~l limits of ~e county, and providing such T ~ ' dAN,-25 991MON) 12'07 SHAST;~ CO, PI.,R(JH.&SI~4 TEL'530 225 5344 () P. O03 3.04.0~5 issued by a city within the g¢ograplfic'ai btmndaries of the county of Shasta, or com- plete and sign a declaration under penalty of perjury, stating that as of the dace the request for bids was issued, the business az listed on the bid was physically maintained and operated at a fixed office or o~er busi- ne~ premises located w/thin the geograph- ical limits of the county, and providing -~uch 56-1 ~JAN.-25'99I)ION) 12108 SHASTA G0. PL'R<;HASiN TEL:S30 225 5344 0 P. 004 other information as may be requested. (Ord. 96-1 § 3, 1996; Oral 91-10 § 1, 1991) 3.tM.050 Deposition of bids. A. Formal sealed bids shall be ot:zned and awarded by or under the direct.ion of the purchasing agent, unless the invitation to bid or the bowd of supervisors directs otherwise. B. Except as provided for in Section 3.04.0~5, formal sealed bids shall be award- ed to the lowest responsibie bidder meeting all bid specifications. Bids shall be opened at the time and place specif'~ed in the invite. tion or as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible. The purchasing agent may reject any bid for failure of the bid to respond to the invitation, including any specifications, for which the bid is submitted. The purchas- ing agent may provide a written explanation to any bidder whose bid has been rejected, upon written request Ir'om the bidder for such an explanation. The purchasing agent may reject ali bids submitted in response to a particular invitation. The puxcbasing agent may waive any minor deviation from the specifications applicable to any bid or any minor technical error in any bid and may award the bid in spite of such a deviation or error, if the purchasing agent determines the award of the bid to be in the best interests of the county. C. Each bid or the full details of each bid shall be kept on file by the purchasing agent and available for public inspection, together with the name of the successful bidder, for thirty days after a bid is awai'ded. (Ord. 91- 10 § 2, 1991: prior code § 1704) 3.04.060 Cooperative purchases, The purchasing agent may purchase any 3.04 materials, equipment or supplies available under a General Services Administration conU.act, a state of California contract, or any other cooperative contract available to the county, if the purchase can be made at lower cost than the purchasing agent can secure through competitive procurement. (Prior code § 1705) 3,04.070 Cost avoidance. The purchasing agent shall consolidate and schedule orders whenever possible to take advantage of savings from discounts for quantity purchases, favorable market conditions, bulk shipment or any other cir- cumstance which may avoid unnecessary expenditure of public funds. However, a purchase may not be divided into smaller units to evade the competitive procurement requirements of this chapter. (Prior code § 1706) 3.04,080 Multi-year purchases. No purchase shall be marie if the. pur- chase agreement, by its terms, requires the expenditure of funds not appropriated when the agreement is made, unless the approval of the board of supervisors is first obtained. This section does not apply to any multi- year purchase agreement when: (A) the county may terminate its obligations under the agreemenl if the board of supervisors. in its sole discretion, determines not to appropriate funds for the purchase for any fiscal year during the term of the agree- ment; or (B) the count), does not guarantee in thc agreement to purchase any minimum quantity of the matter subject to the con- tract. (peior code § 1707) 57 (Sham Co~ary 4-~5 81/'25/1999 ~l:16 530225443~ OIT~/~D~ PJ~OH~BING ~E 82/02 §1500 §1501 CHAPTER 6 PURCHASING AUTHORITY ARTICLE 1. GENERAL SECTION: § 1500: §1501: §1502: §1503: §1504: §1505: §1506: §1507: §1508: §1509: §1510: Adoption of Purchasing System Centralized Purchasing Department Purchasing Officer Exemptions from Centralized Purchasing Estimates of Requirements Requisitions Purchase Orders Encumbrance of Funds Unauthorized Purchases Prohibition of Interest Gifts and Rebates §1500: ADOPTION OF PURCHASING SYSTEM: In order to establish efficient procedures for the purchase of supplies and equipment, to secure for the City supplies and equipment at the lowest possible cost commensurate with quality needed, to exercise positive financial control over purchases, to clearly define authority for the purchasing function and to assure the quality of purchases, a purchasing system is hereby adopted. (Ord. 6677, §2, adopted 1975) §1501: CENTRALIZED PURCHASING DEPARTMENT: There is hereby created a centralized Purchasing Department in which is vested authority for the purchase of supplies and equipment. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) 1. Ord. 514 repealed in its entirety by Ord. 667, adopted 1975. 1051 §1502 §1502 {}1502: PURCHASING OFFICER: The City Manager shall be the City Purchasing Officer unless by action of the City Council a new classified position is created and an appointment is made to such position in compliance with City Ord. 508. The duties of Purchasing Officer may be combined with or assigned to any other office or position. The Purchasing Officer shall have the authority to: A. Purchase or contract for supplies and equipment required by any using agency in accordance with purchasing procedures prescribed by this ordinance, such administrative regulations as the Purchasing Officer shall adopt for the internal management and operation of the Purchasing Department and such other rules and regulations as shall be prescribed by the City Council. Be Negotiate and recommend execution of contracts for the purchase of supplies and equipment. Ce Act to procure for the City the needed quality in supplies and equipment at least expense to the City. De Discourage uniform bidding and endeavor to obtain as full and open competition as possible on all purchases. E. Prepare and recommend to the City Council rules governing the purchase of supplies and equipment for the City. F. Prepare and recommend to the City Council revisions and amendments to the purchasing rules. Ge Keep informed of current developments in the field of purchasing, prices, market conditions and new products. He Prescribe and maintain such forms as reasonably necessary to the operation of this ordinance and other rules and regulations. Supervise the inspection of all supplies and equipment purchased to insure conformance with specifications. U. Recommend the transfer of surplus or unused supplies and equipment between departments as needed. K. Maintain a Bidders' List, vendors' catalog file and records needed for the efficient operation of the Purchasing Department. (Ord. 667, {}2, adopted 1975) 1 o52 §1503 §1508 §1503: EXEMPTIONS FROM CENTRALIZED PURCHASING: The Purchasing Officer, with approval of the City Council, may authorize in writing, any department to purchase specified supplies and equipment independently of the Purchasing Department; but he shall require that such purchases shall be made in conformity with the procedures established by this ordinance, and shall further require periodic reports from the departments on the purchases made under such written authorization. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1504: ESTIMATES OF REQUIREMENTS: Ail departments shall file detailed estimates of their requirements in supplies and equipment in such manner, at such time, and for such future periods as the Purchasing Officer shall prescribe. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1505: REQUISITIONS: Departments shall submit requests for supplies and equipment to the Purchasing Officer by standard requisition forms, or by other means as may be established by the Purchasing Rules and Regulations. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1506: PURCHASE ORDERS: Purchases of supplies and equipment shall be made only by purchase orders. Except as otherwise provided herein, no purchase order shall be issued unless the prior approval of the Purchasing Officer or his designated representative has been obtained. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1507: ENCUMBRANCE OF FUNDS: Except in cases of emergency or in cases where specific authority has been first obtained from the City Manager, the Purchasing Officer shall not issue any purchase order for the supplies or equipment unless there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account against which said purchase is to be charged. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1508: UNAUTHORIZED PURCHASES: Except as herein provided, it shall be unlawful for any City officer or officers to order the purchase of any supplies or make any contract within the purview of this ordinance other than through the Purchasing Department, and any purchase ordered or contract made contrary to the provisions hereof shall not be approved by the City Council, and the City shall not be bound thereby. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) 1 o53 §1509 §1510 §1509: PROHIBITION OF INTEREST: No purchase order or contract within the purview of this Chapter in which the Council, Purchasing Officer or any other officer or employee of the City, in which to their knowledge they are financially interested, directly or indirectly, shall be issued, except the Council shall have the authority to waive compliance with this Section when it finds such action to be in the best interests of the City. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1510' GIFTS AND REBATES: The agent and every officer and employee of the City are expressly prohibited from accepting, directly or indirectly, from any person, company, firm or corporation to which any purchase order or contract is, or might be awarded, any rebate, gift, money or anything of value whatsoever, except where given for the use and benefit of the City. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) 1054 §1520 §1521 CHAPTER 6 PURCHASING AUTHORITY ARTICLE 2. BIDDING PROCEDURES SECTION: §1520: §1521: §1522: Competitive Bidding Required Formal Contract Procedure Open Market and Contractual Services Procedure §1520: COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIRED: All purchases of, and contracts for supplies, and all sales of personal property which has become obsolete and unusable shall, except as specifically provided herein, be based wherever possible on competitive bids. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1521: FORMAL CONTRACT PROCEDURE: Except as otherwise provided herein, purchases of supplies and equipment of an estimated value greater than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), or such greater figure as may be from time to time set by the legislature by amendment to Section 37902 of the Government Code of California, or by other applicable provisions, shall be by written contract with the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to the procedure hereinafter prescribed. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975; amd. by Ord. 766, §1, adopted 1981) A. Notice Inviting Bids: Notices inviting bids shall include a general description of the articles to be purchased, shall state where bid blanks and specifications may be secured, and the time and place for opening bids. 1. Published Notice: Notices inviting bids shall be published at least (10) days before the date of opening of the bids. Notices shall be published at least once 1 O55 §1521 Al) Be Gl De E. §1521 in a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City, or if there is none, it shall be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City that have been designated by ordinance as the places for posting public notices. 2. Bidders' List: The Purchasing Officer shall also solicit sealed bids from all responsible prospective suppliers whose names are on the Bidders' List or who have made written request that their names be added thereto. Bidder's Security: When deemed necessary by the Purchasing Officer, bidder's security may be prescribed in the public notices inviting bids. Bidders shall be entitled to return of bid security; provided, however, that a successful bidder shall forfeit his bid security upon his refusal or failure to execute the contract within ten (10) days after the notice of award of contract has been mailed, unless in the latter event the City is solely responsible for the delay in executing the contract. The City Council may, on refusal or 'failure of the successful bidder to execute the contract, award it to the next lowest responsible bidder. If the City Council awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City to the contract price differential between the lowest bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any, shall be returned to the lowest bidder. If the City Council rejects all bids presented and re-advertises, due to a refusal of the lowest bidder to enter into a contract, the amount of the lowest bidder's security may be used to offset the cost of receiving new bids with the surplus, if any, being returned to the lowest bidder. Bid Opening Procedure: Sealed bids shall be submitted to the City Clerk and shall be identified as "bids" on the envelope. Bids shall be opened in public at the time and place stated in the public notices. A tabulation of all bids received shall be open for public inspection during regular business hours for a period of not less than thirty (30) calendar days after the bid opening. Rejection of Bids: In its discretion, the City Council may reject any and all bids presented and re-advertise for 'bids pursuant to the procedure hereinabove prescribed. Lowest Responsible Bidder: Contracts Shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. In determining "lowest responsible bidder", in addition to price, the City Council shall consider: 1. The ability, capacity and skill of the bidder to perform the contract or provide the service required; 1056 {}1521 {}1521 F. G. E) 2. Whether the bidder can perform the contract, or provide the service promptly or within the time specified, without delay or interference; 3. The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the bidder; 4. The previous and existing compliance by the bidder with laws and ordinance relating to the contract of service; 5. The quality of performance of previous contracts of service; 6. The sufficiency of financial resources and ability of bidder to perform the contract or provide the service; 7. The quality, availability and adaptability of' the supplies, or contractual services to the particular use required; 8. The ability of the bidder to provide future maintenance and service for the use of the subject of the contract; 9. The number and scope of conditions attached to the bid. Award to Other Than Low Bidder: When the award is not given to the lowest bidder, a full and complete statement of the reasons for placing the order elsewhere shall be prepared by the agent and filed with the other papers relating to the transaction. Tie Bids: If two (2) or more bids received are for the same total amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, and if the public interest will not permit the delay of re-advertising for bids, the City Council may in its discretion accept the one it chooses or accept the lowest bid made by and after negotiation with the tie bidders at the time of the bid opening. Performance Bonds: The City Council shall have authority to require a performance bond before entering a contract in such amount as it shall find reasonably necessary to protect the best interests of the City. If the City Council requires a performance bond, the form and amount of the bond shall be described in the notice inviting bids. Bidders in Default to City: The agent shall not accept the bid of a contractor or supplier who is in default on the payment of taxes, licenses or other monies due the City. (Ord. 667, {}2, adopted 1975) 1057 {}1522 {}1522 {}1522: A. OPEN MARKET AND CONTRACTUAL SERVICES PROCEDURE- Purchases Within the Authority of the Purchasing Officer: Rentals or purchases of supplies, equipment or contractual services of an estimated value of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) or less may be made by the Purchasing Officer in the open market by using the procedure set forth in this Section. 1. Rental or Purchases of One Thousand Dollars or Less: The Purchasing Officer shall have authority to issue a purchase order or enter a contract, including a rental agreement for supplies, equipment or contractual services costing one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or less without a written solicitation of formal bids, if the purchase is included within an approved fund account and an unencumbered appropriation exists in the fund against which the purchase may be charged. Whenever possible, the Purchasing Officer shall solicit at least three (3) quotes by telephone. Supplies and equipment shall be rented or purchased and contractual services shall be purchased from the least expensive source, if the Purchasing Officer is satisfied that all sources are equally qualified and suited to the City's needs. The Purchasing Officer shall maintain a permanent public record for a period of one year of the quotes sought and received, the bid selected and the reason for the selection. 2. Rental or Purchase of Supplies and Equipment Costing More Than One Thousand Dollars But Less Than Five Thousand Dollars: The Purchasing Officer may rent or purchase supplies and equipment costing more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) but less than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), if the purchase is included within an approved fund account and an unencumbered appropriation exists in the fund against which the purchase may be charged, using the following procedures: a. Minimum Number of Bids: Open market purchases shall, wherever possible, be based on at least three (3) bids. b. Notice Inviting Bids- The Purchasing Officer shall solicit bids by written requests to prospective vendors and/or by telephone. c. Written or Telephonic Bids: Written bids shall be submitted to the Purchasing Officer by personal delivery, telefacimile ("FAX"), by mail or other means. The Purchasing Officer shall not disclose the contents of any bid, whether submitted by phone, FAX, mail or other means, until the time appointed to open or consider all submitted bids. d. Award of Bid: Supplies and equipment shall be rented or purchased from the least expensive source, if the Purchasing Officer is satisfied that all sources are equally qualified and suited to the City's needs. The PurChasing Officer shall 1058 §1522 §1522 A2d) maintain a permanent public record for a period of one year of the quotes sought and received, the bid selected and the reason for the selection. B. Ce 3. Rental or Purchase of Supplies and Equipment Costing Between Five Thousand Dollars and Ten Thousand Dollars: The Purchasing Officer may rent or purchase supplies and equipment costing between five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) and ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) in accordance with the provisions of subsection A2; provided, that by the close of the City Council agenda for the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting, the Purchasing Officer shall file a report with the City Council setting forth a description of the items purchased, the bids received, and the reason for the selection made. Rental or Purchase Of Supplies and Equipment Requiring Prior City Council Approval: The rental or purchase of supplies and equipment costing more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) must be approved in advance by the City Council. Purchases of supplies and equipment costing more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) shall be awarded in accordance with the procedures specified in subsection A2 or as authorized in sections 1521, 1540 and Public Contracts Code section 22032, as amended, or any successor provision of State law. Contracts for Service: Contracts for services shall be classified as public works contracts and personal services contracts. "Public works contract" means a contract for maintenance, repair, construction or improvement of real or personal property, involving the use of labor and skilled trades, and which may, but need not, include the cost of materials and equipment in the contract price. Public works contract does not include construction project management services provided by a licensed architect, registered engineer, or licensed general contractor provided to the City under a separate agreement pertaining solely to the provision of such services. "Personal services contract" means a contract for professional services, such as accounting, architectural, engineering, legal, personnel, administrative, environmental, construction management, computer programming or similar services, and in which the provision of materials is incidental to the provision of professional services and comprises less than ten percent (10%) of the contract price. 1. Public Works Contracts: a. Contracts Within the Authority of the Purchasing Officer: The Purchasing Officer shall have authority to enter a public works contract costing more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) but no more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), including labor, equipment, materials, overhead and profit, if the 1059 §1522 §1522 C la) work is included within an approved fund account and an unencumbered appropriation exists in the fund against which the purchase may be charged. The Purchasing Officer may only enter such contracts using the following procedures: (1) Minimum Number of Bids: Whenever possible, the Purchasing Officer will award the contract based on at least three (3) bids. (2) Notice Inviting Bids' The Purchasing Officer shall solicit bids by written request and/or by telephone with written confirmation to follow within three (3) working days, which notice shall include such specifications and bidding requirements as .the Purchasing Officer determines are appropriate to the work and as are required by law. (3) Written Bids- Sealed written bids or bids submitted by FAX shall be submitted to the Purchasing Officer. The Purchasing Officer shall not disclose the contents of any bids submitted by sealed bid, FAX or solicited by telephone until the time appointed to open or consider all submitted bids. (4) Award of Bids: Su. pplies and equipment sh'all be rented or purchased from the least expensive source, if the Purchasing Officer is satisfied that all sources are equally qualified and suited to the City's needs. The Purchasing Officer shall maintain a permanent record for a period of one year of the quotes sought and received, the bid selected and the reason for the selection. (5) Public Works Contracts Over Five Thousand Dollars: By the close of the agenda for the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting, occurring after the Purchasing Officer enters a public works contract costing more than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), the Purchasing Officer shall file a report with the City Council setting forth a description of the contract, the bids received, and the reason for the selection. b. Public works contracts requiring prior approval of the City Council. The City Council must approve all public works contracts costing more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00). All such contracts shall be awarded in accordance with the procedures authorized in subsection C1 or as authorized in sections 1521, 1540 and Public Contracts Code section 22032, as amended, or any successor provision of State law. 2. Personal Service Contracts: 1060 §1522 C2) §1522 a. Personal services contracts within the authority of the Purchasing Officer: The Purchasing Officer shall have authority to enter a personal services contract costing more 'than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) but no more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), if the work is included within an approved fund account and an unencumbered appropriation exists in the fund against which the purchase may be charged. The Purchasing Officer may only enter such contracts using the following procedures. (1) Minimum Number of Bids: Whenever possible, the Purchasing Officer will award the contract based on at least three (3) proposals, and shall award the contract on the basis of demonstrated competence and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance' of the services required. To the extent permitted by law, including, but not limited to, Government Code section 4526, the Purchasing Officer shall consider cost as one factor in awarding the contract. (2) Notice Inviting Bids: The Purchasing Officer shall solicit proposals by written request for proposal (RFP), which shall include such specifications and requirements as the Purchasing Officer determines are appropriate to the work and as are required by law. Announcements of RFPs may, but need not, be placed in appropriate professional 'publications. RFPs shall be sent to the largest number of qualified professionals practical in the judgment of the Purchasing Officer. The Purchasing Officer shall include as many small business firms as identified by the Director of General Services of the State of California pursuant to Government Code section 14837 as the Purchasing Officer determines is practical. The Purchasing Officer and his or her designees shall not engage in any practice which might result in unlawful or unfair treatment in processing proposals and awarding contracts, including, but not limited to, rebates, kickbacks, bribes or other unlawful consideration. No City officer or employee shall participate in the selection process when those officers or employees have a relationship with a person or business entity seeking a contract under this subsection which would subject those officers or employees to the prohibition of Government Code section 87100. (3) Written Proposals: Written proposals shall be submitted to the Purchasing Officer who shall keep a public record of all such proposals for a period of one year after their submission. The contract shall be awarded based on the proposal, such personal interviews as the Purchasing Officer deems appropriate, and the criteria set forth in subsection (2). (4) Personal Services Contracts Over Five Thousand Dollars: By the close of the agenda for the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting, 1061 § 1522 §1522 C2a4) occurring after the Purchasing Officer enters a personal services contract costing more than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), the Purchasing Officer shall file'-a report with the City Council setting forth a description of the contract, the proposals received, and the reason for the selection. b. Personal Services Contracts Requiring Prior City Council Approval: The City Council must approve all personal services contracts costing more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00). All such contracts shall be awarded in accordance with the procedures set forth in subsection Clb. De Procedure if Bids Exceed Estimate: Except as may be otherwise required by law, if all bids received for particular items of supplies, equipment or contractual services are in excess of the dollar limits specified herein for the procedures used to solicit those bids, the Purchasing Officer may nevertheless issue a purchase order or enter a contract if the invoice Or contract does not exceed the prescribed limit by more than ten percent (10%). (Ord. 918, §2, adopted 1991) 1 O62 §1530 §1530 CHAPTER 6 PURCHASING AUTHORITY ARTICLE 3. SPECIAL PROCEDURES SECTION: § 1530: §1531: §1532: §1533: §1534: Emergency Purchases Cooperative Purchasing Inspection and Testing Surplus Supplies and Equipment Severability §1530: EMERGENCY PURCHASES: By Agent: In case of an apparent emergency which requires immediate purchase of supplies or contractual services, the City Manager shall be empowered to authorize the Purchasing Officer to secure by open market procedure as herein set forth, at the lowest obtainable price, any supplies or contractual services regardless of the amount of the expenditure. 1. Recorded Explanation: A full report of the circumstances of an emergency purchase shall be filed by the Purchasing Officer with the City Council and shall be entered in the minutes of the Council and shall be open to public inspection. Be By Head of Departments: In case of actual emergency and with the consent of the Purchasing Officer, and the approval of the City Manager, the department head may purchase directly any supplies whose immediate procurement is essential to prevent delays in the work of such department which may vitally affect the life, health or convenience of citizens. 1063 § 1530 B) {}1534 1. Recorded Explanation: The head of such department shall send to the Purchasing Officer a requisition and a copy of the delivery record together with a full written"report of the circumstances of the emergency. The report shall be filed with the Council as provided in subsection A1 above. 2. Emergency Procedure: The Purchasing Officer shall prescribe by rules and regulations the procedure under which emergency purchases by heads of departments may be made. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) §1531' COOPERATIVE PURCHASING: The Purchasing Officer shall have the authority to join with other units of government in cooperative purchasing plans when the best interests of the City would be served thereby. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) . §1532: INSPECTION AND TESTING: .The Purchasing Officer shall inspect supplies and equipment delivered to determine their conformance with the specifications set forth in the order. The Purchasing Officer shall have authority to require chemical and physical tests of samples submitted with bids and samples of deliveries which are necessary to determine their quality and conformance with specifications. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) {}1533: SURPLUS SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT: All departments shall submit to the Purchasing Officer, at such times and in such forms as he shall prescribe, reports showing all supplies and equipment which are no longer used or which have become obsolete or worn out. The Purchasing Officer shall have authority to exchange for or trade in on new supplies and equipment all supplies and equipment which cannot be used by any agency or which have become unsuitable for City use. The Purchasing Officer shall have the authority to dispose of surplus property by solicitation of bids or by public auction. (Ord. 667, §2, adopted 1975) {}1534: SEVERABILITY: if any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the entire ordinance or any of the remaining portions thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause and phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. (Ord. 667, {}2, adopted 1975) 1064 §1540 CHAPTER 6 PURCHASING AUTHORITY ARTICLE 4. INFORMAL BIDDING §1541 SECTION: §1540: §1541: §1542: §1543: §1544: Purpose Maintenance of Contractors' List Revision of Contractors' List Informal Bidding Procedures Awarding of Contract §1540: PURPOSE: The purpose of this Article is to establish an informal bidding ordinance to govern the selection of contractors to perform public projects pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 22032 of the Public Contracts Code, or any successor provision of State law. (Ord. 892, §2, adopted 1989) §1541: MAINTENANCE OF CONTRACTORS' LIST: In November of each year, the City Clerk shall cause a written notice to be mailed to all construction trade journals designated in Public Contracts Code Section 22036, inviting all licensed contractors to submit the name of their firm to the City for inclusion on the City's list of qualified bidders for the following calendar year. The notice shall require that the contractor provide the name and address to which a Notice to Contractors or Proposal should be mailed a phone number at which the contractor may be reached, the type of work in which the contractor is interested and for which the contractor is currently licensed (i.e., electrical, painting, general building, etc.) together with the class of contractor's license or licenses held and the contractor's license number(s). (Ord. 892, §2, adopted 1989) 1 O65 §1542 § 1544 §1542' REVISION OF CONTRACTORS' LIST: On January 1 of each year the City Council may create a new Contractors' List by adding any contractor's name they so desire to the existing Contractors' List. At a minimum, the Contractors' List must include all contractors who have properly provided the City with the information required under Section 1541, during the calendar year in which the list is valid. The City Clerk shall also include on the Contractors' List the names of all contractors who have submitted a valid bid to the City during the preceding calendar year. A contractor may have his/her firm added to the City's Contractors' List at any time by providing the information required under Section 1541, to the City Clerk and by making a request in writing to the Clerk that the contractor's firm be added to the list. (Ord. 892, §2, adopted 1989) §1543- INFORMAL BIDDING PROCEDURES: Public projects of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00), or such greater sum as is authorized by Public Contracts Code section 22032 (b) or any laws that amend said section, or less may be let by the City to contract by the informal bidding procedures provided in this Section. The City clerk shall mail a notice to all contractors on the City's Contractors' List for the category of work being bid. All notices shall be mailed by the Clerk not less than ten (10) calendar days before bids are due. The notice inviting informal bids shall describe the project in general terms, how to obtain more detailed information about the project, and state the time and place for the submission of bids. All bids received shall be filed with the City Clerk and opened by the Clerk at the time and place specified in the notice inviting bids. Any bidder may be present during said bid opening and may inspect any such bid. (Ord. 892, §2, adopted 1989) §1544: AWARDING OF CONTRACT: The awarding of all contracts advertised under this Article shall be made by the City Council to the lowest responsible bidder, provided the bidder is competent. The Council may delegate the authority to award informal contracts to the City Manager or his or her designee. At such time as it is authorized by Public Contracts Code section 22034 (f) or any laws that amend said section, if all bids received are in excess of seventy five thousand dollars ($75,000.00), the City Council may by passage of a resolution by a four-fifths (4/5) vote, award the contract, at eighty thousand dollars ($80,000.00), or less, to the lowest responsible bidder, if it determines the cost estimate of the City was reasonable. (Ord. 892, §2, adopted 1989) 1066 Dear Ukiah City Council, FEB ] 7 1999 CITY OF UKIAH CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT lam intrigued by Kathy Libby's proposal to the Ukiah City Council to look at giving preferences to local businesses bidding on city contracts. ! agree with the concept of promoting local jobs and keeping business taxes paid by companies doing work for the city coming back to the city. I suggest that when looking at all the pros and cons of such a proposal, that we consider the concept of a living wage guarantee for the workers doing the work. I would like to see us somehow guarantee that we do not give preferential treatment to any business who does not pay their employees a livable wage. A living wage is when a family can meet the daily costs of living. It is having enough money to pay the bills without relying on subsidies and handouts. A living wage pays for a healthy family life. It pays for the ordinary and necessa,~, costs of everyday life and it provides for such major expenses as child care for the early years, college and retirement. The living wage strategy has had success in various cities around our' country. We would not have to 'reinvent the wheel' and could benefit from looking at what has been done elsewhere. While we are at it, we could give preferences to businesses who are environmentally friendly as well as worker/family friendly. One idea to consider is a 'three strikes' for businesses. This means that businesses who break the law and are fined or penalized in some way would not be awarded city contracts after their third offense. This could include fines for polluting our environment, endangering employees lives, etc. Ithink with clear objectives we can come up with some excellent and effective solutions. Here are some of my objectives relating to giving local businesses preferences: 1. a healthy local economy; 2. families having a healthy lifestyle from incomes earned working; 3. preserving our environment; 4. supporting businesses that promote our objectives. I'm looking forward to the forthcoming dialogue and decisions on this topic. Karen Poplawski Ukiah 707-462-6570 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 9a DATE: March 17, 1999 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO AMEND THE CITY OF UKIAH'S PERS CONTRACT TO PROVIDE MILITARY SERVICE CREDIT AS PUBLIC SERVICE AND THIRD LEVEL OF 1959 SURVIVOR BENEFITS FOR LOCAL MISCELLANEOUS AND SAFETY MEMBERS AND INTRODUCTION OF IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCE. As agreed upon by a majodty of the City of Ukiah's employee units, and approved by City Council upon ratification of their respective Memoranda of Understanding, the City is proposing to amend its Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) Contract to provide Military Service Credit as Public Service (Government Code Section 21024). A member employee may elect to purchase up to four years of service credit for any continuous active military or merchant marine service prior to employment. The member employee must contribute an amount equal to the contribution for current and prior service that the employee and the employer would have made with respect to that period of service. There is no cost to the City for this contract amendment. Concurrent with this PERS contract amendment, the City has leamed that we can update and improve monthly, pre- retirement death benefits to surviving family members who are already a part of our PERS contract. Our current contract includes the 1959 Survivor Benefit (Government Code Section 21573) at its most basic level. The City of Ukiah is among a small group of agencies who still provides this benefit coverage at Level 1, which is no longer offered to new contracting agencies. The Third Level 1959 Survivor Benefit is administered by pooling the assets and liabilities of many public agencies who have already contracted for this benefit. A Contract Amendment Cost Analysis was performed by PERS which has determined, based upon our agency's 1959 Survivor funding level, that there will be no additional cost to the City of Ukiah (subject to annual change, depending upon the funding reserve level of the pool, which is the method currently used). The cost to employees will remain at $2.00 per month ($0.93 bi-weekly), and this improvement will almost double the employee's monthly survivor benefit levels. (Continued on Page Two) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Adopt Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment to Contract Between the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System and the City Council of the City of Ukiah. 2. Introduce Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the City Council of the City of Ukiah and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System. 3. Authorize Mayor to Execute Agreement to Pool 1959 Survivor Benefits Assets & Liabilities. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Do Not Adopt Resolution. 2. Refer to Staff for further information. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Melody Harris, Personnel Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution of Intention, including Agreement to Pool 1959 Survivor Benefits Assets & Liabilities as an Exhibit. 2. Ordnance Authorizing Amendment APPROVED:, ._(~:~'~~'~'~ Candace Horsley, City I~nager Adoption of Resolution of Intention to Amend the City of Ukiah's PERS Contract Page Two A resolution to approve an amendment to our PERS contract relative to the above two items is attached for the City Council's consideration and adoption. An ordinance is required to actually implement the amendment. PERS requires the adoption of this Resolution of Intention (PERS form required), as well as a signed "Agreement to Pool 1959 Survivor Benefits Assets and Liabilities". No less than 20 days after the adoption of the Resolution the Ordinance is to be adopted, with the effective date of the amendment being the day following the effective date of the Ordinance. Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution for both the Military Service Credit and Third Level of 1959 Survivor Benefit options and execution of the "Agreement to Pool 1959 Survivor Benefits Assets and Liabilities" in order to provide increased 1959 Survivor Benefits and Military Service Credit as Public Service to City employee members and introduction of the ordinance by title only. RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH WHEREAS, the Public Employees' Retirement Law permits the participation of public agencies and their employees in the Public Employees' Retirement System by the execution of a contract, and sets forth the procedure by which said public agencies may elect to subject themselves and their employees to amendments to said Law; and WHEREAS, one of the steps in the procedures to amend this contract is the adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution giving notice of its intention to approve an amendment to said contract, which resolution shall contain a summary of the change proposed in said contract; and WHEREAS, the following is a statement of the proposed change: To provide Section 21573 (Third Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits) and Section 21024 (Military Service Credit as Public Service) for local miscellaneous members and local safety members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the governing body of the above agency does hereby give notice of intention to approve an amendment to the contract between said public agency and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, as an "Exhibit" and by this reference made a part hereof. By: Presiding Officer Title Date adopted and approved (Amendment) CON-302 (Rev. 4/96) CalPERS California Public Employees' Retirement System EXHIBIT AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT Between ~he Board of Administration California Public Employees' Refiremem System and ~he City Council City of Ukiah The Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System, hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of the above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective August 1, 1962, and witnessed June 4, 1962, and as amended effective January 1, 1973, January 2, 1983 and June 30, 1992 which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree as follows: A, Paragraphs 1 through 12 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed effective June 30, 1992, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through 12 inclusive: o All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 55 for local miscellaneous members and age 50 for local safety members. . Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after August 1, 1962 making its employees as hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency. PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ONLY" . , . . . Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement: a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members); b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members); Co Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members). In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System: a. EMPLOYEES WHO ARE PAID ON AN HOURLY, PER DIEM, OR WEEKLY BASIS WHILE BEING EMPLOYED ON A TEMPORARY, EMERGENCY OR SEASONAL BASIS. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for local miscellaneous members for each year of credited prior and current service shall be determined in accordance with Section 21354 of said Retirement Law, subject to the reduction provided therein for service prior to December 31, 1982, termination of Social Security, for members whose service has been included in Federal Social Security (2% at age 55 Full and Modified). The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local safety member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21362 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 50 Full). Public Agency elected and elects to be subject to the following optional provisions: a. Section 20042 (One-Year Final Compensation). b. Section 20965 (Credit for Unused Sick Leave). c. Section 21573 (Third Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits). d. Sections 21624 and 21626 (Post-Retirement Survivor Allowance). PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ONLY" . o 10. e. Section 20516 (Public Agency and its employees have agreed to share the cost of the following benefits): Sections 20042, 21624/21626 and 20965 From and after January 2, 1983 the safety employees of Public Agency shall be assessed an additional 1% of their compensation for a total contribution rate of 10% pursuant to Government Code Section 20516. Section 21024 (Military Service Credit as Public Service), Statutes of 1976. Public Agency, in accordance with Government Code Section 20790, ceased to be an "employer" for purposes of Section 20834 effective on January 2, 1983. Accumulated contributions of Public Agency shall be fixed and determined as provided in Government Code Section 20834, and accumulated contributions thereafter shall be held by the Board as provided in Government Code Section 20834. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respect to local miscellaneous members and local safety members of said Retirement System. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows: ao bo co Contributions required per covered member on account of the 1959 Survivor Benefits provided under Section 21573 of said Retirement Law. (Subject to annual change.) In addition, all assets and liabilities of Public Agency and its employees shall be pooled in a single account, based on term insurance rates, for survivors of all local miscellaneous members and local safety members. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valuations on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. 11. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law. 12. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Board regulation. If more or less than the correct amount of contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment shall be made in connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct payments between the employee and the Board. B. This amendment shall be effective on the day of ,19 BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION _ ~ PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREME~YSTEM ACTUARIAL 8,r-I~LOYER SERVICES DIVISION PUBLIC EJ~;;b~YEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH BY PRESIDING OFFICER Witness Date Attest: ~% AMENDMENT PERS-CON-702A (Rev. 8\96) AGREEMENT TO POOL 1959 SURVIVOR BENEFITS ASSETS AND LIABILITIES BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH WHEREAS, Government Code Section 21573 provides for a single employer rate to be established to provide benefits under said Section on account of members employed by contracting agencies electing to include the provision of said Section in their contracts; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 21573, requires pooling of all assets and liabilities of all contracting agencies subject to said Section; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT AGREED, that assets and liabilities of the City of Ukiah and its covered employees shall be pooled pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 21573. BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH BY KENNETH W. MARZION, CHIEF ACTUARIAL & EMPLOYER SERVICES DIVISION PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM BY PRESIDING OFFICER Jim Mastin, Mayor Date PERS-CON-59 (Rev. 7/96) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM. The City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1 That an amendment to the contract between the City Council ofthe City of Ukiah and the Board of Admires' tration, California Public Employees' Retirement System is hereby authorized, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, marked Exhibit, and by such reference made a part hereof as though herein set out in full. SECTION 2 The Mayor of the City of Ukiah is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said amendment for and on behalf of said Agency. SECTION 3 This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption, and prior to the expiration of__ days ~om the passage thereof shall be published as required by law in the Ukiah Daily Journal, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the County of Mendocino and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: __ day of April, 1999, by the following roll call vote: ATTEST: Made Ulvila, City Clerk 3 :Xperyersamd.ord Jim Mastin, Mayor ITEM NO. Ob DATE: MARCH 17, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR INCREASED MENDOCINO COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATION FEE The City has received the billing from the County for Property Tax administration fee charged pursuant to the State Revenue and Taxation Code. This fee is considerably higher than amount in the adopted budget and thus a budget amendment is necessary to cover the expenditure. According to calculations from the County Auditor's office, tax administration costs increased 30% over the last year resulting in a raise in the fee to all entities. Since 1995 the fees paid by the City for the General Fund and the Parking District have increased 40.6% and 106.6% respectively. Staff has requested a more realistic estimate of next year's fee from the County so our 1999/2000 budget will more effectively reflect anticipated costs. Staff recommends approval of a budget amendment of $3,485 and $330 for increased Property Tax Administration fees to the City and the Parking District, respectively. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Amendment to the 1998/99 Budget increasing account 100.1990.346.000 by $3,485 and account 220.4601.346.000 by $330 for additional Property Tax Administration fees. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine modifications to budget amendment are necessary, identify changes, and approve revised amendment. 2. Determine budget amendment is not necessary and take no action. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: NA Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer ~.~~,,~.-.~ Michael F. Gordon Elton, Director of Finance, and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Budget Amendment worksheets, pages 1-4. APPROVED: mfh:asrcc99 0317TAX ~ ~, j v ~-~ ~ _ J Candace Horsley, Cityl~anager I,M 0 0 =- " I- m 0 -- 0 0 z 0 0 ~,-,-,-,. s o -:oo"= ~§o m o. ,.-. 0 '.~ ._ '~ .~ ~ .... o o o o o e ._'fi~'~ E E ~ ~ ~ o o~,= ~=~~ o~o~ ~'~~ ~ ~ oo i~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~: ooo ~~~ .o ooo oo,~ o~ooo ~ oooo 00 ~ ~0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00. ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 o~ooo~o~ o ~~o~oo ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0~ ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ooo o ~ o ~oo~ OO oo . ~ j I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ 0 O0 GENERAL FUND #100 Budgeted amounts: Beginning fund balance 7/1/98 Revenue budgeted Expenses budgeted Transfers In/(Out), at net Loans to other funds Budgeted ending fund balance 6/30/99 $ 1,245,621 $ 6,695,385 $ (6,810,226) $ (364,856) $ 765,924 Adiustments made durinq the fiscal year: Date Proposed Account No. 7/1/98 Change in beginning fund balance per audit $ 378,793 8/5/98 Additional MESA cost, not budgeted 100.1990.260.000 $ (1,586) 9/2/98 Transfer funds for Perkins St reconstruction 100.283.250 $ ? (81,504) 10/7/98 Replacement computer for Engineering 100.3001.800.000 $ (2,200) 10/7/98 Transfer from Disposal Site for Engineering computer 100.281.660 $ 2,200 10/21/98 Video camera & tripod - Police Dept 100.2001.800.000 $ (1,000) 11/18/98 Civic Center generator repairs 100.1915.302.000 $ (3,125) 12/2/98 Welcome to Ukiah signs 100.1945.651.000 $ (4,000) 12/16/98 Replace Council Chambers sound system 100.1915.800.000 $ (8,000) 1/20/99 MOU & Personnel changes Various depts $ (159,299) 1/20/99 Transfer to COPS Grants Fund for MOU increases 100.283.206 $ (4,766) 1/20/99 Increase employee recognition dinner 100.1001.690.003 $ (350) 1/20/99 Computer software & printers 100.1501.690.000 $ (1,318) 1/20/99 Computer replacements 100.1501.800.000 $ (8,400) 1/20/99 Prior year booking fees 100.2001.500.001 $ ? (20,000) 1/20/99 Emergency services reimbursable employee costs 100.2151.XXX.000 $ (2,500) 1/20/99 Emergency services reimbursable supplies 100.2121.690.000 $ (1,500) 1/20/99 Overtime expenses - Perkins St. reconstruction project 100.3001.115.000 $ (1,939) 1/20/99 Reimb. from Gas Tax Fund #303 - Perkins St project 100.3001.699.000 $ 1,939 1/20/99 North Fire Station repairs 100.2101.301.003 $ (4,254) 1/20/99 Transfer from Fund #250 - MOU costs 100.281.250 $ 100,000 1/20/99 Transfer from Fund #250 - Assist City Mgr 100.281.250 $ 50,000 1/20/99 Computer equipment - Assist City Mgr 100.1201.800.000 $ (2,268) 2/17/99 Increase City Clerk compensation 100.1101.110-156 $ (434) 3/17/99 Property Tax Administration Fee 100.1990.346.000 $ (3,485) 3/17/99 Planning Dept Training for Planning Commission 100.1501.160.000 $ (833) Revised Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 6/30/99 $ 986,095 RESERV99.XLS 3/11/99 Page 1 Funds 100; 110; 115; 130; 131 PARKING DISTRICT - FUND #220 Budgeted amounts: Beginning fund balance 7/1/98 Revenue budgeted Transfers budgeted Expense Budgeted ending fund balance 6/30/99 $ 262,685 $ 9,000 $ 116,049 $ (142,336) $ 245,398 Adjustments made durinq the fiscal year: Date Approved 7/1/98 Change in beginning fund balance per audit 1/20/99 MOU Adjustment 3/17/99 Property Tax Administration Fee Account No. $ 15,528 220.4601.XXX.000 $ (1,444) 220.4601.346.000 $ (330) Revised ending fund balance 6/30/99 $ 259,152 RESERV99.XLS 3/11/99 Page 7 Funds 200 through 290 ITEM NO. 9e DATE; March 17. 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR THE ELECTRIC UTILITY WORKSHOP A public hearing mandated by AB 1890, must be held by June 30, 1999, to determine whether the City of Ukiah will provide open access for the generation portion of the electric utility service. In preparation for that hearing staff is requesting that Council set a date for the Electric Utility Department staff to conduct an educational workshop outlining the City's current status and options in this deregulated environment. Staff's suggestion is for a date other than a regularly scheduled Council meeting; allowing approximately two hours for the discussion. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Set a date for the electric utility workshop. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Direct staff as to alternative. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: N/A Darryl Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Tammi Weselsky, Administrative Analyst Candace Horsley, City Manager APPROVED: ASR Candace Horsley, City Ma ger ITEM NO. DATE: MARCH 17, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF REPLANTING PROGRAM FOR SEMINARY AVENUE MEDIAN STRIPS Seminary Avenue, between State and Oak Streets, is divided by a 15 foot wide median currently landscaped with eight Deodora Cedars which have been in serious decline for several years. The City's arbodst, John Phillips, has been observing the trees dudng the past few years and has provided evaluations regarding their health. Mr. Phillips has found the trees to be in varying stages of decline, from moderate to advanced. In his 1997 letter, he cited specific conditions such as sparseness of foliage, loss of new growth, and a high percentage of dead limbs. In his more recent letter Mr. Phillips states that the trees have experienced an accelerated decline over the past two years and that the trees have little or no chance for recovery given the prevailing conditions of restricted open surface and limited soil exposure. Based in part upon his findings, selective pruning by a professional tree trimming firm was completed to remove dead or diseased materials and prompt new growth in an attempt to revitalize the trees. These efforts have not been successful and the trees have continued to decline. In response to staff's request Mr. Phillips has recently completed an updated evaluation of the trees and has recommended a replanting program, with trees more suitable to the environment. (Continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve replanting program for Seminary Avenue Median Strips ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine additional evaluation is necessary and remand to staff with direction. 2. Determine replanting program is inappropriate and move to deny staff recommendation Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director )--~ ('3 Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Excerpt from February 8, 1999 Parks and Recreation Commission Draft Minutes 2. June 28, 1998 Letter by John Phillips 3. January 12, 1999 Letter by John Phillips 4. Project Cost Estimate APPROVED: '~.~"..~ '-'~~~~. M~an~ger Candace Horsley, City Although the Deodoras have been in place for approximately 50 years, prior to their planting the medians on Seminary were historically known as Carl Purdy Park. Mr. Purdy had originally planted a variety of ornamentals and annuals which eventually died off due to the introduction of the Deodoras. It is Mr. Phillip's opinion, as stated in his attached evaluation, that a replanting program be initiated. This would involve replacement of the existing Deodoras with a deciduous tree more compatible with surrounding street trees. Selection of a deciduous variety in the medians will provide the same quality shade canopy provided by the Deodoras for the street, while still allowing adequate light and soil conditions to support additional ornamental landscaping in the medians. In anticipation of the need to provide improvements, staff has prepared a recommended plant list and cost estimate for the project. Based upon the costs for services and materials provided to us by local service and.materials providers, the estimated cost for the planting part of the project is $17,000. A specific design has not been developed, however, a key element of the proposed improvements is to create a landscape consistent with the historic design by Mr. Purdy, which brings color and dimension to the prime entry to the Civic Center and enhances the view from State Street. While the final design and construction of the project would be completed by a private landscape contractor, staff has attached an estimate and recommended plant list for the project. That estimate includes 24 inch box trees which are substantially larger than the standard five or ten gallon street trees normally planted. The City has also received a donation from a private citizen which will greatly contribute towards the completion of the project. Staff is also coordinating this and several other street tree planting projects with the Shade Brigade, a local citizens group concerned with tree planting throughout the community. This group of citizens has been responsible for an extensive number of successful street tree placements throughout the downtown and is currently coordinating with the City of Ukiah on a state grant for additional tree plantings within the downtown parking lots. Staff has discussed the project with representatives of the group and received their enthusiastic support and willingness to participate in a replanting program. Should the project go forward, staff will be initiating additional meetings with the Shade Brigade to seek their assistance in completing the project. .. The proposed replanting project was reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission on February 8, 1999 and was unanimously approved. Staff also met with the neighborhood businesses to receive their input. While most of the business owners lamented the loss of the trees and their sentimental value as "Christmas Tree Lane", the owners also recognized the decline of the trees and the hazard which they represented. Though the strength of their conviction varied based upon the individual's attachment to the trees they concurred with the replanting. Staff has received bids for the removal of the trees which would be the first phase of the project should the Council approve. While no action is required by the Council to specifically approve the tree removal bids, staff is presenting the entire project in concept for the Council's consideration and action. Should the Council approve the project in concept, a detailed landscape plan will be presented upon completion for the Council's approval. LD2 SEMINARY. MEM a. Election of Vice-Chair Commissioner Henderson was nominated for Vice-Chair. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Rones, seconded by Commissioner Henderson, it was carried by an all AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to elect Commissioner Henderson as Vice- Chair. Discussion of Landscape Improvements to Seminary Avenue Director of Community Services DeKnoblough reported on the proposed landscape improvements to Seminary Avenue. Currently, the medians on Seminary Avenue, between State and Oak Streets, are landscaped with eight Deodora Cedars, which have been in serious decline for several years. This serious decline of the Deodora Cedars have now become a potential hazard. As a result of the proposed liability issues, it has been recommended by John Phillips, the City's arborist, that the present Deodora Cedars be replaced with a deciduous tree more compatible with the surrounding street trees. Mr. Phillips also recommended that a replanting program be initiated. He also stated landscape selection of a deciduous variety will provide the same quality shade canopy as provided by the Deodoras for the street, while still allowing adequate light and soil conditions to support additional ornamental landscaping in the medians. The key element of the proposed improvements is to create a landscape consistent with the historic design by Mr. Purdy, which brings color and dimension to a prime entry to the Civic Center and enhances the view from State Street. Mr. DeKnoblough stated that although a specific design has not been created, Staff has made various landscape proposals which include lighting and bench enhancements. General consensus of the local businesses located near the Deodoras favor landscape replacement. He stated any Staff recommendations for the proposed landscape projects and costs, as well as the proposed removal of the current Deodora Cedars, must be approved by City Council. Discussion followed regarding various replacement landscape proposals and enhancements for the medians on Seminary Avenue,. Mr. DeKnoblough reported that a twenty thousand dollar ($20,000) donation has been received by the City to be used as partial payment for landscape replacement. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Henderson, seconded by Commissioner Koeppel, it was carried by an all AYE voice vote of the members present to approve removal of the eight Deodora Cedars [.__~ocated on Seminary Avenue. c. Discussion of Improvements at Anton Stadium Community Services Recreation Supervisor Sangiacomo reported on the improvements to the ball park field and concession stand at Anton Stadium. He stated that the since the last formal Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, necessary improvements to the infield grass have been completed. Additional soil improvements to the playing field will continue as needed. Interior Parks and Recreation Commission Page 2 February 8, 1999 June 28, 1997 Larry Wise City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, Ca. 95482 JOHN M. PHILUPS AP. BOlT&ST. 3rd GENERATION Dear Larry, At your reqeust, I have inspected the deodar cedar trees along Seminary Ave. My purpose was to evaluate their health with regards to their longevity. Observations were made prior to the recent pruning operation. These trees exhibit moderate to advanced stages of decline. The worst ones are those in the eastern group (divided by the cross street). Symptoms leadin~ to tkis diagno~i~ include tho sparseness of foliage throughout most of the crowns, recent loss of new growth, and a high percentage of dead limbs. I have been observing these trees over several years. Those on the eastern end have been declining steadily and most readily these last two years. Although those trees on the more westerly end appear more healthy, I see early signs of them declining as well. We can only speculate as to the causes for this tree decline. It is undoubtedly root-related and has something to do with loss of soil moisture. In order to best explain the present condition, we would need to know more about the history of this site over at least the last twenty years. At least half of these trees will not recover and may be entirely dead within'one year. The others may last a few more years, losing some percentage of their crowns each grcling season. Remedial care would have to include an irrigation and mulching program. This would be very difficult for trees of this age, size, and in this confined location. Such care would be a "last gasp" n~~~.~ ~ mighb en~y..., buy. n short amount of time. Given the history of pruning on these trees, it is questionable whether an attempt at their salvage is worthwhile. A carefully planned and implemented replacement project seems in order. For more input on this sort of direction, please contact me. Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Very Truly Yours, Jo~~hPh~llips 26010 String Creek Rd., Willits, CA 95490 Phone 707-459-3015 January 12, 1999 Larry DeKnoblough city of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, Ca. 95482 JOHN M. PHILLIPS ARBORIST, 3rd GENERATION Dear Larry, At your request, I have taken another look at the deodar cedar trees on Seminary Ave. Our last inspection was in June, 1997. As you have observed, these trees are continuing to decline. The worst trees are still those in the eastern block (five trees). The most obvious symptom is the loss of foliage, especially near the branch ends. Clearly these trees are in the last stage of their lives. It should be noted that loss of live crown usually indicates loss of live roots. Thus there may be an increased loss of stability. The three cedars in the western block exhibit better vitality than the others. However, they are not true to normal density as a result of overpruning. While this group is probably more stable in terms of uprooting, they could be subject to a higher than normal level of branch breakage as a result of their open crown structure. In my opinion, these trees no longer provide a net return in landscape value. From a safety standpoint, they should be removed. This site offers good potential for planting new trees and the ongoing efforts of renewing the community forest. Please don't hesitate to contact me should you have further questions. Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Very Truly Yours, ~nillips Registered Consulting Arborist #253 26010 String Creek Rd., Willits, CA 95490 Phone 707-459-3015 Seminary Avenue Median Strips ExtendedlUnitlNum. Description $50 Inspection/Evaluation of Deadora Cedar trees: $6,440 Removal of 8 Deadora Cedar trees: IChip limbs Stump removal Wood cut to 18" Wood hauled away chips hauled away $1,550 $910 $228 $100 $180 $45O $66 Plant Materials: $155 $13 $4 $5 $15 $7 - 24" box trees - 5 gal. shrubs - I gal. shrubs - tree stakes, strapping, miscellaneous annuals plantings flats of ground cover plantings - root barrier panels Soil Preparation: $1,051 I $19 I 561 - cubic yards of nitrolized sawdust @ 3" deep Concrete platforms and walkways: $700 15100 I 71Concrete and related miscellaneous Electrical service: Electrical/solar service needed for the irrigation controllers and electric valves. $1,15715579I 21SPC-1 Solar Converter $212 $53 4124-volt DC latching solenoids (E2002) $714 $914 $146 $117 $110 $100 $130 $526 $1,149 !15,7,ooo Irrigation: $357 2 $457 2 $73 2 $29 4 $0 1000 $25 4 $3 52 $526 I Irritrol 2 station Battery controller (can be used with solar converter (SPC-1)) Pedestal Mount (P-6B) Wilkins 1" Double Check Valve HR70010 Hardie 1" --- Electric Globe Valve total feet of 1" and 3/4" PVC pipe 17" x 11" x 12" valve box Toro 4" pop-up sprinkler heads with sprinklers Miscellaneous PVC fittings, glue, wire 7.25% tax on $15,851 Total Estimated Cost II Savings: Price could be reduced by finding a source to take wood for free. Price does not include installation. Savings would be made by having staff install the landscape. Bidding all supplies and materials. Irrigation: The old irrigation system should be removed and a new irrigation system installed. Usable water meters exist on each media strip from the previous (obsolete) irrigation system. Consider: Concrete platforms installed at either end of each median strip to display works of art by local artists. Removal of existing parking meters. Providing concrete walkways across the median strip after pedestrians estabish desired crossing points. sernlist.xls Seminary Avenue Median Strips Plant Material Suggestions: A.qapanthus 'Peter Pan' Arctostaphylos 'Pacific Mist' Berberis Berberis thunber.qii Ceanothus prostratus Cistus purpureus Cotoneaster horizontalis Dietes vegeta Escallonia 'newport dwarf' Grevillea 'noellii' Hypericum calycinum Juniperus horizontalis 'Wiltonii' Lavandula anqustifolia Mydus communis 'compacta' Nandiana domestica 'compacta nana' Pinus mugo mu.qo Pistacia chinensis Pittosporum tobira 'wheeler's Rhaphiolepis indica 'pink lady' Rosmarinus officinalis Sophora japonica 'Regent' Viburum davidii Viburum tinus 'spring bouquet' Lily-of-the-Nile Manzanita Barberry Japanese Barberry Squaw Carpet Rockrose Rock Cotoneaster African Iris . -- - Creeping St. Johnswort Blue Carpet Juniper English Lavender Dwarf Myrtle Heavenly Bamboo Mugho Pine Chinese Pistache ... Rosemary Japanese Pagoda Tree ... Laurustinus AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 9e .DATE: March 17, 1999 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF GROUND LEASE WITH WEST COAST WINGS FOR A PORTION OF THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Staff has been approached regarding an airport lease by Mr. Nick Bishop, owner and operator of West Coast Wings, a fixed base operator specializing in sheet metal and aviation body repair. West Coast Wings is a small start up business operated at this time solely by Mr. Bishop and his wife. Due in large part to Mr. Bishop's professional reputation, the business is experiencing significant growth and will be increasing its employment base by two employees upon opening of the new facility. Mr. Bishop has been operating his business out of his home and has expanded to the point he is in need of a location at the Airport in order to continue his operation. The business does not generally work on intact airplanes but rather exterior components which have been damaged and shipped by truck or express delivery in crates. Upon repair Mr. Bishop then ships the components back to the owner in the same manner. Because the damage being repaired is to the exterior of the plane, the parts are usually removed and shipped as opposed to being flown in. The proposed lease is for 6,000 square feet of Airport property located between the Plane Works and the Flight Service Center (map attached as Exhibit A of the lease). The lease also includes an additional option property of 2,500 square feet to accommodate anticipated business growth. The site is currently paved but unused and Mr. Bishop will be constructing all improvements. The term of the lease is 40 years at which time all improvements would become property of the City. Should the Council determine to approve the proposed lease Mr. Bishop will be required to commence construction within 120 days. Staff believes the proposed lease provides an opportunity to support the development of a locally owned and operated family business with the potential for immediate and future job development for our community. It also represents an opportunity to provide additional lease revenues to the Airport while placing an aviation business while not significantly increasing Airport related impacts. For these reasons staff is recommending approval of the lease with West Coast Wings. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve lease with West Coast Wings for a portion of the Ukiah Regional Airport and authorize City Manager to execute Lease Agreement. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine lease requires revision and remand to staff with direction. 2. Determine approval of lease is inappropriate and move to deny. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: West Coast Wings Prepared by: Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Proposed Lease C~~ I-~rsle~, City Manager LD2 bishop. ASR LEASE AGREEMENT This Lease, made this _day of , by and between the City of Ukiah, State of California, acting by and through its City Council, hereinafter referred to as "Lessor" and West Coast Wings, a for profit company, hereinafter referred to as "Lessee." RECITALS: 1. Lessor has the authority contained in Government Code Sections 37380 and 37395 and does determine that the use of certain property owned by the Lessor is not required for its use at this time and is available for Lease, and 2. The use of said property by the Lessee would be and is beneficial for the citizens of the City of Ukiah. LEASE AGREEMENT 1. LEASE. The parties hereto agree that on the terms and conditions hereinafter expressed, Lessor does hereby let to Lessee and Lessee does hereby hire from Lessor 6,000 square feet of that certain parcel of property commonly referred to as "Ukiah Regional Airport, located at 1411 South State Street, City of Ukiah, Mendocino County, and more specifically described on the attached "Exhibit A" together with a right of access thereto. 1.1. The parties further agree that Lessee shall retain an option to lease an additional fifty (50) foot by fifty (50) foot, (2,500 square foot), area contiguous to the south side of the leased premises for a period of two years commencing on April 1, 1999 and terminating on March 31, 2001. 2. TERM. The term of this Lease is for a period of forty (40) years commencing upon the date whereupon Lessee satisfies the following conditions: 2.1. Lessee obtaining all necessary site development and building permits. -1- 2.2. Lessee securing financing for construction. 2.3. Lessee has one hundred and twenty (120) days from the date of the City Council's adoption of this agreement to satisfy conditions 2.1 and 2.2. 3. RENT. As rent for the term hereby demised, Lessee agrees to pay to Lessor the sum of $180 per month for the primary 6,000 square feet. Lessor further agrees to pay an additional $25 per month for the 2,500 square foot option. At the commencement of the second year and each subsequent year thereafter the rent for both the primary and option properties shall increase by the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) during the preceding calender year (January to December) but not to exceed 5%. CPI means the index for all urban consumers (1982-1984 = 100), U.S. City average, all items, published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. In the event the CPI is discontinued or otherwise not available, "CPI" shall mean such comparable statistics on the purchasing power of the consumer dollar as is reasonably agreed on between the City and Lessee. The rent shall be due by the fifth day of each month and shall be considered delinquent, if not received by the Lessor's finance department by the tenth day of the month. Lessee shall pay Lessor interest on delinquent rent at the rate of 1.5% per month. The full monthly interest shall be due on the first day of each thirty day period after the rent becomes delinquent. 4. USE AND IMPROVEMENTS. Lessee hereby agrees to install all permanent improvements which shall become part of said property and title to said improvements shall be vested in the Lessor upon termination of the lease. 4.1. Lessee shall use the leased premises exclusively as a facility for the maintenance, manufacture, assembly, restoration, sales, and distribution of aircraft or parts thereof. -2- 4.2. Improvements, excavations, removal of any trees, brush, grass or improvements and other modifications to the property shall be the sole responsibility of Lessee and shall be approved by Lessor prior to conducting work. Lessee shall prepare plans and specifications for said improvements including landscaping of the leased property and obtain approval prior to work on the leased premises. 4.3. Lessee agrees to keep the premises and all improvements in good repair and order, and to bear the full cost for maintenance of all improvements. 4.4. Lessee shall acquire the necessary and required permits from the appropriate regulating body for the development proposed under this lease. 4.5. Lessee is responsible for the relocation, alteration, removal, construction, reconstruction of any municipal or private facilities, structures or utilities existing on leased premises which are presently in use or abandoned. 4.6. Lessee shall not only use or permit the leased premises to be used in full compliance with all applicable City, state or federal rules, regulations, statutes or ordinances. 4.7. Lessee shall not do or permit to be done on the Premises, nor bring or keep or permit to be brought or kept in the Premises, anything (a) which is prohibited by or in conflict with any law, ordinance or governmental rule, or (b) which is prohibited by the standard form of fire insurance policy or, (c) which will increase the existing rate of or affect fire or other insurance on the Building or its contents or cause a cancellation of any insurance policy covering the Building or any part of it or its contents. Lessee shall not use or store in the Premises any hazardous or toxic substances, with the sole exception of reasonably necessary substances that are kept in reasonably necessary quantities for normal business operations, provided that their use and storage are in accordance with applicable laws. Lessee shall not use or allow the Premises to be used for any unlawful purposes, nor shall Lessee cause, maintain, or permit any nuisance or waste on or about the Premises. -3- 4.8. Lessee shall be responsible for landscaping or landscape maintenance of the leased premises, and shall maintain the exterior of the improvements and the landscaping in a neat, weed free and healthy condition, in accordance with the approved plans. 4.9. Subject to the conditions set forth in Paragraph 4.2 of this lease, Lessee agrees to complete construction and installation of a second hanger door to the facility proposed under the terms and prior to the termination of this lease. 5. ASSIGNMENT. Lessee shall not, without prior written consent of Lessor, assign or hypotnecate this Lease or any interest in this Lease, sublet the Premises or any part of them, or license the use of the Premise by any party other than the Lessee. Neither this Lease nor any interest in this Lease shall be assignable without the consent of Lessor. Any of the previous acts without consent shall be void and shall, at the option of Lessor, constitute a noncurable default under this Lease. 6. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE. 6.1. Lessor shall not be liable for and is free from the cost of any damages for personal injury or property damage resulting from the use made by Lessee of the demised premises, any defective condition or faulty construction of the demised premises existing at the time of letting or arising thereafter and Lessee covenants and agrees to indemnify and save harmless said Lessor and its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all liability, loss, cost, or other obligation, including reasonable attorney's fee, on account of or arising out of any such injuries or losses however occurring. 6.2. Lessee covenants and agrees during the life of this Lease at Lessee's sole expense to comply with the requirements of Exhibit B, Insurance Requirements for Lessees (No Auto Risks), attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. -4- 6.3. Lessee shall maintain property loss insurance to protect against fire and other hazards with policy limits equal to the full replacement cost of the improvements. The insurer and coverage must be approved by Lessor. In the event of damage to any improvements on the leased premises, Lessor shall rebuild, repair or otherwise reinstate the damaged Improvements in a good and substantial manner according to applicable Uniform Code standards. The reconstruction required herein shall commence within ninety (90) days after the receipt of insurance funds paid for the purpose of reconstruction, and shall be pursued diligently to completion. 7. DEFAULT AND TERMINATION. 7.1. Events of Default. The following events shall constitute events of default under this Lease (each an "Event of Default"): (a) A default by Lessee in the payment when due of any rent or other sum payable under this Lease and the continuation of this default for three (3) or more days after notice of default from Lessor; (b) A default by Lessee in the performance of any of the terms, covenants, agreements, or conditions in this Lease, other than a default by Lessee in the payment when due of any rent or other sum payable under this Lease, and the continuation of the default beyond ten (10) days after notice by Lessor or, if the default is curable and would require more than ten (10) days to remedy, beyond the time reasonably necessary for cure; (c) The bankruptcy or insolvency of Lessee, a transfer by Lessee in fraud of creditors, an assignment by Lessee for the benefit of creditors, or the commencement of proceedings of any kind by or against Lessee under the Federal Bankruptcy Act or under any other insolvency, bankruptcy, or reorganization; (d) The appointment of a receiver for a substantial part of Lessee's assets; (e) The abandonment of the Premises; and -5- (f) The levy upon this Lease or any estate of Lessee under this Lease by attachment or execution and the failure to have the attachment or execution vacated within thirty (30) days. 7.2 Termination upon Default. On occurrence of any Event of Default by lessee, Lessor may, in addition to any other rights and remedies given here or by law, terminate this Lease and exercise remedies relating to it without further notice or demand in accordance with the following provisions: (a) So long as the Event of Default remains uncured, Lessor shall have the right to give notice of termination to Lessee, and on the date specified in this notice, this Lease shall terminate. (b) If this Lease is terminated, Lessor may, by judicial process, reenter the Premises, remove all persons and property, and repossess and enjoy the Premises, all without prejudice to other remedies that Lessor may have because of Lessee's default or the termination. (c) If this Lease is terminated, Lessor shall have all of the rights and remedies of a landlord provided by Civil Code § 1951.2, in addition to any other rights and remedies Lessor may have. The damages which lessor may recover shall include, without limitation, (i) the worth at the time of award of the unpaid rent which had been earned at the time of termination; (ii) the worth at the time of the award of the amount by which the unpaid rent which would have been earned after termination until the time of the award exceeds the amount of the rental loss that Lessee proves could have been reasonably avoided; (iii) the worth at the time of award computed by discounting the amount at the discount rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco at the time of award plus one percent (1%) of the amount by which the unpaid rent for the balance of the term after the time of award exceeds the amount of rental loss that Lessee proves could be reasonably avoided; (iv) all reasonable costs incurred by Lessor in restoring the Premises to good order and condition to relet the Premises; and (vi) all reasonable costs, including without limitation, any brokerage commission incurred by lessor in reletting the Premises. -6- 7.3 Continuation after Default. Even though Lessee has breached this lease and abandoned the Premises, this Lease shall continue in effect for so long as Lessor does not terminate Lessee's right to possession, and Lessor may enforce all rights and remedies under this Lease, including the right to recover the rental as it becomes due under this Lease. Acts of maintenance or preservation, efforts to relet the Premises, or the appointment of a receiver upon initiative of Lessor to protect Lessor's interest under this Lease shall not constitute a termination of Lessee's right to possession. 7.4 Other Relief. The remedies provided in this Lease are in addition to any other remedies available to Lessor at law, by statue, or otherwise. 7.5 Right of Lessor to Cure Defaults. Agreements and provisions to be performed by Lessee under this Lease shall be at Lessee's sole cost and without abatement of rental, except as specifically provided in this Lease. If Lessee (a) fails to pay any sum of money, other than rental, required under this Lease, or (b) fails to perform any other act under this Lease, and this failure continues for ten (10) days after notice of the failure by Lessor, or a longer period as may be allowed under this Lease, Lessor may, without waiving or releasing Lessee from any obligations of Lessee, make payment or perform other acts required by this lease on Lessee's behalf. All sums paid by lessor and all necessary incidental costs shall be payable to Lessor on demand and shall constitute additional rental under this Lease. 8. ATTORNEY'S FEES. In the event of any legal action arising out of this Lease, the prevailing party shall recover its attorney's fees and costs resulting from such action. 9. TIME OF ESSENCE. Time is of the essence of this agreement. 10. WAIVER. -7- City's waiver of any default in Lessee's performance of any condition of this Lease, including the obligation to pay rent, shall not constitute a waiver of remedies available for a subsequent breach of the same or a different condition of this Lease. Acceptance of subsequent rental payments from Lessee or its assignees shall not constitute a waiver of the failure of Lessee to pay rent or obtain prior approval to an assignment of this Lease. 11. NOTICES. Any written notice required hereby shall be deemed sufficient when placed in the United States mail, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: TO LESSEE: TO CITY: West Coast Wings City Manager Ukiah Civic Center 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 12. RECORDING AND BINDING EFFECT This Lease may be recorded and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of any successor to or purchaser of either party's interest. 13. PARAGRAPH HEADINGS. Paragraph headings are included for the convenience of the parties and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this Lease. 14. PREVIOUS AGREEMENTS. Any and all existing statement or agreements, whether oral or written, or renewals thereof, between the parties hereto, covering the same subject matter, are hereby canceled and superseded by the terms of this Lease, and such prior agreements, statements or understandings shall have no further force or effect. -8- 15. DUPLICATE ORIGINALS. This Lease may be executed in one or more duplicate originals bearing the original signature of both parties and when so executed any such duplicate original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of this Lease. Entered on the date first written above. CITY OF UKIAH By: ATTEST: Lessee Marie Ulvilla, City Clerk By: Id/agreements Bishop.agr -9- Exhibit "B" IH.!;[JitAI'ICF~ llEf~UIIIEHEI.IT$ lrOlI: LE$$EI:~S (NO AUTO RISKS) l',li~lil~u~n SCUl~e of Illsurance . . Uuveral;e sllall be at least as broad a~: J.. l~surai~ce Services Ol'[ice .Co~nn~er~al General I_,iability coverage 2. Wot'lcet'~;' c;c~il~e~satio~ i~surancc~ as r~ClUit'ed by Lhe St~te of Ca~fot-nia and 1;~ployer':; I,ial)J.llty jnsut';~ice (for lessdes witli employees). . . I~._ ai[,a ~t all risks of loss to any renault i~nl~t'ovt~l~t~; of ;! i'~'~.~l~Ur[Y j~z;t.~t':l~ 's' il ... Hi)~J)l~u)~l Limits of Insurance .. l.es:;ee sl~aJl ii1;lj[lt;Aill Jji~dts no less tl~nn: .1, (;e~er;~] l,ial)ility' :j;1,000,(}00 pet' occurrence for bodily injury, pet-sol'la.l · . .. · I:t -' ' ~t_J.';t] ~i~L~I.'OI~sto I]~iL i5 used citijet' lJ~o i,,~11~21..;i] ;ll,,ibl-i~[;;iLe ii,niL sl~all bp LwicJ~ LJle rgquit'gd occHrt'ence lin~it. J. 15~l,l,.~5'e~"z: l.i~l.)i.lity: $1,OOU,DO0 per nccbdel'lc for bodiJy j~ljtJt-y of clisear;e. il l,~-ul,Pl-lV II,SLIt';Iii.Ce: J;'tJJJ t'ei~];Jcel~eli~ C05L wiLJl 11o CO]IISUt'/~DC~ . . . i~t'uvisJoll. ,, l)eclucl, il]les and 5el[-i~lsured ........................... ,, declared. Lo and approvecl by A~y tl~lucl, il;le:; u~' .,cll'.-i~lsured rete~tio~s must be linc city. At II~e Ol,tiu~ of [l~e ~;j[y, eitl~e~;: tl~e insure[' sl~all reduce or ~;ut:l~ deductil.~l~z'J o~' sel[-in:.iurud rete~do~s as respecLs tile Ci[y, its o['[icinls, e~l'~l~ye~zs ~nd volunteers; or Llie Lessee shall pt'ovide a ~ina~cial i~vusti/2,:~l, iu~s, c:l:~i~ ad~it~istrakion ;~d defense expenses. , ., Otl~er l~sura~ce l'rovisio~s 'l'l~e ge~eral liability policy Is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following i~t'ovjsJt~t~5: J. 'l'l~e Cily, 11.5 utficcrs, of[ici;als, et~tl.')loye¢~s and volunteer's are Lo be covered ol)ect to li;~bil, ity arising out of ownersliip, ~nai~tcna~ce :~:; il~;~r~tl:; wi[Il l'e~ ur t~:;u vi' [l~;~t l~art of tl~e pru~nises leased to the lessee. 2. 'i'l~e l.,~:;:;et~':; i~st~r;.~lce coveral5e :;l~;fl.l be pri~n;.iry insurance as tl~,.~ City, il.:; olIicers, ol'l'ici;Jls, e~ployees and volul~Leei's. A~ly ~-,-,li'..i~:;~'a~lce ~i;~i~ltai~lcd by tl~e City, its officers, officials, ur vulu~tuut':; sl~ali be excess ut' tl~e bessue's ]~stJr;~ce a~d sl~kl.! cu~tribute witl~ it. 3. i.-~acl~ i~.';ura~ce policy l'e~luired by tl~is clause sl~a.ll be e~dorse¢l to sta~.e {.1~;~I. cover;ll..,.e .,.;1~;~I1 no£ 1.~;, ca~lc~J,2d, e)~Cel)t nftev tl~i~-ty (30) days' prior wrj[l~_~ll ~ti~:~2 by ce~vt.ified ~oJJ, l'el. url~ receipt rc,.clt:estetl, I~as beel~ l;iven to tl~e Cily. ^ccept;)bility_ of I~suret's I~$tjr:Jl~ce J.,; to be placed witli i~sure~'s witl~ ~ current A.I.I. Best's rating o~ no' Verificatio!~_of Coverag_e. Lessee sl~all luz'~is]~ tl~p City wjtl; original certificates and a~nendatory e~IcJvs~z~e~t~; effectJnl5 cove~';~:;e ~-e~iuived by tills clause.. 'l'l~e endoL'sements r;l~o~ld IJe ~'.,~ f~)t'~s l~rovided by tile City or on otl~er tl~an tile City's I~'ovided I.l~ose e~lclovs~?Hle~ts o~- policies confor~n to the reClUiVements. ~1 ~:e~'l.ilic:~/~; ;~(.1 e~dorse~nent:; are to be received and apl)roved by the C~ty I~L~fore wo~'k co~e~ce~;. 'l'l~e City resevves tl~e rigl~t to require co~nplete, ~li~cl.i~; tl~u cov~r~ge re~luired by tl~ese specifications at any ti~e. .. ,. .- .. .. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 9f DATE: MARCH 17, 1999 REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF MINOR IMPROVEMENTS ON CITY PROPERTY BETVVEEN OAK AND BUSH STREETS The City owns a small parcel of open space property fronting Oak Street that connects to Bush Street via a pathway used by residents, as well as school children from Pomolita and Frank Zeek Schools. Staff is coming to the City Council to request approval of some minor improvements to the property, as well as discuss possible future improvements including bank stabilization. BACKGROUND Charlie and Jackie Ruelle own property directly north of the City's open space property. They have built a wooden fence along the entire length of the pathway between Oak and Bush Streets to protect their property and to provide privacy. In September, 1997 the City granted an Encroachment Permit to Mr. Ruelle to plant Oleanders along the southern side of the fence line to protect his fence from continual graffiti. The City was contacted by neighbors about the future potential size of the Oleanders as the western portion of the path is narrow and they were concerned about safety and ease of walking once the shrubs had reached maturity. City staff and Vice Mayor Kelly met with the neighbors to discuss their concerns and potential solutions. Since that time staff has met with the Ruelles and held several neighborhood meetings, including one on the open space site last October. The discussions and points of view on both sides have taken many turns, but staff is now returning to the City Council with plans to make immediate improvements to the property, as well as present cost estimates for substantial improvements in the future. CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Approve the immediate installation of improvements to the Oak and Bush Streets open space; 2) approve an amendment to the 1998/99 budget increasing Account No. 140.6050.800.000 by $2,000, and 3) approve a goal of future capital improvements to this site. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: The Ruelles and Neighborhood Committee Candace Horsley, City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A 1. 2. 3. 4. Engineer's Cost Estimate Letters to Neighborhood Members and Ruelles. Notes of Neighborhood Meeting. Budget Amendment Worksheets. APPROVED: R:I\CM:kk ARUELLE Candace Horsley, City Mlnager Discussion and Approval of Minor Improvements on City Property between Oak and Bush Streets March 17, 1999 Page 2 DISCUSSION There are several sides to the issues surrounding the property and pathway. Once the Ruelles had planted the Oleanders they immediately incurred acts of vandalism. Between December 2, 1997 and February 1, 1998, 16 plants were uprooted and thrown down the embankment. Some plants were destroyed by bicycles as riders crushed the plants on their way down the pathway. The Ruelles had gone to great expense to purchase the plants and install them with an automatic drip irrigation system and were very concerned about the continued vandalism to the plants and their fence line. The neighbors expressed concerns about being able to continue to walk through the pathway, unimpeded by shrubbery, as well as line of vision from Bush Street to Oak Street, especially in the evening hours when the path is used for jogging and walking. We formed a sub-committee of the neighborhood residents, as well as working with the Ruelles on the various issues. The major concerns of the residents included the upkeep of the path, long term preservation for the public's use including ease of walking on the path, as well as safety, continued rights of entry on the Bush Street side, future bank stabilization to insure the integrity of the path, and also that the Ruelles' issues of vandalism and graffiti were satisfied. The Ruelles' and next door property owners concerns include vandalism, late night noise, trespassing from those walking along the path, security of the Ruelles' fence line from vandalism and graffiti, as well as protection of foliage. The Ruelles had the Bush Street side of the property surveyed to determine where their property lines meet the City's. The City Engineer reviewed these plans and agreed that the Ruelles' property line crossed at about mid-point of the stairway entrance to the foot path from Bush Street, with the City's property line encompassing approximately 1' 4" into the stairway. The Ruelles also presented a proposal to the City whereby they would purchase the northeast corner of the City's property in exchange for releasing to the City full rights to the easement at the entrance on the Bush Street side. The proceeds from the sale would provide monies to make improvements that the City was considering. The Ruelles also indicated they would potentially close the Bush Street entrance if we could not reach an agreement. The previous year the City Council had taken the Oak Street property off of the surplus list as it declared its intention to not sell the property at that time. Additionally, during the neighborhood meeting, many of the neighbors expressed their concern with safety, as well as loss of open space, if the property was sold. After several months of discussion and negotiations, the Ruelles have contacted us to say they are no longer requesting that the property be sold in order to keep the pathway open on the Bush Street entrance. They are planning to keep the arrangement status quo and would like to replant along the fence line to protect their property. The plants will be close to the fence and initially protected from deer and vandalism by fastened wire. They have agreed to keep the Bush Street entrance open at this time. Discussion and Approval of Minor Improvements on City Property between Oak and Bush Streets March 17, 1999 Page 3 Based on discussions with all parties individually, staff prepared the following list of possible City improvements to the property to be phased over time: . Relocate the current pathway to follow the creek bank from Bush Street to Oak Street. Currently the path follows the fence line. By relocating the path, pedestrians would not be following the fence line for about half of the path distance. . Plant appropriate shrubbery along the western portion of the fence line that would not encroach on the path line of site or right-of-way at maturity. . Install bank stabilization along the creek bank to protect the pathway and bank's integrity. Attachment 1 delineates the City Engineer's estimate of costs. . Possibly install lighting at the Bush Street entrance to provide for safety which would not encroach upon the neighbors' privacy. . Place some sort of blockade to the entrance of Oak Street near the Ruelles' fence line to encourage pedestrians and bicyclists to use the creek side pathway. Total costs for these improvements is estimated at $45,000. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff is recommending that the City immediately move the pathway to align with the creek, and therefore, remove much of the traffic that is currently traversing along the Ruelles' fence line. In addition, we would place a Iow split rail fence on the northern portion of the property to encourage pedestrians to use the creek side foot path. Staff is also recommending that we purchase the additional plants required to complete the planting along the western portion the fence line with plants that have been recommended by a local landscaper that will not encroach on the path. The plants that were purchased and planted by the Ruelles have been damaged or destroyed by some users of the path. These improvements are estimated at $2,000, and would be paid for from the Park Development Fund (140). We also recommend that due to the expense of stabilization of the bank that the City Council approve the goal of improving the bank, retaining wall, and steps leading to Bush Street at a future date in order to allow for securing appropriate funding of these improvements. R:I\CM ARUELLE PARK DEVELOPMENT - FUND #140 Budgeted amounts: Beginning fund balance 7/1/98 Revenue budgeted Transfers budgeted Expense Budgeted ending fund balance 6/30/99 $ 54,755 $ 62,634 $ (30,065) $ 87,324 Adjustments made durinq the fiscal year: Date Approved 7/1/98 Change in beginning fund balance per audit 3/3/99 Transfer to Special Projects Fund for Riverside Park 3/17/99 Oak & Bush Open Space improvements Account No. $ (311) 140.283.250 $ (1,000) 140.6050.800.000 $ (2,000) Revised ending fund balance 6/30/99 $ 84,013 RESERV99.XLS 3/11/99 Page 2 Funds 120; 140; 141 142 143 150 I.U 0 0 0 0 z 0 0 e'- 0 ~', E E ~ '5 '~m cl.°u~ o e. ~c''' '- '= :: c o o: o o o o ~ g e ~, ~ ~,c .... ._ ~..- ~~ .> m = ~0 ~.~'~ .... _0880 .~ ~,~~~:~° o o ~r88 ~ 000 0 88~88888. . . 8qoo888o 00~0000 ~ 00000 O0 ~ 00 O00 ~ O0000 00;000000 ~ O000000 0000 ~ ~ ~iO 0 ~ ~ 00~ 0 ~ oooooom~ oddmm~o m~dg~ddo d-~ddddd ooooooo~ o ~oo~ O0 0 0 0 0 O0 00~ O0 O0 ~ 0 O0 O0 City of Ukiah Preliminary Cost Estimate Orr Creek Footpath between N. Oak St. and N. Bush St. "CITY OF UKIAH Orr Creek Footpath between North Oak Street an~'~-~th-B~J~h-S;~-eet pr_e. li.m_.!n_.ary cost Estimate , Pr?p_a_r_e_d__B_~_.'___R_i_e_h__$eanor _ Estimated Unit Total Description Unit Quantity Price Price E x_~_a_v_ a_t i _o _n ,_ _R_ _e_ t~ !._n_i_n g _vVa_~ll_ cY 31 $30.00 $930.00 C0 _n_c_rete_R_~t_a!_~i_n g_ _Wal_~l __ cY 26.5 $800.00 $21,200.00 ,, Excav.ati0~_,_..Bank Stabilization CY 49 $30.00 $1,470.00 Geotextile Fabric ~F 720 $2.0-0- $1,440.00 P ia c_e C0.h_-c?t.e?eb_r_i s_-S_!o_p_'~___P. ~o~e~i~n--- ~-~Y- -- 37 ---$--~0-~0-0 -- Place & Co _m_ pac!_Na_tjxe__.~a_c_kfill cY 12 $25.00 $300.00 Place & Compact Ground AC TON 60 $14.00 $840.00 _ -'-SUB-TOTAL, CONSTRUCTION COSTS ;$28,400.00 _ ENGINEERING @ 10% $2,840.00 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION & INSPECTION @ 10% $2,840.00 CONTINGENCIES @ 15% $4,260.00 -_ I ...... 1 .... TOTAL PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE. $38,340.00 Date/Time Printed: 3/18/98 at 11:44 AM Page 1 of 1 Filename: ORRCPATH.XLS br~ e = 'Fa Ta L qOLJ,rNF__ = ~ ~F/FT + Z~. Z4 . -- Id~TE ; 12_ cF - = I~,¥1 PTz = g=/:C,~P F"r'"-- e~- ~keb/~ ~n~rle /.frEt ~tv/rp = 5,~1 FT. ~j- = ID~, I'q FTz' Far- Tg Tie& ~05 T 60f T- P EIZ. T~ (.v~~/t~ T/tX = ~ !~ ~/T~,,v . I, 5"Z~ ~)/, ~--I I,, 5' T~wI - ~Lxfe~,-,ion ~?e~ ~'~' FgE. PL~r.-IhjG CITy STD. PLAN B3-1 133 3O0 · ADMIN. 707/463-6200 · FAX # 707/463-6204 .AVE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 · PUBLIC SAFETY 463-6242/6274 · March 23, 1998 Muhasibi Shalom 405 Cypress Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Ms. Shalom' I wanted to get back to you in writing on the status of the Oak/Bush Street pathway. First of all, I want to personally thank you for volunteering to be part of the sub-committee which will meet, if necessary, on the pathway. I know that you are very busy and offering to do this for your neighborhood was very much appreciated. Several days after we had our neighborhood meeting I met with three of my Department Directors at the site to look at the current situation and discuss alternatives. At that time, I asked my Director of Public Works/City Engineer to develop a preliminary scope of work for upgrading the path and creek bank and also to estimate the associated costs. ! also contacted the Sangiacamo's to ask them for their advice on appropriate plantings that would go up the fence but not out into the pathway. I also met with the Ruelle's to tell them about the meeting and what our current plans were. They were both very encouraged by the discussion and gave their approval of the process. In their turn, they are currently having the Bush Street side of the pathway surveyed to make a final determination on property rights. Once we have received all of this information, I will be in contact with you by phone to let you know the results of all of the research and whether we should meet to discuss the nex~ steps. I want you to know that, even though some time has gone by since our meeting, we have been very actively pursuing a solution to the problems and concerns that were raised at our meeting. If you have any comments or questions, please feel free to contact me at 463-6210. This is my direct line. Sincerely, Candace Horsley City Manager CH:ky 4:Can:LPalh '~(/e Are Here To Serve" 300 S~i~,-i~.~,~VE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 · ADMIN, 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC SAI:-ETY 463-6242/6274 · FAX # 707/463.-6204 · July 14, 1998 Suzanne Farris 904 N. Oak Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Ms. Farris: I want to thank you for taking the time to meet with us several weeks ago to discuss future plans for the pathway along Orr Creek. The City Attorney is currently on vacation but as soon as he gets back he will be furnishing a legal opinion relative to the right-of-way on the Bush Street side of the pathway. As you know, the focus of our discussions have been on improvements to the creekside pathway, which are consistent with the goals of the City of Ukiah General Plan. Those plans have developed to a point that the Council feels it would be beneficial to hold a neighborhood meeting on site to discuss these ideas. Since this may be a community parkway we want to receive comments and hear all viewpoints from the entire neighborhood, the Ruelle's, and City staff. Some of the ideas we may wish to discuss are improvements of the path to include benches and sitting areas and enhancements to the creekbank itself that will preserve its natural state while allowing safe and year-round access. Once the City Attorney has made his final determination relative to the right of way issue, I will be contacting you regarding the on-site neighborhood meeting. Thank you once again for your time and efforts and, as always, if you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, Candace Horsley City Manager CH:ky 4:Can:LPath.2 "W'e Are Here To Serve" 300 SE.~..~.,...~IN.A,R~.~,_~VE., UKIAH, ~ 95482-5400 · ADMIN. 707/-i63-6200 · PUBUC SAFETY 463-6242/6274 · FAX # 707/463-6204 · April 14, 1998 Charles Ruelle 980 N. Oak Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Charlie: I wanted to thank you for our meeting last month and your cooperation in trying to come to a mutual agreement on the pathway between Oak and Bush Streets. I understand that you are in the process of having the Bush Street property surveyed and that you will be meeting with us shortly to discuss the results of that survey. I also wanted to put in writing some of our thoughts and discussions from our last meeting as we continue to work on the various projects each of us agreed to finalize before we had another meeting. o The City of Ukiah Parks crews will now be responsible for mowing the City's property on Oak Street. I have confirmed with the Department Director that they will commence maintaining the property as of the date of this letter. , The City Engineer is preparing a report and cost estimate for improving the path and possibly moving the eastern edge to follow the creek instead of the fence line. He is also including creek improvement costs to be considered as the City has funds available. . The City will be investigating the replacement of the oleanders with other plants that are not as bushy, but will still protect the fence line along the path. Recommendations from a local landscaping firm have been considered and approved both by the City and by you. . Once these issues have been researched I will be also meeting with the community subcommittee that I met with previously, as well as the City Council to obtain additional comment and direction. As you already know, the ultimate dispositoin of the City-owned property at this location will be solely up to the City Council, and any expectation that a sale is possible, is entirely speculative at this point in time. "We Are Here To Serve" Charles Ruelle Re: Pathway Between Oak and Bush Streets April 14, 1998 Page Two Please let us know once you have completed your survey so that we can meet to discuss the results. If in the meantime you have any comments or questions, please feel free to call me at 463-6210. Sincerely, Candace Horsley City Manager CH:ky C: Larry DeKnoblough Rick Kennedy Suzanne Farris Muhasibi Shalom 4:Can:LRuelle NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING CITY LAND ADJACENT TO RUELLE PROPERTY February 25, 1998 THOUGHTS AND IDEAS EXPRESSED BY NEIGHBORS · Keep pathway clear and open to the public. Oleander trees are too large, fast growing, and full foliage to keep the pathway clear and safe. Vines that only grow vertically should be planted rather than bush- or tree-like vegetation. City should maintain this area because it owns the land, and the City should make it a dedicated park. City could create a more permanent and defined pathway, and create a buffer between path and Charlie Ruelle's private property; discarded utility poles could be anchored along the path to make it more difficult to access Ruelle's fence. · Paint a mural on the fence. Communicate with the student body of Pomolita Middle School as to the importance of maintaining the pathway in an open and safe state, and try to get their "buy-in" as to the benefits of not vandalizing Charlie Ruelle's property. City should get Charlie Ruelle to deed west end to the City in order to alleviate his concerns over liability. City can develop a mailing list of affected or nearby neighbors, and can keep neighborhood apprised of actions intended to solve the cited problems. Neighborhood group should assist in solving the problem, and two representatives of the group should meet with Charlie and the City to discuss viable and constructive solutions. CONSENSUS DECISION AT MEETING'S END Two volunteer representatives to meet with City and Charlie to discuss viable solutions. R:I\CM RUELLE ITEM NO. 9g DATE: March 17, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Discussion of City Revenues Introduction The following revenue information is presented to the City Council to provide a framework of background information prior to beginning the upcoming Fiscal Year 1999-2000 budget process. This report will focus on the general categories and trends of the City of Ukiah's General Fund revenues. Two additional "pre-budget" informational items will be brought to the Council prior to the beginning of the formal budget process. Without going into the line item detail of the budget, these reports will provide the Council with a solid foundation of information from which a better understanding of the overall city government financial process can be attained. The second Fiscal Year 1999/2000 pre-budget presentation to the City Council, with a discussion of departmental goals and objectives will take place at the regular meeting of the Council on April 21, 1999. This report focuses on the discretionary revenues of the General Fund. It is through the General Fund that the City of Ukiah's most basic services, Police, Fire, Public Works and Community Services receive their funding. The General Fund revenues have also been the easiest target in recent years for "Revenue Shifts" by the state away from city governments to the state, schools and county. CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and discuss the attached revenue report. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Review and remand to staff with instructions. Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Candace Horsley, City Manager Michael S. Flad, Assistant City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager . 2. 3. 4. 5. Total City Sales Tax. Sales Tax by Economic Segment. History of Sales Tax. Top Ten Sales Tax Segments. Sales Tax by Economic Segment. APPROVED,:Can-daceS? Horsley, C~ty~/lanager R:COUNClL REVCNCL Discussion of City Revenues March 17, 1999 Page 2 Total Revenue The total City of Ukiah expected revenue for the 1998/1999 Fiscal Year is $31,571,450. Of this total amount $6,695,385 or 21% is designated as General Fund revenue. As shown in Figure 1, only this limited amount of City revenue, the General Fund is truly discretionary. Of the revenue not categorized as the General Fund, the vast majority is received from the City's Public Utilities and Public Works Department. In fact, $19,543,450 of the $24,876,065 total, or 79%, of Ukiah's non-General Fund revenues are received by the Sewer, Solid Waste, Electric and Water Funds. City of Ukiah Total Revenue All Sources - $31,571,450 Fiscal Year 1998-99 General Fund 21% $6,695,385 All Other Funds 79% $24,876,065 Figure 1 Total City Revenue General Fund The remainder of this report will focus on the City of Ukiah's General Fund dollars. Over the last 10 Fiscal Years, the General Fund has shown relatively steady growth. Only Fiscal Year 1991/92 suffered a decrease in actual revenue from the year prior. As shown in Figure 2, General Fund revenues have increased from $4,093,826 in Fiscal Year 1989/90 to $6,695,385 in Fiscal Year 1998/99. It should be noted that both Fiscal Years 1997/98 and 1998/99 depict projected revenue while the remaining years reflect actual revenue received. Unfortunately, General Fund expenses have exceeded revenue growth even though the City has gone through extensive cost cutbacks, employee reductions and service delivery decreases. Discussion of City Revenues March 17, 1999 Page 3 10 Year General Fund History $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $- 89190 90191 91/92 92~93 93~94 94~95 95~96 96197 97198 98199 Fiscal Year Figure 2 City General Fund Revenue History For budgetary purposes General Fund revenues are typically broken down into seven sub- categories as presented in Figure 3. Not surprising the dominant provider of local government revenue is sales tax. For the City of Ukiah, Sales Tax accounts for 43% of total General Fund revenues. A distant second, at 16% is the combined revenue from the City's four franchise fee payers. Intergovernmental revenue or money from other agencies represents 10% of the total. The majority of the revenue in the Intergovernmental category is attributable to the Motor Vehicle License Fee. At 9% is the Use of Money and Property which also combines several different revenue sources. Interest and Land Rentals account for much of this category. Other Revenue accounts for 9%, Property Tax 7%, and Other Taxes 6%, for a total of 100%. General Fund Revenue Fiscal Year 1998199 Use of Money & Property 10% Intergo~emmental 10% Other Revenue Property Tax 9% 7% Other Tax~ 6% Franchise Fees 16% Sales Tax 43% Figure 3 General Fund Revenues by Category Discussion of City Revenues March 17, 1999 Page 4 As shown in Figure 4, over the last four years, sales tax has been a driving force in General Fund growth. Sales Tax has increased from $2,265,223 in Fiscal Year 1994-1995 to a projected $2,878,000 for Fiscal Year 1998-99. The increase of just over $600,000 represents a 27% increase in the last three years. Property Tax, while flat over the last three years has actually decreased 10% over the past 10 years. The impact of state imposed Property Tax shifts on City General Fund revenues is discussed in more detail in the Property Tax section of this report. GEI~ERAL FI.N:3 REVENLE Fiscal Years 1995/96; 1996/97; 1997/98 and 1998/99 Compared Figure 4 City Revenue History by Category · 1996-97 I1'11997-98 lB 19cJ8'99 Discussion of City Revenues March 17, 1999 Page 5 Specific Taxes The four major tax categories account for $4,813,500 or 72% of General Fund revenue. As discussed previously, Sales Taxes totaling $2,878,000 or 43% of the General Fund overshadows the other three sources combined. Franchise Fees are next with $1,040,500 or 16%, followed by Property Taxes of $495,000 or 7%, and Other Taxes totaling $400,000 or 6%. The following paragraphs will discuss these sources in greater detail. Property Tax The Property Tax is imposed on real property (land and permanently attached improvements such as buildings) and tangible personal property (movable property) located within the state. Property is assessed by the County Assessor, except for certain public utility properties which are assessed by the State Board of Equalization. The Board also oversees county assessment practices. Taxable property is assessed annually as of 12:01 a.m. on March 1 by counties and January 1 by the State Board of Equalization. Secured property and unsecured property are distinguished for taxing purposes. Secured property includes real property and that personal property which is located upon real property of the same owner. Unsecured property is subject to the tax which applied to secured property in the previous year. Secured roll taxes are paid in two installments, due on December 10 and April 10. Unsecured roll taxes are due on August 31. Article XIIIA of the State Constitution limits the real property tax rate to 1% of the property's value. Locally assessed real property is appraised at the 1975-76 "full cash value", called the base year value and is adjusted each year after 1975 by the change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), not to exceed an increase of 2%. This property is reappraised to current full value immediately upon either a change in ownership or new construction. Only the newly constructed portion of the property is reappraised. Thereafter, it continues to be increased annually by the change in CPI not to exceed 2%. Property which declines in value is assessed to reflect the lower value. Prior to the adoption of Proposition 13, Property Tax was a dominant source of revenue for California cities. Property Tax provided revenues that were remarkably stable during recessions, and could be used flexibly to meet a city's particular needs. Although it is typically referred to as a local tax, Proposition 13 eliminated most local authority over the tax. Not only is the base rate set in the State Constitution at 1%, state statutes control the distribution of tax revenues. In the early 1990's, the state shifted over $3 billion of property taxes from local governments to schools. While the formulas underlying the property tax shifts are exceedingly complex, the concept was simple: shifting property taxes away from city's to schools reduced, on a dollar for dollar basis, the amount the state was required to spend on schools. These shifted revenues, commonly referred to as "ERAF" monies, after Discussion of City Revenues March 17, 1999 Page 6 the name of the fund (Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund) directly reduced the amount of Property Tax allocated to the City of Ukiah. City of Ukiah Proporty Tax Allocation 9.4% City of Ukiah 6.5% Con'rrunity College District 15.7% ERAF 1.3% Special Districs 28.5% County Tax Allocation Cities, Counties, School Districts and Special Districts share the revenues from the 1% Property Tax. Figure 5 shows the disbursement of the Ukiah "growth or increment" of Property Tax from the increased assessed valuation. Figure 5 City of Ukiah Property Tax Allocation It would probably surprise most Ukiah residents to find out that less than 10% of their Property Tax goes to the City General Fund. At the same time however, almost 28.5% is received by the County, and 38.6% by the School District. The State of California average Property Tax percentage allocation is 14% for cities, and 16% for counties. Separate statewide school district data was not available. Stated differently, Ukiah receives 33.3% less Property Tax than the average California city, while Mendocino County receives nearly 75% more than an average County. Staff is working with the office of the County Auditor to obtain additional Property Tax information. Again, it is these recent ERAF shifts in the Property Tax allocations that have directly reduced City General Fund contributions. Sales Tax Sales and use tax is imposed on retailers for the privilege of selling at retail, or on users in California of property purchased outside the state. The tax is based on the sales price of any taxable transaction of tangible personal property. Leases are considered to be a continuing sale or use and are subject to taxation. The current Sales Tax for Mendocino Discussion of City Revenues March 17, 1999 Page 7 County is 7.25%. Figure 6 illustrates the distribution of the Sales Tax with 1% of the total sale price coming to the City General Fund. State of California 5% City of Ukiah Distribution of 7.25% Sales Tax Ukiah General Fund 1% County Public Safety .5% County HealthNVelfare .5% County Transportation .25% Figure 6 Ukiah Sales Tax Allocation The City of Ukiah contracts with Municipal Resource Consultants (MRC) to provide Sales Tax reporting and analysis services. The attached information from MRC details revenue information for the third quarter of 1998 or July, August, and September 1998. Annual information reflects Sales Tax receipts from September 1997 through September 1998. As expected, Ukiah Sales Tax generation is dominated by retail sales. As shown in Attachment A, department store sales accounted for one out of every four Sales Tax dollars in the year ending with the third quarter 1998 (the latest quarter for which information is available). The cyclical nature of retail dominated sales are illustrated in Attachment B. The fourth quarter or Christmas quarter is represented by a pronounced spike in Sales Tax, followed by a traditionally weak first quarter. The Benchmark line clearly demonstrates the steady growth in Sales Tax from year to year. Attachments 3 and 4 breakdown the Sales Tax by Business Segments and Economic Category. Of note is the solid growth in the areas of building materials, construction, office equipment and business to business sales. Franchise Fees In addition to business license taxes, which are imposed for the privilege of doing business in the City, several statutes provide cities with the authority to impose fees on privately - owned utility companies and other businesses for the privilege of using city rights-of-way. Typically the types of businesses which are required by city ordinance to pay Franchise Fees include public utilities, such as gas and electricity; companies which conduct business on city streets such as taxicabs and private ambulances; and cable television Discussion of City Revenues March 17, 1999 Page 8 companies. The State of California has enacted detailed regulations and procedures which must be followed in granting public utility franchises. State regulations dealing with other businesses required to pay Franchise Fees are more general and the detailed procedures are established by local ordinance. Exemptions to Franchise Fees include the telephone companies, railroads, and wharves. The City of Ukiah has four Ordinances and Franchise Agreements which, when combined, generate $1,040,500 or 16% of the total General Fund revenues. Of the total combined Franchise Fee revenues, the majority, $665,000 comes from the Electric Utility. The Council adopted Franchise Fee rate for the Electric Utility is 6% of receipts. The Council approved the Solid Waste Franchise Agreement establishing a Franchise Fee rate of 15% and is expected to generate $293,000 in Fiscal Year 1998-99. The cable television rate is statutorily capped at 5%, and the private utility (gas) is held at 2%. Combined, the cable and gas Franchise Taxes generate $82,000 for the General Fund. While remaining extremely fiat in terms of growth over the last five years, Franchise Fees remain a stable and important component of the overall revenue picture. Other Taxes Expected to generate $400,000 in revenue and representing 6% of the General Fund, Other Taxes combines the Property Transfer Tax, Room Occupancy Tax and Business License Tax. The Property Transfer Tax is by far the smallest of the three generating only $16,000. The Room Occupancy Tax is the largest at $209,000 and the Business License Tax generates $175,000. The Property Transfer Tax is imposed on the transfer of real property. Counties are authorized to levy the tax at a rate of $.55 per $500 of sale value, exclusive of any lien or encumbrance remaining at the time of sale. Once a county has enacted the tax (which all counties have done), a city is authorized to levy a tax at one-half the county rate (which the City of Ukiah has done). The city tax is then credited against the county tax. In Ukiah's case, the City and the County each receive $0.275 per $500 value exclusive of any lien or remaining encumbrance on the property. Nearly every city in California has enacted this tax. The Room Occupancy Tax, also known as the Transient Occupancy Tax is imposed for the privilege of occupying a room or rooms in a hotel, inn, motel, tourist home, or other lodging facility, unless such occupancy is for a period of 30 days or more. Cities may also levy a tax on the privilege of renting a mobile home located outside of a mobile home park, unless such occupancy is for more than 30 days or unless the tenant is an employee of the owner. Rates are set at the city's discretion and range from 1% to 10%. The City of Ukiah Room Occupancy Tax rate is 8%. Over 325 California cities have a Transient Occupancy Tax. Discussion of City Revenues March 17, 1999 Page 9 The Business License Tax is imposed on businesses for the privilege of conducting business within the City. The tax is most commonly based on gross receipts, levied at a flat rate, or a combination of the two. Some cities base rates on the quantity of goods produced, number of employees, number of vehicles, or on a combination of all of these factors. Rates are set at the City's discretion. Cities may levy this tax for both regulatory and revenue raising purposes. However, regulatory fees can only be levied to cover the cost of regulation. The City of Ukiah's Business License Tax was established for revenue raising purposes. Over 420 California cities assess this tax. Statutory exemptions to this tax include certain musicians; disabled veterans engaged in vending goods; real estate auctioneering; renting; leasing or operating laundry equipment and coin operated vending machines; freight haulers; charitable institutions; interstate commerce; farmers; the blind; businesses that sell, purchase, possess or transport alcoholic beverages; banks, insurance companies, their agents and other financial institutions. The Business License Tax for Ukiah businesses ranges from $.20 to $.75 per $1,000 of gross receipts. The determination of the rate is based on the type and in some cases the net profitability of the subject business. Classification "H" pays the highest gross receipts based Business Tax and includes medical doctors, chiropractors, veterinarians, chiropodists, opticians, optometrists, osteopaths, technicians, surgeons, attorneys, consultants, physical therapists, and dentists; electrologists; laboratories; and developers. A flat rate ranging from $50 per year to $100 per day is levied on certain types of businesses. The Business License Tax for any business with annual gross receipts of $2,000 or less is $10. Included in the flat rate schedule are auctioneers, carnivals, acrobatic performances, equestrian acts, telephone solicitor, peddler, promotions, and handbill distribution. Motor Vehicle License Fee This additional significant source of General Fund revenue is collected by the Department of Motor Vehicles and disbursed by the State Controller. A special license fee equivalent to 2% of the market value of motor vehicles is imposed annually by the state in-lieu of local property taxes. In fact, the License Fee is often referred to as the "Motor Vehicle In-Lieu". Originally motor vehicles were counted in the assessment of property taxes, but for ease of administration and conformity, the state now collects these fees through the in-lieu tax. Revenues derived from the fees are apportioned monthly and distributed near the 10th of each month. Effective January 1, 1999, the State Vehicle License Fee was reduced by 25%, with no immediate impact on City revenue. Staff will continue to monitor the long- term implications of this reduction. For the City of Ukiah, Motor Vehicle License Fees totaled $600,00 or 9% of the General Fund revenues. Discussion of City Revenues March 17, 1999 Page 10 State of California Vehicle License and Registration Fee Allocation State General Fund Other State Agencies 8% Cities 2% State Highways 18% 10% DMV 10% CHP Counties 13% 39% Figure 7 Motor Vehicle License Fee Allocation Summary Overall General Fund revenues have increased slightly over the last 10 years. Leading revenue increases has been Sales Tax. Over the last three years, Sales Tax has increased by 27%. Particularly significant in that Sales Tax represents 43% of total General Fund revenues. When analyzing the Sales Tax, growth has been strongest in the retail, construction, and business to business categories. Not all revenue sources however have experienced similar growth. Property Tax for example, has decreased over the last ten years by approximately 10%. This decrease is primarily caused by State imposed changes in the methodology of allocating the revenue away from cities to the schools, counties and state. Other Taxes and Franchise Fees have also either decreased slightly of failed to keep pace with the rate of inflation. It is hoped that the above information has provided the City Council with a background of the major City revenues sources, allocation formulas, and history. As the City Council begins the Fiscal Year 1999-2000 budget process, detailed revenue projections for all General Fund revenues will be presented. Staff will be present at the March 17, 1999 meeting to answer any questions. 0 0 <~ C~ < 0 C) C) C) C) C) CD C) 0 0 0 0 C) C) C:) CZ) C) 0 CZ) 0 C) CZ) CZ) CZ) C) C) C) C) CZ;) CZ) 'c~ C~ C~ CD C:) CD CD C~ < C~ Z < Z :2:; < < X 0 0 0 0 0 ~Z < Z