The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-03-18 PacketIn support of the 60th Annual Redwood Region Logging Conference March 2C~28, 1998 WHEREAS, Forest Families provide an economic foundation through jobs and revenue; and WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah recognizes the historical and continuing contribution to the economic and cultural prosperity that Forest Families provide to our county; and WHE~S, the Redwood Region Logging Conference will honor the role of Forest Families and their communit/es throughout the Redwood Region at their 1998 Conference. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sheridan Malone. Mayor of the City of Ukiah, on beha/f of my fellow City Councilmembers, Jim Mast/n, Kristy Kelly, Phillip Ashiku, and Guadalupe Chavez do hereby invite all citizens to attend the 60th Annual Redwood Region Logging Conference, entitled "S/X DECADES OF DEDICATION TO FORESTS & FAMILIES' to be held at the Redwood Empire Fairgrounds, March 2C~28, 1998; salutes timber workers, thew famlhes and thew communities throughout the Redwood Region. · · . · , MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting - March 4, lgg8 A regular meeting of the Ukiah City Council, the agenda for which was legally noticed and posted, convened It 6:32 p.m. in the Ukiah Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Semina~ Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers ware present: Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. Absent: None. ~taff present: Public Utilities Director Barnes, Community Services Director DeKnoblough, Assistant City Manager I-lan'is, City Manager Horsley, City Attomey Rapport, end City Clerk Henderson. 2. Pledae of Allealanee Mayor Malone led the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Malone announced an urgency matter had arisen regarding the Refinancing of the Lease Purchase Agreement for the Senior Center and noted the need for the Council to matter et this time. MIS Mastin/Chavez to add the matter of Refinancing of Agreement to the agenda, carried by the following roll call Ashiku, Kelly, Masfin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. The matter was added to the agenda as I~m 3. Ap_ DrovallCorrecflon of Minute_~ 3a. Regular Msetin_n of February_ 18. M/S Mastin/Kelly to approve the Minutes of the carded by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cou..n. ci~bers Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. 4. Lease Purchase None..~.:i~!? 1998, es submitted, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone reviewed the S. CONSENT CALENDAR o..uncilm. e..?~er Ashiku ....................... the letter of support for the North Coast aa]road ~~ under.~m::i~::i:.~He i; ~) the letter as presented M/S Maiti~!~:i....t...~' appr6~:~ent Calendar as follows: I. ..[~:?cl ~::~~.ges. ~'from P~ti Mittem/Jce Cooke, Brenda Clark, end Barbara ~ua~;~;~c)a'~~butoJ~:"and referred ,o Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire ~ ant; l[~i:.:'::'~iii~~:: _,~ii..~c)mmumcat~on ~u~pmem, and Installation Services It the Wastewater Treatment Plant: ~i~. ut::~ Ke~mDureernents; [~~Fted~!ut!on _No. eS.-~O, Authorizing Submittal, Execution, .nd Acceptance of Federal ~~ency ~nener urent (FESG) - 1998; ~~~d'Resolution No. 98-31, Designating Agent for Filing Financial Ass~nce Application to the Federal Emergency Management Agency and California Office of Emergency Services (as amended); and g. Awarded bid to Rainbow Agricultural Services for Lease/Purchase of New Vacuum Mower. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEM~ Tim Holman, 308 Clam Avenue, addressed the Council regarding the Traffic Calming Measures in the Wagonseller's neighborhood. He noted the barriers ware unsafe and inconvenient, and he urged the Council to consider other options. Mayor Malone noted the measures were installed on a trial basis. The Council will re-evaluate the effectiveness of the barriem in three months. Regular MMling- Ma~ 4,1Be8 City Manager Horsley will send Mr. Holrrmn information regarding the Wegonseller's Neighborhood Committee which is involved in supporting these traffic calming measures. Jonatl'mn Devidson, 309 Clam Avenue, ~ooke against the installation of the barriers and would like to see them removed. 7. NEW BUSINESS 7a. Introduction of Ordinance Amendino Ukiah Municioal ~_~de Section 7008 Re_=ardin~ Holidays for Enforcement of Parkin_= Re_=ulations City Manager Horsley noted this proposed ordinance is meant to clarify the Municipal Code as it relates to holiday parking in the downtown area. Aseis'mnt City Manager I-larrb noted the ordinance updates the Code to specify holidays currently observed by the County of Mendocino as well a~ the City of Uidah. .~le/$..Mastin/Ashiku to. introduce, by title only, the Ordinance Amendiqg.. Divis!~: Chapter 1, ~,on.7008 of the .Uldah City Code Regarding Holidays for Enforcem~:i~ p~ng Regulations, .City Clerk Henderson read by title only the Ordinance~.~'e City ~!i!~!~!~.. City of U~ Amending Division 8, Chapter 1, ~ection 700e of the~.h c..ily~· the Ordinance Amending~~!~, Chapter 1, ~ecti~8 of the Uldah City Code Regarding .I-~i. idays for Enforcement of Pa~::R~tions' carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councdmembers Chavez, Ashiku.,~lly~:~;~.~l..as~;i.lnd Mayor Malone. NOES' ... :::.:.:::::.:::::: ::::.:: :::. 7b. Discussion of' Possible Ballot Measure ii 'ia.te Dire~i~i!ii~:~d Mavor Position Councilrnember MsstJn asked the CO ' ii~ii!'"'"'i~'~ unc!t?~o consi~i; = b'~i~::~'~'~re which would eliminate the position of directly-elected mayor and-~tum the::.!~osition ~i:"which rotates in some manner among five elected Councilmembe~!i?:!i!f-le nora's'the bu~ of the time commitment involved to whomever acts as mayor, with a ~iar ~itment ~g an unreasonably long time to serve. Counoilme.ber Alhiku ~'s~rtJvt o~:~~ Mayor ~l~ni:?~reed'll?::~n takes ~¥:~:~g'mat de.! of time, .nd it could be expensive to c?.ncl.,da, tes:~...:i~ ~ two ~::::ii~._ng the position of mayor among the Councilmembars would ?minate.the ~;~!:~.vacanc~.:::~i~ I C, ouncllmembar, if that Councilmembar were elected Mayor m~d-way ~gh~ia;:~u.r. ys~Cil term. Counc~l~ber MastJn...::::!'~e~!i~i:ty Clerk Henderson her opinion on the subject, ~ince ~e, at one time, ~":a directly, ele~i!~. ....... rk Henderson ..... s been only about 15 years since the position of directly-elected ~yor was approved ~:lhe people of Uldah at the ballot box. She felt, in light of the defeat of I~v~al recent ballot ~$ures to eliminate the elected City Clerk and City Treasurer positions, the Co~ime~ber Kelly fait the public might be receptive to the idea as the change would eliminate the need for the Council to appoint someone to fill out the term of any Councllmember who may be elected Mayor with two years of his/her Councllmembar term remaining. City Manager Horsle¥ offered the argument that other cities our size, a.~ well a.~ Mendoclno County, ~1o not directly elect the chairperson of their counclis or boards. Councllmember Chavez noted she had the same concame originally as City Clerk Henderson, but noted there are valid reasons for eliminating the direct election of the Mayor. Discussion ensued regarding the issue. Regu~r M#tJng - March 4,1998 It was the general consensus of the Council to refer the matter to mff for preparation of possible ballot arguments, together with an estimate of the costs involved of puffing the matter on the November belloL ?o. Refinancin= of the Senior Center L:_-~e Puroha~ A__-r~eme~ City Manager Healey noted this matter Was brought before the Council es an urgency item in ~)rder to respond to the Senior Center's immed~e need to refinance its Lease-Purchase Agreement. The City acts as a conduit only for these funds, assuming no liability. bl/S Kelly/Mastin to approve the rer~and~ was withdrawn by the maker end the second on advice of City Attorney Rapport. It was the consens~ of the Council to refer the matter to ~laff, so required procedures, including · public hearing, may be followed in order to facilitate thi~ request. The matter will be brought back before the Council at its March 18, 1998 m~ting. CITY COUNCIL REPORT~ Councilmember Chavez thanked staff for continuing to facilitate the Cinco de Mayo parade. The Main Street evening. She encouraged the Council to support the fundraiser. Committee to hosti~ eppreciat~ Councilmember Aahiku had nothing to report. Councilmember Kelly expressed her concern for the area. She noted a forthcoming informal meeting Ukiah Unified School Distri~ representatives regarding ~.J. ocation ........ school. She would like to see the documenta~:i:~i!i~e State locating the school near the Airport. ~ meeting; ell of its loan funds have beer Governments meeting; it looks es if the Board of Supervisors meeting to She shared a copy of the Skateboa~.~ark Co~ittee's choice s?e for the bark 'Oleanoer Neighborhood"; she ~i~:¥ery ap~ciative She attended a meeting of ~ Council~r Meati.~<~ ;~ , Waste Management Authority (MSWMA) .m.e.e~ti.n~:~::;~:;~:e_!ss.~:~:i~;;~!~:~adside'dumping was addressed. He was pleased to hive __u~_ n u.n .m??.~Di._s~_'.c~ .co~~ing Day et Eagle Day School in Redwood Valley. He mquesteo me '~tt~:~:.the mtu~ij~f;:~i~WMA North State Street Transfer Station property be age. ndized. ~):.:.~ci~: !meeti~:!~jihe Mendocino Transit Authority which dealt with budget rna~ers. He:~eU':~::~ywill b~:'~$ponsoring a workshop et which the idea of "local currency" !.a bart~ite, m) will ~:~:. He asked the location of "River Street," the site of a proposed aquo~nse mr use ~;~:~:. a .rm.. ger. Homley ~d the license was most likely to serve a concession/',and. River Street ~!ip~Dao~y a mrmer ~ for Oobbi ~treet, east of Highway 101 ~~:eo,ers. I-IS noted the upcoming Mendecino County Employers Council reception. CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR REPORTS in the Lover's Lane City of Ukiah, and ~sed new elementary the i~sue of ...... Financing Co~oretion I Mendocino Council of ~he ettended a County the Air Quality Study. sheet with the Council; the first- met with · group of people from the for facilitating this positive meeting. CRy Manager Horsley showed the Council draft designs for City direclional signs and asked for their comments on the design. She distributed tickets to the Ukiah Fire Fighters A.tsociation fundreiser, A Fabulous Fifties Revue. Mendocino County approved the parking agreement to provide perking in the downtown area for its employees. The Council adjourned to Closed Session at 8:02 p.m. Regular Milling . Mlmh 4,1998 P. m3 10. CLOSED SESSION I. G.C. Section 54956.9(b_~. Conference with L®osl r_~_u~_~e_! Re_cmrdin,, Anticirmte.= Liti~astion - $ipntficsnt Exaosure to Litiaation~ 1 matter b. G.C. Section 54957.~ - Conference with L-bor Ne_uoti.tor - City Manager The Council reconvened in Open Session .t 8:42 p.m. No Iction wis taken. 11. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was ,djoumed ~t 8:43 p.m. Colleen B. I-lenclerson, City Regullr Mel~ng -Mlrch 4,1~98 P.g. 4 ITEM NO. 6a DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DENIAL OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM GAlL MARIE MORLEY, INA SILVERWOOD, AND ROBERT LONG AND REFERRAL TO THE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND The claim from Gail Marie Morley was received by the City of Ukiah on February 24, 1998 and alleges damages related to harassment and intimidation on February 2, 1998 at 212 Ford Street. At the January 21, 1998 meeting, the City Council denied the claim alleging damages from a September 25, 1997 incident. The City Council's action at this meeting is only relative to the portion of the claim regarding the new incident of February 2, 1998. The claim from Ina Silverwood was received by the City of Ukiah on March 2, 1998 and alleges damages related to a "blackout" on February 6, 1998 at 426 N. School Street. The claim from Robert Long was received by the City of Ukiah on March 6, 1998 and alleges damages related to a power outage on February 5, 1998 at 468 N. School Street. 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 Claim for Damages received from Ina Silverwood, Robert Long, and that portion of the Claim for Damages from Gail Marie Morley relative to the February 2, 1998 incident; and Refer them to the Joint Powers Authority, REMIF. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.: N/A Yes Claimant Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim of Gail Marie Morley, pages 1-4. 2. Claim of Ina Silverwood, pages 5-8. 3. Claim of Robert Long, pages 9-13. APPROVED~~____~_~_ ~, ~ Candace Horsley, City ~anager mfh:asrcc98 ' 0318CLAIM NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF UKiAH, CALIFO This claim must be presented, as prescribed by Parts 3 and 4 of Division 3.6, of Title 1, of the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or by a person acting on his/her behalf· RETURN TO: City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 i · · · 1998 CLAIMgkNT'SNAME: Gail Marie Morley CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS: 212 Ford Street #7 Number/Street and Post Office Box Ukiah California 95482 City State Zip Code Unlisted Home Phone Number Work Phone Number NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE .SENT (if different than above): William A. Welch, Attorney at Law SBN 188391 309A West Perkins Street, Ukiah, CA 95482 · · · · · DATE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: September 25, 1997 February 2,N1998 PLACE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCUPd~ENCE: 500 Block . State/Norton GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE (Attach additional pages if more space is needed): ©fficer of the Ukiah Police Department intentionally used excessiv~ force in effectinq an unlawful arrest resultinq in personal injuries to Gall Marie Morley, in violation of common law principles and constitutionally quaranteed civil rights. ~n 2/2/98, Hoyle harassed and intimadated Ms. Morley. NAMES, IF KNOWN, OF ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES CAUSING THE INJURY OR LOSS: UPD Officer Hoyle, Sqt. John McCutcheon, Officer McQuery, Chief of Police Keplinqer (personal & official); City of Ukiah; Civil Service Board; Hoyle's Supervisors; etc. NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF WITNESSES (optional): NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE A. B. · NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF DOCTORS/HOSPITALS WHERE TREATED: NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE A. Mark H. Louto, MD UVMC 275 Hospital Dr. 462-3111 B. Peter Keegan~ MD 1367 S. Dora St. 463-2701 C. Kevin Kelly, PhD 598 Cochrane Avenue 463-1447 10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE LOSS, INJURY, OR DAMAGE SUFFERED- Soft tissue injury to right arm, upper back, and lower back~ as well as pain and sufferinq arising from the excessive nature of the force and assaultive conduct on the part of Officer Peter Hoyle, On 2/2/98, Hoyle harassed and intimadated Ms. Morley inflicting additional emotionaldistress. 11. TOTAL AMOUNTCLAIMED: Over $10,000; jurisdiction in Superior Court. SEE Govt. Code 910(f) 12. THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED IS AS FOLLOWS: Damages incurred to date: Expenses for medical/hospital care: Loss of earnings: Special damages for: General damages Estimated prospective damages as far as known: Future expenses for medical and hospital care: Future loss of earnings: Other prospective special damages: Prospective general damages: The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his/her behalf. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to the person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six (6) calendar months or 182 days after the accrual of the cause of action, whichever is longer. Claims relating to any other causes of action shall be presented not later than one (1) year after accrual of the cause of action. DATED: February 23, 1998 '~IGNATURE OF C~T(S) Received in City Clerk's Office this ~/~ day of ~~/~~_ SIGNATURE NOTE: This form of claim is for your convenience only, and any other type of form may be used if desired, so 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. If you are in doubt regarding your legal rights or the interpretation of any law, we suggest that you seek legal counseling of your choice. 3:FORNfiCLAIM Rev: 3/10/95 300 s~.~ ~VE.. UKIAH, C_~ 95482-5400 · ADMIN. 707/463.6200 PUBLIC ~,%CETY --63-6~-~,~274 · . '1. ~ ,~. · FAX # 707/463-6204 · NOTICE TO: William A. Welch Attorney at Law 309-A West Perkins Street Ukiah, California 95482 Notice is hereby given that the communication purporting to be a claim by Gall Marie Morley against this public entity dated January 13, 1998, and received in this office on January 13, 1998, was rejected as of January 21, 1998. WARNING Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim See Government Code Sect(on 945.6. ' This warning is required by State law. If your claim is governed by federal law, your time to file a court action on such federal claim may be more or less than six months. If a statute of limitations has already run against your federal claim, or will bar action on your federal claim at a time earlier than six (6) months from the date of this notice, this warning will not waive any rights of the City or prevent it from asserting a statute of limitations defense based on such earlier time limitation. You may seek the advice o1' an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. you desire to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. Dated: January 22, 1998. City of Ukiah by: C"blleen B. Henderson City Clerk William A. Welch Attorney at Law 309A West Perkins Street Ukiah, CA 95482 (707)467-3904 EEB 2 4 1998 CITY CLERK oE.~AR't'MENT February 24, 1998 City Council City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear City Council: In an abundance of caution I am filing the attached Notice of Claim against the City of Ukiah for an incident involving Officer Peter Hoyle of the Ukiah Police Department. The initial Notice of Claim was rejected on January 21, 1998 (a copy of the rejection Notice is attached hereto). This new Notice of Claim is being filed for two reasons. First, there was another incident involving Officer Hoyle and Ms. Morley that took place outside of her home on February 2, 1998, for which a Citizen's Complaint has been filed with the Ukiah Police Department. Because I perceive the events of February 2"d as arising directly from the rejection of the initial Notice of Claim (and the subsequent publicity), any action against the City of Ukiah will include a cause of action pertaining to the latter incident. Second, I want to make it clear that any court action will involve common law claims as well as claims based on deprivations of civil rights under thc color of law. As such, the claims against the City of Ukiah will include a request for punitive damages based on theories of municipal liability. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, . Attorney for Gail M6rley NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST TI-~ CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFO~ This claim must be presented, as prescribed by Parts 3 and 4 of Division 3.6, of Title 1, of the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or by a person acting on his/her behalf. RETURN TO: City Clerk's Office city of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 CITY Ct&,h~t D~_PAltTMEN'J · . CLAIMANT'S NAME: CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS: Number/StzZeet-a~nd Post Office Box C ~ Stat6 ' 'Zi~ Cdde Hdm~ Phone Number ' "Work Phone Number NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE .SENT (if different than above): . . · , PLACE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: ~7_2/.~ GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE (Attach additional.pages if more_ space is needed)· "F'-/-//I-T- u,/Vz%"F T{/Z~ ,¢:'LJ/,'/~.--?¢ Iz,/~:/'Vz'-' ~ F:F Ikc_z-- i_/ · -,~, ...-_ · .' -- '-- , ! ! _- ~ - '" -' ' _._ .., I ' /~.! ~ 77.. /1,,.-.A/ ( .,_,/¢,~.,4- ~ r: z.c_. ,../,':,.; -r3. ,u, ~!/':-: ~/ LOSS: · . o. NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF WITNESSES (optional): NAME ADDRESS B. TELEPHONE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF DOCTORS/HOSPITALS WHERE TREATED' a. NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE B · ,r 10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE LOSS, INJURY, OR DAMAGE SUFFERED: . 4 7( '/.:' [,,_'-, 12. THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED IS AS FOLLOWS: Damages incurred to date: Expenses for medical/hospital care: Loss of earnings: Special damages for: $ 47/~-- General damages Estimated prospective damages as far as known: Future expenses for medical and hospital care: Future loss of earnings: Other prospective special damages: Prospective general damages: $ z.,//'¢ The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his/her behalf. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to the person or to personal property or growing crops sha].l be presented not later than six (6) calendar months or 182 days after the accrual of the cause of action, whichever is longer. Claims relating to any other causes of action shall be presented not later than one (1) year after accr' of the cause of action. DATED: ~ ~d'~A~N T '( S ) Received in city Clerk's Office this ~~ day of _ ~/~~ . SIG~TURE NOTE: This form of claim is for your convenience only, and any otl%er type of form may be used if desired, so 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. If you are in doubt regarding your legal rights or the interpretation of any law, we suggest that you seek legal counseling of your choice. 3: FORM\ClaIM Rev: 3110195 D 0 z ,. !:.:.' ::~ ;~,.; ..'..': :.-_.; ~.. -- . ~'' '~- !3'* "..', ... _ .. ., - , NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF UKTAH, CALIFORNIA This claim must be presented, as prescribed by Parts 3 and 4 of Division 3.6, of Title 1, of the Oovernment Code of the State of California, by the claimant or by a person acting on his/her behalf· ~,~7~..~: RETURN TO= City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 MAR 0 6 i990 CiTY CLERK DP.'.F't~,t,: i'MEN'I' le · Number/Street and Post Office Box CiEy State Home Phone Number Zip Code Work Phone Number . NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE .SENT (if different than above): · · · DATE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR O,~e(5 ~U~R_ ENCE /-(Attach ad itional paq s i~f more s ace~is D~,eded · · NAMES, IF KNOWN, OF ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES CAUSING THE INJURY OR LOSS: · NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF WITNESSES (optional): NAME ADDRESS A. TELEPHONE Be · NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF DOCTORS/HOSPITALS WHERE TREATED: NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE A. Be 10. 11. 12. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE LOSS, INJURY, OR DAMAGE SUFFERED: "-~":-' ,- . ', I ~'? ~/ > ~ /, /_' ,'? ,; , , , . ,~ .~ :~ - ,~-/ ' /..,~ . THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED IS AS FOLLOWS: Damages incurred to date: Expenses for medical/hospital care: Loss of earnings: Special damages for: General damages Estimated prospective damages as far as known: Future expenses for medical and hospital care: Future loss of earnings: Other prospective special damages: Prospective. general damages: The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his/her behalf. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to the person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six (6) calendar months or 182 days after the accrual of the cause of action, whichever is longer. Claims relating to any other causes of action shall be presented not later than one (1) :/ year after accrual of the c~se o~ action. ~SIGN~TURE OF CLAIMANT (~ Received in City Clerk's Office this ~ day of SIGNATURE NOTE: This form of claim is for your convenience only, and any other type of form may be used if desired, so 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. If you are in doubt regarding your legal rights or the interpretation of any law, we suggest that you seek legal counseling of your choice. 3:FORMhCLAIM Rev: 3110195 OCENTURY COMMUNICATIONS Century Mendocino Cable Television, Inc. [] A UNIVERSAL REMOTE WAS (circle one) Rented Purchased [] A TOCOM REMOTE WAS ISSUED PPV [--] U/G F-] D/G IZ3 c/o ED Disc. ~ Installed [---] Transfer [--'-] From New Services Old Services Taken by Taken by CONVERTER AGREEMENT NOTE: DO NOT sign this agreement until it has been read and all information completed. THIS~, /~I]REEMEN~, by ,a/nd.between CENTURY MENDOCINO CABLE TELEVISION. INC. and ~r-,(' i f' ~ "~'i ,.'{ I , hereinafter called "Tile Subscriber." ?' ,)/' ~ The Subscriber agrees to pay, in advance, a monthly service fee in the amount orS , ,' ...""~ per month for the use and enjoyment of the terminal and hereby agrees to pay a like amount in advance on the first day of every month lhr;reafler for tile all,ration of lhe agreement. Price sut)ject lo ct~anfle. Centtlry Cable may cancel Ibis agreement and require the return of the complete terminal al any time Ibc n~onll~ly service fee becomes 30 days or more past due. After the installation in the Subscriber's premises the terminal with remote control (If terminal is so equipped) shall continue to be the exclusive property of Century Cable. Upon termination of the service, the complete terminal must be returned to Century Cable in proper condition within 24 hours and during normal business hours (8:30 AM to 5:00 PM Monday thru Friday.) Tile undersigned Subscriber must return tile complete terminal to the Cel~tury Cable office or make arrangements for an authorized Century Cable agent to successfully recover the complete terminal from tl~c Sul)scriber's premises during normal business hours. The parties do hereby agree that failure to return the complete terminal to Century Cable for ally reason whatsoever shall obligate the Subscriber to pay liquidation damage to Cent~ry Cable in the amount of $ ," 0thor acts or omissions obligating the Subscriber to pay liquidation charges in the amount of $ . f to Century Cable arc as follows: 1. Failure of the Subscriber to notify Century Cable to remove the complete terminal prior to terminating the Subscriber's occupancy of the premises. 2. To sell, disconnect, remove, tamper with or dispose of said complete terminal or to allow such to be done. SUCH ACTS ARE STRICTLY PROHIBITED AND COULD SUBJECT SUBSCRIBER TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION as outlined by State and Federal Laws. DO NOT GIVE THE TERMINAL OR REMOTE (IF TERMINAL IS SO EQUIPPED) TO ANYONE OTHER THAN AN AUTHORIZED CENTURY CABLE EMPLOYEE AND DEMAND A RECEIPT. Date ': i ;' ,' Address / ."" t {" [ i' Acct. no. i~" i , '~ . I have received the following terminal. I understand the penalty for tampering with the equipment. · . ,. . I' ~,' :~" .. . (~ ' .- .~.,.. {.,{ NEW Terminal Serial Ne.i/ ;.' /.'.,, / / ~ ,i f '" (,."' RETURN Terminal Serial No. _ ..: /(...'/?{."". ,) Driver's License No. ." Work phone Home phone Subscriber Signatul:'~" L';',' /(! ,. InstallerV---.--- '"'" Social Security No. ,:,-'/'/..' .... Z,! ' ,~,'/,:/'(Y' t' The viewing of this event is authorized for private home use only. I:l.l'-., I Ldvlf-.ll'.r; IIAMI Al Il) ,J,r,AL '"I'T'"'~- I "^__.~'_'L_ l LONG S 1 REET .',r.. r:s.* 468 RORTH SCHOOL ':~' UKIAH . . r.,~.,'~ 462-7350 NOT DOING ANYTHING. , SERVICE INVOICE Y89009P--'/ PromTme: DATE PURCHASED L)A l E (]ALL i~ECEIVEU 95482 2/1319L~ I DATE REPAIRED f.~(~l }IOMC[.A(:K I'ARi ,:/d.t ~AGF. r-~ ["-~ . , L _J ~ , MICU~L) LEAK ['lEAl)IN(; SrA'rE / F-------R[::C,i~: ......... ~ ...... .,~ ISELLING DEALER/DISTRIBtJTOR CITY QUANTITY FAULT / ,JOB CODE PART NUMBER rMAG / MOTOR I SEALED UNll NO OLD SERVICE AGREEMENT NUMBER r.i,';,.-';-i.~(:r-6~-: SL,',LED UfllI IlO flEW ,SERVICE AGREEMENT EXP. DATE --- ,SERVICER NUMBER ;ERVICER STALE NUMBER CUS IOMER'S SIGI.IATUIiE DATE :ECHIJICIAN'S / OTI4E~SIGr.iATURE / IJUMBE[~ DA'rE 5ER'/ICE CENI ER S~TE NO ............................ SERVICER /,lAME At'ID ADDRESS: I/'ullho~a~o /I C1,~ta. 7o To Ah, Cie<h! C,'lld CAt':tD NAME I Hove Boon A(lvl.,ced ol SIGNAIUIiE DATE SUB TOTAL SALES TAX ....'" L~ 1 Van'm Appliance Repair 268 East Smith St/Po Box 2949 '*'1 REVISEI)~EST OFREPAR Ukiah Ca, 95482 J "~,;,~;;;,, ~:'"'.:.- ...............~ ,,, (' ,- ~ , , J ................ (707) 462-t708 LA~O~ , ' ....... ~ ('~(0~,, ~(; ~ U r ~-~'~ ~ ........................ 'f ~'~,,{~-~'~,~1~'~[~ ~ ~i ~:~C- -JIN I Et-tNAL CON1 ItOL NO ......................... ['~ l~l [:~} .... i J ......... i ........ PLEASE SEE ~EVERSE SIDE FO~ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ,, .,,,' ', .... COMPLETED C/~' LABOR DIAGNOSTIC FEE TOTAL LABOR TRAVEl. STATE TAX .j HANDLING CRAWFORD'S VCR REPAIR 1128 SOUTH STATE STREET UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 Telephone (707) 468-1371 FREE ESTIMATE State Reg. No. 70765 { ] INS1ALI.. [ J DrLIVEI1 '. } I'ml~, ~ I I at~, OIIDI' I'IAMI/' '? ) NAMt O[ APPLIANCE: ! - '-" J r /,:.,.I ~..J.L '~. . ,/r,.. u., ,~': ..... ,:'..... ,_/-/ ~;.-' f, / .'/ " ,~ / ........ (..¢ ~ ) ...... !.~ ~-"~:".. !/y. '~ ~ C .&..~.~.~;.[ ................................................. ,;,, ;0 '0;.,. ~,.;,~;, ...'] f' .'~"':.:-'-:~";:;"2: ................................ ,~,,,., '% ........ ~ ....................................................... ./ ..,/ ......... ~ ............................ NAIIIII[ OI A .--' IIYCIJSlOM[I1 / V~'/. ( % ~ INSUII[D on PROIECIED 10 1HE AMOUNT ~ICOMM[NPAII()N ()CCARION[D BY IHEFI FI[t[ OR VANDALISM ,......,....,.,,.. ........... ,, ........ ......... NO EXCEPTIONS [::::)f?::~S :::.:' ~ . ........................................................... ............ ¢~2:>'"'~'~ ~i'; O'.::;~::::'"/xJ-:'~:7~/'''' ~:::'~"~:~:~"~: ' ...................................................... ~ ~ ....................................... ~ ....................... ::.~ ~. ~ . ............................... ~ ............... ~: ..... ~~ ,' " : ' ~ .... : ....................... ... ..~ ~'" AUTHORI~II~ TO CO~R ADDITIONAL CI~RGES I NOTE: It ~utpment ts returned at customer request ~fore R[C~v~ooy ,,,..,~..':L ,~ I author~z~Se~eis~rlormed, ad~gno~sandha~hngcharge " ~ / ) : I or est,mate tee ot$ ............ willbe made SIGNATURE X 30DAY LABOR-. 90,'bAY 'p~TS GUARANTEED ON ALL WORK PERFORMED o. ITEM NO. DATE 6b March 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 1998 Payments made during the month of February 1998, 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: 103123-103220, 103352-103525, 103652-103740, 77468 Payroll check numbers: 103221-103351,103526-103651 Direct Deposit numbers: 2352-2503 Void check numbers: None 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 1998. 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 a p p ROVE D: (~-'~~~'-) 0,.,., ca'~n-~ace H0rsl~y~'~il[y Manager AGENDA.WPD/krs O~ E~o Ho U · o > I oo O00IOOCXIO~OOODbOI~O~OOOOOCxI ~1 O{NI~I{~O~ILOLOI~OhO~OO(NIO~::~I~ 0 CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 1998 Demand Payments approved: Check No. 103123-103220, 103352-103433, 103434-103525, 103652-103740, 77468 FUNDS: 100 General Fund $7,614,894.62 660 140 Park Development 661 141 Museum Grants 665 142 National Science Foundation 670 143 N.E.H.I. Museum Grant $300.00 675 200 Asset Seizure Fund 678 201 Asset Seizure (Drug/Alcohol) 679 220 Parking Dist. Rev. Fund $408.13 695 260 Downtown Business Improv. 696 270 Signalization Fund 697 301 2107 Gas Tax Fund $819.82 698 332 Federal Emergency Grant $7,193.52 800 333 Comm. Develp. Block Grant $1,300.00 801 340 SB325 Reimbursement Fund 805 341 S.T.P. 806 410 Conference Center Fund $9,853.53 820 550 Lake Mendocino Bond 900 555 Lake Mendocino Bond Reserve 910 575 Garage $1,134.39 920 600 Airport $13,009.96 940 610 Sewer Service Fund 950 611 Sewer Construction Fund 960 612 City/District Sewer $71,416.27 962 615 City/Dist Sewer Replace 965 652 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund 966 Sanit. Disp. Site 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 Community Redev. Agency Redev. Housing Fund Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund Redevelopment Debt Svc. PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 103221 - 103351 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 2352 - 2427 PAYROLL PERIOD 1/25/1998 - 2/7/1998 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 103526 - 103651 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 2428 - 2503 PAYROLL PERIOD 2/8/1998 - 2/21/1998 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS PAYROLL VENDOR DEDUCTION CHECKS PAYROLL CHECKS DIRECT DEPOSIT TOTAL PAYMENTS VOID CHECK NUMBERS - None $56,094.00 $1,767.99 $59,260.70 $1,934.24 $423.80 $2,114.63 $1,223.05 $4,359.74 $685.42 $549 825.54 $2 027.97 $9 086.50 $1 000.00 $25 498.88 $4 617.74 $26 030.45 $59 384.77 $134 118.20 ;487.52 $1,031.05 $63,644.25 $39.59 $8,724,986.27 $61,61 8.69 $187,318.52 $165,174.95 $9,139,098.43 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 H O0 O0 0 0 0 0 00000 00000 00000 00000 ~0~ 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O~ O0 O0 O0 U o o o o o 0 U O0 oo O0 0 ~ ~0~0 0 o o o 0 0 0 o o o ~000~ ~00 UUU ~o00 ~UUU I1~0 H~H0 ~ooo~ U~U o0o0 0000 oooo 0000 o000 o000 oooo UUUU o 0 ~000~ ~000~ ~ ~ ~000~ ~000~ 0 ~0000~ ~0~ ~ ~ ~00~ ~ ~ oo oo oo HH ta0 o O0 oo oo H01 o 0 o o o o ~o ~mo 0oo · 0 0~ H ~BH ,~ H~ ~ H~HU U~~ ~ o~o ~o~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~o~ ooo ~ o H~ o~ ~o U HH o~ NH i OOO OOO OOO O O O U ~ O O O U OOO ~D o (D ~O~~ OOOOOOO OOOOOOO ooooooo ooooooo ooooooo oo OO OO OO oo oo 0~O OO OO OO oo oo o3O o303 OO oo OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO oooooo oooooo O O U ~ o~ O ~ ~ O ~OO ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ 00~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ooo o ~ ~ o D ~oO O O ~ H~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ H ~ OOOOO~O OOOOOOO OOOOOOO ~oooooo oo~~o ~OO~O~ O~O~OO~ o~O~ U UUHU oo ooo ooo o o o · o oo oo oo · . oo 0 mm o o o o 000~00 000000 000000 ~OOOO OOOOOO OOOO~O ~ ~ 0 OOOOOO 0000000 ~0~0~ oooooo HHHHHHH O H UU 0~ UU OO U HI~i~ H Om ~HHHHHH HHHHH ~XXX~XX H ~O HO r..J · o I o O o O ~O~ OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOO OOOO OOOO O O HHHHHHH UUUUUUU OOOOOOO OOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO o o (~0 o o O o 0 o o OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ~~O ~O~ OOO~ OOO~ O~~O~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~ OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~ OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~ O~OOOOOOOOOOO~~OOOOOO~OOO ~O~~~O~OOOO~~OO~ ~ ~ ~OOOOOOO~~O~OOO~~O ~ ~OO~~~OOOOO~OO~~OOOO~ O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~OO~OOOOOOO O O OOOOOOOOOOOOO~O~~OO~~O O O ~HHHHH ~00000 i oooo~ooooooooooooooooooooooo ~ oooo ooooooooooooooooooooooo ~ r~ (3o H :;~ O OC) OO ~ H O OOOO :~ ~ O OOOO O~ H ~o HO r..) o :> ~ 0 c) °°°° OOOO I--3 C) C) C) O C) rJ o oooo 03 0 ,--I ¢Xl 03 ~ U3 ~1 kD r~ 03 O~ 0 ~ 03 03 03 03 03 O~ 0 ~ 03 Oh O~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H H H H H ~ ~ m i~ H H ~ H ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~.~ H H H ~0~0 O0 O0 oo O0 oo O0 oo O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 I I UU O0 O0 oo o~ o3o3 oo O0 ~o~0 ooo o00 ooo I I I o 0 U o~ 000 0oo ~ 0 ~0 0~0~ 0 ~ ~0~ o 0 o o oo O0 O0 o oo O0 oo OO o ~0 0 oo 0 O0 0 mO 0 ~ o 0 0 o o o oo0 000 o00 ooo H ~t] ~.t] ~ ~ ~HH ~ OU o ~ 0 o o~: U o~ H~; U UUU H~ ~HHH H~ HHH H~ 0 i O0 O0 00000000000000000000 00000000000000000000 ~~~000 ~0000~000 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000000000000 00000000000000000000 o 0 0 0 {J ~ 0 r..4 H HI:X; ~ i--,] H ~ ffi o i:::::::1 UO ~ ~ o0000~~~~~o ~~~00o~0000~0~ 000~00000000000000~ ~~00~0~0~~0~ HHHHH ~ H ~z~oo~ ~~ ~o U U U U UU U o 0 o o · o 0 o · o o o o o o H H~ ~ 00 ~ B~ ~ HH ~B H~ H~ ~ ~ ~ o o HHH H H ~ ~U ~ H~H UUUU~UU U~ ~ ~H~H~HOH~BHH~H~~H U H 0 0 0 (',,10,30,,I U')U')U') 000 ~1 ~'-I ~'--I 000 i~.-~. {.,.. ~ 000 000 0000 0000 HHHH 0000 0000 ~0 0 0 0 O~ 0 0 0~~~ 00000000 00000000 UUUUUUUU 00000000 00000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 000000000000000 000000000000000 o 0 0000 00~ 0000 0000 ~00 00000000 00000000 00000000 0~00000 ~00~~ ~0~0~ 0~000~0~ 0~000~00 ~HHHHH HH~~ H 000000000000~00 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 ~0000~~~0 00~~0000000~ 0~~00~0~0~ 0000~0000000~0~ 0000~000~0~0~ UUHHHHHHHHUHUHH HH~~~H~H~ o Om 0~~ UHHHH H~~ H~ ~UUUUUUUU ~HHHHHHHH ~00000000 ~HHHHHHHH HHHHHH HHHHHHHHH ~111111111111111 ~1 ooo OOO ooo OOO o3o3 oo oo >> O3O3 OO OO O O O O O O O O ~O O~O OO OO OO OO OO OO OO o 0 U ~ o o ~ u := ['q r~ 0 O O OOO ~ O O O OO O O O O O O OOO O O O O OO O O O O O O OOO O O O O OO O O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ OOO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~ ~ O O O OOO ~ O O O ~ O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ HH ~ H ~H H ~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ H ~ o o H ~ ~ ~ ~ o o u ~ ~ D HH~ ~ ~ ~ 0 O N OOOo OO~ ooo ooo · 0 o oo oo O0 O~ H ~ mmmm o o ~o ~ 6>> moo ~HH OO H~ ~ o - H U 2~H H ~z4H i~H I 0o I::~..i i i H ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 o~.-I ~.-I ~.-I OO OO O0 oo i.~ 0 o 0 0 o ,-~ 0 0 0 0 ~~0 ~0~ 00000 00000 ~o~ 000~ 00000 00000 00000 00000000000000 00000000000000 UUUUUUUUUUUUUU 00000000000000 00000000000000 00000000000000 o 0 O0 oo · oo · 0 ~.-I0 o~0 ~.-IO · oo O0 00000 0oooo 00o00 00000 00000 0~000 00000 o~ooo U~UUU 0~00~00000000 000~0000000000 00000000000000 0~0000000~0000 ~~000~0~00 ~000~000~0~ 0000000000~0~ 0000000000~~ HHH ~0 0 o 0 o~ ~ o ~ O~HH O~ 0~~ ~O ~UUUUU H HHHHH 00000000000000 00000000000000 o H (33 O ~1 ~1~3 ~1 (~l {~3 ~3 00(~3 O (~1 (~l ~1 ~(~l O OOO OO O OOO OO O OOOOO OOOOO O O O O OOOOO OOOOO O~ OOO OOO OOO I I I OOO OOO OOO OOOOOOO OOOOOOO O~~ OOOOOOO OOOOOOO OOOOOOO 0 0 o o OO~O OO~O OO~O OOOOO ~OO~ 00~ OOOOO ~HH~ HH H ooo OOO ooo oooo OOOo OO~OOO OOOOOOO ooooooo OOOOOO~ ~O~OO~ o~oo~o O~OO~ O~OO~ ~..~ 0 UUHHH~ 0 o 0 o o 0 0 0 o o o o · o · o 000 mm oo0 ~ ~~ ~HH o H~ HUU H~ H mO H ~o ~U o oo oo o o o ~',,~ oo ~,~ oo oo 0 0 o o o o ~0 O0 OO _~o HO ~ · 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 u ~U O~ ~o rj · o > I 0o O~ o o o o H 0 0 0 0 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 0~~ ~00~ ~0~ 00000 00000 00000 0 0 0 0 ~0~~ ~ 00~~ ~ 00000000 000 00000000 000 00000000 000 00000000 000 00000000 000 HHHHHHHH ~ 00000000 000 00000000 000 00000000 000 0 0 0 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 o 0 0 0 o ~00oo 000o0 ooooo ooo00 00000 HHHHH 000000 ~0000~ ~00~ 0000~000 0~0 ~000~000 000 0000~000 000 0~00~00 000 ~00~0~ ~ 0~0~00~ ~0~ 0~000000 000 0~0~~ ~00 000 000 000 ,<o 0 ~o O~ HHHHHH ~OOOOOOOO U~ ~ O~ H~ ~o ~o ~H o ~OOO 0~ o O i OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO O O O OOO O OOO O OOO ~lO OO OO OO OO OO O~O OO OO OO O O O O O OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO ooo OOO ooo ooo 0o03 o3o3 OO oo oo oo oo oo oo oo OO oo oo OOOO OOOO oooo oooo oooo 0000 OOOO OOOO OOOO OO OO OO 04O O~O OO OO OO o 0 ooo o~o OOO ~O~ o~o O OO~ O H o ~ o oo OO oo · oo ooo OOO o~ O~ ooo o 00~ OO o4('4 [.... i~-.. oo o o o · o · o o oooo OOOO oooo OOOO ~O OOOO OOOO o OOOOo OOOOo O~~ O~OO~ OO OO OO OO o · o i-.] H HO ~ 0 ~ HO 2 U~ ~B~ ~HB H ~ ooou ~ ~ ~Z ooo ~ ~0 ~ H B H~U ~ o H ~ O H~ 0 0 i ¢3 o H ~~O OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ~~~O~ OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO IlllilllllI OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOO O O O OOO O O O OOO O O O OOO ~l O O OOO O O O OOO O O O O~ OOOO OOOO OOOO OOOO OOOO OOOO OOOO o 0 OOOOO 00000 OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO oo~o~ OO~O~ HH~H~ OOOO~ OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OO~OO~OOOO OOO~OOOOOOO 000~00~0 00000000000 OO O O O OO O O O OO O O O OO~ O O O 00~ 0 0 ~ o m H~ ~ ~ ~ H~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 OOOO oooo OOOO OOOO OOOO O~O~ O~O~ HHHH HHHH ~~0 HHHH~ o o o o 0o · H o o o o 0 ~HHHHH UUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHH E~ OH Do OO OO oo oo oo O~ oo oo OO oo o o ~0 O ~0 o~ O O o o O o oooo OOOO OOOO oooo oooo oooo OOOO oooo OOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOO oooooooooooo OOOOOOOOOOOO oooooooooooo oooooooooooo ~~OOOOOOO ooooo~~~ oooooooooooo OOOOOOOOOOOO oo OO OO OO oo oo OO o4o4 oo oo oo oo 0 0 OO oo OO ~o OO4 o'~ O ~ o O O · · o o ~ o r.l.1 m o o ~O O O OOOO ~ H U ~ ~ U HHHH ~~0 0 OO~OOOO~OOO OOOOOOOO~OOO OOOOOOOO~OOO O~~OOOO~O OOOOOOO~O~OO ~O~~OO~OO~ O~OOOO~O~O ~OOOOOO~OOO~ ~OOOOOO~OOO~ O OO O OO O OO o~ u~O ~o O~ 0 Om d 0 H~ HH ~ ~ U~ .~ Oi ~ OO ~H ~m ~ ~mmm~ ~H H~ HH ~ ~U ~ o~ 0~ o~ .mmm~ D~ D~ ~H 000~ Ro R i ~i ~i H HHH H %U O ~ ~ H~ o ~ O ~ ~0~000~ ~ 0 ~ ~M~BHHH~ ~BH ~ ~ Hi H 0~ 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 ~~0~ 000000~~ 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 ~~0~ 000000000 000000000 000000000 000000000 000000000 000000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 000000~ 0000000 0000000 0 0 0000 0000 ooo0 0000 00~ 000o oooo UO0 Omm~ ~mO o 000~00~00~ 0000000000 0000000000 ~000~000 0000000000 0000~~ 0000000000 0000000000 H ~H H~ HU~ H ~ H~m~ 0 000000000 000000000 000000000 0000000~0 ~~0~00 ~0~0~ 0000000~0 000000~0 HHHHHHH~H 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 ~000~00 0~00000 0~000~0 HHHHHHH o o ~HHHHHHHHHH H HHHHHHHHHH ~UUUUUUUUU IHHHHHHHHH ~000000000 UO000000 ~0000000 ~UUUUUUU 0 om 0 Hr,/} E~0 ZH 00 U~ 0~ HH o~ H 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 O~ 0 0 0~ 000 000 000 000 ~0 ¢003 000 000 0 000 000 0 000 000 000 000 000 000 ~ ~00 0~0 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 ~~~0~ 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 o 0 U 0000ooo oo0oooo o000000 ooooo~o ~0~0~ 0~000~0 ooo00~0 mmmmm~m0 o oo 0 0 O0 o 0 O0 o o o0~ ~ U U ~ 00~0 m ~ O0 ~ ~m0 H ~00 000 ~00 000 ~00 000 000 000 000 0~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~~H~ 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 00000000~00 000000000000 000000000000 Dm Ot~ O~ ~r~ o~ 0 H ~B~ ~ O~ H HHB~ H U~0~ o ~o o HHHHHHHHHHHH moooooooo0ooo H 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 ~~0~~ 0000000000000 0000000000000 0000000000000 0000000000000 0000000000000 0000000000000 0 0 0 0 U 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 ~O~O~OO~O~O~OOO~~ OO~O~~O~OOO~O~O~OO OOOOOOOOOO~O~O~~OOO 00000000~0~~~0~ oooooooooooooooooooooo o ======================= O O~O~OOOO~OO O OOOOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOOOO O OO~OOOOOOOOOO O O~~O~O~~ O OO~OOOOOOOOOO O ~O~OOO~O~OO~ U H ~ ~0 ~U H~ UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU ~ HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~ ooooooooooooooooooooo m UUUUU UUUUU ooooooooooooo m~ ~ i 0 0 oo0 000 oo0 00o ooo 000 ooo O0 O0 oo o~0 oo oo 00oooo000000oo0000ooooo00 o0ooooooooo0ooooo00oooooo 00ooo0000000000000ooooo00 ooooooooooooooooooooooooo 0000000ooo000000o0000000o UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU oooooooo0o0000ooo00000000 000000000ooo00000ooo0ooo0 ooooo0000000oooo0000oo0oo i:Z:l ~ o 0 U O0 oo O0 oo oo oo O ~..O ~o OM) M;) 00~0~0000000000000000000 000000~000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000 ~~000~0~00~00~00~0~ 0000~0~00~0~000~000~0 ~0~~~00~~00~000~ 0~0000000~0000~000~~0 00~~00~0~~~~~ 0000000000000~~000~00 OOOOOOOOOOOO~~~~O~ 0 f-~ ~.] H [..~..] ~.] [.ti r.t] ft.] ~ ~ ~H~ H ~HH~H~ H ~ H H HH H 0r~ Om O~ H 0HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU 0HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH oo oo oo oo ~0~ 00000 00000 00000 00000 0 0 0 0 i.~ o o o o ooooo o o ooooo o o oo oo oo oo ,,~.,~ ,,~:~ oo oo o o o o o o o o o oo oo oo oo ~-I ~-I oo ,,,~p ,,,~:~ O0 oo oo 0 0 u 0 ~0 D 0 ~ 0oo{2o o ~ ~ oo oo oo oo oo oo oo 0 0 ooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ~o~o~ 00~0~ 0~~ UU UU HH HH o o oo o o o o o o o o · m 0 0 oo ~:;:~ ~-I r. riu O0 o o o oo'~ ~ o o oM;) ,.4 ,:; ,:; ,:;4 04 0 I,.O 00,4 O~ H~ O0 0 OH L~ 0 0 H 0 .00000 H HUUUUU 00000 ~OOUOO H H ~ ~ · ~ ~ ~ H H U ~ 0X ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ H ~ ~ H 0 ~ U HHH 0 · o H 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0000 0000 0000 0000 U~ 0 0 0~ ~o 0 o o o ~0~ o0oo 0o0o oo0o oo0o o0oo 0o00 ooo0 o0o ooo 0o0 ooo 0oo oo0 0 ~ · :~ o 0 ~ 0 0 00oo 0 0 ~ 00oo o o 0 00oo o 0 0 0ooo o o o 00oo o o o ooo0 0 0 ~ oo00 0 o o HHHH H ~ ~ uouuo ~ o 0 0 0 o ~ o o ~; m ~ 0 o 0 0 ~o~ o 0 0 0o0 0 0 0 0oo ~ o ~ oo0 ~ ~ u u H ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ HHH 0 ~ ~ 0 H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ HOH~ o 0t~ O HH ~/~O 0 H · U i-] H i-] H ~ ~ H o u ~ H 0 OO H~ O~ ~H ~H ~ ~0~ ~H0 0 ~oxo > o~ H~ ~ H H~ o o O~ Ho 0 · o > Z :;~ I O~O~OU~O~OU~O~OO~LO~O~O00000 E~ ::~ :D I O~OeO~I~O~tLOLO~O~O~O~O~}O~t~ 0 i 000 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 r-- r-- r-- r~ ooo 0 oo oo oo o I ~ o oo ~ ~ ~ ooo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ooo o o oo o o o ooo o o oo o o o o o 0 o o o o o o o o o o 0 o o 0 0 o o o o ~ o o ~ . ~ H ~ HHH 0 ~ ~00 ~ H ~0 ~ ~ 0 ~00~ ~ H O ~Z ~ ~ U ~ ~oo~ o o ~ ~oo~ o o oooo o o ~oo~ o o oooo ~ ~ o o · o .o ~i . oo ~ O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ o c, ,,-, ,:::; ,:=, ,:::; ~ ko ~ o L,,0 ~ ~ O o ~ ~ o ko u'~ o d ~; · . . ~; · . {""-. o o ~ ~ o {"""- i ~ ~ r,/} i 0 ¢..i ¢..i ¢..i i ~1 ~ O O 0o O O O O o o o O ~ 0 H ~{.~ ~1 L) ~0 O~ 0 ~H OO ~0 O~q H 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 ~000 000~ 000000 000000 0 0 U 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 ~~~~~0~0~00~0~000~~ 00000000~0000~0~~0~000~0~00 0000000000000000000000~0~~000 00000000000000000000~~~0~ 00000000000000000000000000000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 ~000~0 ~00~ 00000~ 00000~ 0 0 0 0 0 · · o 00000000000000000000000000000000 U ~00 U H 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 O0 O0 OO ~~0 oo000 00o00 00ooo o00 o00 oo0 OOO 0o0 00o OO O0 oo O0 O0 o 0 0 0 0 · 0 mo 0 o o · o o 00000 00000 00000 00000 ~0~ 0~~ 00000 00~ O~ ~ ~H~HH ~0 oo~0 ~o~o~ o~ 0oo ooo o o ~ o oo O0 oo · · oo Oo 0 0 H 0 ~o o U~ o ~t~ o HHHHHH o H~ o o~ NH o~ UH ~H HI:El l~ O0 O0 (~0 O0 0{2 O0 0(:0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~-~ HH ~o ~¢~ ~ 00 O0 0 O0 O0 0 O0 I o"~ o'~ (:~ o00 o00 o00 oo0 o00 ooo 0 0 O O U ,-.I U 2) 0 0 ~ U H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ i U U ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o o ~ ¢; ~ ~ ¢; o JJ ~ o. O0 0 I.~ I,.~ O0 ~1 ~lO O0 0 O0 HH ~ H ~ ~i HH ~ 0 m oo 000 ~ 000 ~ ~ 000 ~ ~ o 0 0 · o 0 0oo ooo 00o 00o 000~ HHH ~0 HHHB ooo~ ~0 ~O 0 %H oo HH HHH Zoo o H H O3O3 O0 O0 O0 O0 134~ 0)(33 O0 O0 oo OO O0 co o3 ~lo ~ o~ o~ O0 0 0 0 ~i~l ~ o 0 oo o o 0 oo 0 o o O0 o 0 O0 o o o O0 o oo0 000 000 oo0 ooo 000 00o oo0 0oo {~ o0o 0oo 0o0o03 ~-..I ~1 (~1 o00 I I I o00 ~1 ~1 ~.-I ooo 0 ~--I (~ 00o o00 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 o 0 ~ ~; o o o~; ~ ~ 000 0 0 ~0~ ~ ~0~ ~ ~ 0~ 000 000 000 · · HHH mmmo UUU~ ooo 00o 00o 000 ~0 000~ o ~00~ ~00~ 000000000000 O0 000000000000 O0 000000000000 O0 000000000~0~ 00000000000~0 0000000000~~0 HHHHHHHHHHHH~HH .E~ H~ ~o UUU ~000 o UE] H ~o:>m ~0~ o HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH UUUUUUUUUUUUUU U ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~000000000000000 0 H C~C'4 O0 O0 O3["- O4['- ,~U') O0 O0 oeo o%o5 u~u~ oo oo 0000 0000 0000 0 o u~ cq o o oo0 o0o ooo u~k0~ ooo 00o -,-I o 0 U oo oo O0 · oo · ~0 OO% zz~© oo 0 o 0 · o fxl . o~ ~ 0000 ~ ~ 0 o o · o · 0 · o 0 0 0 0 · o · 0000 00~ 0000 0000 ~00 ~ 0 o o · o · o cq o u-) uO ooo o00 ooo ,, o ~HHH o H HU HO o ~u o UHHHH H~~ o H~i H N H E~ ~0 0 ~0 O OOOOO O O O O O O O OO O O O OOOOO O O O O O O O OO O O OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO r~ p~ t~ {~ ~ P~ p~ ~r~ r~ {~ O O O O O O O OO O O ~:~ ~3~ ~ ~;~ ~ ~3~ ~:~ ~3~ ~:~ ~:~ ~:~ O ~ ~'~ I.~ ~:~ ~ Nil E~ ~ H ;:~ ~ ~ O ~ O O O O O O O OO O O O O O O O OO OOOO OOOO OOOO OOOO OOOO ~O~ OOOO OOOO o 0 U OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO HHHHH HHHHH oooo oooo oooo ~o O~O~ oooo OOOO HHH ~H HHH~ HHH~ 00~0~ oo0o0 d H~ HHHH o HHHH H I ~0 0 0 O~ oo O0 oo 0000o 0000o oo00o 0oooo 00o0 0000 oooo 0000 0 o c~ o 0 0oo0 o00o 0ooo ~0~ 0ooo oo00 oo oo O0 oo o 0 o o O oo OO O0 oo o ~o 00000 00000 00000 00000 ~00 000~ 000~0 000~0 o0o ~HH ~HH o 0000 o0o0 o0o0 0000 ~00o ooo~ HHHH oo00 oooo o0oo 0ooo o0oo O0 O0 oo · HH ~UUUUU ~ HHH m000 r~0 ~:~H H ~0~~ 00000000 00000000 00000000 ~0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 o 0 ooo0~0 00o0ooo0 00000000 0 ~~0~ 00~0~ ~0o~ooo ~00000o ~~oooo o U HHHH~ H ~ m~HO 0 o 0 · o .0 o~ ~0 oo ~o U ~H H H~.~ o 0 U 0 0 0 0 :~ o 0 o U o ~: , E~ ~ u~ ~ O~ E~o Ho rJ · o > I Ell :;~ ~ I OOr~OU~O(NIOU'~OOOU")M;)F~.OOOU'~OOOOOO(XlU') _~4 ~ZD ~:~ I O(%lf'~'"'li'~'Or--tMDk.Ot"'"~t'""O%O~O~O~OO(XlO(Xl"c~L~M;)MDklD 0 ~ o OOOOOOO O O ~ ~ OOOOOOO O O OO O OOOOOOO O O OO O OOOOOOO O O OO O OO OO OO O O O OO OO mmmmmmm m m mm m m mm m mm m m m OOOOOOO O O OO O O OO O OO O O O OOOOOOO O O OO O O OO O OO O O O o 0 ~ OOOOOOO O ~ ~ 0 ~~~ ~ O OO U ~~~ ~ ~ ~ OOOOOOO ~ ~ o~ ~ ooooooo ~ ~ ~ H HHHHHHH ~ ~ BBHHH~BB ~ ~¢ ~ BBB 0 H ~ ~0 0 BBHHHBB~ U H HH~ ~ 00000000 0 0 ~ ~ 00000000 0 0 ~0 ~ ........ S ~'~ o 0 0 o 0 o 0 o o o oo o oo O OO O OO O oo ~o ~U0 HH OO OO OO · OO oo O o o o U~ H o~ o H OO OO OO OO OO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 0 0 U o ,q m~j ~ o OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O~OO~~O~OOO~OO~O~~~~~O ~OOO~O~OO~O~O~OO~OOOOOOOO~OOOO~ OOOO~OOOO~OO~O~O~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~OOO~OOO~OO~O~OOO~OOOOOOOOOOOOOO 00000000000000000000000000000000000 0 u 0 m~ U O ~ H~ O ~H ~m 0 ~ U0 ~ H~ HU ~ ~ ~ ~H ~ O~ ~ 0 UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 0000000000000000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO UUUUUUUUUUUUUUU 000000000000000 H ~~~O~~ OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~.~ O O O U O O OO OO OO ,,~ ,~:~ OO OO OO OO OO OO OOOO OO OOOO OO OOOO OO ~~ OO OOOO OO OOOO OO OOOO OO OOOO OO OO OO oo oo O0 0 0 U OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~OO~~OOO~~ O~OOOO~O~OO O~O~O~~ OOO~O~O~~OOO OOO~O~~O~ OO OO OO ~o OO OOOO OO OOOO OO OOOO ~ OOOO OO ~~ ~ OOOO OO ~~ OO ~~ HH ~ HHHH HH ~~ ~o 0 o o · o o o m~o ooo · 0o3 UUUUUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHH 000000000 0 ro oo U0 o u ~ H~0 U OO~0 0~Q~ O o~ ~o o L~O o 0 0 0 0 0 oo00 oo00 00o0 o3o3 oo OO oo ~0 ~0 O~ O0 O0 O0 OO O0 oo oo mffiffim ~ HH O0 0000 O0 O0 O0 0000 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 {J 0~00 O0 O0 0 0000 O0 O0 0 0000 O0 O0 0 000~ O0 ~ O~ 0~0 ~ ~ ~0 · ,,. ---- .. .. 000~ O~ oo oo 00~ O~ O0 O0 00 UU ~ ~0 ~~0 HH~R U HH HH H~ mmO mmO m~O 0 HmO OO O0 oo oo · 00{-~ 0 o o o O NH UHHHH ~0000 OOOOO ~0 0 0 ~0 H 0 (~0 o"~ ~.-I 0 o 000 000 ,-I 0 0 o~1~ o0o 000 o0o > o 0 o o o o ooo HHH 0oo 0oo 000 ~o ooo o00 O0 O0 0 o O0 oo oo OO o 0 0oo 000 000 HHH ~ HO o o o 0 0 000 0oo 00o ~o 000 0~ ~00 ~o~ ~o~ ~0~ 0 H~ ooo 000 0oo mmmo o 00oo 000o 0ooo o 0 O0 oo O0 mmuO ~0 o o 0 · o O~ o 0o · ~o o~ o o ~U :~H 0 ~0 0 m00~ ~HH~ o UU O H ~ HH · H :~ o o u~ H_~ o H 0~0 O0 00~0 O3O3 O0 O0 O~ ~0~0 O0 O0 ~~~0~ 00000000000 00000000000 IIIIIIIIIII 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000 0 0 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 O0 O0 O0 t~0 o 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000 0000000~000 ~000~00~0~ OOm~O~O~O 000000~0~0 0000~0~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 · ~ 0 0 ~0 O ~ H ~ 0 ~ m ~ m ~ ~ u HHHHHHH~HHH ~ 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 ~00~000~0~0000~~ ~0~00~0~00~~00 000000000~0~~000~ HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH U UU U ~o~~~0~o~ooo ~ H ~ ~HHHHHHHHHHH ~ ~ ~ ~UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH H 0000 HHHH OOOO 00000 OOOOO OOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 00000000000000000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOO OOO OOO OOO OOOOO OOOOO o 0 O OO~O OOOO oooo 00~0 ~ ~0 H~HH0 H~HH~ U O~~ ~O~ ~O~O O~OO~ OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ~U~ U U~U ~ U~UU~ BHBBH~ H HH H~HH~0 ~OOOO~ ~OOOO~ OO~O~ OOOOOOOOOOO~OOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~OOO~~~OOO~ OO~~OOOOOOO~O O~~OO~O~O~O OOOO~OOOOOO~OO~O OOOO~OO~O~OO~O OOO OOO OOO H~H OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO O~O~O ~O~O~ OO~O~ O~~ UU UU HH HH > H~ ~-~ HH oo II H U o HH ~H~ H H00000 H cq ~3~u3 ~D[~ 0 000 O0 0 000 O0 0 o00 O0 ~O ~0 ~D ~:) ~)~:) 0 000 O0 o ooo oo 0000 oooo 0000 O0 O0 O0 oo O0 o~0 oo OO UU 0 0 0 0 000 O0 0 0 000 O0 0 0 000 O0 0 ~ 000 ~ ~ 0 ~ O0 ~ 0 ~ O~ ~o m ~o m o ~ ommo H ~ ~ o 0000 ~ 0 ~ oo00 0000 0000 ~0o 0000 oooo oo oo O0 ooo 000 H~ H ~ 0 U& 0 HHH ~ ~ H~ 0 ~ ~ HO ~ ~00 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ffi O~ ~ 000 H H 0 0 0 ~o E~O~ H oo UI~ o~ U~ oo ~o~ 0E~0 UNO HH ~o o~ o~ o o ~U o H OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O O O HHHHHHHHHHHHH OOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOO OO OO OO OO o 0 OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO O~OO~OOO~~ ~OOO~O~~O ~OOOO~OOOOOOOO HHHHHHHHHH HHHH ~~0 O~OOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOO O OO~O~OO~O O~~O~O~O~ OOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO~OO ~HH~HHHH~H~ O O O · · o O~ oo OO ~o o O~ ~UUUUUUUUUUUUUU ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~00000000000000 U ~HHHHHHH HH~ H 0 H o~0 O0 O0 o o o 0000 ooo0 ~:) o,3 0 0 o o oo OO O0 oo o 0 U 00000 ~ 00000 0 00000 0 ~0~ 0 00000~ 0 00000~ ~ 000000 0 000000 0 o ~UUUU ~0~0~0~ 0 ~o~0~ 0 O0 O0 oo o oo · ooo0 0ooo 0000 ~0~0 oo0~ ~0~ ~0~0 ~o~o U H HHHHHH ~ U~~ H~ HO00000 o o ~U H ~o moom u~0 O0 O0 0 0 U O0 O0 oo · · H ~ H 0 0 o u -r-I o o :~ o 0 o u o ~ , ~ c~ :~ :~ o H 0 O~ ~o U · o > I oo r~ U H .. 0 ~40~ H 0 E~ ~U ~0 mo~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 O0 0 O0 0 omo o ~ F~{~0 ~O~ED 1~ 0 0 0 · · 0 0 · 0 0 U .. :2: E~ ~ 0 0 ~ I~ 0 O~ ~U ~ ~ C)~ ~ ITEM NO. 6c DATE: March 18, !99~ AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION TO COUNCIL REGARDING THE AWARD OF BID FOR ONE 150 KVA PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMER TO WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC FOR THE AMOUNT OF $5,882.66. In compliance with Section 1522 of the City of Ukiah Municipal Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of material costing more than $5,000 but less than $10,000. This transformer will be placed in warehouse stock for planned future projects. A Request for Quotation (RFQ) through the informal bid process was sent to four suppliers. The bids were opened bythe Electric Department on February 26, 1998 at 1:00 p.m. The bids were evaluated by Staff and a purchase order was issued to the low bidder, Western States Electric, in the mount of $5,882.66 including tax and freight. RECOMMENDED ACTION · Receive and file report regarding the award of bid to Western States Electric for the sum of $5,882.66. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A. Acct. No. (if not budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Stan Bartolomei, Electrical Supervisor Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Bid results Acct. No.: 800-3646-420-000 APPROVED.~~ ~q~l),,, ' C~-~ace Nor~ley, ~it~ ~anager 1-150 KVA Pad Mount Transformer Westem States Electric G.E. Supply Wesco Chris Stephens BID RESULTS $5,882.66 $5,888.O3 $7,205.06 No Bid ITEM NO. 6d DATE: March 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE ACQUISITION OF CATAPHOTE POWDER FOR TRAFFIC MARKING APPLICATIONS SUMMARY: In compliance with Section 1522 of the City of Ukiah Municipal Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of supplies costing more than $5,000 but less than $10,000. The City Street Department worked with the Purchasing Department to obtain a quote for the acquisition of cataphote powder. With the aid of a heat applicator machine the powder is used to remark school crosswalks, white crosswalks, and other pavement markings. The cataphote marking system is utilized since it provides a longer life span for pavement markings on streets as compared to conventional traffic paint. Only one quote was obtained since Cataphote, Inc. is the sole source provider for cataphote powder. The purchase amount of $6,196.37 is less than the street maintenance budget amount of $6,600. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report. Report is submitted pursuant to Municipal Code. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.: 100-3110-420-006 (if budgeted) Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Er~ineer Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works~1~_~ Candace Horsley, City Manager Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer 1. FY 1997/1998 budget sheet 2. Price Quote from Cataphote, Inc. APPROVED Candace H0'rsley, Cit! Manager RJS:AGCATAPH SUM ~ 0 0 U{<I~q PLJRCH~IIqg DE~T. CITY of UKIAH }03 ..%~,lna~y Avcm~ ~ CA. Faona 707,,163.623~ Fnx 707~63-d234 1 F'. r3~ P.i lqF/URN lqlI$ ;~ORM THIS IS NOT AN ORDFiR DA l .,: _..~2/27/98 REQ. NO, E 1 7871 CATAPHOTE INC. P.O. BOx 2.309 Jack:on, MS 803-221-2574x248, Fax: ~01-932-~.%39 9UANTri'¥ 2,800 lb,~. Ne t 30 Days O~k.l'O: Ukiah, CA BIDDER: Cal:aptt$>te, Inc. Phon~ C601'Y'~3~6~mx: 932-5339 $2.65 $2.35 ~x ). $2,650.00 $4,230.00 ITEM NO. 6e DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING DIVISION 8, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 7008 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE REGARDING HOLIDAYS FOR ENFORCEMENT OF PARKING REGULATIONS At the March 4, 1998 City Council meeting the ordinance amending the Municipal Code regarding holidays for parking enforcement was introduced by a unanimous vote of the Council. Adoption of the ordinance is now appropriate. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinance. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Ordinance Amending Division 8, Chapter 1, Section 7008 of the Ukiah City Code Regarding Holidays for Enforcement of Parking Regulations ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine this matter need not be addressed in the City Code and do not adopt ordinance. 2. Determine ordinance requires modifications, identify necessary changes, and adopt revised ordinance. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.' N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: NA NA Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Ordinance for adoption, page 1. APPROVED: Candace Horsley, Ci!y Manager mfh:asrcc98 0318PARK ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING DIVISION 8, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 7008 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE REGARDING HOLIDAYS FOR ENFORCEMENT OF PARKING REGULATIONS The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE Section 7008 of Chapter 1, Division 8 of the Ukiah City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: §7008: "HOLIDAYS" DEFINED: Within the meaning of this Chapter, "holidays" are New Year's Day (January 1), Martin Luther King Jr. Day (third Monday in January), Judicial Day (February 12), Washington's Day (third Monday in February), Memorial Day (last Monday in May), Independence Day (July 4), Labor Day (first Monday in September), Admissions Day (September 9), Columbus Day (second Monday in October), Veterans Day (November 11 ), Thanksgiving Day (fourth Thursday in November), and Christmas Day (December 25). If any of the holidays falls upon a Saturday, the Friday proceeding is a holiday; if any of the holidays falls on a Sunday, the Monday following is a holiday. SECTION TWO This Ordinance shall be published as required by law and shall become effective thirty (30) days after it is adopted. Introduced by title only on March 4, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone None None Adopted on March 18, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk mfh: resord ordholi Ordiance No. Page 1 of 1 ITEM NO. 6f DATE: MARCH 18: 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION TO COUNCIL REGARDING THE AWARD OF BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF THREE 600 AMP DISTRIBUTION SWITCHES TO SOUTHWEST POWER IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,413.12. In compliance with Section 1522 of the City of Ukiah Municipal Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of material costing more than $5,0000 but less than $10,000. Quotations were requested for the purchase of three 600 Amp Morpac Distribution Switches, with no substitutions allowed. The switches will be used for reconductoring and systems maintenance. A Request for Quotation (RFQ) through the informal bid process was sent to five suppliers. Four bids were received and opened by the Electric Department on March 4, 1998, at 1:00 p.m. The low bid was received from Southwest Power with a total bid of $7 413.12. A purchase order was issued. ' RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report regarding the award of bid for 600 AMP distribution switches to Southwest Power in the amount of $7,413.12. ALTERNATIV~ COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Attachments: Bid resu/~s APPROVED: candace Morally,/ Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: 800-3646-420-000 Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Stan Bartolomei, Electric Supervisor Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager City Manager 600 Amp Morpac Distribution Switch Southwest Power $7,413.12 Western States Electric $7,593.30 Wesco $7,657.65 Chris Stephens $7,657.65 Morpac No Bid , BID RESULTS AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6g DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 REPORT SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION TO COUNCIL REGARDING THE AWARD OF BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF ELECTRIC METERS TO WESCO IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,606.17. In compliance with Section 1522 of the City of Ukiah Municipal Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of material costing more than $5,0000 but less than $10,000. Quotations were requested for the purchase of the following ABB meters, with no substitutions allowed: 24 - FM 16S, Type AID+ 8 - FM 9S, Type AID+ 4 - FM 5S, Type AID+ 4 - FM 3S, Type AID+ ABB meters and software were determined by City Staff to be the best application for the needs of the City meter change out program. These 40 additional meters are needed to complete the E6 commercial accounts. Wesco is the sole supplier for ABB meters (ABB policies for distribution, see attachments). The bid was opened by the Electric Department on March 5, 1998 at 1:00 p.m. A purchase order was issued to Wesco in the amount of $8,606.17 including tax and freight. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report regarding the award of bid for electric meters to Wesco in the amount of $8,606.17. ALTERNATIYE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: 800-3650-420-000 Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Stan Bartolomei, Electric Supervisor Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: ABB D~ribution Policies Candace Horsley~City Manager RUG 29 '97 14:54 FE RBB EOGERS LRN5 919 212 4717 TO 917074672811 P.01×02 ABB Network ,P. artner ABB Power T&D Company Inc. Information Systems Division 201 South Rogers Lane Raleigh. North Carolina 27610-2107 USA dk I! I! Tel: +1-919-212-4700 Fax:~-l-919-212-4717 FacsimileTransmittal TO: cc; From: City of Ukiah, California Pat Cordgan Date: 8/29/97 Total pages including this one: Telefax: 7074672811 Direct Line: Telefax: +1-919-212-5071 + 1-919-212-4717 SUBJECT: Single Distribution To the Honorable Board of the City of Ukiah, CA: We do not have multiple channels of distribution for our metering product lines. We tried using multiple channels at one time, but the result was extreme difficulty coordinating effective service and support back to the operations departments of our many public power customers. In public power metering, service and support have always been critical issues but they are even more so today. We know our metering operations customers very well and we know that they operate with a very high level of integrity. At the end of the day, they are the keepers of the cash register of our industry. By keeping close tabs on our distributors we are able to achieve a higher confidence that our distributors are property supporting our public power customers; thereby preventing mistakes and misunderstandings. Modern electricity meters produced today (like our Alpha Meter) can hold measurement accuracies anywhere from five to twenty times better (closer to true 100%) than the older electromechanical meters. They can also offer much more information about the quality and diagnostic natures of the electricity at the service point. However, excellent technical and commercial support are essential to succesful use of the new metering technology. Patrick Corrigan Marketing Manager Electronic Metering AUG 29 '9? 14:55 FR ABB ROGERS LANE 919 ~i~ 47i7 'FO 917074672811 P.02×0~ ,, ...Z:~~' ~,VE., UKIAH, CA 954~12 · ~,DMIN. Y07/46.3-6200 · pOUC;~46.~.6242 · FIRE46c]-6274 August 25, 1997 ABB POWER T & D 201 S. Rogers Ln. Raleigh, NC 27610 Attn: Pat. Corrigan Re: Al]B-New Generation Alpha Plus Meters As per our City Municipal Code, under Article 2 - Bidding Procedures, we are requ/red to solicit bids/proposals from a minimum of three suppliers/distributor~, We request your assistance in providing us with three supplier/distributors in California and/or Oregon, Washington. Nevada or Arizona. #1 Company Name Contact ~ #2 Company Name ~3 Comply Nme Co~m~ I~ you for your ~sismce. Ju y Ze~ey~ubli~ Utilities 707/467-2825, F=: 707/467-2811 AUG 25 '97 12:51 ?874672811 PRGE.O1 ** TOTAL PAGE.82 ** ITEM NO. 6h DATE: MARCH 1 g_ 199g AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Award bid for 12,500 ft. of 4/0 AWG 15 KV cable to King Wire Inc. in the amount of $22,763.81. A Request for Quotation (RFQ) for 12,500 ft. of 4/0 AWG 15 KV cable was written to provide material for underground construction projects for the 1997/1998 fiscal year. That RFQ was sent through the formal bid process to five vendors. Five bids from four different vendors were received and opened by the City Clerk on March 9, 1998, at 2:00 p.m. The bids were evaluated by the Electric Utility Staff and the lowest bidder meeting specifications was King Wire Inc. with a total bid of $22,763.81 including tax and freight. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award bid for 12,500 ft.of 4/0 AWG 15 KV cable in the amount of $22,763.81 to King Wire Inc. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject all bids. Acct. No. (if not budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Stan Bartolomei, Electrical Supervisor Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Bid results Acct. No.: 800-3646-420-000 APPROVED' ',-~ ~'~ ~V-~ ~,.-X~- Candace Horsley, City i~lanager BID RESULTS 4/0 AWG; 1SKV Pirelli Cable Corporation (alt)* King Wire Inc. Hendrix % C. Stephens & Associates Pirelli Cable Corporation Champion Wire & Cable Consolidated Electrical Distributors $21,114.84 $22,763.81 $22,777.22 $24,801.56 $26,276.25 No Bid * Specifications call for tin plated concentric; Pirelli offering bare copper concentric. Bid therefore does not meet City's specifications. ITEM NO. 6i, DATE: March 18. 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE REPORT REGARDING EMERGENCY RIVER BANK REPAIR AT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT REPORT: Heavy rainfall events during the months of January and February 1 998 caused the Russian River to remain at consistently high levels. When the river subsided, several areas along the river bank at the wastewater treatment plant had failed. Left unrepaired, these failures could place the holding ponds in jeopardy if heavy rains returned. City staff, along with staff from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, determined that emergency repairs must be made. A Purchase Order was issued to Mendocino Construction Services (MCS) to make the emergency repairs. MCS had the necessary material and equipment on hand and was able to mobilize in the short time frame that was available. Emergency work of this nature is authorized under Ukiah Municipal Code Section 1530. The total cost for emergency repair was $31,1 82. Staff is submitting these expenditures to FEMA for possible reimbursement as part of the FEMA-1203-DR- CA public assistance process. We anticipate 94% recovery of these costs. Though the cost was not specifically budgeted in Account 612-3580-250-000, adequate funds are available through a reprioritization of identified projects. Repair work was completed on March 9, 1998. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report regarding emergency river bank repair. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None 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 APPROVED:t ~'5 ~~ ~ ~andace Horsley, City anager ITEM NO. 6,i DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PERIMETER GAS EXTRACTION PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 97-06 The work of the contract was completed by Environmental Resolutions, Inc., in substantial conformance with the approved plans and specifications. The majority of the project was completed by November 30, 1997, however, there were unresolved issues regarding final pay quantities, final equipment testing, and improperly working condensate return pump. The final testing of pipe mains and equipment have been satisfactorily completed and the condensate return pump has been serviced and is currently in proper working order. A Change Order in the amount of $488.00 has been approved by the City Engineer which should resolve the issue regarding final pay quantities. CONTINUED ON PAGE 2. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. City Council accept the work as complete. , Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion with the County Recorder for Construction of the Perimeter Gas Extraction Project at the Ukiah Landfill, Specification No. 97-06. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None· Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attach me nts: Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager I · 2. 3. 4. · Account No.: (if budgeted) 660.7301.250.020 Notice of Completion. Semi-final pay estimate. Contract Change Order Nos. I and 2. Correspondence to Mendocino County Management District. Current results of Methane Gas Testing. Air Quality Candace Horsle~/~ty Manager R: 1 \LANDFILL:kk AENVlRONM ENTAL.RES Approval of Notice of Completion for the Construction of the Perimeter Gas Extraction Project- Specification No. 97-06 March 18, 1998 Page 2 The Mendocino County Air Quality Management District was notified that the perimeter gas extraction system became operational on November 21, 1997. Subsequent to the initial start-up date the system was shut down twice to make repairs or to perform final testing of the system. The results of the initial stack testing performed by the City's gas consultant was submitted to the Air District on December 23, 1997 and on February 10, 1998, the Health Risk Assessment conducted on the gas effluent was submitted as well. The excess cancer risk for the effluent from the gas extraction has been calculated to be 2.2 in a million which is lower than the District's permitted limit of 10 in a million for the nearest receptor. Current test results in the former violation area of gas monitoring Well No. 4 indicate that methane levels below the surface of the ground are below the allowed 5% compliance level. The final construction contract amount is $157,784.80. Two Change Orders in the total amount of $2,338 were issued. The original contract amount was $161,485.21 and it was based on estimated bid item quantities. The amount budgeted in the 1997/98 budget for both the design work and construction work was $243,000. After 30 days from the date of the Notice of Completion has been recorded, the retention in the amount of $15,729.68 will be paid if there are no stop notices received because of non-payment of materials, equipment or subcontractor services. As soon as the piping covered in Change Order No. 2 is delivered, the amount of $488 will be paid. R: 1 \LANDFILL AENVIRONM ENTAL.RES ITEM NO. DATE: MARCH 15, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PERIMETER GAS EXTRACTION PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 97-06 ~ ~_/! ('~'~' The work of the contract was completed by Enviro/mrnental Resolutions, Inc., in substantial conformance with the approved plans an/d'specifications. The majority of the project was completed by November 30, 199~, however, there were unresolved issues regarding final pay quantities, final e~?r~nt testing, and improperly working condensate return pump. The final testin~i.of~pe mains and equipment have been satisfa( ~ completed and the condensa~turn pump has been serviced and is current ' roper working order. A c~3a~ the amount of $488.00 has been appro.v~t,~e City Engineer which should resolve the issue regarding final pay quantiti~ Mendocino County Air Quality Management District was notified that the penrr/eter gas extraction system became operational on November 21, 1997. Subsequent to the initial start-up date the system was shut down twice to make repairs or to perform final testing of the system. The results of the initial stack testing performed by the City's gas consultant was submitted to the Air District on December 23, 1997 and on February 10, 1998, the Health Risk Assessment conducted on the gas effluent was submitted as well. The excess cancer risk for the effluent from the gas extraction has been calculated to be 2.2 in a million which is lower than the District's permitted limit of 10 in a million for the nearest receptor. Current test results in the former violation area of gas monitoring Well No. 4 indicate that methane levels below the surface of the ground are below the allowed 5% compliance level. The final construction contract amount is $157,784.80. Two Change Orders in the total amount of $2,338 were issued. The original contract amount was $161,485.21 and it was based on estimated bid item quantities. The amount budgeted in the 1997/98 budget for both the design work and construction work was $243,000. After ¢~ days from the date of the Notice of Completion has been recorded, the retenti~.;n?~._~l~e'~ ~~ amount of $15,729.68 will be paid if there are no stop notices receive~~.on-payment of materials, equipment or subcontractor services. As scones ~. _rre~p~ping covered in Change Order No. 2 is delivered, the amount of $488 will 1Se paid. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. City Council accept the work as complete. , Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion with the County Recorder for Construction of the Perimeter Gas Extraction Project at the Ukiah's Landfill, Specification No. 97-06. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' None. Appropriation Requested' N/A Account No.' (If budgeted) Citizen Advised: Requested by' Prepared by: Coordinated with' Attachments' N/A 660.7301.250.020 Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Notice of Completion. 2. Semi-final pay estimate. 3. Contract Change Order Nos. I and 2. 4. Correspondence to Mendocino_ Cou.~y Air Quality ~,~t_ District, ¢,,'/ .~ ~~ ,/...-'--.~."¢~' APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager R: 1 \LANDFILL:kk AENVIRONMENTAL.RES Please return to: CITY OF UKIAH 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 (707) 463-6200 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: · That the real property described is owned by the following whose address or addresses are: City of Ukiah, a Municipal Corporation 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California 95482 . That the nature of the title to the construction of the PERIMETER GAS EXTRACTION SYSTEM FOR THE UKIAH LANDFILL,, SPECIFICATION NO. 97- 06, of all said owners is that of fee simple. 3. That on March 10, 1998, the Contract was actually completed. , That the name and address of the Contractor is ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTIONS INC., 74 DIGITAL DRIVE, SUITE 6, NOVATO CA 94949 , That the real property herein referred to is situated in the County of Mendocino, State of California, and is described as the City of Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site located at 3100 Vichy Springs Road. CITY OF UKIAH, a Municipal Corporation BY: CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF MENDOCINO) COLLEEN B. HENDERSON, being duly sworn says: That she is the Clerk of the City of Ukiah City Council, that she has read the foregoing Notice of Completion and knows that content thereof and the same is true of her own knowledge. COLLEEN B. HENDERSON, City Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this~ day of ,1996. Notary Public in and for the County of Mendocino, State of California0 c:\projects\landfill~gasextr~noti-com.wpd CONTRACTOR: CITY OF UKIAH ENGIN'EERING DIVISION PROGRESS PAY'M~NT NO.4 FOR PERI~TER C~-EXTRACTION SYSTEM FOR T~ CITY UKIAH LANDFILL SPECIFICATION NO. 97-06 F~IRON~AL RESOLUTIONS, INC. 74 DIGITAL DRIVE, SUITE 6 NOVATO, CA 94949 REQUISITION NO. E 17030 PURC~E ORDER NO 29126 ACCOUNT NO. 660-7301-250-020 WORK COMPLETED AS OF FEBRUARY 17, 1998 BASE BID ITEM NO. BID UNIT I DESCRIPTION PERCENT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUARTITYI COMPLETE COMPLETE ' 100 1 $8,800.00 $8, ~00.00 1 · 1 LS .%~o c,lization 2. i LS Fie~d Engineering 100 I $ 5,100.00 $5,100.00 100 1 S 15,200.00 $15,200.00 3 · 1 LS Site Grading and Earthwork 4. 1009 LF 10' Diameter Borehole 100 927 S22.79 $21, 126.33 S. 669 LF 2' P'v'C Screen Casing 100 500 $3~29 $1,645.00 6. 335 LF 2' PVC Blank Casing 100 394 $1.49 $587.06 7. 687 LF Pea Gravel Filter Pack 100 518 12.77 $1,434.86 8. 9 EA =.entonite Grout Barrier 100 9 $55.56 $500.0~, 9. 340 LF Annular Seal 100 356 $11.18 $3,980.08 10 · 9 EA ',veil-Head Assembly 100 9 $333.00 $2,997.00 11. 9 EA Welt-Head Valut 100 9 S888.89 $8,000.01 12. 2780 LF 6' HOPE Pipe 100 2440 $5.47 $15,786.80 13 · 17 EA 2' HDPE Lateral 100 17 $338.89 $5,761.13 0 0 $137.50 $0.00 14. 8 EA ~.lonitoring Well Box for 2' Stub 15. 1 tS Ccndensate System 100 I $18,000.00 $18,000.00 16. 1 LS ~:ower Shed Pad 100 I $3,300.00 $3,300.00 17. I LS =lower Shed 100 i $5,500.00 $5,500.00 18. 1 LS ;.lechanical 100 I $6,500.00 $6,500.00 19. I LS FIectrical 100 1 $3,900.00 $3, 900.00 20. 1 LS Gas-Testing Device 100 i S8,100.00 $8,100.00 ,,,.~ -~,~ .~ .... TOTAL AMOUNT OF BASE BID - $136,21 ADDITIVE BID ITEMS ITEM NO. I BID UNIT I DESCRIPTION PERCENT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITYI COMPLETE COMPLETE ~ ,,, 1. I tS S,te Grading and Earthwork 100 I $1,182.00 $1,182.00 2. 380 LF 10' Diameter 8orehole 100 384 $20.48 $7,864.32 3. 300 LF 2' F'VC Screen Casing 100 225 $3.15 $708.75 4. 80 LF 2' PVC Blank Casing 100 157 $1.37 $215.09 5. 316 LF Pea Gravel Filter Pack 100 241 $2.63 $633.83 100 8 $52.50 $420 . 00 6. 8 EA ~entonite Grout Barrier 7. 56 LF Annular Seal 100 101 110.50 $1,060.50 8. 8 EA %Veil. Head Assembly 100 8 $105.00 $840.00 9. 8 EA ',*/ei~Head Vault 100 8 $ 788.00 $ 6,3 04.00 'OTAL ADDDITIVE BID ITEMS - $19,228 Original Contract Amount - $142,483.13 + $19,002.08 - $161,485.21 (Based on Estimated Quantities) RECOH~ENDED FOR PAY~NT: LARRY J. W(~OD~ SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER DATE CONTRACT AMOUNT $155,446.80 C.C.O. #1 $1,850.00 TOTAL WORK COMPLETE $157,296.80 LESS 104RETENTION ($15,729.68) SUBTOTAL $141,567.12 LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS $139,762.62 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE THIS PAYMENT $1,804.50 RICK SANDS ENGINEERING ASSOCIATE DEPART~$NT . .APpRoVAL: ~ DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINE/~/ CITY OF UKIAH CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER ORDER NO. (NUMERICAL ORDER) 2 DATE (CHRONOLOGICAL) February 17, 1998 Contract for (Description of Facility.) Perimeter Gas-Extraction System for the Ukiah Landfill, Specification No. 97-06 Owner City of Ukiah, 300 SeminaD' Avenue, Ukiah, California, 95482 To (Contractor): Environmental Resolutions, Inc., 74 Digital Drive, Suite 6, Novato, California, 94949 You are hereby directed to make the herein described changes from the contract plans and specifications or do the following described work not included in the contract plans and specifications: Change requested by: City Engineer ESTIMATED ESTIMATED Description of Changes - Itemized Breakdown DECREASE INCREASE To Contract To Contract Amount Amount 1. Deliver to the City of Ukiah's corparation yard located at 1320 Airport Rd., Ukiah, CA a total of 244 linear feet of 2" PVC well screen pipe. This "special order" well screen was excess pipe purchased by the subcontractor (Weeks Drilling) based upon estimated quantities yet not installed during construction due to adjusted well depths. The City agrees to pay the amount of $2.00 per linear foot of pipe as requested by contractor for a total sum of $488.00 (244 x $2). $488.00 TOTALS $0.00 $488.00 ESTIMATED NET CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE $488.00 Justification (Detailed and Concise): Changes are requested to compensate contractor for special order pipe not installed on this project. The amount of the Contract will be increased by the estimated sum of:four hundred eighty eight dollars and no cents ($488.00). The contract total including this and previous Change Orders will be: one hundred sixty three thousand eight hundred twenty three dollars and 21 cents ($163,823.21). The contract period provided for completion will be unchanged. This document w~~come~supple~ to the .contract and all provisions will apply hereto. (~ity 'Engineer) '-/ ' ' ~ Accepted: (Contractor) Date This information will be issued as a record of any chauges to the original construction contract. 02/11/98 WED 13:29, FAX 1 41S 382 1856 CITY OF UKIAH CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER ERI Novato 0fflce ORDF_.R NO. (NUMERICAL o~DP_a) 1 DATE (CHRONOLOGICAL) November 21, 1997 ~]002 Contract for (Description of Facility) Perimeter Gas-Ext_ra_ction System for the Ukiah Landfill. Specification No. 97-06 Owner City of Uk~. ~QQ ~$~minarv Avenue, Uld_ah_._Caltfornia, 95482 To (Contractor): Environmental R~01utions. lnc,, 74 Digital Drive, Suite 6, No,.¥ato. California. 94949 You are hereby directed to make the herein described changes from the contract plans and specificatiot~ or do the followi~g described work not included in the contract plans and specifications: Chanlle requested by: Citw En~neer ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ...... DECREASE INCREASt/ D~cfiption of Changes - Itemized Breakdown To Contract To Contract Amount Amount I InsmI1 "Blower Bypass Assembly' as is shown on Ei~ure 1 .as prepsred by Lawrence & Associates and attached hereto. ~ $1,850.00 TOTALS $0.00 $1,850.00 ESTIMATED NET CHANGB IN CONTRACT PRICE Justificatkm (Detailed and Concise): Changes are reouested to facilitate credits_and savin_~s to the ~rpject. The amount of the Contract will be increased by the estimated sum of: one ~ousand eight hundred fifty dollar~ an(l no cents ($1850.00). The contract total including this and previous Change Orders will be: one hundred sixty three_ _thousand three hundred thirty_ five dollars and 21 cents ($163.33~.21). The contract period provided for completion will be Increased by thirty (30) days This docum~will b-~e tt~a' sul~'f~ to ~e contract and all provisions will apply hereto. - (city eer) ' ' Accepted: (Contractor) Illl NOV B 5 mi[il 300 SE.~,,. 15~..R~VE., UKI^H, CA 95482-5400 · tM)MIN. 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC NED' 463-6242/6274 · · FAX # 707/463-6204 · November 25, 1997 David Faulkner Air Pollution Control Officer MENDOCINO COUNTY AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 306 East Gobbi Street Ukiah, California 95482 RE: NOTICE OF SYSTEM START-UP/AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT 2730-6-26-97-06- 1/PERIMETER GAS EXTRACTION SYSTEM, UKIAH SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE 23-AA-0019 Dear Mr. Faulkner: This is to report that the perimeter gas extraction system installed under the referenced authority becalne operational on November 21, 1997. In accordance with the Special Conditions, a report showing the results of testing will be submitted within 30-days after the system start-up. Because of the Thanksgiving Holiday, the stack gases will be sampled by Lawrence and Associates on Monday, December 1, 1997. A copy of the Authority to Construct has been placed inside the control cabinet located within the blower enclosure. ~ckH. Kennedy -. ./ Director of Public Works/City Engin~r Candace Horsley, City Manager John Morley Clayton Coles RllK:kk R:I\PW LFAULKNF. R 'We Are Here To Serve" ' '~"' 300 . ~MIN. 7071463-6200 · ~U[~LIC ~EIY 463-62421621~ · F~ ~ 7071463-6204 February 10, 1998 David Faulkner Air Pollution Control Officer MENDOCINO COUNTY AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 306 East Gobbi Street Ukiah, California 95482 RE: HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT FOR UKIAH'S LANDFILL PERIMETER GAS EXTRACTION SYSTEM/AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT 2730-6-26-97-06-1 Dear Mr. Faulkner' Enclosed for your review is the Health Risk Assessment Report prepared by Lawrence and Associates for the Perimeter Gas Extraction System installed along the western t~alf of tile southern line of the Ukiai~ Land[ill in accordance witl~ the authority to col~strtJct No. 2730-6-26-97-06-1. Based upon the emission results a't the effluent stack, tt~e lifetime cancer risk from the compounds being discharged in the effluent is estimated to be 2.2 in one million at the property line. This risk value is less than the limit of 10 ina million at the nearest receptor for untreated gas discharge. That point along the west property line nearest the discharge is 450 feet. The nearest receptor which is beyond the property line would have an excess cancer risk lower than 2.2 in a million. We believe we are in compliance with all of the conditions of the authority to construct and we hereby request that your issue the permit to operate. Sincerely, Rick H. Kennedy'' ' /'_ Director of Public Works/City Engineer CC' Candace Horsley, City Manager John Morley "We Are Here To Serve" !. A \,V IR !.{ NCI' ENGINEERING GEOLOGY CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUND-WATER HYDROLOGY o£e~. ,., ........ C96'.'06.08.C February 4, 1998 Mr. Rick Sands City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Drive Ukiah, CA 95482 CITY OF UKIAH DEPT. OF PUBLIC WOrll(S Dear Mr. Sands: SUBJECT: HEALTH-RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL PERIMETER GAS-EXTILA~CTION SYSTEM Enclosed are three copies of the report for the screening-level health-risk assessment conducted on the effluent from the perimeter gas-extraction system at the City of Ukiah Landfill. The health-risk assessment ~vas conductcd per the requirements of the MCAQMD Permit to Construct. The health-risk assessment evaluated the excess-cancer risk fi'om compounds discharged in the effluent. 'The excess-cancer risk for the effluent (2.2 in a million) is lower than the MCQAMD permit limit of 1 O-in-a-million for the nearest receptor. Thus, the system is in compliance with this permit condition. Please feel free to call mc if you have any questions about this report. Sincerely, Bonnie Lampley Registered Geologist 1645 enc.: Health-risk assessment report (3 copies) 2001 Market Street ° Room 523 ° Redding, California 96001 ° (916)244-9703 ° fax (916)244-5021. ° landa~twilight.c-zone.net PERIMETER GAS-WELLS SAMPLING LOG Date Sampled: ~,,?/~"~ Ambient Temperature, Deg C' ~..~ ~ ,,~ ~-~ · End B.P. inches Weather conditions' ~d///u'/v'// Sampled by: .oc~,o= II ~,~ I...ss ~. o~ I ~o~ Units +/- In C % H20 BLOWER STACK ~ ~ ~' ~ /~' ~ GAS-3A ~ ~ -~. ~ /~ ~ /7, ~ GAS 3B GAS-SC ~ ~ -¢. ~ ~- / /7. ~ GAS-4A /~ -- ~/. ¢ /~ ~ /~ GAS-4B /~ ~ I- d ./~. ~ /~. 3 GAS-4C /p ~ - ~ . ~.., ~ I l/. ~ ~, ~ ~. ~ ~. ~ /~Z / /~, // GAS-5A GAS-hB ,, GAS-5C GAS-hD GAS-GS GAS-61 GAS-GD GAS-SS GAS-91 GAS-SD GAS-10S GAS-101 GAS-10D LFGP-2 90-8 92-4 94-1 95-1 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6k DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ADDITIONAL ON-STREET PREFERENTIAL PARKING SPACE FOR THE DISABLED ON THE EAST SIDE OF DORA STREET IN FRONT OF THE UKIAH FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH Submitted for the City Council's consideration and adoption is a resolution which, if adopted, would establish a second on-street preferential parking space for the disabled on the east side of Dora Street, south of Perkins Street in front of the Ukiah First Presbyterian Church. At the written request of Betty Austin, Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the First Presbyterian Church, the Traffic Engineering Committee considered the merits and circumstances of the request for a second on-street parking space for the disabled and recommends the request be granted. If established, the added disabled parking space will be adjacent to the existing disabled parking space beginning at the southeast curb return of Dora Street and Perkins Street. As much as possible of the existing white loading zone just south of the existing disabled parking space will be retained. The cost to mark and sign the additional disabled on-street parking space can be expensed from the Street Department's Special Supplies Account No. 100.3001.690.000. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution Establishing a Preferential Parking Space for the Disabled on the East Side of Dora Street South of Perkins Street and Contiguous to the Ukiah First Presbyterian Church. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' Determine that second disabled parking .space is not needed and do not adopt resolution. Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attach ments: Appropriation Requested' N/A Account No · (if budgeted) 100.3001.690.000 Citizen Advised' Betty Austin, Chairperson, First Presbyterian Church Board Traffic Engineering Committee Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution. 2. Letter of Request. APPROVE Candace Horsley, C~ty Manager R: 1 \PW:kk ADORA.HC RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ESTABLISHING A PREFERENTIAL PARKING SPACE FOR THE DISABLED ON THE EAST SIDE OF DORA STREET SOUTH OF PERKINS STREET AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE UKIAH FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH WHEREAS, a request was made by Betty Austin, Chairperson of the Board of Trustees for the Ukiah First Presbyterian Church, for an additional disabled on-street parking space on the east side of Dora Street, south of Perkins Street and contiguous to the First Presbyterian Church facility; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineering Committee of the City of Ukiah reviewed this matter and determined that circumstances justify the establishment of an additional preferential on-street parking space for the disabled adjacent to the existing disabled parking space in front of the First Presbyterian Church and recommends that the Ukiah City Council approve its establishment; and WHEREAS, Section 22511.7 of the Vehicle Code of the State of California authorizes a local agency, by ordinance or resolution, to designate on-street parkin~ spaces for the exclusive use of a vehicle displaying a distinguishing license plate or placard which has been issued to a disabled person. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Ukiah City Council that a second preferential on-street parking space for the use of the disabled be established along the east side of Dora Street, south of Perkins Street and adjacent to the existing disabled parking space in front of the Ukiah First Presbyterian Church and that appropriate signs and curb markings be erected and placed. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of March, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk B:I\RES1 DORA.HC Resolution No. 98-00 Page I of 2 ATTACHMENT NO. I March 3, 1998 Ukiah Traffic Commis§ion Ukiah City Hall 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah CA 95482 Re: Establishment of Additional Handicapped Curb Parking Dear Commission Members: Ukiah Presbyterian Church currently has one handicapped parking space on Dora Street near Perkins Street. This space is utilized for both handicapped unloading and parking during church related activities. We find that we have more than one or two handicapped persons requiring the 'blue' curb for parking. This is not always the case as some persons come for one activity and some come for another. We are requesting the establishment of one more handi- capped parking designated by the blue curb. It should be in close proximity to the current spot - either the space just ahead of just behind the current space. We do have a loading-unloading white curb just to the south of the current handicapped space. Is this something we can accomplish via the 'letter route' or should we plan to make an appearance. As Chairman of the Board of Trustees, we are the designated group which takes care of such matter as this for our Church. Please let me know if my presence is required, or just what the next step in this procedure should be. Thank you!~ for your interest in this matter. Sincerely, ~~ '~C .~u S t i n ~ ~h a~rr ma~ Board of/ Trustees ~ First presbyterian Church ~_~_ Phone: 462-4588 (message) or 463-1'~077 Mail · ITEM NO. 8a. DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REFINANCING SENIOR CENTER LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT As discussed at the last meeting this public hearing is to consider a refinancing of the Senior Center's lease purchase agreement. The necessary documentation is still being prepared by the Center's attorneys and will be available for Council consideration Wednesday evening. The City Attorney will present this matter verbally at the meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct public hearing and take action as recommended by the City Attorney. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.: N/A Yes Ukiah Senior Citizens Center Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer~t~,~~)'~,,.,~ David Rapport, City Attorney and Candace Horsley, City Manager None Candace Horsley, ~ty Manager , mfh:asrcc98 0318SENCEN EXHIBIT E RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH APPROVING THE LEASE- PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND SUBLEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE GREATER UKIAH ~ENIOR CENTER, INC. WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council of the City of Ukiah, California (the "Issuer") proposed forms of each of the following: 1. Lease-Purchase Agreement, dated as of March 18, 1998 (the "Lease-Purchase Agreement"), between MPA Leasing Corporation, and the Issuer, as lessee, to which this resolution will be attached as Exhibit E; and 2. Sublease-Purchase Agreement, dated as of March 18, 1998 (the "Sublease Agreement,,), between the Issuer, as sublessor, and the Greater Ukiah Senior Center, Inc. (the "Sublessee,,), as sublessee, to which this resolution will be attached as Exhibit E; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH THAT: Section 1. It is hereby found that the Issuer is authorized by the laws of the State of California to provide the funding for the "purposes" (which is generally described in Exhibit A to the Lease- Purchase Agreement) . Section 2. The Lease-Purchase Agreement and the Sublease Agreement (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Agreements") are hereby approved in substantially the form and substance attached hereto as Exhibits A and B respectively, and the City Manager or Mayor of the Issuer is hereby authorized and directed for and on behalf of the Issuer to date, sign, and otherwise execute such documents, and the City Clerk of the Issuer is hereby authorized to affix the seal of the Issuer thereto and to attest such documents, and such officers are hereby authorized to deliver such documents to the other parties to such documents. Upon execution by all parties to the respective documents and delivery thereof in final form, such documents shall be binding upon the Issuer in accordance with the terms and provisions thereof. Section 3. The City Manager or Mayor of the Issuer shall be and he is hereby expressly authorized, empowered, and directed from time to time and at any time to do and perform all such acts and things and to execute, acknowledge, and deliver in the name and under the seal and on behalf of the Issuer all such instruments, whether or not herein mentioned, as may be necessary or desirable in order to carry out the terms and provisions of this Resolution. The City Manager or Mayor of the Issuer is further authorized, empowered and directed to approve on behalf of the Issuer any and all changes approved by the City Attorney, as counsel to the Issuer, to the Agreements, and his approval of all such changes shall be evidenced by his execution and delivery of such documents in final form. Section 4. Ail action (not inconsistent with the provisions of this Resolution) heretofore taken by the qoverning body of the Issuer and the officers or consultants of th~ Issuer in connection with the transaction conteTaplated by this Resolution and the Agreements shall be and the same hereby is ratified approved and confirmed. ' ' Section 5 The City Manager or Mayor being an authorized representative ~f the Issuer having responsibility with respect to the transaction contemplated by this Resolution, is authorized and directed, alone or in conjunction with any other official, employee, or consultant of the Issuer to give an appropriate certificate on behalf of the Issuer, for inclusion in the transcript of proceedings relating to such transaction setting forth the facts, estimates, and circumstances and reasonable expectations pertaining to Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). Section 6. The actions of the Issuer contained in this Resolution shall be subject to and conditioned upon the receipt by the Issuer, at or before the date of closing of the transaction contemplated by this Resolution, of such opinions, evidences, certificates, instruments, or other documents as shall be requested by counsel to the Issuer and Special Tax Counsel to evidence the due performance or satisfaction by the Issuer and the respective parties to the Agreements, at or prior to such time, of all agreements then to be performed and all conditions then to be satisfied by each of them. Section 7. If any section, paragraph, clause, or provision of this Resolution shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability of such section, paragraph, clause, or provision shall not affect any of the remaining portions of this Resolution. In case any obligation of the Issuer authorized or established by this Resolution is held to be in violation of law as applied to any person or in any circumstance, such obligation shall be deemed to be the obligation of the Issuer to the fullest extent permitted by law. PASSED AND ADOPTED on March 18, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Sheridan Malone, Mayor S:\U\Resos98\SENIORfi.wpd March 1~, 1996 2 ATTEST: By: Colleen Henderson, City Clerk AGENDA SUMARY ITEM NO. 8b DATE: March 18, 1998 REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLES 3, 4, AND 5 OF CHAPTER 2 OF THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODE REVISING THE REGULATIONS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. SUMMARY: This proposed Zoning Code revision project updates the regulations for the City of Ukiah Residential Zoning Districts. The purpose of revising these regulations is to bring the provisions into conformance with the Ukiah General Plan; to make them more orderly and easier to administer; and to make them more understandable to the public. The project involves the updating and revising of the allowed and permitted land uses within the "R-I" (Single Family Residential), "R-2" (Medium Density Residential), and "R-3" (High Density Residential) Zoning Districts. The proposed revisions also update the development standards for all three Zoning Districts; revise the provisions for second units and manufactured homes; and include reformatting the text to make it easier to read, understand, and administer. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDATION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Introduce by title only the Ordinance amending Articles 3, 4, and 5 of Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal Code. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Do not introduce the Ordinance, and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Legally noticed according to the requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code. Requested by: Planning Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Senior Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Bob Sawyer, Planning Director, and David Rapport, City Attorney Attachments: 1. Ordinance Amending Articles 3, 4, and 5 of Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal Code. 2. Planning Commission Staff Reports, dated January 14, 1998 and February 11, 1998 (second Units). 3. Planning Commission minutes, dated January 14, 1998 and February 11, 1998 (Second Units). APPROVED: Candace Horsley, Cit!Manager STAFF ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION: The proposed revisions to the Residential Zoning Districts are the result of direction provided in the General Plan, as well as the comments and suggestions of the Planning Commission during a public workshop and subsequent public hearing. Changes are also proposed to assure compliance with State law, and to improve the practical application of the regulations. The following discussion summarizes the proposed revisions: 1. Reformattin_~ 1 ,. Reformatting portions of the text is a key to making the regulations easier to read, understand, and administer. It is proposed that a Purpose and Intent section be added to all three (3) Residential Zoning Districts to clearly state the objective of each district. Additionally, the titles of some sections have been simplified, and their order has been rearranged to provide a logical sequence of the individual regulations. It is also proposed that provisions found elsewhere in the Zoning Code be included in each Residential Zoning District. This will eliminate the task of referring to other Zoning Code Articles for information that is applicable to the Residential Districts. The Planning Commission unanimously supported these amendments, and recommended City Council approval. Allowed and Permitted Land Uses The allowed and permitted land uses in each Residential Zoning District have been changed in response to the direction established in the General Plan, as well as from the comments and suggestions made by the Planning Commission. The main changes to the allowed and permitted land uses within the districts are as follows: R-l: Bed and breakfast establishments, community gardens, and places of temporary public assembly have been added as permitted uses. Crop and tree farming, and greens have been deleted from the list of permitted uses, because they are antiquated land uses in the R-1 District. Fences have been added as an allowed use, and the specific fencing requirements have been relocated to this Section for continuity. R-2: Condominiums, child day care homes, and community care facilities have been added as allowed uses, and bed and breakfast establishments, churches, community gardens, large child day care homes, and professional offices converted from single family residences have been added as permitted uses. R-3: Bed and breakfast establishments, delicatessens, bakeries, video rental stores, and other small commercial uses have been added as permitted land uses. The Planning Commission unanimously supported these amendments, and recommended City Council approval. Manufactured Homes Pursuant to State law, the existing regulations allow manufactured homes on individual parcels in all Residential Zoning Districts. The regulations also list specific requirements for foundation systems, utilities, permits, roofing and siding materials, and w m eaves. Current State law precludes the City from regulating the roofing and siding materials, and size of eave overhangs. Accordingly, it is proposed that these requirements be deleted. The Planning Commission unanimously supported these amendments, and recommended City Council approval. Development Standards Front Yard Setbacks: In the R-1 Zoning Districts, the front yard setback has been increased from ten feet (10') to twenty feet (20'). In the R-2 and R-3 Districts, it has been increased from ten feet (10') to fifteen feet (15) for one-story buildings, and from fifteen feet (15') to twenty feet (20') for multiple-story structures. However, the existing provision for allowing a front yard setback consistent with the average setback of existing development on the block has been retained, except that the term "average" has been replaced with "median." Side Yard Setbacks: In the R-1 Zoning District, the side yard setback requirement of five feet (5') has been retained. However, it is proposed that a two-story structure maintain a ten foot (10') side yard setback, and a three-story structure maintain twenty feet (20'). In the R-2 Zoning District, it is proposed that the side yard setback requirement be increased from five feet (5') to ten feet (10'), because of the more intense nature of a typical medium density type development. Rear Yard Setbacks: The only change to the rear yard setback requirements is for the R-2 and R-3 districts, where it is proposed that the distance increase from 10 feet (10') to fifteen feet (15'), because of the more intense nature of a typical high density type development. Setbacks for Accessory Structures: Another important proposed change in the yard setback provisions for Residential Zoning Districts is for accessory structures. In the R-1 Zoning District, it is proposed that detached accessory structures less than eight feet (8') in height and 120 square feet in area may be located three feet (3') from the side and/or rear property line, rather than the current requirement of five feet (5'). The change is proposed, because it is staff's opinion that there is no detriment associated with the placement of small garden sheds, storage structures, greenhouses, etc., three feet (3') from the property line. Moreover, we find no real difference in terms of impact to adjoining property owners, between placing a small accessory structure three feet (3') from the property line as opposed to the existing requirement of five feet (5'). The Planning Commission unanimously supported these amendments, and recommended City Council approval. Second Dwelling Units The proposed new regulations for second units are intended to balance the provisions of State law with the provisions of the General Plan Housing Element and concerns expressed by the Planning Commission. Additionally, we've reviewed the second dwelling unit regulations of a number of other similar sized jurisdictions, and have incorporated a few standards that we feel will work for Ukiah. The proposed new regulations are not intended to discourage second dwelling units, but rather to provide opportunity for well-planned small units that will fit nicely in established single family residential neighborhoods. Under the proposed regulations, a Use Permit would still be required to establish a second dwelling unit in the R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. The primary changes include the following: Al Maximum Size: It is proposed that the maximum size of second dwelling units be limited to six hundred forty (640) square feet. The existing regulations limit the unit to six hundred sixty (660) square feet for a 6,000 square foot lot OR eleven percent (11%) of the lot size for larger parcels. This means that a 1,100 square foot second dwelling unit could be proposed on a 10,000 square foot lot. The purpose of the proposed six hundred forty (640) square foot maximum size standard is to preclude the possibility of a "second" single family residence on the property, and to assure a small non-impacting and affordable unit no matter what the size of the lot. a,, Maximum Height: The existing provisions do not include a specific height limit for second dwelling units. Staff is proposing to limit the height of an attached unit to the height of the existing primary residential structure or thirty feet (30'), whichever is less. Detached units would be limited to twenty feet (20') or the height of the primary residence, whichever is less. Second units above existing garages would be limited to a total maximum structure height of thirty feet (30'). Gl Separate Entrance: VVhile the existing provisions include a requirement to provide a separate entrance for second dwelling units, they do not stipulate where that entrance must be. The proposed revisions include the requirement that the separate entrance for attached second units cannot be located along the front of the primary residence. This will help to maintain the single family character of the property, rather than providing opportunity for a "duplex" looking structure. Dw Yard Setbacks: The existing regulations state that second dwelling units must observe the yard setbacks applicable to single family residences in the R-1 Zoning District. These proposed regulations allow the unit to be as close to the front property line as the existing primary residence, except that it no case could the unit be any closer than five feet (5'). The proposed regulations also establish a new rear yard setback for properties abutting an alley. In this case the rear yard setback is five feet (5') from the outside boundary of the alley, rather than fifteen feet (15') from the rear yard property line. Em Rental Requirements: The existing regulations require that the second dwelling unit be used only for rental purposes. Staff is proposing to eliminate this requirement because there is no valid reason for it. Moreover, this requirement is very difficult to monitor and enforce. Fi Manufactured Homes: The existing regulations preclude manufactured homes from being used as second dwelling units. It is recommended that this requirement be deleted because there may not be any legal authority to support it, and with the recommended regulations limiting the size of the unit, and requiring architectural compatibility with the surrounding built environment, it simply is not needed. Gm "Ineligible" Standard: The existing regulations state that any home constructed after the effective date of the ordinance is ineligible for the creation of a second unit. It is proposed that this standard be deleted because it is inconsistent with State law, and has no value or validity in terms of "protecting" existing single family neighborhoods from potential impacts resulting from second dwelling units. Staff believes that this antiquated regulation is irrelevant because the development standards/criteria for establishing second units assures compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood regardless of the age of the primary single family residence. The Planning Commission unanimously supported these amendments, and recommended City Council approval. Hi Owner Occupancy: The existing regulations require an owner of the property to occupy one of the units. Staff proposed to the Planning Commission that this requirement be deleted, because it is staff's opinion that in the majority of cases, nothing is truly gained from requiring the property owner to occupy one of the units. Additionally, monitoring and on-going confirmation of this requirement is extremely difficult, and has potential budgetary ramifications. The Planning Commission disagreed, and is recommending that this requirement be retained. VVhile staff respectfully disagrees with the Planning Commission, we do not feel that the issue is highly significant, and therefore do not necessarily disagree with their recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: It is proposed that the Zoning Code text for the three (3) Residential Zoning Districts be updated and revised according to the direction contained in the new General Plan, as well as the direction provided by the Planning Commission during a series of recent workshops and subsequent public hearing. Moreover, the revisions reflect current State law, as well as staff's ideas for creating a more useable set of regulations. 1 2 3 4 5 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 AMENDING DIVISION 9, CHAPTER 2 (ZONING) OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE Pursuant to Section 9260 of the Ukiah City Code, Division 9, Chapter 2 (Zoning) is amended by revising Article 3 (Regulations in Single Family Residential (R-l) Districts; Article 4 (Regulations in Medium Density Residential (R-2) Districts; and Article 5 (Regulations in High Density Residential (R-3) Districts. SECTION TVVO The amendments to Chapter 2 of the Ukiah City Code involve the updating and revising of the allowed and permitted land uses within the "R-I" (Single Family Residential), "R-2" (Medium Density Residential), and "R-3" (High Density Residential) Zoning Districts. They also update the development standards for all three (3) Zoning Districts; revise the provisions for second units and manufactured homes; and include reformatting the text to make it easier to read, understand, and administer. SECTION THREE This amendment to Chapter 2 of the Ukiah City Code is necessary to ensure that the text of Articles 3, 4, and 5 are consistent with the Ukiah General Plan, and to create a more orderly and readable set of residential zoning regulations. SECTION FOUR This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ukiah. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SECTION FIVE This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after adoption. Introduced by title only on March 18, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Passed and adopted on AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: , by the following roll call vote: Sheridan Malone, Mayor ATTEST: Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CHAPTER 2 ZONING ARTICLE 3. REGULATIONS IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-l) DISTRICTS SECTION' 9015: 9016: 9017: 9018: 9019: 9020: 9021: 9022: Purpose and Intent Allowed Uses Permitted Uses Building Height Limits Required Site Area Required Yard Setbacks Required Parking Determination of Appropriate Use 9015: PURPOSE AND INTENT: The purpose of the regulations in the Single-Family Residential (R-l) district is to preserve, enhance, and protect the Iow density residential neighborhoods in the community. The R-1 zone is intended for residential areas characterized predominantly by single family use, and with typical Single-Family residential subdivision lots ranging in size from 6,000 to 10,000 square feet in size. This zone is consistent with the LDR (Low Density Residential) Land Use Designation of the City General Plan. 9016: ALLOWED USES: The following uses are allowed in Single Family Residential (R-l) Districts: A. Single-family residential dwellings. B. Accessory buildings. C. Accessory uses normally incidental to single-family residences. D. Community Care Facility, which provides service for six (6) or fewer persons, with the residents and operators of the facility being considered a family. E. Small Family Child Day Care Home, which provides care for eight or fewer children, including children under the age of ten years who reside at the home. F. Home Occupations (as defined in Section 9301). ORDINANCE NO. Page 1 of 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1-4 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 G. Manufactured homes certified under the National Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. section 5401, et seq.) are allowed on individual residential parcels subject the following regulations: 1. Foundation System: The manufactured home shall be attached to a permanent foundation system approved by the City Building Official and designed and constructed pursuant to section 18551 of the State Health and Safety Code. 2. Utilities: All utilities to the manufactured home shall be installed pursuant to City standard practices and policies. 3. Permits: All applicable building, site development, and encroachment permits associated with development of residential property shall be secured prior to any on-site construction. H. Fences: 1. Fences shall be limited to a maximum height of six feet (6'). Fences exceeding six feet (6') in height may be erected subject to the securing of a Use Permit. 2. No fence shall be constructed and no hedge or other screen planting shall be grown or permitted to grow, to a height exceeding three feet (3') within ten feet (10') from any property line abutting a street. 9017: PERMITTED USES: The following uses may be permitted with the securing of a Use Permit: A. Accredited Public or private schools. B. Churches, chapels, and other places of religious assembly and instruction. C. Public buildings and places of temporary public assembly. D. Parks, community gardens, and playgrounds. E. Community Care Facility for more than six (6) persons, but not more than 12 persons. F. Large Family Child Day Care Home for a minimum of 7 to 14 children inclusive, including children under the age of ten (10) years who reside at the home. ORDINANCE NO. Page 2 of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 G. L. U. Bed and Breakfast establishments. Condominiums. Outdoor Sales Establishments. Temporary uses meeting the purpose and intent of the R-1 zoning district. The temporary use shall be for a maximum period of six (6) months, and shall be subject to permit renewal/time extension at the discretion of the Planning Director. O. Second Dwelling Units subject to the following criteria: A. One of the units on the parcel must be occupied by the property owner. 1. The requirements of this subdivision are applicable to all existing second units as well as those proposed after the effective date of this ordinance, except for legal non-conforming units, or as is otherwise specifically provided herein. Existing units must have an approved use permit to be considered as a legal use. Existing second dwelling units as of the date of this ordinance inconsistent with the provisions listed herein, shall be considered legal non- conforming, provided that they were legal at the time of their creation. Existing second dwelling units created without the benefit of a Use Permit when one was required may be legalized with the approval of a Use Permit if they comply with the development standards for such units in effect at the time of their creation. 2. These regulations do not allow the division of property upon which a second unit is located unless all requirements of the R-1 zoning district are met. 3. The second unit may be used for rental purposes. 4. Second units may be attached to existing single family residences or detached as separate structures. Regardless, all proposed second units shall be architecturally compatible, and have design continuity with existing homes in the neighborhood. 5. The minimum lot size upon which a second unit may be placed is six thousand (6,000) square feet for an intedor lot, and 7,000 square feet for a corner lot. 6. The maximum size of a second unit is six hundred forty (640) square feet. ORDINANCE NO. Page 3 of 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7. Parking requirements for the second unit shall be one off-street independently accessible parking space, in addition to the two independently accessible parking spaces required for the existing single family residence. If the primary residence was legally constructed at a time when on-site parking was not required, then only the parking space for the second dwelling unit shall be required. 8. The second unit must meet all applicable building and fire codes, and shall have electric, water and sewer service provided through the City with the type of meter arrangement at the property owner's option. 9. Attached second units shall ordinarily be limited to a maximum height of thirty feet (30') or the height of the primary residence, whichever is less, unless it is determined in the discretionary review process that a higher structure would not adversely impact the public health, safety, and general welfare. Detached second units shall be limited to a maximum height of twenty feet (20') or the height of the primary residence, whichever is less. Second units above garages are limited to a maximum height of thirty feet (30'). 10. The following yard setback requirements shall apply to all second dwelling units: Front Yard: the same as the existing single family residence. In no case shall the second unit be closer than five feet (5') from the front property line. Side Yard: five feet (5') Rear Yard: fifteen feet (15'), except if the property has frontage on an alley, in which case the rear yard setback shall be five feet (5') from the outside boundary of the alley or fifteen feet (15') from the centerline. 11. The proposed second unit shall have a separate entrance, which, in the event of an attached unit, shall not be located along the front of the existing single family residence unless it is not obviously visible from the street in front of the residence. 9018: BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS: The following shall be the maximum limits for height of buildings in Single-Family Residential (R-l) Districts: ORDINANCE NO. Page 4 of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A. For single family dwellings and attached second dwelling units, a maximum height of thirty feet (30'). B. For accessory buildings a maximum height of twenty feet (20') or the maximum height of the main building whichever is less. C. The height limits for both dwelling units and accessory structures may be exceeded with the securing of a Use Permit. The height limit for second dwelling units may be exceeded through the second unit Use Permit process, provided a finding is made that the higher structure : would not adversely impact the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. 9019: REQUIRED SITE AREA' A. Interior Lots' The required site area on interior lots in the R-1 zoning district is six thousand (6,000) net square feet, and the required lot width is sixty feet (60'). B. Corner Lots: The required site area for corner lots in the R-1 zoning district is seven thousand (7,000) net square feet, and the required lot width is seventy feet (70'). C. Existing Development/Density: In existing development/density, there is no minimum site area. D. Non-Conforming Lots: Development may occur on existing, non-conforming R-1 lots; a Site Development Permit is required for existing lots four thousand five hundred (4,500) square feet and greater and a use permit is required on existing lots of less than four thousand five hundred (4,500) square feet. Minimum width in either case is forty feet (40'). 9020: YARDS REQUIRED: The purpose of establishing yard areas in the R-1 zoning district is to ensure open spaces, and a Iow density appearance to single family residential neighborhoods. In single-Family Residential (R-l) Districts, yards shall be required in the following minimum widths: A. Front Yards: 1. On interior lots the front setback line shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') measured from the street right-of-way line fronting such lot, except in cases where fifty percent ORDINANCE NO. Page 5 of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (50%) of one side of the block is already built out, the median setback shall apply. Garages and carports shall be setback twenty five feet (25'). B. Side Yards: 1. The side yard setback for a one-story structure is five feet (5'). The side yard setback for a two-story structure is ten feet (10'). The side yard setback for a three-story structure is twenty feet (20'). 2. Detached accessory structures less than eight (8') feet in height and 120 square feet in area may be located three feet (3') from the side property line, provided no eaves or other architectural features extend into the required three foot (3') yard setback area. All other detached accessory structures shall comply with the rear yard setback requirements for primary structures. C. Rear Yards: 1. The rear yard setback for a single-story structure located on a lot with a depth of 100 feet or more is fifteen feet (15'). The rear yard setback for two-story and three-story structures located on lots with a depth of 100 feet or more is twenty feet (20'). 2. For lots with less than 100 feet in depth, the rear yard setback may be reduced to 15% of the average lot depth, but in no case shall the rear yard setback be less than 15 feet (15') for a two-story structure, and twenty feet (20') for a three-story structure. 3. Detached accessory structures less than eight (8') feet in height and 120 square feet in area may be located two feet (2') from the rear property line, provided no eaves or other architectural features extend into the required two foot (2') yard setback area. All other detached accessory structures shall comply with the rear yard setback requirements for primary structures. D. Corner Lots: 1. Front Yard: On corner lots, there shall be a front yard setback of twenty (20') and a side street yard of ten feet (10'). The front yard shall be determined by the location of the front door and main entrance to the building. ORDINANCE NO. Page 6 of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2. Interior Side Yard: There shall be an interior side yard setback of five feet (5') for single-story buildings; ten feet (10') for two-story buildings; and twenty feet (20') for three-story buildings. 3. Rear Yard: For lots with less than 100 feet in depth, the rear yard setback may be reduced to 15% of the average lot depth, but in no case shall the rear yard setback be less than 15 feet (15') for a two-story structure, and twenty feet (20') for a three-story structure. E. Yard Setbacks for Unique Circumstances: 1. Architectural Features: Cornices, eaves, canopies, and other similar architectural features for residential structures and accessory structures exceeding 120 square feet in area may extend up to two feet (2') into any required yard. 2. Swimming pools shall not be located in front yards, and no closer than five feet (5') to any rear or side property line. 3. Open porches, landing places or outside stairways may extend into the required front yard setback provided a minimum of fifteen feet (15') is maintained between the stairway/landing place and the front property line. Open porches, landing places or outside stairways may extend up to two feet (2') into any required side yard, and six feet (6') into any required rear yard. Such porches, landing places, and outside stairways may be roofed, but shall not be enclosed with solid siding, glass, or screening materials, or otherwise made a part of the habitable portion of the structure. 9021: REQUIRED PARKING: A. The minimum parking area required in Single-Family Residential Districts is two (2) on-site independently accessible spaces for each dwelling unit. Second dwelling units require one (1) additional on-site independently accessible parking space. The parking requirements for all other allowed or permitted uses shall be subject to the provisions of Section 9198. B. Each required on-site parking space or garage space for single family residential uses shall be a minimum of nine feet (9') in width and nineteen feet (19') in depth. ORDINANCE NO. Page 7 of 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 C. Each required on-site parking space or garage space for single family residential uses shall open directly onto a driveway or aisle and be designed to provide safe and efficient ingress and egress for vehicles accessing such parking space. The maximum width for such driveways shall be twelve feet (12') feet for single-wide driveways, and twenty feet (20') feet for double-wide driveways and access lanes to parcels with no street frontage. D. All driveways on corner lots shall be located a minimum distance of twenty (20') feet from the curb return. 9022: DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE USE BY PLANNING DIRECTOR: A. VVhenever a use is not listed in this Article as a use permitted by right or a use subject to a Use Permit in the R-1 Zoning District, the Planning Director shall determine whether the use is appropriate for the zoning district, either as a right or subject to a Use Permit. In making this determination, the Planning Director shall find as follows: 1. That the use would not be incompatible with other existing or allowed uses in the R-1 Zoning District; 2. That the use would not be detrimental to the continuing residential development of the area in which the use would be located; and 3. That the use would be in harmony and consistent with the purpose of the R-1 Zoning District. 4. In the case of determining that a use not articulated as an allowed or permitted use could be established with the securing of a Use Permit, the Planning Director shall find that the proposed use is similar in nature and intensity to the uses listed as permitted uses. ORDINANCE NO. Page 8 of 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CHAPTER 2 ZONING ARTICLE 4. REGULATIONS IN MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-2) DISTRICTS SECTION' 9030: 9031: 9032: 9033: 9034: 9035: 9036: 9037: 9038: 9030: Purpose and Intent Allowed Uses Permitted Uses Building Height Limits Required Site Area Required Yard Setbacks Required Parking Additional Requirements Determination of Appropriate Use PURPOSE AND INTENT: The Medium Density Residential zoning district is intended to provide land area and opportunities for a range of densities and a variety of housing types, including townhomes, multiple family residential development, and duplexes. The maximum density is one to fourteen dwelling units per gross acre of land. The R-2 District is also intended to provide for a compatible mix of medium density residential, educational, religious, quasi-medical, and small professional office land uses. The "R-2" Zoning District is consistent with the MDR (Medium Density Residential) General Plan Land Use Designation. 9031: ALLOWED USES: The following uses are allowed in Medium Density Residential (R-2) Districts: A. Single-family dwellings, duplexes, condominiums, apartment houses, and rooming or boarding houses. Bo C, D. Accessory buildings and accessory uses. Community Care Facility (Maximum Clients- 6). Small Family Child Day Care Home (Maximum Clients - 6). Home Occupations (as defined in Section 9301). ORDINANCE NO. Page 9 of 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 F. Manufactured Homes certified under the National Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. section 5401, et seq.) are allowed on individual residential parcels subject to the following regulations: 1. Foundation System: The manufactured home shall be attached to a permanent foundation system approved by the City Building Official and designed and constructed pursuant to section 18551 of the State Health and Safety Code. 2. Utilities: All utilities to the manufactured home shall be installed pursuant to City standard practices and policies. 3. Permits: All applicable building, site development, and encroachment permits associated with development of residential property shall be secured prior to any on-site construction. 9032: PERMITTED USES: The following uses may be permitted in Medium Density Residential (R-2) Zoning Districts subject to first securing a Use Permit: A. Single-family dwelling on a three thousand (3000) square feet lot (one side zero lot line and one side five feet (5') setback provided that "0" lot lines are contiguous). B. Dwelling groups. C. Social halls, lodges, public buildings, and places of temporary public assembly. D. Churches, chapels, and other places of religious assembly. E. Parks, community gardens, and playgrounds. F. Rest homes, convalescent services, and other residential medical facilities. G. Accredited public or private schools. H. Professional office converted from a single family residence. I. Bed and breakfast establishments. J. Community care facility for more than six (6) persons, but not more than 12 persons. K. Large family child day care home for a minimum of 7 to 14 children inclusive, including children under the age of ten (10) years who reside at the home. ORDINANCE NO. Pagel0of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 L. Temporary uses meeting the purpose and intent of the R-2 Zoning District. The temporary use shall be for a maximum period of six (6) months, and shall be subject to permit renewal/time extension at the discretion of the Planning Director. M. Outdoor sales establishment. 9033: BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS' The following shall be the maximum limits for height of buildings in Medium Density Residential (R-2) Districts: A. For main buildings a maximum height of thirty feet (30'). B. For accessory buildings, a maximum height of twenty feet (20') or the maximum height of the main building, whichever is less. C. The height limits for main buildings and accessory structures may be exceeded with the securing of a Use Permit. 9034: REQUIRED SITE AREA: In Medium Density Residential (R-2) Districts the required building site area shall be as follows: A. For each building or group of buildings a minimum of six thousand (6,000) square feet in area and a minimum width of sixty feet (60') on interior lots; a minimum of seven thousand (7,000) square feet in net area and a minimum width of seventy feet (70') on corner lots. B. For each family unit intended to occupy any building or group of buildings on such building site area, a minimum of three thousand (3,000) square feet of net area. C. A two (2) parcel land division is allowed for a duplex structure provided both parcels meet site area requirements. D. In existing density cases, there is no minimum site area. 9035: YARDS REQUIRED: In Medium Density Residential (R-2) Districts, yards shall be required in the following minimum widths: A. Front Yard Setback: 1. Single Story Buildings: a. On interior lots the front setback line shall be a minimum of fifteen feet (15') ORDINANCE NO. Page11of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 measured from the street right-of-way line fronting such lot, except in cases where fifty percent (50%) of the same side of the block is already built out, the median setback shall apply. Garages and carports shall be setback twenty feet (20'). b. On corner lots, there shall be a front setback line on each street side of a corner lot. The front setback line for single story buildings shall be a minimum of fifteen feet (15') measured from the street right-of-way line adjacent to such lot. 2. The front yard setback requirement for two-story buildings and second-story additions to single story buildings is fifteen feet (15'). The front yard setback requirement for three-story building and third-story additions to buildings is twenty feet (20'). B. Side Yards: The required side yard setback shall be ten feet (10'), except as provided in Section 9032 (D). C. Rear Yards: The required rear yard setback shall be fifteen feet (15'). D. Special Yards and Distances Between Buildings: Minimum widths shall be as follows: 1. The distance between any buildings in any dwelling group shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') for single-story structures and fifteen feet (15') if one or more of the structures is taller than a single-story. 2. Any side yard providing vehicular access to single-row dwelling groups shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20') for one-way access and twenty-five feet (25') for duel access. 3. Any Inner court providing vehicular access to double-row dwelling groups shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20'), and a minimum width of twenty-four feet (24') if bordered by parking stalls. 9036: PARKING REQUIRED: The minimum parking required in Medium Density Residential (R-2) Districts shall be as follows: A. Single-Family Dwellings: Two (2) on-site independently accessible parking spaces for each dwelling unit. ORDINANCE NO. Page12of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 B. Duplexes: Two (2) on-site independently accessible parking spaces per unit. C. Multiple-Family Dwellings and Condominiums: One (1) on-site independently accessible parking space for one (1) bedroom units; two (2) on-site independently accessible parking spaces for two (2) or more bedrooms per unit. D. All other allowed or permitted uses shall be subject to the parking requirements contained in Section 9198. E. Each required off-street parking space or garage space for Multiple Family residential uses shall be a minimum of nine feet (9') in width and nineteen feet (19') in depth. Thirty percent (30%) of the parking stalls in a parking lot with ten (10) or more stalls shall be compact sized (eight feet (8') in width and sixteen feet (16') in length). F. Each required off-street parking space or garage space for multiple family residential uses shall open directly onto a driveway or aisle and be designed to provide safe and efficient ingress and egress for vehicles accessing such parking space. The maximum width for such driveways shall be twelve feet (12') feet for single-wide driveways, and twenty feet (20') for double-wide driveways and access lanes to parcels with no street frontage. G. All driveways on corner lots shall be located a minimum distance of twenty feet (20') feet from the curb return. H. Relief from the parking requirements in the R-2 Zoning District may be approved through the discretionary review process, provided a finding is made that a reduced number of spaces would not adversely impact the health, safety, or general welfare of the public. 9037: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS: A Site Development Permit is required for development of more than a single duplex. B. All development projects in the R-2 Zoning District requiring discretionary review shall include a proposed Landscaping Plan commensurate with the size and scale of the proposed development project. Landscaping Plans shall be submitted as a required component of all Site Development and Use Permits at the time of application filing. A. ORDINANCE NO. Page13of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1. All proposed Landscaping Plans shall comply with the following standards: A. Landscaping shall be proportional to the building elevations. B. Landscape plantings shall be those which grow well in Ukiah's climate without extensive irrigation. Native species are strongly encouraged. C. All landscape plantings shall be of sufficient size, health and intensity so that a viable and mature appearance can be attained in a reasonably short amount of time. D. Deciduous trees shall constitute the majority of the trees proposed along the south and west building exposures; non-deciduous street species shall be restricted to areas that do not inhibit solar access. E. Parking lots with sixteen (16) or more parking stalls shall have a tree placed between every four (4) parking stalls within a continuous linear planting strip, rather than individual planting wells, unless clearly infeasible. Parking lot trees shall primarily be deciduous species, and shall be designed to provide a tree canopy coverage of 50% at maturity of all paved areas. Based upon the design of the parking lot, a reduced number of trees may be approved through the discretionary review process. F. Parking lots shall have a perimeter planting strip with both trees and shrubs. G. Parking lots with sixteen (16) or more parking stalls shall have defined pedestrian sidewalks or marked pedestrian facilities within landscaped areas and/or separated from automobile travel lanes. Based upon the design of the parking lot, and the use that it is serving, relief from this requirement may be approved through the discretionary review process. H. Street trees may be placed on the property proposed for development instead of within the public right-of-way if the location is approved by the City Engineer, based upon safety and maintenance factors. I. All new developments shall include a landscaping coverage of 20 percent of the gross area of the parcel, unless based upon the small size of a parcel, it would be ORDINANCE NO. Page14of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 unreasonable and illogical. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the landscaped area shall be dedicated to live plantings. J. Landscaping Plans shall include an automatic irrigation system, and Lighting Plan. K. All required landscaping for residential development projects shall be adequately maintained. L. The Planning Director, Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission, or City Council shall have the authority to modify the required elements of a Landscaping Plan depending upon the size, scale, intensity, and location of the development project. 9038: DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE USE BY PLANNING DIRECTOR: VVhenever a use is not listed in this Article as a use permitted by right or a use subject to a Use Permit in the R-2 Zoning District, the Planning Director shall determine whether the use is appropriate for the zoning district, either as of right or subject to a Use Permit. In making this determination, the Planning Director shall find as follows: ^. That the use would not be incompatible with other existing or allowed uses in the R-2 Zoning District: B. That the use would not be detrimental to the continuing residential development of the area in which the use would be located; and C. That the use would be in harmony and consistent with the purpose of the R-2 Zoning District. D. In the case of determining that a use not articulated as an allowed or permitted use could be established with the securing of a Use Permit, the Planning Director shall find that the proposed use is similar in nature and intensity to the uses listed as allowed uses. ORDINANCE NO. Page15of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CHAPTER 2 ZONING ARTICLE $. REGULATIONS IN HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-3) DISTRICTS SECTION: 9045: 9046: 9047: 9048: 9049: 9050: 9051: 9052: 9053: 9045: Purpose and Intent: Allowed Uses Permitted Uses Building Height Limits Required Site Area Required Yard Setbacks Required Parking Additional Requirements Determination of Appropriate Use PURPOSE AND INTENT: The purpose of the "R-3" Zoning District is to implement the General Plan policies for high density residential areas as a transition zone between Iow and medium density residential and commercial land uses with the emphasis upon residential uses. It is intended to provide opportunities for a mix of multiple family residential development and Iow intensities commercial land uses. The R-3 Zoning District is consistent with the HDR (High Density Residential) General Plan Land Use Designation. 9046: ALLOWED USES: The following uses are allowed in High Density Residential (R-3) Districts: A. Single-family dwellings, duplexes, condominiums, apartment houses, and rooming or boarding houses. B. Accessory buildings and accessory uses. This shall not be construed as permitting any business use or occupation other than those specifically listed herein. C. Community Care Facility, which provides service for six (6) or fewer persons, with the residents and operators of the facility being considered a family. D. Small Family Child Day Care Home, which provides care for eight or fewer children, including children under the age of ten years who reside at the home. ORDINANCE NO. Page16of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 E. Home Occupations (as defined in Section 9301). F. Manufactured Homes certified under the National Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. section 5401, et seq.) are allowed on individual residential parcels subject the following regulations: 1. Foundation System: The manufactured home shall be attached to a permanent foundation system approved by the City Building Official and designed and constructed pursuant to section 18551 of the State Health and Safety Code. 2. Utilities: All utilities to the manufactured home shall be installed pursuant to City standard practices and policies. 3. Permits: All applicable building, site development, and encroachment permits associated with development of residential property shall be secured prior to any on-site construction. G. Public or private parking lots for automobiles, when the property is adjacent to any C-N, C-1, or C-2 district, or if required to accompany any new land use. 9047: PERMITTED USES: The following uses may be permitted in High Density Residential (R-3) Districts subject to first securing a Use Permit: A. Dwelling groups. B. Mobile home parks. C. Professional offices. D. Rest homes, hospitals, pharmacies, and community care facilities serving more than six (6) persons, but not more than twelve (12) persons. Eo F. G. H. Hotels, motels, and Bed & Breakfast establishments. Florist. "Mom and Pop" convenience grocery stores, delicatessens, bakeries, and coffee shops. Nursery schools and large family child day care homes for a minimum of seven (7) to ORDINANCE NO. Page17of 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 fourteen (14) children inclusive, including children under the age of ten (10) years who reside at the home. I. Barber shops, beauty shops. J. Coin operated laundromat K. Video rentals/sales L. Parks, community gardens, and playgrounds. M. churches, chapels, and other places of religious assembly. N. Public buildings 9048: BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS: The following shall be the maximum limits for height of buildings in High Density Residential (R-3) Districts: A. For main buildings a maximum height of forty feet (40'), unless abutting an R-1 or R-2 lot in which case a maximum height of thirty feet (30'). B. For accessory buildings, a maximum height of thirty feet (30') or the maximum height of the main building whichever is less. 9049: REQUIRED SITE AREA: In High Density Residential (R-S) Districts the building site area shall be as follows: A. For each building or group of buildings a minimum of six thousand (6,000) square feet in area and a minimum width of sixty feet (60') on interior lots; a minimum of seven thousand (7,000) square feet in a area and a minimum width of seventy feet (70') on corner lots. B. For each family unit intended to occupy any building or group of buildings on such building site area there shall be at least one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet of site area. C. 9050: For each mobile home park a minimum of two (2) acres. YARDS REQUIRED: In High Density Residential (R-3) Districts, yards shall be required in the following minimum widths: ORDINANCE NO. Page18of 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A. Front Yard Setback: 1. Single Story Buildings: a. On interior lots the front setback line shall be a minimum of fifteen feet (15') measured from the street right-of-way line fronting such lot, except in cases where fifty percent (50%) of the same side of the block is already built out, the median setback shall apply. Garages and carports shall be setback twenty feet (20'). b. On corner lots, there shall be a front setback line on each street side of a corner lot. The front setback line for single story buildings shall be a minimum of fifteen feet (15') measured from the street right-of-way line adjacent to such lot. 2. The front yard setback requirement for two-story buildings and second-story additions to single story buildings is fifteen feet (15'). The front yard setback requirement for three-story building and third-story additions to buildings is twenty feet (20'). B. Side Yards: The required side yard setback shall be five feet (5'), except as provided in Section 9032 (E). C. Rear Yards: The required rear yard setback shall be ten feet (10'). D. Special Yards and Distances Between Buildings: Minimum widths shall be as follows: 1. The distance between any buildings in any dwelling group shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') for single-story structures and fifteen feet (15') if one or more of the structures is taller than a single-story. 2. Any side yard providing vehicular access to single-row dwelling group shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20') for one-way access and twenty-five feet (25') for duel access. 3. Any Inner court providing vehicular access to double-row dwelling group shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20'), and a minimum width of twenty-four feet (24') if bordered by parking stalls. ORDINANCE NO. Page19of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 9051: PARKING REQUIRED: The minimum parking required in High Density Residential (R-3) Districts shall as follows: A. Single-Family Dwellings: Two (2) on-site independently accessible parking spaces for each dwelling unit. B. Duplexes: Two (2) on-site independently accessible parking spaces per unit. C. Multiple-Family Dwellings and Condominiums: One (1) on-site independently accessible parking space for one (1) bedroom units; two (2) on-site independently accessible parking spaces for two (2) or more bedrooms per unit. D. All other allowed or permitted uses shall be subject to the parking requirements contained in Section 9198. E. Each required off-street parking space or garage space for multiple family residential uses shall be a minimum of nine feet (9') in width and nineteen feet (19') in depth. Thirty percent (30%) of the parking stalls in a parking lot with ten (10) or more stalls shall be compact sized (eight feet (8') in width and sixteen feet (16') in length). F. Each required off-street parking space or garage space for multiple family residential uses shall open directly onto a driveway or aisle and be designed to provide safe and efficient ingress and egress for vehicles accessing such parking space. The maximum width for such driveways shall be twelve feet (12') for single-wide driveways, and twenty feet (20') for double- wide driveways and access lanes to parcels with no street frontage. G. All driveways on corner lots shall be located a minimum distance of 20 feet from the curb return. H. Relief from the parking requirements in the R-3 Zoning District may be approved through the discretionary review process, provided a finding is made that a reduced number of spaces would not adversely impact the heath, safety, and general welfare of the public. 9052: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS: A. All new construction, exterior modifications to existing buildings or on-site work shall ORDINANCE NO. Page20of 22 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 require a site development permit pursuant to Section 9208. C. All development projects in the R-3 Zoning District requiring discretionary review shall include a proposed Landscaping Plan commensurate with the size and scale of the proposed development project. Landscaping Plans shall be submitted as a required component of all Site Development and Use Permits at the time of application filing. 1. All proposed Landscaping Plans shall comply with the following standards: A. Landscaping shall be proportional to the building elevations. B. Landscape plantings shall be those which grow well in Ukiah's climate without extensive irrigation. Native species are strongly encouraged. C. All landscape plantings shall be of sufficient size, health and intensity so that a viable and mature appearance can be attained in a reasonably short amount of time. D. Deciduous trees shall constitute the majority of the trees proposed along the south and west building exposures; non-deciduous street species shall be restricted to areas that do not inhibit solar access. E. Parking lots with sixteen (16) or more parking stalls shall have a tree placed between every four (4) parking stalls within a continuous linear planting strip, rather than individual planting wells, unless clearly infeasible. Parking lot trees shall primarily be deciduous species, and shall be designed to provide a tree canopy coverage of 50% at maturity of all paved areas. Based upon the design of the parking lot, a reduced number of trees may be approved through the discretionary review process. F. Parking lots shall have a perimeter planting strip with both trees and shrubs. G. Parking lots with sixteen (16) or more parking stalls shall have defined pedestrian sidewalks or marked pedestrian facilities within landscaped areas and/or separated from automobile travel lanes. Based upon the design of the parking lot, and the use that it is serving, relief from this requirement may be approved through the discretionary review process. ORDINANCE NO. Page21of 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 H. Street trees may be placed on the property proposed for development instead of within the public right-of-way if the location is approved by the City Engineer, based upon safety and maintenance factors. I. All new developments shall include a landscaping coverage of 20 percent of the gross area of the parcel, unless based upon the small size of a parcel, it would be unreasonable and illogical. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the landscaped area shall be dedicated to live plantings. J. Landscaping Plans shall include an automatic irrigation system, and Lighting Plan. K. All required landscaping for commercial development projects shall be adequately maintained. L. The Planning Director, Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission, or City Council shall have the authority to modify the required elements of a Landscaping Plan depending upon the size, scale, intensity, and location of the development project. 9053: DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE USE BY PLANNING DIRECTOR: VVhenever a use is not listed in this Article as a use permitted as of right or a use subject to a Use Permit in the R-3 Zoning District, the Planning Director shall determine whether the use is appropriate for the zoning district, either as of right or subject to a Use Permit. In making this determination, the Planning Director shall find as follows: A. That the use would not be incompatible with other existing or allowed uses in the R-3 Zoning District: B. That the use would not be detrimental to the continuing residential development of the area in which the use would be located; and C. That the use would be in harmony and consistent with the purpose of the R-3 Zoning District. ORDINANCE NO. Page22of 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 D. In the case of determining that a use not articulated as an allowed or permitted use could be established with the securing of a Use Permit, the Planning Director shall find that the proposed use is similar in nature and intensity to the uses listed as allowed uses. ORDINANCE NO. Page23of 22 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: DATE: 7C. 01-14-98 DATE: January 14, 1998 TO: City' of Ukiah Planning Commission FROM: City of Ukiah Planning Department SUBJECT: Zoning Code Text Revisions- Residential Zoning Districts PROJECT SUMMARY: This proposed Zoning Code revision project would update the regulations for the City of Ukiah Residential Zoning Districts. The purpose of revising these regulations is to bring the provisions into conformance with the Ukiah General Plan, and to create a more orderly and readable set of residential zoning regulations. This project is quasi-legislative in nature and does not require City Planning Commissioners to visit the site prior to formulating a recommendation to the City Council. PROJECT LOCATION: N/A DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council APPROVAL of the proposed Zoning Code text revisions. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: The City of Ukiah has determined that the proposed revisions to the text of the Residential Zoning Districts does not constitute a project under the provisions of CEQA, pursuant to Section 15378, because they would not directly or indirectly result in a physical change in the environment. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS: N/A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed Zoning Code revision project includes reformatting the text to make it easier to read, understand, and administer; amending the allowed and permitted land uses within the "R-I" (Single Family Residential), "R-2" (Medium Density Residential), and "R-3" (High Density Residential) Zoning Districts; revising the provisions for mobile homes/manufactured homes; updating the development standards for all three (3) Zoning Districts; and revising the standards for second dwelling units. STAFF ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION: The proposed revisions are the result of direction provided in the General Plan, as well as the comments and suggestions of the Planning Commission dudng the series of workshops last fail. Additionally, staff is proposing changes to assure compliance with State law, and to improve the practical application of the residential zoning regulations. A copy of the proposed revisions are attached for review. Deletions are illustrated by a stcikeeut, while new language is illustrated by ~i~!~g. Z-I The following discussion summarizes the proposed revisions to the Residential Zoning District regulations. 1. Reformatting Reformatting portions of the text is a key to making the regulations easier to read, understand, and administer. It is proposed that a Purpose and Intent section be added to all three (3) Residential Zoning Districts to clearly state the objective of each district. Additionally, the titles of some sections have been simplified, and their order has been rearranged to provide a logical sequence of the individual regulations. Staff is also proposing to change the name of the R-2 Zoning District from "Multiple Family" to "Medium Density Residential," and the R-3 District from "General Multiple" to "High Density Residential" to be consistent with the language used in the General Plan. It is also proposed that provisions found elsewhere in the Zoning Code be included in each Residential Zoning District. This will eliminate the task of referring to other Zoning Code Articles for information that is applicable to the Residential Districts. For example, the basic parking requirements for the pdmary allowed uses within each Residential Zoning District are included in the District provisions, rather than in a separate Article. In the "R-I" (Single Family Residential) District, the Second Unit regulations have been relocated from the end of the Chapter to the Section listing the "Permitted Uses," because they are a permitted use in the "R-I" District. 2. Allowed and Permitted Land Uses The allowed and permitted land uses in each Residential Zoning District have been changed in response to the guidance provided by the Planning Commission during the workshops, and as a result of the direction established in the General Plan. The main changes to the allowed and permitted land uses within the districts are as follows: R-l: Bed and breakfast establishments, community gardens, and places of temporary public assembly have been added as permitted uses. Crop and tree farming, and greens have been deleted from the list of permitted uses, because they are antiquated land uses in the R-1 District. Fences have been added as an allowed use, and the specific fencing requirements have been relocated to this Section for continuity. R-2: Condominiums, child day care homes, and community care facilities have been added as allowed uses, and bed and breakfast establishments, churches, community gardens, large child day care homes, and professional offices converted from single family residences have been added as permitted uses. R-3: Bed and breakfast establishments, delicatessens, bakeries, video rental stores, and other small commercial uses have been added as permitted land uses. o e Mobile Homes / Manufactured Homes Pursuant to State law, the existing regulations allow mobile/manufactured homes on individual parcels in all Residential Zoning Districts. The regulations also list specific requirements for foundation systems, utilities, permits, roofing and siding materials, and eaves. Current State law precludes the City from regulating the roofing and siding materials, and size of eave overhangs. Accordingly, it is proposed that these requirements be deleted. Development Standards Front Yard Setbacks: In all the Residential Zoning Districts, the front yard setback has been increased from ten feet (10') to twenty feet (20'). However, the existing provision for allowing a front yard setback consistent with the average setback of existing development on the block has been retained, except that the term "average" has been replaced with "median." Side Yard Setbacks: In the R-1 Zoning District, the side yard setback requirement of five feet (5') has been retained. However, it is proposed that a two-story structure maintain a ten foot (10') side yard setback, and a three-story structure maintain a twenty feet (20'). In the R-2 Zoning District, it is proposed that the side yard setback requirement be increased from five feet (5') to ten feet (10'), because of the more intense nature of a typical medium density type development. Rear Yard Setbacks: The only change to the rear yard setback requirements is for the R-2 and R-3 districts, where it is proposed that the distance increase from 10 feet (10') to fifteen feet (15'), because of the more intense nature of a typical high density type development. Setbacks for Accessory Structures: Another important proposed change in the yard setback provisions for Residential Zoning Districts is for accessory structures. In the R-1 Zoning District, it is proposed that detached accessory structures less than eight (8') feet in height and 120 square feet in area may be located two feet (2') from the side and/or rear property line, rather than the current requirement of five feet (5'). The change is proposed, because it is staff's opinion that there is no detriment associated with the placement of small garden sheds, storage structures, greenhouses, etc., two feet (2') from the property line. Moreover, we find no real difference in terms of impact to adjoining property owners, between placing a small accessory structure two feet (2') from the property line as opposed to the existing requirement of five feet (5'). Table 1: EXISTING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS , , ZONING Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Height Limit DISTRICT Setback Setback Setback 10 feet if 1-story 5 feet 15 feet 30 feet R-1 15 feet if 2-story 10 feet if 1-story R-2 5 feet 10 feet 30 feet 15 feet if 2-story 10 feet if 1-story 40 feet; 30 feet if R-3 5 feet 10 feet abutting an R-1 15 feet if 2-story or R-2 District Table 2: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ZONING Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Height Limit DISTRICT Setback Setback Setback 5 feet if 1-story R-1 20 feet 10 feet if 2-story 15 feet 30 feet 15 feet if 3-story 15 feet if 1-story R-2 10 feet 15 feet 30 feet 20 feet if 2-story 15 feet if 1-story 40 feet; 30 feet if R-3 5 feet 15 feet abutting an R-1 20 feet if 2-story or R-2 District 5. Second Dwelling Units Pursuant to the direction provided by the Planning Commission during the workshop discussions, staff reviewed the State Law pertaining to Second Units (attached). The proposed new regulations for second units are intended to balance the provisions of State law with the direction provided by the Planning Commission dudng the workshop sessions, and with the provisions of the General Plan Housing Element. Additionally, we've reviewed the second dwelling unit regulations of a number of other similar sized jurisdictions, and have incorporated a few standards that we feel will work for Ukiah. The proposed new regulations are not intended to discourage second dwelling units, but rather to provide opportunity for well-planned small units that will fit nicely in established single family 4 Gm Mobile Homes: The existing regulations preclude a mobile/manufactured home from being used as a second dwelling unit. It is recommended that this requirement be deleted because there may not be any legal authority to support it, and with the recommended regulations limiting the size of the unit, and requiring architectural compatibility with the surrounding built environment, it simply is not needed. Hi "Ineligible" Standard: The existing regulations state that any home constructed after the effective date of the ordinance is ineligible for the creation of a second unit. It is proposed that this standard be deleted because it is inconsistent with State law, and has no value or validity in terms of "protecting" existing single family neighborhoods from potential impacts resulting from second dwelling units. Staff believes that this antiquated regulation is irrelevant because the development standards/criteria for establishing second units assures compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood regardless of the age of the primary single family residence. CONCLUSIONS: It is proposed that the Zoning Code text for the three (3) Residential Zoning Districts be updated and revised according to the direction contained in the new General Plan, as well as the direction provided by the Planning Commission during a series of recent workshops. Moreover, the revisions reflect current State law, as well as staff's ideas for creating a more useable set of regulations. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Revisions to the Residential Zoning Districts. 2. State Law pertaining to Second Dwelling Units ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The following personnel prepared and reviewed this Planning Report, respe~c~Ii~ely: ,," · CJ~ ~ rle~¥' St u m p',"~;~r~~~ n ne r Bob Sa PI tor't~~ The minimum lot size upon which a second unit may be placed is six thousand The maximum size ........... it ~r n~i~l;*;~n * ..... ;~;ng ~ .... * .... ~r fhn .:..,:.. :,:,:,-,:.:.:.:.,,:.:..,:.:..,:.:...:,,..., ...., ,:.,. · :.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.: +:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: ............................ feet~; ' ~{~ square ::::::.:::.:.:+...:.:+,....,....,v... ...... :::: Parking requirements for the second unit shall be one off-street independently accessible parking spacei~ii~~i~;~[~i~ij~~~i~ii~~i~i~i~i~ ...................................................................................................................... The second unit must meet all applicable building and fire codes, and zon!ng o-.,~,.-,-~, ~,.~ .... ,~ ..... ; ..... , .... e.-.-,;,-,,,o aOOO ..,,~ aOO~ m~ .... it shall have VVIi~I~UVI~, ~i i~4 ~rlll~l,~l~l IV'~i411VliiViiNiV lkl~Vl VVV~IVl I~i,i~ v ~1~ lll~l l'~ll v ~1~ I · I I I~ electric, water and sewer service provided through the City with the type of meter arrangement at the property owner's option. RECOMMENDATION' Conduct a public hearing, discuss the proposed revisions, and formulate a recommendation to the City Council. was the young age of the arcade's clientele, and inquired if an hour and a half adjustment on the closing times would be acceptable. Mr. Dillard replied that was acceptable, and that they would not operate the arcade past the hour of 11:30 p.m. on Friday and Saturday nights and 10:30 p.m. during the week. Chairman Pruden stated she was supportive of those hours, since it was her preference that closing times be clearly defined. Conditional use permits that are not structured can create enormous problems, and hours of operation are standard conditions in most of these permits. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9:'12 p.m. Commissioner Chiles withdrew his motion, and Commissioner Correll withdrew his second. Commissioner Larson stated he was not supportive of any restrictive hours, since most of the problems would be with adjacent business owners during normal business hours, who generally close in the early evening. Restricting the hours does not address his concerns, and only places an imposition on the business owner. He also was not supportive of posting a code of conduct because it will have little meaning unless it can be enforced. The only thing he would support is some means by which this permit could be revoked if this operation becomes a public nuisance, and none of the restrictions discussed have addressed that issue in any way. Discussion followed regarding hours of operation, wherein it was determined the public curfew is for the purpose of keeping youth off of the City streets, not out of operating businesses. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner Chiles, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to approve Use Permit Application No. 97-43, as submitted by Barry and Christine Dillard, based on Finding Nos. 1-3 and Condition of Approval Nos. 1-'13, as defined and recommended in staff's written report. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, and Correll. Chairman Pruden. None. None. RECESS: 9:20 p.m. RECONVENE: 9:30 p.m. 7C. City Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Application No. 97-41(a), as filed by the City Planning Department, to update and revise the regulations for the City of Ukiah Residential Zoning Districts. The purpose of revising the text of the Residential Zoning Districts is to bring the provisions into conformance with the Ukiah General Plan, and to create a more orderly and readable set of residential zoning regulations. The project involves the updating and revisinq of the allowed and permitted land uses within the "R-'l" (Single Family Residential), "R-2" (Medium Density Residential), and "R-3" (High Density Residential) Zoning Districts. The proposed revisions also update the development standards for all three (3) Zoning Districts; MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page '12 January 14, 1998 revise the provisions for second units, mobile homes, and manufactured homes; and include reformatting the text to make it easier to read, understand, and administer. Senior Planner Stump advised there would be no verbal staff report since the revisions were formulated in response to the guidance provided by the Planning Commission during the previous workshops, and as a result of the direction established in the General Plan. Discussion followed concerning the Regulations in Single Family Residential (R-l) Districts. The Commission queried staff regarding the definition of bed and breakfast establishments, the elimination of Section K relative to renting sleeping quarters to more than two persons, and whether there was a way to regulate the number of persons that occupy or rent a residence at any one time. Mr. Stump replied that the definition of the various, terms will be formulated after such time as the zoning revisions are completed. However, the definition of bed and breakfast operations will most likely follow the standard, which is an establishment that has six or fewer bedrooms, no kitchen facilities in the rooms, and a common dining area. The section regarding sleeping quarters has been eliminated since it was an antiquated description of a boarding house, with the bed and breakfast definition being a more contemporary one. Individuals will still have the choice of renting to two individuals without going through a permitting process, with the option of a bed and breakfast as a permitted use. He further noted that there was no way to legally regulate the number of people that live in a residence or rental nor the number of cars they drive. Discussion followed relative to the desirability of allowing bed and breakfast establishments in an R-1 neighborhood, with the Commissioners expressing concern regarding traffic, parking, the potential loss of single family housing in residential neighborhoods, and alternatives occurring within the City that may or may not be in violation the zoning restrictions. Clarification followed wherein it was determined regulation is imposed on the type of activity, and that zoning basically reflects density, or the number of people congregating on a given square footage. Commissioner Chiles inquired regarding Page 3, H.2. Fences. Mr. Stump replied that Section is to preclude fences or hedges from' causing traffic hazards or conflicting with sight distances. Discussion followed regarding the Section, wherein it was noted the intent was to limit the height of fences or hedges near the front property lines or rights-of-way, and that the language could be modified to include "ten feet or the median setback of the neighborhood." Commissioner Larson suggested a sentence be added to Page 7, D1, Corner Lots, which would read: "In no case shall construction or the planting of a hedge be allowed to create a visibility hazard to traffic movement on adjacent streets" which is one of the primary purposes of setbacks and height limitations in general. He further suggested that on Page 3, H.3. Fences, the second sentence be deleted. Chairman Pruden suggested an "intent" sentence be added to the Section, i.e. "The intent of this MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 13 January 14, '1998 Section is to prevent safety issues with traffic." Commissioner Puser referenced Page 7, A.I., and voiced her concerns regarding the stated garage setback of 20 feet, which is the same as the minimum of 20 feet from the street right-of-way line and allows for a garage and house to be constructed flush, reflective of typical development such as is evidenced near the high school. She further referenced the City of Sacramento's Residential Design Element which illustrates various options for site building placement, submitted it to staff for informational purposes, and suggested these alternatives be taken into consideration with future residential development. Mr. Stump replied that staff is supportive of requiring that garages be set back further than residences, and this language could be modified to read: "Garages and carports shall be set back 25 feet." If an individual wished to pursue anything less than this, they would have the option of pursuing a variance. Discussion followed regarding buildout, subdivisions, and architectural features of neighborhoods. Commissioner Puser referenced Page 15, Regulations in Medium Density Residential (R-2) Districts, Section 9036, Parking Required, and suggested that the Planning Commission may reduce required parking spaces based on the provision that alternative transportation, including but not limited to transit stops and bike parking, are part of the project. Her rationale is that if an apartment complex is built on a main corridor where it is close to services or where mass transit is available, there should be an incentive to reduce the amount of parking if it is appropriate to that site. Staff replied that reduced parking is not an incentive for increased density, but that parking requirements could be reduced under special circumstances, such as senior citizen complexes and Iow income apartments. This would preferably be implemented on a case by case basis, with the result that parking areas could be used for other purposes, such as open areas or green spaces. Commissioner Puser clarified that "mom and pop" grocery stores were allowed in the C-N, R-2, and R-3 Districts. Chairman Pruden referenced Page 8, Section 9021.A. Required Parking, and clarified that "independently accessible" replaced tandem parking. Commissioner Correll referenced Page 7,B.2., Side Yards, and commented regarding detached accessory structures being located two feet from the side property line. He voiced his concern that this distance might be inadequate should the utilities or phone lines need to be accessed. Discussion followed relative to setback requirements and utility easements, wherein it was determined the distance of accessory structures from the side property line be increased to three feet. Commissioner Larson suggested numerous changes, which included: MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 14 January 14, 1998 Page 5, F.8. Determine a modified fee schedule for second units or combined meter situations; Page 12, B. Delete the second sentence as irrelevant as no list exists. Page 13, H. Delete in entirety, as parking lots are an impact and intrusion into residential districts. Page 13, N. Clarified "temporary" to mean block parties, church gatherings, among other. Page 13, I. Define "outdoor sales establishment." Page 15, A.1. Change "one side" to "same side" of the block, and throughout the revisions where applicable. Page 15, D.1 Incorporate language to allow for tiered stories on multiple-story buildings, and throughout the revisions where applicable. Page 19, D. Replace "fewer" with "more." Page 19, H. Replace "small" with "large." Page 22, B. Amend to read: "That the use would not be detrimental to the continuing residential development of the area in which the use would be located," and carry through the revisions where appropriate. Page 22, C. Replace "consonant" with "consistent." Page 22, D. Clarified to provide flexibility to staff to allow a use that may be appropriate but not be listed within the zoning code. Because of the lateness of the hour, it was the consensus of the Commission to postpone the discussion of second units until the regular meeting scheduled for February 11, 1998. , 8A. 8B. 8C. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS City Council and Redevelopment Agency Actions Future Planning Commission Agenda Items Status Reports Mr. Stump reported that the Planner's Institute would be held March 5-7, 1998 in Long Beach, CA and that funds had been budgeted for two Commissioners to attend. He suggested those interested in attending contact staff as soon as possible as pre-registration is required. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS Chairman Pruden reported that the latest issue of the Western Cities magazine included articles on skateboard parks. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m., shortly after which it was ascertained the necessary action had not been taken on Agenda Item 7C nor had a public hearing been held. RECONVENE: 11:05 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 11:06 p.m. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 15 January 14, 1998 downtown parking district is a distinct entity from the Downtown Master Plan area, and the parking standards for new development are a 1 to 350 standard. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9:39 p.m. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Correll, seconded by Commissioner Chiles, it was carried by the following roll call vote to recommend to the City Council APPROVAL of City Zoning Ordinance Text Application No. 97-41(b), filed by the City Planning Department to update and revise the regulations for the City of Ukiah Commercial Zoning Districts, as defined and recommended in staff's written report, with the exception of the changes as noted above. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. None. Commissioner Puser. 7C. Continuation of Discussion Regarding R-1 Development Standards Pertaining to Second Units Chairman Pruden opened the public hearing for the entire discussion of the item. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 9:4'! p.m. Senior Planner Stump explained the supplement containing language derived in a discussion between himself and City Attorney Rapport for Item O(1), which reads as follows: "This provision is applicable to all existing second units as well as those proposed after the effective date of this ordinance. Existing units must have an approved use permit to be considered as a legal use. EXisting secOnd'dwelling units as of the date of this ordinance inconsistent with the provisions listed herein, shall be considered legal non-conforming, provided that they were legal at the time of their creation. Existing second dwelling units created without the benefit of a Use Permit when one was required may be legalized With the approval of a Use Permit if they comply with the development standards for such units in effect at the time of their creation." Commissioner Larson referenced E.7. relative to parking requirements, and inquired if that meant his 100 year old house with no off-street parking would be ineligible for a second unit unless he added three parking spaces, two for the existing residence and the one for the second unit. In essence, is he required to adhere his primary residence to current standards. Mr. Stump replied that perhaps in this particular case, only one parking space would be required since the residence was built at a time when there were no automobiles and there were no standards for parking. Mr. Lohse clarified that should Commissioner Larson desire to put an addition on his house, MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 14 February 11, '1998 and before staff would sign off on that addition, it would be required that today's standards be applied and the two additional required parking spaces for off-street parking be installed. In this case, the parking requirements may be precluded because of the historic nature of the building. Mr. Stump stated it might be preferable to add language similar to that in the commercial districts, which states that through the discretionary review process, relief can be provided. He further stated he would clarify the language with City Attorney Rapport. Commissioner Larson referenced D.5. relative to minimum lot size for second units, suggested its deletion, and recommended decisions be made on a case-by-case basis. Chairman Pruden stated she was not in favor of the case-by-case basis, since that has been the process shaping standards in the past and there never has been an opportunity to look at the bigger picture. Discussion followed relative to lot size, wherein the Commission failed to reach a consensus regarding the deletion of the Item, but it was noted that decisions relative to lot size restrictions would naturally occur through the discretionary use permit process. Commissioner Chiles stated he felt Item O.A. relative to a property owner's residency in one of the units on the parcel should be reinstated, and not deleted as staff was recommending. Chairman Pruden concurred, stating that if this Item is deleted, it then opens things up for the creation of duplexes in the R-1 designation. Senior Planner Stump stated that in his survey of comparison with eight different rural communities, approximately half of them had the owner occupancy requirement in their zoning codes and half did not, and that after discussion with planners in other cities, he was not convinced there was any detriment if the owner did not reside on the premises. Discussion followed relative to the issue, wherein it was debated whether a property was better maintained if the owner lived on site, or if it was dependent more on the condition of the general neighborhood. Although the Commissioners exhibited concern relative to the lack of maintenance on several properties within the City, and suggested various ways to mandate or condition proper maintenance, it was noted that "proper" could be a subjective term, and consistent abatement was dependent on the staffing level. Staff further noted that it cannot be regulated that the property owner must live on-site in an R-1 neighborhood, and it is difficult to make a distinction between an owner occupied primary dwelling or an owner occupied secondary dwelling. Chairman Pruden referenced the Code, in which it states that some of the reasons for having a second unit were so that home owners may experience an increase in income, and for safety and security. She clarified that the text explicitly referred to home owner, not property owner. In spite of the difficulty with enforcement, it is one management tool which she feels is important to retain. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 15 February 11, 1998 Mr. Stump stated that if the Commission decided to recommend that the item relative to second unit owner occupancy be retained, they also advance to the City Council the idea of monitoring and enforcement. There must be a commitment, both politically and financially, to be able to follow through with compliance. Discussion followed wherein several circumstances were cited which could prove to be exceptions to the mandated occupancy, and cause hardship on property owners should they be forced to vacate their residences for some reason. Chairman Pruden stated she would not support a recommendation of approval to the City Council of the Second Unit Regulations unless Item O.A. was reinstated, and would also recommend they consider enforcement powers. Commissioner Larson stated that this issue speaks to the whole notion of second units. While it was the intent of State law to provide for the legalization of second, or "granny" units, or to provide the means for a second income on a homeowner's property, he was of two minds on how to make these discretionary decisions until there is a clearer vision that is reflective of the community's desires as to what the social issues are that are being addressed in this kind of ordinance. Commissioner Correll stated that in his opinion problems could be created if this item is deleted, because the reality is there are many people in this City who have nothing but a monetary interest in this kind of high density property. People do not look at this from an aesthetic or idealistic point of view, but only in terms of profit with the least expense. Discussion followed relative to Item J, recommended for deletion by staff, relative to the exclusion of mobile homes as second units, wherein it was noted that manufactured homes were acceptable. Chairman Pruden clarified and reviewed the desired changes discussed by the Commission. Regarding Item A, owner occupancy, it was the consensus that the Item be reinstated. Following discussion, there was further consensus to delete the word "existing" from the last sentence of Item 9, relative to second units above garages. Clarification was given by staff on several other items; however, no additional changes to staff's proposed revisions were recommended. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: '10:29 p.m. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Correll, it was carried by the following roll call vote to recommend to the City Council APPROVAL of the Residential Zoning District Text Revisions - Second Unit Regulations, filed by the City Planning Department, as defined and recommended in staff's written report, with the exception of the changes as noted above. AYES: NOES: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 16 February 11, '! 998 residential neighborhoods. Under the proposed regulations, a Use Permit would still be required to establish a second dwelling unit in the R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. The primary changes include the following: A. Maximum Size' Limiting the maximum size of second dwelling units to six hundred forty (640) square feet. The existing regulations limit the unit to six hundred sixty (660) square feet for a 6,000 square foot lot OR eleven percent (11%) of the lot size for larger parcels. This means that a 1,100 square foot second dwelling unit could be proposed on a 10,000 square foot lot. The purpose of the proposed six hundred forty (640) square foot maximum size standard is to preclude the possibility of a "second" single family residence on the property, and to assure a small non-impacting and affordable unit no matter what the size of the lot. Bo Maximum Height: The existing provisions do not include a specific height limit for second dwelling units. Staff is proposing to limit the height of an attached unit to the height of the existing pdmary residential structure or thirty feet (30'), whichever is less. Detached units would be limited to twenty feet (20) or the height of the primary residence, whichever is less. Second units above existing garages would be limited to a maximum height of thirty feet (30'). Gl Separate Entrance: VVhile the existing provisions include a requirement to provide a separate entrance for second dwelling units, they do not stipulate where that entrance must be. The proposed revisions include the requirement that the separate entrance for attached second units cannot be located along the front of the primary residence. This will help to maintain the single family character of the property, rather than providing opportunity for a "duplex" looking structure. D. Yard Setbacks: The existing regulations state that second dwelling units must observe the yard setbacks applicable to single family residences in the R-1 Zoning District. These proposed regulations allow the unit to be as close to the front property line as the existing primary residence, except that it no case could the unit be any closer than five feet (5'). The proposed regulations also establish a new rear yard setback for properties abutting an alley. In this case the rear yard setback is five feet (5') from the outside boundary of the alley, rather than fifteen feet (15') from the rear yard property line. E. Owner Occupancy: This requirement has been deleted, because it is staff's opinion that in the majodty of cases, nothing is truly gained from requiring the property owner to occupy one of the units. Additionally, monitoring and on-going confirmation of this requirement is extremely difficult. Fe Rental Requirements: The existing regulations require that the second dwelling unit be used only for rental purposes. Staff is proposing to eliminate this requirement because there is no valid reason for it. Moreover, this requirement is very difficult to monitor and enforce. MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: February 11, 1998 Planning Commission Charley Stump, Senior Planner Residential Zoning District Text Revisions - Second Unit Regulations On January 14, 1998, the Planning Commission completed their review of the Residential Zoning District text revisions, except for the revised regulations for second dwelling units. These provisions within the R-1 (Single Family Residential) District were specifically continued to the February 11, 1998 Planning Commission meeting. The proposed revisions to the second dwelling unit regulations are listed below. As the Commission knows, second dwelling units are a permitted use in the R-1 Zoning District, and therefore require the approval of a Use Permit. This provision is applicable to all existing second units as well as those proposed after the effective date of this ordinance. Existing units must have an approved use permit to be considered as a legal use. These regulations do not allow the division of property upon which a second unit is located unless all requirements of the R-1 zoning district are met. i!1! Any hcm: ccnstr'.'ct:d after th: ~ff~cti';e date of this ordinance is ineligible fcr th= creation =f a second ,.,nit. i I i Vlil/llV I I¥II1¥¥ ll~l I ¥ ¥/~ lill i ¥i IIi ~ ~ll I ¥ ¥ I ill I~I ¥ i.l 1¥I Ill I:/¥ fill ill ~ ¥¥VVl l~:l B~. The second unit shell cn!y ~ be used for rental purposes. ABSTAIN: ABSENT: None. Commissioner Puser. 8,~ 8A. 8B. 8C. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS City Council and Redevelopment Agency Actions Future Planning Commission Agenda Items Status Reports See written reports. Mr, Stump reported that a consultant had been selected to do the Master Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for the community, which is being funded by the Kmart monies. There will be a presentation before both the Planning Commission and City Council after the Plan is formulated. He further reported that staff is in the process of contracting with a consultant to do computer generated General Plan use and zoning maps. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS Chairman Pruden reported that Commissioners Puser and Correll would be attending the Planner's Institute in Long Beach on March 5-7. Discussion followed regarding a future joint session with the City Council, wherein it was noted the Council had not responded to a request for such and there was none scheduled at this time. Commissioner Pruden suggested an agenda item be added for the next regularly scheduled meeting relative to the recycling ordinance passed in 1993. She requested a copy of the ordinance and its two attachments be given to each Commissioner for review, with a short discussion to occur during the time slotted for Planning Commission Reports. '10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:38 p.m. Judy Pruden, Chairman Marge Giuntoli, Recording Secretary b:meg\pc021198.min MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 17 February '1'1, 1998 ITEM NO. 9a DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REQUEST FROM THE WAGENSELLERS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMITTEE FOR LETTER OF SUPPORT TO DISTRICT ATTORNEY MASSINI RELATIVE TO IMPROVING THE SAFETY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD On March 11, Ms. Donna Roberts presented the attached packet to the City Clerk and requested it be agendized for action by the City Council at its March 18 meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.: N/A Yes Wagensellers Neighborhood Committee , ,~ ~--..~ ~ Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. March 10, 1998 letter from Donna Roberts with attachments, pages 1-11. APPROVED:~~ ~ c~n~ace H(~rsley, C~ty Manager mfh:asrcc98 0318PET Wagensellers Neighborhood Committee P O Box 1171 Ukiah, Ca 95482 March 10, 1998 Mr. Sheridan Malone, Mayor and City Council Members City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 RECEIVED 12.~Ty OF' [/K~AH Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council: The recent increase in graffiti and violence in our neighborhood has prompted us to petition the District Attorney, Susan Massini, encouraging her to prosecute those individuals arrested for these crimes. We have asked Ms. Massini to prosecute these crimes to the fullest extent of the law. As residents of the City of Ukiah we are requesting that the City Council support us in our efforts to improve the safety of our neighborhood. A draft letter from the City Council to District Attorney Susan Massini is attached. This letter from you in support of our efforts would make a statement to both the public and the judicial system that this type of behavior will not be tolerated. I have also attached copies of the first signed petitions that were delivered to the District Attorneys office. Thank you. Sincerely, Donna Roberts Neighborhood Advocate Wagensellers Neighborhood Committee March 10, 1998 Susan Massini, District Attorney County of Mendocino Courthouse Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Ms. Massini: On March 18, 1998 represematives of the Wagenseller's Neighborhood Committee (a local citizens group) presented the City Council with a copy of a petition which expressed neighborhood residents concerns regarding the recent increase in graffiti and violence in the Sidnie Court area. Specifically the incidem which involved the "marking" of several signs and buildings and the assault on one person which led to the arrest of several people. We support the efforts of this neighborhood to improve safety for it's residems and urge you to prosecute these crimes to the fullest extent of the law. Thank you. Sincerely, Sheridan Malone, Mayor City of Ukiah March 10, 1998 Susan Masini, District Attorney County of Mendocino Courthouse Ukiah, CA 95482 Subject: Attached Petition Dear Ms. Masini: I have attached several signed petitions from the residents of Sidnie Court and the surrounding neighborhood. These petitions contain a total of 38 signatures, (we will be submitting more in the near future). Each of us has signed this petition in order to make you aware of our concerns and expectations regarding the recent grafitti and violence in our neighborhood. Thank you. If you have any questions please call me in the evenings at 468-1173. Sincerely, Donna Roberts, Neighborhood Advocate Wagensellers Neighborhood Committee March 3, 1998 Susan Masini, District Attorney Count3: of Mendocino Courthouse U'~ah, CA 95482 As residents living on Sidnie Court and in the surrounding nei~mhborhood, we would like to express our anger and outrage at the drug and gang activin, going on in this area. The recent increase in graffiti and x4olence in our neighborhood is intolerable. In cooperation with the Cit3..' of L~ah we have worked ,,,er3.' hard to improve the safet).~' and aesthetics in t!fis neighborhood, and we will not tolerate such actMt3,. The recent 'marking' of several si_mas and buildings and the assault of a person are examples of this t3,pe of intolerable behavior. By signing tlfis petition each of us is making you aware that we expect this t3'pe of behavior to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Specifically, we are requesting that the young men recently arrested on Sidnie Court in connection with an extrernely x4olent incident be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Thank You. John Williams, Acting Chief of Police Cit3.' of Lqdah Director of Juvenile Hall Count)' of Mendocino James Tuso, Sheriff Coun .ty of Mendocino Juvenile Court Judge County of Mendocino Superior Court Judge County of Mendocino Address March 3, 1998 Susan Masini. District Attorney Count)., of,X !endocino Courthouse L.'kiah, CA 95482 As residents lix,/ng on Sidnie Court and in the surrounding neigahborhood, we would like to express our anger and outrage at lhe drug and gang activin,' going on in this area. The recent increase in ~affiti and x4olence in our nei~borhood is intolerable. In cooperation with the Cit3..' of Ukiah we have worked ,,:er).: hard to improve the safety and aes,h,.t,,.s/n t!fisn,..,_-.,bo~nood.~:£~, 4 and we will not tolerate such activiB,.. The recent 'marking: of several signs and buildings and the assault of a person are examples of this type of intolerable behax4or. By si~m~rtg this petition each of us is making you aware !hat we expect this type of behavior to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Specifically, we are requesting that the young men recently arrested on Sidnie Court in connection with an extremely x4olent incident be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Thank You. CC; John Wilhams, Acting Chief of Police Cit3.: of Ukiah Director of Juvenile Hall Count, of Mendocino James Tuso, Sheriff CounB.' of Mendocino Juvenile Court Judge Count3.., of Mendocino Superior Courl Judge CounB~ of Mendocino Address March 3, 1998 Susan Masini. District Attorney Count).; of Mendocino Courthouse l_~ah, CA 95482 As residents 1Mng on Sidnie Court and in the surrounding neighborhood, we would like to express our anger and outrage at the drug and gang ac. tMb' going on in tlfis area. The recent increase in graffiti and x.iolence in our neighborhood is intolerable. In cooperation with the City of Ukiah we have worked veo' hard to improve the safer).' and aesthetics in tkis nei~,~borhood, and we will not ~ '~ _ , to,~.~,te such actix.'it3:. The recent 'marking' of several signs and buildings and the assault of a person are examples of this type of intolerable behax,ior. By signing tlfis petition each of us is making you aware that we expect this type of behax,ior to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Specifically, we are requesting that the young men recently arrested on Sidnie Court in connection with an extrernely x4olent incident be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Thank You. John Wi/Iiams, Acting Chief of PoLice City' of L~ah Director of Juvenile Hall Coun~ of Mendocino James Tuso, Shmfff Count3.' of Mendocino Juven.ile Court Judge CounB, of Mendocino Superior Court Judge County of Mendocino Address March 3, 1998 Susan Masini, District Attorney Count)., of :Xlendocino Courthouse Ukiah, CA 95482 As residents 1Mng on Sidnie Court and in the surrounding neighborhood, we would like to express our anger and outrage at the drug and gang actMb: going on in this area. The recent increase in graffiti and x,:iolence in our neighborhood is intolerable. In cooperation with the Ci~' of Ukiah we have worked very' hard to hnprove the safety and aesthetics in t!fis neigl,,borhood, and we will not tolerate such actMB:. The recent 'marking' of several signs and buildings and the assault of a person are exarnples of tlfis B'pe of intolerable behax4or. By si~m~.ng Il,is petition each of us is makdng you aware that we expect this ~,pe of behaxdor to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Specifically, we are requesting that the young men recently arrested on Sidnie Court in connection with an extremely x4olent incident be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Thank You. CC~ John lVilliams, Acting Chief of Police Cie' of L~ah Dkector of Juvenile Hall Counb, of Mendocino James Tuso, Sheriff Count).,, of Mendocino Juvenile Court Judge Count.' of Mendocino Superior Court Judge County of Mendocino Sig'natm'e Address March 3, 1998 Susan Masini, District Attorney Count); of Mendocino Courthouse Ukiah, CA 95482 As residents 1Mng on Sidnie Court and in the surrounding neighborhood, we would like to express our anger and outrage at the drug and gang activin' going on in this area. The recent increase in graffiti and violence in our neighborhood is intolerable. In cooperation with the Ci.ty of LMah we have worked ver3, hard to improve the safet)' and aesthetics in tlfis nei-g!'tborhood, and we will not tolerate such activit),. The recent 'marking' of several signs and buildings and the assault of a person are examples of this type of intolerable behavior. By signing this petition each of us is making you aware that we expect this t),pe of behavior to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Specifically, we are requesting that the young men recentb' arrested on Sidnie Court in connection with an extremely x4olent incident be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Thank You. CC; Jo~hrt Williams, Acting Chief of Police City of l_.qdah Director of Juvenile Hall Count), of Mendocino James Tuso, Sheriff County of Mendocino Juvenile Court Judge Count)., of Mendocino Superior Court Judge County of Mendocino Si~amre Address '? / March 3, 1998 Susan Masini, District Attorney Count)..' of Mendocino Couflhouse L'kiah, CA 95482 As residents 1Mng on Sidnie Court and in the surrounding neighborhood, we would like to express our anger and outrage at the drag and gang activit)' going on in this area. The recent increase in graffiti and violence in our neighborhood is intolerable. In cooperation with the Cit)' of Uqdah we have worked ver3, hard to improve the safet3~ and aesthetics in tlfis neighborhood, and we will not tolerate such actMt).'. The recent 'marking' of several signs and buildings and the assault of a person are examples of this g'pe of intolerable behavior. By signing this petition each of us is making you aware that we expect this tTpe of behavior to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Specifically, we are requesting that the young men recentb' arrested on Sidnie Court in com~ection with an extremely x4olent incident be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Thank You. CC: John Williams, Acting Chief of Police Ci~' of Ukiah Director of Juvenile Hall County of Mendocino James Tuso, Sheriff Count), of Mendocino Juvenile Court Judge Count3., of Mendocino Superior Court Judge Count): of Mendocino Signature -~. ') Address March 3, 1998 Susan Masini, District Attorney Counb; of Mendocino Courthouse Ukiah, CA 95482 As residents 1Mng on Sidnie Court and in the surrounding neighborhood, we would like to express our anger and outrage at the drag and gang actM~' going on in this area. The recent increase in graffiti and violence in our neighborhood is intolerable. In cooperation with the City of Uki"ah we have worked ,,."er3.' hard to improve the safety and aesthetics/a~ tlfis neighborhood, and we will not tolerate such activit3,. The recent 'marking' of several signs and buildings and the assault of a person are examples of this type of intolerable behavior. By signing this petition each of us is making you aware that we expect this t),pe of behavior to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Spec/~ca!ly, we are requesting that the young men recently arrested on Sidrde Court in connection with an extremely x4olent incident be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Thank You. CC; Jok, n Williams, Acting Chief of Police Cib' of Ukiah Director of Juvenile Hall CounB' of Mendocino James Tuso, Sheriff Count)., of Mendocino Juverfile Court Judge Count3..' of Mendocino Superior Court Judge Count3...'- of Mendocino Address March 3. 1998 Susan Masini, District Attorney Count)., of Mendocino Courthouse l_:~"ah, CA 95482 As residents 1Mng on Sidnie Court and in the surrounding neighborhood, we would like to express our anger and outrage at the drag and gang activib, going on in this area. The recent increase in graffiti and violence in our neighborhood is intolerable. In cooperation with the Cit)., of Ukiah we have worked vet3.' hard to improve the safer); and aesthetics in tkis neighborhood, and we will not tolerate such activit3,. The recent 'marking' of several signs and buildings and the assault of a person are examples of this B'pe of intolerable behavior. By signing this petition each of us is making you aware that we expect this type of behax4or to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Specifically, we are requesting that the young men recently arrested on Sidnie Court in connection with an extremely x4olent incident be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Thank You. John Williams, Acting Chief of Police City? of Ukiah Director of Juvenile Hall Count' of Mendocino James Tuso, Sheriff Count).., of Mendocino Juvenile Court Judge Count5.,, of Mendocino Superior Court Judge County of Mendocino Signature Address ITEM NO. 10a DATE: March 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 Stephen Herr, CPA of Davis Hammond & Co., Certified Public Accountants, conducted the audit of the City of Ukiah's financial statements for the year ended June 30, 1997. Davis Hammond & Co. has audited the City's financial statements for a number of years and therefore has a good understanding of the City's operations. This continuity also provides the financial statements with a similar presentation from year to year. Mr. Herr will attend the Council meeting and answer any questions the Council may have. The financial report is divided into several sections: REPORT Table of Contents Independent Auditors' Report Combined Financial Statements Notes to Financial Statements Enterprise Funds Combining Statements Single Audit Information Supplemental Information Ukiah Redevelopment Agency Audit Report Pages i 3 4-9 10-21 23-30 32-39 41-42 44-53 Independent Auditors' Report The auditors' opinion, titled "Independent Auditors' Report," is unqualified. This means the overall financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City as of June 30, 1997. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file the City of Ukiah financial statements for the year ended June 30, 1997, audited by Davis Hammond & Company, CPA's. ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No. (if budgeted) : N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Gordon Elton, Finance Director Attachments: 1. Schedule of Combining Funds Note: Bound copy of the City of Ukiah Financial Statements for FY 1996-97 were forwarded under separate cover APPROWD: C~'~'~ace'~orsl~y1 City Manager Combined Financial Statements As a whole, the City is fiscally sound. The audited financial statements present a summary level for the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service Funds, Capital Project Funds, Enterprise Funds, Internal Service Funds, and Trust and Agency Funds as well as a listing of the totals for the General Fixed Assets and General Long-term Debt Account Groups. This summary is an overview from which only generalized conclusions should be drawn. In addition, Combining Statements of the Enterprise Funds are included on pages 23-30. The general ledger maintains many more funds than are identified in the audited financial statements. Attached is a schedule of the funds that are combined into the funds identified in the audit report. Notes to Financial Statements In addition to the financial statements themselves, the "Notes to Financial Statements", which begin on page 10, provide important additional information about the financial condition of the City and the manner in which business is conducted. Note 7, Capital Leases, and Note 8, Long-term Debt, identify the commitment for future lease and debt obligations. Note 10, Interfund Assets/Liabilities, lists amounts owed between funds. Note 11, Other Required Individual Fund Disclosures, lists funds that have deficit fund balances and the portion of fund balances that are reserved or designated for specific purposes. Landfill Closure and Post-closure Costs, Note 13, discusses the calculation of the City's future obligation for these costs. Note 15, Joint Powers Agreements, identifies the joint powers agreements the City has entered into. Note 18, Prior Period Adjustments, identifies adjustments made to the fund balances as of July 1, 1996 and the reasons for the adjustments. Enterprise Fund Combining Statements These schedules provide asset, liability, equity, revenue, expense and cash flow information for each of the 12 enterprises in the City. The 12 enterprises within the City are: Electric, Street Lighting, Water, Disposal Site, Sewer, Airport, Parking District, Golf, Ambulance, Youth Service Ukiah, Recreation, Conference Center. Three of these enterprises, Ambulance, Recreation and Youth Service Ukiah, no longer function as enterprises and are presented only to show the combining of these funds into the General Fund. Single Audit (Audit of Federal Funds) The Single Audit section is the area where the auditors report on compliance in accordance with government auditing standards, compliance with general federal requirements, and on internal control structure. The "Reportable Conditions" are: 1) City staff did not investigate and resolve differences between custodians, in a timely manner, when investments were transferred to a new custodian; 2) Fixed asset reports received from the service bureau that maintains the City's fixed asset records, a) have some errors, b) are not always timely, and c) some important information is not included in the reports. Plans are either in place or under way to address all of these concerns. Management responses are included with each issue the auditors raised. GE:AUDIT97.AGN Page 2 Ukiah Redevelopment Agency The Ukiah Redevelopment Agency financial records are included in the statements labeled "City of Ukiah" as well as presented separately at the end of the audit report. This presentation is required under the generally accepted accounting principle of "reporting entity" which states that any entity that the City Council controls a majority of must be included in the City financial statements (Note iA, page 10). Additional Information Staff will make a more detailed presentation at the Council meeting to further explain the financial results of fiscal year 1996-1997. The independent audit firm will be represented by Mr. Stephen Herr. Mr. Herr will answer any questions related to the auditors' opinion, the role of the auditor and the auditor's findings and recommendations. Recommended action Staff recommends receiving and filing the audited financial statements for the year ended June 30, 1997. GE:AUDIT97.AGN Page 3 Schedule of Combining Funds General Fund 100 General Fund 110 Special General Fund 115 General Fund Reserve 131 Equipment Reserve Fund 140 142 205 270 280 300 301 302 303 332 334 335 340 341 345 618 960 962 Special Revenue Park Development Fund National Science Foundation Suppplemental Law Enforcement Services (SLESF) Signalization Fund Storm Drain Fund 2106 Gas Tax Fund 2107 Gas Tax Fund 2107.5 Gas Tax Fund 2105 Gas Tax Fund Federal Emergency Shelter Program EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan Community Dev. Comm. Fund Sb325 Reimbursement Fund S.T.P. Off-System Roads Fund Flood Damages Community Redev. Agency Fund Redevelopment Housing Fund Debt Service 150 Civic Center Fund 966 Redevelopment Debt Service Capital Projects 698 Fixed Asset Fund 965 Redevelopment Cap Impr Fund Internal Service Funds 575 Garage Fund 678 Public Safety Dispatch Fund 696 Stores Fund 697 Billing Enterprise Fund Enterprise Funds Electric 550 Lake Mendocino Bond Interest/Redemption 555 Lake Mendocino Bond Reserve 800 Electric Fund 801 Electric Revenue Fund 810 Electric Reserve Fund Water 820 Water Fund 840 Special Water Fund (Cap Imp) Solid Waste Disposal 660 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund 661 Preclosure Project Reserve 664 Disposal Closure Reserve 665 Refuse/Debris Control Enter. 667 Landfill Self-lnsur. Trust Sewer 500 1957 Sewer Bond Int& Red 610 Sewer Service Fund 611 Sewer Construction Fund 612 City/Dist. Sewer Fund 615 City/Dist Sewer Replace 620 Special Sewer Fund (Cap Imp) Airport 310 Special Aviation Fund 312 Airport Master Plan Grant 315 Airport Capital Improvement 320 Airport Clear Zone Fund 600 Airport Fund 603 Hangar/Site Improvement Fund Parking 220 Pkg. Dist. #10per & Maint 230 Pkg. Dist. #1 Revenue Fund 530 Pkg. Dist #1 Bond Int& Red Expendable Trust Funds 900 Special Deposits 940 Payroll Posting 910 Worker's Comp Fund 915 PERS Reserve Fund 920 Liability Fund 260 Downtown Business Improvemt Agency Funds 640 San Dist Revolving Fund 650 Spec San Dist Fund (Cap Imp) 651 Redip Reserve Account 652 Redip Sewer Enterprise Fund 663 M.S.W.M.A 670 U.S.W. Billing 679 M.E.S.A. 950 General Service Golf 693 Clubhouse Renovations 695 Golf Fund Other Enterprise Funds 805 Street Lighting Fund 680 Ambulance 405 Youth Service Ukiah 400 Recreation Enterprise Fund 410 Conference Center Fund Attachment #1 CITY OF UKIAH AND UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TOGETHER WITH INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 E C'-I x >. "ct' 0 [... Z .< Z Z .< Z Davis W. Hammon, Jr., CPA (1924-1989) Stephen B. Norman, CPA · PFS Stephen J. Herr, CPA Guy E. Marcy, CPA INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council Members of the City of Ukiah Ukiah, California 95482 We have audited the accompanying general purpose financial statements of City of Ukiah, California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 1997, as listed in the table of contents. These general purpose financial statements are the responsibility of City of Ukiah management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these general purpose financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the general purpose financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall general purpose financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the general purpose financial statements referred above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of City of Ukiah as of June 30, 1997, the results of its operations and its cash flows of its proprietary fund types for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. fl In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued a report dated September 19, 1997. on our consideration of the City's internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying combining financial statements as listed in the table of contents are presented for the purpose of additional analysis and are not a required part of the general purpose financial statements of City of Ukiah. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the general purpose financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. September 19, 1997 MEMBERS: AMERICAN INSTITUTE AND CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 2080 Myers Street, Oroville. CA 95966-5341 ~530) 533-3392 FAX ~530) 533-2714 e. c ;0 0 . 0 . .,.-... Z ILl Z u E 0 ,r~ r~ ._E ._= ._ < '~ 'o '~ 'o c .c o _E Z .< .iN, Z ~ o o ~ iOI i 0 0 ¸0 0 o ,Mi. f,~,. 'i qr .< co. Certified Public Accountants Davis W. Hammoh, Jr., CPA (1924-1989) Stephen B. Norman, CPA · PFS Stephen J. Herr, CPA Guy E. Marcy, CPA INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE AND INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING BASED ON AN AUDIT OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT,4 UDITING STANDARDS Honorable Mayor and City Council Members of the City of Ukiah Ukiah, CA 9.5490 We have audited the general purpose financial statements of City of Ukiah, California, as of and for the year ended June .30, 1997, and have issued our report thereon dated September 19, 1997. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free &material misstatement. _Compliance As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and. accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. Internal Control Over Financial Reportin~o In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City of Ukiah's internal control over financial reporting in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the general purpose financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting. However, we noted certain matters involving the internal control over financial reporting and its operation that we consider to be reportable conditions. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control over financial reporting that, in our judgment, could adversely affect the City of Ukiah's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements. Reportable conditions are described in the accompanying Schedule of Findings as items 97-1 and 97-2. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that misstatements in amounts material in relation to the general purpose financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. Our consideration of the internal control over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control over financial reporting that might be reportable conditions and, accordingly, would not disclose all reportable conditions that are also considered to be material weaknesses. However, we believe none of the reportable conditions described above is a material weakness. 32 MEMBERS: AMERICAN INSTITUTE AND CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 2080 Myers Street. Oroville, CA 95966-5341 (530) 533-3392 FAX (530) 533-2714 ~a~s ~o~ ~ co. Certifiecl Public Accountants We noted certain other matters that we have reported to management of the City of Ukiah in a separate letter dated September ! 9, 1997. This report is intended for the information of management, the Office of the Controller of the State of California, and federal awarding ag:ncies. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. September 19, 1997 CITY OF UKIAH SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS JUNE 30, 1997 A) SUMMARY OFAUDIT RESULTS The auditors' report expresses an unqualified opinion on the general purpose financial statements of the City of Ukiah. 2) Two reportable conditions were disclosed during the audit. Neither of the reportable conditions were deemed to be a material weakness. No instances of noncompliance material to the financial statements of the City of Ukiah were disclosed during the audit. 4) The City of Ukiah was determined to be exempt from the requirements of the Single Audit Act for the year ended June 30, 1997. B) R_REPORTABLE CONDITIONS -- 97- i) RECONCILIATION OF INVESTMENTS Condition: During the year, the City changed its investment broker. During the course of transferring its investments in May, 1997, several individual investments were not received by the new investment broker. As a result of bank reconciliation procedures, staff was aware that a problem existed, but failed to identify the exact nature and dollar amount of problem until we began audit fieidwork in September, 1997. The problem was eventually resolved in November, 1997, after much time and effort by the Finance Director. We believe that the time period between the discovery of the problem, and the start of the City's investigation was excessive. Criteria: Proper accounting controls require that problems disclosed during the reconciliation of cash and investment should be resolved in a timely manner. Effect: For a period of several months the City could not account for ali of its investments. The City may have been able to recover the funds sooner and easier had steps been taken immediately upon discovery of the problem. The City may lose potential interest earnings on the missing investments from May until November. Recommendation: City staff should make it a priority to investigate and resolve all significant and unusual matters noted during the cash and investment reconciliation procedure. Management's Response: The situation arose from extraordinary circumstances when the securities were transferred from the old custodian to the new custodian. New procedures are in place whereby the Accounting Supervisor and the Finance Director independently monitor the investment related receipts and compare information on a monthly basis. In addition, the City Treasurer keeps his own records of investment transactions. Immediate resolution of differences between these records will eliminate the delays previously experienced. 34 97-2) RECONCILIATION OF FIXED ASSETS Condition: The City uses an outside service provider to update and maintain the Cit~"s computerized fixed asset records. Annually, forms are prepared by City staff detailing fixed asset additions, deletions and changes. These are then submitted to the service provider for data input. The resulting reports prepared by the service provider are used by City staff to maintain the City accounting records. We found that the reports provided by the service provider 1) have some errors, 2) are not always timely, and 3) do not provide certain important information (such as current year depreciation expense). Criteria: Proper accounting procedures should result in information which allows the City to record, process, summarize and report financial data in an efficient and effective manner. Effect: An excessive amount of staff time, and auditor time, is required to reconcile the fixed asset reports to the City's books and records. City staff has had to contact the service provider several times to inquire about the timeliness of the report, and to receive the types of reports necessary for the preparation of the City's financial statements. Recommendation: City should either l) establish better communication protocols with the service provider to ensure the City's needs are being met, or 2) consider bringing the entire process in-house. By establishing better communications with the service provider and submitting data on a more frequent basis, man), of the above problems might be eliminated. By bringing the entire fixed asset computer processing in-house, the City should have improved control over the timeliness, composition and accuracy of fixed asset activity. Management's Response: Fixed asset transactions will be submitted to the service provider during the fiscal year instead of waiting until the year has ended. This will allow for more timely review of the reports received from the service provider. During the fiscal year 1998/99 budget preparation, implementation of an in-house fixed asset software system will be evaluated. Such a system will allow flexibility to update the records on a timely basis and eliminate the dependence on an external service provider's time lines. CITY OF UKIAH STATUS OF PRIOR YEAR FINDINGS JUNE 30, 1997 A) ~COMPLIANCE FINDINC I) I_MPROPER INVESTMENTS _ Condition: Certain individual investments held within the City's pooled investment porttblio have a final maturity date in excess of five (5) years. Criteria: Section 53601 of the Government Code of the State of California and the City's adopted investment policy set a maximum maturity date of five (5) years for the City's investments. Effect: The City's overall liquidity is not as flexible as if the portfolio was in compliance with the above criteria. Longer term investments weaken liquidity and may result in the City having to sell investments at unfavorable market prices. The City may not be able to take maximum advantage of short-term interest rate increases in future accounting periods. Recommendation: City should continue to monitor the market price of the noncomplvina investments to liquidate them at favorable prices as market opportunities arise. ' - Current Status: The City has adopted investment policies and procedures, and contracted with an outside investment consultant, which will require sufficient review of investment transactions to prevent any reoccurrence of this type of activity. These noncompliant investments were purchased prior to the adoption of the City's improved investment policy, and the market has not yet provided an opportunity to liquidate them in a reasonable manner. It should be noted that the investments are fully backed by the U.S. Government. Also, no additional noncompliant investments have been purchased. B) R~EPORTABLE CONDITIONS 2) RECONCILIATION OF CASH AND INVESTMENTS Condition: The cash and investment accounts of the City were not routinely reconciled to the primary accounts and records of the City. Criteria: Proper accounting controls require account balances should agree with underlying accounting records. Effect: The balance of cash and investments presented on the City's primary accounting records were overstated by $38,331. Unrecorded differences included a) investment return-of-principal recorded as investment income, b) one check not voided from the system, c) unrecorded bank service charges, d) established bank accounts not recorded, e) manual checks not posted to the accounting system, and f) incorrect deposits used in reconciliations. The lack of properly prepared reconciliations significantly increases the likelihood of material errors being undetected and creates an environment more conducive towards irregularities and fraud. 36 Recommendation: The City must establish procedures to reconcile all cash and investment accounts to the primary accounting system on a monthly basis. This duty should be assigned to a responsible individual who is independent of the cash receipts and cash disbursements process. All potent/al reconciling entries should be reviewed and approved by the Finance Director and posted to fl~e Cit3's accounts in a timely manner. Current Status: The City contracted with an outside consultant to prepare the initial reconciliations and write out monthly procedures to facilitate ongoing and timely reconciliations by the Accounting Supervisor. The Finance Director will now review the reconciliations and approve any adjusting entries. 3) F~IXED ASSET ACCOUNTING -- Condition: During the year ended June 30, 1996, the City was able to contract with an outside consulting firm to perform a complete physical inventory and valuation of the City's fixed assets. However, the City did not establish formal accounting procedures designed to insure the fixed asset acquisitions and dispositions subsequent to the inventory were properly accounted tbr on the City's books and detailed accounting records. . Criteria: The City has decided to retain the consulting firm to maintain the City's detailed fixed asset records. This firm provided the City with fixed asset activity forms which should have been completed whenever the City acquired or disposed of an asset. These forms would then be submitted to the outside firm so the detailed fixed asset records could be updated. The City did not complete the required forms until well after June 30, 1996, as there were no procedures established delineating what practices should be followed. Effect: Because the records were not being updated contemporaneously with the actual fixed asset active, we found instances of certain acquisitions being excluding from the detailed records. There was also some confusion concerning what should be included as a capitalized fixed asset, and ~hat should be excluded. If clear procedures are not established and followed, fixed asset records will deteriorate and the City may again receive a qualified audit report. Recommendation: City must adopt clear procedures with regard to the accounting for fixed assets. Whenever an asset is purchase or disposed, the approved accounting records must be completed in a timely manner to ensure detailed records are properly adjusted. The detailed records must be reconciled to the City's primary accounts. Also, any reports prepared by the outside firm should be carefully reviewed by City staff to verify their accuracy. Current Status: The City hired an outside consultant to develop procedures necessary to properly account for fixed asset activity. Fixed asset reports were reconciled to the City's primary accounting records. 37 CO. Certified Public Accountants Davis W. Hammor~, Jr., CPA (1924-1989) Stephen B. Norman, CPA · PFS Stephen J. Herr, CPA Guy E. Marcy, CPA INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS, REPORT ON AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS Honorable Mayor and City Council Members of the City of Ukiah Ukiah, California 9.5490 We have applied the procedures enumerated below to the Appropriations Limit calculations of the City of Ukiah for the year ended June 30, 1997. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Ukiah and the League of California Cities (as presented in the League publication entitled Article XIIIB Appropriations Limitation Uniform Guidelines) were performed solely to assist the City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. This engagement to apply agreed-upon procedures was performed in accordance with standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of the procedures is solel)' tile responsibility of the specified users of the report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or any other purpose. The procedures performed and our findings were as follows: !) We obtained the City's completed alternate computation Appropriations Limit worksheets, and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned worksheets to those that were selected by a recorded vote of the City Council. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 2) Using the City's alternate computational worksheet, we added last year's limit to the total current year limit adjustments, as computed, for this year, and compared the results to this year's limit. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 3) We compared the prior year appropriations limit presented in the alternate computational worksheets to the prior year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council for the prior year. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 38 MEMBERS: AMERICAN INSTITUTE AND CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 2080 Myers Street, Orovllle, CA 95966-5341 (530) 533-3392 FAX (530) 533-2714 va s co. Certiflecl Public Accountants We were not engaged to, and did not perform an audit, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the Appropriations Limit alternate computational worksheets. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No proced,lres have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriation limit for the base year, as defined by the League publication Article )(][]B A/~jvro/ariation$ £irnilation Uniform Guidelines. This report is intended solely for the use of the City of Ukiah and should not be used by those who have not agreed to the procedures and taken responsibility for the sufficiency of the procedures for their purposes. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. September 19, 1997 .39 Z [... Z Immm Certified Public Accountants Davis W. Hammon, Jr., CPA (1924-1989) Stephen B. Norman, CPA · PFS Stephen j. Herr, CPA Guy E. Marcy, CPA INDEPENDENT AUDITOR$, REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council Members of the City of Ukiah Acting as the Governing Body for the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency Ukiah, California 95482 We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency, as of and for the year ended June 30, 1997, as listed in the table of contents. The Ukiah Redevelopment Agency is considered a component unit of the City of Ukiah and, therefore, has been included as part of City of Ukiah's reporting entity. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant est/mates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. in our opinion, the financial statements referred to in the first paragraph present fairly, in all mater/al respects, the financial position of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency as of June .30, 1997, and results of its operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. September 19, 1997 44 MEMBERS: AMERICAN INSTITUTE AND CALIFO =o,,o ,.,.,,.. .................. . ..... .............................. Davis W. Hammon, Jr., CPA (1924-1989) Stephen B. Norman, CPA · PFS Stephen J. Herr, CPA Guy E. Marcy, CPA INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY COMPLIANCE Honorable Mayor and City Council Members of the City of Ukiah Acting as the Governing Body for the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency Ukiah, California 95482 We have audited the general purpose financial statements of City of Ukiah, California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 1997, and have issued our report thereon dated September 19, 1997. The Ukiah Redevelopment Agency is considered a component unit of the City of Ukiah and, therefore, has been included as part of' City of Ukiah' reporting entity. As part of' our audit, we examined the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency management's assertions, included in its representation letter dated September 19, 1997, that the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency complied with laws, regulations and administrative requirements of the State of California, based on the criteria set forth in Guidelines For Compliance Audits of California Redevelopment Agencies issued by the State Controller's Office, Division of Local Government Fiscal Affairs, during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1997. As discussed in that representation letter, the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency management is responsible for the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency's compliance with those requirements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency, management's assertions about the Agency's compliance based on out' examination. Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency's compliance with those requirements and performing such procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency's compliance with specific requirements. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS !) TIME LIMIT FOR ESTABLISHING AGENCY DEBT Finding: Section 33333.6 of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California requires redevelopmenl project area plans set a time limit on establishing loans, advances, and indebtedness not to exceed twenty (20) years from the adoption of' the plan, or January 1, 2004, whichever is later. Existing project area plans had until December 31, 1994, to comply with this requirement. The Ukiah Redevelopment Agency's current project area plan sets a forty (40) year limit, and is not in compliance with this section. Recommendation: Management should take the necessary actions to amend the Agency's project area plan to comply with this section. Management's Response: Management intends to comply with the time limit as described above, but believes that formally amending the plan to expressly comply with this change is not practical. The plan will be amended as necessary for substantive changes. 45 MEMBERS: AMERICAN INSTITUTE AND CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 2080 MYers St~e~!~ ~.r?r~l!le. CA 95966-5341 co. Certified Public Accountants In our opinion, except for the noncompliance item noted above, the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency management's assertion that the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency has complied with laws, regulations and administrative requirements of Section 3.3080. ! of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1997, is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on the criteria set tbrth in the Guideli/Tes For Compliance Audits of California Redevelopment Agencies issued by the State ControlleFs Office. Division of Local Government Fiscal Affairs. This report is intended for the information of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency, and the State Controller's Office. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. September 19, i 997 46 ITEM NO. 10b DATE: March 18. 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF WATER ISSUES AFFECTING THE UKIAH VALLEY The Russian River is an integral and essential element and lifeline to the Ukiah Valley and Sonoma County areas. Since the construction of the Van Arsdale Dam and the Coyote Dam, the land areas surrounding the Russian River have populated in response to the available water source and demand for housing in the Northern California region. The Russian River affects the City of Ukiah residents in three separate ways: 1) A source of drinking water; 2) the source of power for our electro-hydro plant at Coyote Dam; and 3) an integral partner in our wastewater treatment plant operation. Though there are currently many proposed projects that could affect the flow of the Russian River, two are of utmost importance to our Valley at this time. The first is the Section 7 requirements (Continued on Page Two) RECOMMENDED ACTION' Discuss water issues and authorize MCIW&PC to negotiate on behalf of the City regarding Section 7 requirements, with the stipulation that the Council may review the direction of MClW&PC before action is taken. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City Council Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.' (if budgeted) Candace Horsley, City Manager David Rapport, City Attorney , 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. , MOU among Army Corps of Engineers, et al. Letter, dated 12/30/97 to Army Corps of Engineers from Charles Peterson Memorandum, dated 2/15/98, to MClW&PC from David Rapport Memorandum, dated 2/15/98, to Michael Delbar from County Counsel Document - Potter Valley Project/Overview Document - Proposed Recommendation for the Potter Valley Project April 25, 1997 Press Democrat Article, "Wider Protection for Coho" Wilderness News Article, "Effort Launched to Regain Diverted Eel River Water" Letter, dated 2/19/98, to Mike Scannell from Candace Horsley APPROVED: Candace Horsley, Ci~y 4/Can.ASR.Watr {, Manager under the Endangered Species Act regarding the Russian River and the recent decision by the National Marine Fishery Service to list Steelhead Trout and Coho Salmon as threatened species, and the second is the Potter Valley project. , Section 7 Requirements Under the Endangered Species Act On August 18, 1997, the National Marine Fishery Service (NMFS) gave its final determination to list Steelhead Trout as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). On October 31, 1996 it had published its final determination to list Coho Salmon as a threatened species. Both of these species are prevalent in the Russian River. Section 7-A of the ESA requires federal agencies to consult with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce to ensure that any actions a federal agency authorizes, funds, or carries out, are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitat. Studies must be prepared to determine the effect certain flow regimes and other factors have on the viability of the continued existence of the endangered fish. The Army Corps of Engineers has responsibility for the flow regime from the Coyote Dam. Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) originally reimbursed the Corps of Engineers for the non-federal costs of the dam construction and has a contractual right in the water supply storage in Lake Mendocino, which SCWA uses in their water transmission system to their many customers. Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District also has rights to the water in the lake for distribution to the Ukiah Valley. Sonoma County Water Agency has taken aggressive action towards being a major player in the studies and consultations regarding the Section 7 requirements and has initiated a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between themselves, the Corps, and the National Marine Fishery Service. The MOU establishes a framework for the consultation and conference required by the ESA with respect to the activities of any of the controllers of the Russian River, whose actions may directly, or indirectly, affect the Coho Salmon or Steelhead Trout. Sonoma County Water Agency has offered, through the MOU, to prepare the biological assessment that is required under Section 7 and to work in direct communication with the Corps and NMFS on the interpretation of these assessments and possible mitigations resulting from these studies. The MOU also contains a section establishing an Executive Committee that allows a member of our Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (MClW&PC) JPA to sit with the General Manager/Chief Engineer of SCWA and the District Engineer of the Corp to provide public policy advice to Sonoma County Water Agency and the Corps in the execution of their respective obligations. Mayor Malone is the City's designated representative on the MClW&PC. At its recent commission meetings, the MCIW&PC members indicated they feel they also need to be a party to the MOU, rather than just a sub-committee member. The MCIW&PC represents all of the water related agencies within the Valley and it is felt that they, therefore, can provide the best representation for Mendocino County on this water issue. SCWA, at this point, has refused to change the MOU participation. However, in speaking with the Corps of Engineers' representatives, MCIW&PC was told that the Corps would have final review and decision making authority over anything that was done in the Russian River and that they would be listening to all public input. At its meeting of February 16, 1998, the MClW&PC voted to request each of its member agencies to authorize MCIW&PC to exercise the member's rights as an "applicant" under the ESA so that the MClW&PC could assert those rights in its negotiations with the Corps and SCWA over the terms of the MOU. An applicant is any non-federal agency or person who requires a federal permit to engage in an activity that could affect an endangered or threatened species or a critical habitat. If an applicant requests early consultation with a federal agency under Section 7 of the ESA, the federal agency is required to initiate early consultation with the NMFS and the applicant must approve the selection of a non-federal agency, such as SCWA, to conduct the biological assessment to be prepared in connection with that consultation. Under the JPA that created MCIW&PC, its purposes included undertaking any act necessary for the preservation of the Eel River diversions and the maintenance of the PG&E Potter Valley Project, and conducting negotiations and entering agreements respecting Eel River and Russian River waters. However, the members specifically did not delegate to the Commission their respective water, water rights, contracts with third parties, or the right to perform, enforce or negotiate with respect to them (Art. VII, Sec. 7.01.D). Moreover, the members did not delegate their rights under federal permits they hold to engage in activities that could affect endangered species or critical habitat. For these reasons, Commission members who have applicant status, such as the City of Ukiah, would have to take some additional action to delegate their rights as applicants to the Commission. The Board of Supervisors wrote a letter to the Commission stating such a delegation. The Flood Control District passed a resolution with this same intent. The City Council should discuss whether it wants to delegate that authority to the Commission and if so, subject to what, if any, conditions. For example, the Council may want to retain the right to revoke that delegation at any time and to require prior notice of positions the Commission intends to take in enforcing those rights. It may also want detailed reports from the Commission as the negotiations and consultation progress. Though the Sonoma County Water Agency and the Ukiah Valley have many related concerns, there are issues that are unique to the Ukiah Valley and the City of Ukiah. We will be following this issue closely to ensure that our interests are relayed and considered in any mitigations contemplated by the Corps and NMFS. Attached to this report is a letter sent to Richard Shoemaker and Mike Scannell requesting joint staff participation between the County and the City on these water issues so that we may share information and cohesively join together in our efforts on the Russian River mitigations. 2. Potter Valley Project PG&E is the current owner of the Potter Valley/Van Arsdale Dam and Eel River Diversion Project. The Van Arsdale Dam was originally built to divert Eel River water for power generation purposes, as a power source for City of Ukiah residents, but it has since become an essential supply of water to the Russian River watershed, including the Ukiah Valley. Before the Eel River was diverted to the east fork of the Russian River and the Van Arsdale Dam was built, the Russian River would literally dry up during the summer. With this diversion and the Coyote Dam construction, the residents have enjoyed a sustainable water source for many years and the population has grown extensively due to this dependable water supply. Currently, PG&E and several governmental resource agencies are recommending to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) a reduction of the Eel River diversion to the Russian River. The intent is to protect and maintain the migration of Chinook Salmon and Steelhead in the Eel River. The impacts to the Russian River, fish habitat, and dependant water users has not yet been evaluated in any form. Enclosed is a press release from PG&E delineating the process for public review of the recommended changes to FERC. This is a major issue, not only for the Ukiah Valley, but also once again, for the Sonoma County Water Agency. Reduced flows could affect agriculture, electric power, and drinking water interests for both counties. PG&E's recommendations will be filed with FERC by March 30, at which time they will be soliciting input from the public. This is another issue that we hope to jointly analyze and discuss with County staff to offer recommendations to the City Council and Board of Supervisors. Summary Due to the critical and sensitive nature of these issues, staff will be continually monitoring the progress of the Sonoma County Water Agency's actions on both of these items and will be keeping the Council informed at every juncture. The City Attorney will also be participating in the formulation of our direction and will be working with Mayor Malone at the MClW&PC meetings in his efforts to negotiate on behalf of the City of Ukiah. It is recommended that the Council approve MCIW&PC's ability to negotiate for the City of Ukiah and our representative report on the intent of the Commission's direction to the City Council before any decisions or final agreements are made by the MCIW&PC. Staff will continue to monitor and work with the County on these issues. ~AN-13-1998 08:43 MENDOCINO COUNTY P.02 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERST G AMONG UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (-IJSACE), NATIONAL MARINE FISHERII:.S SERVICE (NMFS). AND SONOMA COUNTY WATER AGENCY (SCWA) SECTION I - BACKGROUND On August 18, 1997 the National Marine Fisheries service (NMFS) published its final determination in the Federal Register to list s=eelhead trout as threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of ~973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1S44), (ESA), within a defined central California coast evolutionary significant unit (ESU) which includes the Russian River as its northern extremity. On October 31, 1996 NMFS published its final determination in the Federal Register to list coho salmon as a threatened species under the ESA within a defined central California coast ESU which extends northerly to Punta Gorda and includes the Russian River. Section 7(a) of the ESA re_cuires federal agencies to consult with the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary cf Commerce to insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or results in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. This section also requires federal agencies to confer with the appropriate secretary on agency actions if the actions are likely to jeopardize the continuing existence of species that have been proposed for listing or if the actions are likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat that has been proposed for designation. This section further requires federal agencies to consult with the Secretary on any prospective agency action at the request of, and in cooperation with, a prospective permit or license applicant if the applicant has reason to believe that an endangered species or a threatened species may be present in the area affected by the applicant's project and that implementation of such action will likely affect such species. Pursuant to 50 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 402.02, "actions" include all activities or programs of any kind authorized, funded, or carriad out, in whole or in part, by federal agencies including, but not limited to, the granting of licenses, contracts, leases, easements, right-of- way, permits or grants-in-aid, or actions directly or indirectly causing modifications to the land, water or air. Section 9 of the ESA prohibits certain activities that directly or indirectly affect endangered species. These prohibitions apply to all individuals, organizations, and agencies. Section 4(d) of the £SA allows NMFS to promulgate protective regulations 3AN-13-1998 08:43 MENDOCINO COUNTY P.03 that modify or apply any or all of the section 9 prohibitions to threatened species. NMFS published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 a policy that NI~S shall identify, to the maximum extent practicable at the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not constitute a violation of section 9 of the ESA. The notice proposing to last steelhead trout listed the types of activities which might be construed to directly or indirectly affect steelhead. The notice listing coho extends the section 9 prohibitions to coho pursuant to section 4(d) of the ESA. The notice listing coho identified certain activities that NMFS, based upon the best available information, believes will not result in a violation of ~ection 9 of the ~$A, and certain activities which could potentially harm coho salmon in the central California coast ESU and result in a violation of section 9 of the ~SA. In the notice listing coho, NMFS indicated it may develop a regulation pursuant to section 4(d) for conservation of the species t~at would be more flexible and more specific than the generic section 9 prohibitions, and on July 18, 1997 issued an interim section 4(d) rule which became effective on August 18, 1997. SECTION 2 - PURPOSE The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to establish a framework for the consultation and conference required by the SSA with respect to the activities of the United States Ar~y Corps of Engineers (USACE), the sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) and the Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District (MCRRFC&WCID) which are recited in section 3 of this MOU, or which the parties to this MOU agree are related to those activities, and which may directly or indirectly affect coho salmon or steelhead trout in the Russian River. The parties to this MOU will seek information and assistance from other local, State and Federal agencies with expertise and/or regulatory responsibility within the Russian River Basin including, but not limited to, the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, State Water Resources Control Board, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, the State'Coastal Conservancy, and the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (MCIW&PC). SECTION 3 - RECITALS a. The Coyote Valley Dam Project was authorized by the Flood control Act of 1950 (Pub. L. No. 81-516), and was completed by USACE in 1958. This project i~ operated by USACE. It is situated on the Russian River and includes Coyote Valley Dam 3AN-13-1998 08:44 MENDOCINO COUNTY P.04 which forms Lake Mendocino with a capacity of 122,500 acre-feet for water supply, flood control and recreation purposes. SCWA reimbursed USAcE for the non-federal costs of the project and has a contractual right in the water supply storage in Lake Mendocino. One of the purposes of the Coyote Valley Dam Project is to provide water to SCWA's water transmission system customers. b. The Warm Springs Dam Project was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1962 (Pub. L. No. 87-874), and was completed by the USAcE in 1984. This project is operated by USACE. It is situated on Dry Creek, a tributary of the Russian River, and includes warm Springs Dam which forms Lake Sonoma with a capacity of 381,000 acre-feet for water supply, flood control and recreation purposes. SCWA is reimbursing USACE for the non- federal costs of the project, and has a contractual right in the water supply storage in Lake Sonoma, pursuant to an agreement between USACE and SCWA dated October 1, 1982. One of the purposes of the Warm Springs Dam Project is to provide water to SCWl~s_._~.,~*n~-___._,=, including those served by SCWA's water transmission system. c. USACE owns and contracts with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) for the operation of the Don Clausen Fish Hatchery at Warm Springs Dam. This facility was constructed as mitigation for the annual loss of 6,000 steelhead trout and 100 coho salmon associated with the construction of warm Springs Dam, and to provide a fish run enhancement of 1,000 coho salmon and 1,750 chinook salmon. USACE also owns and contracts with CDFG for the operation of trapping, egg-taking and imprint facilities at Coyote Valley Dam which were constructed, together with an expansion of the Don Clausen Fish Hatchery facilities, to mitigate for the annual loss of 4,000 steelhead trout associated with the construction of Coyote Valley Dam. d. USACE has constructed stabilization and erosion control works on both the Russian River and Dry Creek channels in conjunction with the Coyote Valley and Warm Springs Dam Projects. The USACE projects were constructed to prevent erosion expected to be aggravated by releases of water from the dams. SCWA has a contractual obligation to USACE to maintain those erosion control works situated in Sonoma County pursuant to Agency Board of Directors Resolutions No. 6847 adopted May 24, 1955, No. 7798 adopted September 27, 1955, No. DR00793-1 adopted September 25, 1961 and Resolution No. DR68455 adopted December 23, 1980. The MCRRFC&WCID has a similar contractual obligation to USACE to maintain those erosion control works situated in Mendocino County pursuant to an unnumbered resolution adopted by the District Board of Directors on November 12, 1959. e. USACE regulates releases of water from storage in Lake Mendocino and Lake Sonoma for flood control purposes pursuant to 3AN-13-1998 08:44 MENDOCINO COUNTY P.05 t~he Coyote Valley Dam andLake Mendocino Russian River, California Water Control Manual, dated August 1986 and the Warm Springs Dam and Lake $onoma Dry Creek, California Water Control Manual, dated September 1984. f. At times other than when USACE is operating the reservoirs for flood control purposes, SCWA regulates releases of water from storage in Lake Mendocino and Lake Sonoma to provide water for SCWA's water transmission system, to satisfy the needs of other Russian River water users, and to maintain minimum streamflows required by the California Water Resources Control Board's Decision 1610. g. USACE regulates activities in waters of the United States under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (Section 10) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Section 404). Section 10 requires USACE approval prior to the accomplishment of any work in or over navigable waters of the United States, or which affects the course, location, conaition or capacity of such waters, section 404 requires USACE approval prier to discharging dredged or fill material into the waters of the United States. h. The Russian River estuary is closed periodically because a sandbar forms acros~ the mouth of the estuary. Artificial breaches of the estuary bar have taken place since at least 1968. A Russian River Estuary Study was carried out in 1992 and 1993 for the County of Sonoma and the California State Coastal conservancy under the direction of the Russian River Estuary ~nteragency Task Force. Agencies represented on the task force Included USACE and NMFS. The study identified several elements of a management plan for the Russian River esuuary needed to protect fish and wildlife. The responsibility for implementing the Russian River estuary management plan, recommended by the Russian River Estuary Study, was transferred from the County of $0noma to SCWA in April 1995. USACE has issued a permit to SCWA to implement the plan pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Ac%. i. NMFS has responsibility under the ESA and the Marine Mammal Protection Act for certain endangered and threatened species which reside for all or part of their life cycle in the marine environment. NMFS responsibilities pursuant to the ESA include listed, proposed, and candidate anadromous salmonids within the Russian River Basin. NMFS also advises USACE on Section 10 and Section 404 permits. j. SCWA was created by California state legislation (Statutes of 1949, Chapter 994 as amended). Pursuant to this legislation SCWA, among other things, produces and furnishes surface and groundwater for beneficial uses; controls and disposes of flood, storm and other waters; generates electrical energy; and provides, operates and maintains recreation facilities in IAN-1J-1998 08:45 MENDOCINO COUNTY P.06 connection with its flood control and water conservation works. k. SCWA owns and operates a hydroelectric power project at Warm Springs Dam pursuant to the terms of a license issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Order Issuing License [Major] for Project No. 3351 dated December 18, 1984). Articles 33 and 34 of this license impose requirements on releases from Lake Sonoma regulated by SCWA. 1. SCWA constr~cts, operates and maintains a water transmission system authorized by an Agreement for Water Supply and Construction of the Russian River-Cotati Intertie Project between SCWA and eight public agencies, dated October 25, 1974 and last amended June 28, 1995. Existing facilities which may affect coho salmon or steelhead trout include 5 Ranney collectors and ? wells, diversion works and infiltration ponds. Facilities authorized, but not yet conitructed, which may affect salmon or steelhead trout in the Russian River include a standby 20 million gallon per day Ranney collector to be constructed by SCWA. ~. SCWA has proposed a Water Supply and Transmission system Project (WSTSP) which is the subject of an environmental impact report (EIR) currently under preparation. The objective of the WSTSP is to provide a safe, economical, an~ reliable water supply to meet the defi~ed future meeds of SCWA's service area. Modifications to the Russian River which may affect coho salmon or steelhead trout in the Russian River would result from an incraase in the amount of water diverted from the Russian River (a combination of re-diversion of etored water and direct diversion of winter flow) from 7S,000 to approximately 101,000 acre-feet per year (AFY), and an increase in the SCWA water transmission system delivery capacity from 92 to 149 million gallons per day (mgd). n. SCWA operates and maintains the Central Sonoma Watershed Project, which was constructed by SCWA in cooperation with the National Resources Conservation Service. The project included the construction of flood retarding structures and the straightening, shaping and stabilization of waterways tributary to the Russian River. o. SCWA has established six zones for the purpose of financing the construction and maintenance of flood control works within Sonoma County. Zone IA, which encompasses the Mark West Creek- Laguna de santa Rosa watershed, and Zone SA, which encompasses the Russian River from the Pacific Ocean to Redwood Highway Bridge at Healdsburg excluding Zone iA, are situated within the Russian River watershed. SCWA constructs and maintains flood control and drainage facilities within these zones. IAN-1J-1998 08:46 MENDOCINO COUNTY P.O? SECTION 4 - DESIGNATION OF LEAD AGENCY USACE agrees, pursuant to 50 CFR 402.07, that USACE shall be designated as the lead agency in conducting the consultation and conference described in Section 2 Of this MOU. SECTION 5 - CONSULTATION PROCESS The signatories to this MOU agree that the consultation and conference described in Section 2 of this MOU will be pursued in accordance with the following process: a. Description of USACZ Activ%t%e~. USACE will furnish to SCWA the best information available describing USACE's activities, including but are not limited to copies of the following documents: i. the Operation and Maintenance Manual for Warm Springs Fish Hatchery, dated october 1993; ii. the Operation and Maintenance Manual for Coyote Valley Fish Facility, dated October 1993; iii. the Cooperative Agreement between the United States of America and the State of California Department of Fish and Game for the operation and Maintenance of the Don Clausen Fish Hatchery at the Warm Springs Dam and Lake sonoma Project and the Coyote Valley Fish Facilitie~ at Coyote Valley Dam and Lake Mendocino Project, dated September 30, 1991; iv. the annual reports describing hatchery activities since the beginning of operation of the hatchery; and v. a statement describing the current warm Springs Fish Hatchery and Coyote Valley Fish Facilities fishery program; vi. the coyote Valley Dam and Lake Mendocino Russian River, California Water Control Manual, dated August 1986; vii. the Warm Springs Dam and Lake Sonoma Dry Creek, California Water Control Manual, dated September 1984; viii. the Russian River Channel Improvement Operation and Maintenance Manual for Sonoma County, dated July 1965, which describe the erosion control facilities and operations along the Russian River for which SCWA is responsible; ix. the Russian River Channel Improvement Operation and Maintenance Manual for Mendocino County, dated July 1965, which describe the erosion control facilities and operations 3AN-13-1998 08:46 MENDOCINO COUNTY P.08 along the Russian. River for which MCRRFC&WCID is responsible. x. the Warm Springs Dam and Lake Sonoma Project Channel Improvements Operation and Maintenance Manual, da=ed July 1991, which describes the erosion control facilities and opera=ions along Dry Creek for which SC"WA is responsible. b. Description of_._SCWA Activ£ti~. SCWA wall furnish to USAC£ =he best information available describing SCWA's activities, including but are not limited to copies of the following documents: i. Decision 1610 of the California Water Resources control Board establishing criteria for the wa=er supply operation of the coyote Valley and warm Springs Dam Projects; ii. =he Russian River Estuary Study and a description of the current status of the implementation by sC"WA of the Russian River estuary management plan; iii. a description of existing SCWA transmission system Russian River 4iversion facilities and opera=ions; iv. a description of the proposed currently authorized new transmission system intake facility and operation with an assessment of its environmental impact~; v. the Draft Environmental Impact Report on SCWA's proposed Water Supply and Transmission System Project; vi. the Watershed Work Plan, Central sonoma Watershed, Sonoma County, California, April 1955; vii. a description of SCWA's Zone lA and 5A flood control facilities and maintenance practices. c. ~xecutive_Co~ittee. During the term of this agreement an executive committee shall exist which shall consist of the District Engineer of the San Francisco District of USACE or his designated representative, the General Manager/Chief Engineer of SCWA or his designated representative, and one member appointed by the Board of Directors of the MCIW&PC. The purpose of the Executive Committee shall be to provide public policy advise to USACE and SCWA in the execution of their respective obligations under subsections (e), (f), (h), (i) and (j) of this section. The Executive Committee shall meet upon the call of the District Engineer or his designated representative. d. Public_ Policy. Facilita%~Da Committee. The Board of Directors of SCWA will establish, and SCWA will provide staff support to, a Public Policy Facilitating Committee (PPFC) to JAN-13-1998 08:4? MENDOCINO COUNTY P.09 disseminate information on the Section 7 consultation process and receive public input. The PPFc will consist of one member appointed by and from USACE, one member appointed by and from NMFS, three members appointed by and from the Board of Supervisors of Sonoma County, three members appointed by the Board of Supervisors of Mendocino county, one member appointed by and from the Resources Agency of the state of California, and one member appointed by and from the california Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region. e. Initial screenina by USACE and SCWA. As soon as practicable, USACE and SCWA will jointly review the information furnished and received pursuant to this MOU, and other relevant information which may become available, and identify any actions or activities which may affect coho salmon or steelhead trout in the Russian River or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat critical to the survival of these species. USACE and SCWA will identify possible modifications to the actions and activities, or other discretionary conservation measures, which might be reasonably implemented in order to insure that an action or activity is not likely to adversely affect these species, or to minimize any likely adverse effects on these species. The results of the initial screening will be furnished to NMFS. NMFS may, in its discretion, review and comment on them. f. P_reDaration Of~_Draft Analysis_of Alternatives. Based upon the initial screening, scWA will, in consultation with USACE, prepare or cause to be prepared a draft analysis which will set forth each of the identified possible modifications and conservation recommendations and examine their technical and economic feasibility. The results of the analysis of alternatives will be furnished to NMFS. NMFS may, in its discretion, review and comment on them. g. Pu.blic Workshop. A public workshop will be conducted prior to the preparation of the draft biological assessment, which shall include local, state, and Federal agencies, as well as the interested public. h. Scope of Bioloaical A~e~ment. Based upon the analysis of alternatives, agency and public comments, and NMFS comments, if any, USAC£ and SCWA will jointly define the range of activities and alternatives which will be the subject of the biological assessment. i. PreParation of._._~iQ!oaical Asses~mcnt. Pursuant to 50 CFR 402.08, SCWA is designated as the non-Federal representative to prepare the biological assessment. The USACE shall furnish SCWA guidance and supervision and shall independently review and evaluate the scope and contents of the biological assessment. ~AN-1~-1998 08:4? MENDOCINO COUNTY P.10 j. Submission_of Draft Big~gaical Assessment. SCWA will prepare,or cause to be prepared a draft biological assessment and submit it to USACE and NMFS. upon receipt of comments from USACE and NMFS, it will be circulated to local, State, and Federal agencies, as well as the interested public for co~ent and review. Upon the end of the comment period, SCWA will submit a draft final biological assessment to USACE. k. gubmission of_Bioloaigal ASsessment. USACE will submit the final biological assessment to NMFS. NMFS will respond to USACE in writing within 30 days as to whether or not it concurs with the findings of the biological assessment. If the final biological assessment concludes that actions and activities are likely to adversely affect any listed species or critical habitat or likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any proposed species or result in the adverse modification or destruction of proposed critical habitat, then USACE agrees to initiate formal consultation or conference, or both, upon USACE's formal submission of the final biological assessment to NMFS. USACE need not initiate formal consultation if, as a result of the preparation of the biological assessment, USACE determines, with the written concurrence of NMFS, that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect any listed species or critical habitat. SECTION 6 - SEVERABILIT¥ If for any reason any term or condition under this MOU is found to be inconsistent with any law or reauiation, or in conflict with any other legally enforceable requirement of any party, the remaining terms and conditions of this MOU shall remain in full force and effect to the extent they can be reasonably applied in the absence of the invalid or unenforceable term or condition, unless this MOU is otherwise amended or terminated in accordance with the procedures set forth in this MOU. SECTION 7 - WAIVER OF RIGHTS By signing this MOU, the parties do not waive or relinquish any legal or equitable right that they might otherwise have with respect to any of the actions, activities or obligations contemplated by this MOU. SECTION 8 - AUTHORITIES USACE and NMFS are authorized =o enter into this MOU pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531- 1544) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661- 667c). SCWA is authorized to enter into this MOU pursuant to the ~AN-13-1998 08:48 MENDOCINO COUNTY P.11 Sonoma County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Act (California statutes of 1949, Chapter 994, as amended). This MOU may be executed in counterparts, each which shall constitute the MOU. This MOU is intended to be in furtherance of the agencies' discharge of their respective authority and responsibilities, and its provisions are to be interpreted and implemented accordingly. Nothing in this MOU is intended to or shall have the effect of constraining or limiting the agencies in carrying out their statutory responsibilities. SECTION 9 - TERM OF MOU This MOU becomes effective upon the signature by all parties and remains in effect until modified by mutual consent or terminated in accordance with the following: a. Any party proposing to terminate the MOU shall so notify the other parties and shall identify the reasons, if any, for the proposed termination. ~. The parties shall meet within a reasonable time, but not exceeding thirty (30) days, to attempt to resolve any differences. c. If, following the meeting, any party washes to terminate the MOU, that party shall give 60 days notice of intent to terminate =o the other parties. The notice may be withdrawn at any time during the 60 days. d. Unless the notice of intent to terminate is withdrawn, the MOU shall terminate upon expiration of the 60 day notice period. SECTION 10 - METHOD AND PLACE OF GIVING NOTICE Ail notices shall be made in writing and'may be given by personal delivery or by mail. Notices shall be addressed as follows: USACE District Engineer, San Francisco District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 333 Market Street, 8th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105-2197 NMFS Regional Administrator National Marine Fisherie~ Service 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200 Long Beach, CA 90802-4213 $CWA General Manager, Sonoma County Water Agency 21~0 West College Avenue Santa Rosa, CA 95401 10 JAN-13-1998 08:48 MENDOCINO COUNTY P.12 United States Ar~y Corps of Engineers Date National Marine F~h~ries Service Date Son0ma County Water Agency ~ c:~.~via~c'va~eaa~a~c"/agri3,Vl~ 17/19197 Date 11 TOTAL P.12 JOYCE A. BEARD CLERK OF THE BOARD Telephone: (707) 463-4221 FAX: (707) 463:4245 COUNTY OF MENDOCINO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 501 LOW GAP ROAD, ROOM 1090 UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 December 30, 1997 Mr. Christopher Eng Environmental Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District 333 Market Street, Seventh Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Dear Mr. Eng: On behalf of the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors, I am writing in regard to the draft Memorandum of Understanding proposed by the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) between the SCWA, the Corps, and the National Marine Fisheries Service. This MOU pertains to the required consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act relative to the listing of the coho salmon. You are in receipt of a request from the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (the Commission) to be included as a party member to this Memorandum. As a member of the Commission, we fully support its efforts to be added to this vital document. Our legal counsel has reviewed a correspondence from Mr. Robert F. Beach to you dated November 18, 1997 in regard to the Commission's participation. In his letter, Mr. Beach questions the mutuality of obligation that exists between the Commission and its individual members. It is the intent of this letter to formally declare the Commission as a fully delegated representative of the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors. It should also be noted that the Board of Supervisors also sits as the Mendocino County Water Agency. The M~ndocino County ~oard of Superv'isors further contends that participation by the Commission in this Section 7 consultation is of vital interest to our constituency. The Commission was formed through a joint powers agreement between the County, the Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District, the Potter Valley Irrigation District, the Redwood Valley County Water District, and the City of Ukiah. Through its individual members, the Commission represents the entire watershed of the Mendocino County portion of the Russian River watershed. Each member entity of the Commission performs discrete functions that impact the Russian River. As an example, the County authorizes gravel extraction permits and undertakes public improvement projects including roads, bridges, erosion control activities, etc. The City of Ukiah owns and operates a hydro-electric facility at Coyote Dam as well as water collection facilities in the Russian River. Similarly, the Potter Valley Irrigation District owns and operates extensive irrigation infrastructure MICHAEL M. DELBAR FIRST DISTRICT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RICHARD SHOEMAKER JOHN PINCHES PATRICIA A. CAMPBELL SECOND DISTRICT THIRD DISTRICT FOURTH DISTRICT CHARLES F, PETERSON FIFTH DISTRICT Mr. Christopher Eng December 21, 1997 Page 2 above the Coyote Dam and is a contractor with Pacific Gas and Electric Company with regard to the diversion of water from the Eel River to the East Fork of the Russian River. The County was granted intervenor status with respect to Decision 1 610. This status was granted in major part due to the County's interest in the environmental values of the Russian River with respect to fish life, and the recreational values of the Russian River and Lake Mendocino. The Mendocino County Water Agency is a grant recipient for the undertaking of studies of the Russian River. As has be~n demonstrated, the County plays a vitai role in the management of and activities upon the Russian River. Similar important roles are played by each member agency of the Commission. Many of these responsibilities coexist in entity in Sonoma County, the SCWA. Should each responsible entity demand a seat at the table in this Section 7 consultation, then one could easily see the size of such table becoming very large. Therefore, the Commission makes reasonable and clear sense as the single entity representing all interests in Mendocino County. It should be noted that, while we have no particular concern as to specific management of the Russian River in Sonoma County by the SCWA, any change in operation of Lake Mendocino, the water storage above Coyote Dam, the rates and timing of water releases, or the flow levels in the Russian River as a result of changes made in the consultation process with the SCWA will directly impact Mendocino County. It is therefore imperative that the interests of Mendocino County be strongly represented in this Section 7 consultation. It is our belief that the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission is the appropriate entity to represent these interests. Sincerely, Charles Peterson Chairman CC: Lt. Colonel Richard Thompson Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission City of Ukiah Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District Redwood Valley County Water District Potter Valley Irrigation District Sonoma County Board of Supervisors Sonoma County Water Agency Secretary Douglas Wheeler, California Resources Agency US Representative Frank Riggs Senator Mike Thompson Assemblywoman Virginia Strom-Martin Law Offices Of RAPPORT AND MARSTON An Association of Sole Practitioners 200 W. Henry Street P.O. Box 488 Ukiah, California 95482 David J. Rapport Lester J. Marston Scott Johnson (707) 462-6846 FAX 462-4235 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission David J. Rapport February 15, 1998 Endangered Species Act In the short time available I could not conduct extensive research. The following comments are based on my reading of the Act', the regulations2, the Draft Procedures for Conducting Section 7 Consultations and Conferences, published by the Fish and Wildlife Service in November 1994, and the Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") Among the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers ("USACE"), National Marine Fisheries Service ("NMFS") and the Sonoma County Water Agency ("SCWA").3 The Commission wants to know what remedies it has to force the the USACE to either include the Commission in the MOU or contract separately with the Commission on a similar basis. I will first summarize the status that the SCWA has acquired under the terms of the MOU (in relation to the provisions of the Act and the regulations), and then the remedies for the Commission. 1. Brief description of the consultation process. The consultation process arises out of 16 U.S.C. Section 1536 (Section 7 of the ESA, Pub. L. 93-205). Under Section 1536(a)(2), every federal agency (such as the USACE) must insure that any action which it carries out, is authorized to carry out or is funded to carry out is not likely to jeopardize an endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of a critical habitat of that species, unless the agency has been granted an exemption. The agency is required to review its actions in consultation with the NMFS or the Fish and Wildlife Service4, depending on which has jurisdiction over the species or habitat involved. In addition, any other person or entity, such as SCWA or the MCRRFC&WCID, that requires a permit or license from a federal ~ Endangered Species Act ("ESA"), 16 U.S.C. Sections 1531- 1543. 2 50 CFR Sections 402.01 to 402.15. Much of this may be obvious to Commissioners. 4 Collectively, since these agencies are part of the Interior Department under the Secretary of Interior, the statutes and regulations refer to them as "the Secretary." Memorandum to Commission Subject: ESA and Memorandum of Understanding February 15, 1998 agency to engage in an activity can require the agency to consult with the Secretary as to weather an activity for which it needs a federal permit will likely affect such species or habitat. The regulations have established three types of consultation: early, informal (optional) and formal (mandatory). Federal agencies are encouraged to confer informally with NMFS (also called "the Service") on any action which is likely to jeapardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or destroy or adversely change a critical habitat. (50 CFR Section 402.10(a).) This informal conference can be conducted in accordance with the procedures for formal consultation if requested by the agency and aoreeable to the Service. In that event it is identical to an early consultation, precedes formal consultation. (Section 402.10(d).) If an applicants requests early consultation of a federal agency, then the federal agency is required to initiate early consultation with the Service. (50 CFR Section 402.11(c).) The procedures and responsibilities for early consultation are the same as for formal consultation, but it precedes and may make formal consultation unnecessary. The early consultation is initiated by the applicant submitting a written certification to the agency that (1)it has a definite proposal outlining the action for which it requires a permit and its effect and (2) it intends to implement its proposal, if authorized. (50 CFR Section 402.11(b).) The early consultation is conducted using the same procedures as a formal consultation. Informal consultation is an optional process designed to assist the federal agency in determining whether formal consultation or a conference is required. (50 CFR section 402.13.) If the agency with the written concurrence of the Service determines after informal consultation that the action is not likely to adversely affect listed species or habitat, the consultation process is terminated and no further action is necessary. (Id.) During the informal consultation, the Service may suggest modifications to an agency's actions which avoid the likelihood of adverse effects. (Id.) A biological assessment is prepared (called a preliminary biological assessment when prepared in connection with early consultation). The biological assessment evaluates the potential effects of the action on listed species or critical habitat and determines whether adverse effects are likely. If so, a formal consultation becomes necessary. (50 CFR Section 402.12(a).) The Federal agency can designate a non-federal agency to conduct an informal consultation or prepare a biological assessment. (50 CFR Section 402.08.) If an applicant is involved and is not the designated non-Federal agency, the applicant and the Federal agency must agree on the choice of non-federal representative. (Id.) If a non-federal representative prepares the biological assessment, the federal agency shall independently review and evaluate the scope and content of the assessment. 2. The MOU. In relation to these requirements, the MOU contains tho following significant provisions: a. It obligates tho USACE and SCWA to jointly review information and identify any actions or activities which may affect coho salmon or steelhead trout or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat, including modifications or other measures which could reduce or eliminate these effects. (Section 5.e.) s Any non-federal agency or person who requires a federal permit to engage in an activity that could affect an endangered or threatened species or critical habitat. Memorandum to Commission 3 Subject: ESA and Memorandum of Understanding February 15, 1998 b. It designates the SCWA as the non-Federal representative to prepare the biological assessment. (Section 5i) c. It establishes the process that USACE and the Service will use conduct the consultation and conference required by the ESA. (Section 5.) d. It identifies the actions which are the subject matter of the conference, consultation and biological assessment necessary as a result of the listing of Coho and Steelhead. (Section 3.) e. The principal actions can be grouped as follows: (1) USACE actions (Section 3): Operation of Coyote Valley and Warm Springs Dams Ownership of Warm Springs Dam fish hatchery Egg trapping and imprint facilities at Coyote Valley Dam Construction of stabalization on erosion control works in connection with construction of both dams Releases from both dams for flood control purposes Permitting work in or over navigable waters pursuant Section 10 of Rivers and Harbors Act and 404 of Clean Water Act 2) SCWA actions (Section 3): _ Contractual oblioation to USACE to maintain erosion control works situated in Sonoma County and constructed by USACE to prevent erosion expected to be aggravated by releases of water from dam Receipt of 404 CWA permit to implement estuary managment plan at mouth of Russian River Owns and operates hydroelectric facilities on Warms Springs Dam Operates Ranney collectos and wells, diversion works and infiltrations ponds, and proposed 20 M. gallon/day Ranney collector Proposed increased diversion of 75,000 to 101,000 AF¥ in delivery capacity from 92 to 149 M. Opal from proposed Water Supply & Transmission System Project Contruction of flood retarding structures and waterway modifications of Central Sonoma Watershed Project Creation of zones for financing construction and maintenance of flood control works (3) MCRRFC&WCID actions: Memorandum to Commission Subject: ESA and Memorandum of Understanding February 15, 1998 Contractual obligation to USACE to maintain erosion control works situated in Mendocino County and constructed by USACE to prevent erosion expected to be aggravated by releases of water from dam f. It provides that if the final biological assessment concludes that actions and activities are likely to jeopardize the continujed existence of any proposed species or adverse modification or destruction of proposed critical habitat, then USACE agrees to initiate formal consultation or conference, or both. USACE need not initiate consultation, if it determines, based on the approved biological assessment, that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect any listed species or critical habitat. (Section 5.k.) In other words, the focus of the MOU is on an informal consultation, which will determine whether formal consultation is necessary. 3. Remedies. If the Commission by delegation from its members has the status of an applicant, it has certain rights under the ESA that could affect the MOU. a. It has the right to approve the USACE's appointment of SCWA as the non-Federal representative to prepare the biological assessment, if the biological assessment includes activities of Commission members which require USACE or other federal approval. The MOU purports to include the activities of the MCRRFC&WCID listed in Section 3 of the agreement. In addition to the MCRRFC&WCID erosion control activities identified in the MOU, it may engage in other flood control activities requiring USACE approval. In addition, the City of Ukiah, like SCWA, operates a hydroelectric project on Coyote Dam that includes fisheries mitigation projects, including injecting oxygen in the water out the outlet works and furnishing water to fishery enhancement works. The City operates a Ranney collector. These other members could submit the written certification referenced in 50 CFR Section 402.1 l(b). b. It has the right to require USACE to commence early consultation. According to 50 CFR Section 402.11(a), "the prospective applicant should be involved throughout the consultation process." Early consultation would undoubtedly be conducted in combination with the informal consultation conducted pursuant to the MOU. The Commission's legal remedies depend on its acquiring specific rights under the ESA or its implementing regulations. Private enforcement of the ESA is governed by the citizen suit provisions of 16 U.S.C. Section 1540(g). After providino a 60 day notice, any person may commence a civil action in the United States District Court for the district where the action is proposed, to enjoin any violation of a duty imposed on the Federal agency or the Secretary by the ESA or the regulations. If the agency or the Secretary is acting within the discretion delegated to it under the ESA or the regulations, the Commission could not successfully compel action by means of litigation. County of Mendocino Office of the County Counsel MEMORANDUM FROM: SUBJECT: February 15,1998 MICHAEL DELBAR, Supervisor, 1~t District H. PETER KLEIN, County Counsel MOU between USACE, NMFS and SCWA: Opinion//98-124 You have requested our review of the above referenced MOU between USACE, NMFS and SCWA and the section 7 consultation process under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) with respect to whether the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission can legally become a signatory to the above referenced MOU or become a party to a separate MOU between USACE and NMFS. Backaround/Consultation Requirement Under section 7 of the ESA Federal agencies are required to consult with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce to ensure that any actions the Federal agency authorizes, funds or carries out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Federal agencies are required to consult with the Secretary on any prospective agency action at the request of and in cooperation with, a prospective permit or license applicant if the applicant has reason to believe that an endangered species or threatened species may be present in the area affected by the applicant's project and that implementation of such action will likely affect such species. The term "action" includes all activities or programs of any kind authorized, funded or carried out in whole or in part, by Federal agencies including but not limited to the granting of licenses, contracts, leases, easements, rights of way, permits, grants-in-aid or actions directly or indirectly causing modifications to land, water or air. The purpose of the MOU between USACE, NMFS and SCWA is articulated in section 2 of the MOU: "... to establish a framework for the consultation and conference required by the ESA with respect to the activities of USACE, NMFS, SCWA and the Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District {MCRRFC & WCID) which are recited in section 3 of this MOU or which the parties to the MOU agree are related to those activities and which may directly or indirectly affect coho salmon or steelhead trout in the Russian River. The parties to this MOU will seek information and assistance from other local, State and Federal agencies with expertise and/or regulatory responsibility within the Russian River Basin including, but not limited to, the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, State Water Resources Control Board, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, the State Coastal Conservancy, and the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (MCIW & PC)." The USACE has the ultimate responsibility for compliance with section 7 of the Act. Pursuant to regulation section 402.08, USACE is permitted to designate a non-Federal representative to conduct informal consultation or prepare a biological assessment. In this instance the USACE has designated the SCWA as the non-Federal representative. Despite this description, the USACE is required to furnish guidance and supervision to SCWA efforts to prepare a biological assessment and is also required to independently review and evaluate the scope and content of the biological assessment. Earlier requests by the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (MCIW & PC) to USACE to become an applicant or party to the consultation process have been unsuccessful. In partial recognition of the demand from Mendocino County agencies for a role in the consultation process, the MOU provides for the creation of an Executive Committee to provide public policy advice to the USACE and SCWA in the execution of their respective obligation under subsection (e), (f), (i) and (j) of section 5 of the MOU. These subsections provide as follows: e. Initial Screening by USACE and SCWA. As soon as practicable, USACE and SCWA will jointly review the information furnished and received pursuant to this MOld, and other relevant information which may become available, and identify any action or activities which may affect coho salmon or steelhead trout in the Russian River or result in the destruchon or adverse modification of habitat critical to the survival of these species. USACE and SCWA will identify possible modifications to the actions and activities, or other discretionary conservation measures, which might be reasonably implemented in order to insure that an action or activity is not likely to adversely affect these species, or to minimize any likely adverse effects on these species. The results of the initial screening will be furnished to NMFS. NMFS may, in its discretion, review and comment on them. f. Preparation of Draft Analysis of Alternatives. Based upon the initial screening, SCWA will, in consultation with USACE, prepare or cause to be prepared a draft analysis which will set forth each of the identified possible modifications and conservation recommendations and examine their technical and economic feasibility. The results of the analysis of alternatives will be furnished to NMFS. NMFS may, in its discretion, review and comment on them. h. Scope of Biological Assessment. Based upon the analysis of alternatives, agency and public comments, and NMFS comments, if any, USACE and SCWA will jointly define the range of activities and alternative which will be the subject of the biological assessment. Preparation of Biological Assessment. Pursuant to 50 CFR 402.08, SCWA is designated as the non-Federal representative to prepare the biological assessment. The USACE shall furnish SCWA guidance and supervision and shall independently review and evaluate the scope and contents of the biological assessment. jo Submission of Draft Biological Assessment. SCWA will prepare, or cause to be prepared a draft biological assessment and submit it to USACE and NMFS. Upon receipt of comments from USACE and NMFS, it will be circulated to local, State, and Federal agencies, as well as the interested public for comment and review. Upon the end of the comment period, SCWA will submit a draft final biological assessment to USACE. The membership of the Executive Committee consists of: 1. The USACE San Francisco District Engineer. 2. General Manager/Chief Engineer of SCWA or designee. 3. A representative appointed by the Directors of the MCIW & PC. The MOU also provides for the Board of Directors of the SCWA to establish a Public Policy Facilitating Committee the role of which will be to disseminate information on the section 7 consultation process and to receive public input. The membership of this committee consists of the following: 1. 3 members appointed by the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors. 2. 1 member from USACE. 3. 3 members appointed by the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. 4. 1 member from the State of California Resource Agency. 5. 1 member from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board/North Coast Region. Applicant/Party Status under section 7 Early consultation is beneficial for an applicant because it provides the opportunity for expedited permitting and other regulatory processes associated with actions requiring Federal authorizations. Early consultations are intended to reduce the potential for conflicts between listed species or critical habitat and proposed actions. Early consultation is an optional process that occurs before a prospective applicant files an application for a Federal permit or license, frequently referred to as a pre-application. To qualify, a prospective applicant must: -Provide a definite proposal outlining the action and its effects; and -Certify that he, she or it intends to implement the proposal if it is authorized. If the prospective applicant provides the action agency with this information in writing, the ESA requires the action agency to initiate early consultation. This request must be in writing and contain the same information required for formal consultation [50 CFR 402.14{c)]. Although early consultation in this instance is conducted by the service agency {NMFS) and the action agency {USACE) the prospective applicant {SCWA in this case) should be involved throughout the process. The information required by 50 CFR 402.14(c) is as follows: 4 1. A description of the action to be considered; 2. A description of the specific area that may be affected by the action; 3. A description of any listed species or critical habitat that may be affected by the action; 4. A description of the manner in which the action may affect any listed species or critical habitat and an analysis of any cumulative effects; 5. Relevant reports, including any environmental impact statement, environmental assessment, or biological assessment prepared; and 6. Any other relevant available information on the action, the affected listed species, or critical habitat. NMFS does not formally determine who is an applicant for USACE action. However, ff the Federal action which is sought, such as a USACE permit or license together with the activities resulting from such permission, the action agency (USACE) determines the applicant status, including requests arising from prospective applicants in early consultations. The USACE also determines how the applicants are to be involved in the consultation process consistent with provisions of section 7(a)(3), (b) and (c) of the ESA and the section 7 regulations. If the Federal agency (USACE) identifies an applicant, NMFS meets its obligation to that party by providing the following opportunities for applicant involvement: USACE is to provide an applicant an opportunity to submit information for consideration during the consultation; The applicant must be informed of the estimated length of any extension of the 180-day time frame for preparing a biological assessment, along with a written statement of the reasons for the extension; Time flames for concluding formal consultation cannot be extended beyond 60 days without the applicant's concurrence; The applicant is entitled to review draft biological opinions obtained through the action agency and to provide comments through the action agency; NMFS will discuss the basis of their biological determination with the applicant and seek the applicant's expertise in identifying reasonable and prudent alternatives to the action if likely jeopardy or adverse modification of critical habitat is determined; and NMFS provides the applicant with a copy of the final biological opinion. It should be noted that NMFS does not work directly with or take comments directly from the applicant without the knowledge or consent of the action agency. Issues surrounding MCIW & PC seeking Applicant Status As can be seen above, the status of applicant or signatory to a consultation MOU is project driven. The local Mendocino County agencies which believe they are being adversely impacted by the NMFS/USACE/SCWA Memorandum of Understanding should undertake an examination of whether they meet the legally required prerequisites to be an applicant or signatory to the MOU or, in the alternative, whether they can independently initiate an application for early consultation. A related question, for which we do not have an answer, is whether the MCIW & PC can qualify for applicant status if a permit or project application is another local agency such as the Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District (MCRRFC & WCID) or the City of Ukiah. Can applicant status be delegated to another agency? We believe the MOU itself contains language supportive of, at a minimum, including the MCRRFC & WCID as a party/applicant to the MOU. Once again, section 2 of the MOU states: "The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to establish a framework for the consultation and conference required by the ESA with respect to the activities of the United State Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), The Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) and the Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District (MCRRFC & WCID) which are recited in section 3 of this MOU, or which the parties to this MOU agree are related to those activities, and which may directly or indirectly affect coho salmon or steelhead trout in the Russian River. ***' 6 describes USACE activities Section 5 of the MOU - Consultation Process and SGWA activities but fails to describe MCRRFC & WCID activities pertaining to Decision 1610 and operation of the Coyote Valley Dam Project and any other projects the MCRRFC & WCID is involved with. These activities should be set forth in any MOU to which the MCRRFC & WCID is a party. We have heard discussion about future plans to raise the level of the Coyote Valley Dam this could be another basis for qualifying for applicant/party stares provided this proposed project has moved beyond the speculation stage and has a reasonable probability of being constructed. The Russian River Watershed Program is another project which should qualify local Mendocino County agencies for applicant or party status depending upon their level of involvement. Ultimately, the participation by any Mendocino County based local agency as an applicant or participant in the consultation process will require considerable discussion, planning, cooperation, and coordination among these agencies. The informal consultation process is similar to a streamlined permit process in that it presupposes projects will be undertaken in the near future and sets in motion a fast-track process to accomplish those goals and projects. Again, we believe the current MOU provides support for MCRRFC & WCID involvement as a party for the reasons already stated. HPK/jms CC: THE HONORABLE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MIKE SCANNELL, County Administrative Office JOYCE A. BEARD, Clerk of the Board DENNIS SLOTA, Mendocino County Water Agency fde: Mendocino County Water Agency POTTER VALLEY PROJECT/Overview PG&E and three governmental resource agencies will be recommending to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) changes to the water flows in the Eel River, which in turn could affect diversions to the East Fork of the Russian River. The intent of the changes is to protect and maintain the migration of chinook salmon and steelhead and coho in the Eel River. The recommendation was developed following an extensive study of the impacts of PG&E's Potter Valley project on Eel River fisheries that was required under PG&E's FERC license for the project. The recommendations being presented have been developed jointly by PG&E and government agencies who are primarily responsible and concerned for preserving fish and wildlife in the watershed. They include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. The recommendations of the group are based on the most extensive and comprehensive study ever conducted of the fisheries on the upper Eel River---a study that followed the migratory habits of these fish for 10 years. In addition, water flow recommendations are based on a study of project hydrology, such as lake levels and water flows, over a recent 19 year period. The group is only responsible for recommending changes to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). All decisions regarding water flows for the Eel and the East Fork of the Russian rivers can be made only by FERC and only after extensive public review. Neither PG&E nor any of the governmental resource agencies that developed the recommendations have the authority to decide water flow requirements. People who live in the Russian and Eel river watersheds will have extensive opportunities to influence FERC's decision. The recommendations will be filed with FERC by March 30. FERC will then evaluate not only the recommendations proposed by PG&E and the resource agencies but will also solicit input from the public and will evaluate other alternatives. THE RECOMMENDATIONS The intent of the proposed changes is to increase water available in the Eel River during critical migration periods in the fall and spring. In order to mimic natural water flows and provide as much flexibility as possible, water flows may be'adjusted up to three times a day from October to January (upstream migration) and daily from January through May (downstream migration). To insure that changes to water flows are as beneficial as possible, the group's recommendation includes upgrading the precision of flow gages at Tomki Creek, an unregulated tributary of the Eel that is a prime spawning area and which is considered the best barometer of natural fluctuations in the river. In addition, these changes will minimize the possibility of drawing fish beyond their normal spawning ground. The recommended changes in water flows are expected to have a minimal effect on downstream urban areas along the Russian River. They are estimated to reduce water flows to the Russian River on average by about 15 percent. Except under the most extreme drought conditions, water flows should remain unchanged in the summer, when water supplies are more critical. In addition, the group proposal calls for: · annual surveys of chinook salmon in the upper Eel River · $10,000 annually top suppress squawfish, a predator in the Eel River $30,000 annually to supplement chinook salmon hatcheries · $20,000 annually for a scientific aide hired by the California Department of Fish and Game to manage flow releases from Scott Dam to improve chinook salmon emigration · upgrades to improve the precision of Tomki Creek flow gages · upgrades at Cape Horn Dam to allow accurate regulation of higher minimum flows The group believes that this proposal provides the best balance between protecting fisheries, generating hydroelectric power, meeting consumption needs for both urban and rural areas and preserving water flows for recreation. For more information, contact William Sessa at (916) 923-7051 Proposed Recommendation for the Potter Valley Project Summary by: PG&E, California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service February 19, 1998 OVERVIEW PG&E's current license for the Potter Valley Project, issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), required PG&E to conduct a 10-year fishery study in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to determine the effects of the flow schedule outlined in license Article 38. After completion of the study and before filing with FERC, the license requires PG&E to consult with CDFG and USFWS about the study results and any recommendations for modifications in the flow release schedule or project structures and operations necessary to protect and maintain the fishery resources. Because of the threatened status of anadromous fish under the Endangered Species Act, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) also participated in this review. During this review, the state and federal resource agencies expressed interest in an approach that tracked the natural hydrology of the Eel River more closely than the present flow schedule contained in Article 38 of PG&E's FERC license. As a result of a lengthy process of review and consultation, a proposed recommendation to FERC has been developed by PG&E, CDFG, USFWS, and NMFS for a new Eel River flow schedule. Under the proposed recommendation, flows would be adjusted daily from October through June, primarily in response to runoff from Tomki Creek, an unregulated tributary to the Eel River. Tomki Creek will serve as an indicator of timing of runoff in the mainstem Eel River, which is very difficult to gage accurately, and will allow PG&E to make Project releases following natural runoff patterns. Special provisions are made to progressively reduce minimum flows during very dry periods, as measured by the cumulative inflow into Lake Pillsbury, and for emergency reductions when Lake Pillsbury reaches critically Iow levels. Page I OVERVIEW (continued) In addition to the flow provisions, the proposed recommendation also includes non-flow fisheries mitigation measures: annual chinook salmon surveys in the upper Eel River and Tomki Creek; · $10,000 annually for Ptychocheilus grandis (commonly known as Sacramento squawfish) suppression; · $30,000 annually for chinook salmon and steelhead stock rescue program; · $20,000 annually for a CDFG scientific aide at Van Arsdale Fishery Station; · continued management of flow releases from the spillway of Scott Dam to improve chinook salmon emigration; · upgrades to improve the precision of the Tomki Creek flow gage; and · upgrades to Cape Horn Dam to allow accurate regulation of higher minimum flows. Under this system, flows for migration and spawning by chinook salmon and steelhead in the Eel River will be significantly enhanced. The proposed recommendation would result in an estimated 15% reduction in the diversion of water to the Russian River basin based on the 19- year simulation period (1976/77 through 1994/95). SUMMARY OF FLOW PROPOSAL Background: The proposed recommendation represents a significant departure from the existing Potter Valley flow release schedule contained in Article 38 of the Project license. Under Article 38, the minimum flow requirement below Cape Horn Dam from November through March can be up to 100 cfs, depending on water year type; minimum flows in April and May ramp down to a summer flow requirement of 5 cfs beginning on June 1. Under Article 38, adjustments to minimum flow requirements to reflect changes in water year status are made no more than weekly. During November and December weekly adjustments can occur in response to significant storm runoff ("trigger") events, but from January through May requirements are calculated on a monthly basis. Page 2 Proposed Eel River Flows: The proposed recommendation was developed collaboratively by PG&E, CDFG, USFWS and NMFS with technical support from Steiner Environmental Consulting. Eel River releases were developed from an empirical relationship between Tomki Creek and unimpaired Eel River discharge that has been tuned to balance fishery and water supply constraints. In this proposal, releases are adjusted on a daily basis (up to 3X per day during November - January) to follow the natural pattern of runoff from the Tomki Creek watershed. Flow measurements from Tomki Creek are superior in several ways to direct measurements on the mainstem or Rice Fork of the Eel River above Lake Pillsbury as a basis for setting Eel River flow releases, because: 1. Tomki Creek can be gaged accurately. Because the Eel River has a high sediment load and an unstable bed, flow measurements taken upstream of Lake Pillsbury would be difficult and prone to inaccuracies. In contrast, the gage near the mouth of Tomki Creek was shown during the 10-year fishery study to be a reliable site for flow measurement. 2. By coordinating Eel River flow releases with Tomki Creek (the largest Eel River tributary near Cape Horn Dam), the positive effect of tributary accretion is maximized. 3. It minimizes the risk of drawing Tomki Creek chinook salmon past their natal spawning grounds. In the proposed recommendation, minimum releases below Cape Horn Dam between October I and June 30 will be calculated based on an approximately 13X expansion of the average flow in Tomki Creek over the previous 8 to 24 hours (depending on the frequency of flow adjustments). The resulting value is constrained throughout the fall, winter, and spring by cap and floor limitations. The normal cap marks a point where flows for fisheries needs have been adequately met. The cap is generally 140 cfs from October 1 to June 30, but is raised to 200 cfs from April 1 to May 31 to improve downstream migration for salmon and steelhead. For example, with a Tomki Creek flow of 20 cfs in November, the normal prescribed flow below Cape Horn Dam would be 140 cfs, but the same calculation in a normal May would prescribe 200 cfs. The normal floor on minimum releases during the fall, winter and spring is 35 cfs. Page 3 In order to minimize any adverse impacts to fishery resources from reduced flows during dry periods in the fall, a 5,000 acre-foot block of water will be reserved in Lake Pillsbury each year for release between December 1 and January 31, as directed by the resource agencies. CDFG intends to use this water primarily to stabilize instream flows during chinook salmon spawning and egg incubation. Flows during July, August and September will remain at 5 cfs, as in the current license. The initiation of summer flows occurs a month later than under Article 38 and ends a month earlier. This change enhances flows for downstream migration of juvenile salmonids in the late spring, and for upstream migration of adults in the early fall. Ramping will smooth flow transitions from summer to fall and late spring to summer. Under the proposed recommendation, in the fall the ramping function will typically elevate minimum Eel River flows from five cfs to the normal floor value of 35 cfs. This occurs incrementally during the first 15 days of October, with provision to progressively respond to storm events during this period. On October 15 the flow schedule is fully operational, and Eel River flows can increase up to 140 cfs. Ramping in the late spring to the summer base flow of 5 cfs occurs in two stages. Between June 1 and June 30 prescribed daily flows will be attenuated by a coefficient that decreases daily by 5% from the previous day's coefficient. Floor and cap values (typically 35 and 140 cfs, respectively) stay in effect throughout the month of June. Then, between July 1 and July 7 flows will be ramped down by 1/7 each day to reach 5 cfs. During very dry periods, the available water supply is severely stressed by demands for minimum fish releases in the Eel River and the East Branch Russian River, as well as by contractual obligations to the Potter Valley Irrigation District (PVID). During very dry periods, the proposed recommendation relies primarily on a mechanism termed "water year conservation" to preserve adequate storage in Lake Pillsbury and minimize impacts to the Russian River water supply. With water year conservation, the normal cap and floor can be reduced by a coefficient based on a water year rating factor. Cumulative inflow to Lake Pillsbury is calculated daily, checked against a historical database, and the current year-to-date standing is calculated. A specific coefficient corresponding to this rating is obtained from the water year conservation Page 4 curve and used to affect the reduction in cap and floor amounts. The normal cap (140/200 cfs) and floor (35 cfs) are noticeably reduced only when the cumulative inflow statistic for Lake Pillsbury falls below the 15th percentile (that is, the driest 15% of conditions). East Branch Russian River Flows: Minimum flows in the East Branch Russian River will be determined by the same criteria as in Article 38 (Table 1). In a normal year, the minimum East Branch flow release is 35 cfs from September 16 - May 14, and 75 cfs from May 15 - September 16. In addition to East Branch Russian River minimum flows, Potter Valley Irrigation District has a contract with PG&E for delivery of up to 50 cfs from May 1 through October 15, and up to 5 cfs from Oct 16 through April 30. Lake Level Emergency Provision: During extremely dry periods, the water year conservation provisions are not sufficient to assure that Lake Pillsbury does not dry up. To deal with this extreme case, the proposal provides for special emergency minimum flow reductions. If Lake Pillsbury reaches the levels shown in Figure 1, then minimum flow requirements in the East Branch Russian River will be decreased by 50%. During the period between October 1 and June 31 this same reduction can also apply to Eel River minimum flows. In computer modeling of the new flow schedule as applied to the water years 1976/77 through 1994/95, this emergency provision was invoked for the East Branch Russian River during two periods (May 3 -November 3, 1977, and July 18-September 30, 1988). In the Eel River this provision was invoked from May 3 - June 30, 1977 and October 1 - November 3, 1977. Page 5 SUMMARY OF NON-FLOW PROPOSALS In addition to flow provisions, the proposed recommendation also includes several non-flow measures to minimize project fishery impacts and allow implementation of the new flow schedule. 1. PG&E will provide CDFG $20,000 annually to fund a scientific aide position at Van Arsdale Fishery Station for the duration of the license (Year 2022). This will ensure accurate counts of adult fish arriving at the fish ladder, permit data collection on downstream migrants at the fish screen bypass, and ensure timely maintenance of the counting station and ladder during storms. 2. PG&E will fund annual chinook salmon carcass surveys at selected index sections in the Eel River and Tomki Creek for the duration of the license. This information, along with data from Van Arsdale Fisheries Station, will provide continuing data to help the resource agencies assess the status of the chinook salmon fishery. 3. PG&E will provide CDFG $10,000 annually for Pt¥chocheilus grandis (commonly known as Sacramento squawfish) suppression. In order to reduce the risk of predation on juvenile salmon and steelhead around project facilities, CDFG will coordinate annual efforts to suppress the P. grandis population. 4. PG&E will provide CDFG $30,000 annually for CDFG's chinook salmon and steelhead stock rescue program. This program would be managed under the guidelines for the present CDFG stock rescue program, which emphasizes the production of wild fish. 5. PG&E will continue to cooperate in releasing warm water from the spillway of Scott Dam in the late winter/spring period to promote the timely downstream migration of juvenile chinook salmon from the Eel River between Scott and Cape Horn dams. 6. The Tomki Creek flow gage will be upgraded to improve the precision of Iow flow measurements and to allow telemetry of data for flow calculation. 7. Cape Horn Dam will be modified to allow accurate regulation of the higher minimum flows provided under the proposed recommendation. Page 6 TABLE 1. PROPOSED EAST BRANCH RUSSIAN RIVER FLOW RELEASES ~-~ Period Water Year Classification -~ 3_/ Normal Dry Critical September 16 - May 14 May 15 - September 15 35 35 20 75 40 20 1/ Releases to exclude flows diverted to the Potter Valley Irrigation District. 2_/ Determination of Water Year Type During January The January criteria are based upon the cumulative unimpaired inflow for the water year to Van Arsdale Reservoir, to be reconstructed by PG&E. lfcumulative inflow to Van Arsdale Reservoir is less than 23,500 acre feet, January shall be classified as "dry". If cumulative inflow to Van Arsdale Reservoir is less than 4,000 acre-feet, January shall be classified as "critical". Determination of Water Year Type During February-June "Dry" water year conditions are defined to exist when the actual cumulative inflow to Lake Pillsbury for the water year (beginning October I of each calendar year) is less than or equal to: 39,200 acre-feet as of February 1 65,700 acre-feet as of March 1 114,500 acre-feet as of April 1 145,600 acre-feet as of May 1 160,000 acre-feet as of June 1 Inflow greater than the above will constitute a "normal" water year. "Critical" water year conditions are defined to exist when the actual cumulative inflow to Lake Pillsbury for the water year is less than or equal to: 19,500 40,000 45,000 5O,O00 55,000 acre-feet as of February 1 acre-feet as of March 1 acre-feet as of April 1 acre-feet as of May 1 acre-feet as of June I 3/ Determination of Water Year Type During July-December The water year classification of July through December will be based upon the classification of the previous June. The specified minimum flows shall be reduced 50% if Lake Pillsbury is below the elevations shown in Figure 1. Page 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d~S onv lnr' NN~ XVD, I kldV NYr 03O AON 100 d 8 THE PRESS DEMOCRAT, FRIDAY, APRIL 25, I g97 Justice Department workers arrive with evidence at the Federal Courthouse in Denver on Thursday for the trial of OMahoma City bombing defendant Timothy Mc Veigh. Denver was being blanketed by a spring snowstorm. stored the materials in public lockers around Kansas, and waited for April 19 M the two-year anniversary of Waco. McVeigh, tlartzler said, rented the truck under an alias and then dropped off a getaway car in Oklahoma City -- with Nichols' help. He said a surveillance cam- era there twice captu?ed Nichols' pickup in Oklahoma City. But on the day of the bombing, Hartzler said, it was McVeigh alone who delivered the bomb to the Murrah building. He said residue found on McVeigh's cloth- ing is consistent with components of a detonation cord. And he said a piece of the inside of the truck showed crystals consistent with ammonium nitrate. "In the end, we'll build a solid wall of evidence against t Treaty McVeigh,' he said, "making your job of determining his guilt easy, I believe." Hartzler's opening spanned two hours. Next up was Jones. He addressed the jury for not quite three hours. Reliability questioned Jones attacked the credibility of the governmentr~'~itnesses. He noted three employees at the Ryder agency in Junction City, Kan., could not agree on whether one or two people rented the truck, or whether McVeigh was one of them. He said records from phone debit cards McVeigh and Nichols allegedly used to further their conspiracy will not hold up be- cause they are inaccurate and confusing. do so. If the United States had not ratified it, there would have been no place at the table for American negotiators, and this country would have been locked out of the process for setting monitoring and ~n fnreorn~n~' gtandnrdg Continued from Page d 1 "The credibility of commit- ments made by two presidents -- nn~ Ronllhlican and one Democrat ASSOCIATED PRESS He particularly attacked Mi- chael Fortier, an Army buddy of McVeigh, who has pleaded guilty to lesser charges and will be the government's key witness. He de- scribed Fortier and his wife, Lori, also a government witness, as heavy drug users and liars and people who would say anything to save themselves. And Jones warned jurors they will learn the FBI crime lab, which analyzed some of the foren- sic evidence in the case, allowed much of it to be contaminated, and that lab officials "slanted" their analyses to help the prosecution. The first testimony in the gov- ernment's case will be presented today, most likely an audio tape of the blast and the shouts of terri- fied people in downtown Oklaho- ma City. Coho Continued from Page ,41 California, federal officials said the decision is intended to encour- age states to act independently to protect wildlife and plants and avoid sometimes onerous federal rule-making. "Our goal is to send a wake-up call to California that says, 'Look at what Oregon has done,'" said one administration official. Along the North Coast, develop- ers, ranchers, winemakers and fishermen have expressed con- cern that the Coho protections could limit growth, jobs and pro- ductivity. The impact of October's deci- sion has not yet been felt because planners and politicians are trying to devise ways to protect the fish. But that decision, and today's, are a clear sign of the federal govern- ment's intent to monitor California wildlife issues more closely. The next step this summer could be the imposition of protections for the steelhead trout, which could directly affect the Russian River, countywide water supplies, development and agriculture. Coho salmon, a shimmering fish silvery blue in the ocean and often red-sided as it swims upstream to spawn and die, once provided abundant harvests for commercial fishing fleets now banned from catching cohos anywhere along the West Coast. Historically, it numbered as. many as 1.4 million along the. central and northern Oregon coast; now 80,000 native coho salmon are there, according to the fisheries office. Along the southern Oregon and Northern California coasts, where there used to be 150,000 to 400,000 coho salmon; now there are fewer than 10,000 native cohos. According to federal officials, California is being treated more harshly than Oregon for two rea- sons: First, Oregon prepared a 2,700-page document outlining its salmon-protection plan while Cali- fornia, did not. Second, stream conditions along the central and northern Oregon coasts are less degraded than those to the south and, as a result, "the fish are better off there." The conservation action, taken in response to a federal court order, is part of a larger campaign to protect the diversity of fish in the cold, fast-running streams of the NOrthwest and in the northern Pacific. In October, federal officials de- clared the coho salmon spawning in streams along a relatively nar- row, 300-mile-long stretch, of Cali- fornia coastline are 'heading to- ward extinction. "We do not argue that it is a perfect and infallible instrUment,'' he said. "But it will complicate life for proliferators ... and its verifi- cation provisions cover every as- peet of a chemical weapons Today's action, however, covers a wider area -- about 700 miles of shoreline and waterways up to nearly 150 miles inland -- and, as a result, will have a greater economic impact on the region. program from development This story includes in[ormation [rorn Pacje 6 Effort launched to regain diverted Eel River water Since 1908, a Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) dam and diversion facility known as the Potter Valley Project has taken up to 90 percent of the water from the headwaters of the Eel River and redirected it south through hydro- electric turbines into the East Branch of the Russian River. Concerned citizens of that watershed say unnaturally high flows are damaging the Russian River ecosystem; meanwhile, the Eel River suf- fers from abnormally low wa- ,, . ter levels and high tempera- tures that are lethal for aquatic life. In both rivers, salmon and steelhead trout are on the brink of extinction. The Eel is California's third-largest river system. For- :nc. rlv a cool, deep river, ~t ,s n~w shallow, warm, and ~:hokcd with gravel. Its levels :,t sediment are legendary-- ,:r.c. uably among the h~ghest :rq the world. In years past, :he Ee! was also legendary for :ts great numbers of fish. In '.gt)O, there v'crc at least £5(),O(g) coho, chinook, and steelhead in the F~I Fhver, ,,,,'~t h l tX),O09 chinook alone har- vested from the Eel River. ~,,. Today there might be a total of 25,000 anadromous fish (fish that spawn in fresh wa- ter, live their adult lives in the ocean, and return to their stream of origin to reproduce). Statewide the current total estimate for coho salmon is less than 7,500, and of that number, 3,000 to 5,000 are believed to be from the Eel R~ver. What will it take to make returning this river system to its former health and abundance a priority? While the Potter Valley Project is certainly not the only problem affecting the Eel River, it is certainly one of the main impediments. Stopping the Eel's diversion to the Russian would in- stantly and dramatically lower water temperatures and raise the level of the river. The timing is right for making a move to re- gain this water. PG&E has announced that the Potter Valley Project is no longer a profitable hydroelectric venture, and since down- Sonoma Count2,,' Water AgenQ"s o',vn analysis in 1990 (and again in 1994) stating that there is plenty of water in the Russian River system to meet all legitimate existing needs (with the exception of the community of Potter Valley, which has come to rely on the diversion). This is a political water grab, pure and simple. Sonoma County would maintain the Potter Valley Project not as a hydro- The headwaters of the main stem Eel River. Downstream up to 90 percent of its water is diverted for hydroelectric generation. Photo by Ryan Henson. The Eel is California's thffd- largest river system. Formerly a cool, deep dyer, it is now shallow, warm, and choked with gravel. Its levels of sediment are legendary arguably among the highest in the world, in years past, the Eel was also legendary for its great numbers of fish stream users on the Russian system refuse to subsidize the diversion by paying for any of their diverted Eel River water, PG&E has decided to sell or shut down the.facility. One might think that closure of this hydroelectric facility means the automatic return of diverted water to the Eel. Think again! Sonoma and Matin counties are maneuvering to buy the Potter Valley Project and gain control of the Eel River water flowing south, despite electric bhsiness but rather as a water deliver)' system. A grassroots group known as Friends of the Eel River has studied the situation and is moving to file suit against PG&E to prevent any sale of this project and to insist that if its original purpose---electricity gen- eration~is no longer valid, then the water should stay in its rightful watershed. Based on the public trust doctrine, the lawsuit claims that ecological concerns on both the Eel and Russian rivers mandate the end of the diversion. Furthermore, the facility was initially con- structed against the wishes of Humboldt County (where the majority of the Eel River watershed is lo- cated) and has been a viola- tion of the public trust since its inception. Given the clear needs of the Eel watershed versus the weak claims of counties to the south, the lawsuit has an excellent chance of success. Friends of the Eel River is working to raise $1S,OO0 to launch the lawsuit. Fortunately, the attorney has agreed to work on the case pro bono. Anyone wishing to donate or learn more can contact Friends of the Ed River at P.O. BOx. 183~t, Willits, CA 95490, (707) 459-9278. 300 VE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 . · ADMIN. 707/463-6200 · ~UBLIC SAFETY 463-6242/6274 · FAX a' 707/463-6204 February 19, 1998 Mike Scannell 501 Low Gap Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Mike: I have appreciated our discussions in the last several weeks on the various water issues that are affecting Mendocino County, which are critical to our community and need to be dealt with expediently. Richard Shoemaker had called me several weeks ago to discuss some of his concerns regarding this subject and how it affects Mendocino County. l told him of our discussions on sharing information and asked if he would be interested in forming a committee so that we would have a combined approach and strategy to present to our Boards and Councilmembers. I discussed the possibility of forming a joint committee of County and City staff with the Council last night, and two of our Councilmembers, Jim Mastin and Phillip Ashiku, have agreed to be part of a committee to discuss the vadous issues surrounding the Russian River, including flow control, that may adversely affect our region. City staff members that would be involved include Darryl Barnes, our Public Utilities Director, and Bob Sawyer, our Director of Planning. I really appreciate your knowledge on this subject and sharing your thoughts with me in the last several weeks. Though we may have some distinct differences regarding water issues, as we have discussed, there are many concerns that are held by both agencies. Please let me know if you are interested in meeting and we will coordinate our schedules. Sincerely, Candace Horsley City Manager CH:ky c: Richard Shoemaker 4:Can:LMS.Wat ITEM NO. !0c DATE: March 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF MENDOCINO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY'S (MSWMA) NORTH STATE STREET TRANSFER STATION PROPERTY SALE At the last MSWMA meeting, there was a motion made to bring back to each member agency the question of how long to hold onto the North State Street transfer station property under MSWMA ownership. The County Board of Supervisors discussed this matter at its March 10 meeting, and stated its position that the sale should not be pursued until a transfer station is actually developed. Fort Bragg and Willits are scheduled to address the issue on March 23 and 25, respectively. Jim Mastin will be reporting on this issue at the meeting. Attached are memoranda from Bob Sawyer, Director of Planning, and Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, describing the general process Solid Waste must go through to be permitted for a transfer station at Taylor Ddve, and associated estimated timeframes. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council discuss the sale of the MSWMA North State Street transfer station property. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine discussion is not necessary at this time. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: MSWMA Prepared by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Coordinated with: N/A Attachments: 1. Memorandum, dated 3-9-98, from Bob Sawyer 2. Memorandum, dated 3-5-98, from Rick Kennedy · . [ APPROVED ~ Candace Horsley, CityWlanager 4/Can.ASRSale.msw MEMORANDUM DATE: March 9, 1998 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Candace Horsley, City Manager Bob Sawyer, Planning Director (~ DISCRETIONARY PERMIT PROCEDURES RE: TRANSFER STATION IN COUNTY JURISDICTION You asked me to outline the general permit procedures required to install a solid waste transfer station on industrially zoned property within the County of Mendocino's jurisdictional boundaries. Accordingly, I called the County Planning Department and was informed that such a project would require discretionary approval of a Major Use Permit by the County Planning Commission. The Planning Commission's decision would be final unless the project was appealed to the Board of Supervisors. However, in addition to the local agency review of this project, Public Works Director Rick Kennedy informs me that it will also require review and approval through the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). A separate but sequential process would be required for this State review, which includes the County Division of Environmental Health acting locally on behalf of the CIWMB, and Rick has prepared the attached Memorandum to describe this process. The State-required review of this project would occur after the Local Agency has approved it through the Major Use Permit procedures, and both discretionary reviewing entities would have to adopt or certify the accompanying environmental document before proceeding to approve the project. Hence, complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) would constitute the very first step in the process. To comply with CEQA, the County would have to prepare an Initial Study to determine the depth, breadth, and scope of any, if.any, and all environmental impacts associated with the project. I have attached a standard Initial Study form to give you an idea of what environmental categories and questions would be addressed in the early stages of CEQA documentation, and I have also attached a CEQA "primer" to assist in understanding the basic process. If no environmental impacts are anticipated by the project, the County would prepare a Negative Declaration for review and adoption by the County Planning Commission, and eventually by the State CIWMB. Either hearing body can reject the findings of the Negative Declaration, and cause additional CEQA review, such as preparation of an EIR, to occur. If, on the other hand, environmental impacts are associated with the project, the County would have to have an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared, which is a much more daunting and time-consuming task than the Negative Declaration. The EIR would have to be certified by both hearing bodies, and it too can be rejected as being inadequate or inaccurate (CEQA and CEQA case law are replete with these terms), and sent back to the drawing board. Either environmental document would have to be distributed for public review, which would include distribution by the State Clearinghouse to various State agencies because of CIWMB's involvement, and the County would have to respond to all the comments which challenge the document's accuracy or adequacy. In terms of timing, the CEQA review process could take a very long time, as could the hearing process, depending upon appeals, continuances, incomplete information, and alike. There are many variables involved, both known and unknown, and the project's complexity, acceptability to the public, and environmental setting can have a dramatic effect on the timeline. Nevertheless, in rough, "ball park" figures, I would expect that a fast-paced Negative Declaration could take about 3 months, and a fast-paced EIR could take about 6 months to complete. A slower paced Negative Declaration or EIR, either of which involve complex issues and intense public scrutiny, could take 6 months to well over a year respectively. The timeline for getting a Major Use Permit to the Planning Commission after the environmental review is complete would likely be about 30 days. Included in this timeline would be the lead time for a legal notice in the newspaper, preparation of a staff report, and scheduling on a Commission agenda, which meets twice a month. If the Planning Commission's decision was appealed to the Board of Supervisors, it would take at least another month to notice and schedule a Board meeting on the matter. If, and when, a final approval is rendered, the project would then be forwarded on to the State decision-making process. The attached Memorandum from Rick Kennedy describes the State's involvement. In summary, the project requires local (County) approval, and State-level review and approval. The timeline associated with local approval, consisting of CEQA review and County Planning Commission consideration of a Major Use Permit, could take from a few months to many (possibly many, many) months. The State review process can take up to 120 days after the application for a permit is deemed complete, and after the local review has concluded. M.E.M.O.R.A.N.D.U.M DATE' TO: FROM' RE' March 5, 1998 Bob Sawyer, Director of Planning Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer /~~-~ SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION PERMITTING The provisions of Section 17403.6, Title 14, CCR, require that Large Volume Transfer/Processing Facilities have a complete Solid Waste Facilities Permit (SWFP). Permit provisions are now set forth in Division 2, Title 27, CCR. A large volume transfer/processing facility "is a facility that receives 100 tons or more of solid waste and material per operating day for the purpose of storing, handling or processing the waste prior to transferring the waste to another solid waste operation or facility" (Section 17402). SWFP's are issued by the Enforcement Agency (EA) with concurrence from the CIWMB. In Mendocino County, the Division of Environmental Health, of the County's Health Department, is the designated EA (sometimes referred to LEA for Local Enforcement Agency). Pursuant to former Section 18203, Title 14, the EA has 30 days to reject or accept the application for a SWFP as complete. The items to be submitted with the application are listed under Section 21570, Title 27. CEQA documentation and the and use or conditional use permits are to be included with the application. After the application is deemed complete, the EA has 120 days to issue or not issue the SWFP. This time frame may be waived by the applicant if the applicant desires and receives approval to submit an incomplete application (i.e., pending CEQA documents). I would not advise the submittal of an incomplete package. The EA must submit the proposed permit to CIWMB staff for review 65 days in advance of the EA's decision to issue or not issue the permit. The CIWMB has 60 days to either concur or object to the issuance of the permit. This time period is included in the 120 day time period applicable to the EA's decision to permit. cc' Candace Horsley, City Manager R: 1 \LANDFILL MSAWYER C.EQA .................. Ii INTRODUCTION :~he::.Ca:iif~ini:a::E~.~ii~me:ntai:::Qu!~ii~:::Act:.:~C:EQ~i:.Wa~::.::::::::::::::::::::::i::9:~:::::as::a::::::::: systemiof! cheeks and baia~Ces fOr iia~d;a~ib d~elbpme~tia~diimanagemienti! ! d~¢isions in california:~ ~ its prima~purp0seS ar~ to m~ihtain a quality envir0nment~for the citizen~ in~ Calif0rnia ~ n0w :and~in~the futUre; and ~to assure :~: public di~al°surb and pa~icipatien~ ih thb ~requifed bn~irbhmb~tal analySis 0f pUbliC and private land ~ d:evel0Pme~nt ~prej:ects~ : : ~ The City Quatity~Act~areintended~to~provide~the~sam~e~checks~and~bal~S ~nd~ to ~aint~i~ the hioh ~aiit~ ~f t~e e~ir~~t~I ~i~o i~ t~e ci~y~ in addition; of:being easii~' understood ~:: :: and :::i nterp ret ed ;? bY~ the ~: genera I p ubtic;~ :~ ;: ;~:The;:: :city ~ ;of :U kiah ~ recognizes:: and :::: suppo~s the state:leg iSlative: i ntent to e n sure: pUbliC~ access:a n dp a ~icipation ::in the:environmental:::reviewprocess: fer~;:land:::development ~projects::: citizen:: : : : involvement in tocal government activities: shoUld be a vi~ue and an Obligation !and !the p u bliCi iab0Ut i ithe ien v ironmentali!effects !ofi prop o sedi la nd development: acti~ieS;i 2)iihg019e :the iip Ubli~ ihi the ide~i~io~aEiihgi iprbcessi:i 3)idienti~ ways: th a:t i mpacis!i to the:..e nvi ~on rn e nt :: ca n :., be ::. a~0ided i o i::i i~::ig nil! ca ntlyiied u ~di a ~ d ::::: 4)i:!: prevent i: environmen!tal :!: :impactsli byl: requirin gli i: :m Od ifications::: lin: theI p roj eot through?the::useof:mitigation!i:measureis:0r:altemative:designsi ::::: ::::: :: :~ !action that ! may ::i::cause :: i a :::: ::physicaI:. ::change ::to thei :: :i: However;:i:i:eveni:i: th:Ou:gh:i:iit :may::: :be:: defined::: as:: · Ba~ica!l~; there ar~ ~ typ~s ~f ~mpti~ns''~ fi0m the en~ir0h~ehtaI review i:p~ce~ ;~ i~ateg~qb~li: and~ statut0~:~ exemptions ~apply ~t0 certain cl~sses 0f~projects that ~haVe been ~ determined by ~the ~ State ~secreta~f~Res0urces to~: not ~have ~asignificant adverse effect 0n~theenvi ~0n me nt~ These ... ~. P~°je.ctS..can. :::inbl~de. ~:ia.nds.caping;~ S~.igns small residehtial~and~ commercial~ structures;~ ~ minor ~/Ot::~ ::line ::~a:dJuSt~ents; and the C INITIAL!!STUDIES' i!NEGA TIV:EDECLAR~TIONS;!!iAND:iEIR~Si:: : i prepare iani Initia!i iStUdyi i i!ThiS iw0rkiieff0~ii determines Whetherior !hbti a Negative i i De~la~ation i ibi~i iEtR i i is ii nebded i for!: the i project: . I~formati~:' for thie p~eParati0n:Ofthe:. InitiaiStUdY:iS.::g!ath~e~ by. ; i staffi and in eludes i a!ni Env?onmienta! :Information Form c0m pleted by ::the : applicant a:.ndi:: SU:b~iffed With :thei: appli~ti0n: Other~ environmental reference ~mat;eri~almaintained~bycity staff~is also during the preparati0n~ 0f the ~l~itiat~St~dy~ if the initial :: :Study ~ ide ntifieS ~ sign ificant ~ ad verse ~ impacts; ~ staff~inco nsu Itati0n: the:~:applica~t~ and: ~esp0nsibl~ ~ agencies; ~ Will prepare : mitigation measures; and inc0rp0rate ~them into the project;: If:no: ~; ~significant ;adverse~ ;im pacts~are ;~ identified, or; if the project :revised ~ ~t0;:;include:reasbnable~and~ ~appr0pqate ~ mitigation: meaSures;~ the ~nblUSib~h 0f t~e ~i:nitial;~St~dy i~that thereis no ; ~ :significant: impacts :andaNegative;.De~ia~ati::O~;.iS app~0Priate: :~:: ifad. significant iiad~erse e~irbh~ehtal~ impact is!idehtified~that : i i i: cann.0tiibeii successfu/lyiii:mitigated;~? the ii !initial::istudY Shalli :: conclude: i !that i the pr0ject i Will i ;h!avei i sig nificant ! effects i 0n!! the i envir0nmen:t !that i: a n ! E nvi r0n me ~tal: i i!~ p!acti i ReP0~! !is!!!required!:: Fig u re i B :: · . ill u strates the e n Vi r0n mental ~eView p r~cess ~ :: : POTENTIAL EN N I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. Name of Project Proponent 2. Address of Project Proponent 3. Name of Project 1 e Assessors Parcel Number(s) Date of Initial Study Preparation Se 1 Si Name of Lead Agency Address and Phone Number of Lead Agency Brief Project Description 9. Person Responsible for Preparing Initial Study:. WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 1. EARTH: a. Unstable earth conditions or changes [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ in geologic structures. b. Disruptions, Displacements, Compaction, or overcovering of soil. [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features. [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ d. The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ physical features. e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site. [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion that may [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ modify the channel of a river, stream, inlet, or bay? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ earthquakes. 2 WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 2. AIR: a. Substantial air emissions. [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ b. The creation of objectional odors. c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, [~ [~ ~ [~ [~ or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ d. Violation of local, State, or Federal ozone air quality standard. ~ [~ [~ [~ [~ e. Violation of local, State, or Federal PM-10 air quality standard. [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ d. Violation of local, State, or Federal , Carbon Monoxide, or any other air [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ quality standard not listed above. 3 WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigated Apparent Mitigation 3. WATER: a. Changes in the currents, or the course of water movements, in either [~ J~ ~ ~ [~ fresh or marine waters. b. Changes in the absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and ~ [~ [~ [~ [~ amount of surface runoff. c. to cou o ,owo, C/ C/ Ci Ct flood waters or ground waters. d. Change inthe amount of surface [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ water in any water body or any discharge into surface water. e. Any degradation or alteration of [~ ~ [~ [~ [~ surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity. f. Alteration of the direction or rate of [~ [~ [~ [~ ~ flow of ground water. g. Change in the quantity of ground water, either through direct additions [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations. h. Change in the quality of ground [~ ~ [~ [~ [~ water. i. Substantial reduction in the amount of [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ water otherwise available for public water supplies. j. Exposure of people or property to [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ water related hazards such as flooding or tsunamis. 4 WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 4. PLANT LIFE: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants [~ J~ J~ J~ J~ including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants. b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species ~ [~ ~ ~ J~ of plants. c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the J~ ~ [~ ~ ~ normal replenishment of existing species. d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop. [~ [~ [~ [~ ~ 5. ANIMAL LIFE: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals J~ [~ [~ [~ [~ including birds, land animals, reptiles, fish, insects, and bethnic organisms. b. Reduction in the number of any [~ ~ [~ [~ ~ unique, rare, or endangered species of animals. c. Introdaction of new species of [~ [~ [~ J~ ~ animals into an area, or in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals. d. Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ habitat. 5 WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 6. NOISE: a. Increase in existing noise levels. [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ b. Exposure of people to severe noise 7. LIGHT AND GLARE: a. Production of new light and glare. [~ [~ ~ [~ ~ b. Reduction of solar exposure or adverse impacts to existing solar [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ collection facilities. 8. LAND USE: a. Substantial alteration of the present [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ or planned land use of a given area. 9. NATURAL RESOURCES: a. Increase in the rate of use of any [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ natural resources. 6 WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 10. RISK OF UPSET: a. A dsk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances, (including [~ [~ ~ [~ [~ oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions. b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or ~ ~ ~ [~ ~ evacuation plan. 11. POPULATION: a. Alterations in the location, distribution, [~ ~ [~ [~ [~ density, or growth rate of human populations. 12. HOUSING: a. Will the proposal effect existing ~ J~ ~ [~ ~ housing or create a demand for new housing? WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 13. TRANSPORTATION: a. Generation of substantial additional [~ [~ [~ ~ [~ vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ or demand for new parking facilities? c. Substantial impact upon existing [~ ~ [~ [~ [~ transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterbome, rail, or air [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 8 WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 14. PUBLIC SERVICES: a. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: 1. Fire protection? [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ 2. Police protection? [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ 4. Parks &recreation facilities? [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ 5. Maintenance of public facilities? [~1 [~1 ~ I~1 [~1 15. ENERGY: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or [~ I~ [~1 [~l ~l energy.'? B. Substantial increase in d~mand upon existing sources of energy, or require [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ the development of new energy sources? 9 WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS' Mitigation 16. UTILITIES: a. Will the project result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following: 2. Sewerage? [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ 3. Transmission lines? [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ 17. HUMAN HEALTH: a. Creation of any health hazard or I~1 I~ ~ I~1 [~1 potential health hazard? b. ~po~ure of I~ople to any existing 18. AESTHETICS: a. Obstruction of any scenic ¥ista or aesthetically offens~e site ol:~n to public view? 10 WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 19. RECREATION: a. Impact upon the quality or quantity of [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ existing recreational opportunities? , 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES' a. Alteration or destruction cfa [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ to a prehistoric or historic building or structure? c. Cause a physical change that would [~ [~ [~ [~ [~ effect the unique ethnic cultural values? 11 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 10d DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS CENTER IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS The City has been evaluating the expanded needs of the Public Safety communication center for approximately five years. The equipment is no longer protected by warranty and the costs to repair radios and other apparatus which are long past their service life are increasing; in some cases repair is ineffectual. There are two projects which Staff believes are necessary and appropriate at this time to bring the communications center into the current age of technology, as well as allow for anticipated growth in the future. These projects will physically upgrade the communications center, augment the dispatch system, and enhance Public Safety computer technology. Both of these projects will accommodate a multi-agency consolidated dispatch, if that remains a goal within Mendocino County. Grant programs constitute a large portion of the funding for these improvements. (Continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Approve the Public Safety budget amendment as detailed in the attached schedule. 2. Award contract to GTENision Software for Public Safety Technology enhancement and authorize City Manager to execute documents. 3. Authorize Request for Proposals for computer hardware for Public Safety Technology enhancement. 4. Authorize furniture procurement based upon lowest responsible bid for communication center improvement project. 5. Authorize Request for Proposals for radio procurement for communication center improvement project. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine the requested budget amendment is not appropriate and take no action. 2. Determine an alternative budget amendment is appropriate and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: NA Public Safety Departments of Police, Fire, and Dispatch Chris Dewey, Police Sergeant Roe Sandelin, Acting Fire Chief, John Williams, Acting Police Chief, Mike Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer, Gordon Elton, Director of Finance, and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Budget Amendment schedule 2. Cost Breakdowns 3. Proposed Communications Center and Computer Vault Floor Plan APPROVEDL_~__? I~ ~ Candace-hor:sley, City-y~anager Public Safety Budget Amendment March 18, 1998 Page 2 A significant trend within the dispatch industry is to abandon the old, mainframe-type systems which require expensive maintenance contracts and continual reorder of multi-thousand dollar mainframes as the older models become obsolete and companies refuse support. The preferred systems are now PC based comprised of individual PC units connected to one or two servers and loaded with enhanced software to expand the capabilities as necessary. The Finance Department is also evaluating a PC system for the City's general ledger because of the ease of use, the ability to change software, and the much lower cost of purchasing both the initial and replacement equipment. Communications Center Improvement Project: While preparing for the FY 95/96 budget, the Public Safety Department proposed to improve and move the communications center to the North Fire Station. This proposal included a five year lease at approximately $54,000 per year (total cost of $270,000) for basic radio equipment and desk configurations, but no phone upgrades or modified computer network systems. This proposal was dropped from the 96/97 budget to further consider other options. The Public Safety Department's IBM System 36 computer was used years beyond it's useful life, and failed beyond repair in the summer of 1996. In order to meet the immediate needs of the Police and Fire Departments to access information stored within the City's outdated computer system, the departments began to share the Fort Bragg computer resources. The Public Safety Department then explored the feasibility of consolidating dispatch services with other county entities, and studied proposals from other agencies for this consolidation. After careful consideration and analysis of the proposals, it was determined that the citizens of Ukiah and the City of Ukiah Police and Fire Departments would be better served by maintaining its own communications center at this time. Though the immediate and near term requirements dictate improvements and upgrades to the City's facilities, consolidation of services remains a goal in all of our planning strategies. Staff concluded that several factors needed to be evaluated including short and long-term goals, needs within the communications center, computer capabilities, current human resources, outside funding sources, and the ability to provide the most cost-effective product and services. Over the past eight months, personnel visited other Public Safety Departments of similar size, and examined their solutions to problems in financing, technology growth, and abilities to grow and change in the constant development of computer hardware and software innovations. Additionally, the City's own facility was scrutinized, and a blueprint for additional growth, meeting ADA requirements and other regulations, while addressing current fiscal restraints, was developed. The Police Department was also successful in securing $256,139 in State and Federal grant funds to improve the communications center and identified operational savings with which to assist in funding this project. Staff identified four areas of significant concern and upgrade needs within the current communications center: 1) phone system, 2) radio system, 3) computer system, and 4) ergonomics. Each of these components is past it's serviceable life, and has required extensive maintenance over the last few years. Staff evaluated the current floor plan limitations and studied the steps needed to upgrade the communications center. It was determined that the best solution for upgrading all four of the critical areas was to construct a new communications room, adjacent to the existing room. This solution is less costly than upgrading the present center and provides the opportunity for construction to occur while operating within the current facility. The proposed center would provide ergonomic desk top surfaces to reduce the potential for injuries, necessary electrical upgrades, and one of the three required radio consoles. An "RFP for the City of Ukiah Communication Center Furniture" was issued on March 2, 1998, Public Safety Budget Amendment March 18, 1998 Page 3 and sealed bids are to be opened on March 23, 1998. This request includes compliance with ADA regulations and other governmental building requirements, ergonomic system needs, and a system to reduce the City's exposure to Workmen's Compensation Claims. It will still be necessary to purchase additional radio components at a future date. In the short term, two radio consoles will be needed to fully equip the center. Cost estimates and long term improvement plans for these complex systems are being conducted through radio engineering consultants and staff, and a RFP will be prepared soon. 95% of the funding to complete these upgrades is being covered by grant monies. The State of California has agreed, through a grant, to fund a new Enhanced 911 computer controlled phone system for the City of Ukiah at a cost of $202,260. The State has verbally indicated they may also be willing to reimburse the City 25% to 50% of the cost to improve the work surfaces in the center. The Ukiah Police Department also secured two block grants totaling $53,879 to finance these improvements. Transfers of operating expenses from Police and Dispatch will account for $17,391. The total funding for the dispatch center remodeling is $71,270 of which $14,270 is reserved for future radio upgrades. The Public Safety Departments have designated a lead person for the construction of these projects, and is aggressively exploring grant funding resources to assist with additional future radio system needs. Public Safety Technology Enhancement Project: In addition to the physical upgrades to the communication center and improvements to the communication system, it was determined current technology available to the Police, Fire, and Dispatch departments ~vas inadequate The Public Safety staff, in cooperation with Finance Department Staff, studied and planned for a computer network to improve the communication and computer resources. It was determined that a computer software system that would act seamlessly between different applications and provide needed information to the various parts of the Public Safety Department was necessary. That system must also be capable of growing and expanding to meet the constantly changing world of computer innovations. The system would be required to provide as much information to the various units of Public Safety as possible at the lowest cost. Particularly important tasks included non-repetition of data inputting and information sharing among units of the department. These functions significantly increase employee efficiency and provide first hand data to both Police Officers and Fire Fighters who rely heavily on precise information to quickly and accurately respond to critical incidents. Hazardous material facts at fire locations, past criminal history when dealing with suspects, medical history when responding to a medical emergency, existing critical domestic restraining orders, and evacuation zones are just a few of the examples of the intelligence which should be immediately available through the system. On August 20, 1997 the Ukiah Police and Fire Departments published a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Records Management System (RMS), and Fire Management System (FMS). The City Clerk received six responses to the request by the October 1st, 1997 deadline. The proposals ranged from $40,000 (basic system) to over $300,000 in software costs. A three member committee comprised of the City Computer Support Coordinator, a fire representative and a police representative was formed to evaluate the submittals. The evaluation committee measured the proposals based upon each system's suitability to the criteria established in the RFP. GTE Corporation's proposal using Vision Software as the base was determined to be the best system for the City, meeting immediate computer needs and providing an expandable foundation for the future. Vision Software met every term and condition of the RFP and has Public Safety Budget Amendment March 18, 1998 Page 4 a proven track record nationwide. Vision Software is provided in a module format. The proposal includes the latest trends in Public Safety Software and is written in the latest 32 bit technology. There are several modules available, most notable being CAD which provides interfaces to Records Management, Fire Management, and Emergency Medical Services. The CAD system allows for multi-jurisdiction interaction and access to State and Federal warrants and DMV information. The system guides dispatchers through calls for service, allows for predesignated emergency response plans, and a standard operating procedures library for the communications staff. The other modules are: 1) Police Records Management, which has user defined fields, imaging software for photos and mug shots, personnel and equipment tracking, evidence tracking and bar coding, and other features found in more expensive programs; 2) Fire Management and Emergency Medical System which allows for complete department reporting and management; 3) Emergency Medical Management including bar coding of usable medical items, billing, and other options; and 4) Mobile Data Communications which allows Police, Fire, and Medical units access to all department records, predetermined response plans, medical and haz-mat information, access to State and Federal Wanted, Missing and DMV records, encrypted E-mail and message capabilities, voiceless dispatching, and other features. The system also has complete mapping functions from statistical information to real time status and locations of current calls, and crime trend identification assistance. Vision Software also reduces overall hardware costs since it operates in the Windows NT environment. This allows staff the ease of "Graphical User Interfacing" and the power of multi-tasking, while allowing all applications to work on a single platform for seamless integration. With this NT environment, computer hardware is based on smaller multiple servers, allowing for "built-in" redundancy in the system to prevent system failures and down time, and providing greater speed and user performance at prices much less than single "main-frame" type configurations. The hardware necessary to operate this system was specified by the software bidder. Costs have been estimated for this report. Actual expenditures will be determined through a competitive bid process. The proposal specifically meets the need to perform seamlessly as a "multi-agency software solution" for the Public Safety Departments and the communication center. This solution builds a foundation that will support growth in technology innovations and increased staff capabilities. In addition, Vision can support additional entities such as the Utility and Public Works Departments for dispatching services, the Parking District for computer software applications, and the Finance Department for ambulance billing. The proposal also provides a comprehensive training and support program. Included are eight hours of training for each Officer and Firefighter, 40 hours of training for each Dispatcher, and 40 hours of system administration training for a representative from each department. This training will ensure that employees can take full advantage of the computers and provide in-house support of the system. Vision will also provide initial on-site support of the system, six month on-site follow up support, 24 hour telephone support, and off-site computer support. These support costs will be fixed for a series of years to be negotiated with the contract. The proposed cost of this system was $192,263, and was divided into module purchases. Included in this cost is sales tax, data conversion, support for year one, and 27 days of complete system incorporation, departmental training, and on site support. After negotiations with Vision Software, and the reduction of some portions of their proposal, a total software price of $128,492 was identified as this initial phase of the new system. Of the modules originally proposed, the Emergency Medical and Mobile Data Modules, and aspects of the Mapping Module were eliminated. These are anticipated to be purchased at future dates when additional State and Federal grant funding become available. The Vision Software product fulfills the tasks originally identified for the network, has the ability Public Safety Budget Amendment March 18, 1998 Page 5 to grow and expand with the Public Safety Departments, outperforms more expensive products, has a proven client base of over 450 departments nationwide, and will support staff through training and continued assistance past the purchase of the system. Vision's cost, although not the lowest total, provided all features originally sought at the lowest cost, and about 1/3 the cost of other comparable systems proposed for our community, with a six month, money back guarantee on the software purchased. Once this system is purchased and installed, the Public Safety Departments will continue their aggressive approach toward additional funding through State and Federal grants to provide additional components to the computer network. These items include Mobile Vehicle Computers which provide Officers and Firefighters in the field with real-time accessability to information from the Civic Center, State, and other systems, Automatic Vehicle Locators, and Crime Analysis, Resource Deployment Analysis, and Medical Billing and Tracking software. A transfer from reserves is proposed to fund this project. The total cost of this project including $80,908 for hardware and $128,492 for software is $209,400. The source of reserves to be used for this funding is Fund #915 - PERS Reserve. Use of the money in this fund does not affect the current or future PERS benefits of any employee. This fund was established when PERS issued refunds to cities as it re-evaluated costs and charges. The PERS system is divided into two components, safety employees and non-safety employees. The balance remaining in the PERS Fund is the residual amount reimbursed from the safety component of the PERS system. The employees of the Dispatch, Police, and Fire Departments are the members of the PERS safety component. Therefore it is most appropriate that this reserve become the source of funding for a program which directly benefits all three departments. Summary: This proposal will provide grant funding for a new communications center and computer network which will service the entire Public Safety complex, with over 50% of the funding provided through State and Federal grants. Future improvements to this system may be available through additional grant funding which is currently being actively sought. These improvement projects will provide a foundation for future growth, including a Countywide consolidation of dispatch services, provide the support initially identified as required for these complex systems, remain flexible to meet technology innovations as they occur, and provide additional services and protections to both the employees and the citizens of Ukiah. mfh:asrcc98 0318DISPATCH PUBLIC SAFETY BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR DISPATCH CENTER AND COMPUTER SYSTEM UPGRADES Account Description SLESF Grant SLESF Grant Revenue Dispatch Center Improvements Local Law Enforcement Grant Local Law Enforcement Grant revenue Dispatch Center Improvements General Fund Special Supplies - digital cameras Special Supplies- CLETS machines Police Dept equipment Transfer Out to Fixed Asset Fund Dispatch Fund Training funds Dispatch computer systems Transfer Out to Fixed Asset Fund Fixed Asset Fund Transfer In from General Fund - Police Transfer In from Dispatch Fund Transfer In from PERS Reserve Dispatch Center Improvements Public Safety Computerization project PERS Reserve Transfer Out to Fixed Asset Fund Increase Number (Decrease) 205..0600.488.000 205.2001.800.000 207.0600.488.000 207.2001.800.000 100.2001.690.001 100.2001.690.002 100.2001.800.000 100.283.698 678.2040.640.000 678.2040.800.000 678.283.698 698.279.201 698.279.678 698.279.915 698.2001.800.000 698.2001.800.001 915.283.698 38,412.00 38,412.00 15,467.00 15,467.00 (800.00) (2,500.00) (3,200.00) 6,500.00 (4,291.00) (6,600.00) 10,891.00 6,500.00 10,891.00 209,400.00 3,121.00 209,400.00 209,400.00 SAFETY2.XLS Sheet1 Public Safety Proposals Computer Project Total Total Department Software Hardware Hardware Police 35,870.00 27,703.00 29,517.76 57,220.76 Fire 20,823.00 2,420.00 2,578.53 4,998.53 Dispatch 71,799.00 9,048.00 9,640.71 18,688.71 Joint 41,737.00 (41,737.00) Total 128,492.00 80,908.00 - 80,908.00 Funding I City reserve funds Total Project 93,090.76 25,821.53 90,487.71 - 209,400.00 209,400.00I Dispatch Center Improvements Computer room improvements 7,100.00 Radio Improvements 16,000.00 Dispatch Center Remodel 33,900.00 Enhanced 911 phone system 202,260.00 Total 259,260.00 Funding California Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) 38,412.00 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant 15,467.00 Reduction in Police Department budget 6,500.00 Reduction in Dispatch Department budget 10,891.00 State funding of 911 phone system 202,260.00 Total 273,530.00 I Funding in excess of expenditures I 14,270.001 SUMMARY Fixed Asset Replacement Fund ~98 Revenue, Transfers and Contributions California Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) 38,412.00 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant 15,467.00 Transfers In From General Fund - Police budget 6,500.00 From Dispatch Fund budget 10,891.00 From PERS Fund Reserve 209,400.00 Contributed Capital State of California 911 telephone equipment 202,260.00 Total resources available 482,930.00 Expenditures Police Fire Dispatch Computer Software 35,870.00 20,823.00 71,799.00 Computer Hardware 57,220.76 4,998.53 18,688.71 Computer Room Improvements 7,100.00 Radio Improvements 16,000.00 Dispatch Center Remodel 33,900.00 911 Telehone equipment replacement 202,260.00 Total expenditures 93,090.76 25,821.53 349,747.71 I Total excess (deficiency) of resources Total 128,492.00 80,908.00 7,100.00 16,000.00 33,900.00 202,260.00 468,660.00 I 14,270.00 SAFETY.XLS 3/4/98 Page 1 Sheet1 Ukiah Police Department 300 Seminary Ave., Uldah CA 95482 Software Cost Breakdown: Dispatch Software: Tax Network Configuration, Training, 1 st Yr Maintenance, Software Installation, Project Management CAD Supervisor Station, E911 Interface, NCIC Link, VisionCAD, EMD Module, MapLink 66, 945 x 7. 25% $ 4, 854 Total Dispatch Software Costs $71,799 Police Software: Tax Network Configuration, Training, 1 st Yr Maintenance, Software Installation, Project Management RMS System, Admin, Citations, Field Data 33,445 x 7.25% $ 2,425 Total Police Software Costs $35,870 Fire Software: Tax Network Configuration, Training, 1 st Yr Maintenance, Software Installation, Project Management FMS, Budget, Admin, Equip. 19,415x 7.25% $ 1,408 Total Fire Software Costs $20,823 Totals (Dispatch, Police, Fire) $128,492 Ukiah Police Department 300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah CA 95482 .Hardware Breakdown: Software Breakdown: Common Costs: $41,737 Common Costs: 0 Dispatch Costs: $ 9,048 Police Costs: $27,703 Dispatch Costs: Police Costs: $71,799 $35,870 Fire Costs: $ 2,420 Fire Costs: $20,823 Totals: $80,908 $128,492 Feb-17-9B 19:13 P.03 Vision So, ftware, Inc. Pricing for the City of Ukiah Police and Fire CAD/RM$ System CAD Software 2 CAD Stations E911 Interface NCIC/CLETS lmefface CAD Supervisor Stations EMD Total $37,520 CAD S,ervices Network Configuration CAD Training on-site (11) Eleven days VisionCAD 24x? Maintenance Software Installation Project Management Total $25,005 Grand Total $62,525 PD/Fire RMS Software Vision FIRE Budget Administrative Equipment Maintenance Vision RMS Base Package Administrative Citations Field Collections Total $22,105 Feb-17-g8 19:14 · P.04 Vis,ion Software~ Inc. Pricing for the City of Ukiah Police and Fire CAD/RMS System Continued RMS Services Project Managcmcnt Installation Data Conversion Software Installation RiMS Training Maintenance Total $30,695 Grand Total $52,800 CAD Total $62,525 RIMS Total $52,800 Tax $8,361.06 Grand Total $123,686.06 existing telephone e ~try point &' electric soul existing box 73" off floor o o Communications Room Mounted to Wall above work area workstationa ~ized for 3 17" monitors records room lateral file lighting underneath typ. Supervisor Office not to be bid on this request. 10' printer & CPU storage at each work station armory 17'0" Officer Report Writing 11' 0" mail/forms to match counters Area window sill height 28" window sill height 28" Existing Alarm Panel CAD Mapping Monitor Mounted to Wall above work area Public Night Lobby SUBJECT: ITEM NO. 10e DATE:. MARCH 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT APPROVAL OF CONSULTING CONTRACT FOR CITY OF UKIAH'S ELECTRIC UTILITY DEREGULATION PUBLIC EDUCATION MEDIA CAMPAIGN AND AUTHORIZATION FOR CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE DOCUMENTS Staff has begun an educational campaign regarding the deregulation of the electric utility by preparing and distributing a question/answer sheet regarding the restructuring of California's electric industry (AB 1890) and its affect on City constituents. This flyer was sent to city customers with the January utility statements. In addition, the City of Ukiah has joined forces with other NCPA members, municipalities, and public power agencies to form a statewide coalition for the development and promotion of a public information campaign outlining the benefits of community-owned electric power and the impacts of deregulation. This coalition is called CalPower (California Power Network) and was established to present the most unified and cost effective approach to advertising for publicly owned utilities. Although the materials distributed by CalPower are helpful in the development 'of a public education campaign, the generic nature of the information does not necessarily reflect the City of Ukiah's specific circumstances. Staff believes it is beneficial to establish an independent advertising and educational campaign which depicts the City of Ukiah's unique situation. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Consulting Agreement with Lorand & Company to provide professional public education, research, and strategic planning services as it pertains to the City's Public Utilities and deregulation and authorize the City Manager to execute necessary documents. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' 1. Approve consulting agreement with modifications. 2. Direct staff to perform public education, research, and strategic planning services. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Sue Goodrick, Compliance/Customer Service Officer Darryl Barnes, Director of Public Utilities and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resume of Jane Lorand APPROVEDt_(~ Candace Horsier;, C~y Manager Consultant Agreement for Electric Utility March 18, 1998 Page 2 In order to expedite a City educational campaign, Staff interviewed two consulting firms which were known to have marketing experience and expertise specifically in the area of electric utilities and deregulation. AL&Z from Palm Desert, California, is the marketing agency used by CalPower. In discussions with this firm, staff was given an initial estimated cost of at least $50,000 for the first year of a two year plan, with the annual costs decreasing "somewhat" in the second year. Staff was also quoted a price of $10,000 to establish focus groups to enable the City to determine community perceptions and desires regarding the electric deregulation issue. Staff requested a brief outline of the AL&Z proposal with specific cost data, but it was never received. Jane Lorand of Lorand & Company from Santa Rosa was highly recommended by the cities of Roseville and Palo Alto, and has been involved in strategic planning and public education for the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) and Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA). Ms. Lorand also developed the California Municipal Utilities Agency (CMUA) brochure on restructuring and was the lead technical advisor for the California Public Utilities Commission's statewide campaign. In addition, Ms. Lorand trained the Department of Energy Resources in Boston on its public education program. A copy of her resume is attached. Ms. Lorand proposes a 60 month contract with a total of 107 hours of professional services, the bulk of the time to be utilized during the first 24 months. At the proposed rate of $225 per hour, Ms. Lorand will provide strategies for public education, research, planning, and staff direction. This contract will include survey development, staff training, marketing plans, flyers, and media releases. The cost for development of this five year plan is estimated at $25,000 - $30,000 plus expenses. Funds are available in the Electric Utility Departmental Expenses Contractual Services Account, 800.3733.250.000. Staff believes Ms. Lorand is fully qualified to fulfil the City's marketing needs with costs well below those identified by the other firm considered. Approval of the Consultant Agreement with Lorand and Company and authorization for the City Manager to execute the necessary documents are recommended. The Agreement is presently being reviewed by the City Attorney and will be hand delivered to the City Council prior to the March 18 meeting. mt~:asrcc98 0318LORAND JANE LORAND, J.D., M.A. Post Office Box 15060 Sant~ Rosa, CA 95402 (70D 575-2054 Fax: (707) 578-2086 E-Mail: LORA~orldnet.att.net 1993-1998 1996 1993 1992-1994 Professional Experiences CEO, Lorand & Company, Incorporated * Consultant, Critical Thinking Management, Strategic Planning and Marketing Development for Business, Government, and Boards of DEtectors: Corporate clients include financial Institutions, utility companies, statewide associations, institutes, and state agencies. . Policy Analysis and Knowledge MappingTM of Complex Public Issues: Electric Restmcturlng, School-to.Work, Sustainable Agroecology Policy Author/Project Director · HIGI. I~GH~3 OF RF. STRtJC2Y. rRllVG OUR ELECTRIC INDUSTRY · A CLOSE-UP LOOK AT RF~TRIJCTCIRIHG OUR ~.L£CTRIC 1NDUSTRY · WHATISAND WHATIS POSSIBLE Workshops for Boards of Directors and their Management Teams · 13ITF. LLF. CTUAL STANDARDS AND SEI~-£D[ICA~IO1V, IN SCHOOl. AND BEYOND Coordinator/Facilitator Character Education Task Force; A highly controversial area of oitrlculum was the focus of this Task Force's work, integrating all the communities of interest; multiple meetings over six months - formulated a consensus strategic plan for a school district of 60,000 students. Chair, Task Force on Accountability in F. xlucaflon Linking Education with Economic Development Ci~EED), Sacramento, CA Responsiblity for identifying assesment and accountability issues, formulating policy recommendations, organizing meeting~ and providing support documentation, final report and action plan. LEED involved more than 300 of Sacramento's conununity/busine~$ leaders. Director of Research and Publications, Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California · Co-respomibility for the editing, print management and mazketing plan for two major volumes: Cri~al Thinkir~, What Ever~ Person Needs to Survive in a l~apklly Changing World, and Critical ~g, Preparing Students to Survive tn a Rapidly Changing World · Co-author o! two chapters, 'Accelerafil~ Change, the Complexity of Problems, and the Qua/ity of Our Thtnldng,' and 'Critical Thinking: Identifying the Targets, ' included in both volumes. · Responsibility for CUlTiCUlUm and delivery of inservice and tegiorlal workshops on instructional strategies for critical thinking; marketing of Center programs and products; development of the Academy, Training for Trainers; strategic planning and coaching 1989-1992 President, Sports Learning Systems, Inc. Consultant to School Districts, State Depa~ h,,ent~ of Education - Teamwork Author/Product Development · LET'S TALR SPORTb3tANS~, Preparing for Community & the WorkpIaceru, K-8 Teamwork Curriculum for ~udenta, teachers and parents · HOW TO BF. TH~ COACH KIDS LOV~ AND RF3~MBER ~oo~ t6/0I/g0 JANE LORAND (Professional ~ences, Continued) 1981-1987 1975-1977 1972-1975 Attorney General corporate and tax practice in an agricultural community Trlebsch & Frampton Turlock~ CA Middle School Counselor Individual, faml/y and group counseling services for 700 students, teachers and patents. Lectured extensively on techniques foz managing preventative counseling programs, educating at-risk students, malnstreaming special education students. Elementary Classroom Teacher Title I school with special experience in Spedal Education and Gifted Education, San Juan Unified School District, Carmichael, CA Education Graduate Undergraduate J.D. Degree, 1981 Hastings College of the law, University of California, San Francisco Class Standing: 5th of 518 Honors and Activities: Ordcr of the Coif, Thurston Society, Americaa Jurisprudence Award in Family I~w, Honors in Legal Research and Writing, Roger J. Traynor $odety, Dean's List and Merit Scholarships M.A., Education - 1976 California State University, Sacramento Standard Elementary Teaching Credential- 1972 California State University, Sacramento B.A. - History 1970 University of C, allfo~a, Los Angeles Personal fn the free ffme that remains beyond o~r professional lives, my husband, Andrew, and I focus on the children and our extended family. We enjoy reading, entraining, mt~sic, canoeing, gardening and vtstting historic sites. I enjoy excellent health and vitality, and when I can carve out half a day, I Indulge my£asskm for used book Stores and the Seater. ~oo~ 86/0T/g0 Lorand & Company, incorporated 1 998 Lorand & Company has three divisions with professionals working on various teams. The focus of our most active division has been a niche expertise in explaining electric re- stru~ng to various segments of the public. For the past eighteen months, we have been involved in executive coaching, strategic planning, creating Knowledge MapsTM of the crucial concepts and issues, and preparing tools to enable those without a frame of refer- ence in this area to grasp the essential principles and pm'poses. In this capacity, we devel- oped Highlight~ of Restructuring California's Electric Indztstry and A Close-up look at Restructur. lng our Electric InduStry. We also held media workshops, made public presentations, focus groups, and worked through complex isles with local and state boards and commissions. Incidental to this practice, we provide rigorous five-day courses in Critical Thinking for Business Management. Our courses enable participants to cut to the core of dysfunction in organizations by bringing diagnostic tools and pragmatic strategies to enable everyone to become more capable and accountable for the outcome of their activity. The second division of our company works with public and private education: we are striving to bring critical thinking instructional strategies and teamwork skills for com- plex intellectual tasks to students in high school and college. We provide t-raining for trainers, inservice for college and high school faculties, and publications. One of our pro~ grams in the School-to-Work area is in the first of a three year pilot program in a Southern California community college. A third division of our organization is focused on environmental entrepreneurship, sustainable agricultural practices and consumer involvement in environmental production systems, internationally and in the United States. We publish articles, make presentations at conferences, provide workshops and offer strategic planning for governments and inter- national aid agencies. We were the outside expert for the European Union in developing three Education Centers and Demonstration Farms for Sustainable Agriculture in Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary. Recent Clients: California Public Utilities Commission California Department of Corrections California Department of Consumer Affairs European Union DG-1 Ministry of Foreign Affairs Triodos Bank, NA The Netherlands Social Venture Network, Europe California Municipal Utilities Association City of Palo Alto Northern California Power Authority California Pharmacists Associatlon Los Angeles Department of Water and Power City of Anaheim California Assn. of Park and Recreation Professionals 5MUD City of Roseville City of Lodi City of Riverside Bayview Federal Bank California Association of Appraisers Gero Coso Gommunity College American River College State Department of Education (CA) San Juan Unified School District (Sacramento, CA) Southern California Public Power Authority A California Corporation Federal Tax Identification# 68-020-1199 eooZ $6/0T/C0 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 18, 1998 TO: FROM: City Council Members Sue Goodrick Compliance/Customer Relations Officer SUBJECT: Draft Agreement for Professional Services For the Development of an Advertising & Educational Strategy Related to the Deregulation of the Electric Utility Industry Attached is the draft professional services agreement regarding the development of a five year advertising and educational campaign related to the deregulation of the electric utility industry as it specifically relates to the residents of the City of Ukiah. It will be presented this evening as part of Agenda Item 10E. Although staff will be orally presenting the contract details tonight, we wanted you to have the opportunity to review it in advance. Thank you. CITY OF UKIAH AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ADVERTISING/EDUCATIONAL STRATEGY RELATED TO THE DEREGULATION OF THE ELECTRIC UTILITY INDUSTRY This agreement shall be considered a contract, and is entered into this~ day of ,1998, by and between the CITY OF UKIAH, a general law municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and LORAND & COMPANY, INCORPORATED, hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT." PREMISES The purpose of this agreement is the development of a five (5) year advertising and educational campaign related to the deregulation of the electric utility industry as it specifically relates to the residents of the City of Ukiah. These services include conducting surveys, developing marketing plans and flyers, and training city personnel, further described in CONSULTANT's proposal, dated February 3, 1998 referred to as Exhibit "A", and attached to this agreement. CITY may retain CONSULTANT to perform special services for CITY or any department thereof. CONSULTANT is willing and able to perform duties and render services to fulfil City's marketing needs which are determined by the City Council to be necessary to inform and educate residents of the CITY regarding deregulation of the electric utility industry. CITY believes the provision of these services to the residents is in their best interests, and CONSULTANT agrees to perform such duties and render such services as outlined below: AGREEMENT CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows: 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 ARTICLE 1 SERVICES OF CONSULTANT CONSULTANT shall provide those technical, expert, and professional services as described in Exhibit "A". CONSULTANT shall provide such services within the time limits described below. The absence, omission, or failure to include in this agreement items which are considered to be a part of normal procedure for a project of this type or which involve professional judgement, shall not be used as a basis for submission of inadequate work or incomplete performance. CITY relies upon the professional ability and stated experience of CONSULTANT as a material inducement to entering into this agreement. CONSULTANT understands the use to which the CITY will put his work product and hereby warrants that all findings, recommendations, studies, and reports shall be made and prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional practices. When the agreement calls for the preparation of studies, reports and/or documents, they shall be in a form acceptable to the CITY. Except for production graphics for newspaper spreads and related brochures, CONSULTANT shall bear the expense of all pdnting and reproduction costs until final documents are accepted by the CITY, at which time CONSULTANT shall turn over to CITY all documents. The five-year contract shall be for the period starting March 20, 1998 and ending March 20,2003. Extensions of this contract may be made only upon written consent by the CITY. Time is of the essence and of the utmost importance in the performance of the agreement. CONSULTANTshall be responsible for attendance at as many meetings as necessary with CITY to train, strategize or discuss the project if the CITY so desires. CONSULTANT shall perform any additional services as may be required due to significant changes in general scope of the project. Such additional services shall be paid for by supplemental agreement and shall conform to the rates of payment specified in Article V below. 2.01 2.02 2.03 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.05 ARTICLE II SERVICES OF CITY CITYshall provide any information as to its requirements for performance of the agreement not already contained in Exhibit "A." Upon request, CITY shall provide CONSULTANT any information in its possession or reasonably available to it that consultant may need to perform services under this agreement. CITY will examine the required documents, or other submittals from CONSULTANT and will render, in wdting, decisions or comments pertaining to their adequacy and acceptability within a reasonable period of time and so as not to unreasonably delay consultant's performance. ARTICLE III TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this agreement shall be pursuant to the proposal submitted by CONSULTANT and in accordance with paragraph 1.05 above. This agreement may be extended on its same terms and conditions for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days, upon written agreement between the City Manager and CONSULTANT. The execution of this agreement by the CITY shall constitute the CONSULTANT'S authority to proceed immediately with the performance of the work described by Exhibit "A." All work by CONSULTANT shall be completed pursuant to exhibit "A" and paragraph 1.05 above. CONSULTANT shall not be held responsible for delays caused by circumstances beyond its control. CONSULTANT acknowledges that timely performance of services is an important element of this agreement and will perform services in a timely manner as provided in paragraph 1.05 above and consistent with sound professional practices. If CITY requests significant modifications or changes in the scope of this project, the time of performance shall be adjusted appropriately. 4.01 5.01 5.02 ARTICLE IV COST OF SERVICES CONSULTANT has been selected by the CITY to provide services described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, for which compensation over the five year contract shall not exceed $25,000 plus travel time, expenses and graphic design/production expenses. Total compensation over the five year contract shall not exceed $30,000. ARTICLE V PAYMENT FOR SERVICES CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for work required for satisfactory completion of this agreement in amount to be determined in accordance with the method described in paragraph 5.02 below. CITYshall pay CONSULTANT a 20% ( or $4,815.00) retainer based on an estimated total project cost of $24,075 plus travel time, expenses, and graphic design/production costs prior to the start of any work. Payment scheduling: Total payment over the five year contract shall not to exceed $30,000. Fees for professional services as outlined herein shall be paid as follows: a. $225.00 per hour for profession time. $112.50 per hour for travel time. b. Expenses: CONSULTANT shall also be reimbursed for necessary expenses incurred in performing services under this Agreement, subject to the limits stated above. Reimbursement for necessary expenses shall include the following: (1) Automobile mileage, which shall be reimbursed at a rate equal to the mileage allowance which the Administrator of General Services has prescribed, pursuant to Section 5604 of Title 5, for official travel of employees of the Federal Government (present 27 cents a mile for the use of a privately owned automobile). (2) Airline travel, which shall be reimbursed in an amount equal to the actual costs of such travel at the coach rate. CONSULTANT shall make best efforts, consistent with its professional 5.03 5.04 5.05 responsibilities, to schedule air travel at times which will achieve the most economical travel rate. (3) Costs for hotel accommodations, which shall be reimbursed in amounts equal to the actual cost of such accommodations. CONSULTANT shall make best efforts, consistent with its professional responsibilities, to find the most economical hotel accommodations available in the area where travel on behalf of the City is required. (4) Costs for rental cars and gas, which shall be reimbursed in amounts equal to the actual costs of such rentals. CONSULTANT shall make best efforts, consistent with its professional responsibilities, to find the most economical car rental rate in the area where travel on behalf of City is required. (5) Cost of meals incurred while traveling for the City's benefit at the rate of Thirty-five Dollars ($35) per day (i.e., Seven Dollars ($7) for breakfast; Eight Dollars ($8) for lunch; and Twenty Dollars ($20) for dinner). (6) Cost of long distance phone calls made on behalf of the City. (7) Cost of printing documents, where more than one copy is required and the number of pages in a single printing job exceeds 500. c. Expenses Not Covered. General office overhead expenses, such as rent, lighting, heat and stenographic or clerical services, basic and local phone charges, and routine copying costs shall not be considered as reimbursable expenses under this contract. CONSULTANT will bill monthly for services and deduct said approved invoices from the retainer amount. When retainer amount reaches $2,000, CONSULTANT will bill CITY on monthly cycles for services. The $2,000 shall remain in the retainer account to represent the final payment to CONSULTANT at the termination of the contract. Payments to CONSULTANT shall be based on itemized invoice submitted by CONSULTANT. Payments will be made by CITY within thirty (30) days of receipt of CONSULTANT'S invoice. 5.06 6.01 6.02 7.01 7.02 8.01 8.02 If CITY substantially alters the scope of work to include additional analyses, the total payment and cost of services may be changed by amending the agreement. ARTICLE VI PROJECT INSPECTION AND ACCOUNTING RECORDS Duly authorized representatives of the CITY shall have right of access to the CONSULTANT'S files and records relating to the project included in the agreement and may review the work at appropriate stages during performance of the work. CONSULTANT must maintain accounting records and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred, which records and documents shall be kept available at the CONSULTANT'S California office during the contract period and thereafter for three (3) years from the date of final payment. ARTICLE VII DISPOSITION OF FINAL REPORTS All original reports and documents together with such backup data as required by this agreement shall be and shall remain the sole property of CITY. CONSULTANT'S attention is directed to the required notice under Government Code Section 7550, which states in part that "any documents or written reports prepared as a requirement of this contract shall contain, in a separate section preceding the main body of the document, the number and dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of those documents or reports if the total cost for work by non- employees of the public agency exceeds $5,000.00." ARTICLE VIII TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT At any time CITY may suspend indefinitely or abandon the project, or any part thereof, and may require CONSULTANT to suspend the performance of the service. In the event the CITY abandons or suspends the project, CONSULTANT shall receive compensation for services rendered to date of abandonment and suspension in accordance with the provisions of Sections 5.01,5.02, and 5.03 herein. It is understood and agreed that should CITY determine that any part of the work involved in the program is to be suspended indefinitely, abandoned, or canceled, said agreement shall be amended accordingly. Such 8.03 9.01 abandonment or cancellation of a portion of the program shall in no way void or invalidate this agreement as it applies to any remaining portion of the project. If, in the opinion of the CITY, the CONSULTANT fails to perform or provide prompt, efficient, and thorough service, or if CONSULTANT fails to complete the work within the time limits provided, CITY shall have the right to give notice in writing to CONSULTANT of its intention to terminate this agreement. The notice shall be delivered to CONSULTANT at least seven (7) days prior to the date of termination specified in the notice. Upon such termination, CITY shall have the right to take CONSULTANT'S studies and reports insofar as they are complete and acceptable to CITY, and pay CONSULTANT for his performance rendered, in accordance with Sections 5.01, 5.02, and 5.03 herein, prior to the delivery of the notice of intent to terminate, less the amount of damages, general or consequential, which CITY may sustain as a result of CONSULTANT'S failure to satisfactorily perform his obligations under this agreement. ARTICLE IX RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITIES HOLD HARMLESS: The CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless the CITY, its agents, officers, and employees against and from any and all claims, lawsuits, actions, liability, damages, losses, expenses, and costs (including but not limited to attorney's fees), brought for, or on account of, injuries to or death of any person or persons including employees of the CONSULTANT, or injuries to or destruction of property, arising out of, or resulting from, the performance of the work described herein, provided that any such claim, lawsuit, action, liability, damage, loss, expense, or cost is caused in whole or in part by any negligent or intentional wrongful act or omission of the CONSULTANT, any subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or any for whose acts any of them may be liable. CONSULTANT shall have no duty to indemnify or defend CITY under this paragraph if the damage or injury are caused by the active and sole negligence or willfully wrongful act or omission of CITY or its officers or employees. CITY agrees to timely notify CONSULTANT of any such claim and to cooperate with CONSULTANT to allow CONSULTANT to defend such a claim. 10.01 ARTICLE X INSURANCE CONSULTANT, at its expense, shall secure and maintain at all times during the entire period of performance of this agreement, insurance as set forth in Exhibit "B", attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 11.01 ARTICLE Xl GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS It is understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT will comply with all federal, state and local laws and ordinances as may be applicable to the performance of work under this agreement. 12.01 ARTICLE Xll ENDORSEMENT OF DOCUMENTS It is understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT will endorse studies, reports, and documents in accordance with applicable portions of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California. 13.01 ARTICLE XlII INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT The CONSULTANT, in accordance with its status as an independent contractor, covenants and agrees that it will conduct itself consistent with such status, that it will neither hold itself out as nor claim to be an officer or employee of the CITY by reason hereof, and that it will not by reason hereof, make any claim, demand, or application to or for any right or privilege applicable to an officer or employee of the CITY including, but not limited to, worker's compensation coverage, unemployment benefits, and retirement membership or credit. 14.01 14.02 14.03 ARTICLE XlV SUCCESSOR AND ASSIGNMENTS The CITY and the CONSULTANT each binds itself, its partners, successors, and executors, administrators, and assigns to the other party to this agreement, and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns to such party in respect to all covenants of this agreement. Except as stated above, neither the CITY nor the CONSULTANT shall assign, sublet, or transfer his interest in this agreement without the written consent of the other, however, the CONSULTANT reserves the right to assign the proceeds due under this agreement to any bank or person. In the case of death of one or more members of the firm of the CONSULTANT, the surviving member or members, shall complete the professional services covered by this agreement. 15.01 15.02 15.03 16.01 17.01 ARTICLE XV EXTENT OF AGREEMENT This agreement shall consist of this agreement, the proposal submitted by Jane Lorand dated February 3, 1998, identified as Exhibit "A", as attached hereto and incorporated herein, and the insurance requirements set forth in the attached Exhibit "B." This agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the CITY and CONSULTANT and any other representations or agreements are superseded bythe terms of this agreement. In any conflict between the exhibits and the text of this Agreement, the text shall control. ARTICLE XVl PARAGRAPH HEADINGS The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience and reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this contract. ARTICLE XVll NOTICE Whenever a notice to a party is required by this agreement, it shall be deemed given when deposited with proper address and postage in the U.S. mail or when personally delivered as follows: CITY: CONSULTANT/ CONTRACTOR: City of Ukiah Civic Center 300 Seminary Drive Ukiah, California 95482 Jane Lorand, CEO Lorand & Company, Inc. Post Office Box 15060 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 ARTICLE XVlll DUPLICATE ORIGINALS 18.01 This agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals bearing the original signature of both parties and when so executed and such duplicate original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of the agreement between the parties. ARTICLE XlX FORUM SELECTION 19.01 CONSULTANT and CITY stipulate and agree that any litigation relating to the enforcement or interpretation of the agreement, arising out of CONSULTANT's performance or relating in any way to the work shall be brought in Mendocino County and that venue will lie in Mendocino County. CONSULTANT hereby waives any right it might otherwise have to seek a change of venue based on its status as an out of county corporation, or on any other basis. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused their duly authorized officers to execute this agreement in duplicate the day and year first above written. CITY OF UKIAH Candace Horsley, City Manager Date CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR Jane Lorand, CEO Lorand & Company, Inc. IRS IDN Number Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Rapport, City Attorney Date 10 i EXHIBIT A Lorancl & Compan ?0Z463.6204 Wax) Dear Sue, Darryl, and Candace: I apologize for not getting these figures to you on Monday as I promised. We were hit hard by tl~ storm and are just now recovering water and heat as the next wave prepares to hit us! I hope that you were not unduly inconvenienced by the delay. I have done my best to estimate what professional time I believe the tasks will require. Historically, I have been very close in previous types of projects, and I feel confident that were I the client, I could count on accomp~g the tasks in the budgeted time estimated. Unless the client changes course dramatically, I have yet to renegotiate for more time. Thus, I make this proposal for a long-term planning and development course for the City of Ukiah ElecWic Department. Cost Proposal for the following areas: ~2 Focus Group Review/Integration of AL&Z information/Specific Interviews/ group meetings in Uktah to refine the picture of'What is the state of knowledge and information of our custom~?" Includes a concise report with executive summary that would be an easy read for the ~ Council. 20 hours ~3 I~vtlopm~nt of Message Matrix, with core issues, secondary issues, thnellnes, and appropriate market segmentation for each issue. 16 hours /3 Define objectives and accountability measures, over a 60 month window. 10 hours I3 Develop and refine programs to achieve objectives, monitor programs, revise and amend over time, and assess effectiveness. (Supervisory/Developmental Capadty- 45 hours over 60 months - 25~ hours over the first 12 months, with periodic review and upgrading of programs based on feedback, market changes, assessment over the balance of the 48 months. Within development would include writing/developing a series o/newpaper spr~ds that would be worked into a brochure for customers. Production/graphics would be billed to you at cost.) (7o;0)7e-~+ P~ (7o7) ~7e-zoe6 ~-~I: LOF, XND~dn~a~t TOOI~ /'V& Sg:eT $$It0/~0 ~1 Develop a 4'x6' map of the Strategic Education Plan with the cornponent~, timelines, segments, and Message Matrix for all city employees, utility employ- ees, Council business customers, and residential customers. This map will create the common focus and vision for all participants. 16 hours plus graphic design/production on a cost basis As wtth ali projects, I would want to work closely with the staff, and use this opporhxnity to bring what expertise I have not only to this project, but to help develop the skills of those with whom I would be working. In my view, a suc- cessful consultant (1) enables staff to carry on independently and extend their newly-learned skills to other related projects; and (2) emancipates the client from the need for the services az soon az possible. I would expect to be working at my highest level and to delegate tasks that would not need to be done by me person- ally, thus working as cost-effectively as possible for your city. Given the extensive term of the project, my regular rates would be discounted by 10%, which would reduce them to $~:~_~/hour for professional time, and $112.50/ hour for travel time. Thus, the total project cost over the 60 months would be $24075 plus travel time, expenses, and graphic design/production for the pieces we develop and the map. We ask for 20% retainer and we bill monthly. Let me know if this proposal meets your needs. With best regards, EXHIBIT B SUBMIT IN DUPUCATE AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY SPECIAL ENDORSEMENT ~,~o~s~,o. FOR .. City of Ukiah (the "City") , PRODUCER POLICY INFORMA~ON: I~e ~mp~y: Pol~ No.: PoI~ Pe~: (from) (to) LOSS ADJUS~ENT ~NSE ~ I~in Lim~ ~ In A~it~n to Lim~ , ,, T~ne ~ ~iMe ~ S~4~r~ ~tent~n (ch~ ~) of ., , NAM ED I N SU R E D A PP L! CAB I LITY. ~ instance ~i~ to the ~e~t~ a~/or tenan~ of ~e nam~ u~er all w~en ~n~ a~ ~ h f~e w~ t~ C~ un~u c~ t~ ~11~ ~E~ ~enU a~ ~ w~h t~ Gty are co~: ~ ~R~M~/~RMI~ , ~PE OF INSURANCE OTHER PROVISIONS EOMMER~ A~O ~LI~ BUSINESS A~O ~LI~ O~ER LI MIT OF LIABi LI~ C~l MS: u~ers repr~n(~i~ I~ claims punua~ to this i~rance. Name: S ~ ~ent, f~ ~ily inju~ ~d ~o~ny dama~. Addr~: Tele~: ( In consideraUon of the p~mium ~arg~ a~ ~i~nding ~y incoherent s~tement in ~he ~li~ to ~h th~ endonement is a~tach~ or any en~or~ment ~w or h~ealter attach~ ~e~to, it ~ ~r~ ~ fol~: 1. INSURED. The Ci~, i~ offic~, o[f~a~, ~plo~ and volun~een are includ~ ~ i~ur~ wiih ~a~d to damag~ a~ de[ense of claims a~ing [~om: the own~hip operation, maintena~e, use, ~adi~ or un~i~ of ~y auto own~, leas~, hir~ o~ ~no~d ~ the Nam~ I~ured, o~ ~or which ~e Nam~ I~u~ is ~po~ib~. 2. CONTRIB~ION NOT REQUIRED. ~ r~pec~ work pe~o~ed by the Named I~ur~ for or on beha~ of the Ci~, t~ insurance aflord~ by this policy shall: (a) pNma~ insu~nce ~ r~pec~ the Ci~, i~ afl,ers, o~ficials, employ~ and volunteers; o~ (b) sta~ in an unbroken chain o[ coverage exc~s of the Nam~ Insur~'s prima~ coverage. Any insurance or sell. insurance maintained by the City, i~ oHicers, oH~ials, employe~ and volunteers shall be excess o~ the Named Insured's i~ura~e and ~t cont~bute ~th it. 3. ~CEL~TION NO~CE. ~ r~p~ to the int~ al the Ci~, th~ insurance shall not be c~cell~, except alter ~i~ (30) da~ prior w~tten ~tice I~e~ h~ b~n g~en to the City. 4. SCOPE OF CO~GE. Th~ ~li~ a~fords cave,age at le~t as broad as: (1) I~ primal, I~u~e ~c~ O[F~e l~m number CA0~I (Ed. 1/87), Code 1 ('a~ auto'); or (2) If exc~s, aflor~ cover~e ~i~ ~ at le~t ~ broad ~ ~e pdma~ insura~e [arms refe~ in lhe p~ing s~n (1). Except ~ stat~ abo~ ~thing ~rein ~1 ~ held to waive, alter or exle~ any o[ I~ limits condiUons, agr~men~ or exclusio~ of the policy to which th~ endonemen~ ~ at~ch~. ENDORSEME~ HOLDER CI~ AU~ORIZED ~ Broker/Agent ~ Unde~riter REPRESENTA~VE 300 ~~ ~V~ I (print/~pe name), warrant that I have ~i~ r ~ 95482 authority to bind the above-mentioned insurance company and by my signature her~n do so bind this company to this endorsement. Signature (original ~gnoture required) Telephone: ( ) Date Signed REV. 1/93 WORKERS' COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY SPECIAL ENDORSEMENT FOR City of Ukiah PRODUCER NAMED INSURED CLAIM S: Ur~er~,~e~s representative for claims purs~nt to this insurance. N~ne: Address: Telephone: SUBMIT IN DUPLICATE (the"City") [ ~°~su~E~ ~°'I POLICY INFORMATION: Insurance Company;. Policy No.: Policy Period: (frown) (to) OTHER PROVISIONS EMPLOYERS LIABILITY LIMITS $ (Each ~dder, O ' · $ (Disease - Policy Limit) $ (Dis~as~ - Each Employee) In consideration of the premium charged and notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy to which this endorsement is attached or any endorsement now or h~reafter attached thereto, it is agreed as follows: 1. CANCELLATION NOTICE. This insurance shall not be cancelled, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by receipted delivery has been given to the City. 2. WAJVl~R OF SUBROGATION. This Insurance Company agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its olficers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses paid under the terms ol this policy which arise from the work perlormed by tJ~ Named Insured for the City. Except as stated above nothing herein shall be held to waive, alter or extend any o~ the limits, conditioru, agreements or exclusions of the policy to which this endorse. ment is attached. ENDORSEMENT HOLDER CITY City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 AUTHORIZED Iq Broker/Agent lq Underwriter [] REPRESENTATIVE (print/type name), warrant that I have authority to bind the above-mentioned insurance company and by my signature hereon do so bind this company to this endorsement. Signature Telephone: ( ) (original signature required) Date Signed ~v. !/93 ITEM NO. 10f. DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF MENDOCINO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (MCOG) REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND RELATED POLICY ISSUES Mayor Malone has requested this matter be agendized for City Council discussion. He will make an oral presentation at the meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.: N/A N/A Mayor Malone Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer~~....~ Candace Horsley, City Manager None Candace Morsl~y, City Manager mfh:asrcc98 0318MCOG Comments on M.C.O.G.'s 1998 Regional Transportation Plan r ~ In 1990, as allowed by State law, the Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) elected to prepare their own Regional Transportation Plan(RTP), instead of delegating that authority to the California Transportation Commission (CTC), and the California Department Of Transportation (DOT or Cal-Trans). A plan was paid for to examine all forms of transportation in the County, and to assess current needs while projecting future growth and demands. The Plan was prepared and adopted, revised and expanded as the years have passed, and the 1998 Plan will be effectively a readoption of the October 7,1996 readoption of the 1994 update. The 1998 RTP will go to the CTC for final approval. The comprehensive scope of the plan supports the idea that the priorities listed in the Plan have not changed. The needs assessments identify many significant Mendocino county projects for highway, county roads, bridges, city streets, bus, rail, airport, maritime, bike and pedestrian uses. An overall goal is established to "provide a safe, energy efficient and balanced multi-modal system...", and to be "implemented on the basis of area and regional priorities which view the transportation system in total and not by individual modes. This goal is twice stated in the Plan, both in the Executive and Regional Transportation Goal sections. The Plan begins to become inconsistent in the Policy sections, by including policies which are worded as goals, and by establishing specific objectives from those policies , some of which are also worded as goals. In addition, some of the policies are already stated in State Law, and being required as such do not need to be reiterated'as policy. Another flaw in the policy sections is that they do not suggest who will be responsible for the implementation of the policies, although the implication is that MCOG staff would assume that role unless otherwise indicated. The recent decision by MCOG to fund the Willits bypass with all of the local money from SB45 is not only inconsistent with the primary goal of its own Regional Transportation Plan(RTP),. it may also be illegal to assign all of the SB45 regional money to what should be funded as an interregional project. The loss of this money for local needs is even more critical in the light of the fact that Congress will likely soon be passing a $214 billion bill for transportation, which will include more needed funding for highways and a little for public transportation. Until 1998, there were few major decisions or changes for MCOG to make in the RTP because not much discretionary money came from the State or Federal government. Now that there is a change in substantial local funding, there also needs to be a significant change in the discretion and focus that MCOG should give to its own policies. If MCOG is reluctant or unwilling to truly get active in the policies and implementations of its own local plan, then the following suggestions can be made; A. Reinstate the Citizens Advisory Committee (abandoned in 1985) for the purpose of reviewing the RTP and making it internally consistent from the local perspective. Included should be members of citizen advocate organizations such as biking and hiking trails, bus and rail passenger services, as well as members from around the county. B. Expand the Technical Advisory Committee to include staff from all organizations providing other forms of local transportation in the County and mentioned in the Plan. Coordinating different needs and types of transportation could be better balanced by more inclusion. C. Review the MCOG staff responsibilities for policy implementation and scope of work. An RFP process for this should be undertaken this year and not be delayed. More locally available money makes this measure extremely importm~t. D. For local consistency and priority setting, a policy should be adopted to utilize the transportation elements of the General Plans of Mendocino County and of its incorporated Cities. Having a long range list of locally planned priorities will help keep these projects working towards their implementation. ITEM NO. 10 g DATE: March 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING FOR EMPLOYEE BARGAINING UNITS - MANAGEMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS UNITS The City Manager has met with representatives of the Management and Miscellaneous Units to discuss negotiation items for the 1997-98 fiscal year. The negotiations have resulted in tentative agreements as previously discussed in closed session which have been ratified by the Units. The proposed Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) are being submitted for Council's review and consideration. If the City Council approves the agreements, we recommend adoption of the attached resolution. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consideration of MOUs and adoption of resolution approving Memorandums of Understanding for Management and Miscellaneous Units. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Do not adopt resolution. 2. Refer to Staff for amendments. Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by- Kari Revheim, Personnel Officer~ Coordinated with- Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Resolution for Adoption. Candace Horsley, ity Manager 3: MOU\ASRMOU 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 25 26 :/7 28 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADOPTING THE MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF UKIAH AND THE MANAGEMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS UNITS WHEREAS, the Employee/Employer Relations Officer has met and conferred in good faith with representatives of the Management and Miscellaneous Units; and WHEREAS, a Memorandum of Understanding has been approved by both the Management and Miscellaneous Units; and WHEREAS, said Memorandums of Understanding have been presented to the City Council for its consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Memorandums of Understanding for the Management and Miscellaneous Units are hereby adopted and the Employee/Employer Relations Officer is authorized to enter into this Agreement for the Fiscal Year 1997-98. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of March, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk 3: PER/RES. MOU ITEM NO. ].0h. DATE: MARCH 18, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A SPEED ZONE OF 30 MPH FOR AIRPORT PARK BOULEVARD FROM TALMAGE ROAD TO AIRPORT ROAD Submitted for the City Council's consideration is a proposed ordinance which would, if adopted, establish a speed zone of 30 MPH for Airport Park Boulevard from Talmage Road to Airport Road. A speed limit for Airport Park Boulevard is not currently posted and because the area adjacent to and fronting Airport Park Boulevard does not satisfy the requirements established for a Business District pursusant to Section 240 of the California Vehicle Code (CVC), the maximum speed limit of 65 MPH woud apply for the divided portion and 55 MPH would apply to the undivided portion pursuant to the provisions of Section 22350, CVC. Purusant to the provisions of Section 22358, CVC, the local agency may by ordinance determine and declare a prima facie speed limit less than 65 MPH if it is determined upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that a limit of 65 MPH is more than is reasonable or safe upon any portion of any street within its jurisdiction. CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION' Introduce by title only the ordinance amending Ukiah Municipal Code Section 7071 adding the speed zone of 30 MPH for Airport Park Boulevard. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Do not introduce ordinance. Appropriation Requested: Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Public Safety Department and Traffic Engineering Committee Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Proposed Ordinance. 2. Engineering and Traffic Survey. Candace Horsley, City Manager R: 1 \PVV:kk AAIP.2 Introduction of Ordinances Establishing a Speed Zone of 30 MPH for Airport Park Boulevard from Talmage Road to Airport Road March 18, 1998 Page 2 Based upon an engineering and traffic survey conducted by the Engineering Department, it is recommended that a 30 MPH speed zone be established for both northbound and southbound directions of Airport Park Boulevard from Talamge Road to Airport Road. The 85th percentile speeds of 34.8 and 31.7 MPH were measured for southbound and northbound traffic respectively. Road and development conditions and traffic accident information noted in the study also justify the establishment of a 30 MPH speed zone. The Traffic Engineering Committee has considered this matter and recommends that the 30 MPH speed zone be established. Although a portion of Airport Park Boulevard is not a City maintained street at present, the City may adopt traffic regulations for the public right-of-way pursuant to the provisions of Section 21100 of CVC. R: 1 ~:~V:kk AAIP.2 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTION 7071 OF THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THE SPEED ZONE OF 30 MPH FOR AIRPORT PARK BOULEVARD The City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby ordains as follows: _SECTION ONE. _ Section 7071 of the Ukiah'Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of Paragraph D which shall read as follows: Do Airport Park Boulevard: Thirty (30) miles per hour for both directions of travel from Talmage Road to Airport Road. _SECTION TWO, This Ordinance shall be published as required by law and shall become effective thirty (30) days after it is adopted. Introduced by title only on March 18, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of April, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk B:ORD AIP CITY OF UKIAH DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY NO. 98-1 PROPOSED SPEED ZONE - AIRPORT PARK BOULEVARD March 4, 1998 DATA 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. . . 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Street: Airport Park Boulevard Limits: Talmage Road to 4,340 feet South - Classification of terrain: Flat Roadside development: Commercial, Iow density Type of roadway: Asphalt concrete Width of roadway: Talmage Road to 2,795 feet South, four lanes with two lanes Northbound and two lanes Southbound, 12 feet per lane; 2,795 feet South to South end of Airport Park Boulevard, I lane Northbound and 1 lane Southbound at 12 feet per lane Condition of surface: Talmage Road to Commerce Drive - significant surface deflections; Commerce Drive to south end - acceptable Shoulder or parking width: Not applicable Sight distance: Satisfactory Range of critical speeds on curves: Not applicable The average daily traffic volume for Airport Park Boulevard is 5,371 vehicles. The traffic count was conducted January 9 - 15, 1998 on Airport Park Boulevard between the Shell service station and Wal-Mart. A summary of the traffic count data is attached. Reported accidents: There have been 13 accidents in the last three years through the period ending November 23, 1997. Twelve of these accidents have occurred at the intersection of Airport Park Boulevard and Commerce Drive. A speed survey was conducted on August 22, 1997 at the southwest corner of Airport Park Boulevard and Commerce Drive. The data sheets and cumulative speed curves are attached to this report. The 85th percentile speed for Northbound traffic is 31.7 mph. The 85th percentile speed for Southbound traffic is 34.8 mph. Speed range of pace, miles per hour: Northbound' 22-32 mph Southbound: 25-35 mph Night conditions warranting change from daytime speed: None Business District: Airport Park Boulevard does not currently meet the requirements of a business district as defined in the 1998 California Vehicle Code (CVC) Sections 235 and 240. CONCLUSION On the basis of an engineering and traffic survey completed in accordance with CVC Section 627 and in accordance with the provisions of the CVC Sections 22357 and 22358, a prima facie speed limit of 30 mph should be established on Airport Park Boulevard within the limits of this survey. The speed limit of 30 mph is at or near the 85th percentile vehicle speed and is further supported by the following conditions that are not apparent to the prudent driver: Page 2 Engineering and Traffic Survey No. 98-1 March 4, 1998 For the north section of Airport Park Boulevard, 2,795 feet of four lane street. This section from Talmage Road to the south line of Friedman Brothers is not a City maintained street. 1. The existing street conditions warrant a speed zone of 30 mph. These conditions are: a. The street striping is faded and only partially visible to the motoring public. b. The road surface between Talmage Road and Commerce Drive has significant surface deflections. 2. The intersection of Airport Park Boulevard and Commerce drive is unique to drivers of Ukiah. At no other location in the City will drivers stop on the minor street leg of the intersection and cross free flowing traffic on a four lane boulevard with median islands. Although sight distance at this intersection is satisfactory, motorists crossing Airport Park Boulevard on Commerce Drive must use caution to avoid Northbound/Southbound traffic. For the south section of Airport Park Boulevard from the south line of Friedman Brothers to Mendocino Brewing Company, 1,545 feet of two lane street: 1. This section is currently a half-width street with a half median island. 2. The section is controlled by stop signs at the north and the south ends. ~ic~Ho~vard Kenned~y: ' ' - // Director of Public Works/City Engineer AIRPORT PARK BOULEVARD TRAFFIC COUNT DATA, JANUARY 1998 gl_T_ Y___O_F: UKIAH J__ _L ..... J J Summary of Traffic Counts_ - Airport park Bo~!e_v_a._rd- ........... Data Received ~rom Mendocino Co. Public Works on January 16'--199B NB = Northbound Traffic; SB = Southbound Traffic Prepa~ecl By: P. iol~Seanor .................. ~ ..... i' ............... -~r ~-0 ~'~ P~i'r k- BlJ~-i~-~r~d- Day NB SB ADT .................. Friday 3,159 2-:'~-10 _~_~,_~_O~;_ ...................Saturday .... 3,046 i ..................... Date 9-Jan-98 . . lO-Jan-98 11-Jan-98 12-Jan-98 13-Jan-98 Sunday Monday Tuesday 14-Jan-98 15-Jan-98 ,Wednesday Thursday 3,061 2,724 2,771 -' -2}'553 i 2,949 2,735 1,946 $~872 I ?_, 3 2_3__j 6, 0't'7 2,485 _ 5,256 2,3 2 2,432 ! 5~381 Date Time Printed: 1/16/98 at 1:49 PM "'-'"1 no^o ~o. SPEED SUR VE Y DY,'_ ,,..~%T.~%~?(D-T~,V.3/k.L.t"-,3 DATE __(~:~, - ~ '~-c,~ L NUMBER OF VEHICLES - M.P.tl. 5 10 15 ~o PERCENT CUMULATIVE .__ OF TOTAL PERCENTAGE : .. , ~X ..... . . _ ~ .... : ~ . '" 37 _ ,~ x~~ _.._ ... . ,_ 2.7 ~o.?. ",o ~ Z 7~ -~ .... - .~ ~.4 ~9~' ,, ~ ¢ ...... .. /.4, 4,/' .. ,o X~'Xi /.4 ~.7 ,, .~ Zi ...... :....... . ? /.~ I .... ~ ........ , ~ ,,. -,, , , ..... 11 ,, , ..... 10 .. "'"'"' ' '::"' C,,llllry · SPEED ZONE FILE TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES ENGINEERING SURVEY AND TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION '12/4/97. CUMULATIVE SPEED CURVE AIRPORT PARK BLVD. SOUTHBOUND 100 9O 8O 7O 6O 5O 4O 3O 2O 10 SPEED RANGE (MPH) ..... 34.8 NIPH 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED CURVE 10 MPH PACE REPORT NO.: 97-02.XLS ,~ ~T. o~ ~/ NUMBER OF VEHICLES M.P.II. 5 lO 15 ~o PERCENT CUMULATIVE ....... ~ .... ~ . ~ OF TOTAL PERCENTAGE ~ _ .. . . 53 _ ..... . . 51 50 ,, , , 47 ' 46 ' ~s .. ~ /00 - ~,Z~ ~~~ .... '_,,-/.~~.~ _ _ _ /. i ~?,'T ... ~,j ~~ ~~X-: .... ~'~ ,o N.x¢~'~':xX~x xX~~ ...... ~o ~.~- ,,,_~.................... /..:~.~ '~ ......... uoT~s: . ~ ..... 1. ~ .... ~ ~ X ,'~,. o~[, ~.,.,,. , . ~ /./ ............. ~, .... 0 ,~' ........ ~ 0 ,, ,, , .............. , , , Cahmry . SPEED ZONE FILE TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES ENGINEERING SURVEY AND TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION 12/4/97 CUMULATIVE SPEED CURVE AIRPORT PARK BLVD. NORTHBOUND 100 9O 8O 7O 6O 5O 4o 3O 2O 10 SPEED RANGE (MPH) 31.7 MPH 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED CURVE · -"-"--'10 MPH PACE REPORT NO.: 97-01 .XLS