Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-01-21 Packet MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting - December 17, 1997 A regular meeting of the Ukiah City Council, the agenda for which was legally noticed and posted, convened at 6:31 p.m. in the Uldah Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were pre~ent: Chavez, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. Councilmember Ashiku ardved at 6:33 p.m. Absent: None. Staff preaent: Public Utilities Director Barnes, Community Services Director DeKnoblough, Finance Director Etlon, Assistant City Manager Harris, City Mana.qer Horsley, Deputy Public Works Director Seano,, Senior Planner Stump, and City Clerk Hendersor,. 2. Pled_aa of Alle0lanc~' Mayor Malone led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ADDrovallCormction of Minute~ .~!?:~" :la. Re_~ular Meetin_a of - December 3. 1997 M/$ Mastin/Chavez to approve the Minutes of the RegularMeeting o 'December.3, 1997, with an amendment to page 4, item 9a, as follows: "Martin Van Ze~, RepreseniatiVe of Gattrans, in reply to questioning, noted C, altrans does not spray herbicides in:tt~e Willits ~:iimit.,~"~r:a~Ong the High~ay 101 corridor in Mendocino County." The motion can by the'~rollowing r~ll.iCalt vote~ AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Kelly, Mastin, and Ma~"~:!:Mal~. NOES: NOne: .~ABSTAIN: Councilmember Ashiku. ABSENT: None. ' ........ 5. CONSENT CALENDAR ~?"'"""~iiii!i!i il !:i i Mayor Malone noted there was no itlm.~:'"incJude~~ th~i~i~e'~:Calendar. Mayor Malone asked tha~ item Se, ~prOval of~ase Re~ll with Rusty Bowl BMX Track, be taken off the Consent Calendar..l!~m 5e was' heard as..ll~m ab. M/S KellylMaatin to appro~!:;th~i~onsent ~d~:!!~:'follows: ./.:~. ':. ::-. ¢...'?:::i-i ~::.: !:i~: ..::-:: :i :ii:: -~.~i~:i.~:~::~i:i:!:ii.~i a. Denied Ctaim for Damages received from Richard McCormick, Sr. and referred to ,Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire'Municipal Insurance Fund; b. Approved .Di~bumements 'fo,' the month of November 1997; c. Received nOtification relative io'lhe execution of a Rental Agreement for a Stand-By Generator at the Lake'Mendocino Hydro Plant; d. ApPrOved letter to C.~trans requesting discontinuance of herbicide use within the city limits; f. Adopted Ordinan~':No.:997 Amending the City of Uldah Zoning Map for the City of Ukiah, g./i!?:::~Received notificati0~ regarding purchase of Liquid Polymer, h/;:!::.:~.Adopted ResolutiOn~':No. 98-19, Eliminating On-Street Parking Spaces and Establishing a No ~!ii!i:;: ::~:Paridng ZonelBUS':Loading Zone on South State Street North of the Frontage of Ukiah Valley ~ii: :: 'i it_umber: · ~.i:.i~i:::' . . ' ===================== A;iiii'::i:::~:::Rejected 'IN~ for 175KW Generator at the Hydro Plant; and k~:i:i!:.:'?::~proved 'Budget Amendment in the amount of $2,800 for payment of Appraisal Services for '~:;~:~.~he Ukiah Animal Shelter. The motion carded by the following mil call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEM~ Richard McCormick, Sr. inquired as to the status of his Claim for Damages. Mayor Malone explained the Council had approved staff's recommendation as noted in Consent Calendar item Sa. City Manager Homley invited Mr. McCormick to call her in the morning regarding the matter. Regular Meeting - December 17, 1997 Page 1 7. UNFINISHED BUSINES~ 7a. Consideration of Proposal as Submitted by Waste Solutions Grout) to Provide Raj~ :Transfer for Solid Waste - City Manager Homley noted a proposal from BLT Ente~dses, as ~11 as a Memorandum ~m Public ~ilities ~re~or Barnes, had been distributed to the ~un~l. She also noted the proposal ~ Waste ~l~ons G~up a~v~ ~te F~ay, ~t allo~ng for ~en staff ana~sis. If the ~un~l is interested in mvie~ng any of ~ese late proposals, or a~pting any proposal o~er than from ~lid Wa~e ~ems, ~ ~ must do so by issuing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for this pmje~. ~ ~uld ~ke ~ to four monks to ~mp~te su~ a ~ss. She advised the land at the Sewage Treatment P~nt = not available for use as a ~nsfer statio,, as ~ is needed for ~nt daily use and future e~ansion of the Sewage Treatment Plant. She stated her m~mmendation to a~pt the Solid Wastes Systems proposal, as ~ is ~e ~st pd~ ~ssible. C~ Affomey ~ppo~ a~ved at ~e ~ting. .~::. ~ ~o~y ~p~, ~ ~ to q~i~ ~a~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ewage.~tment Plant ~ for a ~iid ~e ~er fadl~, ~t~ his ~m ~ ~ofiating:With ~ ~mpany other than Solid Wastes Systems. ~at is ~ing proposed by ~mpetitive pm~ss, ~emas an agreement ~h Solid.:~Wa~es ~s~:b ~nsidered an · mend~ent.~o the ~t ~n~ise. ~e~ .~ re.ny is~'to ~nsider'~the n' otiations wer· openeo to omer ~mpan,es ~y an RFP p~ss. ~?~ste~ ~tems, as ~11 as regaling ~ info~ati~ '~o~ed by Waste Soluti~s rou and ,o r ~ ...... .,,. u,,,=. , ne mo. on ama mr m~ ~ ~::~na. ~ayor Ma,one opened the meeting to publi~::~ption-~em 7a o~?~m 7b Penny Ma~his, manager of the mobile h~:e pa~.~:'.7~:E::::;~?~treet, spoke o~ ~half of the senior ~tizens in her pa~; she asked t~::~un~l.:~t0 approve ~e least e~ensive proposal, so the rotes would not have to ~ raised .... ?.~:~" ~:: Robe~ Reich, mobile home pa~?~ananer ~ed the ~?~-. ~suI~ ;- ,~- ~ ................ :~::'~ _ . ,..~.~ ...... ~a~ ~u vga ~or ~e p~pOSal ~at ~uld ~ Mc~,:~:.Mala~:':~':~ed ~e ~T{'0 I~pt the Solid Wastes S~tems proposal ~lliam Sm~ke~0 the ~:~::k~p. the rotes as ~ as ~ssible. ~ck Tm~i~,..~~:~nage~N0~em Parc Railroad, noted ~ative sol,ions need to ~ fo~h~ing t6'keep ~he milroad'0pemble. He offered to tmnspo~ garage from the transfer atation.:~ of the ama ~.mi!.a[a ate ~i~ ~uld on~ ~ver ~sts. ~F~eI'?, .~el A~.~':'~ ~m~r ~ ~ ~m ~l,omi. Railroad A.ho' , u~ed the ~n~ to mrna ~ m~ o~ Me~no ~ ~ usmg ~e mmlmad to ~nspon the ga~e an~ ~e ~:'~ghways of ga~ag~'hauling :hm~ Selzer=T-~ Mead~ ~ve, Rep~senting ~e Mendo~no ~un~ Emplo~ ~un~l ~EC),:~ ~e MCEC ~ ~e mil h~ul option ~s ~ subsi~ for ~e railroad ~nd ~sked the ~?.~°se ~ least e~ensive opUon ~ssible to tmnspo~ the ~ste to ~ I. ndfill o~ of the I~. Judy Pruden, 304 S. Hortense, had concerns regarding the figures put forth in the packet and noted it was necessary to carefully look at the costs of this project. Jim Salyem, Solid Wastes Systems, noted he would like to present his proposal. John Warren, accountant for Solid Wastes Systems, in response to a question from Council, noted the cost of hauling garbage out of the ar~l by train, rather than by truck, would be an additional :$.75 per month per 30 gallon can, but this cost would be lower than what is now being paid by ratepayers. Regular MH'dng - December 17, 1997 Anne Crowder, 5030 North View, spoke to the importance of recycling and of having a recycling facility as part of any transfer station. She also urged transportation of the garbage by rail. Richard Howland, 230 Bourbon Lane, noted the Council should be fiscally conservative and choose the least expensive option. Robed Domey, business owner, urged the proposal which would provide the lowest rate to the retepayers. John Pinches, Mendocino County Third Distdct Supervisor, noted the ber,.~f'rts to the ratepayers as this process has become more competitive. He urged the Council to strive for the most economical proposal, which is the truck hauling option, but also recommended including the construction of the rail siding at this time. Shawn Guttemen, BLT Enterprises, mentioned his company has given the Council two proposals, one as the Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority (MSWMA) project for North State Street and the other presented to the City this morning, which would be located on a site m~ally selected by the City and BLT Enterprises. The rates in his proposal include ~ ~-.,ost ~:lhe land for the Paul Cayler, Director, Sohd Waste D,v,s,on, County of ~doc~no,.:~t~in, m fordeVetOpinga transfer station is short, as the Uldah landfill is scheduled ~0: Close ileal!the summer ofq999,~: He urged the Council to accept the proposal which presented th~ IOWesi:~'esponsible cost, 'while retaining flexibility in construction. "%i~i:ii~i~?;.~...!..?.. ,~::::::::':.: :..: · ..... M cha. McC. .y, Consu, ng, . so noted company's and haul rates were competitive.~!!i !i! ii:ii: Pat McAllister noted the use of the MSWMA ~::~:::~:~at· Street f~':a~:transfer station is being challenged legally. ...... Judy Pruden noted information on the BiT prop~i was '~:~:e available to the public. ~ayor Malone noted the BLT p~Sal was ~ on the ~nda, only Items 7a and 7b are being considered. ' ......... ":'~': ..... ~lvi..d..G.avric.h, Pres'der:~t/~waste .S. oluti~:~::outlined his company's proposa He urged [ne. ~,.. :~.0_ma~<e a ...c~.m~ent to ra~l haul.":'~:floted there may be some flexibility in the rice of using me ~ro'H~ landfill Site overthe life of a 20-year contract. He provided written infoPr~nation to the Council,. entitled pm~ii:to :ProvUe Long. Term Ra// Transfer, Trensport &D/sposa/ to the Anne Cro~r u~g'~ ~~ciI to ~oose an option with a recycling facility on the same site as the transfer station. '~i~ii!il :i:i Ma¥~Malone closed ~ ~Jic input portions on these items and asked that the discussion be re.~med to the Council .~.::. ; .:::.:.. ...... ..:.:-: :.. Peblic Utilities Dim~r Barnes, in response to questioning, noted the Sewage Treatment Plant ~Proposed by VVaSte Solutions Group to be used for a transfer station site is currently in use as e~ge pond and'is also needed for future expansion of the facility. It is not in the best interest of the ~s.~.ewer customem to change the usage of this land. M/S Ashiku/Malone to deny the Waste Solutions Group proposal. Discussion ensued regarding the proposal. The motion carried by the following mil call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. RECESSED: 8:34 p.m. RECONVE:NED: 8:44 p.m. 7b. _C~nsideration of ProDosll from Solid Wastes Systems for a Transfer Station on Tavtg~ - City Manager Homley noted the Solid Wastes Systems's proposal was for the operation and maintenance of a garbage transfer facility located at their Taylor Drive property. The proposal Regular Meeting. December 17, 1997 I=~ge 3 includes a rail haul option, a truck haul option, and a third option for truck haul which would include a rail spur and extra bay with construction of the facility to accommodate rail transport when feasible. City staff met with representatives of Solid Wastes Systems and a Council subcommittee consisting of Councilmembers Kelly and Masfin, to finalize this proposal. She recommends obtaining permits for both truck and rail transportation of the solid waste, in the initial permit phase. Jim Salyers noted, of the three options being presented, all three will provide full service on the Taylor Drive site. He mentioned the urgency of proceeding soon. If the Council chooses the rail haul option, he intends to have Waste Solutions Group as a subcontractor to provide the hauling of the garbage. David Gavrich agreed his company could make that a possibility. City Attorney Rapport reminded the Council this was not the forum in which to make such decisions. He recommended the Council choose one of the three proposals and have staff bdng back a final contract for Council approval. Discussion took place regarding the various options available City Manager Homley urged the Council to approve one of~!~ .opti~ conceptually and to have her work out the details of the contract, before retumi~':the final ~tract to ~the Council for approval. City Manager Rapport agreed that was the manner in ~.:tO.~ceed. ~_,,~.u._n_c..?~e_m__ _b~_r ~Aah!.ku..om. pha. s.ized, he. oould not supp~art!~siv, rail option and urged the u,a~ [o proceea wire me truc~ haul option with the addition, o[ia ;rail .spur if they so desired. Mayor Malone addressed the advantages of supportinli' the rail Councilmember Kelly noted the funds spent ~;;~'~;:'!;~ns,,orta,'~;!~::~;;;'... .. ~ , · = wur~ng lot me puolJC twice, if they are applied to supporting the?:PUblic raj.~?Y. :.!,~,he u.~d a show of confidence by supporting the rail haul option now. .?ii:i~:'' ~i I~' "~<:i~i;~.~i; :-:.;i ::: ./? :i!!: "i:" · -::."': <:i~i!:: {ii?i:::.:::::'i:.:.::: M/S ~astin/Ma~one to authorize the ~'~:~anager~i;' negotia~::'~'"~Titten contract with Solid Wastes Systems, Inc for the construction .~d operation of a solid Waste transfer facility at Taylor Ddve to be configured to accommodate I:mt'h truck and rail service and to begin operation by hauling the garbage out of the area by rail. The motion Carriecl bythe follc;Wi~!g i;0ii call vote: AYES: Councilmembere Kelly, Mastin. and Mayor Malone. NOES: ~lmembers Chavez and Ashiku. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. ..: ?: ' ' -: "!'::! .... ""~:~:i:~.:. - · ..::::.": "i:; ' ':" "::~:::.:;' ." 7¢. ,.Refflement'Agreements Re_ua~ina Invest Financial Corn.. et al. .... ~:=:il. ":::.iii.i: :::" :..: This rn'~tter was discus~d in ~',losed Session see action reported below under Closed Session. ..... ~.:.;~": ~: ;:NEW BUSINESS ~:'~'!'~:!:::onsideration 'of' Cancellation of Council Meetina of January 7. :..::: .. · ~ 'MastirdMil°ne to cancel the regular Council Meeting of January 7, 199B, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. ~b. _Ap~_ roval of' Lease Renewal with Rustv Bowl BMX Track This item was removed from the Consent Calendar by Mayor Malone. He asked for a presentation from the lessees regarding their BMX program. M/S Malone/Mastin to agendize this matter for a brief pmsema~on ~t the next Council meeting. The motion carded by a voice vote of all AYES. ABSENT: None. Regular MeelJng - December 17, 1997 g. CITY COUNCIL REPORT~ Councilmember Chavez reported she attended a meeting of the Main Street Program Board of Directors. That group will follow up on its request for continued support from the City. Councilmember Ashiku will be affending an electric strategy planning session in February with Public Utilities Director Barnes. Planning Commissioner Chiles introduced him to the Web Page of the City of Gait. Also, he will be attending a meeting of the Air Quality District. Councilmember Kelly passed out a pamphlet describing the upcoming exhibit at the Grace Hudson Museum, Artists of the Ame~fcan West. She attended the Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) workshop on Senate Bill 45. She asked the Council for its support in urging MCOG to consider use of transportation funds on other projects in addition to highway improvements projects. City Attorney Rapport warned the Council any collective decision on its part would need to be agendized or, if appropriate, the item could be added to this agenda as an emergencymeasure with a four-fifths majodty vote necessary for passage. - lr~a~nSsM~_a/o.~i_n~K_ .e!l_y~t_o__consi.der the .matter..of urging M..COG ,o ~ider u,~?~;'!~, ,,ion of state ~,,,~ vr~ rungs on various mooes oT transportation, not~[ on hig~.¥:ralated improvements, The motion was made on the finding that the issue wa...~':Presented ~':~l~: MCOG workshop:=~f December 15, 1997, after the agenda for this meeting wasT~Osed; add~0nal'iY;!!~ ~tter nee~:~o fbo~' address.e.d before the next Council meeting on Ja~ry 21, ~8: The ~ion:~ailed i:o~ the rowing ro, call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Cha~ :Kel~i?and Mayor Councilmembers Ashiku and Mastin. ABSTAIN: None. '~$~T; None. Counc,lmember Kelly will approach the issue with MC..~:0~'i~:.,authodty' Councilmember Mastin noted he attended both the Police Depa~:~stmas Dinner and the City of Ukiah Employees' Christmas Party. He alS0 attended a tovvfi::~hal] meeting regarding plans for the transportation hub at the Train Statio~l:as ~f as a :Mendo~O Transit Authority Board meeting. He would like the matter of a s~d::Waste;iiO~S~e for non-Ukiah residents included on the next Council agenda. ~i...<...ii!?'? ??: "~iiiiii~i?: :~ ..... i....-..!?~:.-..~=:' ~ii!!ii~:i:i:~:~:i ..... .~.,.? ;:: '.~::::" ~:::::: .:.·: :::::;:: ,~:.:::: 10. CITY MANAGER/DIRECT~:REPO~i:i!!i?::¥:¥~ii~!? City Mana~i:~r~ley me~:::~he sent t~i!~:cil a preliminary draft of the plans for the City's new Web S~te and requested comments from the Council regarding it by Monday, December 22. 1997. A p~Ot~Peetectric ~::is aYailable for introductory rides. ,She also distributed the October financial.re~.t~ the ~i~:: ?i 11. CLOSED SESSION 1 ta. G... C": Se~ion 54956.:~J ::~ference with Legal Counsel Re_aardinr, Existine Liti~zation, ~Ukiah v. Invest F---~ncial Cor~)oretion. et al.. San Mateo Superior Court Case No. 3984 ... At!!~0:34 p.m., the Co~Cil recessed to Closed Session, which was taken up after the Ukiah Redevelopment Ag~n~meefing. Open Sess o p.m. ~ MastirgKelly to approve the seffiement agreements with Invest Financial Corporation, Meddian Capital Markets, and Grant Boffinger, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 12. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:51 p.m. Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk Regular M~eling. December 17, 1997 Page 5 Th/s C/iy ofUk/ah Commendat/on/s presented on this 21st day of January, 1998, to: ~. appreciation.for his dedicated servwe to the Ukiah Police concerned citizens;- and a drol~in-centerfor our young peopte u~ithln the heart of downtown ~d~ .few dedicated individuals with tasion and persevere; and WI-IE~$, one person in particular was at the forefront of the ~ chartFe to create PAL a~ continues in h/s resoZute course to/reprove and expand PAL to meet the toca/ needs an~ dreams of everyone WHE.P.F~S, Wayne has spent many ho~J~ of personal time developing this program and the PAL facility, working with the youth, and persistently speaking with the community to ~enerate financlal and public support of the PAL program. NOW, T~~RE, L Sheridan Malone, Mayor of the City Kelly, Phillip Ashiku, and Ouadalupe Chavez, all City of Ukiah stq~f, Act/v/t/es Lea/~ue. ITEM NO. 6a DATE' JANUARY 21, 1998 AGENDA ~UMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DENIAL OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM KAGELINI KABINETS, INC., GRACE FROST, AND GAlL MARIE MORLEY, AND REFERRAL TO THE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND The claim from Kagelini Kabinets, Inc. was received by the City of Ukiah on December 15, 1997 and alleges over billing of electric charges from 1975 to 1997. The City has already returned the portion of the claim pertaining to damages which occurred more than one year piror to the filing date as untimely. The City Council's denial action therefore is relative only to the claim for damages between December 16, 1996 and December 15, 1997. The claim from Grace Frost was received by the City of Ukiah on January 6, 1998 and alleges damages related to a traffic accident on July 14, 1997, at the southbound 101 offramp at Talmage. The claim from Gail Marie Morley was received by the City of Ukiah on January 13, 1998 and alleges damages related to an "unlawful" arrest on September 25, 1997, at the 500 block of North State 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 Grace Frost, Gail Marie Morley and the nonreturned portion of claim from Kagelini Kabinets, Inc.; 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 Acct. No.' N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Appropriation Requested: N/A Yes Claimants Michael F. Harris, AICP, Assistant City Manager ~~_.~. ~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim of Kagelini Kabinets, Inc., pages 1-6. 2. Claim of Grace Frost, pages 7-8. 3. Claim of Gail Marie Morley, pages 9-10. APPROVED:~...~"~'~ Candace Horsley, City rv~anager mfh:asrcc98 0121 CLAIM NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF UKI~, CAIIFORNIA 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: I · · · City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 CLAIMANT'S NAME: CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS: Number/Street and Post Office Box City State Zip Code Home Phone Number Work Phone Number NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE .SENT (if different than above): ~~ o~-o~-g%¢ · · · DATE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: PLACE OF THE ~CCiDENT C~ OCCURRENCE: ~, 9'7 5 - t '=3 9 '7 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ~C~n~i-'? ~ ......... R OCCURRENCE (Attach additional pages if more space is needed): ~os'% %~k~0¢~[~6 · · NAMES, IF KNOWN, OF ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES CAUSING THE ~~ NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF WITNESSES (optional): NAME B. ADDRESS TELEPHONE · NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF DOCTORS/HOSPITALS WHERE TREATED: NAME B. ADDRESS TELEPHONE 10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE LOSS, ~, OR DAMAGE SUFFERED: 11. TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED : ~CD~I ~-7. OO ~%L3% 5=/~ e.R. t~t"~-~T 12. THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL ~OUNT C~IMED IS AS FOLLOWS: Damages incurred to date: C C~~ - 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: I '~_- I 5 - 9-7 SIGN~E OF CLAIMANT(S) Received in City Clerk's Office this day of 19 . i'JEC I ~ i!:!,9/ 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: FORM~CLAIM Rev: 3/10/95 t '76 -77 '-ELL d-(. ~5~LL I '-~ ooo -- NOTICE OF CLAn~ AGAINST THE CITY OF U~ZA~, CALIFORN~ JIBTUIM TOt City OlorX's Ofrioe ~ oAW or u~Aah JAN 0 6 1998 soo sentna~ ~ven~e · City -- . i 8tJtJ '' alp ClJ~I '- Home Phone-N~Umbor ' 'work Phone N~-mber' 3_. NAJql~ AND ADDRESS OF '--'~ CLAZH 8MOULD BE .SF. JiT PERSON TO ~lOM NOTICES R~OARDZNG (~tt dl~'rerent than above): l, · · OENE~L DESCRIPTTON OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCC~ENCE (Attach . u m -- ' .... ~l I mmm m .... m m N~ES ~D ADDRESSES OF ~ZT~~S (optional): N~E8 ~D ADD~ES8~8 OF ~CTO~S/HOSPXTALS ~ERE TR~TEDI 11, %2. ~ -- ' ...... I ' ._ ,., ...... - - - ' ' ~ ' TOTAL ~O~T C~IMZDt: _. S O~ 0 0 ~ THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED %S AS FOL~OWSt '~One~&l d~m&ge8 · ~nown~ uturo %omm o! earnings: Other prospective special damagewt Prospectiv, general damages: Tho claim shall be eigne~ My ~he ~laimmnt o= bM some hAs/her behalf. A claim col&ting to a cause ct eo~ion £o~ death o~ for injury to the pe~aon cc to personal property or growing crops lhell be presented no~ later than wix (6) calendar mental or 182 ~ye a~er ~he accrual of the ca,me ct action, whichever le longer. Claims relatin~ ~o any o~her causes ~ action shall Me presented no~ la,er ~han ~ne (1) year at,er a~crual o~ the cause Received 1~/~~. Oovornmwnt Code. The uae o! thLl foL-m Le no~ ~fltoflded Ln any may ~o advLwo you of youc ~wga~ r~ght$ o~ to Ln~wr~rot any 1mw, %f you are £n doubt ~egardLng your Xegei rightw or the inteFpretatL~n or say leu, wa ouggeet that you week legal ¢oufllllL~g of )9Ur ohoLce. l:POIl~lbl NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF UKTAH, CATIFORNIA This claim must be presented, as prescribed by Parts 3 and 4 of Division 3.6, of Title l, of the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or by . person acting on his/her behalf. RECEIVED RETURN TO: me · · City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 CITY OF UKIAH JAN 13 1998 CITY CLERK DEPARTMENT CLAIMANT' S NAME: Gail ~.~rie Morley CLAIMANT' S ADDRESS: 212 Ford Street ~7 Number/Street and Post Office Box ~iah California 95482 City State t.~LISTED 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): ~.Tilliam A. tJelch, Attornev at l~v.w SBN 188391 · · · 309A ~ ~ .qesu Perkins Street~ [~.[iah, CA 95482 DATE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: Seut~mtler 25, 1997 PLACE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: 500 block N, State St.~orton GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE (Attach additional pages if more space is needed): Officer Peter Hovle of the [~:iah Police De~rtment ] nt~rlt] on~l ]v t]~c~, exc~.%~ ye. fnrco ] n .. eff?ctinq an u311a~.j~'~.ll arrest' resulting ih [mrsonal injuries to Gail tbr~. e t~orley. · NAMES, IF KNOWN, OF ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES CAUSING THE INJURY OR LOSS: Officer Peter Hoyle and. tvx) (2) unidentified._ police officers of the U~iah Police De. lk3rtment. · NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF WITNESSES (optional): A· NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE · NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF DOCTORS/HOSPITALS WHERE TREATED: NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE A. t:~-.rk H. Luoto, 1',~ UVMC 275 Hospital Drive 462-3111 B. ~eter Keegan, MD 1367 S. Dora St. 453-2701 C. Kevin I~elly, PhD 598 Cochrane Avehue 463-144'/ 10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE LOSS, INJURY, OR DAMAGE SUFFERED: Soft tissue injury to.r?~jht arm, upper bac]:, an~]. lo~-~er }.~ck as well as ~in and suffering ar]_slnO- frc~:] the excessive nature of the force and assaultive conduct on the ~nrt of Officer Peter Hoyle. 11. 12. TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED: $400,000.00 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: Punitive D~ges $ 30~000 $ 120,000 250 000 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: January 13. 199~ SIgNaTURE OF C~MANT(S) Received in City Clerk's Office this /~ day of ~~ SIG~TURE 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:FORM~CLAIM Rev: 3/10/95 ITEM NO. DATE 6b January 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF DECEMBER 1997 Payments made during the month of December 1997, 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: 101913-102126, 102252-102415, 77464-77465 Payroll check numbers: 101783-101912, 102127-102251 Direct Deposit numbers: 2054-2133, 23627-23697 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 December 1997. 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 APPROVED:i L-~;=w') I~~..-,, AGENDA.WPD/krs Cand~c(~ Horsley,'~Cit~Manager CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF DECEMBER 1997 Demand Payments approved: Check No. 101913-102126, 102252-102415, 77464-77465 FUNDS: 100 General Fund $129,306.27 140 Park Development 141 Museum Grants 142 National Science Foundation $170.50 150 Civic Center Fund 200 Asset Seizure Fund 201 Asset Seizure (Drug/Alcohol) 220 Parking Dist. Rev. Fund 8647.27 260 Downtown Business Improv. 270 Signalization Fund 301 2107 Gas Tax Fund $1,904.91 332 Federal Emergency Grant 87,132.12 335 Comm. Dev. Comm. Fund $106,000.00 340 SB325 Reimbursement Fund $101.56 341 S.T.P. $1,924.50 410 Conference Center Fund $17,592.88 550 Lake Mendocino Bond $1,530.00 555 Lake Mendocino Bond Reserve 575 Garage $783.63 600 Airport 828,541.61 610 Sewer Service Fund 611 Sewer Construction Fund 612 City/District Sewer $24,484.65 61 5 City/Dist Sewer Replace $627.23 652 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund $21,1 60.51 660 Sanit. Disp. Site 661 Sanitary Disposal Replace 663 Countywide JPA 665 Refuse/Debris Control 670 U.S.W. Billing & Collections 675 Contracted Dispatch Services 678 Public Safety Dispatch 679 MESA (Mendo Emerg Srv Auth) 693 Clubhouse Renovations 695 Golf 696 Warehouse/Stores 697 Billing Enterprise Fund 698 Fixed Asset Fund 800 Electric 805 Street Lights 820 Water 900 Special Deposit Trust 910 Worker's Comp. Fund 920 Liability Fund 940 Payroll Posting Fund 950 General Service 960 Community Redev. Agency 962 Redev. Housing Fund 965 Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund 966 Redevelopment Debt Svc. PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 101783 - 101912 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 2054 - 2133 PAYROLL PERIOD 11/16/97 - 11/29/97 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 102127 - 102251 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 23627 - 23697 PAYROLL PERIOD I 1/30/97 - 12/13/97 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS TOTAL PAYROLL VENDOR DEDUCTION CHECKS TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT TOTAL PAYMENTS VOID CHECK NUMBERS - None $30,589.00 $2,716.10 $122,607.03 $1,745.87 $9,48O.92 $7,257.11 $159.87 $7,071.52 $628.91 $715,649.89 $9,090.16 $23,457.99 $8,374.82 $1,223.60 $178,004.57 8851.75 $827.74 ~380,200.00 $548.73 $89,718.40 $1,932,111.62 $60,146.36 $198,192.12 $159,011.04 $2,349,461.14 CERTIFICATION OF CITY CLERK This register of Payroll and Demand Payments was duly approved by the City Council on City Clerk APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER I have examined this Register and approve same. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds. City Manager Director of Finance O~ ~o HO rD · o I Oo 0 u ~ o o · i o0o o0o oo0 0oo 0 oo0 0 oo0 ~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0o0 0 o OO o o 0 o 0 0o0 0 o OO o 0 0 o 0 ooo o 0 oo o 0 o o 0 oo OO OOO O O OO O O O O O OOO O O OO O O O O O o 0 o o o 0 o o · U H o o O~ O ooo o ooo ooo ~o ~-I o o · o o o o o · o o ol ooo o o oo o ~ ~ ~ o ooo o O oo o ~ ~ o o ooo o o oo o ~ ~ o o ooo ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ ~ o o ~® ~ o ~ ~ o o ~ o ~O~ O O O~ O O O O ~ OOOo O O~O ~O O O O ~u~ 0o U% o O~ o~ HE-I UH HE-i ~:x: o~ XXX 000 o ~ HO0 H ~ ~ N OB HB ~ U U U U U i ~~0~ 0o0oooo 0oo0o0o 0oo0o0o 0~~ oooo0oo 0oo0o0o 0o0ooo0 OO OO OO oo oo oo ~-t ~---I oo oo ~0~~ o0o0o0o o0o0o0o o0o0o0o 000000~ Ililiil o0o0ooo oo0oooo ooo0ooo LOP,,- ~'~ O0 O0 O0 o~ o o o 0 0 o o 0 o o o o o o0o0 o0o0 oo0o 0000 0000 0000 00~ 0000 0000 o 0 0000000 0000000 0000000 0~~00 ~0000~ ~o0000~ 0~~o o~~o ....... 0~~oo o~~o0 HZZZ~HH ~HHHH~ UHHHH~U~ o o 0 · o .0 u") · · 0 ~.-IO U [-~H 000o0~0 o0oooo0 o0o0o0o 00~~0 ~oo~o~ O~O~OO~ o~o~ ~U~UUHU O~D I.~o oo · 0 O O O O ~ O O O ~ ,ri ,r-'4 k.O U i 0 m U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ H % ~ 0 ~ ~ H ~ OOOO OOOO OOOO UUUU IiIl~ ~~0 0000 ~~0 o Oo U~ ~HHHHHHH UUUUUUU HHHHHHH ~UUUUUUU o U > ~OOOOOOO H ~ ~ ~ HHHHHHHH ~ ~ H~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ H 2~ ~HHHHHHH B~ ~ ~ ¢ ooooo H~ HHHHHHH B~ H~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ H H ~ o~o H~OmO H I ~~0 00000 00000 00000 00000 000 000 000 o2OOoO 000 000 O0 O0 O0 0 o o ~~o ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo -~1 0 0 0 0 00000 00000 00000 00000 ~0~0 000~0 0 000000 ~0~0~ 0 000 0 000 0 000 · .. 0 000 U ~ HHH oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo ~oo ~00 HHBB mm mm o o · o o 0 [,... o o · o · o 0 0 o o H 0 o o o · o · o 0 o o U 0 o o~ooo o ooooo o ooooo O ~O~ OOO~O O~OO O0 U ~ HH~H O O OOOO~ ~ O ~~O O Oo U% O E-'I H O~ ~HHHHH i~ili 0 ~ 0 o moo .~OO H d ~HHHH 0 L~ u H O~ 0 ~0 ~ O U ~ H ~ 0 o zoooo 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ H E~O HO ~ . 0 ~1~ ooo ooo ooo ooo ~--I ~.-I r-I ooo ooo oo oo o o o c~ 0'3 00 ~-I o o 000 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~4 c~ H ~1 H H O O 000 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u") o o ooo ooo · oo oo oo · HH 000 0 ~ O0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 000 0 ~ O0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 000 0 ~ O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o~o o ~ o~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~00 ~ 0 O0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 HHH H ~ ~0 ~ ~ 0 ~ m ~0~ O H ~ 0 o o o Oo u% 0 Or~ HHH 000 0 H H ~H H~ ~ ~ o ~ ~H ~ O ~m 0 ~ o~ ~0 ~ ~0 ~H ~ 0 0 i O~ 0 ~0 i ~0~ o0oo0 0oo0o 0000o 0 o o o o 0 o 0 o o o o oo0o0o o o o o0oooo o o o o~~ o000ooo ooo0o0o o0o0ooo 0o0oooo o ooooooo o ~0~ o~~o ooo0o0 0ooooo o0oooo 0ooooo o 0 U o U o 00000~ 0 0 000000 0 0 000000 0 0 0~000 O ~ ~OOOO~ ~ ~ ~O~O~ O O ~~O ~ O ~OO~ O O ~O~~ O O ~ H ~ ~HH~ 0o0~0~ 0 ~ o0o~0~ ~ 0 O~O~o ~ o O o O · o · · o O i O OOOOOOO O O OOOOOOO O O OOOOOOO O ~ ~OOO~O O ~ ~OOOOOO O OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO ~OOO ~OOOOO ~OO~ HHHHHH O O O · O · o o o · o · 0 0o U~ o O~ H ~ ~ H~ ~ ~0 ~ HX ~ o ~00000 ~0 ~HHHHH ~ U~ HO H O O ~~ ~ H~HHHHHH ~ ~0 0 ~~ 0~ ~ ~ © ~ ~HUUOUUU Hi  IUHHHHHH UU 0~~~ 0 DHHHHHH 0~~ H UUUUUUU ~o o~ O~ O~ H O~ o~ o~ O H[..fl U~ oo i 0000 0 0 O0 O0 0 0000 0000 0000 0 0 O0 O0 0000 0 0 O0 O0 0000000 0000000 0 0000000 0 0000000 o 0 0o00 o0oo 0oo0 o~ ~000 ~ ~00o o ~ mmmmO 0 o 0 · 0 oo0o oooo oooo 0o0o o0o0 MiNi ~~0 ~~0 HHHH~ 0 o o · o · o o o · 0 · OO oo OO OO oo oo o~ Hi NH UUO HH~ 0 ~ 000 0 ~ 000 0 000000 0 000000 0 000000 0 000000 0 ~~oo0 0000o0o ~~0oo ~ oz~ U H~~ UUU o ~~~0 o o o o o 0 Oo U% o o~ OORO0 ~H~ H~ mH~H H i ~0 n~O H~ ot~ U Z H~ ~ ~UH ~0 ~ ~ ~0~ ~ HHH ~HHHHUUO ~~ooo 0 Hr.~l H O~ ~0~0 O0 O0 000000000000000000000 0 O0 000000000000000000000 0 O0 000000000000000000000 0 ~ 000000000000000000000 0 O0 000000000000000000000 0 O0 000 000 000 000 0~ 000 000 UUU 000 00o o 0 U o 0 o 0 oo OO U H f.~H 000~0000000000000000~ 0 O~ 000000000000000000000 0 O0 000000000000000000000 0 O0 0~000000000000000~0 0 0 O0 ~0~0~~0~0~00~0 0 0~0~00~00~000~00~ ~ ~0 0~000000~000~000~000 ~ O0 o ~ o H 0 o ~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~ O ~ H ~ H HOHHHHHHHHHHHHH HH~ ~ HO o ,~--.I o o o ~,..I ooo O H o o o o o (~oo ooo o0o · · o 0ot~ ¢~o o :::::) u'"'} Oo Z 0 Otr] ~o o OO UUUUUUUUUUUUU ~ UUU HHH O~ ~ O0 0 ~ HH H ~B~ ~HH ~tHH OOOO OOOO UUUU OOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~~O~~~ ~~OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO 000 000000 000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHH OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO 0 0 OOOO OOOO OOOO ~OOO OOOO ~HHH H~ mm 0 OOOOOOO~OOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~O~O~~OOO~ O~OO~OOOO~~O OO~O~O~O~~ OOOOOOO~O~OO OOOOOO~O~O~ UHUHHNUUHHHHHH ~H~[~HH~~[~ 0 0 0 0 ,r...-I 0 Oo U% ~oooo ~HHHH HHHH UUUU 0HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU 0HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH OUUUUUUUUUUUUUU 00000000000000 H ~0 000 000 000 000 000 00000 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 00000 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 lilll ~ 00000 0 O0 0 0 0 0 00000 0 O0 0 0 0 0 ~-I o o >> ~--I~ oo oo o 0 {J o0o 0oo o0o HUU o0o0o o~ o 0 o o 0 o oo0oo oo 0 o o o o o ooooo oo o o o o 0 o o00o0 oo o o o o o o ~0~0~ 0 O~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~~ 0 O0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo~o~ o o~ ~ o o ~ o o o~~ ~ oo ~ o ~ ~ o o UU UU H ~~0 O mm~mmO ~ ta 0 H f~ o o oo oo oo o~ OO · 0 oo UH MU oo D~O oo o ooo ooo ooo o0o 0o0 o Oo U~ o ~H Or~ H ~ HOOOOO ~ oooooo ~ H~UUUUU ~U OE~ ~0 Oreo U~ oo HE~ E~0 0E~ r.~ r~ E~ X >40 Om U o~q o G uaoo ~HH oo ~UU o o i O O O OOOOOO OOOOOO OO OO 0303 OO OO O O OO OO u~u~ ~~ O ~~ > ~ 00 ~~ ~ ~ O0 OOOO O O OO OOOO O O OO OOOOO OOOOO o 0 U o OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOO~O OOOOOO OOOO~ HHHHHH oo oo OO oo oo · oo oo OOOO OOOO 0000 OOOO OOOO OOOO oooo 0000 OOOOO O O o · o · O O O · o · · o 0 o o oC~ U t~ [.~IH H oooo~ ooooo ooooo ooooo oo~ ~ooo ooooo HHHH o o O · o o O O o 0o U% o Om H HHHHHH ~UUU~UU ~oooooo LSO0 ~HH 6 O H H HHHHH HUUUUU HHHHH H~ i 0 o o UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU o0oooo0ooooooooooo oo0oo0oo0o0oo0ooo0 00o0o0 0 o ~ 0o0o0o o o OO 0o0o0o 0 o O0 000000 ~ ~ UUUUUU ~ ~ 000000 ~ o oooooo o o oooooo o o oo oo ooo ooo ~...-4 ,i.--..I r-.-.I ooo ooo 0 0 U 0 0~oo0oo0o0000o0o 0 o00oo0o0oo0o00o0o0 0 000000o00o0oo0o0o0 O~OOOOO~OOOOOOOO O ~OO~~OO~~~ ~OO~OOO~O~~ o ~o0~0~o0~0o0~o 0 00o00o0~0o~0~0o00 o ooooooo~~oo~~ ~ ~0 ~ 0 O~ H~ U O~ ~  H00 ~ ~ i ~ HHH~HHHHH Hi i ~i H ~ ~~~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~o ~O o O ~ ~ o o ~o ~o O o OO oo o o o~o~ ~ ~ O~O~ ~ ~ ~OO~OO ~ O O~O~ ~ O ~O~O ~ ~ OOOOOO O O OO~OO~ O O OO OO OO · OO OO ,r--lO Oo r~r~O oo ooo ooo ooo r.-.-I ~.-t o OOO ooo · HH~ HH~ MHM~ 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 ~]HH oo H 0000 0000 0000 ooo 000 ooo I I I 000 000 o0o0000ooo 0 o oo o o o oo 0oooo000o0 o 0 oo 0 o o oo ~~~~ ~ H HH O 0000000000 ~ 0 ~ U 0000000000 0 0 O0 0 0 0000000000 0 0 O0 0 0 oo oo oo o 0 0000 oooo 0oo0 ooo0 ooo0 HHHH 000 ooo 000 0 000o oooo 000000~0~ 0 0 oo oooooo00o0 0 o oo 00oooooooo o 0 OO 0oooo~oo~o o 0 ~ ~~0o~o~ ~ ~ ~ o~~ooo~o ~ ~ oo 0000~000~0 ~ 0 O0 0~~000~0 ~ 0 O0 mmmmm~0~0 0 ~ ~~0 0 ~~0~~ U ~ HH~ ~~o ~ ~ ~ o ~ oo oo oo oo oo o Oo U% O H om o~ OO HH mm ~ 0 ~H ~ ~HH ~ Z~ 0~ ~ ~ H ~U mOOmm mmm ~ ~ ~ ~~ O OH ~~~ ~ HHH O~ U ~o oo o i O0 O0 oo ~:~ O0 oo o 0 O0 O0 O0 o U o :::::) ~ Oo U% 0 0 0 U u o ~ · 0 ~ O~ U · o > I 0o O~ ~ ~a i ~ D ~HOB ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ H~ H u m ~ o i O0 O0 oo O0 u~ oo O0 OO OO OO oo OOO2 *'-'-t ~-'-I OO OO OOO OOO OOO OOO ,~--I ~--I ,~--I OOO OOO OO OO OO OO OO OO 04O4 OO OO OO OO OO OO ~O~~ OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO ~--I ~--I ~--I OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO OO OO OO ~--'-'1 ~--t ~--t ~'--I OO OO OO OO OO oo oo OO oo oo o 0 oo OO oo oo ~o OO oo oo · o~ ',,DO o o o ooo HH NH oo mm ~oo~ ~OO~ ~OO~ ~OO~ ~OO~ ~OO~ O O O · O .O O k.00 · OO OO H ~.~H i mO oo~ooo o~oooo OOOOOO oo~o~ ~OO~O ~oo~o OOO~ o ~ Qo~ ~ H H H ~ DH~H ooo ooo ooo · , ooo 6ooo0 OO~0 o o ('xl HHZB ~H~ O O · o · O o oo OO oo · 0 oo HH o oo OO oo · oo oo O0 oo z~ zo>> o ~OOOO ~0000 ~ I~H o~ U'~H E~.]H o o~ o o~ o o o i 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 O00000000000000000OO000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 ~~~~~0~0~00~0~000~~ O0000000~O00O~O~~O~O00~O~O0 0000000000000000000000~0~~000 00000000000000000000~~~0~ 0000000000000000000000000 0000000 o o o · · o ~0000000000000000000000000 0000000 On~ n~O 0 0 Hr~ OH ¢~0 H 0 0 0 o o o o o o o oo oo oo oo oo oo oo oo ,,~", i.~ oo oo oo ~O~ ooooooo ooooooo ooooooo oo oo oo u~u~ oo OO ooooooo oo ooooooo oo ooooooo OO ~~o~~~O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ooooooooooooooo HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH UUUUUUUUUUUUUUU OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO o 0 o o o · o o'~ · o o · o t"~O ,O OO o U o o oo oo oo oo O~--I o~ooooo o OOOOOOO O OOOOOOO o ooooooo o~ OO~OO~ ~ O~O~ ~o ooooo~o oo oooo~o oo 0 ~~ O O ~~ % B HHHHH ~ ~H ~DHHHHH ~ OOOOO0 HmO OO~O~O~ OOO OO~O~O~ ~O OOO~OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O~OOOOOOO~O~OOO ~O~~~O~O~ ~OOO~O~OOO~O ~O~OO~OO~O~ ~O~OO~O~~ OOOOOOOO~O~O~ OOOOOOOO~O~~ H O 02 i[.z.] 0~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ I%IHH ~ HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHH BHHHHHHH o 000000 0000000 i OOOOOOO O O OOOOOOO O O OOOOOOO O O HHHHHHH ~ ~ UUUUUUU ~ ~ OOOOOOO O O OOOOOOO O O ~O~ OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO ~~~O~ OOOOOOO~~ OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO O O O O O OO OO 0303 OO OO OO o 0 OOOOOOO O O OOOOOOO O O OOOOOOO O O ~OOO~OO O O O~O~ ~ ~ OO~O~ 0 O ~~OO~ ~ ~ ~OOOOO O O ~OO~ O O o o E~O~o ~ ~ o:~o ~ 00o o00 · OOO Iil~ ooo ~o OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OO~OO~OOOO OOO~OOOOOOO OOO~OO~O 00000000000 o O o O o o · o o · o oo oo oo oo · O O O OOo O O O OOo I..¢3 O Oh O("O0'3 O o Om H ~ooooooo ~ ~ooooooo ~H ~H HHHHHHHHHHH ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~D iH H 00000000000 O~ %~ %H ~ ~UUUUUUUUUUU ~U ~ ~ ~ H 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 o ~ ~-I ~ o o {-~ ~-~ o o o o o o o o 0o o o ~0o'~ oo oo oo ,~,~ oo oo oo 0 0 oo oo oo · 0 ~0o o~ o ~-I o o ~ o "OH ~qO H~ 0 o~ <5> ~0 0 0 HU~ O~ H 0 ~m H~O HO H C'3 C'3 O0 O0 O0 oo O0 oo oo oo ooooooooooooo0oooo0~ oooo00oo000oooo0ooo~ UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU oooo00ooooo00ooooo0 ooooo0oooo000oooo00 ooo0 00o0 UUUUU UU oooo0 oo00o oooo0 0oo o0o ~0 ~o ~o %o%o%o ~o ~0 ~0 oo0 00o ooo 000 o 0 OO oo · , oo U~O o m ~ o O0 oo oo · o~ · OO H ~o ~o~ o 00o ooo · · · oo000oooo00ooooo o0ooooo oooo000ooo000ooo o00oooo oo0oooooooooooo0 ooooooo ooooo0oooo000ooo 00oooo0 OOOOO~OOOOO~~O~O~OOOO ~~O~OO~~~OOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO~O~OOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOO~~OOOOO HHZ · , U ~0 · · H OOD UU~ ~o ~ 0 o00o oooo HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH~HHHH UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUU ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH~HHHH ~0000000000000000000~0000 0 ~UUU HBBB mmm UUU o o HZ L~0 r~ HC~ o H 00000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000 000 000 000 000 u"') u") u") ooo ooo ooo ["'".- (:~0 OO OO OO oo oo oo 0 0 U o O 00000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~~~~~O~O~OO~O~O~OOO~~ OOOOOOOO~OOOO~O~~O~OOO~O~O~OOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~O~O~~OOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~O~~~O~ 00000000000000 r=.l ~ X 0000000000000 00000000 00o ooo o0o · o o o · o o0"~ .o OU') o'~o · 0 OO OO U o U% o O~ UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~00000000000000000000000000000000000 H 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 000 ~l~ 000 000 000 000 000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 ~~0 0000000 0000000 O0 O0 0 ~ 0 ~~~ 0 ~~~ ~0 0 0000000 O0 0 0000000 O0 0 0000000 O0 0 ~0~~ 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 o 0 U o o o ~o~ o~ o~ U~ ~0 0000 00~ 0000 0000 II oo~o ~oo ~ o o 0 · o c~ O 0000000 O0 0 0000000 O0 0 0000000 O0 0 ooooooo ~ ~ ~~~ oo ~ oooo0oo ~o ~ 000000 000000 000000 000000 ~000 00~~ 0~~0 0000~0 0000~0 UUUU OOO O ~ ~~ HHHHHHH H ~ ~H~H o HL~ OH o ~UUU o~ UHHHH HBBB~ U HO OUUUUUU 000000 ~OOOOOO i 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 00000000000000000 ~ OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ,~10 k..0 k.0 OO OO {'"'"' t'"- OO OO OO o 0 {J o 0000~000000000000 0 00000000000000000 0 00000000000000000 0 00000000000000000 ~~O~OO~OO ~ OOOOOO~OO~OOO~ O O~~O~O~~OO~ O OOOO~O~OOOO~OOOO~ O O~~O~OOOO~OOO~ O HHHOOHHOOHHHOHHHH ~ OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO O~O~O OO~O~ O~~ UU UU HH HH o o O~ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ~ ~~~OOOOOOOOOO ~ ~~~~~~ ~H om OUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU ~ 00000000000000000 0 ~ UUUUUUUU OOOO ~ ¥ HUUUUU 00000 ~UUUUU H HL~ n~ o 01:21 E-I H o i H H ~r~ o i 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 o~ oo oo o o o 0 0 o 0 0 o ,,~ ,,~,.~ OO oo 0 oo o OO o OO oo oo 0404 ~--I ~-I k.0 k.0 :::1::1:= ::N:= UU o 0 0 o X o o O O O O O O OO O O O OO · O ~ ~ O~ O O ~ ~ OO O O ~ ~O O O O ~O OO ~ O ~ ~O OO HO ~ ~H H ~ H ~ ~ ~ H~ H o ~ H ~ ~O ~O ~ o ~o o~ ~ o ~o H ~0 0 0 0 o Ox] 0 0 0000000 0000000 ~0~0 00000~ 0000000 0000000 u~ o o o o o OO O0 O0 OO oo ,u") u""} 0'~ o'~ oo r-..I ~-,I ~o ~o oooo 0oo0 oooo 00o0 00oo oo oo OO 0 0 U ~-I 0 o · 0 o o o 0 · o o oo00oo~ ooooo00 oooooo0 o~ooooo 0~oo00o ~o~o 00o0000 ~oo~0 o o o · o · o 0 · oo oo oo · oo · HH oooo ooo0 oooo oooo ~o~ ~oo ~o0 oo0o oo0o t~O~O 0 0 oo oo oo · · 0 O~ ~H · o 0 0t~ 0r~ H ~ ~ OU~U -HO0~ 0 0~0 I~H~l OOt~ H Or~0 o o o o O~ ~o HO U · o I oo OL.O O~ D . 0 0 . > i 000 000 000 000 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 000 000 000 000 0O3 ~o oo oo oo ~o O~ oo oo ,~,-~ ~-I oo oo oo U 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 U 0 0o0 o0o o00 ~0~ ~0 ~ o ~ o o ~ O o o o o o o ~ ~ ~oo O 0 Hi ~ UU i 0 m o O0  ~ mm U H ~ ~ O0 U U~ ~00~ ~00~ ~OO~ ~oo~ ~oo~ OO oo oo oo · 0 0 O0 0oo ooo o o o o · o · o o 0 i U OO oo oo oo o o o o i O O O O O O · O ~ o o u~ i 0 0 Uc~ 0 O~ H O~ OO 0 ~ O r./} H E4E4 ~ ~ Hi i ~ r~ ~ 00 0 [.~1H I~ I~ 0 O O~ H[-.fl HO 0 H 0 0 0000 0000 0000 OOU~ 0000 ~I ~1 ~1 ~1 0000 0000 ~0~~ 0000000 0000000 0000000 O0 O0 O0 0 0000000 ~0o~ oo O0 O0 o~ oo oo oo ~1~ OO OO OO OO oo oo oo OO o 0 U ~oo o0o0 0000 0 ~~ 0 ~~ ~oo ~ UU , 0 0 o · 0 0 ~ 00000 0 0 00000 0 0 00000 0 ~000~ ~-IO O0 O0 ~ o~ 0 0 o o 0 o · o o o o o oo oo OO · OO ~o mmO U~ u ~1 H H ~q o~ U ~ O ~ ~ ~~ ~/ ~ HO ~ ~k H U~H ~ ~ UUUUU ~ ~ HH~ ~0 ~ ~HHHHH ~ ~ ~ O ~HUUUUU 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ O O U O ~ 0HH HI~I~ _~ ~ 1:2:1 o ~,<,< o ~ o 1~1 H~ I~1 ~QHH o H ~0 HO ~ · 0 I 0 o 0 o o 0 0 o 0 oo oo oo ~.-I r-I oo O0 ~ 0::) o~0'~ 0 L.0 ~0 ~0~0 t~- 0 o OO o 0 0 oo o o~ r-i ~.-i oo oo oo oo oo ~0~ oo oo o o o oo oo oo r-lo oo oo ~c~ ~0(:o ,~ u.-) oo oo oo oo oo oo oo o 0 U o 0 o o c~ u") o~{'~ 0 iF) c~ ~0~1 ~-I · -- .0 o ~ ~ · ~ ~ 0 o~ ~ ~ ~ ~o U B b HB H ~ 0 ~H H H ~ ~H ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ o 0'~ ~ 0") 0 0 0 0 · 0 · HH HH o~'-~ oo · o ~mo UU o ~o 0 O0 0 ~ oo U Z o Ot~ HH ~ HHH U O~q ~0 ~U o~ o o u~u~ oo OO 0 0000000000 0 0 0000o000o0 0 o 0000000000 0 I UUUUUUUUUU ~ o oo0oooo0oo o o oooooo0000 0 ~0 OO oo oo oo UU OO oo 0~~ o0o00o o00o00 0o0o00 HHHHHH 000000 000000 O0 O0 O0 o 0 Z o U o OO oo OO 0o0 u~o~ 0 o 0 · 0 · o 0 0 I o 0~o0~ooo o o0o0o0o0o0 o 0o0o0o0o0o o ~o0o~o0o ~ ~~00~ 0 o 0o0o0o0ooo ~ 000~~~ ~ 0 0000000000 ~ O~ O~ O0 O~ U H mO ~0~ 0 o o o · o 0 · o · o o oooooo ooo0o0 0o0o0o o~0o o0oooo H ~ ~o oo oo oo · o ot~ ~H~ O0 ~00 ~HHHHHHHHHH ~UUUUUUUUUU U ~ OH ~E~ ~0~0~ ~00 HO0 OO O- H om 000000 O0 ~UUUUUU OZZ~Z~Z 0~ 000000 O0 OUUUUUU OOO 0HHHHHH 0HH H ~0 O O O 03O OO OO OO 0303 OO OO O O O ~0 O O 03O3 OO OO OO a~C0 O~O OO OO OO OO OO o UU OO oo ~o ~o ooo~ oooo OOOO oooo oooo OOOO o~o o303 OO oo oo OO oo oo oo oO ~~O~ ooooo~ OOOOOOO ooooooo 0000 O0 OOOOOOO OOOOOOO o 0 U O OO O O~ O OO O OO O O~ O OO O OO O O~ O OO S o~ S ~o o So o oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~S S oo ~ O0 ~ ~ ~ O0 ~0 0 ~o E~O~ U O~ H01 z> UU HH o r~ oo~ ~ OOo OOOO 00~ OOOO OOOO Ii ~00 ~UU~ oo oo H 0r~ H ~o o~ o OOo OOOOOOO OOOOOOO ooooooo OOOOOOO ~ooo~ OO~~O o~~OO oooo~oo oooo~oo UUHHHHH HH~~ o o o~ o oo O~ o o~ m~;o o oo U UU H ~ :>~HH 0~~ UHHHH H~~ H O H o OUUUUUUU OOOOOOO i 0 OOm HHHHHHHH~ H ~~~ OOOOOOOOO ~ ~ OO~ ~ ~ OOOO OO O OOOO OO O OOOO o"~ O ~--I ,r..t ~--I r-'l OOO OOO HHH ooo ooo OOO i.~ I..¢} ~..0 O kD ',,~, OOO OOO 0"~ ',,~, O 1.1~ ,,~ ,,~'., OO121 OOO OOO OOO lOk.0 ~--t ,--i OO OO OO 04O4 OO OO 0 0 oooooooo~ O ~~~O ~~O~oo~ OOOO~O~O ~o~o~ , HUHUHHHHH OO O OOOO OO O OOOO OO O OOOO OO O OOOO oo ~ UU ~ HHHH HH ~ ~o mmmmo o o O · · o · o O i OO OO OO O~ ~O · OO~ OOO ..~ ~ 0 00~ ooo ooo II1~ ooo o~ ~o OO oo oo · oo OO · oo OO UU o o o · · o H E4 H H I o O~ OO OOO 0000000~ ~OOOOOOOO~ 6 ~000 ~HHH ~UUU 000 ~UUU o OO o UU ~oo H O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 oo O0 oo ~0 oooo o0o0 0 ~ ~ ~l o o 0 o 0 0 o 0 o 0 o U o o 0 o 0 0 0 · O0 oo oo OO o~-I oo · · o 0 o · · o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 o · o · O 0ooo 0o00 0o00 0o0o 0o0o ~oo 0000 ~00 0 0 0 0 · 0 0 o o 0 ~-I o 0 o4 0 0 ~ 0 o O~ o %H ~U ~IH O~ O~ HHHH U~~ 0~~ ~UUUU U~ O~ O~ U H ~0 H~I UU 0 0 U U% 0 ~O Om H 04 (~} (%1 0o0 U 00o O~ oo oo oo oo OO oo 0 0 c~ c~ o 0 ~~~ 0 0oo0oo0 o 0o0oo0o o 0000000 0000000 0 0000000 0 0000000 0 0000000 0 0000000 0 0000000 ~ ~0~~ o ~o0oo0o 0 ~o0o~o 0 XX~XXXX ~ 0 HHHHHHH~ ~ 00000000 ~ 00000000 ~ ~UUUUUUU ~ ~HHHHHHH o m~ ~mmmmmmm ~ ~ 0 H ~ H 0 o o o ~ o 0 o u o ~ , O~ E~o HO U · 0 I oo ou~ i OO OO OO OO O3O3 OO OO OO O O O O O O O O OO OO OO OO 03O3 OO OO OO O O~O~ OO OOO OOO OOO ~~~O~~~O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO o O U OO OO oo HUO O O · I o o O o · o · · o o U o U O O o · o · OO OO oo o o o o · o · o · o o O o · o o o oo o~ · ~o mO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O~O~O~O~OO~~ ~OO~O~O~OO~O~OOOO OOOOOOO~O~O~OO O ~OOOOOO~~~OOOO 000000000000000000 :~ :~o Om U~ H =; 003 [.=.]:>-iH 2~ ¢:::1 O~ 0 U E-IH o ~oo UUUUUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHH UUUUUUUUUUUUUU 0000000000000 UUUU HHHH UUUU 0000 i 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 U 0 0 O0 O0 O0 o3O3 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 coco O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 o 0 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 ~~~0~00~~000~~ 0000~0000~0~0000~0~00 ~~0~0~0~0~0~~ 0000000000000~0~0~~000 0000000000000~0~~0~ oooo o oo 000000 o O · o I OO oo OO oo o oo oo oo OO ~o o O o O · oo ::no Om U~ o ~o om UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU ZHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 0000000000000000000000 U O0 oo r~o E4 ~IH i O0 O0 oo oo OO oo 00o0 0000 0000 oooo o0oo o0o0 00o0 00 0 o 00o 00o 00o 00o ooo ooo ooo OO OO OO o'~ o'~ OO oo oo OO o o 020::)oo ooo OOO ooo o'~ o'~ o"~ o'~ o ooo u'~ ~;) 02oo oo OO oo o'~ o"~ o~ O oo O OO o OO ~o ~ ~ ~ oo~ ~ ~ o OOO O oo o ooo o oo o 0 O0 OO oo oo 0o0~ oo00 o0o0 ~0 OOOO O~OO O~OO o i i i mO ~OOo ~OO~ O O O O O o O o o · o ~oo ~O .OO OOO o o OOOo OOOo OOOo OOOo OOOo O O · O .O ~ · O1.~ OO o~ O ~ O OOO O OO O O O OOO O OO O O O OOO O OO O O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ OOO ~ OO ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ O O OO~ O OO i ~ ~ ~ HHH i O ~ ~ o oooo o ~ ~ ~ O oooo o ~ ::::) o Om 0 ~HHHH MiNi H ~ooo ~ooo o -- H HHH ~ o O ~ 000 H~ H D ~ ~ HHH ~ ~ H ~ ~ o o ~0 0 0 0 o o ~0~ 00000 00000 00000 00000 UUUUU 00000 00000 0 00 0 0 ~o~ ~0o0o 0 0o0~~ 0 0o00o0o o 0oo0o00 o ooooo0o 0 ~~~ o0oooo0 0o0oo0o o o0oo0o0 o o0o0oo0 oo O0 O0 O0 o o o o 0 o 0 U 0 0 · o 00000 00000 00000 00~0 0~~ i Hi i ~ B HH H U ~ ~oo~ O~OO~o ~ooo~ 0 o o 0 o o · · 0 0 o ~oo~~ o ooooooo O ooooooo o~oooo o ooooooo O OOOOOOO i MiNi H UHHUUUU ~ H~HHHH O O · .O ,fl · ~.-IO · · OO OO U 0 o o O · o · H o o o u'") i i i I :~o Om O~ U H ~UUUUU H o mo ~ ~ H ~ ~H NHHHH 0~ ~~ U~UUUUU ~0~00000 o~ om o ~qo i 0 0 0 0 o~ O0 OO oo oo OO ~l~ 000 000 000 UUU o0o 0o0 o o o ~O~ OOOOO ooooo OOOOO UUUUU OOOOO OOOOO O I.~ O O ~~~O~ OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO XXXXXXXXXX OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO o o 0 · o 0 H H H OO U ¢-IH x~ r.z.1 Om ooo OOO ooo O ooo O H H H HHH I o O o · o · o O o O · o · O · o i OO OO O OO O OOO~ ~OO O ~i~ UUUmm H OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOO~OOO ~OO~OO~O~ OO~O~O~O O~O~~ OOOOO~O~O OOO~O~~ o HHHHHH~HHH m~; X E~ H~ H~ ~ H~ % HHH 0 ~ ~mmm o o ~H ~o o~ rD ~o L~ H ~~ U HHHHH U ~mmmmm UUUUU ~HHHHH ~ H~~ OH ~ooooo ~ o o UUUU UUUUU HHHHHHHHHH ~HHHHHHHHHH 0HHHHHHHHHH i O0 O0 O0 O0 OO OO oo oo oo oo oo oo oo i..~ i.~ o404 OO oo OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ooooooooooooooooooooooooo HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHH U HHHHHHHHH ~ OOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOO O I.~ ~,,.0 ,~-t ~--I OO OO O0 OO oo 0 0 OO oo OO HHO OO Oo oo Oo OOO 000000000000000000000000~ 0 0000000000000000000000000 0 0000000000000000000000000 0 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~O O ~OO~OOO~O~OOOO~~~ ~O~OO~O~OO~~OOOOO~ O OOOOOOOOOOO~O~~OO~OOOO~ HHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHDHO ~ HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH~H~ O O · O Or'~ .O OO'~ OO O~ 0- ~0 ~o Om HH H 00 I~HH U HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH H 00000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000 0 0000 0000000 00000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 00000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000 0 0 ~0~ ~0000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 0 0 O~ oo ooo0ooo0o0o0oo0oooo0o0o0~00o0 000o0o0o0o0o0oo0o0000o0o00o0o ooooooo0o0o0000o0oo0o0o0ooooo o0o0o0oooo0o0o00o0o0000o0o0oo ~~o0~~o0~00o~~~ o 0o0~ooo0o~0o~~oo0o0o0~ o~o~~oo~o~~o0~o~o~ o0ooo~~o0o~oo0o~0o~o~o~0~ UUUHHHHHUHH H O O O O · O O O UUUUUU UUUU ~ HHUUHHHHHHHUHUHHHH ~ oooo oo0o o0o0 oo0o ~~oo o~oooo UUUU~ O~ 0 0 0000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 ~0~000~ ~0~000~ :~0 Om U~ Z 0 ~;O O~ ZH 0 ~ H ~H H~ OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~ ~ ~HHH U~~~~~0000000000000000 U~ HHOH~ IIIIIIIIIIIIIUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Oh ~ ~ H o~ t-lO U · 0 I 0 I oo OO OO oo OO oo OO o4o4 OO OO o O I O O ~O~ OOO ooo ooo O O o OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO o4o4 oo oo oo OO oo ~ ~ ~~ oo ~ ~ ~~ II ~ ~ ooooo oo ~ ~ OOOOO ~ o o OOOOO OO O o ooooo OO oooo oooo oooo UUUU OOOO OOOO 0000 o 0 U OO oo OO OO xu ~o UUU ooo ooo O O O o ~ o o ~ o~ 0 ~ 0 ~00 0 0 ~ ~ 00~ ~ O ~ ~ OOO H H H~ m H 000 H ~ ~ ~ ~ H D ~ ° O O~ O O~ 0~0~ o o · o I · OOOOO OO OOOOO OO OOOOO OO OOOOO ~ ~~ OO ~O~ OO OOOO~ ~ OOO~ ~ HH OOOO OOOO OOOO 00~0 ~0~ 0~0 OO~O OO~ H ~H~H ~o oo o~ U H U o H ~o HI~ :~o Or~ U ol-] o 0 H ~H~ ~DH HH ~U o ~m~ U~~ ~UUUU I ~~0~~ 0ooo00o000o 000000o0o0o o0o0o0ooooo UUUUU UUUUUU oo O0 OO OO OO 0o0o0o0o0oo 0 oo o0o0o0o0o0o o O0 0o0o0o0o0o0 0 OO 0 0 0 0o0 000 ooo 0o0 ooo o0o o0o0oo 00o0o0 0o0oo0 ~~o o0o0o~ 0oooo0 0o0o00 Or-"l O0 O0 O0 oo OO o 0 00~00000000 0 00000000000 0 00000000000 0 0~0~0000000 0 0000~0~~0 U H o0o 0o0 ooo oo4o · · , o 00000~ 000000 000000 0~0000 ~0~0~ ~0~0~0 ~0~0~ 0000~0 00~0~0 H~HHHH oo oo oo HH o ~o Om U~ UC~ 0 ~o OrS} mOOOOOOOOOOO ~ O~ ~m I ~ H H ~ o ~ ~ HHHHHH ~HHHHHH ~0ooooo HHHHHH H~ H ~ ~o~ ~U o i 000 00o ooo 00o o0o t-I o o 0~~ 000o0 0o0o0 ooooo o4,-I k.0 k.o O0 O0 (2,, o'~ OO OO oo ~~ ~0 ~ o 0o0o0 oo o o ooooo OO 0 o o 0 2::) 0 U 0o0 o0o o0o UU HH~ ~o oo~ o 0 o 0 o0o0o OO o o o 0o0o0 oo o 0 0 oooo0 oo o 0 o ®o~ o~ o ~ o 0~000 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~00~ ~ ~ 0 ~ o~oo~ So ~ o S o ~00~ O0 ~ 0 ~ 0 HH~H HH mm 0 mmO o o J::::) o Om 0 ~o 0~ ~0 o H ~:~ H 0 rD 0 0 0 Or~ ~o Ho u . o > i oo H H~ D ~1 O~ 0 H ~l~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 UU O~ O0 O0 O0 0 oo oo oo oo oo oo mOO O~ ~o OL~ ~H HE~ H o U . o i 0 0 0 U ITEM NO. 6c DATE: January 21, 1998 AGENDA ~UMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING CITY OF UKIAH QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS LIST FOR 1998 As required by the Informal Bidding Procedure of the City of Ukiah, Ukiah City Code §1541-1542, the City Clerk prepared and mailed a written notice to 21 construction trade organizations in California on November 17, 1997, inviting all licensed contractor's to submit the name of their firm to the City for inclusion on the City's list of qualified bidders for the following calendar year. A contractor may be included throughout the year, as well, by either submitting a written notice to the City Clerk or by bidding on a City project. All contractors who submitted their company name, address, and construction classification designation by the deadline of December 31, 1997, together with those who bid on projects in 1997, have been included on the current updated list, attached to the Resolution as "Exhibit A." It is appropriate for the Council to adopt the Resolution at this time. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Approving Qualified Contractors List for 1998 Calendar Year. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No. (if budgeted) N/A Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk 0/~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution Approving Qualified Contractors List for 1998 Calendar Year; 2. Notice and list of construction trade organizations to whom Notice was sent. APPROVED.t~;~'~ Ca'dace H0rs~e~, ~it~( Manager 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 RESOLUTION 98- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH APPROVING QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS LIST FOR 1998 CALENDAR YEAR WHEREAS, under Ukiah City Code (UCC) sections 1541-1542, the City Clerk must request licensed contractors who are qualified to perform public work under contract with the City of Ukiah to submit their names, addresses, phone numbers, type of work in which they are interested, class of contractor's license and contractor's license number; and WHEREAS, the City Council is required to adopt a list of qualified contractors, identified according to categories of work; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has published the notice as required in UCC Section 1541 and compiled a list of qualified contractors based on information submitted in response to said notice and including all contractors who have submitted valid bids to the City during the preceding calendar year; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the list as compiled complies with the requirements of the City Code and Public Contracts Code Section 22032(b) and shall constitute the City of Ukiah's Contractors List for use in providing notice under the informal bidding procedure authorized in UCC Section 1543. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the list attached to this resolution as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference is adopted as the Contractors List for the City of Ukiah for the calendar year 1998. PASSED AND ADOPTED the 21st day of January, 1998 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk GENERAL ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS LIST CLASS A Able General Contractor 51 Foley Street Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Arcadian Enterprises P.O. Box 475 Shasta Lake, CA 96089 Adobe Construction Inc. 109 Horn Avenue Petaluma, CA 94952 Argonaut Constructors 1236 Central Ave. Santa Rosa,Ca 95402 Arnold Construction 2119 Wood Rd. Fulton, CA 95439 Arrow Paving 500 C Pinoleville Drive Ukiah, CA 95482 Avila Construction 396 Cottonwood Vacaville, CA 95688 BDM Construction 835 Piner Road Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Barnes Construction 3410 Industrial Blvd., #105 West Sacramento, CA 95691 Beacom Construction Co. P. O. Box 457 Fortuna, CA 95540 Bell Springs Construction P. O. Box 611 Laytonville, CA 95454 Fred Berry Construction 305 La Quinta Drive Windsor, CA 95492 Blaisdell & Baker, Inc. P.O. Box 493459 Redding, CA 96049 Alan A. Bradford 4970 Peabody Road Fairfield, CA 95433 BRCO Constructors, Inc. P. O. Box 367 Loomis, CA 95650 California Pavement Maint. 9390 Elder Creek Rd. Sacramento, CA 95829 CERES Associates 5040 Commercial Circle, Suite F Concord, CA 94520 Cheli & Young Constr. P.O. Box 1939 Sebastopol, CA 95473-1939 Cole-Armstrong Mech. 3232 51 st Avenue #7 Sacramento, CA 95823 Crane of Ukiah 4 Banker Blvd. Ukiah, CA 95482 Curnutt Construction 700 Conrad Road Redwood Valley, CA 95470 Cushman Contractor P.O. Box 6212 Santa Barbara, CA 93160 D.C. Crane & Exc. 7580 Conde Lane Windsor, CA 95492 Delta Oilfield Services, Inc. P. O. Box 1675 Woodland, CA 95776-1675 Environmental Resolutions, Inc. 74 Digital Drive, Suite 6 Novato, CA 94949 Epidendio Construction P.O. Box 452 Lower Lake, CA 95457 Donald Ferranti P.O. Box 259 Redwood Valley, CA 95470 Flannery Group 432 N.Canal St Ste. 22 S.SanFrancisco,CA 94080 C.R. Fredrick P. O. Box 688 Novato, CA 94948 Robert Fiora Constr. 35501 S. Highway 1 Gualala, CA 95445 Ghilotti Bros. 246 Ghilotti Ave. Santa Rosa, CA 95407 RJ Gordon Construction, Inc. 144A Mayhew Way Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Groeniger & Company P. O. Box 3629 Hayward, CA 94540 Mark Guiton & Associates 2360 Nebula Street Redding, CA 96002 Gilardoni Construction 4502 Bennett Valley .Road Santa Rosa, CA 95404 L.A. Grow 4993 Canfield Road Petaluma, CA 94952 Harborth Excavating P.O. Box 736 Lower Lake, CA 95457 Charles A. Heath Construction 3268 Westho Trail Cottonwood, CA 96022 Hersmeyer Paving 5454 Old Redwood Hwy. Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Lee Howard Construction 3900 Parducci Road Ukiah, CA 95482 J.K.H. General Engineering P.O. Box 778 Lower Lake, CA 95457 J & M Land Restoration, Inc. 1640 James Road Bakersfield, CA 93308 Jet-Con Enterprises P.O. Box 508 Ukiah, CA 95482 KBR Construction 2806 Tarmac Road Redding, CA 96003 Kadnen Construction 541 Atherton Avenue Novato, CA 94945 King Bay Landscape Co. 2346 Floral Way Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Kirkwood Bly. Inc. P.O. Box 3339 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 L. J. Construction 9460 Graton Road Sebastopol, CA 95472 Joseph LaMalfa 251 Stipp Lane Ukiah, CA 95482 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95851 Lawson's P.O. Box 235 Yorkville, CA 95494 Ross Mayfield P.O. Box 275 Ukiah, CA 95482 M.P.H., Inc. 81 Brianne Circle VVindsor, California 95492-8639 General Eng. & Bldg. Const. 13515 Pleasant Lane Grass Valley, CA 95945 Mendocino Constr. Services P.O. Box 1517 Willits, CA 95490 Mendocino Paving P.O. Box 1338 Willits, CA 95490 Morerno Trenching P. O. Box 458 Rio Vista, CA 94571 North Bay Construction P.O. Box 6004 Petaluma, CA 94952 Oak Grove Construction 3354 Regional Prkwy Santa Rosa, CA 95403-8203 Northern Industr. Elec. 2430 Radio Lane Redding, CA 96601 Pacific Mechanical Corp. P.O. Box 4041 Concord, CA 94524 Pacific Pipeline Survey P. O. Box 1000 Vacaville, CA 95696 Parnum Paving P.O. Box 970 Ukiah, CA 95482-0970 Pfister Excavating 834 Mayo Court Benicia, CA 94510 3 Pipeline Excavators P.O. Box 1755 Sebastopol, CA 95473-1755 J.H. Pomeroy Co., Inc. P.O. Box 411 Petaluma, CA 94953 Rainbow Construction P. O. Box 2769 Ukiah, CA 95482 C. A. Rasmussen, Inc. P.O. Box 638 Santa Rosa,CA 95402-0638 Rhoads Construction 1696 Ash Way Marysville, CA 95901 Richardson Engineering P. O. Box 638 Healdsburg, CA 95448 C.W. Roen P.O. Box 4 Danville, CA 94526 RTB General Enginering Co. Inc. 9855 Prospect Avenue, Suite H Santee, CA 92071 Schram Constr., Inc. 3162 Regional Parkway Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Sequoia Surfacing 5441 Pepperwood Rd. Santa Rosa, CA 95409-5529 Smith Electric 875 Eureka St. Eureka, CA 95503 Sonomarin, Inc. P. O. Box 966 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0966 Stellar Construction P.O. Box 277 Talmage, CA 95482 Stiles Construction 6209 Lockwood Ddve Windsor, CA 95492 T & S Construction 1525 East Hill Road Willits, CA 95490 Valentine Corporation P. O. Box 9337 San Rafael, CA 94912 Valley Engineers 1010 W. Whitebridge Fresno, CA 93706 Valley Paving P.O. Box 559 Redwood Valley, CA 95470 Valley Slurry Seal P.O. Box 1620 W. Sacramento, CA 95691 K.G. Walters Constr. P.O. Box 4359 Santa Rosa, CA 94502 Wayne Waters Constr. P.O. Box 126 Willits, CA 95490 Wildcat Underground & Eng. 21 Washington St. Petaluma, CA 94952* Wipf Construction P.O. Box 234 Ukiah, CA 95482 James A. Wyse Inc. 12925 Alcosta Boulevard, Suite 1 B San Ramon, CA 94583 Wise Construction Inc. P.O. Box 2826 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 Wimmer Excavating 7960 Silverado Trail Napa, CA 94558 ASBESTOS CIUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST (ASB) AFM Environmental, Inc. P. O. Box 2535 Vacaville, CA 95696-2535 APC Contractors Inc. P.O. Box 12507 Fresno, CA 93778-2507 Asbestos Management Group 2855 Mandela Parkway, Suite 11 Oakland, CA 94608 Barnes Construction 3410 Industrial Blvd. West Sacramento, CA 95692 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95682 C.A. Rasmussen, Inc. P. O. Box 638 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0638 GENERAL BUILDING CONTRACTORS CIUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS R AFM Environmental, Inc. P. O. Box 2535 Vacaville, CA 95696-2535 Able General Contractor 51 Foley Street Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Arcadian Enterprises P.O. Box 475 Summit City, CA 96089 APC Contractors, Inc. P.O. Box 12507 Fresno, CA 93778-2507 Asbestos Management Group 2855 Mandela Parkway, Ste 11 Oakland,CA 94608 Aura Construction P.O. Box 163 Lucerne, CA 95458 Barnes Construction 3410 Industrial Blvd., #105 West Sacramento, CA 95691 Beacom Construction Co. P.O. Box 457 Fortuna, CA 95540 Birge & Sons Const. P.O.Box 283 Upper Lake, CA 95485 BRCO Constructors, Inc. P. O. Box 367 Loomis, CA 95650 Busch Construction Inc. 2020 Industry Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Bourassa Construction P.O. Box 440 Miranda, CA 95553 Boyrie Inc. P.O. Box 5512 Santa Rosa CA 95402-5512 Alan A. Bradford 4970 Peabody Road Fairfield, CA 94533 B. Cantarutti Co. 1575 Indian Valley Road Novato, CA 94947 Carr's Constr. Service 9140 Piccadilly Circle Windsor, CA 95492 Carroll Builders Corp. 8109 Elphick Road Sebastopol, CA 95472 Clark Construction P.O. Box 167 Calpella, CA 95418 Curtney J. Collins 195 Clara Avenue Ukiah,CA 95482 Crane of Ukiah 4 Banker Blvd. Ukiah, CA95482 Cupples Const. 501 Saint Mary's Ave. Hopland, CA 95449 Danube Const & Develop 5749 Corbett Circle Santa Rosa, CA 95403 E & W Construction P.O. Box 858 Ukiah, CA95482 Epidendio Construction P.O. Box 452 Lower Lake, CA 95457 Estok Menton 760 Apple Avenue Ukiah, CA95482 Donald Ferranti P.O. Box 259 Redwood Valley, CA 95470 C. R. Fredrick 320 Deer Island Lane Novato, CA 94948 Robert Flora Constr. 35501 S. Highway 1 Gualala, CA 95445 Hawkes Construction 708 Willow Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Hopley Co., Inc. 770 Mark West Springs Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Jet-Con Enterprises P.O. Box 508 Ukiah, CA 95482 Kitchens & Son Constr. 1506 Hallmark Court Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lawrence Gentry Const. P.O. Box 11039 Santa Rosa, CA 95406 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95851 L.G. Miller Construction 4530 Feliz Creek Road Hopland, CA 95449 C. A. Rasmussen, Inc. P. O. Box 638 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0638 C.W. Roen P. O. Box4 Canville, CA 94526 Sonomarin, Inc. P. O. Box 966 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0966 McCarthy Construction P. O. Box 15246 Sacramento, CA 95823 Meek Construction P. O. Box 208 Lakeport, CA 95453 Miller Paneling P.O. Box 270 Woodland, CA 95695 Mullin Constr. Co., Inc. P.O. Box 68 Sebastopol, CA 95472 A.E. Nelson Construction 1330 White Oak Drive Santa Rosa, CA 95409 Northcoast Caspi Inc. 2117 N Street Eureka, CA 95501 North Coast Energy Sew. P.O. Box 413 Ukiah, CA 95482 Northern Industr. Elect. 2430 Radio Lane Redding, CA 96001 Pipeline Excavators P.O. Box 1755 Sebastopol, CA 95473-1755 Project Builders, Inc. 3213 Orange Grove Ave. Ste B North Highlands, CA 95660 Stellar Construction P.O. Box 277 Talmage, CA 95481 Strong Hold Masonry and Concrete, Inc. P. O. Box 7217 Santa Rosa, CA 95407 T.D.M. Construction 144 A Cherry Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Tavolacci Construction 3278 Moorland Ave. Santa Rosa, CA 9504-5727 Trinity Construction 583 Martin Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Ukiah Construction 676 S. Orchard Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Valley Slurry Seal P.O. Box 1620 W. Sacramento, CA 95691 K.G. Walters P. O. Box 4359 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 Williams Scotsman 4911 Allison Parkway Vacaville, CA 95688 Woodstove Builders Inc. 9501 Mill Station Road Sebastopol, CA 95472 6 INSULATION AND ACOUSTICAL QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C? AFM Environmental, Inc. P. O. Box 2535 Vacaville, CA 95696-2535 APC Contractors, Inc. P.O. Box 12507 Fresno, CA 93778-2507 G. T. Acoustics 866 Vintage Avenue Suisun, CA 94585 Kitchen & Son Constr. 1506 Hallmark Court Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95851 Ukiah Acoustics 676 S. Orchard Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 BOILER, HOT WATER HEATING AND STEAM FITTING QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C4 Dowdle and Sons Mechanical 2949 Pinewood Drive Napa, CA 94458 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95851 Pacific Mechanical Corp P.O. Box 4041 Concord, CA 94524 C.W. Roen P.O. Box 4 Danville, CA 94526 Schram Construction Inc. 3162 Regional Parkway Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Sonomarin, Inc. P. O. Box 966 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0966 CABINET & MILLWORK CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C6 Beacom Construction Co. P. O. Box 457 Fortuna, CA 95540 LOW VOLTAGE SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C7 Advance Security Systems 3302 T Street Eureka, CA 95501 Berbay Corporation 19528 Ventura Blvd., Suite 800 Tarzana, California 91356 Deep Valley Security 960 North State St. Ukiah, CA 95482 CONCRETE CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C8 BDM Construction 835 Piner Road Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Clark Construction P.O. Box 167 Calpella, CA 95418 Epidendio Construction P.O. Box 452 Lower Lake, CA 95457 Donald Ferranti P.O. Box 259 Redwood Valley, CA 95470 Ghilotti Bros. 246 Ghilotti Ave. Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Kitchen & Son Constr. 1506 Hallmark Court Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lemos Concrete Constr. 377 Roseland Avenue. Santa Rosa, CA 95407-6852 Sack Concrete Construction 1320 Chateau PI. Ukiah, CA 95482 Strong Hold Masonry and Concrete, Inc. P. O. Box 7217 Santa Rosa, CA 95407 T.D.M. Construction 144 Cherry Street Ukiah, CA 95482 DRYWALL CONTRACTOR QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C9 Master Plan Const. Sew. P. O. Box 355 Garberville, CA 95542 L.G. Miller Drywall 4530 Feliz Creek Road Hopland, CA 95449 ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C10 Advanced Control Systems P. O. Box 518 Cloverdale, CA 95425 Advanced Security Systems 3302 T Street Eureka, CA 95501 Ed Busch Construction 2020 Industry Road Ukiah, CA 95482 B. Cantarutti Co 1575 Novato Road Novato, CA 94947 Clark Construction P. O. Box 167 Calpella, CA 95418 Deep Valley Security 960 North State Street Ukiah, CA 95482 C.R. Fredrick 320 Deer Island Lane Novato, CA 94948 EETS Engineering P.O. Box 1075 Fair Oaks, CA 95682 Environmental Resolutions, Inc. 74 Digital Drive, Suite 6 Novato, CA 94949 Intersection Development Corp 1511 East Orange Thorpe Ave. Ste. A Fullerton CA 92631 NorCal Electric 6275 Loma Avenue Eureka, CA 95501 Northern Industr. Elect. 2430 Radio Lane Redding, CA 96001 Pacific Lighting & Power 433 Town Center, Suite 296 Corte Madera, CA 94925 Smith Electric 875 Eureka St. Eureka, CA 95503 Sonomarin, Inc. P. O. Box 966 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0966 Ukiah Electric 676 S. Orchard Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 ELEVATOR INSTALLATION CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS Cll Access Development 323 Sutton Place Santa Rosa, CA 95407 EXCAVATING, GRADING, TRENCHING AND PAVING CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C17 Arrow Paving 500 C Pinoleville Road Ukiah, CA 95482 B. Cantarutti Co. 1575 Novato Road Novato, CA 94947 California Pavement Maint. 9390 Elder Creek Rd. Sacramento, CA 95829 Duran Construction P.O. Box 681 Redwood Valley, CA 95470 Robert Fiora Constr. 35501 S. Highway 1 Gualala, CA 95445 Ghilotti Bros. 246 Ghilotti Ave. Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Graham Contractors, Inc. P.O. Box 26770 San Jose, CA 95159 Lee Howard Construction 3900 Parducci Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Joseph LaMalfa 251 Stipp Lane Ukiah, CA 95482 Malott & Peterson-Grundy 3201 Pierce Street Richmond, CA 94804 Ross Mayfield P.O. Box 275 Ukiah, CA 95482 Pipeline Excavators P.O. Box 1755 Sebastopol, CA 95473-1755 FENCING CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C13 Arrow Fencing P. O. Box 167 Philo, CA 95466 Arcadian Enterprises P.O. Box 475 Summitt City, CA 96089 Jet-Con Enterprises P.O. Box 508 Ukiah, CA 95482 Olenik & Frey P.O. Box 508 Willits, CA 95490 T n T Fence 7840 - 14th Avenue Sacramento, CA 95826 SHEET METAL ROOFING CONTRACTOR ..QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C14 Simpson Sheet Metal Inc. P.O. Box 2834 Santa Rosa, CA 95405 FLOORING AND FLOOR COVERING QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C15 Malott & Peterson-Grundy 3201 Pierce Street Richmond, CA 94804 Crown Interiors, Inc. 139 Washington Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERING QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C16 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95829 Pacific Mechanical Corp. P. O. Box 4041 Concord, CA 94524 Superior Sprinkler Co. 7704 Bell Road Windsor, CA 95492 WARM-AIR, VENTILATING, AND AIR CONDITIONING .QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C20 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95829 Pacific Mechanical Corp P.O. Box 4041 Concord, CA 94524 Redwood Air Conditioning 775 E. Gobbi Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Simpson Sheet Metal Inc. P.O. Box 2834 Santa Rosa, CA 95405 Sonomarin, Inc. P. O. Box 966 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0966 Ukiah Air Conditioning P.O. Box 804 Ukiah, CA 95482 BUILDING MOVING AND DEMOLITION .QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C21 B. Cantarutti Co. 1575 Novato Road Novato, CA 94947 D.C. Crane & Exc. 7580 Conde Lane Windsor, CA 95492 Ghilotti Bros. 246 Ghilotti Ave. Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Pacific Structural Corp. 138 Hamilton Dr., Suite A Novato, CA 94949 ORNAMENTAL METAL CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C23 LNS Welding & Fabrication P. O. Box 6336 Willits, CA 95490 Mendocino Metal 207B Clara Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 LANDSCAPING CONTRACTORS .QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C27 Atlas Tree Surgery 2100 Llano Road Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Davey Tree Surgery Co. P.O. Box 351 Livermore, CA 94550 E.C.M.R. P. O. Box 963 Forestville, CA 95436 Firewheel Landscape 350 East Todd Road Santa Rosa, CA 95407 H & M Tree Service P.O. Box 1637 Willits, CA 95490 Horizon Landscaping 8277 Honor Place Cotati, CA 94931 Johnson's Quality Tree Care 2700 Boonville Road Ukiah, CA 95482 King Bay Landscape Co. 2346 Floral Way Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Lake Tree Design P. O. Box 604 Nice, CA 95464 L.J. Construction 9460 Granton Road Sebastopol, CA 95472 lO Little Lake Landscape 27755 Poppy Drive VVillits, CA 95490 Marvins Garden Tree Serv. P. O. Box 1725 Willits, CA 95490 Matt's Custom Tree Care 1575 Elm Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Pacific Environments P.O. Box 1639 Rohnert Park, CA 94927 John Phillips North Coast Tree Care 26010 String Creek Road Willits, CA 95490 Ritner Tree Service P.O. Box 317 Sonoma, CA 95476 Sangiacomo 3150 Guidiville Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Timberlake Tree Service P. O. Box 964 Ukiah, CA 95482 Timberline Tree Service 10220 Old River Road Forestville, CA 95436 TS Landscapes 2110 Road B Redwood Valley, CA 95470 Waterwise Landscape Con. P.O. Box 803 Cloverdale, CA 95425 MASONRY CONTRACTOR .QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C29 Mendocino Masonry P. O. Box 271 Comptche, CA 95427 11 Strong Hold Masonry and Concrete, Inc. P. O. Box 7217 Santa Rosa, CA 95407 POLE MAINTENANCE AND TREATMENT, POLE SETTING, POLE LINES QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C31 Kevin O'Keefe Company 4425 Kristen Lee Court Placerville, CA 95667 PARKING AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C37 Adams Surfacing 1616 Woodhue Ave. Santa Rosa, CA 95403 American Asphalt Company 1771 E Bayshore Road Redwood City, CA 94064 Calif. Pavement Co. 9390 Elder Creek Road Sacramento, CA 95829 Central Stdping Service 11391 Pyrites Way Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 Ellen Tominello Striping P.O. Box 927 Middletown, CA 95461 Price Striping Service 1680 Elk Valley Road Crescent City, CA 95531 Pave-Mark Corporation 9925 Yucca Road Adelanto, CA 92301 Re-Stripe Rite 4954 John Wayne Drive Ceres, CA 95307 Vintage Sweep P.o. Box 885 Ukiah, CA 95482 Womac Striping P.O. Box 994 Tracy, CA 95378 Apply-A-Line 5625 Eastside Road Redding, CA 96001-4531 Apply-A-Line 106 Frontage Road No. Pacific, WA 98047 Traffic Limited P. O. Box 1721 Lodi, CA 95241 Riley's Striping P. O. Box 1188 Benicia, CA 94510 Chrisp Company P. O. Box 1368 Fremont, CA 94538-0136 PAINTING AND DECORATING CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST C33 APC Contractors, Inc. P.O. Box 12507 Fresno, CA 93778-2507 Beacom Construction Co. P. O. Box 457 Fortuna, CA 95540 Markos Painting Co., Inc. P. O. Box 2108 Novato, CA 94948 Master Plan Construction Serv. P. O. Box 355 Garberville, CA 95542 Summit Painting P.O. Box 445 Boonville, CA 95415 Spurgeon Painting P.O. Box 2776 Petaluma, CA 94953 Tru-Tech Coating & Roofing 1700 Reliance Street Modesto, CA 95358 PIPELINE CONTRACTORS .QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C34 Lee Howard Construction 3900 Parducci Road Ukiah, CA 95482 PLASTERING CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C35 Mendo Lake Plastering P.O. Box 791 Ukiah, CA 95482 PLUMBING CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C36 Aura Construction P.O. Box 163 Lucerne, CA 95458 Clark Construction P. O. Box 167 Calpella, CA 95418 Dowdle and Sons Mechanical 2949 Pinewood Drive Napa, CA 94558 Environmental Resolutions, Inc. 74 Digital Drive, Suite 6 Novato, CA 94949 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95829 A. E. Nelson Construction 1330 White Oak Drive Santa Rosa, CA 95409 Pacific Mechanical Corp. P.O. Box 4041 Concord, CA 94524 Schram Construction Inc. 3162 Regional Parkway Santa Rosa, CA 95403 12 Sonomarin, Inc. P. O. Box 966 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0966 Familian Government Sales 3250 Reed Avenue West Sacramento, CA 95605-1622 .Q. UALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C38 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95829 ROOFING CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C39 Malott & Peterson-Grundy 3201 Pierce Street Richmond, CA 94804 Mendocino Roofing P.O. Box 904 Willits, CA 95490 Mendocino Roofing 1772 S. Main Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Ken Ray Roofing 8556 S. Highway 101 Ukiah, CA 95482 Steve Roberts Roofing 1291 Talmage Road Ukiah, CA 95482 American Roofing Co. P.O. Box 785 Lakeport, CA 95453 Warrington Roofing Inc. 1685 Helena Avenue, Suite B Sacramento, CA 95815 Tru-Tech Coating & Roofing 1700 Reliance Street Modesto, CA 95358 SANITATION SYSTEM CONTRACTORS .QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C47 Ghilotti Bros. #644515 246 Ghilotti Ave. Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Lee Howard Construction 3900 Parducci Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Pipeline Excavators P.O. Box 1755 Sebastopol, CA 95473-1755 SHEET METAL CONTRACTORS ,QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C43 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95829 Redwood Air Conditioning 775 E. Gobbi Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Simpson Sheet Metal Inc. P.O. Box 2834 Santa Rosa, CA 95405 Sonomarin, Inc. P. O. Box 966 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0966 SOLAR CONTRACTORS ,QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C44 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95829 ELECTRICAL SIGN CONTRACTOR QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C4-~ J & L Signs P.O. Box 5099 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 13 p. TILE (CERAMIC & MOSAIC) CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS CSa Arnold Ceramic Tile P. O. Box 660 Redwood Valley, CA 95470 Malott & Peterson-Grundy 3201 Pierce Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Miller Paneling P.O. Box 270 Woodland, CA 95695 Roberts Tile, Inc. P.O. Box 6102 Santa Rosa, CA 95406 WELL-DRILLING (WATER) CONTRACTORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C57 Cache Creek Drilling P.O. Box 999 Woodland, CA 95695 Country Pump and Well P.O. Box 1177 Forestville, CA 95436 D. Lyon Drilling P.O. Box 401 Navarro, CA 95463 Performance Excavators 3060 Kerner Blvd., Ste. A San Rafael, CA 94901 WELDING CONTRACTORS ...QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS c6n O.T.S. Welding P. O. Box 216 Redwood Valley, CA 95470 GOLD LEAF GUILDING QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS C61 Hopley Co., Inc. 770 Mark West Springs Road Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Access Development 323 Sutton Place Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Robert L. Cole Goodwin-Cole Company 8320 Belvedere Avenue Sacramento, California 95826 Den-Em Entrerprises P.O. Box 963 Healdsburg, CA 95448 DOORS AND DOOR SERVICE, SHOWER AND TUB ENCLOSURES ACCORDION DOORS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS D08 Vermillion Door 16 Rocca Drive Petaluma, CA 95452 FIBERGLASS, PLASTIC AND SYNTHETIC PRODUCTS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST ,CLASS D12 Miller Paneling P.O. Box 270 Woodland, CA 95695 METAL PRODUCTS AND SERVICES, METAL CABINET METAL PARTITIONS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS D24 Hopley Co., Inc. 770 Mark West Springs Rd. Santa Rosa, CA 95404 PREFABRICATED EQUIPMENT, LABORATORY EQUIPMENT, ETC. ..QUALIFED BIDDERSLIST CLASS D34 Kevin O'Keefe Company 4425 Kristen Lee Court Placerville, CA 95667 CONSTRUCTION CLEAN-UP CONTRACTOR QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS D63 Den-Em Enterprises P.O. Box 963 Healdsburg, CA 95448 14 ~TT'hCR'~n~o T' i ~ P. /~ HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES REMOVAL ClUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST CLASS Able General Contractor 51 Foley Street Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Beacom Construction Co. P. O. Box 457 Fortuna, CA 95540 Environmental Resolutions, Inc. 74 Digital Drive, Suite 6 Novato, CA 94949 Robert Fiora Construction 35501 $. Highway 1 Gualala, CA 95445 Lawson Mechanical Contractors P. O. Box 15224 Sacramento, CA 95829 Oak Grove Construction 3354 Regional Prkwy Santa Rosa, CA 95403-8203 J.K.H. General Engineering P.O. Box 778 Lower Lake, CA 95457 C.A. Rasmussen, Inc. P. O. Box 638 Santa Rosa, CA 95402-0638 15 300 UKIAH, C_A 95482-5400 · /~DMIN. 707/463-6200 . PUBLIC SAFETY 463-6242/6274 · FAX # 707/463-6204 All Licensed Contractors who wish to be included on the City of Ukiah's list of qualified bidders for the year 1998 should submit the following information: . The name and address to which a Notice to Contractor or Request for Proposal should be mailed; . A phone number at which the Contractor may be reached; and . The current license number(s) and classification(s) held by the Contractor, with a description of the type of work in which the Contractor is interested, and in which a license is held. Please forward the information on company letterhead to: Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Or fax to: (707) 463-6204 - DUE BY DECEMBER 31, 1997 - Please publish the above Notice as soon as possible: If there is a publishing cost, please call for confirmation, before publication, from Colleen Henderson at (707) 463-6217. Thank you. 'We Are Here To Serve" Builders Exchange of Alameda Co. 3055 Alvarado Street San Leandro, CA 94577 Builders Exchange of Santa Clara County P. O. Box 58032 Santa Clara, CA 95052-8032 Contra Costa Builders Exchange 115 Aspen Drive Pacheco, CA 94553 Contractor Information Network P. O. Box 6390 Fresno, CA 93703 Daily Construction 589 Howard Street, 2nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Daily Pacific Builders 221 Main Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105 Del Notre Builders Exchange 207 Price Mall Crescent City, CA 95531 Humboldt Builders Exchange 2355 Myrtle Avenue Eureka, CA 95501 Marin Builders Exchange 110 Belvedere Street San Rafael, CA 94901 McGraw Hill/Dodge 130 Doolittle Drive San Leandro, CA 94577 Nevada County Contr. Assn. 111-A New Mohawk road Nevada City, CA 95959 North Coast Builders Exchange 987 Airway Court Santa Rosa, CA 95403 North Coast Builders Exchange 216 W. Perkins Street, Suite 104 Ukiah, CA 95482 North Coast Builders Exchange 522 N. Franklin Street Fort Bragg, CA 95437 North Coast Builders Exchange 175 Park Street Lakeport, CA 95453 Peninsula Builders Exchange 735 Industrial Road San Carlos, CA 94070 Placer County Contr. Assn. 1101 High Street Auburn, CA 95603 Sacramento Builders Exchange P. O. Box 1462 Sacramento, CA 95812 San Francisco Builders Exchange 850 S. Van Ness Ave. San Francisco, CA 94110 Shasta Builders Exchange 2990 Innsbruck Drive Redding, CA 96003 Solano-Napa Builders Exchange 135 Camino Dorado Napa, CA 94558 ITEM NO. 6d DATE: January 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION ELIMINATING ON-STREET PARKING AND ESTABLISHING A NO-PARKING ZONE ON THE EAST SIDE OF MAIN STREET BETVVEEN GOBBI STREET AND MARSHALL STREET SUMMARY: As indicated in the attached correspondence, the Office of Ray Worster, Cai Farm Insurance, and Computer Scene requested the Traffic Engineering Committee (TEC) to address the issue of the traffic on Main Street and the lack of visibility of vehicles leaving east side parking lots and turning onto Main Street. Ms. Donna Worster attended the TEC meeting on December 9, 1997 and requested the establishment of a no parking zone on the east side of Main Street adjacent to the Worster office complex and Computer Scene to improve sight distance for traffic leaving their parking lots. The TEC considered the request and recommended the City Council approve the elimination of all the parking on the east side of Main Street between Gobbi Street and Marshall Street. Should this request be approved, a net loss of five on-street parking spaces will result. Sufficient off-street parking currently exists at the businesses on the east side of Main Street between Gobbi Street and Marshall Street. Ms. Worster stated that the affected businesses on the east side concur with the request to remove the on-street parking. Staff has notified the affected businesses regarding the proposed change in on-street parking. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Eliminating On-street Parking and Establishing a No-parking Zone on the east side of Main Street between Gobbi Street and Marshall Street ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Deny Request. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.: (if budgeted) Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution; 2. Letter of Request from Donna Worster APPROVED,~.~,,,..s, ~~' ~~'~Candace Horsley, Cit~ Manager RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ELIMINATING ON-STREET PARKING AND ESTABLISHING A NO PARKING ZONE ON THE EAST SIDE OF MAIN STREET BETWEEN GOBBI STREET AND MARSHALL STREET WHEREAS, the City Council may by resolution designate portions of streets upon which the standing, parking, or stopping of vehicles is prohibited or restricted pursuant to Article 11, Chapter 1, Division 8, of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineering Committee (Traffic Engineer) received a request from the Office of Roy Worster, CalFarm Insurance, and Computer Scene that parking be eliminated by establishing a no parking zone on the east side of Main Street between Gobbi Street and Marshall Street; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineer recommends that the request be approved so that sight distance can be enhanced for vehicular traffic leaving the driveways of the businesses on the east side of Main Street between Gobbi Street and Marshall Street. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Ukiah City Council that a no parking zone be established on the east side of Main Street between Gobbi Street and Marshall Street. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of _J. anua~, 1998, by the following roll call vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk B:RESI MAIN.NP 1~-04-1997 0~:59PM F;"-I'I TIE OFFICE OF RAY WORSTER TO ~165S2~4 P.O1 December 4, 199~ City of'Ukiah Arm Cathy Fax # 463 6204 We the undersigned request that we be put on the agenda ofthe Ukiah Traffic Engineering Committee meeting on December 9th at 3:00 P2vt. Our concern is the fast pace traffic on Main Str,~-t b~tween Mill and G0bbi and out iact of visibility when exiting our p~'king lots. The Office ofRay Wor~ter Cal Farm Insurance Computer Scene Donna Worster, Representative TOTAL P. O1 ITEM NO. DATE: 6e January 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT FOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CIVIL SERVICE BOARD ACTIVITIES Various activities are necessary during the year that are not anticipated when the budget is developed. The Personnel Department is required to respond to specific situations as they arise. Certain costs related to Civil Service activities were not foreseen in the adopted budget. Because costs related to the Civil Service Board activities were not included in the adopted budget, staff is requesting a budget amendment of $6,622.00 to account 100.1601.250.000 for legal services of Mayer, Coble & Palmer. There is sufficient fund balance to cover the requested appropriation. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the amendment to the 1997/98 budget for the Personnel Department increasing expenditures in account 100.1601.250.000 by $6,622. ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine budget amendment is not appropriate and take no action. 2. Determine an alternate budget amendment is appropriate. Appropriation requested: $6,622.00 Citizens advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachment: N/A Gordon Elton, Finance Director Gordon Elton, Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manager; Kari Revheim, Personnel Director Budget worksheets APPROVED: GE:prsnlbud.agn ~dac~ ~orsle~,( City Manager GENERAL FUND #100 $ 509,388 $ 6,308,310 $ (6,609,488) $ 205,775 $ - Bud.qeted amounts: Beginning fund balance 7/1/97 Revenue budgeted Expenses budgeted Transfers In/(Out), at net Loans to other funds Budgeted ending fund balance 6/30/98 $ 413,985 Adiustments made durin.q the fiscal year: Date Proposed Account No. 7/1/97 Change in beginning fund balance per audit 8/6/97 Storm drain videotaping project 100.3110.250.000 $ (4,000) 8/6/97 South State Street repair 100.3110.250.000 $ (13,500) 8/20/97 City Clerk compensation adjustment 100.1101.110-156 $ (741) 8/20/97 Street portion of Garage cleaner/solvent contract 100.3110.303.000 $ (285) 11/5/97 Traffic Safety Grant Revenue 100.0600.488.911 $ 20,175 11/5/97 Firefighters Association Donation 100.0900.900.911 $ 2,100 11/5/97 Fees for services to Mendocino District Attorney 100.0800.616.911 $ 2,500 11/5/97 Sale of Surplus Fire equipment 100.0800.625.002 $ 2,000 11/5/97 Traffic Safety Grant Expenses 100.2101 .XXX.911 $ (26,775) 11/19/97 Fire hoses and fittings 100.2101.690.001 $ (1,832) 12/17/97 Animal Shelter property appraisal 100.1201.250.000 $ (2,800) 12/17/97 Animal Shelter property appraisal reimbursement 100.0600.489.000 $ 1,400 1/21/98 Legal services for Civil Service hearings 100.1601.250.000 $ (6,622) Revised Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 6/30/98 $ 385,605 RESERV98.XLS 1/8/98 Page 1 Funds 100; 110; 115; 130; 131 IAI Z :3 0 6t= Item No. Date: January. 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Notification to Council Regarding the Purchase of Liquid Polymer. REPORT: Liquid polymer is an essential chemical used to aid the filtering of the effluent water at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Two 275 gallon totes of liquid polymer is now required to augment our current inventory to treat the anticipated inflow of wastewater. Liquid polymer is purchased on an as needed basis, since usage rates vary with the seasonal changes in wastewater inflow. As additional supplies are required, bids are requested. Currently Ecochem, Inc. is the only company that supplies this product. Ecochem was awarded a bid for this product earlier this year and has agreed to extend that price to this purchase. A Purchase Order has been issued to Ecochem, Inc. for a total of $5,666.66. $122,000 is budgeted in Account 612-3580-520 for the purchase of chemicals used at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. To satisfy our purchasing policies, we are giving the City Council the required notification of this action. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding the notification of the purchase of liquid polymer. 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 Attachment:l) None APP ROVED:"~---'~. [, Candace Horsley, Citj[ Manager ITEM NO. 6g DATE: January 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMM'ARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR RECREATIONAL FACILITY FEASIBILITY STUDY EXPENDITURES - CDBG GRANT #97-STBG-1175 On August 6, 1997, a public hearing was conducted and the City Council passed Resolution No. 98-09 which approved the application for a Planning and Technical Assistance Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). This grant application was successful and a $19,000.00 grant was awarded, effective December 16, 1997. This award includes a $4,370.00 local match requirement. The Ukiah Valley Cultural and Recreational Center group deposited the indicated match amount with the City as of January 5, 1998. The Community Services Department will be responsible for grant administration. Since this grant occurred subsequent to the adoption of the 1997/98 budget, there is no authorized budget for these funds. Therefore this is the request to formally authorize the expenditure of both the grant and the match money as outlined in the grant. Expenditures related to this grant will be recorded in Fund #333, Department #4707. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the amendment to the 1997/98 budget for Recreation facility feasibility study, increasing revenue in CDBG Fund account 333.0600.488.000 by $23,370 ($19,000 grant revenue, $4,370 match revenue), and expenditures in account ~333.4707.250.00x by $23,370 ($19,000 grant expenses and $4,370 match expenses). ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine budget amendment is not appropriate and take no action. 2. Determine an alternate budget amendment is appropriate. Appropriation requested: $23,370 Requested by: Gordon Elton, Finance Director Citizens advised: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Dr. Marvin Trotter Gordon Elton, Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manager Larry DeKnoblough, Community Services Dir. 1. Fund #333 Budget worksheets 2. Grant award notice Canaace Horsley, ~ity Manager GE:cdbgbud.agn CDBG GRANT - FUND #333 Budgeted amounts: Beginning fund balance 7/1/97 Revenue budgeted Transfers budgeted Expense Budgeted ending fund balance 6/30/98 $ 30,000 $ - $ (30,000) $ - Ad--~ustments made during the fiscal year: Date Approved Account No. 7/1/97 Change in beginning fund balance per audit $ - 1/21/98 Recreation facility grant#97-STBG-1175 revenue 333.0600.488.000 $ 19,000 1/21/98 Recreation facility grant #97-STBG-1175 match revenue 333.0600.488.000 $ 4,370 1/21/98 Site Evaluations- grant share 333.4707.250.001 $ (10,700) 1/21/98 Funding Plan Development- grant share 333.4707.250.002 $ (2,600) 1/21/98 Agency needs Assessment- grant share 333.4707.250.003 $ (3,000) 1/21/98 Implementation Plan Development- grant share 333.4707.250.004 $ (2,700) 1/21/98 Admin, report preparation, audit- match share 333.4707.250.005 $ (500) 1/21/98 Site Evaluations- match share 333.4707.250.001 $ (2,600) 1/21/98 Funding Plan Development- match share 333.4707.250.002 $ (1,000) 1/21/98 Agency needs Assessment- match share 333.4707.250.003 $ (270) Revised ending fund balance 6/30/98 $ - RESERV98.XLS 1/8/98 Page 2 Funds 332; 333; 334; 335; 530 ; ~: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; N N 0 0 '~0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0:0 ~ ~ 0 0~ ~ '-- > ~ '~ xxxxxxxxx ~ ~ ~E~ ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0I ~ V' e ~ 888 oooo8888888888888'8°~ ..... q8888888888°°88 " o~8~888°°°'°.~dd~' 88. o8 ~i ~~ ~ddd~d~~~oooooo. ~ ~ ~,~ ~ ~ ~ q 0 ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ %~ q ~ . ~ 0000 ~ ~ ~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~iO 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 0 ~ ~oo~o~omoooox 000'0000000000000 ~ 00:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 000)0 ~ 0 ~ 000000 o olmo~ ~ oo~o~ oo oomoooomoom~moooo ooo o ~omo ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00~~ ~I0000~ 0~0~:0~ ~ ~ ~ O~ ~oo, oooo~:o~o~oo~o~ooooooooo~oo~o~ooooo ~ ~ ~0~ ~,~ ~0~0~~~0000 ~ ~0~ 0 ~ ~0~ O~ 8oooo8~ooo~- o~~8ooo, oooo8-ooo~o~8oo~ 0000 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0'000000 0:0 ~ ~ ~ 00 0 0 ~, 0 o,o o o 88 o 8888,88 oo - 88 8°q . o~ ~d4 ~ ' ~'~88 8 ~ dd ~ oK ' ~ ' ' 8 ~ ' ' ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ O] ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 000 O~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ o~oo o · ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 6 ~'00 0 ~ ~ 00 0~ ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA STANDARD AGREEMENT APPROVED BY T.E ATTORNEY GENERAL STD. 2 (REV.5-91) | 4th CONTRAC'r 's COP:¥ A,., ,o ' · · TAXPAYER'S FEDERAL EMPLOYE,:I OENTIFICATION NUMBE O ,ob,,,..7. / ' THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of in thc State of California, by and between State of California, through its duly elected or appointed, qualified and acting TITLE OF OFFICER ACTING FOR STATE I AGENCY Director Department of Housing and Community Development, hereafter called thc State, a~d CONTRACTOR'S NAME City of Ukiah , hereafter called the Contractor. WITNESSETH: That thc Contractor for and in consideration of thc covenants, conditions, agreements, and stipulations of thc State hereinafter expressed, does hereby agree to furnish to the State services and materials as follows: (Set forth service to be rendered by Contractor, amount to be paid Contractor. tirne for performance or completion, and attach plans and specifications, if any.) This agreement will provide official notification of the grant award under the State's administration of the Housing and Community Development Block Grant (hereinafter, "CDBG" or "the Program") Program for Non-entitlement jurisdictions pursuant to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq., 24 CFR Part 570, Subpart I, and 25 California Code of Regulations, Sections 7050 et seq. In accepting this grant award, the Grantee agrees to comply with the terms and conditions of this agreement and all attachments hereto, the representations contained in the Grantee's application (hereinafter, "the Application") which is hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in full, and the requirements &the authorities cited above. For purposes of this agreement, use of the term "Grantee" shall be a reference to "Contractor". Any changes made to the Application after this agreement is executed must receive prior written approval from the State. Term: The effective date of this agreement is the date stamped by the State in the lower right hand comer of this page. This agreement sba terminate on September 30, 1998. Grant Amount: The amount to be paid as a grant to the Grantee under this agreement shall not exceed $19,000. Grant Activity.: The Grantee agrees to perform the grant activity(les) as summarized below and on Attachment C attached hereto, and as more fully described in the approved Application: Feasibility study for family services center. Activities include site evaluation, needs analysis, and funding/implementation plans. $10,700 $2,60O $3,000 $2,7O0 CONTINUED ON 17 Site Evaluations Funding Plan Development Agency needs Assessment Implementation Plan Development SHEETS, EACH BEARING NAME OF CONTRACTOR AND CONTRACT NUMBER. The provisions on the reverse side hereof constitute a part of this agreement. 12q WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement has been executed by the parties hereto, upon the date first above written. STATE OF CALIFORNIA AGENCY Department of Housing & Community Development ByA'~'I~HORIZED SIGNATURE) ,. P, JJ~TED_I~_ ~' OF PERSON SIGNING Judy Nevis TITLE Deputy Director CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR (11 other than an individual, state whether a o~rporation, partnership, etc.) City of Ukiah BY ( IZEDj~IGNA - \ PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING Candacc Horsley, City Manager ADDRESS 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California 95482 AMOUNT ENCUMBERED BY THIS IIPROGRAM/CATEGORY {CODE AND TITLE) I FUND T~,ITn~L~ DOCUMENT JJ 20 J $ 19,000 (OPTIONAL USE) ,.,~o..o~ ~:,,.ac.FCN 14.228 PRIOR AMOUNT ENCUMBERED FOR Il.......... CDBG THIS CONTRACT II ITEM CH P- R STATU $ -0- [] 2240-101-0890 I~x~ I ]q997 s~:~§ TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED TO I / E C E TITLE' OBJECT (~ ) I hereby ce~i~ u~n my own personal ~owledge that budgeted funds T.B.A. NO. B.R. NO. are available for ~e period and purpose of the expenditure stated above. S~NATUREOF ACCOUNTINGDFFICER ~ ~ ~ . J DATE Department of General Services Use Only Exempt from Department ot General Services approval DEC 1 6 1997 ITEM NO. 6h DATE: JANUARY 21, 1998 AGENDA :SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR INSTITUTE OF MUSEUM AND LIBRARY SERVICES GRANT In August 1997, the City received a two year, $49,535, grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the Sun House Museum. Since this grant was not awarded until after the adoption of the 1997/98 budget, a budget amendment is necessary to account for both the revenue and expenditures associated with the prescribed work, including consultant services, education outreach programs, and equipment purchases. This budget amendment addresses approximately half of the grant; the remainder will be included in next fiscal year's budget. Staff recommends the City Council approve the budget amendment to authorize the expenditure of $ 24,050 in account 143.6165.250.001 and the receipt of $24,050 revenue in account 143.0600.491.000 for the activities associated with the Institute of Museum and Library Services grant. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve amendment to the 1997/98 budget by adding expenditures of $24,050 in account 143.6165.250.001 and establishing revenue account 143.0600.491.000 with $24,050 for the Institute of Museum and Library Services grant. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: , , Determine alternative accounts are to be used, identify those changes, and approve modified amendment. Determine budget amendment is not appropriate and direct Staff to notify Institute that grant is to be terminated. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.' Revenue: 143.0600.491.000 - $24,050 Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Expenditures: 143.6165.250.001 - $24,050 NA NA Michael Harris, Assistant City Manager Gordon Elton, Director of Finance and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Budget worksheets, pages 1-2. 2. Grant notification letter and proposed 1997/98 work plan, pages 3-4. Canda~e Ho'rsleyl ~ity'l~anager mfh:asrcc98 0121BA m IMLS GRANT #1G-70518-97 - FUND #143 Bud.qeted amounts: Beginning fund balance 7/1/97 Revenue budgeted Transfers budgeted Expense Budgeted ending fund balance 6/30/98 $ Adjustments made durinq the fiscal year: Date Approved 1/21/98 Grant revenue 1/21/98 Grant expense Account No. 143.0600.491.000 143.6165.250.001 $ 24,050 $ (24,050 Revised ending fund balance 6/30/98 $ RESERV98.XLS 1/14/98 Page 5 Funds 120; 140; 141 142 143 150 INSTITUTE of MUSEUM and LIBRARY SERVICES September 5, 1997 Mr. Rob Wilson Grace Hudson Museum and the Sun Itouse 431 South Main Street Ukiah, CA 95482 IG70518 Dear Mr. Wilson: I am very pleased to inform you that your museum is a recipient of a 1997 General Operating Support grant award. In FY 1997 we received 1,061 applications requesting a total of over $84 million. We could only make 202 awards (19% of those that applied) with the money available. Congratulations on your successful application! Your museum's success in this competition demonstrates an outstanding level of professionaiism among all of your staff. Please note that the following page lists all the materials included in this packet. The Grant Award Notification contains information about complying with the terms of the award. Please read ail of this information carefully. The amount of your award, the dates of the grant period and the grant number we have assigned are included on the Grant Award Notification. If you need to contact IMLS about your grant, please reference this grant number. This grant will enable you to do many important activities for your musemn. We request that your museum credit the Institute of Museum and Library Services in all related publications and activities in conjunction with the use of your grant money. Specific language to use is enclosed in this packet as well as a sample press release to facilitate the publicity of your grant. Plea.se copy and send us any coverage you may receive about your award. This competition depends upon the dedication of Ihe museum com~nunily who generously agree to serve as grant reviewers. If you are already participating as a lield reviewer I thank you. If not, I urge you to serve and Io encourage your staff to participate as well. Please contact IMLS for reviewer applications. You will again be eligible to apply to the IMLS GOS program in 1999. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the Ollice of Museum Services at (202)606-8539. Again, congratulations for the high level of museum services this award recognizes. Sincerely, Diane B. Frm~el Director .4 I"ed,'ra/ age.,?, serving thc pub/i,' h r strcug tl, cu iu[~ ~ttttS~'ll~ts CL ~iht, tries Ii'~ts/,iu.,,,tou. /). ('. IMLS Spending Proposals - Fiscal Year 1997-1998 1] Consultant to work rehousing, cataloging ethnographic collections Deborah Geary, archaeologist (150 hrs. @ $15.00 per hr.) (est. $2,250) 2] Mendocino County School Outreach Programs (Curriculum geared "trunks"/research materials for 3,4,5 grs.) Vicki Patterson, planning consultant (100 hrs. @ $35.00 per hr.) Materials for trunks - est. $1,500 (est.$5,000) 3] Plexiglass hoods for cases - 7 lg. @ $1,000 each, 3 sm. @ $300 each (est. $8,000) 4] Registrar, 8 hrs. a month, $15.00 per hr. Rebecca Snetzelaar (est. $1,000) 5] Conservation of Paintings - (6) (est. $3,000) 6] Shades/Curtains for the Sun House, attic, downstairs (est. $3,000) 7] New UV protecting plexi for bookcases in Sun House 8] Teachers' Packet for "Artists of the American West" Zephyr Bergera, teacher (est. $1,500) (est. $300) TOTAL OF PLANNED SPENDING FOR FY 1997-98: Total Grant Award over 2 years: $49,535.00 $24,767.50 each fiscal year $24,050.00 ITEM NO. 6i DATE: JANUARY 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A PORTION OF HOSPITAL DRIVE INTO THE CITY MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM Submitted for the City Council's consideration is a resolution which, if adopted, would accept into the City Street System a portion of Hospital Drive which was previously vacated and quit claimed to accommodate the new K-Mart Store and then rededicated to the City as an easement for street purposes by the recordation of the Parcel Map for Minor Subdivision No. 94-18. That portion of Hospital Drive to be accepted into the Street System is 140.03 linear feet in length as measured along the north line of Parcel C from the west line of the lands subdivided for Minor Subdivision 94-18. This portion of Hospital Drive will provide public street frontage for the newly created Parcel C. The street improvements which existed prior to the vacation have not been disturbed and are in the same condition as they were prior to the vacation. It is in the best interest of the public that this portion of Hospital Drive be maintained by the City and Staff recommends that it be accepted into the City Street System. RECOMMENDED ACTION' Adopt Resolution accepting a portion of Hospital Drive into the City Street System. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' Determine that it is not in the interest of the public that it be maintained by the City and do not adopt resolution. Abutting property owners will be required to maintain the street dedicated for public use. Appropriation Requested: Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution for Adoption. 2. Graphic illustrating portion to be accepted. APPROVEEJ",,~__ _ ~'~~ Candace Horsle¥, Cit~ R: 1 \PW:kk AH OSPITAL.SS Manager RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ACCEPTING A PORTION OF HOSPITAL DRIVE INTO THE CITY STREET SYSTEM WHEREAS, the provisions of Section 1806 of the California Street and Highways Code provide that no public or private street shall become a City street until and unless the governing body, by resolution, has caused said street to be accepted into the City Street System nor shall any City be held liable for failure to maintain any street unless and until it has been accepted into the City Street System by resolution of the governing body; and WHEREAS, the portion of street to be accepted into the City Street System by the adoption of this resolution was a portion of a former public street maintained by the City known as Hospital Drive and which was vacated by the adoption of Resolution No. 94-59 and the City's fee interest therein was quit claimed by the quit claim deeds recorded in Book 2468, Page 701, and Book 2436, Page 138, Records of Mendocino County Recorder. Said vacation and quit claims were performed to accommodate the construction of the new K-Mart facility; and WHEREAS, the Parcel Map for Minor Subdivision 94-18 rededicated to the City for street purposes and for providing public street access to Parcel C the westerly 140.03 feet of that portion of Hospital Drive formerly vacated and quit claimed; and WHEREAS, the street improvements of that portion of Hospital Drive to be accepted into the City Street System by the adoption of this resolution are in tact and in the same condition as they were prior to the vacation; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the public that the portion of Hospital Drive as identified herein be accepted into the City Street System and maintained by the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Ukiah City Council that the portion of Resolution No. Page I of 2 Hospital Drive rededicated to the City of Ukiah for street purposes by the Parcel Map for Minor Subdivision No. 94-18 (140.03 feet as measured from the west line of the land subdivided and along the north line of Parcel C) is hereby accepted into the City Street System. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21 st of January, 1998, the following roll call vote' AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk B:I~RES1 HOSPITAL.SS Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 z i 5~ PASE ANI:) PUE 5t PASE AI~O PUE Parcel C 40,102.18 SF / 0.92 AC  _.___~ N85'30'10'E 33.00' N.8~'30'lO"E 25.16' !//-- .~'~'2rE ~.oo' ,J ~ NO413'33"W .50.00' I I ~11E TO CORNE:R: S44'35'35'W 14.14' E TO CORNE~ S041)9'48"E 162.15' ~ N89'35'55"E PEAR ORCHARD ASSOCIATES PARCEL 1 C2 029 P23 5' PACIFIC C, AS AND ri rC,'[~lC EASEMENT PER 17! ..~ ? TO ~: 515'26'09'E 10.35' -~.~ , 195.05' 357.20' 0.50' CURB ~T PER 1119 OR 93 - 5' PUBUC U11LITY ~ENT PER C2 039 P17 Item No. 6,~ Date: January 21; 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to sign a Letter to our Senators and State Representative stating our Opposition to Senate Bill 1483. REPORT: Senator Frank Murkowski, Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee has introduced a bill (S. 1483) to amend the Internal Revenue Code to address the treatment of tax-exempt electric facility bonds of municipal utilities that elect to participate in an "open access plan", as part of a deregulated electric energy market. The effect of the bill would appear to require Ukiah to decide between: a) Absorbing huge increases in debt-service costs associated with replacement of our existing tax-exempt debt to taxable debt; or b) Abandon participation in the electric market place, including future plans to join the California Independent System Operator (ISO) and provide customers with direct access options. The bill's chief feature is an irrevocable election with two conditions that must be satisfied before a Municipal Utility may participate in an open access plan without retroactively jeopardizing the tax exemption of its electric system bonds. ( Continued Page 2 ) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the Mayor to sign letter to Senators and Representative opposing Senate Bill 1483. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Direct Staff as to Council's Alternative. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachment:l) Executive Summary of S. 1483 2) Draft Letter APPROVED.{"{~ Candace Horsley, City'~anager ( Page 2 ) The first condition would require a municipal utility to forego all future tax-exempt electric system financing beginning the first date on which it participates in an open access plan. The second condition generally would require the municipal utility to redeem all of its outstanding electric system obligations within six months after the later of (i) the earliest date on which such obligations can be redeemed and (ii) the date on which the election is made. The scope of the bill's redemption requirement is especially onerous because it appears to require all of a municipal utility's tax-exempt debt be retired, even if only a portion of the municipal utility's assets are used in an open access plan. Thus, for example, if an municipal Utility were merely to open its service territory to outside energy providers, wheeling energy through its distribution system strictly on the basis of published 'tariff" rates available to all similarly - situated retail customers, the municipal utiltiy's tax-exempt distribution system bonds, together with any tax-exempt transmission system or generating plant bonds, would be subjected to the redemption requirement of S. 1483. The same result would apply under S. 1483 if the municipal utility committed its bond-financed transmission assets to the open access plan embodied in the ISO, even distribution asset bonds would be subject to redemption. This result is in stark contrast to the current state and federal tax law pertaining to distribution assets Under this bill, the City of Ukiah would be faced with either replacing or defeasing all of our tax-exempt electric system debt or remain on the sidelines as the rest of the electric industry enters the era of open access and deregulated markets. Staff recommends that we oppose Senate Bill 1483. Attached for your review is a summary of this bill produced by Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe. [' RRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE MEMORANDUM Electric Industry Restructuring- Summary of Senate Bill 1483 (Murkowski) Background On November 8, 1997, Senator Frank Murkowski, Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, introduced a bill, S. 1483 (the "Bill"), to amend the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code") to address the treatment of tax-exempt electric output facility bonds of a municipal utility that elects to participate in an "open access plan'a as part of a deregulated electric energy market. The Bill is an outgrowth of the legal analysis reflected in the report of the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (the "Report") released on October 17, 1997, on the subject of federal income tax issues related to the restructuring of the electric industry.'- The Report was prepared at the request of Senator Murkowski and, despite its many troubling aspects, formed the analytical foundation for S. 1483. We have reviewed S. 1483 to determine its potential impacts, particularly in light of the stated objectives of many California MOUs to participate in California's open access arrangements by: (i) opening an MOU's service territory to competition, allowing outside electric energy providers to serve the MOU's historic retail customers; (ii) entering into contracts with existing retail customers to preserve customer base; and (iii) participating fully in California's Independent System Operator ("ISO") and Power Exchange ("PX"). These objectives, of course, can only be optimized if it is possible to preserve the tax- exempt status of the MOU's outstanding electric system obligations without immediately redeeming, defeasing or otherwise providing for the retirement of such obligations. Effects of the Bill S. 1483 appears to require MOUs to decide between incurring substantial immediate expense to provide for the retirement of their tax-exempt electric system debt and abandoning some or all of the goals described above. The Bill's chief feature is an irrevocable election with two conditions that must be satisfied before an MOU may participate in an open access plan without retroactively jeopardizing the tax exemption of its electric system bonds. The first condition would require an MOU to forego all future tax-exempt electric system financing beginning the first date on which it participates in an open access plan. The second condition generally would require the MOU to redeem all of its outstanding electric l In the Bill, an "open access plan" is defined as (i) a plan by a State to allow more than 1 electric energy provider to offer such energy in a State authorized competitive market or (ii) a plan established or approved by an order issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission which requires or allows transmission of electric energy on behalf of another person. 2 We have previously circulated a memorandum (a copy of which is attached hereto) analyzing the issues discussed and conclusions reached in the Report. 01997 Orrick, Henington & Suteliffe LLP Conclusion system obligations within six months after the later of (i) the earliest date on which such obligations can be redeemed and (ii) the date on which the election is made? While the Bill in some circumstances would allow m-exempt bonds to remain outstanding for substantial periods of time, bondholders (together with credit providers) may require that provisions for defeasance of these obligations be made~ simultaneously with the irrevocable election required by S. 1483. This could mean that taxable refundings would have to be undertaken without delay and that the benefits of tax-exempt financing would quickly disappear. In addition, many MOUs would be foreclosed from participating in the deregulated electric markets because of the additional costs that taxable refundings of all electric system debt would impose on them. The sweep of the Bill's redemption requirement is especially onerous because it appears to require all of an MOU's tax-exempt debt be retired, even if only a portion of the MOU's assets are used in an open access plan. Thus, for example, if an MOU were merely to open its service territory to outside energy providers, wheeling energy through its distribution system strictly on the basis of published '~tariff" rates available to all similarly-situated retail customers, the MOU's tax-exempt distribution system bonds, together with any tax-exempt transmission system or generating plant bonds, would be subjected to the redemption requirement of S. 1483. The same result would apply under S. 1483 if the MOU committed its bond-financed transmission assets to the open access plan embodied in the ISO---even distribution asset bonds would be subject to redemption. This result is in stark contrast to the current state of federal tax law pertaining to distribution assets. Private Business Use Exceptions Separately, S. 1483 would, for the first time, enact into statutory law four private business use exceptions for sales of electric output, implying that there are no other permissible transactions with private business entities. These exceptions are much narrower than the exceptions Treasury proposed in 1994 and was expected to adopt this year. Under these exceptions, even a sale to another MOU would be precluded if that MOLl participates in open access. Effective Date The amendments made by the Bill would apply to all sales of output after November 8, 1997. This effective date provision has at least two troublesome features. First, unlike most tax bills, the standards imposed by S. 1483 would be retroactive from the date of enactment to an earlier date. This "reach back" means that MOUs must carefully consider today whether their current output sale arrangements and their plans for open access participation would satisfy a set of legal standards that have not yet been enacted into law. Even more perplexing is the "sale" terminology of this effective date provision. By referring to "sales" after the effective date, rather than to "sale contracts" entered into after such date, the Bill may call into question the status of existing contracts that do not satisfy its requirements, at least to the extent sales continue to be made under such contracts after the effective date. 3 This requirement applies to obligations issued before December 1, 1997. For obligations issued after November 30, 1997, and before the date of participation in open access redemptions must take place within six months after the earlier of (i) the earliest date on which such obligations can be redeemed and (ii) 10 years after the enactment of S. 1483. It is unclear whether any bonds could be issued after the date of participation in open access without the risk that the bonds would become taxable retroactively. [~RRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE u_~ MEMORANDUM JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION REPORT ON INCOME TAX EFFECTS OF ELECTRIC INDUSTRY RESTRUCTURING The Staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (the "Joint Committee") of the U.S. Congress recently released a report (the "Report") that purports to be a comprehensive analysis of the income tax issues that arise in connection with efforts to restructure the electric power industry in the United States. The Report was prepared in response to an April 1997 request from Senator Murkowski, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to the Joint Committee to explain current federal tax law as it relates to the electric industry including the use of tax-exempt financings for municipal electric facilities. While the Report provides a summary of the existing income tax provisions relating to tax-exempt financings of municipal electric facilities, it does not contain an accurate analysis of those provisions as they relate to many of the tax issues arising in connection with public power financings. Indeed, in several respects it reaches conclusions contrary to current interpretations and it ignores the existence of provisions of certain Treasury Regulations that may apply to certain transactions. A first reading of the Report appears to provide a disturbing picture for the municipal electric industry as it moves forward. However, a more thorough and careful reading of the assumed facts and the analysis set forth in the examples in the Report indicates strongly that it provides much less definition and fewer insights than one would otherwise be led to believe. There are at least three major areas in which the Report appears to be contrary to existing law and analysis. First, the Report appears to take a different view than current industry practice of the type of contracts that municipal utilities may enter into without giving rise to "private use." For example, the Report may conclude that "requirements contracts" entere~l into with retail customers create private use problems. This conclusion is contrary to existing authorities including at least one private letter ruling in which the IRS approved a requirements contract entered into by a municipally-owned utility ("MOIY') with a wholesale customer. Second, the Report ignores the existence of certain "change in use" provisions contained in the current Treasury Regulations. Specifically, such provisions would treat an MOU as not taking "deliberate action" to the extent such action is taken in response to a "regulatory directive made by the federal government." This provision is particularly relevant in the context of municipal utilities' responses to open access initiatives being taken around the country. The example ignores the possibility that an MOU which makes its transmission facilities available to an independent system operator should be viewed as taking such action in response to the Federal open access initiatives (e._~. the 1992 amendments to the Energy Policy Act and FERC Order 888). The discussion in the Report seems to conclude that joining an "independent system ~1997 Orriek, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP operator" (an "ISO") constitutes "deliberate action" without regard to whether or not it is in response to these Federal directives. Finally, the Report appears to conclude that a municipal electric facility may not be financed, even in part, where more than 10% of the facility will be privately used. However, to the contrary, the governmental use portion of a public power facility can be financed with tax-exempt bonds so long as no more than 10% of that portion of the facility is privately used. The "heart" of the Report as it relates to public power is contained in five examples, more fully described below, which purport to describe the types of arrangements and resulting tax problems that will arise as municipal utilities move forward into a more competitive electric industry. These examples, however, are deficient in a number of respects, either in a description of the facts, which often would be materially different in the "real" world, or in the legal conclusions reached based upon the facts as given. In several instances, even accepting the facts as given, we believe a more favorable conclusion either can, or should, be reached than that portrayed in the examples. To the extent the Report and the examples discussed below create the impression that the municipal electric industry is faced with unsolveable tax problems without legislative relief, that is clearly an unfortunate and erroneous result of this Report. We believe that, in many cases, the type of contracts, pricing arrangements provided by municipal utilities, and other facts surrounding the different types of transactions will in fact lead to more favorable conclusions, even under existing law. Equally important, whereas the Report appears to describe a high level of certainty, some clarification from Treasury in the pending output regulations would provide needed guidance without any material change in law. Below is a detailed description of the examples contained in the Report: Example 1: The Joint Committee's first example describes the situation in which an MOU has elected to participate in its State's open access plan. In order to avoid losing one of its large industrial customers, the MOU enters into a long-term contract with its customer which matches the prices offered by an independent power producer, which had attempted to enter into a contract with this industrial customer. The example indicates that the prices offered by the MOU matched the competing offer, but were at rates different than those generally available to its other customers. While the industrial customer used only 5% of the electricity supplied by the MOU, that amount comprised more than $15 million of the output of the MOU's electric facilities.. The example concludes that the contract with the industrial customer causes there to be excess private use and that the MOU needs to take remedial action (i.e., redemption of bonds) in order to preserve the tax-exemption of its previously issued bonds. The example seems unduly harsh in a number of respects and leaves unstated facts which would likely lead to more favorable results. First, while unclear, it appears that the MOU's contract with its industrial customer was a "requirements" contract. Essentially, all retail distribution arrangements are requirements contracts, in that under the traditional electric supply monopoly approach, all retail customers have a fight to obtain electric supply from the local electric company. Moreover, the IRS has issued rulings approving requirements contracts in the wholesale context where, if anything, such contracts should be more problematic. Treating retail requirements contracts as giving rise to private use would be revolutionary. Second, while the example indicates that the prices offered by the MOU were not the same as generally available tariffs, most MOUs which are now negotiating with retail customers are, in fact, offering similar rates to similarly situated customers. Indeed, in many states, utilities may not offer preferential rates to comparable customers. Third, the example ignores the possibility, and perhaps likelihood, that the MOU would have multiple facilities financed with separate bond issues which would, under current law, entitle each separate project to its own $15 million limit. Thus, multiple $15 million limits may be available. Moreover, the example also ignores the possibility, and likelihood, that the MOU would have "equity-financed" facilities to which it could allocate the sales made under any contract giving rise to private use. Example 2: This example describes another situation in which an MOU has elected to participate in its state's open access plan. As a result of"opening its doors,"'a neighboring investor-owned utility CIOU") is now supplying electricity to two of the MOU's largest retail, industrial customers. Thus, the MOU has excess generating capacity of more than 10% of its overall capacity, which it contracts to sell to an energy broker pursuant to a firm price, long-term contract. The example also points out that the contract with the energy broker is at a rate different than the regular tariff rates for the MOU's retail customers. The example concludes that the firm price contract between the MOU and the energy broker creates private use in excess of the permitted 10% and therefore the MOU must take remedial action in order to preserve the tax- exemption on its bonds. At first read, the conclusion reached in Example 2 appears to be correct. However, a number of additional facts likely would exist in the real world which would make the result either much less clear or cause the conclusion to be to the contrary. For example, the statement of facts does not indicate, and therefore assumes, that the MOU has no generating facilities which have been financed with equity. The existence of such facilities could allow the MOU to allocate private sales to its equity financed generating plants, avoiding any private-use problems. The example also fails to acknowledge that the MOU may have a number of generating units, each financed with different bond issues and each with its own 10% limit, so that the contract could be allocated to a number of generating units without violating the limits on any single bond issue. Example 3: This example is based on facts similar to Example 2, in which the MOU is selling its excess capacity to an energy broker for resale pursuant to a firm price long-term contract having different rates than the utility's tariff prices to its regular customers. After entering into the contract for more than 10% of its capacity, the MOU decides that it must make improvements to its generating plant. The example concludes that the MOU "may not issue tax-exempt bonds to finance the improvements because an amount exceeding the lesser of 10% or $15 million of the output of the facility is used in a private business use and a like amount of the debt service on its bonds is secured by such payments." Moreover, the "result in this example is identical whether the additional debt would be used to finance repairs and maintenance activities or improvements to the facility." The example is not entirely clear, but it appears to state that no further tax-exempt bonds can be issued to finance any portion of this facility because more than 10% of such improvements will be used to make "impermissible" sales. If that result was intended, the example is in error. Congress itself, in 1986, recognized that there could be separate financings of the governmental and private use portions of output facilities. In the Conference Committee Report on the Tax Reform Act of 1986, a governmental utility agreed to sell 10% of the output ora $500 million facility to an investor-owned utility. The Conference Committee Report provided several examples clearly contemplating that although there is private use in excess of the applicable limitation, the governmental use portion of such facilities can be financed with tax-exempt bonds. If such is true of the original financing, it must be equally true of any separate financing for improvements or repairs. The IRS has also consistently recognized that the governmental portion of an output facility can be financed, although there is private use of the balance of a facility. In a 1992 private letter ruling the IRS held that the governmental portion of an output facility could be financed with governmental bonds, although more than 25% of the output was being taken by private utilities. The IRS again recognized the validity of this approach in its proposed regulations in 1994, in which it stated that, in the case of a mixed use facility such as an output facility, governmental undivided interests and amounts that were analogous to governmental undivided interests could be financed without regard to the amount of non-governmental use. To illustrate, if a power plant were owned 50% each by a governmental utility and a private utility, clearly 50% could be financed on a tax-exempt basis. If instead of ownership, the private utility only had the right to the output of 50% of the facility, there can be no policy reason for concluding the governmental portion may not be financed with tax-exempt debt. Moreover, if instead the private utility only had the right to 50% of the facility's output for less than the term of the bonds, there is even less of a reason why at least 50% of the facility should not be financable on a tax-exempt basis. · Thus, the suggestion in Example 3 that, because there is more than 10% private use, none of the facility may be financed with tax-exempt bonds cannot be 'correct under current law. The Example therefore must be read as saying nothing more than the privately used portion of the repairs or improvements may not be financed with bonds. Example 4: In Example 4, an MOU agrees to participate in its state's open access plan, which requires that it permit IOUs to use its transmission and distribution facilities in serving its retail customers. The MOU enters into a transmission agreement with IOUs "under fixed contractual terms" that permits the IOUs to sell electricity to the MOU's former retail customers. With few additional facts, the example concludes that the MOU has taken a deliberate action that violates the private-use restrictions. The facts and analysis in this example are deficient in several respects which again could, or should, lead to different and probably better results. First, we are not told whether the "fixed contractual terms" are for a short or long period of time, with fixed or variable pricing (although there is an implication that the price is fixed), or whether the prices for either the transmission or distribution services were generally available tariffs or whether they were specially negotiated. While a long-term, specifically negotiated arrangement might well give rise to private use, a relatively short-term (at least up to 90 days) agreement on terms that are generally available would not constitute private use under the present Treasury Regulations. This example contains, for the first time, a suggestion that open access plans would create private use issues for distribution facilities. Presumably, either or both of the competing IOUs and the retail electric customers within the MOU's traditional service territory would constitute customers of the MOU for distribution services. Moreover, such distribution services would be provided by the MOU under generally applicable tariffs. Thus, no private use of the distribution facilities should arise. Another problem with the analysis is that the example does not seem.to permit any allocation of private use to non-bond financed portions (if any) of the MOU's system. Under the 1994 proposed regulations, if the "contract path" or other appropriate allocation can be made to non-bond financed facilities, no private use would arise. Even if allocable to facilities that are partially bond financed, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 Conference Report, as previously noted, states that private use can be allocated first to the non-bond financed portion thereof. As in the other examples there is an implication that there is only one $15 million limit per system. As mentioned earlier, under both the Code, which applies the $15 million limit to facilities that are part of the same "project," as well as the 1994 proposed Treasury Regulations, that implication is simply wrong. Finally, the example gives no information to conclude whether the transmission agreement was voluntary or, rather, an appropriate response to FERC's deregulation orders. If not voluntary, the MOU's participation in open access (and perhaps its agreements with the IOUs) would not constitute a prohibited change in use. Example 5: In Example 5, control (but apparently not ownership or possession) of all of the transmission facilities in the State would be eligible to be transferred to an independent system operator CISO"). In the example, the ISO is an agency of the State and qualifies as a "governmental unit". The ISO would operate all transmission facilities over which it assumes operating control "as a single system without regard to whether electricity transmitted over any given facilities constituted private business use." An MOU owns electric transmission facilities in the State, all of which apparently were financed with tax-exempt bonds that were not previously treated as "private activity bonds." As with several of the other examples, this example ignores the possibility that participation in the ISO arrangement should be treated as an appropriate response to "federal regulatory directives," such as the 1992 amendments to the Energy Policy Act and FERC Order 888. This could be the conclusion even though the example states that the MOU elected to participate in the ISO. If this conclusion were reached, the MOU would not be treated as having taken any deliberate action. Open access plans might permit owners of transmission facilities to turn operating control of their transmission facilities over to the ISO subject to contractual limitations that are designed to preserve the tax-exempt status of bonds issued to finance those transmission facilities. For example, an ISO might be contractually precluded from using bond-financed facilities to provide transmission service to nongovernmental persons for periods exceeding 90 days, which would avoid private use issues. However, Example 5 assumes that no such contractual encumbrance is imposed upon the ISO's use of transmission facilities over which it assumes operating control. Consequently, Example 5 states that interest on the MOU's bonds issued to finance transmission facilities will be retroactively taxable i_f the ISO "uses A's transmission facilities in a manner violating the Code private business tests" unless it takes "remedial actions" described in Treasury Regulations. However, the example does not describe the circumstances under which ISO' operation would create impermissible private use. Indeed, there appears to be an implication that an ISO might operate publicly-owned facilities to provide transmission service to nongovernmental persons in a manner that does not violate the private business tests. For example, if the ISO makes facilities available to provide transmission service only pursuant to generally applicable tariffs (or cost of service based tariffs), there might not be any private business use. Such operating arrangements appear to be the norm as ISOs go into operation. In a final parenthetical clause, Example 5 provides that the private business test would be violated as soon as operating control of transmission facilities are turned over to an ISO that is organized as a "private entity rather than a unit of State government". This clause seems to assume that the private ISO takes over operating control pursuant to a contract or other arrangement that violates the private use test. However, the private use test would not be violated if the ISO receives compensation which represents only reimbursement of"actual and direct expenses" paid to unrelated third parties or under a management contract that satisfias certain IRS ruling guidelines. In addition, participation in the ISO could be viewed, as mentioned earlier, as an appropriate response to Federal regulatory directives in which case no deliberate action will have occurred. Finally, if the ISO can be organized as a private nonprofit corporation which qualifies for treatment under Section 501 (c)(3) of the Code, the tax-exempt status of bonds issued before-September 1, 1986 to finance transmission facilities generally should not be impaired by the ISO use. The tax-exempt status of such bonds issued on or at~er September 1, 1986 might be impaired unless the ISO can avoid being treated as a "test period beneficiary" with respect to the bonds. Conclusion Overall, the Report is a troublesome piece of work that reaches negative conclusions in a number of circumstances where more favorable results could be achievable. While the municipal electric industry faces a host of challenges, some of its federal tax problems could be more easily resolved than is suggested by the Report. For more information, please call any of the Ordck tax lawyers listed below, each of whom participated in the preparation of this memorandum. Los Angeles New York San Francisco Larry D. Sobel 213/612-2421 Richard Nicholls 212/506-5175 George G. Wolf 415/773-5988 Antonio D. Martini 213/612-2285 Richard Chirls 212/506-5250 Dean Criddle 415/773-5783 300 VE.,UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 · ADMIN. 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC SAFETY 463-6242/6274 · · FAX # 707/463-6204 · January 21', 1997 The Honorable Dianne Feinstein 331 Senate Hart Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Subject: Opposition to Senate Bill 1483 (Murkowski) - Electric Industry Restructuring Dear Senator Feinstein: On November 8, 1997, Senator Frank Murkowski, Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, introduced a bill (S. 1483) to amend the Internal Revenue Code to address the treatment of tax-exempt electric output facility bonds of municipal utilities that elect to participate in an" open access plan," as part of a deregulated electric energy market. The Bill requires issuers of tax-exempt bonds to redeem these bonds if the issuer participates in a "open access plan." As a practical matter, most municipalities could only redeem their tax-exempt debt by issuing taxable debt to replace it. The City of Ukiah is a member of the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) and the Transmission Agency of Northern California (TANC), both California Joint Powers Agencies with over $2.0 billion in tax-exempt bonds between them financing multiple electric generation facilities and transmission facilities in California. The effect of the bill appears to require Ukiah to decide between: a) Absorbing huge increases in debet-service costs associated with the replacement of existing debt; or b) Abandoning participation in the electric market place, including future plans to join the California Independent System Operator and provide customers with direct access options. We strongly urge you to oppose S. 1483. Under the provisions of S. 1483, if NCPA and TANC were to participate in the restructured "YVe Are Here To Serve" marketplace, the increase in annual debt-service costs to NCPA members with regard to their NCPA and TANC obligations would amount to over $18,000,000 per year, on average, and over $509,000,000 over the life of the replacement taxable debt. Ukiah's share of this increased cost is $792,000 and $22,000,000, respectively. This sum of money is an astronomical price to pay for participation in a restructured electric industry. Our rate payers are hammed under either alternative, and burden of stranded cost recovery for the City of Ukiah is substantially increased. For the reasons stated above, the City of Ukiah strongly urges you to oppose S. 1483. Sincerely, Sheridan Malone Mayor ITEM NO. 6 k DATE: JANUARY 21. 199g AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECI': AWARD OF BID FOR VARIOUS POLE AND PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMERS AND REJECTION OF BIDS FOR 5 AND 10 KVA PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMERS REPORT: A Request for Quotation (RFQ) was written to purchase transformers of 14 different sizes. Requests through the formal bid process were sent to six suppliers. Six bids were received from the following five suppliers, and opened by the City Clerk on January 12, 1998, at 2:00 p.m. 1. G. E. SUPPLY CO. 2. WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC (Bidding on both Cooper & Pauwels) 3. WESCO 4. CHRIS STEPHENS 5. GRAYBAR (Report continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1) Award bids totaling $111,509.64 as follows: Pad mount transformers: one 1000 KVA, two 500 KVA, and five 37.5 KVA to Wesco for $42,744.28; two 150 KVA, one 300 KVA, two 500 KVA, and three 25 KVA to Western States for $41,543.30; Pole mount transformers: five 25 KVA, five 37.5 KVA, and five 50 KVA to Western States for $12,146.07; five 75 KVA to Wesco for $7,490.23; and five 100 KVA to General Electric for $7,555.76. 2) Reject and re-solicit bid for 5 KVA and 10 KVA Pad Mount Transformers due to incorrect item description in Request for Quotation. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject all bids and direct Staffto re-advertise and re-solicit bids. Acct. No. (If NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Stan Bartolomei, Electric Supervisor Prepared by: Judy Jenndy, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Bid Tabulation 800-3646-420-000 Approved: Cand~ace ~Iorsley, City M~ager Bids were evaluated based on price, delivery time, load losses and physical size. The bids are total cost, including tax and shipping. Based on staff's evaluation the qualified bidder for each unit is as follows: ITEM QUANTITY/DESCRIPTION QUALIFIED BIDDER TOTAL 1 1 - 1000 KVA, Pad Mount Transformer Wesco $13,882.92 2 2 - 150 KVA, Pad Mount Transformers Western States (Cooper) $11,679.53 3 1 - 300 KVA, Pad Mount Transformers Western States (Cooper) $7,169.66 4 2 - 500 KVA, 208Y/277 Volt Pad Mount Transformers Wesco $16,903.54 5 2 - 500 KVA, 480Y/277 Volt Pad Mount Transformers Western States (Cooper) $17,513.93 6 3 - 25 KVA Pad Mount Transformers Western States (Cooper) $5,180.18 7 5 - 37.5 KVA Pad Mount Transformers Wesco $11,987.82 8 5 - 5 KVA Pad Mount Transformers To be rebid 9 5 - 10 KVA Pad Mount Transformers To be rebid 10 5 - 25 KVA Pole Mount Transformers Westem States (Cooper) $3,619.69 11 5 - 37.5 KVA Pole Mount Transformers Western States (Cooper) $3,914.63 12 5 - 50 KVA Pole Mount Transformers Western States (Cooper) $4,611.75 13 5 - 75 KVA Pole Mount Transformers Wesco $7,490.23 14 5 - 100 KVA Pole Mount Transformers G.E. Supply $7,555.76 TOTAL AMOUNT OF BIDS $111,509.64 In selecting best qualified bidders for each item, City electrical staff set the following criteria.' Pad Mount Transformers: 1. A maximum of 60" height for esthetic reasons 2. A maximum delivery time of 17 weeks 3. A low 20 year cost of ownership Pole Mount Transformers: 1. A maximum diameter of 30" for transformers rating 25-50 KVA; a maximum diameter of 35" for transformers rating 75-100 KVA 2. A maximum delivery time of 10 weeks (essential for reconductor program) 3. A low 20 year cost of ownership Items 8 and 9 will be rebid due to incorrect item description. In the case of item 14 General Electric exceeded delivery time, however circuit protector switch required by specification was not supplied by next lowest bidder Western States. Based on this evaluation General Electric was selected. RECOMMENDED QU;tLIFIED BIDDERS TABLE TRANSFORMERS ITEM I ITEM 2 ITEM 3 ITF/~ 4 ITEM 5 SUPPLIER TOTAL BID PLUS EVALUATED 7.25% TAX 20 YR. COST MEETS SPECIFIC2%TIONS I EA 1000 KVA 3 PHASE PAD MOUNT 12000 V PRI 480Y/277 V SEC GE SUPPLY $ 16,189.39 $ WESTERN STATES $ 14,478.75 $ WESCO $ 13,882.92 $ WESTERN STATES $ 14,306.08 $ CHRIS STEPHENS NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 20,635.96 23,971.09 24,846.94 27,687.85 2 EA 150 KVA 3 PHASE PA/) MOUNT 12000 V PRI 208Y/120 V SEC GE SUPPLY $ 13,348.34 $ WESTERN STATES $ 11,540.10 $ WESTERN STATES $ 11,679.53 $ WESCO $ 12,294.95 $ CHRIS STEPHENS NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 14,462.61 14,483.46 14,801.59 17,119.95 i EA 300 KVA i PHASE PAD MOU1TT 12000 V PRI 480Y/277 V SEC GE SUPPLY $ 9,874.51 $ WESTERN STATES $ 7,722.00 $ WESTERN STATES $ 7,169.66 $ WESCO $ 7,882.31 $ CHRIS STEPHENS NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 12,607.63 12,704.69 12,888.19 13,590.32 2 EA 500 KVA 3 PHASE PAD MOUNT 12000 V PRI 208Y/120 V SEC GE SUPPLY $ 21,194.75 $ WESCO $ 16,903.54 $ WESTERN STATES $ 19,701.83 $ WESTERN STATES $ 17,964.38 $ CHRIS STEPHENS NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 23,864.79 24,861.13 26,366.43 26,741.90 2 EA 500 KVA 3 PHASE PAD MOUNT 12000 V PRI 480Y/277 V SEC GE SUPPLY $ 20,448.29 $ WESTERN STATES $ 18,704.40 $ WESTERN STATES $ 17,513.93 $ WESCO $ 21,799.72 $ CHRIS STEPHENS NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 23,181.41 25,295.42 25,702.77 29,231.70 ITEM 6 3 EA 25 KVA i PHASE PAD MOUNT 12000 V PRI 240Y/120 V SEC CHRIS STEPHENS $ WESTERN STATES $ WESCO $ WESTERN STATES NO BID GE SUPPLY NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 6,756.75 $ 5,747.82 5,180.18 $ 6,584.56 5,974.87 $ 7,597.71 RECOMMENDED QUALIFIED BIDDERS TABLE TRANSFORMERS ITEM 7 ITEM 10 ITEM 11 ITEM 12 ITEM 13 ITEM 14 5 EA 37.5 K'VA i PHASE PAD MOUNT 12000 V PRI 240Y/120 V SEC WESTERN STATES $ 7,775.63 WESCO $ 11,987.82 CHRIS STEPHENS $ 12,430.28 WESTERN STATES NO BID GE SUPPLY NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID $ 8,637.61 $ 12,723.66 $ 13,481.48 5 EA 25 KVA i PHASE POLE MOU1T~ 12000 V PRI 120/240 V SEC WESCO $ 3,298.26 $ 3,907.96 GE SUPPLY $ 3,480.26 $ 4,184.57 WESTERN STATES $ 3,619.69 $ 4,250.41 CHRIS STEPHENS $ 5,475.11 $ 6,242.49 WESTERN STATES NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 5 EA 37.5 KVA 1 PHASE POLE MOUNT 12000 V PRI 240/120 V SEC WESTERN STATES $ 3,914.63 $ 4,776.61 WESCO $ 3,771.07 $ 5,305.82 GE SUPPLY $ 4,643.93 $ 5,474.37 CHRIS STEPHENS $ 6,322.39 $ 7,278.98 WESTERN STATES NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 5 EA 50 KVA i PHASE POLE MOUNT 12000 V PRI 120/240 V SEC WESCO $ 4,422.67 $ WESTERN STATES $ 4,611.75 $ GE SUPPLY $ 6,081.08 $ CHRIS STEPHENS $ 7,673.74 $ WESTERN STATES NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 5,326.70 5,547.32 7,268.93 8,745.96 5 EA 75 KVA i PHASE POLE MOI/NT 12000 V PRI 240/120 V SEC WESCO $ 7,490.23 $ WESTERN STATES $ 7,389.53 $ GE SUPPLY $ 8,322.60 $ CHRIS STEPHENS $ 10,001.06 $ WESTERN STATES NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 8,457.34 8,861.21 9,531.48 11,714.52 5 EA 100 KVA i PHASE POLE MOUNT 12000 V PRI 240/120 V SEC GE SUPPLY $ 7,555.76 $ WESTERN STATES $ 9,196.69 $ WESCO $ 10,090.78 $ CHRIS STEPHENS $ 13,744.09 $ WESTERN STATES NO BID GRAYBAR NO BID 9,311.27 10,636.83 11,415.29 15,531.13 61 ITEM NO. DATE' January. 21,1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING SALE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY, ASSESSOR'S PARCEL No. 156-160-06 & 156-180-03 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS At the December 3, 1997 meeting the City Council approved the sale of two adjoining parcels located on Low Gap Road and identified as Assessor's Parcel No's. 156-160-06 and 156-180-03. The title company processing the sale has subsequently requested a resolution approving the sale and specifically granting authority to the City Manager for execution of the agreements. Staff has prepared a draft resolution complying with the requirements of the title company and is recommending adoption. RECOMMENDED ACTION' execute agreements. Adopt Resolution approving sale and authorizing City Manager to ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Redwood Title Company Prepared by: Larry W. DeKnoblough, Assistant Redevelopment Director Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Draft Resolution APPROVED: '~' ~,f '~r~ .... ~1 Candace Horsley, City ~anager LD prop.asr RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH APPROVING SALE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ukiah periodically is required to identify and declare various properties under its ownership and having no forseeable public use, as surplus; and WHEREAS, the properties identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 156-160-06 and 156-180-03 have been declared surplus property by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has conducted a duly noticed public bid for sale of the property; and WHEREAS, a single bid in the amount of $13,000 was submitted by Mr. Martin Kamp. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Uldah hereby approves the sale of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 156-160-06 and 156-180-03 to Mr. Martin Kamp in the amount of $13,000 and authorizes the City Manager to execute all necessary sales agreements. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of January, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk Resolution No. Page 1 of 1 ITEM NO. 6m DATE: JANUARY 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS REQUESTED PURSUANT TO VEHICLE CODE SECTION 40215 California Vehicle Code Section 40215 stipulates that parking citation administrative hearings be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the governing body or chief executive officer. The written procedures are documented in the attached resolution and Staff recommends adoption. The process provides for the independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested parking violations. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Establishing Procedures for Conducting Administrative Hearings Requested Pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 40215. ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine modifications to the proposed procedures are necessary, identify the changes, and adopt revised resolution. Acct. No. (If NOT budgeted): Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No. N/A N/A Michael F. Harris, Assistant City Manager David Rapport, City Attorney and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution for adoption, pages 1-8. APPROVED: mfh:asrcc98 0121 PARKING Candace Horsley, (~tY ~anager RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS REQUESTED PURSUANT TO VEHICLE CODE SECTION 40215. WHEREAS, 1. Division 17, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Vehicle Code (commencing with section 40200) ("Article 3") provides administrative procedures and civil remedies for enforcing parking restrictions in cities and counties; and 2. Vehicle Code Section 40215 requires agencies issuing parking citations (an "issuing agency") under Article 3 to review a citation and conduct an administrative hearing at the request of any person; and 3. Vehicle Code Section 40215 contains requirements and procedures governing such a review and administrative hearing. However, under that section the City Council is required to adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the parking penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due. In addition, the City is required to conduct the administrative hearing in accordance with written procedures approved by the City Council; and 4. The City conducts reviews and administrative hearings as required by Article 3; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. General: The City shall conduct its review of parking citations requested by any person and any requested administrative heatings in full compliance with Vehicle Code Section 40215 as it now reads or as it may be hereafter amended ("Section 40215"), and this resolution. This resolution will not restate procedures or requirements contained in Section 40215, which are incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. (A copy of Section 40215 as it now reads is attached hereto as Exhibit "A.") As used herein "days" means calendar days, unless otherwise stated. 2. Procedure to request hearing without payment of parking penalty. Except as provided in this section, any person requesting an administrative hearing ("claimant") must first pay the parking penalty owing under the notice of violation. If paying the penalty would impose a financial hardship on the claimant, the City shall conduct the hearing without requiring the claimant to pay the penalty in advance. S:\u\resos98\adminprocparking A. Standard of financial hardship. Payment will constitute a financial hardship if claimant establishes that his or her family receives public assistance, has income of no more than 80% of the median family income for Mendocino County, or paying the penalty would result in the family lacking sufficient income that month to pay for the basic necessities of life, taking into consideration its existing debts and expenses. Basic necessities includes food, shelter, clothing, utilities, transportation, and medical care. B. Procedure. A claimant may request waiver of the payment requirement by completing and submitting to the finance department the financial declaration, a copy of which is attached to this resolution as Exhibit "B"). The hearing examiner shall review the form and determine whether claimant is entitled to an administrative hearing without paying the parking penalty. The hearing examiner shall make his or her decision within two working days after receipt of the financial declaration. The hearing examiner shall notify the finance department and the claimant in writing whether or not payment is waived. If payment is not waived, the City shall not conduct an administrative hearing until the claimant pays the penalty. The hearing examiner shall uphold the citation without conducting a hearing, if the claimant has not paid the penalty before the scheduled hearing date. C. Notice. The City finance department shall provide a copy of this resolution to each person who requests a review of a parking citation. If the request is made by telephone, the finance department shall obtain the claimant's address and mail a copy of the resolution and Exhibits A and B to that address along with its decision after conducting the initial interview. Thereafter, all notices required by this resolution shall be mailed to that address, unless the notice is personally served on the claimant or the claimant notifies the City in writing of a different address. Notices shall be deemed served and received when personally delivered or when deposited in the United States mail with proper first class postage affixed and addressed as stated in this subsection. 3. Administrative hearing procedure. A. The City Manager shall designate the hearing examiner. The hearing examiner shall satisfy all of the requirements set forth in Section 40215(c)(4). The City Manager may designate a city employee who satisfies said requirements or may contract with an independent contractor. B. A claimant has a right to request an administrative heating in person, in writing or by telephone. C. Requests for hearings whether made in person, by telephone or by mail shall be made to the City's finance department, which shall transmit the request to the hearing examiner for further processing. D. The heating examiner shall schedule the hearing within the time required by S:\u\resos98\adminprocparking Section 40215 and notify the claimant in writing of the date, time and place of the hearing no later than 10 days before the scheduled hearing date. The notice shall inform the claimant of his or her right to request one continuance of the hearing date. The hearing examiner shall provide written notice of the continued hearing date not less than five days before the scheduled date. E. If the claimant requests a hearing by mail, the heating examiner shall base the decision on the notice of parking violation, any information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles, and any written submission from the claimant. The hearing examiner may provide a copy of the written submission from the claimant to the officer or person who issued the notice of violation and request a written response from that officer or person within 10 working days. If the officer or person submits a timely written response, the hearing examiner shall consider the response before making a final decision. Within 10 days of declaring the hearing closed, the hearing examiner shall issue his or her written decision and serve it on the claimant. F. If the claimant requests a hearing in person, it shall be conducted in accordance with the following rules. (1) The hearing shall be tape recorded and the tape preserved for a period of 45 days after the hearing examiner serves his or her final decision on the claimant. If the claimant files an action to review the decision pursuant to Vehicle Code §40250, the hearing examiner shall preserve the tape until a final, non-appealable judgment has been rendered in that action. A copy of the tape shall be made available upon request to the claimant or the official representing the City in the court proceeding. The City may charge the reasonable cost of copying the tape. (2) The hearing examiner shall preside at the hearing and base his or her decision on the evidence presented at the hearing, including the notice of parking violation issued to the claimant. At the beginning of the hearing, the claimant shall be asked and shall declare whether he or she admits liability for the parking penalty, admits such liability with an explanation, or denies liability. If the claimant admits liability or admits liability with an explanation, he or she may present any extenuating circumstances he or she contends warrant a reduction of the penalty or supports payment of the penalty in installments or through community service. In all cases, the claimant may present argument, comments or explanations, and evidence in the form of personal testimony, the testimony of witnesses and documents. Copies of documents shall be admissible (originals are not required) and marked as exhibits, if accepted as evidence. All documents offered or accepted into evidence shall be preserved for the same length of time as the tape recording of the hearing. The technical roles of evidence shall not apply. Witnesses shall be sworn prior to testifying. The person or officer who issued the notice of parking violation shall not be required to appear and testify, but he or she shall be given not less than five working days' notice of the hearing date, time and place. The hearing examiner shall permit the officer or person to participate and testify at the hearing. The hearing examiner shall issue a final written decision within 10 days after declaring the hearing closed. S:\u\resos98\adminprocparking G. A decision rendered under sections 3. E or F of this resolution shall either determine the claimant liable for the penalty or not liable. If the hearing examiner determines that the claimant is liable for the penalty, he or she shall determine the date by which payment must be made, and whether the penalty shall be reduced, paid in installments or paid through the performance of community service. If the claimant requests a penalty reduction or community service based on financial hardship, the hearing examiner shall require the claimant to complete and file Exhibit B, if not already filed. Community service shall be offered if the claimant satisfies any of the criteria for financial hardship in section 2.A of this resolution. A copy of the decision shall be furnished to the finance department for purposes of enforcement. Community service may be allowed only with the written agreement of the claimant. The amount of community service shall be determined at the rate of $6.00 per hour divided into the amount of the parking penalty imposed on the claimant. PASSED AND ADOPTED this m day of ,1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk S :\u\resos98\adminprocparking )E he Jet .orl lng ~a ent .~nt he ~er ~en or Lhe her ake ing dry of :ive ~ of ivio ted ted ion VEItICLE CODE ~et fm'Uh in ~ notice of parking v~oLUion ff the atarton w~ L~ued electronically' following ~etion 4Q206-; in ~ubCL fo), sub~ ~induding any applicable assess- rnent~ for '~d any applicable a~r~ent~"; and m subcL (dk mzbm~t~ "for, aad any appJicsb]e co~t~ of, § 40215 sermce in coru~ion with ~ debt collector," for "tm gerber with the administrative fee of the department established under' Section 47~, the administrative service fee of the it~uing agency fro' costs of service, and ~ny applicable a~essment~'. . ~ -"'-'-' ;(~, 'T~. ' ,?L, , " § 4021~. Review of notice of parking v~olation; 'initial re~ri~w bY' inuing agency;, admiaiatrative ...... hearing;, proce~; application of ~.ction to certain agencies .... · ;t: <~ (a) For a period of 21 calendar days f~om '":': ~" ' : '" the issuance of a n~)tice of parking violation or 14 calendar da~ from the maaing of a notice of delinquent parking violation, a person may request an initial review of~e notice by the issuing agency. The request may be made 'by telephone, in writing, or in person. There skall be no charge for this review. If, following the' initial review, the issuing agency is satired. ~ the viohtion did not occur, that the regis~ owner was not responsible for the violation, or'that ~ circumstances make dismissal of the citation appropriate in the interest of justice, the issuing "agefi~ 'shall cancel the notice of parking violation or notice of delinquent parking violation. The issuing agemy ~ advise the processing agency, ff any, of the cancellation. The issuing agenq ar the ~ agency ~ marl the results of. the initial review to the person contesting ~ notice. Mminiswafive hearing of the violation no later than 21 calendar days following the totaling of the results of the izming agency's initial review. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, or in .person. The person requesting an administrative hearing shall deposit the amount of the parking penalty with the ~ agency. The issuing agency shall wovide'awritmn'procedure to allow a person to request an admin/m-ative hearing without-l~,l/l_nent of the t~-king penalty upo.n satisfact~..ry proof of ~ the amount due. Notice of this procedure ~ be. provid.ed to all persons. .req~s~ ~g an 'i~.foll?/ng the receipt of a request for ~. administrative lu~ring,~exduding tune tolled pur~umt to "~ he~ing shall be conducted within the' ~on of the msUing agency..If an ~ agency hmtr~e~ with'an administrative provider, hearing~ shall be, held. -within_ . the jurisdict/on of i~e hsuing · ~ or'~b more than 21 nu~es.out~kle the county .... : ~ ,,,~: ...~ :.,~ :~3 ::.. ~. ~:.-.... :.~, ': ..... " - ......... ~. ,. --.~,ii~ ......... ' · .'- ~.' t~) ff the person ~questing ,-hes~mg ts g ?inor., that ..p~sonsh~,..~ p~.rmitted.to appea, r.t · or admit respons/bflity for the parldng viohtibn without the necesatty.~f the appointment, o~_ · guamma. TI~ ~ng'~ncy m~y pr~d ~ the minor in the s~me manner ~s agai~ lin adult. .. ~) The administrative hearing sh~ be conducted in secordance with written procedures esl~blished by the i~uing agency ~i approved by the govert~'tg body o~, ehief executive officer of the issuhg agency. ,~I~ ~ ~ provide ~an inde_PeT~den,.t?~ objective, fair, and impartial review of contested ~king b '(4gA) Th~ im=ing q~ent~s goverr/ng'bedy or chief executive officer sh~ll appoint or m~mct with .~./lm]i~.. ~ or adminis~tJve he~g pro~id~ that employ qualifi~/d 'examiners to emtduct the L~thre hesrings. Ex~iners sh/dl demonstrate those qualifications, training,,.;uzl objectivity m~m~y'to conduct s fair ~:l imlm'~.review. Anexmniner shall.~ot be~employed, mmmgod, or 4'"'~lled by .a person who~ prim~ duti~'~e parking ~forcemem, parking citat/on,.~, :~n~ or issuance. The examiner ~ be separate m~i,independent from the: citation mile~Jon or ~ function. An exm~ne~s continued employment, p~....ormanee.evalu~tion, competition, and -_]I~tl.~l,All-.not, directly or indirectly, be linked/o t. he amount 'bf fines collected' by .the ex~niner. h,,e'a m m 'oi':0 'ho or The a reS' o=' "rl the ~i~of'the~. The kmfing agev~ mi~y roimburse the ex~niner, for. th~'co$ .t~ Trah/~ may be ~'thrOugh (i) an mmx, dit~ collego .or university, (ii) a program conducted by the Commission on .l~m~ Oflfeer Stm~lm~h ~d'~ (iii).Amori=n Arbitr~t/on .A~tion .or a simihr established .~m/o~ or (iv) through ~y program ~pproved 'by the g~/ng board of the ~ im~ding .~ program developed and provided by, or for, th~' ageney; Training programs my include :tq~ ~t to the ~ ~, ineim~g, b~t/tot limited'to, applicable laws ~td regula- e, tion.' 0t e dence, 3~i/ve. ~ ~! written communi~tio~ Upon the approval '6f the; gOverning board of ~e. m~ung - .;~'__'~i~' to 12 hours of relevant experienee may be subst/tated for u_qp to.. 12 hours of tmmmg.. In ~ up to eight hours of the tr~_ ~i%~'.~luireme~ described in this subparagraph maybe credited m ~ 'mdivid~ at the di.~rs~ of the. gover~g board of the'i~suing' agency, based upon trmning Additimm or ~ indkm~ by underltne;.~.deletRms by aster~lm. · : EXHIBIT A, P. 1 of 2 § 40215 vEmCLE CODR'. · r_~ ....... ~.~-._.--~.;-~,~? or ~, ~ ~ m~ormauon rece~m from ~e Uepsrmmnt of Mo~r~ prnna f~e evidence of the ~,. ~:..,,~**.*** =. .~.~ . . ~.- ,'i ' '* the~ (6) The examiner's decision fo]lowing the ~ hearing may be['~:n~ deUvered to · *"' · ...... ' .... Jr,* *.: ~ Following a detem~n by the examin~ tl~ a person has eon~tted .the violatio~ the ' may allow payment of the parking penalty in inmihnents, or an issuing sgeney may allow for deferred -----~.m,~.~ u,y mm' ~ * ' ' · · gvvermng . ,~ the nsmng qency, the examiner may, ' the o emmnnmtv service ~- ,-, ..,.....---:; :,- -:-,-'- - . . .... ~ per~, rmance cf -., ,..~ ~ .va p~3,m~m, ol & 1~ D~tv . - . '(d) ' * - -- ' ' ~ ~' * * ' ' ' * ' -" ~'~ ' ' ' ' ' ...... '&" ~eney ta~ ~s.a L~w. enf~ qen~ ~ tlmlmuing agency does not also act as the processing "~"~"J* ' .' *"~'ff -'fl;.,': ';"~z~'~*,~,,h';~-~u.'.,~-- ~t. .) *' ' ~ - -. ....... , ..... d~-.-*-.~ - "*-'::~- T<*'f'~l ; ".~' ' 'r*'**'/ '**., ' ,p:.. ,, .......... . . . ;.~ .... .:&... "' *' .... ';., *;':&,~ ',: .,'., .;~..~. ~,~ '**.~U..:;2,~le~ '**.~.,i 2f.;u**'* '""~,,. '...q: ..:E.. ';., '~ ,, · % ._ ..' .:.~.,.: . . · ,;!: F' ,;, ~ . · . · llistori~.and 81amtory Notes · -. - .' :. . *~ , ,, , .. :, IM~LegMation *~' '~*''* -'****'*:*'*."*~::,*~,, '~.:ic.., ',~, :~"';"*'~'~'*'l~J~t,egMation ' . ,,:, · . . . . r · · , 'r,.~o I.,, :'~"' review des~bed in .__q,~__~ 402/5 of tlm, Vleldele Cede,-'~tdo~tion: Former- § 40215, 'aiMed 1~ stat~199Z' ~ contest the notice in · emrt Rmeeeding ~ the - - - "*Fetmer § 4~15, added by Stata.'l~86,/e,**.'9:~ g'lfK "~:'Former § 40R15, added by Stats. l~6, c. ~ § 15, relating to the proee, ing agency's duUe~ when a ~ ~ to contest a paridng.vtnl~t~_n nottee, v:*uYe~ealed *,. ,,Former § .,1~200.7, added by. Stats..19~2, ,._ IZI4, ~i 14, · J, t~u,.199Z e. 1,?,44 ( 'A~.40~ §25:.. opemd~ :$uly I, .*" .amended by Stat.%.lg~ c: 1093, § '7. * ..... . ' 1998. See. noT, this Mct~n:.,. .- ""' ~;". ,:~ : ';;.:~ Former§ 4(~0.7. added by StatS. l'~'c.~2, · "' '~'H't'~Y~,~'X:' ~ ....... ;ii'~* ?X~2f;*;.*~.' ' .. .,..,,f; . ' !'~ ~' .*'.~:"'=~'%~?kaes of Decbions. *" ':"'~ .... '~::"'"::'"" Dp.. or,,..,,., ,. to before she could con,esr ~cke~ at 8dmJnistrM~ve hearing '~: 'j:.~: *,. .. ,... .. ..- ..~f~?;, ~ - , . .-,.. 'Dqmait or penai~ '. ... :';~...-,. · Requiring driver to depmit amount ef lmrkin~ penalty on parking ticket before she emdd contest tteimt at admin- istrative hearing depriv~l driver of eonstitntimm~ pro- quimL Love v. City of Monte~y (Ap~ 6 ~ l~) 43 eomidmng ~.inte~t ana,sed ~ ~ aetion, t~sk ':_ .i~?~._ Love v. City ot MonterO ( .~AO~ 6'lYm. mm) 4s .~i-Rptr-2d911,3'/CaLApp.4th56R. '~.-m,.u~. . _v~__-_*__~d due proees~ dr~ver's private inter~t was use of .~.~..ney. !_or pe~od of. Ume..b~en her request for trau~e renew ami resulting administrative deei- non. Love v. City of Monterey (App. 6 DisL 1995) 43 Cal. Rptr'?2d 911, 37 CaLApp.4th 562. For purposes of applying bahneing test to determine whether statutory procedure wher~oy driver wu rtq:[uired to deposit amount of pm'king penlity on pm"king- ticket before she could contest ticket at ndmt~ heating _v~__*_t__,xi due proee~ public's interuts wure prompt leetion of fines and deterrence of dilatory rout frivolouA ehaUenges to parking ~iekets. Love v. (Xty of Montervy (App. 6 Dht. 1995) 43 Cal. Rptr~P.d 911, 3'/Cal. App.4th ~ · For lyarposes or applying bahneing test to deten~ne to deposit amount of pm'king penlty on parking before she could contest ticket at admi~ hearing ~_d~",s money w&s slight; officers issuing parkinR eit~- uons nave expertise in spotting violations, and-driyer could ehnlleng~ ticket in %xTiting prior to reqt~st for adminis~ hearing. Love v. City of Monter~ (App. 6 chnngoolnd~d~d.b~.undoflf~; doJettons by ntori~k~ * * * EXHIBIT A, P.2 of 2 --THIS FORM MUST BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL-- tATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name and Address): TELEPHONE NO.: ATTORNEY FOR (Name): NAME OF COURT: STREET ADDRESS: MAILING ADDRESS: CITY AND ZIP CODE: BRANCH NAME: PLAINTIFF or PETITIONER: DEFENDANT or RESPONDENT: APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF COURT FEES AND COSTS FOR COURT USE ONLY CASE NUMBER: I request a court order so that I do not have to pay court fees and costs. 1. My address and date of birth are (specify): I am receiving financial assistance under one or more of the following programs: a. ~-~ SSI and SSP.- The Supplemental Security Income and State Supplemental Payments Programs b. [~] AFDC: The Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program c. [---] Food Stamps: The Food Stamps Program d. [~ County Relief, General Relief (G.R.) or General Assistance (G.A.) [If you checked box 2 above, sign at the bottom of this side and DO NOT fill out the rest of the form.] 3. [-~ My gross monthly income is less than the amount shown on the Information Sheet on Waiver of Court Fees and Costs available from the clerk's office. [If you checked box 3 above, skip 4, complete 5 and 6 on the back of this form, and sign at the bottom of this side.] 4. ~ My income is not enough to pay for the common necessaries of life for me and the people in my family I support and also pay court fees and costs. [If you checked this box you must complete the back of this form.] WARNING: You must immediately tell the court if you become able to pay court fees or costs during this action. For the next three (3) years you may be ordered to appear in court and answer questions about your ability to pay court fees or costs. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: (SIGNATURE) _'] - Form Adopted by the Judicial Council of California 982(a)(17) [Rev. January 1, 1985] APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF COURT FEES AND COSTS Gov. Code, (In Forma Pauperis) 685113 CEB EXHIBIT B, P. 1 of 2 PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT: CASE NUMBER: FINANCIAL INFORMATION [~l My pay changes considerably from month to month. [If you check this box, each of the amounts reported in 6 should be your average for the past 12 months.] 6. My monthly income: a. My gross monthly pay is: ........................... $ b. My payroll deductions are (specify purpose and amount): (1) $ (2) $ (3) $ (4) $ My TOTAL payroll deduction amount is: $ c. My monthly take-home pay is (a. minus b. ): ............................................. $ 7. a. ~ I am not able to pay any of the court fees and costs. b. Other money I get each month is (specify source and amount): (1) $ (e) $ The TOTAL amount of other money is: e. MY TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME IS (c. plus d.): ........................................................ $ f. The number of people in my family, in- cluding me, supported by this money is: ~ I am able to pay only the following court fees and costs (specify): 8. My monthly expenses .are: a. Rent or house payment & maintenance $ b. Food and household supplies ................. $ c. Utilities and telephone .............................. $ d. Clothing ...................................................... $ e. Laundry and cleaning ......... : ...................... .$ f. Medical and dental payments ....................$ g. Insurance (life, health, accident, etc.) $ h. School, child care ...................................... $ i. Child, spousal support (prior marriage) $ j. Transportation and auto expenses (insurance, gas, repair) ............................. $ k. Installment payments (specify purpose and amount): (1) $ (2) .$ (3) $ The TOTAL amount of monthly installment payments is: ........................... $ 9. I own the following property: a. Cash .......................................................... $ b. Checking, savings and credit union accounts (list banks): (1) $ (2) $ (3) $ c.Cars, other vehicles and boat equity (list make, year of each): (1) $ (2) $ (3) $ 10. m. Amounts deducted due to wage assign- ments and earnings withholding orders Other expenses (specify) (1). $ (2) $ (3) $ (4). $ (5). $ (6) $ The TOTAL amount of other monthly expenses is: ...................................................... $ MY TOTAL MONTHLY EXPENSES ARE (add a. through m.): ........................................... $ Other personal property - jewelry, furniture, furs, stocks, bonds, etc. (list separately): d. Real estate equity ..................................... $ $ Other facts which support this application are (describe unusual medical needs, expenses for recent family emergencies, or other unusual expenses to help the judge understand your budget). If more space is needed, attach page labeled attachment 10. WARNING: You must immediately tell the court if you become able to pay court fees or costs during this action. For the next three (3) years you may be ordered to appear in court and answer questions about your ability to pay court fees or costs. 982(a)(17) [Rev. January 1, 1985] APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF COURT FEES AND COSTS (In Forma Pauperis) Page two CEB EXHIBIT B, P. 2 of 2 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. DATE: JANUARY 21, 1998 SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION INCREASING TO $65.00 THE FEE FOR THE RELEASE OF STORED OR IMPOUNDED VEHICLES AND ESTABLISHING A FEE OF $15.00 PER DAY FOR VEHICLES STORED ON CITY OF UKIAH PROPERTY TO BE COLLECTED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT The Ukiah Police Department routinely has vehicles moved to storage facilities based on violations of the California Vehicle Code (Sections 22651[h, o, p], 14602.6, and 14607.6). Most vehicles are towed to various private storage yards under agreements with tow truck companies. Some vehicles, however, are operable and have been driven to City property for storage. Pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 22850.5 the City has collected an administrative fee to cover the costs associated with the impound and release of these vehicles. A fee for the storage of vehicles on City property has not been charged. The proposal before the City Council is to increase the administrative fee from the current $35.00 to $65.00 and establish a new fee of $15.00 per day for the storage of vehicles on City property. The State statutes require that the administrative fee only reflect the actual costs of processing the impound, storage, and release of the vehicle. A study (City Manager Report, attachment 2) of the staff time required to provide this service was completed and identified personnel costs of $63.84. An additional $1.16 is estimated for support materials and supplies for a total cost of $65.00; thus the proposal to increase the existing fee by $30.00. Upon release of the vehicle by the Police Department, the vehicle owner must pay the respective tow company whatever storage fee the company imposes. The proposed new storage fee is also to recover the costs associated with actual storage of vehicles on City property. $15.00 is comparable to the fees collected for storage by private companies. The Corporation Yard is the prime location for City property storage. Both the increase in administrative fee and the new storage fee are included in the resolution recommended for adoption. RECOMMENDED ACTION' Adopt Resolution Increasing to $65.00 the Fee for the Release of Stored or Impounded Vehicles and Establishing a Fee of $15.00 per Day for Vehicles Stored on City of Ukiah Property to Be Collected by the Police Department ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine other fees are appropriate, identify new amounts, and adopt revised resolution. 2. Determine fee revision and new fee are not appropriate and do not adopt resolution. Acct. No. (If NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No. N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Wayne McBride, Police Captain Coordinated with: Michael Harris, Assistant City Manager, and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Resolution for adoption. 2. City Manager Report 3. Ukiah Polic_e Department General Order regarding Rotation Tow Policy. ~,andace Horsley, Cit-y tV~anager mfh:asrcc98 0121 IMPOUND RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH INCREASING TO $65.00 THE FEE FOR THE RELEASE OF STORED OR IMPOUNDED VEHICLES AND ESTABLISHING A FEE OF $15.00 PER DAY FOR VEHICLES STORED ON CITY OF UKIAH PROPERTY TO BE COLLECTED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah discourages operation of vehicles i~ violation of the law; and WHEREAS, staff time including police officers, clerks, and dispatchers is required to remove, store, and/or impound vehicles that are used by law violators; and WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code Section 22850.5 allows a city to recover a charge equal to its administrative costs relating to the removal, impound, storage, or release of vehicles; and WHEREAS, a fee of $65.00 for administrative fees is based on the estimate of the City's cost for documenting, reporting, tracking, and releasing towed, stored or impounded vehicles; and WHEREAS, a fee of $15.00 per day represents the actual and reasonable cost of storing vehicles on City property; and WHEREAS, the City Council determines that adoption of said fees set forth herein is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) thereof and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15273A in that said fees are for the purposes of meeting operating expenses including employee wage rates and fringe benefits and purchasing or leasing supplies, equipment and materials, and will only partially reimburse the City of Ukiah for the cost of processing said vehicle releases and storages. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. That the Council establishes a $65.00 City administrative fee for the releasing of stored vehicles and a $15.00 per day fee for the storage of vehicles on City property to be collected by the Police Department, and undertakes a cost recovery program relating to the removal, impound, storage, and release of vehicles. The fee is to be collected in addition to any required State fee. 2. The Administrative Fee shall only be imposed on the registered owner or. the agents Resolution No. Page 1 of 2 of that owner and shall be applicable to any vehicle towed under an abatement program, or sold at a lien sale pursuant to Civil Code Sections 3068.1 - 3074 inclusive, and Vehicle Code Section 22851, unless the sale is sufficient in amount to pay the lienholder's total charges and proper administrative costs. 3. The Police Chief or his designee may waive the Administrative Fee upon verifiable proof that the vehicle was reported stolen at the time that the vehicle was removed. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of January, 1998. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Sheridan Malone, Mayor ATTEST: Collen B. Henderson, City Clerk Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 CITY MANAGER REPORT ON PROPOSED IMPOUND VEHICLE FEES The City of Ukiah proposes to increase the Administrative Fee related to the impounding and storing of vehicles pursuant to California Vehicle Code Sections 22651(h), 22651(0), 22651(p), 14602.6, and 14607.6. The fee would increase from $35.00 to $65.00. The imposition of the fee is authorized by California V_ehicle Code Section 22850.5 The fee increase reflects the actual and reasonable cost of impounding and storing vehicles as further explained in this report. The services rendered which are inculded under these code sections are: Police Officer 1. Traffic stop - contact with citizen 2. Communication with dispatcher 3. Inventory vehicle 4. Complete CHP 180 form, citation, and report 5. Wait for tow truck * Straight time for Police Officer is $24.00 per hour (including benefits) 1 hour = $24.00 Dispatcher 1. Communicate with officer 2. Communicate with tow company - complete log entry 3. Check California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) and enter towed vehicle information * Straight time for Dispatcher is $18.73 per hour (including benefits) 20 minutes = $6.24 Police Sergeant 1. Obtain completed CHP 180 form, CLETS entry sheets, and police report 2. Verify correctness 3. Answer telephone/written inquiries regarding stored/impounded vehicle 4. Supervise the towing and storage of subject vehicle * Straight time for Police Sergeant is $29.79 per hour (including benefits) 30 minutes = $14.90 Records Clerk 1. Copy, route, and distribute report 2. Data entry for report and citation 3. Assist citizen with report and vehicle release, issue receipt * Straight time for Records Clerk is $18.67 per hour (including benefits) 30 minutes = $9.34 Police Captain 1. Answer telephone inquiries regarding stored/impounded vehicle 2. Post storage hearing * Straight time for Police Captain is $37.45 per hour (including benefits) 15 minutes = $9.36 Total Cost Breakdown 1. Police Officer: $24.00 2. Dispatcher: $ 6.24' 3. Police Sergeant: $14.90 4. Records Clerk: $ 9.34 5. Police Captain: $ 9,36 Total: $63.84 Other related personnel efforts such as investigative labor or on-duty court time are not included in these calculations. Additionally, the cost of supplies required in this operation are not included in the cost analysis. With the increase of illegal drivers and the indirect costs related to the increase of enforcement, several law enforcement agencies have begun to utilize cost recovery as a way of gaining reimbursement for expenditures involved with stored or impounded vehicles. The fees range from $20.00 to $150.00. California Vehicle Code Section 22850.5 prohibits an agency from charging a fee that is in excess of the actual costs. The funds received from this fee will be used to offset the costs of storing and impounding vehicles, and to purchase supplies used when initiating and processing vehicle storage and impounds. (CHP 180 forms, citations, report forms, receipt books, reproduction, postage, etc.) In addition to the increase in the cost recovery fee, the City proposes to adopt a $15.00 per day storage fee for vehicles that are being stored on City property. This fee is similar to that being charged by tow companies for outdoor storage. This fee would be charged for vehicles that are seized by the Ukiah Police Department pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 14607.6. Currently, these are the only vehicles that are being stored on City property. Additionally, this fee would be charged for vehicles that are seized and then released to the legal owners or registered owners if, for example, the case is litigated and the court orders that the Police Department return the vehicle to the owner. Prepared By: Officer Greg Baarts, Ukiah Police Department UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENTAL GENERAL ORDER DATE: 1122/98 TO: ALL PERSONNEL FROM: CHIEF OF POLICE PROCEDURE NO. SUBJECT: ROTATION TOW POLICY I. GENERAL: II. The purpose of this order is to implement a procedure for the handling of vehicle tows by use of the rotational tow list when vehicles are towed pursuant to 22651(h) CVC, 22651(0) CVC, 22651(p) CVC, 14602.6 CVC( 30 day holds), and14607.6 CVC (vehicle seizures). POLICY: The department policy regarding the handling of rotation tows will be as follows: A. ROTATION LISTS The UPD shall maintain a rotation tow list for the purpose of tracking calls for service to each tow company and to ensure an equitable distribution of calls. A call to a tow truck operator shall constitute one turn on the list and the operator, thereafter, shall be moved to the bottom of the list. This includes when the operator fails to answer the phone, is unable to respond, is unable to perform the required service, refuses to respond or provide service, or is canceled due to excessive response time. If it is determined that the operator is not needed and is canceled by the UPD, up to and including arrival at the scene, the operator will be placed back at the top of the rotation list. . If the operator is canceled by the vehicle's owner or agent prior to the operator taking possession of the vehicle and there are no charges for towing, the operator shall immediately contact the UPD and advise them of the cancellation. The operator will then be placed at the top of the list. An example of this situation is when an operator is summoned by a member of the UPD for an "owners request rotational tow", or if a citizen telephones the UPD requesting an operator but does not specify which company during the request, e.g., AAA Tow. . . If two or more operators are called to the same incident, distribution of the vehicles shall be at the discretion of the UPD Incident Commander. The UPD Incident Commander may direct a UPD rotation tow operator to move vehicles to help clear a roadway or for lifesaving operations. The assistance provided shall not change the operator's place in the rotation. Bo C. . Operators applying for a rotation tow listing shall have a minimum of three (3) years verifiable for-hire-towing experience, as an bwner or principal, prior to the actual filing date of an enrollment period to qualify for a UPD rotation tow listing. . Operators currently on a UPD rotation list and having less than the required three years experience are exempt from this provision. RESPONSE TO CALLS I . The operator shall respond to UPD calls 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The UPD Communications Center will ask for an estimated time of arrival (E.T.A.) to a scene when requesting an operator to respond for a tow. If, in the opinion of the UPD Watch Commander, the E.T.A. is extended to a point where it would be unreasonable to wait for the tow truck's arrival at a scene, the Watch Commander may request an operator that is next in line on the rotation to respond. The operator that was unable to respond in a reasonable amount of time will be placed on the bottom of the rotation list by UPD Communications. STORAGE FACILITY . The operator shall be responsible for the security of vehicles and property at the place of storage. As a minimum, a fenced or enclosed area shall be provided. The operator is responsible for the reasonable care, custody, and control of any property contained in towed or stored vehicles. . The operator shall obtain approval from the UPD prior to the removal of any property from a stored or impounded vehicle and shall provide a receipt, with a copy placed in the stored vehicle. The requirement to obtain approval from the UPD prior to the removal of property may be excused by the Chief of Police if it is determined that proper safeguards and procedures are utilized by the operator. . This requirement may not be waived in cases where a vehicle has been impounded for evidence or investigation. Do . Upon approval from the UPD, the operator shall release personal property from an impounded vehicle at the request of the vehicle owner or his/her agent. . Personal property is considered to be items which are not affixed to the vehicle. . Personal property includes: papers, transportable cellular telephones, pull- out radios, portable radios and/or portable stereo equipment, clothes, luggage, tools, etc. - . The release of vehicles shall be conducted in accordance with UPD procedures. TOWS FOR "30 DAY HOLDS", 14602.6 CVC California Vehicle Code Section 14602.6 provides for a 30 day impoundment of a vehicle when driven by a driver who has a suspended or revoked license, or a driver who has never been issued a license. The following procedure shall be adhered to when an operator responds to a call for service at the request of the UPD regarding a "30 Day Hold" rotation tow. a) The UPD member will advise the tow truck operator that the tow is a storage, a "30 Day Hold" (14602.6 CVC), or a vehicle seizure (14607.6 CVC). b) For "30 Day Holds", the UPD member will mark the "Agency Hold" box on the CHP180 Vehicle Report and indicate "Hold for 30 days" in the "Remarks" section of the CliP180 for impoundments under Section 14602.6 CVC. c) Once the vehicle is stored at the respective tow company's storage facility, it shall remain in the custody of the tow company until the completion of the 30-calender day impoundment period, unless there is an exception which is outlined in the Release Procedures. d) The rules governing the release of property from a vehicle held pursuant to 14602.6 CVC will be the same as the rules outlined in this Policy for regular UPD requested storage requests. 1. RELEASE PROCEDURES FOR "30 DAY HOLDS" a) A vehicle impounded for Section 14602.6 CVC shall be released upon court order or upon completion of the 30-calender day impoundment b) c) period, and then only when the registered owner or agent provides a currently valid drivers license and proof of current vehicle registration to the UPD, shows proof of insurance, pays the UPD Administrative Fee pursuant to 22850.5 CVC, and pays the appropriate fees relating to the towing and storage of the vehicle to the tow company. The registered owner or agent will present a receipt from UPD authorizing the release of the vehicle. The receipt will show that the UPD Administrative Fee has been paid. There may be cases where a vehicle will be released prior to the end of the 30 day impoundment period. If there is a question in regards to whether the vehicle should be released, the on duty Watch Commander should be contacted to confirm that the vehicle can be released. Examples of situations where a vehicle is to be released prior to the 30 day impoundment period are: 1) When a vehicle is a stolen vehicle. 2) When the vehicle is subject to bailment and is driven by an unlicensed employee of a business establishment, including parking or repair garage. 3) When the license of the driver was suspended or revoked for an offense other than those included in Article 2 (commencing with Section 13200) of Chapter 2 of Division 6 or Article 3 (commencing with Section 13350) of Chapter 2 of Division 6 of the California Vehicle Code. 4) When a vehicle release is requested through UPD by a legal owner, provided that the legal owner or the legal owner's agent presents foreclosure documents or an affidavit of repossession for the vehicle to the UPD. A legal owner is a motor vehicle dealer, bank, credit union, acceptance corporation, or other licensed financial institution legally operating in the this state or is another person, not the registered owner, holding a security interest in the vehicle which is recorded with the DMV. The charges relating to the towing and storage of the vehicle must be paid by the legal owner. The legal owner may require the registered owner to pay the fees relating to the towing and storage of the vehicle. 5) If a vehicle is released prior to the 30 day impoundment period after an Administrative Hearing or for any other reason, a Stipulated Vehicle Release Agreement must be signed by the registered or legal owner. 4 E. TOWS FOR VEHICLE SEIZURES, 14607.6 CVC . Califomia Vehicle Code Section 14607.6 allows a police agency to seize a vehicle which is being driven by a person who has a suspended or revoked drivers license or is unlicensed with a prior misdemeanor conviction for driving on a suspended or revoked license or for driving unlicensed. There may be an occasion where the department may request a rotation tow for the towing and possible storage of a vehicle that is going to be seized. The following are guidelines set forth to assist with the facilitation of these storages. a) If a rotation tow is requested for a vehicle that is being seized pursuant to 14607.6 CVC, the UPD member requesting the tow will request that the vehicle be towed to the location utilized by the UPD for the storage of vehicles being seized. b) If a vehicle that is being seized is towed to a location other than the tow company's storage facility, the UPD member will request a copy of the invoice. The officer will forward the invoice to the Mendocino County District Attorneys Office along with the request for forfeiture packet. After the vehicle is liquidated, the tow company will be reimbursed for the amount of the tow bill, utilizing the proceeds from the sale of the vehicle. c) If a vehicle being seized by the UPD is towed to the tow company's storage facility, the tow company will allow the UPD two business days to retrieve the vehicle from storage at no cost tothe UPD for the two days storage. The officer or representative from the UPD who retrieves the vehicle will retain a copy of the invoice for the tow. (Pursuant to a written agreement made between the rotation tow company's on current rotation with the UPD). d) If a vehicle being seized by the UPD is stored at the tow company's storage facility for a term longer than outlined above, the officer or representative from the UPD will retrieve a copy of the invoice for the tow and storage of the vehicle. The invoice will be forwarded to the Mendocino County District Attorneys Office where it will be placed in the case file for the applicable vehicle. Once the case is litigated and the vehicle is liquidated, the tow company will be reimbursed for the tow and storage of the vehicle. e) If a registered owner, legal owner, or any other party who claims an interest in a vehicle being seized by the UPD wishes to retrieve property from the seized vehicle while it is in the possession of the tow company, the owner or owners agent from the tow company shall contact the UPD for authorization for the release of property. Once authorization is gained, the owner or agent for the owner of the tow company will complete a UPD Property Release Form and provide a copy of the form to the UPD. In most f) g) h) cases, all personal property will be removed from a vehicle being seized by the UPD on the date of seizure. Pursuant to 14607.6 CVC, there are times when a vehicle that has been seized by the UPD will be released to the registered owner (not the driver), a community property interest owner (wife of driver), or the legal owner (bank). Prior to the release of the vehicle, authorization must be gained by the UPD and all administrative fees must be paid to the UPD by the person wishing to retrieve the vehicle. All towing and storage fees will be the responsibility of the person wishing to retrieve the vehicle. A Stipulated Vehicle Release Agreement must be signed by the registered or legal owner prior to the release of the vehicle. If a vehicle forfeiture has been initiated and a packet has been sent to the Mendocino County District Attorneys Office, a vehicle shall not be released to the registered or legal owner without prior authorization from the Deputy District Attorney prosecuting vehicle forfeiture cases. UPD members will take all necessary steps to facilitate the storage of a vehicle being seized pursuant to 14607.6 CVC. It is recommended that the vehicle be driven from the scene to the UPD storage location. This is to minimize costs associated with the seizure of vehicles. If a situation exists where it is unreasonable to facilitate the storage of a vehicle being seized (vehicle is unsafe to drive, too many pending calls for service, manpower shortage), the UPD member may have the vehicle towed and stored at the UPD storage location or the tow company's storage facility. By order of John Williams Acting Chief of Police ITEM NO.: 8b DATE: January 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF USE PERMIT AMENDMENT NO. 97-39 SUMMARY: On December 10, 1997, the Planning Commission denied on a 5-0 vote a Use Permit Amendment application filed by Redwood Oil Company to amend Use Permit No. 88-3 and allow the installation of a take-out restaurant kitchen (Aztec Grill) in an existing Chevron service station/convenience store located at 1099 South State Street. continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Deny the subject appeal, thereby affirming the Planning Commission's decision to deny Use Permit Amendment No. 97-39. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY ACTION: 1. Approve the subject appeal, thereby approving the application to install a takeout restaurant (Aztec Grill) in the existing Chevron gas station at State Street and Talmage Road. 2. Approve the project in a modified fashion or configuration, as may be articulated and directed by the City Council. Citizen Advised: Publicly noticed pursuant to provisions of Ukiah Municipal Code Requested by: Mr. Lawrence Mitchell, of Axt & Mitchell, for Redwood Oil Company Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Bob Sawyer, Planning Director Attachments: . 2. 3. 4. 5. Letter of Appeal from Mr. Lawrence Mitchell (dated December 12, 1997) Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting on December 10, 1997 Planning Report for Use Permit Amendment No. 97-39 Letter from Matt Stranko (dated December 10, 1997) in support of project Letter from Patti Whitaker (dated November 10, 1997) in support of project APPROVED: Cand~ce I-:lo~:sley, City ~anager An auto service station has been in operation on the project site since the early 1960's, but the existing Chevron service station and convenience store were developed after the approval of Use Permit No. 88-3, which was required to allow expansion of the station since it is located in the C-2 Zoning District. The proposed take-out restaurant use may also be permitted in this zoning district, but does require the amendment of the previously approved Use Permit. The proposed restaurant would utilize existing kitchen facilities that comprise approximately 160 square feet of the 1,670 square foot convenience store located on the northern portion of the site. This kitchen area was formerly used for the cooking of pre- prepared chicken food products that were sold at the sales counter of the convenience store. The applicant has proposed to remodel this area to install a char-broiler, range/oven, hot table, food preparation counters and sinks necessary for the preparation of made-to-order items. A food-serving counter with no seating would also be installed along the southern wall of this store, according to the site plan and floor plan submitted with the application. The Planning Department reviewed the proposed amendment and determined that the restaurant use would be consistent with the applicable use and development standards for the C-2 Zoning District, particularly since the site area is already developed with the service station/convenience store use and a retail commercial shopping center located on an abutting property. Staff further determined that the proposed restaurant use would require the installation of at least one additional parking stall, which would increase the required number of parking stalls to four. The applicant has indicated that all four parking stalls would be installed on the site, but it is the opinion of staff that the proposed locations of these stalls would significantly increase existing circulation problems and congestion on the site. The sale of made-to- order food products could also increase the amount of time that vehicles remain at the gas pumps, which would further increase congestion on the site since there is little room available for drivers waiting to reach the existing facilities and the proposed restaurant. This congestion could also increase adverse effects on vehicle circulation along South State Street, particularly when the interior lane of south-bound traffic is blocked by vehicles waiting to turn left onto the site to reach gas pumps or other facilities. Overall, therefore, staff believes, and the Planning Commission concurs, the project site is too constrained by size, location and existing development to allow additional parking stalls, and to generally accommodate the proposed food facility. A full analysis of these potential impacts and the Findings recommended for the denial of this project are included in the Planning Report (attached) submitted to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed the project at a hearing on December 10, 1997, and concurred with the concerns outlined by staff. Based on these concerns, the Commission adopted the Findings contained in the Planning Report for the project and denied the project by a 5 to 0 vote. The Minutes for this meeting are attached. MINUTES CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER '10, 1997 MEMBERS PRESENT Eric Larson Joe Chiles Jennifer Puser Mike Correll Judy Pruden, Chairman OTHERS PRESENT Robert Axt Dale Gibney Bridgett Summers MEMBERS ABSENT None STAFF PRESENT Charles Stump, Senior Planner Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Melody Harris, Recording Secretary The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Pruden at 7:01 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken with the results listed above. 3. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION Chairman Pruden polled the Planning Commissioners and determined each had made the required site visits. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - November '12, '1997 Commissioner Larson suggested the following corrections to the minutes: Page 9, Paragraph 4, 1st Sentence, amend sentence to read, "...unfortunately, however, zoning alone can not remedy these problems"; Page 9. Paragraph 4, 3rd Sentence, replace "rewriting" with "considering"; Page 9, Paragraph 4, 5th Sentence, amend sentence to read, "To down zone the property to R-1..."; Page 10, Paragraph 2, 1st Sentence, amend sentence to read, "...since the Zoning Map must be consistent with the General Plan." ON A MOTION BY Commissioner Larson, Seconded by Commissioner Puser, it was carried by following roll call vote to approve the minutes of November 12, 1997, as amended: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, and Chairman Pruden. None Commissioner Correll None Chairman Pruden commended Staff on behalf of the Commission for the accuracy and thoroughness of the Planning Commission minutes. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No one came forward. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page '1 DECEMBER 10, 1997 6. APPEAL PROCESS Chairman Pruden read the appeal process to the audience. For matters heard at this meeting, the final date for appeal is December 22, 1997. Chairman Pruden inquired of Staff if the Administrative Procedures governing the appeal process were now in effect. Charley Stump, Senior Planner, stated the Administrative Procedures Ordinance has been adopted by the City Council which states if you do not attend a meeting and address the Commission in either written or verbal form, you are precluded from filing an appeal in the matter. He noted this procedure will be stated on all future Planning Commission agendas. w PUBLIC HEARINGS Use Permit Amendment Application No. 97-39, as submitted by Redwood Oil Company, to amend a previously approved Use Permit (#88-03) to allow the installation of a food preparation and serving facility within an existing auto service station, on property located in the C-2 (Highway Commercial & Restricted Industrial)Zoning District, at 1099 South State Street (Assessor Parcel No. 003-140-36). Charley Stump, Senior Planner, presented a brief introduction of the Use Permit Amendment application to amend a previously approved use permit on the site of the Chevron gas station at the corner of Talmage and State Streets. The proposal is to establish an "Aztec Grill" food preparation and serving facility. Mr. Stump stated that Staff is generally supportive of these types of land uses, and from their research and analysis Staff finds that this chain is outstanding, and that co-branded or mixed use facilities in general are both a good idea and a trend of the future. However, Staff does not believe it to be appropriate for this site. He introduced Dave Lohse, Associate Planner, for explanation of staff findings and to explain staff's recommendation for denial of this project. Dave Lohse, Associate Planner, reviewed the written staff report, indicating approval of the proposed Use Permit Amendment would amend the existing permit approved in 1987 to allow the currently existing gas station to install and operate a take-out restaurant within the existing convenience store. The store is approximately 1,250 square feet in area and the proposed take-out and food preparation area would constitute 160 square feet of this area. The applicants have not indicated if they would propose seating once the restaurant is opened, but there is no seating indicated on the site plans. Mr. Lohse noted this project is exempt from CEQA. In reviewing the project it was determined the installation of the proposed restaurant would introduce an additional primary use to the site that does require the amendment of the existing Use Permit. It was also determined that the remodel of the existing service station is generally consistent with the applicable development standards for the C-2 Zoning District, which include building height and yard areas. However, it was also determined that the project is not consistent with the parking requirements for the site. Mr. Lohse noted in calculating the number of parking stalls that would be required for this use Staff determined it would be a minimum of one and possibly more, depending upon whether or not seating was installed. The parking requirement is the most beneficial one Staff could give to this project site and after additional research into other "Aztec Grills" located in the Chevrons in Windsor and Cloverdale, Staff determined that additional parking in the future might even be a higher prerequisite. Staff reviewed the varied parking schemes proposed by the applicant. The one shown on the project site would not work specifically because it does allow for the required back-up area to intrude into the designated right-of-way line for State Street. He noted there are no eminent plans to expand State Street at this point in time, but Staff feels it would be creating a hazard if it is developed in the future. The City Engineer has indicated it will be a future project, depending upon funding, etc. Staff also considered reconfiguring the parking stalls as they are striped now, which would have customers backing to the south. It is felt that would interfere with the pump operations if they are used more frequently than MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 DECEMBER 10, '!997 they are now. The restaurant use would probably generate more traffic trips onto the site. The third parking stall is located towards the east of the project site, which is not real visible on site plans, and the fourth parking stall is not shown on the site plan but would be located to the south of the pumps. That area is currently used as the only through-access on the site. Between the pumps and the convenience store building the only other access that they have could be blocked if people are pumping gas. In summary, Mr. Lohse stated the site has certain constraints and the addition of more parking spaces would further constrain and potentially create more hazards and safety problems, particularly between vehicles, and between vehicles and pedestrians. After analyzing this Staff made findings for recommendation for denial, as articulated in Findings 1 and 2, in the Staff Report. Chairman Pruden requested more information relative to the Variance issued in 1988. Mr. Lohse indicated the Variance that accompanied the Use Permit covering not only the project site, but the retail center to the east and the Redwood Auto Wash, allowed the parking required for the total uses of all these sites to be reduced by four or five spaces, by allowing the auto wash bays to be considered as parking stalls. Chairman Pruden inquired if that Variance was still in affect since the properties have subsequently been subdivided. Mr. Lohse stated the Variance is still in affect, it just doesn't technically apply to this property since it has been subdivided off. The Use Permit did require that the project site have three parking stalls. The applicants have, since their submittal of this application, striped those three parking stalls more clearly, as they were not visible on our first site visits. Commissioner Puser asked for clarification of existing parking spaces and what will additionally be required with this application. Mr. Lohse stated the three parking stalls in existence were required by the previous Use Permit #88-03, but does not comply with the current request. Technically they are still lacking one parking stall. Commissioner Chiles inquired if there is any minimum requirement for a radius turn into the parking stalls coming off of State street. Mr. Lohse stated the code does not specify such a radius. The code does require a 24 foot back out area required for parking stalls at a 90-degree angle. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:'16 P.M. Robert Axt, '135 W. Gobbi, stated he is representing the applicants. He addressed issues raised in the Staff Report. He indicated there is no room in the convenience store for seating or stand up eating and stated the owners would most likely be agreeable to a condition of approval to that effect. Mr. Axt described this type of facility as "dashboard dining", indicating it is in vogue now and seems to have become a necessity to service stations these days. Mr. Axt presented letters to the Planning Commission from the Windsor and Cloverdale Chevron Stations with Aztec Grills stating at least 90% of all patrons using their facility for the purpose of buying food are there primarily to get gas, not to buy food. The generation of additional traffic for food, if anything, would be very slight. He also noted gas pump ordering is a potential future consideration for this facility and other similar stations, whereby an intercom system is installed and food is ordered from the gas pump. He reiterated there may be some additional traffic, but it will be slight and should not be cause for alarm. He stated the requirement for an additional parking space is not unreasonable. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 DECEMBER 10, 1997 Mr. Axt also addressed the Chester Fried Chicken food establishment formerly located in the Chevron, which was referenced on Page 2 of the Staff Report. He provided the Planning Commission with a written rebuttal to the Staff Report stating up until this year the Chester Fried Chicken was permitted by the Health Department and was inspected both by them and by Carl Tuliback, Code Enforcement Officer, and was never rejected for the function in which it was used. This is merely a changeover from the chicken food service to the Aztec Grill. He noted copies of the health department inspection reports and a 2/8/96 inspection by Carl Tuliback attached to the written rebuttal. Mr. Axt referenced the plot plan provided in the Staff Report and discussed the three existing parking spaces to the west of the facility, which were recently striped, and a fourth compact parking space that could be utilized without impacting the access to the gas station. He also referenced the potential for a fifth parking space used only by staff at the restaurant. In the applicant's opinion there are four spaces existing and the potential for a fifth parking stall. He commented in regard to the 24 foot back-up that is required if you are making a 90 degree right angle into that parking space. It is not required if you are coming at it in any other angle and you are permitted to access a parking space from a diagonal or other access that permits you into the space. Mr. Axt circulated a drawing that indicates how parking currently sits on the site. Mr. Axt stated he is not sure at this time what the signage requests will be for the Aztec Grill, other than a standard window sign. He did note that the sign for Chester Chicken was permitted. In summary, Mr. Axt stated there won't be an appreciable increase in traffic. It is a service that Chevron feels is important for its operation. He referenced again the letters submitted from the two managers in Cloverdale and Windsor claiming that 90% of their customers are gas customers. Mr. Axt also pointed out that this isn't the same as a "Jack in the Box" or "Subway Sandwich" where people come in to sit and dine. It is a minor adjunct to this operation for the convenience of its customers and to the customers to the laundromat next door. Chairman Pruden inquired as to the proposed operations of the Aztec Grill and hours of operation. Mr. Axt stated the Grill will primarily serve burritos and he assumes the hours of operation will the same as the gas station, which is 24 hours. Mr. Axt introduced Bridgett Summers is an employee of Chevron and could probably address this question mom specifically. Bridgett Summers, 5720 Ridgewood Road, stated the hours of operation will be 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. CommisSioner Chiles referenced the correspondence from the Cloverdale and Windsor locations and inquired what the site land area is on those two locations. He noted he has seen the new facility in Windsor and estimated it to be over half an acre. Mr. Axt stated he does not have that information. Mr. Lohse stated he does not have the exact acreages but he did contact both of the Planning Departments down there. The Windsor restaurant is located in an existing Chevron that had a Grill converted into it. A primary part of the approval by the Windsor Planning Commission was that additional parking could be put on the site. The Cloverdale site was designed with additional parking and a drive-through window. Part of Staff's primary contention with the project site, is that it is constrained. If you can squeeze an adequate number of parking spaces in, them would still be a problem with circulation that can't be addressed properly because of the size and shape of the parcel. Chairman Pruden stated she has visited the Windsor site more than a dozen times, and stopped specifically for the food. She noted there are three handicaped parking spaces on the south side of the station, then you have to pull through the pumps and on the north side of the property there is almost double parking in the sense that you have the pumps and a parking spot beyond that. You essentially can not turn around and it is very awkward, MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 DECEMBER 10, 1997 but there are another four or five parking spaces over there. One of the spaces consists of the air and water dispensers. At best there are seven or eight parking spaces total. It is highly constrained and they are always full. Commissioner Chiles inquired as to what the applicants will do if the Aztec Grill becomes so popular, due to the quality of its food, that it becomes a large, thriving business at this small location. He stated he supports entrepreneurialship, and wonders if this would be a good prospect for it. Commissioner Correll inquired as to why Chester Fried Chicken was closed. Mr. Axt stated Chester Fried Chicken was not closed by the Code Enforcement Officer or the Health Department, but was closed to allow the changeover to the Aztec Grill. Mr. Stump inquired if there was a kitchen with Chester Fried Chicken, and if not where were the chickens prepared. We need to determine if the Grill is a similar use and Mr. Lohse can address if it was permitted or not. Mr. Lohse indicated he had not seen the information that Mr. Axt obtained from Carl Tuliback but in his personal conversations with Mr. Tuliback he indicated it was never a closed code enforcement action. He further stated that the Health Department inspects the health aspects only and does not have any jurisdiction over whether it is a valid land use operation. He pointed out that the Planning Department had received a complaint of food being prepared at that location. The code does not specifically address these co-branded or mixed use type facilities. Mr. Lohse and Mr. Tuliback discussed this issue and determined that it was not an allowed use, otherwise this would be a legal use for which the Aztec Grill would be a continuation and there would be no need for a public hearing. Commissioner Correll inquired of Staff if the Chester Fried Chicken business has definitely ceased to operate. Mr. Lohse clarified the Chester Fried Chicken operation did not cease because of a code violation and he is not sure why it ceased but stated that it is not relative to this discussion. Mr. Lohse stated that chicken was being sold in bags from a heated container on the counter, which is not the same as someone coming in to order a meal and waiting while it is prepared. The Planning Commission addressed a similar issue with the Shell Station and that is why Staff opposed the Subway Sandwich operation they proposed, but recommended approval of the Baskin Robbins. When we look at these co-branded facilities one thing Staff looks at is the congestion that can occur. This is a 24-hour, full service gas station and cardlock facility, and the addition of another use of this potential strains the limit that this site can handle. He reiterated that Staff is not against the concept, but it must be reviewed on a site by site basis. Commissioner Larson requested to speak to a representative of the applicants who could address the food preparation issues more clearly. Bridgett Summers, 5720 Ridgewood Road, introduced herself as a representative for Chevron. Commissioner Larson asked Ms. Summers if Chevron is still operating the Chester Fried Chicken food service. Ms. Summers stated Chevron is no longer serving chicken and stopped that operation in anticipation of the Aztec Grill. She added it seems to be more successful than the Chicken in their other stations. Commissioner Larson asked for Ms. Summers clarification between the Staff Report, which indicated Chevron was informed that the Chicken operation was not a permitted use and that the function ceased, and her earlier statement that Chevron stopped in favor of a new franchise. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 5 DECEMBER 10, 1997 Ms. Summers said her earlier statement was correct and added she was never informed that it was not a permitted use. Commissioner Larson inquired if the Aztec Grill food would be prepared to order as customers come in. Ms. Summers stated the food would be prepared to order, and they will also have a warmer that currently sits on the existing soft drink counter for pre-made burritos. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:40 P.M. Mr. Lohse stated for the record that Planning Staff had not seen any of the exhibits introduced by Mr. Axt prior to this hearing as none of them were presented to Staff. Commissioner Pruden stated she likes the food served by the Aztec Grill and indicated she has stopped at the Windsor location many times on her way home from the Bay Area because it is available during later hours. She stated it is very popular, and it does take time to get the food. She commented that she must be part of the 10% that does just stop for food and no fuel, because the food is above average for take-out food. Chairman Pruden stated she thinks the food is so good that it will attract people to that station for the food alone. She added she worked at the south end of town for the month of October and stopped everyday to purchase a soda on her way to work, and in her experience the parking is virtually non-existent. She cited several examples with lack of parking and congestion on the Chevron site. When recently inspecting the site again on a Sunday, every parking place in the front of the launder- mat was full, so there is no room for overflow. A person would have to park down on someone elses property to get into the Aztec Grill. Even though she loves the food, there is no place to park on this parking lot. Chairman Pruden added she does not know what has happened to the "no parking" sign located by the garbage dumpster. It was posted all during the Fall when she was there and it is no longer there, yet that is access to the garbage and the back service areas. The striping that is there makes no sense because you can not swing into those perpendicular parking spaces. Commissioner Puser stated that Chevron station is the only gas station she goes to in town and it is always hectic and hard to pull out. If the Aztec Grill is decent food, people will hear about it and it will become even more congested. Even though it may be good food, it is not a good site plan. Commissioner Correll stated as much as he would like to see an operation like the Grill, he has to concur with staff's conclusions and findings. He agreed that it is always a congested site and stated he passes by the location all the time. He realizes this type of mixed use seems to be the wave of the future, however, in taking the long view and examining this particular site he can not approve the project. Chairman Pruden added it is too bad off-site parking isn't available on the large vacant lot to the north, but it is not currently available. Commissioner Larson concurred with the conclusions of the other Commissioners, adding it is not only a parking problem, but'a circulation problem as well. Circulation on the site is marginal now; a food franchise service like this is going to present delays in ingress and egress in terms of the fueling station itself. The reason he inquired about the food preparation is when he does fuel up he doesn't like to tie up the gas pumps, unless there is a convenient place to pull off to go inside. That is why the air and water pumps are off to the side, so the fueling pump stations are not tied up. He does not consider the fuel pumps parking spaces. The way this site plan is laid out there is no room to move around. If all the pumps are occupied there is no way to traverse the lot, it is a very constrained lot. Commissioner Larson stated given the fact that a variance was granted for the overall project extending down through the strip mall area and a six space variance that was allowed in conjunction with the carwash, tells us something about the parking constraints for the original project. Another consideration is that as the Redwood Business Park is built out traffic will increase on Talmage Road. There are already some major traffic mitigations that involve that intersection which will further constrain the ability to access this property. If MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 DECEMBER '10, '1997 there were more room, he could see this project going through, but without the ability to conveniently pull aside while food is ordered and prepared he does not see this as a viable project. Commissioner Chiles concurred with the comments made by the Planning Commission. He inquired whether the Fire Department had any comments on this project. Mr. Lohse stated he spoke with the Fire Marshal who stated based on the small size of the lot the Fire Department would not need to get a fire truck on the site, so while he agreed that circulation would not allow him to get a truck on the site, he did not feel that would be a major factor. Chairman Pruden stated she eats at Marino's every Friday and has observed that the fire lane is always parked on and completely full. Chairman Pruden stated it appears the Planning Commission is in agreement about this project and stated it is unfortunate the applicant could not negotiate some additional parking on the empty lot contiguous to the property because they have an excellent product. Commissioner Chiles added there is also plenty of vacant retail office space in town that could be considered for the Aztec Grill. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, Seconded by Commissioner Larson, it was carried by the following roll call vote to DENY Use Permit Amendment Application No. 97-39, based on Findings No. 1 and 2, as stated in the Staff Report: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden None None None Chairman Pruden informed the applicants that their application had been denied and advised if they choose to appeal the decision they must submit it by November 22, 1997. Mr. Stump stated as the applicants indicated a dine and dash facility is a necessity to their operation, but as this Commission realizes, for this community it is a necessity to provide good land use planning. Discussion followed regarding proper use and location of such a franchise, as well as future uses in gas stations and the problems that exist with the Aztec Grills located in Windsor and Cloverdale. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS City Council and Redevelopment Agency Actions Future Planning Commission Agenda Items Status Reports None to report. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Larson referenced the meeting agendas and resumes regularly provided with the Director's Report. He noted they do not receive any meeting synopsis for Design Review and requested to receive copies of minutes on Design Review meetings. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 DECEMBER 10, 1997 Mr. Stump stated Planning Department does not normally attend Design Review Board meetings, unless the agenda contains a project pertinent to them. Larry DeKnoblough, Assistant Redevelopment Director, is the staff attendee. He indicated the minutes are available upon request. Chairman Pruden stated she will be attending a meeting on December 11, 1997 for the Ukiah Transit Center. She referenced an informational flyer that was circulated and inquired if Staff would be attending. Mr. Stump stated he and City Manager, Candace Horsley, would be there. Staff feels comfortable with the direction the project is moving. Discussion followed relative to the Ukiah Transit Center and the level of staff involvement that will be available. Chairman Pruden stated she and Commissioner Larson attended the Kmart and Safeway grand openings, which were alot of fun. She was pleased to see the historical plaque and decorative lighting which had been installed at the new Safeway. Mr. Stump added the lights were a very nice touch and noted several compliments had been received on the lights. Commissioner Correll reported he attended the Planning Seminar at Sonoma State and stated it was very beneficial and informative. He advised the Commissioners that he has a form for a course at Sonoma State, May 22 - July 28, 1998, called The Community Economic Development Process. If anyone is interested he has the form and the materials from the seminar. Commissioner Puser indicated she was unable to attend due to a conflict in schedules. Chairman Pruden referred to an article in Western Cities magazine about a skateboard park in Yucca Valley and noted it will be interesting to see, if and when, Ukiah's skateboard park does evolve what shape it will take on. She will make copies and pass them around since it is a current topic of discussion in Ukiah. Commissioner Puser referenced a recent article in the Ukiah Daily Journal regarding the skateboard Park in Santa Rosa. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m. Judy Pruden, Chairman Melody Harris, Recording Secretary pc121097.min MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 DECEMBER 10, 1997 T I ?CHELL ARCHITECTS--PLANNERS (707) 402-8778 FAX (707) 402-1511 1.35 WEST GOBBI STREET, SUITE 205 UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482-5405 (If'/8F fl~(13ti PLA¢~i~',ilflG DEP'f. December 12, 1997 City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: Use Permit #97-39 Amendment Redwood Oil Company, Inc. Redwood Plaza Chevron ECEIV .ED BEC 1 5 1997 Gl I'Y CLt:.I~K DLP/&t-,f i-MEN ! Dear Council Members: At the request of my client, Redwood Oil Co., I am hereby appealing the decision of the Planning commission to deny Use Permit #97-39, action taken during its regular meeting on 12/10/97. In summary, my Client wishes to change the menu of his food service business operated out of the market located at 1099 So. State Street. The market is part of Redwood Plaza Chevron. The existing food service business has operated from that location for a number of years, having started there in February of 1995. County health Department and City approvals were given for that business. The change in menu necessitates the changing of existing appliances and the addition of new ones, but no walls are being moved and no floor area addition is being made. Some interior doorways are being relocated, but the balance of the market will remain as is. The Owner's vision for the business incorporates a new concept in the fuel station industry. It is called "dashboard dining". It teams a fuel station with a food service type use and allows the traveling public to obtain multiple services in one stop. It is intended that the fueling customers would be the primary market focus and customer base for the food service use. Secondarily, foot traffic from the adjacent commercial uses would also be desired and encouraged. City of Ukiah 12/12/97 Page 2 Please schedule a hearing on this petition at your earliest convenience and notify my client and me of the date, time and location so we may participate in the deliberations concerning this request. Thank you for considering this request. Sincerely, I~awrence S. Mitchell, AIA Architect LSM/db c: P. VanAlyea, ROC Santa Rosa B. Sommers, ROC Ukiah .MEMBERS PRESENT Eric Larson Joe Chiles Jennifer Puser Mike Correll Judy Pruden, Chairman MEMBERS ABSENT none ~TAFF PRESENT Charles Stump, Senior Planner Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Melody Harris, Recording Secretary MINUTES CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 10, 1997 OTHERS PRESENT Robert Axt Dale Gibney Bridgett Summers The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Pruden at 7:01 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center,.300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken with the results listed above. 3, SITE VISIT VERIFICATION ,'"' Chairman Pruden polled the Planning CommisSioners and determined each had made the required site visits. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - November ~2,:,~g97 Commissioner Larson suggested ~e {ollowing c0~e~ionS to the minutes: Page 9, Paragraph 4, 1st Sentence, amend sentence to mad, "...unfo~unately, howeger, zoning alone can not remedy these problems"; Page 9. Paragraph 4.3rd Sentence, replace "rewriting" with "considering"; Page 9. Paragraph 4.5th SenWnoe, amend sentence to read, "To down zone the prope~y to R-I..."; Page 10, Paragraph 2, 1st Sentence, amend sentence to read, "...since the Zoning Map must be consistent with the General Plan." ' ;. '~. ON A MOTION BY Commissioner Larson, Seconded by Commissioner Puser, it was carried by following roll call vote to approve the minutes 0f November 12, 1997, as amended: . ~YfiS: / Commissioners ~ r~on, Chiles, ~u~or, and Chairman ~rudon. NOES: / None ABSTAIN: Commissioner,Correll ABSENT: None ~ · Chairman Pruden 'Commended Staff on behalf of the Commission for the accuracy and thoroughness of the Planning Commission minutes. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No one came forward. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 1 DECEMBER 10, 1997 S. APPEAL PROCESS Chairman Pruden read the appeal process to the audience. For matters heard at this meeting, the final date for appeal is December 22, 1997. Chairman Pruden inquired of Staff if the Administrative Procedures governing the appeal process were now ir effect. Charley Stump, Senior Planner, stated the Administrative Procedures Ordinance has been adopted by the City Council which states if you do not attend a meeting and address the Commission in either written or verbal form, you are precluded from filing an appeal in the matter. Ho noted this procedure will be stated on all future Planning Commission agendas. 7. pUBLIC HEARINGS A. Use Permit Amendment Application No. 97-39, as subrri'itted by I~edw°od Oil Company, to amend a previously approved Use Permit (#88-03) to allow the installation of a food preparation and serving facility within an existing auto service station, on property lOcated in the C,2 (Highway Commercial & Restricted Industrial) Zoning Distric~ at 1099'South State Street (Assessor Parcel Charley Stump, Senior Planner, presented a brief introductipn~'of, the Use Permit Amendment application to amend a previously approved use permit on the site of the CheV~'on ga~, ~tation at the comer of Talmage and State Streets. The proposal is to establish an "Aztec Grill" food preparation a~d.serving facility. Mr. Stump stated that Staff is generally supportive of these types of land uses, and from their research and analysis Staff finds that this chain is outstanding, and that co-branded or mixed.,u~e faCilities in general ~re both a good idea and a trend of the future. However, Staff does not believe it to be appropriate for this site. He introduced Dave Lohse, Associate Planner, for explanation of staff findings and to explain staff's recommendation for denial of this project. Dave Lohse, Associate Planner, reviewed the written s(aff report,-~ndicating approval of the proposed Use Permit Amendment would amend the existing permit approved in 1987 td allow the currently existing gas station to instal, and operate a take-out restaurant withinthe existing convenience store. The store is approximately 1,250 square feet in area and the proposed take-Out ~and food p?paration area would constitute 160 square feet of this area. The applicants haV~ not indicate8 if they would propose seating once the restaurant is opened, but there is no seating indicate~,.on the site pla'ns Mr. Lohse noted this'project is ex m CEQA. In reviewing the project it was determined the installation of the proposed restaurant would introduce an additional primary use to the site that does require the amendment of the existing Use Permit .... It was also determined that the remodel of the existing service station is generally consistent with the applicable development standards for the C-2 Zoning District, which include building height and yard areas. However, it was also determined that the project is not consistent with the parking requirements for the site. Mr~ Lohse noted in c~lculating the number of parking stalls that would be required for this use Staff determine~l it would be a minimum of one and possibly more, depending upon whether or not seating was installed;~ The pa ,rking requirement i§ the most beneficial one Staff could give to this project site and after additional research into other "Aztec Grills" located in the Chevrons in Windsor and Cloverdale, Staff determined that additional parking ir¥.the future might even be a higher prerequisite. Staff reviewed the varied parking schemes proposed by the applicant. The one shown on the project site would not work specifically because it does allow for the required back-up area to intrude into the designated right-of-way line for State Street. He noted there are no eminent plans to expand State Street at this point in time, but Staff feels it would be creating a hazard if it is developed in the future. The City Engineer has indicated it will be a future project, depending upon funding, etc. Staff also considered reconfiguring the parking stalls as they are striped now, which would have customers backing to the south. It is felt that would interfere with the pump operations if they are used more frequently than MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 DECEMBER 10, 1997 they are now. The restaurant use would probably generate more traffic tdps onto the site. The third parking stall is located towards the east of the project site, which is not real visible on site plans, and the fourth parking stall is not shown on the site plan but would be located to the south of the pumps. That area is currently used as the . only through-access on the site. Between the pumps and the convenience store building the only other access 'that they have could be blocked if people are pumping gas. In summary, Mr. Lohse stated the site has certain constraints and the addition of more parking spaces would further constrain and potentially create more hazards and safety problems, particularly between vehicles, and between vehicles and pedestrians. After analyzing this Staff made findings for recommendation for denial, as articulated in Findings I and 2, in the Staff Report. .~:.,.. Chairman Pruden requested more information relative to the Variance issuedin 1981~ Mr. Lohse indicated the Variance that accompanied the Use Permit covering only th~ project ~ite, but the retail ~nter to the east and the Redwood Auto Wash, allowed th~ pa[kin~ required for th~ total usos of all these sites to be reduced by four or tiro ~paces, by allowin~ the auto wash bay~ to b~Consid&md a~ parkinfl ~t~lls. Chairman Pruden inquired if that Variance was still in affe Since'~he prope~ies h~ve subsequently been subdivided. Mr. Lohse stated the Variance is still in affect, it just doesn't {echnically apply to this properly since it has been subdivided off. The Use Permit did require that the project site have three parking stalls. The applicants have, sin~ their submiffal of this application, stdped those three paAing stalls more ~eady, as they were not visible on our first site visits. /~.../~..::.,-~'~,.: .. ' Commissioner Puser asked for clarification of ~xisting parking Sp~s and what will additionally be required with this application. ~ ,, B~f ~ompl~ wifh fhe ~urrenf req~sf. E~hni~ll~ ~ ~re ~fill l~ki~ ~e ~rkiB~ ~f~ll. Q~i~i~r Qhi~ inquire~ if f~m i~ ~n~ mi~i~ r~uirem~f for ~ m~ia~ f~m i~f~ fhe ~rki~ ~f~lls ~mi~ off of State street. ~ ~'" ' t Mr, Lo se stated t e ~ e oes no s~ suc radius. The code does require a 24 foot back out area required for parking stalls at a....90~egree angle. '"~;~. . PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:~: 7:16 P,M. Rob~ ~x~35 W. Gobbi, st he is mpre~entin~ the applicants. He addressed issuos rai~ed in the Staff Repo~. He indicated there is rio room in the convenience ~toro for ~eatin~ or ,rand up eatin~ and stated the owners ~ould most likely be a~reeablo to a condition of approval to that effoct. Mr. ~ described this type of facility as "dashboard dining", indicatin~ it is in vogue now and ~e~m~ to have become a necessity to se~ice ~tations these days. Mr.~t prosentod le~or~ to the ~lannin~ Commission from tho ~ndsor and GIoverdale Chevro3St~tions with ~ec G~lls ~tatin~ at I~a~t 00% of all patron~ u~in~ their facility for the purpose of buyin~ food are them pfima~ly to ~et ~a~, not to buy food. The ~eneration of additional traffic for food, if an~hin~, would ~ w~ slight. He also noted ~as pump ordo~n~ i~ a potential future ~nsidoration for this facility and othor similar ~tations, whereby an intercom ~ystom is installed and food i~ orderod from tho ~as pump. Ho roitomted thero may ~ some ~dditional traffic, Dut it will be ~li~ht and should nol be ~use for alarm. He ~tated the requirement for an additional parkin~ ~pace is not unma~onablo. .t., .~. ... MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 DECEMBER 10, 1997 Mr. Axt also addressed the Chester Fded Chicken food establishment formerly located in the Chevron, which was referenced on Page 2 of the Staff Report. He provided the Planning Commission with a wdtten rebuttal to the Staff Report stating up until this year the Chester Fried Chicken was permitted by the Health Department and was inspected both by them and by Carl Tuliback, Code Enforcement Officer, and was never rejected for the functior in which it was used. This is merely a changeover from the chicken food service to the Aztec Grill. He noted copies of the health department inspection reports and a 2/8/96 inspection by Cad Tuliback attached to the written rebuttal. Mr. Axt referenced the plot plan provided in the Staff Report and discussed the three existing parking spaces to the west of the facility, which were recentb' striped, and a fourth compact parkin9 space that could be utilized without impacting the access to the gas station. He also referenced the potential for afifth parking space used only by staff at the restaurant. In the applicant's opinion there are four spaces ..existing and the potential for a fifth parking stall He commented in regard to the 24 foot back-up that isrequired.~.you are making a 90 degree right angle into t~at parking space. It is not required ~f you are com~n~l at st in any other angle and you are permitted to access a parking space from a diagonal or other access that,permits you int° th~space. Mr. Axt.~.circulated a drawing that indicates how parking currently sits on the site.t:.~ti'i,~.~iI,'': '%...~.~,.. Mr. Axt stated he is not sure at this time what the signage requests will be for the Aztec Grill,..other than a standard window sign. He did note that the sign for Chester Chicken was permitted. In summary, Mr. Axt stated there won't be an appreciable incre~ase ir~'traffic. It is a service that Chevron feels is important for its operation. He referenced again the letters submitted from the two managers in Cloverdale and Windsor claiming that 90% of their customers are gas customers. Mr. Axt also pointed out that this isn't the same as a "Jack in the Box" or "Subway Sandwich" where.l~ople come in to sit and dine. It is a minor adjunct to this operation for the convenience of its customers and to the c~istomers to the laundromat next door. /' he'~: ~G and . Chairman Pruden inquired as to the proposed 0peration'S'0ft tec ~ill hours of operation Mr. Axt stated the Grill will primarily serv6 burritos add he assu~es the hours of operation will the same as the gas station, which is 24 hours. Mr. ~ introduced Bridgett Summers is an employee of Chevron and could Bridgett Summers, 5720 Ridgewood ROad, stated the hours of operation will be 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Commissioner chiles referenced the'c0rrespondence from the Cloverdale and Windsor locations and inquired what the site land area is on those two Io~,afionS. He noted he has seen the new facility in Windsor and estimated it to be over half: an Mr. Axt stated 'he does not haVe that information. Mr. Lohse stated he does not have the exact acreages but he did contact both of the Planning Departments down there. The Windsor restaurant'is located in an existing Chevron that had a Grill converted into it. A primary part of the alSproval by the WindSor Planning Commission was that additional parking could be put on the site. The Cloverdale site was designed with additional parking and a drive-through window. Part of Staff's primary ,~; contention with the project site, is that it is constrained. If you can squeeze an adequate number of parking spaces in, there ~Ould still be a problem with circulation that can't be addressed properly because of the size and shape of the parcel. Chairman Pruden stated she has visited the Windsor site more than a dozen times, and stopped specifically for the food. She noted there are three handicaped parking spaces on the south side of the station, then you have to pull through the pumps and on the north side of the property there is almost double parking in the sense that you have the pumps and a parking spot beyond that. You essentially can not turn around and it is very awkward, MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 DECEMBER 10, 1997 but there are another four or five parking spaces over there' One of the spaces consists of the air and water dispensers. At best there are seven or eight parking spaces total. It is highly constrained and they are always full. Commissioner Chiles inquired as to what the applicants will do if the Aztec Grill becomes so popular, due to the quality of its food, that it becomes a large, thriving business at this small location. He stated he supports entrepreneurialship, and wonders if this would be a good prospect for it. Commissioner Correll inquired as to why Chester Fried Chicken was closed. · Mr. Axt stated Chester Fried Chicken was not closed by the Code Enforcement Officer or~e Health Department, but was closed to allow the changeover to the Aztec Grill. Mr. Stump inquired if there was a kitchen with Chester Fried.~Chicken, a~d.if notWhere were the chickens prepared. We need to determine if the Grill is a similar use and Mr. Lohse can'~,ddress if it was permitted or not. Mr. Lohse indicated he had not seen the information that Mr. AXt obtainedfrom Carl TUliback but in his personal conversations with Mr. Tuliback he indicated it was never a closed code enforcement action. He further stated that the Health Department inspects the health aspects only an"d does not have any jurisdiction over whether it is a valid land use operation. He pointed out that the Planning Department had received a complaint of food being prepared at that location. The code does not specifically address these, co-branded or mixed use type facilities. Mr. Lohse and Mr. Tuliback discussed this issue and determined that it was not an allowed use, otherwise this ,. would be a legal use for which the Aztec Grill would be a continuation and there would be no need for a public hearing. ~ Commissioner Correll inquired of Staff if the Chester Fried 'Chicken bUSiness has definitely ceased to operate. Mr. Lohse clarified the Chester Fried Chicken Operation' did not cease because of a code violation and he is not sure why it ceased but stated that it is not relative to this discussion. Mr. Lohse stated that chicken was being sold in bags from a heated container on the counter, which is not the same as someone coming in to order a meal and waiting while it is prepared. The Planning CommiSSion addressed a similar issue with the Shell Station and that is why Staff opposed the Subway Sandwich opera'tion they proposed, but recommended approval of the Baskin Robbins. When we look at these co-branded facilities one thing Staff looks at is the congestion that can occur. This is a 24-hour, full service gas Station and cardlock facility, and the addition of another use of this potential strains the limit that this site can har~dle. He reiterated that Staff is not against the concept, but it must be reviewed on a site by site basis. Commissioner Larson requested to speak to a representative of the applicants who could address the food preparation issues more clearlY~. · Bridgett SUmmers, 5720 Ridgewood Road, introduced herself as a representative for Chevron. .~- CommiSsioner Larson asked Ms. Summers if Chevron is still operating the Chester Fded Chicken food service. Ms. Summers stated Chevron is no longer serving chicken and stopped that operation in anticipation of the Aztec Grill. She added it seems to be more successful than the Chicken in their other stations. Commissioner Larson asked for Ms. Summers clarification between the Staff Report, which indicated Chevron was informed that the Chicken operation was not a permitted use and that the function ceased, and her earlier statement that Chevron stopped in favor of a new franchise. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page ,5 DECEMBER 10, 1997 Ms. Summers said her earlier statement was correct and added she was never informed that it was not a permitted use. Commissioner Larson inquired if the Aztec Grill food would be prepared to order as customers come in. Ms. Summers stated the food would be prepared to order, and they will also have a warmer that currently sits on the existing soft drink counter for pre-made burritos. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:40 P.M. Mr. Lohse stated for the record that Planning Staff had not seen any of the exhibits intrOduced by Mr. Axt prior to this hearing as none of them were presented to Staff. Commissioner Pruden stated she likes the food served by the 'Grill an;~ indicated she has stopped at the Windsor location many times on her way home from the Bay Area because it iS~vailable during later hours. She stated it is very popular, and it does take time to get the food. She commented that 'she must be part of the 10% that does just stop for food and no fuel, because the food is above average for take-oUt-food. Chairman Pruden stated she thinks the food is so good that it will attract people {O that Station for the food alone. She added she worked at the south end of town for the month of October and st~0pped everyday to purchase a soda on her way to work, and in her experience the parking is virtually non-existent. She cited several examples with lack of parking and congestion on the Chevron site. When recently ins~Pectin~ t.he site again on a Sunday, every parking place in the front of the launder- mat was full, so there is no room for ovei:flow. A person would have to park down on someone elses property to get into the Aztec Grill. Even though she loves the food, there is no place to park on this parking lot. Chairman Pruden added she does not know what has happened to the "no parking" sign located above the air/water pumps. It was posted all during the Fall when she was there and it is no longer there, yet that is access to the garbage and the back service area~. ~The,~tdping that is there makes no sense because you can not swing into those perpendicular parking spaces. 'i~ Commissioner Puser stated that Chevron station.is the only gas station she goes to in town and it is always hectic and hard to pull out. If the Aztec Grill is decent food, people will hear about it and it will become even more congested. Even though it may be good food, it i~ ~not a'gOod site plan. Commissioner'Correll stated as much as he would like to see an operation like the Grill, he has to concur with staff's conclusions and findings. He agreed that it is always a congested site and stated he passes by the location all the time. He realizes this type of rfiixed use seems to be the wave of the future, however, in taking the long view and examining this particular site he- .can not approve the project. · Chairman Prudent'added it is-tOo bad off-site parking isn't available on the large vacant lot to the north, but it is not currently, available.~'~ .. . · CommissiOner Larson concurred~ with the conclusions of the other Commissioners, adding it is not only a parking problem?but a circulation problem as well. Circulation on the site is marginal now; a food franchise service like this is g&ing to present delay~ in ingress and egress in terms of the fueling station itself. The reason he inquired about the food preparation is when he does fuel up he doesn't like to tie up the gas pumps, unless there is a convenient place to pull off to go inside. That is why the air and water pumps are off to the side, so the fueling pump stations are not tied up. He does not consider the fuel pumps parking spaces. The way this site plan is laid out there is no room to move around. If all the pumps are occupied there is no way to traverse the lot, it is a very constrained lot. Commissioner Larson stated given the fact that a variance was granted for the overall project extending down through the strip mall area and a six space variance that was allowed in conjunction with the carwash, tells us something about the parking constraints for the original project. Another consideration is that as the Redwood Business Park is built out traffic will increase on Talmage Road. There are already some major traffic mitigations that involve that intersection which will further constrain the ability to access this property. If MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 DECEMBER 10, 1997 there were more room, he could see this project going through, but without the ability to conveniently pull aside while food is ordered and prepared he does not see this as a viable project. Commissioner Chiles concurred with the comments made by the Planning Commission. He inquired whether the Fire Department had any comments on this project. Mr. Lohse stated he spoke with the Fire Marshal who stated based on the small size of the lot the Fire Department would not need to get a fire truck on the site, so while he agreed that circulation would not allow him to get a truck on the site, he did not feel that would be a major factor. Chairman Pruden stated she eats at Marino's every Friday and has observed that the fire lane is always parked on and completely full. Chairman Pruden stated it appears the Planning Commission is in agreement about this project and stated it is unfortunate the applicant could not negotiate some ~dditional parking on the empty lot contiguous to the property because they have an excellent product.. Commissioner Chiles added there is also plenty of vacant retail office space in town that could be'considered for the Aztec Grill. ~ ~. : "~ ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, Seconded by Commis~i°ner Larson, it was carried by the following roll call vote to DENY Use Permit Amendment Application No. 97-39,13ased on Findings No. 1 and 2, as stated in the Staff Report: AYES: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, CoitalI, and Chairr~'an Pruden NOES: None ~.~.~, .... \:- ABSTAIN' None ~/ ~ii'~ ABSENT: None ~,'. ? ~'~.. ~hairman Pruden informed the applicants t~at their apPlication had been denied and advised if they choose to appeal the decision they must submit it ~y'Novemb, er? ~ 22, 1997.??.. Mr. Stump stated as the applicants indiCated a din~ and daSh facility is a necessity to their operation, but as this Commission realizes, for this co~mmunity it is a n~cessity to provide good land use planning. , ~,, , ,, Discussion followed regarding proper.~se and location of such a franchise, as well as future uses in gas stations and the problems that exist with the Aztec Grills located in Windsor and Cloverdale. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS ~.-:: ~ · City Council and Redevelopment Agency Actions Future Planning Commission'Agenda Items Status Reports ~,'. None to'report. . ~LANNING COMmiSSION REPORTS Commissioner Larson referenced the meeting agendas and resumes regularly provided with the Director's Report. He noted they do not receive any meeting synopsis for Design Review and requested to receive copies of minutes on Design Review meetings. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 DECEMBER 10, 1997 Mr. Stump stated Planning Department does not normally attend Design Review Board meetings, unless the agenda contains a project pertinent to them. Larry DeKnoblough, Assistant Redevelopment Director, is the staff attendee. He indicated the minutes are available upon request. Chairman Pruden stated she will be attending a meeting on December 11, 1997 for the Ukiah Transit Center. She referenced an informational flyer that was circulated and inquired if Staff would be attending. Mr. Stump stated he and City Manager, Candace Horsley, would be there. Staff feels comfortable with the direction the project is moving. Discussion followed relative to the Ukiah Transit Center and the level of staff involvement'that will be available. Chairman Pruden stated she and Commissioner Larson attended the~'Kmart "Safeway grand openings, which were alot of fun. She was pleased to see the historical plaque ap~i decorative:lighting which had been installed at the new Safeway. Mr. Stump added the lights were a very nice touch and notecl severa[,~mpliments had been received on the lights. ·" Commissioner Correll reported he attended the Planning seminar at Sonoma State and stated it was very beneficial and informative. He advised the Commissioners that'he has a~,form for a course at Sonoma State, May 22 - July 28. 1998. called The Community Economic Development Process.? anyone is interested he has the form and the materials from the seminar. Commissioner Puser indicated she was unable to attend due to a conflict i~i 'schedules. Chairman Pruden referred to an article in Western Cities magazine about a skateboard park in Yucca Valley and noted it will be interesting to see, if and when, Ukiah's Skateboard park does evolve what shape it will take on. She will make copies and pass them around since it~i~ a current topic of discussion in Ukiah. Commissioner Puser referenceda r~nt artic, '-n the'U'k;;~ Daily Journal regarding the skateboard Park in Santa Rosa. .. ~ ~-. .... -.~ ADJOURNMENT ~-,, There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m. Melody ~..arfis, Recording Secretary pc121097.min Judy Pruden, Chairman MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 DECEMBER 10, 1997 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM' ,, DATE: ,, 7A. 12-10-97 DATE: December 2, 1997 TO: City of Ukiah Planning Commission FROM: City of Ukiah Planning Department SUBJECT: Use Permit Amendment No. 97-39 APPLICANT' Redwood Oil PROJECT SUMMARY: Approval of the proposed Use Permit Amendment would amend Use Permit #88-03 to allow the installation and operation of a take-out restaurant at an existing auto service station located in the C-2 (Highway Commercial & Restricted Industrial) Zoning District. The discretionary action associated with this project is quasi-judicial in nature; therefore each decision-maker must physically and personally visit the site prior to participating in the vote to approve, disapprove or modify the project. LOCATION' The project site is located at 1099 South State Street, at the northeast corner of the intersection of State Street and Talmage Road (Assessor Parcel No. 003-140-06). DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends DENIAL of Use Permit Amendment No. 97-39 on the grounds that the approval of the restaurant would exacerbate existing adverse congestion and circulation impacts on the project site, which is too constrained by size and existing development to allow the installation of additional parking stalls required to accommodate restaurant customers. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Environmental Coordinator has determined that this project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Categorical Exemption Section 15303, Class 3, which exempts the conversion of small portions of existing commercial structures. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial ZONING DISTRICT: C-2 (Highway Commercial & Restricted Industrial) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project site consists of a 7,750 square foot parcel that has been developed with an auto service station that includes two pump islands with four pumps and a 1,245 square foot convenience store structure. The project site has been used for an auto service station since at least the early 1970's, but was subsequently developed as a Chevron station used by card-lock patrons and the general public as part of a larger retail commercial center permitted by the Planning Commission's approval of Use Permit #88-3 and Variance #88-4. The service station site was later divided from the retail center, which is located on the property to the east, by the approval of Minor Subdivision Map #88-6. Approval of the proposed Use Permit Amendment w~)uld amend Use Permit #88-3 to allow a portion of the convenience store building at an existing auto service station site to be converted into a take-out restaurant known as the Aztec Grill. Specifically, a 160 square foot area of the 1,670 square foot store building would be remodeled to include a char broiler, range/oven, hot table, sandwich and preparation tables, and sinks necessary for the preparation of hot food items. A food-serving counter would also be installed along the southern wall of the building, although no seats would are proposed. The existing kitchen area in the convenience store building was used at one time for preparing chicken meals served by a separate franchiser, but Code Enforcement informed th!s user that such sevices were not a permitted use and this franchise was eventually discontinued. Therefore, the existence of these kitchen facilities in no way constitutes a legal, nonconforming use. STAFF ANALYSIS: Planning staff reviewed the proposed project and determined that the installation of the proposed restaurant use in the convenience store would introduce an additional primary use to the site that would require the amendment of the existing Use Permit to operate in the C-2 Zoning District. Staff has also reviewed the development standards for the C-2 Zoning District and determined that the remodel of the existing service station building is consistent with most of the applicable development standards, including those for building height and yard areas. Planning staff also reviewed parking requirements for the site, including a review of the site Plans for Use Permit #88-3 to determine how many parking stalls are required for the existing auto service station and convenience store. Based on these plans, staff determined that at least three parking stalls were required on the project site. Two of these stalls were to be located on the northwest corner of the site, between the building and the State Street right-of-way; a third stall was to be installed on the eastern property line. Staff has further determined that the takeout restaurant use is required to provide a minimum of ten parking stalls or one parking stall for every 100 square feet of gross area used by the restaurant, whichever is greater. The service station was originally approved as part of the commercial retail center to the east, and the users of the proposed restaurant are allowed to use the parking stalls located on this property. This center, however, contains two other food servers (Marino's and The Bottle Shop) that provide takeout service as a substantial part of their business, and staff calculated the parking requirements for the takeout restaurant based on the area to be used. Therefore, it is the opinion of staff that the restaurant would require a minimum of one additional parking stall for the 160 square feet of restaurant preparation area and two if any seating is installed. This additional stall would bring the minimum number of required parking stalls to four. The applicant has proposed installing four parking stalls on the site, including one along the eastern property line, one to the south of the southernmost pump islanC, and two along the west side of the convenience store building. However, Planning staff is very concerned with the placement and orientation of the proposed parking stalls for reasons more clearly articulated in the following analysis. First, although the parking stall located along the eastern property line is consistent with the parking lot requirements for Use Permit #88-3, it does require that vehicles back into the path of vehicles entering the service station from the adjacent retail center. It is staff's opinion that the allowance of the proposed restaurant would increase the number of vehicles that would enter the project site at this point and exacerbate an existing circulation problem. Second, one of the proposed parking stalls would be located directly south of the southernmost pump island. The installation of a parking stall here would effectively close off the only direct access across the project site, and would require vehicles to back out of pump islands if other vehicles are fueling or paying for gas. Third, the two parking stalls near the west side of the building would be oriented in an east-west direction that would require vehicles leaving the site to back out to a point that is within five to ten feet of the driveway apron for the existing driveway along State Street. This pattern could directly interfere with vehicles entering or leaving the site, and could contribute to accidents if vehicles attempting to enter the site are forced to wait for vehicles that are exiting the parking stalls. This orientation would also force vehicles to drive through the gas pump lanes before exiting onto Talmage Road. The orientation of the two stalls adjacent to the building would also require vehicles to back into an area of the project site that has been dedicated as future right-of-way for State Street. The City Engineer has indicated that there are no immediate plans to fund and construct such an expansion on this portion of State Street, but approval of the parking stalls as shown by the applicant would be restrictive to the efficient and safe use of this right-of-way when constructed. The existing parking stalls west of the convenience store building could be retained with a north-south orientation to mitigate direct interference with the existing improvements and dedicated right-of-way for State Street. This orientation, however, requires vehicles to back into the ingress-egress for the northernmost pump island, and would further impact existing circulation conflicts between different vehicles and pedestrians and vehicles. CONCLUSIONS: The Planning Department concludes that the installation of the proposed takeout restaurant in the convenience store building would require the expansion of existing parking facilities, which are already severely constrained by the relatively small size of the commercial lot and the existing development on this site. Staff further concludes that the installation of one or more additional parking stalls would substantially exacerbate existing circulation problems and increase the potential for conflicts between different vehicles and vehicles and pedestrians. FINDINGS: The Planning Department's recommendation for the denial of the proposed Use Permit Amendment is based, in part, on the following finding: o The installation of the takeout restaurant would require one or more additional parking stalls that would cause additional congestion and circulation on a site that is already constrained by its size and the amount of existing development on the lot; and , The project would adversely affect the health or safety of persons working or residing in the neighborhood since any increase in congestion or circulation problems on the site would impair the ability of vehicles to enter or exit the site and cause additional on-site conflicts between different vehicles and vehicles and pedestrians. ATTACHMENTS: , 2. 3. 4. 5. Location Map Site Plan Floor Plan Revised Parking Plan Submittal Packet prepared by Applicant ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The following personnel prepared and reviewed this Planning Report, respectively: UPA gT-3g.PC LOCATION MAP USE PERMIT AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 97-3~: REDWOOD OIL COMPANY 1099 South State Street {Assessor Parcel No. 003-140-46) I I I I I I I 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 FT. SCALE: 1 inch = 500 feet PLOT PLAN BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION ASSESSOR'S .A.CEL NO. 3--/~'-- APPLICATION NO. COMMUNITY NAME , ~ ~~ , Show II~ bull~lngs, structures, mobile homes, ~ptlc tanks Ind Illth flelOs, wills, streams, lekes, ;fldt, streeU, alleys, retaining wellS, fences, ease. merits, electrical power poles, and any other Improvements and lndi~te al~ Olstanc~ between. Specify whether existing or pro~osea. Draw to eno show s~le. Inflate orientation with a North Arrow, ~ ~... ~ . I / i · I ~ ~ -~ ,, *'.~--, , v' / -c,. · ." . t ·. 0r /~.... ~~ ..' ~.. - . .,', ~ /~~/, · //~ _ ,~'~ ....... ,., ~ · ,.? · ~~o.~ ~~_ /.z z,:.:. ,. .~ ~ .~. ~~. · -/~:. ~~ - ,;~,'.~,' - ~ , ~t .. '~ .... o ~~z, ...... ~ ... ~: ,,~. ~_ . , ~.~ · .. p, ..... · ~. / ~~;~ . . ~ ~o; ,.~ · '-. · .~: · ; ~ ~. · . .... . ~ .. , ~ · . . ~ ~ , · ., , . . . ~ . , ? . ..7 , 7... / .! - .. ~' ~ ' ~," ". ~. ~. · ~'.. -..~~'~ ~ ~/~,~./ '~r~ _.~t'.'-~ · ~ h~ ~.' / ~ ',! .. / ~.~. .'~ '~' · ~ ~T~ -- ',', ~ .~:' ' ' ~ / . "~~...~ ' :i · ' .... ' ,: t ]' ~ -.~, ~' / · ..r'~_% ~"/ _ .~ i _.~- .: · ' ,, , r / FT .... ~ ' · ' /' · P~Y' ' ' ~' ~' ~ ..... ~ ...... .? ':'~': ~-'~::~" I.~' J ' ~ -- > 7 ..... tlC" -- /_o,' REDWOOD PLAZA CHEVRON 1090 South State Street Uldah, CA 95482 10/31/97 Applicant's/Owner's name and other facts: Redwood Oil Company, Inc. 455 Yolanda Avenue Santa Rosa. CA 95404 [707] 546-0766 Contact Person: Liz Cfiss Redwood Plaza Chevron [Ukiah] 1090 South State Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Manager: Bridgett Sommers Agent for Applicant: Ax't & Mitchell 135 West Gobbi Street, Suite #205 Ukiah, CA 95482 Architect: Lawrence Mitchell, AIA Assessor Parcel Number(s): 003-140-046 Project Description: Convert e.'dsting food service menu offering in an existing mini-market/automobile fuel station complex from fried chicken and tempura to a Latin or Mexican menu. The conversion requires that appliances be changed, that a commercial cooking exhaust hood be added, and that a new appliance fuel gas service be installed. It requires the relocation of one walk-in refrigerator door and one kitchen access door. All work vdll be conducted within the existing structure, no added floor area or movement of walls is proposed. There will be some signage changes on the exterior to advertise the new use. It is the intent of the marketing for this business to draw patrons from the fueling islands and from the adjacent Redwood Plaza Shopping Center. The westerly tenant of the plaza being a Laundromat. This would be primarily foot traffic, not necessitating additional parking. No provision is being made for seating within or adjacent to the existing market. This will be strictly take-out. The employee loading will not change [see facts below]. The hours of operation for the food service portion of the business will be 11:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The market and fuel islands will remain open 24 hours a day. Page 1 of 1 Facts about project/site: REDWOOD PLAZA CHEVRON 1090 South State Street Ukiah, CA 95482 10/31/97 Site Land .ad-ca: Building A. rea: Gross = Net = Open Canopy Area: Site Coverage (Bldgs): On-sit~. parking: Landscaped Area: Paved Land Coverage: Total Site Coverage: +/- 9,792 sf +/- 1,248 sf Kitchen Area: Gross = +/- 1,110 sf Net = +/- 1,800 sf % TGA = 32% (includes open canopy) 4 spaces (not including the 8 fueling stations) +/- 907 sf (9.3% of site land area) +/- 5,837 si' (does not include area under open canopy) 90.7% (impervious land coverage = Bldgs + Paving) 119.5 sf 101.3 sf 9.6% Hours of operation: Market/Fuel islands = Food service = 24 hours a day '8 hours a day (11:00 AM to 7:00 PM) Employees: Cashier = (3) 8 hour shift(s) a da)' Kitchen = (1) 8 hour shift(s) a day (1) 4 hour shift(s) a day DeliveD'/Loading facilities: Hand-truck or carry-in only. Business history/location/change: Site has been occupied by a sen'ice/fueling station for man)' years. Originally the site housed a traditional service/fuel station with service bays and public toilets and a small office. The station was operated under a number of brands, including Shell Oil, Beacon, and more recently Chevron. Sometime in the late 1970's or early 1980's the service bays, office and retail sales area. and store room were remodeled and converted into a mini-market. In 1989 following the demolition of the old Bottle Shop and the construction of the Redwood Plaza shopping center, a new canopy was installed and the facade was re-done on the market. Sometime in the early 1990's the food service use was added to the market. The new menu offering is a new feature of an existing, established business which has operated from this site for a number of years [see photographs accompanying]. The proprietor, does not expect the new menu to in any way change the external manifestation of the current use, in areas such as noise, lighting, dust, or vibration. The business has public utility sen'ices such as electricity, sewage, and water provided by the CiD' of Uldah. Gas service does not currently exist. An application has been submined to PG&E for a new gas service for the kitchen. If this request is approved, construction will start within a week. Contractors are currently stucb.'ing the plans and preparing bids for the Owners consideration. Land uses and zoning.on adjacent properties consist of the following by direction: Direction Zone Present Use a.) North C 1 Vacant, Commercial b.) East C 1 Mixed, Commercial c.) South C1 Mixed, Commercial d.) West C 1 Mixed, Commercial Page 2 of 2 Dua~ne MoKinne~ S414~98717 p.1 02' 47P1,~I FFa£'M ~B~ 1 t96'WINDSOiCa, CA IINTIL limBS lilTS ITEM NO. 9a DATE' January. 21,199(1 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: PRESENTATION BY BMX GROUP AND CONSIDERATION OF LEASE RENEWAL FOR RUSTY BOWL BMX TRACK At the December 17, 1997 meeting the City Council requested this item be returned in order to allow representatives of the Rusty Bowl BMX group to provide a presentation to the Council as to their activities. The Board of Directors has been contacted and representatives will be present. As was presented to the Council previously, the lease is for the property adjacent to the South Ukiah Little League site and is in the amount of $1.00 per year. The proposed lease is attached. Staff continues to support the use of the property for this purpose and recommends approval of the lease as proposed. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve lease renewal with Rusty Bowl BMX ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine lease requires revision and remand to staff with direction. 2. Determine lease is inappropriate at this time and do not renew. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Rusty Bowl BMX Prepared by: Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. December 17,1997 Agenda Summary Report with lease APPROVED' ~ ~, ~andace' Manager LD BMX.ASR ITEM NO. 56 DATE: December 17. 1997 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF LEASE RENEWAL WiTH RUSTY BOWL BMX TRACK The City of Ukiah has leased a portion of the property located at the end of Lavaggi Lane (Gobbi Street) to the Rusty Bowl BMX track since Apd118, 1984. The group has requested a renewal as the current five year lease has expired. The site occupied by the Rusty Bowl is located between the South Ukiah Little League site and the Russian River, and consists of 81,532 square feet. As with the Little League, Rusty Bowl leases the property for one dollar per year and is responsible for all utilities, maintenance, and insurance related to their operation. The agreement with the BMX group has been a successful partnership providing a needed site for this healthy sports activity, on what would otherwise be an under utilized property. As no alternative public use for the property has been identified, it is recommended to renew the lease with Rusty Bowl BMX under the proposed terms of five years for one dollar per year. The proposed lease is attached. RECOMMENDED ACTION' Approve renewal of lease with Rusty Bowl BMX track. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' 1. Determine lease requires revision and remand to staff with direction. 2. Determine lease is inappropriate at this time and move to deny. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: Rusty Bowl Board of Directors Requested by: Rusty Bowl Board of Directors _ -~ Prepared by: Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director,,L~,J~J Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachment: 1. Proposed lease Candace Horsley, City~ Manager LD3 BMX..asr LEASE AGREEMENT This Lease, made this 1st day of January, 1998, by and between the City of Ukiah, State of California, acting by and through its City Council, hereinafter referred to as "Lessor" and the Rusty Bowl BMX, Inc. a corporation organized and existing under and in compliance with the laws of the State of California and its officers, hereinafter referred to as "Lessee." RECITALS: 1. Lessor has the authority contained in Government Code { {37380 and 37395 and does determine that the use of certain property owned by the Lessor is not required for its use at this time and is available for Lease, and 2. The use of said property by the Lessee would be and is beneficial for the citizens of the City of Ukiah. LEASE AGREEMENT 1. LEASE. The parties hereto agree that on the terms and conditions hereinafter expressed, Lessor does hereby let to Lessee and Lessee does hereby hire fi.om Lessor a portion of that certain parcel of property commonly referred to as "Old Sewer Plant", located on City property to the Southeast of East Gobbi Street (Levaggi Lane), County of Mendocino and West of the Russian River, not already leased to the South Ukiah Little League, more specifically described on the attached "Exhibit A". The lease includes the right to use for access the road constructed by the South Ukiah Little League, to provide access to other City owned property. Lessor retains its right to use said road at any time for its own purposes. 2. TERM. The term of this Lease is for a period of five (5) years commencing on the date set forth above. -1- 3. RENT. As rent for the term hereby demised, Lessee agrees to pay to Lessor the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) per year in full consideration hereof for the use of said property. 3.1. Lessee specifically represents that it does not intend to make a profit on the use of the leased prerrfises. All income derived from use of the leased premises shall be used exclusively to sponsor or promote BMX bicycle racing on the leased premises or for improvements to the leased premises. 3.2. Lessee shall maintain regular books of account which it shall make available to Lessor upon demand for inspection or audit. 4. USE AND IMPROVEMENTS. Lessee hereby agrees to install all permanent improvements which shall become part of said property and tire to said improvements shall be vested in the Lessor upon termination of this Lease except as set forth herein. 4.1. Lessee shall use the ~ premises exclusively as a non-motorized, bicycle race course and for organized races under the Lessee's sponsorship and supervision. 4.2. lmprovermnts, excavations, removal of any trees, brash, grass or improvements and other modifications to the property shall be the sole responsibility of Lessee and shall be approved by Lessor prior to conducting work. However, Lessee understands that Lessor is not experienced in the safe design of bicycle race courses and relies upon Lessee's experience and expertise in designing a safe course under established standards. Lessee will make all reasonable efforts and take all reasonable precautions to design and construct a course that is safe and free from unreasonable hazards likely to cause injury to persons who use the course. Lessee shall conduct races in accordance with the highest standards for safety and shall require the use of appropriate safety equipment by all persons who use the track. -2- 4.3. Prior to sponsoring its first race, under this Lease, Lessee shall consmact a six foot security type fence around the entire perimeter of the leased premises, or in an alternative location meeting the approval of Lessor. Lessee shall obtain the prior written approval for the fence before its installation as well as the wriuen approval of the Lessor for the constructed fence. Utilities as needed (water, electric, sewer) shall be constructed underground. 4.4. Lessee agrees to keep the premises and all improvements in good repair and order and to bear the full cost for maintenance of all improvements. 4.5. Lessee shall acquire the necessary and required permits from the appropriate regulating body for the development proposed under this lease. 4.6. Lessee is responsible for the relocation, alteration, removal, construction, reconstruction of any municipal or private facilities, structures or utilities existing on leased premises which are presently in use or abandoned. 4.7. Lessee shall insure that no alcoholic beverages are possessed or consumed on the leased premises at any time. Lessee shall not use or permit the leased premises to be used except in full compliance with all roles, regulations, laws or ordinances of the City of Ukiah and the State of California. Lessee shall not permit use of the property for any reason after the hour of 10:00 p.m. Lessee shall not permit vehicles to park on the premises between the hours of 10 p.m. and 8 a.m., and shall properly post the premises in accordance with Vehicle Code requirements. 5. ASSIGNMENT. Lessee will not assign this Lease or any interest therein and will not let or underlet the said premises or any part thereof without the prior written consent of the Lessor. 6. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE. 6.1. Lessor shall not be liable for and is free from the cost of any clamages for personal injury or property damage resulting fi.om the use made by Lessee of the demised premises, -3- any defective condition or faulty construction of the demised premises ex/sting at the time of letting or arising thereafter and Lessee covenants and agrees to indemnify and save harmless said Lessor and its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all liability, loss, cost, or other obligation, including reasonable attorney's fee, on account of or arising out of any such injuries or losses l:owever occunSng. 6.2. Lessee covenants and agrees during the life of this Lease at Lessee's sole expense to comply with the requirermnts of Exhibit B, Insurance Requirements for Lessees (No Auto Risks), attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 6.3 Notwithstanding the provisions of Exhibit B requiring Lessee to procure workrren's compensation insurance, Lessee need not procure such insurance provided all of the fol- lowing conditions are met: a. It maintains its status as a non-profit tax exempt organization; b. It's Board of Directors takes no action to designate any person providing services or work to the organization as its employee; and c. All persons performing services for the organization do so strictly as volunteers without receiving any compensation whatsoever. Lessee shall immediately notify Lessor if it fails to meet all of the conditions of this paragraph 6.3 and shall knamdiately thereafter comply with the workmen's compensation provisions of Exhibit B. 7. TERMINATION. 7.1. This Lease or any renewal thereof, may be cancelled for any reason by either party on sixty (60) days wrinen notice to the other party. 7.2. Lessor can cancel this Lease immediately for any breach of this lease by Lessee, including, but not limited to, failure to provide insurance, without any prior notice to Lessee. -4- 8. ATTORNEY'S FEES. Lessee shall pay Lessor its reasonable costs and attorneys fees if Lessor prevails in any legal action to enforce any of the terms of this Lease. 9. TIME OF ESSENCE. Time is of the essence of this agreement. 10. WAIVER. City's waiver of any default in Lessee's performance of any condition of this Lease, including the obligation to pay rent, shall not constitute a waiver of remedies available for a subsequent breach of the same or a different condition of this Lease. Acceptance of subsequent rental payments from Lessee or its assignees shall not constitute a waiver of the failure of Lessee to pay rent or obtain prior approval to an assignment of this Lease. 11. NOTICES. Any written notice required hereby shall be deemed sufficient when placed in the United States mail, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: TO LESSEE; ~ Rusty Bowl B MX, Inc. City Manager Ukiah Civic Center 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 12. PARAGRAPH HEADINGS. Paragraph headings are included for the convenience of the parties and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this Lease. 13. PREVIOUS AGREEMENTS. Any and all existing statement or agreements, whether oral or written, or renewals thereof, between the parties hereto, covering the same subject matter, are hereby cancelled and superceded -5- by the terms of this Lease, and such prior agreements, statements or understandings shall have no further force or effect. 14. DUPLICATE ORIGINALS. This Lease may be .'.xecuted in one or more duplicate originals bearing the original signature of both parties and when so executed any such duplicate original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of this Lease. Entered on the date f'u'st written above. CITY OF UKIAH ATYEST: By: City Clerk RUSTY BOWL BMX, INC. It's ~,t £_, --~:.T~&9 -6- ~SURAHCE REQUI'REMENTS FOR LESSEES (HO AUTO ,., · BIDDERS' ATTENTION IS DIRECTED TO Tile IHSURANCE REQUIREMENTS BELOW. IT IS IFIGIILY ]IECOMMEFIY)ED TtlAT BI'DDERS CON'FER W'ITIt TIiETR RESPECTTVE I~ISLFRANCE CARR.FERS OR BROI£ERS TO DETERMIN'E ~ ADVAiNCE OF ]BID SUB- bEISS-IOt't 'I-liE AVt~d'LA. BILFI''Y OF IY'ISURANCE CERTIFICATES A/'tD Ei'f'DORSEM'EFITS AS pRESCIUBED Af'tD PROVIDED IIEREIbl. I7' AN APPA_REHT LOW BII)DER F,,LFLS TO COM-PLY STRICTLY WITH TILE INSURAHCE REQUIREMENTS, TIIAT BFDDER MAY BE DISQUALIFIED FROM AWARD OF TIlE CObiTRACT. Lessee shall procure and maintain for the duration of the conwact insurance agaimt claims for injuries to persons or damages to property wtfich may arise from or in connection with the Les.see's operation and use of the leased promises. The cost of such insurance shall be borne by the Lt:sscc. ~]J,~'FS-FSF'u~l SCOPE OF · Coverage shall be. ~t least as bmod as: I. Irrsuranc~ Services Office form number GL O00~Z (Ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Scr,,'ices Office :form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001). 2. .Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability insurance. · B. bJm~ru~i Lmrrr~ orI,~stm.~,xc~i L~se..e shall mai. grain limits no less than: General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, pcmorial injury and property damage. I1' Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form witli a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggr~:gate limit shall apply separately to Ods pmjccfflocadun or the general aggmgau: limit shall be twice rix:: requi~cd occurrence l. bni(. · Workers' Compemation and Employers Liability: Workers' compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State o1' California and Employc~ Liability limits of $1,080,000 p::r accidcnt. - .C. D £DUCT!pL, F-.S Xh"n .,.q £tr-l~$t;'r,£1~ RFIT~\'I'iOYS~ · Any dcd,ctiblcs or scll'-insun:d n:lenfioru must be declared lo and appnavcd by thc Ciiy. At the opton of risc City, either. Ibc immer shall ri:duce or eliminate such deductibles or scll-im'urrd · j~:u:ndo~ 33 r~~'the City, iLs officers, officials, employees 3nd voluntr..crs; or thc Lcss~ ~ha3 procure!a bond guaranteeing payment of los.scs ~nd n:latcd investigations, cLaim admh-dstration ;md dcfcr~c expense. 'D..gq'~rrn Tt;stm,,,:tc'z ?Rov~-qo.xs_ The polici~ am to contain, or te cndoncd to contain, fire following provisions: ' I. General Liability · a. Tl~c City, its officers, officials, employees ~d volunteers are to be covered'as in.vu~s as respects: liability arising out of premises owned, oco~picd or used by thc Lcsscc. Tile covcngc shall contahl no special limitatiorm on the scope of protection afforded to City, iLS officers, officials, cmployccs or volunteers. · b. The Le..ssee's irmurance coverage shall be primary insur'~nce as respecu the City, officers, oflicials, employees and volunteers. Any insu~nce or scLf-bxsurance maintained by file City, iLs officers, officials, employees or volunteer.; shall ~ excess of thc Lessec's · i,L~tU'ance and slmll not conuibute with it. c. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the poticics .shall not affect coverage provided to the City. its ofticers, officials, employees or voluntea:rs. d. Coverage shall s'mte that file Lessc:'s insm'ance shall apply separately ~o each insurea]~ against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to thc limits of the insure s UabilirT. · Workers' Compensation and Employers Liabilily Coverage .· Thc bLsumr shall :,gree. to waive all righu of subrogation ~gainst the City, iLS officers, officials. · cmploye~ and volunteers for losses arising from the leased premises. :3. All Coverages ! ~Each ins-u~ce policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled, reduced in coverage or in limiLS except after thirty (30) days' prior wfiuen notice by certified m~l. return n:ceipt requested, has been given to the City. · Ee /~ CClrI,TA BILFF¥ Of ]'SSUI:t ER__S · Insurance is to be placed with ir~urers with ~ l]est~s rating ofno less than A:ViI. V_VtRrmcxx~o, o~' Co','zm~o~ . · Lessee shall furnish file City with certificates of insurance ~nd with original cndorscmcnu efrccting coverage tuquircd by rids clause. Thc certificates and cndorscmcnu for each i~surance policy arc to be silu~cd by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on iLS behalf. Thc certificates and cndor~cmcnt': re't: to be on forms provided by thc City· Where by statute, thc City's workers' r..omp<:nsation-n:lau:d forms cannot be used, equivalent forms aFprovcd by tl~ IrLvU~ Commissioner arc to Ix: substituted. All certilicatcx' and endorscmc-ntx arc Io be rc~ivr, d znd approved by O~ City before work commences. Thc City re. serves Ore right to rr_quirc complctc, certified copies of all r~luimd policies, at any time. · · · >.. - I-.d o.. "RODUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE WICK ~I~.CH]~ ~NSURANC~ ~C. DOES NOT AMEND, ~END OR ALTER THE COVE~GE AFFORDED BY THE [702 ~. E~gh[ana POLICIES BELOW. su~=e ~=0= COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE ~hoea~x, A[ 85016-4665 ~ER ., ~PANY a INSURED ~e~an B~y~e ~sso~on ~MPANYc ~.O. BOX ?[8 Chandler, AZ 85244 ~MPANY D ~MP~Y E THIS IS TO CERTI~ THAT THE POLICIES OF INSU~NCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NO~ITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT. TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN. THE INSU~NCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SU~ECT TO ALL THE TERMS. ~CLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUOH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID O~IMS. POUCY EFFECTIVE POUOY ~PI~ON CO ~E OF INSU~NCE ~UCY NUMBER UMI~ LTR DA~ (MM~D~ DA~ ~M~D~ ~ GENE~L UABIU~ GENE~ AGGREGA~ $ 1, 000 ~ 000 X ~MUE~ALGENE~LUAB~UW SD~00911-01 02/02/g? 0~/02/98 ~C~~PAGG. S 1, 000, 000 ~ ~cuR ~NAL &AOV. ~NJU~Y S 1, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 C~MS MADE ~NER'S & ~N~OTOR'S P~T. ~CH ~URRENCE S 1 ~ 000 ~ 000 X PARTICIP~ LEGAL FIRE D~AGE (Any o~ fire) $ MED. ~PENSE (Any one ~mon; AUTO~OBI~ UABlU~ ~MBINED SING~ UMIT ANY AUTO A~ OWNED AUTOS ~DILY INJU~ ~HEDU~D AUT~ (Per ~n) HIRED AUTOS ~DILY INJU~ $ NON~WNEO AUTOS ~er accident) G~GE UABIU~ p~PER~ DAMAGE ~CESS MAalU~ ~CH ~URRENCE $  UMBRE~ FORM AGGREGA~ O~ER ~AN UMBREL~ FORM WORKER'S COMPENSATION ~CH ACCIDENT AND DiS~E_~UCY UMIT $ EMPLO~RS' UABILI~ ~S~E_~CH EMPLOYEE ~ OmE~ DE.RIP.ON OF OPE~ONS~A~ONS~EHIC~S~PECIAL Cert holder,C~ty of Uk~h, track o~ers, operators, sponsors, Z~ndlords & part~cipante a=e asa'1 ~ne'~ for all operations out of sauct~o~ea ~A racin~ event &/or trauke.De~uctible $500 ~ ........ S~U'~D' ~'~Y"~'~'"~'~B°vE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE ~ ~PI~TION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL END~VOR TO CA15 Rusty Bowl B~ ~897 ::::?:~;:; MAIL 30 DAYS WRI~EN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE Attn~ J~es Bud Bile7 ~ LE~, BUT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR 100 Laws Ave. Apt. E ~ LIABILI~ OF A~ KIND UPON THE COMPANY, ITS~ENTS OR REPRESENTAT~ES. ITI~M NO. 9b DATE: January. 21,1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF SE'I-I'LEMENT AGREEMENTS, CITY OF UKIAH V. INVEST FINANCIAL CORPORATION, ET AL. The Investment Attorneys are in the process of finalizing the subject agreements, which the Council has discussed in previous Closed Sessions. We anticipate receiving copies of the agreements prior to the City Council meeting so that Council has adequate time for review. If not, this item may be continued to the next meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council approve settlement agreements, City of Ukiah v. Invest Financial Corporation, et al. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Council provide further direction to the City Attorney and do not approve settlement agreements at this time. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City Attorney Prepared by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Coordinated with: David Rapport, City Attorney Attachments: 1. None. Acct. No.: (if budgeted) APPROVED:(~~ ~ Cand-~ce Horsley, City ~anager 4/Can:ASRInvest.2 ITEM NO, 9¢ DATE: January. 21,1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: PRESENTATION BY PHIL DOW AND DISCUSSION OF SB 45 Councilmember Kristy Kelly has requested Council discussion of the Mendocino Council of Governments' (MCOG) SB 45 Regional Improvement Program funds before she attends the next MCOG meeting. The Mendocino County share of these funds is $17.3 million and the Regional Improvement Program recommending the use of these funds is due by March 2, 1998. MCOG staff member Phil Dow will be presenting an overview of SB 45 along with MCOG staff's recommendations for use of the funds. A written overview of SB 45 to the Technical Advisory Committee is included in the packet for Council's review in preparation for the presentation and discussion Wednesday night. The Ft. Bragg Council has considered this issue and voted to recommend that some of these funds be returned to the cities and the County for use in local street and road projects and other purposes, rather than just one large state project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council receive report and conduct discussion regarding Senate Bill 45. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Councilmember Kelly Prepared by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. MCOG memorandum from Phil Dow regarding SB45 APPROVED: ~~_, ~~._ ..~ Candace Horsley, Cit[ 4/Can. ASRSB45.Dow Manager FROM · DOW @ ASSOCIATES PHONE NO. · 707463~2212 Jan. iS 1998 89:8SAM P1 AGENDA ITEM DATE: 1/21/9 MENDOCINO COUNCIl, OF GOVERNMENTS MEMORANDUM J~-~m~ 13, TO: TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: PIIIL DOW, MCOG RE: 5B45 AND ~ 1.8 REGIONAL IMPROVEMENT PRO~RAM INTRODUCTION Senate Bill 45 was signed by the Governor on October 2, 1997 and became effective on January 1, 1998. The author's (Senator Kopp) stated goals for the bill were to simplify the pro~ramminE process and to better establish responsibility and accoumability for project delivery. The bill transforms the STEP (State Transportation Improvement Program) from a project delivery document to a resource management tool. Caitrans continues to be responsible for the operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation of the state highway system. Caltrans will be responsible for programn~g improvement projects funded through the Interregional Improvernent Program from a portion of the total funds which are set aside for that purpose. The majority of the improvement funds available in the state, however, will be programmed by the regional transportation planning agencies through the Regional Improvement Program. MCOG staff is recommending that the entire share of Regional Improvement Program funds available to MCOG ($17,3 million) be programmed to match Interregional Improvement Program funds for completion of the four=lane Willits Bypass project. Please consider this staff report as you consider the Technical Advisory Committee's recommendation to MCO~ on contents of the 1998 Regional Improvement Program. MAJOR FEA~S OF SB 45 There are numerous si?ificam change~ in the planning, programmins, and project delivery processes due to Senate Bill 45. Full discussion ofeach issue could warrant several pages of narrative, therefore only a few are pre~mted below in bullet form: ~ The nine categorie.~l programs ( Intexcity Rail, Interregional Roads, ]Flexible Congestion relief, Retrofit Soundwalls, c'tc.) from the 1989 Transportation Blueprint were consolidated into two programs, the Regional Improvement Program and the Interrogional Improvement Program. FROM · DOW @ ASSOCIATES ~ NO. : -P8746~2212 Jan. 1S 1998 Elg:I~t6AM P2 [] Of the Funds available for the STIP, 75 percent are committed to the Regional lmprovemer~t Program and 25 percent to the interregional Improvement Program. Funds · ,~{d~ are ava~labl~ to individual transportation p/arming asenc, ie.~ are determined based on historical distribution formulas which consider north/.~uth split, road miles, and population. [] The horizon period for the STIP was shortened from 7 to 4 years. For ~e transitional 1998 STIP, the horizon period will tm 6 yeau-s. I~ Full costs of' projects arc to be programmed. These are to be identified as environmental, design, right-of-way, and construction components. I~ Approved projects from the 1996 STIP have been 8randfathered into the SB 45 process. This means that the partial funding of the Willits Bypass and two other smaller highway projects is secure. ~ Upon submittal of'the Regional Improvement Program, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) either adopts the program or rejects |! en masse. The CTC c.~mot pick individual componer~ts of'the Regional Improvement Program, INTERREGIONAL PROGRAM OBJECTIVES The Interregional Improvement Program will include both State highway and rail projects (potentially including mass transit guideway and grade separation projects). For State hi_~hwavs.~ the interregional program should emphasize the development of a basic trunk system ( a subset of the larger interregional road system de~Txibed in statute, with extensions in urbanize~ areas) that provides: 1. access to and through or around California's urbanized an:as (over 50,000 population) and the foilowin£ areas that serve as major economic centers for multicounty areas: Eureka, Susanville, and Bishop; and 2. aooess to California's major interstate and international 8atcways. including interstate and international border crossings, international airports, and maports. ~ the interregional program should emphasize: 1. the preservation and improvement of'the e0dstin8 State-sponsored interoiry passenger rail routes, including compliance with safety and accessibil~ standards; 2. the redu~ion oftl~e system's dependence on State opez~ sub~idies; 3. the improv~nent of oth~ passenger rail ac~.~ be~v~ major urban c~.~er~ airports, ~nd intercity rail route~; ~nd 4. the use o£ r~il grade separ~tion~ to improv~ ~ervice reliability for 'both interplay passenger r~i] and interregional goods movcm~. -2- FROM ' DOW @ ASSOCIATES -, PHONE NO. ' ?0?4632212 Jan. 15 1998 09:06AM P3 The basic trunk system referred to above was identified on January 5, 1998. It consists of ten Focus Routes. In Caltrans Di~riet 1, Routes 20/29/53,299, and 101 are identified as Focus Routes. ]~t is expected that the bulk of highway projects funded by the 25% of total funding available in the state will be expended on projects on the Focus Routes. THE 1998 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPRO~MENT PROGRAM (STIP) California Transportation Commission (CTC) staff, in cooperation with regional agencies, has produced interim guidelines for 1998 STIP developmem. As noted in the above bullets, the 1998 STIP will cover a six-year period. The 2000 STIP and subsequent STIPs will cover four-year horizon periods. Caltrans District 1 is preparing a district-wide Interregional Transportation Improvement Program which includes all proposed projects for the Interregional Road system within the district. Eligible lnterregional Road System routes in Mendocino County are Route 1, Route 20, Route 101, and Route 128. District 1 is proposing two projects within Mendoeino County to be funded under the Interregional Improvement Program: 1. Hopland Unit 3 (PM 5.8-9.2) on Route 101 south of Hopland. This project was once a segment of Unit 2, which has just been completed (near Squaw Rook). This segment had been dropped several years ago due to major geotechnical problems/redesign encountered in Unit 2 which resulted in the need to shorten the project to remain within funding constraints. Caltrans is requesting $19.5 million to complete this segmem. 2. Willits Bypass (PM T43.5-51.3) on Route 101 near Willits. This project will convert the funded two-lane bypass to a full four-lane bypass. A total of $61.4 million will be required to complete the project. District 1 is proposing that this cost be split between the lnterregional Improvement Program funds and the Regional Improvement Program funds now under the authority of MCOO. Both of the above projects are on one of the ten Focus Routes (for interregional improvement program projects) in the state. Funding available through a portion of the Interregional Improvement Program (15% of the total) is discretionary and can be used anywhere in the state for projects on the Interregional Roadway System. There is no guaranteed amount which will be apportioned to each distinct. The remaining amount available for projects (I 0% of total) is also subject to state discretion, but is subject to the north/south split. At least 60% of these funds must be expended in the thirteen southern counties. There axe no guarantees that any state improvement funds will be programmed in Mendocino County or Caltrans District 1. Approximately $170 million will be available for programming interregional projects in each of the six years of the 1998 SLIP. -3- -3- Mendocino Council of Govemmems is charged with the responsibility of preparing the Regional Improvement Program (RIP). The RIP will be incorporated into the 1998 STIP when the CTC adopts the STIP at its June, 1998 meeting RIPs are due to be adopted and mtomi~ttod to th~ CTC by March 2, 1.09g. Caltrans has provided MCOG with an estimate of funds that will be available for programming in the 1998 STIP. The final amount should be available soon, but approximately $19.0 million will be available for programming from the regional share. Of this, $1.4 million is reserved for Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) projects. Up to $380,000 is available for project-related planning, programming, and monitoring of the Regional Improvement Program. At least $17.3 million will be available for programming in the 1998 STIP. An important consideration in programming is that all candidate projeots for STI~ programming must have a completed Project Study Report (PSR). A PSR is an engineering sex)ping study which identifies characteristics of the proj~t such as type, limits, environmental concerns, estimated costs, and schedule. All projects to be included in either the ITIP or RIP must have a complete PSR. In rural counties, up to 2% of the unrestricted regional funds are available for project-related planning, programming and monitoring. Development of PSRs for candidate project is one need from this source of funds. It is also needed to develop a basis for rational candidate project identification and selection. As a transitional program, the 1998 STIP covers a six-year period. The identified funds ($17.3 million) can be progranmaed in any of the six years in the STIP, or spread out, as needs dictate. Another opportunity to program projects will be available in the 2000 STIP, however no new funds will be available. This will be the first four-year STIP period. The next STIP period after 2000 will arise in 2002, with new funding. MCOG can expect approximately $12 million in new programming capability in 2002. Discretionary funds available to the state through the lnterregional Improvemem Program will also be at a high poim in 1998 due to six years of'programming capability. Four-year STIP periods beginning with 2002 will can also expect about a one-third reduction from the 1998 level. REGIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ISSUES Several important issues have been identified by MCOG staff and others have surfaced during MCOG Board discussion or as a result of the MCOG SB 45 Workshop on December 15, 1997. ~ Non-capital projects are not eligible. Projects may generally include improving state highways, local roads, public transit, intereity passenger rail, pedestrian and bicycle faciliti&s, grade separations, transportation system FROM ' DOW @ ASSOCIATES PHONE NO. ' ?0?4632212 Jan. 15 1998 09:08AM P4 management, transportation demand management, soundwalls, intermodal facilities, and safety. , u l esti0ns have been.made to use some of the available funding for rail projects. There are no inte:~ty passenger raqroacts watlun Mendocino County, tlaererore rail rehabilitation/improvement projects on either the Northwestern Pacific or the California Western are not eligible from this source. Since intermodal facilities are eligible, certain limited rail projects which interface with other modes may be eligible for programming. Transit Capital lmprov¢._m_e~t (I?Ci=) Program. Each fall, Caltrans has solicited for candidate projects under the TCI program. Eligible projects include acquisition of'rail right-of-way, bus rehabilitation, exclusive public mass transit guideway and rolling stock, fca'O' vessels and terminals, short line railroad rehabilitation, guideway separation projects, and intermodal transfer stations serving various transportation needs. MCOG made funding priority recommendations through the Regional Ouideway Plan. SB 45 repealed the TCI program and folded the funds which formerly funded this program into the regional shares available for programming in the RIP. Both Northwestern Pacific/North Coast and California Western had been recipients of this program in the past. This source of funding has been permanently lost to the railroads in Mendocino County. It has been suggested that RIP funding could be used to fund projects formerly ~unded under TCI. There is no obligation to do so, since the program no longer exists. As discussed under project eligibility above, the railroads in Mendocino County do not qualify for funding under the Regional Improvement Program. Most other TCI funded projects in the state were for projects on intercity rail routes. local lmprovem~. Funding available through MCOG can be used for a variety of transportation projects including local projects. There is a large back-log of local transportation needs. MCOG funded a transportation funding study in ! 994 which identified a capital need of over $75 million. Furthermore, the needs were found to be increasing by another $1.4 million per year. Stnte Highway !mprove~aLP. tiaritiea State highway improvement priorities have been established by MCOG for many years and are identified in the P,,egiorutl Transportation Plan. These are: 1. The Willits Bypass 2. The Hopland Bypass 3. North Hopland (convert two-lane segments to four-lane) P-a!~fiaLEunding. of the Wi!!its Bypas~s. In the 1992 STIP, approximately $66 -5- -5- million was programmed for partial funding of the Willits Bypass project. Partial funding was made available due to the CTC's recognition of the importance of this project despite its inability to d~-~'dicate over $105 million at a tinle when statcwide ~c.~auzc, c~ wc.~c iow a.nd the seismic retrofit program was cutting heavily into highway resources. The partial funding is supposed to provide a two-lane bypass on four4ane right-of-way with at least two interchanges. Caltrans District I and MCOG have never accepted the two-lane bypass concept as an acceptable alternative. While a two-lane bypass will provide sufficient capacity on Route 101 in the short term and relieve downtown Willits, there are concerns over intersection and passing safet~ (of'the two-lane bypass concept) which have not been addressed. The Regional Transportation Plan identifies the Willits Bypass as the # 1 priority highway improvement project in the County. It has never been modified to recognize the two4ane bypass as a viable alternative. Another $61.4 million is needed to complete the four-lane bypass. Transportntion~_En~la.~t_c=ement Activities Pro_iects. The Coumy Share estimate provided by the State includes $1,404,000 for Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) projects. This is a federal ISTEA program that was formerly administered by the State on a competitive basis. No funds will be available until after ISTEA reauthorization. These funds can be used only for enhancement projects that fit imo one or more of ten categories. Mendocino applicants have been funded in two of the three statewide competitive cycles. These restrictive funds can either be marketed to other agencies or used for TEA projects through MCOG administered competitive cycles. It is assumed at this point that these funds can be used effectively in Mendocino County for enhancement activities. Two good projects remain unfunded from previous cycles. Pro_leer.Study Repa_~tS, A new project may not be included in either an RTIP or the ITIP without a complete project study report (PSR) or, for a project that is on a State highway, a PSR equivalent or major investment study (MIS) prepared according to federal transportation program guidelines. A project study report equivalent will, at a minimum, be adequate to define and justify the project scope, cost, and schedule. For a Transportation Enhancement Activities CI'EA) project, an application prepared in accordance with the CTC's TEA program guidelines is a PSR equivalent. For a transit project, the CTC's Uniform Transit Application is a PSR equivalent. P!anni~and Monito~00.~ SB 45 permits expenditure of up to 2% of the Coumy Share for planning, programming, and monitoring by the regional transportation planning agency. These funds need to be used for work that leads to the identification, selection, and programming of capital transportation projects. MCOG intends to utilize these Cunds for a traffic model of Route 101, environmental documentation of the Regional Transportation Plan, PSR -6- · PHONE NO. : 70?4632212 Jan. 1S 1998 09:09AM PS FROM : DOW @ ASSOCIATES development and program monitoring. These funds need to be programmed in the RIP, REGIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OPTIONS Due to the flexibility inherent in the new planning and programming conc.~pt brought about by SB 45, a wide range of options exist for the 1998 Regional Improvement Program. The 1998 STIP seems to provide a unique opportunity to make substantial progress toward transportation improveznent in Mendocino County. We know that there are local needs that far outstrip local resources. We also know that there are State highway improvement needs that have long been unmet because State priorities had been placed elsewhere· Basic options appear to be limited to three: (1) devote the entire unrestricted local share to the #1 regional highway improvement priority, the W'tllit~ Bypass, (2) reserve some of thc unrestricted local share for local projects and devote the remainder to the Willits Bypass, and (3) reserve all local funding for u~e at a future date. More specifically these basic options would entail: . · Programming the entire unrestricted share (less 2% for planning, programming, and monitoring) towards completion of the full four-lane W'dlits Bypass. Caltrans District I is also recommending this project for funding under the InterregionaI Improvement Program (liP) funding. This would mean a commitment of $17.3'million from MCOG (Regional Improvement Program) funds and $44.1 million from lip funding. Caltrans District 1 is also recommending $19.5 million be programmed for Hopland Unit 3. Programming something less than the entire unrestricted share (lesz 2% for planning, programming, and monitoring) towards completion of the foil four-lane Willits Bypass. The differen~ could be reserved for prosramming in a future year (:2000 STIP) for local projects to be identified in a competitive process. The amount to be set aside for loc.~l projects is arbitrary at this time. A process to identify and select candidate projects has not been initiated. The amount to be set aside could theoretically range from $17.3 million less $I to nearly ali of the $17.3 million available in the RIP. , Reserving all of the unrestricted share (less 2%) for programming in either 2000 or 2002. This option would emphasize a process of local project identification, analysis and selection so that local projects (rosardle~ of mode) would be considered along with the established list of State highway priorities when determining candidate projects for future STIPs. There are several other sub-options which staff feels are less critical which involve project selection, the TIaA program, and the 2% planning, programming, and monitoring set-aside. The following assumptions regarding these have been made: -7- FROM · DOW @ ASSOCIATES 1. The Willits Bypass is being promoted as the critical project since it has long been MCOGs #1 priority project. The two-lane half-pass concept has not been -~. Unit ~ I-Iopln,d i~ ~x, pected to be programme~ in the Interregional Improvement Program and funded with 100% I~P funds. 3. There are no other State highway projects on the horizon with completed PSRs. 4. The construction of the full four-lane Willits Bypass is expected to be in the Interregiorml Improvement Program w~th, in tur~ an expected commitment from MCOO for RIP funding pm~i¢ipation. 5. MCOG will not consider local projects for inclusion in the 1995 RIP. A process to select candidates for future RIP commitment will follow. 6. The federal TEA program is considered valuable and a process will be established to continue the program locally once federal reauthoriz~tion occurs. 7. Project planning, programming and monitoring funding in the amount of $380,000 over the six year period will be used for a variety of uses to eventually select viable projects for funding with regional share dollars. This may include traffic models, regional transportation plan update and environmental documentation~ PSR development~ and system monitoring. MCOG STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THF. 1998 REGIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM MCOG staff' expected to know Caltram projects to be included in the Interregional Improvement Program prior to making a recommendation on the Regional Improvcm~-nt Program_ Caltrans District 1 is very supportive of committing St~¢ funding towards completion of the four-lane W'fllits Bypnss ns wcH as completing Unit :3 of Hoplm~d. We have yet to receive that commitment from Caltrans Headquarters. Cheryl Willis informed me this morning that she now expects to receive thc recommended LIP on lanuary 30, 1998, This information of course will be too late to be useful to the TAC, and will come one work day prior to the scheduled MCOG meetin&. We have o/fly until March 2, 1998 to transmit our recommendations on the RIP to the State. We cannot afford to wait any longer to discuss these important issues. MCOG staff expects that the recommended IIP from Caltrans Headquarters will include both the Hopland Unit 3 project and the four-lm~e Willits Bypass project. MCOG staff recommends that Opt/on 1, devoting all unrestricted funds toward the four-lane W'fllits Bypass, be the selected alternat/ve for the 1998 STIP. -8- AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 10a DATE' JANUARY 21, 1998 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) MANUAL The City of Ukiah began its Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance efforts in 1991, formally adopting its ADA policy in 1994 which states that we will make our programs, services and activities accessible to all citizens whenever possible. The policy assures the City will attempt to accommodate the special needs of the disabled, identified as individuals who have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. The policy also included a procedure for responding to ADA complaints or concerns. In 1993 the City hired a private consultant to survey City facilities to determine if they were ADA compliant. The attached manual is a comprehensive document incorporating all the City's ADA compliance efforts including: a self evaluation of City policies, programs and services to ensure they are available to the disabled community. CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION' City Council approve the ADA Manual including the recommendations made by the Advisory Committee. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: City Council approve the ADA Manual with additional recommended changes. Appropriation Requested' N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: 1. 2. N/A Sue Goodrick, Compliance Officer Sue Goodrick, Compliance Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager ADA Manual Memo to City Manager- ADA Advisory Committee Meeting Ca'~ace Horsley, C~y Manager R:I\COMPLIANCE AADA Approval of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Manual January 21, 1998 Page 2 City accomplishments and accommodations (by facility) made since the initial survey was performed. a transition plan (by facility) identifying future goals for improvement of accessibility. the initial facility and site surveys performed, to determine if City facilities were ADA compliant. The City updates this manual periodically as laws and/or regulations change and/or the City progresses with their efforts to make all facilities accessible. The ADA Advisory Committee consisting of City Staff and a representative for Mayacama Industries, met on January 8, 1998 and made comments and recommendations on the ADA Manual. Their response is identified in the memo to the City Manager dated January 9, 1998 (attached). Staff concurs with the recommendations made by the Advisory Committee. Staff recommends the City Council approve the ADA Manual with the recommendations made by the Advisory Committee. R:I \COMPLIANCE AADA MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: January 9, 1998 Candace Horsley, City Manager Sue Goodrick, ADA Compliance Officer ~ ADA ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING On January 8, 1998, a meeting of the ADA Advisory Committee was held to discuss the City's progress on various ADA requirements, including the identification of accomplishments and accommodations made within the past few years. This committee meets periodically as laws and/or regulations change and/or the City progresses with their efforts to make all facilities accessible. Committee Members present were: Larry DeKnoblough, Director of Community Services, Tammi Weselsky, Community Services Supervisor, Kari Revheim, Personnel Officer, Elaine Taler, representative from Mayacama Industries and myself. Those absent were: Alex Simi, Public Safety and Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works. Written comments were provided by Rick Seanor and are included in the discussion below. Kathy Kinch was in attendance to record meeting minutes. Prior to the meeting, each committee member received a copy of the City's ADA manual. The Manual consists of the following sections: a self evaluation of City policies, programs and services to ensure they are available to the disabled community. a list of accomplishments/accommodations (by facility) a transition plan identifying goals for future improvements with estimated costs (by facility) the initial survey performed by a private consultant in 1993, to determine if City facilities were ADA compliant. The following are Committee comments on the Manual. Please note that for easy reference I have highlighted the requested changes. Prior to submittal to Council, I will correct and reprint specific pages. Memo to Candace Horsley ADA Committee Meeting Page 2 . Table of Contents (pg 6). Change "Community Center" & Golf Club House to read "Todd Grove Roonl" & Club House. All references throughout Manual should be changed to read Todd Grove Room. . Public Services Complaint Procedure (pg 37). Identify as excemt from Resolution 94-53, Explanation: the Employment Complaint Procedure is identified both in Resolution 94-53 and typed separately as a procedure. The Public Service Complaint Procedure is identified in the Resolution only which is presented in its entirety beginning on page 13. Separate complaint forms are available for the public and employees. . Advisory Committee (pg 47). Changed telephone number for Rick Seanor and Tammi's title. . . . . . . Self-Evaluation & Transition Plan Overview (pg 55). Discussed City's emphasis on accessible programs and activities over physical facilities. Based on existing financial conditions and our ability to accommodate needs, recommendations might not necessarily include corrections to all physical deficiencies identified in the site evaluations. Self-Evaluation Process (pg 61). Update Items 11 & 12. Advisory Committee's review/submittal to City Manager. Program Access Checklist (pg 73). Item 4 - Pending. Continue efforts to obtain participation from persons with disabilities. Possibly sending out press release 6 months prior to 2-year review. Also suggested that those individuals coming into City Hall with ADA concerns be asked if they'd like to participate on ADA Advisory Committee. Program Access Checklist (pg 74). Evacuation Procedures - Pending. Explained that written procedures had been approved by City Manager and Public Safety, as well as Floor Plan/Diagram developed identifying exits. Inter-departmental training is pending. Program Access Checklist (pg 78). Discussed City's TDD system and pending purchase of system which does not rely on a third-party relay service. Program Access Checklist - Information/Signage (pg 79). Conf'umed that these issues were identified and planned for in Transition Plan. Memo to Candace Horsley ADA Advisory Committee M~ting Page 3 10. Employment Checklist - Terminology (pg 90). Item (d). Add "yes" check mark to Advisory Committee consultations. 11. Self-Evaluation, Disposal Site (pg 108). At recommendation of Deputy Director of Public Works, posted City ADA policy and accommodation request sign at 12. Self-Evaluation (pgs 116 & 117). Misspellings. 13. Self-Evaluation- Sports Programs (pg 118). Youth basketball grades corrected from 2-8 to 3-8. Co-ed Softball corrected to read: Games conducted at Men's Lea~e Softball Complex L Co-ed Volleyball corrected to read: Games conducted at school facilities, 14. Self-Evaluation - Policies (pg 123). Item 6. Misspelling. 15. Memo dated March, 1997 (pg 135). Noted that as of November, 1997, Fort Bragg no longer used the City's public safety answering communication center. Possibly take out initial letter written in January (pgs 141-144), since pgs 135-139 includes both question and response. Or leave as is and just highlight responses in letter on pgs 135-139. 16. Airport. Accomplishments/Accommodations (pg 151). Question arose as to how disabled would notify Airport staff from outside building if they needed assistance. Placement of a "buzzer" was suggested. The use of the ramp at the Credit Union and requesting Credit Union personnel notify airport staff of need for assistance was discussed as an option, however they have limited hours. 17. Parks. Accomplishments/Accommodations (pg 189). It was noted that Carpenter Park, McGarvey Park and the new Plaza Park were not mentioned in this section. Certain on-going maintenance type procedures for path-way clearance, and mowing grass for a potential access route through parks is performed at all City parks and should be mentioned for these as well. Verbiage to be used identified on pg 189, item 1. 18. Civic Center. Accomplishments/Accommodations (pg 266). Discussion was held on difficulty opening the front doors to the lobby. It was mentioned that this issue was presently being evaluated by the Director of Community Services. It was suggested that a buzzer be placed in front of the Civic Center, so that those unable to open doors could "buzz" for assistance. Memo to Candace Horsley ADA Advisory Committee Meeting Page 4 19. Civic Center (pg 268). Providing four integrated wheelchair parking spaces in the Council Chambers is scheduled for 2001/02. The estimated cost is $500. It was suggested that this project be completed sooner that the year 2001. 20. Public Buildings (pg 286). Corporation yard's west fence should be "east" fence. 21. Community Center (pg 336). All references to Community Center should be changed to Todd Grove Room. 22. Sidewalks and Curb Ramps - Transition Plan. Quantity changed to reflect only MCOG funds with note of explanation (per Rick Kennedy). Additional discussions included: The Committee discussed re-briefing employees on ADA policy and commitment every two years, at same time that re-evaluation of City's progress is monitored. In addition, it was suggested that I develop a brief statement of the City's ADA policy to be incorporated into New Employee Orientation and briefly discussed by the Personnel Officer at time of hire. Please respond to the above mentioned comments and return to me for finalization. I would like to take this Manual to Council for ratification on January 21, 1998. 10b Item No. Date: January 21; 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Approve the Northern California Power Agency Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) and authorize submittal to the Western Area Power Administration ( Western ). REPORT: Federal regulations require customers of Western such as the City of Ukiah, to receive any public comments and receive governing board approval prior to the IRP submittal. Ukiah and the cities of Alameda, Lodi, Biggs, Gridley, Healdsburg, Lompoc and the Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative will be making a joint Northern California Power Agency submittal. As stated in the Program description, "The Program goal is to promote the efficient use of electrical energy by Western's Customers and to extend Western's long-term firm commitments in support of customers IRP's." Western customers, such as the City of Ukiah, must complete a IRP containing Two-Year and Five-Year Action Plans. As a minimum, the City must submit or have submitted on its behalf an updated IRP every five years and provide yearly IRP progress reports to Western. Additionally, each utility must request public comments at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Council and the Council must take action to approve the IRP. A copy of the meeting minutes and the resolution approving the City's IRP must accompany the submittal to Western. ( Continued on Page 2 ) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Northern California Power Agency Integrated Resource Plan and authorize submittal to the Western Area Power Administration. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Direct Staff as to Alternative. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachment:l ) Resolution 2) Integrated Resource Plan APPROVED:~ ~~~_ ~.,/~i, ca--~ace Horsley~-City Manager ( Page 2) The proposed IRP contains the following sections: II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. Introduction Customer Surveys Load Forecast Resource Requirements DSM Analysis Least Cost Resource Plan Two- and Five-Year Action Plans Monitoring Program for Two- and Five-Year Action Plans Environmental Impacts Public Involvement Process The IRP requirements are intended to help insure acquisition of least cost resources by Western's customers and to insure efficient use of all resources in each customer's portfolio. At the time of the requirement for an IRP, Ukiah was completing acquisition of power resources contracts through NCPA to meet our electrical demand. Subsequently, City resource needs to satisfy growth within our service area have been met. As a result, the City has sufficient electric power capacity resources to last into the next century. Based on current forecasts, the City will not require additional capacity resources within the next 5 years, at which time new capacity is expected to be provided from the emerging competitive generation market being established in California. Currently, NCPA and the Electric Utility Department are investigating possible power cost savings in the following areas: , Non-renewal, renegotiation and/or termination of contracts which are no longer competitive in the new energy market; . Reduction in operation of existing projects whenever market energy prices are lower than the projects' variable fuel costs; 3. Retirement or sale of non-economic projects; and 4. Marketing of surplus resources. Therefore, staff recommends the Council approve the Intregrated Resource Plan and authorize participation in submittal to the Western Area Power Administration. NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Customer Surveys III. Load Forecast IV. Resource Requirements and Description v. DSM Analysis Vi. Least Cost Resource Plan vii. Two- and Five-Year Action Plans viii. Monitoring Program for Two- and Five-Year Action Plans IX. Environmental Impacts X. Public Involvement Process List of Attachments Attachment I - Load Forecast Tables and Graphs Attachment II - Resource Summary Printout Attachment III - NCPA Resource Forecast (~BBO) Attachment IV- DSM Analysis Report I. INTRODUCTION The Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) is a California joint-powers agency comprised of fifteen members. Ten members (Alameda, Biggs, Gridley, Healdsburg, Lodi, Lompoc, Palo Alto, Roseville, Ukiah, and the Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative - the 10 IA Members) have signed an Interconnection Agreement (IA) with the Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E), and receive all power requirements through NCPA (NCPA schedules each of the 10 IA Members' Western Area Power Administration allocation). Each member owns, operates and maintains an electric distribution system to serve the customers within its own service area. The 10 IA Members have also formed a power pool to increase electric system efficiencies and take advantage of reduced power costs. This document contains the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) filing to the Western Area Power Administration (Western) for the following Interconnected NCPA members: the City of Alameda, the City of Biggs, the City of Gridley, the City of Healdsburg, the City of Lodi, the City of Lompoc, the Plumas Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative, and the City of Ukiah. H. CUSTOMER SURVEYS NCPA conducted customer end-use surveys in 1987, 1990, and 1993 for both the commercial and residential classes. The results of these surveys are used in NCPA's load forecasts and DSM analysis. Due to the sheer volume of the survey reports, it is impractical to include the results in this IRP. If desired, summaries of the survey results can be provided. III. LOAD FORECAST The ten interconnected members regularly forecast monthly peaks and energy loads. These forecasts are used to determine the system (or coincident) peak used by NCPA for its resource planning efforts. A description of NCPA's forecast methodology follows as well as a summary of the results of NCPA's most recent load forecast completed in August 1996. This forecast provides the basis ofNCPA's IRP filing. A. Load Forecast Methodology- Overview NCPA's load forecast represents a combination of the forecasts of the ten interconnected members: Alameda, Biggs, Gridley, Healdsburg, Lodi, Lompoc, Palo Alto, Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative, Roseville, and Ukiah. Each member supplies to NCPA monthly energy and peak demand forecasts for the 20-year period. NCPA creates hourly loads for each member for all hours in the forecast period from these monthly energy and peak forecasts. The summation of these hourly loads results in the NCPA system loads from which the peak hourly load is derived. These hourly loads are then used for NCPA's resource planning. The results of the coincidence analysis are discussed in the Executive Summary. Be Energy Forecast Methodology 1. Residential a. Overview The following member utilities use the California Energy Commission's (CEC) Residential End Use Model: Gridley, Healdsburg, Lodi, Lompoc, Plumas-Sierra REC, and Ukiah. The City of Biggs' residential forecast is done by multiplying customers times use per customer, with Gridley's use per customer growth rate applied. Alameda uses its own econometric model which is verified by CEC model runs. b. Data Sources The data inputs to the residential model rely on the results of NCPA's Residential End Use surveys. Income per capita data for the model is based on historical Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) county data and county income per capita forecasts made by the Center for the Continuing Study of the California Economy (CCSCE). Other demographic inputs are based on information from each member utility. Historical electric prices are based on historical average $ per MWh, with forecast prices based on NCPA's internal market price analysis. Natural gas and oil prices are based on the CEC's forecast for the PG&E service area. Where possible, California State Department of Finance (DOF) housing data is used for the historical housing stock. In certain cases, this data is unavailable such as with the Plumas-Sierra REC. Where appropriate, judgmental adjustments are made to the DOF series to produce a reasonable and usable input set. Marginal saturation data for new housing units is not available, therefore assumptions are based on recent survey results. All other parameters in the end use model are based on the CEC's input files for the PG&E service area. Each of the NCPA members is assigned to one of the PG&E climate zones and use the appropriate space conditioning usage input file. The model is run for one climate zone for each utility, using the PG&E parameters. 2. Commercial Energy Forecast Methodology a. End Use Model NCPA uses the CEC's Commercial End Use model as its primary forecasting methodology for the Commercial building sector. The decision to use this methodology is driven primarily by the desire to capture the impacts of the non-residential mandatory building and equipment standards. NCPA feels that no other forecasting methodology adequately addresses these efficiency impacts that are effectively outside the "market." These mandatory standards impacts cannot be captured directly by price variables in econometric equations. Additionally, municipal service areas give the ability to reasonably measure the existing commercial building floorspace stock as well as to measure the "build-out" or likely floorspace additions. Given these advantages, it is prudent to use a methodology based on floorspace stocks and kwh use per square foot. Collecting the data required for the CEC Commercial End Use model is a substantial task.' Since the F.W. Dodge floorspace construction data is only disaggregated to the county level and not the zip code level, NCPA relies on its own estimates of floorspace stocks and additions for the 1964 to 1996 period. This was done by utilizing the floorspace vintage results of the end-use survey, combined with the floorspace decay functions as per the CEC commercial model. Commercial sales are disaggregated into sales categories based on the CEC's building type definitions. Historical sales data is obtained from the CEC's QFER (Quarterly Fuel and Electricity Report) database and are assigned to sales categories using the CEC's SIC (Standard Industrial Classification) mappings to sales categories. The CEC Commercial End Use model applies to offices, restaurants, retail, food stores, warehouses, schools, colleges, health facilities, hotel/motel, and miscellaneous categories. In some cases, the commercial forecast is based on the output of the end-use model for another member. For example, the City of Biggs utilizes a floorspace forecast combined with the growth rate in use per square foot derived from the City of Gridley end-use model results. b. Other Non-building Commercial Energy Forecasts All other non-building commercial categories (Transportation-Communications-Utilities (TCU), Agriculture, Other, etc.) are forecast by applying growth rates to the base year sales values by category. These growth rates are based on either household growth rates, the growth rates of commercial floorspace, or the general economic growth rate for the utility service area. 3. Industrial The industrial sector is the most difficult forecast category for small municipal utilities. Most industrial models consist of either: (1) aggregate econometric models based on separate SIC code categories, or (2) aggregated end-use models, such as for the "Assembly Industry" sector, that rely on some measure of industrial output. Neither of these models can be used for small municipals since the required industrial output measures can not be obtained, due to disclosure rules, for small service areas. Even if such output measures could be calculated, their usefulness would be limited since the energy forecast would have to account for very specific firm or plant location/closure choices. Some NCPA members have experienced significant swings in their loads due to single plant closures and/or location decisions. Examples of this are: (1) the City of Healdsburg with Fairchild's departure in 1986 (roughly a 14% drop in load), (2) the City of Biggs with the partial closure of the RGA rice mill in late 1988 (a 33% drop), and (3) the City of Roseville Which has had significant load increases due to several very large industrial firms locating within its service area. Similarly, the closure of the Alameda Naval Air Station has had a very significant impact on the City of Alameda's load, though the Air Station is technically a commercial load, rather than an industrial load. Another difficulty in industrial forecasts is exemplified by the General Mills plant in the City of Lodi. This plant's production (and related electricity use) is determined in large part by the degree of success that General Mills has in acquiring market share. An industrial load forecast model for Lodi would therefore be required to model the future success of General Mills' marketing and advertising campaigns. The application of generalized growth rates for the food processing industry (SIC 20) could also be ineffective, since relative market share changes can run opposite to general industry trends. _ For NCPA members, there is no reliance on aggregations across regions or employment/output measures that characterize the industrial models used by investor-owned utilities (IOU's) or the CEC. NCPA members can rely on statewide or national industrial output projections only in a very general sense. These uncertainties pose considerable problems for industrial energy forecasting.. Using reasonability as their ultimate criteria, most members' industrial forecasts rely on the following evaluations: (1) analysis of current operations of existing industrial customers along with any announced expansion/closure plans, (2) analysis of available land zoned for industrial use, and (3) extrapolation of recent historical industrial energy use. NCPA member industrial forecasts are judgmentally based on the factors described above. C. Load Forecast Quantification of Mandatory Standards Conservation Since 1975, the State of California has imposed significant energy efficiency standards on both equipment and building energy use. By virtue of using the CEC's forecasting models, NCPA has incorporated such standards into its load forecast. The impacts of these standards for the ten interconnected NCPA members are quite substantial, amounting to 32 MW and 135,000 MWh in 1993, increasing to 81 MW and 350,000 MWh by the year 2015. 1. Residential The load forecasts for each member utility incorporate the existing mandatory building and equipment efficiency standards. The quantification of mandatory energy efficiency standards for the residential sector is calculated via numerous runs of the CEC's residential end-use model. Separate runs are made with differing model inputs to calculate mandatory DSM savings. The energy savings are estimated by the end-use model and are then multiplied by the distribution loss factor to obtain savings at city meter. Peak savings are estimated by applying the annual load factor to the total energy savings. 2. Commercial Mandatory savings for commercial buildings are estimated in the same manner as the Residential savings. The energy savings are estimated via the end use model and are then multiplied by the distribution loss factor to obtain savings at city meter. Peak savings are estimated by applying the annual load factor to the total energy savings. 3. Industrial and Other Categories No estimates of mandatory energy efficiency standard impacts have been made for the industrial or the "other" sales categories. This is due to the lack of building-specific information and estimating techniques to overcome this shortage of information. De Peak Forecast Methodology Peak load forecasts are made on a monthly basis using a five year average of monthly load factors. Peak loads are calculated by dividing the average monthly energy by the monthly load factor. Monthly energies are calculated by applying monthly seasonal factors (calculated as a five year average of historical seasonal factors) to total annual energy forecast. In most cases, load factors and seasonal factors are assumed to not vary over the forecast Period. The monthly energy and peak loads are direct inputs into NCPA's coincident peak analysis. E. NCPA System Coincident Load Analysis While each NCPA member is responsible for its own monthly energy and peak load forecast, resource planning for the ten interconnected members is based on the combined or coincident loads summed across the ten interconnected members. Since there is significant diversity across members, a simple summation of member peak forecasts will overstate the actual coincident loads that the members experience. NCPA combines member forecasts to produce coincident loads. Using the monthly energy and peak load forecasts for each member, NCPA constructs a chronological hourly load forecast for each member for each year of the forecast period. These loads are then summed to determine NCPA's peak loads and each member's coincident loads. The creation of forecast hourly loads for each member is based on the construction of a "base year" load shape. Once derived, this load shape is applied to monthly energy and peak forecasts to arrive at hourly loads. The method consists of the following steps (performed for each member utility): 1. Choose the number of historical years to be used in the analysis 2. Create load duration curves (LDC) for each year. 3. Create a "base year" LDC shape by averaging the LDC's over all of the historical years (i.e., averaging all the peak hours together, the second highest hours together, etc., through averaging all the minimum hours together). 4. Average all historical hours together (i.e., all first hours of the year, all 6200th hours together, etc.) over all historical years to create an average load value for each hour. 5. Sort the hourly average loads created in Step 4 and assign to each hour its chronological ranking (i.e., the peak hour based on the average of all historical years may be 2 p.m. on July 14th, while the 3000th highest hour may be 4 a.m. on September 2nd). 6. Apply this chronological ordering to the "base year" LDC created in Step 3 to arrive at the hourly load shape for the base year. Once a base year load shape is created for each member, their forecast of energy and peak loads is applied to arrive at hourly loads. Some iterative adjustments may take place at this time to ensure that the proper amount of energy is under the hourly load curves. These hourly loads are then summed across all members to arrive at the NCPA coincident load. F. August 1996 Forecast Description The 10 IA member forecast for August 1996 represents a Significant increase in the peak demand forecast for all years of the forecast period. This is due to substantial upward revisions in the demand forecasts for Lodi and Roseville, resulting in an increase of 26 MW in 1997 expanding to 33 MW by the year 2000. These increases are the result of reassessments of economic growth in Roseville and new estimates of peak load weather sensitivity based on the record peak loads experienced in the summer of 1996. Please keep in mind that the peak forecasts contained herein represent expected peak conditions, not extreme peak conditions. The August 1996 energy forecast is higher than the February 1996 forecast, being roughly 1% higher in 1997 and increasing to 3% higher in 2000. The 1996 to 2000 average annual peak load growth rate is 2.2% while the energy growth rate is 1.6%. Roseville's load growth is once again the dominant factor in the August 1996 forecast, accounting for 75% of the increase (41 of 55 MW) in the projected system peak. Lodi accounts for 16% of the growth while the other eight members account for the remaining 9% increase. One large source of uncertainty in this forecast is the possible passage of the November growth referendum in Roseville. This would significantly lower the Roseville/NCPA forecasts. Another significant source of uncertainty is the impact of deregulation via the direct access of member retail customers by other generation entities. This issue will be have to be carefully assessed in the context of AB 1890 legislation. 1. Forecast Tables and Graphs Attachment 1 contains tables and graphs which document the forecast. These are organized by utility, with the documentation of the total interconnected load being first. Documentation of the system loads (all values at BBO) contains: (1) annual coincident peaks by member and system totals, (2) annual energy by member and system totals, (3) annual non-coincident peak loads by member, (4) monthly system energy, (5) monthly system peak loads, (6) a comparison of annual energy and peaks between the August 1996 and February 1996 forecasts, and (7) comparison graphs for energy and peak values. Following the tables for the NCPA system loads, sections follow for each of the NCPA members. This documentation (all values at BBO) consists of: (1) monthly energy, (2) monthly non- coincident peaks, (3) monthly coincident peaks, (4) a comparison of the August 1996 and February 1996 forecasts, and (5) comparison graphs for energy and peak values. IV. RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS AND DESCRIPTION A. Summary This plan meets all planning and reliability criteria under the WSCC, NERC, etc. as well as NCPA's Interconnection Agreement with PG&E. The ten Interconnected Members have sufficient existing generation, power purchase agreements, and DSM to meet its capacity requirements through 2004. During this forecast period, our existing resources and both long-term and short-term market purchases and sales will satisfy NCPA's energy requirements. Be Existing Resources 1. Existing Resources NCPA currently owns and operates nine electric power plants. They are: Geothermal Plant No. 1 (Geo No.1), Geothermal Plant No. 2 (Geo No. 2), Hydroelectric Plant No.1 (Hydro No. 1); five combustion turbine generators (CT Project No. 1) and a Steam Injected Gas Turbine (CT Project No. 2). NCPA has also signed a power exchange agreement, an off-peak firm energy contract, and purchases and sells power from and into the wholesale electric power market. Additionally, each member also has an allocation of Western Area Power Adnfinistration CVP Project power. 2. Western Area Power Administration Power Allocations NCPA real-time schedules the 10 IA Members' Western Area Power Administration (Western) power allocations. The Western power contracts are up for renewal after 2004. This report assumes contract renewals with no capacity allocation changes after 2004. 3. Geothermal Plants Both of NCPA's geothermal power plants are located approximately 70 miles north of San Francisco in the Mayacamas mountains. Geo No. 1 was placed in commercial operation in March of 1983, and the last unit of Geo No. 2 in May of 1986. Both plants have performed at better than 90% availability. Each plant is composed of two equivalently sized units. Geo No. 1 is rated at 118 MW at the bus and Geo No. 2 is rated at 120 MW. In August of 1985, NCPA purchased from Grace Geothermal, Inc., rights to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management steam field operating and exploration leasehold. Since acquiring the steam field leasehold rights, NCPA embarked on a very successful well drilling program that resulted in a high ratio of producing to non-producing wells. However, with the continued collection and evaluation of steam field performance data, a degradation in the steam supply became apparent for all geothermal plants in the area. This degradation appears to be related to the total steam mass withdrawal from the subterranean steam source. Consequently, geothermal capacity and energy ratings are expected to decline. In response to this decline, NCPA has evaluated several alternatives for enhancing steam reservoir performance. Some of the alternatives implemented at the Geo plants include operating level variations, low pressure turbine modifications in April 1996 and supplemental water injection into the steam field reservoir. The supplemental water injection program is referred to as the Southeast Geysers Effluent Pipeline Project. Construction began in April 1996, with completion expected in mid-1997. This project is forecasted to increase geothermal energy production by approximately 70% and extend the resource life many years. ' 4. Combustion Turbine In 1986, NCPA completed five 24.9 MW combustion turbine units. (CollectivelY referred to as the CT Project No. 1). Two units are located in Alameda, two in Roseville and one in Lodi. The primary fuel for these projects is natural gas with fuel oil as a backup. Their intended use is as reserve capacity, peaking capacity and emergency plant support. 5. Hydroelectric Project No. 1 The Hydroelectric Project No. 1 (Calaveras) is located on the North Fork of the Stanislaus River. It was completed and placed into commercial operation in early 1990. In return for financing and constructing the project, NCPA has rights to the electric power generation through contracts with the owner, the Calaveras County Water District. The project's capacity is 249 MW. 6. Power Exchange In March 1993, NCPA signed a power exchange contract with the City of Seattle City Light Department (SCL). Through this exchange, NCPA receives power deliveries during the months of June through October, in return for power deliveries to SCL during the months of November through April. 7. Firm Energy Contract NCPA has contracted for a firm off-peak energy purchase of approximately 25 MW (varies by month) from the Midway Sunset Cogen Company. Deliveries from this contract are not available during the on-peak hours. It is scheduled for termination a~er 1997. 8. Power Market NCPA has actively pursued access into the wholesale electric power market. Those efforts resulted in access to significantly lower priced sources of wholesale power as early as ten years ago. We have continued to pursue and expand access to the wholesale power market to the point that today, we both sell and buy, into and out of the wholesale power market on a regular basis for both capacity and energy. NCPA will continue to look to the wholesale power market to maximize benefits to its members. 9. COTP Transmission Several NCPA members participated as members of the Transmission Agency of Northern California (TANC) in the California-Oregon Transmission Project. The 10 IA Members' share of firm transmission is approximately 128 MW. C. Resource Bidding NCPA has implemented two resource bidding processes. NCPA's first resource bidding process began with the issue of a Request For Proposals (RFP) in early 1989. NCPA received 67 separate proposals from 53 different entities in the initial phase of the 1989 RFP. As part of the 1989 process, NCPA also evaluated approximately ten of its own resource options, as well as unsolicited proposals received after the initial phase of the 1989 RFP. The results of the Evaluation Phase of the 1989 RFP process found two resources to be cost effective for meeting NCPA's power requirements for 1993 to 1995 and following years. In 1991, NCPA completed negotiations for a single joint power purchase contract from WWP and BPA. NCPA's plans to construct a 49 MW gas fired STIG project were also found to be cost effective. This project began commercial operations in April 1996.. NCPA's second bidding process (the 1992 RFP) is unique in that it was the first West Coast attempt at All Source Bidding. It began with the release of an all source RFP in August of 1991. NCPA received 87 separate power supply proposals from 58 separate entities totaling almost 9,800 MW. NCPA also received 24 separate Demand Side Management (DSM) proposals from 12 separate entities totaling approximately 140 MW. The proposals were almost exclusively from Energy Service Companies (ESCO's). A preliminary screening review identified a smaller group of proposals that was evaluated further by NCPA and its Members. This group included 11 demand-side management proposals from five separate entities totaling approximately 38 MW of capacity savings as well as 21 power supply proposals from 17 separate entities totaling approximately 1600 MW of capacity. NCPA began negotiations with the Midway Sunset Cogeneration Company and signed a contract for firm off-peak energy in June 1992. During 1992 and 1993, NCPA and the members went through a detailed and extensive evaluation and negotiation process with a short list of ESCO's. This process resulted in the selection of Energy Masters Corporation (EMC) of Overland Park, Kansas. In 1994, NCPA negotiated a central agreement with EMC to provide DSM resources through performance contracting and a central agreement to provide related engineering services to its members. NCPA members including Alameda, Lodi, Redding and Roseville have utilized efficiency services from EMC through the NCPA central agreements. Attachment 2 summarizes the proposals by fuel type for the two resource bidding processes. D. NCPA Resource Requirements Forecasted resource requirements are summarized in Attachment 3. The IA Members have sufficient resources to meet capacity requirements through 2004. During this forecast period, existing resources and purchases from other parties will satisfy energy requirements. 10 NCPA is constantly evaluating all alternative resource options including but not limited to classic supply-side generation, generation research, distributed generation, Photovoltaic (PV) and fuel cells to determine their relative cost-effectiveness and applicability in the market. V. DSM ANALYSIS A. Overview of Assumptions and Methodology The basic approach used to evaluate DSM is to analyze costs and benefits in terms of the NCPA system (10 members combined) peak, an event that normally occurs around 5 PM on a very hot day in July or August. As such, there are no DSM measures evaluated for winter capacity savings and only summer capacity savings are given non-zero values. Energy savings are considered regardless of season. The DSM analysis is done on a measure by measure basis, as opposed to a program basis. The DSM benefit/cost analysis is primarily an incremental analysis, where costs and benefits are identified for measures that are incrementally more efficient than the State's building/equipment standards or some general market standard or efficiency. Four types of benefit-cost ratios are reported: (1) participant, (2) rate impact, (3) utility, and (4) total resource. The NCPA analysis considers only standard, well-known DSM technologies. Given that there is an extremely large set of possible DSM measures, all exotic or experimental measures are precluded from the analysis. The residential DSM measures consist of: (1) building shell measures (insulation, etc.), (2) water heater measures including Iow flow showerheads and water heater blankets, (3) high efficiency air conditioners, (4) compact fluorescent, (5) shade trees, and (6) ground source heat pumps (as an efficiency measure, not as a load building measure). Commercial and industrial measures consist of: (1) lighting measures, (2) efficient motors, and (3) efficient air conditioning. Savings and cost data are derived from two primary sources: (1) the California Energy Commission's DEER database (Database for Energy Efficiency) and (2) SMUD energy efficiency analyses. The avoided capacity and energy cost forecast inputs are not included as these numbers are strategic information that NCPA does not want to list in a public document. B. Summary of DSM Analysis Results Most of the DSM measures analyzed do not pass the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test. However, there are a number of measures that do pass. These measures are: (1) commercial lighting delamping measures, (2) some of the commercial lighting efficiency measures, (3) one or two of the Commercial air conditioner efficiency measures for certain technologies and building types, and (4) commercial/industrial motor efficiency measures. Of these, the motor measures appear to be the most cost effective. None of the residential measures are cost effective with the exception of low flow showerheads and water heater blankets. Please note that the TRC evaluation does not account for lost revenues to the utility. The Rate Impact Measure test (RIM) is the only test that accounts for the lost revenues. Not surprisingly, none of the measures pass the RIM test. Lost revenues are a particularly significant issue for NCPA member 11 utilities, given the load uncertainty that the deregulation of the electric industry will produce and the surplus resource balance of the NCPA system. · ............................ NCPA did not conduct a complete evaluation of the potential markets for those DSM measures that are cost effective. Even though the end use surveys provide appliance saturation rates, it is often difficult to assess the efficiencies of the existing equipment. For example, low flow showerheads are a cost effective measure to reduce water heating energy requirements. However, the saturation of these devices appears to be very high, hence a program in this area would have limited impact. Given the results of NCPA's DSM benefit/cost evaluations, the NCPA members have been provided direction for those DSM programs that appear to be cost-effective, namely various lighting and motor measures. The results of the DSM benefit/cost analysis are contained in Attachment 4. These results consist of several sections: (1) general commercial lighting measures (for all utilities), (2) general commercial/industrial motor measures (for all utilities), and (3) separate sections for each member utility containing all other evaluated measures (such as residential/commercial air conditioning, etc). Commercial lighting measures are disaggregated by the following types: (1) measure technology (more efficient lamps, ballasts, etc.), (2) number of lamps (2, 3, or 4 lamps), and (3) commercial building types. Motor measures are disaggregated by: (1) motor types, and (2) horsepower rating. Residential air-conditioning measures are disaggregated by: (1) SEER rating, and (2) housing vintage. Commercial air-conditioning measures are disaggregated by (1) A/C package size, and (2) building types. VI. LEAST COST RESOURCES A. Supply Side Resources The current forecast indicates that the least cost new supply side resources are most likely gas- fired technologies. However, because the current forecast of WSCC regional resource/load balances indicates a surplus of resources, there are ample opportunities to purchase power supplies at prices well below the total cost of new generators. B. DSM Measures While some DSM measures appear to be cost-effective compared to market prices expected from the deregulated electricity market, NCPA does not recommend that DSM be used as a "hard" resource in either the two-year or five-year action plans for any of the eight members represented by this filing. Given the uncertainty due to the deregulation of the electricity market in California, utilities run significant risks of increasing their "stranded costs" by investing in DSM as a resource. For example, investment in an expensive Commercial A/C unit might become stranded if that customer decides to leave the member utility syste~n to buy power from some other power supplier. It is possible that investments in DSM "resources" such as these could be protected by contractual instruments, but this in itself could cause reluctance on the part of the customers from participating in DSM programs. The experience of the most utilities shows that most customers are unwilling to invest in DSM when confronted with large up-front capital costs. 12 However, as part of NCPA's resource plan, a certain amount of"uncommitted" DSM is included in the resource plan. "Uncommitted" DSM is a term that stems from NCPA's participation in the CEC's Electricity Report process and is defined as DSM that is not yet committed to or funded but is expected to occur in the future. The amount of uncommitted DSM contained in NCPA's ten member resource plan ranges from 2.4 MW in 1997 to 8.1 MW in 2006. NCPA feels that these values represent a "reasonable" DSM effort in view of the concerns raised previously and the impacts that may occur as a result of the Public Benefits Charge mandated under AB 1890. Overall, the NCPA member utilities provide DSM information and/or demonstration projects to their retail customers. However, given the deregulation of the electric industry, the financial impacts of DSM (in terms of lost revenues), and the significant uncertainty associated with customer choice, the policy of NCPA is to not rely, at this time, on DSM programs as significant resources. It is more prudent for the retail customers to undertake their own choices for major DSM investments. DSM can, however, be used as a strategic customer service in order to assist, keep and attract customers. C. Load-Resource Balance NCPA's load-resource analysis shows that the ten interconnected member Power Pool is surplus through the year 2004. Thus, there is no need to acquire firm resources for either the Two Year or Five Year Action Plans. VII. TWO- AND FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLANS Overview The main factors affecting NCPA's Two- and Five-Year Action Plan are: (1) NCPA's projected resource surplus through the year 2004; and (2) the tremendous uncertainty facing NCPA members due to the deregulation of the electric industry. The load forecast underlying this plan does not assume any loss of load to other power suppliers as a result of open access, therefore the surplus could last well beyond 2004. Another factor in NCPA's Two-Year Action Plan is that there is a significant DSM component already in NCPA's Resource Plan, anticipating the impacts of existing NCPA Member Utility DSM efforts as well as the impact of the expenditures of the Public Benefits Surcharges as per AB 1890. The potential risk of additional stranded costs from significant DSM efforts is also a prime determinant of NCPA's planning. Finally, most DSM measures have been found not to be cost effective when compared against purchases from the power market. Two-Year Action Plan NCPA's recommended Two-Year Action Plan consists of: (1) a monthly assessment of the market electricity price, (2) regular re-assessment of the cost-effectiveness of DSM programs contained herein, (3) recommend that NCPA members maintain DSM information dissemination to their retail customers, (4) focus DSM efforts where required as part of a customer retention strategy, (5) target expenditures of Public Benefits Charge moneys to customer DSM information areas that allow "free market" solutions, and (6) an annual assessment of the NCPA Power Pool load/resource balance, including annual load forecast updates and resource analysis. 13 · Five-Year Action Plan The Five-Year Action Plan will consist of: (1) regular assessments of the market electricity price, (2) review of changes in DSM measure technology and costs, (3) review of supply side resource technologies and costs, (4) assessments of the impacts of deregulation on the loads and resources of NCPA members, and (5) annual assessments of the NCPA Power Pool load/resource balance, including annual load forecast updates and resource analysis. VIII. VALIDATION OF TWO- AND FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLANS The validation plan for the Two- and Five-Year Action Plans will consist primarily of monitoring plans for the following areas: (1) load forecast - actual loads vs forecast loads, (2) assessment of the load-resource balance situation to determine if additional resources are required for the NCPA Power Pool, (3) evaluation of new DSM and supply side resources as information becomes available, and (4) assessment of wholesale electric power market prices for deviation from forecast values. IX. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The direct measurement of environmental costs with regards to the NCPA IRP is subjective at best. Accepted environmental costs do not exist for most forms of energy production, whether it is combustion turbines, hydro, or solar. NCPA currently has a disproportionate share of"green" resources that significantly mitigate energy production externalities. The environmental impacts of NCPA power purchases from the "market" are difficult to assess. However, to the extent that these "market" resources must follow local, state, and federal environmental rules and regulations, it is NCPA's expectation that a reliance on market resources will not incur any significant environmental impacts. X. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS Each of the NCPA members presented this IRP to an appropriate public forum, generally as part of a City Council meeting agenda item. Public comments were received and are summarized in Attachment 5. 14 Attachment I 0~3~ te q,~lN 9tOE [ JOE 600E 666 ~ ~66 t Z66 ~ ~6~ ~6t ~66 t ~6~ 686 t Zg6 ~ o o. o. o. o. o. o. g 1,0~, SI, O~ ~,I'0~ £1,0~: ~:1,0~ 1, i.0~ 01,0~: 600~ gO0~: /.00~ 900~: .GO0~: 666 I, ~66 I, 1.66 I, 966 I, ..q66 I, ~66 I, E:66 I, ~:661, 1.66 I, 0661. 6G6 !, 88'61, /.86 I, · o I:::: c~ OaJ~ iR I. JMJ,~J 91.0~ t~ 1,0~; ~:I, OE ~ 1,0~ I. 1.0~: 01,0~; 600E ZO0~: 000~ 666 I, 1~66 I, Z66 I. 9661, .~66 I, b66 I, ~66 I. Z:66 I. 1.661. 0661, 6~6 I. ~61. Z~6 I, gl, O~: gl, O~ £1.0~: :1,0~: I, 1,0~: 01,0: ZOO: go0: PO0~ 666 I. 866 !, Z66 I. 9661. 966~. ~,66 I. £66 i. ~:66 I. 1.661. 0661. 696L gg6 ~ Zg6 ~ Attachment 2 1989 Resource Bid Process Summary of Proposals by Fuel Type Biomas (7.1 Nuclear ( . Coal (1 o. 1 ~) Pump Storage (1.0~) ~ Hydro (10.1%) System Sale (15.2%) sEos (2.o ~,) Geothermal (~S5.4%) Gas (15.2%) Total Bids Received 1992 Resource Bid Process Summery of Proposals by Fuel Type Coal (5.~omass/Wind (1.7%) Hydro (1.9%) _ System Sale (6.8%)-~ DSM (~.4~) Total Bids Received = ggooMw Attachment 3 Utility: NCPA NCPA: TEN INTERCO~~ MEMBERS' FORECAST (~BBO) March 1 1997 Capacity Balanc~ for Planning Forecast for 1987 - 2006 co~ ?K (MW) DSM (Uncommitted) NET LOAD after DSM FIRM RESOURCES: WA.PA SCL EXCH NCTP RSRV - Import BPA EXPORTS: NCPP RSRV - Export Shelter Cove NET LOAD PG&E PR PEAK LOAD RESPONS. Capacity Rsv. - % Capacity Rsv. - MW C AP AB IL YFY' RESPONSIBILITY NCPA RESOURCES: Existing/Committed: GEO l&2 CT HYDRO 1 STIG MSCC SPOT CAP MENDO Uncommitted: BD 1 BID 2 Cap and Enr Resource Energy Only TOTAL NCPA RESOURCES Surplus Resource (Need) 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 612.9 633.1 648.5 663.9 679.2 692.2 705.2 2.4 4.3 4.8 5.3 5.7 6.3 6.8 610.5 628.8 643.7 658.6 673.5 685.9 698.4 299.2 301.7 302.6 323.1 56.1 56.1 56.1 56.1 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 18.7 18.7 18.7 18.7 -10:0 -0.42 -20.5 237.3 0 237.3 -I0.0 'q010' ': ,~10.0 -0.42 -0.42" 0 -19.9 -19.1 -18.1 252.5 265.8 258.8 0 0 0 252.5 265.8 258.8 15.5% 15.5% 15.5% 15.5% 36.8 39.1 41.2 40.1 274.1 291.7 307.0 298.9 2004 718.3 7.3 711.0 2005 731. i 7.7 723.4 322.9 322.9 323.1 323.5 323.8 56.1 56.1 56.1 56.1 56.1 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 18.7 18.7 18.7 18.7 0 ,.. -10.0 -10.0 -10.0 -10.0 -10.0 0 0 0 0 0 -8.3 -7.7 -7.3 -6.6 -6.4 264.1 275.9 237.7 299.4 329.8 0 0 0 0 0 264.1 275.9 287.7 299.4 329.8 2006 _ 742.9 8.1 734.8 324.1 56.1 30.0 0 -10.0 0 -6.1 340.6 0 340.6 15.5% 15.5% 15.5% 15.5% 15.5% 15.5% 40.9 42.8 44.6 46.4 51.1 52.8 _ 305.0 318.7 332.3 345.8 380.9 393.4 88.4 85.7 82.3 78.1 73.3 68.0 63.7 58.3 56.0 53.3 91.9 91.9 91.9 91.9 91.9 91.9 91.9 91.9 91.9 91.9 149.0 149.0 149.0 149.0 149.0 149.0 149.0 149.0 149.0 149.0 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 48.9 48.9 48.9 48.9 48.9 48.9 48.9 48.9 48.9 48.9 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400.7 397.3 393.1 388.3 383.0 378.7 10.0 0 381.0 .1 0 0 373.3 0 0 403.4 129.3 109.0 90.3 94.2 83.3 64.3 46.4 27.6 26.0 0 : 394.4 .9 Utility: NCPA NCPA: TEN I1vrERCONNECrED MEMBERS' FORECAST (~_,BBO) (March I, 1997 Enargy Balanca - Avg Hydro Conditions) NCPA LOAD (GWH) DSM Uncommitted EXPORT - Shelter Cove EXPORT - TID NET LOAD 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 _ 3089 3171 3247 3335 3412 3475 3538 3605 3668 3727 4 8 9 9 10 11 12 13 14 14 ~.2 ~.2 ~.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -169 -168 -167 -159 ~3 48 44 -58 -56 -53 _ _ 3254 3332 3406 3484 3476 3532 3590 3650 3710 3765 Avg Hydro Conditions Maximtm Available Energy : ..... SCL EXCH -29 -29 -29 -29 GHP 1.1 1.1 1.I 1.I ~'Y'D RO 1 358 358 358 358 MMT 1 1 I 1 BPA 65 65 65 65 GEO l&2 727 727 721 684 WAPA 1866 1862 1918 1985 SPOT CAP 0 0 0 0 MENDO 13 13 13 13 MSCC 106 0 0 0 PG&E PR 0 0 0 0 MAINT SUP 40 39 37 35 S'fIG 394 394 394 394 BID 1 Cap and Enr Resource 0 0 0 0 BID 2 Energy Only 876 876 876 876 CT 69 69 69 69 Total Available Ener~' (GWI-I) 4487 4374 4423 4451 Surplus Ener~ (Unmet Load)! 1233 1042 I017 966 -29 -29 -29 -29 -29 -29 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 358 358 358 358 358 358 1 1 I 1 1 1 65 65 65 65 0 0 642 596 558 511 491 467 1985 1990 1996 2002 2008 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 13 13 13 13 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 37 35 32 30 29 394 394 394 394 394 394 0 0 0 0 61 159 876 876 876 876 876 876 69 69 69 69 69 69 ~-- ~ ,, 4404 4370 4336 4292 4272 4350 929 838 746 641 562 585 Utility: NCPA NCPA: TEN INTERCONNECI'ED MEMBERS' FORECAST (~BBO) ~ 1, 1997 Energy Ba/an~ - Dry lEydro Conditions) NCPA LOAD (GV~ DSM Uncommitted EXPORT - Shelter Cove EXPORT - TID NET LOAD · Dry Hydro Conditions Ma.ximua Available Energy SCL_EXCH GHP HYDRO 1 MMT BPA GEO l&2 WAPA SPOT CAP MENDO MSCC PG&E PR MAE'~ SUP STIG BID 1 BID 2 CT Cap and Enr Resource Energy Only Total Available Energy (GWH) -Surplus Energy (U'nmet Load): 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 _ _ _ 3089 3171 3247 3335 3412 3475 3538 ' 3605 3668 4 8 9 9 10 11 12 13 14 -0.2 -0.2 -0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -169 -168 -167 -159 -73 -68 -64 ,-58 -56 3254 3332 3406 3484 3476 3532 3590 3650 3710 2006 : 3727 14 0 -53 3'/65 -29 -29 -29 -29 -29 -29 -29 -29 -29 -29 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 0 0 727 727 721 684 642 596 558 511 491 467 1866 1862 1918 1985 1985 1990 1996 ' 2002 2008 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 39 37 35 30 37 35 32 30 29 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6I 159 876 876 876 876 876 876 876 876 876 876 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 - · 1-------------- il J - 4263 4151 4200 4227 4181 4147 4113 4068 4049 4127 1010 819 794 743 706 615 523 418 339 362 o. · KESOUI{CE NAME DEF]INIrIONS: BID 1 /BID 2 BPA HYDRO 1 CT EXPORT - Slielter Cove EXPORT - TID GEO l&2 GHP MAlN-r SUP MENDO MSCC NCPP KSKV PG~E PR SCL EXCH SPOT CAP STIG DSM WAPA = R~ource~ obtained through competitive bid process = BPA Purchase Contract = Cal~iveras Hydroelectric Project - North fork of the Stanislaus river = Combustion Turbine Project ~1 - Koseville, Lodi and Alameda CA. = Finn power sale to Shelter Cove = Finn power sale to Turlock Irrigation District = Geothermal Plants 1 &2 - C~.ysers Area, close to Middletown = Graeagle Hydro Electric Project - Graeagle, CA_, QF purchase = PG&E Maintenance Support = Ukiah's Mendocino Hydro Project = Mc.kays Micro Turbine.. -, Enhac~ement to the Calavera~ Hydro Project = Nfidway Sunset Cbgenera/ion Company- Fellows, CA = Northern California Power Pool Reserve Sharing A~eement = PG&E Partial Kequirements Purchase (per NCPA/~GScE Interconnect-ion AgTeem = Seattle City Light / NCPA exchange = Spot Market Capacity Purchases = Combustion Turbine Project #2 - Lodi, CA. = Uncommitted Demand Side Managraent = Western Area Power Administration Attachment 4 ~ iiiiiii iii · iiiiilll iiiiii · · , . . · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · . · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · e · , · · · ,, 10c ITEM NO. DATE- January 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR EMPLOYEE BARGAINING UNIT- POLICE The City Manager has met with representatives of the Police Unit to discuss negotiation items for the 1997-99 fiscal years. The negotiations have resulted in a tentative agreement as previously discussed in closed session which has been ratified by the Unit. The proposed Memorandum of Understanding is being submitted for Council,s review and consideration. If the City Council approves the agreement, we would recommend adoption of the attached resolution. RECOMMENDED ACTION- Consideration of MOU and adoption of M0U resolution. 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: Proposed resolution. Candace Horsley, ~ity Manager 3: MOU\ASRMOU 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 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADOPTING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF UKIAHAND POLICE UNIT WHEREAS, the Employee/Employer Relations Officer has met and conferred in good faith with representatives of the Police Unit; and WHEREAS, a Memorandum of Understanding has been approved by the Police Unit; and WHEREAS, said Memorandum of Understanding has been presented to the City Council for its consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Memorandum of Understanding for the Police Unit is hereby adopted and the Employee/Employer Relations Officer is authorized to enter into this Agreement for the Fiscal Years 1997-99. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of January, 1998, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST' Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk ]: PER/RES . MOU ITEM NO. ].Od DATE: January. 21; 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF LEASE WITH NORTH UKIAH LITTLE LEAGUE The North Ukiah Little League organization currently plays games on the property adjacent to Anton Stadium, known as "Lions Field". This field was constructed on City property by the Lions Club in 1956 specifically for the purpose of providing an additional little league facility. At the time no lease or agreement was put in place providing for maintenance, utilities, or insurance. In order to secure the necessary lease agreement and insure continued use of the field by the North Ukiah group, a lease in the amount of $1.00 per year is proposed. The group will also be responsible for field maintenance and all utility costs. Staff has met with representatives of the North Ukiah group and they are amenable to the proposed agreement. These conditions are identical to the agreements the City has with SOuth Ukiah Little League and Rusty Bowl BMX at the Gobbi Street site and staff is recommending approval. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve lease with North Ukiah Little League. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine lease requires further revision and remand to staff with direction. 2. Determine lease is inappropriate at this time and do not approve. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: Yes Requested by: North Ukiah Little League Prepared by: Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director ~J- ~'~ Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Proposed Lease APPROVED:,~~ ~[/~~~ Candace Horsley, Cily Manager LD3 North.asr LEASE AGREEMENT ,, This Lease, made this 1st day of February, 1998, by and between the City of Ukiah, State of California, acting by and through its City Council, hereinafter referred to as "Lessor" and the North 'Ukiah Little League, a corporation organized and existing under and in compliance with the laws of the State of California and its officers, hereinafter referred to as "Lessee." RECITALS: 1. Lessor has the authority contained in Government Code { {37380 and 37395 and does determine that the use of certain property owned by the Lessor is not required for its use at this time and is available for Lease, and 2. The use of said property by the Lessee would be and is beneficial for the citizens of the City of Ukiah. LEASE AGREEMENT 1. LEASE. The parties hereto agree that on the terms and conditions hereinafter expressed, Lessor does hereby let to Lessee and Lessee does hereby hire from Lessor a portion of that certain parcel of property commonly referred to as "Giomo Park", located on City property, more specifically described on the attached "Exhibit A". 2. TERM. The term of this Lease is for a period of five (5) years commencing on the date set forth above. 3. RENT. As rent for the term hereby demised, Lessee agrees to pay to Lessor the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) per year in full consideration hereof for the use of said property. -1- 3.1. Lessee specifically represents that it does not intend to make a profit on the use of the leaSed premises. All income derived from use of the leased premises shall be used exclusively to sponsor or promote Little League Baseball on the leased premises or for improvements to the leased premises. 3.2. Lessee shall maintain regular books of account which it shall make available to Lessor upon demand for inspection or audit. 4. USE AND IMPROVEMENTS. Lessee hereby agrees to install all permanent improvements which shall become part of said property and title to said improvements shall be vested in the Lessor upon termination of this Lease except as set forth herein. 4.1. Lessee shall use the leased premises exclusively as a Little League Baseball field under the Lessee's sponsorship and supervision. 4.2. Improvements, excavations, removal of any trees, brush, grass or improvements and other modifications to the property shall be the sole responsibility of Lessee and shall be approved by Lessor prior to conducting work. 4.3. Prior to beginning baseball activities on the premises, Lessee shall install sound reduction materials to the backstop at the approval of Lessor and provide for at least one port-o-let sanitary station to be placed on the premises during baseball season. 4.4. Lessee agrees to keep the premises and all improvements in good repair and order and to bear the full cost for maintenance of all improvements. 4.5. Lessee shall acquire the necessary and required permits from the appropriate regulating body for any development proposed under this lease. 4.6. Lessee is responsible for the relocation, alteration, removal, construction, reconstruction of any municipal or private facilities, structures or utilities existing on leased premises which are presently in use or abandoned. -2- 4.7. Lessee shall insure that no alcoholic beverages are possessed or consumed on the leased premises at any time. Lessee shall not use or permit the leased premises to be used except in full compliance with all roles, regulations, laws or ordinances of the City of Ukiah and the State of California. 4.8. Lessee shall bear sole responsibility for the cost of all utilities and any possessory interest tax which may result due to Lessee's occupancy of the property. 5. ASSIGNMENT. Lessee will not assign this Lease or any interest therein and will not let or underlet the said premises or any part thereof without the prior written consent of the Lessor. 6. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE. 6.1. Lessor shall not be liable for and is free from the cost of any damages for personal injury or property damage resulting from the use made by Lessee of the demised premises, any defective condition or faulty construction of the demised premises existing at the time of letting or arising thereafter and Lessee covenants and agrees to indemnify and save harmless said Lessor and its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all liability, loss, cost, or other obligation, including reasonable attorney's fee, on account of or arising out of any such injuries or losses however occurring. 6.2. Lessee covenants and agrees during the life of this Lease at Lessee's sole expense to comply with the requiremems of Exhibit B, Insurance Requirements for Lessees (No Auto Risks), attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. -3- .. 6.3 Notwithstanding the provisions of Exhibit B requiring Lessee to procure workn~n's compensation insurance, Lessee need not procure such insurance provided ail of the fol- lowing conditions are met: a. It maintains its status as a non-profit tax exempt organization; b. It's Board of Directors takes no action to designate any person providing services or work to the organization as its employee; and c. All persons performing services for the organization do so strictly as volunteers without receiving any compensation whatsoever. Lessee shall immediately notify Lessor if it fails to meet all of the conditions of this paragraph 6.3 and shall immediately thereafter comply with the workmen's compensation provisions of Exhibit B. 7. TERMINATION. 7.1. This Lease or any renewal thereof, may be canceled for any reason by either party on sixty (60) days written notice to the other party. 7.2. Lessor can cancel this Lease immediately for any breach of this lease by Lessee, including, but not limited to, failure to provide insurance, without any prior notice to Lessee. 8. ATTORNEY'S FEES. Lessee shall pay Lessor its reasonable costs and attorneys fees if Lessor prevails in any legai action to enforce any of the terms of this Lease. 9. TIME OF ESSENCE. Time is of the essence of this agreement. 10. WAIVER. City's waiver of any default in Lessee's performance of any condition of this Lease, including the obligation to pay rent, shall not constitute a waiver of remedies available for a subsequent breach of the same or a different condition of this Lease. Acceptance of subsequent rental payments from -4- Lessee or its assignees shall not constitute a waiver of the failure of Lessee to pay rent or obtain prior approval to an assignment of this Lease. 11. NOTICES. Any written notice required hereby shall be deemed sufficient when placed in the United States mail, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: TO LESSEE: TO CITY: North Ukiah Little League City Manager Ukiah Civic Center 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 12. PARAGRAPH HEADINGS. Paragraph headings are included for the convenience of the parties and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this Lease. 13. PREVIOUS AGREEMENTS. Any and all existing statement or agreements, whether oral or written, or renewals thereof, between the parties hereto, covering the same subject matter, are hereby canceled and superseded by the terms of this Lease, and such prior agreements, statemems or understandings shall have no further force or effect. 14. DUPLICATE ORIGINALS. This Lease may be executed in one or more duplicate originals bearing the original signature of both parties and when so executed any such duplicate original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of this Lease. Entered on the date tn'st written above. -5- CITY OF UKIAH ATTEST: By: City Clerk NORTH UKIAH LITrLE LEAGUE (XuXagrmtsXnull) -6- I/tSURAHCE REOUI'REMEHT$ FOR LESSEES fHO,, AUTO RJSKS~ ; ]IIDDER$' ATTEH'HOI'q I$ DII{ECTED TO TIlE 1]'4SU~AHCE I~.EQUI.REM ENTS BELOW. IT 15 }HGIILY ltECOM'MEHDED TIIAT BIDDERS COh'FER 'WIT'It THETR RESPECT1WE ]U..qURAtICE CAP, ILH.7. R$ OR BROKERS TO DETERM2/',"E IH ADVANCE OF BID SUB- bH$5IOC't TIlE AV,LILAJ3ILH~' OF I'HSUItAHCE CERTHYlCATE$ AHD E~'fDORSEM-EttT$ AS I'ItESCILII;ED A/'ID I'ROVH)ED IIEREIH. LV AFl AI'PA_REHT LOW BIDDER F;LILS TO COM'I'LY STILICTLY W'iTH TIlE IN'SURAHCE REQULREME~NT$, TIIAT BIDDER MAY BE DiSQUA2.,I17~D FROM AW~LRD OF Tile COHTRACT. ' Lessee shall procur~ and maintain for fire duration of fire contract insurance agaimt claims for injuries to ~rr, o[~ or damages lo property which l'nay arise fi-om or in connection with the Lessec's operation and use of O~e leased p~x:mises. The cost of such i~u~ce shall be borne by the Lessee. As ~Yl'i%'D, Iqa.'7, l ~COP£ OF '[..\'SI.,'RA.~CI~ -- · Cover:~ge shall ~ at least as broad · 1. Insuranc~ Services Office form number GL 000~2 (Ed. 1/'/3) coveting Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office :form ntmaber GL 0404 covering B~x~ad Form Compt~:hensive Gencr.zl Liability; or htsutancc Services Office Common:iai General Liabili~ coverage ("occui~cnce" Ionn CG CO01). 2. .Vlo~kers' Compensation insurance as mtuireal by the Labor Code of fl~e State o£ California and Employers Liability hzsurancc. · Lr..ssee shall, maiptain limits no less le General Liability: $1,000.000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, persorial injury ,'md property damage. If Commen:ial General Liability Insurance or other form ~¼tli a general aggregate limit is used. either the general aggregate limit shaU apply ~pas-ately to lltis l)mjcc~ocadon or tl~c gcn::nd aggregau: limit sl~all be twice dx: re, lulled occt, m:ncc Limit. · Workers' Compensation :md -Employers Liability: Workers' compensation limits as required by the l. abor Code of tim State of California and E~ployers LiabLl. it7 Ii, nits of' 51,t%0.000 Fcr accident. . .C. · Any deductibles or self-insured lclen6ons must Ix: declared lo and ~pprovcd by tile City. At the op6on or thc Cily, eiflmr: thc insurer shall reduce or eliminam such deductibles or scLr. i~ircd · rc~ndorts a~ re~cc'Ls'd'~c City, its ol'ficc~, officials, employes and voluntr~rs: or thc Lcss~: sha. U procure~a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related invc~gadons, claim admbiistradon arid · dcfcn..~ expense. .~rL-a I~;SUR^.~CE p;~OV'L~ONS_ The policies are to contain, or I~ endorsed to contain, the following provisiom: ' 1. GeneraILiabilltl · o a. Tl~e City, its officers, officials, employees =d volunteers an: to be covered'as in.~reds as respects: liability arising out of premises owned, oco~pied or used by tile Lessee. Thc covcn?,e shall contah~ no special limitations on tll~ scope of protection afforded to tl~c City. ils officers, officials, employees or volunteers. b. The Lessee's insurance coverage' shall be primary irtsura~nce as respects the City. its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insm~nce or scLf-irts-urancc mai. ntaincd by the City, its officers, offidals, employees or volunteer.; shall be excess of thc Lessz:c's h~--usance md shall not contribute with it. c. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its ol'ficers, official~, employees or volunteers. d. Coverage shall state that the Lessce's insdrance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with ~'esv:ct to thc Limits of the insurer's liabilir'l. · Workers' Compensation and Employers Liabilily Coverage .,, Thc imurer shall :gxr..e to waive all fights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials. employees and volunteers for losses arising from thc leased premises. 3. All Coverages ,Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed ua state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, czncelled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail. return receipt requested, has been given to the City. · ACc£PTABILFFY OF ].NSUR£R~S -- · Insurance is to be placed with inch:rs with a BesCs rating of no less than A:VII. '~'[RFF1CATION OF' COX~1LIIG~-~ , · Lessee shall furnish die City with certificates of insuninc~: and whh original endorsements efl'ccting coverage r~quir,:d by thi~ clause. The certificates and endorsements for each i~tsurancc policy arc to be sitglcd by a person authorized by that insurer to bind covc=§c on ils behalf. Thc certificates and cndorscmcnt-~ arc to be on forms provided by thc City. Where by stat'utc, the City's workcr~' compc-nsadon-rt:lau:d forms czau~t be used, equivalent forms ~ppmv~ by th~ l.n.~ran~: Commissioner am m I~ s-ub~tutcd. All certificates and cndo~cmcnLs am to b~ mcciv~ ~d aFl'~mved by th~ City before work commence. Tim City ~'r. scrves the right to rcc[uirc complete. certified copies of all.required policies, at any time. · · · .. ITEM NO. 10e. DATE: JANUARY 21, 1998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE The adopted 1997/98 budget for the Solid Waste Disposal Site addressed the waste stream of the Ukiah Valley that was then being sent to our landfill. Our landfill is presently accepting refuse from the entire County with the exception of the southcoast's wastes and Fort Bragg's compacted waste which is currently being shipped directly out of the County. Further, changes in the operation (as approved by the Council in July) were initiated to accommodate the expanded coverage. As expected this increase in tonnage has had a substantial affect on both revenues and expenditures. A budget amendment is now recommended by Staff since we have actual figures to date and more refined estimates for year end numbers. The specific revenue and expenditure details of this amendment are enumerated in the attached worksheets and budget comparison chart. Though additional revenue is identified, closure reserves, SHER fund permits, MSWMA surcharges, and related operational costs have all increased, thus the revised Ending Fund Balance is approximately the same as that budgeted. It is also recommended that a Pre-Closure Project reserve be established to insure adequate funds are available to meet site improvement requirements over the next 22 months. Staff recommends the City Council approve the budget amendment for the Landfill fund including increases in revenue, operational expense, and transfers to Closure and Pre-Closure Project reserves. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve amendment to the 1997/98 budget by: 1) increasing landfill revenue by $441,720 in account 660.0800.646.002, 2) increasing expenditures by $112,180 for landfill operation in accounts 660.3401 .XXX.XXX, 3) increasing transfer from account 660.283.664 to landfill Closure Reserve Fund 664 by $175,000, and 4) authorizing a transfer of $154,142 from account 660.283.661 to landfill Pre-Closure Project Reserve Fund 661. ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine modifications to the budget amendment are necessary, identify changes, and, approve revised amendment. 2. Determine budget amendment is not appropriate and take no action Acct. No. (If NOT budgeted): Acct. No.: N/A Appropriation Requested: Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Rick Kennedy, City Engineer/Director of Publi.c )/Vorks~-~., , Prepared by: Michael F. Harris, Assistant City Manager ~ ~ Coordinated with: Gordon Elton, Director of Finance, Rick Kennedy, City Engineer/Director of Public Works, and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Budget amendment worksheets, pages 1-2. 2. Budget comparison chad, page 3 3. July 16, 1997 City Council Agenda Summary Report, pages 4-17. 4. Resolution No. 98-06, pages 18-21. Candace Horsley, Cit~Manager Attachments: APPROVED' mfh:asrcc98 0121 land BUDGET AMENDMENT WORKSHEET SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL - FUND #660 Budgeted amounts: Beginning fund balance 7/1/97 Budgeted revenue Expenditures budgeted from fund Transfers budgeted (net) General Fund loan Budgeted ending fund balance 6/30/98 Adopted $ 380,462 $ 2,075,412 $ (2,064,528) $ (326,803) $ - $ 64,543 Adiustments made during the fiscal year: Date Approved Account No. 1/21/98 Salaries, overtime 660.3401.115.000 $ (12,480) 1/21/98 Salary charged by other departments 660.3401.120.000 $ (4,160) 1/21/98 Utilities 660.3401.210.000 $ (360) 1/21/98 Vehicle repair & maintenance 660.3401.303.000 $ (9,800) 1/21/98 General supplies 660.3401.420.000 $ (850) 1/21/98 Fuels & lubricants 660.3401.450.000 $ (4,570) 1/21/98 SHER Fund fees 660.3401.630.001 $ (13,000) 1/21/98 Misc. Supplies 660.3401.690.000 $ (4,530) 1/21/98 Surcharge to MSWMA 660.3401.690.003 $ (62,430) 1/21/98 Transfer to Closure Reserve Fund ~664 660.283.664 $ (175,000) 1/21/98 Disposal site revenue 660.0800.646.002 $ 441,720 1/21/98 Transferto Pre-Closure Reserve 660.283.661 $ (154,000) 1/21/98 Additional transfer fordebt service 660.283.661 $ (142) Revised ending fund balance 6/30/98 $ 64,476 RESERV98.XLS 1/14/98 Page 1 Funds 660; 661; 664 665 666 670 0 , ..... 0o00 ~00 .oooooo 8, o o ~ ~ ~ ~i~ ~0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ .~ 0 0 0 0 ffi ~ ~~ ~ 0 0 ~ 880000--00-oo00o~0o ...... m~.OO~-O.OOOOOXo~.X 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 00~ X ~0!~~00~~0000~0~ Offi~ ~0~ ~ ~0~ ~;~~X~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v u ~ v ~ 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 ~ ~i~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00iO 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 01~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ o o o o ~ ~ ~ om ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m o o o o o o o~6 6 ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ 6 6 ~ g~~ ~ d~ ~ 0 888 000°0 oO ~00 ~ O0 O00 .0 0 0 · · ' O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~_~~ =~ ~ ~ ~; ~ 0 0 0 0 0 I.l.I Z 0 m BUDGET COMPARISON CHART SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE I ACCOUNT NO. ACCOUNT NAME APPROVED BUDGET REQUESTED REVISION $ CHANGE 115.000 Salaries, OT $ 11,500 $23,980 $12,480 120.000 Salaries charged by other 1,000 5,160 4,160 Departments 210.000 Utilities 27,470 27,830 360 303.000 Vehicle Repair and Maintenance 124,787 134,587 9,800 420.000 General Supplies 8,500 9,350 850 630.001 SHER Fund Fees 38,000 51,000 13,000 690.000 Misc. Supplies 50,745 55,275 4,530 690.003 Surcharge to MSWMA 160,000 222,430 62,430 SUB-TOTAL CHANGE $112,180 Transfer out to Closure Reserve, Fund No. 664 230,000 405,000 175,000 Transfer out to Pre-Closure Project Revenue -0- 154,142 154,142 Fund No. 661 TOTAL CHANGE $441,322 660.0800.650 I Disposal Site Revenue I $2,045,000 I $2,486,720 $441,720 R: 1 \LAND FILL PRECLOSURE.REV AGENDA SUMMARY I I I--IVl l~i~, ' u DATE:~ JULY 16, 1997 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION MODIFYING RESOLUTION NOS. 95-8 AND 97-52 REGARDING LANDFILL TIPPING FEES AND CHARGES, AND DAYS AND HOURS OF OPERATION Summary Submitted for the City Council's consideration and adoption is a resolution which would, if adopted, revise the landfill tipping fees established by Resolution No. 97-52 that would be charged to commercial refuse collectors/haulers representing the County of Mendocino and the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits should these jurisdictions collectively direct their waste to the Ukiah Landfill for disposal. At the request of the General Manager of the Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority (MSWMA), CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: After conducting the Public Hearing and receiving public testimony, adopt the attached resolution Modifying Resolutions Nos. 95-8 and 97-52 Regarding Landfill Tipping Fees, and Charges, and Days and Hours of Operation at the Ukiah Landfill. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Refer matter back to Staff for further analysis utilizing other tipping fee proposal. Appropriation Requested: Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Public Notice Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution for adoption. 2. City Manager's Report. 3. Proposal from Mike Sweeney. 4. Correspondence from the City of Willits 5. Correspondence from Solid Wastes of Willits, Inc. 6. Correspondence from Waste Management Inc. 7. Correspondence from the County of Mendocino regarding loose rate. 8. Approval from the Local Enforcement Agency for additional day of operation and change in hours. 9. Correspondence from City of Ukiah. 10. Correspondence from the County of Mendocino. 11. Proposed schedule for 6 day operational week and estimate of additional operational expenses. 12. Page 3 of EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. Can~ace Ho~rsley,-City ~anager Adoption of Resolution Modifying'Resolution Nos. 9§-8 and 97-52 Regarding Landfill Tipping Fees and Charges, and Days and Hours of Operation July 16, 1997 Page 2 a new fee structure has been proposed which would accommodate a compromise solution whereby all users of the Ukiah Landfill would continue to pay the rates that they currently pay at their present destination landfill. A fee of $64.50 per ton of refuse delivered by a permitted commercial hauler whether compacted or loose plus the applicable MSWMA surcharge per ton will be charged to those haulers representing Fort Bragg, Willits, and those portions of the County not currently utilizing the Ukiah Landfill. A fee of $66.00 per ton of compacted waste plus the applicable MSWMA surcharge per ton will be charged to those haulers representing that portion of the County currently utilizing the Ukiah Landfill. A fee of $57.00 per compacted ton of refuse plus the applicable MSWMA surcharge per ton will be charged to the City of Ukiah's franchised refuse hauler. A fee of $11.90 per cubic yard of loose refuse plus the applicable MSWMA surcharge per cubic yard will be charged to all commercial haulers currently utilizing the Ukiah Landfill and all self- haulers. The Resolution, if adopted, would also change the days and hours of operation of the landfill. It has been requested by Fort Bragg, Willits, and the County of Mendocino that the landfill be opened on Monday from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. for commercial haulers only. It is proposed that an annual fee of $3,500 be charged to the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits to offset additional expenses related to the Monday opening. It is proposed that this annual fee be due on September 1 for 1997 and 1998 prior to services being rendered. Background The City of Ukiah continues to actively participate in County-wide solid waste issues. With the recent closing of the Laytonville and Caspar Landfills and the near future closing of the Willits Landfill, the Ukiah Landfill has been identified as a probable interim disposal site for all jurisdictions within Mendocino County until a regional transfer station is developed. At the request of the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits and the County of Mendocino, the City of Ukiah reviewed its landfill tipping fee structure, operational expenses, and additional waste stream t° determine an appropriate tipping fee which would be charged to the new potential users. On February 5, 1997, the Ukiah City Council adopted Resolution No. 97-52 which established a new tipping fee of $63.00 per ton of compacted refuse plus the adopted MSWMA surcharge which would be charged to franchised or permitted collectors/haulers should the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits and the County of Mendocino collectively agree to direct their waste to the Ukiah Landfill for disposal. The current tipping fees, exclusive of the MSWMA surcharge~of $57.00 per ton of compacted refuse charged to Ukiah's Adoption of Resolution Modifying Resolution Nos. 95-8 and 97-52 Regarding Landfill Tipping Fees and Charges, and Days and Hours of Operation July 1 6, 1997 Page 3 franchised refuse collector and 911.90 per cubic yard of loose refuse charged to private or commercial haulers, remained unchanged. Subsequent to the adoption of Resolution No. 97-52, the City of Willits, and the permitted hauler for Fort Bragg took exception to the City of Ukiah's policy of charging loose waste on a volume rate basis. The County of Mendocino Solid Waste Manager believed that the current rate of 911.90 per cubic yard should be lowered in anticipation of additional waste. These agencies are currently charged on a weight rate basis at the Willits Landfill for loose refuse delivered by commercial haulers. As explained in the attached City Manager's Report, the net effect of Ukiah's volume based rate for loose is an increase in cost to the haulers and, subsequently, to the rate payers of Willits and Fort Bragg. The rate of $63.00 per ton for compacted refuse was proposed in consideration of maintaining the current rate of 911.90 for all loose refuse. Any change to the loose refuse rate or change from a volume based rate to a weight based rate would dramatically reduce landfill revenue below the total revenue required over the remaining life of the landfill. Also, a change from a volume based rate to a weight based rate for loose refuse is contradictory to Staff's position that compactibility and not the weight of refuse is the primary variable or determinate in air space consumption. Setting aside the issues concerning weight based rates versus volume based rates for loose refuse, the objective of any rate structure is to produce sufficient revenue to operate the landfill given the anticipated waste loading. In recognition of this objective, Mike Sweeney, General Manager of MSWMA, submitted a proposal providing a compromise solution whereby all users of the Ukiah Landfill would continue to pay the rates they currently pay at their present destination landfill. Fort Bragg, Willits, and the surrounding County environs not currently utilizing the Ukiah Landfill would continue to pay 964.50 per ton of refuse delivered by a permitted commercial hauler whether compacted or loose plus the applicable MSWMA surcharge per ton of waste as they are currently paying at the Willits Landfill. Those portions of the County currently utilizing the Ukiah Landfill and the City of Ukiah's franchised hauler would continue to pay $66.00 and 957.00 respectively, per ton for compacted refuse and $11.90 per cubic yard for loose refuse plus the applicable MSWMA surcharges. Self-haulers including commercial entities not possessing a permit to haul refuse for public entities would continue to pay 911.90 per cubic yard for loose refuse plus the applicable MSWMA surcharge. Ukiah's rates established for Adoption of Resolution Modifying Resolution Nos. 95-8 and 97-52 Regarding Landfill Tipping Fees and Charges, and Days and Hours of Operation July 16, 1997 Page 4 special wastes such as tires and recyclable green waste and wood waste shall be applicable to all users of the landfill. Given the anticipated waste load from Ukiah, Willits, Fort Bragg, and the entire County area excluding South Coast, the variable rate schedule as proposed by Mike Sweeney would generate an amount equal to the revenue Ukiah needs ($5,330,300) to receive during the remaining life of the landfill. Ukiah Staff can support this proposal as long as Fort Bragg, Willits, and the surrounding County environs collectively direct their waste to the Ukiah Landfill. Given their unique circumstances, the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits and the County of Mendocino have requested that the Ukiah Landfill be opened Monday to receive refuse from their commercial haulers. Staff has devised a schedule which would accommodate the additional day of operation for commercial haulers only without adding additional landfill employees. However, it is estimated that the annual operational expenses will be increased by $36,750 for the additional day. Additional expenses would be incurred for fuel, equipment maintenance, utilities, special and general supplies, occasional assistance from other City departments to cover for vacation and sick leave, and overtime allowance. Approval has been received from the Local Enforcement Agency for modification of the current hours to accommodate Monday opening for commercial haulers only. The new permitted hours are as follows and are effective when the cities of Willits and Fort Bragg and the County collectively direct their wastestream to the Ukiah Landfill for disposal. Open to the public from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. five (5) days per week, Tuesday through Saturday and closed on nationally recognized holidays. Open to permitted or franchised commercial refuse haulers who serve the cities of Ukiah, Fort Bragg, Willits, and the County of Mendocino as follows: Mondays, 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Tuesdays through Fridays, 7:00 a.m. to closure of regular business hours. Saturdays, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Days following designated Holidays recognized at the Landfill- 6:00 a.m. to closure of regular business hours. Adoption of Resolution Modifying Resolution Nos. 95-8 and 97-52 Regarding Landfill Tipping Fees and Charges, and Days and Hours of Operation July 16, 1997 Page 5 It is to be noted that the Monday opening at 8:00 a.m. for the new commercial haulers is in conformance with the EIR Mitigation Monitoring Plan. The new hours also eliminate early morning dumping at 6:00 a.m. for commercial haulers on Tuesday unless it follows a designated holiday. It is recommended that the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits pay a nominal fee of $3,500 per year to help offset the anticipated additional expenses for Monday opening. Since portions of the County will continue to pay the highest rate for compacted refuse ($66.00 plus MSWMA surcharge), Staff recommends that the County not be charged the nominal fee for Monday opening. The balance of the additional expenses will be taken from the anticipated positive revenue balance of $445,353 over the remaining life of the landfill. I~:I~M~IDFILL ATIPPING CITY MANAGER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF TIPPING FEES TO BE CHARGED COMMERCIAL REFUSE COLLECTORS/HAULERS FOR THE DISPOSAL OF COM~PACTED REFUSE SHOULD THE CITIES OF FORT BRAGG AND WILLITS AND THEIR ENVIRONS ELECT TO DISPOSE THEIR REFUSE AT UKIAH'S LANDFILL AND OTHER CHANGES TO RESOL~ON NO. 95-8 AND 97-52 GENERAL INFORMATION The City of Ukiah owns and operates the Uldah Solid Waste Disposal Facility (Landfill) which is located at the terminus of Vichy Springs Road. The current Landfill service area includes the City of Uldah, its County environs (Uldah Valley), Potter Valley, Anderson Valley, Hopland, Boonville, and Redwood Valley. Approximately one-half of the County's population reside within this service area. The Landfill currently accepts an average of 115 tons per day of which an average of 105 tons is landfilled. These daily averages are based on a 5-day operational week or approximately 258 days per year. The difference of 10 tons between what is accepted and what is landfilled represents materials which are diverted and recycled including yardwaste, woodwaste, metals, tires, and other recyclables. Approximately half of the tonnage accepted at the Landfill is generated within the City of Uldah with the balance being generated from the County unincorporated portion of the current service area. On August 8, 1996, the Landfill was re-permitted to accept a maximum daily average tonnage of 190 tons. This daily tonnage represents the estimated amount of refuse that is generated within Mendocino County per day. This new permitted tonnage will allow the City to accept all waste that is generated within the County. Currently, there are three (3) remaining landfills serving the communities of Mendocino County; they are the City of Ukiah, City of Willits, and South Coast landfills. The Willits Landfill is projected to reach capacity on or about August 31, 1997, and it currently receives waste from Fort Bragg, Mendocino, Albion, Laytonville, and Covelo because of the closure of the Caspar and Laytonville landfills. The South Coast Landfill is a small landfill serving the Community of Point Arena and the unincorporated communities along the southern Mendocino Coast. This small landfill is currently opened 3 days a week and accepts approximately 1,200 tons of refuse per year. Under the current County Solid Waste Five Year Plan, the South Coast Landfill is projected to cease landfill operations on or about January 1, 1999, for economic reasons; tipping fees do not c.ffset operational costs. The South Coast Landfill has enough air space remaining to continue to operate for another 20 to 25 years at the current input of 1,200 tons per year. Page 1 of 7 _q- At the current rate of disposal (105 tons per day), the Uldah Landfill is projected to reach capacity over the existing 40 acre foot print by March of 2000. Should the disposal rate increase to 190 tons per day beginning September 1, 1997 the projected closure date would be May 1, 1999. As a result of the Landfill Siting Study completed in December 1992 by the Anderson Consulting Group, it has become clear of the difficulties in c~nstructing a new landfill in Mendocino County. As a result of the Federal Subtitle D regulations and the subsequent State regulations, landfill expansions beyond the existing footprint must be lined with leak detection and leachate recovery capabilities. Landf'fll construction in full compliance with Subtitle D is costly ranging from $400,000 per acre to $500,000 per acre depending upon topography of the proposed site. These cost's are prohibitive for a landf'fll which has a low daily volume such as the City of Ukiah's Landf'dl. County of Mendocino and the City of Ukiah Staff have recognized that given the small quantifies of refuse generated within the entire County of Mendocino, it is imperative and more economical to combine the wastestreams from all jurisdictions within Mendocino County and have it shipped out-of-county to a mega landfill. The Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority 0VlSWMA), a joint powers authority established by the cities of Fort Bragg, Willits, and Ukiah and the County of Mendocino, is pursuing the construction of a Regional Transfer Station to be located within the Ukiah Valley. It is proposed that all waste except that waste generated within Point Arena and the South Coast area be delivered to this Regional Transfer Station for ultimate disposal out-of-county. Should this project proceed in the near future, it is anticipated that the Transfer Facility would be completed and ready to receive waste by Spring of 1999. Since the Willits Landfill is projected to close 15 to 18 months prior to the completion of the Regional Transfer Station, a interim-disposal location is needed for their wastestream of approximately 14,000 tons per year of compacted waste and 47,500 cubic yards per year of uncompacted waste. In the interest of keeping the entire County wastestream intact in order that all jurisdictions within Mendocino County may enjoy the benefits of volume, the City of Ukiah has supported making the Ukiah Landfill available for the disposal of waste from Fort Bragg, Willits, and the remaining County areas. Should these jurisdictions elect to dispose their waste at the Ukiah Landfill, the City's Landfill will reach capacity just after the Transfer Station is projected to begin operations. Pro_oosed Tipping Fees to be Charged Franchised or Permitted Haulers for lhe City of Willits and Fort Bragg. and Portions of the County of Mend0cin0 To encourage a team approach to solving and meeting our future solid waste needs and to maintain a unified wastestream which is needed to achieve reasonable and affordable Page 2 of 7 -..{o- transportation and tipping fees, it is necessary that the City of Uldah offer a reasonable and competitive tipping fee to the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits, and the remaining County area during the interim period. Currently, the City's franchised refuse collector is charged $63 per ton and the County's permitted haulers are charged $72 per ton to dispose of compacted waste at the Ukiah Landfill. Both tipping fees include a $6 per ton surcharge which has been established by the MSWMA. Loose waste or uncompacted waste delivered by commercial and self-haulers are charged $12.65 per cubic yard which includes a $0.75 per cubic yard surcharge established by MSWMA. Should Willits, Fort Bragg, and the balance of the County area elect to direct their waste to Ukiah's Landfill for disposal, the amount of waste received for disposal per day would almost double. This additional volume of waste permits the distribution of fixed costs related to the Landfill's operation over a larger base. Based on waste quantities provided in annual disposal reports, the Director of Public Works has calculated Landfill revenue and expenditures based on a competitive tipping fee of $63 per ton for non-City commercial haulers and the existing fee of $57 per ton charged to the City hauler. These tipping fees exclude the $6 MSWMA surcharge and the estimated revenue and expenditures are based on a waste volume that includes the current wastestream plus all the waste from the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits, and the remaining County area. The combined waste volume is estimated at 31,820 tons of compacted waste and 101,892 cubic yards of loose or uncompacted waste. The revenue projections assumed that all loose waste would continue to be accepted at $11.90 per cubic yard plus the $0.75 per cubic yard MSWMA surcharge. With the additional waste being directed to the Uldah Landfill beginning June 1997, maximum capacity would be reached within approximately 1.7 years. At a tipping rate of $63.00 per ton, the total projected revenue and expenditures over the 1.7 year period are estimated at $5,330,353, and $4,885,000 respectively with a positive balance of $445,353. The expenditures include the required annual set aside for the Closure Fund, however, it does not include a contribution towards Post-Closure Maintenance. Closure costs are estimated to be 1.7 million dollars at time of closure and sufficient annual contributions are being made to the Closure Fund whereby the amount needed for closure will be available at closure. It is estimated that a 2.56 million dollar fund is needed at the time of closure to fund a Post-Closure Maintenance period of 30 years. To date, no funds have been contributed to a Post-Closure Fund because of its affect to the tipping fees. To satisfy financial assurance requirements, the City Council elected to pledge future garbage collection revenue to fund the 30 year post-closure period. Staff proposes that any positive balance remaining in the Landfill Enterprise Account at time of closure be reserved for Post-Closure Maintenance. On February 5, 1997, the Ukiah City Council adopted Resolution No. 97-52 which established a uniform tipping fee of $63.00 per ton which would be charged to all commercial refuse collectors excluding Ukiah's Refuse Collector should the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits and the Page 3 of 7 County of Mendocino collectively agree that the refuse collected within their jurisdiction by their franchised or permitted collectors/haulers would be directed to the Uldah Landfill for disposal after the Willits Landfill is closed on or about June 1997. The fee of $63.00 excluded the adopted Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority surcharge of $6.00 per ton. Refuse currently being disposed of at the South Coast Landfill was excluded and the fee of $57.00 per compacted ton charged to the City of Ukiah's Franchised Refuse Collector remained unchanged. All loose or uncompacted refuse whether delivered by commercial or self-haulers would be charged the current fee of $11.90 per cubic yard plus the $0.75 per cubic yard MSWMA surcharge for a total fee of $12.65 per cubic yard. Subsequent to the adoption of Resolution 97-52, the Commercial Refuse Collectors for the City of Willits and Fort Bragg objected to the City's policy of charging loose or uncompacted refuse $11.90 per cubic yard regardless of the customer being a commercial collector/hauler or private self-hauler. All refuse delivered by commercial collectors/haulers whether compacted or uncompacted is currently being charged by weight at the Willits Landfill. Depending upon the unit weight of the uncompacted refuse, a weight based fee can generate a total dump fee which is considerably different than a total dump fee based on a unit volume fee. The Willits Refuse Hauler reported that the uncompacted refuse collected within his jurisdictions have average unit weights of 200.8 for refuse collected within Willits City and 331.6 tons per cubic yard for refuse collected within the County area. The County representative reported that the average unit weight of uncompacted refuse collected at the drop off/transfer sites is 344 pounds per cubic yard. At the current fee of $70.50 per ton charged at the Willits Landfill, the tipping fees for one cubic yard of uncompacted refuse would be $7.08, $11.69, and $12.13 for refuse delivered from the City of Willits, north county Willits area, and County transfer sites respectively. At the Ukiah Landfill, the Fee for the cubic yard of uncompacted waste would be $12.65 regardless of weight. Because of the different fee basis for uncompacted refuse, it is estimated that the Willits hauler would experience an increase in dump fees of $36,428 per year for disposing his waste at the Ukiah Landfill. This increase in costs does not include additional transportation expenses which would be incurred for transportation to Ukiah. Both the City of Willits and Fort Bragg requested the City of Ukiah to reconsider its volume based fee for uncompacted waste. City of Ukiah Staff have been reluctant to change its policy of charging uncompacted refuse by volume for one primary reason. Weight of refuse has little bearing in landfill operations. Since landfills sell air space, compacfibility of refuse is of major importance. A cubic yard of consolidated concrete with rebar having a unit weight of 150 pounds per cubic feet consumes the same air space as one cubic yard of consolidated wood debris having a unit weight of 45 to 50 pounds per cubic feet. The constituents or materials found in self-haul loads range from furniture, roofing materials, construction debris of all types and weights, and household refuse all having different compacfibilifies or volume reduction rates. Because of the many variables encountered with self-haul or loose loads, particularly weight, landfill management continues to Page 4 of 7 support a volume based fee for uncompaeted refuse. As a means of estimating the amount of air space consumed by a consolidated loose load, it is assumed that the volume of the average loose load received and measured at the gate can be reduced by 45 percent when distributed, compacted and covered in the refuse cell. This assumed reduction percentage of 45 percent for the average loose load in conjunction with an assumed 1,200 pounds per cubic yard in place density for compacted refuse collected at the curb and an assumed 3 to 1 refuse to soil cover creates a space consumption model that compares well with the amount of air space consumed during a two year period between 1992 and 1994. Based on the estimated operational expense of $4,885,000 over the remaining life of the landfill (1.7 years) excluding MSWMA fees and a remaining volume of 177,000 cubic yards, the value of air space is $27.60 per cubic yard. Given the assumed 45 percent volume reduction for the average loose load, a loose load of 1.82 cubic yards will consume 1 cubic yard of air space when compacted in place. At the unit charge of $11.90 per cubic yard for loose refuse (excluding MSWMA surcharge), the cost per cubic yard of air space consumed is $21.66 which is $5.94 less than the value of the air space. In comparison, a $66.00 per ton and $57.00 per ton rate for compacted refuse equates to $39.60 and $34.20 respectively per cubic yard of air space consumed at an in-place density of 1,200 pounds per cubic yard. These figures imply that compacted waste rates subsidize the loose refuse rate. Setting aside the above issues regarding weight based rates versus volume based rates for loose refuse, the objective of any rate structure is to produce the needed revenue to operate the landfill given the anticipated waste load. In recognition of this objective, Mike Sweeney, General Manager of MSWMA, submitted a proposal providing a compromise solution whereby all users of the Ukiah Landfill would continue to pay the rates that they are currently paying at their present destination landfill. Fort Bragg, Willits, and the surrounding County environs not currently utilizing the Ukiah Landfill would continue to pay $64.50 per ton of refuse delivered by a permitted commercial hauler whether compacted or loose plus the applicable MSWMA surcharge per ton of waste as they are currently paying at Willits Landfill. Those portions of the County areas currently utilizing the Ukiah Landfill and the City of Uldah's franchised hauler would continue to pay $66.00 and $57.00 respectively, per ton for compacted refuse and $11.90 per cubic yard for loose refuse plus the applicable MSWMA surcharges. Self-haulers including commercial entities not possessing a permit to haul refuse for public entities would continue to pay $11.90 per cubic yard for loose refuse plus the applicable MSWMA surcharge. Ukiah's rates established for special wastes such as tires and recyclable green waste and wood waste shall be applicable to all users of the landfill. Given the anticipated waste load from Ukiah, Willits, and Fort Bragg and the entire County area excluding South Coast, the variable rate schedule as proposed by Mike Sweeney would generate an equal amount of revenue Ukiah needs ($5,330,300) to receive during the remaining life of the landfill, lJldah Staff can support this proposal as long as Fort Bragg, Willits, and the surrounding County environs collectively direct Page 5 of 7 their waste to the Ukiah Landfill. Adjustment in Landf'dl Hours The Ukiah Landfill is currently permitted to be opened to the general public from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Tuesday through Saturday with early morning dumping for commercial haulers beginning at 7:00 a.m. On Tuesdays and days following designated holidays recognized at the landfill early morning dumping for commercial haulers is permitted to begin at 6:00 a.m. The landfill is currently closed to the public and commercial haulers on Sunday and Monday. Given their unique circumstances, the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits, and the County have requested that the Ukiah Landfill be opened Monday for their commercial haulers; Monday openings are critical to their hauler's operations. A schedule has been devised which would accommodate the additional .day of operation for commercial haulers only without adding additional landfill employees, however, it is estimated that the annual operational expenses will be increased by $36,750 for the additional day of operation. Additional expenses would be incurred for fuel, equipment maintenance, utilities special and general supplies, occasional assistance from other City departments, and overtime allowances. Approval has been received from the Local Enforcement Agency for modification of the current hours to accommodate Monday opening for commercial haulers only. The new permitted hours are as follows and effective when Willits and Fort Bragg and the County collectively dispose of their waste at the Ukiah Landfill. Open to the public from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. five (5) days per week, Tuesday through Saturday and closed on nationally recognized holidays. Open to permitted or franchised commercial refuse haulers who serve the cities of Ukiah, Fort Bragg, Willits, and the County of Mendocino as follows: Mondays from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Tuesdays through Saturday 7:00 a.m. to closure of regular business hours. Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Days following designated Holidays recog~ at the Landfill - 6:00 a.m. to closure of regular business hours. Page 6 of 7 It is to be noted that the Monday opening at 8:00 a.m. for the new commercial haulers is in conformance with the EIR Mitigation Monitoring Plan. The new hours also eliminate early morning dumping at 6:00 a.m. for commercial haulers on Tuesday unless it follows a designated holiday. It is recommended that the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits pay a nominal fee of $3,500 per year to help offset the anticipated additional expenses for Monday opening. Since portions of the County will continue to pay the highest rate for compacted refuse ($66.00 plus MSWMA surcharge), Staff recommends that the County not be charged the nominal fee for Monday opening. The balance of the additional expenses will be taken from the positive revenue balance of $445,353. Attachments: fib tt ftcl! fid ti l_andfill Revenue Calculation Landfill Cost Projections Cost per Ton Calculation with all County Wastestream to Ukiah Resolution No. 97-52 R: I ~MqDFILL Ti~PI~IG2.CMR Page 7 of 7 CITY OF uKIAH J I Ukiah Landfill Cost Projections With Additional Waste from Will)ts Landfill beginning June 1, 1997 and ending February 1999 with the projected closure of Ukiah Landfill ! ! Prepared By: Rick Seanor Date & Time Printed: 11121196 8:38 ,, ,I I ,Note: Assumed Inflation Rate of 4% per fiscal year .Full Va~ue Partia'l Value ,Full VMue Partial Value FY 9~/97 FY 96197 FY 97198 J~ 98/99 FY 98199 TOTAL (4 weeks - 8%) ,(32 weeks - 62%) Landfill Operating Costs $],259.892' 6100,791 "61,303,000 $l,.:355.120 $840,174 62,243,965 Closure Reserve Fund $2J,~.000 618,800 6405,000 616,300 $440.100 AccOunt 7301 $563.00~' 645,040 $4 5,040 Refuse Debris , ,, " $60.000 .... $41800 $60,000 660,000 $124,800 .Subtotal: 62,853,905 Items within O & M which are annual expense add 38% of value I Hydroseeding $27.390 610,410 Monitoring add 1 more quarter $14,900 Scraper Lease Payment $92,204 635,040 Gun Club Lease $88'Ji~1" 633,560 Generai Government Charges $75,78,{ .... $28,040 Scraper Mtce. Agreement $]6,632 66.320 ,, , , Slope Work $7o140 $ 2.710 Billing & Collection $23,703 $9.010 Portion of Special Supplies $$0,000 619,000 J Subtotal $158,990 $158,990 Additional Operating Costs TOTAL O & M $3,012.895 Power (Leachate) $ ~'.000 ~400 65,200 $5.410 $3.350 $8,950 Aerial Topo Mapping $15,000 $15,000 Rebuild Compactor Engine 633,100 $33,100 Replace 955L Track Loader $57,900 $57,900 Replace Pickup Truck 613,200 $13,200 Replace D8 Dozer with used D6 6192,900 $192,900 Delete D8 Lease Payments {$51,500) ($$J.,~60~ {$33,210 l$84,710) Delete Co~npact~)r Lease Pa'ymeni~I ($73,600) ($76,~44~ ($47.460) ($121,060) Gun Club Property Loan Buyout J $441,570 $441,570 Allowance for Scraper Over Usage J $20.000 $20,000 Allowance for Tier 3 EPA Emissions Guidelines ,,, $15,000 615,000 $30,000 / ,,, ~reclotur[ Projects ,Subtotal $606,850 ! , Final Closure Plans ~65,000 $65,000 Perimeter Gas Extraction (west) '" ~273,000 $273,000 Allowance for Gas O & M .... $9,100 $9,100 $18,200 , Allowance for Gas Extraction (east) $284,000 $284,000 Allowance, for Gas O & M I .... $10,000 $ ;I 0.000 Allowance for Benzene Remediation $200.000" $200.00(~ Allowance for Pavement Repair Vichy Springs Rd. ~40,000 " ~40,000 $B00000- AllowanCe"for Final Pavement Surface Vichy Springs Rd. - 6184,000 $184,000 Permanent Siie FenCing ' " 6100,806 .... $100,800- Surface Drainage Improvements ,., 6 50,000 650,000 ' Subtotal $1,265,000 TOTAL EXPENSE $4.854.'/45 PROPOSED PERSONNEL COVERAGE AT LANDFILL FOR 6-DAY OPERATIONAL WEEK Employee Mon. Tue, Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat~ , Whitaker A A A A A Hayden A A A A A , , Employee #1 A A A A A ,,, Castanon B B B B B , , Moody B B B B B Employee ,f2 B B B B B Employee #3 A A A A B A = 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. B = 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. ESTIMATE OF ADDITIONAL OPERATIONAL EXPENSES Fuel - (1/2 of 1/5 of current) ......................... $4,570 Equipment Maintenance & Repair [ 1/2 of 1/5) ................................. 9,800 Utility at gatehouse (1/5 of current) ...................... 360 Charges by other departments (coverage) (4 hrs. week x 52 wks. = 208 x $20/hr) ............. 4,160 Special Supplies ........................................ . ADC ................................. Drain Rock ............................ 3,330 General Supplies .................................... 850 Ovedlme Allowance (8 hrs. week x 52 wks. = 416 x $30/hr.) ............. 12,480 , ADDITIONAL TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS ............. $36,750 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 RESOLUTION NO. 98-06 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH MODIFYING RESOLUTION NOS. 95-8 AND 97-52 REGARDING LANDFILL TIPPING FEES AND CHARGES AND DAYS AND HOURS OF OPERATION AT THE UKIAH LANDFILL WHEREAS, the Ukiah City Council adopted Resolution No. 97-52 establishing new tipping fees for compacted and loose refuse which would be effective should the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits and the County of Mendocino collectively agree that the refuse collected within their jurisdiction by their franchised or permitted collectors/haulers be directed to the Ukiah Landfill for disposal after the Willits Landfill closed on or about June 1997; and WHEREAS, exceptions where taken to Ukiah's method and practice of charging loose refuse on a volume basis for commercial loads and such rate basis and method of charge would substantially increase the disposal costs for the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits; and WHEREAS, a compromise proposal was submitted that would produce an equivalent amount of revenue needed to operate the Ukiah Landfill over the remaining life of the landfill; and WHEREAS, the permitted haulers for the cities of Willits and Fort Bragg and the Count of Mendocino requested that the landfill be opened on Mondays to accommodate their disposal needs; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has provided the legally required notice and the City Council has conducted a public hearing as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the following tipping fees and charges, and days and hours of operation are hereby adopted and established at the Resolution No. 98-06 Page I of 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Ukiah Landfill. 1. Should the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits and those portions of the County of Mendocino not currently utilizing the Ukiah Landfill as of the date of this resolution collectively agree that the refuse collected within their jurisdictions by their franchised or permitted collectors/haulers be directed to the Ukiah Landfill for disposal, excluding refuse currently being disposed of at the South Coast Landfill (approximately 1,200 tons per year), after the Willits Landfill closes on or about September 1, 1997, the tipping fee for compacted and loose refuse delivered by the commercial haulers shall be $64.50 per ton plus the adopted Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority (MSWMA) surcharge. Should any one of the three jurisdictions not elect to have their refuse disposed of at the Ukiah Landfill, the tipping fees shall be $72.00 per compacted ton plus the adopted $6.00 per ton MSWMA surcharge and $12.65 per cubic yard for loose refuse including the adopted $0.75 per cubic yard MSWMA surcharge pursuant to the provisions of Paragraphs b and c of Resolution No. 95-8. 2. The tipping fees to be charged to those commercial haulers serving the County of Mendocino and currently utilizing the Ukiah Landfill at the time of adoption of this resolution shall be $72.00 per compacted ton including the $6.00 per ton MSWMA surcharge and ,~12.65 per cubic yard for loose refuse including the ,~0.75 per cubic yard MSWMA surcharge pursuant to the provisions of Paragraphs b and c of Resolution No. 95-8. 3. The following days and hours of operation for the Ukiah Landfill shall be established to accommodate the needs of the new commercial users and shall be effective when needed and as determined by the Director of Public Works: Resolution No. 98-06 Page 2 of 4 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 Open to the public from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. five (5) days per week, Tuesday through Saturday and closed on nationally recognized holidays. Open to permitted or franchised commercial refuse haulers who serve the cities of Ukiah, Fort Bragg, Willits, and the County of Mendocino as follows: Mondays from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Tuesdays through Fridays 7:00 a.m. to closure of regular business hours. Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Days following designated Holidays recognized at the Landfill - 6:00 a.m. to closure of regular business hours. 4. An annual fee of $3,500 shall be charged to the cities of Fort Bragg and Willits to help offset additional expenses that will be incurred by reason of Monday openings. This fee shall be due on September I for 1997 and 1998. 5. The early morning dumping fee as set forth in Paragraph 3 of Resolution No. 95-8 shall be voided only if the conditions as set forth in Paragraph I of this resolution are met. 6. All other fees, charges, and provisions established under Resolution Nos. 95-8 and 97-52 not modified by this Resolution shall remain in effect and unchanged. /// III III III III Reaolution No. 98-06 Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 9.2 23 24 0.5 9.6 27 28 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of July, 1997, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: ATTEST: Councilmember Chavez S h~id'a n Malone Mayor Col{een B. Henderson City Clerk B:ILRESI :KK TIPPING2.FEE Raaolution No. 98-06 Page 4 of 4 --7. l -