Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-07-19 Packet CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 July 19, 2006 6:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS a. Introduction of New Employee - Stephanie Young, Recreation Supervisor b. Presentation by Dana Burwell on Palace Hotel Appraisal 4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2006 b. Regular Meeting Minutes of June 21,2006 - to be delivered c. Special Budget 06-07 Workshop Meeting Minutes of June 28 and 29, 2006 d. Regular Meeting Minutes of July 5, 2006 - to be delivered 6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roil call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Report to the City Council Regarding the Purchase of Services from Wesco Graphics for the Printing of the 2006 Summer Recreation Guide in the Amount of $5,082.02. b. Report Increased Cost of Equipment on 2006 50' Digger-Derrick International 4300 4x2 to Altec Industries in the Amount of $6,060.94 c. Accept Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Grant in the Amount of $179,550.00 and Authorize City Manager to Sign Grant Documents d. Report of Acquisition of 24 Lengths of 2-1/2 Inch Fire Hose from Jaeco Fire and Safety in the Amount of $8,871.27 e. Report of Disbursements for the Month of June 2006 f. Status of the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant Equipment Refurbishment Emergency g. Notification of Expenditure in the Amount of $5,137.53 to Hewlett Packard Corporation for the Purchase of Two Printers h. Report of the Acquisition of Emergency Traffic Signal Repair Services from Republic Electric in the Amount of $5,235 i. Award of Bid for Various Size Pole Mount and Pad Mount Transformers in the Amount of $92,216.76 to Western States Electric/ERMCO and $26,577.62 to WESCO/ABB for a Total of $118,794.38 j. Report to the City Council Regarding the Purchase of Services from Mendocino Metals for the Fabrication of Twenty Pairs of Commemorative Bench Brackets in the Amount of $9,051 k. Award of Professional Services Agreement to HDR Engineering, Inc. in an Amount Not to Exceed $133,007 for Design Services for the STIP Railroad Crossing Rehabilitation Project I. Award of Professional Services Agreement to Green Valley Consulting Engineers in an Amount Not to Exceed $49,160 for Design Services for the Gobbi Street / Orchard Avenue Traffic Signal Project m. Report of the Acquisition of AUTOCAD 2007 Civil Series from DLT Solutions, Inc. in the Amount of $8,415.07 n. Receive Report Concerning Minor Language Changes to Housing Corporation Major Subdivision Map # 05-17 AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. in order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM) a. Consideration and Action on Hull/Piffero Use Permit Application to Provide Relief from the Maximum Height Standard for an Accessory Structure (Flag Pole) and to Allow Minor Grading and Construction in the Hillside Zoning District b. Discussion and Action on Environmental and Feasibility Analysis for the Orchard Avenue Extension and Orr Creek Bridge Alternative Route 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Award of Contract to Efficiency Services Group, LLC for Public Benefits Program Assessment, Revision, Turnkey Administration and Reporting b. Receive Status Report Concerning Sign Ordinance Enforcement Activities and Provide Direction to Staff c. Adoption of Resolution Consolidating General Municipal Election with the Statewide Election to be Held November 7, 2006, Requesting Mendocino County to Conduct the Election, and Approving a Ballot Measure to be Placed on the Ballot for Such Election d. Introduction of Ordinance Amending Campaign Finance Reform Act e. Adoption of Ordinance Amending Ukiah City Code Section 1151, Regarding Appointment of Planning Commission Members f. Discussion and Possible Approval of Memorandum of Understanding for Preliminary Review for Development of Potential Water Supply g. Adoption of Resolution Making Appointment to the Investment Oversight Committee, Demolition Permit Review Committee, Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission and the Traffic Engineering Committee 11. NEW BUSINESS a. Approval of Letter of Response to Grand Jury Related to Ukiah Police Department and "What Methamphetamine is Costing You" b. Designation of Voting Delegate and Alternate for 2006 League of California Cities Annual Conference - September 6-9, 2006 c. Discussion and Possible Appointment of Councilmember to Discuss City's Level of Interest in Participating on Air Quality Management Board d. Adoption of Resolution Making Appointment of the City Clerk 11. COUNCIL REPORTS 12. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 13. CLOSED SESSION 14. ADJOURNMENT Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend. The City complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda. Dated this 14th day of July, 2006. G~il Petersen, Deputy-Cit~-Clerk~: - ITEM NO. 3a DATE: July 19th, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE, STEPHANIE YOUNG The Community Services Department is pleased to introduce to Council our newest employee, Recreation Supervisor, Stephanie Young. Stephanie started with us in March and immediately jumped into preparing this summers' day camp and pool programs! Stephanie is replacing Gina Greco who left the city to run her recently purchased business, Incognito. We are fortunate to have Stephanie as she brings to the position a broad knowledge of sports, youth and aquatics. Her organizational skills and work ethic are impressive and will greatly contribute to the success of our recreational programs. Stephanie has lived in the Ukiah area for 14 years. Many of you are familiar with her husband Marcus, a recently retired UPD Officer. Stephanie's son, Jeremy, is a UPD cadet and also works at the City Pool. Her daughter, Halley, plays soccer and golf and is the girl's sports commissioner for St. Mary's school. Stephanie thrives on her time with her family and she loves to spend any spare time playing or coaching sports. The Community Services Department is happy to have Stephanie as a part of our team and we are pleased to now welcome her to the City of Ukiah. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Welcome Stephanie Young to the City of Ukiah ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Maya Simerson, Community Services Supervisor Candace Horsley, City Manager and Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Director None APPROVED:candace Horsley, City Manager \ ITEM NO: 3b MEETING DATE: July 13 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: PRESENTATION OF PALACE HOTEL APPRAISAL BY DANA BURWELL, CERTIFIED GENERAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER Dana Burwell a Certified General Real Estate Appraiser was commissioned to perform an appraisal of the Palace Hotel. He was selected for the project due to his extensive background and knowledge of appraising historical buildings. The document was presented to the City Council and sent to the property owner for review in April. Dana Burwell will be in attendance to provide a brief description of how he performed this appraisal and to answer questions. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Candace Horsley, City Manager Dana Burwell Palace Hotel Appraisal---delivered previously Approved: Ca"n~ace Horsley, ~~M~ger 'PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date / I £'- Name & Signature .-?~ t..'t. 'qA o -? Address Phone No. PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date x-, Name & Scigoature Address Phone No. -,-, :~, . _ .~ - ,, ,. ,. , ,, 7/Z_~ _ - ~ - .,. PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date Name & Signature Address Phone No. PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date Name & Signature ., Ad, dress Phone No. ~ ,, ¢' Kc,..cL "F / / l/ PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date ? '¢ Name & Signature Address n / ~ Phone No. PE]'i'I'ION TO SAVE "OUR" FI..AG Major t'se Permit 06-13, as tiled by l)ave Hull and Ric Piffcro to, alto:; to pc:mit thc flag pole It) reach a height ot'45-feet xx het'c 20-feet are allowed b> the kkiaU City Code. Fh.c sukiec; properly is !ocaled a~ 335 Jal~x D:ive. [ ~kiah i APN 001 -(;4()-. 72 }. Date Name & Signature Address Phone No ~ ,' /, ~ ._. , , 2 _,l.r,' ..,.'",, ~..'. ',:5/ z,,,, ~5-~ ' , .- ?. , ,t ..:'~/G"5. ~: 7. ~ ~ c'~:.,::~LYE /:'~--o ~lJ[23_ //>~:,'L'L' ~.-' /~-. n,",~ ~' !2/', , ,, c .. ..... PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date Name & Signature Address Phone No. We the PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date Name & Signature Address Phone No. PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Uldah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date Name & Signature Address Phoue No. PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Rie Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by thc Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date Name & Signature Address Phone No. txo3 PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow lninor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date Name Address Phone No. PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date Name & Signature Address Phone No. PETITION TO SAVE "OUR" FLAG We the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of Ukiah to approve: Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flag pole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flag pole to reach a height of 45-feet where 20-feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001-040-72). Date Name & Signature Address Phone No. July 19, 2006 City Council Honorable Council, RE: Major Use Permit 06-13 I have to work tonight or I would be saying this to you personally. I feel very strongly about this issue. First because at its core it involves the flag of our nation.., the banner that identifies our country from others. We all know it is much more than identification, but instead a reminder to its people of lives lost before and now for freedom. Now more than ever we need to show our unity to the world through the display of our flag. Many sports icons get cheers and hats are waved, but there is no other symbol in our land other than the U. S. Flag, where people rise from their chairs, remove their hat in reverence, place their hands over their heart, and feel strong emotion upon its sight. The obvious reason is patriotism but the most basic reason for such immediate action is gratitude. A constant reminder of our many citizens who have fought and died to keep it flying so that we can enjoy our freedoms more than any country in the world. You could not have this meeting tonight without our flag and what it represents. This of course, is the emotional side of the issue. The practical and logical side of the issue is that according to the findings of staff, which heavily researched these items before they came to you for the final vote, made some findings, specifically Items 1 and 2, which clearly show no reason why this flagpole cannot remain at its current height with your permission: 1. It does not pose a danger and is not a safety issue in any way; 2. It is not a detriment to the area or General Plan and in fact is consistent with the goals of the Plan. So it is not an eyesore. In fact our citizens and visitors drive by, look up and renew their vows to their country silently and pass by with a smile or good feeling. That is a attribute, not a detriment. Please be strong and do not be fooled by the real reasons behind this movement to get that flagpole off the hill. All over our nation the flag is under attack. In our beautiful and unique community of Ukiah, I implore you to stand strong against this hidden agenda and do not let this ugly issue continue and taint our community any further. Please approve the variance not only for the City of Ukiah, but for the citizens of the entire Ukiah Valley who love the flagpole with its banner where it is at the height it is. Kathy Davidson, Citizen of Ukiah Ms. Peterson- Would you please add my comments below to the Public Record~f~r-t-he-eity-(~otrncibx discussion regarding the request for a use permit for the flag pole in the Western Hills: about:blank To the Ukiah City Council Members- I would like to state my strong opposition to granting a permit to Dave Hull and Ric Piffero for the 45 foot flagpole on the property at 335 Janix Drive. I would like to see the flagpole, concrete pad and lighting system dismantled because it does not conform to the Ukiah Municipal Code regarding such structures. No after the fact permit or variance should be allowed. It is not believable that these educated developers were not aware that there would be a permit process required for this structure that is so visible. Our community leaders should set clear guidelines and not ask for exemptions to the law. I lived in Sonoma County while the City Council and Planning Department ignored their promise not to build on the ridge line in Fountaingrove. Now hillside development dominates the skyline and nothing can be done. One exemption will lead to another. Allowing permission for the flag is not governing by the laws we have agreed to live by in our community. What a pity the planning department and the city staff have not done their jobs. It is now up to you to uphold permit regulations. This has been turned into a polarizing argument about patriotism and the flying of the American flag. This is not about patriotism. This is about going out at night and seeing this giant illuminated scar on the hillside from my house. This is about having the arrogance to blast the valley with your own idea of patriotic music on the Fourth of July. This is about placing yourself above the law. This is about all of us living by the same rules; not the 'good old boys' sticking together. You have the opportunity to clarify the goals and objectives of the General Plan. Not to bow to the pressures that will be placed on you by influential people or developers with money. The view of the Western Hills belongs to everyone. I would also ask that our council members act with more professionalism and basic human courtesy toward each other and to the public who come before the council. Thank you for the opportunity to state my opinion. Susan Boling Guhlke 430 Oak Park Avenue 467-1467 I of 2 7/19/2006 2:28 PM SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MENDOCINO 14 2003 RIC PIFFERO Et al., Plaintiff/Petitioner VS. SCUK-CVPT-3-90583-0 FILED NOV 1 2 200 CITY OF UKIAH, Defendant/Respondent. C,I~RK OF/VIEIqDOC~O COUPlTY ORDER RE WRIT OF ~COURTOFCalIK:81'~ MANDATE This matter comes before the court on the plaintiff's Motion for Peremptory Writ of Mandate. On June 5, 2003, Petitioners filed with Respondent City a written request to receive copies of certain public records pursuant to Govt. Code sections 6250, 6253 and 6259(b). Respondent City, denied the request claiming that the withheld records are exempt from disclosure under Govt. Code section 6254(a). The Court has examined the withheld records in camera. The Court £mds the withheld records are (1) pre-decisional communications which are part of the deliberative process, (2) are not permanent and (3) the public interest in withholding the records clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosuret. The Motion for Peremptory Writ of Mandate is denied. Each party shall bear their own costs and attorney fees. Dated: November 10, 2003 Copies to counsel November Bruce W. McCann, Esq. David J. Rapport, Esq. ,2003 JUDGE OPxTEI~ SUPERIOR COURT ~ In its analysis the court considered the nature of:he Ln_t'ormation sought and the content of~e withheld records. PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL I, Dan Garcia, declare: I am employed in the County of Mendocino, State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within action. My business address is P. O. Box 996, Uldah, California 95482. I am familiar with the County of Mendocino's practice whereby each document is placed in an envelope, the envelope is sealed and placed in the office mail receptacle. Each day's mail is collected and appropriate postage affixed thereto and deposited in a U.S. mailbox at or before the close of each day's business. On the date of this declaration, I served copies of the attached document on the below listed persons by placing a tree copy thereof, in the United States mail, addressed as follows: BruceW~Esq POBox308 Ociahln~ Ca 95465 David J Rapport, Esq POBox488 Uldall, Ca 85482 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed this 12 day of November 2003 at L~ciah, California. Dan Garcia ITEM NO. CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting Minutes CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 April 19, 2006 5a 4:30 - 5:30 pm: Ukiah Redevelopment Aqency and Low & Moderate Income Housinq Advisory Committee Joint Meeting Regarding Role and Responsibility of the Committee, Membership, & 20% housing Setaside Allocation Process 1. ROLL CALL 6:16:02 PM Councilmembers Present: Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. Staff Present: City Manager Horsley, Associate Planner Liston, City Attorney Rapport, Planning and Community Development Director Stump, and City Clerk Ulvila. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Everyone recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. PROCLAMATIONS 6:16:25 PM 3a. Proclamation: Workers Memorial Day in the City of Ukiah Mayor Ashiku read the Proclamation proclaiming April 28, 2006 as 'q~Vorkers Memorial Day in the City of Ukiah" in recognition of workers killed, injured, and disabled on the job and informing all residents of the valley about the gathering at 5:30 p.m. at Alex Thomas Plaza on April 28th that is put on by the working men and women in Mendocino County to observe this special day. Mr. Terry Poplawski accepted the Proclamation on behalf of the Mendocino County Coalition of Union Workers. It's their seventh observance and he discussed the purpose of the event. Under the umbrella of the Mendocino County Foundation, a fund has been established for workers' families. 3b. Proclamation: TV - Turn Off Week 6:23:15 PM Vice Mayor Baldwin read the Proclamation proclaiming the week of April 24-30, 2006 as 'q-V-Turnoff Week". Ann Molgaard, First Five Mendocino, accepted the Proclamation and discussed the importance of child development and offered suggestions. 4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 6:26:54 PM 4a. Petition and Communication from Ukiah Community Center Board of Directors City Manager Horsley stated that the Ukiah Community Center Board of Directors would be requesting funding for non-profit organizations from the grant program. Upon conclusion of discussion, staff was directed to agendize the issue. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES None. w RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION 6:34:05 PM Mayor Ashiku read the Right to Appeal Decision. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR 6:34:31 PM Upon a request by Elizabeth Kirkley, Elecrical Distribution Engineer for the City of Ukiah, Consent Item 7.d. "Approved Resource 500 - Aggregate with Other Participants in Order to Have a Vote on the Development Committee", the City Council directed the City Clerk to add "Lassen Municipal Utility District" to "Resource 500". a. Approved Disbursements for Month of March 2006; b. Received Report of Resolution of the Commission of the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) Approving Expenditure of Funds to Complete the Geothermal Unit 3 Scheduled Five- Year Overhaul; Authorize City Manager to Pay City's Proportionate Share of Overhaul from NCPA General Operating Reserve in an Amount of $30,318 (Revised); c. Adopted Resolution 2006-48 Approving Records Destruction (Finance Dept.); d. Approved Resource 500 - Aggregate with Other Participants in Order to Have a Vote on the Development Committee with the inclusion of "Lassen Municipal Utility District"; e. Awarded Bid to Watthour Engineering Company, Inc. for the Purchase of a Model 2350 Electric Meter Test Board in the Amount of $32,247.25; f. Approved Letter to FEMA Appeals Officer on Behalf of Bernard Kent Porter Seeking Reimbursement for Funds Expended on Emergency Repairs for Oak Knoll Road - McCowen; g. Adopted Resolution 2006-49 Waiving the 60-Day Notification Requirement for Establishing a County Facility in the City (327 North State Street), Pursuant to Government Code 25351; h. Received Report to City Council Regarding the Purchase of Native Turf Grass from Emerisa Gardens for Observatory Park Development in the Amount of $5,791.56; i. Awarded Contract to Sou rce California Energy Services to Provide Engineering Services for the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant; j. Authorized City Manager to Sign the New AT&T Internet Service Contract for the City's Primary Internet Circuit for the City's Primary Internet Circuit. M/S Rodin/Crane Approving Consent Calendar Items "a" through "j", carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: none; ABSENT: None; ABSTAIN None.: 8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS 6:37:19 PM Mike Johnson, shared his recent experience with the Design Review Board and dissatisfaction with how the matter was handled by the City. 6:42:11 PM David Leveret, owner of Earth Lab Energy Systems in Willits, a wood and gas stove retail business, addressed the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District's proposal to eliminate woodstoves. Documents submitted to the City Clerk included, "Wood Burning Handbook" and a letter dated April 14, 2006 to the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District. Councilmember McCowen stated this matter is the subject of a future presentation; Mr. Leveret to be notified. = PUBLIC HEARING (6:15 P.M.) 6:46:4.6 PM Consideration and Possible Extension of Urgency Ordinance Imposing Moratorium on New Marijuana Dispensaries 6:47:05 PM City Attorney Rapport stated that this Agenda item requests the City Council to extend the existing moratorium by one year. Conflicts between requirements from both State and Federal 2 laws that the City is currently caught between, could be resolved due to existing litigation. City Attorney Rapport stated it will take a 4/5 vote of the City Council to extend the moratorium. Upon request by Mayor Ashiku, City Attorney Rapport read Paragraph 6. Items a, b, c, d, e, and paragraphs #7, #8, #10, citing dispensary problems in other jurisdictions as well as the City of Ukiah. Public Hearing Opened: 6:53:55 PM Public speaking in opposition of the extension to the existing moratorium: Ukiah Morrison, Alea Walters RN, Reverend Jerimiah Crane, (who submitted a twenty-two page petition to "tell City Council that Ukiah needs legal marijuana dispensaries"), Patrick Burnstead,. Public speaking in favor of one dispensary overseen by a Community Board that creates a check and balance: Dane Wilkins, Director, Northern California NORMAL, Jenny Burnstead. Public encouraging City Council to make medical marijuana available: Michael Toms. Public Hearing Closed: 7:15:04 PM Mayor Ashiku reiterated that City Attorney has brought this matter back due to legal issues and expressed appreciation to the community. M/S McCowen/Baldwin to Adopt amended Ordinance No. 1077, extending a moratorium on new medical marijuana dispensaries from May 17, 2006 through and including May 17, 2007, to take effect immediately. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10 a. Continued Discussion and Consideration of an Ordinance Re.qardin.cl Campai.qn Reform - Baldwin~ Rodin 7::22:27 PM Vice Mayor Baldwin reviewed the process the Campaign Reform Ordinance has taken over the past several months, citing similar ordinances adopted by several other municipalities. 7:26:14 PM Councilmember Rodin stated the primary elements are: Disclosure limit recommended at $50.00; contribution limit recommended at $100.00; displaying FPPC Forms on the City's website; voluntary spending limit; no anonymous contributions and election cycles (for acceptance of contributions). 7:34:30 PM Public Comment Opened 7:35:01 PM Public speaking in favor of campaign reform and voicing support of various elements identified by the Sub-Committee: Laura Fogg, Scott Cratty, Terry Poplawski, Scott Means, Alea Waters, Ron Epstein, Jan Moore, Gregg Foss, Richard Leeman Public speaking in opposition of Campaign Reform: None 3 Public comment closed 7:56:17 PM Extensive discussion ensued regarding campaign contribution limits, voluntary spending limits, and campaign contribution and spending disclosure. Consensus to continue this item to another Council meeting. City Attorney Rapport requested to research whether there can be a contribution limit on an independent committee which is in or out of the City limits. 9:12:5 ! PM Recessed 9:22:$7 PM Reconvened 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10b. Receive Status Report Concerninq Si.qn Ordinance Enforcement Activities 9:23:0l PM Planning Director Stump reviewed his report to the City Council concerning enforcement activities regarding the City's Sign Ordinance. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10c. Reiect General Electric's Bid to Refurbish the Flood Dama.qed Hydroelectric Plant Equipment; Adopt Resolution Declaring Open Market Procurement More Economical; and Authorize Staff to Procure Contractor to Complete Work Scope Outlined in Request for Bids by Open Market Procurement 9:25:]7 PM Interim Public Utilities Director Grande: The City solicited bids for the refurbishment of the flood- damaged equipment by advertising and also submitting notices to trade journals. Four prospective bidders were identified and of those four, only General Electric submitted a bid, for $545,000. GE rejected the City's terms and conditions in the contract outright, and their alternatives were to either utilize their terms and conditions or to negotiate a set of terms and conditions following award of the bid. Their bid was also significantly higher than the engineering estimate of $250,000 to $350,000 for the project; it was our recommendation that we reject it as non-responsive. That would allow us to go forward and negotiate directly with a contractor to perform the work. Director Grande continued to state he feels relatively Confident about the $250,000 to $350,000, and if the City were going to try to move this project forward, perhaps $500,000 would give us a little bit of lead way. M/S Crane/McCowen to approve the recommended action to reject General electric's Proposal Number 1-130^81_1RS407307 to the City's Hydroelectric Plant Equipment Refurbishment RFP and adopt Resolution 2006-50, declaring that repair of flood damaged electrical components at the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant can be performed more economically by open market procurement and authorizing City Manager to negotiate and enter contract for hydroelectric plant repairs with a cap of $500,000; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 11. 11a. NEW BUSINESS Presentation of Palace Hotel Appraisal by Dana Burwell~ Certified General Real Estate Appraiser 9:3!:]4 PM City Manager Horsley provided a brief update regarding the appraisal, in the amount of $309,000., which is based on the value of the land only. Copies will be made available to the public and 4 developers for review and are available at the Civic Center. The appraiser, Dana Burwell, will be present at a future meeting to discuss the appraisal and answer questions. Councilmember McCowen requested a copy of the appraisal be placed at the public library. 11. 11b. NEW BUSINESS Discussion and Consideration of Video Cameras in City Parks to Assist with Crime Prevention 9:36:!8 PM Community/General Services Director Sangiacomo discussed data supporting the reduction in crime due to video surveillance. Director Sangiacomo stated he had spoken with Windsor and cities of Petaluma and Colton who currently have cameras in place in their parks. The City of Ukiah's Police Department has purchased a video system and for a relatively inexpensive cost, the backbone of that system could be utilized and modular units installed within the park facilities. Costs associated with vandalism in parks for this year is estimated at over $15,000 and in excess of 400 hours of staff time. Staff directed to bring back options: Review concept of utilizing the Police Department's system; identify alternative systems such as web cameras or, combination thereof and research liability issues. 11. NEW BUSINESS 11c. Approval of the City of Ukiah Resource Adequacy Program 9:58:45 PM Interim Public Utilities Director Murray Grande approached the Council seeking approval of the City's Resource Adequacy Program which is mandated by Federal and State regulatory authority. Director Grande stated that Northern California Power Authority has approved this program and identified the benefits. He believes it is cost effective for the City. M/S Crane/McCowen approving the redline version of the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) Resource Adequacy Program with modifications as noted therein; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 11. 11d. NEW BUSINESS Adoption of Resolution Approving Memorandum of Understandinq for Electric Em;fiovee Baraainin;; Unit (IBEW Local 1245) ! 0:0!: ! 9 PM City Manager Horsley stated this item is within the parameters as discussed with Council in previous Closed Session and has been ratified by the Bargaining Unit. M/S Baldwin/McCowen approving Resolution 2006-52, adopting Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Ukiah and the Electric Unit; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 11. NEW BUSINESS 11e. Adoption of Resolution Approving Memorandum of Understandinq for Fire Employe~ Bamainine Unit 10:01:58 PM City Manager Horsley stated this item is within the parameters as discussed with Council in previous Closed Session and has been ratified by the Fire Employee Bargaining Unit. 5 M/S Crane/McCowen approving Resolution 2006-53, adopting Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Ukiah and the Fire Unit; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 12. COUNCIL REPORTS 10:02:43 PM Councilmember Crane reported he attended a Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority (MSWMA) meeting. Topics included construction demolition debris ordinances. Councilmember Crane stated that rate recycling incentives may be a better model in that the debris would be better separated. Councilmember Rodin inquired about the status of North Coast Railroad Authority and Mendocino Transit Authority Memorandum of Understanding. City Attorney Rapport stated he is working with North Coast Railroad Authority attorney Chris Neary. Councilmember Rodin stated she enjoys participating on the Library Advisory Board and will be attending the upcoming meeting is in Covelo. Councilmember Baldwin requested that the Inland Water and Power Commission be on the next agenda to discuss the feasibility study agreement; wishes to reverse roles on Inland Water and Power Commission with Councilmember Rodin. 13. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 10:07: City Manager Horsley reported we now have WiFi, at the Golf Shop. Adjourned to URA:10:00:47 PM Reconvened at 12:46:42 AM Adjourned to Closed Session: 1:~:4{5:59 AM 14. CLOSED SESSION a. Employee Negotiations: Electric and Fire Units Negotiator: Candace Horsley b. Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Gov't Code Section 54957) Title: City Manager c. Government Code §54956.8 - Conference with Real Property Ne.qotiator Property: Low Gap Road Property - APN# 001-020-09 Owner: City of Ukiah Negotiator: Candace Horsley Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at: 2:00 AM Gail Petersen, Transcribing Secretary MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21, 2006 5:00 p.m. Presentation by Mendocino County Department of Public Health, Building Healthy Communities Ms. Linda Helland, health educator for the Mendocino County Department of Public Health presented a Public Health report on behalf of the Healthy Lifestyles Action Team of the Mendocino County Public Health Advisory Board. 5:25 p.m. Review of Preliminary Financial Results for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2006 Review of Preliminary Financial Results For Fiscal Year Endinq June 30, 2006 $:29:43 PM Finance Director McCann provided a preliminary review of the current year's financial results relative to budget by highlighting some key budget issues and introduced some items of interest for the upcoming budget approval process. A FY05-06 Recap Budget and Project Actual Summary and Highlights document was provided for reference. The document recap provided information pertinent to appropriations by City department, overall financial position, Measure S, General Fund, electric utility fund balances, and information concerning the separation of fire/ambulance budgets. There were additional discussions concerning future issues relative to rising interest rates, state budget impacts on local revenues, continuing escalation of monitoring and post-closure landfill costs, and establishment of new department for tracking animal control activities. 1. ROLLCALL The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on June 21, 2006, the notice for which being legally noticed, at 6:00 p.m. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were present: Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. Councilmember absent: Rodin. Staff present: City Manager Horsley, Finance Director McCann, Public Works Director/City Engineer Eriksen, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Goodrick, Associate Planner Liston, Associate Planner Lohse, Planning and Community Development Director Stump, Community/General Services Director Sangiacomo, and Recording Secretary Spazek. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 5:57:]5 PM Mayor Ashiku led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS 5:57:26 PM 3a. Introduction of Assistant Engineer, Alan Hasty Public Works Director/City Engineer Eriksen introduced the addition of Alan Hasty as the City's new Assistant Engineer and provided a description of Mr. Hasty's professional background. 3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS 3b. Presentation by Omni Means Ltd., ReRardinR City-Wide Traffic and Circulation Study 5:59:36 PM Public Works Director/City Engineer Eriksen provided an update to the Citywide Circulation and Traffic Study that is being conducted by Omni-Means, Ltd., and advised that with the potential development changes to the Ukiah valley, staff has been working closely with the consultants to ensure all issues and associated criteria are appropriately considered/addressed in this regard. Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21,2006 Page ! The presentation/study update includes the following information: · The consultants looked at key Intersections currently operating at unacceptable levels of service (LOS) and addressed the issue of number of trips generated. · They anticipate a 40 percent increase in traffic in the UVAP area outside of the City. One of the reasons for delays in the study results and corresponding traffic study recommendations for improvements to streets and key intersections is the planning of projects for developments on Lovers Lane and the former Masonite site. · The traffic would increase an additional 30 percent with the proposed new developments referenced above. · The traffic statistics in 2025 with the proposed County land use changes indicate a 19 percent increase in traffic on City streets. · 17 percent of the increase in traffic would come from City development and 70 percent would come from County development. The next presentation by Omni Means concerning the Citywide Traffic Study will provide a more detailed list of the improvements and associated costs, which will include a draft circulation plan. Mayor Ashiku stated it would be helpful to know what the anticipated traffic impact fees and corresponding fee schedule are so that effective decisions about any development can be made. Councilmember McCowen understands the need to make assumptions in order to complete the study, but he is concerned that building these assumptions into the study and basing a fee schedule on those assumptions might make these developments a foregone conclusion. The consultant indicated that they could do a presentation two ways, one with assumptions and one without. They want to be as realistic as they can so they can have an accurate fee schedule. The majority of the costs are going to be to the City where the improvements are not going to be in the City. City Manager Horsley advised they met with County staff today to discuss the possibility of having a shared fee and the County was very open to this. 4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6:3:3:57 PM a. Joint Meetin.q Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission of May 10, 2006 M/S McCowen/Baldwin approving the City Council and Planning Commission joint meeting minutes of May 10, 2006, as presented; and carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. 6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION 6:34:35 PM Mayor Ashiku read the Right to Appeal Decision. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR 6:35:01 PM MIS Baldwin/Crane approving Consent Calendar items "a" through "p" as follows: a. Received Report of Disbursements for Month of April 2006; Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21, 2006 Page 2 b. Received Notification to Council Regarding the Sole Source Purchase of a Breaker Cabinet from Cooper Power Systems in the Amount of $11,686.57; Authorized Budget Amendment in Same Amount; c. Received Notification of the Expenditure of $8,501.48 To LN Curtis & Son's for the Purchase of OSHA Required Firefighter Protective Clothing; d. Received Status of the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant Equipment Refurbishment Emergency; e. Awarded Bid for Trucking Service to Off-Haul Soil from Wastewater Treatment Plant to the NORCAL Waste Systems Hay Road Landfill to Wipf Construction at the Unit Price of $27.93 Per Ton for an Approximate Total of $20,947.50; f. Awarded Bid for Purchase of a New Sullivan-Palatek Model D185Q11JD 185 CFM Air Compressor for the Water and Sewer Maintenance Department to Nation's Rents in the Amount of $11,899.91; Authorized Budget Amendment in Same Amount.; g. Received Notification to the City Council of the Purchase of 36,435,000 Gallons of Water at a Unit Price of $2.08 Per Thousand Gallons from Millview County Water District for a Total Amount of $7,469.18; Authorized Budget Amendment of Same Amount; h. Received Notification to Council Regarding Award of Consultant Contract to Sentinel Archaeological Research, LLC for Archaeological Monitoring Services for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project in the Amount of $8,894.00; Awarded Bid for Purchase of a 2006 Toyota Prius (Hybrid Vehicle) for the Public Utility Department in the Amount of $23,816.16; Received Report To City Council Regarding The Purchase Of Services From Arrow Fencing To Replace Damaged Fencing At The Ukiah Sports Complex In An Amount of $6,000; k. Approved Purchase Replacement Computer Equipment from Dell Marketing, L.P. in an Amount Not to Exceed $43,216.94; I. Awarded Acquisition of a Marking Truck to Line Master Engineering for the Department of Public Works in the Amount of $73,985.46 Funded through the Equipment Replacement Fund Budget ~ m. Awarded Bid to Dimension Ford West for the Purchase of a New 2007 ~ Ton Truck with a Modular Animal Transport Body in the Amount of $36,650.25 and Approved Budget Amendment; n. Received Report to City Council Regarding the Purchase of Bollards for Park Entrances from Cai Pipe Bollards in the Amount of $8,254.73; o. Received Report to the City Council Regarding Acquisition of Services from City of Light Sound and Recording for Sound Management and Equipment Mobilization for the 2006 Sundays in the Park Concert Series an Amount Not to Exceed $8,700; p. Awarded Bid to Pitney Bowes, Inc. for the Purchase of a D1950 Premium Package W/Omar Reader Foldedlnserter System in the Amount of $27,542.30. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. 8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS 6:35:45 PM John Graft commented on the statistics of people dying in wars and emphasized the importance of preserving the right to fly a flag. He then gave his opinion about this right and asked the City Council to do what it can to stop allowing our flag to become an issue. 6:38:06 PM 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6:38:26 PM 9a. Approval of a Minor Subdivision Exception to the Fronta.qe Requirement of the Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21, 2006 Page 3 Subdivision Ordinance for a Property Located at 733 South Oak Street Associate Planner Liston stated a property owner is proposing to divide a residential parcel into two parcels, one of which would be approximately six inches short of the minimum 60-foot street frontage requirement. The project required a variance from the City's zoning requirements where on April 12, 2006, the Ukiah Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and approved the variance. The applicant is also seeking an exception to the frontage requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance. The Planning Commission discussed the matter and recommends the City Council approve the subdivision exception for relief from the 60-foot street frontage requirement. Staff clarified that both the subdivision exception application and the variance application seek to create a lot that is six inches short of the minimum required, based on different codes. Public Hearing Opened: 6:41: 20 ?H Ms. Liston indicated the Planning Commission and staff recommends City Council approve the Minor Subdivision Exception, as well as the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the exception. She presented the findings supporting approval that address the matter of special circumstances, substantial property right, and public welfare. No one from the public came forward. Public Hearing Closed: 6:41:22 PM_ MIS McCowenlCrane approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Minor Subdivision Exception No. 05-49, Martin Gadea, applicant; and carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. MIS McCowen/Crane approving Minor Subdivision Exception to allow a lot that is approximately six inches short of the minimum frontage requirement at 733 South Oak Street, Martin Gadea, applicant; and carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9b. lntroduction of Ordinance Amendin.q the Zonin.q Code to Allow Entryway Trellises to be Constructed Within Front Yard Setback Areas on Parcels in the R-1 (Sin.qle Family Residential Districts) Planning Director Stump stated the Ukiah Planning Commission reviewed the matter of adding language to the Zoning Code that would allow entryway trellises to be constructed within front yard setback areas on May 24, 2006. Specifically, the project involves adding subsection "E" to Section 9020 of Article 1 of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Division 9 of the Ukiah Municipal Code to allow property entryway trellises providing they are located in the front yard setback areas and provided: a. The trellis does not exceed a maximum height of 10 feet. b. The trellis is not more than 10 feet wide. c. The trellis is not located in the public right-of-way. d. The trellis does not obscure or block vehicular traffic lines of sight. e. The trellis does not impede or block pedestrian circulation. Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21, 2006 Page 4 f. The trellis does not pose a threat to the public health and safety as determined by the City Building Inspector. g. The trellis does not hinder the ability of the Fire Department from accessing the property with emergency equipment and providing emergency services. h. A Building Permit is secured in accordance with the Uniform Building Form. Public Hearing Opened: 6:45:16 PM No one from the public came forward. Public Hearing Closed: 6:45:20 PM MIS CranelMcCowen Introducing Ordinance by Title Only; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. City Clerk/Recording Secretary read title of Ordinance, "An Ordinance of the city Council of the City of Ukiah Amending Section 9020 of Article I of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Division 9 of the Ukiah City Code". MIS McCowenlBaldwin Introducing Ordinance; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 6:47:14 PM 10a. Certification of Review and Consideration of Information Contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Giant Reed (Arundo Donax) Removal and Riparian Habitat Restoration in the Russian River Watershed Prepared by the Sotoyome Resource Conservation District; Authorize City Manager to Negotiate and Execute an Access Agreement with Circuit Rider Productions Inc. for Giant Reed Removal and Habitat Restoration on City Property - continued from June 7, 2006 Community/General Services Director Sangiacomo stated the above-referenced project is in collaboration with the Sotoyome and Mendocino Resources Conservation Districts and is funded by a number of local and state agencies. Public Hearing Opened: 6:48 p.m. No one from the public came forward. Public Hearing Closed: 6:49 p.m. MIS McCowen/Baldwin certifying that the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Giant Reed (Arundo donax) Removal and Riparian Habitat Restoration in the Russian River Watershed prepared by the Sotoyome Resource Conservation District; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. And MIS McCowen/Baldwin authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute an Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21, 2006 Page 5 access agreement as amended by the Addendum with Circuit Rider Productions Inc. for giant reed removal and habitat restoration on City property; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 6:49:26 PM 10b. Review and Approval of Modifications to an Ordinance Introduced by the City Council of the City of Ukiah Amending and Deleting Certain Sections from Division 9, Chapter 1 the Ukiah City Code, Pertaining to Subdivisions and Division 9, Chapter 2, Pertaining to Zonina Planning/Community Development Director Stump explained the Ordinance, and stated the Planning Department recently initiated an Ordinance Amendment (OA 06-11) to change regulations governing minor subdivisions of land with lots having less public street frontage than required under the current UMC provisions. The proposed amendment clarifies City standards contained within both the Zoning Code and Subdivision Ordinance to eliminate redundant/inconsistent regulations that currently apply to land divisions. The Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend the City Council adopt the Ordinance. Public Hearing Opened: 6:5] :38 PM No one from the audience came forward. Public Hearing Closed: 6:$1:43 PM MIS BaldwinlMcCowen approving the proposed modifications to the introduced Ordinance and introducing Ordinance by Title Only; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. City Clerk/Recording Secretary read title of Ordinance, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah amending and deleting certain sections from Division 9, Chapter 1 of the Ukiah City Code, pertaining to subdivisions, and Division 9, Chapter 2, pertaining to zoning". MIS Baldwin/McCowen Introducing Ordinance; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10c. Receive Status Report Concerning Downtown and Perkins Street Corridor Community Visioning and Form Based Code Project 6:52:27 PM Planning/Community Development Director Stump stated the purpose of this agenda item is to provide Council with a status report of the Downtown/Perkins Street Corridor Community Visioning and Form Based Code project. An interview panel was formed at the direction of Council to interview the three consulting firms who submitted proposals. The panel conducted the interviews on June 19, 2006, and unanimously made recommendations concerning selection of a qualified consultant and the associated planning sequence. Public Hearing Opened: 6:52:38 PM No one from the audience came forward. Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21,2006 Page 6 Public Hearing Closed:6:52:43 PM By Consensus, Council received the report. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10d. Receive Status Report Concerning Sign Ordinance Enforcement Activities 6:53:49 PM Planning/Community Development Director Stump reported in his discussion with Council concerning sign code violations, Council suggested that in addition to focusing on unauthorized banner signs, staff work on non-complying A-frame signs, abandoned signs, and other sign violations. Councilmember Baldwin has seen some progress, and inquired regarding City policy for frequent violators. Planning Director Stump replied the City does not have a policy in this regard. Councilmember McCowen anticipates that in a couple of months Council can move forward on adoption of a revised Sign Ordinance. Mayor Ashiku does not favor unnecessary micro-managing where the appropriate approach would be to provide effective education. Public Hearing Opened: 7:01 p.m. No one from the audience came forward. Public Hearing Closed: 7:02 p.m. By Consensus, Council received the report. 7:03:53 PM 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10e. Discussion and Possible Introduction of Revised Ordinance Concerning the Appointment of Planning Commissioners - Ashiku 7:03:57 PM Mayor Ashiku stated that at the regular February 15, 2006 Council meeting, Council directed the City Attorney to prepare a draft Ordinance amending the current system of appointing Commissioners. The revised ordinance would permit each Councilmember to nominate a Commissioner requiring final ratification by a vote of the full Council. Public Hearing Opened: 7:12:02 PM Steve Scalmanini stated the current method allows for diversity with each Councilmember having a choice. Public Hearing Closed: 7:13:37 Councilmember McCowen supports making a change whereby each Councilmember, as a courtesy, has the right to nominate a Commissioner of his/her choice with the expectation that the majority of the Council would unanimously approve the selection. There should be "check and Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21, 2006 Page 7 balance" in the rare circumstance when someone is clearly not qualified to perform the functions of a Planning Commissioner. Councilmember Crane made a motion to continue this item. Councilmember Baldwin seconded the motion. Councilmember McCowen stated the proposed change is reasonable. The objections raised to the Ordinance only have validity if one assumes ulterior motives on the part of one's peers. Councilmember Crane supports that the revised ordinance is an improvement over the process currently in effect. However, Planning Commission decorum is an important factor to him. City Attorney Rapport stated that the City Code provides that a Commissioner serves at the pleasure of the Council and can be removed at any time. Furthermore, Finding No. 4 of the revised Ordinance reads, "It is the expectation of the City Council that the Commissioner nominated by a City Council member will be approved by a majority vote of the City Council, except in unusual circumstance, where a majority of the City Council does not believe that the candidate is suited to perform the functions of a Planning Commissioner, which include an ability to understand and apply the laws and standards that apply to Commission decisions, listen carefully to evidence and argument presented during Commission meetings, make reasoned decisions and clearly articulate positions." MIS Crane/Baldwin to continue item. NOES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, and Mayor Ashiku. YES: Baldwin. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. Councilmember Crane recommended adding language to Finding No. 4 relating to a Commissioner's ability to follow the rules of conduct of the Planning Commission that would read "It is the expectation of the City Council that the Commissioner nominated by a City Council member will be approved by a majority vote of the City Council, except in unusual circumstance, where a majority of the City Council does not believe that the candidate is suited to perform the functions of a Planning Commissioner, which include an ability to understand and apply the laws and standards that apply to Commission decisions, listen carefully to evidence and argument presented during Commission meetings, follow the rules adopted by the Commission, make reasoned decisions and clearly articulate positions." MIS McCowen/Crane approving amendment as discussed to and Introducing Ordinance by Title Only; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: Baldwin ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. City Clerk/Recording Secretary read title of Ordinance, "Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Amending Section 1151 of the Ukiah City Code pertaining to the membership of and appointment of members to the Ukiah Planning Commission". MIS McCowen/Crane Introducing Ordinance; Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: 11. 11a. NEW BUSINESS 7:40:09 PM Adoption of Resolution Appointing Members to Demolition Permit Review Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21, 2006 Page 8 Committee; Investment Oversight Committee, Paths Open Space, and Creeks Commission; and the Traffic Engineering Committee City Manager Horsley recommended re-advertising and then scheduling interviews. City Council directed staff to re-advertise for recruitment of members to the above-named Committee/Commissions. 11. NEW BUSINESST:42:0! ?M 11b. Discussion and Possible Approval of Memorandum of Understandin~ for Preliminary Review for Development of Potential Water Sul3131v City Manager Horsley reported the various water districts/public agencies in the County have met to discuss developing additional water supplies and cooperating with one another on other projects in order to effectively improve water availability and service to customers. The MOU is being brought before the City Council for the first time. The MOU places an expenditure cap of $90,000 on the cost of the feasibility study, but the actual cost could be less. Each agency can decide whether it has an interest in further exploring the feasibility of the project. City Attorney Rapport reviewed the agreement and proposed some changes should Council decide to enter into an MOU. Hopland PUD has developed a draft MOU to explore the basic feasibility of the project. Councilmember Crane stated this concept takes into account collection of winter water and it may provide some opportunities for reuse. The most interesting aspect of the project is that it involves a group of water purveyors trying to work toward a common goal. Public Hearing Opened: 8:02:08 PM Barbara Spazek spoke for Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission and the Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District concerning the proposed project. Ross Mayfield spoke regarding the MOU. Public Hearing Closed: 8:17:57 PM Councilmember McCowen supports the idea of six water agencies working together to achieve a common goal. Councilmember McCowen referred to suggested point no. 2 of the staff report concerning additional language and clarified that each agency has the same right regarding selection of the consultant, the RFP, etc. He favored that whatever the majority of the agencies agree to is what should be considered. He supports all the suggestions except nos. 4 and 6. The subject of appointment of agent came up and it was agreed that no decision is necessary at this time. Councilmember Baldwin suggested checking with Russian River Flood Control agency about the matter of additional water for customers. The Council is supportive of pursing the feasibility study and gave direction to City Attorney Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21,2006 Page 9 Rapport regarding suggested revisions to the corresponding MOU. It was the consensus of the Councilmembers present to bring this matter back to Council for further review. 11. NEW BUSINESS 8:41:09 PM 11c. Consideration of Ballot Measure(s) for the November 7, 2006 General Municipal Election Council discussed the matter, supported including a ballot measure(s) to raise the room occupancy tax and gave staff direction in this regard. 11. NEW BUSINESS 8:46:52PM 11d. Selection of Council Subcommittee for Chamber of Commerce Contract Discussion and Appointment of Alternate for Chamber Board Representation Councilmember McCowen will serve in the capacity as an alternate to the Chamber. He was also willing to be on the subcommittee with Councilmember Rodin. Public Hearing Opened: 8:49:$4 PM No one from the public came forward. Public Hearing Closed: 8:49:57 PM MIS Crane/Baldwin appointing Council subcommittee for Chamber contract discussions carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. Mayor Ashiku appointed Councilmember McCowen to serve as an alternate to the Chamber. 11.NEW BUSINESS 8:50:35 PM Closed Session Item 8:51:21 PM 11e. Approval of Letter of Agreement with Vern and Marilyn Watkins 12. COUNCIL REPORTS 8:50:57 PM Councilmember McCowen announced the opening of the Rebuild Store by the Ukiah Community Center located at 195 E. Gobbi Street. It is a fund raiser for the food bank and is open Saturday and Sunday mornings. 13. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 8:55:12 PM City Manager Horsley reported a joint budget meeting with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District will be conducted Wednesday, June 28, 2006. City Manager Horsley reported an interview with the final three applicants for Director of Public Utilities will be Friday, June 30, 2006. Adjourned to the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency: 8:56:43 PM Reconvened: 9:09:38 PM Adjourned to Closed Session: 9:10:51 PM 14. CLOSED SESSION Property: 120-A Leslie Street Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21, 2006 Page 10 City Negotiator: Candace Horsley Negotiating Parties: City of UkiahNernon Watkins Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment Reconvened: 9:29:28 PM 11. NEW BUSINESS 1 le. Approval of Letter of Agreement with Vern and Marilyn Watkins (Closed Session) MIS BaldwinlMcCowen approving Letter of Agreement with Vern and Marilyn Watkins; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30:41 PM. Mark Ashiku, Mayor Cathy Elawadly, Transcriptionist. Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting June 21, 2006 Page 11 CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL BUDGET 06-07 INORKSHOP CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 June 28 and June 29, 2006 MINUTES ROLL CALL Meeting called to order June 28, 2006, at 8:07 a.m. by Mayor Ashiku. Present: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, and MayorAshiku. Staff present: City Manager Horsley, Risk Manager Sue Goodrick, Finance Director Mike McCann, Planning Director Charley Stump, Public Works Director/City Engineer Tim Eriksen, and Water Utilities Project Engineer Ann Burck. Councilmember McCowen introduced a Resolution honoring Sgt. Jason J Buzzard and expressing condolences to his family; the resolution will include signatures of all City Council Members. MIS McCowen/Rodin adding a Resolution honoring Sgt. Jason J Buzzard and expressing condolences to his family to the agenda, carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Baldwin. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. NONE 8:10:29 AM PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007 BUDGET - Wednesday, June 28, 2006, 8:00 a.m. Mayor Ashiku addressed the format for today's hearing, requesting Staff limit comments and keep questions specific. A. Overview of Proposed Budget by City Manager City Manager Horsley reviewed the agenda and stated the staff will address budget items that include new personnel, significant changes, or significant projects and not address each budget item unless questions arise. B. Review of General Budget Figures i. Summary by Activity or Function and Fund Summary (page ES 4) ii. Schedule of Transfers (page ES 8) iii.Debt Summary (page ES 9) Director of Finance Mike McCann addressed the City Council regarding Funds, transfers and debt. iv. Authorized Personnel (page ES 11) City Manager Horsley stated the addition of five new General Fund and five new Enterprise Fund positions. v. General Fund Summary, Revenues, and Expenditures (page ES 18) Director of Finance McCann stated that an increase in revenues, approximately 10 percent, is expected and expenses have increased approximately 5.2 percent (not including Measure S). Page I of 6 Review of General Fund/Enterprise Fund Accounts i. PLANNING a. Community Planning (page 59) b. Building Inspection (page 65) Planning Director Charley Stump stated there are few changes; funds have been set aside for the Downtown Perkins Street Form Based Code Project and for training. Ii MUNICIPAL AIRPORT & SPECIAL AVIATION (page 319) Postponed to the June 29, 2006, 8:00 am session iii. PUBLIC WORKS 8:53:44 AM a. Engineering and Administration (page 110) b. Street Maintenance (page 119) c. Corporation Yard (page 126) d. Signalization Fund (page 130) e. Bridge Fund (page 132) f. Gas Tax and Construction Projects (page 134) g. Municipal Garage (page 150) h. Solid Waste Disposal Site (page 157) Director of Public Works/City Engineering Eriksen reported an increase in asphalt costs and to the Corp Yard budget to meet new requirements for disposal of garage waste. Director Eriksen reviewed the Gas Tax funds and construction projects and the need for a Public Works Project Manager. Discussion ensued regarding the landfill costs, funding, and the Region Water Quality Board issue. 8:58:02 AM iv. FINANCE a. Finance Administration and Accounting (page 36) b. Information Technology (page 41) c. Downtown Business Improvement District (page 69) d. Purchasing (page 46) e. Billing and Collection (page 52) Director of Finance McCann stated the need for a Purchasing Clerk. Adjourned to start the Special Joint Meeting of the Ukiah City Council and Ukiah Valley Sanitation District 9:04:05 AM TIMED ITEMS SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AND UKIAH VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 9:00 a.m. ROLL CALL Meeting called to order June 28, 2006, at 9:20 a.m. by Mayor Ashiku. Present: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, and Mayor Ashiku. Staff present: City Manager Horsley, Risk Manager Sue Goodrick, Finance Director Mike McCann, Water Utilities Project Engineer Ann Burck, Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor Bill Pounders, Wattenburger, Wagonnette. Water Utilities Project Engineer Burck gave an overview of the proposed budget and requested two new positions. Finance Director McCann provided a synopsis of the bond financing. 9:11:06 AM Extensive discussion followed regarding tracking operating expenses and revenue; an independent audit, and the request for the new positions. Page 2 of 6 MIS Wagonette/Crane to approve the 2006-2007 Ukiah Valley Sanitation District Budget as presented noting it is a service contract between the City of Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District, carried by an all AYES vote: Chairman Wattenburger, Directors Wagonette and Crane. PUBLIC EXPRESSION -Mike Johnson stated the City should have jurisdiction over the entire UVSD area in order to become more efficient and cost effective. 9:48:58 AM Public Hearing Closed; Meeting adjourned 9:42:42 AM PUBLIC HEARING -- CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007 BUDGET Continued--Wednesday, June 28, 2006, 10:00 a.m. C. Review of General Fund/Enterprise Fund Accounts v. FIRE DEPARTMENT a. Fire (page 99) b. Fire Volunteers/Explorers (page 108) Measure S (page 75). Fire Marshal Yates stated the need for an additional position of Fire Prevention Captain. Battalion Chief Jennings presented the need for Swift water Rescue Equipment and boat. Due to the swift water rescue boat and equipment, hazardous material and USAR equipment not being covered by grant funding, consideration of funding is requested. No major changes, increases in cost of doing business. vi. PUBLIC UTILITIES a. Water (page 299) Water Utilities Project Engineer Burck requested a new position for the water treatment plant, addressed increases in operating costs, stated the need for new equipment, and reviewed ongoing and new projects. vii. ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS a. City Council (page 1) b. City Clerk/Elections (page 5) c. City Treasurer (page 12) d. City Attorney (page 15) viii. CITY MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION a. City Manager (page 18) b. Personnel/Risk Management (page 22) c. Administrative Support (pages 26) d. Community Outreach/Public Information (pages 30) e. Miscellaneous General Government (pages 33) City Manager Horsley reviewed the City Council, City Clerk/Election, City Treasurer, City Attorney, City Manager, Administrative Support, Community Outreach/Public Information, and Miscellaneous General Government budget changes. No questions were asked. ix. OTHER FUNDS a. Equipment Reserve (page 328) b. Special Revenue (page 329) c. Community Development Block Grant (page 333) d. Economic Development Block Grant (page 334) e. Community Development Commission (page 335) f. Equipment Replacement (page 336) g. Special Projects Reserve (page 339) h. Worker's Compensation Insurance (page 343) i. Liability Insurance (pages 344) Finance Director McCann and City Manager Horsley addressed the Equipment Reserve, Special Revenue, Community Development Block Grant, Economic Development Block Grant, Community Development Commission, Equipment Replacement, Special Projects Reserve, Worker's Compensation Insurance, and Liability Insurance budget changes. Page 3 of 6 ADJOURNMENT: TO MEET AS THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Meeting adjourned at 11:33 am. UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING ROLL CALL Meeting called to order June 28, 2006, at 11:38 a.m. by Mayor Ashiku. Present: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, and Mayor Ashiku. Staff present: City Manager Horsley, Risk Manager Sue Goodrick, Finance Director Mike McCann, and Planning Director Charley Stump. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The Redevelopment Agency welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Agency when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. None PUBLIC HEARING- CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007 BUDGET A. Overview of Proposed Budget by Executive Director i. Fund Summary ii. Debt Summary iii.Authorized Personnel B. Review of Redevelopment Fund Accounts i. Administrative ii. Housing iii. Capital Improvement iv. Debt Service Finance Director McCann and City Manager Horsley provided the overview of the proposed budget by the Executive Director and review of Redevelopment Fund Accounts. C. Adoption of Resolution Approving Ukiah Redevelopment Agency Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Budget MIS Rodin/McCowen approving the adoption of Resolution approving.the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Budget, carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Baldwin. Meeting of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency adjourned at 12:00 pm. ADJOURNMENT: TO RECONVENE AS THE CITY COUNCIL 5:36:59 PM The meeting was called to order Wednesday, June 28, 2006, at 5:3b p.m. by Mayor Ashiku. Present: Councilmembers McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. Staff present: City Manager Horsley, Risk Manager Sue Goodrick, Finance Director Mike McCann, Community Services Director Sangiacomo, Jim Hughes (golf course maintenance), Kerry Randal and Terry Nelson (Conference Center) Police Chief Williams, and Administrative Captain Dewey. Mayor Ashiku reiterated the method in which to address the Council and opened to audience. No audience present. Page 4 of 6 4 PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007 BUDGET Continued-- Wednesday, June 28, 2006, 5:30 pm 5:36:59 PM TIMED ITEMS continued Review of Police Department Budget Fiscal Year 2006-07 a. Police (page 79) b. Major Crimes Task Force (pages 87 c. Police Reserves and Cadets (page 89) d. Supplemental and Local Law Enforcement (page 91) e. Dispatch (page 95) Police Chief Williams informed the City Council of the four police officer positions that have been filled, requested a traffic officer and public safety mechanic which will be partly funded by Measure S, and stated the increases in training costs. Review of Community Service Department budget Fiscal year 2006-2007 a. General Government Buildings (pages 170) b. Parks (page 174) c. Park Development Fund (page 181) d. Animal Control (page 183) e. Recreation, Administration (page 187) f. Recreation, Sports and Programs (page 193) g. Aquatics (page 207) h. Grace Hudson/Sun House Museum (page 211) i. Municipal Golf Course (page 220) j. Parking District (page 226) k. Ukiah Valley Conference Center (page 231) Director of Community Services Sangiacomo stated the need for a Building Leadworker and a Parks Service Worker; the increases in animal control costs; the purchase of 2 general fleet vehicles; recreation, aquatics, parks, museum, parking district and Conference Center were addressed. Budgets were reviewed by the Parks, Golf, and Recreation Commission which requests the City seek out partnerships in funding park activities. Meeting adjourned at 6:50 pm. 3. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION BUDGET - Continued-- Thursday, June 29, 2006, 8:00 a.m. OF FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007 TIMED ITEMS continued Meeting was called to order Thursday, June 29, 2006, at 8:07 am. by Mayor Ashiku. 8:07:50 AM Present: Councilmembers Crain, McCowen, Rodin, and Mayor Ashiku. Staff present: City Manager Horsley, Risk Manager Sue Goodrick, Finance Director Mike McCann, Tim Eriksen, Interim Director of Public Utilities Murray Grande, Electrical District Engineer Liz Kirkley. MIS McCowenlRodin approving a Resolution honoring Sgt. Jason J Buzzard and expressing condolences to his family to the agenda, carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Baldwin. Review of Public Utilities, Electric department Budget Fiscal Year 2006-07 a. Electric (page 263) b. Street Lighting (page 289) Page 5 of 6 a c. Electric Public Benefit (page 291) d. Traffic Signals (page 296) Interim Director of Public Utilities Grande reported an overall 8 percent decrease in this budget expenditures over last year; the infrastructure improvements and tools and training needed; and the need for a new position of Engineering Tech Ill. Review of General Fund/Enterprise Fund Accounts Continued ii MUNICIPAL AIRPORT & SPECIAL AVIATION (page 319) City Manager Horsley repoded on behalf of Paul Richey. An increase is expected for this year's fund balance, a seasonal position has been hired, hanger and sweeper acquisitions are being requested. Staff will come back with more information of the sweeper. Measure S Public Works Projects Identified Public Works DirectodCity Engineer Tim Eriksen identified four possible projects: 1. Traffic signals at Perkins Hwy 101 off ramp 2. Storm drain at railroad tracks on Perkins St. to reduce flooding 3. Storm drain on Clay-west of Clay through Dora 4. State Street paving project Mayor Ashiku recommends sidewalk repair and development. Extensive discussion followed. The Public Works proposed Measure S projects and funding available to complete them will be revisited at a later date. Discussion ensued regarding Measure S funds and the Fire Department's request for: Swift Water Boat, Hazardous Material Equipment, and USAR Equipment. Consensus of City Council is to authorize purchase of the Swift Water Boat in the amount of $22,000 and continue the approval of the Hazardous Material Equipment and USAR Equipment pending review of the Fire Master Plan and possible Homeland Security funding. Consensus of the City Council is to approve all new personnel with the option of reviewing the position level of the Fire Prevention Captain. The Public Works Project Manager Position will be revisited at a later date. Website development in the amount of $7,000 was added to the 2006-2007 Budget based on prior Council action in March 2006. Adoption of Resolution Approving City of Ukiah FY 2006-2007 Budget (page ES 1). MIS McCowenlCrane adopting Resolution 2006-61 approving the City of Ukiah FY 2006- 2007 Budget including revisions referenced above, carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Baldwin. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING Meeting adjourned 10:00 am. Recording Secretary Page 6 of 6 MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, JULY 5, 2006 The Ukiah City Council met prior to a Regular Meeting on July 5, 2006, the notice for which being legally noticed on June 30, 2006. Vice Mayor Baldwin called the meeting to order at 4:58 pm. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were present: Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku arriving at 5:08 p.m. Staff present: City Manager Horsley, IT Supervisor, Steve Butler, IT Tech, Jeff King, Finance Director, Mike McCann, Deputy City Clerk Petersen 5:00 p.m. - Website Workshop - Susan Hernandez discussed the website update and revision as a two-phase approach. Phase one is designed to update information on the website and reform the website to be more user-friendly; Phase two is to be a higher level of website functions offering interactive capabilities such as the ability to pay bills, complete forms, etc. Workshop Opened to the Public: No public response. A lengthy exchange of questions, answers and suggestions followed with key items being noted, as follows: · Public input > have questionnaire available at the Receptionist desk; > include ability on current website for the public to e-mail questions or comments; > include citizen contact area within each department posted on the site · Customer service: > provide information such as the street sweeping schedule, hours of operation at the transfer station, > include a Frequently Asked link on the website; > provide department-specific information including links to standards, regulations, etc. (i.e., components of a fire and life safety inspection by the fire department including codes mandating the inspection); ~' Include a link to the public Library > Include the "modification date" when updates occur; > Consider making the availability of forms within Phase one · Website procedures > Develop procedures and standards Staff to meet and discuss scope of program, bring back time frame and cost to fast track. Councilmember Crane recused himself from the Airport Commission interviews @ 5:44 pm. 5:45 p.m. - Airport Commission Interviews (2) Mr. Rickel and Mr. Crane were interviewed. Upon completion of the interviews, Mayor Ashiku requested Councilmember Crane return to the dias.. Councilmember Crane returns at 5:57:00 PM 1. ROLL CALL - taken at the beginning of the workshop. = 3. 4. 5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - led by City Manager Horsley PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS. None PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATION-~ - None APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Adiourned Reqular Meetinq Minutes of June 147 2006 5:57:25 PM M/S Rodin/McCowen to approve the Minutes with the following changes: Item 3.a "Ukiah Campaign Perform Act" corrected to "Ukiah Campai.qn Reform Act" Item 5. last paragraph, "..June 27th instead of June 28th to review the Community Services and Police Department's budgets", corrected to "June 28th, 5:30 pm to review th~, Community Services and police Department's budqets". Motion carried by unanimous vote. b. Special Meetinq Minutes of June 197 2006 Being that the June 19, 2006 meeting was cancelled due to lack of quorum, the Minutes were ordered accepted by Mayor Ashiku. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission r recommendations. 5:59:52 PM M/S Baldwin/Rodin approving items "a" through "f" of the Consent Calendar as follows: a. Approval of Publishing Services by Ukiah Daily Journal for Fiscal Year 2006/07 in the Amount of $5.96 Per Column Inch for the First Run and $4.06 Per Column Inch for Additional Runs b. Adoption of an Ordinance 2006-1081 Amending and Deleting Sections of Division 9, Chapter I of the Ukiah City Code, Pertaining to Subdivisions and Division 9, Chapter 2, Pertaining to Zoning c. Adoption of Resolution 2006-62 Waiving the 60-day Notification Requirement for Establishing a County Facility in the City (419 Talmage Road), Pursuant to Government Code 25351) d. Adoption of Ordinance 2006-1082 Amending the Zoning Code to Allow Entryway Trellises to be Constructed within Front Yard Setback areas on Parcels in the R-1 (Single Family Residential Districts) e. Status of the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant Equipment Refurbishment Emergency 2 Notification to City Council of the Purchase of Landfill Disposal of Soilfrom the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) to Norcal Waste Systems Hay Road Landfill at the Unit Price of $12.00 Per Ton for an Approximate Total of $9,200.00 Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMO 6:00:23 PM The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. Jim Rickel: Asked when the new Council Chambers camera system will be installed. City Manager Horsley responded the City had been working directly with the County IT Manager, his predecessor and now with a third person from County IT; we continue to move forward on this. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM) 6:15 a. AI31~roval of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Income Reuse Plan Update Don Ballek, Community Development Coordinator stated this update is in response to a requirement by the State Community Development Block Grant Program to update the Income Reuse Plan wording. Opened to the Public: Beng Thomas spoke. Public Comment Closed: M/C Rodin/Baldwin to approve the Community Development Block Grant Income Reuse Plan updated language. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 6:02:37 PM a. Consideration of Ballot Measure(s) for the November 7, 2006 General Municipal Election - continued from June 21,2006 Councilmember Baldwin recommended placing this matter on the ballot A committee consisting of Councilmembers Rodin and McCowen, with Vice Mayor Baldwin as an alternate for Councilmember Rodin to prepare the argument, consult with City Attorney Rapport and submit to the Council at the July 19, 2006 meeting. 3 11. NEW BUSINESS 6:07:20 PM a. Adoption of Resolution Declarinq Results of Special Municipal Election of June 67 2006 M/S Rodin/McCowen to adopt Resolution 2006-63, declaring results of June 6, 2006 Special Municipal Election; Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None b. Adoption of Resolution Makin.q Appointment to Airport Commission Councilmember Rodin stated that the notice published in newspaper was incorrect. There are two Sphere of Influence members on the Airport Commission Two Commissioners currently sitting on the Commission live within the Sphere of Influence, making Jim Rickel ineligible. Councilmember Crane recused himself M/S McCowen/Rodin to adopt Resolution 2006-64, appointing Eric Crane to the Airport Commission. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None c. Approval of City Manaqer's Contract - Item moved to Agenda Item 14. - Closed Session M/S Baldwin/McCowen to approve City Manager's Contract. unanimous vote Motion carried by 12. COUNCIL REPORTS 6:21:27 PM Councilmember McCowen reported that last week-end was the first weekend the Ukiah Community Center's Rebuild Store was open. The store is located at 195 E Gobbi Street and accepts donations of building materials in support of the Food Bank; arrangements can be made for donations to be picked up. Hours are from 9 AM to 3 PM Saturdays and Sundays. Councilmember Rodin reported she will be out of town on August 2, 2006, the next regular Council meeting. Councilmember Baldwin stated that after his recent backpack trip in Trinity Alps he hopes City of Ukiah becomes a leader to extend and expand wilderness in California. 13. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTR City Manager Horsley stated she is looking to schedule the Fire Master Plan Workshop, Council members agreed to meet on July 20, 2006, at 5:30 PM in the City Council Chambers. 14. CLOSED SESSION -Adiourned to Closed Session at 6:26:15 PM a. Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Gov't Code Section 54957) Title: City Manager 4 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m. , Gail Petersen, Deputy City Clerk 5 ITEM NO. 7a DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE PURCHASE OF SERVICES FROM WESCO GRAPHICS FOR THE PRINTING OF THE 2006 SUMMER RECREATION GUIDE IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,082.02. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, staff is filing with the City Council this report regarding the purchase of services from Wesco- Graphics for the print production of the 2006 City of Ukiah Summer Recreation Guide in the amount of $5,082.02. The contracted amount has remained constant, however the size of our guide was four pages larger this Summer, therefore increasing our cost by approximately $500. This expenditure is offset by the revenue from our recreation classes and advertising revenue. The purchase was budgeted and charged to the 100.6120.690.001 account (Cost of Brochures). RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Receive report regarding the purchase of services from Wesco Graphics for the print production of the 2006 City of Ukiah Recreation Guide in the amount of $5,082.02. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Maya Simerson, Community Services Supervisor Candace Horsley, City Manager, Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Director, and Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor N/A APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City ManOr Item No 7b Date: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVE INCREASED COST OF EQUIPMENT ON 2006 50' DIGGER- DERRICK INTERNATIONAL 4300 4 X 2 TO ALTEC INDUSTRIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,060.94 The City Council approved the purchase of 2006 Altec digger derrick for the Electric Department on June 15, 2005. An automatic transmission was substituted for a six speed manual transmission. Even with the addition of the automatic transmission, the firm awarded the bid (Altec) continued to be the lowest bidder for the equipment. Staff is reporting the increased cost of $6,060.94 for the automatic transmission. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Report increased cost of Digger-Derrick in the amount of $6,O64.94. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Prepared by: Colin Murphey Interim Electrical Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager APPROVED: ...~~ Candace Horsley, City Manager AGENDA ITEM NO: 7c MEETING DATE: July 19,2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ACCEPT FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $179,550.00 AND AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN GRANT DOCUMENTS SUMMARY: The City of Ukiah has received a grant offer from FAA to cover the shortfall amount in a FAA grant received in 2002 caused by increasing construction cost and additional design expense. The Council was made aware of this issue when the contract for the airport infrastructure improvements was awarded in November 2005, (see Attachment 1). Staff since then has requested additional grant funding from FAA and the attached grant offer is the culmination of those efforts. It should be noted that the grant amount reflects the previously identified shortfall of $150,075 plus the cost associated with the grant writer fees. Reimbursement for the grant writer fees is acceptable through the grant as administration expense. The project is nearing completion and these grant funds will be needed to pay the contractor. Staff is recommending approval of the grant offer. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept grant offer and authorize City Manager to sign grant documents. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject the grant offer and remand back to staff. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Paul Richey, Airport Manager Paul Richey, Airport Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 ) ASR of November 2, 2005 2) Grant Documents Approved' ~~~'~ Candace Horsley, City)~nager AGENDA SUMMARY ATTACHMENT~ ITEM NO: 10a. DATE: ... November 2, 2005 REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO ARGONAUT CONSTRUCTORS IN THE AMOUNT OF $709,697 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AS OUTLINED IN SPECIFICATION PW 03-t0. · SUMMARY: Submitted for the City Council's consideration and action is staff's recommendation that a construction contract be awarded to Argonaut Constructors in the amount of $709,697 for the installation of additional perimeter fencing and gates at the airport, enclosing an open drainage ditch parallel to 'north taxiway, constructing an apron adjacent to the north taxiway to clear congestion on the ramp, improving and replacing portions of the storm drain system under ramp areas, replacing pavement in portions of ramp that have deteriorated, and constructing an all weather perimeter sei~,ice road around the north end and the east side of the runway for safety equipment access. Compensation for the performance of the work will be based on unit pdces bid for contract items at quantities actually constructed. The contractor's bid proposal and the City of Ukiah's bid tabulation are included as Attachments 1 and 2, respectively. Two years ago, the City of Ukiah rece~ived, two Airport Improvement Program (ALP) grants totaling $1,001,500. Due to the time required to complete the environmental document and design, the City did not solicit bids until September 2005. Since receipt of the initial grant funding, the cost of various construction items has increased substantially, the City has incurred extra expenses in revising the environmental document, and the City has had additional design expenses to delete certain items, per FAA's request. As a result, the City now expects 'to have an overage of $150,075 which is not covered under the existing FAA grants. Please refer to Attachment 3 which identifies the funding and projected expenditures. The City is eligible to apply for its entitlement grant funding in the amount of $186,000 which is held in trust for the City at the FAA and should be more than adequate to cover the overage of $150,075. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize award of contract to Argonaut Constructors in the amount of $709,697 for the construction of Airport Infrastructure Improvements as outlined in Specification PW 03-10. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Choose not to approve the recommended action and provide direction to Staff. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Diana Steele, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Diana Steele, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager & Paul Richey, Airport Manager 1. Bid. Proposal, Argonaut Constructors 2. Tabulation of Bids 3. Current Status of Funding and Expenditures 4. FAA Award Authorization Letter dated October 24, 2005 5. Budget Sheet Approved: Candace H orsl(~~V~ey,~C Manager ATTACHMENT_ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION GRANT AGREEMENT Part 1 - Offer Date of Offer: June 14, 2006 Ukiah Municipal Airport/Planning Area Project No. 3-06-0268-09 Contract No. DTFA08-06-C-31714 TO: City of Ukiah (herein called the "Sponsor") FROM: The United States of America (acting through the Federal Aviation Administration, herein called the "FAA") WHEREAS, the Sponsor has submitted to the FAA'a Project Application dated February 22, 2006, for a grant of Federal funds for a project at or associated with the Ukiah Municipal Airport/Planning Area which Project Application, as approved by the FAA, is hereby incorporated herein and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the FAA has approved a project for the Airport or Planning Area (herein called the "Project") consisting of the following: Construct southeast service road (including drainage ditch enclosure and storm drain replacement) phase II; reconstruct apron area (phase 11); install perimeter fence (phase all as more particularly described in the Project Application. Page 1 of 4 · :(':i'i:i;i~i~TM THEREFORE, pursuant to and for the p_u__rl~,.ose of carrying out the provisions of Title 49, United States Code, as ii;;-i!~4'mended, and in consideration of (a) the Sponsor s adoption and ratification of the representations and assurances .-": contained in said Project Application and its acceptance of this Offer as hereinafter provided, and (b) the benefits to accrue to the United States and the public from the accomplishment of the Project and compliance with the assurances and conditions as herein provided, THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINIST~ON, FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES, HEREBY OFFERS AND AGREES to pay, as the United States share of the allowable costs incurred in accomplishing the Project, 95.00 percent of the allowable project costs. The Offer is made on and subject to the following terms and condlttons: Conditions The maximum obligation of the United States' payable under this offer shall be $179,550.00. For the purposes of any future grant amendments which may increase the foregoing maximum obligation of the United States under the provisions of Section 512(b) of the Act, the following amounts are being specified for this purpose: $0.00 for planning $179,550.00 for airport development or noise program implementation. The allowable costs of the project shall not include any costs determined by the FAA to be ineligible for consideration as to allowability under the Act Payment of the United States share of the allowable project costs will be made pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of such regulations and procedures as the Secretary shall prescribe. Final determination of the United States share wilt be based upon the final audit of the total amount of allowable project costs and settlement will be made for any upward or downward adjustments to the Federal share of costs. The sponsor shall carry out and complete the Project without undue delays and in accordance with the terms hereof, and such regulations and procedures as the Secretary shall prescribe, and agrees to comply with the assurances which were made part of the project application. 5. The FAA reserves the right to amend or withdraw this offer at any time prior to its acceptance by the sponsor. This offer shall expire and the United States shall not be obligated to pay any part of the costs of the project unless this offer has been accepted by the sponsor on or before July 31~ 2006, or such subsequent date as may be prescribed in writing by the FAA. The sponsor shall txke all steps, including litigation if necessary, to recover Federal funds spent fraudulently, wastefully, or in violation of Federal antitrust statutes, or misused in any other manner in any project upon which Federal funds have been expended. For the purposes of this grant agreement, the term "Federal funds" means funds however used or disbursed by the sponsor that were originally paid pursuant to this or any other Federal grant agreement. It shall obtain the approval of the Secretary as to any determination of the amount of the Federal share of such funds. It shall return the recovered Federal share, including funds recovered by settlement, order or judgment, to the Secretary. It shall furnish to the Secretary, upon request, all documents and records pertaining to the determination of the amount of the Federal share or to any settlement, litigation, negotiation, or other efforts taken to recover such funds. All settlements or other final positions of the sponsor, in court or otherwise, involving the recovery of such Federal share shall be approved in advance by the Secretary. The United States shall not be responsible or liable for damage to property or injury to persons which may arise from, or be incident to, compliance w/th this grant agreement. Page 2 of 4 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO 7d DATE: July 19, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF ACQUISITION OF 24 LENGTHS OF 2-1/2 INCH FIRE HOSE FROM JAECO FIRE AND SAFETY IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,871.27 SUMMARY: Section 1522 of the Municipal Code requires a report be filed with the City Council regarding purchases between $5,000 and $10,000. In accordance with the above mentioned section this report is submitted to the City Council regarding the acquisition of Fire Hose as part of the department's on going Fire Hose Replacement Program. The fire department utilizes an assortment of sizes and types of fire hose in order to carry out its mission. Much of the hose is in excess of 15 to 20 years old and has begun failing its annual test. In light of this fact, Staff requested and council approved within the department's 05/06 budget, funds specifically identified for the replacement of fire hose (100-2101 800.000). This purchase of 2-1/2 inch hose is consistent with the budget request and will be used to replace hose that has been taken out of service. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding acquisition miscellaneous 24 lengths of 2- '1/2 inch Fire Hose from Jaeco Fire and Safety in the amount of $8,871.27 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Kurt Latipow Fire Chief Coordinated with: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None APPROVED: ~~~~ Candace Horsley, City Mana er ITEM NO.: 7e DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE 2006 Payments made during the month of June 2006, are summarized on the attached Report of Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the attached Schedule of Bills, representing the five (5) individual payment cycles within the month. Accounts Payable check numbers: 69799-69875, 69946-70120, 70194-70314, 70318-70434 Accounts Payable Manual check numbers: 67422 Payroll check numbers: 69876-69945, 70126-70193 Payroll Manual check numbers: none (70317 will report in July) Void check numbers: 70121-70125, 70315-70316 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 June 2006. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Kim Sechrest, Accounts Payable Specialist Coordinated with:Mike McCann, Director of Finance and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Report of Disbursements APPROVED: Ca~-d~ace Horsley, City Mana~r KRS:WORD/AGENDAJUN06 CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE 2006 Demand Payments approved: Check No.: System generated: 69799-69875, 69946-70034, 70035-70120, 70194-70314, 70318-70434. Manual: 67422 FUNDS: 100 General Fund $286,424.17 600 131 Equipment Reserve Fund 611 140 Park Development $23,457.80 612 141 Museum Grants ~ $1,81-(.._63 615 143 N.E.H.I. Museum Grant 620 150 Civic Center Fund 640 200 Asset Seizure Fund $5,744.29 641 201 Asset Seizure (Drug/Alcohol) 652 203 H&S Education 11489 (B)(2)(A1) ~ 660 204 Federal Asset Seizure Grants 661 205 Sup Law Enforce. Srv. Fund (SLESF) $1,666_.66 664 206 Community Oriented Policing 670 207 Local Law Enforce. BIk Grant 678 220 Parking Dist. #10per & Maint $966.64 679 230 Parking Dist. #1 Revenue Fund $95.00 695 250 Special Revenue Fund 696 260 Downtown Business Improvement _ 697 290 Bddge Fund _ 698 300 2106 Gas Tax Fund $3,272.50 699 301 2107 Gas Tax Fund 800 310 Special Aviation Fund 805 315 Airport Capital Improvement $81,866.-(7 806 330 Revenue Sharing Fund ~ 820 332 Federal Emerg. Shelter Grant 840 333 Comm. Development Block Grant _ 900 334 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan 910 335 Community Dev. Comm. Fund 920 340 SB325 Reimbursement Fund $38,592.99 940 341 S.T.P. 950 342 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief ~ 960 345 Off-System Roads Fund 962 410 Conference Center Fund $12,412.92 965 550 Lake Mendocino Bond 966 575 Garage $1,930.07 975 976 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 69876-69945 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 28175-28343 PAYROLL PERIOD 5121/06-6/03106 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 70126-70193 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 28344-28509 PAYROLL PERIOD 614106-6117106 Airport $3_8,018.82 Sewer Construction Fund $178,019.49 City/District Sewer $99,254.34 City/District Sewer Replace Special Sewer Fund (Cap Imp) San Dist Revolving Fund Sanitation District Special REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund Sanitary Disposal Site Fund $15,783.g4 Landfill Corrective Fund Disposal Closure Reserve $533.10 U.S.W. Bill & Collect $23,522.37 Public Safety Dispatch $976.98 MESA (Mendocino Emergency Srv Auth) $10,979.30 Golf Warehouse/Stores Billing Enterprise Fund Fixed Asset Fund Special Projects Reserve Electric Street Lighting Fund Public Benefits Charges Water Special Water Fund (Cap Imp) Special Deposit Trust Worker's Comp. Fund Liability Fund Payroll Posting Fund General Service (Accts Recv) Community Redev. Agency Redevelopment Housing Fund Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund Redevelopment Debt Svc. Russian River Watershed Assoc Mixing Zone Policy JPA TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS TOTALPAYROLLVENDOR CHECKS TOTALPAYROLLCHECKS TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT TOTAL PAYMENTS $53,145.96 $1,942.94 $9,021.78 $~3,620.37 $638,136.17 $~2,240.29 $13,295.37 $75,179.89 $315,288.23 $27,739.16 $516.45 $396,565.88 $968.53 $4,800.90 $494.55 $43,662.40 $85,751.76 $5,638.25 $2,523,344.66 $49,637.82 $133,176.32 $406,309.59 $3,112,468.39 VOID CHECK NUMBERS: 70121-70125, 70315, 70316 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 Oo U~ ~:o H O~ > o o o o o o o o o o o o 0,< ro c> 0000 0000 0000 o o o Oo ~o rj ~J H ~ H ,~, ~R 0 O~ rJ · > o oo o oo ooo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooooooo oooooooooo oooooooooo oooooooooo 0 0 0 0 0 ~ E.-, ~0 124 kO r~ H o o o o o o r~ o (DOC) 0 0 0 0 m r~. o o ooooo ooooo 0 ~ E~ H ~ ~ 0 o S o 0 O~ 134 ~ 0 O~ 0 0 © o o o o MN ~ 0 0 Oo 0 ~.~ H m u o m ~,.~ O~ ~j · o o r~r.1 OO ~ 00000000000000 O0 o o o o 000000 o o o o 0~ ~ OE~ ~ 00 H 0 00000000 0~ o o 121 0 0 0 0 Oo ~j-.. <o n. ~ · 0 U o~ o 0 c,~ H 0 0 0 (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 o° o° Oo°° o° g ~o o°°~ o o H GO00000 0 000 00 ~d 0 t'rJ oooooooooooooooooooooooo< ~ ~ , HHHHHNHHHHHNNHHHHHHHNNH 000000000000000000000000~ H~ ~ ~ ~ 000~ 0000 ~0 ~0 © o> oO o mm o o o o o u~ o ~o o bo o o o o o o o u~ o bo o ~J o o uJ o o o o ooo ooc) oo oo o o o o ooo oo o 888888888888888888888888 000000000000000000000000 8888 0 0 0 oooo 8888 0000 888°88888888888888888888 o o o o {4::} o o o o oo 8 8 8 888 o CD 0 0 .< LtJ ,.< 0 ~J ~< r~O © 0 0 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 0 0 ~0 ~ H o~ o o 0~ 0 og 000 0 000 0 ~0000 0 O0 ~0 ~ ~ U ~ U ~ U ~ 0 H~H~H~HOHO~ ~ ~ ~ ~0~ O~ ~~~H 0~0~0~0~0~ H © o~ ~o o ~ oo oooo oooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooo ~moo ~ 0 ~ H~ © H ~ © 0 r~ H ~ 0 o o OHHH 0~ mmm o~r~ i i 0 0 0 0 0 ;,., o ~ H 0 t~ o 0000 ~o~o 22 o o 0000 0 ~O O ~ r~o oh 0 O022 OO~ ~ t'rJ ~ r.~ U20 o~ ~ O -~< ~ O 0 o~ 00000000~00000000 · ~ .... -- · · · -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 o o <2> mmm OH i ~ O "U O 0 0 ooooooooooooooooo oO o~ 0 oooooooo ooooooo o~ 000000000000000000 0 000000000000000000000 0 ~ 0 ~0 © oO cD O~ O~ 0 0 O~ ~ ~ H ~H o 0~00000~00 [~ mm o ~J 00000000000000 00000000000000~ o~ oO o ~ H H H 888 o o o 88888888888888 8 888 00000000000000 88888888888888 0000 ~ 0 ~2~ , o o o ~ 8888 8 88 8 ~HH~HUHHHH~ ~ qHH~H~HHHH ~ ° 000000 r.D H 0 H 0 0 oooooooooo 000000 o ~ oo ~ ~ o o ° ~ ~o ~ ~ 0 o ~ U o ,~ 0 o © © cold · ~ L~ 0 ~00 i 2~ U 0 < ~ 0 © o~ ~0 o r~ o ~ U~ 0 ~000 0~ SSSS~S oooooo oooooo 000000 000000 ~888 mmm 888 0 0 888888 000000 0000~0 < U UO © U 0 U 0 U~ 0 ~0 0 H [:J H ~J ~ 0 Oh o c> OHO O~ 0 o§ X c> 0 0 0 (D 888 88 8888 o o 88 88 8 8 0 0 r~ ~J 0 ~ 0 0 o~ ~0 o r.o c0~ o o m',-c' m ~ ~ ~ o o m o o o o o o° o o oo o oO0 o o oooo o o o 88888888888888888888888888888888 8 0 0 ~< 88888888888888888888888888888888 88 2~o o~ 00 O~HHH 00000 OH H r~ ~HO~H 00000000 0 SS~SS 00000000 0 ~0 H ~0 ~ H ~0 © "ri m H H H O o [12) ~88 ©© 8 88~888 o~ § o o 888888 888 8888 ,q ,-.] ,.~ o~ >, o:~ ~]H HO ~SSSSSSS~S~ 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000 § m o0~ < ~0 o~ Oh O0 0~ R~ R~ OL~ 0 U ~U H ~!~00 ~ ~ .... 888 0 © 888888888 8 8 00000 SSSSS 88888 88 [rJ H <: 0 H ~ L~ r~ 0 0 co~ H~ 00000 0 0 ~ HHHHHHHHHHHH ~ ~ ~ HHO~ o © ,-3 H O o~, ~0 0 Oh H H H t~1H H H H H H H H H ~oo,.,ooooo888 oo 0., 0, oo oo o~ ~ oo ~° 2 °~ ~ o oo oo o o oo cpo 888888888888 o oo oo ooo o o Ln o O0 HO 8888888 0000000 Db¼b~b H ~'-~ H ~ [rJ 8~888 88888 OH 0 ~ 0 © 888888888888 8888888 ~ ~ 0 © 88888 888 888 8 E 0 ~ ~0 ~q U r.~ H ~ ~3~ ~0 ,-3 © © r~ 0 0 o~ 0 0 © 0 0 >'0 0 0 0 ['ri "q 'mm 0 0 ~ 0 0 © o~ R o o o o o o ~~ ~ oo°° 000000 000000 o o o o o o~8o~ oo8oo oo 0 ~J i 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ <2> o o oooo oooo oooo o o o o H C> 0 0 r~ ~U O~ r4 o ~ H r~ m 0 ~ H (J o o o o o o o c) 00000000 0000000 0000000 0000000000 0000000000 O~O~OmOffiO~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 8XSXSXSXSX~ gogogogo~o~ ~OHOHOHOHOH o o o oooooo oooooo O0 U~ o~ o o 0 U U HOHHO o r~-~ :i: ~ U H H ? {:2) o o 0 0 0000000000 000000 0 o 0 ~J 0 rj 0 0 :]:: ~> HHHH~O Oc~ 0 Z H > ~HH~HHHH ~oo~mmommmm 0 H 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o 0 0 © r~ 0 0 0 r~ r~ <o o ~/] o r~ ~..o 0 O~ r~lO 0 Z~mm H © o o o ~oUo 0 0 0 0 r~ o o 0000 0000 0000 0 © HO~H 0 O~ 00000 o oooooooo 0 ,44 D~ 0 ,D 0 0 0 0 0 0 U H ~ o 0000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 O~ r~ 000 00000000 00000 000 O0 oo o 0 U 0 ,-3 o o o O © o o r~ © ~0 ~ H ~ {71 ~t] H O~ O~ n. > [.9 o o o o 00000 o o o o o o o 0 0 o o o o o o E..-, 0 ~ O~ o o [FI 0 0 0 o 0 H O~ ~ oo 0 r.o m © ~OH r~ i H ooooooooo ooooooooo o~ 0 000 o 0~ o ooo 0 ~J 0:~ 0~] H 0 H 0 N 0 H C) ~J r~ ~ , ~ · ~ · ~ · o o o o o ~0~0~0~0 ~~fl~ HH 00000000 0000 · O.O.O'O OOOO O0 0000 0 ~ 0 © u~ ~J 888888888888888888888888888888888~888 88888888 0 888888888888888888888888888°°88888888oo 00000000 00000000 ~ggggg 000 O0 888~8888 ~ ~0 o r.~ o'~ mmmm ooo 0000 ~] ~ 0 0 ~ O© i ~0 ,-3 © o~ 0 0 0 ~ oo ~ g ~ ~000 ooo o o o O~ 0 0 0 o o H ~1 ~:~ 0 i.-i L~~. ~ ~ 1'3 © ~H ~J rtl O~ O~ ~ O~ O~ mo © ~0 o r.~ o o 0~%1 ~ 0 ~300 0~ o o o o o o o o o ~. o ~ o m q oo oooo~ °o ~0 o~ mm L~ < o~ ~ ~ ~o 0~0 0 ~00 U r.~ . coq ~J 0 ~ 0 H ,--3 O0 MU c> . 0 0 ~H~ U U :::d~ ~0~0 ~0 ~0 OCm 0~ AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. 7f DATE: July 19, 2006 SUBJECT: STATUS OF THE LAKE MENDOCINO HYDROELECTRIC POWER PLANT EQUIPMENT REFURBISHMENT EMERGENCY At its May 17th, 2006 meeting, Council voted unanimously to declare the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant equipment refurbishment project an emergency and authorized the City Manager to take action to resolve the emergency until such time that the emergency no longer exists. To that end, the City Manager has contracted with Source California Energy Services, Inc. to perform the work necessary to refurbish the power plant equipment that was damaged and contaminated as a result of flooding that occurred earlier this year. A progress report from the Project Manager for Source California Energy Services, Inc. is detailed in an email dated July 7, 2006, see Attachment 1. Continuing progress reports will be made at every City Council meeting until such time that the contract is complete and the emergency no longer exists. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Council continue to declare by a 4/5 vote that the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant equipment refurbishment project is a continuing emergency and to support the refurbishment contract as performed by Source California Energy Services, Inc. until such time that the contract is complete and an emergency no longer exists. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Given that Council declared the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant equipment refurbishment project an emergency at its May 17th Council meeting, and based on that action, the City entered into contract to resolve the emergency, there is no alternative policy option. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Murray Grande, Interim Public Utility Director; Liz Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney 1. Email from Source California dated July 7, 2006 Candace Horsley, City Manag~x~x Ttem No. 7f Attachment i Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 12:58 PM To: Liz Kirkley; 'Murray Grande'; Murray Grande Cc: John Anthoni (John Anthoni); Steve Mays Subject: Ukiah: Hydro Project Status - 7-7-06 Liz & Murray: Below is a shod summary of work that has been accomplished in the last two weeks: As both of you have noticed on recent project tours, a large amount of disassembly work has been performed. In keeping with Source California's priorities, the two highest of which are safety and environmental compliance, we continue to work completely accident free and within the required environmental compliance regulations. A fully compliant temporary hazardous waste collection area has been constructed for oily solids and waste oils. A complete turbine and generator clearance has been applied to both units since dewatering the powerhouse penstocks and draft tubes. This has allowed for the turbine work to begin. It seems that since we are the first maintenance group to disassemble the turbine/generators, our team is faced with two challenges; 1 ) the plant has sat idle for eight years, and 2) the architectural engineers who designed the plant made a mistake. 1 ) The challenge resulting from an idle plant is the amount of corrosion built up on the Unit 2 generator shaft where the turbine runner has to slide over to be removed. The corrosion has been removed but it left the shaft with pitting. The pitting has caused the turbine runner to bind up as we attempted to remove the runner with hydraulic rams and rigging devices. The original pulling device found at this site failed under the load which required the construction of heavier devices. We continue to work on getting the turbine runner off of Unit 2. If the Unit 2 runner comes off soon, a crane can be scheduled for next week to do the generator lifts. The good news is that the turbine runner for Unit 1 came off much more easily. 2) The turbines are AxeI-Johnson turbines and the generators are Shinko generators but Axel- Johnson supplied the full package. In the Axel-Johnson Operating and Instruction Manual, there are Shinko drawings outlining a detailed removal process for separating the rotating part of the generator (aka, field) from the stationary windings (aka: stator). The concrete powerhouse foundations include spacing and rigging pull points to facilitate this "separation" process. The geometric design of the concrete was the responsibility of the architectural engineering firm of Tudor Engineering. What we have discovered is that the space allowed for separating the generator field from the stator is 20 inches too short on both units. This finding has caused us to plan on lifting out the generator as one whole package. It would have been easier and less costly to separate the two components inside the powerhouse. We are now required to use a much larger crane from the Bay Area to do the lifting. We are currently looking into the availability of a large crane. We have also started refurbishment work on the compressed air system and the Iow voltage system. The drainage pump system refurbishment is complete except for the installation of the permanent discharge pipe (we are still using a temporary 4" hose since the small crane has been tied up with the generator removal work), both pumps are fully automated, and the level controls have been repaired and calibrated. We have also completed preparation work to remove the two turbine stop valves (TSV's) by removing instrumentation, piping, and tubing. Paul B. Dirks Project Manager/Sr. Mechanical Engineer Source California Energy Services, Inc. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. DATE: July 19, 2006 SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION OF EXPENDITURE IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,137.53 TO HEWLETT PACKARD CORPORATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO PRINTERS. SUMMARY: Section 1522 of the Municipal Code requires a report be filed with the City Council regarding purchases between $5,000 and $10,000. In accordance with the above mentioned section, this report is submitted to the City Council regarding the acquisition of equipment. The Purchasing Depadment received a request to purchase two printers for the Public Utilities Department: one (1) HP Laser Jet 3050 All-in-One, and one (1) HP Design Jet 800 printer. Three bids were received. The results of those bids are as follows (please note that total prices shown include tax and shipping): Hewlett-Packard Corporation: Tech Depot -An Office Depot Company: Gov Connection: $5,137.53 $5,222.62 $5,402.59 Funds from the 2005-06 fiscal year budget were available for these purchases. A purchase order was issued to Hewlett Packard Corporation in the amount of $5,137.53. RECOMMENDED ACTION' Receive notification of expenditures in the amount of $299.55 for the HP Laser Jet 3050 All-in-One to account 800.3650.690.000, and $4837.98 for the HP Design Jet 800 printer to account 612.3510.690.000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Mary Horger, Purchasing Agent Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A APPROVED:'--~ ~'~~~ Candace Horsley, City Man'a~r ITEM NO. DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE ACQUISITION OF EMERGENCY TRAFFIC SIGNAL REPAIR SERVICES FROM REPUBLIC ELECTRIC IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,235 SUMMARY: In compliance with Section 1522 of the City Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of services costing more than $5,000 but less than $10,000. The Public Works Department contacted Republic Electric to obtain a quote for emergency repairs of a traffic signal pole located on the southeast corner of the intersection of State Street and Perkins Street that was knocked down in a traffic accident. Republic Electric submitted a quote in the amount of $5,235 to install a new traffic signal pole. City Manager Candace Horsley authorized this emergency work. A traffic accident report for the traffic signal pole knockdown has been filed by the Ukiah Police Department. The City will seek reimbursement from the responsible party for this accident. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report of the acquisition of emergency traffic signal repair services from Republic Electric in the amount of $5,235. Report is submitted pursuant to City Code. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer -~/,~ Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works._,(2~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Fiscal Year 2005/2006 budget sheet APPROVED: ~-~'~~~'~ Candace Horsley, City~anager AG-EmergTrafficSig5.SUM I-. Z LU Attachment 1 ITEM NO. 7i DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID FOR VARIOUS SIZE POLE MOUNT AND PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $92,216.76 TO WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC/ERMCO AND $26,577.62 TO WESCO/ABB FOR A TOTAL OF $118,794.38 A Request for Quotation (R.F.Q.) for twelve different sized transformers was sent to six suppliers. The bidders 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. were: WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC - ERMCO WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC - COOPER WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC - PAUWELS WESCO - ABB WRATHALL & KRUSl, INC. - HOWARD INDUSTRIES STEVEN, MCCARTHY LANDCASTER- CENTRAL MALONEY Bids were evaluated on price, delivery time, load losses, size, and availability of circuit protection. The bids are total cost, including tax and shipping. Based on staff's evaluation the lowest compliant bidder for each unit is as summarized in the attached table. The transformers will be placed in warehouse stock and will be charged out on a project-by- project basis. They have been budgeted in the 2006/07 Fiscal Year in Account Number 800.3646.690.000. Sufficient funds are available. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award bids totaling $118,794.38 as follows: Western States Electric/Ermco in the amount of $92,216.76 for three 10 KVA, three 15 KVA, five 25 KVA, one 37.5 KVA and one 100 KVA pole mount transformers, four 25 KVA, one 50 KVA, two 112 KVA, two 300 KVA and one 500 KVA pad mount transformers; Wesco/ABB in the amount of $26,577.62 for two 75 KVA and one 225 KVA pad mount transformers. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject all bids and direct staff to re- advertise and re-solicit bids Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Colin Murphey, Interim Electric Supervisor Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachment: 1. Bid Tabulation Candace Horsley, City i~lanager ,,,o~ ITEM NO. 7i DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE PURCHASE OF SERVICES FROM MENDOCINO METALS FOR THE FABRICATION OF TWENTY PAIRS OF COMMEMORATIVE BENCH BRACKETS IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,051 SUMMARY: Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, staff is filing with the City Council this report regarding the purchase of services from Mendocino Metals for the custom fabrication and powder coating of twenty pairs of commemorative bench brackets in the amount of $9,051. The bench component of the City of Ukiah's commemorative program has been in place since 2002 and has served a dual purpose for the members of the public who desire to memorialize an individual or event and the City's need to add/replace park benches. The expenditure for the production and installation of the benches is offset by the fees collected for program. The purchase was charged to the Commemorative Tree and Bench Program Trust Fund (900.205.212 account). RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Receive report regarding the purchase of services from Mendocino Metals for the fabrication of twenty pairs of commemorative bench brackets in the amount of $9,051. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager and Mary Horger, Supervisor N/A Purchasing APPROVED: k,,. Candace Horsley, City Man~.r AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7k DATE: July 19, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO HDR ENGINEERING, INC. IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $133,007 FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE STIP RAILROAD CROSSING REHABILITATION PROJECT SUMMARY: Staff distributed a request for proposals to 20 firms seeking professional engineering services for design of the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) railroad crossing rehabilitation project. Two firms responded with proposals. Staff reviewed the proposals and selected HDR Engineering, Inc. for submitting the more responsive proposal. This project will involve the design and construction of concrete railroad crossing panels, AC pavement approaches, and sidewalk at eight railroad crossing locations. Funds are included in the Fiscal Year 2006 / 2007 budget as shown on Attachment 1. Staff recommends award of a professional services agreement to HDR Engineering, Inc. for design services for the STIP railroad crossing rehabilitation project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award a professional services agreement to HDR Engineering, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $133,007 for design services for the STIP railroad crossing rehabilitation project. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Select the other firm (not recommended). 2. Redistribute the RFP to seek other proposals. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: None. Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works j~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Fiscal Year 2006 / 2007 budget sheets APPROVED: ~-~-~-~% anagerCandace Horsley, RJS: AG-RR-RehabDes~gn ProfSvcs Attachment { C~ Z 1 Z uJ Attachment · ,~ ~,~-, ITEM NO. 7z DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO GREEN VALLEY CONSULTING ENGINEERS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $49,160 FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE GOBBI STREET / ORCHARD AVENUE TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECT SUMMARY: Staff distributed a request for proposals to 19 firms seeking professional engineering services for design of the Gobbi Street / Orchard Avenue traffic signal project. Four firms responded with proposals. Staff reviewed the proposals and selected Green Valley Consulting Engineers for submitting the more responsive proposal. This project will involve the design and construction of a traffic signal, sidewalk, curb and gutter, curb ramps, and minor pavement repair. Funds are included in the Fiscal Year 2006 / 2007 budget as shown on Attachment 1. Staff recommends award of a professional services agreement to Green Valley Consulting Engineers for design services for the Gobbi Street / Orchard Avenue traffic signal project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award a professional services agreement to Green Valley Consulting Engineers in an amount not to exceed $49,160 for design services for the Gobbi Street / Orchard Avenue traffic signal project. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Select another firm (not recommended). 2. Redistribute the RFP to seek other proposals. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: None. Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer,~ Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Fiscal Year 2006 / 2007 budget sheet Candace Horsley, City I~anager RJS: AG~obbi-Orcha ldSig nalDesig nProfSvcs Atlachment ~ AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7m DATE: July 19, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE ACQUISITION OF AUTOCAD 2007 CIVIL SERIES FROM DLT SOLUTIONS INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,415.07 In compliance with Section 1522 of the City Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of supplies costing more than $5,000 but less than $10,000. The Department of Public Works used DLT Solutions Inc. to acquire a second license for AutoCAD 2007 Civil Series software. The AutoCAD 2007 Civil Series software is an integral part of our ability to map, survey and design Public Works facilities. DLT Solutions has proprietary rights on this software and there are no other available vendors. Therefore no other prices were sought by the Department of Public Works or the Purchasing Department. Funding was available for this acquisition in account no. 100.3001.690.000 in FY 2005/2006, through a previously approved budget adjustment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report of the acquisition of AutoCAD 2007 Civil Series from DLT Solutions Inc in the amount of $8,415.07 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED: N/A Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager .... Candace Horsley, ~y Manager ITEM NO. 7n DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO COUNCIL REGARDING MINOR LANGUAGE MODIFICATIONS TO THE TITLE PAGE OF THE FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP 05-17 AS SUBMITED BY THE HOUSING CORPORATION; CONFIRM FINAL MAP 05-17 AND RESOLUTION 2006-55 REMAINS VALID SUMMARY: On May 17, 2006 the City Council adopted a resolution approving Final Map 05- 17 as submitted by the Housing Corporation. As the map proceeded through final signatures a minor error was discovered on the certificate sheet. This error has been corrected. The corrected certificate sheet includes in the owner's statement an offer to dedicate public utilities easements (P.U.E.s) as shown on the final map, and an acceptance of those P.U.E.s for public use in the City Clerk's statement. Only the first sheet of the map, the certificate sheet, is needed to be modified. BACKGROUND: On July 12, 2006 this issue was brought before the planning commission. The planning commission acknowledged this issue as minor and voted 5-0 to recommend approval of this minor change to the certificate sheet to the City Council. The City Engineer has reviewed the Final Map as well as the corrected certificate sheet and finds that the Final Map remains in substantial conformance with the Tentative Map previously approved by the City Council. Last August, the City Council conditionally approved the Housing Corporation Planned Development and Tentative Subdivision Map project on Low Gap Road. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report and recognize Final Map 05-17 and Resolution 2006-55 remain valid. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Find that the change of the title page of Final Map 05-17 is significant and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Tim Eriksen, City Engineer / Director of Public Works Tim Eriksen, City Engineer / Director of Public Works Candace Horsley, City Manager Resolution 2006-55 Ap p ROVE D: ~.~_~-/.~~'-~ Candace Horsley, City ager ATTACHMENT__ / RESOLUTION NO. 2006-55 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF UKIAH APPROVING FINAL MAP NO. 05-17 WHEREAS, on May 8, 2006, Tim Eriksen, the Ukiah City Engineer, reviewed and checked the Final Map for Major Subdivision No. 05-17, as submitted by The Housing Corporation, and certified it is substantially the same as it appears on the Tentative Subdivision Map approved by the City Council on August 17, 2005, and that the Final Map was prepared in accordance with Title 7, Chapter 2 of the Government Code of the State of California (Map Act) and with the Ukiah Municipal Code requirements for major subdivisions; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 2006, the Ukiah Planning Commission reviewed the Final Map and voted 5-0 to present the Final Map to the City Council; and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project was found adequate and complete by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the proposed lots are consistent with the Major Site Development Permit No. 05-13, which included a precise development plan approved by the City Council on August 17, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Final Map for Major Subdivision No. 05-17 (Attached Exhibit A), is approved conditioned upon all applicable State Statutes, local ordinances, and the conditions of approval outlined in Resolution No. 2006-09 (Attached Exhibit B) for the Tentative Subdivision Map and Resolution No. 2006-10 (Attached Exhibit C) for the Major Site Development/Precise Development Plan that effectively established the Housing Corporation Planned Development project. PASSED AND ADOPTED on May 17, 2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashlku None None None Mark Ashiku, Mayor Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ITEM NO. 9a DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON HULL/PIFFERO USE PERMIT APPLICATION TO PROVIDE RELIEF FROM THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT STANDARD FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (FLAG POLE)AND TO ALLOW MINOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION IN THE HILLSIDE ZONING DISTRICT SUMMARY: On May 24, 2006, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered the Hull/Piffero Use Permit application seeking after-the-fact relief from the 20-foot height limit for flag poles in the Single Family Residential Hillside zoning district. The applicants had erected a 45-foot tall pole without the required Use Permit or Building Permit. Additionally, the applicants were seeking approval of minor grading and construction activities in the hillside district, which also required a Use Permit. After hearing from Staff and the public, the Commission voted 2- 2 (]ennings absent) and were unable to break the tie vote. It then voted unanimously to refer the matter to the City Council for consideration. This Agenda Ttem is intended to present the matter to the City Council for a public hearing and final action. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDATION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) Consider the two opposing conclusions of the Planning Commission; and 3) Act on the Hull/Piffero Use Permit application. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not act on the Use Permit and provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizens Advised: Publicly noticed according to the requirements of the Ukiah City Code Requested by: Dave Hull and Ric Piffiro Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated May 24, 2006 2. Planning Commission Minutes, dated May 24, 2006 3. Written correspondence received from the public Candace Horsley, City BACKGROUND: After receiving an inquiry about the existing pole on the Hull property, Staff conducted an investigation to determine if permits were required. The pole was found to be approximately 45-feet tall, which exceeded the 20-foot height limit for"accessory" structures in the R-1/H (Single-Family Residential / Hillside) zoning district. The erection of the pole had also involved minor grading, the construction of a concrete pad, and the installation of a lighting system to illuminate the pole, which also required a Use Permit. FZNDTNGS THAT MUST BE MADE TO APPROVE THE PRO.1ECT: The Ukiah City Code requires the following two findings of fact to be made in order to grant a Use Permit: 1. "The proposed land use is compatible with surrounding land uses and shall not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare." AND 2. "The proposed land use is consistent with the provisions of this Title as well as the goals and policies of the General Plan." Finding No. :1: Staff concluded that the project would not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the public because it was not highly visible, no trees were removed, no unique land forms or rock outcroppings were destroyed, and no waterways or drainages were impacted. in addition, Staff concluded that because the pole was located on a rural parcel in private ownership, the additional height did not pose a threat to the safety of the general public. Planning Commission Conclusion: The Planning Commission deadlocked on whether or not this finding could be made. Two of the Commissioners agreed with Staff's conclusion, and two disagreed. The two that disagreed felt that the minor grading, concrete pad construction, small lighting system, and the extra height of the pole was detrimental to the general welfare of the public because it was highly visible on the rural hillside. They also felt that the project was not in the best interest of the public and that there was no public need for the additional pole height. Finding No. 2: The primary General Plan Goal, Policy and l~mplementation measure applicable to the project are contained in the Open Space and Conservation Element: Goal 0C-10: Conserve the natural woodlands environment of the area hills Policy OC-10.2: Roads and structures shall be designed and sited to conserve or avoid damage to the natural resources where feasible. Tmplementation Measure 0C-10.2(b): Site and design development to minimize impacts on views from the Valley. To be consistent with this General Plan goal and its associated policy and implementation measure, development must be accomplished in a way that does not damage natural resources and the natural woodland environment. The development must also be sited and designed to minimize impacts on views from the valley. 2 Staff observed the pole from many vantage points throughout the City and surrounding area, and concluded that it did not produce a highly offensive visual experience when viewing the rural hillside area. This was due in part to the pole not being located on a ridgeline with the sky as a back-drop. ~[t was also due to the lengthy distance between the pole and valley floor, which renders it small to the naked eye. For these reasons, Staff concluded that the additional 25-feet of pole height did not produce a significant adverse visual impact. Therefore, Staff was also able to conclude that while the pole had been placed in a location intended to be seen, it was consistent with the General Plan goal and policy to conserve the natural woodlands environment and minimize impacts to views from the valley. Planninq Commission Conclusion: Two of the Planning Commissioners agreed with Staff's conclusion and two Commissioners disagreed. The two that disagreed concluded that the pole had been sited in an area specifically to maximize its visibility rather than to minimize its visibility. They felt the additional 25-feet of pole height created an edifice that was highly visible and out of character with the woodland hillside environment. They concluded that for these reasons, the project was inconsistent with the General Plan. CE(~A COMPLZANCE: If the majority of the City Council conclude that the project can be approved, Staff recommends that the Council determine that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, Class 3(e), which exempts accessory structures. This exemption is for the construction or installation of small structures such as garages, carports, swimming pools, etc. Cl'I'Y COUNCIL OP'I'~ONS: The City Council has a number of options: 1. It could make specific findinqs and deny the Use Permit. The majority of the Council could agree with two of the Planning Commissioners that the project had been sited and designed in an area specifically to maximize its visibility rather than to minimize its visibility, and that the additional 25-feet of pole height created an edifice that was highly visible and out of character with the woodland hillside environment. Therefore, the project would be inconsistent with the General Plan and could not be approved. 2. It could make specific findinqs and approve the Use Permit as proposed. The majority of the Council could agree with two of the Planning Commissioners that the proposed minor grading, concrete pad, lighting fixtures, and 25-feet of additional pole height are compatible with surrounding land uses and would not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare, and that the project would not result in significantly adverse visual impacts. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the General Plan because it would be sited and designed to minimize impacts to the views from the valley. 3 3. It could modify the project, make specific findings and conditionally approve the Use Permit. Tf the Council finds the project to be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare and/or inconsistent with the General Plan, it could modify it by requiring the pole to be relocated, reduced in height, the lighting to be eliminated or changed, or some other modifications to make it not detrimental to the public and to bring it into consistency with the General Plan. RECOMMENDATZON: 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) Consider the two opposing conclusions of the Planning Commission; and 3) Act on the Hull/Piffero Use Permit. 4 City of Ukiah ATTACHMENT / Staff Report to the Planning Commission HULL/PIFFERO FLAG POLE HEIGHT RELIEF AND HILLSIDE CONSTRUCTION Use Permit 06-13 Item No. 9(A) Meeting Date: May 24, 2006 SUMMARY: Mr. Ric Piffero and Mr. Dave Hull are seeking Use Permit approval to allow a 45-foot tall flag pole where 20-feet are the maximum height allowed for such a structure. The Use Permit is also to allow minor grading, concrete pad construction, and the installation of lighting fixtures to illuminate the flag pole and flag. The property is located on the Hull property at 335 Janix Drive in the western hillside area. The minor grading, concrete pad, flag pole and flag lighting system have been constructed without the benefit of required permits in violation of the Ukiah Municipal Code. The applicants are seeking the required permits to correct the violation. Flying the American flag is not at issue. American flags are allowed to be flown on private residential property in the City of Ukiah. At issue are the construction activities that have occurred in the hillside area without the required permits, and the fact that the flag pole exceeds the height limit for flag poles in the single family residential hillside zoning district. BACKGROUND: Staff recently received an inquiry regarding the existing flag pole located on the Hull parcel in the western hillside area. The inquiry focused on whether the flag pole was consistent with City rules and regulations. To adequately respond to the public inquiry, Staff arranged to visit the site and observe the flag pole. Staff visited the site and estimated the height of the flag pole to be approximately 45-feet tall. It had been placed in a concrete base and a lighting system had been installed to illuminate it at night. Review of the Ukiah City Code revealed that accessory structures in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential Hillside) zone are limited to a height of 20-feet or the maximum height of the main building on the site. The Hull property has an approximate 20-foot tall single family residence, so the maximum height of accessory structures on the site would be twenty-feet. The Ukiah City Code allows this maximum height standard for accessory structures in the R-1/H zoning District to be exceeded with the securing of a Use Permit. When notified that the construction activities and flag pole height required a Use Permit, the applicants made formal application to authorize the project after-the-fact. FINDINGS THAT MUST BE MADE TO APPROVE THE PROJECT: The Ukiah City Code requires the following two findings of fact to be made in order to grant a Use Permit: "The proposed land use is compatible with surrounding land uses and shall not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare." AND "The proposed land use is consistent with the provisions of this Title as well as the goals and policies of the General Plan." The Planning Commission must conduct a noticed public hearing, consider all the information and evidence presented by Staff, the applicants, and members of the public and determine if the required findings of fact can be made. The findings cannot be vague and must sufficiently bridge the gap between the evidence and the Planning Commission's conclusions. The Planning Commissioners must physically visit the site. The 45-foot tall flagpole 2 The minor grading, concrete slab and lighting system GENRAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS: The primary General Implementation measure applicable to the project are contained in Conservation Element: Plan Goal, the Open Policy and Space and Goal OC-:10: Conserve the natural woodlands environment of the area hills Policy OC-10.2: Roads and structures shall be designed and sited to conserve or avoid damage to the natural resources where feasible. Tmplementation Measure OC-10.2(b): Site and design development to minimize impacts on views from the Valley. To be consistent with this General Plan goal and its associated policy and implementation measure, development must be accomplished in a way that does not damage natural resources or have a significant adverse impact on views from the valley. Minor Grading, Concrete Pad Development, and Lighting System: As evidenced in the above photograph, the minor grading and concrete pad development occurred on a relatively level site. The amount of grading was minimal and there were no signs of erosion during this year's spring storms. The concrete pad is approximately eight-feet in diameter and four-inches thick. The flagpole rests in a sleeve approximately six-feet deep, and a collar secures it to the concrete structure. The pad is surrounded by a ring of decorative blocks and flower plantings and a number of lights to illuminate the flag pole and flag at night. Based on a site visit, Staff determined that no trees were removed, no unique land forms or rock outcroppings were destroyed, and no waterways or drainages were affected by the minor grading, concrete pad development, and installation of the lighting system. ]~n addition, observations at night revealed the lighting to minimal. 3 Conclusion Regarding General Plan Consistency: Staff is able to conclude that the minor grading, concrete pad development, and lighting system have not and will not damage natural resources or create adverse visual impacts and therefore is consistent with General Plan Policy OC-10.2. Flag Pole Height: Staff observed the height of the flag pole from various locations including the Civic Center, downtown plaza, Orchard Avenue, Perkins Street, Gobbi Street, Talmage Road, the North State Street/Low Gap Road intersection, and numerous other vantage points along the major street network in the City. Based on these off-site observations, it is clear that the 45-foot tall flag pole is visible from many locations in the community. Flag as seen from the Civic Center Flag as seen from the Plaza 4 The central question is whether or not the additional 25-feet of height produce a significant adverse visual impact. Tf it is determined that it does cause a significant visual impact, then it has not been sited in a way to minimize impacts on views from the Valley and would be inconsistent with General Plan Policy OC-10.1. This determination could also lead the decision makers to make the finding that the project would be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare. On the contrary, if it is determined that the additional 25-feet of flag pole height does not cause a significant visual impact, then it could be concluded that it has been sited in a way to minimize impacts on views from the valley and therefore would be consistent with General Plan Policy OC- 10.1. This determination would allow the decision makers to make the finding that the project would not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare. Conclusion Regarding General Plan Consistency: Based on observations on the site and off-site, Staff is able to conclude that while the 45-foot tall flag pole is visible from various vantage points, and it is a man-made structure in a predominantly wooded area, it does not produce a highly offensive visual experience when viewing the hillside area. This is due in part to the fact that the flag pole is not situated on a ridgeline with the sky as a back-drop. :It is also due to the lengthy distance between the flag pole and valley floor, which renders the flag pole small to the naked eye. For these reasons, Staff is able to conclude that the additional 25-feet of flag pole height do not produce a significant adverse visual impact. Therefore, we are also able to conclude that while the flag pole has been placed in a location intended to be seen, it is consistent with the General Plan Goal and policy to conserve the natural woodlands environment of the hillside area, and the implementation measure requiring development to be sited and designed so as to minimize impacts to views from the valley. For these same reasons, Staff also is able to conclude that the added 25-feet of flag pole height would not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public. CEC~A COF,IPLTANCE: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, Class 3(e). CONCLUSTON: The discussion of potential visual impacts resulting from hillside development is not new to the community. Some believe that any visible development causes a significant adverse impact, while others believe that just because hillside development may be visible it does not mean that it creates significant visual impacts. What is significant to some is insignificant to others. Staff observed the flag pole from many vantage points in the community during the morning, afternoon and evening hours. The visibility of the flag pole changes during the day as the sun passes over the western hillside. The flag pole structure and the flag it supports are more visible when it is windy and the flag is extended, but become almost invisible during the late afternoon on a calm day. After analyzing the project and conducting on and off-site inspections, Staff has concluded that the minor grading, concrete pad construction, lighting system, and 25 additional feet of flag pole height do not adversely impact natural resources or the views from the valley. 5 RECOMMENDA'F~ON: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Based on the findings listed below, conditionally approve the Use Permit. RECOMMENDED FTNDTNGS: The proposed minor grading, concrete pad, lighting fixtures, and 25-feet of additional flag pole height are compatible with surrounding land uses and will not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare for the following reasons: Based on detailed off-site observations of the site from vantage points through-out the City, the minor grading, concrete pad development, and lighting system are not noticeable or visible; bm The flag pole is not situated on a ridgeline with the sky as a back-drop, and therefore it does not dominate the views of the western hills and during the late atternoon and evening hours when the sun passes over the western hills, it blends into the hillside environment. c. There is a lengthy distance and elevation change between the flag pole and valley floor, which renders the flag pole small to the naked eye. Observations of the site in the evening reveal minimal lighting, and that the impact of the lighting is less than that of nearby residences, and therefore not significant. The flag pole is located on a rural parcel in private ownership and therefore does not pose a threat to the safety of the general public in the event it experienced structural failure and fell to the ground. The proposed land use is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element for the following reasons: a. The minor grading, concrete pad development, and installation of the lighting system, and the added 25-feet of flag pole height did not involve the removal of any trees, no unique land forms or rock outcroppings were destroyed, and no waterways or drainages were affected. Therefore the project is consistent with General Plan Open Space Element policy for conserving and avoiding damage to the natural resources. It has been concluded that the project would not result in significantly adverse visual impacts and that impacts to the views of the western hills from the valley would be minimal. Therefore the project is consistent with the General Plan Open Space and Conservation Implementation measure to site and design development in the hillside area to minimize impacts to views of the western hills from the valley. RECOMMENDED COND:~"r~ONS OF APPROVAL: All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the application approved by the Planning Commission, and to any supporting documents submitted therewith, including maps, sketches, renderings, etc. 6 Any construction shall comply with the "Standard Specifications" for such type of construction now existing or which may hereafter be promulgated by the City of Ukiah Building Division or Engineering Department; except where higher standards are imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the Planning Commission. Tn addition to any particular condition imposed, any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved and issued. Applicant shall be required to obtain and maintain any permit or approval, which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance, be it required by Local, State, or Federal agency. Pursuant to Ukiah Municipal Code Section 9263, the approved Use Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project related to the Permit is not being conducted in compliance with the stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of approval; or if the established and use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been suspended for twenty-four (24) consecutive months. Pursuant to Section 9263, the applicants may seek a one (:~) year renewal of the Use Permit if after twenty-four (24) months the approved project has not been established. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Use Permit shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving the Permit and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific purposes. The applicants shall pay the appropriate fees and secure the required building Permit for the project within thirty days of the approval of the Use Permit. The cost of the Building Permit shall reflect the fees for building without the benefit of the require permits. The applicants shall pay the final cost for processing the Use Permit within thirty days of its approval. The final cost shall include the penalty fees for performing work without the benefit of permits. 7 ATTACHMENT MINUTES CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION May24, 2006 DRAFT MEMBERS PRESENT Ken Anderson James Mulheren, Chair Judy Pruden Mike Whetzel OTHERS PRESENT Listed below, Respectively STAFF PRESENT Charley Stump, Planning Director Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary MEMBERS ABSENT Kevin Jennings The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Mulheren at 6:36 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. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Staff and the Planning Commissioners led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION Site visit for item 9A was verified. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 10, 2006 ON A MOTION by Commissioner Pruden, seconded by Commissioner Whetzel, it was carried by an all AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to approve the May 10, 2006 minutes, as submitted. 6. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No one from the audience came forward. 7. APPEAL PROCESS Chair Mulheren read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting, the final date for appeal is June 5, 2006. 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE Major Use Permit No. 06-13 and Zoning Code Amendment 06-17 were legally noticed in accordance with the provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code. o PUBLIC HEARINGS Major Use Permit 06-13, as filed by Dave Hull and Ric Piffero to allow minor grading and construction associated with the installation of a flagpole in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential/Hillside) zoning district, and to permit the flagpole to reach a height of 45 feet, where 20 feet are allowed by the Ukiah City Code. The subject property is located at 335 Janix Drive, Ukiah (APN 001'-040-72). Planning Director Stump addressed the project as follows: MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 1 May 24, 2006 · The applicants are seeking Use Permit approval to allow a 45-foot tall flagpole and to allow minor grading, concrete pad construction, and the installation of lighting fixtures to illuminate the flagpole and flag. · The maximum height for such a structure is 20 feet. · The applicants are in violation of the UMC because of the minor grading, concrete pad, flagpole and flag lighting system that have been constructed without the required permits where the applicants are seeking the required permits to correct this violation. · Flying the American flag is not the issue as such flags are allowed to be flown on private residential properties in the City, but rather the activities that have occurred in the hillside area without the required permits. · Public inquiry prompted staff to review whether the flagpole is consistent with City rules and regulations and staff observed the following: 1. The estimated height of this flagpole is 45 feet and is located on the Hull property. 2. Staff determined the flagpole to be an accessory structure. 3. The pole had been placed in a concrete base and a lighting system installed to illuminate it at night. 4. The UMC states that accessory structures in the R-1/H (Single Family Residential Hillside) zone are limited to a height of 20 feet or the maximum height of the main building on the site. 5. The Hull property has an approximate 20-foot tall single family residence, so the maximum height of accessory structures on the property would be 20 feet. The UMC allows this maximum height standard for accessory .structures in this residential district to be exceeded with the securing of a Use Permit. · The UMC requires two findings of fact be made in order for the Planning Commission to support the granting of a Use Permit to include: 1. The proposed land use is compatible with surrounding land uses and shall not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare. 2. The proposed land use is consistent with the provision of this Title and the goals and policies of the General Plan. · The Planning Commission must determine if the required findings of fact can be made based on staff's analysis of the project, public testimony, and information from the applicants. · Staff concluded the minor grading, concrete pad development, and lighting system is consistent with the Ukiah General Plan "Goal .... Policy" and "Implementation Measure" for the corresponding Open Space and Conservation Element, which requires that the project does not damage natural resources or have significant adverse impact on views from the valley, as specifically addressed on page 3 of the staff report. Flagpole Height · Staff determined the 45-foot tall flagpole is visible from many vantage points in the community. · The structure is man-made and situated in a predominantly wooded area. · The question is whether or not the additional 25-feet of height produce a significant adverse visual impact and/or would be inconsistent with the General Plan Policy OC- 10.1. Accordingly, a determination would lead the decision makers to make the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 May 24, 2006 finding that the project would or would not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare. Staff concluded that while the 45-foot tall pole is visible from the valley floor, it is not highly offensive when viewing the hillside area, which is partly because the flagpole is not situated on a ridgeline with the sky as a back-drop and the lengthy distance between the flagpole and valley floor that renders the flagpole small to the naked eye. The visibility of the flagpole changes during the day as the sun passes over the hillside. The structure is more visible when it is windy and the flag is extended, but is almost invisible during the late afternoon on a calm day. For these reasons, the additional 25-feet of height would not create a significant adverse visual impact and is determined to be consistent with the General Plan relative to conservation of the natural woodland environment of the hillside area, and implementation measure requiring development to be sited and designed so as to minimize impacts to views from the valley. Additionally, staff concluded that the additional 25 feet in height would not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. Director Stump received correspondence from Commissioner Jennings, who was unable to tonight's meeting. Staff also received written input from Vicky Cushioner, M. A. Miller, Dennis Tuth, Jan Moore, Suzanne Pletcher, and Becky Thune, and copies are available to the public. Staff also received one telephone call from a person expressing concern and opposition to the added height of the flagpole and two calls from persons, supporting the flagpole and approval of the Use Permit. It was noted that the flagpole is located on the Hull property and it is a privately owned flagpole. Dave Hull and Ric Piffero are business partners for matters concerning the Hull/Piffero subdivision where both persons are named on the Use Permit application. Commissioner Pruden inquired whether flagpoles would be allowed on other parcels in the hillside. Director Stump replied "yes," provided they meet City Code standards. Commissioner Pruden requested clarification that the same Use Permit standard requiring the height exception for an over height flagpole would apply all over town. Director Stump replied "yes." Commissioner Anderson requested clarification that accessory structures in the R-1/H Zoning District are limited to a height of 20-feet or to the maximum height of the main building on the site. Director Stump replied "yes," and stated since the Hull property has an approximate 20-foot tall residence, the maximum height of the accessory structure allowed would be twenty feet. Alternatively, if the height of the residence were 15 feet, the maximum height allowed for an accessory structure would be 15 feet. Commissioner Anderson further questioned the above standard, and stated the flagpole could conceivably be higher than the maximum height of the residence to allow for another 45 feet above this height. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 May 24, 2006 Director Stump replied "yes, conceivably" and stated the height standard is measured according to the grade so if the flagpole is located '100 feet above the house and the flagpole is 45 feet, the structure would be located 145 feet higher in elevation than the house. Commissioner Anderson inquired whether a flagpole would be allowed for secondary dwellings in hillside, since the parcels tend to be large. Director Stump stated the City Code does not limit the number of flagpoles per parcel. It merely states that a Use Permit is required for a flagpole that exceeds the maximum height limit. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:48:11 PM Dave Hull stated the initial flagpole was approximately 35 feet tall and is not the same as the existing one. It was his understanding no permit was required when the initial flagpole was erected. Commissioner Whetzel commented it is the flag that the public sees rather than the pole. He inquired whether the applicants would be amenable to scaling down the size of the flag and paint the pole to blend with the environment. He is not opposed to the structure. Dave Hull stated people view the flagpole differently. He would be amenable to ensuring the poles blends appropriately with the environment even though the pole is not really visible from the valley. The flagpole was built after the 911 incident and inspired by this tragic event. Ric Piffero commented the flag was implemented in recognition to those persons who lost their lives in the 911 event and to show tribute to. persons past and present who have served and are presently serving in the military. It was not intended "to make a statement in someone's face" as one public member implied. The flag represents "our freedom," including the right to debate this matter tonight. He does not view the flag as an "unsightly" structure as inferred by the public. Laura Fogg supports allowing people the right to fly whatever they want to fly because this is the democratic process that makes America great. However, it is the process in which this right is exhibited that she questions. Specifically, her concern is the method/approach Mr. Hull and Mr. Piffero took to achieve their desire to erect the flagpole. There is something consistently awry with the method in which these applicants have gone through the permitting process because the acts have typically been done and found not to be in compliance with the City Code and/or Ukiah General Plan where a permit is issued retroactively. The permitting process is misused and/or misrepresented by allowing these kinds of acts. The process should be utilized or there is no reason to have it. Approving acts retroactively is not how the process was set up to work. She does not support approval of the Use Permit because there is no reason for a flagpole to exceed the height limit. Janice Evans supports the flagpole, enjoys looking at it and is not obtrusive from the valley floor unlike the City water tanks she views from her backyard. Steve Scalmanini stated the staff report is a "textbook" case of poor judgment on the part of staff. The flagpole on the hill is one more flaunting of the City's codes as these property MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 24, 2006 Page 4 owners have done in the past. The flagpole and corresponding night lighting is an eyesore. The intent of the flagpole is to draw attention to it instead of providing for a blank hillside for the enjoyment of its greenery. Although the tribute to the 911 victims is a nice gesture, there are alternative ways to do this which do not interrupt or damage the view of the people who live in the City. He does not support approval of the Use Permit. Albert Krauss addressed his written comments concerning the Hull/Piffero flagpole Use Permit application as follows: History Visual impacts was one of the primary issues during the discussions concerning the Mitigated Negative Declaration for approval of the Hull/Piffero subdivision where the application of foliage/vegetation masking and use of muted color schemes to effectively blend with the environment were recommended as mitigation measures and as project conditions for future developments on these parcels. Now years later, although the lower house blends in with the foliage, the upper house that parallels the flagpole is very visible. He brings up this matter because the applicants exhibit an attitude which contradicts what these same people originally agreed to for approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, which is to soften the visual impact with vegetation, trees, and/or other screening mechanisms. Staff Analysis Staff reviewed whether the project would be consistent with the Ukiah General Plan goal and its associated policy and implementation measure that such development does not in any way damage natural resources or have significant adverse impact on views from the valley. However, there is a fundamental flaw in the staff's findings supporting approval of the 45-foot tall flagpole as it relates to the principles of perspective and distance since what is significant to some people is insignificant to others. The structure is clearly visible from the valley floor even though the flagpole is viewed from very far away. Staff's analysis discusses the potential adverse visual impact of what is considered visible development by using subjective language such as "clearly visible" and "less visible" to define the perception of what is visible versus invisible. Specifically, staff has observed that the flagpole on windy sunlit days, quiet days, and other times of day, is more visible and at other times of the day and weather conditions it is almost invisible. Use of subjective language is not an appropriate analysis of a project. Furthermore, the applicant is hiding behind the flag, rather than upholding it. There would be ample evidence of the structure's visibility in the form of loud complaints if the flag were representative of another nation, political belief, or religious preference. Conclusion The use of the site, and the dimensions of the monument or structure is clearly meant to be seen, day and night and staff's attempts to use subjective language to recommend approval is not an accurate analysis since the real issue is the fact that the applicants have violated City Code standards without obtaining the appropriate permits. He does not agree with staff's observations that the lights are dim by comparison with the existing homes. He questioned the intent of an incident where Mr. Hull and his neighbor below coordinated their residential lights to give staff reason to conclude that flag's illumination is dim by comparison with the houses. He further MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 24, 2006 Page 5 disagrees with staff's conclusion that the project has no significant adverse impacts from the valley floor notwithstanding the unrelenting centrality, positioning, height, and lighting system of the monument structure that becomes the subjective focus for all people who must view it. He requests that the original implicit trade-off rights between subdivision property rights and the public's long standing and preexisting rights to an unimpaired viewscape be re-asserted. He recommends denial of the application and further recommends revisiting of the standards and initial landscaping agreements for the development of homes in plain view of the valley floor. Paulette Arnold implored that the emotionalism associated with the issue be eliminated without focusing on the flag as being an American flag, and focus on 45-foot height of the structure. She questioned whether a permit would have been granted if it had been applied for. Staff has an obligation to uphold/enforce the permit process and ensure the procedures that address standards are in place for existing and future projects as they come forward for evaluation. Approval of a project "after the fact" to correct a City Code violation is not the intent of having a permit process. She expressed concern that there could be numerous 45- foot flagpoles on parcels in the hillside, especially if the Hull/Piffero project is approved in terms of potential preference setting for these types of projects. She does not support approval of the Use Permit. Ruth Van Antwerp represents the organization of "Keep Ukiah Ugly" where one of the ways to encourage an unsightly community is to have no limits on night sky pollution and that the quality of life in the community is really a myth in terms of light pollution and noise. Ukiah is welcoming more and more illumination of the night sky. Adding to the unsightliness is obstruction of the natural beauty of mountains/hillsides with large, poorly designed housing developments. Susan Knopf highly recommends following City Code standards and the permit process. The applicants have repeatedly ignored and mocked the normal order of permitting procedures, as well as exhibited bad faith to the Planning Commission and the community. Furthermore, degradation and ugliness caused by cuts into the hillside for the roadway are clearly visible from almost anywhere in the valley. She does not support again rewarding the behavior of not following the permitting process and violating City Code. While the applicants possess the freedom to fly the flag, the structure is overwhelming and an imposition on the citizens of Ukiah. The sign represents a symbol of overpowering rather than a democracy. It would be appropriate if Mr. Hull would fly a normal size flag on a normal size pole in front of his home. The existing flagpole is not consistent with a residential area or the woodland setting in which it is located. She does not support approval of the Use Permit for the Hull/Piffero flagpole height relief and hillside construction. Linda Sanders is hopeful the Planning Commission will carefully consider the public comments and not approve the Use Permit. She supports the concept that fines be imposed when people violate City codes. People should not be able to arbitrarily violate codes where it takes a complaint/inquiry to trigger a review and/or follow-up procedure and then staff works with these people to process their request to correct the violation. Many people view the flagpole as a focal point to the Western Hills and since the structure sits on a grade the height is really 145 feet. She questioned why the flagpole has to be so massive and illuminated at night, making the structure very apparent. Many of the citizens want to view the night sky rather than the large flag and this is not meant in the context that people are MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 24, 2006 Page 6 not patriotic. She favors that people abide by the law and go through the permit process as opposed to constructing a structure first that results in a City Code violation. Dotty Coplen stated our government was formulated on the principle that rules/regulations and laws are adopted to follow. Rules are not intended to be governed by the elite. Good citizenship is demonstrated by respecting and cooperating with rules and laws. Staff's recommendation for approval sends a message to the community that the Planning Department and Planning Commission do not matter and that a citizen can do anything he/she desires and unless a citizen complains, nothing will be done about it. Alternatively, if a citizen does complain, then he/she can later come into the Planning Department to complete the necessary paperwork. This process makes a farce of the Planning Commission. If this is the intent, then there is no reason to have a Planning Department and Planning Commission. She recommends denial of the project and not grant approval to any applicant seeking a permit after-the-fact. Moreover, an ordinance could be adopted that requires a structure to be taken down and a waiting period of one to five years before being allowed to apply for a permit should someone construct a structure without a permit. Lorie Leif has objected to the flagpole for a long time and appreciates the hearing tonight to discuss this issue. The flag is very oversized, meant to advertise, and should not be illuminated with upward lighting. It is her understanding that City policy requires that lighting systems be subdued and downcast. The flag should follow the protocol of the U S Post Office and be taken down at night. She expressed concern that approval of a project after- the-fact sets precedence that this is acceptable. She recommends denial of the project. Phil Baldwin stated his comment about unsightly structures was made in the context of discussions concerning the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations that currently, as drafted, would allow an unlimited number of out structures. When the subdivision was originally approved in January 2002, staff had written a report calling the project "controversial," and it has proven to be so. Additionally at that time, the City Council on a 3/2 vote rejected a unanimous Planning Commission recommendation to complete an EIR. One of the reasons the City Council voted in favor of very significant roadway exceptions disregarding the Planning Commission's recommendation for an EIR for approval of the subdivision and Major Use Permit may be because of the technical analysis that through assimilation demonstrated what the project would like when complete. Moreover, the analysis included various landscaping and architectural techniques to effectively conceal development in the hillside and none of these techniques showed a very large and illuminated flagpole structure. Mary Misseldine opposes the granting of a permit after-the-fact and/or any exception to the code to allow it. This particular issue makes a good case for regulation in general including enforcement of those regulations. All members of this community are bound by regulations. It is the responsibility of local government to hear public concerns/desires and to create a balance with regard to regulations that everyone supports. Regulations are not necessarily restrictive and designed to be helpful to provide continuity in the community. Individuals have different ways of paying tribute to the events of 911 and erecting a very large and intrusive flagpole for all the community to view may be offensive to some people. Robert Clark opposes approval of the Use Permit application for the following reasons: · The flagpole was erected in violation of City Code without a permit. · There appears to be some type of message the applicants are trying to convey to the community that is unclear relevant to their lighted flagpole. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 24, 2006 Page 7 · Existing City codes prohibit that lighting systems are directed upward in order to preserve the night sky. · Approval of a permit after-the-fact sends the wrong message to those individuals/contractors that must obtain a permit to begin construction. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:25:34 Judy Pruden appreciated the public comments and noted the statements were well thought out. She has carefully reviewed the issues relevant to the proposed Use Permit by applying her knowledge/understanding/background having participated or been present for the processes concerning the various Hull/Piffero projects beginning with the initial subdivision, required environmental/geotechnical studies, and mitigation measures/project conditions for the Major Use Permit, including application of her participation/assistance with writing the Ukiah General Plan. She must apply this background and knowledge of the processes to determine whether there are acceptable findings to approve or deny the project. The standards for a 20-foot height limit on flagpoles are reasonable for all residential parcels whether they are large or small. The Hull/Piffero subdivision hillside developments require a one-story height of 20 feet for all units including accessory structures. In her opinion, this height limit is reasonable. The applicants should be allowed to have a 20-foot flagpole and the flag adjusted according to the height of the flagpole. Commissioner Pruden expressed concern regarding the potential for cluttering on the Western Hills, since there is the likelihood that the parcels could have several flagpoles. She does not favor allowing for numerous flagpoles in the hillside because of visual impacts. She addressed the staff's analysis concerning the Open Space and Conservation Element of the Ukiah General Plan, and stated she has a different interpretation. The request is for a Use Permit to grant relief for the height limit of a flagpole and not for a variance. She cited the following case law relevant to the granting of a Major Use Permit, which in this case, is for a height exception of a flagpole: · A Use Permit may be granted for specific uses if the proposed use will be in the best interest of public convenience. -There is no best interest of public convenience in this particular case. · A Use Permit must bear reasonable relationship to public need. -There is no public need for this particular extra high flagpole. · The decision to allow for a conditional Use Permit is an issue of vital public interest that affects the quality of life of everyone in the area of the proposed use. · The court held that the City Council had the right to interpret public health to include the quality of life as it is affected by the aesthetics of the city. (This is a rendering from a court case in Redding, California). She is unable to make the appropriate findings to approve the Use Permit for a 45-foot tall flagpole. She supports a 20-foot tall flagpole in which a Use Permit would not be necessary. Commissioner Anderson stated it is his responsibility to make the appropriate findings of fact regardless of his personal opinion about the hillside. According to the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan, a project is required to conserve the natural woodlands environment of the area hills. He could not make the finding of fact to support this element. Additionally, the implementation measure provides that site and design MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 24, 2006 Page 8 development must minimize impacts on views from the valley. Again, he could not make the finding of fact to support this element. The development must not have a significant adverse impact on views from the valley. Some people seem to think that the flagpole has a significant adverse impact on views while other people support the concept of the flagpole. There are no facts that can be made to support approval of the Use Permit. Commissioner Whetzel has had comments from public members who like the flagpole and does not impact views. The permitting process for the City is complicated so there are times when "things" are built that require a permit after-the-fact. It may take the public to question whether a particular structure may be in violation of the City code. He does not view the flagpole as a problem. He agrees with staff's analysis that the minor grading, concreted pad construction pad construction, lighting system, and 25 additional feet of flagpole height does not adversely impact natural resources or the views from valley. While some people believe that any visible development causes a significant adverse impact, others believe that just because hillside development may be visible it does not mean that it creates significant visual impacts. What is significant to some is insignificant to others. Additionally, staff observed the flagpole from many vantage points during different times of the day, and determined the visibility of the flagpole changes during the day as the sun passes over the western hills. The flagpole and flag are more visible when it is windy and the flag is extended, but is almost invisible during the late afternoon on a calm day. He was unable to make a decision about the project at this time. Chair Mulheren stated the Planning Commission meeting started out with the pledge of allegiance, there is a flag flying outside of City Hall, and a very large flag flying above the USA gas station. The argument can be made that the flagpole serves the vital public interest for many people that desire to remember 911 and be reminded of the country in which we live. It is not offensive to see the flag flying in the hillside. He supports staff's findings in this regard. Commissioner Pruden stated the purpose of tonight's meeting is to discuss the findings that can be made to support a Use Permit concerning the height of the flagpole and not about the issue of flying the American flag. Chair Mulheren would have supported the flagpole in hillside even before it was erected and became an issue. There may be times when a project should be allowed to go beyond the standard. Commissioner Pruden acknowledged the above statement, and stated this is the reason for discretionary review of projects. She does not agree with staff's findings and conclusions regarding this project nor can she making the necessary findings to approve the conditional Use Permit based on case law, meeting the criteria pertinent to the Ukiah General Plan goals and objectives, and her background knowledge as to how Use Permits should work. Commissioner Anderson inquired whether Chair Mulheren would still support the flagpole project if a different flag, such as a Cuban or Mexican flag were flying in the hills. Chair Mulheren stated this is not Cuba or Mexico and he would not support the concept of flying such flags. Commissioner Anderson asked if Chair Mulheren's "yes" vote is based on which flag flies there. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 24, 2006 Page 9 Chair Mulheren agreed with Commissioner Anderson that his vote is conditional upon which flag flies there. He commented the American flag flies inside the council chambers and outside of City Hall representative of which county in which we live. The American flag is an appropriate flag to be flying in the Western Hills. Commissioner Whetzel stated it appears that the vote will be stalemate, and inquired whether the Commission would be amendable to working out a compromise with the applicants. Commissioner Pruden supports that the applicants enjoy the same privilege every citizen in Ukiah does, which is to have a maximum 20-foot flagpole in their yard and fly whatever flag they choose under freedom of speech and no Use Permit would be necessary. Commissioner Whetzel inquired whether the revised Sign Ordinance contains provisions for a 30-foot high sign. He further inquired regarding the height of the Friedman Bros. flagpole as an example of a possible project compromise. Commissioner Pruden stated the Commission likely understands the difference between "institutional" and "commercial" zoning and the use of the flag within the appropriate context. As a matter of right in Ukiah, she supports the 20-foot height for a flagpole with the flag of one's choice. Chair Mulheren inquired regarding the process when there is a 2/2 vote. Director Stump outlined the following options: 1. Continue the matter until there is a fifth commissioner that would break the stalemate. 2. Refer the matter directly to the City Council for review/discussion and possible action. 3. Continue to dialog to obtain a 3/1 or 4/0 vote. Commissioner Whetzel acknowledged that the flagpole is tall and, in his opinion, people see the flag rather than the flagpole. The subject is very controversial, some of which may be politically driven and spiteful against the subdivision owners. He agrees with staff's analysis of the project and would like to see a compromise made, such as a 30-foot flagpole with a smaller flag. He recommended the Planning Commissioner refer the matter to the City Council. Commissioner Pruden stated if the height were allowed at 30-feet or greater, any one could apply for taller height. Commissioner Whetzel stated such projects should be taken on a case-by-case basis in terms of safety factors. Commissioner Pruden inquired how Commissioner Whetzel could make the findings that the applicants can have a flagpole taller than what other people are entitled to have. It is a matter of what is fair. Commissioner Whetzel stated it is the Planning Commission's responsible to decide what is fair by the granting or denying of a Use Permit. The Use Permit can also be revoked. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10 May 24, 2006 Commissioner Pruden stated revocation of a Use Permit is difficult and requires its own set of findings. She inquired regarding Commissioner Whetzel's reasoning that supports allowing the property owners of the other four parcels of the Hull/Piffero subdivision to apply for a Use Permit exception to have 45-foot flagpoles and their choice of flags. Chair Mulheren stated he supports either continuing the matter until Commissioner Jennings is in attendance or referring the matter directly to City Council. Commissioner Anderson noted a letter from Commissioner Jennings makes it very clear that he supports the project. Commissioner Pruden did not support continuing the matter until the fifth Commissioner is present. Commissioner Whetzel acknowledged that the decision is very difficult. He is not clear on the definition of accessory structure, and emphasized that the structure is only a pole. He inquired as to the findings to support that the pole is an accessory structure. Commissioner Pruden stated the Zoning Code identifies the structure as such. The flagpole is designed to fly a flag So to ignore that there would be a large attachment to the pole would be naYve. Director Stump stated the Zoning Code defines a structure as "that which is built or constructed or an edifice or building of any kind or any piece of work artificially built up or composed or having parts joined together in some. definite manner." Staff supports the concept that the flagpole is defined as a structure. Commissioner Whetzel supports staff's recommendation. He commented the pole is not very visible if the flag is taken away. Commissioner Pruden stated the point is that the applicants are requesting a 45-feet flagpole and according to this process, other persons may apply for the same in their front yard. Commissioner Whetzel stated that is the point, a person can apply for such a project. Commissioner Anderson stated the lighting component of the project has not been addressed. He questioned City regulations regarding upward lighting and lighting systems. Director Stump stated although the City does not have a code provision that precludes upward lighting, the Planning Commission has been conditioning projects over the last few years to require that lighting systems be downcast, since the public expressed concern about preservation of the night sky. The lighting system for the flagpole is not boldly lit like some of the commercial establishments in town. Commissioner Whetzel stated it was his understanding that according to federal code if the American flag is flown at night it must be lit. Commissioner Pruden was not sure if is federal code or protocol on how to handle and display the American flag under certain circumstances and incidents. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11 May 24, 2006 ON A MOTION by Commissioner Whetzel, seconded by Chair Mulheren, it was carried by the following roll call vote of the Commissioners present to approve Major Use Permit No. 06-13 based on the findings contained in the staff report. AYES: NOES: Chair Mulheren, Commissioner Whetzel Commissioners Anderson and Pruden The motion does not carry due to a tie vote. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Pruden, seconded by Commissioner Whetzel, it was carried by an all AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to forward Major Use Permit No. 06-13 to the Ukiah City Council for a final decision. 9B. Zoning Code Amendment 06-17, as initiated by the Planning and Community Development Department staff, to modify Section 9020 (Required Yard Setbacks in the R-1 Zoning District) to allow property entryway trellises to be situated in the front yard setback provided certain criteria are fulfilled. Director Stump stated staff is recommending that language be added to the Zoning Code that would allow entryway trellises to be constructed within front yard setback areas of parcel in the R-1 (Single Family Residential Districts). The purpose is to allow decorative property entryway trellises up to 10 feet in height to be constructed within a front yard setback area and/or adjacent to the sidewalk/public right-of-way without the need for a yard setback variance, which has been the case over the years. Specifically, the project involves adding subsection "E" to Section 9020 of Article 1 of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Division 9 of the Ukiah Municipal Code to allow property entryway trellises providing they are located in the front yard setback areas provided: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The trellis The trellis The trellis The trellis does not exceed a maximum height of 10 feet. is not more than 10 feet wide. is not located in the public-right-way. does not obscure or block vehicular traffic lines of sight. The trellis does not impede or block pedestrian circulation. The trellis does not pose a threat to the public health and safety determined by the City Building Inspector. The trellis does not hinder the ability of the Fire Department from accessing the property with emergency equipment and providing emergency services. A Building Permit is secured for the construction of the trellis, if required by the City Building Inspector. Depending upon the height, size, and scale of the trellis, engineering calculations may be required. Director Stump cited some examples of trellis on pages I and 2 of the staff report. Zoning Code Amendment 06-17 is consistent with the Ukiah General Plan relative to the Community Design Element that calls for the preservation and enhancement of neighborhood character and architecture. Staff asks the Commission to consider recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance modifying the Zoning Code to allow trellis construction in front yard setback areas when they conform to the above-referenced specific criteria. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 12 May 24, 2006 AT1'ACHMENT, C2 V~'EDNESDAY, J[~E 14, 2006 Flag Day poem rings true even many years later Dear Abby: Years ago, when our daughter, Stacy, was in the eighth grade, a contest was held at her school to see if they could win one of the flags that had flown over the U.S. Capitel. Our dabghter, who is now grown, won the prize for the best poem. We thought you might like to print it on Flag Day for your readers to enjoy. We think its message is one that is worthwhile. Stacy's Proud Parents in New York Abigail Van Buren ne'er will stand The flag of any other land That will mean as much to me As this flag of liberty. Dear Proud Parents: I agree with you. It is not only worthwhile, I found it. touch- ing. Readers~ this poem was read into the Congressional Record during the second ses- sion of thc 89th Congress. Read on: "The Flag" {by SLaty Frank, Grade Si This flag of red and white and blue May not mean very' much to you. But as for me this banner flies ,~d with its mighty voice it cries Out to peoples far and near To proclaim our freedom here. A small beginning, I agree, But like the acorn to the tree. Thirteen states we had at first, But as our country grew, our thirst For land and freedom did not stop. That land did well; pro- duced a crop For countries of the world to share And then they knew our flag was fair. And underneath this starqz wing Foreign peoples help to sing The greatest story ever Gl'FY OF UKI ~" ~' ~AH CITY CL,.RK'S DE,~ARTMENT Ukiah City Council 300 Seminary Ukiah, California 95482 14 June 2006 Honorable Members of the Council, Having had experiences in such matters as you have before you regarding a Flag of our Country and, the right to fly it. My question is where were those who are opposed to it when it was first erected? The Permit, if the Flag is with in the City Limits surely some one of the Council knew it was and should have called out the permit issue at the time it was placed. Since the property owners who installed it has since taken out a permit that should make that part a mute issue. Then there is the height issue, this could and should become an agreement issue; if the height is indeed out of place then perhaps it could be lowered. This might be cause for a smaller flag, the size is not so important as the reverence of it, This could also eliminate the so called eye sore that some seem to be offended by and from my point of view who cares if some one is offended by it, so what? I am offended every day by bad car drivers but I still have to put up with the idiots. I another related topic is that it was installed in honor of the after math of 9/11, that was indeed a bad day for our Country and should not be tread on or forgotten, Although there seems to be many that have forgotten that sad day we should not forget it, we need to remember that we are vulnerable to such things and let those who comment such atrocities know that we have not forgotten but are ready to meet them head on if required. I as an outsider ask the Ukiah City Council to give this item a lot of thought; don't jnmp the gun because of a few. It may need a bit of redressing but it can be worked out. there will be some that short of taking it down will not be satisfied; that is the way it is, We are told that the majority rules, don't let one or a few individuals such as one in San Diego is trying to do over a Cross control the issue. Sincerely Bud Wilson. Queen Creek AZ ~o4 ,:%. ~ ~t--_;~ ~ ~t 95a. zz JUN 2-2006 ,.~.,~T'Y OF UKIAH C 1~6 'g~~45 o1~ do~l~ 7 !I . p e i c c ;:1. Tile City of Redding adopted an urgency ordinance prohibiting electronic reader boards. Crown'Motors v. City of Redding, 232 Cal. App. 3d 173, 178 (1991).' The. city found the ordinance necessary for the 'immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety under Government Code section 36937(b), which allows cities to designate urgency ordinances that take effect immediately upon final passage. The court held the city council had the right to interpret '.'Public health" to include the'quality of life as it is affected-by the 'aesthetics of the city. The court stated that "im]ental health is certainly included in the.public health." City of Ukiah il~ Mendocino County Ukiah.Valley General Plan and Crop, th Managemer!t Program IV.I. Open Space and Conservation'~, ?age ! ! Implementation Measure OC-lO. 2(b): Site and design development to minimize impacts on views fi-om the Valley. [Timeframe for completion: Ongoing planning period ~, Measure applies to: City and County ~. Agency/Department responsible: City Planning, County Department of Planning and Building]. Implementation Measure 0C-I0.2(c): Clearings for roads, buildings, and fire protection zones shall be sited in the least visible and ecologically damaging locations possible and screened with vegetation where feaSible. [Timeframe for completion: Ongoing planning period ~, Measure applies to: City and County ~, Agency/Department responsible: City Planning, County Department of Planning and Building] The typical zoning ordinance provides that a spee. ified~,~'se~ if the,,~os~ use" ~i~tffe'~est~f't~'s~'Of'~~di'i'c coa~,aai~qce and necessity and will not be contrary to the public health, moral~' or welfare. Uptan v. Gray, 269 Cal. App. 2d 352 (1969). Some ordinances provide that the proposed use must be compatible with the policies and objectives of the comprehensive zoning ordinance and with the general plan. More generally, cities regularly attach conditions to zoning entitlements to protect neighboring properties'and to deal with effects on the community as a whole. Street dedication and improvement, installation of landscaping and proteclive walls, architectural requirements, and restrictions on hours of opera- tion for CUPs are some examples. A co¢,~tiec~'aes~-bear-a, reae~n-~bte relation:--'} Shil::ff't0 ffte'i~ic-nee~s created by the development, and this should b.e suPCort~by'~e,re¢ord,'ef--t'h~ ¢¢ft:~d~hg. Bank of America v. State .J Water Resources Control Bd., 42 Cal. App. 3d 1981 (1974). 2o-I) 2- Page 1 of 2 Charley Stump From: Becky Thune [tunafish@sonic.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 4:16 PM To: charleys@cityofukiah.com Subject: Hull/piffero Use Permit May 24, 2006 Dear Charley Stump; This note is in regard to the proposed project of Hull/piffero Use Permit to allow for a 45-foot flag pole being discussed at tonight's City Planning Commission Meeting. I have read your recommendation on the city's website. My feeling on the issue is as follows and quoted areas are taken from the Memorandum dated March 14, 2006 for the City Council/Planning Commission Public Workshop- Hillside Regulations Meeting: On flag pole: Chapter 2 Zoning: Pg 6:9137 Definitions: View shed: The near and distant panoramic views of the western hills which form a natural backdrop for the City of Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley, consisting of substantially continuous forest, with a relative lack of visual cars or distractions caused by topographic or vegetative modification or obtrusive manmade structures or alterations. The following "gateways" within the City limits, identified in the General Plan, shall be emphasized in assessing visual impacts: North and South State Street, Gobbi Street, Perkins Street, Talmage Road, and Low Gap Road. The current pole is visible from many vantage points in the valley it can be seen day and night. It is obtrusive and distracts from the natural "continuous forest" of the western hills. The flag poles height affords it a large flag. I realize the "flag" is not the question here; however currently the American Flag is being flown. If the property ever sells who is to say what will be flown from the pole! Would it be alright to fly a large flag of a foreign country? You couldn't stop it, I believe, as it would deny them of their "civil liberty." On the subjects of lights it is my understanding all lighting in the subdivision must be aimed downward and because the American Flag is being flown at night by law it must be illuminated. Chapter 2 Zoning: pg. 32: 9145: Architectural and Design Elements: All buildings shall be designed to reduce the height, bulk, mass, and overall visibility of structures, and to facilitate screening with natural vegetation or landscaping, and reduce grading and alteration of the natural terrain. A. The following architectural and design elements shall be included/incorporated in all proposed development projects in R1-H1 and R1-H2 Zoning District areas: 5. Exterior lighting shall be subdued, low wattage, and directed onto the immediate area intended for lighting (pathway, entryway to residence, etc) and away from adjacent residential properties, the night sky, or out towards the valley below. 6. Street and pedestrian walkway lighting shall be minimized to that required for safety and shall not shine skyward or out towards the valley below. I walk at night around Ukiah and I know the flag pole can be seen from quite a distance. Driving in to the Valley on the 101 corridor I can easily see the flag pole from North and South State Street, Gobbi Street, Perkins Street, Talmage Road, and Low Gap Road. Page 2 of 2 I believe they should be allowed to have a flag pole but it must be in keeping with those regulations that govern other residence in the City of Ukiah for height and visibility. And while someone may choose to fly their flag it should not be so obtrusive as to make an implied statement for all city residences whether it is to be the American flag, Mexican flag, Scandinavian flag etc. From Jones & Oak Park Thank you for the time to read my concerns, Sincerely, Becky Thune Charley Stump From: Sent: To: Subject: Pinky Kushner [pinkkushner@netscape.net] Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9:41 AM candace@ci.tyofukiah.com; Charley Stump Please forward to Commissioner Mulheren PLEASE FORWARD TO COMMISSIONER MULHEREN FOR TONIGHT'S PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING James Mulheren, Planning Commissioner City Hall City of Ukiah Dear Commissioner Mulheren, Please do not allow the construction of a 45-foot high flagpole in Ukiah on private property. The regulation for flagpoles on private property as I understand it is 20 feet high. If this higher one is allowed, what will stop anyone else from also demanding a 45-foot flagpole? And who is to say what sort of flag they will fly? My other problem is perhaps more personal. The proposed 45-foot high flagpole in this instance will use our A~erican flag as an "in-your-face" statement like a billboard. This use of the flag degrades the appropriate use of the flag---in front of City Hall and the County buildings. It degrades the flying of the flag for D-Day and Memorial Day. My grandparents taught me to fly the flag during days of special meaning. Making a flag into a billboard is insulting to the integrity of our country. It is as though the flag's owner doesn't know when to fly one and just wants to make people look at him in a "see me and I am way above you (and the law)" kind of way. How to use of our national flag may not be covered by Ukiah's General Plan. The restriction on the height of the flagpole is and with good reason. Please do not allow a variance. Sincerely, Pinky Kushner 504 N. Oak Street, #1 cc: Charley Stump, Planning Director Candace Horsley, City Manager Page 1 of 1 Charley Stump From: M.A. Miller [ma-miller@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 8:42 AM To: planning@cib/ofukiah.com Subject: Please convey my views to Planning Commission tonight Please convey my views to the Planning Commission tonight. Thank you very much. May 24, 2006 TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Mary Anne Miller 646 Dora Avenue RE: Flag Pole height limit variance via a Use Permit The consequences of an approval tonight would be to set an extremely bad precedent. When any structure exceeds the height limit, it invites other structures to do so in the future. What would prevent every other hillside resident from erecting a tall flag pole.so that it could be seen above the trees? How many flag poles might sprout on the hills? What if, not just flag poles, but billboards were to sprout on the hills? A billboard developer might tell you that while a flag is a rectangular object that is pinned at two corners, a billboard is a similar rectangular object that is pinned down on four corners, and what harm could that possibly do? Using the precedent of this flag pole Use Permit, you would have a hard time turning down other applications for flag poles, for advertising banners, or for billboards. Also, using the concept that it has to be so tall because it will be so small when it is seen from a distance, ali sorts of large objects could be developed on the hills and fioodiit for view from below: sculptures, biblical tablets, portrait heads.. Just use your imagination. This would be a very poor precedent. Please turn down this Use Permit. May 23, 2006 To: City Planning Director Charley Stump City of Ukiah Planning Commissioners This letter comments in a general fashion upon the application to be heard at the May 24, 2006, meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission, regarding Major Use Permit #06-13, the application to erect a 45- foot flagpole at the property located at 335 Janix Drive. Please DENY this application. Isn't there already a nonconforming-height flagpole at that address? Is the applicant trying to retroactively get a use permit for that? If that is the case, then please consider the following: The applicants (and the Mayor of Ukiah) in the last several years appear to have taken a battering ram to the authority of city codes governing construction projects. It also seems that they have gotten away with it despite citizen objections. In particular, some citizens don't like the flagpole on the hill at any height but particularly at an illegal height (perhaps the height of arrogance?). To approve this application would send a message to applicants and others that they can do whatever construction project they like on their own property--no matter who is or how many are affected--because precedent has been set for allowing transgressions; the City will retroactively accommodate the project. Please consider these comments and DENY the application. Sincerely, Suzanne Pletcher Page 1 of 1 Charley Stump From: Kevin Jennings [kjennings@cityofukiah.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:21 AM To: 'Charley Stump' Subject: Planning Commission, Wednesday the 24th. Importance: High Charley, As I mentioned to you yesterday, I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission meeting this Wednesday. I will be in Texas with some of our Swift Water Team receiving a national award for their efforts during the floods. My thoughts on the topics of our meeting. Flag Pole. "Looks Great" I don't see that there is a threat to health, safety or welfare to any citizen. I don't feel that the view shed is at all impacted by the flag or the pole, or that the lights effect any star gazing (dark sky issue). Were Rick Piffero and Dave Hull aware of permit requirements for such an installation? And if they were, a slight penalty is in order. Trellises. Lets not let this to out of hand. You know, engineering, scaled plans, etc. What a.great way to improve the look of an individuals property. Go for it! Please feel free to share my thoughts with the other Planning Commissioners. Thanks for al'l of your hard work. Kevin P. Jennings Battalion Chief City of Ukiah Fire Department 5/23/2006 1021 West Perkins Ukiah, CA 95482 Sunday, May 21, 2006 To Planning Commissioners Kevin Jennings, Ken Anderson, Michael Whetzel, Judy Pruden and Chairman Jim Mulheren; I am presenting this written statement regarding the Hull/Piffero Use Permit Public Heating because I am unable to attend the public hearing. I am also writing without benefit of the Staff Report on this matter because, although it was to be posted on the city website by May 19, it is not there. My recommendation is that because upper hillside properties are visible to a far greater population than valley property, the municipal code should be more restrictive in regard to flag poles and lighting systems. I believe the natural hillside is not improved by the presence of flags; as more hillside property is developed in the future, there could be many more flags, unsightly and incompatible with residential use. A compromise position is simply to require compliance with the existing Ukiah Municipal Code, limiting the pole height to 20 feet and requiring the spot lighting system to face downward as is required of other exterior lighting. The inconvenience of modification by the applicant is unfortunate. Correction of violations of code, inadvertent or otherwise, has been experienced by many residents over the years. In summary, I urge you to: 1) consider more restrictive measures for upper hillside properties, and 2) DO NOT to make an exception to existing code. To do so is not consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and is not compatible with residential land use. Thargc you. Sincerely, cc: Charlie Stump, Planning Director Charley Stuml3 From: Sent: To: Subject: Dennis Toth [ddarrell@earthlink.net] Sunday, May 21, 2006 11:59 AM planning@cityofukiah.com major use permit 06-13 Hello, My name is Dennis Toth and I live at 460 Cochrane Ave in Ukiah. I will be away from home and unable to attend the meeting on Wednesday. I would like to voice my oppositition to the major use permit 06-13 being requested by Mr. Hull and Mr. Piffero. My objection - too large and too visible. Totally out of scale with anything else in the valley. Hasn't the city been working hard to try to mitigate the impact of this development? Please, no lights and/or music. Thank you, Dennis Toth and Mariana Simpson ITEM NO. 9b DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: DISCUSSION AND ACTION ON ENVIRONMENTAL AND FEASIBILITY ANALYSTS FOR THE ORCHARD AVENUE EXTENSION AND ORR CREEK BRIDGE ALTERNATIVE ROUTE SUMMARY: In 2005, the City of UkJah certified a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on a City-sponsored proposal to extend Orchard Avenue from Ford Street to Brush Street and construct a bridge over Orr Creek. Subsequent to the ETR certification, a private party challenged the adequacy of the ETR. Tn its legal settlement with the Ford Street/$/dnie Court Neighborhood Committee, the City agreed to evaluate whether the relocation of the street extension and bridge to the east towards Highway 101 was a feasible and reasonable alternative to the proposed project. This Agenda item presents the environmental analysis of the alternative location, as well as a feasibility analysis for the City Council's review and action. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Discuss the Environmental Evaluation and Feasibility Analysis; 2) Determine that the alternative route is infeasible and direct Staff to proceed with the original route. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1) Determine that the alternative route is the preferred alternative and 2) Direct Staff to prepare a subsequent, supplemental or addendum to the Environmental Impact Report. Citizen Advised: Ford Street/Sidnie Court Neighborhood Committee Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager, David Rapport, City Attorney, and Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works Attachments: 1. Orchard Avenue Extension and Orr Creek Bridge Alternative Route Analysis 2. Correspondence from Rose Zola, Attorney for the Ford Street/Sidnie Court Neighborhood Committee A p p ROVE D .~~:~--~-~~~ Candace Horsley, City Manager DISCUSS]:ON: Leonard Charles and Associates prepared an environmental analysis of the proposed alternative street route and bridge location and City Staff prepared a cost feasibility analysis. The alternative route analysis determined that the alternate route was environmentally "feasible," by which it meant that it would not have additional adverse environmental impacts as compared to the proposed route and would produce less noise and biological impacts than the original route. While the certified ETR included mitigation measures to successfully reduce noise and biological impacts to less than significant levels, the alternative route would require less mitigation. The analysis did not challenge the validity of the conclusion in the original E1~R that the alternate route did not involve a simple extension of Orchard Ave., but would require re- routing a portion of the street and the removal of a portion of the existing roadway. Noise: The environmental evaluation concluded that because the alternative route would be located to the east of the proposed route close to Highway 101, the traffic noise would be indistinguishable from the freeway noise, and therefore no sound wall would be required along Orchard Avenue to buffer noise impacts on the existing Ford Street/Orchard Avenue apartment complex. Biological Tmpacts: The environmental evaluation reveals that neither the original nor the alternative bridge locations would involve highly significant impacts of loss of sensitive species or vegetation, yet construction at the alternative site would be somewhat less damaging. ]~ncreased Construction Costs: Tn terms of cost feasibility, it was determined that the alternative route would increase construction costs from $435,688 to $671,862. The increased cost would be for the additional length of road associated with the alternative route and for the demolition of a portion of existing Orchard Avenue north of Ford Street. These costs figures include the elimination of the $50,400 sound wall mitigation associated with the original route. Land Acquisition Costs: Additionally, land acquisition costs would range from 1.4 million dollars to approximately 5 million dollars, depending upon actual market conditions at the time of acquisition. This range was established by comparing the property required for the alternate route to recent sales of commercial property in the area. Legal Fees: The legal fees associated with the acquisition of the land could reach as much as $100,000 because the property owner is an unwilling seller. If the City decides to relocate the street and bridge as suggested by the Ford Street/$/dnie Court Neighborhood Committee, it could expect an additional cost of between 5 and 6 million dollars for increased construction costs, land acquisition costs, and legal fees. Additional Cost Factors: Staff identified two additional feasibility factors. First, if the alternative route is pursued, the City must fund the preparation of a subsequent, supplemental or addendum to the Environmental Zmpact Report. While this document would not be expected to be highly expensive, the time to prepare it, along with the time to pursue land acquisition could jeopardize the Economic Development Administration grant the City is pursuing to assist in the funding for the project. Moreover, the City has not identified a source of funding for this added cost, and staff does not believe that such funding is realistically available within the foreseeable future. The existence of this added cost and the inability to pay for it would effectively prevent the project from proceeding and could jeopardize the City's ability to use the available funding for the project. 2 Additional Feasibility Factor: The suggested alternative route for the extension of Orchard Avenue and the Orr Creek Bridge would cross the creek as a frontage road adjacent to Highway 101. If the bridge and street were constructed in this location they would conflict with the Brush Street / Highway 101 hook ramps that would be needed to mitigate traffic impacts resulting from build-out of the Brush Street Triangle. Tf the bridge and street were constructed in the suggested location, it would be impossible to construct the hook ramps. Comments from Ford Street/Sidnie Court Neighborhood Committee: Ms. Rose Zoia, Attorney for the Ford Street/Sidnie Court Neighborhood Committee submitted a letter commenting on the Orchard Avenue Extension/Orr Creek Bridge Alternative Route Analysis. She limits her comments to the Environmental Evaluation and urges the Council to select the alternative route because it is environmentally feasible, would meet most of the project objectives, and would reduce two potentially significant impacts. CONCLUSION: As required by the lawsuit settlement, the City prepared an environmental evaluation and feasibility analysis for the alternative Orchard Avenue extension and bridge location suggested by Bill Randolph. The environmental evaluation concluded that there would be fewer impacts to the biological resources along the creek and less noise impacts to the existing apartment residents on Ford Street/Orchard Avenue. While the certified E[R included mitigation measures to successfully mitigate all noise and biological impacts, the costs to mitigate would be less with the alternative route. However, the cost feasibility analysis concluded that the cost to acquire land, and design and construct the alternative route would be so much more than the proposed route as to render the alternative financially infeasible. Moreover, delays caused by the pursuit of the alternative route could effectively prevent the project from proceeding and could jeopardize the City's ability to use available funding for the project. In addition, the alternative route would conflict with the future southbound hook ramp from Brush Street to Highway 101. Staff concludes that while the alternative route would reduce noise and some biological impacts, those impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level in the project as approved by the City Council, and the associated costs to acquire the land for and construct the alternative route makes the alternative project infeasible within the meaning of the CEQA Guidelines. (See 14 CCR §15364.) ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL ACTIONS: The Council has two alternatives in which to proceed. The Council could determine that the alternative route is infeasible and proceed with the original route. Alternatively, the Council could determine that the alternative route is the preferred alternative and direct Staff to redesign the project and prepare the required subsequent, supplemental or addendum to the Environmental Impact Report. 3 CZTY OF UKTAH Orchard Avenue Extension and Orr Creek Bridge Alternative Route Analysis Environmental Evaluation Prepared by Leonard Charles and Associates Feasibility Analysis Prepared by Department of Planning and Community Development Department of Public Works/Engineering 3UNE 2006 INTRODUCTION This alternative route analysis consists of an environmental evaluation prepared by Leonard Charles and Associates and a feasibility analysis prepared by Staff from the Departments of Planning and Community Development and Public Works. Planning Staff analyzed the costs associated with land acquisition and Public Works Staff analyzed the costs associated with constructing the street and bridge in the suggested alternative location. SUMMARY OF FtNDtNGS Leonard Charles and Associates determined that while the alternative route was environmentally feasible, it would not reduce any significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the Final EIR to a less than significant level. Planning Staff found that the property owner of the land needed for the alternative route was an unwilling seller, and that the resulting land acquisition costs would range from 1.4 million dollars to over 5 million dollars. The legal fees associated with the acquisition of the land could reach as much as $100,000. Public Works Staff determined that the alternative route would increase construction costs of the project from $435,688 to $671,862. City Staff determined that the alternative route would conflict with the needed Brush Street/Highway 101 hook-ramps. City Staff determined that the time needed to pursue acquisition of the land, and to prepare a subsequent, supplemental or addendum to the EIR could jeopardize the Federal Economic Development Administration grant being pursued for funding assistance, and therefore add an additional 1 to 2 million dollars to the cost of the project. Tf the City decides to relocate the street and bridge as suggested by the Ford Street/Sidnie Court Neighborhood Committee, it could expect an additional cost of between 3 and 8 million dollars. ~ ORCHARD AVENUE TITLE PROPOSED BRIDGE REALIGNMENT BY ~ e~ ~ WILLIAM RANDOLPH s~zz ~c~ No. DESIGNED: B. ~NDOLPH A i OH~O~D: S~L~ I"=:00'JDAT~ 6/6/2006 J SHE~ q O¢ 1 ORR CREEK BRIDGE AND ORCHARD AVENUE EXTENSION ALTERNATIVE ROUTE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION June 2006 Prepared for: Prepared by: City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Leonard Charles and Associates 7 Robie Court San Anselmo, CA 94960 415.454.4575 A. INTRODUCTION In 2005, the City of Ukiah certified a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on a City-sponsored proposal to extend Orchard Avenue from Ford Street to Brush Street, construct a bridge on Orchard Avenue crossing over Orr Creek, construct access improvements from the south side of the new bridge to City-owned property on the south side of Orr Creek, construct a new waterline across the bridge and replace existing water lines along Brush Street, and construct a storm drainage system south of Brush Street with an outfall to Orr Creek (hereafter called the original project). Subsequent to the EIR certification, a private party challenged the adequacy of the EIR. The City and this private party settled this lawsuit by the City agreeing to conduct a study of whether an alternative site for the bridge would be a reasonable and environmentally feasible project alternative per CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6. The following study is intended to satisfy this stipulation. The scope of work has two objectives: 1) whether the proposed alternative is within the range of reasonable alternatives which would feasibly (from an environmental perspective) attain most of the project objectives and would avoid or substantially reduce any significant impacts identified for the original project, and 2) if the relocation satisfies these criteria, to evaluate the environmental merits as compared to the original project. The City requested that the environmental analysis focus on noise, traffic, and biological impacts, as well as the relative physical impacts of the project and the alternative on existing and proposed future land uses that would be affected. B. DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVE The proposed alternative bridge location is shown on Figure 1. The alternative bridge site is near Highway 101, approximately 300 feet east of the original bridge site. The alternative includes two options for accessing the bridge from the south: Option 1 includes an easterly extension of Ford Street and then an approximately 90-degree turn to the north to access the bridge, and Option 2 includes a more gradual dogleg to the east from Orchard Avenue just north of existing commercial development. For both options, the Orchard Avenue extension north of the bridge would parallel the freeway and end at the east end of Brush Street. The objective of the alternative bridge location is to provide additional undisturbed creek habitat on Orr Creek. Currently, there is an approximately 1,700-foot section of Orr Creek between the bridge crossing at Orr Street and Highway 101. The original bridge site would result in an approximately 1,100- foot long creek section between the Orr Street Bridge and the proposed Orchard Avenue Bridge and an approximately 350-foot long section between the new bridge and Highway 101. Orr Creek Bridge & Orchard Avenue Extension Alternative Analysis City of Ukiah Page I The proposed alternative is silent on whether it would include the other elements that are part of the original project. For purposes of this study, it will be assumed that the new alignment would also include those elements, namely, · Extension of a 12-inch water main along the alternative alignment; · Development of a storm drain system that adequately drains the new road sections; and · Inclusion of a conduit for future electrical and telecommunication lines. C. IMPACTS OF DEVELOPING THE ALTERNATIVE The following describes the potential impacts of constructing the bridge at the alternative site and the 2 options for the alternative road alignment. Where the road options would have different impacts, this difference is described. This section also compares the impacts of constructing the alternative to the original bridge and road alignment. 1. Biological Resources The study biologist (Charles A. Patterson, Plant Ecologist) visited the project area on October 11, 2005, and walked the proposed alternative alignments of the approach roadway. He examined the alternative creek crossing area in close detail, looking specifically for any sensitive habitats or species, or any significant individual biotic features (e.g., heritage trees, rock outcrops, channels, specific wildlife habitats) of note or importance. He documented the area's existing biological conditions and evaluated the habitats present for their inherent sensitivity and ability to absorb disturbance. He sought any conditions that might be suitable for supporting rare, endangered, or otherwise sensitive plant species or communities, and he looked for any unusual ground conditions such as serpentine, clay soils, or wetlands. The area crossed by the alternate approach roadways is covered exclusively by common, highly ruderal (weedy) non-native annual grassland (almost 'scabland') on common well-drained soil, with no evidence of rocks, serpentine, heavy clay, or other unusual soil or substrate conditions. The Iow disturbed vegetation cover here is composed almost entirely of widespread introduced grasses such as Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum), wild barley (Hordeum leporinum), brome grasses (Bromus mollis, B. rigidus), annual hair grass (Aira caryophyllea), wild oats (Avena sp.), annual fescue (Vulpia), and numerous weeds (Erodium, Geranium, Hypochoeris, Convolvulus, Anagallis, Plantago, Rumex, Trifolium, Brassica, Raphanus, Cirsium, Carduus, Sonchus). There are almost no native species present in this ruderal grassland mosaic, except for a very few scattered lupines (Lupinus nanus and L. bicolor), dove weed (Eremocarpus setigerus), hayfield tarplant (Hemizonia congesta cf. luzulifolia), and California poppy ( Eschscholzia californica ). The entire area to be affected by the road approaches consists of open grassland on common well drained soil, with no evidence of rocks, serpentine, Orr Creek Bridge & Orchard Avenue Extension Alternative Analysis City of Ukiah Page 2 heavy clay, or other unusual soil or substrate conditions. There are no trees or shrubs in this area, and examination of the soils and vegetation reveals no indications of any wetland conditions within the footprint of the overall alternative approach roadway routes. Aside from the creek (see discussion below), there are no sensitive or unusual habitats present in the approach area, and no significant potential to support sensitive or rare plants. Most rare and endangered plants known from the region occur on unusual soils or substrates, or under wet conditions, and the approach area contains no such habitats. No rare or unusual plants were observed, and no such species are expected here given the site's conditions. With respect to the actual creek crossing, the point at which the alternative route would cross the creek is approximately 300 hundred feet downstream from the original proposed crossing. The overall reach of creek between the freeway (just to the east) and the original crossing point is a typical (albeit relatively large) channel that has historically been encroached on by development and agricultural uses from both the north and the south, leaving a relatively narrow riparian swath along the immediate channel and its banks. The channel itself averages about eight to 12 feet wide and roughly six to eight feet deep. The bed experiences relatively significant annual (winter) flow and scour, and supports almost no vegetation. From the outer edges of the bed on up each bank, however, there is dense herbaceous and woody vegetation, including an abundance (and localized predominance) of non-native (escaped) ornamental species such as acacia trees, cultivated roses, volunteer fruit (Prunus) trees, shrubs (pyracantha, cotoneaster, etc.), and groundcovers (Vinca, ivy, grasses). The primary canopy is of native trees and shrubs, including some of riparian character such as tree willow (Salix lasiandra) and Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), as well as common woodland (upland) species such as coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) and canyon oak (Q. chrysolepis). In addition there are numerous large 'volunteer' acacia trees. Understory consists of common introduced species such as Himalaya blackberry, periwinkle (Vinca), English ivy, and volunteer fruit (Prunus) trees, plus scattered native shrubs (Baccharis. Rhamnus, Rosa) and many non-native herbs (Brassica, Carduus, Rumex, Cirsium). The channel bed is largely barren due to annual scouring and dense shading, but supports scattered non-native wetland herbs such as umbrella sedge (Cyperus eragrostis), dock (Rumex), and rabbit-foot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis). The actual point of the proposed alternative bridge crossing brings the road to a point relatively close to the nearby freeway in an area that has relatively little native riparian vegetation. This potential crossing point, while having several large oak trees nearby, is largely composed of non-native Himalaya blackberry and periwinkle, both introduced,_non-riparian species, plus old (including several dead) volunteer fruit trees and a small amount of shrubby willows. As such, while the crossing has the potential to disturb some creekbank vegetation, the character of the vegetation that would be disturbed or eliminated is not especially native in character, is largely non-riparian, and does not represent especially Orr Creek Bridge & Orchard Avenue Extension Alternative Analysis City of Ukiah Page 3 good or valuable cover. This crossing point, therefore, represents a potentially less damaging alternative to the original crossing site farther to the west. It would affect less valuable vegetation and fewer native species, and occurring close to the freeway, would leave a longer unbroken and undisturbed reach of stream. While neither crossing point would involve highly significant biotic impacts or loss of sensitive species or vegetation, the alternative site is somewhat less damaging and can be considered a biologically "superior" site. In summary, while the alternative route would eliminate more open grassland vegetation (since the original route stubs out right next to the creek crossing and would eliminate none of this type on the south side of the creek), it would not result in any significant impacts to natural grassland habitats, and it would cross the creek at a point where impacts to native and riparian vegetation would be less. Looking at the entire reach of creek from the general vicinity of the original crossing point to the freeway, this alternative site is probably the least well developed as far as woody, native, and riparian vegetation is concerned, and appears to represent, from a biological perspective, the best crossing point along the entire reach considered here. As with the original crossing, no highly significant or sensitive species or vegetation would be adversely affected, and simple standard erosion control and revegetation measures, as recommended I the EIR, should be adequate to compensate for the project's remaining unavoidable impacts. Wildlife travel along the creek would be enhanced by the alternative site, since there would be additional creek length that would not have a bridge or traffic passing though it. However, because wildlife cannot travel east of the freeway, this travel corridor does not have significant value. 2. Traffic The proposed bridge and road alignments were reviewed by the Crane Transportation Group; the following is the report they prepared. Road Option 1 would have Orchard Avenue extend about 200 feet due east from its current intersection with Ford Street and then due north adjacent to the freeway. This would require two 90-degree turns by drivers desiring to travel along Orchard Avenue. Road Option 2 would have Orchard Avenue realigned at about a 30- degree angle (southwest to northeast) towards Highway 101 about one-third of the distance between Clara Avenue and Ford Street. No description is provided in the Option 2 plan about where Ford Street would connect to Orchard Avenue (i.e., 1) adjacent to Highway 101 via the proposed the Orchard Avenue Option 1 extension; 2) at some location along the diagonal transition of Orchard Avenue from its existing alignment to the alignment adjacent to the freeway; or 3) that it does not connect and ends at the existing Orchard Avenue as is currently the case). The primary issue of concern addressed in this report is whether either of these alignment changes for Orchard Avenue would produce any significant change in Orr Creek Bridge & Orchard Avenue Extension Alternative Analysis City of Ukiah Page 4 traffic volume projections on the local circulation system network developed for the Orchard Avenue extension EIR that the City previously certified. The alignment proposed by the City is about 800 feet from Ford Street to Brush Street while the Option 1 would be about 1,050 feet. At a speed of 35 mph, a vehicle travels about 51 feet per second. So, the additional 250 feet would take about an additional 5 seconds to negotiate. However, it would actually take more time than this since drivers would need to slow to make two 90-degree turns, but the additional time would still be an insignificant increase. Option 2 is only about 100 feet longer than the City-proposed alignment. At 35 mph, it would take about 2 seconds longer to use this route. Again, the actual time would be somewhat slower due to the three turns that the driver must negotiate on this alternative route. Travel along the Option 2 alignment would be faster than along the Option 1 alignment. Any measurable change in traffic volume projections on the City street system would only be expected if there was a significant increase in travel time using Orchard Avenue with either the Option 1 or 2 realignments in comparison to the originally proposed alignment. The approximately 200-foot jog from the existing roadway alignment to an alignment adjacent to the freeway would not be expected to produce either an actual or perceived significant increase in travel time for drivers using Orchard Avenue as a north-south route, whether Orchard Avenue is extended north to just Brush Street or farther north to Ford Road. This is particularly the case if it is assumed that Orr Street (between Ford Street and Brush Street) is closed at the same time Orchard Avenue is extended north to at least Brush Street (as was the case for the proposed alignment). Therefore, realignment of Orchard Avenue adjacent to the west side of Highway 101 via either the Option 1 or 2 realignments would not be expected to produce a significant change in local area circulation volumes. The same impacts to roadways and intersections that were identified for the original project would occur for this alternative. To conclude, the alternative would slightly reduce travel time between Clara Avenue and Brush Street, but the difference would be insufficient to cause drivers to use the existing City street system to the west of Orchard Avenue rather than this new alignment. While it is not part of the scope of work for this study, it is recommended that the City review the proposed new road alignment for consistency or conflicts with the possible future alignment of hookramps that may be proposed on the west side of Highway 101 in the area north of Orr Creek. The alternative is not as safe as the original project since it requires drivers to negotiate two or three turns between Orchard Avenue and Brush Street. Option 1 would require making two 90-degree turns. Unless there were stop signs at the two 90-degree turns, drivers would potentially approach these turns at unsafe speeds. If stop signs were installed, it would further reduce travel time. The "S" turns on Option 2 could also be unsafe. If the City were to approve the alternative with Option 2, a more gradual "S" curve transition is recommended for Orr Creek Bridge & Orchard Avenue Extension Altemative Analysis City of Ukiah Page 5 this option. Option 2 with the more gradual "S" curve would be preferable to Option 1, which requires a 90-degree turn. It is expected that with proper design, these safety hazards could be reduced to a less-than-significant level. 3. Noise The proposed alternative would place the centerline of the roadway about 350 feet from apartment buildings and other sensitive receivers located along Orchard Avenue south of Orr Creek. A substantial increase in noise level was identified for these noise sensitive receivers in the 2002 Draft EIR. Traffic noise levels were analyzed for the new alignment with the same traffic noise model used for the original alignment in the 2002 Draft EIR. The Road Link and Development Scenario that resulted in a substantial increase in noise to sensitive receivers along Orchard Avenue north of Ford Street was the Commercial Development Scenario with Orchard Avenue extended either to Brush Street or Ford Road. In this scenario, an increase in the Ldn of 7 dB was predicted for the residential receivers in this segment of Orchard Avenue south of Orr Creek. Under Road Option 1, relocating the road further to the east adjacent to Highway 101, the noise level increase would still occur for sensitive receivers located south of Ford Street. North of Ford Street, the increase in noise level above existing levels would be reduced to about 1 dB Ldn (decibel), a less than substantial increase not requiring mitigation. Under Road Option 2, all of the apartments and townhouses located south of Orr Creek between Orchard Avenue and Sidney Street would experience an increase in noise of, at most, 1 dB Ldn. This would not be a substantial increase and would cause a less-than- significant impact. The relocation of the road to a location adjacent to Highway 101 would make the sound of traffic on the Orchard Avenue extension indistinguishable from the sound of traffic on Highway 101. No mitigation measures would be required to mitigate noise impacts at residences along Orchard Avenue because the impacts would be less-than-significant. Mitigation measures 1 to 3 on page 142 of the Draft EIR would not be required fro this alternative. The development of the project under this scenario was also predicted to result in an increase in noise levels along Brush Street. The alternative routes are not expected to affect changes in traffic noise predicted along Brush Street in the 2002 Draft EIR. The alternative would have the same impacts for Brush Street as the original project. Mitigation measures identified to address these impacts would be unchanged. Construction Noise Constructing the road extension and bridge would generate noise as described in the Draft EIR. The construction equipment would be further removed from sensitive receptors along Orchard Street. It is expected that construction noise would be just perceptible above ambient noise generated by traffic on Highway Orr Creek Bddge & Orchard Avenue Extension Alternative Analysis City of Ukiah Page 6 101. As such, all the construction noise mitigations listed on page 139 of the DEIR would not be required. 4. Other Resources The following discusses potential impacts to other physical resources. Geology and Soils. There is no reason to expect that soils or geologic conditions along the proposed alternative route would pose any new or more significant construction constraints than the originally proposed route. Similar mitigation measures would be required and would be expected to result in less-than- significant impacts as regards seismic risk and soil constraints. The proposed alternative would cause soil erosion during its construction. The same mitigations recommended for the original project would apply and would reduce this erosion impact to a less-than-Significant level. Hydrology. The project would increase runoff to Orr Creek the same as the original project. In both cases, this would be a less-than-significant impact. The alternative bridge would need to be constructed above the 100-year flood level the same as required for the proposed bridge. There would be similar erosion potential. Similar erosion control mitigations would apply and would be expected to reduce water quality impacts to a less-than-significant level. A new runoff collection system to drain the road extension would need to be developed to replace the drainage system proposed for the original project. It is assumed that this system would be designed and constructed to adequately drain the new streets. Cultural Resources. There is no reason to expect any more potential for cultural resources along the alternative routes than for the proposed route. The mitigation measures recommended in the EIR would apply and would reduce the impact to potential cultural resources to a less-than-significant level. Air Quality. The same number of new trips would occur with the proposed alternative as would occur with the original project. There would be no change in the emission of air pollutants from future use. The alternative would require slightly more grading than the original project, thereby slightly increasing dust emissions during construction. However, the mitigations recommended for the original project would apply, and would reduce the impact to a less-than- significant level. Aesthetics. The Draft EIR determined that construction of the original project would have less-than-significant aesthetic impacts. The alternative design relocates the bridge and road close to Highway 101. Drivers along the highway would see cars moving along this arterial immediately to the west of the highway. This road and vehicles traveling on it would detract from views of open land, but views in the area are not currently considered to be a scenic resource. The impact would not be considered significant. Orr Creek Bddge & Orchard Avenue Extension Alternative Analysis City of Ukiah Page 7 The proposed route of Orchard Avenue north of Orr Creek would eliminate any future plans for developing open space along this portion of the Study Area. The Draft EIR recommended that future development of the Study Area include a coordinated circulation, drainage, open space, and landscaping plan that could include maintaining a landscaped open space buffer along the freeway. Extension of the alternative road as far north as Brush Street would eliminate the potential for such an open space buffer between Brush Street and Orr Creek. Land Use. The original project included the construction of ramps at the south end of the bridge that would provide City maintenance access to City-owned property on the south side of Orr Creek. The alternative bridge site does not abut City-owned property, and it is unlikely that ramps would be constructed at the alternative bridge site. The access ramps were deemed a beneficial impact of the original project. This beneficial impact would not occur for the alternative project. D. FEASIBILITY OF THE ALTERNATIVE Based on the environmental analysis presented above, the proposed alternative location of the bridge and the Orchard Avenue extensions is environmentally a feasible alternative because construction of the bridge and roads at this location would not: Have significant effects on plants or wildlife; Result in a significant traffic impact; · Result in new or significant noise impacts; or · Result in any significant impacts to other physical environmental resources. The alternative would not meet the City's objective of using the existing northern end of Orchard Avenue to provide access to the new bridge and extending Orchard Avenue north of Orr Creek. Instead, the alternative would replace the existing northern section of Orchard Avenue with a new roadway segment crossing privately-owned land to the east. The alternative would meet the City's objective of reducing congestion south of Orr Creek that was caused by City approval of a Kmart project. The alternative would reduce two potentially significant impacts that were identified for the original project: 1) reducing construction noise impacts on residents living along Orchard Avenue to the south of Orr Creek; and 2) reducing vehicle-generated noise impacts on residents along Orchard Avenue between Clara Street and Orr Creek. The EIR prepared for the original project concluded that these two impacts could be reduced to a less-than-significant level by implementing mitigation measures described in that EIR. Orr Creek Bridge & Orchard Avenue Extension Alternative Analysis City of Ukiah Page 8 The Draft EIR did not assess this alternative because it did not meet the basic City objective of using the existing north end of Orchard AvenUe to provide access to the new bridge. COMPARISON OF THE ALTERNATIVE WITH THE ORIGINAL PROJECT AND OTHER ALTERNATIVES Because the proposed alternative is considered environmentally "feasible," the second task is to compare the merits of the alternative with the original project. The following discussion summarizes the impacts of the proposed alternative as compared to that original project. Biological Resources. The alternative bridge location would have fewer impacts on vegetation and result in a longer undisturbed reach of Orr Creek. However, these impacts were considered to be less-than-significant for the original project. The alternative would reduce impacts to biological resources. Traffic. The alternative would increase travel time between Clara Street and Brush Street, but the increase would be minor and would not result in a change in the travel patterns predicted for the original bridge and road alignment. While the alternative would not cause a new impact or change the traffic impacts identified for the original project, the alternative road alignments are not consistent with preferred road alignments for major arterials. Jogging the road to the east is less efficient from a traffic engineering perspective than the original design, which extended Orchard Avenue directly north. The alternative routes would have greater traffic safety impacts than the original project. However, it is not expected that this safety impact would be significant given appropriate roadway design. Noise. The alternative would have fewer noise impacts than the original proposed project. The alternative would eliminate the noise impacts to apartments and sensitive receptors along Orchard Avenue. Noise mitigations recommended for the proposed project would not be required for the proposed alternative. Other Resources. The proposed alternative would potentially affect geological, hydrological, cultural, air, and aesthetic resources. The mitigations recommended for the original project would apply to the alternative, and would reduce all potentially significant impacts to these resources to a less-than- significant level. The alternative road alignment would interfere with any future plan for developing an open space buffer along the Highway 101 frontage in the area between Orr Creek and Brush Street. The alternative is feasible from an envirOnmental perspective (this report does not assess the alternative's feasibility as regards traffic engineering standards, costs, social, or legal factors). The alternative would not reduce any significant and unavoidable impact identified in the Final EIR to a less than significant level. Orr Creek Brfdge & Orchard Avenue Extension Alternative Analysis City of Ukiah Page 9 F. REPORT PREPARERS This report was prepared by the following individuals and firms: · Leonard Charles, Ph.D. of Leonard Charles and ^ssociates - ecologist · Charles ^. Patterson - plant ecologist · Mark Crane, P.E. of the Crane Transportation Group - traffic engineer · Rich Rodkin, P.E. of Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. - acoustic engineer The report was prepared with input from and assistance of Charley Stump, Ukiah Community Development Director, and this assistance was most welcome. Orr Creek Bddge & Orchard Avenue Extension Alternative Analysis City of Ukiah Page 10 Orchard Avenue Extension and Orr Creek Bridge Alternative Route Study Feasibility Analysis Prepared by City Staff June 2006 Introduction In its settlement of Ford Street/$/dn/e ¢our~ Ne/ghborhood Committee, the City agreed to evaluate whether the relocation of the bridge is a feasible alternative to the proposed project, zf the City Council determines that a project alternative is feasible and environmentally superior, as those terms are defined in CEQA, the City will prepare either a subsequent Environmental Impact Report (ETR), supplemental EIR, or an addendum to the REIR, and follow all laws, including CEqA, in processing the chosen document. The City hired Leonard Charles and Associates to assist in preparing an analysis for the City Council to consider in making these determinations. Leonard Charles and Associates has determined that the alternative location of the bridge is environmentally superior as that term is used in CEQA, although it has not altered its conclusion in the EIR that all adverse impacts from extending Orchard Avenue and constructing the bridge in the proposed location have been mitigated to the point where those imPacts are not environmentally significant. The primary basis for its conclusion that the alternative location of the bridge is environmentally superior is that fewer mitigations are required. The CEQA Guidelines define "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social and technological factors." (14 CCR {}15364.) Since economics is a significant element in determining feasibility, City Staff has prepared cost information for the feasibility analysis. The cost factor consists of the following: 1. Increased construction costs associated with the proposed alternative as compared to the app~"oved project. 2. Land acquisition costs not required for the approved project that would be required for the proposed alternative. A. Increased construction costs. The proposed project extends the existing Orchard Avenue by constructing additional roadway to the edge of Orrs Creek, constructing the bridge across Orrs Creek, and extending Orchard Avenue to Brush Street. Constructing the alternative route would require the removal of a portion of Orchard Avenue south of Orrs Creek, construction of additional roadway along a longer alternative route to a location on the south bank of Orrs Creek closer to U.S. Highway 101, construction of the bridge at that new. location on Orrs Creek, and construction of the extension of Orchard Avenue north of the bridge along a different and longer alignment closer to U.S. Highway 101. The alternative route would eliminate the need for a sound barrier wall on the west side of Orchard Avenue. The increased cost of construction, therefore, is computed by adding the additional demolition and road construction costs and subtracting the savings from not constructing the sound barrier. For purposes of this analysis it is assumed that the cost of constructing the bridge itself is approximately the same in either location. The Public Works Department has prepared estimates of the increased costs and cost savings. These are engineer's estimates without preparing detailed construction plans. The basis for the estimates is contained in Schedule 1, attached hereto. 1. Cost of demolishing a portion or Orchard Ave. south of the bridge Option I = $38,152 Option 2 = $81,878 2. Increased cost of alternative route south of bridge as compared to extension or Orchard Option 1 = $389,738 Option 2 = $582,186 3. l~ncreased cost of alternative route north of bridge Option i = $58,198 Option 2 = $58,198 Subtotal Option I = $486,088 Option 2 = $722,262 Minus avoided cost of sound barrier wall Option I = $50,400 Option 2 = $50,400 Total increased construction cost Option i = $435,688 Option 2 = $671,862 B. Additional land acquisition cost of alternative route. To determine the land acquisition cost for the alternative route, Staff sought information about recent commercial property transactions to determine the approximate cost of acquiring the subject parcels for extending Orchard Avenue pursuant to the alternative routes both south and north of Orrs Creek. The City has no land acquisition costs associated with the approved route. It was determined from a planning standpoint that the alternative routes would render the remaining lands within the parcels unmarketable because of their resulting small sizes and odd configurations. Additionally, it was acknowledged that one of Mr. Randolph's goals besides rerouting Orchard Avenue was to use at least portions of the excess land for public park purposes. For these reasons, it became apparent that to move forward with a rerouting project, the' entire two subject parcels would require acquisition rather than just portions for road right-of-way. On February 27, 2006, Staff confirmed with the property owner that he was not interested in selling all or a portion of the parcels for public roadway purposes. He confirmed that he was an unwilling seller. He also provided information concerning his opinion of the market value of the property. His opinion was based on his knowledge of recent sales of nearby commercial real estate, as well as a recent offer he received for another commercially zoned parcel he owns nearby. Staff also spoke with another local real estate professional who recently closed a transaction on a commercially zoned parcel in close proximity to the subject property. Comparable ProPerty Sales/Values Staff received information about one recent sale of commercial property and one recent offer on another. Both parcels are in close proximity to the subject parcels. Property Owner Size Sale Price 002-190-15 GRQ 1/2 Acre $18 sq. ft Perkins Street east of Hospital Drive Enterprises $392,000 (2OO5) $25 sq. ft. 002-200-38 Thomas 1/2 Acre $452,250 Corner of Orchard Avenue and (offer) Perkins Street (2004) The following Table illustrates the potential selling price for the subject parcels based on the recent selling/offer prices of nearby commercial properties. One real estate professional from Century 21 Real estate indicated that the average sale price of commercial property along Perkins Street and/or Orchard Avenue is approximately $15.00 to $22:00 per square foot. The listed sales prices below show $20, $10, and $5 per square foot comparative costs for the subject parcels. Subject Parcels Owner Size Sale Price $20 sq. ft 002-030-05 Thomas i acre $871,200 North of Mervyn's Department Store on Orchard Avenue. 'This parcel is $10 sq. ft. needed for the alternate route on the $435,600 north bank of Orrs Creek? $5 sq. ft. $217,800 $20 sq. ft 002-030-06 Thomas 5.5 Acres $4,791,600 002-101-16 North of Mervyn's Department Store $10 sq. ft. on Orchard Avenue. These parcels $2,395,800 are needed for the alternate route south of Orrs Creek? $5 sq. ft $1,197,900 $2O TOTAL COST (LAND ONLY) $5,662,800 $10 $2,831,400 $5 $1,415,700 Land acquisition cost. Based on recent sales or offers for similar commercially zoned land in the general area, the fair market value of the subject parcels could be $20.00 per square foot. At $20.00 per square foot, the total cost of the three subject parcels would be $5,662,800.00. This higher cost is the most likely land acquisition cost, if acquisition by eminent domain is required. C. Other land acquisition costs City costs of acquisition include appraisal fees, expert witness fees, litigation expenses and attorneys' fees. This estimate assumes that the case would proceed to judgment, although settlement is common in these cases and could reduce some of the costs. Initially, an appraisal would be required. The cost of an appraisal for eminent domain purposes would be approximately $5,000. The City will have to present the appraisal to the property owner and adopt a resolution of necessity, if the property owner is unwilling to accept the appraised value of the properties. 4 Attorneys fees to draft the resolution of necessity, prepare the complaint, conduct discovery, prepare for and conduct a trial on valuation, and prepare the necessary documents following the trial is estimated at $50,000. Expert witness fees are estimated at $10,000. Litigation expenses are estimated at $7,000. An estimate of acquisition costs is $75,000. d. Time and other feasibility considerations The City is seeking a grant to augment funds it has set aside for this project. If the project cannot be commenced by the 2007 construction season, it is uncertain if the grant funds would still be available. The time required to design the alternative route and acquire the required real property is estimated at fourteen months, although the City could obtain possession of the property in seven months without knowing the final acquisition cost for an additional seven months. That includes the time required to obtain the required appraisal (3 months), present appraisal and attempt negotiations with property owners (2 months), prepare and adopt a resolution of necessity (1 month), prepare and file a complaint (1 month), obtain an answer to the complaint (1 month), conduct discovery and prepare for and obtain a trial date (6 months), conduct a trial, receive and document the judgment (1 month). Estimate assumes there is no appeal by either party. e. Conflict with future highway 101 hook ramps The suggested alternative route for the extension of Orchard Avenue and the Orr Creek bridge would cross the creek as a frontage road adjacent to Highway 101. Tf the bridge and street were constructed in this location they would conflict with the Brush Street / Highway 101 hook ramps that would be needed to mitigation traffic impacts resulting from build-out of the Brush Street Triangle. l~f the bridge and street were constructed in the suggested location, it would be impossible to construct the hook ramps (see schematic diagram on next page). Conclusion Total acquisition costs could exceed 5 million dollars. This alone makes the project infeasible, because the City does not have access to the financing to cover this cost. The increased cost would prevent the project from being completed within a reasonable period of time for this economic reason. When the extraordinary cost of the alternative is combined with the additional time the alternative would require and the likely loss of currently available funding due to this delay, the project alternative is even less feasible. Finally, while not strictly related to feasibility, the increased cost would not avoid a significant adverse environmental impact. :It would only eliminate the need for the sound barrier mitigation. 5 Orchard Avenue Extension And Orr Creek Bridge ALTERNATZVE ROUTE ANALYSTS CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES May24,2006 Tim, Here's the Orchard Street Extension "increased construction costs" for oPtions 1 & 2. There are 4 separate documents for "basis of estimates" as follows: 1) Costs for Pricing New Roadway With Existing Pavement - this is the section' of Orchard Avenue north of Ford Street that already has one paved lane completed. 2) Costs for Pricing New City Roadway Without Existing Pavement - this is all other new roadway within the city except for the section in 1) above. 3) Costs for Pricing New County Roadway - this is all new road north of the bridge. 4) Demolition & Soundwall - this has the estimate for constructing a soundwall as well as the costs of removing sections of Orchard Avenue. There are also 2 spreadsheets that summarize the costs. Alan ORCHARD STREET EXTENSION 1. Cost of demolishing a portion of Orchard Ave. south of the originally proposed location of the bridge 2. Increased cost of alternative route south of bridge as compared to extension of Orchard 3. Increased cost of alternative route north of bridge Subtotal Minus avoided cost of sound barrier wall Total increased construction cost Option 1 $38,152 $389,738 $58,198 $486,088 $50,400 $435,688 Option 2 $81,878 $582,186 $58,198 $722,262 $5O,4OO $671,862 Costs For Pricing New Roadway With Existing Pavement (Orchard Ave From Ford St To 380' North of Ford) Preliminary Engineer's Estimate Extension of Orchard Ave From Ford St. to Brush St. Reference: Winzler & Kelley Profile Sheet, C-1, 2002-31, "Orchard Avenue Bridge and Related Street Improvements" Cross Section B (Orchard Avenue Typical Section STA 10+19 To STA 12+40) Notes: Costs Calculated For New Roadway on a Per Foot Basis, including 1) Surveying, 2) Compaction Testing, 3x) Clearing & Grubbing, 4) RoadWay excavation, 5) Roadway Fill, 6) Aggregate Base, 7) Asphalt Concrete, 8) Placing Traffic Stripes, 9) Sidewalk Construction, and 10) Concrete curb and gutter B) Cost of bridge and extra roadway costs of bridge approaches are not included in these calculations because those costs would be the same in all three options under consideration. c) Some costs are based on engineer's estimates of costs for Airport Blvd. extensions made in 1996 and 1999 as well as the Gobbi St. Class 2 Bike Lane in 2003. The inflation indexes are based on the following calculations: ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) May, 2006 = 8445.69 ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) May, 2003 = 7788.80 ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) Dec., 1999 = 6816.70 ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) Dec., 1996 -- 6629.61 Inflation factor for 2003 estimates = 8445.69/7788.80 = 1.08 Inflation factor for 1999 estimates = 8445.69/6816.70 = 1.24. Inflation factor for 1996 estimates = 8445.69/6629.61 = 1.27 1) Surveying Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Length = 2050 Feet, Cost = $20,898 gives a unit cost of $10.19/FT Unit Cost = ($10.19/FT) x (1.27 - inflation factor) = $12.94fFT 2) Compaction Testing Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) . Length = 2050 Feet, Cost = $9875 gives a urfit cost of $4.82/FT Unit Cost (adjusted for inflation) = $4.82 .x 1.27 = $6.12/FT 3) Clearing & Grubbin~ Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Length = 2050 Feet, Cost = $13650 gives a unit cost of $6.66/FT Unit Cost (adjusted for inflation) = $6.66 x 1.27 = $8.46/FT 4) Roadway Excavation Reference: Preliminary Engineer's Estimate (Rick Seanor) "Orchard Ave. from Ford St to Orr Creek", 1999 Cost = $25/CY Lane: Width = 14.25' Height = 1.3" Area = t4.25 x 1.3 = 18.5 SF Shoulder: Width = 6" Height = 1.3' Area = 7.8 SF Ditch: Area -- approx 2 SF Total Area = 18.5 + 7.8 + 2 = 28.3 SF Unit Cost = (28.3 SF) x (1/27 CY/CF) x ($25/CY) x (1.24 inflation factor) = $32.49/FT 5) Imported Borrow Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Cost = $6/CY Shoulder: Area = Approx 1.5 SF Unit Cost = (1.5 SF) x (1/27 CY/CF) x ($6/CY) x (1.27 inflation factor) = $0.42/FT 63 A~ffreeate Base Reference: Preliminary Engineer's Estimate (Kick Seanor) "Orchard Ave. from Ford St to Orr Creek", 1999 Cost = $20/Ton Height = 0.85' Width = 14.25' Weight per linear foot = (14.25 FT) x (0.85 FT) x (0.075 Ton/CF) x (1.1 - 10% cushion) = 1.0 Ton/FT Unit Cost = (1.0 Tons/FT) x ($20/Ton) x (1.24 inflation factor) = $24.80/FT 2 7) Reference: Asphalt Concrete Bid Tabulation dated 8/9/2005 for "Pavement Rehabilitation and Traffic Signal Loop Replacement" showing unit pavement cost of $ ! 06/Ton when pavement raw material cost Was $55/Ton. Current raw material cost is $80.75/Ton and an estimated bid price is (80.75) x (! 06/55) = $156/Ton Width = 14.25' Height =.0.45' Weight per linear foot = (14.25 FT) x (0.45 FT) x (0.075 Ton/CF) x (1.05 - 5% cushion) = 0.505 Tons per linear foot Roadway Unit Cost = (0.505 Tons/FT) x ($156/Ton) --$78.78/FT 8) Place Traffic Stripes Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Unit Cost = ($1/FT) x (1.27 inflation factor) = $1.27/FT 9) Sidewalk Construction Reference: Bid Tabulation "2002 STIP Construction of Sidewalk along North State Street" Bid = $6.50/SF Unit Cost adjusted for inflation = $6.50 x 1.08 x (1.20 - increase in concrete costs) = $8.42/SF Sidewalk width = 5' Unit Cost = ($8.42/SF) x 5 FT = $42.10/FT 10) Concrete Curb and Gutter Reference: Bid Tabulation "2002 STIP Construction of Sidewalk along North State Street" Bid = $3O/LF Unit Cost adjusted for inflation = $30.00 x 1.08 x (1.20 - increase in concrete costs) = $38.88/LF Total Cost per Linear Foot: Orchard Ave South of Bridge (with existing pavement) = 12.94 + 6.12 + 8.46 + 32.49 + 0.42 + 24.80 + 78.78 + 1.27 + 42.10 + 38.88 = $246.26/FT Demolition & Soundwall Preliminary Engineer's Estimate Extension of Orchard Ave From Ford St. to Brush St. Notes: Some costs are based on engineer's estimates of costs for the Gobbi St. Class 2 Bike Lane and the STIP Construction of Sidewalk along North State Street in 2003. The inflation indexes are based on the following calcUlations: ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) May, 2006 = 8445.69 ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) December, 2003 = 7788.80 Inflation factor for 2003 estimates = 8445.69/7788.80 = 1.08 ROAD DEMOLITION Pavement Area North of Ford St. = 20' x 380' = 7600 SF = 844 SY Sidewalk Area North of Ford St. = 5' x 380' = 1900 SF Length Curb & Gutter North of Ford St. = 380' Pavement Area South of Ford St. = 300' x 50' = 15,000 SF = 1667 SY Sidewalk Area South of Ford St. = 300' x 5' = 1500 SF Length Curb & Gutter South of Ford St. = 300' 1) Pavement Removal Reference: Bid Tabulation "Gobbi Street Class 2 Bike Lane from Orchard Avenue to Babcock Lane" July, 2003 Bid = $5.00/SY Option 1: Area of Pavement to demolish = 844 SY Option 2: Area of Pavement to demolish = 844 SY + 1667 SY = 2511 SY Option 1 Total cost = ($5.00/SY) x (844 SY) x (1.08 inflation factor) = $4,558 Option 2 Total cost = ($5.00/SY) x (2511 SY) x (1.08 inflation factor) = $13,559 2) Aggregate Base Removal Reference: Bid Tabulation "Gobbi Street Class 2 Bike Lane from Orchard Avenue to Babcock Lane" July, 2003 Bid = $23/CY Removal of aggregate base should be approximately the cost of Roadway Excavation in Bid Tabulation above. Option 1: Area = 844 SY Height = 1 FT = 0.33 YD Option 1: Total Cost = (844 SY) x (0.33 YD) x ($23/CY) x (1.08 inflation factor) = $6,918 Option 2: Area = 2511 SY Height = 1 FT = 0.33 YD Option 2: Total Cost = (2511 SY) x (0.33 YD) x ($23/CY) x (1.08 inflation factor) = $20,583 3) Sidewalk Removal Reference: Bid Tabulation "2002 STIP Construction of Sidewalk along North State Street" July, 2003 Bid = $10/SF Option 1: Area= 1900 SF Option 1: Total Cost = (1900 SF) x ($10/SF) x (1.08 inflation factor) = $20,520 Option 2: Area = 1900 + 1500 = 3400 SF Option 2: Total Cost = (3400 SF) x ($10/SF) x (1.08 inflation factor) = $36,720 4) Curb & Gutter Removal Reference: Bid Tabulation "2002 STIP Construction of Sidewalk along North State Street" July, 2003 Bid = $15/LF Option 1: Length = 380 LF Option 1: Total Cost = (380 LF) x ($15/SF) x (1.08 inflation factor) = $6,156 Option 2: Length = 300 + 380 = 680 LF Option 2: Total Cost = (680 LF) x ($15/LF) x (1.08 inflation factor) = $11,016 4) Total Demolition Costs Total = Pavement Removal + Aggregate Base Removal + Sidewalk Removal + Curb & Gutter Removal Option 1 Total = $4,558 + $6,918 + $20,520+ $6,156 = $38,152 Option2 Total= $13,559 + $20,583 + $36,720 + $11,016 =$81,878 SOUND WALL Reference: State of California, Dept. of Transportation, 2003 Contract Cost Data, 2004 Contract Cost Data, 2005 Contract Cost Data Average cost/SF from Caltrans Cost Data listed above is approximately $15/SF Block wall: Height = 8', Length = 420' Area = 8 x 420 = 3360 SF Total Cost = (3360 SF) x ($15/SF) = $50,400 Costs For Pricing New County Roadway (All New Roadway North of Bridge) Preliminary Engineer's Estimate Extension of Orchard Ave From Ford St. to Brush St. Costs Calculated For New Roadway on a Per Foot Basis, including 1) Surveying, 2) Compaction Testing, 3) Clearing & Grubbing, 4) Roadway excavation, 5) Roadway Fill, 6) Aggregate Base, 7) Asphalt Concrete, 8) Placing Traffic Stripes Reference: Winzler & Kelley Profile Sheet, C-l, 2002-31, "Orchard Avenue Bridge and Related Street Improvements" Cross Section D (Orchard Avenue Typical Section STA 15+44.38 EB To STA 18+91.43) ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) May, 2006 = 8445.69 ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) Dec., 1999 = 6816.70 ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) Dec., 1996 = 6629.61 Ratio = inflation factor for 1999 estimates = 8445.69/6816.70 = 1.24 Ratio = inflation factor for 1996 estimates = 8445.69/6629.61 = 1.27 1) Surveying: Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Length = 2050 Feet, Cost = $20,898 gives a unit cost of $10.19/FT Unit Cost = ($10.19/FT) x (1.27 -inflation factor) = $12.94/FT 2) Compaction Testing Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Length = 2050 Feet, Cost = $9875 gives a unit cost of $4.82/FT Unit Cost (adjusted for inflation) = $4.82 x 1.27 = $6.12/FT 3) Clearing & Grubbing Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Length = 2050 Feet, Cost = $13650 gives a unit cost of $6.66/FT Unit Cost (adjusted for inflation) = $6.66 x 1.27 = $8.46/FT 4) Roadway Excavation Reference: Preliminary Engineer's Estimate (Rick Seanor) "Orchard Ave. from Ford St to Orr Creek", 1999 Cost = $25/CY Cross-sectional area of each ditch (approximated from drawing) = (16 SF) Unit Cost = 2 x (16 SF) x (1/27 CY/CF) x ($25/CY) x (1.24 inflation factor) = $36.74/FT 5) Imported Borrow Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Cost = $6/CY Unit Cost = (9 SF) x (1/27 CY/CF) x ($6/CY) x (1.27 inflation factor) = $2.54/FT 6) A~gregate Base Reference: Preliminary Engineer's Estimate (Rick Seanor) "Orchard Ave. from Ford St to Orr Creek", 1999 Cost = $20/Ton Width = 24' Height = 0.85' Weight per linear foot = (24 FT) x (0.85 FT) x (0.075 Ton/CF) x (1.1 - 10% cushion) = 1.683 Tons per linear foot Roadway Unit Cost = (1.683 Tons/FT) x ($20/Ton) x (1.24 inflation factor) = $41.74/FT 7) Asphalt Concrete Reference: Bid Tabulation dated 8/9/2005 for "Pavement Rehabilitation and Traffic Signal Loop Replacement" showing unit pavement cost of $106/Ton when pavement raw material cost was $55/Ton. Current raw material cost is $80.75/Ton and an estimated bid price is (80.75) x (106/55) = $156/Ton Width = 24' Height = 0.45' Weight per linear foot = (24 FT) x (0.45 FT) x (0.075 Ton/CF) x (1.05 - 5% cushion) = 0.8505 Tons per linear foot Roadway Unit Cost = (0.8505 Tons/FT) x ($156/Ton) = $132.68/FT 2 8) Place Traffic Stripes Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Unit Cost = ($1/FT) x (1.27 inflation factor) = $1.27/FT Total Cost per Linear Foot: New County Roadway = 12.94 + 6.12 + 8.46 + 36.74 + 2.54 + 41.74 + 132.68 + 1.27 = = $242.49/FT Costs For Pricing New City Roadway Without Existing Pavement (All New Roadway Within City except Portion of Orchard with One Lane Paved) Preliminary Engineer's Estimate Extension of Orchard Ave From Ford St. to Brush St. Reference: Winzler & Kelley Prof'fle Sheet, C-1, 2002-31, "Orchard Avenue Bridge and Related Street Improvements, Cross Section B (Orchard Avenue Typical Section STA 10+19 To STA 12+40). Note: For these sections of road the excavation and Aggregate Base (AB) and Asphalt Concrete (AC) would extend the full width of the street. Notes: Costs Calculated For New Roadway on a Per Foot Basis, including 1) Surveying, 2) Compaction Testing, 3) Clearing & Grubbing, 4) Roadway excavation, 5) Roadway Fill, 6) Aggregate Base, 7) Asphalt Concrete, 8) Placing Traffic Stripes, 9) Sidewalk, and 10) Concrete curb and gutter B) Cost of bridge and extra roadway costs of bridge approaches are not included in these calculations because those costs would be the same in all three options under consideration. c) Some costs are based on engineer's estimates of costs for Airport Blvd. extensions made in 1996 and 1999 as well as the Gobbi St. Class 2 Bike Lane in 2003. The inflation indexes are based on the following calculationS: ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) May, 2006 = 8445.69 ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) Dec., 2003 = 7788.80 ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) Dec., 1999 = 6816.70 ENR Cost Index, CCI (San Francisco) Dec., 1996 = 6629.61 Inflation factor for 2003 estimates = 8445.69/7788.80 = 1.08 Inflation factor for 1999 estimates = 8445.69/6816.70 = 1.24 Inflation factor for 1996 estimates = 8445.69/6629.61 = 1.27 1) Surveying Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Length = 2050 Feet, Cost = $20,898 gives a unit cost of $10.19/FT Unit Cost = ($10.19/FT) x (1.27 - inflation factor) = $12.94/FT 2) Compaction Testing Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Length = 2050 Feet, Cost = $9875 gives a unit cost of $4.82/FT Unit Cost (adjusted for inflation) = $4.82 x 1.27 = $6.12/FT 3) Clearine & Grubbing Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Length = 2050 Feet, Cost = $13650 gives a unit cost of $6.66/FT Unit Cost (adjusted for inflation) = $6.66 x 1.27 = $8.46/FT 4) Roadway Excavation Reference: Preliminary Engineer's Estimate (Rick Seanor) "Orchard Ave. from Ford St to Orr Creek", 1999 Cost = $25/CY Lane: Width= 39.25' Height= 1.3' Area= 39.25 x 1.3 = 51.0 SF Shoulder: Width = 6" Height = 1.3' Area = 7.8 SF Ditch: Area = approx 2 SF Total Area = 51.0 + 7.8 + 2 = 60.8 SF Unit Cost = (60.8 SF) x (1/27 CY/CF) x ($25/CY) x (1.24 inflation factor) = $69.81/FT 5) Imported Borrow Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Cost = $6/CY Shoulder: Area = Approx 1.5 SF Unit Cost = (1.5 SF) x (1/27 CY/CF) x ($6/CY) x (1.27 inflation factor) = $0.42/FT 6) A~gregate Base Reference: Preliminary Engineer's Estimate (Rick Seanor) "Orchard Ave. from Ford St to Orr Creek", 1999 Cost = $20/Ton Height = 0.85' Width = 39.25' Weight per linear foot = (39.25 FT) x (0.85 FT) x (0.075 Ton/CF) x (1.1 - 10% cushion) = 2.75 Tort/FT Unit Cost = (2.75 Tons/FT) x ($20/Ton) x (1.24 inflation factor) = $68.20/FT 2 7) Asphalt Concrete Reference: Bid Tabulation dated 8/9/2005 for "Pavement Rehabilitation and Traffic Signal Loop Replacement" showing unit pavement cost of $106/Ton when'pavement raw material cost was $55/Ton. Current raw material cost is $80.75/Ton and an estimated bid price is (80.75) x (106/55) = $156/Ton Width = 39.25' Height = 0.45' Weight per linear foot = (39.25 FT) x (0.45 FT) x (0.075 Ton/CF) x (1.05 5% cushion) = 1.39 Tons per linear foot Roadway Unit Cost = (1.39 Tons/FT) x ($156/Ton) = $216.84/FT 8) Place Traffic Stripes Reference: Airport Park Blvd Extension (1996 Estimate) Unit Cost = ($1/FT) x (1.27 inflation factor) = $1.27/FT 9) Sidewalk Construction Bid Tabulation "2002 STIP Construction of Sidewalk along North State Street" Bid = $6.50/SF Unit Cost adjusted for inflation = $6.50 x 1.08 x (1.20 - increase in concrete costs) = $8.42/SF Sidewalk width = 5' Unit Cost = ($8.42/SF) x 5 FT = $42.10/FT 10) Concrete Curb and Gutter Reference: Bid Tabulation "2002 STP Construction of Sidewalk along North State Street" Bid = $30/LF Unit Cost adjusted for inflation = $30.00 x 1.08 x (1.20 - increase in concrete costs) = $38.88/LF Total Cost per Linear Foot: Orchard Ave South of Bridge (with existing pavement) = 12.94 + 6.12 + 8.46 + 69.81 + 0.42 + 68.20 + 216.84 + 1.27 + 42.10 + 38.88 = $465.04fFT 3 ,,_~ oia Affachment # ./~t~nrney ..... 01~ Co,,d~o~c S~tarc, S~it.e O00 Santa Rosa, cali[ornia 95404 70~.526.5894. [~x 70~.526.5895 July 7, 2006 via fax 46 3-6204 Charley Stump Director, Planning and Community Development City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Drive Ukiah CA 95482 RE: Orc¢Tard Avenue Extension/Orr Creek Bridge Alternative Route Analysis Dear Charley: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above-referenced environmeqtal-document. In addition, on behalf of Bill Randolph, his family, and the Ford S':reet/Sidnie Court Neighborhood Committee, allow me to express appreciaticn for the City's commitment to the settlement of the Ford Street/Sidnie Court Neig~bo/l)ood Committee v. City of Ukiah litigation, which culminated in [his alternative route analysis. The Committee encourages the acceptance of the alternative route, not )nly as a legal necessity, but in memory of Bill Randolph and his life-long ~edication ::o the Ukiah community. CEQ.A mandates that a proposed project with significant unavoidable rnpacts may not be approved if there are feasible and environmentally-superior ;,Itern. atives which meet project objectives "to some degree.''~ The alternative ~:rossmg ovgr Orr Creek represents a biologically superior project compared to 13e original route? The alternative alignments would not increase traffic CE(;)J~ Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs.), § 15126, subd. (d)(1). Analysis, pp. 3-4. Letter lo (;harley Stump July 7, 2006 Page 2 impacts? With respect to noise, the alternative would not require several noise mitigation measures imposed for the original route? In s.~m, the alternative route analysis concludes that the alternative route is feasible, would meet most of.the project objectives, and would reduce two potentially significant impacts? Therefore, the original project should not be approved. Thank yoLi for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Rose IV6,Zoia Client David Rapport Frank Zotter Analysis, pp. 5-6. Aha ysis, pp. 6-7. An¢lysis, Summary Of Findings & p. 8. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. 10a DATE: July 19, 2006 SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO EFFICIENCY SERVICES GROUP, LLC FOR PUBLIC BENEFITS PROGRAM ASSESSMENT, REVISION, TURN-KEY ADMINISTRATION AND REPORTING SUMMARY: On May 3, 2006 the City Council authorized staff to submit a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Professional Services regarding the City of Ukiah Public Benefits Program (PBP). The RFP (see Attachment 1) includes PBP assessment, revision, administration and reporting on a 'turn-key' basis as the City does not currently employ a PBP staff position. The Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) PBP Committee recommended the following three consultants for this RFP: · Efficiency Services Group, LLC (ESG) · Optimized Energy and Facilities Consulting, Inc. (OEFC) · Utility Consulting (UC) OEFC indicated they were not able to provide the required services via an email dated June 17, 2006. ESG and UC responded with proposals (see Attachments 2 and 3 respectively). Both proposals detail the firms' experience as well as specific services to be provided. Staff investigated references and evaluated (both on a staff level and committee level) the services offered by both firms. Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve award of Request for Proposal for the City of Ukiah Public Benefits Program Assessment, Revision, Development, Turn-key Administration and Reporting to Efficiency Services Group, LLC ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Reject proposals and redirect staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: NA Elizabeth Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Elizabeth Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Public Benefits Program Request for Proposal 2. ESG Proposal 3. UC Proposal Candace Horsley, City Man~er RECOMMENDATION: After careful review, contacting references, and meeting with NCPA PBP Committee members, staff recommends awarding the PBP contract to ESG. ESG's staff has a combined experience of 80 years in the electric utility industry in various aspects of energy efficiency including renewable energy programs and energy audits since the late 1970s. They have also been involved with Redding Electric's Earth Advantage green building program. The references contacted for ESG indicated very high satisfaction with every aspect of services provided. Small California electric municipalities without PBP staff have been especially pleased with the 'turn-key' aspect of ESG's performance and have indicated customer satisfaction as well. ESG plans to provide a "manned" toll free customer service PBP phone number which will greatly assist with customer needs and satisfaction. ESG's staff has been working closely with NCPA to remain current with the State of California's changing political arena which affects the mandatory reporting requirements for the use of Public Benefit Funds. Staff is confident ESG will keep the City of Ukiah compliant with reporting requirements. Cost Costs associated with the RFP are in the following three parts: 1. Program development and marketing ($5,000) Program administration, on-site services and reporting ($36,000 annually plus $400/trip as required). This would include 12 days on-site with approximately 32 residential audits, 4 commercial audits and 2 industrial audits. o Additional on-site audit services ($750/day plus travel expenses). It should also be noted that ESG will be combining trips to the California clients they service, and sharing costs among other clients when possible, to minimize travel expenses. Staff is confident that ESG's successful track record and experience will provide the City of Ukiah with quality PBP and keep our City compliant with mandatory California reporting requirements. Therefore, staff recommends awarding the PBP contract to Efficiency Services Group, LLC to utilize their staff as the City of Ukiah Public Benefits Program Department. If awarded the contract, ESG has informed staff they will be presenting the revised PBP to the City Council for approval. ESG will be in attendance at this City Council meeting to answer any questions. After the first year of service, staff anticipates revisiting ESG's performance and reporting back to Council. Funds were budgeted in Fiscal Year 2006-07 and are available in Acct 806.3765.250.007. Item No. lOa Attachment 1 City of Ukiah Public Utilities Department, Electric Division Request for Proposals Public Benefits Program Assessment, Revision, Turnkey Administration and Reporting June 7, 2006 I. Description of Work The City of Ukiah (City) will be reviewing and revising its energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, along with low income and senior assistance programs, in order to offer its citizens a more comprehensive package of services and to more completely track and account for expenditures under the Public Benefits Programs (PBP) established for publicly owned electric utilities by Public Utilities Code Section 385. The City also desires these funds to be used in a way that helps to reduce the peak demand requirements of its electric utility. II. Background In September of 1996, California signed into law Assembly Bill 1890, enacting Public Utilities Code Section 385 which requires publicly owned electric utilities in California to collect certain revenue in their billings in order to support, among other things, energy efficiency programs and projects for their customers. The City has been collecting and spending this revenue with appropriate programs and projects and now wishes to enhance its program offerings and establish clearer accounting practices to track and record these activities. III. Scope of Services The City of Ukiah seeks a consultant to assist the City to develop and then to operate the City's PBP on a turnkey basis. The services are divided into the following six components: 1. Program Development assistance including Current Program Evaluation-technical assessment and customer feedback New specification development Production of new program forms Defining appropriate program delivery strategies Setting up program data collection and reporting systems Training, if required, for staff and vendors 2. Program marketing assistance Market assessment Marketing materials $. Responding to all customer activities including: All calls (requires a call center to handle questions, information requests, etc), Monday through Friday 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (Pacific Time) Reviewing/Processing all rebate applications Developing and responding to interest of appropriate vendors 4. Providing all required field work Responses to high-bills complaints Residential energy audits Commercial energy audits Industrial energy audits Promotion of special events 5. Providing Ukiah staff monthly activity reports Customer/vendor calls Field work performed (audits/inspections) Rebates processed Energy savings generated Incentive dollars spent Budget tracking 6. NCPA/CMUA reporting Entering appropriate data into reporting tool developed jointly by the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) and the California Municipal Utility Association (CMUA) Staying current with developments regarding reporting tool Keeping the City in compliance with California reporting requirements IV. Proposal Requirements Proposals shall include the following: 1) Statement of Qualifications including a list of references where the full scope of similar or related work was accomplished. 2) Identification of the personnel proposed on this project including a brief resume of their qualifications and experience on similar projects. 3) Clear and comprehensive statements regarding the proposed delivery of all services. 4) A detailed fee proposal broken down by the six components listed above in the Scope of Services as follows: 1) a one-time lump sum fee for components one and two; and 2) a lump sum fee for one year to administer the City's PBP as outlined in components two, three, four, five and six. 5) A statement certifying the bidder's ability to comply with all contract terms and conditions included in the Agreement for Professional Consulting Services substantially in the form attached as Attachment 1. 2 V. Selection Process The City will conduct the Consultant selection process and is the sole and final decision-maker regarding the selection. The City reserves the right to reject any or all responses. The City also reserves the right to request clarification or additional information from individual respondents and to investigate the financial capability, reputation, integrity, skill, business experience and quality of performance under similar operations of each respondent. VI. Selection Criteria and Right of iRefusal The City will select the consultant based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for the types of services to be performed and at fair and reasonable prices to the City. In order to make the selection on this basis the City will consider each Consultant's proposed Scope of Work, Statement of Qualifications and Ability to Comply with Agreement to Provide Consulting Services Terms and Conditions. The City reserves the right to base the award of the RFP on any of the specified components of the Work Scope and/or combination thereof. The City reserves the right select more than one Consultant to perform different portions of the Scope of Services. The City also reserves the right to negotiate specific requirements and fees using the RFP and the Consultant's proposal as a basis. Finally, the City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals without qualifications. VII. Licensing Each Consultant submitting a proposal must include evidence in its response to the RFP substantiating that it is properly licensed to perform all services within the proposed Scope of Work. After award of the RFP, but before final signing of the Agreement for Professional Consulting Services, the Consultant shall obtain a City Business License. VIII. Timeline Key dates are as follows: June 7, 2006 RFP issued June 22, 2006 Proposals must be received at the Address shown in Section X June 26, 2006 Tentative Notice of Award (pending City Council Approval) July 5, 2006 City Council Meeting July 6, 2006 Award of Contract (pending City Council Approval) IX. Contact Information Xe XI. Questions concerning the RFP can be directed to: Elizabeth Kirkley Electric Distribution Engineer City of Ukiah 411 W. Clay Street 707-463-6298 lizk~cityofukiah.com Proposal Submittal Instructions Bidders are to submit 2 copies of their proposal on or before 2:00 PM, June 22, 2006 tO: Office of the Deputy City Clerk 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Mark Outside of Sealed Document: City Clerk-Public Benefits Program, Request for Professional Consulting Services, 2:00 PM, June 22, 2006 It will be the sole responsibility of the bidders to have their bids delivered to the City before the closing hour and date. Late bids will not be considered and will be returned unopened to the sender. All sealed bids will be opened after 2:00 PM, June 22, 2006. Attachment The following is part of the Request for Proposal: Attachment 1: City of Ukiah, Agreement for Professional Consulting Services, substantially in the form attached. 4 EFFICIENCY Group A Proposal to ATTACHM~"~rr'_ ,~ June 15,2006 City of Ukiah For services to provide Public Benefits Program Assessment, Revision, Development, Turnkey Administration and Reporting Efficiency Services Group, LLC (ESG) is pleased to provide the following proposal to the City of Ukiah (Ukiah) for the assessment, revision and development of their energy-efficiency programs. ESG will also provide on-going turnkey administration and reporting for Ukiah's programs and track and account for program expenditures under the Public Benefits Programs (PBP) established for publicly owned utilities under Public Utilities Code Section 385. ESG and its support staff have over 80 years of combined experience designing and implementing top quality energy efficiency and renewable energy programs and services. In the last few years ESG has used those skills and experience to assist utilities throughout California and the Pacific Northwest. ESG will provide the services detailed in this proposal to existing Ukiah customers. Any services or programs developed for new construction in Ukiah will be developed and priced outside this offer. Statement of Qualifications: See the attached Statement of Qualifications. ESG Staff: The following ESG staff will provide the services to Ukiah included in this proposal: Jim Brands Jim has over 26 years of electric utility experience in marketing, sales, implementation and management of energy-efficiency programs (residential and commercial) in the western United States. He has a broad knowledge of the Western US energy picture gained by working for an Oregon municipal utility for 14 years, two investor-owned utilities in the Northwest (6 years) and the Northwest Public Power Association for 6 years. Jim has first-hand experience in the operation of public utility energy efficiency programs, including energy auditing on- site at customer locations. Mark Gosvener Mark has over 24 years of experience in the development, implementation and operation/management of resource efficiency programs in the residential and commercial market sectors for Portland General Electric and other utilities and agencies on the West Coast. Mark has developed and managed a wide array of programs promoting most residential technologies; notably Retrofit Weatherization (including Iow income markets), Water Heaters, Multifamily Direct Install, Water Efficiency, Energy Expert Hotlines and Heat Pump programs. He is well versed in residential energy efficiency and is an expert in developing and managing trade ally networks. Ted Haskell Ted has 29 years of experience in technical support and training of contractors, technicians, utility personnel, building designers, and the general public in energy efficiency, with an emphasis on residential technologies. He also has experience with energy auditing, including small and mid-size commercial buildings. He has worked with Washington State University Cooperative Extension Service, Oregon State University Extension Service, and Portland General Electric. Ted has been certified as an Instructor in Heat Pump Equipment Selection and Duct Design by Air Conditioning Contractors of America, Certified Duct Doctor by Florida Solar Energy Center, and Energy Rater by Energy Rated Homes of Oregon. Ted has trained energy auditors and utility staff for Bonneville Power Administration certification and has a thorough working knowledge of a variety of energy modeling computer tools. ESG Office Support Staff and Contract Help ESG's office coordinator will answer the toll-free customer hotline, address program inquiries from Ukiah customers, process rebate requests, and address requests for other offers or services available under Ukiah's programs. ESG maintains a network of contractors that specialize in various fields within the energy efficiency and renewable energy industry. If the need arises, ESG may utilize contractor assistance to meet specific needs of Ukiah customers. Per section 4.3 of Ukiah's Agreement for Professional Consulting Services, ESG will notify Ukiah of our desire to utilize contractor assistance prior to the commencement of work. ESG will provide qualifications and credentials of contractors for Ukiah's review, and will not begin work without Ukiah's written authorization. Proposed Services: ESG will provide the following services to Ukiah in order to establish energy- efficiency programs designed to save energy, reduce peak, provide excellent customer value, and meet the tracking and reporting requirements of the Public Benefits Programs (PBP) established for publicly owned utilities under Public Utilities Code Section 385. 1. Program development a) Provide a market assessment of Ukiah's customer base to determine which customer segments offer the greatest potential for energy savings and demand reduction. We will also review which programs Ukiah has offered in the past, including customer participation levels, in order to determine market saturation and greatest potential for energy savings. This information will be used to create and target offers to the market segments which will best meet Ukiah's objectives. b) Develop/design residential and commercial offers which are targeted for specific customer segments within Ukiah's service territory. c) Develop appropriate equipment and, if necessary, installation specifications for all energy efficiency equipment and measures promoted in Ukiah's programs. d) Development of all forms necessary for Ukiah customers to apply for participation in Ukiah's programs. e) Development of a data collection and reporting system. f) Development of report formats to meet Ukiah's reporting needs, as well as the reporting requirements of the State of California. g) Track and report monthly all program activity to Ukiah. h) Meet with Ukiah staff to present new programs, and provide training to staff on how to direct customers to participate in the programs. 2. Anticipated Programs Offerings ESG anticipates Ukiah's Programs may include, but not be limited to: a) Appliance and Lighting Rebates · Water heaters · Energy Star Refrigerators · Energy Star Clothes Washer · Energy Star Dishwashers · Energy Star Compact Fluorescent lights · Energy Star Portable Air Conditioners b) Residential Weatherization · Ceiling, Floor, Wall, Duct Insulation Rebates · Replacement windows, Window Shade/Tint/Film Treatments · Energy Audits · Inspections c) Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning · High efficiency Central Air Conditioning · High efficiency Heat Pumps d) Commercial/Industrial Lighting Upgrades e) Commercial/Industrial Heating & Cooling Equipment Upgrades 3. Marketing a) ESG will discuss with Ukiah effective ways to market their programs to various market segments. b) ESG will provide basic information sheets describing program offers that can be handed out or mailed to Ukiah customers. The production of commercial quality brochures is not included in this proposal. c) Provide program information that can be used by Ukiah to announce and promote the start-up of these programs. d) Attend a contractor and vendor program launch meeting to answer contractor/vendor questions regarding Ukiah's programs, and encourage contractor/vendor participation and promotion of programs to Ukiah's customers. 4. Responding to Ukiah Customers a) Provide a toll-free number for Ukiah customers and vendors to call with questions about programs or general energy use. This hotline will be answered by ESG staff from 8:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday, excluding nationally recognized holidays. b) Handle all aspects of program activity, scheduling, customer interaction and rebate and paperwork processing as directed by Ukiah. c) ESG is flexible in how we will represent ourselves to Ukiah's customers and vendors. We suggest representing ourselves as Ukiah's Energy Efficiency Department. Program collateral and forms, as well as non-conformance and other customer communications can be generated and mailed using Ukiah stationery. 5. Providing Required Field Work Provide on-site energy auditing/inspection services and/or oversight, as mutually agreed upon, for residential, commercial and industrial customers.* ESG staff is routinely in California, providing field and on-site services to other California utility clients and, in an effort to reduce costs, will coordinate Ukiah field work with these trips unless specifically requested otherwise. *Please note that some technical services provided to large commercial and industrial customers may require technical specialists whose costs are not included in this proposal. This is addressed in the Pricing section. Reporting ESG will provide monthly reports to Ukiah to include: a) b) c) Customer and vendor call activity Field work performed Rebates processed. ESG assumes that Ukiah will issue rebate checks to customers. ESG will provide Ukiah with a monthly summary report of all customers who qualified for rebates. Ukiah staff may then use this report to issue rebate checks to customers. d) Estimated energy saved and demand reduction. ESG will use the NCPA default assumptions to estimate demand reduction. e) Incentive dollars spent, as well as dollars spent on program administration fees to ESG. These energy and dollar categories will be reported on a monthly, year-to-date and program-to-date basis. f) Actual program expenditures can be reported against program budget to assure that programs are operated within budget. NCPA/CMUA Reporting ESG will enter Ukiah's appropriate program activity into the reporting tool for NCPA/CMUA. ESG will remain current on California reporting requirements, as well as any changes to the use of the reporting software. ESG will keep Ukiah's Energy Efficiency programs in compliance with California state requirements. Pricing: To complete the tasks associated with program development and marketing assistance (Items 1 & 2 under "Proposed Services"), ESG will charge $5,000. To administer the program, provide on-site services to residential and small to mid- sized commercial customers and report on program activity (Items 3-6), ESG will charge $36,000 per year. This fee includes 12 days of field work in Ukiah at Ukiah customer sites and all of the office/support services provided by the ESG office staff. Additional days of field work in Ukiah (beyond 12 per year) would be charged at a daily rate of $750 per day. Travel and overnight costs will be in addition to the costs listed above and are expected to be approximately $400 per trip. For some customers (large commercial and industrial) specialized, technical services may be required to address Ukiah's and/or the customers needs. Fees for these services will be in addition to the fees listed above, and will require pre- approval by Ukiah staff and be priced at a mutually agreed upon hourly rate. Billin_cl ESG will invoice Ukiah 50% of the initial set-up charge ($2,500) upon the signing of the agreement. The remaining 50% will be charged following the completion and acceptance by Ukiah of all tasks detailed in Items 1 & 2. ESG will bill Ukiah $3,000 at the beginning of each month for implementation and administration services (and any associated travel costs) delivered during the previous month. Fees for additional specialized, technical services, if used, would be billed at that time as well. Ability to Comply With Ukiah Terms & Conditions: ESG has reviewed Ukiah's Agreement for Professional Consulting Services and are able to comply with all contract terms and conditions. The following are clarifications and/or items for discussion: 1) Section 4.1 Basis for Compensation - The contract language specifies invoicing based on a time and materials basis, standard hourly rates, and various classifications of ESG personnel. The fee structure, described above, for ESG services under this proposal are not based on a time and materials basis (common for purely consulting services). 2) Section 6.1.B.3 Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability- All services provided to ESG clients are delivered by owners of the Company or independent contractors. Since ESG does not currently maintain a payroll, there is no requirement for Worker's Comp. 3) Section 6.1 .B.4 Professional Liability Coverage - ESG does not currently maintain Professional Liability coverage. The consulting services ESG provides does not result in the liability exposure that architects or home appraisers would incur. Because of this, ESG's other clients have waived the need for Professional Liability insurance, and we would request the same consideration from Ukiah. If Ukiah determines that Professional Liability is required, ESG will retain Professional Liability coverage in the amount specified in the contract. 4) If selected, ESG will secure a Ukiah City Business License. We have attached a printout from the California Secretary of State web site listing ESG as an active, registered company in good standing. We have also attached a copy of our Certificate of Liability Insurance so Ukiah can review our present coverage and limits. If selected, ESG can provide Ukiah with a Certificate of Insurance listing Ukiah as additionally insured. If you have any questions regarding contract terms and conditions, insurance, etc, ESG is available to discuss them with you. Summary ESG appreciates the opportunity to respond to this RFP, and appreciates Ukiah's consideration. We are confident that we would be a strong addition to Ukiah's team, and look forward to the opportunity to helping you develop a great portfolio of energy-efficiency offers for your customers. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact Mark Gosvener at 503-658-4239, or 503-869-5131 (cell). EFFICIENCY Group City of Ukiah Attn: Elizabeth Kirkley 411 W. Clay St. Ukiah, CA 95482 July 10, 2006 Dear Ms. Kirkley, Per your July 7 e-mail request for further clarification, we offer the following answers to your questions: "An itemization of the Public Benefit Programs you will be setting up and administering." Efficiency Service Group is staffed and prepared to operate, on a turnkey basis, all PBP work for the City of Ukiah (City) including energy efficiency, renewable energy programs, Iow income and senior assistance programs. In order to maximize the value provided to Ukiah citizens from PBP dollars, we will first discuss with City staff their business and community objectives. From there we will complete a market assessment, discuss the results with the City of Ukiah and assemble a definitive list of the Public Benefit Programs we would be developing and implementing. In section 1 .a of our proposal under "Proposed Services", we indicated the first step of the services we provide will be a market assessment. Once this is accomplished, a portfolio of offers will be assembled that will best meet the City's objectives. The following provides a more detailed outline regarding our approach to this market assessment: In the City's RFP, it was mentioned that the City will be reviewing their energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, along with Iow income and senior assistance programs, with a goal of offering a more comprehensive package of services to their customers, and tracking and accounting for these programs under the Public Benefits Programs (PBP) established in the Public Utilities Code Section 385. To finalize a list of programs and services to be offered by the City, the following steps need to be taken: 1. Meet with the City to determine the goals and objectives the City wishes to accomplish with their PBP programs and services. More specifically, what are the City's "system/business" needs (energy savings, load reduction, load growth/retention, importance of cost-effectiveness, etc), and what are the City's "customer" goals/objectives (serving lower-income customers and seniors, community relations, political realities, etc.)? 2. Review the City's current offers and evaluate their effectiveness toward meeting the goals and objectives identified in step 1. If there are gaps or under-served markets, modify existing offers or develop new offers to assure that each system and customer goal is addressed with effective offers. Perform a budget analysis and allocate the budget across the various offers in a way that meets the City's goals and objectives. It may be necessary to prioritize and weight the goals and objectives identified in step 1 if the budget is too constrained to provide robust offers in all customer segments. For example, if load reduction is a high priority, we would assure that the budget accommodates photovoltaic, high-efficiency A/C, commercial lighting, and/or other offers that reduce peak. After this process has been completed, the result will be a list of offers and services that best meets the City's system/customer goals and objectives, within a given budget, while addressing the requirements of AB 1890. The list of offers may include, but not be limited to residential appliances, insulation and window treatments, residential and commercial high efficiency A/C and heat pumps, solar photovoltaic, commercial lighting, and large commercial and industrial projects. In addition, incentives may be structured differently among various market segments in order to overcome market barriers and meet the City's objectives (Iow-income and seniors, for example). Number of energy audits included in proposal and cost for additional audits; each by category of residential, commercial & industrial. We estimate that we can provide the following number of audits in a given day: Residential 4 or; Commercial 2 or; Industrial 1 It is important to note that the estimates include time in the field as well as ESG's time to write up reports and respond to customer questions. The numbers above should be used as guidelines. For example, a very large home may take longer to audit than a very small commercial establishment. Another consideration is the comprehensiveness of the audit the City wishes ESG to perform. The above estimates are assuming that ESG will provide "scoping audits". A scoping audit consists of an on-site visit where we identify the opportunities for energy saving measures, a description of any incentives offered by the City, estimated energy savings (if there are deemed savings available), and recommended next steps for the customers to take. The pricing in our initial proposal assumes twelve days of field work on customer locations in Ukiah. As mentioned in our initial proposal, for some customers (large commercial and industrial) specialized, technical services may be required to address Ukiah's and/or the customer's needs. Fees for these services would be in addition to the fees listed in our initial proposal, and will require pre-approval by Ukiah staff and be priced at a mutually agreed upon hourly rate. If the City requested that ESG perform additional days of field work in Ukiah (field day 13 and beyond), each day would be charged at a rate of $750 per day. Travel and overnight costs will be in addition to the costs listed above and are expected to be approximately $400 per trip. ESG will attempt to keep travel and overnight costs as Iow as possible by combining trips to Ukiah with other California clients, and sharing costs among other clients when possible. Will the toll free customer inquiry phone number be manned or set up as a recording with ca/Is being returned? ESG maintains a toll-free hotline that rings in our main office, and is answered live by our Office Coordinator Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 5:00 pm, excluding nationally recognized holidays. There are times, during staff meetings or when our Office Coordinator is helping another customer, when a customer calling the hotline is directed to voice mail. When this happens, calls are returned promptly. However, it is ESG's goal that customers reach a live person when calling the hotline. Bi/ling & payment terms with the City of Ukiah. Development and Implementation - ESG will invoice Ukiah 50% of the initial set-up charge ($2,500) upon the signing of the agreement. The remaining 50% will be charged following the completion and acceptance by Ukiah of all tasks detailed in Items 1 & 2 of our initial proposal. On-going Program Operations and Expenses - ESG will bill Ukiah $3,000 at the beginning of each month for implementation and administration services (and any associated travel costs) delivered during the previous month. Fees for additional specialized, technical services, if used, would be billed at that time as well. For example: If the City's programs are launched October 1, ESG will send out the first invoice to the City within the first five working days of November for services rendered in October. ESG prefers that invoices be considered Net 15. If this creates a problem for the City, ESG will accept Net 30. ATTACHMENT_ City of Ukiah Elizabeth Kirkley Electric Distribution Engineer 411 W. Clay Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: Ukiah PBP Program Development RFP Dear Ms Kirkley: It gives me great pleasure to submit this proposal in response to your RFP for Public Benefits Program Development and Administration. We are confident that a solid program can be established within a year and that the City can reap perhaps unanticipated benefits of economic stimulation and business vitalization that can come with well designed and administered PBP programs. We take a hands-on approach and look forward to working with your customers, local energy efficiency and renewable energy vendors and the business community. The proposal is organized as follows: Section 1: Qualifications Statement Section 2: Personnel Section 3: Scope of Services and Fees Section 4: Compliance with Contract Terms and Conditions Appendix A: Resumes · Frank Di Massa · Charles Munat Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information on any part of our proposal. We look forward to interviewing with you. Sincerely, Frank V. Di Massa Proposal in Response to City of Ukiah RFP: Public Benefits Program Assessment, Revision, Turnkey Administration and Reporting 1. Qualifications Statement With the exception of rebate application processing, UTILITY CONSULTING provides all of the services included in this RFP to other NCPA member utilities including Roseville Electric, Alameda Power & Telecom and Redding Electric. UTILITY CONSULTING has developed rebate programs, designed and produced rebate application forms and associated marketing materials both for the web and in printed form and has developed perhaps the most sophisticated and user-friendly rebate-tracking program in use by any NCPA member utility at this time. Although we have not provided this service in the past, processing rebate applications is well within our realm of capabilities and we have included this service in our proposal. Specific information on similar work performed for other utilities is included within Section 3 Scope of Services and Fees and resumes of the two principal participants is included as Appendix A. The following is a list of relevant references: Carla Johannesen Energy Service Manager Roseville Electric 916.774.5567 Sue Evans Information Systems Supervisor Alameda Power & Telecom 510.748.3922 Dave Jackson Energy Services- Account Manager Redding Electric 550.245.7240 Utility Consulting 1 2. Personnel The work scope contained in this RFP appears to be approximately equivalent to one full- time energy manager and is perfectly suited to UTILITY CONSULTING capabilities. FRANK DI MASSA will perform the lion's share of all of the work included in the Scope of the RFP. CI4^RLES MUNAT, a long-standing associated who has worked on UTILITY CONSULTING projects for the California Independent System Operator, the CPUC, Roseville Electric and Alameda Power & Telecom will provide web and graphics services required under Tasks 1 and 2 pertaining to program development and marketing (design/produce rebate application forms, web content and any needed database work). Please see complete resumes in Attachment A. 3. Scope of Services and Fees There are two main elements to the scope of services included in this RFP: Program Development and Marketing Assistance and Program Administration. A description of services to be provided by UTILITY CONSULTING, examples of similar work and the fee for each of the two main elements are provided below. Program Development and Marketing Assistance As per the RFP - tasks will include: Current Program Evaluation: Working with Ukiah personnel, UTILITY CONSULTING will review and evaluate the effectiveness of existing public benefits programs (PBP) to include energy efficiency, renewable energy, low income and senior assistance programs. Utility Consulting will make recommendations for program modifications and/or the development of new more effective programs. Evaluation of current programs could involve, for example, a survey of customers to determine their awareness of Ukiah programs, their satisfaction and their needs and preferences for future programs. Develop New Program Specifications: UTILITY CONSULTING will develop complete program specifications including Terms and Conditions, Eligibility Requirements etcetera for each selected and approved program. In addition, UTILITY CONSULTING will work with Ukiah staff to develop coherent achievable objectives and goals for each program in the context of legislative mandates and CMUA and NCPA guidelines. Production of Program Forms: UTILITY CONSULTING will layout, design and produce rebate application forms and associated promotional and explanatory collateral material for both print and web. Utility Consulting 2 Defining Program Delivery Strategies: Working with Ukiah staff, UTILITY CONSULTING will identify the best balance of email, bill stuffers, newspaper ads, newsletters, presence at community events, TV, radio and other related strategies that lead to successful programs. Setting up Program Data Collection and Reporting Systems: UTILITY CONSULTING will use its rebate tracking database program and the E3 spreadsheet program for data collection and reporting. Training for Staff and Vendors: UTILITY CONSULTING will provide training as need for Ukiah staff and for vendors interested in participating in Ukiah public benefits programs. Examples of Relevant Experience: For the past eight years UTILITY CONSULTING has provided technical, marketing, education and outreach services associated with the development, administration and evaluation of public goods programs for NCPA member utilities and California's investor-owned utilities. Relevant project work includes: Technical and marketing assistance in all aspects of developing Roseville Electric residential and commercial energy efficiency and solar electric incentive programs and RE's Green Energy program. Primary consultant for Roseville Electric 1 O-year Demand-Side Management - Load Factor Improvement Initiative. In this qualitative and quantitative analytical process developed by UTILITY CONSULTING, the complete range of energy efficiency, distributed generation, demand responsiveness, rates and load management technologies and strategies are being screened and prioritized to identify the most cost effective demand side portfolio of public benefits programs to fit in the utility Integrated Resource Plan. Developed RE commercial, residential and solar data collection and reporting system. Provided customer service representative training for the NCPA, Redding Electric, AP&T and RE (focus on energy efficiency and high bill complaints). Acted as Energy Manager for the City of San Francisco in charge of energy efficiency program conception, development, administration, and evaluation and reporting. Facilitated vendor and developer forums for utilities in support ofrollout and promotion of energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. Provide targeted technical training (e.g., City Building Inspector Inspect of Residential and Commercial PV Solar Electric Systems - Zero Energy Homes/Green Building - How to Assure Success and Maximize Government Incentives) Prepared web-based and hard copy collateral materials in support of RE's public benefits program and maintained RE website. Estimated cost to complete: $ 5,000 Estimated time to complete: 60 Days Utility Consulting 3 Program Administration Program Administration consists of four parts: Responding to Customers, Perform Field Work, Providing Ukiah Staff Monthly Activity Reports and Fulfilling NCPA/CMUA Reporting Requirements. Responding to Customer Inquiries: UTILITY CONSULTING will set up an 800 or equivalent toll-free account and will respond to calls Monday through Friday 8 a.m. through 5 p.m. (Pacific Time). Customer and vendor inquiries will be handled and as appropriate the Ukiah PBP will be promoted. A Post Office Box will be used for receiving rebate applications that are not submitted on-line. Rebate applications will be processed within two-weeks of receipt and verification (verification may include a site inspection). Performing Required Field Work: UTILITY CONSULTING will respond to high bill complaints and perform residential, commercial and industrial energy and renewable energy audits as required. Included in this proposal are up to the equivalent of 20 residential, 4 commercial and 2 industrial energy audits per year. UTILITY CONSULTING staff will participate in special events to assist in promoting Ukiah public benefit programs to include working at community events in a booth to speaking at public meetings such as the Rotary Club. Monthly Activity Reports: Each month a detailed activity report will be prepared itemizing activities during the month to include: customer/vendor calls received and fielded, field work performed, rebates processed, energy savings generated, incentive dollars spent and an updated .budget ledger. NCPA/CMUA Reporting: Utility Consulting will use the E3 spreadsheet program and its rebate tracking program database as a basis for reporting to oversight agencies. Examples of Relevant Experience: For the past eight years UTILITY CONSULTING has provided technical, marketing, education and outreach services associated with the development, administration and evaluation of public goods programs for NCPA member utilities and California's investor-owned utilities. Relevant project work includes: o Frank Di Massa worked in customer service for PG&E for four years responding to customer high bill complaints and providing residential and small commercial energy audits. As the Energy Manager of the City of San Francisco and as a Senior Research Engineer for the DOE Pacific Northwest National Lab and more recently as an independent consultant, Mr. Di Massa has performed commercial and industrial energy/water audits on a large variety of facilities. Mr. Di Massa is a CEM and a Certified Building Commissioning Agent. Mr. Di Massa has also developed a training program and conducted training for NCPA member utility CSRs on working with customers and handling high bill complaints. o Utility Consulting provides detailed monthly activity reports for all of its clients and often is commended on diligence and accuracy. Utility Consulting 4 o Frank Di Massa is currently using the E3 reporting tool and is used by NCPA member utilities to prepare award applications, for example, he authored the application leading to Roseville Electric winning the CMUA 2005 Award for Community Service/Resource Efficiency - Small Utility "Utility Rate Assistance Program (URAP)". http://www.cmua.org/06 award winners.pdf o Frank Di Massa has lengthy experience working with City Council in support of municipal programs and provides timely and concise information to facilitate good decision-making. Cost Estimate: $40,000/year 4. Compliance with Contract Terms and Conditions We have reviewed and can comply with the requirements of Attachment 1 to your RFP sample Agreement for Professional Consulting Services. We meet all of the risk management insurance requirements and otherwise can comply with contract terms and conditions. Utility Consulting 5 July 10, 2006 City of Ukiah Elizabeth Kirkley Electric Distribution Engineer 411 W. Clay Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: Proposal Clarification Questions Dear Ms Kirkley: Our responses to your request for clarification are as follows: Question 1. An itemization of the Public Benefit Programs you will be setting up and administering. Response: · Energy Efficiency · Renewable Energy · Low Income · Senior Assistance Question 2. Number of energy audits included in proposal and cost for additional audits; each by category of residential, commercial & industrial. Response: · 20 residential energy audits per year · 4 commercial energy audits per year · 2 industrial energy audits per year · Additional residential energy audits - $250/audit · Additional commercial energy audits - $300/small commercial audit - $750/large commercial audit · Additional industrial energy audits - $1,000/audit Utility Consulting 1 Question 3. Will the toll free customer inquiry phone number be manned or set up as a recording with calls being returned? Response: The toll free customer inquiry phone number will be manned approximately 80% of the time and a recording will be used for the remaining time. Messages will be checked daily and responses will be in 24 to 48 hours. Question 4. Billing & payment terms with the City of Ukiah. Response: Billing will be monthly; Program Development will be billed based on work completed during the month and Program Administration will be billed at $3,333.33 per month. Utility Consulting payment term is Payable Upon Receipt (typically municipal utility response time is 2 to 4 weeks). Please let me know if additional clarification is required. Thanks, we look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Frank V. Di Massa Utility Consulting 2 Appendix A Resumes Frank Di Massa Charles Munat Utility Consulting FRANK V. DI MASSA 1014 Elsbree Lane A'Iq'ACHMENT, Windsor, CA 95492 Office: 707.837.0956 Cell: 707.486.9881 email: frank~ucitd.com Web: www.ucitd, com Energy Consultant (97-present) Provides program development services to electric utilities, cities and private agencies in the areas of energy management, renewable energy and electricity and natural gas purchasing. Recent representative project work includes: Client: Roseville Electric Currently developing 1 O-year DSM - Load Factor Improvement Plan including development of technology/screening matrix and screening criteria, meeting facilitation, report writing, quantitative and qualitative analysis, cost/benefit analysis and decision analysis. Performed tailored energy end-use site surveys and prepared detailed reports with generic recommendations for energy efficient replacement equipment and renewable energy technology for Roseville Electric's seventy-five largest commercial customers. Developed two relational databases for RE; the first is used to manage commercial and residential customer rebate processes including payment and the second to manage the Shade Tree incentive program. Both databases feature elegant graphical user interface designed for the highest level of simplicity and functionality. Features include a custom query and report generator, reports exported to Word or Excel, and extensive search capabilities. Assisting RE in the development of their Advantage Home new residential construction incentive program designed to encourage local builders to exceed T24 standards and incorporate solar technologies and strategies in their designs. Work included research and development and facilitation of the first exploratory workshop with regional developers. · Conducted small commercial business energy end-use surveys (150 facilities) and developed energy end-use equipment relational database. · Develop Rebate Program, Green Energy and PV Program Collateral Material to include rebate application forms, brochures, mailers and all web-related materials. · Performed comprehensive Commercial Energy/Water Audits on demand. Currently on one-year contract to perform website maintenance. Includes updating web pages, posting new information, redesigning web pages and other general web-maintenance duties. Resume of Frank V. Di Massa - (707) 837-0956 1 Client: Alameda Power & Telecom Provided research and reporting, meeting facilitation and technical decision analysis support for AP&T. Included vendor identification, product review and vendor selection for provision of integrated CIS/Billing software to unify the AP&T's electricity and telecommunications services and avail "one-stop-shopping" for customers. · Develop and provide self-instruction Electric Utility and High Bill Complaint training program for AP&T Customer Service Representatives. Client: Northern California Power Agency & Redding Electric Developed and conducted one-day training programs for NCPA member utility residential energy auditors and customer service representatives. Workshops feature multimedia Powerpoint presentation with insightful video vignettes, illustrative animations and to-the-point graphics with voice-over audio. Detailed full-color handbook is included. This training program was later revised and licensed to Redding Electric. Client: City of Concord Performed "Utility Disposition Analysis" to include: electric utility bill review and rate schedule optimization; load curve development; metering & communications needs assessment; Energy Services RFP preparation; ESP proposal review, vendor selection and contract review and negotiation; and electricity and natural gas service contract monthly utility bill verification and validation. · Performed direct access natural gas analysis and contract review. · Performed power contract, rate schedule and economic optimization analysis on Concord's Cowell Pool Facility cogeneration system. · Organized and facilitated workshops aimed at providing guidance on development of energy strategies for coping with the energy crisis. Sessions included an overview of the electric utility system structure, deregulation, the energy crisis, State and Federal solutions and demand- and supply-side options Cities can consider including developing an energy park. · In response to the threat of high summer electricity prices and brownouts and blackouts, performed comprehensive study to evaluate the load management potential in the City of Concord. The study resulted in the identification and quantification of"dispatchable" load reduction measures at the City's eleven largest facilities. This information will be used to obtain State grants aimed at peak load reduction and energy efficiency. Client: Lassen Municipal Utility District (LMUD) With the threat of steep rate hikes, LMUD was looking to provide their customers with concise information for lowering utility bills and improving operations. Frank Di Massa and an associate provided internal residential energy conservation training and "How to Manage Your Business's Energy Costs" training for LMUD's commercial and institutional customers. Resume of Frank V. Di Massa - (707) 837-0956 2 Client: Southern California Edison (subcontract) Developed the multimedia lecture notes for half-day SCE Energy Buying Options Workshop, co- instructed first two workshops held in Rosemead and conducted two half-day workshops on direct access power purchasing for a group of high-tech industry representatives. Client: PG&E (subcontract) Conducted PG&E Energy Efficiency for Sales Agents training program to educate residential developers and real estate sales agents on the importance and value of energy efficiency measures that exceed Title 24 building standards. Performed 150 and 164 field surveys under two separate state-wide energy efficiency retrofit measures retention studies in PG&E's service territory (low-income direct weatherization program and standard rebate program) Senior Research Engineer (90-96) - DOE Pacific Northwest National Lab · Lead researcher Western Area Power Administration Central Valley Project Year 2004 Power Marketing EIS reporting on potential air quality impacts under EIS alternatives and "no-action" alternative. · Developed RateSET software for utility rate schedule optimization. · Led the development of two environment risk assessment tools - Qualitative Issue Characterization (QulC) and Semi-Quantitative Evaluation (SeQuEl) sof~ware programs. · Performed research, development and demonstration in the area of energy efficient building codes/standards for federal commercial buildings. Included computer modeling and economic analysis of alternate design strategies and equipment selection. · Principal energy efficiency technician in the development of base-wide energy efficiency energy and water audits at Army and Air Force bases. Municipal Program Manager (84-89) - S.F. Bureau of Energy Conservation Managed the City of San Francisco's municipal facility energy efficiency program including: · Conceive, develop and administering $2 million/yr Capital Improvement Program with projects ranging in complexity from simple lighting retrofits to the installation of complex energy management control systems. · Implementation of computerized electricity and natural gas usage and cost tracking program. · Instituted life-cycle cost and energy efficiency training for the City's professional engineers and architects and the "simplified energy conservation measures training program for City Stationary Engineers. Resume of Frank V. Di Massa - (707) 837-0956 3 Energy Conservation Specialist (1981-84) - PG&E From 1981 to 1984 performed residential and commercial energy audits, marketed zero-interest loan and direct weatherization low-income programs and performed post-retrofit inspections. Participated in all phases of customer contact including program promotion, financing and inspection of work. PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS/CERTIFICATIONS/EDUCTION Building Commissioning Agent Certification - 2005 · CHEERS Title 24 New Construction Rater - 2002 · Certified Energy Manager (CEM) - 1988 · CEC Certified Energy Auditor and Inspector - 1981 · Board Member - Association of Professional Energy Managers - 1987 · Board Member - SF Chapter of the Association of Engineers - 1989 M.S. Environmental Management, 1986 (USF) Thesis: A Case Study- Economic and Environmental Feasibility of Cogeneration at USF B.S. Physical Science, 1980 (CSUC) Resume of Frank V. Di Massa - (707) 837-0956 4 Charles F. Munat Charles specializes in database and website development and layout, design and production of forms and brochures for Utility Consulting and other companies and institutions. He has worked on Utility Consulting projects with clients such as Roseville Electric, Alameda Power & Telecom, the California Independent System Operator, the California Public Utilities Commission, Viron Energy Services and the Sacramento Energy Alliance. EXPERIENCE · Seven years in database and website development · Work with MySQL, PostgreSQL, MS Access, MS SQL Server, Oracle, XML, XHTML, CSS, XSLT, Cold Fusion, Tcl/Tk, VBScript, VBA, PHP, Python, JavaScript, Java, C, C++, C#, Apache 2, Cocoon · Recently completed a database-backed website/content management system using Apache 2, Tomcat, Cocoon, MySQL, eXist, Subversion, and Hibernate for the Experimental Education Unit at the University of Washington. · Developed three databases for Roseville Electric - Rebate Program Tracking, Energy Efficiency End-Use Survey Data and Shade Tree Program in MS Access. · Complete redesign of the California Independent System Operator (CaMSO) website and complete development of the City of Roseville Water Conservation webpages and Green Energy webpages. Extensive list of other websites developed and administered available upon request. · Layout, design and production of Roseville Electric rebate application forms and marketing collateral for web and hard copy production. · Currently maintaining Roseville Electric website. EDUCATION Bachelor of Science in Informatics, Magna Cum Laude University of Washington, Seattle,WA. Bachelor of Arts in Linguistics, Magna Cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa UW Associate of Arts & Sciences, Highest Honors Clarke College, Vancouver, WA. 4.0 GPA Comell University School of Engineering Utility Consulting ITEM NO: ~Ob DATE: July 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: RECETVE STATUS REPORT CONCERNI'NG SI'GN ORDTNANCE ENFORCEMENT ACT1'V~'TTES AND PROV1'DE DI'RECT1'ON TO STAFF SUHt4ARY: This Agenda Item is the fifth sign violation enforcement report from Staff. We have used an educational face-to-face approach and have made substantial progress with enforcing the existing sign regulations. Attachment No. 1 lists the sign enforcement cases Staff is currently working on. Pursuant to the direction from the City Attorney, the property owner's names, parcel locations, and business names have not included on the listing. Staff has included the number of times contact was made with the property owner or business proprietor. Typically, after the third or fourth contact, the violator is advised that if the violation is not corrected, the matter will be turned over to the City Attorney. Staff will be initiating contact with the property owners who have abandoned signs this month. At the Council's direction, Staff is prepared to re-visit the draft sign code revisions as we continue to enforce the existing regulations. Our educational efforts could include distribution and explanation of draft materials to the business community with the intent of receiving input for the Council's consideration. Staff is prepared to return to the Council with the draft revisions in September if the Council so desires. RECOMMENDED ACTZON: Receive report and provide direction to Staff. ALTERNATZVE COUNCZL POLZCY OP"DZON: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City Council Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Chris White, Code Compliance Coordinator Attachments: 1. List of Sign Enforcement Cases APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager A'I'I'ACHMENT / Sign Violation Log Page 1 SV06-01 Banner 3/29/2006 4/5/2006 4 SV06-02 Banner 3/29/2006 4/5/2006 2 SV06-03 Banner 3~29~2006 4/3/2006 3 SV06-04 Banner 3/29/2006 4~6~2006 2 SV06-05 Banner 3/29/2006 4/3/2006 1 SV06-06 Banner 3/29/2006 4/6/2006 1 SV06-07 Banner 3~29~2006 4/6/2006 4 SV06-08 Banner 3/29/2006 4/3/2006 2 SV06~09 Banner 4/3/2006 5/9/2006 2 SV06-10 Banner 3/29/2006 4/17/2006 2 SV06-11 Banner 3/29/2006 4/12/2006 1 SV06-12 Banner 3/29/2006 4/19/2006 4 SV06-13 Banner 3/29/2006 4/5/2006 3 SV06-14 Banner 3/29/2006 4/10/2006 4 SV06-15 Banner 3~29~2006 4~5~2006 1 SV06-16 Banner 3/29/2006 4/6/2006 3 SV06-17 Banner 3/29/2006 4/3/2006 1 SV06-18 Banner 3/29/2006 3/29/2006 1 SV06-19 Banner 4/13/2006 4/14/2006 4 SV06-20 Banner 4/3/2006 4/10/2006 1 SV06-21 Banner 3/29/2006 4/6/2006 2 SV06-22 Banner 4/3/2006 4 SV06-23 Banner 4/3/2006 4/17/2006 2 SV06-24 Banner 4/3/2006 4/10/2006 1 SV06-25 Banner 4/3/2006 4/5/2006 2 SV06-26 Banner 3/29/2006 4/3/2006 3 SV06-27 Banner 3/29/2006 5/17/2006 5! SV06-28 Banner 3/29/2006 4/3/2006 3 SV06-29 Banner 312912006 4/10/2006 1 SV06-30 Banner 4/3/2006 4/10/2006 4 SV06-31 Ballon Add 40306 4/14/2006 1 SV06-32 Banner 6/26/2006 1 Sign Violation Log Page 2 SV06-33 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 SV06-34 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 SV06-35 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 SV06-36 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 SV06-37 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 SV06-38 Abandon sign 6~22~2006 SV06-39 Abandon sign 6~22~2006 SV06-40 Abandon sign 6~22~2006 SV06-41 Abandon sign 7/11/2006 SV06-42 Abandon sign 7/11/2006 SV06-43 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-44 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-45 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-47 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-48 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-49 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-50 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-51 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-52 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-53 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-54 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-55 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-56 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-57 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-58 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 !SV06-59 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-60 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-61 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-62 A Frame 6/13/2006 1~ SV06-63 A Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-64 A-Frame 6/13/2006 1 SV06-65 Coming Soon 6/13/2006 7~6~2006 2 SV06-66 Moving Sign 6/13/2006 1 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 10c DATE: July 19, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION CONSOLIDATING GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION WITH THE STATEWIDE ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 7, 2006, REQUESTING MENDOCINO COUNTY TO CONDUCT THE ELECTION, AND APPROVING A BALLOT MEASURE TO BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT FOR SUCH ELECTION; AND POSSIBLE CONSIDERATION OF BALLOT ARGUMENT SUMMARY: The general municipal election for the City of Ukiah is scheduled for November 7, 2006. Three positions on the City Council are to be filled at that election. The City Council has decided to present a ballot measure on the November 7, 2006, ballot. The measure will ask the voters whether they want to increase the transient occupancy or "bed" tax which is imposed on the room rate charged to customers of hotels and motels in the City of Ukiah from the current 8% to 10%. To accomplish this increase, Ukiah City Code Section 1752 must be amended so that the first sentence will read: Each transient paying for the privilege of occupancy in any hotel shall pay a tax in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the rent charged by the operator. The terms "transient" and "rent" are defined in Ukiah City Code Section 1750. A "transient" means a person who rents a room in a hotel or motel for less than 30 days. "Rent" means the charge for the room, whether actually collected by the hotel operator or not. Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: (1) Adopt Resolution consolidating election with statewide November 2006 election, requesting Mendocino County to conduct election, approving ballot measure; and (2) Discussion and possible action approving ballot argument. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Revise and adopt documents Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED: ~',~'~ Candace Horsley, I~ity N/A City Council Dave Rapport, City Attorney Candace Horsley, City Manager; Gail Petersen-Latipow, Deputy City Clerk 1 - Resolution Manager July 19, 2006 Page 2 of 3 The bed tax in Mendocino County is 10%, which means that hotels and motels outside the City limits pay the higher rate. The increase in the City's bed tax would make the tax the same in the City and the County. Under Proposition 2184, any increase in a local city tax, like the bed tax, must be approved at a municipal election. Taxes are classified as either general or special taxes. A general tax is deposited to the City's general fund and may be used for any municipal purpose. A special tax is set aside for a specific purpose. A general tax requires approval by majority vote in the election. A special tax requires approval by 2/3 of those voting in the election. The bed tax in Ukiah is a general tax and would require a majority vote to pass. In order to place this measure on the ballot for the general municipal election scheduled for November 7, 2006, the City Council must adopt the resolution attached to this agenda summary report. The Resolution does the following: 1. It specifies that three positions on the Ukiah City Council are on the ballot; 2. It consolidates the election with the statewide election scheduled for November 7, 2006; 3. It requests the Board of Supervisors to permit the County Elections Clerk to conduct the .election; 4. It approves the form of the ballot measure; 5. It directs the City Clerk to transmit the measure to the City Attorney for an impartial analysis; 6. It directs the City Clerk to publish notice of the election as required by law, to issue and accept nomination papers and to perform other duties in connection with the election for City Council members and to publish notice of ballot arguments as required by law; and 7. It authorizes designated City Council members to file a rebuttal argument, if required. Under Elections Code Section 9286, the City Clerk is required to fix a date 14 days from the calling of the election as a deadline, after which no arguments for or against any city measure may be submitted for printing and distribution to the voters. Within that 14 day time period, the City Clerk must accept arguments for the measure and arguments against the measure. The City Council or one or more members of the City Council, authorized by the City Council, may file a written argument for the measure. Any individual voter who is eligible to vote on the measure, or bona fide association of citizens, or any combination of voters and associations, may file a written argument against the measure. (Elections Code §9282.) Cal. Const. Article 13C, §2. July 19, 2006 Page 3 of 3 The City Clerk is required to send a copy of any arguments received for or against the measure to the authors of the arguments. The authors of the arguments for or against the measure may submit a rebuttal argument not exceeding 250 words. The rebuttal argument must be filed with the City Clerk no later than 10 days after the final filing date for the primary arguments. (Elections Code §9285.) To adhere to this schedule, the City Council would have to approve and file with the City Clerk a ballot argument for the measure no later than August 2, 2006. August 2 is the next City Council meeting following the July 19 meeting. The argument in favor of the measure must be completed, signed and filed with the City Clerk that night. A rebuttal argument, if required, would be due no later than August 12, and could not be approved at a regular City Council meeting. Accordingly, the proposed resolution authorizes designated members of the City Council to file a rebuttal argument on behalf of the City Council. The City Council should decide who will be designated to file the rebuttal argument. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH CALLING FOR CONSOLIDATING MUNICIPAL ELECTION OF CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES AND PRESENTING A BALLOT PROPOSITION WITH NOVEMBER 2006 STATEWIDE ELECTION, REQUESTING BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO DIRECT COUNTY ELECTIONS CLERK TO CONDUCT ELECTION, PRESENTING BALLOT MEASURE, TRANSMITTING MEASURE TO CITY ATTORNEY FOR IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS AND AUTHORIZING ARGUMENTS AND REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF MEASURE. WHEREAS, 1. Election Code Section 10403 authorizes the City Council o£the City o£Ukiah ("City") to request the Mendocino County Board o£ Supervisors to consolidate a municipal election with the statewide election scheduled for November 7, 2006; and 2. The City Council shall set £orth in the resolution the exact form of any ballot measures to appear on the election ballot and other matters necessary or convenient to consider a ballot measure at a general municipal election and consolidate that election with a statewide election; and 3. Section 10002 o£the Elections Code o£the State ogCalifornia authorizes the Clerk o£ the County o£ Mendocino to render specified services relating to the conduct o£ an election to any city or district which has by resolution requested the Board o£ Supervisors to permit the County Clerk to render the services, subject to requirements set £orth in that section; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. The City Council hereby calls for the election o£ candidates for three positions on the Ukiah City Council and the consideration of the ballot proposition set forth below in the general municipal election scheduled for November 7, 2006. 2. The City Council authorizes a ballot proposition for said election as follows: MEASURE Shall Ukiah City Code Section 1752 be amended to increase from the current 8% to 10% the transient occupancy tax imposed on the room rate charged to customers of hotels and motels in the City of Ukiah? Yes No 3. The City Council hereby requests the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors to consolidate the above-referenced municipal election with the statewide election scheduled for November 7, 2006. 4. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Mendocino is hereby requested to permit the County Clerk to perform and render all services and proceedings incidental to and connected with the conduct of the special municipal election of the City of Ukiah with the cooperation and assistance of the City Clerk of the City of Ukiah, such services to include, but not be limited to, the following: l) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Establish voting precincts, secure locations for polling places, and secure the services of election officers for each precinct as required by law. Prepare and furnish to the election officers necessary supplies for the conduct of the election. Cause to be translated, as appropriate, and printed the requisite number of sample ballots, official ballots, rosters and other necessary forms. Make necessary arrangements for the delivery of supplies to the various precincts. Distribute absent voter ballots as required by law. Receive the return of elections material and supplies. Canvass the returns of the election, including the absent voter ballots. 2 8) 9) 11) 5. 1) 2) ~) 4) ~) 6) by law. 6. Furnish a tabulation of the number of votes cast in each precinct. Make all the necessary arrangements to pay the precinct board members and other costs of the election incurred as the result of services performed for the City of Ukiah. Publish a list of precincts, election officers; polling places and hours polls will be open. Verify signatures appearing on petition papers. The City Clerk shall be responsible for: Publication of Notice of Election. Distribution and receipt of nomination papers. Receipt of Candidates Statement and printing deposit. Publication of candidates as required by law. Receive campaign statements and disclosure statements as required by law. Publication of notices related to arguments for and against said measure as required The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of the ballot measure set forth in section 2 of this Resolution to the City Attorney for the preparation of an impartial analysis as required by Elections Code Section 9280. 7. are hereby authorized to submit a rebuttal argument on behalf of the City Council to any argument submitted in opposition to the measure. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Ukiah on this 19th day of July 2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAINING: ABSENT: ATTEST: Mark Ashiku, Mayor Gail Petersen-Latipow, Deputy City Clerk 4 AGENDA ITEM NO: 10d MEETING DATE: July 19, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM ACT SUMMARY: The City Council recently enacted the Ukiah Campaign Finance Reform Act. That ordinance includes incentives for candidates and committees which agree to the voluntary spending limit provisions of the ordinance, including the City paying half the cost of the ballot pamphlet candidate's statement and the free posting of a 500 word statement on the City's website. In preparing the ordinance, the City Attorney overlooked Government Code Section 83500, enacted by Proposition 73, which states: No public officer shall expend and no candidate shall accept any public moneys for the purpose of seeking elective office. This section in Proposition 73 was intended to prohibit public funding of political campaigns. (See Center for Pubfic Interest Law v Fair Po#tical Practices Com. (1989, 4th Dist) 210 Cai App 3d 1476 [$3 check off on state income tax return for use in public funding of campaigns prohibited by this section]. It applies to local, as well as statewide, elections. (County of Sacramento v Fair Political Practices Com. (1990, 3rd Dist) 222 Cai App 3d 687.) Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to introduce ordinance by title only; motion to introduce ordinance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Modify proposed ordinance or decline to introduce ordinance amending Ukiah Political Reform Act. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: David J. Rapport, City Attorney David J. Rapport, City Attorney N/a 1 - Proposed Ordinance Approved: '.~ '~ Candace Horsley, Cl~y Manager July 19, 2006, City Council meeting The State Attorney General has issued an opinion, saying that Government Code Section 83500 does not prohibit a community college district from paying the cost of printing candidate statements, because Government Code Section 85300 does not prohibit all expenditures of public funds on elections and Elections Code Section 13307 gives a local agency the authority to charge candidates for the cost of printing their statements in the voters' pamphlet, but it does not require it to do so. The Attorney General opinion concluded that candidate statements in a voters' pamphlet are not part of the candidate's campaign and would not constitute "campaigning" for any particular candidate in a "partisan" manner. The Attorney General opinion addressed a community college district which paid those costs for all candidates for its board of trustees. In Ukiah's case, the City is paying half the costs only for certain candidates. The courts are not bound by Attorney General Opinions, but those opinions are entitled to serious consideration. On balance, the City Attorney believes the payment of half of the cost of candidate statements for voluntary spending limit candidates and committees would not violate Government Code Section 85300. Each candidate and committee has an equal opportunity to take advantage of the subsidy. For that reason, the City Attorney thinks the City can rely on the Attorney General opinion, at least, until it is rejected by a court. However, the statements posted on the City website are somewhat different. There is no Election Code provision authorizing the use of those statements. The City is undertaking to provide this access entirely on its own. The content of candidate statements in voter pamphlets is prescribed by the Elections Code (name, age and occupation of the candidate and a brief description, of no more than 200 words, of the candidate's education and qualifications. No reference to the candidate's party affiliation, membership or activity in partisan political organizations.) There are no similar limitations in the 500 word website statements authorized in the City's ordinance. For these reasons, in the City Attorney's opinion, the City will have to inform candidates that the website statements are not available or will only be available, if the candidate pays the City's costs in posting the statements on the website, so that no public funds are used. A proposed amendment of the ordinance to avoid this potential violation of Government Code Section 83500 is attached. The ordinance must be introduced on July 19 and adopted at the August 2, 2006, City Council meeting. It will become effective on September 1, 2006. As long as the City informs candidates of the limits on the use of its website, amending the ordinance after the election cycle begins for the November election should not be a problem. ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTION 2081 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE. The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE. Section 2081 of the Ukiah City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: {}2081: VOLUNTARY SPENDING LIMIT: A Candidate or City Committee may elect to comply with the voluntary spending limits as set forth in this Section 2081. A. A Candidate or City Committee which voluntarily accepts expenditure limits may not make Campaign Expenditures in excess of the limits set forth in subsection C, below. Campaign Expenditures by a Candidate and his or her Controlled Committee shall be aggregated. B. Each Candidate and each City Committee shall indicate on a form provided by the City Clerk his, her or its acceptance or rejection of the voluntary spending limits as established under Subsection C, below. At a minimum, the form shall (1) state the voluntary spending limit then in effect, (2) the benefits of acceptance of the voluntary spending limit, and (3) contain an agreement to comply with the requirements of this Section 2081. Said form shall be filed with the City Clerk at the same time that a Candidate files his or her nomination paper and verified statement of acceptance pursuant to Elections Code Section 10224 or that a City Committee files its statement of organization pursuant to Government Code Section 84101. C. For the November 2006 City Election, the spending limit is $5,000.00. This voluntary spending limit shall apply to future elections, but may be adjusted periodically by resolution of the City Council to reflect increases or decreases in City population and the Consumer Price Index since August 2006. D. For Candidates and City Committees accepting the voluntary spending limit, the following benefits apply: 1. The contribution limitation in Section 2079.A is increased from $200.00 to $500.00. 2. Except for recall elections, the voluntary spending limit for any Candidate opposing an incumbent shall be increased by 25%. 3. The City will pay for one-half the cost of the Candidate's statement of qualifications as printed in the ballot pamphlet. 4. Within one week of the filing deadline, the City will issue a news release, describing the purpose and benefits of the program, and announcing the Candidates and City Committees which have accepted the voluntary spending limit. 5. Each participating Candidate and City Committee may use the designation "Voluntary Spending Limit Candidate/Committee" in all election/campaign materials and in the Candidate's ballot pamphlet statement of qualifications. 6. Candidates and their Controlled Committees may carry over funds from one election cycle to the next, if, within the first three days of the next Election Cycle, the Candidate or committee files a statement with the City Clerk accepting the voluntary spending limit applicable to that Election Cycle. If the Candidate or committee does not file the required statement, all funds carried over from the previous Election Cycle shall be disbursed pursuant to Section 2085 within seven days after the beginning of that subsequent Election Cycle. 7. The City shall post on the website a "Voluntary Spending Limit Candidates/Committees" list. For elections occurring after November 8, 2006, and upon payment by the Candidate or Committee of the actual costs thereof, the Candidate or Committee may post on the City's website: a. Up to a 500 word statement along with the Candidate's picture. b. An additional 500 word statement, if an opposing Candidate or City Committee rejects the voluntary spending limit. For purposes of subsections 7.a and 7.b, above, the City Council shall adopt a resolution establishing the actual costs to be charged by the City. Those costs shall include all direct and indirect costs associated with posting the statements on the website, the intent being that no public funds shall be made available for these postings. The statements shall be accompanied by a notice from the City, stating that the views expressed in the statement are those of the Candidate or Committee and do not reflect the views of the City or its officials and do not constitute an endorsement of the Candidate or Committee by the City or its officials. E. A Candidate or City Committee which files a notice accepting the voluntary spending limit may not thereafter reject the limit, except that if an opposing Candidate or City Committee files a statement rejecting the voluntary spending limit, the Candidate or City Committee may file a statement with the City Clerk rescinding its acceptance of the 2 voluntary spending limits within three days after the final date that nomination papers can be filed. F. Any candidate who files a statement of acceptance pursuant to subsection B, above, and makes Campaign Expenditures in excess of the limits shall be subject to the remedies in Section 2086. SECTION TWO. 1. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah, and shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Introduced by title only on July 19, 2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Adopted on August 2, 2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Gail Petersen-Latipow, Deputy City Clerk AGENDA ITEM NO: 10e MEETING DATE: July 19, 2006 SUMMARy REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING UKIAH CITY CODE SECTION 1151, REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS SUMMARY: By less than a unanimous vote, the City Council introduced an ordinance at its regular meeting on June 21, 2006, which amends Section 1151 of the Ukiah City Code. That section contains the procedure for appointing members to the Ukiah Planning Commission. The amended ordinance would change the current procedure by requiring a majority vote of the City Council to approve nominations of planning commissioners by individual City Council members. Under the current procedure, each City Council member appoints one member to the Planning Commission. Approval of that appointment by the City Council is not required. At least five days must elapse after the introduction of an ordinance before the ordinance may be adopted by the City Council. Ordinarily, ordinances introduced at a City Council meeting are placed on the agenda for adoption at the next meeting. In this case, the adoption was delayed by one meeting, because the City Attorney was on vacation and could not attend the July 5 City Council meeting. Ordinances which are introduced by a unanimous vote of the City Council are placed on consent calendar for adoption. Since this ordinance was not introduced by a unanimous vote, it has been placed on the agenda under Unfinished Business. The ordinance introduced at the meeting on June 21 contained a modification to the ordinance proposed in the agenda packet for that meeting. The change added "follow the rules adopted by the Commission" to the list of planning commission functions listed in finding No. 4. The ordinance attached as Attachment 1 includes that modification. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt ordinance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Modify ordinance which will result in a one meeting delay in adoption or not adopt ordinance and leave existing procedure in place. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/a City Council David J. Rapport, City Attorney City Council 1 - Ordinance Amending UCC Section 1151 Approved: Candace Horsley, City %anager ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTION 1151 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO THE MEMBERSHIP OF AND APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: FINDINGS: 1. The City Council finds that a diversity of views should be represented on the City's Planning Commission. 2. This diversity of views is best achieved, if each City Council member has the opportunity to select a planning commissioner. 3. It is the intent of the City Council that each City Council member should have the opportunity to select a planning commissioner, subject to ratification by a majority vote of the City Council. 4. It is the expectation of the City Council that the commissioner nominated by a City Council member will be approved by a majority vote of the City Council, except in unusual circumstance, where a majority of the City Council does not believe that the candidate is suited to perform the functions of a planning commissioner, which include an ability to understand and apply the laws and standards that apply to commission decisions, listen carefully to evidence and argument presented during commission meetings, follow the rules adopted by the Commission, and make reasoned decisions and clearly articulate positions. SECTION ONE. Section 1151 of the Ukiah City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: §1151: MEMBERS; APPOINTMENT: Said commission shall consist of five (5) members who shall be registered voters of the city. Each member of the City Council, including each newly elected or appointed City Council member, may nominate one commissioner who shall be appointed to the commission, if approved by a majority vote of the City Council. Each commissioner's term of office shall coincide with the term of office of the City Council member who nominated him or her. A new City Council member selected to fill a vacancy on the Council and serve out an unexpired term of office may nominate a replacement of the commissioner nominated by that Council member's predecessor in office, who shall be appointed for the remainder of that Council ORDINANCENO. 1 member's term of office, if approved by a majority vote of the City Council. Ifa commissioner vacates his or her office before the expiration of his or her term of office, the City Council member who nominated that commissioner may nominate a replacement to serve the remainder of that commissioner's term of office, who shall be appointed, if the nomination is approved by a majority vote of the City Council. If a City Council member's nomination receives less than a majority vote, he or she may nominate additional candidates, one at a time, until one of them is appointed by a majority vote of the City Council. Commissioners shall be nominated and voted upon at a single City Council meeting, unless a different procedure is approved by a majority vote of the City Council. Ifa City Council member fails to nominate a commissioner within sixty (60) days after the vacancy occurs, a majority of the City Council shall fill the vacancy following the procedure used to appoint members to other city commissions and boards. SECTION TWO 1. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah, and shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. It shall apply to injuries or damage occurring after it becomes effective. Introduced by title only on ,2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Adopted on ,2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Gail Petersen-Latipow, Deputy City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 2 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 10f DATE: July 19, 2006 REPORT SUB3ECT: DI'SCUSSI'ON AND POSSTBLE APPROVAL OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDI'NG FOR PRELTMI'NARY REVl'EW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF POTENTTAL WATER SUPPLY SUMMARY: At its June 21, 2006, meeting the City Council considered a draft Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") and License Agreement among Hopland Public Utility District ("Hopland"), Millview County Water District ("Millview"), Willow County Water District ("Willow"), Calpella County Water District ("Calpella") and Redwood Valley County Water District ("Redwood"). The MOU is proposed primarily to explore the feasibility of a potential project in the Hopland area that would divert water from the Russian River during the winter, store that water in a reservoir located in the area, and use that water in the summer to increase the water available to each agency. The City Council members approved moving forward with the MOU, requesting staff to discuss possible changes to the MOU and License Agreement with the other agencies. On June 22, representatives of the involved public agencies met and discussed the agreement. In addition to the changes the City Attorney suggested in his last Agenda Summary Report (ASR) to the City Council, Redwood Valley requested some changes as well. Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss, revise and/or approve or disapprove MOU contained in Attachment 1 and, if approved, authorize the City Manager to sign the MOU on behalf of the City and revise and/or approve or disapprove the License Agreement in Attachment 2. ALTERNATTVE COUNCI'L POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Dave Rapport, City Attorney Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - IvlOU and License Agreement 2 - E-mail of July 12, 2006 - City Attorney proposed MOU ~.changes APPROVED:~ ~ Candace Horsley~City Manager MOU among Ukiah, Millview, Willow, Calpella, and Redwood Valley Water Districts and Hopland Public Utility District Page 2 of 2 After that meeting, Chris Neary, representing Hopland and Millview, prepared a revised MOU. Attached as Attachment 1 is a memo from Mr. Neary and an attached revised MOU. Due to being on vacation, the City Attorney did not see this memo and the attached revision of the MOU and License Agreement until July 11, 2006. On July 12, the City Attorney emailed the attached suggested revisions to Chris and other participants in the June 22 meeting. (See Attachment 2.) The City Attorney will provide a report to the City Council of any responses to the attached email at the City Council meeting, when this item is considered. The MOU, as revised by Mr. Neary, does address some of the changes suggested by the City Attorney in his previous ASR. The revised agreement requires each public agency party to the agreement to approve the Request for Proposal. It requires wide circulation of the RFP among qualified engineering firms. It requires approval by the agencies of the chosen consultant and the contract with that consultant. The City Attorney's proposed changes are primarily for clarification. He has also asked questions about those provisions that were not addressed in the revised agreement, including a proposed restriction on the amount an agency withdrawing from the agreement could receive, if it chose to sell its interest in the agreement to a third party, and why the License Agreement does not place more restrictions on the property owner, pending completion of the feasibility study. A'n'ACHME~ff._,./~ CHRISTOPHER d. N£ARY ATTI~I~N[Y AT LAW cjn~w~pa~;, nec ("21~?) 4S9 - SSS1 June 26,2006 City of Ukiah c/o David J. Rapport, Esq. Rapport & Marston 405 W. Perkins Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Millview C.W.D. c/o Tim Bradley 3081 N. State St. Ukiah, CA 95482 Willow C.W.D. c/o Dave Redding 151 Laws Avenue Ukkah, CA 95482 Calpella C.W.D. c/o Dave Redding P.O. Box 115 Caipella, CA 95418 Re: Upper Russian River Purveyors MOU Hopland P.U.D. c/o Evert Jacobson P.O. Box 386 Hopland, CA 95449 Redwood Valley C.W.D. c/o Darin P.O. Box 399 Redwood Valley, CA 95470 Gentlemen: Enclosed is a revised draft of the Memorandum of Understanding, taking into account comments made at the meeting last Thursday. I am enclosing a clean version and a red-lined version for your review. Now that the Project has been publicly unveiled at each of the respective board meetings, there is some premium upon speed. Therefore, if there any comments regarding this draft, I recommend that the comments be circulated prior to the week of July 10. when five of the six agencies will be meeting to consider this revised MOU. In addition, in the very first paragraph of the MOU, the concept of a deadline of July 3 I, 2006 has been introduced to permit those agencies desiring to proceed with phase one of this project by developing a feasibility study to be able to proceed. Admission of agencies unable to proceed by July 31 could be taken up in any phase two of this project. Recital B has been added to take into account the possibility of undertaking othe] .projects than the Proposed Project defined in this Algeement. In addition, the MOU has been expanded to provide additional flexibility contenting further approvals and less delegation to the Agent to facilitate commitment to this proce:,s. The ~;g/gOd f~IOf3 fist, LOL=(II AI:IV~N '£ 1:I3H,tO£~II:IR~ 6I:CT Local Water Agencies/City of Ukiah June 26, 2006 Page 2 role of the Agent has been scaled back. The original concept was to appoint authority to the Agent to prepare and issue a Request for Proposals for the Engineering Report. There was reluctance to delegate this function to the Agent so the MOU has been revised to provide that the Agent shall develop a RFP for approval by the Public Agencies. Likewise, issuance of the contract would require approval by the Public Agencies, To accommodate the recognition that the Agent should be recompensed for its ,~:ervices, the Agent is specifically authorized to collec! sufficient funds to recompense it for its services if requested by the Agent and to disburse payment to the Engineers pursuant to the contract. Paragraph 3 reflects the desire to approve the circularized list of the recipients of the RFP. Rather than requiring further approval by thc Public Agencies, the revised draft specifies that there be broad distribution and that any Public Agency may designate proposed respon¢tents for receipt of the RFP. Paragraph 3 also reflects the proposal by Redwood Valley for the scope of the RFP, A new designation numbered "(ix)" has been added allowing any of the parties to specify additional services related to the Proposed Project, Paragraph 4 corrects the earlier draft which limited the contractual basis to a time and materials basis to include "any other basis as may be appropriate." Paragraph 4 has been added to cover the selection process of the successful respondent. The previous draft contemplated leaving the selection of the successful proposal to the Agent. There seemed to be reluctance to extend such delegation. There was considerable discussion concerning the cost of the Engineering RepoJt. The original approximate estimate was $10,000. With the added item specified for the scope of the RFP, the second draft called for compensation "up to $15,000" to provide the policy makers of the respective boards with a general idea as to the upper limit of the potential cost. Thi.3 uncertainty as to cost has lead to reluctance to commit to the MOU. Paragraph 5 has been added to provide for a right of withdrawal after the Public Agencies select the successful respondent and the range of costs is more fully defined. Presumably, the other Public Agencies would commit to covering the cost of any with&awing Public Agency and, if not, there is no point in moving forward. Paragraph 6 reflects the possibility that further studies may be necessary upon receipt of the Engineering Report before moving to Phase Two which would be to develop a consortium to develop the Proposed Project. Local Water Agencies/City of Ukiah June 26, 2006 Page 3 Paragraph 7 contains the approximate estimate of the cost of the Engineering Report as collectively determined in April. Paragraph 7 governs thepro rata dis~bution of any resulting developed resource. Paragraph 8 reflects the discussion last Thursday as to what happens were a Public Agency who is a party to this Agreement later decides that they no longer want to participate after this process extends beyond the Request for Proposals. This paragraph adds additional flexibility to those agencies desiring to retain such option. If any public agency wishe~,, to withdraw from the Memorandum by written notice, the Public Agency may recover its participation costs by assigning any water resource allocated to it to a "recipient who would be agreeable to each of the other non-withdrawing public agencies, giving each remaining public agency a veto right over the admission of a new party." The consideration for such an assignment would be limited to the withdrawing agency's out-of-pocket costs to avoid speculation and in recognition that some of the public agencies who would proceed with the Project with or without the participation of others and would be willing to recompense a withdrawing agency of its out-of-pocket costs in connection with this MOU. The License Agreement has been modified to extend the time from June 2006 September 1, 2006 to september 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007. Additionally, the License has been expanded to require that the License be binding upon any successors and assigns of the Licensor. By extending the time and designating the License as being binding upon su,:eessors and assigns, there is a broadening of the protection from a property owner who might ct~mge its mind after a significant expenditure of public funds in pursuing the Engineering Report. However, any attempt to guarantee non-flertibility for the property owner is less likely t,> make fl~e License agreeable to the property owner[ Additionally, the property owner has expressed concern that the Public Agencie,,, might exercise eminent domain. Because the power of eminent domain is an incident of the police power, there is substantial question of whether it can be contracted away, especially to the extent that it seeks to bind future policy makers of the respective agencies. It is recognized that the License Agreement might have to be re-worked to satisfy the property owner. The Agreement contemplates that the License will be substantially in the form as attached as Exhibit A, subject to future discussions with the property owner. CJN.~en er~C. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING for PRELIMINARY REVIEW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF POTENTIAL WATER SUPPLY This Agreement is made by and among such of the following parties who execute this Memorandum prior to July 31, 2006: the CITY OF UKIAH, a General Law City; HOPLAND PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT, a Special District; MILLVIEW COUNTY WATER DI STRICT, a County Water District; WILLOW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; CALPELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; and REDWOOD VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "PubIic Agencies"). RECITALS A. The Public Agencies are desirous of developing additional public water supply; Bo The Public Agencies anticipate that they will collaborate and cooperate together for the development of future water supplies, including but not necessarily limited to the Proposed Project defined herein; A project has been proposed by which the Public Agencies would impound 10,000 acre feet of unappropriated Winter Russian River Flows (hereinafter the "Proposed Project"); An impoundment site is being offered to the Public Agencies by a properly owner controlling the entire impoundment site presently zoned for water impoundment; The foregoing provides the Public Agencies with a common interest in determining the feasibility for undertaking the Proposed Project and to determine the appropriate' structure for doing so; The Public Agencies now desire to establish thc general terms and conditions b5 which they will collectively define the Proposed Project. AGREEMENT In consideration of the foregoing and the provisions stated herein, the Public Agencies agree as follows: 1. Cooperation. Each Public Agency agrees to cooperate with thc Public Agenci¢,s in implementing the purposes of this Agreement. Page I of 10 2. Appointment of Agent. The Public Agencies shall appoint an agent as Agent of the Public Agencies to implement this Agreement on behalf of the Public Agencies who skall hereafter be designated as the "Agent." The function of the Agent shall bc to develop a Request for Proposals for the engineering report contemplated by this Memorandum, subject to approval by the Public Agencies; to issue a contract to the successful respondent; and to administer such contract, including but not limited to collection of sufficient funds from the Public Agencies to recompense the Agent for its services hereunder, as approved by the Public Agencies, and to disburse payment to the engineers. Issuance of Request for Proposals. (a) The Agent shall ;~,~,--~ ~ ..... ......... ~ .......... w~ ( '- -~ incering Report (the t:ngmeenng Keport ) as defined below, prior to September 30, 2006, to a broad distribution. In addition, any party to this Memorandum ma)' nominate a distributee for the RFP for inclusion in distribution by the Agent. (b) The RFP shall define the Engineering Report to include preliminary cak'ulations and estimates of the following: (i) Estimate the watershed which would contribute water for storage in a reservoir to be constructed on land described in the attached dee¢t. The engineer shall utilize his best approximate judgment as to the positioning of that reservoir utilizing USGS maps and any general observations of the property offered as a proposed reservoir site. (ii) Estimate the periods of time within which it ~fight be possible to store w0tgr, in ~a~servoir g~osttu~ted uti|izi~g t~'1997 SWRCB restart B g ~' (iii) Estimate from rainfall records and downstream gauge readings on the Russian River when releases of storage are not occurring in dry years from Lake Mendocino storage the number of days in which waler might be stored in such a reservoir and the possible storage amounts utilizing a bypass requirement for fish life within the stream downstream of the proposed reservoir site that the Engineer finds reasonable after conversing with knowledgeable fishery experts and personnel of the SWRCB who are currently using guidelines as to the maximum amounts of natural flow which may be diverted without presumptively creating potential impacts upon ana~omous fish. That methodology is called a Water Availability Analysis and utilizes a criteria known as CFII which has been agreed to by the CDFG and NMFS for the Russian River Tributiafies. Dra~: 06126/06 Page 2 of 10 ~/90d 910C 5~t, LOL=(II AH¥~liN '1' H~IHd0J. SIHH:D l~:ll}l (iv) The engineer chosen will then make an estimate based upon the 1976-77 drought cycle and the 1988-92 drought cycle as to the amounts of yield which might be stored and carried over in such a reservoir and of the range of size that would provide an efficient reservoir for the likely yield. (v) The engineer will then estimate construction costs and any relocation costs in the broadest way based upon Construction News Record estimates for typical construction of similar types in similar areas. (vi) The engineer will then apply typical financing and operation and maintenance costs and meet with the participants to discuss the assUmptions, the range of the variables and the likely costs for reliable water supply similar to that required for domestic and industrial customers and the costs for non reliable water supply or interruptible supplies that might be available during normal or above normal water conditions. (vii) It is recognized that such a preliminary estimate procedure will not be able to anticipate temperature problems with release of water from the, proposed reservoir to substitute for Lake Mendocino supplies and the release regime which would allow water flows within the mainstem of the Russian River to be both utilized and not to create potential contentions of disadvantageous conditions to fishery resources because of the substitution and the lack of flow from Lake Mendocino to the point where substitute supplies will enter the mainstem of the Russian River, (viii) It is recognized that the Engineer performing these works will no:: be able to anticipate all Division of Dam Safety requirements or any peculiar earthquake conditions w~iich m~y exist in the area. It is recognized that the Engineer will be creating only a general understanding of the range of costs and obstacles and exactitude is not to be emphasized over Obtaining sufficient information to determine general economic feasibility of the concept. However, the Engineer shall conduct such borings as may be reasonably necessary to identify seismic issues as may be relevant to the feasibility of the construction of the contemplated impoundment. (ix) Any other specification of services related to the Proposed Project reasonably related to the Proposed Project as may be proposed by any party hereto. 4. Issuance of Contract and Notice to Proceed. Upon receipt of proposals by the Agent in response to the RFP, the parties shall convene and ascertain the successful proposer, rhe parties will then collectively authorize the Agent to award a contract for the Proposed Project on a time and materials basis, or such other basis as may be appropriate in revised of the proposal, ~: 06a6/06 Page 3 of I0 and thereupon the Agent shall supervise the contract performance and report regularly ~o the parties to this Agreement. Upon the Agent's receip! of responses to the RFP, the Public Agencies shall promptly convene to finalize the selection of the successful proposal. The Public Agencies shall determine the selection by vote with each Public Agency having one vote exercised by the signator of this Memorandum by each Public Agency, or such other representative as a Public Agency may designate. Upon selection of the successful respondent, the Agent shall execute a cont,~act for the Engineering Report as Agent for the Public Agencies within forty-five (45) days of such selection, provided that there is sufficient financial commilrnen! by the Public Agencie,,: to fund the projected cost of the Engineering Report. 5. Right of Withdrawal. For a period commencing with the selection of the successful respondent as determined in Section 4 above, and the issuance of the notice to proceed, any Public Agency shall have the right to withdraw its financial commitment to fund the expense of the Engineering Report, either on apro rata basis, or upon a portion ofthcpro rata bas~s. Should any Agency so withdraw such commitment, the Agent shall offer the amount of such deficiency to the other Public Agencies who shall then have fifteen (15) days to subscribe to such deficient amount on apro rata basis. The Agent shall ascertain prior to issuance of a notice to proceed that there is sufficient financial commitment to fund the procurement. 6. Receipt of Report. Promptly upon the receipt of the Report, representatives of the Public Agencies shall convene to determine whether the Proposed Project is feasible roi' planning purposes, or whether further study is necessary to make such determination. Upon determination that the Proposed Project is feasible, the Public Agencies shall then determine the structure for proceeding with the supervision and finalization of the Proposed Project, including but not limited to the formation of a Joint Powers Agency for the purpose of completing and m~naging the Proposed Project. 7, Proration of Resources. The Public Agencies have identified the cost of the Project Identification as being up to NINETY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($90,000). Each party to this Agreement has received authorization of its governing body to contribute on apro rata basis to the cost of preparing the Engineering Report at a maximum cost to each Agency of FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($15,000), or in such share as is determined by the process se'~ forth in Paragraph 4 above. It is agreed that the potential water resource from the Project shall likewise by apportioned on apro rata basis among the parties hereto. However, nothing contained herein shall be construed as committing any party to participation in the coat of the Engineering Report, or participation in funding the permitting, environmental license, regulatory clearance or construction of the Property Project. 8. Withdrawal from Process. At any time any Public Agency may withdraw from the Memorandum by written notice to the other parties to the Memorandum. Any such wit~ldrawing Public Agency may recover its participation costs in the Project by assigning i~s water ri.source Page 4 of 10 share defined in Paragraph 7 to a recipient agreeable to each of the non-withdrawing Public Agencies. However, the cor~ideration for such assignment cannot be more than the withdrawing Agency's out-of-pocket cost for participation as contemplated herein. Prior to offering the fight of assignment to a third party not a party to this Memorandum, the offer shall be made on a first-come-first-assigned basis to the other Public Agencies to this Agreement. 9. License for Entry and Right to Negotiate First. Prior to execution ora conUact with thc Engineer committing to expenditure of funds for the work, the Agent shall obtain flora the owner of the property of the four proposed alternative water storage sites a license for entry onto the property in substantially the form as that attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by th/$ reference. 10. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the final agrcemem among tht' parties. It is the complete and exclusive expression of the parties' agreement on the matters contained in this Agreement. All prior and contemporaneous negotiations and agreements between ~he parties on the matters contained in this Agreement are expressly merged into and superseded by this Agreement. 11. Counterparts. The parties may execute this Agreement in counterparts, each of which is deemed an original and all of which constitute only one agreement. 12. Captions. The descriptive headings of the sections ofthis Agreement are for convenience only and do not constitute a part of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is made this 27h day of Suly, 2006 and is effective as of that date. CITY OF UKIAH, a General City HOPLAND PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT, a Slgn~eial District by: by: Its: Its: MILLVIEW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District WILLOW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District by: by: Its: Its: Page 5 of 10 CALPELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District REDWOOD VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District by: Its: by: Its: Draft: 06/26/06 Page 6 of 10 EXHIBIT °'A" LICENSE AGREEMENT This License Agreement is made this day of ,2006 by and between ("Licensor") and _, Agent for the CITY OF UKIAH, a General Law City; HOPLAND PUBLIC UTILITY DISTIl ICT, a Special District; MILLVIEW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; WILLOW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; CALPELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; and REDWOOD VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Agencies") (the "Licensee"). WHEREAS, Licensor is the owner of that certain real property commonly referred to as _, Mendocino County Assessor's Parcel No(s).: __ , more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"). WHEREAS, Licensee desires to obtain permission to perform certain acts on Licensor's Property, NOW THEREFORE it is agreed as follows: 1. Licensor grants to Licensee a Licensee, or Licensee's designee, to enter the Property. upon twenty-four (24) hours' written notice to Licensor, for the purpose of obtaining int0rmation relative to the Property, including but not limited to seismic characteristics and geological characteristics of the Property, in order to gather sufficient information so that Licensee's designee can: Page 7 of 10 (a) (b) (d) (0 Estimate the watershed which would contribute water for storage in a reservoir to be constructed on land described in the attached deed. The engineer shall utilize his best approximate judgment as to the positioning of that reservoir utilizing USI3S maps and any general observations of. the property offered as a proposed reservoir site. Estimate the periods of time within which it might be possible to store water in a reservoir constructed utilizing the 1997 SWRCB report recommending ,ahen diversions of water may occur upon the Russian River without likelihood of harming fishery resources or other water users when there is sufficient flow_ Estimate from rainfall records and downstream gauge readings on the Russian River when releases of storage are not occurring in dry years from Lake Mendocino storage the number of days in which water might be stored iv such a reservoir and the possible storage amounts utilizing a bypass requiremen! for fish life within the stream downstream of the proposed reservoir site that the Engineer finds reasonable after conversing with knowledgeable fishery experts and personnel of the SWRCB who are currently using guidelines as to the maximum amounts of natural flow which may be diverted without presumptively creating potential impacts upon anadromous fish. That methodology is called a Water Availability Analysis and utilizes a criteria known as CFII which has been agreed to by the CDFG and NMFS for the Russian River Tributiaries. The engineer chosen will then make an estimate based upon the 1976-77 drought cycle and the 1988-92 drought cycle as to the amounts of yield which mi~,ht be stored and carried over in such a reservoir and of the range of size that w,~uld provide an efficient reservoir for the likely yield. The engineer will then estimate construction costs and any relocation costs in the broadest way based upon Construction News Record estimates for typical construction of similar types in similar areas. The engineer will then apply typical financing and operation and maintenance costs and meet with the participants to discuss the assumptions, the range of the variables and the likely costs for reliable water supply similar to that required for domestic and industrial customers and the costs for non reliable water supply or intermptible supplies that might be available during normal or above novnal water conditions. It is recognized that such a preliminary estimate procedure will not be able to anticipate temperature problems with release of water from the proposed reservoir to substitute for Lake Mendocino supplies and the release regime which would allow water flows within the mainstem of the Russian River to be both utilized Page 8 of 10 and not to create potential contentions of disadvantageous conditions to fishery resources because of the substitution and the lack of' flow from Lake Mendocino to the point where substitute supplies will enter the raainstem of the Rm,sian [~iver. (h) It is recognized that the Engineer performing these works will not be able to anticipate all Division of Dam Safety requirements or any peculiar earthquake conditions which may exist in the area. It is recognized that the Engineer will be creating only a general understanding of the range of costs and obstacle,~ and exactitude is not to b~ emphasizexl over obtaining sufficient information to determine general economic feasibility of the concept. However, the Engineer shall conduct such borings ~ may be reasonably necessary to identify seismic issues as may be relevant to the feasibility of the construction of thc contemplated impoundment. 2. The License is personal to the Agent of the Licensee and its Engineer/Designee. It is nonassignable and any attempt to assign this License terminates it. 3. This License shall remain in effect for the period of September 1,2006 through June 30, 2007. 4. Except as to the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Licensor, Licensee shall defend, indemnify, and hold the Licensor and/or their officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all loss, damage, claim for damage, liability, expense, or cost, including attorneys' fees which arise out of or is in any way connected with the performance of work under this Agreement by Licensee or any of Licensee's employees, agent~, or subcontractors and from all claims by Licensee's employees, subcontractors and agents for compensation for services rendered to Licensee in the performance of this Agreement, notwithstanding that the Licensor may have benefitted from their services. This indemnification provision shall apply to any acts or omissions, willful misconduct or negligent conduct, whether active or passive, on the part of Licensee or of Licensee's employees, subcontractors or agents_ 5. Licensor understands that Licensees are spending significant public funds for the purpose of conducting these investigations and in doing so, Licensor agrees that Licensor will not enter into negotiations with any other party for an agreement to store winter flows of th{' Russian River or any project similar to that contemplated by Agent and the Agencies for a period of twenty-four months following the date of this Agreement, without first granting to Agem's Agencies as a collective group, the opportunity to negotiate an agreement with Licensor for a period of ninety (90) days. 6. This License shall be binding upon any successors and assigns of the Licensor. l:)rat~: 06126106 Page 9 of 10 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this License Agreement as of' the day and year first above written. LICENSOR: LICENSEE: Agent for the CITY OF UKIAH, a General Law City; HOPLAND PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT, a Spec/al District; MILLVIEW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; WILLOW COUN'I'Y WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; CALPELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; and REDWOOD VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District Page 10 of 10 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING for PRELIMINARY REVIEW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF POTENTIAL WATER SUPPLY This Agreement is made by and among st~ch of the following parties wh~. ~e~t~te.i.thiS; MemorandUm prior to July 31, 2006: the CITY OF UKIAH, a General Law cityi'iaoPLAND PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT, a Special District; MILLVIEW COUNTY WATER DJSTRICT, a County Water District; WILLOW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; CALPELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; and REDWOOD VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District (hereinafter collect ively referred to as the "Public Agencies"). RECITALS A. The Public Agencies are desirous of developing additional public water supply; The Public Agencies anticilaate that. they will ,C~llaborate and ¢oo~mie ,ogCthe~ for the development.of future water sulap!ies,.in¢!u~ng but not necessarily to the Proposed Project d~fined herein; A project has been proposed by which the Public Agencies would impound 10,000 acre feet of unappropriated Winter Russian River Flows (hereinafter the "Proposed Project"); ho An impoundment site is being offered to the Public Agencies by a property owner controlling the entirc impoundment site presently zoned for water impoundment; Bo The foregoing provides the Public Agencies with a common interest in determining the feasibility for undertaking the Proposed Project and to determine the appropriate structure for doing so; Co The Public Agencies now desire to establish the general terms and conditions by which they will collectively define the Proposed Project. AGREEMENT In consideration of the foregoing and the provisions stated herein, the Public Ag,:ncies agree as follows: 1. Cooperation. Each Public Agency agrees to cooperate with the Public Agencies in implementing the purposes of this Agreement. Page 1 of 11 ~g/~ld BIO~ 6~ £0L=~I ARV3N '£ H;HdO£~IHHD ~E:~] 90-9~-90 2. Appoimment of Agent. The Public Agencies si~]l appoint .an agent as Agent (,f the Public Agencies to implement this Agreement on behalf of the Public Agencies who shall hereafter be designated as the "Agent." ,.-w,~,.~ 0.~ ~-,s.,~.~ foll,,w~ "-~. ........... ,~,-,~,,~. ~,fIl~e funcfon, of the. Agent. shall be to develop a Re~luest for Proposals ~ G-..li.fcatlo,~. for the enRineerinR r~ort comemplatedby. ~hi'S Memorandum, sub. iect to ao~roval by the Public Agencies; to issue a contract to ~hcsucC~sfui respondent; and to administer such contract, inciudi .r~.but n0tHmited to coH~ti0tFofs'atiCient funds from the Public Agencies to recomvens~ the.Ag~t fo~: its'.-services hereUnd~ii.,m. approved by the Public Agencies, and to disburse payment to the eng~ne~r~.. 3. Issuance 0f Request for PropOsals. (a} The Agent shall ~c. lcct for ~ En~n~n~ Re~ ~the "E~in~rin~'R~ Se~t~r 30, 20~, Memo~d~ ~yn0min~c ~ thc ~ent. O) The RFP'shall defiae the'Engineedng Report to include preliminary calculations and e imates of me fonowin : (i) Estimate the watershed which would comribute water for storage in a reservoir to be constructed on land de,~cribcd in the attached deed. The engineer shall utilize his best approximate judgment as to the positioning of thru reservoir utilizing USGS maps and any general observation:; oftbe property offercd as a proposed reservoir site. (ii) E$timate thc periods of time within which it might be possible to store water in a reservoir constructed utilizing the 1997 SWRCB repor~ recommending when diversions of water may occur upon the Russian River without likelihood of harming fishery resources or other w,,ter users when there is sufficient flow. Draft Page 2 of 11 (iii) (iv) (v) (vii) (viii) Estimate from rainfall re. cords and downstream gauge readings on the Russian River when releases of storage are not occurring in dry years firom Lake Mendocmo storage the number of days in which water might be stored in such a reservoir and the possible storage amounts utilizing a bypass requirement for fish life within the stream downstream o:f the proposed reservoir site that the Engineer finds reasonable after conversing with knowledgeable fishery experts and personnel of the SWRCB who are currently using guidelines as to the maximum amounts of natural flow which may be diverted without presumptively creating potential impacts upon anadromous fish. That methodology is called a Water Av:dlability Analysis and utilizes a criteria known as CFII which has been asreed to by the CDFG and NMFS for the Russian River Tributiaries. The engineer chosen will then make an estimate based upon thc 1976-77 drought cycle and the 1988-92 drought cycle as to the amounts ofyield which might be stored and carded over in such a reservoir and of the range of size that would provide an efficient reservoir for the likely yield. The engineer will then estimate construction costs and any relocation costs in the broadest way based upon Construction News Record estimates for typical construction of similar types in similar areas. The engineer will then apply typical financing and operation and maintenance costs and meet with the participants to discuss the assumptions, the range of the variables and the likely costs for reliable water supply similar to that required for domestic and industrial customers and the costs for non reliable water supply or interruptible supplies that might be available during normal or above normal water conditions. It is recognized that such a preliminary estimate procedure will not be able to anticipate temperature problems with release of water from the proposed reservoir to substitute for Lake Mendocino supplies and the release regime which would allow water flows within the mainstcm of the Russian River to be both utilized and not to create potential contentions of disadvantageous conditions to fishery resources because of the substitution and the lack of flow bom Lake Mendocino to the point where sul'~timte supplies will enter the mainstem of the Russian River. It is recognized that the Engineer performing these works will no~: be able to anticipate all Division of Dam Safety requirements or any peculiar earthquake conditions which may exist in the area. It is recognized that the Engineer will be creating only a general understanding of the range of costs and obstacles and exactitude is not to be emphasized over obtaining Page 3 of 1 i (ix) sufficient information to determine general economic feasibility of the concept. However, the Engineer shall conduct such borings as may be reasonably necessary to identify seismic issues as may be relevma to the feasibility of the construction of the contemplated impoundmem. Any other s~cification of s~/i.ces:related it0'~he Proposed. Pr0ie~:t reasonably related tot he Proposed Project as may be proPOSed by':~y party hereto. 4. issunnee of Contract and Notice to Proceed. Upon receipt of proposals b~.thc. Ag~nt in response to the ,'~,;,i-ac~; for Prot,c, ra, l~RFP, the parties shall convene and ascertain the successful prov0ser. Thc parties will then collectively authorize .th.~...~gent to award a coast for the Proposed Pr0iect on a time and materials basis, or.such' other' basi~s as.maY':be aporoPfiat¢ in revised of the proposal, and thereupon the Agent shall supervise the contract performmee and report regularly to the parties to this Agreement. Upon the Agent's receipt of responses to the :RFP, the Public Agencies's~lall pr°ml~tly c~nYene to finalize the selection of the successful proposal. The Public' Agencies. shall:d~ermine the .selection by vote with each Public Agency having one vote exercised by the: sim~ator..of~s Memorandum by each Public Agency, or such other representative, as a Public Agency: may designata. Upon selection of the successful respondent,' the. Agent shall execute, acont~act: far the Engineering Report as.A~ent for the Public Agencies within iforty~five (45) dayS::of:.gu~:h selection, provided that there is Sufficient financial c.ommitment:by the:Public Agenc!es..to:fimd the projected cost oft. he Engineering Report. 5. RiF. ht of Withdrawal. For a lxt, Hod commencin,e with the selection of the s'6¢ces~fU! respondent as dete,uined in Section 4 above, and.the issuaneeofthe notice t° proceed, any Public Agency shall have .the riF4ht: to withdraw its financial, c°~tment to fund thelex~'nSe the Engineerin~ Report, either .on. a/~ro rata basis,, or upon a portion of the ~ro rata'basis::. Should:any Agency so withdraw such commitment, the Agent shall offer the amount ofsuch defi~.i~ncyl to the other Public Agencies who shall then have fifteer~ (15) days to.subSCribe 'i0 such ~t~fi~i~nt amount on a pro rata basis. The Agent shall ascertain prior to issuanCe of anotice to pm~ed that there is sufficient financial commitment to fundthe pr ~ocurement. 56. Receipt of Report. brPromptlY upon the receipt of the Report, representati,~s.of the . Pu!p!i~.Agencies shall c.o..nyen~ ,to .determine whc,th, r ¢.r the Proposed Proj,.,cC! is feasible:ilor p~g P~SCS, or whether fitrther study.is necessary to make such determination Upon determination that the Proposed Project is feasible, the Public Agencies shall then determine the struct'vxe for proceeding with the supervision and finalization of the Proposed Project, including but not limited to the formation ora Joint Powers Agency for the purpose of completing and m~naging the Proposed Project. 67, tDedieaeitmProration of Tu.~d~Resources. The Public Agencies have identified the Page 4 of 11 cost of the Project Identification as being up to NINETY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($90,000). Each party to this Agreement has received authorization of [kS..goyeming body to contribute on a pro rata basis to the cost of preparing the l',,,jc,X D~f;~lii~,Engiit~ir!g.Report at a maximum cost to each Agency of FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1 $,000~ °r in.suc~':?a~i a~"i~ det¢.rmined by the process set forth in Paragraph 4 above. It is agreed that the potential water resource from the Project shall likewise by apportioned on apro rata basis among the parties hereto. However, nothing contained heroin shall be construed as committing any partT to participation in the P~oj,~;, ,~ncc ~,"~,~ %ost'of the Engineering Report, Or Particil~ationin ~ding the ~tting, envir°n~ental license, regulatory clearance or construction of the Property Project. 8. Withdrawal from pr°e~ss. At any time any Publi~.Agency m&y withdra~.fi~m~te Memorandum by written notice to'the other parties to the Memorandum.. Any such Withdra~g Public Agency may recover its particil~ation costs in the.Pmiectlby assignin~ its'w~et restur~ share de£meA in Paragraph 7 to a recipient agreeable to each 0fthe n°n'withdraWi Pt~btiC Agencies. However, the consideration for such assignment cannot bemore than the ~i~drawing Agency's °ut-of-rocket cost for-participation as cOntemi~iat~d herein.'.i pfior.~to offering the right of assignmmt to a third i~'ty not a ~arty to.'.this ~Memorand~it~. o~;~r':~i be made on a first-~ome-first-assigned basis to. the other Public Agencies to.this. Agreevtent. 9. License for Entry and Right to Negotiate First. Prior to cxccution of a contract with the Engineer commi~ing to expenditure of funds for the work, the Agent sl~ll obtain from the owner of the property of the four proposed alternative water storage sites a license for er~try omo the property in substantially the form as that attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference. 010,- Entire Agreement. This Ag~eemcm constitutes the final agrccment among the parties. It is the complete and exclusive expression of the parties' agreement on the matters contained in this Agreement. All prior and contemporaneous negotiations and agreements between the parties on the matters contained in this Agreement are expressly merged into and superseded by this Agreement. 911.- Counterparts. The parties may execute this Agr~ent in counterparts, each of which is deemed an original and all of which constitute only one agreement. 102. Captions. The descriptive headings of the sections of this Agreement are for convenience only and do not constitute a part of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is made this 267a day of A-g~jUly, 2006 and is effective as of that date. ~-,~ 0santo6 Page 5 of 11 CITY OF UKIAH, a General City by: Its: M1LLVIEW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District Its: CALPELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District by: Its: HOPLAND PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT, a Special District by: Its: WILLOW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District by: Its: REDWOOD VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District by: Page 6 of 1 ! ~/O~d ~lO~ ~i~ LOL=Cll AltWiRN '£ Hi~HdOL~It:iHD ~:~I 90-9~-g0 EXHIBIT "A" LICENSE AGREEMENT This License Agreement is made this day of _, 2006 by and between ("Licensor") and _ ~ Agent for the CITY OF UKIAH, a Oeneral Law City; HOPLAND PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT, a Special District; M1LLVIEW COUNTY WAIER DISTRICT, a County Water District; WILLOW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; CALPELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; and REDWOOD VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District ~ereinaRer collectively referred to as the "Agencies") (the "Licensee"). WHEREAS, Licensor is the owner of that certain real propezt7 commonly referred to as , Mendocino County Assessor's Parcel No(s).: · more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"). WHEREAS, Licensee desires to obtain permission to perform certain acts on Licensor's Property, NOW THEREFORE it is agreed as follows: 1. Licensor grants to LicenSee a Licensee, or Licensee's designee, to enter the Property, upon twenty-four (24) hours' written notice to Licensor, for the purpose of obtaining information relative to the Property, including but not limited to seismic characteristics and geological characteristics of the ~0perty, in order to gather sufficient information so that Licensee's designee can: Page 7 of 11 ~g/lgd gtO~ fi~O LOL~I AHV~N '£ ~dOlgl~O ~g:~l go-gg-go (a) Estimate the watershed which would contribute water roi' storage in a reservoir to be constructed on land described in the attached deed. The engineer shall utilize his best approximate judgment as to the positioning of that reservoir utilizing USGS maps ~nd any general observations of the property offered as a proposed reservoir site. Co) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) Estimate the periods of time within which it might be possible to store ~'ater in a reservoir constructed utilizing the 1997 SWRCB report recommending when diversions of water may occur upon the Russian River without likelihood of harming fishery resources or other water users when there is sufficient flow. Estimate from rainfall records and downstream gauge readings on the Russian River when releases of storage are not occumng in dry years from Lake Mendocino storage the number of days in which water might be stored iJ~ such a reservoir and the possible storage amounts utilizing a bypass requirement for fish life within the stream downstream of the proposed reservoir site that the Engineer finds reasonable after conversing with knowledgeable fishery experts and personnel of the SWRCB who are currently using guidelines as to the rrutximum amounts of natural flow which may be diverted without presumptively o'eating potential impacts upon anadromous fish. That methodology is called a Water Availability Analysis and utilizes a criteria known as CFII which has been agreed to by the CDFG and NMFS for the Russian River Tributiaries. The engineer chosen will then make an estimate based upon the 1976-77 drought cycle and the 1988-92 drought cycle as to the amounts of yield which might be stored and carried over in such a reservoir and of the range of size that would provide an efficient reservoir for the likely yield. The engineer will then estimate construction costs and any relocation costs in the broadest way based upon Construction News Record estimates for typica[ construction of similar types in similar areas. The engineer will then apply typical financing and operation and maintenance costs and meet with the participants to discuss the assumptions, the range of the variables and the likely costs for reliable water supply similar to that reqt, ired for domestic and industrial customers and the costs for non reliable water supply or interruptible supplies that might be available during normal or above normal water conditions. It is recognized that such a preliminary esfmate procedure will not be able to 06126106 Page 8 of 11 Sg/~d ~10~ ~S~ ZOZ=GI AHV~N '£ HgHdO~IHHD gg:~I go-go-go anticipate temperature problems with release of water fi'om the proposed reservoir to substitute for Lake Mendocino supplies and the release regime which would allow water flows within the mainstem of the Russian River to be both utilized and not to create potential contentions of disadvantageous conditions to fishery resources because of the substitution and the lack of flow from Lake Mendocino to the point where substitute supplies will enter the mainstem of the Rus.qan River. Ca) It is recognized that the Engineer performing these works will not be able to anticipate all Division of Dam Safety requirements or any peculiar earthquake conditions which may exist in the area. It is recognized that the Engineer will be creating only a general understanding of the range of costs and obstacles and exactitude is not to be emphasized over obtaining sufficient information ~o determine general economic feasibility of the concept. However, the Engineer shall conduct such borings as may be reasonably necessary to identify seismic issues as may be relevant to the feasibility of the construction of the contemplated impoundment. 2. The License is personal to the L~c~r,s~s, t~gh- Agar, rAgent of thcILic~n~c¢ and t~h~iAts Engineer/Designee. It is nonassignable and any attempt to assign this License tcn, ninates it. 3. This License shall remain in effect for the period of 3aneSeptembet I, 2006 through ~June 30, 20067. 4. Except as to the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Licensor, Licensee shall defend, indemnify, and hold the Licensor and/or their officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all loss, damage, claim for damage, liability, expense, or cost, in,:luding attorneys' fees which arise out of or is in any way connected with the performance of w~nk under this Agreement by Licensee or any of Licensee's employees, agents, or subcontractors and from ali claims by Licensee's employees, subcontractors and agents for compensation for services rendered to Licensee in the performance of this Agreement, notwithstanding that the Licensor may have benefitted from their services. This indemnification provision shall apply to :my acts or omissions, willful misconduct or negligent conduct, whether active or passive, on the part of Licensee or of Licensee's employees, subcontractors o~' agents. 5. Licensor understands that Licensees are spending significant public fund:; for the purpose of conducting these investigations and in doing so, Licensor agrees that Licenst,r will not enter into negotiations with any other party for an agreement to store winter flows of the Russian River or any project similar to that contemplated by Agent and the Agencies for a period of twenty-four months following thc date of this Agreement, without first granting to Agent's Agencies as a collective group, the opportunity to negotiate an agreement with Licensor for a period of ninety (90) days. Page 9 of 11 6:.': This License shall be binding upo. any successors and :assigns O~'ike!Li, ,ce, ~6~i DraR: 06126106 Page 10 of 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this License Agrc, ement as of the day and year first above written. LICENSOR: LICENSEE: Agent for the CITY OF UKIAH, a General Law City; HOPLAND PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRiCT, a Special District; M[LLVIEW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, ;t County Water District; WILLOW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County g'ater District; CALPELLA COLrNTY WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District; and REDWOOD VALLEY COUNT5' WATER DISTRICT, a County Water District Drnft: 06/26106 Page 11 of 11 Attachment 2 From: drapport [mailto:drapport@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, 3uly 12, 2006 3:05 PM To: Chris Neary Cc: Doug Crane; CMRVCWD@pacific.net; Paul rvlinasian; Dave Redding; Candace Horsley Subject: Draft NOU for Hopland project feasibility study Chris - I would have preferred an email of the Word documents containing the MOU and the License Agreement. It would make proposing revisions easier, but in response to the hard copies that you faxed, I have the following proposed changes. I apologize for not getting these to you sooner, but I was out of town from June 25 to July 10, and I only saw your memo and the revised agreements yesterday. Memorandum of Understanding 2. Appointment of Agent. The Public Agencies shall appoint a person or entity as their Agent for the purpose of administering this Agreement, who shall be referred to herein as "Agent." The Agent shall propose a Request for Proposal ("RFP") for the engineering study and report contemplated by this Agreement and a Contract for use by the Public Agencies and the consultant selected to perform this work. Both the RFP and the Contract must be approved by the Public Agencies as further provided herein. The Agent shall enter the Contract with the selected consultant on behalf of the Public Agencies and shall perform such additional services as are reasonably necessary to administer this Agreement. The Agent shall be authorized to accept reports, provide information to and receive information from the consultant, and perform the Public Agencies' obligations under the Contract. 3(a) The Agent shall issue the RFP requesting the general scope of work described in subsection (b) below. The RFP shall be widely distributed to qualified consultants, including any firms identified by any party to this Agreement. The RFP shall be distributed by September 30, 2006, with a deadline for submitting proposals not sooner than fifteen working days from the issuance of the RFP 3(b)(ii) Estimate the periods of time within which it might be possible to divert and store water at the proposed reservoir location utilizing the August 15, 1997, SWRCB report entitled: Proposed Actions to be Taken by the Division of Water Rights on Pending Water Rights Applications in the Russian River Watershed. 4. Issuance of Contract and Notice to Proceed. After the date established for submitting proposals, the parties shall convene and select the successful consultant. Upon authorization of the Public Entities, the Agent shall award the Contract, the terms of which, including the amount to be paid, must be approved by the Public Agencies as provided below. The Public Agencies' obligation under the Contract shall be subject to sufficient funds being available as provided in Section 5 below. 7. Proration of Resources. The reference to paragraph 4 should probably be paragraph 5. o Why the limitation on the amount of consideration paid to a withdrawing agency? Since the new participant would have to be approved by the others, why should the amount an agency can get for its share be subject to any limitation? The City Council discussed this and seemed to favor a less restrictive right to sell the entitlement. License agreement The City Council agreed with my observation that the License Agreement doesn't prevent the property owner from selling the property or using the property in ways that would prevent the project from proceeding. It just prevents him from negotiating with anyone else for a reservoir project. They favored at least attempting to get a stronger committment from the property owner, such as a provision prohibiting the owner from selling the property or using the reservoir site in any way that would interfere with the reservoir project for the two year period without first negotiating with the parties, and making that agreement binding on the property owner's successors or assigns. The agreement could require that signatures are notarized and allow the agencies to record the License Agreement. If these additional provisions cannot be negotiated, could provide me with an explanation? The approval of the MOU will be placed on the City Council agenda for July 19. The agenda closes on Thursday, but I can get any response to these comments to the City Council at the meeting, even if that material is not available by the end of the day tomorrow. Feel free to call with any questions. David J. Rapport Rapport and Marston 405 W. Perkins Street Ukiah, Ca. 95482 Tel: 707-462-6846 Fax: 707-462-4235 Alt. Fax 501-636-4538 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. '10.q DATE: July 19, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENT TO THE INVESTMENT OVERSIGHT COMMrn'EE, DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW COMMrn'EE, PATHS, OPEN SPACE, AND CREEKS COMMISSION AND THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING COMMITTEE A News Release was issued on May 9, 2006 soliciting applicants to fill one (1) expired term on the Investment Oversight Committee; two (2) expired terms on the Demolition Review Committee; three (3) expired terms on the Paths, Open Space and Creeks Commission, and one (1) vacancy on the Traffic Engineering Committee. As of the June 13, 2006 noon deadline, applications received were as follows: Investment Oversight Committee: Monte Hill and Todd Schapmire Jr. Demolition Permit Review Committee: Judy Pruden and Lisa Mammina Paths, Open Space, and Creek's Commission: Beth Lang, Jimmy Rickel, Suzanne Farris, Robert Werra, Fred Koeppel and Dan Holbrook Traffic Engineering Committee: William French Jr., and John E. Lampi The nominating Council members are signified on Attachment #2. Interviews are not required for these appointments as per Council policy. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution making appointment to the Investment Oversight Committee, Demolition Permit Review Committee, Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commision and the Traffic Engineering Committee ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Applicants notified of appointment process Ukiah City Council Gail Petersen, Deputy City Clerk Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution making appointments 2. Terms of City of Ukiah Commissions and Committees 3. Applications for appointment 4. Resolution 2001-61 Candace Horsley, City Manager Page I of 1 ATTACHMENT # 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2006- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH MAKING APPOINTMENT TO THE INVESTMENT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW COMMITTEE PATHS, OPEN SPACE, AND CREEKS COMMISSION AND THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING COMMITrEE WHEREAS, the annual expiration of terms for City Commissions and Committees occurred on June 30, 2006; and WHEREAS, the vacancies were duly advertised until the close of applications at noon on June 13, 2006, with submitted applications timely received and submitted to Council for consideration; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ukiah City Council approved the nomination submitted per Procedures outlined in Resolution No. 2001-61, and do hereby appoint the following person to term on the following Commissions: Investment Oversight Committee (one vacancy) to fill a term to June 30, 2008; Demolition Permit Review Committee (two vacancies) to fill a term to June 30, 2008 to fill a term to June 30, 2008 Paths, Open space, and Creek's Commission (three vacancies) to fill a term to June 30, 2009 to fill a term to June 30, 2009 to fill a term to June 30, 2009; Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT # 1 Traffic Engineering Committee (one vacancy) to fill a term to June 30, 2008 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of July, 2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Gail Petersen, Deputy City Clerk Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENT # 2 Terms of City of Ukiah Investment Oversight Committee, Demolition Permit Review Committee, Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission, and the Traffic Engineering Committee Investment Oversight Committee Public Member 2-yeer term - (Crane) City Treasurer - Allen Carter, City Treasurer, Chairperson Public Member - Monte Hill Candace Horsley, City Manager Gordon Elton, Interim Finance Director Mari Rodin, City Councilmember Date Appointed Term Expires 6/30/04 6/30/06 Demolition Permit Committee - 2 year term (McCowen) Sage Sangiacomo, Director of Community Development Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Charley Stump, Building Official Chair of Design Review Committee Mendocino County Historical Society Representative Judy Pruden, Chairperson) City of Ukiah Resident William French Jr. Date Appointed 7/7/04 6/30/06 7/7/04 6/30/06 Term Expires Paths, Open Space and Creeks Commission (McCowen) 3 year term Date Appointed Term Expires James Connerton Howell Hawkes Dan Holbrook (unexpired term of Bill Randolph) Fred Koeppel* Lindsay Leland* * Two Commissioners may reside within the Sphere of Influence 8/3/05 6/30/06 5/21/03 6/30/06 8/6/05 6/30/06 5/21/03 6/30/06 8/3/05 6/30/08 Traffic En~lineering Committee - (Rodin) Date Appointed Term Expires Public Representative - Vacancy Public Representative - Steve Turner, Chairperson Local Transit authority - Bruce Richard, MTA Representative* Staff: 2/4/04 N/A N/A City Manager- Ben Kageyama (Representative for City Manager) Chief of Police - Trent Taylor (representative for Chief of Police) City Engineer- (Rick Seanor, Deputy Public Works Director (Representative for City Engineer) Planning Director - Dave Lohse, Associate Planner (Representative for Planning Director) Superintendent of Public Works - Jerry Whitaker ATTACHMENT #3 DATE: 6/2/'06 CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT INVESTMENT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE " ~,~'i-6 2006 I am applying for an appointment as the Public Member of the Investmerlt_O_v_c~r~i~ht Cd~t~itt~2tfor the City of Ukiah. 1. Name Monte Hi]] 2. Residence Address 1308 W. Clay St, ,, rJkJah 95482 Res. Phone 462-2672 3. Employer A.G. Edwards & Sons Job title Financial ~cnsu]tant _Employed since 200~ 4. Business Address 302 S. School St., Ukiah 95482Bus. Phone 462-8585 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? 41 years; Mendocino County?... 41 California? 64 6. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with or elected or appointed positions you have held: See Attached Resume Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. 7. Why are you applying to serve the City of Ukiah in this capacity? z have served in this capacity for 10 sears and feel I am able to contribute to the duties of the ccnmtittee 8. What experience co you have that qualifies you to cam7 out the duties and responsibilities as a member of the Investment Oversight Committee? 25 years in the investment business 9. DO you currently conduct any business with the City as a vendor, supplier, or independent contractor? No 10. Please be specific in describing, your experience in the management of a multifaceted investment portfolio. My 25 years of experience has involved adv,_si_rig investors with a multitude of ,d, iffer.ent investment goals and using a wide variety of investment inst.r~ment.~ 1 1. r~ow. extensive is your experience relating to municipal irfvesting? Are you tammar w~zn the State requirements associated with local government investments? ..... · Lv~ munmczpal experience and knowledge of requirements has come from my service with ~he ccr~rL~ttee 12.Describe any previous experience you have had with municipal government finances· .A~_v,i.~_i__ng clients on purchases of municipal securities 13. What types of internal ~ontrols would ~/ou recomrflend for-tile City's invest(nent committee? Pericdic (monthly?) reviews of the portfolio ' 14. Why should the City Council appoint you to this position? I have extensive experience With investfnents and kn. ow. ledge gained from service.on ~;he I.O.C. When submitting this application, please attach a complete resume covering your eoucauon, career, and community experience. Please return this application and attachments to the City Clerk by Noo_.._._Qn on Tuesday, June 13, 2006. Thank you for your interest in serving the City of Ukiah. Signatur~ _~/z/Z/',~~ ~ ~ Date City of Ukiah, 300-~eSe4nary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone: 463-6217 Fax: 463-6204 Forms: Investment Oversight Committee Application Revised: 5/09/06 RESUME MONTE J. HILL NAME: BIRTHDATE: PLACE: Monte J. Hill September 5, 1941 Sebastopol, California EDUCATION: ELEMENTARY: Sebastopol, CA HIGH SCHOOL: Analy High School 1958 COLLEGE: B.S. Pharmacy-University of Pacific, Stockton, CA- 1963 MILITARY: California Army National Guard (Calaring) 1963-1969 State Service Ribbon-2 clusters Honorable Discharge Rank: E-6 (Staff Sergeant) FAMILY: Married 11/14/64 Wife: Kay - Resource Specialist - Yokayo Elementary School - Retired 2002 Children: Kristine: BA Business-Marketing Sacramento State University- 1988 Craig: BA Industrial Technology - Polymer Science Chico State University - 1990 CHURCH: St. Mary's of the Angels Lector, Finance Committee, Physical Plant Study Committee, Parish Council, Building Committee, Knights of Columbus, St. Mary's School Board of Education -1973-1975. CAREER: 1965-1978 1978-1981 1981-1984 1984-2003 2003 -present Managing Partner - Medico Drug Co., Ukiah, CA Winemaker - Parducci Wine Cellars, Ukiah, CA Stockbroker - Paine Webber, Ukiah/Santa Rosa, CA Financial Advisor/Stockbroker - Wachovia Securities, Inc., (formerly First Union Securities, Inc., formerly EVEREN Securities, formerly Kemper Securities, formerly Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards). Financial Advisor/Stockbroker - A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. Ukiah, CA PROFESSIONAL: Mendocino County Pharmaceutical Association - Founding Member Redwood Health Foundation - Peer Review Committee 1968-1978 Dale Carnegie Graduate - Speaking and Human Relations RESUME: Monte J. Hill PROFESSIONAL continued: Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards - Century Club 1986-1990 Kemper Financial Services - Executive Council Kemper Securities - Chairman's Circle of Excellence California Community Colleges - Lifetime Limited Service Credential LICENSES: California State Board of Pharmacy, California General Life & Variable Annuity, Securities Exchange Commissions Series 7, Chicago Board of Trade Series 3 SERVICE CLUB: Ukiah Rotary Club 1966-present President 1986-1987, Paul Harris Fellow, Chairman Polio Drive 1987-1988 COMMUNITY: Heart Fund Drive - Chairman 1966 Junior Achievement - Board of Directors 1967-1969 Downtown Merchants Association- President 1969 CYO- Basketball Coach 1972-1975 Mendocino Community College - Citizen Advisory Committee, Athletics 1975-1976 Campaign to re-elect Don Clausen - County Chairman Mental Health Association - Board of Directors Chamber of Commerce- Board of Directors 1968-1970, 1992-1996, Chairman 4th of July show 1993-1996, Economic Development Committee - Vice Chairman Grace Hudson Museum Endowment Fund - President 1992-present Masonite Corporation - Citizens Advisory Committee 1995-1996 Mendo Lake Credit Union - Board of Directors 1999-present (Currently President) Ukiah Senior Center Endowment Fund - Board of Directors 2006-present Mendocino Wine Alliance-Tasting and Certifying Panel for "Coro Mendocino" Wine Program 2006-present CIVIC SERVICE: County Board of Supervisors: MPIC, Inc. (formerly Private Industry Council)- Chairman Overall Economic Development Committee 1991-2000 Option 9 CERT Project Review Committee 1994-1998 Workforce Investment Act Taskforce 1999 Workforce Investment Board 2000-present Mendocino Council of Governments: Development Corporation Steering Committee 1987-present RESUME: Monte J. Hill CWIC SERVICE continued: Economic Financing & Development Corporation - Board of Directors 1995-1996 City of Ukiah: Ukiah Business Development Center - Loan Committee Investment Oversight Committee 1996-present MEMBERSHIPS: American Legion Cal Trout Cannibal Club USA Friends of Wine HOBBIES: Flyfishing, traveling, gardening, woodworking, cooking, wine tasting DATE: CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT INVESTMENT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE I am applying for an appointment as the Public Member of the Investment Oversight Committee for the City of Ukiah. 2. Residence Address ¢% ¢-'/~~ ~r- Res. Phone 3. Employer ~ ~0'~¢'t.. P~CT.~ob title /~-~_~ 4. Business Address (¢ 0 / ~'. ~'~ ~"i/-- Bus. Phone 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? //¢ Employed since ¢¢,¢r~/~ years; Mendocino County? ,//~' California? 6. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with or elected or appointed positions you have held: Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. 7. 8. o Why are you applying to serve the City of Ukiah in this capacity? ~ ~ ¢_~ '~, ,~-,~,~~I~ What experience do you have that qualifies you to_,carry out,the duties and responsibilities as a m,,ember of the Inve_stmen[.Oversight Commi~ee? ,¢.. ~,~ /4.¢',~t~. (-¢4,.~ (._~u.,¢c ~, .,-. Do you c_urrently conduct any business with t'he City as a vendor, supplier', ~ independent~'~,?'~ contractor? /L/G ~'" ' 10. Please be specific in describing your experience i..n the management of a multifaceted investment J 1. r~ow extens ve ~s your exlS~ience re ating to municipal nvesting. Are you familiar w th the State requirements associated with local aovernment investments? 12. DesCribe any previous exp"erience you have had with municipal government finances. 13. What types of internal controls would you recommend for the City's investment committee? 14. Why should the City Council appoint you to tbis position?. A When submitting this application, please attach a complete resume covering your education, career, and community experience. Please return this application and attachments to the City Clerk by Noon on Tuesda¥~ June~13, 2006. Thank you for your interest in serving the City of Ukiah. Signatu~. %. Date ~,/~/D ~ City of Ukiah, 300 Semih~r Avenue, Ukiah, CA95482-5400 Phone: 463-6217 Fax: 463-6204 Forms: Investment Oversight Committee Application Revised: 5/09/06 Todd A. Schapmire, Jr. 601 S. State St. Ukiah,, CA 95482 Phone: 707-570-9855 Fax: 707-462-4394 E-mail: tschapmke@.pacific.nct Ob|active To donate my time and knowledge to the community while gaining experience in the operations of local government. Eduoatlon California State University, Long Beach. Long Beach, California. Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, Magna Cum Laude, December 2005 Majors: Accountancy and Human Resources GPA-- 4.0 (4=A) Honor Societies Phi Kappa Phi National Interdisciplinary Honor Society, CSULB Chapter Beta Cmmrna Sigma National Business Honor Socicty, CSULB Chapter Work History 2006- Present, Full Spectrum Properties, Inc. Ukiah, CA Realtor~ / Certified Multi-Residential Consultant / Real Estate Investment Planner Duties: To provide clients with an expertise in the current real estate market, real estate contracts, negotiations, marketing, and problem solving. To help clients maximize their return on investment by creating a real estate investment plan based on current and projected market conditions. 2004-2005, RE/MAX College Park Realty, Long Beach, CA Realtor~ Duties: To provide clients with an expertise in thc current real estate market, real estate eolttracts, negotiations, marketing, and problem solving. 2002-2004, Canteen Vending Service., 13kiah, CA Sales Representative, Technology Advisor (Summers Only) Duties: To h~crease the company's customer base in the service areas of vending and office coffee. To assist with the implementation of handheld computers into everyday operations. 2000, Ukiah Daily Journal, Ukiah, CA Freelance Writer (Summer) Duties: To write news stories about events around Ukiah. References Del Wall, Vic. c-President RE/MAX College Park Realt3', 562-435-7554 Tom l_arson, President Full Spectrum Properties, Inc. 707-462-1600 ~o~' CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW COMMITTEE · O& 1,4A¥ '7 2006 B Y: --~- ............... I c,,'n applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Demolition Permit Review Committee 1. Name 2. Residence Address 3. 9usiness Address 4. Employer 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? ',"~ ~ Res. Phone ?~'1, ?Z~ 2_ ~-c,o ¢.'7,4- ~ Bus. Phone '7¢7 .¢.F7 %?0 o Job title ~r~/w'~--,'f~ Employed since years; Mendocino County? /] California? 6. Please list community groups or organizations ygu are affiliated with and list any offices held. Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. 7. Do you live within the Ukiah City Limits? ....--- ...... "~f-(__..~,'~ ,,~ ~.,/ ...... ~ ~ _t~C~'~'x'.'~ ~,4D-~' 8. Why are you applying to serve on the City of Ukiah's Demolition P'~Committee? 9. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Demolition Permit Review Committee? f'l"~ ?- ~ ~ ~ c.,,~ C//,, .oC~- ~f¢~,.O / [,j i C.-c.4.~ ~7 f~O Dc) ~ o. 10. What is your understanding or experience with the historical preservation of buildings within the City Limits of Ukiah? 2o/ ~- '20 ~' %%' f"¢c-.O~ 11. What type of design, architecture, building, or other closely related field do you have? , 1 2, What has been your involvement with the Iocal'history of the Citv of rdkiah'~ ·., 13. How do 'you believe your own skills, experience, expertise aCid perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Demolition Permit Review Committee? ~,u. c.ci,~ FO ~/yYk.,'~' ./- /--/s/-¢ ,,J, 1 4. Are there any other City of Ukiah Committees/Commissions in which you are interested, and on which you would be willing to serve? ~/1 Please return this application and attachments to the City Clerk by Noon on Tuesda¥~ 'u-. nne,) 2006. Thank you for your interest in serving the City of Ukiah. Signature /,/'"A --Date ~'~' City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone: 463-6217 Fax: 463-6204 Forms: Demolition Permit Review Committee Application 2004 Fron'LT_lxe De lt. OP ... June 5, 2006 To Re City Council, City of Ukiah 300 Seminar5, Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 Demolition Permit Review Committee Honorable members of the City Council, Today I am applying for reappointment to the Demolition Permit Review Committee. Please find the answers to questions #7 through #14 below. 7) I have lived within the City limits for the past 5 years. I have spent 28 years living in the Ukiah Valley, and all of my life living in California. 8) I have greatly enjoyed working on the Committee over the past few years. I have learned a lot about our history and have been able to encourage the City to look into preserving more of our rural and agricultural structures. 9) The Demolition Permit Review Committee reviews applications for the demolition of structures that are over 50 years old. The Committee develops findings regarding the historical and architectural importance of said structures and then makes a recommendation to the City of Ukiah regarding the demolition permit. 10) I have always been interested in the architectural heritage of Ukiah. I have encouraged the preservation of our historical structures, the reconstruction of structures we have lost, and the restoration of our Downtown. I have passed on to property owners historic photos of there properties, to encourage them to develop restoration plans. I served on the Design Review Board for a number of years and resigned when I found that the majority of the committee was not interested in preserving historic architectural elements of the buildings that were up for funding. I have also been a strong advocate for the preservation of important structures and signs that are newer than 50 years of age. I would like to see the City develop a preservation ordinance that allows for the preservation of the handful of important structures and signs that have been built within the past 50 years. 756 Sout~ft ~ It;reel; - I:Ip~l:;nle~l; V - UIt.ic~l, ColiP~q~ gsq82 CT07)q62-q307 - I~te~hjr25~ttotrttail.conl- wt,m,u.be~'l;oPuPdcdl..conl I 1) Where I do not have a background in architecture or design, one of my greatest skills is photograph identification utilizing architectural elements. I also have strong research skills. I volunteered in the photo department of the Marin History Museum when I lived in San Rafael in the late 1990s. 12) I am the owner and operator ofwww.bestofukiah.com, a website that focuses on the historic structures of the Ukiah. I have been a local historian for the past 7 years and have utilized what I have learned in the development of my website. My family came to Ukiah in 1968 and my Father was involved in the installation of the first underground agricultural irrigation system in the County. My Mother even spent a season picking grapes befbre she went to work for the Mendocino County Sheriff's Office, where she worked for 16 years. 13) I have a strong interest in preserving the architectural and historical heritage of Ukiah. I was born into a poor family and have a strong believe in preserving our rural and agricultural heritage. I have tried to preserve important structures, such as the Green Bean factory on Gobbi and the house that sat on the comer of Clara and Orchard. I pay attention to the restoration movement around the Country and watch home improvement programs on television. This has allowed me to gain an understanding of how structures can be saved and utilized for other purposes, while maintaining their historical and architectural elements. I believe that my economic background sets me apart from other members of the Committee. 14) I am applying for the open position on the Traffic Engineering Committee. Thank you,~/~__..~ William D. French, Jr. Pa~ 2 CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR DEMOLITION PER,MIT REVIEW COl I am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Demolition Per ~: JUN -,.r, 2006 O[ "~,' ~.,[ ;:': '-' '~ ."' :?',, ;:. 'rllt-Re'view~ m mitte e 1. Name %_.,/-'~ D ¢ 2. Residence Address ~_~0 L~ .5. /'-/of Res. Phone 3. Business Address Bus. Phone 4. Employer O~ L/:: Job title ~bcc44~/7~'n ¢- Employed since / ! 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? ~.~0///5' years; Mendocino County?~Fr.s California? 6. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with and list any offices held. ~sl~ ¢~ ~/~s~orira~ ~¢~3 Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. -- Do you ive within the Ukiah City Limits? 8. Why are you applying to se~e on the City of Ukiah's Demolition Permit Review Commi~ee? 9. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Demolition Permit Review Committee? 1 0. What is your understanding or experience with the historical preservation of buildings within the City Limits of Ukiah? 1 1. What type of design, architecture, building, or other closely related field do you have? 1 2. What has been. your involvement with the local history of the City of Ukiah? 1 3. How do you believe your own skills, experience, expertise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Demolition Permit Review Committee? w re there any other City of Ukiah Corj~writt~es/Commissions in ~e interested, and on hich you would be willing to Please return this application and attachments to the City Clerk by Noon on Tuesday, June 13, 2006. Thank you for your interest in serving the City of Ukiah. City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone: 463-6217 Fax: 463-6204 Forms: Demolition Permit Review Committee Application 2004 Ms. Judy Pruden Ukiah History Specialist Bldg. Preservation & Research 304 South Hortense Ukiah, CA 95482 707-462-4945 a"¢'~ o//F/(,¢2 CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMeNt- PATHS, OPEN SPACE, AND CREEKS DATE: ~//"~/~)~ i am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Paths, Op~S~e, and~Cr~om[~fission 1. Name "~ 2. Residence Address 3. Business Address 4. Employer Res. Phone /':/L7 ~._~) ~ (0 ( Bus. Phone Job title Employed since 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? ~ years; Mendocino County?~D California? 6. Please list cpmmunity groups or organizatipgs you are affiliated with. Indicate office held? Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. 7. Why are you applying to serve on the City of Ukiah's Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission? @. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission? 9. How do you believe your own si<ills, experience, expertise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission? 10. In your opinion, what type of programs or development should the City encourage? 11. What kind of ideal community do you envision for Ukiah? i 2. L Jo you have any known projects or conflict of interest related to this Commission? 13. Are there any other City of Ukiah Committees/Commissions in which you are interested and on which you would be willing to serve? Please return this application and attachments to the City Clerk by Noon on Tuesda¥~ June 13~ 2006. Thank you for your interest in serving the City of Ukiah. City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Forms: Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission Application Date Phone: 463-6217 Fax: 463-6204 CiTY OF UKIAH ,,'. APPLICATION FOR APPOINTME~t~ PATHS, OPEN SPACE, AND CREEKS i am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Paths, 2 Residenc~dress .~ ~~7/ N, ~r~F~ Res. Phone ~sion 3. Business Address Bus. Phone 4. Employer ~¢(~//~_ H ,~'~'~¢('f__..% Job title Employed since 1'?'7~~'' 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? ~',.¢'~ years; Mendocino County? ,,.'" California? 6. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with. Indicate office held? Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. 7. Why are you applying to serve on the City of Ukiah's Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission? 8. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission? f..~£C:CT~¢~ ~¢F'E..~ec~,,P ,cF T~ ~~v~T~.~ ~.T oF ~, ~. 9, How do you believe your own skills, experience, expertise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission? 1 0. In your opinion, what type of programs or development should the City encourage? 11. What kind of ideal community do you envision for Ukiah? i2. ~o you ~ave any known projects or contlict ot interest related to this Commission? 13. Are there any other City of Ukiah Committees/Commissions in which you are interested and on which you would be willing to se~e? Please return this application and attachments to the ~ity ~lerk by Noon on Tuesda~ dune 1~ 2006.~ Tha~~ your interest in serving the ~it~ of Uk~ah. City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone' 463-6217 Fax: 463-6204 Forms: Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission Application JIMMY RICKEL. G o ~ Page 1 of 2 JIMMY RICKEL i IIII II IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIii11111111 IIIIIIII ......... IIiIIIImllllllll' LOCAL BOY LOOKING AFTER YOUR ISSUES BORN JULY 19,1946 IN TUCSON, ARIZONA. MOVED TO UKIAH CALIFORNIA IN 1952. ATTENDED LOCAL SCHOOLS MILITARY SERVICE: AUGUST 1963 TO SEPTEMBER 1967 US ARMY 82ND AIRBORNE OUT OF FORT BRAGG, NC. OVERSEAS DUTY CLOSED OUT IN GERMANY. EDUCATION: AA SANTA ROSA JUNIOR COLLEGE AA MENDOCINO COMMUNITY COLLEGE HUMAN SERVICES CERTIFICATE MCC BACHELOR OF ARTS SONOMA STATE COLLEGE EMPLOYMENT: NEW CAREERS IN MENTAL HEALTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE OUTREACH COUNSELOR DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES CONSULTANT ACCESS TELEVISION PRODUCER POLITICAL OFFICE HELD: UKIAH VALLEY FIRE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS PAST PRESIDENTS: MENDOClNO COUNTY VETERANS COMMANDAR AMERICAN LEGION POST 76 WOMENS SOFTBALL ASSOCIATION REDWOOD EMPIRE LIONS CLUB (23 YEARS) HAVE BEEN ACTIVE IN LOCAL POLITICS SINCE 1971. I BELIEVE IN THE NEED TO WATCH OUR GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS. SH,~I~, WITH THE PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF PROBLEMS AND SOLUTION WITH STRAIGHT TALK. YOU HAVE CONTROL OVER LOCAL POLITICS. VOTE ABSENT VOTER'S BALLOT 2006 Contact Information Email: jim my ri~kel~a_h .o_0_C _o~ Phone: 707-485-7915 http://j immyrickel, com/ 6/13/2006 JIMMY RICKEL Page 2 of 2 ~aaress · ~'OS[ ~JHIce Pox -'w 3900 # 71 North State Street Ukiah California 95482 United States of America Powered by Yahoo! W_eb H_osting. Copyright ©2005 Yahoo, Inc. http://j immyrickel, com/ 6/13/2006 CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT PATHS, OPEN SPACE, AND CREEKS COMMISSI f '~ /':/, DATE: -'//' c~.A/C/6' ''~ / ? i am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Paths, Open Space,~~s c6'mr~s~n 2. Residence Address % 3. Business Address 4. Employer ~'-6/-- ~ 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? Job title Res. Phone/¢'~ ¢~Z~- 2¢/'~/ ~ / Bus. Phone /~JP Employed since~d/~ J6'' years; Mendocino County? VV California?/~/ 6. Please list com.m.unity groups pr, o]'g~njz.,ations ~ are affiliated with. Indicate office held? Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. Wh~areyou apply~o se~¢ on the f L~ah s Paths, Opgn S ace and Cree's C m~ss o 8. What is your understanding of the purpos~ rb-fe and responsibility of the Pdths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission~.~ ,~- . ., 9. How do you believe your own skills, experience, expe~ise and perspective~ will be beneficial to the worko epa 0 ace ~ Cr~s ~,ssioT° 10. In your~gp,~pCtJypg 9ypro~o~2veLop~¢pt~ould the City enc~raqe?. 1 I. What ki~,i~ cg~y~o~.~iAon~gr~iah~ .... ~-. - * m~ ./~' ~/~ ~. Do ~ou ~ave an~ ~no~n p~ojects or conf,ct of ~nterest relatea to t~is Commission~. ~f(.:~ E/2". - 1 3. Are there any other City of Ukiah Commi~ees/Commissions in which you are interested and on which you would be willing to se~e? ~lease roturn this application and attachments to the Cit~ Clerk 2008. lhank you for gout interest in servin~ the Citg Dat~ City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone: 463-6217 Fax: 463-6204 Forms: Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission Application §1020 §1022 CHAPTER 4 COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS ARTICLE lB. PATHS, OPEN SPACE, AND CREEKS COMMISSION SECTION: §1020: §1021: §1022: §1023: §1024: Creation Membership; Appointment Duties And Powers Expenses Of Members; No Compensation Chairperson; Officers §1020: CREATION: There is hereby created a paths, open space, and creeks commission. This advisory body shall report to the city council. (Ord. 1045, §1, adopted 2003) §1021' MEMBERSHIP; APPOINTMENT: The paths, open space, and creeks commission shall consist of five (5) members. Members shall be appointed according to procedures established by resolution of the city council. (Ord. 1045, §1, adopted 2003) §1022: DUTIES AND POWERS: The paths, open space, and creeks commission shall have the power and duty to recommend and advise regarding: Efficient implementation of the open space and conservation element of the Ukiah general plan. Efficient implementation of the pathway sections of the transportation element of the Ukiah general plan. Procedure and funding mechanisms for acquisition, preservation, and effective stewardship of city paths, open space, and creeks. (Ord. 1045, §1, adopted 2003) 1030.1 August/2003 DATE: CITY OF UKIAH PATHS, OPEN SPACE, AND CREEKS COMMISSION 'JUL 2 2006 I am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission 2. Residence Address q (~ ?X,,J,O~ ~~._~s. Phone 3. Business Address 4. Employer (,-) ~ ~ L~ r} ~,'(~d ~o, ~)~ 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? Bus. Phone Job title~rcCfz:~rC~cJ'~ Employed sinceJ c~ years; Mendocino County?::~)~r-~ California?~c Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with. Indicate office held? Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. 7. Why are you applying to serve on the City of ~kiah's Paths, Open Soace, and Creeks Commission? 8. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission~r~ CL ': ~-- 9. How do you believe your own skills, expe~ience, expe~ise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission? 10. In your opinion, what type of programs or development ~hould the City encourage? 11. What kind of ideal community do you en~i~i6n fo:~j6~,~- jl - ] 12. Do you have any known projects or con~t 5f interest related ta this Oommission? 18. Are there any other City of Ukiah Oommi~ees/Oommissions in which you are intereffied and on which you would be willing to se~e? ~ ~:~C.~o ~ Please return this application and attachments to the City Clerk by Noon on Tuesday: June 13, 2006. Thank you for your interest in serving the City of Ukiah. DSte- City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone: 463-6217 Fax: 463-6204 Forms: Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission Application CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING COMMITTEE Date I am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Traffic ~ngme~mg.com~,i~ee 1.Name ~~ ~, ~-~, 2. Residence Address 3. Business Address 4. Employer Job title Res. Phone -~s.'?P hone Employed since 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? ~-~:~ years; Mendocino County? '~- ¢¢, California? 6. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with. Indicate office held. Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. 7. Why are you applying to serve on the City of Ukiah's Traffic Engineering Committee? /What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Traffic Engineering Committee? How do you believe your own skills, experience, expertise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Traffic Engineering Committee? 10. What do you believe is the single most important traffic related issue facing our community? and why? 11. In your opinion, what pther transportation issues/problems should the City expend its limited resources to resolve? 12. What kind of ideal community do you envision for Ukiah? 13. Are there any other City of Ukiah Committees/Commissions in which you are interested, and on which you would be willing to serve? 14. Do you have any known projects or conflict of interest related to this Committee? SUBMIT THIS APPLICATION TO: City of Ukiah, Attn: City Clerk, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Forms:Traffic Engineering Committee Application Revised: 8/20/99 June 5, 2006 To Re City Council, City of Ukiah 300 Seminar), Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 Traffic Engineering Committee Opening Honorable members of the City Council, Today I am applying for the open position on the Traffic Engineering Committee. Please find the answers to questions #7 through #14 below. 7) The future of Ukiah is very important to me. I was born and raised here and I have seen what bad planning has done to increase traffic congestion. I believe there are practical steps that we can start to take to help ease congestion and improve our roadways. I strongly believe in developing a detailed plan for improving our roads so that when funding is available, projects can get started immediately. I also believe that by working with public transit agencies and the school district we can lighten congestion. 8) By my understanding, the Traffic Engineering Committee develops proposals for improving traffic conditions and then submits them to the City Council for review and approval. 9) I have been involved with local government since 1996, and have developed strong working relationships with the City of Ukiah. I was a member of the Mendocino Count)' Mental Health Board and have developed strong relationships with members of the Board of Supervisors. While on the Mental Health Board, I was known for my ability to learn quickly, and come up with compromises that both sides of issues could accept. I am very observant and have the ability to understand complicated issues. Seeing that I am a student, I do not work from 9am to 5pm. I have been able to be on our roads at different times during the day. This has given me a great understanding of how different traffic problems are at varying times each day. It has also allowed me to focus on what is not currently working and find ways to improve current conditions. I spent part of my late teens and early 20s living in the Bay Area. Because of this I have seen how a well run transit agency can improve traffic congestion. I have also seen how 75§ $ou~i'L Oc~ $1sr~g - I~ar~,n~ V - I~iall, Ca~orr~ g~.182 1~7072)q82.~1~07 - Pr~hir2~Ollo~n~ail.conl.- www.L~s~oPul~.iah..conl stop lights, cross walks, and traffic calming conditions can make cities better places to live for all citizens. 10) This is not an easy question. To me the biggest problem currently effecting traffic is the number of parents dropping off and picking up their children from school. Because of these drop offs and pickups, traffic on Low Gap, Gobbi, and Perkins back up and cause massive congestion. I have been a strong advocate for working with the Ukiah Unified School District to first understand why students are not utilizing buses, and finding ways to increase bus use. By increasing the number of students utilizing our bus systems, the number of cars on the road can be greatly reduced. There are other issues that we face that are more long term, such as the rebuilding of our freeway onramps, and the building of a second North, South corridor. These are issues that will take time and funding, which is not currently available. We can start planning tbr these now, so that when funds do become available work can begin right away. 11) I feel that the City of Ukiah can be instrumental is working with other agencies to improve our public transit system. Currently, the Mendocino Transit Agency offers routes that are confusing and important parts of the City are without service. I believe the City of Ukiah can work with MTA to improve bus stops, routes, and schedules. The Traffic Engineering Committee can study transit districts such as the Golden Gate Bridge and Transit District to see what they do that works, such as better bus stop locations. The City of Ukiah is working in the right direction in developing a Transit Center. I would like to see the City work with the Golden Gate Bridge and Transit District to improve our public transit access to the Bay Area. By doing this, I strongly believe that we can reduce the number of vehicles using our roads. I also feel that having buses available to the Bay Area will decrease repair costs fbr Hwy 101, which can free up money for important projects, such as rebuilding onramps to meet our current and future needs. I have already mentioned how I would encourage the City to work with the School District to improve their bus system. I also believe that it is time to evaluate how effectively our system of stop signs work. There are a few streets where stops signs are actually causing congestion, and there are streets where stops signs are needed to improve safety not only for drives, but for pedestrians as well. A few years ago I wrote a letter to the City Council regarding this issue. My letter was fbrwarded to the Traffic Engineering Committee. I received a response stating that the Committee was waiting for the Traffic Study to be completed before any changes are made. To me, while the Committee has been waiting, traffic conditions have worsened and action needs to be taken sooner than later. I also feel that the City of Ukiah can start the planning process for improving our roadways for both vehicles and pedestrians. Sate Street, from Perkins to Talmage, is Pa~ 2 paved over concrete. By stripping the asphalt and repairing the concrete roadway, we can reduce future costs of repairs. I have had the pleasure of walking around my neighborhood. What has surprised me is just how deteriorated most of our sidewalks are. The City can take steps right now to improve the conditions of our sidewalks, such as developing guidelines for how new sidewalks are to be installed and what materials they are to be made out of. For many of our sidewalks, if two people are walking together, or a person is in a wheelchair, they have to utilize our streets because sidewalks are either too narrow, do not exist, or are blocked by poles or recently planted trees. Developing a plan to improve our street lights will ensure greater public safety. So will adding crossing lights to our major crosswalks. I have seen in Sacramento and San Francisco stop lights that are used solely for cross walks. They have greatly improved safety for pedestrians and do not cause an increase in traffic conditions. They also have the added benefit of slowing traffic down on long stretches of roads. This type of system could easily be utilized between Gobbi and Talmage. I would start planning the replacement of our stop light system. San Francisco uses a system that is hardwired to their traffic center. This allows them to adjust the lights during the day to relieve traffic congestion. Currently, our stop lights use sensors embedded into the streets. They are not the easiest to adjust and when the sensors fail, the City has to spend money to replace them. A hardwired system would greatly improve traffic congestion and reduce costs of maintenance. I would also look at utilizing stop lights that use LEDs (Light Emitting Diodes) instead of tradition light bulbs. LEDs do not have filaments, so the)' never burn out, which would save the City money in bulb replacement. An issue that affects my driving on a daily basis is blind comers at intersections. By working with homeowners to remove bushes and reduce the size of fences, the City can improve sightlines for drivers, which would improve public safety. The City could also evaluate the location of parking spaces near intersections to see if they are having a negative impact on traffic. Near my residence, the intersection of Mill and State is a perfect example. The parking spaces on West Mill reduce the width of the road and cause turning vehicles to come almost to a stop. This causes traffic on State Street to back up, which causes congestion. By removing these parking spaces traffic flow will be improved and congestion lightened. I would also encourage the City to take a look at the trees along State Street. Many of these trees are now blocking business signs, which causes drivers to have to greatly slow down, which causes more congestion. I also find this to be anti-business and another example of bad planning, but one that can easily be corrected. 12) I want to see a Ukiah that respects the needs of all citizens, no matter what their income level or social status. I want to see a Ukiah where everyone is encouraged to get involved in local government and where growth is not completely blocked. Paa~ ~ I would also like to see a Ukiah that is better connected to the Bay Area, which will expand our understanding of Smart Growth issues and allow greater access to cultural events and educational facilities. I also see a Ukiah that develops strong redevelopment plans that allow for the replacement of structures that are not meeting our current and future needs. Such a plan will allow current structures to be replaced by ones that will last 50 to 100 years. By improving the way that our structures function and look will greatly improve how people feel about our community, which could reduce crime and improve our morale. New structures can also take advantage of entire lot sizes. Such a plan will also allow the City to work with larger developers, who have been looking to invest in our community. For me, the biggest thing that I can envision is a community that celebrates its past by restoring our Downtown. Thousands of communities around the world have proven that be restoring their core business districts, the tax base and tourism increase. This brings more money into our community that can be used for public safety and redevelopment. Ukiah is a great place to be raised and we have the ability to make life here even better. We have plenty of room within the City limits to expand our housing stock by utilizing multi-story structures and mixed-use developments. By working together, instead of against each other, we can develop plans that meet our current and future needs without sacrificing what makes Ukiah special. 13) I am currently a member of the Demolition Permit Review Committee and I am submitting my application for reappointment. 14) I do not have any projects or conflicts of interest that would stop me from serving on the Traffic Engineering Committee. Thank you,~"~ .~~ William D. French, Jr. Paae q CITY OF UKIAH .~,f.. ,...,~.j_~ APPLICATION FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING COMMITTEE APPOI~I Mu. Nr'-~ I am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Traffic Engineering Committee 1. Name __~e~,,,[ -~--. [--,~J~) t 2. Residence Address ~ ~ ~ ~ L~,~ "~ ~. 3. Business Address '~,5'5 ~ ]~-~,~-zLr,¢~'~,,-~ 4. Employer ~'~' Job title ~-q~,~( Res. Phone ~"~-7. Bus. Phone Employed since 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? ~o years; Mendocino County? z.[':~ California? 6. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with. Indicate office held. Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. 7. Why are you applying to serve on the City of Ukiah's Traffic Engineering Committee? 8. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Traffic Engineering Committee? 9. How do you believe your own skills, experience, expertise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Traffic Engineering Committee? 10. What do you believe is the single most important traffic related issue facing our community? and why? 11. In your opinion, what other transportation issues/problems should the City expend its limited resources to resolve? 12. What kind of ideal community do you envision for Ukiah? 13. Are there any other City of Ukiah Committees/Commissions in which you are interested, and on which you would be willing to serve? 14. Do you have any known projects or conflict of interest related to this Committee? SUBMIT THIS APPLICATION TO: City of Ukiah, Attn: City Clerk, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Forms:Traffic Engineering Committee Application Revised: 8/20/99 Application for Traffic Engineering Committee Appointment Question Answers #'s 7 through 14 #7. I would like to serve on the City of Ukiah's Traffic Engineering Committee because I have an interest in traffic issues in the City and I would like to contribute to the community by sitting on this committee. #8. The Traffic Engineering Committee serves as the City's Traffic Engineer. The general duty of the Traffic Engineer is to determine the installation and proper timing and maintenance of traffic control devices and signals, to conduct engineering analyses of traffic accidents and to devise remedial measures, to conduct engineering and traffic investigation of traffic conditions and to cooperate with other City officials in the development of ways and means to improve traffic conditions, and to carry out the additional power and duties imposed by City Ordinances. In most cases, the Traffic Engineering Committee submits its recommendations to the City Council for approval. 09. I have been a resident of the City of Ukiah for 40 years and have varied experience at a variety of occupations including having been a reserve and full time Peace Officer. I currently am self-employed as a mechanic working out of my own shop. I have many interests related to the automotive industry and feel that my experiences will benefit this committee. #10. Traffic flow based on a growing area population. I feel the city would be best served by working on the traffic flow issues as they relate to increased traffic on the city surface streets. 011. Traffic Safety for pedestrians and vehicles. More traffic enforcement 012. A community that provides for its citizen's safety and diversity while maintaining the small town atmosphere and appeal. //13. I am not interested in serving on any other commissions or committees. #14. I have no known conflicts and no projects pending in the city limits. Attachment # ,'7 RESOLUTION NO. 2001-61 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING PROCEDURE FOR FILLING VACANCIES ON CITY COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS. WHEREAS, 1. Ukiah City Code §1151 provides that members of the Planning Commission shall be appointed in accordance with a procedure established by resolution of the City Council; and 2. The City Council adopted a procedure for filling vacancies on the City's boards and commissions, including the Planning Commission; and 3. The City Council has determined that using a uniform procedure will insure fair and consistent treatment of candidates and Councilmembers; 4. The City Council has determined to amend its procedures for appointing commissioners; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the following amended procedure for filling vacancies on the City's commissions and boards, including the Planning Commission. PROCEDURE FOR FILLING VACANCIES ON COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS The City Council shall fill vacancies on City boards and commissions, using the following procedure. Applicant pool. The City Council shall develop an available pool of candidates for a vacancy by advertising the vacancy at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in Ukiah not less than thirty (30) days prior to the council meeting at which the vacancy is to be filled. The advertisement shall specify a deadline for submitting applications. All completed applications received prior to the deadline shall be included in the pool of available applicants, provided the applicant: a. meets the minimum qualifications for the position as established in the applicable Ukiah City Code section or resolution, establishing the commission or board; and participates in a personal interview, if the City Council conducts personal interviews for the position. The City Council has determined that interviews will be conducted for applicants of the Planning Commission, the Parks, Recreation and Golf Commission, and the Airport Commission. An application shall be deemed complete when signed by the applicant. Attachment # ~:'/ Applications included in an available pool may be used as a source of nominations for a period of one (1) year from the application deadline. 2. Exceptions. The following shall be considered for appointment or reappointment to a commission or board without submitting a written application: Incumbents seeking reappointment for an additional term; b. Elected officials seeking appointment in their capacity as elected officials; c. City staff seeking appointment in their capacity as City staff; All appointees, except public members, on the Investment Oversight Commission, Traffic Engineering Committee, Cultural Arts Advisory Board and the Disaster Board; e. City Council members, including the Mayor, appointed in their capacity as City Council members; and f. Appointments to the Civil Service Board. Any such exempt applicants shall be considered for appointment, if they submit a written request for consideration within I0 days of the date the appointment is made. 3. Nominations, Each Councilmember, including the Mayor, shall have the right to nominate a candidate from the available pool of candidates. The right to place a name before the City Council for consideration shall rotate among the Councilmembers based on seniority with the most senior Councilmember going first. b. The Council shall vote on each nomination, as it is made. A Councilmember's right to make a nomination shall terminate and the right to nominate candidates shall rotate to the next most senior Councilmember, when a Councilmember's nomination is approved by a majority vote of the Councilmembers present or the Councilmember agrees to pass the nomination to the next most senior Councilmember, whichever occurs first, This process for rotating the right to nominate candidates among Councilmembers to fill vacancies shall be followed for each separate commission or board. 1. The City Clerk shall maintain a record of the last Councilmember to make a nomination for each commission or board. ~!'k"~chm~.nt # 2. When another vacancy must be filled on that commission or board, the next Councilmember in line to make nominations for that commission or board shall make the first nomination to fill the vacancy. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2001, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: Councilmember Libby ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Philip A§hiku, Mayor AGENDA ITEM NO: 1 la MEETING DATE: July 19, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF LETTER OF RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY RELATED TO UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT AND "WHAT METHAMPHETAMINE IS COSTING YOU" The City Council has received a request for information from the Grand Jury for their 2005-2006 Report. The Police Deparment has formulated responses. The report contains responses to two items: 1. "Ukiah Police Department"- Findings and Recommendations 2. "What Methamphetamine is costing you"- Findings and Recommendations Staff is requesting Council approval of the City's response (Attachment 1). Attachment 2 includes the independent response of the Police to the Grand Jury. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve letter of response to the Grand Jury related to the Ukiah Police Department and "What Methamphetamine is Costing You". ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Approve letter of response to the Grand Jury with revisions. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Grand Jury, Mendocino County John Williams, Police Chief Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - Draft letter of response from Mayor Ashiku 2 - Responses from Police Department (2) to Grand Jury Approved: Candace Horsley, City'~Vlanager ATTACHMENT 1 July 19, 2006 Cindee Mayfield, Presiding Judge Mendocino County Superior Court 100 North State Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Honorable Judge Mayfield, The City of Ukiah is in receipt of the 2005-2006 Grand Jury Report. The following is the City's response to the findings and recommendations relative to the reports titled: "Ukiah Police Department" and "What Methamphetamine is Costing You". Ukiah Police Department Findings 1. Concur with findings. 2. Concur with findings. 3. Concur with findings. 4. Concur with findings. 5. Concur with findings. 6. Concur with findings. 7. Concur with findings. 8. Concur with findings. Recommendations 1. "The Ukiah City Council provide secured (non-grant) funds to the UPD for additional School Resource Officers. (Findings 2-3)". Response: While the City recognized the need and funded a Traffic Office position in the 2006-07 budget, the Council agrees with the need to add an additional School Resource Officer and, through the efforts of the City's Police Department, plans to explore funding opportunities over the next 3 to 5 years. What Methamphetamine Is Costinq You Findings 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. 13. The City Council for the City of Ukiah disagrees with this finding citing information from the National Drug Intelligence Center California Northern and Eastern Districts Drug Threat Assessment (January 2001) which states that over the last decade the manufacture and distribution of Methamphetamine has primarily been taken over by Mexican Criminal Groups (Mexican Mafia and others) in the Western United States. Reference is made to the Ukiah Police Department response to Grand Jury Report (attached). 14. Concur with findings. 15. Concur with findings. 16. Concur with findings. 17. Concur with findings. 18. Concur with findings. 19. Concur with findings. Recommendations 1-5 The City Council for the City of Ukiah agrees with these & recommendations noting that cooperation between local 7-10 governments is essential to combat the negative effects of Methamphetamine in Mendocino County and commits to its continued support of ongoing efforts in this regard. Please refer to response provided by the Ukiah Police Department (attached). 6 The City Council for the City of Ukiah cannot agree nor disagree with this finding as it is directed to the Office of the District Attorney. Sincerely, Mark Ashiku, Mayor City of Ukiah cc: Benj Thomas, Foreman Mendocino County Grand Jury County of Mendocino Grand Jury Post Office Box 629 U 'kiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT May 4, 2006 Summary In accordance with duties required, the Grand Jury visited the Ukiah Police Department located at 300 Seminary Avenue in Ukiah. Background California Penal Code §925(a) states, '~the Grand Jury has a general authority to review city affairs." The 2005-2006 Mendocino County Grand Jury undertook this charge with visits to the Ukiah Police Department. Methods The Grand Jury interviewed members of the Ukiah Police Department during on- site visits. The Jury also reviewed the City of Ukiah budget and documents related to the sales tax increase (Measure S), which was intended to augment funds for public safety. Findings 1. The Ukiah Police Department (UPD) is staffed in accordance with' its budget: one Chief, two Captains, six Sergeants, 13 Patrol Officers, three Police Officers/Detectives, one School Resource Officer, three Police Records Clerks, and one Equipment Mechanic. Six Dispatchers are funded through Public Safety monies. 2. Currently there is a School Resource Officer located at Ukiah High School who is also available to other schools within the City. 3. In accordance with the Ukiah City budget, the UPD anticipates receiving $372,964 from Measure S funds for the fiscal year 2005/2006. 4. Four additional Police Officers will be funded through Measure $ monies. 5. The UPD does not possess Tasers. 6. Mental health patients in crisis are transported by the UPD to the Ukiah Valley Medical Center for evaluation, in accordance with California Penal Code §5150. 7. The City of Ukiah has an Emergency Plan, created in 2002, which addresses natural disasters. A new plan is currently being written in conjunction with the County. 8. A significant number of UPD arrests are methamphetamine-related. Recommendations The Mendocino County Grand Jury recommends that: Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 1 of 2 1. the Ukiah City Council provide secured (non-grant) funds to the UPD for additional School Resource Officers. (Findings 2-3) Comments Measure $ funds have made it possible to provide additional Patrol Officers. This increase in staff benefits both UPD and the City of Ukiah. Response Required Ukiah City Council (All findings and Recommendation 1) Ukiah City Manager (All findings and Recommendation 1) Ukiah Police Chief (All findings and Recommendation 1) Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 2 of 2 Response to Grand Jury Reports Rep0rtTitle: UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT (please fill in all information relating to this report) Report Date: 2005 - 2006 Response by: John William.~ Title: FINDINGS mi I (we) agree with findings numbered: i - 8 Clhi mf of Poline (we) disagree wholly Or partially with the findings numbered: (Attach a statement specifying any portions of the findings that are disputed; include an explanation of the reasons therefore.) RECOMMENDATIONS o Recommendations numbered have been implemented. (Attach a summary describing the implemented actions) Recommendations numbered 1 have not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. (attach a time frame for the implementation) Recommendations numbered require further analysis. (Attach an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or director of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.) Recommendations numbered will not be implemented because they are reasonable. (Attach an exPlanation) not warranted or are not Date: 7/11/2006 Number of pages attached: Ukiah Police Department 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 Bus: (707) 463-6262 Fax: (707) 462-6068 John Wimams Chief of Police 2005 - 2006 Mendocino County Grand Jury, Report Ukiah Police Department Response Narrative Summary for Findings: The respondent agrees with findings #1 through #8. Additional Information: Since the report, finding #1 has changed. The Ukiah City Council approved an additional Traffic Officer Position in the 2006 / 2007 fiscal year budget. Narrative Summary for Recommendations: The Ukiah Police Department agrees with this recommendation. In the spring of 2006, the Ukiah Police Department advised the Ukiah City Council of the need to staff an additional School Resource Officer in the next 3 to 5 years. The Department is actively working with the Ukiah Unified School District on this issue, and exploring funding oppommities from the School District, available grants, and City of Ukiah general funds. 07/11/0{5 ...... page 1 County of Men. docino Grand Jury Post Office Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT May 4, 2006 Summary In accordance with duties required, the Grand Jury visited the Ukiah Police Department located at 300 Seminary Avenue in Ukiah. Background California Penal Code §925(a) states, "the Grand Jury has a general authority to review city affairs." The 2005-2006 Mendocino County Grand Jury undertook this charge with visits to the Ukiah Police Department. Methods The Grand Jury interviewed members of the Ukiah Police Department during on- site visits. The Jury also reviewed the City of Ukiah budget and documents related to the sales tax increase (Measure S), which was intended to augment funds for public safety. Findings 1. The Ukiah Police Department (UPD) is staffed in accordance with its budget: one Chief, two Captains, six Sergeants, 13 Patrol Officers, three Police Officers/Detectives, one School Resource Officer, three Police Records Clerks, and one Equipment Mechanic. Six Dispatchers are funded through Public Safety monies. 2. Currently there is a School Resource Officer located at Ukiah High School who is also available to other schools within the City. 3. In accordance with the Ukiah City budget, the UPD anticipates receiving $372,964 from Measure S funds for the fiscal year 2005/2006. 4. Four additional Police Officers will be funded through Measure S monies. 5. The UPD does not possess Tasers. 6. Mental health patients in crisis are transported by the UPD to the Ukiah Valley Medical Center for evaluation, in accordance with California Penal Code §515o. 7. The City of Ukiah has an Emergency Plan, created in 2002, which addresses natural disasters. A new plan is currently being written in conjunction with the County. 8. A significant number of UPD arrests are methamphetamine-related. Recommendations The Me__ndocin_o_ _C_o__un.~ Grand Jury recomrnen~s _tha_t_: .... Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 1 of 2 1. the Ukiah City Council provide secured (non-grant) funds to the UPD for additional School Resource Officers. (Findings 2-3) Comments Measure S funds have made it possible to provide additional Patrol Officers. This increase in staff benefits both UPD and the City of Ukiah. Response Required Ukiah City Council (All findings and Recommendation 1) Ukiah City Manager (All findings and Recommendation 1) Ukiah Police Chief (All findings and Recommendation 1) Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 2 of 2 County of Mendocino GrandJm3, Post Office Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 WHAT METHAMPHETAMINE IS COSTING YOU SU34MARY According to local law enforcement and social services agendes, crimes related to the use, possession, and manufacture of methamphetamine have reached epidemic proportions in Mendocino County. The intent of this report to help the community to identify the symptoms of methamphetamine use, its affect on the environment, and the programs and services that are available to victims of methamphetamine in Mendocino County. BACKGROUND Amphetamines were originally intended for use in nasal decongestants and bronchial inhalers and do have limited medical applications. Methamphetamine, a derivative of amphetamine, is a powerful stimulant that affects the central nervous system. Methamphetamine can be smoked, snorted, orally ingested, and injected; it is accessible in many different forms and may be identified by color, which ranges from white to yellow and darker colors such as red and brown. Methamphetamine is also known as "speed" or "crystal" when it is swallowed or snorted, as "crank" when it is injected, as "ice" or "glass" when it is smoked. Household products contain most of the necessary chemicals to complete the manufacturing process. Items such as isopropyl or rubbing alcohol, brake cleaner, engine starter, drain cleaner, matches, road flares, salt, iodine, batteries, gun scrubber, MSM, sodium metal, gasoline additives, muriatic acid, farm fertilizer, lye, cold tablets containing pseudo-ephedrine or ephedrine, acetone and cat litter can be used. The necessary equipment is just as common: Pyrex or Corning dishes, bottles, paper towels, coffee filters, thermometers, cheesecloth, funnels, blenders, rubber tubing, gloves, buckets, gas cans, tape, clamps, aluminum foil, propane cylinders, hotplates, plastic storage containers, ice chests, measuring cups, towels, bed sheets, and laboratory beakers. Drain cleaner when mixed with salt produces hydrogen gas for use in the final stage of methamphetamine production. The hydrogen chloride gas procedure (as well as other procedures used in the manufacture of methamphetamine) is extremely dangerous and may cause death or serious injury, not only to the individuals making the methamphetamine, but also to others who may be nearby. Methamphetamine producers have been known to leave waste at the site, dump it into streams and rivers, spread it out over open fields, dump it into sewage systems, or leave it in garbage bags for the local trash collector. Motel or hotel rooms may be used for the Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-6 .......................................... Page 1 oLi ...................................... purpose of manufacturing methamphetamine, which may result in toxic fumes that expose other guests and the cleaning staff to health hazards. The chemical vapors produced during the manufacturing process permeate the walls and carpets, making the rooms uninhabitable. Cleaning up these sites requires specialized training and costs that can average into the thousands of dollars per site, in funds that come out of the already strained budgets of state and local agencies. Property owners also face the burden of clean-up costs. METHODS The Grand Jury interviewed employees of the Mendocino County Superior Court, the District Attorney's Office, the Sheriffs Department, the Correctional Department, the Major Crimes Task Force, the Probation Department, the Department of Social Services, the Mental Health Department, the Office of the Public Defender, and the Public Health Department. Also interviewed were employees of the Willits Police Department, the Fort Bragg Police Department, and the Ukiah Police Department. Also interviewed were employees of the Ford Street Project, Project Sanctuary, the Ukiah Community Center, the Ukiah Valley Medical Center, the Howard Memorial Hospital, public housing authorities, and local realtors. F/ND/2VGS 1. Methamphetamine is one of the most powerful and pernicious drugs, potentially addictive from the first use. 2. After methamphetamine use is stopped, severe withdrawal symptoms occur, including depression, anxiety, fatigue, paranoia, aggression, and an intense craving for the drug. Psychotic symptoms can persist for months or years after use has ceased. 3. Methamphetamine use can result in hyperactivity, disturbed sleep patterns, irritability, paranoia, aggressive behavior, shortness of breath, involuntary muscle movements, malnutrition, and severe depression with suicidal tendencies. Chronic users may develop sores on their bodies from scratching at "crank bugs," the term that describes the common delusion that bugs are crawling under the skin. Long- term use may lead to fatal kidney and lung disease, brain damage, liver damage, stroke, lowered resistance to illnesses, tooth decay, and permanent psychological problems such as drug-induced psychosis. 4. Methamphetamine use during pregnancy results in a higher risk of premature births, babies with low birth weight, cardiac blockages and other birth defects. The use of methamphetamine during pregnancy impacts the fetus by reducing blood flow or by a direct toxic effect on the developing brain. 5- Children who are exposed to methamphetamine via second-hand smoke can have detectable levels of methamphetamine in their urine. 6. Children who are legally removed from a methamphetamine environment cannot take with them their clothing and toys due to contamination. 7. Children of methamphetamine-using parents are raised in a highly traumatic Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-6 .................. . .......... Page_ 2 of 5 .............................. environment and often subjected to physical and emotional neglect. 8. Many Child Protective Service and domestic violence eases in Mendocino County are directly related to the use of methamphetamine by a parent or family member. 9. Substance abuse programs in Mendocino County are provided by: a. Mendocino County Alcohol and Other Drug Program (AODP) b. the Ford Street Project c. Narcotics Anonymous (NA) d. Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) xo. The number of patients needing medical services rises significantly in Mendocino County emergency rooms when there is a rise in the purity of the methamphetamine available on the streets. 11. Efforts to secure funding for programs to combat methamphetamine use require considerable staff time, though the yield is generally a short-term grant for a long- term need. m. Gangs are involved with methamphetamine manufacture and sales in Mendoeino County; gang violence can also be attributed to methamphetamine. 13. Biker gangs are becoming more active in the distribution of methamphetamine. x4. Many individuals and departments funded by Mendocino County taxpayers are involved in the arrest, prosecution and incarceration of methamphetamine users. These include city police, the Sheriff's Department, the Major Crimes Task Force, judges, court staff, probation officers, District Attorney staff, and Public Defender staff. ~5. Law enforcement personnel express frustration over the lack of meaningful consequences for those enrolled in the Proposition 36 program, which attempts to provide an alternative to confinement for drug abusers. ~6. Many of the items required to produce methamphetamine are readily available at local grocery and hardware stores. Because many of the chemicals used to make methamphetamine are explosive, caustic and carcinogenic, they pose serious health hazards if mixed together or stored improperly. ~7. With a cash outlay of less than one hundred dollars, a batch of methamphetamine can be manufactured (cooked) and sold on the streets for several thousand dollars. ~8. For every pound of methamphetamine manufactured there are six pounds of toxic waste materials that must be disposed off 19. Professionals who work to combat drug abuse in the County agree that the problem is intensified bemuse there is in the County both a high level of tolerance for general drug use and a lack of awareness of the dangers of methamphetamine. RECOMMENDATIONS The Grand Jury recommends that: ~. The Board of Supervisors and City Councils from the four incorporated cities cooperate in taking the lead in the war on methamphetamine in Mendocino County. (Findings 6, 8-~6) Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-6 ......................... · P-.ag~3-o~$ 2. The Board of Supervisors and City Councils from the four incorporated cities increase controls on the sale of ingredients used in the manufacture of methamphetamine. (Finding 5) 3. the Board of Supervisors and City Councils establish a process to rigorously evaluate both the costs to and the impact on the County and the incorporated cities of the methamphetamine epidemic. (Findings 6, 8-~6) 4. the Board of Supervisors and City Councils continue to aggressively pursue grant funding to address the methamphetamine problem in Mendocino County. (Findings 11-16) 5. the Board of Supervisor and City Councils allocate money from their general funds to address the methamphetamine problem. (Finding 11,14, 19) 6. the District Attorney examine the consequences of current sentencing practices for drug-related crimes. (Finding 7. the Board of Supervisors and City Councils require departments and agencies to freely share information and statistics regarding methamphetamine in order to coordinate programs and maximize resources. (Findings 11-~6) 8. education of the public be the primary weapon to counter the methamphetamine epidemic. The Grand Jury strongly urges that both the County and local communities use all their resources (including school programs, town hall meetings, and media) to further educate and engage the residents of Mendocino County in efforts to combat methamphetamine. (Findings 1, 3, 4, 6, 11, 12, ~7, x8) 9. community members assist law enforcement in uncovering methamphetamine labs by reporting suspicious odors, trash, and unusual traffic flow in their neighborhoods, through neighborhood watch programs, homeowners associations, and other local action groups. (Findings 6, lo. all government agencies and non-governmental organi?ations encourage and cooperate with citizens' methamphetamine suppression efforts. (Findings 1, 3, 4, 6, 11, 12, 17, 18) CO~S As long as there is widespread tolerance among the general public for dangerous drug use, the efforts of law enforcement and drug prevention agencies will be ineffective. The complexities involved in establishing an effective medical marijuana policy further muddy these waters. The leaders in this County, both public and private, need to communicate clearly the realities of dangerous drug use. The public needs also to recognize that the costs of methamphetamine use extend far beyond the immediate consequences to the individual user. That user may be a burden to the community for the rest of his or her life. The family, particularly the children, of that user is at risk for physical, financial and emotional damage for years to come. Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-6 ................................ P-age_4 of 5 .... REQUIRED RESPONSES Mendocino County Board of Supervisors (all findings and all recommendations) Chief Executive Officer, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) City Council of Fort Bragg (all findings and all recommendations) City Council of Point Arena (all findings and all recommendations) City Council of Ukiah (all findings and all recommendations) City Council of Willits (all findings and all recommendations) District Attorney, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) Department of Htunan Services, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) Department of Social Services, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) Public Health Officer, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) Public Health Department, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) Mental Health Department, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) Chief Probation Officer, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) AODP, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) Sheriff, Mendocino County (all findings and all recommendations) Willits Police Department (all findings and all recommendations) Ukiah Police Department (all findings and all recommendations) Fort Bragg Police Department (all findings and all recommendations) Mendocino County Major Crimes Task Force (all findings and all recommendations) Superintendent, Mendocino County Office of Education (all findings and all recommendations) RESPONSE REQUESTED Presiding Judge, Mendocino County Superior Court Project Sanctuary The Ford Sl~eet Project Ukiah Community Center Ukiah Valley Medical Center Frank Howard Memorial Hospital Governor's Office of Emergency Services Law Enforcement and Victim Services Division Mendocino County Mental Health Department report; "Health Problems Caused by Methamphetamine Use" (Beth Martinez, Director) Mendocino County Therapeutic Courts report 2oo4/2oo5 Nevada County Grand Jury Report "What You Don't Know Can Hurt You, Methamphetamine In Nevada County" 2OOl/2OO2 Mendocino County Grand Jury Report "Marijuana and Methamphetamine Suppression Efforts in Mendocino County" MSNBC TV Program - "Wasteland" National Geographic TV Program - "MS13" 2oo5/2oo6 Mendocino County Final Budget Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-6 ....................... - ...... Page5 o,55 Response to Grand .iury Reports Report-~tle: 'WHAT METHAMP~INE IS COSTING YOU (please fill in all information relating to this report) Report Date: 2005-2006 Response by: .~ol-m Williams Title: FINDINGS ! (we) agree with findings numbered' .1 - 12, 14 - 19 Chief of Police (we) disagree wholly.or partially with the findings numbered: 13 (Attach a statement specifying any portions of the findings that are disputed; include an explanation of the reasons therefore.) RECOMM ENDA'I'~ONS Recommendations numbered 1 - 5~ 7 - 10 have been implemented. (Attach a summary describing the implemented actions) Recommendations numbered have not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. (attach a time frame for the implementation) Recommendations numbered requ. ire further analysis. (Attach an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or director of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.) Recommendations numbered 6 will not be implemented because they reasonable. (Attach an explanation) are not warranted or are not Date' 7/11/2006 Number of pages attached: 3 Signed: Ukiah Police Department 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 Bus: (707) 463-6262 Fax: (707) 462-6068 John Williams Chief of Police 2005-2006 Mendocino County Grand Jury, Report Ukiah Police Department Response Narrative Summary for Findings: Respondent agrees with the findings numbered 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,17,18, and 19. The Respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding numbered 13 as follows: Since the late 1990's "Biker Gangs" have become less active in the distribution of Methamphetamine. Over the last decade the manufacture and distribution of Methamphetamine has primarily been taken over by Mexican Criminal Groups (Mexican Mafia and others) in the Western United States. In 1996 the State Legislature enacted the California Methamphetamine Control Act, which tightened regulation of, and reporting requirements for methamphetamine precursor chemicals. Because of the legal restrictions on precursor chemicals and the subsequent shutdown of the San Francisco Bay Area chemical suppliers, the large quantities of precursors for producing methamphetamine have to be imported into California via Mexico or Canada. This trend made an obvious and convenient connection for the Mexican Criminal Groups in California that by way of large-scale production, have flooded the Methamphetamine market and virtually eliminated the small-scale production of methamphetamine in the Western U.S. Information sourced partially from: National Drug Intelligence Center California Northern and Eastern Districts Drug Threat Assessment January 2001 Ukiah Police Department 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 Bus: (707) 463-6262 Fax: (707) 462-6068 John Williams Chief of Police Narrative Summary of Required Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations: Although this recommendation is not directed to the Ukiah Police Department, we concur that cooperation between local governments is necessary to combat the negative effects of methamphetamine in Mendocino County. The Ukiah Police Department will cooperate in these efforts. The Ukiah Police Department is aware that State and Federal regulations already exist controlling the chemicals and ingredients used to manufacture methamphetamine as well as their combined possession. The Ukiah Police Department will continue to enforce criminal violations of statutes regarding these existing regulations. 3. The Ukiah Police Department will lend our assistance to this effort. The Ukiah Police Department will cooperate with the City Council should they seek to acquire any sustainable grant funding that would assist in further addressing the methamphetamine problem in Mendocino County. o This recommendation is directed to the governing bodies of our County. It should be recognized that the City of Ukiah currently contributes a significant amount of money from the general fund to participate in the Mendocino County Major Crimes Task Force. A primary function of the MCMCTF is to combat the criminal activity associated with the manufacture, distribution and use of methamphetamine. 6. N/A. This recommendation is directed to the office of the District Attorney of Mendocino County. 7. The Ukiah Police Department does and will continue to share available information and statistics in order to coordinate and maximize resources. Public education related to the methamphetamine epidemic is already being conducted on many fronts and has been for a significant period of time in Mendocino County. Commitment of resources and cooperation with Schools, Public Health and other Law Enforcement Agencies will continue to be a top priority for the Ukiah Police Department. ............................... P~e2 ....................... Ukiah Police Department 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CALI]ZORNIA 95482 Bus: (707) 463-6262 Fax: (707) 462-6068 John Williams Chief of Police The Ukiah Police Department does and will continue to support community involvement in crime prevention, particularly in the area of methamphetamine abuse. The Ukiah Police Department maintains a 24-hour "Tip Line" to encourage citizens to discreetly report criminal activity. 10. The Ukiah Police Department does and will continue to encourage and cooperate with citizens' methamphetamine suppression efforts. Respectfully, John D. Williams Chief of Police ................ Pag~ 3 - August 9, 2006 Cindee Mayfield, Presiding Judge Mendocino County Superior Court 100 North State Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Honorable Judge Mayfield, The City of Ukiah is in receipt of'the 2005-2006 Grand Jury Report. The following is the City's response to the findings and recommendations relative to the reports titled: "Ukiah Police Department" and "What Methamphetamine is Costing You". Ukiah Police Department Findings 1. Concur with 2. Concur with 3. Concur with 4. Concur with 5. Concur with 6. Concur with 7. Concur with 8. Concur with findings. A Traffic Officer has been added to staffing. findings. findings. findings. findings. findings. findings. findings. Recommendations 1. "The Ukiah City Council provide secured (non-grant) funds to the UPD for additional School Resource Officers. (Findings 2-3)". Response: The Council agrees with the need to add an additional Resource Officer and, through the efforts of the City's Police Department, plans to explore funding opportunities over the next 3 to 5 years. The Department is actively working with the Ukiah Unified School District on this issue, and exploring funding opportunities from the School District, available grants and City of Ukiah general funds. What Methamphetamine Is Costinq You Findings 1. 2. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 Phone# 707~463-6200 Fax'CC 707~463-6204 Web Address: www. cit¥ofukiah.com Response to 2005-2006 Grand Jury Report Page 2 Findings - continued . . 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Concur with findings. The Ukiah Police Department felt that the Public Health Department would be the better lead agency in this effort; we will lend our assistance. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. Concur with findings. 13. The City Council for the City of Ukiah disagrees with this finding citing information from the National Drug Intelligence Center California Northern and Eastern Districts Drug Threat Assessment (January 2001) which states that over the last decade the manufacture and distribution of Methamphetamine has primarily been taken over by Mexican Criminal Groups (Mexican Mafia and others) in the Western United States. Reference is made to the Ukiah Police Department response to Grand Jury Report (attached). 14. Concur with findings. 15. Concur with findings. 16. Concur with findings. 17. Concurwith findings. 18. Concurwith findings. 19. Concurwith findings. Recommendations 1-5 The City Council for the City of Ukiah agrees with these recommendations noting & that cooperation between local governments is essential to combat the negative 7-10 effects of Methamphetamine in Mendocino County and commits to its continued support of ongoing efforts in this regard. The Ukiah Police Department felt that the Public Health Department would be the better lead agency in this effort; we will lend our assistance. Please refer to response provided by the Ukiah Police Department (attached). The City Council for the City of Ukiah cannot agree nor disagree with this finding as it is directed to the Office of the District Attorney. Sincerely, ~lark Ashiku, Mayor City of Ukiah cc: Benj Thomas, Foreman Mendocino County Grand Jury AGENDA ITEM NO: 1 lb MEETING DATE: July 19, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE FOR 2006 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE - SEPTEMBER 6-9, 2006 The League of California Cities 2006 Annual Conference is scheduled for September 6- 9, 2006 in San Diego. On Saturday, September 9 the League holds its Annual Business meeting where membership considers and takes action on resolutions that establish League policy. The League is requesting the City Council designate a voting delegate and, if desired, a voting delegate alternate to participate in this meeting. Staff is requesting Council designate a voting delegate and alternate for the 2006 League Annual Conference and authorize the City Manager to submit the Voting Delegate/Alternate Form (Attachment 1) on their behalf. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Designate a voting delegate and alternate for the 2006 League Annual Conference and authorize the City Manager to submit the Voting Delegate/Alternate Form (Attachment 1) on their behalf. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A League of California Cities Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - Letter from League of California Cities dated June 7, 2006 & Voting Delegate/Alternate Form Approved: Candace Horsley, City ~lanager 1400 K STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 raj: (916) 658-8200 vx: (916) 658-8240 ATTACHMENT, LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES June 7,2006 TO: Mayors, City Managers and City Clerks Designation of Voting Delegate and Alternate for 2006 League Annual Conference - September 6-9, San Diego Please review this memo carefully, as new procedures have been adopted regarding designation of voting delegates and alternates and voting at the Annual Conference. The League's 2006 Annual Conference is scheduled for September 6-9 in San Diego. An important part of the Annual Conference is the Annual Business Meeting, scheduled for Saturday morning, September 9. At this meeting, the League membership considers and takes action on resolutions that establish League policy. In order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting your city council must designate a voting delegate and may designate a voting delegate alternate. Please complete the attached voting delegate form and return it to the League's office no later than August 15 so that voting delegate/alternate records may be established prior to the conference. At the conference, voting delegate forms may be returned to the Voting Delegate desk located in the conference registration area. Please note the following procedures that are intended to ensure the integrity of the voting process at the Annual Business Meeting. Action by Council Required. Consistent with League bylaws, a city's voting delegate and alternate must be designated by the city council. When completing the attached voting delegate form, please attach either a copy of the council resolution that reflects the council action taken, or, have your city clerk or mayor sign the form affirming that the names provided are those selected by the city council. Please note that designating the voting delegate and alternate must be done by city council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor alone. Conference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternate must be registered to attend the conference. At least one must be present at the Business Meeting and in possession of voting card in order to cast a vote. Transferring Voting Card to Non-Designated Individuals Not Allowed. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternate, but only between the voting delegate and alternate. If the voting delegate and alternate find themselves unable to attend the Business Meeting, they may not transfer the voting card to another city official. -over- E .A. G'U E OF CALIFORN lA CITIES 1400 K Street, Suite 400 · Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240 www.cacities.org Annual Conference Voting Procedures 2006 Annual Conference One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to League policy. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Annual Conference, each city council designates a voting delegate and an alternate; these individuals are identified in the Voting Delegate Form provided to the League Credentials Committee. Registering with the Credentials Committee. Thc voting delegate, or alternate, may pick up the city's voting card at the voting card desk in the conference registration area. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals registered and with signatures on file with the Credentials Committee may sign petitions to initiate a resolution. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in his or her possession the city's voting card and be registered with the Credentials Committee. New Voting Area at Business Meeting. At the Business Meeting, individuals with the voting card will sit in a separate area. Admission will be limited to those individuals with a special stamp on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate or alternate. If the voting delegate and alternate wish to sit together, both should sign in at the Voting Delegate desk and obtain the special stamps on their badges. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the Credentials Committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the Business Meeting. LEAG'UE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CITY: II 2006 ANNUAL CONFERENCE VOTING DELEGATE/ALTERNATE FORM Please complete this form and return it to the League office by August 15, 2006. Forms not sent by this deadline may be returned to the Voting Delegate Desk located in the Annual Conference Registration Area. In order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting, voting delegates and alternates must be designated by your city council. Please attach the council resolution as proof of designation. As an alternative, the Mayor or City Clerk may sign this form, affirming that the designation reflects the action taken by the council. Please note: At this year's conference, voting delegates and altemates will be seated in a separate area at the Annual Business Meeting. Admission to this special area will be limited to individuals (voting delegates and alternates) who are identified with a special stamp on their conference badge. If your city's voting delegate and alternate wish to sit together at the Business Meeting, they are both encouraged to register at the Voting Desk in order to obtain the identifying stamp that will admit them to the special voting area. 1. VOTING DELEGATE Name: Title: 2. VOTING DELEGATE ALTERNATE Name: Title: ATTEST (I affirm that the information provided reflects action by the city council to designate the voting delegate and alternate.) Name: Phone: Title: Date: Please complete and return by August 15 to: League of California Cities ATTN: Debbie Kinsey FAX: 1400 K Street Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 658-8240 AC2006Vot[ngDelegateLetter.doc AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Item No 1 lc Date: July 19, 2006 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE APPOINTMENT OF COUNCILMEMBER TO DISCUSS CITY'S LEVEL OF INTEREST IN PARTICIPATING ON AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT BOARD The Air Quality Management District Board has requested that Air Quality Management staff talk with each of the Cities about their interest in serving on the Board. District staff would like to meet with a Council representative to discuss the City's level of interest, talk about how the Board would operate and about the process to add city representation. Staff recommends a Councilmember be appointed to work with District staff in this regard. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion and possible appointment of Councilmember to discuss City's level of interest in participating on Air Quality Management Board. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Air Quality Management District Prepared by: Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager Page 1 of 1 Candace Horsley From: Chris Brown [browncd@co.mendocino.ca. us] Sent: Tuesday, July 11,2006 4:51 PM To: candace@cityofukiah.com; Iruffing@mcn.org; ptarena@mcn.org; rossw@willitscity.com Cc: Ronda Gott Subject: AQMD Board representation The District board has requested that we talk to the various Cities about their interest in serving on the AQMD board and report back to the AQMD Board. I would like to set up individual meeUngs with one representative from each city council to discuss their level of interest, talk about how the board would operate and about the process to add city representation. City staff would be welcome to attend the meetings as well. Please let me know which of your council members would be the most appropriate contact. Thanks. Christopher D. Brown HA A[CP Acting Air Pollution Control Officer / Air Quality Planner Hendocino County Air Quality Management District Ph. (707) 463-4354 Fx. (707) 463-5707 Web http ;//~.co. mend _o~;_j_n_.o__,.~_~_, u sJaqm_d_. 7/12/2006 AGENDA ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: 11d July 19, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY CLERK With the resignation of Marie Ulvila as Ukiah City Clerk effective June 27, 2006 under state statue, the City Council needs to appoint a new City Clerk to the position. Staff is recommending that Executive Assistant, Gail Petersen, be appointed to this position and that the City then recruit for a Deputy City Clerk to fill the thirty-two hour position. This will allow the supervisor of the administrative staff, a full-time position, to have the main responsibilities and duties for the City Clerk functions and yet have a thirty-two hour Deputy that will perform most of the day-to-day operations. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Candace Horsley, City Manager Resolution Making Appointment to Fill the Vacant City Clerk Position Approved: Candace Horsley, City Manage~r RESOLU'DLON NO. 2006- RESOLU'I~ON OF THE CITY COUNCZL OF THE CITY OF UKZAH MAKING APPOZNTMENT TO F[LL THE VACANT CTrY CLERK PosTr/ON WHEREAS~ City Clerk Marie Ulvila tendered her resignation, effective .lune 27, 2006 and; WHEREAS~ Gail Petersen meets all the requirements of the City Clerk position and WHEREAS, Gail Petersen is willing to accept the position. NOW~ THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED~ that the City Council of Ukiah hereby appoints Gail Petersen as City Clerk. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 19th day of 3uly 2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mark Ashiku, Mayor A~E~: Gail Petersen, Deputy City Clerk