Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-09-20 Packet CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 September 20, 2006 6:00 p.m. ., . 1 . . . 1 ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS a. Proclamation - Max Hartley Way Introduction of New Finance Director- Brent Smith PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Adjourned Meeting Minutes of August 21,2006 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 recommendations. a. c. d. e. fo ho Report of Disbursements for the Month of August 2006 Adoption of Ordinance Amending Ukiah City Code Sections 1521 and 1522 Governing Procurement Procedures Adoption of Resolution Establishing Fees for Posting Voluntary Campaign Limit Candidate Statements to the City's Website Award of Bid for New Swiftwater Rescue Boat to All Country Industrial and Marine in the Amount of $21,417.02 Award of Contract to California Pavement Maintenance Co., Inc. for Slurry Seal Aprons at Ukiah Regional Airport, Specification Number 06-09 in the Amount of $27,418.30 Accept Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority (MSWMA) Budget Adoption of Resolution Approving an Application for Proposition 50 California River Parkways Competitive Grant Program for Riverside Park Development Report of Acquisition of Services in the Amount of $100,000 to Hart High Voltage Apparatus to Perform Inspections, Testing, Cleaning and Maintenance at the Gobbi Street Substation Due to Damaged Buswork and Request for Additional $25,000 for Completion of Work Rejection of Bids for Street Striping 2006, Specification Number 06-08 Si . 10. 11. j. Approval to Purchase Replacement Computer Equipment from Dell Marketing, L.P. in an Amount of $20,045.32 Award of Bid For Purchase of Three Patrol Car Vehicles in the Amount of $98,262.41 to Wondries Fleet Group Status Report of FEMA Storm Damage Repairs Award Bid for Replacement of High Side Busings on TR-1 and TR-2 and a Three-Phase Gang Operated Switch at Gobbi Street Substation to Harreld's Hi-Voltage in the Amount of $13,845 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. Adoption of Findings and Final Action on Hull/Piffero Use Permit Application - continued from August 2, 2006 b. Amendment of the Transfer Station Contract to Allow Partial Recovery of Increased Fuel Costs Related to Disposal of Garbage by the Ukiah Transfer Station - continued from September 6, 2006 UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant Refurbishment Project Budget and Scheduling Update; Authorize the Expenditure of Additional Funds Necessary to Complete the Project b. Receive Status Report Concerning Sign Ordinance Enforcement Activities and Provide Direction to Staff c. Summary and Discussion of Traffic Issues Associated with the Development of the Airport Business Park d. Authorize Execution of Amendment to the Agreement with EBA Engineering in an Amount Not to Exceed $109,502.22 for Implementation of the Feasibility Study and Corrective Action Plan at the Corporation Yard e. Review of City Limits and Service Boundaries f. Introduction of Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Amending Section 62 of the Ukiah City Code, Pertaining to Compensation of Mayor and City Councilmembers g. Possible Approval to Participate in Request for Offer to Purchase Claim in Calpine Bankruptcy and Authorize City Manager to Accept Offer and Execute Transaction Documents NEW BUSINESS a. Ukiah Valley Area Plan Status Report b. Review of Special Projects Reserve Fund "699" c. Information Update on Greenhouse Gas Reduction Activities in California and California's Publicly Owned Electric Utilities' Principles Addressing Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals d. Approval of Public Works Project Manager Position e. Discussion and Possible Action on Creek Maintenance - McCowen 12. COUNCIL REPORTS 13. 14. 15. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS CLOSED SESSION a. Conference with Legal Counsel- Existing Litigation (Cal. Gov't Code Section 54956.9) Name of Case: Calpine et al Bankruptcy, United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 05-60200 (BRL) 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 15th day of September, 2006 Gail Petersen, City Clerk ITEM NO. URGENCY ITEM DATE: September 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE LAKE MENDOCINO HYDROELECTRIC PLANT TAINTER VALVE MODIFICATION PROJECT SUMMARY: On July 14, 2006 the City solicited bids for the modification of the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant Tainter Valve. On August 14th one bid in the amount of $419,454 was received from Richardson Engineering of Healdsburg to perform the work. This bid was three times the engineer's estimate and Staff recommended and Council approved at the August 16th City Council meeting that this bid be rejected and Council instructed Staff to rebid the project. On August 17th the City rebid the project with several changes made to the bid. First, the bid walks were made not mandatory in an effort to keep the bids competitive. Second, the work scope was divided up to allow contractors to bid on a portion or all of the scope. Third, the engineer's estimate was increased from $140,000 to $250,000 to better reflect market conditions and to attract more bidders. A single bid was received on September 15th from D.W. Nicolson Corp. in the amount of $301,600. No exceptions were taken to the specifications or contract documents. The received bid is approximately 20% over the revised engineer's estimate with a scheduled completion date of around December 13th. It is felt that given the difficulty in soliciting qualified contractors for this work coupled with reducing the bid price by nearly $120,000 from the first round of bidding and having a completion date that coincides with the projected hydro plant startup, Staff recommends that this bid be accepted and a contract issued to D.W. Nicolson to perform the work. Time is of the essence and In order to keep the hydro project on schedule, the contract will need to be awarded as soon as is possible. The staff is requesting this item to be added to the agenda as an urgency measure since the bids were opened on September th 15th, 2006, after the September 20 Council Meeting agenda was posted. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize Staff to award the contract as soon as possible for the hydroelectric plant Tainter valve modification to D.W. Nicolson. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not authorize the awarding of the hydro plant Tainter valve modification and give alternate direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: N/A Murray Grande, NCPA Hydro Consultant Murray Grande, NCPA Hydro Consultant Candace Horsley, City Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney Candace Horsley, City Mana~ler PROCLAMATION 01~ THE UKIAH CITY COUNCR, Naming Ukiah Airport Access Road W ~ 'Max Hartley ay WHEREAS, Max Hartley was born in Bend, Oregon on June 24, 1917, the youngest of 3 children. His flying career began early in life when elected by his brother and a friend to jump off the roof holding an umbrella; and WHEREAS, His lifelong passion for aeronautics started after graduating high school when he began flight training. His first flights were only 10-15 minutes in length as that was what he could afford. In 1938, working as an aeronautical engineer, he soloed in a Longster stating he was "just testing the engine" and the next thing he knew he was 50 feet in the air. In true Max Hartley fashion, he just went around and landed; and WHEREAS, During the War years and after, Max was involved with the design of the B17, B29, and B47. His B17 project was the design of the ball turret. He was assigned to the War Department by Boeing as a Field Service Engineer overseeing the maintenance and repair of the B17's in England; and WHEREAS, Max earned his Commercial Pilot Certificate with single, multiengine, instrument, and glider ratings, Aircraft and Engine Mechanic, Inspection Authorization, Flight Instructor with single, multiengine, and instrument ratings. In 1967, Max purchased Ace Aerial Service at the Ukiah Airport. Two years later, he purchased Ostair and began crop dusting; and WHEREAS, Max Hartley owned a Fixed Based Operation at the Ukiah Airport and provided a myriad of services to generations of pilots and aircraft owners, seen 7 days a week at the Airport doing what he loved; and WHEREAS, Max will be remembered for his smooth graceful aerobatic performances, sense of humor, and as a fixture and Icon of the Ukiah Airport and community for over 30 years. WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah has an unnamed access road at the Ukiah Airport and wishes to pay tribute to Max Hartley as a supporter of the Ukiah Airport for over 30 years by naming the Airport access road "Max Hartley Way". NOW, THEREFORE, I, Mark Ashiku, Mayor of the City of Ukiah, on behalf of my fellow City Councilmembers, Phil Baldwin, Mari Rodin, John McCowen, and Douglas Crane hereby proclaim the unnamed access road at the Ukiah Airport to be named ~2006 · A~ark./lskilcu, ~l~ayor ITEM NO. 3a AGENDA ITEM NO: 3b MEETING DATE: Sept. 20, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: Introduction of Finance Director Brent Smith We are pleased to introduce Brent Smith as the new Finance Director for the City of Ukiah. Mr. Smith has spent his career in the private sector spanning the areas of finance, administration and general management to his most recent experience as Vice President of a large Australian multi-brand wine company both here in California and in Canada. Between 1992 and 1999, he was Director of Finance for Fetzer Vineyards in Hopland. Since that time, Mr. Smith has spent six years as Vice President and General Manager for Southcorp Canada division where he managed, directed, and oversaw all business and financial activities including sales, marketing, public relations, finance and administration. Brent, his wife and their two children have recently moved from Canada to Ukiah as they decided that of all the places in the United States they could move to, Ukiah was their choice. Brent brings to the City of Ukiah through his past business and financial experience hands on general management, financial management, financial leadership, profit and loss accountability, strong financial and analytical disciplines, and good customer service and staff supervisory experience. We are very pleased to have Brent join our staff and consider him to be a great asset for our financial and customer service operations. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Welcome Brent Smith to the City of Ukiah. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Candace Horsley, City Manager Approved: ', ~.~~~~,~ Candace Horsley, ~ity Manger ITEM NO. 5A CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Adjourned Reqular Meetinq Minutes CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 August 21, 2006 6:00 p.m. The Ukiah City Council met at an adjourned Regular Meeting on August 21, 2006, the notice for which being legally noticed. Roll call was taken at 6:02 p.m. and the following Councilmembers were present: Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. Staff Present: City Manager Horsley, City Attorney Rapport, Community Services Director Sangiacomo and Deputy City Clerk Gail Petersen. ,, 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. Dispense with reading / no public in attendance. 1 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. Dispense with reading / no public in attendance. . UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Review and Possible Direction on Airport Commission Application Process - McCowen 6:04:09 PM Councilmembers discussed the current application and selection process which is inconsistent with other City of Ukiah Boards and Commissions in that the Airport Commission reviews applications to fill vacant seats on the Commission and makes a formal recommendation to the Council on their preferred candidates. Consensus was that the Airport Commission is encouraged to review and make recommendations to the City Council however; there is no formal or required process. The City Council is responsible to review the applications, conduct interviews, and make the appointments. b. Discussion and Possible Direction on Residency Requirement and Appointment Process for City Boards and Commissions- McCowen Councilmember McCowen stated that broadening the boundaries to include County residents would expand the pool of applicants, continue to foster City and County cooperation, and alleviate the uncertainty as to who is eligible to serve. Councilmember McCowen further stated the expanded residency requirement should be applicable for all advisory boards and commissions only and the Planning Commission. Discussion followed with the majority of the Council in support of expanding the residency requirements provided the majority to reside within the City of Ukiah. ITEM NO. 5A Councilmember Baldwin stated his concern that residents living outside of the City's limits will not experience urbanization like those living within the City and will not suffer the consequences of decisions they may make, Staff directed to bring back ordinance amendments to expand the residency / boundary requirements. Additionally, staff to: · Identify all City Commissions and Boards · Develop an informational sheet for each recommending body that describes the purpose, functions, and responsibilities of the body as well as desirable skill sets · Determine whether there continues to be a need for each recommending body · Examine the possibility of consolidation 6:5 1:58 PM Mayor Ashiku reported he had received a request to read a letter dated August 15, 2006, written by Mr. Charles Ruelle. Mr. Ruelle's concerns were in regard to a five acre parcel located at 432 Observatory that was donated to the City of Ukiah several years ago to be used as a public park and questions the delay in completing this project and opening the park for public use. Director of Community Services, Sage Sangiacomo stated he spoke with Mr. Ruelle recently, reporting that progress on the completion of the park is dependent on the availability of volunteers, and that $40,000. has been allocated for this project from the FY 2006-2007 budget. An additional $80,000. has been designated from Fund 699 for the possible renovation of the house. Director Sangiacomo stated that routine maintenance on the house has occurred over the years. Staff was directed to bring back a comprehensive report addressing the house, historical components of the site and park development. C. Discussion and Possible Adoption of Ordinance Amending Ukiah Political Reform Act 7:00:15 PM City Attorney Rapport stated that if this Ordinance, which was introduced July 19, 2006, is adopted as presented, those candidates accepting the Voluntary Spending Limit would not have the ability to post Candidates statements on the City's website. It is his understanding that one or more Councilmember's were not aware that the revised ordinance contained the clause making the posting of statements to the City's website applicable only to elections occurring after November 8, 2006. Subsection 2081 .D.7. of the City Code will be revised to read: "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. ITEM NO. 5A . 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. City Attorney Rapport stated if this is not consistent with the wishes of the Council, the revision would delete "For elections occurring after November 8, 2006, and...". The Council could adopt the proposed revised ordinance tonight, but if changes are made, the revised ordinance would have to come back to a future meeting for adoption. Councilmember McCowen suggested another amendment to the Ordinance pertaining to statements posted on the City website to include the following verbiage: "The statements shall contain no reference to political party affiliation, or partisan political membership, endorsements or activity. 7:0:3:48 PM MIS Baldwin/Rodin to approve the Introduction of Ordinance Amending Campaign Finance Reform Act with the two amendments suggested. Public Comment Opened Jim Mulheren requested clarification of"partisan". Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku Consensus to continue this meeting to August 28, 2006 at 5:30PM d. Discussion of Succession Planning 7:10:08 PM Councilmember Rodin read a statement expressing appreciation to and thanking the City Manager for her leadership, commitment to the City and her many accomplishments. Councilmember Rodin additionally stated her belief that the Council should retain the services of a professional to conduct a nationwide search for a replacement and to do this after the new City Council is seated. Discussion followed with the Council members supporting the recruitment and selection of a nationwide search firm to occur, prior to the new City Council being seated. Consensus to continue this matter to August 28, 2006 at 5:30 PM. ADJOURNMENT 7:24:12 PM There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:24 PM Gail Petersen, City Clerk ITEM NO.: 7a DATE: September 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST 2006 Payments made during the month of August 2006, are summarized on the attached Report of Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the attached Schedule of Bills, representing the four (4)individual payment cycles within the month. Accounts Payable check numbers: 71271-71381, 71383-71492, 71608-71829 Accounts Payable Manual check numbers: 67425-67426 Payroll check numbers: 71158-71270, 71493-71607 Payroll Manual check numbers: none Void check numbers: 71382 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 August 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:Gordon Elton, Interim Finance Director and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Report of Disbursements Candace Horsley, City Manag~ KRS:WORD/AGENDAAUG06 CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST 2006 Demand Payments approved: Check No.: System generated: 71271-71381, 71383-71492, 71608-71728, 71729-71829 Manual: 67425-67426 FUNDS: 100 General Fund $254,909.64 600 Airport 131 Equipment Reserve Fund 611 Sewer Construction Fund 140 Park Development $460.00 612 City/District Sewer 141 Museum Grants $1,387.50 615 City/District Sewer Replace 143 N.E.H.I. Museum Grant 620 Special Sewer Fund (Cap Imp) 150 Civic Center Fund 640 San Dist Revolving Fund 200 Asset Seizure Fund $70,715.81 641 Sanitation District Special 201 Asset Seizure (Drug/Alcohol) 652 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund 203 H&S Education 11489 (B)(2)(A1) 660 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund 204 Federal Asset Seizure Grants 661 Landfill Corrective Fund 205 Sup Law Enforce. Srv. Fund (SLESF) $1,666.66 664 Disposal Closure Reserve 206 Community Oriented Policing 670 U.S.W. Bill & Collect 207 Local Law Enforce. BIk Grant 678 Public Safety Dispatch 220 Parking Dist. #10per & Maint $519.20 679 MESA (Mendocino Emergency Srv Auth) 230 Parking Dist. #1 Revenue Fund 695 Golf 250 Special Revenue Fund $3,105.00 696 Warehouse/Stores 260 Downtown Business Improvement 697 Billing Enterprise Fund 290 Bridge Fund 698 Fixed Asset Fund 300 2106 Gas Tax Fund 699 Special Projects Reserve 301 2107 Gas Tax Fund 800 Electric 310 Special Aviation Fund 805 Street Lighting Fund 315 Airport Capital Improvement $43,699.50 806 Public Benefits Charges 330 Revenue Sharing Fund 820 Water 332 Federal Emerg. Shelter Grant 840 Special Water Fund (Cap Imp) 333 Comm. Development Block Grant 900 Special Deposit Trust 334 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan 910 Worker's Comp. Fund 335 Community Dev. Comm. Fund 920 Liability Fund 340 SB325 Reimbursement Fund 940 Payroll Posting Fund 341 S.T.P. 950 General Service (Accts Recv) 342 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief 960 Community Redev. Agency 345 Off-System Roads Fund 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund 410 Conference Center Fund $11,123.14 965 Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund 550 Lake Mendocino Bond 966 Redevelopment Debt Svc. 575 Garage $1,676.31 975 Russian River Watershed Assoc 976 Mixing Zone Policy JPA PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 71158-71270 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 28846-29001 PAYROLL PERIOD 7116/06-7/29/06 PAYROLL CHECK NOS: 71493-71607 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 29002-29159 PAYROLL PERIOD 7/30/06-8/12/06 VOID CHECK NUMBERS: 71382 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS TOTAL PAYROLL VENDOR CHECKS TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT TOTAL PAYMENTS $36,438.63 $96,764.33 $70,943.03 ._ $18~253.95 $23,357.17 $12,821.72 $3,000.00 $77,518.52 $1,509.33 $2,290.40 $1,657.48 _ $971,224.20 $12,240.29 $54,722.36 $88,687.19 $229,438.18 $19,776.41 $6,952.85 $4,558.00 $369,440.52 __ $1,434.61 $3,323.38 $245,000.00 $41,848.34 $3,813.50 $2,786,277.15 $5O,768.88 $166,227.54 $41 O,779.56 $3,414,053.13 CERTIFICATION OF CITY CLERK This register of Payroll and Demand Payments was duly approved by the City Council on City Clerk APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER I have examined this Register and approve same. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds. City Manager Director of Finance O~ ~ · OO ~:o H 0 H O~ {2) o o oo o oo o o o o o o o O0 or,.) O0 ~ 000000 000000 000000 000000 00 o o o o o oo o~ o o ooo ~0 ~o o°~°°~o o ooo ooo m~ ~o · . ©0 © , , o o o o ~.D CO · O~ ~ OOOHH H l:z: H ZHO 00~ ODD o o o o o o Ix) o o o o o o co co 120 o o o o o o ~o oh 0 0 o o o o o o o o o oo o o o o o o · ~° cq · [~ oh · cq o o o o o cD OO ~:o 0 ~ O~ ~0 H~ ~ r-,.l o O~ 0 H 0 H i ~J · 0 0 00 00 00 00 C~ C~ 00 ~0 ~0 00 00 00 00 0 O0 00000 ~0 0 o 0 0 O0 ~ mm o 0 0 H~ o rj O~ ~0 O~ rj . > c~ oo oooo o o o o o o ~oo~ oooooo O0 000000 00000 000000 ooo ooo 0 0 o~oo o oo oooo 0000 DDDD~ ~~0 HHHHO o~o o o ooo · , ooo · 0 ~0 oo ooo · 0 0 · o ~0 0000 0 o O~ 0 ~ H ~ H ~H~ o~ ~o~oo~oo~ OO OO OO oo ;;oo ~; OO OO ~00~ O O o o c0 CQ 00 c~ c~ O O o o o o o~ o~ oo o oo88 o oo o o oo ooooooooooo ~oo~§oo~oo OO OO OO ~oo~oo o oo o oggoo ° OO OO Oo ~J00 ~:O O~ t.-q ~O~ O O H H ~1 ~r~ H r.J · > ~-~ ~ 0 0 0 0 CX3 O0 O~ O~ 0 00 00 OO ~0 IX) 000 000 o 0 0 o © · O00 · , 0 0 0 ~o H c~ o of~ o o o OH~ I...q o o ~0~ o H O~ > i oo o ooooooo 000 H H H oo o ,.~ ,.~ o o o o o o 120 Oh 0 0 ooo° o o ,---t ~.-~ ,--t HHH o o ~H ~H~ 0~ D~ ~0 ~R o Oo ~:o 0 H~ ~ ~ H oDo~ r~ H HU 0 OH 0,< > O0 O0 O0 00000000000 oo o ooooo ooooo o o oo ooooooo o oo oo o o o o 120 Oh Oh 0 0 O0 O0 0000000 O0 ~oo~oo ~ H~ ~ o o o o · o · o o ~ o 0'3 O~0 0 O0 0 © O~ ~0 ~ ~'. ~00000 O~ O~ ~0000000 ~ ~0000000 ~ ~o H H ~ oo o ~ ~ ~ O0 O0 O0 O0 000 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000 00000000000000000000 0 000 0 O0 oo 0 0 o o o · o o 00 o o · o o 00~0 oo~Soossoosoo S~o~oo~ooo O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 000 0000000000000 0000000000 oo~oo~ooo~o~ ~o~o~oo~ ~000~00~.~00~~ 0~'0~~0~0~00~00~0 oo~oo~o~ oo o~~o~ oo oo o~ ~ O0 0 ~ O0 i i H~ ~HH ~0 Oo r. jo0 ~o H 0 0 o~ I~ H H ~000000000000000000000000 o o ooo <2) <2> O0 000000 000000 oo;~ 0000 00 00 CO CO O~ O~ 0 0 000 000 0 ~:, ~:, o o · o ~'~ o ~ o · c~ o ~ o ~ o~ o o 0 ~0 ~0 O~ HO 0 m~ ~0 H 0~ m~ omm~ H o o oo ~o oo o 77° o o {20 oo o ooooo oo~ 00000 00 00 00 000 lA 0'~ LA · 0 o~$ , , ~ c~ o oo ~ H H i oo7, Oo O~ 0 0 000 0~ ~000 0 0 0~ o o ~ 0 0 oo R~ ~ f ~ ~ ~0 ~ O~ 0 ~0000000~~0~0~000 co (D ~.Q oO tx.) .o O0 ~-1 o o o o . r.a ~ ~ 0 L~ ~ O0 O0 [-q 0 ~ i o~ OUUU ~HHH © mm i H 0 ~ O~ ~ ~ O0 0 ~o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 O~ 0 0 O0 0 ~oo o g oo o ~ oo o O0 0 O0 0 O0 0 0~0 0 0 O0 ~ 0 O0 0 i H , , g ° O~dH ~;~ H ~):~ I~ '--3'--] 0 i {DIDO , · o o 00 00 00 o o o o o o o o o o o 00 00 °g o o o o 00 00 o o o o -..1 o~ o o o o o o~oo o 0o 0~ 0o Q~J © ~ O ooo~ O O HHH~ ~ r~ H O i ~J H H~ © © oo(~ oO ,, m~ o o° o° o° 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~U 0 · 0 0 · 0 ~o ~o~ ~o~o~ ~OOO~ ~ooo o ~ ~ ~o ~ O0 ~ 02 · oOOO o o °o 8 O O O O 02,0002, 00 00 02, 00 ~oo o o o° °o 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O o o o~o o oo U U ~ ~ 00 00 00 ~ H ~ 000000000000~ m~ ~ 000000000000~ o~ 0o~ oo tx..) ,, ~H 000~ 0 (D <2, ~ O0 O~ ~0 0 00000~0~0~00 0 . .... ........ 0~0~~00~ 0 ~0~000~0 ~ 0 ..... .0..... . · 000000000000 0 0 OOOOOOOOOOOO O O OOOOOOOOOOOO ~ O ~ ~ H 0 H~ ~ ~0HH~ ~HH k ~ ~ 0 H O0 o ooo00oo 0 0 . . . ..... OO OO ~ ....... ~ ~ ~ ~ O 0 OOOOOOO ~ oo~oo~ O0 O0 O O O o~°o I 000 C~ C~ O~ ooSoo ~o o ~ ~ oo~o o ~ooo ~ ~ 000000000000 0 SSooSoo o o O0 O0 0 0 i U O0 0 O0 O0 0 0 i ~o~oo o o ~ © < H OM H O~ XXXX~XXX XX~ mmmmmmmmmmm © ~0 © o~ ~ 0 0 '12 H M I:rJ H ~00~ 0~ ~QQQ ~ o o o ~ooo ~ ~oo ~ · . 0 ~ 0 ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ o o 8 8 8 ooo o 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 000 ~ H~ ~ o8 ~0~~00 O0 ~ ~000~000 ~0 o~ ~$~ ~ o ~~0~0~ 0 0000000000 0 ~oo8oo88o8 o oo o oooo ~o o o o oo oogooggoog O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 008oo 88°8~o o c000 o o o o o o co I-., ~O ~UU~ H H H H r~o 0 cof~ oo <2> 00 OOOO . , , O O O O O ~:~ H H O O ~ I-~ · . O O O O O O i i SS ~o~o . 0~ 0~ kO ',,.6; O O · . 0 ,-t.-j O I-,- oo~o o~o 0 020O0O O O LO I-~ O O ~ ...-4 bO ..-4 I-~ O O O O O 00 O2 °~ O O O O 00 00 O O °~ ~D H ~u o~ 2~H 0 H ~o H ~---~ H C~Hm © © 0 O0~U m mO~ ~ 0 © o~ c0~ oo ,, OHH~ 0 ~H o~ kid kO O O O . . , <DC>C> O O O O O O ~H o o o ~° , · OH~HH~ ~H~H 0~000 , . . o~ ~~0 0~00~ · , . · , ~°°~° 00000 O O 00 00 00 00 0 O O O 0'1 C~ o~o 0 0~0~0 0~0~0~0 0~~ 0 OHOH ~0 ~H 0 0 ~0 ~ o~ oO {:2> 00 ~~ ~~ NH H 000000000000000000000 000000~0000~000~00 ........ .... ....... 00000000000000~0000 O0 oo~°°~°~°°~°°~°°~oo o oo oo oo ~~00~~0000000~ O~ ~OU · , 0HHH~H HHH~ ooSS S 000 0 0~ H ~H~ ~ 0 ~m~ 0 H ~m ~ 0 ~ ~ · . . o o o o o o ~ ¢,. o o°SS°°S°°SS°°SS°°S°°oo oo oo oo ooSS o oSSOSSoo oo o ooSSooSS°°S°°SSoo oo o o 0o oo 0o o o o o 00 co o o o o o ~ ~d H I~ "'d Q r~ O0 [-q o © ~ I-~ = ~ o~ ~.~(~ oo ,0 oCCC o~ oos¢oo3oo O0 ~ O0 ~0000000 H~ ~ omm mm 0 0 o o° 00~0 O O O O 00 00 00 ~o 0 O0 O0 O0 ~oo HHHHHHHHH ossoosoos o~oo~oo~ O OO OO 00 O~ O~ ~-~ H4 t,.o ~_1 ~ 120 ~-~ ~o L~ 0 00~ ~J~O L~2~ 00~ H UU [-'* 0 O0 ~U ~0 ::;dX ~ H 2:0 H ~-~ ~O 0~ O ~U O~ ~d H ~2 ~O © o ~ 0~ ~ 0 ~ ~ GHH ~H X 0 0 000 .... ~ ~ 000 · · o° $,88 . ~ H ~ ,--] ~ ,'? ,'¢ ,'? o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 8o°oo o O 0o 0o ~° I-~ (D O 22 U © t',J 0 0 O0 o,~ o~o 000 00 ~O H O0 ~d 0 0 ~ ~ 0 © © ~0 © o~ o ~ o · . Ii-, o .. ~o ~ ~ mm 0~00 00~0 ..... 0~0 oo~ ~00~0 ~00~0~ ........ o~o ~ , ,...... ooooooo o ooooooo o o oo 0000 0 , o o 000000 g° ogoosso 0 O0 0 o~oo~o 0 O0 0 0 0 0 coe0~ o o o0o2o0 ~o o o o ~ o i L~ ~ 0 ~ ~0 0 W 0 H 0 H ooooooooo> ~ o~ ~ O0 I~ 0 ~ · 0 0 0 . . C~ C~ 0 0 . . U1U10 o~ ~ [-q O O O O O ~ ~OOO~ 0HHHH 0~~ OOOO ~°° 0000 ~ ~HQHHHHHH ~ H O ~ ~OOOOOOOO oo~ ~ O OO OO~OO~O ~0 0 O O O O 00 00 O O O O 0'1 01 o~ S°SE°°SgSooo ~o~oo~oo O OO OO 0'1 0 0 Cr~ . © O~HHHHH ~HHHHH o oo~ ..... ~OOOOO ...... O OO OOOOOO 88oO8Oo o o 8~oo~© oo o o o t~. © oo~ ~0 ,, o> coo ~0 oo mc ~ o H 0 H O~ ,-3 ~O H ~ r~o © o~ c0 00 H H o~t.a 2 H ~ O ~ I~'~ ['~ H i i o o ~ ~~O O · , OOOOO~ ~ OOOOOO O ~o~o o o o o ~~o o HHHHH ~OOOOO Sooss oo ~oo~ oo ~HH mmm~ ~O~ OOO~ °°~° 00000 ~oo~o ~ oo OO O OO ~oo~o o oo ~o ~o OO OO ~oo~~ o o~°°~oo OOOOOO OO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ~OOO ~O~ HHHHH ~o~o ~°°~° ~:~ 0a ~ ~H H ~o 0 o ~ co~ ~ ,.-3 H oo ~ 0 o:~ o, o o o oo · 0 o o ~ o o o · 0 {DOC> · , i i i H 0000 oo oooo 0000 0000 ~°° 0000 0 h~ 0~ , 0 o o 0 0 H 0 ~H~H~ ~H~H~HHH ~0~ OOOO~OOOO ....... ~oo~o~oo o o ~~o~o~ · ........ ooooooooo 0 000000000 000000000 000000000 °°°c~ oo o 0o 0o 00 o o o o o ua Ltl U"i ~oo HHHH oo~o oo~o o o o o o 00 ~2, o ~o i o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H k ~k HK ~ 000~ m oo o H~ U H>, U ~o ~ i tx.) O'~ UOU ,--]U :z::o H 0 o i i H ~o o~ O~H OHH © . . , 0 [-q i 0'1 O~ ~ O ~ O O ~ , , O O , O O O O O O p H L-q O'~ bO O ~ O O i--~ , , 0'1 UJ ',42, O O , O O O O O CO kO ,-...10.-,..1 · . 08 H H ['rl 0~00 O O O O O O O O O 00 00 I-~ ~ O O O2 00 bO tx.] O O UJ UJ O O O O ~° O O UJ UJ i--~ i--~ 8° O O O O -,..4 U'I U"I Ua (:~ U'~ O U'~ O O O O O O O O 0000000000000000000000000000000~ 0000000000000000000000000000000~ o~ ,, 12~ o ,, ~go~~~°~~°~~°°ooo~ o ~ ~ ~ ~O ~OO~ ~ ~O ~ ~O ~ ~OOOOO~OOO~OO~OOO~OO~OOOOO~OOO ...0 ....... 0 ........ .. ...... 00, ~oo~ooo~oo~oo~o~oo~oo~oo~o OO OOO OO OO O OO OO OO O O~OOOO~O~O~OOOOOOOOOO~OOOOOOO O OO , · O~H~2H H~ ~H H H O O O O O O ~o~oo~oo~oo~o~oo~o~oo~o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3oo3oo3~oo33oo ~ ~oo~oo ~ ~°° o ~oo oo~oo~°° ooSS°SS°° oooSS°°SS°SS°o o o o ~~~~~88o88oo88oo~oo~o ~ O OO OO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ooo~ o o o u'q u"t L,q o 00 00 oo oo oooooo ~O ~H2 © H h;l O b~ 0 O H H H trI H ~ >40 OO 0000~ 0000~ ~~0 ~0 022 © o~ ~0 ~o ,0 H i ~ i OOO OO OO OOOOOOOOOOO 800880088°0 OO OO OO OOOOOOOOOOO O O O O ~ O OO OO OOOOOO 0~ H ~ o o 00 00 · . ~ uJ o o · . o ~ o o o · 0 0[~ O~r~ I~1H H · 0~ H , , , OOOO · · . · 0 0 00000000000 00000000000 OOOOOOOOOOO ~°° 8880888° o o8 o o ~ i-~ ~ i.~ o ko oo~o >0 H H 0 0 © O00HHHO~ ~ H~ 0 CO ., C> 0 ~RRRRRRRo 0~00~00 O0 O0 0 O0 O0 0 0000000 00 0000 0000000 0000000 0000000 o~oo~o oo~oo~o O0 O0 0 CO ~° © U~ ~ H i ~0 ~Z~ H O b~ H H 0 ~0 0 o~ co 00 o Ix) ~ ~-~ o . . 0 , , 0 0~ oo o · 0 · 0 0 H ~ ~H~ ~ H ~ H ~ ~ 0~0 ~ ~ ~H~ o o o . . I~ 0 H o~o oo~ H H H o~o o 0 Q >o i 0 ~H~ 000~ .. © o~, o'~ ~ 0 © L~ ~ ~ 0 ~0 O~ 0~ U © O~ t~ ,o 0HHHH 0~~ O~OO O OOOO .... °~° 0 0 0 ~1H ~I~ H ~1~ H ~::~ H ~]~ '--]'-3 '--] 0 ~ ~ H ~ H O I'~ 0O O O I-~ , Ln , H H ~ 0'/ ',,0 0 ~ 0 · , · 12> C> H ooo~ 0'~ O~ 0 0 0 -~4 -,3, ,..4 i--~ i--~ i--~ 0 ogg O0 ~0 CO ~oo~ OOOO 0 0 "~ ~ 00 t-~ ~ O O O i--~ i--~ O O O O 00 00 ~ [L~ H o 120 C> O0 H ~0 ~HHH~ o o>, eon ~o 00 HHHHHHHHH O O O O 00 O I.--~ ,,..3 L~ · · . i i 00 kO O O . · 00 Ua O O , . O O O O O O 0HHHH 0~~ HHHH OOOO OOOO OOOO o o I~. oosoossoo OO OO OO ~oo O o~o oo~o ~o~ ~OOO <m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q ~ 0 HHHHHH~ ~~ o0oooo~ ~ ~~H Q ~H ~0 ~ HH ~ ~H 0 000~ ...... ~0~00 00~0~ 0. U~ 00 U~ 00~000~ o ~ ~ OO O~ OO~OO~ oo~o~ ° OHHH~H~HHHHHHHHH~ ~ 8 ommmu m ~ Hi2-j H ~ ~O OO ~ ~O OOO~OOO~~O~O O ~~0~~0000~0 OOOOOO~OOOOOOOOO o8oo88oo8oo8oo~8 O OO OO OO OO OOO~OOOOOOOOOOOO 80088 OO c,~oo O ~oo~o o ~ ~~ ~°~°°~~ ~ OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O OO OO OO OO ~X~ o~ IX) ,, ~8~~~o ~ ~o o~ 000~00000000000 ~~0~00~~0 0~0~0000~0~00 ~00~~0~0~ 0000000000000000 ~oo~oo o o oo o o~oo°~°o o ~ 0000000000000000 ~r~c 00000~~00~0000000000 ~~~~00~0~~000~ 0000~~~000000~000000~ ~~0000000~~00~~~ ~000~00~0000~~00000~000 0~00~0~~00~0~~0~ 0 ..... ,..0 .... 0,.0,. ..... ~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 00~000~00~00~0000~0~000~ 0000000000000000 ooSSoo°SS°°S°°oooo~ o~oo~o~~~ ~oo~oo~ 00000000000000000000000000 0 0'~ rD i 0 UO i ['~ H U~ H 00000000 ~ ~ ~ 00000000~ 0 ~ <<<<<<<<~ ~ ~ ~ HHHHH~ ~ 0 © o~ 0 ~3H i H i · ['..) I-s Lo o o o0 o o o u'l o o ;~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~~HHNH H ~ ~ ~ HH~~ ~ ~ 0~ ~ OOOOOOOO O O · 0 . oooooooo O O O o ~oo~oo~ ~ o o ~ OO OO O O ~OOOOO O O O O 0~ ~ U00 OOOOO °°~° 0 0 2::1 ~ oooooooo o o o ~oo~oo~ o o ~ OO OO O O OO O OOOOO 0 H C~HC~ 0 f~ H © HHHH~ ~~H ~~0 H H 0 t'q q ~ H mc> © ~ 0 © H (7/ (no © o~ tx.) 0, oo~ o o o ~::~ .,~ 00 o [~,,.) o o~o o o L~ 0 0 0 0 L~ 0 0 0 · · ,-4 i 0 ~0 © o~ · o uJ uJ , ~o~oooo o~ oo 0 H 0 i Od HHH HHHHHHHHHHHHH~ HI OO OO ~O OO OO ~ OOOOOOOOOOOOO~~ O .... ...0....0.... ~~~~~0000 00000000000000000 ..o...o......o... OO OO OO OO O OOOO~~~~~ O O O O OO OO OO OO O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SSoossoo ooooS°°SS°°SSoooo OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~OO~~OOO~~ O O ~ L.~ 0'1 Oh O O O O O O O O 0 ['~ H m~ OH ~L-' J[]~ H ~ '""d ~0 © © H~HQO © H ~ 0 o0,Q ~0 ., ~;I H ["~ 0 i i H o o o o o 0 0 o o o o o oo~o OOOO OOOO OOOO OO oo~ o o o o o o o o~oo OOOO ~O OH U H 0 O~ 0 OH o~ ~0 00 ,:,., o,% S g 0:,..., ,-, ~o ,.,., ~ o o o o ~ ~ 8 8 8 © O~H~H ~ ~H 0 o mm mm m c 0 0 0 0 . o o ~ o 0 ~n 0 % I-~ O0O0 O0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 ~~ ~ ~ 0 >0 0 ~ocg° m m m mm o © oo88oo~oo8~oo~oo~oo~o O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 c~ c~ o o o o o o ~D ~D oo oo8~ o8oo~o oo oo oo o~oo~°o 0000000000000000000000 ~o H ~H~ ~:~0 ~H H L~J H ['~ ~ © OQ © u 0 [-q ['rl m ~H~HO0 ~HH H~ ~0 H U ~0 © o~ t~ ,, oo~~~o ~ OOOOOOOOO OO~O~~ o oo~ O0 000~ H U 0~© H~H~ ~0~0 H~H~ ~°~ ~o co ~RRR 0~ o o o o 2~° · 0 · 0 o~;o;~o 0000000 0 0 000 o ~ ~o o o 0 ~J ~h 0 i~- oo~ ~o~oo o~oo k-~ i.-.~ I.-~ O00 u1 ~J H 22O ~, ~ o H o © © o ~ o u" HO H H ~o o o ~oaaaoa$-x~~ QQQQQQQU © o~ H H OH H H H i--~ O O . 0 · 0 0 0 0 0 0 OHHHH~HHHH O~OOOOO OOOOOOOOO oo8~oo~o 00 ~O OOOO~OOOO O O 0'~ O~ bO, I '-4 -4 ~4D ~D .,-,...] ~ O O O O O O i--~ i-~ OOOOOOOOO Soo8oo~o OO OO O o~o~ n o°~8°88°o o ~ Ua Ua Ua H o o~oo~o ~ O OO O H ~o < o 22,--] ~o o o 02~ H © o 00~ H o~ ooouu 000.. · . , 0 0 00000 00000 OO O~dQ i H O~HHHHH~HHHHHH o ~OOO~O~OOOOO ~~~~OOO ~O~O~~OOO O~O~O~OOOO~ · .... oo ~ogg~ggo ..... 0 .... OO OOO O OOOOOOOOOOOOO i I.--I ~oo~ gg~ggo HHHHH O O U'I ~ O O O O "..4 ~ I-~ O ~°~°°~°°~°°~~~~ gg~gg~gg~ggooooo o~oo ~oo~ ~ OO OO ~ S~~ HO~ H [/~ ~1 mom 0000000000~ 8°8 888 8~ ~ 88 8 0 ~-~ o ~n o © o o~ 0, H i ,o2 ~UUHH ~m ~ ~ 0 ~ ooooooo~o o~o o o o~goo°~ 0~0~00~0~ ['q m m ['q 0~ H H 0 U ¢~0 · 0000 0000 000~ .... 0 0 i~. o oo ~~o~oo~~ ooggogg~goo o o o o 00 00 o o 0o 0o o o o o o'1 ~ o o o o 00 0o ko c0 oo~o >0 i H ~ H~HHN~ ~H ~ ~ O0 ,"g ~ tzJ H~~ ~H~H~ ,'-rj 0 H~ t.a ~ © r~O © 0o(~ toO t~ H · , ~ · o tx.) c> · ¢o~ ~o 0.~ , , o o o o o o o 0 ~J ~n 0 i~. o ooo o~o oo oooo o~oo O0 H H 00 H ~ H (~ "'d ¢~ ~,' H ~ 0 H © i ~0 f~ ~0 m [-q b'-' ~ ~L~H H [~ U © 00000000~ mm OO~O H H Soossoo oo ~ OOOO~OOO ~ O O O . ~° , o o 0~ 0'1 o o o o HHHHHHHHH~ 000000000~ OH i o ~o © o~ 00 HHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHH OO ~ ~OO~~ ~OO~~ OOO~OOOO OOOOOOOOO ...... . · , o~oo~oo~ O OO OO OOOOOOOOO o o I~. ~ I~ 0 0 · H tx.) AGENDA ITEM NO: 7b MEETING DATE: September 20, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING UKIAH CITY CODE SECTIONS 1521 AND 1522 REGARDING PROCUREMENT SUMMARY: At its August 16, 2006, meeting, the City Council considered the introduction of an ordinance amending Ukiah City Code Sections 1521 and 1522, concerning formal bidding and open market purchasing by the City. At the meeting, councilmembers expressed concern that the proposed amendments to Section 1522 did not adequately address how the Purchasing Officer solicits bids or proposals for goods and services. The City Attorney also pointed out changes to Section 1522.C.l.c that he recommended. On September 6, 2006, the Council introduced a revised version of the ordinance (Attachment 1). Staff is recommending adoption of the Ordinance as presented. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Ordinance amending Ukiah City Code Sections 1521 and 1522 regarding procurement. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Decline to adopt the ordinance. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A David J. Rapport, City Attorney Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager; Mary Horger, Purchasing Officer 1 - Ordinance Amending Ukiah City Code Sections 1521 and 1522 regarding Procurement Approved: Candace Horsley, City M~nager ATTACHMENT_ ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTIONS 1521 AND 1522 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE, CONCERNING BIDDING PROCEDURES AND OPEN MARKET PURCHASES The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE. Sections 1521 and 1522 in Division 1, Chapter 6, Article 2 of the Ukiah City Code are hereby amended to read as follows. §1521: FORMAL CONTRACT PROCEDURE: When formal public bidding to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder is required by this Code or applicable state law, the City shall invite bids and award contracts using the following procedures and such other or different applicable procedures as may be required by state law or other provisions of this Code: A. Notice Inviting Bids: Notices inviting bids shall include a general description of the articles to be purchased or services to be rendered and shall state where bid blanks, specifications and plans (if applicable) may be secured, and the time and place for opening bids, all in accordance with policies adopted by the City Council. 1. Published Notice: Notices inviting bids shall be published at least (10) days before the date of opening of the bids or for such longer period as may be required by state law, such as the California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (Public Contracts Code Sections 22000 et seq.). Notices shall be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City, and on the City's website, or if there is none, it shall be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City that have been designated by ordinance as the places for posting public notices. 2. Bidders' List: The Purchasing Officer shall also solicit sealed bids from all responsible prospective suppliers whose names are on the Bidders' List or who have made written request that their names be added thereto. B! Bidder's Security: When deemed necessary by the Purchasing Officer, bidder's security may be prescribed in the public notices inviting bids. Bidders shall be entitled to return of bid security; provided, however, that a successful bidder shall forfeit his bid security upon his refusal or failure to execute the contract within ten (10) days after the notice of award of contract has been mailed, unless in the latter event the City is solely responsible for the delay in executing the contract. The City Council may, on refusal or failure of the successful bidder to execute the contract, award it to the next lowest responsible bidder. ]:f the City Council awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City to the contract price differential between the lowest bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any, shall be returned to the lowest bidder. the City Council rejects all bids presented and re-advertises, due to a refusal of the lowest bidder to enter into a contract, the amount of the lowest bidder's security may be used to offset the cost of receiving new bids with the surplus, if any, being returned to the lowest bidder. C. Bid Opening Procedure: Sealed bids shall be submitted to a city official designated in the notice inviting bids and shall be identified as "bids" on the envelope. Bids shall be opened in public at the time and place stated in the public notices. A tabulation of all bids received shall be open for public inspection during regular business hours for a period of not less than thirty (30) calendar days after the bid opening. O. Rejection of Bids: In its discretion, and to the extent and according to the procedures required by law, the City Council may reject any and all bids presented and re-advertise for bids pursuant to the procedure hereinabove prescribed. E. Lowest Responsible Bidder: Contracts shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder submitting a responsive bid. In determining "lowest responsible bidder", in addition to price, the City Council shall consider: 1. The ability, capacity and skill of the bidder to perform the contract or provide the service required; 2. Whether the bidder can perform the contract, or provide the service promptly or within the time specified, without delay or interference; 3. The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the bidder; 4. The previous and existing compliance by the bidder with laws and ordinance relating to the contract of service; 5. The quality of performance of previous contracts of service; 6. The sufficiency of financial resources and ability of bidder to perform the contract or provide the service; 7. The quality, availability and adaptability of the supplies, or contractual services to the particular use required; 8. The ability of the bidder to provide future maintenance and service for the use of the subject of the contract; 9. The number and scope of conditions attached to the bid. F. Award to Other Than Low Bidder: When the award is not given to the lowest bidder, a full and complete statement of the reasons for placing the order elsewhere shall be prepared by the agent and filed with the other papers relating to the transaction. G. Tie Bids: If two (2) or more bids received are for the same total amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, and if the public interest will not permit the delay of re-advertising for bids, the City Council may in its discretion accept the one it chooses or accept the lowest bid made by and after negotiation with the tie bidders at the time of the bid opening. H. Performance Bonds: The City Council shall have authority to require performance and payments bonds before entering a contract in such amount as it shall find reasonably necessary to protect the best interests of the City. ~[f the City Council requires such bonds, the form and amount shall be described in the notice inviting bids. Bidders in Default to City: The agent shall not accept the bid of a contractor or supplier who is in default on the payment of taxes, licenses or other monies due the City. §1522: OPEN MARKET, ]:NFORIVlAL BIDDING AND CONTRACTUAL SERVTCES PROCEDURE: A. Definitions: When used in this Section, the following terms shall have the following meaning, unless another meaning is expressly stated when the term is used. "Contract for supplies and equipment" means a contract for the purchase or rental of supplies and equipment, where the only service provided directly to the City involves the delivery and/or installation of the supplies or equipment, is incidental to the purchase, and where the value of the services provided under the contract is less than 20% of the total contract price. "Costing" as used in such phrases as "costing the City" or "costing more than" means the total cost to the City, including, but not limited to, applicable sales tax and shipping costs. The amount may be estimated before bids are received. Tf a bid is received for not more than 10% more than the estimated amount, the procurement method specified for the estimated amount may be followed. "Local vendor" means a business with a physical business address in Mendocino County at which location the owner and/or employees are regularly employed and with a currently effective business license issued by the city in which it is located or, if located in the unincorporated area, by IVlendocino County. "Maintenance" shall have the meaning provided in Public Contracts Code Section 22002(d), as it currently reads or as it may be amended to read. "Open market purchase" means a purchase made without a prior written solicitation of formal bids. :In making open market purchases, the Purchasing Officer is encouraged to take advantage of modern communications to obtain the lowest possible price, consistent with the City's needs, including, but not limited to, the use of the telephone, the internet and email, and to use all reasonable means to solicit quotes or proposals from local vendors. The Purchasing Officer shall maintain a permanent public record for a period of one year from the date of purchase of each open market purchase, including the method used to obtain information from vendors, the quotes sought and received, the bid selected and the reason for the selection. "Personal Services Contract" means a contract for professional or other services that does not involve the building or construction trades, but does include construction management, engineering, architectural and similar construction design or inspection services. "Public Project" has the meaning provided in Public Contracts Code Section 22002(c)-(d), as it currently reads, and as it may be amended from time to time. B. Purchases of supplies and equipment: 1. Supply and equipment contracts under $10,000. Open market purchases may be used for contracts for the purchase of supplies and equipment costing $10,000 or less, if the purchase is included within an approved fund account and an unencumbered appropriation exists in the fund against which the purchase may be charged. Purchases costing more than $5000 shall be reported to the City Council at its next regular meeting following the purchase. The report shall include the information described in the definition of "open market purchase." 2. Supply and equipment contracts over $:tO, O00. Contracts for the purchase of supplies and equipment costing more than $10,000 shall be procured using the following procedures. a. Minimum Number of Bids: Whenever reasonably feasible, the Purchasing Officer will award the contract based on at least three (3) bids. b. Notice ~[nviting Bids: The Purchasing Officer shall solicit bids by written request, including the use of email or fax, and/or by telephone with written confirmation to follow within three (3) working days, which notice shall include such specifications and bidding requirements as the Purchasing Officer determines are appropriate to the work, and as are required by law. The Purchasing Officer shall make reasonable efforts to solicit bids from local vendors. c. Written Bids: Sealed written bids or bids submitted by email or FAX shall be submitted to the Purchasing Officer. The Purchasing Officer shall not disclose the contents of any bids submitted by sealed bid, fax, email, or telephone, followed by timely written confirmation, until the time appointed to open or consider all submitted bids. d. Award of Bids: Supplies and equipment shall be rented or purchased from the least expensive source, if the Purchasing Officer is satisfied that all sources and the products offered are of equal quality and suited to the City's needs. The Purchasing Officer shall maintain a permanent record for a period of one year of the quotes sought and received, the bid selected and the reason for the selection. The City Council must award the bid based on the recommendation of the Purchasing Officer. 3. Cooperative purchases. The Purchasing Officer may purchase supplies and equipment through a consolidated supply contract or other cooperative purchasing arrangement with another governmental agency, if available to the City and if the Purchasing Officer determines that the procurement method used by that agency provides a purchasing advantage to the City. C. Other Contracts. :[. Public Projects Contracts. a. Contracts for public projects shall be procured in accordance with the California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (Public Contracts Code Sections 22000 et seq.), as it now reads and as it may be amended from time to time. b. Contracts for public projects costing $30,000 or less or such other amount as may be periodically established by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 22020 shall be procured by open market purchase. c. Contracts to be performed for a City owned public utility, such as the City's electrical system, which are not public projects or subject to subsections C. 2 and C.3, below, shall be procured in accordance with procedures adopted by the Public Utilities Department and approved by City Council resolution from time to time. ]:n the absence of a resolutioin, the Public Utilities Department may use the procedures specified in subsections C.l.a and C.l.b, above. 2. Maintenance contracts. a. Open market purchases may be used for maintenance contracts costing $10,000 or less, if the purchase is included within an approved fund account and an unencumbered appropriation exists in the fund against which the purchase may be charged. Maintenance contracts costing more than $5000 shall be reported to the City Council at its next regular meeting following the purchase. The report shall include the information described in the definition of "open market purchase." b. Maintenance contracts costing more than $10,000 shall be procured using the following procedures. i. IVlinimum Number of Bids: Whenever reasonably feasible, the Purchasing Officer will award the contract based on at least three (3) bids. ii. Notice ]~nviting Bids: The Purchasing Officer shall solicit bids by written request, including the use of email or fax, and/or by telephone with written confirmation to follow within three (3) working days, which notice shall include such specifications and bidding requirements as the Purchasing Officer determines are appropriate to the work, and as are required by law. The Purchasing Officer shall make reasonable efforts to solicit bids from local contractors. iii. Written Bids: Sealed written bids or bids submitted by email or fax shall be submitted to the Purchasing Officer. The Purchasing Officer shall not disclose the contents of any bids submitted by sealed bid, fax, email or telephone, followed by timely written confirmation, until the time appointed to open or consider all submitted bids. iv. Award of Bids: The maintenance contract shall be awarded to the least expensive bidder, if the Purchasing Officer is satisfied that all bids are equally qualified and suited to the City's needs. The Purchasing Officer shall maintain a permanent record for a period of one year of the quotes sought and received, the bid selected and the reason for the selection. The Purchasing Officer shall present the recommended bid to the City Council for award. 3. Personal Services Contracts. a. Open market purchases may be used for personal services contracts costing $10,000 or less, if the purchase is included within an approved fund account and an unencumbered appropriation exists in the fund against which the purchase may be charged. Personal services contracts costing more than $5000 shall be reported to the City Council at its next regular meeting following the purchase. The report shall include the information described in the definition of "open market purchase." b. Personal services contracts costing more than $10,000 shall be awarded using the following procedures i. Minimum Number of Bids: Whenever reasonably feasible, the Purchasing Officer will award the contract based on at least three (3) proposals, and shall award the contract on the basis of demonstrated competence and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required. To the extent permitted by law, including, but not limited to, Government Code section 4526, the Purchasing Officer shall consider cost as one factor in awarding the contract. ii. Notice l~nviting Bids: The Purchasing Officer shall solicit proposals by written request for proposal (RFP), which shall include such specifications and requirements as the Purchasing Officer determines are appropriate to the work and as are required by law. Announcements of RFPs may, but need not, be placed in appropriate professional publications. RFPs shall be sent to the largest number of qualified professionals practical in the judgment of the Purchasing Officer. The Purchasing Officer shall include as many small business firms as identified by the Director of General Services of the State of California pursuant to Government Code section 14837 as the Purchasing Officer determines is practical. The Purchasing Officer shall use reasonable efforts to solicit proposals from local vendors. The Purchasing Officer and his or her designees shall not engage in any practice which might result in unlawful or unfair treatment in processing proposals and awarding contracts, including, but not limited to, rebates, kickbacks, bribes or other unlawful consideration. No City officer or employee shall participate in the selection process when those officers or employees have a relationship with a person or business entity seeking a contract under this subsection which would subject those officers or employees to the prohibition of Government Code section 87100. iii. Written Proposals' Written proposals shall be submitted to the Purchasing Officer who shall keep a public record of all such proposals for a period of one year after their submission. The contract shall be awarded by the City Council based on the proposal, such personal interviews as the Purchasing Officer deems appropriate, the criteria set forth in subsection (2), and the recommendation of the Purchasing Officer. D. Miscellaneous 1. Any dollar limits specified herein, except for the limit in subsection B.2, may be revised by a resolution of the City Council based on changes in the cost of living or the cost of goods or services available to the City. 2. Procurement of goods or services not specifically addressed in this section may be purchased by open market purchase, unless a different method is required by state statute or regulation or another provision of this Code. 3. When soliciting bids or proposals, the Purchasing Officer shall use all practically available means to solicit such bids and proposals from as large a pool of qualified sources as possible. To aid in accomplishing this goal, the Purchasing Officer shall solicit proposals from qualified bidders who appear on any list of bidders maintained by the City, including the Bidders' List referenced in Section 1521.A.2. The Purchasing Officer shall develop specialized bidders' lists for each type of contract described in this Section 1522, including contracts for equipment and supplies, public projects, personal service and maintenance services. The Purchasing Officer shall notify potential suppliers or contractors who contact the City of the opportunity to be listed on bidders' lists, including through the City's website. SECTION TWO. 1. SEVERAB1~L]:TY. ]:f 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 ., 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, City Clerk AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7c DATE: September 20, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FEES FOR POSTING VOLUNTARY CAMPAIGN LIMIT CANDIDATE STATEMENTS TO THE CITY'S WEBSITE SUMMARY: On July 19, 2006 the City Council introduced an ordinance amending the Ukiah Campaign Reform Act. The amendment allowed "Voluntary Spending Limit Candidates and Committees" to post for a fee a candidate picture and 500 word statement on the City's website and an additional 500 word statement, if any candidates reject the Voluntary Spending Limit. On August 21,2006, the City Council adopted an ordinance amending the Ukiah Campaign Reform Act to require Voluntary Spending Limit Candidates and Committees to pay the actual cost of those postings so that no public money is used in the campaigns of those candidates and committees. Staff was requested to determine the cost for posting these statements and return to Council with a proposed resolution establishing the web posting fee. Attached is the proposed resolution establishing a $15.00 fee for statements delivered via electronic means (email, floppy disk, CD, etc.) and a $22.00 fee for statements delivered via hardcopy (requiring scanning). Staff recommends adoption of the proposed resolution (Attachment 1 ). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution establishing fees for posting voluntary campaign limit candidate statements to the City's website. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1) Revise the Resolution. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Sue Goodrick Steve Butler, Information Technology Supervisor and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution APPROVED.~ Ma nager RESOLUTTON NO. 2006- RESOLUTZON OF THE CTTY COUNCTL OF THE CI'TY OF UKI'AH ESTABLI'SHI'NG FEES FOR POSTI'NG VOLUNTARY CAMPAI'GN LI'MI'T CAND'rDATE STATEMENTS TO THE CI'TY OF UKI'AH'S WEBSI'TE WHEREAS, on August 21, 2006, the City Council adopted an ordinance amending the Ukiah Campaign Reform Act to require Voluntary Spending Limit Candidates and Committees to pay the actual cost of posting voluntary campaign limit candidate statements to the City of Ukiah's website so that no public money is used in the campaigns of those candidates and committees and; WHEREAS, it has been determined that the actual cost for such postings would be $15.00 for statements delivered via electronic means (email, floppy disk, CD, etc.) and a $22.00 for statements delivered via hardcopy (requiring scanning). NOW, THEREFORE BE ]:T RESOLVED, that the City Council of Ukiah hereby establishes fees as identified above for posting voluntary campaign limit candidate statements to the City of Ukiah's website. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 20th day of September 2006 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mark Ashiku, Mayor Ali-EST: Gail Petersen, Deputy City Clerk AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7d DATE: September 20, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID FOR NEW SWIFTWATER RESCUE BOAT TO ALL COUNTY INDUSTRIAL & MARINE IN THE AMOUNT OF $21,417.02 SUMMARY: Contained within the Fire Department's approved Fiscal Year 2006-07 budget are funds to purchase a replacement boat for the Department's Swiftwater Rescue Program. The replacement of this piece of equipment, which is utilized by the Fire Department in the performance of their river/flood response duties, is part of the Fire Department's overall effort to improve rescue/evacuation response capabilities to the citizens of Ukiah as well as the surrounding area. The purchase of a Zodiac Inflatable Rescue Boat utilized by Fire Department personnel would greatly increase the safety of Fire Department personnel as well as increase the safety of our citizens in the event of additional flooding similar to the flood of December 2005/January 2006. The boat/motor combination currently owned by the City was obtained through the U.S. Military reutilization process in FY 97/98. At that time the boat was deemed not usable by the military. It had a major seam rip that was professionally repaired before it was placed into service in FY 98/99. Since that time the boat has been repaired after almost every use. We are told by the repair company that the boat is well past its serviceable life. In addition to the repair costs associated with the boat, there is the loss of response capability if another flood incident were to occur when the current boat is out for repairs. BACKGROUND: In response to the City's Request for Bids, two (2) bids were received and opened after the bid deadline of September 11,2006 (Attachment 1). Staff has reviewed the bids and determined that both bids meet the advertised specifications. The bid from All County Industrial & Marine in the amount of $21,417.02 meets the advertised specifications and is the lowest responsible bidder. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize Staff to award the bid to purchase one new Swiftwater Rescue Boat to All County Industrial & Marine in the amount of $21,417.02 to be paid from account 105.2101.800.000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Provide Staff with alternative action. Prepared by: Kurt Latipow, Fire Chief Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Bid Summa~r,y_~., APPROVED: ,.. ~_~~~.., '~ Candace Horsley, City lanager Attachment 1 Bid Results For Swiftwater Rescue Boat Bid Opening: 9/11/06 Vendor All County Industrial & Marine, Inc. Zodiac of North America Item New Zodiac Boat New Zodiac Boat Amount $ 21,417.02 $ 28,242.73 Status Met Specifications Met Specifications AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7e DATE:September 20, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO CALIFORNIA PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE CO., INC. FOR SLURRY SEAL APRONS AT UKIAH REGIONAL AIRPORT, SPECIFICATION NUMBER 06-09 IN THE AMOUNT OF $27,418.30 SUMMARY: The City distributed specifications to ten builder's exchanges and five contractors for the slurry seal project at Ukiah Regional Airport. The City publicly advertised this project on August 27, 2006 and September 3, 2006 in the Ukiah Daily Journal. Five sealed proposals were received and opened by the City Clerk on September 12, 2006. The lowest responsive, responsible bidder is California Pavement Maintenance Co., Inc. of Sacramento, California with a total bid of $27,418.30. The Engineer's Estimate for the project is $19,715.50. The Airport's Building and Grounds Maintenance Budget for the current fiscal year includes $20,000 for this project. Staff proposes transferring the remainder of the funds needed for this project from the Airport Machinery & Equipment fund #600-5001-800. If the bid is awarded, compensation for the performance of the work will be based on unit prices bid for contract item quantities actually installed. Bid totals are based on unit prices bid for contract items at estimated quantities, and therefore, the actual total paid to the contractor may be lower or higher than the bid total indicated. As with construction projects, there may be cost overruns by reason of unforeseen work or because actual quantities installed exceed estimated quantities. Policy Resolution No. 13, authorizes the responsible Department Head with approval of the City Manager to issue change orders not to exceed 10 percent of the original contract sum or $5,000 whichever is greater provided that no change, when added to the original contract sum, exceeds the amount budgeted for the project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award the contract for Slurry Seal Aprons at Ukiah Regional Airport, Specification No. 06-09, to California Pavement Maintenance Co., Inc. in the amount of $27,418.30. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject all bids and direct staff to readvertise for bids. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager; Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Paul Richey Airport Manager Attachments :~I~n APPROVED:candace Horsley, City ~anager n 3 o g~-~ t= "-': Attachment ITEM NO. 7f DATE: September 20.2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MENDOCINO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY (MSWMA) BUDGET As a member of the Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority (MSWMA), the City Council reviews and approves the annual budget before its final adoption by the MSWMA Board. General Manager Mike Sweeney has provided the annual report / budget review, which describes the various programs under MSWMA's purview as well as pertinent information for the Council's consideration. The proposed 2006-07 budget was approved by the MSWMA Board on April 12, 2006 and referred to member jurisdictions for comment. The draft budget has very few changes compared to last year's budget. Expenses are budgeted to match the proposed revenue. MSWMA's revenue source is primarily from the waste disposal surcharge. MSWMA's revenue is supplemented by funding from various grants. Staff recommends approval of the budget. The programs under MSWMA's control are well run and assist the City of Ukiah in meeting its State reporting requirements and recycling goals. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve MSWMA's 2006-2007 budget. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Mike Sweeney, MSWMA General Manager Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer-~./t~ Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Mike Sweeney, MSWMA General Manager Attachments: 1. MSWMA's Annual Report and 2006-2007 budget APPROVED:,. ~"~~(~ Candace Horsley, City Malager RJS: AG-MSWMA-Annual budget Review-2006.SUM Attachment # _. _ .~. · Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority Annual Report / Budget Review May, 2006 MOTOR HOME DEMOLITION. MSWMA used backhoes to deal with an accumulation of abandoned trailers and motor homes. MSWMA disposed of 39 abandoned units in 2005, providing this service as part of its support to the county abandoned vehicle abatement program. Support recycling~use recycled content paper ~_ .................... ~,~auing hazardous waste from disposal About 9,000 gallons per year of latex paint are given away. MSWMA's HazMobile receives many materials that still have life in them. Our reuse programs return these materials to the public instead of shipping them off for disposal. Latex paint is bulked into 5-gallon pails and given away. Other household products in like-new condition are given away at the "Free Store" at MSWMA's Ukiah facility. The Free Store is open in Ukiah every Tuesday and the 2na Saturday of each month. Summary MS WMA is facing major additional demands due to new state mandates on disposal. One new ruling classifies many additional electronics as hazardous waste that must be kept out of the trash. Another mandate, AB 2277, requires certification that oils and mercury switches have been removed from appliances before they can be recycled. MSWMA is accommodating this additional workload in addition to its other ongoing services. Programs HazMobile. Our three-county household hazardous waste service (Mendocino, Lake and northwestern Sonoma) continues to experience strong demand for service from the public. To relieve traffic congestion at the HazMobile, MSWMA has conducted a campaign to divert the public to other drop-off opportunities for certain items. Historically, a significant number of HazMobile customers brought only used motor oil to the collection events. With MSWMA's completion of the grant-funded network of used oil recycling tanks, the HazMobile has urged the public to take oil to any of these 10 free drop-off points, which blanket Mendocino County. Electronics recycling has been eliminated at the HazMobile events, since MSWMA now sponsors free electronics drop-off at the solid waste transfer stations. This has also helped manage traffic at the HazMobile events. These changes provide more convenience for the public and reduce MSWMA costs. The HazMobile events can concentrate on more dangerous and restricted hazardous items and the increasing volume of business-generated hazardous waste. The overall vehicle count at the HazMobile's 128 days of collections has therefore declined from its 2003 peak of 7,088 vehicles to 5,871 in 2005. Customers throughout Mendocino and Lake counties take advantage of the "every Tuesday" collection at our Ukiah base facility on Plant Road. In addition to serving the Ukiah Valley, the regular Tuesday service provides an opportunity for people who can't wait for the mobile collection event in other communities. The HazMobile is also open in Ukiah every second Saturday of the month. In total, the HazMobile will collect on 128 days in 2006, spread among 14 locations in the three counties. The collection events are advertised through newspaper, radio, bill inserts, fliers, the annual Recycling Guide, the Recycling Hotline, the website MendoRecycle.org, and signs at disposal sites. MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page 3 HazMobile vehicle count 7000* 0 , ~ ~ ~ t ~ 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Electronics recycling became a much bigger challenge for local government with a new state mandate effective February 9, 2006 which potentially added all consumer electronics to the list of hazardous wastes which are banned from landfills. MSWMA, which started the first permanent electronics recycling program in California in 1999, responded by implementing a new system at transfer stations which allows the public to recycle all electronics together without charge. Although substantial new costs will be incurred to direct-haul these mixed electronics to recyclers, MSWMA expects to cover the expense with reimbursements from the state's SB 20 advance deposit program for televisions and computer monitors. Projected annual volume is 300 tons. MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page 4 Appliance hazardous waste removal expanded dramatically on January 1, 2006 when AB 2277 went into effective. It caused scrap metal recyclers to require certification of removal of mercury switches and lubricating oils from all discarded appliances such as refrigerators, washers, and ovens. Previously, only freon refrigerants were being removed. This change has almost tripled the number of appliances that MSWMA's technicians process at local transfer stations to an annual rate of 6800. MSWMA provides this service at no charge to the transfer stations, in order to reduce the cost to the public of disposing of old appliances. Sometimes it takes 15 minutes to remove a single mercury switch. 7000-~, Household appliances serviced 6000 5000 4000 /i: ' 3000 2000 j 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 projected ~El reciclaje paga! Using Department of Conservation grants funds, MSWMA employed a fully bilingual outreach specialist in 2005. He works with all sectors of the public, but has been a notable addition to MSWMA's outreach to the growing Spanish- speaking population. This has brought dramatic results at apartment complexes throughout the county that have Spanish-speaking tenants. MSWMA's Spanish-language outreach is conducted with personal contact, radio, fliers, and a Spanish-language recycling guide. Excerpt from Spanish-language recycling guide. MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page 5 Illegal dump cleanup requires consistent attention to prevent an accumulation of trash on county roads. Numerous citizen complaints of dumping are referred to MSWMA each year. In addition to providing the roadside cleanup response to citizen complaints, with 274 cleanups in 2005, MSWMA obtains state grants for larger cleanup projects like the recently-completed Branscomb Road cleanup. MSWMA has acquired specialized equipment and techniques to safely deal with dumping on steep slopes. illegal dump cleanups by MswMA 250 200 150- 100 50¸ 0 i 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page 6 Reporting & compliance with complex state requirements on waste diversion has been provided by MSWMA for our member jurisdictions since 1992. This includes filing the annual reports to the cIWMB, filing time extension applications, and most recently, conducting a waste generation study to establish a new "base year" for the unincorporated county and City ofUkiah. MSWMA also assists member jurisdictions in contract issues with franchised haulers and transfer station operators, upon request. ConCrete, Re(Ming Shlngl~ & ; MUST GO ON SCALE TO OILED IN & oUT Measuring disposal is a crucial task for MSWMA jurisdictions to determine their compliance with state diversion mandates and to understand trends in solid waste generation. In 2005, MSWMA discovered a systematic undercount of waste tonnage at the Ukiah Valley Transfer Station, the county's largest, and led an inquiry that identified the cause of the undercount. On MSWMA's recommendations, gatehouse procedures were changed to correct the problem so that a greater number of self-haul loads were measured by weight, not volume. Free tire recycling using state grant funding is another MSWMA program that helps control illegal dumping. This annual event at four disposal sites around the county collects about 8,000 tires without charge for recycling. Recycling information & promotion been provided by MSWMA since 1992 to help the public take advantage of waste diversion programs and help the jurisdictions comply with state recycling mandates. In addition to the toll-free Recycling Hotline, annual Recycling Guide, and website www.MendoRecycle.org, MSWMA employs a bilingual recycling outreach specialist who goes door-to-door at apartments and businesses to solve recycling problems. MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page 7 Organization The Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority is a joint powers authority established in 1990 by the County of Mendocino, City of Ukiah, City of Fort Bragg and City of Willits, for the purpose of carrying out activities of mutual benefit in the solid waste field. MSWMA is governed by a Board of Commissioners consisting of two county supervisors and one city councilmember from each city. Current board members Brian Baltierra, City of Fort Bragg (chair) Tami Jorgensen, City of Willits (vice-chair) Douglas Crane, City of Ukiah Jim Wattenburger, County of Mendocino Kendall Smith, County of Mendocino MSWMA has five full-time employees--a general manager, three hazardous waste technicians, and a recycling outreach specialist. There are two or three part-time employees depending on seasonal needs and programs. $140,000 $120,000 ! HazMobile fee for service income $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 20034)4 2(X)4-05 About 20% of MSWMA 's income comes from fees charged to Lake and Sonoma counties and to commercial businesses for hazardous waste service. The remainder comes from state grants and a $4.50per ton surcharge on solid waste disposal. MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page 8 2006-07 Budget The MSWMA Board approved a proposed 2006-07 budget on April 12, 2006, and referred it to the member jurisdictions for comment. The budget is generally consistent with the previous year. The most notable changes concerns electronics revenues and costs as MS WMA responds to changes in the state mandates. MSWMA GENERAL FUND BUDGET, 2006-07 FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 Proposed budget, as 2006-07 fiscal - iNCOME amended year budget 1 Electronics recycling income 40,000 70,000 2 Fam-i & Ranch cleanup grant income 49,464 _3 HHW service 106,500 120,000 4 Interest 9,600 20,000 5 Recycling Block Grant '32,000 32,000 6 Revenue, misc. 3,000 2,000- 7 Sales, compost bin 400 600- 8 Surcharge 266,.000 292,000 9 Tire Grant income 20,000 14,000 10 Used oil block grant income 32,000 32,000 11 Transfer from Equip. Reserve for 40,000 truck purchase _ 12 TOTAL INCOME 598,964 582,600 MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page 9 MSWMA GENERAL FUND BUDGET, 2006-07 FISCAL YEAR -- continued EXPENDITURES 2005_06 fiscal proposed year budget, 2006-07 fiscal as amended year budget 13 Advertising 3,000 3,000 14 Audit 3,200 3,800 16 Compost bin purchases 1,000 17 Electricity, 350 370 18 Electronics recycling costs 15,000 45,000 19 Fuel 8,000 8,000 20 Health insurance 29,934 26,616 21 HHW disposal expense 80,000 80,000 22 HHW supplies 25,000 20,000 23 Illegal dump fees & cleanup costs 40,464 15,000 24 Liability insurance 15,000 15,0004 25 Miscellaneous 5,000 4,000 26 Office supplies 3,000 3,000 ~ 27 Oil grant expense 12,000 12,000 28 Payroll expense, regular 188,073 188,000 29 Payroll, Used Oil Recycling Grant 20,000 20,000 30 Payroll, Recycling Block Grant 24,000 29,000 31 Pollution insurance 8,000 8,000 32 Postage 700 700 33 Printing 4,000 3,000 34 Recycling Block Grant expense 10,000 3,000 35 Rent 4,400 4,400 36 Sales tax 50 100 37 Telephone (communications) 7,200 6,800 38 Tire recycling amnesty collections 20,000 14,000 39 Trailer acquisition 40 Training fees 3,500 2,000 41 Transfer to depreciation reserve 10,768 10,768 42 Transfer interest to Reserve Fund 5,000 5,000 43 Trash disposal 10,000 10,000 44 Track purchase 40,000 45 Vehicle maintenance 7,500 7,500 46 Vehicle mileage 7,500 8,000 47 Worker's compensation insurance 24,000 24,000 _ 49 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 635,639 580,054 50 NET (36,675) 2,546I MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page I0 Budget Line Explanatory Notes INCOME 1. Electronics Recycling Income. As a registered collector with the state, MSWMA expects to receive per-pound payments for CRTs shipped. Payments are substantially in arrears due to problems in the state program. This is a conservative estimate of income which should be received. 2. Farm & Ranch Cleanup Grant Income. No cut'rem grant projects. 3. HHW Service. Lake and Sonoma Counties pay MSWMA the full cost of HazMobile service to their citizens. MSWMA additionally bills business customers in Mendocino County a pass-through rate for their hazardous waste, and residential customers for any waste in excess of 15 gallons per day. 4. Interest. MSWMA funds are held by the County Treasurer, who pays interest. 5. Recycling Block Grant. MSWMA pools the State Department of Conservation Recycling Grants to its member agencies and uses them in a unified program for promotion of beverage container recycling within the grant's limitations. 6. Revenue, misc. 7. Sales, compost bin. Through three participating recycling centers, MSWMA sells backyard compost bins to the public at cost. 8. Surcharge. MSWMA's core fimding is $4.50 per ton paid by disposal sites on all waste going to landfills. The surcharge was established at $6.00 per ton in 1992 and was reduced in three steps to its present level. In inflation-adjusted dollars, the surcharge is only one-half its original amount. 9. Tire grant income. MSWMA has a state grant that pays 100% of the cost of a free tire recycling program. A new grant is anticipated for 2006. 10. Used oil block grant income. MSWMA pools the allocations to its member agencies under this CIWMB grant program and uses the funds for oil recycling and qualifying HazMobile oil recycling costs. 11. Transfer from Equipment Reserve for truck purchase. Non-recurring expenditure in 2004-05 for replacement of HazMobile tow vehicle. 12. Total Income. EXPENDITURES 13. Advertising. Print, radio and banner expenditures not chargeable under other lines. 14. Audit. Annual outside audit of MSWMA finances. 15. Communications. Telephone, pager, email, and web site hosting & maintenance. 16. Compost bin purchases. Compost bins sold to public at cost in cooperation with three recycling centers. 17. Electricity. For HazMobile base facility, 298A Plant Road, Ukiah 18. Electronics recycling costs. Although the certified recyclers are no longer charging MSWMA for CRT electronics, MSWMA pays a per-pound rate for non-CRTs and also hauling charges to move twin roll-off boxes of electronics to the recylers. 19. Fuel. MSWMA operates three diesel-powered trucks. 20. Health insurance. Blue Shield plan for MSWMA's five full-time employees. MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page 11 21. 22. 23. HHW disposal expense. Primarily for a hazardous waste management contractor who removes packaged hazardous' waste from MSWMA's base facility, and empty drams and supplies delivered by the same truck. Also pays recycling expense for certain other items through other vendors including flourescem tubes and antifreeze. HHW supplies. Materials not supplied under line 21. IHegal dump fees & cleanup costs. Includes materials and equipment costs for roadside cleanup and major cleanup projects, including Farm & Ranch grant-funded work. Also includes MSWMA reimbursement of dump fees to individuals and groups that do volunteer cleanups. Substantial drop from previous year because there are no active Farm & Ranch 24. Liability insurance. $10 million general and vehicle liability coverage through Special District Risk Management Authority. 25. Miscellaneous. 26. Office supplies. Covers office materials used by HazMobile, General Manager and Recycling Outreach Specialist,. 27. Oil grant expense. Oil recycling charges and some HazMobile advertising paid under Used Oil Block Grant. 28. Payroll expense, regular. Wages, salaries, payroll taxes and SEP-IRA contributions not covered under lines 30 or 31. 29. Payroll, Used Oil Recycling Grant. Technician wages during HazMobile collection activity. 30. Payroll, Recycling Block Grant. Recycling Outreach Specialist wages for beverage comainer recycling promotion paid under using this grant. 31. Pollution insurance. $1 million insurance for pollution liability. 32. Postage. 33. Printing. Annual recycling guide, door hangers, other literature. 34. Recycling Block Grant expense. Miscellaneous qualified recycling promotional expenditures. 35. Rent. MSWMA office. 36. Sales tax. Tax on compost bin sales. 37. Telephone (communications). Telephones and website. 38. Tire recycling amnesty collections. Recycling and advertising expenses charged under the Tire Recycling Grant. (Some reimbursement of Payroll Line is also secured from this grant.) 39. Training fees. OSHA-mandated safety classes provided for MSWMA staff. 40. Transfer to depreciation reserve. Set-aside for equipment replacement. 41. Transfer interest to Reserve Fund. Share of interest added to reserve fund for facility replacement. 42. Trash disposal. HazMobile operations and dump cleanup disposal fees. 43. Vehicle maintenance. For MSWMA's three trucks and three trailers. 44. Vehicle mileage. Covers use of personal vehicle by General Manager, Recycling Outreach Specialist, paid at county mileage rate. 45. Worker's compensation insurance. Provided by Special District Risk Management Authority. MSWMA 2006 annual report & budget review - page 12 ITEM NO. 7g DATE: September 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR PROPOSITION 50 CALIFORNIA RIVER PARKWAYS COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAM FOR RIVERSIDE PARK DEVELOPMENT. At the September 6th Council meeting, City staff identified the Proposition 50 California River Parkways Program managed by the California Resources Agency as a possible source of funding for the development of the Riverside Park Project. Council approved technical assistance funding for the grant application, but at the request of staff, agreed to delay the vote on the procedural resolution authorizing the City to submit an application so that all members of the Council would have an opportunity to endorse the effort. The resolution is included as Attachment #1 for review. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the resolution authorizing the application to the Proposition 50 California River Parkways Program for the Riverside Park Development Project. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Determine the application to the Proposition 50 California River Parkways Program is inappropriate at this time and do not move to adopt the resolution. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution Approving Application for Grant Funds APPROVED: ~,-..~.~'~' Candace Horsley MI nagerCity Resolution No: Attachment #1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR THE CALIFORNIA RIVER PARKWAYS GRANT PROGRAM UNDER THE WATER SECURITY, CLEAN DRINKING WATER, COASTAL AND BEACH PROTECTION ACT OF 2002 (Proposition 50) WHEREAS, the Legislature and Governor of the State of California have provided Funds for the program shown above; and WHEREAS, the Resources Agency has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of this grant program, establishing necessary procedures; and WHEREAS, said procedures established by the State Resources Agency require a resolution certifying the approval of application(s) by the Applicants governing board before submission of said application(s) to the State; and WHEREAS, the Applicant, if selected, will enter into an agreement with the State of California to carry out the Project NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Ukiah: 1. Approves the filing of an application for the Gobbi Riverside Park Development; 2. Certifies that Applicant understands the assurances and certification in the appl'ication, and 3. Certifies that Applicant or title holder will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the Project(s) consistent with the land tenure requirements; or will secure the resources to do so, and 4. Certifies that it will comply with the provisions of Section 1771.8 of the State Labor Code regarding payment of prevailing wages on Projects awarded Proposition 50 Funds, and , If applicable, certifies that the Project will comply with any laws and regulations including, but not limited to, legal requirements for building codes, health and safety codes, disabled access laws, and, that prior to commencement of construction, all applicable permits will have been obtained, and o Appoints the City Manager, or designee, as agent to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents including, but not limited to applications, agreements, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned Project(s). Approved and adopted the 20th day of September 2006. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution Number was duly adopted by the following Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mark Ashiku, Mayor Gail Petersen-Latipow, City Clerk ITEM NO. DATE: September 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF ACQUISITION OF SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 TO HART HIGH VOLTAGE APPARATUS TO PERFORM INSPECTIONS, TESTING, CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE AT THE GOBBI STREET SUBSTATION DUE TO DAMAGED BUSWORK AND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL $25,000 FOR COMPLETION OF WORK The City Manager authorized HART High Voltage Apparatus to perform inspections, testing, cleaning and maintenance at the Gobbi Street Substation due to damaged buswork which caused a city-wide electrical outage in July 2006. Due to the possible extent of damage and subsequent repair, the service contract was in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00. This report has been written to report the acquisition of these emergency services and request Council's authorization to increase the current Purchase Order by $25,000 to complete this work for a total contract of $125,000. Attachment 1 identifies the scope of work performed to date and remaining work to be performed. Funds for this work are available in the Electric Department Distribution Station Equipment Account number 800.3642.250.000. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Report of acquisition of services in the amount of $100,000 to Hart High Voltage Apparatus to perform inspections, testing, cleaning and maintenance at the Gobbi Street Substation due to damaged buswork; 2) Authorize additional funding of $25,000 for a total of $125,000 for the completion of said work. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Re-direct 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. Gobbi Substation Maintenance - Hart Cost Estimates (8/31/06) APPROVED:~"%_ % Candace Horsley, City ager August 31, 2006 High-voltage Apparatus Repair and Testing Co. ATTACHMENT_ / Revision #001 Mrs. Liz Kirkley City of Ukiah 411 West Clay Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: Gobbi Substation Maintenance Liz, The following is an estimate of money spent for material and labor for inspection, cleaning, maintenance and testing of equipment at Gobbi substation. · Perform inspection, cleaning, maintenance and testing due to damaged bus work and stand off insulators. H.A.R.T. High-voltage Invoice # 07-06-4013 $13,023.10 · Provide 6 each 115Kv oil filled bushings H.A.R.T. Quotation # 708160001 $ 42,828.00 + tax & frt. · Perform inspection, cleaning, maintenance and testing of 121Kv S&C circuit switcher (C/S-2) and 12Kv UZDRT load tap changer (TR-2). H.A.R.T. Quotation # 707260001 $ 9,595.00 (Estimated Price) · Perform inspection, cleaning, maintenance and testing of 12Kv vacuum circuit breakers. H.A.R.T. Quotation # 803260003 iRev. #001 $ 14,580.00 (Estimated Price) · Provide lea. 15Kv, 2000amp, 30 gang operated disconnect switch H.A.R.T. Quotation # 803260002 $ 7,988.00 + tax & frt. * Estimated Total Thru 08/30/06 $ 88,014.10 + tax &frt. Post Office Box 3389 · Yuba City, California 95992 · Phone: (530) 755-3126 Branch Office · Reno, Nevada 89502 ° Phone: (775) 358-0773 As discussed the following is a list items that remain to be performed: Item #1 Perform testing of 115Kv/12.47Kv TR-2 transformer after installation of 115Kv oil filled bushings. Item #2 Perform testing of 115Kv/12.47Kv TR-1 transformer after installation of 115Kv oil filled bushings. Item #3 Perform inspection, cleaning, maintenance and testing of 12Kv UZDRT load tap changer TR-1. Item #4 Perform protective relay testing and trip function test of 115Kv equipment. Item #5 Perform battery discharge testing and maintenance of 48Vdc station battery system. Item #6 Identify positive ground on 48Vdc station battery associated with TR-1 differential protective circuit. Item #7 Perform inspection, cleaning, maintenance and testing of 1 ea. 12Kv vacuum circuit breaker. * Estimatedprice to complete the above items $ 35,000.00 Please do not hesitate to contact our office with any questions or if you require additional information. Thank you, H.A.R.T. High-voltage Jim Wolfgram General Manager Page 2 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7i DATE: September 20, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF BIDS FOR STREET STRIPING 2006, SPECIFICATION NUMBER 06-08 SUMMARY: The City distributed specifications to ten builder's exchanges and ten contractors for the annual street striping contract. The City publicly advertised this project on August 27, 2006 and September 3, 2006 in the Ukiah Daily Journal. One sealed proposal was received and opened by the City Clerk on September 12, 2006. Central Striping Service of Rancho Cordova, California submitted a total bid of $48,139. The Engineer's Estimate for the project is $24,067.67. The City budget is $22,000 for this project. The submitted bid is more than twice the engineer's estimate and substantially exceeds the amount identified in the budget. Even though paint costs and fuel costs have increased, these cost increases do not justify a doubling in the cost of work over last year's contract amount. It is staff's belief that other bidders declined to bid the project due to the pending end of the striping season and prior striping work commitments. Staff recommends rejection of the bid and re-advertisement of the project with the understanding that striping will be completed in early summer, 2007. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject the bid from Central Striping Service for Street Striping 2006, Specification No. 06-08 and direct staff to re-advertise the project. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Award bid to Central Striping Service and approve budget amendment for additional funds needed. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engi_neer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Attachments: 1. Bid Tabulation APPROVED r Candace Horsley, City AG-striping-2006-reject. SUM ' Attachment · ./. _LIII IL Ill I II CITY OF UKIAH DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS STREET STRIPING 2006 Specification No. 06-08 Bid Tabulation i Prepared By: Rick Seanor Fund/Account No. 100-3110-250-000 Budget = $22,000 .... BID OPENING: SEPTEMBER 12, 2006 I ITEM NO. ! QUANTITY 3 i UNIT 5,776 LF 88,209 LF 4,648 LF 12,813 ;ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE DESCRIPTION i UNIT TOTAL Broken White 4" Broken Yellow 4" Solid White 4" Solid Yellow 4" 3,998 ~ LF Solid White 8" 6 29,122 ~ LF i Double Yellow - -7 - -- 5184~§ LF !Two Way Left Turn Yellow 35,084 ___LE._.- i Bike Lane 4" White 47,967 LF 'Bike Lane 6"White 882 LF 1No Passing 4 Yellow 7,672 ~ LF jA]rportTax~way Centerline 6"Yellow PRICE [ ~-0Z~7 $404.32 $0.07 $6,174.63 $0.08 $371.84 $0.08 $1,025.04 $0.23 $919.54 $0.18 L_ $5,241.96 $0.18i, $1,052.64 i ~5:i~ $1,150.80 Central Striping Service Rancho Cordova, CA UNIT TOTAL ** $0.10 $577.6O $0.10 $8,820.90 $0.20 $0.20 $0.30 $0.35 $929.60 $2,562.60 $1,199.40 $10,192.70 $0.80 $4,678.40 $0.081 $2,806.72 $0.20 $7,016.80 $0.10! $4,796.70 $0.20 $9,593.40 $123.48 $0.30 $264.60 $24,067.67 ** NOTE: ERROR IN BIDDER'S TOTAL AMOUNT FOR EACH BID ITEM. i THE BIDDER ACTUALLY ROUNDED THE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR EACH BID ITEM ~THER THAN ENTERING THE CALCULATED AMOUNT BASED ON THE UNIT BID PRICE. THE BIDDER'S WRITTEN TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID IS $48,139. : $0.30 $2,301.60 $48,137.60 Date and Time Printed: 9/13/2006 at 4:40 PM Filename: BidTabStripmg06-08 AGENDA ITEM NO: 7j MEETING DATE: September 20, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO PURCHASE REPLACEMENT COMPUTER EQUIPMENT FROM DELL MARKETING, L.P. IN AN AMOUNT OF $20,045.32 SUMMARY: Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, staff is requesting authorization to purchase replacement computer equipment in the amount of $20,045.32. Included in the Fiscal Year 2006/2007 budget is the replacement of computers for the Police Department and Dispatch Center. The Information Technology Department has determined that a number of our existing computers are well past their service life, and are no longer supported by the manufacturer. As a result, 9 new computers for the Police Department and 1 new computer for the Dispatch Center are needed. These computers have components that have exceeded their MTF (Mean Time to Failure) ratings resulting in security risks and increased maintenance/support costs. The Information Technology Department has confirmed replacement of these systems is warranted. If approved, the Purchasing Department will issue a Purchase Order for replacement computer equipment through Dell Marketing, L.P. for $20,045.32. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize acquisition of replacement computer equipment from Dell Marketing, L.P. in the amount of $20,045.32. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: N/A FUNDING: Amount Budgeted $2,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 Account Number 105.2001.690.000 100.2001.690.000 678.2040.800.000 Additional Funds Requested None None None Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Not Applicable Chris Dewey, Police Captain Chris Dewey, Police Captain Candace Horsley, City Manager and Steve Butler, IT Supervisor None. Approved: Candace Horsley, City Ma'~ger AGENDA ITEM NO: 7k MEETING DATE: September 20, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID FOR PURCHASE OF THREE PATROL CAR VEHICLES IN THE AMOUNT OF $98,262.41 TO WONDRIES FLEET GROUP SUMMARY: Included in the fiscal year 2006/2007 budget is the purchase of three patrol vehicles for the Police Department at an estimated cost of $120,000 dollars. In August of this year, staff submitted bids to ten vehicle vendors, including all local Ford dealers, for the purchase of three new patrol cars according to State of California Specifications for Police Vehicles with preferred additional optional items desired by the Ukiah Police Department. Bids were opened on August 23, 2006, with 5 responses. Wondries Fleet Group bid, met the specifications provided for in the Request For Proposals (RFP), at $30,390.15 per vehicle, a total cost of $98,262.41, including sales tax. Staff checked this bid price against the State of California contract price for police vehicles and found that our quoted Iow bid was under the state contract price per vehicle. Continued on page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Wondries Fleet Group be awarded the bid for 3 police vehicles in the amount of $98,262.41. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Provide Staff with alternative direction. FUNDING: Amount Budgeted $80,000 $40,000 Account Number 105.2001.800.000 100.2001.800.000 Additional Funds Requested None None Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Chris Dewey, Police Captain Chris Dewey, Police Captain Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A Approved' L~~d~~ Candace Horsley, Cit~Manager Staff continues to research the feasibility of deploying alternative fuel marked patrol vehicles. While many alternative fuel vehicles are now available, their deployment as an emergency response vehicle is not yet practical. Certified emergency response vehicles include a number of additional safety measures to protect occupants in emergency response situations. The Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor leads the market in these safety design features. It is the only vehicle available that has been tested to withstand a 75mph rear crash, uses a Kevlar lined fuel tank, an automatic fire suppression system, bullet proof doors, and hardened windows to protect its occupants. Ford has recently developed this vehicle for use with E85 Bio-Fuel, which if offered in our area, may serve as an alternative in the future. Staff recommends that Wondries Fleet Group be awarded the bid for three police vehicles in the amount of $98,262.41, including sales tax. Bid Results: 2006/2007 4 Door Ford Crown Victoria P71/730A Bid Opening 8/23/06 Vendor Cost Wondries Fleet Group Henry Curtis Ford Harper Ford Country Ukiah Ford North Lake Ford - Mercury $98,262.41 $98,413.95 $99,051.15 $99,198.96 $102,842.10 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 71 DATE: September 20, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT OF FEMA STORM DAMAGE REPAIRS BACKGROUND: On December 30, 2005, the City Manager, acting as the Director of Emergency Services, prepared a proclamation declaring a local emergency due to excessive rain, flooding and storm conditions. The City Council ratified that action at a Special Meeting held on January 5, 2006. The Governor declared a state of emergency in Mendocino County on January 3, 2006 and on February 3, 2006, a Presidential Declaration was signed authorizing the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to provide federal assistance to Mendocino County, including the City of Ukiah. The incident period has been defined as December 17, 2005 through and including January 3, 2006. On February 15, 2006, City staff participated in a Public Assistance Program briefing and filed an initial Request for Public Assistance form. On March 7, 2006 staff met with a FEMA representative for an initial "kick off" meeting to access damages, review data collected, and begin the process of preparing the necessary claim forms. Initial site visits with FEMA representatives began on March 15 and were completed at the end of June. Based on the initial claim forms submitted by city staff, a series of Project Worksheets (PWs) was generated by FEMA and approved by the Risk Manager/Budget Officer with the concurrence of the applicable department manager. These PWs were assigned a unique reference number, and show the location of the work, a description of the damage and the scope of work approved by FEMA. A dollar value was assigned to each project although the actual cost of work will be used to determine the reimbursement upon completion of all projects and submission of a cost reconciliation to FEMA. Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report on New Year's flood damage restoration efforts and most recent costs estimates related to same. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Leigh C. Halvorsen, Accounting Operations Manager Sue Goodrick, Risk ManagedBudget Officer 1 - List of Projects, Notice of Obligation and Payment AP P ROVE D: (--~~"'V~ ~ Candace Horsley, City M~ager SUMMARY: As a result of the federal and state emergency declarations, FEMA will reimburse 75% of eligible emergency work, debris removal and the permanent repair or replacement of disaster damaged facilities. The State Office of Emergency Services' (OES) share of the cost for federally declared disasters is 18.75% and the remaining 6.25% of costs is the local entities responsibility. The total cost per the Project Worksheets of the eligible emergency work, debris removal and permanent repairs is $1.25 million. It is important to recognize that these are "conservative" estimates only and that the actual cost to complete the scope of work detailed in the Proiect Worksheets will be the basis for determining the eligible costs. Final costs will not be available until all projects are completed. The attached spreadsheet (Attachment 1 ) identifies the repair projects submitted to FEMA/OES by Project Worksheet number, the initial estimated amount to complete the repair based on the inspection of damages (FEMA Project Amount), the Total Amount Obligated for those projects which have been reviewed by FEMA and OES and the amount of funds received to date. N/A in the "Total Obligated" column indicated that FEMA has not yet completed their review of the project. Federal and State amounts are paid separately and lag behind the Notices of Obligation. If, at any point, it is determined that the city's property/flood insurance will not cover those projects which were assumed by FEMA to be covered, dollars based on the original Project Worksheet amount will be obligated. Staff will be present to respond to any questions regarding the status of FEMA/OES obligations and payments. Staff anticipates returning to Council with periodic updates. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends Council accept this report. Staff anticipates returning to the Council with future updates. List Of Projects Notice of Obligation and Payment As of 08130106 Project Number Location 1 PW Yokayo School 2 West Standley Street 3 Mill Street 7 Gibson Creek 8 Doolan Creek 10 Vadous Streets 11-12 Fish Hatchery Access Road 13 Gibson Creek Bddge 15 Landfill 16 Landfill 18,90 Airport Clear Zone 19-20 Hydro Plant 24,25,26,29,32 Water Treatment Plant 27 Water Treatment Plant 28 Water Treatment Plant 31 Water Treatment Plant 33,34,35,36,37,39 Waste Water Treatment Plant 44,45,46 Sports Complex 47 Sports Complex 48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55 Sports Complex 56, 58 Sports Complex 57 Sports Complex 60,62 Vinewood Park 67,70 Todd Grove Park 73 Oak Manor Park 76,77,78,80 Anton Stadium 85,86 Observatory Park 87 Observatory Park 91 Riverside Park 92 Riverside Park 93 Riverside Park 95,96,97,102,107,111 Riverside Park 98,99,100,101,103,104, Riverside Park 105,109,110,112 106 Riverside Park 108 Riverside Park Museum & Sun House Museum & Sun House Museum & Sun House Golf Course Golf Course Golf Course Golf Course Golf Course City Parking Lots C & D Civic Center Equipment & vehicles Fire Department Police Dept Public Works Fire Department Fire Department Other emergency Debds box removal 114,118,119 115,116 120 124,125 126 127 128 129 132 133,134,135,137 141 143 143-2,21,22,23 143-3,38,41,42 144-a 144-b 145 146,5,6,17,43,59,63,71 75,82,84,88,113,123,130 Description drain, fence drain drain bank stabilization bank stabilization pavement repairs Slide Repair Babcock Lane fence, guardrail slide repairs pipe repairs debds cleanup repairs silt & gravel removal asphalt repair fence purchase of water emergency pump rentals Field 1 parking lot snack shack bldg Walkways Utility repair turf repair Day Camp facilities tennis courts bleachers, field etc. building repair outbuildings, gutters roads fencing BMX Complex Main Building ball field parking lot Walkways drainage repair building repair Electrical #11 bridge cart path drainage repair erosion/washout repair #5 green repair Pavement, sidewalk,curb roof Emergency response Emergency response Emergency response vehicle repairs equip repairs FEMA Project Amount 55,692.00 0.00 2,838.25 33,200.00 2,061.30 6,354.42 17,715.00 8,354.62 16,440.00 7,051.71 7,152.70 231,017.13 6,183.18 6,482.77 4,196.00 0.00 43,107.94 47,570.67 20,322.75 48,428.76 3,443.45 2,602.70 6,207.60 1,232.28 59,830.00 4,634.39 27,689.78 11,627.98 1,126.39 79,335.50 19,028.42 6,632.42 69,343.15 17,026.96 12,178.80 4,990.50 36,366.04 3,004.05 8,064.49 15,228.50 4,057.08 6,072.81 3,004.05 3,537.35 8,610.26 0.00 16,758.24 5,854.49 0.00 4,776.18 2,879.79 15,981.22 0.00 ATTACHMEN"T._._ i 1,025,294.07 243,452.55 186,653.00 11,473.00 Federal State Total Amount Amount Obligated Received Received 54,368.84 42,882.00 0.00 n/a n/a 2,032.82 1,607.00 n/a 17,294.55 13,640.00 n/a n/a n/a 6,982.00 5,507.00 n/a n/a 6,328.00 4,991.00 4,097.00 3,231.00 0.00 n/a 46,819.00 37,008.00 20,042.68 15,851.00 3,798.00 0.00 Assumes insurance will cover. 3,396.49 2,685.00 643.00 2,541.00 n/a n/a 0.00 Assumes insurance will cover. 4,524.00 n/a n/a 1,101.00 868.00 24,407.00 19,250.00 n/a 0.00 Assumes insurance will cover. 0.00 Assumes insurance will cover. 16,792.03 13,281.00 3,192.00 12,010.66 9,499.00 2,529.00 n/a n/a 2,962.46 2,343.00 562.00 7,872.00 6,209.00 n/a 3,952.02 3,125.00 749.00 5,929.00 4,676.00 0.00 Assumes insurance will cover. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a ITEM NO. 7m DATE: September 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD BID FOR REPLACEMENT OF HIGH SIDE BUSHINGS ON TR-1 AND TR-2 AND A THREE-PHASE GANG OPERATED SWITCH AT GOBBI STREET SUBSTATION TO HARRELD'S HI-VOLTAGE IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,845. BACKGROUND: The City of Ukiah experienced an outage on July 13, 2006 as a result of a fault on the 12 kV Al bus work at the 115 kV-12 kV Gobbi Street Substation. HART High Voltage was hired to inspect & test various components at the sub to determine the extent of damage and provide direction to the city for necessary repairs. Immediate repairs that need to be completed are as follows: 1. Replacement of the 3 high side bushings on TR-2. 2. Replacement of the 3 high side bushings on TR-I. 3. Replacement of a 3-phase gang operated switch. On August 30, 2006 a request for bid (see Attachment 1) was sent to six potential contractors to perform these repairs. Harreld's Hi-voltage, Inc. was the only bid received (see Attachment 2) and totaled $13,845 as a lump sum price. Funds are available in the Electric Utility Distribution Station Equipment Account Number 800.3642.250.000. Staff recommends awarding the bid to Harreld's Hi-voltage, Inc. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve award of bid to Harreld's Hi-voltage for repair work at Gobbi Street Substation in the amount of $13,845. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Re-direct staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: NA Elizabeth Kirkley Elizabeth Kirkley Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Attachment 1 - Request for Bid 2. Attachment 2 - Harreld's Hi-Voltage Bid Candace Horsley, City I~anager August 30~ 2006 TO: RE: ALL BIDDERS TRANSFORMER BUSHING REPLACEMENT AT GOBBI STREET SUBSTATION You are being requested to bid on the following work at the Gobbi Street Substation. Scope of Work The City of Ukiah experienced an outage on July 13, 2006 as a result of a fault on the 12 kV A1 bus work at the 115 kV-12 kV Gobbi Street Substation. HART High Voltage was hired to inspect & test various components at the sub to determine the extent of damage and provide direction to the city for necessary repairs. At this time the immediate repairs that need to be completed are as follows: 1. Replacement of the 3 high side bushings on TR-2 2. Replacement of the 3 high side bushings on TR-1 3. Replacement of a 3-phase gang operated switch. Please provide a lump sum price, to include all labor and materials necessary, for each item as they will be performed on separate dates. Photos are available upon request. The bushings and switches are being procured by HART. Please do not include inspection and testing in your quote after the replacement, HART will be doing that. HART anticipates an early to mid-September date for the arrival of the parts. The selected contractor will be responsible for providing all their own equipment to perform the work requested. Compliance with Laws and Regulations All materials, parts and equipment furnished will be in compliance with the laws and regulations of the State of California and OSHA. The Contractor shall, if requested by the City, supply certification and evidence of such compliance. The Contractor will fully comply with all local, City, State and Federal laws, regulations and ordinances governing performance of contractual services required. License Requirements Contractor must possess a current State of California Contractor's license and a City of Ukiah business license. The Contractor possessed a valid State of California Class ClO license, and any other specific to the completion of the job and/or other license(s) required by the State of California or government agencies. Employees actually performing the tasks may be asked to provide proof of proper certificates of registration for same. Subcontracting If subcontractors/jobbers are used, Contractor shall provide the City with the names of those companies, as well as proof of proper licenses, certificates and proof of insurance for work to be performed. Prevailing Wage Requirements For work that totals more than $1000, each laborer or mechanic of Contractor or any subcontractor engaged in work on the project under this contract shall be paid, pursuant to provisions of Section 1770, including amendments thereof, of the Labor Code of the State of California, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations, State of California, has ascertained the general prevailing rate of wages for straight time, overtime Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays, including employer payment for health and welfare, vacation, pension and similar purposes, copies of the General Prevailing Wage Determination (applicable to the work), for the locality in which the work is to be done, can be reviewed at website: www.dir.ca.gov/dlsr/pwd/northern.html. Insurance Requirements Please see separate attachment for the City's insurance requirements. Please complete the attached form, and fax back to (707) 463-6234. If you have any questions, please call me at (707) 463-6233. Sincerely, Mary Horger Purchasing Agent City of Ukiah CITY OF UKIAH TRANSFORMER BUSHING REPLACEMENT AT GOBBI STREET SUBSTATION FAX to: CITY OF UKIAH Attn: Mary Horger 411 West Clay Street Ukiah, California 95482 Fax: (707) 463-6234 LUMP SUM PRICING FOR WORK AS DESCRIBED IN LETTER DATED AUGUST 30, 2006. 1. Replacement of the 3 high side bushings on TR-2 $ 2. Replacement of the 3 high side bushings on TR-1 $ 3. Replacement of a 3-phase gang operated switch $ Contractor agrees to accept all responsibility for loss or damage to any person or entity, and to defend, indemnify, hold harmless and release the City, its officers, agents and employees, fi.om and against any and all actions, claims, damages, disabilities, or costs of litigation that may be asserted by any person or entity, arising out of or in connection with the negligent or willful misconduct in the performance by contractor hereunder, whether or not there is concurrent, passive, or active negligence on the part of the City, but excluding liability due to the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages or compensation payable to or for Contractor or its agents under Worker's Compensation acts, disability benefits acts or other employee's benefits acts. Contractor shall be liable to the City for any loss or damage to City property arising fi.om or in connection with Contractor performance hereunder. The undersigned declares they are familiar with the items specified and have carefully read the requirements as stated in the City of Ukiah letter dated August 30, 2006, checked all of the figures, and accepts full responsibility for any error or omission. Submitted by, (check one) ~ Individual Owner ~ Partnership Corporation Other Legal Name of Contractor: Address of Contractor: Contractor Lic. No.: Phone Number: Tax ID#: Fax Number: By: (Signature) Print or Type Name: Date: (Title) Check one: rqThis is subject to exception or clarification, a copy of which is attached. [] No exception is taken. 0~ 0~ 10: 05a Harrelds Hi-¥olta~e, Inc ~1~-351 -I~2G CITY OF UKIAIt TRANSFORMER BUSHING REPLACEMENT AT GOB, BI STREET SUBSTATION FAX to: CITY' OF UKIAH Arm: Mary Horger 411 West Clay Street Ukiah, California 95482 Fax: (707) 463-6234 LUMP SUM PRICING FOR WORK AS DESCRIBED EN LETTER DATED AUGUST 30, 2006. 1. Replacement of the 3 high side bushings on TR-2 $_ /] 7o~ q_ OV 2. Replacement of the 3 high side bushings on TR-1 $ Lr~7~Zqt. ~ 3. Replacement of a 3-phase gang operated sMtch $ : ~t~c~ 7. wa Contractor agrees to accept all responsibility for loss or damage to any person or entity, and to defend, indeamify, hold harmless and release the City, its officcm, agents and employees, from a~d against any and alt actions, claims, damages, disabilities, or costa of litigation that may be asserted by arty pemon or entity, arising out of or in co~mection with the negligent or willful misconduct in the performance by contractor hereunder, whether or not Ihem is concurrent,, passive, or active negligence on the part of the City,, but excluding liability due to the sole active negligence or v, Btful misconduct ofth~ City. This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages or compensation payable to or for Contractor or its agents under Worker's Compertsation acts, disability benefits acts or other employee's benefits acts. Contractor shall be liable to the City for any loss or damage to City property arising from or in conaection with Contractor performance hereunder. The undersigned declares they are familiar with the items ~pecified and have carefully read the requirements as stated in the City of Ukiah letter dated August 30, 2006, checked all of the figures, and accepts full responsibility for any error or omission. Submitted by, (check one) ~ Individual Owner . Partnership _~'~. Corporation . Other Legal Name of Contractor: Address of Contractor: ,!gG/~. Contractor bic. No.: . .Tqm. By: . (Signature) Print or lype Name: ~/~.~L927/~ .Check one: Fhis is subject to exception or darifieation~ a copy of which is attached. 13 No exception is taken.. ITEM NO. 9b DATE: September 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AMENDMENT OF THE TRANSFER STATION CONTRACT TO ALLOW PARTIAL RECOVERY OF INCREASED FUEL COSTS RELATED TO DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE BY THE UKIAH TRANSFER STATION -CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 6, 2006 Due to a prior obligation to work at another location this week, Interim Finance Director Gordon Elton was unable to complete this staff report in time to meet agenda production timelines. The completed Agenda Summary Report will be provided to Council via email and posted to the City's website prior to the Council meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve amendment of the transfer station contract to allow partial recovery of increased fuel costs related to disposal of garbage by the Ukiah Transfer Station. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: N/A Gordon Elton, Interim Finance Director Sue Goodrick, Risk ManagedBudget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager AP P ROVE D' ....~~'~,,~ Candace Horsley, City,Manager AGENDA ITEM NO: 9a MEETING DATE: Sept. 20, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF FINDINGS AND FINAL ACTION ON HULL/PIFFERO USE PERMIT APPLICATION BACKGROUND This public hearing was continued from the July 19, 2006, to August 2, 2006, for the City Council to consider the adoption of findings and final action on the above- referenced use permit application. The prior Agenda Summary Reports (with attachments) for this matter are included as Attachments. At the August 2 meeting, public testimony was closed and the City Council commenced its deliberations. A motion was made by Councilmember Crane and seconded by Councilmember McCowen to approve Use Permit Application 06-13 in accordance with the staff recommended action for the Council meeting of July 19, 2006. That motion was revised by Councilmember Crane and the revision was accepted by Councilmember McCowen to approve the use permit subject to a height limit of 32.5 feet above the grade. That motion is still pending. The minutes are attached for a more detailed review of the discussion (Attachment 3). [Continued on Page 2] RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt findings and take final action on the use permit application. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Publicly noticed according to the requirements of the Ukiah City Code Dave Hull and Ric Piffiro David J. Rapport, City Attorney Charley Stump, Planning Director, and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Agenda Summary Report - August 2, 2006 2. Resolution Adopting Findings in Support of Decision to Deny Use Permit - August 2, 2006 3. August 2 City Council Meeting Minutes 4. Agenda Summary Report- July 19, 2006 5. Planning Commission Staff Report- May 24, 2006 6. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes- May 24, 2006 7. Public Written Comments as of July 19, 2006 Ap p rove d- t-...._.~_~,,..¢~%~_~'t Candace Horsley' ~i~~anager Agenda Summary Report Hull/Piffero Use Permit Page 2 Before a vote was taken on that motion, the hearing was continued from August 2,2006, to September 20, 2006, primarily to allow the City Attorney time to review Civil Code Section 1353.5, which was brought to the Council's attention at the hearing on August 2. The argument was made that Section 1353.5 bars the City Council from denying the use permit application. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth below, it is the City Attorney's opinion that Civil Code Section 1353.5 only applies to the boards governing homeowners associations in common interest developments. The section does not apply to the City Council's decision and has no affect on its authority to grant or deny the use permit. DETAILED DISCUSSION Section 1353.5 is contained in Title 6 (which is part of Division 2, Part 4) of the California Civil Code. The following is the Table of Contents for the relevant portion of Title 6: Title 6. Common Interest Developments Chapter 1. General Provisions § 1351. Definitions Chapter 2. Governing Documents Article 1. Creation § 1352. § 1352.5. § 1353. § 1353.5. § 1353.6. § 1353.7. Applicability of title Restrictive covenant that discriminates on basis of race, color, religion or other prohibited basis Contents of declaration Displaying flag of the United States Display of noncommercial signs, posters, flags or banners Requirements for fire retardant roof covering Title 6 regulates "common interest developments." Section 1351, which is in Chapter 1 of Title 6, contains definitions of the terms used in Title 6. "Common interest development" means any of the following: (1) A community apartment project. (2) A condominium project. (3) A planned development. (4) A stock cooperative. Agenda Summary Report Hull/Piffero Use Permit Page 3 All of these terms are also defined in Section 1351. As just one example, a "planned development" means a development (other than a community apartment project, a condominium project, or a stock cooperative) having either or both of the following features: (1) The common area is owned either by an association or in common by the owners of the separate interests who possess appurtenant rights to the beneficial use and enjoyment of the common area. (2) A power exists in the association to enforce an obligation of an owner of a separate interest with respect to the beneficial use and enjoyment of the common area by means of an assessment which may become a lien upon the separate interests in accordance with Section 1367 or 1367.1. Common interest developments have become very popular, particularly in the South, Southwest and Western United States. Typical examples are the gated communities in Palm Desert, California, with golf courses, swimming pools, tennis courts and club houses, owned by a homeowners association. A web search reveals that the unlimited authority of homeowners associations in common interest developments to control how residents use their property, controlling everything from what plants they can grow in their yard and what color they can paint their houses, has become increasingly controversial. Several instances in Florida, Texas and other states, where homeowners associations banned the display of flags, provoked a political reaction from state legislatures. A number of states, including California in 2002, enacted laws to prevent homeowners associations from adopting rules that prohibit residents in planned unit developments from displaying the flag of the United States on their property. Section 1353.5, quoted below, is an example of one of these laws. As you can see, its prohibition on limiting or prohibiting the display of the flag of the United States applies to a "declaration" or other "governing document." "No declaration or other governing document shall limit or prohibit..." Here is Section 1353.5 in its entirety: § 1353.5. Displaying flag of the United States (a) Except as required for the protection of the public health or safety, no declaration or other .qoverninq document shall limit or prohibit, or be construed to limit or prohibit, the display of the fla.q of the United States by' an owner on or in the owner's separate interest or within the owner's exclusive use common area, as defined in Section 1351. (b) For purposes of this section, "display of the flag of the United States" means a flag of the United States made of Agenda Summary Report Hull/Piffero Use Permit Page 4 fabric, cloth, or paper displayed from a staff or pole or in a window, and does not mean a depiction or emblem of the flag of the United States made of lights, paint, roofing, siding, paving materials, flora, or balloons, or any other similar building, landscaping, or decorative component. (c) In any action to enforce this section, the prevailing party shall be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. (Emphasis added.) Section 1353.5 is part of Chapter 2 in Title 6, which regulates the governing documents used to create common interest developments and the homeowners associations which own the common areas in those developments and which also regulate the use of both privately owned lots and common areas in those developments. Chapter 2 is entitled: "Governing Documents." Both "declaration" and "governing document" are defined in Section 1351. "Governing documents" means the declarations and any other documents, such as bylaws, operating rules of the association, articles of incorporation, or articles of association, which govern the operation of the common interest development or association. Finally, Section 1352, in describing the subject matter of Title 6, including Section 1353.5, states that it applies to common interest developments. Based on the above, it is clear that Section 1353.5 applies exclusively to declarations and governing documents, as defined in Section 1351, which are adopted in creating and privately regulating common interest developments in accordance with Title 6, and has no application to a city or its zoning ordinances or General Plan. ATTACHMENT. 1TEN NO. 9a DATE: August 2, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB.1ECT: ADOPI'ZON OF F1'NDZNGS AND FTNAL ACI'ZON ON HULL/PZFFERO USE PERMZT APPLZCATI'ON SUMMARY: This public hearing was continued from the .luly 19, 2006, City Council meeting with directions to staff to prepare findings to support a denial of the use permit application. Attached as Attachment ! are proposed findings. The staff previously prepared findings to support approval of the application. As a result, findings have been prepared to support a decision approving or denying the application. · . RECOMMENDATZON: Adopt findings and take final action on the use permit application. ALTERNATZVE COUNCTL POLTCY OPTI'ON: N/A Citizens Advised: Publicly noticed according to the requirements of the Ukiah City Code Requested by: Dave Hull and Ric Piffiro Prepared by: David 3. Rapport, City Attorney Coordinated with: Charley Stump, Planning Director, Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Adopting Findings in Support of ]:ts Decision to De. ny Use Permit Candace Horsley, City Manage1 Attachment RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADOPTING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF ITS DECISION TO DENY USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 06-13 WHEREAS, 1. On August 2, 2006, the City Council voted to deny use permit application no. 06- 13 for a 45 foot flag pole and related improvements, as described below; and 2. The decision to deny the use permit must be sported by findings of fact; and 3. The findings set forth the ultimate facts which the City Council finds to be true and the findings support the City Council's conclusions; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: The application for a use permit, f'fled April 5, 2006, by David Hull, as the owner of Mendocino County Assessor Parcel No. 001-040-74, and Rick Piffero, as the applicant, is denied based on the following findings. 1. The application is for a 45 foot flag pole on a concrete base illuminated by flood lights at the base directed upward to illuminate the flag at night. The applicants have placed an American flag on the pole which is over 40 feet long and 25-feet wide. A picture in the planning file shows that the flag is almost as long as the pole. For purposes of these findings, the concrete base, flood lights with electrical wiring, the fiberglass pole and the pole's capacity to accommodate a 40' x 25' flag are together considered the "Project." The Project is located in the upper portion of the hills on the west side of the Ukiah Valley. 2, Rick Piffero constructed the Project on the property with the owner' s permission, but no evidence has been submitted establishing that he has a formal legal right, beyond a verbal license, to possess or use AP No. 001-040-74. 3. A use permit is required for the following reasons: a. Ukiah City Code (UCC) Section 9018 limits accessory structures on a parcel in an R-1 Zoning District to 20 feet. The height limit of accessory structures can be exceeded with a use permit. The proposed flag pole is 49 feet tall; 45 feet above grade. b. UCC Section 7178.A provides that flag poles may be permitted in any zoning district in excess of the established height limits with a use permit. c. UCC Section 9139 requires a use permit prior to any grading or construction on a parcel in the R- 1-H Zoning District, if the average ground'gradient across any portion of the property exceeds 15%. The average grOund gradient across portions of AP No. 001-040-74 exceeds 15%. 4. Under UCC Section 9262.E, the decision-maker may grant a Use permit, when the evidence presented supports the following findings: a. The proposed land use is consistent with the provisions of the zoning ordinance and the goals and policies of the Ukiah General Plan; and b. The proposed land use is compatible with surrounding land uses and shall not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare. 5. Issuing a use permit, as applied for, is inconsistent and in conflict with the City of Ukiah General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Element. Policy OC-10.2 provides that roads and structures shall be designed and sited to conserve or avoid damage to the natural hillside resources of the western Ukiah hills. To implement that policy, Implementation Measure OC-10.2(b) directs the City to site and design development to minimize impacts on views from the floor of the Ukiah valley ("Valley"). The Project is not sited and designed to minimize impacts on views from the Valley. a. The flag pole is 25 feet taller or more than double the height limit for accessory structures, including flag poles, in an R-1 Zoning District. The same height limit applies in an R-1-H Zoning District. The extra height and the size of the flag are designed to be seen from the Ukiah valley floor; not to minimize impacts on vieWs from the Valley. b. The flag pole is designed to be viewed at night by directing flood lights upward to illuminate the flag. This design element is intended to maximize rather than minimize views of the flag pole from the Valley, and to make the flag pole visible 24 hours per day. c. Pictures in the Planning Department file for Project No. 06-13 demonstrate that the flag pole is clearly visible from various locations in the Valley, including the Civic Center parking lot, the intersection of Orchard and Gobbi Streets, the Home Depot parking lot and the Safeway parking lot. Testimony submitted at or prior to the heating and before the City Council established that the Project is visible from Highway 101 and other residential areas in the City. Several speakers noted that persons visiting them have commented on the flag as a prominent feature in the western hills. The visibility of the Project is greatly increased when the fully unfurled flag blows in breezes common along the western hills. d. Since under the First Amendment, the City cannot prescribe the type of flag which may be attached to the pole, the impacts of the Project are considered without regard to the type of flag currently proposed by the applicants. The permit will run with the land. Once approved, any owner of A.P. No. 001-040-74 could attach a flag of any type to the pole. Conversely, if the applicants limited themselves to a 20 foOt pole and a flag of commensurate size, the Project would not conflict with GP Policy OC-10.2. 6. The issuance of the use permit would be detrimental to the public' s health, safety and general welfare. a. The General Plan policies in the Open Space and Conservation Element were adop[ed to protect the public welfare of the City and its residents. Because issuance of the use permit would conflict with Policy OC-10.2 and its Implementation Measure OC-10.2(b), it would be detrimental to public welfare to issue the use permit. b. GP Policy OC- 10.2 and Implementation Measure OC- 10.2(b) were intended to preserve the natural beauty of the western hills by requiring man-made structures, such as the flag pole, to be designed and. sited to minimize their impact on Valley views of the natural appearance of the western hills. As a result of the height of the pole and the size of the flag the pole will accommodate, the impact on these views has not been minimized. PASSED AND ADOPTED on August 2, 2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES' NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Gail Petersen-Latipow.,. City Clerk A'I'rACHMENT CITY OF UKIAH --- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue · Ukiah, CA 95482 August 2, 2006 6:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on August 2, 2006, the notice for which being legally noticed. Roll call was taken at 6:00 p.m. and the following Councilmembers were present: Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. Staff Present: City Manager Hor$1ey, Director of Planning Charley Stump, Community Services Director Sage Sangiacomo and City Clerk Gall Petersen. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by public member Benj Thomas 3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS a. Proclamation Declaring August as Breastfeeding Awareness Month - Rodin 6:08:33 PM Councilmember Rodin read and presented the Proclamation to Tess O'Connell. 4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS None 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (items "a" through "d" continued from July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting) defer consideration of the minutes at'this time6:! 1:!7 PM a. Regular Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2006 b. Regular Meeting Minutes of June 21, 2006 c. Special Budget 06-07 Workshop Meeting Minutes of June 28 and 29, 2006 d. Regular Meeting Minutes of July 5, 2006 e. Regular Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2006 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. Read by Mayor Ashiku 7. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember. or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. M/S McCowe/Baldwin to approve Consent Calendar a. Award of Bid for 35,45,50,55 and 70 Foot Class 3 Western Red Cedar Poles to J.H. Baxter Co. in the amount of $21,243.99 b. Status of the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric.Power Plant Equipment Refurbishment Emergency c. Notification to Council Regarding a Three-Year Contract in the Amount of $28,439.04 with Evergreen Job & Safety Training to Provide Onsite Job and Safety Training to the Electric Department d. Award of Bid for New 3,4 Ton Fire Department Pick-up truck to Malta Chevrolet Olds al . e Component Award of Bid to Minor Rubber Co., Inc. Hydroelectric Plant Tainter Valve Modification, Ordering of Long Lead Times Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Crane, Rodin, McCowen, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. .NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None 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 Comment: Steve Scalmanini requested the City Council reconfirm the City's position on the Ukiah Valley Area plan advising the County will be voting on this matter Tuesday, August 8th, to contract with a consulting firm known as "MIG". City Manager Horsley to provide copies of the proposal to the Council. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM) 6:14:56 PM a. Adoption of Findinqs and Final Action on Hull/Piffero Use Permit Application City Attorney Rapport reiterated the action taken at the July 19th meeting, directing staff to prepare the findings opposing approval of the Use Permit. Attorney Rapport stated he had received an e-mail on Government Code Section 434.5 regarding the right to fly the flag, stating no individual should be restricted from displaying the flag on private property. The City can impose reasonable time, place and manner restrictions for displaying the flag however, no restriction shall take place on' purely aesthetic concerns. The findings presented by staff are consistent with the General Plan and Zoning code regulating development. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED 6:34:33 PM Voicing support of approval of the Use Permit Joseph John Turri, Michael Caalim, John Graft, Myron Sawicki (citing Civil Code Section 1353.5), Phil Ashiku, Jim Mulheren, Kevin Orr, Ric Piffero, William Evans Voicing opposition of approval of the Use Permit MaryAnn Miller, Paule.tte Arnold, Steve Scalmanini, Larry Puterbaugh, Pinky Kushner Voicing opinion that the Council has combined the matter of the flag pole with the flag: Michael Caail, Lisa Mammina Voicing opinion that there are other serious matters the City Council needs to address: Benj Thomas Jimmy Rickel stated that the flag pole in Todd Grove Park was dedicated to the Viet Nam Veterans Applicant Ric Piffero stated he and his partner will continue to fly the flag, referencing an e- mail from his partner, Dave Hull dated August 2, 2006, regarding Government Code Section 434.5. Mr. Piffero requested the Council approve the Special Use Permit application. In response to Councilmember McCowen, Mr. Piffero stated that the height of the original flagpole, which had been in place for several years, was 32'8". When asked if he would decrease the height of the pole to 32.5 feet, and the size of the flag to what it was previously, Mr. Piffero responded he did not wish to change the pole or flag. M/S CranelMcCowen move that the Use Permit Application 06-13 be approved in accordance with the staff recommended action for the Council meeting of July 19, 2006. Councilmember Crane stated he wishes to make it clear that in order to receive three supporting votes, a compromise may be necessary. Motion revised by C0uncilmember McCowen and accepted by Councilmember Crane, to approve the use permit subject to a height of 32.5 feet above the grade; Ric Piffero stated he and his partner are not willing to accept the compromise. The discussion regarding a site-visit and whether Council members have viewed this site followed with City Attorney Rapport explaining the City Council's policy. Councilmember Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku announced they had visited the site. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 7:38 Mayor Ashiku addressed Councilmembers and the public regarding the importance of accurate facts and findings, asking Councilmembers McCowen and Crane to reconsider their position. City Attorney Rapport stated he did not have enough time to analyze'Civil Code 1353.5, prior to this meeting and would like to look at the statue. Consensus of the Council was to continue the item to September 20, 2006. Recess 8:0] :09 PM to 8:07 PM Due to the length of the Public Hearing, agenda items requiring immediate consideration will be considered first. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS c. Consideration and Action to approve a Ballot Ar.qument Regarding theMeasure to Increase the Hotel and Motel Room Tax; discuss and Adopt Proposed Resolution the Use of Said Tax 8:08:24 PM M/S Rodin/Baldwin to approve adoption of the ballot argument. Public Comment: Jim Mulheren stated that the Chamber of Commerce was advised of the proposed Resolution after it was presented to Council in draft form. Public Comment Closed: Motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Crane, Rodin, McCowen, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None M/S Rodin/ Baldwin approve Resolution establishing allowable uses of hotel-motel occupancy tax revenues resulting from an increase in the tax rate from'8% to 10% Motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Crane, Rodin, McCowen, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None 8:22:].4 P]Vl 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS d. Adoption of Ordinance Amendinq Ukiah City Code Section 1151~ Re.qardin.q Appointment of Planninq Commission Members- continued from 7/19/06 8:22:29 Councilmember Baldwin read his letter urging Councilmember reconsider revising the current appointment process of Planning Commission members. Public comment opened: 8:27:]2 PM Steve Scalmanini stated that if this Ordinance is passed, it is a blatant double standard. He reiterated that censoring or terminating a Planning Commissioner who is a problem, is currently addressed in the Ordinance. He encouraged Council to reconsider changing the Ordinance. M/S McCowen/Ashiku move to adopt an Ordinance amending Ukiah City Code Section 1151, regarding appointment of Planning Commission members. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Crane, McCowen, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: Rodin, Baldwin ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS b. Award of Contract to Fisher & Hall Urban Desiqn for the Downtown/Perkins Street Community Visioninq and Form Based Zoninq Code Proiect and Budqet Amendment Councilmembers Crane and Rodin were recused at 8:32 pm Planning Director Stump briefly reviewed the interview process, stating the panel's recommendation is to 'award the contract to Fisher & Hall Urban Design. Director Stump further stated he believes that with a staff member assigned to the project and with the trainings that will be provided by the Contractor, this concept could be used in other areas of the City with City staff taking the lead. Public Comment: Mari Rodin speaking as a citizen, stated that the contract includes pre-meetings with staff and planning for the Criminal Justice Center is crucial. Public Comment Closed: MIS McCowen/Baldwin approval of the recommended action to award the contract for the Perkins Street Community Visioning and Form Based Code project to Fisher & Hall Urban Design and to approve a budget amendment to add $15,200 to Account No. 100.1501.250.000. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmember McCowen, Baldwin and MayorAshiku. NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Councilmember Crane, Rodin Councilmember McCowen was excused from the meeting at 8:45 pm Councilmembers Crane and Rodin returned to the dias at 8:45 pm. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Receive Status Report Concerninq Si.qn Ordinance Enforcement Activities and Provide Direction to Staff - Continued from July 19~ 2006 Received report. 11. NEW BUSINESS a. Review of Proposals and Selection of Second Consultina Firm to Perform Structural Encfineerinq Plan Check.and Substitute Buildinq Inspection Service Planning Director Stump stated that of the three proposals received, Philips Group met the requirements and confirmed measures to ensure adherence, to City's deadlines. Brief discussion followed with consideration to post on the City's website, a tracking of the plan checks and building inspections which would encourage the contractor to meet deadlines and provide up-to-date information to the client. MIS Rodin/Crane to approve Phillips Group as the City's second structural engineering and substitute building consulting firm. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Crane, Rodin, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: McCowen Bm APPROVAL OF MINUTES (items "a" through "d" continued from July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting) M/s Rodin/McCowen to approve the Minutes as submitted: a. Regular Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2006 b. Regular Meeting Minutes of June 21,2006 c. Special Budget 06-07 Workshop Meeting Minutes of June 28 and 29, 2006 d. Regular Meeting Minutes of July 5, 2006 e. Regular Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2006 Motion unanimously carried by an "AYE" voice vote. 12. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Baldwin requested Decorum (Rules of Order) be agendized within weeks. Councilmember Crane. requested formal detachment of the North Fire Station and information relative to jurisdiction and other boundary matters be brought back to Council on August 16, 2006. 13. CITY MANAGEPJCITY CLERK REPORTS None 14. CLOSED SESSION 9:0!:0~) PM a. Conference with Real Property Negotiators (GCS 54956.8) Property: 107 South Oak Street, Ukiah Agency Negotiator: Candace Horsley Negotiating Parties: City of Ukiah/Saturday Afternoon Club Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment b. Conference with Legal Council-Anticipated Litigation (GCS 5496.9C) Initiation of Litigation (1 Case) 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 PM ~ail Petersen, City Clerk ATTACHMEN'r_~ ITEM NO. 9a DATE: 3uly 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 (3ennings 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 Item 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 APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Mana~)~r 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. F:IND]:NGS 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: . . "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." Findin~j 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. Findin~j No. 2: The primary General Plan Goal, Policy and ]:mplementation measure applicable to the project are Contained in the Open Space and Conservation Element: Goal OC-:I.0: 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. Implementation 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 and the natural woodland environment. The development must also be sited and designed to minimize impacts on views from the valley. City of Ukiah A'I'I'ACHMEkn' ~ L IIII 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: l. , "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 The minor grading, concrete slab and lighting system GENRAL PLAN CONS:[STENCY ANALYS:[S: The primary General Plan Goal, Policy and ]:mplementation measure applicable to the project are contained in the Open Space and Conservation Element: Goal OC-~.O: Conserve the natural woodlands environment of the area hills Policy 0C-10.2: Roads and structures shall be designed and sited to conserve or avoid damage to the natural resources where feasible. ]:mplementation 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 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. In addition, observations at night revealed the lighting to minimal. 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 The central question is whether or not the additional 25-feet of height produce a significant adverse visual impact. ]:f 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-:L0.:L. 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. Tt 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. CEQA COMPLIANCE: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section :[5303, Class 3(e). CONCLUS]:ON.' 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. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Based on the findings listed below, conditionally approve the Use Permit. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS: 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; b, 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 afternoon 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. d. 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. e. 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. b. 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 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: l. 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. . 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. . In 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. 4. 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 (1) 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. 8. 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. STAFF REPORT PREPARED BY: Charley Stump, Director Planning and Community Development ATTACHMENT~ MINUTES CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION May~24, 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. St 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 staffs' 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 PermiL ' 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. Lode 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 maybe 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 PM Judy Pruden appreciated the public comments and noted the statements were well th°ught 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 Maior 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 Page 8 May 24, 2006 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 th® 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 them is a 2/2 vote. Director Stump outlined the following options: 1. Continue the matter until there is a fifth commissioner th'at 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 Zonir~g 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 Whetzei, 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: 1. The trellis 2. The trellis 3. The trellis 4. The trellis 5. The trellis 6. 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. does not impede or block pedestrian circulation. 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 1 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 ATTACHMENT..~.~ CITY OF UKI^H CITY CLEr4K'S DF_F'AR'TMENT ~1~2 W~so~, 'Ju~E 14, 2006 : '. '- Fi 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 jump 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 iii _ JUN 15 2006 CITY OF UKIAH _ .... C!TYCLF..FIK'S DEPARTMENT I II I I I I ,,~TY ~)-F UKIAH C3ax: 7o%46z-4945 * 44 c'octe pt~nn/'~ ?rc~cT./ke~ e~c/ rode. L¢3 ~ *¢ D ¢¢_.. 2-'00,5' / - Ttie City of Redding .adopted an urgency ordinance prohibiting electronic re'ader 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 36937Co), which allows cities to des!gnate urgency ordinances that , take effect immediately upon final passage. The court held the city council hac[ the right, to 'interpret ~.'Public health" to include the'quality of life as it is affected-by .the 'aesthetics of the c!ty. The court stated that "im]ental health is certainly included in the.public health." City of Ukiah ~ Mendocino County Ukiah Valley General Plan and Growth Management Program IV.1. Open'Space and ConserVation'4' Page 11 Implementation Measure 0C-10.2(b): Site and' design development to minimize impacts on 'views from the Valley. ['r/meframe for completion: Ongoing planning period ~, Measure applies to: City and County 4' Agency/Department responsible: City Planning, County · Department of Planning and Building]. implementation Measure OC-IO. 2(c): Cleariiigs' for roads, buildings, and fire protection zones shall be sited in the least visible and eco!ogically damaging locations possible and screened with vegetation where feasible. [7'imetrame for completion: Ongoing planning period 4, Measure applies to: City and. County 4, Agency/Department responsible: City Planning, County Department of Planning and 'Building] / The typical zoning ordinance· prov. ides that a C. MB::m~y'"be"'~¢~5~~d~for s~.~,se~ if t.~~~ u~'e ~lf't~re"im'th'e':~est~~C"fl~~ft~c_ co--ce and necessity and will not be contrary to the public health, morals or welfare. Upton v. Gray, 269 Cal. App. 2d 352 (1969). Some ordinances provide that the proposed use must be compatib!e 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 neighborir~g properties'and to deal with effects on the community as a whole. Street dedication and improvement, installation of landscaping and protective walls, architectural requirements, and restrictions on hours of opera- tion for CUPs are some examples. A co¢~~s~-bear-~ Ceaed~a:bte relationS.-') shiC':[0'ffte,.~ic,.ne'e~Is created by the d.evelopment, and this should b_e su pC2rfS, tE,~e~.~~he~re¢~rd,-~:~-plrb~dfng. Bank of America v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 42 Cal. App. 3d 1981 (1974). ;Z o.P 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 takert from the Memorandum dated March 1.4, 2006 for the City Council/Planning Commission Public Work. shop- 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 wh° 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 RI-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 ~harle¥ Stu.rn~3 From: Sent: To: Subject: Pinky Kushner [pinkkushner@netscape.net] Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9:41 AM candace@c!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 American 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@raSh.COrn] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 8:42 AM To: planning @cityofukiah.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, ail 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 U-kiah 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 goveming 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 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 heating. 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. Thank you. Sincerely, ~M~r~ cc: Charlie Stump, Planning Director ~harle¥ Stump 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 Nednesday. 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 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 9b DATE: September 20, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: AMENDMENT OF THE TRANSFER STATION CONTRACT TO ALLOW PARTIAL RECOVERY OF INCREASED FUEL COSTS RELATED TO DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE BY THE UKIAH TRANSFER STATION At the Council meeting of September 6th, staff presented a recommendation for a contract amendment with Solid Wastes Systems (SWS) to allow a one-time rate increase at the transfer station of $1.45 per ton. That recommendation was based on the increased cost of fuel for hauling garbage to the landfill. After lengthy discussion, the Council directed staff to meet with (SWS), to develop concepts for a one year fuel surcharge and to develop enabling language for multiple rates for materials brought to the transfer station and present recommendations for implementation. The staff received additional information from SWS and considered it while preparing this report. Revenue Increases and Expenditure Reductions In addition to the cost of fuel, Council questioned the impact of workers' compensation rate reform on SWS's expenses and the amount of revenue the company was receiving from the increased prices for the sale of junk metal. According to data provided by SWS, the actual workers' compensation insurance rates increased from 12.66% of salary to 39.83% of salary, an increase of 215% since the transfer station opened. Health insurance, payroll taxes and retirement plan contributions also increased during this time period. The total cost of personnel (salary and employee related costs) increased by one hundred eighty- (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of an amendment to the Transfer Station Contract allowing for a one-time fuel surcharge of not to exceed $1.45 (one dollar and forty-five cents) per ton and not to exceed $.30 per cubic yard for non-compacted garbage to recover part of the extraordinary increase in fuel costs and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract amendment. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Provide staff with alternative action. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: N/A Solid Wastes Systems, Inc. Gordon Elton, Interim Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manager; Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director; Rick Seanor, Deputy Public Works Director APPROVED: Candace H er six thousand two hundred ninety-four dollars ($186,294) from 2002 to 2005, a 66.5% increase. The CPI increase from January 2002 to January 2005 was 7.7%. If the total 2002 personnel cost are increased by the CPI, they would be $302,234 in 2005, an increase of $21,608. The increased cost of personnel plus the increased cost of fuel, less the increase in junk metal revenue exceeds the CPI adjusted cost of personnel and fuel by $208,792. From 2002 to 2005, the increased costs of personnel and fuel, reduced by the increased revenue from the sale ofjunk metal are $241,076 as detailed in the table below. Selected Transfer Station Expenses - Year to Year Change 2002 2002 2003 2004 2005 to 2005 Wages 191,456 264,202 278,927 269,715 78,259 Workers' Comp 34,987 66,283 95,354 113,173 78,186 Health Insurance 35,653 45,855 63,713 57,725 22,072 Payroll taxes 16,232 22,323 24,270 23,597 7,365 Retirement 2,298 2,963 3,114 2,710 412 Total Personnel 280,626 401,626 465,378 466,920 186,294 [Fuel Costs 138,652 I 128,186 I218,870 I248,870[ 110,218 I Junk Metal tons 1,250 1,034 1,173 1,414 164 Junk Metal revenue 39,819 55,043 79,820 95,255 55,436 Net increased expenses from 2002 to 2005 (Personnel + Fuel- Metal revenue) 241,076 [ The fuel increase has affected other Mendocino County solid waste operations. The County of Mendocino has recognized the need for a fuel surcharge based on the experience of the contract hauler for Solid Wastes ofWillits (SWOW). Based on documented fuel cost increases, the County adopted a method to allow for a specified fuel surcharge over a three year period. The County method has checks and balances and sunsets the fuel surcharge after three years. In determining the requested fuel surcharge for the Ukiah Valley Transfer Station, SWS closely followed the method established by the County. As such, SWS is requesting a rate increase of $1.45 per ton based on increased fuel costs. The requested fuel surcharge increases the cost for self haul by $.30 from $11.25 to 11.55 per cubic yard. The cost per ton of compacted garbage will increase by $1.45 from $57.51 to $58.96. The Council suggested a one year fuel surcharge limit. This recommendation was developed with that limitation in mind. The concept underlying this recommendation is that the major expenses of operating the transfer station, personnel and fuel, are expected to change is a normal and reasonably predictable manner. When major costs change outside a reasonable range and continue for an extended period, consideration should be given to a rate surcharge to offset the cost increases. Staff recommends consideration of any extraordinary expenses changes at the same time that the CPI rate adjustment is processed. \\Fs3\shared files\Goodrick, Sue\Sept 20 Regular Agenda\item9b 1_092006.doc Page 2 The Council also requested recommended language allowing for multiple rates for materials brought to the transfer station. The group currently meeting on the issue of reducing recyclable materials in the garbage at the transfer station is making progress and had a productive meeting last week. The contract language necessary to authorize rates for materials brought to the transfer station depends on the programs that will be implemented to increase recycling. Therefore staff recommends the development of enabling language should be one of the outcomes of the program design and brought before Council in the content of the new plans for promoting recycling. The following table summarizes the current and proposed rates with the fuel surcharge included. The attached schedule shows the calculations of these increases in greater detail... Rate schedule planned by Solid Wastes Systems, Inc. Calculation of Transfer Fuel October 2006 Station rates from year to October Cost Rates After year 2006 Rates Increase increases Compacted Rates Construction component 12.36 -0- 12.36 Operation component 8.11 -0- 8.11 Transportation component 12.30 1.45 13.75 Disposal component 20.24 -0- 20.24 S u btotal 53.01 1.45 54.46 MSWMA surcharge 4.50 -0__: 4.50 Total Cost 57.51 1.45 58.96 Net increase over prior year 1.4% 4.0% Self haul rates Construction component MSWMA surcharge Operation, Disposal & Hauling Subtotal 10% surcharge for Small loads Rounding to nickel Total Cost 2.70 .67 7.15 10.52 .72 .01 11.25 -0- .26 .02 .02 .30 2.70 .67 7.41 10.78 .74 .03 11.55 Yard Waste rates Disposal Cost Per Ton Operation & transportation per ton Total Cost Disposal Cost Per Yard 31.06 6.21 37.27 5.37 .94 32.00 6.21 38.21 5.50 Staff recommends Council approval of the one-time contract amendment requested by SWS to allow recovery of increased fuel costs in an amount not to exceed $1.45 per ton and not to exceed $.30 per cubic yard for non-compacted garbage and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment on behalf of the City. \\Fs3\shared files\Goodrick, Sue\Sept 20 Regular Agenda\item9bl_092006.doc Page 3 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. DATE: REPORT 9a September 6, 2006 SUBJECT: AMENDMENT OF THE TRANSFER STATION CONTRACT TO ALLOW PARTIAL RECOVERY OF INCREASED FUEL COSTS RELATED TO DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE BY THE UKIAH TRANSFER STATION The provisions of the City's franchise agreement with Solid Wastes Systems, Inc., for the Ukiah transfer station requires an annual adjustment be made to the gate fees each year. This adjustment is calculated by applying a rate factor equal to 50% of the change in the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Statistics, Consumer Price Index (CPI), U.S. City Average, January to January (Contract CPI). The CPI increase from January 2005 to the January 2006 is 3.99%. The contract provides that the rate is adjusted by only 50% of the CPI increase or 2.00%. Furthermore the contract provides that the construction component of the rate is not increased by the CPI adjustment. The MSWMA surcharge is added to these rates to determine the cost the customer will pay. The actual cost increase to the customer is 1.4%. To put this in dollar terms, the CPI based cost for self haul will increase by $.15 from $11.10 to 11.25 per cubic yard. The CPI based cost per ton of compacted garbage will increase by $.80 from (continued on page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of an amendment to the Transfer Station Contract allowing for a one-time increase of not to exceed $1.45 (one dollar and forty-five cents) per ton to recover part of the extraordinary increase in fuel costs and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract amendment. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Provide staff with alternative action. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Solid Wastes Systems, Inc. Gordon Elton, Interim Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manager; Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director; Rick Seanor, Deputy Public Works Director 1. Solid Wastes Systems calculation of Transportation costs 2. Transfer Station rate calculation sheet 3. Procedures for Surcharge Decreases APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager $56.71 to $57.51. These increases are in the existing contract and are not part of the question under consideration by the City Council. The contract does not provide for increases other than the increase based on the CPI. SWS has requested an amendment to the contract allowing for an additional rate increase based on the significant increase in the cost of fuel for transporting waste to the landfill. The fuel increase has affected other Mendocino County solid waste operations. The County of Mendocino has recognized the need for a fuel surcharge based on the experience of the contract hauler for Solid Wastes of Willits (SWOW). Based on documented fuel cost increases, the County adopted a method to allow for a specified fuel surcharge over a three year period. The County method has checks and balances and sunsets the fuel surcharge after three years. In determining the requested fuel surcharge for the Ukiah Valley Transfer Station, SWS closely followed the method established by the County. As such, SWS is requesting a rate increase of $1.45 per ton based on increased fuel costs. Staff proposes to follow a similar method of checks and balances as identified in Attachment 3. The requested fuel surcharge increases the cost for self haul by $.30 from $11.25 to 11.55 per cubic yard. The cost per ton of compacted garbage will increase by $1.45 from $57.51 to $58.96. To put the rate request in an overall perspective, the CPI increased by 13.25% from January 2001 to January 2006. The total cost per compacted ton, when the transfer station opened in 2001, was $55.00. If that rate increase was applied to the initial cost, the current cost would be $62.29. If 50% of the CPI was applied to the rate, it would be $58.65. The requested rate is $.31 more than 50% of CPI for the five year period. This may be an over simplification since the construction component and the MSWMA components of the rate are not routinely increased, but, it is an accurate reflection of the overall cost to the customer. If fuel prices increased only by inflation, the 2001 cost of $1.30 per gallon would now cost only $1.48 per gallon. The current fuel cost of $3.20 per gallon is more than double the cost of fuel in 2001. The following table summarizes the current and proposed rates with the fuel surcharge included. The attached schedule shows the calculations of these increases in greater detail. If approved, the new rates will be effective October 1, 2006. C:\Documents and Settings\SGOODRICK\Local Settings\Temporary lntemet Files\OLK 123\item9a - Trsf Station - Fuel 09o06-06.doc Page 2 Rate schedule planned by Solid Wastes Systems, Inc. Calculation of Transfer Increase Rates after Fuel October 2006 Station rates from year to October 2005 per Contracted Cost Rates After year Rates Contract Increase Increase increases Compacted Rates Construction component 12.36 -0- 12.36 -0- 12.36 Operation component 7.95 .16 8.11 -0- 8.11 Transportation component 12.06 .24 12.30 1.45 13.75 Disposal component 19.84 .40 20.24 -0- 20.24 Subtotal 52.21 .80 53.01 1.45 54.46 MSWMA surcharge 4.50 -0._: 4.50 -0~- 4.50 Total Cost 56.71 .80 57.51 1.45 58.96 Net increase over prior year 1.1 % 1.4% 4.0% Self haul rates Construction component MSWMA surcharge Operation, Disposal & Hauling Subtotal 10% surcharge for Small loads Rounding to nickel Total Cost 2.70 .67 7.01 10.38 .70 .02 11.10 -0- .02 -.01 .15 2.70 .67 7.15 10.52 .72 .01 11.25 -0- .26 .26 .02 2.70 .67 7.41 10.78 .74 11.55 Yard Waste rates Disposal Cost Per Ton Operation & transportation per ton Total Cost Disposal Cost Per Yard 30.45 6.09 36.54 5.25 .61 .12 .12 31.06 6.21 37.27 5.37 .94 -0- 32.00 6.21 38.21 5.50 Staff recommends Council approval of the one-time contract amendment requested by SWS to allow recovery of increased fuel costs in an amount not to exceed $1.45 per ton and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment on behalf of the City. C:\Documents and Settings\SGOODRICK\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK123\item9a - Trsf Station - Fuel 09-06-06.doc Page 3 SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS CALCUALTION OF TRANSPORTATION COSTS Attachment # 1 Transfer Station Contract Amendment September 6, 2006 UKIAH VALLEY TRANSFER HAULING COSTE PER HOUR 10/1/2001 FUEL PER GALLON $1.30 MILES PER GALLON 4.00 COST PER MILE 0.33 MILES PER HOUR 45.00 FUEL COST PER HOUR $14.85 OTHER ELEMENTS OF HAULING COST TOTAL COST PER HOUR $26.00 $40.85 Change Fuel Cost Only 1/10~2006 $3.20 4.00 0.80 45.00 $36.00 $26.00 $62.00 UKIAH VALLEY TRANSFER TRANSPORTATION COMPONENT PRICE PER GALLON TRANSPORTATION TO POTRERO HILLS ROUND TRIP TO POTERO MILES PER HOUR HOURS PER ROUND TRIP TRANSPORTATION COST PER HOUR COST PER ROUND TRIP TONS PER TRIP TRANSPORTATION COMPONENT PER TON TRANSPORTATION COMPONENT PER TON EFFECTIVE 10/1/05 FUEL SURCHARGE PER TON RATE PER TON EFFECTIVE 10/1/06 PROPOSED NEW RATE PER TON 10/1/2001 Bid $1.30 234 45 5.2 $4o.85 $212.40 18.4 $11.54 8/1/2006 $3.20 234 45 5.2 $62.00 $322.38 18.4 $17.52 $12.06 $5.46 $57.51 $62.97 rates from year to yearI I Calculation of Transfer Station CPI prior January- All US CitiesI CPI current January All US Cities I Construction component Operation component Transportation component Disposal component MSWMA surcharge Net increase over prior year Transfer Station rates as of I I October 1, 2005 Compacted rate 185.2 190.7 CPI Net Increase Increase 0% 0% 2.97% 1.5% 2.97% 1.5% 2.97% 1.5% 10/1/2005 $12.36 $7.95 $12.06 $19.84 $52.21 $4.50 $56.71 1.1% Self haul rate 185.2 190.7 Attachment #2 Transfer Station Contract Amendment 9-6-06 Transfer Station rates as of October 1, 2006 190.7 198.3 Compacted rate CPI Net Adjustment Increase Increase Increase** 10/1/2006 0% 0% $12.36 3.99% 2.0% $8.11 3.99% 2.0% $1.45 $13.75 3.99% 2.0% $20.24 $54.46 $4.5O $58.96 4.0% Self haul rate 190.7 198.3 CPI prior January - All US CitiesI CPI current January All US Cities I Construction component MSWMA surcharge Operation, Disposal & Hauling Subtotal 10% surcharge for Small loads Rounding to nickel CPI Increase O% O% 2.97% 0.0% Net Increase 1.5% $0.01 10/1/2005 $2.70 $0.67 $7.01 $10.38 $O.7O $O.O2 $11.10 CPI Increase O% O% 3.99% 0.0% Net Increase 2.0% $0.04 0.26 10/1 ~2006 $2.70 $0.67 $7.41 $10.78 $0.74 $O.O3 $11.55 YARD WASTE CALCULATION Disposal Cost Per Ton Operation & transportation per ton Total Cost Per Ton Disposal Cost Per Yard CPI Increase 2.97% 2.97% Net Increase 1.5% 1.5% 10/1/20O5 $30.45 6.09 $36.54 $5.25 CPI Increase 3.99% 3.99% Ratio increase per ton Net Adjustment Increase Increase ** 2.00% 2.00% 10/1 ~2006 $0.94 $32.00 $6.21 $38.21 4.57% $5.50 * Net increase is the allowed increase of 50% of CPI rounded to one tenth of a percent. ** Adjustment increase, for 2006, is an increase of $1.45 per ton, based on the significant increase of fuel for hauling waste to the landfill. FUEL SURCHARGE PROCEDURES FOR SURCHARGE DECREASES SEPTEMBER 2006 1. Baseline fuel cost is $3.20 per gallon. 2. Fuel charge greater than $3.20 will not be considered. 3. Fuel surcharge will extend through the life of the existing 15 year contract. 4. The initial fuel charge will be applied on October 2006. 5. The contract manager will review the fuel surcharge factor in July of each year. 6. The future fuel cost will be measure against the baseline costs to determine if a surcharge decrease is appropriate. . Decreases in the surcharge will be based on the most recent 12 month average as provided by California energy commission. http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/statistics/average_yearly_diesel_prices .html 8. The results of this determination will be separately delineated and applied to and reflected in the annual adjustment on October 1st of each year. AGENDA ITEM NO: 10a MEETING DATE: September 20, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant Refurbishment Project Budget and Schedule Update; Authorize the Expenditure of Additional Funds Necessary to Complete the Project Backc~round: On Apdl 19, 2006, Council approved Staff's recommendation that the bid submitted by General Electric to refurbish the flood damaged Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant be rejected. GE's bid took exception to the City's Construction Contract in its entirety and the bid amount ($545,580) was higher than the engineering estimate that existed at the time. The bid was declared non-responsive. Because additional delay in addressing flood damage to the generators was likely to further damage them, creating an emergency condition, the Council authorized Staff to conduct open market negotiations to procure a contractor to complete the work scope and delegated authority to the City Manager to make repairs up to $500,000 without further action by the Council. Continued on page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Find by a fourth-fifths vote that an emergency condition continues to exist, and authorize the continued expenditure of budgeted and unbudgeted funds necessary to complete the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant equipment refurbishment. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Do not authorize the expenditure of budgeted and unbudgeted funds necessary to complete the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant equipment refurbishment and engineering upgrades and abandon plans to restart the plant or give alternate direction to Staff. FUNDING: Amount Bud.qeted $2,070,955 (FY 05/06) $ 404,100 (FY 06/07) Account Number 800-5536- 302/250/800/690 699 Account Additional Funds Requested $571,199 Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Murray Grande, Hydro Project Manager Murray Grande, Hydro Project Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager Approved: Candace Horsley, C~ Manager A refurbishment contract was issued to Source California Energy Services, Inc. on June 7, 2006. Source California was also awarded the engineering contract for the Hydro plant restart project earlier on May 15, 2006. Having Source California perform both the engineering and refurbishment work added efficiencies to the hydro restart project that helped to effectively control the cost of the project to the greatest extent possible. The refurbishment work commenced in June and has progressed to the point that total project expenditures are approaching the $500,000 limit established by the Council. Additionally, the scope of work associated with the refurbishment contract has significantly changed resulting in a revised cost estimate and schedule to complete the work. On July 20, 2005, Council approved Staff's recommendation to proceed with a Hydro Restart Project with a preliminary budget of $1,350,000. This budget included required Tainter Gate modifications, limited power plant equipment repairs, control upgrades, permit and licensing, start-up costs and contingency. Following the flood, the budget for the hydro plant was increased $600,000 in FY 05/06 to cover the projected costs associated with the flood clean-up and equipment refurbishment. The work scope developed for the refurbishment of the flood damaged equipment was based on an inventory of all the components and equipment that were below the flood water line. Chan.qe in Refurbishment Work Scope: The refurbishment work scope included the disassembly, cleaning, testing and reassembly of the equipment identified in the inventory. Repair or replacement was considered outside the original refurbishment scope of work and would be considered extra work. In order to gain access to critical equipment requiring refurbishment, it was necessary to disassemble the turbines, which were not thought to be impacted by the flood, in order to gain access to the generators, which were affected by the flood. Upon disassembly of the turbine, it was discovered that the turbines as well as the generators did indeed require repairs as the result of not being maintained nor operated for the past eight years. In addition, after testing numerous electrical components, it was determined that a significant portion of these electrical components were not repairable due to being obsolete or damaged beyond repair, necessitating that new components be purchased. The discovery of extra work and the need to replace components has significantly impacted the overall budget and schedule for the project. Bud(3et: The first column in the table below delineates the various components that made up the original budget for the Hydro Restart Project and the components that were added to deal with the aftermath of the flood. The second column shows the estimated cost or actual cost incurred for each component. The third column shows those costs that should be recoverable through a FEMA claim that addresses costs incurred as a result of the flood. Budget Component Original Budget Revised Estimate Estimated FEMA Recoverable Tainter Valve Engr. $100,000 $45,000 Tainter Valve Const. $450,000 $400,000 (awaiting bid) Plant Equip. Refurbishment $350,000 $1,415,000 $912,000 Engineering $0 $350,773 (contract) SCADA/Relays $150,000 $292,000 Flood Clean-up $600,000 ** $197,481 (actual) $197,481 License/Permits/NCPA $50,000 $105,000 Hatchery Pump Upgrades $0 $75,000 Hatchery Flow Meter Upgrade and Other $0 $25,000 Startup $100,000 Included in Engr. Contract Contingency $150,000 $141,000 $91,200 S u b total $1,950,000 $3,046,254 $1,200,681 Net Budget (less FEMA) $1,845,573 ** Added after the flood to cover cleanup and equipment refurbishment costs The net budget following successful recovery of the hydro plant FEMA claim will be below the original project budget plus the $600,000 set aside for the flood cleanup and refurbishment. Actual costs incurred to date for the refurbishment of the flood damaged equipment is approximately $500,000. This does not include cleanup costs and engineering costs incurred to date. Schedule: The original estimated startup date of the hydro project following the start of the refurbishment contract was the first part of November. Due to the increased scope of work found following the disassembly and testing of the affected equipment, it is now estimated the project will begin startup testing in late November with startup projected for the middle of December, before the rainy season and increased releases through Coyote Dam. This will allow for the project to capture the full benefit of dam releases throughout the winter months. Project Economics: The forecasted value of the generation produced by the hydro project has not changed from the original proposal presented to the Council in July of 2005. The project has a net present value (offset contribution to the City's fixed cost budget) through the year 2020 of approximately $8,000,000. With FEMA recovery, the Hydro Restart Project has a NPV payback of less than 2.5 years. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO: 1 Ob DATE: September 20, 2006 REPORT SUB.,1ECT: RECEZVE STATUS REPORT CONCERNI'NG SI'GN ORDZNANCE ENFORCEMENT AC'I'~VZI'ZES AND PROVI'DE DI'RECTZON TO STAFF SUMMARY: This Agenda Item is the sixth sign violation enforcement report from Staff. Attachment No. 1 lists the sign enforcement cases Staff is currently working on, including the A- frame and abandoned sign cases. While the Main Street Program helped out by sending a letter to business owners and the Economic Development Coordinator helped by making initial contact on the A-frame sign cases, code compliance Staff has been unable to devote as much time as they'd like to these and the abandoned sign cases. This is due to the fact that the management of thirty-six other code compliance cases has dominated the Code Enforcement Officer's time. These include eighteen junk and debris cases initiated by upset neighbors, six marijuana cultivation cases, and cases involving illegal businesses, encroachments in the public right-of-way, rodent/pest infestations, fences exceeding the height limit, overgrown vegetation, farm animals in the City, excessive noise, and skateboarding in unauthorized areas. Each case involves site visits, meeting with property owners, renters, neighbors, and responsible departments and agencies, written correspondence and documentation, research, follow-up meetings and site monitoring. In all, the Code Compliance Coordinator is working on 121 cases. Staff has been exploring ways to expedite sign code compliance. In the future, if a property owner does not make a sincere attempt to correct a violation after two contacts, Staff is prepared to refer the case to the City Attorney. 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 the draft sign code materials to the business community with the intent of receiving input for the Council's consideration. Staff is prepared to return to the Council to discuss possible revisions to the sign regulations if the Council so desires. RECOMMENDED AC'I/ON: Receive report and provide direction to Staff. ALTERNATI'VE COUNCZL POLI'CY OPT/ON: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED: N/A City Council Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Candace Horsley, City Manager and Chris White, Code Compliance Coordinator 1. List of Sign Enforcement Cases Candac~ Horsley, City ATTACHMENT / Banner Violation Log Page 1 (State Street 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 3/29/2006 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 I Banner Violation Log Page 2 (State Street SV06-33 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 1 SV06-34 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 1 SV06-35 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 2 SV06-36 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 1 SV06-37 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 1 SV06-38 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 1 SV06-39 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 1 SV06-40 Abandon sign 6/22/2006 1 SV06-41 Abandon sign 7/11/2006 1 SV06-42 Abandon sign 7/11/2006 1 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 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-66 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-67 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-68 Banner 9/11/2006 1 Banner Violation Log Page 3 (State Street' SV06-69 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-70 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-71 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-72 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-73 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-74 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-75 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-76 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-77 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-78 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-79 Banner 9/11/2006 ~ 1 SV06-80 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-81 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-82 Banner 9/11/2006 1 ISV06-83 Banner 9/11/2006 1 SV06-84 Banner 9/11/2006, 1 SV06-85 Banner 9/11/2006 1 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO: i Oc DATE: September 20, 2006 REPORT SUB.1ECT: SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF TRAFFIC ISSUES ASSOC/ATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK SUMMARY: The City Council recently requested a summary report of the traffic issues associated with the development of the Airport Business Park. This Agenda item is intended to provide the Council with that summary and to initiate a discussion of the traffic issues, and how past decision makers acted to resolve or plan for the resolution of those issues. HISTORICAL CONTEXT: In 1979, the City proposed to annex the 138-acre Airport "Industrial" Park area into the City limits. Prior to annexation approval, the City obtained a State grant to prepare a Specific Plan for the area. In 1981, the City Council approved the Specific Plan and Planned Development zoning regulations to implement the plan. Shortly thereafter, the annexation was approved. The 1981 Planned Development allowed only industrial land uses south of Commerce Drive. Office commercial uses were allowed in the northwest corner of the site north of Commerce Drive and up to Talmage Road. Highway oriented commercial land uses (motels, service stations, and restaurants) were permitted in the northeast corner of the site where Walmart, Jack-in-the-Box and the Shell gas station are today. The Planned Development regulations were modified many times over the ensuing years for a variety of reasons. These reasons included amendments to allow more retail land uses, amendments to establish a more comprehensive and clearer set of development standards, amendments to allow the mixing of land uses, etc. As a result, the Airport Business Park has evolved into a development of retail stores, visitor serving land uses, eateries, and professional offices. The Mendocino Brewing Company is the lone industrial land use in the Park. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACT/ON: Receive report and discuss the traffic issues associated with the development of the Airport Business Park. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPT/ON: 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 Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director Attachments: None candace I~or~ley, City Ma'~er ENVTRONMENTAL TMPACT REPORT: Tn 1995, the City Council certified an Environmental Tmpact Report for the buildout of the Airport Business Park. Buildout was based on a series of development assumptions that included types of land uses and building intensities and square footages. The ETR identified a number of significant impacts that would result from buildout and included a comprehensive mitigation program to reduce or eliminate these impacts. Over the years, the City has relied on the ETR and has consistently imposed the mitigations on all development. To mitigate Walmart traffic, the Business Park property owners, Walmart, and the City made a number of improvements to Talmage Road, Airport Park Boulevard, and Hastings Avenue. Additionally, a Traffic Tmpact (Capital Tmprovement) fee was adopted for all future development, so that additional required street and intersection improvements could be funded as buildout occurred. TRAFFZC: Traffic circulation and safety has been an issue since the original Specific Plan and Planned Development were adopted. The Plan included a number of alternative street layouts. The primary alternative included a main north/south access road from Talmage Road south through the site, which was ultimately developed as Airport Park Blvd. ]:t also included a west connection to State Street via Hastings Road, which was eventually developed as Commerce Drive. As amendments were made to the Planned Development regulations, new traffic studies were required to determine if the changes would increase traffic volumes beyond those assumed in the 1995 ETR, and whether or not additional traffic mitigations would be required for future development. The most recent study was conducted in 2002 when the light manufacturing / mixed use area regulations were proposed for the 32-acres west of Airport Park Boulevard. A"worse case" traffic generation scenario of full commercial retail development in this area was evaluated, as well as a more balanced mixed use of retail, office, light manufacturing and residential land uses. Tt was concluded that the mixed use scenario would not require additional mitigation measures beyond those already planned for, but that the full commercial buildout scenario would cause a new significant impact and require a new mitigation measure. Specifically, it would require a traffic signal or roundabout at the intersection of Airport Park Boulevard and Commerce Drive. The following Table lists the intersections, the completed improvements, the planned improvements, and the required new improvements for buildout of the Airport Business Park. Many of the completed improvements resulted from the Walmart project. The City participated in the funding of many of these improvements. TNTERSECT]:ON State Street and Hastings Avenue Hastings Avenue South State Street and Talmage Road Airport Park Blvd and Talmage Road COMPLETED TMPROVEMENTS Signal Widened, repaved, curve realignment, sidewalks, bike lane, and stop sign Southbound left turn lane, elimination of on-street parking Signal, road widening, two-way left out of park, left turn pocket lengthening PLANNED TMPROVEMENTS Widening and adding new dedicated right turn lane None None Widening and additional left lane into park REQUTRED NEW TMPROVEMENTS None None None None ZNTERSECTZON Airport Park Blvd Talmage Road Commerce Drive APB and Commerce Drive Hwy 101 NB ramp and Talmaqe Road Hwy 101SB ramp and Talmaqe Road COMPLETED ZMPROVEMENTS Widening, and median modificationsr Widening, curbs, gutter and sidewalk on north side Railroad crossing improvements 4-way stop sign None required PLANNED TMPROVEMENTS Repair and Repaving Widening None None None REQUTRED NEW TMPROVEMENTS None None None Traffic signal or roundabout Traffic Signal* Realigned and widened Widening None *The City Public Works Director/City Engineer strongly questioned the need for a traffic signal at this intersection, and disputed the assumption that a significant amount of PM peak northbound traffic (+70 vehicles) would exit the highway, desire to turn left (westbound) onto Talmage Road and cause unacceptable delays. He recommended that the City reject this assumption and suggested impact, and not require a future traffic signal at this intersection. The City Council agreed and voted unanimously 4-0 (Councilmember Andersen absent) to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the new regulations for the 32-acre mixed use area. THE SOUTHERN ACCESS CONNECT]:ON: The original plan also included veering Airport Park Boulevard to the west to State Street somewhere between the southern end of the Airport and the residential development along Norgard Lane. This southern access was"necessary to accommodate the anticipated traffic load and to provide a second means of access for emergency vehicles." The plan stated that "the location of the southern access should be designed to avoid passing through the small residential community off Norgard Lane and to preclude interference with the Airport clear zone." The 1995 ETR concluded that upon buildout of the ATP, cumulative PM peak hour traffic volumes could reach 295 vehicles. Based upon this volume, the southern access, while desirable for optimum circulation, would not be essential for overall traffic access and circulation. However, the City Engineer believed it would be important for a truck route and emergency vehicles. The ETR evaluated this connection for a truck route and emergency vehicle access and concluded that it would cause significant noise and safety impacts to residents in the Norgard Lane neighborhood. Right-of-way and other property acquisition would be necessary, and noise attenuation measures would have to be taken. Additionally, the very steep point of connection between Norgard Lane and South State Street would have to be corrected in order for trucks to navigate the route. The City found this southern access alternative infeasible, yet was obligated to provide a southern connection for trucks and emergency vehicles. The Department of Public Works addressed the issue by preparing plans for widening and making improvement to the Hastings Avenue - South State Street intersection to provide the truck route. The City Fire Department indicated that it would need a means to access the southern portion of the Business Park before the area south of Commerce Drive reached 50% buildout. Tt was agreed that a connection to the Airport property would be made to allow emergency vehicles access from South State Street to Airport Road before 50% pf the parcels south of Commerce Drive were developed. BU]:LDOUT STATUS: ]:n a 1998 Airport Business Park Buildout Status Report, Staff determined that 50% buildout of the parcels south of Commerce Drive would occur when 440,750 square feet of buildings were constructed. As of August 2006, 370,295 square feet were constructed or under construction, leaving 70,455 square feet of construction before the 50% threshold is reached. terms of acreage, as of August 2006, approximately 50 of the approximate 104 acres remain vacant in the Park south of Commerce Drive. While a gate currently exists at the southern end of Airport Road, no access road to the Airport has been constructed. The concept of an access road has recently been discussed with the CDF during their design exercises for a new air attack base on the southeast portion of the Airport. Preliminary designs have shown an access route to the gate that would provide the emergency vehicle access to the southern portion of the Park. CONCLUS]:ON: Development of the Airport Business Park began in earnest with the Walmart project in 1993. A significant number of roadway and intersection improvements were made at that time to Talmage Road, Airport Park Boulevard, Hastings Avenue/Commerce Drive, and South State Street. Subsequent to Walmart, the City certified an Environmental Impact Report for the buildout of the Park, which identified a number of additional improvements that would be required as development occurred. The City then adopted a Capital Improvement Program which required future development to pay its fair share of the cost of future street and intersection improvements needed to accommodate the traffic generated by the developments. The City has been collecting these traffic impact fees from development as it has occurred over the past ten years. The EIR found that a previously planned southern access route into the Park would not be required for traffic flow and safety, but would be desirable for public safety and emergency vehicle access. Because of the infeasibility of using Norgard Lane for such a connection, the City chose instead to access the southern end of the Park via the Airport property. This improvement will be necessary when the southern portion of the Park reaches 50% buildout. Changes to the buildout assumptions contained in the EIR and CIP program have required additional traffic studies and modifications to the CIP program. The most recent traffic study, performed in 2002 was necessary because the 32-acre area south of Commerce Drive and west of Airport Park Boulevard was being rezoned to a mixed-use designation that would potentially allow full commercial buildout. The traffic study indicated that additional improvements would be necessary to handle the increase in traffic resulting from such buildout. The primary improvement was a traffic signal at Commerce Drive and Airport Park Boulevard. The 2002 traffic study did not find that a southern access route would be required for traffic flow and safety as a result of the rezoning. Due to the sudden and significant increase in costs over the past two years, Staff is exploring additional funding options for supplementing the existing C]:P funds. These options include, but are not limited to CDBG and EDA grants. RECOMMENDAT]:ON: Receive report. ITEM NO. 10d DATE: September 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH EBA ENGINEERING IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $109,502.22 FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY AND CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN AT THE CORPORATION YARD SUMMARY: EBA Engineering recently completed a Feasibility Study and Corrective Action Plan (FSCAP) to address the contamination related to the underground storage tanks removed from the Corporation Yard in July 1997. The FSCAP was filed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) on December 1, 2005. The RWQCB responded with a letter dated July 14, 2006 (Attachment 2) accepting the FSCAP and requesting the implementation of the FSCAP by October 30, 2006. Due to the extent of the contamination plume, and the momentum and cooperation we have achieved with the RWQCB, both EBA Engineering and staff recommend proceeding with the work at this time. Staff has filed a claim with the State Underground Storage Tank (UST) Cleanup Fund. To date, with EBA's expertise in submitting reimbursement requests, the City has received a total reimbursement of $420,492 from the State UST Cleanup Fund. In addition, the City has pollution liability insurance coverage for the Corporation Yard. Staff therefore expects full reimbursement of all expenses related to this project. Since this work is not included in EBA's current scope of work, staff requested a proposal to complete the additional work. An Amendment (Attachment 1) is included to provide the formal mechanism to complete the implementation of the FSCAP. Funding for this work is identified in the FY 2006-2007 budget (Special Revenue Fund). Upon completion of the work and submittal of reimbursement request, full reimbursement is anticipated for expenses related to the proposed work. Staff recommends authorization of the amendment with EBA Engineering. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize Execution of Amendment to the Agreement with EBA Engineering in an amount not to exceed $109,502.22 for implementation of the Feasibility Study Corrective Action Plan at the Corporation Yard. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Choose not to approve recommended action and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement 2. Letter from NCRWQCB 3. Cost Estimate from EBA Engineering Candace Horsley, City Manager CITY OF UKIAH Attachment # _ AMENDMENT NO. 11 TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES DATED AUGUST 26, 1998 TERMS AND CONDITIONS All terms and conditions of the Agreement for Professional Consulting Services dated August 26, 1998; the Amendment dated December 15, 1998; the Second Amendment dated May 5, 1999; the Third Amendment dated July 5, 2000; the Fourth Amendment dated August 23, 2001; the Fifth Amendment dated September 23, 2002 the Sixth Amendment dated February 27, 2003; the Seventh Amendment dated October 20, 2003; and the Eighth Amendment dated October 4, 2004; the Ninth Amendment dated February 1, 2005; and the Tenth Amendment dated April 26, 2005 shall remain in force and effect except as modified by this eleventh amendment. AUTHORIZATION Upon execution of this amendment, service provider is authorized to provide the service described under the Scope of Additional Work identified in this Amendment No. 11. SCOPE OF ADDITIONAL WORK Work authorized by this amendment shall include that work described in the July 14, 2006 letter from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and in the September 12, 2006 letter proposal from EBA Engineering. Copies of said letters are included in this eleventh amendment. COMPENSATION Compensation for the performance of the additional work shall be made on a time and expense basis at Consultant's customary fees. Expenses shall not exceed a maximum total cost of $109,502.22. EBA ENGINEERING CITY OF UKIAH BY: BY: PRINT NAME: TITLE: CANDACE HORSLEY City Manager DATE DATE Amendment No. 11 to Agreement for Professional Consulting Services Linda S. Adams Agency Secretary July 14, 2006 Attachment California Regional Water Quality Control Board North Coast Region William R. Massey, Chairman www. waterboards.ca.gov.:northcoast 5550 Skylane Boulevard, Suite A, Santa Rosa, California 95403 Phone: (877) 721-9203 (toll free) · Office: (707) 576-2220 · FAX: (707) 523-0135 Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor RECEIVED Mr. Richard Seanor City of Ukiah Department of Public Works 300 Seminary Drive Ukiah, CA 95482 JUL 1 7 2006 CITY OF UKIAH DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS Dear Mr. Seanor: Subject: Corrective Action Plan for Ukiah's City Corporation Yard site File: Ukiah City Corporation Yard, 1320 Airport Road, Ukiah, CA, Case No. 1TMC201 The Feasibility Study and Corrective Action Plan (FS/CAP) dated December 1, 2005, prepared by EBA Engineering, recommends the selection of dual phase extraction (DPE) combined with ozone-sparging (OS) to clean up on-site contamination at the Ukiah City Corporation Yard site. EBA proposes to implement the CAP while further investigation and evaluation of remedial alternatives for off-site groundwater contamination continues. Regional Water Board staff concurs with the selection of DPE and OS as appropriate feasible remedial alternatives for the site. Pursuant to Section 2728 of the California Underground Tank Regulations, the Regional Water Board will post a Notice of Proposed Corrective Action Approval (Enclosure) linked to our Intemet Website to inform the public and to invite comments on the proposed project. In addition, we request the City of Ukiah to distribute copies of the Enclosure to the residents, tenants and property owners of all adjacent parcels and to all other known parties interested in this investigation. The comment period will end 30 days after the date on which all known potentially interested parties have been notified. Accordingly, please inform our staff within fifteen days of your actions and to notify the above-described interested parties of the pending corrective action, indicating .parties notified, the associated parcels, and the dates of the notification. At the end of the comment period, we will notify you that the prOposed CAP has been approved if no significant information or objections have been received. The FS/CAP presents the following recommendations: 1. Discontinue routine quarterly sampling of newly installed extraction wells. 2. Install seven shallow-zone and six deeper-zone groundwater monitoring wells. 3. Prepare a "Remedial Design Package" for on-site soil. 4. Monitor and sample the additionally proposed monitoring wells for one year to evaluate the extent of contamination and to assess appropriate remedial actions for off-site groundwater contamination. California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Mr. Richard Seanor -2- July 14, 2006 C it3; or' Ukiah Regional Water Board staff concurs with the above-referenced recommendations. We request that you inform our staff of the monitoring well installation field schedule at least ten days prior to implementing the work, but no later than July 31, 2006. In addition, we also request you to submit the remedial design and implementation work plan for the CAP within ninety days. Please contact me at (707) 576-2469 if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Jim Tischler Environmental Scientist Enclosure: Notice of Proposed Corrective Action Approval JAT: jat/071406_JAT_UkiahCorpYard01.doc CC.' Mr. Wayne Briley, Mendocino County Health Dept., 501 Low Gap Road, Room 1326, Ukiah, CA 95482 Mr. Matthew Eamshaw, EBA Engineering, 825 Sonoma Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Mr. Dave Lohse, City of Ukiah Planning and Building Planning Department, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482 California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Linda S. Adams Agency Secretary California Regional Water Quality Control Board North Coast Region William R. Massey, Chairman www.waterboards.ca.o~ov.'northcoast 5550 Skylane Boulevard, Suite A, Santa Rosa, California 95403 Phone: (877) 721-9203 (toll free) · Office: (707) 576-2220 · FAX: (707) 523-0135 Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor NOTICE OF PROPOSED CORRJ CTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP) APPROVAL for City of Ukiah Corporation Yard 1320 Airport Road Ukiah Mendocino County Case No. 1TMC201 Internet Posting Date: July 14, 2006 End of Comment Period: August 30, 2006 Problem Description: Petroleum related compounds released from leaking underground storage tanks formerly located at 1320 Airport Road in Ukiah (the site) have impacted soil and groundwater. The contaminants include gasoline range petroleum hydrocarbons, benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, xylenes, and methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE). Contaminants in groundwater have migrated from the site. The full extent of off-site contamination in groundwater has not been delineated. Interim Actions Completed: Three underground storage tanks~ the associated piping, and approximately 435 cubic yards of petroleum-impacted soil have been removed' from the site. Pilot testing of the dual-phase extraction system proposed for cleaning up the site has removed approximately 1500 pounds of petroleum hydrocarbon compounds from subsurface soil and groundwater. Proposed Action: A Corrective Action Plan submitted by the City of Ukiah proposes to use dual-phase extraction combined with ozone sparging to clean up contaminated soil and groundwater at the site while further investigation and assessment of off-site groundwater contamination is completed. Regional Water Board's records for the investigation at 1320 Airport Road in Ukiah are contained in the file known as the "Ukiah, City Corporation Yard"; Case No. 1TMC201. Any interested person may arrange to review the file at the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, 5550 Skylane Boulevard, Suite A, Santa Rosa. Appointments for file review are recommended and can be arranged by calling (707) 576-2220. The proposed corrective action will be approved without further notice unless significant public comment is received before the end of the comment period indicated above. The comment period may be extended if additional time for public review is warranted. Please submit your written comments to: North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Attention: Jim Tischler 5550 Skylane Boulevard, Suite A Santa Rosa, California 95403 You may also submit questions and comments by contacting Jim Tischler of the Regional Water Board staff at (707) 576-2469, or by e-mail at TISCJ~WATERBOARDS.CA.GOV. RECEIVED JUL 1 7 2006 CITY OF UKIAH DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Attachment C, IVI£ & ENVIROI~EI~TAL ENgINEErS September 12, 2006 Mr. Rick Seanor Department of Public Works City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482 COST ESTIMATE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF UKIAH CORPORATION YARD UST INVESTIGATION 1320 AIRPORT ROAD, UKIAH, CALIFORNIA EBA Project No. 98-621 Dear Mr. Seanor: Please find enclosed a cost estimate for implementation of the recommendations including within EBA Engineering's (EBA) Feasibility Study and Corrective Action Plan (FSCAP) dated December 1, 2005. The North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB) in a letter dated July 14, 2006 approved the FSCAP. The following sections include a discussion of the scopes of work, a cost estimate summary, assumptions, and conclusions. Please also find attached a detailed cost estimate that further defines the estimated costs' for the scopes discussed herein. SCOPES OF WORK The scopes of work outlined in the FSCAP have been subdivided into the following six phases as listed below: Phase 1: Additional Monitoring Well Installation- Monitoring well installation will be performed in accordance with. Appendix K of the aforementioned FSCAP. The scope of the monitoring well installation included as part of this budget includes a total of three (3) conductor cased 2-inch wells to approximately 40 feet below ground surface (bgs) and three (3) 2-inch wells to approximately 25 feet bgs. Phase 2: Well Development - Well development will be performed in accordance with Appendix L of the aforementioned FSCAP. A minimum 24-hours after well installation and prior to sampling, the newly installed monitoring wells will be developed using a surge and purge technique. , Phase 3: Pre-Engineering Survey and Design Layout- A surveyor licensed in the state of california will survey the newly installed monitoring wells. After well development and initial sampling, the wells located within construction areas will be buried to protect the wells during final grading and paving. After paving activities have ended, the wells will be located, and fitted LAenv~621 ukiahcorp~cost e.~timate,s~eost eat2006covet, doc 825 Sonoma Avenue, Suite C .Santa Rosa, California 95404 (707) 544-0784 FAX {707) 544-0866 Also in Southern California with Christy boxes to grade. After reaching final top of casing elevation, the wells will be resurveyed for corresponding horizontal (XY) and vertical (Z) datum according to the AB2886 guidelines. As part of these surveying activities, EBA will also survey the Ukiah City Corp Yard site for the purpose of preparing Engineered Drawings to be submitted as part of the Remedial Action Plan (detailed below), and for permitting purposes to the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District (MCAQMD) and City of Ukiah Planning and Building Department. Phase 4: Remedial Action Plan- A Remedial Action Plan (RAP) will be prepared which will document the proposed design layout, site plan, process and instrumentation diagram, and permitting requirements for the proposed remedial system. Phase 5: Report of Investigation Monitoring Well Install - A Report of Investigation (ROI) will be prepared which will include a description of the work performed, a site map showing features relevant to the investigation, a potentiometric groundwater contour map, isoconcentration maps depicting soil and groundwater chemical concentrations, graphical boring logs, and geologic cross sections. Summary tables of analytical results will be presented and complete laboratory analytical data will be appended to the report. Report conclusions will address the vertical and lateral extent of contamination. Phase 6: Quarterly Monitoring and Reporting - Ongoing o~uarterly monitoring and reporting will be provided for the 3rd and 4th quarter 2006 and 1st and 2na quarter 2007 monitoring events. Phase 7: Water and Soil Disposal - A lump sum amount separated for the.disposal of all soil generated as part of Phase 1 and water generated as part of Phases 2 and 6. COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY The estimated cost to implement the above scopes of work is $109,502.22. A detailed breakdown of the cost estimate is attached. ASSUMPTIONS For the purposes of developing the scope of work and the cost estimate, the following assumptions were made: · Groundwater generated during these activities will be disposed of through the City of Ukiah's Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW). · Access for installation of all additional monitoring wells will be obtained from all property owners. L:~env~ust\621 ukiahcorp~cost estimates~:ostest2006cover.doc CONCLUSIONS Throughout this project, additional new information may become available.-This new information may result in a change in the Scope of Work, which may result in a change in the cost of the project. EBA will notify the client when there is a change in the cost and will not proceed without prior approval of the changes from the client. Throughout the project, EBA will make every effort to reduce the cost of the project by negotiating with regulatory agencies to eliminate unnecessary procedures and/or analytical costs. Thank you for allowing EBA this opportunity to perform environmental services for you. Should you have any questions or comments regarding this cost estimate, please contact EBA at (707) 544-0784. EBA will implement this Scope of Work immediately upon your approval. ct Geolog~ /mc Enc: Detailed Cost Estimate L:~env~ust\62 lukiahcorpXcost estimates~costest2000cover, doc ITEM NO; 10 e MEETING DATE: Sept, 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: Review of City Limits and Service Boundaries Council requested a review of the City's boundaries, service areas, and City owned land. The attached maps delineate these areas for Council's review. Additionally, an agenda summary report from September 5, 2001 is included. At this meeting the Council authorized the transfer of water accounts that were out of the City limits, but being served by the City to be transferred back to the Willow County Water District. Due to the cost of providing new service lines, Willow has not been able to transfer all of these accounts over to Willow service at this time. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and discuss. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: City Council Staff Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Map of City limits and City properties 2. Map of water service areas within City limits 3. Map of water service areas outside of City limits 4. Sept. 5, 2001 agenda summary report 5. Map of Sanitation District service in and out of City limits Approved' ~(~~ Candace Horsley, City~ ~lanager LHENSLEY CREEK SPRINGS City Own ,~,; ;Qchmen~ Properties OAD z SH 222 :K ROAD Legend Ukiah City Limits City of Ukiah Owned TOy z z ATTACtU, MEN? ~ City Limits & Water Main Service Area Page2 Parcels served residential valves, and part of the System. outlined in BLUE are currently by Willow Water. These are properties. The water mains, fire hydrants on this map are City of Ukiah Water Distribution Legend Ukiah Streets ~ City_Ukiah_04-04 Ukiah City Limits ................ _i parcels_4_05 1:4,114 M ATTACH M E NT., City Limits & Water Main Service Area Parcels outline in BLUE are currently served by the City of Ukiah. These areas include residential and commercial properties. Legend Ukiah_Streets Ukiah City Limits ~ City_Ukiah_04-041 ................ i parcels 4 05 1:4,114 M ATTACHMENT_ AGENDA SUMMARY [tern No. 9 c Date: September 5, 2001 REPORT SUBJECT: Authorize the Transfer of Specific Water Accounts from the City of Ukiah to the Willow County Water District REPORT: The City of Ukiah currently provides service to water customers who are outside the city limits on the southern edge of the city boundary. The City of Ukiah provided water service to these customers at a time when either the Willow County Water District was unable to provide service due to infrastructure limitations or it had not yet been established. The water main that provides service to these customers, and is maintained by the City, is in need of replacement. The cost to replace" the main has been estimated to be as much as $70,000. In addition, our ordinance requires that customers receiving service from the city outside of our service boundaries pay twice the rate of customers within the city boundary. Willow County Water District has developed the needed infrastructure to service these custOmers and has requested that the City of Ukiah consider transferring these · customers to the District. In addition, Willow County Water District currently maintains the fire hydrants and fire services to these customers due to the limitation of the City main. The customers involved in the transfer are located at: 1510 South State Street, 1570 South State Street, 160 Jefferson Lane, 2129 South State Street, 1639 South State Street, 1631 South State Street These customers contributed approximately $7,600 annually in revenues to the Water Division. Transfer of these customers to the Willow County Water District would save the cost of replacing the main and infrastructure to these customers and reduce their monthly water bill, since they are paying double city rates. Therefore, staff recommends that Council approve the transfer of the above customers into the Willow County Water District. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the Transfer of Specific Water Accounts from the City of Ukiah to the Willow County Water District. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Deny Authorization. Citizen Advised: Letter set to Affected Customers on August 24, 2001 Prepared by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments:l) Letter of Request from Willow County Water District. 2) Copy of Letter sent to affected Customers 3) Map illustrating Locations of Affected Customers APPROVED: ~~ l:~~~,C,~y~nager Candace Horsley, The matter was continued to later in the meeting. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9c. Authorize the Transfer of Specific,Water Accounts from the City of Ukiah to the Willow County Water District - Public Utilities Director Barnes advised that the City of Ukiah currently provides service to water customers who are outside the City Limits on the southern edge of the City boundary. The City of Ukiah provided water service to these customers at a time when either the Willow County Water District (District) was unable to provide service due to infrastructure limitations or it had not yet been established. The District has developed the needed infrastructure to service these customers and has requested that the City of Ukiah consider transferring these customers to the District. In addition, the District currently maintains the fire hydrants and fire services to these customers due to the limitation of the City main. He continued to explain how the transfer of service would be accomplished. Staff has identified seven customers and recommends that Council approve the transfer of those customers into the Willow County Water District. A brief discussion followed with regard to obtaining LAFCO approval for this project and it was noted by the City Attorney that it would not be necessary. M/S Baldwin/Smith authorizing the transfer of specific Water Accounts from the City of Ukiah to the Willow County Water District; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Libby, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9a. Ado~3t Resolution Approving the Ukiah Commercial Development DesiQn Guidelines Planning Director Stump advised that Staff has been working on Design Guidelines for commercial development within the City. The genesis of this was borne out of some General Plan policies and some struggles that the City has had at both the Planning Commission and City Council level regarding approval of discretionary permits and related design issues. Staff was given direction to develop Design Guidelines for commercial development to ease that process. The Planning Commission has unanimously recommended adoption of the Ukiah Commercial Development Design Guidelines. He continued to discuss the content of the Guidelines. Joy Beeler, representing the Ukiah Main Street Program, stated that a draft of the Design Guidelines was presented to the Main Street Board of Directors and they supported the Guidelines. Councilmember Libby inquired if the Guidelines were sent to the Chamber of Commerce. Director Stump explained that staff sent the document to the Chamber of Commerce but has not received any comment from them. Regular Meeting September 5, 2001 Page !7 of 22 300 SEM!NARYAVE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 · Al)MIN. 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC SA,CETY 463-6242/6274 · FAX # 707/463-6204 · EMAlt~ ukiahct~jps.net · August 20, 2001 1631 South State Street Uki~, California 95482 Dear Customer: The City of Ukiah has provided water service to your location for many years, although your service is located outside the City of Ukiah. The City of Ukiah provided service to your location at a time when no other water service was available. The Willow County Water District currently serves water to your area and your service location is within their service boundaries. In addition, they currently provide service to all fire hydrants in your area. As a result, the City of Ukiah is requesting that the Willow County Water District begin providing total water service to your location. The Ukiah City Council will consider approval of the transfer at their regularly scheduled meeting of September 5, 2001. Any comments you might have relative to this transfer would be welcome. Information relating to current Willow County Water District rates can be obtained by contacting them at 462-2666. Should. the Uldah City Council give approval to the transfer, you will be notified of the effective date· · · ' Darryl L. Barnes Director of Public Utilities Water services to be transferred to Willow County Water District North ATTACHMENT UVSD With-In The City of Ukiah Legend Ukiah Streets UVSD ~_-~ City_Ukiah_04_04 Ukiah_City_Limits The UVSD is represented in ORANGE. The City Limit outline is represented in PURPLE. 1'17,841 NORTH AGENDA ITEM NO' 10f MEETING DATE' Sept. 20, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTION 62 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO COMPENSATION OF MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS SUMMARY: At a previous Council meeting, the City Council voted to increase the monthly salary for the Mayor and Councilmembers by $19, from $471 to $490. This represented a 1% annual increase from the last salary increase four years ago or by a total of 4%. The attached ordinance amends Ukiah City Code Section 62 to make this change. The salary increase will go into effect when the Councilmembers elected in the November 7, 2006, election begin their new terms of office. RECOMMENDED ACTION' Adopt motion to introduce ordinance by title only and introduce ordinance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council David J. Rapport, City Attorney N/A Proposed Ordinance Approved: Candace Horsley, City Manager ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTION 62 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO COMPENSATION OF MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows. 1. Ukiah City Code Section 62 is amended to read as follows: {}62: SALARIES: The mayor and council members shall be paid four hundred ninety dollars ($490.00) per month. Any amounts authorized and paid on behalf of such officers for retirement, health and welfare, and federal social security benefits shall not be included for purposes of determining salary under this section. 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, but shall only apply to Councilmember salaries after a council member elected in the November 7, 2006, election begins his or her new term of office. 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, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 1 ITEM NO. 10q DATE: Septembe 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: POSSIBLE APPROVAL TO PARTICIPATE IN REQUEST FOR OFFER TO PURCHASE CLAIM IN CALPINE BANKRUPTCY AND AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT OFFER AND EXECUTE TRANSACTION DOCUMENTS Upon completion of closed session discussion, staff is requesting Council's possible approval to participate in request for offer to purchase claim in Calpine Bankruptcy and authorize City Manager to accept offer and execute transaction documents RECOMMENDED ACTION: Possible approval to participate in Request for Offer to purchase claim in Calpine Bankruptcy and authorize City Manager to accept offer and execute transaction documents. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: N/A Elizabeth Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manag~ ITEM NO: lla DATE: September 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: STATUS REPORT- UKI'AH VALLEY AREA PLAN (UVAP) SUMMARY: The purpose of this agenda item is to provide the City Council with a status report of the Mendocino County Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP) reassessment project. As the Council knows, the County decided early this year to undertake a "reassessment" of the draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan. This decision was based on strong public concern that portions of the Plan may have become stale in light of the development interests and pressure in the Valley that were occurring. The Board of Supervisors followed-up its direction by budgeting funds for the effort and working with its staff to develop a reasonable timeline and framework for completing the project. At the City Council's direction, and the County's invitation, staff has been participating in this Ukiah Valley planning effort. We are a member of the County's"Planning Team", which is overseeing the UVAP reassessment project, as well as other County planning programs. The following is a list of completed and upcoming UVAP events: UVAP transportation and water/sewer data needs meetings. Key City and County Staff met to discuss transportation and water/sewer data needs. The County's UVAP EIR consultant attended and helped facilitate the meetings. UVAP reassessment consultant interview and selection process completed. The process included County and City Staff, as well as representatives from involved groups and agencies, and members of the public. Each consulting firm was interviewed twice; once by the key public representatives and then by selected County and City staff. County approval of contract with consultinq team. The County Board of Supervisors agreed with the Staff recommendation and approved a contract with Moore, Iacofano and Goltsman (MIG) to reassess and complete the UVAP. It also approved a revised contract with Leonard Charles to prepare the required Environmental Impact Report. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTZON: Receive report ALTERNATZVE COUNCZL POLTCY OP'I'ZON: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None APPROVED: ~~z~_,.,.~ Cand~ce Horsley, City ger County planning staff reorganization. The County reorganized its planning staff creating a long range planning department under the purview of the CEO's office. Former Senior Planner Pam Townsend is now the Chief Planner overseeing this department. Three additional staff members have been hired to work on long range planning projects. Planning Team meetings. The UVAP planning team has been routinely meeting to maintain communication, hone the work program, discuss issues, discuss County/City team building, etc. The team consists of the County long range planning staff, County CEO, County Deputy CEO, County Economic Development Coordinator, County Counsel, City Manager, and City Planning Director. Other County Staff attend as needed. The meetings are regularly scheduled and ongoing. Ongoing outreach. The County planning staff has been arranging and attending meetings with interested groups and organizations as the work program is being honed. Once the UVAP reassessment program is formally kicked-off, detailed interviews with "focus groups" will be conducted by the consulting team. Tentatively identified focus groups include affected property owners, the business community, City leadership, the Smart Growth Coalition, Greater Ukiah Localization Project (GULP), the Latino/and Native American community, and others. Event: Mendocino Model- Planninq for Sustainability. The County has hired the Local Government Commission (LGC) to conduct a workshop entitled "Mendocino Model- Planning for Sustainability." The workshop is intended to provide an educational process to explore sustainable planning/smart growth principals and terms, and to learn how other communities have used these principals to develop policy frameworks for long range planning efforts. The purpose is to determine if these principals are relevant or desired as a policy guide for community development in Mendocino County. The workshop is scheduled for September 18, 2006. Event: UVAP"kick-off" tour and open house. The UVAP consulting team will meet with the Planning Team and tour the Ukiah Valley. During the evening, a "consultant open house" will be conducted to provide an opportunity for the public to meet and discuss issues with the consultants. Resources about the process and overall program, as well as initial exercises seeking community input, will be available to the public. ]:nformation about City planning projects and programs will also be made available and shared with the public. The kick-off tour and open house are scheduled for September 25, 2006. Event: Community Workshop No. 1. The first formal community workshop will be conducted by the consultants to receive public input. The public will be invited to participate in exercises, identify and discuss issues, comment on the reassessment of the draft UVAP, and become a vital part of the program. Additionally, a number of other ideas for public involvement and County/City team building have been discussed. One idea is possibly having the Board of Supervisors and City Council conduct a joint meeting as a way to strengthen the City/County planning relationship. Staff seeks Council input on this idea. CONCLIJ$]:ON: The Ukiah Valley Area Plan reassessment program is underway. At the Council's direction, Staff has been participating as a team member to help guide the program, and to help ensure transparency between the City and the County in this regional planning project. Staff will provide regular status reports to the Council and Planning Commission as the program progresses. AGENDA ITEM NO: 11 b MEETING DATE: Sept. 20, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: REVI'EW OF SPECTAL PRO3ECTS RESERVE FUND 699 Attached is the "Summary by Project" of the Special Projects Reserve Fund 699 budget for Fiscal Year 2006-07, along with a fund description of each of the categories that are listed in the budget. Fund 699 was originally created to delineate and provide Council with information on capital projects that needed funding; and to provide a mechanism for accumulating over a period of time funding necessary for project completion through the budget process. Staff will be prepared to discuss the various projects and answer any questions the Council may have. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and discuss. ALTERNATI'VE COUNCI'L POLI'CY OPTI'ONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Candace Horsley, City Manager Department Directors 1. Special Project Reserve Fund 699 Budget Document 2. Project Descriptions Approved' ",,.~~¢'%,/~.~.~~'~ Candace Horsley, City M~nager Attachment #_ j Z ,~ o°~°°°1°~'~'°o°~° ooo~0o:o~o ~ ~ °o ° oo~ ~,o,ooloo~ ~oo~oo~8 ~g ~ 8 oo o o oo O0 0 0 0 0 ~o ~.ooo~o~ooo~ooo o : o ~ . . .,~~o~ooo~ooo~ o o ~.~ 8eo,o~°°°'°~[~ooo~ ...........,o°~°°~°°°~oo~ooo _. q, qqo°:°~°~°~o°. m~ ~ . ~ , ~ ~ 0 <-o~ <~~o ~ ~_- ~~~~o ooooo o o ~o~~~n~~o o o~~~~oo ~ ~ 0 0 Attachment #_ ~ . . . . o . o 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 699 Special Project Reserve Fund Descriptions Grant Match ExPenditures (699.260.001) - Established to provide matching funds for various grant projects. For competitive grant applications, the fund reserve demonstrates the City's financial capacity and readiness to complete projects. Anton Stadium Repair (699.260.003) - Anton Stadium has aged beyond that of routine maintenance and requires significant renovation in order to accommodate continued usage. Project components include field upgrades (dugouts, drainage, and batting cage), resurfacing and lining the parking lot, pedestrian and ADA accessibility upgrades (stairs, walkways, ramps and drinking fountains), and major reconstruction of the grandstand facility. Playground Equipment (699.260.004) - Park amenities including but not limited to playgrounds, tables, tennis courts, benches, bathrooms, and pathways must be replaced/renovated routinely to maintain an acceptable standard for public use. Observatory Park Buildings (699.260.007) - Renovation of 5 structures at Observatory Park including house, office, observation, and two sheds. The renovation will need to include interior/exterior painting, roofing, and repair to interior walls. Todd Grove Picnic Area (699.260.044) - The Todd Grove Park BBQ area is severely degraded and requires renovation. The scope of the project consists of new hardscape, seating, BBQ facilities, and shade structure. Sidewalk Repair Contribution (699.260.009) - Funding for the Residential Reimbursement Program. ADA Ramps (699.260.010) - Various ramps will be constructed pending the results of our ADA study that is going to be complete this winter. Bridge Replacements (699.260.011) -Waugh Lane Replacement. Drainage Upgrade Study (1) (699.260.012) -Phase 1 of the master drainage study and plan for the City to replace the 1958 Brown and Caldwell Study. This phase includes creation of the RFP and data collection. Talmage Road Bike /Ped Improvements (699.260.013) - Improvements for Bike and Ped path along Talmage or along Doolan creek. Depends on the results of the Cai Trans relinquishment plan. Airport Park Blvd (699.260.014) -Ongoing fund for various phases of continued reconstruction of Airport Park Blvd. Open Space Acquisition (699.260.015) - This account was created to provide funds for the future acquisition and development of open space. Match for Bicycle Lane BTA Grant (699.260.016) - Grant match requirement for the development of the Oak Manor Trail. Drainage Upgrade Study (2) (699.260.018) - Phase 2 of the master drainage study and plan for the City to replace the 1958 Brown and Caldwell Study. Phase 2 will be the study of the selected drainage basins. Smith Street repairs (699.260.021) - Funds set aside for the possible coordination of sidewalk subsidence along Smith Street. 16. Drainage Upgrade Study (3) (699.260.023) - Phase 3 of the master drainage study and plan for the City to replace the 1958 Brown and Caldwell Study. Phase 3 will include all remaining areas of the City and any areas of the County that we need to consider for possible future annexation and unincorporated areas that we should coordinated future improvements for City benefit. 17. GASB Implementation Consultants (699.260.024) - Funding for consultant to value the City's infrastructUre as required under GASB 34. 18. Bench Mark Verification Study (699.260.026) - Verify and set new bench marks through out the City in order to provide better vertical control to surveyors. 19. Storm Drain Replacement at Mendocino Place and Yokayo School (699.260.027) - Replace storm drain that has deteriorated away. 20. Upgrade Traffic Loops (699.260.028) - Replacement for Traffic detection loops at various locations. 21. Orchard Ave Extension (699.260.029) - This is for portions of Orchard Avenue and is matching money' for the EDA Grant. 22. Leslie Street Gas Plant Mitigation (699.260.030) - Ongoing evaluation and mitigation of soil contamination. 23. Cleveland Lane Drainage (699.260.031) - These funds are set aside for the ultimate improvement of this area which is between Cleveland Lane and Gobbi Street. These improvements could be slope protection to construction and design of a culvert. 24. Orr Creek improvements (699.260.032) - Replacement of failing retaining walls. 25. Skate Park Property Lease (699.260.034) - This account was created to capitalize 40 years of payments for property leased by the City from North Coast Rail Authority for the Ukiah Skate Park. 26. Park Maintenance Yard Development (699.260.041) - Build or renovate a maintenance yard for the Parks including office space, workshop, supply storage, and equipment storage. 27. Downtown/Perkins Street Form Based Code Project (699.260.042) - Hire consultants to create a Form Based Zoning Code for the downtown core area and Perkins Street. 28. Hydro Plant (699.260.043) - Hydroplant refurbishment. 29. Asset Management System (699.260.038) - Software to build a database of all the Water/Sewer department assets and infrastructure. 30. Facility Needs Study (699.260.039) - Evaluation of City facilities including current and future needs assessment. 31. Fire House & VLF Gap Bonds (699.260.040) - Remaining funds from the sale of the North Fire Station and Gap Bonds financing to be used for 699 Fund projects as needed. AGENDA ITEM NO: 1 lc MEETING DATE: Sept. 20, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INFORMATION UPDATE ON GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION ACTIVITIES IN CALIFORNIA AND CALIFORNIA'S PUBLICLY OWNED ELECTRIC UTILITIES' PRINCIPLES ADDRESSING GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION GOALS BACKGROUND: Recent climate change developments at the state and federal levels have raised the importance of ensuring a clear articulation of public power's formal position regarding greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction. Over the past few months, Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) has been debated in Sacramento and will be signed into law this month by Governor Schwarzenegger. This bill directs the State Air Resources Board to implement broad conservation and energy efficiency objectives with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and limiting GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. Initial staff review of this bill raises many concerns and questions regarding the staffing needed to comply with the implementation and reporting requirements of AB32. Therefore, we are only introducing this item to council for information purposes at this time and will bring further information back for council consideration once we fully research the legislative requirements and impacts. See Attachment 1 - AB 32 Legislative Counsel's Digest for an overview of the bill. AB 32 may be viewed in its entirely at the following internet address: http://www.leqinfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab 0001-0050/ab 32 bill 20060831 enrolled.pdf. Publicly Owned Electric Utilities Initiative With the requirements of AB32 in mind, the California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA) governing board adopted principles addressing Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals on June 6th RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: NCPA Elizabeth Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Jeff Gould, PUD and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. AB 32 Legislative Counsel's Digest 2. California's Publicly Owned Electric Utilities' Principles Addressing Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals Approved: Cand~ce Horsley, Ci~~anager (see Attachment 2), and the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) adopted the same principles on June 22. These principles were drafted to demonstrate public power support for the reduction of Greenhouse Gases. If adopted by local communities, the principles commit public power communities to implement a greenhouse gases reduction plan and ongoing efforts to procure cost-effective, reliable, and feasible energy efficiency and demand reduction resources proactively in compliance with state law. NCPA requests that each of its members consider adoption of these principles. NCPA would assist Ukiah in the fulfillment of these goals and principles, however there would also likely be a need for additional staff in order for Ukiah to implement the development of a local GHG Reduction Plan, perform GHG calculations and analysis, and comply with the reporting requirements. Staff is providing the attached principles for Council information purposes at this time, and will bring back the proposed GHG principles for council consideration and possible action once the staffing implications and impacts of the state legislation (AB32) become clearer. ATTACHMEI~rr / Legislative Counsel's Digest AB 32, Nunez. Air pollution: greenhouse gases: California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. Under existing law, the State Air Resources Board (state board), the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission), and the California Climate Action Registry all have responsibilities with respect to the control of emissions of greenhouse gases, as defined, and the Secretary for Environmental Protection is required to coordinate emission reductions of greenhouse gases and climate change activity in state government. This bill would require the state board to adopt regulations to require the reporting and verification of statewide greenhouse gas emissions and to monitor and enforce compliance with this program, as specified. The bill would require the state board to adopt a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions levels in 1990 to be achieved by 2020, as specified. The bill would require the state board to adopt rules and regulations in an open public process to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost- effective greenhouse gas emission reductions, as specified. The bill would authorize the state board to adopt market-based compliance mechanisms, as defined, meeting specified requirements. The bill would require the state board to monitor compliance with and enforce any rule, regulation, order, emission limitation, emissions reduction measure, or market-based compliance mechanism adopted by the state board, pursuant to specified provisions of existing law. The bill would authorize the state board to adopt a schedule of fees to be paid by regulated sources of greenhouse gas emissions, as specified. Because the bill would require the state board to establish emissions limits and other requirements, the violation of which would be a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. ATTACHMEN'r ,~ California's Publicly Owned Electric Utilities' Principles Addressing Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals California's publicly owned electric utilities have a long history of environmental stewardship, investment in renewable technologies, and commitment to energy efficiency. As not-for-profit utilities regulated by local elected officials and ultimately responsible to their customer/owners, they are motivated by providing value to, and responding to the goals of, the community they serve. Publicly owned utilities have been in the forefront of the development of solar energy, wind energy, fuel cells, and energy efficiency. During California's ill-fated electric restructuring exercise, California's publicly owned utilities continued to meet their obligation to serve. Today, they remain vertically integrated entities, planning for the load they serve and investing in energy efficiency and a diverse resource mix to serve that load. California's publicly owned utilities recognize the necessity of reducing greenhouse gas (Ghg) emissions in accord with state policies while maintaining reliability of electric service, public safety, and economic energy prices. They look forward to working collaboratively with both the state and federal governments to develop and implement greenhouse gas reduction programs that involve all sectors of the economy that contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. PRINCIPLES Therefore, the Board of Governors of the California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA), representing the State's publicly owned electric utilities agree to the following principles and further agree to recommend the adoption of these principles by the governing boards and councils of local publicly owned electric utilities. 1. Each utility will develop a greenhouse gases reduction plan, consistent with the State's reduction goals, adopted by its elected governing board in public hearings, and provided to the California Energy Commission when adopted and whenever updated. Smaller utilities may choose to aggregate their plans into a single, larger plan. Each utility will explore the impact of a "sustainable portfolio" to allow the utility to meet its overall load-based greenhouse gas reduction goals by balancing investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency and demand reduction, carbon trading, carbon emissions mitigation, and/or through other innovative ways. In the design of programs to reduce greenhouse gases emissions, each utility supports the concept of receiving credit for early action to reduce greenhouse gases emissions. 2. As a means of meeting greenhouse gases reduction goals, each utility will proactively implement state law, which requires that "... each local publicly owned electric utility, in procuring energy, shall first acquire all available energy efficiency and demand reduction resources that are cost-effective, reliable, and feasible." Such investment in cost-effective energy efficiency and demand reduction resources will not be limited to public benefits funds allocations. 3. As a means of meeting greenhouse gases reduction goals and meeting energy needs after implementing point 2 above, each utility will first pursue renewable energy supplies, and second, other non greenhouse gas emitting energy resources and clean fossil resources: a. In considering renewable resources in competition with fossil fuel resources each utility will quantify the financial risk of greenhouse gas producing resources in their planning and procurement process, including but not limited to a quantified carbon emissions risk adder for both in-state and out-of-state resources. b. Each utility will continue to aggressively pursue its renewable energy supply in accordance with its renewable portfolio standard (RPS), pursuant to public utilities code section 387. c. Each utility will facilitate distributed generation/combined heat and power (DG/CHP) projects that reduce greenhouse gases emissions in their service territory by evaluating transmission and distribution benefits and providing equitable methods for the DG/CHP owner to sell excess electricity to the host utility. d. Each utility will consider environmental justice issues in its overall resource procurement and greenhouse gas reduction policies. 4. Each utility will support standardized, mandatory greenhouse gases reporting from all significant sources. Smaller utilities may choose to aggregate their greenhouse gases reporting. 5. Each utility will provide measurement and verification of programs that reduce greenhouse gases emissions. 6. Each utility will provide education for its customers on ways that they can reduce their greenhouse gases emissions, and provide assistance where feasible. Any utility that provides financial assistance shall receive credit for appropriate share of the reductions towards that utility's goals. IMMEDIATE ACTIONS The CMUA Board of Governors recommends that all electric utility members initiate the following actions immediately: 1. Obtain governing board or council adoption of these principles. 2. Schedule a joint planning workshop with the California Energy Commission regarding the implementation of these principles. LONG TERM ACTIONS The CMUA members will initiate the detailed actions necessary to implement the principles approved by their governing board or council. ITEM NO. 1 ld DATE: September 20, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MANAGER POSlTON SUMMARY: During the budget hearings of June 2006, based on Council's request, Public Works Staff brought forward the issue of funding a Project Manager position and infrastructure projects from the Measure S funds. This was requested as a result of necessary and required projects being delayed far too long as well as the City's infrastructure repairs having been under funded for many years. The Department cannot manage the current work load yet our infrastructure continues to fall behind both in maintenance and new and replacement components. To alleviate this situation, Staff requested Council authorization to hire a Project Manager to assist in the completion of a number of larger City projects as well as provide staff assistance and support regarding projects that staff should analyze for Measure S expenditure. PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MANAGER There are a number of large projects that have been on the Department's project list for well over five years. Some of the more important and notable ones are: a) the final cap at the Landfill, b) the relinquishment of Talmage Road, c) the second left turn lane into Airport Park Blvd. from Talmage Road, d) Orchard Avenue Bridge and e) the management of the EDA grant for the bridge. All these projects are extremely important to the City in terms of current need and in order to provide the proper facilities for the future. The other similarity between all these projects is their dependency on other agencies. These agencies include Cai Trans, Regional Water Board, Fish and Game, and the Army Corp of Engineers which are all under staffed. However, these Agencies approval and assistance are vital to the projects. Unfortunately it is not as simple as providing an application to these agencies and waiting for their comments. These agencies require continual contact to keep projects RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct Staff to hire a qualified Public Works Project Manager. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Provide Staff with other direction. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: N/A City Council Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager APPROVED: Canda~e H~ty Manager Page 2 COUNCIL DIRECTION TO HIRE PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MANAGER September 20, 2006 on track. With our current staff Icad we do not have the ability to manage the necessary coordination with these agencies. The primary function of the Project Manager will be to drive these projects to completion. Staff would seek the services of an individual with extensive experience managing these types of projects and familiarity with these types of agencies. Staff estimates that this will be a 20 hour per week position. Staff is recommending a wage of $45 to $48 an hour depending on experience and appropriate Engineering registration. This will equate to an investment in personnel of $46,800 to $49,920 annually, for up to three years. Staff anticipates that it will take approximately three years to complete these projects, at which time the Project Manager could focus on the updating and managing of other identified deteriorated Public Works facilities if the Council approves additional funding for this position at that time. MEASURE S PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS The Measure S portion of the budget hearings with regard to Public Works projects focused on four projects for possible funding based on community safety concerns. They were: 1) traffic signals at Perkins Street and the 101 off ramps; 2) drainage system along Perkins Street; 3) pavement improvements on State Street between Henry Street and Clay Street;' and 4) a storm drain on Clay Street west of Clay through Dora. Other projects discussed by the Council were the areas that do not have sidewalks and have perceived high traffic loads. These areas included Clara Avenue, Lorraine Street, Betty Street and Waugh Lane. If Council approves the Project Manager Position, staff will return with details on these projects for Council review.