Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2006-11-15 PacketAmended CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 November 15, 2006 6:00 p.m. 4:30 p.m. Workshop: Planning & Building Activities 6:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1 PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS a. Proclamation Ukiah Valley Association for Habilitation Celebrates 45th Anniversary 4, PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS None 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6, RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. , CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and 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. Report of DisburSements for Month of October 2006 b. Status of the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant Equipment Refurbishment Emergency c. Authorize Budget Amendment for Expenditure of $110,000 for Additional Work for Mendocino Drive Storm Drain Replacement Project and Direct the City Manager to Execute the Contract Change Order d. Rejection of Claims for Damages Received from Fairfield Inn & Suites, Thomas W. Davenport, and the Baking Company of Ukiah and Referral to Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund e. Approval of Notice of Completion for Slurry Seal Aprons at Ukiah Regional Airport, Specification No. 06-09 f. Adoption of Resolution Approving Request to Caltrans for Matching Funds to Federal Aviation Administration (F.^.^.) Grant No. g. Report to City Council Regarding the Annual Purchase of Fertilizer, Grass Seed, Insecticide, and Fungicide From Sierra Pacific Turf Supply for the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course in the Amount of $6,846.77. h. Approval of Contract with Pacific Municipal Consultants to Provide Temporary Contract Planning Services and Budget Amendment i. Approval of Notice of Completion for CMU Block Wall - 182 E. Gobbi, Specification No. 06- 13 j. Rejection of Claim for Damages Received from Chardelle Cadogan and Referral to Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund Notification of PurChase of Computer Hardware for the Grace Hudson Museum's Education Programs from PC Mall Gov for the Amount of $5,917.86 Report to the City Council Regarding Acquisition of Consultant Services from Winzler & Kelly to Assist Staff with Revision and Implementation of the Sewer Lateral Testing Ordinance for an Amount Not to Exceed $10,000. Sm 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. Gl PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM) a. Discussion and Direction Concerning Draft Revised City of Ukiah Sphere of Influence Boundary 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Approval of Contract with the Phillips Group to Provide Structural Engineering Plan Check and Substitute Building Inspection Services b. Discussion and Possible Extension of the Review and Comment Period on the Notice of Preparation for the Water Rights Permit Amendment Environmental Impact Report 11, NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Approval of Sales Tax Revenue Sharing Proposal Between the City of Ukiah and Mendocino County b. Approval of Response to the Grand Jury Water Report c. Introduction of Ordinance Amending Ordinance 895 and Ukiah Redevelopment Agency (URA) Resolution No. 99-1 By Revising Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Plan Time Limits for Incurring and Repayment of Debt and for the Effectiveness of the Plan d. Authorize the City of Ukiah Information Technology (IT) Department to Engage At&T/Cisco to Perform Upgrades to the Ukiah Civic Center Campus Network Infrastructure; Authorize Budget Amendment for Same 12. COUNCIL REPORTS 13. CITY MANAGEPJCITY CLERK REPORTS 14. CLOSED SESSION 15. 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 9th day of November, 2006. Gall Petersen, City Clerk ri'EM NO: wom<s.oP DATE: November 15, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB.1ECT: DZSCUSSZON OF PLANNZNG AND BUZLD]NG ACI'~VTT~ES SUI~II~IARY: The City Council recently requested that a workshop be conducted to discuss the activities, programs, and projects that the Department of Planning and Community Development are working on. The Council also wanted to discuss future projects, staffing levels, and Department direction. This Agenda Item is intended to initiate this workshop discussion. Department Background: The Planning and Community Development Department provides a full range of planning and building inspection services. The Department is comprised of two divisions. Community Planning provides both long-range planning and current planning services. Long-range planning services include General Plan preparation, implementation and updates; zoning code revisions; planning studies; and special projects. Current planning services include processing development permit applications, staffing committees, and providing information to the public. In addition, code compliance is a function of this Division. The Building Inspection division provides plan check and building inspection services, as well as building code compliance services. Plan Check structural engineering services are handled by contract consultants. (continued on page 2) RECOI~IIqENDED Ac'r~ON: Conduct workshop discussion of the Planning and Community Development Department and provide any direction to Staff. ALTERNAT]:VE COUNCZL POLZCY 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 Planning and Building Division Staff Attachments: None APPROVED:~--~'-'~~~ Candace Horsley, City IVlan~r City of Ukiah Planning and Community Development Department Organization Chart Director (1) Development Permit Coordinator (1) I I COMMUNITY PLANNING~'~ ~BUILDING INSPECTIoN~ Senior Planner (1) I [,,. Building Inspector (1) J Associate Planner (1) ! Code Compliance (1) | Planning Permit Review The Planning Permit Review (Current Planning) function is comprised of two Associate Planners with support from the Development Permit Coordinator, and guidance and supervision from the Director. They work in a team setting with the Engineering Staff in the Public Works Department, as well as with the Fire Marshal, the Electrical Distribution Engineer, and Water/Sewer Engineering Specialist. The Division processes an average of 60 planning permits annually, which are either acted on by the City Council, Planning Commission, or Zoning Administrator. Development Review includes providing guidance to applicants and evaluating development permit applications including site development permits, use permits, sign permits, minor and major subdivisions, boundary line adjustments, and variances. These applications involve retail, office, and light manufacturing projects, along with entertainment, small business applications, private schools, multi-family residential developments, second dwelling units, senior housing, community care facilities, and large family day care homes. The Planners coordinate their review with all City Departments, other local and State agencies, and the neighborhood, synthesizing any identified environmental, design or policy issues and works with the applicant to resolve these issues. The Planners prepare detailed environmental review documents, and the projects are scheduled for consideration and action by the City Council, Planning Commission, Zoning Administrator, or City Engineer. The average development permit application takes approximately 6-8 weeks to process. Processing time can be lengthened by the environmental review process and the time it takes to receive a complete application from the project applicants. Zoning Administration The Planning Director functions as the Zoning Administrator and in this capacity, is responsible for conducting public hearings and acting on Minor Use Permits, Minor Site Development Permits, and Minor Variances applications. Minor planning permits are defined in the Ukiah City Code as small additions and expansions of more than 150 square feet, but less than 1000 square feet; amendments to previously approved permits, and changes in use that do not require additional parking, and will not generate substantial amounts of traffic, noise or other potential nuisances. In addition, IVlinor Variances are those seeking less than 50% relief from a yard setback requirement, and in residential zones, a minor Use Permit is required to exceed the height limit by less than 5 feet. The Planners process the minor development permit applications, and are supported by Staff from other reviewing departments. An Administrative Secretary records the meetings, takes notes, and transcribes both into detailed minutes. The Planners are responsible for maintaining the administrative record, reviewing building permits for consistency with the projects approved by the Zoning Administrator, conducting inspections, and monitoring imposed mitigation measures. Long Range Planning Program The Long Range Planning Program is currently working on a number of important projects. These include teaming with the County on the Ukiah Valley Area Plan, the Downtown/Perkins Street Form Based Code Project, Municipal Service Review, Brush Street Triangle Annexation proposals and Development Concept Plan, revising the Hillside Zoning regulations, revising the Sign regulations, and other projects. While the Director of Planning and Community Development is the primary Staff person performing long-range planning tasks, all Staff contribute time to the projects. California Environmental Quality Act The Department of Planning and Community Development performs a number of tasks associated with implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). These tasks include performing environmental review on privately initiated development projects requiring discretionary review, performing environmental review on City initiated development (capital improvements) projects, performing environmental review for long-range planning projects, and providing public information regarding CEQA. Building Permit Review and :[nspection Services The Building Division reviews and issues Building Permits and provides inspection services for all building related construction, as well as survey inspections to property owners who request them. The Building Division reviews and issues an average of approximately 636 building permits annually, and conducts hundreds of inspections. During the 2005-2006 fiscal year, the Division issued 722 Building Permits with a construction valuation of $:[2,235,843. The Division collected $:[90,975 in fees. The Building Division, as it has for many years, contracted with a structural engineering firm to review structural engineering plans associated with Building Permit applications. The contract also called for substitute building inspection services when the City Building ]:nspector is on vacation. Under the terms of the contract, the consultants are required to complete the first review of non- residential plans within fifteen days and within ten days for residential plans. Our consultants, Coastland Engineer, had staffing problems during the summer months of 2005 and fell behind on a number of applications. However, the issues have been resolved, and Coastland has not been late with its review in over thirteen months. The Building Division attempts to have permits ready for issuance approximately four to six weeks from the date the application is submitted. Simple permits not involving structural engineering are issued faster, while complicated permits, such as large retail buildings or medical offices may take longer. Various factors can lengthen the review process and are outside the control of Staff. These factors include the accuracy and timing of plan revisions by architects and engineers, unforeseen infrastructure issues, and ramifications of redesigns. The Building Division Staff have worked very hard to improve the internal staff review process of building permit applications. Due to staff turnover and shortages, a number of reviewing Departments fell behind in their review and the overall timeline for issuing a number of permits was lengthened. In response, the Division created a plan check"center" where the staff review set of plans and resource materials are kept for review. ]:f any reviewing Staff are approaching the internal deadline for review and comment, they are notified by the Development Permit Coordinator. The Staff then come to the "center" and review and comment on the plans. ]:n addition, all comment letters to applicants are sent to the Development Permit Coordinator directly, who compiles them into a package for transmittal to the applicant. This avoids a piece- meal distribution to the applicant, which in turn eliminates a piece-meal plan revision and submittal process, thus saving the applicant time and money. There have been other changes and training that has improved the efficiency of the internal review of Building Permits. As a result, City Staff have been consistently meeting their deadlines over the past several months. Code Compliance The Code Compliance Division handled hundreds of cases in 2005-2006. These cases involved, but are not limited to marijuana cultivation, trash, debris, and weeds on property, basketball hoops in the right-of-way, unauthorized banners and signs, unauthorized outdoor sales, illegal camping, farm animals in residential neighborhoods, illegal land uses, brush and vegetation growing in the public right-of-way, and unauthorized portable car covers erected in yard setback areas. The program includes both commercial and residential code compliance. This entails initial investigation; necessary enforcement; and working with specific property owners, contractors or property managers as needed to obtain compliance. Support is also provided by the Department of Public Works, Fire Department, Police Department, Mendocino County Environmental Health, and the City Attorney. Boards, Commissions and Committees Planninq Commission The Planning Commission (PC) was established in 1947. The PC is made up of five members who are residents of the City. The Municipal Code states "]:t is the function and duty of the planning commission to prepare, make and adopt, subject to the provisions of law, a master plan for the physical development of the city, and of any land situated outside the boundaries thereof which in the commission's judgment bears relation to the planning thereof." The Planning and Community Development Department provides Staff support to the PC. Paths, Open Space and Creeks Commission The Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission (POSC) are a body of 5 citizens who have been appointed by the City Council to review matters related to paths, open space and creeks. The Commission has the duty to advise the City Council on the efficient implementation of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan; the efficient implementation of the pathway sections of the Transportation Element of the General Plan; and procedures and funding mechanisms for acquisition, preservation, and effective stewardship of City paths, open space and creeks. The Commission is purely advisory to the Council and takes no formal action of projects or proposals. The Planning and Community Development Department provides Staff support to the POSC. Demolition Permit Review Committee The Demolition Permit Review Committee (DPC) is a five-member body made up of two citizens appointed by the City Council and three City staff members. The Committee is responsible for reviewing proposals for demolishing structures over fifty years old to determine if the structures have: 1) A special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind; or 2) Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, or architectural history; or 3) Ts strongly identified with persons or events significant in local, State, or national history. The Committee formulates a recommendation to the City Council as to the disposition of the proposed Demolition Permit based on the above criteria. The Planning and Community Development Department provides Staff support to the DPC. The Planning and Community Development Department Staff also provide support to the Traffic Engineering Committee, the RDA Low and IVloderate Income Housing Advisory Committee, the RDA Downtown Design Review Board, and others. Ongoing Education and Training Planninq Division Funds are budgeted every year for ongoing educational opportunities for both the Staff and Planning Commission. Tn recent years, Staff has attended the League of California Planning Institute, courses at U.C. Davis, Chico State, and Sonoma State, various other courses, seminars, and workshops, and most recently the Green Building conference in San Francisco. The Planning Commission routinely attends the League Planners Institute. Buildinq Division The Building Inspector and Development Permit Coordinator consistently take advantage of ongoing education opportunities. The Building Inspector is nearing completion of formal plans examination course work and will taken the exam in the very near future. He will also be beginning the required coursework to become a certified Building Official. The Development Permit Coordinator is close to completing a series of professional courses and will be taking the exam to become a certified Perm it Technician in the near future. The Future Staff is currently evaluating the structure, staffing, and functions of the entire Department with an eye to the future. We have identified a number of priorities: 1. Post as much meaningful information on the new website as possible. 2. Evaluate the structure of the Planning Division and consider re-establishing the Senior Planner position. 3. Evaluate the Building Tnspector/Plans Examiner position and determine if inspection assistance is needed so that big-picture projects can be accomplished. These projects include creating an Unreinforced Masonry Education and Retrofit Program; development of a Policy and Procedures Manual; creation of new forms and information brochures; and preparation of a Fee Evaluation Study. 4. Study and determine the Planning and Building staffing and associated spatial needs in the event of annexation of new lands into the City limits. 5. Develop a formal programmatic approach to Code Compliance with an emphasis on education. Establish clear goals, priorities, as well as efficient citation/infraction procedures. 6. Explore and possibly institute in-house code compliance assistance opportunities. 7. Continue to cross-train all Staff to become familiar with the procedures of all divisions. 8. Continue to provide on-going education opportunities to all Staff. 9. Continue to conduct internal staff meetings with all staff involved with the permit review process, and discuss issues, problems, and solutions. 10. Conduct periodic out-reach meetings with architects, contractors, business owners, and interested property owners to discuss the permit review process, planning and building division procedures, issues, and alternative approaches to solving problems. RECOMMENDED ACT]:ON: Conduct workshop discussion of the Planning and Community Development Department and provide any direction to Staff. Item No. 3a Date: November 15, 2006 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, the goal of the Ukiah Valley Association for Habilitation (U.V.A.H.), a non profit community based organization, formed in 1961, is to help people with disabilities meet their full potential as individuals and productive citizens in our community by providing a wide range of services, a supportive environment and by educating and involving the community in an effort to integrate people with disabilities into community life; and WHEREAS, U.V.A.H. has operated in the greater Ukiah area for the past 45 years, originally serving retarded children, and most recently providing services and programs for people with developmental and other disabilities; and WHEREAS, U.V.A.H.'s two major programs to achieve the objectives of assisting people with disabilities are the Rural Adult Program, which provides training in self-care, domestic skills, community awareness, recreation/leisure skills, and vocational development, enabling people to maximize their independence, and Mayacama InduStries, a vocational training program providing work training, job placement, and support services, enabling individuals to maximize their work skills, habits, and earning in community-based employment; and WHEREAS, U.V.A.H. continues to work toward developing and implementing progressive training concepts aimed at helping people meet their full potential as productive citizens in our community. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Mark Ashiku, mayor of the City of Ukiah, on behalf of my fellow City Council members, Phil Baldwin, Doug Crane, Mari Rodin, and John McCowen do hereby proclaim November 20, 2006 as UKIAH VALLEY ASSOCIATION FOR HABILITATION (U.V.A.H.) DAY In recognition of its 45th anniversary and congratulate the U.V.A.H. Board of Directors, Staff, and volunteers for their significant contribution to our community and a job well done over these last 45 years. Date: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ITEM NO.: 7a DATE: November 15, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 2006 Payments made during the month of October 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: 72559-72668, 72739-72953, 73036-73158 Accounts Payable Manual check numbers: none Payroll check numbers: 72669-72738, 72955-73035 Payroll Manual check numbers: 72557-72558 Void check numbers: 72556, 72954 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 October 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:Brent Smith, Finance Director and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Report of Disbursements Candace Horsley, City M~ager KRS:WORD/AGENDAOCT06 CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 2006 Demand Payments approved: Check No.: System generated: 72559-72668, 72739-72848, 72849-72953, 73036-73158 FUNDS: 100 General Fund $266,640.28 105 Measure S General Fund $1,303.64 131 Equipment Reserve Fund 140 Park Development $19,297.54 141 Museum Grants $6,797.86 143 N.E.H.I. Museum Grant 150 Civic Center Fund 200 Asset Seizure Fund $680.00 201 Asset Seizure (Drug/Alcohol) 203 H&S Education 11489 (B)(2)(A1) 204 Federal Asset Seizure Grants 205 Sup Law Enforce. Srv. Fund (SLESF) $1,666.66 206 Community Oriented Policing 207 Local Law Enforce. BIk Grant 220 Parking Dist. #10per & Maint $567.97 230 Parking Dist. #1 Revenue Fund 250 Special Revenue Fund $2,970.00 260 Downtown Business Improvement $491.04 270 Signalizaton Fund $3,319.86 290 Bridge Fund 300 2106 Gas Tax Fund 301 2107 Gas Tax Fund 303 2105 Gas Tax Fund 310 Special Aviation Fund 315 Airport Capital Improvement $8,922.11 330 1998 STIP Augmentation Fund 332 Federal Emerg. Shelter Grant 333 Comm. Development Block Grant 334 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan 335 Community Dev. Comm. Fund 340 SB325 Reimbursement Fund 341 S.T.P. 342 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief 345 Off-System Roads Fund 410 Conference Center Fund $12,399.30 550 Lake Mendocino Bond 575 Garage $2,195.19 600 Airport $38,039.17 610 Sewer Service Fund 611 Sewer Construction Fund 612 City/District Sewer $51,811.02 615 City/District Sewer Replace 620 Special Sewer Fund (Cap Imp) 640 San Dist Revolving Fund 641 Sanitation District Special 650 Spec San Dist Fund (Camp Imp) 652 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund 660 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund $4,201.00 661 Landfill Corrective Fund 664 Disposal Closure Reserve 670 U.S.W. Bill & Collect $23,380.35 678 Public Safety Dispatch $1,767.77 679 MESA (Mendocino Emergency Srv Auth) 695 Golf $80,141.81 696 Warehouse/Stores $3,308.13 697 Billing Enterprise Fund $19,913.80 698 Fixed Asset Fund $57,300.06 699 Special Projects Reserve $9,215.00 800 Electric $1,330,917.08 805 Street Lighting Fund $12,240.29 806 Public Benefits Charges $21,586.28 820 Water $146,626.87 840 Special Water Fund (Cap Imp) $7,564.16 900 Special Deposit Trust $12,614.70 910 Worker's Comp. Fund $143,013.70 920 Liability Fund $43.59 940 Payroll Posting Fund $350,045.18 950 General Service (Accts Recv) $1,133.96 960 Community Redev. Agency $64,457.60 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund 965 Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund $565.00 966 Redevelopment Debt Svc. $1,404.62 975 Russian River Watershed Assoc $24,727.61 976 Mixing Zone Policy JPA $1,455.29 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 72557-72558, 72669-72738 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 29628-29793 PAYROLL PERIOD 9/24/06-10/7/06 PAYROLL CHECK NOS: 72955-73035 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 29794-29952 PAYROLL PERIOD 10/8/06-10/21/06 VOID CHECK NUMBERS: 72556, 72954 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS-A/P CHECKS $2,853,488.37 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS-WIRE TRANSFERS* $1,081,970.00 TOTAL PAYROLL VENDOR CHECKS $54,808.93 TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS $129,750.31 TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT $409,561.75 TOTAL PAYROLL TAXES (EFTs) $128,290.67 TOTAL PAYMENTS $4,657,870.03 * VENDOR: KIEWIT PACIFIC COMPANY 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 IhaveexaminedthisRegisterandapprovesame. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds. City Manager Director of Finance o ~ H ~'~ H ~ r~ O~ H ['""' ~ · 0 o o o o o oo o o o o ~0S o o i.~ L~ Cq U3 [13 o~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~ 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 00000000000000000000 00000000000000000000 0 0 0 H o8o 00000000000000000000 O0 0 O~ O0 ~ ~0 0~~~0~0~0~~ oo~oo~oo~ooo~oo~o~ 00000000000000000000 OO U~ E) o 0 ~ ~ 0 H 0 0 f,/'J H Or./'} R O~ ~: 0~0 E~o 0 ~RRRR~RRR~RRR~RRRRR ~00000000000000000000 00000 00000 00000 oo~ o o o o o o 0~ o o 0 u,..4 ~ 0 r,~O H H 0 , 0 0 0 ~00000000000 0 ~ooooo ~ o ~ o o o o o o oo oooo oooo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o t'xl c~q ~1 o o o 000 00 0000 00 0000 88 °0 0088©o 0000000 0 0 o o , o o o · 8° o oo~ oo ooo · 0 o~ ~oo · , ~o 008 oo 88°o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ~-i u.-~ ¢¢.~ o o o . O~ O~ ~ O O O O r..) ~ H 0 HHHHHHH ~0000000 ~0000000 o ~OOOOOOO O~ H [--- r..) , > o o ooo ~ 0'3 o o o ~o 000~ 0000 0000 o ooo oo o 0 0 O0 O0 000000 000000 oo~ oo ooo · 0 0 · , ~0 o o o ~ H~ ~0 Oo Oo O~ ~RRRR~ ~00000~ ~00000 ~00000~ ~R O~ o~ ~o D-lU~ 0 ~HHHHH O~ > oooooooo o o o o o o o o 0 0 ~ 0 cz:: n::: r.,J O~ © i i 0 OO o~ ~o ,-I o4 ~ o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o oooooo o oooooo [... ~ ,-I o o o o 0 0 H r~ i o o · 0 g° O© ¥¥ o o o o o o · o o · 0 o o [FI · 0 OO ,<,-..4 Oo 0 0 O~ 0 H H r~ i i ~0 ~ · o c) o o o o oq cq o o oo o oooooooooo o o o oo OOO 1:2> (D o o o o o 00 ooo o o o · o . 0 0 © © oo oo oooooooooo o~oo~oo~~ ~ ~OOOO~~ OO~~OOOO ~§oo~oo~o~ ~ o · , ,--q oh ~H H~ O~ H oo~ o o o o o . . 0 6,4oo · 0 , ~0 OO Oo z 0 u~ O~ ~0 0 ~0 ~ ~ H H O ~,-] ,~ H ~R H i O~ H ~ rJ . > o o oo o o o oo o o ooooooooo oo ooo o o o oo oo ~~ oo oo~oo 0000000000000000 0 0 ,~,400 · , . o o o · . · · oos~S~o~s~o~soo 0000000000000000 ~ O0 ~0 O0 .000.. ...... ~0 ~00~~0~000~ .... 000. ..... 000000000000000~ 000000000000000~ O0 r, JO .<,..-4 O~ :>l 0 0 H 00000000~000~000 00000000000000 000000000000000 o~~~~~o oo oo o o o o °~ ~0 ~ o o o o ~o~oo~oo~o O0 O0 O0 O0 00000000000000 0~~~0~~0 ~0000000~0000~ ~000000~0~ 00~~~000 ~0~~00~000 o§oo~oo~oo~oo 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 000000000000000 SSoo~oos~oSSoo O~ O0 ~0 0~~00~00~ 000000000000~0 000000~00~00~ o 0 ~ 0 O~ 0 0~: F-I U · 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 CD CD · · CD . 00 LD U') CD . . C~ (iD ~-~ C~ 0 0 · 0 oo~ 0 0 O0 o~o~oo~°~o o 00000000000000 00000000000000 ~o~ ~o o 0 0 ~00000000000000 ~000000000000~0 o oUU2U~UoU O~ 0 O~ ~J ~OHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~00000000000000 oo oo oooooooo oooooooo o o o o o o o 00 6o o o {2> ~ o o o O ,4..4 ~ O oo oo ooooooo ~°°2°°~ oo~oo~ ~o~oo o O ~O oooooo oooooo oooooo °~°° o o o o o · . o o , i H i oo o O~ HHHHHHHH ~OOOOOOOO mc) OO~: O O 000o oo~oo ~oo~oo ~ 000000000000000 0 O0 O0 O0 0 o o o oo 0 0 ~oo 0~0 0000 O0 O0 H O 0 0 H ~S~oSSoos~o~SS~ o o oo ooooooooooooooo ~oo~~o~oo 0 ~ O0 ~0 .... .... .... ~00~~0000~~ 0~0000~~000~ 0000000~00000 ~o~oo~ogg~ ~i oUU Ug~ OO z OU~ HO~ ©0 ~000000000000000 000000000000000 O~ ~ H 0 0 0 o o o o ~ o o , , . ~q , ~ ° o OO (Jo o o O~ > o ~ o i i ~ > oo OOOO oo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo oooooooooo oooooooooo oooooooooo S~gS~S~~oooo o OOOOOOOOOO OO OO OO O O O O O O cq cq o o o o o cq oq ~q OOOOO °~°°~ OOOOO 0 0 ,-I ~o oSS O OOO · · OOOOO i ~H H~HHO S~~°°S°° OO OO OO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO ~oo~~~ ~ OO O~ ~~oo~oo HH HH HHHH o oo~ooosooss ~ O~ OOO OO O O O · · , · o oo o r.~o 0r..a m~mmo 0 rJ HHHHHHHHHH > H 0 H i 0 0 0 0 0 H ~ ~ ~ ~ H o o o~ i I.-.q 0000 ~00000 o H o © o o 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 oo~oo ~oo~oo ~oo~oo~ ~oo~ oo 00000 0 u~ ~ 0 oo oo oo oo ooo oo 0000000000000000000000 00000000~0000000000000 ~0~~000~0~~0~~ 000000000~0~000~0000~0 ~~0~00~0~~0~~0~ o~o~o~o~o~o~~o~ ~ ~0 O~ 0~0 O~ ~0 ~ DDDDD ~D DDDD DDDD~ O O 0 H 0 H ~ ~ MO0000 00 o ooo oooooooo;~~oo 000000000000000000000000000000000 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 OOu o 0 OO 00000 ~o~ ~0 OO~OO ~H © °°~°~°~°~°°~°~°°S~°~°°~°°~ ~~~000~~0~00~00~000~~, ~00000~00000~~0~~~000~ 000000000000000000000~0000000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~O~OOO~~O 4~ HH H~H~ H~HHHH~ HHHHHH~~ ~HH0~H~OH~~H~HMHH ~HHHHH ~~0 O~ r_)o 0 n::: n::rj or.,a ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ~ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo H o o o ~ cq cq cq t'xl ~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 00000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 888~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 00000000000000000000000000000000 0~0000000000000000~000000000~0 ~0~~~~0~0~~~0000 S°~S°°~°°~°~~88°S~°°~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o~ ~ ~S°S~°° ~ 0~000~000000000000~~00~~0 o. o ~ o OE~ 0 o cq cq oq o o o co o o o oo oq ~1 cq 0 O0 0 o o~o ~ o o oo 0 0 o · , ooo , 0 0 ~o · , ~0 ~ 0 ~8~ o H H o , 0 ooo 000 o~o ~° mm~o ~H 0 0 O0 o ooooo ~oo o~ o8 HHO o 0 ~ 0 H i 0 ~J~ t.,~ 0 E-,OO ff..] ~ d r..tl OH :~ ,--.] 0 i o o o o ~o oo oo oo oo oo ooooooooo ooooooo oo~ HHHHHHHHH 0 O0 O0 0 0 0000 0000 HHHH 00000 ~~0 i Mm© o'1 o · . ~° H~ ~ ~ ~HH H~H~H(~ 0 ~ ~o~ ~o n:::: r..) o ~ r.z..] 0 0 ~ ~ O~ m~ ~0~ ~0~ H ¢0 H H ~ H H i ~ H~O0~H ~H ~ H i O~ rj . o o o o o 0 0 0 ~ H ~ 0 ¢~ © CD ~0 n40 H ~ 0 U O~ H 0 · > LD o o oo c~q cq c,q o o o o oo o~o~ o o o oo 000 co co oo o o oo o c~q zz~ o o o o o o o o 0 0 o ¢q ~O~o ~o~o oo~ o o o o o . . · o , co co ~o · o , o~o o o L~ O0 · 0 0 ~ Ln C~ CO . ~° H ooo ©© OHH~ ~0 ~00~ ~00~ 0 ~ 0 > H ~ © >> ~111 OZZZ © ~-~ H H ~../~ O O ~ZZZ ~000 Z 0 on~ U ~ (J · > 0 0 O0 O0 0 o o o ooo ~o o ~~oo 00000000000000 o 00000 oo o 0 0 0 ,--4 o~ 0 0 0 0 · o ~ ~ ~00~00~00 . . 0 · · . 0 · · 0 ~ ~o~oo~oo 0 ~0 O0 O0 ~ H~ H~ H~ o~ o~oo~oo~o~o 0 O0 O0 O0 0 00000000000000 ~°~°°~°~°°~°~ ~~ ~ o~o~oo~ o o~~oo~o~o~ ~oo~oo~o o oo oo ~ o~ 0 ~ Z 0 ~ 0 0 ~0 ~ b~ ~ H HH H H~ 00~ 0 ¢~>~>o o o o o 0 0 o8 o , °~ n~ O~ 0 ~ OH 0 ~ o~ H ~ rJ H OH O~ tO 0 H r~ 0 i o~ ~j . > 00 00 000 cq ~ O0 000000 000000 O O o 0 ,.-4 H ,--1 ¢.., ¢.., ~ ~ ~ E'"' ~0 OHO i oo~ OO OOO · · . OOO ~0 HHH0 SSoO~Soo OOOOOO ~oo~~ ~~OO OOO~ OO~~ ~oO~oo i o HH~HH 0 O O O O O O , . O O , O ~ O · 0 O O O O ~HHHHHH ~000000 H H~~ 00000 H~~ 0 0 > 0 121 m o~ r,,J · > <2> c> i o~ > } 0 00 0 o~ 00 00 000 0 C~ u~ L~ 00 0 O00 000 00 000 0 O0 00 00 00 00 C~ C~ 00 00 00 C~ C~ C~ C~ 00 00 00 0 0 0 0 ~ o · , ~o 0 000 000 , , , 0 00 00 C~ C~ · 0 00 i 0 0 0 · 0 · , 0 0 0 O O O ~ O C~ ,--I kD O kO O O O O . .r--I O r'q ~ , ,--I ~ O O 00 C0 · [13 u~ O~ r.J-~ C Jo ,< ,--i O~ ~H~ HHHHH H OU'~H 000 mooo \HHH r..j H Or. om {DO 0 O~ o o o o c000 o o o o o o o o oooo oooo 0~ o o o o o o o ~ 00 ~ o 00 ~0 o o o o ooooo ooooo ooooo o~o~ o o o o o o · o o , o ~ · . o o o o HMO o o o o o o o o · o o · , o o i H o oo ooooo ooooo 00000 ~oo~ oo 00000~ O~ r Jo 0 ~ ¢4 O~ OM 0 H ' ~ 0 ~0 O~ H 0 On4 0 HHHHH H~22~ ~RRRR 6 ~R d ~ ~H ~ R 00000 ~°°~° 00000 c,,} o o c~ c) o c) c~ c~ o o cq ~1 ~oo~oo 0000000 O0 O0 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ · · 00 00 oo~ o o o o o ~ 0 O~ 0 O0 o o o oo oo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ~1 {'N1 cq o o O 0 o o oo o · . . · 0 ¢q t"xl cq · , r-.q ~.-t ~.-.q HHH oo~ o o o oo · . · 0 <D <2> cq · 0 0 o 00 00 00 o 00 6,4000 n~ O o ~ ooo · 0 o o o · . . ~-.q r.-.t ~----I o o o o ~ ~-I OO~ 0064 O O~0 OHHH O 0 0 0¢~ O ~ ~ r~ O n~ o o oooooooooo oooooooooo 0000000000 00000000 00000000 H H I~ H O0 O0 0000000 oo~oog 0000~0~ ~o~o 000000~0 OOOOO~O i ~H~H HHOHHH~O O~ 0 ~r~ rj H ~ H 0 O~ H © > 0 H,< H i 0,< H ~ ~ · > o o o o oo o oq t'xl t'N1 o o o 0 u~ ~ 0 o o o o · 0 · 0 0 0000 ~00~ ~0 0 ~ 0 O~ O~ 0 ~ R ~H H~ O ~ ~ ~ H ~ o~ ~R ~ ~o ~ ~ 0 0 0~ i 0 O0 0 0 © ~00000 0 0,< H ~ r...j > CD 0 0 O0 o ~ 0'~ 000000 000000 0000 ~0 o 0~ o [13 [13 O 0 O0 O0 oo~o ~ oo~~~oo oo 00000000000 HHHHHHHHHHH 00000000000 0 u..4 ~ 0 oo~ oo ooo · , ooo ooo · . ooo ooo DDD~ ~0 HHHO ~~0~0 0000 ~ Sooosoossoo OOO OO OO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO ~o oo o~ ~ooo~oo~o~ 000 O0 ~ O~ 0 o~ H~ ~000 0 o 0 ~0 ~HHHHHHHHHHH O~ H C) o~ 00000000000000 H H HH H HHH 00000000000000 0000 00 0 O0 c,q cxl t'-q o o o o o o o o t~ u~ 0 0 oossoosoossooS OO OO OO OO oo~oo~o~oo~ ~ ~o oo o~o~~o~~ o~~o~o~oo~ O~ ~0 O0 HHHHHHH~H~HHHO H r.~ i o o o 0 0 00~ 000 0 o o o o t-.I 0 oo~ i ,._] r.j O~ r.j O0 0 ~ r...) OH O::,4 ~0 H ~r~ 0~: ~ [-... r.j · > o un u~ o o o o un l~ o o oooooooo OOO OO O O 00000000 00 O00 000 0 00 r~ 0 0 H HO o o . o o ~ ,--.I oo o 0088 o 0088 oo~oo~o oo~oo OOOOOOOO °°8~°°8o OO OO O HHHHHH o°888°88°oo ~oo~ O,--~ r..)o O~ r-,.-1 E-, E-, OOO ~oo 0 O H 0 H i HHHH~OOOO ~O H 0 o i O~ r..) o o o ~~o 0 o ~ o o o o IX) ~ <2> o ~ o o o o o o o o o o o 6,4 ¢4 6'46,4 o o oo~ 000000 RRRRRR gg~ggoo 000000 0 '44 ~ 0 0 O0 o o o o o o o ~ ,,.-I i i oo~ o o o o o o · . o o O© oo 0~0~ 0000 ~oo ~~0 0 © 0 ~J 0 ~r~ r.j . 0 0 LFi U"3 L~ ~ <2) oo <2> C> 00 0 O0 00 0 O0 00000 00 00 0 00 ~ 0 00 i i ~o~o o 0 00 0000 0~0 o 0 0 ~ OO 0 0 0 0 O Ln Lei '..DOM::} OOoO >~ ooo~ o ::z:: ~ i H H i E~ H :>l 0 0 ~ H © H HHHH~ O~ ~ H 0 rJ · 0 0 o i O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000 O0 O0 ~0000~0 0~~0~ o 00 o~ o o o o o o O0 i ~ 0000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000 ~8°°888~oo o o LC) ~ 0 . · o o o o i 0 0080088008008800800880088008 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000 o~oo~o~oo~~°'~S°~°S~o~o ~o ~~ 000000000000000000~0~0~~0 o r~ o Oo n~ O~ 0 0 ~ tJ ~m 0 ~0000000000000000000000000000 i O~ rJ · u~ kD M2 0 0 000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 ooo S°°SS°SS°°SS°°SS°SS°°SS°°S°°SS°°S°°oo o oo oo o oo oo oo oo ooS 000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000 O0 O0 ~ 0 O0 ~ ~0 ~0 ~ ~00 .... ..... . ....... 00 ..... 0... ........ 00000000000000000000000~0~0~~0000 000000000000000000000~0~~~0~ 0 0 0 · 0 0 000000000000000000000000000000000000 H~~~2~~~~~~~~22~22 i co co o o o cq cq cq o o o o o o o o c) 0~ o'~ o o o o o o ~ c~ kD LO O O O O 0~ ~ 0 o o o o o o o o oo · . . . . . o o ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ o ~ ~ o o ~ ~o ~ ~ ~o o o ~ ~ ~ , · . ..... o o oo o o o o o ~ o oo o o o ~ ~ O ~ H H ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ 0 ~>0 o 00 OC'4 rD-... Oo ~ H 0 ~fl O~ i 0 0 ~ H rJ H i H 0 n~ 0 0 0~ H i O oo o ~oo~oo OO OO OO OO OO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO~ OO OO OO OO O O O O O o rj ,< rj r~ 0 O~E-, 0rj~ ~HO o o H~ ~0~0 00 0 0~ H~H~ 0 ~~~~~Soo oo oo o OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~. O~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~ oo~oo~oo~soo~oo OO OO OO OO OO H H H H H H H~ ~~~;~~~o o o o o~o o~ ~H~H~H~H~H~H~HO~ o~ ~>~ © H~O0~O © ~OHH HO0~ U O~ (J . kO 00 D"' i.n !,.n k.o kid 00 00 00 L~ Ln 0,1 C',,1 O0 O0 O~ 0'1 kC) kD 00 o~~~~~~~~~~o oo oo oo oo oo oooo~o~o OOO000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 ,-4 0 · i 0 H 0 co · c~ H H ~-.i 00~ I--4 © 0 co t~ u-) ~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oog~oo~oo~oo~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 000000000000000000000000000000000 O000000000OO000000000000000000000 ~0~~0~00~0~0~~0~00~00 °°~ ~°~°°~~~~~°~°~°°~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ,,.,,0,0,,,,, ................ oo~o~ooooooooooooooooo~oooo~oooo~ ~o~o~oooooooo~ooooooo~oo~oo~o~ OU~ Oml~ 0 ~°Z ~oo oo~oo~ oo So ~o ~00000000000000000 O0 o~oo ~oo~oo~ 0000000000000 i O~ i ~ rJ . o o o ~-I ,,-4 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 0 oo oo ooooooo ~oo~oo ~oo~goo oo ~ o o · o o o f~ i_,'-~ 00 · · . o o 00 D~ Ln ~ oOOo ¢q 6'4 o o · · , o~ o o oo o · , , , {Doc> i H OU~ ( H © 0 0 > o c) o o o tJ~ o Ocq d or. z1 H o o n~ o H H o © o o ~ c~ o cq ~ ~-t ¢,i o o o o o~ o~ t'-Xl ¢,i Lr~ '42 L.,q O O o o o o t~ t~ u'3 ir"} o o o o o o D'.- D'- ~ Ln O O O O O~oO o o oo . . o oo o o o oo0o03 · . · , 0 o o oo~ O0 O~J n~ o r~ 0 H l.-.q r-,4 r~ O~ © O~ UO OU~ OH o i 0 000000 H H H O0 0000000 00000 oo o~~oo H 0000000 D~ ~ 00 0 0 o ~oo~o ~0 O0 ~0 O0 ~0 © O0 O0 O0 0 000000000000 00000~000000 ~ooo~o~o 0 ~ ~ O0 0 H HHHHH~HHHHH~O OOOOOOO ~OOOOOO i DDDD D~ HHHHH~O O O O O~E~ ~ 0 r~ ~H~ n~o 0 o~ ~°°°°~° © O~ 0 0HHHHHHHHHHHH ~O00m~m r, DH 0 H 0 0 O0 C~I oq cq O0 O0 O0 0000000000 oSS~SS~Sooo o 0000000000 o 0 ~0 o~ 0 00 · °~ , o~ cc} ID · ¢4 O0 Ln Ln 0 ~H ~ 0 000~ 0c4 n~ o ~ i © ~H H~ H o ~o~o ~oo ~ 0 ~oo~oo~ o 0,< t-4 U C, O0 O0 0000000 00 000 kn tn o o o o o o o kid 0 ~ O0 O0 0 ~ 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 000000000000000 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 u.4 D-., 0 SSos oo m H H M ~o oo HiM ~>~ oo~ ~0 ~0 o o~o ~poos~ooso~o3oo~ o r~ o 0~ 0 :::,'-, ~H i r~ H f./'] H oo~oooo~oo o o o o o oo o oo oo o o 00 o o o o o o o 0 0 o~o~ O~ O~ oo~o~ © HH H~O o o o o o o · . o o . ,,-t ~-I t-t ,,.-H · n~ E~ H~ HH~ OD ~H 0 0 ~ O~ ~J O~ H o~ <Dm m~ H ~ 0 o o o DD r-.-i 000000000000 OO OO OOOOOOO 0000000 HHHHHHH o o ooo 0 u...4 ~ 0 S~O~oo oo°°SS OSo OOOO OOOO OO OO O ~°°~S~°~~o ~ oo ~oo~oo~oO~oo oo oo HHHH~HHHH~H~O OO OOOOOOO ~oo~oo~ °°~S°°~ OO OO 00~ HH~ ~H 0 RRR 8°8~ ~oo~ o r~o OH ~ U 0 ~00000000000~ i 0 0 o~ H ~ rJ . o > 00 00 Lei LC} O O 0 0 0 r-q ~ O4 6'4 O O {2> ~ O 0 o~ O O O , °~ 0'3 cq , ¢q CO ~0 OO ~~O HHHHO o~ ~! H ~O H~~ ~g S~oooo o o AGENDA ITEM NO: 7b MEETING DATE: November 15, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: STATUS OF THE LAKE MENDOCINO HYDROELECTRIC POWER PLANT EQUIPMENT REFURBISHMENT EMERGENCY At its May 17th, 2006 meeting, Council voted unanimously to declare the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant equipment refurbishment project an emergency and authorized the City Manager to take action to resolve the emergency until such time that the emergency no longer exists. To that end, the City Manager has contracted with Source California Energy Services, Inc. to perform the work necessary to refurbish the power plant equipment that was damaged and contaminated as a result of flooding that occurred earlier this year. Statute requires that progress reports be made at every City Council meeting until such time that the contract is complete and the emergency no longer exists. A progress report from the Project Manager for Source California Energy Services, Inc. is detailed in Attachment 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Council continue to declare by a 4/5 vote that the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant equipment refurbishment project is a continuing emergency and to support the refurbishment contract as performed by Source California Energy Services, Inc. until such time that the contract is complete and an emergency no longer exists. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Given that Council declared the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant equipment refurbishment project an emergency at its May 17th Council meeting, and based on that action, the City entered into contract to resolve the emergency, there is no alternative policy option. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Liz Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney; Jeff Gould, Interim Utility Director 1- 11/6/06 Source California Hydro Project Status Report Approved: Candace Horsley, Cft~Manager ATTAC HMENT_~ / -- Date: November 6, 2006 To: City of Ukiah Below is a short summary of work that has been accomplished in the last two weeks. Safety and environmental compliance continues to be accident and incident free. 1) The turbine wicket gates for both Unit 1 and 2 are complete. 2) Both Unit I & 2 generators have returned to the plant site and have been set inside prior to the first rains. 3) A second new Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) has been ordered 4) The 12kV equipment (i.e., transformer, switchgear, etc.) has been refurbished with one instrumentation/protection potential transformer found bad. 5) A new fence around the 12kV equipment has been installed completed with danger signage and new landscape rock. 6) The new DF&G Hatchery backup generator disconnect transfer switch is installed and the old pumps have been tested. 7) The DF&G Hatchery backup pump control panel is being modified for standby start automated control. 8) An emergency diesel hatchery pump was installed and tested with marginal results. A second test will be performed with slight modifications on Tuesday, November 8th. 9) Most of the Allen-Bradley PLC components have arrived onsite. 10) Most of the river flow monitoring instrumentation has arrived onsite. 11) Internal panel equipment demolition has begun. Paul B. Dirks Project Manager/Sr. Mechanical Engineer Source California Energy Services, Inc. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7c DATE:November 15, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR EXPENDITURE OF $110,000 FOR ADDITIONAL WORK FOR MENDOCINO DRIVE STORM DRAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY: During the course of construction of the Mendocino Drive Storm Drain Replacement project staff became aware that the storm drain pipe had failed for a length considerably longer than originally noted. Staff has identified that a substantial section of storm drain needs to be replaced. Funding for this work is available in the special projects reserve fund. Staff recommends authorization of the budget amendment for this expenditure and execution of a contract change order with Paulson Excavating, Inc., the City's contractor for this project. RECOMMENDED ACTION- Authorize budget amendment for expenditure of $110,000 from the Special Projects Reserve Fund 699 for additional work for Mendocino Drive Storm Drain Replacement Project and direct the City Manager to execute the contract change order. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Deny the expenditure and direct staff to complete the project as shown on the contract drawings. FUNDING: Amount Budgeted $110,000 Account Number Special Projects Reserve Fund 699 Additional Funds Requested None Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works~ Candace Horsley, City Manager None APPROVED.~ ~_ Candace Horsley, City I~anager RJS: AG-YokayoStormDrainCCO ITEM NO. 7d MEETING DATE: November 15, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES, THOMAS W. DAVENPORT, AND THE BAKING COMPANY OF UKIAH AND REFERRAL TO JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND A claim from Fairfield Inn & Suites was received by the City of Ukiah on October 25, 2006 alleging damages to the Inn as a result of flooding (sewer backup) on December 28, 2005. A claim from Thomas Davenport was received by the City on October 16, 2006 alleging damages to his vehicle as a result of a traffic collision with a City emergency vehicle on May 12, 2006. A claim from The Baking Company of Ukiah was received by the City on October 23, 2006 alleging lost revenues due to a power outage which occurred on October 9, 2006. Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject these three claims and refer them to the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject Claim for Damages Received from Fairfield Inn & Suites, Thomas W. Davenport, and The Baking Company of Ukiah and refer them to the Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Yes Claimants Sue A. Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim of Fairfield Inn & Suites, pages 1-4. 2. Claim of Thomas Davenport, pages 1-6. 3. Claim of The Baking Company of Ukiah, pages 1-4 APPROVED: Can~ace Ho;'sley nager File With: City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH A-rf~ 1 RESERVE FOR FILING STAI~I~ i ~ , ,~, '-- , L[.I.~ OCT 25 2006 CITY OF UK!>,H , A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or a person acting on his/her behalf and shall show the following: if additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(s) being answered. 1. Name and address of the Claimant: Name of Claimant: .~v~'~,j"-'.:::~g- /_L L ~Z Address: . Address to which the person presenting the Claim desires notices to be sent: Name of Addressee: ~ :.2'7' ~ /.J'"~/'/,,,-~ Telephone: Address' . The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date of Occurrence: / g /g.,P/o.~- Time of Occurrence: ~,...~¢, _ z/. fi-_S- Location' /~/-TA.(~.,,'? /~ ~ ~'u,~-~'. .................. Circumstances giving rise to this'claim: ~,',,g'7~ . . General description of the indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim. , ...... -,_._~ ~~~ ,,k'~-~, ~,..,-,.,~~ ........ /L_,M~.._ ..__.~¢~__,_. _./L-~P~_ ~~__.: ........ . The name or names of the public employee or employees causing the injury, damage, or loss, if known. Page I of 3 '6. If amount claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed, if it totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed. Amount Claimed and basis for computation: If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: If the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand .dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and coud costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) [----] Limited Civil Case [~'nlimited Civil Case IYou are required to provide the information requested above in order to comply with Government CodeI §910. · · I 7. Claimant(s) Social Security Number(s): (optional) 8. Claimant(s) Date(S) of Birth' 10. ,. Name, address and telephone number of any witnesses to the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted: If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed injury; please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or hospitals providing treatment: /.../' ~ . .................................... 11. If applicable, please attach any medical b#ls or reports or similar documents supporting your claim. If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Auto Ins. Co.' .,.,,,,-" '~ Address: Telephone: Insurance Policy No.' Insurance Broker/Agent: Address: Telephone: Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.: Vehicle Make/Year: Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: · Expiration: If applicable, please attach any repair bills, estimates or similar documents supporting your claim. Page 2 of 3 READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims, place on the following diagram the name of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners. If City of Ukiah vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City of Ukiah vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw City of Ukiah vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicle'at time of accident by "A-I" and location of yourself or your vehicle at [he time of the accident by "B-I" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. CURB' SIDEWALK PARKWAY SIDEWALK ! I CURB Warning: Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to California Ci~/il Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may seek to recover all costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determined not to hav.e be.eo br;Qught.in..go.od faith and with reasonable cause.. Signature: '¢'~¢~~"~'~ Date: Page 3 o! 3 Item Pad Carpet Border labor for Install Wallpaper Power Supply battery back up Holes in Sound Proof wall Insulation,paint texture Base, cabinet tiles room Revenue Fairfield Inn & Suites Ukiah Damage and room revenue loss 4000 sq ft @ $1.00 Sq ft 4000 Sq ft @ $7.00 1200 lin ft @ $2.50 4000 sq ft @ .95 sq ft Hallway wallpaper phone equipment rm labodmaterial labor/material 181 days @ 50% occupancy @ $84.46 ADR $4,000.00 $28,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,800.00 $3,000.00 $800.00 $7,200.00 $1,500.00 $76,436.30 Total $127,736.30 File With: City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH RESERVE FOR FILING STAMP CLAIM NO. A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or a person acting on his/her behalf and shall show the following: If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(s) being answered. Name and address of the Claimant: Name of Claimant: Address: . Address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent: Name of Addressee: -~'/~Jv'v'~ ~- Telephone: "70 '7- ~" ~ --% -') 2_ ~..'~ Address: 3. The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date of Occurrence: W~~ t'~_.,, Location: (,A. Id i~/4 /'7,4- _1 I ~.~~ ~.~_-~. _',m__,o,U o iz -S~. ~~,, ~S't-- ..¢:' ~ ~3 1 ,/ ,._.. ~, · , ,--.-, . .................... Circumstances giving rise to.th~s claim: · _! , .,. ~. [ ;'- ''' - ~. v - .... ,. 4. General description of the indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be ~.lknoCn~~at the time of the presentation of the claim. . The.name or nam.~.e.s of the public e.~,mployee or employees causing the injury, damage, or loss, if known. Page I of 3 .5. If amount claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed, if it totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed. Amount Claimed and basis for computation' If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: If the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and court costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) ] Limited Civil Case ~ Unlimited Civil Case IYou are required to provide the information requested above in order to comply with Government CodeI I §910. I 7. Claimant(s) Social Security Number(s): (optional) . . Claimant(s) Date(s) of Birth: Name, address and telephone number of any witnesses to the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted: 10. If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed injury, please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or hospitals providing treatment: 11. If applicable, please attach any medical bills or reports or similar documents supporting your claim. If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Auto Ins. Co.: <:~.._.~-A. ~ Telephone: I~'~' - ~'O0-/_¢,S-2..~,,,K; 5 ..~/.") Address: Insurance Policy No.:o~'. ~jL.) ;¢,,2-.~./~'"- V ( Insurance Broker/Agent: ~__~.~__~_?~-~J__ ?,.b', ¢14 ~'YI' A,'~--~ Address: Telephone: Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.: Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: Vehicle Make/Year: ~ ~ 7,7::>~,~ _ Expiration: If applicable, please attach any repair bills, estimates or similar documents supporting your claim. Page 2 of 3 READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims, place on the following diagram the name of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners. If City of Ukiah vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City of Ukiah vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw City of Ukiah vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicle at time of accident by "A-I" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-I" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. CURB SIDEWALK PARKWAY SIDEWALK ,,/ CURB P Warning: Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to California Civil Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may seek to recover all costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determined .nOt t.o.h.av~.be.e.n .broL~ght. in good faith and with reasonable cause. Signature: ~~ Date: /0' Page 3 of 3 Date: Estimate ID: Estimate Version: Preliminary Profile ID: 511~/2006 03:35 PM Auto1532 0 DORSEYS Dorseys Auto Body 1211 N STATE ST UKIAH, CA 95482 F07~ 492-2231 Fax: (707) 462-2670 Damage Assessed By: RICHARD PERRY Deductible: 0.00 Claim Number: Autol$32 Owner Telephone: Description: Body Style: VIN: OEMIALT: TOM DAVENPORT Home Phone: (707) 391-6780 Mitchell Service: 911749 1992 Toyota Pickup 2D Pkupxcb 6' Bed 121' WB JT4RN93P2NEO56162 O Drive Train: 2.4L Inj 4 Cyl 2WD Search Code: None Line Entry Labor item Number Type Operation I 1O0740 BDY OVERHAUL 2 100830 BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 3 100870 BDY REMOVE/REPt. ACE 4 100040 BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 5 1009,.34) BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 6 101650 BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 7 102100 BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 8 102570 BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 9 AUTO BDY CHECK/ADJUST 10 103080 BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 11 103730 BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 12 AUTO REF REFINISH ..... 13 .... AUTO REF RERNISH 14 104330 BDY REPAIR 15 AUTO REF RERNISH 16 104370 BDY REPAIR 17 AUTO REF REFINISH 18 105890 REF BLEND 19 106030 BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 2O AUTO REF REFINISH ' 21 AUTO REF REFINISH 22 119044 BDY REMOVE/REPLACE 23 123O4O REF BLEND 24 100137 BDY REMOVE/INSTALL 25 124780 BDY REMOVE/INSTALL 26 125500 .BDY REMOVE/INSTALL 2'/ 900500 BDY* REPAIR 28 931104 MCH ADD1. LABOR OP 29 900500 BDY* REMOVE/REPLACE 30 900500 BDY* ADD1- LABOR OP Line Item Part Type/ Description Part Number FRT BUMPER ASSY FRT BUMPER FACE BAR L FRT BUMPER BRACKET L FRT BUMPER MOUNTING ARM FRT BUMPER VALANCE PANEL GRIII F GRP ! F EMBLEM L H/LAMP ASSEMBLY HEADLAMPS L PARK/CLEARANCE LAMP ASSEMBLY HOOD PANEL HOOD OUTSIDE HOOD UNDERSIDE UPR COOUNG TIE BAR ........................ EXisting UPPER TIE BAR L COOUNG RADIATOR SIDE PANEL Existing L RADIATOR SIDE PANEL R FENDER OUTSIDE L FENDER PANEL L FENDER OUTSIDE L FENDER EDGE L STRIPE TAPE SET L FRT DOOR OUTSK)E L FRT DOOR TRIM PANEL L FRT OTR DOOR HANDLE L FRT VENT FRAME ASSY L FRT APRON = FRONT END ALIGNMENT WILD CAT TIRE MOUNT AND B/M.ANCE 52101-36070 52145-89102 52012-35060 53911-35O10 53111-35070 75311-35050 811504~9185 81620-35080 53301-89124 53812-04040 ORDER FROM DEALER Existing Sublet New Sublet ESTIMATE RECALL NUMBER: 5/18/2006 15:36'.42 Auto1.532 UltraMate is a Trademark of MItchell International Mitchell Data Version: ' MAR_O0_A Copyright (C) 1994 - 2003 MItchell lntemaUonal UltraMate Version: 5.0.214 AIl Rights Reserved Dollar Labor Amount Units 1.0 # 239.09 INC # 10.92 INC 30.35 INC 120~3 INC # 247.99 0.6 20.96 INC 92.38 - 0.3 # 0.4 66.86 INC # 239.33 0.7 # C 2-7 C 1.3 1.0'# 0.6 2.0' # 0.$ C 1.0 217.86 1.5 # C 2.1 C 56.68 C 1.0 INC 0.$ # 1.6 # 2J)' 59.90' 0.9* 109.72" 0.0' 15.9O* 0.9* Page I of 2 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 936012 AUTO 933005 933006 933018 933034 AUTO ADD'L COST REF ADD1_ OPR BDY ADD'L OPR FRM ADD1_ OPR REF ADD'L OPR FRM ADD1. OPR ADD1. COST HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL CLEAR COAT RESTORE CORROSION PROTECTION FRAME/RACK SET UP MASK FOR OVERSPRAYD PULL FOR SAG PAINT Date: Estimate ID: Estimate Version: Preliminary Profile ID: 5118/2006 03:35 PM Auto1532 0 DORSEYS 3.00 * 2.6 10.00 * 0.2* 1.0' 0.2* 2.0' 317.20 * * - Judgement Item # - Labor Note Applies C - Included in Clear Coat Calc IlL Add'l Labor Sublet Labor Subtotals Units Rate Amount Amount Totals Body 11A 65.00 10.00 16.00 766.00 Refinish 12.4 65.00 0.00 0-90 81)6.00 Frame 3.0 65.00 0.00 0.00 195.00 Mechanical 0.0 65.00 0.00 59.95 59.95 Non-Taxable Labor Labor Summary 26.8 Additional Costs Taxable Costs Sales Tax Non-Taxable Costs Total Additional Costs 1,826.95 1,826.96 317.20 7.25O% 23.00 343.20 II. Part Replacement Summary Taxable Parts Sales Tax Total Replacement Parts Amount IV. Adjustments Insurance Deductible Customer Responsibility 7.250% Amount 1,442.26 104.56 1,546.82 Amount 0.00 0.00 I. Total Labor. II. Total Replacement Parts: IlL Total Additional Costs: Gross Total: IV. Total Adjustments: Net Total: This is a preliminary estimate. Additional chanqes to the estimate may be required for the actual repair. 1,826.95 1,546.82 343.20 3,716.97 0.00 3,716.97 ESTIMATE RECALL NUMBER: 5118/2006 15:35:42 Auto1532 UltraMate is a Trademark of Mitchell International Mitchell Data Version: MAR_06_A Copyright (C) 1994 - 2003 Mitchell IntemaUonal UltraMate Version: 5.0.214 All Rights Reserved Page 2 of TRAFFIC DOCKET AND MINUTES NOTICE SENTENCE COMMITMENT FORM DATE ,ctUg:'j.m ,, .~ z: P_O06 1 O' 30 P,P'I DEFENDANT ~'. 5 t'~N~=~- JUDGE ~ F~::~i'.~i:5;:.:: ~rj, /.,, -:j .l: D CLERK. t ~.~,,.: .... : . . REPORTER ~-,. ~0 ~' OUJ~ f~ INTERPRETER DEFENDANT ADVISED OF RIGHTS ~ CITATION ,~ ~ ~.-.,t ! 00381 ,~ "' FILE # ,.- , , - ;~ .,-:...~ DEFENDANT PRESENT;~. PRO PER ~< ~i~}~- ~'~"~" ~"-' NOT PRESENT [-I WAIVES ALL RIG. J"ITS [] PARTIES ~i'>',:"(-- <~, O'" '~' '::" - rIME WAIVED r-! NOT WAIVED ~ PRE~ENT, SWORN & TESTIFIED~ . D A ',,,; }'5'_- N P D .F:-,' T, THONA~-5 W~LTER 5!. NO >:'./~R .UE,~3,:.':,R I PT I ON . . D.~TE ' 0 B.." I,'-.:..'"'./rtL,., ~ TI:ME' t5' O0 VEH' FAIL TO HEED SI SECURITY ASSESSMENT L'.. ~ c..,~.%,--- t:. ¢(' LOC' SION: U ACC -.s DENT: ,-AC I'~ETHOD OF' S'FOP: , =,'~g. I-] YOUR NEXT COURT DATE/TRIAL DATE IS DEF'ENDANT ~DDR.,_ ~.'~,.. AT !~4 13L&CK~ART TEAILPO ~OX ~O Fl CASE DISMISSED RED~ODD VALLEY CA 94FS70 RELEASE -D ~ ~ gA ~ FOUND GUIL~: BY COURT/IN ABSENTIA NALE HAIR' BRO EYE~: BR~ PROOF OF CORRECTION PROVIDED HT' 5 ~ ! i" WOT: :t IS RACE: ["~ ~ $ .CIVIL ASSESSMENT/FEES WAIVED [}F~' ~ ~mR .... ~" TH ' ........... ,~ ~. ~Y CHP ~ TRIAL'BY DEC~TION. PICK UP FORMS AT CLERK'S OFFICE TODAY ' .......... ~ .... t'-.;~ ;~ ~ ~F~- R~URN FORM BY · · .... ' ....· '-:" ...... - .... ~ .,~ .... ~ .. . . ..... T~FFIC SCHOOL GRANTED. YOU ~UST REGISTER I~EDIATELY AND COMPLETE WITHIN 60 DAY~. NO EXTENSlON~ ALLOWE[ COURT FEES DUE IMMEDIATEL~'INR6~'~'{"08 '~ C~i~'i'~TE~'O'F'COM~EETION DUE NO ~TER THAN PAY YOUR FINE OF $ PLUS $ SEC FEE $ PRIORS FEE ~ $24.00 T/S FEE TOTAL: $ TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE ON OR BEFORE FINE SUSPENDED $ ~ REDUCED TO $. WITH PROOF OF CORRECTION, DUE BY:~ DRIVER'S LICENSE SUSPENDED [] RESTRICTED [] DAYS/MONTHS MAY DRIVE TO AND FROM WORK [] ; DU RING EMPLOYMENT [] TO AND FROM PROGRAM [] EXHIBIT(S) Mrk I Adm .[ 1.[ ] / [][] [] EXHIBIT(S) RETURNED / RETAINED BY COURT IF YOU NEED'TO SET UP PAYMENTS, CONTACT COLLECTIONS DEPARTMENT TODAY IN ROOM G-2, OR PHONE (707) 463-4785 VIOLATION OF THE CONDITIONS OF THIS SENTENCE WILL RESULT IN FURTHER COURT ACTION AND PENALTIES. File With: City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH RESERVE FOR FILING STAMP CLAIM NO. A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or a person acting on his/her behalf and shall show the following: If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(s) being answered. .1. Name and address of the Claimant: Name of Claimant: .--T(,.~... Address: Address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent: Name of Addressee: ~,~t~ ~-~¢.~-..~k),~,<-~ ' Telephone: Address: t-"/- ~,,~ --~ Z~L,,~ ~;~"~ } . The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date of Occurrence: O O-~" !~ , ~ ~ Time of Occurrence-. ~ ~ Location: ~ 'Z...o ~ ~'L- ~":, - ........ Circumstances giving rise to's claim' '\~ - .-..l ' , ' -,', . : :~ . ~ /- ~ ~ - . General description of the indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim(. &_ . ~ ~1 The name or~.~,_r,..~Nx~. ~-~.names of the public(~,..~ :empl°yee or ~s causing~.~,...,..~ v,--m,,,.the injury, damage,u, lr, x5 or I~ known~.,~,.,~/ Paae I of 3 If amount claimed totals less than $10,000' The amount claimed, if it totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together'with the basis of computation of the amount claimed. Amount Claimed and basis for computation: If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: If the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim w~)uld be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and court costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) [~ Limited Civil Case ~ Unlimited Civil Case IYou are required to provide the information requested above in order to comply with Government Code] §910. / . . Claimant(s) Social Security Number(s): (optional) Claimant(s) Date(s) of Birth' Name, address and telephone number of any witnesses to the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted: 10. If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed injury, please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or hospitals providing treatment: 11. If applicable, please attach any medical bills or reports or similar documents supporting your claim. If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Auto Ins. Co.: Telephone: Address: Insurance Policy No.: Insurance Broker/Agent: Telephone: Address: Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.: Vehicle Make/Year:. Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: Expiration: · If applicable, please attach any repair bills, estimates or similar documents supporting your claim. Page 2 of 3 READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims, place on the following diagram the name of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners. If City of Ukiah vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City of Ukiah vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw City of Ukiah vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicle at time of accident by "A-I" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-I" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. CURB' ,I' SIDEWALK PARKWAY SIDEWALK CURB Warning: Presentation of a false cl~m is a felony (Penal Code §7,2). Pursuant to California Civil Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may/seato/recover all..costs..of defense in the event an action .is filed which is later determined not to have t/in good faith and with reasonable cause. Signature: Date: Page 3 of 3 THE BAKING COMPANY OF UKIAH 120 Brush Slreel. Ukioh. CA. 95482 le! 707.462.1827, fax: 707.462.2283' wv,,,.~ !hebokingcomponyukioh.com October 16, 2006 City of Ukiah Attn: Candace Horsley, City Manager 300 Seminary Ave. Uldah, CA 95482 Dear Mrs. Horsley: On October 9, 2006, the shffi arrived to work. They found that the power was only partially on. I arrived a few minutes later and determined that the power was single phasing. At about 6:00 a.m., I called the electrical department emergency phone number. A city electrician arrived about forty-five minutes later. He determ/ned that a pothead connector had blown on the pole supplying the bakery's transformer. By 10:30 a.m., the city crew estimated that repairs would be completed about 3:30 that afternoon. This down time eliminated production for the day. I thought of having a crew start that afternoon, but it was not practical. First, it is too disruptive to everyone's life. Second, ifa shift started at 5:00 p.m., the planned nine to ten hours that we had scheduled would end at 2:30 to 3:30 Tuesday morning. The employees could not have been ready for the beginning of the shift at 6:00 Tuesday morning (only two and a half-hours later). For the day in question, October 9, we had scheduled 110,000 units of product for a particular customer. The bakery' sells each unit for $. 18. That means.the bakery, lost $19,800.00 revenue,... ................. The Baking Company of Ulciah is requesting the City of Ukiah's reimbursement for lost income. The address and phone number are printed above. Also, my email is mbx@pacific.net. Please contact me with any questions. Thank you for your help in the past, as well as with this problem. t Mike Bielenberg, General Manager, The Baking Company of Ukiah .. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7e DATE: November 15, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR SLURRY SEAL APRONS AT UKIAH REGIONAL AIRPORT, SPECIFICATION NO. 06-09 SUMMARY: The City Council awarded the contract for slurry seal aprons at the Ukiah Airport on September 20, 2006 to California Pavement Maintenance Company Inc.(contractor) of Sacramento, California in the amount of $27,418.30. The work of the contract was completed by the contractor in substantial conformance with the approved plans and specifications on October 14, 2006. The final contract cost based on actual quantities constructed is $27,418.30. Final payment of the 10 percent retention will be made to the contractor after 35 days from the date the Notice of Completion is filed with the County Recorder. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Accept the work as complete; 2. Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion with the County Recorder for Slurry Seal Of Aprons At Ukiah Regional Airport, Specification No. 06-09. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Tim Erickson, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Paul Richey, Airport Manager Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works 1 - Notice of Completion APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager cc 7e AG-NOC-Spec-05-07 SUM Please return to: CITY OF UKIAH 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482-5400 (707) 463-6200 Attachment 1 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: . That the real property described is owned by the following whose address is: City of Ukiah, a Municipal Corporation, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California 95482-5400 . That the nature of the title to the Slurry Seal Aprons at Ukiah Reqional Airport, Specification No. 06-09 of all said owners is that of fee simple. 3. That on the 14th day of October 2006, the Contract work for this project was actually completed. . That the name and address of the Contractor is California Pavement Maintenance Company, Inc., 9390 Elder Creek Road, Sacramento, California, 95829. . That the real property herein referred to is situated in the County of Mendocino, State of California, and is described as follows: City-owned property identified as Ukiah Regional Airport within the City of Ukiah. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. City Council Approval CITY OF UKIAH, a Municipal Corporation By: Date Gail Petersen, City Clerk Date STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF MENDOCINO } The undersigned, being duly sworn says: That he/she/they is/are the person(s) signing the above document; that he/she/they has/have read the same, and know(s) the contents thereof, and that the acts stated therein are true. Gail Petersen, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF MENDOCINO } Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this ~ day of , 2006, by Gail Petersen, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me. SEAL (Date) (Notary Signature) ITEM NO.: 7f DATE: November 15, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING REQUEST TO CALTRANS FOR MATCHING FUNDS TO FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (F.A.A.) GRANT NO. 3-06-0268-09 SUMMARY: On July 19, 2006, the Ukiah City Council accepted an F.A.A. grant for infrastructure improvements for the Ukiah Regional Airport. This grant is eligible for CALTRANS matching grant funds, in the amount of 2.5% of the total grant amount. Now that the grant has been accepted from the F.A.A., an application must be sent to CALTRANS for the 2.5% match amount. Included in the application process is a resolution from City Council requesting the matching funds. Staff is requesting Council approve the resolution to conclude this grant matching funds request. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Approving CALTRANS grant request. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Vote not to approve grant offer and remand to staff with direction. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Paul Richey, Airport Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. State Matching Grant Application 2. Agenda Summary Report of July 19, 2006 3. Draft Resolution APPROVED: Candace Horsley, Cit~Manager Attachment STATE Of CALIFORNIA - DEPARTMENT Of TRANSPORTATION STATE MATCHING GRANT FOR FAA AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - APPLICATION DOA-0012 (REV. 01/2005) PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE AND COMPLETE ALL ITEMS PART I. AIRPORT INFORMATION PUBLIC ENTITY City of Ukiah CONTACT NAME Paul Richey BUSINESS ADRESS 300 Seminar~ Ave Ukiah, California 95482 AIRPORT NAME TITLE Airport Manager Ukiah Municipal Airport PERMIT NO. 23-3 BUSINESS PHONE 707 467-2855 PART II. PROJECT INFORMATION Vedfy that project is within the Department's most recent Capital Improvement Plan: Yes x No If no, then project is not eligible for grant funds. DESCRIPTIVE TITLE OF APPLICANT'S PROJECT (as shown on page one of the executed grant agreement and in the adopted Capital Improvement Plan): Attach Additional Sheets if Necessary Phase 2 Storm Drain Replacement, Perimeter fencing, Apron, Service Road, Drainage Ditch Enclosure Project FEDERAL GRANT APPLICANT FUNDS $ 179,550 $ 4,725 STATE * FUNDS $4,725 TOTAL COST OF PROJECT $ 189,000 *Maximum is 5% of the federal ~lrant amount PART III. REQUIRED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Sections 21681-21684 and Section 4067 of the CAAP Regulations, submit the following documents with this application: · Local government approval (resolution or minute order) as described in Section 4067(a). · FAA Grant Agreement with FAA and sponsor signatures. · Verification of full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by submitting information to fulfill either 1. or 2. below: 1. Copy of Notice of Exemption or provide the Categorical Exemption Class # 1__ (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300-15333) 2. Copy of Notice of Determination or provide the following information: · Environmental Impact Report (Title/Date) State Clearinghouse (SCH)# · Negative Declaration (Title/Date) State Clearinghouse (SCH)# · National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document (Title/Date) (NEPA documents-Environmental Impact Statement or Finding of No Significant Impact must comply with CEQA provisions) · 11 x 17-inch Drawing or Airport Layout Plan showing project location(s) and dimensions. · Completed CAAP Certification (Form DOA-0007), if not submitted to the Division of Aeronautics earlier for this fiscal year. PART IV. AUTHORIZATION or or AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL'S SIGNATURE TITLE City Manager PRINT NAME Candace Horsley DATE SEND COMPLETED APPLICATION AND ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS TO: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS - MS #40 P.O. BOX 942874 SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001 ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For information call (916) 654-6410 or TDD (916) 654-3880 or write Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814. AGENDA ITEM NO: 7c MEETING DATE: July 19,2006 SUMMARY REPORT 2. SUBJECT: ACCEPT FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $179,550.00 AND AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN GRANT DOCUMENTS SUMMARY: The City of Ukiah has received a grant offer from FAA to cover the shortfall amount in a FAA grant received in 2002 caused by increasing construction cost and additional design expense. The Council was made aware of this issue when the contract for the airport infrastructure improvements was awarded in November 2005, (see Attachment 1 ). Staff since then has requested additional grant funding from FAA and the attached grant offer is the culmination of those efforts. It should be noted that the grant amount reflects the previously identified shortfall of $150,075 plus the cost associated with the grant writer fees. Reimbursement for the grant writer fees is acceptable through the grant as administration expense. The project is nearing completion and these grant funds will be needed to pay the contractor. Staff is recommending approval of the grant offer. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept grant offer and authorize City Manager to sign grant documents. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject the grant offer and remand back to staff. Citizens Advised' Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Paul Richey, Airport Manager Paul Richey, Airport Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager 1) ASR of November 2, 2005 2) Grant Documents Approved: Candace Horsley, Citylnager ATTACHMENT~ ~ RESOLUTION NO. 2006- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION, ACCEPTANCE OF AN ALLOCATION OF FUNDS AND EXCUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION, FOR A MATCHING GRANT FOR FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) APPROVED PROJECT UNDER AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (ALP) NO. 3-06-0268-09 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21683.1 of the Public Utilities Code (PUC) the California Transportation Commission (CTC)is authorized to allocate funds for a portion of the local match for Airport Improvement Program (ALP) grants; and WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation, acting on the authority of the California Transportation Commission, may provide two point five percent (2.5%) for that portion of the FAA grant which is for airport and aviation purposes; and WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah is submitting an application for matching funds for an FAA project to complete construction of service road; reconstruct apron area; and install a perimeter fence for the Ukiah Airport, which is included in the state's Capital Improvement Program (CIP), at the Ukiah Regional Airport. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah, State of California: 1. Authorizes filing of the application for matching funds for the FAA Grant No.3-0 6-0268-09 project. 2. Authorizes accepting the allocation of funds for the project at the Ukiah Regional Airport. 3. Authorizes execution of the Grant Agreement; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby authorize the City Manager to sign any documents required to apply for and accept these funds on behalf of the City of Ukiah. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 15th day of November, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Gail Peterson, City Clerk AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7g DATE: November 15, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE ANNUAL PURCHASE OF FERTILIZER, GRASS SEED, INSECTICIDE, AND FUNGICIDE FROM SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPPLY FOR THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,846.77. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, Staff is filing with the City Council this report regarding the annual purchase of fertilizer, grass seed, insecticide, and fungicide for the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. Requests For Quotation (RFQ) sheets were sent out to all qualified bidders who stock these specialty products for routine golf course maintenance. Bids were returned by Target Specialty Products and Sierra Pacific Turf Supply. Sierra Pacific Turf Supply was the overall Iow bidder in the amount of $6,846.77. This item is budgeted in the 695.6120.690.000 account. Refer to the following table for a complete summary of bids. Bid Summary Table I Sierra Pacific Turf Supply I $6,846.77* Target Specialty ProductsI $7,536.28* *Tax and Shipping Included RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding the purchase of fertilizer, grass seed, insecticide, and fungicide from Sierra Pacific Turf Supply for the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course in the amount of $6,846.77. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' N/A FUNDING: Amount Budqeted $6,846.77 Account Number 695.6120.690.000 Additional Funds Requested N/A Citizen Advised' Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director and Jim Hughes, Golf Supervisor Candace Horsley, City Manager and Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor N/A Horsley, City nagerCandace AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO: 7h DATE: November 15, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WI:TH PACIFIC MUNICIPAL CONSULTANTS TO PROVIDE TEMPORARY CONTRACT PLANNING SERV]~CES AND BUDGET AMENDMENT SUMMARY: As Staff has recently discussed with the City Council, we have been exploring the possible use of a contract planner to assist with the workload while we recruit for a Senior or Associate Planner. We have fourteen development permit applications in various stages of processing and are expecting the filing of a number of new applications. We also have a number of advance planning projects that we need help with, and bringing in a seasoned professional planner familiar with the area will help us keep these important projects moving. This Agenda Item is seeking Council's support and approval of a contract with Pacific Municipal Consultants for temporary contract planner services, and to approve a budget amendment to fund it. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Approve contract with Pacific Municipal Consultants for temporary contract planner services; and 2) Approve a budget amendment transferring $9,000 from the general fund reserves to Community Planning Account 100.1501.250.000 (Contractual Services). ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPT:ION: Do not approve the contract and provide direction to Staff. FUNDING: Funding for a temporary contract planner was not included in the 2006-2007 budget, and therefore a budget amendment is necessary. Staff is proposing to fund the contract with General Fund dollars. From Account Number General Fund Reserves To Account Number 100.1501.250.000 Amount $9,000.00 Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City Council Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager, David Rapport, City Attorney Attachments: i - Draft Contract Candace Horsley, City Man~a~er The Selection Process: Staff did not prepare and distribute a Request for Proposa/sfor contract planner assistance because immediate assistance is needed and by the time an RFP process was concluded, we would likely have filled the staff position and would no longer need the contract planner. Why Pacific Municipal Consultants?: After reviewing information about a number of firms that provide contract planning services, Staff narrowed its interest to Pacific Municipal Consultants (PMC) for the following reasons: · PMC currently provides contract planning services to Mendocino County, the Cities of Willits, Cloverdale, Clearlake, and Santa Rosa. The Project Director and Manager for the Mendocino/Lake/Sonoma County areas is a former Planner for Mendocino County who still lives in the City of Ukiah. He is familiar with City and County issues, knows local architects and builders, and is familiar with the City of Ukiah Staff. · PMC is a full-service firm with over two hundred employees and can draw upon any of their offices for specific assistance depending upon local needs. What Tasks will PMC Perform?: Staff is proposing for PMC to perform the following tasks: Discretionary Permit Processing · Primary Planner for approximately three current planning projects that are in various stages of processing. Also perform as Co-Planner on a number of other applications. Long Range Planning · Primary Planner for two City-initiated zoning code amendment projects. · Co-Planner on a Conceptual P/an project for a large vacant land holding. · Assistance in finalizing the Ukiah Municipal Service Review Document. · Assistance with the Form Based Code Project for the Downtown and Perkins Street Corridor. In addition, we envision a contract planner providing some assistance at the public information counter and possibly with the production of information brochures and/or materials to be posted on the City's website. How Much Time Will PMC Work and For How Long?: The proposed contract calls for sixteen hours per week (four hours per day four days per week) for a one month period. ]~t is for a cost not to exceed $9,000 which would cover the salary of the contract planner and a mileage reimbursement. The contract also provides for an extension if additional services are desired. Budget Amendment: A budget amendment is necessary to fund the contract planner. ]:t is recommended that the funding come from the general fund reserves. CITY OF UKIAH AGREEMENT FOR TEMPORARY PROFESSIONAL CONTRACT PLANNING SERVICES This agreement shall be considered a contract, and is entered into this day of November, 2006, by and between the CITY OF UKIAH, a general law municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and Pacific Municipal Consultants (PMC), a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT." PREMISES The purpose of this agreement is the provision of temporary contract planning services by CONSULTANT. The scope of work is more particularly described in the Exhibit "A", attached to this agreement. CITY may retain independent contractor to perform special services for CITY or any Department thereof. CONSULTANT is willing and able to perform duties and render contract planning services. This work has been determined by the City Council to be necessary for the welfare of residents of the CITY. CITY believes the provision of these services to the residents is in their best interests, and CONSULTANT agrees to perform such duties and render such services as outlined below: AGREEMENT CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 SERVICES OF CONSULTANT 1.01 CONSULTANT shall provide those technical, expert, and temporary professional contract planning services as described in Exhibit "A," which consists of the scope of work, dated October 25, 2006, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein. CONSULTANT shall perform development permit processing and advance planning tasks, provide pubic information, and perform other related duties as assigned. CONSULTANT shall receive direction from the Director of Planning and Community Development or specific CITY staff assigned to work with and supervise CONSULTANT. This Agreement is for a thirty (30) day period beginning on the date of Agreement execution. Temporary contract planning services shall be provided four (4) hours per day four (4) days per week to comprise a sixteen (16) hour work week. 1.02 1.03 2.01 2.02 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.05 CITY relies upon the professional ability and stated experience of CONSULTANT as a material inducement to entering into this agreement. CONSULTANT understands the purpose of providing professional contract planning services to the CITY, and shall perform in a professional manner as an extension of the City Staff. CONSULTANT shall perform any additional services requested by the CITY as agreed upon and such additional services shall be paid for by supplemental agreement and shall conform to the rates of payment specified in Article V below. ARTICLE II SERVICES OF CITY CITY shall provide any information as to its requirements for performance of the agreement not already contained in Exhibit "A." Upon request, CITY shall provide CONSULTANT any information in its possession or reasonably available to it that consultant may need to perform services under this agreement. ARTICLE III TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this agreement shall commence on the effective date and shall terminate when the CITY determines that the temporary services are no longer needed or desired, and that the Agreement will be terminated. The CITY shall provide seven (7) days notice to CONSULTANT if the temporary contract planning services are no longer needed. The execution of this agreement by the CITY shall constitute the CONSULTANT'S authority to proceed immediately with the performance of the work described by Exhibit "A." All work by CONSULTANT shall be completed pursuant to exhibit "A" in a reasonable timeframe according to the policies and procedures of the CITY Department of Planning and Community Development. CONSULTANT shall not be held responsible for delays caused by circumstances beyond its control. CONSULTANT acknowledges that timely performance of services is an important element of this agreement and will perform services in a timely manner consistent with sound professional planning practices. If CITY requests significant modifications or changes in the scope of this project the time of performance shall be adjusted appropriately. The number of days of said extension shall be the final decision of CITY. 4.01 ARTICLE IV COST OF SERVICES CONSULTANT has been selected by the CITY to provide services described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, for which compensation shall not exceed $9,000 for sixty-four (64) hours of work over a thirty (30) day period beginning at the time of contract execution. CONSULTANT Billing Rates shall be consistent with those listed on page 9 of Exhibit "A." It is the desire of the CITY to use the temporary professional contract planning services provided by the CONSULTANT on a sixteen (16) hour per week basis for up to thirty (30) calendar days from the date of agreement execution, which could amount to approximately $7,680.00 at the highest billing rate. Mileage would be paid at the rate listed on page 9 of Exhibit "A." Additional professional contract planning services beyond thirty (30) calendar days may be authorized by the City Manger, and compensation to CONSULTANT shall be consistent with the Billing Rate listed on page 9 of Exhibit "A." 5.01 5.02 5.03 5.04 5.05 6.01 ARTICLE V PAYMENT FOR SERVICES CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for work required and performed in accordance with this agreement in amount to be determined in accordance with the method described in paragraph 5.02 below. Fees for professional services as outlined herein shall be paid according to paragraph 4.01 above. A detailed explanation of services and associated fees shall be listed on each invoice submitted by CONSULTANT. Payments to CONSULTANT shall be based on an itemized invoice submitted by CONSULTANT not more frequently than monthly. Payments will be made by CITY within thirty (30) days of receipt of invoice from CONSULTANT. If CITY substantially alters the scope of work to include additional services not contemplated in Exhibit "A", the total payment and cost of services may be changed by amending the agreement. ARTICLE VI PROJECT INSPECTION AND ACCOUNTING RECORDS Duly authorized representatives of the CITY shall have right of access to the CONSULTANT'S files and records relating to the project included in the agreement and may review the work at appropriate stages during performance of the work. 6.02 7.01 8.01 8.02 8.03 CONSULTANT must maintain accounting records and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred, which records and documents shall be kept available at the CONSULTANT'S California office during the contract period and thereafter for three (3) years from the date of final payment. ARTICLE VII DISPOSITION OF FINAL REPORTS All documents and work products produced by the CONSULTANT shall be and shall remain the sole property of CITY. CONSULTANT shall not be held liable for re-use or modification of the City-owned materials for purposes outside this agreement. ARTICLE VIII TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT At any time CITY may suspend indefinitely or abandon the project, or any part thereof, and may require CONSULTANT to suspend the performance of the service. CONSULTANT may terminate this agreement with or without cause with at least seven (7) days written notice to the CITY. In the event the CITY abandons or suspends the project, CONSULTANT shall receive compensation for services rendered to date of abandonment and suspension in accordance with the provisions of Sections 5.01, 5.02, and 5.03 herein. It is understood and agreed that should CITY determine that any part of the work involved in the program is to be suspended indefinitely, abandoned, or canceled, said agreement shall be amended accordingly. Such abandonment or cancellation of a portion of the program shall in no way void or invalidate this agreement as it applies to any remaining portion of the project. If, in the opinion of the CITY, the CONSULTANT fails to perform or provide prompt, efficient, and thorough service, or if CONSULTANT fails to complete the work within the time limits provided, CITY shall have the right to give notice in writing to CONSULTANT of its intention to terminate this agreement. The notice shall be delivered to CONSULTANT at least seven (7) days prior to the date of termination specified in the notice. Upon such termination, CITY shall have the right to take CONSULTANT'S studies and reports insofar as they are complete and acceptable to CITY, and pay CONSULTANT for his performance rendered, in accordance with Sections 5.01, 5.02, and 5.03 herein, prior to the delivery of the notice of intent to terminate, less the amount of damages, general or consequential, which CITY may sustain as a result of CONSULTANT'S failure to perform his obligations under this agreement. 9.01 9.02 10.01 11.01 11.02 12.01 ARTICLE IX RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITIES HOLD HARMLESS: The CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless the CITY, its agents, officers, and employees against and from any and all claims, lawsuits, actions, liability, damages, losses, expenses, and costs (including but not limited to attorney's fees), brought for, or on account of, injuries to or death of any person or persons including employees of the CONSULTANT, or injuries to or destruction of property, to the extent caused by the negligent performance of the work described herein, provided that any such claim, lawsuit, action, liability, damage, loss, expense, or cost is caused in whole or in part by any negligent or intentional wrongful act or omission of the CONSULTANT, any subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or any for whose acts any of them may be liable. CONSULTANT shall have no duty to indemnify or defend CITY under this paragraph if the damage or injury is caused by the active and sole negligence or willfully wrongful act or omission of CITY or its officers or employees. CITY agrees to timely notify CONSULTANT of any such claim and to cooperate with CONSULTANT to allow CONSULTANT to defend such a claim. ARTICLE X INSURANCE CONSULTANT, at its expense, shall secure and maintain at all times during the entire period of performance of this agreement, insurance as set forth in Exhibit "B", attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. ARTICLE Xl GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS It is understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT will make every reasonable effort to comply with all federal, state and local laws and ordinances as may be applicable to the performance of work under this agreement. The CONSULTANT shall obtain a City of Ukiah Business License. ARTICLE Xlll NON DISCRIMINATION CONSULTANT certifies that it is in compliance with the Equal Employment Opportunity Requirement of Executive Order 11246, as amended by Executive Order 11375, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the California Fair Employment Practices Act, and any other Federal or State laws pertaining to equal employment opportunity and that it will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment on the basis of race, color, religion, handicap, age sex, national origin, or ancestry, in matters pertaining to recruitment, hiring, training, upgrading, transfer, compensation, or termination. 12.02 13.01 14.01 14.02 14.03 15.01 In the event of the CONSULTANT'S noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this agreement, the CITY shall impose such contact sanctions as it may determine to be appropriate including, but not limited to: aa Withholding of payments to the CONSULTANT under the agreement until the CONSULTANT complies, and/or b. Cancellation, termination, or suspension of the Agreement in whole or in part. ARTICLE XIV INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT CITY agrees not to solicit directly for employment the employees of the CONSULTANT who are directly involved in the performance of the services hereunder for the term of this Agreement and a period of one year after termination of this Agreement except with the written permission of the CONSULTANT, provided ,however, that nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the CITY from publishing or otherwise distributing applications and information about job openings where such publication or distribution is directed to the general public, or prevent the CITY from considering for employment any current or former employee of CONSULTANT who applied for a position with the CITY in response to such applications and information. ARTICLE XV SUCCESSOR AND ASSIGNMENTS The CITY and the CONSULTANT each binds itself, its partners, successors, and executors, administrators, and assigns to the other party to this agreement, and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns to such party in respect to all covenants of this agreement. Except as stated above, neither the CITY nor the CONSULTANT shall assign, sublet, or transfer his interest in this agreement without the written consent of the other, however, the CONSULTANT reserves the right to assign the proceeds due under this agreement to any bank or person. In the case of death of one or more members of the firm of the CONSULTANT, the surviving member or members shall complete the professional services covered by this agreement. ARTICLE XVI EXTENT OF AGREEMENT This agreement shall consist of this agreement, the Scope of Work, dated October 25, 2006, identified as Exhibit "A", as attached hereto and incorporated herein, and the insurance requirements also set forth in the attached Exhibit" B." 15.02 16.01 17.01 This agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the CITY and CONSULTANT and any other representations or agreements are superseded by the terms of this agreement. ARTICLE XVII PARAGRAPH HEADINGS The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience and reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this contract. ARTICLE XVIII NOTICE Whenever a notice to a party is required by this agreement, it shall be deemed given when deposited with proper address and postage in the U.S. mail or when personally delivered as follows: CITY: Charley Stump, Director Planning and Community Development City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 CONSULTANT/ CONTRACTOR: Pacific Municipal Consultants 10461 Old Placerville Rd., Suite 110 Sacramento, CA 95827 ATTN: Philip O. Carter 18.01 19.01 ARTICLE XlX DUPLICATE ORIGINALS This agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals bearing the original signature of both parties and when so executed and such duplicate original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of the agreement between the parties. ARTICLE XX FORUM SELECTION CONSULTANT and CITY stipulate and agree that any litigation relating to the enforcement or interpretation of the agreement, arising out of CONSULTANT's performance or relating in any way to the work shall be brought in Mendocino County and that venue will lie in Mendocino County. CONSULTANT hereby waives any right it might otherwise have to seek a change of venue based on its status as an out of county corporation, or on any other basis. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused their duly authorized officers to execute this agreement in duplicate the day and year first above written. CITY OF UKIAH Candace Horsley, City Manager Date CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR Philip O. Carter, President IDN Number Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Rapport, City Attorney Date EXHIBIT 'A CI'TY OF UKIAH October 25, 2006 Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development CITY OF UKIAH 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 SUBJECT: PROPOSAL AND STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS TO PROVIDE CONTRACT PLANNING, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND OTHER LAND USE SERVICES Dear Mr. Stump: On behalf of PMC, we appreciate the opportunity to submit this Letter Proposal to the City of Ukiah to provide contract staff services. The proposal contained in this letter is based upon the information provided to PMC through the Request for Qualifications and Proposals for Contract Planning Services, dated October 18, 2006. Based upon our understanding of the City's needs, PMC is confident that we can assist the City in the processing of the City's development caseload utilizing PMC's extensive range of resources, knowledge and expertise. In response to the Request for Qualifications and Proposals, this Letter Proposal provides a brief overview of our company, our services, qualifications of our personnel current hourly rates, and outlines PMC's proposal to provide contract planning services to the City. COMPANY OVERVIEW PMC provides environmental services, contract staff assistance, special studies and all aspects of current and advanced planning assistance to our clients. The firm was established in 1995 with a mission to provide environmental planning and municipal services to public agencies, special districts, and public-oriented organizations, and has provided service to more than 190 cities, counties, and districts throughout California. The Company has grown steadily and today consists of over 200 employees working out of our nine primary offices. As a primary service, PMC provides long-term and temporary planning assistance for a diverse range of agencies in California, including rural communities, counties, and urban centers. On-site and off-site planning assignments staffed by PMC employees range from public counter assistance, permit processing, code enforcement, General Plan and zoning code updates, and project management of major application submittals. With our public agency orientation we avoid any conflicts of interest and have no direct contractual relationships with the development community in the area. www. pacificmunicipal, corn CHICO 140 independence Circle Suite C Chico, CA 95973 (530) 894-3469 Phone (530) 894-6459 Fax DAVIS 1590 Drew Avenue Suite 120 Davis, CA 95616 (530) 750-7076 Phone (530) 750-2811 Fax LOS ANGELES 21171 S. Weslern Avenue Suite 200 Torrance, CA 90503 (310) 224-4500 Phone (310) 320-5772 Fax MONTEREY 585 Cannery Row Suile 304 Monterey, CA 93940 (831) 644-9174 Phone (831) 644-7696 Fax MT. SHASTA 508 Cheslnul Streel Suile A MI. Shasla, CA 96067 (530) 926-4059 Phone (530) 926-4279 Fax OAKLAND 1440 Broadway Suite 1008 Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 272-4491 Phone (510) 268-9207 Fax PHOENIX 1616 E. Indian School Road Suite 440 Phoenix, AZ 85016 (602) 279-1360 Phone (602) 279-1326 Fax RANCHO CORDOVA 10461 Old Placerville Road Suite 110 Sacramento, CA 95827 (916) 361-8384 Phone (916) 361-1574 Fax SAN DIEGO 10951 Sorrento Valley Road Suite 1-A San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 453-3602 Phone (858) 453-3628 Fax 1-866-828-6762 With a municipal focus, PMC continues to assist governmental agencies as they look for more creative and efficient ways to maximize limited fiscal resources. The use of PMC's services, staff resources, and technical assistance is an effective and viable option to meet the ever-changing demands placed on local, regional, and state agencies. Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 2 CONTRACT STAFF SERVICES We have provided long-term and temporary planning assistance for a diverse range of agencies in California, including rural communities and urban centers. Locally, PMC has been providing assistance to the Counties of Sutter, Butte, Tehama, Yuba, Yolo, Solano, Sonoma, Mendocino, Marin, and Napa, as well as providing contract staff services to the cities of Willits, Cotati, Cloverdale, Santa Rosa, Fort Bragg, Lakeport, Clearlake, Corte Madera, Willows, Rancho Cordova, Rocklin, Roseville, Elk Grove, Folsom, Gridley, Oroville, Biggs, Orland, Anderson, Yuba City, Chico, Shasta Lake, Red Bluff, Yreka and Redding. Our on-call services offer an effective and cost efficient way to respond to your department's fluctuating workload. For current planning projects, PMC staff members are capable of processing applications from initial review through to hearings. Specific tasks typically include review for application completeness, corresponding with project sponsors, conducting (or managing) CEQA review, preparing staff reports and analysis, coordinating noticing and other City procedures, and participating in necessary meetings and hearings. We are extremely flexible in how we can meet your needs. Staff can be provided on-site, work can be completed in our offices, or we can combine an on-site presence supplemented by off-site staffing or work. Additionally, we pride ourselves with our ability to work with and integrate well with in-house planning staff. As noted above, we can split the workload between senior and junior level staff, which cuts costs and expands resources. Contracts may also be arranged as lump sum, hourly, or monthly retainer, whichever best serves your needs. Resources are available to meet increased workload, unlike fulltime employees, as work decreases, so do contract staff costs. THE CONTACT PERSON FOR ASSIGNMENTS TO PMC BASED ON THIS PROPOSAL IS: Ignacio (Nash) Gonzalez, Project Manager/Director 1590 Drew Avenue, Suite 120 Davis, CA 95616 530-750-7076, Fax 530-750-2811, Cell 707-332-6263 Email: ngonzalez@pacificmunicipal.com Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 3 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING As indicated above, it is PMC's understanding that the City seeks immediate assistance in the processing of a range of development applications. The City would like PMC to process current planning assignments from start to finish including any required environmental documentation and mitigation monitoring and compliance with project conditions. In addition to this workload, it is anticipated that PMC staff may also be needed for other planning tasks to be determined based on need. PMC further understands the City's needs as follows: CURRENT PLANNING The City of Ukiah is seeking support for current planning projects, including processing three current planning projects that are in various stages of processing. Assistance may be required on new development applications as well, which may include tentative subdivision and parcel maps, review of conditional use permits, variances, design review and other current planning tasks. In our assistance to the City of Ukiah, we would be responsible for all aspects of development application review. This would begin with review of application materials for completeness and end with presentation to decision makers, with follow up mitigation monitoring. We can provide for ali noticing, inter-departmental and inter-agency coordination, review for consistency with applicable laws, regulations and policies, preparation of staff reports and resolutions, etc. PMC has significant experience in providing these services to other cities and can easily extend service to the City of Ukiah. LONG RANGE PLANNING The City is seeking consultant support for two City-initiated zoning code amendment projects; co- planner on a Form Based Code project for the Downtown and Perkins Street Corridor; and assistance on a Conceptual Plan project for a large vacant land holding. PMC can also assist the City with its General Plan Update and Zoning Code preparation as well as other long range planning and policy planning efforts. SCOPE OF WORK PMC's proposed Scope of Work to provide short-term contract planning services on a time-and- materials basis to the City is based upon our review of the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) regarding the potential tasks that can reasonably be undertaken to provide a maximum amount of benefit while acknowledging contract service limits. The work tasks shown below represent PMC's understanding of Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 4 the near-term needs of the City. Should the City desire to modify the tasks below to achieve alternative department/City goals or to add additional value to the City from this engagement, PMC will be more than happy to discuss how we can modify our proposed Scope of Work to provide a maximum amount of utility. TASK I: PROVIDE INITIAL EVALUATION AND REVIEW OF NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS Work Effort: PMC will review new land development applications to determine the level of completeness of the application. Upon review of the application, PMC will prepare a letter to the applicant outlining the applications level of completeness and the information that is necessary to complete and/or process the application. For those projects deemed to be complete, PMC will initiate the process of distribution of the application for staff and agency review. Deliverable(s) Initial Project Review Letter TASK 2: PREPARATION OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION(S) Work Effort. Upon the determination that the application meets City of Ukiah submittal guidelines, PMC will prepare a Project Description for the project that will be used for the preparation of CEQA documentation (as necessary) and that will be distributed for outside Agency review as part of the project review package. The Project Description will include basic information regarding location, proposed land use, conformity with City land use and zoning plans, basic infrastructure information and site and area characteristics that may affect the review of the project. PMC will coordinate the contents of the Project Description with the applicant prior to its distribution as outlined in Task 3. Deliverable(s) Project Description TASK 3: ROUTING OF PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS Work Effort PMC will route Project Descriptions and Application Materials to both internal City departments and outside agencies for review. Unless otherwise provided for by existing City staff · and/or processes, PMC will be responsible for preparing routing materials .and .for the organization and consolidation of all responses. Upon receipt of internal and external agency review comments, PMC will prepare and distribute the comments to the project applicant and the Planning and Community Development Director. Deliverable(s) Agency / Department review packages; consolidated project comment packages. TASK 4: PREPARE AND/OR MANAGE THE PREPARATION OF THE APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION FOR PROJECT CONSIDERATION Work Efl'ort' PMC staff will prepare the necessary CEQA documentation to support the consideration of the project by the reviewing body. PMC's assigned staff will prepare an Exemption (where determined to be appropriate) or Initial Study to determine the level of review required for the project and will complete the. preparation of a Negative Declaration ! Mitigated Negative Declaration as required. For those projects where it is determined that an Environmental Impact Report is required, PMC staff will advise the Planning and Community Development Director to review options for the preparation and acquisition of necessary materials. Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning: & Community Development City of Ukiah Pa§e S Deliverable(s) Prepare Appropriate Level of Environmental Documentation to Support the Consideration of the Project by the Reviewing Body. TASK 5: STAFF DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETINGS Work Effort: PMC s~aff will attend and participate in Staff meetings on each of the projects assigned to PMC for review and consultation. PMC will provide input on project related items to include general plan consistency, zoning, project modifications, CEQA review and application processing. Deliverable(s) Attendance and participation at Staff meetings. TASK 6: PREPARATION OF PROJECT STAFF REPORT(S), CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND DOCUMENTATION Work Effort' Following the detailed review of the project, supporting application materials, and a review of staff and outside agency comments related to the project, PMC will prepare draft Staff Report(s), Conditions of Approval and appropriate project documentation for each project. PMC will coordinate the preparation and review of the draft Report(s) and Conditions with the Planning and Community Development Director prior to their distribution to the project applicant and formal publication. Deliverable(s) Preparation of Staff Reports, Conditions of Approval and Project Documentation. TASK 7: PRESENTATION OF PROJECTS TO REVIEWING BODIES Work Effort' Following the preparation of project Reports, Conditions and Documentation, PMC will present each project to the appropriate reviewing bodies (i.e. Planning Commission, City Council). PMC's assigned staff will attend all required project review meetings and complete all follow-up work necessary to finalize the actions of the reviewing body. Deliverable(s) TASK 8: Presentation of Project to Reviewing Bodies. FOLLOW UP/MITIGATION MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE Work Effort' As assigned, PMC staff will conduct post-entitlement review for building permits, tentative and final subdivision maps, improvement plans prior to issuance of any post-entitlement permits for compliance with conditions of approval, and or local, state and federal requirements. Deliverable(s): Review and issuance of post-entitlement permits and implementation of development conditions of approval and mitigation measures. BUDGET Initially, PMC will provide contract planning services to the City of Ukiah on a time and materials basis with a not to exceed amount to be determined by the City. In an effort to maintain a high degree of flexibility and an acknowledgement of the limited resources available under this contract, PMC anticipates that the City will determine those projects that it desires to have PMC undertake at this time on a case-by-case basis. Hr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 6 KEY PERSONNEL As outlined above, it is our understanding chat the City of Ukiah is seeking short-term assistance from a qualified consultant to provide both current and long range planning services to assist the City in the processing of various development projects. Specific tasks may include application review, early consultations, agency distribution and comment consolidation, attendance and participation at Staff meetings, and case presentations at public hearings. In response, PMC has identified eight individuals who would be available to respond to specific requests, depending on the nature and complexity of the assigned task. The depth and breadth of our professional staff will allow us the flexibility to provide staff resources in a timely and appropriate fashion. To ensure continuity of service, we propose to assign Ignacio Gonzalez as the primary point of contact. Mr. Gonzalez manages current planning staff for the North Coast California operations in our Davis office and will be able to ensure that appropriate resources are allocated to meet the City's needs. To ensure that the City's needs are met, PMC is also assigning Gary Pedroni as a Deputy Project Manager. Mr. Pedroni assists in the management of various contract staffing operations and will also have responsibility for ensuring that the City of Ukiah's needs are met in a timely and professional manner. Together, both Mr. Gonzalez and Mr. Pedroni will ensure that the City's needs are adequately served. PMC proposes to assign both Mr. Gonzalez and Mr. Pedroni as the key project planners for the City of Ukiah. Both Mr. Gonzalez and Mr. Pedroni will provide an on-site presence to the City as needed and will be responsible for the majority of planning tasks. Their proximity to the City of Ukiah will allow them to serve the City in an efficient and timely manner. Additionally, other staff maybe assigned depending on availability and project expertise. All assigned staff work out of Ukiah, Davis and Rancho Cordova offices, which will minimize travel time and allow for quick response when an on-site presence is required. Provided below are descriptions of several PMC staff members who would be available to assist the City of Ukiah. IGNAClO GONZALEZ, AICP--PROJECT MANAGER/DIRECTOR Mr. Gonzalez is a Senior Associate with PMC and brings over 20 years of planning experience with public agencies to PMC. He specializes in the areas of current Planning, design review, and development application processing. He has performed tasks such as General Plan updates and amendments, Housing Element updates, Zoning Ordinance preparations/amendments, and processing large commercial; industrial, and residential developments. Mr. Gonzalez's experience also includes preparation of complex reports and studies related to design review, and development policy evaluation. Mr. Gonzalez has also assisted numerous communities, including Clearlake, Corte Madera, Walnut Creek, Santa Rosa, Healdsburg, Cotati and the County of Mendocino with the review and processing of telecommunication facilities and accompanying entitlements. He has also been involved in the preparation of various CEQA documents and technical studies, Mitigated Negative Declarations, Environmental Impact Reports; presentations to City Councils, Board of Supervisors and Planning Commissions. Mr. Gonzalez has provided contract staff and management services to the following cities: Willits, Clearlake, Cotati, Hillsborough, Walnut Creek, Corte Madera, Santa Rosa, Fort Bragg and the Counties of Solano, Mendocino, Butte and Sonoma. He has also provided project management services to various jurisdictions, including the management of EIR's and large commercial/industrial projects, including the management of a 270,000 sq. ft. mixed use retail center for the City of Cotati, which includes a Lowe's Home Improvement Center. Mr. Gonzalez also specializes in Subdivision/Map Act review as well as the implementation of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 7 GARY PEDRONI--DEPUTY PROJECT MANAGER Mr. Pedroni provides current and advance planning for complex projects and studies including specific plans, community/area plans, EIR preparation/review, airport plan development (CLUP) and implementation, and redevelopment agency planning. Mr. Pedroni has worked in the planning field for over 2_0 years. He has acted as Departmental Environmental Coordinator, routinely made oral and written presentations to decision-making bodies such as City Councils, County Board of Supervisors, Planning Commissions, and Citizen Advisory Groups. He has coordinated complex project review with numerous levels of government agencies, including Airport Land Use Commissions, Archaeological Commissions, and the California Coastal Commission. He has also formulated work programs, draft:ed grant proposals, and administered project budgets. Mr. Pedroni is currently managing planning projects for the City of Clearlake and is also overseeing the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Cloverdale's General Plan Update. Mr. Pedroni has served as a contract planner for the City of Santa Rosa, City of Corte Madera, and the City of Willits. KAREN MANTELEmSENIOR PLANNER Ms. Mantele is a Senior Planner with PMC and brings over 10 years of planning experience with public agencies to PMC. Ms. Mantele specializes in current planning and long range planning, CEQA compliance and CDBG program administration. Ms. Mantele has served as project manager for a variety of planning and environmental documents, including Specific Plans, EIR's, and a 600 residential unit/golf course/commercial resort development, as well as the preparation of the City of Clearlake's Housing Element. Ms. Mantele possesses outstanding project management, writing and analytical skills. She has provided front counter assistance and recommendations to the public, developers, and landowners on how to achieve compliance with land use issues. During her tenure with the City of Clearlake she was responsible for the preparation and administration of CDBG/EDBG grants, as well as the administration of the City's Building Department, including plan reviews for zoning compliance and building permit issuance. TERRY FARMER---AssocIATE PLANNER Terry Farmer has extensive experience in the preparation of CEQA and NEPA environmental review and compliance documentation and has been involved with several jurisdictions in current planning. Mr. Farmer has worked for the City of Orland, preparing CEQA complianCe documentation, reviewing project applications and preparing staff reports for the Orland Planning Commission. He has also worked for the City of Biggs, assisting the City planner in answering inquiries and preparing documents. Prior to joining PMC, Mr. Farmer worked as a planning intern for the City of Mt. Shasta, in which capacity he reviewed project applications, conducted environmental reviews, and drafted ordinances and reports. DEREK WONG~-MUNIClPAL FINANCE MANAGER Mr. Wong has I I years of consulting experience specializing in infrastructure financing of public facilities. He has managed complex engagements that require the identification and analysis of revenues and costs for local and regional projects and programs, including for the transportation and development communities. He has developed various revenue strategies and funding mechanisms that involve consensus building with local community stakeholders and governing boards to bridge funding shortfalls with capital facilities. Mr. Wong teaches seminars on public financial management to planning and finance professionals throughout California with coursework including revenue strategies and financial planning techniques. He is currently in his third year of teaching these seminars. Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 8 MIKE MARTIN~ASSOCIATE PLANNER Mr. Martin is an Associate Planner in PMC's Chico office. Mr. Martin's responsibilities include environmental planning, policy document preparation, and contract services with client agencies. Mr. Martin has over seven years experience in the urban planning field. As a Project Manager, Mr. Martin was involved in ten Housing Element updates for cities and counties in California. As an Assistant Project Manager he has completed Environmental Impact Reports for large-scale residential developments, multi-use developments and General Plans. Mr. Martin has also written municipal service reviews and development impact fee updates. In addition, Mr. Martin has completed numerous Initial Studies/Negative Declarations, Housing Condition and Income Surveys, Housing Needs Assessments, and has also written CDBG/PTA and General Allocation grants. MELISSA FLOYD--AssOCIATE PLANNER Ms. Floyd is an Associate Planner with pMc and brings over 5 years of Planning and Natural Resources experience with both public agencies and private firms. Ms. Floyd specializes in current planning and development/entitlement review, with an emphasis in natural resources, including vineyard conversions/developments, review of Timber Harvest Plans (THPs), Williamson Act compliance/review and CEQA compliance. She has served as a project manager for two EIR/EIS's involving flood control and restoration as well as an integrated aquatic plant management program. Ms. Floyd has also processed numerous development applications, such as conditional use permits, variances, tentative subdivision maps, rezones, including the preparation of associated environmental documents such as Initial Studies and Negative Declarations. Ms Floyd also specializes in Reclamation Plan Review (SMARA), including annual monitoring inspections; financial assurance review, and is a certified arborist. Currently, Ms. Floyd is providing contract staff planning assistance to the Cities of Clearlake and Cloverdale. Additionally, she is collaborating and serving as the project manager for the preparation of an EIR for and entitlements for a hillside quarry located in southwestern Sonoma County for the Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Division. CHRIS TAYLOR--AsSISTANT PLANNER Mr. Taylor provides a variety of services for PMC clients, including environmental review, project review and processing, research, air quality impact analysis, and publiC information. His work includes both current and advanced planning projects. In 2005, Mr. Taylor will seek LEED accreditation, with the goal of providing clients with consulting services to ensure that new development projects are designed with energy-conserving features. Mr. Taylor is providing current planning staff support services to the Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Division. ADDITIONAL STAFF RESOURCES The above list represents the staff which PMC anticipates will be required, however it is possible that the need for additional staff may arise. Therefore PMC may assign additional staff types as necessary to complete the services required under this agreement. Compensation rates for additional staff types will be determined by PMC and will be consistent with the rates listed herein. Assignment of additional staff will not change the budget of this agreement, unless agreed upon by both parties with the execution of an amendment. Examples of work from any PMC staffer can be made available upon request. Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 9 BILLING RATES The following billing rates are applicable for the individuals named in this proposal. Mileage is billed at the federal government rate of $0.44.5 per mile. Name/staff Billing Rate · $120/hr Project Director/Manager Senior Associate Deputy Project Manager Municipal Finance Manager Senior Planner Associate Planners Assistant Planner $120/hr $ 100/hr $ 100/hr $95/hr $85/hr $70/hr Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page I 0 SELECTED RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Below please find a list of selected relevant experience for PMC. This list is broken into four categories: Planning Services, General Plans, Environmental Documentation, and Other. PLANNING SERVICES City of Anderson Contract Staff PMC served as the Planning Department staff for the City of Anderson. PMC assisted with all aspects of advanced and current planning, reuse and redevelopment activities, CEQA compliance, staff report preparation, presentations to the Planning Commission and City Council, counter assistance, entitlement and permit review, and related activities. City of Biggs General Plan Update, Zoning Ordinance and Contract Planning Staff PMC has served as the planning staff to the City of Biggs since August of 1995. A key element of PMC's role was completion of the City's general plan update. Originally started as an in-house project, the City contracted for assistance in completing the general plan and the project environmental review. After adoption, the General Plan received a statewide APA award for small jurisdictional planning programs. PMC also prepared the City's first comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to assist in the implementation of the General Plan. In addition to general plan related tasks; PMC staff fulfills all current planning duties for the City. This has included processing Tentative Subdivision Maps, Use Permits and Variances, preparing new ordinances establishing Planning Commission duties and Residential Development Standards, and pursuing grant-funding options for design and implementation of flood control projects. Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) Contract Staff PMC provided contract staff to the Butte County ALUC during the update of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP). Duties included research and document preparation; coordination with the consulting team preparing the CLUP; preparation of staff reports and recommendations and monthly presentations to the ALUC; and daily interaction with ALUC Commissioners and County staff. City of Elk Grove General Plan and Contract Staff Serving as contract staff since the City's incorporation, PMC recently completed the City of Elk Grove's first general plan, which included the preparation of a Background Report and General Plan policy document, identification of city-wide issues, the formation of General Plan land use alternatives, and preparation of the associated Environmental Impact Report. This process included more than thirty public visioning workshops, meetings, and hearings to facilitate the implementation of the residents' views and ideas about the future development of the city. PMC has also worked with a General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) for more specific guidance on General Plan goals, policies, and action items. This General Plan is scheduled for completion in late spring 2003. Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page II City of Etna Contract Planning Services PMC provided staff to serve as a Planner for the City. Services included providing advice to the City Council in regards to the planning department as well as providing a complete revision of the City's Zoning Ordinance, fee schedule for planning permits, Home Occupation, and Sign Ordinances. Monterey County Planning and Building Inspection Department Contract Staff and Coastal Permit Processing PMC provides adjunct planning services to assist County staff with application review, permit processing, and CEQA compliance. Services include the processing of administrative permits, grading permits, use permits, coastal permits, and policy analysis. As contract planners, PMC staff conducts all aspects of project review including the preparation of staff reports, initial studies/mitigated negative declarations, mitigation monitoring and reporting programs, notices, and presentations before the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission, and Board of Supervisors. PMC's Monterey office serves as an extension of PBI, with a full library of County background planning documents. PMC staff prepared the initial study template currently utilized by PBI staff and have been assigned more than 40 projects including new single-family structures, remodels and demolitions, major subdivisions, tunnel construction, roadway projects, and hospitality resort facilities. Monterey County Redevelopment Agency and Public Works Contract Staff PMC has been providing contract services to Monterey County Redevelopment Agency and Public Works Department for the past several years primarily in the areas of redevelopment, grant applications and administration, planning, environmental review, housing studies, and economic and financial services. Services have included staff assistance with redevelopment projects, private development projects, community planning, project feasibility, infrastructure studies, inclusionary housing programs, and general development review. City of Orland Contract Staff PMC currently serves the City of Orland in the capacity of contract planning staff. In this capacity, PMC provides the full range of services to the City related to municipal planning services. SPecific duties include weekly office hours, public contact and information distribution via phone, e-mail and personal contact, staffing of Planning Commission meetings, processing and review of development applications to include site plans, subdivision and parcel maps, use permits, rezoning requests and variance applications. Additional tasks performed by PMC in this role include the preparation of environmental reports and documentation, the processing of annexation requests and minor code enforcement responsibilities. PMC is responsible for all aspects of the daily operations of the planning department for the City and provides contract planning services as a direct extension of City staff. City of Mt. Shasta Contract Staff Through our office in Mt Shasta, PMC served as the Planning Department staff for the City of Mt Shasta. Reporting to the City Manager, PMC assisted with all aspects of advanced and current planning, reuse and redevelopment activities, CEQA compliance, staff report preparation, presentations to the Planning Commission and City Council, counter assistance, entitlement and permit review, and related activities. Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 12 City of Redding General Plan Update PMC served as an extension of staff within the City of Redding's Development Services Department focusing on preparation of various draft elements for the City's General Plan Policy Document. Specific elements prepared by PMC staff include: Recreation, Circulation, Public Facilities and Services, Safety, Noise, and Natural Resources. Other tasks include research, coordination with other City Departments, and participation at General Plan Task Force meetings. City of Redding Contract Staff PMC provided support to the City of Redding Staff in preparation of their newly adopted zoning ordinance and substantive changes to the General plan. PMC worked closely with Staff members preparing both the text of changes and staff reports. City of Lake Shasta City On-Call Staff PMC provides on-call planning and technical assistance for the City. Working independently, or with City Staff, PMC provides all detail necessary to consider and approve projects. Work includes public notices, staff reports, environmental documentation, client meetings and representing projects before the Planning Commission and City Council. Sutter County Comprehensive Contract Planning Services PMC staff members have an on-going six-year relationship with Sutter County, providing contract staff assistance for the processing of land development applications, General Plan Update and background report assistance, staff report preparation, ordinance and resolution assistance, and advisory services in conjunction with the North Natomas Habitat Conservation Plan. City of Weed Planning Staff Support PMC provides planning staff support for special projects and devel°pment review. As an on-call service, we prepare staff reports, conditions of approval, and related analyses for presentations to Planning Commission and City Council. City of Willows On-Call Environmental Services PMC provided on-call environmental services to the City for a wide variety of projects subject to CEQA. This included evaluating commercial and residential projects. Yuba County Contract Staff PMC currently serves Yuba County in the capacity of contract planning staff. In this capacity, PMC provides the full range of services to the County related to County planning services. Specific duties include weekly office hours, public contact and information distribution via phone, e-mail and personal contact, staffing of Planning Commission meetings, processing and review of development applications to include site plans, subdivision and parcel maps, use permits, rezoning requests and variance applications. Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 13 Additional tasks performed by PMC in this role include the preparation of environmental reports and documentation and minor development code writing and amendment tasks. PMC functions as an extension of agency staff and operates within the framework of existing agency operations. City of Yreka On-Call Staff PMC provides on-call planning and technical assistance for the City. Working independently, or with City Staff, PMC provides all detail necessary to consider and approve projects. Work includes public notices, staff reports, environmental documentation, client meetings and representing projects before the Planning Commission and City Council. City of Santa Rosa Contract Staff PMC currently serves the City of Santa Rosa in the capacity of contract planning staff. In this capacity, PMC provides the full range of services processing of various land development applications, including design review, conditional use permits, tentative subdivision maps, variances, general plan amendments, rezoning, including preparation of environmental documentation. PMC staff also staff the Design Review Committee, Planning Commission, and City Council hearings. PMC also provides post-entitlement assistance with plans examination and permit review for compliance with zoning, conditions of approval and improvement plans. PMC is also providing assistance with project management of an EIR for a Home Depot Development project. City of Willits On-Call Environmental and Contract Planning Services PMC provides on-call environmental and contract planning services to the City for a wide variety of projects, including residential, commercial, and industrial. Additional services include policy document review, ordinance amendments, as well as the preparation of special studies and other duties as assigned. PMC staff is currently working with the City in the preparation of the City's Land Use Code. City of Cotati Contract Staff PMC has been serving the City of Cotati for the last 2'/2 years by providing all facets of project development review. PMC staff is currently managing all entitlement review/processing for a 270,000 sq. ft. residential/retail commercial mixed-use development, which includes a 165,000 sq. ft. Lowe's Home Improvement Center. County of Mendocino Contract Staff PMC currently serves Mendocino County in the capacity of contract planning staff. In this capacity, PMC provides the full range of services to the County related to County planning services. PMC provides adjunct planning services to assist County staff with application review, permit processing, and CEQA compliance. Services include the processing of tentative subdivision maps, use permits, coastal permits, and policy analysis. As contract planners, PMC staff conducts all aspects of project review including the preparation of staff reports; initial studies/mitigated negative declarations, mitigation monitoring and reporting programs. PMC staff is currently providing SMARA lead agency assistance, including financial assurance review, preparation of annual monitoring reports, as well as the management of the preparation of an EIR for a quarry expansion. Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development City of Ukiah Page 14 Town of Corte Madera Contract Staff/General Plan Update PMC is currently providing contract staff assistance for all facets of development project review, including design review and public assistance. PMC is also currently working with the Town on its comprehensive General Plan update and accompanying Program EIR. CLIENT REFERENCES Please find listed below twelve references that can provide information about PMC relative to project management, work product, schedule, budget and contract planning services. Angela Basch, Interim Community Development Director City of Clearlake 707-994-8201 Joe Riker I!1, City Manager City of Orland 530-865-1600 Jo Sherman, Planning Manager City of Oroville 530-538-2430 Randy Cagle, City Administrator City of Biggs 530-822-7400 · . Marie A. Meredith, Deputy Director City of Santa Rosa 707-543-3181 David Woltering, Planning Director City of Cotati 707-665-3638 Kim Seidler, Planning Director City of Chico 530-895-4852 Jim Hamilton, Planning Director City of Redding 530-225-4020 Mike Mistrot, City Manager City of Willows 530-934-7041 Tim Snellings, Director of Development Services Butte County (530) 538-7541 Alan Falleri, Community Dev. Director City of Willits 707-459-7124 Robert J. Pendoley, Assist. Town Manager Town of Corte Madera 415-927-5064 Mr. Charley Stump, Director, Planning & Community Development CiCy of Ukiah Pa§e I S ABILITY TO COMPLY PMC has reviewed the Notice of Requests for Qualifications & Proposals (RFQP) for Municipal Planning Services, and is confident that should PMC be the selected consultant, we will be able to agree to mutually acceptable contract terms. PMC routinely signs Professional Services Agreements with various municipalities. We believe resolution of minor langua§e chanses can be easily attained, and have not had difficulty resolving terms with municipalities similar in nature to the City of Ukiah. CONFLICT OF INTEREST PMC has no past, actual, apparent, or potential conflicts of interest that may exist relative to the services to be provided under the Agreement for consulting services to be awarded pursuant to this RFPQ. Further, PMC will avoid all actual, apparent or potential conflicts of interest relative to the services to be provided under the Agreement for consulting services pursuant to this RFPQ. Please let us know if you need any additional information, or have questions regarding this submittal. If you desire, we can provide you with a more detailed proposal specifying a proposed approach based on your needs. Once again, thank you for your interest in PMC. Please feel free to give me a call at 707- 332-6263 if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, PMC Ignacio (Nash) Gonzalez, AICP Senior Associate IG:sk Appendices: A Organizational Chart B Resumes C Insurance Certificate Cc: Chris Stabenfeldt, PMC P:\Ukiah, City oflP06-0654 EXHIBIT B INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. A. MINIMUM SCOPE OF INSURANCE Coverage shall be at least as broad as: . InsUrance Services Office form number GL 0002 (Ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001). 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025. . Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability insurance, if CONSULTANT has employees who will directly or indirectly provide service or support CONSULTANT in his provision of services under the Agreement. B. MINIMUM LIMITS OF INSURANCE CONSULTANT shall maintain limits no less than: . General Liability: $1,0000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. . Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. . Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability: Workers compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. C. DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS Dm Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of Ukiah. At the option of the City of Ukiah, either the insured shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City of Ukiah, its officer, officials, employees and volunteers; or the CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages a. The City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured's as respects; liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT, products and completed operations of the CONSULTANT, premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the CONSULTANT. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. b. The CONSULTANT'S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Ci~ of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self- insurance maintained by the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the CONSULTANT'S insurance and shall not contribute with it. Cl Any failure to comply with reporting provision so the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. d. The CONSULTANT'S insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 2. Worker Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the CONSULTANT for the City of Ukiah. 3. All coverages Each ]:nsurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City of Ukiah. E. ACCEPTABI'LI'TY OF I'NSURERS Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII. F. VERTF1'CATZON OF COVERAGE CONSULTANT shall furnish the City of Ukiah with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City of Ukiah. Where by statute, the City of Ukiah's Worker's Compensation related forms cannot be used, equivalent forms approved by the Insurance Commissioner are to be substituted. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City of Ukiah before work commences. The City of Ukiah reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. G. SUBCONTRACTS CONSULTANT shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7i DATE: November 15, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR CMU BLOCKWALL- 182 EAST GOBBI, SPECIFICATION NO. 06-13 SUMMARY: The City Council awarded the contract for CMU Block wall at 182 East Gobbit Street on October 4, 2006 to Ferranti Construction Inc. of Redwood Valley, California (contractor) in the amount of $37,361.00. The work of the contract was completed by the contractor in substantial conformance with the approved plans and specifications on October 27, 2006. The final contract cost based on actual quantities constructed is $47,676.00. Final payment of the 10 percent retention will be made to the contractor after 35 days from the date the Notice of Completion is filed with the County Recorder. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Accept the work as complete; 2. Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion with the County Recorder for CMU Block Wall - 182 E. Gobbi, Specification No. 06-13. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Alan Hasty, Assistant Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Notice of Completion APPROVED --'~~'~ Candace Horsley, Oity Man~'~r cc 7i AG-NOC-Spec-06-13.SUM Please return to: CITY OF UKIAH 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482-5400 (707) 463-6200 Attachment NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: , That the real property described is within a drainage easement maintained by the City of Ukiah, whose address is: City of Ukiah, a Municipal Corporation, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California 95482-5400 , That the nature of the title to the real property at 182 E. Gobbi where the Project ("CMU Block Wall") was constructed is that of a fee simple and an easement. 3. That on the 27th day of October 2006, the Contract work for this project was actually completed. , That the name and address of the Contractor is Ferranti Construction, Inc, P.O. Box 259, Redwood Valley, CA 95470. o That the real property herein referred to is situated in the County of Mendocino, State of California, and is described as follows: City maintained drainage easement at 182 East Gobbi Street within the City of Ukiah. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. City Council Approval CITY OF UKIAH, a Municipal Corporation By: Date Gail Petersen, City Clerk Date STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF MENDOCINO } The undersigned, being duly sworn says: That he/she/they is/are the person(s) signing the above document; that he/she/they has/have read the same, and know(s) the contents thereof, and that the acts stated therein are true. Gail Petersen, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MENDOCINO Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this day of , 2005, by Gail Petersen, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me. SEAL (Date) (Notary Signature) ITEM NO. 7.i MEETING DATE: November 15, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM CHARDELLE CADOGAN AND REFERRAL TO JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND A claim from Chardelle Cadogan was received by the City of Ukiah on October 10, 2006 alleging false arrest and assault by a City Police Officer on September 4, 2006. Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject the portion of the claim related to the incident which occurred on September 4, 2006 and refer it to the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF). The claim also lists damages and/or losses that occurred prior to April 10, 2006. Those damages and/or losses were not presented in the time allowed by state law and therefore no action should be taken for that portion(s) of the claim. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject Claim for Damages Received from Chardelle Cadogan for the incident occurring on September 4, 2006 and refer it to the Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund. No action should be taken on incident occurring on May 21,2004. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Yes Claimant Sue A. Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim of Chardelle Cadogan, pages 1-3. A P P ROVE D.~(~,--~~~"~ Candace Horsley, City vlanager File With: City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 (_ ,~, i-~, cL~-~',..;; A-~o ¢~'~""T,' RESERVE FOR FILING ""'~' ') CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH CLAIM NO. A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or a person acting on his/her behalf and Shai!~ Show the following: If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(s) being answered. . . Name and address of the Claimant: . I ,,~ .' '1 Name of Claim~ant:~~.,~. ~..,~, .~,~J',LA/{;Jj~I~%., l.,,~] ~~. Address: (.)¢~_~~.~ , ~ (~~,'--~~~-~~ , - Address to which the person presentin~ the claim Oesires notic t e sent: Name of Addressee: ~ ~ ~~~~ Telephone: ~¢¢_&&s ~ Address' ' - - ' ' ~ ~ .... o . . The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence.qr tra~on which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date _~-"~ ~ ~(~.~ ~..~l/ :~' ~ _~-A'''~ '~ ~ ~c~urrence:~~, 7~ ~ ~ t~'~~ Time of Occurrence: Circumstances giving rise to this clai~' ~ ~.,, ¢ ~~.~1,~ %'~ ~/'-. ~_ ,~ General dbscription of the indebtedness, obligation, inju~, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim., . ..... ' ' ' I .... - ~v " ~ The ~me or nam,es of the public employee or employees ca~ing ~h~'inju~, damage, or loss, if ~nown. Page 1 of ~ . If amount claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed, if it totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed. Amount Claimed and basis for computation: If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: If the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and court costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) ,~ L--~ Limited Civil Case ited Civil Case You are required to provide the information requested above in order to comply with Government Code §910. . . , 10. 11. Claimant(s) Social Security .Number(s): (optional) imar~t(s) DateJ.¢~of Birth: ' --¢'~~ ._ ,.. .... gave rise to the Name, address and telephon~nur~.bc,.r of any ~i~es to the occurrence or transactip licih claim _~ ~.¥ "~ _ ,¢ .¢'~'L~ \ %, hAr, L~..% .~~ ~, \ t If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed injury, please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or hospitals providing treatment: - If applicable, please attach any medical bills of ?eports or ~¢imilar ¢locuments supporting your claim. If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Au~4 Telephone: Address: Insurance Policy No.: Insurance Broker/Agent: 2/~ [~¢j~__.,~j Address: Telephone: Vehicle Make/Yeari (~ (% ~¢~~~~ Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.: Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: Expiration: If applicable, please attach any repair bills, estimates or similar documents supporting your claim. Page 2 of 3 READ CAREFULLY For all accider~t claims, place on the following diagram the name of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accidem by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners. If City of Ukiah vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City of Ukiah vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw City of Ukiah vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicle at time of accident by "A-I" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-I" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. CURB ' 4" SIDEWALK PARKWAY SIDEWALK CURB Warning: Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to California Civil Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may seek to recover all costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determi/~t to ~,~e been brought in good faith and with~n~use' Signaure: ~0~~ ~~-~E)ate:, ! '1~'~ _ Page 3 of 3 ITEM NO. 7k MEETING DATE: November 15, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION OF PURCHASE OF COMPUTER HARDWARE FOR THE GRACE HUDSON MUSEUM'S EDUCATION PROGRAMS FROM PC MALL GOV FOR THE AMOUNT OF $5,917.86 Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, Museum staff requested 3 price quotes for computer hardware needed for various education programs. Valid quotes were received from PC Mall Gov, CDW Government, Inc., and Apple Store. PC Mall Gov had the lowest price, and the desired equipment was purchased from them for $5,917.86. This equipment was budgeted in fiscal year 2006/07 and funded by a multi-year Dept. of Interior grant (Acct. No. 141.6161.690.001). RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required. Notification to Council of expenditure in the amount of $4,917.86 from Account 141.6161.690.001 to PC Mall Gov for the purchase of computer hardware for various Museum educational programs. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Sherrie Smith-Ferri, Museum Director Sage Sangiacomo, Director of Community Service; Mary Horger, Purchasing Agent; Candace Horsley, City Manager APPROVED'.~ C~n~ce Horsley, City Mtnager AGENDA ITEM NO: 71 MEETING DATE: November 15, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACQUISTION OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FROM WINZLER & KELLY TO ASSIST STAFF WITH REVISION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SEWER LATERAL TESTING ORDINANCE FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, Staff is filing with the City Council this report regarding the acquisition of consultant services from Winzler & Kelly to assist staff with revision and implementation of the Sewer Lateral Testing Ordinance for an amount not to exceed $10,000. In 2004, the Ukiah City Council adopted an Ordinance Article 18 entitled. "Sewer Lateral Testing". The purpose of the Ordinance is to "reasonably insure the soundness of the sewer collection system in order to prevent infiltration, exfiltration and to better protect the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant and the environment". However, significant issues have been raised by the North Bay Association of Realtors and Councilmembers regarding this ordinance. These issues need to be resolved so the ordinance can be revised to meet the needs of the public and for the benefit of the environment. (Continued on Pa.qe 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Receive report regarding acquisition of consultant services from Winzler & Kelly to assist Staff with revision and implementation of the Sewer Lateral Testing Ordinance for an amount not to exceed $10,000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: FUNDING: Amount Budgeted $10,000 To Account Number 612.3505.250.000 From Account Number 612.3505.711.000 Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Jeff Gould, Interim Public Utilities Director Ann Burck, Project Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A Approved: Candace Horsley, City~anager Staff does not have the time or expertise to resolve the sewer lateral testing ordinance issues. Requests to provide sewer lateral ordinance consulting services were made by telephone to Brown and Caldwell, Harris & Associates, Winzler & Kelly, and URS. Winzler & Kelly were selected to provide the required services to the City on the basis of their experience and expertise with municipal sewer lateral testing ordinances. Winzler & Kelly would also be available to provide the same services to the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District if so desired by the Board of Directors. ITEM NO: 9a DATE: November 15, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION CONCERNING DRAFT REVISED CITY OF UKIAH SPHERE OF INFLUENCE BOUNDARY SUMMARY: For the past year, a Committee with City Council, Board of Supervisor, and Staff representation has been discussing the City's current and 1995 proposed Spheres of Influence. The goal of the Committee has been to reach consensus regarding a logical and meaningful boundary for the City's Sphere and to present it to the City Council, Board of Supervisors and general public for discussion. The Committee recently reached consensus and this Agenda Item is intended to present the draft revised Sphere of Influence for discussion. Definition of Sphere of Influence: California law requires that each City have a Sphere of Influence to represent the ultimate limits to which the City will extend its services, embrace new territory, and anticipate its growth over the next twenty years. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss draft revised Sphere of Influence developed by the City/County Subcommittee, allow for public comment, and provide direction to Staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: N/A Citizen Advised: Interested groups and individuals Requested by: City/County Subcommittee Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: City/Council Subcommittee and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. 1995 Ukiah General Plan Map: Existing and Proposed Sphere of Influence 2. Draft Revised Sphere of Influence Map APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager Background: The existing Sphere of Influence for the City of Ukiah basically extends east to west from ridge top to ridge top, and from Burke Hill in the south to Highway 20 in the north. The :L995 General Plan directed that the Sphere be significantly reduced in size to represent the logical and probable area of potential City growth over the ensuing twenty years. Attachment Number 1, excerpted from the General Plan, depicts the existing and 1995 proposed Spheres of Influence. City/County Subcommittee: The City/County Subcommittee formed and began meeting to discuss a number of important long-standing planning issues. To discuss and evaluate issues associated with the Sphere of Influence, it reviewed existing development patterns, environmental constraints, traffic and circulation patterns, existing General Plan land Use Designations, Zoning Classifications, Special District boundaries, and other information and developed a revised Sphere of Influence for the City. After continued discussions, the initial revised Sphere underwent a number of additional modifications, and the final draft version is presented in the attached large map. The revised draft Sphere as developed by the City/County Subcommittee slightly enlarges the suggested 1995 Sphere. zt captures additional hillside lands to the west; lands developed with or designated for urban development to the south; and the lands within the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District boundaries to the north. The land to the east between Talmage Road, Gobbi Street and Babcock Lane is included for discussion. The Subcommittee acknowledged that including this land would be controversial and would not be consistent with the General Plan theme of precluding urban developed east of the Highway. Because of property owner interest in developing it and because it is surrounded on three sides by existing urban development, it has been included for discussion. CEQA: Before the City Council could adopt a Resolution approving a new Sphere of Influence and submitting formal application to LAFCO for approval, it must conduct environmental review of the proposal. The Subcommittee is seeking a City Council public discussion of the proposal to help hone and shape it before conducting and completing environmental review and submitting the proposal to LAFCO for consideration. Municipal Service Review: The City must also complete its Municipal Service Review (IVlSR) before it can submit a proposal to LAFCO to amend its Sphere of Influence. As the Council knows, we are nearing completion of a draft MSR, and anticipate bringing it to the Council in December or .lanuary for discussion. We have met recently with the LAFCO staff to discuss MSR issues and our anticipated timeline, and are maintaining open communication as we finalize our draft document. CONCLUS]:ON: The City/County Subcommittee has been meeting and working together on a number of important long-range planning issues. It has produced a revised draft Sphere of Influence map for public discussion with the City Council and Board of Supervisors. A final draft map needs to be prepared and additional work accomplished before the Council can consider a Resolution approving it and submitting it to LAFCO. RECOMMENDAT:I:ON: Discuss the draft revised Sphere of Influence developed by the City/County Subcommittee, allow for public comment, and provide direction to Staff. ATTACHMENT~ / Ukiah Valley General Plan and Growth Management Program City of Ukiah ~1~ Mendocino County, California I1.1. What is a General Plan? 4, Page 6 Planning Area City Lhnits PROPOSED~ SPHERE OF INFLUENCE CURRENT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ~ ~ ! ! ; ! I Figure II, f-D: Sphere of Influence proposed by the General Plan for LAFCo approval Adopted by the City Council: December 6, 1995 Attachment 2 ATTACHMENT 2 IS TOO LARGE FOR DOCUMENT VIEWING. INSTEAD IT IS AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT CITY HALL, 300 SEMINARY AVENUE, UKIAH, CA. Legend 1995 General plan Sphere o~ ~n§uence Ridge Line 2O06 Sphere of Influence Dlac~ss~on Area ~-- Russian Ri~er 2006 SPHERE OF INFLUENCE DISCUSSION \ / / / 0 1,050 2,100 4,200 6,300 8,400 Feet ITEM NO: 10a DATE: November 15, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH THE PHILLIPS GROUP TO PROVIDE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING PLAN CHECK AND SUBSTITUTE BUILDING INSPECTION SERVICES SUMMARY: Last August, the City Council approved the proposal from the Phillips Group to establish a second firm to provide structural engineering and substitute building inspection services to the City. As the Council knows, Coastland Engineering has provided these services to the City for the past six years, and last summer experienced staffing issues that affected its performance. It was decided that the City would contract with a second firm to ensure certainty in regard to meeting the review deadlines and providing solid and consistent customer service. After a number of meetings with the Phillips Group and working through issues, a draft contract has been prepared for the Council's consideration. The Contract, with the Phillips Group proposal as an Exhibit, is included as Attachment No. 1. Staff is seeking Council's review and approval of the contract. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve contract with The Phillips Group to provide structural engineering plan check and substitute building inspection services. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not approve the contract and provide direction to Staff. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager, David Rapport, City Attorney, and David Willoughby, Building :Inspector Attachments: 1. Draft Contract APPROVED:~~. Candace Horsley, City rq~ager The Cost for the Service: The consultants are paid from the fees collected from the applicants for the plan check and building inspection services. The table below compares the Phillips Group proposed fees with those currently charged by Coastland Engineering: FTRM Full Service Structural Structural Energy Subsequent Review and Review Only and Energy Review Only Re-Checks First Re- Review Check T~/e 80% of Plan 55% of Plan 75% of Plan 75% of Plan Time and i~hillil~$ Check fee Check fee Check fee Check fee Materials GrOUp collected collected collected collected Coastland! 85% of Plan 50% of Plan 75% of Plan 25% of Plan Time and Engineering Check fee Check fee Check fee Check fee Materials collected collected collected collected Since these services are anticipated to cover the current number of projects, no additional funds are anticipated for the budget. Review Timelines: The Phillips Group is proposing the same review times as in the Coastland contract: Residential Proiects: Initial plan check, including the issuance of a letter of review, shall be completed within ten (10) working days upon receipt of a complete submittal package. All subsequent plan checks shall be completed within five (5) working days upon receipt. Non-Residential Projects: Initial plan check, including the issuance of a letter of review, shall be completed within fifteen (15) working days upon receipt of a complete submittal package. All subsequent plan checks shall be completed within ten (10) working days upon receipt. In the original Request for Proposa/s, Staff asked the various firms to include a suggested system of assurances for meeting established deadlines. In other words, we asked the firms to propose specific measures or consequences that would ensure that reviews are completed on time. Both responding firms indicated that they understood the importance of meeting established deadlines for providing excellent customer service and maintaining a positive relationship with the City. The Phillips Group indicated that they pride themselves on providing the highest level of customer service and meeting established deadlines. They invited the City to contact its other clients to discuss its performance history. We contacted a number of the Phillips Group current clients and without exception they were pleased with the Phillips Group overall performance and adherence to established deadlines. RECOMMENDA'r~ON: Approve the contract with The Phillips Group to provide a second structural engineering plan check/substitute building inspection consultant for the City. AGREEMENT FOR PLAN CHECKING AND SUBSTITUTE BUILDING INSPECTION SERVICES This agreement is made this 16th day of November, 2006 between the City of Ukiah ("CITY"), and The Phillips Group, a California corporation located at 100 Stony point Road, Suite 290, Santa Rosa, California 95401 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS Ao CITY is mandated to review building plans to determine whether they comply with the City of Ukiah Municipal Code; and Bo CITY is mandated to inspect building projects to determine whether the work is consistent with the approved plans and all applicable codes and laws; and Co CITY needs substitute building inspection services from time to time when the City Building Inspector is absent from the office; and D, CONSULTANT represents that they are qualified to provide these services required by CITY, and E. The parties have negotiated upon the terms pursuant to which CONSULTANT will provide such services and have herein reduced such terms to writing. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, CITY and CONSULTANT do hereby agree as follows: I. SCOPE OF SERVICE CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with the following services: Ao CONSULTANT shall perform the following services as requested from time to time by CITY'S Director of Planning and Community Development or assigned designee: . Conduct full service or partial review of plans and documents for building projects in the City of Ukiah to determine whether such plans and documents are in substantial compliance with Building Regulations of the Ukiah City Code and with the California Building Code. A full service review is defined as a non-structural, structural, and energy conservation plan check. A structural review is defined as a structural only plan check. An energy review is defined as an energy only plan check. . When such determination has been made, CONSULTANT shall notify the originator of the documentation as to any lack of compliance found. , CONSULTANT will review re-submission of corrected documentation and repeat the process, if necessary, until compliance is obtained. , CONSULTANT will then return all plans and documents, corrected by the originator as necessary, to CITY'S Building Inspector with a statement that compliance has been determined. o CONSULTANT agrees to perform plan review services according to the following time table: a. Residential Projects: Initial plan check, including the issuance of a letter of review, shall be completed within ten (10) working days upon receipt of a complete submittal package. All subsequent plan checks shall be completed within five (5) working days upon receipt. b, Non-Residential Proiects: Initial plan check, including the issuance of a letter of review, shall be completed within fifteen (15) working days upon receipt of a complete submittal package. All subsequent plan checks shall be completed within ten (10) working days upon receipt. B. In addition, CONSULTANT shall be responsible and shall be readily available to CITY'S Director of Planning and Community Development or Building Inspector for the handling and answering of any and all questions, inquiries, and correspondence referred to CONSULTANT by the Director of Planning and Community Development or Building Inspector regarding services performed under this agreement. Co CONSULTANT shall provide substitute building inspection services to the CITY if requested. Inspections will be performed to verify compliance with the CITY'S Building Regulations, in accordance with CITY'S policies and procedures. CONSULTANT will provide appropriate transportation, cell phone, and all necessary tools and materials to provide proper inspection services. D, CONSULTANT shall stand ready to begin to perform services required by this agreement immediately upon execution of this agreement, and shall perform such services diligently until this agreement is terminated according to the procedures herein. II. PAYMENTS A. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for plan review services as follows: , Full service review including first re-check: 80% of the City's plan check fee. . Structural only review including first re-check: 55% of the City's plan check fee. , Structural and energy review including first re-check: 75% of the City's plan check fee. . Energy only review including first re-check: 25% of the City's plan check fee. , Subsequent re-checks and other services shall be paid for on a time and materials basis. The CONSULTANT schedule of hourly rates entitled: "Exhibit A", is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Bo City shall pay CONSULTANT for substitute building Inspection services on an hourly basis according to the attached Exhibit "A." C, Payments prescribed herein shall constitute all compensation to CONSULTANT for all costs of service, including but not limited to, direct costs of labor of employees engaged by CONSULTANT, travel expenses, telephone charges, typing, duplication, computer time, and any and all other costs, expenses, and charges of CONSULTANT, his agents and employees. III. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS A. Ownership of Work and Rights: (1) Work made for hire. The term "Documents" includes, but is not limited to, all designs, drawings, specifications, and other technical data produced by CONSULTANT in performing under this Agreement. Said Documents constitute a work made for hire, as that term is defined in Section 101 of Title 17 of the United States Code (the Copyright Act). (2) Assignment of Copyrights. If all or part of the Documents is, for any reason, deemed not to be a work made for hire, CONSULTANT agrees to execute all documents necessary to transfer to CITY the ownership of any and all rights, including but not limited to copyrights, that CONSULTANT may have in the documents. (3) Waiver of Moral Rights. To the extent that CONSULTANT has any moral rights (droit moral) or similar rights in the Documents under the law of any jurisdiction, CONSULTANT expressly waives those rights. CONSULTANT waives any right to have the documents attributed to CONSULTANT or to prevent the Documents from being modified, edited, transformed, or otherwise adapted as CITY may deem necessary. (4) Ownership of Documents. CITY will own the exclusive rights to and in the documents, including, but not limited to, all United States and International copyrights and other intellectual property rights. In the event that this Agreement is terminated, CITY will own the exclusive rights including, but not limited to, all United States and International copyrights and other intellectual property rights, in the portion of the Documents actually completed. (5) CONSULTANT agrees that CITY shall have access at all reasonable times to inspect and make copies of all notes, designs, drawings, specifications, and other technical data pertaining to the work. Upon termination of this agreement for any reason or by either party, and upon completion of this agreement, all notes, designs, drawings, specification and other technical data produced under this agreement shall be transferred to and become property of CITY upon its request without additional compensation. IV. B. CONSULTANT shall maintain the aforementioned records and any other records related to the performance of this agreement, and shall allow CITY access to such records, for a period of three (3) years after termination of the Agreement. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CONSULTANT covenants that he presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of his services hereunder. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no persons having any such interest shall be employed. V. INDEMNITY VI. CONSULTANT shall indemnify, and hold harmless CITY, its officers, employees and agents from all other claims, loss, damages, injuries, and/or liabilities including attorney's fees and all other expenses of defense, arising directly or indirectly out of negligence or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT under this agreement excluding liabilities due to or arising from the negligence or willful misconduct of CITY, its officers employees, and/or agents. LIABILITY INSURANCE Without limiting CONSULTANT"S obligations arising under paragraph 6.2, CONSULTANT shall not begin work under this Agreement until it procures and maintains for the duration of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with its performance under this Agreement. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance Coverage shall be at least as broad as: o Insurance Services Office ("ISO") Commercial General Liability Coverage Form No. CG 00 01 11 85. . ISO form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" or Code 8,9 if no owned autos and endorsement CA 0025. , Workers' Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. , Professional Liability Insurance covering damages which may result from errors, omissions or acts of professional negligence by CONSULTANT. B. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: o General Liability: $2,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the Agreement premises. . Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. . Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employer's Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. o Professional Liability coverage: $500,000 combined single limit per occurrence. If the coverage is an aggregate limit, the aggregate limit must apply separately to the Agreement premises. C. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the CITY. At the option of the CITY, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. D. Other Insurance Provisions The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages am The CITY, its officers, officials, employees or designated volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects; liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT, products and completed operations of the CONULTANT, premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT, or automobiles Agreemented, hired or borrowed by the CONSULTANT. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the CITY its officers, officials, or employees. bi The CONSULTANT'S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, and employees. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, and employees shall be excess of the CONSULTANT'S insurance and shall not contribute with it. C, Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the CITY, its officers, officials, or employees. do The CONSULTANT'S insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 2. Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage The Insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the CITY, its officers, officials, and employees for losses arising from CONSULTANT'S possession of the Agreemented Premises, pursuant to this Agreement. 3. Professional Liability Coverage If written on a claims-made basis, the retroactivity date shall be the effective date of this Agreement or prior. The policy period shall be maintained for two years following the termination of this Agreement. 4. All Coverages Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled by either party except after thirty (30) days prior written by mail has been given to CITY, unless cancelled for non-payment, when ten (10) days written notice shall be given. E. Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating or no less than A:VII and who are admitted insurers in the State of California. F. Verification of Coverage CONSULTANT shall furnish the CITY with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on forms approved by the CITY. Where by statute, the CITY'S workers' compensation-related forms cannot be used, equivalent forms approved by the Insurance Commissioner are to be substituted. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY before CONSULTANT takes possession of the Agreemented Premises. G. Subcontractors If CONSULTANT uses subcontractors or sub-consultants, it shall cover them under its policies or require them to separately comply with the insurance requirements set forth in the Paragraph 6.1. H. Business License Prior to performing work under the terms of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall apply for and secure a City of Ukiah Business License. VII. ASSIGNMENT CONSULTANT shall not assign any rights or duties under this agreement. 10 VIII. TERMINATION A, This agreement may be terminated by either party by giving thirty (30) days notice to the other in writing of its intent to terminate the agreement. B, Upon such termination, CONSULTANT shall submit to CITY an itemized statement of services performed to the date of termination in accordance with Paragraph II of this agreement. Said services may include both completed work and work in process at the time of termination. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for any such work for which compensation has not previously been made by CITY. IX. Co CITY and CONSULTANT may negotiate and agree upon a fair and equitable method for completing work in progress after termination of the agreement. COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS A. Equal Employment Opportunity In connection with the execution of this agreement, CONSULTANT shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, sex, or national origin. B. Nondiscrimination Civil Riqhts Act of 1964 CONSULTANT will comply with all federal regulations relative to nondiscrimination to federally-assisted programs. Co Solicitations for Subcontractors includinq Procurement of Materials and Equipment In all solicitations, either by competitive bidding or negotiations, made by CONSULTANT for work to be performed under a subcontract including procurement of materials or leases of equipment, each potential subcontractor, supplier, or lessor shall be notified by CONSULTANT of CONSULTANT'S obligations under this agreement and the regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, religion, color, sex, or national origin. 11 X. NOTICES Except as otherwise specifically provided in this agreement, any notice submittal or communication required or permitted to be served on a party hereto, may be served by personal delivery to the person or the office of the person identified below. Service may also be made by mail, by placing the notice, submittal or communication in an envelope, with the proper first-class postage affixed thereto, and addressed as indicated below, and depositing said envelope into the United States mail to: CITY CONSULTANT City of Ukiah Building Division 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA. 95482 The Phillips Group 100 Stony Point Rd, Suite 290 Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Xl. ATTN: Charles Stump, Director Planning and Community Development INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR ATTN: Daryl A. Phillips President It is specifically agreed that in providing the services and in rendering its performance under this agreement, CONSULTANT is an independent contractor and is not and shall not be construed to be an officer or employee of the CITY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have accepted, made and executed this agreement upon the terms, conditions, and provisions above stated, the day and year first above written. THE PHILLIPS GROUP CITY OF UKIAH By: By: Name: Title: Address: Daryl A. Philips President 100 Stony Point Road Suite 100 Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Name: Title: Address: Candace Horsley City Manager 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 12 APPROVES AS TO FORM: ATTEST: David Rapport, City Attorney Gail Peterson, City Clerk Date: ,2006 13 THE PHILLIPS GROUP Plan Review and Building Code Consultants 100 Stony Point Road Suite 290 Santa Rosa, CA 95401 'lei. 707-527-8500 Tel. 800-953-8585 Fax 707-527-0338 www. phillipsgroup.com Building Par[nerships 7)~at ~Vork EXHIBIT "A" SCI-[EDULE OF HOURLY RATES CLASSIFICATION RATE PER HOUR Principal Senior Plan Check Engineer Plan Check Engineer $200.OO $175.00 $I55.00 Senior Plans Examiner $155.00 Plans Examiner $135.00 Building Inspector Adminis~ation Suppo~ $105.00 '$ 90.00 Effective 7-1-06 EXHIBIT B INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. A. MINIMUM SCOPE OF INSURANCE Coverage shall be at least as broad as: . Insurance Services Office form number GL 0002 (Ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG ooo].). 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025. m Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability insurance, if CONSULTANT has employees who will directly or indirectly provide service or support CONSULTANT in his provision of services under the Agreement. B. MINIMUM LIMITS OF INSURANCE CONSULTANT shall maintain limits no less than: . General Liability: $1,0000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. . Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. . Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability: Workers compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 14 C. DEDUCTI'BLES AND SELF-I'NSURED RETENTI'ONS Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of Ukiah. At the option of the City of Ukiah, either the insured shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City of Ukiah, its officer, officials, employees and volunteers; or the CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. D. OTHER I'NSURANCE PROVI'SI'ONS The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages al The City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured's as respects; liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT, products and completed operations of the CONSULTANT, premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the CONSULTANT. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. b! The CONSULTANT'S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the CONSULTANT'S insurance and shall not contribute with it. Cl Any failure to comply with reporting provision so the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. dl The CONSULTANT'S insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 2. Worker Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the CONSULTANT for the City of Ukiah. 16 3. All coverages El Each Insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City of Ukiah. ACCEPTABZLI'TY OF I'NSURERS Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII. F. VERI'FI'CATI'ON OF COVERAGE CONSULTANT shall furnish the City of Ukiah with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City of Ukiah. Where by statute, the City of Ukiah's Worker's Compensation related forms cannot be used, equivalent forms approved by the Insurance Commissioner are to be substituted. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City of Ukiah before work commences. The City of Ukiah reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. G. SUBCONTRACTS CONSULTANT shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. 16 AGENDA ITEM NO: 10b MEETING DATE: Nov. 15, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE EXTENSION OF THE REVIEW AND COMMENT PERIOD ON THE NOTICE OF PREPARATION FOR THE WATER RIGHTS PERMIT AMENDMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The City Council approved the extension of the comment period for the water rights permit environmental impact report from October 23 to November 6, 2006. However, at the special Council workshop on this issue on November 2, there was discussion of whether the deadline should be extended even further to allow the public to provide comment. Staff is bringing this to the Council for discussion and a decision on whether to extend the deadline. The City has received several letters of comment within the November 6th date. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and determine if an extension of the comment period is appropriate. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: FUNDING: Amount Budgeted Account Number Additional Funds Requested Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Candace Horsley, City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager None C~ndace Hors Manager AGENDA ITEM NO: 1 la MEETING DATE: Nov. 15, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF SALES TAX REVENUE SHARING PROPOSAL BETWEEN THE CITY OF UKIAH AND MENDOCINO COUNTY The City of Ukiah and the County of Mendocino have discussed the concept of a tax revenue sharing agreement for purposes of annexation for over twenty-five years. Due to the current potential for large housing and retail developments in the unincorporated area, discussions on tax revenue sharing and the need to reach an agreement have become necessary and critical. History: City of Ukiah representatives Mayor Ashiku and Councilmember McCowen began meeting with Mendocino County Board members W attenburger and Delbar in 2005, to discuss a joint agency sales tax revenue sharing proposal for potential annexations. The committee formulated a list of 'Annexation Discussion Principles' which were used as a basis for continuing negotiations (Attachment 1). As the meetings progressed, the tax sharing proposal for annexed properties was expanded to cover sharing of all sales tax revenue over a selected base year in both jurisdictions. The purpose of the overall revenue sharing discussions was to prevent competition between the City and County for retail development. Due to withdrawals and reapportionment of revenues by the state, sales tax has become a major portion of general fund revenue for local government jurisdictions. Sales tax 'wars' and poor land use decisions are evidenced in many areas of California due to this phenomenon. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and provide direction and/or approval. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Request revisions of the subcommittee Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Mayor Ashiku and Councilmember McCowen Candace Horsley, City Manager Finance Director Brent Smith; Gordon Elton Sales Tax Revenue Sharing Proposal Annexation Discussion Principles Approved: Manager A comprehensive sales tax revenue sharing proposal has been developed and approved in concept by the sub-committee members of both agencies. The draft proposal is attached for your review and discussion. The Board representatives are also reviewing the language at this time. There are nine elements to the proposal which are as follows with accompanying explanation: 1. This will be a twenty (20) year agreement. 2. A base amount was established from the 2005 sales tax revenue collections of the City and County within the City's Sphere of Influence. In the proposal, new sales tax revenue and increases to current revenue from the 2005 base year would be divided 65% City / 35% County. It should be noted that the base year percentages will need to be confirmed. Our sales tax consultant will be doing this work for us. 3. An outside annual audit will be performed on the sales tax calculations. 4. The percentage .sharos will change to sixty (60) percent City and forty (40) percent County after the fifth year unless the independent audit indicates otherwise. 5. Both parties agree to a five year review of the percentages. A significant change in the annual sales tax collections will trigger an interim review of the percentages. Significant changes that could trigger a review during the five-year period aro an increase or decrease of over ten percent in net collections between each agency due to economic conditions, a natural disaster or other catastrophic event. 6. Both parties will abstain from legal challenges to proposed developments in either jurisdiction. 7. The annual base will be the prior year's actual sales tax distribution. 8. The City agrees that once this agreement is in place and approved by both parties, we will pursue annexations in the surrounding areas. 9. Ninety days after an agreement is approved by both parties and in place, we will begin discussions regarding the potential sharing of transient occupancy tax. Conclusion: Urban development should occur to the extent practical occur within incorporated cities which exist to provide a full range of municipal services and are responsible for urban land use planning. This statement has been acknowledged by both the City and County representatives and was the emphasis for the discussions on a tax sharing plan. The committee members worked earnestly, fairly and with respect for the positions and needs of the other's agencies. This agreement will allow for development to proceed in a logical and orderly manner with mutual cooperation between the city and county to ensure appropriate mitigation of impacts. Staff is recommending Council discussion and approval of this proposal. Attachment # SALES TAX REVENUE SHARIN PROPOSAL BETWEEN CITY OF UKTAH AND NENDO¢INO COUNTY SUBJECT TO BOARD AND COUNCIL APPROVAL Dated: November 11, 2006 The County and City Committee members propose: 1. A 20 year agreement. 2. The General Sales Tax, in excess of the base amount established from 2005 collections in the selected area, will be divided 65% City, 35% County. These percentages are predicated on confirmation of sales tax for that base year. Special district or local tax measure revenues will not be counted in this allocation. 3. An outside annual audit. 4. The percentage shares will change to 60% City and 40% County after the fifth year unless the independent audit indicates otherwise. 5. Both parties agree to a 5-year review of the City/County sales tax sharing percentages based on the audit. A significant change in the annual sales tax collections will trigger an interim review of the sales tax sharing percentages. 'Significant changes are: 1) Economic: +/- 10% change in net collections after each entity is made whole to the previous base year 2) Catastrophic event 6. An agreement that parties will abstain from "Legal" challenges to proposed developments in either jurisdiction. 7. The annual base will be the prior year's actual sales tax distribution. 8. City agrees to pursue annexations in surrounding areas of the County and within the City's sphere. 9. City and County agree to begin discussions regarding the potential sharing of Transient Occupancy Tax revenues within 90 days of approval of a Sales Tax Revenue Sharing Agreement. CITY OF UKIAH COUNTY OF MENDOCINO IVlayor Ashiku Supervisor Wattenburger Councilmember McCowen Supervisor Delbar Attachment ANNEXATION DISCUSSION PRINCIPLES · Urban development should occur, whenever and wherever practical, within incorporated cities, which exist to provide a full range of municipal services and are responsible for urban land use planning. Prior to land being developed for urban purposes, annexation to the city is preferable to the formation of new urban service areas and resulting sprawl. · Development standards and capital improvement requirements imposed by the county for new developments should not be less than those that would be imposed by the city, or land use planning suffers. · A master tax sharing agreement is preferable to individual agreements for each annexation. This will facilitate cooperative land use decisions and development to avoid unnecessary costs and delays for the property owners and will de-politicize the process by establishing uniform standards. · Both the city and county will have expenses in the annexed areas. Municipal services can be more costly due to the specific nature and level of service provided. · Some of the unincorporated area is deficient in urban infrastructure and will need to be upgraded to meet city standards and the needs of the residents. AGENDA ITEM NO: 1 lb MEETING DATE: Nov. 15~ 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF RESPONSE TO THE GRAND JURY WATER REPORT Attached for Council's review and discussion is a draft letter in response to the findings and recommendations proposed by the Mendocino Grand Jury for Mendocino County water districts. This is the second and final response requested by the Grand Jury; the first involving the Police 'Department which the Council has already approved. The draft letter contains responses submitted by staff for Council's consideration and discussion. Many of the findings and recommendations are based on fact however others require a response of what the City sees as an appropriate role for the County Water Agency and Board of Supervisor's in the future. Therefore careful consideration by the Council is requested. Staff has attached the report responses from the Inland Water and Power Agency as well as the Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District to give the Council a flavor of the variation in viewpoints. Council will find that the City staff's version is also distinct from the other two agencies in various elements. Staff is requesting Council's direction so that the letter may be finalized. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and provide direction to staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Attachments: Mendocino Grand Jury Candace Horsley, City Manager Ann Burck, Water Project Engineer 1. Response letter 2. Grand Jury letter 3. Responses from IWPC and MCRRFCWCID A pp roved: ~ Candace Horsley, G~ Manager Attachment November 15, 2006 Judge of the Mendocino County Superior Court Mendocino County Courthouse 100 S. School Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Honorable Judge: The City of Ukiah is in receipt of the Grand Jury Report for 2005-2006 entitled, "WATER, WATER EVERYWHERE, but ... MENDOCINO COUNTY WATER DISTRICTS REPORT" dated May 4, 2006. The following information is the City's response to the findings and recommendations contained in the report. Findings Se The City of Ukiah, RRFCWCD, PVID and Redwood Valley CWD comprise the Joint Powers Agency (JPA) that makes up lWPC. Agree with the finding. It should be noted that IWPC has invited the County to once again join the JPA. ® Continual growth and development, together with increased population demands, have resulted in some overlap of interests, influence and competition between various UV/PV area water districts. Do not agree with this finding. The water agencies have distinct water rights and/or contracts under which they serve water to their customers. In addition, the City has been involved with various water agencies in cooperative efforts to share emergency water, investigate new water sources and to respond to outside threats to current water rights. 13. Except for the City of Ukiah, accurate measurement and/or metering of water usage (industrial, agricultural, and residential) within most water districts varies widely. Currently, it is not possible to know exactly how much water is actually being used in the UV/PV area because of the multiple systems of accountability in use, as well as a degree of undocumented use. The City of Ukiah does not know what other water agencies are doing in this regard. As a customer of the RRFCWCD, we are aware that several years ago they required their customers to accurately meter their water use. 14. The amount of water used by many water purveyors is known and available from those required to file Statement of Use with State Water Resource Control Board (WRCB). Reporting has been haphazard, with no current consequence for noncompliance. The City lacks sufficient information to agree or disagree with this statement. The City of Ukiah is in compliance with all SWRCB reporting requirements. 15. RRFCWCD is currently operating under a Cease and Desist Order from WRCB over questions about water usage measurement. The City is not able to comment on the status of this issue. 16. Users with riparian rights, those whose property is immediately contiguous to a water source, are required to file a Statement of Use with WRCB. The requirement to report is currently not enforced, and many do not file. Currently, there is no requirement to report usage locally. Disagree partially with the finding. SWRCB recommends that users with riparian rights report usage; it is not required. The City of Ukiah has no direct knowledge regarding the reporting status by riparian rights users. 17. Projections of population growth and development within the County and specifically the UV/PV area indicate that continued availability of adequate water resources will be problematic. Without knowing the status of water rights in the valley, final disposition of the Potter Valley project, what limitations may be imposed due to State regulations, or what water source alternatives are available, it is not possible for us to answer to agree or disagree with this finding. 18. Increased demand for potable water within UV/PV area would require developing new water sources, conservation of existing sources, and the construction of new treatment, storage or supply facilities. Construction of these facilities could have significant environmental effects. Agree with the finding. 20. Except for the City of Ukiah, the plans of most UV/PV area water districts for responding to earthquakes and multi-year droughts are marginal to non-existent. Disagree partially with the finding. According to the DWR, any water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers, or that provides over 3,000 acre-feet annually should adopt and implement an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Included in the UWMP is a Water Shortage Contingency Plan to determine water allocation during drought or emergency conditions. 22. While there may be some arrangements between various water districts for water sharing, there is no official comprehensive plan or legal agreement among water districts for sharing water resources. Disagree partially with the finding. Every water district is restricted in the place of use by that 23. 4. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. specified in their water permit. Before a plan or agreement could be made to share water, each district would require approval from the SWRCB for a change in the place of use. The City of Ukiah, Millview and Willow Water Districts have an agreement in place for sharing water under an emergency intertie system and have submitted applications for change in place of use to the State. The Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) and the Inland Water and Power Commission (IWPC), the local sponsoring agency, are studying methods to improve flood control and increase water storage for the UV/PV area. Agree with the finding. The Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study will consider various options for increasing water supplies and storage. Raising the water level behind Coyote Dam or raising the dam itself are two of those options. Agree with the finding. ACE has completed its initial Reconnaissance Study and is prepared to proceed with the next phase of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, which will include California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses. Agree with the finding. The current cost for the complete Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study is estimated to be approximately $6,000,000 and will take five or more years to complete; $3,000,000 of that cost will consist of local matching funds. Agree with the finding. In the past, nearly $300,000 in ACE's annual appropriations for the Study has been lost due to local entities' inability to furnish the required matching funds. Disagree with the finding. The City isnot aware of any funding being lost due to local timing issues. We were told by the ACE that their allocation was summarily reduced at the Federal level due to other funding priorities. In fiscal year 2006-2007, the Federal government has appropriated $100,000 to ACE for the next phase of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, anticipating $100,000 of local matching funds. This appropriation will expire September 30, 2006 if local monies are not forthcoming. Agree with finding. Each member of IWPC pledged and gave their apportioned share of the match which the ACE is now using. While Redwood Valley CWD has not committed to the project, three of the four members of IWPC (City of Ukiah, RRFCWCD and PVID) are currently negotiating financial participation relationships and funding availability for the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, under critical time constraints. Qualification for Federal funds will depend upon successful completion of these negotiations. Partially disagree with the finding. All four members of the IWPC, including RVCWD, have signed a participation agreement. 30. 31. 33. 34. Funding for development and construction costs for the potential project coming out of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study would consist of 75% from the Federal government and 25% local monies. Total costs are estimated to be in excess of $150 million. Disagree with the finding. The percentage share and cost of the construction project is dependant on which option the ACE determines is appropriate based on the Feasibility Study results. State, Federal, and local laws deal with environmental issues, water supply, water quality, and water rights, utilization and distribution. Agree with the finding. Agencies outside Mendocino County influencing decisions regarding UV/PV area water resources include: Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) California Water Resources Control Board (WRCB) California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) California Department of Health Services (DHS) Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) National Marine Fisheries Services (NOAA-Fisheries) State and Federal courts Agree partially with the finding--there are other agencies involved not listed above. There is universal agreement that the most efficient, inexpensive and environmentally sensitive method to increase water availability is to reduce demand through conservation. Disagree partially with the finding. Water conservation is an environmentally sensitive method that will increase water availability by reducing demand, but the City of Ukiah has no direct knowledge regarding universal agreement or whether conservation would necessarily be the most efficient and inexpensive method to increase water availability in every situation. Recommendations 0 The BOS take a leadership role in developing long-range comprehensive management plans and strategic policy for dealing with all aspects of water resources (supply, rights, availability, usage, conservation, storage, distribution and infrastructure) countywide and specifically for the UV/PV area. (Findings 3, 10, 35-37) Response: A coordinated approach to these various issues including new water supply analysis and storage development could protect our customers and ensure a viable level of water resources in the valley. It should be noted that the BOS has no authority over any other agencies water right and therefore this would be a coordination effort and role. 2, The BOS establish a Water Resource Policy Council, composed of all water agencies/special districts and official water-related entities within the County and the UV/PV area. The Council should explore interests and concerns in order to develop common long-range plans and strategies to address the issues of adequate guaranteed water availability, usage, conservation and storage within the COunty. (Findings 3, 10, 35-37) Response: This certainly would allow each agency to have a voice in these matters. Cooperation among water-related agencies would be valuable. There are already several agencies that perform some of these functions with a limited scope. Coordination and local buy-in on eliminating duplication would nccd to bc achieved before success with a Council of this sort would work. e The BOS and the IWPC, perhaps in conjunction with other appropriate entities, arrange necessary financing for the matching funds to add to the ACE's 2005- 2006 appropriated monies for the continued development of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study. (Findings 26-29, 36, 37) Response: All four members of the IWPC have signed participation agreements for the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study. IWPC has requested BOS involvement in the recent past and most likely would appreciate assistance in the funding issue. This would need to be agreed to by the IWPC members. , The BOS take all steps necessary to ensure the water rights of any added water capacity be negotiated in favor of the County and UV/PV. (Findings 23, 24, 31) Response: Several projects are already in process by various agencies. The County could assist with future projects and issues that arise with water agencies outside Mendocino County boundaries. This would give a united voice and strength to our local water issues with outside agencies. e The BOS by ordinance or other appropriate authority (activate Mendocino County Service Area #3) require all water purveyors, providers, agencies and special districts, as well as riparian rights users, to install meters and/or measuring devices to track water usage for local reporting. (Findings 13-16) Response: Thc City of Ukiah supports the accurate accounting of water use as a necessary part of water management and conservation. However, we wonder what the need for this provision is at this point in time due to recent State requirements that have been communicated to various water agencies. ge The Mendocino County Water Agency receive and compile water usage data for informational and planning purposes. (Findings 13-16) Response: Water usage data from water agencies is already available upon request. If the Water AgencY worked with the water districts to determine what additional information is needed, performed the study and then compiled the information that would be extremely helpful. This would reduce duplication of effort and provide resources for data that may not be available to the smaller agencies. All water agencies/special districts immediately develop and implement conservation programs, with an education component for residential, agricultural and industrial use. Devices such as reduced-flow water fixtures and irrigation equipment and other passive and active approaches, including reclaimed water (treated wastewater) systems, should be investigated and considered. (Findings 3, 18, 31) Response: The City of Ukiah has implemented a voluntary water conservation program during summer months for residential and commercial users. Since 1992, low- flush toilets have been required in all new construction in Ukiah. The City of Ukiah has set a goal to develop a Water Recycling Master Plan within the next five to seven years to investigate the economic feasibility of recycled water in the City and Ukiah Valley and to identify potential uses for recycled water to reduce the demand on its drinking water supplies. In 2005 and 2006, the City and Ukiah Valley Sanitation District submitted applications for state and federal grants to conduct a feasibility study and a Water Recycling Master Plan study for a recycled water system. Sincerely, Mark Ashiku, Mayor City of Ukiah Attachment # ,~ Count3' of Mendocino Grand Jtm; Post Office Box 629 Ukiah. CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 WA TER, WA TER EVERYWHERE, but... MENDOClNO COUNTY WA TER DISTRICTS REPORT May 4, 2006 Summary As part of its obligation to conduct periodic reviews of County Special Districts, the Grand Jury performed an oversight of Water Districts as they impact water resources within the County, focusing primarily on those water agencies and special districts in Ukiah Valley and Potter Valley, their available water supply, their plans, and their ability to respond to emergencies and major water shortfalls. Background The area of Ukiah Valley and Potter Valley contains a high proportion of the Mendocino County population. Water agencies and special districts in the Ukiah and Potter Valleys originated in distinctly separate communities responding to various water events such as floods or droughts, local and neighborhood interests, needs and demands. Over decades, as the population increased, boundaries and interests have grown together and have overlapped. Continued urbanization has placed increased demand on a relatively fixed water supply; the issue has been further complicated by the advent of environmental interests, concerns, and habitat requirements. Almost no rainfall occurs in Mendocino County from May through October. In addition, at 10 to 15 year intervals, the County, including the Ukiah and Potter Valley area, experiences extreme droughts lasting two to four years. The source of water within the Ukiah and Potter Valley area is the Eel River Diversion, created by the Van Arsdale Dam and the Scott Dam (Lake Pillsbury), Coyote Dam (Lake Mendocino), the Russian River and its tributaries, as well as numerous ground water wells. Hydrologists have determined that geologically, the Ukiah Valley ground water aquifer is considered undeveloped and a potential water source, while Potter Valley is a fractured aquifer which is most likely not a water source. The Eel River Diversion has supplied the Ukiah and Potter Valley area with summer water for nearly 100 years. However, a decrease in water imports from the Eel River Diversion is a distinct possibility. There are three reasons for this: the age and physical condition of the Eel River Tunnel; the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued a decision regarding water supply, though this is currently under appeal; and other possible environmental determinations. Primary water storage for the Ukiah and Potter Valley area is Coyote Dam; other sources include agricultural ponds, various smaller dams and reservoirs, and storage Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 1 of 7 tanks. The availability of stored water is not only essential but critical in drought conditions. No one entity in Mendocino County has overall responsibility and authority for the development of water resource management plans and policy. The Board of Supervisors is required by law to develop these plans and policies but does not have the authority to implement or enforce them. The entities involved in Mendocino County water policy are: the Board of Supervisors, Mendocino County Water Agency, Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission, Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation District, the City of Ukiah, and all the other individual County Water Districts. Methods The Grand Jury conducted interviews with officials of Mendocino County and the City of Ukiah, as well as representatives of some of the water agencies/special districts. The Jury reviewed numerous documents, hydrological studies, and reports concerning water, focusing primarily within Ukiah Valley and Potter Valley. Findings 1. There are some 20 agencies, including Special Districts, involved with water resources within the entire County. 2. The Ukiah Valley and Potter Valley (UV/PV) area alone has nine Mendocino County water agencies and/or special districts. They are: - City of Ukiah Mendocino County Water Agency (MCWA) Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (IWPC) Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RRFCWCD) Calpella County Water District (CWD) Millview CWD Potter Valley Irrigation District (PVID) Redwood Valley CWD Willow CWD In addition there are a number of private water companies; the largest is the Rogina Water Company. 3. In accordance with the Mendocino County Water Agency Act, the Board of Supervisors (BOS) acts as the Board of Directors for MCWA, and to the extent that the BOS may deem expedient or economical, MCWA is charged "to control flood and storm waters and other waters within the District [County] and the flood waters of streams outside the District, which flow into the District; to conserve such waters by storage in surface reservoirs, to divert and transport such waters for beneficial uses within the District; to release such waters from surface reservoirs to replenish and augment the supply of waters in natural underground reservoirs and otherwise to reduce the waste of water and to protect life and property from floods within the District; and to do any and every lawful act necessary to be done that sufficient water may be available for any present or future beneficial use or uses of the lands or inhabitants within the district..." (California Water Code, §54-3.q) Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 2 of 7 4. MCWA operates with a full-time equivalent staff of 2.8 persons. 5. The City of Ukiah, RRFCWCD, PVID and Redwood Valley CWD comprise the_Joint Powers Agency (JPA) that makes up IWPC. 6. RRFCWCD does not physically provide water directly to any individual user. 7. RRFCWCD wholesales water to water providers and agriculturists for beneficial use within the Ukiah Valley, but not Potter Valley. 8. Current water agencies/special districts in the UV/PV area originated as a result of an unplanned and uncoordinated history of water events, local and distinctly separate community and neighborhood interests, needs and demands. 9. Continual growth and development, together with increased population demands, have resulted in some overlap of interests, influence and competition between various UV/PV area water districts. 10. State law and codes that mandate the organization and structure of water agencies/special districts are involved and complex. 11. Water districts are largely autonomous and governed by elected boards of directors serving a specific defined geographical area and population. 12. Unification or consolidation of water districts, a complex process, requires that all parties or districts concerned must approve such action. 13. Except for the City of Ukiah, accurate measurement and/or metering of water usage (industrial, agricultural, and residential) within most water districts varies widely. Currently, it is not possible to know exactly how much water is actually being used in the UV/PV area because of the multiple systems of accountability in use, as well as a degree of undocumented use. 14. The amount of water used by many water purveyors is known and available from those required to file Statement of Use with State Water Resource Control Board (WRCB). Reporting has been haphazard, with no current consequence for non- compliance. 15. RRFCWCD is currently operating under a Cease and Desist Order from WRCB over questions about water usage measurement. 16. Users with riparian rights, those whose property is immediately contiguous to a water source, are required to file a Statement of Use with WRCB. The requirement to report is currently not enforced, and many do not file. Currently, there is no requirement to report usage locally. 17. Projections of population growth and development within the County and specifically the UV/PV area, indicate that continued availability of adequate water resources will be problematic. 18. Increased demand for potable water within UV/PV area would require developing new water sources, conservation of existing sources, and the construction of new treatment, storage or supply facilities. Construction of these facilities could have significant environmental effects. Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 3 of 7 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. The majority of UV/PV area water districts have adequate emergency and water management plans for responding to local emergencies, such as power outages, local and system-wide contamination, and/or distribution interruptions. Except for the City of Ukiah, the plans of most UV/PV area water districts for responding to earthquakes and multi-year droughts are marginal to non-existent. New contracts for water from RRFCWCD require agencies and individuals using its water to develop water conservation programs. To date, this requirement has not been enforced by RRFCWCD. While there may be some arrangements between various water districts for water sharing, there is no official comprehensive plan or legal agreement among water districts for sharing water resources. The Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) and the Inland Water and Power Commission (IWPC), the local sponsoring agency, are studying methods to improve flood control and increase water storage for the UV/PV area. The Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study will consider various options for increasing water supplies and storage. Raising the water level behind Coyote Dam or raising the dam itself are two of those options. ACE has completed its initial Reconnaissance Study and is prepared to proceed with the next phase of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, which will include California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses. The current cost for the complete Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study is estimated to be approximately $6,000,000 and will take five or more years to complete; $3,000,000 of that cost will consist of local matching funds. In the past, nearly $300,000 in ACE's annual appropriations for the Study have been lost due to local entities' inability to furnish the required matching funds. In fiscal year 2006-2006, the Federal government has appropriated $100,000 to ACE for the next phase of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, anticipating $100,000 of local matching funds. This appropriation will expire September 30, 2006 if local monies are not forthcoming. While Redwood Valley CWD has not committed to the project, three of the four members of IWPC (City of Ukiah, RRFCWCD and PVID) are currently negotiating financial participation relationships and funding availability for the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, under critical time constraints. Qualification for Federal funds will depend upon successful completion of these negotiations. Funding for development and construction costs for the potential project coming out of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, would consist of 75% from the Federal government and 25% local monies. Total costs are estimated to be in excess of $150 million. State, Federal, and local laws deal with environmental issues, water supply, water quality, and water rights, utilization and distribution. Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 4 of 7 32. 33. RRFCWCD, ACE, and the Sonoma County Water agency (SCWA) are currently undertaking a Section 7 Consultation with NOAA-Fisheries to evaluate the effects of existing and proposed operation and maintenance activities (SCWA's "Water Supply and Transmission System Project") on the Russian River on listed salmonid species. Agencies outside Mendocino County influencing decisions regarding UV/PV area water resources include: Sonoma County Water Agency Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) (SCWA) National Marine Fisheries Services, California Water Resources Control (NOAA-Fisheries) Board (WRCB) State and Federal courts California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) California Department of Health Services (DHS) 34. There is universal agreement that the most efficient, inexpensive and environmentally sensitive method to increase water availability is to reduce demand through conservation. 35. The authority and ability of the Board of Supervisors (BOS) to directly affect water resource policy is limited by statute and the nature of the autonomous organizational character of County Water Districts. 36. There is in existence a Mendocino County Service Area #3 which has jurisdiction over the entire county. The BOS acts as its Board of Directors. Created in the 1950's and last activated in 1991, it has been inactive and non-operational in recent years. 37. The BOS has the authority to allocate monies for water projects within the County. Recommendations The Grand Jury recommends that: 1. the BOS take a leadership role in developing long-range comprehensive management plans and strategic policy for dealing with all aspects of water resources (supply, rights, availability, usage, conservation, storage, distribution and infrastructure) countywide and specifically for the UV/PV area. (Findings 3, 10, 35- 37) 2. the BOS establish a Water Resource Policy Council, composed of all water agencies/special districts and official water-related entities within the County and the UV/PV area. The Council should explore interests and concerns in order to develop common long-range plans and strategies to address the issues of adequate guaranteed water availability, usage, conservation and storage within the County. (Findings 3, 10, 35-37) 3. the BOS increase staff and funding for the MCWA and immediately initiate procedures with the State necessary to expand its mission, powers and authority to include co-ordination and administration of all water resource management and feasibility studies within the County. (Findings 3, 4) Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 5 of 7 4. the BOS and the IWPC, perhaps in conjunction with other appropriate entities, arrange necessary financing for the matching funds to add to the ACE's 2005-2006 appropriated monies for the continued development of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study. (Findings 26-29, 36, 37) 5. the BOS take all steps necessary to ensure the water rights of any added water capacity be negotiated in favor of the County and UV/PV. (Findings 23, 24, 31) 6. the BOS by ordinance or other appropriate authority (activate Mendocino County Service Area #3) require all water purveyors, providers, agencies and special districts, as well as riparian rights users, to install meters and/or measuring devices to track water usage for local reporting. (Findings 13 -16) 7. the Mendocino County Water Agency receive and compile water usage data for informational and planning purposes. (Findings 13-16) 8. all water agencies/special districts immediately develop and implement conservation programs, with an education component for residential, agricultural and industrial use. Devices such as reduced-flow water fixtures and irrigation equipment and other passive and active approaches, including reclaimed water (treated wastewater) systems, should be investigated and considered. (Findings 3, 18, 31) 9. the BOS lobby State and Federal agencies to promote solutions to each and all water resource and distribution problems within the County and UV/PV area. (Findings 10-12, 31,35) Comments Historically, instead of using a unified consensual approach, various County Water Districts have been embroiled in continual squabbles and infighting, petty territorial and philosophical conflicts, and competition, typically without accomplishing any meaningful results except to generate extraordinarily high legal costs for all involved. Strategic planning must be done now rather than waiting until a crisis develops. The process of developing new supplies in the face of ever increasing demand will be difficult and time-consuming, especially if there is a material decrease in imports from the Eel River Diversion. Additionally, the potential impact of a typical multi-year drought, as well as outside restrictions on Russian River water use, requires immediate and serious attention to both short and long range strategies. The Municipal Service Review of the Ukiah Valley/Russian River Watershed currently being written for the Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO) may shed more light on the issues of water resources in the UV/PV area. A properly organized, single entity dealing with UV/PV area water issues can provide the appropriate direction and leadership for smaller independent agencies and special districts to follow in addressing and solving mutual water problems. There must be a top-down political will to accomplish any multi-agency unification among the various agencies and special districts, with the assistance of LAFCO. The agencies and special districts must be committed to the benefits of unification and consensus. Agencies and special districts should retain their individual water rights Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 6 of 7 even as they work together. The BOS needs to play a pivotal role in the development of this political will and consensus among the diverse independent water entities within UV/PV. Beyond that, citizen involvement and engagement in development of this political will is equally essential. Because water development, improvement and infrastructure require large financial resources, a unified entity can better provide the financial leadership needed to negotiate with financial institutions about bond issues, as well as to negotiate with political groups and elected officials concerning revenues. Outside entities such as several State and Federal agencies, ACE and SCWA require an effective County negotiator. A single unified entity would provide a coherent and knowledgeable negotiating force. Responses Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors: (Findings 1-4, 8-12, 17-19, 33, 35-37, All Recommendations) Mendocino County Water Agency: (Findings 1-4, 8-12, 18-34, 36, All Recommendations) Chief Executive Officer, Mendocino County: (Findings 1-4, 8-12, 17-19, 33, 35-37, All Recommendations) Ukiah City Council: (Findings 5, 9, 13-18, 20, 22-31,33, 34, Recommendations 1,2, 4-8) Board of Directors, Inland Water and Power Commission: (Findings 1,2, 5, 8, 9, 13, 17, 18, 20, 22-31, 33, 34, Recommendations 5, 6) Board of Directors, Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation District: (Findings 1,2, 5-18, 21-34, Recommendations 1,2, 4-8) Board of Directors, Calpella County Water District: (Findings 1,2, 8-14, 16-20, 22, 31,33, 34, Recommendations 1,2, 4-8) Board of Directors, Millview County Water District: (Findings 1,2, 8-14, 16-20, 22, 31,33, 34, Recommendations 1,2, 4-8) Board of Directors, Potter Valley Irrigation District: (Findings 1,2, 8-14, 16-20, 22, 31, 33, 34, Recommendations 1,2, 4-8) Board of Directors, Redwood Valley County Water District: (Findings 1,2, 8-14, 16-20, 22, 31, 33, 34, Recommendations 1,2, 4-8) Board of Directors, Willow County Water District: (Findings 1,2, 8-14, 16-20, 22, 31,33, 34, Recommendations 1,2, 4-8) Resources California Water Code, Chapter 45, Mendocino Water Agency - 1996 Ukiah Valley Drinking Water Adequacy Assessment - April 2002 City of Ukiah Water Management Plan - November 2002 Ukiah Valley Area Plan, Draft Environmental Impact Report - July 2005 The Ukiah Valley/Russian River Watershed Municipal Service Review (in progress) Mendocino County Grand Jury 2005-2006 Page 7 of 7 Attachment # ~_~ Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission 425 Talmage Road Ukiah, CA 95482 June 30, 2006 Mendocino County Grand JUry P.O. Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 Re.' Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission Response to the Mendocino County Grand Jury, May 4, 2006 Report entitled "Water, Water Everywhere, but .... Mendocino County Water Districts Report." Dear Grand Jury Members: The Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission's (MCIWPC) responses will be limited to the Grand Jury Report findings and recommendations for which we have specific disagreement or corrections. In many cases the member agencies of MCIWPC will have more specific comments regarding the findings that need not be reiterated by MCIWPC. Response to Finding #2 -- We disagree with this finding. The MCIWPC is a joint powers authority, not a water agency or a special district. The Grand Jury also failed to include Hopland Public Utility District in the list of UV/PV water agencies. Response to Finding #5 -- We partially disagree with this finding because it requires clarification. MCIWPC originally had five members, the four listed and the MCWA. The BOS, after much politically based disagreement, decided to withdraw from MC1WPC. The remaining four entities, City of Ukiah, Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District (RRFCWCD), Potter Valley Irrigation District (PVID) and Redwood Valley County Water District (RWVCWD) have continued to move forward protecting existing water rights, water supply and sponsoring the Coyote Valley Dam Flood Damage Reduction and Water Supply Study. Response to Finding #8 -- We disagree with this finding. Current water agencies and/or special districts in the UV/PV area originated as the need for them occurred. In the case of PVID they began when summer irrigation water became available in 1924. The RRFCWCD was formed by the voters when an entity was required to hold the water right and retire the bond for construction of Coyote Valley Dam (the County did not want this responsibility). The City of Ukiah's water system grew with time and their population. RWVCWD became established after water was available from Lake Mendocino and they could provide a more integrated and reliable source of water for domestic and agricultural use. All of these agencies were carefully planned and their water supplies are secured by contracts and water rights. To say that our agencies originated as a result of an "unplanned and uncoordinated history of water events..." implies that the current water agencies are somehow . haphazard or dysfunctional. This is definitely not the case. Response to Finding//9 -- We disagree with this finding. UV/PV area water districts are quite distinct. They utilize water under separate water rights and for different purposes. The term "competition" in this finding implies that we are fighting amongst ourselves for an existing water supply. Every agency provides water to their users based on their own supply, on contracts and/or water rights. As we move forward with increased water demands, we will need to look at increased water supplies. This is a main function of MCIWPC. Response to Finding # 10 -- We disagree with this finding. State Law and Codes that mandate the organization and structure of water agencies and special districts are concise. Response to Finding #11 -- We disagree with the term "autonomous" in this finding. The term "autonomous" implies that our elected boards are somehow "above the law." All of our elected board members, including the commissioners appointed by them to the MCIWPC, are bound by specific State laws of conduct and are accountable to the voters in each of their respective districts. Response to Finding #12 -- We are unclear of the meaning of this finding. Does "unification" mean consolidation of the day to day functioning of all the water districts into one "super water agency" or does it mean politically unified to work together to protect existing water supplies, water fights and develop plans for increased water supplies and work on critical issues such as environmental protection and conservation? We have formed the MCIWPC to provide a political unification of existing water districts while protecting the individual function of each member. A "super water agency" would require more than simple approval of existing water agencies, it would also require approval by voters. Besides the fact that such an agency would be extremely cumbersome, the development of such would require a complete revision of all of our water rights. This process could, in fact, jeopardize those water fights. Response to Finding #13 -- We disagree with this finding. All member agencies of the MC1WPC, and other agencies that we are aware of, measure or meter water use. This is required for accurate billing of both domestic and agricultural water. All of the agencies are required to report water use to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). This information is public and records have been kept since the inception of each water agency. Multiple year compilation of this information is a simple process. Response to Finding #14 -- We disagree with this finding. It is irresponsible for the Grand Jury to state that the UV/PV water district's water use "reporting has been haphazard, with no current consequences for non-compliance." All water districts file use reports with the SWRCB, as required by law, and more importantly, to protect their water rights. Response to Finding #15 -- We do not understand the purpose of this inaccurate statement. Response to Finding #16 -- This finding does not apply to any of the listed water districts. Response to Finding #17 -- We agree with this finding and are hopeful that agencies not currently members of MCIWPC, as well as the BOS, will join in our efforts to study the feasibility of increasing water storage in Lake Mendocino. o Response to Findings//19 to 22 -- We believe that the individual water agencies are best suited to respond to these findings, however, collectively as MClWPC we are aware of many district's plans for response to emergencies including conservation, inter ties and other types of mutual assistance. Response to Finding//23 -- We agree with this finding but would correct it to read "The Army Corps of Engineers and the MCIWPC, the local sponsoring agency, are studying methods to improve flood control and increase water storage at Lake Mendocino for the UV/PV area." Response to Finding #25 -- We agree with this statement but would correct the study title. The formal title of the ACOE study is "Coyote Valley Dam Flood Damage Reduction and Water Supply Study." Response to Finding #27 -- We disagree with this finding. The local entities did not lose an ACOE annual appropriation due to an "inability to furnish the required matching funds." Matching funds had been approved by all the member agencies of MCIWPC. Due to political posturing by the BOS valuable time was lost. When the BOS finally voted to withdraw from MCIWPC it was necessary to redraft the cost sharing agreement. Response to Finding #28 -- We disagree with this finding. The $100,000.00 matching funds to begin the feasibility study are in place and available for the ACOE at this time. Response to Finding #29 -- We disagree with this finding. RWVCWD has signed a contract with the other three MCIWPC member agencies and is a full participant in the feasibility study. Response to Finding #30 -- We disagree with this finding. We have never heard the $150 million estimate for an ACOE project. At this time there is no way to estimate the cost of a project. The ACOE study will determine if a project, or change of operation, is economically and environmentally feasible. We cannot estimate the cost of a project that does not exist. Response to Finding #32 -- We disagree with this finding. The Section 7 Consultation, under the ESA, was initiated by NOAA Fisheries with the ACOE, RRFCWCD and SCWA to determine the impact of the operation of two ACOE projects, Coyote Valley Dam and Warm Springs Dam, on ESA listed species of salmonids. Response to Finding #33 -- We disagree with this finding. Also involved currently, or in the recent past, have been the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the U.S. Department of Dam Safety. We would also remind the Grand Jury that a major non agency stakeholder in the Potter Valley Project, that has not been mentioned in your report, is Pacific Gas and Electric Company. RECOMMENDATIONS Response to Recommendation #1 and #2 -- During the formation of MCIWPC, two county supervisors worked with representatives from all of the UV/PV water agencies to craft an agreement and form an entity dedicated to protecting existing water supply and water rights, and to provide a forum for discussion of future water needs. At the time of the formation of MCIWPC, the MCWA was under funded and meagerly staffed. We all had hopes that, with future support and funding from the BOS, 5, the MCWA would become a valuable member and asset to MCIWPC and all other county watershed areas. However, the BOS did not take a leadership role, and instead, due to purely political posturing and not by working in the best interest of the people in the UV/PV area, determined that the MCIWPC was somehow a threat to the strengthening of the MCWA and withdrew from the MC1WPC. We are hopeful that with a change of the political face of the BOS they will rejoin MCIWPC as a full participating member. Herein lies a concern that all of the other member agencies have regarding the past history of the BOS. The BOS has historically been very political. They tend to change policies with the political winds. The County of Mendocino does not have any water rights, does not sell water, manage water delivery systems or deal in any way with the day to day business of water. While the BOS, via the MCWA, could be a valuable asset to existing water agencies they cannot, and should not, be involved with the day to day management of our existing water delivery systems. The role of the MCWA should be one of support. This support should take the form of providing expertise in water law, grant writing, political lobbying, funding general education programs to heighten awareness of water conservation, environmental protection and clean water. The MCWA should also rejoin the MCIWPC to be at the grassroots level of water issues in the UV/PV. The MCWA should take the same interest in other watersheds of Mendocino County. MCIWPC was not formed to help the watersheds of Navarro, Noyo, Big River, Albion, Ten Mile, or the Garcia. MCIWPC was formed solely by concerned agencies within the Russian River watershed. Recommendation #2 asks for two separate things-- a Water Resource Policy Council in UV/PV (we submit that MCIWPC fulfills that request), and then suggests that the same council address issues within the entire county. The MCWA should work within each watershed to help where needed to provide the services described above. It makes no sense to duplicate the MCIWPC for UV/PV and then make the new entity completely ineffective by attempting to have it oversee all of the concerns of the disparate watersheds in our large and diverse county. Response to Recommendation #3 -- We agree with this recommendation as long as in "expanding its mission, powers and authority" is the inclusion of working with existing water agencies. It is critical that the MCWA work with existing water agencies, not above or outside of them. To be truly valuable to our County, the MCWA should work with existing water agencies to develop their "mission." Response to Recommendation 4/4 -- MCIWPC welcomes membership by other water agencies in the UV/PV area. We have repeatedly encouraged other Russian River watershed water agencies to join MC1WPC. We strongly encourage the BOS to rejoin MCIWPC and be part of the study process with the ACOE. The MCWA should be involved as a member of the MCIWPC as we begin the largest water project study in this county for the last 50 years. Response to Recommendation #5 -- This recommendation cannot occur without the MCWA participation in the MCIWPC. If a project is realized at Lake Mendocino that results in increased water supply, those entities that financially participated in the study and subsequent construction will share the new water supply. A contract is in place that assures participants in the feasibility study, current members of the MCIWPC, will benefit from an increased water supply. The BOS will have no say over who has the right to new water unless they participate as a member of the MCIWPC. Response to Recommendation #6 -- The BOS has no authority to oversee the water accounting o methods used by existing public water agencies. Further, there is no reason that the BOS should have such authority. All of our member agencies have specific accounting and reporting systems in place. Response to Recommendation #7 and #8 -- These recommendations are best addressed by the individual water agencies, however, MClWPC believes that all water use data are public record and readily available. We also believe that all of our water districts are actively involved in water conservation efforts. Response to Recommendation//9 -- It is important for the BOS to "lobby State and Federal agencies to promote solutions to each and all water resource and distribution problems within the County and UV/PV area," however, the BOS first needs to understand what those "water resource and distribution problems" really are. The BOS should begin by rejoining the MCIWPC to become aware of the real issues within the UV/PV area and then, also learn about the concerns of the other Mendocino County watershed area's water districts. Sincerely, Janet K.F. Pauli Chairman o Mendocino County RUSSIAN RIVER FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSER VA TION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 151 Laws Avenue, Suite D Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 462-5278 Fax (707) 462-5279 rrfc@saber.net Response to Mendocino County Grand Jury Report (Report) for 2005-06 entitled, A WATER, WA TER EVERYWHERE, BUT .... MENDOCINO COUNTY WATER DISTRICTS REPORT--_ dated May 4, 2006 submitted by the Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District (RRFCD). FINDINGS Finding #1 B There are some 20 agencies, including Special Districts, involved with water resources within the entire County. Our District does not interface with agencies other than those agencies that are within our District boundaries and, therefore, cannot agree nor disagree with this finding. Many of the 20 agencies are limited purpose agencies that have very limited service areas. Finding #2 lists nine (9) water agencies and/or special districts. Our District agrees with eight of those nine (9) listed; however, the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (IWPC) is a Joint Powers Authority, not a special district or agency. In addition, the Hopland Public Utility District is not listed. This is a public agency purveying water which is withdrawn from the Russian River and this district is within the RRFCD boundaries. Finding #3 B Although we were not asked to respond to this finding, we feel it is necessary for the following reasons: When the RRFCD was formed, the Mendocino County Water Agency, which was governed by the Board of Supervisors, gave up their water entitlements to the Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control District. This was the result of the vote by the majority of residents of Mendocino County to bifurcate the water supply and service functions of our District from the County. This necessary vote took place in order to secure the financial support of farmers and agricultural interests for the repayment of the bonds to pay for the dam. The agricultural community would only support paying for the project if a separately elected board residing within our District' s boundaries, and not the Board of Supervisors who reside outside our District, held and administered the water rights. The RRFCD has the exact same powers within its District Boundaries as the Mendocino County Water Agency, although the MCWAgency has never held water rights or delivered water to any contractors or customers in Mendocino County. Finding #5 B A The City of Ukiah, RRFCWCD, PVID and Redwood Valley CWD comprise the Joint Powers Agency (JPA) that makes up IWPC._-- We agree with the four agencies listed that are members of the IPWC; however, it should be pointed out that the Mendocino County Water Agency was one of the founding agencies along with the four listed. Unfortunately, after two years of discussions during the formation period and over two years of existence, the Board of Supervisors (BOS) opted to withdraw from the IWPC. This was a very divisive action to the inland water agencies. Interestingly, MCWA was the only member agency that has no water rights and has never delivered water to any customers in Mendocino County. A more appropriate statement might be that the RRFCD, City of Ukiah, PVID, and RVCWD comprise the Joint Powers Agency (JPA) that make up IWPC. The RRFCD represents those agencies located within their District boundaries. MCWA was part of the formation of the JPA, but has withdrawn. Finding #6 ARRFCWCD does not physically provide water directly to any individual user._-- This finding is factually untrue. Further, it sadly misrepresents both the specific and implemented provisions of our water rights permits that have been granted to our District by the State Water Resources Control Board, and the specific provisions and requirements of our service contracts. Our method of delivery is the release of stored water to the Russian River for diversion. This is the delivery system that is approved by the State of California. Every single legal user of the District' s water presently has an executed contract and takes their water from our delivery system. Attached for your edification are copies of the contracts with those individuals and entities to which we provide water. Had the Grand Jury arranged for even one meeting with our staff, we would have happily provided this information. Finding #7 B "RRFCWCD wholesales water to water providers and agriculturists for beneficial use within the Ukiah Valley, but not Potter Valley." The District partially agrees with the statement about providing water to the Ukiah Valley, however, the Report neglects to mention or take into consideration those agencies to the south, namely, the Hopland PUD, the East Sanel Irrigation District, the River Estates Mutual Water Company and the Henry Station Mutual Water Co. These agencies are all part of the Russian River system and receive water during certain times of the year from the RRFCD pursuant to contracts. They should be included in any references to water users. If the Grand Jury is looking at all the inland water districts, it should include the additional districts and mutual water companies mentioned. Finding #8 B Current water agencies/special districts in the UV/PV area originated as a result of unplanned and uncoordinated history of water events, local and distinctly separate community and neighborhood interests, needs and demands._-- Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District Response to Grand Jury Report June 26, 2006 -2- The RRFCD disagrees with this finding as it is factually untrue. The RRFCD was formed by legislation after a majority vote of the people of Mendocino County. The legislative history, which may be easily secured from a variety of official sources including the Water Code of the State of California, reveals a decade long process (1947- 1957) of deliberate local and state governmental actions to secure water rights and develop a comprehensive water supply project for the benefit of the Ukiah Valley. It was not a result of unplanned or uncoordinated history of water events, local and distinctly separate community and neighborhood interests, needs and demands. RRFCD has supplemented the water needs of the other agencies within its District boundaries. These agencies were formed after careful planning. This is proven by the fact that obtaining water rights from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is not something that is done without any planning or forethought. In addition, district boundaries and complete places of use were submitted to the SWRCB by those districts at the time of application of these rights. Finding gq9 B AContinual growth and development, together with increased population demands have resulted in some overlap of interests, influence and competition between various UV/PV area water districts._-- We completely disagree with this finding. Continual growth and demands have not resulted in overlapping of interests. The County has grown at pace that was slower than was anticipated. The Mendocino County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) oversees annexations and out of services agreements and is there, pursuant to express state legislation, to insure that there is no overlapping or duplication of duties or services. Finding #10 B "State law and codes that mandate the organization and structure of water agencies/special districts are involved and complex'" We disagree with this finding. The State Codes are very specific and concise. Finding #11 B "Water districts are largely autonomous and governed by elected boards of directors serving a specific defined geographical area and population._-- We agree with this finding. We believe it is extremely beneficial to have elected boards of directors that must answer directly to their constituents. This is the democratic process. Finding #12 B "Unification or consolidation of water districts, a complex process, requires that all parties or districts concerned must approve such action." We partially agree with this finding, but believe it is incomplete. Any consolidation or annexation would have to be brought before the voters. Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District Response to Grand Jury Report June 26, 2006 -3- Finding # 13 B "Except for the City of Ukiah, accurate measurement and/or metering of water usage (industrial, agricultural and residential) within most water districts varies widely. Currently, it is not possible to know exactly how much water is actually being used in the IV/PV area because of the multiple systems of accountability in use, as well as a degree of undocumented use." We strongly disagree with this finding. Every single water user who has a contract with our District is required by contract to have a functioning meter that is read monthly. In addition, every individual district and mutual water district within the RRFCD=s boundaries has individual water meters for all of their customers and knows exactly how much water they are using. There are no multiple systems of accountability in use. Each water user reports how much water they are using under their water fight and the RRFCD reports how much water is being used under its fight. The one area the Grand Jury Report does not reference is "Water Rights._-- Every water fight has certain conditions and each individual holder of that fight knows what those conditions are. If water users in the Ukiah Valley are not pumping under their water right, they are pumping under the RRFCD=s fight if that individual or entity has a contract. The RRFCD must report to the SWRCB how much water is used under its permit annually. This has been done for the past 30 years under the approval of the SWRCB. Finding #14 B "The amount of water used by many water purveyors is known and available from those required to file Statement of Use with State Water Resources Control Board. Reporting has been haphazard, with no current consequence for non compliance._-- We strongly disagree with this finding. It is inaccurate since individuals with water rights do not file Statements of Use. Reporting has not been haphazard. The SWRCB performed compliance inspections over four years ago and everyone within the UV/PV is well aware of their obligations. Finding # 15 B "RRFCWCD is currently operating under a Cease and Desist Order from WRCB over questions about water usage measurement.~ We disagree with this finding. This finding is incomplete and inaccurate and fails to point out that the requirements of the SWRCB which our District sought to implement in 2001 through ordinances were challenged in Mendocino Superior Court by a local water district who opposed the implementation of the compliance requirements. Our District was the prevailing party after three years and $80,000.00 of legal expenses. The CDO was filed in large part because of the three year delay resulting from the unjustified lawsuit. Finding #16 B "Users with riparian rights, those whose property is immediately contiguous to a water source, are required to file a State of Use with WRCB. The requirement to report is currently Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District Response to Grand Jury Report June 26, 2006 -4- not enforced, and many do not file. Currently, there is no requirement to report usage locally.~_ We disagree with this finding. It is inconclusive and misleading. The reporting requirement is recommended not required. The RRFCD, in its accounting, must calculate how much natural flow is in the river, and therefore, how much riparian water is in the system. Finding #17 B "Projections of population growth and development within the County and specifically the UV?PV area, indicate that continued availability of adequate water resources will be problematic." We agree with this finding. Therefore, the BOS, County Planning, LAFCO, and the City of Ukiah need to make intelligent, fact-based planning decisions based upon full and complete CEQA documents when approving amendments to their General Plans, subdivisions, and land use. Finding #18 B "Increased demand for potable water within UV/PV area would require developing new water sources, conservation of existing sources, and the construction of new treatment, storage or supply facilities. Construction of these facilities could have significant environmental effects, m We agree with this finding. Finding #21 B "New contracts for water from RRFCWCD require agencies and individuals using its water to develop water conservation programs. To date, this requirement has not been enforced by RRFCWCD._-- We disagree with this finding. The RRFCD has on file, conservation plans from everyone who has a contract with the District. The agricultural users are already conserving a tremendous amount of water. In the Ukiah Valley area, each water year is different. Had the Grand Jury visited our offices, it would have seen the plans. Finding #22 B "While there may be some arrangements between various water districts for water sharing, there is no official comprehensive plan or legal agreement among water districts for sharing water resources." We disagree with this finding. First of all, every district is limited as to where they can use their water, what they can use the water for, and when they can use the water. This is largely a function of their state-granted water rights. During emergencies every district can wheel water under the RRFCD=s permit through the emergency interties that are presently in place. Otherwise, as mentioned above, they are limited by their water rights permits. Finding #23 B "The Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) and the Inland Water and Power Commission Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District Response to Grand Jury Report June 26, 2006 -5- (IWPC), the local sponsoring agency, are studying methods to improve flood control and increase water storage for the UV/PV area._-- We agree with this statement. Finding #24 B "The Coyote Dam Feasibility Study will consider various options for increasing water supplies and storage. Raising the water level behind Coyote Dam or raising the dam itself are two of those options._-- We partially disagree with this finding. First of all, Coyote Dam is a flood control project. Raising the water level behind the Dam as it exists today does not provide any additional water supply. The present design of the dam allows for a certain amount of water to be stored in the conservation pool. Increasing the water level does not change the conservation pool, it only increases the flood pool. Finding #25 B AACE has completed its initial Reconnaissance Study and is prepared to proceed with the next phase of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, which will include4 California Environmental Quality Ace (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses._-- It is our understanding this is correct. Finding #26 BAThe current cost for the complete Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study is estimated to be approximately $6,000,000 and will take five or more years to complete; $3,000,000 of that cost will consist of local matching funds.~ We partially agree with this finding. In mentioning the matching funds, in-kind service contributions should be referenced. Finding #27 BAIn the past, nearly $300,000 in ACE=s annual appropriations for the Study have been lost due to local entities= inability to furnish the required matching funds._-- We disagree with this finding. It is factually untrue. The money was lost due to the fact that the BOS withdrew from the IWPC creating the necessity to recreate the cost sharing apportionment agreement between the remaining agencies. The County understood that its withdrawal would result in the loss of funds from the ACE. Finding #28 B "In Fiscal year 2006-2007, the Federal government has appropriated $100,000 to ACE for the next phase of the Coyote Dam Feasibility Study, anticipating $100,000 of local matching funds. This appropriation will expire September 30, 2006 if local monies are not forthcoming._-- Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District Response to Grand Jury Report June 26, 2006 -6- We disagree with this finding. The finding is not true since the $100,000 is already in place. Finding #29 B "While Redwood Valley CWD has not committed to the project, three of the four members of IWPC (City of Ukiah, RRFCWCD and PVID) are currently negotiating financial participation relationships and funding availability for the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, under critical time constraints. Qualification for Federal Funds will depend upon successful completion of these negotiations. We disagree with this finding. It is a moot statement since the agreements have been signed by all four parties (including Redwood Valley). Finding #30 B "Funding for development and construction costs for the potential project coming out of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, would consist of 75% from the Federal government and 25% local monies. Total costs are estimated to be in excess of $150 million. We disagree with this finding. It is incorrect, incomplete and premature. The total cost of construction will depend on just What is constructed. The federal funding will depend on what the study produces. In view of those items, the entire statement in inaccurate and inappropriate. Finding #31 B "State, Federal, and local laws deal with environmental issues, water supply, water quality and water rights, utilization and distribution, m We disagree with this finding. It is innocuous and unnecessary. Finding #32 B "RRFCWCD, ACE, and the Sonoma County Water Agency (SWCA) are currently undertaking a Section 7 Consultation with NOAA-Fisheries to evaluate the effects of existing and proposed operation and maintenance activities (SCWA ~ A Water Supply and Transmission System Project_--) on the Russian River on listed salmonid species._-- We disagree with this finding. It is completely inaccurate. SCWA=s AWater Supply and Transmission System Project" is not associated with the Section 7 consultation. The reason for the Section 7 Consultations is to look at what activities relating from the operations of the Coyote Valley Dam and the Warm Springs Dam might have impacts on the three anadromous fish listed under the Endangered Species Act. Finding #33 B "Agencies outside Mendocino County influencing decisions regarding UV/PV area water resources include: SCWA, WRCB, RWQCB, DHS, ACE, NOAA Fisheries, State and Federal Courts~ We partially agree with this finding. You neglected to mention the California Department of Fish Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District Response to Grand Jury Report June 26, 2006 -7- and Game. Finding //34 B "There is universal agreement that the most efficient, inexpensive and environmentally sensitive method to increase water availability is to reduce demand through conservation._-- We neither agree nor disagree with this statement. However, we would not be presumptuous enough to make the statement without any facts and figures. RECOMMENDATIONS: lo "The BOS take a leadership role in developing long-range comprehensive rnanagement plans and strategic policy for dealing with all aspects of water resources (supply, rights, availability, usage, conservation, storage, distribution and infrastructure) countywide and specifically for the UV/PV area._-- This recommendation is not warranted and we strongly disagree with this recommendation for the following reasons: o o . o o o The BOS/County has no water rights and only the SWRCB can grant water rights. The BOS/County has no authority over any other party's water rights. The SWRCB is the only agency in California that can legally condition individually held water rights. The RRFCD was formed by legislation after a majority vote reflecting the will of the people of UV. That vote removed any possible control of the water resources of Lake Mendocino from the BOS. The BOS/County, by its own volition, has chosen to give up its authority and not to be involved in these areas in the past. Over several decades, and many issues, they have consistently voted not to participate including the most recent project, raising Lake Mendocino. The voters and taxpayers have indicated they do not want the County=s participation now. Each District has their own expertise for the needs within their own districts. The constituents of each water district, specifically the voters within the UV/PV area, do not want the Supervisors involved with their water. This recommendation would result in huge increases in the price of water. Price increases will favor developers and discriminate against agriculturalists who have historically paid for the dam. The price will go so high that agriculture would be a thing of the past in this valley. All of these systems were paid for by the taxpayers within each individual district. Those taxpayers would not be happy with a take-over of their property by elected Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District Response to Grand Jury Report June 26, 2006 -8- . representatives outside of their service areas. This recommendation would put at risk all of the water rights in the Ukiah Valley by directly interfering with water rights holders obligations to the SWRCB. . "The BOS establish a Water Resource Policy Council, composed of all water agencies/special districts and official water-related entities within the County and the UV/PV area. The Council should explore interests and concerns in order to develop common long-range plans and strategies to address the issues of adequate guaranteed water availability, usage, conservation and storage within the County._-- This recommendation is not warranted because it is redundant, superfluous, and will waste public funds. Already in place is the Mendocino County Water Agency which is capable of communicating with all of the existing districts. The IWPC is already in place and represents the inland agencies/special districts. . "The BOS and the IWPC, perhaps in conjunction with the other appropriate entities, arrange necessary financing for the matching funds to add to the ACE~ 2005-2006 appropriated monies for the continued development of the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study.~_ This recommendation is not warranted, it is moot. The money has been received, the IWPC is the lead and if the County wants to be involved, they should rejoin the IWPC. o "The BOS take all steps necessary to ensure the water rights of any added water capacity be negotiated in favor of the County and UV/PV._-- This recommendation is not warranted and has already been implemented with the IWPC. The IWPC is in place. It has continued its efforts to move forward on the Feasibility Study and potential water supply. It has worked with the other agencies in their quest for additional water. The BOS should be involved through the IWPC rather than refusing to participate. o "The BOS by ordinance or other appropriate authority (activate Mendocino County Service Area #3) require all water purveyors, providers, agencies and special districts, as well as riparian rights users, to install meters and/or measuring devices to track water usage for local reporting._-- This recommendation is not warranted. The water is being metered. Those people With pumps in the River have meters. All of the Districts have meters. The RRFCD is working with the State, who is reviewing their updated accounting system which will show the amount of water that is being used. Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District Response to Grand Jury Report June 26, 2006 -9- . o This just creates another layer of redundant bureaucracy with huge new fees and charges that are subject to the voter approval requirements of Prop. 218 and that has no authority over any water fights. The Russian River is one of the most complicated systems in California and the SWRCB has declared it fully appropriated during most of the summer. "The Mendocino County Water Agency receive and compile water usage data for informational and planning purposes._-- This recommendation is not warranted since the Mendocino County Water Agency has the ability to contact any district which is an authorized water rights holder and retrieve that public information. "All water agencies/special districts immediately develop and implement conservation programs, with an education component for residential, agricultural and industrial use. Devices such as reduced-flow water fixtures and irrigation equipment and otherpassive and active approaches, including reclaimed water (treated wastewater) systems, should be investigated and considered, m This recommendation is not warranted. Conservation Plans are mandated by the State and they are required by the RRFCD=s contract. Had the Grand Jury visited our offices, they might have seen these completed plans. The Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District would like to take this opportunity to address the Grand Jury Report Comments regarding water. It references a unified consensual approach to the water problems in the Ukiah Valley. This was one of the reasons for the formation of the Inland Water and Power Commission. It took two years to organize and elected officials from all agencies and special districts were instrumental in this formation. Its priorities were not only to address the potential sale of the Potter Valley Project, but to present a united front politically and literally in water issues in Mendocino County. It was designed to pursue additional water rights because any project would be too costly for one individual agency. Because it is a JPA, its commissioners are accountable to the voters of each district. The IWPC was always envisioned as the proper vehicle to address all water issues in the Russian River watershed in Mendocino County. Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District Response to Grand Jury Report June 26, 2006 -10- AGENDA ITEM NO: ttc MEETING DATE: November 15, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 895 AND UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (URA) RESOLUTION NO. 99-1 BY REVISING REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (RDA) PLAN TIME LIMITS FOR INCURRING AND REPAYMENT OF DEBT AND FOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PLAN Background: The Ukiah Redevelopment Agency (URA), the City of Ukiah and the City of Sonoma were participants in a $9,510,000 financing by the Redwood Empire Financing Authority in January 1994. Approximately, $5,475,000 remains as the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency's portion of the 1994 issue. The bonds carry interest rates ranging from 6.0% to 6.4% and are callable on December 1, 2006 without incurring a premium. The refunding would lower the URA's debt service requirements from its present range of 6.0%-6.4% to a range of approximately 3.75% to 5.0%. On October 4th, 2006 the URA adopted Resolution 2006-14 directing the implementation of proceedings for the refunding of Redwood Empire Financing Authority Certificates of Participation issued in 1994, and providing other matters relating thereto. Since the resolution was passed, the external financing team began the process of preparing the necessary plan documents and reports that are required during the refunding process. During this due diligence phase, the consultants discovered some inconsistencies in the current Redevelopment Agency (RDA) plan which must be corrected before the financing can move forward. Continued on pa.qe 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt motion to introduce the ordinance by title only; Adopt a motion to introduce the ordinance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Revise the ordinance prior to introduction; Decline to introduce the ordinance. Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Brent Smith, Finance Director Brent Smith, Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manager (1) Ordinance (2) Revised Financing Schedule Approved:,., ~~'X% '-'~C~ndace Horsley, Cil Manager The ordinance attached as Attachment 1 will resolve these inconsistencies and take full advantage of changes to the Community Redevelopment Law which were enacted in 2002 and 2003. The proposed ordinance has a dual purpose. 1. The first purpose is to eliminate the time limit contained in the original RDA Plan for incurring debt. When the Plan was originally adopted in 1989 (Ordinance 895), it contained a time limit of 35 years to incur debt. Subsequently, after the passage of AB 1290, a major redevelopment reform bill, the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency adopted URA Resolution No. 99-1 to establish a revised time limit on incurring debt to 20 years from the time of the original Plan adoption. This was done to comply with the time limit set by AB 1290. More recently, however, the Legislature abolished the requirement that redevelopment plans contain time limits for incurring debt, and provided that redevelopment plans could be amended to eliminate this requirement by simply adopting an ordinance. This change is in the proposed ordinance. 2. The second purpose of the proposed ordinance is to extend by one year the time limits for the effectiveness of the Plan and for the repayment of debt. As you may recall, when the state was experiencing a severe fiscal crisis, the Legislature required redevelopment agencies throughout the state to make contributions to their county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund. In exchange for making that payment in 2003-2004, the legislation also allows redevelopment agencies to amend their plans to extend the time limits for the effectiveness of the redevelopment plan and for repaying debt. Again, this change can be accomplished through the adoption of an ordinance. With the introduction and adoption of the attached ordinance, these revisions to the RDA plan will enable the RDA to continue with the refinancing process of the Agency bonds which is scheduled for completion in early 2007. The revised financing schedule is shown on Attachment 2. ATTACHMENT_ / ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ELIMINATING THE TIME LIMIT ON INCURRING DEBT AND EXTENDING THE TIME LIMITATION FOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE REPAYMENT OF DEBT FOR THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows. SECTION ONE. FINDINGS. 1. The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 895 on November 15, 1989, approving and adopting the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Ukiah Redevelopment Project (the "Project"). 2. The Ukiah Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has been designated as the official redevelopment agency in the City of Ukiah to carry out the functions and requirements of the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and to implement the Redevelopment Plan. 3. On December 16, 1998, the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency adopted URA Resolution No. 99-1, amending the Redevelopment Plan to limit the Agency's ability to incur new debt to twenty (20) years from the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, which would be November 15, 2009. 4. Section 33333.6 of the Health and Safety Code, which was amended by SB 211 and took effect on January 1, 2002, authorizes redevelopment agencies to eliminate the time limit on the establishment of loans, advances, and indebtedness contained in redevelopment plans adopted before December 31, 1993. 5. Section 33681.9 of the Health and Safety Code, which was added by SB 1045 and took effect on September 1, 2003, required the Agency during the 2003-04 fiscal year to make a payment for deposit in Mendocino County's Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (an "ERAF Payment"). 6. Section 33333.6 of the Health and Safety Code, which was amended by SB 1045 to add subsection (e)(2)(C), provides that when an agency is required to make a payment pursuant to Section 33681.9, the legislative body may amend the redevelopment plan by ordinance to extend by one year the time limit of the effectiveness of the plan and the time limit to repay indebtedness. 7. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33681.9, the Agency was required to make an ERAF payment for the fiscal year 2003-04. 968762vl 04513/0001 8. The existing time limit on the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan, as set forth in Section 800 of the Redevelopment Plan, is November 15, 2029 (40 years from the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan) and the existing limit on the cumulative amount of tax increments that the Agency may be allocated is $260 million. SECTION TWO. CONTENTS OF ORDINANCE Section 1. The Redevelopment Plan for the Ukiah Redevelopment Project is hereby amended to eliminate the time limit on the establishment of loans, advances, and indebtedness contained in Section 502 of the Redevelopment Plan and previously amended by URA Resolution No. 99-1. Section 2. A. In accordance with Section 33333.6(e)(2)(C) of the Health and Safety Code, the time limit on the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan, as set forth in Section 800 of the Redevelopment Plan, currently scheduled to terminate on November 15, 2029 shall be extended by one year. Based upon such extension, the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan shall terminate on November 15, 2030. B. In accordance with Section 33333.6(e)(2)(C) of the Health and Safety Code, except for loans and indebtedness approved or incurred prior to December 31, 1993, the Agency shall not pay indebtedness or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 after ten (10) years from the termination of the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan. Based upon the termination date established in Subsection 2.A. of this Ordinance, the Agency shall not pay indebtedness or receive property taxes pursuant to Section 33670 after November 15, 2040; provided, however, that any loans or other indebtedness approved or incurred by the Agency prior to December 31, 1993, to finance the Project, may be repaid in accordance with the terms relating to such indebtedness, and the Agency may receive property tax increments after November 15, 2040, to repay such debt accordingly. SECTION THREE. MISCELLANEOUS 1. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. 2. EFFECT ON ORDINANCE NO. 895. Ordinance No. 895 is continued in full force and effect except as amended by this Ordinance. 3. DIRECTION TO CITY CLERK. The City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Agency. 968762vl 04513/0001 4. 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 968762vl 04513/0001 UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 2006 REFUNDING BONDS FINANCING SCHEDULE As of November 1, 2006 ATTACHMENT~ ~ Week of October 2 Week of October 9 Week of October 16 Week of October 30 November 8 Week of November 13 November 15 Week of November 27 December 6 January 5, 2007 January 10 January 17 January 18 Week of February 12 Week of February 19 Week of February 26 Week of March 12 April 16 June 1 URA Resolution of Intent and Hiring of Financing Team URA notifies Trustee of intent to call bonds Engage Redevelopment attorneys to review AB 1290 compliance First draft of POS distributed (delayed) Fiscal Consultant site visit and first draft of report distributed (delayed) All hands meeting (or conference call) to review project status Iris to draft amended RDA plan ordinance for city council adoption, submit for all hands review Agenda documents (Final amended RDA plan ordinance) due for November 15 Ukiah Council meeting First draft of Hdl Coren & Cone RDA report available Amended plan ordinance introduced to Ukiah City Council to comply with AB 1290 Final Hdl Coren & Cone RDA plan report issued Ukiah City Council has second reading and adopts plan ordinance RDA plan ordinance takes effect Agenda documents (Financing documents and POS) due for January 17th URA meeting. URA approves financing documents and POS Documents submitted to Moody's and bond insurers Moody's rating and bond insurance bids due Print and mail Preliminary Official Statement Pre-price and price bonds Close Trustee sends out call notice 1994 Bonds called AGENDA ITEM NO: 1 ld MEETING DATE: November 15, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE THE CITY OF UKIAH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) DEPARTMENT TO ENGAGE AT&T/CISCO TO PERFORM UPGRADES TO THE UKIAH CIVIC CENTER CAMPUS NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE; AUTHORIZE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR SAME Back.qround The data network infrastructure at the Civic Center campus was built out in a segmented fashion over the last fifteen years as the City's needs expanded. While this infrastructure has sufficed to this point of meeting the demands of 170 computer users on the network, we have recently seen system deficiencies occurring. An upgrade to our current network infrastructure will be necessary in order to support the requirements of new system capabilities that are already in place or will be implemented in the near future. These include the recently approved Mobile Computer Terminals for the City's Police patrol vehicles; operation of a secure video surveillance system (already installed); provide support for Council requested Internet public facing applications; and provide City employees (including law enforcement officers) secure remote access to the City's IT resources. (continued Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve budget amendment to fund an upgrade in the core network infrastructure to support the critical Information System needs of the City in an amount of $43,944.00. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Do not authorize the recommended action and return to staff with alternative direction. FUNDING: Amount $18,944 $20,000 $5,000 Amount Budgeted: $0 Account Number 100.2001.110.000 678.2040.800.000 100.1965.250.000 Amount Requested: $43,944.00 Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: NA Steven Butler, Information Services Supervisor Steven Butler, Information Services Supervisor Candace Horsley, City Manager; Brent Smith, Finance Director Approved: Candace Horsley, Manager As mentioned above, the core network infrastructure has been stretched past its limits. To meet upcoming needs, new functions and greater security requirements, the network architecture needs refreshing. Another major challenge facing the system pertains to the confidential law enforcement data that travels on our network. We are required to have the system architecture approved by the Department of Justice (DO J). The DOJ recommends IT infrastructure have CISCO certification of compliance. For this reason, the IT Department has been working on implementing the network infrastructure changes with AT&T/CISCO to assure certification of compliance. To summarize: Issues · Non-compliant and obsolete (out of warranty) network equipment · Poor performance including dropped connections during use · No remote capabilities · No public interaction application capabilities · Inadequate security capabilities, doesn't meet DOJ standards, can't support new Police MCT project, can't provide police remote access to California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS). Goals · Assure maximum network availability · Add additional network features such as; Quality of service, Voice over IP, VLAN (DOJ requirement), port level control · Secure sensitive public safety data (DOJ requirement) · Increase network stability · Provide proactive monitoring (logging, trouble and Intrusion Detection) (DOJ requirement) · Enable and support remote capabilities (MCT's, remote email, teleworkers) Budget With the recent Council approval of the new Public Safety procurement of MCT's, we are moving forward on the network upgrade project for completion this fiscal year to support the MCT's once they are installed in early 2007. Public Safety has given their full support to this critical project by committing a portion of the necessary funds through departmental savings in operations to this project. The accounts and associated amounts are shown on page 1 under the Funding section.