Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2007-03-21 Packet
CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 March 21, 2007 6:00 p.m. 4:30 Special Redevelopment Meeting 5:40 Interview: Appointment to Parks, Recreation & Golf Commission 6:OO 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS None. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Meeting Minutes of December 20, 2006 RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The C[ty 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 the Month of February 2007 b. Adoption of Resolution Approving City of Ukiah Qualified Contractors List For 2007 c. Rejection of Claim for Damages Received from Vincent Rosenbalm and Referral of Claim to the Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal insurance Fund d. Report of the Acquisition of Services from California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection in the Amount of $6,560 for Debris Removal e. Status of Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant Equipment Refurbishment Emergency f. Notification to City Council of the Purchase of Toxicity Testing Services for the Wastewater Treatment Plant to Pacific Ecorisk for a Total Not To Exceed $8,215.00 g. Approval of Budget Amendment for Mendocino County Property Tax Administrative Services Fee h. Adoption of Resolution Approving Records Destruction AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM) a. Adoption of Resolution Amending the Planning Permit and Services Fee Schedule b. Adoption of Resolution Authorizing Disbursement of Funds in the Mendocino County Office of Education Capital Outlay Fund Maintained by the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency and Approving Agreement for Sale of Real Property to the MCOE 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. City of Ukiah Public Benefits Program Presentation by Efficiency Services Group and Possible Action on Recommendations; Authorize Budget Amendment in the Amount of $98,000--continued from March 7, 2007 b. Review of Final Report for the Citywide Circulation Study Prepared by Omni Means Limited Engineers and Planners c. Request from Citizen U Group for Sponsorship of the Conference Center Room for Three More Citizen Educational Forums d. Extend Source California Energy Services' One Year Equipment and Labor Warranty for the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant to Include One Year of Operation and Maintenance Services for $20,000 e. Selection of Consultant to Facilitate City Strategic Planning Process and Authorize Budget Amendment for Same in an Amount Not To Exceed $6,000 11. NEW BUSINESS Adoption of Resolution Making an Appointment to the Parks, Recreation & Golf Commission Discussion and Possible Direction in Response to the California Transportation Commission's Denial of Funding for the Willits' Bypass Project. Discussion Regarding Sidewalk Issues in the City of Ukiah Award of Contract for 2000 and 2002 STIP Railroad Crossing Rehabilitation Project, Specification No. 07-06 Authorization of the City Manager to Negotiate and Enter into a Professional Consulting Services Agreement with Balance Hydrologics, Inc. to Conduct a Hydrogeologic Study for an Amount not to Exceed $114,994 Discussion and Possible Action Supporting Local Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Purchase of Garven Ranch Consideration of Council Representation on the Skate Park Design Subcommittee for the Selection of a Skate Park Design Contractor. 12. COUNCIL REPORTS 13. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 14. CLOSED SESSION a. Employee negotiations; Department Directors Bargaining Unit Negotiator: Candace Horsley, City Manager 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 16th day of March, 2007. Gall Petersen, City Clerk CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting Minutes CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 December 20, 2006 6:00 p.m. 5a The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on December 20, 2006, the notice for which being legally noticed December 15, 2006. Mayor Rodin called the meeting to order at. 5:59:58 PM Roll was taken with the following Councilmembers present: Thomas, Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Rodin. Staff present: City Manager Horsley, Building and Planning Director Stump, Public Works Director Eriksen, Fire Chief Clarabut, Community Services Director Sangiacomo, Public Utilities Director Gould, Electrical Distribution Engineer Kirkley, Water Utilities Project Engineer Burck, Hydro Project Manager Grande, City Attorney Rapport, and Deputy City Clerk Brown. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Ann Burck. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS a. Introduction of New Chamber Executive Director Bert Mosier City Manager Horsley introduced the Ukiah Chamber of Commerce new Executive Director Bert Mosier. Mr. Mosier stated he is looking forward to a good working relationship with the City. b. Introduction of New Employees - Patrick Garrett and Rebecca Schwen.qer, Firefi,q hter/Pa ramedics Prior to introductions of new staff, Fire Chief Clarabut announced the retirement of Fire Captain Mark Hilliker, effective December 30, 2006, after 39 years of service to the City. Capt. Hilliker stated it was a privilege to serve the City and he hopes to continue as a volunteer. Fire Chief Clarabut introduced new Firefighters Patrick Garrett and Rebecca Schwenger to the Council. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS There were none. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There were none. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Mayor Rodin read the appeal policy. CONSENT CALENDAR MIS McCowen/Crane to approve the Consent Calendar, with item 7.b. removed. Report of Disbursements for the Month of November 2006 Award of Consulting Contract for Gobbi Substation Upgrade (pulled to item 11 .c.) Electric Rate Study Consultant Selection - Award of Contract to Borismetrios in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $29,900 Award of Bid to Simplexgrinnell for Semi-Annual Inspection of the Civic Center Halon Systems in the Amount of $3,700 per Year for Three Years 9. 10. Authorize Award of Contract with Peffectio Plus Transcription for Police Transcription at an Amount Not to Exceed $25,000 per Fiscal Year Report to Council on Contract Extension with Whitlock and Weinberger Transportation, Inc. (W-Trans) for Professional Services in the Preparation of a Downtown Parking Improvement Study and Authorize Budget Amendment in an Amount Not to Exceed $6,101.40 for Same Status of the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant Equipment Refurbishment Emergency Report of the Acquisition of Services from Tim Narvaez in the Amount of $9,642.50 for Slope Repair Work at the Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site Rejection of Claim for Damages Received from Sylvia H. Corona and Referral of Claim to the Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund Motion carried with an all AYE voice vote. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Elizabeth Daniels spoke regarding a police department matter. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM) There were none. UNFINISHED BUSINESS c. City of Ukiah Public Benefits Proflram Presentation by Efficiency Services Group and Possible Action on Recommendations Electrical Distribution Engineer Kirkley reported, introducing Mark Gossner of Efficiency Services Group, hired to revise the City's public benefits program and address other public benefits programs. The effort has been aimed at meeting the new requirements of public benefits legislation. The City Council's direction is needed to finalize allocations for 07-08. Public Comment Opened 7:22:16 PM Gina Scott, asked about elimination of a rebate on doublepane windows. Marjorie Caulfield expressed concern about a raise in water and sewer rates. Public Comment Closed 7:27:51 PM Ms. Kirkley asked the City Council for direction on time deadrines for using the encumbered $154K in solar funds. MIS Baldwin/McCowen that once approval is given, if the applicant hasn't used it within a year, the grant is rescinded unless the applicant receives an extension for good cause. Motion carried with an all AYE voice vote. By General Consent the City Council deferred approval of recommended changes to the renewable energy efficiency programs, pending receipt of additional information about the state guidelines and comparable programs in other jurisdictions. The Council also expressed an interest in reviewing the income guidelines and benefit levels for the Ukiah Cares program which provides assistance to income eligible residents. a. Status Report on the Ukiah Skate Park Development Project and Authorize the. Release of the Request for Proposals for Professional Desitin Services for the Development of the Ukiah Skate Park 7:$4:35 PM[ Director Sangiacomo referred to a competitive State Grant the City is in receipt of for $500,000-for which the City must raise $215,000 in matching funds. The Skate Park Committee has raised approximately $174,000 to date, not including volunteer and donation matches and County funds that have also been secured. The City successfully leased a one-acre site at the Ukiah Rail Depot shortly before grant award, and has since secured three parcels adjacent to the Depot site donated by the Watkins family. Public Comment Opened 8:08:54 PM Jim Mulheren asked why the agenda order for the Ukiah Skate Park agenda item was taken out of order to hear the public benefits item. John Graft asked if the design for the skatepark would take care of the road redesign regarding Hospital Drive and Leslie. Judy Pruden referred to the redevelopment documents that went into effect in 1989/90 stating she thinks they will drive this project and they should be pulled back out for review. MIS McCowen/Crane moved the recommended action to receive the status report on the Ukiah Skate Park Development Project and authorize the release of the Request for Proposal for Professional Design Services for the development of the park, with the understanding that any design will not preclude options for realigning Hospital Drive into the Depot parcel and connecting it with Leslie. Motion carried with an all AYE voice vote. b. Discussion and Appointment of Plannin~l Commission Members Director Stump stated the newly elected City Council members need to initiate discussion and each appoint a Planning Commission member. The ordinance provides that the appointed commissioners serve for the duration of the Councilmember's term. MIS Thomas/McCowen nominating Anne Molgaard; motion carried with an all AYE voice vote. Councilmember McCowen thanked Kevin Jennings for having served as his previous appointment. MIS McCowen/Crane nominating Mary Anne Landis; motion carried with an all AYE voice vote. MIS Baldwin/McCowen nominating Ken Anderson; motion carried wiith an all AYE voice vote. Mayor Rodin asked City staff to bring this ordinance back to consider placing some flexibility in the term of the commissioner appointments. d. Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant Refurbishment Project Bud,qet and Schedule Update; Authorize the Expenditure of Additional Funds Necessary to Complete the. Project 8:25:22 PM Hydro Project Manager Grande reported recommending that the City Council authorize the expenditure of budgeted and unbudgeted funds of approximately $700K to complete the project repairs. MIS Crane/McCowen moved the recommended action. Motion carried with an all Aye voice vote. e. Discussion and Appointment of City Councilmembers to Various Boards and Commissions 12:36:06 AM In addition to potential committee appointments discussed on December 6, Councilmember Thomas would also accept appointment to the Mendocino Transit Authority, alternate to Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority, Economic Development & Financing Corp, and alternate to the Main Street Program. By General Consent, the City Council adopted the committee appointments discussed at the December 6 meeting as well as the additional ones of tonight's meeting. 11. f. Discussion on Issues to be Discussed at a Joint City Council/County Board of Supervisors Meetin,q Re.qardin.q the Ukiah Valley Area Plan - McCowen Director Stump reported that a joint meeting with the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors to discuss the Ukiah Valley Area Plan {UVAP) has been set up for January 10, 2007, at the Ukiah Valley Conference Center. An ad hoc committee was formed including Mayor Rodin and Councilmember McCowen who developed talking points of the City's current position and priorities for the consdieration of the City Council. Public Comment Opened 8:38:36 PM Judy Pruden stated she had concern that community input would not be part of the process. Richard Shoemaker, stated the UVAP discussion needs to be an open process and the vision statement should be crafted by the Community. Public Comment Closed 8:46:35 PM By General Consent Council approved the talking points that were proposed. Recessed at 9:01:31 PM Reconvened at 9:10:43 PM NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Possible Action on Status of Implementin.q the City's Sewer Lateral Inspection Ordinance IncludinR Point-Of-Sale Requirement- Water Utilities Project Engineer Burck reported on status of implementing the ordinance adopted in 2004 for sewer lateral testing, and issues that subsequently arose that need to be resolved through a revision of the ordinance. Winzler & Kelly have been working with staff and the public on this project. Public Comment Opened 9:41:36 PM Kathy Hayes, North Bay Association of Realtors (NORBAR), submitted a letter she had written to City Council in 2004. She expressed concern about passage of the ordinance without further outreach to the real estate community. Sharon Hatfield provided a copy of MLS statistics for 2005-06 to see how many properties this ordinance would affect. She thinks that it would be more logical to apply this geographically. She was concerned about open permits if deals didn't close. Richard Shoemaker stated the issuance of the lateral to the curb is key to the issue. The City delivers water to the meter at the curb; power to the the meter usually on the home, while the utility delivers to the middle of the road. John Graft stated that we don't have many contractors in town that can do both home and street repairs. Eric Crane stated he thought a geographical application was the best solution. Public Comment Closed 10:12:02 PM Referring to Attachment 2, Implementation of Issues and Alternatives, the City Council discussed alternatives with the following result: · Issue 1: A Point-of-Sale Requirement is not as Effective as a Geographically Targeted Program The preferred alternative is: Alternative 2, Make some changes to Section 3799 to facilitate its implementation (see discussion under Issues 5 through 10 below) and increase consistency with the Ukiah Valley Sanittation District requirements. Continue to pursue 4 mainline inspections and a mainline Capital Improvement Program consistent with available revenue. · Issue 2: The Existing City Policy Regarding Ownership of Laterals Makes Repairs Too Expensive and Is Unfair. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2, Develop and implement a City assistance program for property owners in the form of incentive grants or loans. See discussion under Issue 3 below. This Alternative has the advantage of allowing the City to control its costs associated with lateral repair by establishing budgets for the grant/loan program based on anticipated savings at the treatment plant from the reduced cost of treating I/I. And, possibly Alternative 3, Modify City policy to accept responsibility for the portion of the sewer lateral in the public right-of-way once an inspection and repair, funded by the property owner, have occurred. · Issue 3: The Cost of Required Repairs to Private Laterals May Be Too Expensive for Some Owners. The preferred alternatives are Alternative 2, Develop and implement a City- sponsored loan program whereby owner costs can be financed over time; and Alternative 3, Limit owner liability to private property only thereby reducing costs to individual property owners, but increasing City responsibility and liability. · Issue 4: Other Jurisdictions Do Not Require Point-of-Sale Inspections. Referring to Exhibit A, Excepts from Sonoma County City Codes Regarding Sewer Laterals, the City Council would like more discussion about the pros and cons of the City taking ownership of the laterals from the property line to the main. · Issue 5 - '10: Leave open for the future. Streamline language that is easier to work with. Ms. Burck stated that staff would work with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District for some language consistency as far as is practical, and will bring back more information including ownership of the laterals. The City would ~ike more discussion about the prospective language with the UVSD and will bring back more information including discussion about the laterals ownership. b. Discussion and Possible Action on Electric Resource Options Authorizinq City Manager to Increase the City's Participation in the New Lodi Power Project and Authorizing the City Manager to Direct NCPA to Acquire Short Term Power Purchase Contracts to Meet the City's Power Deficit 10:39:47 PM Electrical Distribution Engineer Kirkley reported that the City has need of additional electric power resources for fhe future. The City has been working with Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) to that end. The recommended action would 1) authorize the City Manager to increase the City's participation in the New Lodi Power Project to 5MW by signing the Phase 88 Agreement for Financing the Planning and Development of the new Lodi Project; and 2) authorize the City Manager to direct NCPA to acquire short-term power purchase contracts to meet the City's power deficit for up to three years at the following percentages of the City's power deficit: 100% for 2007, 50% for 2008, and 25% for 2009 given the uncertainty of timing for when the NGPP units might start providing energy. MIS McCowen/Crane moved approval of the recommended action both as to the participation in new load at 5 MW and also the short-term power purchase. Motion carried with an all AYE voice vote. c. Electric Facilities Assessment Presentation Director Gould reported on the assessment of the electric utility infrastructure, to provide, the City with a roadmap for improvements to the electric system and recommendations for maintenance programs, to set priorities, and identify budget needs. MIS McCowen/Baldwin to accept the report and approve item 7b of the consent calendar. Motion carried with an all AYE voice vote. 5 d. Wastewater Treatment Plant Update and Discussion and Possible Action on the Cost 11:54:19 PM Water Utilities Project Engineer Burck presented a multi-part presentation to update Council on the progress made on the Wastewater Treatment Plant construction project. Discussion on cost reduction alternatives also took place. By General Consent the City Council accepted the reports and determined that Tiers 2 and 3 generally don't meet the "value" and "risk" test criteria established for cost reductions. e. Discussion and Action Concerning Property Owners Request for City Initiated Annexation of the Brush Street Triangle This item was pulled, at the request of the applicant, and continued to January 3, 2007. f. Award of Contract for 2000 and 2002 STIP Railroad Crossing Rehabilitation Proiect Specification A memorandum to the City Council dated December 20 was received from Director Ericksen recommending rejection of the bids which greatly exceeded the engineer's estimates. MIS McCowen/Thomas moved to reject the bids. Motion carried by an all AYE voice vote. g. Award of Contract for Gobbi Street and Orchard Avenue Traffic Signal Improvements - Specification No. 06-16 12:26:07 There is an irregularity with this bid as the apparent Iow bidder did not adequately set the limit of bond, so the second Iow bidder has appealed. This issue was discussed with City Attorney Rapport and he has expressed comfort recommending the City award the bid to the Iow bidder, Pipeline Excavators, who have corrected the bond amount, find this as an irregularity, and award them the bid. City Attorney Rapport advised that case law states the City has the discretion to waive a bid irregularity as long as it doesn't give the iow bidder a competitive advantage. MIS CranelMcCowen to authorize the recommended action; Motion carried by an all AYE voice vote. h. Request for Sponsorship of Citizen U Educational Water Forum - Rodin Public Comment Opened 10:32:31 Mary Anne Landis stated there is much for UVAP to finalize and there is more to learn--the genesis of Citizen U. They are planning four educationar seminars with other co- sponsors including, she hopes, the City of Ukiah. The first meeting is schedured January 18, 6-8 pm. She asked the City to sponsor the cost of the conference center for hosting the meetings. By General Consent the City Council approved paying for the first meeting. i. Discussion Concerning Measure "X" Implementation - McCowen Councilmember McCowen reported that Measure × did pass. It was discussed with the City Council and the Chamber of Commerce that a committee should be convened to develop a work plan for expending the promotion funds. Don Ballek is the logical staff choice, and Council liaisons may also want to be involved--as well as local groups and hoteliers. A work plan will be incorporated into the performance agreement with the Chamber. All groups may not wish to participate, but should be invited with the understanding that the purpose is to promote Ukiah and its tourism industry. By General Consent the City Council approved formation of the committee. j. Discussion of Recruitment Process for City Manager and Possible Authorization to Prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a Professional Recruitment Firm City Manager Horsley reported that staff is recommending Council authorize preparing a request 12. for proposal for a professional recruitment firm. By General Consent the City Council authorized preparation of a request for proposal. k. Possible Approval of Settlement Agreement in Ukiah versus Mattern. MIS Crane/Baldwin approving Settlement Agreement in Ukiah versus Mattern. Motion carried by thefollowing roll call vote: AYES: Thomas, Crane, Baldwin, and Mayor Rodin; NOES: McCowen; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Crane reported the work with the Sanitation District on the sewer lateral ordinance for the District is coming together. The Grease Trap ordinance was done in parallel, and the District has approved it, but we should bring it back for possible revisions by the City Council. Councilmember Baldwin reported attendance at two meetings: One was with Inland Water and Power Commission about the meeting with PG&E, but proposed bringing it back for future discussion regarding alternative storage sites, etc. He also met with Councilmember Crane, City Manager Horsley, and two members of the Willow Water Board. 13. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 14. 15. There were none. Recessed to Closed Session 12:48:53 AM CLOSED SESSION a. Conference With Legal Counsel-Existing Litigation (Gov't Code 54956.9(a))- River Watch v. Ukiah~ U.S.Dist. Ct. N.D. Cal.~ C04 45t8 CW Conference With Legal Counsel-Existing Litigation (Gov't Code 54956.9(a))- Ukiah v. Mattern, Court of Appeal case no. A1'12897~ Mendocino County Superior Court case no. CV94844 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1:15 AM. Linda C. Brown, Deputy City Clerk 7 ITEM NO.: 7a DATE: March 21, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2007 Payments made during the month of February 2007, 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 74940-75153, 75225-75334, 75357-75476 Accounts Payable Manual check numbers: none Payroll check numbers: 74860-74939, 75154-75224 Payroll Manual check numbers: 75335-75346 Void check numbers: 75347-75356 This report is submitted in accordance with Ukiah City Code Division 1, Chapter 7, Article 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Report of Disbursements for the month of February 2007. 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 Manlger KRS:WORD/AGENDAFEB07 CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2007 Demand Payments approved: Check No: System generated: 74940-75035r 75036-75153, 75225-75334, 75357-75476 FUNDS: 100 General Fund $263,469 25 105 Measure S General Fund $1,243.77 131 Equipment Reserve Fund 140 Park Development $6,003.32 141 Museum Grants 143 N E.H 1, Museum Grant 150 Civic Center Fund 200 Asset Seizure Fund $602.36 201 Asset Seizure (Drug/Alcohol) 203 H&S Education 11489 (B)(2)(A1) $1,187.26 204 Federal Asset Seizure Grants 205 Sup Law Enforce Srv. Fund (SLESF) ~'),0~3 33 206 Community Oriented Policing 207 Local Law Enforce BIk Grant 220 Parking Dist. #10per & Maint $797.20 230 Parking Dist. #1 Revenue Fund 250 Special Revenue Fund $3,393.17 260 Downtown Business Improvement 270 Signalizaton Fund $4,683.88 290 Bridge Fund $27,521.42 300 2106 Gas Tax Fund 301 2107 Gas Tax Fund 303 2105 Gas Tax Fund 318 Special Aviation Fund 315 Airpor~ Capital Improvement $65000 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.TP. 342 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief 345 Off-System Roads Fund 410 Conference Center Fund $11,332~ 550 Lake Mendocino Bond 575 Garage $3,636.79 600 Airpod $17,957 28 610 Sewer Service Fund 611 Sewer Construction Fund $164,691 81 612 City/District Sewer $47,29434 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 $37,78078 661 Landfltl Corrective Fund 664 Disposal Closure Reserve 670 U.S.W Bill & Collect $23,896.36 678 Public Safety Dispatch $48404 679 MESA (Mendocino Emergency Srv Auth) 695 Golf 696 Warehouse/Stores $611.35 697 Billing Enterprise Fund $5,287 58 698 Fixed Asset Fund $28,675.68 699 Special Projects Reserve 800 Electric $1,194,18~.~7 805 Street Lighting Fund $9,386 81 806 Public Benefits Charges $9,41585 820 Water $68,861.59 840 Special Water Fund (Cap Imp) $8,706 37 900 Special Deposit Trust $2,545 73 910 Worker's Comp. Fund $1,095.50 920 Liability Fund 940 Payroll Posting Fund $285,61238 950 General Service (Accts Recv) $961 83 960 Community Redev Agency $276.54 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund 965 Redevelopment Cap Imprv Fund $1,606 38 966 Redevelopment Debt Svc. $1,892 65 975 Russian River Watershed Assoc $41,17326 976 Mixing Zone Policy JPA $11,746 89 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 74860-74939 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 30969-31133 PAYROLL PERIOD 1/14107-1/27107 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 75154-75224, 75335-75346 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 31134-31299 PAYROLL PERIOD 1/28/07-2/10/7 VOID CHECK NUMBERS: 75347-75356 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS- NP CHECKS $2,327,27003 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS-WIRE TRANSFERS* $1,579,28200 TOTAL PAYROLL VENDOR CHECKS $51,032 14 TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS $127,01392 TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT $406,671 88 TOTAL PAYROLL TAXES (EFTs) $121,644 01 TOTALPAYMENTS $4,612,91398 * 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 I have examined this Register and approve same. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds City Manager Director of Finance o CD o o o §o° oooo o oooo ooooo o oooooooooooooo o .... ~oo .... ~ ~ oo · oooo~oo~ . ~ oooo~ ~ oooooo~ oooo~o ..... ~oo~o~oooo oo .... oo .... ooooo~ooooo~ooooooo~ooooo ~ ~ o o? a~ o o o ~o ~ ~ ~o o o oooooooooo ~ooooo~ o o o o S S°°°°°°~ ~oooooo 0 oo oooo ooooo ooooooooooo ~ °°° ooooo ooo o oo~ooooo~ooo .... o o o oo o o ooo ooooo o o ooo ~ ° ~ ~ ..... §~oo oo gg ..... ggooo g o o oo ooooo ooo o o oo oooooooooooo o o o o oo °°°oo88°ooo° ~ oo o o,-., o ~, ~ ....... oo ooooo ooo 8 o o ooo o o ooooo o oo o oo~ o 88 o .... SS~ ~ o~. . oo .... o o 2oo o ~ 8 oo oo~ .... ~ ~oooooo~ o o o o o oo o o ~ Ua ~o~sg>o~o oo~ ..... ~ ooooo oo ooooooooooo DDDD~ ~oo o© g ~> °° ~ ~ 00000000000 ~ o oooo~ ~ ~ ~ ooooo oooooo oooooooooooooooooooo o UUUg~ ~UU °° ~ o ~ oo ~ ~ ~ooooooooooooo ~oo~ g ° ooooo~oo oooo o o o o oo ooooo oo ~oo o ~ o o oo o 888 5oo°° o ~°88 ..... o .... S o 8 88 oo ooooo ooooo ooooooooo ooooo o o o ~oo ........ ~ ~ o ~ oooo ......... g o ~ o ~ oo mmm o o o~ o o~ ooooooo o o o o ~= ~® o oooooooooooooooooo o oo~g ..... ~ ...... ~ o oo ooooo oooooo g ~oooooo~ ..... ~oo o o ooooo oooooo oooooooooooooooooo ..... ~ooo~g~o~o ~ .... ~ ...... ~ .... ooooo~ ...... ~ ~o ~o 000000000000000000 ~000000000000000000 ooooo§goooooo~so .... S S ooo ~ooooo ooooo ~ ~ o o SSoo o oo oo ooooo ooooooo oo oo ~ .... ; ~ 00000 0000~ o oo o o o o ~ ooo ~ ~ ~ ooo ... o ~ · o oog ooo g o go© oo~ooooo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ o ooooooooo oo oo o o oo oo o o oo ..... oo oo ~ o ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ .... oo~ ..... ~ ~ ~ ooo ~ o o oooo~oooooo~ooooo~ .... oooo oooooo ooooo oooo oooo ooo~o .... ~ ...... ~oooo oo~ ..... ~ ..... o~ ..... ¢ og ~ ooogggooooo ~ ooo~ ...... ~ © ~ aooooooooooo ~ oo~ ~o ~ o~ ood~ oo oo oo oo o ooo oo o ooooo ~ ooo ~ ~° ~oo ~ ~ oo o ooo~ ~oo o ooo oo oo ooo oo o ~ o °© OOoO ~ ~ ~ oooooo .... oo~ooooo~ ~o oooo S o~ oo CD o oo ~ ooo~ ..... ~Soo o oooooooooooooo o oo~ ..... ~ooo 55 ~ ~ooo oooooooo ..... ~ ..... ~ooo o~ooooo~ooooo~ ooooo o ~ooooooofiooooo~ ~ o°o©o ~ oo ~ ~ o~ ~ooo~o~oooooo ~ ~oooo o o oooo o o o o o o oooo o o o o o o o o ~ °o~o~°~°~ ~ ~ ~o° ~°°°ooo ~ ~°~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oooo°°°°~ OOOooo oo o~o o oo oo ooo o o ~o~o~o~ o o ooooo~ oooo ooooo~ oooo ~ ~ ~ > §~ ~ oo°° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~o ~ ~ oo~o~ ~ ° ~OOOooo ~OOoo ~ ooooS .... o oooS .... ooo© oo 0 0 0 o o ooooo oooooo oooooo 0 o°8 oo ooo~ ooss ..... S~ .... o oo ooooo ooooo ~oooooo~ooooo ~oooooo~ ..... .... o~ oo~o~ oooo oo H H 0 ~ ~ ~ oooo °°°°77°°° oooo oooo o '' 0 U U © ~ 888ooooo~ o oooooooo o oo~o~o o o ITEM NO. 7b MEETING DATE: March 21,2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING CITY OF UKIAH QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS LIST FOR 2007 As required by the Informal Bidding Procedure of the City of Ukiah, Ukiah City Code § 1541-1542, the City Clerk's office prepared and mailed written notice to construction trade organizations and contractors in California on February 1,2007, inviting all licensed contractors to submit information regarding their firm to the City for inclusion on the City's list of qualified contractors for the 2007 calendar year. A contractor may be included throughout the year by either submitting a written notice to the City Clerk or by bidding on a City project. All contracting firms are verified through the State Licensing Board for license validity. All contractors who submitted their company information and construction classification designation, together with those who bid on projects in 2006, have been included on the current updated list, attached to the Resolution as "Exhibit A". The resolution ensures that staff has a comprehensive list of qualified contractors when soliciting bids for the City of Ukiah. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Approving Qualified Contractors List for 2006 Calendar Year. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Contractors notified N/A Gail Petersen, City Clerk David Rapport, City Attorney 1. Notice to construction trade organizations and contractors 2. Resolution Approving qualified Contractors List for 2007 Calendar Year with Exhibit A APPROVED: ' ~~~'~ Candace Horsley, City Manage~ NOTICE Attachment 1 DATE: FOR RELEASE: SUB3ECT: CONTACT: January 25, 2007 Immediately Application for Qualified Contractor's List Gail Petersen, City Clerk 463-6213 All Licensed Contractors who wish to be included on the City of Ukiah's list of qualified bidders for the year 2007, must submit the name and address to which Notice of Bids or Proposals should be mailed, a phone number at which the contractor may be reached, the type of work in which the contractor is interested and for which the contractor is currently licensed (e.g., earthwork, pipelines, electrical, painting, general building, etc.) together with the class and license numbers of the Contractor's License or Licenses currently held by the contractor. A Qualified Contractors' List Application Form can be obtained from the City Clerk or downloaded from the City's website: www.cityofukiah.com. Insurance Requirements for Contractors can be obtained from the City Clerk or downloaded from the City's website. Completed forms should be submitted to: City of Ukiah Attention: Gail Petersen, City Clerk 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482 OR: Fax to (707) 463-6204 Attachment 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH APPROVING QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS LIST FOR 2007 CALENDAR YEAR WHEREAS, under Ukiah City Code (UCC) {}1541-1542, the City Clerk must request licensed contractors who are qualified to perform public work under contract with the City of Ukiah to submit their names, addresses, phone numbers, type of work in which they are interested, and the contractor's classification and license number; and WHEREAS, the City Council is required to adopt a list of qualified contractors, identified according to categories of work; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has published the notice as required in UCC §1541 and compiled a list of qualified contractors based on information submitted in response to said notice and including all contractors who have submitted valid bids to the City during the preceding calendar year; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the list as compiled complies with the requirements of the City Code and Public Contracts Code {} 22032(b) and shall constitute the City of Ukiah Contractors List for use in providing notice under the informal bidding procedure authorized in UCC §1543. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the list attached to this resolution as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference is adopted as the Contractors List for the City of Ukiah for the calendar year 2007. PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of ,2007 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Marl Rodin, Mayor ATTEST: Gall Petersen, City Clerk ~ ~ ~ '~= .... O0 · - =~ E= D5~ ~Eo>=~ ~a.E ~ ~ o~._o.=~o~ · ~ ~ o o~ .... ~ [~ ~ ~.= ITEM NO. 7¢ MEETING DATE: March 21,2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM VINCENT ROSENBALM AND REFERRAL OF CLAIM TO THE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND A claim from Vincent Rosenbalm was received by the City of Ukiah on February 20, 2007 alleging theft of personal property, illegal imprisonment and malicious prosecution by the City's Police Department and Animal Control Officer that occurred on September 22, 2006 and October 19, 2006 at 459 Cochrane Avenue and the Ukiah Golf Course. Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject this claim and refer it to the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject claim for damages received from Vincent Rosenbalm and refer 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 Claimant Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim from Vincent Rosenbalm, pages 1-4. APPROVE D:~~A~-~,~ Candace Horsley, City Man~er DATE FiFe With: City Cl~rk City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avem:~ 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 o~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 Post Off~ce address of the Claimant: Name of Claimant: ~/~_.~/~~/~J ~~ Post Office Address: Post Office address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent: Name of Addressee: ~ Telephone: Post Office Address: The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Oat e o/oc Locat,on: _~/~--_~ ~__~._-~-~ /~'2~_ /~~ccurrence: Ci~nces giving dse to this claim: ~ ~/., . General description 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. The name or names of ~e public employee or employees causing the inju~, damage, or loss, if known. Page 1 of 3 Revised 12/2006 If amount claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed if it i0tafs less 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: ,~"~.j ~/[~-~_(/_ ~(~/,~ _ 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 ~Civil Case ~required to provide the information requested above, plus your signature on page 3 of this form lin °rder t° comply with Government Code §910 In additl°n, Jn order to conduct a timely investigation an~ P~_0~s~-I~ie'~'esolution of your c aim, the city requests that you answer the following questions. 10. 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: If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed inj~jnj, please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or hospitals providing treatmgr~[: If appficable, please attach any medical bills or reports or similar documents supporting your If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Auto Ins. Co.: ~ ~ Telephone: Address: In--~u ra n~ee ~ ,~ker/Agent: Address: --' insurance Policy No.: Telephone: Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.: Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: Vehicle Make/Year: If apPlicabl~ch a~r billsT'~ .... Expiration: , estimates or similar documents supporting your claim. Page ~ of 3 Revised 12/2006 For all ~ccident .?aims, Place on followin,~ d/a-- READ CAREFULLY Streets, including ~ ~ . u~am name of /Ag.e. nc,y, Vehicle; !ocation of/Agency vehicle at time of accident orth, East, South, and West, red,cate place of by A 1 and Iocahon of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to accident b ". . street, corners. If/Agency Vehicle was involved, designate by y B 1 and the point of mpact by "X." "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw proper diagram signed by claimant. letter A" Iocahon of/Agency Vehicle when you first saw it, and by NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a CURB Warning: Presentation ora false claim with the intent to defraud is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to CCP §1038, the /Agency may seek to recover ali costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determined not to have been brought in good faith and with reasonable Cause. Page 3 o~3 Revised12/2006 ITEM NO: 7d MEETING DATE: March 21, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE ACQUISITION OF SERVICES FROM CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,560 FOR DEBRIS REMOVAL SUMMARY: In compliance with Section 1522 of the Ukiah City Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of services costing $5,000 or more but less than $10,000. Staff obtained a proposal from California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) for debris removal work in City creeks and drainage ditches. The Purchasing Department issued a purchase order to CDF and the debris removal work completed. The total cost for debris removal was $6,560. Funds are available in the City's budget, account number 100.3110.250.000. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report regarding the acquisition of services from California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection in the amount of $6,560 for debris removal. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: N/A. Citizens Advised: N/A Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None Approved: ~ Candace Horsley, City M~.ager ITEM NO: 7e MEETING DATE: March 21, 2007 AGENDA 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. The schedule remains unchanged from the last report presented to Council with a March 21st start up date for Unit 1 and April 5th for Unit 2. Repairs to the communication line between the hydro plant and Gobbi Substation are being addressed in order to minimize its impact on start up. 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 415 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 1. 3/13/07 Source California Hydro Proiect Status Report Approved: Candace Horsley, City, Manager Date: Mamh 13, 2007 To: City of Ukiah ATTACHMENT 1 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 following sub-subsystems have been placed in service electrically powered from the UPS: a) SCADA and Auxiliary PLC's. b) Unit 1 & 2 generator vibration monitor. c) 12kV Recloser. 2) Field terminations are complete for the Auxiliary and SCADA PLC's. 3) The following PLC's have completed loop testing: a) Unit I PLC. b) Auxiliary PLC. 4) The Unit 2 PLC is installed and terminations are in progress. 5) All generators, bus, and line protection relays are complete and in service except the 12kV Recloser (will be electrically connected to the 12kV bus on Wed., March 14th). 6) Unit 1 turbine water side has been hydrostatically tested. 7) Unit 2 turbine water side pressure fittings are complete. 8) The Unit 2 bearings have been filled with oil and the unit rotated 180 degrees. 9) The operator's console is functional (including the annunciator display) and is being used to conduct loop testing. 10) The auto-synchronizer is electrically installed, wired, and powered up. Paul B. Dirks Project Manager/Sr. Mechanical Engineer Source California Energy Services, Inc. AGENDA ITEM NO: 7f MEETING DATE: March 21, 2007 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION TO CITY COUNCIL OF THE PURCHASE OF TOXICITY TESTING SERVICES FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT TO PACIFIC ECORISK FOR A TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED $8,215.00 Section 1522 of the Municipal Code requires a report to the City Council of purchases from $5,000.00 to $10,000.00. In accordance with the above-mentioned section, this report is submitted to the City Council. The WWTP Waste Discharge Requirements specify that a Chronic Toxicity Bioassay be conducted on plant effluent once a year during periods of discharge to the Russian River. This laboratory test measures the quality of plant effluent by exposing test organisms to the effluent and comparing the effects to that of control organisms. Price quotes for a Chronic Toxicity Test were solicited from three laboratories. Pacific EcoRisk provided a price quote of $5,020.00 for the initial test plus an additional amount of $3,195.00 only if needed for additional services after initial test results are determined. Alpha Laboratories, Inc. and Brelje and Race Laboratories, Inc. declined to provide price quotes because they do not provide this service. No other laboratories in this area were found to provide this type of test. Funds for the testing service have been budgeted in the WWTP Operation and Maintenance Fund under account number 612.3580.250.001 and adequate funds are available for the purchase. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file notification of the purchase of toxicity testing services for the Wastewater Treatment Plant to Pacific Ecorisk for a total not to exceed $8,215.00 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: N/A FUNDING: Amount Budgeted $8215.00 Account Number 612.3580.250.001 Additional Funds Requested N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Ann Burck, Water-Utilities-Project Engineer Prepared byI William Pounders, Waste Water Treatment Plant Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Appr°ved: ~~M Candace Horsley, anager AGENDA ITEM NO: 7g MEETING DATE: March 21,2007 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR MENDOCINO COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FEE. Counties are allowed to charge cities for property tax administration per Section 95.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code to recover a proportionate share of the cost of operating the property tax system from each agency receiving a portion of the ad valorem property tax. Implemented in 1993, the property tax administrative fee to the City of Ukiah has ranged from $6,000 to $20,000 with an average $12,400 per year. Last year's charge was $6,581. The City has recently received the property tax administration billing from the County of Mendocino for FY06/07 fiscal year in the amount of $46,099.99. The fee is based on the property tax allocations received by the City in 2005-06 and the costs associated with those allocations. The 2004 State triple flip law exchanging city sales tax revenue for property tax revenue, authorized the counties to recalculate the property tax administrative fee beginning in fiscal year 2006-07 to include Vehicle License Fees which were never included previously (Revenue & Taxation Code 97.75). The adopted budget for FY 2006/07 provided for a fee of $11,000.00. Therefore a budget amendment of an additional $35,100 is necessary to cover the actual fee of $46,099.99. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve a budget amendment for account 100.1990.346.000 in the amount of $35,100.00. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Provide Staff with alternative direction. FUNDING: Amount Budqeted From Account No. To Account No. Additional Request $11,000 $35,100 Citizens Advised: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: General Fund Balance 100.1990.346.000 NA Brent Smith, Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. - Mendocino County Auditor Invoice #1004 2. - Mendocino County Auditor's calculation of Property Tax Administrative Costs Approved: Candace Horsley, City I~nager Mendocino County Auditor JAN 2 9 2005 501 Low Gap Road, Room 1080 Ukiah, CA 95482 ClTYOF UKIAH (707) 463-4388 FINANCE DEPT. Fax: (707) 467-2503 Thursday, January25, 2007 City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Property tax administration reimbursement authorized by Section 95.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code allows counties to recover a proportionate share of the cost of operating the property tax system from each agency receiving a portion of the ad valorem property tax. Accordingly, your district's charge for Property Tax Administrative Services based upon the property tax allocations received by your district in 2005-06 and the costs associated with those allocations has been determined to be: Invoice Number: 1004 Invoice Amount: $46,099.99 Please accept this letter as your invoice for these services. A worksheet which demonstrates how this fee was determined is available from this office upon request. This invoice is due and payable upon receipt and will be delinquent if not paid by February 28, 2007. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7h MEETING DATE: March 211 2007 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING RECORDS DESTRUCTION SUMMARY: The Finance Department has reviewed Records Destruction Notices encompassing ninety-nine boxes and has identified these boxes as ready for destruction. The City's Records Retention Schedule was adopted by City Council in 1999. The City Attorney has reviewed the Records Destruction Notices for each archival box and has approved those boxes designated for destruction. Funds have been allocated in the City Clerk's budget for shredding of these documents. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adoption of Resolution Authorizing Destruction of Certain Records ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Gall Petersen, City Clerk Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - Resolution Authorizing Destruction of Certain Records 2 - Exhibit A - Record Destruction Notice A p p r o v e d: ~,~¥-~.,~ .~'~ C~ndace Horsley, C~/ Manager Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS WHEREAS, the Finance Department has reviewed and approved the list of records that are ready for destruction; and WHEREAS, the attached list of City records represents records which are no longer necessary and may at this time be destroyed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ukiah City Council hereby approves the destruction of certain records, contained in Exhibit A of this Resolution, and authorizes the City Clerk to destroy the records. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of March, 2007, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Mari Rodin, Mayor Gail Petersen, City Clerk RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH EXHIBIT A I Date: January 29, 2007 I Department: Finance Records Coordinator: I I Gall Petersen, City Clerk Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction. Instructions: 1 Review this listing. 2 Obtain Department Head's Signature. 3 Return this notice, signed, no later than February 28, 2007 to the City Clerk. Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and legally. Gall Petersen, City Clerk LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE 'DATES RETENTION COMMENTS DATES 3 1606 Labor Distribution Reports 12/94-12/95 1999 Thomas 13 1229 Warrants paid G-K 7/91-6/92 2001 DeKnoblough 173 2987 Utility billin~l b-list 1/00-7/00 2006 McLellan 207 2115 Payroll timesheets 11/98-5/99 2006 Thomas 239 3293 Bankruptcy files 1985-1996 2003 McLellan 253 3298 Bad debt write-off 7/91-2/94 2002 McLellan 313 3300 Financial statements 4/00-8/00 2005 Norris 351 2175 Employee distribution reports 1/99-6/99 2005 Thomas 367 2178 Employee distribution reports 12/99-2/00 2006 Thomas 374 2179 Employee distribution reports 7/99-11/99 2005 Thomas 381 2185 Employee distribution reports 3/00-5/00 2006 Thomas 382 2184 Calculation totals 1/99-12/99 2002 Thomas 383 2186 Employee distribution reports 6/00-7/00 2006 Thomas 397 2196 Benefit distribution 1/99-12/99 2006 Thomas 409 2201 Payroll GL interface 1/99-9/99 2003 Thomas 410 3301 Emer~lency response billing 1992-1997 2002 Norris 413 2198 Labor distribution 1/99-12/99 2002 Thomas 415 2206 Vacation/sick leave reports 1/99-6/00 2001 Thomas 416 2205 Payroll interfaces/authorizations 10/99-6/00 2003 Thomas 445 1821 Billing register copies-dump/dui 7/95-1/96 2001 McLellan 455 1823 billing register copies-dump/dui 1/96-6/96 2005 McLellan 463 1928 Payroll records 12/95-10/86 2001 Thomas 488 3261 Prod/non productive report & 7/04-12/04 2005 MacFadand Vac/Sick Leave Report 493 3265 Billing and customer records !1/04-7/04 2006 McLellan 503 1597 Payroll records 12/93-12/94 2001 Thomas 505 1368 Bad debt write-offs (S-Z) 7/88-6/91 None Sechrest Signatures Authorizing Destruction Department Head I C!ty Clerk j ' Destroyed by: Date: Destroy (Finance)-City Clerk Feb 2007 RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH J Date: January 29, 2007 Department: Finance Records Coordinator: Gall Petersen, City Clerk Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction. Instructions: 1 Review this listing. 2 Obtain Department Head's Signature. 3 Return this notice, signed, no later than February 28, 2007 to the City Clerk. Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and legally. Gall Petersen, CitY Clerk LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS DATES 519 3308 Billing records 1988-1993 1996 McLellan 529 1392 Time sheets 8/92-11/92 2000 DeKnoblough 540 3313 Billing records 2/88-12/88 1991 McLellan 599 3320 Booking fees 1994-1999 2004 Norris 608 3323 Bad debt write-offs 1987-1991 1999 McLellan 626 3324 Billing records 2/00-2/02 2005 McLellan 633 1853 i Payroll timesheets 6/94-11/94 2002 Thomas 634 1854 Payroll timesheets 11/94-5/95 2003 Thomas 635 1855 Payroll timesheets 5/95-10/95 2003 Thomas 637 1857 Payroll timesheets 3~96-8~96 2004 Thomas 638 1858 Payroll timesheets 10~95-3~96 2003 Thomas 639 1859 Payroll validation 12186-10197 2001 Thomas 652 3329 Billing records 1998-202 2005 McLellan 655 3320 Billing records 1/05-6/05 2003 McLellan 658 3332 Bad debt write-offs 1975-1995 2003 McLellan 659 1879 Payroll timesheets 8/96-12/96 2004 Thomas 729 1999 Confidential payroll timesheets 5/98-11/98 2006 Thomas 734 2004 Confidential payroll timesheets 11/97-6/98 2005 Thomas 755 3340 Billing records 7/01-9/01 2005 McLellan 768 3341 Parking invoices 1988-1995 1999 Norris 816 2292 Utility payment reclisters 3/96-12/96 None Elton 839 2315 Utility service tags routes 2141 §/95-6/97 2005 Erin 870 3342 Cash receipts edit list 10/01-1/02 2005 Norris 875 2351 Employee distribution reports 8/00-10/00 2006 Thomas 888 2362 Health ins -terminated policies 1/94-12/00 2005 Thomas 889 2365 Payroll checks copies 8/99-2/00 2006 Thomas 892 2343 Billing records 1995-1999 2003 rvlcLellan Signatures Authorizing Destruction Department Head City Clerk I,~i~y Date: '-~-~-'/7//~- ~ ~ Date: Destroyed by: Date: Destroy (Finance)-City Clerk Feb 2007 RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH I Date: January 29, 2007 Department: Finance Records Coordinator: Gall Petersen, City Clerk Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction. Instructions: 1 Review this listing. 2 Obtain Department Head's Signature. 3 Return this notice, signed, no later than February 28, 2007 to the City Clerk. Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and legally. Gall Petersen, City Clerk LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS DATES 897 2373 Payroll records 1/01-12/01 2003 Thomas 899 2375 Payroll records 11/01-12/01 2006 Thomas 900 2376 Payroll records 1/00-12/00 2006 Thomas 901 2377 Payroll records 1/01-6/01 2004 Thomas 902 2378 Payroll records 7/01-12/01 2004 Thomas 903 2379 Payroll timesheets 10/99-4/00 2006 Thomas 904 2380 Payroll records 1/00-12/00 2003 Thomas 905 2381 Payroll checks copies 1/01-6/01 2006 Thomas 907 2383 Payroll records 1/01-9/01 2004 Thomas 908 2384 Payroll records 1/01-12/01 2002 Thomas 910 2386 Payroll records 1/01-4/01 2006 Thomas 915 2391 Payroll records 8/01-10/01 2006 Thomas 917 2932 Payroll checks copies 3/00-8/00 2006 Thomas 919 2395 Payroll records 91,98-99 2002 Thomas 920 2396 Payroll records 5/01-7/01 2006 Thomas 923 2399 Payroll records 7/00-12/00 2003 924 2400 Payroll records 1/01-12/01 2004 925 3345 Billing records 1/02-12/02 2005 McLellan 930 3346 Cash receipt stubs 5/00-5/00 2005 McLellan 932 3347 Cash receipt stubs 2/00-2/00 2005 McLellan 935 3348 Cash receipt stubs 7/00-8/00 2005 McLellan 938 3351 Cash receipts edit list 2/02-5/02 2005 Norris 944 2420 Billing records 7/02-9/02 2005 Erin 946 2422 Billing records 11/02-12/02 2005 947 2423 Billing records 1/03-1/03 2005 968 2444 Payroll records/EDD reports 1/94-12/00 2005 Thomas 969 2445 Payroll Validation 4/93-6/94 1999 Thomas Signatures Authorizing Destruction Destroyed by: Date: Destroy (Finance)-City Clerk Feb 2007 RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH I Date: January 29, 2007 Department: Finance Records Coordinator: Ga I Petersen, City Clerk Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction. Instructions: 1 Review this listing. 2 Obtain Department Head's Signature. 3 Return this notice, signed, no later than February 28, 2007 to the City Clerk. Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and legally. Gall Petersen, City Clerk LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS DATES 970 2446 Vacation/Sick leave reports 7/94-12/95 1996 Thomas 971 2447 Labor distribution reports 6/93-6/94 1997 Thomas 972 2448 Employee distribution reports 6/93-10/93 1999 Thomas 973 2449 Employee distribution reports 11/93-4/94 2000 DeKnoblough 974 2450 Employee distribution reports 7/94-12/94 2000 Thomas 975 2451 Payroll Interface report 1/92-9/92 1995 DeKnoblough 977 2453 Payroll reports 10/92-6/93 1996 DeKnoblough 978 2454 Payroll records-benefit dist. 7/93~10/93 2000 Thomas 981 2457 Labor distribution reports 2/97-2/98 2000 Thomas 985 2461 Payroll registers 6/93-6~94 1995 Thomas 987 2463 Payroll timesheets 5/86-12/86 1993 Inman 988 2464 Payroll records-benefit dist. 5/90-6/91 1998 990 2466 Employee distribution reports 12/94-9/95 2000 Thomas 992 2468 Employee dist. Reports 6/91-4/92 1998 Inman 994 2469 Employee dist. Reports/labor dist 5/90-6/91 1997 Inman 1019 2495 Warrants - paid 7/93-6/94 2004 Sechrest 1023 2499 Warrants - paid 7/93-6/94 2004 Sechrest 1132 2608 Confidential cash receipt rag. 3/03-4/03 None Archibald Signatures Authorizing Destruction ~e/~rfl~l. :~eadI Cit~._. Clerk Date: ~ Date: Destroyed by: Date: Destroy (Finance)-City Clerk Feb 2007 RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH Date: March 7, 2007 Department: Finance Records Coordinator: Gail Petersen, City Clerk Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction. Instructions: 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature. 3. Return this notice, signed, no later than to City Clerk. Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and legally. Gail Petersen, City Clerk LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS DATES 485 1138 REMIF - Liability Loss 11/30/82- None Given Goodrick Experience Reports 4~30~84 _ignatures Authorizin~l Destruction Date: ~ ,-,2~ ct 7 Date: Reports: Destroy-City Clerk 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO: 9a DATE: March 21, 2007 REPORT SUB3ECT: ADOPT/ON OF RESOLUTION AMENDZNG THE PLANNZNG PERMIT AND SERVZCES FEE SCHEDULE SUMMARY: The City Council adopted the most recent Planning Permit and Services fee schedule in June of 2005. It sets forth the fees the Department charges for the various permits and services it provides. Recently, the City Council discussed establishing a new encroachment permit for A-frame signs, sidewalk displays, outdoor caf6 tables and chairs, and other "encroachments" in the public right-of-way. The purpose of this Agenda Item is to consider adopting a Resolution (Attachment No. 1) modifying the fee schedule to establish a fee for the Spec/a/Encroachment Permit. Additionally, Staff is requesting that the Council consider establishing a new fee for a P/ann/ng Corem~ss/on Pre- App//cat/on Rev/ew Process. Finally, Staff is suggesting that the fee schedule be modified to list the new State Department of Fish and Game Environmental Review fees. Special Encroachment Permit Staff has prepared a draft Special Encroachment Permit application (Attachment No. 2) and a Public information Handout (Attachment No. 3) for discussion. To formally establish the Special Encroachment Permit process, the Ukiah City Code must be amended. For example, the sign regulations currently prohibit A-frame type signs from being placed within the public right-of-way. Staff is working with the City Attorney on these Code amendments and will return to the Council in the near future. In terms of the Special Encroachment Permit fee, it could be established in the proposed Resolution or in a subsequent Resolution once the Code amendments are completed. Staff is suggesting that the Spec/a/Encroachment Permitfee be $50.00. (continued of page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution modifying the Planning Permit and Services Fee Schedule. Citizen Advised: Ukiah Main Street Program, Ukiah Chamber of Commerce, Employers Council of Mendocino County, Ukiah Daily Journal 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 Attachments: 1. 2. Resolution Special encroachment permit application Special encroachment permit public information handout Department of Fish and Game fee correspondence Department of Fish and Game public information handout APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager Planninq Commission Pre-Application Fee The current fee schedule includes a fee for Staff and Project Review Committee pre-app//cation review. Staff would like to establish a fee for Planning Commission pre-app//cat/on review, which would provide the applicants, Commission, and public an opportunity to meet and discuss potential projects in the early planning and design stages. It would not be a mandatory process, but rather an optional process available to potential applicants. Based on the Planning Commission stipend of $50.00 per Commissioner per meeting, the Staff time for meeting with the applicant and preparing a Staff Report, and the cost to notice the public, Staff has concluded that a reasonable fee would be $250.00. State Department of Fish and Game Fees The State Department of Fish and Game recently notified the City of Ukiah that it has changed its fees and procedures associated with the review of environmental documents for Planning Permits. This change was a result of Senate Bill 1535 passed by the Legislature and signed into law by the Governor on September 29, 2006. in the past, if a project clearly had no impact on fish and wildlife resources, the City would file a notice of "De Minimus" or "no effect" when it filed the Negative Declaration or EIR Notice of Determination (NOD) for the project (Site Development Permits, Use Permits, etc.). Now the City is required to collect a State Fish and Game fee of $1,800 from the applicant and it must be paid to the County Clerk at the time the Negative Declaration or EIR Notice of Determination (NOD) is filed, which occurs within five days from the date the City approves a project. For projects involving an Environmental Impact Report, the fee is $2,500. To avoid this fee, the applicant can contact the State Department of Fish and Game and seek a "completed form from the Department ofFish and Game documenting the DFG's determination that the project will have no effect on fish and ~ildlife." Staff is recommending that these fees be listed in the adopted fee schedule so that the public, as well as future Staff are aware of it, 2 ATTACHMENT t RESOLUTION NO. 2007 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ESTABLISHING UPDATED PLANNING PERMIT FEES PURSUANT TO CITY ADOPTED ORDINANCE 880 WHEREAS, 1. Planning Permit fees in the City of Ukiah were last updated on June 1, 2005; and 2. The City has established a Special Encroachment Permit to place signs, tables/chairs, and other objects on sidewalks within the street right-of-way; and 3. The City has determined that a reasonable fee should be charged to cover the basic costs to process Special Encroachment Permits; and 4. The City has determined that the basic costs for precessing a Special Encroachment Permit would be $50.00; and 5. The City desires to provide a precess for development permit applicants to have conceptual discussions with the City Planning Commission about site planning and building design before making formal application: and 6. The cost for Planning Commission conceptual review is $250.00, which includes a portion of the meeting stipend for the Commission and the cost for preparing a staff report and other basic tasks to prepare for the meeting; and 7. The State Department of Fish and Game has adopted new environmental review precedures and fees associated with Negative Declarations and Environmental Impact Reports, which require applicants for development permits to pay $1,800.00 dollars for Negative Declarations and $2,500 for Environmental Impact Reports unless they receive A determination from State Fish and Game that the fee is waived; and 8. The City must collect this fee or waiver at the time of discretionary Development Permit application filing; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the updated fee schedule that establishes fees for Special Encroachment Permits, Planning Commission Pre- Application Review, and State Department of Fish and Game fees, and indicated on the revised Department of Planning and Community Development fee schedule attached as Exhibit 'A." PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21 st day of March 2007, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Marl Rodin, Mayor Linda Brown Deputy City Clerk 3 EXHIBIT "A" RESOLUTION NO. 2007 - PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIRED FEE OR SERVICE Site Development Permit $1000.00 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Major Affordable Housing Project: 80% Cost Recovery Special Housing Needs Project 60% Cost Recovery Acct.: 100.0400.449.001 Level 1:$150 Site Development Permit Level 2:$450 Minor Level 1 Minor Site Development Permits are very minor projects such Acct.: 100.0400.449.001 as parking lot expansions, minor exterior modifications to existing commercial/industrial buildings, etc. Level 2 Minor Site Development Permits are minor additions per the provisions contained in Article 20, Chapter 2 of the U.M.C. Use Permit $1000.00 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Major Affordable Housing Project: 80% Cost Recovery Special Housing Needs Project 60% Cost Recovery Acc~: 100.0400.449.001 Level 1:$150 Use Permit Level 2:$450 Minor Level 1 Minor Use Permits are temporary outdoor sales/display Acct.: 100.0400.449.001 projects, special events, etc. Level 2 Minor Use Permits are minor expansions or changes in use per the provisions contained in Article 20, Chapter 2 of the U.M.C. $500 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery (Major) Use PermitJSDP Amendment $50 (Minor Level 1) $150 (Minor Level 2) Acct#: 100.0400.449.001 Variance Major $1000.00 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Affordable Housing Project: 80% Cost Recovery Acct.: 100.0400.449.001 Special Housing Needs Project 60% Cost Recovery Variance $225 Minor Minor Variances are those seeking less than 50% relief from zoning Acct.: 100.0400.449.001 requirements per Article 20, Chapter 2 of the U.M.C. 4 Subdivision $1000,00 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Major Affordable Housing Project: 80% Cost Recovery Special Housing Needs Project 60% Cost Recovery Acct.: 100.0800.610.001 Subdivision Minor $900 Affordable Housing Project: $720 (80% Acct.: 100.0800.610.001 Special Housing Needs Project: $540 (60%) Subdivision Exception $500.00 Deposit and 100% cost Recovery Affordable Housing Project: 80% Cost Recovery Acc~: 100.0800.610.001 Special Housing Needs Project 60% Cost Recovery Boundary Line Adjustment $450 Affordable Housing Project: $360 (80%) Acct.: 100.0800.610.001 Special Housing Needs Project: $270 (60%) Appeal $100 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery (Applicants) $100.00 (public) Acct.: 100.0400.449.001 Agenda/Minutes $200/Year 100.0900.905,000 General Plan Amendment $1000.00 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Acc~: 100.0800.611.001 Annexation General Plan Amendment $1000.00 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Acc~: 100.0800.611.001 Rezoning $1000.00 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Acc~: 100.0800.611.001 Rezoning $1000.00 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Planned Development Affordable Housing Project: 80% Cost Recovery Special Housing Needs Project 60% Cost Recovery Acct.: 100.0800.611.001 CEQA Document Filing $25 $50 5 CEQA Fish and Game Fee Ne.qative Declarations: ~1~800 Environmental Impact Report: $2~500 (Fee required unless applicant provides City with Dept of Fish and Game determination that proiect will not have impact on fish and wildlife) Level 1:$0 Pre-Application Level 2: $100 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Conference/Review (Planning Staff) Level 1 Pre-Application Review is a meeting of less than 1 hour. Level 2 Pre-Application Review is a meeting exceeding 1 hour in length Acc~: 100.0800.611.003 and requiring research and preparation. Project Review Committee Pre-Application Review $200 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Acc~: 100.0800.611.003 Plannin,q Commission Pre-Application Review $250 Acct-~: 100.0800.611.003 Minor: $25 Sign Permit Major: $50 A Minor Siqn Permit involves up to one hour of analysis and Acct,: 100.0400.424.000 administrative work. A Maior Si!qn Permit takes more than 1 hour. Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Special CEQA Document or Complex Initial Full Consultant Cost plus 15% administration fee Environmental Study Acct,: 100.0400.449.003 Mitigation Monitoring $200 Acct.: 100.0800.611.003 Archaeological Search -for Cost - SSU Northwest Information Center Environmental Review 6 Public Hearing Continuations requested by applicants that require $50 Re-noticing Acct.: 100.0800.611.003 PenaltyNiolation (proceeding without permit) Double the cost of the permit Acc~: 100.0800.611.003 Level 1:$0 Level 2:$100 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Zoning/Planning Research Level 1 Zoning/Planning Research means reseamh taking up to 1 Acct.: 100.0800.611.003 hour Level 2 Zoning/Planning Research means research taking more than 1 hour Specific Plan/Master Plan $1000 Deposit and 100% Cost Recovery Review Affordable Housing Project: 80% Cost Recovery Special Housing Needs Project: 60% Cost Recovery Acct.: 100.0800.611.003 Address Change $100 Acct.: 100.0800.611.003 County Airport Land Use Commission Referral for Land Use Plan Consistency $150 Determination Acct.: 100.0800.611.003 Outdoor Sales/Display (Temporary) $150 (Level 1 Minor Use Permit) Acct.: 100.0400.449,001 Building Permit Review Fee for Discretionary Review Projects $50 Acct.: 100.0800.611.003 General Plan/Advance Planning Maintenance Fee 15% of the total cost of a Building Permit (Building Permit, Mechanical Permit, Electrical Permit, Acct~ 900.205.234 Plumbing Permit and Plan Check) 7 Special Ri.qht-of-Way $50 Encroachment Fee (si~lns, planters~ etc.) Acct.: 100.0400.424.000 Document and Map Fees General Plan $30.00 Zoning Ordinance $20.00 Subdivision Ordinance $20.00 Master Bike/Ped Plan $20.00 Airport Master Plan $25.00 Airport Good Neighbor Policy Document $15.00 Landscaping Guidelines $15.00 Design Guidelines $15.00 Creek Plans $15.00 General Plan Map (color) $30.00 General Plan Map (B&W) $10,00 Zoning Map (color) $30.00 Zoning Map (B&W) $10.00 Miscellaneous Maps/Graphics/Reports $5.00-$30,00 Acc'~: 100.0900.905.000 Photo Copy $0.20 per page Acct.: 100.0900.905.000 NOTES: Affordable Housing Projects: Projects proposing 100% of the housing units to be "locked-in" affordable to citizens earning less than 80% of the area median income, "sweat-equity" residential projects, and residential second units. 2. Special Needs Projects: Projects involving housing for identified groups in need such as seniors, homeless persons, and the mentally ill. 3. General Plan/Advance Planning Maintenance Fee: This fee is charged on all Building Permits, and will be used to update the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and other long range planning documents. The cost for basic CEQA Initial Studies and Negative Declarations wil~ be recovered through the 100% cost recovery for the discretionary permit 8 ATTACHMENT Permit Coordinator SPECIAL Department of Public Works ENCROACHMENT PERMIT 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 Phone: 707-463-6284 Fax: 707-463-6204 PERMITEE'S NAME: BUSINESS LICENSE NUMBER: BUSINESS NAME: ADDRESS: PHONE: FAX: OBJECT TO BE PLACED IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: PROPOSED LOCATION OF OBJECT: SUBMITI-AL REQUIREMENTS: 1. Site Plan showing proposed location of object 2, Photograph or drawing of object 3, Proof of required Insurance 4, Processing fee 5, Statement regarding the size and height of the object STANDARD REQUIREMENTS 1. All Businesses shall possess a valid Business License that has been issued by the City of Ukiah Director of Finance. 2. Any sidewalk encroachment shall comply with the American's with Disability's Act requirement of having the minimum of three (3') feet of sidewalk clearance for wheelchairs. 3. Only one (1) sandwich board sign is allowed provided each side does not exceed 6 sq. ff. 4. All objects in the public right-of-way shall be removed at the end of each business day. 5. All objects placed in the public right-of-way shall be maintained in a safe and presentable condition. This may include replacement of defective parts, painting, repainting, cleaning and other acts required for the maintenance of the object. Insurance Requirements 1. Businesses shall procure and maintain for the duration of the permit General Liability insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the sidewalk encroachment. The General Liability coverage and policy is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 2. Amount: $1,000,000 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 the location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 3. The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as insureds with respect to liability arising out of sidewalk encroachment owned, leased, hired or borrowed by or on behalf of the Business; and with respect to liability arising out of sidewalk encroachment on behalf of the Business including materials, parts or equipment in connection with such sidewalk encroachment. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Businesses insurance, or as a separate owner's policy. 4. The Businesses insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Businesses insurance and shall not contribute with it. 5. The insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given the City. Special Encroachment Permit Application 2007 6. Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of the additional insured in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional insured would be invalid under Subdivision (b) of Section 2782 of the Civil Code. Verification of Insurance Coverage Businesses shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements affecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements should be on forms provided by the City or on other than the City's forms, provided those endorsements or policies conform to the requirements. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before the sidewalk encroachment permit shall be issued. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of ail required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications at any time. Other Conditions: This encroachment permit shall be granted for the installation of which is to be located in the City owned public right-of-way. If said encroachment proves to be a public health or safety hazard, the owner or permitee sha~l be required to remove said encroachment at the owner's or permitee's own expense. City shall notify owner or permitee with written notice if removal is required and said encroachment shall be removed immediately upon receipt of said written notice. Agreement to Indemnify the City of Ukiah 1. PERMITEE agrees to waive any claim it might have against the City of Ukiah ("CITY") or its officers and employees for death to any person, personal injury, or property damage, resulting from the use of City right-of-way for the sidewalk encroachment authorized by this permit. 2. PERMITEE agrees to indemnify and hold CITY and its officers and employees harmless from and against any claim by its members or third parties for death to any person, personal injury, or property damage, including all costs associated with defending against any such claim which arises out of PERMITEE'S activities under this permit, except for deaths, personal injuries, or property damage resulting solely and exclusively from the active negligence of CITY or its officers or employees. ACCEPTANCE OF PERMIT CONDITIONS: ACCEPTED BY: (Business Representative) Title: IDATE: PERMIT VALIDATION: ISSUED BY: DATE: IPERMIT NUMBER: VERIFICATION OF LOCATION AND COMPLIANCE WITH ALL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: INSPECTED BY: DATE: Signature of Applicant Date Special Encroachment Permit Application 2007 A'FrACHMENT,--, CTTY OF UKTAH Department of Planning & Community Development 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482 www.cityofukiah.com Special Encroachment Permits The City of Ukiah allows objects to be placed in the public right-of-way with the approval of a Spec/a/Encroachment Perm/t. This permit is intended to allow tempora~ signs (such as A-Frame signs), caf~ outdoor tables and chairs, sidewalk displays, planters, and other objects to be located on the sidewalk or other area within the public right-of-way. The Spec/a/Encroachment Perm/t is different than the traditional Encroachment Permit that is issued for construction activities taking place within the public right-of-way, Application Process: After a Speda/Encroachment Perm/t application is submitted and the required $50.00 processing fee is paid, the application is reviewed to make sure that the type and location of the encroaching object meets all requirements/conditions. In addition, the business must have a business license and the required insurance. 1. All Businesses shall possess a valid Business License that has been issued by the City of Ukiah Director of Finance. 2. No object shall be placed in any way to impede the free flow of pedestrian traffic. 3. Any sidewalk encroachment shall comply with the American's with Disability's Act requirement of having the minimum of three (3') feet of sidewalk clearance for wheelchairs. 4. Only one (1) sandwich board sign is allowed per business provided each side does not exceed 6 sq. ft. 5. In addition any other types of sidewalk encroachments (i.e. clothing racks, display tables, eating tables, flower pots etc.) shall be removed at the end of each business day. 6. All objects placed in the public right-of-way shall be maintained in a safe and presentable condition. This may include replacement of defective parts, painting, repainting, cleaning and other acts required for the maintenance of the object. Based upon the object to be placed in the public right-of-way and its proposed location, additional conditions may be required. Application Submittal Requirements: The following information must be submitted when applying for a Special Encroachment Permit: 1. Completed application 2. $50.00 processing fee 3. Site plan showing proposed location of object 4. Photograph or drawing of object 5. Proof of required insurance Insurance Requirements: Businesses shall procure and maintain for the duration of the permit General Liability insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the sidewalk encroachment. The General Liability coverage and policy is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. Amount: $1,000,000 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 the location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2. The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as insureds with respect to liability arising out of sidewalk encroachment owned, leased, hired or borrowed by or on behalf of the Business; and with respect to liability arising out of sidewalk encroachment on behalf of the Business including materials, parts or equipment in connection with such sidewalk encroachment. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Businesses insurance, or as a separate owner's policy. 3. The Businesses insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Businesses insurance and shall not contribute with it. 4. The insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given the City. 5. Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of the additional insured in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional insured would be invalid under Subdivision (b) of Section 2782 of the Civil Code. Verification of Insurance Coverage: Businesses shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements affecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements should be on forms provided by the City or on other than the City's forms, provided those endorsements or policies conform to the requirements. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before the sidewalk encroachment permit shall be issued. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications at any time. Applications: Special Encroachment Permit applications are available at the City of Ukiah Department of Planning and Community Development, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah or on the City of Ukiah website - www.cit¥ofukiah.com. Information: Information regarding Special Encroachment Permits can be obtained by contacting the Department of Planning and Community Development, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah - (707) 463-6200. A'I~ACHMENT State of California - The Resources Aaency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME htr p://www.dfg,ca.gov Habitat Conserv~ion Planning Brench 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1260 Sacramento, California 95814 (916) 653-4875 December 28, 2006 County Clerks CEQA Lead Agencies ARNOLD SCHWARZENE(;GER~ Governor RECEIVED JAN 0 8 2007 CITY OF PLAI NI IG DEPT. Dear Sir or Madam: Senate Bill (SR) 1535 was passed by the Legislature and signed into law by the Governor on September 29, 2006. The bill contains, among other things, previsions which amend Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 to increase Department of Fish and Game (DFG) CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) filing fees. The environmental filing fees pay for many important DFG activities. They help fund DFG's cost of consulting and coordinating with other public agencies, reviewing environmental documents, recommending avoidance and mitigation measures to eliminate or reduce project impacts to fish and wildlife, developing mitigation monitoring requirements and carrying out other activities to protect public trust resources under CEQA. The increased fee will provide, among other things, funding for additional DFG staff to participate in the CEQA review and coordination process, This will mean an improved response time to lead and responsible agencies for advanced project planning, DFG consultation, and direct review and comment of environmental documents for many projects. Although the fees will contribute to more comprehensive review of CEQA documents, DFG will continue to prioritize reviews to ensure focus on those projects with the greatest potential to impact the State's most important fish, wildlife and habitat resources. Mandatory statutory changes in the bill, which will take effect on January 1, 2007, require the fo!!owing: · An increase in the DFG filing fees for Negative Declarations (NDs), Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs), and Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) as outlined in the attached table; Annual fee adjustment based on an inflation index; Elimination of the "de minimis" fee exemption for projects determined to have a de minimis effect on wildlife (The de minimis exemption is replaced by a fee exemption, issued by DFG, for eligible projects that have "no effect on wildlife"); and · An increase in the County Clerk processing fee. Under the revised statute, a lead agency may no longer exempt a project from the filing fee requirement by determining that the project will have a de minimis effect on Conserving California's ¢Vi'ldlife Since 1870 CEQA Lead Agencies and County Clerks December 28, 2006 Page 3 documenting the DFG's determination that the project will have no effect on fish and wildlife. The DFG appreciates your cooperation with payment and collection of these fees, which fund important programs to protect fish and wildlife resources in California. If project applicants have questions regarding fees for their individual projects, please direct them to the DFG 2007 CEQA fee information line at (916) 651-0603, a recorded message will provide information about the filing fee increase and process. Messages received through the information line will be returned in the order they were received. Information is also available at the DFG website at www.dfg.ca.gov. If you or your staff have questions regarding the statutory changes to the fees, or the fee collection process, please contact Scott Flint, directly at (916) 651-0371. Sonke Mastrup Deputy Director Resources Management and Policy Division Attachment IJJ LU MARSHA A. WHARFF ASSESSOR COUNTY CLERK - RECORDER REGISTRAR OE VOTERS COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL MARRIAGES ASSESSOR FAX: (707) 463-6597 CLERK-RECORDER FAX: (707)463-4257 COUNTY OF MENDOCINO OFFICE OF ASSESSOR-COUNTY CLERK-RECORDER 501 LOW GAP ROAD, RM. 1020 UK~AH, CALIFORNIA95482 e-maih acr@co.mendocino.ca.us SUSAN M. RANOCHAK ASSISTANT ASSESSOR (707) 463 431~ CINDY L. FRANCI ASSISTANT CLERK RECORDER County Clerk: (707) 463-4370 Recorder: (707) 463-4376 KATRINA BARTOLOMIE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF VOTERS (707) 463-4371 December 14, 2006 City of Ukiah #00 Seminary Avenue Ukiah CA 95482 As an agency who frequently submits Notices of Determination and/or Notices of Exemption to the County Clerk's Office for processing, I wanted to make sure you were aware of SB 1535 pertaining to the fees for Notices of Determination & Notices of Exemption (Negative Declaration & EIR) this bill will increase those costs effective January l, 2007, and in addition increases the County Clerk's processing fee from $25.00 to $50.00. Notice of Determination where an Environmental Impact Report was prepared will now be $2,500.00 in addition to the $50.00 County Clerk's processing fee (the $2,500.00 fee can be waived provided it meets the requirements for exemption & the lead agency submits an original certificate of fee exemption with the notice). Notice of Determination where a Negative Declaration ~vas prepared will now be $1,800.00 - in addition to the $50.00 County Clerk's processing fee (the $1,800.00 fee can be waived provided it meets the requirements for exemption & the lead agency submits an original certificate of fee exemption with the notice). Notice of Exemption County Clerk s processmg ee will be $50.00. Please share this information with anyone in your organization who may submit Notices of Determination and/or Notices of Exemption to the County Clerk's Office for processing. Please do not hesitate to contact our office with any questions. 707-463~4376. Very truly yours, MARSHA A. WHARFF Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder Cindy L. ~m~i, Assistant ~J~rk--Recorder IMPORTANT CHANGE TN STATE LAW Planning Permits / CEQA Review State Department Fish and Game Fees ATTACHMENT TO: Planning Permit Applicants Please be advised that the State Department of Fish and Game recently notified the City of Ukiah that it has changed its fees and procedures associated with the review of environmental documents for Planning Permits. This change was a result of Senate Bill 1535 passed by the Legislature and signed into law by the Governor on September 29, 2006. Tn the past, if a project clearly had no impact on fish and wildlife resources, the City would file a notice of "De Minimus" or "no effect" when it filed the Negative Declaration or EI~R Notice of Determination (NOD) for the project (Site Development Permits, Use Permits, etc.). Now the City is required to collect a State Fish and Game fee of $1,800 from the applicant and it must be paid to the County Clerk at the time the Negative Declaration or ETR Notice of Determination (NOD) is filed, which occurs within five days from the date the City approves a proiect. For proiects involvinq an Environmental impact Report, the fee is $2,500. The City is required to collect this $1,800/$2,500 fee before action is taken on Planning Permit projects involving a Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report to ensure that the funds are available to pay at the time of NOD filing with the County Clerk. The County Clerk will not accept the NOD for filing unless the fee is paid. Failure to file the NOD provides a six-month rather than a 30-day CEQA legal challenge period to the approval of the project. The State Department of Fish and Game indicates that failure to pay the fee invalidates any local permit (Section 711.4c3 of the Fish and Game Code}. To avoid this fee, the applicant can contact the State Department of Fish and Game and seek a "comp/eted form from the Department of Fish and Game documenting the DFG's determination that the project wi//have no effect on fish and w/id/ire." State Fish and Game Staff (Scott Flint) can be contacted directly at: (916) 651-0371 or (916) 651-0603. APPLICANTS SHOULD CONTACT THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF FTSH AND GAME BEFORE FILING AN APPLICATION WITH THE CITY TO DISCUSS THEIR PRO3ECTS AND DETERMINE IF TT WILL BE SUB3ECT TO THE FEE. A copy of the State Department of Fish and Game notification letter and information regarding this new Fish and Game fee can be obtained from the Department of Planning and Community Development, Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah / (707) 463-6203 / planning @cityofukiah.com. AGENDA ITEM NO: 9b MEETING DATE: March 21, 2007 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS IN THE MENDOCINO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND MAINTAINED BY THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND APPROVING AGREEMENT FOR SALE OF REAL PROPERTY TO THE MCOE SUMMARY: There is an agenda summary report on both the Redevelopment and City Council agendas regarding several agreements with the Mendocino County Office of Education (MCOE). Both a release agreement and a real property sales agreement, attached as Attachment 1, have been considered by the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency at previous meetings, including in closed session on February 7, 2007. The purchase and sale agreement with the City provides for the sale of real property located at 1100 Low Gap Road to the Mendocino County Office of Education ("MCOE") that it currently leases from the City for a dollar per year. MCOE has constructed a complex of buildings on the property, which, according to MCOE's Superintendent Paul Tichinin, cost approximately $1.9 Million. MCOE and the City have been negotiating over the sale of this property to MCOE. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct public hearing and adopt attached resolution. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A FUNDING: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Mendocino County Office of Education City Manager David J. Rapport, City Attorney Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property 2. Proof of publication 3. Resolution Approved: ~'~'~ Candac~ Horsley, C~ Manager The Settlement and Release Agreement with the Agency resolves a misunderstanding by the auditors of the formula which determines the amount of money to deposit in a Capital Outlay Fund the Agency maintains for the benefit of MCOE under a 1990 agreement between MCOE and the Agency. Under the settlement agreement, the Agency credits the MCOE Capital Outlay Fund with funds not credited to the fund in the past and calculates future deposits in the correct way. MCOE will fully release the Agency from any other liability related to the miscalculation of deposits to the Capital Outlay Fund. MCOE has asked to use money in the fund to buy the Low Gap property from the City for $174,667 and to pay the closing costs associated with that purchase at $5,000 as provided in Attachment 1. MCOE would then continue to draw down funds from this account to pay for the costs of construction. Before the City can approve the purchase agreement and the Agency can approve the settlement agreement, the City Council must conduct a public hearing and make specified findings as required by the 1990 Agreement and the Community Redevelopment Law. The required public notice of the hearing and a summary of the proposal in compliance with Health and Safety Code Section 33679 have been published and available for two successive weeks prior to the hearing. (See Proof of Publication, attached as Attachment 2.) The Resolution and Exhibit A (Summary), attached thereto, explain the purpose of the hearing and the required findings and contain the factual basis for the findings. (See Attachment 3.) The Council should conduct the public hearing. Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. A'I-fACHM ENT / AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE, SALE AND DEVELOPMENT OF REAL PROPERTY This Agreement is entered by and between the CITY OF UKIAH ("Seller") and MENDOCINO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION ("Purchaser") on , 200~' ("Effective Date"), in Ukiah, California. 1. Sale of Premises: Seller agrees to sell and Purchaser agrees to buy that certain portion of real property located in the City of Ukiah, Mendocino County, California and commonly known as 1011 Low Gap Road, Mendocino County Assessor's Parcel No. APN. O01.020.09, and as more fully described in the attached Exhibit A which is incorporated herein by reference ("the Premises."). 2. Purchase Price: Seller agrees to accept fi.om Purchaser One Hundred and Seventy Four Thousand, Six Hundred and Sixty Seven dollars ($174,667.00), as full and complete payment for the Premises and all attendant costs. Purchaser may pay the purchase price and any closing costs of this Agreement from the Capital Outlay fund established for the Purchaser under the Agreement between the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency ("URDA") and Purchaser, dated Januaryl7, 1990. Purchaser hereby requests and authorizes the URDA to transfer the funds fi.om the Capital Outlay Fund to Seller to open escrow and the balance prior to close of escrow. 3. Condition of Title: Title to the Premises shall be flee and clear of all liens, except for taxes not yet due, and all easements and encumbrances not approved by Purchaser. 4. Lot split: Prior to the close of escrow, Seller shall effectuate the legal process for separating the property described in Exhibit A into a separate parcel Upon completion of such process Seller shall have a record survey conducted, and officially recorded with the Mendocino County Recorder's Office, at its own expense by a licensed civil engineering firm to verify the property description including easements. 5. Escrow: Purchaser shall open escrow with a title company of its choice within five (5) days fi.om the Effective Date and deposit with the title company $1,O00frornparagraph 2 above, which shall be applied toward the total purchase price. The parties shall deliver escrow instructions to the escrow agent within 14 days fi.om the effective date of this Agreement, which shall include the following: a. Closing date: Escrow must close on or before · 200~- b. Preliminary title report and title insurance: Purchaser shall purchase using funds from paragraph 2 above, review and approve a preliminary title report within fourteen (14) days of the Effective Date. If Purchaser disapproves the report, it must provide written notice of such disapproval to Seller. Purchaser shall have no further obligations under this Agreement and shall be entitled to the return of any money or documents deposited with the escrow agent, if he gives Seller timely written notice that he disapproves of title as set forth in a preliminary title report. If Purchaser fails to provide such timely written notice, he shall be deemed to have waived all objections to title. c. Inspections and Condition of Premises: Purchaser acknowledges that it has had exclusive possession and control of the Premises under a lease since 1990, and that it has constructed numerous structures and improvements on the Premises. Accordingly, Purchaser waives any right to inspect the Premises. (1) Premises sold "AS IS": Seller makes no representation or warranty concerning the condition of the Premises and Purchaser agrees to accept the Premises in its "AS IS" condition. Purchaser hereby acknowledges that he has not relied upon any representation, statement or warranty concerning the condition of the Premises by Seller or any of its officers, agents or employees in deciding to purchase the Premises. (2) Flood ltazard Area Disclosure: The Property is not located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) "Special Flood Hazard Area." (3) Geologic Hazard Zone: The Premises is not located within a Special Studies Zone as designated under Public Resources Code sections 2021-2625. d. Closing costs: Seller shall pay all escrow and title insurance costs of said conveyance in accordance with paragraph 2. Real property taxes, assessments and insurance premiums, if any, shall be prorated between the parties from the date the deed is recorded in the official records of Mendocino County. All prorations shall be made on the basis ora 365 day year or 30 day month as applicable. e. Payment of purchase: Prior to close of escrow, Purchaser shall deposit the balance of the Purchase in accordance with paragraph 2, which shall be disbursed to Seller upon close of escrow. f. Development of property: Purchaser acknowledges that Seller is the City of Ukiah and that Purchaser's proposed development of the Premises is an important consideration in the Seller's decision to sell the Premises to Purchaser. Prior to close of escro~v and as a condition thereto, Purchaser shall: (1) Utilize the sum of Twenty Six Thousand dollars ($26,000.00) received from the Capital Outlay fund for landscaping purposes on the premises. h. Tax Withholding: Under the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPA; 26 USC section 1445), every Purchaser of U.S. real property must, unless an exemption applies, deduct and withhold from a seller's proceeds 10% of the gross sales price. No withholding is required if the Seller certifies under penalty of perjury that it is not a foreign person within the meaning of the Act. The Seller hereby certifies under penalty of perjury that it is not a "foreign person" within the meaning of FIRPA and Purchaser is not required to and shall not withhold any portion of the gross sales price for state or federal capital gains tax. i. Termination of Lease: Upon close of escrow the lease of the Premises between Seller and Purchaser, dated January 17, 1990, is hereby terminated and shall be of no further force 2 or effect. 6. Release and indemnity. Purchaser agrees to waive and release Seller fi.om any and all liability, cost or obligation arising from any defect in or condition of the Premises, including, but not limited to, conditions involving the presence of hazardous or toxic substances on the Premises. In addition, Purchaser agrees to fully indemnify and defend Seller from and against any such cost, obligation or liability, including all costs incurred by Seller in defending against any such claim, liability, cost or obligation, such as, but not limited to, attorneys' fees, fees of experts and investigators, and litigation expenses. 7. Right of Possession: Purchaser's right of possession shall continue after close of escrow. 8. Force Majeure: The time for performing any condition under this Agreement shall be extended, and the obligations of Purchaser suspended, by the number of days during which the performance of that condition is prevented due to fire, flood, unusual weather events, strikes, labor disputes, shortages, utility curtailments, power failures, explosions, civil disturbances, the time required to satisfy government regulatory requirements beyond the minimum periods permitted by law, acts of God, shortages of equipment or supplies, unavailability of transportation, acts or omissions of third parties or any other reason beyond the reasonable control of the Purchaser. 9. Notice: Whenever notice is permitted or required under this Agreement, it shall be deemed given when personally served or when deposited in the United States mail with proper first class postage affixed thereto and addressed as follows: SELLER: City of Ukiah c/o Candace Horsley, City Manager Ukiah Civic Center 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482 PURCHASER: Mendocino County Office of Education c/o Vicla' Todd 2240 Old River Road Ukiah, CA 95482 Either party may change its official address by giving notice as provided in this paragraph. 10. Counterparts: This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. 11. Partial Invalidity: If any term or provision of this Agreement shall be deemed to be invalid or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this Agreement will not be affected thereby, and each remaining term and provision of this Agreement will be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 3 12. Possession of the Premises: Seller will deliver possession of the Premises to Purchaser upon the Close of Escrow. 13. Waivers: No waiver of any breach of any covenant or provision contained herein will be deemed a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach thereof, or of any other covenant or provision contained herein. No extension of time for performance of any obligation or act will be deemed an extension of time for performance of any other obligation or act except those of the waiving party, which will be extended by a period of time equal to the per/od of the delay. 14. Successors and Assigns: This Agreement is binding upon and inures to the benefit of the permitted successors and assigns of the parties hereto. 15. Professional Fees: If any party to this agreement prevails in any action or proceeding to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party or parties its costs of suit, including the reasonable fees of attomeys, investigators, expert witnesses or consultants necessarily incurred by the prevailing party in prosecuting or defending the action or proceeding. 16. Entire Agreement: This Agreement (including all Exhibits attached hereto) constitutes the entire contract between the parties hereto and may not be modified except by an instrument in writing signed by the party to be charged. This Agreement supercedes any prior statements, representations or agreements between the parties concerning its subject matter, none of which shall he admissible in any proceeding concerning the enforcement or interpretation of this Agreement. 17. Time of Essence: Seller and Purchaser hereby acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition, obligation, and provision hereof. 18. Construction: This Agreement has been prepared by Seller and its professional advisors and reviewed by Purchaser and its professional advisors. Seller and Purchaser and their respective advisors believe that this Agreement is the product of all of their efforts, that it expresses their agreement and that it should not be interpreted in favor of or against either Purchaser or Seller. The parties further agree that this Agreement will be construed to effectuate the normal and reasonable expectations ora sophisticated Seller and Purchaser. 19. Governing Law: The parties hereto expressly agree that this Agreement will be governed by, interpreted under, and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties mutually consent to jurisdiction and venue in the courts of Mendocino County and waive any objections to the jurisdiction or venue of such courts. 20. Agreement and Release: This Agreement is dependant upon and effective only upon the execution and completion of the "Agreement and Release" dated 21. 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 agreement. WHEREFORE, the parties have entered this Agreement on the Effective Date. SELLER PURCHASER By: By: CANDACE HORSLEY, City Manager PDS~vlendoCOEXLowGapPurchaseLAgreementForPurchasel 11706 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MENDOCINO I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above- entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of the Ukiah Daily Journal, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published daily in the City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino and which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Mendocino, State of California, under the date of September 22, 1952, Case Number 9267; that the notice, of which the annexed is a 'printed copy (set in type not smaller than non-pareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to wit: all in the year 2007. I certify (or decline) under penalty of perjury that the ,foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Ukiah, California, this ~o ~ ~'¥'' day of ~'¢ ~¢¢~ ¢, ¢' ~, , 2007. ANNETTE KAHOUN, LEGAL CLERK This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp ATTACHMENT 2.7F Proof of Publication of: 138-07 2-25107 NOTICE OF PUBliC NEARING · NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City ~of 0kiah .(the 'lS"~y"), at its ~'eg~!a? me,ting oniMarch.21; _2.097, at 6:i5 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, will hold a public hearing pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33679 on the proposed use of UkJah Redevelopment Agency funds for the acquisition of land and to reimburse the construction o,! buildings to be owned by the Mendocino Office of Educa- tion. The property an~f buildings are located at 1100 Lbw G~p Road in the City of UkJah. The hearing will be held in the City Council cham- bers at' the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah, CA. 95482. A summary of the proposal is available' for in- spection and copying at the office of the City Clerk ,of the City of Ukiah at the Ukiah Civic Center and may be viewed on the City's web- sits: www.citvofukiah.com~ By:/s/Gall Pctersen City clerk Dated: February 22, 2007 PROOF OF PUBLICATION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Ukiah (the "City"), at its regular meeting on March 21, 2007, at 6:15 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, will hold a public hearing pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33679 on the proposed use of Ukiah Redevelopment Agency funds for the acquisition of land and to reimburse the construction of buildings to be owned by the Mendocino Office of Education. The property and buildings are located at 1100 Low Gap Road in the City of Ukiah. The hearing will be held in the City Council chambers at the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah, CA. 95482. A summary of the proposal is available for inspection and copying at the office of the City Clerk of the City of Ukiah at the Ukiah Civic Center and may be viewed on the City's website: www.ciWofukiah.com. By: /s/Gail Petersen City Clerk Dated: February 22, 2007 Publish Sunday February 25, 2007 ATTACHMENT 3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING THE USE OF FUNDS IN THE MENDOCINO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WITH THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. WHEREAS, 1. The Ukiah Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") maintains a Capital Outlay Fund for the benefit of the Mendocino County Office of Education ("MCOE"), pursuant to the 1990 agreement between the MCOE and the Agency ("the Agreement"); and 2. The Capital Outlay Fund consists of the tax increment revenues to the Agency produced by the annual 2% increase in the assessed value of real property within the Agency's Redevelopment Project Area, which would have been received by MCOE, if the Agency and Project Area had not been established; and 3. Pursuant to the Agreement, MCOE may request the City Council to approve the disbursement of funds in the Capital Outlay Fund for property acquisition and capital projects proposed by MCOE that comply with Health and Safety Code Sections 33445, 33678, 33679 and other provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law; and 4. Before the City Council may approve a disbursement from the Capital Outlay Fund requested by MCOE, the City Council must conduct a public hearing in compliance with Health and Safety Code Section 33679; and 5. Health and Safety Code Section 33679 requires notice of the public hearing to be published for two successive weeks prior to the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and a summary of the proposal to be available for public inspection during that two week period; and 6. Notice has been published as required by law and the Summary, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, was available for inspection during the required period; and 7. Health and Safety Code Section 33679 requires the City Council to determine the total funds to be disbursed from the fund and to make specified findings before it can approve the disbursement of said funds; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. The total taxes to be disbursed on behalf of MCOE from the Capital Outlay Fund for the acquisition of land and construction of improvements is as follows: a. $ 174,667 b. 5,000 c. 1,900,000 $2,079,667 for land purchase. closing cost (estimated). approximate construction cost Total 2. Based on the facts as set forth in the attached Exhibit A, the City Council hereby finds: a. The buildings are of benefit to the project area and contribute to the elimination of blight. b. There are no other reasonable means of financing the acquisition of land or the construction of the buildings available to the community. 3. The distribution as requested by MCOE is hereby approved. 4. The Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property between the City of Ukiah and the Mendocino County Office of Education presented to the City Council for approval at its meeting on February 7, 2007, is hereby approved and the City Manager is authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the City. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Ukiah City Council on March 21, 2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Marl Rodin, Mayor Gall Petersen, City Clerk EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION (ATTACHMENT 3 TO ASR) SUMMARY OF PROPOSED EXPENDITURE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MENDOCINO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND The City of Ukiah created a redevelopment agency ("Agency"), adopted a redevelopment plan, and established a redevelopment project area in 1990. The Agency uses a portion of property tax revenues to undertake projects and finance improvements to reduce or eliminate blighted conditions in the redevelopment project area. The primary source of income to a redevelopment agency is "tax increment," which is the portion of ad valorem real property tax that results from the increase in assessed value of real property in the Agency's redevelopment project area over the "base year," which is the year the redevelopment plan is approved. The increment is composed of two parts: the annual 2% increase authorized by Cal. Revenue and Taxation Code Section 110, and the increase resulting from reassessment of real property after a sale or after the construction of improvements. In 1990, when the City of Ukiah adopted its redevelopment plan and created the Agency, it entered an agreement ("MCOE Agreement") with the Mendocino County Office of Education ("MCOE"), among other local government agencies. The agreement with MCOE requires the Agency to pay into a Capital Outlay Fund for MCOE the 2% of property tax increment above the 1990 base year that goes to the Agency. The agreement authorizes MCOE to request the City Council to approve the disbursement of funds in the Capital Outlay Fund for capital improvements proposed by MCOE that comply with Health and Safety Code Sections 33445, 33678, 33679 and other provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law. Under the agreement and the Community Redevelopment Law, the City Council must conduct a public hearing in compliance with Health and Safety Code Section 33679 before it can approve the disbursement of funds in the Capital Outlay Fund for the acquisition of land or the construction of buildings to be owned by MCOE. MCOE has requested that the funds currently on deposit in its Capital Outlay Fund and all future funds to be deposited during the remaining term of the Ukiah Development Plan be disbursed to MCOE to pay for the cost of acquiring real property from the City of Ukiah upon which MCOE has constructed the Ukiah High On-Campus Community School and the Ukiah High Young Parent Program/CalSAFE at 1100 Low Gap Road and to reimburse MCOE for the cost of constructing the school and landscaping the school grounds. Under the MCOE Agreement, MCOE currently leases this property from the City of Ukiah for $1 per year. The City has agreed to sell the property to MCOE for $174,667. Prior to conducting its public hearing on this request, the City is required to make available for two weeks a summary. The summary must state the total amount of taxes proposed to be used for the acquisition of land and the construction of buildings and other improvements, and it must include the facts supporting the findings which are required by Health & Safety Code §33445. Those findings are as follows: (1) That the buildings, facilities, structures, or other improvements are of benefit to the project area or the immediate neighborhood in which the project is located. (2) That no other reasonable means of financing the buildings, facilities, structures, or other improvements, are available to the community. (3) That the payment of funds for the acquisition of land or the cost of buildings, facilities, structures, or other improvements will assist in the elimination of one or more blighting conditions inside the project. 1. Estimate of taxes proposed to pay for land and construction of buildings. a. $ 174,667 b. 5,000 c. 1,900,000 $2,079,667 for land purchase. closing cost (estimated). approximate construction cost Total 2. Facts supporting findings under Health & Safety Code Section 33445. a. The buildings are of benefit to the project area and contribute to the elimination of blight. i. The Community School Program serves probation referred, juvenile court referred, expelled, and habitual truants. The community school also serves pregnant and parenting teens and their children through the Cai SAFE program. Collectively, these programs will be referred to as CSF. Their mission is meet the social, emotional, academic, vocational and creative needs of "at-risk" students in Mendocino County. They provide these services in an environment that honors and respects each student. ii. The CSF is located across Low Gap Road from the Ukiah High School. iii. The current enrollment in CSF, grades 8-12, is 163 students. Of these, a significant number are Hispanic (56) and Native American (25). Students attending the CSF have shown steady improvement, year-to-year, on the standardized state tests, including the California Achievement Test. iv. Minors in juvenile probation, subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, particularly those who have committed acts which would constitute a crime, if committed by an adult, or who are in danger of becoming delinquent, as well as habitual truants and students expelled from school commit acts of vandalism and other crimes and join gangs, all of which contributes to blighted conditions within the Ukiah Redevelopment Project Area. v. The CSF provides educational opportunities, counseling and other services which address the needs of these "at risk" youth, and thereby contribute to the reduction of blighted conditions in the project area. b. There are no other reasonable means of financing the buildings available to the community. i. According to MCOE, it lacks the means to finance the pumhase of the land or the construction of the buildings, comprising the CSF. ii. According to MCOE, the funds it advanced to construct the buildings must be restored from the Capital Outlay Fund. iii. The use of Capital Outlay Funds in compliance with the request of the school district for which they have been set aside is consistent with the implementation plan adopted by the Agency pursuant to Health & Safety Code {}33490. Februa~ _,2007 Ukiah Redevelopment Agency AGENDA ITEM NO: 10a MEETING DATE: March 21,2007 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: CITY OF UKIAH PUBLIC BENEFITS PROGRAM PRESENTATION BY EFFICIENCY SERVICES GROUP AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RECOMMENDATIONS; AUTHORIZE BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $98,000 - continued from March 7, 2007 SUMMARY: On December 20, 2006 Efficiency Services Group (ESG) made an initial presentation with recommendations to the City Council regarding the City's Public Benefits Program (PBP). On Mamh 7, 2007, the City Council requested the topic be re-agendized for the March 21, 2007 Council meeting. Based on Council direction, staff was told not to reproduce this agenda packet, as it had already been copied to Council. However, portions of the previous agenda summary report have been revised. Only the revisions are attached and include: Attachment 1 the consultant's, Efficiency Services Group, response to the City Council's request for further information from the December 20, 2006 Council meeting. The revised sections have been noted in bold italics for ease in identifying changes. Attachment 2 (Energy Efficient Commercial Lighting Rebates) is an addition to Attachment 3 documents previously presented. ESG will be presenting their proposal to the City Council. Staff recommends adopting the revised and/or new programs, associated PBP budget, administrative process and reporting as recommended by ESG. As expenditures are reaching current budget limits, Staff is requesting Council authorize a budget amendment using Public Benefits Fund Balance in the amount of $98,000 within Account number 806.3765.250 as indicated below. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Approve Efficiency Services Group recommendations for the City of Ukiah Public Benefits Program Assessment, Revision, Development, Turn-key Administration and Reporting and associated Public Benefits Funds Program Budget as listed on pages 8 and 9 of Attachment 1. 2) Authorize budget amendment in the amount of $98,000 using Public Benefits Fund Balance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Re-direct staff. FUNDING: Amount Budqeted $68O,226 Account Number Additional Funds Requested 806.3765 806.3765.250.001 Senior Assistance $17,000 606.3765.250.002 Emergency Assistance 14,000 806.3765.250.003 Monthly Discount 13,000 806.3765.250.005 Efficiency Rebates 54,000 Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Elizabeth Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Elizabeth Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager; Brent Smith, Finance Director 1. ESG Response to Ukiah City Council Request 2. Energy Efficient Commercial Lighting Rebates Approved: ~--~~~ Candace Horsley, City'l~anager Public Note: This item, 10a City of Ukiah Public Benefits Pro~ram Presentation... was continued from the March 7, 2007 City Council Meeting. Part of the discussion for this item will include information provided in the March 7, 2007 Agenda packet--refer to City Council, Agenda item 10e, for this information posted previously. Attachment 1 EFFICIENCY Group March 21, 2007 Response to Ukiah City Council Request for Information On December 20, 2006, Efficiency Services Group (ESG) and the City of Ukiah (Ukiah) made a presentation with recommendations for modifications to Ukiah's Public Benefits Energy Efficiency (EE) programs, including recommendations for EE rebates for Ukiah's lower-income customers. During the presentation, several issues and questions came up for which City Council requested additional information and/or work to be done. Among those issues: 1. Council requested a complete review of Ukiah's CARES programs, and suggestions for needed modifications or changes. 2. Council requested copies of California's Public Benefits (PB) legislation for their review, as well as information regarding deemed values for EE measures approved under PB guidelines. 3. A discussion regarding the removal of windows as an approved measure. 4. A discussion of the impact the new measures and rebate levels would have on customer participation in the program. This report addresses the issues raised by Council during the December 20, 2006 presentation. This report also summarizes previous and new recommendations to Council needed to revise Ukiah's EE, solar, and Iow- income/senior assistance CARES programs. Review of Ukiah's CARES Programs Ukiah's Finance Department performed a thorough review of Ukiah's CARES program. The following discussion and associated chad attachments are provided in response to Council's request for information. ESG and staff also gathered information regarding the Iow-income and senior assistance programs from other utilities. Ukiah C.A.R.E.S. (City Assistance for Relief through Energy Support) is the City Sponsored program that has been in place since October 1998 that has provided financial assistance to qualifying senior and Iow and moderate-income customers to assist them in making their electric utility payments. Once determined income eligible, a household can receive relief in the form of a monthly discount or temporary emergency assistance. There are three programs currently offered through CARES: · Temporary Emergency Assistance · Senior Citizen Monthly Discount · Non-Senior Household Monthly Discount Total cost to the City for these programs in FY05/06 was $214,000, with approximately 650 households participating in the CARES program (see Attachment 3). The attachments show statistics on the three programs listed above which include number of households participating in each program on an annual basis; total annual % and dollar savings per program participants; and total cost of the program. The Temporary Emergency Assistance program offers a City of Ukiah electric utility customer to receive up to $350 in emergency assistance in a twelve-month period. In order to receive this assistance, an ENERGY emergency must be present and documented however there are some exceptions to this guideline. The Monthly Discount program consists of two discount elements: one provides a $25.00 monthly discount to lower-income applicants; the second element provides a monthly discount of $30.00 to qualified Senior applicants. To qualify for a discount, a household must meet the qualifying income requirements that are published in the Ukiah CARES Guidelines document which was last updated in October 2003. Though most other cities use a % of GROSS income for qualifying purposes, the City of Ukiah uses NET income as the qualifier. The current CARES Guidelines state that the qualifying total NET household income (after tax and other various deductions) must meet 160% of the current Federal Poverty Income Guidelines. Deductible expenses include mandatory (taxes) amounts withheld from wages or other income and monthly Shelter Costs (rent). This method could also leave -2- room for other deductions from income such as contributions to retirement or savings plans; Christmas club withholdings; wage garnishments, etc. Council requested staff to review the current City of Ukiah CARES income guidelines in comparison to other local utilities (see Attachment 4). Upon completion of this review, Staff has concluded that the 160% threshold when used with NET household income as the qualifier is rather generous. Staff proposes (see Attachment 4, section titled "proposed") that the CARES income guidelines be changed to 200% GROSS of the 2007 Federal Poverty Income Guidelines (see Attachment 5) which would align us with other local utilities. This would eliminate all deductible expenses from the calculation and would make the system fair and equitable for all participants. Ukiah will continue to utilize the Salvation Army for program administration; screening customers for income eligibility and working closely with Utility Billing Department personnel. Once this proposal is approved, Staff recommends that all current "qualified" customers be "re-qualified" on their respective annual enrollment anniversary date in the program and be changed over to the new 200% threshold, ESG researched the following cities to determine the percentage of each city's PB budget funding their Iow income programs: City %PB Fund G ridley 14% Lodi 25% (supplemented w/other funds) Shasta Lake 17% Lassen 33% Ukiah 43% Should the City Council approve Recommendation 1, ESG and staffwill review the impact this change has on the CARES portion of the PB budget. This data will then be used to make further recommendations for the Iow income portion of the PB FY07/08 budget. There are currently two different income qualifying criteria for CARES and low-income energy efficiency rebates. Staff recommend$ that the income qualifying guidelines for CARES and Low-Income Energy Efficiency rebates be the same. Recommendation 1: that Council review and discuss the proposed changes to the Ukiah CARES program, and provide direction on other modifications to the program. -3- California Public Benefits Pro.qram Legislation ESG has provided the City Council members with copies of California's Public Benefits legislation and EE measures with deemed values for review. Information regarding approved measures, deemed values, etc. is contained in large spreadsheets based on evaluations by KEMA. ESG has provided this information to staff as well. The spreadsheet includes measures from all of the California climate zones. Ukiah is in climate zone 2. KEMA KEMA was hired to perform energy savings analysis on the various measures to be offered through utility PB energy efficiency programs. When establishing the deemed energy savings, KEMA draws from a wide variety of sources; engineering analysis and the results of independent Measurement & Verification studies conducted throughout the EE industry. KEMA's deemed savings have been accepted by the State. In order for a measure to be deemed cost-effective, a utility must offer rebates less than or equal to the savings estimates established by KEMA. For more information regarding KEMA visit their website at www. kema.com. Removal of Windows as an Approved Measure There was a good deal of discussion and questions as to why windows were removed as an approved measure. It is understood and agreed by most that new, EE windows provide greater comfort, appearance and energy savings to those who choose to make this investment. The following are discussion points to provide a better understanding of Ukiah's current windows incentives, as well as to better explain why windows do not appear on Ukiah's proposed measure list. Ukiah's current incentive is $150 per window with a maximum rebate of $1000 per house. This is the largest sinqle use of PB customer rebate dollars for EE. The current rebate per window does not change with regard to the window size. For example, a typical 3' x 3' (9 sqft) window would receive a rebate of $16.67 per sqft, while a typical patio sliding door (approx. 40 sqft) would receive a rebate of $3.75 per sqft. It is important to note that PB funds are intended to save "electrical" energy. Since a great deal of the residences in California are heated with natural gas, the California Energy Commission (CEC) focuses on air conditioning savings when determining the deemed values for windows. -4- Customers that replace their windows, and heat their homes with natural gas, are encouraged to contact PG&E to inquire regarding the availability of window rebates. Ukiah's air conditioning loads are considered to be Iow compared to other areas of the state, such as Redding. Because of this, the energy savings credited to windows in Ukiah are small. The deemed values for replacement windows in Ukiah range from $.01 per sqft for clear glass to $.42 per sqft for tinted glass. See '¥Vindow Savings from KEMA Tables", Attachment 6. It is also important to note that KEMA is utilizing an "incremental" approach to calculating energy savings. This means that the savings are based on upgrading from a "new, standard efficiency window (code)" to a "new, high efficiency window". The savings would be higher if KEMA based their savings on upgrading from the "existing window (ie. metal frame, single pane)" to a "new, high efficiency window". ESG is not stating that we are in agreement with the above approach taken by KEMA. We are simply providing the above discussion to assist Council in understanding the issue. Because of the Iow energy savings attributed to windows in Ukiah's climate zone (as stated in #6 above), ESG did not include windows on the approved measure list for Ukiah's proposed program. Recor~mendation 2: that Council select from the following options regarding window rebates and make it effective immediately to avoid depletion of PB funds which could be used for effective measures. Staff Recommends Option A: Option A: That window rebates no longer be offered through Ukiah's PB program. Option B: Offer window rebates of $2.00 per sqft. For example: a 3' x 4' or 12 sqft window would receive a rebate of $24 to a maximum of $250 rebate per household. To qualify, customers would need to have either electric heat or central air conditioning. This would assure that the energy saved is electric energy. This offer would not be cost-effective according to KEMA, but does acknowledge the value of replacement windows, and provides a rebate for some of Ukiah's customers. Customers with gas heat can apply to PG&E for window rebates. -5- Floor Insulation At the December 20, 2006, it was noted that underfloor insulation was not included on the measure list. KEMA's analysis of underfloor insulation does not support savings for this measure. KEMA assumes that during the air conditioning season, the ground temperature in the crawl space contributes to helping cool the home. If the floor is insulated, the ground temperature contribution to cooling is negated. Because of this, ESG did not include floor insulation on Ukiah's measure list submitted in December, 2006. Recommendation 3: that Council select from the following options regarding floor insulation and make it effective immediately to avoid depletion of PB funds which could be used for effective measures. Staff recommends Option A: Option A: That under floor insulation no longer be offered through Ukiah's PB pmgram. Option B: Offer under floor rebates of $.20 per sqft. A customer with a 1000 sqft home would receive a $200 rebate under this offer. To qualify, customers would need to have electric heat. This would assure that the energy saved is electric energy. This offer would not be cost-effective according to KEMA. Customers with gas heat can apply to PG&E for floor insulation rebates. Impact of New Measures and Rebates on Customer Participation It should be anticipated that the revised measures and rebates will have the following impact on customer participation in the program: Residential Lighting - It is expected that rebates for residential lighting will increase substantially. The new program makes the rebate application process for EE residential lighting easy to understand, and easy to apply for. ESG recommends that Ukiah should strongly promote the use of compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFL's) to their customers. Commercial Lighting - This is a new offer. This offer provides excellent benefits to both the customer (energy savings) and Ukiah's electrical system (reduced load on the system). This is a popular program when offered by utilities, and we expect Ukiah's commercial customers to actively participate. Commercial lighting rebates listed may be reduced for Ukiah roll out due to successful program in Healdsburg. -6- Solar PV - It is expected that customer participation and funding will remain level for this offer. (There will be more information presented to Council in the future regarding SB1. SB1 will have an impact on Ukiah's current solar program design and funding.) Appliances - Rebate expenditures for appliances will decline. There are three reasons for this: 1. The appliance rebates have been reduced based on KEMA analysis. A requirement has been added that a customer needs to have an electric water heater to qualify for clothes washer and dishwasher rebates. Customers with gas water heaters should contact PG&E to check on the availability of rebates for clothes washers and dishwashers. Rebates are no longer being offered for freezers, stoves, ovens, clothes dryers, evaporative coolers, ceiling fans, and attic ventilators. KEMA does not recognized deemed savings for these measures. Therefore, Ukiah cannot claim any energy benefits for these measures. Weatherization - Rebate expenditures for weatherization measures will decline substantially. There are two main reasons for this: 1. Window rebates are substantially reduced, or no longer being offered (pending Council decision). 2. A requirement has been added that a customer needs to have electric space heat or central air conditioning to qualify for weatherization rebates. Customers with gas space heat should contact PG&E to check on the availability of rebates for weatherization and windows. -7- Summary of Recommendations The following recommendation was approved by City Council on December 20, 2006: Council approved staff and ESG to pursue gaining state recognition of Ukiah's Geysers EFFLUENT payments as approved PB expenditures. That Council provide direction to ESG and staff as to how they should deal with the large balance being carried forward in the PB budget; Option I or 2. During the discussion at the December 20, 2006 meeting, it appeared that Council was leaning toward maintaining the balance in the PB fund. ESG and staff would like to confirm this with Council. The following is a summary of the new recommendations not included in ESG and staff's December 20, 2006 repod to City Council: Recommendation 1: that Council review and discuss proposed changes to the Ukiah CARES program. Recommendation 2: that Council select either Option A or Option B regarding window rebates as presented on pages 4-5 of this report, to be effective immediately. Recommendation 3: that Council select either Option A or Option B regarding under floor insulation rebates as presented on page 6 of this report, to be effective immediately. The following is a summary of the recommendations included in ESG and staff's December 20, 2006 report to City Council: Recommendation 4: that Council adopt the proposed Renewable and Energy Efficiency Measures & Incentives as outlined in Attachment 3 of the December 20, 2006 Agenda Summary Report. Recommendation 5: that Council approve the PB Program services A - D as described on page 7 in the "New Services to be Provided Under Agreement w/ESG" section of ESG's December 20, 2006 report to City Council (Attachment I of the December 20, 2006 Agenda Summary Report.) -8- Recommendation 6: that Council adopt the following guidelines regarding reserving Solar PV incentives for customers: For Applications submitted at time of: Building Permits: 1 year deadline Planning Permits: 2 year deadline, with possible 1 year extension Plan Development: 3 year deadline, with possible 1 year extension Next Steps Once Council provides approval on Recommendation 1, Ukiah' revised CARES programs can be implemented. With Council approval of Recommendations 2 - 6, we will work to finalize the rebate application forms, customer information sheets, etc, necessary to begin offering the new EE services to Ukiah customers. We will also identify key vendors and contractors and make them aware of Ukiah's PB offers, encouraging them to promote these offers to their customers. If Council grants approval during their March 21, 2007 Council meeting, ESG anticipates being ready to launch Ukiah's PB EE offers on May 1, 2007. Staff estimates that the revisions to the CARES program can be implemented within 30 days. -9- ATI'ACHMENT ~ ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: March 21,2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REVIEW OF FINAL REPORT FOR THE CITYVVIDE CIRCULATION STUDY PREPARED BY OMNI MEANS LIMITED ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS SUMMARY: The City contracted with Omni-Means Ltd. Engineers and Planners, of Roseville, California, on September 22, 2003, to perform a City-Wide Circulation Study. The Study was delivered to the Council February 28, 2007 to provide extra time for review prior to the meeting. This study will serve as an important tool for long-range transportation planning and to identify projects to improve current conditions and support future development. The final adoption of this study will permit its use in the MCOG AB 1600 Traffic Impact Mitigation Fees Study. The adoption of this study will also be a key element in the downtown master plan study. BACKGROUND: In 2003 and 2004 as part of their work, Omni-Means studied several specific problem areas recognized by staff or identified as a concern of the public, as well as various traffic and circulation management concepts. During this time, Omni-Means spent time researching existing plans and studies, taking traffic counts throughout the City and developing and calibrating traffic models. The existing condition report was completed in early 2004 and a public workshop was held on May 19, 2004 at the Ukiah Valley Conference Center. On that same date, a report was presented to the City Council at its regularly scheduled meeting. Based on the existing conditions and comments from the Council and community, the consultant conceptually designed and then presented street reconfiguration and other unique improvement options for the City Council to consider. Continued on page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide comments to the Final Report and direct staff to coordinate with consultant to prepare report for adoption. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Find that there are no further comments and adopt final report Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Tim Eriksen, City Engineer and Director of Public Works Tim Eriksen, City Engineer and Director of Public Works Candace Horsley, City Manager Approved:i._ L~:~../~..'"~'""~%r Ca.dace Horsley, Cly Manager Page 2 REVIEW OF FINAL REPORT FOR THE CITYWlDE CIRCULATION STUDY PREPARED BY OMNI MEANS LIMITED ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS In February 2005 these improvement options were presented to the Council in a workshop format at the Conference Center. They included a one way couplet concept which proposed one way streets along Main Street and Oak Street with several roundabouts on State Street. At that meeting, there was a significant contingent of individuals who were not in favor of these options. The main concerns were the increased traffic loads on Oak Street. The Council directed staff and the consultants to not pursue the one way couplet concept. The consultant attempted to finalize the land use assumptions outside of the City Limits in order to calibrate the traffic generation model. The consultant was dealing with the County of Mendocino and their consultant who were in the process of determining the land use assumptions in the County. The biggest concerns were the proposed Ryder Home project, the Lovers Lane properties and the Masonite site. Omni Means attended several Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP) meetings in order to get the answers they needed for the completion of the study. Although these meetings were not in the consultants original schedule of work and caused delays in the project, they were considered to be vital to the project. As a result of the UVAP meetings, it was clear that the County and the City would have to work together with the improvements in the City and in the unincorporated (UVAP) area. Staff employed the assistance of Phil Dow, the Director of the Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) to assist with this process. MCOG produced a Request For Proposal (RFP) for the MCOG AB 1600 Study Traffic Impact Mitigation Fees. The consultant selected for this project was Fehr & Peers. This study will be based on the Omni Means traffic model which has been provided to Fehr & Peers to assist in their study. In June of 2006, Omni Means made a presentation updating the Council on the project progress. Omni Means has prepared the final Study based on the comments from that meeting. The Traffic Engineering Committee held a special meeting to discuss this study. They have found some minor inconsistencies and other clean up items that they would like to see incorporated in the final study. Staff intends to package these comments up with any Council comments and have the study finalized. These final comments may be incorporated into the study by Omni Means or City staff depending on there magnitude and type. The budget for this project has long been expired and Omni Means has written off much of their expenses in order to provide a finished product to the City. Much of the UVAP coordination was not in their original proposed schedule. Any significant changes or items that would require more study and changes to the traffic model will require additional funding. Once the changes are incorporated the study will then be agenized for adoption by the City Council for its further and future use. Tonight's presentation of proposed improvements to the City Council will be presented by Associate Paul Miller, who is the Project Manager for this study, and President of Omni- Means and Principal-in-Charge, Ross Ainsworth. AGENDA ITEM NO: ~_0¢ MEETING DATE: March 21,2007 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REQUEST FROM CITIZEN U GROUP FOR SPONSORSHIP OF THE CONFERENCE CENTER ROOM FOR THREE MORE CITIZEN EDUCATIONAL FORUMS SUMMARY: The City Council previously approved $500.00 towards the first Citizen U Educational Forum on water issues. The group is now going forward with three more planned forums. The next meeting will be on Economic Development, the third on Affordable Housing and, the fourth on other items of interest of which the community has requested information and discussion. The non-profit rate for the half-red room is $650.00 per event. The Citizen U group has a total of $400.00 to help off-set other costs for the remaining programs and is requesting Council's approval of funding the use of the conference room for each of the next three sessions, for a total of $1,950.00. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss, request and determine what level of funding the City will provide for the remaining three Citizen U Educational Forums ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Mary Ann Landis Citizen U Candace Horsley, City Manager Mayor Rodin Economic Development Forum flyer Approved: ~ Ho~ Candace er The Future of in Our Valley THURSDAY, MARCH 29, 2007 6:00-9:00 p.m. UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER 200 S. SCHOOL STREET, UKIAH The Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP) will set the boundaries for economic development in the Ukiah Valley for the next genera- tion. But what type of economic development should the UVAP prepare us for? Should we set aside more or less space for ag- riculture? What about industry? How much should we plan to grow? Are there limiting factors? Should our land use planning encourage or discourage specific types of economic growth? To begin to answer such critical questions, our panelists will discuss what economic development is and provide some common understanding about the range of options we have. Madelln H01tkamp, Executive Director, Economic Development and Finance Corporation. T0nyShaw, Coordinator, County Economic Development, will highlight current County development efforts. Don Sheller, Executive Director, BALLE [Business Alliance for Local Living Economies] will present information about new approaches to economic development that have worked in areas like the Ukiah Valley. These speakers will be followed by a wide range of community representatives presenting their own visions of positive, possible economic development opportunities for community evaluation and discussion. YOU will also have an opportunity to provide yeur 2¢, literally. ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS INCLUDE: AFREE public forum to provide knowledge and perspectives on planning the future of the Ukiah Valley For more information, contact Ukiah Main Street Program, 463-6729. 9asld Hance, Executive Director Ukiah Players Theatre; Boardmember, The Mendocino Promotional Alliance Jess8 nurnell, Director, Northern California Tribal Economic Development Consortium mel~L0ulhsrlll, Senior Vice President, Savings Bank of Mendocino Mlcheel IIIssllnger, Program Coordinator, CATALYST North Coast Opportunities Or. Klrslee Brodl0rd, MD, MPH, Family Practice Physician nave Smilll, Proprietor of Mulligan Books SheJleh h0gels, President, McKenzie Consulting Jan nell, President/CEO, Mends Lake Credit Union; Board President, Chamber of Commerce [role Wlpl, Owner, Wipf Construction Knnler PI0cher, Owner, Yokayo Biofuel J~lam Steinbesk, Mendocino Redwood Company ITEM NO: 10d MEETING DATE: March 21, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: EXTEND SOURCE CALIFORNIA ENERGY SERVICES' ONE YEAR EQUIPMENT AND LABOR WARRANTY FOR THE LAKE MENDOCINO HYDROELECTRIC POWER PLANT TO INCLUDE ONE YEAR OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR $20,000 The Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant refurbishment project is nearing completion with initial start up of Unit One (1 MW Unit) scheduled for March 21st. Upon final completion of the entire refurbishment project and commencement of operation the power plant will be in need of routine operation and maintenance functions on a weekly basis. Given the refurbishment contractor's (Source California Energy Services; "SCES") familiarity with the power plant and their obligation/responsibility to the power plant of a one year equipment and labor warranty related to most of the power plant, it is prudent to consider sole sourcing this function to SCES for the one year term of their warranty. SCES has provided a fixed price quote for the routine weekly visits for one year of $20,000, which is the hourly cost of the employee currently working on the site. No other charges are included in the quoted price. SCES will continue to be fully responsible for any warranty work. The term of this would start at the turn over of the power plant to the City. The Public Utility staff consulted with the City Attorney about awarding this contract on a sole source basis without competitive bidding. He stated that the award of this contract is not subject to the public bidding requirements of the Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Act, because as operation and maintenance work on a publicly owned power system, it is excluded from the definition of Public Project in Public Contracts Code Section 22002(c). This is particularly true in this case, because any repair work would be performed by SCES Continued on pa.qe 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the City Manager to sign a one year operations and maintenance contract for $20,000 with Source California Energy Services for the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL FUNDING: Amount Budgeted $2o,ooo OPTIONS: Direct staffto qo out for bid. Account Number Additional Funds Requested 800.5536.250.003 NA Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Approved: Murray Grande, Hydro Project Manager Murray Grande, Hydro Project Manager; Elizabeth Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney N/A Candace Horsley, City anager under the existing one year warranty. He stated that seeking bids for maintenance work from at least three bidders is required under the Ukiah City Code when it is "reasonably feasible." This terminology gives the City considerable discretion in requiring multiple bids for maintenance work. In the City Attorney's opinion, the City Council can take into account SCES's knowledge of the hydroelectric plant and the one year warranty contract in deciding whether seeking bids is reasonably feasible in this case. This one year period will allow the City time to evaluate the performance of SCES under this arrangement and explore longer term arrangements for the ongoing operations and maintenance of the power plant. On March 7, 2007 the City Council approved the funds necessary to provide this service. AGENDA ITEM NO: 10e MEETING DATE: March 21,2007 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: SELECTION OF CONSULTANT TO FACILITATE CITY STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS AND AUTHORIZE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR SAME IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $6,000 Council's subcommittee of Councilmember Crane and Mayor Rodin undertook a search for a consultant to facilitate the council's strategic planning process. The search process consisted of examining an initial list of 10 possible consultants. The members of the subcommittee made, or attempted to make, telephone contact with each of the consultants. Following is a list of the 10 consultants: 1. Kevin Wolf, Wolf & Associates, Davis. 2. Marilyn Snider, Snider & Associates, Berkeley 3. Laura Mason-Smith, Mason Smith Success Strategies, Sacramento area 4. Mary Egan, Mary Egan Consulting, Sacramento area 5. Daniel lacofano, MIG, Berkeley 6. Michael Kisslinger, Ukiah 7. Anne Oliver, Ukiah 8. Steve Zueiback, Ukiah 9. John Dickerson, Ukiah 10. Don Saylor, Councilmember, Davis Continued on pa.qe 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Approve subcommittee recommendation to hire Steve Zueiback to facilitate the council's strategic planning process; 2) Authorize the City Manager to sign contract for same; 3) Authorize budget amendment in the not to exceed amount of $6,000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Direct staff to qo out for bid. FUNDING: Amount Budgeted From Account N/A General Fund Balance To Account Additional Funds Requested 100.1001.250.000 $6,000.00 Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: City Council Mayor Rodin; Councilmember Crane Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - Zueiback Bio 2 - Zueiback's Resume 3 - Proposed Scope of Work Approved: ~anager The subcommittee found four of the candidates to be strong. A couple of the consultants were dismissed based on cost estimates that exceeded what the council discussed as a ballpark budget, even though they might have seemed capable and worth pursuing based upon the telephone interview. One of the consultants did not return our phone call. A couple of others did not seem to have the qualifications we were looking for. Among the candidates that stood out was Steve Zueiback. We called several references that he provided and were impressed with their reports. Mr. Zueiback is a professional consultant working in the area of organizational development and strategic planning. He has national and international experience and happens to live here in Ukiah. Although his rates are consistent with those of the most expensive consultants, he is willing to give a local discount. For these reasons, the subcommittee is recommending that the city council contract with Mr. Zueiback for an amount not to exceed four days of work, based on the attached scope of work. Please find attached Mr. Zueiback's bio, resume, and proposed scope of work. A'I-rACHMENT I Steven Zuieback Synectics, LLC 208 Banker Boulevard, Ukiah, California 95482 (707) 463-2088 - synectics2@mindspring.com Steve Zuieback is president of Synectics and a member of the Dalmau Network based in Australia. Steve has extensive consulting and training experience with education, private business, governmental organizations, communities and non-profit organizations in the areas of leadership, systems, creative planning, change implementation, productivity improvement, team development, and community building. Steve's professional activities take him around the country and internationally. Currently has worked with BHP, ALSOC, Coles Myer and Transport South Australia in intensive leadership development and planning sessions in Australia, and has provided consultation services to the Ministries of Health and Education in Alberta, Canada, and has worked extensively with Ernst & Young in South Africa and Australia and Indonesia. The key focus of work now is in the area of building deep leadership capacity within large organizations and systems. In this regard, he is currently working with Riverside County Office of Education in the state-wide Focused Monitoring Program, San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools, Los Angeles County Office of Education, and Desert Mountain SELPA. RESUME ATTACHMENT Steven L. Zuieback Synectics, LLC 208 Banker Boulevard Ukiah, California 95482 (707) 463-2088 FAX (707) 462-6882 I have been privileged to work with a large range of industries, large corporations, nonprofit organizations, small businesses, school systems, and communities. While each of these organizations and groups are unique in their needs, I typically assist in improving facilitation and communication skills, conflict resolution, strategic planning, visioning, team building, and organizational development. Educational Background: Bachelor of Science: 1973: Health Science, California State University, Northridge Master of Science: 1975: Environmental and Occupational Health Management, California State University, Northridge Certified Practitioner of Neurolingustic Programming Professional Experience: 1974-1976: 1976-1978 1978-1981 1979-1984 Los Angeles County Department of Personnel, Occupational Health Specialist California State University, Northridge: Instructor in Environmental and Occupational Health Management California State University, Fresno: Assistant Professor and Coordinator of Occupational Safety and Health Option President of OSHCG. Health and management consultation firm 1984-2006 1989-1993 President of Synectics: Creative Management Strategies. Organizational development consultation firm Consulting General Manager- National Training Associates Sebastopol, California 1993-1995 President, National Training Associates Sebastopol, California 1995 - 2006 Associate of the Dalmau Network Group - Global Consulting ATTACHMENT. Steve Zuieback Synectics, LLC 208 Banker Boulevard Ukiah, California 95482 Preliminary Work Plan for City of Ukiah Strategic Planning Process This preliminary proposal is meant to lay out the broad template of a work plan for the proposed strategic planning process. The ideas are based on a limited understanding of the desired outcomes presented during an initial conversation between myself and two council members. Based on that conversation, I understand that the outcomes for this strategic planning process include, but may not be limited to: 1. Create alignment among the city council members about the their top strategic priorities for the City of Ukiah 2. Develop a set of operational principles for the council that will allow them to efficiently and effectively work together in achieving and supporting the strategic priorities. 3. Identify specific mechanisms for tracking these strategic priorities over time that will allow the council and city staff to make necessary adjustments to achieve the strategic priorities. Based on that initial interview I indicated that the process would involve between 3-4 days of consulting work at a daily rate of $1,500.00. More than likely the actual design of the approach will change based on the findings from the interviews and initial data gathering processes. A few key design principles will guide the actual design and facilitation of the strategic planning process: Gathering and distributing information about the current state of the system (city) to the planning participants is essential in order to create a common base of understanding. Work on what people can agree upon and develop strategies based on the common ground rather than working on the difference. As people develop a track record of results they willingly engage in tougher areas. 3. The people most impacted by the planning need to participate in the planning process in appropriate ways. 4. The planning process needs to build on the successes and learning from prior planning processes. In order for a planning process to be successful it needs to develop mechanisms for reflection into the ongoing way of doing business for the organization The ultimate aim of planning is to identify a few key strategic areas of focus for an organization that allow the organization to be more effective and efficient in achieving its mission. Components of Work: Interview Phase: I will want to conduct interviews with the following people and or groups: · All council members · City Manager · Department Managers and key staff (key operational departments) Data Gathering and Analysis Phase: Based on the interviews I will want to work with city staff to put together an objective overview of current status of operations with specific input from staff about key priorities, constraints and future opportunities. The emphasis will be to utilize existing analysis, reports, surveys, etc. Strategic Planning Process Design: Based on the prior two processes an actual facilitation design will be developed that models the planning principles described above. The issues, outcomes and available data will determine who is involved and how they are involved in the planning process. Facilitation of the Strategic Planning Process: The scope of work will determine whether this is a one or two day process. The actual meeting will need to be open to the public and held in a location that is conducive to relaxed exploration and conversation. The meeting time and location will need to be established so that it is convenient to city staff who may be involved in various components of the planning conversation. Report of Findings and Recommendations: A simple report of the results of the planning conversations will be provided at the end of the planning process. In addition the consultant will provide a set of recommendations, as necessary, based on additional issues or work that may need to be considered based on the system issues or needs that surface during this current scope of work. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 11a DATE: March 21, 2007 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION MAKING AN APPOINTMENT TO THE PARKS, RECREATION & GOLF COMMISSION. Recently, a vacancy was created on the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission with the resignation of Mr. Bob Beltrami. The term for this vacancy is set to expire on June 30, 2007. A News Release was issued on January 19, 2007 soliciting applicants to fill the partial term vacancy and reissued on February 12th. As of the March 13, 2007 deadline, one application was received from Mr. Alex Goeken. Mr. Goeken's application is included as Attachment #1 for review and consideration. Please note an interview of the applicant for appointment to the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission is scheduled to begin at 5:40 p.m. on March 21,2007 prior to the normally scheduled regular meeting of the Ukiah City Council. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution making an appointment to the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Direct staff to re-advertise for the vacancy and/or reschedule appointments accordingly. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Applicant notified of the interview and appointment process Ukiah City Council Gail Petersen, City Clerk Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Application for Appointment 2. Resolution making an appointment to the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Candace Horsley, City IV~nager Page 1 of 1 Attachment #1 CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT PARKS, RECREATION & GOLF COMMISSION Tgt3w Expires 0f//3~/07 am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Parks, Recreation & Golf Commission. Bus;tess Aad~ess_ __~.~ A~o~ Bus Phone~ EmployeL. _~ I~ Job ~itie ~(%~mployed Sincerer, how long have you resided in Uklah3~ears: Mendocmo County~years; Ca,if > ~yeam Please list community grqups or organizations you a,e aff~iiate~ w~th and indicate any offi~s Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach to application. 7 Wi3y are you applying to serve o,~ the City of Uk~ah's Parks, Recreation anti Golf Commission? 8 What is your understanding of the purpose, role anM responsibility of the Parks. Recreation and Go~f Commission? How do you believe your own skJils, experience, experlise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Parks, Recreation and Golf Corniness:on I 3 What do you believe is the sirgle most important parks, recreahor, and golf issue facing our community? And why? 11 In your opinion whal lype or types of parks development or recreational and golf programs shouid the City encourage? 12. Ir, your opimon what type or types of parks development or recreational and golf programs should the C~ty d;scourage? 13. What kind of ideal community do you enws on for Ukiah', 14 A,e there any other C~ty of Ukiah Committees/Commissions in which you are interested and or, which you would be wilhng to serve'~ Please return this application and attachments to the City Clerk by Noo13 on J~nuary 30, 2007. Thank you for you~:)ntej'es~t in serving the City of Uklah. Signature ~'~''/~- Date City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482.5400 Phone: 463-6213 Fax: 463-6204 Page 2 of 1 7. I am currently a member of the L'kiah Men's Golf Club Board of Directors and am .serving as their President. This is my first year back on lhe board after a three year absence, l served for five years t~fore that alld wa,~, Presidenl then also. As a Commission appointee, I would like to look out for the public interest as it is concerned with ~heir parks ~a",d recreation opportunities, but with pJ~rdcular intcrt.~t toward the golf course 'and p~rks. ~. I I~li~e that thc primary concerns of the Commiltee are to advi~ on financial and policy matters with regard toward implementation by City s~afl'and to protecl the interests of the citizens or any other mers of the (2ifies recreational facilities. 9 I would draw fi'om my per~nal experiences to develop an overall understanding of the tasks facing the Commiltee 'and the needs facing the citizens of the community who use those ~rvices. 10. Water. l'his is the most important issue facing not only thc Parks and recreational facilities, but our community as a whole. Without water, things will not ~ow, whether it is crops, or the ovendl health of the community. I I. Conservation. It could include several things, from crcadng efficient irrigation systems, to installation of Iow flow toilets. It may cost something to initiate these programs, but the overall savings and bel'~efil$ could bc substantial. Besides. il would help benelit worldwide conservation. 12. I can't think of any. ]'hey currently seem to do a great job a,s exemplified by the attention they give to tree trimming for ,safety, as well as the cleanup alter summer Concerts in the Park. 13. Ukiah is a great place to live. I would bc proud to defend it as a place Io live for anyone considering moving here. 14 At this time, ! can't think of a. ny. Page 3 of 1 Attachment #2 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH MAKING AN APPOINTMENT TO THE PARKS, RECREATION, AND GOLF COMMISSION WHEREAS, a recent resignation of a commissioner on the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission created a vacancy for a term ending on June 30, 2007; and WHEREAS, the vacancy was duly advertised until the close of applications on March 13, 2007, with a submitted application timely received and submitted to Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for appointment for the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission on March 21, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ukiah City Council approved the nominations submitted per procedures outlined in Resolution No. 2001-61, and do hereby appoint the following person to the term on the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission: Alex Goeken, as a member of one of the local golf clubs residing within the sphere of influence, to fill a term to June 30, 2007; PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of March, 2007, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Mari Rodin, Mayor Gail Petersen, City Clerk Page 4 of 1 ITEM NO.: llb DATE: March 21,2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION IN RESPONSE TO THE CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF FUNDING FOR THE WILLITS' BYPASS PROJECT As the result of a recent Mendocino County Council of Governments (MCOG) meeting regarding the California Transportation Commission's denial to fund the Willits Bypass Project, · Councilmember McCowen has requested the Council discuss this issue. Councilmember McCowen will be providing information for discussion on this item. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion and possible action in response to the California Transportation Commission's denial of funding for the Willits' Bypass Project. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Councilmember McCowen Prepared by: Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Coordinated with:Candace Horsley, City Manager APPROVED: Candace Horsley, Cit1 Manager Item No.: 11¢ Date: March 21,2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING SIDEWALK ISSUES IN THE CITY OF UKIAH BACKGROUND: On December 6, 2006 the Council was presented with options for Public Works projects to receive funding. During that presentation, a discussion ensued on areas within the City that needed sidewalks. This item is intended to address the current sidewalk inventory and identify issues that are associated with the construction and usability of sidewalks in our City. EXISTING SIDEWALK INVENTORY There are approximately 75 miles of sidewalk within the City. In comparison, there are approximately 53 miles of road in the City. Considering that there is typically sidewalk on both sides of the street, we have approximately 70% of our streets with full improvements of curb, gutter and sidewalk. There are specific locations in the City, however, that are not intended to ever have standard sidewalk based on the grades and other features at the street frontage. Those include areas with large retaining walls that can not easily be removed and reconstructed, or locations with large trees that are considered a community asset. These locations either will go without standard sidewalk or some creative alternatives must be considered project by project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and discuss sidewalk issues in the City of Ukiah; provide direction to Staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A. Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Prepared by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1) Commercial Sidewalk Program boundaries APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City 'l~anager DISCUSION REGARDING SIDEWALK ISSUES IN THE CITY OF UKIAH PAGE 2 MARCH 21, 2007 SIDEWALK PURPOSE Sidewalks have many purposes but the two most significant issues are to provide a safe separation between pedestrian traffic, auto and bike traffic, and providing compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Pedestrian separation from vehicular traffic is the main reason for sidewalks. One of the challenges agencies face is the width of the standard sidewalk. The standard width of a sidewalk is 4.5 feet with a six inch curb. This provides a five foot walking surface. This case is compounded if the pedestrians are walking in pairs. Examples of items that compete for this space are overgrown shrubs, utilities (such as poles, guys, and boxes), street signs, and mail boxes. ADA compliance issues regarding sidewalks is a moving target. Two of the more consistent regulations in ADA are that thero be 36" width available for passage and that there not be more than a half inch grade separation. The City continues to strive for compliance with these two issues. Other ADA issues less consistent are certain slope criteria on access ramps at street intersections as well as cross slope criteria at driveway curb cuts. Many times the compliance criteria changes so quickly that by the time a curb ramp is designed and constructed, the ramp is out of compliance with the newer compliance criteria. This is a challenge staff continues to confront. ADDING AND REPAIRING SIDEWALK INVENTORY Sidewalks are maintained by the property owners of the parcels that front the right of way where the sidewalks are located. The City Street crews repair sidewalks in emergency situations only in order to remove eminent hazards. The City has adopted ordinances that enable the City to require new sidewalk construction as a condition of building permits that are over 1/3 the value of the structure for which the work is being permitted. This ordinance also enables the City to condition discretionary planning permits requiring sidewalk construction. CITY SPONSORED FUNDING SOURCES The City has adopted two sidewalk funding programs. The two programs are the Residential Sidewalk Program (Residential) which is City-wide and the Commercial Sidewalk Program (Commercial) which is only within a certain boundary inside the Redevelopment District (see Attachment 1). Both programs are funded 50% by the property owner and 50% by the City or RDA. The residential program was adopted in June 19, 2002 and we have funded approximately $45,000 through that program. The Commercial program was adopted on August 1, 2006 and we currently have one applicant for this program. This program has a budget of $30,000. DISCUSION REGARDING SIDEWALK ISSUES IN THE CITY OF UKIAH NEIGHBORHOODS WITH MISSING SIDEWALKS PAGE 3 MARCH 21, 2007 In the last few years community members have come forward requesting sidewalks in their neighborhood. These include Wagenseller's especially Clara Avenue, the Betty Street and Lorain Street area, Waugh Lane, and the west portion of Standley Street. Each area has issues with respect to construction of sidewalks as described below. Drainage is an issue when a proposed curb, gutter and sidewalk system is constructed. Prior to the installation of a sidewalk system drainage runs off to the shoulder of the road where it permeates into the soil at the edge of the right of way and the adjacent private properties. After saturation of the soil the storm water will puddle. These puddles allow sediment into the roadway and discourage pedestrian activity. Once the puddles form they deteriorate and require the City or the property owner to re-grade the area. Clara Avenue and Betty/Lorain both face this issue. Right of Way width is another issue that confronts a sidewalk system. There are two issues regarding right of way. First there is the issue of available right of way. Does the current right of way have the width to include sidewalk and all the other items that may be wanted such as parking, traveled lane widths and bike lanes? The other issue is existing improvements that are in or near the right of way and may have to be removed, demolished or will be impacted by the sidewalk improvements. Standley Street and Betty/Lorain both face these issues. Waugh Lane also faces right of way issues. In this case the right of way is obtained during the development process. However, prior to the completion of this process the street has various widths along the length of the street. NEIGHBORHOOD SOLUTION A possible method to further delineate the issues with these pocket areas would be to develop a master plan for each area. This plan would define the design for the entire neighbor hood including roadway widths sidewalk locations, parking lanes and/or identified parking pockets. The plan would also layout the drainage and grades of the entire neighborhood. These types of plans are usually completed with neighborhood meetings to come to agreement on what the neighborhood wants and expects. ATTACHMENT. COMMERCIAL SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENT REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM ~O1~ ;N STREET--J--~ , ~L~V~LAND LA,L- ....... MARSHALL STREET AGENDA ITEM NO: 11d MEETING DATE: March 21, 2007 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR 2000 AND 2002 STIP RAILROAD CROSSING REHABILITATION PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 07-06 SUMMARY: The City distributed plans and specifications to nine builder's exchanges and four contractors for the 2000 and 2002 STIP Railroad Crossing Rehabilitation Project Specification No. 07-06. The City publicly advertised this project on February 26 and March 4, 2007, in the Ukiah Daily Joumal. A copy of the Notice to Bidders was sent to 61 contractors including all License Class A contractors on the City's 2006 Qualified Contractors List. In addition, a copy of the Notice to Bidders was posted on the City's website. Sealed proposals will be received and opened by the City Clerk on March 20, 2007. This project will be partially reimbursed by STIP funds through Caltrans. Staff is seeking Council approval for award of the contract based on the outcome of the bid opening. The need for City Council approval so soon after the bid opening date is necessitated by the fact that this project must be awarded by the California Transportation Commission extended deadline of March 31,2007. A bid tabulation sheet will be provided to the public and the Council at the meeting. If the bid is awarded, compensation for the performance of the work will be based on unit prices bid for contract item quantities actually installed. Bid totals are based on unit prices bid for contract items at estimated quantities, and therefore, the actual total paid to the contractor may be lower or higher than the bid total indicated. As with construction projects, there may be cost overruns by reason of unforeseen work or because actual quantities installed exceed estimated quantities. Policy Resolution No. 13, authorizes the responsible Department Head, with approval of the City Manager, to issue change orders not to exceed 10 percent of the original contract sum or $5,000 whichever is greater provided that no change, when added to the original contract sum, exceeds the amount budgeted for the project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award contract for 2000 and 2002 STIP Railroad Crossing Rehabilitation Project Specification No. 07-06, to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder based on bids submitted on March 20, 2007. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: (1) Reject Bids; (2) Provide Staffwith other direction. Citizens Advised: N/A Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City En~]inee Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None Approved: Candle H~anager MEMORANDUM To: From: CC: Date: Re: Members of the City Council /t? il Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works and City Engineer-~/~. Gail Petersen, City Clerk March 21, 2007 ITEM 1 ld - MEETING OF MARCH 21,2007, AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR 2000 AND 2002 STIP RAILROAD CROSSING REHABILITATION PROJECT - SPECIFICATION NO. 07-06 Attachment "A" for your review is the Bid Tabulation sheet for the above referenced project. The bid opening occurred at 2:00 PM Tuesday, March 20, 2007 and there was one bidder. Granite Construction of Ukiah submitted a bid of $417,122.00. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funds in the amount of $284,000 will be reimbursed by Caltrans for this project. The remainder of project funding will be a combination of the following: Surface Transportation Program d(1) funds, Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) funds, and gas tax funds. Based on the attached Bid Tabulation sheet and the information supplied by the Agenda Report Item 1 ld, staff recommends that the City Council award the construction contract for the 2000 and 2002 STIP Railroad Crossing Rehabilitation Project, Specification No. 07-06, to Granite Construction. ITEM NO. lle DATE: March 21, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BALANCE HYDROLOGICS, INC. TO CONDUCT A HYDROGEOLOGIC STUDY FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $114,994. The City of Ukiah (City) received a new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from the North Coast Regional Water Qualtiy Control Board (Regional Board) effective November 9, 2006. One of the requirements of the new discharge permit is a hydrogeologic study of the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and enter into a Professional Consulting Services Agreement with Balance Hydrologics, Inc. to conduct a Percolation Pond Hydrogeologic Study for an amount not to exceed $114,994. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1) Determine a different firm is more qualified and select another consultant to perform the work. 2) Reject all proposals and provide direction to staff. FUNDING: Amount Budgeted $115,000 Account Number 612.3580.250.001 Additional Funds Requested N/A Citizen Advised:N/A Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Ann Burck, Project Engineer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1) RFP 2) RFP Distribution List 3) Provision C.2.a.i. of the NPDES Permit, pp. 17-19. APPROVED: ~ ~:~- ' Cand~a-ce Horsley, City'M. anager pemolation ponds to determine the fate and transport of wastewater pollutants discharged via the pemolation ponds. The Regional Board is requiring the study to assure compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region (Basin Plan) which prohibits discharge of treated wastewater to the Russian River from May 15 through September 30. A Request for Proposal (RFP) to conduct a hydrogeologic study was sent to 21 engineering consulting firms that provide hydrologic services. The primary objective for the Consultant is to design, perform and report a scientifically sound and defensible study in accordance with the discharge permit special study requirements of the Regional Board. Four proposals were received from the following firms: Winzler & Kelly, Brown and Caldwell, SHN Consulting Engineers, and Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Staff from Public Utilities and Public Works evaluated the proposals based on criteria specified in the RFP document. The evaluation results for the four proposals are shown in Table 1. Balance Hydrologics received the highest evaluation score, 90.4 out of a possible 100 points. Table I - Proposal Evaluation Results Proposal Evaluation Criteria Maximum Brown and Winzler & SHN Balance # of Caldwell Kelly Hydrologics Points 1. Fulfillment of RFP Requirements 5 5.0 2. Technical Approach 30 24.0 3. Project Personnel Experience 25 22.7 4. Past Performance on Similar Projects 25 22.7 5. Current Workload of Consultant 5 5.0 5.0 6. Suitability of Project Schedule 5 5.0 4.7 7. Conciseness 5 4.7 4.7 Total Points 100 89.1 86.7 Proposal Cost Estimate $139,883 $271,659 Total Staff Hours 718 1,349 5.0 4.7 5.0 24.0 18.3 26.7 23.3 15.0 20.7 20.0 18.3 24.3 5.0 5.0 4.7 4.7 5.0 4.0 71.0 90.4 $93,780 $114,994 610 580 Rankin~l 2 3 4 1 The strengths of Balance Hydrologics' proposal include: 1) an experienced and qualified team with 87 years of combined hydrogeologic experience, 2) work plan designed to generate findings as early as possible, 3) multiple lines of investigation to determine if a hydraulic connection exists from the ponds to the Russian River and its significance regarding the fate of wastewater pollutants, and a hydrogeologic study that includes a) two 50-foot deep, 4-inch diameter monitoring wells, b) boreholes sampled and geophysical e- log conducted, c) 8-hour pumping test to determine specific capacity, transmissivity, and hydraulic capacity of aquifer, d) datalogger in the wells, e) water quality samples taken from the Ranney collector, downstream of the ponds and the ponds analyzed for general minerals, metals, and key constituents, and f) specific conductance survey of ground water on site with an auger rig and field meters to map concentration gradients. Balance Hydrologics' cost estimate was not the lowest, but the second lowest. However, their technical approach and additional data collection and analysis will be essential in determining conclusively whether a hydraulic connection exists and its significance in the fate and transport of pollutants. Balance will be drilling two monitoring wells and collecting soil samples and a geophysical e-log of each boring. Then an 8-hour pumping test will be conducted to accurately characterize the aquifer. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers a pumping test to be the most reliable type of aquifer test. Slug tests, proposed by SHN, provide very limited information on the hydraulic properties of the aquifer and often produce estimates which are only accurate within an order of magnitude. Balance will also install a datalogger in each monitoring well (5 total) and the Russian River to continuous monitor the changes in the water level through 2007 and 2008. The better the data, the more defensible the groundwater flow model will be in determining the fate and transport of pollutants from the percolation ponds. Staff believes Balance Hydrologic, Inc. has the requisite experience and qualifications and offers the City the best value to provide consulting services for the Percolation Pond Hydrogeologic Study. Therefore, Staff is recommending the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate the final terms and enter into a contract with Balance Hydrologics. Copies of the recommended proposal from Balance Hydrologics, Inc. are available for City Council review. Funds were budgeted and are available for this project in the FY '06-'07 budget, account # 820-3901-250-003. .~TTACHMENT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL CITY OF UKIAH WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDROGEOLOGIC PERCOLATION POND STUDY FEBRUARY 2007 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Ukiah (City) has developed the enclosed scope of services for this RFP. The primary role of the selected Consultant will be to provide services to assist the City with complying with the California Regional Water Quality Board (RWQCB) North Coast Region Order No. 1-2006-0049/NPDES No. CA0022888 for the Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Facility (effective November 9, 2006) for a hydrogeologic study of the percolation ponds. The primary objective for the Consultant is to design, perform and report a scientifically sound and defensible study. This RFP solicits the services of a Consultant to: 1. Prepare Hydrogeologic Study Workplan 2. Conduct Hydrogeologic Study 3. Prepare Hydrogeologic Study Report 4. Project Management, Coordination and QA/QC These tasks are described in more detail below. The deliverables produced by the Consultant will be used by the City in its efforts to comply with the Board Order. II. PROJECT BACKGROUND The City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) is a publicly owned treatment works serving the City of Ukiah and residential areas to the north and south of Ukiah as well as east of the Russian River. The WWTP treats wastewater from two entities, the City of Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. Construction of the original WWTP was completed in 1958. In 1983, the plant capacity was increased to 2.8 MGD ADWF with a maximum wet weather flow discharge of 7.0 MGD. The WWTP discharges advanced, tertiary treated water to the Russian River from October 1 through May 14 at a rate that does not exceed one percent of the Russian River flow. From May 15 through September 30, discharge is only to three evaporation/percolation ponds (ponds). The Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region prohibits wastewater discharge to the Russian River between May 15 and September 30. The ponds are shown in Figures I and 2. Ponds 1 and 2 were constructed in 1959. Each pond covers 14 acres and is 7 feet deep with a capacity of 27.5 million gallons. Pond 3 was constructed in 1983, covers 14 acres and is 12 feet deep with a capacity of 55 million gallons. The estimated percolation rate for each pond is between 1 to 2 million gallons per day. The new NPDES permit places a requirement to conduct a hydrogeologic study to determine the fate and transport of wastewater pollutants discharged via the ponds. If a hydraulic connection is found to exist, the City will have to find an alternative means for disposal of all plant effluent during the summer discharge season. III. SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services for the Hydrogeologic Percolation Pond Study shall include tasks described in the attached Exhibit "A", Scope of Services, as well as other elements or modifications which may be suggested by consultants presenting proposals to better meet the needs of the City. All services shall be provided in accordance with the City's Standard Consultant Services Agreement and General Provisions attached as Exhibit "B" to this request for proposal. IV. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS Proposals submitted shall conform to the following format. The maximum number of pages, including all graphics, shall be limited to 25 pages, not including resumes, standard company brochures or other attachments. The proposal shall address all the following items and be presented in the following order: A. Cover Letter The cover letter should include a brief overview of the specific approach and procedures the firm proposes to complete the tasks described in Exhibit "A", Scope of Services. An explanation of why the specific plan detailed in the proposal is the best plan for the City should be included. The cover letter must be signed by an official authorized to bind the proposer contractually and shall contain a statement to the effect the proposal is a firm offer for a minimum period of sixty (60) days after the submittal date. The letter accompanying the proposal shall also provide the following: name, title, address, and telephone number of individuals with the authority to negotiate a contract and bind the Consultant to the terms of the contract. B. Introduction This section of the proposal shall highlight the specific requirements of the project and introduce the prime consulting firm and the subconsultants who shall participate in the project. A description of the Consultant's prior experience successfully completing hydrogeologic studies approved by a RWQCB to determine the fate and transport of wastewater pollutants including placement and construction of monitoring wells should be presented. C. Project Approach The Consultant shall describe their workplan proposal for a hydrogeologic study to determine the fate and transport of wastewater pollutants discharged via the City of Ukiah's WWTP ponds. The workplan proposal shall meet all the requirements of Section VI.C.2., Tasks 1 and 2 of the the California Regional Water Quality Board North Coast Region (Board) Order No. 1-2006-0049/NPDES No. CA0022888 (Order) for the Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Facility (effective November 9, 2006) for a hydrogeologic study of the ponds. D. Project team List the key staff to be assigned to the project. A concise statement of qualifications and experience of each related specifically to the hydrogeologic pond study and thc hours that each shall be committed to the project shall be furnished. Resumes and work experience for each team member shall be included, along with a list of references with contact names and telephone numbers of similar projects completed by each team member. Only those personnel to be involved specifically in this project shall be listed. Also, include the names, addresses and telephone numbers of any subconsultants. Describe the qualifications and experience of any proposed subconsultants and identify the tasks or sub-tasks to be assigned to them along with the expected hours (or contract percentage) they will participate in the project. Also include a brief description of the experience of the project team related specifically to successfully completing hydrogeologic studies to determine the fate and transport of pollutants. E. Schedule and Estimated Budget The Consultant shall provide a bar chart schedule for the proposed work showing the interrelationship of the various discreet tasks. These tasks are to be those identified in Attachment "A", Scope of Services. The final agreement with the Consultant shall include a schedule for completion of the major milestones based upon selected consultant's schedule. The City's review periods shall not be counted against the time of completion for the various tasks or milestones. The Consultant shall propose an estimated fee based on an hourly rate schedule with a "not to exceed" maximum cost for all work identified in Attachment "A", Scope of Services. Labor hour projections for all personnel categories shall be provided for each discreet task. A copy of the Consultant's current itemized hourly rate fee schedule for all personnel categories shall be submitted. The Consultant shall provide a breakdown of the estimated fee by task and separate out any costs associated with the proposed services. Include budgets for any mileage, travel time, reproduction, photographs, etc., which are not associated with strict hourly rates. Fees shall include all markup, overhead, and profit for each task of the project. Estimated subconsultant fees and expenses shall also be individually identified. The Consultant shall submit the estimated fee in a separate, sealed envelope with the name of the firm and project name clearly noted on the front of the envelope. The request for submission of estimated fees to complete all tasks of the project is for use by the City in determining whether the Consultant has a proper understanding of the project scope and has adequately staffed the project to insure its timely and proper completion. The final agreement shall include a payment schedule including the following provisions: 1. Payment shall be on a time and materials basis in accordance with the consultant's attached fee schedule and payments shall be made monthly as the work progresses. The 3 total payment for completion of all the tasks included in the agreement shall not exceed the agreed upon "not to exceed" amount. 2. The total amount paid during the course of the work shall not exceed certain set percentages of the total "not to exceed" amount. Part of the completion of associated major milestones or tasks (set percentage of the total payment) shall be determined from the consultant's submitted fee schedule or negotiated before the final agreement. F. Related Experience Consultant shall provide a statement of related experience. Project descriptions shall include sufficient information to verify comparability with this project and shall also include the name of a contact person, address and telephone number of references who may be contacted to verify the Consultant's previous performance. Include client references for any proposed subconsultants. G. Exceptions The Consultant shall identify any exceptions proposed with respect to Attachment "A", Scope of Services, the City's insurance requirements and/or the City's contract provisions. V. SELECTION PROCEDURES A. Proposal Review Written proposals submitted by the deadline shall be reviewed to determine if the proposal requirements contained in Section IV have been met. Failure to meet the requirements for the Request tbr Proposals shall be cause for rejection of the proposal. The City may reject any proposal if it is conditional, incomplete, or contains irregularities. The City may waive an immaterial deviation in a proposal. Waiver of an immaterial deviation shall in no way modify the Request for Proposals documents or excuse the proposer from full compliance with the contract requirements if the proposer is awarded the contract. B. Proposal Evaluation The Consultant for the Hydrogeologic Percolation Pond Study for the City of Ukiah shall be selected based upon favorable evaluation of written proposals and supplemented, if required, by presentations during formal interviews scheduled by the City. The City reserves the right to select a consultant 'after review of the written proposals or after completion of interviews. The City shall evaluate proposals using a number of factors, as described below: 1. Fulfillment of the requirements as stated in this RFP. Technical Approach Thoroughness of Consultant's proposed technical approach towards data collection and analysis and recommendation for the hydrogeologic study workplan shall be carefully assessed to determine understanding of the project and compliance with requirements of the NPDES permit for the Hydrogeologic Study. 4 Project Personnel Experience The direct experience of the project manager and key support personnel shall be considered closely in the evaluation of the Consultant. Demonstrated familiarity with the requirements of the project by the Consultant's understanding of potential problems and methods and procedures for resolving these problems is important. Past Performance on Similar Projects The Consultant's performance on similar projects relating particularly to the quality of work, promptness of performance, cost control, cooperativeness with the owner's staff and regulatory agencies and success in obtaining approval of workplans for similar studies from a Regional Board is important. 5. Current Workload of Consultant Of particular interest to the City is the consulting firm's capability to staff this project adequately to meet scheduling requirements. Adequacy of the consultant's technical resources, including staff and office facilities and sufficiency of technical and clerical support staff to properly complete the project is important. Suitability of Project Schedule Infor~nation furnished on the proposed work plan, organizational chart and labor-hour projections shall be closely considered to establish whether the consultant is capable of completing the work with available staff in a timely manner. Cost The City shall consider cost as part of the evaluation criteria. Low cost is not essential to win; however, large cost differentials between respondents shall be carefully examined. Cost shall be used as a final indicator for determining the finalist when all other criteria have been normalized. Conciseness Consultants are encouraged to limit their information to that directly pertinent to the completion of the project. Promotional or other unsolicited materials shall not be submitted. Elaborate proposals with company brochures, non-related project pictures, etc., are discouraged. The proposal is limited to 25 pages, excluding resumes and other similar material which may be placed in the Appendix. VI. RIGHT OF REFUSAL The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals without qualifications. Proposals shall be considered only in their entirety. The City reserves the right to negotiate the specific requirements and costs using the selective proposals as a basis. VII. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS The insurance requirements are set forth in the City's Standard Consultant Services Agreement and General Provisions on Attachment "B'. VIII. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Proposals are due on or before 4 PM PDT on Thursday, March 8, 2007, at the following address: Ms. Ann Burck Ukiah Utilities, City of Ukiah 411 West Clay Street Ukiah, California 95454-5400 Proposers shall submit five (5) copies of the proposal. All proposals shall be in accordance with the instructions for preparing proposals as set forth herein.. All shipping containers for the proposals shall be clearly marked on the outside as follows: [INSERT NAME OF PROPOSER] Proposal to the City of Ukiah for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydrogeologic Percolation Pond Study The delivery of the proposals to the City of Ukiah on the above date and prior to the specified time is solely the responsibility of the proposer. The City shall not be responsible for delays caused by the U.S. Postal Service or any private delivery service. Proposals delivered after the specified time shall not be accepted and shall be returned unopened to the submitting proposer with the notation, "This proposal was received after the delivery time designated for the receipt and opening of the proposals". No faxed responses shall be accepted. IX. OTHER PROCUREMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS Period of Validity/Binding Offers All priced proposals shall be deemed to remain valid for a minimum period of sixty (60) days after their submittal date. No priced proposal may be modified or withdrawn by any qualified respondent within such sixty (60) day period without the prior written consent of the City. Be Interpretations and Addenda No interpretation, explanation or clarification of this RFP, including without limitation, the Appendices hereto, by any official, employee, consultant, attorney or other representative of the City shall be considered authoritative or binding on the City unless contained in a written addenda to this RFP. The City shall not be bound by any information, explanation, clarification or any interpretation, oral or written, by whoever made that is not incorporated into a written addendum to this RFP. All addenda shall be distributed to each interested firm or qualified respondent (as applicable). All such 6 addenda shall become part of this RFP and all interested parties or qualified Respondents (as applicable) shall be bound by such addenda. C. Prohibited Contacts All Respondents, including persons affiliated with, or in any way related to them, are prohibited from contacting thc City, thc City's employees, consultants or attorneys, on any matter relating to this RFP other than as contemplated herein. Failure of any Respondent to adhere to this prohibition may, at thc sole discretion of thc City, result in disqualification and rejection of any proposal. Any and all contacts with such persons associated with thc City shall be made only through and in coordination with: Ms. Ann Burck Project Engineer/Manager Ukiah Utilities, City of Ukiah Utilities 411 West Clay Street Ukiah, California 95482-5400 (707) 463-6286 (707) 463-6740 (fax) email address: annb@cityofukiah.com D. Expense of Proposal Preparation The City accepts no liability under any circumstances for any costs or expenses incurred by respondents in acquiring, clarifying, or responding to any condition, request or standard contained in this RFP, any addenda, or any revised RFP, including without limitation, meetings. Each respondent that participates in this procurement process does so at its own expense and risk and agrees that the City shall not reimburse any costs incurred during this process, and each respondent shall indemnify and hold harmless the City from and against any claims (including any costs and attorney's fees) for such reimbursement, directly or indirectly, made by or on behalf of such respondent. E. Rights of the City This RFP constitutes an invitation to submit a proposal to the City. This RFP does not obligate the City to procure or contract for the scope of services set forth in this RFP. Without limitation, the City, including its agents and designated representatives, reserves and holds at its sole discretion, the following rights and options: 1. To waive any minor informalities in a proposal; 2. To prepare and issue modifications and/or addenda to the RFP prior to tile receipt of a proposal that may expand, restrict, or cancel any portion or all work described in this RFP; 3. To receive questions from respondents and to provide such answers as it deems appropriate; 4. To reject any and all proposals and other submittals; 5. To change the date for receipt of proposals or any deadlines and dates specified in this RFP and other submittals; 6. To conduct investigations with respect to the information provided by each respondent and to request additional information to support such respondents responses and submittals: 7. To seek clarification of proposals and other submittals from such respondents: 8. To select the respondent that in the sole judgement of the RFP evaluation committee has the most advantageous proposal, from a responsible and responsive standpoint taking into consideration price and the evaluation criteria set forth in this RFP; and 9. To cancel this RFP with or without the substitution of another RFP. F. Schedule The tentative schedule of activities related to this RFP is as follows: Activity Date RFP Mail-out ............................................. February 16, 2007 Deadline for Submission of Questions ................ March 2, 2007 Proposal Submittal Deadline ........................... March 8, 2007 Evaluation Of Proposals .................................March 13, 2007 Consultant Selection Recommendation ............... March 21, 2007 Consultant Award ........................................March 22, 2007 Project Starting Date ..................................... March 23, 2007 Project Completion Date .................................. May 9, 2010 G. Property Rights Proposals received within the prescribed deadline become the property of the City of Ukiah and all rights to the contents therein become those of the City. H. Public Domain All products used or developed in the execution of any contract resulting from this RFP shall remain the public domain at the completion of the contract. Cancel Solicitation and Rejection of Any and All Proposals The City reserves the right to cancel this solicitation and to reject, in whole or in part, any and all proposals and is not bound to accept any proposals if any proposals are deemed by the City, in its sole judgement, to not be in the best interest of the City. The City reserves the right to take any action with regard to this RFP and the facilities and services which are the subject of this RFP that it considers, in its sole judgement, to be in its best interest. J. Outstanding Claims and Disputes The City reserves the right to reject proposals from any respondent if such respondent, or any firm comprising such respondent, or any of its affiliates, or any of their respective officers, parents or subsidiaries, is the subject of, or is party to, any outstanding claim or financial dispute relating to contract performance with the City. PC]NO NO 5 DRAINAC/ EFFLUENT PUMP 0 2O0 4OO 800 ~ ' Approximate Scole in Feet Figure 1 - Site Plan of Existing WWTP and Percolation Ponds 9 Figure 2 - Aerial Photograph of Existing WWTP and Percolation Ponds 10 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR CITY OF UKIAH WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDROGEOLOGIC PERCOLATION POND STUDY INTRODUCTION The City of U -kiah (City) has developed the enclosed scope of services for this RFP. The primary role of the selected Consultant will be to provide services to assist the City with complying with the California Regional Water Quality Board North Coast Region (Board) Order No. 1-2006-0049/NPDES No. CA0022888 (Order) for the Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Facility (effective November 9, 2006) for a hydrogeologic study of the percolation ponds. The primary objective for the Consultant is to design, perform and report a scientifically sound and defensible study that satisfies the Board Order. The selected Consultant will work under the direction of the Project Manager in the City of U 'kiah Utilities Department. SCHEDULE The project will extend over as much as three and one-half years. Consultants shall predicate their proposal on these schedule constraints. Task Prepare Hydrogeologic Study Workplan Installation of At Least One Monitoring Well Conduct Hydrogeologic Study Prepare Hydrogeologic Study Report Project Management, Coordination and QA/QC Start 3/23/07 5/9/07 5/9/07 Finish 5/9/07 7/13/07 5/9/09 5/9/09 11/9/09 2/9/07 5/9/10 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES This Pdc'P sol/cits the services of a Consultant to: 1. Prepare Hydrogeologic Study Workplan 2. Conduct Hydrogeologic Study 3. Prepare Hydrogeologic Study Report 4. Project Management, Coordination and QA/QC These tasks are described in more detail below. The deliverables produced by the Consultant will be used by the City in its efforts to comply with the Board Order. 12/2(I/2(gl6\12/20/20lff~kS:\Administrat~on\Agcndas & ASRskMar 21 RcgnMar Agenda\Pert Ptmd Scope.dockdt\dt DETAII.1Z.D DESCRIPTION OF TASKS The following is a description of the tasks identified to complete the required assignment. Consultant shall expand upon this description of work and/or add tasks to fully identify work products. Task 1-Prepare Hydrogeologic Workplan Submit for Regional Board approval, a workplan for a hydrogeologic study to determine the fate and transport of wastewater pollutants discharged via the City's percolation ponds. The workplan proposal should be designed to investigate: current and/or projected surveyed elevations of pond features referenced to mean sea level (e.g., pond bottom, peak water surface level) and nearby surface water features (e.g., channel bed, top of bank, seasonal average and maximum water surface elevations); · site specific lithology; · depth to groundwater across seasonal variations; · seasonalgroundwater gradients; · transmissivity of arcal soil; concentration gradients of targeted wastewater constituents measured at various points extending away from the disposal area towards the Russian River. The Consultant may use conservative indicator pollutants for the purpose of this study. The Draft workplan shall contain milestones and a time schedule for completion of the study. The study time schedule shall be as short as practicable, and in no case, extend beyond three and a half years following the effective date of thc Board Order. The study time schedule shall include provisions for the submittal of semi-annual progress reports. This task includes up to two meetings with Board staff. Task 2-Conduct Hydrogeologic Study The Consultant shall perform the hydrogeologic study described in the final study workplan approved by the Board. For thc purposes of the Consultant's proposal, the study shall be assured to include: · Review of Background Data. · Development of Fieldwork Safety Plan. 12/20/21)(}6~12/211/21R}6\S:\Administradon~A[,mndas & ASRs\Mar 21 ReguLar Agenda\Pert Pond $copc doc\dr\dr Design, Permitting, Construction, and Development of Monitoring Wells (As the result ora Consent Decree, one monitoring well must be installed by 7/13/07. The Board Order also requires one well by May 9, 2008. The Cnnsultant should assume installation of two monitoring wells.) · Monitoring of Water Levels and Water Quality in Five Monitoring Wells (Assume Two Years). · Groundwater Flow and Fate and Transport Modeling Between the Percolation Ponds and Russian River. Task 3-Prepare Hydrogeologic Study Report Consultant shall submit a report describing the findings and conclusions of the hydrogeologic study that monitors and models the fate and transport of wastewater pollutants. The report shall include all pertinent information from groundwater monitoring wells used to collect data, including, but not limited to well locations and well logs. The report shall include conclusions and rccommendations for further work if appropriate. This task includes up to two meetings with Board staff. Task 4-Project Management Coordination and QA/QC Consultant shall manage all of its staff, subconsultants and subcontractors (including drilling subcontractor and analytical laboratory), and coordinate all activities with the City's Project Manager. Consultant will present the study workplan and study findings to City staff and/or City council. This task includes quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) of all work products. Consultant shall provide written monthly status reports to the (2i~' and semi-annual progress reports for the City to deliver to the Board. Task 5-Optional Tasks In addition to the above four tasks, the Consultant is requested to provide a description and cost esdmate for one or morc tasks that the Consultant recommends and/or envisions may benefit by the City. De~verables The Consultants shall provide 15 copies of an Administration Draft, Draft and Final of both the Study Workplan and Study Report and a presentation of the Study findings. 12/20/2006\12/20/20~16\S:\Administrauon\Agendas & ASRs\Mar 21 II. cguhr Agcnda\Pcrc Pond Scopc.doc\dt\dt ITEM NO. DATE: March 21, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BALANCE HYDROLOGICS, INC. TO CONDUCT A HYDROGEOLOGIC STUDY FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $114,994. The City of Ukiah (City) received a new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from the North Coast Regional Water Qualtiy Control Board (Regional Board) effective November 9, 2006. One of the requirements of the new discharge permit is a hydrogeologic study of the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and enter into a Professional Consulting Services Agreement with Balance Hydrologics, Inc. to conduct a Percolation Pond Hydrogeologic Study for an amount not to exceed $114,994. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1) Determine a different firm is more qualified and select another consultant to perform the work. 2) Reject all proposals and provide direction to staff. FUNDING: Amount Budqeted $115,000 Account Number 612.3580.250.001 Additional Funds Requested N/A Citizen Advised:N/A Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Ann Bumk, Project Engineer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1) RFP 2) RFP Distribution List 3) Prevision C.2.a.i. of the NPDES Permit, pp. 17-19. APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager percolation ponds to determine .the fate and transport of wastewater pollutants discharged via the percolation ponds. The Regional Board is requiring the study to assure compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region (Basin Plan) which prohibits discharge of treated wastewater to the Russian River from May 15 through September 30. A Request for Proposal (RFP) to conduct a hydrogeologic study was sent to 21 engineering consulting firms that provide hydrologic services. The primary objective for the Consultant is to design, perform and report a scientifically sound and defensible study in accordance with the discharge permit special study requirements of the Regional Board. Four proposals were received from the following firms: Winzler & Kelly, Brown and Caldwell, SHN Consulting Engineers, and Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Staff from Public Utilities and Public Works evaluated the proposals based on criteria specified in the RFP document. The evaluation results for the four proposals are shown in Table 1. Balance Hydrologics received the highest evaluation score, 90.4 out of a possible 100 points. Table 1 - Proposal Evaluation Results Proposal Evaluation Criteria Maximum Brown and Winzler & SHN Balance Cf of Caldwell Kelly Hydrologics Points 1. Fulfillment of RFP Requirements 5 5.0 2. Technical Approach 30 24.0 3. Project Personnel Experience 25 22.7 4. Past Performance on Similar Projects 25 22.7 5. Current Workload of Consultant 5 5.0 5.0 6. Suitability of Project Schedule 5 5.0 4.7 7. Conciseness 5 4.7 4.7 Total Points 100 89.1 86.7 Proposal Cost Estimate $139,883 $271,659 Total Staff Hours 718 1,349 5.0 4.7 5.0 24.0 18.3 26.7 23.3 15.0 20.7 20.0 18.3 24.3 5.0 5.0 4.7 4.7 5.0 4.0 71.0 90.4 $93,780 $114,994 610 580 Rankin~ 2 3 4 1 The strengths of Balance Hydrologic's proposal include: 1) an experienced and qualified team with 87 years of combined hydrogeologic experience, 2) work plan designed to generate findings as early as possible, 3) multiple lines of investigation to determine if a hydraulic connection exists from the ponds to the Russian River and its significance regarding the fate of wastewater pollutants, and a hydrogeologic study that includes a) two 50-foot deep, 4-inch diameter monitoring wells, b) boreholes sampled and geophysical e- Icg conducted, c) 8-hour pumping test to determine specific capacity, transmissivity, and hydraulic capacity of aquifer, d) datalogger in wells, e) water quality samples taken from the Ranney collector, downstream of the ponds and the ponds analyzed for general minerals, metals, and key constituents, and f) specific conductance survey of ground water on site with an auger rig and field meters to map concentration gradients. Staff believes Balance Hydrologic, Inc. has the requisite experience and qualifications and offers the City the best value to provide consulting services for the Percolation Pond Hydrogeologic Study. Therefore, Staff is recommending the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate the final terms and enter into a contract with Balance Hydrologics. Copies of the recommended proposal from Balance Hydrologics, Inc. are available for City Council review. Funds were budgeted and are available for this project in the FY '06-'07 budget, account # 820-3901-250-003. Aq-I'ACHMENT B AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES This Agreement, made and entered into this __ day of ,2006 ("Effective Date"), by and between CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA, hereinafter referred to as "City" and , a [sole proprietorship, corporation, partnership, limited partnership, limited liability company, etc.] organized and in good standing under the laws of the state of , hereinafter referred to as "Consultant". RECITALS This Agreement is predicated on the following facts: City requires consulting services related to a hydrogeologic study of the City of Ukiah's Wastewater Treatment Plant evaporation/pemolation ponds. Consultant represents that it has the qualifications, skills, experience and properly licensed to provide these services, and is willing to provide them according to the terms of this Agreement. City and Consultant agree upon the Scope-of-Work and Work Schedule attached hereto as Attachment "A", describing contract provisions for the project and setting forth the completion dates for the various services to be provided pursuant to this Agreement. TERMS OF AGREEMENT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 1.1 The Project is described in detail in the attached Scope-of-Work (Attachment "A"). 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES 2.1 As set forth in Attachment "A". 2.2. Additional Services. Additional services, if any, shall only proceed upon written agreement between City and Consultant. The written Agreement shall be in the form of an Amendment to this Agreement. 3.0 CONDUCT OF WORK 3.1 Time of Completion. Consultant shall commence performance of services as required by the Scope-of-Work upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed from City and shall complete such services within three and one-half years from receipt of the Notice to Proceed. Consultant shall complete the work to the City's reasonable satisfaction; even if contract disputes arise or Consultant contends it is entitled to further compensation. 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 5.0 5.1 COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES Basis for Compensation. For the per[ormance of the professional services of this Agreement, Consultant shall be compensated on a time and expense basis not to exceed a guaranteed maximum dollar amount of $ Labor charges shall be based upon hourly billing rates for the various classifications of personnel employed by Consultant to perform the Scope of Work as set forth in the attached Exhibit B, which shall include all indirect costs and expenses of every kind or nature, except direct expenses. The direct expenses and the fees to be charged for same shall be as set forth in Exhibit B. Consultant shall complete the Scope of Work for the not-to- exceed guaranteed maximum, even if actual time and expenses exceed that amount. Changes. Should changes in compensation be required because of changes to the Scope-of-Work of this Agreement, the parties shall agree in writing to any changes in compensation. "Changes to the Scope-of-Work" means different activities than those described in Attachment "A" and not additional time to complete those activities than the parties anticipates on the date they entered this Agreement. Sub-contractor Payment. The use of sub-consultants or other services to perform a portion of the work of this Agreement shall be approved by City prior to commencement of work. The cost of sub-consultants shall be included within guaranteed not-to-exceed amount set forth in Section 4.1. Terms of Payment. Payment to Consultant for services rendered in accordance with this contract shall be based upon submission of monthly invoices for the work satisfactorily performed prior to the date of the invoice less any amount already paid to consultant, which amounts shall be due and payable thirty (30) days after receipt by City. The invoices shall provide a description of each item of work performed, the time expended to perform each task, the fees charged for that task, and the direct expenses incurred and billed for. Invoices shall be accompanied by documentation sufficient to enable City to determine progress made and to support the expenses claimed. ASSURANCES OF CONSULTANT Independent Contractor. Consultant is an independent contractor and is solely responsible for its acts or omissions. Consultant (including its agents, servants, and employees) is not the City's agent, employee, or representative for any purpose. It is the express intention of the parties hereto that Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee, joint venturer, or partner of Ukiah for any purpose whatsoever. Ukiah shall have no right to, and shall not control the manner or prescribe the method of accomplishing those services contracted to and performed by Consultant under this Agreement, and the general public and all governmental agencies regulating such activity shall be so informed. Those provisions of this Agreement that reserve ultimate authority in Ukiah have been inserted solely to achieve compliance with federal and state laws, rules, regulations, and interpretations thereof. No such provisions and no other provisions of this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed as creating or establishing the relationship of employer and employee between Consultant and Ukiah. Consultant shall pay all estimated and actual federal and state income and self- employment taxes that are due the state and federal government and shall furnish and pay worker's compensation insurance, unemployment insurance and any other benefits required by law for himself and his employees, if any. Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold City and its officers, agents and employees harmless from and against any claims or demands by federal, state or local government agencies for any such taxes or benefits due but not paid by Consultant, including the legal costs associated with defending against any audit, claim, demand or law suit. Consultant warrants and represents that it is a properly licensed professional or professional organization with a substantial investment in its business and that it maintains its own offices and staff which it will use in performing under this Agreement. 5.2 Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibility is solely to City. Consultant has no interest and will not acquire any direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of the Agreement. Consultant shall not in the performance of this Agreement employ a person having such an interest. 6.0 INDEMNIFICATION 6.1 Insurance Liability. 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: Insurance Services Office ("ISO") Commercial General Liability Coverage Form No. CG 00 01 11 85. ISO Form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, Code 1 "any auto" or Code 8, 9 if no owned autos and endorsement CA 0025. Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability Insurance. Errors and Omissions liability insurance appropriate to the consultant's profession. Architects' and engineers' coverage is to be endorsed to include contractual liability. B. Minimum Limits of Insurance Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commemial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work performed under this Agreement, or the aggregate limit shall be twice the prescribed per occurrence limit. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability: Worker's compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 4. Errors and Omissions liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. 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 to 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 Coveraqes The City, it officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds 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, 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. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. 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. 6.2 2. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Covera~le The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from Consultant's performance of the work, pursuant to this Agreement. 3. Professional Liability Coveraqe If written on a claims-made basis, the retroactivity date shall be the effective date of this Agreement. The policy period shall extend from to 4. All Coveraqes 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. E. Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with admitted California insurers with an A.M. Best's rating of no less than A- for financial strength, AA for long-term credit rating and AMB-1 for short-term credit rating. F. Verification of Coveraqe Consultant shall furnish the City with Certificates of Insurance and with original Endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement. 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 or approved by the City. All Certificates and Endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before Consultant begins the work of this Agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. If Consultant fails to provide the coverages required herein, the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to purchase any or all of them. In that event, after notice to Consultant that City has paid the premium, the cost of insurance may be deducted from the compensation otherwise due the contractor under the terms of this Contract. 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 this Paragraph 6.1. Indemnification. Notwithstanding the foregoing insurance requirements, and in addition thereto, Consultant agrees to indemnify the City for any claim, cost or liability that arises out of, or pertains to, or relates to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 the Consultant and its agents in the performance of services under this contract, but this indemnity does not apply to liability for damages for death or bodily injury to persons, injury to property, or other loss, arising from the sole negligence, willful misconduct or defects in design by the City, or arising from the active negligence of the City. "Indemnify," as used herein includes the expenses of defending against a claim and the payment of any settlement or judgment arising out of the claim. Defense costs include all costs associated with defending the claim, including, but not limited to, the fees of attorneys, investigators, consultants, experts and expert witnesses, and litigation expenses. References in this paragraph to City or Consultant, include their officers, employees, agents, and subcontractors. CONTRACT PROVISIONS Ownership of Work. All documents furnished to Consultant by City and all documents or reports and supportive data prepared by Consultant under this Agreement are owned and become the property of the City upon their creation and shall be given to City immediately upon demand and at the completion of Consultant's services at no additional cost to City. Deliverables are identified in the Scope-of-Work, Attachment "A". Governin,q Law. Consultant shall comply with the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, and all local governments having jurisdiction over this Agreement. The interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by California law and any action arising under or in connection with this Agreement must be filed in a Court of competent jurisdiction in Mendocino County. Entire A.qreement. This Agreement plus its Attachment(s) and executed Amendments set forth the entire understanding between the parties. Severability. If any term of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in effect. Modification. No modification of this Agreement is valid unless made with the agreement of both parties in writing. Assiqnment. Consultant's services are considered unique and personal. Consultant shall not assign, transfer, or sub-contract its interest or obligation under all or any portion of this Agreement without City's prior written consent. Waiver. No waiver of a breach of any covenant, term, or condition of this Agreement shall be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach of the same or any other covenant, term or condition or a waiver of the covenant, term or condition itself. Termination. This Agreement may only be terminated by either party: 1) for breach of the Agreement; 2) because funds are no longer available to pay Consultant for services provided under this Agreement; or 3) City has abandoned and does not wish to complete the project for which Consultant was retained. A party shall notify the other party of any alleged breach of the Agreement and of the action required to cure the breach. If the non-breaching fails to cure the breach within the time specified in the notice, the contract 7.10 8.0 shall be terminated as of that time. If terminated for lack of funds or abandonment of the project, the contract shall terminate on the date notice of termination is given to Consultant. City shall pay the Consultant only for services performed and expenses incurred as of the effective termination date. In such event, as a condition to payment, Consultant shall provide to City all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed hereunder, subject to off-set for any direct or consequential damages City may incur as a result of Consultant's breach of contract. Duplicate Oriqinals. This Agreement may be executed in duplicate originals, each bearing the original signature of the parties. When so signed, each such document shall be admissible in administrative or judicial proceedings as proof of the terms of the Agreement between the parties. NOTICES Any notice given under this Agreement shall be in writing and deemed given when personally delivered or deposited in the mail (certified or registered) addressed to the parties as follows: ANN BURCK, PROJECT MANAGER CITY OF UKIAH DEPT. OF PUBLIC UTILITIES 411 WEST CLAY STREET UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482-5400 9.0 SIGNATURES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the Effective Date: CONSULTANT BY: PRINT NAME: Date IRS IDN Number CITY OF UKIAH BY: CANDACE HORSLEY CITY MANAGER Date A'I-TEST GAlL PETERSEN Date CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAVID J. RAPPORT CITY A'I-I'ORNEY, CITY OF UKIAH WWTP Percolation Pond Hydrogeologic Study RFP Engineering Consultant Services Distribution List February 2007 Geoconsultants, Inc. 1450 Koll Circle Suite 114 San Jose, California 95112 Joel B. VaIBrown Boyle Engineering Corporation 1211 North Dutton Avenue, Suite C Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Hanover Environmental Services, Inc. 1072 Marauder Street, Suite 220 Chico, Ca. 95973 SHN Consulting Engineers 812 West Wabash Eureka, CA 95501 Todd Engineers 2200 Powell Street, Suite 225 Emeryville, California 94608-1809 URS Corporation 100 California Street, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94111 Ulrick & Associates 1400 Grand View Drive Berkeley, California 94705 MWH Americus, Inc. 1340 Treat Boulevard, Suite 300 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Martin Steinpress, R.G.C.H.G. Brown and Caldwell 201 North Civic Drive Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Camp Dresser & McKee One Walnut Creek Center 100 Pringle Avenue, Suite 300 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Perry Petersen, P.E. HDR Engineering, Inc. 350 Frank H Ogawa Plaza, Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94612-2049 Greg Ow, P.E. Harris & Associates 120 Mason Circle Concord, CA 94520-1214 Ted Whiton, P.E. Winzler & Kelly 495 Tesconi Circle Santa Rosa, CA 95401-4696 Robert Gailey, R.G., C.H.G. The Source Group, Inc. 3451-C Vincent Road Pleasant Hill, California 94523 Geothermal Surveys, Inc. 520 Mission St. South Pasadena, CA 91030 Carrollo Engineers 2500 Venture Oaks Way, Suite 230 Sacramento, CA 95883 Brelje & Race Consulting Engineers 5570 Skylane Boulevard Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Quest GeoSystems Management 504 Limewood Drive Antioch, California 94509-5657 Black and Veatch 8950 Cai Center Drive, Suite 238 Sacramento, CA 95826 Mr. Mark Woyshner Balance Hydrologies 841 Folger Boulevard Berkeley, CA 94710 Richard C. Slade & Associates 6442 Coldwater Canyon Ave., Suite 214 North Hollywood, CA 91606 Cil? o1" Ukiah Ul.:iah '~L astewater Treatment ©RDER NO. k t -2006-0049 NPDES NO. CA0022888 FaciliL~ causing or significantly contributing to adverse impacts to water quality and/or beneficial uses of receiving waters. In the event that the Regional Water Board's interpretation of the narrative toxicity objective in the Basin Plan is modified or invalidated by an order of the State Water llnard._-a~eoumdeeisiom-or~tate-or-federa! statute er re~_qation, ef_fl_uent limltatinn~ for toxic pollutants established by this Order may be revised to be consistent with the order, decision, statute, or regulation. The Regional Water Board may reopen this Order within five years of its adoption, if effluent monitoring results or other new information demonstrates reasonable potential for any pollutant or pollutant parameter with applicable water criteria established by the NTR, CTR, or Basin Plan. 2. Special Studies, Technical Reports and Additional Monitoring Requirements The Discharger shall comply with one of the following special study requirements in order to assure compliance with the Basin Plan's discharge prohibitions for the Russian River, described in Discharge Prohibition III.I. of this Order: i. Hydrogeologic Study Task Task Description Due Date The Discharger shall conduct all work under the , direction of a California registered engineer or ;eologist experienced in pollution investigation in accordance with all laws. All necessary permits shall be obtained. 1 Submit for Executive Officer approval, a workplan Six months for a hydrogeologic study to determine the fate and following the transport of wastewater pollutants discharged via the effective date Discharger's percolation ponds. The workplan of this Order proposal should be designed to investigate: · current and/or projected surveyed elevations of pond features referenced to mean sea level (e.g., pond bottom, peak water surface level) and nearby surface water features (e.g., channel bed, top of bank, seasonal average and maximum water surface elevations); · site specific lithology; · depth to groundwater across seasonal variations; Limitations and Discharge Requirements i 7 C;~y of L, kiah LJkiah Wasmwater Trcatmen~ Facilit~ ORDER NO. R 1-2006-©049 NPDES NO. CA©1i~285§ Task Task Description Due Date · seasonal groundwater gradients; · transmissivity of areal soil; · concentration gradients of targeted points extending away from the disposal area towards the Russian River. The Discharger may use conservative indicator pollutants for the purpose of this study. The workplan proposal shall contain milestones and a time schedule for completion of the study. The study time schedule shall be as short as practicable, and in no case, extend beyond three and a half years following the effective date of this Order. The study time schedule shall include provision for the submittal of semi-annual progress reports. 2 Submit a report describing the findings and No later than conclusions of the hydrogeologic study that models 3.5 years the fate and transport of wastewater pollutants. The following the report shall include all pertinent information from effective date groundwater monitoring wells used to collect data, of this Order including, but not limited to well locations and well logs. 3 If the Regional Water Board determines that the No later than I hydrogeologic study demonstrates that wastewater 4 years pollutants discharged to the percolation ponds reach following the the Russian Pdver, the Discharger shall submit a effective date written proposal to study disposal alternatives to of this Order comply with the Basin Plan discharge prohibitions. The study plan shall contain milestones and a time schedule for selection and implementation of an alternative disposal method. The study time schedule shall be as short as practicable. In addition, the Regional Water Board would adopt a cease and desist order with a compliance schedule for achieving compliance with the Basin Plan discharge prohibitions. Limitations and Discharge Reqtfirements 18 Cit.x of Ukiah LJl~iah Wn~te,,x ~rer Tr'eatmenr Facilit~ ORDF_R NO. RI-2006-0049 ,'qJ>l)E$ NO. CA002288§ OR ii. Study to Determine Alternative Disposal Method 1 Submit a written commitment to modify existing Six months effluent disposal methods in order to ensure following the compliance with the Basin Plan discharge effective date of prohibitions. The commitment shall include a this Order preliminary schedule of tasks necessary to develop a detailed study plan containing milestones and a time schedule for selection and implementation of an alternative disposal method. 2 Submit a written proposal to study disposal No later than 3.5 alternatives to comply with the Basin Plan years following the discharge prohibitions. The study plan shall effective date of contain milestones and a time schedule for this Order selection and implementation of an alternative disposal method. The study time schedule shall be as short as practicable but no longer than five years from the expiration date of this Order. 3. Best Management Practices and Pollution Prevention a. Pollutant Minimization Program The Discharger shall, as required by the Executive Officer, prepare a Pollutant Minimization Program in accordance with section 2.4.5.1 of the SIP, when there is evidence (e.g., sample results reported as DNQ when the effluent limitation is less than the MDL, sample results from analytical methods more sensitive than those methods included in the permit, presence of whole effluent toxicity, health advisories for fish consumption, results of benthic or aquatic organism tissue sampling) that a priority pollutant is present in the effluent above an effluent limitation and either: i. A sample result is reported as detected and not quantified (DNQ) and the effluent limitation is less than the Reporting Limit (RL); or, ii. A sample result is reported as not detected (ND) and the effluent limitation is less than the method detection limit (MDL). Limitations and DischarE¢ Requirements 19 ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 11f March 21,2007 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION SUPPORTING LOCAL BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT'S (BLM) PURCHASE OF GARVEN RANCH Mayor Rodin has requested that a discussion with possible authorization to send a letter of support for the local Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) purchase of the Garven Ranch be agendized. Refer to Attachment 1, BLM correspondence requesting support. The BLM has confirmed that sending the letter after the March 20 date is acceptable. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Discussion and possible authorization to send letter of support to the local Bureau of Land Management for the purchase Garven Ranch. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Requested by: Mayor Rodin Prepared by: Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. BLM Correspondence Approved: ~~-"~ Candace Horsley, City,Manager ATTACHMENT 1 Open Letter to the Ukiah City Council: The local district BLM office is currently making a concerted effort to develop a southern access to the south Cow Mountain (Red Mountain) OHV area via Highway 175. To do this they need the financial support of the Trust for Public Land to buy the access rights or to buy the access property itself. BLM has requested that letters of support from the community be sent before March 20 to: Erik Vink Trust for Public Land 1107 9th Street, Suite 1050 Sacramento, CA 95814 Please send an official letter of support for the BLM Ukiah Field Office's effort to purchase the Garven Ranch. A southern access is sorely needed for the following reasons. 1) The current main access road, Mill Creek Road, is dangerous. It is narrow and windy. Young drivers often do not have the necessary experience to drive it safely. In inclement weather it is even more dangerous. The 25 MPH speed limit is usually not enforced. 2) Mill Creek Road already has more traffic than it can handle. On some weekends there are 300 to 400 motorcycles and trucks. For some official OHV events, there are more than 500 participants. 3) Mill Creek Road is too narrow to allow access to trailers and RVs. 4) The Mill Creek watershed is undergoing extreme stress due to the overuse of the road. 5) Approximately 85% of the traffic on Mill Creek Road are users of the Red Mountain OHV area from south of Mendocino County. These people contribute nothing significant to the local economy and rarely even stop to buy gas. They often travel at excessive and dangerous rates of speed. A significant number are intoxicated by alcohol or drugs, and there are many accidents on the road. Significant road repair costs to Mendocino county are not balanced by benefit to the county. Local residents also do not want to encourage even more traffic and problems by improving the road, which would also be prohibitively expensive. 6) Both local residents and local OHV area users have strongly recommended that BLM develop an alternate route to the south Cow Mountain OHV area via Highway 175. Although the areas in question are not within the city limits, Mill Creek Road is within the city's sphere of influence and the issue is one that affects Ukiah residents. I am sure that the overwhelming majority of residents in the entire Ukiah valley and surrounding areas will be grateful for your support of this project. For further information, please contact: Rich Burns, Field Office Manager BLM Ukiah Field Office 2550 North State Street Ukiah, CA 95482 rburnsCb, ca.blm.qov <mailto:rburnsC, ca.blm.qov> Ron Epstein March 23, 2007 Mr. Erik Vink Trust for Public Land 1107 9th Street, Suite 1050 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Mr. Vink, On behalf of the Ukiah City Council I am writing to express our support for a southern access to the south Cow Mountaha OffHighway Vehicle (OHV) area via Highway 175. There seems to be agreement from OHV and non-OHV users alike that a southern access point is desirable. ~ Creek Road, the current mare access road, is too narrow for the number of vehicles that use it, creating dangerous conditions for residents and visitors alike. The narrowness of Mill Creek Road also impedes access to Cow Mountain by trailers and recreational vehicles. We hope that OHV users will find a new, southern access point more accessible and easy to use and that residents along Mill Creek Road will experience some relief from the noise, congestion, and danger that currently exists on an otherwise peaceful country lane. Sincerely Yours, Marl Rodin Mayor 300 SEMINARYAVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 PhoneC¢ ?07/463-6200 Fax¢~ 707/463-6204 WebAddress: www.cityofukiah,corn March 23, 2007 Mr. Rich Burns BLM Ukiah Field Office Re: Cow Mountain RAMP Project Lead 2550 North State Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Mr. Btmas, On behalf of the Ukiah City Council I am writing to ask you to consider additional hiking trails in the new Recreation Area Management Plan for the Cow Mountain area. We view trails in and around our city as a unique amenity, improving the quality ofhfe for residents and also providing a draw for people from outside of Mendocino County. Although not all of us have hiked or biked the Cow Mountain area, we have heard reports of illegal shooting outside the boundaries of the shooting range. We hope that future plans for COW Mountain include improved enforcement of activities surrounding the shooting range. Thank you for providing us the opportunity to comment on the RAMP. Sincerely Yo~ Marl Rodin Mayor 300 SEMINARYAVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 ITEM NO. DATE: March 21,2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL REPRESENTATION ON THE SKATE PARK DESIGN SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THE SELECTION OF A SKATE PARK DESIGN CONTRACTOR. With Council's approval, the City of Ukiah released a Request For Proposals (RFP) for professional design/construction management services for the development of the Ukiah Skate Park. Eight proposals were received by the February 20, 2007 deadline and are ready for review. In an effort to develop an efficient process to review the detailed proposals and interview the top firms, Staff recommends developing a subcommittee consisting of members of the Ukiah Skate Park Committee; Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission; and the Ukiah City Council. The Ukiah Skate Park Committee and the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission have already identified members to serve on the subcommittee. If Council chooses to select representation for the subcommittee, proposals will be forwarded for review and a meeting date will be selected to begin the selection process. Once the subcommittee has a recommendation, the item will be forwarded to each of the respective executive bodies for consideration with final approval to be considered by the City Council. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consider Council representation on the Skate Park Design Subcommittee for the selection of a skate park design contractor. ALTERNATIVE COMMISSION OPTIONS: 1. Determine Council representation is not necessary and remand to staff with direction. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Ukiah Skate Park Committee N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director and Maya Simerson, Community Services Supervisor Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A APPROVED: {'-~ .~.~/~ Candace Horsley, City Ma'~ager