Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-12-05 PacketCITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 December 5, 2007 6:00 p.m. 5:15 PM Airport Commission Interviews -Conference Room #3 ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS 4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Special Minutes of 9/27/07 6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Authorize Award of Repair Work of 1994 Altec Am 755 Lift Truck (Double Bucket) to Altec Industries in an Amount Not to Exceed $15,000.00 and Authorize Budget Amendment of Same b. Rejection of Claim for Damages Received from Dave Henry Edres, Sr. for Insufficiency c. Authorize the City Manager to Enter Into an Interlocal Contract with H-GACBUY to Enable Cooperative Purchasing Through that Program d. Approval of Assignment of Contract for Professional Services for the Preparation of Downtown/Perkins Street Community Vision Program and Form Based (Smartcode) Zoning Regulations from Fisher & Hall Urban Design to Hall Alminana, Inc. e. Award of Contract to Ferranti Construction in the Lump Sum Price of $28,364 for the Sealing of The Concrete Roof and Tainter Gate Housing Structure at the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant along with a Minor Sink-Hole Repair; Authorize Budget Amendment in the Amount of $3,364.00 Necessary to Complete the Project f. Status of Posting Bids on the City's Website g. Notification of Award of Contract to Geotechnical Consultant Services to Address Issues Associated with a Leak in the Wastewater Treatment Plant's North Percolation Pond h. Adoption of Resolution Removing 105 Lineal Feet of On-Street Parking Along Perkins Street Near the Intersection of North Bound Off Ramp of US 101 i. Award of Contract to North Bay Construction for 2002 STIP Arterial /Collector Rehabilitation, Specification No. 07-03 in the Amount of $418,270.35 j. Award of Contract to North Bay Construction for 2002 STIP Local Street Rehabilitation, Specification No. 07-04 in the Amount of $186,081.71 k. Report to the City Council Regarding Purchase of a Dance Floor for the Ukiah Valley Conference Center from American Portable Dance Floors in the Amount of $5,362.02 I. Report to the City Council Regarding Acquisition of Services from Spencer Brewer for the ManagemenUProduction of the 2008 Sundays in the Park Concert Series in the Amount of $8,000 m. Report to the City Council Regarding the Purchase of Services From Rouse Masonry in the Amount of $6,592 for Rock Wall Repairs at Todd Grove Park. n. Report to the City Council Regarding the Purchase of an Electronic Scoreboard for the Ukiah Sports Complex from Aussport Scoreboards US, Inc in the Amount of $5,331.11 o. Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Submittal of an Application and Acceptance of an Allocation of Funds From the California Department of Water Resources, for a Local Groundwater Assistance Grant for a Groundwater Quality Monitoring Project; Authorize the City Manager to Sign Grant Documents p. Adoption of Resolution in Support of the Ukiah Northwestern Pacific Rail Trail Phase 1 and Commitment to Provide Local Matching Funds 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. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM- 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Ukiah City Code by Adding Article 10, Entitled: Marijuana Cultivation Enforcement, to Division 7, Chapter 1 and Amending Section 9254, Entitled: "Marijuana Cultivation." b. Airport Commission Appointments c. Request for Authorization for the Installation of Video Cameras at the Corporation Yard and Purchase of a Recording Device from AT&T at a Cost of $32,286.38 Plus Shipping and Sales Tax and Authorize Budget Amendment for Same d. Dispatch Communications Center Update e. Receive Status Report Concerning Code Compliance Activities 11. NEW BUSINESS a. Consideration of the Measure X Transient Occupancy Tax Performance Agreement with The Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce; Authorization for the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute the Agreement; Approval of a Corresponding Budget Amendment in the Amount of 75% of the Additional Revenue Generated and Subsequently Collected for the 2007 Calendar Year from the 2% TOT Measure X Increase; and Consideration of Representation on the TOT Task Force. b. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Request from Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority to Consider Initiatives on Plastic Carryout Bags c. Discussion and Possible Action Approving City's Participation as Sponsor of the Fourth Citizen U Forum and Possible Hosting of Event at the City's Conference Center d. Discussion of the Use of Tasers and Taser Policy for the Ukiah Police Department e. Authorization of the Purchase of an Uninterruptable Power Supply (UPS) from AT&T Datacomm in an Amount Not to Exceed $85,000.00; Approval to Redirect $63,300 from Account 699.1965.800.000 Originally Budgeted for the Storage Area Network to the UPS System; Approve Budget Amendment of the $21,700.00 for Account 678.2040.800.000 from the Dispatch Fund Balance f. Discussion and Direction Concerning the Development of a Specific Plan for a Portion of the Downtown g. Discussion and Determination of Mayor and Vice Mayor for Calendar Year 2008 12. COUNCIL REPORTS 13. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 14. CLOSED SESSION -Closed Session may be held at any time during or before the meeting a. Conference with Real Propertv Negotiators (§ 54956.8); Property: APN 156-240-02, 03, 06, 07, 08 (Ukiah); Negotiator: Candace Horsley, City Manager; Negotiating Parties: City of Ukiah & David Hull/Ric Piffero; b. Public Employment (§ 54957) Title: 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 30th day of November, 2007. Linda C. Brown, City Clerk Sa CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP CITY OF UKIAH CIVIC CENTER #3 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 September 27, 2007 4:45 p.m. ROLL CALL The Ukiah City Council met at a Special Meeting on September 27, 2007, the notice for which being legally noticed on, September 25, 2007. Mayor Rodin called the meeting to order at 4:50 PM. Roll was taken with the following Councilmembers present: Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Rodin; with Councilmember Thomas arriving late. Absent: None. Staff present: City Manager Horsley. 2. CITY STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION The Strategic Planning Session continued from the previous sessions. 3. Adoption of Resolution Approving Memorandum of Understanding for Employee Bargaining Unit-Police Unit Recommended Action: Adopt resolution approving Memorandum of Understanding for the Police Unit. M/S Crane/Thomas to approve the recommended action. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Thomas, Crane, Baldwin, and Mayor Rodin. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember McCowen. 4. CLOSED SESSION-Closed Session may be held at any time during or before the meeting. a. Labor Negotiations: Police Unit (§ 54957.6) Negotiator: Candace Horsley, City Manager ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 PM. Linda C. Brown, Deputy City Clerk ITEM NO: 7a MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF REPAIR WORK OF 1994 ALTEC AM 755 LIFT TRUCK (DOUBLE BUCKET) TO ALTEC INDUSTRIES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $15,000.00 AND AUTHORIZE BUDGET AMENDMENT OF SAME. Staff is requesting authorization to award the repair work for City of Ukiah Vehicle #2211, a 1994 Altec AM 755 Lift Truck, to Altec Industries Inc. in the not to exceed amount of $15,000.00. Background: Annual boom inspections and testing for City of Ukiah Electric Department were completed on Tuesday, October 23, 2007 as required by law. During these inspections, the All Cal technician noted cables integral to the boom for the ALTEC lift truck were outdated, and according to manufacturer, Altec Industries, need to be changed as soon as possible. These cables are generally good for only 3 years. Truck #2211 is now 13 years old, and the original cables are still in use. Also noted by All Cal and Altec technicians was excessive play in the turret turntable which exceeds allowable standards (See Reports attached as Attachment 2). This excess play is attributable to the rotation bearing being worn out. Based on the inspection report findings and as determined by the City of Ukiah Electric Supervisor, this truck has been removed from service by because it is unsafe. It has been out of service since the technician and mechanics reports were issued on October 23, 2007. This is a necessary piece of equipment for the City of Ukiah's Electric Department and it is essential that this truck be brought back to safe operating order and available for use. Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award repair work to Altec Industries Inc. for a not to exceed amount of $15,000.00 and authorize budget amendment of same. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Reject request and provide direction to Staff. FUNDING: Amount Budgeted $ 135,000 Acct No. 800.3728.800.000 Requested by: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor and Colin Murphey, Electric Supervisor Prepared by: Mary Parker, Purchasing Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1 - Altec Price Quote 2 -Annual Examination and Load Test for Truck #2211 Approved: Candace Horsley, City Altec Industries Inc. is the only qualified company that can work on these specialized repairs. Altec Industries Inc. has submitted a bid for repairs in the amount of $12,360.11 (Attachment 1). The head mechanic from Altec has advised to be prepared for some smaller items in need of repair that cannot be identified until the boom is dismantled and a thorough visual inspection can be made. As a result a request in the amount of $15,000.00 is being submitted to cover all identified and also unforeseen repairs. Although funds for this unforeseen expense were not specifically budgeted, they are currently available in Account Number 800.3728.800.000. Staff anticipates reviewing this budget at midyear to see if adjustments need to be made to compensate for this usage funds. ~rzec «~a~-isr.~res, ~~c. ATTACHM~NT_L "~'o No«in First str«~et pixor,CA,9°*320 US -'- d ~.. _.. Quote # 3823 - Versionl Service Request # Customer ITY OF UKIAH ~ ~~ . ~~c---- Account # 4346 Payment Tenns ET 30 Customer Veh # 11 Contact OLIN MURPHY Make b Model M755H Address SEMINARY AVE Chassis Vin # FDXK84ESRVA13187 City, ST, ZIP KIAH,CA,95482-0000 Mileage Email Unit Serial # 893-82310 Phone 07-467-2626 Fax Serial #(FA) 77-0011956 Mobile P.O. In-Service Dale 8-APR-94 ~ .` Contact mid Zanabi Email rrab@altec.com Phone 07-678-0800 ax 0778-1038 his proposal is valid until: 23.1AN-08 Notes: 1. additional parts might be needed to complete these tasks 11/14/07 Page 1 of 1 'This proposal is provided with the understanding that there may be additional items that require repair. kerns that are not cl~dy viskNe at the lime the proposal was prepared which inductee, but is rot limited to: rusted fasteners, seized parts or internal components. 'Travel to/from or transportation of the vehicle is not inducted unless specified. 'This proposal does not include taxes. ~ .. Akec Industries, Inc. ~ ~ f ~~~~,:; 5202 East Hwy 36 St Joseph, MO 64507 SJ7-GO-ALTEC (87763-68321 CUSTOMER SERVICE REQUESt COMPANY ~ /`~ *, ~ z t 7%~, , ~ SERVICE REQUEST# CONTACT UNtT INFORM ATI(}N ADDRESS ~~; _"> +_ ~ y ( -' STOMER VEHICLE # ~ ~_ ~ ~, CITt', ST, ZIP ? ~' MAKE ~ i G FF1CE PHONE FAX MODEL ~.-' it". ` ? S OB-LEPHONE P.O. CHASSISYIN# ~ /~~ ~~ ~~`~ A LTEC R~PRESE NTATNE MILEAGE .- ~ ~t NAME ~ ~ ,~.r ~ , - ^ i PHONE 877-M162-SA32 UNIT SERFAL # (1~. ~-' jr ~. FAX 816-236-Li 19 SERIAL # (FA) -~ ~ -) DATE t-}~ '~ ~ ! IN-SERVICE llATE r legend A=acceptable X=repair needed na=not applicable COMPLETE VISUAL INSPECTION COMPLETE OPERATIONAL TEST COMPLETE LUBRICATION TURNTABLE BOLT TORQUE INSPECTION TURNTABLE TILT MEASURMENT I~ . ,. . INSPECTOR NOTES: ' LAST MEASURMENT DATE !',9 j i~ '~~ t _ ~: 'v ., ~. t ... .-... L~..C .-~:c_ CERTIFICATE OF ANNUAL EXAMINATION AND LOAD TEST ~C.-.5_ ..~L ATfAC':~IMENT~"~ 1. Owner: City Of Ukiah 2. Owner's Address• 1320 Airport Road, Ukiah, Ca., 95482 3• Device (check): ^ Derrick ~ Aerial Manlift ^ Overhead Crane 4, Location: 1320 Airport Road, Ukiah, Ca., 95482 Rated Capacity 600 # 5, Manufacturer: Altec Model No.: AM 755 H Serial No.: 0893 R2310 6. Owner's Identification'(ifsny 2211 License Plate No. 7 ~ load Test Weigfit: 600 # $. Test bads applied including functional test load: Rnnm Anole Boom Radius Proof Load Rated Load Boom Direction 60 DEG 22FT 900 # 600 # Side 65/30 de 2A ft 900 it 600 >r Side 9. Remarks and/or limitations imposed: Unit is unable to lift under its own power any Capacity loads. Testing of the boom holding valves was conducted by a pulling force on the boom at the appropriate weights. i certify that on the 23rd day of October , 2007,the above described device was tested and examinetl b undersigned: that said test and examination has been conducted in accordance with the requirements of ANSI. Signs Print Title: Annual Certificate Expires: 10-23-08 Issue Date: 10-23-07 rt~5~i. 2..5;., -_~. _y.~7 ~~ _::« Aerial Lift Safety Inspection All-Cai Equipment Service Owner: City of Ukiah Address: 1320 Airport Road, Ukiah Ca. 95482 Street City State Zio Makes Altec Serial Number: 0893 R2310 Rated Capacity: 600 # b-unda Mudel: AM 755 H Unit: 2211 Service Status: X Description: Chassis mounted, aRicula[ed,boom Boom Type: Upper is F/G, Lower is steel w/ F/G insert Boom Length; q8 ft )ib: YES Platform Height: SS FT Insulated: X Dass: Fail: X See Comments: Yes Reinspection recommended: No Load test recommendod: Yes Inspected By; Stephen Lockhart Date: 10-23-07 Person Contacted: Collin Date: 10-23-07 +o-25~:. .r. ~CG Annual Aerial lift Safety Inspection SEE A. General oK N/A rrores 1. InspeRion records both regular and eriodic X 2. En ineerin secs or OEM a royal for modifications x 3. Review of preventative maintenance rerords x B. Controls - Uooer and Lower 1. All controls kientificd X 2. All controls protected from damage and inadvertent actuation X 3. Lower controls override u r controls X 4. Controls return to neutral when released X 5. Platform controls rovided with an unlocking device deadman) X 6. Override mode prevents boom movement with lower controls unattended X 7. Emer ency stop at u r Controls X e. Outriggers shall 6e visible from the control station X 9. Material handlln winches have both u er and lower mn[rols X 10. All controls u er and lower) o rate ropers X I1. Pefiormairce test [he boom throw h the entire ran a of deli ned motion X 12. Limit switches function properly X C. Identification Markings 1. Manufacturer X 2. Model X 3. Serial Number X 4. Insulated or noninsulated X 5. ualif'ication volts a and date of test X 6. Rated toad capacity X 7. Hel ht X 8. System pressure voltage or both X 9. Year of manufacture X 10. Number of lattorms X 11. Cate o of device X 1Z. Design voltaye X 1. Electrical hazard indlcatin that the unit does not rovide protection X Z. tledncal hazard indiWting that the unit is conslttered energized when working on or near enP.r ized circuits X 3. hlazards resulting hom failure to operate in the roscribed manner X 4. Information on [he use and load rating of the a ui merit k 5. Information on the load rating and use of alternative configurations X 6. 0 rotors cautions X 7. Noninsulated hazard indications X 8. Other ~. .,m c...c ~~LL Annual Aerial Lift Safety Inspection E. Chassis ~L.: ~.: ..... see 1. Truck tires are ro erly inflated and are not worn or dama ed X 2, Truck Arkin brake or wheel locku holding properl X 3. Frame intact and without obvious defect X 4. Outri er mountings are secure and cross channels are intact X 5. Aerial lift mountin intact (bolts and welds X 6. Body mountin intact X 7. Bed or bumper winch mounts secure X 8. Torsion bars intact and roperly lubricated X 9. Boom rest secure) anchored and stable X l0. Exhaust stem intact X 11. Trailer intle hook or ball secure and not showin extreme wear X 12. other an urnta a 1. Mountin4 secure bolts and wekls as a liable) X 2. Tum[able bearings or bushin snot excessively worn X 3. No cracked welds or deformed members X 4. Rotation drive motor and gearbox secure X 5. Rotation eartoK no[ cracked or leakin X 6. Rotation gears properl lubricated X 7. Keys not loose or ke wa s deformed X 8. Other v. vucnggers 1, Outriggers not deformed or cracked X 2. Pins ane component parts ro erl retained and not worn or tracked X 3. H draulic cylinders not leakin X 4. Hydraulic cylinders u. ed with holdin devices X 5. Brits intact X 6, Pads not excessive) worn or cracked X 7. Other n. owu uuuma, vasneu a oracrorms 1. Check for deformed tracked, or corroded members X Z. Rollers, wear ads anA guides proper lubricated and not exmssivel worn X 3. Pivot ins not worn or cracked and mounting holes not elon ated X 4. Pln roperly lubricated with bearings and bushin snot excessively wom X 5. Pins roper) retainetl X 6. Cylinders not leaking and end caps are secure X 7. Cylinders a ui ed with holding devices X 8. Basket structure not corroded X 9. Basket levelin and securing devices functioning properl X 10. Other __~...nLl.L _.:CL Annual Aerial Lift Safety Inspection ~LJ ~.. .. ...'S /..._ I. Fiberglass booms, baskets Q platforms ,,,, .,,. sEe 1. Secure fit at all fiber lass and steel 'unctions X 2. Flberglav has no cracks, deformations nor defects in the proteRlve coating X 3. Bucket has no holes or cracks X 4. Bucket mountng point has no distortion, loose bolts or any cracks X 5. Travel pad is in satisfactory condition X 6. Boom tie-down straps are intact and functional X 7. Un insulated baskMs and latforrns there are no holes or passa es X 8. Wear ads are in sabsfacto condition X 9. Platform sus nsion Ian ards arc in satisfacto condition X 10. Rollout mounting inhales are not cracked or elongated X 11. Safety belt laic and attachment ant is not cracked or deformed X 12. Other ). Hydraulic drive and hoses /Air and vacuum systems 1. PTO shift and lockout are secured and not worn X 2. Pump mount and drive line are secure x 3. h draulic relief valves functioning proper) X 4. No evidence of um cavitation or of leakin suction lines X 5. Pipe and hibin secure and undama ed X 6. No visible leaks in any lines X 7. No flexin or abrasion wear on hoses X B. Hoses free of blisters, abnormal twists or pinches X 9. Rotary oints secure and functionln with do internal or external leaks X 10. Air and vacuum s stems intact and free from leaks including hoses X 11. Where practical, ex osed lines are protected X 12. ExhausC Systems ihtad and no fumes at operator statloh or m cab and spark arrestor ftinctionl and oils lash wards roperly installed X 13. Air brake system 1lolding pressure when activated with engine off and [he cam ressor Ovcrnor enga in ro erly X 14. Other n. r.uao~wr nm 1, Material handler strutturally intact X 2. Mountin bolts and welds intact X 3. Winch erforms all functions ropcrty X 4. draulic system free From leaks and functionln X 5. Load rope not dama ed or worn X 6. Hookin[act and notdeformcd X 7. Other ._~. _a. ~~;~ __.<< L_ tevelino systems Annual Aerial Lift Safety Inspection a Z55 ,.-.- i-~:.:. SEE nr wie xnrre 1. Chains not showing excessive wear and properl ad'usted X 2. Drive gears not worn X 3. Chains and ears properl lubricated X q. Pins and retainers intact and not excessive worn X 5. Wire ro cs ore not excessive worn or with extensive wlfe damaye (breaks X 6. Wire ro cs are pro erl ad'usted and lubricated X 7. Sheaves are not showln excessive wear or deformation X 8. Turnbuckles and Safety wires are intact and functional X 9. Levelin c tinders not leakiii x L0. Hoses and fittings are intact and free from defect X li. Hydraulic levelin stem function ro erly X 12. Gravi s stem shock absofiers functioniP9 properl X 13. Brake mechanism holdin the basket as desi ned X 14. Brake mechanism seizin and releasin ro erly X 15. Other M. Miscellaneous safety Edllromint 1. Wheel chocks available X 2. Safety belts and Ian ards are com lete and undamaged X 3. First aid kit available and pro d stocked X 4. Ful loaded Firc eMin wisher With Current service date X S. Backing alarm o eratln correctly X G. Skid resistant coatin son access wa s and steps X %. Other N_ Ultrasarric insoectlon fits aDD11CdDle' ) Outri er 'ns N/A 2. Outri er toutPlate pins N/A 3. Main boom hinge pins NIA 4. Lower boom lift tinder N/A 5. ll nr boom lift cylinder N A 6. Extension cylinder N/A 7. elbow scissors link ins N(A 8. Basket attachment ins N/A 9. ]ib assembly Oins N/A 10. Leveling tinder ins N/A I1. Other n 1. Ouhlggers N/A 2. Mounts antl frame N(A Turntable and pedcsta N/A .~.n. L..:L ...LL Annual Aerial Lift Safety Inspection ~'L ~J.. ..._ i_.. .. 0. Magnetic PartiClo continued SEE OK N/A NOTES 1. Hook N/A 2. Cylinder ends N/A 3. Other P. Rotation Bearing 1. Left Side: 2. Right Side: 3. Frant: 4. Rear: Comment: Load Test After repairs: O Other: U Partial: U Quadrennial: Gl Description of Proof Load: KNOWN WEIGHT Basis for assigned lodd ratln MANUFACTURER'S ASSIGHNED RATINGS Test Weight Calculations Test #1 Test #2 Test #3 Test #4 Load block o 0 Slin sand shackles o 0 5 reader beam o 0 Jib o 0 Test wei ht 900 # 900 # Total Weight 900 ~ 900 # Test Load Annlied Boom Length Boom An le Boom Radius Proof Load Rated Load Outriggers (yes/no Boom Direction 1. 48 ft 60 de 22 ft 900 # 600 li Yes Side 2. 48 K 65/30 de 24 n 900 # 600 # Yes Side 3. 4. Type of Test (structural, lib, on rubber, etc.) Test #1: Proof Test #2: Droof Test #3: Test #4: LlmitatlOnS impose( NONE IMPOSED Notes: Holding valves hold the load OK, but the boom Is unable to pick up a capacity load _ by simply using the controls:. When the boom was straight out the rear of the truck the _ lower boom could not lift the boom with just an operator in the bucket m'L.]~].. ~..-- l ~:.. DISCREPANCIES Owner: City of Ukiah Unit Number: 2211 Description of unit inspected: Chassis mounted aerial Date: 10-23-07 Manu/aMurer: Alter Model: AM 755 H Serial Number: 0893 R2310 Item Description of Deficiency orrecte B Date Cat o 1 2 Levelin Cables arc dated 11/98. Check the manufacturers recommended replacement date for these cables. 2 2 Dedeslal has a deflection o(.14". Check the manufactures allowable deflection. 3 2 Fire ext annual cert ex fires this month Issued certlflrate of Annual Examination. N • ManINaIYIOC/'f RKDIIAnrntllNM NpIIW'rryr lbe Le4uenr:ynlinx/prnnnS dnJmdNf4Vnn SnWIINI nMIUUeruNewsJ /w the sum nry:rpbnn 01fh4 unN. Inspected by: Stephen Lockhart Date: 1.0-23-07 Repoli received by: Collin Date: 10-23-07 LEGEND: Category I ~ Repairs necessary, those detectr that are desiyna[eA mosl serious. Category Il -Those defects that could H;ad to downtime or a more costly repair. Category III -Check and repair as necessary Category N -There were no defects found at the time of the inspectlon CORRECTIONS MADE BY: Date DIELECTRIC TEST REPORT grtitulatino booths: PlaNorm Neight:6 ft Upper Boom Angh 0 Lower Boom Anglf 0 P/atfortn Height recorded for consistonry ar duplfcaNon of test rCSUlts Of Address: 1320 Airport Road, Ukiah, Ca., 95482 Unit tt:2211 Device: Articulating: Yes Test Equipment Use Hipotroni[s Model: C-1 N.25~1 ~.^": :. 1C::= Te/escop/hg boom Platform Height; _ Boom Angle: Date110.23-07 _ Power Telescoping: Equimpment Number: Lower Test Electrode System?V Yes ~ No TemF65deg Humidity 36% Flashover rJ Yes U No line Lift Test Weather Conditions Manufacturer: Alter LJ Wet ~ Dry Model: AM 755 H rl Calm Q Windy Sorial #: 0893 R2310 C'7 Clear U Overcast Rated Line Voltage: 46 KV Test Voltage: 56 KV U AC n DC Test Volta a 56 KV Test Volta a 50 KV Test Voltage KV Test Volta a KV Time of Test 3 Min Time of Test 3 Min Time of Test Min Time of Test Min Leaka a Current 12 uA Leaka a Curren[ 60 uA Leaka a Current uA Leakage Current uA Dielectric Test Results: ~ Pass ~ Fail (See note page) t Basket Liner lest Volta a KV KV KV KV KV H draulic 011 Breakdown KV KV KV KV KV Breakdown Valta e: KV KV KV KV KV This iy la uerlily +hnnhe nhnvt tell In ncedores. whew ~Ppliesldc, comply wish +h° m°uirommn. ul'+he Am+vics+n Nminntl Sl:wd:uJ vchu:k-nmuntesl clcvnting u+d m4,Ihir, plvllonns. ANSI AO] ]-IYnY, 147?, 19')U. Nmiw: The nhuve+esls VU ne+gusrance Um cunlinging insuln+inn nl the kxkJ nsrn. Nsh°Il hc+hen>ttrespusuibilily to nmi°sniud~e insulnsing quali+ies ohbe a:rul Aevu:< Ilnough periotlie wn+inp, ITEM NO. ~b MEETING DATE: December 5. 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM DAVE HENRY EDRES, SR. FOR INSUFFICIENCY An incomplete claim was received by the City of Ukiah from Dave Henry Edres, Sr. on November 1, 2007 and returned to him on November 13, 2007 requesting correction. As of this date, acorrected/completed claim has not been received. Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject this claim as insufficient. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject claim for damages received from Dave Henry Edres, Sr. for insufficiency. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Prepared by: Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Man ger r ITEM NO: 7~ MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN INTERLOCAL CONTRACT WITH H-GACBUY TO ENABLE COOPERATIVE PURCHASING THROUGH THAT PROGRAM SUMMARY: The City's Municipal Code, Section 1531 "Cooperative Purchasing" states that "The Purchasing Officer shall have the authority to join with other units of government in cooperative purchasing plans when the best interests of the City would be served thereby." H-GACBuy is a "Government-to-Government" procurement service available nationwide. This H-GAC Cooperative Purchasing Program is based out of Houston, Texas. Governmental entities have been procuring products and services through H-GACBuy for over 30 years. All contracts available to members of H-GACBuy have been awarded by virtue of a public competitive procurement process. H-GACBuy is self-funded and self- supported through an administrative fee assessed on each purchase order. The primary benefit of joining a program such as this is that it will give the City access to volume purchasing and discounts, as well as making available to the City an expedited procurement process. In order to participate in this program, the City is required to execute an "Interlocal Contract" (ILC). (Please see Attachment A.) By executing the ILC, the City represents and warrants to H-GAC that (1) it is eligible to contract with H-GAC under the Act because it is a qualifying municipality of the State of California, and (2) it possesses adequate legal authority to enter into this Contract. Staff requests that authorization be given to the City Manager to enter into an Interlocal Contract with H-GACBuy to enable the City to participate in their cooperative purchasing program. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the City Manager to enter into an Interlocal Contract with H-GACBuy to enable cooperative purchasing through that program. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Provide alternative direction to Staff. Requested by: Gordon Elton, Director of Finance Prepared by: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager; Dave Rapport, City Attorney Attachments: 1 -Interlocal Contract for Cooperative Purchasing Approved: Candace Horsley, City I panager ATTACHMENT rx<rx.er •un<xnstxo •orurto~ FORICOOPERATIVE PURCHASING No.: I'crmancm NnmFa nssibmcJ ny I1-GAC THIS INTERLOCAL CONTRACT ("Contract"), made and entered into pursuant to the Texas Interlocal Cooperation Act, Chapter 791, Texas Government Code (Ihe "Act"), by and behveen the Houston-Galveston Arca Council, hereinaler refened to as "FI-GAC;' having its principal place al business at 3555 Timmons Lane, Suite 120, Houston, Texas 77027, and a local government, a stale agency, or anon-profit corporation created and operated to provide one or more govemmentul functions and services, hereinafter referred to us "End User," having its principal place of business at * WITNESSETH WHEREAS, H-GAC is a regional planning commission and political subdivision ofthc Stale ofTexas operating under Chapter 391, Texas Local-C'iovemmem Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Ihe Acl, li-GAC is autherized to contract with eligible cnlilies to perform govemmentul functions and services, including the purchase of goods and services; and WHEREAS, in reliance on such authority, I-1-GAC has instituted a cooperative purchasing program under which it contracts with eligible entities under the Act; and WHEREAS, End User has represented that it is an eligible entity under the Act, that its governing body has authorized this Contract on * (Do(e), and that it desires to contract with H-GAC on the terms set forth below; NOW, THEREFORE, H-GAC and the End User do hereby agree as follows ARTICLE l: LEGAL AUTHORITY The End Uscr represents and wanunts (o H-GAC that (1) it is eligible to contract with I-I-GAC under the Act because it is one of the following: a local govemment, as defined in the Act (a county, a municipality, a special district, or outer political subdivision of the Slate of Texas or any other stale, or a combination of hvo or more of those cnlilies, a stale agency (an agency oRhe State ofTexas as deGncd in Section 771.002 of the Texas Government Code, or a similar agency of another state), or anon-profit corporation created and operated to provide one or more govemmentul functions and services, and (2) it possesses adequate legal authority to enter into this Contract. ARTICLE 2: APPLICABLE LAWS H-GAC and the End User agree to conduct all activities under this Contract in accordance with all applicable rules, regulations, and ordinances and Imvs in effect or promulgated During the temt of this Contract, ARTICLE 3: WHOLE AGREEMENT This Contract and any attachments, as provided herein, constitute the complete contract between the parties hereto, and supersede any and all oral and written agreements behveen the parties relating to matters herein. ARTICLE 4: PERFORMANCE PERIOD The period of this Contract shall be for the balance oCllte fiscal year ol'lhe End User, which begun * and ends * . This ContrJCl shall dtereaRer automatically be renewed annually forcach succeeding fiscal year, provided that such renewal shall not have Ilse effect of extending the period in which the End Uscr may make nny payment due an li- GAC contractor beyond the fiscal year in which such obligation was incurred under this Contract. ARTICLE 5: SCOPE OF SERVICES The End User appoints H-GAC its true and Imvful purchasing agent for the purchase of certain products and services through the H- GAC Cooperative Purchasing Program. End Uscr will access the Program through HCd CBuv.m~e and by submission of any duly executed purchase order, in Ihe loon prescribed by H-GAC to a contractor having a valid contract with H-GAC. All purchases hereunder shall be in accordance with (I) Texas statutes and procedures governing competitive bids and competitive proposals, (2) in accordance with specificmions and contract lemtsu established by FI-GAC, and (3) at published prices listed on H-GAO's web site. Ownership (title) to products purchased through H-GAC shall transfer directly Rom the contractor to the End Uscr. (Duet) ARTICLE 6: PAYMENTS H-GAC will confirm each order and issue notice to contractor to proceed. Upon delivery of goods or services purchased, and presentation of a properly documcNed invoice, the End User shall promptly, and in any case within thirty (30) days, pay H-GAC's contractor the full amount of the invoice. All payments for goods or services will be made from curtent revenues available to the paying party. In no event shall }I-GAC have any financial liability to the End User for any goods or services End Uscr procures from an H- GAC contractor. ARTICLE 7: CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS This Contract may be amended only by a written intendment executed by both parties, except that any alternations, additions, ar deletions to the lemts of this Contract which are required by changes in Federal and State law or regulations arc automatically incorporated into this Contract without written amendment hereto and shall become effective on the date designated by such law or regulation. H-GAC reserves the right to maAe changes in the scope of products and services offered through the H-GAC Cooperative Purchasing Program to be perforated hereunder. ARTICLE 8: TERMINATION PROCEDURES H-GAC or the End Uscr may cancel this Contract at any time upon thirty (30) days written notice by certified mail to the odterparty to this Contract. The obligations of the End Uscr, including its obligation to pay H-GAC's contractor for all costs incurred under this Contract prior to such notice shall survive such cancellation, as well as any other obligation incurred under this Contract, until perl'omted or discharged by the End User. ARTICLE 9: SEVERA6I LITY All parties agree that should any provision oClhis Contract be determined to be invalid or unenforceable, such dclemtination shall not affect any other term of this Contract, which shall continue in full force and effect. ARTICLE 10: FORCE MAJEURE To the extent that either party to This Contract shall be wholly or punially prevented from the performance within the temt specified of any obligation or duty placed on such party by reason of or Ihrough strikes, stoppage of labor, riot, fire, flood, acts ofwar, insurrection, accident, order of any court, act of God, or specific cause reasonably beyond llte party's control and not attributable to its neglect or nonfeasance, in such event, the time for the performance ofsuch obligation or duly shall be suspended until such disability to perform is removed; provided, however, force majeure shall not excuse an obligation solely to pay funds. Determination of force majcure shall rest solely with H-GAC. THIS INSTRUMENT HAS BEEN EXECUTED IN TWO ORIGINALS BY THE PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOWS: * Houston-Grrh~estou Area Cornrci! Name o(Hnd User (loco/ government. ugene'r, or not-yrvJlr carpatvtiou/ 3555 Timmons Long Suite I]U, Flauston, TX 77(P_7 * Dy: Mailing Address Excewive Director w City Smm ZIP Codc Dmc: •By: Aucsc Signamrc of dticf dccicd or appcimcd official hlnnagcr typed Nomc S Title of Signnlary Dmc: Dom 'Denotes required fieldv rev. 7/07 ITEM NO: 7d MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE PREPARATION OF DOWNTOWN/PERKINS STREET COMMUNITY VISION PROGRAM AND FORM BASED (SMARTCODE) ZONING REGULATIONS FROM FISHER & HALL URBAN DESIGN TO HALL ALMINANA, INC. SUMMARY: On August 2, 2006, City Council approved a contract to be entered with Fisher & Hall Urban Design, a partnership, for professional services for the preparation of Downtown/Perkins Street Community Vision Program and Form Based (Smartcode) Zoning Regulations. City Council was recently informed by Charley Stump, Director of Planning, that the partnership of Fisher & Hall no longer existed. However, one of the original partners, Hall Alminana, Inc., will continue with the work as originally requested from Fisher & Hall. This report is to request formal approval of this assignment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the assignment of contract for professional services for the preparation of Downtown/Perkins Street Community Vision Program and Form Based (Smartcode) Zoning Regulations from Fisher & Hall Urban Design to Hall Alminana, Incorporated. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Do not approve the assignment, and provide direction to Staff. Citizens Advised: N/A Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning Prepared by: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: N/A Approveb;~~~1~,7~ Candace Horsley, Ci ~y Manager ITEM NO: 7e MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO FERRANTI CONSTRUCTION IN THE LUMP SUM PRICE OF $28,364 FOR THE SEALING OF THE CONCRETE ROOF AND TAINTER GATE HOUSING STRUCTURE AT THE LAKE MENDOCINO HYDROELECTRIC POWER PLANT ALONG WITH A MINOR SINK-HOLE REPAIR; AUTHORIZE BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,364.00 NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT The 2007-2008 Fiscal Year Budget approved by the City Council provides $25,000 in account number 800.5536.250.000 for contractual services to seal the concrete roof of the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant. Staff evaluated their ability to do this work and determined it should be performed by a qualified contractor. On November 8, 2007 Request for Bids (RFB) were sent out per open market purchase procedure under Section 1522 of the Ukiah City Code. The RFB was also posted on the City's website. Staff received three bids, two of which were deemed non- responsive as they did not provide required information as requested in the RFB. The lump sum amounts of the non-responsive bids were $19,900 and $36,900. Ferranti Construction submitted the only responsive bid in the lump sum price of $28,364. Staff recommends the award of contract to Ferranti Construction for the lump sum price of $28,364 for the sealing of the concrete roof and Tainter Gate housing structure at the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant along with a minor sink-hole repair, as well as authorizing a budget amendment in the amount of $3,364 to complete the project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award contract to Ferranti Construction for the lump sum price of $28,364 for the sealing of the roof and Tainter housing structure at the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant along with a minor sink-hole repair, and authorize a budget amendment in the amount of $3,364 necessary to complete the project. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Re-direct Staff. FUNDING: Amount Reauested From Acct No. To Acct. No. $3,364 Electric Fund 815 800.5536.250.000 Fund Balance Requested by: Elizabeth Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Prepared by: Elizabeth Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer; Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Approved: _ Candace Horsley, J ITEM NO: ~f MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: STATUS OF POSTING BIDS ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE SUMMARY: Based on direction from the City Council, Staff selected a tool for posting bid packages to the City's website and is now reporting back to Council on this issue. The City chose to use Construction Bidboard, Inc. as its tool for website postings. Construction Bidboard, Inc. provides a free service, which provides links directly from the City's website, and enables the City's Purchasing Department to post Request for Bids and Request for Proposals that are able to be directly downloaded by the Contractor. Postings have consistently increased, and are becoming the normal routine whenever possible. The City's Purchasing Department plans to look into possible training in order to better educate Contractors regarding the City's use of website postings, and how to access them. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding the status of posting bids on the City's website. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: N/A Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Approved: Candace Horsley, City I Hager ITEM NO: 7g MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT TO GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT SERVICES TO ADDRESS ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH A LEAK IN THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT'S NORTH PERCOLATION POND Back on July 27tH, City Staff at the Wastewater Treatment Plant discovered a discharge of water from the northeast levee of the facility's North Percolation Pond. Subsequent to the discovery, Staff determined that the water was being discharged from the internal embankment of the subject levee. Staff immediately communicated the issue to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Per guidance given by that regulatory agency, City Staff pursued and obtained emergency geotechnical consulting service from SHN Consulting Engineers and Geologists, Inc. to provide an immediate assessment of the integrity of the levee. SHN developed an assessment on July 27tH and verbally communicated it to the regulatory agency as well as City Staff. The consultant also provided a written report regarding the same issue after delivering the verbal report. Given the information provided by the consultant, City Staff completely drained the pond and determined that additional work would need to be done to investigate the condition of the levee and make repairs as needed. SHN provided oversight of contractor repair work and the development of a final letter on the condition of the levee, after the repairs were made. As of October 26tH, the investigative assessment and the oversight of repairs to the North Percolation Pond levee have been completed and a report on the status of the treatment unit has been delivered to City Staff by SHN. Staff included a copy of the consultant's letter in a report to the Regional Water Quality Control Board which notified the subject agency that repairs to the pond have been completed and the unit will be returned to beneficial use at the treatment plant. A copy of the consultant's work proposal is attached to this report. The dollar amount specified on the purchase order, generated on September 24tH, and the expected final cost for the totality of SHN's services in this matter is $5,777.75. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept notification of award of contract to Geotechnical Consultant Services to address issues associated with a leak in the wastewater treatment plant's north percolation pond, beginning Julv 27, 2007. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: N/A FUNDING: Amount Budgeted From Acct No. Additional Funds Requested $5,777.75 612.3580.250.005 None Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Jesse Pagliaro, Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor Coordinated with: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor; Candace Horsley, City Manager ~t#arhmante• 1 _ rnnei iltant'e nrnnneal Candace Horsley, City ATTACHMENT ~ A CONSTJLTING ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS, INC. Y 093 S. Maln Street • Willks, CA 95490-3907.7074594578 • Fax 707459-1884 • wiltilsinfo®shn-wi0its.com Reference: 407087 September 19, 2007 Mr. Jesse Pagliazo Ukiah Waste Water Treatment Plant 300 Plant Road Ukiah, Ca 95482 (707)467-2818 Subject: Proposal for Geotechnical Services: Repair Small Leak through Existing Treatment Pond Levee, Ukiah Waste Water Treatment Plant (W4VTP), Ukiah CA Deaz Mr. Pagliazo SHN Consulting Engineers and Geologists, Inc (SHN) is pleased to provide this proposal for geotechnical services related to the repair of the treatment pond levee. The purpose of our work is to prepare recommendations for repair and to observe grading operations for compliance with recommendations. We will also be conducting soil compaction tests and preparing a final letter suunmarizing completion of the work. Our proposed scope of work includes the following: 1. Prepare geotechnical and grading rernmmendations for repair of the levee. 2. Provide construction oversight for completion of grading and excavation. 3. Perform field and laboratory testing during grading operations. 4. Prepare a letter summarizing test results. SHN has commenced work on this project and has completed the geotechnical and grading recommendations. Cost for these services as of today total $2952.75. Additional services will include construction oversight, field and laboratory testing, and prepazation of final letter. We estimate the cost of these services will be $2825 as detailed below: Construction Oversight: Don Cornell: 20 hrs x $90/hr = $1800 Field and Laboratory testing; Generation of 3 soil curves x $125 each =$375 Final Letter: Don Cornell: 4 hr x $90/hr =$360 Clerical: 1 hr x $45 = $45 Meetm¢: Chandler Koehn: 1 hr x $125/hr = $125 OA/QC Review: Dave Bradley 1 hr x $120/hr = $120 SHN assumes that Ukiah W WTP will be responsible for procurement of a contractor to perform excavation and grading. SHN estimates that the work will be completed in 7 to 10 days following the start date. All services will be invoiced on a time and expense basis in accordance with the attached fee schedule.. Should the project scope increase or estimated budget be exceeded you will be notified as soon as possible. SHN appreciates this opportunity m serve you. If you have any questions regarding this scope of work or cost estimate please contact me at 707-459-4518 Sincerely, SHN Consulting Engineers & Geologists, Inc. c 1~K Car~k.L 4.~ Don Cornell Geologist Cr. Tom Herman David Bradley Chandler Koehn ITEM NO: 7h MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION REMOVING 105 LINEAL FEET OF ON- STREET PARKING ALONG PERKINS STREET NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH BOUND OFF RAMP OF US 101 SUMMARY: The property owner at 704 East Perkins Street is in the process of developing the eastern portion of his property. The western portion of this property is developed with a Starbuck's drive through as well as other tenants. See Attachment 2 for the location. The first phase of this project is the addition of off street parking spaces to address the owner's existing needs as well as future needs. In his effort to coordinate his development, Mr. Dan Thomas (owner) has been working with staff in order to address community concerns regarding site distance for the western driveway of his existing development (Starbucks). Site distance is an issue as vehicles exit the driveway and drivers look to the east. This site distance is limited as a result of parked vehicles along the North side of Perkins Street. The staff and the owner agree that the elimination of this parking will solve this site distance problem. The net result of the proposed action will be the loss of approximately five on-street parking spaces. There will be no impact to parking availability with the addition of the parking lot to the east. This eastern development required a Use Permit. During the planning commission meeting of June 13, 2007 this site distance concern was discussed. This is the first measure to address the concerns of this site distance issue. Please notice that attachment 2 is our most recent GIS photograph from 2001. The sidewalk is in the same location but the building on that site has been demolished and the new Starbucks building has been constructed. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt resolution removing 105 lineal feet of on-street parking along Perkins Street near the intersection with North bound off ramp of US 101. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Do not adopt resolution and provide direction to staff. Citizens Advised: Dan Thomas (adjacent property owner) Requested by: Tim Eriksen, City Engineer and Director of Public Works Prepared by: Tim Eriksen, City Engineer and Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Resolution for Adoption 2. Location Map Approved: Candace Horsley, City ATTACHMENT___,(__' RESOLUTION N0.2007- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH REMOVING 105 LINEAL FEET OF ON-STREET PARKING ALONG EAST PERKINS STREET NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH BOUND OFF RAMP OF US 101 WHEREAS, the City Council may by resolution designate portions of streets upon which the standing, parking, or stopping of vehicles is prohibited or restricted pursuant to Article 11, Chapter 1, Division 8 of the Ukiah City Code; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer considered the request to establish the no parking zone within the City of Ukiah; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommends this request regarding the no parking zone. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, thattheCity Council of the City of Ukiah does establish a no parking zone on the north side of East Perkins Street across from the intersection with the North bound off ramp of US 101 at a specific location determined by the City Engineer. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of December, 2007 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mari Rodin, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Brown, City Clerk Resolution No. 2007- Page i of t SITE MAP 704 EAST PERKINS STREET ATTACHMENT P• z ' ' (Feet 0 85 170 340 ITEM NO: ~; MEETING DATE: December 5. 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO NORTH BAY CONSTRUCTION FOR 2002 STIP ARTERIAL /COLLECTOR REHABILITATION, SPECIFICATION NO. 07-03 IN THE AMOUNT OF $418.270.35 SUMMARY: The City distributed plans and specifications to nine builder's exchanges and ten contractors for the 2002 STIP Arterial /Collector Rehabilitation, Specification No. 07-03. The City publicly advertised this project on November 11 and 18, 2007, in the Ukiah DailyJoumal. A copy of the Notice to Bidders was sent to 58 contractors including all License Class A and License Class C- 12 contractors on the City's 2007 Qualified Contractors List. In addition, electronic copies of the plans and specifications were posted on the City's website. Seven sealed proposals were received and opened by the City Clerk on November 29, 2007. The lowest responsive, responsible bidder is North Bay Construction of Petaluma, California with a total bid of $418,270.35. The Engineer's Estimate for the project is $686,293. This project is eligible for a total reimbursement of up to $700,000 by STIP funds through Caltrans. Due to Caltrans funding requirements, a construction contract must be awarded by no laterthan December 31, 2007. Realizing this, staff incorporated a provision in the specifications to suspend construction until late spring when the weather is suitable for paving. 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. Therefore staff recommends the purchase order be authorized for $460,097.39 which is 10% more than the base bid. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award the contract for 2002 STIP Arterial /Collector Rehabilitation, Specification No. 07-03, to North Bay Construction in the amount of $418,270.35. 2. Designate funding in the amount of $41,827.04 for authorized change orders. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: (1) Reject bids; (2) Provide staff with other direction Citizens Advised: N/A Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works /City Engineer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Bid Tabulation Approved: Candace Horsley, City M Gager l ~~~ ~~~°°s ~a°' d o _ ml ~' a°~ ~ l ~ , a >I ~ ~ ~~ ~ n~e~~i I rvn ~ 51 ~~ F p O+ wNNq a~~p ~ F ~ ' ~ Z ~ I~ w q W N T ~ 50 ~ ~ ~~ O~~ v~~0 Q _ ~ Q ! Q min G m(r ~N~~' y ~ ~ 1 ~~ arora ~~rs ~ ' ` ` u '. i 4 w U I . i w I ° Iwa w w ~ i w e~ h 1 ~ e 518 5 S-Slle a 8 81.88 Q o ~ d g o ww o L ', ~ a i ~ i to ~ I m w I ~ , E ~ ~g ~n~$ ~ '. ~=U o ~ w ~ w jm ~,~,$. 1 IQ f piw N z ~ -518 8 8''8 A ~ 5'I a x N 9 21 o m O fl ~ Og o ' ~ W ~ w N ' 'F • ~ ~ . w SSO 8 ' S ' ~ O O N 'o N l V Q Q Q !q ~i u~$~ cavi b 1 F $ ~ IIK o ~ 8 8~S 8 118 ~ Q I 1 H ' ~N, ~ ~gw. w ' ww l O '. - ~~ 8, _i5 88 5 y ' '' 2 ~ ° N.pl i~ ~ w , I » ,w w S ~ ° ~ 8'8 1858. o z i w w w I o ~ '. (7 o ~ .. I h ooN Y ° '' a a ° ~ m ~ a ~ c i u m ~ o om ,» "' ~ 1 ~ ~ Flo O O ~! oz o mQ ' ' °~ s 815 s' ~ ~ I8 Q H c 3 r ' m z I ,. ~ 5 'lo h ' _ Z as ~ U w ~ u~ gg~i la ~lo° ` ~ . r rG '^' alti o~, ~ of ' S 8 °o ° ' 8 m m. o ol 6 m 18 S ~ ~p a ~ Q < CIO ~i of h N ~ w° 1 ' w W ° 1 E I . Q I ~. .$ 5~ °e o m a 1 o O r z ~ nl w ~ r °88 SY~oB 8 i '. ~ q5~Q 'o Y S X n~ ~ oo°I r ' E i ~ ~ ~ o ~ w m ~ w wn « nw « u U'^I r ~,a.5555 °n ~i55 5°a 1 ~~ rn z I o 8 8 w ° w8,o w o 'Io w 7 ~ pl - w~w w '. I c ". ~ I y ~NI~ I~ Z o q, Vi ~ ' ~ a m. v IE,~ ~ a rn N'' w °a E ('J c'' ~ 8~ 3 } ~i' ac/ moo. v f.v ~ ' a pa UC S~mn 1 ~ E~~' to °'hl v$ v ~~ ~ , Irc~m_ ~ u vas ov ',a ~ m a E >U ~ UUv' V l E ~ . ~ l o d ~ 1 ' ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ E ~ S ~~ti rc ~ ¢ n z u a w ' ~ ~ U ~Iw www I . ~ ~ ~. Q '~., N wIn ml.~ ~5'n ~~N ~ ~ N nm O 1 ~O na~n ml's. ~ z , ATTACHMENT ~ 2 5 6 b 7 E E ITEM NO: z3 MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO NORTH BAY CONSTRUCTION FOR 2002 STIP LOCAL STREET REHABILITATION, SPECIFICATION NO. 07-04 IN THE AMOUNT OF $186,081.71 SUMMARY: The City distributed plans and specifications to nine builder's exchanges and ten contractors for the 2002 STIP Local Street Rehabilitation, Specification No. 07-04. The City publicly advertised this project on November 11 and 18, 2007, in the Ukiah Daily Journal. A copy of the Notice to Bidders was sent to 58 contractors including all License Class A and License Class C-12 contractors on the City's 2007 Qualified Contractors List. In addition, electronic copies of the plans and specifications were posted on the City's website. Seven sealed proposals were received and opened by the City Clerk on November 29, 2007. The lowest responsive, responsible bidder is North Bay Construction of Petaluma, California with a total bid of $186,081.71. The Engineer's Estimate for the project is $248,163. This project is eligible for a total reimbursement of up to $252,000 by STIP funds through Caltrans. Due to Caltrans funding requirements, a construction contract must be awarded by no later than December 31, 2007. Realizing this, staff incorporated a provision in the specifications to suspend construction until late spring when the weather is suitable for paving. 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. Therefore staff recommends the purchase order be authorized for $204,689.88 which is 10% more than the base bid. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Award the contract for 2002 STIP Local Street Rehabilitation, Specification No. 07-04, to North Bay Construction in the amount of $186,081.71. 2. Designate funding in the amount of $18,608.17 for authorized change orders. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: (1) Reject bids; (2) Provide staff with other direction. Citizens Advised: N/A Requested by: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works /City Engineer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works RdL Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager V`~ Attachments: 1. Bid Tabulation Approved: Candace Horsley, City M Hager ---aa~~,~ao U Q vrv F m O ~ 8 q~,~ » m ~) 0 8,,8 >" ~ z ,» «, ~ ~ - w mi mQ O w ww dU 'z.. °088 8~8 u49iN8888'.88 U'' ~- w uiw M~18 N Y O Q J m ~a ~ ~ 0 F- Z U W H W ~~ ~s z y a' 33m d~m N~ 888588'~,SS8888888 '.2 ~ o, m ~ m'1~ 4'~8 N ~~ ~1 F 8 8 S 8 8 °o,8ii $ 818.8°0°0 ~~°0 z °oNN«~`~wid, «, ,,, 8,n °_ o w s 88888881, _ -_-- is ~88881$888, m a °N °~ 2a O wig-www~.. o w'^ `ot ° ~ F 8 8 8' °o, o °o °o °o -8 8 8 m88~.8 8 SIS 8.88'8 8 n U p, w m~ ~ ~w wwwn o~ ' 888mS8i8$88888$~.. ~m i1 e4 8~ d, .»»., _ =NN~ _. ~ g 888888.488888888 q `t N W O OO Q+ ~... W S X O 4 Y . g v E ~ 2 U - O ~ ,0 ~ vJ w w . O U¢ vii ° cN z $~ . a ~z P ~ w ww w ', ~ LL dw'. ado-. w 0 dro N m ¢ ~ ~ ~i',r ~ U ~ w h ' __ z z ~ w I I 888888488''i.N48$I,88 d o',', $ 4 ~ ~ S~Im 4 °~ A o °' '^ a N w- ~ww.. w ~w r U ~^ _. ,n i_. I_ _._._ pp ~ ~ 1 Z. 0 g g'i.Q w Qa i W J w O. F o w L ~ 4 x l yy m~ L gy6d6 _ F F m- o a E 0 °.3 d did dZ U',5 y Qc cKC'mo m;lla amcl~m '. U a F c_ u V U' F E~~,c ~ )S m d~d,d ~-w¢LL~~c ~.w ~~u »u~u. j ~ U'~ UYi Q';W '.~ ~ i ~ ~ ~.w w Q ~ ~ n. ~Orv ml~ ~ ~ 'n O ~n<n I =21, ~Nnvb~O r ~~~i~ ATTACHMENT ~ S 3 5 E ITEM NO. 7k DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING PURCHASE OF A DANCE FLOOR FOR THE UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER FROM AMERICAN PORTABLE DANCE FLOORS IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,362.02. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, staff is filing with the City Council this report regarding the purchase of a replacement dance floor for the Ukiah Valley Conference Center from American Portable Dance Floors in the amount of $5,362.02. The old portable dance floor was 13 years old and had begun to fail. The Community Services Department in collaboration with the Purchasing Department examined a number of products and secured bids from three agencies. The lowest bid was from American Portable Dance Floors in the amount of $5,362.02. Bid Results American Portable Dance Floor $5,362.02 SICO America $5,901.00 Highland Floor $8,215.00 The cost for the purchase is off-set by revenue from recreation class fees and Conference Center rental fees. The purchase was charged to the following two accounts: 50%- Recreation Division Supply Account 100.6110.690.000 and 50%-Conference Center Supply Account 410.6190.690.000. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding the purchase of dance floor from American Portable Dance Floors in the amount of $5,362.02. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A FUNDING: Amount Budgeted Account Number Additional Funds Requested $2,681.01 100.6110.690.000 N/A $2,681.01 410.6190.690.000 N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Katie Merz, Community Services Supervisor Coordinated with: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor and Kerry Randal, UVCC Administrator Attachments: N/A APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City M Hager ITEM NO. ~l DATE: December 5. 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACQUISITION OF SERVICES FROM SPENCER BREWER FOR THE MANAGEMENTIPRODUCTION OF THE 2008 SUNDAYS IN THE PARK CONCERT SERIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,000 SUMMARY: Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, staff is filing with the City Council this report regarding the acquisition of services from Spencer Brewer (dba: Laughing Coyote Productions) for the management and production of the 2008 Sundays in the Park Concert Series in the amount of $8,000. The draft contract is attached for review. Mr. Brewer is one of the original organizers and has provided management and production services since the beginning of the series. The contracted amount is the same as last year. The event is funded entirely by private sponsorship, and the funds are held in a trust account (900.205.226) that the City manages. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding the acquisition of services from Spencer Brewer (dba: Laughing Coyote Productions) for the management and production of the 2008 Sundays in the Park Concert Series in the amount of $8,000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A FUNDING: Amount Budgeted Account Number Additional Funds Reouested $8,000" 900.205.226.000 N/A 'Funded entirely by private sponsorships Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City Council Prepared by: Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Draft 2008 Contract Proposal from Spencer Brewer APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City ~nager Attachment #1 Proposal to Manage the 2008 Sundays in the Park Concert Series I propose to manage the 2008 Sundays in the Park Concert Series for the City of Ukiah to the same extent that I handled the project in 2007. I will coordinate all the acts, bookings of said acts, sound logistics, radio spots, radio & press releases, stage coordination, help on the poster layout, concert day opening speeches, fund raising, and general on site management at each concert. If a previously scheduled concert of my own occurs on the day of any of the SITP concerts, I will make ample arrangements. The terms are as follows: $2,500. to be paid on or before December 14th, 2007. This covers all my expenses in enlisting sponsors, booking of the bands, setting up the publicity campaign and the pre- work to begin the 2008 series. The next payment of $2,500 will be due on or before April 1, 2008. An additional $500 per each of the six concert dates will be due on the day of each concert. If there are 7 concerts, the amount will be adjusted. Total: $8,000. Signed: Spencer Brewer November 26, 2007 Accepted for the City of Ukiah: Date: ITEM NO. 7m DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE PURCHASE OF SERVICES FROM ROUSE MASONRY IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,592 FOR ROCK WALL REPAIRS AT TODD GROVE PARK. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, staff is filing with the City Council this report regarding the payment for repairs made to the rock wall in Todd Grove Park in the amount of $6,592 to Rouse Masonry. The work was necessary to maintain the historical rock wall surrounding Todd Grove Park which requires routine repairs due to age deterioration and vandalism. The Community Services Department in collaboration with the Purchasing Department sent bid requests to five contractors specific to masonry work. Two bids were received including Rouse Masonry in the amount of $6,592 and Manes & Manes Masonry in the amount of $6,630. The work was awarded to the low bidder, Rouse Masonry. The purchase was charged equally to the following accounts: Parks Contractual Services 100.6001.250.000 and 100.6001.692.000 Parks Vandalism Repair. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding the payment of services from Rouse Masonry for repairs to rock wall at Todd Grove Park in the amount of $6,592. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. N/A FUNDING: Amount Budgeted Account Number Additional Funds Requested $3,296 100.6001.250.000 N/A $3,296 100.6001.692.000 N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Katie Merz, Community Services Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manger, Tom Hamblet, Parks Supervisorand Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor Attachments: N/A APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manag r ITEM NO. 7n DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE PURCHASE OF AN ELECTRONIC SCOREBOARD FOR THE UKIAH SPORTS COMPLEX FROM AUSSPORT SCOREBOARDS US, INC IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,331.11. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, staff is filing with the City Council this report regarding the purchase of an electronic scoreboard for the Ukiah Sports Complex in the amount of $5,331.11 from Aussport Scoreboards US, Inc. The Community Services Department in collaboration with the Purchasing Department examined a number of products and secured bids from four agencies. The lowest compliant bid was from Aussport Scoreboards US in the amount of $5,331.11. The product from Sportable Scoreboards failed the requirements because it did not include a running clock and the product from Scoreboards-US did not have an acceptable controller. Bid Results Sportable Scoreboards $4,317.94 Not compliant; no running clock Scoreboards-US $5,201.96 Not compliant; controller was not adequate Aussport Scoreboards US $5,331.11 Spectrum $9,376.99 The purchase was made from the Adult Softball Account 100.6115.690.000 with the majority of the cost off-set by a sponsorship from One Stop Garden Shop in the amount of $5,000. The $331.11difference will be offset by player fees. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding the purchase of an electronic scoreboard from Aussport Scoreboards US, Inc. in the amount of $5,331.11. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A FUNDING: Amount Budgeted Account Number Additional Funds Requested $5,331.11 100.6115.690.000 N/A Prepared by: Katie Merz, Community Services Supervisor Coordinated with: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor and Jake Burgess, Sports Coordinator Attachments: N/A APPROVED:; Candace Horsley, City M pager ITEM NO. ~O DATE December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF AN ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, FOR A LOCAL GROUNDWATER ASSISTANCE GRANT FOR A GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING PROJECT; AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN GRANT DOCUMENTS The City of Ukiah's (City) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) requires a hydrogeologic study of the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) percolation ponds to determine the fate and transport of wastewater pollutants discharged via the percolation ponds. The hydrogeologic study, which began in March 2007, is well along. Balance Hydrologics, contracted by the City for the study, has completed Task 1 and 2 and begun Task 3: Task 1: Prepare hydrogeologic work plan Task 2: Hydrogeologic study a. Design and installation of two monitoring wells b. Datalogger installation in wells and river and data collection c. Survey of wells, ponds, channel geometry, bank full water levels d. Water level monitoring e. Stream bank survey for seeps f. Dry-season base flow water quality monitoring g. Sampling for ground-water isotopes and pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCP) as tracers Task 3: Prepare Hydrogeologic Study Report (continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution and Authorize the City Manager to Sign Grant Documents. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY ACTION: Determine grant request is not appropriate and provide direction to staff. Requested By: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared By: Ann Burck, W/S Utilities Project Engineer Coordinated With: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1 -Draft Resolution APPROVED: ~ ~ ~1 Candace Horsley, City anager The Department of Water Resources (DWR) has grants available to conduct groundwater studies, monitoring, or groundwater management activities. A total of $6.4 million is available, and the maximum grant amount is $250,000 per applicant. The Local Groundwater Assistance Grant would provide funds for additional work for the hydrogeologic study (e.g., additional wells, tracer study) to investigate whether the percolation ponds discharge pollutants to the Russian River. Additional data collected would include: 1. Additional water quality sampling. 2. The City has been sampling three monitoring wells at the pond site. Grant funds could be used to conduct sampling in 2008 of these three wells, in addition to the two new wells installed this year. 3. Sampling for ground-water isotopes and pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCP) as tracers. 4. Groundwater flow modeling. DWR Local Groundwater Assistance (LGA) grant applications are due December 11, 2007 and must include an authorizing resolution adopted by the City Council. Staff is requesting the City Council approve the attached resolution and authorize the City Manager to sign the grant documents. Attuciiment # ~ RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION, ACCEPTANCE OF AN ALLOCATION OF FUNDS AND EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, FOR A LOCAL GROUNDWATER ASSISTANCE GRANT FOR A GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING PROJECT. WHEREAS: 1. The Local Groundwater Management Assistance (LGA) Act of 2000 (California Water Code (CWC) Section 10795 et seq.) was enacted to provide grants to local public agencies to conduct groundwater studies or to carry out groundwater monitoring and management activities; and 2. The California Department of Water Resources has been authorized to allocate funds for LGA grants up to $250,000; and 3. The City of Ukiah is currently conducting a hydrogeologic study of the percolation ponds at the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant and LGA grant funds may be used to conduct the following tasks and provide additional data for the hydrogeologic study: • Additional water quality sampling o The City has been sampling three monitoring wells at the pond site. Grant funds could be used to conduct sampling in 2008 of these three wells and in addition to the two new wells installed this year. o Sampling for ground-water isotopes and pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCP) as tracers • Groundwater flow modeling NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah, State of California: 1. Authorizes filing of the application for funds for the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Project. 2. Authorizes accepting the allocation of funds for the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Project at the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant. 3. Authorizes execution of the Grant Agreement with the California Department of Water Resources; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby authorize the City Manager to sign any documents required to apply for and accept these funds on behalf of the City of Ukiah. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 5`h day of December, 2007 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mari Rodin, Mayor Linda Brown, City Clerk ITEM NO: 7p MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE UKIAH NORTHWESTERN PACIFIC RAIL TRAIL PHASE 1 AND COMMITMENT TO PROVIDE LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS SUMMARY: The Department of Public Works is in the process of applying for funds for the Ukiah Northwestern Pacific Rail Trail Phase 1 (Rail Trail) project. As part of the Bicycle Transportation Account 2008/2009 (BTA) application, a resolution by the City Council must be included that declares the City's commitment to a 10% local match of the funding for the project. This item is intended to provide that resolution for the application. The current project estimate $662,150. The City's responsibility for funding will be $66,215 if the grant is awarded to the City of Ukiah. BACKGROUND: The Rail Trail phase 1 extends from Gobbi Street to the south to Clara Avenue to the north (see Attachment A). The Rail Trail will consist of an eight foot wide paved path which will be within the existing railroad right-of-way (see Attachment B). The City Council adopted the Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan that includes the rail trail facility as one of the high-priority bicycle and pedestrian projects. In August of 2003 the City Council adopted Resolution 2004-03 which adopted the feasibility study for the Rail Trail. Also, on October 18, 2007 the City Council adopted the 2006 Mendocino County Regional Bikeway Plan with Resolution No. 2006-75. This plan lists the Rail Trail as a "high need" project. FUNDING: There are many funding sources for the 10% match. The funds do not have to be identified at this time. If the City is awarded the BTA funds the match could come from a variety of sources. Staff has applied for a grant from the Air Quality District. These funds can be used RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt resolution in support of the rail trail and commitment to provide local matching funds. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Direct staff on how to proceed Citizens Advised: N/A Requested by: Tim Eriksen, City Engineer and Director of Public Works Prepared by: Tim Eriksen, City Engineer and Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Resolution A. Site Map B. Cross Section Approved: Candace Horsley, City Mana r Page 2 December 5, 2007 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE NWP RAIL TRAIL PHASE 1 AND COMMITMENT TO PROVIDE LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS as a local match. Also the gas tax, STP di and Traffic Congestion Relief Program can all be used for bicycle projects. The Proposition 1 B funds can also be programmed for local match. If the grant is awarded, staff will return to Council with a recommendation for funding the 10% local match. ATTACHMENT ~ RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH IN SUPPORT OF THE NWP RAIL TRAIL PHASE 1 PROJECT AND COMMITMENT TO PROVIDE LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan that included a rail trail facility as one of the high-priority bicycle and pedestrian projects; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Department has prepared a Project Feasibility Study for the Ukiah Northwestern Pacific (NWP) Rail Trail, in which it was determined that the development of this trail is structurally possible and economically feasible with the use of grant funding sources; and WHEREAS, said Project Feasibility Study was approved by Resolution of the City Council on August 6th 2003, Resolution No. 2004-03; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the 2006 Mendocino County Regional Bikeway Plan on October 18th, 2006, Resolution No. 2006-75, which lists the NWP Rail Trail as a "high need" project; and WHEREAS, the City Public Works Department is applying for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funds through the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the NWP Rail Trail Phase 1, project limits from Gobbi Street to Clara Street, the application of which requires a resolution of the City Council which commits to providing the required 10 percent local matching funds in the event the project is approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby declare its support for the NWP Rail Trail Phase 1 project, and commits to providing the required 10 percent local matching funds in the event the project is approved for BTA funding by Caltrans. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of December, 2007 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mari Rodin, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Brown, City Clerk Resolution No. 2007- Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT "A" Proposed NWP Rail Trail -Phase 1 (Clara Ave. to Gobbi St. -Length 0.78 mi.) NWP Rail Trail 1 inch equals 500 feet Photo Date: March 2001 AT TRChCMENT "8 " 25ft Fence to provide physical ® C barrier between railroad / ` tracks and trail !// ~ . , 8ft m~mum ~ ITEM NO: l0a MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING UKIAH CITY CODE BY ADDING ARTICLE 10, ENTITLED: MARIJUANA CULTIVATION ENFORCEMENT, TO DIVISION 7, CHAPTER 1 AND AMENDING SECTION 9254, ENTITLED: "MARIJUANA CULTIVATION." SUMMARY: A City Council subcommittee consisting of Council member Thomas and Vice Mayor Crane met with staff, including the City Manager, the Police Chief, the Code Enforcement Officer and the City Attorney, to discuss ways to improve the enforcement of the marijuana cultivation ordinance in the City. The City's marijuana cultivation ordinance is contained in Section 9254 which is part of Chapter 2 of Division 9 of the City Code, containing the City's zoning ordinance. The City recently amended Section 9254 to provide an administrative hearing procedure as an additional enforcement mechanism. This mechanism helps with some situations, but not others. During this past year, the Police Department received a large number of complaints from residential neighborhoods related to the odor, safety and criminal effects of indoor and outdoor marijuana cultivation. Because of the complexity of the zoning abatement process, the Police Department commonly referred these complaints to the City Code Enforcement Officer for investigation. During these investigations, the civilian Code Enforcement Officer would often find situations where marijuana RECOMMENDED ACTION: Pass a motion to introduce the ordinance by title only followed by a motion to introduce the ordinance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Revise ordinance before introduction or refuse to introduce it. Citizens Advised: N/A Requested by: Police Department Prepared by: David J. Rapport, City Attorney Coordinated with: City Council subcommittee, Police Chief, Code Enforcement Officer Attachments: Attachment 1-Proposed ordinance Attachment 2- CA Health & Safety Code §§11472-11479 Approved: ` Candace Horsley, City anager Agenda Summary Report Page 2 December 5, 2007, City Council meeting cultivation areas were being protected and his safety was in danger. These type of events have lead the Police Department to experience more acts of violence, sometimes involving weapons related charges, in connection with the cultivation of marijuana than in any previous year. In order to provide the Police Department with an additional enforcement tool, the draft ordinance in Attachment 1 adds a new Article 10 to Division 7, Chapter 1 of the Ukiah City Code which contains, as part of Police Regulations, Crimes Against Public Peace and Order. Article 10 contains new sections 6093 and 6094. Section 6093 makes violation of Section 9254 a misdemeanor, a criminal violation within the enforcement authority of the Police Department. Section 6094 makes the seizure and destruction of marijuana in the enforcement of Section 6093 subject to the rules in the California Health and Safety Code that apply to the seizure or destruction of marijuana in the enforcement of that Code. (See Attachment 2, which contain Health and Safety Code sections 11472-11479.) The Police Department has requested this addition to the City Code so that its authority to seize and destroy marijuana in the enforcement of the City Code is made clear and so that it is not required to store large quantities of marijuana for indefinite periods. The Health and Safety Code sections, as applied to the enforcement of Section 9254 of the Ukiah City Code, authorize the seizure of marijuana being cultivated in violation of Section 9254 and authorize the City Police to apply for a search warrant in aid of such seizure. (§11472.) Upon conviction of such violation, they authorize the court to order the destruction of the marijuana which has been seized. (§11473. See, also, §§ 11474- 11477.)They also allow the destruction without a court order of the amount of marijuana seized which is in excess of 10 pounds as long as certain steps are taken to preserve evidence of the violation. (§11479.) As modified by the proposed Section 6094 of the City Code, those steps include taking photographs which reasonably demonstrate the total number of mature and immature plants to be destroyed and the location where they were growing immediately prior to their seizure. The Police Department has requested these changes to provide it with the tools needed to take enforcement action in appropriate circumstances like the situations described above. The City will continue to emphasis voluntary compliance and the enforcement efforts of the Code Enforcement Officer, where appropriate. The focus of these proposed amendments is not patients growing medical marijuana for their own use, but commercial operations which pose a significant threat to the neighborhoods, where they are taking place, and to enforcement officials. The Code Enforcement Officer has also suggested changes to the definition of "fully enclosed and secure structure" contained in Section 9254, Section 1.1. The current definition can be construed as allowing cultivation of marijuana within a greenhouse composed of flimsy plastic sheeting, which are commonly used throughout the City. The Code Enforcement Officer feels that these structures are not secure and do not control odors. He has requested a definition like the one recently adopted in the City of Willits. The proposed revised definition requires that marijuana be cultivated within a Agenda Summary Report December 5, 2007, City Council meeting Page 3 building that complies with the California Building Code. For buildings, such as buildings with a roof area of 120 square feet or less, which are exempt from the permit requirements of the CBC, the revised definition requires a substantial structure that is truly secure against unauthorized entry. It also requires grow lights or air filtration systems, if used, to comply with applicable Building, Electrical and Fire Codes. These changes will provide authority under the Ukiah City Code allowing the Police Department to participate in the enforcement of the City's marijuana cultivation rules, in situations which warrant a law enforcement response beyond that available in the enforcement of the City's zoning code. ATTACHMENT ~ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADDING ARTICLE 10, ENTITLED: MARIJUANA CULTIVATION ENFORCEMENT, TO DIVISION 7, CHAPTER 1 AND AMENDING SECTION 9254, ENTITLED: "MARIJUANA CULTIVATION," OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE. Anew Article 10 is hereby added to Chapter 1 of Division 7 of the Ukiah City Code to read as follows: DIVISION 7. POLICE REGULATIONS CHAPTER 1 CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE AND ORDER ARTICLE 10 MARIJUANA CULTIVATION ENFORCEMENT §6093 MARIJUANA CULTIVATION PROHIBITED. Outdoor Cultivation of marijuana, or Indoor Cultivation in excess of 12 mature plants or 24 immature plants, within the City Limits of the City of Ukiah in violation of Section 9254 constitutes a violation of this Article. Any person violating any provision of this Article shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed six months or by both a fine and imprisonment. §6094 SEIZURE AND DESTRUCTION OF MARIJUANA. Except as otherwise expressly stated in this section, all marijuana seized by the City Police in the enforcement of this Article shall be seized, retained and destroyed in the same manner and subject to the same procedures as are provided in California Health and Safety Code sections 11472-11479, for marijuana possessed in violation of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code. The requirements in subsection (b) of Health and Safety Code Section 11479, prescribing the conditions that must be satisfied before seized marijuana may be destroyed without a court order, as applied by this section, are revised as follows: (b) Photographs have been taken which reasonably demonstrate the total number of mature and immature plants to be destroyed and the location where they were growing immediately prior to their seizure. ORDINANCE NO. 1 SECTION TWO. Section 1 of Section 9254 of the Ukiah City Code is hereby amended to read as follows. §9254: MARIJUANA CULTIVATION: Section 1. Definitions. As used herein the following definitions shall apply: 1. "Cultivation" means the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, or processing of marijuana plants or any part thereof. 2. "Fully enclosed and secure structure" means a space within a building that complies with the California Building Code, as adopted in the City of Ukiah ("CBC"), or, if exempt from the permit requirements of the CBC, that has a complete roof enclosure supported by connecting walls extending from the ground to the roof, a foundation, slab or equivalent base to which the floor is secured by bolts or similar attachments, is secure against unauthorized entry, and is accessible only through one or more lockable doors. Walls and roofs must be constructed of solid materials that cannot be easily broken through, such as 2" X 4" or thicker studs overlain with 3/8" or thicker plywood or the equivalent. Plastic sheeting, regardless of gage, or similar products do not satisfy this requirement. If indoor grow lights or air filtration systems are used, they must comply with the California Building, Electrical, and Fire Codes as adopted in the City of Ukiah.. 3. "Immature marijuana plant" means a marijuana plant, whether male or female, that has not yet flowered and which does not yet have buds that are readily observed by unaided visual examination. 4. "Indoors" means within a fully enclosed and secure structure. 5. "Mature marijuana plant" means a marijuana plant, whether male or female, that has flowered and which has buds that are readily observed by unaided visual examination. 6. "Outdoor" means any location within the City of Ukiah that is not within a fully enclosed and secure structure. 7. "Parcel" means property assigned a separate parcel number by the Mendocino County Assessor. 8. "Primary caregiver" means a "primary caregiver" as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7(d). 9. "Qualified patient" means a "qualified patient" as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7(f). ORDINANCE NO. 2 SECTION THREE 1. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA. The City Council finds that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment), 15061(b)(3) (there is no possibility the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment). In addition to the foregoing general exemptions the following categorical exemptions apply, Sections 15308 (actions taken as authorized by local ordinance to assure protection of the environment), and 15321 (action by agency for enforcement of a law, general rule, standard, or objective administered or adopted by the agency, including by direct referral to the City Attorney as appropriate for judicial enforcement). 2. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah, and shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Introduced by title only on , 2007, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Adopted on , 2007 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mari Rodin, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Brown, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. ATTACHMENT2 1 of 9 DOCUMENTS Deering's California Codes Annotated Copyright ©2007 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. *** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION ENACTED *** *** THROUGH 2007 CH. 750, APPROVED 10/14/07 *** HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE Division 10. Uniform Controlled Substances Act Chapter 8. Seizure and Disposition GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE DIRECTORY Cal Health & Saf Code § 11472 (2007) § 11472. Seizure of controlled substances and paraphernalia; Warrant Controlled substances and any device, contrivance, instrument, or paraphernalia used for unlawfully using or administering a controlled substance, which are possessed in violation of this division, may be seized by any peace officer and in the aid of such seizure a search warrant maybe issued as prescribed by law. HISTORY: Added Stats 1972 ch 1407 § 3, as H & S C § 11473. Renumbered by Stats 1980 ch 1019 § 3. 2 of 9 DOCUMENTS Deering's California Codes Annotated Copyright ©2007 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. *** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION ENACTED *** *** THROUGH 2007 CH. 750, APPROVED 10/14/07 *** HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE Division 10. Uniform Controlled Substances Act Chapter 8. Seizure and Disposition Page 2 Cal Health &Saf Code § 11473 GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE DIRECTORY Cal Health &Saf Code ,¢ 11473 (2007) § 11473. Destruction of property on conviction (a) All seizures under provisions ofthis chapter, except seizures of vehicles, boats, or airplanes, as specified in subdivision (e) of Section 11470, or seizures of moneys, negotiable instruments, securi- ties, or other things of value as specified in subdivision (f) of Section 11470, shall, upon conviction of the owner or defendant, be ordered destroyed by the court in which conviction was had. (b) Law enforcement may request of the court that certain uncontaminated science equipment be relinquished to a school or school district for science classroom education in lieu of destruction. HISTORY: Added Stats 1972 ch 1407 § 3, as H & S C § 11474. Amended Stats 1976 ch 1407 § 2. Amended and renumbered by Stats 1980 ch 1019 § 4. Amended Stats 1982 ch 1289 § 2; Stats 1983 ch 948 § 2; Stats 1988 ch 1492 § 3; Stats 1989 ch 1195 § 1.5; Stats 1994 ch 979 § 2 (SB 937). 3 of 9 DOCUMENTS Deering's California Codes Annotated Copyright ©2007 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. *** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION ENACTED *** *** THROUGH 2007 CH. 750, APPROVED 10/14/07 *** HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE Division 10. Uniform Controlled Substances Act Chapter 8. Seizure and Disposition GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE DIRECTORY Cal Health &Saf Code ,¢ 11473.5 (2007) § 11473.5. Destruction of property in absence of conviction (a) All seizures of controlled substances, instruments, or paraphernalia used for unlawfully using or administering a controlled substance which are in possession of any city, county, or state official as found property, or as the result of a case in which no trial was had or which has been disposed of by Cal Health &Saf Code § 11473.5 Page 3 way of dismissal or otherwise than by way of conviction, shall be destroyed by order of the court, unless the court finds that the controlled substances, instruments, or paraphernalia were lawfully possessed by the defendant. (b) If the court finds that the property was not lawfully possessed by the defendant, law en- forcement may request of the court that certain uncontaminated instruments or paraphernalia be re- linquished to a school or school district for science classroom education in lieu of destruction. HISTORY: Added Stats 1972 ch 1407 § 3, as H & S C,¢ 11474. S. Amended and renumbered by Stats 1980 ch 1019 § 5. Amended Stats 1994 ch 979 § 3 (SB 937). 4 of 9 DOCUMENTS Deering's California Codes Annotated Copyright ©2007 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. *** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION ENACTED *** *** THROUGH 2007 CH. 750, APPROVED 10/14/07 *** HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE Division 10. Uniform Controlled Substances Act Chapter 8. Seizure and Disposition GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE DIRECTORY Cal Health &Saf Code ~ 11474 (2007) § 11474. Court order for destruction of property A court order for the destruction of controlled substances, instruments, or paraphernalia pursuant to the provisions of Section 11473 or 11473.5 may be carried out by a police or sheriffs department, the Deparhnent of Justice, the Department of the California Highway Patrol, or the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The court order shall specify the agency responsible for the destruction. Controlled substances, instruments, or paraphernalia not in the possession of the designated agency at the time the order of the court is issued shall be delivered to the designated agency for destruction in compliance with the order. HISTORY: Added Stats 1980 ch 1019 § 6. Amended Stats 1996 ch 1154 § 5 (AB 3020), effective September 30, 1996; Stats 1999 ch 787 § 7 (AB 749). Page 4 5 of 9 DOCUMENTS Deering's California Codes Annotated Copyright ©2007 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. *** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION ENACTED *** *** THROUGH 2007 CH. 750, APPROVED 10/14/07 *** HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE Division 10. Uniform Controlled Substances Act Chapter 8. Seizure and Disposition GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE DIRECTORY Cal Health & Saf Code § 11475 (2007) § 11475. Seizure and summary forfeiture of Schedule I substances Controlled substances listed in Schedule I that are possessed, transferred, sold, or offered for sale in violation of this division are contraband and shall be seized and summarily forfeited to the state. Controlled substances listed in Schedule I, which are seized or come into the possession of the state, the owners of which are unknown, are contraband and shall be summarily forfeited to the state. HISTORY: Added Stats 1972 ch 1407 § 3. 6 of 9 DOCUMENTS Deering's California Codes Annotated Copyright ©2007 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. *** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION ENACTED *** *** THROUGH 2007 CH. 750, APPROVED 10/14/07 *** HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE Division 10. Uniform Controlled Substances Act Cal Health &Saf Code § 11476 Chapter 8. Seizure and Disposition GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE DIRECTORY Cal Health &Saf Code ~ 11476 (2007) § 11476. Seizure and summary forfeiture of plants Page 5 Species of plants from which controlled substances in Schedules I and II may be derived which have been planted or cultivated in violation of this division, or of which the owners or cultivators are unknown, or which are wild growths, may be seized and summarily forfeited to the state. HISTORY: Added Stats 1972 ch 1407 § 3 7 of 9 DOCUMENTS Deering's California Codes Annotated Copyright ©2007 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. *** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION ENACTED *** *** THROUGH 2007 CH. 750, APPROVED 10/14/07 *** HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE Division 10. Uniform Controlled Substances Act Chapter 8. Seizure and Disposition GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE DIRECTORY Cal Health &Saf Code ,¢ 11477 (2007) § 11477. Seizure and forfeiture of plants on failure of occupant to produce registration The failure, upon demand by a peace officer of the person in occupancy or in control of land or premises upon which the species of plants are growing or being stored, to produce an appropriate registration, or proof that he is the holder thereof, constitutes authority for the seizure and forfeiture of the plants. HISTORY: Added Stats 1972 ch 1407 § 3. Amended Stats 1980 ch 1019 § 7. Page 6 8 of 9 DOCUMENTS DEERING'S CALIFORNIA CODES ANNOTATED Copyright (c) 2007 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. *** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION ENACTED *** *** THROUGH 2007 CH. 750, APPROVED 10/14/07 *** HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE Division 10. Uniform Controlled Substances Act Chapter 8. Seizure and Disposition GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE DIRECTORY Cal Health & Saf Code ~ 11478 (2007) § 11478. Marijuana for research projects Marijuana maybe provided by the Attorney General to the heads of research projects which have been registered by the Attorney General, and which have been approved by the research advisory panel pursuant to section 11480. The head of the approved research project shall personally receipt for such quantities of marijuana and shall make a record of their disposition. The receipt and record shall be retained by the Attorney General. The head of the approved research project shall also, at intervals and in the manner required by the research advisory panel, report the progress or conclusions of the research project. HISTORY: Added Stats 1972 ch 1407 § 3. Amended Stats 1974 ch 545 § 60; Stats 1980 ch 1019 § 8. 9 of 9 DOCUMENTS Deering's California Codes Annotated Copyright ©2007 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. *** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS ALL URGENCY LEGISLATION ENACTED *** *** THROUGH 2007 CH. 750, APPROVED 10/14/07 *** Cal Health &Saf Code § 11479 HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE Division 10. Uniform Controlled Substances Act Chapter 8. Seizure and Disposition GO TO CALIFORNIA CODES ARCHIVE DIRECTORY Cal Health &Saf Code ,¢ 11479 (2007) § 11479. Destruction of excess quantities of suspected controlled substance Page 7 Notwithstanding Sections 11473 and 11473.5, at any time after seizure by a law enforcement agency of a suspected controlled substance, that amount in excess of 10 pounds in gross weight may be destroyed without a court order by the chief of the law enforcement agency or a designated sub- ordinate. Destruction shall not take place pursuant to this section until all of the following require- ments are satisfied: (a) At least five random and representative samples have been taken, for evidentiary purposes, from the total amount of suspected controlled substances to be destroyed. These samples shall be in addition to the 10 pounds required above. When the suspected controlled substance consists of growing or harvested marijuana plants, at least one 10 pound sample (which may include stalks, branches, or leaves) and five representative samples consisting of leaves or buds shall be retained for evidentiary purposes from the total amount of suspected controlled substances to be destroyed. (b) Photographs have been taken which reasonably demonstrate the total amount of the suspected controlled substance to be destroyed. (c) The gross weight of the suspected controlled substance has been determined, either by actu- ally weighing the suspected controlled substance or by estimating that weight a8er dimensional measurement of the total suspected controlled substance. (d) The chief of the law enforcement agency has determined that it is not reasonably possible to preserve the suspected controlled substance in place, or to remove the suspected controlled substance to another location. In making this determination, the difficulty of transporting and storing the sus- pected controlled substance to another site and the storage facilities may be taken into consideration. Subsequent to any destruction of a suspected controlled substance pursuant to this section, an affidavit shall be filed within 30 days in the court which has jurisdiction over any pending criminal proceedings pertaining to that suspected controlled substance, reciting the applicable information required by subdivisions (a), (b), (c), and (d) together with information establishing the location of the suspected controlled substance, and specifying the date and time of the destruction. In the event that there are no criminal proceedings pending which pertain to that suspected controlled substance, the affidavit may be filed in any court within the county which would have jurisdiction over a person against whom those criminal charges might be filed. HISTORY: Cal Health & Saf Code § 11479 Page 8 Added Stats 1979 ch 865 § 2, effective September 22, 1979. Amended Stats 1983 ch 946 § 1; Stats 1984 ch 1209 § 1; Stats 1986 ch 1031 § 2; Stats 1989 ch 1072 § 1, effective September 29, 1989; Stats 2002 ch 787 § 3 (SB 1798). ~-~ l~-~~'~ w....~ .-_enCa ~ a. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADDING ARTICLE 10, ENTITLED: MARIJUANA CULTIVATION ENFORCEMENT, TO DIVISION 7, CHAPTER 1 AND AMENDING SECTION 9254, ENTITLED: "MARIJUANA CULTIVATION," OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE. Anew Article 10 is hereby added to Chapter 1 of Division 7 of the Ukiah City Code to read as follows: DIVISION 7. POLICE REGULATIONS CHAPTER 1 CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE AND ORDER ARTICLE 10 MARIJUANA CULTIVATION ENFORCEMENT §6093 MARIJUANA CULTIVATION PROHIBITED. Outdoor Cultivation of marijuana, or Indoor Cultivation in excess of 12 mature plants or 24 immature plants, within the City Limits of the City of Ukiah in violation of Section 9254 constitutes a violation of this Article. Any person violating any provision of this Article shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed six months or by both a fine and imprisonment. §6094 SEIZURE AND DESTRUCTION OF MARIJUANA. Except as otherwise expressly stated in this section, all marijuana seized by the City Police in the enforcement of this Article shall be seized, retained and destroyed in the same manner and subject to the same procedures as are provided in California Health and Safety Code sections 11472-11479, for marijuana possessed in violation of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code. The requirements in subsection (b) of Health and Safety Code Section 11479, prescribing the conditions that must be satisfied before seized marijuana may be destroyed without a court order, as applied by this section, are revised as follows: (b) Photographs have been taken which reasonably demonstrate the total number of mature and immature plants to be destroyed and the location where they were growing immediately prior to their seizure. SECTION TWO. ORDINANCE NO. 1 Sections 1 and 2 of Section 9254 of the Ukiah City Code are hereby amended to read as follows. §9254: MARIJUANA CULTIVATION: Section 1. Definitions. As used herein the following definitions shall apply: 1. "Cultivation" means the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, or processing of marijuana plants or any part thereof. 2. "Fully enclosed and secure structure" means a space within a building that complies with the California Building Code, as adopted in the City of Ukiah ("CBC"), or, if exempt from the permit requirements of the CBC, that has a complete roof enclosure supported by connecting walls extending from the ground to the roof, a foundation, slab or equivalent base to which the floor is secured by bolts or similar attachments, is secure against unauthorized entry, and is accessible only through one or more lockable doors. Walls and roofs must be constructed of solid materials that cannot be easily broken through, such as 2" X 4" or thicker studs overlain with 3/8" or thicker plywood or the equivalent. Plastic sheeting, regardless of gage, or similar products do not satisfy this requirement. If indoor grow lights or air filtration systems are used, they must comply with the California Building, Electrical, and Fire Codes as adopted in the City of Ukiah.. 3. "Immature marijuana plant" means a marijuana plant, whether male or female, that has not yet flowered and which does not yet have buds that are readily observed by unaided visual examination. 4. "Indoors" means within a fully enclosed and secure structure. 5. "Mature marijuana plant" means a marijuana plant, whether male or female, that has flowered and which has buds that are readily observed by unaided visual examination. 6. "Outdoor" means any location within the City of Ukiah that is not within a fully enclosed and secure structure. 7. "Parcel" means property assigned a separate parcel number by the Mendocino County Assessor. 8. "Primary caregiver" means a "primary caregiver" as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7(d). 9. "Qualified patient" means a "qualified patient" as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7(f). Section 2. Cultivation of Marijuana. ORDINANCE NO. 2 A. Outdoor cultivation: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any premises within any zoning district in the City of Ukiah to cause or allow such premises to be used for the outdoor cultivation of marijuana plants. B. Indoor cultivation in residential zoning districts: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any Parcel within any residential zoning district (R-1, R-2, R-3 and CN districts) in the City of Ukiah to cause or allow such Parcel to be used for the cultivation of more than twelve mature and twenty-four immature marijuana plants within a fully enclosed and secure structure on the Parcel. C. Indoor cultivation of marijuana restricted to Qualified Patients and Primary Care Givers: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any Parcel within the City of Ukiah to cause or allow such premises to be used for the cultivation of marijuana, unless the person is a Qualified Patient or Primary Caregjver growing the amount of marijuana per qualified patient authorized by Health and Safety Code Section 11362.77(a) - (b) and (d) - (f), not to exceed the per Parcel limit in Section 2.B., above. D. Public nuisance prohibited: [Unchanged] SECTION THREE 1. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA. The City Council finds that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment), 15061(b)(3) (there is no possibility the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment). In addition to the foregoing general exemptions the following categorical exemptions apply, Sections 15308 (actions taken as authorized by local ordinance to assure protection of the environment), and 15321 (action by agency for enforcement of a law, general rule, standard, or objective administered or adopted by the agency, including by direct referral to the City Attorney as appropriate for judicial enforcement). 2. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a De1Metl: G Deleted: P ORDINANCE NO. 3 newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah, and shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Introduced by title only on , 2007, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Adopted on , 2007 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mari Rodin, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Brown, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 4 ITEM NO: lOb MEETING DATE December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AIRPORT COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS At the October 3 City Council Meeting the Council directed staff to re-advertise the Airport Commission vacant seat for the "within Mendocino County" designation, according to City Ordinance 1100. This advertisement was published in the Ukiah Daily Journal, in addition to posting it on the City's website. The result is five candidates have applied for appoint- ment consideration by the City Council to the one open seat. Applicants include Don Albright, Susan Jordan, Andrew Stein, Paul Zellman, and Floyd Smoller. Interviews are being scheduled for 5:15 p.m., in Conference Room #3, just prior to the City Council Meeting on December 5. The item will then come up on the Regular Agenda under Unfinished Business for the Council to make the appointment. The order for the right to place a nomination before the City Council is based on seniority, as is spelled out in Council Resolution 1006-61, attachment 2. Dottie Deerwester was nominated by Councilmember McCowen at the August 15, 2007 meeting to fill the open City resident seat, placing Councilmember Crane as next having the right to place a nomination before the City Council. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Interview Applicants, 2) Appoint one Commissioner to the open "Mendocino County" seat, 3) Adopt the Resolution ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: N/A Requested by: Paul Richey, Airport Manager Prepared by: Linda Brown, City Clerk Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Applications for Commission Seat 2. Resolution 1006-61, Nomination Procedure 3. Resolution for Adoption Approved: Candace Horsley, City anager Attuc;i ~ment # i~ .l ~ ~ _ ~~ ,~, - --- CITY OF UKIAH i~ r---- -::_~ L I~"~1 APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT I ! , `t! AIRPORT COMMISSION i~ (~i ~ JUL 1 7 ZJ01 I' ~ '~~ I --- --- ~; L^ 1 L_ '~,` DATE: ~- I-~~ I rrv~;`'~r ~ ,L~. ~-/ 1 I am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Airport Commission 1. Name ~o~OJAW ~'_!'t~j~~~ 2. Residence Address I2 `~~ Vi~fa V~/~e ~d. Res. Phone 707-~l6Z-1 I ~~ 3. Business Addres(fs 15 73 So, ~a'1c S'3• Bus. Phone 7D7 " U~"U $ u ~ 4. Employer Se I3'/ ~4ii /1lSj 8ca H[r Job title Employed since 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? ~2. years; Mendocino County?ZZ California? z~- 6. Please list communi}'/~ gro7ups or o/ra'anizations you are affiliated with. Indicate office held? r (~ U ~ ~1C Yn tYr C~- l~7 h M+f~~f 4S ~~ 30 '. n 11,. C ~. _ ras.. "Treas. Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. Why are you applying to serve on the City of Ukiah's Airport Commission? What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Airport Commission? How do you believe your own skills, experience, expertise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Airport Commission? 10. What do you believe is the single most important Airport related issue facing our community? and why? 11. In your opinion, what type of Airport programs or Airport development should the City encourage? 12. In your opinion, what type of Airport programming or Airport development should the City discourage? 13. What kind of ideal community do you envision for Ukiah? 14. Do you have any known projects or conflict of interest related to this Commission? Please return this application and attachments to the City Clerk by Noon on Mondav, December 6, 2004. Thank you for your interest in serving the City of Ukiah. Signature - Date ~ " ~-U~ City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone: 463-6217 Fax: 463-6204 Email: marieu(a~cityofukiah.com Forms: Airport Commission Application Revised: 11/15/04 7. To help and serve an entity that I consider valuable to not only my future but to the future of any modern community. 8. The airport commission acts in an advisory role the Ukiah City Council. It was created to carry out the will of the city council, to help administer the policies and guidelines established for it. 9. 1 believe my background in commercial banking (20+years with Savings Bank) and the job's interaction with the local business community makes me aware of the needs that local business require of an airport. As a private pilot who utilizes the Ukiah Airport, I see the potential of the airport for it's own viablility as well as it's importance to the community at large. ] 0. 1'o show the airport as an integral part of the community, not an independent entity but one that works with any and all other agencies and the community as a whole. 1 1. For the Airport to have a worth to a community, it must show that it's a good, trusted partner. That it takes its responsibilities seriously and acts in a way that pleases the City as a whole. ] 2. Polarization and lack of communication between it's users and the policy makers. 13. I have no personal agenda for the Ukiah community. 1 believe we have elected ofticials that the community as chosen to set the course and direction oC the City. 14. I have no known projects nor conflicts of interest related to this Commission. . _. ._..,._.., ~...t VT un tRH CITY C1F UKIAIi CATION FOR APP INTMENT DATE: 07-09-97 16:40 Pg; iii ;, l ; rl i_ i I am applyin8 for an appointment to the Clty of Uklah's Airport Commission 1. ~ ~ a v~w 2.F ~UL 1 1 2007 ,_ - ;~d,r 3. Business Addrea 5 ~ ~ -~'t' [ .~ ~ "taul~s' Phone '~ Ir 1 ~- Z ~.5 4. Employer ~ ~ Job title G t f Employed since ~~-7 5, How long have you owi ~e in Ukiah? ___. _L_. years; Mendocino County? 33 Califomla?~/ 8. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with and Ilst any offices held, Please answer the following questions on separate ahsete of paper and attach. 7. Why are you applying to serve on the Clty of Ukiah's Airport Commission? B. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responeibllity of the Airport Commission? 8. Howdo you believe yyour awn skies, experience, expertise and perspectives will be beneficial to the wor4c of the Airport Commission? 10. W hat do you believe is the singie most important Airport related Issue facing our community, and why? 11. In your opinion, what type of Airport programs or Airport d4evelopment should the Clty encourage? 12. In your opinion, what type of Airport programming orAllportdevelopmentshould the City diacouraga7 13. What kid of Ideal community do you envision for Uklah7 14. DO you have any known projects or conflict of interest related to this Commission? 15. Are there any other City of Ukiah Commlttaes/Commissions in which you are Interested and on which you would be willing to serve? Please return this application and attachments tp fife City Clerk by Noon on Wednesday. July 18. sooT• Thank you f r Intsrget in serving the City of O~kJiah. Signature Dat® /,~,~~ City of Ukiah, urinary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 98482.6400 Phone: 4$3-8213 Fax: 483204 Forma. Airport Commission App9catlOr. ~~y~~c~ . r~J7~cew 7. I am applying to serve on the Airport Commission because I have been involved at the airport for over 25 years. I learned to fly at the airport in 1981, and became a hangar tenant shortly thereafter. I have always felt that the airport is a wonderful plac_, and a very valuable asset to the community, I want to contribute to maximizing its value to our community. 8. I am not familiar with the exact purpose, role and responsibility of the Airport Commission as these have been defined by the City and previous Commissions. It seems to me that these are to to set the priorities for the airport administration, administer the budget, and guide the direction of the airport. 9. I have been a pilot, and a tenant at the airport for over 25 years. I am also an attorney, with knowledge of FAA rules and regulations. I am also a business and property owner In the City of Ukfah. I believe my experience and expert(se, plus my long membership in this community will benefit the Airport Commission. As a female pilot, with an Instrument rating and commercial license, I bring a woman's perspective to what might easily be taken as a man's world. 10. The single most important issue facing the airport is that its important role In our community is not understood by the community at large, and is therefore misunderstood and undervalued. 1 1. The City should encourge programs to educate the community about the airport, by having programs to involve the community--including school children. The City should might encourage a restaurant operator to open at the airport, which would be an asset to the pilot community, as well as the City. 12. The City should discourage developers from looking at the airport as a potential residential development site. 13. I envision a community where citizens are employed and feel safe, and where they can raise their children with optimism and responsibility for the future. Such a community will always have an accessible, thriving and friendly airport, such as we already have. The airport can be a place where children and adults act extremely responsibly and see posslbllitfes for their futures. 14. I have no known conflicts of interest. 15. I would be willing to serve on other commissions or committees. Paee I of 1 Linda Brown From: Paul Richey Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 11:12 AM To: Linda Brown Subject: FW: Application for Airport Commissioner Attachments: Resume AS 11-07.pdf; ATT238407.htm Linda, Mr. Stein will not be available on 12-5-07, due to a business commitment, but asked me to reiterate his interest in the position. You may want to include this on to the Councilmemebers. Thanks Paul Richey From: Andrew Stein [mailto:stein@theairport.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 11:05 AM To: Paul Richey Subject: Application for Airport Commissioner Paul: Thank you for the telephone call. I am sorry to say that, due to a business commitment, I will be unable to attend the Ukiah City Council meeting on December 5. However, I am still interested in serving on the Airport Commission, and will be available the week of December 10 and thereafter for interviews. I am also enclosing my resume, which offers additional information that was not included on the formal application for Commissioner. Thank. Sincerely, Andv Andrew Stein stein TheAiroort.com +1-707-467-9160 (home) +1-703-989-9458 (mobile) 1575 Crane Rd. Ukiah CA 95482 USA 11 /30/2007 Andren• Stein 1575 Crane Road Ukiah, California 95482 707-467-9160 (home) 703-989-9458 (mobile) stein@theairport.com AVIATION EXPERIENCE: 1/2004 -Present Senior Associate, R. Dixon Speas Associates, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts Senior Associate, IOSA Auditor, Morten Beyer & Agnew (MBA), Arlington, Virginia IOSA Auditor, United PROS, Denver, Colorado Provide aviation technical and management consulting services, including operator compliance, safety and quality audits, technical writing and program development, and management and systems analysis to aviation industry clients. Perform Maintenance, Cargo, Ground Handling, and Management Organization audits under the IATA-IOSA airline auditing program on behalf of MBA and United PROS. Under contract with R. Dixon Speas Associates, as Lead Auditor, conduct assessments of FAR Part 135 executive charter operators on behalf of a major aircraft fractional ownership company. 1/2001 -Present Internal Evaluation Program Auditor, Polar Air Cargo, Purchase, New York Manage the Internal Evaluation Program for the Maintenance and Engineering division of an FAR Part 121 Air Carrier operating a fleet of Boeing 747 aircraft. Perform scheduled and unscheduled audits. Provide analysis of deficiencies, and compile annual status reports for the Chief Operating Officer. 8/2000 - 1/2004 Vice President, Morten Beyer 8 Agnew, Arlington, Virginia Provided aviation technical and management consulting services, including aviation business analysis and equipment valuation, to airlines and financial institutions. Provided aviation technical consulting, including safety and compliance auditing, to airlines, repair stations and aircraft owners. Consulting projects included business plan analysis and development for the Initial Public Offering of a startup airline, a "due diligence" investigation for investors considering the purchase of a European scheduled low-fare airline, and maintenance process analysis and improvement for a large helicopter operator. 2198- 8/2000 Director, Aircraft Operations, ORBIS International, New York, New York Managed all aspects of the non-commercial, non-profit operation and maintenance of a DC-10 aircraft. Supervised field technicians, operations planning and logistics team, and Chief Pilot. Directed world- wideflight, ground and aircraft maintenance operations. Developed aircraft records and maintenance planning systems. Managed maintenance contracts. Conducted ongoing internal surveillance and review to ensure regulatory compliance and promote safe operations. Managed budget, augmenting organizational funds by soliciting donations and gifts-in-kind from aviation and airline industry companies. Represented ORBIS in relations with the FAA and foreign regulatory authorities. 6/96 - 8/2000 Senior Associate, R. Dixon Speas Associates, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts (R. Dixon Speas Associates, Inc. was known as PRC Aviation until 1997.) Provided aviation technical and management consulting services, including airline compliance, safety and quality audits, management and systems analysis, and database management systems evaluation and integration to aviation industry clients. Advised and assisted clients in communication with regulatory authorities. Assisted high-visibility airline client in recovery from FAA-ordered cessation of operations, providing advice in reorganization and verification of recordkeeping processes. Supported that client during the development and FAA approval of revised systems and procedures. Consulting projects have included safety audits for American Eagle and Champion Air, ATOS training and review for America West Airlines, an operational reliability study for Northwest Airlines, initial startup and certification of a cargo airline, Y2K compliance reviews for Aeromexico and Mexicana Airlines, and a hub operation study for America West Airlines. Resume of Andre« Stcin (c AVIATION EXPERIENCE (continued): 12/95 - 5196 Manager, Heavy Maintenance, World Airways, Herndon, Virginia Managed all scheduled heavy maintenance for a fleet of 15 DC-10 and MD-11 aircraft. Trained and managed Technical Representatives in the oversight of aircraft maintenance. Supervised corporate contracts for airframe maintenance. Assessed vendor performance, and coordinated with Director of Quality Control to address vendor quality issues and concerns. 6/93 - 12/95 Manager, Quality Assurance, World Airways, Herndon, Virginia Managed the Quality Assurance department, supervising a staff of six individuals providing aircraft recordkeeping, technical writing, technical library and document control, reliability analysis and quality assurance functions for an airline operating DC-10 and MD-11 aircraft. • Responsible for fleet airworthiness, conformity and AD compliance, and assurance of regulatory compliance for the airline maintenance group. • Responsible for development, revision and publication of aircraft maintenance programs. • Received, tracked, and analyzed all Airworthiness Directives for applicability to World Airways fleet and components. Composed and/or delegated composition of all AD compliance documents, including task cards, engineering orders, and fleet campaign directives. Communicated with the FAA regarding compliance issues, including AD alternate means of compliance. • Supervised the Reliability Analyst in the conduct of the monthly reliability meetings, providing analysis and recommended action to the maintenance group in response to dispatch, service and component reliability difficulties. • Responsible for the development and revision of aircraft and engine maintenance programs. • Reviewed Service Bulletins for applicability and economic benefit, taking into account the reliability history of the fleets. Designed, programmed and implemented database systems for tracking compliance with Airworthiness Directives and Service Bulletins, management of technical publications, recording of non-routine maintenance, and forecasting of routine maintenance. • Directly responsible for purchasing and coordinating outside engineering services. • Conducted ongoing internal surveillance of department functionsto ensure compliance with federal regulations and company policies and procedures. 8191 - 6/93 Senior Associate, PRC Aviation, Inc., Louisville, Kentucky Provided aviation technical consulting services, including airline compliance and quality audits, aircraft records research and auditing, technical writing, management consulting and maintenance program development, to PRC Aviation clients. Contributed to the development, marketing, documentation, and customer support of an integrated computer database system for airline maintenance and engineering. PRC Aviation was known as R. Dixon Speas Associates, Inc. after 1997. 6/88 - 6/93 Aviation Consultant (independent), Louisville, Kentucky Provided Designated Airworthiness Representative (DAR) services, air carrier technical representation, aircraft records research and auditing, technical writing, aircraft inspection and evaluation, maintenance program development, and aircraft recordkeeping system organization and setup services for airlines and aircraft leasing companies. 1/88 - 6/88 Technical Writer/Technical Publications Supervisor, Orion Air, Louisville, Kentucky Responsible for generation and control of all technical publications for the Maintenance and Engineering department of air carrier operating DC-8, DC-9, Boeing 727 and 747 aircraft. Provided initial engineering analysis and interpretation of all Airworthiness Directives and Service Bulletins applicable to Orion Air fleet, and chaired bi-weekly AD/SB Review meetings. Communicated with the FAA regarding AD alternate means of compliance, as necessary. Composed engineering orders. fleet campaign directives and task cards in response to AD and Service Bulletin requirements. Supervised the Technical Librarians in the control and distribution of documents. Resume of Andrew Stein (continued) page 3 AVIATION EXPERIENCE (continued): 8/87 - 1/88 Technical Representative, Orion Air, Louisville, Kentucky Managed aircraft maintenance projects performed by vendors, including B, C, and D checks, and major structural repairs, for fleet of DC-8, DC-9, Boeing 727 and 747 aircraft. Responsible for the cost and quality of maintenance performed. Conducted technical evaluation of heavy maintenance vendors. Held Required Inspection Item (RII) authorization for DC-8 and DC-9 aircraft, and was authorized by the airline to return these aircraft to service (airworthiness release). 10/85 - 7/87 Aircraft Mechanic /Lead Mechanic, Pacific Southwest Airlines, San Francisco, CA Performed line and base maintenance on DC-9, MD-80, BAe 146, and Boeing 727 aircraft. From 10/86 through 7/87 held authority to return aircraft to service. 8/85 - 10/85 Aircraft Mechanic, World Airways, Oakland, California Performed line and base maintenance on DC-8, DC-10, and Lockheed L-382 Hercules aircraft. 1/84 - 8/85 Aircraft Mechanic, Transamerica Airlines, Oakland, California Performed line and base maintenance on DC-8, Boeing 747, Lockheed L-100, L-188 and L-382 aircraft. EDUCATION and TRAINING: 2004 Aviation Quality Services GmbH / IATA - IOSA Initial Auditor Training Course 1997 Arthur D. Little Co. - EHS Auditing Fundamental Skills and Techniques, self-study course 1992 Federal Aviation Administration -Designated Airworthiness Representative (onR) training 1990 University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky- Engineering Studies 1983 Embry Riddle Aeronautical University, International Campus -Aircraft Accident Investigation 1982 - 83 College of Alameda, Alameda, California -Certificates in Aviation Maintenance Technology, with Honors. 1968 - 70 City College of New York, New York, New York -Liberal Arts Studies 1964 - 68 Brooklyn Technical High School, Brooklyn, New York-Academic Diploma 1985 Transamerica Airlines, Oakland, California- L-382, Boeing 747, and JT9D engine familiarization courses 1986 - 87 Pacific Southwest Airlines, San Francisco, California -DC-9, MD-80, BAE 146, JT8D engine, and ALF-502 engine familiarization courses FAA CERTIFICATES: Mechanic, with Airframe and Powerplant Ratings Private Pilot CITY CiF' UKIAW APPLICATIpN FtJR APPOINTMENT _.__- AIRPORT GbMMISSION ~ " .- ' __ , 1 ~ ~; !'a`i'r' 13 X007 fJATE: lI /Vo~ 200' ," L ~ ~.~ Ci7~C,~~~~~ i ., -'_, ..~ am applying for an appointment trs the City of Ukiaiti's Airport Gammrs~ibrr- -=----_ _ ~;-' ~r ~ 1. Name ~N~i~GW ~'1"~-N 2. Residence Address /S~-S Ge,Vni'G,~ t) . L[K/AN ~'5~87-F2es. Phone ~~ ~ • ~l~r - `~l (n ~ 3. Qusiness Address ""'~ i3us. Phone '-' 4. Employer St~uF Job title •f~i5uC.7"ANT Employed since /QQ~' 5. Wow long have you resided in Ukiah? 3 ~ years; Mendocino County? 3-t- California? ~ ~ 6. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with and list any offices held. Mo A1~ Please answer the following questions on separate sheets of paper and attach. 7, Why are you applying td serve cn the City of Ukiah's Airport Commission? 8. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Airport Commission? 9. Wow do you believe your own shills, experience, expertise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the Airport Commission? 10. What do ynu believe is the single most important Airpoi t related issue facing our community, and why? 11. In your opinion, what type of Airport programs or Airport development should the City encourage? 12. In your opinion, what type of Airport programming orAirport development should the City discourage? 13. What hind of ideal community do you envision for Ukiah? 14. Do ynu have any known projects or conflict of interest related to this Commission? 15. Are there any other Cityof Ukiah Committees/Commissions in which ynu are interested and vn which ycu would be willing tv serve? Please return this application and attachments to the City Clerk by Noon on Tuesdav..November 13, 2[107. Thank you far yo~u~Tr,i~~n/,teLr~est in serving the City of Ukiah. Signature _~ ~l~t''~~~ " " t7ate ,__ l l /~U . 2u c~'~- City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, GA 954II2-6400 Phone; 463-fi213 Fax: 463-8204 Forms: Airport Commission Applic8titln ANDREW STEIN November 11, 2007 Attachment to Application for Appointment City of Ukiah Airport Commission Answers to Questions 7 through 15: I am applying to serve on the Airport Commission in order to make a contribution to my community in an area for which I have considerahle experience and understanding. 8. As I understand it, the Airport Commission serves to govern and administer the airport for the good of the community. 9. I have worked in aviation fortwenty-three years, and hold FAA certification as a private pilot and aircraft mechanic. Since 1991, I have made my living as an aviation consultant, serving clients' Wends regarding aircraft maintenance and engineering, operational safety, and efficiency. I have been involved in nearly all aspects of aircraft operation, from corporate and private flight departments tv international airlines. I believe that my diverse aviation background will provide a unique dimension to the Commission. In addition to my aviation background, I am articulate, well-read, and intelligent. My experience in consulting and project management has developed my skills in interpersonal communication and cooperative decision-making. 10. I think that the most important airport related issue facing the community is the maintenance of a safe and environmentally friendly facility that is integrated into the business and social fabric; of our valley. To retain critical services such as CDF aviation and CALSTAf2, and operational tenants such as Fed Ex, which are vital to the social and commercial health of our community, the airport must ensure that it operates as a "good neighbor" in terms of safety and environmental policies. 11. The airport should encourage all aviation related businesses and services, including medical, passenger, freight and logistics, forestry, agricultural and firefighting operations, aircraft maintenance and engineering, as wc;ll as aircraft fueling, servicing, parking, hangarinra and storage. t 5'75 CRANE ROAD + t .7O7.A67.9160 UKIAH. CALIFORNIA 854$2 USA STEINC~THEAIRFO RT.COM Attachment to Application for Airport Commissioner Andrew Stein 12. Our community should discourage development that 1) is environmentally unsound; 2) conflicts with the basic goal of encouraging aviation operations and aviation-related businesses, and 3) is opposed by consensus of our neighbors in the community. 13. I envision a Ukiah' • That is a safe and pleasant place to live, ~NOrk and visit; • That has a sound and mutually-beneficial relationship with the greater Ukiah Valley and Mendocino County; • Where commercial development is carefully planned to benefit the community and protect our precious environment, preserving our quality of life; • Where residents and visitors can access and enjoy our local uniqueness in terms of community, viniculture, agriculture, and natural beauty, and • Where the agricultural roots of our community continue to be supported and integrated in#o our lives. 14. I have no known projects or conflicts of intera_st related to the Commission. 15. At this time, I am not interested in serving on any other City Committees or Commissions. Y ti `-^~ November 11, 2007 November 11, 2007 page 2 of 2 City of Ukiah Application for Appointment Airport Commission Date: November 12, 2007 I am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Airport Commission 1. Name: PaulLellmau 2. Residence Address:493 South Highland Drive Res. Phone: 463.6600 3. Business Address: Bus. Phone: 621.2668 4. Employer: City of Ukiah Job Title: WTO Employed since: 2005 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? 9 years. Mendocino County? 9 California? 50 6. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with and list any offices held. Boy Scouts of America Troop 62, Assistant Scout Master. Ukiah//U/~Iti~/i7/~~ate, Quartermaster. Signature: ~ `"~' ~~~~~_ Date: ~~J ~ t' ~ Z.GZJ City of Ukiah Application for Appointment Airport Commission Date: November 12, 2007 Name: Paul Zellman 7. Why are you applying to serve on the City of Ukiah's Airport Commission? NOV 1 3 2007 ~~-'I City of Ukiah During the past fifteen months I have been at the airport about once or twice a week as a Student Pilot (I hope to complete my Pilot's Certificate by this Christmas.) During this time, I have gained some experience as to the rhythms of the facility throughout the year. I find the airport to be interesting to me and I believe it is very important to our city. I feel I should participate more fully in the workings of our community and I think the Airport Commission would be a good place for me. 8. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Airport Commission? I view the Airport Commission (AC) as a liaison between the Ukiah City Council /Management Staff and the Airport tenants, resident and transient flyers and the general public with includes the citizens of both City of Ukiah and Mendocino County. I understand that the AC gives advice and recommendations to the Ukiah City Council and those decisions are ultimately the responsibility of the Ukiah City Council and not the AC. 9. How do you believe your own skills, experience, expertise and perspectives will be beneficial to the work of the AC? My brief experience as a student pilot has brought me into contact with several of the users and tenants at the airport e.g. Ukiah Aviation, Cal Fire, CalStar, delivery service personnel and many local and out-of- town pilots. Through this experience, I am gaining an understanding of the diverse uses and needs of the airport community. I served for seven years as elected board member of the Mission Resource Conservation District (MRCD). On the MRCD board I served as Secretary, Treasurer and President. I served for nine years on the California Association of Production Consultants Association at the chapter level and for four years at the state level. I view the Ukiah Airport (UA) as an important and vital asset to both the City of Ukiah and Mendocino County. I believe the UA is currently under-utilized. I believe that a more dynamic Ukiah Airport could become an important vehicle that promotes our community while providing additional jobs to our citizens. 10. What do you believe is the single most important Airport related issue facing our community, and why? Retention of current key airport tenants-especially Cal Fire and CalStar; but also FedEx, DHL, Ukiah Aviation, Hertz and Enterprise. These tenants must be provided with quality facilities that are appropriate to their needs while providing critical services to our community. I do not mean to slight our resident flyers that rent hangers nor the aviation mechanics that provide important services for flyers, but, I do believe the primary tenants have an important relationship to our community that cannot be easily duplicated by other resources. 11. In your opinion, what type of Airport Programs or Airport development should the City encourage? I believe the Airport could provide an important avenue to promote tourism for the Ukiah Valley as well as being the "Gateway to the Redwood Empire." We have a good airport facility equipped with a relatively large runway, suitable for both visual and instrument flights. The recent addition of quality hotels and restaurants near the airport facilitates and encourages more visits by pilots. (And when the coast is socked in with fog, Ukiah is often clear.) I think that bringing back the old "Rotary Fly-in" would be great for Ukiah. As an example, just look at what the Fabulous Flashback Car Show does for Ukiah. Just over the hill, Lakeport promotes its seaplane fly-in capabilities each September with an event. For casual weekend flyers, it would be very helpful if at least one of the two car rental facilities could be open on Sundays. Along these lines, I think the debris around the airport could be cleaned up or hidden from view. Also, signage and bathrooms are not adequate for out-of--town visitors. 12. In your opinion, what type of Airport Programs or Airport development should the City discourage? I do not like to see use of hanger space for purposes not related to aviation, but I understand the requirement for rental cash flow. 13. What kind of ideal community do you envision for Ukiah? The diversity of our natural environment and agricultural enterprises near the City of Ukiah and within Mendocino County are strengths of our community. Our community is also blessed with a number of excellent artists and musicians. Mendocino College is growing in stature and importance. These elements of our community are important to us and this diversity of ours is attractive to many people and it can be promoted in a manner that will attract healthy and sustainable enterprises. Mendocino County has evolved from rural lifestyles based on timber and fishing, through hops, pears and winegrapes. The next years will reveal new directions for our town. I hope that my children might find meaningful work and lives here in Mendocino County in the future. 14. Do you have any known projects or conflict of interest related to this Commission? No. 15. Are there any other City of Ukiah Committees/Commissions in which you are interested and on which you would be willing to serve? Perhaps, I a~ot//c/ertain at this time. Signature: ~ c~ ~ , ~~~--- Date: ~, ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ C'j y DATE: October 23, 2007 CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AIRPORT COMMIISSION ............._ . , ._ ~ ~ , li:. ,. GCT ~i,~? , L L_ '' _ ~ -.- }~ ~J I am applying for an appointment to the City of Ukiah's Airport Commission 1. Name: Floyd Smoller 2. Residence Address: 9289 Colony Drive, Redwood Valley CA. 95470 Res. Phone: 707-485-1000 Cell Phone: 707-272-6270 3. Business Address: None 4. Employer: At this time I am retired, however, iust prior to moving to the Ukiah area I was employed by Hughes Aircraft as an electronics engineer and advanced programs manager for 40+ years) 5. How long have you resided in Ukiah? 0 years in Ukiah proper: In Mendocino County? 13 years (Redwood Valley): California? Lifelong except for two years in Tucson Arizona ) 6. Please list community groups or organizations you are affiliated with. Indicate office held? 6a. Mendocino County Search and Rescue-Air Squadron Offices held -Squadron Vice Commander- Squadron Commander- Board member representing the Air Squadron to the county wide Search and Rescue Organization. 6b. Ukiah Airport Volunteer Representative to the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) Which is a very active national organization dealing with the interests of aviation all over the country 6c. My family is associated with T.R.A.I.L. a non profit organization using horses to aid In the physical rehabilitation of physically challenged Children. This organization functions at Ridgewood Ranch lust south of Willits. . As requested in the application for appointment, the answers to the rest of the questions are presented on individual attached sheets. Signature _ ./. '2 Date ~~~~ Z 3 ~ .Z~,~O z City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Phone: 463217 Fax: 463-6204 Email: marieu(a)citvofukiah.com CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AIRPORT COMMIISSION 7. Why are you applying to serve on the City of Ukiah's airport Commission? Primarily because it is an opportunity for me utilize my long term experience related to aviation to give back to the Ukiah community where I live. Also, since I am retired and have the time, energy and desire to contribute at this time. I also feel that that my background and involvement with the Ukiah airport since moving to the Ukiah area might be useful during any upcoming city and airport issues that that are likely to come up before the Commission. CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AIRPORT COMMIISSION 8. What is your understanding of the purpose, role and responsibility of the Airport Commission? As I understand it, the purpose, role and responsibility of the Airport Commission is to provide recommendations and information to city officials contemplating action on issues involving the Ukiah airport. It is also my understanding that it is not the responsibility of the commission to enact or resolve solutions of these issues; rather to be a valuable experienced resource to provide the recommendations and information to those that are responsible! CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AIRPORT COMMIISSION 9. How do you believe your own skills, experience, expertise and perspective will be beneficial to the work of the Airport Commission? The following is an outline of my baGcground: Born and raised in Los Angeles area, graduated from L. A. High School and UCLA (BA and graduate courses in Electronic Engineering) worked for a few Aerospace firms in the L.A. Area culminated by joining Hughes Aircraft and stayed with Hughes for 40 years primarily as a Program Manager of several different Programs. Selected by Hughes as a member of a 12 man team to take Hughes' technologies into the private sector. Typical areas were aviation and road related systems. These projects had to deal with many of the same subjects that airports deal with; such as: public and private funding and public acceptance as well as government regulation. At this time I am retired, however, I was the managing partner for Eagles Nest Aviation which was an active aircraft Certified Repair Station providing aircraft maintenance and specializing in electronics installation and repair. This business operated in a hangar next to CDF on the Ukiah Airport from 1999 to 2007. I am an active private pilot (35 years, instrument rated), 1 owned aircraft by myself and in clubs and Partnerships. I believe this experience will be beneficial to the work of the Airport Commission. CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AIRPORT COMMIISSION 10. What do you believe is the single most important Airport related issue facing our community? And Why? I believe the single most important Airport related issue facing our community is under recognition and utilization of the airport as the valuable community resource that it is and will continue to be during community planning, actions and setting of goals for Ukiah's future. This is an important issue because a considerable amount of our population is not aware of the services it provides and how and why it is a valuable resource to the community now and will be in the future. Some example areas that contribute to the "value to community° are: Fast Medical Transportation, Overnight Product Delivery, Disaster Relief. Business Management Transportation, On Airport Business (city revenue and jobs etc.), Calfire -aerial fire suppression. 5 CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AIRPORT COMMIISSION 11. In your opinion, What type of Airport programs or Airport development should the City encourage? Presently there is a push from federal and state governments for cities to develop comprehensive disaster preparedness plans. Because of the capability of aircraft to operate when a disaster disables a large amount of ground, bridge and rail usage, keeping airports viable after a disaster is a must! Therefore, most of these disaster preparedness plans are expected to apply new technologies to upgrade local airports. In addition in California (particularly Northern Califomia- "Read Earthquake"} There must be grant monies available to upgrade Ukiah airport to meet the new requirements. The resulting upgraded airport should also be a benefit to the usage of the airport for the entire community. In addition to the above: other types of programs/operations that enhance existing operations on the airport are air taxi, additional air freight, new facility for Cal Fire. 6 CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AIRPORT COMMIISSION 12. In your opinion, What type of Airport programs or Airport development should the City discourage? While advocating airport improvements to handle normal General Aviation airport issues such as encroachment and compatible land use, I would discourage programs in this area that are not balanced with the need to be a good neighbor (noise and pollution etc.) CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AIRPORT COMMIISSION 13. What kind of ideal community do you envision for Ukiah? While I am sure that all communities have some problems I would like to preserve a community with the characteristics that brought me here some 13 years ago. A. We wanted recreation that met our needs., i.e. horse property for my wife; an airport for an airplane and me; a lake for my boat, my wife, my grandchildren and me! B. More importantly, I was impressed with the fact that Ukiah had a history before the civil war and was not an expansion town on the periphery of a smog ridden large city., had adequate medical facilities, and was the county seat C. While a certain amount of growth is anticipated, I hope it will be done intelligently while preserving, as much as possible, the small town with a long history feel! CITY OF UKIAH APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AIRPORT COMMIISSION 14. Do you have any known projects or conflict of interest related to this Commission? Absolutely none!! Attc.c;l ~ment # .Z RESOLUTION N0.2001-61 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING PROCEDURE FOR FILLING VACANCIES ON CITY COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS. WHEREAS, Ukiah City Code §1151 provides that members of the Planning Commission shall be appointed in accordance with a procedure established by resolution of the City Council; and 2. The City Council adopted a procedure for filling vacancies on the City's boards and commissions, including the Planning Commission; and 3. The City Council has determined that using a uniform procedure will insure fair and consistent treatment of candidates and Councilmembers; 4. The City Council has determined to amend its procedures for appointing commissioners; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the following amended procedure for filling vacancies on the City's commissions and boards, including the Planning Commission. PROCEDURE FOR FILLING VACANCIES ON COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS The City Council shall fill vacancies on City boards and commissions, using the following procedure. Applicant pool. The City Council shall develop an available pool of candidates for a vacancy by advertising the vacancy at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in Ukiah not less than thirty (30} days prior to the council meeting at which the vacancy is to be filled. The advertisement shall specify a deadline for submitting applications. All completed applications received prior to the deadline shall be included in the pool of available applicants, provided the applicant: a. meets the minimum qualifications far the position as established in the applicable Ukiah City Code section or resolution, establishing the commission or board; and b. participates in a personal interview,rf the City Council conducts personal interviews for the position. The City Council has determined that interviews will be conducted for applicants of the Planning Commission, the Parks, Recreation and Golf Commission, and the Airport Commission. An application shall be deemed complete when signed by the applicant. Applications included in an available pool may be used as a source of nominations for a period of one (f) year from the application deadline. 2. Exceptions. The following shall be considered for appointment or reappointment to a commission or board without submitting a written application: a. Incumbents seeking reappointment for an additional term; b. Elected officials seeking appointment in their capacity as elected officials; c. City staff seeking appointment in their capacity as Cify staff; d. All appointees, except public members, on the Investment Oversight Commission, Traffic Engineering Committee, Cultural Arts Advisory Board and the Disaster Board; e. City Council members, including the Mayor, appointed in their capacity as City Council members; and f. Appointments to the Civil Service Board. Any such exempt applicants shall be considered for appointment, if they submit a written request for consideration within 10 days of the date the appointment is made. 3. Nominations. Each Councilmember, including the Mayor, shall have the right to nominate a candidate from the available pool of candidates. a. The right to place a name before the City Council for consideration shall rotate among the Councilmembers based on seniority with the most senior Councilmember going first. b. The Council shall vote on each nomination as it is made. c. A Councilmember's right to make a nomination shall terminate and the right to nominate candidates shall rotate to the next most senior Councilmember, when a Councilmember's nomination is approved by a majority vote of the Councilmembers present or the Councilmember agrees to pass the nomination to the next most senior Councilmember, whichever occurs first. d. This process for rotating the right to nominate candidates among Councilmembers to fill vacancies shall be followed for each separate commission or board. The City Clerk shall maintain a record of the last Councilmember to make a nomination for each commission or board. 2. When another vacancy must be filled on that commission or board, the next Councilmember in line to make nominations for that commission or board shall make the first nomination to fill the vacancy. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2001, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku NOES: Councilmember Libby ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None `~~ t'~M/ Philip Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: ~ll~~~e~i ~~~~ Marie Ulvifa, City Cierk Attachment # 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH MAKING APPOINTMENT TO THE AIRPORT COMMISSION WHEREAS, the annual expiration of terms forAirport Commission occurred on June 30, 2007; WHEREAS, the vacancies were duly advertised until the close of applications on July 18, and November 13 with submitted applications timely received and submitted to Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, five applications were received for the one Sphere/Mendocino County Airport Commission seat, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ukiah City Council approved the nomination submitted per procedures outlined in Resolution No. 2001-61, and do hereby appoint the following person to a term on the Airport Commission: to fill a term to June 30, 2010. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of December, 2007, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Mari Rodin, Mayor ATTEST: Linda C. Brown, City Clerk ITEM NO. ion DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF VIDEO CAMERAS AT THE CORPORATION YARD AND PURCHASE OF A RECORDING DEVICE FROM AT&T AT A COST OF $32,286.38 PLUS SHIPPING AND SALES TAX AND AUTHORIZE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR SAME. This agenda Item will be delivered to Council on Monday, December 3, 2007. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Funding: Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City departments Prepared by: Steven Butler, IT Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager; Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works; Sage Sangiacomo, Director of Community Services; and Chris Dewey, Chief of Police Attachments: AT&T Quotation for Video cameras, recording device and installation APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City anager ITEM NO. 10c DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF VIDEO CAMERAS AT THE CORPORATION YARD AND PURCHASE OF A RECORDING DEVICE FROM AT8~T SUMMARY: On Monday, November 26th this item was initially presented to the City Council. City Council requested additional information on the project which is provided in a questions/answer format: Q. Will the system integrate with infrared and motion detection systems? A. The video system contains infrared and motion detection within the system. The features are options within each camera unit. Q. Has staff solicited others users of the system? Is it a useful tool for them? A. The following cities have operating video camera systems: City of Petaluma, City of Vacaville and the City of Santa Rosa. Klamath-Trinity School District and Petaluma Municipal Schools have been reported to use the solution as well. The City of Santa Rosa has had a public video monitoring system in place for several years and utilizes it in their downtown area, parking garages and is currently expanding the overall system. They have reported successful results in aiding with identifying suspects in some of their criminal cases. The following cities are currently considering using the video system: City of Sacramento, City of Fresno, City of Ripon and City and County of San Francisco. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the installation of video cameras at the corporation yard and purchase of the recording device for city wide use at $32,286.38 plus shipping and sales tax and authorize budget amendment for same. Funding: Electric $7,200; Water/Sewer $7,200; General Government Buildings $9,886; Police measure S $8,000 plus shipping and tax. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City departments Prepared by: Steven Butler, IT Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager; Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works; Sage Sangiacomo, Director of Community Services; and Chris Dewey, Chief of Police Attachments: AT&T Quotation for Video cameras, recording device and installation r APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Ma ger Q. Are there monthly and/or ongoing costs for the system? A. There are no ongoing costs. Q. Are there maintenance costs? A. There are no maintenance costs. Q. To prevent damage to the cameras, are they disguised or hidden? A. The cameras will be housed in enclosures to protect the camera unit from the environment and vandalism. Santa Rosa claims most people do not notice the cameras. Staff will ensure they are made as inconspicuous as possible when they are installed. Q. How much recording /storage capacity does the system have? A. With the 5 cameras included in the proposal, the system has enough storage for 90 - 120 days. Additional cameras would lower the length of time video could be stored. However, additional storage capacity could be added to the system at any time. Q. Why are there 2 different types of cameras in the quote for the Corp. Yard? Why aren't they all the same? A. Not all the cameras have the same features. It was determined during the site interview one of the cameras would not need Pan/TilUZoom features. Therefore a lower cost unit would work. Q. Why isn't motion detection adequate to protect the Corp. Yard? A. Motion detection has been used at the Corp. Yard. It proved unsuccessful as suspects seeing cars approaching would quickly leave the Corp. Yard allowing them to easily avoid apprehension. Q. What is the video quality at night? A. During the site survey, the lighting at the Corp. Yard was taken into consideration. Low light video cameras were deemed to be the proper units for the job. The cameras are designed to allow video of sufficient quality to enable suspect and/or vehicle identification. Q. Do the cameras use flash which might draw attention to them? A. No, the video cameras do not use flash. Q. What are the costs to expand coverage to other City sites? A. For estimation purposes we can assume the basic costs to install additional cameras at other sites to be: $1000.00 for the wireless network components, $2500.00 per each camera plus installation costs which would vary per site. Proposal For L`'~/ + City of Ukiah, CA* .' ~ I~~Iu~~~nS~`~+' a l8ct Yeur wnrltl. Qeliwrr+rl. Corp Yard Rev 1.0 Monday, Decembor 03, 2007 Equipment Part Number Qty Description Unit Price Total Price SI-WEAN-ANT 5 External Antenna for Wireless LAN Card $350.00 $1,750.00 SI-WEAN 5 Wireless LAN Card $160.00 $800.00 AMX-WAP200g I Wireless Access Point 802. $500.00 $500.00 ON-ENT-BASE- I Network Digital Video Management System(Support) $367.97 $367.97 SUP ON-ENT-BASE- 5 Network DVMS(Camera-Support) $49.80 $249.00 I -c-SUP SI-CAMF-18X I Network Camera Color 1RX AF POE/24VAC/DCl2 $1,152.78 $1,152.78 BNC SI- 4 Network Camera PTZ Color ISX (4-73mm) AF 12VDC $1,291.11 $5,164.44 CAMPTZISX BNC SI-CM-ADAPT 4 Corner Mount Adapter $70.00 $280.00 SI-GNWM 4 Gooseneck Wall Mount Bracket $100.00 $400.00 SI-7NHTW-25H6 4 Normal Wireless 7" Tinted Dome w/ Heater/Blower $675.00 $2,700.00 SI-HSG-E 1 Outdoor Aluminum Housing 13" 24VAC Htr/Blwr $198.28 $198.28 (CAM & CAM 18) SI-PWR-BLK 5 Power Block IIOAC In 24AC Out $300.00 $1,500.00 ON-ENT-BASE I Network Digital Video Management System $1,843.52 $1,843.52 ON-ENT-BASE- 5 Network DVMS(Camera) $248.08 $1,240.39 I-c DE-NVR-800 1 Network Video Recorder 512M6 DDR2,Pen[42.8 $6,200.00 $6,200.00 GHz, 800 MHz, 800GB HD ID-CBL-MH I Cable, Conduit and Misc. Hardware $550.00 $550A0 $24, 896.38 Services Part Number Qty Description Unit Price Total Price IDS-Install I Installation, Project Management, Engineering $6,190.00 $6,190.00 Programming T-100 2 Training Delivered -2 Hour $600.00 $!,200.00 $7,390.00 Optional Peripherals Part Number Qty Description Unit Price Total Price SI-CAMVF 1 Network Camera Color VP(3-8mm)AF 24VAC/DCl2 $700.89 $700.89 BNC SI-DOMECAM-R 1 Network Exterior Mini Dome Camera Color VF(3- $968.33 $968.33 Smm) AE POF/24VAC/DCl2 BNC Proposal#: 1001-090707-2 Monday, December 03, 2007 Page I of 2 Grand Total w/o Optional Items and w/o Shipping: $32,286.38 Shipping: TBD Grand Total w/o Optional Items: $32,286.38 "'This proposal contains the Enterprise ONSSI License that the city can implement as many times as is necessary. The ONSSI solution can be utilized to streamline any existing camera management platforms of and tie them into one cohesive and standardized system. This will provide one common interface and negates the need for multiple stand-alone systems. The proposed solntion and platform is non-proprietary and very scaleable. This quote is for implementation and support with expedited parts for City of Ukia. A total of 4 PTZ cameras and 1 fixed camera are included in the proposal with the opfion to add to other types of fixed cameras. The NVR would allow the city to add camerae up to a total of 40 without a hardware upgrade or add on.* Proposal#: 1001-090707-2 ITEM NO: 10d MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISPATCH COMMUNICATIONS CENTER UPDATE Summary: The purpose of this report is to update Council on the staff work which has been completed researching current workload and staffing issues and the technology related improvements which are being developed to decrease workload without increasing personnel costs. 1. Dispatch Staffing Dispatchers typically work a modified 40 hour work schedule, which allows the department to staff the Dispatch Center with a single dispatcher from midnight to 1 PM and two dispatchers from 1 PM until 6 PM and 8 PM to midnight. Dispatchers are split into two teams, which allow dispatchers the ability to have every-other weekend off, while still providing 7 day, 24 hour coverage for the Dispatch Center. Our dispatch staff supports all police, fire and ambulance services within the City of Ukiah. A dispatcher answers an emergency designated telephone line on average over 178 times per day. Adding our non-emergency telephone lines and radio traffic from police, fire and ambulance personnel, along with requests for dispatch assistance, coordinating responses, and performing numerous criminal warrant, DMV and DOJ computer inquiries, police, fire and ambulance workload has overburdened the dispatch staff to the point of responding to an officer, firefighter or citizen an average of 1.2 times a minute. Continued on pane 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report on current status of the Dispatch Center. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: N/A Prepared by: Chris Dewey, Chief of Police Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None Approved: ~~~~ Candace Horsley, Cit (Manager DISPATCH COMMUNICATIONS CENTER UPDATE For budget purposes, staff had prepared a justification to expand dispatch staffing from 6 to 8 full-time dispatchers. The Ukiah Police Department responds on average to 30,000 calls for service each year, with an authorized staff of 6 dispatchers, while the Mendocino County Sheriffs Office and Fort Bragg Police respond on average of 48,000 calls for service a year with an authorized staff of 12 dispatchers and 2 supervisors. However, the request was modified to a Dispatcher Supervisor for the budget hearings, which was approved by Council. Staff had determined that the Police Captain responsible for overall supervision of the Dispatch Center, spent 30% of his on-duty time on dispatch related responsibilities including; day to day supervision issues; coordinating schedules; managing the dispatcher training program; coordinating radio and telephone audio evidence requests; working with the IT Department, the 911 maintenance vendor, and radio vendors on maintenance issues; coordinating procedure guidelines for Police, Fire, and Medical responses; coordinating on-going mandated training for emergency medical dispatching, fire procedures and police procedures, and supervising dispatcher warrant, restraining order and other related legal requirements. Creating a dispatch supervisor position will provide for extra assistance to the current dispatch staff during peak periods, and assist in the overall management of the center. Future changes in dispatching needs may occur due to changes in Fire dispatch and possible consolidation with other local agencies. Discussions by the Ukiah Fire Department and Ukiah Valley Fire Department on consolidation efforts or increased mutual aid assistance, will impact workload within the Dispatch Center, and future funding for personnel. Ukiah Fire Department and Ukiah Valley Fire Department Both fire agencies are in discussions on ways to increase service, including dropping current fire area boundaries and dispatch closest units to emergencies. Currently, UFD is dispatched from the City of Ukiah Dispatch Center, and UVFD is dispatched through CDF's Howard Forest Dispatch Center. Staff has been working with UFD on possible dispatching solutions, including sharing computer technologies with CDF's Howard Forest Dispatch Center. However, sharing computer related information with Howard Forest and continuing to dispatch UFD and possibly UVFD, may increase dispatcher work load. Ukiah dispatchers would still be required to answer the initial 911 calls, and determine the type of emergency service needed, and would then transfer the coordination and dispatching of fire and medical related services to Howard Forest. Preliminary estimates associated with contracting with Howard Forest for Ukiah Fire Department dispatch services, while still under negotiation, are estimated to be approximately $110,000 dollars a year. Currently, the Ukiah Fire Department contributes $187,752 general fund dollars to the dispatch budget annually for dispatching services. While the Dispatch Center would experience a slight decrease in workload, staffing levels could not be decreased, and the current costs associated with the Dispatch Center could not be reduced. 2 DISPATCH COMMUNICATIONS CENTER UPDATE Since September, staff has been researching and implementing a number of projects to assist dispatch workload within the communications center. Each of these projects has been highlighted and their progress summarized. 2. Mobile Computer Terminals To reduce dispatch workload, staff presented to the City Council in November of 2006, a plan for the deployment of Mobile Computer Terminals (MCT's) for emergency response vehicles. It is estimated that MCT's in emergency response vehicles reduce radio communication demands between field units and dispatch by up to 50%. MCT's rely on a wireless computer network, which enables a user to send and receive dispatch calls, access a variety of computer databases, communicate with other emergency responders and provide immediate status updates to their departments via laptop computers, instead of passing this information through a Dispatch Center via radio communications. These functions reduce dispatcher workload, by allowing in-field users direct access to information needed, and free dispatch personnel to focus on collecting additional information from an emergency caller, or turning their attention towards other emergency calls being received by the Dispatch Center. Although this complex project has taken over a year, it is nearing completion. Final approval to purchase the computers for the vehicles has been authorized by Council, and the complex computer networks and software are now in the testing phase. It is anticipated that the project will be completed in the spring of 2008. 3. Front Office and MCSO Dispatch Assistance This fall Staff met with MCSO and developed a cooperative effort to share Computer Aided Dispatch information systems. Staff also worked with the Ukiah Police Department front office staff, in an effort to reduce dispatch workload. As a result of these efforts, Council approved the purchase of three additional Computer Aided Dispatch software licenses. Two of these licenses were recently installed at the Ukiah Police Department front office area and records clerks are now being trained with the new systems. In the near future, records personnel will have the ability to enter calls for service and support many of the functions of the Dispatch Center from their work stations. In addition, plans are currently being worked on to give investigative personnel and the School Resource Officer access to computer aided dispatch information through the front office records clerks. The third license purchased will be installed at the MCSO Dispatch Center, and MCSO will be installing their Computer Aided Dispatch software at our Dispatch Center. This cooperative agreement will allow each dispatcher to view, enter, and modify on-going emergency traffic. Each dispatcher will also be able to remotely assist the other dispatcher during nighttime minimum staffing, or during critical events. Staff has been working with the IT staff to support the remote installation of our software at the MCSO Dispatch Center. A new fiber optic line between MCSO and UPD has been planned for installation at the MSCO Dispatch Center, early in 2008 to support this application. 3 DISPATCH COMMUNICATIONS CENTER UPDATE 4. Department of Justice Network Connection Recently, the department sent a records clerk and a dispatcher to a one day class in Cotati on managing our connection to the Department of Justice computer system. We recently developed a direct connection to Sacramento to assist the department in deploying the Mobile Computers to the Police and Fire vehicles. This direct connection will allow our field personnel to complete warrant, driver's license and vehicle checks without running those requests through the Dispatch Center. This will dramatically reduce dispatch work load once completed. Staff has been learning how to manage our department's users, provide them with training, and develop the security procedures required by the department to maintain the direct link with Sacramento. The City IT staff is currently working with the Department of Justice on network security related requirements for this project, and its implementation is planned for the spring of 2008. 5. Other State 911 Projects Impacting Dispatch Although not directly related to workload issues, a number of other large projects are currently impacting the Dispatch Center as outlined below. 911 System Upgrade Once every 5 years, the State of California 911 funds can be used to upgrade Dispatch Center 911 telephone equipment. The current system in our Dispatch Center is now over 5 years old, and is not compliant with new cell-phone and internet phone standards. Staff has applied for and obtained grant funding approval in the amount of $150,000 to replace or upgrade our current system. Since obtaining funding, staff has been researching vendor solutions to either upgrade or replace our current system. One possible solution is to upgrade our existing 911 system with new technology to become compliant with new 911 standards. A second solution that has been explored is to tie our 911 system to the MCSO dispatch 911 system. This solution although more complex, would utilize common servers and backroom hardware to support 911 calls at both Dispatch Centers. Support equipment would be stored at the MCSO facility, and 911 calls would be routed to our Dispatch Center through a fiber optic line. This approach would allow dispatchers from our agency and from MCSO to operate from a common platform, and would further enhance their ability to work in a team approach in crisis situations. Cellular 911 -GIS Mapping Project Historically, cellular phone 911 calls have been answered by the CHP Dispatch Center. Over the last few years, the State of California has been working on a project to shift these calls from the CHP centers, to the local Dispatch Center where the caller is located. To route the calls to the proper center, cell phone providers use GIS Mapping software and GPS transmitters in phones to send calls to the proper center. Using a phased approach, this technology has been placed throughout the State of California by geographic region. Our region, including all of Mendocino County, is now beginning the process of mapping and sending cell phone and internet callers to local Dispatch Centers. Final 4 DISPATCH COMMUNICATIONS CENTER UPDATE work has been started on the GIS Mapping portions of the project which will allow 911 calls to be routed to the proper Dispatch Center directly, rather than being routed through the CHP office. To assist in this transition, our Dispatch Center qualifies for $30,000 in State of California funding to help in deploying and maintaining the Mapping system. Staff has secured our authorization for funding and is currently working with State of California 911 and Mendocino County Dispatch Center representatives in the planning process of this project. Staff has also begun to research the software and hardware requirements needed to move forward with this project. AVL I GPS Mapping of Emergency Response Vehicles Along with the mapping of in-coming 911 calls from cell phones, staff has been working on incorporating real-time mapping of emergency response vehicles. With mapping systems in place, having the ability to send the closest police car, fire truck, or ambulance, will be greatly enhanced. Staff has included GPS signal antennas in our Mobile Computer Terminal specifications, to ensure once GIS Mapping software is installed, dispatchers will have the ability to track emergency response unit locations in real-time. This technology will allow dispatchers to quickly determine what emergency units are near a 911 related incident. Staff has provided this report to update the Council on the Dispatch Communications Center activities and respond to any questions you might have on its progress with addressing workload issues. 5 ITEM NO: toe DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: RECEIVE STATUS REPORT CODE COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES SUMMARY: This Agenda Item is intended to provide the Council with a brief status report concerning recent code enforcement activities. Attached is the code violation case log listing the case number and the type and status of each case. The City Council Code Violation Subcommittee has been meeting monthly since July. The Subcommittee consists of Councilmembers Crane and Thomas, the Planning Director and the Code Compliance Coordinator. The Subcommittee recently discussed the neighborhood enhancement code compliance program that has been focused on the Lockwood/Burlington Drive neighborhood, as well as the marijuana cultivation cases, and ways to measure success. Neighborhood Enhancement: The Code Compliance Coordinator has been visiting properties in the Lockwood/Burlington Drive neighborhood, identifying code violations, and distributing educational information. Thus far, approximately 150 property owners have received code information brochures. Identified violations include abandoned vehicles, trash and debris, overgrown vegetation, dilapidated structures, marijuana cultivation, and encroachments in the street right-of-way. Staff has witnessed progress with the removal of some abandoned vehicles, removal of overgrown vegetation, trash and debris, and right-of-way encroachments, and the repair and painting of structures. Other cases are on-going. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City Council Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Chris White, Code Compliance Coordinator Attachments: 1. Code Violation Case Log APPROVED: ~~ Candace Horsley, City anager V' Tota12007 Cases: 140 Total 2007 Cases Closed/Resolved: 85 Total Marijuana Cultivation Cases: 30 -While marijuana cultivation has primarily been a seasonal enforcement issue, strategies for enforcement earlier in the year are being discussed. The goal is to correct violations before the plants mature and become odorous and valuable. Measuring Success: Code compliance success has been measured by the number of violations that have been corrected, on-going monitoring, and reduced reoccurrence. An electronic case tracking sheet has been used to document cases, along with photographs and associated narrative. Staff is currently exploring computer software options for documenting and tracking cases that could also be used for preparing a variety of reports. Staff is also exploring how the Geographic Information System program can assist with documenting and mapping cases, and providing additional information. Staff will continue to provide brief monthly Status Reports to the City Council. In addition, monthly Status Reports will be provided to the Planning Commission to keep it informed of our code compliance efforts. 2 pttachmQ~~ # --~ c s U Q °I N~ NI ~I vl 'd 1 `rl a 1 NI NI T I `" U O e- ~I ~' ~I ~ Q T ~I r ~ r r- rn c r c 0 0 ~ ~ ~ I r 1 ~I ~' `I T' !' r 3I ~I ~ O TI !I !I `I r' ` { O N ~~ ~ ~I ~I ~I ~ O O d O 0 ~ O ~ O _N O ; N O l0 O (0 ~ O O 7 O d N ~ .- '~ :o o o a ~ a m v, 0 V C > c `° m a 0 U C > Q c n E s ~ o E ~' ~ -o r ~ ~ o o ~ y C O °o t a Y m m -O O E ~ m o U 'j w O o o c c m E a N L N n ~ o d o ~ j O ° o c c m E a o U C > ~ c a d a N N E ~ ~ o E °' ~ o> ~ o " ~ > ~i > O m ~ aai > a C O a ~ L 3 ~ Y ~ 3 O c ° o o ~ ~ > N y E o ~ o E °' ~7 O E ~ ~ o E o m N _ O ~ O ~ a~ o E m d m O ~ o ~ > ° ~ `-' y > d c o a ~ o E d N c o a ~ o E ~' N d ~' ~ o d o> E ~ ~ ° °a' >0 E D a ~ a d 3 ~ o a ~ a a-Oi 3 ~ C O a C O ~ N N o ~ d N o C U Q -o N N o C y a 'o N H o C U a C O v N N 0 -o N H 0 ~o N to 0 -o N N 0 -o N U1 0 -o N f~ 0 -o N N 0 -a N N 0 -o d N 0 v N N 0 'o d N 0 ~ d N 0 v N N 0 -o O N 0 a N N 0 O O D U O U O U O O D U U U U U U v U U U U U U U n 0 0 r 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 r 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 r 0 0 n 0 0 r 0 0 r 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 n 0 0 N ~n N ~ N .n N ~n N n N v~ N n N o N n N r N `n N ~n N n N in N in N N m N c N v N v N v N v N v N N N N N N N N N N ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ r U U U U U U U U U U ~ O d >O E E C ~ > E o N ~ r > O d > O E d i N > ¢~ c O Q1 ~ g N > d U p c ~ ~n > C (6 m ~ O x -O o > O E m ~ N > -O a~ > O E a~ ~ N > -O y > O E m u N > o o O E ~ d O E v o O E ~ > o ~ O ~ ~ y Y m E N - O c -o O Y `m E N - O c -'o N Y m E N - O c -o N Y `m E d = ~ c v y Y `m E N = O c -o y Y m E N - O c 'o O Y `m E N - O c a O Y m E N - O c -o O Y `m E d O \ v N Y m E N - o d a~ d U U U U O ~ O U N O O j' N C C C C N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U O O o c O O a O O O ~ O O a d ~ 0 c O O a N U O ~ 0 c O O a C 3 O O 0 c O O a O U U O O 0 `c_ O O a U U O O 0 c O O a O ~ 0 c O O d Q > ? w O O a C 3 O O 0 S O O a N ~ o c O O a y Y O E d r. O O nL, ~ y O E o ~ O O a ~ y O E 0 ~ O O a y y O E y O O a C 3 O O o ~ O O a L y U 0 c a Y ~ ~ L ~ U 0 c ~ Y ~ ~ L N U 0 c ~ Y ~ ~ L N U 0 c `v Y ~ ~ L °- N U 0 c -o Y ~ ~ L y U 0 c ~ Y ~ ~ L y U ~o c a Y ~ ~ L y U 0 c 'v Y ~ ~ L N U 0 c -o Y ~ ~ w 0 0 0 0 0 ' Y ~ a M N 0 Q 'a N o N C Q a c O h L N ~ s ~ E L ~p O U w` ~ n L N ~ a y a d f/1 `-' Q ¢ C > ~ a Q a '> c ` a L ~ '> m Y n`, L ~ '> m Y d L ~ ~> c Y d L ~ > m Y d L ~ 6 m Q a Q ¢ Q a Q a Q ¢ Q a Q ¢ Q a Q a n n r r n n n n n r r r n r n n n r r n n n n n n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 N 0 N r 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N W 0 N O~ 0 N ~ 0 N ~ 0 N m 0 N m 0 N ~ 0 N ~ 0 N O) ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- O) O N M V' l0 (O r OD W O ~ M ~ ~ CD r O O) O N M d) O O O O O O O O O O r r N N N N O r O ~ O n O r O n O ~ O ~ O n O n O n O n O r O r O n O ~ O ~ O r O n O n O ~ O n O ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 4' 4 N f W ~ { Q ~ m A = ! ` T r r r ! s ~ r t t ! r r' ~1 ~~ ~ N p„ ~ '~ ~ C ~ t ~ ~,: L C N N „n„ !I ~I rJr~ rI `-I ~~ `I ~ ` ~ N N c~'~ M r ITEM NO. lla DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF THE MEASURE X TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE GREATER UKIAH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT; APPROVAL OF A CORRESPONDING BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF 75% OF THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE GENERATED AND SUBSEQUENTLY COLLECTED FOR THE 2007 CALENDAR YEAR FROM THE 2% TOT MEASURE X INCREASE; AND CONSIDERATION OF REPRESENTATION ON THE TOT TASK FORCE. In 2006, the voters of the City of Ukiah approved Measure X which increased the transient occupancy tax (TOT) from 8% to 10%. The argument in favor stated that Measure X would help ensure that funds will be available for General Fund purposes, including promotion and tourism efforts, economic development, park development and maintenance, and recreation program scholarships. During discussions regarding Measure X, Council specified 75% of the additional revenue generated from the 2% increase for the first two years would be used to promote the City of Ukiah and the local tourism industry and 50% thereafter. Furthermore, Council specified that the Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce was best equipped to administer these funds given the Chamber's expertise and relationship with local businesses, the community, and tourism industry. Continued on Page #2 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1) Review and consider the TOT Measure X work plan and performance agreement with the Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce. 2) Authorize the Executive Director to negotiate and execute the Agreement. 3) Approve a corresponding budget amendment in the amount of 75% of the additional revenue generated and subsequently collected for the 2007 calendaryearfromthe 2% Measure X TOT increase. 4) If approved, provide direction for representation on the TOT Task Force. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Determine that the Work Plan and/or performance agreement requires revision and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: TOT Committee Requested by: Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce Prepared by: Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Gordon Elton, Director of Finance Attachments: 1 -Draft 2008 Performance Agreement with Work Plan APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City onager Under this directive over the course of the past year, the Chamber in consultation with a broad-based committee of individuals from the local tourism industry developed a TOT Measure X work plan with the objective of providing a quality promotional program on behalf of the Greater Ukiah area, the City of Ukiah, and its tourism industry. The work plan approved by the Chamber's Board of Directors is included as Exhibit A of Attachment #1 for review and consideration. As stated in the plan, there are two types of general expenses proposed forthe first year of implementation including those directly related to promotion and those related to building capacity to ensure that the community is prepared for a growing tourism industry. While the plan describes specifics, implementation will require continued oversight and possible modification as influences change. The Chamber will form and manage a TOT Task Force with the appropriate expertise to implement and further develop the work plan. Please note that representatives of the Chamber will be available at the meeting to provide additional background and answer specific questions regarding the plan. City Staff has prepared a draft performance agreement in an effort to detail the relationship with the Chamber regarding the TOT funds. The agreement is included as Attachment #1 for review. In summary, the term of the agreement is for one year from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008 and will include the disbursement of an estimated $90,000. The scope of services for the agreement is simply the work plan developed by the Chamber. However, the agreement ensures collaboration with the City with a provision that provides for up to two City representatives on the TOT Task Force. In addition, the agreement requires detailed progress and financial reports that include the requirement for quantifiable evidence of successful implementation of the various tasks and objectives undertaken over the course of the year. Staff requests that Council review and consider the work plan and performance agreement with the Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce, and if acceptable, authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute the agreement. Furthermore, Council will need to approve a corresponding budget amendment in the amount of 75% of the additional revenue generated and subsequently collected for the 2007 calendar year from the 2% Measure X increase. This amount is estimated at approximately $90,000. If these actions are approved, Staff requests that Council provide direction for representation on the TOT Task Force. Several Council members have been involved with the initial TOT work plan development process, but it may be judicious to have staff representation at this level. Council may wish to consider the Museum Director and the Economic Development Manager, given the inherentexpertise ofthese positions related to promotion and tourism (and past involvement with the development of the work plan). Council representation may not be necessary since Council members participate at the Board of Director level with the Chamber which will be overseeing the Task Force and the Council also has sole discretion over the performance agreement. 2 Attachment 1 TOT MEASURE X PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF UKIAH AND THE GREATER UKIAH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE This Agreement is made this 5th day of December, 2007, by and between the City of Ukiah, herein called "City," and the Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce, a California not for profit corporation formed pursuant to the laws of the State of California, herein called "Chamber." RECITALS 1. The City is desirous of creating a quality promotional program for the Greater Ukiah area, the City of Ukiah, and Ukiah's tourism industry. 2. In November 2006, the voters of the City of Ukiah passed Measure X which raised the transient occupancy tax (TOT) in the City from 8% to 10%. The ballet measure specified for the first two years, 75% of the additional revenue would be spent on promotion of the City of Ukiah and it's tourism industry, and 50% thereafter. 3. The City specified that the Chamber would administer and distribute the portion of funds identified by the City for a promotional program. 4. The Chamber has the ability and desire to develop and implement a promotional program on behalf of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above-recited facts and agreement contained herein, it is agreed as follows: A. TERM This Agreement shall be effective from January 1, 2008, and shall terminate on December 31. 2008. B. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Chamber shall carry on promotional activities with and on behalf of the City. These activities shall be carried on in cooperation and coordination with the City. These services shall include, but are not limited to the work plan attached as Exhibit A. C. REPRESENTATION The Chamber shall provide the City the option for two (2) representatives on the Chamber's TOT Task Force organized to develop and implement the work plan under the direction of the Chamber's Board of Directors. D. RECORDS. REPORTS AND ACCOUNTABILITY In addition to the agenda packets of the regular scheduled meetings of the Chamber's Board of Directors and the TOT Task Force supplied to the City's representatives, the Chamber shall furnish an written annual report by January 31, 2009 covering the prior year's activities and services defined in this agreement for the period from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008. The report shall include the type and scope of promotional activities implemented under this agreement; measures documenting the success of the promotional activities; and such other information that may be relevant to provide sufficient data to satisfy the terms and scope of this agreement. Such report shall identify and quantify all work program tasks and objectives completed during the term of this agreement and detail and quantify the impact of completed program objectives on promotion and tourism for the City of Ukiah. The report shall also itemize and quantify any uncompleted program work tasks or goals, provide justification for failure to complete any tasks or goals, and forward recommendations for how those tasks or goals might be successfully completed in the future. Chamber shall maintain a bookkeeping system and books of account in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles consistently applied, which outline the accounting and utilization of the City's funds paid to the Chamber for services defined in this agreement. The City shall have access to said books of account during regular business hours for purposes of inspection and audit. Chamber shall fully cooperate with the City and its agents and accountants during any such inspection and audit, including, but not limited to, making its employees, accountants, bookkeepers, or officials available to provide any requested information or documents. Chamber shall furnish a detailed financial report by December 31, 2008 covering the annual activities of the promotional program undertaken on behalf of the City. Furthermore, the Chamber shall provide a verbal report to the Ukiah City Council at a regular scheduled council meeting by January 31, 2009 detailing the activities defined in this agreement. The presentation shall include a summary of the items identified in the written reports. Any and all future Agreements between the Chamber and the City shall not only be predicated on the Chamber's on-going ability to accomplish the prescribed services contained in the "Scope of Services" and completion/submission of the identified reports, but also shall be dependent on the City's ability to garner available funds from its budget to support the Chamber. E. FINANCIAL COMPENSATION BY CITY In consideration of the Chamber's performance of the above services, and under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall pay the Chamber the sum of 75% of the additional revenue collected from the increase in transient occupancy tax from S% to 10% for the 2007 calendar year. This sum of money shall constitute the entirety of the City's financial contribution to the Chamber for the term and scope of services detailed in this Agreement. Chamber shall submit a written request for the release of funds from the City and within 15 business days thereafter the City shall pay the Chamber. F. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION During the term of this Agreement, the Chamber agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, and employees from and against any and all claims, losses, defense costs, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents, and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property as a result of, arising out of, or in any manner connected with the Chamber's performance under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole and active negligence of the City. Without limiting the Chamber's indemnification, it is agreed that the Chamber shall maintain in force at all times during the performance of this Agreement, the following policy or policies of 2 insurance approved by the City and issued by admitted California insurers approved by the City covering its operations: 1. Comprehensive General Liability, including contractual liability, products, and completed operations and business automotive liability, all of which shall include coverage for both bodily injury and property damage with a combined single limit of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000). 2. Worker's Compensation coverage at statutory limits. 3. The certificates of insurance and endorsements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City. Should the Chamber fail to comply with this paragraph then, the City shall have the right to immediately terminate this Agreement without further notice to Chamber. G. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CHAMBER AND CITY Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as making the Chamber or any of its employees or representatives, the agent or employee of the City for any purpose, or any employee of the City an employee of the Chamber or creating between the City and the Chamber the relationship of legal partners or joint ventures. It is understood that the contractual relationship of the Chamber to the City is that of an independent contractor. H. TERMINATION FOR NON-PERFORMANCE Except as provided in paragraph D, if any party to this Agreement breaches any provision thereof, then the other party may give the defaulting party a notice to remedy such violation within thirty (30) days. The other party may terminate the Agreement: (a) if such violation is not remedied within said 30 days; (b) if the breach cannot be remedied within such time period; or (c) the defaulting party has not commenced efforts to cure the breach or fails to diligently complete steps necessary to cure the breach. Should this contract be terminated for breach on the part of the Chamber, compensation as provided in paragraph D, shall be refunded to the City on a prorata basis. A waiver by either party of performance of any provision of this Agreement shall not amount to a future waiver of the strict performance of such provisions or of any other provision of this Agreement. NON-PERFORMANCE DUE TO CONDITION BEYOND CONTROL OF PARTIES If either party is unable to perform its obligations under this Agreement due to conditions beyond its reasonable control, such as, but not limited to, changes in local, state, or federal laws or regulations arising form legislative changes, judicial interpretations of existing law, vote by the citizens of Ukiah, or administrative action, and not due to the fault or neglect of any party, such failure to perform shall not be deemed a violation of this Agreement provided the party whose performance is so prevented performs its obligation as soon as practicable after the occurrence of the event preventing performance under this Agreement. Such party shall use reasonable diligence to put itself again in a position to carry out its obligations hereunder, and in the event such party does not or cannot within a reasonable time put itself again in a position to do so, the other party may, at its option, terminate this Agreement. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS WAIVER OR MODIFICATION INEFFECTIVE UNLESS IN WRITING No waiver or modification of the Agreement or of any covenant, condition, or limitations herein contained shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by the party to be charged therewith. Furthermore, no evidence of any waiver or modification shall be offered or received in evidence in a proceeding, arbitration, or litigation between the parties arising out of or affecting this Agreement, or the rights or obligations of any party hereunder, unless such waiver or modification is in writing and duly executed. The provisions of this paragraph may not be waived, except as herein set forth. 2. SEVERABILITY In the event any section, subsection, provision, or clause of this Agreement or any combination thereof is found to be unenforceable at law, inequity, or under any presently existing or hereafter enacted legislation, regulation, or order of the United States, any state or subdivision thereof or any municipality, those findings shall not in anyway affect the other sections, subsections, provisions, or clauses of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, and the unenforceable provisions shall be interpreted in a manner that imposes the maximum restriction or obligation permitted by applicable law. Every provision of this Agreement is intended to be severable. If any term or provision hereof is illegal or invalid for any reason whatsoever, such illegality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the Agreement. 3. NOTICE Whenever notice is permitted or required by this Agreement, it shall be deemed given when deposited in the U.S. Mail with proper first class postage affixed thereto and addressed or personally delivered to: City of Ukiah Attention: City Manager 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482 4. DUPLICATE ORIGINALS Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce Attention: CEO 200 South School Street Ukiah, CA 95482 This Agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals each bearing the original signatures of the parties. When so executed, each such duplicate original shall be admissible to establish the existence and terms of this Agreement. 5. AUTHORITY The parties hereto acknowledge that they have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the entity that they represent as herein set forth below. 6. ARBITRATION (a) All claims or controversies, disputes and other matters in question arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach hereof, shall be decided by binding arbitration. On the written request of either party served on the other party shall be submitted to arbitration. Arbitration shall comply with and be governed by the provisions of the California Arbitration Act. The award rendered by the arbitrators shall be final, and judgment may be entered upon it in accordance with the laws of the State of California in any court having jurisdiction thereof. Arbitration shall be conducted at a situs in the County of Mendocino, State of California. (b) The arbitrator shall be a person mutually agreed upon by Chamber and City within 30 days notice of either party's request for arbitration. If the parties cannot agree upon an arbitrator, they shall each appoint one arbitrator. The two persons so appointed shall select a third impartial arbitrator whose decision shall be final and conclusive upon both parties. (c) The charges, expenses and fees of the arbitrator(s) shall be borne and paid fifty (50%) percent by the disputing party instituting the arbitration and the balance by the other party. The cost of arbitration shall be borne by the losing party or in such proportions as the arbitrator decide. At such time as the arbitrator determines who is the prevailing party, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award, which represents the charges, expenses and fees of arbitration, and an award for attorney fees and costs. (d) Notice of demand for arbitration shalt be filed in writing with the other party. The demand for arbitration shall be made before the date when the institution of legal or equitable proceeding based upon such claim, dispute or other matter would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. By the parties initials below each of them hereby acknowledges that they have read, understood and agree to be bound by the arbitration provisions stated herein above. City of Ukiah Candace Horsley, City Manager GREATER UKIAH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Bert Mosier. CEO Jan Bell, Chairperson of the Board 7. ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS If any action is commenced, whether suit is filed or not, to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement, or to determine if the contract has been breached, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs, and necessary disbursements in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. This provision shall be construed as applicable to the entire contract. 8. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either, oral or in writing, between the parties hereto with respect to the terms and conditions contained herein, and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to this Agreement in any manner whatsoever. Each party to this agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreements, statement, or promise not contained in this agreement shall be valid or binding. 9. GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION This agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California as they apply to a contract entered into and performed in that State. Jurisdiction shall be in Mendocino County, California. 10. PLAIN MEANING This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with its plain meaning, neither for nor against any party. 11. HEADINGS AND CONTEXT The headings of this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and do not define, limit or extend the scope or intent of this agreement or any provision thereof. When the context permits, a word or phrase used in the singular means the plural and when used in any gender, its meaning also includes all genders. 12. MERGER This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties as to the terms and conditions contained herein, all previous understandings being merged herein. 13. ADEQUATE ASSURANCES Each party shall execute, acknowledge and deliver such additional documents, writings or assurances as the other may periodically require so as to give full force and effect to the terms and provisions of this Agreement. 14. CONSTRUCTION OF AGREEMENT This Agreement has been reviewed by separate counsel for both parties. Any ambiguity existing in this Agreement shall not be construed against either party as the drafter of this Agreement. 15. TIME Time is of the essence of this Agreement. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by the City of Ukiah and the Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce, by their duly authorized representatives, on the day and year first above written. BY SIGNATURE HEREUNDER, THE PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BIND THE ORGANIZATION ON WHOSE BEHALF THEY EXECUTE THIS 6 DOCUMENT; READ THIS ENTIRE AGREEMENT; HAVE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE OBLIGATIONS, RIGHTS, DUTIES, AND LIABILITIES WHICH ARISE AS A RESULT OF THEIR EXECUTION BELOW; AND ARE IN RECEIPT OF A COPY HEREOF. CITY OF UKIAH GREATER UKIAH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Candace Horsley, City Manager Bert Mosier, CEO APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jan Bell, Chairperson of the Board David Rapport, City Attorney ATTEST: Linda Brown, City Clerk 7 GREATER UKI.~I-I CI-UMBER OF COMMERCE 200 SOU'I'II SCI IOOI. S'PILEli1', UKIAtI, CA 95482 • VI-IONIi 462-4705 • ~nX 462-2D88 TOT MEASURE X WORKPLAN BACKGROUND Exhibit A Measure X, passed by the voters of the City of Ukiah in November 2006, raised the transient occupancy tax (I'OT-also known as the "bed tax' to the City from 8% to 10%. The ballot measure specified for the First two years, 75% of the additional revenue would be spent on promotion of the City of Ukiah and it's tourism industry, and 50% thereafter. The ballot measure also specified that the TOT funds were to be administered and distributed by the Great Ukiah Chamber of Commerce according to a plan developed by a broad-based committee oEindividuals Erom the tourism industry. I-Iowever, as the process moves Forward into workplan implementation, asmaller TOT Turk Fnrre, consisting of seven members working under the direction of the Greater Ukiah Area Chamber of Commerce board of directors, will replace the TOT Committee. The TOT Committee, which developed the proposed workplan, included the following individuals: • Tom Eiden, Ukiah Main Street Program Chairperson • Michelle Johnson, Mendocino Wine Company • Glenna Blake, MTA & MCPA Boazd member • Don Ballek, City of Uldah Economic Development/EDFC Director • Sherri Smith-Ferri, Grace Hudson Museum • Jitu Ishwaz, Ukiah hoteliers (Holiday Inn Express) • Bret Cooperrider, Mendocino County Restaurant Association (Ultiah Brewery) • Stuart Marcus, Mendocino County Lodging (Shambhala Ranch) &MCPA • Jennifer Seward, Redwood Empire Fairgrounds CEO • ]an Bell, Ukiah Chamber of Commerce Chairperson • Dert Mosier, Ukiah Chamber of Commerce CEO • Kumar Plocher, Yokayo BioEuels, Inc Prior to commencing the wont of the TOT Committee, The Chamber uiitiated an educational process Eor board members and other interested community members by inviting Mr. Cliff Chapman from the Fortuna Chamber of Commerce to share Formna's experiences in developing a similar progt~am. Mr. Chapman advised those present to be prepared for success, before beginning a marhedngprogram. This advice was carried through the planning process and has informed the proposed plan at many levels. The objective of the Measure X initiative is to provide a quality pcomotiomd program on belmlf of the Greater Ukiah area, the City of Ukiah and its tourism industry. COMMUNITY ASSETS, ATTRACTIONS, AND OPPORTUNITIES The TOT Committee began its work in February of 2007 with a series of meetings to identify community assets, attractions, events, partners, and marketing opportunities as a basis for producing the workplan. "1"he committee members Eound this an enriching experience, discovering many community assets previously unknown and developing ways to translate these assets into increased tourism dollazs Eor Ukiah. The Findings from the inventory of assets, attractions, and events identified by the TOT Committee are shown below to illustrate the breadth of promotional opportunities that exist Eor Uldalt. Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce TOT Workp].an Page 2 OUTDOOR RECREATION The greater Ukiah area and Mendocino County aze fortunate to have public lands that are accessible. The opportunities for outdoor tourism are expansive. The Task Force will continue to look at inventive ways to leverage those rerseaion dollars into more merchant dollars. • Lake Mendocino • Cow Mountain South, Motorized Equipment Allowed, ATV, Motorcycles • Cow Mountain -North, Equestrian, Mountain Biking, Walking Trails • Montgomery Woads • Nature Based Tourism Initiative • Ukiah Valley Trails Group • City of Ukiah Muniupal Golf Course • Fairgrounds-Motorcross track, space Eor other events • Disc GoIF • Share Park • Fish I-Iatchery • Low Gap Park • Russian River II. ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT The cotnmunity has access fo many Eorms of entertainment including theatre, music, photography, visual arts, and area-wide events and festivals that showcase Ukiah. In the Uliah Valley, art is business. The Task Force will continue to explore options on expanding some or all of these events by collaborating with arts organizers. Arts Organizations Mendocino Arts Commission S.P.A.C.E. Ukiah Players Theatre Mendocino College Grace Hudson Museum Music Sundays in the Park Acoustic Cafe-Ukiah Music Center Summer Grillin' Series-Paxducci Ukiah Brewery-Local Band Showcase Band Slam Dig Music Events • Events Pumplin Felt Pure Mendocino Lit Pest I-Iaiku Festival I-Iopland Passport Weekend Flashback Car Show Taste of Downtown Taste oERedwood Valley Motorcycle Show Farmers Market Small Town Christmas I Ioliday Showcase Redwood Empire Fair III. OFF-SEASON PROMOTIONS A great asset of Ukiah is the Ukiah Valley Conference Centex, astate-of-the-art conference facility. Meeting capacity ranges from 10-600 people. There are eight meeting rooms, each with wireless-Internet access and telecommunications book-ups. A commercial ]citchen and full Eood service are available, with support staff. The Task Force will work in conjunction with the center's director on ways to maximize this wonderful asset. • Educational Seminars-Organics, food • Collector Conventions and or Trade and wine Shows • Ag and Farm Tours • Specialty Ma$wts Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce TOT Workplan Page 3 IV. WINE, WINEGRAPE, AND VINEYARDS Weekend opporturities for "city people" who want to hear great music, drink great wine and/or beer, and eat at a local restaurant are abundant. Crossover marketing opportunities with travelers interested in Mendocino County's expansive organics industry are also present. Mendocino County wine has captured the attention of wine connoisseurs worldwide. With attention focused on the area already, we must work wide out partners to capitalize on this interest. How do we collaborate with the Wine and Wine Grape Comnussion to leverage dollars? Possible Package opportunities for exclusive behind the scene tours. 1. Walking tours of vineyards Z. Stomp the grapes (experiential tourism) 3. Puticipatein grape harvest 4. Expanded opporhmities Eor wine tasting 5. Bio Fuel tour bus V. ORGANICS/GREEN In[eresttn organics and green industry is a trend that continues to grow nationwide. This category crosses over into many other sections of life in Ukiah and Mendocino County. This section has high potential For grant opportunities that will help grow events that showcase what is unique abouC Ukiah and Mendocino County. • Mendocino County is seen as a leader in the nation • Cross ovex in every sector, Food, Wine, Outdoor Recreation, and Lifestyle • Possible recogtudon from the State of California for Mendorno County • Farmers Market • Real Goods, a destination stop, on Interstate 101 • Locally raised and/or made (Beef, Cheese, BuEEalo and other local products) • Winc • r-ona • Puce Mendo Event • Bio fuel Tour Buses (Bring the tourists to us, using our own buses powered by bio- fuel made locally.) VI. TOURISM INDUSTRY PARTNERS "Ukiah" needs to get on [he radar screen of the state and take advantage of existing programs. At dre present time adequate information about Ukiah is lacking in the oEFicial State of California guide. Plans arc to invite a representative from die State of California Travel & Tourism Division to our community to learn more about partnering with them. The Task Force wilt also investigate other programs such as regional travel and tourism groups and USDA Rural Development and other options as they become available. • State Tourism Guide • Grants Eor Rural Communities • USDA Rural Development • Promoting Tourism in Rural America • Historic Tourism • Redwood Empire Association 3c The Northern California Visitors Bureau • San Francisco Visitors Center • Ag Tourism • Nature-Based Tourism Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce 'I'OT Workplan Page 9 VII, UNIQUELY UKIAH- WHO WE ARE! Soul tourism (get in touch with yourself) Civic Tourism -Revolves around unique cultures/heritage and ecology. Eco-Green Tourism -Encourages environmentally responsible travel. • 1-lofistic Health Care -The concept of traveling to a particular destination Eor alternative health care. Explore Mendocino County Develop an "Explorers Club" of Ukiah. Ukialt and Mendocino County residents are sometimes too close to home to really appreciate what the area has to offer. This program could be a dues-based membership program that encourages locals and others to look at the area with new eyes. Learn more about Ukiah and Mendouno County! Suggested elements of study are: 1. People-to learn more about unique places to tape friends and relatives 2. Architecture-past, present and future 3. Cuisine-the many tastes of Mendocino County 4. Commerce-more money spent in local merchant's businesses 5. History-who we axe, how we got here and the unique stories waiting to be told 6. Geography-learn more about where you live and edurnte visitors 7. Art-cultural, geographical or cutting edge, its all here locally. 8. Customs-share cultural diversity and differences to educated others Organized events along with a quaxtedy 1r-newsletter could be used to entice members to participate. Results and/or information through this organization would be a beneficial tool in keeping a current community asset list. The TOT Task Force will continue to explore this opportunity that could geneta[e revenue for promotions. TOT WORKPLAN ELEMENTS The TOT Workplan developed by the TOT Committee can be viewed as comprising nvo general types of expenses. There are expenses that are direcdy related to promotion and those that relate to "preparing for success", which means building capacity internally at the Chamber and amongst partners to ensure that the community is prepared when tourism builds. Below is the proposed budget for the T'OT Workplan with line item detail following. I. BUDGET Projected Income Total 90,000.00 Projected Expenses Capadty-blrildiag expenrer Table Tents ................. ° ----.............. .........4,000.DO Bookkeeping.-----° ...... ........ . .. .... .- - ... ---- 960.00 Pazt time staff-----------------------------°------ ---------8,640.00 Storage Unit .............................. ...• °- -- -~-~ GGO.DO Chamber Administration (Q10%)--------- ---------9,000.00 Contract Fulfillment Costs„------------------ ---------4,200.00 Pick up & Delivery ................°----°---... .........1,000.00 Postage.------ -° °----- --- -- ... ° -. .........4,840.00 Website &Ted~nology ........................... .........4,000.00 Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce Promotion TOT Grants--------------- ° ° --° -- -----. ....-° --00,000.00 Hear I-Iere: Ukiah Story Project .......... ..........11,700.00 Dxodmres.---- °° .................. ...... ... ...........•5,500.00 Mendocino Film OfBce ..................... ............3,000.00 North Coast Tourism ......................... ............5,000.00 SF Visitor Center Fee_ ....................... ............1,500.00 Association Fces-------------------------------- ------------1,000.00 Marketing Opportunities .................... ............'+,500.00 Misc. office expense--------------------------- -------------- 500.00 Projected Expenses Total 90,000.00 II. $UDGET LINE ITEM DETAIL T01' Workpl.an Page 5 • Table Tents: Table tents for dining establishments and hotels 50,000 @ $0.08/each = $4,000.00 • Bookkeeping: Susan David $80.00 per month = $960.00 per year to sct up an accounting system and provide monthly reports. • Part time staff: Part-time position 20hrs per week ®$9.00 pee hour = $8,640.00 per year • Storage Unit: Storage unit -$ 55.00 per month (space for fulfillment materials). • Chamber Administration: Anew TOT bank account will be setup specifically for these funds. The Greater Ukiah Chamber C)r0 will provide direction and oversight of the TOT progt-am. 10% _ $9,000. • Contract Fu1fi1/menG Will provide assistance with large mailings, Mayacama Industries estimates that at full production they will be able to produce 2,500 packets per weep if needed. a. 7 piece packet, assembled, with label and postage applied - $0.12 each -cost without postage b. 9 piece paclket, assembled with label and postage applied - $0.14 each -cost without postage e. Pick up and delivery charges, per week, include picking up labels at the chamber office, delivering packets to the Post Office, picking up inventory and supplies from storage-$20,00 per week. • Pick-up and Delivery: Contract provider will pidk-up Erom storage, assemble, and then drop of the post office • Postage: Cost of mailing requested materials. • Website and Technology: Software and updates. • Grant Opportunities within the TOT Program: The TOT Committee decided to allocate $20,000 For a competitive grant program to help develop new or Oedgling market opportunities and/or events that will promote Uldah. The grant selection committee will be comprised of aseven-member committtee. The TOT Task Porce will develop guidelines and awacd ¢iteria for this program. (Please see example application attached to this workplan.) • Ukiah Story Project HERE HEAR: Hear is based upon a project carried out in Toronto called [murmutJ. [murmur] is a documentary oral history project that records stories and memories told Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce TOT Wor.kplan Page 6 about specific geographic locations. [murmur] organizers collect and make accessib{e people`s personal histories and anecdotes about the places in their neighborhoods that are important to them. In each of these locations [murmur] organizers install a [murmur] sign with a telephone number on it that anyone can call with a mobile phone to listen to that story while standing in that exact spot, and engaging in the physical experience oEbeing right where the story takes place. Some stories suggest that the listener walk around, following a certain path through a place, while others allow a person to wander with both their Eeet and their gaze. The stories that are recorded range from personal recollections to more "historic" stories, or sometimes both-but always aze told Erom a personal point oEview, as iE the storyteller is just out for a stroll and was casually talking about their neighborhood to a Friend. It's history from the ground up, told by the vices drat ere often overlooked when the stories of cities are told. We often know about the standard landmarks, but Hear Ilexe will look for die intimate, neighborhood-level voices that tell the day-to-day stories that make up our city. The smallesC, greyest or most nondescript building will be transformed by the stories that live in it Once heard, these stories can change the way yeople think about that place and the city at large. (Please see attached information for the Ukiah Story Project) Advertising sales opportunities will be possible with Kiosks, please see attadlmenL) • Brochures: Ukiah promotional brochure-cost of printing 50,000 packets @ $0.] ]/each = $s,soo.oo • Mendocino Film Once: Helps promote Ukiah to movie/Film industry • North Coast Tourism: Regional tourism organization (collaborative marketing opportunities). • San Francisco Visitor Center Fee: Brochure placement. • Association Fees: Memberships for touristn organizations. • Marketing Opportunities: Marketing opportunities that may arise during this budget year. • Miscellaneous o;7ce expense: Office supplies. III. ACTION ITEMS AND TIMELINE • December 13th 2007-Begin design oFUkiah Broclmre • January 10th 2008-TOT Taslt Force Meeting • January 10th 2008 -Begin Proper Signage Placement Program project. o Look for ways to parmet with the State of California for signage on lntetstate l01 o Worlt with the City of Ukiah and Mendocino County, tourist information signage in place through out the greater Ukiah area. o Begin work with GPS placement companies; provide update information Eor proper display. • February 22nd 2008-TOT Task Force Meeting • March 2008-Ukiah brochures in stock ready as a fulfillment piece • March 2008-Ad Placements (Sunset Magazine, Comcast TV Ads, radio etc.} • Remainder of 2008-Continue with planning and implementation Greater Ukiah Chamber of Commerce IV. COLLADORATIVE PARTNERS TOT Workplan Page 7 The Greater Uldah Chamber oECommeue and the City of Ukiah look forward to worlung in a collaborative effort with all interested parries to further enhance the promotional effort of the greater Ulvah area. I3y working together, resources will be maximized; partnerships formed, and quaGry promotional programs evil] be developed. • City of Ukiah • Ukiah Restaurant/Mendocino County • Mendocino County Restaurant Association • gomendo.com • Willits Chamber of Commerce • Wine and Wine Grape Commission • Mendocino Coast Chamber of Commerce • Mendocino Film Commission • Lake County • Mendocino County Lodging Association • Bureau of Land Management • State of California • Corps of)/ngineers • 101 things to do in Mendocino County • Sauth Caast Chamber of Commerce • Ukiah Main Street Program • Local, State and National Media sources • Ukiah Hoteliers SUMMARY The ever-expanding tottrism market in dtc Greater Ukiah area is one with great potential and many marketing options. The TOT task force will continue to explore the best marketing opportunities as more TOT' funds become available. ~7 ~ o ° C7 G7 -o ~ y~ ~ ~ T. 0 ~ _o m ~ 3 ~ ~ fn o ~ m C _> D v, m ai o' > m m ~ v. m ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ 3 o ~ v ~ C1 ~ m m n 3 ~ ~ N D ~ m O ~ v, n ~ D ~ ~ p ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ < ~ o ~~ m n o ~' ~ O ~ ~ 4. ° T < ~ n ~ m l ~ ~ ~~ O v 'O 2 m m m m o m ~. o~ ~ ~ o ~ v m ~ ~ C7 - ° m ~ °' N ~ o. ~ O ~ f/1 3 W o o o m ~~ N m c ~ p ~ ~ ~ m ~ u, -I m v -i m ~ m ~' ~ W ~ c m ~~ o ° ~ p m < ~c ~ W o s c (p -~ m ~ o ~ ~ N D o 0 3 m O (D L X x X x x x X x x X x x X X ~ T x x x x x x x o 3 x x x x x x x x o m D x x x x x x x o x x x x x x x o x x x x x x o x x x x x x x x o D x x x x x x ~ y x x x x x x o 0 x x x x x o z x x x x x v x x x x x o x x x x x x x x x x x x °~ x x x x ~ 3 x x x x o D x x x x ~ 3 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x D x x x x N x x x x x o 0 x x x x x z x x x x x v x x x x o O 0 x n w a w ~~ ~, r ~~ p-,~ P ~' / ,.~ r~< ITEM NO: i i h MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING REQUEST FROM MENDOCINO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER INITIATIVES ON PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS The Board of Commissioners of Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority (MSMWA) has sent out a letter through Chair Doug Crane (Attachment 1) requesting that each of the cities and county agencies discuss and comment on the desirability of ordinances which would prohibit use of plastic carryout bags at stores in Mendocino County. The City of Willits' Council has discussed this issue and directed their MSWMA representative to continue discussions of a plastic bag prohibition. Mike Sweeney, General Manager for MSWMA will be in attendance to make a presentation to the City Council on this issue and answer any questions that you may have. Also, attached is information on this issue from Michael Sweeney (Attachment 2) and a November 12, 2007 letter (Attachment 3) from the California Grocers Association. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and provide direction to MSWMA representative Crane. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: n/a Citizens Advised: Mike Sweeny Requested by: Vice Mayor Crane Prepared by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. MSWMA correspondence dated October 30, 2007 2, MSWMA correspondence dated November 26, 2007 3. CA Grocers Association correspondence dated November 12, 2007 Approved: Horsley, ATTACHMENT' / Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority P.O. Box 123 Ukiah, CA 95482 October 30, 2007 Mayor Mazi Rodin City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 RE: Plastic shopping bags Dear Mayor Rodin & Council Members: The Board of Commissioners of the Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority has considered the issue of plastic shopping bags following recent actions in our region and throughout the world. Plastic shopping bags are a drain on natural resources and a particulaz threat to wildlife. There are a variety of responses to this problem, ranging from a new California law that promotes plastic bag recycling; to fees charged for plastic bags by Ireland and the IKEA stores; to the outright prohibition on plastic bags enacted by San Francisco and Oakland. Enclosed aze background materials on the issue. The MSWMA Board believes that any new initiative in Mendocino County should be uniform among the four cities and the unincorporated county. The MSWMA Board invites the city council to comment on the desirability of ordinances which would prohibit use of plastic carryout bags at stores in Mendocino County. Our General Manager, Mike Sweeney, is available to provide additional information on request. Sincerely, ~-MENDOCINO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY /~ ~ ~ ~~-act-v-C _ -----_ Doug~Crane, Chairman enclosure Findings, AB 2449 SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (a) On a global level, the production of plastic bags has significant environmental impacts each year, including the use of over 12 million barrels of oil, and the deaths of thousands of marine animals through ingestion and entanglement. (b) Each year, an estimated 500 billion to 1 trillion plastic bags are used worldwide, which is over one million bags per minute, and of which billions of bags end up as litter each year. (c) Most plastic carryout bags do not biodegrade, but photodegrade, which means that the bags break down into smaller and smaller toxic bits that contaminate soil and waterways and enter in the food web when animals accidentally ingest those materials. 1 he Problem of i'lastic Bags ! C.:,itornians Against Waste 2449 ° Understanding the Resin Identification Code =~~~kl What's the Best Strategy for Reducing Toxics in Consumer Electronics?: File Prop 65 Lawsuits Against Electronics Manufacturers Establish Advance Disposal Fees on all Toxic Electronics Require Manufacturers to Establish Takeback Opportunity Prohibit Sale of Toxic Electronics (Consistent with EU RoHS Directive) Mandate Local Governments to Establish & Finance Recycling Do Nothing -- Toxic E-waste is Not a Serious Problem Vote `~ fs:'~ ~i:~~~~ql Page 3 of d million annually to deal with plastic bag litter-that equates to roughly 17 cents for every bag distributed in the city. Additionally: . It costs the state $25 million annually to landfill discarded plastic bags. . Public agencies in California spend in excess of $303 annually in litter abatement. .Southern California cities have spent in excess of $1.7 billion in meeting Total Maximum Daily Loads for trashed in impaired waterways. . Cities and Recyclers spend incalculable amounts removing plastic bags from their recyclables stream, where the jam machinery and add to the manual labor costs of recycling. Beyond the economic costs, plastic ~` bags area blight to our marine w.<r environment as well. We have all seen plastic bags in transit to our rivers and oceans-trapped in trees or in storm gutter drains-but it is less often that we see the full environmental affects of plastic bags. http:/Jww~~.cawrecyc les.org/plastic_campainglplastic _bags/problem'?PHPSESSID-1 Se 1845 73 83... 10/29/2007 ! \ '/ / , C ~ _~ - t. -'~; -t~ - j G%C° f- I~..c:: ~:. <., l_.-/1 / i i c''r'\ .'mss (.-i, t ~~t;'- O cJ Global Costs: In 2003 the Government of Bangladesh realised that almost the entire floor of the Buriganga River in Dhaka was covered in plastic bags. The river was dying and the main waterway of one of the world's biggest cities was in big trouble, and so was its people. In 2003 Bangladesh passed a law banning plastic bags throughout the country. People are encouraged to use bags made from jute, a natural fiber. • In Nepal, plastic bags litter the environs around Mount Everest, left there by intrepid but thoughtless travelers. The Nepalese Government has also moved to ban the use of plastic bags in the area. • The Irish government has decided to do something to discourage people from using so many bags -tax them. Shoppers who want items in a plastic bag pay about 20 cents extra per bag. • The Red Sea and its unique marine life is in danger from the litter of thousands of plastic bags. Friends of the Earth in Jordan, Egypt and Israel want the area near the Gulf of Aquiba to be a plastic bag-free zone. ~7.~t~~~.~~ ' ~~` S~~` ~ ~_1 ~C- ~~~;9r_ v Compostable Grocery Bap Legislation Issues Summary In Favor of - Against - SF Environment[ , California Grocers' Association2 Compostable plastic bags can be composted and rovide a reat benefit to customers: _ • All compostable grocery bags will be • Limited opportunities exist to compost accepted in [he citywide curbside green bin carryout bags in comparison with collection program. After 10 years of in- established and growing options for store plastic bag recycling programs an carryout bag recycling. estimated I% recovery of all bags are • Compostable carryout bags will only being recycled. compost if commercially composted. • Norcal, the company that operates Golden Gate Recycling and Sunset Scavenger, endorses the current compostable bags le islation. Letter attached. • San Francisco has set the goal to achieve • Compostable carryout bags not industrially 75% recycling rate by 2010 and zero waste composted will end up in a landfill, by 2020. Tfiis goal can only be achieved if resulting in no waste diversion gain. there is greater participation in the green Nothing biodegrades in modem landfills. cart program. • Residents will he able to use compostable bags to fill with food scraps and place them in their green bin. Studies show [hat [his helps reluctant residents participate in the composting program and get over any °ick factor" associated with collecting food scraps. • A recent study found 40% of all waste still going to the landfill is compostable, which results in signiftcant greenhouse gas emissions from even state of the art modem landfills. • Compostable bags, under the ordinance, Educating the public about placing ONLY will be required to have large, clear and compostable bags in their compost containers color-coded labeling so residents can easily for collection will be very difficult and will no identify which cart the bags go into. Non- doubt result in normal plastic bags compostable plastic bags are already a contaminating the compost stream. significant contaminant in the compost stream. Having easily available and clearly labeled compostable bags will Likely reduce significantly [he use of non- compostable bags in the composting process. f-- ~ Arguments in favor and responses [o Grocer's Association concerns provided by SF Environment ' From ahand-out distributed a[ [he SPUR Sustainable Development Committee Page 1 of 4 compostable Grocery Bag Legislation Issues Summary tar et stores. ~ Increased costs and lack of availability , • Replacing plastic bags with compostable Consumers will ultimately bear the cos[ of bags may in the long run help keep garbage mandating the use of a more expensive rates down because diverting [he bags from carryout bag. landfill into the compost system will save landfill costs. In the short term, there will be no additional costs incurred to establish curbside collection for compostable bags. • The current and predicted production • There are serious concerns about the capacity of compostable plastic bag availability of compostable plastic carryout manufacturers can meet likely demand bags -they do not exist in a marketable for uantit and ualit quantity and quality. Bag Reduction agreement results • None of the grocery stores that signed the. • The grocery industry is extremely proud of agreement to reduce bag use by 10 million and pleased with [he results of the bags over the course of the year supplied voluntary plastic bag reduction agreement data by the agreed upon deadline. between participating retailers and the City • Even after the city granted athree-week and County of San Francisco. extension, the data submitted was not in a • As evidence by the preliminary numbers, form that could be verified. Therefore, no there has been a remarkable and dramatic bag reduction can be confirmed. reduction in the number of bags used by grocery retailers in SF. • Grocers and consumers have collaboratively worked to increase rec clin and reduce bag usage. AB2449, which Grocers worked to pass • in Sacramento, precludes cities from charging fees for grocery bags, and prevents cities from asking grocery stores any questions about the number of bags they use. Based on this legislation it would not be possible to extend the bag reduction agreement into future years in any meaningful way because we could not ask for bag reduction data. • Page 3 of 4 i ~,-v' i r.fc i is ei_as i iC tiAG KEVUCTION OKDINANCE Page 2 of i renewable based product content is maximized over time as set forth in Department of the Environment regulations; (4) conforms to requirements to ensure that products derived from genetically modified feedstocks are phased out over time as set forth in Department of the Environment regulations; and (5) displays the phrase "Green Cart Compostable" and the word "Reusable" in a highly visible mamler on the outside of the bag. (c) "Checkout bag" means a carryout bag that is provided by a store to a customer at the point of sale. (d) "Department" means the Department of the Environment. (e) "Director" means the Director of the Department of the Environment. (f) "Highly visible manner" means (1) for compostable plastic bags, displaying both of the following in green lettering contrasting with the bag's background color that is at least two inches high: (i) the phrase "Green Cart Compostable" "either on the front and back of the bag together with a solid green band at least one-half inch thick circling the circumference of the bag, or repeatedly, as a band of text or text alternating with solid stripe, circling the circumference of the bag, and (ii) the word "Reusable" displayed on the front and/or back of the bag; and (2) for recyclable paper bags, displaying the words "Reusable" and "Recyclable" on the front and/or back of the bag in blue lettering contrasting with the bag's background color that is at least two inches high, and (3) for both compostable plastic bags and recyclable paper bags, as otherwise required by Department of the Environment regulations. (g) "Person" means an individual, trust, firm, joint stock company, corporation, cooperative, partnership, or association, (h) "Pharmacy" means a retail use where the profession of pharmacy by a pharmacist licensed by the State of California in accordance with the Business and Professions Code is practiced and where prescriptions (and possibly other merchandise) are offered for sale, excluding such retail uses located inside a hospital. (i) "Recyclable" means material that can be sorted, cleansed, and reconstituted using San Francisco's available recycling collection programs for the purpose of using the altered form in the manufacture of a new product. Recycling does not include burning, incinerating, converting, or otherwise thermally destroying solid waste. (j) "Recyclable Paper Bag" means a paper bag that meets all of the following requirements: (1) contains no old growth fiber, (3) is 100% recyclable overall and contains a minimum of 40%post-consumer recycled content, and (3) displays the words "Reusable" and "Recyclable" in a highly visible manner on the outside of the bag. (k) "Reusable Bag" means a bag with handles that is specifically designed and tittp:/Jwtivw.mm~icode.comicontentl420 ] / l 413~31HTML/ch017.html 10/391 3007 i ii:~r i rrc i is t~~a~ I ICdAG Kh_llU~`flO~'~' OKDiN~1NCE PIIgC '~ Ot J (b) In the event that the City adopts an ordinance creating a procedure for the City Administrator to impose and review Administrative Penalties pursuant to California Government Code Section 53069.4, the City may impose Administrative Penalties for violation of this Ordinance as follows: (I) in an amount not exceeding $100.00 for the first violation, (2) in an amount not exceeding $200.00 for the second violation in the same year, and (3) in an amount not exceeding $500.00 for each subsequent violation in the same year. (c) The City Attorney may seek legal, injunctive, or other equitable relief to enforce this Ordinance, including without limitation, civil penalties in an amount not exceeding $200.00 for the first violation, $400.00 for the second violation, and $600.00 for each subsequent violation in any given year. (d) The City may not recover both administrative and civil penalties for the same violation. (Added by Ord. 51-07, File No. 070085, App. 4/20/2007) SEC. 1706. OPERATIVE DATE. All of the requirements set forth in this Ordinance shall become operative as to Stores that are supermarkets six (6) months after its effective date. All of the requirements set forth in this Ordinance shall become operative as to Stores that are pharmacies one (1) year after its effective date. (Added by Ord. SI-07, File No. 070085, App. 412012007) SEC. 1707. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. (Added by Ord. 81-07, File No. 070085, App. 4/20/2007) SEC. 1708. NO CONFLICT WITH FEDERAL OR STATE LAW. Nothing in this Ordinance shall be interpreted or applied so as to create any requirement, power or duty in conflict with any federal or state law. (Added by Ord. 81-07, File No. 070085, App. 4/20/2007) SEC. 1709. UNDERTAKING FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE. http:/lwww.municode.comlcontent142011141341HTML/ch017.html 10/?9/3007 ~-iasues ~e~cs C hula - Pnnter-lnendly version Page I of 3 ~(1~ , `~ s a $ v San Francisco OKs plastic grocery bag ban ay Mike Verespej PLASTICS NEWS STAFF WASHINGTON, D.C. (April 10, 2007) -- Setting a precedent that could prod other cities into action, San Francisco is scheduled to become the first U.S. city to ban plastic grocery bags, and it may extend that ban to other plastic bags, including those used to deliver newspapers. The ban was approved by San Francisco's board of supervisors in a 10-1 vote March 27. The action is a response to seven major supermarket chains' failure to reduce bag use voluntarily in 2006, as they had pledged, and the city's desire to reduce the number of plastic bags in landfills, the waste stream and the bay. The San Francisco Department of the Environment estimates that 181 million plastic grocery bags are distributed annually in the city. An estimated 19 billion are used each year in California. If a second vote passes April 10, the ban will become effective in six months for grocery stores with sales of more than $2 million (15.4 million yuan). Pharmacies and other retailers with five or more stores will have 12 months to comply. The ordinance requires the city's largest grocers and retailers to use only recyclable paper bags, reusable cloth bags or compostable plastic bags at checkout counters. Plastics industry officials argue that the ban disregards the potential negative impact that compostable bags could have on the recycling stream. They said that before passing the ban, the city should wait to gauge the effectiveness of a statewide recycling bag mandate that goes into effect July 1. "There is a better way to keep plastics out of landfills than a mandate that will cost consumers money and negatively hurt the recycling stream, and that is to get more of those bags into the recycling stream," said Donna Dempsey, executive director of the Washington-based Film and Bag Federation, a unit of the Society of the Plastics Industry Inc. Dempsey said that having recycling bins at stores for plastics bags is a better solution, because 90 percent of consumers already have said they will use them. Laurie Hansen, an FBF lobbyist, agreed. "AB 2449, the plastic bag recycling mandate, hasn't even had a chance to go into effect," said Hansen, who also represents the Progressive Bag Alliance. But others argued that the industry's lack of response set the ordinance into motion. "This is a perfect example of where a community tried to work with retailers and industry, and where the retailers and the industry wouldn't step up to the plate," said Stephanie Barger, executive director of Earth Resource Foundation in Costa Mesa, California. "I applaud San Francisco for trying to work with the grocery stores first." Barger said there has been "a huge outcry from communities" since AB 2449 was passed in August because the mandate prevents communities from placing taxes or fees on plastic bags. http:i,'w~~tiv.plasticsnews.eomlchinaienglislL`printer_en.hUnl?id=1175893462 4/36/2007 r~asrics .~e~cs ~ nma -Printer-tnendly~ version Page 3 of? which costs considerably less." The plastic recycling industry also sees trouble ahead because of the ban. "Although the intent of the legislation may be admirable, we believe such legislation will severely impact current recycling efforts and will detrimentally affect a number of industries," said Harry Monahan, executive vice president of materials and engineering for Trex Co. Inc. in Winchester, Virgins. In manufacturing its decking products, Trex recycles about 160,000 metric tons of plastics annually, mostly from plastic bags and stretch pallet wrap. "This legislation will have a detrimental effect on the recycling of polyethylene, not only in San Francisco, but also well beyond," Monahan said in a letter to Ross Mirkarimi, the city supervisor who sponsored the ban. Monahan pointed out that Trex and other users of recycled polyethylene will not be able to use certain regions as sources of recycled PE if there is a risk of biodegradable bags contaminating the supply. Toronto-based correspondent Michael Lauzon contributed to this story. Entire contents copyright 2007 by Crain Communications Inc. All rights reserved. http:lJwww.plasticsnews.com/china/englisfti'printer_en.html?id=1 175893462 4/26/2007 S.I. h'fRSY C~11~' i'O BAN PLASTIC SHOPP[:VG BAGS /Supermarkets and chain pharmacies ... Page 3 of3 compostable bags made of corn starch or bags made of recyclable paper. San Francisco will join a number of countries, such as Ireland, that already have outlawed plastic bags or have le~~ied a tax on them. Final passage of the legislation is expected at the board's next scheduled meeting, and the mayor is expected to sign it. The grocers association has warned that the new law will lead to higher prices for San Francisco shoppers. "We're disappointed that the Board of Supervisors is going down this path," said Kristin Power, the association's vice president for government relations. "It will frustrate recycling efforts and will increase both consumer and retailer costs. There's also a real concern about the availability and quality of compostable bags." Power said most of the group's members operating in San Francisco are likely to switch to paper bags "simply because of the affordability and availability issues." Mirkarimi's legislation is one in a string of environmentally sensitive measures -- such as outlawing Styrofoam food containers and encouraging clean-fuel construction vehicles at city job sites -- adopted by the city in recent months. "It's really exciting," Jared Blumenfeld, director of the city's Department of the Environment, said after the vote on Tuesday. "We're thrilled. It's been a long time in the making." Blumenfeld said it takes 4go,ooo gallons of oil to manufacture ioo million bags. compostable bags can be recycled in the city's green garbage bins and will make it more convenient for residents to recycle food scraps, he said. Recycling of paper bags also is far more active today than it was when the plastic bag was first introduced to U.S. consumers. The lone dissenting voice in the board chamber on Tuesday was Supervisor Ed Jew, who noted that 95,000 small businesses in San Francisco will continue to use plastic bags. Jew, who in his third month in office has taken to critiquing his colleagues for being too quick to burden residents and businesses with new mandates, complained that Mirkarimi's legislation has taken too much of the board's time. "We need to move on to address the larger issues in San Francisco," Jew said shortly before he voted against the ordinance. http:Uwww.sYgate.comicgi-bin/article.cgi?Pile=/cla/?007I03I38IMNGDRO7SQN LDTL&type=pri... 4/26/?007 OAkLAND !Council panel OICs plastic bag ban Page l of 3 SFGate ~.,~~~ OAKLAND Council panel OKs plastic bag ban Jim Herron Zamora, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 27, 2007 A measure to ban plastic bags from grocery stores and other large retailers in Oakland was unanimously passed by a key City Council committee Tuesday. The measure, which is very similar to a ban adopted in San Francisco, w-i11 be passed onto the full council next week and if approved w711 take effect in August. Under the measure sponsored by Councilwomen Nancy Nadel and Jean Quan, any retailer grossing more than $i million a year would be banned from using the nonbiodegradable plastic bags. Nadel said that 1o percent of petroleum is used to create plastic so that reducing the use of bags will help the environment in multiple ways. "Californians use 19 billion plastic disposable bags each year, and throw away 60o every second," Nadel said. "These bags are made from oil, so reducing their use will serve the mission of the 'Oil Independent Oakland by 2020' "task force established last year. Supporters originally wanted legislation to encourage shoppers to use cloth or other re- usablebags for groceries but stopped short. Councilwoman Desley Brooks voted for the plan but said she wanted more information about the environmental cost of encouraging customers to use paper bags. Both Brooks and Councilwoman Pat Kernighan said the city should consider banning other forms of plastic, including plastic bags used to deliver newspapers. Quan said that plastic bag trash was causing so much harm and costing the city so much money that it was important to do something now. "The city pays dearly to clean up littered plastic bags that make their way to Oakland's storm drains, creeks, Lake Merritt, and the Bay," Quan said. About 20 people spoke at the hearing, all but a few in favor of the ordinance. Richard Bailey of the Lake Merritt Institute said plastic bags were major source of damage to the lake, one the nation's oldest bird sanchiaries. He said discarded plastic bags entangle birds, fish and aquatic creatures and hinder plant growth. http:~/www.stgate.conv'cgi-bii~/article.cgi?file=/c/a/?007/06/27i0AKPLASTICTMP&type=print... 1 012 9/2 0 0 7 Ltside Bay Area -ft's official: Oaklanri buts plastic bags ,.. sf m ~~r r ; Pate 1 of_ It's official: Oakland bans plastic bags 'It's a good first small step' OAKLAND -Paper or plastic? In Oakland. that won't likely be a choice much longer. The Oakland City Council Tuesday banned petroleum-based nonbiodegradable shopping bags in an effort to reduce the amount of waste Oakland sends to landfills and prevent the plastic bags from polluting the environment. Authored by Councilmembers Nancy Nadel (Downtown-West Oakland) and Jean Quan (Montclair-Laurel), the ordinance encourages people to bring their own reusable totes to bag their groceries because of the devastating Impact of all of the plastic products -including bags -used once and tossed away. "Iflf make a real difference," Quan said, urging her colleagues not to be intimidated by the plastics manufacturers who warned the council they were violating the law by adopting the ban without further study. The ban would apply to stores with gross annual sales of more than $lmillion, which would include all supermarkets and chain drug stores. However. the measure would not apply to restaurants or fast food eateries. "It's a good first small step." said Councilmember Patricia Kernighan (Grand Lake- Chinatown). "It's not going to solve alt of the problems in the world." The new law does not apply to the sacks provided by grocery stores to bag fresh fruit and vegetables or meat, only those bags shoppers get at the check stand. Councilmembers Desley Brooks tEastmont- Seminary) and Larry Reid (Elmhurst-East Oakland) abstained from the otherwise unanimous vote. saying the measure had been rushed andneeded further consideration. Reid said he was worried that the additional burden the measure imposes on groceries would discourage them from opening new locations in Oakland's Flatlands. "I'm also concerned that this is going to be another one of those ordinances that we can't enforce," Reid said. The ordinance will go into effect in six months and would require stores to offer shoppers paper bags that are 100 percent recyclable and contain at least 40 percent recycled material or compostable plastic sacks. Each year, Californians use 19 billion plastic shopping bags and throw away 600 per second, according to city officials. A law banning the bags in San Francisco will go into effect this fall. and similar measures are under consideration in Berkeley and Marin Cow~ty. ScofFlaws could be fined $500 for violations after PrinterStitial® ads by Format Dynamics. ,,., Yiy ~ r tirt $~;%~: ~~; ~"• k {l k ~ ~,~ Jk ~y „~~ S!Y'a M.7~„ .:'.i". °-' Print f r~reri sy http:/iwww.insidebayazea.com/search/ci_6296696?IADID=Search-wwtic.insidebayarea.com-ww... 10/29/Z007 Pnae 1 oft ~h~ ~~tt ~~~~ ~ribun~ ~ . , , , , ~ ,, ,. i..,__~ Rlastic grocery bags come with price tag ,, By Leslie Earnest Los Angeles Times Salt Lake Tribune Article Las[ UOdated:07/15/2007 11:49:21 PM MqT When it comes to sacrificing to help the environment, IKEA shoppers are like everybody else: conFlicted. Even if what they're sacrificing is a nickel. The home products retailer (which recently opened a store in Draper) charges S cents per plastic checkout bag. and customers are either happy that IKEA is doing something positive for [he planet or irritated that they would have to fork over anything for a flimsy little sack or some combination of both. "IPs pretty ridiculous," said Will Sisto, balancing 12 drinking glasses and two glass coffeepots in this arms as he headed to his car in the Costa Mesa, Calif, store's parking lot recently, nursing a sprained ankle. "I'm not going to pay any money to get a bag." In the big business crusade to be greener than the other guy, IKEA gets kudos from environmentalists who recognize the Swedish chain as the first major retailer in the U. S. to put a price on the omnipresent bags made of thin, flexible plastic film that clog landfills, don't readily decompose and can suffocate wildlife. The infamy of the nonbiodegradable plastic shopping bag is recent, but the war against it nationwide is moving fast. The bags will be banned altogether in San Francisco this fall, and similar embargoes are being considered by other jurisdictions. A California law that went into effect [his month requires large grocery stores and pharmacies to recycle plastic bags returned by customers and to offer reusable bags for purchase. Plastic bags are so reviled that reusable conveyances for groceries are the rage. Trader Joe's sells a canvas sack for $299, while luxury retailer Hermes asks $960 for one made of silk. IKEA's oversized tote, called Big Blue Bag, goes for 19 cents. Even with prices like that, some people won't give IKEA a break, griping that the store is charging for something that ought to be free. The company tries to be understanding. "It's a change; it's a new way of thinking;' spokeswoman Mona Astra Liss said. "Any change has a certain level of uncomfortableness to it. "W'e're hoping that people will make wise choices." To encourage them, IKEA places signs near registers that say, "The world uses a trillion plastic bags a year. Unfortunately most end up in the trash or in the ocean or in trees ...and they take forever to disappear." The signs recommend that people buy the reusable tote rather than drop 5 cents on plastic but note that every nickel spent on the latter is donated to American Forests, a nonprofit group in Washington, D.C., for the planting of trees [o offset carbon dioxide emissions. Asking people to ante up for the plastic "makes you aware of waste," said Kim Russo, 38, a design consultant. "If you have to buy the bags, you're going to think of creative ways to bring your things out," said the Laguna Nigueh Calif, resident, who bought a plant basket and used it to carry her other purchases to her car. "I think it's great." Americans toss about 100 billion polyethylene plastic bags a year, and fewer than I percent of them are recycled, according to IKEA. and the company's goal in the U.S. is [o cut its customers' annual plastic bag consumption by at least ~0 percent in the first year of the program to 35 million. Liss said IKEA was on track to achieve that goal. (After IKEA introduced its program in Britain last year, bag use plunged 95 percent) The U.S. is behind the curve, compared ro other countries. In many places, shoppers carry reusable bags as a matter of course, said Dan 3acobson, legislative analyst for Environment California in Los Angeles. httpa/www.sltrib.cotll/portlet/article/11un1/fragments/print_article.,jsp?articleld=6384558&siteld=397 8/~/?007 :llflr) " _ _. _ _. paper. Plastic or Prada? -- Printout -- fIME Simplicity is !<nowing your health and wellbeing are being cared for Back to Article .1 Click to Print Thursday, Aug. u2, 2007 Paper, Plastic or Prada? By Lisa Mc[aughlin Page 1 of3 i~Htl.l~S ti,.,~~ ._~„~ii~~ry For fashion-conscious women, every season has an It handbag. Shopping blogs, lunch hours and entire episodes of Sex and the City are denoted to discussing the waiting lists, long lines and bribes to key salespeople often required to get an early shot at the most sought-after Birkin, Marc Jacobs, Balenciaga or Fendi baguette. So when the newest must-have tote, designed by British bag guru Anya Hindmarch, went or sale in England in April, it wasn't terribly unusual that devotees began lining up at 2 a.m. or that all 20,000 coveted pieces were gone by 9 a.m. What was odd was that instead of queuing up in front of department stores or exclusive boutiques, fashion addicts were camped outside of humdnim supermarkets. And the bag in question was not one of Hindmarch's luxurious metallic clutches but a $t5 camas tote designed for ferning groceries home and embroidered with the phrase I'M NOT A PLASTIC BAG. The frenzy surrounding these limited-edition bags--several would-be owners were trampled in Taipei, Taiwan, in July, the same month in which a mob of Hindmarch fans forced police to shut down a mall in Hong Kong--is the result of a calculated effort to encourage shoppers to use fewer disposable plastic sacks, some 88 billion of which are consumed each year in the U.S. alone, with many ending up stuck in trees, clogging roadside drains and killing the birds and sea creatures that accidentally ingest them. As legislators around the globe debate whether to tax or ban outright these petroleum-based products--which experts estimate take up to r,ooo years to decompose--celebrities have been doing their part to steer consumers down a greener path. This year's trendy eco-tote has been photographed on the arms of actresses Keira Knightley, Alicia Silnerstone and Reese Witherspoon. And Hindmarch isn't the only high-priced designer--her wares typically cost thousands of dollars apiece-- tr}ng to improve the ~~~orld one purse at a time. Joining her in the attempt to persuade fashionistas to carry their groceries home in a reusable bag is Stella McCartney, the English designer--and daughter of Sir Paul-- whose organic cotton shopper retails for $495 Hermes' collapsible sdk bag costs nearl[y~ {{double that, while httpalwww.time.cotnltimelprintout/0.8816,1649301.OO.html 8/5/2007 Paper. Plastic or Yrada? -- Printout -- TIME Page 3 of 3 The trouble is that California is one of the few places to mandate that stores offer plastic-bag recycling, and the industry has been slow to volunteer elsewhere. Less than t% of bags are recycled in the U.S., according t the Washington-based Worldwatch Institute. Major chains like Giant Foods are trying to improve that statistic by gi~ing rebates to shoppers who return plastic bags for recycling, although few consumers take advantage of the policy. In March, Ikea began charging a nickel per plastic bag and selling a reusable tote fo 594'• tti'hile it's still too soon to tell how this strategy has affected U.S. consumers, a similar program launched in the U.K. last year reduced plastic-bag consumption 95%. Ireland has reported a similar decline since the country instituted a roughly zo¢-per-bag "plastax" in 2ooz. Designer bags may- make such taxes and prohibitions more palatable. But even Hindmarch concedes that he canvas tote has its limits. "I have five kids," she explains, which adds up to a lot ofgroceries--and she's still not willing to ditch the plastic when bringing home a smelly fish or other items with leak potential. But the combination of stylish looks and too-thin wallets may drive real change. Thousands of shoppers camped out in Dublin in July to get a Hindmarch bag. And many of this season's trendy $ts eco-tote bags have been selling on eBay for more than $400. Which means that this year's enczronmental slogan could be reduce, reuse, resell. Bagging plastic bags. A map of bans around the globe--plus some high-fashion alternative carryalls [This article contains a complex diagram. Please see hardcopy or pdf.] ,~, Click to Print Find this article at: http://~tww.time.cnm/time/magaiine/article/o,9t°t,t6493o1,oo.html Copyright ? 2007 Time Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. Pnvacy Policy ~ Add TIME Headlines to your Site ~ Contact Vs ~ Customer Service http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1649301,OO.httnl 8/5/3007 1 hotter solution on plastic ~ phi(adelphia Daily Ne~~~s 110/:3/2007 Page 2 of 3 plastic bag, especially with regard to health issues presented by produce, meat and poultry, not to mention protection against leaks. Although use of reusable bags is increasing, the reality is that only a small portion of the population has adopted this behavior. San Francisco, the only U.S. city to ban plastic, is looking to compostable bags to replace conventional plastic. But they can't be recycled, generate large amounts of greenhouse gases during decomposition and actually contain more oil than a normal plastic bag. They are two-thirds fossil-fuel-based plastic and a third organic polymers - but are three times heavier than a normal bag to make up for the weakness of the material. Composting of these bags presents another hurdle. San Francisco's recycling system is unique. The city has industrial composting facilities and collects food scraps as part of its curbside program. These two elements are essential to breaking down compostable bags and are not available in most parts of the country. Absent those special conditions, a compostable bag will break down no faster than a normal littered plastic bag. Plastic bags area 100 percent recyclable product. They can easily be deposited in bins available at most supermarkets, then sent to processing facilities. There's a thriving secondary market for this material, which is used for products like decking, railroad ties and new recyclable bags. We at the Progressive Bag Alliance are helping grocers across the United States implement at-store recycling through our "Bring it back" program. SUCH PROGRAMS have a record of success. Despite low recycling rates for plastic bags, at-store rates are increasing. One Southern grocery chain reports agreater- than-20-percent rate with at-store recycling aided by educational efforts. So, instead of rushing into a decision on a ban, City Council should be looking at a creative and effective recycling measure like those being implemented across the country. Donna Dempsey is senior managing director of the Progressive Bag Alliance, a group of manufacturers dedicated to ensuring that plastic bags are recycled, reused and disposed of properly. Find this article at: http://www.philly. com/da ilynews/opinion/20071023_A_better_solution_on~lastic, html Check the box to include the list of links referenced in the article. http:i.wtivw.printthis.clickability.con~/pUcpt?action=opt&title=q+better+solutio^+on+plastic+%7... 10/29/2007 ATfACHMENT~_ Mendocino Solid Waste Michael E. Sweeney General Manager Management Authority P.O.Boxl23 Ukiah, CA 95482 A joint powers public agency (707) 468-9710 Sweeney@pacific.net November 26, 2007 ~~S ~ (~ t ~, ~ ~ J n i ~di To: Boazd of Supervisors & City Councils ~~ Il(~Ir ~ ~ 2G0% From: Mike Sweene I~G~f-~- E Y: ____._--~_ RE: Additional documents regarding plastic carryout bags The MS WMA Board of Commissioners referred the plastic bag issue to the member jurisdictions for comment on October 29, 2007. Since then I have obtained two important documents on this issue: 1. "An Overview of Carryout Bags in Los Angeles County," Los Angeles County's Plastic Bag Working Group, August, 2007. This is a comprehensive report. One omission, however, is the alternative of combining a ban on In antic carryout bags with a requirement that stores charge a minimum amount for paver bags to reflect the actual cost to the store per bag (azound 10 cents each). Such an incentive would further the key goal of shifting consumer behavior towazd reusable bags. The experience in Ireland shows that even a small fee has an impact. 2. Court Petition, Coalition to Support Plastic Bag Recycling v. City of Oakland, August, 2007. The plastic bag manufacturers have sued Oakland and Fairfax on the grounds that their ordinances banning plastic bags should have been subject to CEQA. The cities held that the ordinances were CEQA-exempt as "action by regulatory authorities to protect natural resources." I'm told that Oakland is going to fight the lawsuit. The two documents are enclosed. Please contact me if you would like any additional infonnation. enclosures An Overview of Carryout Bags in Los Angele s County pF lAs "To Enrich Lives Through Effective and Caring Service" COUNTY O F LOS A N G E L E S LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Zev Yaroslavsky Board Chair Gloria Molina Supervisorial District 1 Yvonne Brathwaite Burke Supervisorial District 2 Don Knabe Supervisorial District 4 Michael D. Antonovich Supervisorial District 5 County's Plastic Bag Working Group All Supervisorial Districts Chief Executive Office Department of Public Works Internal Services Department Department of Public Health County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County For additional copies of this publication, contact: Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Environmental Programs Division 9D0 South Fremont Avenue Alhambra, CA 91803 www.888CIeanLA.com 1(888)CLEAN LA August 2007 Printed on recycled paper containing a minimum of 30 percent post-consumer content Preface Report Mandate On April 10, 2007, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors instructed the Chief Executive Officer to work with the Director of Internal Services and the Director of Public Works to solicit input from environmental protection and grocer organizations to: o Investigate the issue of polyethylene plastic and paper sack consumption in the County, including the pros and cons of adopting a policy similar to that of San Francisco; o Inventory and assess the impact of the current campaigns that urge recycling of paper and plastic sacks; o Investigate the impact an ordinance similar to the one proposed in San Francisco would have on recycling efforts in Los Angeles County, and any unintended consequences of the ordinance; and, o .Report back to the Board with findings and recommendations to reduce grocery and retail sack waste within 90 days. This report is in response to this Motion. Although the report to the Board of Supervisors was due on July 9, 2007, a memorandum was sent to the Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2007 requesting a 45-day extension to incorporate feedback from interested stakeholders, consumers, industry, and environmental representatives. Solid Waste Management Responsibilities of the County of Los Angeles Pursuant to the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (Assembly Bill 939), the County of Los Angeles undertakes the following solid waste management functions: Unincorporated County Areas o Implements source reduction and recycling programs in the unincorporated County areas to comply with the State's 50 percent waste reduction mandate. In 2004, the County was successful in documenting a 53 percent waste diversion rate for the unincorporated County areas. o Operates seven Garbage Disposal Districts, providing solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal services for over 300,000 residents. o Implements and administers a franchise solid waste collection system which, once fully implemented, will provide waste collection, recycling, and disposal services to over 700,000 residents, and will fund franchise area outreach programs to enhance recycling and waste reduction operations in unincorporated County areas that formerly operated under an open market system. Countywide o Implements a variety of innovative Countywide recycling programs, including: SmartGardening to teach residents about backyard composting and water wise gardening; Waste Tire Amnesty for convenient waste fire recycling; the convenient Environmental Hotline and Environmental Resources Internet Outreach Program; interactive Youth Education/Awareness Programs; and the renowned Household Hazardous/Electronic Waste Management and Used Oil Collection Programs. o Prepares and administers the Countywide Siting Element, which is a planning document which provides for the County's Yong-term solid waste management disposal needs. o Administers the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Summary Plan which describes how all 89 of the jurisdictions Countywide, acting independently and collaboratively, are complying with the State's waste reduction mandate. o Provides staff for the Los Angeles County Solid Waste Management Task Force (Task Force). The Task Force is comprised of appointees from the League of California Cities, the County Board of Supervisors, the City of Los Angeles, solid waste industries, environmental groups, governmental agencies, and the private sector. The County performs the following Task Force functions: o Reviews all major solid waste planning documents prepared by all 89 jurisdictions prior to their submittal to the California Integrated Waste Management Board; o Assists the Task Force in determining the levels of needs for solid waste disposal, transfer and processing facilities; and, o Facilitates the development of multi-jurisdictional marketing strategies for diverted materials. Report Organization The Executive Summary provides an overview of the report; Chapter i contains an introduction and description of the report's methodology; Chapter 2 provides the history and overview of plastic carryout bags; Chapter 3 discusses the litter impacts from plastic carryout bags; Chapter 4 includes general ecosystem, environmental and public health issues; Chapter 5 compares types and costs of some reusable bags; Chapter 6 summarizes case studies on plastic carryout bags in other countries and jurisdictions, including a discussion on San Francisco's Ordinance and California's new at-store recycling program; Chapter 7 provides a summary of stakeholder comments; Chapter 8 contains the report's findings and options for the Board of Supervisors to consider. Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................1 KEY FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................. .. 1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................. .. 1 Increasing Environmental Awareness and Recycling Efforts ............................................... .. 1 Need to Reduce Plastic Bag Litter ........................................................................................ .. 2 Reusable Bags ...................................................................................................................... .. 5 Biodegradable Carryout Bags ................................................................................:.............. .. 6 State Law and Other Relevant (ssues .................................................................................. .. 7 ALTERNATIVES FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSIDER ................................................... .. 7 Supplementary Measures ..................................................................................................... .. 9 CHAPTER 1 ....................................................................................................... 11 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY .......................................................... 11 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 11 Description of Mofion ............................................................................................................ 11 Background on Current Disposal Conddions ........................................................................ 11 METHODOLOGY USED .................................................................................................................. 12 CHAPTER 2 .......................................................................................................~4 OVERVIEW OF PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS ..................................................14 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................. 14 PLASTIC BAG F1ISTORY ................................................................................................................ 14 HOW ARE PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS MANUFACTURED? ....................._..........._..........._............... 16 WHAT TYPES OF PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAG ARE COMMONLY USED BY SUPERMARKETS, FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS AND RETAIL STORES? ...................................................................................... 17 DO LOCAL ,1URISDICTIONS COLLECT PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS AT CURBSIDES .............................. 18 DO COUNTY DEPARTMENTS USE PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS? ....................................................... 22 CHAPTER 3 ............................................... ....23 LITTER IMPACT OF PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS ..........................................23 LITTER IMPACT ........................................................................................................................... . 23 FINANCIAL IMPACT ....................................................................................................................... 25 County of Los Angeles' Litter Cleanup/Prevention Costs ..................................................... 25 Caltrans Costs ...................................................................................................................... 26 Zero Trash TMOL .................................................................................................................. 26 ANTI-LITTERING LAW .................................................................................................................... 27. CHAPTER 4 ....................................................................................................... 29 ECOSYSTEM, ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES ................ 29 ECOSYSTEM IMPACTS FROM LITTERED CARRYOUT BAGS .............................................................. 29 Plastic Carryout Bags ........................................................................................................... 29 Paper Canryout Bags ............................................................................................................ 31 Biodegradable Carryout Bags ............................................................................................... 31 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FROM CARRYOUT BAGS ....................................................................... 32 Manufacturinglfransportation ............................................................................................... 33 Endo/-Life (Disposal) Assumptions ..................................................................................... 33 PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACT OF CARRYOUT BAGS ............................................................................... 33 CHAPTER 5 .......................................................................................................34 TYPE AND COST OF REUSABLE BAGS .........................................................34 REUSABLE BAG TVPES ................................................................................................................ 34 ECONOMICS OF REUSABLE BAGS ................................................................................................. 36 CHAPTER 6 .......................................................................................................37 CASE STUDIES ................................................................................................ .37 CITY/COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO .............................................................................................. . 37 CITY OF OAKLAND ..................................................................................................................... .. 38 OTHER STATES AND CITIES CONSIDERING RESTRICTIONS ............................................................ . 39 State ..................................................................................................................................... . 39 Cdies ................................................ .............................. ...... ....................... . 39 ELSEWHERE ............................................................................................................................... . 40 Ireland .................................................................................................................................. . 40 Australia ............................................................................................................................... . 41 South Africa ......................................................................................................................... . 42 CALIFORNIANS NEW AT-STORE RECYCLING PROGRAM .................................................................. . 42 IKEA~S SELF-IMPOSED FEE ON PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS ............................................................ . 43 CHAPTER 7 ........................... . 44 . .......................................................................... STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS..-° ...................................................................... 44 INDUSTRYIGROCER CONCERNS ................................................................................................... 44 EXAMPLES OF ALTERNATIVE PRODUCTS ADVOCATED BY INDUSTRY ............................................... 44 CONSUMER AND ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS PERSPECTIVE ............................................................ 45 LIST OF CONTACTED $TAKEHOLDERS ........................................................................................... 46 CHAPTER 8 ....................................................................................................... 47 FINDINGS AND OPTIONS . 47 ................................................................................ ICEY FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................. 47 ALTERNATIVES FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSIDER ................................................... 47 Supplementary Measures ..................................................................................................... 49 List of Figures FIGURE 1 --TVPICAL LANDFILL pGTIVITY ........................................................................................... .. 2 FIGURE 2 -SEAL CHEWING ON A PLASTIC BAG .................................................................................. . 3 FIGURE 3 -PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS RUIN THE OTHERWISE SCENIC LANDSCAPE ALONG COLUMBIA WAY IN PALMDALE ................................................................................................................... . 4 FIGURE 4 -PLASTIC PELLETS USED TO MAKE PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS ........................................... 17 FIGURE 5 -- HDPE 2 PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAG FIGURE 6 - LDPE 4 PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAG ......... 17 FIGURE 7 -TVPICAL WASTE STREAM TRAVELING ALONG A CONVENOR BELT ..................................... 21 FIGURES 8 AND 9 -SAMPLE LITTER CAPTURE DEVICES .................................................................... 26 FIGURE 10 -SEAL ENTANGLED IN PLASTIC BAG ............................................................................... 30 List of Tables TABLE 1 -- PLASTIC AND PAPER BAG STATISTICS ........................................................ ...................... 15 TABLE 2 -TYPES OF PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS USED ................................................ ...................... 17 TABLE 3 -CURBSIDE COLLECTION OF PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS ................................ ...................... 18 TABLE 4 -- USE OF PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS BY COUNTY DEPARTMENT ..................... ...................... 22 TABLE 5 -- SUMMARY OF LITTER STUDIES .................................................................... ..................... 24 TABLE 6 -ABUNDANCE (PIECES/Klui~~ BY TYPE AND SIZE OF ......................................... ...................... 31 PLASTIC PIECES AND TAR FOUND IN THE NORTH PACIFIC GYRE ...................................... ..................... 31 TABLE 7 -AUSTRALIA'S ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES ............................................. ..................... 32 TABLE 8 -- TYPES OF REUSABLE BAGS ......................................................................... ..................... 34 TABLE 9 --COST COMPARISON OF CARRYOUT BAGS .................................................... ..................... 36 TABLE 1O-STAKEHOLDER LIST .................................................................................. ..................... 46 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Key Findings o Plastic carryout bags have been found to significantly contribute to litter and have other negative impacts on marine wildlife and the environment. o Biodegradable carryout bags are not a practical solution to this issue in Los Angeles County because there are no local commercial composting facilities able to process the biodegradable carryout bags at this time. o Reusable bags contribute towards environmental sustainability over plastic and paper carryout bags. o Accelerating the widespread use of reusable bags will diminish plastic bag litter and redirect environmental preservation efforts and resources towards "greener" practices. Background Increasing Environmental Awareness and Recvclina Efforts In 2006, despite achieving a 50 percent Countywide recycling rate (one of the highest in the nation), Los Angeles County still disposed over 12 million tons of trash -this is equivalent to filling the Rose Bowl 34 times. Currently, about 20 percent (7,400 tons per day) of the County's trash is exported for disposal to other counties, including Riverside, Orange, and Ventura Counties. By 2020, this figure could rise to 80 percent due to anticipated population/economic growth and landfill closures, assuming no landfill expansions or alternatives to landfills such as conversion technologies are developed. This means more trash being transported over long distances to other counties, leading to higher trash rates and added traffic congestion and air pollution. To reduce the environmental impact of solid waste disposal, the County of Los Angeles, in partnership with the 88 cities and the private sector, is aggressively expanding and implementing new source reduction and recycling programs. Such programs are geared towards raising environmental awareness; promoting environmental stewardship; and, promoting sustainable uses of resources. Page 1 Need to Reduce Plastic Baa Litter Each year, approximately 6 billion plastic carryout bags are consumed in Los Angeles County.' This is equivalent to 600 bags per person per year. If tied together, these bags would form a string long enough to reach the moon and back, five times.Z Most plastic carryout bags are disposed (less than 5 percent are recycled3) due to lack of facilities needed to recycle plastic carryout bags. As a result, approximately 45,000 tons of plastic carryout bags are disposed by residents countywide each year, comprising approximately 0.4 percent of the 12 million tons of solid waste disposed each year." California Integrated Waste Management Board, Resolution, Agenda Item 14, June 12, 2007 Board Meeting. Countywide figure is prorated. z http //sse 'pl Hasa gov/planets/profile cfm~Obiect=Moon, May 15, 2007. Assumes each bag is 1 foot wide and distance to moon is 238,855 miles. s Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board, Staff Report, Agenda Item 14, June 12, 2007 Board Meeting. ` California Integrated Waste Management Board's 2004 Statewide Characterization Study, Table 7. Countywide figure is prorated. Page 2 Figure 7 - Typical Landfill Activity Although paper carryout bags have a higher recycling rate (21 percent nationally5), approximately 117,000 tons of paper carryout bags are disposed by residents countywide each year, comprising approximately 1 percent of the total 12 million tons of solid waste disposed each years This tonnage is higher than the amount of plastic carryout bags disposed because each paper bag weighs more than a comparable plastic carryout bag. The indiscriminate littering of plastic carryout bags is an increasing blight problem. Although plastic carryout bags are inexpensive and have other useful qualities, they have a propensity to become litter, thus overshadowing these benefits. Due to their expansive and lightweight characteristics, wind easily carries these bags airborne like parachutes. They end up entangled in brush, tossed around along freeways, and caught on fences. Because it is often white or brightly colored and difficult to collect, plastic carryout bag litter is a greater eyesore and nuisance than other littered materials. For this reason, there is an increasing need to diminish the prevalence of plastic carryout bags to maintain a clean and healthy environment, positively enhance the County's recreational and tourism economy, and improve the quality of life for all residents countywide. a US EPA 2005 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste, Table 4. e California Integrated Waste Management Board's 2004 Statewide Characterization Study, Table 7. Countywide figure is prorated. Page 3 Figure 2 -Seal Chewing on a Plastic Bag (Courtesy of the Whale Rescue Team) Public agencies collectively spend tens of millions of dollars annually on litter prevention, cleanup, and enforcement activities. The litter collected is composed of constituents including plastic carryout bags. Additionally, the cost to local governments in Los Angeles County is expected to dramatically rise over the next few years in order to comply with Federal Clean Water Act. For example, the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works and the Flood Control District annually spend $18 million per year on, but not limited to, street sweeping, catch basin cleanouts, cleanup programs, and litter prevention and education efforts. Communities within close proximity to landfills and other solid waste processing facilities are especially impacted as plastic carryout bags escape from trash trucks while traveling or emptying their loads. Although trucks and facilities are required to provide cover and fences, carryout bags manage to escape despite Best Management Practices (BMPs) including using roving patrols to pickup littered bags. Inevitably the cost for cleanup is passed on to residents in the form of higher disposal costs. Despite the efforts of various cleanup activities and thousands of residents who annually volunteer countless hours in beach, roadside (e.g., Adopt-A-Highway programs), park, and neighborhood cleanups, plastic carryout bag litter remains a significant problem. Page 4 Figure 3 -Plastic Carryout Bags Ruin The Otherwise Scenic Landscape Along Columbia Way In Palmdale Reusable Baos Upon comprehensively evaluating the environmental, ecological, and litter impacts of various types of carryout bags, it is conclusive that the widespread use of reusable bags in lieu of plastic and paper carryout bags would be socially, ecologically and economically beneficial. Facilitating the increased use of reusable bags would conserve energy and natural resources, reduce the total volume of waste disposed in landfills, diminish plastic bag litter, and invite citizens to actively participate in practices that promote a clean and sustainable environment. Specifically, benefits of widespread use of reusable bags include the following: o Fewer plastic carryout bags littering neighborhoods. o Decreased likelihood of plastic bag litter negatively impacting the marine environment (marine wildlife, such as sea turtles and whales, ingest littered plastic carryout bags, which they mistake for food). o Significant cost savings to taxpayers (e.g., less money spent on litter prevention/cleanup/enforcement resulting from plastic bag litter). o An environmental cycle motivated by less waste generated, fewer natural resources consumed, reduced energy consumption, and less air and water pollution from manufacturing, transportation, and recycling/disposal processes. o Grocers' costs for purchasing plastic and paper carryout bags would no longer be passed on to customers. o Consistent with the intent of Assembly Bill 2449 (Levine, 2006 Statutes) "to encourage the use of reusable bags by consumers and retailers and to reduce the consumption of single-use bags."' o Assists in the development of the emerging "green economy" by spurring the reusable bag industry. As environmental awareness gains momentum, the timing is optimal for instilling the importance of sustainable practices. One of the most pressing needs now, as landfill capacity become scarce, is to maximize our waste reduction and reuse efforts. Assembly Bill 2449, Chapter 845, Statutes of 2006. Page 5 Biodegradab/e Camout Bates Biodegradable carryout bag usage in Los Angeles County is not practical at this time, due to the lack of commercial composting facilities needed to process the biodegradable carryout bags. The nearest facilities are located in Kem and San Bernardino Counties.8 Since transporting biodegradable carryout bags to distant commercial composting facilities involves higher services rates, increased traffic congestion and adds to air pollution, it is less ideal in comparison to other alternatives that involve local operations. Additionally, the use of biodegradable carryout bags would not alleviate the litter problem or potential harm to marine wildlife since they have the same general characteristics of plastic carryout bags (lightweight, persistent in the marine environment, etc.). Furthermore, the presence of biodegradable carryout bags in the recycling stream could potentially jeopardize plastic recycling programs through contamination, and reduce the quality of plastic resins. This contamination could ultimately result in batches of recyclable plastic materials or biodegradable carryout bags being landfilled. a California Integrated Waste Management Board's Solid Waste Information System (SWIS), www. ciwmb.ca. aov/S WI SlSearch. aso Page 6 State Law and Other Relevant Issues The majority of plastic carryout bags consumed in the County are distributed at supermarket checkout stands. Because supermarket bags are lighter and thinner than bags used at other retail stores, they have a higher propensity to become litter. To address this and other issues, California adopted Assembly Bill 2449 (Levine, 2006 Statues) in 2006, whose goal was to "encourage the use of reusable bags by consumers and retailers and to reduce the consumption of single-use carryout bags."9 AB 2449, which became effective July 1, 2007, requires all large supermarkets and retail stores to make available at-store containers for the collection and recycling of plastic carryout bags, and reusable bags for purchase. Although this requirement may increase the recycling rate of plastic carryout bags (currently at less than 5 percent), no recycling rate benchmarks were established. Moreover, AB 2449 also included a clause which prohibits local governments from imposing a fee on plastic carryout bags or otherwise "interfering" with the at-store plastic bag recycling program. Since a fee cannot be imposed on plastic carryout bags, another option for local governments to reduce the consumption of plastic carryout bags is to implement a ban. The implementation of such a ban, in conjunction with supplementary measures not pre-empted by AB 2449, are described below. Alternatives for the Board of Supervisors to Consider Since plastic carryout bags distributed at supermarkets and other large retail outlets contribute disproportionately to the litter problem, the County plastic bag working group recommends reducing the prevalence of these bags as a first priority. The working group seeks to subsequently investigate measures to reduce the consumption of plastic and paper carryout bags at the remaining retail establishments throughout the County. Based on the above factors, the following alternatives are presented to the Board for consideration. Supplementary measures are also provided below to further strengthen the main alternatives. o ALTERNATIVE 1 -Ban Plastic Carryout Bags at Large Supermarkets and Retail Stores One Year After Adoption of Ordinance To reduce plastic bag litter, request the County's plastic bag working group (consisting of the Chief Executive Office, County Counsel, Internal Services Department, Public Works, and other County departments/agencies as e Assembly Bill 2449, Chapter 845, Statutes of 2006. Page 7 appropriate) to draft an ordinance banning plastic carryout bags at large supermarkets and retail stores. All large supermarkets and retail stores voluntarily applying a point of sale fee (e.g., 10¢) on each plastic carryout bag consumed would be exempt from the Ordinance. This exemption would provide more flexibility to affected stores, while providing a mechanism (the consumption fee) with proven effectiveness in reducing overall consumption. The consumption fee is to be retained by the affected store. The Ordinance would also define "large supermarkets and retail stores." Delay implementation of the ban for one year to allow the working group to work with affected stakeholders, conduct additional outreach efforts and promote awareness of the upcoming ban. o ALTERNATIVE 2 -Ban Plastic Carryout Bags At Large Supermarkets And Retail Stores Effective: o July 1, 2010, If The Bag Disposal Rate Does Not Decrease By A Minimum Of 35%. o July 1, 2013, If The Bag Disposal Rate Does Not Decrease By A Minimum Of 70%. To reduce plastic bag litter, request the County's plastic bag working group to draft an ordinance banning plastic carryout bags at large supermarkets and retail stores. The ban would go into effect automatically, effective: o July 1, 2010 if the disposal rate of plastic carryout bags does not decrease by a minimum of 35%, using FY 2007-08 as the baseline, by January 1, 2010. o July 1, 2013 if the disposal rate of plastic carryout bags does not decrease by a minimum of 70%, using FY 2007-OS as the baseline, by January 1, 2013. All large supermarkets and retail stores voluntarily applying a point of sale fee (e.g., 10¢) on each plastic carryout bag consumed would be exempt from the Ordinance. This exemption would provide more flexibility to affected stores, while providing a mechanism (the consumption fee) with proven effectiveness in reducing overall consumption. The consumption fee is to be retained by the affected store. The Ordinance would also define "large supermarkets and retail stores." To achieve these goals, the working group shall coordinate with grocers/industry to establish the aforementioned baseline (the difference between total consumption and recycling), reduce the consumption of plastic carryout bags, and increase the recycling rate of plastic carryout bags (within the constraints of Assembly Bill 2449). Page 8 The County may accelerate the ban on plastic carryout bags if cities containing a majority of the County's population adopt an ordinance or enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the County banning plastic carryout bags. o ALTERNATIVE 3 -Status Quo Request the County's plastic bag working group to monitor the effects of Assembly Bill 2449 and other related actions. Supplementary Measures To complement the alternatives identified above, the working group also recommends implementing all of the following supplementary measures. Each of these measures may be implemented in addition to whichever alternative is selected by the Board: A. Direct the Department of Public Works, in consultation with the County plastic bag working group, to implement a comprehensive public education campaign, and create partnerships with large supermarkets, retail stores, and elementary schools to promote reusable bags over plastic and paper carryout bags. B. Direct the plastic bag working group to draft a resolution for Board consideration prohibiting the purchase and use of plastic carryout bags at all County-owned facilities and County offices. C. Direct the County's plastic bag working group to actively work with the 88 cities in Los Angeles County to implement measures which reduce the consumption of plastic and paper carryout bags. D. Direct the Department of Public Works, to aggressively pursue grants and other funding opportunities to fund the comprehensive public education campaign as described in Supplementary Measure A above. E. Direct the Chief Executive Office, Department of Public Works, and the County's Legislative Advocates to work with the State legislature to: o Repeal the provision of Assembly Bill 2449 which prohibits local governments from imposing a fee on plastic carryout bags or implementing other at-store recycling measures; o Implement either a statewide fee on each plastic bag used with funds directed to local governments on aper-capita basis for litter prevention and cleanup efforts; or implement statewide Page 9 benchmarks to reduce the consumption of plastic carryout bags; or implement a statewide ban on plastic carryout bags. F. Direct the County's plastic bag working group to investigate measures to reduce the consumption of plastic carryout bags at other retail establishments, as well as evaluate paper bag usage throughout the County. G. Direct Public Works to work with the State, solid waste industry and other stakeholders 1o develop markets and other programs to reduce plastic bag litter. H, Direct the County's plastic bag working group to establish a Subcommittee to assist in carrying out the functions of the working group, including tracking the reduction of plastic bag litter to comply with the Federal Clean Water Act. Direct the County's plastic bag working group t progress report to the Board describing progress consumption of plastic and paper carryout bags in o provide asemi-annual and efforts to reduce the Los Angeles County. Page 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY Introduction Description of Motion On April 10, 2007, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors instructed the Chief Executive Officer to work with the Director of Internal Services and the Director of Public Works to solicit input from outside environmental protection and grocer organizations to: o Investigate the issue of polyethylene plastic and paper sack consumption in the County, including the pros and cons of adopting a policy similar to that of San Francisco; o Inventory and assess the impact of the current campaigns that urge recycling of paper and plastic sacks; o Investigate the impact an ordinance similar to the one proposed in San Francisco would have on recycling efforts in Los Angeles County, and any unintended consequences of the ordinance; and, o Report back to the Board with findings and recommendations to reduce grocery and retail sack waste within 90 days. This report is in response to this Motion. Although the report to the Board of Supervisors was due on July 9, 2007, a memorandum was sent to the Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2007 requesting a 45-day extension to incorporate feedback from interested stakeholders, consumers, industry, and environmental representatives. Background on Current Disposa/ Conditions Los Angeles County has the most extensive and complex solid waste system in the nation. It covers an area of 4,752 square miles and encompasses 88 cities and 140 unincorporated communities. Home to more than 10.2 million people, Los Angeles County is the most populous county in the nation, having a larger population than 42 states and 162 countries.10 One in three Californian's live in Los Angeles County. The County's population is expected to increase to 10 Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation, Los Angeles County Profile, May 2006. Page 11 approximately 11 million people by 2020." If it were a country, Los Angeles County would rank 17"' in the world in terms of Gross Domestic Product.12 This vigorous population growth, coupled with comparable increases in economic activity, will have a major impact on the solid waste management infrastructure in Los Angeles County. In 1989, the California Legislature passed the California Integrated Waste Management Act (Assembly Bill 939). Assembly Bill 939 requires every city and county to divert 50 percent of solid waste generated from landfill disposal, otherwise face a fine of $10,000 per day. Counties have the added responsibility of managing the residual trash that remains after recycling. Since 1990, numerous programs have been implemented at the city and County levels, including curbside recycling, construction and demolition waste recycling, and business recycling enhancement programs. In addition, the County has implemented Countywide recycling programs to assist jurisdictions to comply with Assembly Bill 939, such as the Countywide Household Hazardous Waste/Electronic Waste Management Program, the Waste Tire Collection Program, and the SmartGardening Program. In 2006, despite achieving a 50 percent Countywide recycling rate (one of the highest in the nation), Los Angeles County disposed over 12 million tons of trash -this is equivalent to filling the Rose Bowl 34 times. Currently, about 20 percent (7,400 tons per day) of the County's trash is exported for disposal to other counties, including Riverside, Orange, and Ventura Counties. By 2020, this figure could rise to 80 percent due to anticipated population/economic growth and landfill closures, assuming no landfill expansions or alternatives to landfills such as conversion technologies are developed. This means more trash being transported over long distances to neighboring counties, leading to higher trash rates and added traffic congestion and air pollution. To reduce the environmental impact of solid waste disposal, the County of Los Angeles, in partnership with the 88 cities and the private sector, is aggressively expanding and implementing new source reduction and recycling programs. Such programs are geared towards raising environmental awareness; promoting environmental stewardship; and, promoting sustainable uses of resources. Methodology Used To comprehensively assess the ecological, environmental, and financial impacts of carryout bags on Los Angeles County, published studies from around the " Los Angeies County Economic Development Corporation, L.A. Stats, June 2006. 11 http //lacountv.info/miscellany pdf, May 15, 2007. Page 12 world were reviewed and analyzed. In addition, surveys of major grocery and retail stores, solid waste facilities, Caltrans, cities, and County departments were conducted to gather information on prevailing recycling, litter, and cleanup methods and costs. Several public and environmental interest groups, industry and manufacturing trade organizations were also consulted regarding plastic carryout bag consumption and management, litter impacts, and cleanup efforts. Page 13 CHAPTER 2 OVERVIEW OF PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS Overview Plastic carryout bags were first introduced into the marketplace in 1975.13 Since then, plastic carryout bags have become an integral part of our everyday custom because they are convenient, inexpensive, and functional. They are sometimes reused to line trash cans, collect pet waste, and for general storage purposes. Below is a history of plastic carryout bags as well as relevant facts and figures. Plastic Bag History 1975: Montgomery Ward, Sears, J.C. Penny, Jordan Marsh, and other large retail stores were the first to switch to plastic merchandise bags." 1977: Supermarkets began offering plastic carryout bags.15 1996: Four of every five grocery stores use plastic carryout bags.'s 2002: Ireland introduced the first consumer plastic carryout bag fee (20¢ [U.S.] per bag)." 2006: California passed legislation mandating at-store recycling of plastic carryout bags, by all large supermarkets and retail businesses beginning July 1, 2007.18 2007: San Francisco becomes the first U.S. city to ban the use of non- biodegradable plastic carryout bags at alt large supermarkets and pharmacy chains. 13 viww plasticsindustrv orq/abouUfbt/environment htm#plasticbaahistorv, May 3, 2007. `" ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. " http //www environ ie/enlEnvironment/Waste/PlasticBags/News/MainBody 3199.en.htm, May 1, 2007. 1e Assembly Bill 2449, Chapter 845, Statutes of 2006. Page 14 Table 1 -Plastic and Paper Bag Statistics Item Statistic Annual Plastic Bag Consumption Rate Worldwide Between 500 billion and 1 trillion National 380 billion plastic carryout bags, sacks, wra s er ear20 California <20 billion Countywide 6 billion Unincorporated County area 600 million Percentage of Overall Disposal Waste Stream Plastic Carryout Bags 0.4 percent by weight Paper Carryout Bags 1 percent by weight Annual Rate of Disposal at Landfills Plastic Carryout Bags Calfomia 147,D38 tons Countywide 45,000 tons Paper Carryout Bags California 386,097 tons Countywide 117,000 tons Annual Rate of Recycling Plastic Carryout Bags National <5 percen California <5 percen Countywide <5 percent Paper Carryout Bags 19 http://www.eoa.aov/oamsrpod/hcsc/0613326/attl0.gdf May 2007 TO http://www.eoa.gov/reaiont/communities/shopbaas.html, May 14, 2007. Z' Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board, Resolution, Agenda Item 14, June 12, 2007 Board Meeting. sz Prorated from the State figure. z3 Ibid. 24 Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board's 2004 Statewide Characterization Study, Table 7. ze California Integrated Waste Management Board's 2004 Statewide Characterization Study, Table 7. Countywide figures are prorated from State figures. ze US EPA 2005 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste, Table 7. 27 Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board, Staff Report, Agenda Item 14, June 12, 2007 Board Meeting. se Assumed State rate applies to Los Angeles County. Page 15 Item Statistic National 21 percen California 21 percent Countywide 21 percent Cost to Purchase Plastic Carryout Bags 2 - 5 cents each Paper Carryout Bags 5 - 23 cents each Biodegradable Carryout Bags 8 - 17 cents each How Are Plastic Carryout Bags Manufactured? Plastic resin is created by taking chemical chains called polymers commonly found in petroleum and natural gas processing, and connecting them together using heat and pressure to create plastic resins. The plastic resin is heated in a chamber and pushed through an opening (called a die) by air, which cools the heated plastic, and creates the air pocket of the plastic bag. After the plastic sheet is cooled, it is guided through several rollers to flatten and stretch the film to size the width of the bag. Once properly sized, the final step is to cut the plastic sheet into appropriate size bags.3a It is estimated that there are at least nine companies in Southern California, and three companies in Northern California that manufacture plastic carryout bags. x9 US EPA 2005 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste, Table 4. 30 Assumed National rate applies to California. "Assumed National rate applies to Los Angeles County. 32 www.usolastic.com (May 22, 2007), www.restockit.com (May 22, 2007). "www.mrtakeoutbacs.com (May 22, 2007), www.restockit.com (May 22, 2007). '" www.ecoaroducts.com (May 22, 2007). as www Plasticresources.ora (May 22, 2007). ae www Thomasnet.com (May 22, 2007). - Page 16 a Figure 4 -Plastic Pellets Used to Make Plastic carryout bags What Types of Plastic Carryout Bag Are Commonly Used by Supermarkets, Food Establishments and Retail Stores? Published studies and reports show that there are two main types of plastic carryout bags on the market. The first type of bag is HDPE 2 which is thin, lightweight and found in most grocery stores. The second type of bag is LDPE 4 which is thicker and glossier and found in retail stores. A random survey of major supermarkets, food establishments, and retail stores countywide, and site visits to plastic bag manufacturers confirmed this information. p~ ~~ y~°~~~,?a~~~aE ~~~~ ' Figure 5 -HDPE 2 Plastic Carryout Bag Figure 6 -- LDPE 4 Plastic Carryout Bag Table 2 -Types of Plastic Carryout Bags Used Store Type of Plastic Ba Used? Grocery Albertsons HDPE 2 Food4Less HDPE 2 Rai s HDPE 2 Safewa HDPE 2 Stater Bros. HDPE 2 Vons HDPE 2 Wild Oafs HDPE 2 Retail CVS HDPE 2 Kmart HDPE2 RiteAid HDPE 2 Tar et LDPE 4 Walmart HDPE 2 Page 17 Do Local Jurisdictions Collect Plastic Carryout Bags at Curbside? A survey of the 89 jurisdictions in Los Angeles County revealed that 25 cities currently allow their residents to recycle their plastic carryout bags at curbside. Table 3 -Curbside Collection of Plastic Carryout Bags Jurisdiction Existing Plastic Carryout Bag Recycling at CurbsMe A oura Hills Yes Alhambra No Arcadia No Artesia Yes Avalon No Azusa No Baldwin Park No Bell Yes Bell Gardens No Bellflower No Beverl Hills Yes Bradbu No Burbank No Calabasas Yes Carson No Cerritos No Commerce No Claremont No Com ton No Covina Yes Cudah No Culver C' No Diamond Bar No Downe No Duarte No EI Monte No EI Se undo No Gardena Yes Glendale No Glendora Yes Page 18 Jurisdic8on EzisUng Plastic Carryout Bag Recycling at Curbside Hawaiian Gardens No Hawthorne No Hermosa Beach Yes Hidden Hills No Huntin ton Park No Indust No In lewood No Irwindale Yes La Canada Flintri a Yes La Habra Hei ht5 No La Mirada No La Puente No La Verne No Lakewood Yes Lancaster No Lawndale Yes Lomita No Lon Beach No Los An eles Yes L nwood Yes Malibu No Manhattan Beach No Ma ood No Monrovia Yes Montebello No Montere Park Yes Norwalk Yes Palmdale No Palos Verdes Estates No Paramount Unknown Pasadena No Pico Rivera No Pomona No Rancho Palos Verdes No Redondo Beach No Rollin Hills No Rolling Hills ___ Yes Page 19 Jurisdiction Existing Plastic Carryout Bag Recycling at Curbside Estates Rosemead No San Dimas No San Fernando No San Gabriel No San Marino Yes Santa Clarita No Santa Fe S rin s No Santa Monica No Sierra Madre Yes Si nal Hill Yes South EI Monte Yes South Gate No South Pasadena Yes Tem le Ci No Torrence No Vernon No Walnut No West Covina No West Holl ood Yes Westlake Villa a No Whittler No Uninc. Coun No TOTAL 25 res onded Yes The collected plastic carryout bags are taken to a recycling or materials recovery facility (depending on the jurisdiction's collection system) where they are either sent for disposal, or in some eases sorted, baled, and so{d on the open market. The facility's main objective is to maximize diversion of recyclables from the waste stream, while reducing cost and maximizing revenue from those materials targeted for recovery. The most commonly recovered materials include plastic containers, paper, aluminum cans, and cardboard because they are easy to collect, have an available market, and provide the most revenue without specialized sorting machinery. Like most plastics, the majority of plastic carryout bags that are recovered are sold to foreign markets, where anecdotal accounts reveal that the material is converted to plastic resin for remanufacturing or incinerated for energy. Policy makers have begun to take notice of this issue for all commodities, not just plastics, because commodities managed overseas do not meet the same level of standards for environmental protection as in the U.S. Page 20 Based on a survey of recycling and materials recovery facilities (and field visits of selected facilities), it was revealed that over 90 percent of the plastic carryout bags taken to these facilities are not recycled, but instead taken to landfills for the following reasons: o Plastic carryout bags usually have a high contamination rate due to reuse as a household trash bin liner or by coming into contact with other contaminants (e.g., pet waste) when placed in the collection bin. As the contamination rate increases, the quality of the plastic resin is reduced. o Plastic carryout bags interfere with machinery and have a tendency to jam the screens used to separate materials. o It is not cost efficient to recycle plastic carryout bags due to lack of suitable markets. The domestic market for plastic carryout bags are extremely limited, especially in California, requiring recycling facilities and materials recovery facilities to truck plastic carryout bags over long distances, making the recycling of plastic carryout bags economically unfeasible. Foreign markets have shifted to using local markets due to quality concerns and transportation costs. Page 21 Figure 7 -Typical Waste Stream Traveling Along a Conveyor Bek Do County Departments Use Plastic Carryout Bags? Based on a survey of County departments, it was revealed that plastic carryout bags are rarely used (see below). Sable 4 -Use of Plastic Carryout Bags by County Department County Department Use Plastic Carryout Ba s? If Yes, How Much? Child Su ort Services No N/A Coroner No NIA Communi Develo ment Commission No N/A LACERA No N/A Communi Senior Services Yes Don't know Su erior Court No N/A Grand Ju No N/A Chief Information Office No N/A Public Defender No N!A Fire De artment No N/A Sheriff Yes 20-301bs Re istrar Recorder/Coun Clerk No N!A Treasurer and Tax Collector No N/A Internal Services No N/A Assessor Office of No N/A tACMA No N/A Affirmative Action Compliance, Office of No N/A Mental Health No N/A Animal Care and Control No N/A pistrict Attorne 's Office No N/A Parks and Recreation Yes 36700/month Re'ional Plannin De t. No N/A Public Health No N!A Health Services No N/A Alternate Public Defender No N/A " Of the 56 County Departments, only 25 responded to the survey. The Department of Community Senior Services indicated that they utilize plastic carryout bags to carry food in their food pantry program once a week. Page 22 CHAPTER3 LITTER IMPACT OF PLASTIC CARRYOUT BAGS Litterlmpact The indiscriminate littering of plastic carryout bags is an increasing blight problem. Although plastic carryout bags are inexpensive and have other useful qualities, they have a propensity to become litter, thus overshadowing these benefits. Due to their expansive and lightweight characteristics, wind easily carries these bags airborne like parachutes. They end up entangled in brush, tossed around along freeways, and caught on fences. Because it is often white or brightly colored and difficult to collect, plastic carryout bag litter is a greater eyesore and nuisance than other littered materials. For this reason, there is an increasing need to diminish the prevalence of plastic carryout bags to maintain a clean and healthy environment, positively enhance the County's recreational and tourism economy, and improve the quality of life for all residents countywide. Public agencies collectively spend tens of millions of dollars annually on litter prevention, cleanup, and enforcement activities. The litter collected is composed of constituents including plastic carryout bags. Additionally, the cost to local governments in Los Angeles County is expected to dramatically rise over the next few years in order to comply with Federal Clean Water Act. For example, the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works and the Flood Control District annually spend $18 million per year on, but not limited to, street sweeping, catch basin cleanous, cleanup programs, and litter prevention and education efforts. Communities within close proximity to landfills and other solid waste processing facilities are especially impacted as plastic carryout bags escape from trash trucks while traveling or emptying their loads. Although trucks and facilities are required to provide cover and fences, carryout bags manage to escape despite Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as using roving patrols to pickup littered bags. Despite litter control devices (e.g., {itter fences), local landfills and solid waste transfer station operators estimate they spend approximately $25,000 and $1,500 per month at each facility, respectively, to send roving patrols to pickup littered plastic carryout bags. Even with these measures, it is very difficult to pick up the errant plastic carryout bags. Inevitably the cost for cleanup is passed on to residents in the form of higher disposal costs. Despite the efforts of various cleanup activities and thousands of residents who annually volunteer countless hours in beach, roadside (e.g., Adopt-A-Highway programs), park, and neighborhood cleanups, plastic carryout bag litter remains a significant problem. Page 23 Plastic carryout bags that make their way into the storm drain system impact the system's ability to efficiently channel storm water runoff. The County Department of Parks and Recreation, confers that plastic carryout bags contribute to litter within local lakes, and negatively impacts the environment and wildlife. Furthermore, plastic carryout bag litter inhibits proper landscape maintenance operations as it becomes entangled in the turt mowing machinery. While the exact percentage of plastic carryout bags in the total litter stream is not definitively quantified, below is a summary of several studies conducted on plastic litter. Table 5 -Summary of Litter Studies All Plastic Pilm Plastk Bags Weigh Volume. Welgh Volume % ^h 9L % Caltrans Litter Management 7 12 Pilot Stud 1998-2000 Great Los Angeles River 34 Clean U 4!30/04 City of Los Angeles Catch 30 24 25 19 Basin Cleaning (6/10104) (Note, plastic carryout bags listed separately; not included under All Plastic Film Hamilton Bowl Project-Street 20 Swee in 2006 Hamilton Bowl Project-Trash 30 Capture Devices (Feb. 2007) Caltrans Litter Management Pifot Study -- The purpose of the study was to investigate the characteristics of litter in freeway stormwater and the effectiveness of BMPs. The study was conducted from 1998 through 2000 on a freeway in the Los Angeles area. Results showed that plastic film, which includes plastic carryout bags, was 7 percent by mass of the litter collected and 12 percent by volume. These percentages do not include moldable plastics, which was a separate category. On April 30, 2004, during the Great Los Angeles River Clean Up, organized by the Friends of Los Angeles River, a waste characterization study was conducted. Approximately 60 cubic feet of titter was collected and sorted. Results showed plastic film to be 34 percent of the total litter by volume. This percentage does not include moldable plastics, which was a separate category. Page 24 On June 10, 2004, the City of Los Angeles conducted a waste characterization study. Litter was cleaned from 30 storm drain catch basins and characterized for plastic film and plastic carryout bags separately, among other litter types. The plastic film was found to be 30 percent by weight and 24 percent by volume of the litter. Plastic bags were 25 percent by weight and 19 percent by volume. o The Hamilton Bowl Trash Reduction Project -- The purpose of the study was to investigate the costs and efficiency of three end-of-pipe and one catch basin structural trash capture systems. The Hamilton Bowl is a 15 acre storm detention basin containing 15 water outtalls in the City of Long Beach. The Hamilton Bowl Project characterized trash collected from street sweeping and trash capture systems. In summer 2006, trash from street sweeping from various land uses was collected and sorted. The composition was classified into glass, paper, yard waste, and plastic. Plastic consisted of bags, bottles, jugs and Styrofoam. It ranged from 5 percent of the total trash from open space and commercial land uses to 20 percent from institutional land use. Then in December 2006 and February 2007, trash capture system was characterized. This consist of up to 30 percent plastics. Financial Impact trash from the Hamilton Bowl's trash was sorted and found to County of Los Angeles' Litter Cleanuo/Prevention Costs The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, as the lead County agency responsible for implementing litter reduction and education programs, implements a variety of programs to reduce the impact of litter on our communities. This includes litter collection along roadways, channel inverts, street sweeping, emptying public trash containers, catch basin cleanous, flood control channel cleanups, stormwater pollution prevention activities, capital improvement projects, implementing best management practices, and implementing public education and outreach activities. The County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works and the Flood Control District spends approximately $18 million per year to carryout these responsibilities. For example, the County sweeps over 81,000 miles of streets on a weekly basis. Street sweeping is an effective means to collect litter before it enters catch basins and the storm drain system, thus reducing possible impacts to the environment. In addition, in order to maintain the integrity of the County storm drain system and meet the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit Page 25 requirements, the Department of Public Works cleans out litter from its 78,000 catch basins and additional city owned catch basins at least once a year. In addition, catch basins which receive considerable litter are cleaned up to three additional times a year. Over 644 tons of litter was removed from County and city catch basins in the 2005-2006 rain year. Furthermore, Public Works installs and maintains numerous devices to allow for the removal of litter from the storm drain system. They include 1,026 catch basin inserts and 1,826 curb inlet catch basin retractable screens, 61 "full capture" hydrodynamic separators, 4 end-of-pipe screens, and 21 in-stream floating booms or nets. Figures 8 and 9 --Sample Litter Capture Devices Caltrans Costs The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is responsible for planning, designing, constructing, and maintaining the State's highway system. Caltrans District 7, which consists of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties is the second largest of the 12 workforce districts. It is responsible for maintaining 915 freeway and highway miles in Los Angeles County alone. In fiscal year 2005- 2006, District 7 collected 50,000 cubic yards of litter and debris at a cost of $12 mil{ion, not including the tens of thousands of man hours spent by community service workers collecting litter along the highways. Zero Trash TMDL The quality of storm water and urban runoff is fundamentally important to the health of the environment and quality of life in Southern California. Polluted storm Page 26 water runoff is a leading cause of water quality impairment in the Los Angeles Region. Storm water and urban runoff (during dry and wet weather) are often contaminated with pesticides, fertilizers, animal droppings, trash, food wastes, automotive byproducts, and many other toxic substances generated by our urban environment. Water that flows over streets, parking lots, construction sites, and industrial, commercial, residential, and municipal areas carries these untreated pollutants through the storm drain networks directly into the receiving waters of the Region. A watershed is the land area where water collects and drains onto a lower level property or drains into a river, ocean or other body of water. There are 8 watersheds in Los Angeles County: The Los Angeles River, Sun Valley, San Gabriel River, Ballona Creek, North Santa Monica Bay, Dominguez, Santa Clara River, and Antelope Valley. The Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the County of Los Angeles, and cities within the County are required to by their National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to prevent discharges into its rivers, lakes, and ocean, including the above watersheds. In addition, the Regional Water Quality Control Board recently imposed a total maximum daily load (TMDL) for what can enter these water bodies. Therefore, the County must implement BMPs to meet these TMDL requirements. The County has for years implemented and maintained numerous BMPs to prevent littering and to remove the litter from its right-of-ways and its storm drain system. Recently, the Regional Water Quality Control Board established a Zero Trash TMDL for the Los Angeles River and Ballona Creek watersheds. These TMDLs require a 10 percent annual reduction of trash entering the water body until zero trash is reached by 2014. These TMDLs not only affect the County of Los Angeles, but also many other agencies. For example, the Ballona Creek Trash TMDL also applies to Caltrans and the cities of Los Angeles, Culver City, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, and Inglewood. The Los Angeles River Trash TMDL also affects Caltrans, the City of Los Angeles, and 41 other municipalities within the Los Angeles River watershed. The estimated annual operation and maintenance costs to comply with these requirements for the County of Los Angles and other agencies is expected to exponentially increase in coming years. Anti-littering Law State law requires any person convicted for littering to pay the following fine Between $250 and $1,000 (first conviction) Between $500 and $1,500 (second conviction) Between $750 and $3,000 (third conviction) Page 27 The court may require a person to perform 8 hours of community service by picking up litter.aa However, this law is difficult to enforce because a law enforcement officer must observe the person in the act of littering. In addition, inadvertent plastic carryout bag litter (which is a significant source) is extremely difficult to enforce because it is not possible to identify and fine the person causing the inadvertent litter. '~ Section 374.4 of the Penal Code. Page 28 CHAPTER 4 ECOSYSTEM, ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES Ecosystem Impacts From Littered Carryout Bags Plastic Carrvout Baps Although plastic bag litter creates blight, it also has many adverse effects on marine- and land-based wildlife. Due to the County's extensive and diverse watersheds, many of the littered plastic carryout bags find their way into local beaches, and eventually the ocean. Several studies have reported that up to 90 percent of marine debris is plastic, with plastic carryout bags making up a portion of the litter.39 It is estimated that over 267 species of wildlife have been affected by plastic bag litter, including birds, whales, turtles and many others.40 Although the impacts of plastic carryout bags on the ecosystem are not precisely quantified, several anecdotal reports have documented numerous health impacts on wildlife attributed to plastic carryout bag litter. For example, ingested plastic carryout bags have impacted marine life in the following unintended ways: o Clogging the throat, thus choking the animal o Artificially filling the stomach so that the animal cannot consume food, depriving them of nutrients o Infecting them with harmful toxins that can poison the animal o Entangling the animal, leading to choking, cuts, and even restricting growth" Whales and large birds often swallow plastic carryout bags inadvertently during feeding, which become permanently lodged in the stomach. Turtles swallow plastic carryout bags, since they resemble their main food source, jellyfish'Z Similarly, plastic bags can smother plants, restricting growth and destroying the 3e www.cawrecvcles.ora (May 15, 2007), WWW.plasticdebris.ora (May 15, 2007). °0 http://www.mcsuk.ora/mcsaction/pollution/lifter (May 15, 2007), http lwww.plasticdebris com/PRDS Brochure DOWNLOAD pdf (May 15, 2007). www.marinedebris.noaa.gov (May 15, 2007), http llvvww plasticdebris com/PRDS Brochure DOWNLOAD pdf (May 15, 2007). ~ http://www.seaworld.org/animal-info/Animal- Bvtes/ani malia/eumetazoa/coelomates/deuterostomes/chordala/craniatalreptilia/testudines/sea- turtles.htm (August 1, 2007) Page 29 Plastic film, which includes plastic carryout bags, makes up approximately 29% of the plastic pieces collected. Table 6 --Abundance (pieces/kmz) by type and size of plastic pieces and tar found in the North Pacific gyre Mesh- Styro- Thin size foam PPIMono Plastic Misc./ mm Fra ments Pieces Pellets -filament Films Tar Unid_ .Total >4.760 1,931 84 36 16,811 5,322 217 350 24,764 4.759- 2.800 4,502 121 471 4,839 9,631 97 36 19,696 2.799- 1.000 61,187 1,593 12 9,969 40,622 833 72 114,288 0.999- 0.710 55,780 591 0 2,933 26,273 278 48 85,903 0.709- 0.500 45,196 567 12 1,460 10,572 121 0 57,928 0.499- 0.355 26,888 338 0 845 3,222 169 229 31,692 Total 195,484 3,295 531 36,857 95,642 1,714 736 334,270 Paoer Carryout Baps Littered paper carryout bags do not have the same impact on the ecosystem as plastic carryout bags for the following reasons: o Paper carryout bags are less likely to be littered because they are heavier and less likely to become airborne, as well as have a higher recycling rate (e.g., they are universally collected at curbside and have a recycling rate of 21 percent47); and, Paper carryout bags will biodegrade the negative environmental impacts. in the marine environment, minimizing Biodegradable Canvout Baos Although biodegradable carryout bags will only decompose in a commercial composting facility, no such facilities exist in Los Angeles County. In addition, reports have shown that biodegradable carryout bags can take over five months to partially decompose in marine environments; thus, it is assumed that these biodegradable carryout bags would have similar impacts as regular plastic carryout bags.48 " US EPA 2005 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste, Table 4. '~ The Biodegradation of Mater-Bi Starch-Based Polymer in Freshwater and Sea Water Project Report, December 1996, Dr. Nick McClure, Finders University of South Australia. Page 31 Environmental Impacts From Carryout Bags To comprehensively evaluate the environmental impacts of various carryout bags, published studies were reviewed and analyzed that investigated air qualit4y impacts and energy consumption from different phases of the lifecycle. 9 Although we were unable to locate any current U.S. research publication detailing these impacts, we were able to locate several published studies conducted overseas.50 Based on our review of these studies, the study ~repared in 2002 for the Australian Department of the Environment and Heritages was the most comprehensive and comparable report. The report included a computer model that simulated the life-cycle impacts of various carryout bags. Below is a summary table detailing the environmental findings from this life cycle analysis.52 Table 7 -Australia's Assessment of Akematives Bags Greenhouse Primary Type of Used YVlaterlal Gas Energy lJse Carryout Bag per Consumed Equivalent For One Year Year (kg) (C03) For One (~) Year Reusable (PP 4.15 0.48 1 96 46 3 fiber ba . . Biodegradable 520 6.5 6 61 61 3 starch based . . Sin le HDPE 520 3.12 6.08 210 Kraft Paper Bag 520 22.15 11 8 721 with handles . Boutl ue LDPE 650 11.77 29.8 957 Based on the information above, reusable bags made of polypropylene have the least environmental impact due to the reduced number of bags consumed per year. However, it must be noted that the study may not represent actual conditions in Los Angeles County. For example, the study assumed the following information regarding manufacturing/transportation and disposal: 49 Australian Department of the Environment and Heritage Plastic Shopping Bags -Anaylsis of Levies and Environmental Impacts Final Report, prepared by Nolan-ITU, December 2002, page 28. w Australian Department of the Environment and Heritage Plastic Shopping Bags -Anaylsis of Levies and Environmental Impacts Final Report, prepared by Nolan-ITU, December 2002; SOCIO Economic Impact of the Proposed Plastic Bag Regulations by Bentley West Management; and, Environmental Group Research Report: Proposed Plastic Bag Levy -Extended Impact Assessment Volume 1: Main Report 2005. 51 Plastic Shopping Bags -Analysis of Levies and Environmental Impacts, prepare by Nolan-ITU. sz Australian Department of the Environment and Heritage Plastic Shopping Bags -Anaylsis of levies and Environmental Impacts Final Report, prepared by Nolan-ITU, December 2002, page 36. Page 32 Manufacturina/Transportation 0 67% of HDPE plastic carryout bags were imported from South-east Asia 0 66% of LDPE plastic carryout bags were imported from South-east Asia 0 0% of paper carryout bags were imported 0 100% of biodegradable carryout bags were imported from Italy (but made in Australia) 0 0% of reusable bags imported End-of-Life (Disaosal) Assumptions 0 78.5%, 2%, 0.5%, and 19% of HDPE plastic carryout bags were landfilled, recycled, littered, and reused per year 0 80.5%, 0%, 0.5%, and 19% of LDPE plastic carryout bags were landfilled, recycled, littered, and reused per year 0 39.5%, 60%, 0.5%, and 0% of paper carryout bags were landfilled, recycled, littered, and reused per year 0 80.5%, 0%, 0.5%, and 19% of biodegradable carryout bags were landfilled, recycled, littered, and reused per year 0 99.5%, 0%, 0.5%, and 0% of reusable bags were landfilled, recycled, littered, and reused per year Public Health Impact of Carryout Bags Most plastic carryout bags carry a voluntary warning label which typically states, "Warning: To Avoid Danger of Suffocation, Keep This Plastic Bag Away From Babies and Children. Please Do Not Use This Bag in Cribs, Beds, Carriages and Playpens." Despite the above safety warning, according to the United States Consumer Product Commission, the Commission receives "an average of about 25 reports a year [nationwide] describing deaths to children who suffocated due to plastic carryout bags. Almost 90 percent of them were under one year of age. Recent reports often describe bags originally used for dry cleaning or storage. Some may have been used to protect bedding and furniture, and others just were not carefully discarded."ss ss httpa/www.cosc.qov/CPSCPUBlPUBS/5064.html, April 30, 2007. Page 33 CHAPTER 5 TYPE AND COST OF REUSABLE BAGS Reusable Bag Types Reusable bags are a viable option for consumers because they are typically recyclable, lightweight, durable, washable, and can carry three to four times that of a plastic carryout bag. Reusable bags can be purchased from a number of locations, including grocery and retail stores, and Internet websites such as www.reusablebags.com and www.earthwise.com. Below is list of common reusable bags. Table 8 -Types of Reusable Bags Type Store Avg. Cost Contents ' Whole Foods Non-woven ~~ , (Gives 5¢ back for 52 99 polypropylene ~ , each reusable bag (Plastic #5) used) 100% recyclable 1 Ralphs 51.50 Non-woven (Gives 5¢ back for (50¢ will be polypropylene each reusable bag donated to (Plastic #5) used) environmental groups) 100% recyclable Non-woven 99¢ polypropylene Vons (Plastic #5) 100% recyclable Non-woven polypropylene Albertsons 99¢ (Plastic #5) 100% recyclable Page 34 Type Store Avg. Cost Contents Non-woven polypropylene ~.. .> Target $1.49 (Plastic #5) 100°k recyclable Recycled Products.com $5.00 Cotton canvas S `'""""°'°'"" Etcetera, Etcetera, Etcetera $6.00 100% recycled L° .~ water/soda bottles . 600 Denier ~ $9.99 Polyester : - Papemorplastiacom (4m free) backed with Vinyl ,; (similar to school backpacks) ~ ~9 r ,.. Ecobags.com $10 100% cotton Page 35 Economics of Reusable Bags Although reusable bags cost between 99¢ and $10 each, the savings to consumers can be significant since grocers/retailers cost for purchasing single use carryout bags is no longer passed along to customers (see table below). Table 8 -- Cost Comparison of Carryout Bags Type of Annual Average Cost Annual Cost To Carryout Bag Consumption Rate Per Bag Consumers 3¢ $16 Plastic Bag 600 (ranges between 54 (in hidden costs) 2 5¢) 300 (consumption rate is 10¢ $30 Paper Bag unknown, assumed ' (ranges between (in hidden costs) /: of plastic carryout 5 - 23¢) bags due to size) Biodegradable 600 15¢ (ranges be peen $90 Bag 8 - 17¢) (in hidden costs) 1 (assumes avg. Whole Food consumer will use 3 $2 99 $4.50 Reusable Bag bags/year and will (direct cost) last 2 years before replacement) ~' www.usolastiacom (May 22, 2007), www.restockit.com (May 22, 2007). 55 ~,~, mrtakeoutbags.corn (May 22, 2007), www.restockil.com (May 22, 2007). ~ www.ecooroducts.com (May 22, 2007). Page 36 CHAPTER 6 CASE STUDIES City/County of San Francisco In 2005, the City of San Francisco considered imposing a 17¢ fee on non- biodegradable plastic carryout bags before reaching an agreement with the California Grocers Association. The agreement called for large supermarket stores to voluntarily reduce the number of plastic bags consumed by 10 million in 2006. Although the California Grocers Association claimed that supermarket stores reduced plastic bag consumption by 7.6 million, the City disputed this figure since it was not verifiable. This disagreement led to a renewed interest in banning non-biodegradable plastic carryout bags.57 On March 22, 2007, San Francisco adopted an ordinance banning the distribution of non-biodegradable plastic carryout bags. Effective September 22, 2007, all supermarket stores (generating $2 million or more) must provide their customers one (or a combination) of the following 3 choices: o Biodegradable carryout bags -the bags must display the words "green cart compostable" and "reusable," and display a solid green line that circles the bag. o Paper carryout bags -- the bags must display the words "reusable" and "recyclable," cannot contain old-growth fiber, and be made of 40 percent post- consumer recycled content. o Reusable bags -the bags must be cloth or plastic (greater than 2.25 mils thick) bags.ea In addition, effective March 22, 2008, all pharmacy chains (with more than 5 stores located in San Francisco) must also comply with the above requirement. Supermarkets or pharmacies failing to comply with the Ordinance may face civil liabilities of $100, $200, or $5,00 for the first, second, or third violation, respectively.59 According to the Biodegradable Products Institute, San Francisco is promoting the use of biodegradable carryout bags because it has an advanced residential and commercial food scrap diversion program.60 However, Biodegradable 57 San Francisco Chronicle, March 2t3, 2007, San Francisco First City to Ban Shopping Bags. ~ Plastic Bag Reduction Ordinance, San Francisco County Board of Supervisors, March 22, 2007. 59 Ibid. fig http://www boiworld org/Files/PressRelease/PRsxdBPP odf, May 20, 2007 Page 37 carryout bags usage in Los Angeles County is not practicable at this time, due to the lack of commercial composting facilities necessary to process the biodegradable carryout bags. The nearest facilities are located in Kern and San Bernardino Counties.s' Since transporting biodegradable carryout bags to distant commercial composting facilities involves higher service costs, and adds to traffic congestion and air pollution, it is less ideal in comparison to other alternatives that involve local operations. Additionally, the use of biodegradable carryout bags would not alleviate the litter problem or potential harm to marine wildlife since they have the same general characteristics of plastic carryout bags (lightweight, persistent in the marine environment, etc.). Furthermore, the presence of biodegradable carryout bags in the recycling stream could potentially jeopardize plastic recycling programs through contamination and reduce the quality of plastic resins. This contamination could ultimately result in batches of recyclable plastic materials or biodegradable carryout bags being landfilled. City of Oakland On July 17, 2007, the City of Oakland adopted an ordinance banning the distribution of non-biodegradab/e plastic carryout bags. Effective January 17, 2008, all stores (generating $1 million or more), except restaurant and fast food establishments, must provide their customers one (or a combination) of the following 3 choices: o Compostable or biodegradable carryout bags. o Paper carryout bags -- the bags cannot contain old-growth fiber, and be made of 40 percent post-consumer recycled content. o Reusable bags -the bags must be (1) cloth or other machine washable fabric, or (2) made of other durable material suitable for reuse.sz Stores failing to comply with the Ordinance will be given a written warning. If a store continues to violate the Ordinance, the owner may face civil liabilities of $100, $200, or $500 for the first, second, or third violation, respectively, following the initial warning63 According to City of Oakland's Resolution accompanying the Ordinance, Oakland is banning non-biodegradable plastic carryout bags because: o Of its negative impacts on the environment and wildlife; 81 California Integrated Waste Management Board's Solid Waste Information System (SWIS), wv~v ciwmb.ca.oov/SWIS/Search.aso Ors dinance Banning Plastic Carry-out Bags, City of Oakland, July 3, 2007. 63 Ibid. Page 38 o It's consistent with the City's adopted policy to reduce its reliance on oil; and, o It's consistent with Assembly Bill 2449 (Levine, 2006 Statutes), which "encourage[s] the use of reusable bags by consumers and retailers and reduce the consumption of single-use bags."64 All City sponsored events are also prohibited from distributing non-biodegradable plastic carryout bags effective October 17, 2007.ss On August 3, 2007, the "Coalition to Support Plastic Bag Recycling" filed a petition for writ of mandate under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in Alameda Superior Court. The coalition alleges that Oakland failed to analyze the ordinance's potential environmental impact as required by CEQA. Other States and Cities Considering Restrictions Since San Francisco's move to ban non-biodegradable plastic carryout bags in March 2007, and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors request to investigate the feasibility of banning plastic carryout bags in April 2007, a number of U.S. cities and states have also begun investigating similar measures. State Alaska New York Cities Annapolis, MD Austin, TX Bakersfield, CA [Issue placed on hold] Baltimore, MD Berkeley, CA Boston, MA Fairfax, CA Maui, HI New Haven, CT Oakland, CA [Banned non-biodegradable plastic carryout bags on July 17, 2007] Portland, OR Phoenix, AZ Santa Cruz, CA Seattle, WA s, Ibid. ~ Ibid. Page 39 Elsewhere Several countries have restricted the consumption of plastic carryout bags, through bans, taxes, andlor increased public awareness and recycling. Litter, conservation of natural resources, and negative impacts on the marine environment were the primary reasons of this action. Below is a brief description of several actions. Ireland Effective 2002, Ireland imposed a fee of 20 cents (U.S.) on each plastic carryout bag consumed.ss The primary purpose of the tax, commonly known as PlasTax, was to shift public behavior towards greater use of reusable bags, and reduce plastic carryout bag litter which was impacting the Country's coastline and tourism industry. The collected monies are used to fund litter, waste management, and other environmental initiatives.s7 The Minister for the Environment determined that a consumer fee would be the most effective way to change shopping habits and break consumer reliance on plastic carryout bags. Therefore, a decision was made to impose a fee on consumers. Prior to the PlasTax, an estimated 1.2 billion plastic carryout bags were consumed annually. within months of its inception, the consumption rate dropped precipitously -studies found a dramatic reduction from 328 bags used per person per year to 21 (a 95 percent drop).88 The use of reusable bags has become widely accepted and consumers now carry reusable bags when they go grocery shopping. Moreover, even people who use reusable bags support the PlasTax model because it allows a 'safety net' in case they do not have their reusable bags at the time of purchase. To further reduce plastic carryout bag consumption, effective July 1, 2007, Ireland increased the PlasTax to 25 (U.S.) cents per bag.89 ~ www.environ.ie/en/Enyiro_nmenUWaste/PlasticSagsiNews/MainBodv 3199.en.htm, May 1, 2007. 67 www environ ie/en/Environment/Waste/PlastcBagsiPubllcationsDoaiments(EileDownload 1386.en. dt, May 1, 2007. ~ www.environ.ielen/Env_iro_nmenUWaste/Plastic6agsiNews/MainBodv 3199.en.htm, May 1, http:;lwvrvv.irelard com/newspaper/breaking/2007/0701lbreaking27.htm, July 17, 2QQ7. Page 40 Australia In 2002, it was estimated that Australians were using approximately 6.9 billion plastic carryout bags each year, of which 50 to 80 million bags ended up as litter. In October 2002 the Australian government convened a stakeholder working group consisting of state and local governments, industry, retailers, recyclers, and environmental groups. This stakeholder group established a national voluntary goal to reduce plastic carryout bag litter by 75% and reduce the consumption of HDPE type plastic carryout bags by 50% (by December 31, 2005).70 Retailers were categorized in two groups o Group One retailers (major supermarkets) o Group Two retailers (all others providing plastic carryout bags) Since then, a number of initiatives have been implemented, including voluntary at-store recycling of plastic HDPE type carryout bags. According to a report from the Australia Retailers Association, as of December 31, 2005, Group One retailers spent $50 million on public education efforts over two years which resulted in a 45% reduction in the issuance of plastic carryout HDPE bags and a 14 percent in-store recycling rate. The report concluded that "despite these major achievements, the majority of consumers have yet to alter their behavior," and plastic carryout bag "litter remains static over the five year life ... at around 2% of the total litter stream."" This finding is supported by a subsequent report which found "in Australia, voluntary efforts have seen significant reductions in plastic bag consumption; however these do not appear to have had a noticeable impact on litter with levels remaining approximately the same."'Z (emphasis added) Regarding Group Two retailers, "identifying target retailers and activities to gain their attention, and subsequent commitment to act, proved challenging..." Thus, it's estimated that Group Two retailers reduced their consumption by only 23%.73 Currently, the Australian Retailers Association continues to advocate for more education, and the Australian govemment continues to examine other options to 70 Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Investigation of Options to Reduce The Environmental Impact of Plastic Bags, Environment Protection and Heritage Council, January 2007, page 37. "htto://vvww.ephc.oov.au/pdf/Plastic Baas/ANRA Report to EPHC Chair 22 Mav 2006odf, 'Z Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Investigation of Options to Reduce The Environmental Impact of Plastic Bags, Environment Protection and Heritage Council, January 2007, page 23. 73 Ibid, page 38. Page 41 phase out plastic carryout bags by 2009, including banning them or levyin~ a fee on each plastic carryout bag consumed (similar to Ireland's PlasTax). "~ 7s, s South Africa In 2003, the South African government adopted regulations impacting the manufacture, trade, and commercial distribution of plastic carryout bags in order to combat the plastic carryout bag {fitter problem. The problem was so pervasive that plastic bag litter was commonly referred to as 'the new national flower.' Under the new regulations, all plastic carryout bags must now have a minimum thickness of 24 micrometers (microns). In addition, all monies collected from a 3 cent levy are used to fund cleanup efforts, and promote reuse and recycling," California's New At-Store Recycling Program To increase the plastic carryout bag recycling rate (currently less than 5 percent), in 2006, California passed Assembly Bill 2449 to "encourage the use of reusable bags by consumers and retailers and to reduce the consumption of single-use carryout bags."'s Effective July 1, 2007, all large supermarkets and retail businesses (of at least 10,000 square feet with a licensed pharmacy) are required to: o Establish a plastic carryout bag recycling program at each store; o Make the recycling bin easily accessible and identifiable to customers; o Ensure that each plastic carryout -bag provided to customers be labeled, "Please Retum To A Participating Store For Recycling;"'s o Make available reusable bags which are made of cloth, fabric or plastic with a thickness of 2.25 mils or greater. The stores may charge for reusable bags; and, o Maintain program records for a minimum of three years and make the records available to the California Integrated Waste Management Board or the host jurisdiction. It is estimated that 7,000 stores statewide are affected.80 If large supermarkets or manufactures fail to comply, they may face a fine of $500, $1,000, or $2,000 for the first, second, or third violation, respectively. T4 http //v/ww ephc gov au/pdf/Plastic Baos/ANRA Report to EPHC Chair 22 Mav 2006 gdf. 75 Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Investigation of Options to Reduce the Environmental Impact of Plastic Bags, Environment Protection and Heritage Council, January 2007, page 70. 76 The Daily Telegraph -Australia, July 21, 2007, Plastic Bags Ban Rubbished. " http llwww !fib uct ac za/covpubs/plasticbaos hUn 7e Assembly Bill 2449, Chapter 845, Statutes of 2006. 79 Ibid. Page 42 Although Assembly Bill 2449 does not establish an at-store recycling rate goal or a consumption reduction goal, on June 12, 2007, the California Integrated Waste Management Board adopted emergency regulations establishing reporting requirements to evaluate the effectiveness of the program.81 However, of most interest to local governments is Assembly Bill 2449's preemption clause which prohibits local governments from interfering in the above at-store recycling program, imposing a plastic carryout bag fee on the affected stores, or increasing the above reporting requirements. While it is unclear where the collected plastic carryout bags are taken for recycling, a few businesses indicated that the bags are taken to their distribution centers and shipped to various recyclers throughout the country. Assembly Bill 2449 sunsets on January 1, 2013.BZ Ikea's Self-Imposed Fee On Plastic Carryout Bags On March 15, 2007, to reduce plastic carryout bag consumption, IKEA became the first major retailer in the United States to voluntarily no longer offer a `free' plastic bag to customers. Instead, customers are given a choice of purchasing a plastic carryout bag for 5 cents each (all proceeds in the first year would go towards American Forests to plant trees), or purchasing a 'big blue' reusable bag for 59 cents (down from 99 cents).83 After IKEA introduced a similar program in the United Kingdom last year, IKEA's plastic carryout bag consumption dropped 95 percent.84 w California Integrated Waste Management Board, Staff Report, Agenda Item 14, June 12, 2007 Board Meeting. B' Ibid. es Assembly Bill 2449, Chapter 845, Statutes of 2006. es httD://wvrN.ikea.com/ms/en US/about Ikea/social environmental/environment html, July 17, 2007. ~' htto:!/www.sltrib.com/ci 6384558, July 17, 2007. Page 43 CHAPTER 7 STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS Industry/Grocer Concerns While many plastic products play a vital and important role in enhancing our quality of life, recent proposals by local and state governments to ban plastic carryout bags to reduce litter and increase recycling have concerned the plastic and grocer industries. Although these industries acknowledge that plastic carryout bags are a contributor to the litter problem, they believe that plastic carryout bags are unfairly targeted because the problem is not with the plastic carryout bags themselves, but with the lack public education regarding recycling programs. Industries believe that increasing plastic carryout bag recycling programs at stores and at curbside is the key to reducing litter. Industry also believes that a lack of litter prevention programs is the main cause of litter around parks and beaches (e.g., trash cans often don't have lids or are overfilled, causing trash to spill on the ground and plastic canyout bags to be blown away). In addition, grocers fear a plastic carryout bag ban will result in increased paper bag use, which are heavier, cost more, and ultimately increase the cost to consumers. Arise in cost may also drive consumers to shop at stores not affected by the ban. In addition, grocers fear reusable bags would increase check-out times, thus negatively impacting their business operations. Grocers are quick to point out that many stores already stock reusable bags for consumers to purchase, and that large grocery stores are now required to offer plastic carryout bag recycling stations effective July 1, 2007 as a result of Assembly Bill 2449 (see Chapter 6) -thus, providing consumers more opportunities to recycle and curbing plastic carryout bag litter. Industry believes that with proper public education and promotion, AB 2449 will be successful in reducing the number of plastic carryout bags littered. Examples of Alternative Products Advocated by Industry Crown Poly Crown Poly, a local manufacturer, has created a plastic carryout bag with a reinforced strip on the bottom and reinforced hold handles called the Hippo SakrM Because the Hippo SakT"" is slightly larger then the conventional plastic carryout bag, coupled with the aforementioned qualities, it allows consumers to carry more items in each bag and is capable of being reused as a trash can liner. Page 44 Although the number of conventional plastic carryout bags consumed may be reduced if the Hippo Sakr"" was widely distributed, the litter and environmental impacts associated with conventional plastic carryout bags continue to be applicable to the Hippo Sakr"" DePoly Degradable Solutions DePoly Degradable Solutions, a company based in England, specializes in making plastic products biodegradable by introducing an additive into the manufacture process. The technology, OX0.degradalion, is capable of making plastic carryout bags biodegradable, thus allowing it to breakdown in the natural environment. Because it takes many months for the biodegradable plastic carryout bags to partially degrade in the natural environment, it would not reduce plastic bag litter. Stripes2Stripesr"' Stripes2stripesT° is an emerging company which advocates a system for recycling plastic carryout bags. Under the company's system, plastic carryout bags would have three identifiable diagonal stripes in the lower right-hand corner imprinted with a 1-800 number; consumers would be given a larger plastic bag to store their used Stripes2stripes"' bags; and, when the larger plastic bag is full, consumers would be encouraged to caA the 1-800 number or visit the company's website for instructions on where to take their bag for recycling. Upon evaluating the Stripes2stripesT° program, plastic carryout bag litter would not be reduced since the amount of plastic carryout bags consumed would remain the same; and, the program may contribute to litter since it introduces a larger recycling bag into the marketplace instead of encouraging consumers to store Stripes2stripes'" bags within the same bags. Consumer and Environmental Groups Perspective Plastic carryout bags, although convenient, have numerous adverse environmental impacts, including litter and harming marine wildlife. Consumer and environmental groups cited many of the same studies used throughout this report to support their claims. In addition, these groups also emphasize that local governments should further promote a "reduce, reuse, and recycle" philosophy that educates consumers and businesses on the need to reduce overall plastic carryout bag usage through the use of reusable bags. To discourage the use of plastic carryout bags and curb litter, consumer and environmental groups support a ban or fee on each plastic carryout bag consumed. Page 45 CHAPTER 8 FINDINGS AND OPTIONS Key Findings o Plastic carryout bags have been found to significantly contribute to litter and have other negative impacts on marine wildlife and the environment. o Biodegradable carryout bags are not a practical solution to this issue in Los Angeles County because there are no local commercial composting facilities able to process the biodegradable carryout bags at this time. o Reusable bags contribute towards environmental sustainability over plastic and paper carryout bags. o Accelerating the widespread use of reusable bags will diminish plastic bag litter and redirect environmental preservation efforts and resources towards "greener" practices. Alternatives for the Board of Supervisors to Consider Since plastic carryout bags distributed at supermarkets and other large retail outlets contribute disproportionately to the litter problem, the County plastic bag working group recommends reducing the prevalence of these bags as a first priority. The working group seeks to subsequently investigate measures to reduce the consumption of plastic and paper carryout bags at the remaining retail establishments throughout the County. Based on the above factors, the following alternatives are presented to the Board for consideration. Supplementary measures are also provided below to further strengthen the main altematives. o ALTERNATIVE 1 -Ban Plastic Carryout Bags at Large Supermarkets and Retail Stores One Year After Adoption of Ordinance To reduce plastic bag litter, request the County's plastic bag working group (consisting of the Chief Executive Office, County Counsel, Internal Services Department, Public Works, and other County departments/agencies as appropriate) to draft an ordinance banning plastic carryout bags at large supermarkets and retail stores. All large supermarkets and retail stores Page 47 F. Direct the County's plastic bag working group to investigate measures to reduce the consumption of plastic carryout bags at other retail establishments, as well as evaluate paper bag usage throughout the County. G. Direct Public Works to work with the State, solid waste industry and other stakeholders to develop markets and other programs to reduce plastic bag litter. H. Direct the County's plastic bag working group to establish a Subcommittee to assist in carrying out the functions of the working group, including tracking the reduction of plastic bag litter to comply with the Federal Clean Water Act. I. Direct the County's plastic bag working group to provide asemi-annual progress report to the Board describing progress and efforts to reduce the consumption of plastic and paper carryout bags in Los Angeles County. Page 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DOWNEY BRAND LLP MICHAEL N. MILLS (Bar No. 191762) WENDY LEE BOGDAN (Baz No. 196940) RYAN C. WOOD (Bar No. 232267) 555 Capitol Mall, Tenth Floor Sacramento, CA 95814-4686 Telephone: (916) 444-1000 Facsimile: (916) 444-2100 Attorneys for Petitioner COALITION TO SUPPORT PLASTIC BAG RECYCLING SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA COALITION TO SUPPORT PLASTIC BAG RECYCLING, an unincorporated association, Petitioner, v. CASE NO. VERIFIED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ("CEQA") (Code Civ. Proc. §1085; Pub. Res. Code §21168.5) CITY OF OAKLAND, a municipal corporation, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLAND, collectively and in their official capacities, and DOES 1 through 20 inclusive, Respondents. Petitioner, COALITION TO SUPPORT PLASTIC BAG RECYCLING, an unincorporated association ("Petitioner"), for its Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate alleges as follows: This is an action seeking a writ of mandate to preclude the enforcement of, invalidate, set aside, void or otherwise annul, Oakland Ordinance No. 12818 banning the use of non-biodegradable plastic bags (the "Ordinance"), adopted by Respondent, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLAND (the "Council") on July 17, 2007. The Ordinance has the ostensible policy ofeliminating the use of plastic shopping bags at certain large retailers. A true and correct copy of the Ordinance is attached hereto as Exhibit A. XM1iM1911 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 2. Respondents claim that the Ordinance is a benefit to the environment. However, substantial evidence exists in the record that, if implemented, the Ordinance will result in adverse environmental impacts. These impacts include, but are not limited to, contamination of the process for recycling plastic bags. For example, the Ordinance endorses and anticipates extensive use of compostable bags, which consumers will mistakenly try to recycle as plastic bags. This will contaminate the plastics recycling system, causing more wasted energy and resources. 3. Additionally, substantial evidence exists in the record that the Ordinance will 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 increase greenhouse gas emissions and add more pollutants to water resources by causing a significant rise in the use of other types of bags, including paper bags, which are more costly, generate more pollutants during manufacturing, and require more energy to produce and recycle than plastic bags. 4. Because there is substantial evidence that the Ordinance's environmental impacts aze significant, Respondents have abused their discretion by ignoring the California Environmental Quality Act's ("CEQA") mandate to evaluate environmental impacts, including feasible alternatives and mitigation measures. Pub. Res. Code §§2100Q et seq. Accordingly, Petitioner requests that this Court issue a writ of mandate to preclude the enforcement of, invalidate, set aside, void or otherwise annul, the Ordinance, as well as preliminary and permanent injunctive relief to maintain the status quo as necessary to prevent harm to the environment, until Respondents comply with CEQA. I. PARTIES AND STANDING 5. The COALITION TO SUPPORT PLASTIC BAG RECYCLING is an unincorporated association, which is comprised of individuals and companies concerned about the environmental impacts of the Ordinance. The member companies operate and do business within the City of Oakland and other nearby Bay Area communities. The individual members are residents of the City of Oakland. These companies and individuals pay taxes and formed the coalition for the purpose of representing the interests of the public with respect to the enduonmental impacts of the Ordinance detailed below. On behalf of these member companies and other residents of the City of Oakland, Petitioner challenges the City's approval of the ftfi3e91.3 2 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE Ordinance. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6. Petitioner is a party beneficially interested in the issuance of the requested writ of mandate, because in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21177(c), Petitioner is an organization formed after the approval of the project to maintain an action against Respondents under CEQA. Petitioner also is beneficially interested because members of Petitioner's association, including Fresh Pak Corporation and Kevin Kelly, complied with Public Resources Code section 21177(b) by timely commenting on the proposed Ordinance and objecting to Respondent's lack of compliance with CEQA. Further, Petitioner is beneficially interested because the environmental impacts of Respondent's Ordinance will extend to aeeas in which citizens and companies represented by Petitioner own property, do business and/or reside. 7. Petitioner's membership is comprised of the following: . a. Fresh Pak Corporation. Fresh Pak Corporation is, and was at all times here relevant, a Texas corporation, organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of Texas. Fresh Pak Corporation recycles plastics, including single-use carry out bags commonly provided by retailers to consumers at the point of sale. It procures its materials from Bay Area recyclers, including areas in and neaz Oakland. It also sent correspondence to Oakland commenting on the adverse impacts of the Ordinance on June 26, 2007 and July 3, 2007. b. Kevin Kelly. Kevin Kelly is an individual. He is, and was at all times here relevant, a tax payer, residing in the City of Oakland. Mr. Kelly sent correspondence to the City of Oakland, dated June 26, 2007, commenting on the adverse impacts of the Ordinance, including the danger posed to the plastic bag recycling process, as well as the detrimental environmental effects from the increased use of paper bags. c. Other members of Petitioner include the following companies: Advance Polybag, Inc.; Crown Poly, Inc.; Elkay Plastics Co., Inc.; Grand Packaging, Inc.; Heritage Plastics, Ina; Hilex Poly Company, LLC; and Superbag Operating, Ltd. 8. Moreover, Petitioner has standing as an association to bring this action, because (i) i[s members would otherwise have standing to sue on their own behalf; (ii) the interests Petitioner seeks to protect in this lawsuit are germane to the organization's purpose; and (iii) neither the Nn369U 3 PETITION FOR WR[T OF MANDATE claims asserted herein, nor the relief requested, requires participation of the members in this lawsuit. This action involves public rights, and Petitioner's objective in bringing this action is that of an interested citizen seeking to procure enforcement of the City's public duties and its compliance with applicable state and local laws. 9. Respondent, CITY OF OAKLAND ("Oakland" or the "City"), is, and was at all 10 times here relevant, a municipal corporation and a political subdivision of the State of California exercising local government power. The Ordinance is a "project" under CEQA, and Oakland is the "lead agency." As the lead agency for the project, Oakland is responsible for the prepazation of an environmental document that describes the project, and, if necessary, evaluates mitigation measures and/or feasible alternatives to lessen or avoid any significant environmental impacts. 10. Respondent, Council, is the legislative body duly authorized under the California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Constitution and the laws of the State of California to act on behalf of Oakland. The Council is responsible for complying with CEQA, as well as the California Code of Regulations. (Oakland and the Council aze referred to collectively herein as "Respondents.") 11. Petitioner is ignorant of the true names and capacities of DOES named herein as DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, and therefore sues these Respondents by such fictitious names. Petitioner will amend this Petition to allege their true names and capacities when ascertained. Petitioner is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of these fictitiously named Respondents were, and continue to be, responsible in some manner for the acts or omissions herein alleged. 12. Petitioner is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times relevant, each Respondent, including the DOE Respondents, were the agents, employees, or partners of each of the other Respondents, ahd were at all times acting within the purpose and scope of their employment, agency or partnership, or at the direction of the other Respondents. II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 13. This Court has jurisdiction over the matters alleged in this Petition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1085, and/or section 1094.5, and Public Resources Code section 21168.5, and/or section 21168. Hfi}6Y1 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 14. Venue is proper in this Court under section 394(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ]0 I1 12 13 14 15 16 l7 18 l9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Ill. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I5. In 1970 the Califomia Legislature enacted CEQA primarily as a means to require public entities to document and consider the environmental impact of their decisions. Public Resources Code §§21000-01. CEQA applies to all "governmental agencies at all levels" in Califomia, including "local agencies." Id. Oakland is a governmental agency under CEQA and must abide by its mandates. CEQA specifically states that: [I]t is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there aze feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible altematives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. Pub. Res. Code §21002. 16. On July 17, 2007, the Council adopted the Ordinance, which was added to Oakland's Municipal Code under TITLE 8, HEALTH AND SAFETY. The Ordinance prohibits retail establishments with gross annual sales exceeding $1,000,000 from providing plastic carry- out bags to customers at the point of sale. The Ordinance encourages the use of "compostable" or "bio-degradable" bags, as well as ordinary paper bags. Oddly, the ordinance endorses the use of paper bags even though the recitals acknowledge that paper bags have an "adverse impact on the environment." The recitals make no such acknowledgment about the adverse impacts of compostable bags. 17. The legal impact of the Ordinance will be to ban the use of carry-out plastic bags only by certain large retailers. There will be no prohibition for the use of plastic bags by other retailers. 18. Despite Oakland's ostensible attempt to aid the environment, there is ample evidence [hat this Ordinance will do the exact opposite. For instance, compostable bags and ordinary plastic bags are nearly indistinguishable, yet they have two very different and incompatible recycling systems. AB 2449, implemented on July 1, 2007, is a statewide mandate flfiJM19~J 5 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 4 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 to require the recycling of most, if not all, ordinary plastic bags. Oakland's Ordinance operates to frustrate the objective of AB 2449, in that, by endorsing the use of compostable plastic bags, the public will be confused about the recyclable nature of compostable bags. In fact, when the public attempts to recycle compostable bags it will contaminate the plastics recycling process, rendering the otherwise 100% recyclable plastic bags unable to be recycled. Although Respondents modified the Ordinance to attempt to minimize its impact on contamination of Respondents' food scraps and composting program, Respondents' modification did nothing to address the Ordinance's impact on the recycling of plastic bags. As a result the Ordinance will result in a significant amount of unusable recycled plastic that will ultimately be discarded, adding to landfills and defeating the benefit of recycling. 19. The Ordinance also will result in adverse environmental impacts as a result of consumers' increased use of other types of bags, especially paper bags. There is not a sufficient supply of compostable bags available to meet the demand created by the Ordinance. As a result, there is substantial evidence in the record that retailers and consumers are likely to utilize significantly more paper bags as a substitute, which was presented to Respondents in the form of documented studies prior to their adoption of the Ordinance. Paper bag use increases greenhouse gas emissions, in that more than 60% of paper grocery bags end up in landfills, decomposing and releasing methane gas. Paper bags consume the same, or more, total non-renewable energy in their life cycle than do ordinary plastic bags. Further, according to the EPA, paper in today's landfills does not degrade or breakdown at a substantially faster rate than plastic does, which is due in large part to the lack of water, light and oxygen. 20. By compazison, plastic bags generate 69% less greenhouse gas emissions than an- composted paper bags. Additionally, it takes 91 % less energy to recycle a pound of plastic than to recycle a pound of paper. 21. The increased use of paper bags will also have an adverse environmental impact on water resources. For instance, the manufacturing of paper bags generates 50 times more water pollutants than the manufacturing of plastic bags. 22. In order to afford the fullest possible environmental protection, an analysis of the Nfi]691~ PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 4 6 Ordinance's potential environmental impacts pursuant to CEQA is appropriate and necessary. Given the adverse impacts to the environment as outlined above, Respondents' reliance on a categorical or statutory exemption also is inappropriate, as it would evade the intent of the legislature under CEQA. Oakland's failure to comply with CEQA, including Oakland's unsubstantiated reliance upon CEQA's exemptions, necessitates the need for this Court to issue a writ of mandate to preclude the enforcement of, invalidate, set aside, void or otherwise annul the Ordinance. IV. EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES 23. On June 26, 2007, Petitioner's counsel prepazed a letter addressed to the 10 I1 12 13 14 15 ]6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Honorable Henry Chang Ir., Vice Mayor and At-Large Council Member of Respondent, the Oakland City Council. That letter outlined Petitioner's environmental concerns with the Ordinance, in particular the concern that the increased use of "biodegradable" plastic carryout bags will result in contamination of the plastic bag recycling process. 24. The June 26, 2007 letter outlined other adverse environmental impacts as well, such as the fact that biodegradable bags are only composted if sent to an industrial or food composting facility, and the purported benefits of those bags will not be attained if they fmd their way into a landfill. Additionally, the letter outlined the environmental impact that results from increased use of paper bags, such as the greenhouse gas emissions that result from the breakdown ofpaper bags. The letter also cited the fact that paper bags generate 50 times more water pollutants that plastic bags. Finally, the letter commented on the lack of an applicable exemption under CEQA, as there is substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that Respondents' implementation of the Ordinance would result in significant adverse environmental impacts that would need to be addressed to follow the intent ofthe Legislature. 25. Respondents' response to the June 26, 2007 letter was inadequate. Rather than investigating and addressing the obvious environmental concerns raised in the letter, Council members Nancy Nadel and Jean Quan prepared a Supplemental Agenda Report, dated July 3, 2007, with a very brief and incomplete section addressing CEQA. The report offers little more than a conclusory statement that the Ordinance is exempt from CEQA, as outlined in Paragraph tl616911 7 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE (8) of the report: Although not legally required to articulate the basis for concluding that a project is exempt from CEQA, the City hereby finds and determines that this Ordinance is exempt from CEQA. Specifically, the basis for the exemptions include, without limitation, the following (each providing a separate and independent basis and when viewed collectively providing an overall basis for an exemption): (1) Common-Sense Exemption (CEQA Guidelines section 15061(6)(3)); (2) actions by regulatory agencies for protection of natural resources (CEQA Guidelines section 15307); (3) actions by regulatory agencies for protection of the environment (CEQA Guidelines section 15307(sic)); and/or projects consistent with a general plan (CEQA Guidelines section 15183). 26. Furthermore, Respondents' Supplemental Agenda Report, and accompanying 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 modifications to the Ordinance failed to address any of Petitioners' concems regarding contamination of the recycling stream or increased adverse environmental impacts resulting from the increased use of other types of bags, including compostable and paper bags. Respondents amended the language of the Ordinance to "require" rather than "encourage" markings that differentiate compostable bags from ordinary plastic bags. This does not reduce the adverse impact on plastics recycling and the ensuing environmental impact on the environment. Respondents' basis for requiring the markings is to support Waste Management's "food scraps and yard trimmings composting program," which utilizes "pickers" on the line to ensure that ordinary plastic bags do not get composted. These pickers could easily isolate the relatively few plastic bags that may be mixed with this material. In contrast to the material collected in Waste Managements' food scraps and yard trimmings program, the material collected for the plastic bag recycling program includes substantial quantities of bags, which quantity renders it infeasible to segregate compostable bags from non-compostable bags. 27. Petitioner's counsel submitted a July 3, 2007 reply letter to Respondent's Supplemental Agenda Report to put Respondents on notice that the Supplemental Agenda Report did not adequately respond to Petitioner's concems and that Oakland failed to comply with CEQA. 28. In response, On July 17, 2007, Respondents ignored the comments, approved the Ordinance, and filed a Notice of Exemption (hereinafter "NOE"). A true and correct copy of the Ab3fi91] PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE NOE is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The NOE reasserted the same exemptions from the 4 Supplemental Agenda Report: Reasons why oroiect is eaemot: All the following provide a separate and independent basis for an exemption and when reviewed collectively provide an overall basis for exemption: The project will have positive environmental effects and no possibility of significant adverse effects (15061(b)(3)). The project is consistent with the Land Use and Transportation Element E1R for which an EIR was certified, as well as consistent with other general plan elements, and there are no project specific effects which are peculiaz to the project or its site (15183). The project is designated to protect both the environment (15308) and natural resources (15307). 29. Petitioner has no plain, speedy or adequate remedy at law, and will suffer 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 nreparable harm, in that if enforcement of the Ordinance is not immediately enjoined: (1) Petitioner will not be able to preserve the integrity of the plastic bag recycling program, forcing immeasurable non-biodegradable waste into landfills and a fivther waste ofnon-renewable energy; and (2) the citizens represented by Petitioner will suffer the effect of the increased greenhouse gas emissions, water quality, and other adverse endvonmental impacts resulting from the increased use of paper and other types of bags. 30. Thus, it is necessary for this Court to provide provisional and permanent remedies to Petitioner by means of an injunction and a writ of mandate to prevent Oakland, and each of its agents, officers, employees, representatives, duly elected officials, and all persons acting in concert or participating with it, from implementing and/or enforcing the Ordinance. V. ATTORNEY'S FEES 3l . Petitioner brings this action under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, and other applicable laws, which entitle Petitioner to an award of attorney's fees in actions to enforce an important right affecting the public interest, such as the CEQA violation here in question. 32. In addition to section 1021.5, or in the alternative, Petitioner brings this action on the basis of Government Code section 800, which entitles Petitioner to an award of attorney's fees to overturn Respondents' arbitrary and capricious approval of the Ordinance. /// SR1WU PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE SOLE CAUSE OF ACTION (Abuse of Discretion -CEQA, Public Resources Code §§21000 et seq.) 33. Petitioner realleges and incorporates herein, as if set forth in full, each and every 4 allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 32 of this Petition, and further alleges as follows: 34. Respondents have abused their discretion and failed to act in a manner required by 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CEQA with respect to the Ordinance, because they have failed to adequately address, analyze, or otherwise consider the environmental impacts, necessary or foreseeable mitigation measwes, or a reasonable range of alternatives to the Ordinance. Petitioner further alleges that the specifically articulated CEQA exemptions cited by Respondents in the July 3, 2007 Supplemental Agenda Report and the NOE are inapplicable, arbitrarily applied, and a fiu-ther abuse of discretion intended to evade the intent of the legislatwe under CEQA. 35. Public Resources Code section 21168.5 governs the standard of review of Oakland's decision that approval of the Ordinance was exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines. Under section 21168.5, the standard of review is whether the agency has abused its discretion. "Abuse of discretion" exists if Respondents fail to proceed in a manner required by law, or if its decision was not supported by substantial evidence. 3b. Respondents abused their discretion by relying upon exemptions without substantial evidence in the record to support their decision to do so. The exemptions relied upon by the City include: (i) the "common sense" exemption under section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines; (ii) the categorical exemption of "actions by regulatory agencies for the protection of natural resources" under section 15307 of [he CEQA Guidelines; (iii) the categorical exemption of "actions by regulatory agencies for protection of the environment" under section ] 5308 of the CEQA Guidelines; and (iv) the statutory exemption of "projects consistent with the general plan" under section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines. A. 37. Respondents abused their discretion by concluding that the adoption of the Ordinance was exempt from CEQA under section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, because IG5]fi91.1 1 0 PETITION FOR W RIT OF MANDATE there was no substantial evidence in light of [he whole record to support that conclusion. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 290 221 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 38. The July 3, 2007 Supplemental Agenda Report and the NOE found that the adoption of the Ordinance was exempt from further environmental review under section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. That generic section exempts from CEQA review activities covered by "the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment." This section can only be used in very narrow circumstances that do not apply here. 39. In the case at hand, the Council, not the public, has the burden of proof to demonstrate that its decision to approve the Ordinance will not have a significant impact on the environment. 40. The Council provides no facts or reasoning to support its conclusion that there is not even a possibility that a significant environmental effect would be caused by the Council's approval of the Ordinance. In fact, there is substantial evidence to suggest the contrary. As outlined above, Petitioner provided comments prior to Oakland's enactment of the Ordinance outlining the specific adverse environmental impacts if the Ordinance were implemented. Respondents ignored this and other substantial evidence in the record, and abused their discretion by arbitrarily relying upon this exemption. B. 441. SBetitinri 3380'ii6flthdYXuiddtiiiaes;at9g@ritiallt~yeasmp)N~'ifimiC~lrrtvc~av "actions taken by regulatory agencies as authorized by state or local ordinance to assure the maintenance, restoration, or enhancement of a natural resource where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment." CEQA Guidelines § 15307. Section 15308 of the CEQA Guidelines categorically exempts from CEQA review "actions taken by regulatory agencies, as authorized by state or local ordinance, to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment." !d. § 15308. flfi3691J PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 42. However, where, as here, there is not substantial evidence that adoption of the Ordinance falls within the scope of a categorical exemption, and where, as here, there is evidence in the record that approval of the Ordinance falls within an exception to the categorical exemptions, the agency cannot rely on the exemptions. Save Our Carmel River v. Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, 141 CaLApp.4th 677 (2006); International Longshoreman's and Warehouseman's Union v. Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County, 116 Ca1.App.3d 265 (1981). 43. In determining whether a project meets the requirements of a categorical exemption, courts apply the rule that exemptions must be narrowly construed and that the scope of the exemption should not be unreasonably expanded. No categorical exemption applies to Oakland's adoption of the Ordinance, because a reasonable possibility exists that the Ordinance will cause significant adverse impacts on the environment. 44. As discussed in more detail above, Respondents' arbitrary and unsubstantiated conclusion that the Ordinance meets these exemptions is an abuse of discretion, and unsupported by the evidence. As a result, adoption of the Ordinance was not exempt and Respondents have failed to comply with CEQA. C. Oakland Inaoorooriately Relied On Statutory Exemption Section 15183 45. Section 15183 provides a partial statutory exemption for development projects that are consistent with general plans, community plans, or zoning actions for which EIRs have been prepared. The general plan, for which an EIR was approved, did not foresee the specific environmental impacts from implementation of this Ordinance. In particular, the significant adverse effects on the environment, discussed above, were not envisioned in the general plan. Accordingly, this exemption is inapplicable to the Ordinance. /// /// /// /// /// xn3fiY13 12 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays for: 1. A peremptory or alternative writ of mandate directing: a) Oakland and the Council to rescind, invalidate, set aside, void or otherwise annul, the Ordinance for failing to comply with CEQA; b) Oakland and the Council to comply with CEQA with respect to the Ordinance, including the preparation of a legally adequate EIR; c) A stay of all action under the Ordinance, including its enforcement, by Oakland and the Council pending fmal resolution of this action; 2. For preliminary and permanent injunctive relief; 3. For reasonable attorneys fees; 4. For costs of this suit incurred herein; and 5. For other such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. DATED: August _, 2007 DOWNEY BRAND LLP By MICHAEL N. MILLS Attorneys for Petitioner COALITION TO SUPPORT PLASTIC BAG RECYCLING Bfi3fi91,1 13 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE ~~ ATTACHMENT mss" C ~ L6tr1^Lv` November 12, 2007 The Honorable Tami Jorgensen ' Willits City Council C n L ~ r o a N 1 A 111 E. Commercial Street G e o c e. >: s Willits, CA 95490 Assocla~ ioN RE: Banning Plastic Shopping Bags -Item 7A, November 14, 2007 a,.,° raRr°«r,.r,e,t Deaz Mayor Jorgensen, Presi0ent Peter J. Larkiv y.;N~~ On behalf of the California Grocers Association, I write to inform you of our serious concerns with a prohibition on recyclable plastic cazryout bags. The City Chairman "1 the BoarE Wllllam w A"den°" of Willits and Mendocino County have an opportunity to enable consumers to Raleye „ ,,,r„^,e°,° reuse, and recycle carryout bags of all types. However, prohibiting the reduce ,, , use of plastic carryout bags Mendocino County will not gain an environmental First Y¢e Chair w=hard F. Morga^• 1r. advantage. The negative effects and unintended consequences of a recyclable "°„e°v,~a" M°r `o°a, °„°^w°°a plastic bag ban will likely result in no reduction in carryout bag use, no 4 Si Gh i s infrastructure for proper disposal, and unnecessarily burden grocery stores e<°n re a r KP41" "ems'°'~ financially and operationally. safewav,^r. r,e^aa^,°~ Treasurer The California Grocers Association is anon-profit, statewide trade association B°b L'"g re resentin the food Indus since 1898. CGA re resents a roximatel 500 P g bS' P PP Y 1,^,aeawearememeen.,^e. °mmerre retail companies operating over 6,000 stores in California and Nevada Secretary George Frahm A , B M k On July 1, 2007, the grocery industry implemented statewide Assembly Bill a eo ros. ar ets °"°^ 2449 (Levine, Statutes of 2006), which requires certain grocery and other Pas[ Chair retailers providing plastic carryout bags to implement at-store recycling ]ay M<G°rmack a;° as^r„ Ma,re,. programs. Additionally, stores provide reusable bags for sale to customers. This w'Ve°'ae program provides Mendocino County residents their only easily accessible opportunity to reduce, reuse and properly dispose of plastic carryout bags through recycling. Unfortunately, no jurisdiction within Mendocino County allows curbside recycling of plastic carryout bags, unlike neazly 100 jurisdictions statewide including Petaluma, Santa Cruz, Fresno, and Los Angeles. By prohibiting the use of recyclable plastic carryout bags, grocery stores would be forced to use paper or compostable carryout bags, which provide no environmental benefit. Eliminating one baQ tune does not encouraee consumers to reduce carryout bag usage. In order to reduce carryout bag usage grocery stores discourage double bagging, retrain baggers to pack bags more efficiently, sell reusable bags, and provide public education to Reduce-Reuse-Recycle. 1615 L 8meet, Sulte 450 Sacramento, CA 95814 Tel: 916/448.3545 Fex: 916/668.2793 1020 NorN Lake S[ree[ Burbank, CA 91502 Tel: 818/840.8610 Fax: 818/840.861 I CGA The Honorable Tami Jorgensen November 12, 2007 Page 2 CALIFORNIA Compostable plastic carryout bags will only compost if industrially composted. G a o c e a s Furthermore, compostable plastic carryout bags do not compost in the natural AssocJn noN environment or in a landfill. No opportunities exist to properly dispose of a compostable plastic bag in Mendocino County, while opportunities to recycle WU^v,.,gra«~><<"~~ plastic carryout bags aze currently available and accessible due to the grocery industry's environmental commitment. Additionally, the presence of recyclable Pres;demt carryout bags along with compostable carryout bags will confuse consumers PeterJ. Larkin regazding proper disposable resulting in co-mingling and contamination of '"'`-° = recyclable material. The contamination of recycling and composting feedstock Chairman of [he Board eliminates the mazketability of each final product, eliminating any Wllllam W. Anderson ~~_~= Wes, sarrrme"~° environmental gain. Pirst 9i=e Chair It is important to recognize that carryout bags distributed in Mendocino County ai=hard F. Mmrga°' Jr. H°II°a mM°r F°°"s /S are not necessarily disposed of in Mendocino County and bags distributed in Y ^ `°"°^w °° surrounding communities will enter Mendocino County for disposal. Given this sa=omd v=e Chair a prohibition on the use of plastic carryout bags does not equal reality Kevin Herglm¢ ,a~ewav ~^r , elimination of plastic cazryout bags in Mendocino County. This reality """""'" compounds recycling and composting contamination issues in Mendocino Treaaarer County and will negatively impact the efforts of surrounding communities Bab Ling . umara wenero rro<err, inc. t:"„merre The difference in cost between a recyclable plastic bag and other types of se=rerarv carryout bags is 5 to 10 times more at a minimum. Given these costs, °`°`ge Frahm S B M k prohibiting plastic carryout bags places a financial burden on grocery stores d~er ros. ar ets °"°^ with no environmental gain for the increased cost. When compared to Past Chair recyclable plastic carryout bags, paper and compostable plastic bags present lay McCormack k„, a."r" Marre,= grocers with additional challenges in regazds to procurement, storage, and k"`°"° meeting consumer needs. The California Grocers Association respectfully asks the City of Willits to oppose prohibiting the use of recyclable plastic carryout bags. We encourage the City of Willits and Mendocino County to work in tandem with the grocery industry to continue to provide its citizens with opportunities to Reduce-Reuse- Recycle carryout bags. Sincerely,.~`~ TIMOTHY M. JA Manager, Local Government Relations cc: Members, Willits City Council Members, Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority, Mr. Ross Walker, Willits City Manager, Mr. Mike Sweeney, Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority Manager 1415 L Street, Suite 450 Saaamentq CA 95874 Tel: 916/448.3545 Fax: 976/448.2793 1020 No[th Lake Street Burbank, CA 97502 Tel: 818/840.8610 Fax: 818/840.8611 it !',~ir4,{S~~ X.151'., r.ftii '1't51 4?Cr ( !:'.`,_ St {.. t?FSABY : ,.n ru ~r l.a~s s l~r Sao, It. r..~ea ge Frahas v IC1 ._ ~_~:ph. t =,..~; L s, t C:3i A,t2 t : ,St' < 1"; _~ }':~5~ [;HAI}i ~... ,r 7.5:}4' i)un Ahrars . ~~ ym :1 n.e~ 2 ~ .. .::.b. y;: i i ~+l'11.r1I l~IllY ll'$ if ll4_.M 1.~1.iRJ P9.3~l,l i.~i7'1.1 Sl.1 t.V i~c~.~x~ {~~ ~~~~~.,f~'~~~9 ~~t)fJ-~Q~. }if'. iS :rUC,F0f~Y1 ~' ~._ _~;:er,.. ~ .; t.i i_'•;e; . ~ t ~ .., - ic, .4srr tiatl v'.'j(ItE?1?. ~_ H~~Ui4 . .:! ll .. .., t^ ... Nuti> NucP:in JOha: 'fir. _~G,stt;~i'..= 'iia<p M'zmidin ~Av-as'v t't,,,;rts s=ill i?s, i. s . ~ Biil Csc}:iruon ti; ian 3~. Er mid7. y .. ... ., stau_ _. ,. ..sip a'd:e ~!)~. rita i ~ I ILi _n..., R nr:,h :!oiania i .....~ ~ie~nig~o ., .... •. tlekti Jdrli I`~Cti fj{'LTn tA£>.. s ., lzal) {v U~'Cti+ .c,ei +Jak~c~ jr R6 F'r ~;i0.^ ~~ ... .~, t4.>~ s 1'~ cii :1~: ,i„ ~ . ,.. ~. l.l: ~, [)Jii fih 1'$t763Ii v, i.r-~~ , r ~ r ~rnrae ITEM NO: iii MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION APPROVING CITY'S PARTICIPATION AS SPONSOR OF THE FOURTH CITIZEN U FORUM AND POSSIBLE HOSTING OF EVENT AT THE CITY'S CONFERENCE CENTER Mary Anne Landis of the Citizen U forums has asked for the City's participation as a sponsor and host to the fourth Citizen U Forum entitled Small Town, Mall Town -You Decide. The event will be held on the evening of Thursday, January 29, 2008. The event will be a debate about land use and our local economy. The format will be a Lincoln/Douglas debate moderated by a neutral facilitator. It is intended that both perspectives will be fully presented, so that the citizens of our community can become more informed and make decisions based on accurate information. Representing the small town viewpoint will be Michael Shuman who is an economist and an attorney who understands the multi-faceted reasoning behind localization efforts. Although not yet confirmed, discussions are currently underway with Jeff Adams of Developers Diversified Realty to represent the perspective that a large retail development is the best use of the Masonite property. If unsuccessful in obtaining a participant from Developers Diversified Realty, Citizen U will continue their search in finding a suitable pro-mall speaker. Citizen U has reserved a room at the Conference Center for this event, estimating approximately 200 people in attendance, and is asking for City sponsorship for the room at the City's cost recovery rate of $650.00. Should more space be needed the cost recovery rate for two rooms would be $1,200.00. It should be noted that a previous Citizen U meeting regarding water issues required the last minute opening of the second room. Given the nature of this topic it is likely that two rooms will be needed. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion and possible action approving City's participation as sponsor of the fourth Citizen U forum and possible hosting of event at the City's Conference Center. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: N/A Requested by: Councilmember McCowen and Mayor Rodin Prepared by: Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attarhmant• 1 - F-mail frnm Marv Anna I anriic Approved: L~'~a.,~ Candace Horsley, City ATTACHMENT ~ Page 1 of 1 Candace Horsley From: Mary Anne Landis [malandis@pacific.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 10:38 AM To: Linda Helland; Bert Mosier; Joy Beeler; Tom Mitchell; Kathy Lehner; Candace Horsley Cc: Jeff Adams; Michael Shuman Subject: Citizen U IV: Small Town, Mall town -- You Decide Hello to all the sponsors of Citizen U, With the holidays approaching, I checked my mental calendar yesterday and realized that we have just over 2 months before the fourth Citizen U will occur. This message is to pave the way for you to consider your continued sponsorship of this series. Here's what we know. The debate will be on the evening of Thursday, January 29, 2008. The title of the event will be "Small Town, Mall Town -You Decide", a debate about land use and our local economy. The format will be a Lincoln/Douglas debate moderated by a neutral facilitator. Our intention is to present both perspectives fully, so that the citizens of our community can become more informed and make decisions based on accurate information. Representing the small town viewpoint will be Michael Shuman who is an economist and an attorney who understands the multi-faceted reasoning behind localization efforts. The first two pages of his CV are attached. We have also been in conversation with Jeff Adams of Developers Diversified Realty to represent the perspective that a large retail development is the best use of the Masonite property. DDR has not replied to my most recent inquiry about being a speaker, as well as an invitation to utilize the facilitation services of Fair and Powerful Communication, with whom they have been working. We are hopeful that they will be full participants, helping us to find a speaker and fund the event; if not we will need help in finding a suitable pro-mall speaker. What else are we asking for? This Citizen U will be a more costly event due to the need to find speakers with a regional and/or national perspective to elucidate the discussion. We could use your help in suggesting possible sources of funding, securing some of the funding and of course, as before, with the logistical needs of flyers, ftlming, food, mailings and event day details. We are already working to secure funding from some local businesses who would like to be given mention in our publicity. Based on the attendance at the first three Citizen U educational forums, we think we can expect 200 people to attend this event, maybe more. We would again like to use the Conference Center -- or City Hall as the venue. We understand that the Conference Center may have TV/video capability by that time so that would be our preference. Please let me know about your sponsorship and how you'd like to participate by December 12th. I look forward to working together again. Enjoy your Thanksgiving; we sure have a lively small town to call Home! Mary Anne 11 /29/2007 ITEM NO: ild MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF THE USE OF TASERS AND TASER POLICY FOR THE UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT The Ukiah Police Department has over the last eight years, developed a number of alternatives to the use of a firearms in potentially deadly force type encounters, including enhanced crisis intervention techniques, defensive tactics training programs, and less- lethal alternatives to a firearm. Though these have been helpful, they do not work in all situations. The Taser allows the officers an immediate alternative to the use of their firearm in a deadly force situation. Within Mendocino County, the Mendocino County Sheriffs Office, Willits and Fort Bragg Police Department and the CHP, issue the Taser weapon to their personnel. Staff found that most Northern California and REMIF agencies now issue the Taser to their officers. The purpose of this report is to inform the Council about the Taser weapon, provide industry history and recommendations, and discuss the potential future use of the Taser by the Ukiah Police Department. Continued on page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Authorize the Department to begin the bid and procurement process to purchase Tasers. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: Provide Staff with alternate direction. Requested by: Prepared by: Chris Dewey, Chief Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager; City Attorney Dave Rapport; Jeff Davis, General Manager REMIF Attachments: None ~' Approved:< Candace Horsley, City anager DISCUSSION OF THE USE OF TASERS AND TASER POLICY FOR THE UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT Background The Taser product was first developed and sold in the late 1990's as an alternative weapon in deadly force situations. The weapon was designed to subdue a violent subject for a short period of time. The Taser uses a cartridge containing compressed nitrogen to deploy two small probes that are attached to the Taser by wires with a maximum length of 35 feet. The Taser transmits electrical pulses along the wires and into the body affecting the sensory and motor functions of the peripheral nervous system. These electrical pulses can be used to subdue a person in violent situations. The Taser is now outfitted with a microphone and camera, which provides documentation of the audio and video images of the event. Although the Taser was designed as an alternative to the use of a firearm in a deadly force incident, concerns over the use of the Taser have been raised in the past. In response to this concern, the ACLU of Northern California issued the report, Sfun Gun Fallacy: How the lack of Taser reputation endangers lives, in September of 2005. This report studied 79 law enforcement agencies in Northern California to determine how Tasers were being used, and which agencies regulated their use through Policies and Training Programs. Concern in the study surrounded law enforcement agencies • who had not adopted policies surrounding Taser use in deadly force situations; • had policies which allowed repeated applications which may present unanticipated health effects and danger; • agencies that did not regulate it's use against those who may be adversely affected (pregnant women, ederly, children); • and agencies which did not have effective training programs which accurately reflect the potential danger associated with Taser use. The ACLU study concluded; While the Taser stun gun has the potential to save lives as an alternative to deadly force, it poses a serious health risk as long as it remains largely unregulated. Deaths in the aftermath of Taser jolts are increasing steadily, and there have yet to be sufficient independent studies of the weapon's health effects. However this scenario need not continue. Local law enforcement should follow the above recommendations and reevaluate its training and use polices. At the very least. /bestl practices currently employed by law enforcement in northern and central California should be consolidated and followed so that Tasers do. indeed. save lives rather than end them unnecessarily. DISCUSSION OF THE USE OF TASERS AND TASER POLICY FOR THE UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT Currently, the Ukiah Police Department, along with many other police departments utilizes a shotgun size, less-lethal impact device weapon, as an alternative to using a firearm in a deadly force situation. This weapon fires a baseball size, hard rubber object, which is intended to knock down and incapacitate a suspect so that they can be taken into custody without using deadly force from a firearm. This weapon has proven to be effective as an alternative to using deadly force, but has limitations because of its size. Similar in size to a shotgun, the weapon is stored in an officers vehicle, and its size limits when officers can carry the weapon in critical incidents. Although its use is preferred in deadly force situations, officers have often been confronted with a deadly force situation and this alternative is too far away from the officer to be used. Because of the restrictions of the impact device weapon, most law enforcement agencies now also issue individual Taser weapons to their officers, which can be carried on an officer's duty belt. This allows individual officers an immediate alternative to the use of their firearm in a deadly force situation. Based on the available research, the department desires to begin a discussion with Council over the deployment of the Taser as a deadly force alternative for officers. Staff reviewed in detail each of the ACLU recommendations for safer police practices, and has developed a proposed implementation plan which meets these recommendations. Implementation Plan 1. Adopt Strong Taser Regulations -Tasers should only be used in life- threatening situations. Such a policy would allow Tasers to be used in very limited circumstances and may save lives while avoiding unnecessary deaths. The Department would utilize Taser policy guidelines, which mirror the "Best Practices Taser Policy" created by the ACLU. On-going training on policy and policy changes would be included in Officer's daily training bulletin program, to keep officers up to date on the department's policy and potential changes. 2. Create New Training Materials -Local law enforcement should review the training materials they are utilizing and develop new training materials that more accurately reflect the potential danger associated with Taser use. Staff found that in September of 2007, the Palo Alto Police Department began the planned implementation of the Taser system after a comprehensive study. Their study included designing a training program which met the recommendations of the ACLU report and included: demonstration, in-custody death issues, departmental policy, practical application, crisis intervention techniques and strategies, and written and practical testing. The Department would utilize the training materials and program recently developed by the Palo Alto Police Department as a model in developing an appropriate training program for Officers. The Palo Alto training program is the most encompassing training program developed within Northern California on the use of this weapon. DISCUSSION OF THE USE OF TASERS AND TASER POLICY FOR THE UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT 3. Mandate Openness - We urge local law enforcement and local government to adopt policies favoring disclosure of such documents. The department has used the ACLU standard as the benchmark in creating a deployment plan for this deadly force weapon to ensure highest standards possible. 4. Use of Force Collection - We urge local law enforcement to require collection, collation, and analysis of use of force data. Taser now offers a digital video and audio recording device which is attached to the weapon. This new system, documents the deadly force incident and the actions of the suspect and officer, allowing greater documentation and accountability during the critical event. The mandated use of the digital audio and video collection will document the deadly force incident and the actions of the suspect and officer, allowing greater documentation and accountability during the critical event. Summary: After extensive research and review, staff has found that the Taser weapon does offer an opportunity to save lives if properly used through an effective training program and a highly regulated use policy. Although the department has utilized less-lethal shotgun style weapons in the past, these weapons are limited in their use because of their size. The immediate availability of the Taser on an Officer's duty belt, offers an immediate alternative in deadly force situations. Funding: Initial estimates indicate that it would cost approximately $50,000 dollars to equip and train all 33 sworn officers in the department. Funding for this purchase would be made from the department's asset forfeiture accounts. Further research and bid process would be required before action is taken. Recommendations: The purpose of this report is to inform the Council about the Taser weapon, and discuss the potential future use of the Taser by the Ukiah Police Department. Staff desires authorization from Council to begin the bid and procurement process for Tasers. ITEM NO. lle DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE AN UNINTERRUPTABLE POWER SUPPLY (UPS) AND COOLING SYSTEM FROM AT8~T DATACOMM IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $85,000.00; APPROVAL TO REDIRECT $63,300 FROM ACCOUNT 699.1965.800.000 ORIGINALLY BUDGETED FOR THE STORAGE AREA NETWORK; AND APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $21,700.00 TO ACCOUNT 678.2040.800.000 FROM THE DISPATCH FUND BALANCE. The main server room located in the Civic Center has experienced a significant increase in the amount of computer equipment as the City has modernized its various operations. These increases have out grown the capabilities of the existing power supply and cooling systems. The inadequacy of these systems jeopardizes the longevity and functionality of the equipment and the City's ability to safely store data and provide critical services. The existing UPS lacks the capability to integrate with the City's more sophisticated computer systems to provide uninterruptable managed power. In addition, the current power system is not capably of supplying the needed power for the Emergency Services Dispatch Center to fully function during power fluctuations and outages. Furthermore, other critical services including the City's Emergency Operations Center have no protection for electronic equipment during outages. Continued on Pa e 2 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Authorize the purchase of an Uninterruptable Power Supply (UPS) and Cooling System from AT&T Datacomm in an amount not to exceed $ 85,000.00. 2. Approve the use of $63,300 from account 699.1965.800.000, originally budgeted for the storage area network to the UPS system. 3. Approve a budget amendment of $21,700.00 for account 678.2040.800.000 from the Dispatch Fund Balance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject recommendation(s) and provide direction to staff FUNDING: Amount Budoeted $63,300 N/A Account Number 699.1965.800.000 678.2040.800.000 Additional Funds Requested N/A $21,700* *Fund from Dispatch Fund Balance Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Steven Butler, IT Supervisor Prepared by: Steven Butler, IT Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1 -Price Quote APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Ma ger As previously indicated, the cooling system for the server room is also inadequate. The room is currently cooled by a standalone portable cooling unit that has exceeded its ability to cool the room as evident with temperatures exceeding 80 degrees even on moderate days. The inability to control the heat generated in the server room significantly increase the likelihood of equipment failure. In an effort to correct the power and cooling system inadequacies, the IT Department recommends the acquisition of a dual uninterruptable power system and cooling unit for the server room. In review of potential systems, AT&T DataComm was determined to be the only qualified company with the knowledge of the City's network infrastructure to plan and safely complete installation. Integration of the UPS systems will require careful implementation into the existing Public Safety computer systems on the network. The goals for replacing the UPS and cooling system are to protect the City's computer network from power supply fluctuations, allow for adequate time for controlled automated system shutdowns in cases of extended power outages, and maintain server room temperatures at 70 degrees while systems are operating. Staff requests authorization to purchase a dual UPS/cooling system and installation from AT&T DataComm in an amount not to exceed $85,000. Given the critical need for the UPS/cooling system, Staff recommends using $63,300 originally budgeted for the storage area network in the 699.1965.800.000 account and rescheduling the storage area network project for next fiscal year. Furthermore, Staff recommends using the Dispatch Fund Balance to cover the additional amount of $21,700 for the Dispatch Center which will require the approval of a budget amendment to account 678.2040.800.000 (Dispatch). ATTACHMENT~- at&t 2600 Camino Ramon San Ramon, CA 94583 Phone: 925.824.9721 Fax: 707.435.6306 To: City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Attn: Steven Butler sbutlaRC7aiyofukiah rom Ph: 707-707-463-6209 AT&T DataComm Price Quotation Duofation Valid for 10 Days From Application Specialist: Inside Sales: Sales Engineer: Date: 10/12/2007 Matt Rhodes 707.585.5510 Steven Chang 925.824.9721 John Williamson 925.603.3477 quote Number: APC2007-07-11-02A Duote Total: E 62,415.fi3 Calnet 2 Contract Product Item Description pty Unit List Prlee Dlsc. % Unit Diac. Price Extended Disc. Price E UIPMENT APC 20 KW APC ISX-20KF 206V 20kW UPS w/ B ass and Distribution 1 $ 0% $ S APC APC APC ISX-20KF BASE UPS W DISTR OG-SY20KF DISTRIBUTION BREAKERS 120V ISX-20KF BASE UPS W DISTR GENERIC ASSV SVM 20KVA 3PH 208V W/DIST TYPE 8 AMP OF DISTRIBUTION CKT BRKS 1 1 1 $ S 13,852.24 $ 0% 0 % o% $ - E 13,852.24 $ - $ E 13,852.24 $ APC OM~264 3-Pole, 20A Bolt-On S uare D Breaker 2 $ 72.28 0% $ 72.28 $ 144.56 APC OM-0216 S/A BLANK PNL 1P CKTBRK NAM PSX-PDU 32 $ 24.85 0% $ 2a.85 8 795.20 APC OM-5363 S/A TESTED BRKR 1 P 30A PNL 1 $ 39.53 0% $ 39.53 8 39.53 APC DISTRIBUTION CORDSETS 120V OVERHEAD DISTRIBUTION CORDSETS i $ 0% $ - $ APC OM-5350-007 TC 5WIRE W/L21-20 7 FT 1 $ 77.93 0% $ 77.93 $ 77.93 APC OM-5350-011 TC 5WIRE W/L21-2011 FT 1 $ 84.71 0% $ 84.71 $ 84.71 APC OM-5356-015 TC 3WIRE W/L5-3015 FT 1 S 114.07 0% S 114.07 $ t1a.07 APC ISX-20KF OPTIONS 8 ACCESSORIES ISX-20KF OPTIONS BACCESSORIES 1 $ 0% $ - $ APC OM-5011 ASSY ISX-20KF FINAL ITEMS 1 $ 429.18 0 % $ 429.18 $ 429.18 APC APC SYPMIOKF SYBT4 S mmetra PX 10kW Power Module, 208V Bade Module (orS mmetra PX Or Smart-UPS VT 3 4 $ 3,768.85 $ 1,292.05 0% 0% $ 3,768.85 $ 1,292.05 S 11,306.55 $ 5,168.20 APC AR3100 NetShelter SX 42U 600mm Wide x 1070mm Dee Enclosure 2 $ 1,071.81 0% $ 1,071.81 $ 2,143.fi2 APC AP7862 Rack PDU, Metered, Zero U, 5.7kW, 120V, (42)5-20 2 $ 382.87 0% $ 382.87 8 765.74 APC AR8163ABLK Data Cable Partition, NetShelter, 600mm Wide, ass-throw h 2 $ 38.40 0 % $ 38.40 S 76.80 APC AR8112BLK NetShelter VXNS Bolt Down Bracket Kit -Black 1 S 38.40 0 % E 38.40 E 38.40 APC APC AR7701 AR8161ABLK NetShelter SX Bolt-Down Kit Power Cable Trou h, NetShelter, 600mm Wide 2 2 E 49.69 E 66.64 0 % 0 % $ 49.69 $ 66.64 E 99.38 $ 133.28 APC APC APC AR8162ABLK AR8160ABLK AR8160ABLK Data Cable Partition, NetShelter, 600mm Wide Power Cable Trou h, IntraStruXure PDU, 600mm Wide Power Cable Trou h, InfraStruXure PDU, 600mm Wide 2 1 1 $ 38.40 $ 66.64 $ 66.66 0 % 0% 0% $ 38.40 $ 66.64 $ 66.6a 8 76.80 $ 66.64 8 66.64 APC AR8162ABLK Data Cahle Partition, NetShelter, 600mm Wide 1 $ 38.40 0% E 38 40 $ 38 a0 APC AR8163ABLK Data Cable Partition, NetShelter, 600mm Wide, assihrou h 1 S 38.40 0 % $ 38.40 $ 38.40 APC APC AP9340 AP92200 APC Environmental Marta er IntraStruXure Marta erA liance 1 1 S 402.07 $ 1,609.41 0% 0% $ 402.07 $ 1,609.41 $ 402.07 $ 1,609.41 APC AP9430 IntraStruXure Marta er, 25 Node License Onl 1 8 807.53 0 % $ 807.53 $ 807.53 APC 3827GY-5 APC CATEGORY 5 UTP 5688 PATCH CABLE, GREY, RJ45M/RJ45M 1 $ 1.52 0% $ 1.52 $ 1.52 APC 3827GY-10 APC CATEGORY 5 UTP 5688 PATCH CABLE, GREY, RJ45M/RJ45M 5 $ 2.32 0% $ 2.32 8 11.fi0 APC 3827GY-15 APC CATEGORY 5 UTP 5688 PATCH CABLE, GREY, RJ45M/RJ45M 2 $ 2.61 0% S 2.61 $ 5.22 APC APC APC 47136WH AP9224110 AR8429 APC CAT 5 INLINE COUPLER, RJ45 FEMALE TO FEMALE, STRAIGHT THROUGH, WHITE APC 24 PoA 10/100 Ethernet Switch Horizontal Cable Or anizer 1 U w/hrush stri 2 1 1 $ 4.72 $ 236.05 S 28.24 0% 0 % 0 % $ 4,72 $ 238.05 E 28.24 $ 9.44 $ 236.05 $ 28.2q APC AP9335TH APC Tem rature & Humidi Sensor 1 $ 72.28 0% $ 72.28 $ 72.28 APC AP7802 Rack PDU, Meteretl, 2U, 30A, 120V, 16 5-20 1 S 520.66 0 % $ 520.66 S 520.66 APC ACSC700 IntaStruXure InRow SC Air Cooled Self Containetl 200-240V 60Hz 2 $ 5,590.59 0% $ 5,590.59 $ 11,181.18 APC ACAC70021 InRow SC Brid a Trou h, Power and Data Cables 1 $ 145.69 0 % 8 1a5.69 E 1a5.69 8 SERVICES APC WASSEM-AX-14 Scheduled Assembly and Start-Up Service for In-Row DX SKW self contained coolin solution. 2 $ 1,104.56 0% 8 1,104.56 $ 2,209.12 APC WSTRTUP7X24-PX-21 Start-Up Service for (i) Symmetra 40kW UPS and/or (1) PDU 1 $ 617.69 0% $ 817.69 $ 617.69 APC APC WASSEMUPS-PX-21 WASSEM7-3R-PX-10 Scheduled Assembly Service for Symmetra PX 20/40KW UPS and/or PDU Scheduled Assembl of i-3 Additional Racks 1 1 $ 909.18 $ 313.98 0% 0 % $ 909.18 $ 313.98 $ 909.18 $ 313.98 APC WSITECOORD Site Coordination Service 1 $ 2,835.95 0% $ 2,835.95 $ 2,635.95 Please FAX Purchase Orders To: Fax: 707.436.6306 Attn: Steven Chang ATBT DataComm 2600 Camino Ramon San Ramon, CA 94563 Wireless Equipment Total S 50,587.16 Sales Tax 7.375 % S 3,730.80 Maintenance Total Installation Total S 7,085.92 Estimated Ground Shipping S 1,011.74 Total S 62,415.63 Phone: 925.824.9721 Purchase orders shall indicate payment terms of net 30 days from date of invoice. Equipment invoices are issued when Equipment is delivered to carrier. Service invoices are issuetl 30 days after services are rendered. Maintenance Service invoices are issued in full on date of contract. The purchase price is F.O.B. frst point of shipment. Title to Equipment and risk of loss pass to Buyer upon delivery to carrier. Licensor retains title to any software provided with Equipment and grants Buyer a license for the software according to the software license agreement. ((Equipment arrives damaged, Buyer will immediately notify the carcier and Seller in writing. Shipping date is estimated. Seller is not liable for an dela s or dama a in delive or shi ment. at&t 2600 Camino Ramon San Ramon, CA 94583 Phone: 925.824.9721 Faz: 707.435.6306 70: City of Ukiah Dept of Public Safety 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 Attn: Capt. Chris Dewy Ph: 707-707-463.6200 AT&T DataComm Price Quotation Quotation Valltl for EO Daya From Application Specialist: Inside Sales: Sales Engineer: Date: 10/12/2007 Matt Rhotles 707.585.5510 Steven Chang 925.824.9721 John Williamson 925.803.3477 Quote Number: APC2007-07-31-02B Quote Total: $ 21,414.49 r,w,.. ~ r,......._, Product Item Description Qty Unit Llat Price Dlae. % Unit Dlae. Price Extentled Oisc. Price E UIPMENT Quote -1EF6BFX/1 pPC 20 KW APC SYA72K16PXR APC Symmetra LX 12kVA Scalable to 16kVA N+t Ext. Run Tower, 208/240V In ut, 208V/240V and 120V Out ut 1 E 13,272.9a o% 8 13,272.94 $ 13,272.94 APC aPC SVBTS SYPM4KP APC S mmetfa LX Bade Module APC S mmetra LX 4kVA Power Module, 200/208V 4 1 $ 370.59 $ 1,477.65 0% 0% $ 370.59 8 1,477.65 $ 1,482.36 E 7 A7Z65 E ICES APC APC WONSITENBD-SY-16 WSTRTUP7X24-SY-16 1 Year Next Business Day On-Site Service for Symmetra, Matrix-UPS, SUDP Start-U Service 7x24 fors mmetra Matrix-UPS, SUDP 1 1 $ 1,088.24 E 1,529.41 0% 0% 8 1,088.24 8 1,526 Al 8 1,09824 g 1,529.41 APC WASSEMUPS-3R-SY-00 InfraStruXUre ASSemb Services 1 $ 981.18 0% $ 981.18 $ 681.16 Please FAX Purchase Orders To: Fax: 707.435.6306 Attn: Steven Chang ATBT DataComm 2600 Camino Ramon San Ramon, CA 94583 Wireless Equipment TOtal E 16,232.95 Sales Tax 7.75 % S 1,258.05 Maintenance Total E 1,088.24 Installation Total E 2,510.59 Estimated Grountl Shipping E 32d.66 Total S 21,414.49 Phone: 925.824.9721 Purchase orders shall indicate payment terms of net 30 days from date of invoice. Equipment invoices are issued when Equipment is delivered to carrier. Service invoices are issued 30 days after services are rendered. Maintenance Service invoices are issued in full on date of contract. The purchase price is F.O.B. frst point of shipment. Title to Equipment and risk of loss pass to Buyer upon delivery to carrier. Licensor retains title to any software provided with Equipment and grants Buyer a license for the software according to the software license agreement. If Equipment arrives damaged, Buyer will immediately notify the carrier and Seller in writing. Shipping date is estimated. Seller is not liable for an dela s or dams a in delive or shi merit. ITEM NO: > if DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION CONCERNING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SPECIFIC PLAN FOR A PORTION OF THE DOWNTOWN SUMMARY: At the November 15, 2007 Strategic Planning session, the group discussed the concept of having a Specific Plan prepared for a portion of the downtown to assist with economic development and redevelopment efforts. At the conclusion of the discussion, it was decided to continue the discussion at the December 5`h City Council meeting. This Agenda Item is intended to initiate the continued discussion and to seek direction from the Council regarding the possible formation of a City Council Subcommittee to discuss the concept further and report back to the City Council. What is a Specific Plan? A Specific Plan is a tool for sparking the implementation of the General Plan. It can be as general as setting forth broad policy concepts, or as detailed as providing direction to every facet of development from the type, location and intensity of uses to the design and capacity of infrastructure; from the resources used to finance public improvements to the design and type of buildings and land uses. Why Prepare a Specific Plan for a Portion of the Downtown? The Ukiah General Plan contains goals and policies for preserving and enhancing the downtown, and includes implementation measures to provide incentives and support for improving and restoring buildings and maintaining the character of the downtown. A Specific Plan would help provide the incentive and support for fostering positive redevelopment and enhancing the unique character of the Ukiah downtown. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss the concept of preparing a Specific Plan for a portion of the Downtown and consider establishing a Subcommittee to explore the concept further and report back to the City Council. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1 -Strategic Plan Background Information APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Mana er It would also provide a tool for organizing priorities and redevelopment projects, as well as a mechanism for attracting interest in the downtown. It would provide the avenue for the City to partnership with the business community and property owners in a leadership role ratherthan a role of reacting to proposed change. It would also establish public/private partnership opportunities that could initiate positive change more rapidly than it has occurred in the past. Factors of Change: There are currently a number of significant factors that could cause changes to the downtown. These include the Courthouse Relocation project, the Masonite/DDR project, the Palace Hotel, The Redevelopment Agency projects discussion, the Downtown Parking Study, and the Form Based Code project. A Specific Plan would provide a process and tool for managing these factors, solidifying the City's goals, establishing priorities, and identifying funding sources and responsibilities. Subcommittee: One option for exploring the Specific Plan concept further that was briefly discussed on November 15`" was the establishment of a Subcommittee. This initial group could consist of two Councilmembers, two Planning Commissioners, and Staff. The purpose would be to sound-board the concept further, define the purpose and scope of the effort, and discuss the potential boundaries of the Specific Plan area. The Subcommittee could also prepare recommendations to the City Council regarding the process, funding, and the roles of property owners, interest groups and organizations, and Staff. RECOMMENDATION: Discuss the concept of preparing a Specific Plan for a portion of the Downtown and consider establishing a Subcommittee to explore the concept further and report back to the City Council. 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 WHAT IS A SPECIFIC PLAN? 1. A Specific Plan is a tool for the systematic implementation of the general plan. It effectively establishes a link between implementing policies of the general plan and the individual development proposals in a defined area. 2. A Specific Plan may be as general as setting forth broad policy concepts, or as detailed as providing direction to every facet of development from the type, location and intensity of uses to the design and capacity of infrastructure; from the resources used to finance public improvements to the design guidelines of a subdivision. 3. A Specific Plan may encompass an area containing thousands of acres or as small as a single acre. 4. A Specific Plan may be developed in response to a single policy issue, or to address each applicable policy of the general plan. It may also diverge from the issues contained in the general plan into other subjects viewed by the community as being of relevance. WHAT ARE THE CONTENTS OF A SPECIFIC PLAN? 1. To an extent, the range of issues that is contained in a Specific Plan is left to the discretion of the decision-making body. However, all Specific Plans, whether prepared by a general law city or county, must comply with Sections 65450 - 65457 of the Government Code. These provisions require that a Specific Plan be consistent with the adopted general plan of the jurisdiction within which it is located (see Statutes below). 2. Specific Plans must be consistent with any Airport Land Use Plan pursuant to Public Utilities Code §21676. In turn, all subsequent subdivision and development, all public works projects and zoning regulations must be consistent with the Specific Plan. 3. Specific Plans typically contain an Introduction, Vision Statement, Goals, Development Standards, and an Implementation Strategy. Additional topics can be customized into a Specific Plan, such as open space, circulation, development sustainability, etc. WHY PREPARE A SPECIFIC PLAN? The initiation of the Specific Plan process may be motivated by any number of factors including development issues or the efforts of private property owners, elected officials, citizen groups, or the local planning agency. As with a general plan, the authority for adoption of the Specific Plan is vested with the local legislative body pursuant to §65453(a). However, unlike the general plan, which is required to be adopted by resolution (§65356), two options are available for the adoption of a Specific Plan: 1) adoption by resolution, which is designed to be policy driven, or 2) adoption by ordinance, which is regulatory by design. When a Specific Plan is prepared in consultation with affected property owners and local citizens, and adopted by the City Council, it provides a definitive set of rules for the development or redevelopment of a defined area. It is typically more detailed than a zoning code because it can take the forward step of identifying specific developments on specific parcels, specific development standards for those projects, and how those developments would be financed. In the end, the level 3 of certainty for the property owners, community members, decision makers, and developers is higher than that provided by a zoning code. ADVANTAGES OF A SPECIFIC PLAN A thorough Specific Plan can enable planners to effectively implement selected long term general plan objectives in a short time frame. The enabling statutes are flexible, allowing public agencies to create standards for the development of a wide range of projects or solutions to any type of land use issues. 2. The plan may present the land use and design regulations which guide the development of a city center or incorporate land use and zoning regulations, infrastructure plans, and development approval processes for the development of residential, office, commercial and open space uses. 3. The plan may be organized into a concise set of development policies and include land use regulations, a capitol improvement program, or financing program within a single document. 4. A Specific Plan may be used to implement the policies of an optional economic development element of a general plan. Policies of the general plan which are specific to financing infrastructure improvements and extensions, or cost recovery programs may be implemented by matching land uses with supporting public facilities. This is done to assist development engineering departments and developers avoid ineffective or undersized streets, sewers, water lines, and other necessary improvements. In addition, it may directly impose exactions in association with the general plan's capitol improvement policies. The Specific Plan process must provide opportunities for the general public, as well as residents located within planning areas, to assist in the planning of their particular communities. Public involvement helps define the community's vision of future growth and development. Future development proposals may benefit from the foundation created by the Specific Plan. For example, a Program EIR adopted to fulfill the plan's CEQA obligation may streamline the processing of subsequent discretionary projects by obviating the need for additional environmental documentation. The Specific Plan represents a good tool for developing a community "sense of place." A creative and innovative Specific Plan may bridge-the-gap between monotonous urban development and a livable neighborhood. DISADVANTAGES OF A SPECIFIC PLAN The Specific Plan also has disadvantages. These include the time, cost, and obligation of staff resources. To be effective, the plan requires the collection and analysis of significant amounts of detailed data. Since most planning agencies do not have the staff to commit to the preparation process, most plans include the involvement and cost of outside consultants. Similarly, the incorporation of the plan into the day to day planning processes may require the commitment of additional staff time, particularly when the plan establishes regulations which are only applicable to the area affected by the plan. Further, Specific Plans prepared for a single project may become obsolete if the project is not implemented. The result could include the need for extensive revision or repeal. 4 3. The adoption of a Specific Plan does not vest development by statute, but its entitlements may be defined by development agreements and vesting tentative maps. Specific Plans themselves are dynamic documents and may be subject to change. There are no assurances to residents and project proponents that the plan will not be subject to future revisions. WHAT ARE THE STAUTORY REQUIREMENTS OF A SPECIFIC PLAN? Section 65451 of the Government Code mandates that a Specific Plan contain: (a) A Specific Plan shall include a text and a diagram or diagrams which specify all of the following in detail: (1) The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan. (2) The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan. (3) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable. (4) A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraphs (1), (2), and (b) The Specific Plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the general plan. ITEM NO: i 1 MEETING DATE: December 5, 2007 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2008 The City Council determined a process for selection of the rotation for Mayor at their December 6, 2006 Council meeting. A copy of the minutes is attached for Council's review of the process that was approved. As the only Council members having only two years left in their terms, Mari Rodin was designated as Mayor and Doug Crane as Vice Mayor. The process was then to be one of rotation according to seniority. Unless the process is changed by the Council, this item is placed on the agenda to confirm that the next senior member, Councilmember Phil Baldwin, would accept the Vice Mayor appointment and current Vice-Mayor Crane would accept the Mayor position for the December 19, 2007 Council meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and determine the appointment of Vice Mayor. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: n/a Citizens Advised: Requested by: City Council Prepared by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Coordinated with: Attachments: 1. Minutes of December 6, 2006 Candace Horsley, City Manager ~` nv`~ ATTACHMENT ~ in the Amount of $28,881.19 and Authorize Budget Amendment for Same Using the Department's Equipment Replacement Funds j. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Lease Agreement with South Ukiah Little League for a Portion of the Riverside Park Property. k. Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute a Lease Agreement with Astro Business Technologies for Two Copy Machines for the City of Ukiah Administrative Offices and Approve a Budget Amendment in the Amount of $5,069. Pulled to Agenda Item ll.e. I. Report to Council Regarding the Purchase of Professional Services From RRM Design Group for Grant Writing Technical Assistance for the Proposition 50 California River Parkways Competitive Grant Program for Riverside Park Development Project in the Amount of $10,000 Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Thomas, McCowen, Crane, Rodin and Vice Mayor Baldwin NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None 8. 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. Lilian Zucker requested cross walks and sidewalks be installed on Clara Avenue.6:51:23 PM 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PMl None 10. FINI HED B 1 IS NESS a. Determination of Process for Aooointment of Mavor and Vice Mavor• Aooointment of 'yi Mavor and Vice Mavor 6:51:39 PM "~ Vice Mayor Baldwin requested discussion regarding the appointment process. Councilmember Rodin stated it is common to make the appointment based in order of seniority. Councilmember McCowen stated the Council is free to devise any appointment method and, Councilmember Thomas advised it is important to keep in perspective, the Council as a whole and entertained a discussion identifying what the Council feels is important qualities and responsibilities of a Mayor. Vice Mayor Baldwin stated he believes fairness to Council members and to the public is important and stated he would be willing to set aside the Mayor appointment to allow other Council members the opportunity. 6:57:54 PM PUBLIC COMMENT OPENED Gordon Elton requested Council consider including fairness to staff to Vice Mayors list of fairness. He suggested that the least desirable method of selection is by the number of votes each member had received in the election and feels that the ability to run a meeting is key to being an effective mayor. 6:59:51 PM John Graff recommended that the Councilmember receiving the highest percentage of votes be appointed Mayor and rotate to the next highest the following year. 7;03:20 PM Grega Foss suggested the two Council members having two years left in office (Councilmembers Rodin and Crane) be appointed first, allowing each Councilmember to serve as Mayor for aone-year term. Once the first year appointment sunsets, the other Councilmember could accept or reject the appointment to Mayor. 7:05:39 PM 7:06:16 PM Jim Mulheren and Diane Zucker also spoke to the issue. 7:07:30 PM PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED Discussion ensued regarding: r The decision to appointment a Mayor is based on a process not a person; Council members would rotate into the position; > Fairness to council members, community and staff is important; Appointment possibly could be made to one of the two Councilmembers having two years left of their terms (Rodin and Crane); > The length of the term could be six months; concern is the °learning curve" 7:20:59 PM PUBLIC COMMENT OPENED Greg Foss stated asix-month term is not long enough and expressed appreciation of Vice Mayor Baldwin re-opening public comment. 7:22:50 PM PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED 7:24:00 PM M/S Rodin/Thomas to begin with one year terms and follow Greg Foss's suggestion of those having two years left, begin the cycle and rotate according to seniority through the others. Anybody would have right to pass on being Mayor if they like. Discussion: Councilmember McCowen noted that the motion did not identify who would be Mayor. Councilmember Rodin stated the motion begins the process, with Councilmember McCowen replying that naming who shall be Mayor is part of the process because the criteria hasn't been completely determined on choosing between the Councilmembers having two years left to their terms. Councilmember Rodin apologized for having left out "seniority". M/Rodin to modify the motion adding "seniority". Councilmember Thomas accepts the amendment. Discussion: Councilmember McCowen stated he will vote "no" on this motion, stating he believes this action is a political process and that it is important to pick someone who will get the process off to a smooth start. He stated that this Council can not bind any future Council to follow any particular process. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Thomas, Crane, Rodin and Vice Mayor Baldwin NOES: McCowen; ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None M/S Baldwin/McCowen appointing Councilmember Crane as Vice Mayor for the concurrent term with the Mayor. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Thomas, McCowen, Crane, Rodin and Vice Mayor Baldwin NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None Mayor Rodin presided over the meeting. 7:37:09 PM b. Receive Status Report Concerning Sian Ordinance Enforcement Activities and Provide Direction to Staff 7:37:20 PM Building and Planning Director Stump brieFly discussed the staff report stating that the Department is working on educating the public regarding the rules and getting compliance for A-frame signs. He reported that encroachment issues have developed which will also be part of the public's educational process. Discussion ensued regarding encroachment permits being issued through the City's Planning Department. The Risk Manager and Planning Director should review insurance requirements and fees. Fall 2007 State Street Sidewalks Completed! Construction has wrapped up on the fourth and final phase of the State Street Sidewalk Improvement Project. Taking place in the 400 and 500 blocks of State Street, Phase IV of the long-term project was completed at the end of May. Phase [II of the sidewalk project, along the 600 and 700 blocks of State Street, was completed in 2002; Phases I and II, along the 800 to 1200 blocks, were completed in 2001. The project goals have been to improve pedestrian circulation and safety, improve business visibility, enhance landscape diversity, and provide pedestrian amenities, thereby creating a more pedestrian-friendly State Street Plaza. Redevelopment Agency funds were allotted for the basic project of landscaping improvements and replacement of the existing colored concrete sidewalk. However, in all phases, property owners expressed a preference for additional enhancements, includingbrickpavers and a holiday lighting system. With coordination by the Agency, property owners voted for the formation of Public Works Benefit Assessment Districts to cover costs above the basic project scope. The Santa Barbara Downtown Organization managed public relations, directing their efforts to keeping the downtown businesses and public informed of the project schedule and to promote "business as usual." Frequent public meetings were also held during construction to maintain an open forum with the community. Phase III of the project formally opened in June 2002. Accolades followed in 2003 when Santa Barbara Beautiful bestowed the Open Public (continued on page 2) Highlights Granada Theatre ....... ... 3 Building Hope ......... ... 6 Transit Village ......... .. 12 East Cabrillo Sidewalks.. .. 13 West Beach Project..... .. 15 Santa Barbara Redevelopment Update SA1~TA BARBARA The 400 and 500 blocks of State Street have been enhanced with new brick sidewalks and crosswalks, landscaping, fountains, and street furniture. Fall 2007 $I(~@W811CS (continued from Page 1J Space award on the improvements made to State Street from Victoria Street to Cota Street (Phases 1, II and [I[), and the Hugh Petersen Award for Public Art was conferred upon "Crescent Crossing" at 628 State Street. This public bench, crafted in brick, was designed by local sculptor Donald Davis. Also in 2003, the City's Architectural Board of Review and Historic Landmarks Commission chose the State Sheet Sidewalk Improvement Project (Phases I, I[ and [II) and its Landscape Architect, Bob Cunningham of Arcadia Studio, to be the recipients of the Lockwood de Forest Award, which is given for exemplary design in landscape architecture and non-habitable structures. That same year, the main street was further enhanced when brick crosswalks were constructed aaoss the 400 and 500 blocks of State Street and also at the intersection of State Street and Cabrillo Boulevard. "Crescent Crossing," designed by Donald Davis. Phase IV of the project removed the existing saltillo tiles in the walkway and extended the familiar brick and landscape upgrades to State Street, between Gutierrez and Cota Streets. [n addition to sidewalk widening at the State Sfreet and Gutierrez Sheet intersection, the project also included further enhancements to Phase 1 (1000, 1100, and 1200 blocks), adding elements that were not possible within the original budget for that phase. ^ The new downtown Teen Center opened its doors on March 16th with a fabulous grand opening celebration. In an effort to enhance the experience of teens in our community, the City Council designated the City- owned building at 1235 Chapala Street to be used as a Teen Center. The Teen Center serves youth in Grades 7 through 12 as a drop-in facility and includes amenities such as a game room, study room, Internet cafe, arcades, lounge, and recording studio. [t offers opportunities for youth enrichment and development and provides an alternative to loitering and other potentially detrimental activities. The existing building required alterations to accommodate the Teen Center, including the relocation or removal of a number of existing walls, replacement of interior doors, new painting and flooring, and other minor construction and electrical work. Total costs for the project were approximately $440,000, of which the Redevelopment Agency contributed $200,000. ^ Louise Lowry Davis Center Renovated Renovation of the Louise Lowry Davis Center was completed in March 2006. Originally built in 1922 and having served as a portion of Santa Barbara's first high school, this Structure of Merit was last remodeled in 1969. Interior and exterior improvements were made to this primarily senior citizen-serving recreational center. Accessibility was enhanced throughout the building, restrooms were enlarged and made compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), electrical and plumbing systems were upgraded, and new kitchen cabinetry was installed. On the outside, new curbs, walkways, landscaping and lighting fixtures were added, and a new main entrance was constructed. The Redevelopment Agency contributed approximately $700,000 to renovate this important downtown facility. ^ 2 I Santa Barbara Redevelopment Update Downtown Teen Center Opens Its Doors