The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-25-2022 - Agenda Pkg - CC Regular MeetingTuesday, January 25, 2022 5:00 PM City of Hermosa Beach City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 City Council Mayor Michael Detoy Mayor Pro Tem Raymond Jackson Councilmembers Stacey Armato Mary Campbell Justin Massey Regular Meeting Agenda Face masks required for all in-person attendance. Closed Session - 5:00 P.M. Open Session - 6:00 P.M. Duly posted on January 21, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by S.M. Executive Team Angela Crespi, Deputy City Manager Viki Copeland, Finance Director Myra Maravilla, City Clerk Paul LeBaron, Chief of Police Joe SanClemente, Public Works Director Carrie Tai, Community Development Director Vanessa Godinez, Human Resources Manager Lisa Nichols, Community Resources Manager City Treasurer Karen Nowicki City Attorney Patrick Donegan Suja Lowenthal, City Manager 1 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda VIEWING OPTIONS FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS Public meetings are broadcast live on Spectrum Channel 8 and Frontier Channel 31 in Hermosa Beach. Additional viewing options are provided as a courtesy. ZOOM: Join the meeting link if available or participate by phone YOUTUBE CHANNEL: https://www.youtube.com/c/CityofHermosaBeach90254 CITY WEBSITE: www.hermosabeach.gov and visit the Agendas/Minutes/Videos page ***PLEASE NOTE: IF YOU EXPERIENCE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES WHILE VIEWING THE MEETING ON ONE OF THESE PLATFORMS, PLEASE TRY ONE OF THE OTHER VIEWING OPTIONS*** All council meetings are open to the public. PLEASE ATTEND. The Council receives a packet with detailed information and recommendations on nearly every agenda item. City Council agenda packets are available for your review on the City's website located at www.hermosabeach.gov. Complete agenda packets are also available for public inspection in the City Clerk's office. During the meeting, a packet is also available in the Council Chambers foyer or you can access the packet at our website, www.hermosabch.org, on your laptop, tablet or smartphone through the wireless signal available in the City Council chambers - Network ID: CHB-Guest, Password: chbguest To comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Assistive Listening Devices (ALD) will be available for check out at the meeting. If you require special assistance to participate in this meeting, you must call or submit your request in writing to the Office of the City Clerk at (310) 318-0204 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Page 2 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 2 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 5:00 P.M. - CLOSED SESSION (LOCATION: Meetings convene in the Council Chambers and move to the Second Floor Conference Room after Public Comment) CALL TO ORDER IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CLOSED SESSION AGENDA Hybrid virtual/in-person meetings are held pursuant to AB361. State and local officials recommend measures to promote social distancing. Members of the public may email comments to cityclerk@hermosabeach.gov or submit eComments until 3:00 p.m. on the meeting date. COUNCIL CHAMBERS: 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach (Face mask required for all in-person attendance) JOIN THE VIRTUAL MEETING AT: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89968207828?pwd=bXZmWS83dmxHWDZLbWRTK2RVaUxaUT09 OR PARTICIPATE BY PHONE: •Toll Free: 833-548-0276 •Meeting ID: 899 6820 7828, then # •Passcode: 472825 ATTENDEES WILL BE MUTED UNTIL THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD IS OPENED. If you are joining by phone, press * 9 to raise your virtual hand and * 6 to unmute your line when asked to do so. Comments from the public are limited to 3 minutes per speaker. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION IN SECOND FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM a.22-0063 MINUTES: Approval of minutes of Closed Session held on January 11, 2022. b.22-0051 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: Pending Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. Name of Case: Name of Case: Lejins v. City of Long Beach Case Number: S272594, California Supreme Court Consideration whether to join multiple cities requesting Supreme Court review. RECESS TO OPEN SESSION Page 3 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 3 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 6:00 P.M. - REGULAR AGENDA Hybrid virtual/in-person meetings are held pursuant to AB361. State and local officials recommend measures to promote social distancing. Members of the public may email comments to cityclerk@hermosabeach.gov or submit eComments until 3:00 p.m. on the meeting date. COUNCIL CHAMBERS: 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach (Face mask required for all in-person attendance) JOIN THE VIRTUAL MEETING AT: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89968207828?pwd=bXZmWS83dmxHWDZLbWRTK2RVaUxaUT09 OR PARTICIPATE BY PHONE: •Toll Free: 833-548-0276 •Meeting ID: 899 6820 7828, then # •Passcode: 472825 ATTENDEES WILL BE MUTED UNTIL THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD IS OPENED. If you are joining by phone, press * 9 to raise your virtual hand and * 6 to unmute your line when asked to do so. Comments from the public are limited to 3 minutes per speaker. Oral and Written Communication Persons who wish to have written materials included in the agenda packet at the time the agenda is published on the City's website must submit the written materials to the City Manager's office by email (cityclerk@hermosabeach.gov) or in person by noon of the Tuesday, one week before the meeting date. Written materials pertaining to matters listed on the posted agenda received after the agenda has been posted will be added as supplemental materials under the relevant agenda item on the City's website at the same time as they are distributed to the City Council by email. Supplemental materials may be submitted via eComment (instructions below) or emailed to cityclerk@hermosabeach.gov. Supplemental materials must be received before 3:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting to ensure Council and staff have the ability to review materials prior to the meeting. Supplemental materials submitted after 3:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting or submitted during the meeting will be posted online the next day. Submit Supplemental eComments in three easy steps: Note: Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information (i.e. phone numbers, addresses, etc) that you do not want to be published. 1. Go to the Agendas/Minutes/Video webpage and find the meeting you’d like to submit comments on. Click on the eComment button for your selected meeting. 2. Find the agenda item for which you would like to provide a comment and select the comment button. 3. Sign in to your SpeakUp Hermosa Account or as a guest, enter your name and comment in the fields provided. If you have an account, you may attach files before submitting your comment. Page 4 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 4 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. CLOSED SESSION REPORT V. ANNOUNCEMENTS - UPCOMING CITY EVENTS VI. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:This is the time for the City Council to change the order in which it takes up items on this agenda, remove and/or continue agenda items and pull items from the consent calendar for separate consideration. VII. PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS a.22-0039 COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT b.22-0049 LOS ANGELES COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PRESENTS AWARD TO CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH VIII. CITY MANAGER REPORT - The City Manager and staff may provide brief reports on pending City business. Longer oral reports to be provided are as follows: a.22-0040 POLICE CHIEF UPDATE IX. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION -- ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC: This is the time for members of the public to address the City Council on any items within the Council's jurisdiction not on this agenda, on items on this agenda as to which public comment will not be taken (City Manager Reports, City Councilmember Reports Consent Calendar items that are not pulled for separate consideration and Future Agenda Items), on written communications, and to request the removal of an item from the consent calendar. Public comments on the agenda items called City Manager Reports, City Councilmembers Reports, Consent Calendar items that are not pulled for separate consideration and Future Agenda Items will only be heard at this time. Further, comments on public hearing items are heard only during the public hearing. Members of the audience may also speak during discussion of items removed from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration; during Public Hearings; and, during discussion of items appearing under Municipal Matters. Page 5 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 5 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda All comments from the public under this agenda item are limited to three minutes per speaker, but this time allotment may be reduced due to time constraints. The City Council acknowledges receipt of the written communications listed below. No action will be taken on matters raised in oral and written communications, except that the Council may take action to schedule issues raised in oral and written communications for a future agenda. Speakers with comments regarding City management or departmental operations are encouraged to submit those comments directly to the City Manager. a.22-0050 WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council receive and file the written communication. X. CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS: Councilmembers may briefly respond to public comments, may ask a question for clarification or make a brief announcement or report on his or her own activities or meetings attended. a.23-0041 UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES AND STANDING COMMITTEE DELEGATES/ALTERNATES XI. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following matters will be acted upon collectively with a single motion and vote to approve with the majority consent of the City Council. Councilmembers may orally register a negative vote on any consent calendar item without pulling the item for separate consideration prior to the vote on the consent calendar. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council member removes an item from the Consent Calendar, either under Approval of the Agenda or under this item prior to the vote on the consent calendar. Items removed will be considered under Agenda Item XII (12), with public comment permitted at that time. The title is deemed to be read and further reading waived of any ordinance listed on the consent calendar for introduction or adoption. a.REPORT 22-0038 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (Interim City Clerk Susan Morrow) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council approve the following minutes: 1. January 11, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting b.REPORT 22-0042 CHECK REGISTERS (Finance Director Viki Copeland) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council ratify the following check registers. Page 6 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 6 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda c.REPORT 22-0048 MEMORANDUM REGARDING REVENUE REPORT, COVID-19 REVENUE REPORTS, EXPENDITURE REPORT, AND CIP REPORT BY PROJECT FOR DECEMBER 2022 (Finance Director Viki Copeland) d.REPORT 22-0047 MEMORANDUM REGARDING CITY TREASURER’S REPORT AND CASH BALANCE REPORT (City Treasurer Karen Nowicki) e.REPORT 22-0046 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STATUS REPORT AS OF JANUARY 13, 2022 (Public Works Director Joe SanClemente) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council receive and file the Capital Improvement Program Status Report as of January 13, 2022. f.REPORT 22-0045 ACTION MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 2021 (Public Works Director Joe SanClemente) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of November 17, 2021. g.REPORT 22-0015 ACTION MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2022 (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council receive and file the action minutes of the canceled Planning Commission meeting of January 18, 2022. h.REPORT 22-0017 PLANNING COMMISSION TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council receive and file the February 15, 2022 Planning Commission tentative future agenda items. i.REPORT 22-0037 FINDINGS TO HOLD REMOTE TELECONFERENCE/MEETINGS, PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361 (Interim City Clerk Susan Morrow) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council authorize remote teleconference/virtual meetings of all City of Hermosa Beach legislative bodies in accordance with Assembly Bill 361 ("AB 361"), by finding that: (1) a statewide state of emergency is currently in place; (2) state and local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing in connection with COVID-19; and meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. Page 7 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 7 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda j.REPORT 22-0036 APPROVAL OF THE COMMENCEMENT OF SPECIAL EVENT LONG-TERM AGREEMENT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER FOR THE COMMUNITY CHANUKAH CELEBRATION AND THE GREAT AUTOS OF YESTERYEAR FOR THE ENDLESS SUMMER CLASSIC CAR SHOW (Community Resources Manager Lisa Nichols) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council approve the commencement of special event long-term agreement negotiations with the following organizations: 1. The Jewish Community Center for its Community Chanukah Celebration; and 2. The Great Autos of Yesteryear for its Endless Summer Classic Car Show. XII. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION - Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be handled separately. Public comment will be taken prior to Council deliberation and action on each item pulled from the Consent Calendar. XIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 6:30 P.M. NONE XIV. MUNICIPAL MATTERS a.REPORT 22-0034 APPROVAL OF FINAL PLANS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 689 CLARK BUILDING RENOVATIONS (Public Works Director Joe SanClemente) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council: 1. Approve the Clark Building Renovations final plans; and 2. Appropriate $747,033 from the Capital Improvement Fund to the CIP 689 project budget for the construction phase of the project. b.REPORT 22-0035 DESIGNATION OF A MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF FEE WAIVERS TO BE GRANTED FOR SPECIAL EVENTS HELD IN 2022 (Community Resources Manager Lisa Nichols) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council designate a maximum amount of $20,000 in fee waivers to be granted for special events held in 2022, as per the City's Special Event Fee Waiver Policy. Page 8 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 8 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda c.REPORT 22-0043 DISCUSSION OF NEXT STEPS TOWARDS ACHIEVING THE CITY’S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GOALS AND CONSIDERATION OF COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION OPTIONS (Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council: 1. Discuss Community Choice Aggregation options as a means of reducing emissions to meet the City's carbon neutrality goal; 2. Provide staff direction to return to Council with a fuller treatment of one or more Community Choice Aggregation options and/or authorize the City Manager to sign an authorization to proceed with Clean Power Alliance to conduct an applicant impact study for $10,000 (Attachment 5); and 3. Authorize a move to Southern California Edison's 100 percent Green Rates for municipal facilities at an estimated annual cost of $15,000. d.REPORT 22-0044 DISCUSSION OF ENCROACHMENT FEES FOR TEMPORARY OUTDOOR DINING PERMIT PROGRAM (Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council consider the information presented by staff and provide direction regarding possible fees for the City's temporary outdoor dining permit programs. e.REPORT 22-0061 UPDATE REGARDING THE PARKING STUDY SESSION SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON JANUARY 31, 2022 (City Manager Suja Lowenthal) Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council: 1. Receive an update regarding the parking study session scheduled to be held on January 31, 2022; and 2. Provide staff direction on whether to schedule a special meeting of the City Council following the parking study session to discuss and decide whether to postpone the 2022-2023 Residential and Employee parking permit sales and renewals to allow for a review of the current rates. XV. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items and questions from Councilmembers regarding the status of future agenda items. No discussion or debate of these requests shall be undertaken; the sole action is whether to schedule the item for consideration on a future agenda. No public comment will be taken. Councilmembers should consider the city's work plan when considering new items. The existing list of future agenda items below is for information only. a.22-0052 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS XVI. ADJOURNMENT Page 9 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 9 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda FUTURE MEETINGS AND CITY HOLIDAYS CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS: January 31, 2022 -Monday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 5:00 PM - Parking Study Session February 8, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting February 22, 2022 - No meeting due to lack of quorum March 3, 2022 -Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 5:00 PM - Revenue Study Session March 8, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting March 22, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting March 31, 2022 -Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 5:00 PM - ADA Study Session April 12, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting April 21, 2022 -Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 5:00 PM - FY 2022-2023 CIP Study Session April 26, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting May 10, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting May 24, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting June 2, 2022 -Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 5:00 PM - Budget Study Session June 14, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting June 28, 2022 - No meeting due to lack of quorum July 12, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting July 21, 2022 -Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 6:00 PM - Joint meeting with all Boards/Commissions July 26, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting August 4, 2022 -Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 5:00 PM - Study Session August 9, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting Page 10 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 10 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS - CONTINUED: August 23, 2022 - Tuesday - No Meeting (Dark for Summer Break) September 1, 2022 -Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 5:00 PM - Study Session September 13, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting September 27, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting October 11, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting October 22, 2022 -Saturday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 8:00 AM - City Council Retreat October 25, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting November 3, 2022 -Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - Regular Meeting November 8, 2022 - No meeting due to lack of quorum (General Election) November 22, 2022 - No meeting due to lack of quorum (Thanksgiving week) November 29, 2022 -Tuesday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - Regular Meeting (Installation of new officers) December 1, 2022 -Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 6:00 PM - Mayor Transition Ceremony & Reception December 13, 2022 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting December 27, 2022 - Tuesday - No Meeting (Dark for WInter Break) Page 11 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 11 January 25, 2022City Council Regular Meeting Agenda BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS: February 1, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting February 7, 2022 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee Meeting February 15, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting March 1, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting March 7, 2022 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee Meeting March 15, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting March 16, 2022 - Wednesday - 6:00 PM - Public Works Commission Meeting April 4, 2022 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee Meeting April 5, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting April 19, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting May 2, 2022 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee Meeting May 3, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting May 17, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting May 18, 2022 - Wednesday - 6:00 PM - Public Works Commission Meeting June 6, 2022 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee Meeting June 16, 2022 - Thursday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting June 21, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting July 5, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting July 19, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting July 20, 2022 - Wednesday - 6:00 PM - Public Works Commission Meeting August 2, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting August 16, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting September 6, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting September 20, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting September 21, 2022 - Wednesday - 6:00 PM - Public Works Commission Meeting October 6, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting October 18, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting November 15, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting November 16 - Wednesday - 6:00 PM - Public Works Commission Meeting December 6, 2022 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting December 20, 2022 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting CITY OFFICES CLOSED FRIDAY-SUNDAY AND ON THE FOLLOWING DAYS: February 21, 2022 - Monday - President's Day May 30, 2022 - Monday - Memorial Day July 4, 2022 - Monday - Independence Day September 5, 2022 - Monday - Labor Day November 24, 2022 - Thursday - Thanksgiving Day December 26, 2022 - Monday - Christmas Day (observed) January 2, 2023 - Monday - New Year's Day (observed) Page 12 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023 12 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 22-0063 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Closed Session of January 25, 2022 MINUTES: Approval of minutes of Closed Session held on January 11, 2022. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™13 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 22-0051 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Closed Session of January 25, 2022 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: Pending Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. Name of Case: Name of Case: Lejins v. City of Long Beach Case Number: S272594, California Supreme Court Consideration whether to join multiple cities requesting Supreme Court review. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™14 B305134 Court of Appeals of California Lejins v.City of Long Beach Decided Dec 1, 2021 B305134 B306506 12-01-2021 DIANA LEJINS et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. CITY OF LONG BEACH, Defendant and Appellant. CHANEY, J. Charles Parkin, City Attorney, Howard D. Russell, Principal Deputy City Attorney, Richard Anthony, Deputy City Attorney; Jarvis, Fay & Gibson, Benjamin P. Fay, and Gabriel McWhirter for Defendant and Appellant. Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, Michael G. Colantuono, and Matthew C. Slentz, for League of California Cities as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant. Benink & Slavens, Eric J. Benink, and Vincent D. Slavens for Plaintiffs and Respondents. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County No. 18STCP02628 James C. Chalfant, Judge. Affirmed. Charles Parkin, City Attorney, Howard D. Russell, Principal Deputy City Attorney, Richard Anthony, Deputy City Attorney; Jarvis, Fay & Gibson, Benjamin P. Fay, and Gabriel McWhirter for Defendant and Appellant. Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, Michael G. Colantuono, and Matthew C. Slentz, for League of California Cities as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant. Benink & Slavens, Eric J. Benink, and Vincent D. Slavens for Plaintiffs and Respondents. *11 CHANEY, J. Diana Lejins and Angela Kimball (collectively, Plaintiffs) filed a petition for writ of mandate in the trial court, challenging a surcharge defendant City of Long Beach (the City) imposes on its water and sewer customers by embedding the surcharge in the rates the Long Beach Water Department (the Water Department) charges its customers for service. The surcharge covers transfers of funds from the Water Department to the City's general fund, to be used for unrestricted general revenue purposes. The City contends the surcharge was legally imposed because it was approved by a majority of the City's voters pursuant to article XIII C of the California Constitution. Plaintiffs argue notwithstanding majority voter approval, the surcharge violates article XIII D, which prohibits a local agency from assessing a fee or charge "upon any parcel of property or upon any person as an incident of property ownership" unless the fee or charge satisfies enumerated requirements the City acknowledges were not met here. (Art. XIII D, §§ 3, subd. (a) & 6, subd. (b).) The trial court entered judgment in favor of Plaintiffs, concluding the surcharge is unconstitutional and invalid under article XIII D for the reason Plaintiffs advance. As explained below, we agree with Plaintiffs' argument and affirm the judgment and post- judgment order awarding attorney fees to Plaintiffs. *2 1 22 1 Undesignated article references are to the California Constitution. 2 Plaintiffs also argue, and the trial court also concluded, the surcharge is unconstitutional and invalid under article 1 15 XI, section 7 to the extent the City collects the surcharge from water and sewer utility customers who receive service at a location outside the City. We need not reach this issue based on our holding the surcharge is unconstitutional and invalid as to all customers under article XIII D. BACKGROUND I. Proposition 218 - A Brief Overview In 1996, California voters adopted Proposition 218, the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act," which added articles XIII C and XIII D-the California Constitution provisions the parties reference in this action. As our Supreme Court has explained:" 'Proposition 218 can best be understood against its historical background, which begins in 1978 with the adoption of Proposition 13, '" which added article XIII A. (Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles County, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (2001) 24 Cal.4th 830, 836 (Apartment Assn.).) Among other things, Proposition 213" 'limited ad valorem property taxes to 1 percent of a property's assessed valuation and limited increases in the assessed valuation to 2 percent per year unless and until the property changed hands;'" it also prohibited local governments" 'from enacting any special tax without a two-thirds vote of the electorate.'" (Ibid.; art. XIII A, §§ 1, 2 & 4.) Article XIII D, added in 1996 by Proposition 218," 'allows only four types of local property taxes: (1) an ad valorem property tax; (2) a special tax; (3) an assessment; and (4) a fee or charge'" for a property-related service. (Apartment Assn., supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 837; art. XIII D, § 3, subd. (a), ¶¶ (1)-(4).) Proposition 218" 'buttresses Proposition 13's limitations on ad valorem property taxes and special taxes by placing analogous restrictions on assessments, fees, and charges.'" (Ibid.) The parties here agree the Measure M surcharge does not constitute an ad valorem property tax, a special tax, or an assessment; as discussed below, they disagree whether it constitutes a fee or *3 charge "assessed by any agency upon any parcel of property or upon any person as an incident of property ownership," subject to article XIII D's restrictions. (Art. XIII D, § 3.) A "property-related fee [or charge] violates article XIII D if [among other things] the revenues derived from the fee [or charge] exceed the amount required to provide the property-related service [(art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b), ¶ (1))]"; "if revenues derived from the fee [or charge] are used for any purpose other than that for which it was imposed (see art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b)(2)) or if the fee [or charge] is imposed for general governmental services (see art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b)(5))." (Citizens for Fair REU Rates v. City of Redding (2018) 6 Cal.5th 1, 14 (Redding).) 3 Article XIII C, added in 1996 by Proposition 218, "restricts the authority of local governments to impose taxes by, among other things, requiring voter approval of all taxes imposed by local governments." (City of San Buenaventura v. United Water Conservation Dist. (2017) 3 Cal.5th 1191, 1200.) As defined in article XIII C, a general tax is "any tax imposed for general governmental purposes," and a special tax is "any tax imposed for specific purposes, including a tax imposed for specific purposes, which is placed into a general fund." (Art. XIII C, § 1, subds. (a) & (d).) "Article XIII C buttresses article XIII D by limiting the other methods by which local governments can exact revenue using fees and taxes not based on real property value or ownership." (Redding, supra, 6 Cal.5th at p. 10.) "As a constitutional initiative, Proposition 218 is binding upon charter cities," such as the City here. (Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. City of San Diego (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 374, 391, italics omitted.) *44 II. The City and Its Water Department The City is governed by the Long Beach City Charter (Charter), which created its Water Department at article XIV, section 1400 et seq. of the Charter. The City's Water Department, which is not a legal entity separate from the City, 2 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 16 provides water and sewer services to most of the City's residents and businesses and to a small number of customers located in nearby cities or unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. At all relevant times, plaintiff Diana Lejins has resided in the City and is a water and sewer customer of the Water Department; and plaintiff Angela Kimball has resided in an unincorporated area of Los Angeles County and is a water customer of the Water Department. The Water Department is managed by a five- member Board of Water Commissioners (the Board). (Charter, art. XIV, § 1400.) One of the Board's powers, as provided in the Charter, is to fix rates charged for water and sewer services. The rates ultimately must be approved by the City Council. (Id. at § 1403(5)-(6).) Monies collected from customers for water service are accounted for and initially maintained in the City's Water Revenue Fund, and monies collected from customers for sewer service are accounted for and initially maintained in the City's Sewer Revenue Fund. (Id. at §§ 1403(13) & 1407.) As described in the record on appeal, there is a long history in the City of transferring revenues from the City's utilities to the City's general fund to help support general City services, such as police, fire, library, and parks. III. Prior Litigation and Settlement The City devised the surcharge at issue in this case to account for a reduction of general fund revenue that resulted *5 after Diana Lejins (one of the plaintiffs in this case) sued the City in 2016 (in a different case), challenging a pipeline permit fee the City required the Water Department to pay to the City's general fund to install and operate pipelines and other facilities in the City's streets and rights-of-way. The City established the pipeline permit fee by ordinance, without approval by the City's voters. The Water Department's pipeline permit fee payments that were placed in the City's general fund were treated as unrestricted revenue. The Water Department, with City Council approval, fixed its water and sewer rates at a level to recoup the amount of the pipeline permit fees from its customers. 5 On November 8, 2017, the City and Lejins settled the pipeline permit fee lawsuit. The City agreed to stop collecting pipeline permit fees from the Water Department. The settlement also allowed the Water Department to make payments to the City's general fund to cover street repair and public safety costs associated with the Water Department's activities. The City commissioned studies of such costs during the pipeline permit fee litigation and determined payments to the general fund to cover such costs would be less than the amount the pipeline permit fee had generated for the general fund. The City reduced water and sewer rates accordingly, and agreed to transfer $12 million from the City's general fund to the Water Department over approximately four years. On December 5, 2017, the City Council adopted an ordinance reducing water and sewer rates in accordance with the settlement. IV. Measure M and the Surcharge Embedded in the Rates the Water Department Charges Its Customers In early 2018, the City Council held public meetings to consider amending its Charter to address the loss of general fund *6 revenue resulting from the settlement of the pipeline permit fee lawsuit-the amount which exceeded the Water Department's payments to the City's general fund to cover street repair and public safety costs associated with the Water Department's activities. During a January 10, 2018 meeting of the City's Charter Amendment Committee and the City Council there was discussion regarding the long history in the City of transferring revenues from the City's utilities to the City's general fund to help support general City services, such as police, fire, library, and parks. 6 The City devised Measure M, which would amend article XIV, section 1407 of the Charter to authorize the Water Department to transfer to the 3 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 17 City's general fund any funds from the Water Revenue Fund and/or the Sewer Revenue Fund that the Board determined "to be unnecessary to meet" other obligations of the Water Department, not to exceed 12 percent of the "annual gross revenues of the water works and sewer system, respectively." (Charter, art. XIV, § 1407(5).) Measure M would permit the City to use the proceeds from these transfers for "unrestricted general revenue purposes," as the City Council may direct "by budget adoption or other appropriation." (Id. at § 1407(6)-(7).) Measure M would also authorize, but not require, the Board to fix, and the City Council to approve, "water and sewer rates in an amount sufficient to recover the cost" of any transfers to the general fund that the Board may make. (Id. at § 1407(8).) As set forth in the City's opening brief on appeal, the purpose of the Measure M revenue transfers was "to provide financial support for general city services." On March 7, 2018, the City Council adopted a resolution calling for the submission of the proposed Charter amendment to *7 City voters at the next general election. The Official Sample Ballot for the general election at which Measure M was approved asked voters the following: "To maintain general City services like 9-1-1 emergency response, police/fire protection, street/pothole repairs, senior services, parks and libraries, shall the City of Long Beach amend its Charter to authorize annual fund transfers from the City's water, sewer and gas utilities to the General Fund not to exceed 12% of utility gross revenues, generating approximately $25, 500, 000 annually for unrestricted general revenue purposes, requiring annual independent audits, until ended by voters?" An "Impartial Analysis of Measure M" prepared by the city attorney described the revenue to be transferred from the utilities to the general fund under Measure M as "surplus" revenue that is "not necessary to pay for a utility's capital improvements, bond/debt service, operations and maintenance, personnel, reserves, and other costs." At the June 5, 2018 general election, 53.76 percent of City voters approved Measure M. 7 On June 21, 2018, the Board passed a resolution fixing water and sewer rates effective October 1, 2018, raising rates for potable and recycled water by 7.2 percent, and leaving sewer rates unchanged. In a Notice of Public Hearing for an August 30, 2018 hearing, the Water Department informed customers the proposed increase in water rates was due to the following: "In June 2018, voters in the city of Long Beach passed Measure M, reauthorizing and affirming the City's historical practice of revenue transfers from the City's utilities to the General Fund, as approved by the City Council and Board of Water Commissioners. The revenue transfer is subject to a cap of twelve percent (12%) of each utility's annual gross revenues, as shown by audited *8 financial reports. All proceeds from utility revenue transfers to the General Fund shall be used to maintain local General Fund services, which include general City services such as police, fire and paramedic response, street repair, parks, libraries and youth/senior programs." On September 6, 2018, the City Council passed Ordinance No. ORD-18- 0022, approving the rates fixed in the Board's June 21 resolution, including the potable and recycled water rates that were increased by 7.2 percent to fund the transfers to the City's general fund authorized by Measure M. 8 The Measure M surcharge, which the City characterizes as a general tax, is embedded in the Water Department customers' utility service charges and is not separately identified in the Water Department's bills to customers. Thus, it is not possible to discern from looking at the bills what percentage of the customers' utility charges make up the Measure M surcharge. As the City explains in its opening brief on appeal, the Measure M surcharge is "the part of the [water and sewer] rates that raises unrestricted revenue for the support of the City's general fund," not the 4 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 18 part of the rates that is "designed to recoup the Water Department's costs of providing water and sewer service." The City characterizes the surcharge as a tax because it "exceeds the Water Department's costs of providing water and sewer service," as the City explains in its opening brief. V. The Present Action On October 22, 2018, Plaintiffs filed in this action a verified petition for writ of mandate and complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief, asserting the Measure M surcharge violates article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b) because the rate revenue collected through the surcharge "does not benefit the water or sewer utility, is not used for the provision of water and sewer *9 service, and is not a reimbursement of costs incurred in the General Fund for the benefit of the water and sewer utilities. Instead, such rate revenue is used for general governmental purposes." Plaintiffs further asserted, to the extent the City contends the Measure M surcharge is a general tax, article XIII D, section 3, subdivision (a) "precludes local governments from imposing general taxes upon any parcel [of property] or upon any person as an incident of property ownership." 9 By their first cause of action, Plaintiffs sought a writ of mandate directing the City (1) to invalidate the September 6, 2018 ordinance (Ordinance No. ORD-18-002) approving utility rates that include the Measure M surcharge; (2) to cease transferring proceeds from the surcharge to the City's general fund; (3) to return to the Water Department any proceeds already so transferred; and (4) to cease embedding the surcharge in water and sewer fees and charges. In their second cause of action for declaratory relief, Plaintiffs sought a judgment declaring the City violated article XIII D, section 3, subdivision (a), and section 6, subdivision (b), paragraphs (1)-(2) and (5), by imposing the Measure M surcharge. In their third cause of action for an injunction pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 526a, Plaintiffs sought a permanent injunction precluding Measure M transfers of funds from the Water Department and ordering the return to the Water Department of previously-transferred funds. Finally, Plaintiffs sought an award of attorney fees and costs. After the City filed an answer to the petition for writ of mandate and complaint, Plaintiffs filed a motion asking the trial court to issue the requested writ of mandate, declaration, and permanent injunction. In their opening brief on the petition for writ of mandate, Plaintiffs argued the Measure M surcharge *10 violates article XIII D, section 3, subdivision (a), and section 6, subdivision (b), paragraphs (1)-(2) and (5), for the reasons asserted in their petition, as summarized above. 10 3 3 Plaintiffs also argued the Measure M surcharge violates article XI, section 7 to the extent the City collects the surcharge from water and sewer utility customers who receive service at a location outside the City. As stated above, we need not reach this issue because we conclude the surcharge is unconstitutional and invalid as to all customers under article XIII D, for the reasons set forth below. In opposition to the petition for writ of mandate, the City argued article XIII D is inapplicable to a general tax imposed on the use of a property- related service (water and sewer) after approval by a majority of the City's voters pursuant to article XIII C. The City also conceded that to the extent a court concludes the Measure M surcharge is a fee or charge subject to article XIII D, the surcharge does not comply with article XIII D's requirements. The City's opposition brief below states: "[T]he City concedes that the general fund surcharges do not comply with article XIIID [sic], section 6(b)'s substantive requirements; after all, proceeds from the surcharges are not used to fund the City's water and sewer services, and instead are intended for 'general revenue purposes.' " On January 2, 2020, the trial court held a hearing on Plaintiff's petition for writ of mandate and causes of action for declaratory and injunctive 5 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 19 relief. After hearing argument by the parties, the court adopted its 24-page tentative ruling as its final decision, with oral modifications as set forth in the reporter's transcript of the hearing. The court concluded the Measure M surcharge violates article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b) *11 because it "is a general tax imposed as an incident of property ownership and not a charge based on actual water usage. The surcharge is not required to provide the water and sewer service [(art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b), ¶ (1))], is not used for that service [(art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b), ¶ (2))], and only benefits the general community [(art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b), ¶ (5))]." The court also concluded the Measure M surcharge violates article XIII D, section 3, subdivision (a) "because it is a charge as an incident of property ownership that does not fall under any of the enumerated exceptions" for a permissible fee or charge. The court explained article XIII D, section 3, subdivision (a) "ensures that the only levies that can be imposed on property ownership per se are an ad valorem tax, a special tax, an assessment, or some other levy that complies with the substantive requirements" of article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b), and the Measure M surcharge does not fit within any of these categories. (Italics omitted.) The court rejected the City's contention that obtaining voter approval of Measure M pursuant to article XIII C rendered XIII D inapplicable to the surcharge, stating in its decision, "The answer is that [article XIII C] does not relieve the City from complying with [article XIII D], which carries independent constitutional requirements." Finally, the court concluded the City's imposition of a general tax (the Measure M surcharge) upon customers who receive water and sewer services at locations outside the City's boundaries violates article XI, section 7. 11 On February 7, 2020, the trial court entered judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against the City, providing (1) the Measure M general tax is unconstitutional and invalid under article XIII D; (2) the Measure M general tax is unconstitutional and invalid under article XI, section 7, to the extent the City collects the *12 surcharge from water and sewer utility customers who receive service at a location outside the City; (3) "any transfers of the proceeds of the Measure M general tax from the City's Water Revenue Fund and Sewer Revenue Fund to its General Fund are unconstitutional and invalid" under article XIII D; and (4) "all City ordinances that establish and/or fix water or sewer rates, including, but not limited to, Ordinance No. 18-0022 and Ordinance No. 19- 0018 [the then-current water and sewer rate ordinance, which became effective October 1, 2019], are unconstitutional and invalid to the extent that they embed or otherwise impose the Measure M general tax on the City's water and sewer utility customers." The judgment enjoined the City from making any further transfers of Measure M proceeds to its general fund. The judgment also ordered the issuance of a peremptory writ of mandate. On February 11, 2020, the clerk of the trial court issued a peremptory writ of mandate to the City, commanding it to set aside or rescind Ordinance No. ORD-19-0018 and return all prior transfers of Measure M proceeds from the City's general fund to the Water Revenue Fund and Sewer Revenue Fund. 12 The City appealed from the judgment. Pursuant to stipulation by the parties, the trial court stayed enforcement of the peremptory writ of mandate and the injunction, subject to certain enumerated conditions, pending resolution of this appeal. The parties stipulated to an award of attorney fees to Plaintiffs. On May 27, 2020, the trial court entered an order awarding attorney fees based on the stipulation. The City appealed from the order, seeking reversal of the attorney fees award to the extent this court reverses the judgment in favor of Plaintiffs on the merits. *1313 Amicus curiae League of California Cities (Cal Cities) filed in this appeal a brief in support of the City, and Plaintiffs filed an answer to the amicus 6 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 20 curiae brief. Cal Cities describes itself as "an association of 476 California cities dedicated to protecting and restoring local control to provide for the public health, safety, and welfare of their residents and enhance the quality of life for all Californians." We have considered this additional briefing in analyzing the matter before us. DISCUSSION The City contends the trial court erred in invalidating the Measure M surcharge, arguing "a voter-approved general tax on the use of municipal water and sewer service" is not a fee or charge subject to article XIII D's restrictions. We disagree with the City's interpretation of article XIII D's scope and conclude the trial court properly found in favor of Plaintiffs and against the City. I. Standard of Review Whether the Measure M surcharge violates article XIII D is a question of law that we review de novo based on the undisputed facts. (Apartment Assn., supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 836; Tesoro Logistic Operations, LLC v. City of Rialto (2019) 40 Cal.App.5th 798, 806 (Tesoro).) In construing article XIII D, "The aim of constitutional interpretation is to determine and effectuate the intent of those who enacted the constitutional provision at issue. [Citation.] To determine that intent, we begin by examining the constitutional text . . . ." (Richmond v. Shasta Community Services Dist. (2004) 32 Cal.4th 409, 418 (Richmond).)" 'The principals of constitutional interpretation are similar to those governing statutory construction.' [Citation.] If the language [of the *14 constitutional text] is clear and unambiguous, the plain meaning governs. [Citation.] But if the language is ambiguous, we consider extrinsic evidence in determining voter intent, including the Legislative Analyst's analysis and ballot arguments for and against the initiative." (Silicon Valley Taxpayers' Assn., Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (2008) 44 Cal.4th 431, 444-445 (Silicon Valley).) We conclude the language of article XIII D is clear and unambiguous. In evaluating the issue before us, however, we quote California Supreme Court authority, which references extrinsic evidence, such as the Proposition 218 Legislative Analyst's analysis. 14 II. The Measure M Surcharge Violates Article XIII D A. Article XIII D, section 3 Article XIII D, section 3 provides: "Property Taxes, Assessments, Fees and Charges Limited. (a) No tax, assessment, fee, or charge shall be assessed by any agency upon any parcel of property or upon any person as an incident of property ownership except: "(1) The ad valorem property tax imposed pursuant to Article XIII and Article XIII A. "(2) Any special tax receiving a two-thirds vote pursuant to Section 4 of Article XIII A. "(3) Assessments as provided by this article. "(4) Fees or charges for property related services as provided in this article. "(b) For purposes of this article, fees for the provision of electrical or gas service shall not be deemed charges or fees imposed as an incident of property ownership." The word "agency," as used in article XIII D "means any local government," including a charter city. (Art. XIII D, § 2, *15 subd. (a); art. XIII C, § 1, subd. (b).) "Property ownership" is defined in article XIII D "to include tenancies of real property where tenants are directly liable to pay the assessment, fee, or charge in question." (Id. at § 2, subd. (g).) A "property-related service" for purposes of article XIII D, "means a public service having a direct relationship to property ownership." (Id. at § 2, subd. (h).) 15 4 5 7 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 21 4 Cal Cities asserts in its amicus curiae brief that "voter approval takes [a tax, like the Measure M surcharge, ] outside article XIII D, as such a tax is not imposed by an 'agency,' but by voters." Not so. As our Supreme Court has explained, when an agency places a measure on the ballot for voter approval-as the City did here-it is the agency, not voters, that assesses or imposes the tax, assessment, fee, or charge within the meaning of article XIII D. (California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland (2017) 3 Cal.5th 924, 940-941, 942 ["that a local government's imposition of a general tax 'will not take effect' absent subsequent approval by the voters" does not mean it is the voters, as opposed to the local government, who impose the tax].) 5 Thus, "article XIII D broadly defines ownership to include rental interests." (Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. City of Fresno (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 914, 925, fn. 3 (Fresno).) B. Article XIII D, section 6 Article XIII D, section 6 provides, in pertinent part: "(b) Requirements for Existing, New or Increased Fees and Charges. A fee or charge shall not be extended, imposed, or increased by any agency unless it meets all of the following requirements: "(1) Revenues derived from the fee or charge shall not exceed the funds required to provide the property related service. *1616 "(2) Revenues derived from the fee or charge shall not be used for any purpose other than that for which the fee or charge was imposed. [¶] . . . [¶] "(5) No fee or charge may be imposed for general governmental services including, but not limited to, police, fire, ambulance or library services, where the service is available to the public at large in substantially the same manner as it is to property owners. . . . In any legal action contesting the validity of a fee or charge, the burden shall be on the agency to demonstrate compliance with this article." "Fee" or "charge," as used in article XIII D "means any levy other than an ad valorem tax, a special tax, or an assessment, imposed by an agency upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, including a user fee or charge for a property related service." (Art. XIII D, § 2, subd. (e).) As our Supreme Court has explained, "Because article XIII D provides a single definition that includes both 'fee' and 'charge,' those terms appear to be synonymous," and may be used interchangeably. (Bighorn-Desert View Water Agency v. Verjil (2006) 39 Cal.4th 205, 214, fn. 4 (Bighorn).) C. The City imposed the Measure M surcharge as an incident of property ownership As set forth above, article XIII D, section 3, subdivision (a) prohibits an agency from assessing a tax, fee, or charge "upon any parcel of property or upon any person as an incident of property ownership," with limited exceptions. Article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b) places restrictions on an agency's imposition of a fee or charge "upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, including a user fee or charge *17 for a property related service." (Art. XIII D, § 2, subd. (e).) Whether the Measure M surcharge is imposed upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership is the key dispute between the parties to be resolved in this appeal. The City has acknowledged the Measure M surcharge does not comply with article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b)'s requirements applicable to fees or charges imposed upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, as set forth more fully below. 17 As our Supreme Court explained in Apartment Assn., "article XIII D only restricts fees imposed directly on property owners in their capacity as such." (Apartment Assn., supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 8 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 22 838.) "In other words, taxes, assessments, fees, and charges are subject to the constitutional strictures [of article XIII D] when they burden landowners as landowners." (Id. at p. 842.) The Supreme Court in Apartment Assn. concluded an inspection fee imposed on private landlords by city ordinance was not a fee upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, within the meaning of article XIII D, because the fee was imposed on landlords "by virtue of their ownership of a business-i.e., because they [were] landlords," not because they were property owners. (Apartment Assn., at p. 842.) The fee was "imposed only on those landlords who [chose] to engage in the residential rental business, and only while they [were] operating the business." (Id. at p. 840.) In other words, the fee was "imposed because the property [was] being rented. It cease[d] along with the business operation, whether or not ownership remain[ed] in the same hands." (Id. at p. 838; cf. Tesoro, supra, 40 Cal.App.5th 798, 801, 814 ["an 'annual business license tax' of 'up to One Dollar [($1.00)] per year for each One (1) cubic foot of *18 liquid storage capacity' on '[a]ny person engaged in the business of owning[, ] operating, leasing, supplying[, ] or providing a wholesale liquid fuel storage facility' in the City" violated article XIII D, section 3 because it was "a tax on real property and on persons, namely, owners of wholesale liquid fuel storage facilities, as an incident of owning the facilities," "regardless of whether the facilities or the storage tanks [were] used in any business operations," and no exception set forth in section 3 applied].) 18 The City characterizes the Measure M surcharge as a valid "utility users tax, or an excise tax levied on the use of utility services-including water and sewer service." The City argues the surcharge is not imposed upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, within the meaning of article XIII D, because one may own real property without obtaining water or sewer service. Case law does not support the City's view. In Richmond, supra, 32 Cal.4th 409, our Supreme Court held "a charge that a local water district imposed as a condition of making a new connection to the water system, and that the district used to finance capital improvements to the water system," was not subject to article XIII D's restrictions, as the district did not "impose the capacity charge on real property as such, but on individuals who apply for new service connections." (Richmond, at pp. 415, 420.) The Court "conclude[d] that a water service fee is a fee or charge under article XIII D if, but only if, it is imposed 'upon a person as an incident of property ownership.' (Art. XIII D, § 2, subd. (e).) A fee for ongoing water service through an existing connection is imposed 'as an incident of property ownership' because it requires nothing other than *19 normal ownership and use of property. But a fee for making a new connection to the system is not imposed 'as an incident of property ownership' because it results from the owner's voluntary decision to apply for the connection." (Richmond, at p. 427.) 19 The Court in Richmond explained that the Proposition 218 "Legislative Analyst apparently concluded that water service has a direct relationship to property ownership, and thus is a property-related service within the meaning of article XIII D because water is indispensable to most uses of real property; because water is provided through pipes that are physically connected to the property; and because a water provider may, by recording a certificate, obtain a lien on the property for the amount of any delinquent service charges [citation]. But the Legislative Analyst was apparently referring to fees imposed on existing water service customers, not fees imposed as a condition of initiating water service in the first instance. "Several provisions of article XIII D tend to confirm the Legislative Analyst's conclusion that charges for utility services such as electricity and water should be understood as charges imposed 'as an incident of property ownership.' For example, 9 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 23 subdivision (b) of section 3 provides that 'fees for the provision of electrical or gas service shall not be deemed charges or fees imposed as an incident of property ownership' under article XIII D. Under the rule of construction that the expression of some things in a statute implies the exclusion of other things not expressed [citation], the expression that electrical and gas service charges are not within the category of property-related fees implies that similar charges for other utility services, such as water and sewer, are property- related fees subject to the *20 restrictions of article XIII D." (Richmond, supra, 32 Cal.4th at pp. 426- 427.) 20 In Bighorn, supra, 39 Cal.4th 205, a case in which our Supreme Court held article XIII C, section 3 "grants local voters a right to use the initiative power to reduce the rate that a public water district charges for domestic water," the Court cited with approval the above-quoted principles from its opinion in Richmond. (Bighorn, at pp. 209, 214- 215.) In analyzing the issue presented to it under article XIII C, the Court in Bighorn reiterated its conclusion in Richmond "that a public water agency's charges for ongoing water delivery . . . are fees and charges within the meaning of article XIII D." (Bighorn, at p. 216.) In Fresno, supra, 127 Cal.App.4th 914, the Fifth District Court of Appeal relied on the Supreme Court's analysis in Richmond in concluding a fee" 'in lieu of property and other taxes normally placed upon private business, '" imposed "by Fresno on its utility departments and divisions, and passed through to ratepayers [by blending it into the user fees], [was] a fee subject to the restrictions of article XIII D, section 6" because it was imposed as an incident of property ownership. (Fresno, at pp. 917, 918, 925, 926.) The appellate court rejected Fresno's argument-identical to the City's argument here-that the fee was" 'imposed on the use of utility services, '" rather than" 'solely on the basis of property ownership.' " (Id. at p. 925; see *21 also Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. City of Roseville (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 637, 647 [Third District Court of Appeal held article XIII D applied to in lieu franchise fee of four percent on water, sewer, and refuse collection utilities' annual budgets, paid by ratepayers and transferred to Roseville's general fund, as the fee was "necessarily tied to property ownership"]; Crawley v. Alameda County Waste Management Authority (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 396, 408 ["Ordinance's fee for the collection of household hazardous waste is imposed 'as an incident of property ownership'" because it is imposed on each household in the county and" 'vacant [h]ouseholds also require household hazardous waste collection and disposal in connection with property improvements, maintenance, or landscaping.' Thus, the fee requires nothing other than normal ownership and use of property"].) 6 21 6 The City attempts to distinguish Fresno based on differences between Fresno's charter and the City's charter, for example, the fact Fresno's charter expressly prohibited Fresno from taxing any person for using a utility service. (Fresno, supra, 127 Cal.App.4th at p. 926.) The facts the City cites are not germane to our analysis of whether the Measure M surcharge is imposed upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, and violates article XIII D, and we need not address such facts further. Following our Supreme Court's guidance, we conclude the City imposed the Measure M surcharge upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, within the meaning of article XIII D. "A fee for ongoing water service through an existing connection is imposed 'as an incident of property ownership' because it requires nothing other than normal ownership and use of property." (Richmond, supra, 32 Cal.4th at p. 427.) Because the Measure M surcharge therefore qualifies as a "levy other than an ad valorem tax, a special tax, or an assessment, imposed by an agency upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, including a user fee *22 or charge for a22 10 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 24 property related service," it satisfies the definition of "fee" or "charge" in article XIII D. (Art. XIII D, § 2, subd. (e).) D. The Measure M surcharge must comply with article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b)'s requirements regardless of voter approval As set forth above, and as relevant to the parties' dispute here, article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b) requires that "[r]evenues derived from the fee or charge shall not exceed the funds required to provide the property related service"; "[r]evenues derived from the fee or charge shall not be used for any purpose other than that for which the fee or charge was imposed"; and "[n]o fee or charge may be imposed for general governmental services, including but not limited to, police, fire, ambulance or library services, where the service is available to the public at large in substantially the same manner as it is to property owners." (Art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b), ¶¶ (1), (2) & (5).) The City argues article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b)'s restrictions on fees and charges are inapplicable to the surcharge at issue here because Measure M was approved by a majority of the City's voters pursuant to article XIII C, which requires voter approval of taxes imposed by local governments. There is no language in article XIII C or article XIII D that supports the City's argument. Article XIII D makes clear that regardless of whether the imposition is characterized as a tax, assessment, fee, or charge, if it is imposed upon a parcel of property or upon a person as an incident of property ownership-as we have concluded the Measure M surcharge is-it must satisfy one of the exceptions to the prohibition on an agency's imposition of a tax, assessment, fee, or charge upon a parcel of property or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, enumerated in *23 article XIII D, section 3. The only exception relevant here is a fee or charge for a property-related service that complies with the requirements of article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b). (Art. XIII D, § 3, subd. (a), ¶ (4).) There is no exception for a voter- approved tax, assessment, fee, or charge imposed upon a parcel of property or upon a person as an incident of property ownership that does not satisfy one of the four enumerated exceptions in article XIII D, section 3, subdivision (a). Indeed, article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (c) has its own voter approval requirements for certain property-related fees and charges (not applicable here), which do not obviate subdivision (b)'s requirements for a valid property-related fee or charge. (Art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (c) ["Voter Approval for New or Increased Fees and Charges. Except for fees or charges for sewer, water, and refuse collection services, no property related fee or charge shall be imposed or increased unless and until that fee or charge is submitted and approved by a majority of the property owners of the property subject to the fee or charge or, at the option of the agency, by a two-thirds vote of the electorate residing in the affected area"].) 23 7 7 The other exceptions to the prohibition on an agency's imposition of a tax, assessment, fee, or charge upon a parcel of property or upon a person as an incident of property ownership are for an ad valorem property tax, a special tax receiving a two- thirds vote, and an assessment. (Art. XIII D, § 3, subd. (a), ¶¶ (1)-(3).) The City does not dispute that none of these other exceptions applies here. Thus, voter approval of Measure M pursuant to article XIII C does not rescue the City from an independent constitutional violation of article XIII D. (See Silicon Valley, supra, 44 Cal.4th at p. 449 ["voter consent cannot convert an unconstitutional *24 legislative assessment into a constitutional one"].) The cases the City cites in support of its position are inapposite. 24 For example, in Capistrano Taxpayers Assn. v. City of San Juan Capistrano (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 1493 (Capistrano), the Fourth District Court of Appeal held Proposition 218 allows "public water agencies to pass on to their 11 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 25 customers the capital costs of improvements to provide additional increments of water," but Proposition 218 also "requires public water agencies to calculate the actual costs of providing water at various levels of usage" under article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b), paragraph (3)-a provision not pertinent to the parties' dispute here. (Capistrano, at p. 1497.) The City relies on Capistrano for the following dicta set forth in the conclusion of the appellate court's opinion: "The way Proposition 218 operates, water rates that exceed the cost of service operate as a tax, similar to the way a 'carbon tax' might be imposed on use of energy. But, we should emphasize: Just because such above-cost rates are a tax does not mean they cannot be imposed-they just have to be submitted to the relevant electorate and approved by the people in a vote. There is no reason, for example, why a water district or local government cannot, consistent with Proposition 218, seek the approval of the voters to impose a tax on water over a given level of usage-as we indicated earlier, that might be a good idea. However, if a local government body chooses to impose tiered rates unilaterally without a vote, those tiers must be based on cost of service for the incremental level of usage, not predetermined budgets. (For the moment, of course, we need not decide whether such a proposed tax would constitute a general *25 tax or special tax.)" (Capistrano, supra, 235 Cal.App.4th at p. 1515.) 25 The court in Capistrano did not analyze the tax it proposed to determine if it might qualify as a valid special tax under article XIII D, section 3, subdivision (a), and we have no cause to engage in that undertaking. Suffice it to say, we conclude the Measure M surcharge at issue here is a fee or charge imposed upon a parcel of property or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, that was not approved by two-thirds of the City's voters (and is not an ad valorem tax or an assessment), and therefore must comply with article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b)'s requirements in order to be valid. (Art. XIII D, § 3, subd. (a).) The City also cites Redding, supra, 6 Cal.5th 1, a case in which our Supreme Court concluded an electric utility's transfer of utility funds to Redding's general fund did not result in an increase in rates customers paid, and the customers' rates did not exceed the reasonable costs of providing electric service, so voter approval of the rates was not required pursuant to article XIII C. (Redding, at pp. 4-5, 15.) In analyzing the issue, the Supreme Court did not interpret article XIII D. As set forth above, article XIII D expressly states: "For purposes of this article, fees for the provision of electrical or gas service shall not be deemed charges or fees imposed as an incident of property ownership." (Art. XIII D, § 3, subd. (b).) Nonetheless, the City cites the following language the Court used in Redding in discussing article XIII C in relation to the facts of that case: "[F]or any service charge to which the article [art. XIII C] applies, a local government must either charge a rate that does not exceed the reasonable costs of providing the service or obtain voter approval for rates that exceed *26 costs." (Redding, at p. 18, italics added.) This language has no applicability here, as charges for water and sewer service-like those at issue here-are not excluded from article XIII D's definition of fee or charge. 26 E. The City has conceded the Measure M surcharge is not a valid fee or charge under article XIII D, as it does not comply with subdivision (b)'s requirements The City has acknowledged that to the extent article XIII D applies to the Measure M surcharge- as we concluded above- the surcharge is unconstitutional because it does not comply with article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b)'s requirements. The City's opposition brief in the trial court states: "[T]he City concedes that the [Measure M] general fund surcharges do not 12 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 26 comply with article XIIID [sic], section 6(b)'s substantive requirements; after all, proceeds from the surcharges are not used to fund the City's water and sewer services, and instead are intended for 'general revenue purposes.'" Similarly, the City's opening brief on appeal asserts: "Because the proceeds of a general tax [referring to the Measure M surcharge] are used for general governmental purposes [citation], and the proceeds of a 'fee' or 'charge' may only be used to provide the service for which the 'fee' or 'charge' is collected [citing art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b), par. (2)], general taxes can never satisfy the substantive limitations applicable to 'fees' and 'charges.' " The City made no attempt to prove the Measure M surcharge complies with article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b)'s requirements, relying instead and solely on its argument article XIII D does not apply to a voter-approved general tax imposed on the use of municipal water and sewer services, an argument we *27 have rejected. For example, the City did not attempt to demonstrate any correlation between the Measure M transfers from the Water Department to the City's general fund/the Measure M surcharge, and the costs to the City associated with the Water Department's use of the City's infrastructure. (See art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b), ¶ (1) ["Revenues derived from the fee or charge shall not exceed the funds required to provide the property related service"].) As the record before us shows, and the City acknowledges in its briefing, the purpose of Measure M is to raise unrestricted revenue to support a variety of municipal services (9-1-1 emergency response, police/fire protection, street/pothole repairs, senior services, parks, and libraries), not to reimburse the City for costs associated with the Water Department's use of the City's infrastructure. 27 In this regard, the matter before us is distinguishable from Wyatt v. City of Sacramento (2021) 60 Cal.App.5th 373, a recent Third District Court of Appeal case on which the City relies in support of its contention a city's voter-approved general tax on utility services, to fund transfers to the city's general fund, does not violate article XIII D. In Wyatt, Sacramento argued-and the Court of Appeal concluded Sacramento proved-a voter- approved mandatory 11 percent tax Sacramento imposed on utilities' revenues was a cost of providing services that the utilities could pass on to ratepayers without violating article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b). (Wyatt, at pp. 378, 380, 383.) We express no opinion on whether Wyatt was correctly decided. We note only that Wyatt's analysis is inapplicable to the case before us because the City here never argued, and there is nothing in the record indicating, the Measure M transfers and/or surcharge were in *28 any way related to the costs of providing water and sewer services. 28 As it pertains to whether the City proved-or even attempted to prove-the Measure M surcharge complies with article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b)'s requirements, this case is more similar to Fresno, supra, 127 Cal.App.4th 914, where the Court of Appeal explained: "On the current record . . . Fresno has not even claimed the in lieu fee approximates the cost of city services to the utility departments and divisions, much less has it established such a relationship as a fact. (See art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b)(5) [allocating to governmental agency burden to demonstrate compliance with art. XIII D].) Accordingly, the trial court correctly issued an injunction to prohibit Fresno from collecting the current 1 percent in lieu fee from the water, wastewater, and solid waste divisions of the department of public utilities." (Fresno, at p. 927.) Based on the City's concessions that the Measure M surcharge does not comply with article XIII D, section 6, subdivision (b)'s requirements, and the absence of anything in the record before us indicating such compliance, we need not address this issue further. The Measure M surcharge is a fee or charge within the meaning of article XIII D, section 6, and the City has not carried its burden 13 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 27 of demonstrating compliance with subdivision (b)'s requirements. (Art. XIII D, § 6, subd. (b), ¶ (5) ["In any legal action contesting the validity of a fee or charge, the burden shall be on the agency to demonstrate compliance with this article"].) Thus, we hold the Measure M surcharge is unconstitutional because it violates article XIII D. The City and Cal Cities assert the invalidation of the Measure M surcharge on these grounds will mean the *29 invalidation of numerous taxes imposed by local governments throughout California. The only tax, fee, or charge before us is the Measure M surcharge. We express no opinion on the validity of taxes not before us. 29 Because we conclude the Measure M surcharge violates article XIII D as to all Water Department customers, for the reasons explained above, we need not determine whether the trial court correctly decided the surcharge also violates article XI, section 7 to the extent the City collects the surcharge from water and sewer utility customers who receive service at a location outside the City. And because we affirm the judgment on the merits, we have no cause to reverse the stipulated award of attorney fees to Plaintiffs. DISPOSITION The judgment and post-judgment order awarding attorney fees are affirmed. Respondents are entitled to recover costs on appeal. We concur: ROTHSCHILD, P. J., CRANDALL, J. *30 Judge of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution. [*]30 [*] 14 Lejins v. City of Long Beach B305134 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021) 28 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 22-0039 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™29 BCHD COVID-19 Health Update January 25, 2022 30 View our data dashboard at www.bchd.org/covidnumbers State of COVID-19 31 State of COVID-19 in the Beach Cities 32 Vaccination Numbers in the Beach Cities Data as of January 20, 2022 Percentage of residents age 5+ Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach Los Angeles County Received 1+ dose 89%92%88%81% Fully vaccinated 81%84% 81%72% Received 1+ additional dose 45%49%44%32% 33 Free At-Home COVID-19 Tests Every home in the U.S. is eligible to order 4 free at-home COVID-19 tests Visit: covidtests.gov Other Options •Free COVID-19 Tests at the YMCA •LA County Home Test Collection Program (limited availability) •LA County’s The Pick-Up Testing Kit •BCHD COVID-19 Testing for School & City Employees bchd.org/covidtesting 34 Protect Yourself & Others from COVID-19 Get Vaccinated & Boosted Upgrade Your Mask Wash Your Hands Stay Home & Test When Sick 35 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 22-0049 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 LOS ANGELES COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PRESENTS AWARD TO CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™36 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 22-0040 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 POLICE CHIEF UPDATE City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™37 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 22-0050 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council receive and file the written communication. Attachments: 1.Letter from Matt McCool submitted January 18, 2022 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™38 From: Matt McCool <mccool.matt@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 8:25 AM To: 'Landon Phillips' <lphillips@hermosabeach.gov> Cc: 'Dorothy Scheid' <dscheid@hermosabeach.gov>; 'Paul LeBaron' <plebaron@hermosabeach.gov>; 'Suja Lowenthal' <suja@hermosabeach.gov> Subject: RE: [Document Released to Requester] City of Hermosa Beach public records request #21-79 Lt. Phillips: Thank you for confirming my observation that I was not provided a record of the watch commander log for my 3/15/14 attack. “We no longer have a copy of the graveyard activity report for 3/16/14” is unacceptable. It creates the perception of impropriety, as this is too much of a coincidence. I highly recommend you try harder to locate the activity report. I am sure there are redundant systems in place that include a hard copy and a digital copy for this exact reason. Please do what you can by the next City Council meeting, where I will be addressing this issue. If you are unable to locate the 3/16/14 activity log, I will be forced to make a public records request for all activity reports six months before and six months after 3/16/14 in order to count the other missing activity reports. With that data, I can calculate the statistical probability of you no longer having a copy of the 3/16/14 activity log. Very respectfully, Matt McCool From: Landon Phillips <lphillips@hermosabeach.gov> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2022 7:05 AM To: Matt McCool <mccool.matt@gmail.com> Cc: Dorothy Scheid <dscheid@hermosabeach.gov>; Paul LeBaron <plebaron@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal <suja@hermosabeach.gov> Subject: RE: [Document Released to Requester] City of Hermosa Beach public records request #21-79 Good morning Mr. McCool, As you know, the incident on 3/15/14 was documented in a crime report by Sgt. Ramirez. At the time of the incident, the Watch Commander’s Daily Activity Report for the graveyard shift was evenly split between two dates and it was dated using the second half of the shift. For example, if the graveyard shift started on Friday, March 14, 2014 at 6pm and ended on Saturday, March 15, 2014 at 6am, the activity report would be dated as 3/15/14. The documents you received included the activity reports for: 3/15/14 Graveyard – Beginning on 3/14/14 at 6pm and ending on 3/15/14 at 6am 3/15/14 Dayshift – Beginning on 3/15/14 at 6am and ending on 3/15/14 at 6pm 3/16/14 Dayshift – Beginning on 3/16/14 at 6am and ending on 3/16/14 at 6pm 3/17/14 Graveyard – Beginning on 3/16/14 at 6pm and ending on 3/17/14 at 6am 39 3/17/14 Dayshift – Beginning on 3/17/14 at 6am and ending on 3/14/14 at 6pm The incident involving you was reported to Sgt. Ramirez on 3/15/14 at 6:24pm so it may have been included in the graveyard activity report dated 3/16/14. We no longer have a copy of the graveyard activity report for 3/16/14 so I cannot say if it was included in that report or not. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Landon Phillips |Lieutenant City of Hermosa Beach O: 310-318-0336 E: lphillips@hermosabeach.gov We exist so Hermosa Beach can be the safest little beach city through partnerships, integrity and excellent service. From: Matt McCool <mccool.matt@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2022 3:36 PM To: Landon Phillips <lphillips@hermosabeach.gov> Cc: Dorothy Scheid <dscheid@hermosabeach.gov>; Paul LeBaron <plebaron@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal <suja@hermosabeach.gov> Subject: RE: [Document Released to Requester] City of Hermosa Beach public records request #21-79 Lt. Phillips: I am respectfully requesting if you can confirm if my 3-15-14 attack was recorded on the watch commander log. I do not see it. However, my 3-16-14 follow up with Ofc. McDermott was recorded. See attached. For your situational awareness, this case was part of a public hearing before the City Council in 2014. At your convenience, please confirm if my 3-15-14 attack was logged or not. Very respectfully, Matt McCool From: Starla Smith <ssmith@hermosabeach.gov> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 5:48 PM To: Matt McCool <mccool.matt@gmail.com> Cc: Landon Phillips <lphillips@hermosabeach.gov> Subject: Re: [Document Released to Requester] City of Hermosa Beach public records request #21-79 Good Evening Mr. McCool, 40 We have produced all the responsive records for your request, please contact my Lieutenant Landon Phillips if you have any questions regarding your request. I have cc'ed him on this email. Starla Smith | Police Service Officer Supervisor Hermosa Beach Police Department 540 Pier Ave. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 o: 310-318-0344 e: ssmith@hermosabeach.gov hermosabeach.gov/police We exist so Hermosa Beach can be the safest little beach city through partnerships, integrity, and excellent service. From: Matt McCool <mccool.matt@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 5:40 PM To: Starla Smith <ssmith@hermosabeach.gov> Subject: RE: [Document Released to Requester] City of Hermosa Beach public records request #21-79 Ofc. Smith: Thank you for the public records request. I want to follow up with you before I take this up the chain of command. My attack on 3-15-14 is not on the watch commander log. On the attached page from 3-16- 14, Ofc. McDermott references “yesterday,” but I do not see anything logged by Sgt. Ramirez. At your convenience, please confirm if my 3-15-14 attack was logged or not. Thank you in advance. Very respectfully, Matt McCool From: City of Hermosa Beach Public Records <support@nextrequest.com> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 3:36 PM 41 To: mccool.matt@gmail.com Subject: [Document Released to Requester] City of Hermosa Beach public records request #21-79 -- Attach a non-image file and/or reply ABOVE THIS LINE with a message, and it will be sent to staff on this request. -- City of Hermosa Beach Public Records A document has been released for record request #21-79 along with the following message: Dear Mr. McCool: This correspondence is in response to your Public Records Act request submitted to the City of Hermosa Beach (“City”) on December 27, 2021 and received by the City on the same date. Your request seeks: the Hermosa Beach Police Department Watch Commander Log for March 15-17 of 2014. The City is hereby producing all responsive records to your request. A copy of these records is attached. Please note, however, that the PRA and case law interpreting it, exempts certain types of information from disclosure, including personal information that, if released, would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, such as the name of minors, medications taken, and the dates of birth pursuant to Gov. Code, § 6255. Information pertaining to person’s receipt of involuntary and voluntary medical services is also exempt from disclosure pursuant to Gov. Code, § 6254(k) & 42 Welfare & Institutions Code, § 5328. This information has accordingly been redacted where possible. In addition, the PRA only requires disclosure of records existing at the time of the request and not those that have been lawfully discarded (if any) prior to receipt of the request. (Cal. Gov. Code § 6254, subd. (c); Haynie v. Superior Court (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1061, 1075.) Finally, we note that privilege logs are not required under the PRA and will not be provided by the City. (Haynie, supra, 26 Cal.4th at 1075.) If you have any questions. Please feel free to contact our office. Sincerely, Starla Smith | Police Service Officer Supervisor Hermosa Beach Police Department 540 Pier Ave. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 o: 310-318-0344 e: ssmith@hermosabeach.gov hermosabeach.gov/police • PRR 21-79.pdf View Request 21-79 https://cityofhermosabeach-ca.nextrequest.com/requests/21-79 43 Document links are valid for one month. After February 13, you will need to sign in to view the document(s). POWERED BY NEXTREQUEST The All in One Records Requests Platform Questions about your request? Reply to this email or sign in to contact staff at City of Hermosa Beach. Technical support: See our help page 44 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 23-0041 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES AND STANDING COMMITTEE DELEGATES/ALTERNATES City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™45 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0038 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (Interim City Clerk Susan Morrow) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council approve the following minutes: 1.January 11, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting Respectfully Submitted by: Susan Morrow, Interim City Clerk Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™46 Hermosa Beach Virtual Council Regular Meeting Minutes Tuesday, January 11, 2022 Closed Session - 5:00 P.M. Regular Session - 6:00 P.M. Virtual Meeting via Zoom City Council Michael Detoy, Mayor Ray Jackson, Mayor Pro Tem Stacey Armato, Councilmember Mary Campbell, Councilmember Justin Massey, Councilmember I. CALL TO ORDER The City Council Regular Meeting of the City of Hermosa Beach met via a virtual meeting held pursuant to Executive Order AB 361 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom September 16, 2021 on the above date. The Closed Session Meeting was called to order by Mayor Detoy at 5:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Massey, Campbell, Armato, Mayor Pro Tem Jackson, and Mayor Detoy Absent: None IV. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS The following person provided public comment: 1. Matt McCool IV. RECESSED TO CLOSED SESSION 47 The City Council recessed to Closed Session at 5:07 p.m. to the hear the following Closed Session items: a. MINUTES: Approval of minutes of Closed Session held on December 14, 2021. b. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: Pending Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. Name of Case: Lynn Webster v. City of Hermosa Beach Case Number: 21STCV26516, Los Angeles Superior Court c. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: Anticipated Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City Council on the advice of its legal counsel, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City. Number of Cases: Threat of litigation from the County of Los Angeles pertaining to workers compensation claims. (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Closed Session) I. CALL TO ORDER The City Council Regular Meeting of the City of Hermosa Beach met via a virtual meeting held pursuant to Executive Order AB 361 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom September 16, 2021 on the above date. The Regular Session meeting was called to order by Mayor Detoy at 6:01 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Detoy. III. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Massey, Campbell, Armato, Mayor Pro Tem Jackson, and Mayor Detoy Absent: None IV. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Jenkins stated that the Closed Session meeting began at 5:07 p.m. and one person provided public comment for the Closed Session agenda. He stated that the conference with legal counsel: pending litigation was not heard and there were no 48 reportable actions were taken on the conference with legal counsel: anticipated litigation. (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Closed Session Report) V. ANNOUNCEMENTS – UPCOMING CITY EVENT Councilmember Massey announced the Los Angeles County hazardous waste collection event by on Valley Drive, adjacent to Clark Field, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. this Saturday. Mayor Detoy thanked those who donated to the 29th Annual Beach Cities Toy Drive as it was another successful year with donations still trickling in after the holidays. He thanked the community for their generosity. Mayor Detoy shared the sad news of the tragic death of L.A. County Firefighter Jonathan Flagler. He lost his life on January 6th after heroically battling a house fire in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. The City of Hermosa Beach joins with the Los Angeles County Fire Department and County Board of Supervisors in sending our deepest sympathies to his family, friends, and fellow firefighters – especially those who served alongside him at Fire Station 83 in Rancho Palos Verdes. His bravery will not be forgotten, and we keep his wife and two children in our thoughts and prayers. Mayor Detoy concluded his announcement by mentioning that he will be holding neighbor walks and city talks as Mayor. He stated that more details will be forthcoming, and his first event will be on January 29th. (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Announcements Upcoming City Events) VI. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Armato moved to approve the agenda except for removing Agenda Item l, second reading of Ordinance 22-1440 off the Consent Calendar, seconded by Councilmember Campbell. Motion carried unanimously. AYES: Councilmembers Massey, Campbell, Armato, Mayor Pro Tem Jackson, and Mayor Detoy NOES: None 49 (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Approval of the Agenda) VII. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS a. COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT AND LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE b. ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE WINNER OF THE 12TH ANNUAL PARKING PERMIT ART CONTEST c. HERMOSA BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PRESENTS REVIEW OF 2021 PROGRAMS AND VISION FOR 2022 (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s Office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Proclamations and Presentations) VIII. CITY MANAGER REPORT City Manager Lowenthal began her report by announcing that the City was seeking civic- minded residents and business owners who are interested in serving on Hermosa Beach’s Cannabis Advisory Group. Members of the Cannabis Advisory Group should be available to participate in at least four or five public meetings of at least two to three hours in length. The meetings will be conducted by teleconference and will include testimony from the public. This group will provide input to the City Council on whether Hermosa Beach should modify its ordinance that bans cannabis sales in the city limits. She encouraged those interested to submit their Statement of Interest to anny@hermosabeach.gov by Thursday, January 13th. Ms. Lowenthal mentioned that staff continues to work and the City has extended the City’s limitations on direct, in-person services until at least Tuesday, January 18th. Outdoor areas including parks, playgrounds, restrooms, and sports courts will also remain open. Ms. Lowenthal stated that the City was nearing completion of its CalTrans-funded Climate Adaptation Planning project. This project will develop concepts for capital projects that can address both mobility improvements and adaptations to potential sea -level rise. A final community meeting will be held on Wednesday, January 12th at 5 p.m. via Zoom and more information can be found on the City’s website and calendar. City Manager Lowenthal announced that Los Angeles County will host its annual hazardous waste collection event on Valley Drive, adjacent to Clark Field, from 9 a.m. to 50 3 p.m. on January 15th. This event is an excellent opportunity for all Los An geles County residents to safely dispose of their household hazardous waste and a complete list of eligible items and contact information is available on the City’s website and CleanLA.com. Ms. Lowenthal stated that the implementation of the state-mandated organic waste recycling program has been delayed due to supply shortages on the delivery of the organic waste carts. She added that all other aspects of the mandatory organics program, including food donation tracking and city procurement, were moving forward on schedule. Ms. Lowenthal mentioned that the Skechers Project will begin the construction of a walkway underneath 30th Street to connect their 2901 Pacific Coast Highway and 3001 Pacific Coast Highway buildings. Construction will last 9 months, and traffic will be restricted to one-lane eastbound with flagmen directing traffic. The City will be sharing the same update by email, social media, and online. City Manager Lowenthal concluded her report by stating that the Planning Commission has rescheduled its public hearing regarding Starbucks’ application for a drive -through at its location on 2nd Street and Pacific Coast Highway. The new meeting will take place on February 15, and the City will issue a new public notice and direc tly notify community members who have reached out to the City regarding this matter. Chief LeBaron provided his update. (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 City Manager Report) IX. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS/ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS The following people provided public comment: 1. Tony Higgins 2. Kent Allen 3. Trent Larson 4. Sarah Harper 5. Nancy Schwappach 6. Matt McCool (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Public Communication/Oral Written Communications) 51 X. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS a. UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES AND STANDING COMMITTEE DELEGATES/ALTERNATES Mayor Detoy stated that he and Councilmember Campbell, attended the Economic Development Committee meeting on January 3rd. He reported that the Economic Development Plan was moving forward, and action items were being divided into five categories for implementation. Councilmember Campbell encouraged the community to review the meetings and provide their input as they finalize the Plan. Mayor Detoy asked staff to provide an update on the CEQA analysis for the Outdoor Permit Program, which City Manager Lowenthal stated that the CEQA consultant was recently hired. (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 City Council Comments) XI. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Councilmember Massey moved to approve the Consent Calendar except for Agenda Item l, second reading of Ordinance 22-1440, seconded by Councilmember Campbell. Motion carried unanimously. AYES: Councilmembers Massey, Campbell, Armato, Mayor Pro Tem Jackson, and Mayor Detoy NOES: None a. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES b. CHECK REGISTERS c. REVENUE REPORT, COVID-19 REVENUE TRACKING REPORT, EXPENDITURE REPORT, AND CIP REPORT BY PROJECT FOR OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER 2021 d. CITY TREASURER’S REPORT AND CASH BALANCE REPORT e. CANCELLATION OF CERTAIN CHECKS 52 f. ACTION MINUTES OF THE PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY RESOURCES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 7, 2021 g. LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE AND AMBULANCE MONTHLY REPORT FOR NOVEMBER 2021 h. ACTION MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 13, 2021 i. ACTION MINUTES OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF JANUARY 3, 2022 j. AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR CIP 629 THE ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF THE MUNICIPAL PIER k. FINDINGS TO HOLD REMOTE TELECONFERENCE/MEETINGS, PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361 m. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE SOUTH BAY CITIES COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE BEACH CITIES REGARDING USE OF SBCCOG’S ALLOCATED COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES INNOVATION GRANT FUNDS TO IMPLEMENT THE CITIES’ CASE MANAGEMENT PROJECT (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Consent Calendar) XII. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION l. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 16, ADDING CHAPTER 16.24 URBAN LOT SPLITS AND SECTIONS 16.24.10 THROUGH 16.24.70 AND ALSO AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 17 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 17.08 R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE TO INCLUDE TWO-UNIT PROJECTS AS PERMITTED USES IN SECTION 17.08.020 AND ADD A NEW SECTION 17.08.050 TWO-UNIT PROJECTS PERMITTING THEM SUBJECT TO OBJECTIVE STANDARDS IN 53 THE R-1 ZONE AS ALLOWED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 9 The following people provided public comment: 1. Dean Francois 2. Trent Larson 3. Jon Davis MOTION: Councilmember Massey moved to waive full second reading and adopt by title Ordinance 22-1444; and direct staff to publish a summary ordinance, seconded by Councilmember Armato. Motion carried by majority consent. AYES: Councilmembers Massey, Campbell, Armato, and Mayor Detoy NOES: Mayor Pro Tem Jackson (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Items removed from Consent Calendar) XIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. APPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL 2022 IMPACT LEVEL III EVENTS INCLUDING: BATTLE AT THE BEACH-SUPER BOWL TOURNAMENT (2/06); BEACH TENNIS TOURNAMENTS (3/05-3/06, 4/09, 6/04-6/05, 8/27, 9/17-9/18; 10/15- 10/16; AND 10/29-10/30); CONCERT AT CLARK FIELD (5/14); AND TRIATHLON (6/10-6/12) The following people provided public testimony: 1. Trent Larson 2. Mark Mamber 3. Dency Nelson MOTION: Councilmember Campbell moved to approve the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission’s recommendation to include the following additional Impact Level III Special Events on the 2022 Special Event 54 Calendar:  Battle on the Beach-Super Bowl Tournament on Sunday, February 6 south of the pier;  Beach Tennis Tournaments on Saturday, March 5 -Sunday, March 6; Saturday, April 9; Saturday, June 4-Sunday, June 5; Saturday, August 27; Saturday, September 17-Sunday, September 18; Saturday, October 15- Sunday, October 16; and Saturday, October 29-Sunday, October 30 on the beach tennis courts;  Concert at Clark Field on Saturday, May 14 on Clark Field; and  West Coast AAU Junior Olympic Games on Monday, July 25 -Friday, July 29 on the volleyball courts north and south of the pier; and Triathlon on Friday, June 10-Sunday, June 12 on the strand north and south of the pier, Pier Plaza, and the volleyball courts north of the pier, seconded by Councilmember Massey. Motion carried unanimously. AYES: Councilmembers Massey, Campbell, Armato, and Mayor Pro Tem Jackson, and Mayor Detoy NOES: None (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Public Hearing item a) b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ALLOCATION OF APPROXIMATELY $62,938 OF FEDERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS FOR SIDEWALK RECONSTRUCTION ALONG LONGFELLOW AVENUE AND MONTEREY BOULEVARD, AUTHORIZING USE OF CDBG FUNDS FOR CONTRACTORS, AND GRANTING THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AUTHORITY TO SUBMIT A NOTICE OF COMPLETION The following person provided public testimony: 1. Trent Larson MOTION: Councilmember Armato over to: 1. Adopt the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 budget resolution which: a. Approves the FY 2022-23 CDBG allocation of approximately $62,938; b. Approves the allocation of approximately $62,938 of Federal CDBG funds in FY 2022-23 for the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) sidewalk improvements project; 55 c. Authorizes the use of CDBG funds in FY 2022 -23 for a construction contractor and a Contract/Labor Compliance Officer to provide direct project related services including but not limited to construction management and inspections; and 2. Grant the Public Works Director authority to submit a notice of completion once work is complete, seconded by Councilmember Massey. Motion carried unanimously. AYES: Councilmembers Massey, Campbell, Armato, and Mayor Pro Tem Jackson, and Mayor Detoy NOES: None (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Public Hearing item b) XIV. MUNICIPAL MATTERS a. AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER SERVICES TO LAURA MECOY COMMUNICATIONS, LLC The following people provided public comment: 1. Kent Allen 2. Trent Larsen 3. Matt McCool 4. Laura Pena MOTION: Councilmember Armato moved to: 1. Award a Professional Services Agreement to Laura Mecoy Communications, LLC, to provide Public Information Officer Services in the amount of $86,400 for one year, with the option to renew for four (4) additional one-year terms; and 2. Authorize the Mayor to execute and the City Clerk to attest the Professional Services Agreement, seconded by Councilmember Campbell. Motion carried unanimously. AYES: Councilmembers Massey, Campbell, Armato, and Mayor Pro Tem Jackson, and Mayor Detoy 56 NOES: None (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Municipal Matter item a) XV. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS a. MAYOR PRO TEM JACKSON REQUESTS THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE AN ITEM FOR THE JANUARY 25, 2022 AGENDA THAT INCLUDES A RECOMMENDATION FOR AN ENCROACHMENT FEE FOR THE TEMPORARY OUTDOOR PERMIT PROGRAM FOR THE DINING DECKS Mayor Pro Tem Jackson wanted to have City Council support to have an agenda item prepared on a recommendation for an encroachment fee for the Temporary Outdoor Permit Program for the dining decks. Councilmembers Massey, Campbell, Amato, and Mayor Detoy supported a full agenda item be brought back on January 25, 2022. (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Future Agenda item a) b. TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Council received and filed as there were no changes to the tentative agenda items. (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Future Agenda item b) XVI. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Detoy adjourned the meeting at 9:42 p.m. Mayor Detoy announced the next City Council meeting will be on January 25, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. for Closed Session and 6:00 p.m. for the Regular Session. (Complete audio and video are available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: January 11, 2022 Meeting Adjournment). Susan Morrow, Interim City Clerk 57 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0042 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 CHECK REGISTERS (Finance Director Viki Copeland) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council ratify the following check registers. Attachments: 1.Check Register 12/30/2021 2.Check Register 1/6/2022 Respectfully Submitted by: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™58 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98745 12/30/2021 A.J. KIRKWOOD & ASSOCIATES K210949 EMERG REPAIRS/CLARK FIELD TENNIS LIGHTS21688 105-2024 1,530.00 Total : 1,530.0021688 98746 12/30/2021 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CO OP 113006 TAXI VOUCHER PROGRAM - CARD/NOV 2111437 145-3404-4201 1,525.22 TAXI VOUCHER PROGRAM - VOUCHERS/NOV 21113021 145-3404-4201 256.37 Total : 1,781.5911437 98747 12/30/2021 ALHAMBRA FOUNDRY CO.118633 COVER FOR MONUMENT00353 001-3104-4309 591.28 001-3104-4309 60.61 Total : 651.8900353 98748 12/30/2021 AMERICAN GUARD SERVICES, INC. INV35019 CROSSING GUARD SERVICES/ NOV 2120685 146-2102-4201 19,481.28 Total : 19,481.2820685 98749 12/30/2021 BANK OF NY MELLON TRUST CO NA, THE 252-2421195 INVESTMENT SAFEKEEPING/ JUL - SEP 2111575 001-1141-4201 875.00 Total : 875.0011575 98750 12/30/2021 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP 921516 CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES-GENERAL/NOV 2120942 001-1131-4201 21,652.80 ATTORNEY-PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS/NOV 21921517 001-1131-4201 6,658.00 CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES-COVID/NOV 21921518 157-2702-4201 11,732.50 CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES - ADA/ NOV 21921519 001-1203-4201 20.50 CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES-LAND USE/ NOV 21921520 001-1131-4201 4,216.85 CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES-FANGARY/ NOV 21921521 705-1133-4201 9,008.39 LEGAL - HUMAN RESOURCES/ NOV 21921522 001-1203-4201 2,660.00 LEGAL-PW CONSTRUCTION/ NOV 21921523 Attachment 159 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98750 12/30/2021 (Continued)BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP20942 001-1131-4201 4,785.00 Total : 60,734.0420942 98751 12/30/2021 BRAUN LINEN SERVICE 1723000 to 1730086 PRISONER LAUNDRY/ NOV 2100163 001-2101-4306 451.35 Total : 451.3500163 98752 12/30/2021 CAPITAL WHOLESALE LIGHTING 447101, 447103 ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES/ NOV 2121720 001-4204-4309 1,808.97 Total : 1,808.9721720 98753 12/30/2021 CDWG M079276 TONER - JAIL PRINTER09632 001-2101-4305 556.17 COMPUTER POWER ADAPTER - PDN349221 001-2101-4305 56.03 Total : 612.2009632 98754 12/30/2021 CLEAN ENERGY CE12415921 COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS/ JUL 2109694 715-3109-4310 32.38 COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS/ AUG 21CE12425057 715-3109-4310 25.42 COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS/ SEP 21CE12433755 715-6101-4310 40.19 COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS/ OCT 21CE12442654 715-3109-4310 40.94 Total : 138.9309694 98755 12/30/2021 COLANTUONO, HIGHSMITH &50102 LEGAL SERVICES/UUT LAWSUIT/ NOV 2121871 705-1133-4201 137.05 Total : 137.0521871 98756 12/30/2021 COMMERCIAL BUILDING MANAGEMENT 68534 JANITORIAL/COVID PORTER/ NOV 2120627 001-4204-4201 6,861.00 157-2702-4201 4,296.44 Total : 11,157.4420627 98757 12/30/2021 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AR0241676 BACKFLOW TESTING12964 001-6101-4251 74.00 BACKFLOW TESTINGAR0262944 60 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98757 12/30/2021 (Continued)COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES12964 001-6101-4251 37.00 BACKFLOW TESTINGAR0262945 001-6101-4251 37.00 BACKFLOW TESTINGAR0262946 001-6101-4251 37.00 BACKFLOW TESTINGAR062943 001-6101-4251 37.00 Total : 222.0012964 98758 12/30/2021 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES C0010168 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES/ JAN 2220781 001-2202-4251 524,522.03 180-2202-4251 3,588.52 Total : 528,110.5520781 98759 12/30/2021 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, C/O AUDITOR CONTROLLER900001 SART EXAM ACCT#102484019722456 001-2101-4201 1,074.76 Total : 1,074.7622456 98760 12/30/2021 CROTTY, CRAIG R 12621 CRAIG CROTTY - ARBORIST SERVICES AT CLAR19444 301-8689-4201 2,500.00 Total : 2,500.0019444 98761 12/30/2021 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 542123 MAT REQ 973968/FINGERPRINTING/OCT 2100364 001-1203-4251 512.00 Total : 512.0000364 98762 12/30/2021 DEWEY PEST CONTROL 1233239 SEWER RAT ABATEMENT/OCT-DEC 2111449 160-3102-4201 834.00 Total : 834.0011449 98763 12/30/2021 DONNOE & ASSOCIATES, INC 9141 POLICE TESTS INV 914117868 001-1203-4201 550.00 Total : 550.0017868 98764 12/30/2021 DUNCAN SOLUTIONS, INC.1006303 CITATION PAYMENT SYSTEM FEES/ NOV 2120668 001-1204-4201 3,273.65 Total : 3,273.6520668 98765 12/30/2021 FEDEX OFFICE 7-571-51072 MAT REQ 973970/SHIPPING SERVICES06293 61 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98765 12/30/2021 (Continued)FEDEX OFFICE06293 001-1203-4201 48.81 MAT REQ 973970/SHIPPING SERVICES7-601-44834 001-1203-4201 83.78 Total : 132.5906293 98766 12/30/2021 FLORES, ANTHONY 80640 PO 37057 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT/FALL2120842 001-2101-4317 3,240.00 Total : 3,240.0020842 98767 12/30/2021 GALLS LLC BC1499824 MAT REQ 838555/FLASHLIGHT/CSO ALVARADO01320 001-3302-4314 124.15 Total : 124.1501320 98768 12/30/2021 HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS AND ASSC SIN013241 SALES TAX AUDIT/OCT21-DEC2107547 001-1202-4201 1,352.09 Total : 1,352.0907547 98769 12/30/2021 HONDA MD INC, STEPHAN T 00132913 DETAINEE BLOOD DRAW/ NOV 2115141 001-2101-4201 63.60 Total : 63.6015141 98770 12/30/2021 INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP INC 74187 ON-CALL ENGINEERING SRVCS/OCT2121849 001-3104-4201 1,920.00 Total : 1,920.0021849 98771 12/30/2021 JONES, JOHN RILEY 0000001 EXECUTIVE COACHING SRVCS/OCT 2122496 001-1201-4201 800.00 EXECUTIVE COACHING SRVCS/NOV 210000002 001-1201-4201 900.00 Total : 1,700.0022496 98772 12/30/2021 KEALY CONSTRUCTION, PATRICK 52306/PW21-0771 STREET EXCAVATION PERMIT REFUND12978 001-3831 722.25 Total : 722.2512978 98773 12/30/2021 LA SUPERIOR COURT - TORRANCE PO 36976 CITATION SURCHARGES/NOV2100118 001-3302 40,611.50 Total : 40,611.5000118 62 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98774 12/30/2021 LAW OFFICE OF C PATRICK HAMBLI 4441 LEGAL SRVCS/PERSONNEL/SEPT2122299 001-1203-4201 486.75 LEGAL SRVCS/PERSONNEL/OCT214523 001-1203-4201 1,468.50 Total : 1,955.2522299 98775 12/30/2021 LEO WEB PROTECT INC 3456 PD SUBSCRIPTION/INTERNET PRIVACY22111 001-2101-4201 3,999.96 Total : 3,999.9622111 98776 12/30/2021 M6 CONSULTING INC 1907 PLAN CHECKS/NOV2119487 001-4202-4201 6,130.00 Total : 6,130.0019487 98777 12/30/2021 MERCHANTS LANDSCAPE SERVICES 58970 CITYWIDE LANDSCAPING/NOV2118071 001-6101-4201 21,200.00 CITYWIDE MEDIAN LANDSCAPING/NOV2158971 105-2601-4201 3,600.00 Total : 24,800.0018071 98778 12/30/2021 MV CHENG & ASSOCIATES INC 11/30/2021 TEMP ACCTS PAYABLE CLERK/NOV2122444 001-1201-4201 8,812.50 Total : 8,812.5022444 98779 12/30/2021 PARS 49086 ALT RETIREMENT PLAN ADMIN FEES/AUG2114693 001-1101-4185 6.36 001-1204-4185 0.59 001-3302-4185 2.94 001-4204-4185 5.51 001-4101-4185 6.16 001-4201-4185 6.16 001-4601-4185 98.67 ALT RETIREMENT PLAN ADMIN FEES/SEPT2149233 001-1101-4185 6.51 001-1204-4185 0.61 001-3302-4185 3.01 001-4204-4185 5.64 001-4101-4185 6.30 001-4201-4185 6.30 63 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98779 12/30/2021 (Continued)PARS14693 001-4601-4185 101.02 ALT RETIREMENT PLAN ADMIN FEES/OCT2149454 001-1101-4185 6.48 001-1204-4185 0.60 001-3302-4185 3.00 001-4204-4185 5.62 001-4101-4185 6.27 001-4201-4185 6.27 001-4601-4185 100.58 Total : 384.6014693 98780 12/30/2021 POELSTRA, GERRITT "JOE"TR 896 PER DIEM/SHERMAN BLOC LEADRSHIP15701 001-2101-4312 150.00 Total : 150.0015701 98781 12/30/2021 PROVIDENCE MEDICAL GuarantorID600000284 MAT REQ 973969/EMPLOYEE PHYSICALS01911 001-1203-4305 309.00 MAT REQ 973969/EMPLOYEE PHYSICALSGuarantorID600000285 001-1203-4305 473.00 Total : 782.0001911 98782 12/30/2021 REDONDO BEACH, CITY OF 574173 CITY PROSECUTOR SERVICES/NOV2103282 001-1132-4201 16,667.00 Total : 16,667.0003282 98783 12/30/2021 RJ PRINTING & PROMOTIONAL 800 PD EXCEPTION SLIPS21153 001-2101-4305 663.60 001-2101-4305 58.96 Total : 722.5621153 98784 12/30/2021 SAFETY-KLEEN SYSTEMS, INC.87393558 REQ 638996/HAZARDOUS WASTE REMOVAL03428 001-3104-4201 1,091.00 Total : 1,091.0003428 98785 12/30/2021 SAFEWAY INC VONS 724516-111121-2110 REQ 987408/WATER/VETERANS DAY EVENT16425 001-4601-4308 16.17 REQ 987407/WATER/VETERANS DAY EVENT804136-111021-2110 001-4601-4308 9.59 64 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 25.76 98785 12/30/2021 SAFEWAY INC VONS16425 98786 12/30/2021 SASE COMPANY INC INV278576 PW GRINDER PARTS08165 001-3104-4309 388.64 001-3104-4309 36.93 PW GRINDER PARTS/DRUMSINV280180 001-3104-4309 777.28 001-3104-4309 73.83 PW GRINDER PARTSINV280194 001-3104-4309 145.51 001-3104-4309 13.82 Total : 1,436.0108165 98787 12/30/2021 SBCU VISA 0028 PO 37026 CC FIELD TRAINING OFCR/SMITH/JAN2103353 001-2101-4312 315.00 CELL PHONE CASE/J.DAVIS0650632 PO 36864 CC 001-4202-4305 44.96 001-4202-4305 4.27 PW ENGINEERS/COFFEE SUPPLIES0882643 PO 36806 CC 001-4202-4305 79.95 001-4202-4305 2.92 FUEL PURCHASE/LEEDS INSTITUTE/LEBARON105707 TR868 CC 001-2101-4317 22.00 SENIOR CENTER MUSIC/NOV21124487479006 CC 001-4601-4328 9.99 CITY CLERK JOB POSTING200000172 PO 36871CC 001-1203-4201 200.00 TRAINING/SECONDS IN COMMAND/SCHEID20541 PO 36888 CC 001-2101-4317 150.00 CITY COUNCIL RETREAT/11-6-21213759 PO 36916 CC 001-1101-4201 2,345.89 001-1101-4201 175.14 MAYOR TRANSITION RECEPTION/11-8-2124 PO 36897 CC 001-1101-4319 732.00 001-1101-4319 57.00 SOUTH BAY CHIEF LUNCHEON 11-4-2131 11/4/21 CC 001-2101-4305 175.10 SNOWMAN EVENT SUPPLIES3180 PO 36920 CC 001-4601-4308 134.10 65 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98787 12/30/2021 (Continued)SBCU VISA03353 FUEL PURCHASE/LEEDS INSTITUTE341099001201 TR868CC 001-2101-4317 58.00 LED LIGHTS/PARTS377302/PO 36696CC 001-4601-4201 589.88 LEBARON/ADDT'L CELL PHONE STORGE/NOV21469266 PO36578 CC 001-2101-4305 2.99 GAVEL PLAQUE/MAYOR MASSEY47276 PO 37009 CC 001-1101-4319 80.00 001-1101-4319 6.38 SCHEID/ADDT'L CELL PHONE STORAGE/NOV21478166 PO 36578 CC 001-2101-4305 0.99 COFFEE/PASTRIES/PD RECRUIT ORAL BOARD49960 PO36867 CC 001-1203-4305 26.90 PW YARD TEAM MEETING/BREAKFAST5 PO 37011 CC 001-1201-4305 159.30 001-1201-4305 13.73 LEAGUE OF CITIES/CM CONFERENCE533355 TR 894 CC 001-1201-4317 725.00 COUNCIL MEMBR ACADEMY/REGISTRATION533357 PO 37013 CC 001-1101-4317 250.00 TRANSPORTATION/UBER/LEBARON54962 TR868 CC 001-2101-4317 2.50 PD CAR WASH/CHIEF554 PO 37031 CC 715-2101-4311 23.99 COFFEE TRAVELER/PW/GALLEGOS GATHERING570387 MR 791238 CC 001-4202-4305 59.85 COMPUTER RAM/DESKTOP MEMORY65069 PO 37066 CC 001-4201-4305 106.50 001-4101-4305 106.50 001-4201-4305 10.11 001-4101-4305 10.11 BEREAVEMENT FLOWER PURCHASE/PD7276935859 PO37025CC 001-2101-4305 112.53 COMPUTER MEMORY/BRACKET/HARD DRIVE73820 PO 36834 CC 001-1201-4305 214.96 001-1201-4305 20.41 PW ENGINEER/HEADPHONES/WEBCAM8521023 PO 36833 CC 001-4202-4305 161.07 66 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 9 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98787 12/30/2021 (Continued)SBCU VISA03353 001-4202-4305 15.30 MGMNT TEAM BUILDING WORKSHOP/LUNCH878857 PO 37012 CC 001-1203-4317 249.00 001-1203-4317 19.71 FUEL PURCHASE/LEEDS INSTITUTE/LEBARON9533062 TR 868CC 001-2101-4317 58.00 CA CONTRACT CITIES ASSOC/LEGISLATIV TOUREBUQUJ TR 893CC 001-1101-4317 575.00 COMM RESOURCES/RENEWAL DUESPO 36872 CC 001-4601-4315 555.00 FLIGHT/CPRS CONFERENCE/NICHOLSPO 36886 CC 001-4601-4317 443.88 MONTHLY DAILY BREEZE/NOV21PO 37072 CC 001-4101-4315 14.00 EOC SATELLITE PHONE/10-28 TO 11-27-21RU311890 PO36585CC 001-1201-4304 57.67 Total : 9,177.5803353 98788 12/30/2021 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 9304-6 MAT REQ 279167/PAINTING SUPPLIES17903 001-3301-4309 206.10 MAT REQ 279169/PAINTING SUPPLIES9684-1 001-3104-4309 157.06 Total : 363.1617903 98789 12/30/2021 SMART & FINAL 3220630001001 MAT REQ 838904/PD BRIEFING SUPPLIES00114 001-2101-4305 107.52 MAT REQ 838906/JAIL SUPPLIES3220630002802 001-2101-4306 188.28 MAT REQ 479091/PD FAREWELL EVENT3220630007902 001-1201-4305 24.77 MAT REQ 437845/PD BASE OFFICE SUPPLY3220630008501 001-3302-4305 95.59 MAT REQ 838900/JAIL SUPPLIES3220630021801 001-2101-4306 14.99 Total : 431.1500114 98790 12/30/2021 SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC COMM 04067 MAT REQ 583676/CELLULAR ANTENNAS08812 715-3302-4311 358.31 67 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 10 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98790 12/30/2021 (Continued)SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC COMM08812 MAT REQ 583675/CELLULAR ANTENNAS04068 715-3302-4311 358.31 MAT REQ 583674/CELLULAR ANTENNAS04069 715-3302-4311 441.00 MAT REQ 583678/CELLULAR ANTENNA04070 715-3302-4311 358.31 MAT REQ 583679/CELLULAR ANTENNAS04072 715-3302-4311 358.31 MAT REQ 583681/ CELLULAR ANTENNA04073 715-3302-4311 358.31 MAT REQ 583680/CELLULAR ANTENNAS04074 715-3302-4311 358.31 MAT REQ 583677/ETHERNET ADAPTER04075 715-3302-4311 30.78 Total : 2,621.6408812 98791 12/30/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO 700057262780 ELECTRICITY 11-4-21 TO 12-6-2100159 105-2601-4303 74.39 001-2026 0.69 001-2027 -0.69 ELECTRICITY 11-4-21 TO 12-6-21700234897163 001-3304-4303 2,381.62 001-2026 32.96 001-2027 -32.96 ELECTRICITY 11-4-21 TO 12-6-21700304673105 160-3102-4201 90.53 001-2026 0.53 001-2027 -0.53 ELECTRICITY 11-5-21 TO 12-7-21700338055956 001-4204-4303 1,495.49 001-2026 31.41 001-2027 -31.41 ELECTRICITY 11-8-21 TO 12-8-21700371314327 105-2601-4303 139.44 001-2026 1.46 001-2027 -1.46 Total : 4,181.4700159 68 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 11 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98792 12/30/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA NEWS GROUP 0011499124 CLASSIFIED/ADVERTISING/NOV2119623 001-1121-4323 553.12 Total : 553.1219623 98793 12/30/2021 SPCALA 2021-1130 ANIMAL SHELTERING/DISPOSAL/NOV2118821 001-3302-4201 875.00 Total : 875.0018821 98794 12/30/2021 THAYER'S DIST. & ELECTRICAL 7587 ELECTRICAL GATE REPAIR/CITY YARD21075 001-4204-4201 635.58 ELECTRICAL GATE SRVC/REPAIR/BARD ST7628 001-4204-4201 682.50 Total : 1,318.0821075 98795 12/30/2021 THE COUNSELING TEAM INTERNATIO 79782 PD COUNSELING SRVCS/JUL2120121 001-1203-4201 500.00 PD COUNSELING/OCT2180618 001-1203-4201 250.00 Total : 750.0020121 98796 12/30/2021 TRIANGLE HARDWARE 30607 thru 30621 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES/DEC2100123 001-3104-4309 1,868.42 001-4204-4309 2,129.97 001-6101-4309 636.26 105-2601-4309 480.65 715-4206-4311 392.90 001-2021 115.29 001-2022 -115.29 Total : 5,508.2000123 98797 12/30/2021 WEBB, W. ROBERT PO 37014 TAXI VOUCHER REFUND/UNUSED09718 145-3853 27.00 Total : 27.0009718 98798 12/30/2021 WIRELESS CCTV LLC 83458 PD CCTV CAMERA TRAILER22297 150-2120-4201 31,192.62 Total : 31,192.6222297 98799 12/30/2021 YAMADA COMPANY INC.81434 MAT REQ 583665/HONDA PARTS00315 715-3102-4311 81.53 69 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 12 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 81.53 98799 12/30/2021 YAMADA COMPANY INC.00315 3191081 10/22/2021 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET 74911615 VEHICLE FUEL/ 9-11 TO 10-10-2110668 715-4206-4310 67.91 715-6101-4310 428.53 001-1250 188.21 715-2101-4310 5,592.96 715-3104-4310 530.03 715-3302-4310 982.74 715-4204-4310 312.08 Total : 8,102.4610668 3219023 12/2/2021 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET 75758176 VEHICLE FUEL/ 10-11 TO 11-10-2110668 715-2101-4310 5,854.16 715-3104-4310 601.28 715-3302-4310 1,301.64 715-4204-4310 684.56 715-4206-4310 171.44 715-6101-4310 524.35 Total : 9,137.4310668 5358260 9/10/2021 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET 73394591 VEHICLE FUEL/ 7-11 TO 8-10-2110668 001-1250 91.60 715-2101-4310 5,803.14 715-3104-4310 529.83 715-3302-4310 1,418.17 715-4204-4310 596.73 715-4206-4310 153.52 715-6101-4310 328.04 Total : 8,921.0310668 5715626 12/30/2021 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET 76666174 VEHICLE FUEL/ 11-11 TO 12-10-2110668 001-1250 98.44 715-2101-4310 4,775.73 715-3104-4310 162.35 715-3302-4310 1,048.95 715-4204-4310 620.36 715-4206-4310 71.86 715-6101-4310 421.81 70 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 13 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 7,199.50 5715626 12/30/2021 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET10668 6021662 6/17/2021 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET 72288068 VEHICLE FUEL/ 5-11 TO 6-10-2110668 001-2024 89.02 715-2024 8,191.12 Total : 8,280.1410668 8382322 12/24/2021 CALPERS FISCAL SERVICES DIV 100000016655403 REPLACEMENT BENEFIT CONTRIBUTION - 202115230 001-2101-4184 8,306.28 Total : 8,306.2815230 8548574 9/17/2021 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET 73958959 VEHICLE FUEL/ 8-11 TO 9-10-2110668 001-1250 94.32 715-2101-4310 5,807.12 715-3104-4310 887.35 715-3302-4310 1,161.42 715-4204-4310 282.02 715-4206-4310 176.36 715-6101-4310 272.55 Total : 8,681.1410668 9894382 7/16/2021 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET 72835012 VEHICLE FUEL/ 6-11 THROUGH 7-10-2110668 001-2024 90.03 715-2024 3,640.84 715-2101-4310 1,915.84 715-2024 290.13 715-3104-4310 289.80 715-2024 817.69 715-3302-4310 286.53 715-2024 279.10 715-4204-4310 189.80 715-2024 176.64 715-6101-4310 85.53 Total : 8,061.9310668 1579591776 12/24/2021 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT L0045324560 UNEMPLOYMENT CLAIMS/JUL - SEP 2101397 705-1215-4186 4,586.00 158-3756 -2,443.35 Total : 2,142.6501397 71 12/30/2021 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 14 5:29:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount Bank total : 879,172.63 64 Vouchers for bank code :boa 879,172.63Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 64 "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages 1 to 14 inclusive, of the check register for 12/20/2021 are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date 12/30/21 72 01/06/2022 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 5:14:25PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98800 1/6/2022 ADAMSON INDUSTRIES INV366903 PD HELMETS WITH SHIELDS00138 001-2101-4201 611.80 Total : 611.8000138 98801 1/6/2022 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 4286211111 WATER USAGE - JUN 2100016 105-2024 3,585.09 001-2024 35,813.42 WATER USAGE - AUG 214286211111 105-2601-4303 5,368.97 001-6101-4303 42,993.95 001-4204-4303 2,139.69 001-3304-4303 304.24 WATER USAGE - SEP 214286211111 105-2601-4303 6,049.72 001-6101-4303 43,555.06 001-4204-4303 1,998.36 001-3304-4303 1,256.25 WATER USAGE - OCT 214286211111 105-2601-4303 5,530.55 001-6101-4303 29,562.58 001-4204-4303 1,827.31 001-3304-4303 296.81 Total : 180,282.0000016 98802 1/6/2022 CANON BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, INC 4038244936 DETECTIVE COPIER/SEPT21-DEC2110838 715-2101-4201 694.55 Total : 694.5510838 98803 1/6/2022 CAPITAL WHOLESALE LIGHTING 447938 ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES/ NOV 2121720 105-2601-4309 733.16 Total : 733.1621720 98804 1/6/2022 CONTINENTAL MAPPING SERVICE 120121 PUBLIC NOTICE SERVICES/ DEC 2120398 001-4101-4201 550.00 Total : 550.0020398 98805 1/6/2022 CRECY, STEVEN 8457826 PO 37069 REIMBURSEMENT/VETERANS MEMORIAL FLAG14752 001-2120 120.33 Attachment 273 01/06/2022 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 5:14:25PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 120.33 98805 1/6/2022 CRECY, STEVEN14752 98806 1/6/2022 ELITE PRIVATE INVESTIGATION 202118 INVESTIGATION SERVICES/10-16 TO 11-16-2122113 001-2101-4201 2,841.00 INVESTIGATION SERVICES/ 11-16 TO 12-4-21202119 001-2101-4201 1,976.00 Total : 4,817.0022113 98807 1/6/2022 FJR PACIFIC, INC.24650 TROUBLESHOOT AC UNIT IN PD21217 001-4204-4201 345.00 Total : 345.0021217 98808 1/6/2022 FRONTIER 209-188-4669-0714985 LANDLINES/COMPUTER LINKS/DEC2119884 001-3302-4304 85.43 001-2101-4304 730.69 001-4204-4321 235.68 001-4202-4304 62.68 001-3304-4304 62.49 001-1204-4304 60.51 PD COMPUTER CIRCUITS/DEC21209-190-0013-1206175 001-2101-4304 902.84 PD JAIL BREATHALYZER/DEC21310-318-9210-0827185 001-2101-4304 76.32 CHAMBERS EOC ANALOG LINE/NOV21310-318-9800-1204155 715-1206-4304 1,580.87 001-2026 45.78 001-2027 -45.78 CHAMBERS EOC ANALOG LINE/DEC21310-318-9800-1204155 715-1206-4304 1,526.24 Total : 5,323.7519884 98809 1/6/2022 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1033362 MAT REQ 435181/PLYWOOD/PD TRAINING03432 001-4204-4309 305.18 MAT REQ 435185/DRYWALL/YARD OFFICE1034322 001-4204-4309 240.72 MAT REQ 638613/MEMORIAL BENCH MATERIALS3012517 001-6101-4309 93.27 PRESSURE WASHER/GRAFFITI REMOVAL350069 001-3104-4309 605.27 74 01/06/2022 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 5:14:25PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98809 1/6/2022 (Continued)HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES03432 MAT REQ 435182/ELECTRICAL WORK SUPPLIES5011110 001-4204-4309 82.09 MAT REQ 008586/TOOLS/DOOR LOCK KIT7514303 001-4204-4309 107.90 MAT REQ 008587/CORDLESS TOOL/ATOMIC KIT7514304 001-6101-4309 431.92 MAT REQ 638536/CITY YARD SUPPLIES8970382 001-4204-4309 444.19 MAT REQ 638502/POWER WASHER PARTS9030165 001-3104-4309 187.27 MAT REQ 435184/PD DOOR9033900 001-4204-4309 268.13 Total : 2,765.9403432 98810 1/6/2022 JOHN L HUNTER AND ASSOC INC HB1MS412109 MUNI STORM WATER PROG ADMIN/SEP 2105356 161-3109-4201 4,163.34 MUNI STORM WATER PROG ADMIN/ OCT 21HB1MS412110 161-3109-4201 5,842.50 MUNI STORM WATER PROG ADMIN/ NOV 21HB1MS412111 161-3109-4201 6,643.75 Total : 16,649.5905356 98811 1/6/2022 JONES, MARQUIS 37049 CITATION (33014054) REFUND - OVERPAYMENT22484 001-3302 28.00 Total : 28.0022484 98812 1/6/2022 K9 SERVICES LLC HBPD-23 K9 OFFICER MAINT TRAINING/ DEC 2121552 170-2105-4317 250.00 Total : 250.0021552 98813 1/6/2022 LEARNED LUMBER B758048-B760156 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES/ DEC 2100167 001-6101-4309 785.01 Total : 785.0100167 98814 1/6/2022 MANHATTAN BEACH, CITY OF 494 MEDIAN MAINTENANCE00183 105-2601-4251 2,402.04 Total : 2,402.0400183 98815 1/6/2022 MILLER PLANNING ASSOCIATES LLC 20007-1121-12 ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE/ NOV 2121660 75 01/06/2022 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 5:14:25PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98815 1/6/2022 (Continued)MILLER PLANNING ASSOCIATES LLC21660 001-4105-4201 5,180.00 Total : 5,180.0021660 98816 1/6/2022 ONWARD ENGINEERING 6104 PAVING/CONSTRUCT MGR/INSPECT/SEP 2121596 115-8186-4201 17,330.00 Total : 17,330.0021596 98817 1/6/2022 PACIFIC COAST CONSTRUCTION 958 INSTALL MONUMENT COVER/ 11TH ST @ PROSPE09513 001-3104-4201 1,455.00 Total : 1,455.0009513 98818 1/6/2022 SBCU VISA 01046 PO 37047 CC PD K9 FOOD03353 170-2105-4309 71.95 HOTEL/MOTOR SCHOOL/GRODRIGUEZ058029 TR 891 CC 001-2101-4317 166.88 HOTEL/MOTOR SCHOOL/GRODRIGUEZ075112 TR891 CC 001-2101-4314 155.68 TRAINING/ENHANCED DRUG ID/V JOHNSON08288 PO 36885 CC 001-2101-4313 100.00 TUITION/CIVILIAN LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE11042021 TR 892CC 001-2101-4317 3,000.00 DEPOSIT/HOLIDAY STAFF PARTY111121 PO 36870 CC 001-1203-4201 3,340.00 CASHIER TRAINING/11-17-2111172021 PO 36765 CC 001-1204-4317 360.00 REFUND/STAFF HOLIDAY PARTY12302021 CC 001-1203-4201 -3,340.00 PD FILE SHARING/ADDT'L LICENSE/RENEW31QCGD PO 37082 CC 001-2101-4305 7.23 PD SANTA COSTUME/BATTERY STARTER5035 PO 37021 CC 001-3302-4201 69.99 715-2101-4311 51.99 001-3302-4201 6.65 715-2101-4311 4.94 PD WATER DELIVERY/OCT21513168 PO 36582CC 001-2101-4305 485.81 ANIMAL SERVICES/EUTHANASIA780560 PO 36889 CC 001-3302-4201 29.77 76 01/06/2022 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 5:14:25PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98818 1/6/2022 (Continued)SBCU VISA03353 ANIMAL SERVICES/EUTHANASIA780881 CC 001-3302-4201 27.00 HOTEL/BEHAVORIAL ANALYSIS/T.MATEKO8944 TR 881CC 001-2101-4312 821.40 PD HOLIDAY ELF COSTUMES9270658 CC 001-3302-4201 227.68 STAFF HOLIDAY PARTYNOV 11 CC 001-1203-4201 152.33 PD FILE SHARING LIC RENEWALNW6Y/PO 37056 CC 001-2101-4201 1,200.00 PD VACUUM CLEANERPO 36862 CC 001-2101-4305 98.54 PD CABLE BIKE LOCKSPO 36863 CC 001-2101-4305 198.15 001-2101-4305 18.75 HIGH VISIBILITY RAIN JACKET/CSO ALVARADOPO 36894 CC 001-3302-4314 65.93 001-3302-4314 5.79 Total : 7,326.4603353 98819 1/6/2022 SONG, XI 37050 CITATION (33014614) REFUND - OVERPAYMENT22482 001-3302 28.00 Total : 28.0022482 98820 1/6/2022 SPECTRUM BUSINESS 8448300300046247 CITY HALL CABLE 11/24/21-12/23/2120236 715-4204-4201 109.85 CITY HALL CABLE 12/24/21-1/23/228448300300046247 715-4204-4201 109.85 PD CABLE 11-11-21 TO 12-10-218448300300049969 001-2101-4201 76.95 PD CABLE 12-11-21 TO 1-10-228448300300049969 001-2101-4201 76.95 PW YARD CABLE 12/16/21-1/15/228448300300088884 001-4202-4201 146.90 1301 HERMOSA/RCC CONNECT/DEC218448300300350359 001-2101-4304 149.99 1301 HERMOSA/RCC CONNECT/JAN218448300300350359 001-2101-4304 149.99 77 01/06/2022 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 5:14:25PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 98820 1/6/2022 (Continued)SPECTRUM BUSINESS20236 1301 HERMOSA/540 CONNECT/DEC218448300300402150 001-2101-4304 798.92 1301 HERMOSA/540 PIER CONNECTION/JAN218448300300402150 001-2101-4304 798.92 Total : 2,418.3220236 98821 1/6/2022 STEWART, KEVIN M 37051 CITATION (33014302) REFUND - OVERPAYMENT22481 001-3302 28.00 Total : 28.0022481 98822 1/6/2022 SWRCB SW-0222981 STORM WATER PERMIT/ OCT 21 TO SEP 2211908 161-3109-4251 10,602.00 SEWER PERMIT/ 2021-22WD-0190001 160-3102-4251 3,326.00 Total : 13,928.0011908 98823 1/6/2022 T-MOBILE acct 954297746 PW YARD/CELL PHONES/HOTSPOTS/NOV2119082 001-4202-4304 321.48 PW YARD/CELL PHONES/HOTSPOT/DEC21acct 954297746 001-4202-4304 321.48 Total : 642.9619082 98824 1/6/2022 TURBODATA SYSTEMS, INC.36042 TICKET WRITER WIRELESS/OCT21-JAN2120670 001-3302-4201 3,750.00 Total : 3,750.0020670 98825 1/6/2022 UPS 000023R146012 SHIPPING SERVICES - PD/ DEC 2114148 001-2101-4305 11.13 Total : 11.1314148 98826 1/6/2022 UPTIME COMPUTER SERVICE 32283 MONTHLY PRINTER MAINT/ DEC 2104768 715-1206-4201 554.45 MONTHLY PRINTER MAINT/ JAN 2232315 715-1206-4201 587.38 Total : 1,141.8304768 98827 1/6/2022 VCA COAST ANIMAL HOSPITAL 401468062 CARDBOARD ANIMAL/PET CARRIERS09672 001-3302-4305 172.75 001-3302-4305 16.41 78 01/06/2022 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 5:14:25PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 189.16 98827 1/6/2022 VCA COAST ANIMAL HOSPITAL09672 5469331 12/24/2021 SOCAL GAS 097 904 5900 3 CITY-OWNED BLDGS/NATURAL GAS - NOV 2100170 001-4204-4303 120.21 Total : 120.2100170 5469361 12/24/2021 SOCAL GAS 102 104 5900 3 CITY-OWNED BLDGS/NATURAL GAS - NOV 2100170 001-4204-4303 109.89 Total : 109.8900170 5469602 12/24/2021 SOCAL GAS 139 104 4600 7 CITY-OWNED BLDGS/NATURAL GAS - NOV 2100170 001-4204-4303 15.29 Total : 15.2900170 5469631 12/24/2021 SOCAL GAS 141 204 4600 1 CITY-OWNED BLDGS/NATURAL GAS - NOV 2100170 001-4204-4303 22.17 Total : 22.1700170 Bank total : 270,054.59 32 Vouchers for bank code :boa 270,054.59Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 32 79 01/06/2022 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 5:14:25PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages 1 to 8 inclusive, of the check register for 1/6/2022 are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date 1/6/22 80 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0048 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 MEMORANDUM REGARDING REVENUE REPORT, COVID-19 REVENUE REPORTS, EXPENDITURE REPORT, AND CIP REPORT BY PROJECT FOR DECEMBER 2022 (Finance Director Viki Copeland) The December 2021 Revenue, COVID-19 Revenue Tracking, Expenditure, and CIP reports will be submitted with the Midyear Budget Review, which is scheduled for the March 8, 2022 City Council meeting. Respectfully Submitted by: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™81 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0047 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 MEMORANDUM REGARDING CITY TREASURER’S REPORT AND CASH BALANCE REPORT (City Treasurer Karen Nowicki) The December 2021 City Treasurer’s Report and Cash Balance Report will be submitted with the Midyear Budget Review, which is scheduled for the March 8, 2022 City Council meeting. Respectfully Submitted by: Karen Nowicki, City Treasurer Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™82 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0046 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STATUS REPORT AS OF JANUARY 13, 2022 (Public Works Director Joe SanClemente) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council receive and file the Capital Improvement Program Status Report as of January 13, 2022. Executive Summary: In order to provide greater clarity of the City’s ongoing efforts to make accessibility improvements,the Capital Improvement Program Status Report was revised.The report now contains a column titled “ADA Component”to indicate projects that include an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) improvement.In addition,the “Project Description”column was expanded to contain a description of the ADA improvements. Analysis: Number of Projects/Studies by Phase # of Projects/Studies Study/Conceptual Planning 9 Preliminary Design 9 Final Engineering Design 16 Project Approvals/ Bidding 2 Construction 5 Closeout 4 Total Projects 39 Total Studies 6 Number of Projects/Studies by Completion Timeline # of Projects/Studies 1 - Complete by end of FY 21-22 11 2 - Complete in FY 22-23 7 3 - 3 years to completion 0 4 - 5 years to completion 0 5 - TBD 23 Projects/Studies Complete 4 Total Projects 39 Total Studies 6 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™83 Staff Report REPORT 22-0046 Number of Projects/Studies by Completion Timeline # of Projects/Studies 1 - Complete by end of FY 21-22 11 2 - Complete in FY 22-23 7 3 - 3 years to completion 0 4 - 5 years to completion 0 5 - TBD 23 Projects/Studies Complete 4 Total Projects 39 Total Studies 6 Number of Projects/Studies by Category # of Projects/Studies Street & Highway Improvements 14 Sewer & Storm Drain Improvements 6 Park Improvements 4 Public Building & Ground Improvements 21 Total Projects 39 Total Studies 6 # of Projects/Studies Number of Projects/Studies by Manager Lead Support Total Lucho Rodriguez 4 3 7 Romany Basilyous 7 0 7 Andrew Nguyen 6 3 8 Michelle Licata 5 1 6 Jonathan Pascual 5 1 6 John Cordova 1 0 1 Doug Krauss 4 1 5 Lisa Nichols 2 0 2 TBD 11 0 11 Total Projects/Studies 45 Attachments: Capital Improvement Program Status Report as of January 13, 2022. Respectfully Submitted by: Joe SanClemente, Public Works Director Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™84 City of Hermosa Beach Updated 1-13-22 UPDATED FY 2021-22 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Grey indicates projects on hold. Light Blue indicates projects milestone updates. Project CategoryADA ComponentCIP No.Project Name Project Budget Project Manager Study/Conceptual PlanningPreliminary DesignFinal Engineering DesignProject Approvals/BiddingConstructionCloseoutTentative Date to Next Milestone/ Update Estimated Project Completion Date Current Project Status Project Description SH X 102 Bus Stops Improvements 900,000$ Romany Basilyous X Complete Preliminary Design - 3/22 09/22 Final Engineering Design.This project will improve bus stops throughout the City. These improvements will include Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible curb ramps, concrete bus pads, crosswalk, striping improvements, furnishing, and other general improvements within direct vicinity of the bus stops. SH 108 Pay-By-App Parking Signage (NEW)75,000$ TBD X TBD TBD Final Engineering Design. Pending staff availability.The implementation of a pay by app system will require the installation of signs that will provide instructions for users and zone numbers necessary to use the system. The industry recommendation is that at least two signs be installed per block. At this time, most vendors providing pay by app systems will provide the signs at no additional cost to the City but require City staff to install them and any additional poles. It is estimated that the City will need approximately 375 signs installed, and 30 new poles installed in some locations due to a lack of existing poles. The installation would occur in areas of the City where paid parking is currently provided. SH X 143 PCH Mobility Improvement Project 148,243$ Lucho Rodriguez X TBD TBD On Hold. Study/Conceptual Planning. Metro Approved funding of $1.8 million for the City for the project development phases - PA&ED (Project Approval and Environmental Document) as a result of Public Work's Measure M application in 2020. Metro is procuring the services of their on-call consultants to assist with this phase. Estimated date of kick-off meeting, February 2022. This project would retain the existing number of lanes including north and south bound flex lanes and maintain lane widths of ten (10) feet, and flex lanes of twelve (12) feet with zero (0) feet shoulders. Collectively, the improvements will address existing, near-term, and long-range future traffic conditions along this corridor by improving intersection operations, reducing instances of unsafe turning movements, create a safe and more comfortable environment for pedestrians and transit riders, and improving the efficient movement of vehicles along the corridor. Improvements will include ADA components to be determined during design. SH 164 Hermosa Avenue Green Street 159,500$ Doug Krauss Michelle Licata X Complete Final Engineering Design - 10/22 TBD Final Engineering Design. Preparation of plans and specifications by consultant (CWE) through grant managed by City of Torrance. This project is also part of Study 103. Consultant selected and preparing plans. The project will design and implement Low Impact Development (LID) and green infrastructure on Hermosa Ave from 4th Street to Herondo Avenue, which will include a variety of green street design elements. This project is part of Study 103 Sea Level Rise Risk Assessment Grant recipient for preliminary design. This project is also part of a multicity green street project lead by City of Torrance. SH 186 Street Improvements - Various Locations 1,485,095$ Romany Basilyous X Closeout Closeout Closeout.This project provides for pavement rehabilitation of streets at various locations. The project will also repair/replace deteriorated portions of sidewalk, curb and gutter, and curb ramps. This project also includes the resurfacing of 24th Street between Valley Drive and Park Avenue. The scope of work includes the construction of curb and gutter as needed to correct street drainage deficiencies as well as lowering of public utilities (by utility companies) to standard depth to permit the proper street construction. This work will be performed following the sewer and storm drain repairs identified in the Sewer and Drainage Master Plans. Project will be bided out together with Project 190. SH X 188 Strand Bikeway and Walkway Improvements at 35th Street 10,000$ TBD X TBD TBD Part of Study 103 Sea Level Rise Risk Assessment Grant. Consultant selected and preparing report. This project would provide improved accessibility and connectivity for bicyclists travelling between the Cities of Hermosa Beach and Manhattan Beach via The Strand at 35th Street. This project is part of Study 103 Sea Level Rise Risk Assessment Grant recipient for preliminary design. The project will also consider the addition of a dedicated ADA path to provide greater ADA accessibility to The Strand. SH X 190 Annual Street Improvements 200,000$ Romany Basilyous X Closeout Closeout Closeout.This project provides for pavement rehabilitation of streets at various locations. The project will also repair/replace deteriorated portions of sidewalk, curb and gutter, and curb ramps. This work will be performed following the sewer and storm drain repairs identified in the Sewer and Drainage Master Plans. Project will be combined with Project 186. Project will construct new ADA curb ramps. Estimated cost of ADA improvements is $170,000 SH X 191 Annual Street Improvements 45,000$ Romany Basilyous X Complete Preliminary Design - 3/22 TBD Preliminary Design.This project provides for pavement rehabilitation of streets at various locations. The project will also repair/replace deteriorated portions of sidewalk, curb and gutter, and curb ramps. This work will be performed following the sewer and storm drain repairs identified in the Sewer and Drainage Master Plans. Improvements will include ADA components to be determined during design. SH X 192 Annual Striping Improvements 100,000$ Michelle Licata X Closeout Closeout Closeout.This project provides traffic striping, markings, and signage improvements and modifications throughout the City at various locations to improve safety and visibility. This project will help address needed thermoplastic striping which the City is not capable of installing directly. Project includes restriping and new signage to bring City ADA parking spots in City lots to comply with current ADA standards. Estimated cost of ADA improvements is $32,000 SH 193 Pedestrian Crossing Safety Improvements 500,000$ Andrew Nguyen X Complete Final Engineering Design - 3/22 TBD Final Engineering Design. On-call design firm finalizing plans and specifications.This project will implement rectangular rapid flashing beacons and other measures at several uncontrolled pedestrian crossings on Hermosa Avenue at 4th, 6th, 19th, 24th, 25th Streets and the crossing in front of Clark Building on Valley Drive. SH X 194 Annual Striping Improvements (NEW)200,000$ Michelle Licata X Complete Preliminary Design - 3/22 TBD Preliminary Design.This project provides traffic striping, markings, and signage improvements and modifications throughout the City at various locations to improve safety and visibility. This project will help address needed thermoplastic striping which the City is not capable of installing directly. Improvements will include ADA components to be determined during design. SH X 195 City Sidewalk Improvements (NEW)50,000$ Michelle Licata X Complete Final Engineering Design - 2/22 TBD Final Engineering Design.This project provides repairs, replacements, and improvements to sidewalks throughout the City at various locations to maintain and improve safety. Improvements will include ADA components by increasing sidewalk accessibility to be determined during design. Categories: SH = Street/Highway SSD = Sewer/Storm Drain PI = Parks PBG = Public Building and Ground 1 of 4 85 City of Hermosa Beach Updated 1-13-22 UPDATED FY 2021-22 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Grey indicates projects on hold. Light Blue indicates projects milestone updates. Project CategoryADA ComponentCIP No.Project Name Project Budget Project Manager Study/Conceptual PlanningPreliminary DesignFinal Engineering DesignProject Approvals/BiddingConstructionCloseoutTentative Date to Next Milestone/ Update Estimated Project Completion Date Current Project Status Project Description SSD 417 Annual Storm Drain Improvements - Various Locations 2,044,966$ Romany Basilyous X Complete Final Engineering Design - 3/22 08/22 Final Engineering Design. On-call design firm finalizing plans and specifications.Storm drain improvements throughout the City. Locations will be as identified and prioritized per the Storm Drain Master Plan. Projects will address deficiencies, ponding, and repairs as well as where new storm drains are needed citywide. This project will also address operational deficiencies at the outfall structures at 18th Street and 19th Street. Improvements include for design and construction activities on an annual basis. Project to be bided out together with Project 422. SSD 419 Storm Drain Pipe Screens 150,000$ Romany Basilyous Doug Krauss X Closeout Closeout Closeout.The City has revised its strategy for addressing the Santa Monica Bay Debris Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) using State Board-approved full capture devices or systems to achieve 100% reduction of trash from the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). The City will install approximately 160 screen assemblies inside various storm drain catch basins throughout the City, in front of the outlet pipe, preventing debris from entering the storm drain system. They City has installed approximately 120 screens previously. SSD 421 Annual Sewer Improvements 2,414,774$ Andrew Nguyen X Complete Construction - 2/22 03/22 Construction. Begin Construction November , 2021. Project consists of 2 phases. Phase 1 includes lining work and point repairs. Phase 2 includes point repairs, pipe replacement, and maintenance access hole rehabilitation. Phase 2 to start after completion of Phase 1. This project includes design and construction of sewer improvements and repairs based on the Sewer Master Plan. SSD 422 Annual Storm Drain Improvements 500,000$ Romany Basilyous X Complete Final Engineering Design - 3/22 08/22 Final Engineering Design. On-call design firm finalizing plans and specifications.Storm drain improvements throughout the City. Locations will be as identified and prioritized per the Storm Drain Master Plan. Projects will address deficiencies, ponding, and repairs as well as where new storm drains are needed citywide. This project will also address operational deficiencies at the outfall structures at 18th Street and 19th Street. Improvements include for design and construction activities on an annual basis. Project will be bid out together with Project 417. SSD 423 Annual Sewer Improvements 250,000$ Andrew Nguyen X TBD TBD Preliminary Design.This project includes design and construction of sewer improvements and repairs based on the Sewer Master Plan. SSD 424 Annual Storm Drain Improvements 250,000$ TBD X TBD TBD Preliminary Design. Pending staff availability.Storm drain improvements throughout the City. Locations will be as identified and prioritized per the Storm Drain Master Plan. Projects will address deficiencies, ponding, and repairs as well as where new storm drains are needed citywide. This project will also address operational deficiencies at the outfall structures at various locations. Improvements include for design and construction activities on an annual basis. PI 548 Park Planting Improvements (NEW)50,000$ John Cordova X 06/22 06/22 Construction. City landscape contractors planting new planting. This project provides new plantings needed throughout the City's parks. PI X 549 Temporary Beach Accessible Routes (NEW)90,000$ Andrew Nguyen X Complete Construction - 3/22 04/22 Construciton. City is awaiting delivery of mobi mats to deploy. This project is to continue the City's temporary beach access routes pilot program. Access routes will be established on the beach at 2nd Street, 11th Street, and 22nd Street. ADA improvements are integral to the project. PBG X 601 Prospect Avenue Curb Ramps 63,710$ Jonathan Pascual Andrew Nguyen X Complete Project Approvals/Bidding - 2/22 05/22 Project Approvals/Bidding. Preparing to bid project in February with new online system.This project provides improvements and relocation of sidewalks, curb ramps and obstructions along Prospect Avenue in order to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and meet the latest Federal Standards. Project to be bided out together with Project 698. ADA improvements are integral to the project. PBG 603 South Park Slope and Irrigation Repairs (NEW)275,000$ Jonathan Pascual Lucho Rodriguez X Complete Final Engineering Design - 3/22 06/22 Final Engineering Design. Finalizing irrigation and landscaping plans and specifications for phase 1. This project will address sloped areas around the playground area at South Park. Funding would be utilized to install interim measures in order to open up the area to the public while the City pursues more permanent measures for repairs required of the entire park, including irrigation and landscaping. PBG X 604 City Wide ADA Improvements (NEW)50,000$ TBD X TBD TBD Preliminary Design. Pending staff availability.This project provides improvements city wide in order to comply with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and meet the latest Federal Standards along with the City's Transition Plan being developed. ADA improvements are integral to the project. PBG 608 Downtown Lighting Improvements 58,519$ TBD X TBD TBD Final Engineering Design. Pending staff availability.This project will improve safety, security and ambiance in the downtown area through lighting improvements as determined by the Downtown Security Assessment Report. PBG 609 Downtown Strategic Plan Implementation 460,166$ Andrew Nguyen X Complete Final Engineering Design - 3/22 06/22 Final Engineering Design. Preparing plans and specifications for Pier Plaza catenary lights and light dimming units. Preparing assessment of Hermosa Ave and Pier Ave median electric system. The purpose of this project is to mitigate safety concerns with lighting improvements for the City’s downtown area. This project will install catenary lights and dimming units on Pier Plaza. PBG 615 New Corporate Yard Facilities 1,291,891$ Doug Krauss Lucho Rodriguez X TBD TBD Preliminary Design.This project is for the design and construction of a new city yard. Construction will be done in two phases. Phase 1 to include one metal prefabricated building to house a new mechanic, paint/sign shop and contracted services. New wash down station area. Phase 2 to include demolition of existing buildings. Construction of new administration building. General yard improvements (fencing, landscaping, drainage). PBG 629 Municipal Pier Structural Assessment and Repairs 413,075$ Michelle Licata X Complete Final Engineering Design - 3/22 09/22 Final Engineering Design. Consultant to update and finalize plans in conjunction with CIP 650.Repairs of the municipal pier structural elements including the piles, pile caps, deck and the lifeguard storage room. Categories: SH = Street/Highway SSD = Sewer/Storm Drain PI = Parks PBG = Public Building and Ground 2 of 4 86 City of Hermosa Beach Updated 1-13-22 UPDATED FY 2021-22 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Grey indicates projects on hold. Light Blue indicates projects milestone updates. Project CategoryADA ComponentCIP No.Project Name Project Budget Project Manager Study/Conceptual PlanningPreliminary DesignFinal Engineering DesignProject Approvals/BiddingConstructionCloseoutTentative Date to Next Milestone/ Update Estimated Project Completion Date Current Project Status Project Description PBG 660 Municipal Pier Electrical Repairs 520,284$ Michelle Licata X Complete Final Engineering Design - 3/22 09/22 Final Engineering Design. Consultant to update and finalize plans in conjunction with CIP 629.The pier electrical repairs will involve the replacement of existing conduit, junction boxes, connections and wiring so that the lights can be functional. The project will also eliminate the service box towards the end of the pier and create a new service connection point for the foghorn at the end of the pier. This project will also include the replacement of the bollard lighting at the pier with new LED lighting fixtures. PBG X 669 City Park Restrooms and Renovation 2,450,925$ Lucho Rodriguez Jonathan Pascual X Complete Construction - 3/22 06/22 Construction.This project consists of construction of new ADA compliant restrooms at Forts Lots-of-Fun, Seaview Parkette, South Park, and Clark Field. This project also plans to renovate existing restrooms at South Park and Clark Field. ADA improvements are integral to the project. PBG X 682 Parking Lot D Improvements 480,836$ Doug Krauss X Complete Final Engineering Design - 3/22 12/22 Final Engineering Design. Coastal Conservancy Board grant approved in April 2021. Pending application for construction funds with Measure W grant. Finalizing plans. The project will install a rapid electric vehicle charging station, expand bicycle parking and capture and treat storm water run-off from road and parking surfaces. Project will include new ADA ramp to the parking lot and new ADA parking spots. Estimated cost of ADA improvements is $15,000 PBG 684 Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Renovations 192,880$ TBD X TBD TBD Preliminary Design. Pending staff availability.This project will add restrooms to the EOC and renovate the adjacent room for future EOC uses. The EOC is located within a building designated as a historical building, which will require a Certificate of Appropriateness to complete the repairs. This project will be completed in two phases. Phase 1 includes restroom construction including flooring, lighting, wall and ceiling repairs, painting, new plumbing, and installing fixtures. Phase 2 includes complete room renovation including new flooring, ceiling, lighting, furnishings, and relocation of Emergency System IT equipment, including a new switch, 2 UPC batteries, and firewall to support the EOC. Security Improvements to include new key fob locking systems. PBG X 689 Clark Building Renovations 399,889$ Jonathan Pascual Lucho Rodriguez X Complete Final Engineering Design - 2/22 08/22 Final Engineering Design. On-call design firm finalizing plans and specifications. Will Present to City Council. The project proposes: 1. Design, Operational Review 2. Kitchen Remodel - including new commercial appliances, sinks, countertops, lighting, tile, flooring, doors and ADA upgrades. 3. Restrooms Remodel - including new flooring, fixtures, stalls, sinks, toilets, lighting, and ADA upgrades. Electrical, plumbing, sewer line upgrades. 4. Install new Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning. 5. Acoustic panels and new lighting throughout ballroom area. 6. ADA upgrades to entrance building entrance points. ADA improvements are integral to the project. PBG X 692 14th Street Beach Restroom Rehabilitation 530,000$ TBD X TBD TBD Study/Conceptual Planning. Pending staff availability.This project proposes to construct a new restroom facility which includes replacement of the entire building; restrooms; appurtenant plumbing; ADA improvements for compliance. This project will also include the replacement of the existing sewer lift station components which includes 2 submersible pumps; motor control panel; associated plumbing; addition of telemetry for condition/outage notifications. New restrooms will be ADA compliant. PBG X 695 Parking Lot A Improvements 592,260$ TBD X TBD TBD Preliminary Design. Pending staff availability.This project will consist of upgrading Parking Lot A to meet ADA standards, with improvements including: • New layout to maximize parking capacity and improve circulation. • Consideration of the layout of parking spaces on 11th Street and explore incorporating 11th Street parking spaces into the Lot A pay station system. • New surfacing and lighting. • New trash enclosures adjacent to commercial buildings and removal of the trash enclosure and joint compactor. • Low impact development elements including permeable pavers and landscaping. Coastal Commission permits will be required. Improvements will include ADA components to be determined during design. PBG 696 Police Station Improvements 28,500$ TBD X TBD TBD Preliminary Design. Pending staff availability.The Police Station is in need of improvements including increased security measures and improvements to report writing room and evidence and property room. The restrooms in the basement of the Police Station are in need of improvements. PBG X 698 ADA improvements 71,298$ Jonathan Pascual Andrew Nguyen X Complete Project Approvals/Bidding - 2/22 05/22 Project Approvals/Bidding. Preparing to bid project in February.The project proposes: Improvements and relocation of sidewalks, curb ramps and obstructions along Prospect Avenue in order to follow the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and meet the latest Federal Standards. Project to be bided out together with Project 601. ADA improvements are integral to the project. PBG X 699 Parking Structure (Lot C) Improvements (NEW)1,200,000$ Jonathan Pascual Andrew Nguyen X Complete Final Engineering Design - 5/22 TBD Final Engineering Design. On-call design firm finalizing plans and specifications.This project provides repairs and improvements to the City's parking structure (Lot C) based on the assessment report from Study 694 Parking Structure (Lot C) Structural Assessment including structural, elevator, and electrical repairs. Improvements will include ADA components to be determined during design. Categories: SH = Street/Highway SSD = Sewer/Storm Drain PI = Parks PBG = Public Building and Ground 3 of 4 87 City of Hermosa Beach Updated 1-13-22 UPDATED FY 2021-22 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Grey indicates projects on hold. Light Blue indicates projects milestone updates. Project CategoryADA ComponentCIP No.Project Name Project Budget Project Manager Study/Conceptual PlanningPreliminary DesignFinal Engineering DesignProject Approvals/BiddingConstructionCloseoutTentative Date to Next Milestone/ Update Estimated Project Completion Date Current Project Status Project Description SH X 101 Hermosa Avenue Greenwich Village Street Realignment (STUDY) 10,000$ TBD X TBD TBD Part of Study 103 Sea Level Rise Risk Assessment Grant. Consultant selected and preparing report. This study will evaluate potential improvements at the intersections of: • Hermosa Avenue and Greenwich Village; and • Manhattan Avenue and Greenwich Village/27th Street The study will evaluate opportunities improve the flow and visibility for pedestrian, bikes, and vehicles at the two intersections. This study is part of Study 103 Sea Level Rise Risk Assessment Grant recipient for preliminary design. Study will also evaluate potential ADA improvements. PBG 103 Sea Level Rise Risk Assessment (STUDY) 279,058$ Doug Krauss X Complete Study/Conceptual Planning - 2/22 02/22 Study/Conceptual Planning. Consultant selected and preparing report.This study will assess the risk of sea level rise in three areas along Hermosa Avenue, 35th Street, Greenwich Village, and 4th Street to Herondo Avenue. It incorporates three other projects. Project 164 Hermosa Avenue Green Street, Project 188 Strand Bikeway and Walkway Improvements at 35th Street, and Study 101 Hermosa Avenue Greenwich Village Street Realignment. PI 538 Citywide Park Master Plan (STUDY) 193,368$ Lisa Nichols X TBD TBD Study/Conceptual Planning.The City is seeking to prepare a Parks Master Plan that achieves the following goals: • Engages the community and local recreational organizations in a dialogue about parks and open space resources in Hermosa Beach; • Identifies the current demand/utilization and the future/evolving parks and recreational facility needs for the Hermosa Beach community; • Leverages the vision and goals of the recently adopted General Plan and the Community Decision-Making Tool; • Identifies an appropriate balance between organized and informal recreational activities at the City’s parks and open spaces; • Serves as a dynamic useful planning and implementation document that enjoys broad community and political support; • Provides a comprehensive strategy to maintain, rehabilitate and improve the City’s network of parks, facilities, and open space assets, including current unfunded park and recreational opportunities; • Evaluates the effective use of the City’s financial and physical resources and opportunities to fund implementation of the recommendations in the Master Plan. PI X 544 Greenbelt Accessible Path Assessment (STUDY) 10,000$ Lucho Rodriguez X Complete Study/Conceptual Planning - 3/22 03/22 Study/Conceptual Planning. Preparing report.Determine the feasibility of installing an ADA surface path on the Greenbelt to provide a firm, natural looking and permeable path that increases accessibility for the disabled and boosts accessibility for all. PBG 605 City Facilities Condition and Needs Assessment (NEW) (STUDY) 175,000$ TBD X TBD TBD Study/Conceptual Planning. Pending staff availability.Prepare condition assessment reports for City facilities throughout the City to understand the infrastructure improvement needs. PBG 668 Library Community Needs Assessment (STUDY) 60,000$ Lisa Nichols X TBD TBD On Hold. On hold until funding opportunities become available for a new or renovated library facility. Phase II consists of preparation of conceptual designs and estimates for: • Keeping the city’s library at its current location, to include: Renovation and expansion of existing building or adding a second floor to the existing building (before preparation of renovation schemes for the existing building, the structural condition must be assessed to make sure that the building is not beyond its useful life); Construction of a two (2) story library building at the existing location; or • Construction of a new library at a new site • Relocation of “Friends of the Library” from Bard Street to a more appropriate location. Funding is reimbursed to the City through the Library’s Excess Operating Funds through agreement with the LA County Library. Other funding options will be explored. SH 160 PCH Traffic Improvements (RECONCILIATION) 160,000$ Lucho Rodriguez X Complete Construction - 3/22 03/22 Project was to be closed out in FY 19-20 but delayed due to modifications requiring Caltrans approval. Funding approved by Council during Midyear budget. Project to be completed and closed out by FY 21-22. Caltrans pre-inspection meeting schedule to finalize work in January. The purpose of this project is to improve operational mobility along State Route 1 (Pacific Coast Highway) which also provides operational relief to I-405 by improving operations in a parallel route. The proposed project also includes improvements including but not restricted to truck turning radius, ADA curb ramps, striping and pedestrian signal improvements of the segment on PCH between Anita Street and Artesia Boulevard. Pedestrian signal, crosswalks and ADA curb ramps improvements at the intersections of PCH and Pier Avenue and PCH and Aviation Boulevard including improvements at intersection to aid trucks turning onto Aviation. PBG 760 Tree Well Grates (RECONCILIATION) 51,068$ Andrew Nguyen X TBD TBD Project has been under dispute resolution. Funds to be used to purchase and install tree well grates on Hermosa Ave. This project will install iron tree grates in existing tree wells on Hermosa Ave. Categories: SH = Street/Highway SSD = Sewer/Storm Drain PI = Parks PBG = Public Building and Ground 4 of 4 88 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0045 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 ACTION MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 2021 (Public Works Director Joe SanClemente) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of November 17, 2021. Attachments: Action Minutes of the November 17, 2021 Public Works Commission Meeting Respectfully Submitted by: Joe SanClemente, Public Works Director Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™89 ACTION MINUTES PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2021 CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1315 VALLEY DRIVE 6:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Janice Brittain Commissioner Scott Hayes Chair David Grethen Vice Chair Andrea N. Giancoli Commissioner Kathy Dunbabin ********************************************************************************************* ****************** THIS MEETING IS HELD PURSUANT TO AB361 BECAUSE STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS ARE RECOMMENDING MEASURES TO PROMOTE SOCIAL DISTANCING. ANY OR ALL COMMISSION MEMBERS MAY ATTEND AND PARTICIPATE BY TELECONFERENCE/VIRTUAL MEETING. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY PARTICIPATE BY TELECONFERENCE. ********************************************************************************************* ****************** PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Members of the public may email comments to anguyen@hermosabeach.gov until 5:00 p.m. on the meeting date. Members of the public may also participate by phone or through Zoom. JOIN THE VIRTUAL PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION MEETING AT: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83076777652?pwd=Z3lQcDFpUU1obDVuMUpnMGlQME1pUT09 OR PARTICIPATE BY PHONE: 1. Email anguyen@hermosabeach.gov to be added to the speaker list. Please indicate which item you would like to speak on. 2. Dial-in to meeting: • Toll Free: 877-853-5257 • Public Works Commission Webinar ID: 830 7677 7652 • Passcode: 748636 3. ATTENDEES WILL BE MUTED UNTIL THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD IS OPENED. When you are called on to speak, press * 6 to unmute your line. Comments from the public are limited to 3 minutes per speaker. Note: Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information (i.e. phone numbers, addresses, etc.) that you do not want to be published. Public Works Commission agendas and staff reports are available for your review on the City’s web site located at www.hermosabeach.gov. 1. Call to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance 90 2 3. Roll Call Present: Chairperson Grethen, Vice Chairperson Giancoli, Commissioner Dunbabin, Commissioner Brittain, Commissioner Hayes Staff present: Joe SanClemente, Director of Public Works; Lucho Rodriguez, Deputy City Engineer, Andrew Nguyen, Interim Associate Engineer; Douglas Krauss, Environmental Programs Manager; Jonathan Pascual, Assistant Engineer; Kambria Vint, Recreation Coordinator; John Natalizio, City Attorney’s Office 4. Approval of Action Minutes A. September 15, 2021 ACTION: Commissioner Dunbabin motioned to receive and approve minutes. Seconded by Vice Chairperson Giancoli, the motion passed 5-0. 5. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items: Anyone wishing to address the Commission on items pertaining to Public Works that are not listed on the agenda and pertaining to Public Works may do so at this time. Comments from the public are limited to three minutes per speaker. No public comments received. 6. Correspondence A. Written Communication from Anthony Higgins B. Written Communication from R. Bender ACTION: Commissioner Hayes motioned to receive and file the written communications. Seconded by Commissioner Dunbabin, the motion passed 5-0. 7. Presentations A. West Coast Sea Water Barrier Project Update – Douglas Krauss, Environmental Programs Manager The upgrades to the wells within the City of Hermosa Beach have been completed and only landscape repairs are pending. A kiosk describing the project will be installed at the intersection of Gould Avenue and Valley Drive along the Greenbelt. Further notification of the finalization of the project will be posted on the City website. B. Hermosa Ave Green Street Project Update – Douglas Krauss, Environmental Programs Manager Staff is seeking funds for the construction phase. The engineering phase is in progress. Outreach consultants are hosting pop-up events on November 18th and 29th to inform the public about the project. Outreach will continue when the project moves into the construction phase. C. Climate Adaptation Project (Sea Level Rise Risk Assessment) Update – Douglas Krauss, Environmental Programs Manager The project is anticipated to be completed in February 2022 to meet grant deadlines. Staff is currently completing a cost/benefit analysis and working on developing final concept designs 91 3 based on feedback received at community meetings. Final concept designs will be presented during the virtual meeting scheduled for January 12, 2022. D. 26th Street One-Way Conversion Project Update – Douglas Krauss, Environmental Programs Manager On November 3, 2021, a community meeting was held to discuss the project. More communications are scheduled for early 2022, which will determine the next steps. 8. Items for Consideration A. Appointment of Public Works Commission Chairperson and Vice Chairperson for 2022 and Meeting Schedule for 2022 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Public Works Commission consider: 1. Appoint the Public Works Commission Chairperson and Vice Chairperson for 2022; ACTION: Commissioner Brittain motioned to appoint the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson for 2022 following the adopted chair rotation tradition, which is based on seniority. In 2022, Vice Chairperson Giancoli will become the Chairperson and Commissioner Dunbabin will be the Vice Chairperson. 2. Receive and file the Public Works Commission Meeting Schedule for 2022. ACTION: Commissioner Brittain motioned to receive and file the Public Works Commission Meeting Schedule for 2022. Seconded by Commissioner Dunbabin, the motion passed 5-0. B. Ordinance to Require Property Owners to Repair and Maintain the Parkway Abutting Their Real Property and Amending the City’s Municipal Code Related to Payment for Tree Removal Recommendation: It is recommended that the Public Works Commission consider: 1. Recommend the City Council consider and approve an Ordinance titled, “An Ordinance of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, Adding Chapter 12.42 (Parkway Maintenance and Repair) to Title 12 (Streets, Sidewalks and Public Places) of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code to Require Property Owners to Repair and Maintain the Parkway Abutting their Real Property and Amending the City’s Municipal Code Related to Payment for Tree Removal”. ACTION: Commissioner Hayes motioned to direct staff to remove section 12.42.020 (Liability for Injuries to the Public) from the ordinance and modify the language of 12.42.040 (Failure to Make Repair) to eliminate the penalty of misdemeanor and replace it with language that enables the City to issue citations to homeowners that are refusing to repair after being notified by the City; further direct staff to develop guidelines that dictate what is and what is not allowed in a parkway, a list of what conditions are considered dangerous, and rules that dictate when an encroachment permit is required; and to extend the time to correct beyond 30 days at the director’s discretion as long as the homeowner can show a good faith effort to correct the condition. Seconded by Vice Chair Giancoli, the motion passed 5-0. 92 4 C. Design Updates for Capital Improvement Project 689 Clark Building Renovations Recommendation: It is recommended that the Public Works Commission consider: 1. Recommend the City Council consider and approve the Clark Building Renovation plans. ACTION: Commissioner Hayes motioned to recommend City Council’s consideration and approval of the Clark Building renovation plans with the acknowledgement that staff will strive to incorporate the input they received from Public Works Commission at their discretion. Seconded by Vice Chair Giancoli, the motion passed 5-0. 9. Commissioners’ Reports None. 10. Monthly Reports A. Monthly Activity Reports (Provided for Information Only) B. CIP Status with Verbal Updates Deputy City Engineer highlighted the following: • CIP 164 – Hermosa Avenue Green Street – The project is transitioning to the final engineering design. • CIP 186 – Street Improvements – Various Locations – The project was completed. • CIP 192 – Annual Striping Improvements – The project was completed. • CIP 194 – Annual Striping Improvements (NEW) – The project was completed. • CIP 195 – City Sidewalk Improvements (NEW) – Staff is in the process of identifying the best locations and starting design. • CIP 417 – Annual Storm Drain Improvements-Various Locations – The design is soon to be completed. Advertising for bids is to follow. • CIP 419 – Storm Drain Pipe Screens – Staff is working with LA County to close-out the project. • CIP 421 – Annual Sewer Improvements – The construction phase is soon to begin. • CIP 422 – Annual Storm Drain Improvements – The project is in the final engineering design phase. The construction phase is soon to begin. • CIP 160 – PCH Traffic Improvements – Staff was notified the final piece of equipment needed to close-out the project was manufactured and expected to be installed in December or January 2022, which completes the project. 93 5 • CIP 669 – City Park Restrooms and Renovation – Staff met with the contractor and visited the sites. The restrooms at South Park are fully framed. Renovations at South Park also include the construction of a brand new sewer system. The foundations have been completed for the restrooms at Fort Lots of Fun and Seaview Park. The next step is the completion of the frames. This project is on track to be completed by the allowed time. • CIP 689 – Clark Building Renovations – The project is moving along, but there is a tree possibly preventing the sidewalk from being constructed. If that is the case, the tree will be removed. • CIP 692 – 14th Street Beach Restroom Rehabilitation – Staff is awaiting the structural report. 11. Director’s Verbal Updates Director SanClemente provided the following updates: • The department hired four new temporary employees, including two temporary Maintenance I Workers and two Assistant Engineers. In addition, two interns were hired to provide assistance in Engineering. The department also posted six new positions. • The beach mats were pulled back from the winter length burn by the pier, so the path is shorter. • The bike racks near the former Mermaid Restaurant were removed to accommodate events. Staff plans to relocate these racks and is working to identity a location. • The department lost a team member, Alfonso Gallegos, who had been with the City approximately four years. His last day with the City was November 6, 2021. The team is working through the loss. City Council adjourned their meeting in his honor. 12. Commissioner Items (Other Matters) Chairperson Grethen inquired about the status of CIP 186 – Street Improvements – Various Locations and CIP 190 – Annual Street Improvements. Deputy City Engineer Rodriguez noted the project will be completed by City staff as it is more cost effective. The design is to be completed soon. He also shared the PMP is completed, and the final step will help determine what areas should be paved next. 13. Commissioner’s Announcements Commissioner Brittain invited everyone to participate in the Hermosa Holiday Weekend activities, including the Tree Lighting Ceremony on Sunday, November 21, 2021. Commissioner Dunbabin encouraged everyone to support local businesses. As Chairperson Grethen’s term as Chair came to an end, Commissioner Hayes thanked him for his leadership. In response. Chairperson Grethen congratulated Commissioner Hayes on his one-year anniversary as Public Works Commissioner. He also commented on his experience as Chair and expressed his gratitude for the opportunity. 14. Adjournment 94 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0015 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 ACTION MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2022 (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council receive and file the action minutes of the canceled Planning Commission meeting of January 18, 2022. Attachments: Action Minutes of the January 18, 2022 Canceled Planning Commission Meeting Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™95 City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 City of Hermosa Beach Action Minutes - Draft Planning Commission Chair Marie Rice Vice Chair David Pedersen Commissioners Stephen Izant Peter Hoffman Rob Saemann 6:00 PMTuesday, January 18, 2022 ******************************************************************************************************* THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, JANUARY 18, 2022 HAS BEEN CANCELED DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM. ******************************************************************************************************* Call to Order Roll Call Commissioner Rob Saemann, Commissioner Peter Hoffman, Commissioner Stephen Izant, Vice Chair David Pedersen, and Chair Marie Rice Excused:5 - Absent:0 Public Comment Noting that tonight's regular meeting had been canceled, the meeting was adjourned due to lack of quorum. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:01 pm. Page 1City of Hermosa Beach 96 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0017 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 PLANNING COMMISSION TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council receive and file the February 15, 2022 Planning Commission tentative future agenda items. Attachments: Planning Commission February 15, 2022 Tentative Future Agenda Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™97 \\CHB-FS-01\Vol1\B95\CD\CC\CC 2022\1-25-22\Planning Commission Tentative Agenda for 2-15-22.docx Revised 01/13/2022 5:31 PM Tentative Future Agenda PLANNING COMMISSION City of Hermosa Beach February 15, 2022 Regular Meeting 6:00 P.M. Project Title Public Notice Meeting Date ⇒ Comedy and Magic Club - 1018 Hermosa Ave. – Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Parking Plan Amendment. 2/3/22 2/15/22 ⇒ 204-210 Pacific Coast Highway – Conditional Use Permit for drive- thru (Starbucks). 2/3/22 2/15/22 ⇒ Rotation of Chair to Pedersen, Vice Chair to Izant n/a 2/15/22 ⇒ Triannual CUP Review (Staff Item) n/a 2/15/22 Upcoming and Pending Projects ⇒ 825 15th Street – Final Map ⇒ 685 5th Street – Two unit condominium project. ⇒ 301-311 31st Street – Lot Merger ⇒ City Yard – Precise Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Environmental Review – pending environmental clearance. ⇒ 911 1st Street – Zone and General Plan Amendment, Precise Development Plan and Planned Unit Development for a 12-unit condominium project. 98 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0037 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 FINDINGS TO HOLD REMOTE TELECONFERENCE/MEETINGS, PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361 (Interim City Clerk Susan Morrow) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council authorize remote teleconference/virtual meetings of all City of Hermosa Beach legislative bodies in accordance with Assembly Bill 361 (“AB 361”),by finding that: (1)a statewide state of emergency is currently in place;(2)state and local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing in connection with COVID-19;and meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. Background: All meetings of the City’s legislative bodies are subject to the Ralph M.Brown Act (Gov.Code §§ 54950 et seq.)and must be open and public so that any member of the public may attend and participate in the meetings.Commencing in March of 2020,Governor Newsom issued a series of executive orders aimed at preventing the spread of a respiratory disease that came to be known as the novel coronavirus,“COVID-19.”Among these were Executive Orders (“EO”)N-25-20,N-29-20, and N-35-20 (collectively,the “Brown Act Orders”)that waived the teleconferencing requirements of the Brown Act to allow legislative bodies to meet virtually. On June 11,2021,the Governor issued EO N-08-21 to begin winding down some of the prior measures that were adopted to respond to COVID-19.Notably,EO N-08-21 rescinded the Brown Act Orders,effective September 30,2021.On September 16,2021,Governor Newsom signed AB 361,which became effective October 1,2021,and amended the Brown Act to allow legislative bodies to meet virtually,without following the Brown Act’s standard teleconferencing rules,provided that the legislative body makes specific findings, which include the following: 1.A statewide state of emergency is currently in place; 2.State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing in connection with COVID-19; and/or 3.Meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. Continued compliance with AB 361 would require City Council to approve the action making theCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™99 Staff Report REPORT 22-0037 Continued compliance with AB 361 would require City Council to approve the action making the required findings at least every 30 days. Discussion: All three findings under AB 361 can be made given the current circumstances.The Governor has proclaimed a state of emergency in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.The state of emergency currently remains in effect. Further,State officials,including the California Department of Public Health,have recommended measures to promote social distancing in connection with COVID-19,which are currently in place.Similarly,local officials,including the County Public Health Officer,have also recommended measures to promote social distancing in connection with COVID -19.In a recommendation dated September 28,2021,the County Public Health Officer stated that “utilizing teleconferencing options for public meetings is an effective and recommended social distancing measure to facilitate participation in public affairs and encourage participants to protect themselves and others from the COVID-19 disease.” Finally,the City has determined that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. Accordingly, all of the above-referenced AB 361 findings currently exist. If City Council thus desires to allow virtual meetings in order to both ensure the health and safety of the public,the legislative bodies of the City,and City staff,as well as continuity of government in allowing regularly-scheduled meetings to continue to occur without interruption,staff recommends City Council authorize virtual/teleconference meetings by making the findings set forth above. Alternative: If City Council does not make the findings pursuant to AB 361,the City would have to conduct its public meetings for City Council and other public boards and commissions in person and not have the option of conducting its meetings via teleconferencing. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action. Attachments: Link to Assembly Bill 361 Respectfully Submitted by: Susan Morrow, Interim City Clerk Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™100 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0036 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 APPROVAL OF THE COMMENCEMENT OF SPECIAL EVENT LONG-TERM AGREEMENT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER FOR THE COMMUNITY CHANUKAH CELEBRATION AND THE GREAT AUTOS OF YESTERYEAR FOR THE ENDLESS SUMMER CLASSIC CAR SHOW (Community Resources Manager Lisa Nichols) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council approve the commencement of special event long-term agreement negotiations with the following organizations: 1.The Jewish Community Center for its Community Chanukah Celebration; and 2.The Great Autos of Yesteryear for its Endless Summer Classic Car Show. Executive Summary: The City Council approved implementation of the special event long-term agreement (LTA)policy pilot program for a three-year period commencing with the 2020 event calendar.Considering the cancellation of events in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic,the City Council extended the policy’s pilot program by one year,ending with the 2023 event calendar.Staff received LTA applications from the Jewish Community Center for its Community Chanukah Celebration and the Great Autos of Yesteryear for its Endless Summer Classic Car Show.The Parks,Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission (Commission)reviewed the applications and recommends City Council approval to commence LTA agreement negotiations with the Jewish Community Center for its annual Community Chanukah Celebration,and the Great Autos of Yesteryear for its Endless Summer Classic Car Show. Background: On December 3,2019,the Commission recommended that City Council approve the proposed special event LTA policy as a three-year pilot program,scheduled to begin with the 2020 event calendar.Additionally,the Commission recommended that City Council affirm and request that the Commission review and provide an update on the policy in two years,in advance of entering the pilot program’s third and final year.The City Council formally approved the Commission’s recommended policy and subsequent review at its January 14, 2020 meeting. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 6 powered by Legistar™101 Staff Report REPORT 22-0036 Considering the cancellation of large gatherings and events in 2020,the Commission recommended that City Council extend the special event LTA policy pilot program by one year at its August 4,2020 meeting.The City Council approved the Commission’s recommendation at its October 27,2020 meeting.Therefore,the Commission is due to review the policy in 2022,instead of in 2021.The three -year policy pilot program would then be completed in 2023,at which time the Commission would recommend its permanent implementation with or without modifications. At its January 4,2022 meeting,the Commission reviewed LTA applications from the Jewish Community Center for its Community Chanukah Celebration and the Great Autos of Yesteryear for its Endless Summer Classic Car Show.Following its review,the Commission recommended the commencement of LTA negotiations with the Jewish Community Center for its annual Community Chanukah Celebration, and the Great Autos of Yesteryear for its Endless Summer Classic Car Show. Past Parks, Recreation, and Community Resources Advisory Commission and Council Actions Meeting Date Description December 3, 2019 Commission recommended Council approve the proposed special event LTA policy as a three-year pilot program January 14, 2020 City Council formally approved the Commission’s recommended LTA policy August 4, 2020 Commission recommended that City Council extend the special event LTA policy pilot program by one year October 27, 2020 City Council approved the Commission’s recommendation extension January 4, 2022 Commission reviewed LTA applications from the Jewish Community Center for its Community Chanukah Celebration; and the Great Autos of Yesteryear for its Endless Summer Classic Car Show Discussion: Staff began accepting LTA applications on September 17,2020 for special events that met the eligibility requirements.In addition to completing the application,each event producer is required to submit a corresponding letter that addresses how the organization or event qualifies for each of the eligibility requirements. To be eligible for a long-term agreement,an organization must satisfactorily meet at least three of the following qualifiers: ·The event qualifies as an Impact Level II or III (per the Impact Worksheet),and at least one of City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 2 of 6 powered by Legistar™102 Staff Report REPORT 22-0036 ·The event qualifies as an Impact Level II or III (per the Impact Worksheet),and at least one of the following: o Have a combined total of 5,000 attendees; or o Take place over two consecutive days (including setup and teardown). ·The event has been held in Hermosa Beach for at least three consecutive years and can demonstrate a positive impact to the City including substitutive and measurable economic and community benefits; ·The event is produced by an organization that serves,involves,and/or promotes Hermosa Beach’s coastal lifestyle, its residents, schools, and/or businesses; and ·The event producer or organization can demonstrate how its programs (outside of those provided at the event)provide a positive impact to the City,including enhancements to quality of life to the Hermosa Beach community or the offering of recreational,cultural,social,and/or educational activities of interest to the community. Staff received LTA applications from the Jewish Community Center for its Community Chanukah Celebration on November 4,2021 and the Great Autos of Yesteryear for its Endless Summer Classic Car Show on November 29,2021.As required by the LTA policy,the Commission reviewed the applications at its January 4,2022 meeting and recommended City Council approve the commencement of special event long-term agreement negotiations with the Jewish Community Center and the Great Autos of Yesteryear.If City Council affirms the Commission’s recommendation to proceed,staff would begin negotiating with both organizations and return to City Council for formal adoption of the final agreements. Included in Table 1 are the Jewish Community Center’s and the Great Autos of Yesteryear’s date requests for consideration. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 3 of 6 powered by Legistar™103 Staff Report REPORT 22-0036 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 4 of 6 powered by Legistar™104 Staff Report REPORT 22-0036 Requested dates are not confirmed at this phase of review but would be part of the negotiation process if approved by the Council to proceed.Dates are provided here for informational purposes only and are consistent with each organization’s event dates held in previous years. Event Information: Community Chanukah Celebration The Jewish Community Center’s annual Community Chanukah Celebration includes music, entertainment,the lighting of the Menorah,and family fun activities on Pier Plaza.Setup consists of the installation of the Menorah on Pier Plaza and Greenwood Park the Wednesday prior to the event. The Menorahs stay in place through the indicated teardown dates.Additional event details and the organization’s justification for consideration of an LTA are included in its LTA application and supplemental letter included as Attachment 1. Endless Summer Classic Car Show The Great Autos of Yesteryear’s annual Endless Summer Classic Car Show includes the display of 48 classic cars throughout Pier Plaza.Additional event details and the organization’s justification for consideration of an LTA are included in its LTA application and supplemental letter included as Attachment 2. General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendation have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below: Governance Element Goal 1. A high degree of transparency and integrity in the decision-making process. Policy: ·1.6 Long-term considerations.Prioritize decisions that provide long-term community benefit and discourage decisions that provide short-term community benefit but reduce long-term opportunities. Parks and Open Space Element City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 5 of 6 powered by Legistar™105 Staff Report REPORT 22-0036 Goal 3. Community parks and facilities encourage social activity and interaction. Policies: ·3.1 Community-friendly events.Encourage, permit, and support community group,nonprofit,or business organized events on City property that support physical activity, beach culture, and family-friendly social interactions. ·3.2 Social and cultural events.Design and program parks and open space to accommodate unique social and cultural events to foster connectedness and interaction. ·3.3 Commercial use of facilities.Regulate and enforce commercial use of City parks and open spaces to ensure activities do not impact general use and enjoyment. Goal 8.Special events at the beach are balanced to support community recreation and economic development without restricting coastal access or impacting the community. Policies: ·8.3 Community-focused events.Prioritize the approval of special events that enhance the sense of community, improve economic vitality, and foster ·8.4 Family-focused events.Prioritize events that appeal to a wide segment of community members. Fiscal Impact: At this time,there is no known fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.Special event fees are negotiated as part of each agreement,but those impacts are not known until the commencement of negotiations. Attachments: 1.Jewish Community Center Long-term Agreement Application 2.Great Autos of Yesteryear Long-term Agreement Application 3.Link to December 3, 2019 Commission Report 4.Link to January 14, 2020 City Council Report 5.Link to August 4, 2020 Commission Report 6.Link to October 27, 2020 City Council Report 7.Link to January 4, 2022 Commission Report Respectfully Submitted by: Lisa Nichols, Community Resources Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 6 of 6 powered by Legistar™106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 Endless Summer Classic Car Show Long Term Agreement Application By David Freedman Show Coordinator From the application: In order for an organization to be eligible for consideration of a long - term agreement, its event(s) must satisfactorily meet at least three of the following: The event(s) must qualify as an Impact Level II or III (per the Impact Worksheet found in the Special Event Application) event, AND at least one of the following: □ Have a combined estimated total of 5,000 people in attendance; or □ The event must be at least two (2) consecutive days (including setup and teardown). The show is determined to be an impact Level II. We do not track the number of people in attendance because the car show is an open, free show but it is reasonable to estimate that during the course of the day-long show, we have over 5000 people entering the plaza and enjoying the beautiful classic cars. □ Have held its event in Hermosa Beach for at least three consecutive years and can demonstrate a positive and differentiated impact to the city including substantive and measurable economic and community benefits; 115 The show has taken place for 21 consecutive years with the exception of 2020 due to COVID. Because the show occurs in early May, it brings pedestrians to Hermosa Beach and the Plaza during a time of the year that people would not regularly consider going to the beach, resulting in increased economic benefits. The long-term sponsors of the show, such as Hennessey’s Tavern and Baja Sharkeez has consistently stated that they far busier on the car show day, that the previous or following weekend. □ The event must be produced by an organization that serves, involves, and/or promotes Hermosa Beach’s coastal lifestyle, its residents, schools, and/or businesses; The sponsoring classic car club, Great Autos of Yesteryear was founded in Los Angeles and convertibles and w oodies have been a part of the beach culture for as long as there have been cars. On a sunny, cool, early May Saturday, there is nothing finer than enjoying a free and diverse classic car show while reveling in the delicious food and beautiful sites offered on the Plaza in Hermosa Beach. □ The organization or event producer must be able to demonstrate how its programs (outside of those provided at the event) provide a positive impact to the City including enhancements to quality of life to the Hermosa Beach community; or the offering of recreational, cultural, social, and/or educational activities of interest to the community. The sponsoring classic car club, Great Autos of Yesteryear, is the largest LGBT classic car club in the world, yet many of our members, and participants in this show, are straight-identified, making this show and the numerous classic car shows and classic car cruise-ins sponsored by the club, a shining example of diversity, equality and friendship, all bound by the love of classic cars. 116 I personally have made lifelong friends through this show, straight and gay identified, many of them local to my hometown of Hermosa Beach and the South Bay, and consider my life enriched as a result. But it is the smiles on peoples’ faces as they enter the Plaza and see the classic cars, that is the ultimate sign of the importance and success of this show. With Warmest Regards, David Freedman 117 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0034 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 APPROVAL OF FINAL PLANS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 689 CLARK BUILDING RENOVATIONS (Public Works Director Joe SanClemente) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council: 1.Approve the Clark Building Renovations final plans; and 2.Appropriate $747,033 from the Capital Improvement Fund to the CIP 689 project budget for the construction phase of the project. Executive Summary: Capital Improvement Project (CIP)689 Clark Building Renovations provides for a full renovation of the Clark Building.The renovation includes remodeling of the kitchen area complete with new appliances;remodeling the restrooms and ballroom area;the addition of air conditioning,heating, and solar panels;acoustical improvements;new lighting throughout;a new sewer lateral;and full Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance for both the interior and exterior of the building. Approval of the final design plans and appropriation of $747,033 from the Capital Improvement Fund would allow staff to move forward with the bidding process to complete construction of the project. Background: The Clark Building was constructed in 1936,adjoining Clark Stadium and the Lawn Bowling Facility. The building houses a ballroom,two storage rooms,two restrooms,a small stage,and kitchen.The Clark Building is currently used for nonprofit,community,school,and civic organization meetings and gatherings, as well as private parties. Over the years,the building has undergone various refurbishments.Most recently in 2008,City Council approved CIP 641,which included painting of the exterior of the building,replacement of windows and doors. At its June 15,2017 meeting,with the adoption of the FY 2017-18 budget,City Council approved CIP 689,with the purpose of remodeling the kitchen,making minor restroom upgrades,and painting the City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 5 powered by Legistar™118 Staff Report REPORT 22-0034 689,with the purpose of remodeling the kitchen,making minor restroom upgrades,and painting the interior of the building.Under the original project scope,the bulk of the work was to be done by City maintenance crews with a budget of just $165,000.On June 12,2018,with the adoption of the FY 2018-19 budget,City Council increased the project’s total budget to $475,100 to cover a larger scope of work including heating,ventilation,air conditioning (HVAC)system,new lighting in the ballroom space,and new ADA access to the building.The current project detail sheet for CIP 689 is included as Attachment 1. At its July 3,2018 meeting,the Parks,Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission reviewed preliminary designs for the Clark Building kitchen.The Commission recommended the kitchen design be part of a facility-wide design to include the ballroom and restroom space and that the designs consider both existing and potential future uses of the facility.Additionally,the Commission recommended the involvement of subcommittees from both the Parks,Recreation,and Community Resources Advisory Commission and the Public Works Commission in design development. On May 28,2020,staff selected one of the City’s on-call consultants,The Albert Architect Group (Architect) to design the Clark Building Renovations. The cost of these design services is $63,000. On September 14,2020,the Community Resources Department performed community engagement through a survey and a virtual community forum.The survey was shared with neighboring residents, past facility users,and to the community through a social media campaign.Two surveys were developed,one for community and facility users and another for nearby residents.A virtual community forum was hosted on Monday,October 19,2020,to discuss the scope of the project, evaluate facility user needs,gather community input,and understand the neighboring residents’ concerns.Information gathered through community engagement was used by staff,the subcommittees,and the architect to guide the design and specifically to determine the best kitchen type to accommodate the needs of the current and future building users. On November 2,2021,the architect presented the current design plans to the Parks,Recreation,and Community Resources Advisory Commission and the Commission provided their approval.On November 17,2021,the architect presented the current design plans to the Public Works Commission and the Commission also provided approval. Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description June 15, 2017 City Council approves CIP 689 with the adoption of the FY 2017-18 budget June 12, 2018 City Council increases the budget and scope for CIP 689 with the adoption of the FY 2018-19 budgetCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 2 of 5 powered by Legistar™119 Staff Report REPORT 22-0034 Meeting Date Description June 15, 2017 City Council approves CIP 689 with the adoption of the FY 2017-18 budget June 12, 2018 City Council increases the budget and scope for CIP 689 with the adoption of the FY 2018-19 budget Analysis: Included as Attachment 2 are the current design plans prepared by the project architect.These plans reflect design goals developed through the public engagement process and cover the following elements: ·Provides compliance with ADA standards for the building; ·Designs an overall space including a main hall,kitchen,and restrooms that meet the building’s occupancy load of 170 seated and 240-assembly style; ·Includes elements that are complimentary to the building’s art deco architecture in the overall design; ·Increases energy efficiency for all appliances and lighting; ·Provides a kitchen and hall space that is versatile for the needs of existing users,as well as potential future users; ·Includes audio visual (AV) equipment and acoustic improvements; ·Provides storage areas compatible with the storage of all necessary equipment for the space including tables, chairs, AV equipment, a podium and stage; ·Designs modern restroom facilities that are compatible with building usage; ·Incorporates the addition of solar panels; and ·Develops a design that minimizes maintenance costs. The funds requested in FY 2018-19 for the project were based on preliminary cost estimation,to be further developed during design.The FY 2018-19 construction cost estimate only included the original scope of work and did not include the increased scope or cost escalation for future years. The additional items included in the project are complete electrical,plumbing,and mechanical upgrades;enhanced ADA access throughout the property;new trash enclosure;addition of an HVAC and solar systems;a new sewer lateral;new flooring;and an acoustical ceiling to improve the acoustics of the building. The current construction cost estimate for the building is approximately $850,000 and includes all modern appliances and fixtures and cost escalation.The actual cost would depend on the bids received for construction.Actual bid prices would be presented to City Council for approval and award. During the bidding and construction phase of the project,City staff and the Parks,Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission subcommittee would review and update the Clark City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 3 of 5 powered by Legistar™120 Staff Report REPORT 22-0034 Community Resources Advisory Commission subcommittee would review and update the Clark Building use policies to better suit the renovated space.The remodel is tentatively scheduled to be completed by 2023. General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendation have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below: Sustainability Element Goal 4. A leader in reducing energy consumption and renewable energy production. Policies: ·4.4 Municipal facilities.Utilize renewable energy sources at City facilities. ·4.5 Sustainable building standards.Use sustainable building checklists to minimize or eliminate waste and maximize recycling in building design,demolition,and construction activities. Parks + Open Space Element Goal 3. Community parks and facilities encourage social activity and interaction. Policy: ·3.6 Availability of City facilities.Consider the demand and availability of City facilities for general community use in the long-term lease and/or rental of City facilities. Goal 4.Direct and accessible routes and connections to parks,recreational facilities,and open space are provided. Policy: ·4.4 ADA accessible park access.Install ADA and universally accessible amenities and equipment so that all parks, beach, and trail networks are accessible to all persons. Infrastructure Element Goal 1. Infrastructure systems are functional, safe, and well maintained. Policy: ·1.8 Minimize recurring repairs.Ensure that recurring repairs to City facilities are minimized by investing in low maintenance materials and performing preventive procedures where available. Fiscal Impact: Staff is requesting an additional $747,033 to support the construction phase of the project.The funds would cover the full construction costs,as well as the construction management and inspection City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 4 of 5 powered by Legistar™121 Staff Report REPORT 22-0034 would cover the full construction costs,as well as the construction management and inspection services for the project.If approved,the total expected budget would be a total of $1,109,000 including:$850,000 for construction;$159,000 for construction management and inspection services; and $100,000 as a contingency for any unforeseen conditions or work.Any unused funds will be returned to the Capital Improvement Fund. Table A. Project Funds Fund Title Funds Remaining Budget $361,967 Requesting Funds $747,033 Total Expected Budget $1,109,000 Table B. Project Expenses Fund Title Expenses Construction $850,000 Contingency $100,000 Construction Support $159,000 Total $1,109,000 Attachments: 1.CIP 689 Clark Renovations-Approved FY 2021-22 Capital Improvement Project Detail Sheet 2.Clark Building Design - Presented to the Commissions 3.Clark Building Design - Received on January 19, 2022 4.Clark Building Design Presentation by the Albert Architect Group 5.Link to June 15, 2017 City Council Report 6.Link to June 12, 2018 City Council Report Respectfully Submitted by: Jonathan Pascual, Assistant Engineer Concur: Lucho Rodriguez, Deputy City Engineer Concur: Joseph SanClemente, Public Works Director Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 5 of 5 powered by Legistar™122 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS PRIORITY NO.: ACCOUNT NO.: CATEGORY: Public Building and Ground Improvements 301-8689-4201 PROJECT NO./TITLE: CIP 689 Clark Building Renovations PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project proposes: 1. Design, Operational Review 2. Kitchen Remodel - including new commercial appliances, sinks, countertops, lighting, tile, flooring, doors and ADA upgrades. 3. Restrooms Remodel - including new flooring, fixtures, stalls, sinks, toilets, lighting, and ADA upgrades. Electrical, plumbing, sewer line upgrades. 4. Install new HVAC. 5. Acoustic panels and new lighting throughout ballroom area. 6. ADA upgrades to entrance building entrance points. JUSTIFICATION: The kitchen has already been demolished in 2018 and the restrooms are very dated. Repairs to kitchen appliances and restroom fixtures are common due to numerous malfunctions. STATUS: Final Engineering Design On-call design firm finalizing plans and specifications. Construction to be completed in FY 21-22. MAINTENANCE: Additional janitorial services estimated at $1,420 annually. COST TO COMPLETE PROJECT REMAINING PRIOR YEAR FUNDS Design (Conceptual/Construction Docs/MEP/Operational Review) $50,300 301 Capital Improvement Funds $399,889 Construction $409,000 Construction Management $15,800 CURRENT REQUEST 301 Capital Improvement Funds $0 PROJECT TOTAL: $475,100 TOTAL FY 18-19 CIP FUNDING: $399,889 123 ARCHITECTURAL ABBREVIATIONS GA.GUAGE GALV.GALVANIZED G.I.GALVANIZED IRON GL.GLASS GR.GRADE GYP.BD.GYPSUM BOARD G.D.GARBAGE DISPOSAL H.B.HOSE BIBB HWD.HARDWOOD HGT.HEIGHT H.PT.HIGH POINT HDR.HEADER HTR.HEATER H.W.HOT WATER HORIZ.HORIZONTAL H.C.HOLLOW CORE I.D.INSIDE DIAMETER INT.INTERIOR INSUL.INSULATION INV.INVERT I.P.S.IRON PIPE SIZE I.I.C.IMPACT INSULATION CLASS LAV.LAVATORY LGTH.LENGTH LKR.LOCKER MIN.MINIMUM MAS.MASONRY MAX.MAXIMUM MECH.MECHANICAL MEMB.MEMBRANE MTL.METAL M.H.MANHOLE MISC.MISCELLANEOUS M.O.MASONRY OPENING M.R.MOISTURE RESISTANT MFG.MANUFACTURER N.I.C NOT IN CONTRACT NO.NUMBER NOM.NOMINAL N.T.S.NOT TO SCALE OBSC.OBSCURE O.C.ON CENTER O.D.OUTSIDE DIIAMETER OFF.OFFICE OPG.OPENING OV.OVEN OVFL.OVERFLOW OPP.OPPOSITE PL PROPERTY LINE PART'N PARTITION PLAS.PLASTER PLYWD.PLYWOOD PR.PAIR P.L.PLASTIC LAMINATE A.F.F.ABOVE FINISH FLOOR A.F.S.ABOVE FINISH SURFACE BD BOARD BLK BLOCK BLKG BLOCKING BM BEAM BOT BOTTOM BLDG BUILDING BET BETWEEN C.L.CENTER LINE C.B.CATCH BASIN CEM.CEMENT CER.CERAMIC C.I.P.CAST IRON PIPE CLG.CEILING CLO.CLOSET CLR.CLEAR C.O.CLEAN OUT COL.COLUMN COM.COMMON CONC.CONCRETE CONT.CONTINUOUS C.W.COLD WATER C.T.CERAMIC TILE C.YD.CUBIC YARD DET.DETAIL D.F.DRINKING FOUNTAIN D.D.DOOR DIMENSION DIA. DIAMETER DWG.DRAWING D.S.DOWNSPOUT D.W.DISHWASHER DR.DOOR DIM.DIMENSION EA.EACH ELEC.ELECTRICAL ELEV.ELEVATION ENCL.ENCLOSURE EXH.EXHAUST EXIST.EXISTING EXP.EXPANSION EXT.EXTERIOR E.J.EXPANSION JOINT F.D.FLOOR DRAIN F.E.C.FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET FIN. FINISH FLR.FLOOR FLRG.FLOORING F.GL.FIXED GLASS F.S.FLOOR SINK FLUOR.FLUORESCENT F.O.C.FACE OF CONCRETE F.O.M.FACE OF MASONRY F.O.S.FACE OF STUD F.O.F.FACE OF FINISH F.F.FINISH FLOOR F.J.FLOOR JOIST R.RISER RAD.RADIUS REINF.REINFORCING RESIL.RESILIENT RD.ROOF DRAIN RM.ROOM R.O.ROUGH OPENING REF.REFRIGERATOR REQ'D REQUIRED S.C.SOLID CORE SHT.SHEET SIM.SIMILAR SHTG.SHEATHING SQ.SQUARE STD.STANDARD STL.STEEL STRUCT.STRUCTURAL S.S.STAINLESS STEEL SUSP.SUSPENDED SPECS.SPECIFICATIONS STOR.STORAGE S.T.C.SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS S.F.SQUARE FOOT SSD SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS TEL.TELEPHONE TERR.TERRAZZO T&G TONGUE AND GROOVE T.O.C.TOP OF CURB T.O.W.TOP OF WALL TYP.TYPICAL THRU.THROUGH TEMP.TEMPERED T.O.P.TOP OF PARAPET T.TREAD T.O.PL TOP OF PLATE U URINAL U.O.N.UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED VERT.VERTICAL VEST.VESTIBULE V.C.T.VINYLE COMPOSITION TILE VIF VERIFY IN FEILD W/WITH WAINS.WAINSCOT W.C.WATER CLOSET WD. WOOD WH WATER HEATER WP.WATERPROOF DEMOLISH EXISTING NEW PHASING LEGEND SLOPE ARROWS SLOPE ARROWS ELEVATION CALLOUTS GRID BUBBLE BUILDING ELEVATION SHEET NUMBER INTERIOR ELEVATIONS SHEET NUMBER BUILDING SECTION SHEET NUMBER WALL SECTION SHEET NEUMBER DETAIL NUMBER SHEET NUMBER DETAIL TICK MATCHLINE BREAK LINE SLOPE 0:12 T.O.WALL T.O.WALL X 1 A0.0 1 A0.0 1 1 A0.0 1 A0.0 1 A0.0 1 ROOM FINISH TAG SUSMP AREA ALLOCATION POINT ELEVATION STEP IN SLAB FACADE ELEVATION MARKER WALL TYPE REVISION CALLOUT DOOR CALLOUT WINDOW CALLOUT ROOM NUMBER CEILING HEIGHT NORTH ARROW KEYNOTES CEILING HGT. ROOM NAME FLR. MATERIAL SUSMP +00.00' +0'-0" +0" X X X 0 D-000 W-000 000 ROOM NAME 0'-0" RENOVATION OF THE CLARK BUILDING CONSISTING OF ACCESSIBILITY UPGRADES, NEW KITCHEN, RENOVATED RESTROOMS, AND MATERIAL UPGRADES THROUGHOUT. NO CHANGE TO THE BUILDING STRUCTURE MEP UPGRADES PER SEPERATE PERMIT. SITE ADDRESS: CLARK BUILDING 861 VALLEY DRIVE, HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION ZONING INFORMATION UNDERLYING ZONE: OPEN SPACE ZONING INFORMATION:COSTAL ZONE OWNER COMPANY:CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTACT:JONATHAN PASCUAL EMAIL:jpascual@hermosabeach.gov TELEPHONE:310.318.0222 ADDRESS:1315 VALLEY DRIVE, HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 COMPANY:A & N DESIGN GROUP INC. CONTACT:ARASH NAZARI, PE EMAIL:arash@an-dg.com TELEPHONE:818.288.4361 ADDRESS:21550 OXNARD STREET #300 WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91367 MEP ENGINEER ARCHITECT COMPANY:THE ALBERT GROUP ARCHITECTS ARCHITAG LLP CONTACT:BRITTANY EDWARDS EMAIL:bedwards@tagarch.net TELEPHONE:310.820.8863 x205 ADDRESS:2032 STONER AVE, STUDIO A LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 1. THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND COPIES, OR ANY OTHER ACCESSORIES THEREOF, ARE LEGAL INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE FOR USE BY THE OWNER AND AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES ON THE DESIGNATED PROPERTY ONLY. 2. IN THE EVENT DISCREPANCIES OCCUR IN THE DRAWINGS OF DIFFERENT DISCIPLINES, CONTACT THE ARCHITECT FOR RESOLUTION. 3. THESE PLANS ARE FOR GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES ONLY. THEY ARE NOT EXHAUSTIVELY DETAILED OR FULLY SPECIFIED. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO SELECT, VERIFY, RESOLVE, AND INSTALL ALL EQUIPMENT. 4. WHERE DISCREPANCIES OCCUR BETWEEN STRUCTURAL AND ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS, CONSULT ARCHITECT. 5. STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION SHALL BE REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEER FOR STRUCTURAL CONFORMANCE TO THE APPROVED PLANS. 6. DIMENSIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALE. 7. ALL ADDENDA, CHANGE ORDERS, BULLETINS, AND NOTICES, IF ANY ISSUED LATER, SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE WORK. 8. IN THE EVENT THERE ARE FOUND DISCREPANCIES OR AMBIGUITIES IN OR OMISSIONS FROM THE DRAWINGS, OR SHOULD THERE BE DOUBT AS TO THEIR MEANING OR INTENT, THE ARCHITECT SHALL BE NOTIFIED, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN CLARIFICATION. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTINUOUS CLEANUP OF THE SITE AND OF ALL DEBRIS, WHETHER CREATED BY HIS WORK, OR BY THE FAILURE OF HIS SUBCONTRACTORS TO CLEAN UP AFTER THEIR WORK. 10. PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN AND PROPERTY PROTECTION BARRICADES AND/OR CANOPIES REQUIRED BY THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES , OR AS NECESSARY FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY. AS A PERMIT IS REQUIRED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS FOR A PROTECTION FENCE OR CANOPY ON OR OVER ANY STREET OR PUBLIC SPACE. 11. TYPICAL DETAILS SHALL APPLY WHERE NO SPECIFIC DETAILS OR SECTIONS ARE GIVEN. 12. ALL DIMENSIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALE. NOTE THAT DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE WALL, UNLESS OBVIOUSLY SHOWN, OR MARKED CENTERLINE OF WALL OR COLUMN. CONTRACTOROF SHALL NOT SCALE FROM THE DRAWINGS. 13. ANY DEVIATIONS FROM THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS WHICH ARE NECESSITATED BY FIELD CONDITIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT. 14. ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS SHALL BE CHECKED AND VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE BY EACH SUBCONTRACTOR BEFORE THAT SUBCONTRACTOR BEGINS WORK. ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT AND GENERAL CONTRACTOR BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. 15. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REGULATIONS OF THE OCCUPATION SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT. 16. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN APPROVAL BY THE LOCAL BUILDING INSPECTOR FOR ALL CONCEALED WORK BEFORE CLOSING UP. 17. ALL EXTERIOR OPENINGS EXPOSED TO THE WEATHER SHALL BE FLASHED IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO MAKE THEM WATERPROOF. ALL FLASHING, COUNTERFLASHING AND COPING WHEN OF METAL, SHALL MEET THE GAUGES SPECIFIED, BUT NO LESS THAN 24 GA. GALVANIZED. 18. PROVIDE WATERPROOF MEMBRANE OVER ALL EXTERIOR BUILDING WALLS BELOW GRADE. CARRY WATERPROOF MEMBRANE 6" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. INSTALL PROTECTION BOARD PRIOR TO BACKFILLING. 19. NO TRENCHES OR EXCAVATIONS 5' OR MORE IN DEPTH INTO WHICH A PERSON IS REQUIRED TO DESCEND SHALL BE ALLOWED WITHOUT ENGINEERED SHORING PLANS. IT SHALL BE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO PREPARE SUCH PLANS AND OBTAIN REQUIREDTHE APPROVALS. PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE As indicated 2017 A0.00 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS TITLE SHEET 3/31/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL CLARK COMMUNITY CENTER PROGRESS SET 861 VALLEY DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PROJECT SYMBOLS GENERAL A0.00 TITLE SHEET A0.02 GENERAL NOTES A0.03 GENERAL NOTES A0.10 CODE COMPLIANCE SHEET LIST ARCHITECTURAL A1.00 SITE PLAN A1.10 DEMO PLAN A2.00 PROPOSED PLAN A2.01 PROPOSED RCP A2.10 ENLARGED RAMPS A2.11 ENLARGED RESTROOMS AND KITCHEN A3.00 BUILDING ELEVATIONS A3.10 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS- BALLROOM A3.11 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS- KITCHEN A3.12 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS- RESTROOM A3.13 MATERIALS A3.14 RENDERING A3.15 RENDERING A3.16 RENDERING A3.17 RENDERING A7.00 DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ACC.1 ACCESSIBILITY DETAILS ACC.2 ACCESSIBILITY DETAILS AD.10 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS- WALLS AD.20 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS- FOUNDATION AD.50 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS- DOORS AD.70 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS- STAIRS AD.80 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS- FINISHES PROJECT DATA DIRECTORY AREA MAP PROJECT SITE PROJECT SITE ZONING MAP CONSTRUCTION NOTES REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 124 DN DN DN DN DN APPLICABLE BUILDING CODE: 2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS TITLE 24 PART 11 2019 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE TOTAL BUILDING OCCUPANCY: 200 PERSONS OCCUPANCY TYPE: ASSEMBLY A-3 WATER CLOSETS MALE: 1: 1-100 MALE: 1 MALE: 2 MALE: 2 MALE: 1 FEMALE: 3: 51-100 FEMALE: 3 FEMALE: 3 FEMALE: 3 FEMALE: 1 FIXTURE TYPE CALCULATION FIXTURE COUNT FIXTURE COUNT FIXTURE COUNT ADA FIXTURES REQUIRED EXISTING PROVIDED PROVIDED 1. FIXTURE REQUIREMENTS PER CPC 2019 TABLE 422.1 2. 201 PERSONS ASSUMED 50% GENDER SPLIT. FOR THE PERPOSES OF THIS CALCULATION THERE ARE 100 MALES AND 100 FEMALES. URINALS 1: 1-100 1 2 2 1 LAVATORIES MALE: 1: 1-200 MALE: 1 MALE: 1 MALE: 2 MALE: 1 FEMALE: 1: 1-100 FEMALE: 1 FEMALE: 2 FEMALE: 3 FEMALE: 2 MAIN BALLROOM 2,938 SF ASSEMBLY (UNCONCENTRATED) 15 NET 195 PERSONS ROOM AREA OCCUPANCY TYPE FLOOR AREA CALC. OCCUPANCY KITCHEN 391 SF KITCHEN 200 SF GROSS 2 PERSONS MEN'S RESTROOM 171 SF N/A N/A N/A WONEN'S RESTROOM 188 SF N/A N/A N/A STORAGE 1 145 SF ACCESSORY STORAGE 300 SF GROSS 1 PERSON STORAGE 2 199 SF ACCESSORY STORAGE 300 SF GROSS 1 PERSON STORAGE 3 84 SF ACCESSORY STORAGE 300 SF GROSS 1 PERSON TOTAL 3,366 SF 200 PERSONS 1. PER TABLE 1004.1.2 CBC 2016 1 1 BALLROOM 100 200 SF STORAGE 1 105 180 SF STORAGE 2 104 213 SF WOMEN'S RESTROOM 103 182 SF MEN'S RESTROOM 102 372 SF KITCHEN 101 98 SF STORAGE 3 106 6744"44"44"67 67 ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE As indicated 2017 A0.10 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS CODE COMPLIANCE 01/08/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL CODE SUMMARY PLUMBING FIXTURE REQUIREMENTS OCCUPANCY CALCULATIONS REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 125 200 SF STORAGE 1 213 SF WOMEN'S RESTROOM 182 SF MEN'S RESTROOM 3,366 SF BALLROOM 372 SF KITCHEN 98 SF STORAGE 3 W S S VALLEY DRIVE (E) SIDEWALK(E) PARKING (E) ACCESSIBLE PARKING (E) ACCESSIBLE PARKING (E) ACCESSIBLE PARKING (E) ACCESSIBLE PARKING (E) PARKING (E) PARKING (E) BASEBALL FEILD (E) LAWN BOWLING FEILD CLARK BUILDING COMMUNTY CENTER BUILDING TOTAL = 5,119 SF EXTENT OF ARCHITECTURAL SCOPE 180 SF STORAGE 2 N PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 3/16" = 1'-0" 2017 A1.00 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS SITE PLAN 7/14/2020 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"SITE PLAN 1 REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 126 1 XA4.00 A A B B C C D D E E F F 55 44 11 33 22 A3.01 1 A3.001 A3.01 2 A3.00 2 2 XA4.00 2 XA4.00 BALLROOM STORAGE 1 KITCHEN STORAGE 2 D01 D02 D03 D13 D14 D04 D04D04 D04 D05 D05 D06 D06 D06 D06D06 D07 D08 D08 D08 D08 D08 D08 D08D08D08 D08 D09 D10D10 D10D10 D10D10D10 D11 D12 D11 D15 D16 D08 A3.10 2 1 34 9' - 9 1/2" V.I.F.7' - 0" A3.141 A3.16 1 1. PROTECT AND PRESERVE EXISTING TREE AT SOUTH-EAST CORNER OF BUILDING DURING CONSTRUCTION. 2. PRESSURE WASH EXTEROR AND INTERIOR OF BUILDING BEFORE PAINTING OR APLICATION OF NEW MATERIAL. DEMO NOTES PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE As indicated 2017 A1.10 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS DEMO PLAN 8/18/2020 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"EXISTING / DEMO PLAN 1 DEMO KEYNOTES D01 REMOVE EXISTING FIREPLACE, FLUE, AND BRICK FACADE. D02 REMOVE DRYWALL ON CEILING BETWEEN STRUCTURAL BAYS- PROTECT BEAMS F STRUCTURAL BAYS, LEAVE FRAMING SYSTEM INTACT D03 REMOVE EXISTING INTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES THROUGHOUT D04 DEMOLISH PORTION OF CONCRETE WALL TO CREATE A SURFACE FLUSH WITH THE SURROUNDING GRADE D05 REMOVE STALL PARTITIONS D06 REMOVE EXISTING WALL (OR PORTION OF WALL)- PROTECT SURROUNDING WALL SURFACES - PATCH AND REPAIR AS NEEDED D07 REMOVE VANITY COUNTER AND SINK D08 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR- PATCH AND REPAIR AS NEEDED D09 REMOVE SINK D10 REMOVE TOILET / URINAL D11 DEMOLISH EXISTING CONCRETE LANDING AND STAIRS D12 DEMOLISH EXISTING RAMP AND HANDRAILS D13 PULL UP EXISTING FLOORING THROUGHOUT D14 REMOVE EXISTING WATER HEATER- SEE PLUMBING PLANS FOR DEATILS AND REPLACEMENT D15 REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE D16 REMOVE EXISTING STAIR - PORTION PER PROPOSED PLAN REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 127 DN DN DN DN DN DN A A B B C C D D E E F F 55 44 11 33 22 A3.01 1 A3.001 A2.11 2 A3.00 2 A3.12 4 5 2 3 A3.12 8 9 6 7 200 SF STORAGE 1 213 SF WOMEN'S RESTROOM 182 SF MEN'S RESTROOM 3,366 SF BALLROOM 601 501 401 101 602 372 SF KITCHEN 0' - 0" 0' - 0" (EXISTING)(EXISTING) 98 SF STORAGE 3 4' - 0"-0'-1/4"1% SLOPE 8' - 7" W S 180 SF STORAGE 2 A2.11 1 5' - 4"7' - 0"02 09 11 14 14 12 01 01 01 01 01 02 03 03 04 09 05 06 07 07 07 08 08 0'-0" 1% SLOPE 1% SLOPE 1% SLOPE 1% SLOPE 1% SLOPE 1% SLOPE A3.112 6 3 5 A3.11 4 14' - 8 1/2"14' - 9"14' - 9"14' - 9"-1' - 6" 3' - 7"5' - 0" 6' - 0" MIN.16' - 8" V.I.F. 4 4 " MI N . 3' - 1 0 " -0'-1/4" -0'-1/4" 1% SLOPE 1% SLOPE 1% SLOPE 10' - 0 1/2"3' - 6"3' - 3 1/2"10' - 3 1/2"1' - 11" 7' - 5 1/2"6' - 3 1/2"7' - 3 1/2"5' - 0"5' - 4 1/2"5' - 4 1/2" 2' - 10" 6' - 6 1/2"6' - 7 1/2"6' - 4 1/2"13' - 5 1/2"7' - 3 1/2"6' - 4" V.I.F. A3.10 2 1 34 A 4 0 A 6 0 A 6 0 A 4 0 A 4 0 A 4 0 A 4 0 A 6 0 A 4 0 A 4 0 A 4 0 A 6 0 44" MIN.3' - 10"1' - 0"1' - 11" 1' - 0"1' - 0" 1' - 0"1' - 0" 1' - 0"1' - 11"1' - 0"1' - 11" 1' - 0"1' - 11" 1' - 0" 1' - 0"1' - 0"1' - 0"60" MIN. 6' - 7" -0'-1/4"0' - 0"1' - 6"2' - 0"2' - 1"18' - 9" V.I.F.5' - 8"1' - 0"1' - 0"1' - 0"60" MIN.5' - 5"1' - 0"18' - 9" V.I.F.1' - 0" 6' - 0" 1' - 0"1' - 0" 1' - 0" 1' - 6"5' - 0"17' - 2" V.I.F.1' - 0"1' - 0"V.I.F. 1' - 7 1/2" 6' - 6" 301 102 103 503 402 502 201 (EXISTING) (EXISTING)(EXISTING) (EXISTING) -0'-1/4"0'-0"11' - 9"3' - 9"7' - 6"0' - 0" 4' - 10" 8.3% SLOPE MAX. 8.3% SLOPE MAX. 8.3% SLOPE MAX. 8.3% SLOPE MAX. 8.3% SLOPE MAX. 8.3% SLOPE MAX. 8.3% SLOPE MAX. N A3.141 A3.16 1 A2.10 1 -0'-1" A2.10 3 A2.10 5 A2.10 2 A2.10 4 001 002 003 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 1/4" = 1'-0" 2017 A2.00 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PROPOSED PLAN 8/18/2020 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"PROPOSED PLAN 1 PLAN KEYNOTES 01 ACCESSIBLE CONCRETE RAMP AND METAL HANDRAIL, SEE DETAILS 02 CONCRETE OVERPOUR TO BE PROVIDED FOR AN ACCESSIBLE TRANSITION @ ENTRY DOOR- 2% SLOPE MAX. FOR DRAINAGE 03 CONCRETE WALKWAY AND METAL HANDRAIL, SEE ENLARGED PLANS AND DETAILS 04 CONCRETE STAIRS AND METAL HANDRAIL, SEE ENLARGED PLANS AND DETAILS 05 FILL EXISTING STAIR W/ CONCRETE FOR A FLUSH FINISHED SURFACE 06 PROVIDE NEW RETAINING WALL TO MATCH EXISTING FOR CONTINUOUS STRUCTURE 07 NEW COCRETE WALKWAY ON GRADE 08 CONCRETE LANDING PER ENLARGED PLANS AND DETAILS- ALIGN LANDING W/ ADJACENT WALKING SURFACE FOR ACCESSIBLE TRANSITION 09 CONCRETE STAIRS AND METAL HANDRAIL, SEE ENLARGED PLANS AND DETAILS; V.I.F. IF EXISTING STAIRS CAN BE UTILIZED W/ OVERPOUR TO ADJUST FOR OVERPOUR @ LANDING 11 WATER HEATER CLOSET- SEE MEP DRAWIGNS FOR DETAILS 12 ATTIC ACCESS PULL DOWN LADDER- VERIFY EXACT LOCATION IN FEILD 14 NEW RESTROOM LAYOUT AND FIXTURES PER ENLARGED PLAN B01 ARMSTRONG FLORING LUXE PLANK; GROVELAND NATURAL OR APPROVED EQ. B02 CERTAINTEED ECOPHON SOLO PANEL, WHITE- SEE RCP B04 MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE SYSTEM, ECOVEIL SHEER, METAL- OR APPROVED EQ. B05 PAINT- WHITE OR APPROVED EQ. B06 ACCENT PAINT- LIGHT GREEN OR APPROVED EQ. REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 128 1 XA4.00 1 XA4.00 A A B B C C D D E E F F 55 44 11 33 22 A3.01 1 A3.001 A3.01 2 A3.00 2 2 XA4.00 2 XA4.00 200 SF STORAGE 1 3,366 SF BALLROOM 213 SF WOMEN'S RESTROOM 182 SF MEN'S RESTROOM 372 SF KITCHEN 4' - 0"3' - 6"4' - 0" 180 SF STORAGE 2 3' - 6"3' - 6"3' - 6"3' - 6"3' - 6"4' - 7"4' - 0" 3' - 6"EQEQEQ3' - 0"3' - 6"98 SF STORAGE 3EQ EQ4' - 0"4' - 0" EQ EQ EQ EQ EQEQEQ EQ CL OF SINK CL OF SINK 1' - 0" CL OF SINK CL OF SINK 1' - 0"EQEQEQ EQ EQ EQEQ EQCL EQ EQEQ EQEQEQEQ EQ CL OF SINK 1' - 0"1' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0" C01 C03 C03 C03 C03 C03 C02 C02 C08C08 C08C08C08C08 C08C08 EQ EQ C07C07 C07C07 C07C07 C07C07C10 C08C08 C08C08 C08 C08C08C08 C10 C08 C08C08 C09C09 C09C09 C09 C09 C09 C09 C09C09 CL OF SINK C07 EQ EQ 1' - 6"1' - 6"EQEQEQC14C14 C14C14 CL OF COUNTER BELOW A3.14143' - 5"PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 1/4" = 1'-0" 2017 A2.01 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PROPOSED RCP 09/23/20 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"PROPOSED RCP 1 RCP KEYNOTES C01 PATCH EXISTING DRYWALL CEILING- HT. TO MATCH EXISTING- PAINTED WHITE C02 DRYWALL SOFFIT @ 1'-0" BELOW MAIN CEILING C03 EXISTING DRYWALL CEILING TO REMAIN C07 2" RECESSED CAN LED LIGHT FIXTURE- 4000K C08 4" RECESSED CAN LED LIGHT FIXTURE- 4000K C09 6" RECESSED CAN LED LIGHT FIXTURE- 3000K, DIMMABLE C10 EXHAUST FAN PER MECH. DRAWINGS- VENTS TO BE DUCTED TO THE EXTERIOR PER MECHANICAL C14 LUMENWERX 2" VOILA PENDANT, 9" HT FIXTURE- 3500K REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 129 DN DN DN DN DN 4' - 0"8.3% SLOPE MAX. 5' - 0"1' - 0" 5' - 0"1' - 0" RAMP 18' - 9" V.I.F.7' - 0" LANDING 1' - 0" 1' - 0" ALIGN PROPOSED CONCRETE LANDING W/ EXISTING PARKING LOT -0' - 1"5' - 0"6' - 0" LANDING 4' - 0" LANDINGV.I.F. 8.3% SLOPE MAX. -0' - 3/4" 5' - 0" LANDING RAMP 1' - 7 1/2" V.I.F.6' - 6" LANDING 1' - 0"8.3% SLOPE MAX. 1' - 6" -1' - 6"1' - 0"1' - 0"5' - 0" LANDINGRAMP17' - 2" V.I.F.5' - 0" 5' - 4" 1% SLOPE 4 4 " MI N . 3' - 1 0 "44" MIN.3' - 10"5' - 0" LANDING6' - 0" LANDING5' - 0" LANDING V.I.F. V.I.F.6' - 0" LANDING5' - 0" LANDING1' - 0"1' - 0"RAMP4' - 3" V.I.F. 5' - 0" LANDING 5' - 0" LANDING5' - 0" LANDING1' - 0" 1' - 0" RAMP 14' - 6" V.I.F.6' - 6" LANDING 8.3% SLOPE MAX. 8.3% SLOPE MAX. -1' - 6" -0' - 3 1/2" V.I.F. V.I.F. 5' - 0" LANDING 5' - 0" LANDING4' - 0"8.3% SLOPE MAX. 1' - 0" RAMP 16' - 8" V.I.F.1' - 0" 1' - 0"1' - 0" 6' - 0" LANDING 4' - 0" LANDING-1' - 6"-0' - 3 1/2" V.I.F.V.I.F. ALIGN PROPOSED CONCRETE LANDING W/ EXISTING PARKING LOT 5' - 0" LANDING5' - 0" LANDING6' - 0" LANDING4' - 0" LANDING 1' - 0"RAMP18' - 9" V.I.F.1' - 0"1' - 0"2' - 1"5' - 8"4' - 0"8.3% SLOPE MAX. - 0' - 1/4" 11' - 1 1/2" - 1' - 6" V.I.F. PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 1/2" = 1'-0" 2017 A2.10 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS ENLARGED RAMPS 07/21/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"ENLARGED RAMP 1 1 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"ENLARGED RAMP 2 3SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"ENLARGED RAMP 3 5 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"ENLARGED RAMP 4 2 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"ENLARGED RAMP 5 4 130 A3.12 4 5 2 3 A3.12 8 9 6 7 213 SF WOMEN'S RESTROOM 182 SF MEN'S RESTROOM 2' - 0" MIN.2' - 0"2' - 0"15" MIN.15" MIN.15" MIN.15" MIN.5' - 0" ø 5 ' - 0 " 1' - 6" MIN. ø 5 ' - 0 "1' - 9"4' - 0" 2' MIN. 5' - 6"1' - 10"5' - 0" MIN.5' - 0" MIN.5' - 0"5' - 0" MIN.2' - 0" MIN.2' - 0"1' - 0"15" MIN.15" MIN.15" MIN.15" MIN.2' - 6" MIN.15" MIN.3' - 0"4' - 10"8' - 2 1/2" V.I.F.18"24"12"12"42" 59" CL. 4' - 0" MIN. 6' - 4 1/2" V.I.F. 18"59" CL.36"2' - 0" MIN.6' - 0"42"12"24"12" 5' - 0" MIN. 2' MIN. 2' MIN. ø 5 ' - 0 "2' - 6"2' - 6"60" MIN.A3.12 12 11 10 13 R01 R01 R01 R01 R01 R02 R02 R03 R03 R03 EQ EQ EQ EQ R04 R04 R04 R04 R04 R05 R05 R06 R06 R05 R06 R05 R06 R05 R06 R07 R07 R08 R08 R08 R08R11 R12 R09 R100' - 10 1/2"R13 R07 R13 R13 2' - 0"4' - 1"13' - 1"5' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"4' - 2"2' - 6"3' - 0"2' - 0"3' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 6"1' - 6"2' - 0"8' - 0"0' - 6" 2' - 0"6' - 1"7' - 0"ø 5 ' - 0 " ø 5 ' - 0 " 5' - 0" KITCHEN STORAGE 3 A3.112 6 3 5 A3.11 4 8' - 0"7' - 0" V.I.F. WINDOW PLACEMENT6' - 0"ALIGN W/ SOFIT ABOVE 2' - 1"3' - 0"2' - 0"3' - 0"3' - 0"2' - 1"2' - 0"3' - 0"3' - 0" 3' - 0"3' - 0"2' - 0" K01 K03 K04 K05 K06 K11 K12 K12 K02 2' - 6"3' - 0"K10 K08 K13 2' - 6"2' - 0"4' - 5"PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 1/2" = 1'-0" 2017 A2.11 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS ENLARGED RESTROOMS AND KITCHEN 8/18/2020 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"ENGLARGED RESTROOM PLAN 2 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"ENLARGED KITCHEN PLAN 1 RESTROOM KEYNOTES R01 WATER CLOSET, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 2|ACC.3 "ULTRA LOW FLUSH" TYPE TOILET: MAX 1.28 GAL/FLUSH (TOTO CT705ULN(G) OR APPROVED EQ.) 29" DEEP MAX, RECESSED TOTO ECOPOWER CONCEALED FLUSH VALVE OR APPROVED EQUAL R02 URINAL, "ULTRA HIGH EFFICIENCY" TYPE URINAL: MAX. 0.125 GAL/FLUSH (TOTO UT445U(V) W/ CONCEALED TOTO ECOPOWER FLUSH VALVE - ADA COMPLIANT, OR APPROVED EQ.) R03 COUNTERTOP, ADA COMPLIANT, MIN 27" KNEE CLR A.F.F., CAESARSTONE- NOBLE GREY OR APPROVED EQ. R04 UNDERMOUNT LAVATORY BASIN, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 2|ACC.2, KOHLER VERTICYL MODEL NO. K-2882-0, WHITE OR APPROVED EQ R05 LAVATORY FAUCET, AUTOMATIC, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 7|ACC.1, BRADLEY VERGE ZEN SERIES S53-3700 OR APPROVED EQ. R06 SOAP DISPENSER, DECK MOUNTED, AUTOMATIC, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 7|ACC.1, BRADLEY VERGE ZEN SERIES 6-3700 OR APPROVED EQ. R07 HAND DRYER, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 7,8|ACC.1, TOTO CLEAN DRY HIGH SPEED HAND DRYER HDR111#SS R08 HANDICAP GRAB BAR, ICC 11B COMPLIANT, SEE 3,5|ACC.2 R09 SEAT-COVER DISPENSER, SANITARY NAPKIN DISPOSAL, TOILET TISSUE DISPENSER- BOBRICK CLASSIC SERIES PARTITION-MOUNTED B-357 OR APPROVED EQ. R10 SEAT-COVER DISPENSER, SANITARY NAPKIN DISPOSAL, TOILET TISSUE DISPENSER, ADA COMPLIANT- BOBRICK CLASSIC SERIES RECESSED B-3574 OR APPROVED EQ. R11 SEAT-COVER DISPENSER, TOILET TISSUE DISPENSER, ADA COMPLIANT- BOBRICK CLASSIC SERIES RECESSED B-34745 OR APPROVED EQ. R12 SEAT-COVER DISPENSER, TOILET TISSUE DISPENSER- BOBRICK CLASSIC SERIES RECESSED B-3474 OR APPROVED EQ. R13 FRAMELESS MIRROR; SIZE AND HEIGHT PER INTERIOR ELEVATIONS R20 FLOOR TILE, PORCELANOSA, CONCRETE GREY NATURE 12X24 OR APPROVED EQ. R21 WALL TILE, ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE, BLANCO IN MATTE OR APPROED EQ. R22 WALL TILE, ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE, GRIS IN GLOSS OR APPROED EQ. R23 ARMTRONG LUX PLANK W/ RIGID CORE- GROVELAND NATURAL; OR APPROVED EQ. REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE KITCHEN KEYNOTES. K01 30" GAS RANGE, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K02 30"x18" HOOD, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K03 24" WIDE UNDERCOUNTER MICROWAVE, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING DRAWERMICRO OVEN 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K04 30" WARMING DRAWER, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K05 24"x24" UNDERCOUNTER DISHWASHER, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 524 MODEL OR APPROVED EQ. K06 30" ELECTRIC OVEN, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES VSOE350 OR APPROVED EQ. K08 STAINLESS STEEL UNDER-MOUNT SINGLE BOWL KITCHEN SINK W/ GRABAGE DISPOSAL, KOHLER VAULT K-3821-3 OR APPROVED EQ. K10 24"x24" PENAL-WARE 1630 SERIES STAINLESS STEEL MOP SINK OR APPROVED EQ. K11 30" WIDE ADA COMPLIANT WORK SPACE W/ NO BASE CABINET FOR KNEE & TOE CLEARANCE. K12 36" HIGH, STONE TOP COUNTER, TYP. @ KITCHEN, CAESARSTONE EMPIRA WHITE OR APPOVED EQ. K13 KOHLER PURIST K-24982 FAUCET, VIBRANT STAINLESS- OR APPROVED EQ. K14 FLOOR TILE, PORCELANOSA, CONCRETE GREY NATURE 12X24 OR APPROVED EQ. K15 WALL TILE, ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE, BLANCO IN MATTE OR APPROED EQ. K17 ARMTRONG LUX PLANK W/ RIGID CORE- GROVELAND NATURAL; OR APPROVED EQ. K18 STONE COUNTERTOP WATERFALL OVER EDGE K19 MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE SYSTEM, ECOVEIL SHEER, METAL- OR APPROVED EQ.; SEE INTERIOR ELEVATION FOR WALL LOCATION K20 KARMAN, FORTE, ULTRA MATTE ACRYLIC, COLOR METALIC SILVER OR APPROVED EQ. 131 (E) BALLROOM FF 5 4 132 ADJACENT GRADE (E) LAWN BOWLING FIELD1' - 10"1' - 10"7' - 10"9"E01 E01 E01E02E02 E03 E03 E04E06E06 E06 E06 E05 E07 E07 E08 (E) BALLROOM FF 54132 ADJACENT GRADE (E) LAWN BOWLING FIELD (E) RETAINING WALL E03 E03 E07 E01 E01E02 E04 E05 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 1/4" = 1'-0" 2017 A3.00 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS BUILDING ELEVATIONS 3/31/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"EAST FRONT ELEVATION 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"WEST REAR ELEVATION 2 ELEVATION KEYNOTES E01 CONCRETE RAMP, SEE PLANS E02 CONCRETE STAIRS, SEE PLANS E03 POWDER COATED BLACK METAL RAILING E04 POWERWASH & REPAINT EXTERIOR- COLORS TO MATCH EXISTING PER ARCHITECT'S APPROVAL E05 REPLACE EXISTING DOOR PER SCHEDULE E06 STOREFRONT WINDOWS & DOORS TO REMAIN E07 CONCRETE OVERPOUR TO BE PROVIDED FOR AN ACCESSIBLE TRANSITION @ ENTRY DOOR- 2% SLOPE MAX. FOR DRAINAGE E08 FRAMED COLUMN W/ STUCCO FINISH- PAINT TO MATCH EXISTING COLUMNS E09 REPLACE EXISTING WINDOW PER SCHEDULE REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 132 (E) BALLROOM FF ABCDEF ADJACENT GRADE E06E06E06 E06 E06 E01 E01 E03E03 E04 E07 (E) BALLROOM FF A B C D E F ADJACENT GRADE 1' - 10"1' - 10"7' - 10"9"E09 E09 E09 E09E04 E08 E03 E03 E01E01 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 1/4" = 1'-0" 2017 A3.01 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS BUILDING ELEVATIONS 3/31/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"NORTH ELEVATION 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"SOUTH ELEVATION 2 ELEVATION KEYNOTES E01 CONCRETE RAMP, SEE PLANS E02 CONCRETE STAIRS, SEE PLANS E03 POWDER COATED BLACK METAL RAILING E04 POWERWASH & REPAINT EXTERIOR- COLORS TO MATCH EXISTING PER ARCHITECT'S APPROVAL E05 REPLACE EXISTING DOOR PER SCHEDULE E06 STOREFRONT WINDOWS & DOORS TO REMAIN E07 CONCRETE OVERPOUR TO BE PROVIDED FOR AN ACCESSIBLE TRANSITION @ ENTRY DOOR- 2% SLOPE MAX. FOR DRAINAGE E08 FRAMED COLUMN W/ STUCCO FINISH- PAINT TO MATCH EXISTING COLUMNS E09 REPLACE EXISTING WINDOW PER SCHEDULE REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 133 (E) LAWN BOWLING FIELD1' - 10"1' - 10"9"E01 E01 E01E02E02 E03 E03 E04E06E06 E06 E06 E05 E07 E07 E08 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 1/4" = 1'-0" 2017 A3.14 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS RENDERING 06/23/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"EAST ELEVATION 1 RAILING- METAL; POWDER COATED BLACK WALL- PAINT COLOR BENJAMIN MOORE; JACK AND THE BEANSTALK WALL- PAINT COLOR BENJAMIN MOORE; DESERT GREEN WALL- PAINT COLOR BENJAMIN MOORE; CEDAR GROVE ELEVATION KEYNOTES E01 CONCRETE RAMP, SEE PLANS E02 CONCRETE STAIRS, SEE PLANS E03 POWDER COATED BLACK METAL RAILING E04 POWERWASH & REPAINT EXTERIOR- COLORS TO MATCH EXISTING PER ARCHITECT'S APPROVAL E05 REPLACE EXISTING DOOR PER SCHEDULE E06 STOREFRONT WINDOWS & DOORS TO REMAIN E07 CONCRETE OVERPOUR TO BE PROVIDED FOR AN ACCESSIBLE TRANSITION @ ENTRY DOOR- 2% SLOPE MAX. FOR DRAINAGE E08 FRAMED COLUMN W/ STUCCO FINISH- PAINT TO MATCH EXISTING COLUMNS E09 REPLACE EXISTING WINDOW PER SCHEDULE WALL- PAINT COLOR BENJAMIN MOORE; GREENWICH VILLAGE TRIM- PAINT COLOR BENJAMIN MOORE; STORMY SKY 134 A3.112 6 3 5 A3.11 4 K14 K17 2' - 0"4' - 1"13' - 1"5' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"4' - 2"2' - 6"3' - 0"2' - 0"3' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 6"1' - 6"2' - 0"8' - 0"0' - 6" 2' - 0"6' - 1"7' - 0"ø 5 ' - 0 " ø 5 ' - 0 " 5' - 0" KITCHEN STORAGE 3 8' - 0"7' - 0"6' - 0"ALIGN W/ SOFIT ABOVE 2' - 1"3' - 0"2' - 0"3' - 0"3' - 0"2' - 1"2' - 0" 3' - 0"3' - 0" 3' - 0"3' - 0" 2' - 0"2' - 6"3' - 0"K01 K03 K04 K05 K06 K11 K12 K12 K02 K10 K08 K13 K20 K19 K20 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 3/8" = 1'-0" 2017 A3.15 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS RENDERING 06/23/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE K13 KOHLER PURIST K-24982 FAUCET; VIBRANT STAINLESS K01 / K02 VIKING 5 SERIES STOVE & HOOD; STAINLESS STEEL K06 VIKING 5 SERIES OVEN; STAINLESS STEEL K07 VIKING 5 SERIES REFRIGERATOR; STAINLESS STEEL K14 PORCELANOSA TILE; CONCRETE GREY NATURE K19 MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE, ECOVEIL SHEER; METAL K15 ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE TILE; BLANCO IN MATTE WALL- ACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE; THORNTON SAGE K12 CAESARSTONE; EMPIRIA WHITE K20 KARMAN, FORTE, ULTRA MATTE ACRYLIC; METALIC SILVER K03 / K04 VIKING 5 SERIES MICROWAVE & WARMING DRAWER; STAINLESS STEEL K05 VIKING 5 SERIES DISHWASHER; STAINLESS STEEL SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"KITCHEN MATERIAL PLAN 1 KITCHEN KEYNOTES K01 30" GAS RANGE, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K02 30"x18" HOOD, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K03 24" WIDE UNDERCOUNTER MICROWAVE, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING DRAWERMICRO OVEN 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K04 30" WARMING DRAWER, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K05 24"x24" UNDERCOUNTER DISHWASHER, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 524 MODEL OR APPROVED EQ. K06 30" ELECTRIC OVEN, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES VSOE350 OR APPROVED EQ. K08 STAINLESS STEEL UNDER-MOUNT SINGLE BOWL KITCHEN SINK W/ GRABAGE DISPOSAL, KOHLER VAULT K-3821-3 OR APPROVED EQ. K10 24"x24" PENAL-WARE 1630 SERIES STAINLESS STEEL MOP SINK OR APPROVED EQ. K11 30" WIDE ADA COMPLIANT WORK SPACE W/ NO BASE CABINET FOR KNEE & TOE CLEARANCE. K12 36" HIGH, STONE TOP COUNTER, TYP. @ KITCHEN, CAESARSTONE EMPIRA WHITE OR APPOVED EQ. K13 KOHLER PURIST K-24982 FAUCET, VIBRANT STAINLESS- OR APPROVED EQ. K14 FLOOR TILE, PORCELANOSA, CONCRETE GREY NATURE 12X24 OR APPROVED EQ. K15 WALL TILE, ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE, BLANCO IN MATTE OR APPROED EQ. K17 ARMTRONG LUX PLANK W/ RIGID CORE- GROVELAND NATURAL; OR APPROVED EQ. K18 STONE COUNTERTOP WATERFALL OVER EDGE K19 MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE SYSTEM, ECOVEIL SHEER, METAL- OR APPROVED EQ.; SEE INTERIOR ELEVATION FOR WALL LOCATION K20 KARMAN, FORTE, ULTRA MATTE ACRYLIC, COLOR METALIC SILVER OR APPROVED EQ. 135 B05 B06 B06B06 B06 B01 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 3/8" = 1'-0" 2017 A3.16 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS RENDERING 06/23/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE B02 LARGE KOVACS BOWL P592-3; COPPER BRONZE PATINA B03 EMPIRE WALL SCONSE; MODERN BRASS WINDOW COVERING- MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE, ECOVEIL SHEER; METAL B06 ACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE; THORNTON SAGE B01 ARMSTRONG LUXE PLANK; GROVELAND NATURAL TRIM- ACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE; STORM AF-700 B05 PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE; WHITE DIAMOND SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"BALLROOM SOUTH Copy 1 1 136 A3.12 4 5 2 3 A3.12 8 9 6 7 A3.12 12 11 10 13 R20R20R23 213 SF WOMEN'S RESTROOM 182 SF MEN'S RESTROOM ø 5 ' - 0 " ø 5 ' - 0 " ø 5 ' - 0 "2' - 0" MIN.2' - 0"2' - 0"5' - 0" 1' - 6" MIN.1' - 9"4' - 0" 5' - 7"1' - 10"5' - 0" MIN.5' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"2' - 0" MIN.2' - 0"1' - 0"2' - 6"1' - 5 1/2"4' - 11"8' - 2 1/2"6' - 4 1/2" 2' - 0" MIN.6' - 0"5' - 0"2' - 6"1' - 3"EQ EQ EQ EQ 0' - 10 1/2"PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 3/8" = 1'-0" 2017 A3.17 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS RENDERING 06/23/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE MEN'S RESTROOM SINKWOMEN'S RESTROOM SINK FLOOR- PORCELANOSA TILE; CONCRETE GREY NATURE COUNTER- CAESARSTONE; NOBLE GREY FIXTURE- TOTO URINAL WALL- ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE TILE; BLANCO IN MATTE FIXTURE- TOTO TOILET WALL- ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE TILE; GRIS IN GLOSS FIXTURE- TOTO CLEAN DRY HIGH SPEED HAND DRYER; STAINLESS STEEL FIXTURE- RADLEY VERGE ZEN AUTOMATIC FAUCET; STAINLESS STEEL WALL- ACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE; THORNTON SAGE FIXTURE- KOHLER VERTICYL SINK; WHITE SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"RESTROOM MATERIAL PLAN 1 137 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 2017 A3.13 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS MATERIALS 06/16/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL BALLROOM FLOOR- ARMSTRONG LUXE PLANK; GROVELAND NATURAL WINDOW COVERING- MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE, ECOVEIL SHEER; METAL WALL- ACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE; THORNTON SAGE KITCHEN FIXTURE- KOHLER PURIST K-24982 FAUCET; VIBRANT STAINLESS APPLIANCE- VIKING 5 SERIES STOVE & HOOD; STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCE- VIKING 5 SERIES OVEN; STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCE- VIKING 5 SERIES REFRIGERATOR; STAINLESS STEEL FLOOR- PORCELANOSA TILE; CONCRETE GREY NATURE WINDOW COVERING- MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE, ECOVEIL SHEER; METAL RESTROOM FLOOR- PORCELANOSA TILE; CONCRETE GREY NATURE COUNTER- CAESARSTONE; NOBLE GREY FIXTURE- TOTO URINAL EXTERIOR CONCRETE RAILING- METAL; POWDER COATED BLACK WALL- ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE TILE; BLANCO IN MATTE WALL- PAINT COLOR BENJAMIN MOORE; JACK AND THE BEANSTALK WALL- ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE TILE; BLANCO IN MATTE FIXTURE- TOTO TOILET WALL- ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE TILE; GRIS IN GLOSS FIXTURE- TOTO CLEAN DRY HIGH SPEED HAND DRYER; STAINLESS STEEL FIXTURE- RADLEY VERGE ZEN AUTOMATIC FAUCET; STAINLESS STEEL REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE WALL- ACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE; THORNTON SAGE WALL- ACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE; THORNTON SAGE COUNTER- CAESARSTONE; EMPIRIA WHITE CABINET- KARMAN, FORTE, ULTRA MATTE ACRYLIC; METALIC SILVER FIXTURE- KOHLER VERTICYL SINK; WHITE WALL- PAINT COLOR BENJAMIN MOORE; CEDAR GROVE WALL- PAINT COLOR BENJAMIN MOORE; CAMBRIDGE GREEN LIGHTING LARGE KOVACS BOWL P592-3; COPPER BRONZE PATINA LIGHTING EMPIRE WALL SCONSE; MODERN BRASS 138 B01 B06 B06 B06B05 B05 B06 B06B06 B06 B01 B06 B06B05 B04B04 B04B02 B04 B04 B04 B04 B04 B06B06B06B06B05 B01 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 3/8" = 1'-0" 2017 A3.10 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS INTERIOR ELEVATIONS- BALLROOM 06/16/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"BALLROOM WAST 4 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"BALLROOM SOUTH 1 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"BALLROOM EAST 3 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"BALLROOM NORTH 2 BALLROOM KEYNOTES B01 ARMSTRONG FLORING LUXE PLANK; GROVELAND NATURAL OR APPROVED EQ. B02 CERTAINTEED ECOPHON SOLO PANEL, WHITE- SEE RCP B04 MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE SYSTEM, ECOVEIL SHEER, METAL- OR APPROVED EQ. B05 PAINT- WHITE OR APPROVED EQ. B06 ACCENT PAINT- LIGHT GREEN OR APPROVED EQ. REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 139 A3.112 6 3 5 A3.11 4 K14 K17 2' - 0"3' - 0"2' - 0"3' - 0"3' - 0"4' - 0"3' - 0"3' - 6"2' - 6" 2' - 0" 3' - 0" 2' - 0" K05 K13 K02 K01 K15 3' - 0" K12 2' - 0" 3' - 0"3' - 0" 2' - 0"5' - 1"2' - 0" K03 K04 K06 K18 2' - 0"4' - 1"3' - 0" 2' - 0"3' - 0"3' - 0"3' - 0" 2' - 0" 3' - 0" 2' - 0" K01 K02 K15 1' - 6" 2' - 10"3' - 0" K04 K06 K15 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 3/8" = 1'-0" 2017 A3.11 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS INTERIOR ELEVATIONS- KITCHEN 06/16/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"ENLARGED KITCHEN MATERIAL PLAN 1SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"KITCHEN WES 2 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"KITCHEN NORTH 6 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"KITCHEN EAST 1 3 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"KITCHEN SOUTH 5 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"KITCHEN EAST 2 4 KITCHEN KEYNOTES K01 30" GAS RANGE, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K02 30"x18" HOOD, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K03 24" WIDE UNDERCOUNTER MICROWAVE, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING DRAWERMICRO OVEN 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K04 30" WARMING DRAWER, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES OR APPROVED EQ. K05 24"x24" UNDERCOUNTER DISHWASHER, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 524 MODEL OR APPROVED EQ. K06 30" ELECTRIC OVEN, STAINLESS STEEL, VIKING 5 SERIES VSOE350 OR APPROVED EQ. K08 STAINLESS STEEL UNDER-MOUNT SINGLE BOWL KITCHEN SINK W/ GRABAGE DISPOSAL, KOHLER VAULT K-3821-3 OR APPROVED EQ. K10 24"x24" PENAL-WARE 1630 SERIES STAINLESS STEEL MOP SINK OR APPROVED EQ. K11 30" WIDE ADA COMPLIANT WORK SPACE W/ NO BASE CABINET FOR KNEE & TOE CLEARANCE. K12 36" HIGH, STONE TOP COUNTER, TYP. @ KITCHEN, CAESARSTONE EMPIRA WHITE OR APPOVED EQ. K13 KOHLER PURIST K-24982 FAUCET, VIBRANT STAINLESS- OR APPROVED EQ. K14 FLOOR TILE, PORCELANOSA, CONCRETE GREY NATURE 12X24 OR APPROVED EQ. K15 WALL TILE, ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE, BLANCO IN MATTE OR APPROED EQ. K17 ARMTRONG LUX PLANK W/ RIGID CORE- GROVELAND NATURAL; OR APPROVED EQ. K18 STONE COUNTERTOP WATERFALL OVER EDGE K19 MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE SYSTEM, ECOVEIL SHEER, METAL- OR APPROVED EQ.; SEE INTERIOR ELEVATION FOR WALL LOCATION K20 KARMAN, FORTE, ULTRA MATTE ACRYLIC, COLOR METALIC SILVER OR APPROVED EQ. REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 140 A3.12 4 5 2 3 A3.12 8 9 6 7 A3.12 12 11 10 13 R20R20R2380"42"4"34"R13 R05 R06 R03 R22 R21 46"34"48" MAX.R03 R13 R07 R01 R21 R08 R08 R21 R01 R01 R01 34"46"10"R01 R05R04 R13 R21 3' - 8"R02 R01 R21 R01 R01 R08 R21 R21 46"34"2' - 0" R21 R03 R13 5' - 0"5' - 2"42"38"5' - 8"1' - 0"1' - 0"6' - 8"48" MAX.R02 R02 R13 R07 R22R21 R21 4" 34" R13 R21 R21 R03 R13 42"4"34"42"4"34"R22 R05 R06R03 R13R1348" MAX.46"4"34"R07 R21 R05 R04 R13 PROJECT #:SHEET #: SHEET NAME: SHEET ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: DRAWING SET:SCALE: PROJECT ADDRESS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHT. __ OF__ FILE NUMBER DATE ADJ. , QUAD. No. , ELEV. BENCH MARK: DATE BUILDING #: PLANS PREPARED BY: ENGINEER NAME, RCE LICENSE No.STA T E OF C A L IF O RNIALICEN S E D ARCHIT E CTNO. C 9412 REN. 5/31/21 STEPHEN M. ALBERT SHEET SIZE: 30" X 42" ARCH E1 DO NOT SCALE 3/8" = 1'-0" 2017 A3.12 CITY REVIEW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS INTERIOR ELEVATIONS- RESTROOM 06/16/21 861 VALLEY DR. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 CIP 698--CLARK BUILDING REMODEL SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"ENGLARGED RESTROOM MATERIAL PLAN 1 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"WOMEN'S RESTROOM WEST 9 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"WOMEN'S RESTROOM NORTH 6 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"WOMEN'S RESTROOM EAST 7 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"WOMEN'S RESTROOM SOUTH 8 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"MEN'S RESTROOM SOUTH 4 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"MEN'S RESTROOM WEST 5 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"MEN'S RESTROOM NORTH 2 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"MEN'S RESTROOM EAST 3 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"WOMEN'S VANITY SOUTH 12 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"WOME'S VANITY WEST 13 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"WOMEN'S VANITY NORTH 10 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"WOMEN'S VANITY EAST 11 RESTROOM KEYNOTES R01 WATER CLOSET, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 2|ACC.3 "ULTRA LOW FLUSH" TYPE TOILET: MAX 1.28 GAL/FLUSH (TOTO CT705ULN(G) OR APPROVED EQ.) 29" DEEP MAX, RECESSED TOTO ECOPOWER CONCEALED FLUSH VALVE OR APPROVED EQUAL R02 URINAL, "ULTRA HIGH EFFICIENCY" TYPE URINAL: MAX. 0.125 GAL/FLUSH (TOTO UT445U(V) W/ CONCEALED TOTO ECOPOWER FLUSH VALVE - ADA COMPLIANT, OR APPROVED EQ.) R03 COUNTERTOP, ADA COMPLIANT, MIN 27" KNEE CLR A.F.F., CAESARSTONE- NOBLE GREY OR APPROVED EQ. R04 UNDERMOUNT LAVATORY BASIN, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 2|ACC.2, KOHLER VERTICYL MODEL NO. K-2882-0, WHITE OR APPROVED EQ R05 LAVATORY FAUCET, AUTOMATIC, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 7|ACC.1, BRADLEY VERGE ZEN SERIES S53-3700 OR APPROVED EQ. R06 SOAP DISPENSER, DECK MOUNTED, AUTOMATIC, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 7|ACC.1, BRADLEY VERGE ZEN SERIES 6-3700 OR APPROVED EQ. R07 HAND DRYER, ADA COMPLIANT, SEE 7,8|ACC.1, TOTO CLEAN DRY HIGH SPEED HAND DRYER HDR111#SS R08 HANDICAP GRAB BAR, ICC 11B COMPLIANT, SEE 3,5|ACC.2 R09 SEAT-COVER DISPENSER, SANITARY NAPKIN DISPOSAL, TOILET TISSUE DISPENSER- BOBRICK CLASSIC SERIES PARTITION-MOUNTED B-357 OR APPROVED EQ. R10 SEAT-COVER DISPENSER, SANITARY NAPKIN DISPOSAL, TOILET TISSUE DISPENSER, ADA COMPLIANT- BOBRICK CLASSIC SERIES RECESSED B-3574 OR APPROVED EQ. R11 SEAT-COVER DISPENSER, TOILET TISSUE DISPENSER, ADA COMPLIANT- BOBRICK CLASSIC SERIES RECESSED B-34745 OR APPROVED EQ. R12 SEAT-COVER DISPENSER, TOILET TISSUE DISPENSER- BOBRICK CLASSIC SERIES RECESSED B-3474 OR APPROVED EQ. R13 FRAMELESS MIRROR; SIZE AND HEIGHT PER INTERIOR ELEVATIONS R20 FLOOR TILE, PORCELANOSA, CONCRETE GREY NATURE 12X24 OR APPROVED EQ. R21 WALL TILE, ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE, BLANCO IN MATTE OR APPROED EQ. R22 WALL TILE, ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE, GRIS IN GLOSS OR APPROED EQ. R23 ARMTRONG LUX PLANK W/ RIGID CORE- GROVELAND NATURAL; OR APPROVED EQ. REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION DATE 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 CLARK COMMUNITY CENTER RENOVATION 171 VALLEY DRIVE (E) SIDEWALK (E) BASEBALL FEILD(E) LAWN BOWLING FEILD CLARK BUILDING COMMUNTY CENTERBUILDING TOTAL = 5,119 SFEXTENT OF ARCHITECTURAL SCOPENExterior Scope of WorkCOSMETIC UPGRADESACCESSIBILITY UPGRADES SOLAR ROOF ARRAY 172 VALLEY DRIVE (E) SIDEWALK (E) BASEBALL FEILD(E) LAWN BOWLING FEILD CLARK BUILDING COMMUNTY CENTERNACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVELACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVELAccessibility Upgrades 5 ADDITIONAL RAMPS KITCHEN ACCESSIBILITY RESTROOM ACCESSIBILITY173 VALLEY DRIVE (E) SIDEWALK (E) BASEBALL FEILD(E) LAWN BOWLING FEILD CLARK BUILDING COMMUNTY CENTERNAccessibility Upgrades TRASH ENCLOSURE KITCHEN AND STORAGE ACCESS 174 Ballroom Scope of WorkFLOORINGCEILING AND LIGHTING ACOUSTICSWINDOW SHADES AIR CONDITIONINGSTAGE AND AUDIO/VISUALREMOVE FIREPLACE LARGE KOVACS BOWL;COPPER BRONZE PATINAEMPIRE WALL SCONSE;MODERN BRASSWINDOW COVERING-MOTORIZED MECHO SHADE, ECOVEIL SHEER;METALACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE;THORNTON SAGEARMSTRONG LUXE PLANK;GROVELAND NATURALACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE;STORM AF-700PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE;WHITE DIAMOND175 STORAGE FOR APPROX. (25) 6' ROUND TABLES & 150 FOLDING CHAIRS STORAGE 1 STORAGE 2STORAGE 3BALLROOMEXISTING STRUCTUE ABOVE SPEAKER LOCATION 3 LIGHTING OPTIONSUsability and Flexibility 3 STORAGE LOCATIONS MOVABLE STAGE LIGHTING OPTIONS ADDED A/V EQUIPMENT176 KITCHENSTORAGE 3Kitchen Scope of WorkFLOORINGCEILING AND LIGHTING APPLIANCES WINDOW SHADES CABINETRY, COUNTERTOP, TILE VIKING 5 SERIES STOVE & HOODVIKING 5 SERIES OVENVIKING 5 SERIES REFRIGERATORPORCELANOSA TILE; CONCRETE GREY NATUREMOTORIZED MECHO SHADE, ECOVEIL SHEER;METALANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE TILE;BLANCO IN MATTEACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE;THORNTON SAGECAESARSTONE;EMPIRIA WHITEKARMAN, FORTE, ULTRA MATTE ACRYLIC;METALIC SILVER VIKING 5 SERIES MICROWAVE & WARMING DRAWERVIKING 5 SERIES DISHWASHER177 Restroom Scope of WorkFLOORINGCEILING AND LIGHTING FIXTURES COUNTERTOP, TILEREMOVE FIREPLACE FOR UPDATED FIXTURE COUNT AND ACCESSIBILITY PORCELANOSA TILE; CONCRETE GREY NATURETOTO URINAL ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE TILE;BLANCO IN MATTETOTO TOILET ANN SACKS ARCILLA RECTANGLE TILE;GRIS IN GLOSSTOTO CLEAN DRY HIGH SPEED HAND DRYER RADLEY VERGE ZEN AUTOMATIC FAUCETACCENT PAINT COLOR, BENJAMIN MOORE;THORNTON SAGE178 For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! 179 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0035 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 DESIGNATION OF A MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF FEE WAIVERS TO BE GRANTED FOR SPECIAL EVENTS HELD IN 2022 (Community Resources Manager Lisa Nichols) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council designate a maximum amount of $20,000 in fee waivers to be granted for special events held in 2022, as per the City’s Special Event Fee Waiver Policy. Executive Summary: The City’s Special Event Policy Guide,adopted by City Council in 2017,outlines policies and procedures required of event producers to hold an event on public property within the City of Hermosa Beach.An updated Special Event Fee Waiver Policy was included following its adoption by the City Council on October 10,2019.The Special Event Fee Waiver Policy requires City Council to annually designate a maximum amount of fee waivers that may be granted for special events held in each calendar year.As staff develops the 2022 calendar of events,the Parks,Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission’s (Commission)consideration of fee waiver requests must take place soon to ensure event producers have time to financially plan for their events. Therefore,staff requests City Council designate the maximum amount of fee waivers that can be applied to qualified events held in 2022. Background: The City’s Special Event Policy Guide (Attachment 1),adopted by City Council in 2017,outlines policies and procedures required of event producers to hold an event on public property within the City of Hermosa Beach.At its October 10,2019 meeting,City Council approved the Commission’s recommended Special Event Fee Waiver Policy. The policy provides the Commission the ability to approve the award of fee waivers through a grant process.As detailed in the policy,City Council is to annually affirm the maximum amount of grant funding available to the Commission to award to qualified events for the upcoming calendar year.City Council designated a maximum of $20,000 for events held in each of the last two, calendar years. Unfortunately,due to the COVID-19 pandemic,events were unable to be held in the 2020 calendar City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 7 powered by Legistar™180 Staff Report REPORT 22-0035 Unfortunately,due to the COVID-19 pandemic,events were unable to be held in the 2020 calendar year or from January through March of the 2021 calendar year.Therefore,no fee waivers were granted during these time periods.The fee waivers granted in the remainder of the 2021 calendar year, from April through December, can be found in Table 1 below: City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 2 of 7 powered by Legistar™181 Staff Report REPORT 22-0035 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 3 of 7 powered by Legistar™182 Staff Report REPORT 22-0035 At its October 12,2021 meeting,City Council approved an additional waiver of $23,542 for the Hermosa Holidays event organized for community-wide benefit by the Chamber of Commerce.This was a one-time waiver of two days of Pier Plaza Use Fees.Future requests for fee waivers would be handled through the formalized grant process per policy. Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description October 10, 2019 Council approves adoption of Special Event Fee Waiver Policy October 12, 2021 Council approves a one-time waiver of two days of Pier Plaza Use Fees for Hermosa Holidays event Discussion: The Special Event Policy Guide outlines the Special Event Fee Waiver policy and the level of fee waivers that can be awarded in addition to the types of fees that are eligible for fee waiver consideration, including: “Grants will be awarded up to a maximum of $2,500 per event or a 50 percent reduction of indirect City special event fees, whichever is the lesser amount.” Each organization that meets the qualifications of the grant policy,may receive the lesser amount of $2,500 or 50 percent of applicable special event fees (indirect costs)eligible for reduction.Fees applied toward the application fee,staff time,inspections,Police or Fire services,etc.are ineligible. Those fees that are eligible for fee reductions include daily permit fees,set-up and tear-down fees, etc. Included in Table 2 are the various special event fees categorized between indirect or direct fees: City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 4 of 7 powered by Legistar™183 Staff Report REPORT 22-0035 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 5 of 7 powered by Legistar™184 Staff Report REPORT 22-0035 As required in the Special Event Fee Waiver Policy,City Council must annually determine a maximum amount of fee waivers the Commission can award to qualifying events for each calendar year.The City Council designated the maximum of $20,000 in fee waiver grants for each of the 2020 and 2021 calendar years.As previously noted,grant funding was not awarded in 2020 and from January through March in 2021 due to event cancelations associated with COVID-19 precautionary measures. General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendation have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below: Parks and Open Space Element Goal 3. Community parks and facilities encourage social activity and interaction. Policy: •3.1 Community-friendly events.Encourage,permit,and support community group,nonprofit, or business organized events on City property that support physical activity,beach culture, and family-friendly social interactions. Goal 8.Special events at the beach are balanced to support community recreation and economic development without restricting coastal access or impacting the community. Policies: •8.2.Off-peak season events.Incentivize event producers to host special events during off- peak seasons through reduced fees or accommodating location/reserved area preferences. •8.6.Special event impact fees.Require special event applicants pay a fair share of costs associated with impacts on City services and facilities required to support special events. Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact associated with the recommended action is unknown since the 2022 Special Event Calendar continues to be developed and it is unknown at this time how many event producers intend to apply for this aid. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 6 of 7 powered by Legistar™185 Staff Report REPORT 22-0035 Attachments: 1.Special Events Policy Guide 2.Link to October 10, 2019 City Council Report 3.Link to October 12, 2021 City Council Report Respectfully Submitted by: Lisa Nichols, Community Resources Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 7 of 7 powered by Legistar™186 HERMOSA BEACH SPECIAL EVENTS POLICY GUIDE 187 1 This policy guide has been developed to clarify and carry out the City’s mission statement related to special events that occur on outdoor public spaces within the community. Cover Image: Hermosa Beach Murals Project - John Van Hamersveld Mission Statement Hermosa Beach strives to offer a safe and enjoyable environment for special events to take place in a way that balances resident and visitor needs. Special events in Hermosa Beach are celebrated for being community-friendly, enhancing local beach culture, and offering a myriad of benefits to the local community. The City of Hermosa Beach* works collaboratively with event operators in an efficient and clear manner to process and carry out permits in compliance with this policy. * “City of Hermosa Beach” collectively refers to City staff, Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission, City Manager, and City Council. City Contact Information The City of Hermosa Beach Department of Community Resources is available to assist and answer any questions related to the special events process: Website: www.hermosabeach.gov Phone: (310) 318-0280 Email: hbconnect@hermosabeach.gov Address: 710 Pier Avenue, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 188 2 Table of Contents General Information + Frequently Asked Questions..............................................................................................3 When is a special events permit required? How do I apply for a special events permit? Are private events allowed? What is the “Nothing Weekend”? How will this policy be enforced? Where are special events allowed? Use Classification + Impact Characteristics……………………………………………………………………………….…...…………………6 Impact Characteristics Matrix Pass-Through Events Pier Plaza Promotions Approval Guidelines + Requirements………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….7 Event Approval Findings Application Submittal Deadlines and Approval Process Peak Season Event Limits Simultaneous Use of North and South Volleyball Courts Pre/Post Event Meetings Accessibility Plan Site Plan, Equipment, and Signage Amplified Sound Food, Beverage, or Merchandise Sales Professional Filming Security Insurance Event Day Expectations Applicable Fees………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 Current Fee Schedule Application Fees Special Events Permit Fee Additional Fees Damage Deposit Refund/Cancellation Policy Compliance…...…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………12 Environmental Requirements Applicable Codes + Regulations Fee Waivers…...…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………13 Funding Limits Eligibility Approval Obligations Disqualification Long-term Agreements…...…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………15 Eligibility Term Limits Procedures Obligations 189 3 General Information + Frequently Asked Questions When is a special events permit required? Any organized event, activity, celebration, or function involving the use of the beach at which one hundred (100) or more persons are to be assembled, or use of outdoor city facilities, rights-of-way, or parkland at which twenty-five (25) or more persons are to be assembled requires a special events permit. Additionally, special events permits shall be required for any commercial or non-profit group requesting use of any outdoor area or public facility within the city. How do I apply for a special events permit? Applications for special events must be submitted using the online form on the City of Hermosa Beach website and questions may be directed toward the Department of Community Resources. Are private events allowed? All events located on the beach within the commercial zone, the Pier, or Pier Plaza must be open to spectators/general public free of charge. Participant entry fees are permissible. What is the “Nothing Weekend”? On at least one weekend during each summer season, the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission will recommend that no special events permits be issued. This means that any application for a special events permit that coincides with the designated “Nothing Weekend” will be asked to change dates in order for their event to be considered. How will this policy be enforced? The special events policy will be strictly enforced by Community Resources Department staff, Code Enforcement Officers, and the Police Department. Events, either permitted or unpermitted, found to be violating the City's rules or failing to comply with any of the requirements of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code may be subject to penalties or fines. Special events, and any of its participants, vendors, or spectators, found to have caused damage or be in violation of any City rules may be subject to greater deposits, regulation, or restrictions when submitting special events applications in the future. Where are special events allowed? To ensure adequate space and resources are available, and to limit potential disturbances to residents, special events are limited to the following locations: • South of Pier (Adjacent to the commercial area on the beach (between 10th Street and the pier); • North of the Pier (Adjacent to the commercial area on the beach (between the pier and 15th Street • Designated Surf Zone • Along The Strand (only allowed for races or events that are continuously moving); • Pier Plaza • Within a public right of way (please note that any event, race, or block party within the public right of way is subject to approval by the Chief of Police); • The following City Parks and Facilities o Valley Park: Corner of Gould and Valley Drive o Community Center: 710 Pier Avenue o Clark Field: 861 Valley Drive o South Park: 425 Valley Drive o Greenwood Park: PCH & Aviation o Edith Rodaway Park: Prospect & Hollowell Ave o The Greenbelt Events on the beach outside of the commercial area (between 10th and 15th Street) are not permitted. 190 4 Special Events Permitted Locations 191 5 Beach Special Event Boundaries 192 6 Use Classifications + Impact Characteristics Special events are evaluated based on a number of factors and will be categorized as a level I, II, or III event based on the information provided in the special events application. Once the information is submitted and reviewed by the Community Resources Department, City staff will determine the impact level of the event using the impact characteristics matrix. The impact level of the event will be used to determine: o applicable fees; o timing of application submittal; o requirements for pre event meeting and post event walk through; and o level of review for approval (City staff, Commission or City Council) Impact Characteristics Matrix If more than one option is applicable, the highest characteristic will be considered to determine the impact level. Characteristic Impact Level I Impact Level II Impact Level III Attendees and spectators total 100-500 501 – 1,999 2,000 or more Event has previously occurred in Hermosa Beach 3 or more years 1 or 2 years New event Event location(s) a park or the beach Pier or Pier Plaza Streets, the Strand, or public right of way Event season(s) Winter Spring or Fall Summer Event day(s) Monday - Thursday Friday, Saturday, or Sunday Holiday Total event days per year (including set-up and tear-down) 1-2 3-4 5 or more Events per year 1-2 3-4 5 or more Additional requests such as filming, reserved parking, fencing, stage, street closures, or amplified sound None 1-2 3 or more Impact Level 5 or more applicable = Impact Level I 2 or more applicable = Impact Level II 2 or more applicable = Impact Level III Pass-Through Events A pass-through event is exactly what the name implies, the event participants pass through the City of Hermosa Beach and the event does not start or end in Hermosa Beach. A special events application is required to be submitted and pass-through events must also go through the approval process required based on the impact level assigned to the event. Pier Plaza Promotions The Pier Plaza Promotion option is designed to provide companies or event sponsors a one-day promotional opportunity on Pier Plaza subject to a Pier Plaza use fee. These events must be strictly commercial product or service promotions and not special events. Companies or sponsors who request approval for this use will be required to submit a special events application. 193 7 Approval Guidelines + Requirements Event Approval Findings A special events permit may be issued upon finding that: 1. The applicant reimburses the City for all costs incurred by the City in connection with the event, including public safety, traffic control and monitoring. 2. The number of estimated attendees can be accommodated at the proposed location and surrounding area. 3. The applicant is capable and qualified to manage the event in a competent, professional manner in accordance with all conditions of approval. 4. Adequate provision has been made for satellite parking, shuttle transportation and traffic control (as requested and determined by City staff). 5. Adequate provision has been made for security, crowd control, ingress and egress, and clean-up. 6. The total number of days required for the event shall not exceed sixteen consecutive days. 7. The applicant provides required insurance, deposits, bonding and indemnification of the City. Application Submittal Deadlines and Approval Process Special Events Applications must be submitted as follows: • Level III events: Must be submitted no later than July 30 for the following calendar year. Will be subject to a public hearing by both the Parks and Recreation Commission and the City Council. Upon approval by the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission and City Council, permits will be processed and issued by the Community Resources Manager. o New events: Please note, any events that are new to Hermosa Beach will need to follow the approval process for impact level III events. • Level II events: Must be submitted at least ninety (90) days in advance of the event, but no earlier than October 15 of the prior calendar year. Upon Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission recommendation, the Community Resources Manager may process and issue permits. Should the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission recommend denial of a Special Event, that decision may be appealed to the City Council. • Level I events: Must be submitted at least thirty (30) days, but no earlier than October 15 of the prior calendar year. Level I events will be reviewed and permits will be issued by the Community Resources Manager. Should the Community Resources recommend denial of a Special Event, that decision may be appealed to the City Council. o Pier Plaza Promotions: Review and approval of Pier Plaza Promotion events will follow the same approval process as Level I events. The Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission and City Council will evaluate and recommend approval of Level III events and a “Nothing Weekend” first, and then will consider approval of Level II events. Events submitted earliest will be given priority for their preferred dates. Review Timeline Application Period Opens Last Day to Submit Application Commission Review City Council Review Level I October 15 (for following calendar year) 30 days prior to event n/a n/a Level II October 15 (for following calendar year) 90 days prior to event Beginning in December n/a Level III July 1 (for following calendar year) July 30 (for following calendar year) September Meeting – Public Hearing October Meeting – Public Hearing At the discretion of the Community Resources Manager, special events applications may be submitted and approved after the application submittal deadline has passed, provided: 194 8 • there are unforeseeable circumstances (memorial service, team victory celebration, need for minimal marketing/advertising) • the event does not exceed Peak Season Event Limits • the event can still meet all of the event approval findings (as noted on Page 9) The Community Resources Manager and the City’s Special Events Team will participate in the review and approval of event applicants submitted after the deadline has passed. The Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission will receive an update on the status of events submitted after the deadlines. City staff will provide both a calendar of all upcoming special events and a brief event wrap-up summary for special events to the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission and City Council (if required). Event organizers are expected to be present at the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission and City Council meetings (if required) where their event is scheduled to be reviewed. Peak Season Event Limits To balance coastal access with beach events, the beach/Pier Plaza area will be limited to the following number of events during the peak summer season (Memorial Day to Labor Day – approximately 100 days over the summer): o Maximum of 30 days used by Level III Events o Maximum of 40 days used by Level I and II Events, City Sponsored/Contracted Events, and Long-Term Agreement events (on days not used by Level III Events) Additionally, the monthly number of event limits for off-peak season (Labor Day to Memorial Day) will be limited to a maximum of 15 days used by events per month. Simultaneous Use of North and South Volleyball Courts One side of the North and South of Pier Volleyball courts will be required to remain open for general public use during special events occurring on weekends (exception provided for events that occur at the same time as City-sponsored classes utilizing the North or South of Pier Volleyball Courts) or at the discretion of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission and the City Council. Pre/Post Event Meetings Pre-event meetings and post-event walkthrough/evaluations with City staff and event producers may be required. A “pre-event meeting” may be scheduled anytime between 3 months to several weeks prior to the actual event date as determined by City staff. The goal of this meeting is to provide information to any and all City departments involved or impacted by your event. The Community Resources Department may require any event to have an “on-site meeting” prior to the event and a final site map must be presented at this time. City staff may require multiple meetings if the event details require further discussion or if additional information is requested. First-time events that expect to be recurring events may also be required to attend a “post-event meeting.” The Community Resources Department will invite representatives from other City Departments to these meetings if who may be involved or affected by your event. Permits may also specify a time for a “post-event walkthrough” where he applicant, event coordinator, or another authorized representative of the applicant is required to be present during the “post-event walkthrough” inspection, as staff will walk through the site and assess the condition it was left in. Failure to participate in pre or post meeting events, may jeopardize your approved event or future events in Hermosa Beach. Site Plan, Equipment, and Signage A detailed map schematic must be submitted to move forward with the review and approval process that includes the proposed location of the event, including all temporary facilities/structures/signage/equipment to be erected, ingress and egress, number and type of vehicles and whether existing structures/facilities are to be relocated or modified. Events requiring Building, Police, or Fire Department review, must include maps and plans that are drawn to scale. 195 9 A parking plan showing the number of public parking spaces to be occupied by the event organizers, the location of satellite parking lots to be used for attendee parking, arrangements for shuttle bus transportation, and plans for publicizing the availability of off-site public parking may also be required. Events that set up bleachers, stages higher than 2’ off the ground, fencing or other temporary structures will be subject to review and inspection by the City Building Official prior to the start of the event. Accessibility compliance will be required for seating, bleachers or any stages higher than 2’ off the ground. Pedestrian access shall be maintained and a layout plan may be required to ensure proper access and circulation. Events including promotional signs/banners, a frame signs, and other signage items shall not be placed on City facilities or premises without prior written approval from the City and must include a temporary sign/banner permit and site plan. Accessibility Plan It is the applicant’s responsibility to comply with all City, County, State and Federal disability access requirements applicable to the event, including the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). All indoor and outdoor sites, activities and programs must be accessible to persons with disabilities. Amplified Sound Amplified sound (Public Address system for announcements, etc.) is limited to the hours of 10:00 AM to 9:00 PM for up to a total of four hours in any day. Exceptions may be approved for special events, in conjunction with the Special Event approval. Events must comply with the City Noise Ordinance HBMC 8.24 and speakers must be facing westward (towards the ocean) at all times. Event producers are required to obtain an Amplified Sound Permit if the event intends to use a loudspeaker or sound amplifying equipment for the purpose of giving instructions, directions, lectures, or transmitting music. Requests should be noted when submitting a special events application to the Community Resources Department to ensure proper coordination with the Chief of Police. The Chief of Police will consider the following in the issuance of amplified sound permits: 1. The volume and intensity of the noise, particularly as it is experienced within a residence or place of business; 2. Whether the noise is prolonged and continuous; 3. How the noise contrasts with the ambient noise level; 4. The proximity of the noise source to residential and commercial uses; 5. The time of day; and 6. The anticipated duration of the noise Food, Beverage, or Merchandise Sales In accordance with HBMC Section 12.20.300, the sale of food, non-alcoholic beverages, or branded merchandise from the event producer on the beach are allowed pursuant to a special events permit approved by the City Council. The sale of any other commodity, merchandise, wares, products, or service on the beach or the strand is not allowed. Applicant is responsible for obtaining any applicable food or beverage permits. A Temporary Food Permit is required when selling, serving, giving away, or sampling food or consumable products, including water or other beverages, at a public event. Additionally, each food vendor at the event must also have a Temporary Food Permit. Different permits, policies and procedures depend on the classification and the number of days of the event. As part of the food handling requirements, applicants or event organizers are required to include public safety features in the event plans such as hand-washing sinks. The County of Los Angeles Department of Environmental Health issues food permits. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure all vendors have current permits. If the sale of alcohol is included in a special event application (requests for alcohol on the beach will not be approved), approval from the City Council is required and the applicant must request authorization from the State of California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC). A copy of the ABC License must be provided to the Community Resources Department prior to the issuance of a permit. City departments may place restrictions on the way in which alcohol is managed at a proposed event. 196 10 Professional Filming A Film Permit Application is required for any event utilizing professional filming equipment or recording activities resulting in commercial use. Information about professional filming permits can be obtained on the City of Hermosa Beach website. Security City staff or law enforcement may deem an activity warrants the presence of one or more Police Officers or security personnel and the cost of such services shall be borne by the applicant. Security personnel must be licensed, in uniform and are subject to approval by the City. Proof of obtaining the required security personnel must be provided to the Community Resources Manager at least two (2) weeks prior to the event. Portable Restrooms + Hand Sanitizing/Sink Facilities Events may be required to provide portable restrooms and hand-sanitizing/sink facilities. The cost of such services shall be borne by the applicant. The number of portable restrooms and hand-sanitizing/sink facilities required will be determined by City staff and factors such as the event location, total duration of the event, estimated attendance (participants and spectators), season the event takes place and whether food and beverage will be served will be considered. City staff will designate the location for any portable restrooms and hand-sanitizing/sink facilities required at the event location. Insurance At least ten (10) days prior to the event, applicants will provide the City with a certificate of insurance providing liability insurance naming the “City, its officers, employees, and agents as additional insured” (exact verbiage is required) with a minimum coverage of $2 million combined single limit coverage. The policy shall also contain the statement that the City will be notified thirty (30) calendar days prior to termination, reduction, cancellation, suspension, or expiration of the policy. Applicants and Event Organizers must agree to hold the City harmless and to indemnify the City. Approved events will require the authorized applicant or event organizer to sign a Hold Harmless Statement on the permit itself. Events with vendors or active participants require a vendor and or participant waiver that indemnifies the City. Event Day Expectations In order to immediately address any issues or changes that may arise during the course of an event, producers are responsible for: • Providing a cell phone number upon which City staff may contact the producer • Being available on-site or providing a designated contact at all times during the event. This includes agreement that producers (or their designated contact) will not actively participate in the event. • Maintaining copies of all applicable special events permits and any other permits issued by the City of Hermosa Beach on-site during the event. Applicable Fees All special events are subject to an application fee, special event category fees and additional fees established by resolution of the City Council and any additional costs incurred by the City on behalf of the event. Payment of special event fees is due upon receipt. The Community Resources Manager has the discretion to revoke a permit or place a hold on processing future event applications if all applicable fees are not paid in a timely manner. 197 11 Current Fee Schedule Event Categories Fee Category I • Less than 500 people Non-profit: $2 per registrant and roster or participants due to City Commercial: 70/30 split of proceeds and roster or participants due to City Category II • Impacts public areas for no longer than one (1) day including set-up/tear-down • Is conducted in the off-season (not between Memorial Day and Labor Day or on any holiday) • Participant plus spectator crowd more than 500 but less than 3,000 • Has no television coverage (except news) • A non-profit entity is the beneficiary of the net revenues (100%) • Does not meet any of the identifying criteria for a Category III or IV event $2,940 per event day Category III • Impacts public areas for more than one (1) day including set-up/tear- down • Participant plus Spectator crowd does not exceed 5,000 • Has no television coverage (except news) • Has more than $3,000 and less than $50,000 in prize money • Does not meet any of the identifying criteria for a Category IV event $3,235 per event day Category IV • Meets Category III Criteria and has one or more of the following: ▪ Has network television coverage ▪ Estimated participant/spectator crowds exceed 5,000 people ▪ Prize money in excess of $50,000 ▪ Charges admission to spectator ▪ Gross revenues in excess of $50,000 $5,882 per event day Additional Fees Fees Commercial Application Fee - non-refundable $924 Non-Profit Application Fee - non-refundable $616 Pass-Thru Application Fee - non-refundable $308 Amplified Sound Permit $181 Pier Plaza Use Fee $12,312 per event day Event Co-Sponsor $311 each Event Set-Up/Tear-Down $278 per location, per day Community Resources Staff $369 per day Parking Meter Space Fee $1.25 per hour (8am-8pm) $1.50 per hour (8pm-8am) Please note that fees may be updated at any time. Depending on event details additional fees may apply due to required staffing and/or services from the City of Hermosa Beach’s Building Division, Public Works Department and the Los Angeles County Fire Department. 198 12 Application Fees Upon review of the special events application, City staff will follow up to the event contact to collect payment of the application fee, which will be due immediately to continue the review and approval process. This fee will not be applied to special events permit fees and is non-refundable. Special Events Permit Fees Events are subject to a daily permit fee based on the designated event category level. Payment of applicable special event permit fees shall be due following event approval and must be submitted at least 10 days in advance of the scheduled event. Additional Fees The Community Resources Department will confirm the necessary permits during application review and will coordinate with applicants to secure permits and process fees from the appropriate City departments once the Special Event is approved by the appropriate review body. Additional fees may be required for: • the use of Pier Plaza and reservation of City Facilities • installation of street banners or temporary signs • reservation/use of public parking spaces • use of amplified sound • use of professional filming or still photography • presence of police, fire, community resources, or paramedic staff on site before, during or after event • application for business license Damage Deposit Monetary deposits, bonds and other security may be necessary to guarantee performance of all required conditions, clean-up and repair of any City property or facilities damaged as a result of the event. Events may be required to submit a deposit to cover any potential damage to City facilities. All or a portion of the deposit may be refunded upon post event inspection or sign-off by Public Works, Chief of Police, or other applicable City staff. Events will be billed for the costs to repair or replace any City property damaged as a result of the event if the damage exceeds the deposit provided. Refund/Cancellation Policy Once a permit is approved and issued, the special events permit and additional impact fees may be refunded when written notice is given to the Community Resources Department at least two weeks prior to the event date and provided that no staff services are incurred. If rain is predicted and the decision is made to cancel within two weeks prior to the event, no monetary refund will be given but City staff will work with event producers to re-schedule events to another available date. Compliance Environmental Requirements All events will be required to submit an environmental protection plan showing proposed compliance to reduce environmental impacts as part of the application form. Such measures may include, but shall not be limited to: • Waste recycling and reduction • Energy efficiency • Protection of the marine environment • Community education opportunities • Monitoring and reporting compliance with the environmental protection plan 199 13 Applicable Codes + Regulations The City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code governs the approval, review, and enforcement of Special Events. The Special Event Policy rules and regulations must be strictly adhered to and all pertinent City Ordinances shall be enforced. The sections of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code relevant to Special Events include: Title 8 – Health and Safety 8.24 Noise Control - http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/HermosaBeach/#!/HermosaBeach08/HermosaBeach0824.html 8.64 Ban on Polystyrene Food Service Ware – http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/HermosaBeach/#!/HermosaBeach08/HermosaBeach0864.html#8.64 Title 9 – Public Peace Morals and Welfare 9.28 Parties, Events and Gatherings on Private Property http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/HermosaBeach/#!/HermosaBeach09/HermosaBeach0928.html#9.28 Title 10 – Vehicles and Traffic 10.28 Loading and Unloading http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/HermosaBeach/#!/HermosaBeach10/HermosaBeach1028.html#10.28 10.32 Stopping, Standing and Parking http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/HermosaBeach/#!/HermosaBeach10/HermosaBeach1032.html#10.32 Title 12 Street, Sidewalks and Public Places 12.20 Beach and Strand Regulations http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/HermosaBeach/#!/HermosaBeach12/HermosaBeach1220.html#12.20 12.24 Municipal Pier http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/HermosaBeach/#!/HermosaBeach12/HermosaBeach1224.html#12.24 12.28 Parks, Playgrounds and Other Public Areas http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/HermosaBeach/#!/HermosaBeach12/HermosaBeach1228.html#12.28 Fee Waivers To support qualifying organizations, the City provides special event fee waiver grant opportunities to assist in its success by relieving the financial burden associated with the cost of the City’s special event fees. The Special Event Fee Waiver Grant Policy is intended for those events required to complete the annual application filing, review, and approval process. Events and organizations that qualify for a long-term agreement are not bound to the terms of this policy. Funding Limits The Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission (“Commission”) awards grant funding for qualified organizations that have received approval to hold their event in the City of Hermosa Beach. The annual award limit of the Special Event Fee Waiver Grant is approved by the City Council each fall for the upcoming calendar year. 200 14 Grants will be awarded up to a maximum of $2,500 per event or a 50% reduction of indirect City special event fees, whichever is the lesser amount. Awards may only be used toward indirect special event fees charged by the City; direct costs (i.e. application processing fee, inspections, staff time, Police or Fire services, etc.) are not eligible for consideration of this grant and organizations are required to pay those in full. A fee worksheet is included in the Fee Waiver Grant Application that further outlines those fees eligible under this grant. The minimum amount of requested special event fee waiver grants must total at least $250. Fee waivers will not be considered for events taking place between Memorial Day and Labor Day (peak season). Eligibility In order to be eligible to apply for a Special Event Fee Waiver Grant, the special event must have been successfully approved through its applicable approval process as outlined in the Special Event Policy Guide. Following approval of a special event, a completed Special Event Fee Waiver Grant Application is required to be submitted to the Community Resources Department at least 60 days prior to the event. Following a review to ensure the completeness of the application, the request will be included on an upcoming meeting of the Commission for its formal review and determination of grant award. Fee waivers may be granted when the Commission determines that the event is of significant value to the community or to a significant portion of its residents and provides a measurable community benefit. In addition, the organization producing the event must meet at least 1 (one) of the following criteria: 1) An organization that has a demonstrated community benefit to Hermosa Beach. 2) Hermosa Beach business that is not delinquent on city permits or fees. 3) Organizations that are producing returning events to the City of Hermosa Beach and can demonstrate: a. A community benefit (must complete the Community Benefit form); or b. A positive economic impact as a result of the event (must complete the Economic Impact Report with previous years’ event details). Activities specifically prohibited from receiving a fee waiver grant include those events that: • Promote, advocate or advance a political message or belief. • Projects or organizations who have unsatisfactorily fulfilled its obligations from previous Special Event Fee Waiver Grant awards. Approval The five (5) member Commission is tasked with reviewing and determining the level of Special Event Fee Waiver Grant award at one of their regular meetings held on the first Tuesday of each month beginning at 7:00pm. Consideration will include careful review of: • Special Event Fee Waiver Grant Application. • Community Benefit Form (if required). • Economic Impact Report (if required). • Successful fulfillment of previously awarded grant obligations. In addition, the Commission will consider the following evaluation criteria: • Whether the event serves, involves, and/or promotes Hermosa Beach, its residents, schools, and/or businesses. • Whether the event delivers substantive and measurable economic and community benefits to the City. • Whether the event enhances the quality of life to the Hermosa Beach community; offering recreational, cultural, social, and or and/or educational activities of interest to the community. The Commission’s decision to deny grant funding for specific events is appealable by the City Council. The City Council will not consider additional fee waiver considerations in addition to the maximum award amounts allowable through the Special Event Fee Waiver Grant program. Obligations Organization receiving grant funding through the Special Event Fee Waiver Grant program will be required to complete the following: 201 15 • Submission of a Grant Final Report within 30-days following the event. • A formal presentation to the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission at one of its regular meetings no more than 60-days following the event. The presentation shall include discussion of: o Number of attendees. o Beneficiary of funds raised by the event (if applicable). o Overview of event budget and financial outlook. Disqualification Failure to complete these requirements in accordance with this policy shall automatically disqualify the organization from submitting a future request to receive a Special Event Fee Waiver Grant for the remainder of the current calendar year plus one additional year. If any information submitted as part of the Special Event Fee Waiver Grant is found to be fraudulent, event approvals already granted for the remainder of the calendar year will be automatically revoked. While the organization will be permitted to reapply for approval of event(s) in the following calendar year, it will no longer be eligible to apply for Special Event Fee Waiver Grants. Long-term Agreements The City of Hermosa Beach recognizes the value in hosting a variety of beloved community events that help create a balanced and enjoyable events calendar for its residents. To support and develop a long- term approach to the scheduling of events, eligible events can qualify for a long-term agreement (LTA) with the City. Eligibility In order for an organization to be eligible for consideration of a long-term agreement, its event(s) must satisfactorily meet at least three of the following: □ The event(s) must qualify as an Impact Level II or III (per the Impact Worksheet), and at least one of the following: o Have a combined estimated total of 5,000 people in attendance; or o The event must be at least two (2) consecutive days (including setup and teardown). □ Have held its event in Hermosa Beach for at least three consecutive years and can demonstrate a positive and differentiated impact to the city including substantive and measurable economic and community benefits; □ The event must be produced by an organization that serves, involves, and/or promotes Hermosa Beach’s coastal lifestyle, its residents, schools, and/or businesses; and □ The organization or event producer must be able to demonstrate how its programs (outside of those provided at the event) provide a positive impact to the City including enhancements to quality of life to the Hermosa Beach community; or the offering of recreational, cultural, social, and/or educational activities of interest to the community. Upon request of an organization whose event does not satisfy one or more of the above eligibility criteria, the City Council may at a regular Council meeting authorize such organization to apply for an LTA where its event provides a demonstrable or differentiated benefit to the community or a service that the City would otherwise be unable to provide. Term Limits LTA’s shall be for no less than two (2) years but shall not exceed a maximum of three (3) years unless otherwise determined by the City Council. Procedures The following steps are required to guide the development and implementation of an LTA: 1. Submittal of an LTA Application and corresponding letter to the Community Resources Department explaining the organization’s qualifications (as outlined above). 202 16 2. Review and recommendation for City Council approval by the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission (Commission). 3. Review and approval by the City Council to begin LTA negotiations with Staff. 4. LTA negotiations and development. 5. Presentation of the final LTA to the City Council for approval. Obligations Organizations whose event(s) are approved through an LTA are required to provide a formal presentation to the Commission at one of its regular monthly meetings no more than 60-days prior AND 60-days following its event(s). The pre-event presentation shall include a general event overview including anticipated number of attendees; an overview of the event footprint and individualized setup; and its anticipated impact(s) to the community, etc. The post-event presentation shall include a general overview including the actual number of attendees; actual impact(s) to the community; and any event struggles and successes, etc. 203 204 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 DISCUSSION OF NEXT STEPS TOWARDS ACHIEVING THE CITY’S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GOALS AND CONSIDERATION OF COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION OPTIONS (Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council: 1.Discuss Community Choice Aggregation options as a means of reducing emissions to meet the City’s carbon neutrality goal; 2.Provide staff direction to return to Council with a fuller treatment of one or more Community Choice Aggregation options and/or authorize the City Manager to sign an authorization to proceed with Clean Power Alliance to conduct an applicant impact study for $10,000 (Attachment 5);and 3.Authorize a move to Southern California Edison’s 100 percent Green Rates for municipal facilities at an estimated annual cost of $15,000. Executive Summary: The City has a long history of addressing greenhouse gas (GHG)emissions,both to achieve sustainability and to lower City operational costs.PLAN Hermosa identifies the goals of reducing emissions from both municipal and community-wide operations and prescribes regular progress evaluations for measuring progress towards those goals.With this report,staff presents the established goals and presents some of the options available to make advancements towards those goals. Background: In 2006,the City of Hermosa Beach endorsed the U.S.Mayors Climate Protection Agreement (the “Cool Cities Program”),committing itself to aligning with the greenhouse gas emissions reductions spelled out in the Kyoto Protocol.This heralded a series of actions by the City Council to address GHG emissions reduction.These actions included development of a Sustainability Plan in 2011,and both a Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan and a Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan (Attachment 1)in 2016. PLAN Hermosa,completed in 2017,serves as the City’s General Plan,as well as its Climate Action Plan (CAP).This plan incorporates many of these strategies and details a course of action the City City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 10 powered by Legistar™205 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 should take to achieve its emission-reduction goals. The State has set goals for reducing GHG emissions through AB 32 and Executive Order (EO)S-3- 05 for local governments to achieve a 15 percent reduction below 2005 levels by 2020.PLAN Hermosa outlined the following City goals: 1.A Community emissions reduction target of at least 66 percent reduction below 2005 levels by 2040; and 2.A Municipal emission reduction target that meets or exceeds 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. Municipal emissions result from City-owned facilities and operations,while community emissions result from all the privately-owned facilities and activities in the City including residential and commercial.Understandably,the City has greater control over municipal emissions,while community emissions represent a much greater amount of emissions from a more complex mix of sources. PLAN Hermosa also requires the City evaluate its progress at five-year intervals and take corrective action as needed to stay on track to meet its municipal emissions reduction goals.Inventories of municipal and community emissions were performed in 2015 by the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG)comparing the years 2005 and 2012 (Attachment 2).These inventories show the following progress towards the City’s goals: ·The community of Hermosa Beach decreased emissions 7.7 percent from 2005 to 2012,from 137,160 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) to 126,611 MTCO2e; ·Under the Adjusted Business-as-Usual (BAU)forecast,community emissions will be 111,690 MTCO2e in 2020 and 94,162 MTCO2e in 2035.These emissions levels are 19 percent lower in 2020 than 2005 and 31 percent lower than 2005 by 2035; and ·Municipal emissions have decreased 9 percent from 2005 to 2012,from 1,501 MTCO2e to 1,372 MTCO2e. Since then,the City has implemented many additional emissions reductions measures.These measures include: ·Installation of additional electric vehicle chargers for both the public and for City fleet.The City now maintains 34 chargers citywide, 28 of which are for public use; ·Installation of a 99 kilowatt (kW)solar photovoltaic system on the Community Center.The installation cost the City approximately $200,000,but has saved the City almost $70,000 in electricity costs to date while reducing energy use by more than half; ·Retrofit of over 900 streetlights from low-pressure sodium vapor bulbs to LED technology, reducing energy consumption by approximately 360,000 kilowatt hours (kWh)over the last City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 2 of 10 powered by Legistar™206 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 reducing energy consumption by approximately 360,000 kilowatt hours (kWh)over the last three years; and ·The City revised its Clean Fleet policy in 2017 to align with the City’s municipal carbon neutral plan and commit to a progressive transition to zero and low-emissions vehicles and equipment. Despite this progress,the City must do more to ensure achievement of the emissions reduction goals adopted in PLAN Hermosa.Due to the COVID-19 pandemic,City staff was unable to dedicate the resources necessary to perform the anticipated 2020 assessment of progress towards municipal emissions reductions.Auspiciously,the SBCCOG has begun work on new emissions inventories for its member agencies.Expected to be completed by Summer 2022,this inventory will address community emission sources.Additional municipal inventory analysis is under discussed.These inventories should capture the reductions resulting from the major energy efficiency projects mentioned above and help further illustrate both the City’s progress and any need for further reductions. Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description November 18, 2014 Hosted Study Session and approved Feasibility Study to Explore formation of a CCA February 24, 2015 Accepted Carbon Neutral Municipal Plan August 22, 2017 Adopted Plan Hermosa November 6, 2021 Hosted Council Retreat to discuss emissions reductions strategies and directed staff to return to Council with CCA options and recommendations Discussion: At its November 6,2021 retreat,City Council focused on the topic of City emissions reductions goals and strategies.At that meeting,there was an extensive discussion of CCA including a presentation from the Clean Power Alliance.As described in the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan and in PLAN Hermosa,CCA is potentially one of the most impactful options the City has in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.Below is a discussion of CCA,the options available to the City,and recommended next steps. Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) CCA was made possible in California in 2002 with the passing of AB117 (Migden).CCA provides public agencies,such as the City,the opportunity to procure their own energy for their customers-the City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 3 of 10 powered by Legistar™207 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 public agencies,such as the City,the opportunity to procure their own energy for their customers-the residents and businesses in their jurisdiction.CCA can purchase power and sell it to its customers, utilizing the infrastructure (poles and wires)of the existing Investor-owned Utility (IOU).In Hermosa Beach,the IOU is Southern California Edison (SCE).This results in customer bills that include both the IOUs delivery costs and the CCA’s energy (“generation”)costs.The IOU would typically continue to provide customer billing with a description of the CCA’s charges included. One of the biggest benefits a CCA offers is the ability to control the energy portfolio.This has been used most commonly to increase the percentage of renewable energy in the portfolio compared to that currently offered by the IOUs.Another important feature of a CCA is that once a public agency chooses to form or join a CCA,every customer within the agency’s jurisdiction is automatically enrolled into the program.The agency sets a default initial renewable energy level for both its municipal accounts and all other community accounts.Customers then have the option of opting out of the CCA entirely and going back to their original IOU for energy.Customers also have the option of changing their individual renewable energy level or remaining at the original default level set by the jurisdiction.The public agency also has the option of changing its citywide default renewable energy level if necessary. Hermosa Beach was one of the first cities in the South Bay to seriously consider the CCA model.As early as 2014,with its work on a Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan,the City identified a CCA as a viable strategy for reducing the City’s overall carbon emissions.At the time,the only established CCA in Southern California was Lancaster Choice Energy which was also the first to be formed as a standalone CCA.Most CCAs in California are formed as Joint Power Authorities (JPA)between multiple public agencies.A number of CCAs have been operating successfully in Northern California since 2010 including California’s first CCA, Marin Clean Energy. Since these early considerations of a CCA,the City has hosted study sessions on the topic and staff has produced reports concerning the topic of CCA.At its November 10,2015 meeting,City Council gave staff direction to pursue two avenues for implementing Community Choice Aggregation:1)as part of the Los Angeles County JPA model (which evolved into Clean Power Alliance)and 2)as a standalone CCA in partnership with Lancaster Choice Energy (Attachment 3).At that meeting,the Council authorized a consulting agreement between Hermosa Beach and the City of Lancaster for a feasibility study and preparation of an Implementation Plan. In June 2016,a draft technical feasibility study was completed and presented to City Council at a special study session.Following a discussion of the results,City Council directed staff to continue pursuing establishment of a City of Hermosa Beach CCA-Hermosa Beach Choice Energy (HBCE). Council also requested information on the timing and costs associated with the Los Angeles County CCA Program. Much of the discussion at the time centered on potential risk to the City of forming its own CCA and associated costs.Amidst this discussion,in September 2016,Council approved an Ordinance and City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 4 of 10 powered by Legistar™208 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 associated costs.Amidst this discussion,in September 2016,Council approved an Ordinance and associated Implementation Plan and Statement of Intent allowing for the formation of a Hermosa Beach CCA (Attachment 4).Though it was made clear by Council that this was not a commitment to form a CCA,the implementation was filed with the California Public Utilities Commission to allow the City the option to proceed with the process. Ultimately,the City decided against forming or joining a CCA at the time.In 2017,the County’s CCA program became the Clean Power Alliance and now has 32 member agencies,including neighboring Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach. Current CCA Options Currently, there are three feasible options for the Hermosa Beach to become part of a CCA: 1.Form its own standalone CCA; 2.Join CalChoice, a hybrid CCA model affiliated with Lancaster Choice Energy; or 3.Join Clean Power Alliance. There would be significant administrative and financial burdens associated with formation of a new CCA.Though all the revenue of the CCA would go directly to the City of Hermosa Beach in this scenario,so would all potential risk.Though most likely operated by contractors and consultants,City staff would be required to oversee these operations and interface between Council and the CCA. This would require additional, specialized City staff to administer the program. CalChoice provides a hybrid CCA option in which the City would technically have its own CCA,but would be overseen administratively by Lancaster Choice Energy.CalChoice has a team of consultants that handles administration and energy procurement for its members,and each member pays a fee for these services.The City would have total control over rate-setting,branding,billing and programs.CalChoice personnel have indicated over ongoing discussions that Hermosa Beach would likely not be a viable member for CalChoice due to the City’s small size and would instead be encouraged to partner with another larger agency to join. Clean Power Alliance is the largest CCA in California,covering 32 agencies in Los Angeles and Ventura counties.Clean Power Alliance is a JPA and each member agency has a representative on the Board of Directors.The JPA format relieves the member agencies from any liability to their general funds.The Board of Directors determines the programs,rates,and policies of the JPA with the guidance from Clean Power Alliance staff.Current Clean Power Alliance program offerings include:solar plus clean backup power for critical member agency facilities;rebates for publicly accessible electric vehicle chargers;demand response incentives for residential and commercial smart technologies;and community solar for customers in disadvantaged communities.Clean Power Alliance handles all customer billing and administration for its members though each member’s City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 5 of 10 powered by Legistar™209 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 Alliance handles all customer billing and administration for its members though each member’s governing board determines its agency’s default renewable energy rates.Clean Power Alliance currently offers three energy options:Lean Power (40 percent clean energy,similar to SCE’s base product),Clean Power (50 percent clean energy),and 100 percent Green Power (100 percent renewable energy). Based on the City’s 2016 feasibility study,as well as more current information,the table below illustrates some of the risks and benefits associated with these three CCA options: CCA OPTION RISK AUTONOMY COST Standalone CCA High–all cost and revenue tied to General Fund High–run entirely by City. High–significant initial costs but long-term revenue potential Hybrid CCA– CalChoice High–all cost and revenue tied to General Fund Moderate– CalChoice consultants handle admin. and procurement High–significant initial costs but long-term revenue potential. Ongoing fees to CalChoice Clean Power Alliance Low–no connection to General Fund. Customers pay direct. Low–City has one vote on Board of Directors Low–after feasibility study, no additional costs. The most likely risk associated with CCA is based on the potential for errors made in forecasting energy needs and costs.If Hermosa Beach had its own CCA with its own unique energy needs, forecasting and purchasing supplies would be critically important.In the CCA model,there is no real threat of outages due to underestimating energy loads,but there could be exorbitant costs associated with procuring energy in real-time in the event of an unexpected shortfall.Because the CCA would be connected to the General Fund,any potential shortfalls experienced in the stand- alone CCA model could impact the City’s overall budget. Clean Power Alliance’s combination of low-risk with cooperative local control has made it a popular option among local agencies,including the neighboring cities of Redondo Beach and Manhattan Beach.Clean Power Alliance is now the State’s largest CCA and is currently accepting new members.This process includes a required feasibility study at a one-time cost of $10,000.Manhattan Beach recently changed its default energy level so that now all customers are at a default level of City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 6 of 10 powered by Legistar™210 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 Beach recently changed its default energy level so that now all customers are at a default level of 100 percent renewable energy.Redondo Beach voted in December 2021 to change the default level for its customers to 100 percent renewable energy effective October 1,2022.Individual customers have the option of choosing lower clean energy content or opting out of the program altogether and returning to paying SCE for both generation and delivery costs. From 2018 through 2020,Clean Power Alliance’s rates were 1-2 percent less expensive than SCE’s for Lean Power,at parity with SCE for Clean Power,and 7-9 percent more expensive for 100 percent Green Power.In 2021,the Lean Power and Clean Power rates became more expensive than SCE due to an increase in the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA)(commonly referred to as the “exit fee”)and market conditions that forced CPA to purchase system power at historically high prices.The 100 percent Green Power rate remained around the nine percent premium as falling prices for renewable energy offset the rise in system power prices.Clean Power Alliance expects that in March 2022 all three Clean Power Alliance rate products will be less expensive than SCE if the PCIA goes down and SCE generation rates go up.The Clean Power Alliance Board conducts an annual rate setting process in June,at which time the rate comparisons will likely return to levels similar to the 2018-2020 period for Lean and Clean,with a 3-4 percent premium for 100 percent Green. In the short term,the City also has the option of subscribing to SCE’s 100 percent renewable option for its municipal accounts.This would ensure the City eliminates virtually all GHG emissions associated with energy consumption at City facilities.An initial estimate from SCE shows that this option would increase the City’s annual energy bill by approximately $11,000.The City’s annual cost may decrease or increase slightly should it later join Clean Power Alliance’s 100 percent Green Power rate for municipal facilities,depending on SCE and Clean Power Alliance 100 percent Green rates at that time. Additional Strategies Onsite generation of electricity is another means for the City to lower emissions and reduce its energy consumption.If the City were to procure 100 percent renewable energy,onsite generation would not contribute to GHG emissions reductions resulting from electricity use,but it could potentially offset emissions from other sources that cannot be easily made carbon neutral (e.g., natural gas use,emissions from employee commuting,etc.).This could also reduce energy costs and allow the possibility of contributing power back to the grid and offer some potential revenue when conditions allow. Photovoltaic solar power systems are the most common type of onsite generation.The solar installation on the Community Center has cut offsite electricity consumption for the facility by over half.Additionally,battery storage of energy from such installations offers a way to further reduce consumption of offsite energy and develop resiliency among City facilities by providing a source of backup energy in the event of power outages,such as those expected to occur following a natural disaster-when municipal operations will be needed for emergency services.Onsite generation and City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 7 of 10 powered by Legistar™211 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 disaster-when municipal operations will be needed for emergency services.Onsite generation and energy efficiency improvements typically require an upfront financial commitment that is repaid over the life of the improvement.Grants are also sometimes available,particularly for multi-benefit projects,such as energy resiliency and emergency operations,that go beyond simply improving City facilities. Energy efficiency improvements can also be made to existing facilities and equipment that reduce emissions.These include:more efficient HVAC systems,lighting retrofits,and more significant green construction practices during remodels and new builds of facilities.For instance,the City is currently working to incorporate solar panels and battery storage in the upcoming upgrades planned for the Clark Building.Another strategy to consider is revisions to building codes and policies to require more ambitious energy efficiency installations on public and private projects.For instance,Manhattan Beach recently began developing a plan to require solar panel installations on all new public and private commercial buildings.As a member agency,Hermosa Beach may be able to partner with Clean Power Alliance on these and other initiatives,leveraging Clean Power Alliance’s technical expertise, industry relationships and collective purchasing power. Next Steps Staff recommends City Council determine whether to renew its pursuit of CCA.As mentioned above and discussed at the recent City Council retreat,Clean Power Alliance is now accepting new member agencies.The process of joining the Clean Power Alliance includes a $10,000 one-time cost for Clean Power Alliance to develop a feasibility study that would assess the City’s current and projected power needs and help determine what additional resources Clean Power Alliance would need to secure to accommodate Hermosa Beach’s customers (Attachment 5). Should this feasibility study support the City’s inclusion in the Clean Power Alliance,Clean Power Alliance would then discuss with the City its next steps.These would include the City Council officially declaring its interest in joining Clean Power Alliance in late 2022,adopting an ordinance to join the JPA,and then developing an outreach plan.The majority of outreach to the community and customers would be done by Clean Power Alliance itself with a goal of opting in all customers citywide in 2024. Joining Clean Power Alliance would be the most efficient and impactful strategy for further reducing the City’s overall GHG emissions.Based on the City’s most recent emissions inventories,community energy use (residential,commercial,and municipal usages)contributes approximately 40 percent of the City’s overall GHG emissions.By switching to 100 percent renewable sources for energy (for comparison,currently SCE’s default service uses approximately 36 percent renewable energy),the City could essentially reduce its GHG emissions instantly by roughly 40 percent.This would help the City move significantly towards meeting both its municipal and community emissions goals City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 8 of 10 powered by Legistar™212 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 simultaneously. In the meantime,staff recommends Council authorize the City to subscribe to SCE’s 100 percent Green Rate to ensure its municipal electricity use is carbon-neutral in the short-term while the City weighs its other long-term options.The annual premium for this service is currently estimated at approximately $11,000,but estimating $15,000 annually would allow for any potential rate variations, which cannot be accurately projected at this time. General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendations have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below: Sustainability and Conservation Element Goal 1.Hermosa Beach is a low-carbon municipal organization,reducing greenhouse gases at a rate that meets or exceeds 80% below 2005 levels by 2030. Policy: 1.1 Low-carbon municipality.Demonstrate environmental leadership and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from municipal facilities and operations by at least 80%below 2005 levels by 2030. Goal 2.Hermosa Beach is a low-carbon community meeting State greenhouse gas reduction goals by 2040 Policy: 2.1 State targets and goals.Reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a rate that meets long- term State targets and goals to reduce emissions by at least 66%below 2005 levels by 2040. Fiscal Impact: The $10,000 cost for the Clean Power Alliance feasibility study was appropriated in the 2021-22 Budget (Account #001-1201-4251).The additional $15,000 annual cost to fund the SCE 100 percent Green Rates would be allocated between all utility accounts during the annual budget process.If approved,the transition to SCE 100 percent Green Rates would be effective March 2022,at an increased cost of approximately $5,000 for the remainder of the fiscal year.The utility accounts would be reviewed as a part of the Midyear Budget Review and any increases to current appropriations would be requested at that time.The fiscal impact of other future emissions reductions programs is unknown at this time but will be analyzed by staff as needed. Attachments: 1.Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan 2.Emissions Inventory 3.2015 Staff Report City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 9 of 10 powered by Legistar™213 Staff Report REPORT 22-0043 4.2016 Ordinance and Feasibility Study 5.Letter from Clean Power Alliance regarding feasibility study 6.Link to November 18, 2014 Study Session 7.Link to February 24, 2015 City Council Report 8.Link to August 22, 2017 City Council Report 9.Link to November 6, 2021 Study Session Respectfully Submitted by: Doug Krauss, Environmental Programs Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 10 of 10 powered by Legistar™214 Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan Prepared for the City of Hermosa Beach and the Southern California Association of Governments January 2015 kaizenergy Prepared by Juan Matute • em: juan@kaizenergyllc.com • ph: LOCLIMATE-1 (562-546-2831) 215 Existing Actions: Page 2 Disclaimer The following disclaimer is provided as a condition of the contract terms under which this plan was produced: “This is a project for the City of Hermosa Beach with funding provided by the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) Sustainability Program Grants. The Sustainability Program assists Southern California cities and other organizations in evaluating planning options and stimulating development consistent with the region's Sustainable Communities Strategy. Sustainability Program Grants support visioning efforts, infill analyses, economic and policy analyses, and marketing and communication programs. The preparation of this report has been financed in part through grant(s) from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FT A) through the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) in accordance with the provisions under the Metropolitan Planning Program as set forth in Section 104(t) of Title 23 of the U.S. Code. The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of SCAG, DOT or the State of California. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. SCAG shall not be responsible for the City's future use or adaptation of the report. The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of SCAG or DOT. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation.” 216 Existing Actions: Page 3 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Action Baseline ................................................................................... 1 Defining Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment ......................................................................... 6 Electricity ..................................................................................................................................... 29 Municipal Fleet ............................................................................................................................ 45 Employee Commutes .................................................................................................................. 57 Other Emissions .......................................................................................................................... 66 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets ................................................................................................. 69 Performance Monitoring, Costs, Transparency, and Outreach ................................................... 87 217 Existing Actions: Page 1 Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan Hermosa Beach’s Climate Action Baseline Municipal Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory A recent draft update to Hermosa Beach’s greenhouse emissions inventory for municipal operations indicates that streetlights and traffic signals, vehicle fleet, and building and other electricity make up Hermosa Beach’s top three municipal emissions sources. The City’s municipal operations inventory is being updated as part of the Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan process. The 2005 inventory is compared to the draft 2012 inventory below. Top Municipal Operations Emissions Sources in Hermosa Beach (2005 to 2012) Emissions Source/Activity (Scope) 2005 MT CO2e (% of total) 2012 MT CO2e (% of total) % Change in MT CO2e (2007-2012) Streetlights and Traffic Signal Electricity (2) 405 (27%) 359 (26.2%) -11.4% Employee Commute (3) 348 (23.2%) 218 (15.9%) -37.4% Building & Other Facility Electricity (2) 301 (20%) 305 (22.2%) 1.3% Vehicle Fleet (1) 227 (15.1%) 328 (23.9%) 44% Solid Waste - Contract Services (3) 215 (14.3%) 162 (11.8%) -24.7% Total 1,501 1,372 -8.6% Source: EECAP Final Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report. Note: Some 2005 figures in EECAP Draft inventory are inconsistent with 2005 & 2007 Inventories. City of Hermosa Beach Actions toward Carbon Neutrality Like many communities in California, the City of Hermosa Beach has developed a number of plans and strategies to address climate change and reduce the city’s greenhouse gas emissions. The latest effort, an Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan (EECAP), has provided the City of Hermosa Beach with a foundation in development of a comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CAP) by understanding community and municipal energy use, identifying local level 218 Existing Actions: Page 2 strategies resulting in long term energy efficiency, developing implementation plans, and establishing progress reports. In pursuit of carbon neutrality, the City of Hermosa Beach has taken progressive steps in the planning, collaborating, and goal-setting for GHG reductions. Since setting the goal of carbon neutrality, the City Council has developed or is working on community discussions, strategic plans, and updates to the General Plan in keeping with its new sustainability targets. They have contracted outside vendors to inventory municipal GHG emissions so City operations and building may become the beacon of carbon reductions for the entire community. As a result of this inventory, the City has begun specific financial and technical assessments of its energy procurement. It has also begun exploring options to reduce energy use, including park and street lighting, and minimize GHG emissions by City operations. In doing so, the City set green purchasing and fleet policy goals to allow considerations for their target reductions and initiated a preliminary review of their employee rideshare program. The keystone of Hermosa Beach’s existing climate action planning activities is the Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan prepared by its Green Task Force and accepted by the City Council in 2011. This prior plan is estimated to support a 25% reduction in emissions below 2005 levels by 2020. 219 Existing Actions: Page 3 Existing Plans, Measures, and Documents Related to Climate Action Title Description Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to the City of Hermosa Beach A report assessing options to deliver carbon neutral electricity to the City. It focuses on Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) and SCE's version of a Green Tariff Shared Renewables (GTSR) program as solutions. Assessment and Planning Report for an Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan (Draft) Describes actions that the City, the SBCCOG, and region have already taken toward the goals of reduced energy use and GHG emissions, and outlines the process for planning and implementing new measures to continue to work toward those goals. (Prepared by SBCCOG in consultation with city) Beacon Award Program Resolution to participate in recognition program “Beacon Award: Local Leadership toward Solving Climate Change Leader Partnership Program” run by the Institute for Local Governments. Carbon Neutral Issue Paper: City Council Staff Report The document summarizes issues and actions taken toward carbon reduction for municipal operations. (January 3, 2014) Carbon Neutral Road Map for Municipal Facilities & Operations Definitions, actions and target date for carbon neutrality. Summary of accomplishments, 2005 baseline, Sustainability Plan Targets. (SCAG Grant). Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan Provides analysis of emissions conditions by sector and identifies scenarios and options for GHG reduction to achieve carbon neutrality (GHG emissions model). City Council Strategic Plan The plan sets City Council goals and action plans (5-year/current year), such as a road map to carbon neutrality. Clean Fleet Policy and Action Plan and Update City Council adopted the policy, targets, and a plan to green the City fleet. Community Dialogue: Decision-Making Tool, Quality of Life, Fiscal/Financial A summary of the community character and what people value about the City. Provides a comparison of the City's financial/fiscal condition as compared to other peer communities. City Council incorporated Decision Making Tool into its Strategic Plan, 2014. 220 Existing Actions: Page 4 Title Description Employee Commute Survey and Reduction Strategies (Draft): 2013 Employee Commute Survey. Summary identifies strategies for the Employer Commuter Program to support the City's carbon neutrality goal. Enterprise Energy Management Information System A program designed to track electricity, natural gas, and water data in real time. Energy Savings at a Glance Quarterly Report Reports created by GSE Solutions for the SBCCOG. The reports summarize total annual energy use for all municipal facilities and energy-savings projects completed, in progress, and planned/identified and quantify opportunities for reducing operating costs. Energy Study Report This report, by GSE Solutions, assesses the City’s options for energy efficiency retrofits and makes recommendations to pursue the most cost-effective options through on-bill financing. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory: Community-wide and Municipal Community and municipal GHG inventories per Local Government Operations Protocol and International Local Government GHG Emissions Analysis Protocol. The baseline year is 2005, interim year is 2007, and 1990 is the historic level. Municipal High- Efficiency Product Procurement Policy Allows energy efficiency to be a consideration in purchasing. Solar Project Proposal Conceptual proposal by PSOMASFMG for 2 solar sites (total system size of 176 kW-DC) with a net purchase price of $740,843 and annual O&M of $4,893 in year 1. Sites include solar energy systems mounted on carports at City Hall and Community Center. Strategy and Steps to Accelerate Energy Reduction and Cost Savings Report includes recommendations to implement energy reduction projects for City building, park lighting, and street lighting through CIP funds and on-bill financing agreement with SCE and adoption of a Municipal High Efficiency Product Procurement Policy. Sustainability Plan A plan of actions to reduce GHG emissions City-wide by 15% from 2005 by 2020. 221 Existing Actions: Page 5 In-Progress Plans, Measures, and Documents Related to Climate Action Title Description Energy Element: Climate Action Plan The South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) is developing the EECAP, which is the electricity section of the City’s Climate Action Plan. The Energy Element will provide the foundation and framework to develop a comprehensive CAP and put the city on a measurable path toward energy and GHG emissions reductions. This report will describe actions already taken towards reducing energy use and GHG emissions. It will also provide an energy and emissions inventory, forecasts, and targets, potential measures for energy efficiency and GHG reduction, and the proposed processes for public participation, environmental review, and ongoing monitoring processes. General Plan Update Integrating the Coastal Land Use Plan Focused on Sustainability and a Low Carbon Future A General Plan Update will be focused on sustainability and carbon reduction targets adopted by the City prior to or through the process. Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan This plan helps the City navigate its pathway to Carbon Neutrality and ancillary benefits. 222 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 6 Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan Defining Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment Determining the City’s Municipal Climate Action Goal The Elements of a Climate Action Goal Local governments have various options in defining their climate commitment. The time frame, magnitude, boundary, and control options are detailed in the table below. Goals with larger magnitude reductions and future years that are nearer are seen as more aggressive. For instance, an 80% reduction in emissions by 2030 is viewed as far more aggressive than an 80% reduction in emissions by 2050 or a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030. Choices for Climate Action Goals Goal Element Goal Choices Time Frame Choose both: ● Base Year - typically in the past ● Future Year - the year by which the entity commits to meeting its climate commitment Magnitude Choose an absolute or percentage reduction, relative to the base year Applicable Boundary Choose one depending on the type of goal: ● Organizational boundary (for entities) ● Geographic boundaries (for communities) Control over Emissions Determine which emissions are within and outside of control: ● Direct & indirect emissions (scopes 1 through 3, for entities) ● Activities & sources (communities) Note: Communities and entities will typically use a greenhouse gas accounting protocol to aid in identifying applicable boundaries and control over emissions. Most goals follow the following format: an X% reduction in boundary-wide greenhouse gas emissions versus Base Year levels by the future year. For example, California’s greenhouse gas reduction goal is to achieve 1990 levels in statewide emissions by 2020. This is a 0% reduction in all statewide emissions (adjusting for electricity imports) versus 1990 levels by 2020. The most common local climate commitment is the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement. Mayors from the 1,060 cities that have signed onto the agreement indicated their City’s 223 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 7 commitment to “strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution by taking actions in our own operations and communities.” Kyoto targets were 7% below 1990 levels by 2012. Former Hermosa Beach Mayor Sam Edgerton III signed onto this agreement. In commissioning this Carbon Neutral Plan for Municipal Operations, Hermosa Beach wishes to explore the feasibility of a 100% reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions. While this determines the magnitude, the City has yet to determine the future year, boundary, and control over emissions. The base year becomes important if Hermosa Beach seeks to go beyond carbon neutrality by offsetting additional emissions to become “climate positive” or “carbon negative”. Defining the “Carbon Neutral” goal for Municipal Operations In pursuing carbon neutral municipal operations, Hermosa Beach is striving for a 100% reduction in emissions from local government operations. The key remaining decisions are: ● Determining the future year by which Hermosa Beach plans to achieve carbon neutrality. ● Deciding which local government emissions are subject to the goal. ● Deciding whether to set a goal for “gross” emissions in addition to net emissions. Gross emissions are subtotals before any use of offsets. In determining the future year, Hermosa Beach must balance its desire to be a state, national, or international climate action leader with a desire to make pursuit of carbon neutrality as cost - effective as possible. Prior work on greenhouse gas accounting for local governments and prior actions by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) have largely determined which emissions should be subject to Hermosa Beach’s goal. An understanding of these accounting procedures and consideration of the boundary and control decisions made by other cities are useful in determining which emissions the City should seek to neutralize. Accounting Standards for Local Government Operations The California Air Resources Board recommends that municipalities that seek to inventory their entity’s emissions use the Local Government Operations Protocol, which it helped develop. The Local Government Operations Protocol provides specific guidance for accounting and reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions throughout North America, with additional guidance for California. The Local Government Operations Protocol is based on the North America-specific General Reporting Protocol, published by The Climate Registry. Forty-one US States have declared The Climate Registry’s General Reporting Protocol as their preferred greenhouse gas emissions accounting and reporting guidance. The General Reporting Protocol is based on the 224 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 8 worldwide Corporate Standard, jointly published by the World Business Council on Sustainable Development and the World Resources Institute. All three documents are used for entity-based greenhouse gas emissions accounting and reporting. Entity-based accounting differs from geographic-based accounting and reporting, which is used to account for and report emissions from the community, a state, or a nation. The U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories are two commonly-accepted guidance documents for geographic-based accounting. Both entity-based and geographic-based accounting and reporting guidance require an inventory to include gross emissions totals before adjusting for any offsets. Offsets and the inventory’s gross emissions after adjusting for offsets are included as an informational item. Looking at requirements for state agencies may shed light on what accounting procedures local governments would need to use should the state one day mandate greenhouse gas reductions from local government operations. California Law requires state agencies that are members of the Climate Action Team to estimate their greenhouse gas emissions from their operations. An Executive Order (B-18-12) requires all other state agencies to prepare an annual inventory. The guidance to state agencies dictates that inventories should be conducted using protocols established by The Climate Registry, which includes the Local Government Operations Protocol. The following cities in Los Angeles County are members of The Climate Registry: Lomita, Long Beach, Santa Monica, and Vernon. Only Vernon has reported a third-party verified GHG inventory to The Climate Registry. Los Angeles County is also a member of The Climate Registry. The 2005 and 2007 municipal inventories and current draft of the City of Hermosa Beach GHG Inventory, Forecasting, Target-Setting Report for an Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan also uses the Local Government Operations Protocol. ➤ ➣ ➢ Because the Local Government Operations Protocol is currently recommended and is the most likely candidate if municipal accounting and reporting were ever made compulsory, Hermosa Beach should use this protocol to determine which local government operations emissions are subject to its carbon neutrality goal. Defining Organizational Boundaries for the Local Government Organization Each of the three entity-based reporting standards discussed earlier allows entities the option of reporting emissions using operational control or financial control. 225 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 9 ● Operational Control: Occurs when an entity wholly owns the operation, facility, or source, or when it has the full authority to introduce and implement operational and health, safety, and environmental policies (including both GHG- and non-GHG-related policies). ● Financial Control: Occurs when a local government wholly owns an operation, facility, or source, or is a majority partner in a joint venture. A local government may own an asset (e.g. a transit bus), but not maintain operational control (e.g. transit operations and maintenance are contracted out). Because of the unique nature of local governments, the Local Government Operations Protocol “strongly encourages local governments to utilize operational control when defining their organizational boundary.” In addition, the Local Government Operations Protocol makes several reporting recommendations for jointly-controlled operations, sources, or facilities. Organizational Boundaries for Local Governments Structure Reporting Recommendation in Local Government Operations Protocol Joint Powers Authority (JPA) A JPA is considered a distinct entity; a local government should not report emissions from a JPA of which it is a member. Special Districts Special Districts are considered distinct entities; however, a local government may optionally report as scope 3 those emissions which are attributable to the local government (e.g. emissions at a special district operated landfill attributable to the municipal government’s waste) Community Choice Aggregation Community Choice Aggregation is a distinct entity when implemented through a Joint Powers Authority; a local government should not report emissions from community electricity used through a CCA. The local government should report emissions from municipal electricity procured via a CCA. ➤ ➣ ➢ Hermosa Beach should use operational control to define its organization for purposes of GHG emissions accounting and reporting. Scope 3 emissions from special districts can be incorporated on a case-by-case basis, as determined by the relevancy of emissions to municipal operations. Determining Appropriate Emissions within the Municipal Operations Boundary To become carbon neutral, Hermosa Beach would have to reduce or offset emissions from all sectors, activities, and sources for which it reports emissions. The Local Government Operations Protocol suggests that municipalities report scope 1 and 2 emissions over which they have operational control from the following 11 sectors: 226 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 10 Local Government Operations Protocol Sectors and Reporting Recommendations for Hermosa Beach Sector Operational Control in Hermosa Beach Recommendation Buildings and other facilities ✔ Operational control over City-owned buildings. Report these emissions. Streetlights and traffic signals ✔ Operational control over City-owned streetlights. ✘ Limited or no operational control of streetlights provided by Southern California Edison. Report these emissions, including emissions from SCE-owned street lighting. Water delivery facilities ✘ No operational control: ○ Water is imported, recycled, treated, and supplied by West Basin Municipal Water District. ○ Water is delivered by California Water Service Company (Rancho Dominguez/Hermosa-Redondo). Consider reporting emissions from water distribution. Port facilities ✘ No port facilities. Do not report. Airport facilities ✘ No airport facilities. Do not report. Vehicle fleet ✔ Owned municipal vehicle fleet Report these emissions Transit fleet ✘ No operational control. Hermosa Beach is served by Beach Cities Transit (controlled by Redondo Beach, operated by Transportation Concepts), the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Lines 130 & 232, (operated by MV Transportation), Los Angeles Department of Transportation Commuter Express Route 438 (operated by MV Transportation). Consider these emissions as an informational item. Power generation facilities ✘ Service provided by Southern California Edison. Emissions reported in other sectors as scope 2. 227 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 11 Sector Operational Control in Hermosa Beach Recommendation Solid waste facilities ✔ Operational control via contracting. Athens Services provides haulage and sorting, landfills are owned by a third party. Report community- wide collection and haulage emissions. Report landfill emissions from waste generated by municipal operations. Wastewater facilities ✘ Services provided by the Southern California Sanitation Control District / South Bay Cities District. Consider these emissions as an informational item. Other process & fugitive emissions These are cross-sectoral emissions. Report fugitive emissions of common high-GWP gases (refrigerants and fire suppression systems) over which the City has operational control Other special districts of which Hermosa Beach is a part These sectors are not included in the Local Government Operations Protocol Flood Control Los Angeles Flood Control District Do not report. Vector Control Los Angeles County West Vector & Vector- Borne Control District Do not report. Community Health District Beach Cities Health District - preventative healthcare for the residents of Hermosa, Manhattan, and Redondo Beach. Do not report. Emissions from transit and wastewater are not currently included in Hermosa Beach’s greenhouse gas inventory. We recommend they are included as an informational item because these services are provided in Hermosa Beach, but by other local government entities. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Scopes & Biogenic Emissions Entity-based accounting guidance also classifies emissions into three scopes depending on the operational control possessed over the emissions. Hermosa Beach should report and neutralize all scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, and certain scope 3 emissions. 228 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 12 Emissions Scopes and Local Government Protocol Reporting Requirements Emissions Scope Reporting Recommendation for Selected Sectors 1 - Direct Emissions Include per Local Government Operations Protocol 2 - Indirect Emissions from Imported Energy, Steam, & Cooling Include per Local Government Operations Protocol 3 - Other Indirect Emissions Optional per Local Government Operations Protocol Hermosa Beach should include emissions from: ● waste generated by government operations, but disposed of outside its organizational boundary; ● emissions from employee commuting; and ● emissions from employee business travel (not currently included in the City’s municipal inventories). Hermosa Beach should consider including: ● upstream life-cycle emissions from goods and services consumed by Hermosa’s municipal government. Anthropogenic versus Biogenic Emissions Anthropogenic sources represent new greenhouse gas emissions, above and beyond the atmospheric carbon balance that existed before industrialization and use of fossil fuels. Much of the carbon emitted is new atmospheric carbon, formerly trapped underground. Biogenic or non-anthropogenic sources are considered part of the carbon cycle or result from emissions not caused by humans. Because of this difference, greenhouse gas reporting guidelines differentiate between biogenic and anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gas emissions, reducing gross or net inventory figures by biogenic emissions totals. Biogenic CO2 emissions from the combustion of biomass should be quantified and reported as an informational item rather than as part of scope 1 emissions. Climate Action Goals by Other Cities This section examines the context for Hermosa Beach’s climate commitment by looking at aggressive local government goals for both the community and municipal operations. In general, cities have set and pursued aggressive climate action goals because of internal pressure to take action to mitigate climate change and provide an example to others rather than to capitalize on any economic benefits that may accrue to climate action leaders. 229 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 13 Hermosa Beach seeks a reputation as a prominent local climate action leader. While the City’s position in California gives it clear guidance on choosing the minimum set of emissions which it should neutralize, Hermosa Beach should look to other cities’ goals and use of offsets in order to position itself as a climate action leader. When Hermosa Beach adopts and publicizes a goal, it will be compared first and foremost to current and future goals by other cities in California, followed by cities elsewhere in the U.S. Less weight will likely be placed on comparing goals set by Hermosa with those of major world cities. Cities in California Davis: Carbon Neutral Community by 2050 In 2008, the City of Davis adopted, by resolution, GHG targets for community and municipal operations that put the City on a path toward carbon neutrality by 2050, with average reductions of 2.6% per year between 2015 and 2040. Davis plans to use offsets to neutralize emissions it cannot reduce on its own. Davis uses the Local Government Operations Protocol to account and report municipal emissions and the U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions for community emissions. Within its inventory, Davis includes its vehicle fleet, special equipment, refrigerant leakage, natural gas and facility emissions, electricity (buildings, streetlights, traffic lights, and water & wastewater conveyance), as well as direct emissions from treating and processing water and wastewater. In 2010, Davis adopted its Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, which details the City’s past and future climate actions. The City of Davis reported verified emissions to The Climate Registry for calend ar years 2009 and 2010. Berkeley: Reductions by Popular Demand In 2006, the voters of the City of Berkeley adopted a GHG reduction target of 80% below 2000 levels by 2050. 82.3% of voters favored Measure G. The Office of Energy and Sustainable Development within the Department of Planning & Development regularly tracks community and municipal progress. Berkeley does not have a carbon neutrality goal. Palo Alto: Carbon Neutral Electricity The City of Palo Alto Utilities Electricity Supply Portfolio Carbon Neutral Plan outlines a strategy to secure long-term contracts for renewable energy, with use of RPS-eligible unbundled RECs and greenhouse gas offsets in the interim (2013-2016). In 2007, the Palo Alto City Council adopted a goal to reduce municipal and community GHG emissions 15% below 2005 levels by 2020. 230 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 14 Lancaster: “Solar Capital of the World” The City of Lancaster’s goal is to become the Solar Capital of the World. In 2011, the City formed the Lancaster Power Authority to install solar photovoltaic arrays at local schools and to partner with private clean energy companies. On March 26, 2013, the City adopted an ordinance that required new single family homes to provide solar-generated power. In 2014, the City started Lancaster Choice Energy, a pending community choice aggregator. The City does not have a climate action plan. In 2010, it passed a resolution asking the state to suspend AB 32. San Francisco: A Cautionary Tale on Ephemeral Climate Goals In his January 2008 inaugural address, Mayor Gavin Newsom pledged to make the City completely carbon neutral by 2020: “The most important step we can take is make this city completely carbon neutral, and that is exactly what we’re going to do.... Today I want to pledge to make this City -- and this, by the way this is not one of those fanciful pledges that never gets done, you can't measure, and nothing ever happens, and we come and go, and no one holds us to account. Let us pledge today -- with a specific plan that will follow -- to make San Francisco and City government carbon neutral by 2020. I think that's a fair, reasonable, as well as an audacious goal.” The resulting plan, released later that year, contained a goal to reduce community emissions to 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2012 through implementation of reduction strategies and the use of offsets. The plan mentioned neutrality, but did not express a future year to make the goal concrete. In 2008, the City adopted an ordinance to reduce community-wide emissions 25% below 1990 levels by 2017 and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. San Francisco failed to meet its 2012 goal for reductions in municipal greenhouse gas emissions. Sacramento: Acting Through the General Plan Sacramento incorporated its 2012 Climate Action Plan into its 2035 General Plan Update in 2014. The City did this to strengthen the plan’s objectives by including them as general plan policies and implementation measures. The 2014 Draft includes a general plan policy to reduce community-wide emissions 83% below 2005 levels by 2050. The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), which provides electric service to the City and surrounding areas, maintains an offset program and offers opt-in 50% and 100% renewable options through its Greenergy product. Neither the City nor the utility have a carbon neutral goal. 231 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 15 Santa Barbara: Concerned about the Cost of Carbon Neutrality Santa Barbara considered a municipal carbon neutral goal in 2008 through 2009, but ultimately decided against setting aggressive greenhouse gas reduction targets. According to an agenda from their March 10, 2009 meeting, “The [Finance] Committee is in favor of having City goals in this regard, but has requested additional financial information. Once the Committee receives the additional information, the Committee will review the options and return to the full Council in the near future.” No evidence in the council record suggests that the council ever reconsidered a carbon neutral goal. In Santa Barbara’s 2012 Climate Action Plan, the City adopted the standard AB 32 target of reducing community emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Cities Elsewhere in the United States Seattle, Washington: A Gross Emissions Reduction Goal In 2005, municipal utility Seattle City Light became the first carbon neutral electric utility, aided by the fact that 90% of the utility’s portfolio comes from hydroelectric resources. Seattle City Light offsets the balance of emissions using offsets registered with the Climate Action Reserve and other third-party organizations. In May 2011, the City released Getting to Zero: A Pathway to Carbon Neutral Seattle. In October 2011, the City Council adopted a resolution to set a goal of 87% gross reduction in community emissions by 2050, with the balance neutralized by offsets. The City does not have a separate target for municipal operations. In 2013, the City adopted the Seattle Climate Action Plan, which relies on a combination of pricing, transportation electrification, and integrated transportation and land use planning to move the city towards its long-term goal. Seattle’s approach to climate action and long-term goal highlight both the urgency of the effort, but also the deliberate process in deciding to decarbonize a local economy. The City made its carbon neutral community commitment 10 years after its first notable climate action, a LEED building incentive program, and five years after its first Climate Action Plan. Control over the electric utility -- and the revenues it provides -- will undoubtedly aid the City in its pursuit. Austin, Texas: Carbon Neutral Community by 2050; Municipality by 2020 In 2007, Austin adopted, by resolution, a goal of carbon neutral municipal operations by 2020. The resolution included an interim goal to power all City facilities with renewable energy by 2012 (achieved), implement an ordinance to mandate zero net-energy capable1 new homes by 2015, and create an interdepartmental climate action team to address emissions from the community, and a unified approach to obtain offsets for municipal and community emissions. 1 Austin defines a net-zero energy capable” homes as a home that is energy efficient enough would produce as much energy as it uses if it were to have a reasonably-sized solar system on the roof 232 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 16 In 2014, Austin adopted a resolution to pursue community carbon neutrality by 2050, which reiterated the City’s 2020 goal for a carbon neutral municipality. Austin’s City Council has control over its electric utility, Austin Energy, which gives the City substantial leeway to fund and implement climate action programs. The City has its own offsets program, which prioritizes local sources of offsets. Offsets are funded by voluntary contributions from various large events in Austin, including Austin City Limits. Boulder County and City, Colorado Boulder County has a goal of carbon neutral municipal operations by 2020. The County plans to use offsets to achieve this goal. The County’s stated goal in its 2012 Environmental Sustainability Plan is to “Achieve carbon neutrality and become more resilient to the potential effects of climate change.” The County adopted this goal before the County and other parts of Colorado experienced a once-in-a-century flood in September 2013, which were seen as a potential symptom of climate change. The City of Boulder’s years of consideration provide an example of a thoughtful, deliberative approach to making long-term climate commitments. The City discussed three climate commitment goals in a council study session on July 30, 2013, following four shorter study sessions in 2013. They are summarized below: ● Realizing that aggressive climate action efforts must span City departments, Boulder has an integrated approach at the top level of administration and policy-making (city manager and general plan level). Boulder also found it important to develop a short-term goal in addition to its long term goal, as this would solidify early actions rather than approaching “analysis paralysis” in determining the ordering of actions towards the long- term goal. As a key part of its efforts to build climate change information into decision - making, Boulder strives to create a more robust and dynamic data management and performance system for monitoring progress. ● Key points of the climate commitment are: ○ Seven Core Principles: be strategic, yet opportunistic; take calculated risks; avoid analysis paralysis; partner with other agencies, nonprofits, and businesses; demonstrate ethical leadership; focus on system change; and harness the economic benefits of climate leadership. ○ Six Pillars of Action: “ramp up renewables”, “better buildings” (efficiency and resilience), “travel wise” (sustainable transportation), “waste not” (materials & resource recovery), and “every drop” (conserve water) ○ Five Elements: goal setting, defining targets, strategy development, monitoring and reporting, and community & partner engagement. 233 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 17 Three Goals The City of Boulder explored 3 community-wide goals for carbon neutrality, from least to most aggressive: 1. An 80% reduction in emissions by 2050 (ultimately selected) 2. Carbon neutral by 2050 3. Carbon neutral by 2030 (determined to be too aggressive) Staff ultimately decided to recommend the Council consider the first two goals, as the third option would require immediate, drastic reductions (25% per year). The Council ultimately decided on Option 1: an 80% reduction in community-wide emissions by 2020. While some council members sought the stronger goal, the Council ultimately decided that they would revisit the goal in a few years. A comment from Councilmember Macon Cowles captured the sentiment of the majority: “I don’t look at this as an endpoint but as an aggressive goal...that we can revisit again in a couple of years... With this goal (option one), I think that we can do this. But the times are uncertain....Let’s make sure we can do this and that we do this.” (3:42:03 in video). City of Boulder’s financial resources for climate action In 2006, Boulder’s voters passed a Climate Action Plan tax as a surcharge on electric utility bills. Voters extended the measure in 2012. Boulder is served by an investor-owned utility, Xcel Energy. The tax, similar to California’s Utility Users Tax, provides the City with an opportunity to collect revenues based on electricity usage. Per-kWh rates are $0.0049 for residential, $0.0009 for commercial, and $0.0003 for industrial customers. The tax generates around $1.8 million per year and funds personnel, energy audits, rebates and incentives, and public education programs. Next Steps The July 30th council discussion provided direction for staff, but did not formalize the City’s climate commitment. As of September 2014, Boulder has not yet adopted a target via resolution or ordinance. The City of Boulder and Hermosa Beach are both working with the Brendle Group on climate action strategy. The Brendle Group conducted much of the background research for the City’s climate commitment study. South Miami, Florida In 2009, the City adopted a resolution and work plan committing to carbon neutrality by 2030. The resolution applies only to municipal operations. 234 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 18 Cambridge, Maryland Cambridge has a “getting to zero” task force scoping options to become a “net zero community.” This term is not defined, but the task force is focused on reducing carbon emissions from building operations. Cities Outside of the United States British Columbia, Canada British Columbia is globally unique due to its low-per capita emissions, pervasive local government climate commitments, and high price of carbon. The province has high utilization of emissions-free energy, since BC Hydro gets more than 90% of its power from hydroelectricity and other clean energy sources. Many British Columbia Municipalities have signed on to the British Columbia Climate Action Charter and have made a commitment to carbon neutral operations by 2012. British Columbia’s revenue-neutral carbon tax reached its full phase-in value of $30 per metric ton during 2012. In measuring municipal carbon neutrality goals, British Columbia considers core services, whether provided directly or contracted. It also considers fuel and energy used for vehicles, facilities, machinery, and equipment (whether or not they are owned or leased). Excluded are non-core services such as airports, janitorial services, staff commuting and travel, and construction emissions. Offsets are used to neutralize gross greenhouse gas emissions. Their use - and controversy - are covered in the discussion of offsets later in this chapter. Aarhus, Denmark Aarhus is the central city of a region of about 1,250,000 people. In 2008, the City Council adopted a goal for the community to be CO2-neutral by 2030. The implementation plan does not include a discussion of offsets. Copenhagen, Denmark Copenhagen has a comprehensive plan to achieve community carbon neutrality by 2025. The City plans to implement aggressive energy efficiency measures, and will offset any remaining emissions via surplus renewable energy generation. Malmö, Sweden Across the Sound from Copenhagen, Malmö is a city with a population of about 300,000. In 2009, the City set a community-wide goal to be “climate neutral” by 2020 (by using offsets) and run on 100% renewable energy by 2030. The City plans to reduce gross emissions 40% below 1990 levels by 2020. Melbourne, Australia In 2002, the City adopted a goal of carbon neutral municipal operations by 2020. In 2013, Melbourne verified its carbon neutral municipal operations status through an independent audit. The City used offsets to achieve this goal: investments in an Indonesian clean energy plant. 235 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 19 The City hopes that its central business district and surrounding areas will be carbon neutral by 2020. Climate Commitments by Entities Other Than Local Governments As carbon neutral commitments are relatively uncommon among local governments, climate commitments from other entities -- specifically universities, but also corporations -- are relevant to Hermosa Beach’s decision-making. More similarities exist between local government and universities than with corporations. Similarities between local governments and higher educational institutions include: close ties between an individual’s identity and the institution and place, 24-hour communities with residential life, and the role of competing missions and priorities in considering climate commitments and action. Colleges and Universities The American College and University President’s Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) is a national climate commitment registry and information-sharing network designed to enhance the credibility and success of college and university climate goals. As many colleges and universities are on the leading edge of climate action, the ACUPCC effort is the most mature climate commitment effort in the U.S. The effort’s commitment requirements and support structure can provide an example for municipalities. Signatories agree to: (1) complete an emissions inventory; (2) set a target date and interim milestones to become climate neutral; (3) immediately implement short-term actions to reduce GHGs; (4) integrate sustainability into the curriculum; and (5) submit the action plan, inventory, and progress reports to the network. ACUPCC provides membership-based guidance and technical support, much as ICLEI provides for local governments. Annual dues vary from $750 to $4,000 for a basic membership based on the institution’s size. As of September 2014, ACUPCC has 684 signatories, 73 of which are in California. 236 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 20 Southern California Signatories of the American College and University President’s Climate Commitment: Anaheim University Antioch Los Angeles CSU Pomona CSU Fullerton CSU Long Beach CSU Northridge Chaffey College Claremont McKenna College East Los Angeles College Harvey Mudd College Los Angeles City College Los Angeles Harbor College Los Angeles Mission College Los Angeles Pierce College Los Angeles Southwest College Los Angeles Trade-Technical College Los Angeles Valley College Loyola Marymount University Pasadena City College Pitzer College Pomona College Santa Monica College UC Irvine UC Los Angeles UC Riverside University of La Verne University of Redlands West Los Angeles College West Valley College Defining Carbon Neutrality for Colleges and Universities The ACUPCC defines carbon neutrality as “having no net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, to be achieved by eliminating net GHG emissions, or by minimizing GHG emissions as much as possible, and using carbon offsets or other measures to mitigate the remaining emissions.” At a minimum, institutions must report scope 1 (direct) emissions produced through campus activities; scope 2 (indirect-energy) emissions from purchased energy; and scope 3 (indirect) emissions from student, faculty, & staff commuting and institution-funded air travel. ACUPCC recommends (but does not require) that universities evaluate upstream (scope 3) emissions in purchased goods and services. ACUPCC requires use of an accounting method consistent with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol of the World Business Council on Sustainable Development and World Resources Institute. Both The Climate Registry’s General Reporting Protocol and its derivative for municipalities, the Local Government Operation Protocol, are consistent. The ACUPCC has provided a commonly-accepted standard for college and university climate commitments. Because carbon neutral commitments are relatively rare for U.S. local governments, no equivalent commonly-accepted standard exists. This signals a leadership opportunity for Hermosa Beach and other cities considering carbon neutrality goals in the coming years. Future Year for College and University Climate Commitments The most common horizon year for college and university carbon neutrality goals is 2050. A few universities have set - and achieved - neutrality goals with horizon years prior to 2014. A discussion of their efforts and use of offsets follows in this chapter. 237 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 21 A Closer Look at University of California’s Climate Commitment The University of California hopes to be the first research university system to achieve carbon neutrality by 2025. Although the goal has been discussed publicly by the Regents and President Janet Napolitano, it has not been formally adopted as a UC Policy. Existing climate goals are measured against emissions scopes 1, 2, and select scope 3 (student, staff, and faculty commutes and university-funded air travel). In 2011, the Regents discussed a carbon neutrality commitment, stating that while reductions in gross emissions were preferred, offsets would be required. In order to keep funds within the UC system, the Regents discussed developing a UC offset fund. Corporate Climate Goals In 2014, Ceres, a non-profit organization dedicated to sustainable investment and business, released a report of corporate greenhouse gas goals for Fortune 500 companies using information from the CDP (formerly Carbon Disclosure Project). A total of 53 Fortune 100 companies reported target data to the CDP. 238 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 22 Notable Climate Goals of Fortune 500 Companies Fortune 500 Company (rank) Sector Gross Emissions Goal (before offsets) Walmart Stores (1) Retail 30% reduction in GHG-intensity per square foot from 2010 levels by 2020. General Electric (8) Industrials / Financials 25% reduction in scope 1 & 2 emissions from 2004 levels by 2015. JP Morgan Chase (18) Financials 40% reduction in scope 1 & 2 emissions from 2005 levels by 2020. Wells Fargo & Company (25) Financials 35% reduction in scope 1, 2, & 3 emissions from 2008 levels by 2020. Microsoft (35) Information Technology Carbon neutral by 2013. Uses an internal carbon fee to allocate resources. Goldman Sachs (68) Financials Carbon neutral for offices and data centers by 2020. Nike (126) Apparel Carbon neutral facilities by 2015. Excelon (129) Utility eliminate 17.5 million metric tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year by 2020 Kohls (148) Retail Carbon neutrality goal, 2009 through 2015. Mattel (395) based in South Bay Consumer Reduce emissions per unit of revenue 50% from 2008 levels by 2020. Many companies have backed off carbon neutrality claims that they made in the mid 2000s. Yahoo, Nike, Pepsi, and Dell are examples. Dell achieved carbon neutral status in 2008, but backed off after a Wall Street Journal article criticized their lack of transparency and exception of supply-chain emissions. The shoeware and apparel company Timberland set a goal in 2005 to be carbo n neutral by 2010. By 2010, they had reduced 38% of emissions and offset the remaining 62%. Timberland continues to report annual emissions, though it estimates that 96% of life-cycle emissions associated with its products are outside of corporate control. The company continues to have a goal of a 50% reduction in 2006 levels by 2015. VF Corporation bought Timberland in 2011. The change in ownership highlights that decision-maker priorities can change over time. Defining Climate Goals for Hermosa Beach The validity of climate action and renewable energy claims is complicated by California’s Cap - and-Trade and Renewable Portfolio Standard programs. The climate action and renewable 239 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 23 energy goals presented in this section are not mutually exclusive: the concurrent pursuit of multiple goals is possible, and some goals are inclusive within others. It’s possible for the City to pursue multiple goals, and achieve some goals along the way towards others. Summary of Possible Goals for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Goal What it means for municipal operations What it means for the community Zero Emissions Zero gross scope 1, 2, and select scope 3 emissions attributable to municipal operations, before accounting for offsets and RECs. Zero gross greenhouse gas emissions from emissions- generating activities or emissions sources attributable to the community, before accounting for offsets and RECs. Carbon Neutral A zero balance of net emissions on a municipal greenhouse gas inventory after accounting for offsets and RECs. A zero balance of net emissions on a municipal greenhouse gas inventory after accounting for offsets and RECs. Carbon Negative A real, additional, and verifiable reduction in California (and global) greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to some base year emissions (e.g. Hermosa Beach’s 2005 or 2012 municipal inventory). A real, additional, and verifiable reduction in California (and global) greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to a community baseline. 240 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 24 Possible Goals for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Zero Emissions Zero Emissions means zero gross emissions, even before accounting for adjustments that appear as informational items on a greenhouse gas inventory, such as use of offsets and Renewable Energy Certificates. Zero Emissions is the strictest definition of carbon neutrality and the most difficult to achieve. Because Hermosa Beach is in California (which has a cap- and-trade program), achieving Zero Emissions would not lead to real, verifiable reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions (see Carbon Negative section). Zero Emissions requires 100% participation of: ● Facilities and fleet that exclusively operate on zero-emissions electricity or renewable biofuels that emit non-anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Zero emissions renewable electricity could be produced on-site or off-site. ● Employees that either walk, bike, or take electric or biofuel-powered vehicles for commutes. 241 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 25 ● Contracted service providers that exclusively use electricity or biofuels, either biodiesel or renewable natural gas. ● Use of landfills and wastewater treatment facilities that employee state-of-the-art greenhouse gas mitigation techniques. Carbon Neutral Carbon Neutral status results when a greenhouse gas inventory has a net zero balance after subtracting informational items such as offsets and Renewable Energy Certificates from gross emissions. Carbon Neutral status is possible with less than 100% participation of the activities outlined under Zero Emissions, plus the retirement of greenhouse gas allowances and, in certain cases, Renewable Energy Certificates. Hermosa Beach can achieve Carbon Neutral status by retiring California-eligible greenhouse gas emissions allowances in an amount equal to its gross emissions inventory. Hermosa Beach can retire qualified renewable energy used for municipal operations through the California Air Resources Board’s Voluntary Renewable Energy Program. Hermosa Beach can also purchase and retire California-eligible offsets through direct participation in California’s carbon market or through services offered by carbon balancing firms. Hermosa Beach can also purchase and retire greenhouse gas allowances that are not California-eligible. While non-California allowance retirement can also lead to a reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions, it will not reduce emissions in California and therefore would not meet potential future guidance from the California Air Resources Board. If the City chooses to pursue this route, Hermosa Beach should seek out high-quality offsets that are measurable, real, additional, and verifiable: typically those that are admissible to mandatory greenhouse gas reduction programs with high offset performance standards. In some cases, voluntary allowances may meet this high performance standard, such as those certified by the Climate Action Reserve, Gold Standard, and Verified Carbon Standard. Carbon Negative A new term to describe municipal climate action goals is needed for cities subject to a cap-and- trade program. The absolute cap on emissions in such a program means that emissions reductions attributable to activities in Hermosa Beach would be replaced by equivalent emissions from other sources outside of Hermosa Beach, but within the jurisdiction of the cap- and-trade program. Therefore, the overall level of greenhouse gas emissions in California (and globally) remains the same regardless of Hermosa Beach’s actions. Cap-and-trade programs allow for guaranteed reductions in program-wide greenhouse gas emissions, but negate emissions reductions from individual entity or community action. 242 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 26 Carbon Negative status means that Hermosa Beach achieves a real, additional, and verifiable reduction (or “dent”) in California and global greenhouse gas emissions. If Hermosa Beach were not located within a cap-and-trade program, achieving Zero Emissions or Carbon Neutral status would lead to a real, additional, measurable, and verifiable reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the City’s business-as-usual baseline. Hermosa Beach and other entities and communities can achieve Carbon Negative status by retiring greenhouse gas emissions allowances. The retirement of any amount of allowances greater than the City’s gross greenhouse gas emissions inventory allows the City to make Carbon Negative claims. However, as the City’s gross emissions decrease, the “dent” will decrease over time. Thus, the business-as-usual baseline is recommended for offset purchase and retirement targets, as this approximates the “dent” Hermosa Beach would make in global greenhouse gas emissions if it pursued aggressive climate action outside of California’s cap- and-trade program. Summary of Possible Goals for Use of Renewable Energy Goal What it means for municipal operations What it means for the community Powered by Renewable Energy The municipality can validly claim that operations are powered by renewable energy, using Green-e RECs to support the claim. The community can validly claim that it is powered by renewable energy. Powered by California Renewable Energy The municipal can validly claim that operations are powered by renewable energy delivered to California, using direct purchases, on-site generation, and California- eligible RECs to support the claim. The community can validly claim that operations are powered by renewable energy delivered to California, using direct purchases, on-site generation, and California- eligible RECs to support the claim. Powered by Renewable Energy Using Renewable Energy Certificates certified under the Green-e program, Hermosa Beach can make claims that municipal operations are powered by renewable energy. Renewable Energy Certificates represent the environmental attributes of renewable power, and their monetary value has aided in financing additional renewable energy generation in the United States. While valid under commonly-accepted energy accounting principles, such claims may be challenged because there is no credibility that the renewable energy was delivered to California. For instance, the certificate could represent renewable energy generated at a wind farm in West Texas or North Dakota with no connection to the Southern California electricity grid. 243 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 27 Whether Hermosa Beach can take credit for an associated reduction in greenhouse gas emissions depends on a number of factors. Under the Local Government Operations Protocol, Hermosa Beach can take emissions credit (as an informational item) for net greenhouse gas reductions in scope 2 (electricity) emissions only if the certificates come from electricity generation not delivered to California. This is somewhat counterintuitive and is due to California’s cap-and-trade program. Full details are covered in the Section on Electricity. Because California-eligible RECs are desirable for compliance with California’s mandatory Renewable Portfolio Standard, less-expensive, voluntary Green-e RECs available for purchase are not California-eligible. Within California, greenhouse gas claims made from use of non-California RECs may ultimately be seen as weak and considered the result of an accounting maneuver. There is not yet a commonly-accepted standard for the adjusting community-wide emissions inventories for the purchase of Renewable Energy Certificates. This scenario could be applicable under a Community Choice Aggregation program. Powered by California Renewable Energy California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard requires 33% of statewide electricity consumption to come from qualified renewable energy sources by 2020. Because of this mandate, generation from qualified sources is at a price premium compared to non-qualified sources. Because of California’s cap-and-trade program, Hermosa Beach must take the extra step of retiring allowances through the California Air Resources Board’s Voluntary Renewable Energy Program in order to claim emissions-related benefits. Despite being more expensive and requiring an extra step to claim greenhouse gas benefits, California Renewable Energy is likely to be perceived as the gold standard for renewable energy claims in California. Hermosa Beach could purchase California Renewable Energy from Southern California Edison’s Green Rate Option, from a future Community Choice Aggregation program, possibly from direct access provider (through a lottery), or from on-site generation. A Community Choice Aggregation program could offer, and Southern California Edison’s Green Rate Option will offer, California Renewable Energy. Recommendation for Hermosa Beach To be seen as a leader in municipal climate action, Hermosa Beach would need to commit to neutralizing emissions from municipal operations within the next 10 years. While a goal of 2025 244 Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 28 would still help Hermosa Beach be seen as a leader, the City should match goals set by the City of Austin and County of Boulder and commit to a 2020 goal. Committing to the same goal as other leading local governments would unambiguously establish Hermosa Beach as a climate action leader. While many British Columbia municipalities have already achieved carbon neutral status for 2010, many have backed off the use of offsets to neutralize greenhouse gas emissions. Hermosa Beach has an opportunity to be achieve “first-to” status for municipal operations in the United States by committing to neutralize as early as 2015. Hermosa Beach can seek the more aggressive goals of “Carbon Negative” status and “Powered by 100% California Renewable Energy”. However, this level of climate commitment from the City is currently unnecessary for the City to be seen as a national leader. The City should re-evaluate its climate and renewable energy goals in the future if it finds itself undifferentiated in a growing pool of cities with simple “Carbon Neutral” goals, which are currently rare. ➤ ➣ ➢ Hermosa Beach should set a goal to become Carbon Neutral for municipal operations by the end of 2020. 245 Electricity: Page 29 Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan Electricity Introduction Municipal electricity use accounts for 43.4% of total scope 1, 2, & selected scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions reported in the City’s 2007 operations inventory. This section of the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan focuses on the procurement of emissions-free renewable electricity in order to make carbon neutrality claims and implement Program E5 of the City’s Sustainability Plan: Municipal Renewable Energy Generating. Efficiency efforts remain important, nonetheless, and the City should continue to pursue actions outlined in the Energy Study Report and the Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan. The Hermosa Beach Carbon Neutral Electricity Procurement Plan explored on-site zero emissions generation, Southern California Edison’s Green Rate Option, and Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) for community electricity. In this section, we also discuss a Power Purchase Agreement, a municipal lease, Direct Access programs, and the use of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) as options. We recommend a combination of on-site generating, RECs, and pursuit of a CCA for achieving the City’s carbon neutral goals. On-site Electricity Generation Production Incentives for Owned Generation California Solar Initiative The California Solar Initiative began in 2007 to provide additional incentives for solar generation in California. When the program began in 2007, non-residential entities were eligible for a $2.40/watt incentive for installation and a $0.39/kWh incentive for energy production. The program utilizes a tiered schedule where incentives decline as more solar projects are installed. In Southern California Edison territory, the California Solar Initiative incentive for non-residential customers, including local governments, is currently $0.20 per watt of installed capacity (step 10 is the final step for the incentive). As of July 2014, approximately 72 MW of installed capacity remains available in the program. Go Solar California maintains up-to-date information on the status of the program. The incentive for residential customers in Southern California Edison Territory has been exhausted. 246 Electricity: Page 30 The Local Government Renewable Energy Self-Generation Bill Credit Transfer The Local Government Renewable Energy Self-Generation Bill Credit Transfer allows local governments with on-site energy generation to transfer excess bill credits between accounts. This would allow Hermosa Beach to generate excess solar power at one facility and transfer any credit to other accounts. According to CPUC Guidance, the program applies only to local government-owned systems and would not apply to a power purchase agreement. Southern California Edison does not require transfer of the Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) produced by the generating facility, which would transfer the renewable benefits of the energy to another party. Hermosa Beach could retain these RECs to claim use of renewable energy and associated emissions benefits (if allowances are voluntarily retired) if it has no other agreement to transfer the RECs to another party. Southern California Edison can offer up to 124.6 MW total under their bill credit transfer program. As of June 16, 2014 107.72 MW remains available. SCE charges a $500 set up fee and $30 monthly billing fee per generating account. Other Options for Procurement of On-Site Generation Entering into a Power Purchase Agreement or lease agreement can spread the costs of solar installation over several years, reducing the need for upfront payments. Unlike local governments, private owners of solar generating equipment can also utilize investment tax credits to reduce system cost. Power Purchase Agreement Under a Power Purchase Agreement, a third party owns and installs the equipment needed to generate on-site solar power, and Hermosa Beach signs a contract to purchase all power delivered by the unit at a pre-specified price per MWh. A Power Purchase Agreement can be a compelling option to pay for solar over time, and the City can negotiate the option to purchase the equipment at a substantially reduced rate at the end of the contract term. The U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory has published a Power Purchase Agreement Checklist for Local Government. In addition, a presentation from the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources outlines the pros and cons. Among the cons are that the City would receive two electricity bills and that transaction costs for establishing the agreement may be high. Another con is that because the system would be privately owned, the city cannot participate in the Self-Generating BIll Credit Transfer, which would have allowed the city to overproduce at one site and use that energy at a site with a higher demand. Solar Lease A third party owns and installs the equipment needed to generate on-site solar electricity, and Hermosa Beach signs a contract to lease this equipment at a pre-specified price. Some 247 Electricity: Page 31 agreements have an option to purchase the equipment at a substantially reduced rate at the end of the lease term. One option unique to local governments is the California Lease Finance Program (CaLease). However, this program has a $500,000 minimum financing amount. Another option is the Southern California Regional Energy Center Public Agency Master Lease, which offers a minimum loan of $250,000, but allows multiple projects to be bundled under a single loan. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Credit for On-site Renewable Electricity Generating California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires utilities to procure a specified quantity of renewable electricity. The current mandate requires 33% of energy to come from renewable sources by 2020. While the use of renewable energy helps the state meet its greenhouse gas cap, additional generation or use of renewable, all else held equal, does not reduce the cap. Any reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that come from meeting or exceeding the RPS requirement will lower an electricity utility’s compliance obligation - the allowances they must surrender each year to comply with the cap. Excess procurement will not affect the overall greenhouse gas emissions cap for California, but rather free up additional space under the cap for other sources to emit greenhouse gasses. In effect, greenhouse gas reductions that come from exceeding RPS or implementing greenhouse gas reduction measures would decrease the cost of a compliance unit. The notable exception is presented below. Because of California’s Cap-and-Trade program, the greenhouse gas reduction benefits of renewable energy are separate from other environmental properties. As such, The National Green-e standard has special procedures for creating RECs from voluntary renewable energy generated in California. Voluntary renewable energy is electricity that is procured in excess of an entity’s compliance obligation under the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard. This includes electricity rooftop solar projects on Hermosa Beach municipal facilities, whether owned by the City or procured through a lease or Power Purchase Agreement. Southern California Edison would not obtain RPS credit for voluntary renewable energy generated within its service territory. California’s Voluntary Renewable Electricity Program allows for retirement of greenhouse gas allowances for renewable energy. Each year from 2015 to 2020, up to 0.25% of allowances under California’s Cap-and-Trade program will be retired through the program. Allowances are retired on a first-come, first-served basis. Hermosa Beach cannot own and sell credits produced under the Voluntary Renewable Electricity Program. Claiming Emissions Reductions Under The Climate Registry’s rule, retiring allowances is not necessary for Hermosa Beach to claim greenhouse gas reductions for on-site renewable energy generation. However, Hermosa 248 Electricity: Page 32 Beach’s participation in the program is necessary for it to claim that its use of renewable energy reduced greenhouse gas emissions in California. If allowances remain in the Voluntary Renewable Energy Reserve Account after the California Air Resources Board serves all greenhouse gas allowance retirement requests, then these allowances may be auctioned. This has two implications for producing real, additional reductions to greenhouse gas emissions in California: 1. If the Reserve Account is undersubscribed, meaning that there are fewer requests for retirements than allowances available in the account, then Hermosa Beach’s participation produces real, additional reductions in statewide greenhouse gas emissions. This is because the City’s participation in VREP prevents another entity from purchasing the allowance via auction. Hermosa Beach could then claim zero-emissions electricity under the ARB’s rules. 2. If the Reserve Account would be exhausted regardless of Hermosa Beach’s participation, then Hermosa Beach’s successful retirement of allowances does allow Hermosa Beach to take credit for zero-emissions electricity under the ARB’s rules, but does not produce real, additional reductions in statewide greenhouse gas emissions. Retiring allowances, though not required for Hermosa Beach to claim carbon neutrality under The Climate Registry rules, makes the City’s neutrality claim more robust. The City must enact and sustain greenhouse gas reduction activities that allow it to retire allowances in order to make valid Carbon Negative or Climate Positive claims. Qualified Renewable Energy Sources Section 95841.1 of the California Cap-and-Trade Regulation identifies general requirements to retire greenhouse gas allowances under the program: 1. The generator must be new and not have served load prior to July 1, 2005. 2. The generator of the renewable energy or RECs must be certified as RPS-eligible by the California Energy Commission or meet the design and installation programs of the Guidelines for California’s Solar Electric Incentive Programs in place at the time the system received an approved utility incentive claim. The California Energy Commission maintains a list of generators that meet RPS-eligibility requirements. 3. Voluntary renewable electricity must be directly delivered to California (PCC-1 and PCC- 2). 4. The REC must be generated in the same year that Hermosa Beach requests the retirement of greenhouse gas allowances through the ARB. For example, 2014 vintage RECs can only be retired as 2014 vintage greenhouse gas allowances. 5. The REC must be tracked by and retired with the Western Region Renewable Generation Information System (WREGIS) before submitting an application to the ARB for allowance retirement. 249 Electricity: Page 33 6. The ARB determines the greenhouse gas reduction that comes from a given unit of power consumption. How to Apply The annual application deadline for requesting the retirement of a REC(s) is July 1 of the year after the unit of renewable energy was generated. July 1, 2014 was the first deadline for parties to request retirement of allowances. As of September 2014, the California Air Resources Board reports zero retirements from the program’s account. If Hermosa Beach generates on-site renewable energy in the future, it can apply to the program. In order to reduce the City’s application burden, one application for multiple systems with nameplate capacities of 200 kW or less may be aggregated and submitted together. Criteria for Siting Solar Photovoltaic Systems Generating zero-emissions renewable electricity at locations recognizable as city facilities is an attractive option to demonstrate the city’s climate actions while reducing gross greenhouse gas emissions. The following criteria will help the City determine appropriate locations for on-site solar photovoltaic systems: ● If rooftop-mounted, the building and roof have the structural integrity to support a solar photovoltaic system. ● The host facility won’t undergo significant changes that affect the roof and photovoltaic system during the financing contract, or, if purchased, the assumed 30-year life of the solar system. ● The host facility is part of an electricity service account that has sufficient usage to size a cost-effective solar photovoltaic system. In general, larger systems have a lower cost per watt-hour of electricity, since fixed costs are defrayed over additional units of electricity. Also, in certain financing scenarios the energy must be used on-site as a bill transfer credit is not allowed under a municipal lease arrangement or power purchase agreement. ● Ideally, the solar photovoltaic system would be visible from publicly-accessible areas, allowing the photovoltaic panels to be a visible part of the city’s public education a nd outreach efforts. Southern California Edison’s Green Rate Option The Green Rate, a high-renewables content energy subscription program, will be available to ratepayers within SCE’s territory beginning January 2015. This program enables customers to participate in off-site renewable energy generation through SCE by subscribing to 50% or 100% renewable resource content for a determined price premium. We estimate the Green Rate Charge to be a 6.77 cent/kWh premium over the City’s estimated average generating charge of 7.53 cents/kWh. With a subscription to this new program, the City of Hermosa Beach could 250 Electricity: Page 34 meet their entire energy load with one hundred percent renewable energy; however this method will be far more costly than other alternatives. Also under SB 43, the founding legislation for this program, SCE is only required to offer the Green Rate until January 1, 2019. No provisions are currently established to continue the program beyond this deadline. According to a report compiled by GSE Solutions, the City’s average annual energy usage is 1,717,582 kWh. Detailed, itemized bills provided by the City covered 1,339,598 kWh of usage, and we used the rates on those bills to estimate the annual premium for the Green Rate option. The table below shows a comparison of the current annual total paid by the City for electricity with a standard renewables content and the projected annual price should Hermosa Beach subscribe to 100% renewable energy on the Green Rate. Green Rate vs. Annual Total Annual Electricity Use (kWh) Estimated Annual Green Rate Premium Current Annual Charge Total Projected Annual Charges GSE Solutions Report 1,717,582 $116,318.09 $300,961.00 $417,279.09 Provided SCE Bills 1,339,598 $90,720.26 $264,672.61 $355,392.87 Direct Access Program Direct Access is an electricity procurement option in California that allows certain customers to purchase their electricity directly from Electric Service Providers. Electric Service Providers are able to offer a greater variety of retail options to electricity customers, offering more competitive pricing or greater renewable energy attributes than is offered by SCE’s bundled product. Direct Access first became an option in California in 1998, but was suspended in September 2001. Electricity customers with existing Direct Access contracts could continue. Through 2010, 7,764 GWh of annual customer load remained with the Direct Access program. Direct Access is an extremely limited option for Hermosa Beach. New direct access connections are offered only via an annual lottery, so there is little certainty that Hermosa Beach would be able to choose this option. Furthermore, Hermosa Beach’s annual electricity demand may be insufficient to obtain a competitive rate quote from an Electric Service Provider. Additionally, as many Electric Service Providers use unbundled RECs to offer green power, there would be no greenhouse gas reductions benefit over separately purchasing and retiring RECs. Hermosa Beach’s annual electricity demand in 2010 was under 2 GWh. Even a municipality with over ten times the 251 Electricity: Page 35 annual electricity demand (Santa Monica) found it could not obtain competitive rates from prospective Electric Service Providers for Direct Access service. The staff report at the time alleged that the City did not receive a competitive rate because the City’s 28.95 GWh in annual demand was “too small to offer significant price discounts or flexible terms over a long -term contract.” In 2009, SB 695 re-opened Direct Access to new non-residential customers in 2010. Four phase-in periods were offered via first-come, first-served applications to allocate an additional 3,946 GWh in annual load for new Direct Access customers. In each period, there was more demand for the Direct Access than there was load available, and many potential customers were turned away. Southern California Edison’s overall Direct Access program cap is 11,710 GWh per year, about 13.5% of the utility’s 2012 load of 86,558 GWh. Direct Access Lottery A post phase-in enrollment process allows aspiring new direct access customers to join an annual waitlist. Waitlist applications are accepted during an annual phase-in enrollment period, the second full week of June, and new Direct Access customers are assigned via a lottery if and when existing direct access customers end their contract. If the City wished to participate in the Direct Access lottery, it would first choose an approved Electric Service Provider. Before the second week in June, Hermosa Beach’s selected Electric Service Provider would complete and submit a Customer Information Service Request (CISR) form to obtain the City’s energy usage and billing histories from Southern California Edison. The form requires the signature of the Hermosa Beach City Manager or another person authorized to bind the City to a financial contract. Southern California Edison must receive and approve the CISR in advance of the June enrollment period. During the second week of June, Hermosa Beach would submit a Six-Month Advance Notice Form to switch service from Southern California Edison to its chosen Electric Service Provider. Southern California Edison would then assign Hermosa Beach’s application a random waitlist number. Each month, Southern California Edison will review available Direct Access and randomly select numbers from the waitlist and notify Hermosa Beach if load is available. If selected, Hermosa Beach would be allowed to switch to its preselected Electric Service Provider beginning January 1 of the following calendar year. The chosen Electric Service Provider must submit a Direct Access Service Request form in order to complete the transition. Each waitlist is for one calendar year. Hermosa Beach would need to submit a new application each June if it wished to remain on the waitlist. 252 Electricity: Page 36 Customers subscribing to a Direct Access program may be automatically enrolled in a Community Choice Aggregation program, unless they opt out. The state maintains a list of registered Electric Service Providers, 21 of whom have agreements with Southern California Edison. Two providers are notable for Hermosa Beach’s Carbon Neutrality efforts. 1. Three Phases Renewables is a Manhattan Beach-based company that focuses on 100% renewable energy. 2. The City of Santa Monica has a Direct Access contract with Commerce Energy to provide 100% of municipal energy demand with 100% renewable power. However, due to a lapse in service, Commerce only supplies 59% of the City’s energy demand. Community Choice Aggregation AB 117, passed in 2002, established the legislative precedent for forming a Community Choice Aggregation (CCA). This bill enables California cities, groups of cities, or counties to supply electricity to customers within their jurisdiction. Establishment of a CCA allows the community to specifically allocate resources for electricity procurement, while the Investor Owned Utility (IOU) retains ownership of all transmission and delivery systems. Once a city or community forms a CCA, they gain autonomy over their energy sources, and are thus free to pursue specific initiatives like carbon neutral electrical generation. Community Choice Aggregators comply with California’s RPS, but they can procure renewable energy above and beyond this requirement. The City of Hermosa Beach could utilize this procurement method in one of three ways to reach their overall goal of Carbon Neutrality. First, the City may launch its own effort to form a CCA as a single city. This method could prove cost-intensive as none of the fees or surcharges associated with the formation of this entity would be shared. Second, the City could pursue a partnership with surrounding cities, communities, or counties with similar, progressive climate goals and establish a CCA in which startup costs would be split. Finally, the City of Hermosa Beach may opt to join an already emerging or pre-existing CCA. CCAs have garnered significant success in California since the formation and growth of Marin Clean Energy (MCE) beginning May 2010. Sonoma Clean Power soon followed this success and will provide service by the end of the 2014 calendar year. These successes in the North Bay have given rise to other efforts to form CCAs in California. Listed below is a synopsis of actions taken by California communities toward CCA formation. 253 Electricity: Page 37 Lancaster Choice Energy Lancaster Choice Energy plans to be the next operational CCA in California. This entity plans to begin accepting Municipal enrollment in May 2015, Commercial/Industrial enrollment in November 2015, and Residential enrollment in November 2016. Lancaster Choice Energy has reached agreement with SCE as an approved Community Choice Aggregator Service and has already received accreditation on their Service Provider Application. San Diego Energy District The San Diego Energy District is in its beginning stages to become a CCA serving the City and County of San Diego. A Technical Feasibility Study has recently been authorized for the region. Clean Power S.F. Clean Power S.F. is planned to serve residential electricity customers in the City of San Francisco. Thus far, the efforts in the area to form this service have reached just short of residential service, which was expected at the end of 2013 and is currently accepting pre - enrollment. East Bay Community Choice Energy The County of Alameda has endeavored to create a CCA serving its residential electr icity load excluding the City of Alameda. The Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to launch a feasibility study in June 2014. 254 Electricity: Page 38 Summary of Current CCA Planning & Pre-operational Efforts in California CCA Current Stage Lancaster Choice Energy Preoperational: Community Choice Aggregator Service Agreement with Southern California Edison has been approved and Service Provider Application has been approved. Service Begins: ● Municipal enrollment May 2015 ● Commercial/Industrial enrollment in November 2015 ● Residential enrollment by November 2016 San Francisco Preoperational (delayed): Implementation Plan certified by CPUC and registered as a CCA. For residential customers only. Was expected for late-2013. Pre-enrollment is open. East Bay Community Choice Energy Feasibility: After an initial study, Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to launch a Feasibility Study in June 2014. San Diego Energy District Feasibility: Technical Feasibility Study authorized by City of San Diego. Contra Costa County Under Consideration: Public information presentations underway Hermosa Beach Under Consideration: The City Council adopted a resolution to join with other cities for a feasibility study. Humboldt County & Arcata Under Consideration: Student-authored feasibility study released 2011 & 2013 from UC Davis. San Luis Obispo County Under Consideration: The County’s EnergyWise Plan suggests evaluation of a CCA. Santa Barbara Under Consideration: County’s emissions reduction strategy includes ‘evaluate CAA formation’ in Staff Report for Climate Action Plan, August 2014. Yolo County, City of Davis Under Consideration: Yolo Climate Action Plan requires the County to determine ‘feasibility of CCA Issue’ brought up on City Council Agenda in August 2012. 255 Electricity: Page 39 Renewable Energy Certificates Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) can be part of a long-term or transitional strategy to incorporate renewable energy into Hermosa Beach’s electricity mix. Because California both requires utilities to procure a certain amount of renewable energy and caps greenhouse gas emissions, the rules surrounding the use of RECs for Carbon Neutrality claims is somewhat complicated. RECs do not directly translate into greenhouse gas offsets because the replacement power is not fully accounted for. However, special rules apply to convert California RECs into offsets, and commonly-accepted greenhouse gas accounting rules allow Hermosa Beach to use certain RECs to reduce gross emissions. Accounting for Renewable Energy Purchases in the Emissions Inventory The multi-partner, sector-specific Local Government Operations Protocol and The Climate Registry’s General Reporting Protocol provide greenhouse gas accounting and reporting guidance for cities. Section 6.2.4 of the Local Government Operations Protocol outlines guidance for green power and renewable energy certificate purchases. In summary, the guidance suggests that local governments report “green power” or REC purchases as supplemental information in their inventory report; the purchases should not be deducted from scope 2 emissions. The reasoning behind this recommendation is that deducting this electricity use would result in double counting of the greenhouse gas benefit from renewable energy because the renewable energy is already accounted for in the electricity emissions factor. In the 2010 update, the partners that publish the protocol wrote: “The partner organizations will continue to monitor and track the evolution of green power programs and the REC market. We hope that a broadly used, credible tracking, and retirement processes will soon be in place and that we will be able to provide better guidance to account for the GHG reductions associated with these purchases in future versions of this Protocol.” It is Kaizenergy’s opinion that a 2013 update to the Climate Registry’s General Reporting Protocol provides the guidance needed for local governments to adjust scope 2 electricity consumption and emissions for REC purchases. The Local Government Operations Protocol provides sector-specific guidance for implementation of the General Reporting Protocol. The 2013 update also provides for the use of program-specific utility emissions factors for entities that subscribe to a utility’s green power program, such as Southern California Edison’s Green Rate Option. The 2013 update to the General Reporting Protocol also provides a method to adjust for the ownership and retirement of unbundled RECs that meet the Green-e standard. This includes 256 Electricity: Page 40 RECs from solar electric, such as concentrated solar thermal, wind, geothermal, certified low- impact or EcoLogo hydropower, pipeline or irrigation canal turbine hydropower, and biomass (non-chemically treated woody waste, agricultural crops or waste). Adjusting Hermosa Beach’s emissions inventory for REC purchases is simple: the City follows the same methodology as in its 2005 and 2007 municipal emissions inventories, adjusting for the emissions factor of renewable energy. Emissions are calculated by multiplying the quantity, in Megawatt-hours, of qualified, current-year RECs retired on Hermosa Beach’s behalf by the emissions factor of the renewable energy source. Some renewable energy generation projects create anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, such as additional organic material decomposition behind a hydroelectric dam. Greenhouse gas emissions from any electricity purchases not covered by retiring RECs will be calculated as usual: Megawatt -hours times the emissions factor of the source (e.g. Southern California Edison’s utility-specific emissions factor). Nationally, the use of RECs for greenhouse gas accounting is subject to a number of rules: ● The REC must be separate from offsets. For example, offsets produced by a livestock project that captures and combusts biogenic methane must not include the carbon offsets produced by the renewable energy generation. ● RECs must be of near-similar vintage to the inventory year they will be used to offset electricity purchases. REC accounting standards allow some leeway: RECs can be produced up to six months before or three months after the period covered by the inventory (typically a calendar year). ● To ensure that RECs lead to the creation of new renewable energy generation, they must come from facilities that began operations fewer than 15 years before the inventory year. The California policy environment creates two additional requirements for RECs: ● RECs must include all renewable and environmental attributes associated with the production of renewable energy. In California, this means that the greenhouse gas benefits of renewable energy production must be retired through the Air Resources Board’s Voluntary Renewable Electricity Program ● RECs must be surplus to regulatory requirements. That is, they must be produced above and beyond what’s needed to comply with California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard. According to The Climate Registry, RECs bearing the Green-e Energy and EcoLogo tags will meet the national and California requirements. RECs from energy not delivered to California do not require allowance retirement in order to be Green-e eligible. Green-e Renewable Energy Certificates Requirements for California’s Cap and Trade System Green-e standards require the full greenhouse gas reduction benefits be included with the REC. This creates special procedures for renewable energy delivered to areas where greenhouse gas 257 Electricity: Page 41 emissions are capped, such as California. Green-e standards require RECs created by energy generated in or delivered to California (PCC 1 and PCC2) to have their associated greenhouse gas benefit retired through allowances, procured either through the Voluntary Renewable Energy Program or purchased through other means. California Renewable Energy Certificates California Law defines RECs as "a certificate of proof, issued through the accounting system established by the Energy Commission… that one unit of electricity was generated and delivered by an eligible renewable energy resource.” This includes “all renewable and environmental attributes associated with the production of electricity from the eligible renewable energy resource, except for an emissions reduction credit issued pursuant to [California’s Cap- and-Trade Program] and any credits or payments associated with the reduction of solid waste and treatment benefits created by the utilization of biomass or biogas fuels.” In the table below, each renewable energy classification is presented with procurement options and whether Hermosa Beach could make valid Carbon Neutrality claims under the Air Resources Board (ARB) accounting regulations or The Climate Registry’s (TCR) accounting guidance. 258 Electricity: Page 42 Categories of California Renewable Energy Renewable Energy Classification Description Cost Premium ($/MWh over grid power) Procurement Options Carbon Neutrality Claims* PCC 1 Renewable electricity generated in or near California, with arrangements to deliver the power to California. $10-$30 DA, CCA ARB, TCR (with allowance retirement) PCC 2 Renewable electricity generated outside of California, bundled with environmental attributes, but without arrangements to deliver the power to California. $5-$25 DA, CCA ?, TCR (with allowance retirement) PCC 3 The unbundled (separate from electricity) environmental attributes of renewable energy generated outside of California. $1-$10 REC, DA, CCA TCR (if Green-e certified) Green-e Renewable Energy Certificate The unbundled environmental attributes of renewable energy, generated outside of California. $1-$5 REC, CCA TCR California Green-e REC A Green-e REC from a qualifying PCC 1 or 2 facility with retired CA-eligible CO2 allowance. $5-$30 REC, CCA ARB, TCR *for zero-emissions renewable generation. Not all renewable generation is zero non-biogenic emissions (e.g. biomass processes that require electricity). Cost estimates are for 2013 from Table 6 of Palo Alto’s Electricity Supply Portfolio Carbon Neutral Plan. Marin Clean Energy use of Renewable Energy Certificates Many CCA Programs, utility green power purchase programs, and Direct Access providers make use of RECs in order to offer “green” power. Marin Clean Energy uses a mix of California RPS energy and Green-e RECs for its product. According to their 2013 Integrated Resources Plan: 259 Electricity: Page 43 “MEA is largely resourced for the next several years, having contracted for most of its projected needs for bundled renewable energy through 2017, non -renewable energy through 2017 and capacity through 2015. However, MEA has a short term need for bundled renewable energy in 2014 (PCC1) and a longer term need beginning in 2017 (PCC1 and PCC2). MEA also has a need for capacity purchases to meet resource adequacy obligations beginning in 2015. ... The majority of MEA’s voluntary renewable energy purchases (those in excess of RPS- eligible purchases) are under contract through the end of 2013. MEA has a need for renewable energy certificates in 2014 and beyond to support RPS compliance (PCC3) and voluntary renewable energy targets (Green-e). MEA also has a need for carbon neutral energy in 2014 and beyond to support voluntary GHG emissions targets. In 2013, MCE offered 60% renewable or zero emissions energy. Twenty-seven percent of its total load came from RPS-eligible generation. The balance is met with Green-e certified REC purchases.” The graphic below highlights Marin Clean Energy’s plan to use bundled and bundled RECs in order to offer its renewable energy programs. Marin Clean Energy Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy, 2013 to 2022 260 Electricity: Page 44 Recommendations First and foremost, the City should continue and expand upon existing energy efficiency programs. As the GSE Solutions report indicates, the City has opportunities to improve building energy efficiency by 40% or more. The City should pursue Projects 1 and 2, and the bundle of hot water and HVAC projects identified in the GSE Solutions report. After committing to Carbon Neutrality, the City should include the cost to neutralize emissions from electricity (approximately 0.3 cents additional per kWh) when evaluating whether to pursue electricity efficiency and retrofit projects. To take a highly-visible climate action step, Hermosa Beach should take steps to install solar photovoltaic systems on municipal property. The City should continue to explore the options of a Power Purchase Agreement and Solar Lease. The City should also request the retirement of greenhouse gas emissions allowances through the state’s Voluntary Renewable Electricity Program in order to claim unambiguous emissions reductions. RECs are a commonly-accepted element of a green or carbon neutral portfolio, and should be an element of Hermosa Beach’s municipal Carbon Neutrality efforts. Some entities employ RECs as a short term strategy while they wait for new generating projects to be built. Hermosa Beach can retire Green-e RECs to make greenhouse gas reduction claims under The Climate Registry’s General Reporting Protocol. Over the long term, Hermosa Beach should establish a CCA program and become one of program’s first customers. This would allow for a unified approach to community and municipal greenhouse gas emissions reductions, with community members participating in the same program as the municipality. A CCA program can offer a 100% renewable, emissions-free energy option for the municipality, households, and firms. According to Southern California Edison rate schedule OBF-2, on-bill financing programs for energy efficiency retrofits will continue to be available under a CCA program. Even with on-site solar generation and a CCA program, Hermosa Beach will likely continue to purchase streetlight services from Southern California Edison, particularly for streetlights on wood poles. The City can shift these accounts to Edison’s Green Rate option, or purchase Green-e RECs equal the amount of electricity used by SCE-owned streetlights. 261 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 45 Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan Municipal Fleet Introduction The Clean Fleet Policy and Action Plan, created in 2013, specifies a long-term goal of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions for the municipal fleet and alternative fuel used by 100% of contracted city service vehicles. The Plan also sets an interim goal to determine the feasibility of 50% emissions reduction for the City fleet and 20% emissions reduction for contractor service vehicles. These goals demonstrate the City’s strong commitment to reducing the carbon footprint of its municipal operations. The City’s policies to “maximize the use of alternative fuel and low emission vehicles used to supply city services,” “reduce vehicle emissions through efficient fleet management and operations,” and “facilitate infrastructure to support alternative fuel vehicles” are in line with current best practices for California Local Governments, as identified by the Institute for Local Government and the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). Currently, the municipal fleet is comprised of CNG, diesel, gasoline, and propane fueled vehicles. According to Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan checklist, the City utilizes vehicles with fuel ranges from 11-44 mpg gasoline, 9-12 mpg diesel, 13-30 mpg CNG, and 30 mpg propane, all of which have varying emissions intensities. Though over 20% of the vehicle fleet is comprised of alternative fuel vehicles, making Hermosa Beach ahead of, or in line with many neighboring cities (Manhattan Beach has 13%, for instance), it is behind some area cities. For example, Santa Monica’s non-emergency fleet is comprised of 81% alternative fuel vehicles. Some national cities also have more aggressive goals. Indianapolis, for instance, is the first city in the U.S. to pledge to convert its entire municipal non-police fleet to electric or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles by 2025. 262 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 46 Hermosa Beach’s City Fleet by Fuel Type Fuel Type Number of Vehicles (In Use) Models CNG 6 Camry, Interceptor, F-150, F-250 Diesel 8 Leader, Spartan, Fire Truck, Equipment Gasoline 57 Tahoe, Escape hybrid, Crown Victoria, Durango, F- 150, F-250, F-350, F-450, Interceptor, Wrangler, Explorer, Utility truck, Impala, Taurus, Propane 1 Interceptor Source: Hermosa Beach Energy Efficiency and Climate Action Plan Checklist Related Sustainability Plan Goals The City’s Sustainability Plan details three goals for the City’s fleet: ● T10: Adopt a clean fuel/ultra low emission vehicle buying policy for all City vehicles and devise a long-term plan for replacement, identifying several options for low emissions vehicles that includes a cost-benefit analysis for all fleet vehicle types. ● T11: Evaluate CNG filling station for municipal vehicles. ● T12: Provide EV charging stations for City vehicles. Recommendations for Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet Hermosa Beach’s 2013 City Fleet Policy and Master Plan is aligned with current regional best practices and policies. The City can continue to pursue their goal of Carbon Neutral municipal operations by continuing to adopt the most current trends in green fleet procurement and management. As the technology, performance, cost, financing options, and availability of alternative fuel vehicles are quickly evolving, the fleet policy should be responsive to these trends. The City of Hermosa Beach should review and revise the policy on a regular basis to ensure the City is acquiring the lowest emission vehicles that meet its needs. These recommendations are meant to provide guidance for future fleet procurement and management decisions. The recommendations are based upon the successful practices of other government agencies and best practices identified by respected resources. To remain consistent with the City Fleet Policy’s guideline, which states, “Review available green vehicle options including: electric vehicles, hybrids, CNGs, hydrogen, biodiesels, and any other emission reducing vehicles,” the City of Hermosa Beach should continue to consider the latest and lowest-emissions alternative fuel technology when replacing fleet vehicles. Zero- emissions vehicles are now becoming staples of alternative fueled vehicle fleets, in addition to 263 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 47 conventional hybrid and natural gas vehicles. These zero-emissions vehicles have environmental and operating advantages over other alternative fuel vehicles. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, fuel-cell electric vehicles, and battery-electric vehicles are now available in most vehicle classes. To keep up with the fast-changing California market for alternative fuel vehicles through comparison of price, performance, and environmental qualities of specific vehicles, Hermosa Beach should consult the California Air Resource Board’s Drive Clean Buying Guide and the guidance provided in Zero-Emission Vehicles in California: Community Readiness Guidebook created by the State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) is a California regulation adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARB) that requires petroleum suppliers to reduce the life-cycle carbon intensity of transportation fuels sold in the state. The regulation provides additional opportunities for Hermosa Beach to reduce gross greenhouse gas emissions and additionally neutralize net emissions from the transportation sector. The regulation establishes a declining schedule for the average adjusted carbon intensity, in grams of CO2/MegaJoule (g/MJ), of fuel sold in the state. In 2014, the required adjusted carbon intensity is 94.41 g/MJ. To reduce the greenhouse gas intensity of gasoline sold in California 10% by 2020, the average adjusted carbon intensity of fuels sold must decrease to 86.27 g/MJ. Producers, refiners, blenders, and distributors of transportation fuels must acquire and surrender LCFS credits, denominated in metric tonnes of CO2-equivalent, to demonstrate compliance with the regulation. Hermosa Beach does not generate LCFS credits when using electricity or natural gas as vehicle fuels, as these credits are retained by the respective utilities. However, Hermosa Beach’s use of low-carbon fuels reduces the City’s gross greenhouse gas emissions. Adjusted carbon intensity values compensate for differences in the energy economy of a vehicle. According to the ARB, an electric-powered vehicle travels 3.0 times further on a unit of energy than a gasoline-powered vehicle. 264 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 48 Adjusted Carbon Intensity of California Vehicle Fuels Fuel Type Adjusted Carbon Intensity (grams CO2e/MJ California Gasoline (CARBOB) 95.86 California Reformulated Gasoline (CaRFG) 95.85 Midwestern Corn Ethanol 99.40 California Low-CI Ethanol 80.70 California-Sourced Compressed Natural Gas 75.22 California-Sourced Landfill Gas 12.51 Cellulosic Ethanol 20.40 Electricity (California average electricity mix) 41.37 Electricity (California marginal electricity mix) 34.90 Electricity (Zero Emissions Generating) 0.00 Hydrogen 33.09 Source: ARB Low Carbon Fuel Standard Staff Report Volume 1 Table IV-1 Electricity, landfill gas, and hydrogen are attractive options for reducing life-cycle emissions from transportation. Electricity is an especially attractive option, as the carbon intensity is a function of the mix of sources used to produce the electricity. For zero-emissions renewable energy, the carbon intensity value is zero. According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Alternative Fuels Data Center, electric vehicle infrastructure is most prevalent near Hermosa Beach, with 3 stations and 7 chargers, including 2 DC fast chargers, listed within the city. Three compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling stations are available in Torrance and near the Los Angeles Airport. Two of Southern California’s 9 hydrogen stations are located in the South Bay. Three biodiesel (B20+) and ethanol (E85) facilities are located in the Harbor Gateway corridor. 265 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 49 Alternative Fueling Stations near Hermosa Beach Source: U.S. Department of Energy Hermosa Beach should continue to prioritize plug-in electric vehicle purchases where they are practical. The convenience and future expansion potential of electric vehicle supply infrastructure and the low carbon intensity of electricity for vehicles makes plug-in electric vehicles an ideal choice for reducing gross emissions. Hermosa Beach should invest $50,000 in electric vehicle service equipment (chargers) and an additional $250,000 to accelerate its Clean Fleet Policy and Master Plan. Public Safety Vehicles As identified in the City’s Clean Fleet Policy, some fleets, particularly public safety, have limited or no alternative fuel options that meet their requirements. Where electric, natural gas, or hydrogen-fueled vehicles are not practical, Hermosa Beach could look to acquire Flex-Fuel vehicles, which can run on fuel blends of up to 85% ethanol (“E85”). 266 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 50 Ethanol has been criticized due to its high energy requirement to refine blends from certain feedstocks, and the indirect greenhouse gas emissions that result from additional land required to farm fuel crops. The California Low Carbon Fuel Standard takes a life-cycle perspective on environmental impacts in order to mitigate potential upstream environmental degradation due to use of ethanols and other fuels. American automobile manufacturers offer a number of E85-capable Police Pursuit Vehicles, including the Chevrolet Impala, Dodge Charger, and Ford Police Interceptor Utility. The Hermosa Beach City Council recently authorized the purchase of four police vehicles. The 2014 Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicle offers both a standard E85-capable 3.7-L V6 model and an upgraded 3.5-L V6 EcoBoost model that Hermosa Beach selected. The EcoBoost model offers higher performance, but is not E85-capable. The three 2015 Ford Fusion Hybrid vehicles the City authorized offer improved fuel economy but are not E85 capable. Cellulosic Ethanol has a carbon intensity of 20.40, but is not widely available for use in California. The more commonly available California Low-CI Ethanol has a carbon intensity of 80.70. As of September 2014, 220 flex-fuel capable models are available in the U.S. for general use. Alternatively, the City could look to purchase and retire greenhouse gas emissions credits produced under the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. Transportation-specific offset options and procedures are discussed later in this section. Financing Options and Considerations As consistent with the City Fleet Policy guideline stating “Research available grants, dealer incentives, and organization incentives” within the City’s purchasing, maintenance and environmental considerations, the City of Hermosa Beach should continue to consider all available financing options when purchasing or leasing (or considering the purchase or lease of) an alternative fuel vehicle. A review of best practices identified the following financing options for consideration: ● Municipal Lease Financing: Although local governments do not benefit from tax credits offered for the purchase of zero emission vehicles, many lenders offer municipal lease financing options. Municipal lease financing programs allow municipalities to capture a portion of the $7,500 tax credit that they would not capture in a direct purchase. The Nissan Municipal Lease Financing program and the Ford Municipal Financing program are two examples in which auto dealers provide financing options to local government agencies. Riverside County; the City of Loveland, Colorado; the City of Houston, Texas; and the City of Olympia, Washington have all utilized municipal lease financing programs to acquire electric vehicles for their municipal fleet. 267 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 51 ● State Procurement Contracts: Local governments are eligible to purchase vehicles using the California Department of General Services’ (DGS) state procurement contracts. Although many local government agencies prefer procuring fleet vehicles from local dealers, using the negotiated prices for alternative fuel vehicles listed with the state procurement contracts can serve as a baseline price for comparison purposes. ● Consider Total Cost of Ownership: The City should consider how capital and operating expenditures are allocated when making fleet procurement decisions. Since fuel costs will be lower in alternative fuel vehicles, the City may find that future operating savings justify higher initial procurement costs for alternative fuel vehicles. ● Include Co-Benefits in Cost Analysis: Hermosa Beach should explicitly assess other co-benefits and values that arise from the use of alternative vehicles, such as environmental health and the marketing of low emission vehicles to the community when comparing costs of alternative fuel vehicles to those of conventional vehicles. Potential Partnerships and Resources Instead of managing its municipal fleet internally, the City of Hermosa Beach could utilize local fleet management service companies to determine the best way to green their municipal fleet while maintaining fleet quality and cost-effectiveness. ● Vision Fleet Capital: Vision Fleet Capital strives to implement clean vehicles within fleets, cutting total cost of ownership, reliance on foreign oil, and enhancing service levels. Vision Fleet Capital also helps finance and manage fleets by offering low-cost financing, strategic operational advice, telematics tools, and asset management. Based locally in Venice Beach, California, Vision Fleet Capital could be a potential partner for Hermosa Beach to help the City electrify their vehicle fleet in the most cost-effective manner. Fleet Management Regulations The City Fleet Policy states that the City aims to “Reduce vehicle emissions through efficient fleet management and operations.” Best practices for efficient fleet management from the Institute for Local Government can assist Hermosa Beach in implementing this policy: ● Use Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and integrated software to control fleet vehicles, reduce misuse and increase efficiency through trip planning and location information. ● Provide fuel saving tips to drivers of fleet vehicles. These can include prohibiting idling, rapid acceleration, etc. ● Install battery systems for vehicles with onboard equipment to reduce truck idling when equipment is in use. ● Use technology options, such as requests via mobile device, for field personnel to prevent unnecessary trips back to the office. 268 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 52 Carsharing Instead of replacing old or under-utilized vehicles, the City of Hermosa Beach can also consider using carsharing to meet its fleet needs. Carsharing is a model of car rental where people rent cars by the hour or fraction of an hour. Local governments throughout the U.S. have used carsharing to lower fleet costs, reduce carbon emissions, and support sustainable transportation in their communities. Municipalities that have utilized car sharing to supplement their fleet include Berkeley, San Francisco, Austin, New York City, Seattle, and Washington DC. Local governmental support for carsharing services usually involves either the direct contracting of service and/or provision of parking spaces. These municipalities experienced many benefits using carsharing within their operations, including lower fleet replacement, maintenance, fuel, insurance and staffing costs; newer, cleaner, and lower emission vehicles; more efficient vehicle allocation; increased vehicle access for employees; more available parking; and better data on vehicle use and mileage. As each municipality’s program varied in scope, the following provides more detail on the experiences of a few municipalities who have utilized carsharing. ● The City of Berkeley: The first city to replace municipal fleet vehicles with carsharing, Berkeley has had considerable success reducing vehicle emissions, costs, and inefficient fleet use through an innovative partnership with City Carshare, the San Francisco Bay Area’s carsharing service. Berkeley’s partnership with City Carshare not only uses carsharing to replace municipal fleet vehicles, but also includes carsharing in the planning and development process and supports carsharing for citizens and businesses. Berkeley also contracted City Carshare to develop specialized vehicle reservation software that dedicates vehicles for City employee use during normal work hours, and allows any member of City Carshare to use the vehicles on evenings or weekends. In the first year of the program, 4-5 carshare vehicles replaced 10-15 fleet vehicles. The use of carsharing has resulted in an annual financial savings of about $8,000 per year, most of which results from not having to use the City’s vehicle replacement funds to replace fleet vehicles. These savings do not include air quality, parking, or public health benefits. ● The City and County of San Francisco: As the City and County of San Francisco retires its older vehicles, City Carshare’s fleet provides vehicles for City employee use so the City does not have to purchase new fleet vehicles. This partnership reduces San Francisco’s vehicle fleet size, lowers purchase and maintenance costs, and reduces carbon emissions. ● Washington DC: In 2008, Washington DC replaced 360 vehicles with a shared fleet of 71 passenger vehicles operated by Zipcar technology through the “FastFleet” program. FastFleet is Zipcar’s fleet management model that helps fleet managers right-size current fleets, enables self-service reservations and keyless access, develops analytics on driver and vehicle history, leverages software and support services, and transitions fleets to energy-efficient hybrid and electric vehicles where sensible. In Washington DC, employees use an intuitive web-based reservation system, phone, or mobile device to select and reserve vehicles and a wallet size access card to unlock the reserved car. 269 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 53 FastFleet varies from Zipcar’s conventional carsharing model in that it does not supply the vehicles. Instead, the City’s existing vehicles are equipped with FastFleet’s in - vehicle technology. After the first year of the pilot program, Washington DC projected a savings of greater than $6 million over five years. ● The City of Portland: Flexcar (now Zipcar) partnered with the City of Portland to provide fleet management services. In the pilot, Flexcar managed 12 out of 25 motor pool vehicles. Employees signed up for Flexar individually, and then each department was charged for vehicle use. This partnership saved Portland approximately 25% in the motor pool’s annual operating, maintenance, and fuel costs. After the pilot, Portland contracted all 25 motor pool vehicles to Flexcar, and Flexcar’s tracking technology helped Portland identify underutilized cars. ● The City of Austin: The City of Austin, Texas entered a revenue-neutral barter agreement with the carsharing organization Car2Go. Municipal employees could use vehicles for free during a six-month pilot phase, allowing Car2Go to gather consumer testing data and receive dedicated parking spaces avoiding parking fees. This partnership was innovative in that the City did not directly subsidize Car2Go, but the parking benefits were valued at about $85,000. After the successful pilot, Austin extended the partnership and numerous Texas state agencies have signed up for the Car2Go program. Potential Carsharing Partnerships for Hermosa Beach A few different organizations that offer carsharing services in L.A. County may serve as potential partners for Hermosa Beach. Each carsharing service listed below has experience working with a municipality and varies in its fleet composition, services offered, and other program components. ● Car2Go: In June 2014, Car2Go launched its pay-by-the-minute carsharing service in several South Bay Cities of LA County, including Hermosa Beach. Car2Go members use a smartphone application to find a vehicle, drive it, and then are able to park it in any public parking space identified as 2-hour parking or longer. This model differs from conventional round-trip services such as those provided by Zipcar. Hermosa Beach could contact Car2Go about the possibility of extending carsharing services for municipal fleet use, similar to Car2Go’s arrangement with the City of Austin, Texas. ● Zipcar: Now owned by Avis and operating in over 20 cities across North America, Zipcar is the world’s largest carsharing service and is an alternative to traditional car rental and ownership. Members use a Zipcard to unlock their car, pay a $6 per month membership fee and a driving rate of $8-10 per hour. Zipcar is a round-trip service, meaning members must return vehicles to the same parking space from which they obtained it. Beginning in 2009, the City of Los Angeles partnered with Zipcar to dedicate 40 on- street parking spots near USC and UCLA campuses to Zipcar. Washington DC partnered with Zipcar to utilize Zipcar’s FastFleet program to help them more efficiently 270 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 54 manage their municipal fleet. Hermosa Beach could partner with Zipcar either through the provision of parking spaces or by using Zipcar’s FastFleet as a tool to manage Hermosa Beach’s municipal fleet. Recommendations for Other Vehicles To achieve Carbon Neutrality for municipal operations, the City of Hermosa Beach must consider ambitious and innovative strategies. A review of the programs implemented by other municipalities identified the following strategies for consideration for Hermosa Beach: Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs) Hermosa Beach should also consider utilizing Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs) within its vehicle fleet. Falling under the U.S. classification for low-speed vehicles, NEVs are battery electric vehicles have a maximum speed of 25 mph and are legally limited to roads with speed limits of 45 mph or less. Although NEVs are not included in vehicle sales forecasts and passenger fleet projects, these short-range, low-speed vehicles designed for local use could become a key component of the electric vehicle mix, especially in mature suburban areas like the South Bay that will likely not attract transit investments in the near future. Beginning in 2004, the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) began to research a land use and transportation strategy that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, pollution, and gasoline use without focusing on transit investments or increased residential density. This led to the adoption of the Sustainable South Bay Strategy (SSBS) in 2010, which proposes that cities create compact destinations in neighborhood centers to encourage walking, cycling, and the use of NEVs for travel between these centers. As part of this strategy, the SBCCOG launched a NEV Demonstration Project which loaned a fleet of NEVs to South Bay households for an 18-month period. This project was highly successful, finding that of those who participated, NEV mode share averaged 46% of the roundtrips. The average round-trip travel distance ranged from 2-5 miles. Due to Hermosa Beach’s compact size, NEVs could also be an effective component of travel for municipal employees, whose average work trip or personal errand is likely only a few miles. Global Electric Motorcars (GEMs), a type of Neighborhood Electric Vehicle by Polaris, are small vehicles which serve as an alternative to golf carts. GEMs have served municipal fleets as utility, parking and security, and even landscaping and construction vehicles. Municipalities who have employed NEVs within their fleet include the City of Palm Springs, the City of Cypress, and the City of Santa Monica. Hermosa Beach should purchase two neighborhood electric vehicles for municipal fleet use and later determine whether these vehicles are a suitable replacement for other fleet needs. 271 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 55 Bicycle Fleet The Institute for Local Government’s Sustainability Best Practices Framework recommends establishing a pool of shared bicycles to allow employees to borrow a bicycle for use during the workday. Providing bikes to employees reduces vehicle trips made during the day for business and personal errands, therefore reducing emissions. Municipalities all over California have adopted employee bike share programs, including Long Beach, Santa Monica, Cupertino, San Jose, and San Francisco. Municipal bike fleet programs typically provide bicycles, secure bicycle storage, and showers and lockers. They usually require employees to complete a bicycle safety training program to participate. Traveling by bike especially makes sense in the City of Hermosa Beach due to its compact size. Although most cities provide regular bicycles, Hermosa Beach can also consider adding electric bicycles to its fleet program. Electric bicycles make it easier to travel on hilly terrain but still emit zero tailpipe emissions. An electric bike can achieve over 2,000 mpg-equivalent, making them a highly energy and cost-efficient option for Hermosa Beach. Hermosa Beach could be one of the very first cities to utilize electric bikes within their bike fleet. Purchasing regular or electric- assist bicycles also provides Hermosa Beach with an opportunity to support local businesses. See the following for a list of several local bike shops: ● Hermosa Cyclery, Inc: Located on the Strand at 20 13th Street in Hermosa Beach, Hermosa Cyclery specializes in strand cruisers that are easy to ride around the city and is regarded as a trusted bicycle service center. ● The Old Bike Shop: Located at 430 Pier Ave. in Hermosa Beach, the Old Bike Shop is an owner-operated bike shop that specializes in custom-built high end bikes. ● Beach Cities Cycle: This bike shop is located at 219 Pacific Coast Hwy in Hermosa Beach. ● Motion Bicycle Establishment: Motion Bicycle Establishment sells, rents, services, and repairs all types of bikes and is located at 914 Aviation Blvd in Hermosa Beach. ● Electric Bikes LA: Located at 433 Main Street in El Segundo, Electric Bikes LA is the first bicycle store in the region dedicated to the sale and repair of electric and folding bikes. Offsetting Emissions from Vehicles Implementation of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) is leading to the availability of low greenhouse gas transportation fuels in California. However, costs to transport these fuels from their production location to Hermosa Beach can be high. Additionally, many vehicles are not designed to use low-carbon fuels. The LCFS credits generated under the program are tradable. LCFS credits trade for $24 to $85 per credit, which, like allowances and offsets, are denominated in units of metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e). Compared with the $11.50 cost of California allowances, 272 Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 56 LCFS credits are an expensive means of offsetting emissions. However, in the future their use could allow for sector-specific neutrality claims. Instead of offsetting transportation emissions with forest or livestock projects, retiring LCFS credits will allow Hermosa Beach to claim that it is subsidizing low carbon fuels consumed by others on Hermosa Beach’s behalf. Whether entities without compliance obligations like Hermosa Beach can acquire and voluntary retire LCFS credits for climate action goals has not been tested as of this writing. Additionally, no greenhouse gas accounting method currently exists to adjust fuel purchases for LCFS credits. If a commonly accepted method to account for LCFS credit emerges, one specific LCFS credit opportunity may aid the City’s climate action outreach and education campaign. Digester gas is not currently a common transportation fuel, but the Climate Trust believes LCFS could change that. Many livestock farms in California are looking to capture methane in order to generate ARB offset credits. If the biogas is then consumed as transportation fuel in California, LCFS credits can be generated above and beyond these offsets, which are for avoided methane emissions. If Hermosa Beach decides to establish a direct relationship with a livestock project for purposes of acquiring greenhouse gas offsets, the City may be able to negotiate receiving any LCFS credits produced by the project. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard is not to be confused with Federal renewable fuel regulations, which are based on the quantity of renewable stocks blended into transportation fuel, not the resulting change in greenhouse gas emissions. Federal regulations require fuel suppliers to blend renewable fuels into gasoline and diesel. In a manner similar to the Renewable Portfolio Standard, each refiner or importer of fuel must meet a Renewable Volume Obligation by surrendering a series of Renewable Identification Numbers to the U.S. EPA. The Renewable Identification Numbers can be separated and traded. When renewable fuel with a Renewable Identification Number is produced in or imported to California, that fuel may also generate LCFS credits for California’s program, which is a separate regulation. 273 Employee Commutes - Page 57 Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan Employee Commutes Introduction The City’s Sustainability Plan calls for a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from employee commutes relative to 2005 levels by 2020, which were 348 metric tonnes of CO2- equivalent2. The 2012 draft inventory shows 218 metric tonnes, a 37.4% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions versus 2005. However, it is important to note that the number of full- time equivalent City employees decreased 33.8% during this period. In pursuit of attaining the greenhouse gas reduction goal for employee commutes, the City’s Sustainability Plan recommends revising Hermosa Beach’s existing rideshare program to better incentivize employees to substitute more environmentally conscious alternatives to single occupant vehicle (SOV) trips for commuting. Launched in 1990 to comply with the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Regulation XV, the City’s existing rideshare program provides employees who use alternative transportation modes 3 out of 4 days per week with $30 per month. Despite the incentive in place, the program had no participants as of July 2013. Just 11% of employees biked, walked, used transit, or a combination of these modes at least once a week. An employee commute survey conducted in 2013 on 108 out of 142 employees found that about 31% of employees were interested in participating in a rideshare program, and 50% of employees would be influenced by tax savings or other monetary incentives. Using data gathered from the 2013 City of Hermosa Beach Employee Commute Survey, information regarding other cities’ employee commute reduction programs, and best practices in transportation demand management, Kaizenergy has outlined a strategy and plan the City of Hermosa Beach could use to overhaul its employee commute reduction program thus increasing participation and reducing resultant municipal carbon emissions. Hermosa’s Employee Commute Reduction Challenge Traditional commuter rideshare programs rely on matching employees with similar schedules, origins, and destinations. Creating successful carpool or vanpool matches is mostly a numbers game. Successful traditional rideshare matches rely on a large pool of people who are eligible 2 The Energy Efficiency & Climate Action Plan Draft Inventory, Forecasting and Target-Setting Report shows employee commutes at 348 metric tonnes in 2005. However, the City’s previous inventory reports employee commutes at 399 metric tonnes for 2005. The more recent document is presented to show change over time. 274 Employee Commutes - Page 58 to match, a subset of whom are interested in ridesharing. Strategies to match more carpools or vanpools include increasing the size of the pool of potential ride-sharers and/or improving and increasing incentives to motivate more people to share rides. The City of Hermosa Beach’s current employee commute reduction challenges are twofold. First, Hermosa Beach is a relatively small employer, with only 142 employees across multiple sites. This limits the potential for rideshare matching. Second, the City’s 2013 Employee Commute Survey indicated that, due to the structure of existing incentives, their effectiveness is limited. As seen below, many potential carpool matches live in or near the City. While matching employees who live nearby into carpools will reduce vehicle trips and the need for on-site car parking, these consolidated short-distance trips will not cause substantial reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from employee commutes. However, successful matches could provide an example of the program’s benefits for other employees who live farther away. Hermosa Beach could also incentivize employees who live nearby to commute using neighborhood electric vehicles or electric-assist bicycles if these vehicles are added to the City’s fleet. 275 Employee Commutes - Page 59 Map of Zip Codes with 2 or more employees Legend: Number of employees per zip code: 1 to 3 4 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 20 Top Zip Codes Zip Code Place Number of Employees Distance from Hermosa Beach (miles) 90278 North Redondo Beach 20 2.0 90277 South Redondo Beach 14 2.3 90254 Hermosa Beach 9 0 90260 Lawndale 6 4.7 90275 Rancho Palos Verdes 6 13.3 276 Employee Commutes - Page 60 Heatmap of All Employees Responding to 2013 Commute Survey Best Practices in Local Government Commute Trip Reduction Programs To reduce their municipal carbon footprint and to comply with regional regulatory agency trip reduction requirements, many municipalities have begun implementing employee commute reduction programs. Reviewing best practices in local government transportation demand management programs as well as the practices of neighboring cities and other successful local programs can help Hermosa Beach identify most effective methods to decarbonize its employee commutes. Statewide Best Practices The Institute for Local Government identifies several best practices for municipalities developing programs to reduce employee commutes via SOV. These best practices focus on using effective incentives and acquiring the necessary infrastructure to encourage employees to bike, walk, take public transit, or carpool to work. Hermosa Beach’s existing program is in line with the incentive best practices identified by Institute for Local Governments, but the City could enhance the attractiveness of these incentives and ensure the City provides the necessary 277 Employee Commutes - Page 61 infrastructure for employees to feel comfortable walking or biking to work. The best practices described by the Institute for Local Government are summarized below3: Create an Incentive Program The Institute for Local Government states that a municipality should “offer agency employees incentives to use alternatives to single-occupant commuting.” Incentives could include parking cash-out, flexible schedules, public transit incentives, bike share and rideshare services and subsidies, transit subsidies, and telecommuting. Rideshare programs should incorporate a “Guaranteed Ride Home” program and utilize smartphone technology. Provide Infrastructure As mentioned in the employee fleet recommendations, the Institute for Local Government suggests municipalities “establish a ‘bike barn’ to enable agency employees to borrow a bicycle to use for local meetings.” The bikes purchased for the bike barn could also be rented to employees for commute purposes. The Institute for Local Government also suggests municipalities “construct bicycle stations for employees that include bicycle storage, showers, and bicycle repair space” and provide locker and shower facilities for employees who bike or walk to work. Review of Other Programs in Nearby Cities The City of Hermosa Beach and neighboring South Bay cities face a unique set of challenges in motivating employees to cut SOV commutes: they are already mature, built-out suburbs without the robust public transit service found elsewhere in L.A. County. Nonetheless, we found that adjacent cities have ascertained more effective commuter incentive programs. The following discussion describes employee commute reduction strategies employed in the South Bay cities that neighbor Hermosa Beach as well as the successful approach taken by the City of Santa Monica, a municipality recognized statewide for its environmental leadership. Manhattan Beach The City of Manhattan Beach offers an incentive of $60 per month to employees who carpool, bike, walk, take public transit, or use a combination of these modes to get to work. The City currently has about 12 employees who participate (6 carpool, 2 bike, 2 walk, 1 public transit, and 1 combination of modes). The program costs the City about $8,500 per year. Information about the program is posted on the City’s employee “intranet” with all necessary instructions and forms. The City does not currently have a bike fleet or share program. In Manhattan Beach, only one staff member administers the program. 3 http://www.ca-ilg.org/sustainability-best-practice-area/efficient-transportation#agency-employee- programs 278 Employee Commutes - Page 62 Redondo Beach The City of Redondo Beach launched its “Employee Rideshare Program” in 2008. Employees who carpool, walk, bike, use public transit, vanpool, or drive alternative fuel vehicles earn incentive points on a daily basis that can be traded in for Sears gift certificates. Redondo Beach offers guaranteed return trip services, ride matching services, free CNG fueling, and an annual prize drawing for all employees who participate. Torrance The City of Torrance launched its “Catch a Ride” program to comply with the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) rule 2202. Rule 2202 requires employers with 250 or more employees to reduce mobile source emissions generated from employee commutes. In the Catch a Ride program, employees who carpool, walk, bike, use public transit, or vanpool earn points on a daily basis that can be traded in for time off, gas vouchers, gift cards, and discounts on public transit. Program participants are eligible for emergency rides home, preferential parking, free car washes, and ride matching services. Santa Monica The City of Santa Monica reduced emissions from employee commutes through its Rideshar e Club. The Rideshare Club consists of three sub-categories, the Commute Club, the Transit Club, and the Vanpool Subsidy Club. The Commute Club provides incentive points to employees who bike, carpool, drive an electric scooter, walk, ride the bus, and more. Participants can drive as part of their commute or mix these options. A carpool consists of two or more people (they do not need to be coworkers at the City, but children without driver’s licenses do not count) who ride together at least 51% of round trip travel. Employees earn incentive points for each day they rideshare, and they exchange these points quarterly for a bonus on their paychecks. Commute Club participants must earn a minimum of 4 incentive points per month and a maximum of 40 points per month. Transit Club provides riders of mass transit fare reimbursement for travel costs to and from work. Mass transit includes bus, light rail, and train. To qualify, employees must use transit for at least 15 roundtrips per month. They are provided up to $84 for bus and $100 for rail. The Vanpool Subsidy Club provides employees who participate in a vanpool with up to $100 per month. To provide alternative mode commuters with mobility options at work, the City allows staff to borrow a bike from its “Bikes At Work” fleet to run errands, exercise, or attend meetings. Recommendations To reduce gross greenhouse gas emissions attributed to employee commutes, the City of Hermosa Beach should revise its Employee Commute Reduction Program (ECRP) to better incentivize employees to adopt alternative modes of commute and to generate lasting program participation. This section provides a brief description of the strategies the City could employ. 279 Employee Commutes - Page 63 1. Appoint an Employee Transportation Coordinator The City should institutionalize its commuter program by designating a staff member to serve as the citywide Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC). This staff person’s work plan would include launching a revamped program and tracking the success of the program through annual surveys. Typically, ETCs are staff members in human resources, but Hermosa Beach might find it is more successful in recruiting staff who are already involved in promoting other sustainability-related initiatives. At an employer of Hermosa Beach’s size, the ETC role would not be a full-time position. This person would also serve as the go-to peer to answer questions, administer incentives, and disseminate informational materials to educate and inform fellow staff members about their options. Finally, this role would include investigating resources the City could access from Metro’s Commute Services, in order to further strengthen the program. 2. Form Partnerships In concert with the newly-appointed ETC, Hermosa Beach should form partnerships with nearby employers to increase the likelihood of a carpool or vanpool match. The options are limited, but they include: ● The Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce’s 300 members, who represent firms that employ many private sector workers in Hermosa Beach. ● The Hermosa Beach City School District. School District offices are a short walk from Hermosa Beach City Hall, on the campus of Hermosa Valley School. However, as 55% of commute survey respondents work a 4/10 schedule, from 7AM to 6PM Monday through Thursday, and school district employees may have different work schedules than City employees. Hermosa Beach could also promote online ride matching through services already provided by Metro (www.ridematch.info). Unfortunately, no existing vanpool routes terminate in Hermosa Beach; many terminate in El Segundo. 3. Restructure Incentives A common theme among successful local employee commute reduction programs is the provision of incentives to participants. These programs typically provide a monetary incentive to employees who participate a certain number of times per month, or employees earn incentive points on a daily basis that can be traded in for monetary incentives or other prizes. Of the 64 employees who answered the question, “What is the minimum monthly cash reward that would entice you to carpool, bike, walk, or take public transit to and from work at least 50% of the time?” in the 2013 Employee Commute Survey, 42% answered $30-50, and 37.5% answered greater than $50. Based on these results and the programs of neighboring cities, here are some future considerations: 280 Employee Commutes - Page 64 ● Create a tiered incentive system: Although as of July 2013 no employees were participating in the City’s rideshare program, about 11% were biking, carpooling, walking or taking transit to work at least one day a week. This gap in participation could reflect the program’s stringent requirement, enforcing 3 days participation each week to qualify for incentives. To encourage more employee participation, the City could create a tiered incentive system in which participants utilizing the program more receive a larger incentive. For instance, employees who participate 5 days per month receive $20, and those who participate 10 days per month receive $50. ● Create a “points based” incentive system: Like the Cities of Redondo Beach, Torrance, and Santa Monica, Hermosa Beach could create a system based upon incentive points that are earned on a daily basis. This system also encourages employees to participate who are not ready for the existing program’s stringent requirement of 3 days per week. At the end of the month or the quarter, employees can trade in their incentive points for cash or prizes. ● Incorporate alternative fuel vehicle commuters: Some municipalities, like Manhattan Beach, offer incentives to employees who commute in 100% alternative fuel vehicles (100% electric, CNG, LNG, hydrogen fuel cell). Hermosa Beach could even look to subsidize alternative fuel vehicle purchases and leases as a component of planned compensation increases. If the employee saves money on vehicle operation costs, the alternative fuel vehicle incentive could put additional money in the employee’s pocket above and beyond the City’s contribution. The City of Hermosa Beach may also consider providing direct subsidies or a pre-tax set-aside for workers who use transit and vanpool. ● Direct subsidies: Employers can provide up to $230 per month tax-free to employees who use transit or vanpools. The employer therefore pays the benefit and receives equivalent deduction from business income taxes. The employer pays directly for vanpool expenses or purchases transit passes for employees. ● Set aside pre-tax dollars: Employees are allowed to set aside up to $230 per month of their pretax income to pay for transit or vanpools. Employees save on payroll and income taxes since it is not reported as a taxable salary. The amount set aside is a benefit and therefore reduces employer payroll costs. ● Partially subsidize costs: The employer subsidizes a portion of vanpool or transit costs in addition to salary, and allows employees to pay the rest. Finally, if it is eligible to do so, Hermosa Beach should submit a Rideshare Service Agreement with Metro’s Commute Services division in order to make its employees eligible for Metro Rewards. Metro Rewards is an incentive program available at no cost 281 Employee Commutes - Page 65 to participating employers. In 2014, the Metro Rewards program provided workers who commuted using an environmentally-friendly mode with a coupon discount book to purveyors of goods and services throughout Los Angeles County worth $1,000 in immediate savings. The eligibility threshold is much lower: Employees must rideshare at least 8 work days a month during three consecutive months. 4. Add Bike Accommodations To support bicycle commuting and the use of bicycles for mid-day trips, the City of Hermosa Beach should investigate: ● Ensuring there is adequate and safe bicycle parking at all work sites. ● Including building showers and lockers with bicycle commuters in facility renovation plans. ● Launching a bike barn at City Hall and the City Yard to allow for use of shared bicycles, including electric-assist bicycles. ● Initiating a Take Home Bike Program, which allows nearby employees to take home bicycles or neighborhood electric vehicles for use in commutes. 5. Determine a Telecommuting Policy Instituting a telecommuting policy could help the City significantly lower vehicle emissions attributed to employee commuting, especially if initiated as an option for long- distance commuters. This would be both effective in reducing emissions and attractive to employees with significant commutes. Thirty-four percent of employees surveyed expressed interest in this option in the 2013 Employee Commute Survey. These employees indicated their ability to use such a policy 3 to 4 times a month; however 46% stated their work would not be compatible with telecommuting, and 17% were not interested. Several cities had success. A few strategies the City of Hermosa Beach should include when determining a telecommuting policy are listed below: ● Establish an eligibility list of suitable job categories, employment status, and prior performance ratings for telecommuting. ● Create a performance agreement for those employees eligible to telecommute, specifying a minimum for office-based hours, accessibility during regular work hours, methods of communication with supervisor, and necessary requirements for alternative worksites including computer specification and special equipment, desk size and configuration. 282 Other Emissions: Page 66 Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan Other Emissions Natural Gas Hermosa Beach uses natural gas for both building energy and some vehicles in the City’s fleet. Increasing the energy efficiency of the City’s natural gas vehicles and equipment is key to gross emissions reductions. However, even with efficiency improvements, the 2013 Hermosa Beach Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan found that gross reductions in natural gas emissions are limited by the fuel’s inherent greenhouse gas intensity. This is in contrast to gross greenhouse gas emissions from electricity, which can be eliminated through use of renewable generation. Efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions have generated interest in low-carbon sources of natural gas. The section on the City’s vehicle fleet details an option for transferable credits when renewable natural gas is used as a transportation fuel. Biogas Transfer Credits may be a future option for other uses of natural gas. Biogas Transfer Credits Biogas Transfer Credits are a concept to separate the renewable qualities and emissions benefits from physical biogas, in a manner similar to RECs and LCFS credits. Biogas (or biomethane) is natural gas that is produced from the breakdown of organic material in the absence of oxygen. Biogas can be produced through anaerobic digestion at facilities that handle green waste, manure, municipal solid waste, and sewage. Biogas must typically be cleaned in order to improved quality, but can then be compressed into Biogas CNG or liquefied into Biogas LNG. Biogas combustion is considered a biogenic source of greenhouse gas emissions, and is not included in gross emissions totals in greenhouse gas inventories. Historically, most biogas used for energy in California has been combusted on -site or nearby a landfill, dairy, or sewage treatment plant. A new law may bring new opportunities for pipeline biogas use in California. In 2014, the California Public Utilities Commission adopted regulations to implement AB 1900 (2012) enabling biogas injections into natural gas pipelines. The implementing regulations pertain to safety requirements and recordkeeping for biogas injections, including a facility’s annual biomethane production rate. The law does not establish Biogas Transfer Credits in California, but future laws or regulations could do so. If Biogas Transfer Credits (or conceptually similar units with a different name) become available in the U.S. or California, Hermosa Beach could look to acquire credits to offset its natural gas consumption. For Hermosa Beach to take credit in its inventory, greenhouse gas accounting guidance would need to incorporate a method to adjust for the credits. 283 Other Emissions: Page 67 Contract Vehicles Hermosa Beach contracts its street cleaning, landscaping, and refuse & recycling services. The City has already included stipulations that some of these contractors use cleaner, natural gas vehicles. The City’s street cleaning provider and refuse/recycling service use natural gas vehicles. The City’s Clean Fleet Policy and Action Plan establishes several goals for contracted vehicles: ● Interim: ○ Determine feasibility of 50% emissions reduction for City fleet and 20% emissions reduction for contractor service vehicles (implemented with new contracts, or with amendments when feasible). ● Long-term: ○ Net zero greenhouse gas emissions for City fleet. ○ Alternative fuel used for 100% of contracted City service vehicles. This is a lesser goal in that it is not a net carbon neutral goal. In the future, Hermosa Beach can specify contract terms that require the service provider to neutralize greenhouse gas emissions from the services they perform on behalf of Hermosa Beach. Alternatively Hermosa Beach could require that the contracted service provider disclose the volume and carbon intensity of fuels and amount of electricity used to service the contract, and Hermosa Beach can then take additional steps to offset those emissions. Solid Waste The City’s 2007 inventory reported 167 metric tonnes from waste in landfills. Hermosa Beach does not have operational or financial control over a landfill. However, emissions from waste sent to landfills are considered to be Scope 3 emissions under the Air Resources Board’s Local Government Operations Protocol. The City should include these emissions within its offset program. The City’s 2007 inventory reported 85 metric tonnes from all contract service vehicles. Because Hermosa Beach can exercise operational control over its waste service provider, compressed natural gas combustion emissions from Athens Services’ collection of waste and transfer to landfills would be considered Scope 3 transportation emissions from contracted services. Hermosa Beach’s current contract with Athens Services ends in 2021. Before Hermosa Beach considers a new waste hauling contract, it can include Athens Services’ GHG emissions in th e city’s annual purchases of GHG emissions offsets. Hermosa Beach can also seek to include contract terms that Athens offset their emissions, if the City amends the contract before 2021. 284 Other Emissions: Page 68 Water According to the 2007 Municipal Inventory, Hermosa Beach has operational control over limited sprinkler and irrigation systems and lift stations. These emissions, derived from electricity, may be addressed through electricity procurement strategies. Hermosa Beach may wish to consider upstream emissions related to water treatment and distribution. In the 2013 Hermosa Beach Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan, West Basin Water District’s emissions factors for imported and recycled water were found to be 0.00414 and 0.00388 kgCO2e/gallon, respectively. Hermosa Beach could elect to track and offset upstream emissions from water use, but it is not necessary for the City to claim carbon neutral status under the Local Government Operations Protocol. 285 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 69 Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets The Role of Offsets in Climate Commitments Greenhouse gas offsets, typically denominated in metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e), represent avoided greenhouse gas emissions produced from a monetary investment in a specific project. Offset projects range from those that capture and destroy methane and other potent greenhouse gases to those that sequester emissions in soil, plants, and trees. All aggressive (80% reduction or more) entity and community climate commitments referenced in this document either explicitly permit offsets or are silent on their use in achieving their goal. Some commitments include separate goals for gross reductions - those achieved without the use of offsets - in addition to a goal for net emissions. Commitments from organizations that plan to use offsets differ in the types of offsets that they will use. Some local governments and entities prefer to use offsets that are in some way connected to the city or entity. For instance, Austin Texas has its own boutique offset program, and the University of California plans to develop its own as well. Others have prescribed standards for the types of offsets they will pursue. Offsets range in quality: the ability to demonstrate that the offset is real, measurable, verifiable, additional, and permanent. Offsets of lower quality and those that are not connected to a particular sector or geography are typically cheaper. Various registries and protocols have been established to guarantee offset quality. Defining Offsets Real The offset has produced an actual reduction in GHG emissions, rather than shifting emissions to some other source. Measurable The offset can be quantified, typically in metric tonnes of CO2-equivalent. Verifiable An outside auditor can determine the existence of a single offset unit, which is then tracked using an offset registry. Additional The offset was produced as a result of its value. The offset would not have occurred in the absence of an offset payment. Permanent The offset cannot be reversed. If there is risk of reversal (e.g. the risk that forestry carbon stocks will be destroyed by wildfire), the offset protocol typically requires some portion of offsets be set aside. 286 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 70 Cities and Offsets Guidance on the Use of Offsets Accounting guidance for local governments doesn’t allow cities to replace gross emissions with offsets. Instead, local governments report their use of offsets – and resulting net emissions – as an informational item. Local Government Operations Protocol (section 13.1.2.5) “Carbon offsets retired/generated and sold. Local governments should account for and report all carbon offsets which they purchase and retire. These offsets may not be deducted from Scope 1 or Scope 2 emissions due to the fact that a complete accounting framework which accurately and credibly tracks the ownership and retirement of these credits has not yet been established. Local governments should also report any offsets that they both generate and sell as part of a climate mitigation project.” U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions “The ICLEI community protocol requires the community to report gross GHG emissions without the impact of carbon offset projects, stocks, sinks, sequestration projects, purchases of carbon credits, or renewable energy certificates. The community may optionally, and separately, report the emissions reductions associated with any of the above activities.” City Standards for Offset Quality Few cities have specified the level of quality, types of projects, and project locations that they expect from offsets used to meet climate commitments. British Columbia does have requirements for offsets used to meet that province’s goal for carbon neutral municipalities for 2012 and beyond. Offsets must be generated in British Columbia and meet the requirements set by the Pacific Carbon Trust, a boutique offset program established as a joint venture of the provincial government and a League of Cities equivalen t. Many local governments achieved carbon neutral municipal operations in 2012 or earlier, but the entire province is now readjusting its Carbon Neutral pursuits as a result of an offset scandal. The local offset registry, the Pacific Carbon Trust, has been absorbed by the provincial government after a scandal caused attempts to repeal the requirement that local governments neutralize their emissions. Local government were purchasing offsets at a cost of more than double the amount of their wholesale cost, and some of the offsets the Trust purchased and sold to local governments were ineligible under the provincial rules. 287 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 71 British Columbia’s experience highlights the potential trade-off of establishing a new, boutique offset program. Establishing the Trust allowed British Columbia greater control over the locations and types of offset projects that would be funded. However, costs of the boutique offset program may be higher than under an established, multisectoral offset program, and as with any new entity, oversight is important to ensure that actions are within the public interest. One alternative to establishing a boutique offset program is to invest in a narrow range of projects offered by an existing offset registry. Hermosa Beach could, for example, seek out forestry projects in the Western United States. Municipal Utilities Several municipal utilities make use of both offsets and renewable energy certi ficates (RECs) in order to make climate-related claims. Palo Alto Utilities uses RECs that are eligible under California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard. The Sacramento Municipal Utilities District invests in its own projects as well as RECs eligible in California. Outside of California, Austin Energy makes direct contracts with wind generators. Seattle Power & Light uses offsets from the Climate Action Reserve and other third-party organizations. Universities and Colleges The few colleges that have already achieved carbon neutral status have chosen to be transparent about their use of offsets and the projects in which they invest. As educational institutions, these entities can incorporate a discussion of climate commitments and the use of offsets within their curriculum. That offsets are required to meet Carbon Neutrality commitments can highlight the vast challenge in decarbonizing organizations and places. The College of the Atlantic in Maine claims to be the first Carbon Neutral educational institution. It chose to use offsets from specific projects from two carbon project developers: the Carbon Fund and the Climate Trust. These developers invested in a traffic signal optimization project in Portland, OR and a truck stop electrification project in Oregon and Washington. These two projects are verified to the Oregon Standard, an offset standard created by the state legislature. Colby College, also in Maine, first invested on-campus: in a biomass project and energy retrofits. For the remaining emissions, Colby purchased and retired carbon offsets from three projects: two landfills in Maine and Connecticut and one farm in Michigan. The offsets are registered with the Climate Action Reserve and meet the Reserve’s verification requirements. However, the offsets are not eligible for conversion to California Compliance Offsets because they were not verified to the more stringent California standard. Green Mountain College, another Carbon Neutral educational institution, invested in a farm methane project in Vermont. 288 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 72 Corporations Microsoft is one of the few companies which details its use of offsets. Microsoft looks to use offsets that are credible, verifiable, and additional. Through the Gold Standard and Veri fied Carbon Standard offset registries, Microsoft has invested in reforestation in Kenya, home fuel switching in Mongolia, wind farms in China, and alternatives to deforestation in Brazil. Consumers TerraPass is a consumer service that retires offsets from the Verified Carbon Standard and Climate Action Reserve on behalf of consumers. One project registered on the Climate Action Reserve, the Arcata Community Forest, expanded an existing forest to protect adjacent land from logging. Offset Programs Available to Hermosa Beach Both California Compliance Offsets and voluntary offsets are available to Hermosa Beach. California Compliance Offsets California Compliance Offsets are admissible to the state’s Cap-and-Trade program. They are issued by the Air Resources Board. In certain cases, California Compliance Offsets can be converted from offsets generated by the Climate Action Reserve, Verified Carbon Standard, and American Carbon Registry. California Cap-and-Trade California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan outlines the state’s strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, as required by AB 32 (2006). The Scoping Plan relies heavily on a cap on greenhouse gas emissions that come from electricity, natural gas, transportation fuels, and certain other industries like cement production. Entities in these sectors must acquire and surrender an amount of emissions allowances equivalent to their greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from other sectors, like agriculture and landfills, are uncapped and will likely remain uncapped due to monitoring and verification challenges in enforcing compliance. Emissions reductions projects from uncapped sectors can produce compliance offsets. California Greenhouse Gas Allowances The California Air Resources Board issues both California Greenhouse Gas Allowances and ARB Offset Credits, which together serve as compliance instruments for sources subject to state’s Cap-and-Trade program. Up to 8% of the total compliance obligations for a year can be met using ARB Offset Credits. The Air Resources Board issues ARB Offset Credits for projects that meet certain criteria contained in an approved offset protocol. Registry Offsets from projects meeting the same criteria but registered with the American Carbon Registry, Climate Action Reserve, or Verified Carbon Standard can be converted to ARB Offset Credits. 289 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 73 California Greenhouse Gas Allowances and ARB Offset Credits are both denominated in metric tonnes of CO2-equivalent, and are identical aside from the ARB Offset Credits being limited to 8% of the overall compliance obligation. Hermosa Beach can acquire and retire either California Greenhouse Gas Allowances or ARB Offset Credits to offset its greenhouse gas emissions within California’s Cap-and-Trade program. Allowances are available in vintages corresponding to the three established compliance periods, 2013-14, 2015-17, and 2018-20. When retiring allowances to offset the City’s emissions from municipal operations, the City should retire offsets of the same vintage as the year to be offset. For example, if the City wishes to offset its 2015 emissions, it should retire 2017 vintage offsets. Acquiring California Allowances to Offset Hermosa Beach’s Emissions Hermosa Beach is not a covered entity and does not have a compliance obligation under California’s Cap-and-Trade Program. Hermosa Beach does indirectly participate in California’s Cap-and-Trade system. Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas, and transportation fuels distributors who sell products and services to Hermosa Beach and their contractors do have a compliance obligation, and these entities must surrender allowances to the Air Resources Board for each compliance period. Hermosa Beach has several options to retire California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Allowances. The City can register on the California Air Resources Board’s Compliance Instrument Tracking System Service (CITSS) to purchase allowances at auction and transfer compliance instruments to the Retirement Account. The City can register as a Voluntary Associated Entity pursuant to California Code of Regulations Section 95814. Under this scenario, the City could acquire allowances: ● Directly from the Air Resources Board at quarterly auctions. The City must register as an auction participant after establishing a CITSS Account and submitting a bid guarantee prior to each auction. ● From a third party via an exchange. The Intercontinental Exchange and CME Group offer futures contracts for California Carbon Allowances (CCA). Futures contracts provide for delivery of a tangible or intangible asset at a future date. For instance, between now and December 24, 2015, Hermosa Beach could purchase and retire 2017 Vintage California Carbon Allowances to be delivered to Hermosa Beach’s CITSS account at the end of December 2015. ● From a third party via an over-the-counter transaction. The third party must maintain a CITSS Account and the transaction must be registered on CITSS to guarantee legitimacy. 290 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 74 Hermosa Beach can also work with a registered Voluntarily Associated Entity to purchase and retire offsets on behalf of the City. A Voluntarily Associated Entity would conduct transactions on Hermosa Beach’s behalf. Several brokers hold CITSS accounts and provide carbon offsetting (or “balancing”) services on behalf of third parties, like Hermosa Beach. These include: ● 3Degrees - offers Carbon Balancing Services ● Element Markets - developer and supplier of GHG credits, including California ● Evolution Markets - Kyoto, EU-ETS, RGGI, & California Hermosa Beach should expect to pay a slight price premium or service fee when working with an exchange or Voluntary Associated Entity to purchase and retire allowances. For instance, contracts for 2014 allowances delivered at the end of September 2014 traded for $12.00 on the Intercontinental Exchange, while allowances from the August 2014 Air Resources Board auction settled at $11.50. Retiring California Allowances to Offset Hermosa Beach’s Emissions Retiring California Compliance Instruments is simple. Hermosa Beach, a broker, or a third party can access CITSS and process a transfer from the General Account to the Retirement Account. Instruments transferred to a compliance account will result in real offsets to Hermosa Beach’s emissions. Analysis of California Allowance Prices California allowances are of the highest quality, as they are used for compliance in a legally- binding Cap-and-Trade program. As such, California allowances are more expensive than offsets for voluntary programs. The California Air Resources Board has sold allowances at auction since the fall of 2012. Allowance prices peaked at $14.00 in May of 2013. The settlement price at 2014 auctions (as of August) has concentrated between $11.48 and $11.50. 291 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 75 California Air Resources Board Allowance Auction Prices In the 2010 Economic Analysis, the Air Resources Board projected a 7% annual price increase from 2012 through 2020, which is roughly what a company could earn on invested capital. The reasoning behind that is because entities with a compliance obligation can hold onto allowances for a future compliance period, and allowances are subject to a rate of return similar to what allowance holders can achieve from asset classes of a similar risk. If allowance holders expected allowances to appreciate at a higher rate (say 10%), they would buy and bank allowances in pursuit of an extraordinary profit opportunity. This would bid up the price of allowances to a price level where the extraordinary profit opportunity vanishes (back to 7%). The 2010 Economic Analysis projected an allowance price of $25 per metric tonne in 2020. At a 7% annual price increase, expected 2014 values would be $16.66 per tonne, $5.16 higher than the latest auction. Because of this price discrepancy, an updated analysis is needed to forecast allowance prices through 2020. The analysis below projects a 5.8% (low-case), 7% (mid-case), or 11% (high case) annual increase in allowance prices after 2014. 292 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 76 Projected California Air Resources Board Allowance Prices Cost Projection Annual % Increase 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Low 5.8% $11.50 $12.17 $12.87 $13.62 $14.41 $15.24 $16.13 Middle 7.0% $11.50 $12.31 $13.17 $14.09 $15.07 $16.13 $17.26 High 11.0% $11.50 $12.77 $14.17 $15.73 $17.46 $19.38 $21.51 Analysis by Kaizenergy The California State Legislature must amend state law for the state’s Cap-and-Trade program to continue beyond 2020. Two factors point towards continuation of the Cap-and-Trade program. First, the legislature and public’s support for addressing climate change through carbon pricing remains strong. Second, allowing the program to end would mean a significant loss of revenue from allowance sales. With future Cap-and-Trade auction revenues already committed to the California High Speed Rail project, abandoning carbon pricing would leave the project partially- finished or in search of another multi-billion dollar source of funds. Voluntary Offset Registries Voluntary greenhouse gas emissions offsets have been available for two decades. Most climate commitments have used voluntary offsets to validate emissions reductions claims. Outside of California, Quebec, and a handful of other places subject to Cap-and-Trade programs, voluntary offsets are the standard instruments of making carbon claims. Voluntary offsets are available at a fraction of the price of compliance offsets. A 2013 study of voluntary offsets found an average price of $4.90 per metric tonne of CO2-equivalent, 42% of the California ARB allowance price. A system of registries and independent verifiers are responsible for assuring the quality of voluntary offsets. Registries determine policy related to offset production through protocols, work with the offset project developer to verify the project, issue offset units based on the metric tonnes of reductions produced, and track the transfer offset units between parties. Some projects on these registries can also be certified to produce California Compliance Offsets, if the projects meet certain protocol and verification requirements 293 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 77 Voluntary Offset Registries Offset Registry Share of Global Market Convertible to ARB Offsets? Notes Verified Carbon Standard 47% Some projects 70 U.S.-based projects (of 1,200+). VCS has the most methodologies of any offset registry. The Gold Standard 15% No Focuses on offsets produced outside of the United States, primarily in developing countries. Climate Action Reserve 5% Some projects California-based organization (Los Angeles) focused on offsets produced in the U.S. (360 projects), Mexico (8 projects), and Canada. 51 projects are in California. American Carbon Registry 1% Some 95 U.S.-based projects (of 105). Staff trained on ARB protocols. Market shares based on 2013 data in Forest Trends State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2014 Voluntary Offset Project Types Offset projects must adhere to an approved protocol or methodology. While the California Air Resources Board has approved protocols for five project types, the various voluntary registries have approved dozens of protocols and methodologies. The table below presents the range of offset projects, which are classified by their Kyoto Protocol greenhouse gas emissions sector. 294 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 78 Types of Offset Projects, by Emissions Sector Sectoral Scope Registries with approved method/protocol Types of projects 1 - Energy Generation ACR, VCS, TGS Cogeneration facilities, fuel use in cooking stoves 2 - Energy Distribution ACR Recycling of transformer oil 3 - Energy Demand ACR, VCS Building weatherization, campus energy efficiency 4 - Manufacturing Industries None None yet 5 - Chemical Industries VCS Chemical production processes 6 - Construction None yet 7 - Transport ACR, VCS Vehicle fuel switching, truck stop electrification 8 - Mining/Mineral Production ARB, CAR Coal mine methane 9 - Metal Production None None 10 - Fugitive Emissions from Fuels None None 11 - Fugitive Emissions from Gases CAR, VCS Destruction of ozone depleting substances, leak detection 12 - Solvents Use None None 13 - Waste Handling and Disposal CAR, VCS Landfill methane capture, organic waste composting 14 - Agriculture, Forestry, Land Use ACR, ARB, CAR, VCS, TGS Rice cultivation, forestry, urban forest, prevention of deforestation, fertilizer management, soil management, 15 - Livestock and Manure Management ARB, CAR Manure management, grazing management ACR = American Carbon Registry, ARB = California Air Resources Board, CAR = Climate Action Reserve, TGS = The Gold Standard, VCS = Verified Carbon Standard, 295 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 79 Recommendations on Use of Offsets Offsets are an important part of an aggressive climate commitment, as demonstrated by other cities, corporations, and colleges that have claimed or plan to achieve Carbon Neutrality status. Offsets put a price signal on carbon emissions. By purchasing offsets, Hermosa Beach acknowledges the real environmental cost of greenhouse gases emissions from municipal operations. Offsets also signal that the City is looking for other ways to reduce its emissions as any investments to reduce gross emissions will, in turn, reduce future offset expenditures. As such, the sustained use of offsets can be seen as a commitment device for achieving gross emissions reductions: the City cannot simply ignore the cost of its gross greenhouse gas emissions. As a climate commitment device, offset retirements are not limited to a certain percentage of a City’s emissions ㅡ the City pledges to neutralize gross emissions at any level. However, offsets are not a free pass to emit; they are only effectively utilized as part of a larger climate action strategy. Hermosa Beach stakeholders may have a negative perception of the City’s use of offsets, especially if they feel the City’s efforts to reduce gross emissions are inadequate. Use of offsets alone will not accomplish the City’s other objectives or lead to the desired co-benefits from the City’s climate action efforts. Transparency is exceedingly important in climate action, especially when offsets are used. Hermosa Beach should establish a performance monitoring program that includes regular reporting of the City’s climate action efforts, along with publishing greenhouse gas emissions inventories. Offsets utilized within a public education and outreach campaign that focuses on the City’s efforts to reduce its gross greenhouse gas emissions from municipal operations. The offsets should tell a story that people can connect to when understanding the City’s climate actions and considering their own. The experience of existing cities and entities, particularly the three educational institutions, highlights the possibility to connect offsets with a community as part of a public education program about a city’s climate action efforts. By investing in certain projects – projects whose stories resonate with residents – Hermosa Beach can communicate the climate action challenges that it is seeking while connecting the community with specific projects they can also invest in to offset their own emissions. While a wide range of offset project types exist, Hermosa Beach may find some more suitable than others if the City wishes to include its own offset retirements as part of a public education and outreach program. The public may feel more of a connection with offsets generated within the United States, especially those from projects in California. 296 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 80 Should Hermosa Beach Use Compliance or Voluntary Offsets? Hermosa Beach must decide whether to use the cheaper voluntary emissions offsets or the more expensive California Compliance Offsets. The annual price of offsets to cover the City’s 2007 municipal inventory in all cost projection scenarios is less than 0.1% of the City’s general fund budget. Range of Annual Costs to Offset 1,552 Metric Tonnes of CO2-e Scenario Offset Price per Metric Tonne Annual Cost to Offset 1,552 MT ARB - Current $11.50 (August 2014 auction price) $17,848 ARB - Future High $21.51 (high-case projection for 2020) $33,383 Voluntary - Current $5.00 $7,760 Voluntary - Future High $7.50 $11,640 Under this range of prices, the City will find that many of its opportunities to reduce gross greenhouse gas emissions are not cost competitive with offsets or allowances. For example, for $99.84, the City could retire the more expensive ARB-eligible allowances (at $11.50/metric tonne) to offset the tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions of a 2002 Ford Expedition traveling 60 miles round trip, 4 days per week, 48 weeks per year. The annual cost of ARB-eligible offsets to neutralize for a Prius traveling 15 miles per day is approximately $7.74. Incidentally, the Expedition driver would save $2,051.30 per year in fuel costs (at $4.00/gallon) by switching to a Prius. This example illustrates both how inexpensive greenhouse gas emissions are, even within California’s Cap-and-Trade system, and also the need for strategic climate action policies that are well-integrated within the City’s existing municipal operations. It also illustrates that use of offsets can be the most cost-effective option to achieve a given level of reductions. The price of allowances will increase in the future as California’s cap on emissions decreases and early actions are exhausted, but even a seven-fold increase in allowance price would only yield a $60 per-month incentive for the Ford Expedition driver to switch to a carpool. The City has found this level of incentive too low for many employees. 297 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 81 Advantages and Disadvantages of ARB and Voluntary Offsets Advantages Disadvantages Voluntary ● Are 50% cheaper than California Compliance Offsets. ● Offers a greater variety of projects. ● Most projects are located outside of California. ● Voluntary offsets can be perceived to be lower quality than compliance offsets. California Compliance ● California offsets are perceived as the highest quality offsets. ● There exists a strong connection between Hermosa Beach and statewide actions: these offsets can help the City explain statewide actions including cap and trade program. ● Their use creates additional emissions reductions within California; effectively reducing the cap. ● Their use shows Hermosa Beach is willing to put a higher price on greenhouse gas emissions. ● California offsets are more expensive; and these additional expenditures could be used to reduce gross emissions. ● It may be more difficult for consumers to acquire and retire offsets if households and businesses within Hermosa Beach want to invest in the same offset project as the City. ➤ ➣ ➢ Hermosa Beach should primarily rely on California Compliance Offsets to validate its emissions claims. Although California Offsets are slightly more expensive, their higher perceived quality and the connection they provide to statewide climate actions will make Hermosa Beach’s climate commitment more robust. Selecting Among ARB-Approved California Compliance Offsets Up to 10% of allowances in California’s Cap-and-Trade system can come from offsets. While, purchasing and retiring California Emissions Allowances has the same effect on emissions as purchasing and retiring California Compliance Offsets, Emissions Allowances have a number of limitations that make them less ideal for Hermosa Beach. For instance, it is difficult to explain within a public education campaign, that, as a result of Hermosa Beach’s offset purchases, a petroleum refinery or a natural gas power plant had to pay a slightly higher price to comply with California’s greenhouse gas regulations. Emissions allowances are intangible, and the only distinguishing characteristic is their ARB-assigned serial number. Offsets have a story: a project location, emissions removal process, and organization associated with their production. As of September 2014, Hermosa Beach can choose from 298 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 82 projects among the five ARB-approved offset protocols. Offsets from each type of project are functionally equivalent in mitigating climate change as they are denominated in metric tonnes of CO2-equivalent. However, each individual project can tell a different story. In choosing among project types, Hermosa Beach should consider how stakeholders can relate to the project’s location, the type of project, and the organization that produces the offset and receives payment. In addition, attractive photographs of the project itself would aid in any public education and outreach efforts the city conducts. U.S. Forest Projects The link between trees and carbon dioxide emissions is well-established in middle school biology classes. Trees are tangible, beautiful, and provide a range of ecosystem services besides converting carbon dioxide into oxygen. Projects certified under the U.S. Forest Protocol provide for the preservation of large, contiguous forest lands in the United States, including some locations in California. These forests will provide for attractive photographs, and the sites could even be visited by Hermosa Beach stakeholders. The offsets are produced by non-profit conservation organizations or private landowners. 299 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 83 U.S. Forest Project Harvego Bear River Preserve Project / Photo by Placer Land Trust Urban Forest Offsets Urban forests, including street trees, parks, and wildlands within city limits, are highly sought - after amenities that provide shade, mitigate the urban heat island effect, and give character to streets and parks. Under current Air Resources Board guidance, planned tree planting and maintenance activities within the urban forest and qualify for offsets. Few projects have used this approach thus far, but a possible protocol update could expand the volume of offsets that come from urban forest projects. The Climate Action Reserve approved two Urban Forest protocols in June 2014. The Urban Forest Management Protocol offers a programmatic approach to the updated Urban Tree Planting protocol. The California Air Resources Board previously adopted the Climate Action Reserve’s Urban Forest Protocol and will need to adopt the Urban Forest Management protocol for the programmatic approach to create California Compliance Offsets. The Reserve hopes that these new protocols facilitate implementation of more urban forest projects. 300 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 84 Municipalities and counties can aggregate projects within an urban area boundary, as established by the U.S. Census Bureau. Projects must be a minimum of 50 acres. Projects are issued credits that are for renewable 25-year periods. Projects are subject to monitoring, reporting, and verification for 100 years to ensure permanent removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Carbon offsets are generated annually based on the difference in standing live carbon stocks in trees that results from an urban forest management plan (versus the area’s baseline). The City of Santa Monica’s Urban Forest Protocol Project was the first submitted to the Climate Action Reserve. The 1,000 new trees planted under the City’s Urban Forest Master Plan are estimated to produce 5,000 metric tonnes in CO2 reductions over 100 years, or an average of roughly 50 metric tons per year. The fact that this is roughly 4% of Hermosa Beach’s emissions from municipal operations illustrates the sheer number of trees needed to offset emissions. To date, the Santa Monica project hasn’t produced any offsets. Boulder estimates that its urban forest of approximately 330,000 trees sequesters 2,000 tons of CO2 annually. Because the annual amount of emissions sequestered from an urban forest in a 1.4 square mile city would be low relative to the municipality’s emissions from operations, Hermosa Beach may wish to express interest in participating in any potential future South Bay Cities Council of Governments-wide or county-wide urban forest management protocol effort. A larger effort could be more efficient for cities that wish to participate. Livestock Projects The ARB’s livestock projects involve biogas control systems to manage manure on cattle and pig farms. Manure is processed into biogas in a digester, then typically combusted to produce electricity and heat. Livestock projects provide a connection to the familiar topics of farms and food, though this could be perceived as negative as many of the livestock projects are sited at concentrated animal feeding operations. Offsets are typically produced by companies that specialize in biogas control systems and complying with the offset protocols. 301 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 85 Livestock Project New Hope Dairy Livestock Biogas Digester Project in Galt, CA / Photo American Biogas Council Ozone Depleting Substances Some substances which deplete the ozone layer also have a high global warming potential, as measured in carbon dioxide equivalent. Ozone depleting substances that also have a high global warming potential are used as refrigerants, solvents, and fire suppressants. Destroying these substances provides both ozone protection and greenhouse gas reduction. Chemical companies typically produce greenhouse gas offsets from the destruction of ozone depleting substances, and photos of the project locations appear to be a chemical plant. Mine Methane Capture In a mine methane project, methane is combusted and used to make energy. The ARB recently approved the Mine Methane Capture Protocol. The Climate Action Reserve has existing projects registered in Alabama, Colorado, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Coal mine methane projects may be challenging to explain in a public education and outreach campaign that highlights Hermosa Beach’s actions and use of offsets. The projects may evoke a negative association with dirty coal mining and burning coal in power plants, both environmentally harmful activities. In addition, payments to the mining companies or energy/environmental service companies that produce the offsets are unlikely to be viewed as positively compared with payments to forest conservation non-profits. 302 Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 86 Photos of projects depend on mine location; the project in Colorado is on a scenic mountainside. Mine Methane Capture Project Vessels Coal Gas project in Colorado / photo by Vessels Coal Gas ➤ ➣ ➢ Hermosa Beach should prioritize U.S. Forest and Urban Forest offset projects, but may consider other projects within an offset portfolio. Other important considerations are whether Hermosa Beach stakeholders can invest in the same project as the City and how the specific project would fit within the City’s outreach and education efforts. 303 Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 87 Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan Performance Monitoring, Costs, Transparency, and Outreach Performance Monitoring In committing to neutralize greenhouse gas emissions from municipal operations, the City of Hermosa Beach is assuming responsibility for its own emissions. It will track and neutralize its contributions to global emissions. Thus, greenhouse gas emissions are now seen as a liability to the City, and the City should take steps to continuously account for emissions with processes similar to how the City accounts for cash, indebtedness, and other assets and liabilities. After the City sets a greenhouse gas reduction target for local government operations, Hermosa Beach should conduct an annual greenhouse gas emissions inventory within 9 months of the close of each calendar year. Meeting this timeline necessitates that the City implement systems to track the following at a minimum of a calendar-year resolution: ● Amount (kWh) of electricity used for each service account, by year. If electric vehicle chargers used exclusively for municipal operations are submetered, this electricity may be broken out into vehicle fleet. ● Volume of gasoline, diesel, natural gas, and other fuels loaded into City-owned vehicles and equipment. ● Volume of gasoline, diesel, natural gas, and other fuels attributable to Hermosa Beach from contracted waste, landscaping, and street sweeping services. ● Miles traveled by vehicle type for employee commutes and business travel. ● City pairs and number of City passengers for any business travel flights taken. ● Weight and composition of waste generated by the City’s municipal operations. ● Recharge volume of high-global warming potential gases into vehicle or facility air conditioning units, fire extinguishers, or other equipment. Performance Monitoring Tools Much of this data can be tracked in ICLEI’s Master Data Workbook4, an Excel spreadsheet- based tool that can be compiled by multiple individuals or shared on a networked hard drive. Two web-based tools will assist Hermosa Beach in tracking activity data and conducting an annual emissions inventory. These are described below. 4 ICLEI’s Master Data Workbook is recommended for Hermosa Beach’s purposes over The Climate Registry’s Local Government Operations Protocol Activity Data Entry Workbook, developed by Juan Matute in 2009 304 Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 88 ClearPath Tool for Online Greenhouse Gas Performance Monitoring ClearPath is a web-based tool that allows local governments to perform community-scale and government operations GHG inventories in the cloud. Multiple users can collaborate to enter data from different departments, and the data can be exported in the common .csv format for sharing outside of the web-based tool. ClearPath includes modules for forecasting business-as- usual emissions changes (adjusting for state-level actions like renewable electricity and fuel economy standards) and forecasting the effectiveness of various emissions mitigation strategies. ClearPath offers two tracks: a Government Track and a Community-Scale Track. Using the Government Track, a user can create an inventory following the guidelines of the Local Government Operations Protocol. Using ClearPath, a local government can translate its activity data, like fuel or electricity use, into greenhouse gas emissions by using emissions factors. ClearPath contains default emission factors, including some that are California-specific. Users can also add their own emissions factors, for instance a utility-specific value for kg CO2e from electricity. ClearPath allows users to compare between inventory years, tracking progress over time. An inventory module user guide contains additional information about ClearPath’s features. With data tracking, emissions calculation, and forecasting in the same web-based tool, Hermosa Beach can close the loop between climate target setting, performance monitoring, and iterative policymaking. Hermosa Beach has access to ICLEI ClearPath as an ICLEI member and a California Local Government through the Statewide Energy Efficiency Collaborative California (SEEC). SEEC is a collaboration between investor-owned gas and electric utilities, ICLEI, the Institute for Local Government, and the Local Government Commission. The SEEC program website offers live and recorded training materials on ClearPath and other resources. Enterprise Energy Management Information System In the summer of 2014, an analyst at the South Bay Environmental Service Center began using McKinstry’s Enterprise Energy Management Information System (EEMIS), a web-based tool, to accesses and analyze the Hermosa Beach’s account data from Southern California Edison. This tool will be used to track changes in energy use over time, particularly those that follow efficiency and retrofit projects. The EEMIS tool can report monthly, quarterly, and annual consumption data, streamlined for greenhouse gas reporting and other uses. Hermosa Beach should budget to maintain an account on the McKinstry EEMIS, approximately $900 per year. Additionally, the City should train staff to access the data in order to monitor the progress of energy retrofit projects, assess the City’s opportunities for power purchase agreements, and produce annual reports for use in greenhouse gas emissions inventories. 305 Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 89 Municipal Climate Action Indicators Many intermediate indicators will help the City better understand its progress versus annual greenhouse gas emissions totals or subtotals. For instance, a draft 2012 inventory indicates that commute emissions fell by 37.4% between 2005 and 2012. At first, this may seem to indicate that the City achieved its goal of a 20% reduction in 2005 commute emissions by 2020. However, the number of full-time equivalent employees (FTE) decreased 33.8% during the 2005 to 2012 period. Commute greenhouse gas emissions per FTE during that same period decreased by only 5.3%. Indicators like metric tonnes of CO2-e per FTE can give a clearer picture of the City’s climate action performance than can aggregate totals or subtotals. Activity data, such as miles traveled by employees or kWh of electricity used by facility, can also elucidate the City’s climate action position in greater detail. The Local Government Operations Protocol and other guidance for municipal operations recommend several indicators for municipal operations. The following indicators and metrics are applicable to Hermosa Beach’s annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory: 306 Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 90 Indicators and Metrics for Municipal Climate Action Performance Indicator Metrics What it Means Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Fleet GHG/VMT A measure of GHG intensity of each mile traveled by the City’s vehicle fleet. As the City’s fleet procurement policies take effect, this metric will show progress. Number of vehicles (#Vehicles) VMT/#Vehicles The utilization rate for vehicles as the City considers shared-use fleet Equipment Operating Hours (EOH) Equipment GHG/EOH The GHG intensity of equipment operations Number of Pieces of Equipment (#Equipment) EOH/#Equipment GHG intensity per unit of equipment Solid Waste Tonnage Disposed (Waste) Waste GHG/Waste The GHG intensity of the waste the municipal government sends to landfills; varies based on a landfill’s methane control practices Refuse & Recycling Vehicle Service Hours (WasteVehHours) Waste Vehicle GHG/ WasteVehHours Indicates the GHG intensity of the contractor’s refuse and recycling operations Kilo-watt Hours (kWh) Electricity GHG/kWh The GHG intensity of electricity used by Hermosa Beach. As Hermosa Beach begins to blend its energy procurement, the effects will show in this metric. Number of FTE Employees (#Employees) Commute GHG/#Employees The GHG intensity of employee commutes. This metric allows the City to monitor the effectiveness of its commute reduction program Volume of Water Pumped (Water) Water Pumped GHG/Water The GHG intensity of water pumping at the City’s water pumping lift stations. Transparency Transparency is exceedingly important in climate action. Greenhouse gases are invisible, and the activity that leads to their emission is difficult to track. Thus, interested stakeholders must 307 Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 91 rely on the City’s recordkeeping of activity data, indicators, and annual emissions in order to assess the City’s climate action progress. Transparency is even more important when instruments such as RECs or offsets are used to neutralize all or a portion of emissions. Most stakeholders cannot verify the off-site RECs or offsets. When claiming offsets in its annual greenhouse gas inventory, Hermosa Beach should list the serial numbers (or ranges) of offsets retired for the year. When using unbundled RECs to claim renewable energy and reduce the scope 2 emissions, the City should follow guidelines in The Climate Registry’s General Reporting Protocol and “disclose additional activity data such as MWh consumed, purchased, generated or sold as supplemental information.“ Hermosa Beach should also disclose the serial numbers of RECs credited to the City’s electricity consumption. Carbonn Cities Climate Registry An emerging global standard for reporting municipal and community climate action provides a venue for Hermosa Beach to register its targets, document its actions, and publish its annual greenhouse gas inventory. The Carbonn Cities Climate Registry is a new partnership of C40, R20, and other global groups focused on sub-national climate action. The Carbonn registry will help local governments to achieve transparency and accountability for their local climate actions. In reporting its targets, inventories, and actions on Carbonn, Hermosa Beach will be on the same platform as other cities seen as national or global climate action leaders. In September 2014, ICLEI USA’s Resilient Cities for America Initiative named Carbonn as their official reporting platform. As of October 2014, 465 cities are reporting to Carbonn, including Manhattan Beach and Hawthorne. The two South Bay cities have reported their greenhouse gas emissions targets, performance, and mitigation actions. Verification & Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Inventories Some entities have a third-party verify their greenhouse gas inventory prior to reporting the results. The process for verifying greenhouse gas emissions inventories is similar to auditing corporate accounting records, and the intention is to enhance the credibility of the results. Because the cost to verify emissions can be substantial, few local governments and other entities contract with a third-party verifier before reporting their emissions. Credible verification can be obtained through an ISO 14064 compliant procedure, such as through The Climate Registry. Hermosa Beach can increase the credibility of its municipal GHG claims by obtaining third-party verification for a greenhouse gas inventory. However, because the cost of verification, Her mosa Beach should only audit certain inventories (for instance, the first year it sets a carbon neutrality 308 Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 92 goal). As Hermosa Beach develops new systems to monitor emissions, its annual emissions inventories will become more accurate and precise, reducing the need for third-party verification. Outreach and Education Building external awareness of the city’s climate action programs necessitates an effective public outreach and education plan. Effective implementation can be challenging - especially because most greenhouse gas reduction efforts produce intangible resul ts. Unlike some other air pollutants, greenhouse gases are undetectable by human senses at typical concentrations. Furthermore, greenhouse gas reductions represent the absence of these undetectable gasses. This creates an environmental communications challenge versus tangible efforts like cleaning water in a river or reducing urban smog. The City should lead its climate action messaging with the city’s goal to be a climate action leader: that its municipal actions will show both the community and other cities what can be possible. The City should support this message by detailing specific actions that have been implemented, and those that are planned for the future. Visualizations of alternative fuel vehicles or solar photovoltaic panels on City facilities can be the most salient demonstrations of climate actions. When explaining less salient actions, the City should tie examples to actions that that community members can take. For example: ● When explaining specific energy retrofit actions, include information on the various options for residential and commercial energy retrofits, especially property-assessed financing ● Connect the City’s actions to procure zero-emissions electricity with options available to residents and business owners, especially the emerging option of Community Choice power ● make the City’s employee commute program an example of implementing GHG reductions in transportation sector called for in the City’s General Plan update Tying municipal efforts to community action will also strengthen the perception of the City as a climate action leader. As, greenhouse gas emissions from municipal operations make up only about 1% of community-wide emissions, connecting the City’s municipal actions with other emissions reductions will demonstrate the city’s ability to leverage its position as a climate action leader. Outside resources, such as ICLEI’s education and outreach guidance and reports from the Yale Project on Climate Change Communications, will help the City determine effective messaging for its outreach and education program. Rather than relying on a limited number of City staff to communicate the City’s climate action program, Hermosa Beach should train municipal employees and community members to be climate action ambassadors. By holding regular information sessions that describe the City’s 309 Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 93 climate action commitment, existing actions, and future plans, Hermosa Beach can empower City employees and community members to tell the City’s story – and connect it with community-wide actions. This training problem would follow the model popularized by An Inconvenient Truth, the film version of a presentation Al Gore had taught thousands of others to deliver. This model of empowering others to tell climate-related stories has showed great success in connecting individual action with an overwhelming problem. Information sessions specific to municipal employees could first highlight all municipal actions and then highlight efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions reductions opportunities within an employee’s area of responsibility. The training sessions can also highlight how some highly- visible municipal programs (such as the employee commute reduction program and bicycles at work) serve as examples for community-wide actions. The City should publish regularly-updated presentations on the its website, so that ambassadors can obtain and deliver the most up-to-date information, which stakeholders can also access on the Carbonn Cities’ Climate Registry. A version of the climate ambassador information session could also be delivered within the Hermosa Beach Unified School District, combined with materials from California’s Education and the Environment Initiative. Costs of Municipal Climate Action After accounting for savings from projects which reduce energy cost or vehicle operating costs, the 30-year estimated cost of recommended municipal carbon neutral programs is $59,130, or $1,971 per year. This low cost is made possible because many of the municipal climate action opportunities available to the City have a payback period of less than 5 years. In addition to the projects listed above, the recommended municipal climate action programs will fund and Employee Commute Coordinator (20% FTE Assistant), a Climate Programs Analyst (25% FTE Analyst), and annual Greenhouse Gas Offsets required to make carbon neutral claims. The recommended plan is cash-flow positive by 2019. The added cost of a “first-to” position, in which the city would achieve carbon neutrality in 2017 rather than 2020, would be approximately $52,475. 310 Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 94 Municipal GHG Reduction Project Options - Cost Summary Implementation Measure Range in Cost per MTCO2e Recommended Electricity Community Choice Aggregation $10 to $18 Yes Solar Photovoltaic Projects (ASE Solar Solutions Proposal) -$5 to $20 Yes GSE Solutions "Project 1" -$125 to -$175 Yes GSE Solutions "Project 2" -$225 to -$275 Yes GSE Solutions - Hot Water, HVAC $20 to $35 Yes Municipal Fleet Bicycle Parking Yes Employee Bicycles Yes Mode Switching Yes Bicycle Fleet Program (Summary) $0 to -$200 Yes (Bundle) EV Service Equipment Yes Accelerate Clean Fleet Master Plan Yes Fuel Switching Yes EV Fleet Program (Summary) -$50 to -$150 Yes (Bundle) Employee Commutes Employee Commute - Carpool Incentive $100 to $200 Yes Employee Commute - EV Incentive $500 to $1,000 No 311 Recommended Municipal Climate Actions: Cost Details and Timeline Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 95 Implementation Measure Cost Assigned 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 to 2044 Total Electricity Community Choice Aggregation Additional Costs of Procurement $0 $18,309 $14,119 $9,193 $4,501 $90,024 $136,147 Solar Photovoltaic Projects Max upfront buydown of PPA Rate to Cost-Neutral $30,000 0 0 0 0 0 $30,000 GSE Solutions "Project 1" Outlay and annual savings $89,262 $72,087 $54,912 -$51,524 -$51,524 -$51,524 -$51,524 - $1,236,576 - $1,315,673 GSE Solutions "Project 2" Outlay and annual savings $63,029 $126,059 -$23,792 -$23,792 -$23,792 -$23,792 -$571,008 -$477,088 GSE Solutions - Hot Water, HVAC Outlay and annual savings $53,785 $107,571 -$5,056 -$5,056 -121344 $29,900 Municipal Fleet Bicycle Parking Infrastructure at City Facilities $7,500 $7,500 Employee Bicycles 5 regular bicycles; 5 electric- assist bicycles $18,500 $46,250 $64,750 Mode Switching Vehicle Operating Savings from Car -> Bike -$2,750 -$2,750 -$2,750 -$2,750 -$2,750 -$66,000 -$79,750 Bicycle Fleet Program (Summary) EV Service Equipment $50,000 $50,000 Accelerate Clean Fleet Master Plan Additional Costs for Procurement (versus BAU) - $7,500 per vehicle $100,000 $75,000 $75,000 $0 $250,000 Fuel Switching Operating Savings from $3 to $4 Gasoline -> Electricity mi/year -$3,817 -$9,860 -$18,568 -$23,124 -$21,733 -$521,593 -$598,695 EV Fleet Program (Summary) Employee Commutes Carpool Incentive Add’l Costs for $50 Incentive $1,200 $2,400 $3,600 $4,800 $6,000 $144,000 $162,000 EV Incentive Costs for $125 Incentive $7,500 $15,000 $22,500 $30,000 $37,500 $900,000 $1,012,500 Employee Commute Coordinator - Staffing Additional Costs for Incentive $20,000 $21,000 $22,050 $23,153 $24,310 583443 $693,956 Climate Programs Staffing - Analyst Additional Cost of Managing All Climate Programs $30,000 $31,500 $33,075 $34,729 $36,465 729303.75 $895,073 Total Costs Total Cost of All Projects $89,262 $142,616 $424,104 $114,068 $158,781 -$34,371 -$33,579 -$923,500 -$151,880 Estimated Advance from Equipment Replacement Fund $142,026 $142,026 $142,026 $426,077 Outlay Before Offsets, Net of Advance -$52,764 $591 $282,079 $114,068 $158,781 -$34,371 -$33,579 -$923,500 -$577,957 CARB (High Quality) GHG Offsets 2021 - 2044 costs assume further reductions in gross GHG emissions $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,442 $490,609 $511,051 Total Cost After Offsets -$52,764 $591 $282,079 $114,068 $158,441 -$34,837 -$13,736 -$447,279 $59,130 312 Recommended Municipal Climate Actions: Cost Details and Timeline Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 96 Begins Duration 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q Electricity Community Choice Aggregation 1Q2015 8 Solar PV Procurement 3Q2015 6 GSE Solutions "Project 1"1Q2014 12 GSE Solutions "Project 2"3Q2015 8 GSE Solutions - Hot Water, HVAC 3Q2017 6 Municipal High Efficiency Procurement Policy 1Q2014 ongoing Municipal Fleet Municipal Facility - Bicycle Parking 4Q2014 1 Bike Barn @ Work 1Q2016 1 Municipal Facility - EV Service Equip.3Q2015 4 Electric Vehicle Procurement 1Q2016 10 NEV Procurement 2Q2016 Employee Commute Carpool Incentive 1Q2016 ongoing EV Incentive 1Q2016 ongoing Municipal Service Contracts Amendment with Athens Services Other Purchase Offsets 1Q2017 ongoing Climate & Commute Programs Staffing 1Q2016 ongoing 2019 20202016 implementation period Implementation Measures Implementation Period 2015 2017 2018 active 313 Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 97 Revenues for Climate Action Climate Action leaders are often expected to “put their money where their goals are” in order to fund climate action measures and programs. For instance, Boulder’s Climate Action Plan tax generates about $1.8 million per year for the City. Voters renewed that measure in 2012. One possible source of dedicated, local funds for climate action is Hermosa Beach’s Utility User Tax, which currently generates approximately $2.5 million per year. At current prices for California Emissions Allowances ($11.50), the community’s 134,000 metric tonnes of CO2-e would cost about $1.54 million to offset. This represents an approximately 61% i ncrease above existing rates of 6% on electricity, gas, and water and 5.5% on communications services, bringing the total Utility User Tax would be 10%, comparable to Santa Monica’s. Utility User Tax rates in California range from 1% to 11%, except in Arcata, which levies a 45% tax on residential customers that use greater than 600% of the baseline electricity usage. Currently, it appears that Albany is the only California city looking to use the Utility User Tax to fund climate action. Hermosa Beach could try an alternate approach to funding aggressive reductions in community- wide emissions. The City could declare its interest in implementing innovative demonstration projects and programs in order to achieve aggressive reductions in community-wide greenhouse gas emissions, provided they are available at no additional expense to the City. The City’s national-leading commitment to neutralize emissions from government operations could attract attention from companies looking for such an opportunity. However, as more cities dedicate funding to climate action, Hermosa Beach may lose out on some promising demonstration projects to cities that can dedicate some local funding to assisting these companies. Hermosa Beach will likely find itself in a more competitive position for state and federal grants as a result of its aggressive climate commitment. The state and federal government have a vested interest in the success of leaders, so that they may lead the path for others to follow. If Hermosa Beach maintains a climate leadership position into the future, it will likely find success in attracting government grants and government-sponsored pilot projects. 314 City of Hermosa Beach GHG Inventory, Forecasting, Target-Setting Report for an Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan January 2015 Prepared for: Prepared by: 3570 Carmel Mountain Road, Suite 300 San Diego, California 92130 Funded by: Local Government Strategic Plan Strategies Program Under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission 315 316 Contents i Contents List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ iii Key Findings ................................................................................................................................................. iv Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 GHG Emissions Inventories ........................................................................................................................... 2 Emissions Reporting ............................................................................................................................... 2 Emissions Sectors ...................................................................................................................... 2 Calculation Methodology .......................................................................................................... 4 Community Emissions ............................................................................................................................ 4 2005—2012 Emissions Summary .............................................................................................. 5 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Inventories ................................................................................... 6 Energy ........................................................................................................................................ 9 Municipal Emissions ............................................................................................................................. 11 2005—2012 Emissions Summary ............................................................................................ 11 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Inventories ................................................................................. 13 Energy ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Inventory Forecasts ..................................................................................................................................... 17 Business-as-Usual Forecasts ................................................................................................................. 17 Community Business-as-Usual Forecast .................................................................................. 18 Municipal Business-as-Usual Forecast .................................................................................... 19 Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecasts ................................................................................................. 19 Community Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast .................................................................. 20 Municipal Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast ..................................................................... 21 Reduction Targets ....................................................................................................................................... 22 Recommended Community Targets ..................................................................................................... 22 Recommended Municipal Targets ........................................................................................................ 23 Conclusions and Next Steps ........................................................................................................................ 25 References .................................................................................................................................................. 26 Appendix A: Glossary of Terms Appendix B: Methodology 317 ii Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Tables Table 1. Key Terms in the Report .................................................................................................................. 1 Table 2. GHGs Analyzed in the Inventories .................................................................................................. 2 Table 3. Community-Wide GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 .................................................... 6 Table 4. Community GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 ........................................................ 7 Table 5. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Community Inventories ................................... 8 Table 6. Demographic Data for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 ....................................................................... 9 Table 7. Activity Data and GHG Emissions of Energy in 2005 and 2012 ....................................................... 9 Table 8. Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 .............................................................. 12 Table 9. Municipal GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 .......................................................... 13 Table 10. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Municipal Inventories .................................. 14 Table 11. Activity Data and GHG Emissions of Energy in 2005 and 2012 ................................................... 15 Table 12. Growth Factors for 2012, 2020, and 2035 .................................................................................. 18 Table 13. Community BAU Forecast ........................................................................................................... 18 Table 14. Municipal BAU Forecast .............................................................................................................. 19 Table 15. Community Adjusted BAU Emissions .......................................................................................... 21 Table 16. Municipal Adjusted BAU Emissions ............................................................................................. 21 Table 17. State-Aligned GHG Reduction Targets ........................................................................................ 22 Table 18. State-Aligned Municipal GHG Reduction Targets ....................................................................... 23 Figures Figure 1. Community-Wide GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 ................................................... 5 Figure 2. Community GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 ........................................................ 6 Figure 3. GHG Emissions for Community Electricity and Natural Gas, by Sector ....................................... 10 Figure 4. Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 .............................................................. 12 Figure 5. Municipal GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 ......................................................... 13 Figure 6. GHG Emissions for Municipal Electricity and Natural Gas, by Sector .......................................... 16 Figure 7. Community Emissions Inventories, Projections, and Targets ...................................................... 23 Figure 8. Municipal Emissions Inventories, Projections, and Targets ......................................................... 24 318 List of Acronyms and Abbreviations iii List of Acronyms and Abbreviations AB Assembly Bill ADC Alternative Daily Cover BAU Business-as-Usual CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy CH4 Methane CARB California Air Resources Board CIWMB California Integrated Waste Management Board CO2 Carbon Dioxide CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalents EECAP Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan EO Executive Order GHG Greenhouse Gas GWP Global Warming Potential IEAP International Local Government GHG Emissions Analysis Protocol IFT Inventories, Long-Term Forecasts, and Target-Setting IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change JWPCP Joint Water Pollution Control Plant kWh Kilowatt-hour LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard LGOP Local Government Operations Protocol MT Metric Tons NDN Nitrification/denitrification N2O Nitrous Oxide RPS Renewable Portfolio Standard RTP Regional Transportation Plan SBCCOG South Bay Cities Council of Governments SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCE Southern California Edison SCG Southern California Gas Company SEEC Statewide Energy Efficiency Collaborative 319 iv Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Key Findings Community  The City of Hermosa Beach decreased emissions 7.7% from 2005 to 2012, from 137,160 MT CO2e to 126,611 MT CO2e.  On-Road Transportation, Commercial Energy, Solid Waste, Water, and Off-Road Sources sector emissions decreased while Residential Energy and Wastewater sectors increased emissions from 2005 to 2012.  Energy-related emissions account for about 40% of the total community emissions.  Under the Adjusted Business-as-Usual (BAU) forecast, emissions will be 111,690 MT CO2e in 2020 and 94,162 MT CO2e in 2035. These emissions levels are 19% lower in 2020 than 2005 and 31% lower than 2005 by 2035.  The City should choose a reduction target that is feasible and ambitious. The State recommends a 15% reduction below 2005 levels by 2020, which would be achieved under the Adjusted BAU scenario.  To continue reductions consistent with the State’s long-term emissions reduction goal of lowering emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, the City would need to reduce emissions in 2035 by 24,210 MT CO2e from an Adjusted BAU forecast. This is a 24% reduction from the Adjusted BAU emissions level and would achieve a 49% reduction from 2005 levels. Municipal  Municipal emissions have decreased 9% from 2005 to 2012, from 1,501MT CO2e to 1,372 MT CO2e.  Emissions in all sectors decreased between 2005 and 2012 except for the Vehicle Fleet & Equipment and SCE-Owned Outdoor Lights.  Municipal energy use accounts for approximately 1% of all emissions.  Under the Adjusted BAU forecast, emissions will be 1,751 MT CO2e in 2020 and 1,872 MT CO2e in 2035. These emissions levels are 17% higher in 2020 than 2005 and 25% higher than 2005 by 2035.  The City would need to reduce emissions by 1,751 MT CO2e from the 2020 Adjusted BAU emissions level to meet its carbon neutrality goal by 2020. 320 Introduction 1 Introduction The Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventories, Long-Term Forecasts, and Target-Setting (IFT) Report contains the first steps toward the City of Hermosa Beach (City) identifying energy-efficiency measures in an Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan (EECAP). The inventories describe historic energy use and GHG emissions and the forecasts describe projected future emissions in the City. The target-setting section describes GHG reduction recommendations that are consistent with State goals and may assist the City in establishing local GHG reduction targets. The inventories and recommended reduction targets will help the City in the next step of the EECAP, which is to identify energy efficiency and GHG reduction measures that are relevant, meaningful, and feasible. Specifically, the IFT Report includes (words and phrases in bold are described in Table 1):  Historic GHG emissions in community inventories and municipal inventories for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012;  Future GHG emissions for 2020 and 2035 under a business-as-usual forecast scenario and adjusted business-as-usual forecast scenario; and  Recommended GHG reduction targets for 2020 and 2035. Table 1. Key Terms in the Report1 Term Definition Adjusted business-as-usual A GHG forecast scenario that accounts for known policies and regulations that will affect future emissions. Generally, these are state and federal initiatives that will reduce emissions from the business-as-usual scenario. Baseline year The inventory year used for setting targets and comparing future inventories against. Business-as-usual A GHG forecast scenario that assumes no change in policy affecting emissions since the most recent inventory. Changes in emissions are driven primarily through changes in demographics. Community Inventory GHG emissions that result from the activities by residents and businesses in the city. An inventory reports emissions that occur over a single calendar year. Emission factors The GHG-intensity of an activity. Municipal Inventory GHG emissions that result from the activities performed as part of the government operations in the city and are a subset of the community inventory. An inventory reports emissions that occur over a single calendar year. Reduction targets GHG emissions levels not to be exceeded by a specific date. Local reduction targets are often informed by state recommendations and different targets may be established for different years. Sector A subset of the emissions inventory classified by a logical grouping such as economic or municipal-specific category. 1 A glossary of terms is also included as Appendix A. 321 2 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach GHG Emissions Inventories GHG emissions inventories are the foundation of planning for future reductions. Establishing an existing inventory of emissions helps to identify and categorize the major sources of emissions currently being produced. In this report, four years of historic inventories are presented to show not only the major sources of emissions in the City, but also how those sources vary over time. For both the community and municipal inventories, the years 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 are presented. The 2005 inventory (for both community and municipal operations) is considered the baseline year. A baseline year is established as a starting point against which other inventories may be compared and targets may be set, and is generally the earliest year with a full emissions inventory. The most recent inventory (2012) has the most relevant data for planning purposes, while the interim years (2007 and 2010) provide context and may help identify trends or anomalies. Emissions Reporting The primary GHGs from the community and municipal operations are from carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Because each of these gases has a different capacity for trapping heat in the atmosphere, known as its global warming potential (GWP), a method of reporting is needed to be able to compare gases in the same terms. As a result, emissions are reported in carbon dioxide equivalents, or CO2e, with each GHG normalized and calculated relative to CO2 using its GWP. Table 2 describes the GHGs analyzed in this report, their symbol, GWP, and primary community sources of emissions. While N2O has the highest GWP and may be considered the most dangerous on a per- molecule basis, CO2 is by far the most prevalent, accounting for 88% of statewide emissions in 2005 (CARB 2011). Table 2. GHGs Analyzed in the Inventories Greenhouse Gas Symbol Global Warming Potential Primary Community Sources Carbon Dioxide CO2 1 Fossil fuel combustion Methane CH4 25 Fossil fuel combustion, landfills, wastewater treatment Nitrous Oxide N2O 298 Fossil fuel combustion, wastewater treatment Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007. Emissions Sectors The inventories identify the major sources of GHGs emissions caused by activities in sectors that are specific to community or municipal activities. A sector is a subset of the economy, society, or municipal operations whose components share similar characteristics. An emissions sector can also contain subsectors that provide more specificity about the source of emissions (e.g., natural gas and electricity are subsectors of the energy sector). 322 GHG Emissions Inventories 3 As mentioned above, inventories were completed for the community and municipal operations. Because the majority of municipal activities occur within the boundaries of the City and therefore contribute to the overall emissions of the community, both inventories are interconnected, with the municipal inventory considered a subset of the community inventory. As a result, municipal emissions are included in numbers reported for the community. The municipal inventory is separated to highlight areas of emissions that the City has more direct control over and to identify where they can begin to set examples for the community on how reduction strategies can be implemented. The following subsections describe the sectors used in the community and municipal inventories. It is important to note that both inventories capture similar types of information but may be categorized differently. For example, energy is reported in both the community and municipal inventory, but community level energy emissions are reported as “Residential” and “Non-residential”, whereas municipal energy emissions are more logically reported as “Buildings & Facilities” and “Streetlights”.2 Community Sectors The community inventory is categorized by sectors based on the sector’s ability to be affected through regional and local programs, incentives, zoning, and other policies. The City’s community inventories were divided into the following sectors:  Energy in the Community Inventory is further broken down into two sectors: o Commercial/Industrial Energy includes emissions from electricity and natural gas consumption in non-residential buildings and facilities (including outdoor lighting) in the City. o Residential Energy includes emissions from electricity and natural gas consumption in residential buildings in the City.  On-road Transportation includes emissions from vehicle fuel use in trips wholly within the City (in-boundary) and trips that either originate or end in the City (cross-boundary). Emissions from in-boundary trips are fully accounted for in the inventory, whereas only half of the emissions from cross-boundary trips are accounted for. Trips that pass-through the City, (such as on State Route 1) are not accounted for in the inventory because the City has little or no control of these emissions. As a result, this methodology reflects only trips or parts of trips within City borders that the City has the ability to affect.  Solid Waste includes emissions from waste that is generated in the community and sent to landfills.  Water includes emissions from the electricity used to source, treat, and deliver imported water in the community that is not accounted for in the community utility data.  Wastewater includes emissions from treating wastewater generated in the community. 2 Streetlights are further categorized as SCE-owned or City-owned as described later. 323 4 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach  Off-road Sources include emissions from operating equipment for construction, commercial, light industrial and agricultural activities; lawn and garden equipment; and recreational vehicles such as all-terrain vehicles. Municipal Sectors Sources of municipal emissions are divided into the following sectors:  Energy in the municipal inventory is further broken down into four sectors: o Buildings and Facilities includes energy use by the government, including electricity and natural gas. o SCE-owned Outdoor Lighting includes energy for streetlights on fixtures owned by SCE and outdoor lighting. o City-owned Outdoor Lighting includes energy for streetlights on fixtures owned by the City, traffic control signals, and outdoor lighting. o Water Pumping & Irrigation includes energy for water pumping and irrigation.  Vehicle Fleet & Equipment includes emissions from vehicles owned or operated by the government or contracted by the City for services such as street cleaning. It also includes equipment, such as emergency generators.  Employee Commute includes emissions from fuel use in vehicle trips by municipal employees commuting to and from work in the City.  Solid Waste includes emissions from waste generated by municipal employees or at municipally owned facilities. Calculation Methodology GHG emissions were calculated using activity data available (e.g., kilowatt-hours of electricity) for each sector and protocols for converting activity data to emissions output using relevant emission factors. Emission factors relate the activity to GHG emissions and may vary by year (e.g., for electricity) and often are not affected by local actions or behavior, unlike activity data. The U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions (ICLEI 2012) and the Local Government Operations Protocol for the Quantification and Reporting of GHG Emissions Inventories (LGOP) (CARB 2010) were the primary protocols used for developing the community and municipal inventories, respectively. Activity data are reported in the community and municipal emissions subsections below, and emission factors are detailed in Appendix B. Community Emissions The community inventory includes the GHG emissions that result from activities within City boundaries. This section presents the findings of the community inventory for four years: 2005 (baseline year), 2007, 2010, and 2012. It also provides more specific detail and findings on the energy sectors, which will form the basis of the reduction targets and reduction measures the City identifies in the EECAP. 324 GHG Emissions Inventories 5 2005—2012 Emissions Summary  The City of Hermosa Beach reduced emissions 7.7% from 2005 to 2012, from 137,160 MT CO2e to 126,611 MT CO2e.  On-Road Transportation, Commercial Energy, Solid Waste, Water, and Off-Road Sources sector emissions decreased while Residential Energy and Wastewater sectors increased emissions from 2005 to 2012. As shown in Figure 1 and Table 3, the On-Road Transportation sector was the largest contributor to emissions in both 2005 (54%) and 2012 (54%) by producing 73,567 MT CO2e in 2005 and 68,235 MT CO2e in 2012. This change represents a 7.2% decrease in emissions from 2005 to 2012. Residential energy is the second-largest contributor to emissions, accounting for 23% of emissions in 2005 and 27% in 2012. This change represents a 4.7% increase from 2005 to 2012, from 32,293 MT CO2e to 33,808 MT CO2e. The proportion of emissions from the Commercial sector decreased 12.7% from 2005 to 2012, from 20,280 MT CO2e to 17,830 MT CO2e. Solid waste comprised 4% of the total (6,015 MT CO2e) in 2005, but accounted for 3% of the total (3,334 MT CO2e) in 2012. Water, Wastewater, and Off-road sources made up the remaining emissions in each year. Water and Off-Road Transportation emissions declined from 2005 to 2012; however, Wastewater sources increased 13.5% (from 52 to 59 MT CO2e) in the same period. Figure 1. Community-Wide GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 54% 15% 23% 4% 3% <1% 1% 2005 54% 14% 27% 3% 2% <1% <1% 2012 On-Road Transportation Commercial Energy Residential Energy Solid Waste Water Wastewater Off-Road Sources 325 6 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Table 3. Community-Wide GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 Sector 2005 (MT CO2e) 2012 (MT CO2e) % Change 2005 to 2012 On-Road Transportation 73,567 68,235 -7.2% Residential Energy 32,293 33,808 4.7% Commercial Energy 20,280 17,830 -12.1% Solid Waste 6,015 3,334 -44.6% Water 4,065 2,600 -36.0% Off-Road Sources 888 745 -16.1% Wastewater 52 59 13.5% Total 137,160 126,611 -7.7% 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Inventories Figure 2 and Table 4 show the GHG emissions by sector for all inventory years. Emissions are variable among the inventory years, and may reflect changes in the economy, weather, and programs implemented to reduce emissions. The table also lists the percentage of each sector relative to total emissions and shows that the proportion of each sector does not vary greatly by year. Figure 2. Community GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 - 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 2005 2007 2010 2012MT CO2e Off-Road Sources Wastewater Water Solid Waste Residential Energy Commercial Energy On-Road Transportation 326 GHG Emissions Inventories 7 Table 4. Community GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Sector 2005 (MT CO2e) % of Total 2007 (MT CO2e) % of Total 2010 (MT CO2e) % of Total 2012 (MT CO2e) % of Total On-road Transportation 73,567 54% 71,863 54% 70,277 55% 68,235 54% Residential Energy 32,293 24% 31,964 24% 32,700 26% 33,808 27% Commercial Energy 20,280 15% 19,792 15% 18,372 14% 17,830 14% Solid Waste 6,015 4% 4,584 3% 3,510 3% 3,334 3% Water 4,065 3% 3,942 3% 2,552 2% 2,600 2% Off-Road Sources 888 1% 588 <1% 419 <1% 745 1% Wastewater 52 <1% 35 <1% 59 <1% 59 <1% Total 137,160 132,768 127,889 126,611 % Change from 2005 -- -3.2% -6.8% -7.7% Activity data can provide more insight into behavioral changes in the community, as these data are not affected by emission factors. Table 5 summarizes activity data for each sector and subsector. The activity data show that residential electricity, natural gas (residential and non-residential), wastewater, industrial off-road sources, and light commercial off-road sources increased from 2005 to 2012, while on-road transportation, commercial electricity, solid waste, water, recycled water, and off-road sources (lawn & garden, construction, recreation, and agriculture) decreased from 2005 to 2012. Wastewater and Off-road emissions use indicator data to attribute county-level emissions to the City and the indicator data are also shown in Table 5. Demographic data also help provide perspective to changes in emissions over time. Table 6 shows the number of households, jobs, population, and service population (jobs + population) for each inventory year. Energy emissions in particular often reflect trends in demographic data. For example, the slight increase in population and households between 2005 and 2012 may explain some of the increase in Residential Energy emissions. 327 8 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Table 5. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Community Inventories Sector 2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change 2005 to 2012 On-road Transportation Total Vehicle Miles Traveled 140,684,101 138,727,165 139,197,605 138,350,955 -1.7% Residential Energy Electricity (kWh) 47,843,215 49,976,195 49,906,427 49,778,450 4.0% Natural Gas (therms) 3,339,783 3,305,637 3,448,010 3,364,392 0.7% Commercial Energy Electricity (kWh) 51,741,467 52,130,513 48,545,739 41,191,832 -20.4% Natural Gas (therms) 857,687 900,024 827,116 875,986 2.1% Solid Waste Landfilled (tons) 24,578 18,490 14,230 13,511 -45.0% ADC (tons) 1 246 180 50 48 -80.7% Water and Wastewater Water (MG) 760.2 760.2 687.7 700.3 -7.9% Recycled Water (MG) 30.9 30.9 26.4 27.7 -10.3% Wastewater (City portion of countywide residents) 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.5% Off-road sources2 (% of LA County emissions attributed to the City) Lawn & Garden (% Households) 0.30% 0.29% 0.29% 0.29% -1.7% Construction (% Building permits) 0.32% 0.20% 0.13% 0.24% -25.7% Industrial (% Manufacturing Jobs) 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 4.3% Light Commercial (% Other jobs) 0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.18% 5.9% Recreation (Population weighted by income) 0.36% 0.36% 0.35% 0.34% -6.3% Agriculture (% Ag. Jobs) 0.10% 0.11% 0.06% 0.08% -17.6% 1 ADC is Alternative Daily Cover, which is green waste (grass, leaves, and branches) that is used to cover landfill emissions. They are reported separately by CalRecycle and therefore shown separately here. 2 Off-road emissions are available at the county level through CARB’s OFFROAD model. Emissions attributable to the City were derived using indicator data related to the off-road source. For example, the percentage of households in the City compared to the county was used to attribute the same percentage of lawn & garden equipment emissions to the City. See Appendix B for more methodology details. 328 GHG Emissions Inventories 9 Table 6. Demographic Data for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change 2005-2012 Service Population (Population + Jobs) 26,199 26,421 26,173 26,419 0.8% Population 19,340 19,174 19,477 19,574 1.2% Households 9,507 9,457 9,550 9,548 0.4% Jobs 6,859 7,247 6,696 6,845 -0.2% Energy The EECAP ultimately will focus on increasing energy efficiency and reducing GHG gases from energy; therefore, it is important for the City to understand its current energy consumption to make informed decisions for reducing energy-related emissions. Energy use consists of electricity and natural gas. Emissions from Commercial/Industrial and Residential energy use account for about 40% of the total community emissions in 2005 and 2012. Table 7 shows the breakdown in activity (kWh or therms) and GHG emissions by sector and energy source. Table 7. Activity Data and GHG Emissions of Energy in 2005 and 2012 Sector 2005 2012 % Change in Activity 2005-2012 % Change in Emissions 2005-2012 Activity (kWh or therms) Emissions (MT CO2e) Activity (kWh or therms) Emissions (MT CO2e) Commercial/ Industrial Electricity 51,741,467 15,719 41,191,832 13,172 -20.4% -16.2% Natural Gas 857,687 4,561 875,986 4,658 2.1% 2.1% Residential Electricity 47,843,215 14,534 49,778,450 15,918 4.0% 9.5% Natural Gas 3,339,783 17,759 3,364,392 17,890 0.7% 0.7% Total (MT CO2e) 52,573 51,638 -1.8% 329 10 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Commercial electricity use decreased 20.4% between 2005 and 2012; emissions decreased by more than 16%. Residential electricity use increased by about 4% but emissions increased by more than 9%. These changes are due to the emission factor used for electricity for 2005 and 2012. Emission factors convert activity data into GHG emissions and electricity emission factors vary annually based on how electricity is generated by the electricity provider (i.e., the amount of renewables, natural gas, coal, etc.). In 2005, Southern California Edison (SCE) generated electricity that resulted in an emission factor of 669.7 CO2e. In 2012, SCE’s electricity generation resulted in an emission factor of 705.0 CO2e. Therefore, a kilowatt-hour of electricity used in 2012 emitted more GHGs than a kilowatt-hour of electricity used in 2005. Future emissions could increase or decrease based on changes to SCE’s emission factors, which the City cannot directly affect, or through changes in usage, which can be affected by changes in local policy, outreach, or incentive programs. Unlike electricity, the emission factor for natural gas is estimated on a national basis and remains fairly constant over time. Therefore, the natural gas GHG emissions follow the same trend as usage. In Hermosa Beach, Commercial/Industrial natural gas consumption (therms) decreased by 2.1% from 2005 to 2012; therefore the emissions also declined 2.1%. Residential natural gas therms used and GHG emissions declined nearly 0.7% from 2005 to 2012. Figure 3 shows the trend in electricity and natural gas emissions from 2005 to 2012 for the Commercial/Industrial and Residential sectors. Electricity-Related Emissions All emissions are comprised of activity data and the emission factor, or GHG-intensity, of that activity. For electricity, the activity data are the kilowatt-hours (kWh) used by the city’s residents and businesses and the energy intensity is based on the sources of power that Southern California Edison uses to generate electricity. Changes to either component can affect the GHG emissions from electricity in the City. - 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 Electricity Natural Gas Electricity Natural Gas Commercial ResidentialMT CO2e 2005 2012 Figure 3. GHG Emissions for Community Electricity and Natural Gas, by Sector 330 GHG Emissions Inventories 11 Municipal Emissions As described earlier, a municipal GHG emissions inventory is a subset of the community inventory. The municipal inventory includes emissions from activities conducted as part of government operations in the City. While emissions from government operations are normally a fraction of the overall community emissions, the City has the most direct control over municipal emissions and the City can demonstrate leadership in the community by adopting and implementing energy and GHG reduction strategies. This section presents the findings of the municipal inventory for 2005 (the baseline year), 2007, 2010, and 2012. It also provides more specific detail and findings on the energy sectors, which will form the basis of the reduction measures the City identifies in the EECAP. 2005—2012 Emissions Summary  Municipal emissions have decreased nearly 9% from 2005 to 2012, from 1,501 MT CO2e to 1,372 MT CO2e.  The sector with the greatest reductions was Employee Commute, which decreased 130 MT CO2e between 2005 and 2012.  Emissions from municipal operations account for 1% of community emissions. The City’s Employee Commute is the sector with the largest percentage of emissions in 2005 (23%) and decreased to the third-largest contributor in 2012 (16%) as emissions from this sector decreased 37% over the period (Figure 4). The second largest-emitting sector for 2005 and 2012 was Buildings & Facilities, accounting for 20% of emissions in 2005 and 22% of emissions in 2012 (increasing from 301 MT CO2e to 305 MT CO2e). The Fleet & Equipment sector contributed 227 MT CO2e (15% of total emissions) in 2005 and increased by 44% 2012 (to 328 MT CO2e, or 24% of total emissions), making this sector the largest emissions sector in 2012. Emissions from Solid Waste declined 25% over the period (from 215 to 162 MT CO2e). Emissions from SCE-owned Outdoor Lights increased 4% from 2005 to 2012, while City-owned Outdoor Lights emissions decreased by 19% from 2005 to 2012. The smallest sector, Water Pumping & Irrigation, decreased emissions from 5 MT CO2e in 2005 to less than 1 MT CO2e between 2005 and 2012. The 2005 and 2012 emissions and changes are detailed in Table 8. 331 12 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Table 8. Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 Sector 2005 (MT CO2e) 2012 (MT CO2e) % Change 2005 to 2012 Employee Commute 348 218 -37% Buildings & Facilities 301 305 1% Outdoor Lights—City-Owned 264 213 -19% Fleet & Equipment 227 328 44% Solid Waste 215 162 -25% Outdoor Lights—SCE-Owned 141 146 4% Water Pumping & Irrigation 5.0 0.6 -87% Total 1,501 1,372 -8.6% Note: City-Owned Outdoor Lights includes streetlights, traffic signals, and area lighting. SCE-Owned Outdoor Lights includes streetlights and outdoor lighting. 20% 15% 23% 14% 10% 18% <1% 2005 22% 24% 16% 12% 11% 15% <1% Buildings & Facilities Fleet & Equipment Employee Commute Solid Waste Outdoor Lights—SCE-Owned Outdoor Lights—City-Owned Water Pumping & Irrigation 2012 Figure 4. Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 332 GHG Emissions Inventories 13 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Inventories Figure 5 and Table 9 show the municipal GHG emissions by sector for all four inventory years. Emissions peaked in 2007 (1,541 MT CO2e) and were the lowest in 2010 (1,340 MT CO2e). Figure 5. Municipal GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Table 9. Municipal GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Sector 2005 (MT CO2e) % of Total 2007 (MT CO2e) % of Total 2010 (MT CO2e) % of Total 2012 (MT CO2e) % of Total Employee Commute 348 23% 333 22% 274 20% 218 16% Buildings & Facilities 301 20% 333 22% 276 21% 305 22% Outdoor Lights—City- Owned 264 18% 258 17% 185 14% 213 16% Fleet & Equipment 227 15% 270 18% 320 24% 328 24% Solid Waste 215 14% 213 14% 162 12% 162 12% Outdoor lights—SCE- Owned 141 9% 134 9% 122 9% 146 11% Water Pumping & Irrigation 5.0 0% 0.49 0% 0.55 0% 0.64 0% Total 1,501 1,541 1,340 1,372 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 2005 2007 2010 2012MT CO2e Water Pumping & Irrigation Outdoor Lights—SCE-Owned Solid Waste Fleet & Equipment Outdoor Lights—City-Owned Buildings & Facilities Employee Commute 333 14 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Table 10 summarizes activity data for each sector and subsector. City-Owned Fleet showed significant increases in compressed natural gas (CNG) and diesel fuel used, which reflects the increase in Fleet & Equipment emissions. The significant decrease in Employee Commute reflects the change in City employees from 2005 to 2012, which decreased 34%. Table 10. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Municipal Inventories Sector 2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change 2005 to 2012 Buildings & Facilities Electricity (kWh) 895,746 932,207 883,858 915,327 2% Natural Gas (therms)1 5,383 11,977 4,621 2,542 -53% Outdoor Lights City-Owned Electricity (kWh) 868,589 895,841 643,360 664,636 -23% SCE-Owned Electricity (kWh) 464,752 466,608 424,794 455,210 -2% Fleet & Equipment City-Owned Fleet Gasoline (gallons) 12,665 17,406 20,481 20,341 61% Diesel (gallons) 2,584 2,584 4,121 5,502 113% LPG (gallons) - - 36 23 NA CNG (standard cubic feet) 13,377 13,377 81,114 98,658 638% Contracted2 Gasoline (gallons) 3,640 3,640 3,640 3,640 0% Diesel (gallons) 2,057 2,057 2,057 2,057 0% LPG (gallons) 5,127 5,127 5,127 5,127 0% Employee Commute Gasoline (gallons) 794,170 760,056 634,526 506,797 -36% Diesel (gallons) 26,784 35,852 25,110 20,055 -25% # Full Time Employee Equivalents 186 184 154 123 -34% Solid Waste2 Generated Waste (tons) 666 660 660 660 -1% Water Pumping & Irrigation Electricity (kWh) 17,033 1,712 1,907 1,999 -88% 1 Contracted fuel use was not available for 2010 and 2012. Data from 2007 were used. 2 Solid Waste data for 2010 and 2012 assumed 2007 values. 334 GHG Emissions Inventories 15 Energy As with the community emissions, the EECAP will focus on increasing energy efficiency and reducing GHG gases from energy within municipal operations. The City has more direct control over energy- related emissions than other sectors, such as employee commute. Municipal energy use includes Buildings & Facilities, SCE-owned Outdoor Lighting, City-owned Outdoor Lighting, and Water Pumping & Irrigation. Energy accounted for 47% of total emissions in 2005 and 48% in 2012. While both electricity and natural gas are used for Building & Facilities, Outdoor Lighting and Water Pumping & Irrigation only use electricity. Emissions from energy declined 7% from 2005 to 2012; electricity-based emissions declined almost 5% and natural gas related emissions decreased 52% (Table 11). As with community energy, municipal emissions use variable electricity emission factors and constant natural gas emission factors. Table 11. Activity Data and GHG Emissions of Energy in 2005 and 2012 Sector 2005 2012 % Change in Activity 2005-2012 % Change in Emissions 2005-2012 Activity (kWh or Therms) Emissions (MT CO2e) Activity (kWh) Emissions (MT CO2e) B&F (kWh) 895,746 272 915,327 291 2% 7% Outdoor Lighting— City (kWh) 868,589 264 664,636 213 -23% -19% Outdoor Lighting— SCE (kWh) 464,752 141 455,210 146 -2% 4% Water Pumping & Irrigation (kWh) 17,033 5 1,999 0.64 -88% -87% B&F (therms) 5,383 29 2,542 14 -53% -52% Total 2,251,503 711 2,039,714 665 -9% -7% Note: B&F is Buildings and Facilities. 335 16 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Figure 6 shows the trend in electricity and natural gas emissions from 2005 to 2012 for the municipal energy sectors. Note: B&F is Buildings and Facilities. Figure 6. GHG Emissions for Municipal Electricity and Natural Gas, by Sector - 50 100 150 200 250 300 B&F (Electricity)Outdoor Lighting— City Outdoor Lighting— SCE B&F (Nat Gas)Water Pumping & IrrigationMT CO2e 2005 2012 336 Inventory Forecasts 17 Inventory Forecasts GHG emissions are forecast using two scenarios: a Business-as-Usual (BAU) and an Adjusted BAU scenario. The BAU scenario describes emissions based on projected growth in population and employment and does not consider policies that will reduce emissions in the future (that is, the policies in place in 2012 are assumed to remain constant through 2035). The Adjusted BAU scenario describes emissions based on projected growth and considers policies that will achieve GHG reductions in the future. Policies, described in detail below, include State-adopted or approved legislation that will affect future emissions. By evaluating the two scenarios, the City can see the effect that existing policies may have on future emissions and be better able to determine how local measures can provide additional reductions. Two future years are forecasted for each scenario: 2020 and 2035. The 2020 forecast year is consistent with the goals identified in Assembly Bill (AB) 32, which identifies a statewide GHG reduction target by 2020. The 2035 forecast year will allow the City to develop long-term strategies to continue GHG reductions beyond 2020. Business-as-Usual Forecasts The BAU forecasts estimate future emissions using current (2012) consumption patterns and emission factors with the anticipated growth in the City. Anticipated growth is estimated using data from regional planning scenarios developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the City, and other relevant sources (Table 12). The most relevant growth factors are used to project emissions by sector. For example, future Residential Energy emissions were developed using current energy use per household (from the 2012 inventory) and the anticipated number of households in the future. Actual energy use is a function of several variables, not only the number of households; however, this approach is supported by current protocols and best practices within the State and provides a consistent approach to forecasting. Compound annual growth rates were developed using the growth projections from 2012 to 2020 and from 2021 to 2035, as shown Table 12. In general, the City is expecting modest growth to 2020 and 2035 as population and jobs are expected to increase. SCAG is projecting fewer vehicle miles traveled from 2012 to 2020 despite population and job growth, but that trend is reversed after 2020, when vehicle miles traveled will again increase. Due to the relatively low growth, the City does not anticipate major staffing changes in its government services. 337 18 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Table 12. Growth Factors for 2012, 2020, and 2035 Sector Demographic Indicator 2012 2020 2035 2012-2020 CAGR1 2020-2035 CAGR1 Transportation Vehicle Miles Traveled 138,350,955 126,238,272 129,742,671 -1.14% 0.18% Solid Waste, Water, Wastewater, Off- Road Sources Service Population (Population + Jobs) 26,419 26,900 27,400 0.23% 0.12% NA2 Population 19,574 19,600 19,700 0.02% 0.03% Residential Energy Households 9,548 9,600 9,600 0.07% 0.00% Commercial/ Industrial Energy Jobs 6,845 7,300 7,700 0.81% 0.36% Municipal Jobs Municipal Emissions3 106 F/T 34 P/T 137 F/T 60 P/T 146 F/T 65 P/T 3.9% 0.45% Source: SCAG 2012. F/T: Full-time employees; P/T: Part-time employees 1 Compound annual growth rate. 2 Not Applicable. Population data are shown for informational purposes but are not used for forecasting any sector. 3 The number of jobs in the City is used as an indicator for all municipal operation emissions. Community Business-as-Usual Forecast  BAU community emissions are expected to decrease 8.1% from baseline levels by 2020 and 5.8% by 2035. The City’s BAU emissions in 2020 are estimated to be 125,982 MT CO2e, or an 8.1% decrease from baseline (2005) emissions. By 2035, emissions are estimated to decrease 5.8% from the baseline level to 129,157 MT CO2e (Table 13). Table 13. Community BAU Forecast Sector 2005 (MT CO2e) 2012 (MT CO2e) 2020 (MT CO2e) % Change 2012-2020 2035 (MT CO2e) %Change 2012-2035 On-Road Transportation 73,567 68,235 66,150 -3% 67,986 0% Residential Energy 32,293 33,808 33,969 0% 33,969 0% Commercial Energy 20,280 17,830 18,930 6% 19,967 12% Solid Waste 6,015 3,334 3,391 2% 3,454 4% Water 4,065 2,600 2,645 2% 2,694 4% Off-Road Sources 888 745 837 12% 1,026 38% Wastewater 52 59 60 2% 61 3% Total 137,160 126,611 125,982 0% 129,157 2% % Change from 2005 -7.7% -8.1% -5.8% 338 Inventory Forecasts 19 Municipal Business-as-Usual Forecast  BAU municipal emissions are expected to be 20% higher than baseline levels in 2020 and 28% higher than baseline levels in 2035. The City is anticipating significant growth in city employees by 2020 or 2035 from current (2012) levels— 36% more full-time equivalent employees in 2020 compared with 2012, and 45% more employees in 2035 compared with 2012. Therefore, the activity data for municipal services is also expected to increase relative to 2012. Table 14. Municipal BAU Forecast 2005 (MT CO2e) 2012 (MT CO2e) 2020 (MT CO2e) % Change 2012-2020 2035 (MT CO2e) % Change 2012-2035 Buildings & Facilities 301 305 400 31% 428 40% Employee Commute 348 218 286 31% 306 40% Solid Waste 215 162 213 31% 227 40% Outdoor Lighting 405 359 471 31% 504 40% Vehicle Fleet 227 328 430 31% 460 40% Water Pumping & Irrigation 5.0 0.64 1 56% 1 56% Total 1,501 1372 1801 31% 1926 40% % Change from 2005 -9% 20% 28% Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecasts State legislation has been approved and/or adopted that will reduce GHG emissions in the City. These policies do not require additional local action, but should be accounted for in the City’s emissions forecasts to provide a more accurate picture of future emissions and the level of local action needed to reduce emissions to levels consistent with State recommendations. This forecast is called the Adjusted BAU forecast. The measures are described briefly below. Low Carbon Fuel Standard. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was developed as a result of Executive Order S-1-07, which mandates that the carbon intensity of transportation fuels in California are lowered 10% by 2020. The State is currently implementing this standard, which is being phased in and will achieve full implementation in 2020. Assembly Bill (AB) 1493 and Advanced Clean Cars. AB 1493 directed CARB to adopt GHG standards for motor vehicles through model year 2015 that would result in reductions in GHG emissions by up to 25% in 2030. In addition, the State’s Advanced Clean Cars program includes additional components that will further reduce GHG emissions statewide, including more stringent fuel efficiency standards for model years 2017—2025 and support infrastructure for the commercialization of zero-emission vehicles. CARB 339 20 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach anticipates additional GHG reductions of 3% by 2020, 27% by 2035, and 33% by 20503. These are also known as “Pavley I” and “Pavley II” regulations. California Building Code Title 24. California’s building efficiency standards are updated regularly to incorporate new energy efficiency technologies. The code was most recently updated in 2013 and went into effect for new development in 2014. For projects implemented after January 1, 2014, the California Energy Commission estimates that the 2013 Title 24 energy efficiency standards will reduce consumption by an estimated 25% for residential buildings and 30% for commercial buildings, relative to the 2008 standards. These percentage savings relate to heating, cooling, lighting, and water heating only; therefore, these percentage savings were applied to the estimated percentage of energy use by Title 24. Renewable Portfolio Standard. The Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires energy providers to derive 33% of their electricity from qualified renewable sources. This is anticipated to lower emission factors (i.e., fewer GHG emissions per kilowatt-hour used) statewide. Therefore, reductions from RPS are taken for energy embedded in water, which uses energy sources throughout the state to move from the water source area to the City. However, no credit was taken for this measure for the SCE service region (i.e., for residential and commercial electricity used in the City supplied by SCE). Analysis of SCE’s current portfolio and the sources needed to replace the nuclear generation that has been taken out of service has revealed great uncertainty in how SCE’s emission factors may change over time. Therefore, the emission factor used in the 2012 inventory and the BAU forecast was also used in the Adjusted BAU forecast. Senate Bill X7-7. California’s SB X7-7 requires water suppliers to reduce urban per capita water consumption 20% from a baseline level by 2020. The City is supplied by California Water Service and the reductions in GHG emissions from SB X7-7 were calculated by applying the reduction goals established by California Water Service to the City’s population in 2020 and 2035. Community Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast  Emissions are expected to decrease under the Adjusted BAU forecast and will be 19% lower in 2020 than 2005 and 31% lower than 2005 levels by 2035. The City’s Adjusted BAU emissions in 2020 are estimated to be 111,690 MT CO2e in 2020 and 94,162 MT CO2e in 2035 (Table 15). This change represents an 18.6% reduction from 2005 by 2020 and 31% reduction by 2035. Due to the stringent State vehicle standards, the emissions from the Transportation sector are expected to decrease significantly over time, while the proportion of emissions from Residential and Non-residential Energy will increase. Emissions from Solid Waste are expected to increase while emissions from Water and Wastewater will remain steady over time, but all account for less than 10% of total emissions. 3 CARB Advanced Clean Cars Summary Sheet 340 Inventory Forecasts 21 Table 15. Community Adjusted BAU Emissions Sector 2005 (MT CO2e) 2012 (MT CO2e) 2020 (MT CO2e) 2020 % of Total 2035 (MT CO2e) 2035 % of Total Transportation & Mobile Sources 74,455 68,980 53,857 49% 35,533 38% Non-Residential Energy 20,280 17,830 18,742 17% 19,564 21% Residential Energy 32,293 33,808 33,953 30% 33,953 36% Solid Waste 6,015 3,334 3,391 3% 3,454 4% Water & Wastewater 4,117 2,659 1,747 2% 1,658 2% Total 137,160 126,611 111,690 100% 94,162 100% % Change from 2005 -8% -19% -31% Municipal Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast  Emissions are expected to increase under the Adjusted BAU forecast and are estimated to be 17% higher in 2020 and 25% higher in 2035 relative to 2005 levels.  The City will need to reduce emissions by 475 MT CO2e in 2020 from the forecasted level to meet a state-aligned target of 15% below 2005 levels. The City’s Municipal Adjusted BAU emissions in 2020 are estimated to be 1,751 MT CO2e, which is 17% above the 2005 baseline level (Table 16). By 2035, the level of reductions is anticipated to be 25% above 2005 levels, or 1,872 MT CO2e. The Adjusted BAU emissions are slightly lower than the BAU emissions due to the Low Carbon Fuel Standard measure described earlier. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard would lower the carbon intensity of fuels used in both the City’s Vehicle Fleet and Employee Commute sectors. Table 16. Municipal Adjusted BAU Emissions Sector 2005 (MT CO2e) 2012 (MT CO2e) 2020 (MT CO2e) 2020 % of Total 2035 (MT CO2e) 2035 % of Total Buildings & Facilities 301 305 400 23% 428 23% Employee Commute 348 218 266 15% 284 15% Solid Waste 215 162 213 12% 227 12% Outdoor Lighting 405 359 471 27% 504 27% Vehicle Fleet 227 328 400 23% 428 23% Water Pumping & Irrigation 5 0.64 0.64 <1% 0.64 <1% Total 1,501 1,373 1,751 100% 1,872 100% % Change from 2005 -9% 17% 25% 341 22 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Reduction Targets The State has set goals for reducing GHG emissions by 2020 and 2050 through AB 32 and Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, respectively. The State has also provided guidance to local jurisdictions as “essential partners” in achieving the State’s goals by identifying a 2020 recommended reduction goal. That goal, stated in the AB 32 Scoping Plan, was for local governments to achieve a 15% reduction below 2005 levels by 2020, which aligns with the State’s goal of not exceeding 1990 emissions levels by 20204. The State’s long term target is to emit no more than 20% of 1990 levels by 2050 (or, a reduction of 80% below 1990 levels by 2050). The State has not provided an interim target, nor has it provided guidance to local governments beyond the 2020 emissions target recommendations. It is however clear that the issue of climate change will not end in 2020 and continued reductions should be achieved to keep the State on a path toward the 2050 goal. A straight-line projection from the 2020 to 2050 goals would result in a reduction goal of 49% below 2005 levels by 2035 midpoint. Ultimately, the City will determine the level of reductions that it can and should achieve. The recommended targets provided below are guidance based on consistency with the State’s goals. Recommended Community Targets In 2020, the City will meet the reduction target through existing efforts. In 2035, the City would need to reduce 24,210 MT CO2e emissions below the Adjusted BAU scenario to meet the State-aligned target (Table 17 and Figure 7). Table 17. State-Aligned GHG Reduction Targets Sector 2005 2012 2020 2035 BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) 137,160 126,611 125,982 129,157 Adjusted BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) 137,160 126,611 111,690 94,162 State-Aligned Target(% change from 2005) -15% -49% State-Aligned Target (% change from 2012) -8% -45% State-Aligned Emissions Goal (MT CO2e) 116,586 69,952 Reductions from Adjusted BAU needed to meet the Target (MT CO2e) Target Met 24,210 4 In an analysis, the State concluded that a 15% reduction in emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 would be equivalent to achieving 1990 emissions levels. 342 Reduction Targets 23 Municipal Targets In 2010, the Hermosa Beach City Council declared its goal to become carbon neutral. The City is hoping to achieve this goal by 2020. Without this goal, the City’s emissions are anticipated to be 1,751 MT CO2e in 2020 and 1,872 MT CO2e in 2035. Therefore, the City must reduce emissions by 1,751 from the Adjusted BAU forecast to meet the 2020 goal and maintain this level in the future (Table 18 and Figure 8). Table 18. State-Aligned Municipal GHG Reduction Targets 2005 2012 2020 2035 BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) 1,501 1,372 1,801 1,926 Adjusted BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) 1,501 1,372 1,751 1,872 Carbon Neutrality Target (% Reduction from 2005) -100% -100% Carbon Neutrality Emissions (MT CO2e) 0 0 Reductions from Adjusted BAU needed to meet the Target (MT CO2e) 1,751 1,872 - 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035MT CO2e Water & Wastewater Solid Waste Commercial Energy Residential Energy Transportation & Mobile Sources 15% below 2005 49% below 2005 Path to 2035 from 2020 ABAU (-3.1%/yr) Figure 7. Community Emissions Inventories, Projections, and Targets 343 24 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Figure 8. Municipal Emissions Inventories, Projections, and Targets 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035MT CO2e Water Pumping & Irrigation Solid Waste Buildings & Facilities Outdoor Lighting Employee Commute Vehicle Fleet Path to 2020 from 2012 344 Conclusions and Next Steps 25 Conclusions and Next Steps This Report presents the City’s community and municipal inventories, forecasts, and recommended reduction targets. It is the foundation of the EECAP and provides the City a first look at what will be needed to meet emissions reductions that are aligned with the State and to mitigate the City’s impacts on climate change. This Report also helps to guide the City in determining feasible energy efficiency reduction opportunities by detailing energy-related emissions, including electricity and natural gas from Residential and Non-residential sectors. The next steps in the EECAP process are to review the information provided in this Report and to determine preliminary GHG reduction targets for the community and municipal operations. The South Bay Cities Council of Governments will also begin to work with the City to identify local and subregional energy efficiency measures that could be implemented to reach the City’s emissions targets. 345 26 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach References Association of Environmental Professionals. 2013. The California Supplement to the United States Community-Wide Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Protocol. California Air Resources Board. 2010. Local Government Operations Protocol For the quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions inventories version 1.1. California Air Resources Board. 2011. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory: 2000-2009. ICLEI 2012. U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions version 1.0. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (IPCC) 1996. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. 346 Appendix A: Glossary of Terms Adjusted Business-as-Usual: A GHG forecast scenario that accounts for known policies and regulations that will affect future emissions. Generally, these are state and federal initiatives that will reduce emissions from the business-as-usual scenario. Baseline Year: The inventory year used for setting targets and comparing future inventories against. Business-as-Usual (BAU): A GHG forecast scenario used for the estimation of greenhouse gas emissions at a future date based on current technologies and regulatory requirements and in the absence of other reduction strategies. Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e): This is a common unit for normalizing greenhouse gases with different levels of heat trapping potential. For carbon dioxide itself, emissions in tons of CO2 and tons of CO2e are the same, whereas one ton of nitrous oxide emissions equates to 298 tons of CO2e and one ton of methane equates to 25 tons of CO2e. The values are based on the gases’ global warming potentials. Community Inventory: GHG emissions that result from the activities by residents and businesses in the city. An inventory reports emissions that occur over a single calendar year. Emissions Factor: A coefficient used to convert activity data into greenhouse gas emissions. The factor is a measure of the greenhouse gas intensity of an activity, such as the amount of CO2 in one kilowatt-hour of electricity. Global Warming Potential (GWP): The relative effectiveness of a molecule of a greenhouse gas at trapping heat compared with one molecule of CO2. Metric Ton (MT): Common international measurement for the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions. A metric ton is equal to 2205 lbs. or 1.1 short tons. Municipal Inventory: GHG emissions that result from the activities performed as part of the government operations in the city and are a subset of the community inventory. An inventory reports emissions that occur over a single calendar year. Reduction targets: GHG emissions levels not to be exceeded by a specific date. Reduction targets are often informed by state recommendations and different targets may be established for different years. Sector: A subset of the emissions inventory classified by a logical grouping such as economic or municipal-specific category. 347 348 Appendix B: Methodology This appendix provides a detailed description of the data sources, emission factors, policies, and assumptions used to develop the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventories, forecasts under a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario, forecasts under an Adjusted BAU scenario, and the recommended GHG reduction targets. Protocols The GHG inventories for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 were calculated using tools and guidance documents developed or supported by government agencies. Calculation protocols have been developed to ensure consistency among community and municipal inventories. Specifically, the U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Community Protocol) (ICLEI 2012) and the California Supplement (AEP 2013) were used for the community inventories and the Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP) was used for the municipal inventories (CARB 2010). These protocols often have multiple calculation methods for a single emission source depending on the data available. There are two broad approaches for calculating emissions: “bottom -up” and “top-down”. A bottom-up approach relies on end-use data, such as the city-level electricity usage. A top-down approach relies on aggregated data that is allocated to the city based on population, employment, or other relevant indicator. Bottom-up calculations were performed whenever possible to provide the most detailed and likely accurate picture of emissions within a jurisdiction; however, when detailed data were not available, other appropriate methods were used and are described in this appendix. Data were also calculated and managed to best fit the GHG inventory and planning software tool used for this project, called ClearPath. ClearPath was developed by the Statewide Energy Efficiency Collaborative (SEEC) which is a partnership between several statewide agencies, utilities, and non-profits to assist cities and counties in climate mitigation planning. ClearPath is further described at californiaseec.org. In addition, a South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) User’s Guide is being developed as part of this project to help cities and SBCCOG to maintain the data and provide for consistent reporting of emissions over time. Global Warming Potential Factors The inventories include the three GHGs most relevant to community and municipal emissions: CO2, CH4, and N2O. Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on their molecular properties and expected lifetime in the atmosphere, and it is useful to describe emissions in one unit of measurement. That unit of measurement is a CO2-equivalent, or CO2e and Global Warming Potential (GWP) factors are used to standardize emissions from various GHGs. GWP factors, developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), represent the heat-trapping ability of each GHG relative to that of CO2. For example, the GWP factor of CH4 is 25 because one metric ton (MT) of CH4 has 25 times the heat-trapping capacity as one MT CO2 (over a 100-year period). IPCC periodically updates the GWP factors of GHGs based on new science and updated background mixing ratios of CO2. CO2 always has a GWP factor of 1 and the other GHGs are calculated relative to CO2. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) recently updated their GWP factors to align with the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, as shown in Table B-1. GWP factors are unitless. Emissions in the inventories are reported in units of CO2e. 349 B-2 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Table B-1. Global Warming Potentials CO2 CH4 N2O GWP 1 25 298 Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007. Activity Data Activity data is the end-use consumption amount of a sector, such as kilowatt hours of electricity, therms of natural gas, and vehicle miles traveled for on-road transportation. In estimating the City’s historic GHG emissions, activity data at the City level were obtained when possible (a “bottom -up” approach). When not available, other data sources were used, generally at the county level (a “top- down” approach). Municipal data for 2005 and 2007 were obtained from the City’s previous inventory report. Other data were provided by the sources as identified Table B-12. TableB-12. Activity Data Sources Data Data Source Notes Community Electricity Southern California Edison Municipal Electricity Southern California Edison Maintained by SBCCOG Community Natural Gas Southern California Gas Company Municipal Natural Gas Southern California Gas Company Community Water California Water Service Vehicle Miles Traveled Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Origin-destination approach, described below Demographic Data SCAG Vehicle Fleet City Employee Commute City Off-Road Emissions OFFROAD Model County-level data Waste CalRecycle Origin-Destination VMT For the community inventory, activity data (vehicle miles traveled) were based on an origin-destination approach used by the State in developing emissions target for metropolitan planning organizations under SB 375. This approach has also been the typical approach used in estimating emission within a city. This approach accounts for:  Half of the emissions where one endpoint is in the City, for example either the origin or destination of the trip.  All of the emissions where the trip begins and ends within the City.  None of the emissions that are “pass-through”; that is, a trip passes through the City but does not begin or end within its boundary. This approach is used to account for trips or portions of trips that the city may have some control over. 350 B-3 Appendix B: Methodology Community Activity Data Community activity data are shown in Table B-13, except for off-road emissions, which are shown in Table B-14 for Los Angeles County. Table B-13. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Community Inventories Sector 2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change 2005 to 2012 On-road Transportation Total Vehicle Miles Traveled 140,684,101 138,727,165 139,197,605 138,350,955 -1.7% Residential Energy Electricity (kWh) 47,843,215 49,976,195 49,906,427 49,778,450 4.0% Natural Gas (therms) 3,339,783 3,305,637 3,448,010 3,364,392 0.7% Commercial Energy Electricity (kWh) 51,741,467 52,130,513 48,545,739 41,191,832 -20.4% Natural Gas (therms) 857,687 900,024 827,116 875,986 2.1% Solid Waste Landfilled (tons) 24,578 18,490 14,230 13,511 -45.0% ADC (tons) 1 246 180 50 48 -80.7% Water and Wastewater Water (MG) 760.2 760.2 687.7 700.3 -7.9% Recycled Water (MG) 30.9 30.9 26.4 27.7 -10.3% Wastewater (City portion of countywide residents) 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.5% Off-road sources2 (% of LA County emissions attributed to the City) Lawn & Garden (% Households) 0.30% 0.29% 0.29% 0.29% -1.7% Construction (% Building permits) 0.32% 0.20% 0.13% 0.24% -25.7% Industrial (% Manufacturing jobs) 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 4.3% Light Commercial (% Other jobs) 0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.18% 5.9% Recreation (Population weighted by income) 0.36% 0.36% 0.35% 0.34% -6.3% Agriculture (% Ag. Jobs) 0.10% 0.11% 0.06% 0.08% -17.6% 351 B-4 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Table B-14. Emissions from Off-road Categories for Los Angeles County Off-road Class GHG Type 2005 (MT CO2e /yr) 2007 (MT CO2e /yr) 2010 (MT CO2e /yr) 2012 (MT CO2e /yr) Agricultural Equipment CO2 921.79 910.27 893.24 882.09 CH4 0.19 0.17 0.14 0.12 N2O 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Construction and Mining Equipment CO2 268,646.23 277,541.76 290,911.26 299,875.79 CH4 34.12 31.44 28.24 26.28 N2O 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.26 Industrial Equipment CO2 8,099.90 8,562.29 9,255.58 9,870.65 CH4 7.16 6.2 4.46 3.89 N2O 0.69 0.63 0.56 0.55 Lawn and Garden Equipment CO2 2,581.13 2,737.30 2,968.71 3,215.02 CH4 4.98 4.87 4.76 4.96 N2O 2.01 2.01 2.01 2.13 Light Commercial Equipment CO2 5,300.36 5,572.36 5,979.92 6,387.77 CH4 2.83 2.54 2.18 2.05 N2O 0.91 0.97 1.02 1.07 Recreational Equipment CO2 286.54 309.8 343.68 369.04 CH4 2.14 2.32 2.58 2.77 N2O 0.52 0.57 0.64 0.68 Municipal Activity Data Municipal activity data are shown in Table B-15. Employee Commute Data for Employee Commute in ClearPath are entered as gasoline or diesel. Annual vehicle miles traveled is entered as is the percent of miles traveled by passenger cars, light trucks, and heavy trucks. The City conducted a ridership survey in 2013 through SurveyMonkey.com and presented the results in a 2014 report titled “The City of Hermosa Beach Employee Commute Survey: 2013 & Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Strategies”. 108 employees completed the survey, representing 76% of employees. The results were summarized and extrapolated to the total number of City employees in 2010 and 2012. Employee commute vehicle miles traveled by fuel type for 2005 and 2007 were taken from the City’s previous GHG inventories. The number of employees for 2010 was assumed to be the same as in 2012. 352 B-5 Appendix B: Methodology Table B-15. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Municipal Inventories Sector 2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change 2005 to 2012 Buildings & Facilities Electricity (kWh) 895,746 932,207 883,858 915,327 2% Natural Gas (therms)1 5,383 11,977 4,621 2,542 -53% Outdoor Lights City-Owned Electricity (kWh) 868,589 895,841 643,360 664,636 -23% SCE-Owned Electricity (kWh) 464,752 466,608 424,794 455,210 -2% Fleet & Equipment City-Owned Fleet Gasoline (gallons) 12,665 17,406 20,481 20,341 61% Diesel (gallons) 2,584 2,584 4,121 5,502 113% LPG (gallons) - - 36 23 NA CNG (standard cubic feet) 13,377 13,377 81,114 98,658 638% Contracted2 Gasoline (gallons) 3,640 3,640 3,640 3,640 0% Diesel (gallons) 2,057 2,057 2,057 2,057 0% LPG (gallons) 5,127 5,127 5,127 5,127 0% Employee Commute Gasoline (gallons) 794,170 760,056 634,526 506,797 -36% Diesel (gallons) 26,784 35,852 25,110 20,055 -25% # Full Time Employee Equivalents 186 184 154 123 -34% Solid Waste2 Generated Waste (tons) 666 660 660 660 -1% Water Pumping & Irrigation Electricity (kWh) 17,033 1,712 1,907 1,999 -88% 1 Contracted fuel use was not available for 2010 and 2012. Data from 2007 were used. 2 Solid Waste data for 2010 and 2012 assumed 2007 values. Emission Factors Emissions factors are used to convert activity data to GHG emissions. An emission factor is defined as the average emission rate of a given GHG for a given source, relative to units of activity. By definition, an emission factor is related to activity data. The emission factors used in the inventories are described by sector below. 353 B-6 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Electricity California utilities report the average CO2 content per output of electricity on an intermittent basis. The CO2-intensity of electricity varies by utility and year, due to changes in supply, renewable generation, and other factors. The community and municipal operations use electricity provided by SCE except for embedded energy in water, which travels throughout the state and therefore utilizes electricity from multiple utilities (and are shown under the Water Sector). Southern California Edison SCE reported CO2 factors for 2005 and 2007 through the Climate Registry, and a CO2e factor for 2012 in their 2012 Corporate Responsibility & Sustainability Report. When an emission factor is unknown for a certain year, it is standard to use the most recently-reported historic factor until (and if) there is an updated factor. There is no published SCE emission factor for 2010; therefore the factor for 2007 was used for SCE electricity-related emissions calculations in 2010 (Table B-2). Table B-2. Southern California Edison Electricity Emission Factors Year CO2 CH4 N2O Proxy Year Data Source 2005 665.72 0.03 0.011 NA CO2: Climate Registry. CH4 and N2O: U.S. Community Protocol 2007 630.89 0.029 0.010 NA CO2: Climate Registry. CH4 and N2O: U.S. Community Protocol 2010 630.89 0.029 0.010 2007 CO2: Climate Registry. CH4 and N2O: U.S. Community Protocol 2012 7051 NA NA NA 2012 Corporate Responsibility & Sustainability Report NA: Not Applicable. 1 The 2012 factor was reported as CO2e; therefore, there are no CH4 and N2O factors. Natural Gas Combustion Emission factors for natural gas do not vary greatly over time or by supplier. Therefore, emission factors are U.S. averages as listed in the Community Protocol and are applied for all years (TableB-4). Table B-4. Natural Gas Emission Factors CO2 CH4 N2O Data Source kg /MMBtu 53.02 0.005 0.0001 U.S. Community Protocol Transportation and Mobile Sources EMFAC Model CO2 emission factors for transportation and mobile sources are calculated using the State-developed Emissions Factor (EMFAC) model, which can be downloaded at http://www.arb.ca.gov/emfac/. Emissions are available at the county level and emission factors were developed and applied to vehicle miles traveled specific to each inventory year. Data are aggregated as annual emissions for all vehicle 354 B-7 Appendix B: Methodology model years and speeds, but separated by vehicle category. Vehicle categories include light-duty autos, light-duty trucks, medium-duty vehicles, heavy-duty trucks, and motorcycles.1 These categorizations are used to develop an emissions factor for gasoline and diesel vehicles. Emission factors were developed using total CO2 exhaust, which includes emissions from vehicles in motion, idling, and ignition. While emissions from idling and ignitions are not directly related to mileage, they were included so that reductions from measures that may decrease idling could be accounted for in future inventories. On-Road Transportation Emissions were converted to emission factors as grams of CO2 per mile for gasoline and diesel vehicle using EMFAC and a 3-step process (for each inventory year): 1. Calculate the vehicle-class average fuel efficiency (miles/gallon) using EMFAC vehicle miles traveled and gallons of fuel consumed for Los Angeles County; 2. Calculate the vehicle-class average CO2 emission factor using EMFAC CO2 emissions2 and gallons of fuel consumed for Los Angeles County; 3. Calculate the average grams CO2/mile traveled factor weighted by vehicle class miles traveled for Los Angeles County. EMFAC does not provide emissions for CH4 and N2O; therefore, factors from the Community Protocol were used (Table B-5). Table B-5. Fleet-Average Emission Factors Gasoline On Road Average Factor (grams/mile) Diesel On Road Average Factor (grams/mile) CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 CH4 N2O 2005 466.062 0.030 0.034 1329.797 0.001 0.001 2007 464.019 0.028 0.029 1331.634 0.001 0.001 2010 458.638 0.028 0.029 1280.045 0.001 0.001 2012 442.657 0.028 0.029 1302.653 0.001 0.001 Employee Commute Emissions from employee commute in the municipal operations are calculated using annual vehicle miles traveled for gasoline and diesel. CO2 emissions are estimated using a default emission factor of 8.78 and 10.21 kg/gallon for gasoline and diesel, respectively3 and fuel economy, which is based on EMFAC outputs for each inventory year and vehicle class. Vehicle miles traveled are converted to CH4 1 Vehicle categories may use either EMFAC2007 or EMFAC2011 categorizations and result in the same data for the purposes of these inventories; EMFAC2007 categories were used here EMFAC2011 further disaggregates medium heavy-duty vehicles and heavy heavy-duty vehicles into 29 vehicle categories. This level of detail is not needed for these inventories. More information on vehicle categories is available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/vehicle- categories.xlsx. 2 For 2010 and 2012, the emissions accounting for the effects of existing policies (Pavley and Low Carbon Fuel Standard) were used. These standards did not exist in 2005 and 2007. 3 Information from ClearPath developers e-mail dated June 19, 2014. 355 B-8 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach and N2O emissions using emission factors from the Community Protocol. Table B-6 shows the miles per gallon and grams (CH4 and N2O) per mile used to estimate emissions from employee commute by vehicle class. Vehicle Fleet Vehicle fleet consists of City-owned and contracted vehicles used to perform City services. Vehicle Fleet requires input of gallons of fuel used by fuel type to estimate CO2 emissions. Vehicle miles traveled are used to estimate CH4 and N2O. The factors used for the City are shown in Table B-6. Table B-6. Employee Commute and Vehicle Fleet Emission Factors 2005 2007 2010 2012 Gasoline Passenger Vehicle MPG 21.700 21.875 22.027 22.064 g CH4/mi 0.030 0.028 0.028 0.028 g N2O/mi 0.034 0.029 0.029 0.029 Light Truck MPG 16.575 16.666 16.795 16.823 g CH4/mi 0.035 0.031 0.031 0.031 g N2O/mi 0.049 0.043 0.043 0.043 Heavy Truck MPG 12.754 12.806 12.854 12.856 g CH4/mi 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 g N2O/mi 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 Diesel Passenger Vehicle MPG 27.558 27.662 29.006 29.889 g CH4/mi 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 g N2O/mi 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Light Truck MPG 27.032 27.251 27.705 28.498 g CH4/mi 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 g N2O/mi 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Heavy Truck MPG 17.343 17.588 18.797 18.858 g CH4/mi 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 g N2O/mi 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Note: MPG is miles per gallon and is derived from EMFAC at the county level. CH4 and N2O emission factors are from the Community Protocol; Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck emission factors have data for 2005 and later; Heavy Truck only have 2010 data. Off-Road Off-road emissions include emissions from agriculture, construction, industrial, lawn and garden, light commercial, and recreational equipment. Annual emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O are available at the county level from the State’s OFFROAD model. To estimate values for each city, relevant indicator data are used to estimate the proportion of county-level emissions attributable to the city. Table B-7 lists the 356 B-9 Appendix B: Methodology indicator used to estimate the City’s portion of emissions for each category and Table B-8 shows City- specific data. City- and county-level indicator data were obtained from SCAG. Table B-7. Off-road Emissions Indicators Category Indicator Agriculture Equipment Agriculture Jobs Construction Equipment Building Permits Issued Industrial Equipment Manufacturing Jobs Lawn and Garden Equipment Households Light Commercial Equipment Non- Manufacturing or Agriculture Jobs Recreational Equipment Population, Weighted by Median Income Table B-8. Off-road Emissions Indicator Data Ag. Jobs Building Permits Mfg. Jobs Households Other Jobs1 Population Income ($) 2005 City 3.786 1 136 2,884 3,646 8,058 123,702 County 13,562 25,623 461,099 3,178,736 4,045,922 9,816,200 48,606 % 0.03% 0.00% 0.03% 0.09% 0.09% 0.21% 2007 City 4.002 59 144 2,902 3,854 7,939 130,825 County 13,562 20,303 461,099 3,224,053 4,045,922 9,780,800 51,439 % 0.03% 0.29% 0.03% 0.09% 0.10% 0.21% 2010 City 3.69 2 114 3,100 3,572 8,064 142,286 County 10,598 7,466 362,157 3,454,093 3,758,244 9,818,605 56,000 % 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 0.09% 0.10% 0.21% 2012 City 3 3 116 3,100 3,660 8,097 117,305 County 10,798 18,926 369,005 3,454,093 3,829,313 9,889,632 53,880 % 0.03% 0.02% 0.03% 0.09% 0.10% 0.18% Note: Some percentages may appear off due to rounding. Ag. = Agriculture. Mfg. = Manufacturing. 1 Other indicates non-manufacturing and non-agricultural. Water Emissions from water are indirect. Water requires energy to move from its source to final treatment and the energy for most of these processes is not captured in local utility data (i.e., the portion that is used in a home or business and therefore contained in the owner’s utility bill). This portion is termed the “embedded energy” in water and particularly for southern California, the energy embedded in water is high and should be accounted for in a community inventory. The California Energy Commission (CEC) developed a report, titled Refining Estimates for Water-Related Energy Use in California, which estimates the energy required to supply, convey, distribute, and treat water in northern and southern California. Recycled water is less energy-intensive because it does not require the supply and conveyance energy. Outdoor water infiltrates into the ground and therefore does not have the 357 B-10 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach wastewater energy treatment component. Therefore, the emission factors are adjusted to account for the proportion of recycled and outdoor water. The amount of water used for indoor or outdoor use was not available at the City level; however, the 2010 Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, Urban Water Management Plan states that 61% of water is for indoor use for the City of Los Angeles. The water usage is assumed to be similar for the South Bay sub-region. Therefore, the embedded energy in a million gallon (MG) of water in the City is estimated in Table B-9 using the CEC report and estimated indoor vs. outdoor water usage in the region. Table B-9. Energy Embedded in Water Conventional1 (kWh/MG) Recycled (kWh/MG) Supply and Convey 9,727 -- Treatment 111 111 Distribution 1,272 1,272 Wastewater Treatment 1,911 1,911 Total 13,022 3,294 South Bay Factor 12,275.71 2,548.71 1 From CEC’s 2006 Refining Estimates for Water-Related Energy Use in California, for Indoor water use in southern California. Statewide Average Electricity For energy embedded in water, a statewide average emission factor is applied because water in the South Bay sub-region is supplied from various regions in the State (Table B-3). Similar to SCE data, statewide emission factors are not available for each inventory year. For 2010 and 2012, the 2009 statewide emission factors were used as the proxy year. Table B-3. California Statewide Electricity Emission Factors Year CO2 CH4 N2O Proxy Year Data Source 2005 948.28 0.03 0.011 NA U.S. Community Protocol 2007 919.64 0.029 0.010 NA U.S. Community Protocol 2010 658.68 0.029 0.006 2009 U.S. Community Protocol 2012 658.68 0.029 0.006 2009 U.S. Community Protocol NA: Not Applicable. Wastewater The emissions for wastewater include the CH4 and N2O emissions from processing which consist of three sources: stationary, process, and fugitive emissions. Stationary emissions are derived from combustion of digester gas at a centralized treatment facility. The City is served by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District’s Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP). JWPCP is a centralized treatment facility that uses an anaerobic digester process and does not employ a formal nitrification/denitrification (N/DN) system. Detailed information regarding the amount of digester gas produces was not available, so an alternative method using City population information 358 B-11 Appendix B: Methodology was used. Default factors from the Community Protocol were applied to estimate CH4 and N2O emissions for stationary emissions. Although CO2 emissions are also produced, the fuel source is considered a biofuel, and the resulting CO2 emissions are considered “biogenic” and are not reported4. Process emissions include N2O emissions as a result of N/DN processes at the treatment facility. All wastewater facilities have emissions from N/DN—some facilities have a formal N/DN process, which would result in greater N/DN emissions, but for the JWPCP, N/DN emissions are solely a result of natural processes. The recommended approach to estimating these emissions is through the population served and default factors listed in the Community Protocol. In an advanced, centralized treatment facility, stationary and process emissions are relatively small compared to fugitive emissions. The Community Protocol, and likewise ClearPath, recommends multiplying the population-derived emissions by 1.25 to account for commercial and industrial discharges to the system. Regions without any commercial and industrial sources should use a factor of 1.0. Because the City is largely residential, a factor of 1.0 was applied to these emissions. Fugitive emissions occur from inflow (septic systems) and effluent discharge. JWPCP reports facility- wide effluent, and effluent nitrogen content, which are factors used in estimating fugitive emissions (Table B-10). The City’s portion was determined by estimating the proportion of the population served by JWPCP. The ClearPath tool requires the daily N load in kg N per day. This is calculated using the factors listed in Table B-9 and the Community Protocol Equation WW.12: Daily N Load for the City (kg N/day) = Effluent X Effluent Nitrogen Content X gallons/liter X City Population/Service Population, Where Effluent is the facility-wide discharge in millions of gallons per day (MGD), Effluent Nitrogen Content is the average nitrogen content per volume (mg/L), and gallons/liter is a conversion factor (3.79). The Daily N Load entered into ClearPath was adjusted by a factor of 0.5 to account for the difference in emission factors for direct ocean discharge and stream/river discharge. In ClearPath, ocean discharge is not an option; however, the emissions are estimated to be ½ of those from discharge to a stream or river (see Community Protocol Appendix F). Therefore, the Daily N Load was adjusted by 0.5 to account for this difference. Table B-10. Los Angeles County Joint Water Pollution Control Plant Data Used in Wastewater Fugitive Emissions 2005 2007 2010 2012 Effluent (MGD) 403a 296b 237c 264d Effluent Nitrogen content (mg/L) 40a 36.7b 39.7 e 41.1d a Default assumption based on influent. b 2008 annual report data. c 2011 annual report data. d 2013 annual report data. e Based on communication with Los Angeles County Sanitation District for 2009. 4 Emissions from digester gas combustion are automatically calculated in ClearPath when population is entered. 359 B-12 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Solid Waste Emissions from solid waste are primarily in the form of fugitive emissions of methane from decomposition. Emission factors are derived from the Community Protocol, based on the type of waste disposed. The State conducts a Waste Characterization Study (Study) every 4 to 6 years to determine the amount of waste attributable to each waste type. The Study is conducted at the State level by economic sector; therefore, community-level characterizations are not available. For the community inventory, the overall composition of California’s disposed waste stream was used to convert total tons into waste types (Table B-11). For the municipal inventory, the characterization for public administration was used (Table B-11). In addition to community-generated waste, some diverted green waste is used as landfill cover rather than importing landfill cover from other regions. This green waste is known as alternative daily cover (ADC) and is reported by CalRecycle for each community. The ADC characterization was determined through communication with the developers of ClearPath and does not vary by year or community. The emission factor to determine methane generation varies if the landfill operates a methane flare or generates electricity from methane capture. The Community Protocol recommends using an average factor of 75% recovery from landfill gas, although some landfills with have much higher gas recovery systems, and other landfills do not have any. Carbon dioxide generated by decomposition of waste in landfills is not considered anthropogenic because it would be produced through the natural decomposition process regardless of its disposition in the landfill. Nitrous oxide is not a by-product of decomposition and therefore no fugitive emissions of nitrous oxide are anticipated from this source. The waste characterizations and emission factors used to estimate emissions from solid waste are provided in Table B-11. The “Category in in the 2004 and 2008 Studies” detail which Study categories make up the ClearPath Category. Table B-11. Waste Characterization and Emission Factors for Solid Waste ClearPath Category Category in 2004 and 2008 Studies Alternative Daily Cover1 2004 Study2 2008 Study3 Public Administration Emission Factor1 Newspaper Newspaper 0% 2.2% 1.3% 5.5% 0.043 Office Paper White/Colored Ledger Paper + Other Office Paper + Other Miscellaneous Paper 0% 5.4% 4.9% 13% 0.203 Cardboard Uncoated Corrugated Cardboard + Paper Bags 0% 6.7% 5.2% 5.1% 0.120 Magazine/ Third Class Mail Magazines and Catalogs + Remainder/ Composite Paper 0% 6.5% 5.9% 15.4% 0.049 Food Scraps Food 0% 14.6% 15.5% 9.8% 0.078 Grass Leaves and Grass 30% 2.1% 1.9% 8.05% 0.038 Leaves Leaves and Grass 40% 2.1% 1.9% 8.05% 0.013 Lumber Branches and Stumps + Prunings and Trimmings 0% 9.6% 14.5% 0.1% 0.062 Branches Lumber 30% 2.6% 3.3% 5% 0.062 1 Breakdown from ClearPath Developers via e-mail dated June 19, 2014. Used for all inventory years. 2 2004 Waste Characterization Study for California, Overall Waste Stream. Used for 2005 inventory. Does not total 100% as not all waste is organic. 3 2008 Waste Characterization Study for California, Overall Waste Stream Used for 2007, 2010, 2012 inventories. Does not total 100% as not all waste is organic. 360 B-13 Appendix B: Methodology Forecasts The forecasts are an estimate of what emissions in the City may be in 2020 and 2035. The forecasts were developed using standard methodologies under two scenarios: Business-as-Usual (BAU) and Adjusted BAU. Business-as-Usual Forecasts The BAU scenario uses current (2012) consumption patterns and predicted growth in the City in the absence of state and federal legislation that would reduce future emissions. The growth assumptions are those estimated by SCAG in their 2012 Regional Transportation Plan and are applied to emissions sectors based on their relevance. For example, future Residential Energy emissions were developed using current energy use per household (from the 2012 inventory) and the anticipated number of households in the future. Table B-16 shows the growth factors used to project emissions in the City. Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecasts The Adjusted BAU scenario also uses growth estimates for the City, also accounts for legislation that will reduce emissions in the future, regardless of City actions. Table B-17 summarizes the legislation that will reduce the City’s emissions in the future and which sectors the legislation applies to. TableB-16. Emissions Sectors and Demographic Growth Indicators Sector Demographic Indicator Residential Energy Households Commercial/ Industrial Energy Jobs Solid Waste, Water, Wastewater, Aviation, Off-Road Sources Service Population (Population + Jobs) Transportation Vehicle Miles Traveled, modeled by SCAG Municipal Jobs Municipal Emissions1 SCAG: Southern California Association of Governments 1 The number of jobs in the City is used as an indicator for all municipal operation emissions except Aviation, which is forecast consistent with the community forecast (by change in service population). Table B-17. Legislation Applied to Adjusted BAU Forecasts Legislation Description Emissions Sector Affected Low Carbon Fuel Standard Reduce carbon intensity of transportation fuels 10% by 2020. On-road Transportation, Employee Commute, Vehicle Fleet AB 1493 and Advanced Clean Cars Implement GHG standards for passenger vehicles, implement zero-emission vehicle program, support clean fuels outlet regulation. On-road Transportation California Building Code Title 24 Improved energy efficiency standards for new residential and non-residential construction. Residential Energy, Non-residential Energy Renewable Portfolio Standard1 Provide 33% of electricity from renewable sources by 2020. Water Senate Bill X7-7 Reduce urban per capita water consumption 20% by 2020. Water 1 Potential GHG reductions from this legislation were not applied to the electricity in SCE’s service territory due to the uncertainty in SCE’s generation sources after the closure of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. 361 B-14 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Low Carbon Fuel Standard, AB 1493, and Advanced Clean Cars Changes in on-road emissions in Los Angeles County were modeled using EMFAC, which models both the emissions with and without Low Carbon Fuel Standard and Pavley I. Additional modeling was conducted to estimate the change in emissions due to Advanced Clean Cars. The rate of reductions from on-road transportation measures through 2020 was assumed to be 0.0344% per year for gasoline and 0.0106% per year for diesel. After 2020, the rate of reductions was assumed to be 0.03452% per year for gasoline and 0.0251% per year for diesel. California Building Code Title 24 Title 24 updates will raise the minimum energy efficiency standards for new buildings, thereby decreasing the expected energy consumption of future development in the City. Under the adjusted BAU scenario, it was assumed that the 2013 Title 24 standards that went into effect in 2014 will make new residential and non-residential buildings more efficient than they would be under the 2008 Title 24 standards for new residential buildings. The energy savings were estimated using analyses developed by the California Energy Commission and the applied to the expected new development in the City to 2020 and 2035. The rate of reductions was applied to the City’s 2012 energy use (kWh or therms) per household (for Residential energy) or per job (for Commercial energy). Savings were applied to new development anticipated in the City. Detailed energy savings assumptions are below. Residential Residential electricity is estimated to be 32.6% lower under the new standards.5 This percentage savings is relative to heating, cooling, lighting and water heating only and do not include other appliances, outdoor lighting that is not attached to buildings, plug loads, or other energy uses. Electricity consumption due to heating, cooling, lighting, and water heating accounts for 34% of total household electricity use.6 Therefore, the percentage of total residential electricity that will be reduced as a result of the 2013 Title 24 standards is 11.1%. Residential natural gas savings were estimated 5.8% lower under the new standards. Again, this percentage savings pertains only to the energy sources affected by Title 24 Standards. Natural gas consumption due to space and water heating accounts for 86% of total household natural gas use.7 Therefore, the percentage of total residential natural gas that will be reduced as a result of the 2013 Title 24 standards is 5.0%. Commercial Commercial Electricity savings were estimated to be 21.8% lower under the new standards. Title 24- related measures would impact 77.2% of total electricity use in commercial buildings8; therefore, 16.8% reduction in electricity consumption may be expected in new commercial development. 5 CEC Impact Analysis, California’s 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, July 2013. CEC-400-2013-008. 6 CEC 2009 California Residential Appliance Saturation Appliance Study, October 2010. CEC -200-2010-004. 7 CEC 2009 California Residential Appliance Saturation Appliance Study, October 2010. CEC -200-2010-004. 8 CEC 2006. California Commercial End-Use Survey. March 2006. CEC-400-2006-005. 362 B-15 Appendix B: Methodology Natural gas savings were estimated to be 16.8% under the new standards compared to the previous standards. Heating and cooling account for 69.7% of natural gas consumption in commercial facilities; therefore, 11.7% reduction in natural gas consumption may be expected from 2013 Title 24 standards applied to new commercial development. Renewable Portfolio Standard The Renewable Portfolio Standard will be fully implemented in 2020. The level of implementation varies by utility; however, ICLEI estimates that the average statewide level of implementation is 5% per year, compounded annually. As noted in the Report, this reduction is only taken for electricity used in the transport and treatment of water, which moves throughout the State. The reduction is not taken for electricity wholly within SCE’s territory. Senate Bill X7-7 SB X7-7 will be implemented by individual water districts. For the City’s water provider, California Water Service Company, the level of implementation was estimated using an annualized reduction rate from the Company’s baseline water consumption rate (141 gallons per capita per day, GPCD) to the target water consumption rate (126 GPCD). Target Setting The state-aligned targets are provided to assist the City in determining appro priate emission reduction goals. Recommended targets are based on existing California climate change legislation and State guidance relevant to establishing a GHG reduction target. While State goals are based on a 1990 baseline year, the City’s baseline year is 2005. Therefore, the reduction targets are expressed as a percent reduction below 2005 levels. Targets are recommended for 2020 to align with AB 32 and 2035, which is a midpoint between the 2020 goal and the State’s long-term 2050 goal. Planning beyond 2035 is considered speculative, as legislation and technology may change significantly before 2050. While it is important for continued reductions well beyond 2035, no local targets are recommended at this time. Table B-18 provides a summary of the State’s goals and the State’s guidance to local governments regarding GHG reduction targets. This guidance applies to and communitywide emissions reductions efforts. The City has adopted a carbon neutrality goal for municipal operations by 2020. Table B-18. Summary of State Reduction Targets and Guidance on Local Government Targets Aligned with State Targets 2020 Interim Year Between 2020-2050 2050 State Targets (AB 32 and EO S-3-05) 1990 levels NA 80% below 1990 levels State Guidance on Local Government Targets (AB 32) Scoping Plan Recommended Target and Attorney General’s Office Guidance 15% below 2005-2008 levels Demonstrate a trajectory toward statewide 2050 levels (e.g., 49% below 2005 levels by 2035) NA 363 B-16 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach Table B-19 demonstrates how the local targets are aligned with State targets. Table B-19. Comparison of 1990 Baseline Targets vs. 2005 Baseline Targets Target Year Percent below 1990 Emission Levels Percent below 2005 Emission Levels 2020 0.0% 15.0% 2021 2.7% 17.3% 2022 5.3% 19.5% 2023 8.0% 21.8% 2024 10.7% 24.1% 2025 13.3% 26.3% 2026 16.0% 28.6% 2027 18.7% 30.9% 2028 21.3% 33.1% 2029 24.0% 35.4% 2030 26.7% 37.7% 2031 29.3% 39.9% 2032 32.0% 42.2% 2033 34.7% 44.5% 2034 37.3% 46.7% 2035 40.0% 49.0% 364 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of November 10, 2015 COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION (CCA) CONTRACT-LANCASTER (Environmental Analyst Kristy Morris) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that: 1)City Council direct staff to continue exploring two opportunities for implementing Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) in Hermosa Beach: (1) the Los Angeles County CCA model, and (2) Lancaster Choice Energy CCA model; 2)Transfer $77,000 of prospective expenditures to a newly established account and to utilize funds to contract with the City of Lancaster to prepare an implementation plan, which will include a feasibility study, for the City of Hermosa Beach CCA as described in the attached scope of work; and, 3)Adopt Agreement for Consulting Services by and between the City of Hermosa Beach and the City of Lancaster. Background On February 24th 2015 City Council adopted the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan and adopted a goal to be carbon neutral as a municipality by 2020.The Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan recommends the City of Hermosa Beach pursue Community Choice Aggregation (CCA),which can leverage buying power to offer renewable,zero-emissions power to all electricity accounts in Hermosa Beach,starting in 2017.Although a goal for the community carbon emissions has not been established,the draft General Plan for a Low-Carbon Future will likely recommend 2040 as a goal.CCA has the potential to significantly reduce emissions from municipal and community sources that are attributed to electricity generation and supply.Emissions from this source comprise up to 41%of City’s Greenhouse Gas (GHG)inventory according the GHG Inventory,Forecasting,and Target-Setting Report for an Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan (2015). City staff is concurrently exploring two opportunities for Community Choice Aggregation in Hermosa Beach:(1)the Los Angeles County CCA model,and (2)Lancaster Choice Energy CCA model.On September 24 2015,staff convened a Community Choice Aggregation Study Session to update City Council and the community on Community Choice Aggregation options for Hermosa Beach,and discuss the opportunities and challenges of the various models.Jason Caudle and Barbara Boswell from the City of Lancaster,and Joe Galliani of South Bay Clean Power were present to answer questions regarding Lancaster Choice Energy (LCE)and LA County CCA,respectively.Staff File #:REPORT 15-0803,Version:1 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/30/2021Page 1 of 5 powered by Legistar™365 File #:REPORT 15-0803,Version:1 questions regarding Lancaster Choice Energy (LCE)and LA County CCA,respectively.Staff confirmed that the City is committed to participating in the LA County CCA through South Bay Clean Power while expediting the implementation of CCA for Hermosa Beach through Lancaster Choice Energy (LCE). On Monday September 21,2015,staff spoke with Howard Choy,General Manager of the Los Angeles County Office of Sustainability,to discuss the current status of the Los Angeles County CCA Program and discuss the City’s options for pursuing CCA simultaneously with Los Angeles County and the City of Lancaster.In a follow-up email (Attachment 1)from Mr.Choy he confirms that if we submit our data,we are included in the County Feasibility Study and Program,and we can pursue the Lancaster CCA however we choose. At this time,staff proposed the City pursue both the Los Angeles County and Lancaster CCA models simultaneously in the initial start-up phase and that staff return to council with a contract with the City of Lancaster for $77,000 to develop an Implementation Plan,which will include a feasibility study,for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) for the City of Hermosa Beach. Lancaster Choice Energy Lancaster Mayor R.Rex Parris and the Lancaster City Council have led a comprehensive effort to implement renewable energy throughout the City of Lancaster in an effort to preserve the environment and protect their local air quality,with the ultimate goal of becoming the nation's first net- zero electricity city.Following a long and steadily increasing series of successful renewable energy projects,ranging from residential rooftop solar programs and energy storage to utility-scale solar developments,Lancaster Choice Energy (LCE)is the most recent step in the City's quest to reach net-zero status.The mission to establish LCE officially began on May 13,2014,when the Lancaster City Council approved the implementation plan which outlined the City’s intent to establish a Community Choice Aggregator (CCA).A month later,the approved plan was submitted to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)for review and certification,making LCE the first CCA in Southern California Edison (SCE)territory.In October of this year,Lancaster became the State’s first fully operational City CCA. LCE offers customers two renewable energy rate options:1)Clear Choice is 35%renewable and is offered at a rate 3%lower,on average,than SCE;and 2)Smart Choice is 100%renewable and is offered at an additional $10 month to Clear Choice.LCE rates are set annually by the Lancaster City Council.LCE searches for the best transactions on both conventional and renewable energy sources from three categories: 1) Local renewable energy sources 2) Non-local, California renewable energy sources 3) Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) purchased from projects both in and out of California. For 2015, LCE renewable energy mix includes 50% from category 1, 10% category 2, and 40% City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/30/2021Page 2 of 5 powered by Legistar™366 File #:REPORT 15-0803,Version:1 category 3. This is expected to change in 2016 when a large, local solar project comes online. The LCE webpage provides more information on rate options, billing and opting-out: <http://www.lancasterchoiceenergy.com/index.php>. Analysis To date, there have been two types of CCA’s formed in California. The first type is Marin and Sonoma County models in which a regional entity took the initiative to organize a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) for the purpose of creating a regional CCA. The second is a stand-alone City CCA. In this case, the only operational City CCA in California is the City of Lancaster. Other possible models have been presented by private firms that look and act similar to a franchise system. In recommending a preferred approach that is a hybrid, staff is not suggesting the existing models are not effective, but rather to seek the best alternative to the current opportunities specific to Hermosa Beach. Otherwise, there are strengths and weaknesses to all of these approaches. In the regional LA County JPA model, each member City when becoming a member receives one voting position on the respective board, and must submit control to the collective group of members. In exchange, the JPA provides all the service, and takes all the risk such as financial exposure or potential sudden cost increases to the customer. This scenario has proven very effective in situations where like-minded cities and like-minded areas pool their resources and attributes to make the group stronger. In the stand-alone City model, the City assumes all the responsibilities and roles, in addition to all the risks related to financial exposures and energy market fluctuations. However, the City retains all control of the rate setting, operation, and operational revenues. This allows opportunities to tailor programs, and benefit from the continuing revenue stream as a community. The difficulty in this approach (or model) is the effort it takes to gain the required experience and expertise for the creation of such an entity. In addition, the knowledge gained is only used once, in that a City is only required to set up the CCA one time. This model works well where no cooperative like-minded Cities exist, and/or the City has capable Council and staff willing and able to implement such a venture. In the private firm model, the risk is minimized, a portion of the revenue is retained by the City, staff time is minimal, and the Council’s control is limited. This model works for a City that is not near an existing CCA, or is unwilling to submit to the JPA model, and has limited staff resources. There is a time and place for each model. Determining which model fits is essential to long term success. In researching each of the JPA and CCA formation alternatives, it became apparent that first, one size does not fit all, and second, alternative JPA models can be created to mitigate the risk, share in experience, and allow member agencies to maintain control, and program revenues. Contracting with Lancaster to prepare an Implementation Plan, which includes a feasibility study, provides Hermosa Beach the ability to decide which model is best suited to achieve its goals while keeping all options open. Summary Staff has been working closely with LA County, through South Bay Clean Power, and the City of Lancaster to assess and pursue CCA options for the City of Hermosa Beach. As a result of this effort, staff recommends that it will be most prudent to stay the course with each opportunity as both models provide complementary and distinctive opportunities. The City of Lancaster has proposed City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/30/2021Page 3 of 5 powered by Legistar™367 File #:REPORT 15-0803,Version:1 preparing an Implementation Plan, which includes a feasibility study, for a Hermosa Beach CCA. The attached Scope of Services describes the detailed scope of work and price. In addition, at the end of this process, Hermosa Beach will be the fourth certified CCA in the state. At that point, staff will begin discussion and community outreach to determine the community interest. Senate Bill 790 describes how each customer is given an opportunity to opt-out of their community’s aggregation program within 60 days or two billing cycles of the date of their automatic enrollment without penalty. The community choice aggregator will inform participating customers at least twice within two calendar months, or 60 days, in advance of the date of commencing automatic enrollment through notifications such as direct mailings to customers, or inserts in water, sewer, or other utility bills. To ensure the success of the program, the City of Hermosa Beach would conduct a poll to determine community interest in participating in the CCA. Once sufficient interest has been gauged, City Council will discuss implementation strategies, determine rates, type of energy, and begin the procurement process if that is the direction of City Council (Figure 1). In the instance that City Council does not pursue the expedited Lancaster CCA proposal, it may be prudent to revise the 2020 carbon neutrality goal for municipal facilities and operations since CCA is one of the main tools identified for reducing municipal-generated carbon emissions. Figure 1. Timeline for Hermosa Beach CCA Implementation Fiscal Implications: The cost of the contract is $77,000. These funds will be transferred from prospective expenditures to a newly established account to contract with the City of Lancaster to conduct the attached scope of work. At the conclusion of the project, the City of Hermosa Beach will be the fourth registered CCA in the state, and will be prepared to take the next steps in securing our energy future. Attachments: 1.Email from Howard Choi, Los Angeles County Office of Sustainability 2.Agreement for Consulting Services Respectfully Submitted by: Kristy Morris, Environmental Analyst Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/30/2021Page 4 of 5 powered by Legistar™368 File #:REPORT 15-0803,Version:1 Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Tom Bakaly, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/30/2021Page 5 of 5 powered by Legistar™369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 [DATE] Suja Lowenthal City Manager City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Ms. Lowenthal: Clean Power Alliance (CPA) understands that the Hermosa Beach City Council is considering taking the required actions necessary for the City to join Clean Power Alliance before December 31st, 2022 so that customers in your city could begin enrollment in CPA in 2024. We welcome your interest and look forward to working with you. Should the City Council decide to move forward, the process to join will involve several steps as outlined below. 1. Data gathering (begin immediately): Hermosa Beach will need to submit a Form 14- 769, Community Choice Aggregator Non-Disclosure Agreement, and Form 14-770, Community Choice Aggregation Service Declaration, to Southern California Edison (SCE) authorizing SCE to supply energy usage data for your community for the most recent period available. CPA will assist you with this request to SCE. 2. Applicant Impact Study (completed by the end of August): CPA will conduct an analysis of the impact to existing CPA customers should Hermosa Beach join. The study will be at a fixed fee cost of $10,000, payable by the City of Hermosa Beach. The study will determine what, if any, conditions may apply to Hermosa Beach’s membership and will include the following elements: a. Impact on CPA peak load and total generation b. Financial analysis including net benefits compared to additional procurement, administrative, financing, implementation costs, and any other financial impacts. c. Impacts to renewable energy and greenhouse gas content of CPA’s overall portfolio. d. Sensitivity analysis of various market scenarios. e. Summary of expected impacts and recommended mitigation measures, if needed. 406 DRAFT Page 2 of 2 3. CPA Board considers Applicant Study (considered at the September 1, 2022 CPA Board meeting): The CPA Board will decide if Hermosa Beach should be invited to join the JPA and, if so, any special conditions that would apply. 4. Hermosa Beach adopts Ordinance to join CPA and adopts JPA Agreement (completed by end of November): Hermosa Beach adopts implementing ordinance and JPA agreement. Please note that the ordinance adoption requires two readings and that both votes must take place by the end of November. 5. Updated Implementation Plan and JPA amendment (considered at the December 1, 2022 CPA Board meeting): CPA Board votes to amend its JPA to include Hermosa Beach and to file an amended Implementation Plan with the CPUC to cover the addition of Hermosa Beach beginning in 2024. CPA may do the Implementation Plan Amendment in-house or engage a consultant to prepare this filing. Depending on the results of the feasibility study and any subsequent conditions attached by the CPA Board to Hermosa Beach’s invitation to join CPA, Hermosa Beach and any other cities joining CPA in 2022 may be asked to share in the costs of preparing the Implementation Plan Amendment. Please note that the process outlined above only applies to Hermosa Beach joining CPA during 2022. The process may look different in 2023 and a new impact analysis would be required at that time. If you agree with the terms outlined in this letter, please sign and return the attached Authorization to Proceed and CPA staff will begin conducting the impact study. We look forward to working together through the process. If you have any additional questions please contact Karen Schmidt, Senior Advisor, Strategy, at (805) 798-1629 or at kschmidt@cleanpoweralliance.org. Sincerely, Ted Bardacke Chief Executive Officer Enc: Authorization to Proceed Form 407 DRAFT Authorization to Proceed The City of Hermosa Beach hereby authorizes Clean Power Alliance of Southern California to conduct an Applicant Impact Study which will cover the items listed in the above [DATE] letter from CPA Chief Executive Officer Ted Bardacke. The cost of the Applicant Impact Study will be a fixed fee of $10,000, payable within 30 days of invoicing. _____________________________ ___________________________ Suja Lowenthal Date City Manager City of Hermosa Beach 408 From:noreply@granicusideas.com To:City Clerk; Ann Yang; City Council; Angela Crespi; Suja Lowenthal Subject:New eComment for City Council Hybrid Meeting (Closed Session - 5:00 PM and Open Session - 6:00 PM) Date:Saturday, January 22, 2022 8:49:21 AM SpeakUpNew eComment for City Council Hybrid Meeting(Closed Session - 5:00 PM and Open Session - 6:00PM) Tracy Hopkins submitted a new eComment. Meeting: City Council Hybrid Meeting (Closed Session - 5:00 PM and Open Session - 6:00 PM) Item: c. REPORT 22-0043 DISCUSSION OF NEXT STEPS TOWARDS ACHIEVING THE CITY'S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GOALS AND CONSIDERATION OF COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION OPTIONS (Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss) eComment: Community Choice Aggregation is a new program that allows California city governments to operate “communitywide electricity buyers’ programs.” Commonly known as community choice aggregators, or CCAs, these are new government agencies created by Joint Powers Agreement among several cities. Additionally, individual cities may run their own CCA programs. Our local utility company, Edison, will still provide transmission, distribution and customer billing services to the CCA agency for a fee that is passed along to consumers. Once our city council decides to join or establish a CCA, all residents are automatically enrolled in the program. It will be up to individual residents to “opt out” and continue with their regular service with Edison. CCAs are vulnerable to changing market conditions. Energy procurement is risky, complex, costly and long-term. Because withdrawal from CCA membership is cost-prohibitive, our city’s decision to join binds future City Councils and future generations of taxpayers. CCAs operate without adequate oversight, virtually invisible to the public. Creating Joint Powers Agencies (JPAs), such as CCAs, costs taxpayers money. JPAs employ staff, set up offices and, most importantly, make decisions -- such as issue debt -- for which taxpayers are responsible but have no knowledge or say. JPA governing board members are not directly elected by voters, which contributes to their relative obscurity and lack of transparency. Does the nominal increase in renewable energy use promised by CCAs justify their risks? Unequivocally, no. Local government doesn’t belong in the electricity business. It is reckless for government to gamble on risky ventures for which it is ill-prepared and unqualified. “Green” energy companies, consultants, activists and lobbyists all stand to gain politically and financially from the proliferation of CCAs. Public agencies rely on some of these same sources for advice on CCAs - - a clear conflict of interest. Today’s cities and counties struggle to provide essential services, including basic public safety and human services. Throwing precious tax dollars into a CCA 409 money pit won’t help the environment, but will burden future generations with additional unwanted debt. Thank you for you consideration View and Analyze eComments This email was sent from https://granicusideas.com. Unsubscribe from future mailings 410 For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! 411 For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! 412 Tuesday, January 25, 2022 Honorable Mayor Detoy, Mayor Pro Tem Jackson and Council Members City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 11027 Westwood Blvd. Culver City, CA 90230-4956 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Angeles Chapter Re: Agenda Item #XIVc for Tuesday, January 25, 2022 – Discussion of Next Steps Towards Achieving the City’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Goals and Consideration of Community Choice Aggregation Options Dear Mayor Michael Detoy, Mayor Pro Tem Raymond Jackson and Councilmembers Stacey Armato, Mary Campbell, and Justin Massey: The Sierra Club writes in strong support for Hermosa Beach pursuing Community Choice Aggregation (CCA), and specifically for developing a feasibility study of joining the Clean Power Alliance at the 100% renewable energy default rate. The City of Hermosa Beach has long been a leader in addressing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and has committed itself to the GHG emissions reductions spelled out in the Kyoto Protocol. In pursuit of these goals, the City of Hermosa Beach was one of the first cities in the South Bay to seriously consider the CCA model. Since then, Clean Power Alliance (CPA) has become the largest CCA in California and is the largest provider of 100% renewable energy in the USA. As the staff report states, “Joining Clean Power Alliance would be the most efficient and impactful strategy for further reducing the City’s overall GHG emissions.” California’s 2020 wildfire season was the worst in recorded history, involving 4% of California land and more than 30 fatalities, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.i We can expect more of this, more extreme weather events, droughts and fires due to an unnaturally rapid rate of global warming. The United Nations IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report warns that we need to transition off of fossil fuels as soon as possible or face a global and catastrophic climate crisis by 2040.ii At a time when the world needs leadership, you are in a unique position to send a message of hope and commitment by joining CPA and setting a 100% renewable energy default for the City of Hermosa Beach. This is what the majority of your constituents want. The Public Policy Institute of California recently surveyed Californians and reported, “Majorities support action on climate change even if it brings increased costs.”iii 413 People are willing to pay more to avert a climate crisis. The good news is that in this case those costs are minimal. Southern California Edison (SCE) recently indicated that on March 1, 2022, the Power Change Indifference Adjustment (PCIA) (exit fee) charged by SCE to CPA customers will be reduced, resulting in bill reductions for CPA customers of approximately six percent. If that forecast becomes reality, all three CPA rate products will be less expensive than SCE, at least for 2022. You can take the step of setting a 100% tier default without foisting higher costs on anyone who doesn’t want that tier or can’t afford it. Everyone will be offered multiple opportunities to choose a 50% or 40% renewable energy plan at the outset and can opt down any time. The wishes of any residential or small business customer who already opted down to lean power would be honored, meaning that they would not be opted up to 100% green power with the rest of the city. In addition, you have time to do extensive education about this option to make sure everyone is informed. What’s more, for those communities with a 100% default, CARE and other low- income customers will have the plan benefit at no additional cost. Clean Power Alliance created a $2 million COVID-19 Relief Program that provides bill credits to help impacted customers manage their electricity payments. From a social and environmental justice perspective, this is ideal. The most financially vulnerable customers will be protected but still enjoy the benefits of using clean, renewable energy. And those communities most afflicted by pollution associated with fossil fuel power production will breathe easier because of the choice you made to direct more investment in renewable energy instead. It will also be a driver of jobs. Renewable energy is creating jobs 12 times faster than the rest of the economyiv and employs more people in the U.S. than fossil fuels.v A 100% default would be good for Hermosa Beach’s image as a great place to live, work, and visit. It would inspire other cities and counties. Almost 200 cities across the country have joined Sierra Club’s “Ready for 100” campaign by committing to 100% renewable energy. Within the Clean Power Alliance, to date Ventura County and the cities of Agoura Hills, Calabasas, Culver City, Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Ojai, Oxnard, Rolling Hills Estates, Santa Monica, Sierra Madre, South Pasadena, Thousand Oaks, Ventura County, Ventura City, and West Hollywood have all decided to go with 100% renewable energy defaults. Recently, Beverly Hills, Redondo Beach and Los Angeles County decided to go up to 100% renewable energy as the default rate, so Hermosa Beach will be in very good company. As Debra Roberts, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group says about their report that was written and edited by 91 scientists from 40 countries who analyzed more than 6,000 scientific studies, “The decisions we make today are critical in ensuring a safe and sustainable world for everyone, both now and in the future.” This report gives policymakers and practitioners the information they need to make decisions that tackle climate change while considering local context and people’s needs. 414 The next few years are probably the most important in our history.” We urge you to act on behalf of City of Hermosa Beach, to consider the local context, the decision you are empowered to make, and choose to be on the right side of history with a 100% renewable energy default. With best regards, David A. Haake, MD Chair, Clean Break Team, Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club Chair, Clean Power Alliance Community Advisory Committee i CalFire website (https://www.fire.ca.gov/incidents/2020/) ii “Sixth Assessment Report”, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, August, 2021 (https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/) iii Californians’ Views on Climate Change, Public Policy Institute of California, September 2018 (http://www.ppic.org/publication/californians-views-on-climate-change/) iv “Renewable Energy Is Creating Jobs 12 Times Faster Than the Rest of the Economy,” Fortune, 2017 (http://fortune.com/2017/01/27/solar-wind-renewable-jobs/) v “U.S. Clean Energy Jobs Surpass Fossil Fuel Employment,” NRDC summary of a Department of Energy Report, February 2017 (https://www.nrdc.org/experts/lara-ettenson/us-clean-energy- jobs-surpass-fossil-fuel-employment) 415 For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! 416 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0044 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 DISCUSSION OF ENCROACHMENT FEES FOR TEMPORARY OUTDOOR DINING PERMIT PROGRAM (Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council consider the information presented by staff and provide direction regarding possible fees for the City’s temporary outdoor dining permit programs. Executive Summary: The temporary outdoor dining program was created during the COVID-19 pandemic as a means of supporting our residents and business during limited indoor operations.Since its original implementation,fees for this temporary program,as well as a variety of outdoor programs administered by the City,have been suspended.As directed by City Council,staff is currently working on the development of a permanent outdoor dining permit program including performing the necessary California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)analysis.Staff recommends Council discuss and consider an encroachment fee for the temporary outdoor permit program for the dining decks until such time as the permanent program is developed. Background: The City has long supported and encouraged outdoor dining on private and public property to supplement indoor operations.With the onset of the pandemic and related heath orders,businesses were limited to conducting business outdoors.Recognizing this hardship,City Council suspended existing encroachment fees and approved a program to allow expanded outdoor dining and other commercial activity.The City also suspended zoning and parking requirements that allow outdoor dining on private property and established a temporary encroachment permit program allowing encroachments into sidewalks,public streets,and Pier Plaza.Both the private property programs and encroachment program (together,the “Outdoor Permit Program”)include a basic set of guidelines. These guidelines include: ·Business hours no later than 11:00 P.M.; City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 7 powered by Legistar™417 Staff Report REPORT 22-0044 ·Temporary furnishings to be brought in every night; ·Maintenance of cleanliness; ·Alcohol service only with food; and ·Insurance maintained by permitees. At the May 12,2020 City Council meeting,City staff presented an item describing a concept to repurpose sections of public right of way to improve multimodal traffic safety and expand physical- distancing options for the public and businesses per Los Angeles County Health orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic.The City Council moved quickly to accommodate these programs and staff developed guidelines based on information gathered from existing programs in other cities and internal review of policies and regulations.This led to Council’s approval of downtown lane reconfigurations that allowed businesses to expand their on-street deck areas. The City has issued over 60 permits during the term of the Outdoor Permit Program in a variety of commercial locations (Attachment 1).To date,City Council has allowed these uses without consideration of any encroachment area rents or reimbursement of lost parking meter revenue.At its June 22,2021 meeting,City Council approved extension of this pilot program and authorized implementation of a reapplication process for outdoor dining areas that included: -Renewal of applicants’permissions from neighboring businesses where decks encroach upon the frontage of these other businesses. -Requirement of a surety bond or deposit to fund any City costs related to deck removal in the event of maintenance emergencies or abandonment. The City also approved an outdoor live music program for the outdoor dining encroachments.In October 2021,Council directed staff to develop permanent versions of these programs and in December of 2021, Council approved extension of the programs through June 30, 2022. At City Council’s regular meeting on January 11,2022,Mayor Pro Tem Jackson requested,and a unanimous vote of the City Council supported,directing staff to place on the next regular session agenda an item that includes a recommendation for an encroachment fee for the temporary outdoor permit program for the dining decks. Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description June 9, 2020 Approved Ordinance 20-1410U allowing temporary permit program for outdoor dining in response to pandemic. July 14, 2020 Directed staff to proceed with development of lane closure plans. August 11, 2020 Chose a lane reconfiguration concept for Hermosa Avenue, extended it to 8th Street, authorized the City Manager to implement lane reconfiguration, and provided a six-month duration. September 8, 2020 Chose a lane reconfiguration concept for Pier Avenue. October 27, 2020 Awarded contract for construction of lane reconfigurations. June 22, 2021 Approved extension of the outdoor permit program through December 31, 2021. July 13, 2021 Approved Resolution authorizing extension of lane reconfigurations. October 26, 2021 Approved development and implementation of permanent versions of these programs and directed staff to return with item to discuss fees for outdoor encroachment programs December 14, 2021 Approved extension of programs through June 30, 2022 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 2 of 7 powered by Legistar™418 Staff Report REPORT 22-0044 Meeting Date Description June 9, 2020 Approved Ordinance 20-1410U allowing temporary permit program for outdoor dining in response to pandemic. July 14, 2020 Directed staff to proceed with development of lane closure plans. August 11, 2020 Chose a lane reconfiguration concept for Hermosa Avenue, extended it to 8th Street, authorized the City Manager to implement lane reconfiguration, and provided a six-month duration. September 8, 2020 Chose a lane reconfiguration concept for Pier Avenue. October 27, 2020 Awarded contract for construction of lane reconfigurations. June 22, 2021 Approved extension of the outdoor permit program through December 31, 2021. July 13, 2021 Approved Resolution authorizing extension of lane reconfigurations. October 26, 2021 Approved development and implementation of permanent versions of these programs and directed staff to return with item to discuss fees for outdoor encroachment programs December 14, 2021 Approved extension of programs through June 30, 2022 Discussion: As directed by Council from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic,encroachment fees were suspended for all existing encroachment permittees and no new encroachment fees were created for new outdoor dining areas in the public right of way.Many of the businesses with existing encroachments,especially those on Pier Plaza,expanded their prior encroachment areas with no additional fee.Additionally,the City has not sought reimbursement of any parking meter revenues lost from on-street deck operators.Also,as part of its business assistance efforts,the City waived fees for the outdoor music program,temporary signs and banners,extended business license tax renewals,deferred business license taxes for businesses who were closed,and waived business license tax penalties and interest.The extended business license taxes and waived penalties and interest totaled $57,322 in revenue the City did not collect.The waived sign and banner fees are estimated at about $10,000 thus far.At its January 12,2022 meeting,Council unanimously supported having a discussion regarding encroachment fees for the new outdoor dining areas. For many years,Hermosa Beach businesses have been able to request use of the public right of way through an encroachment permit program.Fees for this use vary based on location and operating hours: Location and Hours Fee per Square Foot Pier Plaza, open after midnight $5 Pier Plaza, closed before midnight $2 Outside of Pier Plaza or snack shop $1 These fees generate approximately $283,000 annually and consequently,due to their suspension since the beginning of the pandemic in Spring of 2020,approximately $500,000 in encroachment City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 3 of 7 powered by Legistar™419 Staff Report REPORT 22-0044 since the beginning of the pandemic in Spring of 2020,approximately $500,000 in encroachment fees have not been collected. The new outdoor dining areas,permitted by the City’s pandemic related urgency orders,have not been charged any encroachment fees.Additionally,decks placed in on-street parking areas have not been charged for any lost parking meter revenue.Staff researched the historic parking meter revenue for the 60 parking spots currently occupied by deck areas.The individual annual revenue from these spaces ranges from approximately $2,000-6,000 each and,in total,these spots generated nearly $220,000 in 2019. The City’s many encroachment areas vary in size,with some on Pier Plaza measuring over 1,000 square feet and some of the smallest under 100 square feet.The new on-street deck areas also have a wide range but,as a guide,a typical parking spot measures approximately 160 square feet and most decks utilize 2-3 parking spots at a minimum. For comparison,the City of Manhattan Beach recently began charging its public right of way deck areas an encroachment fee.Manhattan Beach approved a $1 per square foot fee in September 2021 and increased that fee to $3 per square foot in December 2021.In their effort to develop a “nominal yet reasonable”fee,Manhattan Beach utilized a variety of factors including parking revenue lost and commercial lease rates.The neighboring agencies of El Segundo and Redondo Beach have not implemented fees for their on-street decks yet. There are many rationales to be considered in the creation of these new fees.In reference to the existing encroachment fees,the new on-street decks compare to the areas being charged $1 per square foot because of their location off Pier Plaza and the fact that they close before midnight.A key difference is the decks’use of on-street public parking spaces and the consequent loss of the space for wider public benefit and suspension of parking meter revenues.Assuming an average of $4,000 per parking spot in annual meter revenue and a typical deck size of three parking spots,it would require approximately $1,000 in monthly fees per typical deck to fully compensate for annual meter revenue loss.This is approximately $2 per square foot per month.A few possible encroachment fee scenarios are described in the table below: At $1 per sq. ft.At $2 per sq. ft.At $3 per sq. ft. Monthly Fee for an on-street deck occupying 3 parking spots Approximately $480 Approximately$960 Approximately $1,440 The benefit these decks provide to the City as a whole is also a consideration.Discussions with other agencies have anecdotally shown that,despite parking revenue loss from on-streets decks,there is an overall increase in visitors and the resulting parking revenue has offset a portion of the losses.A fee of $2 per square foot per month for the new on-street decks could be an efficient compromise City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 4 of 7 powered by Legistar™420 Staff Report REPORT 22-0044 fee of $2 per square foot per month for the new on-street decks could be an efficient compromise between the various factors mentioned above.It would reflect the methodology of the existing public encroachment area fees while also including additional compensation to offset the parking meter revenue loss. General Plan Consistency: The proposed program options match the model of “living streets”,also known as “complete streets”,and a key guiding principle of the General Plan Vision is to foster a vibrant local economy. A living street combines safety and livability while supporting ground floor and outdoor economic activities.This centers on designing streets that can be safely shared by both vehicular and non- vehicular traffic.A living street should also contribute to an engaging public realm and a vibrant local economy. Relevant Goals and Policies are listed below: Governance Element Goal 6. A broad-based and long-term economic development strategy for Hermosa Beach that supports existing businesses while attracting new business and tourism. Policies: ·6.4 Business support.Support the Chamber of Commerce, retailers, tourist service businesses, artists, and other agencies to develop an aggressive marketing strategy with implementation procedures. ·6.6 Pop-up shops.Develop plans and programs for underutilized spaces, such as vacant buildings, utility corridors, parkways, etc., for temporary retail, restaurant, and community promoting uses. Mobility Element Goal 1. Complete Streets (Living Streets) that serve the diverse functions of mobility, commerce, recreation, and community engagement for all users whether they travel by walking, bicycling, transit, or driving. Policy: ·1.1 Consider all modes.Require the planning, design, and construction of all new and existing transportation projects to consider the needs of all modes of travel to create safe, livable and inviting environments for all users of the system. Goal 7. A transportation system that results in zero transportation-related fatalities and which minimizes injuries. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 5 of 7 powered by Legistar™421 Staff Report REPORT 22-0044 Policy: ·7.1 Safe public rights-of-way. Encourage that all public rights-of-way are for all users at all times of day where users of all ages and ability feel comfortable participating in both motorized and non-motorized travel. Fiscal Impact: The encroachment fees that have not been charged during the pandemic typically generate approximately $283,000 annually.Due to their suspension since the beginning of the pandemic in Spring of 2020,approximately $500,000 in encroachment fees have not been collected.A discussion of the existing encroachment fee schedule is anticipated for a revenue study session coming in Spring of 2022.The parking meter revenue lost to the newly-created on-street deck areas was approximately $220,000 in 2019.The deferred fees related to business license tax and associated waived penalties is $57,322.Revenue from any new fees charged for these new encroachment areas would depend on the rate approved by City Council.Based on the estimates described above, the following revenue projections could result: At $1 per sq. ft.At $2 per sq. ft.At $3 per sq. ft.At $6 per sq. ft. Total annual revenue for 60 on-street deck encroachments (at 160 sq. ft. each) $115,200 $230,400 $345,600 $691,200 Attachments: 1.Map of current encroachment areas and decks 2.Link to June 9, 2020 City Council Report 3.Link to July 14, 2020 City Council Report 4.Link to August 11, 2020 City Council Report 5.Link to September 8, 2020 City Council Report 6.Link to October 27, 2020 City Council Report 7.Link to June 22, 2021 City Council Report 8.Link to July 13, 2021 City Council Report 9.Link to October 26, 2021 City Council Report 10.Link to December 14, 2021 City Council Report Respectfully Submitted by: Douglas Krauss, Environmental Program Manager Concur: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 6 of 7 powered by Legistar™422 Staff Report REPORT 22-0044 Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 7 of 7 powered by Legistar™423 HermosaAveP i e r Av e Ardmore AveManhattanA v e Valley DrMonterey BlvdManhattanAve2nd St Hermosa AveHermosa AveGreenwichVillageTemporary Outdoor Encroachments Encroachment Footprint (approximate) 424 From:noreply@granicusideas.com To:City Clerk; Ann Yang; City Council; Angela Crespi; Suja Lowenthal Subject:New eComment for City Council Hybrid Meeting (Closed Session - 5:00 PM and Open Session - 6:00 PM) Date:Monday, January 24, 2022 8:41:21 AM SpeakUpNew eComment for City Council Hybrid Meeting(Closed Session - 5:00 PM and Open Session - 6:00PM) Kristal Palomo submitted a new eComment. Meeting: City Council Hybrid Meeting (Closed Session - 5:00 PM and Open Session - 6:00 PM) Item: d. REPORT 22-0044 DISCUSSION OF ENCROACHMENT FEES FOR TEMPORARY OUTDOOR DINING PERMIT PROGRAM (Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss) eComment: Hello my name is Kristal, I am the owner of El Tarasco Mexican Restaurant on Pier Ave. We definitely support the dining decks staying permanently and have no issue paying a reasonable monthly deck fee. Having the decks is brought so much life to upper pier, especially now that the restaurant are able to have live entertainment outsides it brings so much foot traffic to upper pier. We even get very positive feed back with our surrounding business neighbors and how busier they also have gotten. View and Analyze eComments This email was sent from https://granicusideas.com. Unsubscribe from future mailings 425 For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! 426 From:Raymond Dussault To:City Council; City Clerk; Suja Lowenthal Subject:Outdoor dining decks Date:Tuesday, January 25, 2022 9:10:37 AM Please add to council agenda. Dear Council & Staff, The outdoor dining decks have not only helped our local restaurants and retailers continue their recovery from the pandemic, they also have added a new vital social dynamic to our beautiful community. There are costs to both businesses and the City. The staff recommendation of $2/foot seems fair for the high traffic Pier Plaza businesses. I would encourage you to consider a staggered approach, $2/square foot for Pier Plaza and $1/square foot for businesses on Hermosa and Pier Ave. where foot traffic has never been as high. It is energizing to walk up Pier Avenue and find friends and neighbors enjoying a glass of wine and acoustic music at Uncorked and adjourning to Hermosa Brewing Co. for dinner as the sun sets over the Pacific. The added space on Pier Plaza makes it easier to find a table and has had zero negative impact on the public experience. I commend all of you for your continued support of this important change that is one of the few long-term benefits that have come from the trauma we survived. The extended patios are not just helping the restaurants recover from the pandemic, they are helping us as residents too! Sincerely, Raymond Dussault 427 For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! 428 HERMOSA BEACH CHAMBER of COMMERCE and VISITORS BUREAU HBCHAMBER.NET | 310.376.0951 | INFO@HBCHAMBER.NET January 25, 2022 City Council City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach CA 90254 RE: Dining Deck Fees We are writing to you to with our comments on the recent staff report proposal for encroachment fees for outdoor dining decks. Firstly, we would like to thank the City for being responsive and proactive in its approach to assisting businesses during the ongoing pandemic. We can say with certainty that quite a few Hermosa businesses would have shut down had it not been for the various measures taken by the City. While we do appreciate the support from the City, as evidenced by the recent surge in COVID cases due to the Omicron variant, we are not out of the woods yet. Many Hermosa businesses are still struggling to recover from the two very difficult pandemic years of closures and restrictions. In weighing the fee proposal, we believe that many factors need to be taken into consideration: • The City staff report shows that while there has been parking revenue loss from on-street decks, there has also been an overall increase in visitors and the resulting parking revenue has offset a portion of the losses. • Having the dining decks remain is vital for Hermosa’s existence as a desirable place to live, work and play for the next century and speak directly to Hermosa’s General Plan and model of “living streets.” • Our neighboring cities provide us with data for comparison. Manhattan Beach has implemented an encroachment fee of $3/sq. ft. and Redondo has yet to charge an encroachment fee for their dining decks. Both neighboring cities have significantly higher foot traffic than Hermosa which is reflected in their commercial lease prices per square foot which, in the case of Manhattan Beach, is in many cases twice as high as Hermosa’s commercial lease rate. We feel very strongly that the staff report proposal of $2/sq. ft. for dining deck encroachment fees is too high. We believe it will result in some businesses closing their dining decks and ultimately closing their businesses. 429 HBCHAMBER.NET | 310.376.0951 | INFO@HBCHAMBER.NET On behalf of the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce, we believe that a square foot fee of no greater than $1.50/sq. ft. would be fair and equitable to the city and the businesses of Hermosa. We appreciate Council considering all of the above-mentioned points and recognizing the multitude of benefits the dining decks bring to the City of Hermosa and its residents. Sincerely, Dave Davis Chairman of the Board Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce and Visitors Bureau 430 1 Susan Morrow To:Ann Yang Subject:RE: Dining Decks Agenda Item From: Megg Sulzinger <megg.sulzinger@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 3:21 PM To: City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal <suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Ann Yang <anny@hermosabeach.gov> Subject: Dining Decks Agenda Item Dear Council & Staff, The outdoor dining decks have not only helped our local restaurants and retailers continue their recovery from the pandemic, they also have added a new vital social dynamic to our beautiful community. There are costs too and the staff recommendation of $2/foot seems fair for the high traffic Pier Plaza businesses. I would encourage you to consider a staggered approach, $2/square foot for Pier Plaza and $1/square foot for businesses on Hermosa and Pier Ave. where foot traffic has never been as high. It is energizing to walk up Pier Avenue and find friends and neighbors enjoying a glass of wine and acoustic music at Uncorked and adjourning to Hermosa Brewing Co. for dinner as the sun sets over the Pacific. The added space on Pier Plaza makes it easier to find a table and has had zero negative impact on the public experience. I commend all of you for your continued support of this important change that is one of the few long-term benefits that have come from the trauma we survived. The extended patios are not just helping the restaurants recover from the pandemic, they are helping us as residents too! Megg Sulzinger Megg.Sulzinger@gmail.com Hermosa Beach, CA 431 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 22-0061 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 UPDATE REGARDING THE PARKING STUDY SESSION SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON JANUARY 31, 2022 (City Manager Suja Lowenthal) Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council: 1.Receive an update regarding the parking study session scheduled to be held on January 31, 2022; and 2.Provide staff direction on whether to schedule a special meeting of the City Council following the parking study session to discuss and decide whether to postpone the 2022-2023 Residential and Employee parking permit sales and renewals to allow for a review of the current rates. Executive Summary: To facilitate a public discussion regarding issues related to the parking system,City Council will hold a parking study session on January 31,2022.During the study session,staff will present information regarding existing parking infrastructure and programs and facilitate a discussion regarding strategies to effectively address and manage current and future parking needs.The study session is intended for discussion only and does not contemplate an increase in parking permit rates.Mayor Pro Tem Jackson has expressed a strong desire to allow Council the opportunity to act on parking rate adjustments following the study session,prior to the opening of the 2022 parking pass sales,which is scheduled to take place on February 1,2022.Council has the option of adjourning to a special meeting with actionable items on the agenda immediately after the study session. Background: In recent years,the City has prepared two very important and forward-thinking planning documents to analyze issues and identify goals related to parking management.In 2017,the City adopted PLAN Hermosa,which includes a mobility element.A few years later in 2019,the City completed its Coastal Zone Parking Management Study as a basis to revise parking standards and make necessary adjustments to residential and employee parking permit and fee programs within the Coastal Zone. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™432 Staff Report REPORT 22-0061 Discussion: The agenda for the January 31,2022 parking study session agenda includes an update on the status of the Coastal Zone Parking Management Study;a review of street metered and public parking lot metered programs;and a review of the residential and employee parking permit program (Attachment 1).Staff will provide information and updates regarding these select parking system elements.Discussions from the meeting will guide the development of policy and programs to meet the City’s diverse and changing mobility demands. As noted,one item on the study session agenda is an update regarding the Residential and Employee parking permit programs.Sales and renewals for the 2022-2023 permits are set to begin on February 1,2022,the day following the parking study session.The 2022-2023 permits are valid from March to February.If desired,City Council may provide direction to extend the effective dates of the 2021 pass and postpone sale dates of the 2022 passes to allow for a review of the current rates. At least one Councilmember has expressed a desire to contemplate changes to the parking rates on January 31,2021,the date of the parking study session.To do so,City Council may adjourn from the study session to a special meeting.The Hermosa Beach Municipal Code does not allow action items to be undertaken during a study session. General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendation have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below: Governance Element Goal 2. The community is active and engaged in the decision-making processes. Policy: ·2.4 Public Forums.Host periodic public forums on issues important to the community, facilitating theses forums with the purpose of guiding policy. Goal 4.A parking system that meets the parking needs and demand of residents,visitors,and employees in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Policies: ·4.1 Shared parking.Facilitate park-once and shared parking policies among private developments that contribute to a shared parking supply and interconnect with adjacent parking facilities. ·4.2 Encourage coastal access.Ensure parking facilities and costs of such facilities are not a barrier to beach access by the public. ·4.3 Reduce impacts.Reduce spillover parking impacts due to employee parking and City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™433 Staff Report REPORT 22-0061 seasonal and event-based demands. ·4.4 Preferential parking program.Periodically study and evaluate the current inventory of public parking supply and update the preferential parking program. ·4.7 Parking availability.Optimize parking availability through dynamically adjusted pricing and new technology to manage available spaces for short-term parking use to encourage rates of turnover that are responsive to fluctuating demands. ·4.8 Ensure commercial parking.Ensure that prime commercial parking spaces are available for customers and other short-term users throughout the day. ·4.9 Encourage TDM strategies.Encourage use of transportation demand management strategies and programs such as carpooling,ride hailing,and alternative transportation modes as a way to reduce demand for additional parking supply. ·4.10 Visitor parking information.Manage information about passes and accessing public parking lots to facilitate use by longer-distance visitors with limited transportation choices. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended actions.Any impacts that may result from changes in parking programs or rates would be presented to City Council at the time of the proposed modification. Attachments: 1. Draft Parking Study Session Agenda Respectfully Submitted by: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™434 City Council DRAFT Adjourned Meeting Agenda January 31, 2022 1 5:00 P.M. – STUDY SESSION I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. ANNOUNCEMENTS – UPCOMING CITY EVENTS V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA VI. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Although the City Council values your comments, the Brown Act generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted agenda as a business item. Comments from the speaker are limited to three minutes per speaker. VII. OPENING REMARKS (Suja Lowenthal) VIII. REVIEW OF CITY PARKING PROGRAMS a. REPORT REVIEW STATUS OF COASTAL ZONE PARKING MANAGEMENT STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Recommendation: Staff recommends City Council receive and discuss the status and priorities of the 12 recommendations in the Parking Management Study and challenges of coordinating all these efforts with goals of Plan Hermosa and the City’s efforts to certify a Local Coastal Program with the Coastal Commission Attachments: 1. Power Point Presentation 2. Table of Recommendations and Status 3. 2019 Coastal Zone Parking Management Study b. REPORT REVIEW STREET METERED AND PUBLIC PARKING LOT METERED PROGRAMS INCLUDING RATES (Community Services Manager Peter Ahlstrom) Recommendation: Staff recommends City Council receive an update and discuss the following topics: 1. Parking Rates 2. Parking Time Limits 3. Parking Citation Fine Comparisons with Other Cities 4. Coastal Commission Review and Approval Process Attachments: 1. Meter and Lot Rate Comparisons with Other Cities 2. Parking Citation Fine Comparisons with Other Cities 435 City Council DRAFT Adjourned Meeting Agenda January 31, 2022 2 c. REPORT REVIEW RESIDENTIAL AND EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT PROGRAM (Community Development Director Ken Robertson and Community Services Manager Peter Ahlstrom) Recommendation: Staff recommends City Council receive an update and discuss the following topics: 1. Resident Permit Program and Fees 2. Employee Permit Program and Fees 3. Coastal Commission Review and Approval Process Attachments: 1. City’s Coastal Development Permit for Residential Preferential Parking District IX. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Although the City Council values your comments, the Brown Act generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted agenda as a business item. Comments from the speaker are limited to three minutes per speaker. X. ADJOURNMENT 436 For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! 437 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 22-0052 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of January 25, 2022 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Attached is the current list of tentative future agenda items for Council’s information. Attachments: Tentative Future Agenda Items City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/24/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™438 January 19, 2022 Honorable Mayor and Members Regular Meeting of of the Hermosa Beach City Council January 25, 2022 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS MONDAY, JANUARY 31, 2021 @ 5:00 PM PARKING STUDY SESSION: 1) Review Residential and Employee Parking Permit Program 2) Review Street Metered and Parking Garage Program FEBRUARY 8, 2022 @ 5:00 PM INITIAL DATE CLOSED SESSION FEBRUARY 8, 2022 @ 6:00 PM PRESENTATIONS COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE SERVICES AND MCCORMICK AMBULANCE SEMI-ANNUAL REVIEW CITY MANAGER REPORTS Police Chief Update CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS Updates from City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittees and Standing Committee Delegates/Alternates CONSENT CALENDAR City Council Minutes City Clerk Ongoing Check Registers Finance Director Ongoing Acceptance of Donation Finance Director Staff Request Dec. 14, 2021 Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of January 4, 2022 Community Resources Manager Ongoing Los Angeles Fire Services and McCormick Ambulance Monthly Report for December 2021 Emergency Management Coordinator Ongoing Assembly Bill 361 Compliance City Clerk Ongoing Approve new job description for Senior Management Analyst Human Resources Manager Staff Request Jan. 18, 2021 Approve changes to Accountant job description Human Resources Manager Staff Request Jan. 18, 2021 Approve changes to GIS Analyst job description Human Resources Manager Staff Request Jan. 18, 2021 Approve eligibility list for Senior Account Clerk Human Resources Manager Staff Request Jan. 18, 2021 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS – CITY COUNCIL Future Agenda Items City Manager Ongoing NO MEETING FEBRUARY 22, 2022 CANCELLED DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM 439 2 THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 2022 @ 5:00 PM REVENUE STUDY SESSION MARCH 8, 2022 @ 5:00 PM INITIAL DATE CLOSED SESSION MARCH 8, 2022 @ 6:00 PM PRESENTATIONS COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT PRESENTATION FROM WEST BASIN WATER DISTRICT AND CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE ON WATER CONSERVATION CITY MANAGER REPORTS Police Chief Update CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS Updates from City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittees and Standing Committee Delegates/Alternates CONSENT CALENDAR City Council Minutes City Clerk Ongoing Check Registers Finance Director Ongoing Revenue Report, Expenditure Report and CIP Report by Project for December 2021 and January 2022 Finance Director Ongoing 2020-21 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (Including Report from Independent Auditor) Finance Director Ongoing City Treasurer’s Report and Cash Balance Report for December 2021 and January 2022 Finance Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2022 Community Development Director Ongoing Planning Commission Tentative Future Agenda Items Community Development Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Economic Development Committee meeting of February 7, 2022 Community Development Director Ongoing Review of submittal of the 2021 Hermosa Beach Housing Element Annual Progress Report Community Development Director Annual Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of February 1, 2022 Community Resources Manager Ongoing Los Angeles Fire Services and McCormick Ambulance Monthly Report for January 2022 Emergency Management Coordinator Ongoing Assembly Bill 361 Compliance City Clerk Ongoing South Bay Workforce Investment Board 2nd Quarter Summary for 2021-2022 City Manager Quarterly MUNICIPAL MATTERS Midyear Budget Review 2021-22 Finance Director Annual Leadership Hermosa Beach Class of 2022 Class Project ?? Annual FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS – CITY COUNCIL Future Agenda Items City Manager Ongoing 440 3 MARCH 22, 2022 @ 5:00 PM INITIAL DATE CLOSED SESSION MARCH 22, 2022 @ 6:00 PM PRESENTATIONS COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT CITY MANAGER REPORTS Police Chief Update CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS Updates from City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittees and Standing Committee Delegates/Alternates CONSENT CALENDAR City Council Minutes City Clerk Ongoing Check Registers Finance Director Ongoing Revenue Report, Expenditure Report and CIP Report by Project for February 2022 Finance Director Ongoing City Treasurer’s Report and Cash Balance Report for February 2022 City Treasurer Ongoing Cancellation of Certain Checks City Treasurer Ongoing Capital Improvement Program Status Report Public Works Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of March 15, 2022 Community Development Director Ongoing Planning Commission Tentative Future Agenda Items Community Development Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Economic Development Committee meeting of March 7, 2022 Community Development Director Ongoing Assembly Bill 361 Compliance City Clerk Ongoing PUBLIC HEARINGS – 6:30 PM Approval of Amendments to HBMC Chapter 12.20 Beach and Strand Regulations to Require a 50-foot Distance from the Strand Wall for Recreational Activities Including Temporary Volleyball Courts; Prohibition of Recreational Activities from Blocking Beach Access Points or Emergency Lanes; and Additional Language Updates to Reflect Modern Uses of the Beach Community Resources Manager Staff Request July 7, 2021 MUNICIPAL MATTERS Economic Development Committee Six Month Progress Report Community Development Director Six Months FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Tentative Future Agenda Items City Manager Ongoing THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2022 @ 5:00 PM ADA STUDY SESSION 441 4 APRIL 12, 2022 @ 5:00 PM INITIAL DATE CLOSED SESSION APRIL 12, 2022 @ 6:00 PM PRESENTATIONS COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT TENTATIVE – PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL AS DONATE LIFE MONTH CITY MANAGER REPORTS Police Chief Update CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS Updates from City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittees and Standing Committee Delegates/Alternates CONSENT CALENDAR City Council Minutes City Clerk Ongoing Check Registers Finance Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of March 1, 2022 Community Resources Manager Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Economic Development Committee meeting of April 4, 2022 Community Development Director Ongoing Los Angeles Fire Services and McCormick Ambulance Monthly Report for February 2022 Emergency Management Coordinator Ongoing Assembly Bill 361 Compliance City Clerk Ongoing Approval of a Resolution authorizing the preparation of a report for the Annual Levy of Assessments within the Hermosa Beach Landscaping and Street Lighting District during FY 2022-2023 Public Works Director Annual FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS – CITY COUNCIL Future Agenda Items City Manager Ongoing THURSDAY, APRIL 21, 2022 @ 5:00 PM FY 2022-2023 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STUDY SESSION 442 5 APRIL 26, 2022 @ 5:00 PM INITIAL DATE CLOSED SESSION APRIL 26, 2022 @ 6:00 PM PRESENTATIONS COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT CITY MANAGER REPORTS Police Chief Update CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS Updates from City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittees and Standing Committee Delegates/Alternates CONSENT CALENDAR City Council Minutes City Clerk Ongoing Check Registers Finance Director Ongoing Revenue Report, Expenditure Report and CIP Report by Project for March 2022 Finance Director Ongoing City Treasurer’s Report and Cash Balance Report for March 2022 City Treasurer Ongoing Cancellation of Certain Checks City Treasurer Ongoing Capital Improvement Program Status Report Public Works Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of April 19, 2022 Community Development Director Ongoing Planning Commission Tentative Future Agenda Items Community Development Director Ongoing Assembly Bill 361 Compliance City Clerk Ongoing MUNICIPAL MATTERS Upcoming Vacancies: One Civil Service Board Term Expires July 15, 2022, (Recommendation to advertise with filing deadline of Thursday, June 23, 2022) City Clerk 4 year term FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Tentative Future Agenda Items City Manager Ongoing 443 6 PENDING STRATEGIC PLAN ITEMS STATUS / TENTATIVE MEETING DATE Update Personnel Policies Human Resources Manager Pending Labor Negotiations/Meet & Confer Process Beach Policy/Regulations (Continued from meeting of October 27, 2016) Community Resources Manager On hold by Council Alternative Fuel Transportation Report, Nov. 2016 Environmental Analyst Community Choice Aggregation Direction, Dec. 2016 Environmental Programs Manager PENDING NEW ITEMS STATUS / TENTATIVE MEETING DATE Approval of the Municipal Lease Policy Initiated by: Staff Request Jun. 12, 2018 Community Resources Manager Document Retention Policy Initiated by: Staff Request Nov. 28, 2018 City Clerk Pending Deputy City Clerk Appointment Landscape and Street Lighting District Assessment Adjustment (mail-in election authorization) Initiated by: Council Direction Jul. 9, 2019 Public Works Director To be included in Revenue Strategy Study Session (March 3, 2022). PW staff has funding to prepare an assessment adjustment study and will advance that effort – it is anticipated that the study will take approximately 2 to 3 months to complete. If council agrees to advance the adjustment, it will need to go to a city-wide ballot. The annual assessment is required to go to council each year for approval and may need to go to council separately before the ballot vote. It was last approved at the 7/13/2021 council meeting. Pavement Condition Index Update Initiated by: Staff Request Sept. 23, 2019 Public Works Director The new pavement management plan report is being prepared and is anticipated to be completed in approximately 2 to 3 months. PW staff will prepare a staff report with the updated document and have our consultant available to present the item to council. Public Records Request Guidelines Initiated by: Staff Request Oct. 14, 2019 City Clerk/Assistant to the City Manager Pending Deputy City Clerk Appointment Emergency Services Municipal Code Chapter 2.56 Update Emergency Management Coordinator Waiting for State to review proposed language changes Return to Council to discuss a full ban on tobacco sales and to include all available data related to other communities who have adopted complete bans Initiated by: Council Direction Jan. 28, 2020 Community Development Director Staff to work with BCHD to consider appropriate timing to return to consider a full ban Consideration of licensing agreement/fees for use of City logo Initiated by: Council Direction Jun. 9, 2020 City Attorney The City will develop a licensing agreement for commercial uses of the City 444 7 logo as part of a comprehensive Administrative Memorandum (AM) on City Branding and Logo Use by City Staff. City staff will begin drafting the AM after finalizing the City’s style guide and filing its “Intent to Use” trademark application for the City logo with the USPTO. As part of developing a Licensing Agreement for the Commercial Use of the City Logo, staff will establish a process for reviewing and handling these requests. This process will likely include the negotiation of royalties and as well as the preparation of a staff report to obtain Council approval to enter into the agreement. Only once after the City receives the issuance of a Notice of Allowance from the USPTO can it begin approving applications for commercial uses of the logo. Follow-up on Mayor’s Pledge Initiated by: Council Direction August 25, 2020 City Manager’s Office/Police Chief Pending proposal from Sunny Lee Ordinance to regulate nuisance Outdoor Lighting Initiated by: Staff Request June 3, 2021 Community Development Director Council referred to Planning Commission at June 2021 meeting, tentatively scheduled for Planning Commission, February 2022 An Ordinance of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adding Chapter 12.42 to the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code to require property owners to repair the sidewalk area abutting their real property Initiated by: Staff Request June 12, 2021 City Attorney Update on single use plastics ordinance and resources needed to meet compliance (Supported by Massey, Campbell, Armato) Initiated by: Council Direction October 26, 2021 Environmental Program Manager PLAN Hermosa 5-year check-in on milestones (Supported by Massey, Campbell, Armato, Jackson) Initiated by: Council Direction October 26, 2021 Community Development Director/Environmental Program Manager 445