Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03/25/14
The Email below from Fran Parker was forwarded to The City Clerk March 20, 2014 at 11:06pm From: halearsi@aol.com <halearsi@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 2:14 PM To: Nanette Barragan Subject: Drought problems Dear Ms. Barragan, I would like you to seriously consider urging your fellow City Council members to adopt a city policy regarding water usage in times of drought. I ask this because, at present neither the City nor the Water Company ha such a policy. I see one of my neighbors automatic watering system operating every morning, regardless of how hard it is raining. This same neighbor has the gardener hosing down the driveway and walkway as well as the gutter area of the street every other week. I have checked with the City and, at this point in time, there is no policy. I spoke to the Water company and they do not have such a policy either In fact the person I spoke to there said that it was the home owners property and that as long as they paid the bill there was nothing the water company could do. Thank you for any consideration you give to my request. Fran Parker 310 379-0196 521 1/2 Loma Dr. The Letter below was Emailed to The City Clerk from Katrina Preiss on March 21, 2014 at 3:47pm March 19, 2014 Mayor Michael DiVirgilio Council Members Peter Tucker, Nanette Barragan, Carolyn Petty, Hany Fangary, City Manager Tim Bakaly City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Dear Mayor DiVirgilio, Council Members Tucker, Barragan, Petty, and Fangary, and City Manager Bakaly: Hello my name is Katrina Preiss. I attend school at Mira Costa and I am a 10th grader. I am very invested with this beautiful city that we live in. I am writing this letter not only for a class assignment but also because in your decision-making I think that it is important to know every citizen’s opinion. I believe that the oil drilling in Hermosa Beach is a bad thing. Oil and gas companies are exempt from 7 environmental federal laws. The companies will destroy our community; most of our residents live within 0.5 miles of the proposed drilling site. On my way to school there is a lot of traffic and with all the construction and drilling my rote will be much longer. Many kids will late to school and more teaches will be later too and cause a disturbance in our learning process. Some people believe that it would benefit the city to allow drilling. One of their arguments is that it will bring much more money to the city. However, Hermosa is opening a new hotel that will bring in as much as the drilling would. We are Hermosa Beach and as a resident I am very proud of how my city looks and with drilling, it would harm our environment and out air. I am a tenth grader and I am very much opposed to the proposed drilling in Hermosa. As a resident I do not believe we should allow drilling because the risks out number the rewards. Yours sincerely, Katrina Preiss From: Robert Fortunato [mailto:Fortunato@ForStrategy.com] Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 1:55 PM To: 'Michael DiVirgilio'; 'ptucker@hermosabch.org'; 'nbarragan@hermosabch.org'; 'cpetty@hermosabch.org'; 'hfangary@hermosabch.org' Cc: 'Tom Bakaly'; 'Ken Robertson'; 'Pamela Townsend'; 'edoerfling@hermosabch.org' Subject: Dispelling rumors and Tuesday night Dear Mayor DiVirgilio, Coucilmembers and Staff, I am writing first to dispel a rumor circulating that that the only reason I am pushing the Carbon Neutral initiative is that I want work from the city. As you know, I and a number of other people have been working on this Carbon Neutral initiative for the past seven years and have never received a penny in compensation. We have volunteered our time to plan and execute an all day planning session with 70 of the state's experts on Carbon Neutrality. I persuaded my client, AECOM, to volunteer a year's worth of grant writing services that led to the City getting $410k to do a Carbon Neutral plan. Even when City Manager, Tom Bakaly, recently offered to pay for limited coaching re my expertise on Carbon Neutrality, I provided it at no charge. The only time I offered my services was as part of a response to the RFP for the Carbon Neutral overlay to the General Plan and, even then, offered my services at less than half my normal rate. Those of us involved in making Hermosa Beach the first Carbon Neutral city only want what is best for the businesses and residents of our city and have dedicated many years of service to that end. To put an end to any misperception, I would like to officially state that I am not seeing and will not seek work from the City and would only consider it if the City requests assistance and there is no other local alternative. Secondly, I have a board meeting on Tuesday night and will not be able to attend the City Council meeting. Nonetheless, I wanted to express my continued support for making Hermosa Beach the first Carbon Neutral city in Southern California at the March 4th planning session for the following reasons: The Carbon Neutral movement is a way to brand and differentiate Hermosa in a way that attracts business, tourists, investment and like minded residents. It can not only help the city increase revenue, but through the lens of carbon neutrality the city can reduce costs. Organizations are understanding that CN is the new proxy for efficiency in not only buildings but operations as well. Being first brings with it a sense of urgency that will motivate us to maximize our resources. The city is in year two of a 3 year grant for $410K to do a carbon neutral overlay to the general plan and about to solidify its strategic goals for the year. Unless we act now to focus that money and strategy on being the first carbon neutral city, we will forever lose that branding opportunity. This Carbon Neutral movement is entirely consistent with our culture as Hermosans. We've always been the leader in what's cool. As innovators and iconoclasts we have championed west coast jazz at the lighthouse, the beat movement at the Either Or Bookstore, surfing, skateboarding, volleyball, punk rock, beach tennis. Carbon Neutral is just the next logical progression for the innovative Hermosa Beach. Hermosa Beach is uniquely positioned to be the first Carbon Neutral city. It is an ideal test bed for all kinds of new technologies. Because of our town's small size, advantageous climate, lack of heavy industry and disruptive culture we can be first and take the benefits that come with it. This Carbon Neutral movement will allow us to renew our brand and reinvent city operations; but without your support we will be lose this unique opportunity and our ability to be competitive with our larger and wealthier beach cities to our north and south Respectfully, Robert Fortunato Robert Fortunato President 310.798.1570 office 310.594.5924 cell 707.356.5341 fax www.ForStrategy.com Our commitment to sustainability is reflected in our Green Idea House Case Study "Don’t be put off by people who know what is not possible. Do what needs to be done, and check to see if it was impossible only after you are done" - Paul Hawken From: donaldreed20@comcast.net [mailto:donaldreed20@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 12:33 AM To: City Clerk Subject: Please introduce an official English resolution! Donld Reed 45 Sherwood Cir Cloverdale, CA 95425-4017 March 13, 2014 City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear City of Hermosa Beach: Polk County, Wisconsin just adopted an official English resolution. I strongly support this effort of English unity and I urge you to introduce a similar resolution in our county. An overwhelming 85% of likely voters support official English. Rasmussen Reports found as recently as 2013 that high levels of support for official English have remained unchanged for the past decade. Sincerely, Donld Reed 7078944102 From: Michael Collins, Psy.D. [mailto:drmichaelcollins@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 10:39 AM To: Michael DiVirgilio; Carolyn Petty; Peter Tucker; Hany Fangary; Nanette Barragan; Elaine Doerfling Subject: Renewable Energy, Carbon Neutrality and Leading Edge Ideas All, This would be a great event to have happen in Hermosa Beach. Do you think we could still catch the wave and possibly work toward cashing in on the branding, marketing and money that might come from attempting to lead the way on this effort? I'd hate to see Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach start to get out ahead of us on ideas such as renewable energy and solar programs for schools. Respectfully, Mike Collins 03/06/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 4:54:58PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 14306 3/6/2014 14008 YORK SCRMA 03062014 W/Comp Claims - 2/28/14 705-1217-4324 29,647.71 Total : 29,647.71 73335 3/6/2014 11359 ALKADIS, CHRISTOPHER 3196 PER DIEM- SUPV TRAINING 001-2101-4312 24.00 Total : 24.00 73336 3/6/2014 16660 ATHENS SERVICES 4040180913-1 CITYWIDE SWEEPING & CLEANING/ SEP 13 001-3104-4201 12,024.23 001-3301-4201 7,236.16 001-3304-4201 1,675.33 001-6101-4201 1,330.49 Total : 22,266.21 73337 3/6/2014 17271 BARROWS, PATRICK 3346 Instructor Pymt-19311,42,62,64,63,66 001-4601-4221 1,596.00 Total : 1,596.00 73338 3/6/2014 17839 BEHBOODI, HOMAYOUN 347 Per Diem/H Behboodi 001-4202-4317 100.00 Total : 100.00 73339 3/6/2014 18417 BENSON, JEREMY HM Surfer's Walk of Fame T-Shirts 001-2130 957.02 Total : 957.02 73340 3/6/2014 03372 CA EMS PERSONNEL FUND 03457 Paramedic License Renewal/S. Durkin 001-2201-4315 200.00 Total : 200.00 73341 3/6/2014 10584 CALIFORNIA NARCOTIC OFF ASSOC 3390 REGIS/INTRO TO SEARCH WARRANTS-J.CRUZ 001-2101-4317 170.00 Total : 170.00 73342 3/6/2014 09632 CDWG JW46675 Video Card Dual Monitor 715-1206-5401 321.93 1Page: 03/06/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 4:54:58PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 321.93 73342 3/6/2014 09632 CDWG 73343 3/6/2014 03674 CPS HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICES SOP36277 Test Supplies/PD 001-1203-4201 2,194.50 Total : 2,194.50 73344 3/6/2014 09491 DE CASTRO, DOUG 3968 VinyO Banners E&O Oil Proj 001-2109 2,987.88 Total : 2,987.88 73345 3/6/2014 00181 EASY READER ER140213009 Ad / E&B Oil Project 001-2109 600.00 Total : 600.00 73346 3/6/2014 16259 FIONA HUTTON AND ASSOCIATES 111729 Public Realtions Services/Jan 14 705-1209-4201 5,652.00 Total : 5,652.00 73347 3/6/2014 08652 GAROFANO, MICHAEL 326 Travel Exp Reimb/ TR#326 001-2201-4317 1,191.36 Total : 1,191.36 73348 3/6/2014 18118 GLENDORA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 02168 Excursion/ Rubel Castle 001-4601-4201 470.00 Total : 470.00 73349 3/6/2014 10451 HYATT REGENCY HOTEL 345 Lodging/G Lonnquist-CALEA 001-2101-4317 746.88 Total : 746.88 73350 3/6/2014 16598 ICON SAFETY CO INC 107005024 Calibration Gas Cylinder 001-2201-4309 225.30 Total : 225.30 73351 3/6/2014 00354 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES 67040372 Irrigation Supplies Jan 14 001-6101-4309 353.91 Total : 353.91 2Page: 03/06/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 4:54:58PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73352 3/6/2014 14111 LONNQUIST, GEORGIA 345 Per Diem-G Lonnquist 001-2101-4317 160.00 Total : 160.00 73353 3/6/2014 10768 MARIN CONSULTING ASSOCIATES 3195 Regis-Training-Alkadis&Sibbald 001-2101-4312 550.00 3229 Regis-Training -Saylor 001-2101-4312 275.00 Total : 825.00 73354 3/6/2014 14344 MONROE SYSTEMS 78H39A 3/Calculators 001-2201-4305 504.27 Total : 504.27 73355 3/6/2014 13309 PEREZ, SHAWN 3395 Instructor Pymt-19525,32 001-4601-4221 539.00 Total : 539.00 73356 3/6/2014 16782 PETERSON, TERRY 3344 Piano Tuning-Community Theatre 001-4601-4201 115.00 Total : 115.00 73357 3/6/2014 12910 PIP PRINTING 25119 Banners /HBFD Advertisement 001-2201-4305 790.25 Total : 790.25 73358 3/6/2014 11573 SAYLOR, OFFICER STEVEN 3230 Per Diem-Training 001-2101-4312 24.00 Total : 24.00 73359 3/6/2014 13033 SENTENO, FRANK J.344 Per Diem-F.Senteno 001-4202-4317 100.00 Total : 100.00 73360 3/6/2014 12581 SIBBALD, JONATHAN 3197 Regis- Supv Training 001-2101-4312 24.00 Total : 24.00 3Page: 03/06/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 4:54:58PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73361 3/6/2014 00146 SPARKLETTS 4472788020614 Drinking Water /Feb 14 001-4601-4305 117.89 Total : 117.89 73362 3/6/2014 10098 SPRINT NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 371554311-147 Cell Phone Usage FD/Jan 14 001-2201-4304 289.96 Total : 289.96 73363 3/6/2014 17973 STATEWIDE TRAFFIC SAFETY 18410 TAPCO SOLAR BLINKER STOP SIGNS 301-8141-4201 4,659.41 Total : 4,659.41 73364 3/6/2014 16735 TORRANCE AUTO PARTS 019686 55 gallon drum 715-4206-4310 690.24 022814 Auto Parts Purchase/Feb 14 715-2101-4311 102.88 715-3302-4311 376.08 715-4601-4311 166.19 001-2022 -13.17 001-2021 13.17 Total : 1,335.39 73365 3/6/2014 00123 TRIANGLE HARDWARE 022814 Hardware Supplies/Feb 14 001-2201-4309 42.78 001-3104-4309 291.02 001-4204-4309 988.62 001-6101-4309 57.33 105-2601-4309 243.93 715-4206-4309 153.12 001-2021 49.05 001-2022 -49.05 Total : 1,776.80 73366 3/6/2014 00015 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 3101758766000906 White Pages Listing 001-1203-4304 5.13 3103726373040311 Personnel Fax line 001-1203-4304 47.34 4Page: 03/06/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 4:54:58PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73366 3/6/2014 (Continued)00015 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 3180200 Phone Charges-Jan 14 001-1121-4304 14.61 001-1132-4304 7.73 001-1141-4304 3.72 001-1201-4304 11.24 001-1202-4304 47.39 001-1208-4304 1.89 001-2101-4304 363.55 001-2201-4304 214.31 001-4101-4304 32.56 001-4201-4304 55.01 001-4202-4304 170.96 001-4601-4304 83.51 001-1204-4304 51.04 001-3302-4304 5.19 715-1206-4304 16.22 001-1203-4304 48.15 3186379 Phone Charges-Jan 14 001-1121-4304 5.08 001-1132-4304 2.69 001-1141-4304 1.29 001-1201-4304 3.91 001-1202-4304 16.47 001-1203-4304 16.74 001-1208-4304 0.66 001-2101-4304 126.33 001-2201-4304 74.49 001-4101-4304 11.32 001-4201-4304 19.12 001-4202-4304 59.42 001-4601-4304 29.02 001-1204-4304 17.74 001-3302-4304 1.80 715-1206-4304 5.64 Total : 1,571.27 5Page: 03/06/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 4:54:58PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 20140305 3/5/2014 00243 HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT 03052014 PAYROLL 2/16 - 2/28/14 125-1103 669.27 145-1103 107.02 147-1103 892.37 150-1103 223.09 152-1103 172.74 160-1103 4,670.09 705-1103 3,779.32 715-1103 8,419.41 117-1103 4,087.54 001-1103 641,219.13 105-1103 5,364.24 115-1103 2,677.01 Total : 672,281.23 20140306 3/6/2014 14008 YORK SCRMA 03052014 W/Comp Claims - 3/21/14 705-1217-4324 13,231.17 Total : 13,231.17 Bank total : 768,049.34 35 Vouchers for bank code :boa 768,049.34Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 35 6Page: 03/06/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 4:54:58PM Page:vchlist 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 to inclusive, of the check register for are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date 7Page: 03/13/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 5:45:41PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73367 3/13/2014 00321 A T AND T 310-796-6526 991 3 Circuit Billing -Feb 14 001-2101-4304 117.85 323-267-6155 686 1 Circuit Billing - Feb 14 001-2101-4304 185.90 323-267-6160 767 0 Circuit Billing -Feb 14 001-2101-4304 58.67 323-267-6161 416 3 Circuit Billing -Feb 14 001-2101-4304 58.67 323-267-6164 193 5 Circuit Billing -Feb 14 001-2101-4304 50.05 323-267-6165 717 0 Circuit Billing -Feb 14 001-2101-4304 50.05 331-254-6071 301 5 Circuit Billing -Feb 14 001-2101-4304 56.91 Total : 578.10 73368 3/13/2014 04715 ADMINSURE 6824 LIABILITY & AUTO CLAIMS/MAR 14 705-1209-4201 1,300.00 Total : 1,300.00 73369 3/13/2014 13361 AT AND T MOBILITY 287016141723 Cell Phone Usage -Feb 14 001-4202-4304 235.29 287247228942 Cell Phone Usage -PD&SCO Feb 14 001-2101-4304 567.79 001-3302-4304 343.07 Total : 1,146.15 73370 3/13/2014 17271 BARROWS, PATRICK 03397 Instructor Pymt-19312,19298,67 001-4601-4221 675.50 03439 Instructor Pymt-19316,19266,43 001-4601-4221 959.00 Total : 1,634.50 73371 3/13/2014 15141 BAYSIDE MEDICAL CENTER 3763 Blood Draw-Feb 14 001-2101-4201 127.20 1Page: 03/13/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 5:45:41PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 127.20 73371 3/13/2014 15141 BAYSIDE MEDICAL CENTER 73372 3/13/2014 08482 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 81337238 Medical Supplies /Feb 14 001-2201-4309 204.37 Total : 204.37 73373 3/13/2014 01037 CALBO 8865 Ad For Employee Bldg Inspector 001-1203-4201 75.00 Total : 75.00 73374 3/13/2014 18400 CHARGEPOINT INC 13943 Two (2) Yr Subscription 715-4204-4201 1,820.00 Total : 1,820.00 73375 3/13/2014 00356 CITY CLERKS ASSN OF CALIFORNIA 371 Membership-Doerfling/L. Abbott 001-1121-4315 185.00 Total : 185.00 73376 3/13/2014 14850 CORDOVA, JOHN RC-014141-15 Reimbursement School Books 001-4202-4317 280.57 Total : 280.57 73377 3/13/2014 00850 CURTIS, L.N.1302588-00 Turnout Gloves 001-2201-4350 373.87 Total : 373.87 73378 3/13/2014 12160 D-PREP LLC 03505 Tuition-Peer Support 001-2101-4317 590.00 Total : 590.00 73379 3/13/2014 18161 ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS 03369 Citation Refund/#200085624 001-3302 38.00 Total : 38.00 73380 3/13/2014 17824 EXSEL PROMOTIONS INC 6490 Plaque/Mayor 001-1101-4319 130.80 Total : 130.80 2Page: 03/13/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 5:45:41PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73381 3/13/2014 01320 GALLS LONG BEACH UNIFORM CO BC0045051 Supplies/Dec 13 001-2101-4314 181.58 BC0057642 Handcuff Holder and Key 001-2101-4314 49.03 Total : 230.61 73382 3/13/2014 14713 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS 1414063 STORMWATER&NPDES PROG ADMIN/DEC 13 160-3102-4201 3,341.82 Total : 3,341.82 73383 3/13/2014 05125 GHASSEMI PETTY CASH, MARIA 03497 Petty Cash Replenishment 001-2109 2.77 001-1101-4305 69.74 001-1121-4317 62.02 001-1201-4305 52.32 001-2101-4305 31.86 001-2101-4312 61.00 001-2201-4309 14.38 001-2201-4305 9.81 001-2201-4314 50.00 001-4101-4305 75.00 001-4201-4305 104.94 001-4202-4317 57.88 001-4601-4305 69.63 001-4204-4309 95.00 001-4601-4328 82.90 170-2105-4201 45.00 715-1206-4201 114.43 001-1201-4317 34.49 Total : 1,033.17 73384 3/13/2014 14589 GRANICUS INC 52716 STREAMING VIDEO & OPEN PLATFORM SRVS/ AP 715-1206-4201 5,657.04 Total : 5,657.04 73385 3/13/2014 14977 HARTLEY, KENNETH 03359 Exp Reimb/EDC TV 001-2201-5402 2,902.23 3Page: 03/13/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 5:45:41PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 2,902.23 73385 3/13/2014 14977 HARTLEY, KENNETH 73386 3/13/2014 06518 HAYER CONSULTANTS INC 3734 Plan Checks-FD/Feb 14 001-4201-4201 780.00 Total : 780.00 73387 3/13/2014 07547 HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & ASSOC 0021784-IN SALES TAX AUDIT SERVICES/3RD QTR 001-1202-4201 1,333.55 Total : 1,333.55 73388 3/13/2014 16742 INDEPENDENT STATIONERS 0396196 Office Supplies/Fe 14 001-1121-4305 29.98 393130 Office Supplies/Feb 14 001-1204-4305 9.54 393178 Office Supplies/Feb 14 001-2101-4305 65.38 397807 Office Supplies/March 14 001-1121-4305 86.86 398319 Office Supplies/March 14 001-1208-4305 82.19 398508 Office Supplies/March 14 001-1201-4305 32.43 Total : 306.38 73389 3/13/2014 05356 JOHN L HUNTER AND ASSOC INC HBBCR0114 BEV CONTAINER RECYCLING PROG ADMIN/ 150-3102-4201 190.00 HBBCR1213 BEV CONTAINER RECYCLING PROG ADMIN/ 150-3102-4201 652.50 Total : 842.50 73390 3/13/2014 18132 JOHNSON, LESLIE 03400 Instuctor Pymt-19456,19361,56,57,58,60, 001-4601-4221 6,720.00 Total : 6,720.00 73391 3/13/2014 02175 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 176122 Legal, RE: Personnel Matter/Jan 14 001-1203-4201 1,405.10 4Page: 03/13/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 5:45:41PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73391 3/13/2014 (Continued)02175 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 176123 Legal, RE: Personnel Matter/Jan 14 001-1203-4201 201.50 Total : 1,606.60 73392 3/13/2014 13658 MBF CONSULTING INC 1000-670 ENGINEERING SER-SEWERS/12/18-2/14 160-3102-4201 19,480.00 1000-671 ENGINEERING STREET IMPROV/12/18/-2/14 001-8127-4201 16,080.00 Total : 35,560.00 73393 3/13/2014 18138 MC DANIEL LAMBERT INC 44554 Health Impact - Oil Project/Jan 14 001-2109 17,388.75 Total : 17,388.75 73394 3/13/2014 17431 MICROSOFT CORPORATION C10005XC65 OFFICE 365 HOSTED/EMAIL-KIOSK LIZ/FEB 14 715-1206-4201 6.00 C100062XHG Office 365 Hosted Email/Feb 14 715-1206-4201 600.00 Total : 606.00 73395 3/13/2014 10279 MITY LITE INC 950337 P Chair Cart 001-4601-5401 504.33 Total : 504.33 73396 3/13/2014 13791 MONTROSE AND ASSOCIATES INC 25106 Design HD Video System/ Council Chambers 715-4204-5402 1,950.00 Total : 1,950.00 73397 3/13/2014 16650 PAYPAL INC 29947723 Credit Processing - Prkg Meters/Feb 14 001-3302-4201 172.27 001-3305-4201 751.47 001-3304-4201 932.40 001-3302-4201 118.34 Total : 1,974.48 73398 3/13/2014 13309 PEREZ, SHAWN 03438 Instrutor Pymt-19526 001-4601-4221 231.00 5Page: 03/13/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 5:45:41PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 231.00 73398 3/13/2014 13309 PEREZ, SHAWN 73399 3/13/2014 17064 PET MART 00563 Pet Supplies/Kg Officer Keef 170-2105-4309 65.38 Total : 65.38 73400 3/13/2014 04898 PIERCE, BONNIE 03506 Per Diem-Bonnie Pierce 001-2101-4317 24.00 Total : 24.00 73401 3/13/2014 01911 PROVIDENCE MEDICAL INSTITUTE 600000285 Pre-employment- Exam/Jan 14 001-1203-4320 852.00 Total : 852.00 73402 3/13/2014 17676 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 40757725 Mats&ShopTowels-Jan 14 001-2201-4309 27.18 40757726 Mats-Jan 14 001-4204-4309 46.28 40757727 Mats-Jan 14 001-3302-4309 26.78 40757728 Mats-Jan 14 001-4204-4309 33.68 40757729 Shop Towels-Jan 14 715-4206-4309 19.68 40757730 Uniform Rentals-Jan 14 001-4202-4314 41.92 40757731 Mats-Jan 14 001-2101-4309 33.08 40757732 Mats&ShopTowels-Jan 14 001-3104-4309 24.18 40759980 Uniform Rentals-Feb 14 001-4202-4314 41.44 40762285 Mats&Shop Towels-Feb 14 001-2201-4309 27.18 40762286 Mats-Feb 14 001-4204-4309 46.28 6Page: 03/13/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 5:45:41PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73402 3/13/2014 (Continued)17676 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 40762287 Mats-Feb 14 001-3302-4309 26.78 40762288 Mats-Feb 14 001-4204-4309 33.68 40762289 Shop Towels-Feb 14 715-4206-4309 19.68 40762290 Uniform Rentals-Feb 14 001-4202-4314 40.87 40762291 Mats-Feb 14 001-2101-4309 33.08 40762292 Mats&Shop Towels-Feb 14 001-3104-4309 24.18 40764560 Uniform Rentals-Feb 14 001-4202-4314 39.92 Total : 585.87 73403 3/13/2014 18223 RAIMI AND ASSOCIATES INC 13-757 GEN & COASTAL PLAN UPDATE/DEC 13 150-4104-4201 25,834.83 Total : 25,834.83 73404 3/13/2014 00839 SAXE CLIFFORD PH D, SUSAN 14-0226-1 Pre-employment Exam/Feb 14 001-2101-4201 450.00 Total : 450.00 73405 3/13/2014 00018 SIMS WELDING SUPPLY CO INC 00602689 Welding Supplies/Feb 14 715-4206-4309 31.37 Total : 31.37 73406 3/13/2014 13776 SMITH, STARLA 03507 Per Diem-S.Smith 001-2101-4317 24.00 Total : 24.00 73407 3/13/2014 10412 STERICYCLE 3002539010 Medical Waste Disposal -Jan 14 001-2101-4201 25.00 Total : 25.00 7Page: 03/13/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 5:45:41PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73408 3/13/2014 00015 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 310 PLO 0347 030623 Phone Charges-Feb 14 001-2101-4304 45.01 310-167-1756 990511 Phone Charges-Feb 14 001-2101-4304 323.60 310-318-0113 101216 Phone Charges-Feb 14 001-2201-4304 422.81 310-372-6186 890831 Phone Charges-Feb 14 001-1132-4304 44.79 Total : 836.21 73409 3/13/2014 09056 VERIZON ONLINE 1160742236 Fiber Optic Line -Feb14 715-1206-4201 164.99 Total : 164.99 73410 3/13/2014 13359 WITTMAN ENTERPRISES LLC 1401062 AMB TRANSPORT BILLING SER/ 001-1202-4201 2,201.90 Total : 2,201.90 73411 3/13/2014 01206 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES 0150750 Street Sign Maint Material-Feb 14 001-3104-4309 636.09 0150818 Street Sign Maint Material- Feb 14 001-3104-4309 666.73 0150885 Street Sign Maint Material-Feb 14 001-3104-4309 700.74 0150897 Street Sign Maint Material-Feb 14 001-3104-4309 948.95 0150992 Street Sign Maint Material-Feb 14 001-3104-4309 700.74 Total : 3,653.25 2014031 3/13/2014 14008 YORK SCRMA 03132014 W/Comp Claims - 3/07/14 705-1217-4324 14,298.38 Total : 14,298.38 Bank total : 140,499.20 46 Vouchers for bank code :boa 140,499.20Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 46 8Page: 03/13/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 9 5:45:41PM Page:vchlist 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 9 inclusive, of the check register for 3-13-14 are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date 3-18-14 9Page: March 19, 2014 Honorable Mayor and Members Regular Meeting of of the Hermosa Beach City Council March 25, 2014 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS APRIL 8, 2014 @ 6:00PM CLOSED SESSION APRIL 8, 2014 PRESENTATIONS PRESENTATION BY THE HERMOSA BEACH PARENTS AND PARENT EDUCATION TEACHERS TO HONOR KATHLEEN WHITEHEAD – ONE OF THE FIRST TEACHERS OF THE EDUCATION PROGRAM OVER 60 YRS AGO FOR THE SOUTH BAY ADULT SHOOL AES CORPORATION POWER PLANT UPDATE – REDONDO BEACH CITY COUNCIL MEMBER OIL PROJECT STATUS REPORT – CITY MANAGER MUNICIPAL MATTERS Fin Fest Event Assistant to the City Manager Approve PCH-Aviation Beautification Final Concept Plan Public Works Director Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Finance Director AES Corporation – Policy Direction Community Development Director Summer Concerts Agreement Assistant to the City Manager MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER Complaint Tracking System Update City Manager APRIL 22, 2014 @ 6:00PM STUDY SESSION: DOWNTOWN CORE REVITALIZATION STRATEGY APRIL 22, 2014 PRESENTATIONS OIL PROJECT STATUS REPORT – CITY MANAGER CONSENT CALENDAR Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of March 19, 2014 Public Works Director Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of April 1, 2014 Assistant to the City Manager Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of April 15, 2014 Community Development Director MUNICIPAL MATTERS Downtown Plan Update Community Development Director City of Redondo Beach Harbor Dr/Herondo St Improvement Project Public Works Director Code Enforcement Progress Report and C.U.P. Action Community Development Director PENDING ITEMS Discussion and Direction Concerning New Revenue Sources: • Demand pricing for parking meters • Convenience Fee • Grant Applications • Green Zone Recommendations and the Installation of Silver and Green Meters Downtown Finance Director Restaurant/Bar Definition - Policy Discussion Community Development Director Consideration of reduction of business license fee request from Carol G. Weiss, Ph.D.. Finance Director Procurement Policies - RFP City Manager Ethics Policy City Manager & Finance Director Carbon Neutrality Goals Community Development Director Food Trucks Community Development Director Video Cameras – Pier Plaza Police Chief March 19, 2014 Honorable Mayor and Members Regular Meeting of of the Hermosa Beach City Council March 25, 2014 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS APRIL 8, 2014 @ 6:00PM CLOSED SESSION APRIL 8, 2014 PRESENTATIONS PRESENTATION BY THE HERMOSA BEACH PARENTS AND PARENT EDUCATION TEACHERS TO HONOR KATHLEEN WHITEHEAD – ONE OF THE FIRST TEACHERS OF THE EDUCATION PROGRAM OVER 60 YRS AGO FOR THE SOUTH BAY ADULT SHOOL AES CORPORATION POWER PLANT UPDATE – REDONDO BEACH CITY COUNCIL MEMBER OIL PROJECT STATUS REPORT – CITY MANAGER MUNICIPAL MATTERS Fin Fest Event Assistant to the City Manager Approve PCH-Aviation Beautification Final Concept Plan Public Works Director Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Finance Director AES Corporation – Policy Direction Community Development Director Summer Concerts Agreement Assistant to the City Manager MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER Complaint Tracking System Update City Manager APRIL 22, 2014 @ 6:00PM STUDY SESSION: DOWNTOWN CORE REVITALIZATION STRATEGY APRIL 22, 2014 PRESENTATIONS OIL PROJECT STATUS REPORT – CITY MANAGER CONSENT CALENDAR Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of March 19, 2014 Public Works Director Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of April 1, 2014 Assistant to the City Manager Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of April 15, 2014 Community Development Director MUNICIPAL MATTERS Downtown Plan Update Community Development Director City of Redondo Beach Harbor Dr/Herondo St Improvement Project Public Works Director Code Enforcement Progress Report and C.U.P. Action Community Development Director PENDING ITEMS Discussion and Direction Concerning New Revenue Sources: Demand pricing for parking meters Convenience Fee Grant Applications Green Zone Recommendations and the Installation of Silver and Green Meters Downtown Finance Director Restaurant/Bar Definition - Policy Discussion Community Development Director Consideration of reduction of business license fee request from Carol G. Weiss, Ph.D.. Finance Director Procurement Policies - RFP City Manager Ethics Policy City Manager & Finance Director Carbon Neutrality Goals Community Development Director Food Trucks Community Development Director Video Cameras – Pier Plaza Police Chief 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 City Council1101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1101-4100 Personal Services 36,984.00 21,574.06 21,574.06 58.331101-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 15,409.94 2,527.00 1,484.70 1,484.70 58.751101-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 1,042.30 26,112.00 15,535.61 15,535.61 59.501101-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 10,576.39 10,780.00 6,101.26 6,101.26 56.601101-4180 Retirement 0.00 4,678.74 9,868.00 13,416.39 13,416.39 135.961101-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 -3,548.39 915.00 559.45 559.45 61.141101-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 355.55 2,637.00 1,540.00 1,540.00 58.401101-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 1,097.00 Total Personal Services 89,823.00 60,211.47 60,211.47 0.00 29,611.53 67.03 1101-4200 Contract Services 67,010.00 5,777.47 5,777.47 8.621101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 61,232.53 Total Contract Services 67,010.00 5,777.47 5,777.47 0.00 61,232.53 8.62 1101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 100.00 18.51 18.51 18.511101-4304 Telephone 0.00 81.49 14,000.00 4,505.91 4,505.91 32.191101-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 9,494.09 24,000.00 14,282.99 14,282.99 59.511101-4315 Membership 0.00 9,717.01 15,000.00 8,417.39 8,417.39 56.121101-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 6,582.61 27,070.00 11,566.46 11,566.46 42.731101-4319 Special Events 0.00 15,503.54 3,620.00 2,114.00 2,114.00 58.401101-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 1,506.00 4,183.00 2,443.00 2,443.00 58.401101-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 1,740.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 87,973.00 43,348.26 43,348.26 0.00 44,624.74 49.27 1101-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1101-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Total City Council 244,806.00 109,337.20 109,337.20 0.00 135,468.80 44.66 City Clerk1121 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1121-4100 Personal Services 111,941.00 63,565.60 63,565.60 56.781121-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 48,375.40 11,637.00 4,747.31 4,747.31 40.791121-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 6,889.69 40,797.00 38,799.00 38,799.00 95.101121-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 1,998.00 24,193.00 17,465.47 17,465.47 72.191121-4180 Retirement 0.00 6,727.53 39,599.00 21,235.71 21,235.71 53.631121-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 18,363.29 2,248.00 1,553.55 1,553.55 69.111121-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 694.45 12,707.00 7,413.00 7,413.00 58.341121-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 5,294.00 Total Personal Services 243,122.00 154,779.64 154,779.64 0.00 88,342.36 63.66 1121-4200 Contract Services 7,380.00 1,457.77 1,457.77 19.751121-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 5,922.23 52,000.00 2,172.75 2,172.75 4.181121-4251 Contract Services/Govt 0.00 49,827.25 Total Contract Services 59,380.00 3,630.52 3,630.52 0.00 55,749.48 6.11 1121-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 785.00 331.54 331.54 42.231121-4304 Telephone 0.00 453.46 5,175.00 2,619.72 2,619.72 50.621121-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 2,555.28 565.00 0.00 0.00 0.001121-4315 Membership 0.00 565.00 2,423.00 2,703.54 2,703.54 111.581121-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 -280.54 16,000.00 5,441.20 5,441.20 34.011121-4323 Public Noticing 0.00 10,558.80 7,065.00 4,123.00 4,123.00 58.361121-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 2,942.00 612.00 357.00 357.00 58.331121-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 255.00 9,725.00 5,670.00 5,670.00 58.301121-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 4,055.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 42,350.00 21,246.00 21,246.00 0.00 21,104.00 50.17 1121-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total City Clerk 344,852.00 179,656.16 179,656.16 0.00 165,195.84 52.10 2Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 City Attorney1131 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1131-4200 Contract Services 320,000.00 62,758.60 62,758.60 19.611131-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 257,241.40 Total City Attorney 320,000.00 62,758.60 62,758.60 0.00 257,241.40 19.61 3Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 City Prosecutor1132 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1132-4200 Contract Services 145,000.00 136,909.26 136,909.26 94.421132-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 8,090.74 Total Contract Services 145,000.00 136,909.26 136,909.26 0.00 8,090.74 94.42 1132-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 300.00 91.38 91.38 30.461132-4304 Telephone 0.00 208.62 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.001132-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 100.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 400.00 91.38 91.38 0.00 308.62 22.85 Total City Prosecutor 145,400.00 137,000.64 137,000.64 0.00 8,399.36 94.22 4Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 City Treasurer1141 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1141-4100 Personal Services 936.00 0.00 0.00 0.001141-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 936.00 28,440.00 1,159.37 1,159.37 4.081141-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 27,280.63 3,644.00 72.45 72.45 1.991141-4180 Retirement 0.00 3,571.55 886.00 1,731.80 1,731.80 195.461141-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 -845.80 412.00 16.80 16.80 4.081141-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 395.20 1,641.00 1,939.00 1,939.00 118.161141-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 -298.00 Total Personal Services 35,959.00 4,919.42 4,919.42 0.00 31,039.58 13.68 1141-4200 Contract Services 3,520.00 1,792.26 1,792.26 50.921141-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 1,727.74 Total Contract Services 3,520.00 1,792.26 1,792.26 0.00 1,727.74 50.92 1141-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 400.00 121.03 121.03 30.261141-4304 Telephone 0.00 278.97 2,500.00 1,540.13 1,540.13 61.611141-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 959.87 55.00 40.00 40.00 72.731141-4315 Membership 0.00 15.00 2,255.00 190.15 190.15 8.431141-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 2,064.85 3,782.00 2,205.00 2,205.00 58.301141-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 1,577.00 609.00 357.00 357.00 58.621141-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 252.00 3,483.00 2,030.00 2,030.00 58.281141-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 1,453.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 13,084.00 6,483.31 6,483.31 0.00 6,600.69 49.55 1141-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total City Treasurer 52,563.00 13,194.99 13,194.99 0.00 39,368.01 25.10 5Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 City Manager1201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1201-4100 Personal Services 222,000.00 130,955.50 130,955.50 58.991201-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 91,044.50 36,483.00 1,187.75 1,187.75 3.261201-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 35,295.25 77,844.00 10,272.00 10,272.00 13.201201-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 67,572.00 32,986.00 16,051.08 16,051.08 48.661201-4180 Retirement 0.00 16,934.92 26,759.00 14,740.39 14,740.39 55.091201-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 12,018.61 4,117.00 2,128.14 2,128.14 51.691201-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 1,988.86 26,254.00 1,596.00 1,596.00 6.081201-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 24,658.00 Total Personal Services 426,443.00 176,930.86 176,930.86 0.00 249,512.14 41.49 1201-4200 Contract Services 38,699.00 31,321.62 31,321.62 80.941201-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 7,377.38 Total Contract Services 38,699.00 31,321.62 31,321.62 0.00 7,377.38 80.94 1201-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 1,200.00 1,363.06 1,363.06 113.591201-4304 Telephone 0.00 -163.06 900.00 1,324.75 1,324.75 147.191201-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 -424.75 1,900.00 1,610.00 1,610.00 84.741201-4315 Membership 0.00 290.00 5,000.00 1,306.20 1,306.20 26.121201-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 3,693.80 7,103.00 4,144.00 4,144.00 58.341201-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 2,959.00 3,406.00 1,988.00 1,988.00 58.371201-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 1,418.00 16,480.00 9,611.00 9,611.00 58.321201-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 6,869.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 35,989.00 21,347.01 21,347.01 0.00 14,641.99 59.32 1201-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total City Manager 501,131.00 229,599.49 229,599.49 0.00 271,531.51 45.82 6Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Finance Administration1202 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1202-4100 Personal Services 434,681.00 240,935.23 240,935.23 55.431202-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 193,745.77 550.00 1,051.45 1,051.45 191.171202-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 -501.45 35,874.00 22,519.76 22,519.76 62.771202-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 13,354.24 74,212.00 42,193.72 42,193.72 56.861202-4180 Retirement 0.00 32,018.28 91,711.00 45,662.34 45,662.34 49.791202-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 46,048.66 4,429.00 2,638.72 2,638.72 59.581202-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 1,790.28 41,769.00 23,387.00 23,387.00 55.991202-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 18,382.00 Total Personal Services 683,226.00 378,388.22 378,388.22 0.00 304,837.78 55.38 1202-4200 Contract Services 112,850.00 51,035.07 51,035.07 68.811202-4201 Contract Serv/Private 26,617.15 35,197.78 Total Contract Services 112,850.00 51,035.07 51,035.07 26,617.15 35,197.78 68.81 1202-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 2,000.00 1,012.04 1,012.04 50.601202-4304 Telephone 0.00 987.96 7,950.00 5,928.27 5,928.27 74.571202-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 2,021.73 595.00 455.00 455.00 76.471202-4315 Membership 0.00 140.00 6,125.00 3,045.46 3,045.46 49.721202-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 3,079.54 18,193.00 10,612.00 10,612.00 58.331202-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 7,581.00 2,113.00 1,232.00 1,232.00 58.311202-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 881.00 26,325.00 15,358.00 15,358.00 58.341202-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 10,967.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 63,301.00 37,642.77 37,642.77 0.00 25,658.23 59.47 1202-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Finance Administration 859,377.00 467,066.06 467,066.06 26,617.15 365,693.79 57.45 7Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Human Resources1203 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1203-4100 Personal Services 66,501.00 42,884.33 42,884.33 64.491203-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 23,616.67 412.00 172.39 172.39 41.841203-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 239.61 10,458.00 6,529.25 6,529.25 62.431203-4180 Retirement 0.00 3,928.75 14,725.00 11,389.24 11,389.24 77.351203-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 3,335.76 993.00 679.97 679.97 68.481203-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 313.03 11,885.00 6,930.00 6,930.00 58.311203-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 4,955.00 Total Personal Services 104,974.00 68,585.18 68,585.18 0.00 36,388.82 65.34 1203-4200 Contract Services 251,591.00 144,123.93 144,123.93 57.311203-4201 Contract Serv/Private 75.00 107,392.07 11,000.00 1,667.00 1,667.00 15.151203-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 9,333.00 Total Contract Services 262,591.00 145,790.93 145,790.93 75.00 116,725.07 55.55 1203-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 10,000.00 7,847.93 7,847.93 78.481203-4300 Employee recognition instant bonus 0.00 2,152.07 1,500.00 762.83 762.83 50.861203-4304 Telephone 0.00 737.17 3,000.00 4,907.62 4,907.62 163.591203-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 -1,907.62 1,075.00 330.00 330.00 30.701203-4315 Membership 0.00 745.00 13,000.00 3,213.00 3,213.00 24.721203-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 9,787.00 12,000.00 17,483.02 17,483.02 145.691203-4320 Medical Exams 0.00 -5,483.02 6,858.00 4,004.00 4,004.00 58.381203-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 2,854.00 612.00 357.00 357.00 58.331203-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 255.00 5,680.00 3,311.00 3,311.00 58.291203-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 2,369.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 53,725.00 42,216.40 42,216.40 0.00 11,508.60 78.58 1203-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Human Resources 421,290.00 256,592.51 256,592.51 75.00 164,622.49 60.92 8Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 9 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Finance Cashier1204 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1204-4100 Personal Services 308,006.00 153,490.03 153,490.03 49.831204-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 154,515.97 1,200.00 1,018.45 1,018.45 84.871204-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 181.55 6,438.00 4,539.59 4,539.59 70.511204-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 1,898.41 43,560.00 20,900.61 20,900.61 47.981204-4112 Part Time Temporary 0.00 22,659.39 56,732.00 27,932.49 27,932.49 49.241204-4180 Retirement 0.00 28,799.51 102,676.00 37,069.04 37,069.04 36.101204-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 65,606.96 3,520.00 1,704.82 1,704.82 48.431204-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 1,815.18 31,752.00 18,522.00 18,522.00 58.331204-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 13,230.00 Total Personal Services 553,884.00 265,177.03 265,177.03 0.00 288,706.97 47.88 1204-4200 Contract Services 119,326.00 57,130.55 57,130.55 49.131204-4201 Contract Serv/Private 1,500.00 60,695.45 Total Contract Services 119,326.00 57,130.55 57,130.55 1,500.00 60,695.45 49.13 1204-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,641.00 1,922.31 1,922.31 52.801204-4304 Telephone 0.00 1,718.69 46,072.00 27,631.01 27,631.01 59.971204-4305 Office Operating Supplies 0.00 18,440.99 210.00 0.00 0.00 0.001204-4315 Membership 0.00 210.00 2,975.00 0.00 0.00 0.001204-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 2,975.00 23,184.00 13,524.00 13,524.00 58.331204-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 9,660.00 1,828.00 1,064.00 1,064.00 58.211204-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 764.00 17,947.00 10,472.00 10,472.00 58.351204-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 7,475.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 95,857.00 54,613.32 54,613.32 0.00 41,243.68 56.97 Total Finance Cashier 769,067.00 376,920.90 376,920.90 1,500.00 390,646.10 49.21 9Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 10 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 General Appropriations1208 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1208-4100 Personal Services 50,073.00 35,776.46 35,776.46 71.451208-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 14,296.54 804.00 121.07 121.07 15.061208-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 682.93 5,251.00 3,751.55 3,751.55 71.441208-4180 Retirement 0.00 1,499.45 20,297.00 10,867.58 10,867.58 53.541208-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 9,429.42 726.00 520.53 520.53 71.701208-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 205.47 5,467.00 3,192.00 3,192.00 58.391208-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 2,275.00 Total Personal Services 82,618.00 54,229.19 54,229.19 0.00 28,388.81 65.64 1208-4200 Contract Services 17.00 15.13 15.13 89.001208-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 1.87 Total Contract Services 17.00 15.13 15.13 0.00 1.87 89.00 1208-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 115.00 67.91 67.91 59.051208-4304 Telephone 0.00 47.09 -13,176.00 -7,914.62 -7,914.62 60.071208-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 -5,261.38 16,557.00 9,660.00 9,660.00 58.341208-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 6,897.00 306.00 175.00 175.00 57.191208-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 131.00 1,473.00 861.00 861.00 58.451208-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 612.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 5,275.00 2,849.29 2,849.29 0.00 2,425.71 54.01 1208-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total General Appropriations 87,910.00 57,093.61 57,093.61 0.00 30,816.39 64.95 10Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 11 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Prospective Expenditures1214 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1214-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 64,267.00 0.00 0.00 0.001214-4322 Unclassified 0.00 64,267.00 Total Prospective Expenditures 64,267.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 64,267.00 0.00 11Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 12 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 1,974,348.00 1,151,703.00 1,151,703.00 58.331299-4399 OperatingTransfers Out 0.00 822,645.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 1,974,348.00 1,151,703.00 1,151,703.00 0.00 822,645.00 58.33 12Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 13 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Police2101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2101-4100 Personal Services 4,068,110.02 2,034,199.02 2,034,199.02 50.002101-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 2,033,911.00 74,976.00 37,017.12 37,017.12 49.372101-4105 Special Duty Pay 0.00 37,958.88 315,285.00 198,083.63 198,083.63 62.832101-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 117,201.37 729,937.00 335,332.38 335,332.38 45.942101-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 394,604.62 35,837.00 758.98 758.98 2.122101-4112 Part Time Temporary 0.00 35,078.02 6,500.00 3,305.95 3,305.95 50.862101-4117 Shift Differential 0.00 3,194.05 8,500.00 2,843.81 2,843.81 33.462101-4118 Training Officer 0.00 5,656.19 2,088,042.00 1,128,749.77 1,128,749.77 54.062101-4180 Retirement 0.00 959,292.23 300.00 0.00 0.00 0.002101-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 300.00 32,024.00 16,228.60 16,228.60 50.682101-4187 Uniform Allowance 0.00 15,795.40 829,212.00 369,666.81 369,666.81 44.582101-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 459,545.19 57,866.00 37,885.38 37,885.38 65.472101-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 19,980.62 411,229.00 239,883.00 239,883.00 58.332101-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 171,346.00 Total Personal Services 8,657,818.02 4,403,954.45 4,403,954.45 0.00 4,253,863.57 50.87 2101-4200 Contract Services 108,808.71 67,651.12 67,651.12 62.172101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 41,157.59 600,348.00 444,285.15 444,285.15 95.642101-4251 Contract Service/Govt 129,883.20 26,179.65 Total Contract Services 709,156.71 511,936.27 511,936.27 129,883.20 67,337.24 90.50 2101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 51,000.00 27,159.59 27,159.59 53.252101-4304 Telephone 0.00 23,840.41 40,929.27 26,437.90 26,437.90 68.672101-4305 Office Oper Supplies 1,666.57 12,824.80 10,000.00 7,737.66 7,737.66 77.752101-4306 Prisoner Maintenance 37.20 2,225.14 2,500.00 0.00 0.00 28.942101-4307 Radio Maintenance 723.50 1,776.50 6,500.00 430.04 430.04 6.622101-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 6,069.96 15,000.00 4,258.70 4,258.70 28.392101-4312 Travel Expense , POST 0.00 10,741.30 7,162.00 937.00 937.00 13.082101-4313 Travel Expense, STC 0.00 6,225.00 19,100.00 5,989.42 5,989.42 32.562101-4314 Uniforms 230.06 12,880.52 3,559.00 1,835.00 1,835.00 51.562101-4315 Membership 0.00 1,724.00 13Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 14 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Police2101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 52,086.00 25,871.57 25,871.57 49.672101-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 26,214.43 13,358.00 0.00 0.00 0.002101-4350 Safety Gear 0.00 13,358.00 304,939.00 177,884.00 177,884.00 58.332101-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 127,055.00 6,925.00 4,039.00 4,039.00 58.322101-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 2,886.00 358,125.00 208,908.00 208,908.00 58.332101-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 149,217.00 1,168,403.00 681,569.00 681,569.00 58.332101-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 486,834.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 2,059,586.27 1,173,056.88 1,173,056.88 2,657.33 883,872.06 57.08 2101-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2101-5400 Equipment/Furniture 3,053.00 2,315.69 2,315.69 75.852101-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 737.31 Total Equipment/Furniture 3,053.00 2,315.69 2,315.69 0.00 737.31 75.85 2101-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Police 11,429,614.00 6,091,263.29 6,091,263.29 132,540.53 5,205,810.18 54.45 14Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 15 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Crossing Guard2102 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2102-4200 Contract Services 88,909.00 28,451.89 28,451.89 89.532102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 51,144.11 9,313.00 Total Crossing Guard 88,909.00 28,451.89 28,451.89 51,144.11 9,313.00 89.53 15Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 16 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Fire2201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2201-4100 Personal Services 1,872,785.00 1,001,584.42 1,001,584.42 53.482201-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 871,200.58 473,210.00 265,621.22 265,621.22 56.132201-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 207,588.78 193,804.00 118,583.83 118,583.83 61.192201-4108 FLSA Overtime 0.00 75,220.17 258,453.00 85,556.37 85,556.37 33.102201-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 172,896.63 127,500.00 40,160.00 40,160.00 31.502201-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 87,340.00 5,600.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 44.642201-4119 Fitness Incentive 0.00 3,100.00 841,941.00 473,492.08 473,492.08 56.242201-4180 Retirement 0.00 368,448.92 1,206.00 452.34 452.34 37.512201-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 753.66 10,200.00 5,075.00 5,075.00 49.752201-4187 Uniform Allowance 0.00 5,125.00 218,504.00 105,127.21 105,127.21 48.112201-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 113,376.79 24,554.00 20,008.92 20,008.92 81.492201-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 4,545.08 118,638.00 69,209.00 69,209.00 58.342201-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 49,429.00 Total Personal Services 4,146,395.00 2,187,370.39 2,187,370.39 0.00 1,959,024.61 52.75 2201-4200 Contract Services 112,469.00 12,134.78 12,134.78 11.392201-4201 Contract Serv/Private 675.90 99,658.32 151,625.00 59,943.52 59,943.52 50.242201-4251 Contract Service/Govt 16,235.40 75,446.08 Total Contract Services 264,094.00 72,078.30 72,078.30 16,911.30 175,104.40 33.70 2201-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 17,768.00 8,576.83 8,576.83 48.272201-4304 Telephone 0.00 9,191.17 16,484.00 4,467.31 4,467.31 27.232201-4305 Office Oper Supplies 21.80 11,994.89 36,907.00 14,959.16 14,959.16 40.532201-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 21,947.84 2,475.00 600.70 600.70 24.272201-4314 Uniforms 0.00 1,874.30 4,710.00 2,765.00 2,765.00 58.702201-4315 Membership 0.00 1,945.00 55,800.00 18,899.62 18,899.62 33.872201-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 36,900.38 38,917.00 4,912.70 4,912.70 12.622201-4350 Safety Gear 0.00 34,004.30 39,896.00 23,325.36 23,325.36 58.472201-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 16,570.64 4,325.00 2,520.00 2,520.00 58.272201-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 1,805.00 244,888.00 142,849.00 142,849.00 58.332201-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 102,039.00 16Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 17 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Fire2201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 587,760.00 342,860.00 342,860.00 58.332201-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 244,900.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 1,049,930.00 566,735.68 566,735.68 21.80 483,172.52 53.98 2201-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2201-5400 Equipment/Furniture 19,850.00 3,583.48 3,583.48 21.442201-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 671.40 15,595.12 23,820.00 6,121.03 6,121.03 64.832201-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 9,321.16 8,377.81 83,959.00 2,888.51 2,888.51 4.552201-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 928.73 80,141.76 Total Equipment/Furniture 127,629.00 12,593.02 12,593.02 10,921.29 104,114.69 18.42 2201-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Fire 5,588,048.00 2,838,777.39 2,838,777.39 27,854.39 2,721,416.22 51.30 17Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 18 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Sewers/Storm Drains3102 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3102-4900 Depreciation Total Sewers/Storm Drains 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 19 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Street Maint/Traffic Safety3104 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3104-4100 Personal Services 287,492.00 164,864.76 164,864.76 57.353104-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 122,627.24 6,000.00 10,249.07 10,249.07 170.823104-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 -4,249.07 11,663.00 6,055.44 6,055.44 51.923104-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 5,607.56 57,684.00 33,098.91 33,098.91 57.383104-4180 Retirement 0.00 24,585.09 72,698.00 38,878.70 38,878.70 53.483104-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 33,819.30 1,470.00 894.32 894.32 60.843104-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 575.68 30,987.00 18,074.00 18,074.00 58.333104-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 12,913.00 Total Personal Services 467,994.00 272,115.20 272,115.20 0.00 195,878.80 58.15 3104-4200 Contract Services 302,562.00 78,066.19 78,066.19 62.163104-4201 Contract Serv/Private 109,993.68 114,502.13 2,657.00 3,382.42 3,382.42 244.603104-4251 Contract Service/Govt 3,116.59 -3,842.01 Total Contract Services 305,219.00 81,448.61 81,448.61 113,110.27 110,660.12 63.74 3104-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 7,066.00 3,123.90 3,123.90 44.213104-4303 Utilities 0.00 3,942.10 60,238.00 27,637.25 27,637.25 45.883104-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 32,600.75 666.00 385.00 385.00 57.813104-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 281.00 50,391.00 29,393.00 29,393.00 58.333104-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 20,998.00 210,705.00 122,913.00 122,913.00 58.333104-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 87,792.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 329,066.00 183,452.15 183,452.15 0.00 145,613.85 55.75 3104-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Street Maint/Traffic Safety 1,102,279.00 537,015.96 537,015.96 113,110.27 452,152.77 58.98 19Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 20 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Downtown Enhancement3301 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3301-4100 Personal Services 41,591.00 28,485.12 28,485.12 68.493301-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 13,105.88 1,200.00 124.49 124.49 10.373301-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 1,075.51 3,187.00 3,104.68 3,104.68 97.423301-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 82.32 8,169.00 5,240.65 5,240.65 64.153301-4180 Retirement 0.00 2,928.35 9,198.00 4,508.32 4,508.32 49.013301-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 4,689.68 514.00 412.02 412.02 80.163301-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 101.98 2,859.00 1,666.00 1,666.00 58.273301-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits/OPEB 0.00 1,193.00 Total Personal Services 66,718.00 43,541.28 43,541.28 0.00 23,176.72 65.26 3301-4200 Contract Services 185,350.00 40,127.72 40,127.72 66.013301-4201 Contract Serv/Private 82,223.40 62,998.88 Total Contract Services 185,350.00 40,127.72 40,127.72 82,223.40 62,998.88 66.01 3301-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 304.00 166.39 166.39 54.733301-4303 Utilities 0.00 137.61 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.003301-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 4.00 221.00 126.00 126.00 57.013301-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 95.00 468.00 273.00 273.00 58.333301-4395 Equip Replacement Chrgs 0.00 195.00 22,150.00 12,922.00 12,922.00 58.343301-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 9,228.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 23,147.00 13,487.39 13,487.39 0.00 9,659.61 58.27 3301-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3301-5400 Equipment/Furniture 14,810.00 0.00 0.00 0.003301-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 14,810.00 Total Equipment/Furniture 14,810.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14,810.00 0.00 Total Downtown Enhancement 290,025.00 97,156.39 97,156.39 82,223.40 110,645.21 61.85 20Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 21 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Community Services3302 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3302-4100 Personal Services 833,142.00 495,968.24 495,968.24 59.533302-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 337,173.76 30,000.00 9,048.71 9,048.71 30.163302-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 20,951.29 50,839.00 45,409.12 45,409.12 89.323302-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 5,429.88 80,175.00 8,117.37 8,117.37 10.123302-4112 Part Time Temporary 0.00 72,057.63 5,300.00 4,301.12 4,301.12 81.153302-4117 Shift Differential 0.00 998.88 600.00 0.00 0.00 0.003302-4118 Field Training Officer 0.00 600.00 218,622.00 126,425.05 126,425.05 57.833302-4180 Retirement 0.00 92,196.95 264.00 141.72 141.72 53.683302-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 122.28 5,400.00 3,510.00 3,510.00 65.003302-4187 Uniform Allowance 0.00 1,890.00 225,907.00 123,480.27 123,480.27 54.663302-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 102,426.73 12,221.00 7,689.22 7,689.22 62.923302-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 4,531.78 90,040.00 52,521.00 52,521.00 58.333302-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 37,519.00 Total Personal Services 1,552,510.00 876,611.82 876,611.82 0.00 675,898.18 56.46 3302-4200 Contract Services 53,998.00 39,582.79 39,582.79 73.303302-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 14,415.21 69,442.00 49,773.58 49,773.58 71.683302-4251 Contract Services/Govt 0.00 19,668.42 Total Contract Services 123,440.00 89,356.37 89,356.37 0.00 34,083.63 72.39 3302-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,500.00 2,669.52 2,669.52 76.273302-4304 Telephone 0.00 830.48 16,500.00 10,863.39 10,863.39 65.843302-4305 Office Operating Supplies 0.00 5,636.61 1,000.00 393.00 393.00 39.303302-4307 Radio Maintenance 0.00 607.00 14,800.00 4,049.45 4,049.45 27.363302-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 10,750.55 5,000.00 1,428.11 1,428.11 28.563302-4314 Uniforms 0.00 3,571.89 405.00 0.00 0.00 0.003302-4315 Membership 0.00 405.00 1,918.00 0.00 0.00 0.003302-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 1,918.00 76,784.00 44,793.00 44,793.00 58.343302-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 31,991.00 7,088.00 4,137.00 4,137.00 58.373302-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 2,951.00 97,659.00 56,966.00 56,966.00 58.333302-4395 Equip Replacement Chrgs 0.00 40,693.00 21Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 22 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Community Services3302 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 219,992.00 128,331.00 128,331.00 58.333302-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 91,661.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 444,646.00 253,630.47 253,630.47 0.00 191,015.53 57.04 3302-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3302-5400 Equipment/Furniture 29,273.00 1,554.93 1,554.93 5.313302-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 27,718.07 Total Equipment/Furniture 29,273.00 1,554.93 1,554.93 0.00 27,718.07 5.31 3302-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Community Services 2,149,869.00 1,221,153.59 1,221,153.59 0.00 928,715.41 56.80 22Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 23 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 North Pier Parking Structure3304 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3304-4200 Contract Services 115,145.00 75,356.99 75,356.99 76.733304-4201 Contract Serv/Private 12,995.35 26,792.66 225.00 0.00 0.00 0.003304-4251 Contract Services/Gov't 0.00 225.00 Total Contract Services 115,370.00 75,356.99 75,356.99 12,995.35 27,017.66 76.58 3304-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 22,084.00 9,405.78 9,405.78 42.593304-4303 Utilities 0.00 12,678.22 543.00 303.13 303.13 55.833304-4304 Telephone 0.00 239.87 4,500.00 972.59 972.59 35.503304-4309 Maintenance Materials 625.00 2,902.41 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 27,127.00 10,681.50 10,681.50 625.00 15,820.50 41.68 3304-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total North Pier Parking Structure 142,497.00 86,038.49 86,038.49 13,620.35 42,838.16 69.94 23Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 24 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Downtown Parking Lot A3305 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3305-4200 Contract Services 44,106.00 25,686.19 25,686.19 58.243305-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 18,419.81 Total Contract Services 44,106.00 25,686.19 25,686.19 0.00 18,419.81 58.24 3305-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.003305-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 2,000.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 0.00 3305-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Downtown Parking Lot A 46,106.00 25,686.19 25,686.19 0.00 20,419.81 55.71 24Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 25 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Co. Share Pkg Structure Rev.3306 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3306-4200 Contract Services 321,890.00 0.00 0.00 0.003306-4251 Contract Services/Gov't 0.00 321,890.00 Total Co. Share Pkg Structure Rev. 321,890.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 321,890.00 0.00 25Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 26 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Community Dev/Planning4101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4101-4100 Personal Services 373,034.00 218,762.09 218,762.09 58.644101-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 154,271.91 14,001.00 8,244.89 8,244.89 58.894101-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 5,756.11 88,948.00 31,385.10 31,385.10 35.284101-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 57,562.90 81,694.00 46,107.91 46,107.91 56.444101-4180 Retirement 0.00 35,586.09 70.00 13.47 13.47 19.244101-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 56.53 70,111.00 38,592.16 38,592.16 55.044101-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 31,518.84 6,362.00 3,898.25 3,898.25 61.274101-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 2,463.75 31,302.00 18,263.00 18,263.00 58.344101-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 13,039.00 Total Personal Services 665,522.00 365,266.87 365,266.87 0.00 300,255.13 54.88 4101-4200 Contract Services 37,347.00 21,317.50 21,317.50 86.304101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 10,913.00 5,116.50 Total Contract Services 37,347.00 21,317.50 21,317.50 10,913.00 5,116.50 86.30 4101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 1,300.00 710.16 710.16 54.634101-4304 Telephone 0.00 589.84 4,500.00 1,134.23 1,134.23 25.214101-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 3,365.77 1,773.00 600.00 600.00 33.844101-4315 Membership 0.00 1,173.00 4,000.00 179.60 179.60 4.494101-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 3,820.40 12,743.00 7,434.00 7,434.00 58.344101-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 5,309.00 2,234.00 1,302.00 1,302.00 58.284101-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 932.00 27,834.00 16,240.00 16,240.00 58.354101-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 11,594.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 54,384.00 27,599.99 27,599.99 0.00 26,784.01 50.75 Total Community Dev/Planning 757,253.00 414,184.36 414,184.36 10,913.00 332,155.64 56.14 26Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 27 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Coastal Permit Auth Grant4104 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4104-4200 Contract Services 220,000.00 15,851.23 15,851.23 102.734104-4201 Contract Serv/Private 210,148.77 -6,000.00 Total Coastal Permit Auth Grant 220,000.00 15,851.23 15,851.23 210,148.77 -6,000.00 102.73 27Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 28 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Community Dev/Building4201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4201-4100 Personal Services 291,071.00 145,927.40 145,927.40 50.134201-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 145,143.60 10,804.00 14,046.82 14,046.82 130.014201-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 -3,242.82 31,136.00 9,373.69 9,373.69 30.114201-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 21,762.31 58,260.00 29,430.28 29,430.28 50.524201-4180 Retirement 0.00 28,829.72 85.00 0.00 0.00 0.004201-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 85.00 44,360.00 22,877.93 22,877.93 51.574201-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 21,482.07 4,279.00 2,533.24 2,533.24 59.204201-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 1,745.76 31,927.00 18,627.00 18,627.00 58.344201-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 13,300.00 Total Personal Services 471,922.00 242,816.36 242,816.36 0.00 229,105.64 51.45 4201-4200 Contract Services 90,425.00 51,803.84 51,803.84 77.144201-4201 Contract Serv/Private 17,950.00 20,671.16 Total Contract Services 90,425.00 51,803.84 51,803.84 17,950.00 20,671.16 77.14 4201-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 4,000.00 2,192.39 2,192.39 54.814201-4304 Telephone 0.00 1,807.61 4,000.00 1,243.16 1,243.16 31.084201-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 2,756.84 1,300.00 200.00 200.00 15.384201-4315 Membership 0.00 1,100.00 3,100.00 2,359.25 2,359.25 76.104201-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 740.75 17,632.00 10,283.00 10,283.00 58.324201-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 7,349.00 1,409.00 819.00 819.00 58.134201-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 590.00 19,704.00 11,494.00 11,494.00 58.334201-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 8,210.00 36,567.00 21,329.00 21,329.00 58.334201-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 15,238.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 87,712.00 49,919.80 49,919.80 0.00 37,792.20 56.91 4201-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4201-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 29 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Community Dev/Building4201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number Total Community Dev/Building 650,059.00 344,540.00 344,540.00 17,950.00 287,569.00 55.76 29Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 30 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Public Works Administration4202 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4202-4100 Personal Services 332,313.00 156,089.10 156,089.10 46.974202-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 176,223.90 15,170.00 4,904.60 4,904.60 32.334202-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 10,265.40 26,238.00 0.00 0.00 0.004202-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 26,238.00 62,578.00 29,360.91 29,360.91 46.924202-4180 Retirement 0.00 33,217.09 55,337.00 25,124.73 25,124.73 45.404202-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 30,212.27 5,860.00 2,486.12 2,486.12 42.434202-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 3,373.88 26,174.00 15,267.00 15,267.00 58.334202-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 10,907.00 Total Personal Services 523,670.00 233,232.46 233,232.46 0.00 290,437.54 44.54 4202-4200 Contract Services 97,295.00 20,073.66 20,073.66 25.264202-4201 Contract Serv/Private 4,500.00 72,721.34 Total Contract Services 97,295.00 20,073.66 20,073.66 4,500.00 72,721.34 25.26 4202-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 12,614.00 5,684.54 5,684.54 45.074202-4304 Telephone 0.00 6,929.46 6,640.00 5,528.26 5,528.26 83.264202-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 1,111.74 6,678.00 1,184.06 1,184.06 19.044202-4314 Uniforms 87.12 5,406.82 950.00 710.00 710.00 74.744202-4315 Membership 0.00 240.00 10,167.00 1,138.70 1,138.70 11.204202-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 9,028.30 70,847.00 41,328.00 41,328.00 58.334202-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 29,519.00 6,478.00 3,780.00 3,780.00 58.354202-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 2,698.00 22,580.00 13,174.00 13,174.00 58.344202-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 9,406.00 55,169.00 32,179.00 32,179.00 58.334202-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 22,990.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 192,123.00 104,706.56 104,706.56 87.12 87,329.32 54.55 4202-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4202-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 31 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Public Works Administration4202 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4202-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Public Works Administration 813,088.00 358,012.68 358,012.68 4,587.12 450,488.20 44.60 31Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 32 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Building Maintenance4204 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4204-4100 Personal Services 179,428.00 104,037.26 104,037.26 57.984204-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 75,390.74 9,000.00 7,035.53 7,035.53 78.174204-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 1,964.47 7,480.00 10,369.09 10,369.09 138.624204-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 -2,889.09 0.00 29,767.48 29,767.48 0.004204-4112 Part Time Temporary 0.00 -29,767.48 34,008.00 22,842.54 22,842.54 67.174204-4180 Retirement 0.00 11,165.46 0.00 262.89 262.89 0.004204-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 -262.89 61,287.00 31,383.31 31,383.31 51.214204-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 29,903.69 2,623.00 2,356.27 2,356.27 89.834204-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 266.73 14,495.00 8,456.00 8,456.00 58.344204-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 6,039.00 Total Personal Services 308,321.00 216,510.37 216,510.37 0.00 91,810.63 70.22 4204-4200 Contract Services 149,343.00 64,790.57 64,790.57 90.674204-4201 Contract Serv/Private 70,615.50 13,936.93 225.00 0.00 0.00 0.004204-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 225.00 Total Contract Services 149,568.00 64,790.57 64,790.57 70,615.50 14,161.93 90.53 4204-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 149,951.00 72,645.74 72,645.74 48.454204-4303 Utilities 0.00 77,305.26 34,652.00 20,250.13 20,250.13 58.444204-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 14,401.87 6,000.00 2,263.98 2,263.98 37.734204-4321 Building Sfty/Security 0.00 3,736.02 22,723.00 13,258.00 13,258.00 58.354204-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 9,465.00 667.00 392.00 392.00 58.774204-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 275.00 12,063.00 7,035.00 7,035.00 58.324204-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 5,028.00 49,457.00 28,847.00 28,847.00 58.334204-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 20,610.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 275,513.00 144,691.85 144,691.85 0.00 130,821.15 52.52 4204-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4204-5400 Equipment/Furniture 32Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 33 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Building Maintenance4204 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4204-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Building Maintenance 733,402.00 425,992.79 425,992.79 70,615.50 236,793.71 67.71 33Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 34 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Affordable Hous/Marineland Mobile H Loan4401 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4401-4200 Contract Services 0.00 1,908.87 1,908.87 0.004401-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 -1,908.87 Total Contract Services 0.00 1,908.87 1,908.87 0.00 -1,908.87 0.00 4401-4400 Grants Total Grants 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Affordable Hous/Marineland Mobile H Loan 0.00 1,908.87 1,908.87 0.00 -1,908.87 0.00 34Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 35 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Affordable Hous/Marineland Mobil / Grant4402 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4402-4200 Contract Services 0.00 111,831.00 111,831.00 0.004402-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 -111,831.00 Total Affordable Hous/Marineland Mobil / Grant 0.00 111,831.00 111,831.00 0.00 -111,831.00 0.00 35Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 36 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Community Resources4601 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4601-4100 Personal Services 246,448.00 106,957.37 106,957.37 43.404601-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 139,490.63 3,000.00 728.72 728.72 24.294601-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 2,271.28 8,503.00 3,073.39 3,073.39 36.144601-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 5,429.61 298,706.00 138,154.17 138,154.17 46.254601-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 160,551.83 46,188.00 30,397.14 30,397.14 65.814601-4180 Retirement 0.00 15,790.86 2,226.00 629.58 629.58 28.284601-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 1,596.42 39,210.00 19,244.27 19,244.27 49.084601-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 19,965.73 4,290.00 3,725.09 3,725.09 86.834601-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 564.91 21,419.00 12,495.00 12,495.00 58.344601-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 8,924.00 Total Personal Services 669,990.00 315,404.73 315,404.73 0.00 354,585.27 47.08 4601-4200 Contract Services 56,734.00 21,943.49 21,943.49 38.684601-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 34,790.51 231,000.00 174,836.66 174,836.66 75.694601-4221 Contract Rec Classes/Programs 0.00 56,163.34 Total Contract Services 287,734.00 196,780.15 196,780.15 0.00 90,953.85 68.39 4601-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 10,000.00 3,253.79 3,253.79 32.544601-4302 Advertising 0.00 6,746.21 5,000.00 2,209.97 2,209.97 44.204601-4304 Telephone 0.00 2,790.03 13,000.00 7,568.51 7,568.51 58.224601-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 5,431.49 20,525.00 8,533.82 8,533.82 42.354601-4308 Program Materials 159.12 11,832.06 2,000.00 1,290.00 1,290.00 64.504601-4315 Membership 0.00 710.00 17,000.00 383.96 383.96 2.264601-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 16,616.04 6,000.00 4,410.21 4,410.21 73.504601-4328 Hermosa Senior Center Programs 0.00 1,589.79 35,350.00 20,622.00 20,622.00 58.344601-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 14,728.00 35,235.00 20,552.00 20,552.00 58.334601-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 14,683.00 19,484.00 11,368.00 11,368.00 58.354601-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 8,116.00 79,674.00 46,480.00 46,480.00 58.344601-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 33,194.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 243,268.00 126,672.26 126,672.26 159.12 116,436.62 52.14 36Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 37 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Community Resources4601 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4601-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4601-5400 Equipment/Furniture 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.004601-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 1,000.00 Total Equipment/Furniture 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 0.00 4601-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Community Resources 1,201,992.00 638,857.14 638,857.14 159.12 562,975.74 53.16 37Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 38 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Parks6101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 6101-4100 Personal Services 124,444.00 79,675.38 79,675.38 64.036101-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 44,768.62 500.00 0.00 0.00 0.006101-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 500.00 8,725.00 5,786.93 5,786.93 66.336101-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 2,938.07 21,561.00 11,868.56 11,868.56 55.056101-4180 Retirement 0.00 9,692.44 26,173.00 8,822.47 8,822.47 33.716101-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 17,350.53 887.00 666.60 666.60 75.156101-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 220.40 12,522.00 7,308.00 7,308.00 58.366101-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 5,214.00 Total Personal Services 194,812.00 114,127.94 114,127.94 0.00 80,684.06 58.58 6101-4200 Contract Services 309,647.00 105,010.04 105,010.04 74.576101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 125,898.24 78,738.72 160.00 0.00 0.00 0.006101-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 160.00 Total Contract Services 309,807.00 105,010.04 105,010.04 125,898.24 78,898.72 74.53 6101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 191,226.00 113,004.09 113,004.09 59.096101-4303 Utilities 0.00 78,221.91 22,658.00 13,062.02 13,062.02 57.656101-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 9,595.98 21,867.00 12,754.00 12,754.00 58.336101-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 9,113.00 27,621.00 16,114.00 16,114.00 58.346101-4395 Equip Replacement Chrgs 0.00 11,507.00 55,943.00 32,634.00 32,634.00 58.336101-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 23,309.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 319,315.00 187,568.11 187,568.11 0.00 131,746.89 58.74 6101-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6101-5400 Equipment/Furniture 0.00 1,427.36 1,427.36 0.006101-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 -1,427.36 Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 1,427.36 1,427.36 0.00 -1,427.36 0.00 6101-5600 Buildings/Improvements 38Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 39 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Parks6101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Parks 823,934.00 408,133.45 408,133.45 125,898.24 289,902.31 64.81 39Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 40 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Citywide St Impr/Various Locations8127 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8127-4200 Contract Services 430,523.00 54,270.00 54,270.00 24.148127-4201 Contract Serv/Private 49,641.00 326,612.00 Total Citywide St Impr/Various Locations 430,523.00 54,270.00 54,270.00 49,641.00 326,612.00 24.14 40Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 41 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 PCH-Aviation Beautification Project8143 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8143-4200 Contract Services 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.008143-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 150,000.00 Total PCH-Aviation Beautification Project 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 0.00 41Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 42 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Fire Station Traffic Signal8153 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8153-4200 Contract Services 50,575.00 0.00 0.00 3.268153-4201 Contract Serv/Private 1,650.00 48,925.00 Total Fire Station Traffic Signal 50,575.00 0.00 0.00 1,650.00 48,925.00 3.26 42Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 43 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Clark Field Electrical8602 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8602-4200 Contract Services 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.008602-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 1,000.00 Total Clark Field Electrical 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 0.00 43Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 44 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Fire Station Renovation & Upgrades8606 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8606-4200 Contract Services 52,727.00 27,278.08 27,278.08 56.048606-4201 Contract Serv/Private 2,268.75 23,180.17 Total Fire Station Renovation & Upgrades 52,727.00 27,278.08 27,278.08 2,268.75 23,180.17 56.04 44Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 45 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Civic Center Strategic Plan8609 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8609-4200 Contract Services 198,632.00 52,723.00 52,723.00 75.528609-4201 Contract Serv/Private 97,277.00 48,632.00 Total Civic Center Strategic Plan 198,632.00 52,723.00 52,723.00 97,277.00 48,632.00 75.52 45Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 46 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 City Yard Roof8613 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8613-4200 Contract Services 30,836.00 23,986.00 23,986.00 100.008613-4201 Contract Serv/Private 6,850.00 0.00 Total City Yard Roof 30,836.00 23,986.00 23,986.00 6,850.00 0.00 100.00 46Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 47 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Police Facility Improvements8619 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8619-4200 Contract Services 70,000.00 1,742.00 1,742.00 25.708619-4201 Contract Serv/Private 16,250.00 52,008.00 Total Police Facility Improvements 70,000.00 1,742.00 1,742.00 16,250.00 52,008.00 25.70 47Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 48 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Pier Architectural Upgrades8621 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8621-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Pier Architectural Upgrades 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 49 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Lot A Trash Enclosure8651 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8651-4200 Contract Services 304,829.00 34,809.83 34,809.83 16.058651-4201 Contract Serv/Private 14,129.50 255,889.67 Total Lot A Trash Enclosure 304,829.00 34,809.83 34,809.83 14,129.50 255,889.67 16.05 49Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 50 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Citywide Energy Conservation Upgrades8656 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8656-4200 Contract Services 50,000.00 4,676.40 4,676.40 9.358656-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 45,323.60 Total Citywide Energy Conservation Upgrades 50,000.00 4,676.40 4,676.40 0.00 45,323.60 9.35 50Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 51 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Lawn Bowling Lighting8657 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8657-4200 Contract Services Total Lawn Bowling Lighting 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 52 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Municipal Pier Structural Repairs Ph.II8659 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8659-4200 Contract Services 10,716.00 0.00 0.00 0.008659-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 10,716.00 Total Municipal Pier Structural Repairs Ph.II 10,716.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,716.00 0.00 52Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 53 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Hermosa Beach Surfing Memorial8661 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8661-4200 Contract Services 51,242.00 0.00 0.00 97.588661-4201 Contract Serv/Private 50,000.00 1,242.00 Total Hermosa Beach Surfing Memorial 51,242.00 0.00 0.00 50,000.00 1,242.00 97.58 53Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 54 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Parking Structure Repairs8663 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8663-4200 Contract Services 69,592.00 0.00 0.00 0.008663-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 69,592.00 Total Parking Structure Repairs 69,592.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 69,592.00 0.00 54Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 55 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 City Fac. Condition Assessm.& Asbesto Rp8664 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8664-4200 Contract Services 55,739.00 0.00 0.00 0.008664-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 55,739.00 Total City Fac. Condition Assessm.& Asbesto Rp 55,739.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55,739.00 0.00 Total General Fund 33,670,387.00 16,885,263.18 16,885,263.18 1,127,023.20 15,658,100.62 53.50 55Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 56 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Lightg/Landscapg Dist Fund105 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 8,414.00 4,907.00 4,907.00 58.321299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 3,507.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 8,414.00 4,907.00 4,907.00 0.00 3,507.00 58.32 56Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 57 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Lightg/Landscapg Dist Fund105 Lighting/Landscaping/Medians2601 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2601-4100 Personal Services 96,543.00 50,445.11 50,445.11 52.252601-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 46,097.89 1,000.00 1,241.24 1,241.24 124.122601-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 -241.24 5,065.00 4,917.93 4,917.93 97.102601-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 147.07 17,295.00 10,084.60 10,084.60 58.312601-4180 Retirement 0.00 7,210.40 31,565.00 12,580.67 12,580.67 39.862601-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 18,984.33 1,258.00 824.61 824.61 65.552601-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 433.39 8,458.00 4,935.00 4,935.00 58.352601-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 3,523.00 Total Personal Services 161,184.00 85,029.16 85,029.16 0.00 76,154.84 52.75 2601-4200 Contract Services 44,492.00 17,004.00 17,004.00 90.622601-4201 Contract Serv/Private 23,314.00 4,174.00 20,493.00 11,664.86 11,664.86 56.922601-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 8,828.14 Total Contract Services 64,985.00 28,668.86 28,668.86 23,314.00 13,002.14 79.99 2601-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 224,024.00 106,432.14 106,432.14 47.512601-4303 Utilities 0.00 117,591.86 28,300.00 20,420.55 20,420.55 72.162601-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 7,879.45 667.00 392.00 392.00 58.772601-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 275.00 45,724.00 26,670.00 26,670.00 58.332601-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 19,054.00 31,002.00 18,088.00 18,088.00 58.342601-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 12,914.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 329,717.00 172,002.69 172,002.69 0.00 157,714.31 52.17 Total Lighting/Landscaping/Medians 555,886.00 285,700.71 285,700.71 23,314.00 246,871.29 55.59 Total Lightg/Landscapg Dist Fund 564,300.00 290,607.71 290,607.71 23,314.00 250,378.29 55.63 57Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 58 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Downtown Enhancement Fund109 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Interfund Transfers Out 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 58Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 59 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Downtown Enhancement Fund109 Downtown Enhancement3301 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3301-4100 Personal Services Total Personal Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3301-4200 Contract Services Total Contract Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3301-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3301-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3301-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Downtown Enhancement 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 59Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 60 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Downtown Enhancement Fund109 North Pier Parking Structure3304 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3304-4200 Contract Services Total Contract Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3304-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3304-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3304-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total North Pier Parking Structure 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 61 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Downtown Enhancement Fund109 Downtown Parking Lot A3305 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3305-4200 Contract Services Total Contract Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3305-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3305-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3305-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Downtown Parking Lot A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 61Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 62 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Downtown Enhancement Fund109 Co. Share Pkg Structure Rev.3306 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3306-4200 Contract Services Total Co. Share Pkg Structure Rev. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 62Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 63 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Downtown Enhancement Fund109 Citywide St Impr/Various Locations8127 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8127-4200 Contract Services Total Citywide St Impr/Various Locations 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 63Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 64 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Downtown Enhancement Fund109 Lot A Trash Enclosure8651 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8651-4200 Contract Services Total Lot A Trash Enclosure 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 64Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 65 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Downtown Enhancement Fund109 Municipal Pier Structural Repairs Ph.II8659 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8659-4200 Contract Services Total Downtown Enhancement Fund 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 66 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Parking Fund110 Community Services3302 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3302-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Parking Fund 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 66Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 67 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 State Gas Tax Fund115 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 293,498.00 171,206.00 171,206.00 58.331299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 122,292.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 293,498.00 171,206.00 171,206.00 0.00 122,292.00 58.33 67Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 68 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 State Gas Tax Fund115 Street Maint/Traffic Safety3104 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3104-4900 Depreciation Total Street Maint/Traffic Safety 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 68Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 69 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 State Gas Tax Fund115 Citywide St Impr/Various Locations8127 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8127-4100 Personal Services 21,151.00 4,900.45 4,900.45 23.178127-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 16,250.55 3,681.00 306.27 306.27 8.328127-4180 Retirement 0.00 3,374.73 7,797.00 58.40 58.40 0.758127-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 7,738.60 731.00 71.05 71.05 9.728127-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 659.95 Total Personal Services 33,360.00 5,336.17 5,336.17 0.00 28,023.83 16.00 8127-4200 Contract Services 713,614.00 314,704.29 314,704.29 44.108127-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 398,909.71 Total Contract Services 713,614.00 314,704.29 314,704.29 0.00 398,909.71 44.10 Total Citywide St Impr/Various Locations 746,974.00 320,040.46 320,040.46 0.00 426,933.54 42.84 69Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 70 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 State Gas Tax Fund115 Valley Ardmore8137 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8137-4200 Contract Services Total Valley Ardmore 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 70Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 71 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 State Gas Tax Fund115 PCH-Aviation Beautification Project8143 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8143-4200 Contract Services 49,455.00 3,345.00 3,345.00 38.248143-4201 Contract Serv/Private 15,566.84 30,543.16 Total PCH-Aviation Beautification Project 49,455.00 3,345.00 3,345.00 15,566.84 30,543.16 38.24 Total State Gas Tax Fund 1,089,927.00 494,591.46 494,591.46 15,566.84 579,768.70 46.81 71Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 72 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 AB939 Fund117 Source Redctn/Recycle Element5301 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 5301-4100 Personal Services 28,463.00 29,109.42 29,109.42 102.275301-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 -646.42 5,279.00 1,037.43 1,037.43 19.655301-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 4,241.57 7,872.00 4,627.90 4,627.90 58.795301-4180 Retirement 0.00 3,244.10 6,988.00 3,820.05 3,820.05 54.675301-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 3,167.95 733.00 450.32 450.32 61.445301-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 282.68 Total Personal Services 49,335.00 39,045.12 39,045.12 0.00 10,289.88 79.14 5301-4200 Contract Services 19,000.00 18,312.00 18,312.00 96.385301-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 688.00 Total Contract Services 19,000.00 18,312.00 18,312.00 0.00 688.00 96.38 5301-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 5,400.00 2,100.18 2,100.18 38.895301-4315 Membership 0.00 3,299.82 1,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.005301-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 1,500.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 6,900.00 2,100.18 2,100.18 0.00 4,799.82 30.44 Total AB939 Fund 75,235.00 59,457.30 59,457.30 0.00 15,777.70 79.03 72Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 73 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Prop A Open Space Fund121 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 20,557.00 11,991.00 11,991.00 58.331299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 8,566.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 20,557.00 11,991.00 11,991.00 0.00 8,566.00 58.33 73Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 74 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Prop A Open Space Fund121 South Park Phase I Improvements8537 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8537-4200 Contract Services 148,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.008537-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 148,000.00 Total South Park Phase I Improvements 148,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 148,000.00 0.00 74Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 75 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Prop A Open Space Fund121 14Th. St. Beach Restroom Rehabilitation8631 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8631-4200 Contract Services 3,354.00 5,623.17 5,623.17 167.668631-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 -2,269.17 Total 14Th. St. Beach Restroom Rehabilitation 3,354.00 5,623.17 5,623.17 0.00 -2,269.17 167.66 75Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 76 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Prop A Open Space Fund121 Pier Structural Repairs FY128652 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8652-4200 Contract Services Total Pier Structural Repairs FY12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 77 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Prop A Open Space Fund121 Hermosa Senior Activity Center8653 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8653-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Hermosa Senior Activity Center 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Prop A Open Space Fund 171,911.00 17,614.17 17,614.17 0.00 154,296.83 10.25 77Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 78 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Tyco Fund122 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Interfund Transfers Out 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 78Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 79 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Tyco Fund122 14Th. St. Beach Restroom Rehabilitation8631 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8631-4200 Contract Services 46,521.00 12,573.71 12,573.71 27.038631-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 33,947.29 Total 14Th. St. Beach Restroom Rehabilitation 46,521.00 12,573.71 12,573.71 0.00 33,947.29 27.03 79Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 80 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Tyco Fund122 Pier Structural Repairs FY128652 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8652-4200 Contract Services Total Pier Structural Repairs FY12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 81 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Tyco Fund122 Municipal Pier Structural Repairs Ph.II8659 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8659-4200 Contract Services 205,335.00 9,445.00 9,445.00 10.328659-4201 Contract Serv/Private 11,750.00 184,140.00 Total Municipal Pier Structural Repairs Ph.II 205,335.00 9,445.00 9,445.00 11,750.00 184,140.00 10.32 Total Tyco Fund 251,856.00 22,018.71 22,018.71 11,750.00 218,087.29 13.41 81Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 82 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Tyco Tidelands123 14Th. St. Beach Restroom Rehabilitation8631 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8631-4200 Contract Services 3,545.00 3,229.36 3,229.36 91.108631-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 315.64 Total Tyco Tidelands 3,545.00 3,229.36 3,229.36 0.00 315.64 91.10 82Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 83 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Interfund Transfers Out 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 83Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 84 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 Parks6101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 6101-4200 Contract Services 35,813.00 0.00 0.00 0.006101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 35,813.00 Total Contract Services 35,813.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35,813.00 0.00 6101-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6101-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Parks 35,813.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35,813.00 0.00 84Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 85 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 Citywide Park Master Plan8538 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8538-4100 Personal Services 5,574.00 408.38 408.38 7.338538-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 5,165.62 307.00 25.53 25.53 8.328538-4180 Retirement 0.00 281.47 650.00 4.86 4.86 0.758538-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 645.14 61.00 5.92 5.92 9.708538-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 55.08 Total Personal Services 6,592.00 444.69 444.69 0.00 6,147.31 6.75 8538-4200 Contract Services 60,261.00 0.00 0.00 0.008538-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 60,261.00 Total Contract Services 60,261.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60,261.00 0.00 Total Citywide Park Master Plan 66,853.00 444.69 444.69 0.00 66,408.31 0.67 85Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 86 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 Clark Field Electrical8602 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8602-4200 Contract Services 47,700.00 0.00 0.00 1.978602-4201 Contract Serv/Private 940.00 46,760.00 Total Clark Field Electrical 47,700.00 0.00 0.00 940.00 46,760.00 1.97 86Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 87 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 Comm Ctr General Improvements8649 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8649-4100 Personal Services 8,370.00 816.73 816.73 9.768649-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 7,553.27 614.00 51.04 51.04 8.318649-4180 Retirement 0.00 562.96 1,300.00 9.73 9.73 0.758649-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 1,290.27 122.00 11.84 11.84 9.708649-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 110.16 Total Personal Services 10,406.00 889.34 889.34 0.00 9,516.66 8.55 8649-4200 Contract Services 103,407.00 0.00 0.00 0.008649-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 103,407.00 Total Contract Services 103,407.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 103,407.00 0.00 Total Comm Ctr General Improvements 113,813.00 889.34 889.34 0.00 112,923.66 0.78 87Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 88 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 Citywide Energy Conservation Upgrades8656 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8656-4200 Contract Services 25,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.008656-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 25,000.00 Total Citywide Energy Conservation Upgrades 25,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25,000.00 0.00 88Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 89 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 Lawn Bowling Lighting8657 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8657-4200 Contract Services Total Lawn Bowling Lighting 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund 289,179.00 1,334.03 1,334.03 940.00 286,904.97 0.79 89Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 90 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Bayview Dr Dist Admin Exp Fund135 Administrative Charges1219 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1219-4200 Contract Services 1,890.00 1,110.57 1,110.57 58.761219-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 779.43 Total Administrative Charges 1,890.00 1,110.57 1,110.57 0.00 779.43 58.76 90Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 91 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Bayview Dr Dist Admin Exp Fund135 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 2,718.00 1,589.00 1,589.00 58.461299-4399 Operating Trsfr Out 0.00 1,129.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 2,718.00 1,589.00 1,589.00 0.00 1,129.00 58.46 Total Bayview Dr Dist Admin Exp Fund 4,608.00 2,699.57 2,699.57 0.00 1,908.43 58.58 91Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 92 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Lower Pier Admin Exp Fund136 Administrative Charges1219 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1219-4200 Contract Services 1,725.00 971.82 971.82 56.341219-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 753.18 Total Administrative Charges 1,725.00 971.82 971.82 0.00 753.18 56.34 92Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 93 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Lower Pier Admin Exp Fund136 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 1,142.00 665.00 665.00 58.231299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 477.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 1,142.00 665.00 665.00 0.00 477.00 58.23 Total Lower Pier Admin Exp Fund 2,867.00 1,636.82 1,636.82 0.00 1,230.18 57.09 93Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 94 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Myrtle Dist Admin Exp Fund137 Administrative Charges1219 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1219-4200 Contract Services 8,625.00 4,982.83 4,982.83 57.771219-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 3,642.17 Total Administrative Charges 8,625.00 4,982.83 4,982.83 0.00 3,642.17 57.77 94Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 95 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Myrtle Dist Admin Exp Fund137 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,310.00 1,932.00 1,932.00 58.371299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 1,378.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 3,310.00 1,932.00 1,932.00 0.00 1,378.00 58.37 Total Myrtle Dist Admin Exp Fund 11,935.00 6,914.83 6,914.83 0.00 5,020.17 57.94 95Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 96 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Loma Dist Admin Exp Fund138 Administrative Charges1219 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1219-4200 Contract Services 7,750.00 5,198.29 5,198.29 67.071219-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 2,551.71 Total Administrative Charges 7,750.00 5,198.29 5,198.29 0.00 2,551.71 67.07 96Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 97 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Loma Dist Admin Exp Fund138 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,783.00 2,205.00 2,205.00 58.291299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 1,578.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 3,783.00 2,205.00 2,205.00 0.00 1,578.00 58.29 Total Loma Dist Admin Exp Fund 11,533.00 7,403.29 7,403.29 0.00 4,129.71 64.19 97Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 98 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Beach Dr Assmnt Dist Admin Exp Fund139 Administrative Charges1219 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1219-4200 Contract Services 1,955.00 1,170.76 1,170.76 59.891219-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 784.24 Total Administrative Charges 1,955.00 1,170.76 1,170.76 0.00 784.24 59.89 98Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 99 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Beach Dr Assmnt Dist Admin Exp Fund139 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 1,155.00 672.00 672.00 58.181299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 483.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 1,155.00 672.00 672.00 0.00 483.00 58.18 Total Beach Dr Assmnt Dist Admin Exp Fund 3,110.00 1,842.76 1,842.76 0.00 1,267.24 59.25 99Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 100 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Community Dev Block Grant140 City Fac. ADA Transition Plan & Improv.8655 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8655-4200 Contract Services 70,059.00 0.00 0.00 0.008655-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 70,059.00 Total Community Dev Block Grant 70,059.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 70,059.00 0.00 100Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 101 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Interfund Transfers Out 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 101Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 102 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 Bus Pass Subsidy3403 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3403-4200 Contract Services 3,300.00 910.00 910.00 27.583403-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 2,390.00 Total Bus Pass Subsidy 3,300.00 910.00 910.00 0.00 2,390.00 27.58 102Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 103 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 Dial-A-Taxi Program3404 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3404-4200 Contract Services 69,000.00 26,875.14 26,875.14 100.003404-4201 Contract Serv/Private 42,124.86 0.00 Total Dial-A-Taxi Program 69,000.00 26,875.14 26,875.14 42,124.86 0.00 100.00 103Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 104 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 Commuter Express3408 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3408-4100 Personal Services 1,380.00 1,199.92 1,199.92 86.953408-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 180.08 Total Personal Services 1,380.00 1,199.92 1,199.92 0.00 180.08 86.95 3408-4200 Contract Services 11,262.00 0.00 0.00 0.003408-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 11,262.00 Total Contract Services 11,262.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11,262.00 0.00 Total Commuter Express 12,642.00 1,199.92 1,199.92 0.00 11,442.08 9.49 104Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 105 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 Recreation Transportation3409 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3409-4200 Contract Services 40,000.00 17,099.06 17,099.06 42.753409-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 22,900.94 Total Recreation Transportation 40,000.00 17,099.06 17,099.06 0.00 22,900.94 42.75 105Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 106 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 Special Event Shuttle3410 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3410-4200 Contract Services 6,000.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 50.003410-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 3,000.00 Total Special Event Shuttle 6,000.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 0.00 3,000.00 50.00 106Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 107 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 After School Program Shuttle3411 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3411-4200 Contract Services 41,400.00 21,160.00 21,160.00 51.113411-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 20,240.00 Total After School Program Shuttle 41,400.00 21,160.00 21,160.00 0.00 20,240.00 51.11 107Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 108 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 Beach Cities Transit Line 1093412 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3412-4200 Contract Services 18,940.00 1,689.25 1,689.25 35.683412-4251 Contract Services/Gov't 5,067.75 12,183.00 Total Beach Cities Transit Line 109 18,940.00 1,689.25 1,689.25 5,067.75 12,183.00 35.68 108Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 109 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 PCH-Aviation Beautification Project8143 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8143-4200 Contract Services 275,000.00 11,648.00 11,648.00 4.248143-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 263,352.00 Total PCH-Aviation Beautification Project 275,000.00 11,648.00 11,648.00 0.00 263,352.00 4.24 Total Proposition A Fund 466,282.00 83,581.37 83,581.37 47,192.61 335,508.02 28.05 109Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 110 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition C Fund146 Pavement Management Study4208 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4208-4200 Contract Services 47,547.00 1,935.42 1,935.42 29.754208-4201 Contract Serv/Private 12,208.22 33,403.36 Total Pavement Management Study 47,547.00 1,935.42 1,935.42 12,208.22 33,403.36 29.75 110Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 111 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition C Fund146 Protective Bollards at Pier Plaza8139 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8139-4200 Contract Services 3,250.00 376.95 376.95 11.608139-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 2,873.05 Total Protective Bollards at Pier Plaza 3,250.00 376.95 376.95 0.00 2,873.05 11.60 111Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 112 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition C Fund146 PCH-Aviation Beautification Project8143 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8143-4200 Contract Services 592,820.00 1,740.00 1,740.00 10.808143-4201 Contract Serv/Private 62,265.61 528,814.39 Total PCH-Aviation Beautification Project 592,820.00 1,740.00 1,740.00 62,265.61 528,814.39 10.80 Total Proposition C Fund 643,617.00 4,052.37 4,052.37 74,473.83 565,090.80 12.20 112Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 113 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Measure R Fund147 Citywide St Impr/Various Locations8127 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8127-4100 Personal Services 14,885.00 1,633.48 1,633.48 10.978127-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 13,251.52 1,227.00 102.09 102.09 8.328127-4180 Retirement 0.00 1,124.91 2,599.00 19.49 19.49 0.758127-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 2,579.51 244.00 23.69 23.69 9.718127-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 220.31 Total Personal Services 18,955.00 1,778.75 1,778.75 0.00 17,176.25 9.38 8127-4200 Contract Services 213,145.00 144,115.88 144,115.88 67.618127-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 69,029.12 Total Contract Services 213,145.00 144,115.88 144,115.88 0.00 69,029.12 67.61 Total Citywide St Impr/Various Locations 232,100.00 145,894.63 145,894.63 0.00 86,205.37 62.86 113Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 114 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Measure R Fund147 Protective Bollards at Pier Plaza8139 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8139-4200 Contract Services 42,824.00 8,276.67 8,276.67 19.338139-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 34,547.33 Total Protective Bollards at Pier Plaza 42,824.00 8,276.67 8,276.67 0.00 34,547.33 19.33 114Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 115 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Measure R Fund147 PCH Traffic Improvements8160 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8160-4200 Contract Services 248,800.00 21,825.62 21,825.62 36.028160-4201 Contract Serv/Private 67,802.38 159,172.00 Total PCH Traffic Improvements 248,800.00 21,825.62 21,825.62 67,802.38 159,172.00 36.02 115Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 116 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Measure R Fund147 Herm View Elem Safe Rte to School Grant8179 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8179-4100 Personal Services Total Personal Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8179-4200 Contract Services 5,775.00 2,069.70 2,069.70 35.848179-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 3,705.30 Total Herm View Elem Safe Rte to School Grant 5,775.00 2,069.70 2,069.70 0.00 3,705.30 35.84 Total Measure R Fund 529,499.00 178,066.62 178,066.62 67,802.38 283,630.00 46.43 116Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 117 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Bulletproof Vest Partnership2111 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2111-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Bulletproof Vest Partnership 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 117Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 118 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 ARRA Justice Assistance Grant (JAG)2112 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2112-4900 Depreciation Total ARRA Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 118Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 119 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Fire Department (OJP Equip Grant)2201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2201-5400 Equipment/Furniture 75,000.00 0.00 0.00 99.872201-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 74,903.38 96.62 Total Fire Department (OJP Equip Grant) 75,000.00 0.00 0.00 74,903.38 96.62 99.87 119Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 120 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 State Homeland Sec Grant/Fire2203 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2203-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2203-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total State Homeland Sec Grant/Fire 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 120Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 121 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Fireman's Fund Emerg Prep Prog Grant2225 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2225-4200 Contract Services Total Fireman's Fund Emerg Prep Prog Grant 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 121Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 122 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Beverage Recycle Grant3102 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3102-4200 Contract Services 10,817.00 3,547.50 3,547.50 100.003102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 7,269.50 0.00 Total Beverage Recycle Grant 10,817.00 3,547.50 3,547.50 7,269.50 0.00 100.00 122Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 123 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Coastal Permit Auth Grant4104 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4104-4200 Contract Services 410,000.00 29,565.73 29,565.73 100.004104-4201 Contract Serv/Private 380,434.27 0.00 Total Contract Services 410,000.00 29,565.73 29,565.73 380,434.27 0.00 100.00 4104-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Coastal Permit Auth Grant 410,000.00 29,565.73 29,565.73 380,434.27 0.00 100.00 123Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 124 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Pier Ave/Hermosa Ave to PCH8116 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8116-4200 Contract Services Total Pier Ave/Hermosa Ave to PCH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 124Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 125 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 PCH-Aviation Beautification Project8143 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8143-4200 Contract Services 124,006.00 0.00 0.00 0.008143-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 124,006.00 Total PCH-Aviation Beautification Project 124,006.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 124,006.00 0.00 125Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 126 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 PCH Traffic Improvements8160 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8160-4100 Personal Services 3,721.00 408.38 408.38 10.988160-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 3,312.62 307.00 25.53 25.53 8.328160-4180 Retirement 0.00 281.47 650.00 4.86 4.86 0.758160-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 645.14 61.00 5.92 5.92 9.708160-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 55.08 Total Personal Services 4,739.00 444.69 444.69 0.00 4,294.31 9.38 8160-4200 Contract Services 95,261.00 0.00 0.00 0.008160-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 95,261.00 Total Contract Services 95,261.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95,261.00 0.00 Total PCH Traffic Improvements 100,000.00 444.69 444.69 0.00 99,555.31 0.44 126Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 127 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Herm View Elem Safe Rte to School Grant8179 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8179-4100 Personal Services Total Personal Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8179-4200 Contract Services 20,884.30 19,957.30 19,957.30 95.568179-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 927.00 Total Herm View Elem Safe Rte to School Grant 20,884.30 19,957.30 19,957.30 0.00 927.00 95.56 127Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 128 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Herm Strand Infiltration Trench-Prop 508420 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8420-4200 Contract Services Total Herm Strand Infiltration Trench-Prop 50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 128Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 129 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Citywide Energy Conservation Upgrades8656 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8656-4200 Contract Services 55,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.008656-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 55,000.00 Total Citywide Energy Conservation Upgrades 55,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55,000.00 0.00 129Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 130 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Energy Eff & Conserv Block Grant (ARRA)8662 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8662-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Energy Eff & Conserv Block Grant (ARRA) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Grants Fund 795,707.30 53,515.22 53,515.22 462,607.15 279,584.93 64.86 130Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 131 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Ofc of Traffic Sfty Grant Fund151 Ticket Writer/Traffic Mgmt Grant2114 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2114-4900 Depreciation Total Ofc of Traffic Sfty Grant Fund 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 131Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 132 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Air Quality Mgmt Dist Fund152 Emission Control3701 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3701-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,600.00 750.00 750.00 20.833701-4327 AQMD Incentives 0.00 2,850.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 3,600.00 750.00 750.00 0.00 2,850.00 20.83 3701-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3701-5400 Equipment/Furniture 76,670.00 80,222.56 80,222.56 104.633701-5403 Vehicles 0.00 -3,552.56 Total Equipment/Furniture 76,670.00 80,222.56 80,222.56 0.00 -3,552.56 104.63 Total Air Quality Mgmt Dist Fund 80,270.00 80,972.56 80,972.56 0.00 -702.56 100.88 132Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 133 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Supp Law Enf Serv Fund (SLESF)153 C.O.P.S. Program2106 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2106-4200 Contract Services 98,029.00 49,992.99 49,992.99 51.002106-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 48,036.01 Total Contract Services 98,029.00 49,992.99 49,992.99 0.00 48,036.01 51.00 2106-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2106-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2106-5400 Equipment/Furniture 1,561.00 1,607.00 1,607.00 102.952106-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 -46.00 170,870.00 0.00 0.00 7.852106-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 13,405.31 157,464.69 Total Equipment/Furniture 172,431.00 1,607.00 1,607.00 13,405.31 157,418.69 8.71 2106-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total C.O.P.S. Program 270,460.00 51,599.99 51,599.99 13,405.31 205,454.70 24.04 133Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 134 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Supp Law Enf Serv Fund (SLESF)153 Emission Control3701 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3701-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Emission Control 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Supp Law Enf Serv Fund (SLESF) 270,460.00 51,599.99 51,599.99 13,405.31 205,454.70 24.04 134Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 135 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 CA Law Enf Equip Prog Fund (CLEEP)154 High Technology Grant2107 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2107-4900 Depreciation Total CA Law Enf Equip Prog Fund (CLEEP) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 135Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 136 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Sewer Fund160 Sewers/Storm Drains3102 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3102-4100 Personal Services 152,245.00 57,932.12 57,932.12 38.053102-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 94,312.88 7,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.003102-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 7,000.00 9,671.00 4,457.54 4,457.54 46.093102-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 5,213.46 22,114.00 7,810.94 7,810.94 35.323102-4180 Retirement 0.00 14,303.06 46,518.00 8,090.21 8,090.21 17.393102-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 38,427.79 2,219.00 912.44 912.44 41.123102-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 1,306.56 14,386.00 8,393.00 8,393.00 58.343102-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 5,993.00 Total Personal Services 254,153.00 87,596.25 87,596.25 0.00 166,556.75 34.47 3102-4200 Contract Services 473,290.00 69,662.28 69,662.28 36.913102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 105,014.77 298,612.95 27,845.00 11,534.00 11,534.00 41.423102-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 16,311.00 Total Contract Services 501,135.00 81,196.28 81,196.28 105,014.77 314,923.95 37.16 3102-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 881.00 369.08 369.08 41.893102-4303 Utilities 0.00 511.92 19,000.00 553.50 553.50 5.083102-4309 Maintenance Materials 412.26 18,034.24 667.00 392.00 392.00 58.773102-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 275.00 51,575.00 30,086.00 30,086.00 58.333102-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 21,489.00 35,545.00 20,734.00 20,734.00 58.333102-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 14,811.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 107,668.00 52,134.58 52,134.58 412.26 55,121.16 48.80 3102-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3102-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Sewers/Storm Drains 862,956.00 220,927.11 220,927.11 105,427.03 536,601.86 37.82 136Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 137 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Sewer Fund160 Used Oil Block Grant3105 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3105-4200 Contract Services 5,857.00 2,331.50 2,331.50 100.003105-4201 Contract Serv/Private 3,525.50 0.00 Total Used Oil Block Grant 5,857.00 2,331.50 2,331.50 3,525.50 0.00 100.00 137Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 138 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Sewer Fund160 Storwater Improvements8308 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8308-4200 Contract Services 40,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.008308-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 40,000.00 Total Storwater Improvements 40,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40,000.00 0.00 138Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 139 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Sewer Fund160 Sewer Impr Various Locations 20128401 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8401-4200 Contract Services 782,934.00 17,818.00 17,818.00 11.588401-4201 Contract Serv/Private 72,870.29 692,245.71 Total Sewer Impr Various Locations 2012 782,934.00 17,818.00 17,818.00 72,870.29 692,245.71 11.58 139Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 140 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Sewer Fund160 Sewer Improvements 20068419 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8419-4900 Depreciation Total Sewer Improvements 2006 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 140Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 141 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Sewer Fund160 Storm Drain Impr/Various Locations8426 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8426-4200 Contract Services 163,944.00 0.00 0.00 8.448426-4201 Contract Serv/Private 13,839.15 150,104.85 Total Storm Drain Impr/Various Locations 163,944.00 0.00 0.00 13,839.15 150,104.85 8.44 Total Sewer Fund 1,855,691.00 241,076.61 241,076.61 195,661.97 1,418,952.42 23.54 141Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 142 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Asset Seizure/Forft Fund170 Special Investigations2103 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2103-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2103-5400 Equipment/Furniture 31,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.002103-5403 Vehicles 0.00 31,000.00 Total Special Investigations 31,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31,000.00 0.00 142Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 143 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Asset Seizure/Forft Fund170 Police K-9 Program2105 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2105-4200 Contract Services 2,500.00 1,609.52 1,609.52 64.382105-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 890.48 Total Contract Services 2,500.00 1,609.52 1,609.52 0.00 890.48 64.38 2105-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 1,200.00 653.64 653.64 54.472105-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 546.36 3,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 33.332105-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 2,000.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 4,200.00 1,653.64 1,653.64 0.00 2,546.36 39.37 2105-4900 Depreciation Total Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2105-5400 Equipment/Furniture 600.00 43.59 43.59 7.272105-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 556.41 0.00 28,756.41 28,756.41 0.002105-5403 Vehicles 0.00 -28,756.41 Total Equipment/Furniture 600.00 28,800.00 28,800.00 0.00 -28,200.00 4,800.00 Total Police K-9 Program 7,300.00 32,063.16 32,063.16 0.00 -24,763.16 439.22 Total Asset Seizure/Forft Fund 38,300.00 32,063.16 32,063.16 0.00 6,236.84 83.72 143Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 144 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Fire Protection Fund180 Fire Protection2202 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2202-4900 Depreciation Total Fire Protection 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 144Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 145 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Fire Protection Fund180 Fire Station Renovation & Upgrades8606 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8606-4200 Contract Services 13,361.00 13,360.46 13,360.46 100.008606-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 0.54 Total Fire Station Renovation & Upgrades 13,361.00 13,360.46 13,360.46 0.00 0.54 100.00 145Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 146 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Fire Protection Fund180 Fire Sta Upstairs Remodel/Addn8610 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8610-4900 Depreciation Total Fire Sta Upstairs Remodel/Addn 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Fire Protection Fund 13,361.00 13,360.46 13,360.46 0.00 0.54 100.00 146Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 147 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Capital Improvement Fund301 CIP Administration4203 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4203-4100 Personal Services Total Personal Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4203-4200 Contract Services 40,490.00 33,970.00 33,970.00 125.854203-4201 Contract Serv/Private 16,985.00 -10,465.00 Total CIP Administration 40,490.00 33,970.00 33,970.00 16,985.00 -10,465.00 125.85 147Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 148 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Capital Improvement Fund301 Pier Ave/Hermosa Ave to PCH8116 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8116-4200 Contract Services 19,466.00 0.00 0.00 0.008116-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 19,466.00 Total Pier Ave/Hermosa Ave to PCH 19,466.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19,466.00 0.00 148Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 149 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Capital Improvement Fund301 Citywide St Impr/Various Locations8127 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8127-4200 Contract Services 467,989.00 408,336.87 408,336.87 87.258127-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 59,652.13 Total Citywide St Impr/Various Locations 467,989.00 408,336.87 408,336.87 0.00 59,652.13 87.25 149Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 150 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Capital Improvement Fund301 Gould Avenue Street Improvements8141 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8141-4200 Contract Services 42,101.00 15,564.68 15,564.68 48.068141-4201 Contract Serv/Private 4,670.66 21,865.66 Total Gould Avenue Street Improvements 42,101.00 15,564.68 15,564.68 4,670.66 21,865.66 48.06 150Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 151 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Capital Improvement Fund301 Sewer Impr Various Locations 20128401 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8401-4200 Contract Services 146,469.00 12,030.00 12,030.00 26.768401-4201 Contract Serv/Private 27,157.90 107,281.10 Total Sewer Impr Various Locations 2012 146,469.00 12,030.00 12,030.00 27,157.90 107,281.10 26.76 151Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 152 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Capital Improvement Fund301 Herm Strand Infiltration Trench-Prop 508420 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8420-4200 Contract Services 13,192.00 0.00 0.00 0.008420-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 13,192.00 Total Herm Strand Infiltration Trench-Prop 50 13,192.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13,192.00 0.00 152Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 153 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Capital Improvement Fund301 Storm Drain Impr/Various Locations8426 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8426-4200 Contract Services 47,720.00 0.00 0.00 0.008426-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 47,720.00 Total Storm Drain Impr/Various Locations 47,720.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47,720.00 0.00 153Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 154 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Capital Improvement Fund301 Comm Ctr General Improvements8649 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8649-4200 Contract Services 17,954.00 0.00 0.00 5.578649-4201 Contract Serv/Private 1,000.00 16,954.00 Total Comm Ctr General Improvements 17,954.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 16,954.00 5.57 Total Capital Improvement Fund 795,381.00 469,901.55 469,901.55 49,813.56 275,665.89 65.34 154Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 155 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Artesia Blvd Relinquishment302 Street Maint/Traffic Safety3104 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3104-4200 Contract Services 4,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.003104-4251 Contract Services/Gov't 0.00 4,000.00 Total Contract Services 4,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,000.00 0.00 3104-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Artesia Blvd Relinquishment 4,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,000.00 0.00 155Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 156 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Insurance Fund705 Liability Insurance1209 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1209-4100 Personal Services 33,251.00 19,882.85 19,882.85 59.801209-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 13,368.15 447.00 86.19 86.19 19.281209-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 360.81 5,228.00 3,101.27 3,101.27 59.321209-4180 Retirement 0.00 2,126.73 7,376.00 4,083.56 4,083.56 55.361209-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 3,292.44 496.00 310.74 310.74 62.651209-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 185.26 Total Personal Services 46,798.00 27,464.61 27,464.61 0.00 19,333.39 58.69 1209-4200 Contract Services 607,592.00 460,140.37 460,140.37 76.591209-4201 Contract Serv/Private 5,200.00 142,251.63 Total Contract Services 607,592.00 460,140.37 460,140.37 5,200.00 142,251.63 76.59 1209-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 200.00 29.64 29.64 14.821209-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 170.36 360.00 0.00 0.00 0.001209-4315 Membership 0.00 360.00 600,000.00 168,436.78 168,436.78 28.071209-4324 Claims/Settlements 0.00 431,563.22 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 600,560.00 168,466.42 168,466.42 0.00 432,093.58 28.05 Total Liability Insurance 1,254,950.00 656,071.40 656,071.40 5,200.00 593,678.60 52.69 156Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 157 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Insurance Fund705 Auto/Property/Bonds1210 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1210-4200 Contract Services 58,338.00 56,954.90 56,954.90 97.631210-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 1,383.10 Total Contract Services 58,338.00 56,954.90 56,954.90 0.00 1,383.10 97.63 1210-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.001210-4324 Claims/Settlements 0.00 10,000.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 0.00 Total Auto/Property/Bonds 68,338.00 56,954.90 56,954.90 0.00 11,383.10 83.34 157Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 158 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Insurance Fund705 Unemployment1215 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1215-4100 Personal Services 10,000.00 8,816.00 8,816.00 88.161215-4186 Unemployment Claims 0.00 1,184.00 Total Unemployment 10,000.00 8,816.00 8,816.00 0.00 1,184.00 88.16 158Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 159 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Insurance Fund705 Workers' Compensation1217 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1217-4100 Personal Services 33,251.00 19,883.07 19,883.07 59.801217-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 13,367.93 302.00 86.19 86.19 28.541217-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 215.81 5,229.00 3,101.29 3,101.29 59.311217-4180 Retirement 0.00 2,127.71 7,377.00 4,083.83 4,083.83 55.361217-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 3,293.17 497.00 310.74 310.74 62.521217-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 186.26 Total Personal Services 46,656.00 27,465.12 27,465.12 0.00 19,190.88 58.87 1217-4200 Contract Services 183,546.00 197,928.00 197,928.00 107.841217-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 -14,382.00 Total Contract Services 183,546.00 197,928.00 197,928.00 0.00 -14,382.00 107.84 1217-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 100.00 6.92 6.92 6.921217-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 93.08 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.001217-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 1,000.00 1,200,000.00 454,850.59 454,850.59 37.901217-4324 Claims/Settlements 0.00 745,149.41 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 1,201,100.00 454,857.51 454,857.51 0.00 746,242.49 37.87 Total Workers' Compensation 1,431,302.00 680,250.63 680,250.63 0.00 751,051.37 47.53 159Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 160 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Insurance Fund705 Benefit & Cost Analysis/Oil Project4105 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4105-4200 Contract Services 125,000.00 26,571.84 26,571.84 21.264105-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 98,428.16 Total Benefit & Cost Analysis/Oil Project 125,000.00 26,571.84 26,571.84 0.00 98,428.16 21.26 160Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 161 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Insurance Fund705 Community Dialogue4106 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4106-4200 Contract Services 141,502.00 137,065.42 137,065.42 96.864106-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 4,436.58 Total Contract Services 141,502.00 137,065.42 137,065.42 0.00 4,436.58 96.86 4106-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Community Dialogue 141,502.00 137,065.42 137,065.42 0.00 4,436.58 96.86 Total Insurance Fund 3,031,092.00 1,565,730.19 1,565,730.19 5,200.00 1,460,161.81 51.83 161Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 162 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 City Council1101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1101-4900 Depreciation 15,611.00 0.00 0.00 0.001101-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 15,611.00 5,437.00 0.00 0.00 0.001101-4903 Depreciation/Bldgs 0.00 5,437.00 Total Depreciation 21,048.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21,048.00 0.00 1101-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1101-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total City Council 21,048.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21,048.00 0.00 162Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 163 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 City Clerk1121 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1121-4200 Contract Services 2,290.00 0.00 0.00 0.001121-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 2,290.00 Total City Clerk 2,290.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,290.00 0.00 163Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 164 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Finance Cashier1204 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1204-4200 Contract Services Total Contract Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1204-5400 Equipment/Furniture 2,027.00 0.00 0.00 0.001204-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 2,027.00 Total Finance Cashier 2,027.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,027.00 0.00 164Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 165 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Information Technology1206 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1206-4200 Contract Services 599,081.00 221,134.78 221,134.78 69.651206-4201 Contract Serv/Private 196,128.42 181,817.80 Total Contract Services 599,081.00 221,134.78 221,134.78 196,128.42 181,817.80 69.65 1206-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 1,647.08 1,647.08 0.001206-4304 Telephone 0.00 -1,647.08 17,000.00 6,629.01 6,629.01 38.991206-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 10,370.99 111.00 63.00 63.00 56.761206-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 48.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 17,111.00 8,339.09 8,339.09 0.00 8,771.91 48.74 1206-4900 Depreciation 49,861.00 0.00 0.00 0.001206-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 49,861.00 Total Depreciation 49,861.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49,861.00 0.00 1206-5400 Equipment/Furniture 70,515.00 13,178.83 13,178.83 18.691206-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 57,336.17 26,402.00 26,353.43 26,353.43 99.821206-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 48.57 52,343.00 0.00 0.00 0.001206-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 0.00 52,343.00 Total Equipment/Furniture 149,260.00 39,532.26 39,532.26 0.00 109,727.74 26.49 Total Information Technology 815,313.00 269,006.13 269,006.13 196,128.42 350,178.45 57.05 165Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 166 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 General Appropriations1208 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1208-4200 Contract Services 9,000.00 1,010.51 1,010.51 11.231208-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 7,989.49 Total Contract Services 9,000.00 1,010.51 1,010.51 0.00 7,989.49 11.23 1208-4900 Depreciation 6,956.00 0.00 0.00 0.001208-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 6,956.00 Total Depreciation 6,956.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,956.00 0.00 1208-5400 Equipment/Furniture 29,056.00 27,859.17 27,859.17 95.881208-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 0.00 1,196.83 Total Equipment/Furniture 29,056.00 27,859.17 27,859.17 0.00 1,196.83 95.88 Total General Appropriations 45,012.00 28,869.68 28,869.68 0.00 16,142.32 64.14 166Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 167 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Police2101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2101-4200 Contract Services 26,442.00 23,882.93 23,882.93 93.882101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 941.50 1,617.57 Total Contract Services 26,442.00 23,882.93 23,882.93 941.50 1,617.57 93.88 2101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 81,402.00 37,662.58 37,662.58 46.272101-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 43,739.42 60,000.00 20,719.27 20,719.27 36.022101-4311 Auto Maintenance 890.19 38,390.54 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 141,402.00 58,381.85 58,381.85 890.19 82,129.96 41.92 2101-4900 Depreciation 82,821.00 0.00 0.00 0.002101-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 82,821.00 125,932.00 0.00 0.00 0.002101-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 125,932.00 Total Depreciation 208,753.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 208,753.00 0.00 2101-5400 Equipment/Furniture 27,234.00 0.00 0.00 0.002101-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 27,234.00 224,956.00 198,679.59 198,679.59 95.522101-5403 Vehicles 16,199.16 10,077.25 84,797.00 27,217.31 27,217.31 42.272101-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 8,630.14 48,949.55 Total Equipment/Furniture 336,987.00 225,896.90 225,896.90 24,829.30 86,260.80 74.40 2101-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Police 713,584.00 308,161.68 308,161.68 26,660.99 378,761.33 46.92 167Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 168 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Fire2201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2201-4200 Contract Services 30,840.00 0.00 0.00 0.002201-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 30,840.00 Total Contract Services 30,840.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30,840.00 0.00 2201-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 21,115.00 8,687.43 8,687.43 41.142201-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 12,427.57 63,479.00 7,428.62 7,428.62 11.702201-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 56,050.38 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 84,594.00 16,116.05 16,116.05 0.00 68,477.95 19.05 2201-4900 Depreciation 5,291.00 0.00 0.00 0.002201-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 5,291.00 95,067.00 0.00 0.00 0.002201-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 95,067.00 Total Depreciation 100,358.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100,358.00 0.00 2201-5400 Equipment/Furniture 694,350.00 549,975.00 549,975.00 79.212201-5403 Vehicles 0.00 144,375.00 120,493.00 9,806.81 9,806.81 30.832201-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 27,338.43 83,347.76 Total Equipment/Furniture 814,843.00 559,781.81 559,781.81 27,338.43 227,722.76 72.05 Total Fire 1,030,635.00 575,897.86 575,897.86 27,338.43 427,398.71 58.53 168Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 169 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Lighting/Landscaping/Medians2601 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2601-4200 Contract Services 5,400.00 0.00 0.00 0.002601-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 5,400.00 Total Contract Services 5,400.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,400.00 0.00 2601-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 6,700.00 1,902.66 1,902.66 28.402601-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 4,797.34 1,300.00 2,531.88 2,531.88 194.762601-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 -1,231.88 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 8,000.00 4,434.54 4,434.54 0.00 3,565.46 55.43 2601-4900 Depreciation 12,811.00 0.00 0.00 0.002601-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 12,811.00 Total Depreciation 12,811.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12,811.00 0.00 2601-5400 Equipment/Furniture 1,075.00 664.90 664.90 61.852601-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 410.10 59,370.00 47,950.74 47,950.74 80.772601-5403 Vehicles 0.00 11,419.26 Total Equipment/Furniture 60,445.00 48,615.64 48,615.64 0.00 11,829.36 80.43 Total Lighting/Landscaping/Medians 86,656.00 53,050.18 53,050.18 0.00 33,605.82 61.22 169Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 170 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Sewers/Storm Drains3102 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3102-4200 Contract Services 5,000.00 1,147.09 1,147.09 22.943102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 3,852.91 Total Contract Services 5,000.00 1,147.09 1,147.09 0.00 3,852.91 22.94 3102-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.003102-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 1,000.00 5,825.00 793.62 793.62 13.623102-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 5,031.38 2,384.00 402.12 402.12 16.873102-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 1,981.88 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 9,209.00 1,195.74 1,195.74 0.00 8,013.26 12.98 3102-4900 Depreciation 2,032.00 0.00 0.00 0.003102-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 2,032.00 27,137.00 0.00 0.00 0.003102-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 27,137.00 Total Depreciation 29,169.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29,169.00 0.00 3102-5400 Equipment/Furniture 1,075.00 664.90 664.90 61.853102-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 410.10 70,023.00 47,950.74 47,950.74 68.483102-5403 Vehicles 0.00 22,072.26 Total Equipment/Furniture 71,098.00 48,615.64 48,615.64 0.00 22,482.36 68.38 Total Sewers/Storm Drains 114,476.00 50,958.47 50,958.47 0.00 63,517.53 44.51 170Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 171 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Street Maint/Traffic Safety3104 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3104-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 9,520.00 2,987.09 2,987.09 31.383104-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 6,532.91 2,977.00 958.31 958.31 32.193104-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 2,018.69 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 12,497.00 3,945.40 3,945.40 0.00 8,551.60 31.57 3104-4900 Depreciation 4,427.00 0.00 0.00 0.003104-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 4,427.00 14,882.00 0.00 0.00 0.003104-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 14,882.00 Total Depreciation 19,309.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19,309.00 0.00 3104-5400 Equipment/Furniture 10,901.00 664.90 664.90 6.103104-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 10,236.10 Total Equipment/Furniture 10,901.00 664.90 664.90 0.00 10,236.10 6.10 Total Street Maint/Traffic Safety 42,707.00 4,610.30 4,610.30 0.00 38,096.70 10.80 171Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 172 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Downtown Enhancement3301 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3301-5400 Equipment/Furniture 1,637.00 0.00 0.00 0.003301-5403 Vehicles 0.00 1,637.00 Total Downtown Enhancement 1,637.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,637.00 0.00 172Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 173 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Community Services3302 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3302-4200 Contract Services 6,150.00 6,101.00 6,101.00 99.203302-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 49.00 Total Contract Services 6,150.00 6,101.00 6,101.00 0.00 49.00 99.20 3302-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 22,592.00 10,967.70 10,967.70 48.553302-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 11,624.30 8,000.00 3,877.98 3,877.98 48.473302-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 4,122.02 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 30,592.00 14,845.68 14,845.68 0.00 15,746.32 48.53 3302-4900 Depreciation 11,942.00 0.00 0.00 0.003302-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 11,942.00 25,601.00 0.00 0.00 0.003302-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 25,601.00 Total Depreciation 37,543.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37,543.00 0.00 3302-5400 Equipment/Furniture 27,150.00 0.00 0.00 0.003302-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 27,150.00 13,538.00 0.00 0.00 0.003302-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 13,538.00 10,922.00 5,901.80 5,901.80 54.043302-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 0.00 5,020.20 Total Equipment/Furniture 51,610.00 5,901.80 5,901.80 0.00 45,708.20 11.44 Total Community Services 125,895.00 26,848.48 26,848.48 0.00 99,046.52 21.33 173Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 174 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Community Dev/Building4201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4201-4200 Contract Services 350,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.004201-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 350,000.00 Total Contract Services 350,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 350,000.00 0.00 4201-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 2,805.00 602.37 602.37 21.474201-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 2,202.63 838.00 639.60 639.60 76.324201-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 198.40 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 3,643.00 1,241.97 1,241.97 0.00 2,401.03 34.09 4201-4900 Depreciation 4,970.00 0.00 0.00 0.004201-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 4,970.00 Total Depreciation 4,970.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,970.00 0.00 4201-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Community Dev/Building 358,613.00 1,241.97 1,241.97 0.00 357,371.03 0.35 174Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 175 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Public Works Administration4202 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4202-4200 Contract Services 530.00 0.00 0.00 0.004202-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 530.00 Total Contract Services 530.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 530.00 0.00 4202-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,795.00 1,163.65 1,163.65 30.664202-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 2,631.35 7,904.00 726.85 726.85 9.204202-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 7,177.15 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 11,699.00 1,890.50 1,890.50 0.00 9,808.50 16.16 4202-4900 Depreciation 1,066.00 0.00 0.00 0.004202-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 1,066.00 3,757.00 0.00 0.00 0.004202-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 3,757.00 Total Depreciation 4,823.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,823.00 0.00 4202-5400 Equipment/Furniture 45,729.00 0.00 0.00 0.004202-5403 Vehicles 0.00 45,729.00 Total Equipment/Furniture 45,729.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45,729.00 0.00 Total Public Works Administration 62,781.00 1,890.50 1,890.50 0.00 60,890.50 3.01 175Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 176 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Building Maintenance4204 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4204-4200 Contract Services 154,000.00 14,744.12 14,744.12 9.574204-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 139,255.88 Total Contract Services 154,000.00 14,744.12 14,744.12 0.00 139,255.88 9.57 4204-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 450.00 459.46 459.46 102.104204-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 -9.46 4,047.00 129.95 129.95 3.214204-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 3,917.05 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 4,497.00 589.41 589.41 0.00 3,907.59 13.11 4204-4900 Depreciation 2,042.00 0.00 0.00 0.004204-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 2,042.00 1,739.00 0.00 0.00 0.004204-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 1,739.00 455.00 0.00 0.00 0.004204-4904 Depreciation/Improvements 0.00 455.00 Total Depreciation 4,236.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,236.00 0.00 4204-5400 Equipment/Furniture 165,730.00 0.00 0.00 1.184204-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 1,950.00 163,780.00 Total Equipment/Furniture 165,730.00 0.00 0.00 1,950.00 163,780.00 1.18 4204-5600 Buildings/Improvements 9,800.00 0.00 0.00 0.004204-5602 Imprvmnts Other Than Bldgs 0.00 9,800.00 Total Buildings/Improvements 9,800.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9,800.00 0.00 Total Building Maintenance 338,263.00 15,333.53 15,333.53 1,950.00 320,979.47 5.11 176Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 177 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Equipment Service4206 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4206-4100 Personal Services 122,704.00 54,264.99 54,264.99 44.224206-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 68,439.01 3,000.00 989.87 989.87 33.004206-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 2,010.13 5,571.00 720.75 720.75 12.944206-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 4,850.25 0.00 10,771.55 10,771.55 0.004206-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 -10,771.55 22,554.00 9,230.76 9,230.76 40.934206-4180 Retirement 0.00 13,323.24 42,675.00 17,006.06 17,006.06 39.854206-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 25,668.94 1,785.00 815.21 815.21 45.674206-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 969.79 13,295.00 7,756.00 7,756.00 58.344206-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 5,539.00 Total Personal Services 211,584.00 101,555.19 101,555.19 0.00 110,028.81 48.00 4206-4200 Contract Services 6,900.00 2,823.31 2,823.31 40.924206-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 4,076.69 500.00 0.00 0.00 0.004206-4251 Contract Services/Govt 0.00 500.00 Total Contract Services 7,400.00 2,823.31 2,823.31 0.00 4,576.69 38.15 4206-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,500.00 2,460.23 2,460.23 70.294206-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 1,039.77 2,300.00 690.57 690.57 30.024206-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 1,609.43 1,300.00 503.95 503.95 38.774206-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 796.05 34,484.00 20,118.00 20,118.00 58.344206-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 14,366.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 41,584.00 23,772.75 23,772.75 0.00 17,811.25 57.17 4206-4900 Depreciation 791.00 0.00 0.00 0.004206-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 791.00 Total Depreciation 791.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 791.00 0.00 4206-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Equipment Service 261,359.00 128,151.25 128,151.25 0.00 133,207.75 49.03 177Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 178 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Community Resources4601 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4601-4200 Contract Services 780.00 0.00 0.00 0.004601-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 780.00 Total Contract Services 780.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 780.00 0.00 4601-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 2,200.00 909.67 909.67 41.354601-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 1,290.33 2,000.00 110.68 110.68 5.534601-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 1,889.32 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 4,200.00 1,020.35 1,020.35 0.00 3,179.65 24.29 4601-4900 Depreciation 2,138.00 0.00 0.00 0.004601-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 2,138.00 2,352.00 0.00 0.00 0.004601-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 2,352.00 Total Depreciation 4,490.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,490.00 0.00 4601-5400 Equipment/Furniture 8,707.00 9,806.81 9,806.81 112.634601-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 0.00 -1,099.81 Total Equipment/Furniture 8,707.00 9,806.81 9,806.81 0.00 -1,099.81 112.63 Total Community Resources 18,177.00 10,827.16 10,827.16 0.00 7,349.84 59.57 178Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 179 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Parks6101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 6101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 4,000.00 2,511.20 2,511.20 62.786101-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 1,488.80 1,300.00 350.15 350.15 26.936101-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 949.85 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 5,300.00 2,861.35 2,861.35 0.00 2,438.65 53.99 6101-4900 Depreciation 4,455.00 0.00 0.00 0.006101-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 4,455.00 Total Depreciation 4,455.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,455.00 0.00 6101-5400 Equipment/Furniture 35,510.00 31,002.15 31,002.15 87.316101-5403 Vehicles 0.00 4,507.85 Total Equipment/Furniture 35,510.00 31,002.15 31,002.15 0.00 4,507.85 87.31 Total Parks 45,265.00 33,863.50 33,863.50 0.00 11,401.50 74.81 179Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 180 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Civic Center Strategic Plan8609 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8609-4200 Contract Services 15,000.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 100.008609-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 0.00 Total Civic Center Strategic Plan 15,000.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 180Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 181 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Public Works Yard Renovation8612 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8612-4200 Contract Services Total Public Works Yard Renovation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Equipment Replacement Fund 4,100,738.00 1,523,710.69 1,523,710.69 252,077.84 2,324,949.47 43.30 181Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 182 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Gen Fixed Assets Account Group905 Sale Of Fixed Assets1291 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1291-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Sale Of Fixed Assets 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 182Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 183 3:33PM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Gen Fixed Assets Account Group905 Infrastructure Purchases4209 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4209-9000 Infrastructure Total Infrastructure 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4209-9100 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4209-9200 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4209-9300 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4209-9400 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4209-9500 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4209-9700 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4209-9900 *** Title Not Found *** Total Gen Fixed Assets Account Group 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grand Total 48,844,850.30 22,092,243.98 22,092,243.98 50.03 2,346,828.69 24,405,777.63 183Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3101 Current Year Secured 10,128,092.00 5,060,835.95 5,060,835.95 5,067,256.05 49.97 3102 Current Year Unsecured 426,858.00 398,884.97 398,884.97 27,973.03 93.45 3103 Prior Year Collections 200,000.00 142,611.47 142,611.47 57,388.53 71.31 3104 In-lieu Sales Tax 638,111.00 336,592.56 336,592.56 301,518.44 52.75 3106 Supplemental Roll SB813 126,481.00 86,990.61 86,990.61 39,490.39 68.78 3107 Transfer Tax 250,960.00 158,505.39 158,505.39 92,454.61 63.16 3108 Sales Tax 1,914,335.00 1,020,723.72 1,020,723.72 893,611.28 53.32 3109 1/2 Cent Sales Tx Ext 192,175.00 81,573.15 81,573.15 110,601.85 42.45 3110 Time Warner Cable TV Franchise 160,364.00 36,383.00 36,383.00 123,981.00 22.69 3111 Electric Franchise 74,692.00 0.00 0.00 74,692.00 0.00 3112 Gas Franchise 43,600.00 0.00 0.00 43,600.00 0.00 3113 Refuse Franchise 205,000.00 123,360.88 123,360.88 81,639.12 60.18 3114 Transient Occupancy Tax 2,036,077.00 1,092,350.51 1,092,350.51 943,726.49 53.65 3115 Business License 1,000,000.00 445,738.62 445,738.62 554,261.38 44.57 3120 Utility User Tax 2,495,895.00 1,234,027.09 1,234,027.09 1,261,867.91 49.44 3122 Property tax In-lieu of Veh Lic Fees 1,920,577.00 961,166.00 961,166.00 959,411.00 50.05 3123 Verizon Cable Franchise Fee 269,607.00 72,463.33 72,463.33 197,143.67 26.88 Total Taxes 50.95 22,082,824.00 11,252,207.25 11,252,207.25 10,830,616.75 3200 Licenses And Permits 3202 Dog Licenses 18,000.00 14,666.00 14,666.00 3,334.00 81.48 3204 Building Permits 368,744.00 216,419.51 216,419.51 152,324.49 58.69 1Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3205 Electric Permits 72,210.00 33,553.00 33,553.00 38,657.00 46.47 3206 Plumbing Permits 63,000.00 40,794.60 40,794.60 22,205.40 64.75 3207 Occupancy Permits 16,244.00 9,350.00 9,350.00 6,894.00 57.56 3208 Grease Trap Permits 8,415.00 3,946.00 3,946.00 4,469.00 46.89 3209 Garage Sales 200.00 182.00 182.00 18.00 91.00 3211 Banner Permits 6,660.00 4,136.00 4,136.00 2,524.00 62.10 3212 Animal/Fowl Permits 160.00 0.00 0.00 160.00 0.00 3213 Animal Redemption Fee 1,000.00 470.00 470.00 530.00 47.00 3214 Amplified Sound Permit 4,310.00 2,664.00 2,664.00 1,646.00 61.81 3215 Temporary Sign Permit 1,360.00 601.00 601.00 759.00 44.19 3217 Open Fire Permit 460.00 340.00 340.00 120.00 73.91 3218 Auto Repair Permit 3,400.00 0.00 0.00 3,400.00 0.00 3219 Newsrack Permits 1,305.00 0.00 0.00 1,305.00 0.00 3225 Taxicab Franchise Fees 176,000.00 20.00 20.00 175,980.00 0.01 3227 Mechanical Permits 30,068.00 15,706.80 15,706.80 14,361.20 52.24 3228 Concealed Weapons Permit 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 0.00 Total Licenses And Permits 44.43 771,736.00 342,848.91 342,848.91 428,887.09 3300 Fines & Forfeitures 3301 Municipal Court Fines 215,413.00 112,335.15 112,335.15 103,077.85 52.15 3302 Court Fines /Parking 2,383,128.00 1,574,040.03 1,574,040.03 809,087.97 66.05 3305 Administrative Fines 3,075.00 3,175.00 3,175.00 -100.00 103.25 Total Fines & Forfeitures 64.94 2,601,616.00 1,689,550.18 1,689,550.18 912,065.82 2Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 101,749.00 43,449.62 43,449.62 58,299.38 42.70 3402 Rents & Concessions 1,395.00 667.33 667.33 727.67 47.84 3404 Community Center Leases 47,000.00 28,065.60 28,065.60 18,934.40 59.71 3405 Community Center Rentals 170,000.00 116,447.08 116,447.08 53,552.92 68.50 3406 Community Center Theatre 75,000.00 40,618.75 40,618.75 34,381.25 54.16 3411 Other Facilities 20,000.00 9,942.75 9,942.75 10,057.25 49.71 3412 Tennis Courts 18,000.00 9,722.25 9,722.25 8,277.75 54.01 3418 Special Events 120,000.00 50,260.00 50,260.00 69,740.00 41.88 3422 Beach/Plaza Promotions 20,000.00 0.00 0.00 20,000.00 0.00 3425 Ground Lease 35,816.00 20,892.90 20,892.90 14,923.10 58.33 3427 Cell Site License 33,184.00 19,118.12 19,118.12 14,065.88 57.61 3428 Cell Site License - Verizon 9,600.00 0.00 0.00 9,600.00 0.00 3429 Inmate Phone Services 0.00 20.00 20.00 -20.00 0.00 3431 Storage Facility Operating Lease 180,000.00 105,000.00 105,000.00 75,000.00 58.33 3450 Investment Discount 1,607.00 962.97 962.97 644.03 59.92 3475 Investment Premium -5,402.00 -3,303.25 -3,303.25 -2,098.75 61.15 Total Use Of Money & Property 53.37 827,949.00 441,864.12 441,864.12 386,084.88 3500 Intergovernmental/State 3507 Highway Maintenance 3,100.00 775.06 775.06 2,324.94 25.00 3508 Mandated Costs 4,192.00 4,244.32 4,244.32 -52.32 101.25 3509 Homeowner Property Tax Relief 79,784.00 39,891.85 39,891.85 39,892.15 50.00 3Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3510 POST 15,000.00 2,880.75 2,880.75 12,119.25 19.21 3511 STC-Service Officer Training 7,162.00 3,162.50 3,162.50 3,999.50 44.16 3575 VLF Coll Excess of $14m-Rev code 11001.5 10,051.00 8,337.78 8,337.78 1,713.22 82.95 Total Intergovernmental/State 49.70 119,289.00 59,292.26 59,292.26 59,996.74 3800 Current Service Charges 3801 Residential Inspection 31,185.00 20,480.50 20,480.50 10,704.50 65.67 3802 Planning Sign Permit/Master Sign Program 16,120.00 6,885.00 6,885.00 9,235.00 42.71 3803 Negative Declaration 9,885.00 3,328.00 3,328.00 6,557.00 33.67 3804 General Plan Maintenance Fees 63,000.00 33,666.00 33,666.00 29,334.00 53.44 3805 Amendment to Planning Entitlement 16,965.00 13,252.00 13,252.00 3,713.00 78.11 3807 Refuse Lien Fees/Consolidated 0.00 10,136.86 10,136.86 -10,136.86 0.00 3808 Zone Variance Review 3,880.00 0.00 0.00 3,880.00 0.00 3809 Tentative Map Review 36,025.00 24,725.00 24,725.00 11,300.00 68.63 3810 Final Map Review 5,675.00 3,539.00 3,539.00 2,136.00 62.36 3811 Zone Change 3,705.00 0.00 0.00 3,705.00 0.00 3812 Conditional Use Permit - Comm/Other 15,633.00 6,072.50 6,072.50 9,560.50 38.84 3813 Plan Check Fees 384,954.00 304,045.20 304,045.20 80,908.80 78.98 3814 Appeal to City Council From Staff 1,086.00 1,086.00 1,086.00 0.00 100.00 3815 Public Works Services 60,000.00 29,215.50 29,215.50 30,784.50 48.69 3816 Utility Trench Service Connect Permit 58,000.00 19,372.00 19,372.00 38,628.00 33.40 3817 Address Change Request Fee 2,160.00 582.00 582.00 1,578.00 26.94 3818 Police Services 4,500.00 2,850.10 2,850.10 1,649.90 63.34 3819 Jail Services 7,000.00 6,105.87 6,105.87 894.13 87.23 4Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3821 Daily Permit Lot A/Parking Structure 66,000.00 37,079.01 37,079.01 28,920.99 56.18 3823 Special Event Security/Police 36,000.00 16,391.00 16,391.00 19,609.00 45.53 3824 500' Noticing 16,575.00 9,951.00 9,951.00 6,624.00 60.04 3825 Public Notice Posting 2,520.00 2,428.00 2,428.00 92.00 96.35 3827 Library Grounds Maintenance 14,517.00 14,516.70 14,516.70 0.30 100.00 3831 Non-Utility Street Excavation Permit 25,000.00 12,769.00 12,769.00 12,231.00 51.08 3833 Recreation Service Charges 12,000.00 60.00 60.00 11,940.00 0.50 3834 Encroachment Permit 260,000.00 104,447.38 104,447.38 155,552.62 40.17 3836 Refund Transaction Fee 750.00 330.00 330.00 420.00 44.00 3837 Returned Check Charge 1,000.00 385.00 385.00 615.00 38.50 3839 Photocopy Charges 1,000.00 500.60 500.60 499.40 50.06 3840 Ambulance Transport 550,000.00 327,931.25 327,931.25 222,068.75 59.62 3841 Police Towing 84,000.00 57,418.00 57,418.00 26,582.00 68.35 3842 Parking Meters 1,719,613.00 956,195.57 956,195.57 763,417.43 55.61 3843 Parking Permits-Annual 416,000.00 32,704.50 32,704.50 383,295.50 7.86 3844 Daily Parking Permits 1,500.00 8,488.00 8,488.00 -6,988.00 565.87 3845 Lot A Revenue 540,000.00 303,222.37 303,222.37 236,777.63 56.15 3846 No Pier Pkg Structure Revenue 730,000.00 415,559.35 415,559.35 314,440.65 56.93 3848 Driveway Permits 1,700.00 1,796.00 1,796.00 -96.00 105.65 3849 Guest Permits 2,200.00 1,551.00 1,551.00 649.00 70.50 3850 Contractors Permits 15,000.00 14,416.00 14,416.00 584.00 96.11 3851 Cash Key Revenue 10,000.00 5,339.50 5,339.50 4,660.50 53.40 3852 Recreation Program Transaction Fee 40,000.00 26,396.33 26,396.33 13,603.67 65.99 3856 500' - 2nd Noticing 1,500.00 500.00 500.00 1,000.00 33.33 5Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3857 Parking Plan Application 15,345.00 12,939.00 12,939.00 2,406.00 84.32 3858 Monthly Permit Lot A/Parking Structure 105,005.00 73,501.00 73,501.00 31,504.00 70.00 3861 Fire Alarm Sys Insp - New Installation 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 0.00 3862 Alarm Permit Fee 4,000.00 2,848.00 2,848.00 1,152.00 71.20 3867 Precise Development Plans 15,870.00 5,343.00 5,343.00 10,527.00 33.67 3868 Public Noticing/300 Ft Radius 9,689.00 6,659.00 6,659.00 3,030.00 68.73 3871 Passport Processing Fee 18,500.00 7,175.00 7,175.00 11,325.00 38.78 3872 Passport Photo Fee 3,000.00 950.00 950.00 2,050.00 31.67 3878 Fire Re-Inspections 1,000.00 166.00 166.00 834.00 16.60 3882 Special Event Fire Code Permit 4,000.00 1,256.00 1,256.00 2,744.00 31.40 3884 Lot Line Adjustment 3,555.00 375.00 375.00 3,180.00 10.55 3886 Text Amendment/Private 4,630.00 4,676.00 4,676.00 -46.00 100.99 3888 Slope/Grade Height Determination 6,465.00 2,715.75 2,715.75 3,749.25 42.01 3890 300 Ft Radius Noticing/Appeal to CC 225.00 225.00 225.00 0.00 100.00 3891 Appeal of Plng Comm Action to Council 1,805.00 0.00 0.00 1,805.00 0.00 3893 Contract Recreation Classes 400,000.00 279,634.35 279,634.35 120,365.65 69.91 3894 Other Recreation Programs 160,000.00 144,497.00 144,497.00 15,503.00 90.31 3895 Zoning Information Letters 260.00 261.00 261.00 -1.00 100.38 3896 Mailing Fee 20.00 3.00 3.00 17.00 15.00 3897 Admin Fee/TULIP Ins Certificate 1,400.00 1,217.45 1,217.45 182.55 86.96 3899 Condo - CUP/PDP 86,943.00 59,243.00 59,243.00 27,700.00 68.14 Total Current Service Charges 56.30 6,108,560.00 3,439,401.64 3,439,401.64 2,669,158.36 3900 Other Revenue 6Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3902 Refunds/Reimb Previous Years 203,645.00 218,610.79 218,610.79 -14,965.79 107.35 3903 Contributions Non Govt 23,375.00 23,375.00 23,375.00 0.00 100.00 3904 General Miscellaneous 171,937.00 175,908.44 175,908.44 -3,971.44 102.31 3907 Pkg Str Utility Reimb From Beach House 4,000.00 1,325.27 1,325.27 2,674.73 33.13 3908 Hermosa Sr Ctr Donations/Memberships 5,000.00 5,433.20 5,433.20 -433.20 108.66 3914 Planning EIR Admin Reimbursement 152,500.00 0.00 0.00 152,500.00 0.00 3920 BCHD Healthy Cities Fund 21,835.00 5,392.50 5,392.50 16,442.50 24.70 3938 Solid Waste Contract Admin Fee 50,000.00 25,000.02 25,000.02 24,999.98 50.00 3945 In-Serv Firefighter Trng Prog/El Camino 14,275.00 0.00 0.00 14,275.00 0.00 3955 Operating Transfers In 334,577.00 195,167.00 195,167.00 139,410.00 58.33 3960 Verizon PEG Grant 16,000.00 0.00 0.00 16,000.00 0.00 Total Other Revenue 65.21 997,144.00 650,212.22 650,212.22 346,931.78 6800 Current Service Charges Continued 6802 Sign Variance 2,785.00 0.00 0.00 2,785.00 0.00 6807 Planning Commission Interpretation 2,290.00 2,290.00 2,290.00 0.00 100.00 6809 Categorical Exemption 2,400.00 2,169.00 2,169.00 231.00 90.38 6810 Deed Restriction/Covenant Review 6,785.00 6,330.00 6,330.00 455.00 93.29 6811 Landscape Plan Review 1,515.00 303.00 303.00 1,212.00 20.00 6812 Planning Landscape Doc Package Review 695.00 0.00 0.00 695.00 0.00 6813 Preliminary Plan Review 675.00 272.00 272.00 403.00 40.30 6816 Traffic/Special Study Review 1,600.00 240.00 240.00 1,360.00 15.00 6825 Clean Bay Restaurant - NPDES Inspection 8,000.00 340.00 340.00 7,660.00 4.25 6828 Public Improvement Plan Check 15,000.00 12,684.00 12,684.00 2,316.00 84.56 7Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 6832 DUI Collision Response 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 0.00 6834 Citation Sign-off 2,720.00 1,560.00 1,560.00 1,160.00 57.35 6835 Taxicab Inspection 180.00 0.00 0.00 180.00 0.00 6836 Police Business Background Check 430.00 0.00 0.00 430.00 0.00 6837 Deceased Animal Pickup 100.00 150.00 150.00 -50.00 150.00 6839 Pet Home Quarantine Review 100.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 6840 Multiple Dog Review 100.00 101.00 101.00 -1.00 101.00 6841 Fire Sprinkler System Insp - New Install 1,180.00 0.00 0.00 1,180.00 0.00 6847 Document Certification 15.00 0.00 0.00 15.00 0.00 6849 Traffic Plan Review 1,186.00 289.00 289.00 897.00 24.37 6850 Annual Business Fire Inspection 40,000.00 1,870.00 1,870.00 38,130.00 4.68 6851 Busines Licenses State Mandated Fee 1,500.00 946.00 946.00 554.00 63.07 Total Current Service Charges Continued 29.77 99,256.00 29,544.00 29,544.00 69,712.00 15,703,453.42 17,904,920.58 17,904,920.58 33,608,374.00 53.28Total General Fund 8Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 9 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Lightg/Landscapg Dist Fund105 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3101 Current Year Secured 454,000.00 229,114.87 229,114.87 224,885.13 50.47 3103 Prior Year Collections 17,000.00 4,242.08 4,242.08 12,757.92 24.95 3105 Assessment Rebates -2,850.00 -1,058.23 -1,058.23 -1,791.77 37.13 Total Taxes 49.62 468,150.00 232,298.72 232,298.72 235,851.28 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 531.00 190.50 190.50 340.50 35.88 3450 Investment Discount 8.00 4.56 4.56 3.44 57.00 3475 Investment Premium -31.00 -20.19 -20.19 -10.81 65.13 Total Use Of Money & Property 34.42 508.00 174.87 174.87 333.13 3900 Other Revenue 3955 Operating Transfers In 52,031.00 30,352.00 30,352.00 21,679.00 58.33 Total Other Revenue 58.33 52,031.00 30,352.00 30,352.00 21,679.00 257,863.41 262,825.59 262,825.59 520,689.00 50.48Total Lightg/Landscapg Dist Fund 9Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 10 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 State Gas Tax Fund115 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 4,340.00 1,217.13 1,217.13 3,122.87 28.04 3450 Investment Discount 68.00 33.36 33.36 34.64 49.06 3475 Investment Premium -220.00 -110.59 -110.59 -109.41 50.27 Total Use Of Money & Property 27.22 4,188.00 1,139.90 1,139.90 3,048.10 3500 Intergovernmental/State 3501 Section 2106 Allocation 65,523.00 32,477.91 32,477.91 33,045.09 49.57 3502 Section 2107 Allocation 136,376.00 70,802.32 70,802.32 65,573.68 51.92 3503 Section 2107.5 Allocation 4,000.00 0.00 0.00 4,000.00 0.00 3512 Section 2105 (Prop 111) 91,599.00 43,366.68 43,366.68 48,232.32 47.34 3513 Sec 2103 Higher Mtr Veh Excise Tax(HUTA) 277,533.00 140,749.97 140,749.97 136,783.03 50.71 Total Intergovernmental/State 49.98 575,031.00 287,396.88 287,396.88 287,634.12 290,682.22 288,536.78 288,536.78 579,219.00 49.81Total State Gas Tax Fund 10Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 11 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 AB939 Fund117 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 213.00 8.09 8.09 204.91 3.80 3450 Investment Discount 3.00 0.55 0.55 2.45 18.33 3475 Investment Premium -10.00 -2.45 -2.45 -7.55 24.50 Total Use Of Money & Property 3.00 206.00 6.19 6.19 199.81 3800 Current Service Charges 3860 AB939 Surcharge 55,000.00 28,273.95 28,273.95 26,726.05 51.41 3874 Compost/Worm Bin 525.00 0.00 0.00 525.00 0.00 Total Current Service Charges 50.92 55,525.00 28,273.95 28,273.95 27,251.05 3900 Other Revenue Total Other Revenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6800 Current Service Charges Continued Total Current Service Charges Continued 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27,450.86 28,280.14 28,280.14 55,731.00 50.74Total AB939 Fund 11Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 12 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Prop A Open Space Fund121 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3600 Intergovernmental/County 3608 Maintenance Allocation 20,557.00 0.00 0.00 20,557.00 0.00 3631 South Park Phase I Improvements Grant 148,000.00 0.00 0.00 148,000.00 0.00 168,557.00 0.00 0.00 168,557.00 0.00Total Prop A Open Space Fund 12Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 13 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Tyco Fund122 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 3,065.00 1,572.08 1,572.08 1,492.92 51.29 3426 Easement Agreement 312,900.00 239,133.84 239,133.84 73,766.16 76.43 3450 Investment Discount 48.00 34.61 34.61 13.39 72.10 3475 Investment Premium -164.00 -93.66 -93.66 -70.34 57.11 75,202.13 240,646.87 240,646.87 315,849.00 76.19Total Tyco Fund 13Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 14 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Tyco Tidelands123 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 76.00 12.56 12.56 63.44 16.53 3450 Investment Discount 1.00 0.35 0.35 0.65 35.00 3475 Investment Premium -5.00 -1.08 -1.08 -3.92 21.60 60.17 11.83 11.83 72.00 16.43Total Tyco Tidelands 14Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 15 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3116 Parks & Recreation Facility Tax 7,019.00 7,019.00 7,019.00 0.00 100.00 Total Taxes 100.00 7,019.00 7,019.00 7,019.00 0.00 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 2,417.00 1,237.60 1,237.60 1,179.40 51.20 3450 Investment Discount 38.00 26.68 26.68 11.32 70.21 3475 Investment Premium -129.00 -74.47 -74.47 -54.53 57.73 Total Use Of Money & Property 51.15 2,326.00 1,189.81 1,189.81 1,136.19 3900 Other Revenue 3910 Park/Recreation In Lieu Fee 297,294.00 92,467.00 92,467.00 204,827.00 31.10 Total Other Revenue 31.10 297,294.00 92,467.00 92,467.00 204,827.00 205,963.19 100,675.81 100,675.81 306,639.00 32.83Total Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund 15Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 16 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Bayview Dr Dist Admin Exp Fund135 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 19.00 9.37 9.37 9.63 49.32 Total Use Of Money & Property 49.32 19.00 9.37 9.37 9.63 3900 Other Revenue 3925 Spec Assessment Admin Fees 4,350.00 4,350.00 4,350.00 0.00 100.00 Total Other Revenue 100.00 4,350.00 4,350.00 4,350.00 0.00 9.63 4,359.37 4,359.37 4,369.00 99.78Total Bayview Dr Dist Admin Exp Fund 16Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 17 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Lower Pier Admin Exp Fund136 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3900 Other Revenue 3925 Special Assessment Admin Fees 2,600.00 2,600.00 2,600.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 2,600.00 2,600.00 2,600.00 100.00Total Lower Pier Admin Exp Fund 17Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 18 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Myrtle Dist Admin Exp Fund137 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 140.00 62.90 62.90 77.10 44.93 Total Use Of Money & Property 44.93 140.00 62.90 62.90 77.10 3900 Other Revenue 3925 Special Assessment Admin Fees 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 0.00 100.00 Total Other Revenue 100.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 0.00 77.10 9,062.90 9,062.90 9,140.00 99.16Total Myrtle Dist Admin Exp Fund 18Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 19 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Loma Dist Admin Exp Fund138 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 190.00 86.24 86.24 103.76 45.39 Total Use Of Money & Property 45.39 190.00 86.24 86.24 103.76 3900 Other Revenue 3925 Special Assessment Admin Fees 10,000.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 100.00 Total Other Revenue 100.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 103.76 10,086.24 10,086.24 10,190.00 98.98Total Loma Dist Admin Exp Fund 19Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 20 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Beach Dr Assmnt Dist Admin Exp Fund139 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 24.00 11.86 11.86 12.14 49.42 Total Use Of Money & Property 49.42 24.00 11.86 11.86 12.14 3900 Other Revenue 3925 Special Assessment Admin Fees 3,000.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 0.00 100.00 Total Other Revenue 100.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 0.00 12.14 3,011.86 3,011.86 3,024.00 99.60Total Beach Dr Assmnt Dist Admin Exp Fund 20Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 21 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Community Dev Block Grant140 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3700 Intergovernmental/Federal 3720 Americans with Disabilities Act 70,059.00 0.00 0.00 70,059.00 0.00 70,059.00 0.00 0.00 70,059.00 0.00Total Community Dev Block Grant 21Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 22 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition A Fund145 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3117 Proposition A Transit 333,166.00 190,009.04 190,009.04 143,156.96 57.03 Total Taxes 57.03 333,166.00 190,009.04 190,009.04 143,156.96 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 3,413.00 1,779.13 1,779.13 1,633.87 52.13 3450 Investment Discount 54.00 39.03 39.03 14.97 72.28 3475 Investment Premium -184.00 -106.85 -106.85 -77.15 58.07 Total Use Of Money & Property 52.13 3,283.00 1,711.31 1,711.31 1,571.69 3800 Current Service Charges 3853 Dial-A-Taxi Program 5,300.00 3,330.00 3,330.00 1,970.00 62.83 3855 Bus Passes 1,000.00 574.80 574.80 425.20 57.48 Total Current Service Charges 61.98 6,300.00 3,904.80 3,904.80 2,395.20 147,123.85 195,625.15 195,625.15 342,749.00 57.08Total Proposition A Fund 22Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 23 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Proposition C Fund146 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3118 Proposition C Local Return 276,353.00 157,296.57 157,296.57 119,056.43 56.92 Total Taxes 56.92 276,353.00 157,296.57 157,296.57 119,056.43 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 5,851.00 2,920.91 2,920.91 2,930.09 49.92 3450 Investment Discount 92.00 64.28 64.28 27.72 69.87 3475 Investment Premium -310.00 -175.27 -175.27 -134.73 56.54 Total Use Of Money & Property 49.88 5,633.00 2,809.92 2,809.92 2,823.08 121,879.51 160,106.49 160,106.49 281,986.00 56.78Total Proposition C Fund 23Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 24 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Measure R Fund147 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3119 Measure R Local Return Funds 207,264.00 117,436.74 117,436.74 89,827.26 56.66 Total Taxes 56.66 207,264.00 117,436.74 117,436.74 89,827.26 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 4,098.00 1,543.44 1,543.44 2,554.56 37.66 3450 Investment Discount 64.00 37.66 37.66 26.34 58.84 3475 Investment Premium -213.00 -111.35 -111.35 -101.65 52.28 Total Use Of Money & Property 37.22 3,949.00 1,469.75 1,469.75 2,479.25 92,306.51 118,906.49 118,906.49 211,213.00 56.30Total Measure R Fund 24Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 25 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Grants Fund150 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3500 Intergovernmental/State 3558 Beverage Recycling Grant 10,817.00 5,547.00 5,547.00 5,270.00 51.28 3562 State Homeland Security Grant Program 75,000.00 0.00 0.00 75,000.00 0.00 Total Intergovernmental/State 6.46 85,817.00 5,547.00 5,547.00 80,270.00 3700 Intergovernmental/Federal 3732 STPL Street Improvement Reimb 235,178.00 235,178.00 235,178.00 0.00 100.00 3734 Solar Grant TBD/Energy Upgrades 55,000.00 0.00 0.00 55,000.00 0.00 3746 State Safe Routes to School (SR2S) 20,886.00 0.00 0.00 20,886.00 0.00 3748 Gen Plan/Coastal/Strat Growth Council 410,000.00 0.00 0.00 410,000.00 0.00 3749 SCE Rule 20A Funds/PCH Beautification 124,006.00 0.00 0.00 124,006.00 0.00 Total Intergovernmental/Federal 27.83 845,070.00 235,178.00 235,178.00 609,892.00 3900 Other Revenue Total Other Revenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 690,162.00 240,725.00 240,725.00 930,887.00 25.86Total Grants Fund 25Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 26 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Air Quality Mgmt Dist Fund152 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 982.00 266.33 266.33 715.67 27.12 3450 Investment Discount 15.00 7.08 7.08 7.92 47.20 3475 Investment Premium -52.00 -26.78 -26.78 -25.22 51.50 Total Use Of Money & Property 26.10 945.00 246.63 246.63 698.37 3500 Intergovernmental/State 3538 AQMD Emission Control AB2766 22,500.00 6,207.22 6,207.22 16,292.78 27.59 Total Intergovernmental/State 27.59 22,500.00 6,207.22 6,207.22 16,292.78 16,991.15 6,453.85 6,453.85 23,445.00 27.53Total Air Quality Mgmt Dist Fund 26Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 27 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Supp Law Enf Serv Fund (SLESF)153 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3135 C.O.P.S. Allocation 100,000.00 66,817.54 66,817.54 33,182.46 66.82 Total Taxes 66.82 100,000.00 66,817.54 66,817.54 33,182.46 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 1,420.00 657.92 657.92 762.08 46.33 3450 Investment Discount 22.00 14.56 14.56 7.44 66.18 3475 Investment Premium -74.00 -40.17 -40.17 -33.83 54.28 Total Use Of Money & Property 46.22 1,368.00 632.31 632.31 735.69 33,918.15 67,449.85 67,449.85 101,368.00 66.54Total Supp Law Enf Serv Fund (SLESF) 27Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 28 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Sewer Fund160 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 10,553.00 5,057.80 5,057.80 5,495.20 47.93 3450 Investment Discount 164.00 111.43 111.43 52.57 67.95 3475 Investment Premium -548.00 -299.09 -299.09 -248.91 54.58 Total Use Of Money & Property 47.89 10,169.00 4,870.14 4,870.14 5,298.86 3500 Intergovernmental/State 3550 CA Waste Oil Recycling Grant 5,689.00 0.00 0.00 5,689.00 0.00 Total Intergovernmental/State 0.00 5,689.00 0.00 0.00 5,689.00 3600 Intergovernmental/County 3602 Beach Outlet Maintenance 13,570.00 0.00 0.00 13,570.00 0.00 Total Intergovernmental/County 0.00 13,570.00 0.00 0.00 13,570.00 3800 Current Service Charges 3828 Sewer Connection Fee 21,000.00 13,010.00 13,010.00 7,990.00 61.95 3829 Sewer Demolition Fee 3,000.00 1,439.00 1,439.00 1,561.00 47.97 3832 Sewer Lateral Installation 12,000.00 3,322.00 3,322.00 8,678.00 27.68 Total Current Service Charges 49.36 36,000.00 17,771.00 17,771.00 18,229.00 3900 Other Revenue 3955 Operating Transfers In 1,019,149.00 594,503.00 594,503.00 424,646.00 58.33 Total Other Revenue 58.33 1,019,149.00 594,503.00 594,503.00 424,646.00 467,432.86 617,144.14 617,144.14 1,084,577.00 56.90Total Sewer Fund 28Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 29 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Asset Seizure/Forft Fund170 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3300 Fines & Forfeitures 3307 Department of Justice Forfeited Funds 36,000.00 0.00 0.00 36,000.00 0.00 3308 Department of Treasury Forfeited Funds 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 0.00 Total Fines & Forfeitures 0.00 37,000.00 0.00 0.00 37,000.00 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 3,023.00 1,342.26 1,342.26 1,680.74 44.40 3450 Investment Discount 47.00 30.18 30.18 16.82 64.21 3475 Investment Premium -158.00 -86.76 -86.76 -71.24 54.91 Total Use Of Money & Property 44.15 2,912.00 1,285.68 1,285.68 1,626.32 3900 Other Revenue Total Other Revenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38,626.32 1,285.68 1,285.68 39,912.00 3.22Total Asset Seizure/Forft Fund 29Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 30 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Fire Protection Fund180 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 282.00 85.83 85.83 196.17 30.44 3450 Investment Discount 4.00 2.08 2.08 1.92 52.00 3475 Investment Premium -15.00 -6.27 -6.27 -8.73 41.80 Total Use Of Money & Property 30.13 271.00 81.64 81.64 189.36 3900 Other Revenue 3912 Fire Flow Fee 10,500.00 6,668.37 6,668.37 3,831.63 63.51 Total Other Revenue 63.51 10,500.00 6,668.37 6,668.37 3,831.63 4,020.99 6,750.01 6,750.01 10,771.00 62.67Total Fire Protection Fund 30Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 31 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Capital Improvement Fund301 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 7,980.00 2,525.01 2,525.01 5,454.99 31.64 3450 Investment Discount 120.00 60.02 60.02 59.98 50.02 3475 Investment Premium -395.00 -200.42 -200.42 -194.58 50.74 Total Use Of Money & Property 30.95 7,705.00 2,384.61 2,384.61 5,320.39 3900 Other Revenue 3913 In-Lieu Fee/Street Pavement 10,150.00 6,775.00 6,775.00 3,375.00 66.75 Total Other Revenue 66.75 10,150.00 6,775.00 6,775.00 3,375.00 8,695.39 9,159.61 9,159.61 17,855.00 51.30Total Capital Improvement Fund 31Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 32 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Artesia Blvd Relinquishment302 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 133.00 0.00 0.00 133.00 0.00 3450 Investment Discount 2.00 0.15 0.15 1.85 7.50 3475 Investment Premium -4.00 -0.88 -0.88 -3.12 22.00 131.73-0.73-0.73 131.00 -0.56Total Artesia Blvd Relinquishment 32Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 33 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Bayview Dr Redemption Fund 2004-2609 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 1,048.00 462.17 462.17 585.83 44.10 585.83 462.17 462.17 1,048.00 44.10Total Bayview Dr Redemption Fund 2004-2 33Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 34 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Lwr Pier Dist Redemption Fund610 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 294.00 96.21 96.21 197.79 32.72 197.79 96.21 96.21 294.00 32.72Total Lwr Pier Dist Redemption Fund 34Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 35 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Beach Dr Assessment Dist Redemption Fund611 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 533.00 232.55 232.55 300.45 43.63 300.45 232.55 232.55 533.00 43.63Total Beach Dr Assessment Dist Redemption Fund 35Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 36 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Beach Dr Assessment Dist Reserve Fund612 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 63.00 18.33 18.33 44.67 29.10 44.67 18.33 18.33 63.00 29.10Total Beach Dr Assessment Dist Reserve Fund 36Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 37 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Myrtle Ave Assessment Fund617 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 695.00 289.08 289.08 405.92 41.59 405.92 289.08 289.08 695.00 41.59Total Myrtle Ave Assessment Fund 37Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 38 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Loma Drive Assessment Fund618 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 885.00 354.54 354.54 530.46 40.06 530.46 354.54 354.54 885.00 40.06Total Loma Drive Assessment Fund 38Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 39 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Bayview Dr Reserve Fund 2004-2619 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 159.00 60.20 60.20 98.80 37.86 98.80 60.20 60.20 159.00 37.86Total Bayview Dr Reserve Fund 2004-2 39Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 40 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Insurance Fund705 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3800 Current Service Charges 3880 Insurance Service Charges 2,700,092.00 1,575,063.00 1,575,063.00 1,125,029.00 58.33 Total Current Service Charges 58.33 2,700,092.00 1,575,063.00 1,575,063.00 1,125,029.00 3900 Other Revenue 3902 Refunds/Reimb Previous Years 108,177.00 34,886.59 34,886.59 73,290.41 32.25 3955 Operating Transfers In 903,168.00 526,848.00 526,848.00 376,320.00 58.33 Total Other Revenue 55.54 1,011,345.00 561,734.59 561,734.59 449,610.41 1,574,639.41 2,136,797.59 2,136,797.59 3,711,437.00 57.57Total Insurance Fund 40Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 41 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3800 Current Service Charges 3822 Building Maintenance Service Charges 101,555.00 59,234.00 59,234.00 42,321.00 58.33 3885 Comm Equip/Business Mach Charges 663,656.00 387,149.00 387,149.00 276,507.00 58.34 3889 Vehicle/Equip Replacement Charges 950,282.00 554,330.00 554,330.00 395,952.00 58.33 Total Current Service Charges 58.33 1,715,493.00 1,000,713.00 1,000,713.00 714,780.00 3900 Other Revenue 3903 Contributions Non Govt 0.00 1,750.00 1,750.00 -1,750.00 0.00 3911 Gain on Sale of Fixed Assets 0.00 11,730.00 11,730.00 -11,730.00 0.00 Total Other Revenue 0.00 0.00 13,480.00 13,480.00 -13,480.00 701,300.00 1,014,193.00 1,014,193.00 1,715,493.00 59.12Total Equipment Replacement Fund 41Page: 03/17/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 42 3:30PM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 1/31/2014 Periods: 1 through 7 Investment Fund900 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Total Investment Fund Grand Total 44,130,013.00 23,431,127.18 23,431,127.18 20,698,885.82 53.10 42Page: 1 ACTION SHEET AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1315 VALLEY DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 March 18, 2014 7:00 P.M. Peter Hoffman, Chairman Kent Allen, Vice Chairman Michael Flaherty Sam Perrotti Ron Pizer 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call. ALL PRESENT. 3. Oral / Written Communications - Anyone wishing to address the Commission regarding a matter not related to a public hearing on the agenda may do so at this time. a. Letter from Lucy Atkinson dated February 13, 2014. ACTION: RECEIVED AND FILED. Section I Consent Calendar 4. Approval of the February 18, 2014 action minutes ACTION: APPROVED (4-0; COMMISSIONER ALLEN ABSTAINED). 5. Resolution(s) for consideration - None Section II Public Hearing 6. CON 14-3 / PDP 14-3 -- Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 72604 for a two-unit residential condominium project at 1111 17th Street, and determination that the project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (continued from the February 18, 2014 meeting). Staff Recommended Action: To adopt the resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan, and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map subject to conditions, and determination that the project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ACTION: ADOPTED RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBJECT REQUEST WITH MODIFICATIONS (5-0). 2 Section III Hearing 7. CON 14-4 / PDP 14-4 / PARK 14-2 – Request to extend the expiration dates of a Precise Development Plan, Parking Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a 21-Unit commercial condominium project at 2101 Pacific Coast Highway. Staff Recommended Action: To adopt a Minute Order extending the expiration dates for a Precise Development Plan, Parking Plan, and Conditional Use Permit for a 21-unit commercial condominium by two years to March 14, 2016. ACTION: ADOPTED A MINUTE ORDER EXTENDING THE EXPIRATION DATES BY TWO YEARS TO MARCH 14, 2016 (3-2; COMMISSIONERS ALLEN AND PIZER NO). 8. C-36 – Semi-annual review and report on Conditional Use Permit compliance for on-sale alcoholic beverage establishments City wide. Staff Recommended Action: To receive and file the report. ACTION: CONTINUED TO APRIL 15, 2014 MEETING TO REVIEW POLICE INCIDENT REPORTS AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT DATA AND TO DISCUSS WHETHER TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS AND ENFORCEMENT (4-1; CHAIRMAN HOFFMAN NO). Section IV 9. Staff Items a. Purpose, Format and Procedures for April 2nd and 10th Meetings for Public Comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for E&B’s Proposed Oil Drilling and Production Project. b. Memorandum regarding rotation of the Planning Commission Chairmanship. c. Report on City Council actions. d. Report on comprehensive planning processes. e. Tentative future Planning Commission agenda. f. Community Development Department activity report of January, 2014. 10. Commissioner Items 11. Adjournment (to April 2, 2014) Page 1 of 5 MINUTES EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS ADVISORY COMMISSION MONDAY, JANUARY 6, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Hartley called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Jan Brittan led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Gila Katz, Alan Benson, Tracy Hopkins, Ken Hartley, William Hallett, George Schmeltzer STAFF: ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Hopkins • Planned power outage by SCE - reminder to have necessary emergency supplies, such as ice to save food in refrigerators. To find out about food safety visit www.SCE.com/foodsafety. Commissioner Katz suggested posting the information in the newspaper for advertisement to all residents. • Reminding residents to prepare for any emergency that may arise, such as the recent cold weather that the east coast is experiencing. Commissioner Hartley • Thanked Commissioner Russell for her time served on the commission. She has resigned from the commission due to her work schedule. Motion Schmeltzer, second by Hopkins to officially recognize Carol for her time served and dedication to the EPAC. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION None PRESENTATIONS 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE MEETING OF MARCH 4, 2013. Motion by Commissioner Katz to approve the minutes from the meeting of November 4, 2013 as written, seconded by Commissioner Hopkins. Vote: 4-0. Schmeltzer and Hartley abstained (they were not in attendance at the November 4, 2013 meeting). Page 2 of 5 1a. Rotation of Chairperson from Commissioner Hartley to Katz, and Rotation of Vice-Chair from Commissioner Hopkins to Schmeltzer. 2. MONTHLY E-NEWSLETTER ARTICLE - TIP OF THE MONTH. The following eNewsletter tips will be posted on the City's website: a. Tsunami Preparedness- Commissioner Hopkins reminded residents that since Hermosa Beach is located near the ocean there are parts that are vulnerable to possible tsunami. She reviewed tsunami warning tips. For more information visit www.conservation.california.gov and search “tsunami”. b. Water Purity- Commissioner Hopkins reviewed the process for cleaning water during an emergency. 3. REPORT BY WEBSITE SUBCOMMITTEE. Verbal report (Commissioner Benson). Commissioner Benson commented that the web pages have been forwarded to city staff for posting. A draft “under construction” page will be available for review at the next EPAC meeting. 4. AED UPDATE. Verbal report (Commissioner Hartley). Commissioner Hartley reported that an instructor has been found to conduct the CPR- AED training for city employees. The Risk Manager of the school district has confirmed that their training has been completed. 5. EPAC GOALS & OBJECTIVES. Discussion was held and the list below will be the focus goals and objectives for 2014: 1. Business Plan Advertisement - Commissioner Hopkins’ project. 2. Residential Plan Advertisement – Commissioners Schmeltzer & Hartley (working with Chamber of Commerce and City Manager Bakaly) 3. Capital Improvement – Police & Fire Facilities – Suggestions from EPAC to City Staff 4. Promotion of CodeRED – Suggestions from EPAC to City Staff 5. Use of eNews – Suggestions from EPAC to City Staff 6. Work with local newspapers – develop a schedule to advertise emergency preparedness information. Page 3 of 5 Commissioner Benson suggested getting the youth involved with emergency preparedness through social media, i.e. developing a contest to get the youth engaged and interested. A sub-committee consisting of commissioners’ Benson and Katz will form to develop a youth program. They will confer with Commissioner Hartley as needed. The project will be titled “Youth Virtual Preparedness”. Jeff Robinson will assist in the development of the plan. He will prepare an outline based on suggestions from the EPAC Commissioners. Jan Brittain suggested that once a plan is developed the commission approach the youth clubs such as the Cub Scouts and Circle K as “test” groups for participation. Commissioner Hopkins reminded all commissioners to get involved in other activities to promote preparedness in the city, e.g. she attends the monthly Chamber of Commerce networking luncheons and passes out emergency preparedness information. Commissioner Hartley suggested commissioners attend a city council meeting at which there may be many residents in attendance. This would be a great opportunity to register residents for CodeRED. Commissioner Katz commented that EPAC may attend other commissions’ meetings to explain EPACs roles and responsibilities. Commissioner Benson will attend a Planning Commission meeting. 6. REPORTS a. HERMOSA BEACH DISASTER SERVICES WORKERS (HBDSW) Jan Brittain reported that two major events occurred with the Neighborhood Watch group. One was a drill on 10/17/13 in conjunction with the ShakeOut drill. Sixteen workers, 16 students, along with the fire department and Red Cross participated. The second event was the ShakeOut drill on 10/24/13. Certificates are now available for HBDSW volunteers. The back of the certificate now tracks volunteer hours. Jan distributed certificates to those EPAC Commissioners who participated in the ShakeOut drill exercises. Chairperson Katz thanked Jan for all of her work with the HBDSW. Jan will be working with Jeff Robinson to develop CERT training. The next HBDSW meeting is January 24, 2014, 7pm in the EOC. For more information visit www.hbdsw.org Page 4 of 5 Jan commented that HBDSW is in need of Red Cross training. Chairperson Katz will contact the Red Cross. HBDSW is also in need of a trailer and a permanent storage container. Jan explained that currently the only place in the city for supplies is the school district and during an emergency the school is closed and the public is not allowed on campus. b. HERMOSA BEACH AMATEUR RADIO ASSOCIATION (HBARA REPORTAND EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOP UPDATE. Oral report from Commissioner Hartley, Founder HBARA. Commissioner Hartley reported that the HBARA took part in the ShakeOut event on 10/24/13. Information was tested and passed from Bard Ave. up to the EOC and then to the school. The Cub Scouts were given a “hands on” demonstration for HAM Radio operations. c. OFFICE OF DISASTER MANAGEMENT - AREA G REPORT (South Bay Area of Los Angeles County). - Oral Report from Jeff Robinson, Executive Director. Jeff Robinson reported that he is now serving on the Virtual Operations Support Team (VOST) coalition and support team. He is recruiting volunteers that are computer savvy or interested in learning computers and social media. Jeff has completed the Emergency Volunteer Training Center. There are classes available for those that have involvement in emergency preparedness. Sylvia Moreno will forward training information to all commissioners. Commissioner Katz suggested Jeff develop a training for the EPAC Commissioners and for other city staff that may be interested. Jeff will prepare a training and will deliver it at the May 5, 2014 EPAC meeting. d. FIRE CHIEF REPORT i. ICMA UPDATE No report – Chief Lantzer Absent e. POLICE CHIEF REPORT No report – Chief Papa absent Page 5 of 5 7. COMMISSION MEMBER REOUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. Commissioner Schmeltzer • Status of earthquake fault maps – and the need for an updated map. Jeff Robinson will send any legislation information to Sylvia Moreno who will then forward to commissioners. Jeff suggested focusing on an early warning alert system. Commissioner Katz • Consider water conservation due to the recent drought situation. 8. EPAC MEETING DATES Motion by Commissioner Schmeltzer, second by Commissioner Hartley to approve meeting dates for 2014 as submitted. Vote: 6-0. Note: The January 2015 meeting will be held the second Monday- January 12, 2015. 9. NEW EPAC CHAIRPERSON (see 1a.) 10. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Katz, second by Commissioner Hartley. Vote: 6-0 to adjourn to the meeting of March 3, 2014. Meeting adjourned at 8:40pm. From: Karen Anderson [mailto:kadelle@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 4:17 PM To: Hany@velascolawgroup.com Cc: City Clerk Subject: Re: City Council Meeting Tonight Hi Hany, Thanks so much for your time today. Feel free to share this. As a resident who shares a property line with the proposed new gym at 725 Cypress Avenue, I’m extremely concerned about noise. A Crossfit gym is not just any kind of gym. Crossfit is the most intense and structured of gyms and their workouts are designed to push their patrons’ bodies to the extreme. This is not a quite activity. Crossfit is known for their unconventional workouts and the passion from the people that work out there. They make an incredible amount of noise. Having a gym like this share its borders with personal residences, open-air, with no sound barrier of any kind, will produce excessive noise to those nearby. At the previous City Council meeting, there were comments about the auto body shop that was there previously (Rubio’s), and how a gym would be better than an auto body shop. This is incorrect. The auto body shop that was there did not produce any prolonged or repetitive sound of any kind. A Crossfit gym promises to do exactly this and for between 15 and 16 hours each day, seven days a week. Rubio’s was only open between 8am and 5pm Monday through Friday. They were closed on Saturdays and Sundays. The noise they would produce would be occasional. It was not continuous. It was not bothersome. A Crossfit gym will not produce occasional noise, but continuous and repetitive noise. It has already been stated that the potential new gym plans on offering classes every hour and plans to operate with the doors open from 8am to 10pm. If the gym is open from 6am to 10pm as was stated previously, this is 16 hours of constant noise that those living in close proximity will have to endure. Assuming we could get a full 8 hours of sleep a night, that would mean that every waking hour will be spent listening to the noise. Gyms produce all sorts of noise. Crossfit produces a greater amount of noise from their structured workouts. Chanting, counting, yelling, encouragement, weights dropping, music…these are all things we as neighbors will be hearing for 16 hours a day. Anyone can get a sample of what it will be like by visiting the Crossfit a mere 3 blocks away on 5th Street. They play music all day from open to close. They too keep their roll-away doors open all day and the music, classes, and weight machines can be plainly heard all the way down the street. This particular gym also drags barrels across the concrete ground. They incorporate tractor tires into their workout, flipping, dragging, and rolling them down the street. From personal accounts of residents that live across the street from the Crossfit on 5th, they absolutely hate the noise. In their situation, they have some (albeit not enough) open space between the gym and themselves which may dissipate some of the noise, whereas, we have zero space. The neighbors here share walls and property lines with the proposed gym. The other noise producing businesses on Cypress Avenue are all either indoors and/or do not share a border with residences. They are not a nuisance and do not produce long term audible noises. They don’t produce repetitive noises or excessively loud noises. They don’t play music all day. Very different from a gym that plans on operating noisy classes and workouts, consistently, all day, with its doors and windows open. I work from home, as do many people neighboring the 725 Cypress Ave lot. Not only will my personal home life be disturbed, but my work life as well. Our lives will be affected in more ways than one. If this Crossfit gym was an indoor only gym, the noise heard by neighbors would be significantly reduced. In the previous City Council meeting, there comparisons made to other gyms in Hermosa such as Anytime Fitness on the east side of PCH, The Yard on Hermosa Avenue, and 24 Hour Fitness on PCH. Anytime Fitness is completely indoors. Not comparable to what they are going to put in next door to us. The Yard and 24 Hour Fitness are also completely indoors. The noise produced by these gyms is minimal and not bothersome to residents as the workouts are performed indoors with windows and doors closed. Allowing an indoor/outdoor gym to operate for 16 hours a day when it shares its borders with residences is cruel. Furthermore, gym patrons do not come to Crossfit solely for the classes. They come early, before class, to warm up and stretch. They stay after to stretch, cool down, and talk with friends. They come to use the equipment and have personalized training sessions. Stating that the 15 minute window between classes will be used so people can arrive and leave on time just for their class, making parking plentiful, is misleading. This was something brought up in the last City Council meeting. Crossfit fans are passionate and extreme. They apply that same passion to their workouts. The intensity of this gym was downplayed a great deal in the last City Council meeting. As was the fact that these workouts will happen both indoors and outdoors (with the large bay doors open) for everyone to hear. Imagine having those passionate and extreme people working out next to your home all day, every day. It will be terrible. It’s not a question of “if” this new business will disturb neighbors. It will. Anyone can visit the Crossfit on 5th Street today and see what it will be like. There are multiple classes offered at the same time that span from 15 minutes to an hour and 15 minutes. The trainers wear headsets and their voices are projected over a speaker so everyone in their class can hear them. We will hear all of that. Even without headsets, trainer will need to be loud enough so that everyone can hear them. Music playing all day during these workouts is disturbing as well. All gyms operate with music playing. The difference is, most gyms are completely indoors where the music will not disturb those living next door. As residents of Hermosa Beach, we can experience the hustle and bustle of city life on Hermosa Ave, Pier Avenue, or the beach. We do this at will and can then return to our homes for a little bit of peace if we so choose. If this gym goes in next door, wall to wall with homes, we will have no sanctuary or place to go for quite. We only have one home. A business like this gym next door, specifically a Crossfit gym, will destroy the one quite place that we can go to find peace, our homes. Thank you for your consideration, Karen Anderson FINAL REPORT UPDATE OF PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (Citywide) 2014-2019 City of Hermosa Beach, CA March 4, 2014 100-21 March 4, 2014 Mr. Frank Senteno, P.E Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Subject: Final Report - Update of the Pavement Management Program Dear Frank: As part of the 2013-14 Update of the Pavement Management Program for the City of Hermosa Beach, Bucknam & Associates is pleased to submit the Final Report for the City’s pavement management program. The information contained in this report was used to develop the recommended improvement program for the pavement network. The report covers the following categories: Section I - Executive Summary Section II - Pavement Management Program Development and Reporting Section III - Pavement Conditions For Each Segment in the Network, PCI Report The Pavement Condition Index report shows the present condition of each street in the pavement network. In addition, the report shows the basic geometry of each street segment. Section IV - Forecast Maintenance Reports Recommended Maintenance and Repair (M&R) Strategies The recommended maintenance and repair strategies were used to generate the Forecasted Maintenance Report and were based on our 2013 inspections. Additionally, we have assessed and incorporated unit cost and maintenance application practices/types with our strategies. Projected Projects based on M&R Strategies The Forecasted Maintenance Report projects the street maintenance activities required for the next five years, broken down to show maintenance levels for Arterials and Local streets. The report included in this section is broken down by fiscal year. Our thorough analysis of previous and current Hermosa Beach PMP strategies enabled our staff to make proactive recommendations to the City’s pavement CIP. All comments received from the City have been incorporated in the reports that follow. All of the City’s issues and needs that were brought to our attention are included in the report. It has been a pleasure working with you and the City on updating your Pavement Management Program. We look forward to the continued success of this project and future teamwork with City staff. Sincerely, Bucknam & Associates Peter J. Bucknam Project Manager Infrastructure Management – GIS Services City of Hermosa Beach Page i 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary II. Pavement Management System-Capital Improvement Program A. Summary of PMP Project B. Arterial Budget Scenario C. Local Budget Scenario D. Condition Distribution Report III. Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Reports A. PCI Map B. A to Z Order C. PCI Order IV. Forecast Maintenance Report A. Arterial (2014-2019) B. Local (2014-2019) City of Hermosa Beach Page ii 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Table and Figure Reference Page # Figure 1 – Pavement Area by Rank Sec 1-2 Figure 2 – PCI Condition Distribution by Miles for All Streets Sec 1-5 Figure 3 – Sample Pavement Life Cycle Sec 2-3 Figure 4 – Resulting Network PCI & Budget Expenditures (Actual Budget) Sec 2-7 Figure 5 – Resulting Network PCI & Budget Expenditures (Maintain Budget) Sec 2-9 Figure 6 – Arterial Condition Distribution Sec 2-15 Figure 7 – Local Condition Distribution Sec 2-15 Table 1 – Condition Distribution by Mileage for AC Streets Sec 1-3 Table 2 – Condition Distribution by Mileage for PCC Streets Sec 1-3 Table 3 – Condition Distribution by Mileage for All Streets Sec 1-4 Table 4 – Citywide Projection Utilizing “Actual” Budget ($720k/yr) Sec 1-9 Table 5 – Five-Year Projection Demonstrating Required Budget to Maintain PCI of 74 Sec 1-9 Table 6 – PCI Range Sec 2-2 Table 7 – Maintenance Strategy Assignments Sec 2-2 Table 8 – Citywide Projection Utilizing “Actual” Budget ($720k/yr) Sec 2-6 Table 9 – Five-Year Projection Demonstrating Required Budget to Maintain PCI of 74 Sec 2-8 Acronym Listing Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) American Public Works Associations (APWA) American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Geographic Information System (GIS) Government Accounting Standards Board Statement 34 (GASB 34) Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (METRO) Maintenance and Repair (M&R) Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Pavement Management Program (PMP) Pavement Management System (PMS) City of Hermosa Beach Page 1 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I SECTION I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2014 UPDATE OF PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM As the City of Hermosa Beach continues to show modest growth with its population, demographics, infrastructure and maintenance needs, the street network has been running parallel as the system matures and capital street projects widen and lengthen streets. The City of Hermosa Beach developed its Pavement Management System (PMS) in 2004 with the use of an automated database program. Today, the City is using the Army Corps of Engineers software, MicroPAVER, to manage the street network. This system is essential to the City in that it assists Public Works staff in capturing funding for its arterial street system as well as cost-effectively manages the local network through proactive maintenance and scheduling. Under this project, the City has incorporated the development of a unique Pavement Management – GIS layer that will assist the City in spatially analyzing pavement conditions and other attribute information that resides in the MicroPAVER database. The Hermosa Beach PMS has been developed to assist City personnel by providing current data on the City’s street network and to develop cost-effective maintenance strategies to maintain a desirable level of pavement performance on a network scale, while optimizing the expenditure of limited fiscal resources. The PMP efforts in 2013-14 consisted of analyzing the City’s 2012 PMS datasets for quality and usability. City staff also provided key information pertaining to the ongoing maintenance that has occurred throughout the City since 2012. In doing this, we were tasked to generate an updated Capital Improvement Program report that identified recommendations and deficiencies in the current operating and maintenance efforts put forth by the City. For the 2014 project, our staff surveyed all arterial routes to assist the City in complying with Los Angeles County MTA (METRO) PMP requirements as well as surveyed all local streets and analyzed historical maintenance operations. Specifically, the program provides administrators and maintenance personnel with: The present condition status of the pavement network (arterial and local streets), as a whole and of any grouping or individual component within the City; A ranked list of all streets, or segments of streets, by condition within the network; Rehabilitation/maintenance needs of each street segment by year; An optimized priority maintenance and rehabilitation program based on cost/benefit analysis and various levels of funding; Optimum annual budget levels for pavement maintenance for the current and the following five (5) years; Prediction of the future performance of the City’s pavement network and each individual street section; City of Hermosa Beach Page 2 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I Updated PMS data to assist the City with GASB 34 compliance; and Pavement condition data and analysis presented in ArcGIS that is compatible with City’s existing GIS Pavement is a dynamic structure where deterioration is constantly occurring; thus the pavement management system needs to be updated on a regular basis to reflect these changes in pavement conditions, pavement maintenance histories, and maintenance strategies based upon budgetary constraints. This report reflects the current state of the City’s pavement network and recommended maintenance strategies for the next five (5) years. CITY’S PAVEMENT NETWORK Within the Hermosa Beach pavement management network there are approximately 17.5 miles of Arterial streets. The Arterial network consists of approximately 3,050,584 SF of pavement which consists of 167 pavement sections. The Local network consists of approx. 3,791,818 SF of pavement which consists of 368 pavement sections totaling in 29.7 centerline miles. The Alley network consists of approx. 33,873 SF of pavement which consists of 10 sections totaling 0.5 miles. Combined, the entire network consists of 47.7 miles of streets. The City’s pavement network is broken down into manageable groups that have similar characteristics, such as pavement rank, surface type and logical segmentation. Pavement segments are identified by their branch and section numbers. Pavement “branches” that have a common usage, such as Hermosa Avenue, defines a “branch” within MicroPAVER. Pavement “sections” are pavement segments within the defined branch that have consistent pavement rankings, construction/maintenance histories and use. Representative inspection samples are then selected and visually surveyed to locate distress data. This data is used to calculate the pavement sections Pavement Condition Index (PCI) which includes distress type, extent of the distress and its severity. The PCI is a condition rating that ranges from 100 (a new pavement section or recently overlaid or reconstructed) to 0 for a section that has structurally failed and deteriorated dramatically. Weighted average PCI of a given area/zone = pavement section PCI * its own area divided by the total square footage of the given area/zone. Table 1 summarizes the section conditions found within the City of Hermosa Beach pavement network by rank. Figure 1 City of Hermosa Beach Page 3 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I The weighted average PCI for the City of Hermosa Beach Arterial network is 77.9 The weighted average PCI for the City of Hermosa Beach Local network is 72.1 The weighted average PCI for the City of Hermosa Beach Alley network is 41.2 The weighted PCI value associated with the Arterial and Local routes shown through our survey analysis is timely in that it is showing that a large amount of preventative, slurry seal, and overlay work will be needed over the next several years to increase the level of condition (PCI) to a “preventative maintenance” state. CURRENT CITYWIDE CONDITIONS (ARTERIALS AND LOCALS) The overall condition of the City’s pavement network is “Fair” with a weighted average PCI of 74.6 based on the surface area of each segment. The distribution of the City’s overall pavement network is shown in Section III of this report (Condition Distribution). For comparison, Bucknam & Associates performed pavement management studies for several other Los Angeles County agencies and have included their weighted PCI values; El Segundo (63.4), Culver City (62.9), Lomita (59.2), and Huntington Park (60.1). Table 1 – Condition Distribution by Mileage for Asphalt Concrete (AC) Streets Table 2 – Condition Distribution by Mileage for Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Streets City of Hermosa Beach Page 4 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I Table 3 – Condition Distribution by Mileage for All Streets As shown above, a large majority of segments are distributed through Fair to Very Good condition categories (81%, approximately 38.3 miles). These findings indicate that the proper maintenance has been performed on the pavement network for some time. These condition ranges are defined by the Army Corps of Engineers. With 89% of the City’s Arterial pavement sections within the condition levels of “Fair to Very Good” (approximately 15.5 miles), a proactive preventative / slurry seal maintenance program needs to be implemented and funded; this will maintain the citywide weighted PCI at its current conditions and will gradually increase the PCI to a higher condition level while reducing maintenance costs in fiscal years 2016 and beyond. Local conditions show that 76% of the pavement network is within the condition levels of “Fair to Very Good” (approximately 22.8 miles). The remaining 25% of the Local network should be considered for Cape Seal and overlay maintenance; this accounts for approximately 7.3 miles of streets. The City should consider implementing a zone maintenance approach that will focus maintenance efforts, on an annual basis, within a small geographic area thus improving specific areas of the City over the next five years. On a positive note, the Arterial network is showing higher condition levels compared to the Local network; there are only a handful of key overlay projects that should be proactively managed in the next few years of the Arterial Streets CIP. This is clear by looking at the number of arterial sections that fall within the Poor to Very Poor condition categories (approximately 2.0 miles of the 17.5 mi., which accounts for approx. 11% of the arterial network). Over the next five years it will be essential to sustain the Arterial network at a manageable PCI level To accomplish this, key preventative, stop gap, slurry seal and overlay projects are scheduled within the City’s forecasted maintenance report (Section IV); these streets include: o Ardmore, Hermosa, Manhattan, Monterey, Prospect and Valley These findings are positive in that the amount of revenue to maintain the network is not overbearing or detrimental to the system as a whole. Cost efficient preventative maintenance should be the focus of the Arterial PMP for the next several years. City of Hermosa Beach Page 5 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I The Local network needs to receive additional proactive Cape Seal and overlay maintenance in the short-term (FY 2014 thru 2019); after that a stronger slurry seal program can be put in place to maintain the asset. Furthermore, as large overlay and rehabilitation projects are considered for funding, the City should also consider using sub-grade R - Values, structural design, distress severities and extents as parameters for determining whether a pavement section that lies within the Fair to Poor condition range should be overlaid or reconstructed. PCI conditions reflect “surface” conditions; additional sub-surface data such as coring data, R-Values and asphalt depths will provide City to with a better approach to the maintenance that should be applied. Figure 2 – PCI Condition Distribution by Miles for All Streets Units shown above indicate total mileage (Table 3) MAINTENANCE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT Based on the results of the condition survey and input from the City, pavement maintenance/rehabilitation strategies were developed. At the outset, the City and Bucknam & Associates staff identified a distribution of City maintenance funds that would be applied to the network over the next five to seven years. This was based upon the desire to prevent the decrease in street conditions and not allow an increase in the maintenance backlog funds over the five/seven-year program. City of Hermosa Beach Page 6 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I With this approach, Bucknam & Associates has recommended a “minimal level of service” which creates a major dividing line in determining pavement maintenance. Generally within pavement management programs, a PCI range between 55 to 70 determines the threshold of when preventative or major overlay maintenance is activated. Based on the City’s weighted average PCI, condition distribution, maintenance practices, our team has identified a PCI of “65” as the minimum level of service. This means that any pavement section with a PCI greater than 65 will be recommended for preventative maintenance. This recommendation is indicated in Table 7, Section II. Bucknam & Associates developed a multi-year Capital Improvement Program for the City based on the pavement records, yearly capital expenditures and the most recent 2013 inspections. These recommendations and results are shown in Section II of this report where we have demonstrated what level of funding is necessary to improve the current weighted condition level of 74 to a level of 77 by FY 2019. As shown in Figure 2, 81% of the City’s streets are in Very Good to Fair condition. These sections will be targeted for “preventive” maintenance within our Capital Improvement Program (CIP) recommendations. The reasoning in doing this is to extend the life cycles of those “fair/good” pavement sections which accrues capital saving to aggressively rehabilitate those pavement sections that are below the “minimal level of service”. In order to achieve the most effective and optimum program for the City, certain strategies have been selected and/or analyzed. Below is a listing of the maintenance activities utilized in strategy development. Each activity is representative of the types of work that have been programmed as part of the long-term maintenance requirements of the City’s street network. General Repairs-Stop Gap (Localized Maintenance*) For this maintenance type, small localized surface treatments are utilized as “holding action” solutions (stop gaps) to delay the need for pavement structural strengthening. They typically include activities such as crack sealing, deep patching, skin patching, grinding and leveling. Slurry Seals (Global Maintenance*) Surface treatments applied to pavements with minimal surface distress to provide new wearing surfaces and extend pavement life. Generally consists of a mixture of conventional or latex- modified emulsified asphalt, well-graded fine aggregate, mineral filler and water placed over an existing AC surface. Cape Seals (Global Maintenance*) This is an application of a single layer of asphalt binder to a road surface immediately followed by a single layer of cover aggregate (chips). The single layer chip seal is then followed with a slurry seal application. City of Hermosa Beach Page 7 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I Leveling Courses (Global Maintenance*) The existing pavement should be made as smooth as possible before being overlaid. It is difficult to make up elevation differences or smooth out ruts by varying overlay thickness. For flexible overlays, Hot-mix asphalt (HMA) tends to differentially compact; a rule of thumb is that conventional mixes will compact approximately 6 mm per 25 mm (0.25 inches per 1 inch) of uncompacted thickness. Therefore, before applying the final surface course the existing pavement is typically leveled by one or both of the following methods: 1. Applying a leveling course (HMA pavements). The first lift applied to the existing pavement is used to fill in ruts and make up elevation differences. The top of this lift, which is relatively smooth, is used as the base for the wearing course. 2. Milling (HMA pavements). A top layer is milled off the existing pavement to provide a relatively smooth surface on which to pave. Milling is also commonly used to remove a distressed surface layer from an existing pavement. 3. Diamond Grinding (PCC pavements). A thin top layer can be milled off of an existing pavement to smooth out relatively small surface distortions prior to flexible or rigid overlay. Overlays (Major Maintenance*) AC Overlay – Placement of a layer of hot-mixed asphalt concrete over the existing pavement surface (may include pavement fabric). Grinding (milling) is performed prior to the overlay to reduce the total height of asphalt and assure alignment with existing gutter lines. This also includes “dig-outs” and crack sealing prior to the application of an overlay. This treatment provides a new wearing surface and increased structural strength to the pavement section. A conventional overlay should be designed for a ten-year life. AC Over PCC – Placement of a layer of hot-mixed asphalt concrete over the existing PCC surface. Includes grinding, leveling course, joint sealing and localized repairs prior to AC overlay. Asphalt Rubber Hot-Mix Overlay - The ASTM definition is: Asphalt-Rubber is a blend of asphalt cement, reclaimed tire rubber and certain additives in which the rubber component is at least 15% by weight of the total blend and has reacted in the hot asphalt cement sufficiently to cause swelling of the rubber particles. Specifically, using crumb rubber modified binders in pavement application benefit local agencies in that cities find: Pavement resists cracking by being more flexible; Cost savings come from a longer life cycle (from Bucknam’s experience typically 20% longer), decreased maintenance and the use of less material Improvement in skid resistance; Decreased noise; and It provides long-lasting color contrast for marking and striping City of Hermosa Beach Page 8 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I Reconstruction (Major Maintenance*) Removal of the existing pavement section to a prescribed depth followed by the placement of a conventional flexible pavement section using a structural AC Hot Mix or AR Hot Mix or a full depth asphalt. Each classification of road has a typical design cross-section upon anticipation traffic loading. *Localized, Global and Major maintenance activities are default terms used within the MicroPAVER pavement software. Specific pavement repair applications are placed within each maintenance activity in order to develop multi-year maintenance forecast recommendations. City of Hermosa Beach Page 9 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I ANNUAL BUDGET PROJECTIONS The budgeting process was approached with the following in mind; generate two unique work programs for the next five (5) years based upon actual road pavement conditions in order to: 1. Demonstrate how the City’s current “Actual” budget allocation for pavement maintenance performs against the conditions found through our surveys 2. Recommend a proactive annual budget that, at a minimum, maintains the current weighted PCI on the network Based on current and future pavement maintenance needs, two annual work programs have been prepared and summarized below. Table 4 demonstrates the citywide five-year, $720,000 per year work program. Table 5 demonstrates the recommended budget that is needed to maintain the current weighted PCI on the network (each scenario addresses arterial and local streets). Table 4 – Citywide Projection Utilizing “Actual” Budget ($720k/yr) Table 5 – Five-Year Projection Demonstrating Required Budget to Maintain PCI of 74 Additional detail and breakdown of the Table 4 budget projections are demonstrated in Section IV of this report. All work program budgets generated are presented in terms of current 2014 dollars. All repair activities were based on distresses observed at the time of field survey. These are recommendations and are to be used as “the best case scenario” for improving the City of Hermosa Beach street network. City of Hermosa Beach Page 10 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I QUALITY CONTROL EFFORTS As indicated in our scope of work, Bucknam & Associates performed numerous quality control checks in the field during survey efforts as well as specific data analysis with the existing 2012 Hermosa Beach MicroPAVER database. Field check efforts were performed at the end of each week of survey. During in-house and field operations, we came across numerous issues with the previous databases. These included incorrect pavement section widths, lengths and true areas; these were corrected through our field inspections. No previous inspection data was provided through the previous consultant; our staff incorporated the necessary survey and sampling data to generate accurate and reliable PCI’s. Through our internal quality control efforts, we believe we have found all the necessary publicly owned streets that needed to be reported on under this project. Minor area adjustments for specific pavement sections were made by our field technicians in order to create a more accurate network. City of Hermosa Beach Page 11 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Arterials The actual workload requirements identified indicate that the Arterial street network is currently in “Good” condition. To maintain this condition, it is critical that preventive maintenance and overlay activities are funded at the levels identified in Table 2 and the reports in Section IV to maintain a very good network weighted average PCI value. Our arterial findings for conditional data and recommendations for revenue expenditures are shown below: The Arterial network has a weighted PCI of 77.9; Currently, 9% of the arterial network (approx. 1.58 miles) qualify for overlay/reconstruction maintenance; Arterial maintenance projects should focus on maintaining the current weighted PCI of 77.8 over the next five years; Develop a proactive fiscal and planned approach to identify arterial overlay projects based on the deterioration modeling within MicroPAVER; Maintain arterial revenues at the levels shown within the Section IV Forecasted Maintenance Report for a minimum of five to seven years to generate the results identified within this report. Reassess/re-evaluate the arterial rehabilitation budget program every two years to improve on CIP forecasts for 2014-15 and beyond to ensure the results shown in Table 4 or 5; Perform pavement inspections on the arterial network every two years to build a solid planning model within MicroPAVER to track PCI deterioration. Demonstrated budgets shown in Table 4 & 5 are ample enough to maintain the arterial weighted PCI of 77.8 through five years, Bucknam & Associates recommends that the City proactively budget pavement maintenance at the levels shown in Table 4 in order to improve upon the conditions found today City of Hermosa Beach Page 12 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section I Locals Our Local findings for conditional data and recommendations for revenue expenditures are shown below: The Local network has a weighted PCI of 72.1 (was 68.7 in 2012; Currently, 25% of the Local network (approx. 7.3 miles) qualify for overlay/reconstruction maintenance; Local maintenance projects should focus on increasing the current weighted PCI of 72.1 above the level of 75 over the next five years; Develop a proactive fiscal and planned approach to identify Local overlay projects based on the deterioration modeling within MicroPAVER; Increase Local revenues at the levels shown within the Section IV Forecasted Maintenance Report for a minimum of five years to generate the results identified within this report. Reassess/re-evaluate the Local rehabilitation budget program every two years to improve on budget forecasts for 2014-15 and beyond to ensure the results shown in Tables 4 or 5; Perform pavement inspections on the Local network every three years to build a solid planning model within MicroPAVER to track PCI deterioration (1/3 of the City each year); Demonstrated budgets shown in Tables 4 or 5 are ample enough to increase the Local weighted PCI; proactive funding needs to be implemented and continued through FY 2018 to see these results. City of Hermosa Beach Page 1 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II SECTION II PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Bucknam & Associates performed the following services in accordance with the scope of services that was contracted with the City of Hermosa Beach. As a quick overview, the following tasks were performed to complete the work over the past several months: 2013-14 Pavement Management Work Efforts: Task 1: Project Kickoff-Data Management Task 2: Update of Maintenance Activities Task 3: Pavement Condition Survey (approx. 16 miles – 1/3 of the network) Task 4: Budgetary Analysis and Capital Improvement Reports Task 5: Executive Summary and Final CIP Reports Task 6: Mapping of the Pavement Network Pavement Management Update 2014 As a part of the 2014 update of the pavement management system, a major element of work was to complete a comprehensive assessment of the existing street network and PMS database within the City. This included assessing the City’s existing 2012 MicroPAVER database, existing GIS-Pavement layer, street naming conventions and work history information. From there, Bucknam & Associates worked with the City to confirm public and private street listings which set the foundation for accurate CIP reporting. All data was then converted into the City’s new MicroPAVER database. Work history information was provided by the City in the form of completed bid documents, institutional knowledge, and previous dataset and Excel documents. This information was entered into the proper pavement segments that match the limits of those projects. From there, CIP pavement recommendations were performed (discussed and demonstrated below) where the pavement maintenance information the City provided (PMS material practices, unit costs, and capital budgets) were used to generate recommendations through the MicroPAVER system. Table 6 demonstrates PCI ranges defaulted within MicroPAVER. Once a pavement inspection is complete, a PCI is calculated for each pavement section. Each PCI calculated falls within a defined PCI range category (Very Good, Very Poor, etc.). Furthermore, a weighted PCI was calculated for the each functional class within the network (arterials and locals). The PCI is a condition rating that ranges from 100 (a new pavement section or recently overlaid or reconstructed) to 0 for a section that has structurally failed and deteriorated dramatically. Weighted average PCI of a given area/zone = pavement section PCI multiplied by its own area divided by the total square footage of the given area/zone. This information can also be represented through MicroPAVER to show how much square footage or percentage of area falls within a PCI range category. City of Hermosa Beach Page 2 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II PCI RANGE CONDITION 86-100 Very Good 75-85 Good 60-74 Fair (Hermosa Beach Network 2014 = 74.6) 41-59 Poor 0-40 Very Poor Table 6 - PCI Range These condition ranges are defined by the Army Corps of Engineers and defaulted within the MicroPAVER software. The summary of all roads condition data and their representative PCI's can be seen in the Pavement Condition Report in Section III. STRATEGY ASSIGNMENT TABLE Once the appropriate activities from the above listings were selected by the City, a Maintenance Strategy Table was defined within the system that allocated the appropriate actions to the specific repair needs of the street. In defining the maintenance strategy list, emphasis was placed on defining pavement condition thresholds and using the PCI for the specific maintenance activities within these categories. Strategy Assignment Table Table 7 – Maintenance Strategy Assignments The Strategy Assignments List, shown in Table 7, was developed to identify the most critical segments in each of the work programs (Arterial and Local). Segment priorities were established by determining the range of PCI's requiring first attention based on the relative value of each segment’s PCI, thus maximizing the annual maintenance budget. Also, distress quantity, area extent, type and severity were critical elements in the decision process for recommending maintenance. City of Hermosa Beach Page 3 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II The assignment table is used as a guide within MicroPAVER to recommend maintenance, however, further assessment by City staff and/or outside parties can override maintenance recommendations. This can be done by reviewing and assessing distress extents and their weighted percentages. Once the strategy assignments were set within the system, budgets and work assignments were generated for each work program on an annual basis. Using pavement deterioration curves for each type of pavement surface and class of road, both current year and future years work requirements for each pavement segment within the City were determined. In forecasting the maintenance requirements in future years, the current PCI value is reduced annually for each pavement segment based on the MicroPAVER deterioration curves within the City’s database. Likewise, maintenance activities performed in a given year increase the PCI value as they are applied to the segment. The overall program is dynamic in that each strategy consists of a cyclic series of actions that simulates the pavement anticipated life cycle. Figure 3 – Sample Pavement Life Cycle City of Hermosa Beach Page 4 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II MULTI-YEAR ANNUAL WORK PROGRAM PROJECTIONS The goal of these projections is to assist City policy makers in utilizing the recommendations of the MicroPAVER system. By using the City of Hermosa Beach’s current budgets and maintenance practices the system will develop “section unique” improvements and strategies. Each segment will be tied to a specific fiscal year. As shown in the following pages, we have assessed the budgets that have been projected to meet the maintenance and rehabilitations needed to maximize the City’s return on investment. The budget forecasting goal for the City network focused on: Establishing a proactive multi-year Maintenance & Rehabilitation Program; Developing a preventive maintenance program; and Selecting the most cost-effective repairs based on City strategies ACTUAL BUDGET – The Actual budget was generated for the City to demonstrate how the limited $720k / yr budget allocation performs against the current citywide conditions. City’s Actual budget includes: o $150,000 – General Fund o $470,000 – State Gas Tax o $100,000 – Measure R MAINTAIN BUDGET – A Maintain budget was generated for the City to demonstrate the necessary funding that is required to maintain the current weighted PCI level of 74.6 through a five year model. *All multi-year budget projections include a 3% inflation rate for the term of the budget forecast. City of Hermosa Beach Page 5 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II ARTERIAL / LOCAL BUDGET PROJECTIONS City of Hermosa Beach Page 6 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II ACTUAL – The first key step in developing a proactive PMP is to model the City’s existing conditions against the “actual” annual budget. In doing this, PCI performance, deferred maintenance and pavement application uses are able to be benchmarked and demonstrated in a positive or negative result. The City’s existing $720,000 / yr budget was used for this model; the City provided Bucknam with current 2014 unit costs for pavement maintenance applications. City’s Actual budget includes: o $150,000 – General Fund o $470,000 – State Gas Tax o $100,000 – Measure R The resulting PCI conditions and maintenance distributions are shown below. Bucknam & Associates worked with the City’s Public Works staff to review previous methodologies and schedules applied by the City. The City also provided information on the current work schedules and yearly goals for asphalt applications. With this scenario, our initial goal is to provide the City with a budgetary outlook and conditional impact report that can be used to eventually create a solid, preventative maintenance program. ACTUAL BUDGET PROGRAM Actual Budget Program incorporates pavement sections that have a functional class of Arterial (A), Collector (C) and Locals (E). Table 8 – Citywide Projection Utilizing “Actual” Budget ($720k/yr) By modeling the existing pavement conditions against the City’s available funding, we have found that two major positive results occur over the five year CIP (See Figure 4 on the following page). First, the weighted PCI for the entire network increases from a level of 74.6 to a level 77.7 over the five year CIP. Secondly, the resulting deferred maintenance backlog show that it decreases from $5.3 million to $4.1 million after the five year program which indicates that an annual $720,000 budget is ample enough to improve upon the deferred maintenance (or backlog of maintenance) on the network. The current budget allocation is allowing the necessary arterial and local cape seal / overlay projects to be completed; this in turn reduces a potential high amount of maintenance to latter years of the CIP thus decreasing the costs of maintenance. Combining these positive results with the weighted PCI we recommend that this five- year maintenance schedule be followed and used as a guide for pavement improvements through FY 2018. City of Hermosa Beach Page 7 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II This situation is good for the City in that with a continued proactive slurry seal / cape seal program combined with strategic and timely overlays the City will be in a “preventative” state of condition. This equates to lower cost maintenance and proactive management of Hermosa streets and right-of-ways. As shown, this projection model does meet the initial goal of maintaining or increasing the City’s pavement network PCI. With today’s economic issues at the Federal, State and local levels; the City should continuously monitor the management of overlay deferred maintenance. The potential delay in projects and the resulting build up of more overlay work in the five-year time frame is not a debt that City will want to accept. Through Bucknam & Associates analysis of the previous pavement database, work history dates and our experience with AC Overlay deterioration rates, it is important to point out that pavement sections that were overlaid in the early 2000’s to fiscal year 2003 will need proper overlay maintenance approximately around fiscal year 2015-16 and beyond. Figure 4 – Resulting Network PCI and Budget Expenditures (Actual Budget) The resulting “increase of the weighted PCI” for the entire network demonstrates how applying proper funds to the network is preventing the City’s pavement from deteriorating at a rate that is not conducive to a PMP success. Based on available funding or programmed funding identified by the City’s long-term CIP, there may be an opportunity to proactively schedule or appropriate funds to areas of the City that City of Hermosa Beach Page 8 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II have been annually deferred due to high maintenance costs. Additionally, the City should continue to implement local, stop gap maintenance (i.e. deep patching, crack sealing, etc.) prior to any major slurry seal or overlay maintenance. By performing stop gap measures to individual pavement sections the overall performance of the sections condition will increase and sustain itself longer than if no preventative maintenance was performed. MAINTAIN PCI PROGRAM (FIVE YEAR MODEL) With the City striving to show proactive maintenance across all City pavements, a budget program was generated to show the greatest return on investment through the application of slurry seal, mill & cap, and alternative overlay maintenance. Our goal under this model is to maintain the current 2014 weighted PCI of 74.6 through a five-year program. This model will demonstrate the necessary funding to achieve this goal. Again, we used the “Actual” 5-yr PMP model (shown above) as a cornerstone for our modeling within the “maintain” program. Combining the previous reporting model with a realistic and achievable annual budget, we found positive results. The Recommended Program incorporates pavement sections that have a functional class of Arterial (A), Collector (C) and Local (E). Table 9– Five-Year Projection Demonstrating Required Budget to Maintain PCI of 74 Referring to Table 9, it is noted that the weighted PCI maintains itself through the five-year projection (74.6 to 74.2). However, the annual deferred maintenance total increase from $5.3 million to $5.9 million at the end of the five-years if the City utilizes an annual budget average of $424k/yr for slurry, overlay, and reconstruction maintenance. We found that annual average square footage breakdowns of maintenance areas were consistent and well balanced; We recommend that a stronger focus be placed on the Local network improvements due to the fact that the Local network is slightly larger in total square footage and has a worse weighted PCI than the arterials. We still recommend minor maintenance to the arterial network, i.e. localized patching, slurry seal and the use of awarded Measure R funds. But again, with the Local network showing a higher degree of negative results, a new focus for zoned area maintenance and proactive overlays should be implemented. City of Hermosa Beach Page 9 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II Figure 5 – Resulting Network PCI and Budget Expenditures (Maintain Budget) As mentioned above, a local slurry/overlay maintenance “area” strategy should be established for several reasons. With the City applying a maintenance area methodology to the local network, four beneficial impacts occur: 1) Planned / Maintenance areas are addressed every seven years which creates a dedicated project schedule for City staff and constituent inquiries; 2) Deferred overlay maintenance can be addressed in a more effective manner due to accrued revenues 3) A preventative maintenance strategy is more cost-effective in a long-term PMP rather than implementing a maintenance approach that addresses only the “worst-first” streets. 4) All maintenance alternatives are available due to the increased funding and focused maintenance within one zone per year. On the negative side, if low weighted PCI values occur within a given zone, all streets within that zone may not be able to be addressed with maintenance when that zone is scheduled for maintenance. The deferred maintenance will have to be scheduled for maintenance in future years or simply will have to wait until the zone cycle repeats. The Local maintenance model that has been developed under the Actual budget can be used as a benchmark to monitor the City’s annual budget allocations as the network continues to mature and age; the proper amount of funding for slurry seal and overlay maintenance needs to be the City’s highest priority. City of Hermosa Beach Page 10 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II Additionally, it is recommended that the City continue to monitor the application of Cape Seal or Grind & Overlay as an asphalt application for the specific local sections. Specific sections are now qualifying for maintenance that warrants a stronger application rather than a typical slurry seal. With a five to seven year cycle in motion, it is essential to address local sections that have PCI’s less than 65 with the proper maintenance since crews will not be back within that area for five to six years. Through our analysis we have found and recommend the follow line items should be considered in the next pavement management efforts for FY 2012 and beyond: PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM REPORTS In addition to the annual budget scenario, this report contains a comprehensive and complementary assemblage of pavement management reports ranging from summary reports to annual maintenance and rehabilitation schedules (Forecasted Maintenance Report, Section IV). Collectively as well as individually, the reports represent reasonable projections of pavement maintenance needs and performance based on visual condition assessments, unit cost estimates, and pavement deterioration models. It is important to note that pavement segment dimensions and surface area (recorded during 1999- 2006, 2011 inspections, along with the action and repair costs, as presented within the reports are accurate within tolerable limits. This is noteworthy due to the "implied" accuracy of reporting length and width to the nearest foot, surface area to the nearest square foot, and action and repair unit costs and project estimates to the nearest penny and dollar, respectively. NEXT STEPS As with any infrastructure management software program, time investments need to be made by key Public Works staff to maintain the integrity of the data as well as the accuracy. Bucknam & Associates can perform training sessions in the use of the MicroPAVER system and demonstrate how to generate standard maintenance reports to assist City staff in developing yearly budgets, project level analysis, and CIP projections. This will be key to future staff management of the pavement program and reporting. City personnel need to maintain their commitment to the preventive maintenance system, while working toward reducing the City's present backlog of rehabilitation projects. In order to ensure that report outputs are accurate and credible, it is essential that the integrity of all data files be maintained. This will require performing all necessary updates when changes are made to scheduling scenarios, unit cost information, historical data, etc. In addition, the entire pavement network will have to be re-inventoried at regular intervals. This typically includes surveying arterial every two years and locals every three. One recommendation the City may consider to keep the program “managed” is” Survey half the arterials each year; and One-third of the locals each year City of Hermosa Beach Page 11 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II This will not only allow work to be scheduled based on the most current condition data available, but will provide City personnel with a means to monitor actual rates of pavement deterioration so appropriate modifications can be made to the system curves. To be compliant with the MTA requirements, the City must generate a triennial Arterial network pavement management report indicating condition ratings. Bucknam & Associates will be supporting the City with staff level support to assist in the continuous updates with the MicroPAVER system. This will include work history updates, generating reports from the system, unit cost updates, and future inspections. ALTERNATIVE PMP FINANCING OPTIONS Through Bucknam & Associates experience with PMP financing and maintenance forecasting, we have been involved with numerous PMP projects that include alternative funding. We have included below several examples and alternatives to PMP funding that the City may want to consider if annual PMP funding becomes limited: Grants - State funding for alternative asphalt applications (i.e. Rubber Asphalt Concrete through the Cal Recycle Grant Program) http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Tires/Grants/default.htm#RAC Bond Measures - Bonds maybe issued to fund the amount of the unpaid assessments. The bonds are secured by a pledge of the assessment installments. The amount of bonds issued equals the amount of the unpaid assessment plus additional bond issuances costs and establishment of a reserve. If the City Council determines that it is not convenient to collect the amount assessed in a single year, then the amount of the proposed assessment maybe collected in installments over a period of years. Property owners are given an opportunity to pay all or a portion of the amount assessed. Special Assessments – Through our experience, we have seen several local agencies perform Special Assessment Feasibility studies and eventually form Special Assessment Districts for the purpose of funding pavement improvements beyond the annual allocated City funding. The purpose of a feasibility study for the formation of an assessment district within the City would provide insight as to how an assessment district would be formed within the City’s boundaries. The analysis utilizes a common approach by comparing average daily trip miles among the different land uses and the average units per acre to obtain EDU rates. The EDU rates are then multiplied by the parcel’s individual number of units or acres to establish the parcel’s assessment amount. The City’s possible options in forming the street maintenance assessment district are set forth below. These options can be implemented in combination; however, it is highly recommended that the City establish communication with affected property owners as early as possible, prior to the City moving forward with the initial proceedings of district formation. City of Hermosa Beach Page 12 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II Conduct Outreach Efforts to Inform Property Owners It is recommended that the City hold informational sessions for affected property owners. Participation of residents in the process will build cooperation and trust and ensures the viability of the proposed assessment district. Input from residents is important in gaining understanding of the process and the reasons for levying the assessments. The City might also create a citizens’ committee to disseminate information and express concerns to and from the residents and the City. Public Opinion Survey In addition, it is recommended that a Public Opinion Survey be conducted to further gauge the resident’s interest or desire to participate in being assessed for street and pavement rehabilitation. Response from the survey would also guide the City in determining whether a Citywide or Phased Assessment District is warranted. Form Assessment Districts in Phases The City may time the initial formation of separate assessment districts with the street improvement schedule of each zone as opposed to a one-time formation of a citywide assessment district. A zone’s start date for street improvements would trigger the assessment for parcels in that particular zone. If each zone improvements were separately initiated on an annual basis, the assessment for the twelfth zone will begin in the twelfth year. The City has the option to accelerate the improvement schedule of each zone. Through our review and assessment, several local agencies have successfully implemented Special Assessments for pavement improvements, see below: A. City of San Clemente The City of San Clemente’s Citywide Street Improvement Program was adopted by City Council in July 1995 as Street Improvement Assessment District 95-1 (AD 95-1). The program was to restore approximately 60 miles (one-half) of the City’s streets over a span of 18 years. The program is funded by a combination of various revenues from (1) Street Assessment District 95- 1, which assesses all developed properties; (2) the General Fund; (3) the Gas Tax Fund. Water, sewer and storm drain funds pay for work done on underground facilities in conjunction with street work. The final assessment for AD 95-1 was collected in Fiscal Year 2010-11. In that year, only the maintenance portion of the assessment was collected (approximately $45 per parcel), which was one-half the normal assessment amount. The final bond redemption, paid in September 2011, was paid for by the mandatory reserve funds held since the bonds were issued. AD 95-1 is expired and fully paid. City of Hermosa Beach Page 13 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II B. City of Elk Grove Beginning with Zone No. 1 in 2003, the City of Elk Grove formed Street Maintenance Assessment District No. 1. The City of Elk Grove’s Street Maintenance District No. 1 funds street maintenance costs associated with local, collector and arterial streets. The assessment amounts for developed property are prepared by the City annually. The City levies an assessment according to the Engineer’s Reports prepared for Zone Nos. 1 to 5. The assessment formula uses EDU factors to establish assessment amounts per unit or acre. C. City of La Habra Heights The City of La Habra Heights established the Citywide Street Maintenance Assessment District No. 4 in 2007. The City of La Habra Heights levied the assessments for five years. The first levy of assessments occurred in Fiscal Year 2007-08 and the final levy for District No. 4 has been prepared for Fiscal Year 2011-12. City of Hermosa Beach Page 14 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II CONDITION DISTRIBUTION REPORT This report graphically depicts the distribution of the pavement condition throughout the street network by area. The condition scheme ranges from “Very Good” to “Very Poor”; with a “Very Good” condition corresponding to a pavement at the beginning of its life cycle, and a “Very Poor” condition representing a badly deteriorated pavement with virtually no remaining life. The table below shows the general description for each pavement condition: Condition Description – PCI Range - Description Very Good (86-100) - Minor to low distress, no significant distress. Little distress, with the exception of utility patches in good condition, or slight hairline cracks; may be slightly weathered Good (75-85) - Slight to moderately weathered, slight distress, possibly patching Fair (60-74) - Severely weathered or slight to moderate levels of distress, generally limited to patches and non-load-related cracking. (City of Hermosa Beach citywide weighted average PCI is 74.6). Poor (41-59) - Moderate to severe distresses including load-related types, such as alligator cracking. Very Poor (0-40) - Severely distressed, large quantities of distortion or alligator cracking. Failure of the pavement, distress has surpassed tolerable rehabilitation limits. City of Hermosa Beach Page 15 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section II Figure 6 – Arterial Condition Distribution Figure 7 – Local Condition Distribution City of Hermosa Beach Page 1 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section III SECTION III CITYWIDE PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX REPORT A. PCI Map B. A to Z C. PCI Order City of Hermosa Beach Page 2 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section III PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX REPORT Listed alphabetically by street name or PCI, this report provides the City with a listing of pertinent inventory and pavement condition data for each inventory unit within the City's pavement network. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report notes the names, limits, classification, dimension, surface type, and lane configuration of each inventory unit. Detailed descriptions of the information appearing on this report are presented below: BRANCH NAME - The name of each inventory unit appears in this column. Generally, the inventory unit name is taken directly from a street sign; however, where no street signs are posted, the name appearing on the network map is noted instead. A sample set of street name suffix abbreviation definitions is presented below: AV - Avenue CT - Court CIR - Circle DR - Drive LN - Lane RD - Road ST - Street WAY - Way EB - East Bound NB - North Bound SB - South Bound WB - West Bound FROM - A description of the beginning limit of each inventory unit appears in this column. If the beginning limit exists between intersections, then the beginning limit description may be an address, post mile marker, or a distance from a known point of reference (e.g., "500' N/MAIN ST"). TO - A description of the ending limit of each inventory unit appears in this column. Like BEGIN limit, the END limit description may consist of a street name, an address, or a distance from a known point of reference. In the case of cul-de-sacs, or dead-ends, the END limit consists of and address, or a directional reference, such as "NORTH END," when no address is available. RANK - The codes for the five functional classifications as the inventory unit appears in this column are represented below. Basically, units are classified according to traffic volume. CODE DESCRIPTION A Arterial C Collector E Local SURFACE TYPE - A code was assigned to each inventory unit to describe surface type. CODE DESCRIPTION AC Asphalt Concrete PCC Concrete LENGTH - The length of the section within each branch. City of Hermosa Beach Page 3 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section III UNITS - The unit of measurement for the section length, typically linear feet (LF). AREA - The area of each section within a branch. UNITS - The unit of measurement for the section area, typically square feet (SF). PCI - Pavement Condition Indices were calculated for inventory units based on severity and extent of distress manifestations observed within the inventory unit. Ranging between 0 and 100, a PCI of "100" corresponds to a pavement at the beginning of its life cycle, while a PCI of "0" corresponds to a badly deteriorated pavement which is at or near the end of its life cycle. City of Hermosa Beach Page 4 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section III City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date Arterial AC 1 1ST PL PROSPECT AVE BARNEY CT A 2 AC 751 27 20,277 85 87 0 13 12/3/2013 2 2ND ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 40 11,600 82 85 0 15 11/21/2013 3 2ND ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 299 40 11,960 86 97 0 3 11/21/2013 4 2ND ST BEACH DR HERMOSA AVE C 2 AC 148 40 5,920 95 100 0 0 11/21/2013 6 2ND ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY C 2 AC 666 30 19,980 80 51 0 49 12/3/2013 13 2ND ST ARDMORE AVE VALLEY DR C 2 AC 578 30 17,340 88 95 0 5 11/21/2013 14 2ND ST MONTEREY BLVD VALLEY DR C 2 AC 510 40 20,400 88 94 0 6 11/21/2013 1 4TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 38 11,020 100 0 0 0 12/12/2013 2 4TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 300 40 12,000 98 100 0 0 12/12/2013 1 6TH ST LOMA DR MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 272 32 8,704 78 68 0 32 12/12/2013 2 6TH ST CYPRESS AVE LOMA DR C 2 AC 245 26 6,370 85 100 0 0 12/12/2013 3 6TH ST VALLEY DR CYPRESS AVE C 2 AC 338 28 9,464 87 100 0 0 12/12/2013 4 6TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 40 11,600 82 78 0 22 12/12/2013 5 6TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 299 40 11,960 82 77 0 23 12/12/2013 1 8TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 38 11,020 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 2 8TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 299 28 8,372 85 100 0 0 12/12/2013 3 8TH ST LOMA DR MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 270 38 10,260 82 60 0 40 12/12/2013 4 8TH ST CYPRESS AVE LOMA DR C 2 AC 246 28 6,888 84 59 0 41 12/12/2013 5 8TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE C 2 AC 620 25 14,600 84 66 0 34 11/21/2013 7 8TH ST VALLEY DR ARDMORE AVE C 2 AC 129 27 3,483 88 31 0 69 11/21/2013 8 8TH ST CYPRESS AVE VALLEY DR C 2 AC 442 28 12,376 86 64 0 36 12/12/2013 3 10TH ST LOMA DR MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 272 30 8,160 87 40 0 60 12/12/2013 4 10TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 38 11,020 96 0 0 100 12/12/2013 5 10TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 299 40 11,960 96 0 0 100 12/12/2013 5 21ST ST PACIFIC COAST HWY RHODES ST C 2 AC 339 38 12,882 98 27 0 73 3/21/2012 6 21ST ST RHODES ST PROSPECT AVE C 2 AC 433 35 15,155 97 31 0 69 3/21/2012 1 22ND ST END HERMOSA AVE C 2 AC 154 40 6,160 88 78 0 22 5/7/2012 2 22ND ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 296 40 11,840 79 73 0 27 5/7/2012 1 27TH ST MANHATTAN AVE MORNINGSIDE DR C 2 AC 640 42 26,880 78 70 0 30 5/7/2012 1 ARDMORE AVE GOULD AVE 30TH ST C 2 AC 624 22 13,728 79 27 0 73 3/23/2012 2 ARDMORE AVE 30TH ST BOUNDARY PL C 2 AC 413 22 9,086 56 76 0 24 3/23/2012 3 ARDMORE AVE PIER AVE 10TH ST C 2 AC 963 25 24,075 66 82 0 18 12/3/2013 4 ARDMORE AVE 8TH ST 5TH ST C 2 AC 761 25 19,025 70 73 0 27 12/3/2013 5 ARDMORE AVE GOULD TER PORTER LN C 2 AC 814 27 21,663 74 86 0 14 3/23/2012 6 ARDMORE AVE 21ST ST PORTER LN C 2 AC 1,216 27 32,432 49 46 36 18 3/23/2012 7 ARDMORE AVE 16TH ST 21ST ST C 2 AC 1,404 27 37,908 54 82 0 18 3/23/2012 8 ARDMORE AVE 16TH ST 256' n/o PIER AVE C 2 AC 308 27 8,316 64 90 0 10 3/23/2012 10 ARDMORE AVE 10TH ST 8TH ST C 2 AC 673 25 16,825 46 48 27 25 12/3/2013 11 ARDMORE AVE 2ND ST 5TH ST C 2 AC 832 25 20,800 71 84 0 16 12/3/2013 (percentage % of PCI calc) Page 1 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 2 ARTESIA BLVD HARPER AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY A 3 AC 1,252 45 56,340 93 4 0 96 3/21/2012 4 ARTESIA BLVD PACIFIC COAST HWY HARPER AVE A 3 AC 1,254 45 56,430 93 40 0 60 3/21/2012 1 AVIATION BLVD CORONA ST PROSPECT AVE A 2 AC 379 30 11,370 72 70 0 30 12/5/2013 2 AVIATION BLVD OCEAN DR CORONA ST A 2 AC 654 30 19,620 73 54 0 46 12/5/2013 3 AVIATION BLVD PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN DR A 2 AC 746 30 22,380 69 25 26 49 12/5/2013 4 AVIATION BLVD PROSPECT AVE HARPER AVE A 2 AC 358 30 10,740 71 65 0 35 12/5/2013 5 AVIATION BLVD PROSPECT AVE CORONA ST A 2 AC 379 30 11,370 74 53 18 29 12/5/2013 6 AVIATION BLVD OCEAN DR PACIFIC COAST HWY A 2 AC 740 30 22,200 81 65 0 35 12/5/2013 7 AVIATION BLVD CORONA ST OCEAN DR A 2 AC 654 30 19,620 73 36 15 49 12/5/2013 8 AVIATION BLVD CITY LIMIT PROSPECT AVE A 2 AC 358 30 10,740 87 56 26 18 12/5/2013 2 BARD ST ALLEY PIER AVE C 2 AC 140 48 6,720 99 100 0 0 4/9/2012 3 BARD ST END PIER AVE C 2 AC 390 44 17,160 94 100 0 0 12/5/2013 1 GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY A 2 AC 1,572 39 61,308 46 29 48 23 3/26/2012 2 GOULD AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE A 2 AC 1,562 39 60,918 53 40 54 6 3/26/2012 3 GOULD AVE VALLEY DR MORNINGSIDE DR C 2 AC 634 60 38,040 53 45 39 16 3/26/2012 4 GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE VALLEY DR C 3 AC 160 54 8,640 62 50 31 19 3/26/2012 1 GREENWICH VILLAGE 27TH ST HERMOSA AVE C 2 AC 390 30 11,700 95 100 0 0 5/7/2012 1 HERMOSA AVE 26TH ST 27TH ST A 2 AC 308 28 8,624 83 37 0 63 3/27/2012 2 HERMOSA AVE 27TH ST 26TH ST A 1 AC 308 20 6,160 93 58 0 42 3/27/2012 3 HERMOSA AVE 26TH ST 25TH ST A 2 AC 279 38 10,602 84 68 0 32 3/27/2012 4 HERMOSA AVE 21ST ST 22ND ST A 2 AC 356 36 12,816 84 78 0 22 3/27/2012 5 HERMOSA AVE 25TH ST 22ND ST A 2 AC 808 38 30,704 79 86 0 14 3/27/2012 6 HERMOSA AVE 16TH ST 15TH CT A 2 AC 406 38 15,428 79 74 0 26 3/27/2012 7 HERMOSA AVE 2ND ST LYNDON ST A 2 AC 914 36 32,904 78 100 0 0 11/21/2013 8 HERMOSA AVE 15TH CT PIER AVE A 2 AC 693 35 24,255 80 61 0 39 3/27/2012 9 HERMOSA AVE 6TH ST 8TH ST A 2 AC 539 36 19,404 77 70 0 30 12/12/2013 10 HERMOSA AVE 4TH ST 2ND ST A 2 AC 541 36 19,476 83 38 0 62 3/27/2012 11 HERMOSA AVE 21ST ST 19TH ST A 2 AC 586 38 22,268 78 73 10 17 3/27/2012 12 HERMOSA AVE PIER AVE 10TH ST A 2 AC 559 36 20,124 74 74 0 26 12/12/2013 13 HERMOSA AVE 10TH ST 8TH ST A 2 AC 539 36 19,404 76 76 0 24 12/12/2013 14 HERMOSA AVE 6TH ST 4TH ST A 2 AC 540 36 19,440 78 83 0 17 12/12/2013 15 HERMOSA AVE 19TH 16TH ST A 2 AC 823 38 31,274 76 51 0 49 3/27/2012 16 HERMOSA AVE 25TH ST 26TH ST A 2 AC 279 36 10,044 83 61 0 39 3/27/2012 17 HERMOSA AVE 22ND ST 21ST ST A 2 AC 356 38 13,528 84 85 0 15 3/27/2012 18 HERMOSA AVE 22ND ST 25TH ST A 2 AC 808 36 29,088 79 79 0 21 3/27/2012 19 HERMOSA AVE 15TH CT 16TH ST A 2 AC 406 36 14,616 80 49 0 51 3/27/2012 20 HERMOSA AVE LYNDON ST 2ND ST A 2 AC 907 36 32,652 75 54 46 0 11/21/2013 21 HERMOSA AVE PIER AVE 15TH CT A 2 AC 693 40 27,720 74 48 0 52 3/27/2012 22 HERMOSA AVE 8TH ST 6TH ST A 2 AC 539 36 19,404 77 73 0 27 12/12/2013 23 HERMOSA AVE 2ND ST 4TH ST A 2 AC 541 36 19,476 77 80 0 20 12/12/2013 24 HERMOSA AVE 19TH ST 21ST ST A 2 AC 586 36 21,096 77 87 0 13 3/27/2012 Page 2 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 25 HERMOSA AVE 10TH ST PIER AVE A 2 AC 559 36 20,124 77 68 0 32 12/12/2013 26 HERMOSA AVE 8TH ST 10TH ST A 2 AC 539 36 19,404 75 68 0 32 12/12/2013 27 HERMOSA AVE 4TH ST 6TH ST A 2 AC 540 36 19,440 79 80 0 20 12/12/2013 28 HERMOSA AVE 16TH ST 19TH ST A 2 AC 823 36 29,628 77 52 0 48 3/27/2012 29 HERMOSA AVE LONGFELLOW AVE 30TH ST A 1 AC 384 20 7,680 91 43 0 57 3/27/2012 31 HERMOSA AVE 35TH ST 34TH ST A 1 AC 223 20 4,460 93 80 0 20 3/27/2012 32 HERMOSA AVE 34TH ST LONGFELLOW AVE A 2 AC 426 20 8,520 90 56 0 44 3/27/2012 33 HERMOSA AVE HERONDO ST LYNDON ST A 2 AC 260 28 7,280 83 61 39 0 11/21/2013 34 HERMOSA AVE LYNDON ST HERONDO ST A 1 AC 259 28 7,252 81 100 0 0 11/21/2013 35 HERMOSA AVE 27TH ST 30TH ST A 1 AC 655 20 13,100 93 100 0 0 3/27/2012 36 HERMOSA AVE 30TH ST LONGFELLOW AVE A 1 AC 384 20 7,680 88 31 0 69 3/27/2012 37 HERMOSA AVE LONGFELLOW AVE 34TH ST A 1 AC 426 20 8,520 83 17 0 83 3/27/2012 38 HERMOSA AVE 34TH ST 35TH ST A 1 AC 223 20 4,460 90 68 0 32 3/27/2012 39 HERMOSA AVE 30TH ST 27TH ST A 1 AC 651 20 13,020 81 13 0 87 3/27/2012 4 HERONDO ST HERMOSA AVE MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 569 12 6,828 28 40 54 6 11/21/2013 5 HERONDO ST VALLEY DR MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 784 12 9,408 27 40 56 4 11/21/2013 1 HIGHLAND AVE 35TH ST LONGFELLOW AVE C 2 AC 557 38 21,166 78 79 0 21 3/29/2012 1 LONGFELLOW AVE MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 640 40 25,600 96 38 0 62 3/29/2012 2 LONGFELLOW AVE INGLESIDE DR MORNINGSIDE DR C 2 AC 490 40 19,600 94 43 0 57 3/29/2012 4 LONGFELLOW AVE HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 313 40 12,520 91 62 0 38 5/8/2012 8 LONGFELLOW AVE VALLEY DR INGLESIDE DR C 2 AC 233 36 8,388 86 33 0 67 3/29/2012 1 MANHATTAN AVE LONGFELLOW AVE 29TH ST C 2 AC 598 30 17,940 65 85 0 15 3/28/2012 3 MANHATTAN AVE 4TH ST 6TH ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 85 89 0 11 12/5/2013 4 MANHATTAN AVE 1ST ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 440 40 17,600 84 88 0 12 11/21/2013 5 MANHATTAN AVE 6TH ST 8TH ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 85 100 0 0 12/5/2013 6 MANHATTAN AVE 8TH ST 10TH ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 84 80 0 20 12/5/2013 7 MANHATTAN AVE PIER AVE 14TH ST C 2 AC 386 40 15,440 87 92 0 8 3/28/2012 8 MANHATTAN AVE 19TH ST CIRCLE DR C 2 AC 352 40 14,080 88 100 0 0 3/28/2012 9 MANHATTAN AVE 4TH ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 88 55 0 45 12/5/2013 11 MANHATTAN AVE 27TH ST 29TH ST C 2 AC 466 30 13,980 86 64 0 36 3/28/2012 12 MANHATTAN AVE 10TH ST PIER AVE C 2 AC 733 40 29,320 83 81 0 19 12/5/2013 13 MANHATTAN AVE 16TH ST 14TH ST C 2 AC 539 40 21,560 90 82 0 18 3/28/2012 14 MANHATTAN AVE CIRLCE DR MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 712 40 28,480 84 86 0 14 3/28/2012 15 MANHATTAN AVE 24TH ST MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 362 40 14,480 86 79 0 21 3/28/2012 16 MANHATTAN AVE 25TH ST 24TH ST C 2 AC 424 40 16,960 83 100 0 0 3/28/2012 17 MANHATTAN AVE LONGFELLOW AVE NEPTUNE AVE C 2 AC 775 30 23,250 64 81 0 19 3/28/2012 18 MANHATTAN AVE 27TH ST 25TH ST C 2 AC 525 40 21,000 83 79 0 21 3/28/2012 1 MONTEREY BLVD 6TH ST 4TH ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 67 57 0 43 12/12/2013 2 MONTEREY BLVD 8TH ST 6TH ST C 2 AC 540 38 20,520 70 51 0 49 12/12/2013 3 MONTEREY BLVD 8TH ST 10TH ST C 2 AC 539 38 20,482 79 67 0 33 12/12/2013 4 MONTEREY BLVD 11TH ST 10TH ST C 2 AC 510 36 18,360 73 35 0 65 12/12/2013 Page 3 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 5 MONTEREY BLVD PIER AVE 16TH ST C 2 AC 663 40 26,520 77 85 0 15 3/28/2012 6 MONTEREY BLVD 11TH ST PIER AVE C 2 AC 486 36 17,496 75 40 0 60 12/12/2013 7 MONTEREY BLVD 16TH ST 19TH ST C 2 AC 845 40 33,800 87 56 0 44 3/28/2012 8 MONTEREY BLVD CIRCLE CT 19TH ST C 2 AC 665 40 26,600 84 66 0 34 3/28/2012 9 MONTEREY BLVD HERONDO ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 820 40 32,800 84 96 0 4 11/21/2013 10 MONTEREY BLVD 4TH ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 72 62 0 38 12/12/2013 11 MONTEREY BLVD CIRCLE CT MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 729 40 29,160 78 80 0 20 3/28/2012 1 PIER AVE ARDMORE AVE VALLEY DR A 3 AC 122 40 4,880 98 62 0 38 3/26/2012 2 PIER AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE A 2 AC 655 36 23,580 93 89 0 11 3/26/2012 3 PIER AVE VALLEY DR BARD ST A 2 AC 230 38 8,740 98 69 0 31 3/26/2012 6 PIER AVE VALLEY DR ARDMORE AVE A 2 AC 122 40 4,880 99 100 0 0 3/26/2012 7 PIER AVE ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY A 2 AC 655 36 23,580 90 77 0 23 3/26/2012 8 PIER AVE BARD ST VALLEY DR A 2 AC 230 38 8,740 97 55 0 45 3/26/2012 9 PIER AVE BARD ST MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 739 38 28,082 97 48 0 52 3/26/2012 10 PIER AVE MANHATTAN AVE HERMOSA AVE A 2 AC 373 38 14,174 98 64 0 36 3/26/2012 11 PIER AVE MANHATTAN AVE MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 395 38 15,010 98 73 0 27 3/26/2012 12 PIER AVE MONTEREY BLVD BARD ST A 2 AC 736 38 27,968 96 55 0 45 3/26/2012 13 PIER AVE MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE A 2 AC 395 38 15,010 98 72 0 28 3/26/2012 14 PIER AVE HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE A 2 AC 373 38 14,174 97 51 0 49 3/26/2012 2 PROSPECT AVE 6TH ST GENTRY ST C 2 AC 586 30 17,580 85 85 0 28 12/3/2013 3 PROSPECT AVE ANITA ST VAN HORNE LN C 2 AC 702 30 21,060 79 79 0 10 12/3/2013 4 PROSPECT AVE AVIATION BLVD 9TH ST C 2 AC 923 30 27,690 61 61 25 9 12/5/2013 6 PROSPECT AVE 17TH ST 15TH ST C 2 AC 815 36 29,340 54 54 17 66 3/21/2012 7 PROSPECT AVE 21ST ST 20TH ST C 2 AC 459 36 16,524 75 75 0 66 3/21/2012 8 PROSPECT AVE 17TH ST 20TH ST C 2 AC 883 36 31,788 70 70 31 50 3/21/2012 9 PROSPECT AVE VAN HORNE LN GENTRY ST C 2 AC 681 30 20,430 73 73 0 12 12/3/2013 10 PROSPECT AVE AVIATION BLVD 14TH ST C 2 AC 486 36 17,496 69 69 0 63 3/21/2012 11 PROSPECT AVE 14TH ST 15TH ST C 2 AC 248 36 8,928 73 73 0 48 3/21/2012 12 PROSPECT AVE 21ST ST ARTESIA BLVD C 2 AC 574 30 17,220 83 83 0 50 3/21/2012 13 PROSPECT AVE ARTESIA BLVD 21ST ST C 2 AC 567 30 17,010 83 83 0 31 3/21/2012 14 PROSPECT AVE 8TH ST 6TH ST C 2 AC 575 30 17,250 71 71 0 28 12/5/2013 15 PROSPECT AVE 8TH ST 9TH ST C 2 AC 345 30 10,350 80 80 0 6 12/23/2013 1 VALLEY DR GOULD AVE 30TH ST C 2 AC 725 25 18,125 70 70 0 47 3/29/2012 2 VALLEY DR LONGFELLOW AVE 30TH ST C 2 AC 370 32 11,840 78 78 0 45 3/29/2012 3 VALLEY DR 20TH ST 18TH ST C 2 AC 486 28 13,608 63 63 46 29 3/28/2012 4 VALLEY DR PIER AVE 18TH ST C 2 AC 1,250 28 35,000 64 64 26 41 3/28/2012 5 VALLEY DR HERONDO ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 754 25 18,850 73 73 0 0 11/21/2013 6 VALLEY DR 8TH ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 1,693 25 42,325 71 71 23 0 11/21/2013 7 VALLEY DR 11TH ST 8TH ST C 2 AC 915 24 21,960 72 72 31 17 12/12/2013 8 VALLEY DR PIER AVE 11TH ST C 2 AC 738 25 18,450 75 75 31 21 12/12/2013 9 VALLEY DR 25TH ST 24TH ST C 2 AC 675 28 18,900 64 64 40 4 3/28/2012 Page 4 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 10 VALLEY DR 24TH ST 20TH ST C 2 AC 598 28 16,744 63 63 53 14 3/28/2012 12 VALLEY DR GOULD AVE 25TH ST C 2 AC 1,031 28 28,868 73 73 20 24 3/28/2012 3,028,972 Arterial PCC 12 ARDMORE AVE 256' n/o PIER AVE PIER AVE C 2 PCC 256 27 6,912 84 20 80 0 3/23/2012 3 FRANCISCO ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR C 1 PCC 484 20 9,680 61 25 65 10 4/9/2012 10 MORNINGSIDE DR 35TH ST FRANCISCO ST C 1 PCC 251 20 5,020 48 29 33 38 4/9/2012 21,612 Local AC 2 1ST PL ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 653 26 16,978 73 75 0 25 12/5/2013 1 1ST ST PROSPECT AVE BARNEY CT E 2 AC 732 28 20,496 81 80 0 20 12/3/2013 2 1ST ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 769 28 21,532 50 54 0 46 12/12/2013 3 1ST ST HERMOSA AVE MONTEREY BLVD E 2 AC 591 40 23,640 74 100 0 0 11/21/2013 4 1ST ST MEYER CT BARNEY CT E 2 AC 180 30 5,400 83 70 0 30 12/3/2013 5 1ST ST PACIFIC COAST HWY MEYER CT E 2 AC 851 30 25,530 77 95 0 5 12/3/2013 1 2ND ST PACIFIC COAST HWY HOLLOWELL AVE E 2 AC 1,324 24 31,776 76 65 4 31 12/3/2013 5 2ND ST THE STRAND BEACH DR E 1 AC 100 28 2,800 67 42 0 58 11/21/2013 15 2ND ST CITY LIMIT HOLLOWELL AVE E 2 AC 428 24 10,272 86 79 0 21 12/3/2013 1 3RD CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 168 20 3,360 98 0 0 100 11/21/2013 1 3RD ST PACIFIC COAST HWY HOPKINS AVE E 2 AC 1,311 30 39,330 66 68 24 8 12/3/2013 2 3RD ST HOPKINS AVE HOLLOWELL AVE E 2 AC 349 30 10,470 68 89 0 11 12/23/2013 4 3RD ST ARDMORE AVE END E 2 AC 285 26 7,410 65 66 26 8 12/23/2013 5 3RD ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 716 25 17,900 32 49 35 16 12/23/2013 1 4TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 208 20 4,160 95 100 0 0 12/12/2013 6 4TH ST ARDMORE AVE COCHISE AVE E 2 AC 240 25 6,000 78 73 0 27 12/23/2013 8 4TH ST CULPER CT MONTEREY BLVD E 1 AC 153 20 3,060 45 49 39 12 12/23/2013 1 5TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 248 20 4,960 91 42 0 58 12/12/2013 1 5TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 805 28 22,540 72 64 0 36 12/5/2013 2 5TH ST OCEAN VIEW AVE PINE CT E 2 APC 152 28 4,256 72 96 0 4 12/5/2013 3 5TH ST PINE CT HOPKINS AVE E 2 APC 210 30 6,300 77 73 0 27 12/5/2013 4 5TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN VIEW CT E 2 APC 303 28 8,484 70 63 26 11 12/23/2013 5 5TH ST REYNOLDS LN MASSEY AVE E 2 AC 239 26 6,214 79 81 0 19 12/5/2013 8 5TH ST HOPKINS AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 APC 298 30 8,940 83 96 0 4 12/5/2013 1 6TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 280 20 5,600 92 42 0 58 12/12/2013 9 6TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 706 28 19,768 94 89 0 11 12/5/2013 13 6TH ST 58' s/o PROSPECT AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 58 28 1,624 82 80 0 20 12/5/2013 1 7TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH ST E 2 AC 300 20 6,000 92 44 0 56 12/12/2013 2 7TH PL REYNOLDS LN CITY LIMIT E 2 AC 111 30 3,330 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 2 7TH ST VALLEY DR CYPRESS AVE E 2 AC 457 25 11,425 85 80 0 20 12/23/2013 Page 5 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 3 7TH ST ARDMORE AVE END E 2 AC 305 25 7,625 94 88 0 12 12/23/2013 4 7TH ST PROSPECT AVE CITY LIMIT E 2 AC 902 28 25,256 97 0 0 100 3/15/2012 5 7TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 1,077 25 26,925 62 73 19 8 12/5/2013 1 8TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AAC 322 20 6,440 97 100 0 0 12/12/2013 2 8TH PL PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN DR E 2 AC 684 24 16,416 92 100 0 0 12/5/2013 3 8TH PL OCEAN DR PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 490 24 11,760 95 100 0 0 12/5/2013 10 8TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 1,119 20 22,380 69 46 0 54 12/5/2013 1 9TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 342 20 6,840 91 42 0 58 12/12/2013 1 9TH ST OCEAN DR PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 676 24 16,224 77 95 0 5 12/5/2013 5 9TH ST PROSPECT AVE REYNOLDS LN E 2 AC 806 28 22,568 95 100 0 0 12/5/2013 6 9TH ST OCEAN DR OWOSSO AVE E 2 AC 256 24 6,144 78 83 0 17 12/5/2013 1 10TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 363 20 7,260 86 29 0 71 12/12/2013 1 10TH ST OCEAN DR AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 654 24 15,696 84 53 0 47 12/5/2013 2 10TH ST PROSPECT AVE HARPER AVE E 2 AC 821 25 20,525 84 32 0 68 12/5/2013 6 10TH ST HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 472 35 16,520 92 42 0 58 12/12/2013 9 10TH ST OWOSSO AVE OCEAN DR E 2 AC 362 24 8,688 82 69 0 31 12/5/2013 10 10TH ST BEACH DR END E 2 AC 103 35 3,605 92 41 0 59 12/12/2013 1 11TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 378 20 7,560 87 31 0 69 12/12/2013 1 11TH PL PROSPECT AVE HARPER AVE E 2 AC 422 25 10,550 76 91 0 9 12/23/2013 2 11TH PL PACIFIC COAST HWY END E 2 AC 317 39 12,363 14 15 47 38 3/26/2012 3 11TH PL VALLEY DR BARD ST E 2 AC 233 26 6,058 88 95 0 5 12/5/2013 1 11TH ST PROSPECT AVE HARPER AVE E 2 AC 604 25 15,100 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 2 11TH ST LOMA DR MONTEREY BLVD E 2 AC 269 38 10,222 84 100 0 0 12/12/2013 3 11TH ST THE STRAND BEACH DR E 2 AC 115 40 4,600 81 24 0 76 12/12/2013 4 11TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 620 28 17,360 84 67 0 33 12/5/2013 5 11TH ST LOMA DR VALLEY DR E 2 AC 684 25 17,100 75 68 0 32 12/23/2013 6 11TH ST BEACH DR HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 379 40 15,160 95 90 0 10 12/12/2013 1 13TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 426 20 8,520 86 37 0 63 5/7/2012 2 13TH ST HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 435 30 13,050 93 80 0 20 5/7/2012 3 13TH ST OCEAN DR PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 689 25 17,225 49 73 20 7 12/5/2013 1 14TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 445 21 9,345 79 46 0 54 5/7/2012 1 14TH ST BONNIE BRAE ST OCEAN DR E 2 AC 124 24 2,976 92 100 0 0 3/20/2012 2 14TH ST OCEAN DR PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 690 24 16,560 79 66 0 34 3/20/2012 3 14TH ST PROSPECT AVE CORONA ST E 2 AC 100 24 2,400 69 61 0 39 12/5/2013 4 14TH ST CORONA ST BONNIE BRAE ST E 2 AC 491 24 11,784 68 73 0 27 3/20/2012 5 14TH ST END PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 461 24 11,064 48 66 4 30 3/21/2012 6 14TH ST MANHATTAN AVE HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 455 30 13,650 81 91 0 9 4/9/2012 7 14TH ST HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 448 35 15,680 82 85 0 15 4/9/2012 1 15TH CT HERMOSA AVE END E 2 AC 396 20 7,920 50 55 21 24 5/7/2012 1 15TH PL MIRA ST BONNIE BRAE ST E 2 AC 455 20 9,100 47 27 43 30 3/20/2012 1 15TH ST THE STRAND HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 575 38 21,850 51 65 9 26 5/7/2012 Page 6 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 3 15TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN DR E 2 AC 690 22 15,180 66 48 0 52 3/20/2012 1 16TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 484 19 9,196 77 31 0 69 5/7/2012 1 16TH ST MONTEREY BLVD LOMA DR E 2 AC 160 30 4,800 92 60 0 40 4/9/2012 2 16TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 290 30 8,700 86 91 0 9 4/9/2012 5 16TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 608 40 24,320 72 25 0 75 3/26/2012 6 16TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 298 30 8,940 82 93 0 7 4/9/2012 8 16TH ST PROSPECT AVE GOLDEN AVE E 2 AC 267 25 6,675 46 50 35 15 3/21/2012 1 17TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 498 19 9,462 84 35 0 65 5/7/2012 3 17TH ST GOLDEN ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 371 24 8,904 24 24 46 30 3/21/2012 4 17TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 881 24 21,144 92 0 0 100 3/21/2012 5 17TH ST END GOLDEN ST E 2 AC 246 24 5,904 58 29 52 19 3/21/2012 1 18TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 485 19 9,215 80 31 0 69 5/7/2012 3 18TH ST VALLEY DR VALLEY PARK AVE E 2 AC 475 22 10,450 88 34 0 66 5/7/2012 4 18TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 752 30 22,560 79 78 0 22 3/23/2012 1 19TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 446 20 8,920 79 30 0 70 5/7/2012 1 19TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 310 20 6,200 75 60 0 40 3/23/2012 2 19TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY RHODES ST E 2 AC 341 30 10,230 84 26 0 74 5/8/2012 5 19TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 274 30 8,220 87 96 0 4 4/9/2012 6 19TH ST MONTEREY BLVD LOMA DR E 2 AC 151 30 4,530 93 100 0 0 3/28/2012 7 19TH ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 679 25 16,975 52 12 43 45 3/21/2012 1 20TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 384 20 7,680 82 43 0 57 5/7/2012 1 20TH PL HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 564 25 14,100 51 37 17 46 3/21/2012 2 20TH ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 611 26 15,886 79 63 0 37 3/21/2012 3 20TH ST VALLEY DR POWER ST E 2 AC 622 20 11,240 86 55 0 45 5/7/2012 1 21ST CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 297 20 5,940 80 54 0 46 5/7/2012 1 21ST ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 299 30 8,970 89 55 0 45 5/7/2012 2 21ST ST POWER ST END E 2 AC 194 26 5,044 81 100 0 0 5/7/2012 3 21ST ST VALLEY DR POWER ST E 2 AC 580 26 15,080 79 64 0 36 5/7/2012 4 21ST ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 726 30 21,780 87 84 0 16 3/26/2012 7 21ST ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 512 32 16,384 75 40 21 39 3/21/2012 1 22ND CT 21ST ST 22ND ST E 2 AC 313 12 3,756 74 78 0 22 5/7/2012 1 24TH PL ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 809 28 20,552 84 88 0 12 3/26/2012 2 24TH PL PARK AVE VALLEY DR E 2 AC 1,002 28 28,056 82 85 0 15 5/7/2012 1 24TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 269 30 8,070 87 66 0 34 5/7/2012 2 24TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 773 28 19,544 83 87 0 13 3/26/2012 3 24TH ST VALLEY DR PARK AVE E 2 AC 1,132 26 29,432 40 47 17 36 5/7/2012 4 24TH ST MANHATTAN AVE PARK AVE E 2 AC 598 30 17,940 90 54 0 46 5/7/2012 6 24TH ST END HILLCREST DR E 2 AC 198 28 7,044 68 4 55 41 3/21/2012 7 24TH ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 460 25 11,500 47 34 29 37 3/21/2012 1 25TH ST MYRTLE AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 285 30 8,550 81 54 0 46 5/7/2012 2 25TH ST END ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 413 24 9,912 63 31 43 26 5/7/2012 Page 7 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 3 25TH ST VALLEY DR PARK AVE E 2 AC 922 26 23,972 85 54 0 46 5/7/2012 4 25TH ST 25TH ST MYRTLE AVE E 2 AC 668 30 20,040 82 48 0 52 5/7/2012 5 25TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 271 30 8,130 83 85 0 15 5/7/2012 2 26TH ST MANHATTAN AVE HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 270 30 8,100 87 94 0 6 5/7/2012 2 28TH CT MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 AC 175 18 3,150 74 72 0 28 5/8/2012 3 28TH CT END MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 AC 470 15 7,050 66 56 0 44 5/8/2012 1 28TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 311 30 9,330 89 80 0 20 5/7/2012 2 28TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 AC 489 30 14,670 57 74 0 26 4/9/2012 3 28TH ST MANHATTAN AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 AC 640 30 19,200 62 77 0 23 5/8/2012 1 29TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR PALM DR E 2 AC 177 15 2,655 78 58 0 42 5/8/2012 1 30TH PL MORNINGSIDE DR PALM DR E 2 AC 641 15 9,615 60 30 46 24 5/8/2012 1 30TH ST VALLEY DR ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 132 25 3,300 76 62 0 38 3/29/2012 2 30TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY TENNYSON PL E 2 AC 683 32 21,856 82 15 0 85 3/23/2012 7 30TH ST TENNYSON PL ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 946 30 28,380 82 27 36 37 3/23/2012 1 31ST PL PALM DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 181 11 1,991 78 83 0 17 5/8/2012 4 31ST PL MANHATTAN AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 AC 640 12 7,680 71 55 0 45 5/8/2012 1 32ND PL PALM DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 182 10 1,820 49 54 0 46 5/8/2012 2 32ND PL MANHATTAN AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 AC 640 11 7,040 35 79 0 21 5/8/2012 1 33RD PL PALM DR MANHATTAN AVE E 1 AC 177 14 2,478 77 66 0 34 5/8/2012 1 34TH PL MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 1 AC 177 11 1,947 76 47 0 53 5/8/2012 1 35TH PL MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 1 AC 180 10 1,800 80 38 0 62 5/8/2012 1 35TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 323 30 9,690 53 90 0 10 4/9/2012 2 35TH ST MANHATTAN AVE HIGHLAND AVE E 1 APC 341 14 4,774 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 1 AMBY PL 30TH ST END E 2 AC 299 25 7,475 77 32 0 68 3/23/2012 9 ARDMORE AVE END 2ND ST E 2 AC 581 25 14,525 75 83 0 17 12/3/2013 1 AUBREY CT END AUBREY CT E 1 AC 93 18 1,674 82 63 0 37 12/5/2013 1 AUBREY PARK CT AVIATION BLVD END E 2 AC 378 15 5,670 45 89 0 11 12/23/2013 1 BARD ST END 8TH ST E 2 AC 304 25 7,600 40 33 50 17 12/23/2013 1 BARNEY CT 1ST ST 1ST PL E 2 AC 269 28 7,532 85 58 0 42 12/3/2013 1 BAYVIEW DR 2ND ST 1ST ST E 2 AC 461 20 9,220 100 63 12 25 11/21/2013 2 BAYVIEW DR 4TH ST 2ND ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 100 0 0 0 12/12/2013 3 BAYVIEW DR 6TH ST 4TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 100 0 0 0 12/12/2013 4 BAYVIEW DR 6TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 100 0 0 0 12/12/2013 5 BAYVIEW DR 19TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 836 20 16,720 49 15 0 85 3/28/2012 6 BAYVIEW DR 19TH ST CIRCLE DR E 2 AC 643 20 12,860 71 17 0 83 3/28/2012 7 BAYVIEW DR 16TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 767 20 15,340 37 40 0 60 3/28/2012 8 BAYVIEW DR PIER AVE 10TH ST E 2 AC 892 20 17,840 85 27 0 73 12/12/2013 9 BAYVIEW DR 8TH ST 10TH ST E 2 AC 539 20 10,780 83 22 0 78 12/12/2013 2 BEACH DR 1ST ST 2ND ST E 2 AC 273 20 5,460 87 0 0 100 11/21/2013 3 BEACH DR LYNDON ST 1ST ST E 2 AC 435 20 8,700 86 0 0 100 11/21/2013 4 BEACH DR 15TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 82 32 0 68 5/7/2012 Page 8 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 5 BEACH DR 18TH ST 19TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 79 53 0 47 5/7/2012 6 BEACH DR 17TH ST 18TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 83 54 0 46 5/7/2012 7 BEACH DR 16TH ST 17TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 86 38 0 62 5/7/2012 8 BEACH DR 19TH ST 20TH ST E 2 AC 271 20 5,420 79 70 0 30 5/7/2012 9 BEACH DR 20TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 271 20 5,420 76 68 0 32 5/7/2012 10 BEACH DR PIER AVE 13TH ST E 2 AC 290 22 6,380 93 46 0 54 5/7/2012 11 BEACH DR 13TH ST 14TH ST E 2 AC 270 21 5,170 92 53 0 47 5/7/2012 12 BEACH DR 2ND ST 3RD ST E 2 AC 273 20 5,460 98 0 0 100 11/21/2013 13 BEACH DR 3RD ST 4TH ST E 2 AC 272 20 5,440 94 88 0 12 12/12/2013 14 BEACH DR 5TH ST 6TH ST E 2 AC 269 20 5,380 93 71 0 29 12/12/2013 15 BEACH DR 4TH ST 5TH ST E 2 AC 273 20 5,460 95 100 0 0 12/12/2013 16 BEACH DR 7TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 93 73 0 27 12/12/2013 17 BEACH DR 6TH ST 7TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 93 73 0 27 12/12/2013 18 BEACH DR 8TH ST 9TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 95 100 0 0 12/12/2013 19 BEACH DR 9TH ST 10TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 86 31 0 69 12/12/2013 20 BEACH DR 10TH ST 11TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 91 38 0 62 12/12/2013 21 BEACH DR 11TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 290 20 5,800 95 100 0 0 12/12/2013 22 BEACH DR 22ND ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 288 20 5,760 79 60 0 40 5/7/2012 1 BONNIE BRAE ST 14TH ST AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 756 25 18,900 44 58 9 33 12/5/2013 2 BONNIE BRAE ST 16TH ST 14TH ST E 2 AC 639 25 15,975 46 24 31 45 3/20/2012 1 BORDEN AVE 21ST ST END E 2 AAC 284 33 9,372 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 1 BOUNDARY PL TENNYSON PL ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 1,014 20 17,238 38 35 59 6 3/23/2012 2 BOUNDARY PL PACIFIC COAST HWY TENNYSON PL E 2 AC 685 20 13,550 12 21 36 43 3/23/2012 1 BRAEHOLM PL AMBY CT 30TH ST E 2 AC 334 20 6,680 76 52 0 48 3/23/2012 1 CAMPANA ST PROSPECT AVE JOY ST E 2 AC 442 22 9,724 38 44 0 56 3/20/2012 1 CIRCLE CT CIRCLE DR MONTEREY BLVD E 2 AC 169 30 5,070 80 93 0 7 3/28/2012 1 CIRCLE DR MANHATTAN AVE CIRCLE CT E 2 AC 347 20 6,940 82 70 0 30 3/28/2012 2 CIRCLE DR CIRCLE CT MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 427 20 8,540 53 46 0 54 3/28/2012 1 CORONA ST AVIATION BLVD 14TH ST E 2 AC 573 25 14,325 34 66 21 13 12/5/2013 2 CORONA ST 14TH ST END E 2 AC 71 22 1,562 39 40 54 6 3/20/2012 1 CULPER CT 2ND ST 4TH ST E 1 AC 431 25 10,775 100 0 0 0 12/23/2013 1 CYPRESS AVE 6TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 539 25 13,475 95 100 0 0 12/23/2013 2 CYPRESS AVE 8TH ST END E 2 AAC 304 28 8,512 95 100 0 0 12/23/2013 3 CYPRESS AVE 6TH ST END E 2 AC 220 26 5,720 34 55 39 6 12/23/2013 4 CYPRESS AVE PIER AVE 11TH ST E 2 AC 733 28 20,524 84 57 0 43 12/5/2013 1 EL OESTE DR END GOULD AVE E 2 AC 500 30 16,150 91 4 0 96 3/26/2012 1 GENTRY ST 6TH ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 500 28 14,000 41 18 65 17 12/23/2013 2 GOLDEN AVE 16TH ST 17TH ST E 2 AC 276 24 6,624 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 3 GOLDEN AVE 17TH ST END E 2 AC 161 24 3,864 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 1 GOULD TER GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 937 20 18,740 63 50 0 50 3/26/2012 1 GRAVELY CT END 6TH ST E 2 AC 130 24 3,120 76 75 0 25 12/23/2013 Page 9 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 1 HARPER AVE CARNEGIE LN PALM ST E 2 AC 1,275 19 20,400 78 58 0 42 3/21/2012 2 HARPER AVE AVIATION BLVD 11TH ST E 2 AC 591 25 14,775 52 46 37 17 12/5/2013 3 HARPER AVE ARTESIA BLVD CARNEGIE LN E 2 AC 1,265 15 18,975 47 41 35 24 3/21/2012 1 HERMOSA VIEW DR 30TH ST END E 2 AC 335 32 11,820 81 91 0 9 3/23/2012 2 HILL ST 2ND ST END E 2 AC 56 21 1,176 49 52 0 48 12/23/2013 1 HILLCREST DR 24TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 207 28 5,796 76 3 0 97 3/21/2012 2 HILLCREST DR 18TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 976 28 27,328 76 81 0 19 3/23/2012 1 HOPKINS AVE 5TH ST 3RD ST E 2 AC 555 27 14,985 57 64 23 13 12/23/2013 7 INGLESIDE DR LONGFELLOW AVE FRANCISCO ST E 2 AC 250 30 7,500 86 65 0 35 4/9/2012 1 JOY ST CAMPANA ST BONNIE BRAE ST E 2 AC 135 29 3,915 83 58 0 42 3/20/2012 1 LA CARLITA PL 30TH ST MARLITA ST E 2 AC 242 30 7,260 78 26 56 18 3/23/2012 1 LOMA DR 6TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 549 27 14,823 71 68 0 32 12/12/2013 2 LOMA DR 10TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 540 25 13,500 80 50 0 50 12/12/2013 3 LOMA DR END 6TH ST E 2 AC 220 27 5,940 76 73 0 27 12/12/2013 4 LOMA DR MANHATTAN AVE PARK AVE E 2 AC 462 20 9,240 67 49 9 42 3/28/2012 6 LOMA DR PIER AVE 10TH ST E 2 AC 1,085 27 29,295 79 32 0 68 12/12/2013 7 LOMA DR 16TH ST END E 2 AC 530 25 13,250 80 32 0 68 4/9/2012 8 LOMA DR 16TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 597 25 14,925 88 31 12 57 4/9/2012 9 LOMA DR LOMA DR 19TH ST E 2 AC 1,264 20 25,280 81 22 0 78 3/28/2012 1 LYNDON ST MONTEREY BLVD HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 586 20 11,720 89 85 0 15 11/21/2013 10 MANHATTAN AVE 19TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 832 40 33,280 89 87 0 13 3/28/2012 1 MARLITA END END E 2 AC 220 22 4,840 55 1 88 11 3/23/2012 1 MASSEY AVE 5TH ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 470 25 11,750 30 67 22 11 12/5/2013 1 MEYER CT END 1ST ST E 2 AC 186 28 5,208 78 72 0 28 12/3/2013 2 MEYER CT 1ST END E 2 AC 193 21 4,053 85 74 0 26 12/3/2013 1 MIRA ST 16TH ST 15TH PL E 2 AC 121 22 2,662 75 33 25 42 3/20/2012 1 MONTGOMERY DR AUBREY PARK CT OCEAN DR E 2 AC 276 17 4,692 51 54 34 12 12/5/2013 2 MORNINGSIDE DR 30TH PL LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 AC 439 24 10,536 77 27 0 73 4/9/2012 5 MORNINGSIDE DR END 25TH ST E 2 AC 373 32 11,936 88 79 0 21 5/7/2012 1 MYRTLE AVE 24TH ST 25TH ST E 2 AC 573 30 17,190 84 82 0 18 5/7/2012 2 MYRTLE AVE 26TH ST 25TH ST E 2 AC 277 30 8,310 84 100 0 0 5/7/2012 1 OAK ST BARD ST LOMA DR E 2 AC 557 20 11,140 96 58 0 42 4/9/2012 2 OCEAN DR 15TH PL 14TH ST E 2 AC 517 20 10,340 67 63 0 37 3/20/2012 3 OCEAN DR 14TH ST AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 748 19 14,212 61 87 0 13 12/23/2013 4 OCEAN DR AVIATION BLVD 10TH ST E 2 AC 194 24 4,656 70 81 0 19 12/5/2013 5 OCEAN DR 10TH ST 9TH ST E 2 AC 200 24 4,800 59 69 0 31 12/5/2013 6 OCEAN DR 9TH ST 8TH PL E 2 AC 210 24 5,040 75 84 0 16 12/5/2013 2 OWOSSO AVE 14TH ST AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 708 24 16,992 37 88 0 12 12/23/2013 1 OZONE CT 26TH ST 27TH ST E 2 AC 219 18 3,942 91 34 0 66 5/7/2012 2 OZONE CT 24TH ST 25TH ST E 2 AC 493 18 8,874 86 20 0 80 5/7/2012 4 OZONE CT 26TH ST 25TH ST E 2 AC 303 20 6,060 87 23 0 77 5/7/2012 Page 10 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 1 PALM DR 27TH ST GREENWICH VILLAGE E 2 AC 142 21 2,982 89 50 0 50 3/29/2012 3 PALM DR 4TH ST 6TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 82 21 0 79 12/12/2013 4 PALM DR 2ND ST E 1ST ST E 2 AC 440 20 8,800 85 30 0 70 11/21/2013 5 PALM DR 6TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 77 17 0 83 12/12/2013 9 PALM DR 19TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 827 20 16,540 89 25 0 75 3/29/2012 12 PALM DR 16TH ST 14TH ST E 2 AC 539 20 10,780 78 16 0 84 3/29/2012 13 PALM DR 14TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 538 20 10,760 86 27 0 73 3/29/2012 14 PALM DR 21ST ST 22ND ST E 2 AC 289 20 5,780 80 20 0 80 3/29/2012 15 PALM DR 25TH ST 24TH ST E 2 AC 405 20 8,100 77 18 0 82 3/29/2012 16 PALM DR PIER AVE 10TH ST E 2 AC 581 20 11,620 78 64 0 36 12/23/2013 17 PALM DR 10TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 539 20 10,780 76 17 26 57 12/12/2013 18 PALM DR 4TH ST 2ND ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 80 20 0 80 12/12/2013 19 PALM DR 25TH ST 26TH ST E 2 AC 268 20 5,360 91 42 0 58 3/29/2012 20 PALM DR GREENWICH VILLAGE 26TH ST E 2 AC 159 20 3,180 84 67 0 33 3/29/2012 23 PALM DR 21ST ST 19TH ST E 2 AC 719 20 14,380 85 41 0 59 3/29/2012 28 PALM DR 24TH ST 22ND ST E 2 AC 385 20 7,700 70 27 0 73 3/29/2012 29 PALM DR NEPTUNE AVE 35TH ST E 2 AC 144 23 3,312 84 89 0 11 3/29/2012 1 PARK AVE MONTEREY AVE LOMA DR E 2 AC 150 30 4,500 87 67 0 33 5/7/2012 2 PARK AVE LOMA DR 25TH ST E 2 AC 522 30 15,660 87 55 0 45 5/7/2012 1 PINE ST 5TH ST 6TH ST E 2 AC 310 24 7,440 95 100 0 0 12/5/2013 1 PORTER LN GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 645 30 19,350 56 48 3 49 3/23/2012 1 POWER ST 21ST ST 20TH ST E 2 AC 240 25 6,000 75 81 0 19 5/7/2012 2 POWER ST 24TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 469 25 11,725 71 73 0 27 5/7/2012 1 RAYMOND AVE 17TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 320 20 6,400 95 3 0 97 3/21/2012 1 REYNOLDS LN 7TH PL 5TH ST E 2 AC 405 15 6,075 91 40 0 60 12/5/2013 2 REYNOLDS LN 5TH ST VAN HORNE LN E 1 AC 569 15 8,535 75 82 0 18 12/5/2013 3 REYNOLDS LN 10TH ST 9TH ST E 1 AC 238 15 3,570 77 40 0 60 12/5/2013 1 RHODES ST 18TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 931 29 26,999 78 92 0 8 3/23/2012 2 RHODES ST 21ST ST END E 2 AC 256 22 5,632 17 27 60 13 5/8/2012 1 SILVERSTRAND AVE 25TH ST 24TH ST E 2 AC 664 30 19,920 89 71 0 29 5/7/2012 2 SPRINGFIELD AVE END SPRINGFIELD AVE E 2 AC 49 40 1,960 65 90 0 10 3/26/2012 1 SUNSET DR 11TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 549 20 10,980 77 15 0 85 12/12/2013 2 SUNSET DR 11TH ST 10TH ST E 2 AC 510 20 10,200 76 41 0 59 12/12/2013 3 SUNSET DR 8TH ST 10TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 77 46 0 54 12/12/2013 4 SUNSET DR 8TH ST 6TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 72 51 0 49 12/12/2013 1 TENNYSON PL END 30TH ST E 2 AC 490 22 10,930 78 46 0 54 3/23/2012 2 TENNYSON PL BOUNDARY PL LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 AC 140 27 3,780 65 44 48 8 3/23/2012 3 TENNYSON PL LONGFELLOW AVE 30TH ST E 2 AC 266 24 6,384 92 100 0 0 3/23/2012 1 VALLEY PARK AVE 20TH ST END E 2 AC 736 26 19,136 81 29 11 60 5/7/2012 1 VAN HORNE LN REYNOLDS LN PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 51 26 1,326 60 100 0 0 12/5/2013 2,983,735 Page 11 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date Local PCC 1 1ST CT MONTEREY BLVD PALM DR E 2 PCC 449 20 8,980 62 47 50 3 11/21/2013 6 3RD ST GENTRY ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 353 30 10,590 17 18 36 46 12/3/2013 4 4TH ST HOPKINS AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 425 28 11,900 59 46 30 24 12/23/2013 7 4TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 783 28 21,924 47 35 61 4 12/23/2013 9 4TH ST OCEAN VIEW AV PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 304 25 7,600 41 24 22 54 12/5/2013 6 6TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PINE ST E 2 PCC 459 28 12,852 40 26 56 18 12/5/2013 7 6TH ST HOLLOWELL AVE REYNOLDS LN E 2 PCC 389 25 9,725 54 32 23 45 12/5/2013 10 6TH ST PROSPECT AVE HOLLOWELL AVE E 2 PCC 888 25 22,200 73 15 56 29 12/23/2013 12 6TH ST PINE ST 58' s/o PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 477 28 13,356 79 46 44 10 12/5/2013 1 7TH PL PROSPECT AVE REYNOLDS LN E PCC 467 30 14,010 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 1 8TH PL PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 PCC 627 26 16,302 53 46 54 0 12/23/2013 9 8TH ST CITY LIMIT PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 847 28 23,716 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 3 9TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 625 28 17,500 57 28 28 44 12/23/2013 7 9TH ST OWOSSO AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 336 24 8,064 97 100 0 0 12/5/2013 7 10TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 PCC 623 28 17,444 34 18 47 35 12/23/2013 8 10TH ST PROSPECT AVE OWOSSO AVE E 2 PCC 349 24 8,376 97 100 0 0 12/5/2013 2 15TH PL MIRA ST END E 2 PCC 160 24 3,840 48 12 55 33 3/20/2012 2 15TH ST PROSPECT AVE CITY LIMIT E 2 PCC 579 28 16,212 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 7 16TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 949 24 22,776 27 12 76 12 3/21/2012 1 20TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY RHODES ST E 2 PCC 340 28 9,520 69 16 78 6 3/23/2012 5 24TH ST THE STRAND HERMOSA AVE E 2 PCC 191 25 4,775 84 17 75 8 5/7/2012 3 26TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 693 25 17,325 85 42 40 18 5/7/2012 1 27TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR OZONE CT E 2 PCC 559 15 8,385 61 23 51 26 5/7/2012 2 27TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 1 PCC 332 25 8,300 79 29 71 0 5/7/2012 1 28TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 640 15 9,600 62 45 46 9 5/8/2012 2 29TH CT INGLESIDE DR MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 15 7,335 98 0 0 100 5/8/2012 3 29TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 640 15 9,600 76 50 32 18 5/8/2012 1 29TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 640 24 15,360 73 27 23 50 4/9/2012 2 29TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 24 11,736 65 6 44 50 4/9/2012 3 29TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 311 25 7,775 65 24 62 14 4/9/2012 2 30TH PL INGLESIDE DR MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 14 6,846 78 33 45 22 5/8/2012 3 30TH PL VALLEY DR INGLESIDE DR E 1 PCC 111 15 1,665 75 0 89 11 4/9/2012 3 30TH ST MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 178 25 4,450 69 38 57 5 5/8/2012 4 30TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 26 12,714 67 43 38 19 5/8/2012 5 30TH ST INGLESIDE DR VALLEY DR E 2 PCC 139 25 3,475 55 16 59 25 4/9/2012 6 30TH ST HERMOSA AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 133 25 3,325 87 83 0 17 5/8/2012 2 31ST PL INGLESIDE DR VALLEY DR E 1 PCC 166 10 1,660 75 12 62 26 4/9/2012 3 31ST PL MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 10 4,890 62 32 49 19 5/8/2012 2 31ST ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 26 12,714 63 15 45 40 4/9/2012 Page 12 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 3 31ST ST INGLESIDE DR VALLEY DR E 2 PCC 193 25 4,825 57 20 78 2 4/9/2012 4 31ST ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 312 25 7,800 82 71 21 8 5/8/2012 3 32ND PL MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 1 PCC 489 10 4,890 56 17 67 16 5/8/2012 4 32ND PL INGLESIDE DR VALLEY DR E 1 PCC 216 10 2,160 65 19 44 37 4/9/2012 2 33RD PL HIGHLAND AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 PCC 315 14 4,410 50 34 50 16 5/8/2012 3 33RD PL MANHATTAN AVE HIGHLAND AVE E 1 PCC 324 14 4,536 54 25 57 18 5/8/2012 4 33RD PL INGLESIDE DR MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 PCC 486 15 7,290 67 35 61 4 5/8/2012 1 33RD ST HIGHLAND AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 PCC 315 24 7,560 54 22 69 9 5/8/2012 2 33RD ST MANHATTAN AVE HIGHLAND AVE E 2 PCC 325 24 7,800 50 31 61 8 5/8/2012 3 33RD ST MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 177 24 4,248 68 13 52 35 4/9/2012 3 34TH PL HIGHLAND AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 1 PCC 326 10 3,260 33 14 74 12 5/8/2012 1 34TH ST HIGHLAND AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 336 24 8,064 11 9 90 1 5/8/2012 2 34TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR HIGHLAND AVE E 2 PCC 326 24 7,824 41 18 60 22 4/9/2012 3 34TH ST MANHATTAN AVE HERMOSA AVE E 2 PCC 314 26 8,164 42 23 76 1 5/8/2012 1 AVA ST 21ST ST END E 2 PCC 528 25 13,200 54 25 51 24 3/26/2012 10 BAYVIEW DR 35TH ST 34TH ST E 2 PCC 140 18 2,520 60 16 52 32 5/8/2012 1 BEACH DR 22ND ST 24TH ST E 1 PCC 550 12 6,600 100 0 0 0 5/7/2012 1 CREST DR 34TH ST 33RD ST E 2 PCC 152 20 3,040 79 36 57 7 5/8/2012 2 CREST DR 35TH ST 34TH ST E 2 PCC 135 20 2,700 73 36 57 7 5/8/2012 2 GENTRY ST PROSPECT AVE 3RD ST E 2 PCC 302 28 8,456 69 38 44 18 12/23/2013 1 GOLDEN AVE 15TH ST END E 2 PCC 558 28 15,624 100 12 74 14 3/21/2012 1 HILL ST END 2ND ST E 2 PCC 198 24 4,752 30 32 66 2 12/23/2013 1 HOLLOWELL AVE 6TH ST 7TH PL E 2 PCC 179 28 5,012 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 2 HOLLOWELL AVE PROSPECT AVE 6TH ST E 2 PCC 629 28 17,612 18 14 71 15 12/5/2013 3 HOLLOWELL AVE 3RD ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 174 28 4,872 45 32 36 32 12/3/2013 4 HOLLOWELL AVE 2ND ST 3RD ST E 2 PCC 221 28 6,188 27 19 47 34 12/3/2013 1 INGLESIDE DR 29TH ST 30TH ST E 2 PCC 215 25 5,375 45 10 58 32 4/9/2012 2 INGLESIDE DR 28TH ST 29TH ST E 2 PCC 219 25 5,475 86 39 54 7 4/9/2012 3 INGLESIDE DR 30TH ST 31ST ST E 2 PCC 190 25 4,750 79 29 71 0 4/9/2012 6 INGLESIDE DR 31ST ST LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 PCC 179 24 4,296 42 8 41 51 4/9/2012 3 LONGFELLOW AVE TENNYSON PL PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 684 30 20,520 47 16 56 28 3/23/2012 5 LONGFELLOW AVE ARDMORE AVE TENNYSON PL E 2 PCC 992 30 29,760 30 16 72 12 3/23/2012 1 MORNINGSIDE DR 33RD PL LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 PCC 114 25 2,850 53 17 80 3 4/9/2012 3 MORNINGSIDE DR 27TH ST 26TH ST E 2 PCC 222 24 5,328 94 100 0 0 4/9/2012 7 MORNINGSIDE DR FRANCISCO ST 33RD PL E 2 PCC 131 51 6,681 55 26 54 20 4/9/2012 9 MORNINGSIDE DR 27TH ST 30TH PL E 2 PCC 770 25 19,250 59 28 60 12 4/9/2012 1 NEPTUNE AVE PALM DR THE STRAND E 2 PCC 120 30 3,600 78 51 0 49 4/9/2012 2 NEPTUNE AVE MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 202 30 6,060 65 11 67 22 4/9/2012 1 OCEAN DR 8TH PL 8TH ST E 2 PCC 187 24 4,488 90 100 0 0 12/5/2013 1 OCEAN VIEW AVE END 5TH ST E 2 PCC 493 24 11,832 55 24 76 0 12/5/2013 1 OWOSSO AVE AVIATION BLVD 9TH ST E 2 PCC 426 24 10,224 90 99 0 1 12/5/2013 Page 13 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, Name (A to Z) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 3 OZONE CT LOMA DR 24TH ST E 2 PCC 177 20 3,540 100 0 0 0 5/7/2012 2 PALM DR 34TH ST 35TH ST E 1 PCC 218 15 3,270 90 36 62 2 3/29/2012 6 PALM DR 31ST ST 30TH ST E 1 PCC 190 18 3,420 91 56 41 3 3/29/2012 7 PALM DR 28TH ST 27TH ST E 1 PCC 220 15 3,300 83 27 64 9 3/29/2012 8 PALM DR END LYNDON ST E 2 PCC 189 19 3,591 56 41 59 0 11/21/2013 10 PALM DR LONGFELLOW AVE 33RD ST E 1 PCC 225 15 3,375 95 99 0 1 3/29/2012 11 PALM DR LONGFELLOW AVE 31ST ST E 1 PCC 194 15 2,910 90 44 54 2 3/29/2012 24 PALM DR E 1ST ST LYNDON ST E 2 PCC 260 19 4,940 62 38 46 16 11/21/2013 25 PALM DR 29TH ST 28TH ST E 1 PCC 219 15 3,285 79 21 51 28 3/29/2012 26 PALM DR 30TH ST 29TH ST E 1 PCC 215 15 3,225 93 97 0 3 3/29/2012 27 PALM DR 33RD ST 34TH ST E 1 PCC 200 15 3,000 96 99 0 1 3/29/2012 1 SILVER ST 15TH ST END E 2 APC 415 28 11,620 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 1 SPRINGFIELD AVE SPRINGFIELD AVE 21ST ST E 2 PCC 540 25 13,500 66 30 67 3 3/26/2012 3 VISTA DR FRANCISCO ST 33RD PL E 2 PCC 133 18 2,394 81 44 46 10 5/8/2012 Alleys 1 ALLEY 4TH ST 5TH ST N 2 AC 397 15 4,764 68 66 0 34 12/5/2013 2 ALLEY 30TH ST LONGFELLOW AVE N 1 AC 269 11 2,959 4 32 35 33 5/7/2012 3 ALLEY END TENNYSON PL N 1 AC 537 11 5,907 8 52 13 35 5/7/2012 5 ALLEY TENNYSON PL ALLEY w/o TENNYSON PL N 1 AC 459 11 5,049 15 53 10 37 5/7/2012 7 ALLEY 64' w/o 21ST ST 20TH ST N 2 PCC 186 20 3,720 100 0 0 0 5/8/2012 8 ALLEY RHODES ST ALLEY w/o RHODES ST N 2 AC 187 20 3,740 46 43 0 57 5/8/2012 9 ALLEY 22ND CT BEACH DR N 2 AC 61 19 1,159 71 37 0 63 5/7/2012 10 ALLEY 20TH ST ALLEY n/o 19TH ST N 2 AC 123 20 2,460 48 36 15 49 5/8/2012 13 ALLEY 21ST ST 64' s/o 21ST ST N 2 AC 64 20 1,280 38 38 0 62 5/8/2012 14 ALLEY RHODES ST ALLEY w/o RHODES ST N 2 AC 189 15 2,835 51 33 0 67 5/8/2012 Page 14 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date Arterial AC 5 HERONDO ST VALLEY DR MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 784 12 9,408 27 40 56 4 11/21/2013 4 HERONDO ST HERMOSA AVE MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 569 12 6,828 28 40 54 6 11/21/2013 10 ARDMORE AVE 10TH ST 8TH ST C 2 AC 673 25 16,825 46 48 27 25 12/3/2013 1 GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY A 2 AC 1,572 39 61,308 46 29 48 23 3/26/2012 6 ARDMORE AVE 21ST ST PORTER LN C 2 AC 1,216 27 32,432 49 46 36 18 3/23/2012 2 GOULD AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE A 2 AC 1,562 39 60,918 53 40 54 6 3/26/2012 3 GOULD AVE VALLEY DR MORNINGSIDE DR C 2 AC 634 60 38,040 53 45 39 16 3/26/2012 7 ARDMORE AVE 16TH ST 21ST ST C 2 AC 1,404 27 37,908 54 82 0 18 3/23/2012 6 PROSPECT AVE 17TH ST 15TH ST C 2 AC 815 36 29,340 54 54 17 66 3/21/2012 2 ARDMORE AVE 30TH ST BOUNDARY PL C 2 AC 413 22 9,086 56 76 0 24 3/23/2012 4 PROSPECT AVE AVIATION BLVD 9TH ST C 2 AC 923 30 27,690 61 61 25 9 12/5/2013 4 GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE VALLEY DR C 3 AC 160 54 8,640 62 50 31 19 3/26/2012 3 VALLEY DR 20TH ST 18TH ST C 2 AC 486 28 13,608 63 63 46 29 3/28/2012 10 VALLEY DR 24TH ST 20TH ST C 2 AC 598 28 16,744 63 63 53 14 3/28/2012 8 ARDMORE AVE 16TH ST 256' n/o PIER AVE C 2 AC 308 27 8,316 64 90 0 10 3/23/2012 17 MANHATTAN AVE LONGFELLOW AVE NEPTUNE AVE C 2 AC 775 30 23,250 64 81 0 19 3/28/2012 4 VALLEY DR PIER AVE 18TH ST C 2 AC 1,250 28 35,000 64 64 26 41 3/28/2012 9 VALLEY DR 25TH ST 24TH ST C 2 AC 675 28 18,900 64 64 40 4 3/28/2012 1 MANHATTAN AVE LONGFELLOW AVE 29TH ST C 2 AC 598 30 17,940 65 85 0 15 3/28/2012 3 ARDMORE AVE PIER AVE 10TH ST C 2 AC 963 25 24,075 66 82 0 18 12/3/2013 1 MONTEREY BLVD 6TH ST 4TH ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 67 57 0 43 12/12/2013 3 AVIATION BLVD PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN DR A 2 AC 746 30 22,380 69 25 26 49 12/5/2013 10 PROSPECT AVE AVIATION BLVD 14TH ST C 2 AC 486 36 17,496 69 69 0 63 3/21/2012 4 ARDMORE AVE 8TH ST 5TH ST C 2 AC 761 25 19,025 70 73 0 27 12/3/2013 2 MONTEREY BLVD 8TH ST 6TH ST C 2 AC 540 38 20,520 70 51 0 49 12/12/2013 8 PROSPECT AVE 17TH ST 20TH ST C 2 AC 883 36 31,788 70 70 31 50 3/21/2012 1 VALLEY DR GOULD AVE 30TH ST C 2 AC 725 25 18,125 70 70 0 47 3/29/2012 11 ARDMORE AVE 2ND ST 5TH ST C 2 AC 832 25 20,800 71 84 0 16 12/3/2013 4 AVIATION BLVD PROSPECT AVE HARPER AVE A 2 AC 358 30 10,740 71 65 0 35 12/5/2013 14 PROSPECT AVE 8TH ST 6TH ST C 2 AC 575 30 17,250 71 71 0 28 12/5/2013 6 VALLEY DR 8TH ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 1,693 25 42,325 71 71 23 0 11/21/2013 1 AVIATION BLVD CORONA ST PROSPECT AVE A 2 AC 379 30 11,370 72 70 0 30 12/5/2013 10 MONTEREY BLVD 4TH ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 72 62 0 38 12/12/2013 7 VALLEY DR 11TH ST 8TH ST C 2 AC 915 24 21,960 72 72 31 17 12/12/2013 2 AVIATION BLVD OCEAN DR CORONA ST A 2 AC 654 30 19,620 73 54 0 46 12/5/2013 7 AVIATION BLVD CORONA ST OCEAN DR A 2 AC 654 30 19,620 73 36 15 49 12/5/2013 4 MONTEREY BLVD 11TH ST 10TH ST C 2 AC 510 36 18,360 73 35 0 65 12/12/2013 9 PROSPECT AVE VAN HORNE LN GENTRY ST C 2 AC 681 30 20,430 73 73 0 12 12/3/2013 11 PROSPECT AVE 14TH ST 15TH ST C 2 AC 248 36 8,928 73 73 0 48 3/21/2012 (percentage % of PCI calc) Page 1 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 5 VALLEY DR HERONDO ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 754 25 18,850 73 73 0 0 11/21/2013 12 VALLEY DR GOULD AVE 25TH ST C 2 AC 1,031 28 28,868 73 73 20 24 3/28/2012 5 ARDMORE AVE GOULD TER PORTER LN C 2 AC 814 27 21,663 74 86 0 14 3/23/2012 5 AVIATION BLVD PROSPECT AVE CORONA ST A 2 AC 379 30 11,370 74 53 18 29 12/5/2013 12 HERMOSA AVE PIER AVE 10TH ST A 2 AC 559 36 20,124 74 74 0 26 12/12/2013 21 HERMOSA AVE PIER AVE 15TH CT A 2 AC 693 40 27,720 74 48 0 52 3/27/2012 20 HERMOSA AVE LYNDON ST 2ND ST A 2 AC 907 36 32,652 75 54 46 0 11/21/2013 26 HERMOSA AVE 8TH ST 10TH ST A 2 AC 539 36 19,404 75 68 0 32 12/12/2013 6 MONTEREY BLVD 11TH ST PIER AVE C 2 AC 486 36 17,496 75 40 0 60 12/12/2013 7 PROSPECT AVE 21ST ST 20TH ST C 2 AC 459 36 16,524 75 75 0 66 3/21/2012 8 VALLEY DR PIER AVE 11TH ST C 2 AC 738 25 18,450 75 75 31 21 12/12/2013 13 HERMOSA AVE 10TH ST 8TH ST A 2 AC 539 36 19,404 76 76 0 24 12/12/2013 15 HERMOSA AVE 19TH 16TH ST A 2 AC 823 38 31,274 76 51 0 49 3/27/2012 9 HERMOSA AVE 6TH ST 8TH ST A 2 AC 539 36 19,404 77 70 0 30 12/12/2013 22 HERMOSA AVE 8TH ST 6TH ST A 2 AC 539 36 19,404 77 73 0 27 12/12/2013 23 HERMOSA AVE 2ND ST 4TH ST A 2 AC 541 36 19,476 77 80 0 20 12/12/2013 24 HERMOSA AVE 19TH ST 21ST ST A 2 AC 586 36 21,096 77 87 0 13 3/27/2012 25 HERMOSA AVE 10TH ST PIER AVE A 2 AC 559 36 20,124 77 68 0 32 12/12/2013 28 HERMOSA AVE 16TH ST 19TH ST A 2 AC 823 36 29,628 77 52 0 48 3/27/2012 5 MONTEREY BLVD PIER AVE 16TH ST C 2 AC 663 40 26,520 77 85 0 15 3/28/2012 1 6TH ST LOMA DR MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 272 32 8,704 78 68 0 32 12/12/2013 1 27TH ST MANHATTAN AVE MORNINGSIDE DR C 2 AC 640 42 26,880 78 70 0 30 5/7/2012 7 HERMOSA AVE 2ND ST LYNDON ST A 2 AC 914 36 32,904 78 100 0 0 11/21/2013 11 HERMOSA AVE 21ST ST 19TH ST A 2 AC 586 38 22,268 78 73 10 17 3/27/2012 14 HERMOSA AVE 6TH ST 4TH ST A 2 AC 540 36 19,440 78 83 0 17 12/12/2013 1 HIGHLAND AVE 35TH ST LONGFELLOW AVE C 2 AC 557 38 21,166 78 79 0 21 3/29/2012 11 MONTEREY BLVD CIRCLE CT MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 729 40 29,160 78 80 0 20 3/28/2012 2 VALLEY DR LONGFELLOW AVE 30TH ST C 2 AC 370 32 11,840 78 78 0 45 3/29/2012 2 22ND ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 296 40 11,840 79 73 0 27 5/7/2012 1 ARDMORE AVE GOULD AVE 30TH ST C 2 AC 624 22 13,728 79 27 0 73 3/23/2012 5 HERMOSA AVE 25TH ST 22ND ST A 2 AC 808 38 30,704 79 86 0 14 3/27/2012 6 HERMOSA AVE 16TH ST 15TH CT A 2 AC 406 38 15,428 79 74 0 26 3/27/2012 18 HERMOSA AVE 22ND ST 25TH ST A 2 AC 808 36 29,088 79 79 0 21 3/27/2012 27 HERMOSA AVE 4TH ST 6TH ST A 2 AC 540 36 19,440 79 80 0 20 12/12/2013 3 MONTEREY BLVD 8TH ST 10TH ST C 2 AC 539 38 20,482 79 67 0 33 12/12/2013 3 PROSPECT AVE ANITA ST VAN HORNE LN C 2 AC 702 30 21,060 79 79 0 10 12/3/2013 6 2ND ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY C 2 AC 666 30 19,980 80 51 0 49 12/3/2013 8 HERMOSA AVE 15TH CT PIER AVE A 2 AC 693 35 24,255 80 61 0 39 3/27/2012 19 HERMOSA AVE 15TH CT 16TH ST A 2 AC 406 36 14,616 80 49 0 51 3/27/2012 15 PROSPECT AVE 8TH ST 9TH ST C 2 AC 345 30 10,350 80 80 0 6 12/23/2013 6 AVIATION BLVD OCEAN DR PACIFIC COAST HWY A 2 AC 740 30 22,200 81 65 0 35 12/5/2013 Page 2 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 34 HERMOSA AVE LYNDON ST HERONDO ST A 1 AC 259 28 7,252 81 100 0 0 11/21/2013 39 HERMOSA AVE 30TH ST 27TH ST A 1 AC 651 20 13,020 81 13 0 87 3/27/2012 2 2ND ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 40 11,600 82 85 0 15 11/21/2013 4 6TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 40 11,600 82 78 0 22 12/12/2013 5 6TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 299 40 11,960 82 77 0 23 12/12/2013 3 8TH ST LOMA DR MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 270 38 10,260 82 60 0 40 12/12/2013 1 HERMOSA AVE 26TH ST 27TH ST A 2 AC 308 28 8,624 83 37 0 63 3/27/2012 10 HERMOSA AVE 4TH ST 2ND ST A 2 AC 541 36 19,476 83 38 0 62 3/27/2012 16 HERMOSA AVE 25TH ST 26TH ST A 2 AC 279 36 10,044 83 61 0 39 3/27/2012 33 HERMOSA AVE HERONDO ST LYNDON ST A 2 AC 260 28 7,280 83 61 39 0 11/21/2013 37 HERMOSA AVE LONGFELLOW AVE 34TH ST A 1 AC 426 20 8,520 83 17 0 83 3/27/2012 12 MANHATTAN AVE 10TH ST PIER AVE C 2 AC 733 40 29,320 83 81 0 19 12/5/2013 16 MANHATTAN AVE 25TH ST 24TH ST C 2 AC 424 40 16,960 83 100 0 0 3/28/2012 18 MANHATTAN AVE 27TH ST 25TH ST C 2 AC 525 40 21,000 83 79 0 21 3/28/2012 12 PROSPECT AVE 21ST ST ARTESIA BLVD C 2 AC 574 30 17,220 83 83 0 50 3/21/2012 13 PROSPECT AVE ARTESIA BLVD 21ST ST C 2 AC 567 30 17,010 83 83 0 31 3/21/2012 4 8TH ST CYPRESS AVE LOMA DR C 2 AC 246 28 6,888 84 59 0 41 12/12/2013 5 8TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE C 2 AC 620 25 14,600 84 66 0 34 11/21/2013 3 HERMOSA AVE 26TH ST 25TH ST A 2 AC 279 38 10,602 84 68 0 32 3/27/2012 4 HERMOSA AVE 21ST ST 22ND ST A 2 AC 356 36 12,816 84 78 0 22 3/27/2012 17 HERMOSA AVE 22ND ST 21ST ST A 2 AC 356 38 13,528 84 85 0 15 3/27/2012 4 MANHATTAN AVE 1ST ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 440 40 17,600 84 88 0 12 11/21/2013 6 MANHATTAN AVE 8TH ST 10TH ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 84 80 0 20 12/5/2013 14 MANHATTAN AVE CIRLCE DR MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 712 40 28,480 84 86 0 14 3/28/2012 8 MONTEREY BLVD CIRCLE CT 19TH ST C 2 AC 665 40 26,600 84 66 0 34 3/28/2012 9 MONTEREY BLVD HERONDO ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 820 40 32,800 84 96 0 4 11/21/2013 1 1ST PL PROSPECT AVE BARNEY CT A 2 AC 751 27 20,277 85 87 0 13 12/3/2013 2 6TH ST CYPRESS AVE LOMA DR C 2 AC 245 26 6,370 85 100 0 0 12/12/2013 2 8TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 299 28 8,372 85 100 0 0 12/12/2013 3 MANHATTAN AVE 4TH ST 6TH ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 85 89 0 11 12/5/2013 5 MANHATTAN AVE 6TH ST 8TH ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 85 100 0 0 12/5/2013 2 PROSPECT AVE 6TH ST GENTRY ST C 2 AC 586 30 17,580 85 85 0 28 12/3/2013 3 2ND ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 299 40 11,960 86 97 0 3 11/21/2013 8 8TH ST CYPRESS AVE VALLEY DR C 2 AC 442 28 12,376 86 64 0 36 12/12/2013 8 LONGFELLOW AVE VALLEY DR INGLESIDE DR C 2 AC 233 36 8,388 86 33 0 67 3/29/2012 11 MANHATTAN AVE 27TH ST 29TH ST C 2 AC 466 30 13,980 86 64 0 36 3/28/2012 15 MANHATTAN AVE 24TH ST MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 362 40 14,480 86 79 0 21 3/28/2012 3 6TH ST VALLEY DR CYPRESS AVE C 2 AC 338 28 9,464 87 100 0 0 12/12/2013 3 10TH ST LOMA DR MONTEREY BLVD C 2 AC 272 30 8,160 87 40 0 60 12/12/2013 8 AVIATION BLVD CITY LIMIT PROSPECT AVE A 2 AC 358 30 10,740 87 56 26 18 12/5/2013 7 MANHATTAN AVE PIER AVE 14TH ST C 2 AC 386 40 15,440 87 92 0 8 3/28/2012 Page 3 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 7 MONTEREY BLVD 16TH ST 19TH ST C 2 AC 845 40 33,800 87 56 0 44 3/28/2012 13 2ND ST ARDMORE AVE VALLEY DR C 2 AC 578 30 17,340 88 95 0 5 11/21/2013 14 2ND ST MONTEREY BLVD VALLEY DR C 2 AC 510 40 20,400 88 94 0 6 11/21/2013 7 8TH ST VALLEY DR ARDMORE AVE C 2 AC 129 27 3,483 88 31 0 69 11/21/2013 1 22ND ST END HERMOSA AVE C 2 AC 154 40 6,160 88 78 0 22 5/7/2012 36 HERMOSA AVE 30TH ST LONGFELLOW AVE A 1 AC 384 20 7,680 88 31 0 69 3/27/2012 8 MANHATTAN AVE 19TH ST CIRCLE DR C 2 AC 352 40 14,080 88 100 0 0 3/28/2012 9 MANHATTAN AVE 4TH ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 540 40 21,600 88 55 0 45 12/5/2013 32 HERMOSA AVE 34TH ST LONGFELLOW AVE A 2 AC 426 20 8,520 90 56 0 44 3/27/2012 38 HERMOSA AVE 34TH ST 35TH ST A 1 AC 223 20 4,460 90 68 0 32 3/27/2012 13 MANHATTAN AVE 16TH ST 14TH ST C 2 AC 539 40 21,560 90 82 0 18 3/28/2012 7 PIER AVE ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY A 2 AC 655 36 23,580 90 77 0 23 3/26/2012 29 HERMOSA AVE LONGFELLOW AVE 30TH ST A 1 AC 384 20 7,680 91 43 0 57 3/27/2012 4 LONGFELLOW AVE HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 313 40 12,520 91 62 0 38 5/8/2012 2 ARTESIA BLVD HARPER AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY A 3 AC 1,252 45 56,340 93 4 0 96 3/21/2012 4 ARTESIA BLVD PACIFIC COAST HWY HARPER AVE A 3 AC 1,254 45 56,430 93 40 0 60 3/21/2012 2 HERMOSA AVE 27TH ST 26TH ST A 1 AC 308 20 6,160 93 58 0 42 3/27/2012 31 HERMOSA AVE 35TH ST 34TH ST A 1 AC 223 20 4,460 93 80 0 20 3/27/2012 35 HERMOSA AVE 27TH ST 30TH ST A 1 AC 655 20 13,100 93 100 0 0 3/27/2012 2 PIER AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE A 2 AC 655 36 23,580 93 89 0 11 3/26/2012 3 BARD ST END PIER AVE C 2 AC 390 44 17,160 94 100 0 0 12/5/2013 2 LONGFELLOW AVE INGLESIDE DR MORNINGSIDE DR C 2 AC 490 40 19,600 94 43 0 57 3/29/2012 4 2ND ST BEACH DR HERMOSA AVE C 2 AC 148 40 5,920 95 100 0 0 11/21/2013 1 GREENWICH VILLAGE 27TH ST HERMOSA AVE C 2 AC 390 30 11,700 95 100 0 0 5/7/2012 4 10TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 38 11,020 96 0 0 100 12/12/2013 5 10TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 299 40 11,960 96 0 0 100 12/12/2013 1 LONGFELLOW AVE MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 640 40 25,600 96 38 0 62 3/29/2012 12 PIER AVE MONTEREY BLVD BARD ST A 2 AC 736 38 27,968 96 55 0 45 3/26/2012 6 21ST ST RHODES ST PROSPECT AVE C 2 AC 433 35 15,155 97 31 0 69 3/21/2012 8 PIER AVE BARD ST VALLEY DR A 2 AC 230 38 8,740 97 55 0 45 3/26/2012 9 PIER AVE BARD ST MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 739 38 28,082 97 48 0 52 3/26/2012 14 PIER AVE HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE A 2 AC 373 38 14,174 97 51 0 49 3/26/2012 2 4TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 300 40 12,000 98 100 0 0 12/12/2013 5 21ST ST PACIFIC COAST HWY RHODES ST C 2 AC 339 38 12,882 98 27 0 73 3/21/2012 1 PIER AVE ARDMORE AVE VALLEY DR A 3 AC 122 40 4,880 98 62 0 38 3/26/2012 3 PIER AVE VALLEY DR BARD ST A 2 AC 230 38 8,740 98 69 0 31 3/26/2012 10 PIER AVE MANHATTAN AVE HERMOSA AVE A 2 AC 373 38 14,174 98 64 0 36 3/26/2012 11 PIER AVE MANHATTAN AVE MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 395 38 15,010 98 73 0 27 3/26/2012 13 PIER AVE MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE A 2 AC 395 38 15,010 98 72 0 28 3/26/2012 2 BARD ST ALLEY PIER AVE C 2 AC 140 48 6,720 99 100 0 0 4/9/2012 6 PIER AVE VALLEY DR ARDMORE AVE A 2 AC 122 40 4,880 99 100 0 0 3/26/2012 Page 4 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 1 4TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 38 11,020 100 0 0 0 12/12/2013 1 8TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE C 2 AC 290 38 11,020 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 3,028,972 Arterial PCC 10 MORNINGSIDE DR 35TH ST FRANCISCO ST C 1 PCC 251 20 5,020 48 29 33 38 4/9/2012 3 FRANCISCO ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR C 1 PCC 484 20 9,680 61 25 65 10 4/9/2012 12 ARDMORE AVE 256' n/o PIER AVE PIER AVE C 2 PCC 256 27 6,912 84 20 80 0 3/23/2012 21,612 Local AC 2 BOUNDARY PL PACIFIC COAST HWY TENNYSON PL E 2 AC 685 20 13,550 12 21 36 43 3/23/2012 2 11TH PL PACIFIC COAST HWY END E 2 AC 317 39 12,363 14 15 47 38 3/26/2012 2 RHODES ST 21ST ST END E 2 AC 256 22 5,632 17 27 60 13 5/8/2012 3 17TH ST GOLDEN ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 371 24 8,904 24 24 46 30 3/21/2012 1 MASSEY AVE 5TH ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 470 25 11,750 30 67 22 11 12/5/2013 5 3RD ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 716 25 17,900 32 49 35 16 12/23/2013 1 CORONA ST AVIATION BLVD 14TH ST E 2 AC 573 25 14,325 34 66 21 13 12/5/2013 3 CYPRESS AVE 6TH ST END E 2 AC 220 26 5,720 34 55 39 6 12/23/2013 2 32ND PL MANHATTAN AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 AC 640 11 7,040 35 79 0 21 5/8/2012 7 BAYVIEW DR 16TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 767 20 15,340 37 40 0 60 3/28/2012 2 OWOSSO AVE 14TH ST AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 708 24 16,992 37 88 0 12 12/23/2013 1 BOUNDARY PL TENNYSON PL ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 1,014 20 17,238 38 35 59 6 3/23/2012 1 CAMPANA ST PROSPECT AVE JOY ST E 2 AC 442 22 9,724 38 44 0 56 3/20/2012 2 CORONA ST 14TH ST END E 2 AC 71 22 1,562 39 40 54 6 3/20/2012 3 24TH ST VALLEY DR PARK AVE E 2 AC 1,132 26 29,432 40 47 17 36 5/7/2012 1 BARD ST END 8TH ST E 2 AC 304 25 7,600 40 33 50 17 12/23/2013 1 GENTRY ST 6TH ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 500 28 14,000 41 18 65 17 12/23/2013 1 BONNIE BRAE ST 14TH ST AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 756 25 18,900 44 58 9 33 12/5/2013 8 4TH ST CULPER CT MONTEREY BLVD E 1 AC 153 20 3,060 45 49 39 12 12/23/2013 1 AUBREY PARK CT AVIATION BLVD END E 2 AC 378 15 5,670 45 89 0 11 12/23/2013 8 16TH ST PROSPECT AVE GOLDEN AVE E 2 AC 267 25 6,675 46 50 35 15 3/21/2012 2 BONNIE BRAE ST 16TH ST 14TH ST E 2 AC 639 25 15,975 46 24 31 45 3/20/2012 1 15TH PL MIRA ST BONNIE BRAE ST E 2 AC 455 20 9,100 47 27 43 30 3/20/2012 7 24TH ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 460 25 11,500 47 34 29 37 3/21/2012 3 HARPER AVE ARTESIA BLVD CARNEGIE LN E 2 AC 1,265 15 18,975 47 41 35 24 3/21/2012 5 14TH ST END PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 461 24 11,064 48 66 4 30 3/21/2012 3 13TH ST OCEAN DR PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 689 25 17,225 49 73 20 7 12/5/2013 1 32ND PL PALM DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 182 10 1,820 49 54 0 46 5/8/2012 5 BAYVIEW DR 19TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 836 20 16,720 49 15 0 85 3/28/2012 2 HILL ST 2ND ST END E 2 AC 56 21 1,176 49 52 0 48 12/23/2013 Page 5 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 2 1ST ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 769 28 21,532 50 54 0 46 12/12/2013 1 15TH CT HERMOSA AVE END E 2 AC 396 20 7,920 50 55 21 24 5/7/2012 1 15TH ST THE STRAND HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 575 38 21,850 51 65 9 26 5/7/2012 1 20TH PL HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 564 25 14,100 51 37 17 46 3/21/2012 1 MONTGOMERY DR AUBREY PARK CT OCEAN DR E 2 AC 276 17 4,692 51 54 34 12 12/5/2013 7 19TH ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 679 25 16,975 52 12 43 45 3/21/2012 2 HARPER AVE AVIATION BLVD 11TH ST E 2 AC 591 25 14,775 52 46 37 17 12/5/2013 1 35TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 323 30 9,690 53 90 0 10 4/9/2012 2 CIRCLE DR CIRCLE CT MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 427 20 8,540 53 46 0 54 3/28/2012 1 MARLITA END END E 2 AC 220 22 4,840 55 1 88 11 3/23/2012 1 PORTER LN GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 645 30 19,350 56 48 3 49 3/23/2012 2 28TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 AC 489 30 14,670 57 74 0 26 4/9/2012 1 HOPKINS AVE 5TH ST 3RD ST E 2 AC 555 27 14,985 57 64 23 13 12/23/2013 5 17TH ST END GOLDEN ST E 2 AC 246 24 5,904 58 29 52 19 3/21/2012 5 OCEAN DR 10TH ST 9TH ST E 2 AC 200 24 4,800 59 69 0 31 12/5/2013 1 30TH PL MORNINGSIDE DR PALM DR E 2 AC 641 15 9,615 60 30 46 24 5/8/2012 1 VAN HORNE LN REYNOLDS LN PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 51 26 1,326 60 100 0 0 12/5/2013 3 OCEAN DR 14TH ST AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 748 19 14,212 61 87 0 13 12/23/2013 5 7TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 1,077 25 26,925 62 73 19 8 12/5/2013 3 28TH ST MANHATTAN AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 AC 640 30 19,200 62 77 0 23 5/8/2012 2 25TH ST END ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 413 24 9,912 63 31 43 26 5/7/2012 1 GOULD TER GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 937 20 18,740 63 50 0 50 3/26/2012 4 3RD ST ARDMORE AVE END E 2 AC 285 26 7,410 65 66 26 8 12/23/2013 2 SPRINGFIELD AVE END SPRINGFIELD AVE E 2 AC 49 40 1,960 65 90 0 10 3/26/2012 2 TENNYSON PL BOUNDARY PL LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 AC 140 27 3,780 65 44 48 8 3/23/2012 1 3RD ST PACIFIC COAST HWY HOPKINS AVE E 2 AC 1,311 30 39,330 66 68 24 8 12/3/2013 3 15TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN DR E 2 AC 690 22 15,180 66 48 0 52 3/20/2012 3 28TH CT END MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 AC 470 15 7,050 66 56 0 44 5/8/2012 5 2ND ST THE STRAND BEACH DR E 1 AC 100 28 2,800 67 42 0 58 11/21/2013 4 LOMA DR MANHATTAN AVE PARK AVE E 2 AC 462 20 9,240 67 49 9 42 3/28/2012 2 OCEAN DR 15TH PL 14TH ST E 2 AC 517 20 10,340 67 63 0 37 3/20/2012 2 3RD ST HOPKINS AVE HOLLOWELL AVE E 2 AC 349 30 10,470 68 89 0 11 12/23/2013 4 14TH ST CORONA ST BONNIE BRAE ST E 2 AC 491 24 11,784 68 73 0 27 3/20/2012 6 24TH ST END HILLCREST DR E 2 AC 198 28 7,044 68 4 55 41 3/21/2012 10 8TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 1,119 20 22,380 69 46 0 54 12/5/2013 3 14TH ST PROSPECT AVE CORONA ST E 2 AC 100 24 2,400 69 61 0 39 12/5/2013 4 5TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN VIEW CT E 2 APC 303 28 8,484 70 63 26 11 12/23/2013 4 OCEAN DR AVIATION BLVD 10TH ST E 2 AC 194 24 4,656 70 81 0 19 12/5/2013 28 PALM DR 24TH ST 22ND ST E 2 AC 385 20 7,700 70 27 0 73 3/29/2012 4 31ST PL MANHATTAN AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 AC 640 12 7,680 71 55 0 45 5/8/2012 6 BAYVIEW DR 19TH ST CIRCLE DR E 2 AC 643 20 12,860 71 17 0 83 3/28/2012 Page 6 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 1 LOMA DR 6TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 549 27 14,823 71 68 0 32 12/12/2013 2 POWER ST 24TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 469 25 11,725 71 73 0 27 5/7/2012 1 5TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 805 28 22,540 72 64 0 36 12/5/2013 2 5TH ST OCEAN VIEW AVE PINE CT E 2 APC 152 28 4,256 72 96 0 4 12/5/2013 5 16TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 608 40 24,320 72 25 0 75 3/26/2012 4 SUNSET DR 8TH ST 6TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 72 51 0 49 12/12/2013 2 1ST PL ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 653 26 16,978 73 75 0 25 12/5/2013 3 1ST ST HERMOSA AVE MONTEREY BLVD E 2 AC 591 40 23,640 74 100 0 0 11/21/2013 1 22ND CT 21ST ST 22ND ST E 2 AC 313 12 3,756 74 78 0 22 5/7/2012 2 28TH CT MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 AC 175 18 3,150 74 72 0 28 5/8/2012 5 11TH ST LOMA DR VALLEY DR E 2 AC 684 25 17,100 75 68 0 32 12/23/2013 1 19TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 310 20 6,200 75 60 0 40 3/23/2012 7 21ST ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 512 32 16,384 75 40 21 39 3/21/2012 9 ARDMORE AVE END 2ND ST E 2 AC 581 25 14,525 75 83 0 17 12/3/2013 1 MIRA ST 16TH ST 15TH PL E 2 AC 121 22 2,662 75 33 25 42 3/20/2012 6 OCEAN DR 9TH ST 8TH PL E 2 AC 210 24 5,040 75 84 0 16 12/5/2013 1 POWER ST 21ST ST 20TH ST E 2 AC 240 25 6,000 75 81 0 19 5/7/2012 2 REYNOLDS LN 5TH ST VAN HORNE LN E 1 AC 569 15 8,535 75 82 0 18 12/5/2013 1 2ND ST PACIFIC COAST HWY HOLLOWELL AVE E 2 AC 1,324 24 31,776 76 65 4 31 12/3/2013 1 11TH PL PROSPECT AVE HARPER AVE E 2 AC 422 25 10,550 76 91 0 9 12/23/2013 1 30TH ST VALLEY DR ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 132 25 3,300 76 62 0 38 3/29/2012 1 34TH PL MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 1 AC 177 11 1,947 76 47 0 53 5/8/2012 9 BEACH DR 20TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 271 20 5,420 76 68 0 32 5/7/2012 1 BRAEHOLM PL AMBY CT 30TH ST E 2 AC 334 20 6,680 76 52 0 48 3/23/2012 1 GRAVELY CT END 6TH ST E 2 AC 130 24 3,120 76 75 0 25 12/23/2013 1 HILLCREST DR 24TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 207 28 5,796 76 3 0 97 3/21/2012 2 HILLCREST DR 18TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 976 28 27,328 76 81 0 19 3/23/2012 3 LOMA DR END 6TH ST E 2 AC 220 27 5,940 76 73 0 27 12/12/2013 17 PALM DR 10TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 539 20 10,780 76 17 26 57 12/12/2013 2 SUNSET DR 11TH ST 10TH ST E 2 AC 510 20 10,200 76 41 0 59 12/12/2013 5 1ST ST PACIFIC COAST HWY MEYER CT E 2 AC 851 30 25,530 77 95 0 5 12/3/2013 3 5TH ST PINE CT HOPKINS AVE E 2 APC 210 30 6,300 77 73 0 27 12/5/2013 1 9TH ST OCEAN DR PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 676 24 16,224 77 95 0 5 12/5/2013 1 16TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 484 19 9,196 77 31 0 69 5/7/2012 1 33RD PL PALM DR MANHATTAN AVE E 1 AC 177 14 2,478 77 66 0 34 5/8/2012 1 AMBY PL 30TH ST END E 2 AC 299 25 7,475 77 32 0 68 3/23/2012 2 MORNINGSIDE DR 30TH PL LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 AC 439 24 10,536 77 27 0 73 4/9/2012 5 PALM DR 6TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 77 17 0 83 12/12/2013 15 PALM DR 25TH ST 24TH ST E 2 AC 405 20 8,100 77 18 0 82 3/29/2012 3 REYNOLDS LN 10TH ST 9TH ST E 1 AC 238 15 3,570 77 40 0 60 12/5/2013 1 SUNSET DR 11TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 549 20 10,980 77 15 0 85 12/12/2013 Page 7 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 3 SUNSET DR 8TH ST 10TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 77 46 0 54 12/12/2013 6 4TH ST ARDMORE AVE COCHISE AVE E 2 AC 240 25 6,000 78 73 0 27 12/23/2013 6 9TH ST OCEAN DR OWOSSO AVE E 2 AC 256 24 6,144 78 83 0 17 12/5/2013 1 29TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR PALM DR E 2 AC 177 15 2,655 78 58 0 42 5/8/2012 1 31ST PL PALM DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 181 11 1,991 78 83 0 17 5/8/2012 1 HARPER AVE CARNEGIE LN PALM ST E 2 AC 1,275 19 20,400 78 58 0 42 3/21/2012 1 LA CARLITA PL 30TH ST MARLITA ST E 2 AC 242 30 7,260 78 26 56 18 3/23/2012 1 MEYER CT END 1ST ST E 2 AC 186 28 5,208 78 72 0 28 12/3/2013 12 PALM DR 16TH ST 14TH ST E 2 AC 539 20 10,780 78 16 0 84 3/29/2012 16 PALM DR PIER AVE 10TH ST E 2 AC 581 20 11,620 78 64 0 36 12/23/2013 1 RHODES ST 18TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 931 29 26,999 78 92 0 8 3/23/2012 1 TENNYSON PL END 30TH ST E 2 AC 490 22 10,930 78 46 0 54 3/23/2012 5 5TH ST REYNOLDS LN MASSEY AVE E 2 AC 239 26 6,214 79 81 0 19 12/5/2013 1 14TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 445 21 9,345 79 46 0 54 5/7/2012 2 14TH ST OCEAN DR PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 690 24 16,560 79 66 0 34 3/20/2012 4 18TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 752 30 22,560 79 78 0 22 3/23/2012 1 19TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 446 20 8,920 79 30 0 70 5/7/2012 2 20TH ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 611 26 15,886 79 63 0 37 3/21/2012 3 21ST ST VALLEY DR POWER ST E 2 AC 580 26 15,080 79 64 0 36 5/7/2012 5 BEACH DR 18TH ST 19TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 79 53 0 47 5/7/2012 8 BEACH DR 19TH ST 20TH ST E 2 AC 271 20 5,420 79 70 0 30 5/7/2012 22 BEACH DR 22ND ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 288 20 5,760 79 60 0 40 5/7/2012 6 LOMA DR PIER AVE 10TH ST E 2 AC 1,085 27 29,295 79 32 0 68 12/12/2013 1 18TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 485 19 9,215 80 31 0 69 5/7/2012 1 21ST CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 297 20 5,940 80 54 0 46 5/7/2012 1 35TH PL MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 1 AC 180 10 1,800 80 38 0 62 5/8/2012 1 CIRCLE CT CIRCLE DR MONTEREY BLVD E 2 AC 169 30 5,070 80 93 0 7 3/28/2012 2 LOMA DR 10TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 540 25 13,500 80 50 0 50 12/12/2013 7 LOMA DR 16TH ST END E 2 AC 530 25 13,250 80 32 0 68 4/9/2012 14 PALM DR 21ST ST 22ND ST E 2 AC 289 20 5,780 80 20 0 80 3/29/2012 18 PALM DR 4TH ST 2ND ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 80 20 0 80 12/12/2013 1 1ST ST PROSPECT AVE BARNEY CT E 2 AC 732 28 20,496 81 80 0 20 12/3/2013 3 11TH ST THE STRAND BEACH DR E 2 AC 115 40 4,600 81 24 0 76 12/12/2013 6 14TH ST MANHATTAN AVE HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 455 30 13,650 81 91 0 9 4/9/2012 2 21ST ST POWER ST END E 2 AC 194 26 5,044 81 100 0 0 5/7/2012 1 25TH ST MYRTLE AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 285 30 8,550 81 54 0 46 5/7/2012 1 HERMOSA VIEW DR 30TH ST END E 2 AC 335 32 11,820 81 91 0 9 3/23/2012 9 LOMA DR LOMA DR 19TH ST E 2 AC 1,264 20 25,280 81 22 0 78 3/28/2012 1 VALLEY PARK AVE 20TH ST END E 2 AC 736 26 19,136 81 29 11 60 5/7/2012 13 6TH ST 58' s/o PROSPECT AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 58 28 1,624 82 80 0 20 12/5/2013 9 10TH ST OWOSSO AVE OCEAN DR E 2 AC 362 24 8,688 82 69 0 31 12/5/2013 Page 8 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 7 14TH ST HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 448 35 15,680 82 85 0 15 4/9/2012 6 16TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 298 30 8,940 82 93 0 7 4/9/2012 1 20TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 384 20 7,680 82 43 0 57 5/7/2012 2 24TH PL PARK AVE VALLEY DR E 2 AC 1,002 28 28,056 82 85 0 15 5/7/2012 4 25TH ST 25TH ST MYRTLE AVE E 2 AC 668 30 20,040 82 48 0 52 5/7/2012 2 30TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY TENNYSON PL E 2 AC 683 32 21,856 82 15 0 85 3/23/2012 7 30TH ST TENNYSON PL ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 946 30 28,380 82 27 36 37 3/23/2012 1 AUBREY CT END AUBREY CT E 1 AC 93 18 1,674 82 63 0 37 12/5/2013 4 BEACH DR 15TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 82 32 0 68 5/7/2012 1 CIRCLE DR MANHATTAN AVE CIRCLE CT E 2 AC 347 20 6,940 82 70 0 30 3/28/2012 3 PALM DR 4TH ST 6TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 82 21 0 79 12/12/2013 4 1ST ST MEYER CT BARNEY CT E 2 AC 180 30 5,400 83 70 0 30 12/3/2013 8 5TH ST HOPKINS AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 APC 298 30 8,940 83 96 0 4 12/5/2013 2 24TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 773 28 19,544 83 87 0 13 3/26/2012 5 25TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 271 30 8,130 83 85 0 15 5/7/2012 9 BAYVIEW DR 8TH ST 10TH ST E 2 AC 539 20 10,780 83 22 0 78 12/12/2013 6 BEACH DR 17TH ST 18TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 83 54 0 46 5/7/2012 1 JOY ST CAMPANA ST BONNIE BRAE ST E 2 AC 135 29 3,915 83 58 0 42 3/20/2012 1 10TH ST OCEAN DR AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 654 24 15,696 84 53 0 47 12/5/2013 2 10TH ST PROSPECT AVE HARPER AVE E 2 AC 821 25 20,525 84 32 0 68 12/5/2013 2 11TH ST LOMA DR MONTEREY BLVD E 2 AC 269 38 10,222 84 100 0 0 12/12/2013 4 11TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 620 28 17,360 84 67 0 33 12/5/2013 1 17TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 498 19 9,462 84 35 0 65 5/7/2012 2 19TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY RHODES ST E 2 AC 341 30 10,230 84 26 0 74 5/8/2012 1 24TH PL ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 809 28 20,552 84 88 0 12 3/26/2012 4 CYPRESS AVE PIER AVE 11TH ST E 2 AC 733 28 20,524 84 57 0 43 12/5/2013 1 MYRTLE AVE 24TH ST 25TH ST E 2 AC 573 30 17,190 84 82 0 18 5/7/2012 2 MYRTLE AVE 26TH ST 25TH ST E 2 AC 277 30 8,310 84 100 0 0 5/7/2012 20 PALM DR GREENWICH VILLAGE 26TH ST E 2 AC 159 20 3,180 84 67 0 33 3/29/2012 29 PALM DR NEPTUNE AVE 35TH ST E 2 AC 144 23 3,312 84 89 0 11 3/29/2012 2 7TH ST VALLEY DR CYPRESS AVE E 2 AC 457 25 11,425 85 80 0 20 12/23/2013 3 25TH ST VALLEY DR PARK AVE E 2 AC 922 26 23,972 85 54 0 46 5/7/2012 1 BARNEY CT 1ST ST 1ST PL E 2 AC 269 28 7,532 85 58 0 42 12/3/2013 8 BAYVIEW DR PIER AVE 10TH ST E 2 AC 892 20 17,840 85 27 0 73 12/12/2013 2 MEYER CT 1ST END E 2 AC 193 21 4,053 85 74 0 26 12/3/2013 4 PALM DR 2ND ST E 1ST ST E 2 AC 440 20 8,800 85 30 0 70 11/21/2013 23 PALM DR 21ST ST 19TH ST E 2 AC 719 20 14,380 85 41 0 59 3/29/2012 15 2ND ST CITY LIMIT HOLLOWELL AVE E 2 AC 428 24 10,272 86 79 0 21 12/3/2013 1 10TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 363 20 7,260 86 29 0 71 12/12/2013 1 13TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 426 20 8,520 86 37 0 63 5/7/2012 2 16TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 290 30 8,700 86 91 0 9 4/9/2012 Page 9 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 3 20TH ST VALLEY DR POWER ST E 2 AC 622 20 11,240 86 55 0 45 5/7/2012 3 BEACH DR LYNDON ST 1ST ST E 2 AC 435 20 8,700 86 0 0 100 11/21/2013 7 BEACH DR 16TH ST 17TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 86 38 0 62 5/7/2012 19 BEACH DR 9TH ST 10TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 86 31 0 69 12/12/2013 7 INGLESIDE DR LONGFELLOW AVE FRANCISCO ST E 2 AC 250 30 7,500 86 65 0 35 4/9/2012 2 OZONE CT 24TH ST 25TH ST E 2 AC 493 18 8,874 86 20 0 80 5/7/2012 13 PALM DR 14TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 538 20 10,760 86 27 0 73 3/29/2012 1 11TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 378 20 7,560 87 31 0 69 12/12/2013 5 19TH ST MONTEREY BLVD MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 274 30 8,220 87 96 0 4 4/9/2012 4 21ST ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 726 30 21,780 87 84 0 16 3/26/2012 1 24TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 269 30 8,070 87 66 0 34 5/7/2012 2 26TH ST MANHATTAN AVE HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 270 30 8,100 87 94 0 6 5/7/2012 2 BEACH DR 1ST ST 2ND ST E 2 AC 273 20 5,460 87 0 0 100 11/21/2013 4 OZONE CT 26TH ST 25TH ST E 2 AC 303 20 6,060 87 23 0 77 5/7/2012 1 PARK AVE MONTEREY AVE LOMA DR E 2 AC 150 30 4,500 87 67 0 33 5/7/2012 2 PARK AVE LOMA DR 25TH ST E 2 AC 522 30 15,660 87 55 0 45 5/7/2012 3 11TH PL VALLEY DR BARD ST E 2 AC 233 26 6,058 88 95 0 5 12/5/2013 3 18TH ST VALLEY DR VALLEY PARK AVE E 2 AC 475 22 10,450 88 34 0 66 5/7/2012 8 LOMA DR 16TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 597 25 14,925 88 31 12 57 4/9/2012 5 MORNINGSIDE DR END 25TH ST E 2 AC 373 32 11,936 88 79 0 21 5/7/2012 1 21ST ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 299 30 8,970 89 55 0 45 5/7/2012 1 28TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 311 30 9,330 89 80 0 20 5/7/2012 1 LYNDON ST MONTEREY BLVD HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 586 20 11,720 89 85 0 15 11/21/2013 10 MANHATTAN AVE 19TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 832 40 33,280 89 87 0 13 3/28/2012 1 PALM DR 27TH ST GREENWICH VILLAGE E 2 AC 142 21 2,982 89 50 0 50 3/29/2012 9 PALM DR 19TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 827 20 16,540 89 25 0 75 3/29/2012 1 SILVERSTRAND AVE 25TH ST 24TH ST E 2 AC 664 30 19,920 89 71 0 29 5/7/2012 4 24TH ST MANHATTAN AVE PARK AVE E 2 AC 598 30 17,940 90 54 0 46 5/7/2012 1 5TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 248 20 4,960 91 42 0 58 12/12/2013 1 9TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 342 20 6,840 91 42 0 58 12/12/2013 20 BEACH DR 10TH ST 11TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 91 38 0 62 12/12/2013 1 EL OESTE DR END GOULD AVE E 2 AC 500 30 16,150 91 4 0 96 3/26/2012 1 OZONE CT 26TH ST 27TH ST E 2 AC 219 18 3,942 91 34 0 66 5/7/2012 19 PALM DR 25TH ST 26TH ST E 2 AC 268 20 5,360 91 42 0 58 3/29/2012 1 REYNOLDS LN 7TH PL 5TH ST E 2 AC 405 15 6,075 91 40 0 60 12/5/2013 1 6TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 280 20 5,600 92 42 0 58 12/12/2013 1 7TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH ST E 2 AC 300 20 6,000 92 44 0 56 12/12/2013 2 8TH PL PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN DR E 2 AC 684 24 16,416 92 100 0 0 12/5/2013 6 10TH ST HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 472 35 16,520 92 42 0 58 12/12/2013 10 10TH ST BEACH DR END E 2 AC 103 35 3,605 92 41 0 59 12/12/2013 1 14TH ST BONNIE BRAE ST OCEAN DR E 2 AC 124 24 2,976 92 100 0 0 3/20/2012 Page 10 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 1 16TH ST MONTEREY BLVD LOMA DR E 2 AC 160 30 4,800 92 60 0 40 4/9/2012 4 17TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 881 24 21,144 92 0 0 100 3/21/2012 11 BEACH DR 13TH ST 14TH ST E 2 AC 270 21 5,170 92 53 0 47 5/7/2012 3 TENNYSON PL LONGFELLOW AVE 30TH ST E 2 AC 266 24 6,384 92 100 0 0 3/23/2012 2 13TH ST HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 435 30 13,050 93 80 0 20 5/7/2012 6 19TH ST MONTEREY BLVD LOMA DR E 2 AC 151 30 4,530 93 100 0 0 3/28/2012 10 BEACH DR PIER AVE 13TH ST E 2 AC 290 22 6,380 93 46 0 54 5/7/2012 14 BEACH DR 5TH ST 6TH ST E 2 AC 269 20 5,380 93 71 0 29 12/12/2013 16 BEACH DR 7TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 93 73 0 27 12/12/2013 17 BEACH DR 6TH ST 7TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 93 73 0 27 12/12/2013 9 6TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 706 28 19,768 94 89 0 11 12/5/2013 3 7TH ST ARDMORE AVE END E 2 AC 305 25 7,625 94 88 0 12 12/23/2013 13 BEACH DR 3RD ST 4TH ST E 2 AC 272 20 5,440 94 88 0 12 12/12/2013 1 4TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 208 20 4,160 95 100 0 0 12/12/2013 3 8TH PL OCEAN DR PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 490 24 11,760 95 100 0 0 12/5/2013 5 9TH ST PROSPECT AVE REYNOLDS LN E 2 AC 806 28 22,568 95 100 0 0 12/5/2013 6 11TH ST BEACH DR HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 379 40 15,160 95 90 0 10 12/12/2013 15 BEACH DR 4TH ST 5TH ST E 2 AC 273 20 5,460 95 100 0 0 12/12/2013 18 BEACH DR 8TH ST 9TH ST E 2 AC 270 20 5,400 95 100 0 0 12/12/2013 21 BEACH DR 11TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 290 20 5,800 95 100 0 0 12/12/2013 1 CYPRESS AVE 6TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 539 25 13,475 95 100 0 0 12/23/2013 2 CYPRESS AVE 8TH ST END E 2 AAC 304 28 8,512 95 100 0 0 12/23/2013 1 PINE ST 5TH ST 6TH ST E 2 AC 310 24 7,440 95 100 0 0 12/5/2013 1 RAYMOND AVE 17TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 320 20 6,400 95 3 0 97 3/21/2012 1 OAK ST BARD ST LOMA DR E 2 AC 557 20 11,140 96 58 0 42 4/9/2012 4 7TH ST PROSPECT AVE CITY LIMIT E 2 AC 902 28 25,256 97 0 0 100 3/15/2012 1 8TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AAC 322 20 6,440 97 100 0 0 12/12/2013 1 3RD CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 168 20 3,360 98 0 0 100 11/21/2013 12 BEACH DR 2ND ST 3RD ST E 2 AC 273 20 5,460 98 0 0 100 11/21/2013 2 7TH PL REYNOLDS LN CITY LIMIT E 2 AC 111 30 3,330 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 1 11TH ST PROSPECT AVE HARPER AVE E 2 AC 604 25 15,100 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 2 35TH ST MANHATTAN AVE HIGHLAND AVE E 1 APC 341 14 4,774 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 1 BAYVIEW DR 2ND ST 1ST ST E 2 AC 461 20 9,220 100 63 12 25 11/21/2013 2 BAYVIEW DR 4TH ST 2ND ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 100 0 0 0 12/12/2013 3 BAYVIEW DR 6TH ST 4TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 100 0 0 0 12/12/2013 4 BAYVIEW DR 6TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 100 0 0 0 12/12/2013 1 BORDEN AVE 21ST ST END E 2 AAC 284 33 9,372 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 1 CULPER CT 2ND ST 4TH ST E 1 AC 431 25 10,775 100 0 0 0 12/23/2013 2 GOLDEN AVE 16TH ST 17TH ST E 2 AC 276 24 6,624 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 3 GOLDEN AVE 17TH ST END E 2 AC 161 24 3,864 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 2,983,735 Page 11 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date Local PCC 1 34TH ST HIGHLAND AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 336 24 8,064 11 9 90 1 5/8/2012 6 3RD ST GENTRY ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 353 30 10,590 17 18 36 46 12/3/2013 2 HOLLOWELL AVE PROSPECT AVE 6TH ST E 2 PCC 629 28 17,612 18 14 71 15 12/5/2013 7 16TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 949 24 22,776 27 12 76 12 3/21/2012 4 HOLLOWELL AVE 2ND ST 3RD ST E 2 PCC 221 28 6,188 27 19 47 34 12/3/2013 1 HILL ST END 2ND ST E 2 PCC 198 24 4,752 30 32 66 2 12/23/2013 5 LONGFELLOW AVE ARDMORE AVE TENNYSON PL E 2 PCC 992 30 29,760 30 16 72 12 3/23/2012 3 34TH PL HIGHLAND AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 1 PCC 326 10 3,260 33 14 74 12 5/8/2012 7 10TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 PCC 623 28 17,444 34 18 47 35 12/23/2013 6 6TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PINE ST E 2 PCC 459 28 12,852 40 26 56 18 12/5/2013 9 4TH ST OCEAN VIEW AV PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 304 25 7,600 41 24 22 54 12/5/2013 2 34TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR HIGHLAND AVE E 2 PCC 326 24 7,824 41 18 60 22 4/9/2012 3 34TH ST MANHATTAN AVE HERMOSA AVE E 2 PCC 314 26 8,164 42 23 76 1 5/8/2012 6 INGLESIDE DR 31ST ST LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 PCC 179 24 4,296 42 8 41 51 4/9/2012 3 HOLLOWELL AVE 3RD ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 174 28 4,872 45 32 36 32 12/3/2013 1 INGLESIDE DR 29TH ST 30TH ST E 2 PCC 215 25 5,375 45 10 58 32 4/9/2012 7 4TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 783 28 21,924 47 35 61 4 12/23/2013 3 LONGFELLOW AVE TENNYSON PL PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 684 30 20,520 47 16 56 28 3/23/2012 2 15TH PL MIRA ST END E 2 PCC 160 24 3,840 48 12 55 33 3/20/2012 2 33RD PL HIGHLAND AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 PCC 315 14 4,410 50 34 50 16 5/8/2012 2 33RD ST MANHATTAN AVE HIGHLAND AVE E 2 PCC 325 24 7,800 50 31 61 8 5/8/2012 1 8TH PL PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 PCC 627 26 16,302 53 46 54 0 12/23/2013 1 MORNINGSIDE DR 33RD PL LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 PCC 114 25 2,850 53 17 80 3 4/9/2012 7 6TH ST HOLLOWELL AVE REYNOLDS LN E 2 PCC 389 25 9,725 54 32 23 45 12/5/2013 3 33RD PL MANHATTAN AVE HIGHLAND AVE E 1 PCC 324 14 4,536 54 25 57 18 5/8/2012 1 33RD ST HIGHLAND AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 PCC 315 24 7,560 54 22 69 9 5/8/2012 1 AVA ST 21ST ST END E 2 PCC 528 25 13,200 54 25 51 24 3/26/2012 5 30TH ST INGLESIDE DR VALLEY DR E 2 PCC 139 25 3,475 55 16 59 25 4/9/2012 7 MORNINGSIDE DR FRANCISCO ST 33RD PL E 2 PCC 131 51 6,681 55 26 54 20 4/9/2012 1 OCEAN VIEW AVE END 5TH ST E 2 PCC 493 24 11,832 55 24 76 0 12/5/2013 3 32ND PL MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 1 PCC 489 10 4,890 56 17 67 16 5/8/2012 8 PALM DR END LYNDON ST E 2 PCC 189 19 3,591 56 41 59 0 11/21/2013 3 9TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 625 28 17,500 57 28 28 44 12/23/2013 3 31ST ST INGLESIDE DR VALLEY DR E 2 PCC 193 25 4,825 57 20 78 2 4/9/2012 4 4TH ST HOPKINS AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 425 28 11,900 59 46 30 24 12/23/2013 9 MORNINGSIDE DR 27TH ST 30TH PL E 2 PCC 770 25 19,250 59 28 60 12 4/9/2012 10 BAYVIEW DR 35TH ST 34TH ST E 2 PCC 140 18 2,520 60 16 52 32 5/8/2012 1 27TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR OZONE CT E 2 PCC 559 15 8,385 61 23 51 26 5/7/2012 1 1ST CT MONTEREY BLVD PALM DR E 2 PCC 449 20 8,980 62 47 50 3 11/21/2013 Page 12 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 1 28TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 640 15 9,600 62 45 46 9 5/8/2012 3 31ST PL MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 10 4,890 62 32 49 19 5/8/2012 24 PALM DR E 1ST ST LYNDON ST E 2 PCC 260 19 4,940 62 38 46 16 11/21/2013 2 31ST ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 26 12,714 63 15 45 40 4/9/2012 2 29TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 24 11,736 65 6 44 50 4/9/2012 3 29TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 311 25 7,775 65 24 62 14 4/9/2012 4 32ND PL INGLESIDE DR VALLEY DR E 1 PCC 216 10 2,160 65 19 44 37 4/9/2012 2 NEPTUNE AVE MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 202 30 6,060 65 11 67 22 4/9/2012 1 SPRINGFIELD AVE SPRINGFIELD AVE 21ST ST E 2 PCC 540 25 13,500 66 30 67 3 3/26/2012 4 30TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 26 12,714 67 43 38 19 5/8/2012 4 33RD PL INGLESIDE DR MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 PCC 486 15 7,290 67 35 61 4 5/8/2012 3 33RD ST MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 177 24 4,248 68 13 52 35 4/9/2012 1 20TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY RHODES ST E 2 PCC 340 28 9,520 69 16 78 6 3/23/2012 3 30TH ST MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 178 25 4,450 69 38 57 5 5/8/2012 2 GENTRY ST PROSPECT AVE 3RD ST E 2 PCC 302 28 8,456 69 38 44 18 12/23/2013 10 6TH ST PROSPECT AVE HOLLOWELL AVE E 2 PCC 888 25 22,200 73 15 56 29 12/23/2013 1 29TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 640 24 15,360 73 27 23 50 4/9/2012 2 CREST DR 35TH ST 34TH ST E 2 PCC 135 20 2,700 73 36 57 7 5/8/2012 3 30TH PL VALLEY DR INGLESIDE DR E 1 PCC 111 15 1,665 75 0 89 11 4/9/2012 2 31ST PL INGLESIDE DR VALLEY DR E 1 PCC 166 10 1,660 75 12 62 26 4/9/2012 3 29TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 640 15 9,600 76 50 32 18 5/8/2012 2 30TH PL INGLESIDE DR MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 14 6,846 78 33 45 22 5/8/2012 1 NEPTUNE AVE PALM DR THE STRAND E 2 PCC 120 30 3,600 78 51 0 49 4/9/2012 12 6TH ST PINE ST 58' s/o PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 477 28 13,356 79 46 44 10 12/5/2013 2 27TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 1 PCC 332 25 8,300 79 29 71 0 5/7/2012 1 CREST DR 34TH ST 33RD ST E 2 PCC 152 20 3,040 79 36 57 7 5/8/2012 3 INGLESIDE DR 30TH ST 31ST ST E 2 PCC 190 25 4,750 79 29 71 0 4/9/2012 25 PALM DR 29TH ST 28TH ST E 1 PCC 219 15 3,285 79 21 51 28 3/29/2012 3 VISTA DR FRANCISCO ST 33RD PL E 2 PCC 133 18 2,394 81 44 46 10 5/8/2012 4 31ST ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 312 25 7,800 82 71 21 8 5/8/2012 7 PALM DR 28TH ST 27TH ST E 1 PCC 220 15 3,300 83 27 64 9 3/29/2012 5 24TH ST THE STRAND HERMOSA AVE E 2 PCC 191 25 4,775 84 17 75 8 5/7/2012 3 26TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 693 25 17,325 85 42 40 18 5/7/2012 2 INGLESIDE DR 28TH ST 29TH ST E 2 PCC 219 25 5,475 86 39 54 7 4/9/2012 6 30TH ST HERMOSA AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 133 25 3,325 87 83 0 17 5/8/2012 1 OCEAN DR 8TH PL 8TH ST E 2 PCC 187 24 4,488 90 100 0 0 12/5/2013 1 OWOSSO AVE AVIATION BLVD 9TH ST E 2 PCC 426 24 10,224 90 99 0 1 12/5/2013 2 PALM DR 34TH ST 35TH ST E 1 PCC 218 15 3,270 90 36 62 2 3/29/2012 11 PALM DR LONGFELLOW AVE 31ST ST E 1 PCC 194 15 2,910 90 44 54 2 3/29/2012 6 PALM DR 31ST ST 30TH ST E 1 PCC 190 18 3,420 91 56 41 3 3/29/2012 26 PALM DR 30TH ST 29TH ST E 1 PCC 215 15 3,225 93 97 0 3 3/29/2012 Page 13 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Report - All Streets Sorted by Rank, Pavement Type, PCI (0-100) Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI PCI Climate PCI Load PCI Other Insp. Date 3 MORNINGSIDE DR 27TH ST 26TH ST E 2 PCC 222 24 5,328 94 100 0 0 4/9/2012 10 PALM DR LONGFELLOW AVE 33RD ST E 1 PCC 225 15 3,375 95 99 0 1 3/29/2012 27 PALM DR 33RD ST 34TH ST E 1 PCC 200 15 3,000 96 99 0 1 3/29/2012 7 9TH ST OWOSSO AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 336 24 8,064 97 100 0 0 12/5/2013 8 10TH ST PROSPECT AVE OWOSSO AVE E 2 PCC 349 24 8,376 97 100 0 0 12/5/2013 2 29TH CT INGLESIDE DR MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 15 7,335 98 0 0 100 5/8/2012 1 7TH PL PROSPECT AVE REYNOLDS LN E PCC 467 30 14,010 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 9 8TH ST CITY LIMIT PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 847 28 23,716 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 2 15TH ST PROSPECT AVE CITY LIMIT E 2 PCC 579 28 16,212 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 1 BEACH DR 22ND ST 24TH ST E 1 PCC 550 12 6,600 100 0 0 0 5/7/2012 1 GOLDEN AVE 15TH ST END E 2 PCC 558 28 15,624 100 12 74 14 3/21/2012 1 HOLLOWELL AVE 6TH ST 7TH PL E 2 PCC 179 28 5,012 100 0 0 0 12/5/2013 3 OZONE CT LOMA DR 24TH ST E 2 PCC 177 20 3,540 100 0 0 0 5/7/2012 1 SILVER ST 15TH ST END E 2 APC 415 28 11,620 100 0 0 0 8/1/2013 808,083 Alleys 2 ALLEY 30TH ST LONGFELLOW AVE N 1 AC 269 11 2,959 4 32 35 33 5/7/2012 3 ALLEY END TENNYSON PL N 1 AC 537 11 5,907 8 52 13 35 5/7/2012 5 ALLEY TENNYSON PL ALLEY w/o TENNYSON PL N 1 AC 459 11 5,049 15 53 10 37 5/7/2012 13 ALLEY 21ST ST 64' s/o 21ST ST N 2 AC 64 20 1,280 38 38 0 62 5/8/2012 8 ALLEY RHODES ST ALLEY w/o RHODES ST N 2 AC 187 20 3,740 46 43 0 57 5/8/2012 10 ALLEY 20TH ST ALLEY n/o 19TH ST N 2 AC 123 20 2,460 48 36 15 49 5/8/2012 14 ALLEY RHODES ST ALLEY w/o RHODES ST N 2 AC 189 15 2,835 51 33 0 67 5/8/2012 1 ALLEY 4TH ST 5TH ST N 2 AC 397 15 4,764 68 66 0 34 12/5/2013 9 ALLEY 22ND CT BEACH DR N 2 AC 61 19 1,159 71 37 0 63 5/7/2012 7 ALLEY 64' w/o 21ST ST 20TH ST N 2 PCC 186 20 3,720 100 0 0 0 5/8/2012 Page 14 of 14 City of Hermosa Beach Page 1 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section IV SECTION IV FORECASTED MAINTENANCE REPORT A. Actual Budget, Five Year Plan (2014--2019) City of Hermosa Beach Page 1 2014 Pavement Management Program Final Report – March 4, 2014 Section IV FORECASTED MAINTENANCE REPORT Listed in chronological order by plan year then alphabetically by street name, this report presents the year and action corresponding to the next scheduled work activity for each segment within the pavement network. ACTUAL BUDGET – The Actual budget was generated for the City to demonstrate how the limited $720k / yr budget allocation performs against the current citywide conditions. City’s Actual budget includes: o $150,000 – General Fund o $470,000 – State Gas Tax o $100,000 – Measure R The following report is sorted by Fiscal Year, then by Rank (functional classification), then by street name. City of Hermosa Beach, CA Forecasted Maintenance Report (2014-2019) Sorted by Rank, FY, Name (A to Z) FY Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI Total $Maint. Type Arterials 2013-14 4 ARDMORE AVE 8TH ST 5TH ST C 2 AC 761 25 19,025 70 Funded Cape Seal 2013-14 11 ARDMORE AVE 2ND ST 5TH ST C 2 AC 832 25 20,800 71 Funded Cape Seal 2014-15 1 GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY A 2 AC 1,572 39 61,308 46 $133,038 Grind-Overlay 2014-15 2 GOULD AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE A 2 AC 1,562 39 60,918 53 $132,192 Grind-Overlay 2014-15 3 GOULD AVE VALLEY DR MORNINGSIDE DR C 2 AC 634 60 38,040 53 $82,547 Grind-Overlay 2014-15 4 GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE VALLEY DR C 3 AC 160 54 8,640 62 $18,749 Grind-Overlay 2014-15 4 HERONDO ST HERMOSA AVE MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 569 12 6,828 28 $10,242 AC R&R 2014-15 5 HERONDO ST VALLEY DR MONTEREY BLVD A 2 AC 784 12 9,408 27 $11,290 AC R&R $388,058 2015-16 12 ARDMORE AVE 256' n/o PIER AVE PIER AVE C 2 PCC 256 27 6,912 84 $22,464 PCC Repair 2015-16 3 ARDMORE AVE PIER AVE 8TH C 2 AC 963 25 24,075 67 $20,704 Cape Seal 2015-16 10 ARDMORE AVE 10TH ST 8TH ST C 2 AC 673 25 16,825 46 $14,469 Cape Seal $57,637 2016-17 6 ARDMORE AVE 21ST ST PORTER LN C 2 AC 1,216 27 32,432 53 $27,892 Cape Seal 2016-17 7 ARDMORE AVE 16TH ST 21ST ST C 2 AC 1,404 27 37,908 68 $12,510 Slurry Seal 2016-17 8 ARDMORE AVE 16TH ST 256' n/o PIER AVE C 2 AC 308 27 8,316 69 $2,744 Slurry Seal 2016-17 3 VALLEY DR 20TH ST 18TH ST C 2 AC 486 28 13,608 63 $4,491 Slurry Seal 2016-17 9 VALLEY DR 25TH ST 24TH ST C 2 AC 675 28 18,900 64 $6,237 Slurry Seal 2016-17 10 VALLEY DR 24TH ST 20TH ST C 2 AC 598 28 16,744 66 $5,526 Slurry Seal 2016-17 8 VALLEY DR PIER AVE 11TH ST C 2 AC 738 25 18,450 76 $6,089 Slurry Seal $65,489 2017-18 1 MANHATTAN AVE LONGFELLOW AVE 29TH ST C 2 AC 598 30 17,940 65 $15,967 Cape Seal 2017-18 17 MANHATTAN AVE LONGFELLOW AVE NEPTUNE AVE C 2 AC 775 30 23,250 66 $7,905 Slurry Seal $23,872 2018-19 1 VALLEY DR GOULD AVE 30TH ST C 2 AC 725 25 18,125 71 $6,344 Slurry Seal 2018-19 2 VALLEY DR LONGFELLOW AVE 30TH ST C 2 AC 370 32 11,840 79 $4,144 Slurry Seal 2018-19 4 VALLEY DR PIER AVE 18TH ST C 2 AC 1,250 28 35,000 66 $85,400 Grind-Overlay 2018-19 5 VALLEY DR HERONDO ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 754 25 18,850 74 $6,598 Slurry Seal 2018-19 6 VALLEY DR 8TH ST 2ND ST C 2 AC 1,693 25 42,325 72 $14,814 Slurry Seal 2018-19 7 VALLEY DR 11TH ST 8TH ST C 2 AC 915 24 21,960 76 $7,686 Slurry Seal 2018-19 12 VALLEY DR GOULD AVE 25TH ST C 2 AC 1,031 28 28,868 78 $10,104 Slurry Seal $135,089 Locals 2013-14 2 1ST ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 769 28 21,532 50 Funded Cape Seal 2013-14 1 3RD ST PACIFIC COAST HWY HOPKINS AVE E 2 AC 1,311 30 39,330 66 Funded Slurry Seal 2013-14 2 3RD ST HOPKINS AVE HOLLOWELL AVE E 2 AC 349 30 10,470 68 Funded Slurry Seal Page 1 of 5 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Forecasted Maintenance Report (2014-2019) Sorted by Rank, FY, Name (A to Z) FY Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI Total $Maint. Type 2013-14 4 3RD ST ARDMORE AVE END E 2 AC 285 26 7,410 65 Funded Slurry Seal 2013-14 5 3RD ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 716 25 17,900 32 Funded Slurry Seal 2013-14 4 4TH ST HOPKINS AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 425 28 11,900 59 Funded PCC Repair 2013-14 7 4TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 783 28 21,924 47 Funded PCC Repair 2013-14 3 7TH ST ARDMORE AVE END E 2 AC 305 25 7,625 94 Funded Slurry Seal 2013-14 1 8TH PL PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 PCC 627 26 16,302 53 Funded PCC Repair 2013-14 9 ARDMORE AVE END 2ND ST E 2 AC 581 25 14,525 75 Funded Slurry Seal 2013-14 1 GENTRY ST 6TH ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 500 28 14,000 41 Funded Cape Seal 2013-14 2 GENTRY ST PROSPECT AVE 3RD ST E 2 PCC 302 28 8,456 69 Funded PCC Repair 2013-14 2 GENTRY ST PROSPECT AVE 3RD ST E 2 PCC 302 28 8,456 69 Funded AC R & R 2013-14 1 HILL ST 2ND ST END E 2 PCC 198 24 4,752 30 Funded PCC repair 2013-14 2 HILL ST 2ND ST END E 2 AC 56 21 1,176 49 Funded Cape Seal 2013-14 1 HILLCREST DR 24TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 207 28 5,796 76 Funded AC R & R 2013-14 2 HOLLOWELL AVE PROSPECT AVE 6TH ST E 2 PCC 629 28 17,612 18 Funded PCC Repair 2013-14 4 HOLLOWELL AVE 2ND ST 3RD ST E 2 PCC 221 28 6,188 27 Funded PCC Repair 2013-14 1 HOPKINS AVE 5TH ST 3RD ST E 2 AC 555 27 14,985 57 Funded Grind-Overlay 2013-14 1 MASSEY AVE 5TH ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 470 25 11,750 30 Funded Grind-Overlay 2014-15 2 11TH PL PACIFIC COAST HWY END E 2 AC 317 39 12,363 14 $73,189 AC Recon 2014-15 3 14TH ST PROSPECT AVE CORONA ST E 2 AC 100 24 2,400 69 $768 Slurry Seal 2014-15 5 14TH ST END PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 461 24 11,064 48 $9,183 Cape Seal 2014-15 1 15TH PL MIRA ST BONNIE BRAE ST E 2 AC 455 20 9,100 47 $7,553 Cape Seal 2014-15 2 15TH PL MIRA ST END E 2 PCC 160 24 3,840 48 $24,960 PCC Repair 2014-15 3 15TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN DR E 2 AC 690 22 15,180 66 $4,858 Slurry Seal 2014-15 5 16TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 608 40 24,320 72 $7,782 Slurry Seal 2014-15 8 16TH ST PROSPECT AVE GOLDEN AVE E 2 AC 267 25 6,675 46 $5,540 Cape Seal 2014-15 3 9TH ST ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 625 28 17,500 57 $113,750 PCC Repair 2014-15 1 BARD ST END 8TH ST E 2 AC 304 25 7,600 40 $6,308 Cape Seal 2014-15 2 BONNIE BRAE ST 16TH ST 14TH ST E 2 AC 639 25 15,975 46 $13,259 Cape Seal 2014-15 1 CAMPANA ST PROSPECT AVE JOY ST E 2 AC 442 22 9,724 38 $21,782 Grind-Overlay 2014-15 1 CORONA ST AVIATION BLVD 14TH ST E 2 AC 573 25 14,325 34 $11,890 Cape Seal 2014-15 2 HARPER AVE AVIATION BLVD 11TH ST E 2 AC 591 25 14,775 52 $12,263 Cape Seal 2014-15 1 LYNDON ST MONTEREY BLVD HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 586 20 11,720 89 $3,633 Slurry Seal 2014-15 1 MONTGOMERY DR AUBREY PARK CT OCEAN DR E 2 AC 276 17 4,692 51 $3,894 Cape Seal 2014-15 4 OCEAN DR AVIATION BLVD 10TH ST E 2 AC 194 24 4,656 70 $1,490 Slurry Seal 2014-15 5 OCEAN DR 10TH ST 9TH ST E 2 AC 200 24 4,800 59 $1,536 Slurry Seal $323,639 2015-16 7 10TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 PCC 623 28 17,444 34 $91,581 PCC Repair 2015-16 1 15TH CT HERMOSA AVE END E 2 AC 396 20 7,920 50 $6,811 Cape Seal Page 2 of 5 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Forecasted Maintenance Report (2014-2019) Sorted by Rank, FY, Name (A to Z) FY Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI Total $Maint. Type 2015-16 2 15TH ST PROSPECT AVE CITY LIMIT E 2 PCC 579 28 16,212 17 $125,319 PCC Recon 2015-16 7 16TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 949 24 22,776 27 $176,058 PCC Recon 2015-16 1 17TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 498 19 9,462 84 $3,122 Slurry Seal 2015-16 3 17TH ST GOLDEN ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 371 24 8,904 24 $32,589 AC Level-Overlay 2015-16 1 22ND CT 21ST ST 22ND ST E 2 AC 313 12 3,756 74 $1,239 Slurry Seal 2015-16 2 24TH PL PARK AVE VALLEY DR E 2 AC 1,002 28 28,056 82 $9,258 Slurry Seal 2015-16 3 24TH ST VALLEY DR PARK AVE E 2 AC 1,132 26 29,432 40 $25,312 Cape Seal 2015-16 6 24TH ST END HILLCREST DR E 2 AC 198 28 7,044 68 $2,325 Slurry Seal 2015-16 7 24TH ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 460 25 11,500 47 $9,890 Cape Seal 2015-16 8 4TH ST CULPER CT MONTEREY BLVD E 1 AC 153 20 3,060 45 $2,632 Cape Seal 2015-16 1 AVA ST 21ST ST END E 2 PCC 528 25 13,200 54 $42,900 PCC Repair 2015-16 5 BAYVIEW DR 19TH ST 16TH ST E 2 AC 836 20 16,720 49 $14,379 Cape Seal 2015-16 7 BAYVIEW DR 16TH ST PIER AVE E 2 AC 767 20 15,340 37 $56,144 AC Level-Overlay 2015-16 1 CIRCLE DR MANHATTAN AVE CIRCLE CT E 2 AC 347 20 6,940 82 $2,290 Slurry Seal 2015-16 2 CIRCLE DR CIRCLE CT MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 427 20 8,540 53 $7,344 Cape Seal 2015-16 2 CORONA ST 14TH ST END E 2 AC 71 22 1,562 39 $1,343 Cape Seal 2015-16 3 HARPER AVE ARTESIA BLVD CARNEGIE LN E 2 AC 1,265 15 18,975 47 $16,319 Cape Seal 2015-16 4 LOMA DR MANHATTAN AVE PARK AVE E 2 AC 462 20 9,240 67 $3,049 Slurry Seal 2015-16 28 PALM DR 24TH ST 22ND ST E 2 AC 385 20 7,700 70 $2,541 Slurry Seal 2015-16 1 PORTER LN GOULD AVE ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 645 30 19,350 56 $16,641 Cape Seal 2015-16 1 POWER ST 21ST ST 20TH ST E 2 AC 240 25 6,000 75 $1,980 Slurry Seal 2015-16 2 POWER ST 24TH ST 21ST ST E 2 AC 469 25 11,725 71 $3,869 Slurry Seal 2015-16 2 RHODES ST 21ST ST END E 2 AC 256 22 5,632 17 $34,355 AC Recon 2015-16 1 VAN HORNE LN REYNOLDS LN PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 51 26 1,326 60 $1,140 Cape Seal $690,432 2016-17 1 27TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR OZONE CT E 2 PCC 559 15 8,385 61 $59,534 PCC Repair 2016-17 2 28TH CT MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 AC 175 18 3,150 74 $1,071 Slurry Seal 2016-17 3 28TH CT END MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 AC 470 15 7,050 66 $2,397 Slurry Seal 2016-17 1 29TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 640 24 15,360 73 $52,992 PCC Repair 2016-17 3 30TH ST MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 178 25 4,450 69 $31,595 PCC Repair 2016-17 4 30TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 26 12,714 67 $90,269 PCC Repair 2016-17 1 31ST PL PALM DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 181 11 1,991 78 $677 Slurry Seal 2016-17 3 31ST PL MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 10 4,890 62 $34,719 PCC Repair 2016-17 1 32ND PL PALM DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 182 10 1,820 49 $1,620 Cape Seal 2016-17 2 32ND PL MANHATTAN AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 AC 640 11 7,040 35 $6,266 Cape Seal 2016-17 4 32ND PL INGLESIDE DR VALLEY DR E 1 PCC 216 10 2,160 65 $15,336 PCC Repair 2016-17 1 33RD PL PALM DR MANHATTAN AVE E 1 AC 177 14 2,478 77 $843 Slurry Seal 2016-17 2 33RD PL HIGHLAND AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 PCC 315 14 4,410 50 $31,311 PCC Repair 2016-17 4 33RD PL INGLESIDE DR MORNINGSIDE DR E 1 PCC 486 15 7,290 67 $51,759 PCC Repair Page 3 of 5 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Forecasted Maintenance Report (2014-2019) Sorted by Rank, FY, Name (A to Z) FY Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI Total $Maint. Type 2016-17 3 33RD ST MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 177 24 4,248 68 $30,161 PCC Repair 2016-17 1 34TH PL MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 1 AC 177 11 1,947 76 $662 Slurry Seal 2016-17 1 34TH ST HIGHLAND AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 336 24 8,064 11 $66,125 PCC Recon 2016-17 1 35TH PL MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 1 AC 180 10 1,800 80 $612 Slurry Seal 2016-17 1 35TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 323 30 9,690 53 $8,624 Cape Seal 2016-17 2 ALLEY 30TH ST LONGFELLOW AVE N 1 AC 269 11 2,959 4 $18,583 AC Recon 2016-17 5 ALLEY TENNYSON PL ALLEY w/o TENNYSON PL N 1 AC 459 11 5,049 15 $19,035 AC Level-Overlay 2016-17 10 BAYVIEW DR 35TH ST 34TH ST E 2 PCC 140 18 2,520 60 $17,892 PCC Repair 2016-17 1 BOUNDARY PL TENNYSON PL ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 1,014 20 17,238 38 $15,342 Cape Seal 2016-17 2 BOUNDARY PL PACIFIC COAST HWY TENNYSON PL E 2 AC 685 20 13,550 12 $51,084 AC Level-Overlay 2017-18 2 CREST DR 35TH ST 34TH ST E 2 PCC 135 20 2,700 73 $19,170 PCC Repair 2016-17 1 MARLITA END END E 2 AC 220 22 4,840 55 $4,308 Cape Seal 2016-17 2 MORNINGSIDE DR 30TH PL LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 AC 439 24 10,536 77 $3,582 Slurry Seal 2016-17 2 NEPTUNE AVE MANHATTAN AVE PALM DR E 2 PCC 202 30 6,060 65 $25,755 PCC Repair 2016-17 1 TENNYSON PL END 30TH ST E 2 AC 490 22 10,930 78 $3,716 Slurry Seal 2016-17 2 TENNYSON PL BOUNDARY PL LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 AC 140 27 3,780 65 $1,285 Slurry Seal $666,322 2017-18 3 13TH ST OCEAN DR PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 689 25 17,225 49 $15,675 Cape Seal 2017-18 1 15TH ST THE STRAND HERMOSA AVE E 2 AC 575 38 21,850 51 $19,884 Cape Seal 2017-18 1 16TH CT HERMOSA AVE BEACH DR E 2 AC 484 19 9,196 77 $3,219 Slurry Seal 2017-18 3 32ND PL MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 1 PCC 489 10 4,890 56 $31,052 PCC Repair 2017-18 3 33RD PL MANHATTAN AVE HIGHLAND AVE E 1 PCC 324 14 4,536 54 $28,804 PCC Repair 2017-18 1 33RD ST HIGHLAND AVE MORNINGSIDE DR E 2 PCC 315 24 7,560 54 $48,006 PCC Repair 2017-18 2 33RD ST MANHATTAN AVE HIGHLAND AVE E 2 PCC 325 24 7,800 50 $49,530 PCC Repair 2017-18 1 5TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 805 28 22,540 72 $7,889 Slurry Seal 2017-18 2 5TH ST OCEAN VIEW AVE PINE CT E 2 APC 152 28 4,256 72 $1,490 Slurry Seal 2017-18 3 5TH ST PINE CT HOPKINS AVE E 2 APC 210 30 6,300 77 $2,205 Slurry Seal 2017-18 4 5TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY OCEAN VIEW CT E 2 APC 303 28 8,484 70 $2,969 Slurry Seal 2017-18 5 5TH ST REYNOLDS LN MASSEY AVE E 2 AC 239 26 6,214 79 $2,175 Slurry Seal 2017-18 8 5TH ST HOPKINS AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 APC 298 30 8,940 83 $3,129 Slurry Seal 2017-18 1 BONNIE BRAE ST 14TH ST AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 756 25 18,900 44 $17,199 Cape Seal 2017-18 3 CYPRESS AVE 6TH ST END E 2 AC 220 26 5,720 34 $13,957 Grind-Overlay 2017-18 1 GENTRY ST 6TH ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 500 28 14,000 41 $91,000 PCC Repair 2018-19 3 LONGFELLOW AVE TENNYSON PL PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 684 30 20,520 47 $130,302 PCC Repair 2018-19 5 LONGFELLOW AVE ARDMORE AVE TENNYSON PL E 2 PCC 992 30 29,760 30 $188,976 PCC Repair 2017-18 2 OWOSSO AVE 14TH ST AVIATION BLVD E 2 AC 708 24 16,992 37 $41,460 Grind-Overlay $698,919 2018-19 5 11TH ST LOMA DR VALLEY DR E 2 AC 684 25 17,100 75 $6,156 Slurry Seal 2018-19 4 14TH ST CORONA ST BONNIE BRAE ST E 2 AC 491 24 11,784 68 $4,242 Slurry Seal Page 4 of 5 City of Hermosa Beach, CA Forecasted Maintenance Report (2014-2019) Sorted by Rank, FY, Name (A to Z) FY Sec ID Name From To Rank Lanes Type L W Area PCI Total $Maint. Type 2018-19 1 19TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 AC 310 20 6,200 75 $2,232 Slurry Seal 2018-19 2 1ST PL ARDMORE AVE PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 AC 653 26 16,978 73 $6,112 Slurry Seal 2018-19 3 1ST ST HERMOSA AVE MONTEREY BLVD E 2 AC 591 40 23,640 74 $8,510 Slurry Seal 2018-19 1 20TH PL HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 564 25 14,100 51 $12,831 Cape Seal 2018-19 1 20TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY RHODES ST E 2 PCC 340 28 9,520 69 $3,427 Slurry Seal 2018-19 7 21ST ST HARPER AVE PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 512 32 16,384 75 $5,898 Slurry Seal 2018-19 2 25TH ST END ARDMORE AVE E 2 AC 413 24 9,912 63 $3,568 Slurry Seal 2018-19 1 28TH CT MORNINGSIDE DR MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 640 15 9,600 62 $60,960 PCC Repair 2018-19 2 29TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 24 11,736 65 $74,524 PCC Repair 2018-19 3 29TH ST HERMOSA AVE MANHATTAN AVE E 2 PCC 311 25 7,775 65 $49,371 PCC Repair 2018-19 2 31ST ST MORNINGSIDE DR INGLESIDE DR E 2 PCC 489 26 12,714 63 $80,734 PCC Repair 2018-19 2 34TH ST MORNINGSIDE DR HIGHLAND AVE E 2 PCC 326 24 7,824 41 $30,357 AC Level-Overlay 2018-19 3 34TH ST MANHATTAN AVE HERMOSA AVE E 2 PCC 314 26 8,164 42 $31,676 AC Level-Overlay 2018-19 4 3RD ST ARDMORE AVE END E 2 AC 285 26 7,410 65 $2,668 Slurry Seal 2018-19 9 4TH ST OCEAN VIEW AV PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2 PCC 304 25 7,600 41 $29,488 AC Level-Overlay 2018-19 5 7TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 1,077 25 26,925 62 $9,693 Slurry Seal 2018-19 10 8TH ST PACIFIC COAST HWY PROSPECT AVE E 2 AC 1,119 20 22,380 69 $8,057 Slurry Seal 2018-19 1 ALLEY 4TH ST 5TH ST N 2 AC 397 15 4,764 68 $1,715 Slurry Seal 2018-19 3 ALLEY END TENNYSON PL N 1 AC 537 11 5,907 8 $37,096 AC Recon 2018-19 8 ALLEY RHODES ST ALLEY w/o RHODES ST N 2 AC 187 20 3,740 46 $3,403 Cape Seal 2018-19 9 ALLEY 22ND CT BEACH DR N 2 AC 61 19 1,159 71 $417 Slurry Seal 2018-19 13 ALLEY 21ST ST 64' s/o 21ST ST N 2 AC 64 20 1,280 38 $1,165 Cape Seal 2018-19 1 AUBREY PARK CT AVIATION BLVD END E 2 AC 378 15 5,670 45 $5,160 Cape Seal 2018-19 6 BAYVIEW DR 19TH ST CIRCLE DR E 2 AC 643 20 12,860 71 $4,630 Slurry Seal 2018-19 3 HOLLOWELL AVE 3RD ST PROSPECT AVE E 2 PCC 174 28 4,872 45 $30,937 PCC Repair 2018-19 1 INGLESIDE DR 29TH ST 30TH ST E 2 PCC 215 25 5,375 45 $34,131 PCC Repair 2018-19 6 INGLESIDE DR 31ST ST LONGFELLOW AVE E 2 PCC 179 24 4,296 42 $16,668 AC Level-Overlay 2018-19 1 LOMA DR 6TH ST 8TH ST E 2 AC 549 27 14,823 71 $5,336 Slurry Seal 2018-19 2 OCEAN DR 15TH PL 14TH ST E 2 AC 517 20 10,340 67 $3,722 Slurry Seal 2018-19 24 PALM DR E 1ST ST LYNDON ST E 2 PCC 260 19 4,940 62 $1,778 Slurry Seal 2018-19 4 SUNSET DR 8TH ST 6TH ST E 2 AC 540 20 10,800 72 $3,888 Slurry Seal $580,553 Page 5 of 5 Public Works Department City of Hermosa Beach, CA PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2014-2019 Public Works Department Hermosa PMP Background Pavement Management Inventory •Pavement studies performed in 2004, 2008, 2012, 2014 •The weighted average PCI for the Arterial network is 77.9 •The weighted average PCI for the Local network is 72.1 •The weighted average PCI for the Alley network is 41.2 •Weighted average PCI citywide is 74.6 (49 in 2004) •6,876,275 SF of pavement throughout City •Arterial network –17.5 miles •Local network –29.7 miles •Alley network –0.5 miles The pavement network is the City’s largest asset with an estimated replacement cost of $66.2 million Public Works Department Factors That Effect Pavement Life •Traffic volume and static / dynamic loads •Weather (rain, poor drainage, extreme heat, freezing) •Type of pavement •Age of pavement •Water runoff / pumping (high water) •Soil and base material under pavement •Preventative maintenance efforts and available funding Public Works Department Pavement Management Program •Steps to Implementing a PMP: Step 1: Assessment of Existing Pavement Network Step 2: Update of Work Histories Step 3: Pavement Condition Survey (Inspections) Step 4: Develop Rehabilitation Strategies / Life-cycle Analysis Step 5: Forecast Future Pavement Rehabilitation Projects and Costs Step 6: Develop 5-year Plan based on available budget and desired goals Public Works Department 2014Update of Hermosa Beach PMP Over the past several months the City has been working with Bucknam & Associates to assess the previous PMP database, its pavement segmentation and to incorporate data into the City’s MicroPAVER database Completed a pavement condition survey on all streets to generate a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for each pavement section Developed and ranked street conditions, maintenance recommendations, and cost estimates for all streets based on current conditions and maintenance practices Developed a CIP maintenance and rehabilitation schedule to report on the overall weighted average PCI anticipated for the next 5 years based on projected available funding Prepared the citywide PMP report for LACMTA (METRO) Public Works Department Pavement Condition Index (PCI) •The PCI is a condition rating that ranges from 0 to 100 •Citywide Weighted Average PCI = Pavement section PCI x by its area / by the total area of the network Public Works Department PCI = 85 to 100 (Very Good) Action Preventative/Stop Gap Public Works Department PCI = 65 to 85 (Fair to Good) Action Surface Treatment (Slurry Seal) Public Works Department PCI = 25 to 65 (Poor to Fair) Action 2” –3” Cape Seal or Overlay Public Works Department PCI = 0 to 25 (Very Poor) Action 4” to 6” Reconstruction Public Works Department Hermosa Beach Street Network The City of Hermosa Beach Street Network: Arterial roads consist of approx. 3,050,584 SF of pavement totaling 17.5 centerline miles Local streets consist of approx. 3,791,818 SF of pavement totaling 29.7 centerline miles Alley streets consist of approx. 33,873 SF of pavement totaling 0.5 miles The weighted average PCI for the Arterials is 77.9 The weighted average PCI for the Locals is 72.1 The overall citywide average PCI is 74.6 (Overall PCI in 2004 study was 49) Public Works Department Current Street Network Pavement Condition Summary Arterial and Local quantities show total centerline miles Public Works Department Current Street Conditions Public Works Department Citywide Weighted PCI’s Fountain Valley = 77.2 El Segundo = 64.2 Sierra Madre = 74.9 Pico Rivera = 50.1 Hermosa Beach = 74.6 Lomita = 59.2 PCI Comparison to Surrounding Cities Public Works Department Asphalt Pavement Life Cycle $.21/SF For Slurry here It is more cost effective to maintain a pavement section in good condition over its useful life in comparison to letting it deteriorate to the point that it requires a major overlay or reconstruction. Public Works Department Maintenance Development Sample of projects considered and needing major overlay or reconstruction (Very Poor 0-40) Gould Avenue, AC Grind –Overlay cost $367,000 Massey Avenue, AC Grind –Overlay cost $41,000 11th Pl, AC Reconstruction cost $73,000 All three projects listed include five total sections @ 193,000 SF 2.9 miles of the network qualifies for major overlay / recon Slurry / cape seal programs need to be continued to address the amount of preventative maintenance (PCI 41-85); 68% of the total network or 32.8 mi. would allow for 110+ sections to receive maintenance covering 2,300,000 SF It is more cost effective to maintain a pavement section in good condition over its useful life in comparison to letting it deteriorate to the point that it requires a major overlay or reconstruction –FINDING THE BALANCE BETWEEN PROJECT IS KEY! Public Works Department Next Steps Forecast Pavement Rehabilitation Projects •How does our current $720K/yr budget perform •What level of funding is necessary to maintain the PCI level of 74.6 in five years Need to Consider: •Current Funding –Fed, State, County, Special Assessments / Grants •Current Unit Costs for accepted maintenance practices •Long-term Goals –Proactive Arterial -Local planning •Alternative pavement applications (slurry & cape seal) •Achieve goal of “preventative maintenance” condition Public Works Department Unit Cost Estimates (Pavement) Per Square Foot Public Works Department Funding Analysis for PMP Scenario 1 -Actual Budget $720,000 / yr –PCI = 77.7 Scenario 2 –Maintain PCI of 74.6 in Five Years -$424,000 / yr Budget City included annual 3% inflation and 30% contingency for contract administration, design, construction and management area included within budgetary calculations and summary tables Public Works Department Funding Analysis for PMP PCI Results of Two Maintenance Projections City included annual 3% inflation and 30% contingency for contract administration, design, construction and management area included within budgetary calculations and summary tables Public Works Department Current citywide weighted average PCI is 74.6 (Fair/Good per MicroPAVER criteria) Continue to model and use Hermosa Beach forecasted maintenance schedule (PMP Report) to see proactive increases in weighted PCI’s Based on cost benefit, proactive overlay / reconstruction and right-of-way improvement program should continue to be funded to address deferred overlay maintenance City’s current conditions will remain high as long as the PMP network is funded at appropriate annual levels Continue to inspect all streets every two to three years Remain proactive with residential/zone maintenance schedules to maximize slurry and cape seal budgets; apply a balanced maintenance program Pursue alternative funding sources such as special assessments, grants, and cost effective asphalt materials (i.e. slurry seal / cape seal) Hermosa Beach PMP Findings Public Works Department Questions? City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Department Police Operations Report Hermosa Beach Police Department Hermosa Beach, California August 2013 Submitted by and reply to: ICMA Center for Public Safety Management International City/County Management Association 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20002 PublicSafety@icma.org 202-962-3607 Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page ii About ICMA The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) is a 100-year-old, non-profit professional association of local government administrators and managers, with approximately 9,000 members located in 28 countries. Since its inception in 1914, ICMA has been dedicated to assisting local governments in providing services to its citizens in an efficient and effective manner. Our work spans all of the activities of local government: parks, libraries, recreation, public works, economic development, code enforcement, brownfields, public safety, and a host of other critical areas. ICMA advances the knowledge of local government best practices across a wide range of platforms including publications, research, training, and technical assistance. Our work includes both domestic and international activities in partnership with local, state and federal governments as well as private foundations. For example, we are involved in a major library research project funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and we are providing community policing training in El Salvador, Mexico and Panama with funding from the United States Agency for International Development. We have personnel in Afghanistan assisting with building wastewater treatment plants and have teams in Central America conducting assessments and developing training programs for disaster preparedness working with SOUTHCOM. ICMA Center for Public Safety Management The ICMA Center for Public Safety Management (ICMA/CPSM) is one of four Centers within the ICMA’s U.S. Programs Division, providing support to local governments in the areas of police, fire, emergency medical services (EMS), emergency management, and homeland security. In addition to providing technical assistance in these areas, we also represent local governments at the federal level and are involved in numerous projects with the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. ICMA/CPSM is also involved in police and fire chief selection, assisting local governments in identifying these critical managers through original research and the identification of core competencies of police and fire managers and by providing assessment center resources. Our local government technical assistance includes workload and deployment analysis, using operations research techniques and credentialed experts to identify workload and staffing needs as well as best practices. We have conducted approximately 140 such studies in 90 communities ranging in size from 8,000 population Boone, Iowa, to 800,000 population Indianapolis, Indiana. Thomas Wieczorek is the Director of the Center for Public Safety Management. Leonard Matarese is the Director of Research & Project Development. Methodology The ICMA Center for Public Safety Management team follows a standardized approach to conducting analyses of fire and other departments involved in providing services to the public. We Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page iii have developed this standardized approach by combining the experience sets of dozens of subject matter experts in the areas of police, fire, and EMS. Our collective team has more than one hundred years of conducting research in these areas for cities in and beyond the United States. The reports generated by the operations and data analysis team are based upon key performance indicators that have been identified in standards and safety regulations and by special interest groups such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police, International Police Association, and the Association of Public Safety Communication Officials International, and through the Center for Performance Measurement of ICMA. These performance measures have developed following decades of research and are applicable in all communities. For that reason, comparison of reports will yield similar reporting formats, but each community’s data are analyzed on an individual basis by the ICMA specialists and represent the unique information for that community. The Public Safety Management team begins most projects by extracting calls for service and raw data from a public safety agency’s computer aided dispatch system. The data are sorted and analyzed for comparison to nationally developed performance indicators. These performance indicators (e.g., response times, workload by time, multiple-unit dispatching) are valuable measures of agency performance regardless of departmental size. The findings are shown in tables and graphs organized in a logistical format. Due to the size and complexity of the documents, a consistent approach to structuring the findings allows for simple, clean reporting. While the categories for the performance indicators and the overall structure of the data and documents follow a standard format, however, the data and recommendations are unique to the organization under scrutiny. The team conducts an operational review in conjunction with the data analysis. The performance indicators serve as the basis for the operational review. The review process follows a standardized approach comparable to that of national accreditation agencies. Prior to the arrival of an on-site team, agencies are asked to provide the team with key operational documents (e.g., policies and procedures, asset lists, etc.). The team visits each city on-site to interview fire agency management and supervisory personnel, rank-and-file officers, and local government staff. The information collected during the site visits and through data analysis results in a set of observations and recommendations that highlight strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the organizations and operations under review. To generate recommendations, the team reviews operational documents, interviews key stakeholders and observes physical facilities, reviews relevant literature, statutes and regulations, industry standards, and other information and/or materials specifically included in a project’s scope of work. The standardized approach ensures that the ICMA Center for Public Safety Management measures and observes all of the critical components of an agency, which in turn provides substance to benchmark against localities with similar profiles. Although agencies may vary in size, priorities, and challenges, there are basic commonalities that enable comparison. The approach also enables the team to identify best practices and innovative approaches. In general, the standardized approach adopts the principles of the scientific method: We ask questions and request documentation upon project start up; confirm accuracy of information Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page iv received; deploy operations and data analysis teams to research each unique environment; perform data modeling; share preliminary findings with the jurisdiction; assess inconsistencies reported by client jurisdictions; follow up on areas of concern; and communicate our results in a formal, written report. ICMA Project Contributors Thomas J. Wieczorek, Director, ICMA Center for Public Safety Management Leonard A. Matarese, Director, Research and Project Development Dov N. Chelst, Ph.D., Director, Quantitative Analysis Priscila Monachesi, Quantitative Analyst James E. McCabe, Ph.D., Senior Public Safety Consultant – Team Lead Bernard Melekian, DPPD, Senior Public Safety Consultant Dennis Kouba, Senior Editor Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page v Table of Contents About ICMA ..................................................................................................................................... ii ICMA Center for Public Safety Management............................................................................................ ii Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ ii ICMA Project Contributors ...................................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ v Tables ............................................................................................................................................ vii Figures ........................................................................................................................................... viii Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1 Major Recommendations: ........................................................................................................................ 1 Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 3 Data Analysis............................................................................................................................................. 3 Interviews ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Focus Groups ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Document Review ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Operational/Administrative Observations ............................................................................................... 3 Implementing the Report’s Recommendations ....................................................................................... 3 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Hermosa Beach Demographics ................................................................................................................. 5 Uniform Crime Report/Crime Comparisons ............................................................................................. 5 Comparisons/Benchmarks ........................................................................................................................ 7 Performance Assessment ............................................................................................................... 9 Issues Raised by Stakeholders .................................................................................................................. 9 Building a Culture of Performance ......................................................................................................... 11 Operations Division ....................................................................................................................... 14 Demand Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 14 Patrol Deployment and Staffing ............................................................................................................. 17 Deployment ............................................................................................................................................ 20 Community Lead Sergeant (Nightclub Enforcement) ............................................................................. 33 Traffic ...................................................................................................................................................... 35 Technology on Patrol .............................................................................................................................. 37 Support Services Division .............................................................................................................. 38 Detectives ............................................................................................................................................... 38 Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page vi Crime Scene Investigations ..................................................................................................................... 41 Regional Task Forces ............................................................................................................................... 41 Crime Analysis/Criminal Intelligence ...................................................................................................... 41 Jail/Records/Evidence-Property ............................................................................................................. 42 Administrative Section............................................................................................................................ 42 Miscellaneous ............................................................................................................................... 44 Salary, Recruitment, and Retention ....................................................................................................... 44 Accreditation .......................................................................................................................................... 44 Department Policy and Procedures ........................................................................................................ 45 Police Facility Maintenance .................................................................................................................... 45 Crime Prevention .................................................................................................................................... 46 Reorganization .............................................................................................................................. 47 Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 48 Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page vii Tables TABLE 1: Recommended Staffing for the HBPD ....................................................................................... 2 TABLE 2: 2011 UCR Crime Comparisons ................................................................................................... 6 TABLE 3: Hermosa Beach Police Department in Perspective ................................................................... 8 TABLE 4: 2011 Calls for Service .............................................................................................................. 15 TABLE 5: HBPD Patrol Deployment Plan ................................................................................................ 19 TABLE 6: Recommended Patrol Staffing for the HBPD .......................................................................... 33 TABLE 7: Proposed Hermosa Beach Police Department Organization Table ......................................... 47 Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page viii Figures FIGURE 1: Deployment and Main Workload, Weekdays Summer 2012 .................................................. 23 FIGURE 2: Workload Percentage by Hour, Weekdays, Summer 2012 ..................................................... 23 FIGURE 3: Deployment and Main Workload, Weekends, Summer 2012 ................................................ 25 FIGURE 4: Workload Percentage by Hour, Weekends, Summer 2012 ..................................................... 25 FIGURE 5: Deployment and Main Workload, Weekdays, Winter 2013 ................................................... 28 FIGURE 6: Workload Percentage by Hour, Weekdays, Winter 2013 ....................................................... 28 FIGURE 7: Deployment and Main Workload, Weekends, Winter 2013 ................................................... 30 FIGURE 8: Workload Percentage by Hour, Weekends, Winter 2013 ....................................................... 30 FIGURE 9: Spatial Representation of CFS Demand ................................................................................... 32 Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 1 Executive Summary ICMA was commissioned to review the operations of the Hermosa Beach Police Department (HBPD). While our analysis covered all aspects of the department’s operations, a particular focus of our study was on identifying the appropriate staffing of the agency given its workload, community demographics, and crime levels. We analyzed departmental workload using operations research methodology and compared that workload to staffing and deployment levels. We reviewed other performance indicators, which allowed us to understand the implications of service demand on current staffing. We reviewed the department’s organizational design to determine if the many functions required of a modern police agency are staffed appropriately. Our study involved data collection, interviews with key police and administration personnel, on-site observations of the job environment, data analysis, comparative analyses, and development of alternatives and recommendations. Our principle recommendations appear below and are described in detail throughout the report. Major Recommendations: 1. Create a “culture of performance” by developing and implementing strategic plans directed at crime, traffic, and quality of life in the downtown area. In addition, the department should embrace a performance management framework to drive performance of the entire organization through quantitative analysis and accountability. 2. Examine more aggressively the demand generated by certain calls for service in order to reduce response to nonemergency calls. 3. Modify the current patrol shift schedule. Once the schedule is modified and more efficient, two additional officers should be added and assigned geographic responsibility in neighborhoods outside the downtown area. 4. Create a separate Downtown Enforcement Unit consisting of one sergeant, four police officers, and two community service officers, and ensure aggressive implementation of the Late-Night Establishment Action Plan. 5. Implement electronic report writing and wireless technology on patrol. 6. Implement a more robust case management system for detectives. 7. Examine the cases presented for prosecution to the City Prosecutor. 8. Reassign personnel to regional task forces. 9. Add civilian personnel in the following capacities: ○ crime analysis and criminal intelligence ○ administration ○ crime prevention. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 2 10. Develop an early warning system for personnel management. 11. Conduct a comprehensive salary survey for police officers. 12. Explore construction of a new police facility. Combining all of the personnel recommendations contained in this report will result in an organization consisting of 39 sworn and 27 civilian personnel. Table 1 presents the organization for sworn and civilian positions. ICMA considers these staffing levels appropriate given the current workload demands and community demographics. The ICMA team thanks the city and police administrations of Hermosa Beach for their assistance in completing this project. In particular, ICMA commends City Manager Tom Bakaly and Police Chief Michael McCrary for their enthusiasm and cooperation with ICMA team regarding documentation requests and the overall project. TABLE 1: Recommended Staffing for the HBPD Chief Captain Lieutenant Sergeant PO/Detective Civilian Executive 1 1 2 Support Division 1 1 Detectives 1 3 1 Task Forces 2 DART 1 4 Administration 1 1 Jail/Records 9 Operations Division 1 1 Patrol 4 16 Traffic 1 2 Community Services 12 Total 1 1 2 8 27 27 Grand Total Sworn 39 Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 3 Methodology Data Analysis We used numerous sources of data to support our conclusions and recommendations for the Hermosa Beach Police Department. Information was obtained from the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, Part I offenses, along with numerous sources of HBPD internal information. UCR Part I crimes are defined as murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, and larceny of a motor vehicle. Internal sources included data from the computer-aided dispatch (CAD) system for information on calls for service (CFS). Interviews This study relied extensively on intensive interviews with HBPD personnel. On-site and in-person interviews were conducted with all division commanders regarding their operations. We interviewed representatives of the union to get an understanding of the labor-management climate in the HBPD. Focus Groups A focus group is an unstructured group interview in which the moderator actively encourages discussion among participants. Focus groups generally consist of eight to ten participants and are used to explore issues that are difficult to define. Group discussion permits greater exploration of topics. For the purposes of this study, focus groups were held with representatives of the department. Document Review ICMA consultants were furnished with numerous reports and summary documents by the Hermosa Beach Police Department. Information on strategic plans, personnel staffing and deployment, evaluations, training records, and performance statistics were provided. Operational/Administrative Observations Over the course of the evaluation period, numerous observations were conducted. These included observations of general patrol, special enforcement, investigations, and administrative functions. ICMA representatives engaged all facets of department operations from a “participant observation” perspective. Implementing the Report’s Recommendations ICMA’s conclusions and recommendations are a blueprint for both the city and police administrations. The city administration should have periodic meetings with the HBPD to ensure that ICMA’s recommendations are implemented. It is strongly recommended that the chief identify and task one individual with responsibility for implementing these recommendations. This person should establish a liaison with the chief of police, and should be given the authority and Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 4 responsibility to effectuate the changes recommended. This includes ensuring the recommendations are executed in a timely fashion and then evaluating the department’s progress every six months for efficiency, effectiveness, and performance. All of ICMA’s recommendations are practical and sensible and should be implemented by the police administration within a reasonable period of time. If the city desires, ICMA can provide a service to review, monitor, and evaluate the department’s progress and ensure that the recommendations are being implemented properly. If the police administration continues to have difficulty implementing the recommendations, ICMA can assist with implementation. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 5 Background Hermosa Beach Demographics When determining the appropriateness of the deployed police resources—both current and future—a key factor for consideration is the demographics of the community. Hermosa Beach is located in Los Angeles County, California, is a suburb of Los Angeles, and is a popular beach destination for the area. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the town’s population is relatively stable. In 2000, Hermosa Beach had an estimated 18,566 residents, which increased 6.5 percent to 19,773 in 2012. The racial makeup of the city is estimated to be 86.8 percent white, 1.2 percent African-American, 5.7 percent Asian, and 4.2 percent other, with 8.4 percent of the total population reported as Hispanic. The median household income in Hermosa Beach is $102,289, which is 66 percent higher than the median household income in the state. Similarly, on average between the years 2007-2011, only 3.6 percent of the Hermosa Beach population was below the poverty level, which is much lower than the statewide rate of 14.4 percent. These data indicate that Hermosa Beach is an affluent, stable, and homogeneous community. The Hermosa Beach Strategic Plan seeks to position the city as the “Best Little Beach City” by 2028. This vision involves the cultivation of a hometown spirit, a beach lifestyle, and an eclectic downtown area. This vision, combined with the demographics of the community, has important implications for the police department and the style of policing services delivered to the community. Any police department is a reflection of the community it serves; therefore, these factors are essential for understanding the department as well as offering improvement opportunities that are sustainable in the community. Uniform Crime Report/Crime Comparisons As defined by the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, the seven major Part I offenses are used to measure the extent, fluctuation, and distribution of serious crime. Part I crimes are the seven most serious offenses in two categories (violent and property crime). Serious violent crime is defined as murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Serious property crime is defined as burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. As can be seen in Table 2, Hermosa Beach reported in 2011 a UCR Part I violent crime rate of 314 violent crimes per 100,000 residents. For UCR Part 1 property crimes, the rate in Hermosa Beach was 3,066 property crimes per 100,000 residents. The violent crime rate in Hermosa Beach was 23.7 percent lower than the state rate, and 18.7 percent lower than the national rate. The rate of property crime wa 18.7 percent higher than the state average and 5.4 percent higher than the national average. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 6 TABLE 2: 20111 UCR Crime Comparisons Agency Population Violent Crime Rate* Property Crime Rate* U.S. 311,591,917 386 2,909 California 37,691,912 411 2,584 Population Comparison La Canada Flintridge 20,484 68 1,704 South El Monte 20,352 599 1,847 Marina 19,950 246 2,416 Hermosa Beach 19,735 314 3,066 American Canyon 19,683 224 2,677 Arvin 19,531 845 2,709 Chowchilla 18,940 433 2,392 Neighboring Comparison Torrance 147,148 126 1,880 Redondo Beach 67,533 249 2,371 Manhattan Beach 35,548 124 2,506 Lawndale 33,154 528 1,348 El Segundo 16,850 226 3,264 Note: * = per 100,000. Looking at community crime rates, we took information from the FBI UCR Program on Crime in the United States and compared Hermosa Beach with neighboring communities and other California jurisdictions of similar populations. For this analysis La Canada Flintridge, South El Monte, Marina, American Canyon, Arvin, and Chowchilla were used as population comparators, and Torrance, Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach, Lawndale, and El Segundo were used as neighboring comparators. It should be noted that the demographics of these communities encompass a wide range and the analysis is not intended to strictly compare Hermosa Beach with Marina or Redondo Beach, for example. Crime is a complex social phenomenon, and these data should not be interpreted too closely. This analysis is meant as an illustration of communities in California and how they compare with respect to rates of crime. Examination of the comparisons presented in Table 1 indicates that Hermosa Beach has a comparably high crime rate. Out of the seven jurisdictions with similar population, Hermosa Beach has the 4th highest violent crime rate and the highest property crime rate. When compared with neighboring communities regardless of population, Hermosa Beach has the second highest rate of both violent and property crime. 1 At the time of this report only 2010 UCR data were available on comparison jurisdictions. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 7 Comparisons/Benchmarks In order to put the HBPD into perspective on a wider scale, it is important to compare it with other police departments. In a 2011 study, IBM looked at several financial, organizational, and demographic variables to assess the relative efficiency of local governments. The resulting report, Smarter, Faster, Cheaper, presents data from the 100 largest U. S. cities in various regions.2 In addition, the Overland Park, Kansas, Police Department conducts an annual survey of 26 small- to medium-sized police departments each year on, among other measures, the same measures reported in the IBM report. This Overland Park report, entitled “Benchmark Cities Survey,”3 is also useful for comparative evaluation. Furthermore, the Bureau of Justice Statistics publishes periodic reports on the administrative and managerial characteristics of police departments in the United States.4 Keeping in mind that each community has characteristics that govern the style and size of its police department, these characteristics and comparisons can help assess the relative performance of the HBPD. These documents are useful in benchmarking the HBPD on several key variables, including per-capita spending on police services, spending per crime, number of sworn personnel per crime, overtime expense, and sworn officers per capita (see Table 3). On average, the HBPD spends approximately $530 per capita on police services, substantially higher than the average of $323 per capita presented in the IBM report and the $217 per capita presented in the Benchmark Cities Survey. Hermosa Beach’s 2011 crime rate of 3,380 serious crimes per 100,000 residents is approximately 32.4 percent lower than the average crime rate of 5,000 crimes per 100,000 among the cities in the IBM report and is approximately 3.1 percent higher than the average crime rate reported in the Benchmark Cities Survey. Also, the HBPD spent $337,000 on overtime expenses in FY2012 out of a personnel payroll of $7.9 million.5 This represents approximately 4.3 percent of total salaries paid. This overtime-to-payroll ratio is comparable to the benchmark on police overtime expenses from the IBM report but higher than the overtime percentage reported in the Benchmark Cities Survey. Lastly, the HBPD authorized strength is 35 sworn officers (currently there are 5 vacancies, which brings the actual headcount to 30), or 178 officers per 100,000, which, again, is lower than the average of 190 officers per 100,000 residents from the IBM study, but higher than the 144 officers/100,000 residents from the Benchmark Cities Survey. 2 David Edwards, Smarter, Faster, Cheaper: An Operational Efficiency Benchmarking Study of 100 US Cities (Somers, NY: IBM, 2011), available at http://icma.org/en/icma/knowledge_network/documents/kn/Document/303182/Smarter_Faster_Cheaper. 3 http://www.opkansas.org/maps-and-stats/benchmark-cities-survey/ 4 Bureau of Justice Statistics, Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (2007). 5 Personnel payroll is determined as the sum of regular, extra, premium, longevity, certification, field training, and workers’ comp payments. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 8 TABLE 3: Hermosa Beach Police Department in Perspective Benchmark Area HBPD IBM Benchmark Vs. IBM Benchmark Benchmark City Survey Vs. Benchmark City Survey Per capita police spending $530 $323 HIGHER $217 HIGHER Crime rate 3,380 5,000 LOWER 3277 HIGHER Overtime 4.3% 5% LOWER 3.8% HIGHER Officers per capita 178 190 LOWER 144 HIGHER Overall, the HBPD earns mixed marks for financial benchmarks. The cost of operations appears lower in some areas and higher in others. This is related to many factors that will be discussed in the body of the report. In brief, the department spends more per capita and has a lower number of officers per capita, and has a mixed experience with regards to comparison reports on officers per capita, overtime, and crime rate. The mixed results are likely due to the characteristics of the cities included in the different sources. The IBM report focused on the 100 largest cities, and the Benchmark Cities Survey focuses on an availability sample of smaller communities. The key to operational efficiency, however, is not found exclusively in financial austerity. The size and style of a police department and the types of services that it provides are a reflection of the character and demands of that community. The challenge is to determine how many police officers are necessary to meet that demand, and how to deploy those personnel in an effective and efficient manner. The above analysis demonstrates that the HBPD is financially efficient in its personnel deployment. The analysis that follows is an attempt to build upon this discussion and answer the “how many” and “how to deploy” questions that are the essence of police operational and personnel resource decisions. Our report now turns to the various elements of the HBPD and an assessment of those elements in context with prevailing industry standards and best practices. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 9 Performance Assessment One of the most important aspects of the ICMA study of the HBPD is an exploration of the viewpoints of the various stakeholders. The project methodology included two focus groups with police officers and supervisors to understand the internal working of the department from their eyes. Also, during the site visit an open forum was held for community members to attend and voice their concerns, raise important issues, and provide a community perspective of the department. The community meeting was held in the city council chambers and was attended by approximately twenty members of the Hermosa Beach community. The issues raised by the sworn employees and the community are presented here. Additionally, there is a discussion on building a culture of performance. Issues Raised by Stakeholders Staffing • Every stakeholder group we spoke with mentioned the issue of staffing. The issue manifests itself in several ways. The greatest concern was expressed with respect to the Pier Plaza area. The feeling is that there are insufficient personnel to deal with the alcohol-related issues in the area, particularly after 10:00 p.m. • There is a feeling, particularly among community members, that there is no police presence east of Pacific Coast Highway unless there is a call for service. • There is a feeling among all of the sworn ranks that enforcement should be avoided in order to prevent officers being taken out of the field. Minimum staffing for patrol is described as two officers and a sergeant. This contention wasn’t supported by a brief review of the patrol logs, although it was unclear as to which officers on the log were assigned to patrol and which were assigned to extra details. • Senior officers are used as watch commanders, particularly on Wednesday and Thursday evenings. • All ranks described feeling tired and overburdened. Captains and lieutenants work overtime details to help lessen the staffing burden. • The city council funded five additional police officer positions, but the department has been unable to fill them. There is some concern about officers being involved in the hiring of new officers. • Community members praised the department’s responsiveness and level of caring. All community members talked about lack of resources. • Several community members noted the lack of traffic enforcement; both for moving violations and parking violations. These observations were validated by the sworn personnel. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 10 Pay and Compensation • Sworn personnel, including the command staff, say that they are the lowest paid in the South Bay and among the lowest paid in southern California. • Sworn personnel have not had any pay raises in several years. Officers point to the fact that the city needed to raise the compensation level for both the city manager and the police chief in order to attract the most qualified candidates. • Officers did not feel that they needed to be among the highest paid, but felt that there was no recognition or respect for the work that they do. They pointed to Manhattan Beach, which has more personnel and who handle fewer calls (it was unclear as to whether they meant in total or per officer), yet whose personnel make significantly more money. Miscellaneous • There is a concern that the City Prosecutor is not pursuing prosecutions vigorously enough. • There is a perceived disconnect between the police department and City Hall. • There is a belief that the CALEA accreditation is not very realistic in terms of the staffing hours required to maintain it. It was described as being a slogan to put on the side of the cars and not something that actually makes a difference. • The police facilities are very inadequate. There is an occupied office directly under the condemned fire tower. This would appear to be a very serious safety issue. Several officers mentioned the lack of a range training facility. The Pier Plaza Area • All stakeholders agree that the single biggest challenge facing the city is the alcohol-related issues being generated by the Pier Plaza bars. The Pier Plaza area is perceived as being out of control and stakeholders also perceive that there are not adequate resources to deal with the situation. • A very common phrase, again used by all stakeholders, was that the city had created the “beach party culture” downtown and now doesn’t want to provide adequate resources to deal with this issue. • A brief review of the daily logs suggests that alcohol abuse and other related issues are the greatest drain on patrol resources. • There are two downtowns; one before 10:00 p.m. and one after. • There does not seem to be any type of strategic approach to dealing with this situation. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 11 Building a Culture of Performance On numerous occasions the ICMA team heard the expression “beach lifestyle” to describe the culture of the community and the culture of the HBPD. The beach lifestyle is an important part of the vision and strategic planning of the city and an integral part of the community. A police department is a reflection of the community it serves, and the beach lifestyle is present in the culture of the department as well. Undoubtedly, the expression has different meaning in the community and the department, and in the department the beach lifestyle is thought to be reflected in a casual approach to management. Officers and supervisors reflect positively on this style of management and believe it is one of the most positive qualities of working in the HBPD. Employees are not micromanaged, the work gets done in a casual and friendly atmosphere, and employees are trusted to bear the responsibility of their jobs. But this approach can also breed a lack of accountability for performance and a disinvestment by the officers in the community they serve. Several issues are threatening this beach lifestyle in the HBPD and the organization is struggling to change. First, the department is short on resources. The personnel shortage is forcing the officers to work longer hours and more days. Second, the culture of the downtown area is changing. The nightlife is growing as source of community dissatisfaction and the department is not prepared to respond. Third, the economic realities faced by the community are pitting these two issues against each other. It is ICMA’s contention that these three issues must be addressed simultaneously and that the beach lifestyle management approach can be sustained within a culture of performance. This can be accomplished through a strategic approach to performance by integrating measures and accountability into the existing organizational culture, and by adding resources to the department in order to position it more effectively to confront the challenges of crime, traffic, and disorder present in the community. Strategic plans must be created to address problem crime, disorder, and community problems. Strategic planning begins with a thorough analysis of the issues. Times, days, locations, types of property stolen, hot spots, frequent offenders/known recidivists, wanted persons, and so on, must all be identified at frequent and regular intervals. Armed with this information, a coordinated and integrated plan must be created that involves all elements of the HBPD. For example, the role of patrol officers and detectives must be clearly established. And these roles, tasks, and responsibilities must be driven by the information presented. More thorough, quicker, and more deliberate analysis of information and creation of actionable intelligence leading to an immediate deployment of resources will shorten the cycle between crime and arrest. A shorter cycle leads to greater efficiency and fewer instances of crime. It also lessens the possibility that good police work is left up to the individual motivation of certain officers, or worse, chance. Rather, results are driven by deliberate actions of the entire department. The outcome of a strategic planning approach will be a more robust response and fewer police incidents in Hermosa Beach. The unique elements of the Hermosa Beach community need to be considered in developing such a plan. The common denominators, however, are that such a plan must be based on a thorough analysis of the problem and must involve all facets of the HBPD (in other words, it is not a patrol plan or an investigative plan). A plan must include measures developed to evaluate performance, Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 12 and the department must regularly track progress and alter tactics in response to changing conditions. The plan must also be written and distributed to all personnel involved.6 Currently, the operations of the HBPD are almost entirely reactive. Responding to crime, traffic accidents, and incidents of disorder after they occur should be viewed as a failure of performance. An effort must made to identify the root causes of community problems and then the department must bring resources to bear on the causes. At present, when patterns or problems arise, the department prepares a notice to be read and discussed at daily lineups for officers on patrol to perform extra checks and to be aware of crime conditions on their beats. The expectation is that officers will use their discretionary patrol time to investigate these conditions and try to prevent future crimes. Currently, there is little, if any, feedback on these efforts, and the administration has no way of knowing if the condition has been addressed. There is also only a limited follow-up to determine if the officers are making the extra checks in the first place. With software technology that is now available, crime, traffic, and quality–of-life conditions can be mapped and tracked in order to better manage the conditions and ensure that they are being addressed. The concept of putting “cops-on-the-dots,” meaning deploying resources where and when the problems exist and then aggressively tracking the conditions to make sure they are ameliorated, is part of contemporary police management that largely absent in the HBPD. Inspection of the station house facility reveals that mapping technology is not used to any great extent and crime analysis and intelligence is not being disseminated in a coordinated manner to officers in the agency. In fairness to the HBPD, the community is small enough and the issues predictable enough that officers formulate a common working knowledge of the community, which may make sophisticated planning methods unnecessary. However, the problems confronted by the community seem to be growing and seem to be unmanageable. Perhaps it is time to replace the intuitive approach with an approach based upon the contemporary principles of strategic planning. The strategic planning process, including the use of MIS and GIS software, proper planning, deployment, and follow-up, is a circular process that uses feedback from enforcement and deployment efforts to readjust future operations and deployment. This creates feedback-loops and the organization learns from its successes and failures and more effectively uses enforcement resources. Incident analysis, intelligence, mapping, and strategy development are critical components of this process and the HBPD could benefit substantially from these efforts. This approach can be taken with crime, traffic, and disorderly conditions from the nightlife downtown. Accountability is another essential component of this process. Someone in the HBPD needs to be accountable for two major parts of the strategic plan: 1) ensuring that enforcement efforts are 6 Elements of a strategic plan regarding thefts might include the following: Deployment and activity of patrol and specialized units in hot spots; monitoring of repeat/known offenders; interrogating all persons arrested for any form of theft to learn motives, tactics, associates, etc.; identifying and monitoring pawn shop/fencing locations; public education and programs public service announcements; performing sting operations; establishing heightened prosecution programs for shoplifting and other theft offenses; working closely with private security; working with building and property managers to provide greater physical security measures; and pickpocket or other training. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 13 directed properly (the right levels, and the right offenses, times, and locations), and 2) making sure that the conditions are being monitored and tactics changed in response to the changing conditions. This is not a role for the officer on patrol, but someone must be the “quarterback” of these efforts (see discussion below). Again, the product of this strategic planning process is a written plan, and a prescribed method of follow-up and periodic review to ensure the plan is working. Resources are needed to accomplish strategic planning. Analyses must be conducted, plans written and distributed, and enforcement actions must be acted on aggressively. Also, this process must be repeated for all major issues facing the HBPD, that is, crime, traffic, and the downtown district. It is recommended that a position be created in the HBPD and which is explicitly responsible for this process. A “Planning Officer” or “Intelligence Officer” or some variation of these titles must be created and tasked with the responsibility for developing and evaluating the strategic enforcement efforts of the HBPD. The person in this position should work directly for the chief of police, should be removed from day-to-day operations, and should be responsible for focusing the resources of the department in a targeted and coordinated fashion to address the problems faced by the community. Furthermore, it should be noted the while the HBPD should prepare and disseminate an annual report, an annual report is not a strategic plan. An annual report is a summary of past performance and a strategic plan is a document that drives future performance and directs operational efforts. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 14 Operations Division The HBPD provides the community with a full range of police services, including responding to emergencies and calls for service (CFS), performing directed activities, and solving problems. The HBPD is a service-oriented department providing a high level of service to the community. Essentially, every call for service gets a police response and every criminal case gets investigated. The department embraces this approach and considers every request for service from the public important and deserving of a police response. Demand Analysis Time and time again, it was reported to the ICMA team that no call is considered too minor to warrant a response and no case is too small to warrant an investigation. From the command staff to the rank-and-file officers, this approach was demonstrated to us on numerous occasions. The result of this policing philosophy is the delivery of comprehensive policing services to the Hermosa Beach community. The department has the hallmark of a small-town approach to policing, in which people are not just citizens but members of a community. Service is personalized, the police are part of the fabric of the community, and expectations for police service are high. This approach is not without costs, however. Considerable resources are needed to maintain the small-town approach. The patrol division must be staffed with enough officers to respond to virtually every call placed to the HBPD. From conversations with HBPD officers of all ranks, it’s clear that the community of Hermosa Beach expects this level of service, and the HBPD must be structured to deliver it. Because the department entertains almost every request for police service, the choice will be between the options of “Do we continue to police the community in a full-service mode?” and “What steps can we take to restructure demand and still promote order and safety?” That is, the department must decide whether to sustain this comprehensive level of police service or take the steps necessary to manage it. Essentially, this is a political decision regarding the quantity of police services offered. But quality doesn’t need to suffer. The recommendations offered regarding operations, if implemented, will permit the HBPD to continue its full-service model of policing and run the agency more efficiently while keeping personnel resources stable into the foreseeable future. Table 4 presents information on the categories of calls for service (CFS) that were handled by the HBPD between May 1, 2012 and April 30, 2013. In total, HBPD officers were dispatched to 17,381 calls during that 12-month period, or approximately forty-eight calls per day, with approximately 38 percent of these calls initiated by the police and 63 percent were direct calls for service from the public. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 15 TABLE 4: 2011 Calls for Service First, total CFS volume as a percentage of population is about what is expected for a community the size of Hermosa Beach. According to the table there were 17,381 CFS in the year examined, with 5,285 being traffic enforcement. Therefore, direct demand for service is approximately 12,096 CFS. The population of Hermosa Beach is 19,735. This indicates that during the 12-month period under observation the CFS rate was approximately 0.613 per person (or 613 CFS for every 1,000 residents). While there is no accepted standard ratio between calls for service and population, the lower the ratio means the better managed the CFS function is in an organization. ICMA studies of other communities show the CFS/population ratio to range between 0.4 and 1.1 CFS per person per year. A value of 0.613 CFS/person/year indicates that there is an effective “triage” system in place in that call takers are screening out frivolous and/or “nonpolice” calls. ICMA experience indicates that without effective management, the 911 system can become a catch-all for community demands. Being open 24 hours, 365 days each year, 911 is often the “go-to” resource for community concerns. If not properly managed, this can result in the misuse or ineffective deployment of valuable police resources. The data from the HBPD indicate that police resources, as reflected by CFS/population ratio, are being deployed effectively. In group discussions, patrol officers voiced frustration over being dispatched to nuisance, or nonemergency, calls for service, such as kids refusing to go to school, landscapers blowing leaves in the street, birds or other animals that had gotten into homes, etc. Although these types of calls for service were reported, in general the HBPD seems to do a fairly good job of minimizing response to nonemergency calls coming into the 911 system. However, the department can be more aggressive Category Police-initiated Other-initiated All CFS Calls Units per Call Minutes Calls Units per Call Minutes Total Calls % of Total Rank Accidents 0 N/A N/A 648 2.1 36.5 648 3.7 6 Alarm 0 N/A N/A 569 2.1 11.1 569 3.3 9 Animal calls 0 N/A N/A 71 1.4 20.4 71 0.4 11 Assist other agency 1 2.0 30.3 435 1.9 28.7 436 2.5 10 Check/investigation 159 1.3 38.7 467 2.2 23.5 626 3.6 8 Crime–persons 3 1.7 32.7 641 2.2 32.3 644 3.7 7 Crime–property 6 1.8 17.2 1,413 1.6 32.5 1,419 8.2 5 Disturbance 0 N/A N/A 3,678 2.0 17.3 3,678 21.2 2 Miscellaneous 299 1.5 13.2 1,141 1.4 33.6 1,440 8.3 4 Prisoner–arrest 1 4.0 7.5 20 1.5 65.6 21 0.1 12 Suspicious person/ vehicle 1,419 1.5 13.1 1,125 2.0 17.0 2,544 14.6 3 Traffic enforcement 4,692 1.3 11.5 593 1.6 14.6 5,285 30.4 1 Total 6,580 1.4 12.6 10,801 1.9 23.4 17,381 100.0 Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 16 at screening CFS and attempt to minimize even more the nonemergency CFS from being dispatched to officers on patrol. Reducing Responses to Certain Calls Despite what appears to be effective CFS triaging, the HBPD still handles a high number of calls that have limited or no relationship to law enforcement. Consideration should be given to evaluating responses to these calls. This evaluation could be performed by a committee of HBPD personnel, who can examine calls for service and recommend means to eliminate, downsize, and streamline responses to certain calls by units on patrol. The quantity and quality of certain calls deserve closer scrutiny, as substantially curtailing response holds enormous potential for improving operational efficiencies. Also, the HBPD handles a large number of “disturbance” CFS, undoubtedly originating from the downtown area. Other sections of this report recommend the creation of a downtown response team to deal with long-term problems in this area. Using the CFS data will give this team information and intelligence to respond to problematic locations, correct the conditions associated with these locations, and therefore limit the number of CFS received from the public. Three categories of calls (burglar alarms, traffic accidents with property damage only, and miscellaneous) might not warrant the response of a sworn police officer. For example, at motor vehicle accidents involving only property damage, the police role is largely administrative, preparing and filing reports. Similarly, industry experience also tells us that more than 98 percent of all burglar alarms are false alarms and that calls regarding animal complaints are typically just nuisance-type calls that do not involve any danger to citizens. The bottom line here is that many calls for service dispatched to officers in the HBPD could be eliminated. During interviews and focus groups, officers raised concerns about the time they spend responding to calls that have no police purpose. Calls in this miscellaneous category are likely to capture many of these assignments. Police departments across the nation are removing property-damage traffic crashes from the emergency police responsibility. Response by a sworn police officer to a routine property-damage-only traffic crash is a questionable use of emergency police resources. Combined, these three categories of calls represent more than 15 percent of the patrol CFS workload in Hermosa Beach. If traffic enforcement and disturbance CFS are eliminated from the model, then accidents, alarms, and miscellaneous CFS become 32 percent of all CFS handled by the HBPD. In other words, almost one-third of all CFS handled by the HBPD that are not traffic enforcement or disturbances are nonemergency CFS that do not require a police response. These categories of calls must be examined carefully to determine whether police response should be continued. To accomplish this task, ICMA recommends that the HBPD establish a committee that includes all the principal stakeholders, including representatives from all ranks within the department along with community members. The committee should be assigned the responsibility of evaluating the CFS workload with an eye toward reducing nonemergency CFS response. This process, combined with an dedicated team in the downtown area, can have a substantial impact on reducing CFS handled by the HBPD and can free officer time on patrol to deal with quality of life and other important community problems. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 17 Time Spent on Calls The data presented in Table 4 show that in the study period it took officers an average of 23.4 minutes to complete a nonpolice-initiated call for service. This is excellent. ICMA research on calls for service in similar jurisdictions indicates that the average time for CFS completion is approximately 30 minutes. This indicates that it takes approximately 22 percent less time for the HBPD to handle a call for service than it does for the average U. S. police department of a similar size. The variables that drive CFS completion time are numerous and beyond the scope of this analysis. However, this suggests that officers are handling CFS promptly and the department should be commended for this accomplishment. Similarly, the data from Table 4 indicate that the HBPD dispatches approximately 1.9 officers to the average call for service. ICMA research in this area indicates that in similar jurisdictions the average number of officers dispatched to calls is approximately 1.6. This indicates that the HBPD sends more officers per call than may be needed. Looking at these data in context with the discussion on the saturation index presented later in this report leads to several important conclusions. First, Hermosa Beach adopts a moderately aggressive CFS management process, but this process can be even more finely tuned through closer examination of the CFS categories of alarms, miscellaneous, and traffic crash–property damage only. Second, the surplus of officers assigned to the patrol division indicates that more officers are assigned to calls for service than would otherwise be necessary. In other words, the excess supply of police personnel resources and the paucity of CFS demand may be contributing to the fact that there are more officers responding to calls. Third, it is clear that a large number of CFS are related to disturbances. Properly dealing with disturbances requires long-term problem solving and resources. Generally, officers on patrol are not equipped with the time or resources to deal effectively with the underlying problems that generate the CFS. A long-term, strategic, and integrated approach is necessary to deal with disturbances. Other recommendations follow that will enable the HBPD to reduce this category of CFS as well. Recommendations: • Empanel a calls for service committee in order to evaluate service demands and attempt to reduce nonemergency responses. Patrol Deployment and Staffing Uniformed patrol is considered the “backbone” of American policing. Bureau of Justice Statistics indicate that more than 95 percent of police departments in the U.S. in the same size category as the HBPD provide uniformed patrol. Officers assigned to this important function are the most visible members of the department and command the largest share of resources committed by the department. Proper allocation of these resources is critical in order to have officers available to respond to calls for service and provide law enforcement services to the public. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 18 Schedule and Staffing General patrol operations are staffed using 12-hour shifts. Each shift is commanded by a sergeant. Officers work three consecutive 12-hour shifts, then have four days off each week. The days worked and days off are fixed for each officer in the patrol shift. For example, one officer will work Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday on a steady basis and have Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday off. Shifts are 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., with two sergeants and seven officers assigned to each shift. Having seven officers assigned to each “side” of the rotation allows one officer to have each combination of days working and days off; therefore, there are always three officers scheduled to work. During the months from June through November officers work a “payback” day, which is one full 12-hour shift added to the patrol rotation every twenty-eight days. The payback adds more personnel to the shift schedule during the busy times of the year, and adds more hours to the annual number of hours worked by officers. Like any shift schedule, HBPD’s has several advantages and disadvantages that are worth noting. On the positive side, this is a very user-friendly schedule. Working thirty-six hours each week with four days off is beneficial to officers and a huge advantage of this schedule. Even adding the “payback” days between June and November does not detract from the overall experience. Also, having steady days off and steady work hours each week is a positive for employee quality of life. The current work plan does, however, have substantial drawbacks. First, it is expensive. The HBPD schedule is about 15 percent more costly than other 12-hour schedules. Second, the organization of the schedule undermines the span of control between sergeant and officer. Due to the structure of days off/on, officers report to different sergeants, depending on the day of the week. Similarly, every day an officer will work with a different cadre of officers, again, depending on the day of the week. The combination of these factors leads to a fractured patrol function that lacks cohesiveness, esprit de corps, and inconsistent supervision. Third, including the “payback” day during the busiest times of the year seems to be implemented in a fashion that does not maximize the need for additional coverage. In other words, it appears that the payback day is simply added to the beginning or end of an officer’s three-day work cycle and is not necessarily driven by the need for patrol coverage during particular days or times. The HBPD would be much better off if the department could utilize these payback days at its discretion as opposed to simply appending them to the originally scheduled workweek. The fourth drawback of the current staffing plan is that a fixed level of patrol officers is deployed throughout the day. Demand for police service ebbs and wanes during the day and this staffing plan does not match that demand for service. The HBPD is limited, however, given the number of patrol personnel, and makes the best of these resources by deploying personnel in the 12-hour schedule. Fifth, the reactionary style of patrol in the HBPD indicates that community-based problem solving is not utilized to a great degree. With a different shift schedule that employed consistent teams of officers with consistent supervisors and areas of assignment, greater community engagement could be realized. If the patrol schedule that had less fragmentation, officers and supervisors could work together consistently and identify and solve problems in the community in a coordinated effort. Instead of responding from call to call, officers could have a greater ability to respond to long-term problems and deal with these problems in an organized fashion. The current schedule dictates that Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 19 each day there are different officers and different supervisors working together, which inhibits a team-based approach to community policing and long-term problem solving. Alternative shift schedules exist that can address all of the drawbacks identified above, while still maintaining the user-friendly elements of the current schedule. ICMA strongly recommends evaluating the current shift schedule and looking for alternatives that meet the needs of the community and the officers. ICMA believes that with the current personnel levels using 12-hour shifts is the most efficient option given departmental staffing; however, the current structure of the shift schedule has room for improvement. With seven officers scheduled in each half of the rotation (days and nights) there are always three scheduled to work, plus a supervisor. The data analysis indicates that the workload in Hermosa Beach through CFS ranges from 1.0 to 1.4 officers per hour on average. The current compliment of officers is more than sufficient to handle this workload. The 12-hour plan in place appears to be the most efficient deployment of patrol officers, but the department should evaluate how to better schedule days within shift. TABLE 5: HBPD Patrol Deployment Plan 0600x1800 and 1800x0600 M T W H F SA SU Sgt 1 1 1 1 1 Sgt 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PO1 1 1 1 PO2 1 1 1 PO3 1 1 1 PO4 1 1 1 PO5 1 1 1 PO6 1 1 1 PO7 1 1 1 PO on Duty 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Note: 1=Work, on duty; 2=Off. Recommendation: • Restructure the existing patrol shift schedule. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 20 Deployment Although some police administrators suggest that there are national standards for the number of officers per thousand residents, that is not the case. The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) states that ready-made, universally applicable patrol staffing standards do not exist. Furthermore, ratios such as officers-per-thousand population are inappropriate to use as the basis for staffing decisions. According to Public Management magazine, “A key resource is discretionary patrol time, or the time available for officers to make self-initiated stops, advise a victim in how to prevent the next crime, or call property owners, neighbors, or local agencies to report problems or request assistance. Understanding discretionary time, and how it is used, is vital. Yet most police departments do not compile such data effectively. To be sure, this is not easy to do and, in some departments may require improvements in management information systems.”7 Essentially, “discretionary time” on patrol is the amount of time available each day where officers are not committed to handling CFS and workload demands from the public. It is “discretionary” and intended to be used at the discretion of the officer to address problems in the community and be available in the event of emergencies. When there is no discretionary time, officers are entirely committed to service demands, do not get the chance to address other community problems that do not arise through 911, and are not available in times of serious emergency. The lack of discretionary time indicates a department is understaffed. Conversely, when there is too much discretionary time officers are idle. This is also an indication that the department is overstaffed. Staffing decisions, particularly in patrol, must be based on actual workload. Once the workload is determined, the amount of discretionary time can also be determined and then staffing decisions can be made consistent with the department’s policing philosophy and the community’s ability to fund desired staffing. The HBPD is a full-service police department, and its philosophy is to address essentially all requests for service in a community policing style. With this in mind it is necessary to look at workload to understand the impact this style of policing in the context of community demand. To understand actual workload (the time required to complete certain activities) it is critical to review total reported events within the context of how the events originated, such as through directed patrol, administrative tasks, officer-initiated activities, and citizen-initiated activities. Performing this analysis allows identification of activities that are really “calls” from those activities that are some other event. Understanding the difference between the various types of police department events and the staffing implications is critical to determining deployment needs. This portion of the study looks at the total deployed hours of the police department, with a comparison to the time being spent to currently provide services. 7 John Campbell, Joseph Brann, and David Williams, “Officer-per-Thousand Formulas and Other Policy Myths,” Public Management 86 (March 2004): 22−27. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 21 From an organizational standpoint, it is important to have uniformed patrol resources available at all times of the day to deal with issues such as proactive enforcement and community policing. Patrol is generally the most visible and most available resource in policing and the ability to harness this resource is critical for successful operations. From an officer’s standpoint, once a certain level of CFS activity is reached, the officer’s focus shifts to a CFS-based reactionary mode. Once a threshold is reached, the patrol officer’s mindset begins to shift from one that looks for ways to deal with crime and quality-of-life conditions in the community to one that continually prepares for the next CFS. After saturation, officers cease proactive policing and engage in a reactionary style of policing. The outlook becomes “Why act proactively when my actions are only going to be interrupted by a CFS?” Uncommitted time is spent waiting for the next call. Sixty percent of time spent responding to calls for service is believed to be the saturation threshold. In general, a “Rule of 60” can be applied to evaluate patrol staffing. The “Rule of 60” has two parts. The first part maintains that 60 percent of the sworn officers in a department should be dedicated to the patrol function, and the second part maintains that no more than 60 percent of this manpower should be “saturated” by workload demands from the community. Rule of 60 – Part 1 According to the HBPD Roster dated 6/10/2012, patrol in the HBPD is staffed by four sergeants and fourteen police officers assigned to a CFS response capacity. These 18 of the total of 30 sworn officers represent 60 percent of the sworn officers in the HBPD. Adding the two traffic officers (one sergeant and one officer) into the calculation and there are 20 of the 30 officers on patrol, or approximately 67 percent of the entire department. According to these statistics, the HBPD has a slightly higher percentage of officers assigned to patrol compared to the rest of the department than is used in the Rule of 60. This indicates that more officers are assigned to patrol and fewer to other areas of the department and the department is not balanced appropriately. Rule of 60 – Part 2 The second part of the “Rule of 60” examines workload and discretionary time and suggests that no more than 60 percent of time should be committed to calls for service. In other words, ICMA suggests that no more than 60 percent of available patrol officer time be spent responding to the service demands of the community. The remaining 40 percent of the time is the “discretionary time” for officers to be available to address community problems and be available for serious emergencies. This Rule of 60 for patrol deployment does not mean the remaining 40 percent of time is downtime or break time. It is simply a reflection of the point at which patrol officer time is “saturated” by CFS. This ratio of dedicated time compared to discretionary time is referred to as the “Saturation Index” (SI). It is ICMA’s contention that patrol staffing is optimally deployed when the SI is in the 60 percent range. A SI greater than 60 percent indicates that the patrol manpower is largely reactive, and overburdened with CFS and workload demands. An SI of somewhat less than 60 percent Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 22 indicates that patrol manpower is optimally staffed. SI levels much lower than 60 percent, however, indicate patrol resources are underutilized, and signals an opportunity for a reduction in patrol resources or reallocation of police personnel. Departments must be cautious in interpreting the SI too narrowly. For example, one should not conclude that the SI can never exceed 60 percent at any time during the day, or that in any given hour no more than 60 percent of any officer’s time be committed to CFS. The SI at 60 percent is intended to be a benchmark to evaluate service demands on patrol staffing. When SI levels exceed 60 percent for substantial periods of a given shift, or at isolated and specific times during the day, then decisions should be made to reallocate or realign personnel to reduce the SI to levels below 60. Lastly, this is not a hard-and-fast rule, but a benchmark to be used in evaluating staffing decisions. The ICMA data analysis in the second part of this report provides a rich overview of CFS and staffing demands experienced by the HBPD. The analysis here looks specifically at patrol deployment and how to maximize the personnel resources of the HBPD to meet the demands of calls for service while also engaging in proactive policing to combat crime, disorder, and traffic issues in the community. The following eight figures represent workload, staffing, and the “saturation” of patrol resources in the HBPD during two months that represent different levels of demand. By “saturation” we mean the amount of time officers spend on patrol handling service demands from the community. In other words, how much of the day is “saturated” with workload demands. This “saturation” is the comparison of workload with available manpower over the course of an average day during the months selected. The figures represent the manpower and demand during weekdays and weekends during the months of August 2012 and February 2013. Examination of these figures permits exploration of the second part of the Rule of 60. Again, the Rule of 60 examines the relationship between total work and total patrol, and to comply with this rule, total work should be less than 60 percent of total patrol. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 23 FIGURE 1: Deployment and Main Workload, Weekdays Summer 2012 Hour 2321191715131197531 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Personnel Added patrol Patrol Directed patrol work Out-of-service work Police-initiated work Other-initiated work FIGURE 2: Workload Percentage by Hour, Weekdays, Summer 2012 2220181614121086420 100 80 60 40 20 0 HourPercentage Total workload Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 24 Workload vs. Deployment, Weekdays, Summer 2012 Avg. Workload: 1.1 officers per hour Avg. % Deployed (SI): 25 percent Peak SI: 44 percent Peak SI Time: 11:30 a.m. Figures 1 and 2 present the patrol workload demands and SI for weekdays in summer 2012. As the figures indicate, the SI never exceeds the 60 percent threshold. The SI ranges from a low of approximately 10 percent at 6:00 a.m. to a high of 44 percent at 11:30 a.m., with a daily average of 25 percent. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 25 FIGURE 3: Deployment and Main Workload, Weekends, Summer 2012 Hour 2321191715131197531 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Personnel Added patrol Patrol Directed patrol work Out-of-service work Police-initiated workOther-initiated work FIGURE 4: Workload Percentage by Hour, Weekends, Summer 2012 2220181614121086420 100 80 60 40 20 0 HourPercentage Total workload Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 26 Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 27 Workload v. Deployment, Weekends, Summer 2012 Avg. Workload: 1.4 officers per hour Avg. % Deployed (SI): 28 percent Peak SI: 49 percent Peak SI Time: 2:45 a.m. Figures 3 and 4 present the patrol workload demands and SI for weekends in summer 2012. As the figures indicate, the SI never exceeds the 60 percent threshold. The SI ranges from a low of approximately 8 percent at 6:00 a.m. to a high of 49 percent at 2:45 a.m., with a daily average of 28 percent. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 28 FIGURE 5: Deployment and Main Workload, Weekdays, Winter 2013 Hour 2321191715131197531 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Personnel Added patrol Patrol Directed patrol work Out-of-service work Police-initiated work Other-initiated work FIGURE 6: Workload Percentage by Hour, Weekdays, Winter 2013 2220181614121086420 100 80 60 40 20 0 HourPercentage Total workload Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 29 Workload v. Deployment, Weekdays, Winter 2013 Avg. Workload: 1.2 officers per hour Avg. % Deployed (SI): 27 percent Peak SI: 45 percent Peak SI Time: 10:00 p.m. Figures 5 and 6 present the patrol workload demands and SI for weekdays in winter 2013. As the figures indicate, the SI never exceeds the 60 percent threshold. The SI ranges from a low of approximately 5 percent at 5:30 a.m. to a high of 45 percent at 10:00 p.m., with a daily average of 27 percent. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 30 FIGURE 7: Deployment and Main Workload, Weekends, Winter 2013 Hour 2321191715131197531 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Personnel Added patrol Patrol Directed patrol work Out-of-service work Police-initiated work Other-initiated work FIGURE 8: Workload Percentage by Hour, Weekends, Winter 2013 2220181614121086420 100 80 60 40 20 0 HourPercentage Total workload Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 31 Workload v. Deployment, Weekends, Winter 2013 Avg. Workload: 1.0 officers per hour Avg. % Deployed (SI): 20 percent Peak SI: 37 percent Peak SI Time: 10:15 p.m. Figures 7 and 8 present the patrol workload demands and SI for weekends in winter 2013. As the figures indicate, the SI never exceeds the 60 percent threshold. The SI ranges from a low of approximately 0 percent at 6:30 a.m. to a high of 37 percent at 10:15 p.m., with a daily average of 20 percent. In Figures 2, 4, 6, and 8, the patrol resources available are denoted by the dashed green line at the top. The 100 percent value indicates the total police officer hours available during the 24-hour period. This amount varies during the day consistent with the staffing of the shifts, but at any given hour the total amount of available manpower will equal 100. The red dashed line fixed at the 60 percent level represents the saturation index (SI). As discussed above, this is the point at which patrol resources become largely reactive as CFS and workload demands consume a larger and larger portion of available time. The blue line represents workload generated by calls for service from the public and the solid black line represents total workload experienced by the HBPD. Looking at the comparisons of the green, red, and black lines in the SI figures, comparing workload to available staffing, the data indicate that workload demands in Hermosa Beach are relatively low. The overall daily averages range from 20 percent to 28 percent and are well within acceptable limits. In fact, these data suggest that there are too many officers deployed to patrol. However, given the demographics of the community, a reduction in patrol staffing is not warranted. Spatial Representation of CFS Demand The figures presented above provide a thorough examination of the service demands placed on the HBPD during different times of the day and week. In addition to these “temporal” demands, it is also possible to illustrate the “spatial” demands on the HBPD. Examining the spatial demands permits the exploration of where incidents are occurring. According to Figure 9, there are three distinct “hot spots” in Hermosa Beach. The first and largest should come as no surprise, and this is the area of Pier Plaza. Clearly, this area accounts for an overwhelming amount of service demands placed on the HBPD. The second is in the vicinity of police headquarters. Undoubtedly, this hot spot is generated due to CFS from the police station house and the higher level of vehicular and foot traffic in this vicinity. Third is the hot spot in the vicinity of Pacific Coast Highway and 11th Street in the vicinity of Greenwood Park and Clark Park and Ralph’s Grocery Store. In addition to these identifiable hot spots, the areas in and around the beach and along the Pacific Coast Highway also present areas of heightened service demands. These observations point to two conclusions that support issues raised during the site visit. First, the downtown area and the beach consume the lion’s share of resources from a service demand Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 32 perspective through CFS. Conversely, the remaining areas of the community see low levels of CFS volume and support the contention that the nondowntown area is underserved with respect to police resources. Indeed, the areas of the community that are NOT along major arteries or the downtown and beach areas show almost no concentrations of call volume at all. On the positive side, the argument can be made that there are no problems in these areas in general, thus a police presence is not required. On the negative side, in a department where almost 38 percent of the call volume is self-initiated (6580/17,381), officers are initiating a small amount of calls in these “other” areas, which undermines a community policing philosophy that is clearly central to the HBPD approach to policing the community. FIGURE 9: Spatial Representation of CFS Demand Revisiting the Rule of 60 Pulling all of these factors together, it appears that there are sufficient resources available on patrol to meet the CFS demands from the community. ICMA contends, however, that the shift schedule in the HBPD needs to be reevaluated to make it more efficient and responsive to the needs of the community. Restructuring the schedule and adding two officers to patrol will create a more efficient and effective patrol function which, in turn, will deliver better services to the community. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 33 TABLE 6: Recommended Patrol Staffing for the HBPD Lt. Shift Squad Sgt. PO 1 0600X1800 A 1 4 0600X1800 B 1 4 1800X0600 C 1 4 1800X0600 D 1 4 Traffic 1 1 1 5 17 Under the staffing recommended in Table 6, one sergeant and four officers would work together each day. Each officer would be responsible for long-term problem solving in each major area in the city (B101, B102, B103, B104, with the DART focusing on B105 and B106). Based on this recommendation, it is necessary to revisit both parts of the Rule of 60 to demonstrate the impact this staffing model will have on workload, and to determine the foundation for staffing the department. Based upon the workload analysis, 23 sworn personnel should be assigned to the patrol division (one lieutenant, five sergeants, and 17 officers). Applying the first part of the Rule of 60, there should be approximately 38.3, or 39 sworn officers in the entire HBPD (23/38.3 equals 60 percent). Currently, the HBPD has 29 sworn officers, so adopting this model would require adding ten sworn officers to the department. Community Lead Sergeant (Nightclub Enforcement) The downtown area is an important part of Hermosa Beach. Identified explicitly in the city’s strategic plan, an “eclectic downtown” in Hermosa Beach is envisioned as a unique and well-maintained focal point of the community, with a pedestrian-friendly atmosphere and locally owned retail and dining establishments. Anecdotal evidence obtained during meetings with stakeholders in the community and members of the HBPD indicate that this vibrant public space often takes on a different character than the one desired by the community. Numerous accounts were given about the raucous and rowdy nature that the downtown area exhibits during the evening hours due to the bar and nightclub scene. Essentially, it appears that the “friendly” atmosphere sought by the community degrades into a disorderly location due to this nightlife. The downtown area is an important part of Hermosa Beach, and the dining, shopping, and nightlife experience available in this area brings a vibrant social scene to the area and, along with the beach, is one of the “signature” characteristics of the community. However, the area demands a substantial amount of attention. From a strategic, tactical, and resource allocation perspective this area must be a high priority and the HBPD must have the resources available to maximize the positive and minimize the negative aspects of the area. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 34 Examination of CFS volume reported by the HBPD indicates that more than 20 percent of the entire CFS volume can be attributed to the downtown area. Additionally, of all the CFS logged in the downtown area, more than 22 percent of those calls are “disturbance” calls of various types. Essentially, one out of every twenty calls received by the HBPD are disturbance calls downtown. Currently, the HBPD dedicates one sergeant to the downtown area. This “Community Lead Sergeant” works a shift of 1500 hours x 0300 hours, and follows the 3 on-4 off schedule, working every Thursday, Friday, and Saturday evening. Complementing this position, the HBPD staffs three overtime shifts every Friday and Saturday night from 1900 hours to 0300 hours. First, it is recommended that the primary responsibility for covering this area be removed from general patrol and a specific unit be created. A Downtown Unit, with one sergeant and four police officers, should be created and charged with providing seven-day coverage to the downtown area. The unit would have flexible hours and days off to maximize coverage. Flexibility in coverage would permit these officers to start their shifts at 2:00 p.m. or 5:00 p.m., thus doubling-up coverage during peak times, and ending their shifts at 2:00 a.m. or 5:00 a.m. when the conditions in the area end (or any variation that meets the need). Similarly, the consistent assignment of personnel will increase familiarity with the area and improve service. It is noted that the HBPD already assigns a sergeant to this area on a steady basis. This sergeant has been very successful in establishing relationships with stakeholders in the area and understands the area conditions very well. Removing a cadre of officers from the patrol division and allowing them to specialize and focus their efforts to a greater extent would only enhance their performance. Second, the dedicated unit would provide a vehicle for long-term planning and a coordinated approach to problematic locations in this area. Recently, the HBPD created the “Late-Night Establishment Action Plan” to deal with the issues downtown. Examination of this plan indicates numerous excellent tactical recommendations to regulate the nightclub experience in the area. The plan calls for the exploration of creating a “Business Improvement District” downtown, quarterly meetings with the Restaurant and Tavern Association, coordinating with other law enforcement agencies, engaging in more proactive enforcement, reevaluating Conditional Use Permits, enforcing the “closed window” ordinance, and conducting club/bar checks each weekend. In addition to these important steps, the HBPD might also consider the following tactics: • Conduct bar checks simultaneously with other oversight and regulatory agencies to maximize enforcement (police, code enforcement, fire, health, alcohol control, etc.) • Conduct underage drinking sting operations • Conduct training for owners, bartenders, and security personnel on running an orderly establishment • Ensure the City Prosecutor and District Attorney provide “enhanced” prosecution of ALL cases occurring in the downtown area • Conduct undercover narcotics enforcement in and around nightclubs • Enact a “nuisance” statute to better regulate disorderly locations Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 35 • Continue to track incidents from locations granted a C.U.P. and create a “scorecard” to identify the most problematic locations for targeted enforcement and closure • Create a process to meet with bar/club owners within 24 hours of a serious incident happening in their establishment to discuss security plans and efforts to reestablish order. A supervisor dedicated specifically to these efforts, combined with dedicated officers, would undoubtedly enhance enforcement, prosecution, and ultimately, behavior of clientele at these establishments. The supervisor’s job would be to take an integrated approach aimed at strategic planning, on-the-scene supervision, and then aggressive follow-up with the establishment owners. Lastly, a strategic planning approach can be taken with regards to this area. With proper intelligence and analytical data, enforcement efforts should be focused on the frequent offenders in the downtown area, with sustained attention leveled upon them until they are closed or comport themselves to the standards expected by the Hermosa Beach community. Communities around the country are implementing effective methods to deal with public nuisances. ICMA publishes reference material to assist communities that wish to enact and execute civil nuisance laws to deal with problematic locations. In brief, nuisance laws pertaining to noise, drugs, and violence emanating from locations (particularly locations governed by licensing agencies) are created and enforced. Enforcement of these laws gives the police and other regulatory authorities additional tools to close problematic locations or force them to abide by expected norms. There have been numerous successes around the nation in which civil nuisance statutes have been employed to address problems of drugs, abandoned property, unruly bars and night clubs, and the like. The HBPD should explore the use of such a statute and use it effectively to police unwanted nuisances in the downtown area. Recommendations: • Create a separate downtown enforcement unit consisting of one sergeant, four police officers, and two community service officers. • Ensure aggressive implementation of the Late-Night Establishment Action Plan. Traffic The HBPD Traffic Unit is staffed by one sergeant and one officer. The unit is responsible for the general traffic enforcement, responding to traffic crashes, planning special events, accident investigation and reconstruction, providing appropriate training, etc. At one time there were four officers and a sergeant assigned to this detail, but unit numbers were reduced due to budget constraints. It was evident from listening to all of the stakeholders interviewed that this situation should be reevaluated. There is a significant opportunity to utilize traffic enforcement to address issues in the Pier Plaza area as well as in the eastern part of the city through increased visibility. As a congested beach city, Hermosa Beach might benefit from more officers on motorcycle enforcement. There is also Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 36 currently no dedicated DUI (driving under the influence) enforcement other than a regional task force. In order to further improve the operations of this unit, a performance management approach (using traffic data to drive deployment and enforcement decisions) should be embraced and communicated to the rest of the operations division. Adopting a strategic approach to traffic safety, and engaging the entire department in this effort, will leverage the current efforts of the traffic unit and make the overall traffic safety plan of the HBPD more effective. The scope of this effort is beyond the unit itself and must be embraced by the operations division commander. Under this approach, the operations commander would become responsible for the overall traffic safety plan of the HBPD. The traffic unit, continuing in its current method of operation, would develop the plans necessary to focus the effort of the rest of the department. This approach would entail the creation of written traffic safety plans, monthly reports using traffic crash data to identify times/days/locations/causes of traffic crashes, and holding patrol shifts accountable for implementing this plan. Currently, the focus of the traffic unit is largely reactive. The unit responds to incidents and investigates crashes after they occur. It is also focused on enforcement, with an emphasis on citations, warnings, and traffic stops. While these efforts are important, continuing operations in the same manner is problematic with only two officers assigned. Instead of a reactionary and enforcement-driven approach to traffic safety, it is recommended that the HBPD use the two officers assigned to this unit to develop and help implement an overarching traffic safety strategy that integrates many operational units in the department. Therefore, the focus shifts from reactive to proactive and the responsibilities of the traffic unit shift from enforcement to strategic planning. A strategic approach would embrace a more thorough analysis of the temporal characteristics of crash data and then design the 3E approach to traffic safety (enforcement, engineering, and education). Current data analysis captures key variables associated with traffic crashes, injuries, and fatalities. The data analysis could be improved upon by adding temporal aspects of traffic crashes, such as an analysis of the times and days of week when accidents occur. Armed with this traffic intelligence, the unit could expand enforcement and incorporate activities aimed at roadway engineering and at-risk driver education. Therefore, under the existing staffing the officers assigned to the unit focus less on enforcement and more on education, engineering, and prevention, as well as creating the intelligence information to be used by the patrol division to perform the bulk of the enforcement. Recommendation: • Utilize the current cadre of traffic unit personnel to develop a strategic approach to traffic safety. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 37 Technology on Patrol Currently, officers on patrol in the HBPD are required to prepare and submit handwritten reports. These reports must then be keyed into electronic records systems for further processing. In addition to being a source of discontent among officers on patrol, this process is highly inefficient. Technology is available that would permit the department to automate the entire process from beginning to end. This will improve record keeping, would improve the ability to search records, and would save time and costs. It is recommended that the department explore automated report-writing alternatives and embrace the evolution from the handwritten system. Recommendations: • Implement an automated report writing system. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 38 Support Services Division The Support Services Lieutenant is responsible for managing the Detective Bureau, Internal Affairs, hiring / training, the jail, records, and property / evidence elements of the police department. The Detective Bureau, supervised by the Detective Sergeant, is responsible for investigating crime, filing cases with the District Attorney or City Prosecutor, and serving on task forces. The Administrative Sergeant is responsible for conducting Internal Affairs investigations, hiring / training, other duties as assigned, and assisting the Accreditation Manager as needed. The jail facility is used to temporarily house arrestees. The Records Bureau maintains all records held by the agency, enters information in the records management system, releases information per state law, performs records checks, and prepares statistical reports. The Property and Evidence unit stores evidence/property, assists with CSI, sends evidence to the lab for testing, and arranges for the disposition / destruction of property as required. The jail, Records Bureau, and Property and Evidence units are staffed by Police Service Officers (PSO), who report to PSO Supervisors. The division is staffed by one lieutenant, two sergeants, three general case detectives, and eight FTE civilian staff members responsible for court liaison activities, records, and prisoner processing. The division also has one vacancy in the Special Investigations Unit. Members of the division work a variety of schedules. Detectives The Hermosa Beach Police Department’s Detective Bureau consists of one sergeant and three detectives (with one detective vacancy). The detectives work 10-hour shifts from 0600x1600 hours four days each week. Detectives are assigned to one of four “desks” that indicate their area of investigative specialization. Detective Hours/Days Case Assignments 1D2 0600x1600; Mon.-Thurs. ID theft, fraud, theft of access card, embezzlement, robbery, forgery, defraud innkeeper, malicious mischief, sex crimes and registry 1D3 0600x1600; Tues.-Fri. Burglary, child abuse, pawns, missing persons, prowling, trespassing, weapons, receiving stolen property 1D4 0600x1600; Mon.-Thurs. Auto theft, elder abuse, grand theft, resisting, petty theft, annoying calls, evidence, general narcotics, assaults 1D5 Vacant Death investigations, stalking, threats, court order violations, domestic violence, The sergeant receives copies of all of the reported crimes and incident reports prepared by officers on patrol. The sergeant reviews these cases and evaluates them based upon their level of solvability. Cases with high probability of being solved receive a “1” and cases with limited or no solvability receive a “4.” After the solvability score is assigned each case is then assigned to a detective for follow up-investigation. In general, solvability scores are used to evaluate the potential Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 39 to investigate cases successfully. It is unusual for an investigative unit to assign a solvability measure without using this measure to triage and assign cases. However, the caseload in the HBPD appears manageable enough that all incidents get assigned regardless of solvability so as to develop intelligence information on these categories of offenses. With detectives loosely specialized in certain areas, therefore, having all the criminal complaints and incident reports pertaining to these areas appears to have merit. In the absence of a formalized criminal intelligence system, this process seems to be manageable. The sergeant could not provide the number of cases assigned to each detective, or the number of cases cleared by the division as a whole or by the individual detective. This is an improvement opportunity for the investigations process in the HBPD. It appears that the members of the investigations division are motivated and dedicated officers who understand their mission and also possess the training and skill to successfully handle the current level of crime that requires investigation. They perform their assignments with little direct supervision and are highly praised by their supervisors and other members of the department. The unit would further enhance its success by retaining and referencing collected data concerning case assignments and case clearances. The unit should immediately begin to accurately track individual statistics relating to case assignments and case clearances by the individual detectives. This would be a very valuable resource to assist in justifying adjustments in staffing levels. It would also be very valuable in the evaluation and assessment of the individual detectives and the unit as a whole. Although the HBPD collects information on case assignments and case closures in the “case log,” this process is used for administrative purposes and it is not used to manage the investigative process. Without this information, it is impossible to determine the workload and effectiveness of individual detectives and, therefore, the required staffing level of the division. For example, the detective log was obtained for one detective for the calendar year 2012. According to this log, the detective was assigned 450 cases for investigation. ICMA considers an annual caseload of between 120 and 160 cases per investigator to be the benchmark for effective and efficient case management. With 450 cases assigned it would not be possible for this detective to conduct comprehensive investigations on each one. Undoubtedly, most of these cases are categorized as unsolvable and are assigned for information and intelligence purposes, therefore, it is difficult to determine the effectiveness of this investigator at solving cases when the exact number of “actual” investigations is not known. In 2012, this detective’s case log indicated 10 percent (45 of the 450 assigned) of the cases were “Filed” (cases presented to the prosecutor for adjudication after an arrest is made). Also, out of these 450 assigned cases, almost 72 percent (323 of 450) were “suspended, PFI” (suspended, pending further investigation or closed). A 10 percent clearance rate on assigned cases would be considered poor. In general, when a detective is assigned a case that has solvability potential the rate of solving that case is high. High-performing detective units can be expected to solve 75 percent of crimes involving persons (assault, robbery, sex offenses, domestic violence, etc.) and about 25 percent of crimes involving property (burglary, theft, fraud, etc.). However, detectives in the HBPD are assigned a large number of cases that are for information only and if the caseload Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 40 were to be reduced to from 120 to160 cases that could be investigated effectively, the detectives’ performance would be similar to a high-performing unit (45 cases filed out of 120 = 37.5 percent). Compounding this issue is a technical limitation in the case management system. When a detective closes a case the information system being used does not allow for the categorization of that closure. In general, cases assigned for investigation should be closed in several possible ways: cleared by arrest, exceptional clearance, unfounded, or closed with no further investigation possible. The system only permits an entry marking the case closed without allowing for the specific reason. The detective must indicate in the narrative of the disposition how the case was closed. Without this categorization it is impossible to track and evaluate the performance of the detectives either individually or collectively. As it stands now, there is no management of how many cases are assigned or how effective each detective is in solving cases without individually inspecting each case log. Fortunately, the entire detective unit works very closely together and the sergeant has an intuitive understanding of the performance of the team. While this is a strength of the unit’s operation, it is strongly recommended that case management policies (both technological and procedural) be implemented immediately. The current process in place in the HBPD with respect to case management needs improvement. In addition to solving cases by arrest, cases must be prosecuted successful to ensure the full value of the criminal justice system. If an arrest is made and the defendant is not prosecuted, then the deterrent value of the law is undermined and the effectiveness of the police department is compromised. During the ICMA evaluation of the HBPD, anecdotal information was obtained that indicated improvements could be made in the area of case prosecution. It is well beyond the scope of the ICMA study to assess the full spectrum of the criminal justice system in Hermosa Beach; however, descriptive data is presented here that highlights an important issue that warrants further examination by the HBPD, the City Prosecutor, and the city administration. Using the same detective’s case log from 2012 it is readily apparent that a significant number of cases filed with the City Prosecutor are rejected for prosecution. In 2012, 45 cases were filed by this detective, but 13 cases were rejected for prosecution. Of the 58 cases brought forward for prosecution, 36 were filed with the District Attorney and 22 were filed with the City Prosecutor. Of the 36 cases filed with the District Attorney, two were rejected for prosecution (5.6 percent). Of the 22 cases filed with the City Attorney, 11 were rejected for prosecution (50 percent). Based upon the cases filed by this one detective in 2012, the City Prosecutor rejected cases nine-times more than the District Attorney. While it is impossible to draw conclusions based upon one detective’s experience in one calendar year, the information presented here supports the anecdotal information presented in meetings with officers and during the town hall meeting with the public. Clearly, however, there is enough information here that warrants a closer examination of the cases filed and rejected by the City Prosecutor. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 41 Crime Scene Investigations Crime scene investigations are handled by three members of the HBPD who work in various units. There is one sergeant, one detective, and one police officer trained as crime scene investigators/identification technicians. If for any reason additional personnel are needed or a shift is without a crime scene investigator the officers assigned to other shifts are available for call-out. The department’s commitment to this method of deploying on-duty officers to handle crime scene investigations seems to have provided a level of service that meets the needs of the department. Basic crime scene services such as dusting for prints, photographing the scene, and the gathering and processing of evidence is provided by these officers; however, no data were available demonstrating the activities of this team or the outcome of their investigations. The ad hoc deployment of crime scene investigators seems to meet the needs of the department and the level of crime in Hermosa Beach does not warrant the assignment of a full-time position. ICMA would recommend that the department should continually monitor this program to make certain that there is sufficient supervision and support provided to the crime scene officers. They also must be given sufficient time to effectively perform their duties at the crime scenes. Realizing that there are budget conditions present that limit the department’s ability to expand this operation ICMA would recommend a detailed work analysis of this unit. Management should have information that provides an accurate assessment of the positive and negative aspects of the police officers/crime scene technician model. The cost of this model in comparison to other options should also be studied. Regional Task Forces The organization chart of the HBPD dated April 11, 2013 shows two detective assignments to regional task forces. One detective is assigned to the LA IMPACT (Interagency Metropolitan Police Apprehension Crime Task-Force), which focuses on investigating drug trafficking and money laundering, and one was assigned to the Redondo Beach Special Investigations Unit, which investigates serious crime in the region. The SIU position was eliminated due to shortages in personnel. It is strongly recommended that the HBPD maintain personnel assigned to these multi-agency task forces. Crime Analysis/Criminal Intelligence There appears to be very little effort either to capture data or to use it in the investigative process. There appears to be a great deal of reliance on experience and intuition to buttress the investigations and little reliance on crime analysis or intelligence. While this may have served the department well in the past, a more deliberate and robust process is recommended. It is recommended that additional staff be assigned to the support services division reporting directly to the commander and who would be responsible for crime and analysis and intelligence. With proper training and equipment this position can leverage the enormous amount of Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 42 information processed by the HBPD and identify crime trends and cultivate this information into actionable intelligence to aid investigations. Jail/Records/Evidence-Property The unit that manages the jail, records, and evidence / property is staffed by one PSO Supervisor and eight Police Service Officers (PSOs). The HBPD provides temporary detention for prisoners arrested by HBPD officers. PSOs provide seven-day, twenty-four hour coverage of the jail facility, and assist staffing the public reception area during nonbusiness hours. The ICMA assessment of the entire police facility indicates that it is in poor condition; however, examination of the jail portion of the building reveals a well-maintained space. The cells are clean and serviceable, equipped with newly installed cameras, and the workspace is appropriate given the staff size and demand. The HBPD should be commended for maintaining this facility in outstanding condition. PSOs are also responsible for records management and staffing the public window in headquarters during business hours. These PSOs provide data entry from numerous police reports and staff the public entry to the police facility. The workspace appears well-maintained and the public reception area is professional in appearance. The court liaison position is responsible for interacting with the LA County District Attorney and the Hermosa Beach City Prosecutor to successfully prepare and prosecute criminal cases. The court liaison is also responsible for handling subpoenas served on members of the department and coordinating the property management function of the department. The court liaison also acts as the administrative arm of the support services division. It is recommended that additional civilian personnel be added to the support services division to support this function as well as the other critical needs of the division. Adding two PSOs to the division would provide administrative support in the property management, crime analysis and criminal intelligence, court processing, and planning functions of the division. Administrative Section The Administrative Section is staffed by one sergeant. This sergeant is responsible for all recruiting and background investigations, training, managing the employee evaluation process, conducting internal investigations, and administering the disciplinary process. Our observations, discussions with staff, and review of documents related to this division indicate that this is an outstanding feature of the HBPD that warrants recognition. The department should be commended for creating an organizational entity that is responsible for the full range of “professional standards” responsibilities. The administrative sergeant manages hiring, training, and internal investigations. Having these important functions all under the responsibility of one unit provides seamless organizational oversight of the integrity, development, and professionalization of the department. In order to improve upon an already outstanding unit, two recommendations are offered: Recommendation: • Develop an “early warning system” to monitor human resources issues Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 43 An early warning system would enable the HBPD to address employee discipline and misconduct in a proactive manner. Instead of waiting for employees to be charged with misconduct, an early warning system would help the department manage information and provide more comprehensive supervision of “at-risk” employees. Common risk factors associated with employee misconduct (sickness, absenteeism, poor performance, minor infractions, etc.) can be tracked and monitored by individual supervisors and commanders. Heeding early warning signals could lead to early intervention. The Department of Justice conducted a comprehensive analysis of early warning systems in three major American cities: Miami, New Orleans, and Minneapolis. This report, published in July 2001, is an excellent resource for the HBPD to design and implement such a system. • Add personnel to support the function of this position With only one person assigned to this position all duties and responsibilities must be handled by this individual. The often heavy administrative burden associated with this position requires a substantial amount of time and possibly detracts from the core responsibilities of the position. It is recommended that a civilian staff member be assigned to the administrative section to assist with the administrative and clerical duties in order to free up the sergeant to perform the critical investigating, planning, and training functions of this position. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 44 Miscellaneous Salary, Recruitment, and Retention On numerous and varied occasions stakeholders raised the issue of below-market salary and compensation. Examination of HBPD salaries is beyond the scope of this report; however, the issue was raised to such an extent that it requires discussion. According to anecdotal accounts, HBPD employees in every position have lower compensation than their peers in the region, and as well, employees have not had an increase in salary in more than seven years. Salary and benefits are considered a source of dissatisfaction for employees. Raising compensation will not necessarily improve satisfaction with work or motivate employees to perform, but ignoring compensation will create challenges in recruiting and retaining employees. Inspection of the personnel roster dated June 11, 2013 indicates that the HBPD has retained only one officer hired after July 1, 2010. All other officers hired since that date have either transferred to other departments or separated from the department. Although it is too early to tell if the compensation changes put into effect on July 1, 2010 are hampering recruitment and retention of employees, the HBPD and the city need to monitor this situation very carefully. Recommendation: • Conduct a comprehensive salary survey for all positions within the department. Use the data to conduct meaningful discussions in order to determine appropriate levels of compensation. Accreditation The HBPD recently received reaccreditation by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA). Accreditation requires an agency to develop a comprehensive, well thought-out, uniform set of written directives. This is one of the most successful methods for reaching administrative and operational goals, while also providing direction to personnel. This accreditation program provides public safety agencies an opportunity to voluntarily demonstrate that they meet an established set of professional standards. CALEA accreditation has both positive and negative implications. Anecdotal reports indicate a belief that the CALEA accreditation program is being kept solely because the department and the city require it. It is seen as not being very realistic in terms of the staffing hours required to maintain it. It was described as being a slogan to put on the side of the cars and not something that actually makes a difference. This is the downside of accreditation, wherein an agency uses the achievement as a trophy and does not use it to drive the organizing and managing principles of the department. Achieving CALEA accreditation is a commendable accomplishment and a sign that the HBPD demonstrates a standard of professional excellence; it should be used for the purpose for which it was intended. The issue of accreditation should be reviewed thoroughly. If it is deemed to be desirable, then the incoming chief should be made aware of this fact very clearly and communicate it throughout the Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 45 organization. It should be made part of the department’s operating philosophy. Conversely, if the department wishes to step away from it, then other alternatives for maintaining a culture of accountability should be pursued (e.g. Lexipol). Department Policy and Procedures ICMA reviewed the HBPD’s rules, regulations, policies, and procedure manuals and found that the documents provide direction and guidance to the police officers and civilians in the department. An extensive review of each procedure is beyond the scope of this report. Examination of the most critical and frequent police policies and procedures reveal that the HBPD has thorough and comprehensive policies in these critical areas and which are consistent with respect to acceptable industry standards. ICMA reviewed HBPD policies on the use of force, domestic violence, vehicle pursuits, prisoner processing, and complaints against police officers. In general, these policies are current and accurately reflect current laws and accepted industry standards in these critical areas. The HBPD should be commended for adhering to such high standards and promulgating appropriate and relevant policies. Police Facility Maintenance The existing building is located downtown and is in poor condition. Staff has expressed concerns about storage and space issues. The police administration reiterated these findings, revealing a clear concern about workspace and the storage of property and evidence. Our experience is that there is a limited number of architects who specialize in police facility design and that their involvement in the design of a new police facility, at the earliest stages of discussion, are often critical to the success of the project. This does not mean that a local architectural firm could not handle the working drawings of the project. However, a police facilities design expert should be engaged to provide expertise to the primary architect. There is an adage in law enforcement that “a police facility is a tool, not just a shelter.” Failure to identify appropriate adjacencies and accommodate them in the design can doom a new police facility. Recommendation: • We strongly urge the city to send a team of representatives (police, management, and elected officials) to the IACP training program on designing police facilities. This will provide the city with a full understanding of how to approach this important project to achieve the best long-term outcomes. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 46 Crime Prevention Currently, there are no specific crime prevention activities conducted by the HBPD. This is another improvement opportunity for the department. Although the HBPD policy and procedures manual dictates that the community lead sergeant is responsible for this area, the community lead sergeant is appropriately preoccupied with the downtown area and does not have the capacity to handle this function. However, given the nature of Hermosa Beach with the focus on a “hometown spirit,” crime prevention could be a valuable approach to community safety and community relations. It is recommended that consideration should be given to investing responsibility for these duties with one individual in the organization. Specifically, this function is an off-shoot of the strategic planning process and could be undertaken by the individual responsible for that process. So, for example, where the plan calls for community involvement (traffic education programs, personal safety presentations, etc.) the strategic planner becomes responsible for delivering that information. One of the important performance measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of a police department is the extent to which it assists the community in its own self-protection. Commonly referred to as “crime prevention,” modern police departments engage in numerous programs designed to help the community protect itself against crime. General (towards the entire community) and specific (towards at-risk people or places) crime prevention must be developed to a greater extent and implemented in Hermosa Beach. Below is a brief list of various programs in these areas that must be explored by the department: • Gang Resistance Education and Training (GREAT) • Drug Abuse Resistance Education • VIN etching • Personal property identification programs • Residential and commercial burglary security survey • Personal protection classes. The above is not meant to be a comprehensive list of programs, but a sample of what other communities are offering to reduce crime and improve traffic safety. It is understood that the HBPD offers many of these programs, but staffing limitations and other demands for service make robust delivery of these programs challenging. In addition to these programs the HBPD coordinates a Neighborhood Watch. The Neighborhood Watch Program needs to be reinvigorated and leveraged to provide both crime prevention and positive community relations and to offer the public an additional method of interacting with the department. Recommendation: • Explore crime prevention programs and integrate these programs into an overall strategic planning approach to crime reduction, accident reduction, and quality-of-life plans in Hermosa Beach. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 47 Reorganization With all the ICMA recommendations considered, it is recommended that the sworn strength of the HBPD should be 39 officers. Table 7 presents the recommended structure of the organization. TABLE 7: Proposed Hermosa Beach Police Department Organization Table Chief Captain Lieutenant Sergeant PO/Detective Civilian Executive 1 1 2 Support Division 1 1 Detectives 1 3 1 Task Forces 2 DART 1 4 Administration 1 1 Jail/Records 9 Operations Division 1 1 Patrol 4 16 Traffic 1 2 Community Services 12 Total 1 1 2 8 27 27 Grand Total Sworn 39 Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California page 48 Summary The Hermosa Beach Police Department faces several organizational challenges. A vibrant and eclectic downtown area is a major attraction for the surrounding area in both day and night. This area appeals to different groups of people that enjoy it for different reasons. Hoever, the department is struggling to provide policing services to this area while simultaneously providing services to the remainder of the community. The department needs to add resources in both personnel and technology and leverage these resources toward addressing crime, traffic, and disorderly conditions in the community. The recommendations contained in this report should be viewed as improvement opportunities and possibilities to assist the department meeting these challenges. ICMA believes that the appropriate staffing of the HBPD should be approximately 39 sworn officers, which is 10 more than its current headcount of 29. Similarly, the department is faced with recruiting and retention problems and will encounter difficulties staffing the organization at the recommended level. The department should consider adding resources to nonpatrol functions to improve operations in these areas as well. The HBPD should build on its strengths as a professional organization. Adding resources and improving processes will bolster the department and put it on sound footing to provide the Hermosa Beach community with top-notch police services. End of Analysis Section Operations Analysis Report Fire and Emergency Medical Services Hermosa Beach, California October 2013 Final Report Submitted by and reply to: ICMA Center for Public Safety Management International City/County Management Association 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20002 PublicSafety@icma.org 202-962-3607 Copyright © 2013 Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page i General Information About ICMA The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) is a 100-year-old nonprofit professional association of local government administrators and managers, with approximately 9,000 members located in 28 countries. Since its inception in 1914, ICMA has been dedicated to assisting local governments in providing services to their citizens in an efficient and effective manner. Our work spans all of the activities of local government: parks, libraries, recreation, public works, economic development, code enforcement, brownfields, public safety, and a host of other critical areas. ICMA advances the knowledge of local government best practices across a wide range of platforms, including publications, research, training, and technical assistance. Our work includes both domestic and international activities in partnership with local, state, and federal governments, as well as private foundations. For example, we are involved in a major library research project funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and are providing community policing training in El Salvador, Mexico, and Panama with funding from the United States Agency for International Development. We have personnel in Afghanistan helping to build wastewater treatment plants and have teams working with the United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) in Central America on conducting assessments and developing training programs for disaster preparedness. ICMA Center for Public Safety Management The ICMA Center for Public Safety Management (ICMA/CPSM), one of four centers within ICMA’s U.S. Programs Division, provides support to local governments in the areas of police, fire, emergency medical services (EMS), emergency management, and homeland security. In addition to providing technical assistance in these areas, we also represent local governments at the federal level and are involved in numerous projects with the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. ICMA/CPSM is also involved in police and fire chief selection, assisting local governments in identifying these critical managers through original research, the identification of core competencies of police and fire managers, and assessment center resources. Our local government technical assistance includes workload and deployment analysis, using operations research techniques and credentialed experts to identify workload and staffing needs and best practices. We have conducted approximately 140 such studies in 90 communities ranging in size from 8,000 population (Boone, Iowa) to 800,000 population (Indianapolis, Indiana). Thomas Wieczorek is the Director of the Center for Public Safety Management. Leonard Matarese is the Director of Research & Project Development. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page ii Methodology The ICMA Center for Public Safety Management team follows a standardized approach to conducting analyses of fire, police, and other departments involved in providing services to the public. We have developed this approach by combining the experience sets of dozens of subject matter experts in the areas of police, fire, and EMS. Our collective team has several hundred years of experience leading and managing public safety agencies, and conducting research in these areas for cities in and beyond the United States. The reports generated by the operations and data analysis team are based upon key performance indicators that have been identified in standards and safety regulations and by special interest groups such as the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), and the Association of Public-Safety Communication Officials International, and through ICMA’s Center for Performance Measurement. These performance measures have been developed following decades of research and are applicable in all communities. For this reason, the data yield similar reporting formats, but each community’s data are analyzed on an individual basis by the ICMA specialists and represent the unique information for that community. The ICMA team begins most projects by extracting calls for service and raw data from a public safety agency’s computer-aided dispatch system. The data are sorted and analyzed for comparison with nationally developed performance indicators. These performance indicators (e.g., response times, workload by time, multiple-unit dispatching) are valuable measures of agency performance regardless of departmental size. The findings are shown in tables and graphs organized in a logical format. Despite the size and complexity of the documents, a consistent approach to structuring the findings allows for simple, clean reporting. The categories for the performance indicators and the overall structure of the data and documents follow a standard format, but the data and recommendations are unique to the organization under scrutiny. The team conducts an operational review in conjunction with the data analysis. The performance indicators serve as the basis for the operational review. The review process follows a standardized approach comparable to that of national accreditation agencies. Before the arrival of an on-site team, agencies are asked to provide the team with key operational documents (policies and procedures, asset lists, etc.). The team visits each city to interview fire agency management and supervisory personnel, rank-and-file officers, and local government staff. The information collected during the site visits and through data analysis results in a set of observations and recommendations that highlight the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities of—and threats to—the organizations and operations under review. To generate recommendations, the team reviews operational documents; interviews key stakeholders; observes physical facilities; and reviews relevant literature, statutes and regulations, industry standards, and other information and/or materials specifically included in a project’s scope of work. The standardized approach ensures that the ICMA Center for Public Safety Management measures and observes all of the critical components of an agency, which in turn provides substance to benchmark against localities with similar profiles. Although agencies may vary in size, priorities, and challenges, there are basic commonalities that enable comparison. The approach also enables the team to identify best practices and innovative approaches. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page iii In general, the standardized approach includes: ICMA will ask questions and request documentation upon project start-up; confirm accuracy of information received; deploy operations and data analysis teams to research each unique environment; perform data modeling; share preliminary findings with the jurisdiction; assess inconsistencies reported by client jurisdictions; follow up on areas of concern; and communicate our results in a formal written report. ICMA/CPSM Project Contributors Thomas J. Wieczorek, Director Leonard A. Matarese, Director of Research and Project Development Joseph E. Pozzo, Senior Manager for Fire and EMS Mike Iacona, Senior Associate Dov N. Chelst, Ph.D., Director of Quantitative Analysis Gang Wang, Ph.D., Senior Quantitative Analyst Sarita Vasudevan, Quantitative Analyst Lydia Bjornlund, Editor Dennis Kouba, Editor Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page iv Contents General Information ............................................................................................... i About ICMA ................................................................................................................................. i ICMA Center for Public Safety Management .............................................................................. i Methodology .............................................................................................................................. ii ICMA/CPSM Project Contributors ............................................................................................. iii Executive Summary................................................................................................ 1 Recommendations .................................................................................................................... 2 Operational Analysis .............................................................................................. 5 Governance and Administration ............................................................................................... 5 City of Hermosa Beach ..................................................................................................................... 5 Hermosa Beach Fire Department ............................................................................................. 7 Staffing and Deployment ................................................................................................................. 9 Organizational Processes ........................................................................................................ 13 Time Allocation .............................................................................................................................. 14 Succession Planning ...................................................................................................................... 14 Education and Training Programs ................................................................................................. 16 Assessment and Planning ...................................................................................................... 17 Strategic Planning/Goals and Objectives ...................................................................................... 17 Performance Measurement ........................................................................................................... 22 Community Risk Assessment and Risk Management Planning .................................................. 22 Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................... 25 Fixed Facilities/Capital Vehicles ..................................................................................................... 25 Programs ............................................................................................................. 27 Operational Response and Workload ...................................................................................... 27 Operational Category Call Type ..................................................................................................... 27 Operational Unit Deployment Time............................................................................................... 30 Operational Response Times ......................................................................................................... 37 Essential Resources ................................................................................................................. 45 Fire Prevention/Fire Investigation/Public Education ..................................................................... 45 Emergency Communications ......................................................................................................... 46 External System Relationships/Consolidation Alternative ....................................................... 50 Appendix A: Hermosa Beach Fifre Department Data Analysis ............................. 53 Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page v This Page Intentionally Left Blank Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 1 Executive Summary ICMA was retained by the city of Hermosa Beach, California, to complete an operational analysis of the city’s fire department to include staffing and workload. The analysis is intended to provide the town with an unbiased review of fire services provided by the Hermosa Beach Fire Department (hereinafter, HBFD). This report is the result of this analysis and is accompanied by recommendations for ways to improve efficiencies and effectiveness in the delivery of services. The report also provides some benchmarking of the town’s existing service delivery performance. To begin the review, the ICMA project staff asked the city for a variety of documents, data, and information. The staff used this information to learn about the fire department’s structure, assets, and operations. The data also was used in conjunction with performance data collected by ICMA to assess the existing performance of the fire department. The ICMA project management staff conducted a site visit for the purpose of observing fire department and agency-connected supportive operations, interviewing key city and fire department staff, and reviewing preliminary data and operations. Follow-up telephone calls with city staff allowed ICMA staff to affirm the project information and elicit further discussion regarding this operational analysis. In reviewing information and discussing operations with department members, the ICMA team always seeks first to understand the operations, then to identify ways the department can improve efficiency, effectiveness, and safety for both its members as well as the community it serves. ICMA found that the city of Hermosa Beach is not unique, in that it seeks to create a more efficient fire department within existing financial resources. ICMA found the HBFD to be a capable department in the delivery of first response emergency medical (EMS) and fire services, but there is always room for improvement. Critical areas the ICMA team has identified that need improvement and that resulted in our recommendations are: the department has not, however plans to complete a comprehensive community risk analysis, which will significantly assist with the objective planning for staffing and deployment of resources; there is a need to work with the regional communications center to fully implement emergency medical dispatch for the HBFD and further screen fire calls for service so that only the most appropriate unit (s)are dispatched to EMS calls for service-this review should also include the current deployment of the basic life support ambulance; the need to review how senior and captain level staff spend their time during the work day to insure all critical elements of the organization are given the proper attention such as training and staff development-included in this is the need to fund the administrative division chief position on a full time basis; the need to continue to implement a comprehensive performance measurement system; the need to continue to address relocating the current fire station; the need to undertake a comprehensive effort to study the options available for a fire department consolidation. These needs are addressed further in the report and recommendations. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 2 Twenty-six recommendations are listed below and in the report. The recommendations are based on best practices derived from the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE), ICMA, the U.S. Fire Administration, the International Association of Emergency Managers (IAEM), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to name a few, as well as the knowledge of ICMA reviewers. All recommendations are listed in the order they appear in the report. Recommendations 1. Merge the HBFD Organizational Chart, to include the proposed division chief position with the proposed functional organizational matrix. 2. Examine the option of operating the basic life support (BLS) ambulance in a capacity that it is more independent and can be dispatched to minor EMS calls and patient assists without the accompaniment of other HBFD units. 3. Consider the operation of the BLS Ambulance on the busiest days of the week (Friday, Saturday and Sunday) and only during peak hours of operations (11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) ICMA further recommends that should the EMS demand increase to include duplicate calls, the HBFD should consider, as funding permits and as a maximum service level increase, transitioning from peak load staffing to full-time staffing of the BLS ambulance (addition of six full time employees). 4. Closely evaluate overtime expenditures for fire personnel and consider changes to the Firefighters Association memorandum of understanding with regard to its overtime/time-worked provision. 5. Use the funds currently spent on overtime to pay captain for collateral duties to fund a division chief position that would be responsible for training and operations program areas. 6. Consider as a minimum service level increase, a civilian fire marshal position to implement new and maintain more effectively and efficiently the department’s community wide risk reduction efforts. 7. Adopt a time allocation model; implement and monitor time allocation to ensure effective use of fire officer and staff time as it relates to achieving the organizational mission. 8. Follow current strategic plan and develop and implement a succession planning process that identifies and develops future leaders. 9. Follow current strategic plan and develop and implement a career path training and development program for career advancement that focuses on personal and professional development for promotion. 10. Continue implementing current strategic planning process goal statements to ensure the management and delivery of a comprehensive training program is a priority and includes both cognitive learning and hands-on practical training, as well as annual assessments of all personnel in both EMS and fire suppression skills. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 3 11. Continue with the development and implementation of a performance measure reporting system that expands the type of measurement it employs, including a program logic model. This system should incorporate the HBFD vision statement “Achieving national standards and industry best practices as they relate to meeting established performance measures and positive outcomes.” 12. Continue with the development and implementation of performance measures for each department activity as indicated above; link these measures to the strategic and comprehensive planning documents and fiscal/budget documents. 13. Expand the use of MDCs to store and retrieve critical information regarding building occupancy files, pre-plan information, and contact information. Evaluate options for fully automating the pre-planning process so that critical occupancy information is retrievable from the mobile data computers (MDCs) and certain hazardous components are identified by the system in order to give responding personnel critical information regarding an occupancy’s status or specific hazard. 14. Continue to develop and enhance, as funding allows, annual medical screenings, respiratory protection plan/program, and an ongoing fitness assessment process for operational personnel; consider a partnering effort with neighboring jurisdictions in providing medical screening and fitness assessments to personnel. 15. Work with the community development and public works departments to ensure that the second-floor addition remains sound, is to code, and is safe for occupancy. 16. Continue to seek an appropriate parcel (size and location) for the construction of a new fire station. 17. Adjust the vehicle replacement program to reflect current industry cost standards for each fire department vehicle. Further, apparatus replacement should be adjusted and based on industry best practices such as age, performance, maintenance costs, safety features, and reliability. 18. Continue to develop performance measures for critical tasks that can be implemented on low and moderate risks, regularly train on these measures for continuous improvement, and evaluate each member in the department annually against established benchmarks for the purpose of continuous process improvement. 19. Continue to evaluate options for deploying fewer vehicles on the initial response to emergency incidents; conduct a comprehensive review of all current medical priority dispatch system call typing in the regional communications center and a comprehensive review of fire-related responses and run-card assignments. 20. Continue with the comprehensive review of current fire reporting to ensure that the proper information is being entered, with particular focus on estimated fire loss, and implement a quality assurance program for incident reporting that links to continuous training and improvement. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 4 21. Continue to discuss the dispatch handling times with the regional communications center (RCC) management and pursue efforts to improve these times, particularly on fire calls. 22. Continue developing and monitoring performance measures specific to fire services that are benchmarked against demand and response time and that measure elements such as percent of fires contained to room of origin (in place now), percent of fires contained to building of origin, and target goals for call processing, turnout, access, set-up, travel, and total response times. The results of these performance measures should be reported with explanation in an annual report. 23. Continue use of the South Bay Regional Public Communication Authority for fire and EMS dispatching. The services received, the quality of operation, and technical support balances the annual fee. 24. Continue discussions with RCC regarding expanding the use of emergency medical dispatch (EMD) through the South Bay Regional Public Communication Authority in order to further define the severity of EMS call and adjust response assignment to incidents with a focus on efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery. 25. Request changes in operations with the South Bay Regional Public Communication Authority with regard to the quality assurance process for call screening and pre-arrival instructions. Emphasis should focus on ensuring that these functions are being carried out in accordance with the recommended guidelines. 26. Preserve the options available for fire department consolidation. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 5 Operational Analysis Governance and Administration City of Hermosa Beach Located on the southern end of the Santa Monica Bay region and 17miles Southwest of Los Angeles in Los Angeles County, Hermosa Beach is comprised of 1.43 square miles of land area and is approximately 40 blocks long, with the Pacific Coast Highway running through the middle of the City. The 2011 population was 19,773. The main area of attraction in Hermosa Beach is the Hermosa Pier, which offers shopping, entertainment, and year round fishing.1 The top employers include a fitness club, the city of Hermosa Beach, a grocer, and a realty.1 Hermosa Beach is known for its picturesque beaches, which offer numerous recreational outlets and its ideal climate. Hermosa Beach has a council/manager form of government. This form of government combines the political leadership of elected officials in a city council with the managerial experience of an appointed city administrator.2 Pursuant to Title 9, California Government Code, the city council is comprised of a mayor and four councilmembers who are elected at large to serve four-year terms. Section 2.12.070 of the code provides that the city manager is the chief administrative officer of the city and is appointed by the council to administer all affairs of the city except those identified in the code.3 Hermosa Beach is typical of many cities and towns across the United States in that it has its own police and fire departments; public works, community development, and community agencies; and full finance and human resources internal functions. Figure 1 illustrates the organizational chart for the city of Hermosa Beach, California. 1 Annual Report Statistical Section, http://www.hermosabch.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentID=1011. 2 Official Code of Hermosa Beach, California. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 6 Figure 1: City of Hermosa Beach Organizational Chart Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 7 Hermosa Beach Fire Department The Hermosa Beach Fire Department is a career fire and emergency medical services (EMS) department. The HBFD responds to calls for service from one fire station, which is south-centrally located on Pier Avenue near Ardmore Avenue. There are 17 positions currently approved and staffed in the fire department budget. These include 15 suppression shift personnel, a fire chief, and a civilian administrative assistant. The organization chart also includes one assistant fire chief, but this position is currently unfunded. The suppression shift personnel operate on a 48/96 hour rotational schedule with three platoons.4 In addition to full-time firefighters, the city of Hermosa Beach also has an ambulance fire intern (AO/FI) program with part-time interns. The program is a mutually beneficial relationship: the community benefits from having a certified responder that can provide EMS to residents and visitors at a reduced cost, while the AO/FI garners the on-the-job experience, education, and training to prepare for a full-time career in the fire service. The program has some limitations, however, which are discussed later in this report. The department provides traditional services, including fire suppression, EMS and emergency rescue; enforcement of regulations essential to the fire protection and safety of life and property; fire prevention and investigation; community support functions; and other duties prescribed by the council. Figure 2 illustrates the HBFD organization chart. Figure 2: Hermosa Beach Fire Department Organization Chart Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 8 A functional table of the organization illustrates to the community a clear picture of what and where key services of the organization are located within an organization. The HBFD has implemented a functional organization matrix table that clearly defines a collateral duty for which each member of the organization is responsible. In this organizational matrix, each task or functional area becomes a focal point. Specialization is centralized and employees that are doing these specialized jobs or tasks are identified. This functional matrix enables the HBFD to better visualize the division of responsibilities and offers a high level of transparency to both internal and external stakeholders. The functional matrix is supported by in-depth definitions of each collateral duty, clearly laying out the responsibility and accountability level of each. The functional table also provides to the agency a clear picture of the leadership functions at each organizational level and illustrates the work that must be performed at these organizational levels. Integrating the functional table with the traditional organizational model helps leaders move from a specific focus of an individual to an organizational perspective that breaks down organizational silos and creates leadership teams within each organizational component. This promotes lateral team building between organizational divisions. Figure 3 is a functional chart of the organization that further defines organizational components and leadership responsibilities. Both citizens and organizational members can see the impacts each organizational component has not only on the department, but also the community. Figure 3 illustrates a defined functional organizational chart. Figure 3: Proposed Functional Organization Chart Office of the Fire Chief Provides leadership and direction; establishes long term vision for mission direct services; formulates departmental policy; provides planning, research, continuous improvement, and creates the future. Suppression and EMS Provides efficient and effective fire suppression services , first response and EMS transport; performs specialized paramedic services; provides community outreach through public education and building inspection/safety surveys. Maintain skills through continuous training and company improvement. Maintain equipment in a ready state for efficient and effective service delivery. Fire Prevention-Investigation-Education Provides management of fire prevention, investigation, and public education programs; directs all levels of building and prevention inspections; manages agency and cooperative origin and cause investigations and effectively investigates arson related fires; provides continuous community outreach educating the public continuously on fire, EMS, and relevant community safety topics Training Provides federal, state, and locally mandated minimum standard training; career development, and advanced fire and EMS training; oversees new and incumbent employee development. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 9 Staffing and Deployment During the period covered by this study (May 1st, 2012 to April 30th, 2013), the HBFD operated three frontline response apparatus: one engine, one advanced life support (ALS) ambulance, and one basic life support (BLS) ambulance. In addition, the fire department operated one reserve engine/quint and one reserve utility vehicle. The department operational minimum daily staffing is five personnel, all of whom are certified as paramedics. The engine is staffed with three personnel (one captain, one engineer and one fire fighter). The ALS ambulance is staffed with two personnel (two firefighter/paramedics), and the BLS ambulance is staffed with two ambulance operators/fire interns (AO/FI). As discussed earlier, the HBFD is currently comprised of sixteen sworn fire personnel and one civilian administrative assistant. In addition, the department employs up to twenty-six ambulance operator/fire intern (AO/FI) staff, who are part-time, temporary emergency medical technicians. All three HBFD units respond on most responses. For many incidents HBFD units operate as a joint response/mutual aid contingent, primarily with the Redondo Beach or Manhattan Beach Fire Department. The BLS ambulance never responds without being accompanied by another HBFD unit. but if a full-time HBFD employee determines a patient to have a non-life-threatening condition, the BLS ambulance provides patient transport to the appropriate medical facility (usually in Torrance) independently of other HBFD units. Our evaluation indicates that the AO/FI program operates as a training ground for new employees who seek employment elsewhere once they obtain enough field experience. Subsequently, the turnover rate among the AO/FI personnel is extremely high, with very few employees staying longer than six months. The high turnover rate makes supervising, scheduling, and training these personnel a time-consuming process, which is compounded by the limited administrative staff within the fire department. HBFD has initiated discussions with the Manhattan Beach Fire Department regarding a pool of hourly employees to expand capacity of this program. These discussions remain ongoing. HBFD provides both ALS and BLS transports. In the 12-month period evaluated in 2012-13, a total of 911 transports were carried out by HBFD units. EMS in Hermosa Beach is regulated by the Emergency Medical Services Agency of Los Angeles County (LA County EMS). This agency provides licensing guidelines, treatment protocols, medical supervision, and a pharmacy for drug replacements. LA County EMS also stipulates pricing for transport activities. Currently HBFD is authorized to charge $1,412.25 for an ALS transport and $1,010.25 for a BLS transport. The city utilizes a third-party billing service for EMS transports (Wittman Enterprises) that is paid on a percentage basis (6.1 percent) for collections. In the 12-month period between March 2012 and February 2013, HBFD billed approximately one million dollars for its transports activities and had total receipts of just over $550,000. This is an estimated collection rate of approximately 56 percent. The current utilization of the BLS ambulance is a viable concept, but we believe greater efficiency can be achieved if its work schedule and utilization are altered. The AO/FI staff has limited role that should be expanded. Currently the AO/FIs are scheduled for a 24-hour period for which they are paid a $100 stipend. In FY 2012-13, the city of Hermosa Beach budgeted $127,500 for AO/FI Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 10 stipends. Because AO/FIs are considered part-time, they are not eligible for pensions, health care, sick and vacation time, and other benefits. ICMA believes that the AO/FI concept is viable on a part-time basis but should be restructured and expanded to further complement services provided by HBFD. As discussed in the workload analysis later in this report, call activity in the non-peak hours (typically 10:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m.) is low, and rarely do simultaneously incidents occur during these hours. ICMA believes that HBFD should consider reallocating the current AO/FI funding ($127,500) to implement a peak-period BLS ambulance that would be staffed with better-trained part-time staff who are paid a commensurate rate of pay. This would help improve the longevity and productivity of these workers. In addition, the BLS ambulance should be equipped with an automatic external defibrillator (AED), and personnel should be allowed to manage basic EMS and public-assist calls without support from other HBFD units. Further, should the EMS demand increase to include duplicate calls, the HBFD should consider, as funding permits, transitioning from peak load staffing to full-time staffing of the BLS ambulance. The fire chief oversees the daily operations of the agency and reports directly to the city manager. The fire chief is assisted by an administrative assistant (a 40-hour-per-week clerical position) and three fire captains. The fire captains are assigned to a 56-hour shift assignment (48/96) and fulfill key departmental functions in addition to their emergency response and supervisory duties. One captain serves as the fire marshal and is responsible for plan review and code enforcement. Another captain oversees the fire department’s facilities/safety/communications programs, and the third oversees equipment purchasing. Because the city frequently holds special events and activities (such as beach festivals, volleyball tournaments, or film productions), a fire engineer works as the fire department’s special events coordinator in permitting and oversight of special events. These collateral duties and activities are time consuming and entail significant responsibility. Many of the related tasks are done in the employee’s time off, and the employee is compensated by either overtime pay or compensatory time, in compliance with the terms of the city’s labor memorandum of understanding (MOU). Prevention, training, EMS, and special events account for up to 15 to 20 hours for each program, each week. The department has attempted to address the workload by using outside contract services. For instance, a private contractor, Hayer Consultants, assists in the review of building plans and construction permits. In addition, the city employs a nurse educator to deliver in-service EMS training. Changing the current approach offers potential for considerable cost savings: the city’s expenditures for these support functions and the overtime and compensatory time costs that result from them are staggering for a city and department of this size. The employees responsible for these functions receive several thousand dollars annually in additional pay beyond their salaries. The overtime costs for the fire department exceeded $500,000 in 2012. On a per capita basis, this amounted to an average of $35,778 in overtime pay per employee. According to the HBFD fire chief, this is a decrease from overtime expenditures that occurred 2007-2008 of $707,735. Article 28, Section D, of the MOU between the city and the firefighters association (July 1, 2012-June 30, 2015) specifies that “paid leaves of absences for vacation, sick, comp. time, and holiday compensatory time shall be counted as hours worked.” The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 11 provides oversight and guidance to employers regarding the payment of overtime and stipulations regarding these criteria. FLSA does not require payment for time not worked, such as vacations, sick leave, or holidays (federal or otherwise). These benefits are matters of agreement between an employer and an employee (or the employee's representative). ICMA believes that the city should re-evaluate its definition of and determination for “time worked” to align them closer to with FLSA guidelines. We believe this would result in a significant reduction in overtime costs. ICMA was asked to evaluate a proposal in the FY 2013-14 fire department budget that provides funding for an administrative division chief position to oversee training and operations. In light of the administrative functions currently assigned to 56-hour captains and the fire chief, and the amount of overtime pay spent to support these activities, we believe that the administrative division chief position should use overtime funds in lieu of funding the current unfunded assistant chief position. We believe there is a significant workload available for an administrative division chief. In addition to providing better continuity for the oversight of some critical programs currently overseen by fire captains, the administrative division chief would provide both administrative and command support for the fire chief during absences. We also believe that the assignment of duties for this new position has the potential to offset overtime costs currently resulting from paying line officers for these services. HBFD should look strategically at the assignment of duties for the proposed administrative division chief with a keen eye toward reducing overtime costs associated with the programs identified above. The city also asked ICMA to further review alternatives for staffing and deployment of resources. Current capacity is addressed in this study through the ICMA workload analysis presented in Appendix A and further discussed in the body of this report. Information for this analysis was first validated utilizing the data recorded in HBFD fire incident reporting (NFIRS) using computer-aided dispatch (CAD) data, which was provided by the regional communications center. In cases where the timestamps were not recorded in NFIRS and were recorded in CAD, we used the CAD data. In all other cases we used the NFIRS data. The HBFD fire chief also provided ICMA information presented to the Hermosa Beach city council (November 2012) regarding the HBFD response capacity. This presentation included data compiled by the fire chief regarding HBFD incidents and trends, Hermosa Beach population trends, mutual aid with surrounding jurisdictions and the importance of time in emergency response. The HBFD fire chief utilized as an evaluation of unit capacity, a model as prescribed by the Center for Public Safety Excellence fire accreditation program that benchmarks response time as a measure of capacity as it relates to the availability of units. ICMA while utilizing response time as a benchmark also analyzes workload of individual units as a bench mark of capacity. Ultimately ICMA is asked here by the city to discuss an operational maximum service level increase and a pro-active risk reduction minimal service level increase in order to meet city council’s adopted mission intent of first class service as it relates to fire and EMS services. Minimally the HBFD can increase service level in a pro-active manner through community wide risk reduction efforts. As discussed above each employee in the department is assigned a collateral duty Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 12 that at times takes them away from their respective operational shift assignment. In addition to this some department members, due to their assigned collateral duties, must return to work on their day (s) off to perform critical tasks associated with their assignment. One of these areas is fire prevention and education and associated program activities such as managing certain aspects of special event planning and permitting. One full time position that may be considered in this area is a city fire marshal, which is recommended to be a civilian position assigned to the fire department. Program task areas this position would be responsible for include: • California Fire Code maintenance, revision, and enforcement. • Manage engine company fire inspection program • Manage community risk reduction programs: o Public Access Defibrillation o Fire Prevention Week o Public Education o Injury/Fall Prevention • Track inspection and permit billing to ensure all applicable are invoiced and paid. • Manage fire permit pre-incident planning. • Manage/enforce occupant load enforcement issues, with an emphasis on entertainment/nightlife occupancies. • Manage/perform special event plan review, inspection, and permitting. • Manage community risk and vulnerability analysis in accordance with the HBFD strategic plan. A maximal increase in service delivery alternatives includes the increase in the delivery of EMS services, which makes additional personnel available also to assist with fire services critical tasking as discussed further in this report. As noted in the ICMA workload analysis included in this report, and the fire chief’s November 2012 city council statistical analysis presentation, EMS responses represent the greatest number of overall calls for service in Hermosa Beach. As discussed above the HBFD has in place a BLS ambulance staffed by part-time employees. ICMA provides an incremental approach in this discussion regarding the staffing of the BLS ambulance, which includes peak load staffing at certain times of the day and on certain days of the week. Additionally ICMA recommends as a policy consideration, that if demand increases, this potentially may increase the capacity of current HBFD units as indicated by the fire chief in his November 2012 city council presentation. Six full time positions would be needed (two per operational shift) to reach this maximum operational service level increase. These personnel would be assigned to the BLS ambulance with a primary operational assignment of responding to EMS calls and transporting BLS patients to local hospital emergency departments as indicated through protocol. Additionally these positions add capacity to fire ground operations (when this unit, or when both ambulances are available) to perform fireground critical tasks as discussed later in this report. Recommendations: • Merge the HBFD Organizational Chart, to include the proposed division chief position with the proposed functional organizational matrix. • Examine the option of operating the BLS ambulance in a capacity that it is more independent and can be dispatched to minor EMS calls and patient assists without the accompaniment of other HBFD units. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 13 • Consider the operation of the BLS Ambulance on the busiest days of the week (Friday, Saturday and Sunday) and only during peak hours of operations (11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) ICMA further recommends that should the EMS demand increase to include duplicate calls, the HBFD should consider, as funding permits and as a maximum service level increase, transitioning from peak load staffing to full-time staffing of the BLS ambulance (addition of six full time employees). • Closely evaluate overtime expenditures for fire personnel and consider changes to the Firefighters Association MOU with regard to its overtime/time-worked provision. • Use the funds currently spent on overtime to pay captain for collateral duties to fund a division chief position that would be responsible for training and operations program areas. • Consider as a minimum service level increase, a civilian fire marshal position to implement new and maintain more effectively and efficiently the department’s community wide risk reduction efforts. Organizational Processes Time Allocation To effectively operate in an organization, an employee must understand his or her role and, as important, where he/she should allocate his/her time to be most effective. Understanding this concept is essential in an organization such as the HBFD, which has a compact organizational chart. Managers and firefighters have a responsibility to understand their organizational roles and responsibilities and to perform the tasks related to these roles and responsibilities. One would not expect senior-level officers to spend as much time operating the system as a frontline service provider does. Conversely, one would not expect a first-line or mid-level officer to spend as much time as a senior-level officer planning for the future of the organization. In this way, each level of the organization has a different set of priorities, and the employees at each level should allocate their time accordingly. In the HBFD, however, this is not possible because mid-level officers (captains) spend a majority of their workday tending to administrative duties tied to collateral duty assignments. Figure 4 illustrates the components of efficient time allocation in the public sector. As shown in this illustration, three segments of organizational time allocation are central to achieving the goals and objectives of any organization and, more important, to enabling the organization to fulfill its mission and realize its vision: (1) operating the system; (2) improving the system; and (3) creating the future. Operating the system is the time during the workday that an organizational member is implementing service deliverables, touching those components of the organization that make it go. Improving the system is the time an organizational member spends seeking ways to make service deliverables and organizational components more efficient or, simply, better. Creating the future is a critical piece of time allocation when an organizational member develops goals and objectives that link to strategic planning and considers the vision of the organization in a way that focuses on successful, effective outcomes. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 14 Figure 4: Time Allocation Model Time allocation is discussed in this report in large part because the HBFD currently has an unfunded vacancy at the assistant chief level. As illustrated in Figure 2, the assistant fire chief position is allocated responsibility for the day-to-day organizational program and operational functions. HBFD’s vacancy in this position leaves the current organizational structure centralized to the fire chief’s office. Ideally, even in a compact organization like the HBFD, it is critical that the appropriate time be spent at the appropriate level in the organization to continuously make improvements and create the future. In the HBFD, captains are allocating much of their workday to administrative functions that are not tied to company- or shift-level responsibilities. In fact some of these administrative functions take the captain away from the station, leaving the duty crew supervised either by the fire chief, whose office is in the same building, or by a senior-level engineer or firefighter. Day-to-day activities (operating the system) and training in some cases are going unsupervised by the assigned officer, as he has to allocate more time to improving the system through the administrative tasks tied to collateral duties. To be an effective public organization, the proper time allocation of officers and subordinate personnel is essential to ensure the efficient delivery of services. ICMA suggests (as recommended above) the funding of an officer-level position between fire chief and captain to correct the time allocation imbalance of the staff at the captain level. Recommendation: • Adopt a time allocation model; implement and monitor time allocation to ensure effective use of fire officer and staff time as it relates to achieving the organizational mission. Succession Planning The analysis of the HBFD did not reveal a clear organizational succession plan. Additionally, there is no career-path training program that outlines expectations to help prepare staff for advancement at Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 15 various levels in the organization. For example, there is no certification or advanced training requirement for an engineer, an important position in the department. However, the extensive collateral duty program currently in place that extends to all employees does serve as an informal succession planning/career development program. It is important for the HBFD to implement programs that will help to identify and prepare future leaders of the organization; that is, that will go beyond the technical courses for career advancement. Key to this strategy is the development and implementation of a formal succession plan. Succession planning is a systematic approach to developing potential successors to ensure organizational leadership stability. Successful succession planning identifies, develops, and nurtures potential future leaders. It is critical for the long-term success of any organization that such a process is in place. As such the HBFD has included succession planning in their organizational strategic planning process. Critical to the success of succession planning is the engagement and commitment of the senior leaders to the program, as well as a commitment of other members of the organization to their own personal and professional development. To be a part of the succession plan, one must commit to one’s own professional development process to be able to compete for and fill critical organizational leadership roles. Figure 5 illustrates one example of a succession plan. Figure 5: Six-Step Succession Planning Model From United States Office of Personnel Management, HCAAF Systems, 2005. According to Kramer, “education and training in the fire service are complimented by an equally important third factor: experience. A healthy mix of all three is required for an effective fire officer, Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 16 but as he or she moves through a career, the mix and the proportion of each tend to vary, with education becoming more and more important over time.”3 The HBFD does not have a career-path training program that identifies technical and organizational development courses and/or formal education programs that must be completed as one prepares to increase the level of responsibility or advance one’s position in the organization. For the officer (captain) level, California state fire officer certification is required. Ideally, a candidate for any officer level in the department is experienced and has the foundational technical and formal education and training to be successful with each new level. A formal program that identifies the foundational technical and organizational courses germane to each level in the organization should be implemented. As such the HBFD has included this in their strategic planning process. ICMA realizes this may have to be discussed and agreed upon with the bargaining unit, but strongly supports the utility of this approach. Recommendations: • Follow current strategic plan and develop and implement a succession planning process that identifies and develops future leaders. • Follow current strategic plan and develop and implement a career path training and development program for career advancement that focuses on personal and professional development for promotion. Education and Training Programs An operational shift captain serves as the training officer for the HBFD. The captain is responsible to the fire chief to ensure that training is conducted across all operational shifts. In addition to this responsibility and his primary duty as a shift officer, this captain is also assigned the collateral duties to serve as facilities manager, fleet manager, radio communications officer, hazard communications officer, public information officer, and coordinator of hydrant inspections. Other operational members are responsible for coordinating and administering specific types of training. For instance, an engineer has the responsibility to coordinate rapid intervention crew training, a firefighter coordinates paramedic continuing education, and a firefighter coordinates training for the ambulance operator/fire intern program. Current requirements for probationary firefighters (new hires) are certifications for Firefighter I (in accordance with the California Fire Marshal Office) and paramedic (in accordance with the California Emergency Medical Services Authority and local requirements). At HBFD a new hire is a fire academy graduate and a licensed paramedic, and receives two weeks of HBFD orientation training and then is assigned to an operational shift. Continuing education requirements for paramedic level certification are delivered on a monthly basis to all operational personnel maintaining this certification by a part-time contracted employee. 3 Joseph R. Bachtler and Thomas F. Brennan, eds. The Fire Chief’s Handbook, Fifth Edition. (Saddle Brook, NJ: Fire Engineering Books, 1995), 328. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 17 The department considers training a priority, and strives to complete one to two hours of training a day. Shift captains expressed concern that training is not being completed properly due to the collateral duties, and often competing priorities of those responsible for this training. The training officer’s collateral duties suggest that this position may be challenged to provide the critical overarching management of a comprehensive training program. This is evident in the training completed and recorded at Target Solutions, the online training and training records management system used by the HBFD. Although the training is important and often is mandated by the department and state agencies, the online delivery platform and the subject matter content fail to meet the fire risk potential and critical tasks that need to be completed by first- and second-arriving engine and ladder company crews on fire suppression calls for service in general or specific to Hermosa Beach risks. Recommendation: • Continue implementing current strategic planning process goal statements to ensure the management and delivery of a comprehensive training program is a priority and includes both cognitive learning and hands-on practical training, as well as annual assessments of all personnel in both EMS and fire suppression skills. Assessment and Planning Strategic Planning/Goals and Objectives The development of a long-range fire protection and prevention comprehensive strategic plan involves three key steps. The first step is to generate an assumption of what the community will look like at the end of the planning process. Second, the department needs to assess realistically the strengths and weaknesses of the existing fire protection system to include codes, standards, and ordinances relating to fire prevention efforts, public safety education programs, and emergency response capability. The third and final step is to project the needed capabilities and capacity of the fire protection system and its fire department component as the community changes.4 This process helps to ensure that an adequate level of resources, including staffing and equipment, is allocated to meet the community’s needs for the services delivered by the fire department as efficiently as possible. A strategic plan also assists the department in matching resources with available revenues. Defining clear goals and objectives for any organization through a formal strategic planning document establishes a resource that any member of the organization, as well as external stakeholders, can see the goals toward which the organization is heading and how the organization is planning to get there. The HBFD has a five-year strategic plan for 2012 to 2016, a best practice. The organization has developed a strategic plan and identified specific goals and objectives and an action agenda to measure completion of these goals and objectives. 4 Fire Protection Handbook, Twentieth Edition, Volume II (National Fire Protection Association, 2008): 12-5. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 18 As the HBFD has developed a strategic plan, ICMA recommends the following steps be completed during the next update of the startegic plan for a contiuned successful approach to this critical process:5 • Develop a vision of the community: Work with the community development department to develop a comprehensive vision of what Hermosa Beach will look like in the short term and several years out. • Monitor and update the plan: Regularly reflect on the extent to which goals are being met and action plans are being implemented. Perhaps the most important feedback is positive feedback from customers, both internal and external to the organization. Performance Measurement Fire suppression, prevention programs, and EMS service delivery need to be planned and managed to achieve specific, agreed-upon results. This requires establishing intended results and developing a set of goals and activities to achieve these results. Determining how well an organization or program is doing requires that these goals be measurable and that they are measured against desired results. This is the purpose of performance measurement. Simply defined, performance measurement is the ongoing monitoring and reporting of progress toward pre-established goals. It captures data about programs, activities, and processes and displays data in standardized ways that help communicate to service providers, customers, and other stakeholders how well the agency is performing in key areas. Performance measurement provides organizations with tools to assess performance and identify areas in need of improvement. In short, what gets measured gets done. The need to continually assess performance requires adding new words and definitions to the fire service lexicon. Fire administrators need to be familiar with the different tools available and the consequences of their use. In Managing the Public Sector, business professor Grover Starling applies the principles of performance measurement to the public sector. He writes that the consequences to be considered for any given program include: • Administrative feasibility: How difficult will it be to set up and operate the program? • Effectiveness: Does the program produce the intended effect in the specified time? Does it reach the intended target group? • Efficiency: How do the benefits compare with the costs? • Equity: Are the benefits distributed equitably with respect to region, income, gender, ethnicity, age, and so forth? • Political feasibility: Will the program attract and maintain key actors with a stake in the program area?6 5 McNamara, C. (1996-2007) Basic Overview of Various Strategic Planning Models. Adapted from the Field Guide to Nonprofit Strategic Planning and Facilitation. Minneapolis, MN: Authenticity Consulting, LLC. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 19 Performance measurement systems vary significantly among different types of public agencies and programs. Some systems focus primarily on efficiency and productivity within work units, whereas others are designed to monitor outcomes produced by major public programs. Still others track the quality of services provided by an agency and the extent to which citizens are satisfied with these services. Within the fire service, performance measures tend to focus on inputs (the amount of money and resources spent on a given program or activity) and short-term outputs (the number of fires in the community, for instance). One of the goals of any performance measurement system should be also to include efficiency and cost-effectiveness indicators, as well as explanatory information on how these measures should be interpreted. The types of performance measures are shown in Table 1. The HBFD measures some aspects of performance through published department goals. For instance, it collects and reports typical fire department data on response times and nonemergency services, fire loss, training, and department communication. These are typical workload measures seen among fire service organizations today, but if they are to be used to justify program budgets and service delivery levels, they need to link department goals to specific target rates or percentages. To accomplish this linkage, other forms of performance measures, particularly service-quality and customer-satisfaction measures, should be incorporated into the system. Table 1: The Five GASB Performance Indicators Category Definition Input indicators These are designed to report the amount of resources, either financial or other (especially personnel), that have been used for a specific service or program. Output indicators These report the number of units produced or the services provided by a service or program. Outcome indicators These are designed to report the results (including quality) of the service. Efficiency (and cost- effectiveness) indicators These are defined as indicators that measure the cost (whether in dollars or employee hours) per unit of output or outcome. Explanatory information This includes a variety of information about the environment and other factors that might affect an organization’s performance. From Harry P. Hatry et al., eds. Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting: Its Time Has Come (Norwalk, CT: GASB, 1990). One of the most important elements of performance measurement within the fire service is to describe service delivery performance in a way so that both citizens and those providing the service have the same understanding. The customer will ask, “Did I get what I expected?” the service provider will ask, “Did I provide what was expected?” 6 Starling, Managing the Public Sector, 396. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 20 Ensuring that the answer to both questions is “yes” requires alignment of these expectations and the use of understandable terms. The author of the “Leadership” chapter of the 2012 edition of ICMA’s Managing Fire and Emergency Services “Green Book” explains how jargon can get in the way: Too often, fire service performance measures are created by internal customers and laden with jargon that external customers do not understand. For example, the traditional fire service has a difficult time getting the public to understand the implications of the “time temperature curve” or the value of particular levels of staffing in the suppression of fires. Fire and emergency service providers need to be able to describe performance in a way that is clear to customers, both internal and external. In the end, simpler descriptions are usually better.7 The HBFD Vision Statement includes language centered on “achieving national standards and industry best practices as they relate to meeting established performance measures and positive outcomes.”8 As such the HBFD has included in its strategic planning process goals to include digitizing fire, EMS, and fire prevention reporting so that performance measurement data is easily accessible. Additionally the fire chief has advised ICMA he is evaluating dashboard performance measurement systems as a means of automating performance measurement. Staff throughout the organization should and will according to the fire chief participate in developing performance measures. In addition to helping facilitate department wide buy-in, enlisting the participation of personnel at all levels provides a valuable opportunity for upper management to better understand what the line staff believes to be critical goals—and vice versa. For the same reason, the process of developing performance measures should include citizen input regarding service level preferences. Translating community input into performance measures will help to link the preferences of citizens and business community to the goals of the department and will help identify areas where community expectations are and are not being met. Establishing a performance management system within the framework of an overall strategic plan will also help city management and elected officials gain a better understanding of what the HBFD is trying to achieve. Building any successful performance management system that measures more than outputs requires a consistent model. Figure 6 illustrates a successful program logic model9 designed to build consistent performance measures and should be linked to the performance measure indicators shown in Table 1 to build a successful performance measurement system. 7 I. David Daniels, “Leading and Managing,” in Managing Fire and Emergency Services (Washington, DC: 2012), 202. 8 Hermosa Beach Fire Department Strategic Plan, 2012-2016. 9 A logic model shows the logic by which program activities are expected to lead to targeted outcomes. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 21 Figure 6: Performance Measure Program Logic Model10 Program logic components are defined as follows: • Type of measure: the type of indicator to be measured. • Program activities: the provision of services provided by this program area. • Outputs: the results of or how much is produced from the program activities. • Initial/intermediate outcomes: substantive changes/improvements/benefits of the program as measured against the program goal. • Long-term outcomes: satisfy the stated goal—links to the budget and strategic plan. Recommendations: • Continue with the development and implementation of a performance measure reporting system that expands the type of measurement it employs, including a program logic model. This system should incorporate the HBFD vision statement “Achieving national standards 10 Theodore Poister, Measuring Performance in Public and Nonprofit Organizations (San Francisco, CA: 2003), 44. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 22 and industry best practices as they relate to meeting established performance measures and positive outcomes.” • Continue with the development and implementation of performance measures for each department activity as indicated above; link these measures to the strategic and comprehensive planning documents and fiscal/budget documents. Community Risk Assessment and Risk Management Planning The city of Hermosa Beach and the entire LA County metroplex are adept in emergency planning and community risk assessment. ICMA has found the caliber of emergency planning and its level of specificity in the Hermosa Beach area to be comprehensive and extremely sophisticated. The city’s emergency operations plan (EOP) and utilization of the National Incident Management System (NIMS) are far reaching and widely utilized by all sections of city government. The city operates within the Los Angeles County’s Operational Area Response and Recovery System (OARRS) network. All systems are closely aligned with the state of California Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS), and this effort is in accordance with the FEMA National Response Framework. The local, county, and state response plans rely heavily on regional and statewide mutual aid networks. Community risk and vulnerability assessments are essential elements in a fire department’s planning process. According to an NFPA paper on assessing community vulnerability, fire department operational performance is a function of three considerations: resource availability/reliability, department capability, and operational effectiveness.11 These elements can be further defined as: • Resource availability/reliability: The degree to which the resources are ready and available to respond. • Department capability: The ability of the resources deployed to manage an incident. • Operational effectiveness: The product of availability and capability. It is the outcome achieved by the deployed resources or a measure of the ability to match resources deployed to the risk level to which they are responding. The community risk and vulnerability assessment evaluates the community as a whole, as well as with regard to property types. It is used to measure all property and the risk associated with that property and then segregates the property as either a high, medium, or low hazard. According to the NFPA Fire Protection Handbook, these hazards are defined as: • High-hazard occupancies: Schools, hospitals, nursing homes, explosives plants, refineries, high-rise buildings, and other high life-hazard or large fire-potential occupancies. • Medium-hazard occupancies: Apartments, offices, and mercantile and industrial occupancies not normally requiring extensive rescue by firefighting forces. 11 Fire Service Deployment, Assessing Community Vulnerability. http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/pdf/urbanfirevulnerability.pdf. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 23 • Low-hazard occupancies: One-, two-, or three-family dwellings and scattered small business and industrial occupancies.12 The city of Hermosa planning efforts places great emphasis in identifying the potential hazards that can affect the community as a whole. Through a vulnerability analysis for the community they have identified those events that would have the highest potential for occurrence and the greatest devastation. These include: • Earthquake, at the Newport Inglewood fault • Transportation accident • Flood, coastal and Urban • Severe weather • Terrorism/ workplace & school violence • Energy shortage/ disruption • Hazardous materials incident • Water emergency/ drought The city’s planning efforts also focus on the support and organizational systems that would be necessary to respond and sustain ongoing relief efforts during times of disaster. Included in these efforts are: • Continuity of operations planning (COOP) • Public awareness and public information • Succession planning (continuity of government) • Utilization of volunteers and management of donations • Interoperable communications • Mutual aid • Alternate facilities / record preservation. Linking a fire department’s operational functionality to the community risk and its vulnerability assessment is intended to assist fire personnel in refining their preparedness efforts. According to the HBFD strategic planning process this assessment will begin in October 2014. Fire Pre-Planning In addition to examining communitywide risk and vulnerability, the HBFD should continue to examine specific risk and vulnerability on the basis of the community’s critical occupancies. Risk assessment and vulnerability analysis are not new to the fire service: the NFPA 1620 Standard, 12 National Fire Service Data Summit Proceedings, U.S. Department of Commerce, NIST Tech Note 1698, May 2011. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 24 Recommended Practice for Pre-Incident Planning, identifies the need to utilize both written narrative and diagrams to depict the physical features of a building, its contents, and any built-in fire protection systems. The occupancies that are typically specified for pre-incident plans, or “pre-plans,” are as follows: • Large assembly • Educational • Health care • Detention and correction • High-rise residential • Residential board and care (assisted living) • Mercantile • Business • Industrial • Warehouse and storage. Risk Management/Firefighter Health and Fitness: In addition to examining community risk and vulnerability, HBFD should examine the internal risk and vulnerability of its personnel. NFPA 1500, Standard for a Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program (2007 ed.), recommends the development of a separate risk management plan for fire department personnel in response to their work environment. In order for this process to be effective, the following components must be included in the risk management plan: • Risk identification: Actual or potential hazards. • Risk evaluation: The potential for occurrence of a given hazard and the severity of its consequences. • Prioritizing risk: The degree of hazard based upon the frequency and severity of occurrence. • Risk control: Solutions for eliminating or reducing real or potential hazards by implementing an effective control measure. • Risk monitoring: Evaluation of effectiveness of risk control measures. NFPA 1582, Standard on Comprehensive Occupational Medical Program for Fire Departments (2013 ed.), and NFPA 1583, Standard on Health-Related Fitness Programs for Fire Department Members (2008 ed.), provide guidance to fire departments regarding medical screening and annual fitness requirements for their members. ICMA found that HBFD does not currently conduct annual medical screenings for its employees, but does conduct annual fitness evaluations based on performance however these are voluntary. Additional compensation for those who participate is available and is based on certain performance criteria. According to the HBFD fire chief, a Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 25 respiratory protection plan/program is in the final stages of development and will serve as the foundation of the medical/fitness program. The NFPA 1582 standard of safety establishes the parameters within which the HBFD should conduct all activities during emergency and nonemergency operations. The intent is for all members to operate within this standard or plan of safety and not deviate from this process. Through this effort accidents can be minimized and employee lost time reduced. Recommendations: • Expand the use of MDCs to store and retrieve critical information regarding building occupancy files, pre-plan information, and contact information. Evaluate options for fully automating the pre-planning process so that critical occupancy information is retrievable from the mobile data computers (MDCs) and certain hazardous components are identified by the system in order to give responding personnel critical information regarding an occupancy’s status or specific hazard. • Continue to develop and enhance, as funding allows, annual medical screenings, respiratory protection plan/program, and an ongoing fitness assessment process for its operational personnel. Further, HBFD should consider a partnering effort with neighboring jurisdictions in providing medical screening and fitness assessments to it personnel. Infrastructure Fixed Facilities/Capital Vehicles The HBFD operates out of a single station located in the south-central part of Hermosa Beach. The facility was constructed in 1959 as a single-story, two-bay fire station and is in poor condition. In the early 1980s, fire staff, with assistance from the city building department, constructed and completed second-story dormitory and bathroom facilities. The second floor facilities are still in use today. A training/hose-tower rising from the roof of the original building has been condemned and is no longer in full use. Staff expressed concerns about the construction of the second-floor addition and wondered whether it was built in accordance with proper building codes. The HBFD facility houses both the administrative offices and the operational component of the department. Two ambulances, the quint, and the primary engine apparatus operate out of the facility with a crew of five career and, at times, two additional AO/FI personnel. The administrative function currently consists of two people: the fire chief and civilian administrative assistant. The facility is cramped, as there is insufficient space for both the administrative and operational functions. The fire chief advised a new fire station is under consideration, but the city has not been successful in finding an available parcel in an optimal location for a new station. The city does not have a viable or exercised option for relocating the fire/police functions in the event that the current structures become inoperable. As noted above, the HBFD operates an array of vehicles that includes heavy fire apparatus, ambulances, and staff vehicles. In the FY 2012-2013 budget, there is a replacement schedule for these vehicles, a best practice. This schedule benchmarks the year the vehicle was placed in service, the projected life of the vehicle, projected cost to replace the vehicle, and funds available to Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 26 replace the vehicle (through the most recent fiscal year). In review of this schedule, ICMA found that the 1990 engine, which was due for replacement in 2012, has not been replaced. ICMA also found that the projected costs to replace the heavy fire apparatus and ambulances are not within current industry standards. Recommendations: • Work with the community development and public works departments to ensure that the second-floor addition remains sound, is to code, and is safe for occupancy. • Continue to seek an appropriate parcel (size and location), and continue with its consideration for the construction of a new fire station. • Adjust the vehicle replacement program to reflect current industry cost standards for each fire department vehicle in the program. Further, apparatus replacement should be adjusted and based on industry best practices such as age, performance, maintenance costs, safety features, and reliability. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 27 Programs Operational Response and Workload The Hermosa Beach Fire Department provides fire and EMS services from its sole fire station located in the south-central area of town at 540 Pier Avenue. The city, which is approximately 1.43 square miles, is an oceanfront, densely populated suburb in the Southern California metroplex. There are approximately 20,000 year-round residents, but Hermosa Beach has frequent surges in population due to tourism and beach-related special events. Hermosa Beach itself is predominantly residential, but there are concentrations of commercial and strip development along the major thoroughfares, and various freeway and rail lines transect the larger regional area. The South Bay Regional Public Communication Authority serves as the city’s 911 public safety answering point (PSAP). During the twelve-month study period from which data was derived (May 1, 2012, to April 30, 2013), HBFD units responded to 1,660 calls that originated from within city limits. Of these calls, 23 were structure fire calls and 22 were classified as other or outside fire calls (grass, trash, dumpster, vehicle, etc.). There were also 78 incidents classified as “Hazardous Conditions” and 1,152 (69.4 percent) emergency medical incidents (including motor vehicle accidents). The remaining 199 calls (12 percent) were classified as public assist, good intent, or false alarms. In addition, HBFD responded to 755 incidents that originated in mutual aid or automatic response jurisdictions, raising the total incident count to 2415. On approximately 186 of the calls, HBFD units were cancelled en route to the call, prior to arrival. Operational Category Call Type Nationwide, fire departments are responding to more EMS calls and fewer fire calls, particularly fire calls that result in active firefighting operations by responders. Improved building construction, code enforcement, automatic sprinkler systems, and aggressive public education programs have contributed to a decrease in serious fires and, more importantly, fire deaths among civilians. In addition, the incidence of fires is greatly influenced by demographics: on a national basis, lower income earners and rental properties have a higher occurrence of fire on a national basis.13 Another interesting trend is the frequency of true emergencies versus non-emergency or public assist calls. ICMA’s findings nationally indicate that in some jurisdictions more than 50 percent of all responses (fire, EMS, and other) are non-emergency calls. This factor is critical when calculating response time data, determining staffing levels, and identifying appropriate deployment strategies. The key to improved efficiency with regard to deploying resources to emergency incidents is best achieved through a more robust call prioritization process at the 911 dispatch center. The ability for 911 call takers to accurately screen calls and then assign the most appropriate unit(s) and personnel to a call can pay substantial dividends in the following ways: 13 Socioeconomic Factors and the Incidence of Fire, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, United States Fire Administration, and National Fire Data Center, June, 1997. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 28 • increased unit availability • reduced wear and tear on vehicles • lower fuel costs • reduced vehicle maintenance needs • fewer vehicle accidents and reduced risk of accidents. In addition to having fewer units respond to minor incidents and public assistance calls, cities also can respond at slower speeds, without using lights and sirens, and obeying all traffic signals. ICMA believes that HBFD, in conjunction with the regional communications center (RCC), should adjust its response patterns and reduce the frequency of multiple-unit responses in lights-and-siren mode. To this end, the HBFD should expand the use of medical priority dispatch system (MPDS) and call prioritization though the RCC to further define the severity of EMS calls and adjust the response to incidents accordingly. This is further discussed in the emergency communications section of this report. Table 2 depicts the specific call types and the number of calls in each category to which the HBFD responded. Table 2: Call Types Call Type Number of Calls Calls per Day Call Percentage Cardiac and stroke 57 0.2 2.4 Seizure and unconsciousness 118 0.3 4.9 Breathing difficulty 43 0.1 1.8 Overdose and psychiatric 176 0.5 7.3 MVA 52 0.1 2.2 Fall and injury 318 0.9 13.2 Illness and other 388 1.1 16.1 EMS Total 1,152 3.2 47.7 Structure fire 23 0.1 1.0 Outside fire 22 0.1 0.9 Hazard 78 0.2 3.2 False alarm 76 0.2 3.1 Good intent 28 0.1 1.2 Public service 95 0.3 3.9 Fire Total 322 0.9 13.3 Mutual aid 755 2.1 31.3 Canceled 186 0.5 7.7 Total 2,415 6.6 100 Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 29 Observations from this table include: • The department received 6.6 calls, including 0.5 canceled calls and 2.1 mutual aid calls, per day. • EMS calls for the year totaled 1,152 (48 percent of all calls), averaging 3.2 per day. • Fire calls for the year totaled 322 (13 percent of all calls), averaging 0.9 per day. • Structure and outside fires combined for a total of 45 calls during the year, averaging one call every 8.1 days. • Of the 755 mutual aid calls, 314 calls (42 percent) were canceled. As there are a significant number of mutual aid calls, ICMA analyzed these calls separately. Table 3 depicts this analysis. Table 3: Mutual Aid Call Analysis Call Type Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach Other EMS 308 68 3 MVA 15 2 0 Structure fire 13 14 0 Outside fire 0 0 1 Hazard 2 1 0 False alarm 2 2 0 Public service 1 1 1 Good intent 4 3 0 Canceled 231 83 0 Total 576 174 5 Percentage 76.3 23.0 0.7 Calls per Day 1.6 0.5 0.0 Observations from this table include: • 76 percent of mutual aid calls occurred in Manhattan Beach, averaging 1.6 calls per day. • 23 percent of mutual aid calls occurred in Redondo Beach, averaging 0.5 calls per day. • A total of 314 (42 percent) mutual aid calls were canceled. • HBFD responded to 27 mutual-aid structure fire calls and 1 mutual-aid outside fire call. EMS alarm activity clearly dominates the HBFD workload and accounts for nearly 70 percent of all responses. This call distribution is also evident in responses into mutual-aid jurisdictions. Fire responses and actual fire incidents were very limited, accounting for less than 2 percent of the Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 30 alarm activity. The nature of EMS responses is characteristic of a relatively younger service population that is fairly affluent. The volume of the workloads and the nature of call activity are consistent with the call activity ICMA has observed in similar jurisdictions and do not present any significant anomalies. Operational Unit Deployment Time The time a unit is deployed on a single call, referred to as deployed time, indicates the workload of that particular unit. This can be measured as productive emergency response time over a shift. In the case of the HBFD, the shift is twenty-four hours. An analysis of the HBFD response data shows that on average EMS calls lasted 30.0 minutes and fire calls lasted 16.4 minutes. It is interesting to note that mutual/automatic-aid calls lasted longer, on average they were 35.4 minutes. HBFD responded with only one unit to only 7.8 percent of EMS incidents and 44.1 percent of fire calls. We feel this outcome is indicative of a response pattern that exceeds the requisite level. Table 4 presents incident categories that are typically non-emergency or minor in nature and should be considered for a reduced response assignment in the HBFD system. Table 4: Recommended Single Unit Call Types Public/Patient Assists Rescue Minor Trash Fires Minor vehicle accidents Smoke Investigations Overcrowding investigations Vehicle Fires Police Assists Dumpster Fires All automatic fire alarm soundings/notifications (without smoke or fire showing) Natural Gas Leaks Wires Down/Sparking Wires The following tables (Tables 5, 6, and 7) further break down unit deployment time, workload, and unit utilization. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 31 Table 5: Annual Deployed Time by Call Type Call Type Average Deployed Minutes per Run Annual Hours Percent of Total Hours Deployed Minutes per Day Annual Number of Runs Runs per Day Cardiac and stroke 36.6 89 4.3 14.6 146 0.4 Seizure and unconsciousness 35.0 174 8.3 28.5 298 0.8 Breathing difficulty 41.1 74 3.5 12.2 108 0.3 Overdose and psychiatric 32.3 233 11.2 38.3 433 1.2 MVA 27.9 56 2.7 9.2 120 0.3 Fall and injury 28.7 368 17.6 60.4 769 2.1 Illness and other 26.4 415 19.9 68.2 942 2.6 EMS Total 30.0 1,408 67.5 231.5 2,816 7.7 Structure fire 21.7 17 0.8 2.8 48 0.1 Outside fire 16.4 10 0.5 1.6 36 0.1 Hazard 21.3 47 2.2 7.7 132 0.4 False alarm 12.0 28 1.3 4.5 138 0.4 Good intent 11.9 9 0.4 1.4 44 0.1 Public service 15.7 39 1.9 6.4 149 0.4 Fire Total 16.4 149 7.2 24.6 547 1.5 Mutual Aid 35.5 490 23.5 80.5 829 2.3 Canceled 5.6 40 1.9 6.6 427 1.2 Total 27.1 2,088 100.0 343.2 4,619 12.7 Observations from this table indicate: • Total deployed time for the year, or deployed hours, was 2,088 hours. This is the total deployment time of all the units deployed on all type of calls, including 490 hours spent on mutual-aid calls. The deployed hours for all units combined averaged approximately 5.7 hours per day (this is a composite of all units responding to all incidents). • There were 4,619 runs, including 829 runs dispatched for mutual-aid calls. The daily average was 12.7 runs for all units combined. • Fire category calls accounted for 7.2 percent of the total workload. • There were 84 runs for structure and outside fire calls, with a total workload of 27 hours. This accounted for 1.3 percent of the total workload. The average deployed time for structure fire calls was 22 minutes, and the average deployed time for outside fire calls was 16 minutes. • EMS calls accounted for 67.5 percent of the total workload. The average deployed time for EMS calls was 30 minutes. The deployed hours for all units dispatched to EMS calls Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 32 averaged 3.9 hours per day (this includes transport time and time spent off-loading patients at the hospital). • Mutual-aid calls accounted for 23.5 percent of the total workload. Table 6: Call Workload by Unit Unit Type Unit ID Average Deployed Minutes per Run Annual Number of Runs Annual Hours Runs per Day Deployed Minutes per Day BLS ambulance A12 37.4 1,246 775.9 3.4 127.5 Engine E12 15.9 1,722 478.1 4.8 78.6 ALS ambulance R11 30.3 1,651 833.8 4.5 137.1 Note: In this section, the actual time spent by each unit on calls is reported in two types of statistics: workload and runs. A dispatch of a unit is defined as a run; thus a call might include multiple runs. Observations from this table indicate: • ALS ambulance R11 was deployed most often and had the most deployed hours. It averaged 4.5 runs and 137.1 minutes per day. • BLS ambulance A12 was dispatched on an average of 3.4 runs per day and was deployed 127.5 minutes per day. • Engine E12 was dispatched on an average of 4.8 runs per day and was deployed 78.6 minutes per day. As discussed above, deploying the most appropriate unit(s) to an incident must be done as efficiently as possible. It is essential that the HBFD evaluate its deployment of resources as it is a single-resource fire-service provider and at times a single-resource EMS service provider. Table 7 illustrates the response deployment pattern currently in place by the HBFD. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 33 Table 7: Number of Units Dispatched to Calls Call Type Number of Units One Two Three or Four Total Cardiac and stroke 4 17 36 57 Seizure and unconsciousness 3 50 65 118 Breathing difficulty 2 17 24 43 Overdose and psychiatric 12 72 92 176 MVA 7 22 23 52 Fall and injury 25 136 157 318 Illness and other 37 150 201 388 EMS Total 90 464 598 1,152 Structure fire 5 11 7 23 Outside fire 10 10 2 22 Hazard 32 38 8 78 False alarm 30 30 16 76 Good intent 14 12 2 28 Public service 51 34 10 95 Fire Total 142 135 45 322 Mutual aid 689 58 8 755 Grand Total 921 657 651 2,229 Percentage 41.3 29.5 29.2 100 Observations from this table show that: • Overall, three or four units were dispatched to 29 percent of calls. • On average, 1.7 units were dispatched per fire category call. • For fire category calls, one unit was dispatched 44 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 42 percent of the time, and three or four units were dispatched 14 percent of the time. • For structure fire calls, one unit was dispatched 22 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 48 percent of the time, and three or four units were dispatched 30 percent of the time. • For outside fire calls, one unit was dispatched 45 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 45 percent of the time, and three or four units were dispatched 9 percent of the time. • On average, 2.4 units were dispatched per EMS category call. • For EMS category calls, one unit was dispatched 8 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 40 percent of the time, and three or four units were dispatched 52 percent of the time. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 34 • For mutual-aid calls, one unit was dispatched 91 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 8 percent of the time, and three units were dispatched 1 percent of the time. Essentially the HBFD serves as a first-response fire agency, due to the resources it currently deploys. Figures 7 and 8 illustrate the resources required in two different risk scenarios (low and moderate). The HBFD calls on mutual aid from contiguous and at times non-contiguous jurisdictions for assistance for incidents requiring multiple units. Figure 7: Low-Risk Fire Response Figure 7 represents critical task elements for a moderate-risk structure fire. Some jurisdictions add additional response resources to meet and in some cases exceed the specifics of national benchmarking, such as NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Departments (2010 ed.). Figures 7 and 8 are intended to illustrate the foundational critical tasks associated with these types of risk and are not intended to recommend that the city of Hermosa Beach add staffing to meet these critical tasks in a stand-alone fire department. Current data does not support the need for additional staffing. The HBFD relies on mutual aid from contiguous and at times non-contiguous jurisdictions to fulfill the critical tasking associated with this risk. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 35 Figure 8: Moderate Risk Fire Response As discussed, during the data study period conducted by ICMA the HBFD responded to total of 45 fire-related calls (structure and outside fires). The total fire loss (property and contents) for all fires was estimated to be $43,150. ICMA found that an estimate of actual fire damage recorded for only nine of the structure fires. For all structure fires the average combined structure and content loss was only $1,341. When analyzing the forty-five fires within city limits during the study period, the average fire loss associated with all incidents was $938 per incident. The limited data set makes it hard to evaluate the quality of fire protection and agency effectiveness. The difficulty is compounded by the relatively high property values in the Hermosa Beach area. A single fire in a multimillion-dollar structure would significantly skew fire loss estimates. The fire problem in the period evaluated for this study is uncharacteristically low. As a comparison, the NFPA found that the average loss per structure fire (including contents) in 2011 was $20,006.14 This is nearly the entire fire loss experience for a full year evaluated in Hermosa Beach. Table 8 depicts property and content loss for fire incidents as reported to ICMA by the HBFD. 14 Michael Karter, Fire Loss in the United States, 2011 (Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association), 23. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 36 Table 8: Property and Content Loss for Structure and Outside Fires Call Type Property Loss Content Loss Loss Value Number of Calls Loss Value Number of Calls Structure fire $8,900 9 $21,950 9 Outside fire $11,300 3 $1,000 2 Total $20,200 12 $22,950 11 Note: This analysis includes only fire-related property or content losses in which the total is greater than $0. Another measure of workload for fire-related incidents is what actions the fire department took after arrival on the scene. Of specific interest is how many times the fire department actually extinguished a fire. Table 9 depicts actions taken by the HBFD after arrival on the scene. Of the forty-five structure and outside fires occurring in the city limits during the study period, the HBFD extinguished the fire twenty-two times, or 49 percent of the time. Table 9: Actions Taken Analysis for Structure and Outside Fire Calls Action Taken Non-Mutual Aid Mutual Aid Structure fire Outside fire Structure fire Outside fire Other 1 0 0 0 Establish safe area 0 0 2 0 Extinguishment by fire service personnel 8 14 8 0 Fires, rescues & hazardous conditions, other 0 0 1 0 Investigate 9 3 4 1 Investigate fire out on arrival 0 1 0 0 Notify other agencies. 0 1 0 0 Provide manpower 0 0 3 0 Restore fire alarm system 0 0 1 0 Salvage & overhaul 2 2 2 0 Search & rescue, other 0 1 0 0 Standby 0 0 1 0 Ventilate 2 0 2 0 Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 37 One last piece discussed in the operational report regarding workload is when calls for service are occurring. Figure 9 illustrates calls for service by hour of day. Figure 9: Calls by Hour of Day Observations from Figure 9 include: • Hourly call rates averaged between 0.10 calls and 0.39 calls per hour. • Call rates were highest during the day between 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., averaging between 0.33 and 0.39 calls per hour. The rate peaked between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., when it averaged 0.39 calls per hour. • Call rates were lowest between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m., averaging between 0.10 to 0.16 calls per hour. This is equivalent to one call in this six-hour period of the day. Operational Response Times Dispatch time is the time interval that begins when an alarm is received at the communication center and ends when the response information is transmitted via voice or electronic means to the emergency response facility or emergency response units in the field. Turnout time is the time interval that begins when the notification process to emergency response facilities and emergency response units begins by an audible alarm or visual announcement or both and ends when the unit is en route to the incident. The fire department has the greatest control over these segments of the total response time. Travel time is the time interval that initiates when the unit is en route to the call and ends when the unit arrives at the scene. Response time (or total response time) is the time interval that begins when the call is received by the primary dispatch center (RCC) and ends when the dispatched unit arrives on the scene to initiate action. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 38 According to NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Departments (2010 ed.) the alarm processing or dispatch time should be less than or equal to 60 seconds 90 percent of the time. This standard also states that the turnout time should be less than or equal to 80 seconds (1.33 minutes) for fire and special operations 90 percent of the time, and travel time shall be less than or equal to 240 seconds for the first arriving engine company 90 percent of the time. The standard further states the initial first-alarm assignment should be assembled on scene in 480 seconds 90 percent of the time. NFPA 1710 response time criterion is a benchmark for service delivery and not an ICMA recommendation. The 90th percentile measurement, often referred as a fractile response, is a more conservative and stricter measure of total response time. Most fire agencies are unable to meet this standard. Simply explained, for 90 percent of calls, the first unit arrives within a specified time, and if measured, the second and third unit. Table 10 depicts average dispatch, turnout, travel, and total response times of first-arriving fire units for fire calls. Table 11 includes the 90th percentile response time, which as indicated is a stricter evaluation of performance. For this study, unless otherwise indicated response times and travel times measure the first- arriving unit only. The following averages were determined from the data provided to ICMA (see Tables 10 and 11): the average dispatch time was 1.3 minutes, the average turnout time was 1.4 minutes, and the average travel time was 2.6 minutes. The total average response time (EMS and Fire) was 5.3 minutes, and the 90th percentile total response time (EMS and Fire) was 7.5 minutes. A total of 1,138 calls in Hermosa Beach were utilized in developing the response time analysis, as these were the total calls that had valid dispatch, turnout, and travel times. This accounts for 77 percent of the EMS and fire calls. The average dispatch time was 1.3 minutes. The average turnout time was 1.4 minutes, and the average travel time was 2.6 minutes. The average total response time for EMS calls was 5.0 minutes, and the average total response time for fire category calls was 7.3 minutes. The 90th percentile total response time for EMS and fire category calls was 6.8 and 10.8 minutes, respectively. Regarding response times for fire incidents, the criterion is based on a concept called “flashpoint” or “flashover”. This is an occurrence in which super-heated gasses from a fire are released rapidly, causing the fire to burn freely and become so volatile that the fire reaches an explosive state. In this situation, usually after approximately eight to twelve minutes, the fire expands rapidly and is much more difficult to contain. These situations do not occur with any great frequency, but when flashover does occur it presents greater challenges for fire suppression. Figure 10 illustrates this phenomenon and its potential impact on firefighters and fire extinguishment as the fire propagation curve. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 39 Figure 10: Fire Propagation Curve Further depicting the criticality of ensuring the appropriate and timely response of fire suppression units are the five critical time frames that a fire department attempts to manage and which revolve around the total reflex time sequence for any incident response (some of which have already been discussed). As can be seen from the following definitions, some of these segments are more manageable than others: • Dispatch time, defined as the amount of time that it takes to receive and process an emergency call. The dispatch time includes receiving the call, determining what the emergency is, verifying where the emergency is located, determining what resources are required to handle the call, and notifying the units that are to respond. • Turnout time, defined as the period beginning from when units acknowledge notification of the emergency to the beginning point of response time. Turnout time can be managed by monitoring data recorded in computer-aided dispatch; it is one of the most manageable segments in the reflex sequence. • Travel time, defined as the time that begins when units are en route to the emergency incident and ends when units arrive on the scene. • Access time, defined as the amount time required for the crew to move from where the apparatus stops to the emergency. This can include moving to the interior of upper floors of a large building and dealing with any barriers along the way. Access time is managed through a good prefire planning process that familiarizes the firefighters with access Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 40 points, automatic system controls, annunciator panel locations, and travel routes through buildings. • Setup time, defined as the time required for fire department units to set up, connect hoselines, position ladders, and otherwise prepare to extinguish the fire. It includes disembarking from the apparatus, pulling and placing hoselines, charging hose lines, donning self-contained breathing apparatus, making entry into the building, and beginning to apply water. The opportunity for saving time during setup is minimal, even for trained personnel. 15 By looking at each segment within the total reflex time sequence and understanding the objectives of the segment (see flow chart below), a fire department can measure its current performance against these objectives. Figure 11 illustrates the total reflex time sequence. Figure 11: Total Reflex Time Sequence ICMA noted the HBFD does not currently use performance measures in assessing all of its operations. We believe the system will be more apt to achieve community expectations if such measure are developed and monitored on a regular basis. Understanding response time capabilities from a jurisdiction’s fire station or stations is an essential planning element. To illustrate the importance of this, the following figure shows the HBFD response area and industry standard response travel time bleeds from the HBFD station on maps derived from a geographic information system (GIS). Figure 12 uses GIS mapping to illustrate response time probabilities, showing 240-second, 360-second, and 480-second travel time bleed comparisons, respectively. These comparisons are made by road network from the HBFD fire station and normal conditions. ICMA does realize at certain times of the day traffic patterns may change due to traffic congestion, weather and other factors. 15 “Non-Emergency Fire Department Functions,” In A.E. Cote, (Ed.) et al, Fire Protection Handbook, Volume II, Twentieth Edition (Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association), 12-218. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 41 Figure 12: 240/360/480-Second Response Bleed Layers from the HBFD Station Red=240 seconds/Green = 360 seconds/Blue=480 seconds Observations from Figure 12 tell us from the HBFD facility, the entire city is within the 240-second travel time window. ICMA further analyzed the travel time bleeds from two contiguous jurisdictions that routinely provide mutual aid to the HBFD (Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach). These are illustrated in Figures 13 and 14. Observations from these maps show that additional resources for moderate- and high-risk fire incidents can be assembled within a 360-second window from both jurisdictions. Additionally, there are significant 240-second travel times from these jurisdictions into Hermosa Beach. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 42 Figure 13: 240/360/480-Second Response Bleed Layers from the Manhattan Beach Fire Facilities Red=240 seconds/Green = 360 seconds/Blue=480 seconds Figure 14: 240/360/480-Second Response Bleed Layers from the Redondo Beach Fire Facilities Red=240 seconds/Green = 360 seconds/Blue=480 seconds Hermosa Hermosa Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 43 Table 10: Average Dispatch, Turnout, Travel, and Response Times of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type Call Type Dispatch Time Turnout Time Travel Time Response Time Sample Size Cardiac and stroke 1.3 1.4 2.2 4.9 45 Seizure and unconsciousness 1.0 1.2 2.2 4.4 107 Breathing difficulty 0.9 1.5 2.5 4.8 41 Overdose and psychiatric 1.2 1.5 2.3 5.0 142 MVA 1.3 1.2 2.3 4.9 47 Fall and injury 1.2 1.5 2.5 5.2 269 Illness and other 1.2 1.4 2.5 5.1 330 EMS Total 1.2 1.4 2.4 5.0 981 Structure fire 1.7 1.7 2.7 6.1 20 Outside fire 1.5 1.4 3.6 6.5 18 Hazard 2.2 1.4 4.3 7.9 38 False alarm 1.9 1.5 3.9 7.3 63 Good intent 1.9 1.4 4.6 7.9 18 Fire Total 1.9 1.5 3.9 7.3 157 Total 1.3 1.4 2.6 5.3 1,138 Note: First arriving units with valid dispatch, turnout, and travel times were used in this analysis. Observations from Table 10 indicate: • The average dispatch time was 1.3 minutes. • The average turnout time was 1.4 minutes. • The average travel time was 2.6 minutes. • The average response time for EMS calls was 5.0 minutes. • The average response time for fire category calls was 7.3 minutes. • The average response time for structure fire calls was 6.1 minutes. The average response time for outside fire calls was 6.5 minutes. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 44 Table 11: 90th Percentile Dispatch, Turnout, Travel, and Response Times of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type Call Type Dispatch Time Turnout Time Travel Time Response Time Sample Size Cardiac and stroke 1.5 2.2 3.4 6.4 45 Seizure and unconsciousness 1.8 1.9 3.3 5.8 107 Breathing difficulty 1.5 2.4 3.3 6.3 41 Overdose and psychiatric 2.0 2.4 3.3 6.7 142 MVA 2.0 1.8 3.8 6.5 47 Fall and injury 2.0 2.3 4.0 7.2 269 Illness and other 1.9 2.2 3.8 6.9 330 EMS Total 1.9 2.2 3.6 6.8 981 Structure fire 3.0 2.0 3.3 10.1 20 Outside fire 3.4 2.0 6.9 9.6 18 Hazard 4.6 2.5 7.2 11.7 38 False alarm 3.3 2.6 7.2 11.1 63 Good intent 3.6 2.3 10.1 11.5 18 Fire Total 3.6 2.5 7.1 11.1 157 Total 2.1 2.2 4.0 7.5 1,138 Note: A 90th percentile value of 7.5 indicates that the total response time was less than 7.5 minutes for 90 percent of all calls. Unlike averages, the 90th percentile response time is not equal to the sum of 90th percentile of dispatch time, turnout time, and travel time. Observations from Table 11 indicate: • The 90th percentile dispatch time was 2.1 minutes. • The 90th percentile turnout time was 2.2 minutes. • The 90th percentile travel time was 4.0 minutes. • The 90th percentile response time for EMS calls was 6.8 minutes. • The 90th percentile response time for fire category calls was 11.1 minutes. • The 90th percentile response time for structure fire calls was 10.1 minutes. • The 90th percentile response time for outside fire calls was 9.6 minutes. Our observations indicate that the dispatch handling times are high for EMS and fire calls. An average time of 1.2 minutes and a fractile time of 1.9 at the 90 percentile should be improved. Considering that little call screening is done, ICMA feels that these dispatch times warrant further evaluation. Fire dispatch handling times are poorer than EMS; at 1.9 minutes on average and 3.6 minutes at the 90 percentile. This is an exceeding slow processing time, even when taking the multiple page-outs required for mutual aid or automatic response assignments into consideration. The slow processing time impacts total response time and could contribute to difficulties in incidents with flashover and critically ill or injured patients. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 45 There are several potential ways to reduce dispatch handling times. The city might be able to reduce the amount of information required of the 911 dispatcher for the initial station notification by the 911 dispatcher. In many systems this information is limited to the unit assigned; the type of call (fire, EMS, other); and the address of the call. A further description of the call is then included once the unit is en route. Another method is through a pre-alerting system transmitted electronically and received via a printed form when the unit is in the station or via the MDC when the unit is on the road. Again, the alerting provides a brief initial notification with limited essential information (unit assigned, type of call, and address) that allows the unit to respond sooner and shortens the verbal transmission associated with the call. Recommendations: • Continue to develop performance measures for those critical tasks that can be implemented on low and moderate risks, regularly train on these measures for continuous improvement, and evaluate each member in the department annually against established benchmarks for the purpose of continuous process improvement. • Continue to evaluate options for deploying fewer vehicles on the initial response to emergency incidents; conduct a comprehensive review of all current medical priority dispatch system call typing in the regional communications center and a comprehensive review of fire related responses and run card assignments. • Continue with the comprehensive review of current fire reporting to ensure that the proper information is being entered, with particular focus on estimated fire loss, and implement a quality assurance program for all incident reporting that links to continuous training and improvement. • Continue to discuss the dispatch handling times with the RCC management and pursue efforts to improve these times, particularly on fire calls. • Continue developing and monitoring performance measures specific to fire services that are benchmarked against demand and response time and that measure elements such as percent of fires contained to room of origin (in place now), percent of fires contained to building of origin, and target goals for call processing, turnout, access, set-up, travel, and total response times. The results of these performance measures should be reported with explanation in an annual report. Essential Resources Fire Prevention/Fire Investigation/Public Education Fire suppression and response, although necessary to protect property, have little impact on preventing fire deaths. Rather, public fire education, fire prevention, and built-in fire protection systems are essential elements in protecting citizens from death and injury due to fire, smoke inhalation, and carbon monoxide poisoning. The HBFD enforces the 2010 edition of the California Fire Code (CFC) as adopted according to city of Hermosa Beach Code of Ordinances (Chapter 15.20). Chapter 15.20 of the city’s code further defines certain elements of fire prevention in Hermosa Beach to include enforcement of the code, Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 46 storage of certain commodities, fire code appeals processes, and penalties for violating the Hermosa Beach fire prevention code.16 Fire inspection procedures are administrated through a comprehensive standard operation procedure (SOP), namely SOP #902. The fire prevention program is managed by a shift operational captain as a collateral duty, which according to this captain occupies twelve to fifteen hours of his administrative time weekly. Actual inspection of occupancies is handled by on-duty shift firefighters, a best practice. The HBFD has a goal of conducting one thousand of these inspections per year. SOP #902 establishes targeted occupancy types that should receive regular inspections. Plan review for fire suppression extinguishing and alarm systems, as well as the review of site plans involving fire lanes, ingress and egress for fire apparatus, are handled through a third-party vendor. Rough and final inspections of these systems are conducted by the fire department, usually by the captain who manages the program. Arson investigation is managed by the same captain that manages the fire prevention program. This captain is assisted by an engineer/paramedic assigned to his shift. Both are sworn peace officers and have arrest powers. Origin and cause is the responsibility of the on-duty operational officer. If arson is suspected, one or both arson investigators will respond to investigate. The HBFD is a member of the “Area G” fire departments arson investigation program, and can call on the other departments in this program for assistance if needed. The HBFD public education program works jointly with various neighborhood groups to provide fire education and home safety programs. Additionally, the HBFD offers at certain times of the year citizen sidewalk CPR training. The HBFD also provides various fire prevention and fire/EMS education segments in the city’s newsletter. All of these public education programs are best practices. Emergency Communications The HBFD receives its emergency communication services from the South Bay Regional Public Communication Authority, known by participants as the Regional Communication Center, or RCC. The RCC is an independent agency that provides 911 dispatching services to five cities: Gardenia, Hawthorne, Manhattan Beach, El Segundo, and Hermosa Beach. It is the public safety answering point (PSAP) for all police and fire requests in Hermosa Beach. The RCC received a total of 115,412 emergency-911 calls in 2012, resulting in 27,143 combined police and fire dispatches for the five participating departments. There were a total of 6,634 fire related dispatches for the cities of El Segundo, Manhattan Beach, and Hermosa Beach. The HBFD had 1858 incident responses in 2012 that originated within city limits. In addition, HBFD responded to 619 incidents that originated in mutual-aid or automatic-response jurisdictions. Of the 1858 responses to incidents within city limits, 404 (21.7 percent) were fire related, 1400 (75.4 percent) were emergency medical responses, and 54 (2.9 percent) were other types of calls. 16 “Chapter 15.20 Fire Prevention Code,” Hermosa Beach, http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=388#010. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 47 The RCC is located at 4440 West Broadway in Hawthorne. The center has three managing members: Gardenia, Hawthorne, and Manhattan Beach. El Segundo and Hermosa Beach are contracting members. Funding for these services is divided among the five departments. Hermosa Beach currently pays an annual fee of $64,942 for its fire/EMS-related dispatching services. The RCC is a professionally run and well equipped center. It is staffed with fully trained telecommunicators, and e-911 call takers. Staffing levels are relatively stable, and employee turnover has not been a problem. The center maintains a floor supervisor at all times. Staffing levels vary depending on the time of day, from a minimum of eight personnel during late-night shifts and slower timeframes to a high of ten personnel during peak-demand periods. During special events or major incidents, additional staffing is added to accommodate the anticipated increased call volume. The RCC staffs two fire positions for the participating agencies. However, the cities of Gardena and Hawthorne receive fire protection through LA County Fire, so their fire-related dispatching is not provided through the RCC. The center has three staff members at all times to handle e-911 telephone traffic. Staffing levels for the RCC appear appropriate to handle the e-911 call volume and radio traffic. In the most recent ISO review for Hermosa Beach, the center received maximum credit with regard to its staffing levels. Hermosa fire officials are very pleased with this service and did not voice any concerns regarding proficiency or responsiveness to issues. The center has designated the Torrance Police Dispatch Center as a back-up dispatch center in case of an emergency, equipment failure, or other situation that would require the RCC to go off-line. The facility is secure, and auxiliary generators are on site to ensure uninterrupted operations during power outages. All radio and telephone communications are recorded and the RCC utilizes a Tiburon computer aided dispatch (CAD) system. The RCC uses a PowerPhone Total Response Tablet, which has a series of questions that assist in identifying the nature and severity of the illness and the pre-arrival instructions that are appropriate. This system is used on a limited basis to alter response assignments. The center has the capacity to expand its use of emergency medical dispatching (EMD) into its dispatching operations for Hermosa. EMD is a systematic process in which dispatchers utilize a pre-defined series of questions to determine the severity of the call. EMD also gives dispatch personnel the ability to provide pre-arrival instructions (first aid and safety instructions) while callers await the arrival of emergency personnel. EMD in its optimum application recommends an altered level of response based on the severity of the call. EMD systems have improved system efficiency in managing EMS workloads in many jurisdictions across the nation. Typically the EMD call screening process categorizes responses into four levels of severity: • Alpha: Non-life-threatening where time will not affect patient outcome (e.g., band-aids and non-acute illness); • Beta: Non-life-threatening where time may affect outcome (e.g., acute illness, minor fractures, and/or immobilizing injuries due to pain); Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 48 • Charlie: Potentially life-threatening where time may affect outcome (e.g., major fractures or blunt trauma); • Delta: Life-threatening of highest priority (e.g., cardiac arrest or respiratory difficulty/arrest.). These determinants can also foster an altered emergency response mode. Typically the breakdown of these response modes is as follows: • Alpha: Single BLS response, no lights or sirens; • Beta: Single BLS response, light and sirens; • Charlie: ALS and BLS Response, one unit with lights and sirens; • Delta: Priority ALS Response, all units responding with lights and sirens. The RCC does classify its EMS calls for Hermosa Beach. These classifications are as follows: • Rescue: EMS Response (one rescue and one engine); • Rescue Minor: EMS Response (one rescue and one engine); • Rescue Major: Typically multi-vehicle accidents (one B/C, one Rescue and one Engine). There are a number of fire call categories in which units respond in a non-emergency mode (no lights or sirens). On these alarms a single engine is dispatched, and the rescue vehicle remains available for simultaneous calls. These non-emergency responses are substantial and account for more than 50 percent of the total fire responses. The categories for this low-level response include: • Residential fire alarms (with no smoke or fire seen) • Fire investigations • Public assists • Police assists • Hazardous condition • Overcrowding investigation. The center does not have a medical director to support its EMD activities. Having one is a best practice. Any adjustments in response assignments are developed through the recommendations of PowerPhone Total Response Tablet and the decisions of the participating agencies. In addition, there is not a formal quality assurance process that reviews the performance of call takers regarding pre-arrival directives or call prioritization. The dispatch process is the first line of response in pre-hospital emergency medical care. The ability to dispatch the most appropriate resources to an incident is a proven method in ensuring optimum efficiency. With the limited resources available in Hermosa Beach and the frequent use of automatic response and mutual aid, it is imperative that the dispatching process be as efficient as possible. RCC employees currently receive little feedback regarding the call screening process. Organizations Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 49 that excel in their call screening process usually have a vibrant and consistent quality review process that utilizes training and remediation in maintaining system proficiency. The emergency radio system used by HBFD and its neighboring partners appears robust and fully able to accommodate the workload and the communications environment in which these departments operate. The system operates a series of UHF conventional analog frequencies designated as dispatch, command, and tactical channels. Portable radios and mobile and base station equipment are fully interoperable with neighboring communities. The system also provides direct radio communications between Hermosa police and fire units. This interoperability is relatively rare and is highly commendable. HBFD and partner agencies have established radio protocols that appear effective in assigning units to the appropriate channels both during the dispatch mode and during extended field operations. The system has been described by HBFD officials as having suitable coverage; there are policy directives in place to address alternative channel selection when coverage is poor due to tower locations or atmospheric interference. The RCC has technical support personnel on staff that provides oversight of the system. Downtime associated with maintenance and repairs appear minimal. All HBFD units are equipped with mobile data computers (MDCs). This technology allows the transmission and receipt of data via air card, allowing each unit to have direct multi-modal communication links from field locations. The system is also designed to have stored files on the computer that include such things as street mapping and addressing, building schematics, contact information, fire hydrant locations, and other occupancy or storage information that can assist in managing field operations. HBFD utilizes its MDCs primarily for the transmission of response data between the dispatch center and field units. It also provides street mapping and address locations. Typically transmissions from an MDC are achieved through a key-type entry that depicts unit status (e.g., en route, arrival, assignment completed, available, etc.). MDCs use key-stroke transmission to ensure that messages are transmitted and received. The system also supports the accuracy of the transmission by placing a time stamp in the CAD when the entry is made. The primary reasons for utilizing key-stroke transmission from an MDC rather than radio voice transmission is to ensure accuracy of the transmission and to minimize the amount of radio voice traffic. Many agencies and response personnel do not fully embrace key-stroke transmission over voice transmission because determining a unit’s status with key-stroke transmission requires visual monitoring of a computer screen. When personnel are en route in emergency response mode, they tend to prefer voice transmission. The main advantage of key-stroke transmissions is that they are always captured by CAD; voice communications, on the other hand, are often missed by dispatchers who are engaged in multiple transmissions at the same time or because one unit overrides the transmission of another. HBFD gives response personnel the option to document vehicle status either by voice radio or a key-stroke transmission through the MDC. This policy is unusual; most agencies require one or the other. As such, ICMA has no basis to judge its effectiveness from an accuracy or consistency perspective. HBFD officials have indicated that they have not experienced any accuracy issues and that CAD data is being recorded properly. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 50 ICMA believes that the use of the MDCs needs to be expanded to include the storage of information regarding critical building occupancy files, pre-plan information, and contact information. Given the frequency of response into neighboring jurisdictions and the need for reliable information for in-city structures, it would be prudent to have this information available on responding units. As mentioned above, the Tiburon CAD system used by the RCC provides the capability to utilize automatic vehicle locators (AVL) as part of their dispatching operation. AVL is a real-time tracking process in which vehicles are equipped with transmitters that monitor their location via GPS coordinates. When a call is initiated, the AVL identifies the closest available unit and assigns it to the incident. AVL has proven to be effective in larger metropolitan settings with multiple vehicles and high workloads. AVL is a viable technology solution in certain environments, and as such HBFD is currently working with Manhattan Beach in regards to AVL in conjunction with dissolving jurisdictional boundaries and EMS priority dispatching. Current discussion links EMS priority dispatching and AVL with a goal of dispatching the closest unit to Charlie and Delta EMS calls for service regardless of jurisdictional location. One identified impact to this model is that it may prevent dispatching the closest unit from a neighboring jurisdiction to a non-emergency, or Alpha EMS call for service. ICMA recommends these discussions continue. Recommendations: • Continue use of the South Bay Regional Public Communication Authority for fire and EMS dispatching. The services received, the quality of operation, and technical support balances the annual fee paid. • Continue discussions with RCC regarding expanding the use of emergency medical dispatch (EMD) through the South Bay Regional Public Communication Authority in order to further define the severity of EMS call and adjust response assignment to incidents with a focus on efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery. • Request changes in operations with the South Bay Regional Public Communication Authority with regard to the quality assurance process for call screening and pre-arrival instructions. Emphasis should focus on ensuring that these functions are being carried out in accordance with the recommended guidelines. External System Relationships/Consolidation Alternative The city of Hermosa Beach has developed an extensive series of formal and working relationships with neighboring communities that facilitate service delivery. The relationships Hermosa Beach has forged with its neighboring communities are truly commendable. These extensive and deeply intertwined relationships are built out of necessity. In reality, HBFD would be unable to effectively manage its service responsibilities without the assistance of its neighbors. Response of Hermosa Beach and the surrounding communities of Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach, and El Segundo, along with LA County, are built around mutual aid agreements, automatic response agreements, and the city’s participation in a Public Communications Authority that provides 911-emergency communications. In addition Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach, and Manhattan Beach have been extremely innovative by establishing an apparatus and equipment loan program and a personnel cooperative agreement through which the three entities share vehicles, rescue equipment, and personnel to address shortfalls. Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 51 Hermosa Beach has evaluated consolidation options for the fire department a number of times in recent years. Most recently, in 2010, talks with Redondo Beach were discontinued. Fire department consolidations are difficult to organize and implement. The recent consolidation talks with Redondo highlighted as unresolved issues EMS transport, differences in employee pay and benefits, and different dispatching systems. However, consolidations in communities across the United States, including many in California, have resulted in lasting arrangements in which agencies have been able to maintain their autonomy, improve service delivery. and realize significant cost savings. ICMA’s observations suggest that a regional consolidation model to include the Hermosa Beach Fire Department can provide efficient and effective services. We do not believe that the technical obstacles cited in recent consolidation efforts are insurmountable. HBFD has begun this process and has a proven track record of working successfully with its neighbors. In addition, the adjoining cities are in close proximity and joint response is a daily undertaking. These agencies work well together, they generally operate under a common dispatch center, and the communities are generally very similar. Table 12 provides a brief evaluation of the three-city area of Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach, and Manhattan Beach. Figure 15 illustrates the very efficient travel times (does not consider certain times of the day with heavy traffic) of the three cities combined, in particular the almost 100 percent 240-second coverage of all three cities as a merged agency. Table 12: Potential Consolidation Geographical Information City Population # of Fire Stations Square Miles FY12 Budget (millions) # of FTEs 2012 Alarms Hermosa Beach 19,773 1 1.5 $4.9 18 1,716 Redondo Beach 66,748 3 6.2 $16.08 63 5,331 Manhattan Beach 35,135 2 3.9 $10.5 31 3,158 Total 121,389 6 11.62 $31.38 112 10,205 Fire Operational Analysis: Hermosa Beach, CA page 52 Figure 15: 240/360/480-Second Response Bleed Layers from the Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, and Redondo Beach Fire Facilities Red=240 seconds/Green = 360 seconds/Blue=480 seconds Observations from this map include: • Near 100-percent 240-second travel time coverage in all three cities. • 100-percent 360- and 480-second travel time coverage in all three cities. Recommendation: • Preserve the options available for fire department consolidation. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 53 Appendix A: Data Analysis Report Introduction This analysis covers all calls for service between May 1st, 2012, and April 30th, 2013, as recorded in the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) by the Hermosa Beach Fire Department (HBFD). During the period covered by this study, the department operated out of one fire station with three frontline response apparatus, including one engine, one advanced life support (ALS) ambulance, and one basic life support (BLS) ambulance. In addition, the fire department also operated one reserve engine and one reserve utility unit. During this period, HBFD units responded to 2,415 calls, including 755 mutual aid calls. HBFD units transported patients in 911 calls. Excluding mutual aid calls, the department responded to 23 structure fire calls and 22 outside fire calls. When mutual aid calls are included, the department responded to 51 structure fire and 24 outside fire calls. A total of 4,647 units were dispatched to all calls. The total combined yearly workload (deployed time) for all units was 2,104 hours. The average estimated response time was 5.3 minutes and the 90th percentile response time was 7.5 minutes. This analysis is divided into four sections: the first section focuses on call types and dispatches; the second section explores time spent and workload of individual units; the third section presents analysis of the busiest hours in a year; and the fourth section provides a response time analysis. The analysis is restricted to HBFD units. In cases where units other than HBFD units arrive on scene, the response time reflects the response time of the HBFD unit that arrives first. Methodology In this report, we analyze calls and runs. A call is an emergency service request or incident. A run is a dispatch of a unit. Thus, a call might include multiple runs. We first processed the data to improve its accuracy. We first validated the data recorded in NFIRS using computer-aided dispatch (CAD) data. In cases where the timestamps were not recorded in NFIRS and were recorded in CAD, we used the CAD data. In all other cases we used the NFIRS data. We started with a total of 2,482 incidents recorded in NFIRS. We removed nine duplicate incidents which occurred at the same time and location, six calls where no units were dispatched, and forty-three where no HBFD units were dispatched. A total of nine incidents that were solely responded to by utility vehicle and the arson unit are not included in the first four sections of the report. Nevertheless, the workload associated with these units is documented in Appendix II. All canceled calls are included in the report. We classified the remaining calls in a series of steps. When possible, we used standard NFIRS incident types to identify a call. The classification based upon these types is documented in Appendix III. As NFIRS does not describe the nature of EMS calls, these were distinguished based Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 54 on the EMS assessment information from the regional dispatch center. When the description was not available, EMS calls were listed, by default, as “illness and other.” For this report, we took the following steps to categorize all calls as mutual aid, canceled, fire, or EMS. First, we identified mutual aid calls, which were identified by “aid type” in NFIRS. Next, the NFIRS incident type allowed us to identify (non-mutual aid) canceled calls. All other calls were identified as either fire category or EMS category calls. We also separately categorized the mutual aid calls into fire and EMS categories and provided a summary of these calls. In this report, mutual aid and canceled calls are included within the introductory summary and all analyses of the fire department’s workload. However, they are not included in the response time analysis. The NFIRS and CAD data recorded was not sufficient to identify calls responded with lights and sirens. HBFD identified NFIRS incident types that required lights and sirens responses and those calls were used in response time analysis. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 55 Aggregate Call Totals and Dispatches During the year studied, the Hermosa Beach Fire Department responded to 2,415 calls. Of these, 23 were structure fire calls and 22 were outside fire calls. There were 1,152 emergency medical service (EMS) calls. TABLE 1: Call Types Call Type Number of Calls Calls per Day Call Percentage Cardiac and stroke 57 0.2 2.4 Seizure and unconsciousness 118 0.3 4.9 Breathing difficulty 43 0.1 1.8 Overdose and psychiatric 176 0.5 7.3 MVA 52 0.1 2.2 Fall and injury 318 0.9 13.2 Illness and other 388 1.1 16.1 EMS Total 1,152 3.2 47.7 Structure fire 23 0.1 1.0 Outside fire 22 0.1 0.9 Hazard 78 0.2 3.2 False alarm 76 0.2 3.1 Good intent 28 0.1 1.2 Public service 95 0.3 3.9 Fire Total 322 0.9 13.3 Mutual aid 755 2.1 31.3 Canceled 186 0.5 7.7 Total 2,415 6.6 100 Observations: • The department received 6.6 calls, including 0.5 canceled calls and 2.1 mutual aid calls, per day. • EMS calls for the year totaled 1,152 (48 percent of all calls), averaging 3.2 per day. • Fire calls for the year totaled 322 (13 percent of all calls), averaging 0.9 per day. • Structure and outside fires combined for a total of 45 calls during the year, averaging one call every 8.1 days. • Of the 755 mutual aid calls, 314 calls (42 percent) were canceled. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 56 FIGURE 1: EMS and Fire Calls by Type Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 57 Observations: • A total of 23 structure fire calls accounted for 7 percent of the fire category total. • A total of 22 outside fire calls accounted for 7 percent of the fire category total. • Public service calls were the largest fire call category and accounted for 29 percent of the fire category total. • False alarm calls were 24 percent of the fire category total. • Illness and other calls were the largest EMS call category and 34 percent of the EMS category total. • Cardiac or stroke calls were 5 percent of the EMS category total. • Motor vehicle accidents were 5 percent of the EMS category total. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 58 FIGURE 2: EMS Calls by Type and Duration Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 59 Observations: • A total of 827 EMS category calls (72 percent) lasted less than one hour, 303 EMS category calls (26 percent) lasted between one and two hours, and 22 EMS category calls (2 percent) lasted more than two hours. On average, there were 0.9 EMS category calls per day that lasted more than one hour. • A total of 42 cardiac and stroke calls (74 percent) lasted less than one hour, and 15 cardiac and stroke calls (26 percent) lasted more than an hour. • A total of 38 motor vehicle accident calls (73 percent) lasted less than one hour, and 14 motor vehicle accident calls (27 percent) lasted more than an hour. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 60 FIGURE 3: Fire Calls by Type and Duration Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 61 Observations: • A total of 307 fire category calls (95 percent) lasted less than one hour, 12 fire category calls (4 percent) lasted between one and two hours, and 3 fire category calls (1 percent) lasted more than two hours. • A total of 21 structure fire calls (91 percent) lasted less than one hour and 2 structure fire calls (9 percent) lasted between one and two hours. • A total of 21 outside fire calls (95 percent) lasted less than one hour and 1 outside fire call (5 percent) lasted between one and two hours. • A total of 76 false alarms (100 percent) lasted less than one hour. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 62 FIGURE 4: Average Calls per Day, by Month Observations: • Average calls per day ranged from a low of 5.6 calls per day in February 2013 to a high of 7.8 calls per day in July 2012. The highest monthly average was 39 percent greater than the lowest monthly average. • Average EMS calls per day ranged from a low of 2.4 calls per day in February 2013 to a high of 4.3 calls per day in July 2012. • Average fire calls per day ranged from a low of 0.6 calls per day in August 2012 to a high of 1.1 calls per day in both June 2012 and January 2013. • Average mutual aid calls per day ranged from a low of 1.5 calls per day in September 2012 to a high of 2.8 calls per day in January 2013. • Average canceled calls per day ranged from a low of 0.3 calls per day in April 2013 to a high of 0.7 calls per day in May 2012. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 63 FIGURE 5: Calls by Hour of Day TABLE 2: Calls by Hour of Day Two-Hour Interval Hourly Call Rate EMS Fire Mutual Aid Canceled Total 0-1 0.12 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.21 2-3 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.16 4-5 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.10 6-7 0.07 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.15 8-9 0.12 0.04 0.08 0.01 0.25 10-11 0.16 0.04 0.14 0.02 0.36 12-13 0.15 0.05 0.15 0.02 0.37 14-15 0.16 0.04 0.14 0.03 0.37 16-17 0.19 0.06 0.13 0.02 0.39 18-19 0.17 0.05 0.10 0.04 0.37 20-21 0.16 0.04 0.10 0.02 0.33 22-23 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.26 Calls per Day 3.16 0.88 2.07 0.51 6.62 Note: Average calls per day shown are the sum of each column multiplied by two, since each cell represents two hours. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 64 Observations: • Hourly call rates averaged between 0.10 calls and 0.39 calls per hour. • Call rates were highest during the day between 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., averaging between 0.33 and 0.39 calls per hour. The rate peaked between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., when it averaged 0.39 calls per hour. • Call rates were lowest between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m., averaging between 0.10 to 0.16 calls per hour. This is equivalent to one call in this six-hour period of the day. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 65 TABLE 3: Number of Transport Calls by Call Type Call Type Number of Calls Calls per Day Percentage Cardiac and stroke 41 0.1 4.5 Seizure and unconsciousness 93 0.3 10.2 Breathing difficulty 40 0.1 4.4 Overdose and psychiatric 110 0.3 12.1 MVA 12 0.0 1.3 Fall and injury 137 0.4 15.0 Illness and other 147 0.4 16.1 Mutual aid 331 0.9 36.4 Total 911 2.5 100.0 Note: Transport calls were identified when at least one responding unit had recorded an arrival at a hospital. Observations: • Hermosa Beach Fire Department transported patients in 911 calls, averaging 2.5 transport calls per day. • 37 percent of transport calls are mutual aids, averaging 0.9 mutual aid transport calls per day. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 66 TABLE 4: Frequency Distribution of the Number of Transport Calls Number of Transport Calls in a Day Frequency Percentage 0 37 10.1 1 70 19.2 2 104 28.5 3 58 15.9 4 54 14.8 5 26 7.1 6 7 1.9 7 5 1.4 8 2 0.5 10 2 0.5 Observations: • The largest number of transport calls in a day, 10 calls per day, occurred twice (August 12, 2012, and March 17, 2013) in the study year. • In 16 days of the year, the HBFD transported patients during 6 or more calls. • In 37 days of the year, no patients were transported. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 67 FIGURE 6: Number of Units Dispatched to Calls TABLE 5: Number of Units Dispatched to Calls Call Type Number of Units One Two Three or Four Total Cardiac and stroke 4 17 36 57 Seizure and unconsciousness 3 50 65 118 Breathing difficulty 2 17 24 43 Overdose and psychiatric 12 72 92 176 MVA 7 22 23 52 Fall and injury 25 136 157 318 Illness and other 37 150 201 388 EMS Total 90 464 598 1,152 Structure fire 5 11 7 23 Outside fire 10 10 2 22 Hazard 32 38 8 78 False alarm 30 30 16 76 Good intent 14 12 2 28 Public service 51 34 10 95 Fire Total 142 135 45 322 Mutual aid 689 58 8 755 Canceled 31 69 86 186 Grand Total 952 726 737 2,415 Percentage 39.4 30.1 30.5 100 Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 68 Observations: • Overall, three or four units were dispatched to 31 percent of calls. Of all calls, four units were dispatched 4 times, responding to EMS calls. • On average, 1.7 units were dispatched per fire category call. • For fire category calls, one unit was dispatched 44 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 42 percent of the time, and three units were dispatched 14 percent of the time. • For structure fire calls, one unit was dispatched 22 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 48 percent of the time, and three units were dispatched 30 percent of the time. • For outside fire calls, one unit was dispatched 45 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 45 percent of the time, and three units were dispatched 9 percent of the time. • On average, 2.4 units were dispatched per EMS category call. • For EMS category calls, one unit was dispatched 8 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 40 percent of the time, and three or four units were dispatched 52 percent of the time. • For mutual aid calls, one unit was dispatched 91 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 8 percent of the time, and three units were dispatched 1 percent of the time. • For canceled calls, one unit was dispatched 17 percent of the time, two units were dispatched 37 percent of the time, and three units were dispatched 46 percent of the time. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 69 TABLE 6: Annual Deployed Time by Call Type Call Type Average Deployed Minutes per Run Annual Hours Percent of Total Hours Deployed Minutes per Day Annual Number of Runs Runs per Day Cardiac and stroke 36.6 89 4.3 14.6 146 0.4 Seizure and unconsciousness 35.0 174 8.3 28.5 298 0.8 Breathing difficulty 41.1 74 3.5 12.2 108 0.3 Overdose and psychiatric 32.3 233 11.2 38.3 433 1.2 MVA 27.9 56 2.7 9.2 120 0.3 Fall and injury 28.7 368 17.6 60.4 769 2.1 Illness and other 26.4 415 19.9 68.2 942 2.6 EMS Total 30.0 1,408 67.5 231.5 2,816 7.7 Structure fire 21.7 17 0.8 2.8 48 0.1 Outside fire 16.4 10 0.5 1.6 36 0.1 Hazard 21.3 47 2.2 7.7 132 0.4 False alarm 12.0 28 1.3 4.5 138 0.4 Good intent 11.9 9 0.4 1.4 44 0.1 Public service 15.7 39 1.9 6.4 149 0.4 Fire Total 16.4 149 7.2 24.6 547 1.5 Mutual aid 35.5 490 23.5 80.5 829 2.3 Canceled 5.6 40 1.9 6.6 427 1.2 Total 27.1 2,088 100.0 343.2 4,619 12.7 Note: Each dispatched unit is a separate "run." As multiple units are dispatched to a call, there are more runs than calls. Therefore, the department recorded 6.6 calls per day and 12.7 runs per day. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 70 Observations: • Total deployed time for the year, or deployed hours, was 2,088 hours. This is the total deployment time of all the units deployed on all type of calls, including 490 hours spent on mutual aid calls. The deployed hours for all units combined averaged approximately 5.7 hours per day. • There were 4,619 runs, including 829 runs dispatched for mutual aid calls. The daily average was 12.7 runs for all units combined. • Fire category calls accounted for 7.2 percent of the total workload. • There were 84 runs for structure and outside fire calls, with a total workload of 27 hours. This accounted for 1.3 percent of the total workload. The average deployed time for structure fire calls was 22 minutes and the average deployed time for outside fire calls was 16 minutes. • EMS calls accounted for 67.5 percent of the total workload. The average deployed time for EMS calls was 30 minutes. The deployed hours for all units dispatched to EMS calls averaged 3.9 hours per day. • Mutual aid call accounted for 23.5 percent of the total workload. Of the 829 runs for mutual aid calls, 338 runs (41 percent of mutual aid runs) were canceled and the total deployed time of those canceled runs was 35 hours (7 percent of total deployed mutual aid hours). Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 71 Workload by Individual Unit—Calls and Total Time Spent In this section, the actual time spent by each unit on calls is reported in two types of statistics: workload and runs. A dispatch of a unit is defined as a run; thus a call might include multiple runs. TABLE 7: Call Workload by Unit Unit Type Unit ID Average Deployed Minutes per Run Annual Number of Runs Annual Hours Runs per Day Deployed Minutes per Day BLS ambulance A12 37.4 1,246 775.9 3.4 127.5 Reserve Engine E11 14.8 165 40.7 0.5 6.7 Engine E12 16.9 1,557 437.4 4.3 71.9 ALS ambulance R11 30.3 1,651 833.8 4.5 137.1 Observations: • ALS ambulance R11 was the unit deployed the most often and had the most deployed hours. It averaged 4.5 runs and 137.1 minutes per day. • BLS ambulance A12 was dispatched on an average of 3.4 runs per day and was deployed 127.5 minutes per day. • Engine E12 was dispatched on an average of 4.3 runs per day and was deployed 71.9 minutes per day. • Reserve engine E11 (when filling in for Engine 12) was dispatched 165 runs, and its total annual deployed time was 40.7 hours. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 72 FIGURE 7: Deployed Minutes by Hour of Day TABLE 8: Deployed Minutes by Hour of Day Two-Hour Interval EMS Fire Mutual Aid Canceled Total 0-1 8.8 1.0 1.2 0.5 11.5 2-3 6.3 0.5 0.8 0.4 8.0 4-5 4.7 0.4 1.5 0.1 6.7 6-7 6.4 1.0 2.2 0.1 9.7 8-9 9.7 0.9 3.1 0.1 13.9 10-11 12.2 0.8 5.5 0.2 18.6 12-13 11.2 1.1 5.6 0.2 18.1 14-15 12.6 1.2 4.7 0.2 18.7 16-17 13.7 1.5 4.7 0.3 20.3 18-19 11.3 1.0 4.7 0.5 17.4 20-21 10.5 1.1 3.7 0.3 15.6 22-23 8.4 1.7 2.6 0.4 13.2 Daily Total 231.5 24.6 80.5 6.6 343.2 Note: Daily totals shown equal the sum of each column multiplied by two, since each cell represents two hours. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa, CA page 73 Observations: • Hourly deployed minutes were highest during the day between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., averaging between 17.4 minutes and 20.3 minutes per hour. Average deployed minutes peaked between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., averaging 20.3 minutes per hour. • Hourly deployed minutes were the lowest between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m., averaging fewer than 10 minutes per hour. Hermosa Beach, California, Final Fire/EMS Data Analysis Report page 74 TABLE 9: Fire Equipment: Total Annual and Daily Average Number of Runs by Call Type and Unit Unit EMS Structure Fire Outside Fire Hazard False Alarm Good Intent Public Service Mutual Aid Canceled Total Runs per Day E11 108 0 1 7 5 4 11 14 15 165 0.5 E12 995 18 18 71 71 23 74 124 163 1,557 4.3 Note: A dispatch of a unit is defined as a run; thus a call might include multiple runs. TABLE 10: Fire Equipment: Daily Average Deployed Minutes by Call Type and Unit Unit EMS Structure Fire Outside Fire Hazard False Alarm Good Intent Public Service Mutual Aid Canceled Total Fire Category Calls Percentage E11 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.1 6.7 26.9 E12 50.6 1.1 1.0 4.6 2.4 0.8 3.4 5.9 2.1 71.9 29.6 Observations: • Engine E12 made 1,557 runs during the year, averaging 4.3 runs per day. However, the vast majority of runs were not fire calls. Structure and outside fire runs accounted for just 36 of the runs. • Reserve engine E11 was dispatched 165 times during the year. • Engine E12 was deployed an average of 71.9 minutes (one hour and 12 minutes) per day. The unit spent 70 percent of its deployed time responding to EMS calls. • Engine 11 averaged 6.7 minutes of deployed time per day. Hermosa Beach, California, Final Fire/EMS Data Analysis Report page 75 TABLE 11: Ambulance Units: Total Annual and Daily Average Number of Runs by Call Type and Unit Unit Cardiac and Stroke Seizure and Unconsciousness Breathing Difficulty Overdose and Psychiatric MVA Fall and Injury Illness and Other Structure and Outside Fire Fire Other Mutual Aid Canceled Total Runs per Day R11 51 111 43 160 42 298 337 21 70 374 144 1,651 4.5 A12 38 68 25 106 27 179 228 26 127 317 105 1,246 3.4 Note: A dispatch of a unit is defined as a run; thus a call might include multiple runs. TABLE 12: Ambulance Units: Daily Average Deployed Minutes by Call Type and Unit Unit Cardiac and Stroke Seizure and Unconsciousness Breathing Difficulty Overdose and Psychiatric MVA Fall and Injury Illness and Other Structure and Outside Fire Fire Other Mutual Aid Canceled Total EMS Calls Percentage R11 7.2 16.6 6.9 18.3 3.4 24.2 27 1.1 1.9 27.9 2.6 137.1 75.6 A12 2.9 4.8 2.2 10.2 2.7 24.5 25.3 1.3 5.8 46.1 1.8 127.5 56.9 Observations: • R11 made 1,651 runs during the year, averaging 4.5 runs per day. • A12 made 1,246 runs during the year, averaging 3.4 runs per day. • On average, R11 was deployed 137.1 minutes (two hours and 17 minutes) per day. EMS calls accounted for 76 percent of its daily workload. • On average, A12 was deployed 127.5 minutes (two hours and eight minutes) per day. EMS calls accounted for 57 percent of its daily workload. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 76 Analysis of Busiest Hours There is significant variability in the number of calls from hour to hour. One special concern relates to the fire and EMS resources available for hours with the heaviest workload. We tabulated the data for each of the 8,760 hours in the year. Approximately once every 29 hours (1 day and 5 hours), the Hermosa Beach Fire Department responded to two or more calls in an hour. This is less than 3.4 percent of the total number of hours. We report the top ten hours with the most calls received and discuss the two hours with the most calls received. TABLE 13: Frequency Distribution of the Number of Calls Number of Calls in an Hour Frequency Percentage 0 6,690 76.4 1 1,763 20.1 2 273 3.1 3 30 0.3 4 4 0.0 Observations: • During 273 hours (3.1 percent of all hours), two calls occurred; in other words, HBFD responded to two calls in an hour roughly once every 32 hours (one day and eight hours). • Three or four calls occurred during 34 hours of the year. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 77 TABLE 14: Top 10 Hours with the Most Calls Received Hour Number of Calls Number of Runs Total Deployed Hours 7/4/2012, 7 p.m. to 8 p.m. 4 8 1.9 7/4/2012, 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. 4 6 2.5 9/2/2012, 11 p.m. to 12 a.m. 4 5 2.2 10/28/2012, 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. 4 5 1.5 8/12/2012, 2 a.m. to 3 a.m. 3 8 2.9 1/11/2012, 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. 3 8 0.9 7/4/2012, 4 p.m. to 5 p.m. 3 7 1.9 7/7/2012, 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. 3 7 2.1 6/27/2012, 7 p.m. to 8 p.m. 3 6 1.7 1/9/2013, 11 a.m. to 12 p.m. 3 6 2.4 Note: The combined workload is the total deployed minutes spent responding to calls received in the hour, and which may extend into the next hour or hours. Observations: • The hour with the most calls received was 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on July 4, 2012. The four calls involved eight individual dispatches. These four calls included one illness and other call, one fall and injury call, one mutual aid, and one canceled call. The combined workload was 1.9 hours. The longest call was the fall and injury call; it lasted 52 minutes. The fall and injury call was responded to by three units. • During the hour from 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. on July 4, 2012, four calls involving six individual dispatches occurred. These four calls included one illness and other call, one seizure and unconscious call, one mutual aid, and one canceled call. The combined workload was 2.5 hours. The longest call was the illness and other call; it lasted 50.5 minutes. It was responded to by two individual units. • Three of the hours with the most calls received occurred on July 4, 2012. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 78 The HBFD Fire Department is staffed with two ambulances and one engine at a time. When events remain active simultaneously or when a call requires a larger number of resources, mutual aid is requested. Thus, understanding how often multiple calls overlap is important when assessing the department’s overall needs. Here we report overlapping events. We examine EMS calls and fire calls separately as they require different types of resources. In addition, for this analysis, we do not distinguish between calls within Hermosa Beach and mutual aid (given) calls. Nevertheless, canceled calls are still removed. To determine overlapping events, we looked at each individual call and then identified the number of other calls that began at any time between when the first call began and ended. “No overlapped call” would mean that no other call of the same type occurred while the department was involved in the first call. “One overlapping call” means that one additional call began while the first call was still in progress, and so forth. TABLE 15: Analysis of Overlapping Calls, by Type Description EMS Fire No overlapped call 1,149 351 One overlapping call 187 10 Two overlapping calls 14 0 Three overlapping calls 1 0 Note: The “EMS” column includes regular EMS category calls and all mutual aid calls which fit our standard EMS descriptions (including accidents); this is also the case for the “Fire” column. For this reason, the total number of EMS and fire calls is larger than shown previously. At the same time, due to the way that overlaps are counted, the total within the “EMS” column is smaller than a simple combination of regular EMS calls and mutual aid EMS calls. Finally, percentages shown in the observation below still use the overall total of 1,548 EMS calls and 367 fire calls. Observations: • A total of 1,149 EMS calls (74 percent of all EMS and mutual aid EMS calls) had no overlapping call. • Situations where one EMS call overlapped another EMS call happened 187 times in the study period. • The most demanding situation occurred when one EMS call overlapped three other EMS calls on January 21, 2013. One long mutual aid EMS call lasted 85 minutes (one hour and 25 minutes). During that time period, one fall and injury call and two other mutual aid EMS calls occurred. • A total of 351 fire calls (96 percent of all fire and mutual aid fire calls) had no overlapping call. • Situations where one fire call overlapped another fire call happened 10 times in the study period. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 79 Dispatch Time and Response Time This section presents dispatch and response time statistics for different call types and fire units. The main focus is the dispatch and response time of the first arriving units for calls responded with lights and sirens. Different terms are used to describe the components of response time: Dispatch processing time is the difference between the unit dispatch time and call received time of the first arriving unit. Turnout time is the difference between the unit time en route and the unit dispatch time. Travel time is the difference between the unit on-scene arrival time and the time en route. Response time is the difference between the on-scene arrival time and call received time. The NFIRS and CAD data could not identify calls responded with lights and sirens. HBFD identified NFIRS incident types which required emergency responses and those calls were used in our response time analysis. We also excluded mutual aid calls, thereby limiting our response time analysis to calls within the city of Hermosa Beach. A total of 1,138 calls that had valid dispatch, turnout, and travel times were used in the analysis. This accounts for 77 percent of the EMS and fire category calls. The average dispatch time was 1.3 minutes. The average turnout time was 1.4 minutes, and the average travel time was 2.6 minutes. The average response time for EMS calls was 5.0 minutes, and the average response time for fire category calls was 7.3 minutes. The 90th percentile response time for EMS and fire category calls was 6.8 and 10.8 minutes, respectively. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 80 TABLE 16: Average Dispatch, Turnout, Travel, and Response Times of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type Call Type Dispatch Time Turnout Time Travel Time Response Time Sample Size Cardiac and stroke 1.3 1.4 2.2 4.9 45 Seizure and unconsciousness 1.0 1.2 2.2 4.4 107 Breathing difficulty 0.9 1.5 2.5 4.8 41 Overdose and psychiatric 1.2 1.5 2.3 5.0 142 MVA 1.3 1.2 2.3 4.9 47 Fall and injury 1.2 1.5 2.5 5.2 269 Illness and other 1.2 1.4 2.5 5.1 330 EMS Total 1.2 1.4 2.4 5.0 981 Structure fire 1.7 1.7 2.7 6.1 20 Outside fire 1.5 1.4 3.6 6.5 18 Hazard 2.2 1.4 4.3 7.9 38 False alarm 1.9 1.5 3.9 7.3 63 Good intent 1.9 1.4 4.6 7.9 18 Fire Total 1.9 1.5 3.9 7.3 157 Total 1.3 1.4 2.6 5.3 1,138 Note: First arriving units with valid dispatch, turnout, and travel times were used in this analysis. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 81 FIGURE 8: Average Dispatch, Turnout, and Travel Times of First Arriving Unit, by EMS Call Type Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 82 FIGURE 9: Average Dispatch, Turnout, and Travel Times of First Arriving Unit, by Fire Call Type Observations: • The average dispatch time was 1.3 minutes. • The average turnout time was 1.4 minutes. • The average travel time was 2.6 minutes. • The average response time for EMS calls was 5.0 minutes. • The average response time for fire category calls was 7.3 minutes. • The average response time for structure fire calls was 6.1 minutes. The average response time for outside fire calls was 6.5 minutes. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 83 TABLE 17: 90th Percentile Dispatch, Turnout, Travel, and Response Times of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type Call Type Dispatch Time Turnout Time Travel Time Response Time Sample Size Cardiac and stroke 1.5 2.2 3.4 6.4 45 Seizure and unconsciousness 1.8 1.9 3.3 5.8 107 Breathing difficulty 1.5 2.4 3.3 6.3 41 Overdose and psychiatric 2.0 2.4 3.3 6.7 142 MVA 2.0 1.8 3.8 6.5 47 Fall and injury 2.0 2.3 4.0 7.2 269 Illness and other 1.9 2.2 3.8 6.9 330 EMS Total 1.9 2.2 3.6 6.8 981 Structure fire 3.0 2.0 3.3 10.1 20 Outside fire 3.4 2.0 6.9 9.6 18 Hazard 4.6 2.5 7.2 11.7 38 False alarm 3.3 2.6 7.2 11.1 63 Good intent 3.6 2.3 10.1 11.5 18 Fire Total 3.6 2.5 7.1 11.1 157 Total 2.1 2.2 4.0 7.5 1,138 Note: A 90th percentile value of 7.5 indicates that the total response time was less than 7.5 minutes for 90 percent of all calls. Unlike averages, the 90th percentile response time is not equal to the sum of 90th percentile of dispatch time, turnout time, and travel time. Observations: • The 90th percentile dispatch time was 2.1 minutes. • The 90th percentile turnout time was 2.2 minutes. • The 90th percentile travel time was 4.0 minutes. • The 90th percentile response time for EMS calls was 6.8 minutes. • The 90th percentile response time for fire category calls was 11.1 minutes. • The 90th percentile response time for structure fire calls was 10.1 minutes. • The 90th percentile response time for outside fire calls was 9.6 minutes. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 84 FIGURE 10: Average Dispatch, Turnout, Travel, and Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Hour of Day Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 85 TABLE 18: Average Dispatch, Turnout, Travel, and Response Times of First Arriving Unit, by Hour of Day Hour Dispatch Time Turnout Time Travel Time Response Time Sample Size 0 1.5 1.9 2.4 5.8 46 1 1.2 2.2 2.4 5.8 43 2 1.2 2.0 2.2 5.3 41 3 1.2 2.0 2.6 5.8 22 4 1.1 2.3 2.7 6.1 25 5 0.5 1.9 2.6 5.1 9 6 1.1 1.8 2.6 5.5 28 7 1.4 1.5 3.2 6.1 32 8 1.2 1.4 3.3 5.9 44 9 1.3 1.3 2.9 5.5 49 10 1.3 1.3 2.5 5.0 48 11 1.6 1.1 2.6 5.2 66 12 1.4 1.3 2.6 5.3 54 13 1.2 1.1 3.0 5.3 51 14 1.1 1.1 2.7 4.8 52 15 1.0 1.2 2.5 4.7 54 16 1.2 1.1 2.3 4.6 65 17 1.2 1.2 2.4 4.8 62 18 1.5 1.2 2.7 5.4 64 19 1.3 1.2 2.9 5.4 71 20 1.4 1.3 2.5 5.1 63 21 1.4 1.4 3.0 5.7 53 22 1.2 1.5 2.5 5.2 44 23 1.4 1.9 2.5 5.8 52 Observations: • Average dispatch time was between 0.5 and 1.6 minutes. • Average turnout time was between 1.1 and 2.3 minutes. Between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m., the average turnout time was consistently more than 2.0 minutes. • Average travel time was between 2.2 and 3.3 minutes. • Average response time was between 4.6 and 6.1 minutes. Between 4:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m., and between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m., the average response time peaked at 6.1 minutes. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 86 TABLE 19: Number of Total Calls by First Arriving Units Unit EMS Structure and Outside Fire Other Fire Total Percentage Cumulative Percentage R11 715 13 12 740 65.0 65.0 E12 199 22 89 310 27.2 92.3 A12 48 2 11 61 5.4 97.6 E11 19 1 7 27 2.4 100.0 Observations: • Ambulance unit R11 arrived first on scene most often, followed by engine E12. The top two first arriving units accounted for 92 percent of the first arrivals at calls. • For structure and outside fire calls, engine E12 arrived first on scene most often. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 87 FIGURE 11: Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) of Response Time of First Arriving Unit for EMS calls Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 88 FIGURE 12: Frequency Distribution Chart of Response Time of First Arriving Unit for EMS calls Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 89 TABLE 20: Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) of Response Time of First Arriving Unit for EMS Calls Response Time (minute) Frequency Cumulative Percentage 0-1 0 0.0 1-2 8 0.8 2-3 57 6.6 3-4 200 27.0 4-5 300 57.6 5-6 239 82.0 6-7 91 91.2 7-8 46 95.9 8-9 10 96.9 9-10 7 97.7 10-11 3 98.0 11-12 4 98.4 >=12 16 100.0 Observations: • The average response time for EMS calls was 5.0 minutes. • For 82 percent of EMS calls, the response time was less than or equal to 6 minutes. • For 90 percent of EMS calls, the response time was less than 6.8 minutes. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 90 TABLE 21: Average Response Time for Structure and Outside Fire Calls by First Arriving Engine First Arriving Engine Outside Fire Structure Fire Total Response Time Number of Calls Response Time Number of Calls Response Time Number of Calls E11 2.4 1 NA 0 2.4 1 E12 6.6 16 6.6 15 6.6 31 Total 6.4 17 6.6 15 6.5 32 Observations: • For outside fire calls, the average response time of the first arriving engine was 6.4 minutes. • For structure fire calls, the average response time of the first arriving engine was 6.6 minutes. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 91 Appendix I Number of Automatic/Mutual Aid Calls by Type Type Deployed Hours Number of Dispatches Non- Canceled Canceled Total ALS response 170.0 206 168 374 BLS response 280.7 227 90 317 Engine response 39.2 58 80 138 Total 489.9 491 338 829 Observations: • HBFD provided 374 ALS dispatches, and 168 (45 percent) were canceled. • HBFD provided 317 ALS dispatches, and 90 (28 percent) were canceled. • HBFD provided 138 engine dispatches, and 80 (58 percent) were canceled. • HBFD received mutual aids in 43 calls, and automatic aids in 182 calls. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 92 Appendix II Workload of Other Units Units Annual Number of Runs Annual Deployed Hours ARSON 1 5.6 1X50 2 0.5 U11 25 10.0 Total 28 15.8 Observations: • The three arson and utility units made 28 runs and were deployed 15.8 hours in a year. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 93 Appendix III Property and Content Loss Analysis for Structure and Outside Fire Calls Call Type Property Loss Content Loss Loss Value Number of Calls Loss Value Number of Calls Structure fire $8,900 9 $21,950 9 Outside fire $11,300 3 $1,000 2 Total $20,200 12 $22,950 11 Note: This analysis only includes calls with property loss or content loss greater than 0. Observations: • Out of 23 structure fire calls, 9 calls (39 percent) had recorded property loss, with total recorded loss value of $ 8,900. • Out of 23 structure fire calls, 9 calls (39 percent) had recorded content loss, with total recorded loss value of $21,950. • Out of the 22 outside fire calls, three calls (14 percent) had recorded property loss, with total loss value of $11,300. Two outside fire calls had recorded content loss and the total loss value was $1,000. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 94 Appendix IV Actions Taken Analysis for Structure and Outside Fire Calls Action Taken Non-Mutual Aid Mutual Aid Structure fire Outside fire Structure fire Outside fire Action taken, other 1 0 0 0 Establish safe area 0 0 2 0 Extinguishment by fire service personnel 8 14 8 0 Fires, rescues & hazardous conditions, other 0 0 1 0 Investigate 9 3 4 1 Investigate fire out on arrival 0 1 0 0 Notify other agencies 0 1 0 0 Provide manpower 0 0 3 0 Restore fire alarm system 0 0 1 0 Salvage & overhaul 2 2 2 0 Search & rescue, other 0 1 0 0 Standby 0 0 1 0 Ventilate 2 0 2 0 Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 95 Appendix V Correspondence between NFIRS Incident Code and Call Type Incident Type Code Call Type NFIRS Incident Description 111 Building fire Structure fire 112 Fires in structure other than in a building Structure fire 113 Cooking fire, confined to container Structure fire 114 Chimney or flue fire, confined to chimney or flue Structure fire 117 Commercial Compactor fire, confined to rubbish Structure fire 118 Trash or rubbish fire, contained Structure fire 130 Mobile property (vehicle) fire, other Outside fire 131 Passenger vehicle fire Outside fire 142 Brush or brush-and-grass mixture fire Outside fire 151 Outside rubbish, trash or waste fire Outside fire 154 Dumpster or other outside trash receptacle fire Outside fire 162 Outside equipment fire Outside fire 164 Outside mailbox fire Outside fire 311 Medical assist, assist EMS crew EMS 321 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury EMS 3210 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury EMS 322 Motor vehicle accident with injuries MVA 3220 Motor vehicle accident with injuries MVA 323 Motor vehicle/pedestrian accident (MV Ped) MVA 324 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. MVA 331 Lock-in (if lock out , use 511 ) EMS 353 Removal of victim(s) from stalled elevator EMS 357 Extrication of victim(s) from machinery EMS 364 Surf rescue EMS 411 Gasoline or other flammable liquid spill Hazard 412 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) Hazard 413 Oil or other combustible liquid spill Hazard 422 Chemical spill or leak Hazard 424 Carbon monoxide incident Hazard 440 Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other Hazard 441 Heat from short circuit (wiring), defective/worn Hazard 442 Overheated motor Hazard 444 Power line down Hazard 445 Arcing, shorted electrical equipment Hazard 451 Biological hazard, confirmed or suspected Hazard Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 96 Incident Type Code Call Type NFIRS Incident Description 481 Attempt to burn Hazard 510 Person in distress, other Public service 511 Lock-out Public service 520 Water problem, other Public service 522 Water or steam leak Public service 5220 Water or steam leak Public service 531 Smoke or odor removal Public service 551 Assist police or other governmental agency Public service 552 Police matter Public service 553 Public service Public service 554 Assist invalid Public service 561 Unauthorized burning Public service 571 Cover assignment, standby, move-up Public service 600 Good intent call, other Good intent 611 Dispatched & canceled en route Canceled 611F Dispatched & canceled en route Canceled 611M Dispatched & canceled en route Canceled 611T Dispatched & canceled en route Canceled 622 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address Canceled 631 Authorized controlled burning Good intent 651 Smoke scare, odor of smoke Good intent 652 Steam, vapor, fog or dust thought to be smoke Good intent 653 Smoke from barbecue, tar kettle Good intent 661 EMS call, party transported by non-fire agency Good intent 671 HazMat release investigation w/no HazMat Good intent 672 Biological hazard investigation, none found Good intent 714 Central station, malicious false alarm False alarm 715 Local alarm system, malicious false alarm False alarm 731 Sprinkler activation due to malfunction False alarm 733 Smoke detector activation due to malfunction False alarm 734 Heat detector activation due to malfunction False alarm 735 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction False alarm 736 CO detector activation due to malfunction False alarm 740 Unintentional transmission of alarm, other False alarm 741 Sprinkler activation, no fire - unintentional False alarm 743 Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional False alarm 744 Detector activation, no fire - unintentional False alarm 745 Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional False alarm 911 Citizen complaint Public service Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 97 Note: First, mutual aid calls were identified using “aid type” information in NFIRS. Then, we used the above correspondence table to categorize the remaining calls. For calls that are identified as medical in nature by NFIRS, we used the EMS assessment data to further assign detailed EMS categories as needed. Appendix A: Data Analysis Report, Hermosa Beach, CA page 98