The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06/10/14 From: Jon Furgison [mailto:jonfurg@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2014 5:55 AM To: City Clerk; mcampbell@hbcsd.org Cc: MBove-Lamonica@hbcsd.org; hbcarleen@verizon.net; claypoole@verizon.net; packerman@hbcsd.org; pescalante@hbcsd.org; tbakalay@hermosabch.org; hfangary@hermosbch.org; cpetty@hermosabach.org; Nanette Barragan; Peter Tucker; Michael DiVirgilio Subject: Valley Park proposals Dear Community Representatives, Please accept this letter as my formal opposition to the proposed plans to pave over portions of Valley Park. Unfortunately, I am out of the country with my family for the next few weeks and I am unable to attend the upcoming meetings on these issues. Nevertheless, I would like my voice heard and I would prefer consideration of the options that impact the park the least. I have been a resident of north Hermosa Beach for over 18 years. I use Valley Park and specifically the grass field almost daily, as do many of my neighbors. I walk my dog around the park, my wife gets together with other new mothers and their children to excersise. We also take our 4 month old son to play on the field and all other areas of the park. As my son grows, so will our use and enjoyment of the entire park. Valley Park is a wonderful resource and has proven to be an invaluable location to meet and connect with many of our neighbors. The park is an integral factor is helping us build a tight knit community. Please do not approve any plan that will impair our ability to nurture these relationships and improve this wonderful community. Thank you for your attention to this matter. JON Jon C. Furgison 444 Longfellow Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-2118 Phone: (310) 356-6890 Fax: (310) 356-7812 E-mail: jonfurg@gmail.com 05/22/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 5:45:55PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46490 5/22/2014 14691 ADMINSURE AS AGENT FOR THE 05222014 Liability Claims Reimb - April '14 705-1209-4324 26,990.81 Total : 26,990.81 52014 5/20/2014 00243 HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT 051514 PAYROLL 5/1/2014 TO 5/15/2014 001-1103 472,483.13 105-1103 3,431.47 115-1103 2,183.14 117-1103 1,788.27 125-1103 545.76 147-1103 727.72 150-1103 181.92 152-1103 28.46 160-1103 5,401.03 705-1103 2,597.63 715-1103 4,323.09 Total : 493,691.62 73885 5/22/2014 11437 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CO OP 316892 TAXI VOUCHER PROGRAM - FEB 14 145-3404-4201 4,898.60 317888 TAXI VOUCHER PROGRAM - APR 14 145-3404-4201 5,238.06 Total : 10,136.66 73886 5/22/2014 06290 AIR SOURCE INDUSTRIES INC 061585 OXYGEN REFILL- FEB 14 001-2201-4309 396.60 Total : 396.60 73887 5/22/2014 17442 ALMANZA, EDWARD P 19 Project Mgr-Enviro Rpt/ 4-5 to 5-13-14 001-2109 14,414.80 Total : 14,414.80 73888 5/22/2014 14898 AOKI, ELAYNE 03907 Tuit Reimb/Summer 2014 001-2101-4317 1,916.38 Total : 1,916.38 1Page: 05/22/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 5:45:55PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73889 5/22/2014 09366 AQUA FLO 577799 Irrigation Supplies / Mar 14 001-6101-4309 553.74 586387 Irrigation Supplies / Mar 14 001-6101-4309 399.38 586869 Irrigation Supplies / Mar 14 001-6101-4309 97.57 596231 Irrigation Supplies / Apr 14 001-6101-4309 139.23 598992 Irrigation Supplies / Apr 14 001-6101-4309 52.83 Total : 1,242.75 73890 5/22/2014 17271 BARROWS, PATRICK 03855 Instructor Pymt # 19551,52 001-4601-4221 646.10 Total : 646.10 73891 5/22/2014 03621 CALIFORNIA FENCE AND SUPPLY CO 5553 INSTALL CHAIN LINK FENCE/ Lot A 11th St 001-8651-4201 4,995.00 Total : 4,995.00 73892 5/22/2014 16167 CIVIL SOURCE INC 1017-0403-1 Staff Augmentation Svc- Mar 14 001-4202-4201 8,633.00 1017-403-2 Staff Augmentation Svc - Apr 14 001-4202-4201 9,211.50 Total : 17,844.50 73893 5/22/2014 00456 CLEARS, INC.03744 Membership Dues/ E. Aoki 001-2101-4315 50.00 Total : 50.00 73894 5/22/2014 00034 COASTAL BUSINESS GRAPHICS 297040 Exception to Assigned Shift 001-2101-4305 545.30 297125 5,000 Correction Notices/CD 001-4201-4305 583.52 Total : 1,128.82 73895 5/22/2014 18070 COME LAND MAINTENANCE CO INC 78420 JANITORIAL SERVICES/ JAN 14 2Page: 05/22/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 5:45:55PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73895 5/22/2014 (Continued)18070 COME LAND MAINTENANCE CO INC 001-4204-4201 3,354.00 Total : 3,354.00 73896 5/22/2014 08855 D AND D SERVICES INC 79394 Dead Animal Disposal/ Apr 14 001-3302-4201 319.00 80396 Dead Animal Disposal/ Mar 14 001-3302-4201 319.00 Total : 638.00 73897 5/22/2014 14171 DAVOODIAN, MICHAEL 110658 Preliminary Budgets 001-1202-4201 2,844.90 Total : 2,844.90 73898 5/22/2014 00154 DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL CARE 041014 Shelter Services/ Mar 14 001-3302-4251 245.20 Total : 245.20 73899 5/22/2014 15143 DISNEY STUDIOS MOTION PICTURES, WALT040314 Summer Camp Trip/ El Capitan Theatre 001-1550 748.00 Total : 748.00 73900 5/22/2014 18528 FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES 202 Lodging / Post Plan 111 001-2101-4312 276.25 Total : 276.25 73901 5/22/2014 18531 GRAHAM RESEARCH CONSULTANTS 03705 Educational & Training Programs 001-1203-4317 4,500.00 Total : 4,500.00 73902 5/22/2014 14204 HARTZOG AND CRABILL INC 14-0232 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES/ MAR 14 001-3104-4201 225.00 14-0247 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES/ MAR 14 001-3104-4201 1,580.46 14-0248 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES/ MAR 14 001-3104-4201 827.50 Total : 2,632.96 3Page: 05/22/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 5:45:55PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73903 5/22/2014 08673 HIGGINS, ROBERT 03437 Per Diem - Radar/Lidar Operator 001-2101-4312 112.00 Total : 112.00 73904 5/22/2014 17441 INTELLIBRIDGE PARTNERS, LLC 196929 TEMP SERVICES - APR 14 001-1202-4201 5,665.00 Total : 5,665.00 73905 5/22/2014 12151 JAHNG, CHRISTOPHER Y.03853 Instructor Pymt # 19676 001-4601-4221 945.00 Total : 945.00 73906 5/22/2014 13840 JOHN M CRUIKSHANK 12302 ENGINEERING SER - PIER REPAIRS/ FEB 14 122-8659-4201 2,780.00 Total : 2,780.00 73907 5/22/2014 15442 LANTZER, DAVE 348 Per Diem - Emergency Mgmt Course 001-2201-4317 250.00 Total : 250.00 73908 5/22/2014 14111 LONNQUIST, GEORGIA 202 Airfare/ TR 202- Paid with personal 001-2101-4317 336.00 001-2101-4312 150.00 Total : 486.00 73909 5/22/2014 18274 MAGNUM VENTURE PARTNERS 03851 Instructor Pymt # 19676 001-4601-4221 945.00 03856 Instructor Pymnt # 19653 001-4601-4221 784.00 Total : 1,729.00 73910 5/22/2014 18122 MARINE RESEARCH SPECIALISTS 514-2014-10 EIR Serv - Oil Project/ Mar 14 001-2109 69,730.13 Total : 69,730.13 73911 5/22/2014 06473 NOWDOCS INTERNATIONAL, INC 56390 Inv # 56390 pd 5/8 did not include tax 001-1202-4305 14.94 4Page: 05/22/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 5:45:55PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 14.94 73911 5/22/2014 06473 NOWDOCS INTERNATIONAL, INC 73912 5/22/2014 13114 OFFICE DEPOT 704826661001 Office Supplies/ Apr 14 001-2201-4305 87.12 710327797001 Office Supplies/ Apr 14 001-4601-4305 97.49 710417949001 Office Supplies/ Apr 14 001-2201-4305 96.61 711128512001 Office Supplies/ Apr 14 001-4601-4328 84.57 Total : 365.79 73913 5/22/2014 17007 ORTLEY TRANSPORTATION 3287 Afterschool Shuttle/ 5-12 to 5-23-14 145-3411-4201 2,300.00 Total : 2,300.00 73914 5/22/2014 14694 PARTEK SOLUTIONS INC 15766 PARKING CITATIONS & ENVELOPES 001-3302-4201 3,293.28 Total : 3,293.28 73915 5/22/2014 16782 PETERSON, TERRY 03793 Piano Tuning/ Theatre 001-4601-4201 115.00 Total : 115.00 73916 5/22/2014 15112 PICCIONI, ANNAMARIE A 03852 Instructor Pymnt # 19676-18 001-4601-4221 945.00 Total : 945.00 73917 5/22/2014 10325 POALAC 04012 Regis/ Critical Incident Mgmt 001-2101-4317 225.00 Total : 225.00 73918 5/22/2014 00398 POSTMASTER 03986 Bulk Mail Permit # 100-Direct Mailing 001-1101-4319 1,744.20 Total : 1,744.20 73919 5/22/2014 18530 RALPH ANDERSON ASSOCIATES 11345 Class & Comp Study/ Jan 14 001-1203-4251 1,750.00 5Page: 05/22/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 5:45:55PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73919 5/22/2014 (Continued)18530 RALPH ANDERSON ASSOCIATES 11405 Class & Comp Study/ Mar 14 001-1203-4251 3,500.00 Total : 5,250.00 73920 5/22/2014 07869 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S OFFICE 03435 Regis Radar/Lidar Operator 001-2101-4317 240.00 Total : 240.00 73921 5/22/2014 17903 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 4207-7 Paint Supplies/ Apr 14 001-3104-4309 410.71 4208-5 Paint Supplies/ Apr 14 001-3104-4309 409.84 4896-6 Paint Supplies/ Apr 14 001-3104-4309 102.46 5130-9 Paint Supplies/ Apr 14 001-4204-4309 16.38 5709-0 Paint Supplies/ Apr 14 001-3104-4309 410.71 5907-0 Paint Supplies/ Apr 14 001-3104-4309 187.10 Total : 1,537.20 73922 5/22/2014 10764 SOUTH BAY CENTER FOR 033114 Dispute Resolution/ 3rd Quarter 001-1132-4201 1,100.00 Total : 1,100.00 73923 5/22/2014 10532 SOUTH BAY FORD 408632 Auto Parts Purchase - Mar 14 715-2201-4311 116.52 409733 Auto Parts Purchase - Mar 14 715-2101-4311 567.61 410228 Auto Parts Purchase - Mar 14 715-4201-4311 66.06 410229 Auto Parts Purchase - Mar 14 715-2601-4311 174.95 411279 Auto Parts Purchase - Mar 14 715-3104-4311 56.03 6Page: 05/22/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 5:45:55PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73923 5/22/2014 (Continued)10532 SOUTH BAY FORD 411814 Auto Parts Purchase - Mar 14 715-3302-4311 23.29 Total : 1,004.46 73924 5/22/2014 00146 SPARKLETTS 4472788 040314 Drinking Water - Apr 14 001-4601-4305 110.64 Total : 110.64 73925 5/22/2014 10098 SPRINT NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 397572146-093 Cell Phone Usage - Apr 14 001-4201-4304 96.08 Total : 96.08 73926 5/22/2014 18456 SURFSIDE RESTORATION AND WATER 3699 PARKING STRUCTURE REPAIRS/ MAR 14 001-8663-4201 3,422.25 Total : 3,422.25 73927 5/22/2014 15040 TEAK WAREHOUSE, INC 654877 Memorial Bench / Evelyn Chidsey 001-6101-5402 866.55 Total : 866.55 73928 5/22/2014 01860 TORRANCE, CITY OF 042814 Disaster Mgmt - Area G/ FY 13/14 001-2201-4251 2,472.00 Total : 2,472.00 73929 5/22/2014 18529 TRIDENT PROFESSIONALS 202 Regis/ Post Plan 111 001-2101-4312 500.00 Total : 500.00 73930 5/22/2014 10155 TRUGREEN CHEMLAWN 6740052092 Root Fertilization- Pier Plaza Palms 001-3301-4201 646.00 7001303480 Fertilizer / Hermosa Ave 001-3301-4201 992.00 Total : 1,638.00 201405 5/22/2014 14008 YORK SCRMA 05222014 W/Comp Claims - 5/16/14 705-1217-4324 10,807.57 7Page: 05/22/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 5:45:55PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 10,807.57 201405 5/22/2014 14008 YORK SCRMA Bank total : 708,438.44 49 Vouchers for bank code :boa 708,438.44Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 49 "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages 1 to 8 inclusive, of the check register for 5-22-14 are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date 6-2-14 8Page: 05/29/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 5:08:24PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73931 5/29/2014 18269 ANDERSON PENNA PARTNERS INC 2673 CIP REPORT PRODUCTION SUPPORT/NOV-MAR 14 001-4202-4201 2,000.00 Total : 2,000.00 73932 5/29/2014 17271 BARROWS, PATRICK 03951 Instructor Pymnt # 19862 001-4601-4221 178.50 Total : 178.50 73933 5/29/2014 09614 BROMBERG, GEORGE 50914 300' & 500' Notices-Plan Comm Mtg/May 14 001-4101-4201 1,499.00 Total : 1,499.00 73934 5/29/2014 03372 CA EMS PERSONNEL FUND 03804 Paramedic License Renewal/ Aaron Marks 001-2201-4315 200.00 Total : 200.00 73935 5/29/2014 18069 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF A4267 Consult & Review-E & B Oil/ Nov & Dec 13 001-2109 1,429.20 A4359 Consult & Review-E & B Oil/ Feb 14 001-2109 1,113.48 Total : 2,542.68 73936 5/29/2014 16933 CHALLENGER SPORTS GROUP 3953 Instructor Pymt #19509 001-4601-4221 280.00 Total : 280.00 73937 5/29/2014 05970 COLLINS, DENNIS 03924 Instructor Pymnt #19635,39,43,36,40,44 001-4601-4221 2,464.00 Total : 2,464.00 73938 5/29/2014 00642 DAILY BREEZE, THE 5007722 Public Notice Ad - South Park Design 001-4601-4302 246.20 Total : 246.20 73939 5/29/2014 09491 DE CASTRO, DOUG 4179 Banner Changes - 5/8 and 5/30 001-4104-4201 2,112.91 1Page: 05/29/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 5:08:24PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 2,112.91 73939 5/29/2014 09491 DE CASTRO, DOUG 73940 5/29/2014 00193 EMBLEM ENTERPRISES 580446 Shoulder Patch / Police Dept 001-2101-4314 58.29 Total : 58.29 73941 5/29/2014 08422 FIRE INFORMATION SUPPORT SERV 1041 Fire Prevention Inspection System 001-2201-5405 1,500.00 1042 Records Mgmt-CSFM 1st Qtr 001-2201-4201 250.00 Total : 1,750.00 73942 5/29/2014 06344 FIRST CALL STAFFING SERVICES 0709-142444 Temp Services/ Week ending 4-24-14 001-4202-4112 1,662.88 0709-142552 Temp Services/ Week ending 05-04-14 001-4202-4112 1,702.40 0709-142664 Temp Services/ Week ending 05-11-14 001-1204-4112 1,702.40 Total : 5,067.68 73943 5/29/2014 12303 HAWTHORNE POLICE DEPT 03984 Unclaimed Money/ FY 08/09 001-2024 1,949.00 Total : 1,949.00 73944 5/29/2014 11509 HENGES, PAULA E E 49295 EMBROIDERY/ CITY SEAL ON UNIFORM SHIRTS 001-4202-4314 97.66 Total : 97.66 73945 5/29/2014 18533 HOPKINS, ALLISON 03941 Refund Cite # 200058230 001-3302 48.00 Total : 48.00 73946 5/29/2014 09130 HRBOKA, DENNIS 03831 Instructor Pymnt # 19349,50 001-4601-4221 3,657.50 03950 Instructor Pymnt # 19668 001-4601-4221 2,310.00 Total : 5,967.50 2Page: 05/29/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 5:08:24PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73947 5/29/2014 02458 INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC 244956-00 Electrical Supplies - Mar 14 105-2601-4309 488.32 244957-00 Electrical Supplies - Mar 14 105-2601-4309 482.34 Total : 970.66 73948 5/29/2014 12151 JAHNG, CHRISTOPHER Y.04044 Instructor Pymt # 19676 001-4601-4221 472.50 Total : 472.50 73949 5/29/2014 15782 LA CO METRO TRANSPORTATION 800057876 TAPS Bus Pass Sales/ Jan 14 145-3403-4251 212.00 Total : 212.00 73950 5/29/2014 12482 LEXISNEXIS RISK DATA MGMT INC 1114400-20140430 Information Services/ Apr 14 001-2101-4201 50.00 Total : 50.00 73951 5/29/2014 02175 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 171495 Legal, RE: Personnel Matter/ Sept 13 001-1203-4201 3,080.00 171496 Legal, RE: Personnel Matter/ Sept 13 001-1203-4201 3,144.50 Total : 6,224.50 73952 5/29/2014 18274 MAGNUM VENTURE PARTNERS 03930 Instructor Pymnt # 19672 001-4601-4221 1,750.00 04045 Instructor Pymt # 19676 001-4601-4221 472.50 Total : 2,222.50 73953 5/29/2014 07828 MANHATTAN STITCHING COMPANY 21772 EMBROIDERY- Jackets/FD 001-2201-4305 43.60 Total : 43.60 73954 5/29/2014 18535 MELNICK, GLENN 03980 Delivery Refund Fee/Passport 001-3871 19.99 Total : 19.99 3Page: 05/29/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 5:08:24PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73955 5/29/2014 13309 PEREZ, SHAWN 03990 Instructor Pymt # 19530 001-4601-4221 504.00 Total : 504.00 73956 5/29/2014 18411 PLATA, YUNUEN 03906 Mileage Reimb-Correctional Core Academy 001-2101-4313 1,265.60 Total : 1,265.60 73957 5/29/2014 00398 POSTMASTER 04046 Postage - E & B Oil EIR Meeting Mailing 001-2109 4,350.00 Total : 4,350.00 73958 5/29/2014 17817 SANTA MONICA UCLA MED CENTER 1043375100 SART Exam # 1043375100 001-2101-4201 730.00 Total : 730.00 73959 5/29/2014 10127 SOUTH BAY CHAPTER SPEBSQSA 101125 Theatre Damage Deposit Refund 001-2111 435.00 Total : 435.00 73960 5/29/2014 00159 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO 2-00-989-6911 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 119.55 2-00-989-7315 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 12,913.13 2-01-836-7458 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 16.91 2-02-274-0542 Electrical Billing - apr 14 001-6101-4303 25.62 2-08-629-3669 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 001-4204-4303 94.94 2-09-076-5850 Electrical Billing - apr 14 105-2601-4303 189.25 2-19-024-1604 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 001-4204-4303 2,365.02 2-20-128-4825 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 001-3304-4303 1,120.87 4Page: 05/29/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 5:08:24PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73960 5/29/2014 (Continued)00159 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO 2-20-128-5475 Electrical Billing - apr 14 001-4204-4303 43.00 2-20-984-6179 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 24.35 2-20-984-6369 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 102.67 2-21-400-7684 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 32.35 2-21-964-8003 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 23.35 2-26-686-5930 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 430.43 2-31-250-3303 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 001-4204-4303 32.30 2-33-095-1989 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 24.22 Total : 17,557.96 73961 5/29/2014 09532 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 3228994784 Office Supplies/ Apr 14 001-4202-4305 78.01 Total : 78.01 73962 5/29/2014 18450 THE RULES GUYS LLC 5 Records Mgmt Software/ FD 001-2201-4201 1,650.00 Total : 1,650.00 73963 5/29/2014 16735 TORRANCE AUTO PARTS 23984 Auto Parts Purchase/Mar 14 715-6101-4311 49.28 23985 Auto Parts Purchase/Mar 14 715-3302-4311 66.02 23986 Auto Parts Purchase/Mar 14 715-2101-4311 44.93 23988 Auto Parts Purchase/Mar 14 715-2201-4311 17.96 5Page: 05/29/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 5:08:24PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73963 5/29/2014 (Continued)16735 TORRANCE AUTO PARTS 26618 Auto Parts Purchase/ Apr 14 715-2101-4311 41.33 26623 Auto Parts Purchase/ Apr 14 715-6101-4311 18.33 26626 Auto Parts Purchase/ Apr 14 715-3302-4311 67.22 Total : 305.07 73964 5/29/2014 00015 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 310 167-1756 Circuit Billing/ Apr 14 001-2101-4304 329.72 310 372-6186 Phone Charges - Apr 14 001-1132-4304 49.77 310 PL0-0346 Circuit Billing/ Apr 14 001-2101-4304 50.56 310 PL0-0347 Circuit Billing/ Apr 14 001-2101-4304 50.56 310 UH0-3618 Circuit Billing/ Apr 14 001-2101-4304 438.49 310 UH9-9686 Circuit Billing/ Apr 14 001-2101-4304 167.52 310 VM6-6158 Circuit Billing/ Apr 14 001-2101-4304 47.93 Total : 1,134.55 73965 5/29/2014 09056 VERIZON ONLINE 1160742236 Fiber Optic Line - Apr 14 715-1206-4201 170.00 Total : 170.00 73966 5/29/2014 03209 VERIZON WIRELESS LA 9723601162 LCM 12 Lead Program - FD/ Apr 14 001-2201-4304 137.99 9723602572 EPCR Program F/D - Apr 14 001-2201-4304 190.05 Total : 328.04 73967 5/29/2014 15815 YOUNG, DONALD CURTISS 03991 Instructor Pymt/ Beach Tennis Tourney 001-4601-4221 504.00 6Page: 05/29/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 5:08:24PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 504.00 73967 5/29/2014 15815 YOUNG, DONALD CURTISS 20140529 5/29/2014 14008 YORK SCRMA 05292014 W/Comp Claims - 5/22 & 23/14 705-1217-4324 45,128.46 Total : 45,128.46 Bank total : 110,817.86 38 Vouchers for bank code :boa 110,817.86Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 38 "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages 1 to 7 inclusive, of the check register for 5-29-14 are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date 6-2-14 7Page: June 5, 2014 Honorable Mayor and Members Regular Meeting of of the Hermosa Beach City Council June 10, 2014 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS JUNE 18, 2014 @ 6:00PM JOINT COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION: FINAL EIR JUNE 24, 2014 @ 5:00PM STUDY SESSION: 1. CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY 2. LAND MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE JUNE 24, 2014 PRESENTATIONS SOUTH BAY WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD PRESENTATION CONSENT CALENDAR Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of May 21, 2014 Public Works Director Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of June 3, 2014 Assistant to the City Manager Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of June 17, 2014 Community Development Director Award of Contract – Land Management Software: Accela Community Development Director Approve Payment Increase to Lyle Sumek Associates Inc. for Strategic Planning City Manager PUBLIC HEARINGS Delinquent Refuse Billing City Manager Adoption of Budget Finance Director Adoption of Appropriation Limit Finance Director MUNICIPAL MATTERS E&B’s Proposed Oil Drilling and Production Project Update Community Development Director MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER Initial Discussion – Real Estate Signs Enforcement Economic Development Officer Pilot Parking Program Update Management Aanalyst JULY 8, 2014 PRESENTATIONS AES CORPORATION POWER PLANT UPDATE - CITY OF REDONDO BEACH REPRESENTATIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS Final EIR Community Development Director MUNICIPAL MATTERS E&B’s Proposed Oil Drilling and Production Project Update Community Development Director AES/Redondo Beach Power Plant Policy Direction Community Development Director City of Redondo Beach Harbor Dr/Herondo St Improvement Project Public Works Director 2 PENDING ITEMS Consideration of reduction of business license fee request from Carol G. Weiss, Ph.D. Finance Director Green Zone Recommendations and the Installation of Silver and Green Meters Downtown Police Chief Procurement Policies – RFP City Manager Ethics Policy City Manager & Finance Director Contract Public Information and Communications Plan City Manager SCE Update City Manager AUGUST 2014 Citywide Service Level/Performance Benchmark System Report Finance Director AES Resolution, Intervener, Future Development on the Site Community Development Director Communications Plan and Direction City Manager Living Streets Update Report Public Works Director Public Safety Service and Staffing: Quarterly Report Police Chief / Fire Chief Event Policy Discussion City Manager Restaurant/Bar (50/50) Definition Community Development Director Oil - Cost Benefit Analysis, Health Impacts Assessment Community Development Director Oil – Simulating Project Impacts Community Development Director Public Information and Communications Plan Adoption City Manager Cypress Avenue - Direction on Zoning Changes for Manufacturing Uses Community Development Director Update on Direction for Schools Strategy and Specific Actions: Support for Top Quality Schools City Manager Strategic Plan – Quarterly Update City Manager SEPTEMBER 2014 Priority Based Budgeting Report Finance Director Downtown Action Plan Community Development Director OCTOBER 2014 Carbon Neutral Municipality - Solar Report – Early Actions and Overall Direction City Manager Carbon Neutral Community Policy, Direction on Plan Development Community Development Director Carbon Neutral Municipality: A. SCE Street Light Energy Efficiency: Update Report B. Municipal GHG Emissions Inventory: Update Report (SBCCOG) Community Development Director NOVEMBER 2014 Compensation Study and Policy Direction Assistant to the City Manager National Citizen Survey Overview Assistant to the City Manager DECEMBER 2014 Comprehensive City Facilities Master Plan – Award Contract Public Works Director Carbon Neutral Municipality: A. Final SCAG Report: Setting Target, Action Plan, Funding – Employee Commute Program B. Net Zero Carbon Policy for City Facilities and Service Delivery Analysis C. Renewable Energy Policy for City Facilities and Service Delivery Community Development Director Strategic Plan – Quarterly Update City Manager JANUARY 2015 None FEBRUARY 2015 Employee Salaries/Benefits Funding Assistant to the City Manager 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 City Council1101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1101-4100 Personal Services 36,984.00 29,731.09 29,731.09 80.391101-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 7,252.91 2,527.00 9,726.80 9,726.80 384.911101-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 -7,199.80 26,112.00 23,485.61 23,485.61 89.941101-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 2,626.39 10,780.00 8,237.42 8,237.42 76.411101-4180 Retirement 0.00 2,542.58 9,868.00 22,304.04 22,304.04 226.021101-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 -12,436.04 915.00 912.43 912.43 99.721101-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 2.57 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 95,937.39 95,937.39 0.00 -6,114.39 106.81 1101-4200 Contract Services 67,010.00 6,359.94 6,359.94 9.491101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 60,650.06 Total Contract Services 67,010.00 6,359.94 6,359.94 0.00 60,650.06 9.49 1101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 100.00 18.58 18.58 18.581101-4304 Telephone 0.00 81.42 14,000.00 7,966.21 7,966.21 56.901101-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 6,033.79 24,000.00 22,197.99 22,197.99 92.491101-4315 Membership 0.00 1,802.01 15,000.00 8,611.14 8,611.14 57.411101-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 6,388.86 27,070.00 27,082.56 27,082.56 100.051101-4319 Special Events 0.00 -12.56 3,620.00 3,020.00 3,020.00 83.431101-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 600.00 4,183.00 3,490.00 3,490.00 83.431101-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 693.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 87,973.00 72,386.48 72,386.48 0.00 15,586.52 82.28 1101-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Total City Council 244,806.00 174,683.81 174,683.81 0.00 70,122.19 71.36 City Clerk1121 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1121-4100 Personal Services 111,941.00 90,808.00 90,808.00 81.121121-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 21,133.00 11,637.00 5,368.98 5,368.98 46.141121-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 6,268.02 40,797.00 43,110.00 43,110.00 105.671121-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 -2,313.00 24,193.00 22,462.27 22,462.27 92.851121-4180 Retirement 0.00 1,730.73 39,599.00 30,856.19 30,856.19 77.921121-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 8,742.81 2,248.00 2,020.35 2,020.35 89.871121-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 227.65 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 243,122.00 202,038.79 202,038.79 0.00 41,083.21 83.10 1121-4200 Contract Services 7,380.00 1,811.76 1,811.76 24.551121-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 5,568.24 52,000.00 44,694.97 44,694.97 85.951121-4251 Contract Services/Govt 0.00 7,305.03 Total Contract Services 59,380.00 46,506.73 46,506.73 0.00 12,873.27 78.32 1121-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 785.00 480.68 480.68 61.231121-4304 Telephone 0.00 304.32 5,175.00 3,402.96 3,402.96 65.761121-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 1,772.04 210.00 185.00 185.00 88.101121-4315 Membership 0.00 25.00 2,778.00 2,816.56 2,816.56 101.391121-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 -38.56 16,000.00 6,896.75 6,896.75 43.101121-4323 Public Noticing 0.00 9,103.25 7,065.00 5,890.00 5,890.00 83.371121-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 1,175.00 612.00 510.00 510.00 83.331121-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 102.00 9,725.00 8,100.00 8,100.00 83.291121-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 1,625.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 42,350.00 28,281.95 28,281.95 0.00 14,068.05 66.78 1121-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total City Clerk 344,852.00 276,827.47 276,827.47 0.00 68,024.53 80.27 2Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 City Attorney1131 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1131-4200 Contract Services 320,000.00 91,425.50 91,425.50 28.571131-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 228,574.50 Total City Attorney 320,000.00 91,425.50 91,425.50 0.00 228,574.50 28.57 3Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 City Prosecutor1132 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1132-4200 Contract Services 145,000.00 201,439.76 201,439.76 138.921132-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 -56,439.76 Total Contract Services 145,000.00 201,439.76 201,439.76 0.00 -56,439.76 138.92 1132-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 300.00 221.93 221.93 73.981132-4304 Telephone 0.00 78.07 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.001132-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 100.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 400.00 221.93 221.93 0.00 178.07 55.48 Total City Prosecutor 145,400.00 201,661.69 201,661.69 0.00 -56,261.69 138.69 4Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,749.37 2,749.37 9.671141-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 25,690.63 3,644.00 171.81 171.81 4.711141-4180 Retirement 0.00 3,472.19 886.00 4,349.26 4,349.26 490.891141-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 -3,463.26 412.00 39.84 39.84 9.671141-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 372.16 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 9,249.28 9,249.28 0.00 26,709.72 25.72 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 400.00 160.39 160.39 40.101141-4304 Telephone 0.00 239.61 2,500.00 1,846.27 1,846.27 73.851141-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 653.73 55.00 40.00 40.00 72.731141-4315 Membership 0.00 15.00 2,255.00 1,236.39 1,236.39 54.831141-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 1,018.61 3,782.00 3,150.00 3,150.00 83.291141-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 632.00 609.00 510.00 510.00 83.741141-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 99.00 3,483.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 83.261141-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 583.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 13,084.00 9,843.05 9,843.05 0.00 3,240.95 75.23 1141-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total City Treasurer 52,563.00 20,884.59 20,884.59 0.00 31,678.41 39.73 5Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 City Manager1201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1201-4100 Personal Services 222,000.00 181,212.96 181,212.96 81.631201-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 40,787.04 0.00 740.33 740.33 0.001201-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 -740.33 36,483.00 7,781.42 7,781.42 21.331201-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 28,701.58 77,844.00 56,861.75 56,861.75 73.051201-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 20,982.25 32,986.00 23,243.42 23,243.42 70.461201-4180 Retirement 0.00 9,742.58 26,759.00 20,723.00 20,723.00 77.441201-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 6,036.00 4,117.00 3,289.54 3,289.54 79.901201-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 827.46 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 426,443.00 295,448.42 295,448.42 0.00 130,994.58 69.28 1201-4200 Contract Services 51,360.00 30,010.75 30,010.75 58.431201-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 21,349.25 Total Contract Services 51,360.00 30,010.75 30,010.75 0.00 21,349.25 58.43 1201-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 1,200.00 2,799.21 2,799.21 233.271201-4304 Telephone 0.00 -1,599.21 900.00 3,297.53 3,297.53 366.391201-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 -2,397.53 1,900.00 1,644.00 1,644.00 86.531201-4315 Membership 0.00 256.00 5,000.00 1,440.21 1,440.21 28.801201-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 3,559.79 7,103.00 5,920.00 5,920.00 83.351201-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 1,183.00 3,406.00 2,840.00 2,840.00 83.381201-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 566.00 16,480.00 13,730.00 13,730.00 83.311201-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 2,750.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 35,989.00 31,670.95 31,670.95 0.00 4,318.05 88.00 1201-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total City Manager 513,792.00 357,130.12 357,130.12 0.00 156,661.88 69.51 6Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Finance Administration1202 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1202-4100 Personal Services 434,681.00 347,458.10 347,458.10 79.931202-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 87,222.90 550.00 1,506.80 1,506.80 273.961202-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 -956.80 35,874.00 26,066.69 26,066.69 72.661202-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 9,807.31 74,212.00 58,635.12 58,635.12 79.011202-4180 Retirement 0.00 15,576.88 91,711.00 62,691.04 62,691.04 68.361202-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 29,019.96 4,429.00 3,814.06 3,814.06 86.121202-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 614.94 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 683,226.00 523,558.81 523,558.81 0.00 159,667.19 76.63 1202-4200 Contract Services 120,850.00 72,145.09 72,145.09 72.161202-4201 Contract Serv/Private 15,055.00 33,649.91 Total Contract Services 120,850.00 72,145.09 72,145.09 15,055.00 33,649.91 72.16 1202-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 2,000.00 1,391.56 1,391.56 69.581202-4304 Telephone 0.00 608.44 7,950.00 7,035.55 7,035.55 88.501202-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 914.45 595.00 455.00 455.00 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 15,160.00 15,160.00 83.331202-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 3,033.00 2,113.00 1,760.00 1,760.00 83.291202-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 353.00 26,325.00 21,940.00 21,940.00 83.341202-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 4,385.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 63,301.00 50,787.57 50,787.57 0.00 12,513.43 80.23 1202-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Finance Administration 867,377.00 646,491.47 646,491.47 15,055.00 205,830.53 76.27 7Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Human Resources1203 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1203-4100 Personal Services 66,501.00 58,983.12 58,983.12 88.701203-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 7,517.88 412.00 172.39 172.39 41.841203-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 239.61 10,458.00 9,088.40 9,088.40 86.901203-4180 Retirement 0.00 1,369.60 14,725.00 14,596.48 14,596.48 99.131203-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 128.52 993.00 938.48 938.48 94.511203-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 54.52 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 90,708.87 90,708.87 0.00 14,265.13 86.41 1203-4200 Contract Services 243,591.00 164,350.62 164,350.62 67.501203-4201 Contract Serv/Private 75.00 79,165.38 11,000.00 1,955.00 1,955.00 17.771203-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 9,045.00 Total Contract Services 254,591.00 166,305.62 166,305.62 75.00 88,210.38 65.35 1203-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 10,000.00 8,355.28 8,355.28 83.551203-4300 Employee recognition instant bonus 0.00 1,644.72 1,500.00 1,011.35 1,011.35 67.421203-4304 Telephone 0.00 488.65 3,000.00 6,365.19 6,365.19 212.171203-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 -3,365.19 1,075.00 330.00 330.00 30.701203-4315 Membership 0.00 745.00 13,000.00 3,243.00 3,243.00 24.951203-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 9,757.00 12,000.00 20,735.02 20,735.02 172.791203-4320 Medical Exams 0.00 -8,735.02 6,858.00 5,720.00 5,720.00 83.411203-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 1,138.00 612.00 510.00 510.00 83.331203-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 102.00 5,680.00 4,730.00 4,730.00 83.271203-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 950.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 53,725.00 50,999.84 50,999.84 0.00 2,725.16 94.93 1203-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Human Resources 413,290.00 308,014.33 308,014.33 75.00 105,200.67 74.55 8Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 9 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Finance Cashier1204 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1204-4100 Personal Services 301,206.00 213,871.96 213,871.96 71.011204-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 87,334.04 8,000.00 8,598.95 8,598.95 107.491204-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 -598.95 6,438.00 9,105.94 9,105.94 141.441204-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 -2,667.94 43,560.00 27,392.54 27,392.54 62.881204-4112 Part Time Temporary 0.00 16,167.46 56,732.00 36,628.03 36,628.03 64.561204-4180 Retirement 0.00 20,103.97 102,676.00 48,607.05 48,607.05 47.341204-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 54,068.95 3,520.00 2,435.00 2,435.00 69.181204-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 1,085.00 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 553,884.00 365,161.47 365,161.47 0.00 188,722.53 65.93 1204-4200 Contract Services 119,326.00 91,495.00 91,495.00 77.931204-4201 Contract Serv/Private 1,500.00 26,331.00 Total Contract Services 119,326.00 91,495.00 91,495.00 1,500.00 26,331.00 77.93 1204-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,641.00 2,808.57 2,808.57 77.141204-4304 Telephone 0.00 832.43 46,072.00 30,979.21 30,979.21 67.241204-4305 Office Operating Supplies 0.00 15,092.79 210.00 0.00 0.00 0.001204-4315 Membership 0.00 210.00 2,975.00 135.00 135.00 4.541204-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 2,840.00 23,184.00 19,320.00 19,320.00 83.331204-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 3,864.00 1,828.00 1,520.00 1,520.00 83.151204-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 308.00 17,947.00 14,960.00 14,960.00 83.361204-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 2,987.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 95,857.00 69,722.78 69,722.78 0.00 26,134.22 72.74 Total Finance Cashier 769,067.00 526,379.25 526,379.25 1,500.00 241,187.75 68.64 9Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 10 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 General Appropriations1208 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1208-4100 Personal Services 50,073.00 48,791.46 48,791.46 97.441208-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 1,281.54 804.00 121.07 121.07 15.061208-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 682.93 5,251.00 5,116.31 5,116.31 97.431208-4180 Retirement 0.00 134.69 20,297.00 15,808.53 15,808.53 77.891208-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 4,488.47 726.00 709.26 709.26 97.691208-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 16.74 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 73,738.63 73,738.63 0.00 8,879.37 89.25 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 92.19 92.19 80.171208-4304 Telephone 0.00 22.81 -13,176.00 -11,870.55 -11,870.55 90.091208-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 -1,305.45 16,557.00 13,800.00 13,800.00 83.351208-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 2,757.00 306.00 250.00 250.00 81.701208-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 56.00 1,473.00 1,230.00 1,230.00 83.501208-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 243.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 5,275.00 3,501.64 3,501.64 0.00 1,773.36 66.38 1208-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total General Appropriations 87,910.00 77,255.40 77,255.40 0.00 10,654.60 87.88 10Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 11 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Prospective Expenditures1214 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1214-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 51,606.00 -450.00 -450.00 0.871214-4322 Unclassified 0.00 52,056.00 Total Prospective Expenditures 51,606.00 -450.00 -450.00 0.00 52,056.00 0.00 11Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 12 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Interfund Transfers Out1299 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1299-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 2,433,085.00 2,165,262.00 2,165,262.00 88.991299-4399 OperatingTransfers Out 0.00 267,823.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 2,433,085.00 2,165,262.00 2,165,262.00 0.00 267,823.00 88.99 12Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 13 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Police2101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2101-4100 Personal Services 4,068,110.02 2,904,629.70 2,904,629.70 71.402101-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 1,163,480.32 74,976.00 52,791.96 52,791.96 70.412101-4105 Special Duty Pay 0.00 22,184.04 315,285.00 270,468.14 270,468.14 85.792101-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 44,816.86 729,937.00 590,884.83 590,884.83 80.952101-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 139,052.17 35,837.00 758.98 758.98 2.122101-4112 Part Time Temporary 0.00 35,078.02 6,500.00 4,558.40 4,558.40 70.132101-4117 Shift Differential 0.00 1,941.60 8,500.00 4,483.32 4,483.32 52.742101-4118 Training Officer 0.00 4,016.68 2,088,042.00 1,615,763.25 1,615,763.25 77.382101-4180 Retirement 0.00 472,278.75 300.00 10.35 10.35 3.452101-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 289.65 32,024.00 23,224.61 23,224.61 72.522101-4187 Uniform Allowance 0.00 8,799.39 829,212.00 541,500.97 541,500.97 65.302101-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 287,711.03 57,866.00 55,779.20 55,779.20 96.392101-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 2,086.80 411,229.00 239,883.00 239,883.00 58.332101-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) 0.00 171,346.00 Total Personal Services 8,657,818.02 6,304,736.71 6,304,736.71 0.00 2,353,081.31 72.82 2101-4200 Contract Services 108,808.71 85,201.08 85,201.08 78.302101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 23,607.63 600,348.00 599,029.14 599,029.14 99.782101-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 1,318.86 Total Contract Services 709,156.71 684,230.22 684,230.22 0.00 24,926.49 96.49 2101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 51,000.00 37,799.73 37,799.73 74.122101-4304 Telephone 0.00 13,200.27 38,729.27 29,029.55 29,029.55 79.262101-4305 Office Oper Supplies 1,666.57 8,033.15 13,000.00 10,640.72 10,640.72 82.142101-4306 Prisoner Maintenance 37.20 2,322.08 2,500.00 723.50 723.50 28.942101-4307 Radio Maintenance 0.00 1,776.50 3,500.00 562.36 562.36 16.072101-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 2,937.64 15,000.00 8,202.70 8,202.70 54.682101-4312 Travel Expense , POST 0.00 6,797.30 7,162.00 4,791.16 4,791.16 66.902101-4313 Travel Expense, STC 0.00 2,370.84 19,100.00 9,463.62 9,463.62 49.552101-4314 Uniforms 0.00 9,636.38 3,559.00 2,180.00 2,180.00 61.252101-4315 Membership 0.00 1,379.00 13Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 14 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Police2101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 52,086.00 32,366.46 32,366.46 62.142101-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 19,719.54 13,358.00 0.00 0.00 0.002101-4350 Safety Gear 0.00 13,358.00 304,939.00 254,120.00 254,120.00 83.332101-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 50,819.00 6,925.00 5,770.00 5,770.00 83.322101-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 1,155.00 358,125.00 298,440.00 298,440.00 83.332101-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 59,685.00 1,168,403.00 973,670.00 973,670.00 83.332101-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 194,733.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 2,057,386.27 1,667,759.80 1,667,759.80 1,703.77 387,922.70 81.14 2101-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2101-5400 Equipment/Furniture 5,253.00 2,315.69 2,315.69 44.082101-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 2,937.31 Total Equipment/Furniture 5,253.00 2,315.69 2,315.69 0.00 2,937.31 44.08 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 8,659,042.42 8,659,042.42 1,703.77 2,768,867.81 75.77 14Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 15 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Crossing Guard2102 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2102-4200 Contract Services 88,909.00 53,458.30 53,458.30 94.912102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 30,928.20 4,522.50 Total Crossing Guard 88,909.00 53,458.30 53,458.30 30,928.20 4,522.50 94.91 15Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 16 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Fire2201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2201-4100 Personal Services 1,872,785.00 1,434,347.60 1,434,347.60 76.592201-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 438,437.40 473,210.00 344,998.92 344,998.92 72.912201-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 128,211.08 193,804.00 165,915.90 165,915.90 85.612201-4108 FLSA Overtime 0.00 27,888.10 258,453.00 120,290.61 120,290.61 46.542201-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 138,162.39 127,500.00 57,880.00 57,880.00 45.402201-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 69,620.00 5,600.00 3,700.00 3,700.00 66.072201-4119 Fitness Incentive 0.00 1,900.00 841,941.00 670,469.99 670,469.99 79.632201-4180 Retirement 0.00 171,471.01 1,206.00 662.02 662.02 54.892201-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 543.98 10,200.00 7,475.00 7,475.00 73.282201-4187 Uniform Allowance 0.00 2,725.00 218,504.00 155,928.01 155,928.01 71.362201-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 62,575.99 24,554.00 28,399.33 28,399.33 115.662201-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 -3,845.33 118,638.00 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 3,059,276.38 3,059,276.38 0.00 1,087,118.62 73.78 2201-4200 Contract Services 112,469.00 27,369.96 27,369.96 24.942201-4201 Contract Serv/Private 675.90 84,423.14 151,625.00 131,000.06 131,000.06 97.112201-4251 Contract Service/Govt 16,235.40 4,389.54 Total Contract Services 264,094.00 158,370.02 158,370.02 16,911.30 88,812.68 66.37 2201-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 17,768.00 12,831.35 12,831.35 72.222201-4304 Telephone 0.00 4,936.65 16,484.00 8,153.13 8,153.13 49.592201-4305 Office Oper Supplies 21.80 8,309.07 36,907.00 17,977.41 17,977.41 48.712201-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 18,929.59 2,475.00 2,383.91 2,383.91 96.322201-4314 Uniforms 0.00 91.09 4,710.00 3,961.00 3,961.00 84.102201-4315 Membership 0.00 749.00 55,800.00 33,555.49 33,555.49 60.142201-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 22,244.51 38,917.00 8,676.14 8,676.14 22.292201-4350 Safety Gear 0.00 30,240.86 39,896.00 33,300.36 33,300.36 83.472201-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 6,595.64 4,325.00 3,600.00 3,600.00 83.242201-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 725.00 244,888.00 204,070.00 204,070.00 83.332201-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 40,818.00 16Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 17 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Fire2201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 587,760.00 489,800.00 489,800.00 83.332201-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 97,960.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 1,049,930.00 818,308.79 818,308.79 21.80 231,599.41 77.94 2201-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2201-5400 Equipment/Furniture 19,850.00 3,934.29 3,934.29 19.822201-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 15,915.71 23,820.00 9,023.26 9,023.26 77.012201-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 9,321.16 5,475.58 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 15,846.06 15,846.06 10,249.89 101,533.05 20.45 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 4,051,801.25 4,051,801.25 27,182.99 1,509,063.76 72.99 17Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 18 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Sewers/Storm Drains3102 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3102-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total Sewers/Storm Drains 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 19 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Street Maint/Traffic Safety3104 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3104-4100 Personal Services 287,492.00 228,997.03 228,997.03 79.653104-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 58,494.97 6,000.00 11,150.27 11,150.27 185.843104-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 -5,150.27 11,663.00 11,263.54 11,263.54 96.573104-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 399.46 57,684.00 45,351.41 45,351.41 78.623104-4180 Retirement 0.00 12,332.59 72,698.00 56,171.50 56,171.50 77.273104-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 16,526.50 1,470.00 1,298.76 1,298.76 88.353104-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 171.24 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 467,994.00 372,306.51 372,306.51 0.00 95,687.49 79.55 3104-4200 Contract Services 324,043.00 116,076.40 116,076.40 58.193104-4201 Contract Serv/Private 72,483.47 135,483.13 2,657.00 3,746.66 3,746.66 244.603104-4251 Contract Service/Govt 2,752.35 -3,842.01 Total Contract Services 326,700.00 119,823.06 119,823.06 75,235.82 131,641.12 59.71 3104-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 7,066.00 5,160.43 5,160.43 73.033104-4303 Utilities 0.00 1,905.57 60,238.00 50,362.42 50,362.42 83.613104-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 9,875.58 666.00 550.00 550.00 82.583104-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 116.00 50,391.00 41,990.00 41,990.00 83.333104-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 8,401.00 210,705.00 175,590.00 175,590.00 83.333104-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 35,115.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 329,066.00 273,652.85 273,652.85 0.00 55,413.15 83.16 3104-5400 Equipment/Furniture Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Street Maint/Traffic Safety 1,123,760.00 765,782.42 765,782.42 75,235.82 282,741.76 74.84 19Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 20 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Downtown Enhancement3301 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3301-4100 Personal Services 41,591.00 39,270.09 39,270.09 94.423301-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 2,320.91 1,200.00 124.49 124.49 10.373301-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 1,075.51 3,187.00 5,647.48 5,647.48 177.203301-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 -2,460.48 8,169.00 7,371.69 7,371.69 90.243301-4180 Retirement 0.00 797.31 9,198.00 6,495.66 6,495.66 70.623301-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 2,702.34 514.00 594.53 594.53 115.673301-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 -80.53 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 61,169.94 61,169.94 0.00 5,548.06 91.68 3301-4200 Contract Services 163,869.00 73,951.93 73,951.93 82.963301-4201 Contract Serv/Private 61,999.22 27,917.85 Total Contract Services 163,869.00 73,951.93 73,951.93 61,999.22 27,917.85 82.96 3301-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 304.00 248.25 248.25 81.663301-4303 Utilities 0.00 55.75 4.00 1,100.00 1,100.00 27,500.003301-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 -1,096.00 221.00 180.00 180.00 81.453301-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 41.00 468.00 390.00 390.00 83.333301-4395 Equip Replacement Chrgs 0.00 78.00 22,150.00 18,460.00 18,460.00 83.343301-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 3,690.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 23,147.00 20,378.25 20,378.25 0.00 2,768.75 88.04 3301-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 268,544.00 155,500.12 155,500.12 61,999.22 51,044.66 80.99 20Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 21 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Community Services3302 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3302-4100 Personal Services 833,142.00 716,857.49 716,857.49 86.043302-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 116,284.51 30,000.00 15,925.71 15,925.71 53.093302-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 14,074.29 50,839.00 45,612.84 45,612.84 89.723302-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 5,226.16 80,175.00 8,658.31 8,658.31 10.803302-4112 Part Time Temporary 0.00 71,516.69 5,300.00 6,120.96 6,120.96 115.493302-4117 Shift Differential 0.00 -820.96 600.00 0.00 0.00 0.003302-4118 Field Training Officer 0.00 600.00 218,622.00 181,271.22 181,271.22 82.923302-4180 Retirement 0.00 37,350.78 264.00 147.26 147.26 55.783302-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 116.74 5,400.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 94.443302-4187 Uniform Allowance 0.00 300.00 225,907.00 181,272.28 181,272.28 80.243302-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 44,634.72 12,221.00 10,855.66 10,855.66 88.833302-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 1,365.34 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 1,224,342.73 1,224,342.73 0.00 328,167.27 78.86 3302-4200 Contract Services 53,998.00 51,973.15 51,973.15 96.253302-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 2,024.85 69,442.00 66,087.38 66,087.38 95.173302-4251 Contract Services/Govt 0.00 3,354.62 Total Contract Services 123,440.00 118,060.53 118,060.53 0.00 5,379.47 95.64 3302-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,500.00 4,110.64 4,110.64 117.453302-4304 Telephone 0.00 -610.64 16,500.00 12,122.65 12,122.65 73.473302-4305 Office Operating Supplies 0.00 4,377.35 1,000.00 393.00 393.00 39.303302-4307 Radio Maintenance 0.00 607.00 14,800.00 6,299.88 6,299.88 42.573302-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 8,500.12 5,000.00 1,428.11 1,428.11 28.563302-4314 Uniforms 0.00 3,571.89 405.00 270.00 270.00 66.673302-4315 Membership 0.00 135.00 1,918.00 108.73 108.73 5.673302-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 1,809.27 76,784.00 63,990.00 63,990.00 83.343302-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 12,794.00 7,088.00 5,910.00 5,910.00 83.383302-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 1,178.00 97,659.00 81,380.00 81,380.00 83.333302-4395 Equip Replacement Chrgs 0.00 16,279.00 21Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 22 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Community Services3302 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 219,992.00 183,330.00 183,330.00 83.333302-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 36,662.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 444,646.00 359,343.01 359,343.01 0.00 85,302.99 80.82 3302-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3302-5400 Equipment/Furniture 29,273.00 1,846.51 1,846.51 6.313302-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 27,426.49 Total Equipment/Furniture 29,273.00 1,846.51 1,846.51 0.00 27,426.49 6.31 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 1,703,592.78 1,703,592.78 0.00 446,276.22 79.24 22Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 23 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 93,427.91 93,427.91 88.063304-4201 Contract Serv/Private 7,969.36 13,747.73 225.00 0.00 0.00 0.003304-4251 Contract Services/Gov't 0.00 225.00 Total Contract Services 115,370.00 93,427.91 93,427.91 7,969.36 13,972.73 87.89 3304-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 22,084.00 13,583.72 13,583.72 61.513304-4303 Utilities 0.00 8,500.28 543.00 460.96 460.96 84.893304-4304 Telephone 0.00 82.04 4,500.00 1,597.59 1,597.59 35.503304-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 2,902.41 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 27,127.00 15,642.27 15,642.27 0.00 11,484.73 57.66 3304-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total North Pier Parking Structure 142,497.00 109,070.18 109,070.18 7,969.36 25,457.46 82.13 23Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 24 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 33,672.30 33,672.30 76.343305-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 10,433.70 Total Contract Services 44,106.00 33,672.30 33,672.30 0.00 10,433.70 76.34 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 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Downtown Parking Lot A 46,106.00 33,672.30 33,672.30 0.00 12,433.70 73.03 24Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 25 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 26 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Community Dev/Planning4101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4101-4100 Personal Services 373,034.00 310,322.17 310,322.17 83.194101-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 62,711.83 14,001.00 8,244.89 8,244.89 58.894101-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 5,756.11 88,948.00 52,387.52 52,387.52 58.904101-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 36,560.48 81,694.00 65,385.12 65,385.12 80.044101-4180 Retirement 0.00 16,308.88 70.00 28.44 28.44 40.634101-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 41.56 70,111.00 55,953.65 55,953.65 79.814101-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 14,157.35 6,362.00 5,598.20 5,598.20 87.994101-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 763.80 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 665,522.00 516,182.99 516,182.99 0.00 149,339.01 77.56 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 1,052.23 1,052.23 80.944101-4304 Telephone 0.00 247.77 4,500.00 1,591.75 1,591.75 35.374101-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 2,908.25 1,773.00 1,683.00 1,683.00 94.924101-4315 Membership 0.00 90.00 4,000.00 449.60 449.60 11.244101-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 3,550.40 12,743.00 10,620.00 10,620.00 83.344101-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 2,123.00 2,234.00 1,860.00 1,860.00 83.264101-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 374.00 27,834.00 23,200.00 23,200.00 83.354101-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 4,634.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 54,384.00 40,456.58 40,456.58 0.00 13,927.42 74.39 Total Community Dev/Planning 757,253.00 577,957.07 577,957.07 10,913.00 168,382.93 77.76 26Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 27 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 20,459.50 20,459.50 12.034104-4201 Contract Serv/Private 6,000.00 193,540.50 Total Contract Services 220,000.00 20,459.50 20,459.50 6,000.00 193,540.50 12.03 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 220,000.00 20,459.50 20,459.50 6,000.00 193,540.50 12.03 27Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 28 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Community Dev/Building4201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4201-4100 Personal Services 291,071.00 207,996.29 207,996.29 71.464201-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 83,074.71 10,804.00 14,046.82 14,046.82 130.014201-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 -3,242.82 31,136.00 21,363.91 21,363.91 68.614201-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 9,772.09 58,260.00 41,171.57 41,171.57 70.674201-4180 Retirement 0.00 17,088.43 85.00 0.00 0.00 0.004201-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 85.00 44,360.00 34,445.63 34,445.63 77.654201-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 9,914.37 4,279.00 3,638.96 3,638.96 85.044201-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 640.04 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 471,922.00 341,290.18 341,290.18 0.00 130,631.82 72.32 4201-4200 Contract Services 90,425.00 73,828.91 73,828.91 101.504201-4201 Contract Serv/Private 17,950.00 -1,353.91 Total Contract Services 90,425.00 73,828.91 73,828.91 17,950.00 -1,353.91 101.50 4201-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 4,000.00 3,167.93 3,167.93 79.204201-4304 Telephone 0.00 832.07 4,000.00 2,158.28 2,158.28 53.964201-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 1,841.72 1,300.00 690.00 690.00 53.084201-4315 Membership 0.00 610.00 3,100.00 2,462.92 2,462.92 79.454201-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 637.08 17,632.00 14,690.00 14,690.00 83.314201-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 2,942.00 1,409.00 1,170.00 1,170.00 83.044201-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 239.00 19,704.00 16,420.00 16,420.00 83.334201-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 3,284.00 36,567.00 30,470.00 30,470.00 83.334201-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 6,097.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 87,712.00 71,229.13 71,229.13 0.00 16,482.87 81.21 4201-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 29 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Community Dev/Building4201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number Total Community Dev/Building 650,059.00 486,348.22 486,348.22 17,950.00 145,760.78 77.58 29Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 30 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Public Works Administration4202 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4202-4100 Personal Services 332,313.00 235,888.59 235,888.59 70.984202-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 96,424.41 15,170.00 13,804.35 13,804.35 91.004202-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 1,365.65 26,238.00 5,723.56 5,723.56 21.814202-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 20,514.44 62,578.00 42,872.50 42,872.50 68.514202-4180 Retirement 0.00 19,705.50 55,337.00 37,792.80 37,792.80 68.304202-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 17,544.20 5,860.00 4,035.41 4,035.41 68.864202-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 1,824.59 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 523,670.00 355,384.21 355,384.21 0.00 168,285.79 67.86 4202-4200 Contract Services 97,295.00 22,217.36 22,217.36 25.974202-4201 Contract Serv/Private 3,047.50 72,030.14 Total Contract Services 97,295.00 22,217.36 22,217.36 3,047.50 72,030.14 25.97 4202-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 12,614.00 7,935.35 7,935.35 62.914202-4304 Telephone 0.00 4,678.65 6,640.00 6,391.58 6,391.58 96.264202-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 248.42 6,678.00 1,508.65 1,508.65 23.904202-4314 Uniforms 87.12 5,082.23 950.00 985.00 985.00 103.684202-4315 Membership 0.00 -35.00 10,167.00 3,457.04 3,457.04 34.004202-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 6,709.96 70,847.00 59,040.00 59,040.00 83.334202-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 11,807.00 6,478.00 5,400.00 5,400.00 83.364202-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 1,078.00 22,580.00 18,820.00 18,820.00 83.354202-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 3,760.00 55,169.00 45,970.00 45,970.00 83.334202-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 9,199.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 192,123.00 149,507.62 149,507.62 87.12 42,528.26 77.86 4202-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 31 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 813,088.00 527,109.19 527,109.19 3,134.62 282,844.19 65.21 31Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 32 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Building Maintenance4204 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4204-4100 Personal Services 179,428.00 147,477.48 147,477.48 82.194204-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 31,950.52 9,000.00 10,181.98 10,181.98 113.134204-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 -1,181.98 7,480.00 14,229.29 14,229.29 190.234204-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 -6,749.29 0.00 34,091.15 34,091.15 0.004204-4112 Part Time Temporary 0.00 -34,091.15 34,008.00 31,813.86 31,813.86 93.554204-4180 Retirement 0.00 2,194.14 0.00 353.44 353.44 0.004204-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 -353.44 61,287.00 46,478.80 46,478.80 75.844204-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 14,808.20 2,623.00 3,153.60 3,153.60 120.234204-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 -530.60 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 308,321.00 296,235.60 296,235.60 0.00 12,085.40 96.08 4204-4200 Contract Services 149,343.00 97,498.69 97,498.69 97.584204-4201 Contract Serv/Private 48,226.00 3,618.31 225.00 0.00 0.00 0.004204-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 225.00 Total Contract Services 149,568.00 97,498.69 97,498.69 48,226.00 3,843.31 97.43 4204-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 149,951.00 103,364.73 103,364.73 68.934204-4303 Utilities 0.00 46,586.27 34,652.00 23,589.27 23,589.27 68.074204-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 11,062.73 6,000.00 2,863.48 2,863.48 47.724204-4321 Building Sfty/Security 0.00 3,136.52 22,723.00 18,940.00 18,940.00 83.354204-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 3,783.00 667.00 560.00 560.00 83.964204-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 107.00 12,063.00 10,050.00 10,050.00 83.314204-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 2,013.00 49,457.00 41,210.00 41,210.00 83.324204-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 8,247.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 275,513.00 200,577.48 200,577.48 0.00 74,935.52 72.80 4204-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4204-5400 Equipment/Furniture 32Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 33 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 733,402.00 594,311.77 594,311.77 48,226.00 90,864.23 87.61 33Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 34 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,909.00 1,908.87 1,908.87 99.994401-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 0.13 Total Contract Services 1,909.00 1,908.87 1,908.87 0.00 0.13 99.99 4401-4400 Grants Total Grants 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Affordable Hous/Marineland Mobile H Loan 1,909.00 1,908.87 1,908.87 0.00 0.13 99.99 34Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 35 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Affordable Hous/Marineland Mobil / Grant4402 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4402-4200 Contract Services 111,831.00 111,831.00 111,831.00 100.004402-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 0.00 Total Affordable Hous/Marineland Mobil / Grant 111,831.00 111,831.00 111,831.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 35Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 36 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Community Resources4601 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4601-4100 Personal Services 246,448.00 150,418.09 150,418.09 61.034601-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 96,029.91 3,000.00 763.46 763.46 25.454601-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 2,236.54 8,503.00 3,073.39 3,073.39 36.144601-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 5,429.61 298,706.00 197,086.83 197,086.83 65.984601-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 101,619.17 46,188.00 42,595.24 42,595.24 92.224601-4180 Retirement 0.00 3,592.76 2,226.00 898.49 898.49 40.364601-4185 Alternative Retirement System-Parttime 0.00 1,327.51 39,210.00 28,054.85 28,054.85 71.554601-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 11,155.15 4,290.00 5,253.51 5,253.51 122.464601-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 -963.51 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 669,990.00 440,638.86 440,638.86 0.00 229,351.14 65.77 4601-4200 Contract Services 56,734.00 30,077.66 30,077.66 53.024601-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 26,656.34 231,000.00 214,628.76 214,628.76 92.914601-4221 Contract Rec Classes/Programs 0.00 16,371.24 Total Contract Services 287,734.00 244,706.42 244,706.42 0.00 43,027.58 85.05 4601-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 10,000.00 4,824.48 4,824.48 48.244601-4302 Advertising 0.00 5,175.52 5,000.00 3,332.35 3,332.35 66.654601-4304 Telephone 0.00 1,667.65 13,000.00 11,086.23 11,086.23 85.284601-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 1,913.77 20,525.00 10,411.28 10,411.28 50.724601-4308 Program Materials 0.00 10,113.72 2,000.00 1,290.00 1,290.00 64.504601-4315 Membership 0.00 710.00 17,000.00 1,425.96 1,425.96 8.394601-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 15,574.04 6,000.00 5,045.36 5,045.36 84.094601-4328 Hermosa Senior Center Programs 0.00 954.64 35,350.00 29,460.00 29,460.00 83.344601-4390 Communications Equipment Chrgs 0.00 5,890.00 35,235.00 29,360.00 29,360.00 83.334601-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 5,875.00 19,484.00 16,240.00 16,240.00 83.354601-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 3,244.00 79,674.00 66,400.00 66,400.00 83.344601-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 13,274.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 243,268.00 178,875.66 178,875.66 0.00 64,392.34 73.53 36Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 37 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Community Resources4601 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4601-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4601-5400 Equipment/Furniture 1,000.00 504.33 504.33 50.434601-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 495.67 Total Equipment/Furniture 1,000.00 504.33 504.33 0.00 495.67 50.43 4601-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Community Resources 1,201,992.00 864,725.27 864,725.27 0.00 337,266.73 71.94 37Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 38 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Parks6101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 6101-4100 Personal Services 124,444.00 105,307.78 105,307.78 84.626101-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 19,136.22 500.00 0.00 0.00 0.006101-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 500.00 8,725.00 8,329.73 8,329.73 95.476101-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 395.27 21,561.00 16,965.70 16,965.70 78.696101-4180 Retirement 0.00 4,595.30 26,173.00 12,794.59 12,794.59 48.886101-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 13,378.41 887.00 847.50 847.50 95.556101-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 39.50 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 194,812.00 151,553.30 151,553.30 0.00 43,258.70 77.79 6101-4200 Contract Services 304,647.00 163,893.51 163,893.51 80.606101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 81,639.77 59,113.72 160.00 0.00 0.00 0.006101-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 160.00 Total Contract Services 304,807.00 163,893.51 163,893.51 81,639.77 59,273.72 80.55 6101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 191,226.00 144,307.39 144,307.39 75.466101-4303 Utilities 0.00 46,918.61 0.00 54.61 54.61 0.006101-4304 Telephone 0.00 -54.61 27,658.00 20,502.61 20,502.61 74.136101-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 7,155.39 21,867.00 18,220.00 18,220.00 83.326101-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 3,647.00 27,621.00 23,020.00 23,020.00 83.346101-4395 Equip Replacement Chrgs 0.00 4,601.00 55,943.00 46,620.00 46,620.00 83.336101-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 9,323.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 324,315.00 252,724.61 252,724.61 0.00 71,590.39 77.93 6101-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6101-5400 Equipment/Furniture 0.00 1,614.30 1,614.30 0.006101-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 -1,614.30 Total Equipment/Furniture 0.00 1,614.30 1,614.30 0.00 -1,614.30 0.00 38Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 39 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Parks6101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 6101-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Parks 823,934.00 569,785.72 569,785.72 81,639.77 172,508.51 79.06 39Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 40 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 70,350.00 70,350.00 18.398127-4201 Contract Serv/Private 8,811.00 351,362.00 Total Citywide St Impr/Various Locations 430,523.00 70,350.00 70,350.00 8,811.00 351,362.00 18.39 40Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 41 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Str Improvements/Various Locations8128 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8128-4200 Contract Services Total Str Improvements/Various Locations 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 42 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 42Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 43 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 43Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 44 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 21st St Improv/PCH & Ardmore8163 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8163-4200 Contract Services Total 21st St Improv/PCH & Ardmore 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 44Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 45 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Pipeline Replace 603-6108402 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8402-4200 Contract Services Total Pipeline Replace 603-610 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 46 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 South Park Phase I Improvements8537 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8537-4200 Contract Services 210,890.00 0.00 0.00 0.008537-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 210,890.00 Total South Park Phase I Improvements 210,890.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 210,890.00 0.00 46Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 47 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Citywide Park Master Plan8538 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8538-4200 Contract Services Total Citywide Park Master Plan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 48 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 *** Title Not Found ***8541 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8541-4200 Contract Services Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 49 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 49Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 50 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 29,547.23 29,547.23 56.048606-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 23,179.77 Total Fire Station Renovation & Upgrades 52,727.00 29,547.23 29,547.23 0.00 23,179.77 56.04 50Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 51 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Civic Center Strategic Plan8609 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8609-4200 Contract Services 198,632.00 115,642.00 115,642.00 75.528609-4201 Contract Serv/Private 34,358.00 48,632.00 Total Civic Center Strategic Plan 198,632.00 115,642.00 115,642.00 34,358.00 48,632.00 75.52 51Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 52 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 43,834.00 43,834.00 142.158613-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 -12,998.00 Total City Yard Roof 30,836.00 43,834.00 43,834.00 0.00 -12,998.00 142.15 52Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 53 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 *** Title Not Found ***8614 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8614-4200 Contract Services Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 53Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 54 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 18,488.55 18,488.55 26.418619-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 51,511.45 Total Police Facility Improvements 70,000.00 18,488.55 18,488.55 0.00 51,511.45 26.41 54Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 55 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 55Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 56 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Clark Building Refurbishment8632 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8632-4200 Contract Services Total Clark Building Refurbishment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 56Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 57 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Community Center Gen Improvements Ph. II8649 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8649-4200 Contract Services Total Community Center Gen Improvements Ph. II 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 58 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Lot A Trash Enclosure8651 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8651-4200 Contract Services 93,939.00 37,705.95 37,705.95 55.188651-4201 Contract Serv/Private 14,129.50 42,103.55 Total Lot A Trash Enclosure 93,939.00 37,705.95 37,705.95 14,129.50 42,103.55 55.18 58Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 59 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 City Fac. ADA Transition Plan & Improv.8655 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8655-4200 Contract Services Total City Fac. ADA Transition Plan & Improv. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 59Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 60 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 60Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 61 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 61Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 62 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 62Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 63 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 63Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 64 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 30,762.00 30,762.00 93.328663-4201 Contract Serv/Private 34,180.00 4,650.00 Total Parking Structure Repairs 69,592.00 30,762.00 30,762.00 34,180.00 4,650.00 93.32 64Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 65 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 34,242,864.00 24,482,928.14 24,482,928.14 532,641.25 9,227,294.61 73.05 65Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 66 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 7,010.00 7,010.00 83.311299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 1,404.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 8,414.00 7,010.00 7,010.00 0.00 1,404.00 83.31 66Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 67 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 71,707.48 71,707.48 74.282601-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 24,835.52 1,000.00 1,353.29 1,353.29 135.332601-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 -353.29 5,065.00 6,189.33 6,189.33 122.202601-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 -1,124.33 17,295.00 14,333.49 14,333.49 82.882601-4180 Retirement 0.00 2,961.51 31,565.00 18,027.00 18,027.00 57.112601-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 13,538.00 1,258.00 1,154.61 1,154.61 91.782601-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 103.39 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 161,184.00 117,700.20 117,700.20 0.00 43,483.80 73.02 2601-4200 Contract Services 44,492.00 20,956.00 20,956.00 99.502601-4201 Contract Serv/Private 23,314.00 222.00 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 32,620.86 32,620.86 23,314.00 9,050.14 86.07 2601-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 224,024.00 157,999.73 157,999.73 70.532601-4303 Utilities 0.00 66,024.27 28,300.00 28,538.30 28,538.30 100.842601-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 -238.30 667.00 560.00 560.00 83.962601-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 107.00 45,724.00 38,100.00 38,100.00 83.332601-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 7,624.00 31,002.00 25,840.00 25,840.00 83.352601-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 5,162.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 329,717.00 251,038.03 251,038.03 0.00 78,678.97 76.14 Total Lighting/Landscaping/Medians 555,886.00 401,359.09 401,359.09 23,314.00 131,212.91 76.40 Total Lightg/Landscapg Dist Fund 564,300.00 408,369.09 408,369.09 23,314.00 132,616.91 76.50 67Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 68 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 68Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 69 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 69Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 70 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 70Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 71 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 71Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 72 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 72Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 73 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 73Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 74 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 74Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 75 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 75Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 76 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 76Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 77 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 293,498.00 244,580.00 244,580.00 83.331299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 48,918.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 293,498.00 244,580.00 244,580.00 0.00 48,918.00 83.33 77Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 78 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 State Gas Tax Fund115 Street Maint/Traffic Safety3104 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 3104-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total Street Maint/Traffic Safety 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 78Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 79 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 18,663.43 18,663.43 88.248127-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 2,487.57 3,681.00 1,166.47 1,166.47 31.698127-4180 Retirement 0.00 2,514.53 7,797.00 1,538.07 1,538.07 19.738127-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 6,258.93 731.00 270.59 270.59 37.028127-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 460.41 Total Personal Services 33,360.00 21,638.56 21,638.56 0.00 11,721.44 64.86 8127-4200 Contract Services 713,614.00 423,996.90 423,996.90 59.428127-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 289,617.10 Total Contract Services 713,614.00 423,996.90 423,996.90 0.00 289,617.10 59.42 Total Citywide St Impr/Various Locations 746,974.00 445,635.46 445,635.46 0.00 301,338.54 59.66 79Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 80 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 State Gas Tax Fund115 Str Improvements/Various Locations8128 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8128-4200 Contract Services Total Str Improvements/Various Locations 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 81 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 81Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 82 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 12,915.80 12,915.80 38.248143-4201 Contract Serv/Private 5,996.04 30,543.16 Total PCH-Aviation Beautification Project 49,455.00 12,915.80 12,915.80 5,996.04 30,543.16 38.24 Total State Gas Tax Fund 1,089,927.00 703,131.26 703,131.26 5,996.04 380,799.70 65.06 82Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 83 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 40,684.49 40,684.49 142.945301-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 -12,221.49 5,279.00 2,685.85 2,685.85 50.885301-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 2,593.15 7,872.00 6,483.27 6,483.27 82.365301-4180 Retirement 0.00 1,388.73 6,988.00 5,399.02 5,399.02 77.265301-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 1,588.98 733.00 647.76 647.76 88.375301-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 85.24 Total Personal Services 49,335.00 55,900.39 55,900.39 0.00 -6,565.39 113.31 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 76,312.57 76,312.57 0.00 -1,077.57 101.43 83Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 84 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 17,130.00 17,130.00 83.331299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 3,427.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 20,557.00 17,130.00 17,130.00 0.00 3,427.00 83.33 84Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 85 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 15,912.60 15,912.60 10.758537-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 132,087.40 Total South Park Phase I Improvements 148,000.00 15,912.60 15,912.60 0.00 132,087.40 10.75 85Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 86 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 86Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 87 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 87Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 88 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 38,665.77 38,665.77 0.00 133,245.23 22.49 88Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 89 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 89Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 90 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Tyco Fund122 Sewer Improvements- Various Locations8402 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8402-4200 Contract Services Total Sewer Improvements- Various Locations 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 90Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 91 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 13,568.71 13,568.71 29.178631-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 32,952.29 Total 14Th. St. Beach Restroom Rehabilitation 46,521.00 13,568.71 13,568.71 0.00 32,952.29 29.17 91Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 92 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 92Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 93 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Tyco Fund122 City Fac. ADA Transition Plan & Improv.8655 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8655-4200 Contract Services Total City Fac. ADA Transition Plan & Improv. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 93Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 94 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 10,835.00 10,835.00 10.328659-4201 Contract Serv/Private 10,360.00 184,140.00 Total Municipal Pier Structural Repairs Ph.II 205,335.00 10,835.00 10,835.00 10,360.00 184,140.00 10.32 Total Tyco Fund 251,856.00 24,403.71 24,403.71 10,360.00 217,092.29 13.80 94Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 95 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 14Th. St. Beach Restroom Rehabilitation 3,545.00 3,229.36 3,229.36 0.00 315.64 91.10 95Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 96 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Tyco Tidelands123 Municipal Pier Structural Repairs Ph.II8659 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8659-4200 Contract Services Total Municipal Pier Structural Repairs Ph.II 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Tyco Tidelands 3,545.00 3,229.36 3,229.36 0.00 315.64 91.10 96Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 97 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 97Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 98 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 98Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 99 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 South Park Playground Improvement8537 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8537-4200 Contract Services 28,030.00 0.00 0.00 0.008537-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 28,030.00 Total South Park Playground Improvement 28,030.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28,030.00 0.00 99Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 100 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,555.33 1,555.33 27.908538-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 4,018.67 307.00 97.23 97.23 31.678538-4180 Retirement 0.00 209.77 650.00 128.19 128.19 19.728538-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 521.81 61.00 22.55 22.55 36.978538-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 38.45 Total Personal Services 6,592.00 1,803.30 1,803.30 0.00 4,788.70 27.36 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 1,803.30 1,803.30 0.00 65,049.70 2.70 100Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 101 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 *** Title Not Found ***8539 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8539-4200 Contract Services Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 101Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 102 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund125 *** Title Not Found ***8541 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8541-4200 Contract Services Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 102Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 103 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 103Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 104 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 3,110.49 3,110.49 37.168649-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 5,259.51 614.00 194.39 194.39 31.668649-4180 Retirement 0.00 419.61 1,300.00 256.36 256.36 19.728649-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 1,043.64 122.00 45.08 45.08 36.958649-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 76.92 Total Personal Services 10,406.00 3,606.32 3,606.32 0.00 6,799.68 34.66 8649-4200 Contract Services 75,377.00 0.00 0.00 0.008649-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 75,377.00 Total Contract Services 75,377.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 75,377.00 0.00 Total Comm Ctr General Improvements 85,783.00 3,606.32 3,606.32 0.00 82,176.68 4.20 104Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 105 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 105Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 106 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 5,409.62 5,409.62 940.00 282,829.38 2.20 106Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 107 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 107Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 108 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,270.00 2,270.00 83.521299-4399 Operating Trsfr Out 0.00 448.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 2,718.00 2,270.00 2,270.00 0.00 448.00 83.52 Total Bayview Dr Dist Admin Exp Fund 4,608.00 3,380.57 3,380.57 0.00 1,227.43 73.36 108Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 109 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 109Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 110 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,142.00 950.00 950.00 83.191299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 192.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 1,142.00 950.00 950.00 0.00 192.00 83.19 Total Lower Pier Admin Exp Fund 2,867.00 1,921.82 1,921.82 0.00 945.18 67.03 110Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 111 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 111Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 112 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,760.00 2,760.00 83.381299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 550.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 3,310.00 2,760.00 2,760.00 0.00 550.00 83.38 Total Myrtle Dist Admin Exp Fund 11,935.00 7,742.83 7,742.83 0.00 4,192.17 64.87 112Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 113 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 113Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 114 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 3,150.00 3,150.00 83.271299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 633.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 3,783.00 3,150.00 3,150.00 0.00 633.00 83.27 Total Loma Dist Admin Exp Fund 11,533.00 8,348.29 8,348.29 0.00 3,184.71 72.39 114Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 115 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 115Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 116 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,155.00 960.00 960.00 83.121299-4399 Operating Transfers Out 0.00 195.00 Total Interfund Transfers Out 1,155.00 960.00 960.00 0.00 195.00 83.12 Total Beach Dr Assmnt Dist Admin Exp Fund 3,110.00 2,130.76 2,130.76 0.00 979.24 68.51 116Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 117 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 117Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 118 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 118Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 119 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,108.00 1,108.00 33.583403-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 2,192.00 Total Bus Pass Subsidy 3,300.00 1,108.00 1,108.00 0.00 2,192.00 33.58 119Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 120 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 32,276.63 32,276.63 107.833404-4201 Contract Serv/Private 42,124.86 -5,401.49 Total Dial-A-Taxi Program 69,000.00 32,276.63 32,276.63 42,124.86 -5,401.49 107.83 120Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 121 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,714.86 1,714.86 124.273408-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 -334.86 Total Personal Services 1,380.00 1,714.86 1,714.86 0.00 -334.86 124.27 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 1,714.86 1,714.86 0.00 10,927.14 13.56 121Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 122 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 20,767.66 20,767.66 51.923409-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 19,232.34 Total Recreation Transportation 40,000.00 20,767.66 20,767.66 0.00 19,232.34 51.92 122Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 123 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 123Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 124 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 32,430.00 32,430.00 78.333411-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 8,970.00 Total After School Program Shuttle 41,400.00 32,430.00 32,430.00 0.00 8,970.00 78.33 124Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 125 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 3,378.50 3,378.50 35.683412-4251 Contract Services/Gov't 3,378.50 12,183.00 Total Beach Cities Transit Line 109 18,940.00 3,378.50 3,378.50 3,378.50 12,183.00 35.68 125Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 126 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 466,282.00 106,323.65 106,323.65 45,503.36 314,454.99 32.56 126Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 127 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 14,143.64 14,143.64 29.754208-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 33,403.36 Total Pavement Management Study 47,547.00 14,143.64 14,143.64 0.00 33,403.36 29.75 127Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 128 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 128Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 129 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 40,023.20 40,023.20 10.808143-4201 Contract Serv/Private 23,982.41 528,814.39 Total PCH-Aviation Beautification Project 592,820.00 40,023.20 40,023.20 23,982.41 528,814.39 10.80 Total Proposition C Fund 643,617.00 54,543.79 54,543.79 23,982.41 565,090.80 12.20 129Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 130 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 6,221.14 6,221.14 41.798127-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 8,663.86 1,227.00 388.78 388.78 31.698127-4180 Retirement 0.00 838.22 2,599.00 512.77 512.77 19.738127-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 2,086.23 244.00 90.23 90.23 36.988127-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 153.77 Total Personal Services 18,955.00 7,212.92 7,212.92 0.00 11,742.08 38.05 8127-4200 Contract Services 213,145.00 208,145.01 208,145.01 97.658127-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 4,999.99 Total Contract Services 213,145.00 208,145.01 208,145.01 0.00 4,999.99 97.65 Total Citywide St Impr/Various Locations 232,100.00 215,357.93 215,357.93 0.00 16,742.07 92.79 130Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 131 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Measure R Fund147 Str Improvements/Various Locations8128 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8128-4200 Contract Services Total Str Improvements/Various Locations 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 131Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 132 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 132Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 133 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 26,774.62 26,774.62 37.298160-4201 Contract Serv/Private 66,002.38 156,023.00 Total PCH Traffic Improvements 248,800.00 26,774.62 26,774.62 66,002.38 156,023.00 37.29 133Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 134 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 3,705.00 0.00 0.00 0.008179-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 3,705.00 Total Personal Services 3,705.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,705.00 0.00 8179-4200 Contract Services 2,070.00 2,069.70 2,069.70 99.998179-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 0.30 Total Contract Services 2,070.00 2,069.70 2,069.70 0.00 0.30 99.99 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 529,499.00 252,478.92 252,478.92 66,002.38 211,017.70 60.15 134Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 135 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 135Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 136 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Grants Fund150 ARRA Justice Assistance Grant (JAG)2112 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2112-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total ARRA Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 136Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 137 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 75,000.00 75,000.00 100.002201-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 0.00 0.00 Total Fire Department (OJP Equip Grant) 75,000.00 75,000.00 75,000.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 137Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 138 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 138Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 139 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 139Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 140 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 4,793.00 4,793.00 100.003102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 6,024.00 0.00 Total Beverage Recycle Grant 10,817.00 4,793.00 4,793.00 6,024.00 0.00 100.00 140Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 141 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Grants Fund150 Coastal Permit Auth Grant4104 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4104-4200 Contract Services 410,000.00 103,649.75 103,649.75 106.304104-4201 Contract Serv/Private 332,185.08 -25,834.83 Total Contract Services 410,000.00 103,649.75 103,649.75 332,185.08 -25,834.83 106.30 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 410,000.00 103,649.75 103,649.75 332,185.08 -25,834.83 106.30 141Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 142 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 142Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 143 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 143Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 144 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,555.33 1,555.33 41.808160-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 2,165.67 307.00 97.23 97.23 31.678160-4180 Retirement 0.00 209.77 650.00 128.19 128.19 19.728160-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 521.81 61.00 22.55 22.55 36.978160-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 38.45 Total Personal Services 4,739.00 1,803.30 1,803.30 0.00 2,935.70 38.05 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 1,803.30 1,803.30 0.00 98,196.70 1.80 144Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 145 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Grants Fund150 Hermosa Ave/27th To Boundary8168 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8168-4200 Contract Services Total Hermosa Ave/27th To Boundary 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 145Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 146 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 927.00 0.00 0.00 0.008179-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 927.00 Total Personal Services 927.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 927.00 0.00 8179-4200 Contract Services 19,957.30 19,957.30 19,957.30 100.008179-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 0.00 Total Contract Services 19,957.30 19,957.30 19,957.30 0.00 0.00 100.00 Total Herm View Elem Safe Rte to School Grant 20,884.30 19,957.30 19,957.30 0.00 927.00 95.56 146Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 147 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 147Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 148 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 148Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 149 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 795,707.30 205,203.35 205,203.35 338,209.08 252,294.87 68.29 149Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 150 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 *** Title Not Found *** Total Ofc of Traffic Sfty Grant Fund 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 150Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 151 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,410.00 1,410.00 39.173701-4327 AQMD Incentives 0.00 2,190.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 3,600.00 1,410.00 1,410.00 0.00 2,190.00 39.17 3701-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3701-5400 Equipment/Furniture 76,670.00 115,889.57 115,889.57 151.153701-5403 Vehicles 0.00 -39,219.57 Total Equipment/Furniture 76,670.00 115,889.57 115,889.57 0.00 -39,219.57 151.15 Total Emission Control 80,270.00 117,299.57 117,299.57 0.00 -37,029.57 146.13 151Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 152 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Air Quality Mgmt Dist Fund152 *** Title Not Found ***8615 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8615-4200 Contract Services Total *** Title Not Found *** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Air Quality Mgmt Dist Fund 80,270.00 117,299.57 117,299.57 0.00 -37,029.57 146.13 152Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 153 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 52,167.69 52,167.69 53.222106-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 45,861.31 Total Contract Services 98,029.00 52,167.69 52,167.69 0.00 45,861.31 53.22 2106-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2106-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 53,774.69 53,774.69 13,405.31 203,280.00 24.84 153Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 154 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 53,774.69 53,774.69 13,405.31 203,280.00 24.84 154Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 155 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 *** Title Not Found *** Total CA Law Enf Equip Prog Fund (CLEEP) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 155Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 156 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 82,676.10 82,676.10 54.303102-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 69,568.90 7,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.003102-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 7,000.00 9,671.00 7,000.34 7,000.34 72.383102-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 2,670.66 22,114.00 12,702.94 12,702.94 57.443102-4180 Retirement 0.00 9,411.06 46,518.00 15,023.56 15,023.56 32.303102-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 31,494.44 2,219.00 1,311.37 1,311.37 59.103102-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 907.63 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 254,153.00 127,107.31 127,107.31 0.00 127,045.69 50.01 3102-4200 Contract Services 473,290.00 189,398.96 189,398.96 49.493102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 44,808.79 239,082.25 27,845.00 26,694.00 26,694.00 95.873102-4251 Contract Service/Govt 0.00 1,151.00 Total Contract Services 501,135.00 216,092.96 216,092.96 44,808.79 240,233.25 52.06 3102-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 881.00 601.90 601.90 68.323102-4303 Utilities 0.00 279.10 19,000.00 965.76 965.76 5.083102-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 18,034.24 667.00 560.00 560.00 83.963102-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 0.00 107.00 51,575.00 42,980.00 42,980.00 83.333102-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 0.00 8,595.00 35,545.00 29,620.00 29,620.00 83.333102-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 5,925.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 107,668.00 74,727.66 74,727.66 0.00 32,940.34 69.41 3102-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 862,956.00 417,927.93 417,927.93 44,808.79 400,219.28 53.62 156Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 157 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,654.00 2,654.00 100.003105-4201 Contract Serv/Private 3,203.00 0.00 Total Used Oil Block Grant 5,857.00 2,654.00 2,654.00 3,203.00 0.00 100.00 157Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 158 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Sewer Fund160 Storwater Improvements8308 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8308-4200 Contract Services Total Storwater Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 158Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 159 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Sewer Fund160 Sewer Impr Various Locations 20128401 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8401-4200 Contract Services 826,676.00 348,672.49 348,672.49 46.538401-4201 Contract Serv/Private 35,987.39 442,016.12 Total Sewer Impr Various Locations 2012 826,676.00 348,672.49 348,672.49 35,987.39 442,016.12 46.53 159Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 160 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Sewer Fund160 Pipeline Replace 603-6108402 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8402-4200 Contract Services Total Pipeline Replace 603-610 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 160Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 161 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Sewer Fund160 Sewer Improvements 20068419 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8419-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total Sewer Improvements 2006 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 161Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 162 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Sewer Fund160 Storm Drain Impr/Various Locations8426 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8426-4200 Contract Services 160,202.00 129,653.15 129,653.15 93.838426-4201 Contract Serv/Private 20,663.00 9,885.85 Total Storm Drain Impr/Various Locations 160,202.00 129,653.15 129,653.15 20,663.00 9,885.85 93.83 Total Sewer Fund 1,855,691.00 898,907.57 898,907.57 104,662.18 852,121.25 54.08 162Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 163 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Asset Seizure/Forft Fund170 Special Investigations2103 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2103-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 163Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 164 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,679.52 1,679.52 67.182105-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 820.48 Total Contract Services 2,500.00 1,679.52 1,679.52 0.00 820.48 67.18 2105-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 1,200.00 846.52 846.52 70.542105-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 353.48 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 1,846.52 1,846.52 0.00 2,353.48 43.96 2105-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 21,256.41 21,256.41 0.002105-5403 Vehicles 0.00 -21,256.41 Total Equipment/Furniture 600.00 21,300.00 21,300.00 0.00 -20,700.00 3,550.00 Total Police K-9 Program 7,300.00 24,826.04 24,826.04 0.00 -17,526.04 340.08 Total Asset Seizure/Forft Fund 38,300.00 24,826.04 24,826.04 0.00 13,473.96 64.82 164Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 165 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Fire Protection Fund180 Fire Protection2202 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2202-4900 *** Title Not Found *** Total Fire Protection 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 165Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 166 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 166Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 167 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Fire Protection Fund180 Fire Sta Upstairs Remodel/Addn8610 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8610-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 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 167Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 168 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 168Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 169 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 169Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 170 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 467,989.00 442,325.43 442,325.43 94.528127-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 25,663.57 Total Citywide St Impr/Various Locations 467,989.00 442,325.43 442,325.43 0.00 25,663.57 94.52 170Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 171 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Capital Improvement Fund301 Street Improvements- Various Locations8128 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8128-4200 Contract Services Total Street Improvements- Various Locations 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 171Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 172 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 20,224.09 20,224.09 48.048141-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 21,876.91 Total Gould Avenue Street Improvements 42,101.00 20,224.09 20,224.09 0.00 21,876.91 48.04 172Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 173 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 194,189.00 12,030.00 12,030.00 20.188401-4201 Contract Serv/Private 27,157.90 155,001.10 Total Sewer Impr Various Locations 2012 194,189.00 12,030.00 12,030.00 27,157.90 155,001.10 20.18 173Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 174 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Capital Improvement Fund301 Pipeline Replace 603-6108402 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8402-4200 Contract Services Total Pipeline Replace 603-610 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 174Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 175 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 175Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 176 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 Total Storm Drain Impr/Various Locations 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 176Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 177 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 795,381.00 508,549.52 508,549.52 45,142.90 241,688.58 69.61 177Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 178 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 178Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 179 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Insurance Fund705 Liability Insurance1209 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1209-4100 Personal Services 33,251.00 27,932.18 27,932.18 84.001209-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 5,318.82 447.00 86.19 86.19 19.281209-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 360.81 5,228.00 4,380.88 4,380.88 83.801209-4180 Retirement 0.00 847.12 7,376.00 5,880.73 5,880.73 79.731209-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 1,495.27 496.00 436.32 436.32 87.971209-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 59.68 Total Personal Services 46,798.00 38,716.30 38,716.30 0.00 8,081.70 82.73 1209-4200 Contract Services 592,699.00 469,138.62 469,138.62 79.151209-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 123,560.38 Total Contract Services 592,699.00 469,138.62 469,138.62 0.00 123,560.38 79.15 1209-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 200.00 30.12 30.12 15.061209-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 169.88 360.00 0.00 0.00 0.001209-4315 Membership 0.00 360.00 600,000.00 217,271.55 217,271.55 36.211209-4324 Claims/Settlements 0.00 382,728.45 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 600,560.00 217,301.67 217,301.67 0.00 383,258.33 36.18 Total Liability Insurance 1,240,057.00 725,156.59 725,156.59 0.00 514,900.41 58.48 179Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 180 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 180Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 181 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Insurance Fund705 Unemployment1215 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1215-4100 Personal Services 10,000.00 14,116.54 14,116.54 141.171215-4186 Unemployment Claims 0.00 -4,116.54 Total Unemployment 10,000.00 14,116.54 14,116.54 0.00 -4,116.54 141.17 181Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 182 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Insurance Fund705 Workers' Compensation1217 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1217-4100 Personal Services 33,251.00 27,932.45 27,932.45 84.001217-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 5,318.55 302.00 86.19 86.19 28.541217-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 215.81 5,229.00 4,380.90 4,380.90 83.781217-4180 Retirement 0.00 848.10 7,377.00 5,881.09 5,881.09 79.721217-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 1,495.91 497.00 436.32 436.32 87.791217-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 60.68 Total Personal Services 46,656.00 38,716.95 38,716.95 0.00 7,939.05 82.98 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 11.45 11.45 11.451217-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 88.55 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.001217-4317 Conference/Training 0.00 1,000.00 1,200,000.00 688,461.86 688,461.86 57.371217-4324 Claims/Settlements 0.00 511,538.14 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 1,201,100.00 688,473.31 688,473.31 0.00 512,626.69 57.32 Total Workers' Compensation 1,431,302.00 925,118.26 925,118.26 0.00 506,183.74 64.63 182Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 183 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Insurance Fund705 Benefit & Cost Analysis/Oil Project4105 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4105-4200 Contract Services 125,000.00 124,916.95 124,916.95 99.934105-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 83.05 Total Benefit & Cost Analysis/Oil Project 125,000.00 124,916.95 124,916.95 0.00 83.05 99.93 183Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 184 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Insurance Fund705 Community Dialogue4106 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4106-4200 Contract Services 156,395.00 137,065.42 137,065.42 87.644106-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 19,329.58 Total Contract Services 156,395.00 137,065.42 137,065.42 0.00 19,329.58 87.64 4106-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other Total Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Community Dialogue 156,395.00 137,065.42 137,065.42 0.00 19,329.58 87.64 Total Insurance Fund 3,031,092.00 1,983,328.66 1,983,328.66 0.00 1,047,763.34 65.43 184Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 185 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Equipment Replacement Fund715 City Council1101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1101-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 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 *** Title Not Found *** 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 185Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 186 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 186Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 187 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 187Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 188 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Information Technology1206 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 1206-4200 Contract Services 599,081.00 280,332.10 280,332.10 73.501206-4201 Contract Serv/Private 160,017.50 158,731.40 Total Contract Services 599,081.00 280,332.10 280,332.10 160,017.50 158,731.40 73.50 1206-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 0.00 2,469.23 2,469.23 0.001206-4304 Telephone 0.00 -2,469.23 17,000.00 8,255.29 8,255.29 48.561206-4305 Office Oper Supplies 0.00 8,744.71 111.00 90.00 90.00 81.081206-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 21.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 17,111.00 10,814.52 10,814.52 0.00 6,296.48 63.20 1206-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 49,861.00 0.00 0.00 0.001206-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 49,861.00 Total *** Title Not Found *** 49,861.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49,861.00 0.00 1206-5400 Equipment/Furniture 70,515.00 28,821.31 28,821.31 40.871206-5401 Equip-Less Than $1,000 0.00 41,693.69 26,402.00 32,548.26 32,548.26 123.281206-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 -6,146.26 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 61,369.57 61,369.57 0.00 87,890.43 41.12 Total Information Technology 815,313.00 352,516.19 352,516.19 160,017.50 302,779.31 62.86 188Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 189 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,816.30 2,816.30 31.291208-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 6,183.70 Total Contract Services 9,000.00 2,816.30 2,816.30 0.00 6,183.70 31.29 1208-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 6,956.00 0.00 0.00 0.001208-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 6,956.00 Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 30,675.47 30,675.47 0.00 14,336.53 68.15 189Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 190 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Police2101 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2101-4200 Contract Services 26,442.00 24,824.43 24,824.43 97.442101-4201 Contract Serv/Private 941.50 676.07 Total Contract Services 26,442.00 24,824.43 24,824.43 941.50 676.07 97.44 2101-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 81,402.00 54,649.58 54,649.58 67.142101-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 26,752.42 60,000.00 28,787.19 28,787.19 49.462101-4311 Auto Maintenance 890.19 30,322.62 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 141,402.00 83,436.77 83,436.77 890.19 57,075.04 59.64 2101-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 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 *** Title Not Found *** 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 27,234.00 224,956.00 208,603.10 208,603.10 95.492101-5403 Vehicles 6,204.52 10,148.38 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 336,987.00 235,820.41 235,820.41 14,834.66 86,331.93 74.38 2101-5600 Buildings/Improvements Total Buildings/Improvements 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Police 713,584.00 344,081.61 344,081.61 16,666.35 352,836.04 50.55 190Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 191 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Fire2201 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 2201-4200 Contract Services 30,840.00 105.30 105.30 0.342201-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 30,734.70 Total Contract Services 30,840.00 105.30 105.30 0.00 30,734.70 0.34 2201-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 21,115.00 11,342.70 11,342.70 53.722201-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 9,772.30 63,479.00 8,318.60 8,318.60 13.102201-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 55,160.40 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 84,594.00 19,661.30 19,661.30 0.00 64,932.70 23.24 2201-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 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 *** Title Not Found *** 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 37,419.31 37,419.31 31.062201-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 0.00 83,073.69 Total Equipment/Furniture 814,843.00 587,394.31 587,394.31 0.00 227,448.69 72.09 Total Fire 1,030,635.00 607,160.91 607,160.91 0.00 423,474.09 58.91 191Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 192 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,929.37 2,929.37 43.722601-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 3,770.63 1,300.00 2,549.31 2,549.31 196.102601-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 -1,249.31 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 8,000.00 5,478.68 5,478.68 0.00 2,521.32 68.48 2601-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 12,811.00 0.00 0.00 0.002601-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 12,811.00 Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 54,094.32 54,094.32 0.00 32,561.68 62.42 192Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 193 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,135.56 1,135.56 19.493102-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 4,689.44 2,384.00 481.10 481.10 20.183102-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 1,902.90 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 9,209.00 1,616.66 1,616.66 0.00 7,592.34 17.56 3102-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 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 *** Title Not Found *** 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 51,379.39 51,379.39 0.00 63,096.61 44.88 193Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 194 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 4,348.80 4,348.80 45.683104-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 5,171.20 2,977.00 1,491.02 1,491.02 50.083104-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 1,485.98 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 12,497.00 5,839.82 5,839.82 0.00 6,657.18 46.73 3104-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 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 *** Title Not Found *** 19,309.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19,309.00 0.00 3104-5400 Equipment/Furniture 3,582.00 664.90 664.90 18.563104-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 2,917.10 7,319.00 0.00 0.00 0.003104-5405 Equipment more than $5,000 0.00 7,319.00 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 6,504.72 6,504.72 0.00 36,202.28 15.23 194Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 195 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 195Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 196 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 6,124.49 6,124.49 99.593302-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 25.51 Total Contract Services 6,150.00 6,124.49 6,124.49 0.00 25.51 99.59 3302-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 22,592.00 16,467.41 16,467.41 72.893302-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 6,124.59 8,000.00 4,662.16 4,662.16 58.283302-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 3,337.84 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 30,592.00 21,129.57 21,129.57 0.00 9,462.43 69.07 3302-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 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 *** Title Not Found *** 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 33,155.86 33,155.86 0.00 92,739.14 26.34 196Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 197 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,202.63 838.00 753.22 753.22 89.884201-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 84.78 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 3,643.00 1,355.59 1,355.59 0.00 2,287.41 37.21 4201-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 4,970.00 0.00 0.00 0.004201-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 4,970.00 Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 1,355.59 1,355.59 0.00 357,257.41 0.38 197Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 198 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,505.31 1,505.31 39.674202-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 2,289.69 7,904.00 748.65 748.65 9.474202-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 7,155.35 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 11,699.00 2,253.96 2,253.96 0.00 9,445.04 19.27 4202-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 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 *** Title Not Found *** 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 2,253.96 2,253.96 0.00 60,527.04 3.59 198Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 199 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 16,834.12 16,834.12 10.934204-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 137,165.88 Total Contract Services 154,000.00 16,834.12 16,834.12 0.00 137,165.88 10.93 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 *** Title Not Found *** 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 *** Title Not Found *** 4,236.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,236.00 0.00 4204-5400 Equipment/Furniture 165,730.00 1,950.00 1,950.00 1.184204-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0.00 163,780.00 Total Equipment/Furniture 165,730.00 1,950.00 1,950.00 0.00 163,780.00 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 19,373.53 19,373.53 0.00 318,889.47 5.73 199Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 200 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 83,806.80 83,806.80 68.304206-4102 Regular Salaries 0.00 38,897.20 3,000.00 989.87 989.87 33.004206-4106 Regular Overtime 0.00 2,010.13 5,571.00 1,992.15 1,992.15 35.764206-4111 Accrual Cash In 0.00 3,578.85 0.00 10,771.55 10,771.55 0.004206-4112 Part Time/Temporary 0.00 -10,771.55 22,554.00 13,579.70 13,579.70 60.214206-4180 Retirement 0.00 8,974.30 42,675.00 26,527.14 26,527.14 62.164206-4188 Employee Benefits 0.00 16,147.86 1,785.00 1,263.48 1,263.48 70.784206-4189 Medicare Benefits 0.00 521.52 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 211,584.00 146,686.69 146,686.69 0.00 64,897.31 69.33 4206-4200 Contract Services 6,900.00 3,126.29 3,126.29 45.314206-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 3,773.71 500.00 0.00 0.00 0.004206-4251 Contract Services/Govt 0.00 500.00 Total Contract Services 7,400.00 3,126.29 3,126.29 0.00 4,273.71 42.25 4206-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3,500.00 3,182.80 3,182.80 90.944206-4309 Maintenance Materials 0.00 317.20 2,300.00 1,380.81 1,380.81 60.044206-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 919.19 1,300.00 728.61 728.61 56.054206-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 571.39 34,484.00 28,740.00 28,740.00 83.344206-4396 Insurance User Charges 0.00 5,744.00 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 41,584.00 34,032.22 34,032.22 0.00 7,551.78 81.84 4206-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 791.00 0.00 0.00 0.004206-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 0.00 791.00 Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 261,359.00 183,845.20 183,845.20 0.00 77,513.80 70.34 200Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 201 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Community Resources4601 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 4601-4200 Contract Services 780.00 186.78 186.78 23.954601-4201 Contract Serv/Private 0.00 593.22 Total Contract Services 780.00 186.78 186.78 0.00 593.22 23.95 4601-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 2,200.00 1,312.39 1,312.39 59.654601-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 887.61 2,000.00 370.87 370.87 18.544601-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 1,629.13 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 4,200.00 1,683.26 1,683.26 0.00 2,516.74 40.08 4601-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 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 *** Title Not Found *** 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 11,676.85 11,676.85 0.00 6,500.15 64.24 201Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 202 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 3,796.20 3,796.20 94.916101-4310 Motor Fuels And Lubes 0.00 203.80 1,300.00 390.40 390.40 30.036101-4311 Auto Maintenance 0.00 909.60 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 5,300.00 4,186.60 4,186.60 0.00 1,113.40 78.99 6101-4900 *** Title Not Found *** 4,455.00 0.00 0.00 0.006101-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 0.00 4,455.00 Total *** Title Not Found *** 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 35,188.75 35,188.75 0.00 10,076.25 77.74 202Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 203 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 203Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 204 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 204Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 205 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Equipment Replacement Fund715 Citywide Energy Conservation Upgrades8656 Prct UsedBalance Year-to-date Encumbrances Year-to-date ExpendituresExpenditures Adjusted AppropriationAccount Number 8656-4200 Contract Services Total Citywide Energy Conservation Upgrades 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Equipment Replacement Fund 4,100,738.00 1,748,262.35 1,748,262.35 176,683.85 2,175,791.80 46.94 205Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 206 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 206Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 207 7:14AM Page:expstat.rpt Expenditure Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 49,417,327.30 31,732,832.36 31,732,832.36 67.02 1,386,842.76 16,297,652.18 207Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3101 Current Year Secured 10,128,092.00 8,751,537.73 8,751,537.73 1,376,554.27 86.41 3102 Current Year Unsecured 426,858.00 428,730.43 428,730.43 -1,872.43 100.44 3103 Prior Year Collections 200,000.00 122,126.38 122,126.38 77,873.62 61.06 3104 In-lieu Sales Tax 638,111.00 338,173.55 338,173.55 299,937.45 53.00 3106 Supplemental Roll SB813 126,481.00 150,119.76 150,119.76 -23,638.76 118.69 3107 Transfer Tax 250,960.00 214,326.00 214,326.00 36,634.00 85.40 3108 Sales Tax 1,914,335.00 1,509,105.24 1,509,105.24 405,229.76 78.83 3109 1/2 Cent Sales Tx Ext 192,175.00 133,241.02 133,241.02 58,933.98 69.33 3110 Time Warner Cable TV Franchise 160,364.00 70,628.40 70,628.40 89,735.60 44.04 3111 Electric Franchise 74,692.00 77,094.35 77,094.35 -2,402.35 103.22 3112 Gas Franchise 43,600.00 49,504.69 49,504.69 -5,904.69 113.54 3113 Refuse Franchise 205,000.00 174,685.76 174,685.76 30,314.24 85.21 3114 Transient Occupancy Tax 2,036,077.00 1,599,492.02 1,599,492.02 436,584.98 78.56 3115 Business License 1,000,000.00 652,029.61 652,029.61 347,970.39 65.20 3120 Utility User Tax 2,495,895.00 1,865,574.01 1,865,574.01 630,320.99 74.75 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 269,607.00 146,536.83 146,536.83 123,070.17 54.35 Total Taxes 78.09 22,082,824.00 17,244,071.78 17,244,071.78 4,838,752.22 3200 Licenses And Permits 3202 Dog Licenses 18,000.00 15,569.00 15,569.00 2,431.00 86.49 3204 Building Permits 368,744.00 383,142.50 383,142.50 -14,398.50 103.90 1Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3205 Electric Permits 72,210.00 54,137.32 54,137.32 18,072.68 74.97 3206 Plumbing Permits 63,000.00 61,682.00 61,682.00 1,318.00 97.91 3207 Occupancy Permits 16,244.00 13,706.00 13,706.00 2,538.00 84.38 3208 Grease Trap Permits 8,415.00 5,150.00 5,150.00 3,265.00 61.20 3209 Garage Sales 200.00 308.00 308.00 -108.00 154.00 3211 Banner Permits 6,660.00 5,592.00 5,592.00 1,068.00 83.96 3212 Animal/Fowl Permits 160.00 0.00 0.00 160.00 0.00 3213 Animal Redemption Fee 1,000.00 670.00 670.00 330.00 67.00 3214 Amplified Sound Permit 4,310.00 3,510.00 3,510.00 800.00 81.44 3215 Temporary Sign Permit 1,360.00 859.00 859.00 501.00 63.16 3217 Open Fire Permit 460.00 440.00 440.00 20.00 95.65 3218 Auto Repair Permit 3,400.00 0.00 0.00 3,400.00 0.00 3219 Newsrack Permits 1,305.00 1,120.00 1,120.00 185.00 85.82 3225 Taxicab Franchise Fees 176,000.00 20.00 20.00 175,980.00 0.01 3227 Mechanical Permits 30,068.00 23,608.80 23,608.80 6,459.20 78.52 3228 Concealed Weapons Permit 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 0.00 Total Licenses And Permits 73.80 771,736.00 569,514.62 569,514.62 202,221.38 3300 Fines & Forfeitures 3301 Municipal Court Fines 215,413.00 162,916.18 162,916.18 52,496.82 75.63 3302 Court Fines /Parking 2,383,128.00 2,345,672.98 2,345,672.98 37,455.02 98.43 3305 Administrative Fines 3,075.00 2,800.00 2,800.00 275.00 91.06 Total Fines & Forfeitures 96.53 2,601,616.00 2,511,389.16 2,511,389.16 90,226.84 2Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 66,179.34 66,179.34 35,569.66 65.04 3402 Rents & Concessions 1,395.00 1,029.00 1,029.00 366.00 73.76 3404 Community Center Leases 47,000.00 38,390.40 38,390.40 8,609.60 81.68 3405 Community Center Rentals 170,000.00 130,613.08 130,613.08 39,386.92 76.83 3406 Community Center Theatre 75,000.00 49,878.75 49,878.75 25,121.25 66.51 3411 Other Facilities 20,000.00 15,409.00 15,409.00 4,591.00 77.05 3412 Tennis Courts 18,000.00 14,028.75 14,028.75 3,971.25 77.94 3418 Special Events 120,000.00 82,668.00 82,668.00 37,332.00 68.89 3422 Beach/Plaza Promotions 20,000.00 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 100.00 3425 Ground Lease 35,816.00 29,847.00 29,847.00 5,969.00 83.33 3427 Cell Site License 33,184.00 34,757.39 34,757.39 -1,573.39 104.74 3428 Cell Site License - Verizon 9,600.00 0.00 0.00 9,600.00 0.00 3429 Inmate Phone Services 0.00 176.57 176.57 -176.57 0.00 3431 Storage Facility Operating Lease 180,000.00 165,000.00 165,000.00 15,000.00 91.67 3450 Investment Discount 1,607.00 1,334.10 1,334.10 272.90 83.02 3475 Investment Premium -5,402.00 -4,414.84 -4,414.84 -987.16 81.73 Total Use Of Money & Property 77.89 827,949.00 644,896.54 644,896.54 183,052.46 3500 Intergovernmental/State 3507 Highway Maintenance 3,100.00 775.06 775.06 2,324.94 25.00 3508 Mandated Costs 4,192.00 4,787.32 4,787.32 -595.32 114.20 3509 Homeowner Property Tax Relief 79,784.00 39,891.85 39,891.85 39,892.15 50.00 3Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3510 POST 15,000.00 4,157.48 4,157.48 10,842.52 27.72 3511 STC-Service Officer Training 7,162.00 5,376.25 5,376.25 1,785.75 75.07 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 53.09 119,289.00 63,325.74 63,325.74 55,963.26 3800 Current Service Charges 3801 Residential Inspection 31,185.00 32,042.00 32,042.00 -857.00 102.75 3802 Planning Sign Permit/Master Sign Program 16,120.00 11,616.50 11,616.50 4,503.50 72.06 3803 Negative Declaration 9,885.00 6,656.00 6,656.00 3,229.00 67.33 3804 General Plan Maintenance Fees 63,000.00 65,463.00 65,463.00 -2,463.00 103.91 3805 Amendment to Planning Entitlement 16,965.00 17,060.00 17,060.00 -95.00 100.56 3807 Refuse Lien Fees/Consolidated 0.00 21,820.40 21,820.40 -21,820.40 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 26,985.00 26,985.00 9,040.00 74.91 3810 Final Map Review 5,675.00 4,963.00 4,963.00 712.00 87.45 3811 Zone Change 3,705.00 3,742.00 3,742.00 -37.00 101.00 3812 Conditional Use Permit - Comm/Other 15,633.00 6,072.50 6,072.50 9,560.50 38.84 3813 Plan Check Fees 384,954.00 402,980.89 402,980.89 -18,026.89 104.68 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 38,969.50 38,969.50 21,030.50 64.95 3816 Utility Trench Service Connect Permit 58,000.00 20,675.00 20,675.00 37,325.00 35.65 3817 Address Change Request Fee 2,160.00 2,402.00 2,402.00 -242.00 111.20 3818 Police Services 4,500.00 3,046.10 3,046.10 1,453.90 67.69 3819 Jail Services 7,000.00 10,451.38 10,451.38 -3,451.38 149.31 4Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3821 Daily Permit Lot A/Parking Structure 66,000.00 52,982.01 52,982.01 13,017.99 80.28 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 12,163.00 12,163.00 4,412.00 73.38 3825 Public Notice Posting 2,520.00 3,064.00 3,064.00 -544.00 121.59 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 16,094.00 16,094.00 8,906.00 64.38 3833 Recreation Service Charges 12,000.00 80.00 80.00 11,920.00 0.67 3834 Encroachment Permit 260,000.00 190,632.29 190,632.29 69,367.71 73.32 3836 Refund Transaction Fee 750.00 375.00 375.00 375.00 50.00 3837 Returned Check Charge 1,000.00 605.00 605.00 395.00 60.50 3839 Photocopy Charges 1,000.00 762.00 762.00 238.00 76.20 3840 Ambulance Transport 550,000.00 418,292.33 418,292.33 131,707.67 76.05 3841 Police Towing 84,000.00 82,352.00 82,352.00 1,648.00 98.04 3842 Parking Meters 1,719,613.00 1,395,256.06 1,395,256.06 324,356.94 81.14 3843 Parking Permits-Annual 416,000.00 388,053.50 388,053.50 27,946.50 93.28 3844 Daily Parking Permits 1,500.00 8,731.00 8,731.00 -7,231.00 582.07 3845 Lot A Revenue 540,000.00 428,758.85 428,758.85 111,241.15 79.40 3846 No Pier Pkg Structure Revenue 730,000.00 574,215.35 574,215.35 155,784.65 78.66 3848 Driveway Permits 1,700.00 2,122.00 2,122.00 -422.00 124.82 3849 Guest Permits 2,200.00 1,983.00 1,983.00 217.00 90.14 3850 Contractors Permits 15,000.00 20,366.00 20,366.00 -5,366.00 135.77 3851 Cash Key Revenue 10,000.00 5,375.25 5,375.25 4,624.75 53.75 3852 Recreation Program Transaction Fee 40,000.00 36,944.26 36,944.26 3,055.74 92.36 3856 500' - 2nd Noticing 1,500.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 500.00 66.67 5Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3857 Parking Plan Application 15,345.00 18,135.00 18,135.00 -2,790.00 118.18 3858 Monthly Permit Lot A/Parking Structure 105,005.00 104,501.00 104,501.00 504.00 99.52 3861 Fire Alarm Sys Insp - New Installation 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 0.00 3862 Alarm Permit Fee 4,000.00 3,552.00 3,552.00 448.00 88.80 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 7,871.00 7,871.00 1,818.00 81.24 3871 Passport Processing Fee 18,500.00 11,250.00 11,250.00 7,250.00 60.81 3872 Passport Photo Fee 3,000.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 50.00 3878 Fire Re-Inspections 1,000.00 334.00 334.00 666.00 33.40 3882 Special Event Fire Code Permit 4,000.00 1,659.00 1,659.00 2,341.00 41.48 3883 Final/Tentative Map Extension 0.00 2,020.00 2,020.00 -2,020.00 0.00 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 4,892.75 4,892.75 1,572.25 75.68 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 400,000.00 355,450.35 355,450.35 44,549.65 88.86 3894 Other Recreation Programs 160,000.00 182,549.00 182,549.00 -22,549.00 114.09 3895 Zoning Information Letters 260.00 392.00 392.00 -132.00 150.77 3896 Mailing Fee 20.00 3.00 3.00 17.00 15.00 3897 Admin Fee/TULIP Ins Certificate 1,400.00 1,729.42 1,729.42 -329.42 123.53 3899 Condo - CUP/PDP 86,943.00 64,586.00 64,586.00 22,357.00 74.29 Total Current Service Charges 83.79 6,108,560.00 5,118,189.39 5,118,189.39 990,370.61 6Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3900 Other Revenue 3902 Refunds/Reimb Previous Years 203,645.00 169,293.96 169,293.96 34,351.04 83.13 3903 Contributions Non Govt 23,375.00 30,575.00 30,575.00 -7,200.00 130.80 3904 General Miscellaneous 171,937.00 186,426.20 186,426.20 -14,489.20 108.43 3907 Pkg Str Utility Reimb From Beach House 4,000.00 1,900.06 1,900.06 2,099.94 47.50 3908 Hermosa Sr Ctr Donations/Memberships 5,000.00 7,733.20 7,733.20 -2,733.20 154.66 3914 Planning EIR Admin Reimbursement 152,500.00 69,598.06 69,598.06 82,901.94 45.64 3920 BCHD Healthy Cities Fund 21,835.00 10,835.69 10,835.69 10,999.31 49.63 3938 Solid Waste Contract Admin Fee 50,000.00 37,500.03 37,500.03 12,499.97 75.00 3945 In-Serv Firefighter Trng Prog/El Camino 14,275.00 0.00 0.00 14,275.00 0.00 3955 Operating Transfers In 334,577.00 278,810.00 278,810.00 55,767.00 83.33 3960 Verizon PEG Grant 16,000.00 17,248.00 17,248.00 -1,248.00 107.80 Total Other Revenue 81.22 997,144.00 809,920.20 809,920.20 187,223.80 6800 Current Service Charges Continued 6802 Sign Variance 2,785.00 0.00 0.00 2,785.00 0.00 6803 General Plan Amendment/ Map or Text 0.00 1,833.00 1,833.00 -1,833.00 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 2,532.00 2,532.00 -132.00 105.50 6810 Deed Restriction/Covenant Review 6,785.00 6,785.00 6,785.00 0.00 100.00 6811 Landscape Plan Review 1,515.00 2,727.00 2,727.00 -1,212.00 180.00 6812 Planning Landscape Doc Package Review 695.00 0.00 0.00 695.00 0.00 6813 Preliminary Plan Review 675.00 408.00 408.00 267.00 60.44 7Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 General Fund001 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 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 17,350.00 17,350.00 -2,350.00 115.67 6832 DUI Collision Response 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 0.00 6834 Citation Sign-off 2,720.00 1,860.00 1,860.00 860.00 68.38 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 100.00 202.00 202.00 -102.00 202.00 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 6,093.00 6,093.00 33,907.00 15.23 6851 Busines Licenses State Mandated Fee 1,500.00 1,582.00 1,582.00 -82.00 105.47 Total Current Service Charges Continued 45.02 99,256.00 44,681.00 44,681.00 54,575.00 6,602,385.57 27,005,988.43 27,005,988.43 33,608,374.00 80.35Total General Fund 8Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 9 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Lightg/Landscapg Dist Fund105 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3101 Current Year Secured 454,000.00 389,495.28 389,495.28 64,504.72 85.79 3103 Prior Year Collections 17,000.00 6,443.97 6,443.97 10,556.03 37.91 3105 Assessment Rebates -2,850.00 -1,796.53 -1,796.53 -1,053.47 63.04 Total Taxes 84.19 468,150.00 394,142.72 394,142.72 74,007.28 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 531.00 349.44 349.44 181.56 65.81 3450 Investment Discount 8.00 7.52 7.52 0.48 94.00 3475 Investment Premium -31.00 -29.75 -29.75 -1.25 95.97 Total Use Of Money & Property 64.41 508.00 327.21 327.21 180.79 3900 Other Revenue 3955 Operating Transfers In 52,031.00 43,360.00 43,360.00 8,671.00 83.33 Total Other Revenue 83.33 52,031.00 43,360.00 43,360.00 8,671.00 82,859.07 437,829.93 437,829.93 520,689.00 84.09Total Lightg/Landscapg Dist Fund 9Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 10 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,809.89 1,809.89 2,530.11 41.70 3450 Investment Discount 68.00 43.74 43.74 24.26 64.32 3475 Investment Premium -220.00 -142.73 -142.73 -77.27 64.88 Total Use Of Money & Property 40.85 4,188.00 1,710.90 1,710.90 2,477.10 3500 Intergovernmental/State 3501 Section 2106 Allocation 65,523.00 47,825.86 47,825.86 17,697.14 72.99 3502 Section 2107 Allocation 136,376.00 102,737.32 102,737.32 33,638.68 75.33 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 63,671.82 63,671.82 27,927.18 69.51 3513 Sec 2103 Higher Mtr Veh Excise Tax(HUTA) 277,533.00 197,750.26 197,750.26 79,782.74 71.25 Total Intergovernmental/State 71.65 575,031.00 411,985.26 411,985.26 163,045.74 165,522.84 413,696.16 413,696.16 579,219.00 71.42Total State Gas Tax Fund 10Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 11 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 43,258.90 43,258.90 11,741.10 78.65 3874 Compost/Worm Bin 525.00 0.00 0.00 525.00 0.00 Total Current Service Charges 77.91 55,525.00 43,258.90 43,258.90 12,266.10 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 12,465.91 43,265.09 43,265.09 55,731.00 77.63Total AB939 Fund 11Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 12 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 13 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,695.94 2,695.94 369.06 87.96 3426 Easement Agreement 312,900.00 239,133.84 239,133.84 73,766.16 76.43 3450 Investment Discount 48.00 52.42 52.42 -4.42 109.21 3475 Investment Premium -164.00 -146.19 -146.19 -17.81 89.14 74,112.99 241,736.01 241,736.01 315,849.00 76.54Total Tyco Fund 13Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 14 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Tyco Tidelands123 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 76.00 19.21 19.21 56.79 25.28 3450 Investment Discount 1.00 0.46 0.46 0.54 46.00 3475 Investment Premium -5.00 -1.40 -1.40 -3.60 28.00 53.73 18.27 18.27 72.00 25.38Total Tyco Tidelands 14Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 15 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,052.20 2,052.20 364.80 84.91 3450 Investment Discount 38.00 39.61 39.61 -1.61 104.24 3475 Investment Premium -129.00 -112.60 -112.60 -16.40 87.29 Total Use Of Money & Property 85.09 2,326.00 1,979.21 1,979.21 346.79 3900 Other Revenue 3910 Park/Recreation In Lieu Fee 297,294.00 184,178.00 184,178.00 113,116.00 61.95 Total Other Revenue 61.95 297,294.00 184,178.00 184,178.00 113,116.00 113,462.79 193,176.21 193,176.21 306,639.00 63.00Total Park/Rec Facility Tax Fund 15Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 16 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 17.92 17.92 1.08 94.32 Total Use Of Money & Property 94.32 19.00 17.92 17.92 1.08 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 1.08 4,367.92 4,367.92 4,369.00 99.98Total Bayview Dr Dist Admin Exp Fund 16Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 17 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 18 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 140.00 104.14 104.14 35.86 74.39 Total Use Of Money & Property 74.39 140.00 104.14 104.14 35.86 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 35.86 9,104.14 9,104.14 9,140.00 99.61Total Myrtle Dist Admin Exp Fund 18Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 19 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 190.00 142.04 142.04 47.96 74.76 Total Use Of Money & Property 74.76 190.00 142.04 142.04 47.96 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 47.96 10,142.04 10,142.04 10,190.00 99.53Total Loma Dist Admin Exp Fund 19Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 20 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 21.01 21.01 2.99 87.54 Total Use Of Money & Property 87.54 24.00 21.01 21.01 2.99 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 2.99 3,021.01 3,021.01 3,024.00 99.90Total Beach Dr Assmnt Dist Admin Exp Fund 20Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 21 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 22 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Proposition A Fund145 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3117 Proposition A Transit 333,166.00 274,102.68 274,102.68 59,063.32 82.27 Total Taxes 82.27 333,166.00 274,102.68 274,102.68 59,063.32 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 3,413.00 3,026.33 3,026.33 386.67 88.67 3450 Investment Discount 54.00 58.09 58.09 -4.09 107.57 3475 Investment Premium -184.00 -161.78 -161.78 -22.22 87.92 Total Use Of Money & Property 89.02 3,283.00 2,922.64 2,922.64 360.36 3800 Current Service Charges 3853 Dial-A-Taxi Program 5,300.00 4,800.00 4,800.00 500.00 90.57 3855 Bus Passes 1,000.00 819.80 819.80 180.20 81.98 Total Current Service Charges 89.20 6,300.00 5,619.80 5,619.80 680.20 60,103.88 282,645.12 282,645.12 342,749.00 82.46Total Proposition A Fund 22Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 23 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Proposition C Fund146 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3118 Proposition C Local Return 276,353.00 227,061.02 227,061.02 49,291.98 82.16 Total Taxes 82.16 276,353.00 227,061.02 227,061.02 49,291.98 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 5,851.00 4,772.82 4,772.82 1,078.18 81.57 3450 Investment Discount 92.00 93.32 93.32 -1.32 101.43 3475 Investment Premium -310.00 -260.22 -260.22 -49.78 83.94 Total Use Of Money & Property 81.77 5,633.00 4,605.92 4,605.92 1,027.08 50,319.06 231,666.94 231,666.94 281,986.00 82.16Total Proposition C Fund 23Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 24 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Measure R Fund147 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3100 Taxes 3119 Measure R Local Return Funds 207,264.00 169,800.60 169,800.60 37,463.40 81.92 Total Taxes 81.92 207,264.00 169,800.60 169,800.60 37,463.40 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 4,098.00 2,394.94 2,394.94 1,703.06 58.44 3450 Investment Discount 64.00 51.23 51.23 12.77 80.05 3475 Investment Premium -213.00 -151.37 -151.37 -61.63 71.07 Total Use Of Money & Property 58.11 3,949.00 2,294.80 2,294.80 1,654.20 39,117.60 172,095.40 172,095.40 211,213.00 81.48Total Measure R Fund 24Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 25 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 26 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 982.00 282.67 282.67 699.33 28.79 3450 Investment Discount 15.00 7.58 7.58 7.42 50.53 3475 Investment Premium -52.00 -28.55 -28.55 -23.45 54.90 Total Use Of Money & Property 27.69 945.00 261.70 261.70 683.30 3500 Intergovernmental/State 3538 AQMD Emission Control AB2766 22,500.00 11,679.08 11,679.08 10,820.92 51.91 Total Intergovernmental/State 51.91 22,500.00 11,679.08 11,679.08 10,820.92 11,504.22 11,940.78 11,940.78 23,445.00 50.93Total Air Quality Mgmt Dist Fund 26Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 27 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 100,000.00 100,000.00 100,000.00 0.00 100.00 Total Taxes 100.00 100,000.00 100,000.00 100,000.00 0.00 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 1,420.00 1,208.63 1,208.63 211.37 85.11 3450 Investment Discount 22.00 22.85 22.85 -0.85 103.86 3475 Investment Premium -74.00 -63.96 -63.96 -10.04 86.43 Total Use Of Money & Property 85.35 1,368.00 1,167.52 1,167.52 200.48 200.48 101,167.52 101,167.52 101,368.00 99.80Total Supp Law Enf Serv Fund (SLESF) 27Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 28 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 7,322.92 7,322.92 3,230.08 69.39 3450 Investment Discount 164.00 150.96 150.96 13.04 92.05 3475 Investment Premium -548.00 -420.88 -420.88 -127.12 76.80 Total Use Of Money & Property 69.36 10,169.00 7,053.00 7,053.00 3,116.00 3500 Intergovernmental/State 3550 CA Waste Oil Recycling Grant 5,689.00 5,697.00 5,697.00 -8.00 100.14 Total Intergovernmental/State 100.14 5,689.00 5,697.00 5,697.00 -8.00 3600 Intergovernmental/County 3602 Beach Outlet Maintenance 13,570.00 727.62 727.62 12,842.38 5.36 Total Intergovernmental/County 5.36 13,570.00 727.62 727.62 12,842.38 3800 Current Service Charges 3828 Sewer Connection Fee 21,000.00 28,688.00 28,688.00 -7,688.00 136.61 3829 Sewer Demolition Fee 3,000.00 2,782.00 2,782.00 218.00 92.73 3832 Sewer Lateral Installation 12,000.00 4,614.00 4,614.00 7,386.00 38.45 Total Current Service Charges 100.23 36,000.00 36,084.00 36,084.00 -84.00 3900 Other Revenue 3955 Operating Transfers In 1,019,149.00 849,290.00 849,290.00 169,859.00 83.33 Total Other Revenue 83.33 1,019,149.00 849,290.00 849,290.00 169,859.00 185,725.38 898,851.62 898,851.62 1,084,577.00 82.88Total Sewer Fund 28Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 29 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,102.28 2,102.28 920.72 69.54 3450 Investment Discount 47.00 42.08 42.08 4.92 89.53 3475 Investment Premium -158.00 -121.59 -121.59 -36.41 76.96 Total Use Of Money & Property 69.46 2,912.00 2,022.77 2,022.77 889.23 3900 Other Revenue Total Other Revenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37,889.23 2,022.77 2,022.77 39,912.00 5.07Total Asset Seizure/Forft Fund 29Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 30 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Fire Protection Fund180 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 282.00 143.46 143.46 138.54 50.87 3450 Investment Discount 4.00 2.98 2.98 1.02 74.50 3475 Investment Premium -15.00 -8.90 -8.90 -6.10 59.33 Total Use Of Money & Property 50.75 271.00 137.54 137.54 133.46 3900 Other Revenue 3912 Fire Flow Fee 10,500.00 11,563.74 11,563.74 -1,063.74 110.13 Total Other Revenue 110.13 10,500.00 11,563.74 11,563.74 -1,063.74 -930.28 11,701.28 11,701.28 10,771.00 108.64Total Fire Protection Fund 30Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 31 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 3,546.18 3,546.18 4,433.82 44.44 3450 Investment Discount 120.00 76.36 76.36 43.64 63.63 3475 Investment Premium -395.00 -248.87 -248.87 -146.13 63.01 Total Use Of Money & Property 43.79 7,705.00 3,373.67 3,373.67 4,331.33 3900 Other Revenue 3913 In-Lieu Fee/Street Pavement 10,150.00 10,175.00 10,175.00 -25.00 100.25 Total Other Revenue 100.25 10,150.00 10,175.00 10,175.00 -25.00 4,306.33 13,548.67 13,548.67 17,855.00 75.88Total Capital Improvement Fund 31Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 32 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 0.38 0.38 1.62 19.00 3475 Investment Premium -4.00 -1.50 -1.50 -2.50 37.50 132.12-1.12-1.12 131.00 -0.85Total Artesia Blvd Relinquishment 32Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 33 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 1,048.00 763.89 763.89 284.11 72.89 284.11 763.89 763.89 1,048.00 72.89Total Bayview Dr Redemption Fund 2004-2 33Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 34 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 294.00 172.65 172.65 121.35 58.72 121.35 172.65 172.65 294.00 58.72Total Lwr Pier Dist Redemption Fund 34Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 35 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 533.00 385.85 385.85 147.15 72.39 147.15 385.85 385.85 533.00 72.39Total Beach Dr Assessment Dist Redemption Fund 35Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 36 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 29.03 29.03 33.97 46.08 33.97 29.03 29.03 63.00 46.08Total Beach Dr Assessment Dist Reserve Fund 36Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 37 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Myrtle Ave Assessment Fund617 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 695.00 507.38 507.38 187.62 73.00 187.62 507.38 507.38 695.00 73.00Total Myrtle Ave Assessment Fund 37Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 38 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 Loma Drive Assessment Fund618 Account Number Adjusted Estimate Revenues Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 3400 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 885.00 627.49 627.49 257.51 70.90 257.51 627.49 627.49 885.00 70.90Total Loma Drive Assessment Fund 38Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 39 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 95.34 95.34 63.66 59.96 63.66 95.34 95.34 159.00 59.96Total Bayview Dr Reserve Fund 2004-2 39Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 40 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 2,250,090.00 2,250,090.00 450,002.00 83.33 Total Current Service Charges 83.33 2,700,092.00 2,250,090.00 2,250,090.00 450,002.00 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 1,361,905.00 1,211,377.00 1,211,377.00 150,528.00 88.95 Total Other Revenue 84.78 1,470,082.00 1,246,263.59 1,246,263.59 223,818.41 673,820.41 3,496,353.59 3,496,353.59 4,170,174.00 83.84Total Insurance Fund 40Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 41 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 84,620.00 84,620.00 16,935.00 83.32 3885 Comm Equip/Business Mach Charges 663,656.00 553,070.00 553,070.00 110,586.00 83.34 3889 Vehicle/Equip Replacement Charges 950,282.00 791,900.00 791,900.00 158,382.00 83.33 Total Current Service Charges 83.33 1,715,493.00 1,429,590.00 1,429,590.00 285,903.00 3900 Other Revenue 3901 Sale of Real/Personal Property 0.00 3,200.00 3,200.00 -3,200.00 0.00 3903 Contributions Non Govt 0.00 2,250.00 2,250.00 -2,250.00 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 17,180.00 17,180.00 -17,180.00 268,723.00 1,446,770.00 1,446,770.00 1,715,493.00 84.34Total Equipment Replacement Fund 41Page: 06/05/2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 42 7:23AM Page:revstat.rpt Revenue Status Report 7/1/2013 through 4/30/2014 Periods: 1 through 10 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 44,588,750.00 35,277,014.41 35,277,014.41 9,311,735.59 79.12 42Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 14515 5/15/2014 14008 YORK SCRMA 05152014 W/Comp Claims - 9/09/14 705-1217-4324 13,178.16 Total : 13,178.16 73832 5/15/2014 18486 AHUJA, MANAV 03639 Refund Cite # 200068280 001-3302 53.00 Total : 53.00 73833 5/15/2014 06827 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT 34991 Crossing Guard Service/ 3-30 - 4-12-14 001-2102-4201 2,395.25 Total : 2,395.25 73834 5/15/2014 17442 ALMANZA, EDWARD P 17 Project Mgr-Enviro Rpt/ 3-4 to 4-4-14 001-2109 21,463.72 Total : 21,463.72 73835 5/15/2014 18476 AMERICAN TRAFFIC PROCESSING 03684 Refund Cite # 200085250 001-3302 83.00 Total : 83.00 73836 5/15/2014 00163 BRAUN LINEN SERVICE 1165101 Prisoner Laundry/ Apr 14 001-2101-4306 80.36 1166511 Prisoner Laundry/ Apr 14 001-2101-4306 95.78 1167971 Prisoner Laundry/ Apr 14 001-2101-4306 129.94 1169395 Prisoner Laundry/ Apr 14 001-2101-4306 51.65 Total : 357.73 73837 5/15/2014 03372 CA EMS PERSONNEL FUND 03803 Paramedic License Renewal/ M. Garofano 001-2201-4315 200.00 03933 Paramedic License Renewal/J.Santos 001-2201-4315 200.00 Total : 400.00 1Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73838 5/15/2014 18487 CAIN, DONALD 03638 Refund Cite # 200072654 001-3302 53.00 Total : 53.00 73839 5/15/2014 00016 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 4286211111 Water Usage - Mar 14 105-2601-4303 2,227.53 001-6101-4303 7,928.36 001-4204-4303 905.86 001-3304-4303 77.28 Total : 11,139.03 73840 5/15/2014 11393 CARTER, TRACEY 03910 Edu Exp Reimb/ Tuition - Summer 2014 001-2101-4317 833.65 Total : 833.65 73841 5/15/2014 09632 CDWG LL26321 HP 7110 Format Printer/PW 715-1206-5401 225.27 LL27536 Document Scanner/PD 715-1206-5401 310.99 LL31659 Privacy Filter's for Monitors 001-2101-4305 276.51 Total : 812.77 73842 5/15/2014 18481 DUDA, ALEXANDRA 03679 Refund Cite # 1512002361 001-3302 48.00 Total : 48.00 73843 5/15/2014 00122 DUNCAN PARKING TECHNOLOGIES DPT017104 Single Space Meter Parts 001-3302-4309 1,674.73 Total : 1,674.73 73844 5/15/2014 00181 EASY READER 893742 Legal Ads/ Feb 14 001-1121-4323 1,025.13 Total : 1,025.13 73845 5/15/2014 18478 EBRAHIMI, ELHAM 03682 Refund Cite # 200061736 001-3302 53.00 2Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 53.00 73845 5/15/2014 18478 EBRAHIMI, ELHAM 73846 5/15/2014 18474 FREEMAN, ANDREW 101174 Damage Deposit Refund- # 6012 001-2111 500.00 Total : 500.00 73847 5/15/2014 02822 GAINES, GARTH 357 Per Diem - G.Gaines 001-2101-4312 84.00 Total : 84.00 73848 5/15/2014 18483 GARCIA, CHRISTINE 03643 Refund Cite # 200012411 001-3302 53.00 Total : 53.00 73849 5/15/2014 18489 GIODANO, GIACOMO 03635 Refund Cite # 200009797 001-3302 53.00 Total : 53.00 73850 5/15/2014 18485 HARGER, ROBERT 03640 Refund Cite # 200075661 001-3302 53.00 Total : 53.00 73851 5/15/2014 18480 HENDERSON, AMANDA 03680 Refund Cite # 200038887 001-3302 30.00 Total : 30.00 73852 5/15/2014 18320 HOWARD, STACEY 03634 Refund Cite # 1112001142 001-3302 15.00 Total : 15.00 73853 5/15/2014 10909 HUB INTERNATIONAL 03867 Tulip Insurance/ Mar 14 001-3897 649.42 Total : 649.42 73854 5/15/2014 18491 ISEMINGER, MARK 03631 Refund Cite # 1812023011 001-3302 48.00 Total : 48.00 3Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73855 5/15/2014 10820 JENKINS AND HOGIN LLP 22380 Legal, RE: Gen City Attorney Svc-Mar 14 001-1131-4201 15,277.90 22381 Legal, RE: E & B Oil - Mar 14 001-2109 5,086.40 22382 Legal, RE: Community Dev Land Use-Mar 14 001-1131-4201 2,374.90 22383 Legal, RE: Pitchess Motions - Mar 14 001-1131-4201 545.00 22384 Legal, RE: Code Enforcement - Mar 14 001-1132-4201 30,130.00 22385 Legal, RE: Finder-Fiesta Shuttle - Mar 001-1131-4201 65.40 Total : 53,479.60 73856 5/15/2014 05356 JOHN L HUNTER AND ASSOC INC HBBCR0314 BEV CONTAINER RECYCLING PROG ADMIN/MAR 1 150-3102-4201 166.25 HBUO0314 USED OIL RECYCLING PROG ADMIN/MAR 14 160-3105-4201 95.00 Total : 261.25 73857 5/15/2014 17780 KATHERINE SPITZ ASSOCIATES INC 14-3702 CONSULTANT-PCH/AVIATION IMPROVE/ 146-8143-4201 6,771.20 115-8143-4201 1,692.80 14-3715 CONSULTANT-PCH/AVIATION IMPROVE/APR 14 115-8143-4201 700.00 146-8143-4201 2,800.00 Total : 11,964.00 73858 5/15/2014 18479 KNUDSON, KELSI 03681 Refund Cite # 200041193 & 94 001-3302 96.00 Total : 96.00 73859 5/15/2014 10677 LAWRENCE, LARRY 040414 Staff Support Services/ Apr 14 117-5301-4201 161.50 Total : 161.50 73860 5/15/2014 11817 LINNELL, RICHARD 03854 Instructor Pymt # 19573,74,77,78 4Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73860 5/15/2014 (Continued)11817 LINNELL, RICHARD 001-4601-4221 654.50 Total : 654.50 73861 5/15/2014 11140 LUPI, PAUL 03624 Refund Cite # 200062361 001-3302 48.00 Total : 48.00 73862 5/15/2014 18274 MAGNUM VENTURE PARTNERS 97978 Special Event Security Dep Refund- #5468 001-2111 500.00 Total : 500.00 73863 5/15/2014 18490 MECKLER, CAROL 03633 Refund Cite # 200054736 001-3302 48.00 Total : 48.00 73864 5/15/2014 18488 MEYER, RAUER 03637 Refund Cite # 200074145 001-3302 53.00 Total : 53.00 73865 5/15/2014 18497 MILLER, MICHAEL 03623 Refund Cite# 200059754 001-3302 48.00 Total : 48.00 73866 5/15/2014 18492 MUELLER, GREGORY 03629 Refund Cite # 200039522 & 42854 001-3302 96.00 Total : 96.00 73867 5/15/2014 16397 NUNIS, MARK & JULIE 03628 Refund Cite # 200001040, 5196, 6103 001-3302 114.00 Total : 114.00 73868 5/15/2014 18477 PAMIERI, ALBERT 03683 Refund Cite # 200032790 001-3302 53.00 Total : 53.00 73869 5/15/2014 01183 PMW ASSOCIATES 357 Regis / Internal Affairs 001-2101-4312 428.00 5Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 428.00 73869 5/15/2014 01183 PMW ASSOCIATES 73870 5/15/2014 11539 PROSUM TECHNOLOGY SERVICES 147681 IT SUPPORT/ 715-1206-4201 12,659.00 Total : 12,659.00 73871 5/15/2014 17676 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 40766873 Mats-Feb 14 001-4204-4309 46.28 40766874 Mats-Feb 14 001-3302-4309 26.78 40766875 Mats - Feb 14 001-4204-4309 33.68 40766876 Shop Towels - Mar 14 715-4206-4309 19.68 40766877 Uniform Rentals-Feb 14 001-4202-4314 39.92 40766879 Mats&Shop Towels-Feb 14 001-3104-4309 24.18 40769139 Uniform Rentals - Mar 14 001-4202-4314 40.11 40771462 Mats&ShopTowels - Mar 14 001-2201-4309 27.18 40771463 Mats - Mar 14 001-4204-4309 46.28 40771464 Mats - Mar 14 001-3302-4309 26.78 40771465 Mats - Mar 14 001-4204-4309 33.68 40771466 Shop Towels - Mar 14 715-4206-4309 19.68 40771467 Uniform Rentals - Mar 14 001-4202-4314 39.92 40771468 Mats - Mar 14 001-2101-4309 33.08 40771469 Mats&ShopTowels - Mar 14 001-3104-4309 24.18 6Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73871 5/15/2014 (Continued)17676 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 40773748 Uniform Rentals - Mar 14 001-4202-4314 39.92 40776240 Mats & Shop Towels - Mar 14 001-2201-4309 27.18 40776241 Mats - Mar 14 001-4204-4309 46.28 40776242 Mats - Mar 14 001-3302-4309 26.78 40776243 Mats - Mar 14 001-4204-4309 33.68 40776244 Shop Towels - Mar 14 715-4206-4309 19.68 40776245 Uniform Rentals - Mar 14 001-4202-4314 39.92 40776246 Mats - Mar 14 001-2101-4309 33.08 40776247 Mat & Shop Towels - Mar 14 001-3104-4309 24.18 Total : 772.11 73872 5/15/2014 18223 RAIMI AND ASSOCIATES INC 14-771 GEN & COASTAL PLAN UPDATE/ 150-4104-4201 9,874.01 Total : 9,874.01 73873 5/15/2014 09402 S&S WORLDWIDE, INC 8043303 PARK PROGRAM SUPPLIES 001-4601-4308 897.94 Total : 897.94 73874 5/15/2014 16425 SAFEWAY INC VONS 721395 Senior Center Supplies/ Apr 14 001-4601-4305 34.96 Total : 34.96 73875 5/15/2014 03353 SBCU VISA 0180988 Refreshments/Oral Board - Feb 14 001-1203-4201 69.51 032714 CALPELRA Membership/D.Strickfaden 001-1203-4317 350.00 7Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73875 5/15/2014 (Continued)03353 SBCU VISA 04186 Regis/League of California-F.Senteno 001-4202-4317 525.00 2208-4802-1253-0463 Medal of Valor Luncheon-S.Papa 001-2101-4317 450.00 227 Baggage Fee-S.Papa CPCA Training 001-2101-4317 25.00 2615-3015-3345-8464 Medal of Valor Luncheon 001-2101-4317 450.00 327 Lodging/S. Papa- CPCA Training 001-2101-4317 734.44 347 Lodging/League of California-H.Behboodi 001-4202-4317 1,909.36 571160 Party Supplies/Awards Dinner - Mar 14 001-1203-4305 11.88 574208 Decorations/Emploee Party 001-1203-4300 37.15 662752526 Party Supplies / Awards Dinner - Mar 14 001-1203-4300 397.50 835139 Refreshments/ Oral Board - Mar 14 001-1203-4201 86.76 Total : 5,046.60 73876 5/15/2014 08812 SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC COMM 201213225 RADIO VOTER PROJECT - HERMOSA VIEW SCH 715-2101-5405 8,774.14 153-2106-5405 15,080.34 Total : 23,854.48 73877 5/15/2014 00159 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO 2-01-414-1071 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 001-4204-4303 2,794.96 2-01-414-2152 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 001-4204-4303 1,197.08 2-01-414-3747 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 52.27 2-01-414-3994 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 160-3102-4303 78.97 8Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 9 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73877 5/15/2014 (Continued)00159 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO 2-01-414-4281 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 344.07 2-01-414-5106 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 001-3104-4303 533.19 2-23-687-8021 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 001-3104-4303 65.24 2-23-725-4420 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 001-4204-4303 4,025.59 2-29-332-0750 Electrical Billing - Apr 14 105-2601-4303 239.69 Total : 9,331.06 73878 5/15/2014 10098 SPRINT NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 269424317-149 Wireless Mgmt-PD - Apr 14 153-2106-4201 385.00 371554311-150 Cell Phone Usage - Apr 14 001-2201-4304 293.04 551834312-149 Cell Phone Usage - Apr 14 001-4601-4304 90.11 Total : 768.15 73879 5/15/2014 18484 STIMPFL, PAUL 03641 Refund Cite # 200075657 001-3302 53.00 Total : 53.00 73880 5/15/2014 18456 SURFSIDE RESTORATION AND WATER 3704 Parking Structure Repairs/CIP 13-663 001-8663-4201 6,169.25 Total : 6,169.25 73881 5/15/2014 00123 TRIANGLE HARDWARE 018988 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 160-3102-4309 271.41 018990 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 160-3102-4309 299.80 019073 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 105-2601-4309 288.39 019074 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 001-4204-4309 267.57 9Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 10 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 73881 5/15/2014 (Continued)00123 TRIANGLE HARDWARE 019075 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 160-3102-4309 283.38 019076 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 001-4204-4309 245.03 019098 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 105-2601-4309 221.43 019099 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 001-3104-4309 151.01 019100 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 001-6101-4309 187.91 019101 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 715-4206-4309 31.88 019102 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 001-3104-4309 29.39 019103 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 160-3102-4309 214.80 18986 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 160-3102-4309 293.21 18987 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 160-3102-4309 299.75 18989 Hardware Supplies/ Apr 14 105-2601-4309 283.29 Total : 3,368.25 73882 5/15/2014 18482 TROUT, JESSICA 03678 Refund Cite # 200047176 001-3302 53.00 Total : 53.00 73883 5/15/2014 18475 VERA, JESUS 03685 Refund Cite # 200043711 001-3302 83.00 Total : 83.00 73884 5/15/2014 16729 ZAPPIA LAW FIRM 14-02-30 Legal, RE: Personnel Matters/ Feb 14 001-1203-4201 17,662.50 Total : 17,662.50 10Page: 05/15/2014 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 11 5:38:01PM Page:vchlist Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 145993 5/15/2014 14691 ADMINSURE AS AGENT FOR THE CV-12-06570 GA\F Liability Claims Reimb - Case 705-1209-4324 150,000.00 Total : 150,000.00 Bank total : 363,687.75 55 Vouchers for bank code :boa 363,687.75Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 55 "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages 1 to 11 inclusive, of the check register for 5-15-14 are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date: 5-20-14 11Page: 4c resulting 2014 special events calendar is hereby attached for Council review and approval. Staff has also prepared a short description of each event. Original event permit applications are available on the City’s website under the Dept. of Community Resources tab at http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=768 Discovery Channel Fin Fest Parking Plan Update When the Fin Fest event was presented to Council, Discovery Channel requested to use all of Parking Lot A on August 9 & 10, instead of just the 40 spaces normally allotted to the summer concert producer on August 10. As this request raised concerns about available parking for a sizeable event during a busy summer weekend, the Council requested a future pre-event update regarding the parking plan. Since then, Discovery Channel has modified their request for parking spaces in Lot A. They now wish to “return” 50 of the spaces Council had approved, and only use about 60 spaces on the west side of the Lot in the same manner as the summer concerts. They also have made a written request to the school district and plan to offer additional parking at Valley School. In addition, they are working with the summer concerts on locating a bike valet at the event in a manner similar to other events. Please see the attached map which outlines their planned usage of Lot A. FISCAL IMPACT Event fees are assessed according to impact and vary depending upon the event. Attachments: May 13, 2014 Agenda Report May 27, 2014 Agenda Report 2014 Events Calendar 2014 Events Spreadsheet HBMC Section 12.28.010 – Special Events Permits Discovery Channel Fin Fest Parking Plan Map Concur: _______________________ _______________________ Tom Bakaly, City Manager 1 June 4, 2014 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach City Council June 10, 2014 STATUS REPORT ON E&B’S PROPOSED OIL DRILLING AND PRODUCTION PROJECT AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO SUBCOMMITTEE REGARDING NEGOTIATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Recommended Action: That the City Council receive and file this report. The Council may also wish to give its subcommittee direction pertaining to negotiation points of the Development Agreement. Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)  A postcard was mailed to residents and will be included as a display advertisement in the Beach Reporter, Easy Reader and Daily Breeze; it is also provided on the city’s website.  The City EIR team interacted with the applicant prior to the finalization of the EIR in order to address their concerns that the FEIR had not sufficiently considered E&B’s comments and submittals on the draft EIR.  The City’s Parks and Recreation ((P&R) Commission on June 3rd was provided a Presentation on the Oil Project Draft Environmental Impact Report in Relation to Parks and Recreation by Ed Almanza, the City’s Project Manager. While the P&R Commission passed a motion that the Planning Commission recommend not certifying the Final EIR, staff notes that the matter was not agendized to allow action and this Commission has no jurisdiction with regard to CEQA. Therefore, staff advises that the P&R Commission’s action has no relevance or effect as regards the CEQA process.  The Final EIR will be online on June 9th at www.hermosabch.org. A study session on the Final EIR with the Planning Commission is scheduled for June 18 at 6:00 p.m., City Council Chambers. Staff will briefly highlight major EIR changes on June 10th. Final Cost Benefit Assessment (CBA)  Per Council direction on May 27, Kosmont Companies will respond to comments on the Cost Benefit Analysis, review pre-trial testimony, and review historic Hermosa Beach well lot data. The cost of the additional work authorized by Council was $50,000. The cost of the overages mentioned at the May 27, 2014 City Council meeting are $25,000, bringing the total cost of the Cost Benefit Analysis to $200,000. This is paid by the City. Kosmont expects to deliver the Final CBA to the City in July, 2014. Final Health Impact Assessment (HIA)  The City’s consultant McDaniel Lambert/Intrinsik indicates the HIA will be available in July. At the May 27, 2014 Council meeting it was reported to Council that the parent - 1 - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND E&B NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CORPORATION THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (“Development Agreement” or “Agreement”) is entered into as of the ____ day of ______________, _____, by and between the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a California municipal corporation ("City"), and E&B NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, a California corporation (“E&B”). RECITALS A. The City is the owner of that certain real property in the City of Hermosa Beach, County of Los Angeles, and State of California described in Section 2.4 of this Agreement (Exhibit A to this Agreement), also known informally as the City Maintenance Yard (“Property” or “City Maintenance Yard”). B. On or about January 14, 1992, the City entered into Oil and Gas Lease No. 2 (“Lease”) with Macpherson Oil Company, a California corporation, for itself and for Windward Associates, a California limited partnership, of which it is the general partner (collectively “Macpherson”). The Lease was approved by the California State Lands Commission (“CSLC”). The Lease authorized Macpherson to perform oil and gas extraction activities in the tidelands granted to the City by the State of California, and also authorized Macpherson to utilize the Property for oil and gas drilling activities (“Macpherson Project”). C. During the 1990s, Macpherson sought and obtained approvals for the Macpherson Project from the City, the CSLC, the California Coastal Commission and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. In 1995, the voters of the City passed Proposition E, an initiative to ban oil drilling in the City. During this time, and subsequently, Macpherson, the City, the CSLC, and opponents to the Macpherson Project were parties to several lawsuits regarding the Macpherson Project, including an action by Macpherson against the City regarding whether Proposition E constituted a breach of the Lease (“Macpherson Lawsuit”). The trial court in the Macpherson Lawsuit determined that the adoption of Proposition E constituted a breach of the Lease, subject to certain City defenses, and scheduled a trial in April 2012 to determine Macpherson’s damages. D. E&B, who had no prior relationship with Macpherson, investigated the Macpherson Project and approached the City and Macpherson with a proposal to settle the Macpherson Lawsuit and to provide E&B with a potential opportunity to proceed with “a state- of-the-art directional well oil drilling project conducted from an urban drill site.” (Settlement Agreement, p. 2.) On March 2, 2012, the City, Macpherson and E&B entered into a Settlement Agreement and Release (“Settlement Agreement”). - 2 - E. The Settlement Agreement provided for the dismissal of the Macpherson Lawsuit, certain payments to Macpherson, and the assignment to E&B of Macpherson’s rights under the Lease and all other permits for the Macpherson Project which would allow E&B to proceed with a redesigned oil development project (“Project”) under certain conditions. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the City is to place on the ballot, in a manner that comports with all applicable law, a measure that asks the voters whether to approve, among other things, “a development agreement that would afford E&B a vested right to proceed with the Project . . . .” (Settlement Agreement, p. 7.) F. The California Elections Code sets forth the procedures for a local legislative body to submit a proposition to the voters of the City. The placement of such a proposition on the ballot by the City is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). On __________, 2014, the City Council of City certified an Environmental Impact Report in compliance with CEQA by its adoption of Resolution No. _______. G. The California Legislature enacted Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code, which provides that cities and counties may enter into development agreements with persons having legal or equitable development interests in real property. Section 65867.5 of the Government Code states that a development agreement is a “legislative act” to be approved by ordinance, and the California Constitution establishes the right of voters to approve legislative acts. Elections Code section 9222 authorizes the City Council to submit any ordinance to the voters for their approval. Section 65869 of the Government Code mandates Coastal Commission approval for any development agreement in an area where a local coastal program has not been certified. H. The City has adopted rules and regulations for consideration of development agreements, pursuant to Government Code Section 65865, in Chapter 17.64 of the City’s Municipal Code. I. In compliance with the Settlement Agreement and all other applicable law, the City submitted the [insert title of proposition] (“Proposition”) to the voters of the City on [insert date] in compliance with California Elections Code Section 9222. The Proposition includes the following legislative approvals: 1) an amendment to the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program (a component of the City’s General Plan) to modify the land use designation for the Property to allow for the implementation the Project and to provide energy policies in compliance with the California Coastal Act; 2) various amendments to the Municipal Code to allow the Project to proceed on the Property; 3) an oil pipeline franchise; 4) amendments to the Oil Code; and 5) this Development Agreement. These legislative approvals are referred to in this Agreement as “Proposition Approvals.” J. By approving the Proposition and this Agreement, the voters of the City have determined that the public interest is served by entering into this Agreement because the Project, as described in Section __ of the Proposition (or Exhibit ___ to this Agreement), will provide for the remediation of the City Maintenance Yard, will provide for safe oil drilling and production activities, and will provide substantial economic benefits to the City and to the School District in the form of royalties as described in the Lease and as further set forth in Exhibit __ to this Agreement. - 3 - K. This Agreement will bind future City Councils to the terms and obligations specified in this Agreement and limit, to the degree specified in this Agreement, the future exercise of the City's ability to regulate development on the Property. L. This Agreement and the Project is consistent with, and will serve to implement the policies, objectives, and standards of, the elements of the City of Hermosa Beach General Plan, as amended by the Proposition Approvals. M. This Agreement and the Project is consistent with, and will serve to implement, the provisions of Article 3 of the California Coastal Act. N. This Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning and provide for the orderly development of the Property and generally serve the public interest. AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the mutual covenants and conditions herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agrees as follows: 1 DEFINITIONS For purposes of this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided or unless the context otherwise requires: "Agreement" means this Development Agreement by and between the City and E&B. "Approval Date" means the date on which the Commission approves the Development Agreement. "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 21000, et seq., of the California Public Resources Code. "City" means the City of Hermosa Beach, California. "City Council" means the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach. "Code" means the Municipal Code of the City of Hermosa Beach. "Commencement Date" means that date when the Development Agreement is recorded by the City Clerk with the Los Angeles County Recorder’s office pursuant to Section 65868.5 of the California Government Code; provided, however, if litigation challenging the validity of this Agreement including any Project Approvals and/or environmental review pursuant to CEQA should be brought against the City or the Coastal Commission, the Commencement Date shall be - 4 - the date such litigation is concluded in a manner that permits the commencement or continuation of the parties' rights and obligations under this Agreement. “Commission” means the California Coastal Commission. “Conditional Use Permit” means the Conditional Use Permit for Oil Development at the City Maintenance Yard, approved by the City in Resolution No. 93-5632, and the validity of which was confirmed by the Settlement Agreement. "Current Land Use Regulations" means the ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, requirements and official policies of the City in force as of the Effective Date and shall also include the Proposition Approvals and the Permitted Uses. "Development Agreement Act" means Section 65864 et seq., of the California Government Code. “E&B” means E & B NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, a California corporation in the business of exploring for and producing oil and gas and each of its respective successors and assigns to all or any portion of its interests in the Property during such time as such portion is subject to this Agreement. “Effective Date” means the date the Proposition becomes effective pursuant to Section 9217 of the California Elections Code. “Election Date” means the date that the Proposition was submitted for a vote to the voters. "Event of Default" is defined in Section 5.1.1. "Exactions" means any requirement imposed by the City in connection with or pursuant to any land use regulation or land use approval process for the dedication of land, construction or improvement of public improvements or amenities, payment of development fees, or other mitigation measures required to mitigate the impacts of the development including, without limitation, all development impact fees or linkage fees, utility capacity fees, service or connection fees, major facilities fees, park fees, flood control fees, environmental impact mitigation fees, affordable housing fees, arts fees, transportation fees, child care fees and any similar governmental fees, charges and exactions required for the development of projects or property. "Force Majeure Delay" is defined in Section 6.23. "Future Ministerial Permits" is defined in Section 3.2.1. "General Plan" means the General Plan of the City as of the Effective Date. “Oil Code” means the Hermosa Beach Oil Code, Chapter 21A (Oil Production), approved by the City with Ordinance No. 85-803. - 5 - "Permitted Uses" means those uses set forth in the Project Description, Exhibit B hereto, consisting of [insert description]. "Processing Fees" means all routine and generally applicable City-wide fees required by the City for processing applications and permits including, but not limited to, fees for land use applications, project permits, building applications, building permits, grading permits, maps and certificates of occupancy in effect at the time paid. Expressly exempted from Processing Fees are all Exactions. "Project" means the proposed development of the Property described in the Project Description contained in Exhibit B. "Project Approvals" means the Proposition Approvals approved by the voters of the City on the Election Date, and to be implemented by the City as set forth in the Proposition, the LUP approved by the City and certified by the Commission, the Coastal Development Permit approved by the Commission, the Conditional Use Permit, the Development Agreement approved by the City and the Commission, and those other discretionary actions and approvals of the City and other public agencies as set forth in Section 2.6 of this Agreement. “Proposition __” means the proposition that was approved by the voters on the Election Date. “Proposition Approvals” means the: [insert approvals]. "Public Benefits" means those improvements to be constructed, services to be provided and/or amounts to be paid by E&B to the City as consideration for this Agreement pursuant to Section ___ and Exhibit __. "Term" means the term of this Agreement, as provided in Section 6.1 of this Agreement. "Transfer" is defined in Section _____. "Zoning Ordinance" means the comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City, found in Title 19 of the Code of the City of Hermosa Beach as it exists on the Effective Date. 2 THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROCESS 2.1 Statement of Benefits and Consideration. The voters of the City have determined that the Project is a development for which a development agreement is appropriate. Development of the Project in accordance with a development agreement will provide for the orderly development of the Property in accordance with the objectives set forth in the General Plan, including the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program, as amended. Moreover, a development agreement for the Project will eliminate uncertainty in planning for and securing orderly development of the Property, ensure attainment of the maximum efficient utilization of resources within the City at the least economic cost to its citizens, and achieve the provision of public services, public uses, urban infrastructure and other goals and purposes for which the - 6 - Development Agreement Act was enacted, all in the promotion of the health, safety and general welfare of the City of Hermosa Beach and its residents. In exchange for these and other benefits to the City, E&B will receive the assurance that E&B may develop the Project during the Term of this Agreement, subject to the terms and conditions herein contained. By approving Proposition ___, the voters of the City have found and determined that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, including the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program, as amended, and have approved this Agreement. This Agreement does not (1) grant density or intensity in excess of that otherwise established in the Project Approvals, (2) supersede, nullify or amend any condition imposed in the Project Approvals, (3) guarantee to E&B any profits from the Project, or (4) prohibit or, if legally required, indicate E&B’s consent to, the Property's inclusion in any public financing district or assessment district. The City will receive substantial benefits as a result of the development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement, as set forth in Exhibit __, in recognition of and in exchange for this Agreement and the benefits provided to E&B pursuant to this Agreement. The voters of the City acknowledge the adequacy of the consideration provided by E&B to the City pursuant to this Agreement. In consideration of the benefits, commitments and consideration to be provided by E&B pursuant to this Agreement and in order to strengthen the public planning process and reduce the economic costs of development, the voters of the City hereby provide E&B assurance that it can proceed with the development of the Property for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the land use, density and intensity specified in the Current Land Use Regulations, the Project Approvals and this Agreement. E&B would not enter into this Agreement or agree to provide the public benefits, commitments and consideration described in this Agreement if it were not for the certainty provided by this Agreement that the Property can be developed during the Term of this Agreement in accordance with the Current Land Use Regulations and the Project Approvals including the land use, density and intensity set forth in the Project Approvals. 2.2 Public Hearings. On [insert dates], the Planning Commission of the City, after providing notice as required by law [insert specific code provisions – Gov’t Code and Elections Code], held public hearings on the Project, including this Agreement. The City Council, after providing public notice as required by law, similarly held public hearings on the Project, including this Agreement [insert dates and specific code provisions]. 2.3 City Council and Voter Findings. The City Council adopted findings that review of the environmental impacts of this Agreement and the Project Approvals has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State and local guidelines adopted thereunder, and the City Council has given consideration to such environmental review prior to placing the Proposition on the ballot and has undertaken all actions necessary to comply with CEQA, including adoption of findings. In approving the Proposition and this Agreement, the voters of the City have determined and found that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, including the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program, as amended, and all other applicable City plans, policies and regulations. - 7 - 2.4 Property. The Property includes all real property that is subject to this Agreement. The Property as of the Election Date is commonly known as City Maintenance Yard, as more fully described in Exhibit __ incorporated herein by reference. [Consider need to address offsite components of the Project, e.g., pipelines, parking.] 2.5 The Project. The Project consists of the development, construction and operations on the Property permitted under this Agreement and the Project Approvals. The description of the Project and its uses are more fully described in the Project Description set forth in Exhibit __ which is incorporated herein by reference. 2.6 Current Project Approvals. The Project includes, without limitation, all items described in the Project Description contained in Exhibit __ and incorporated herein by reference and the following Project Approvals [insert list from Project Application]: (a) Conditional Use Permit for Oil Development at the City Maintenance Yard, approved by the City in Resolution No. 93- 5632 (will be superseded by this Agreement); (b) Environmental Impact Report, dated ________________, prepared pursuant to CEQA and certified by the City Council on ______________; (c) Amendment to the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program (a component of the City’s General Plan), approved by Proposition __ on ________________, and by Commission [insert Commission action] on ______________________; (d) Amendment to the Municipal Code, approved by Proposition __ on _________________; (e) Oil Pipeline Franchise, approved by Proposition __ on _______________; (f) Amendment to the Oil Code, approved by Proposition __ on _______________; and (e) Development Agreement, approved by Proposition __ on _________________, and by Commission [insert Commission action] on _________________. 3 VESTED DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS 3.1 Vested Rights to Develop. Subject to the terms, conditions, and covenants of this Agreement, including the Reservations of Power in Section 3.4, E&B shall have a vested right to develop the Property in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Project Approvals, Permitted Uses and the Current Land Use Regulations. The approved use of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height, footprint, and square footage of proposed buildings and structures, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land or public purposes shall be those set forth in the Project Approvals and on Exhibit __. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed - 8 - to obligate E&B to initiate development of the Project or any portion thereof within any period of time or at all. 3.1.1 Certain Changes Prohibited Without Consent of E&B. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, during the Term, the City shall not, as to the Property and the Project, without the prior written consent of E&B, which may be withheld in E&B’s sole and unfettered discretion: (a) change the Current Land Use Regulations, Permitted Uses or Project Approvals as they apply to the Property or Project so as to prevent or adversely affect development or construction of the Project in accordance with this Agreement, the Current Land Use Regulations, Permitted Uses or Project Approvals; or (b) apply to the Property or the Project any new or amended ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, requirement or official policy that is inconsistent with the Current Land Use Regulations, Permitted Uses or Project Approvals, so as to prevent or adversely affect development or construction of the Project in accordance with this Agreement, the Current Land Use Regulations, Permitted Uses or Project Approvals, or prevent or adversely affect the operation of the Project as contemplated hereby in accordance with the Current Land Use Regulations, Permitted Uses or Project Approvals; or (c) apply to this Agreement, the Property or the Project any new or amended ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, requirement or official policy that requires additional discretionary review or approval not otherwise required for the Project by the Current Land Use Regulations, Permitted Uses or Project Approvals; or (d) apply to this Agreement, the Property or the Project any new or amended ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, requirement or official policy that materially, adversely affects the timing or phasing of construction or development, or which limits the availability of utilities or other infrastructure for the Project. For the purposes of this Section 3.1, “prevent or adversely affect development or construction of the Project” shall include, without limitation, any changes which fundamentally affect the ability of any of the Permitted Uses to operate within the Project (e.g. prohibit any of the Permitted Uses, change parking standards for any of the Permitted Uses, etc.). 3.1.2 Rights are Vested. Unless amended or terminated in the manner specified in this Agreement (and subject to the provisions of this Agreement), E&B shall have the rights and benefits afforded by this Agreement and this Agreement shall be enforceable by E&B and the City notwithstanding any growth control measure, initiative, proposition or any development moratorium adopted after the Effective Date, or any change in the General Plan, zoning, or subdivision regulations adopted by the City which alter or amend the Current Land Use Regulations, Permitted Uses or Project Approvals or the adoption of any new or amended ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, requirement or official policy that is inconsistent with the Current Land Use Regulations, Permitted Uses or Project Approvals and so as to prevent or adversely affect development or construction of the Project in accordance with the Current Land Use Regulations, Permitted Uses or Project Approvals. This Section shall be construed to prohibit the City from applying to the Property or the Project any development moratorium or growth control measure that is adopted specifically to prohibit the construction or operation of the Project, or as an interim measure pending contemplated General Plan, Specific Plan or zoning changes, or as a general growth control management measure except as provided for pursuant to Section 3.4. 3.1.3 Future Changes to Current Land Use Regulations. Following the Approval Date, if the City modifies the Current Land Use Regulations in a manner that E&B, in - 9 - its sole discretion, determines is more beneficial than the Current Land Use Regulations, then the E&B may choose in its sole discretion to be governed by the modified land use regulations rather than the Current Land Use Regulations, without E&B being deemed to have waived or limited any rights, remedies or privileges under this Agreement. 3.2 Other Rights. 3.2.1 Future Ministerial Permits. The E&B will seek additional ministerial permits as required by the City, including, without limitation, excavation only permits, grading permits, demolition permits, building permits, well permits, drilling permits and public works permits, as needed to implement the Project Approvals and to construct and operate the Project. Collectively, these ministerial permit applications are called the "Future Ministerial Permits". The City agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold or unreasonably condition any of the Future Ministerial Permits which must be issued by the City in order for the Project to proceed, provided that E&B reasonably and satisfactorily complies with all preliminary procedures, actions, payment of Processing Fees and criteria generally required for processing such Future Ministerial Permits, and provided further that such Future Ministerial Permits comply with this Agreement, the Current Land Use Regulations and the Project Approvals and approvals of other governmental agencies with jurisdiction over the Project.. 3.2.2 Phasing of Development. The parties acknowledge that E&B cannot at this time predict when or the rate at which the Project would be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors which are not all within the control of E&B, such as market orientation and demand, availability of financing and competition. Because the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal. 3d 465, that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development permitted a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development, it is the intent of E&B and the City to hereby acknowledge and provide for the right of E&B to develop the Project in such phases and at such rate and times as E&B deems appropriate within the exercise of its sole and subjective business judgment subject to Section 3.2 hereof, and in compliance with Project Approvals, notwithstanding the adoption of any initiative or proposition by the City’s electorate after the Effective Date of the Agreement. The City acknowledges that such a right is consistent with the intent, purpose and understanding of the parties to this Agreement. Without in any way limiting E&B's right under Section 5.2.2 not to proceed with development of the Project and, in such an event, to terminate this Agreement in its sole and subjective business judgment, if E&B proceeds with the Project, E&B will use its reasonable efforts, in accordance with its own business judgment and taking into consideration market conditions and other economic factors influencing its business decision, to commence or to continue development, and to develop the Project in accordance with the provisions and conditions of this Agreement, the Current Land Use Regulations, and the Project Approvals. 3.3 Reservations of Power. - 10 - 3.3.1 Limitations, Reservations and Exceptions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the following subsequent land use regulations shall apply to the development of the Property: (a) Processing Fees (but not Exactions) imposed by the City to cover the estimated actual costs to the City of processing applications for Project Approvals, fees for monitoring compliance with any Project Approvals, or fees for monitoring compliance with environmental mitigation measures. (b) Procedural regulations applied on a City-wide, nondiscriminatory basis relating to City entities required to review petitions or applications, forms of petitions and applications, notice requirements, information requested with petitions or applications, conduct of hearings, form of staff reports, nature and type of recommendations by City entities, appeal procedures and any other similar matters of procedure. (c) Regulations governing building codes and similar construction standards and specifications including, but not limited to, the California and International Codes, as they may be changed from time to time. (d) Regulations that are necessary to protect the public health and safety, including without limitation, development moratorium or limitation on the delivery of City-provided utility services, which meet each of the following requirements: (a) are based on genuine health, safety and general welfare concerns (other than general growth management issues); (b) which arise out of a documented emergency situation, as declared by the President of the United States, Governor of California, or the Mayor or City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach; and (c) are based upon its terms or its effect as applied, does not apply exclusively or primarily to the Property or the Project. To the extent possible, any such regulations shall be applied and construed so as to provide E&B with the rights and assurances provided under this Agreement. (e) Regulations that are not in conflict with the Project Approvals, Current Land Use Regulations or this Agreement. Any regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate, timing, phasing or sequencing of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Project and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property. Any regulation limiting the Permitted Uses of the Property, limiting the density or intensity of use of the Property, or limiting the size, height or location of improvements on the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Project Approvals and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property. (f) Regulations that are in conflict with the Project, but as to which the E&B has given its prior written consent for such regulations to be applied to the Property or to the development of the Property. (g) Regulations applied on a City-wide, non-discriminatory basis that do not prevent or adversely affect development or construction of the Project. 3.3.2 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law. In the event that state or federal laws or regulations, or those of any regional authority having jurisdiction over the - 11 - Project or Property, enacted after the Approval Date of this Agreement, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such state, federal, or regional authority laws or regulations and to effectuate to the extent possible the terms of this Agreement. 3.3.3 Police Power. The parties acknowledge and agree that City is restricted in its authority to limit its police power by development agreement and that the foregoing limitations, reservations and exceptions are intended to reserve to City all of its police power which cannot be so limited. This Agreement shall be construed to reserve to City all such power and authority which cannot be restricted by development agreement. 3.3.4 Taxes, Assessments and Fees. Anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, City may impose on the Project any new non-discriminatory, City-wide taxes, assessments and fees, including but not limited to business license taxes or franchise fees, but not including any Exaction or other fee designated to mitigate the impact of development of the Project. 3.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties that other public agencies not within the control of the City may possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from or jointly with City, and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. 3.5 Agreement and Assurances on the Part of E&B. Without in any way limiting E&B’s rights under Section 5.2.2 not to proceed with development of the Project and, in such an event, to terminate this Agreement in its sole and subjective business judgment, if E&B proceeds with the Project, E&B agrees that it will use commercially reasonable efforts, in accordance with its own business judgment and taking into account market conditions and economic considerations, to develop the Project, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Current Land Use Regulations, the Lease and the Project Approvals. 3.6 Public Benefits. 3.6.1 The parties acknowledge and agree that development of the Project will result in public benefits as set forth in Exhibit __. The City acknowledges the adequacy of the consideration, including the Public Benefits, provided by E&B to the City pursuant to this Agreement. 3.6.2 Exactions and Processing Fees. 3.6.2.1 Exactions. E&B shall pay the Exactions set forth in Exhibit __ in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Current Land Use Regulations. No other Exactions may be imposed on all or part of the Project. 3.6.2.2 Processing Fees. E&B shall pay to City all applicable Processing Fees regularly charged by the City and the amount of such Processing Fees may be increased from time to time on a non-discriminatory City-wide basis. - 12 - 3.7 Public Improvements and Utilities 3.7.1 Installation Obligations. The parties hereby agree that the obligations to install public improvements and utilities necessary for the development of the Property shall be as provided for in the Project Approvals. 3.7.2 City-Provided Utilities: Reservation of Sufficient Capacity. To the extent that it is within the control of the City, the City shall use its best efforts to ensure that there shall be sufficient capacity, facilities and services with respect to City-provided utilities to complete construction of the Project and open the uses thereon to the public. The City agrees that if limitations in the provision of utilities become necessary due to the existence of an emergency situation, they shall be applied only to the extent necessary to respond to such emergency, and shall not be applied against the Property or the Project in a discriminatory manner. 3.7.3 City-Provided Utilities: Nondiscriminatory Rates and Provision of Service. The City agrees that rates and charges for City-provided utilities for the Property and Project shall not be set or imposed in a discriminatory manner, but shall be those rates and charges that are or would be generally applicable to any user of a comparable quantity and quality of the utility use in the City (i.e., any other entity whose use or consumption of the utility is comparable to that of E&B), and that the City shall not discriminate against the Property or the Project in the provision of any City-provided utilities (such as potable and reclaimed water, sewer and drainage). 3.7.4 Dedications, Reservations and Conditions of Development. The portions of Property to be reserved or dedicated for public purposes pursuant to this Agreement, if any, shall be that property described in the Project Approvals. Unless otherwise indicated herein, the property described in the Project Approvals to be reserved or dedicated for public use shall be dedicated by E&B as provided in the Project Approvals. The City shall take such actions as may be necessary to vacate any prior dedications, offers to dedicate and grants of easements that are no longer necessary for the development of the Project in accordance with this Agreement. 3.8 Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval. E&B shall at its own expense timely perform all mitigation measures identified in the environmental documentation for the Project and conditions of approval identified in the Project Approvals as set forth in Exhibit __. E&B shall have no liability with respect to the completion of mitigation measures or conditions of approval, except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, if the contemplated development fails to occur. 4 ASSIGNMENT, AMENDMENT AND REVIEW 4.1 Assignment 4.1.1 Right to Assign. E&B shall have the right to sell, transfer or assign its rights or interests in the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall - 13 - be permitted to cause a violation of the Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation at any time during the Term. The conditions and covenants set forth in this Agreement and incorporated herein shall run with the land and the benefits and burdens shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties. ; provided, however, that aAny such sale, transfer or assignment that willshall include the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties and obligations arising under or from this Agreement with respect to the property transferred and shall be made in strict compliance with the following requirements: (a) No sale, transfer or assignment of any right or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer or assignment of all or a part of the Property and then, only in accordance herewith. (b) Concurrently with the closing of such sale, transfer or assignment, E&B shall provide the City with an executed agreement by the purchaser, transferee or assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee or assignee expressly and unconditionally assumes the duties and obligations of E&B under this Agreement to the extent of such transfer or assignment. (c) The purchaser, transferee or assignee shall provide the City with security equivalent to any security previously provided by E&B to secure performance of its obligations hereunder, if any, or under any of the Project Approvals. Any sale, transfer or assignment under Section 4.1 of this Agreement not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions shall constitute a default by E&B under this Agreement and any such assignment shall be void and of no effect. Notwithstanding the failure of any purchaser, transferee or assignee to execute the agreement required by subparagraph (b) of this Subsection 4.1.1, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee or assignee, but the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such purchaser, transferee or assignee until and unless such agreement is executed. 4.1.2 City’s Reasonable Consent Required. E&B may sell, transfer or assign its rights or interests in the Property in whole or in part and this Agreement to any other person, partnership, joint venture, firm, corporation, trust or other lawful entity with the City’s consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or conditioned (“Transfer”). In the event E&B desires to make such Transfer, E&B shall submit to the City a request for approval at least forty- five (45) days prior to such Transfer, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed by the City. The City may withhold, condition or delay its approval upon finding of any of the following: (1) The proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee lacks the financial ability to perform the obligations of this Agreement; (2) The proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee lacks the necessary qualifications, competence, experience or capability to implement the development plan contemplated by the Project Approvals with the skill, expertise and quality equivalent to that of E&B; provided, however, if the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee is a nationally or - 14 - regionally recognized, or regionally known in Southern California, as an owner or developer of oil and gas facilities, such proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee shall be deemed to have met this requirement; or (3) An Event of Default by E&B as defined in Section 5.1.1 has occurred and is continuing under this Agreement; or E&B shall provide to the City such information that the City reasonably requests in order for the City to make any determinations provided for by Subsection 4.1.3 above. E&B agrees to provide such information on a timely basis sufficient to permit the City to make its determinations within the forty-five (45) day time period. 4.1.3 Applicability. The provisions of Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.3 2 shall not be applicable to a Transfer as a result of which E&B retains at least a fifty (50) percent interest in the Property or as a result of which E&B retains at least twenty-five (25) percent interest in the Property and maintains effective management control of the Project 4.2 Changes and Amendments to Project 4.2.1 In the event E&B reasonably finds that a change or amendment in the Project Approvals is reasonably necessary or appropriate, E&B shall apply for any required changes to the Project Approvals. Any such application that does not require an amendment to the Permitted Uses, Zoning Ordinance, or General Plan shall be processed in the normal manner for processing such matters in accordance with the Current Land Use Regulations, except as otherwise provided by this Agreement, including the Reservations of Power. Any application that requires an amendment to the Permitted Uses, Zoning Ordinance, or General Plan shall be processed in the normal manner for processing such matters in accordance with the land use regulations in effect at the time the application is filed. 4.2.2 Minor Changes to Project - No Amendment of Agreement The parties acknowledge that refinements or modifications of the Project may be required during the Term. The parties agree that refinements and modifications which constitute a "minor change” in the Project or Project Approvals shall not require an amendment to this Agreement or public notice and a hearing. For any such minor change, the City shall not impose as a condition to approval any Exaction, except as authorized in this Agreement. The City Manager shall be authorized to make the determination on behalf of the City whether a requested refinement or modification may be effectuated pursuant to this Section 4.2.2 or whether the requested refinement or modification is of such a character to require an amendment hereof pursuant to Section 4.2.3. The City Manager shall be authorized to approve any minor changes hereunder on behalf of the City. The City Manager shall not unreasonably withhold or delay its determination that a requested refinement or modification is a “minor change” as that term is used herein. A change to the Project Approvals shall not be deemed “minor change” if such change: (a) Alters the Permitted Uses of the Property as a whole; - 15 - (b) Requires an amendment to the Permitted Uses, Zoning Ordinance, or General Plan; (c) Increases the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole; (d) Deletes a requirement for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes within the Property; (e) Constitutes a project requiring a subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166; (f) Creates a situation adverse to public health or safety. 4.2.3 Other Changes. Any change in the Project which does not qualify as a "minor change" as defined herein shall require an amendment to this Agreement as provided in Section 6.9. 4.3 Annual/Special Review. 4.3.1 Annual Review. The City shall, at least every twelve (12) months during the Term of this Agreement, review the extent of good faith substantial compliance by E&B with the terms of this Agreement. Subject to the notice and cure procedure set forth in Section 5.1.2, such a periodic review may result in amendment or termination of this Agreement, provided a default has been established under the terms of this Agreement. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1, as amended, E&B shall have the duty to file an annual review request with the City, pay any applicable Processing Fees for such annual review and demonstrate its good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement at such periodic review. The parties recognize that this Agreement and the documents incorporated herein could be deemed to contain many requirements (i.e., construction standards, landscape standards, etc.) and that evidence of each and every requirement would be a wasteful exercise of the parties' resources. Accordingly, E&B shall be deemed to have satisfied its duty of demonstration if it presents evidence satisfactory to the City of its good faith and substantial compliance with the major provisions of this Agreement. 4.3.1.1 Any party may address any requirement of this Agreement during the review. However, ten (10) days’ written notice of any requirement to be addressed shall be made by the requesting party. If at the time of review an issue not previously identified in writing is required to be addressed, the review at the request of either party shall be continued to afford sufficient time for analysis and preparation. 4.3.2 Special Review. The City Council may order a special review of compliance with this Agreement at any time. The Director of Community Development or City Council, as determined from time to time by the City Council, shall conduct such special reviews. Any special review shall comply with the procedural provisions of an annual review as provided by Section 4.3.1. - 16 - 4.3.3 Opportunity to be Heard. Upon written request to the City by E&B, E&B shall be permitted an opportunity to be heard orally and/or in writing at a hearing before the City Council regarding its performance under this Agreement. E&B shall also be heard before the City Council at any required public hearing concerning a review of action on the Agreement. 4.3.4 Information to be Provided E&B. The City shall, to such an extent as is practical, deposit in the mail to E&B a copy of staff reports and related exhibits concerning contract performance a minimum of seven (7) business days prior to any such review or action upon this Agreement by the Planning Commission or the City Council. 5 DEFAULT, REMEDIES AND TERMINATION 5.1 Enforceability. 5.1.1 Default. Subject to Sections 5.1.2 and 5.1.3, failure by any party to perform any term or provision of this Agreement required to be performed by such party shall constitute an event of default ("Event of Default”). In the event that E&B files for reorganization or other relief under any Federal or State bankruptcy or insolvency law, whether voluntarily or by involuntary bankruptcy or insolvency action, all provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless E&B engages in an Event of Default. For purposes of this Agreement, a party claiming another party is in default shall be referred to as the "Complaining Party", and the party alleged to be in default shall be referred to as the "Party in Default". 5.1.2 Procedure Regarding Defaults. 5.1.2.1 Notice of Default. The Complaining Party shall give written notice of default to the Party in Default, specifying the default complained of by the Complaining Party. Delay in giving such notice shall not constitute a waiver of any default nor shall it change the time of default. The Party in Default shall diligently endeavor to cure, correct or remedy the matter complained of, provided the such cure, correction or remedy shall be completed within the applicable time period set forth herein after receipt of written notice (or such additional, time as may be deemed by the Complaining Party to be reasonably necessary to correct the matter). Any failures or delays by a Complaining Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies. Delays by a Complaining Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies shall not deprive the Complaining Party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert, or enforce any such rights or remedies. If an Event of Default occurs, prior to exercising any remedies, the Complaining Party shall give the Party in Default written notice of such default. Without limitation, evidence of default may arise in the course of the regularly scheduled annual review or a special review described in Section 4.3. 5.1.2.2 Cure Periods. If the default is reasonably capable of being cured within thirty (30) days, the Party in Default shall have such period to effect a cure prior to exercise of remedies by the Complaining Party. If the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot practicably be cured within such thirty (30) day period, the cure shall be deemed to have occurred within such thirty (30) day period if (i) the cure is commenced at the earliest practicable - 17 - date following receipt of the notice; (ii) the cure is diligently prosecuted to completion at all times thereafter; (iii) at the earliest practicable date (in no event later than thirty (30) days after the curing party's receipt of the notice), the curing party provides written notice to the other party that the cure cannot practicably be completed within such thirty (30) day period; and (iv) the cure is completed at the earliest practicable date. In no event shall the Complaining Party be precluded from exercising remedies, subject to the preceding sentence if a default is not cured within sixty (60) days after the first notice of default is given. Subject to the foregoing, if a party fails to cure a default in accordance with the foregoing, the Complaining Party, at its option, may terminate this Agreement pursuant to California Government Code Section 65868, and/or institute legal proceedings pursuant to this Agreement. 5.1.2.3 Procedures Regarding City Termination. Notice of intent to terminate shall be by certified mail, return receipt requested. Upon delivery by the City of notice of intent to terminate, the matter shall be scheduled for consideration and review by the City Council within thirty (30) days in accordance with Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868. Upon consideration of the evidence presented in said review and a determination by the City Council based thereon, the City may give written notice of termination of this Agreement to E&B. Any determination of default (or any determination of failure to demonstrate good faith compliance as a part of annual review) made by the City against E&B, or any person who succeeds to E&B with respect to any portion of the Property, shall be based upon written findings supported by substantial evidence in the record. Any purported termination of this Agreement for alleged default shall be subject to review in the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.5(c). 5.1.3 Institution of Legal Action. Subject to notice of default and opportunity to cure under Section 5.1.2, and subject further to the limitation on remedies set forth in Section 5.1.4, in addition to any other rights or remedies, any party to this Agreement may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof, or to obtain any other remedies consistent with this Agreement. If a legal action or proceeding is brought by any party to this Agreement because of an Event of Default under this Agreement, or to enforce a provision hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reimbursement of all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred in prosecuting such legal action or proceeding. This provision is separate and several and shall survive the merger of this Agreement into any judgment on this Agreement. 5.1.4 Remedies. 5.1.4.1 E&B’s Remedies. It is acknowledged by the parties that the City would not have entered into this Agreement if it were liable in damages under or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. In addition, the parties agree that monetary damages are not an adequate remedy for E&B if the City should be determined to be in default under this Agreement. The parties further agree that specific performance shall be E&B’s only remedy under this Agreement and E&B may not seek monetary damages in the event of a default by City under this Agreement. E&B covenants not to sue for or obtain monetary damages for the breach by City of any provision of this Agreement. - 18 - 5.1.4.2 City's Remedies. The parties agree that the City shall have limited remedies for monetary damages and specific performance as specifically provided for in this Section 5.1.4.2. The City shall not have any right to compel specific performance with respect to the construction of the Project, or any obligation to construct the Project, including without limitation Section 3.7. Further, the City shall have no right to monetary damages as a result of E&B's failure to construct the Project or its failure to comply with Section 3.7. The City shall have the right to sue for monetary damages for failure by the E&B to pay any amounts owing under this Agreement including without limitation any amounts owing pursuant to Section 6.5.1. In no event shall the City be entitled to consequential damages or punitive damages for any breach of this Agreement. City also shall have the right to seek monetary damages for reimbursement of the actual cost to the City incurred by the City to construct, complete, demolish, remove or restore any physical infrastructure improvement in the public right of way which E&B commences construction of but fails to complete. 5.1.4.3 Other Actions. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to waive or limit any rights and remedies that the parties would otherwise have against the other relating to matters not covered by this Agreement. 5.2 Termination of Agreement. 5.2.1 As to the Property and all of the rights of E&B hereunder, and except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the expiration of the Term of this Agreement unless earlier terminated pursuant to this Agreement. Subject to the notice and cure provisions set forth in Section 5.1.2, the City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement as to the Property and the rights of E&B hereunder, in the event E&B defaults and fails to cure such default within the respective cure period. Subject to the notice and cure provisions set forth in Section 5.1.2, E&B shall have the right to terminate this Agreement and the rights of the City hereunder in the event the City defaults and fails to cure such default within the respective cure period. Upon the termination of this Agreement, neither party shall have any further right or obligation with respect to the Property hereunder except with respect to any obligation to have been performed prior to such termination or with respect to any default in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement which has occurred prior to such termination (other than commencement of construction of either phase) or with respect to any obligations which are specifically set forth as surviving this Agreement. 5.2.2 Termination by E&B Prior to Development. E&B is free, in its sole and subjective business judgment, not to proceed with development of the Project and, in such an event, to terminate this Agreement. The City acknowledges that such a right is consistent with the intent, purpose and understanding of the parties to this Agreement. In the event E&B decides not to proceed with development of the Project and to terminate this Agreement, the E&B shall provide written notice to the City of that decision and of the final, irrevocable termination of this Agreement. Immediately upon the giving of such written notice to the City, the parties’ rights and obligations under this Agreement shall cease, except with respect to any obligations which are specifically set forth as surviving this Agreement. In the event of such written notice to the City terminating this Agreement, all Project Approvals other than the Lease and those included in the City’s General Plan and/or the Municipal Code, shall terminate and be extinguished. Formatted: Expanded by 0.1 pt - 19 - 5.2.25.2.3 Effect of Termination on City. Upon any termination of this Agreement, the entitlements, conditions of development, limitations on fees and all other terms and conditions of this Agreement shall no longer be vested hereby with respect to the property affected by such termination (provided vesting of entitlements, conditions or fees applicable to the Property shall be governed by planning and zoning law) and the City shall no longer be limited, by this Agreement, to make any changes or modifications to such entitlements, conditions or fees applicable to such property. 6 GENERAL PROVISIONS 6.1 Term. 6.1.1 Term. The Term of this Agreement shall commence upon the Commencement Date and shall be thirty-five (35) years, unless terminated, modified or extended pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement or by the voters of the City. The Term of this Agreement shall be tolled during any period of time in which a Force Majeure Delay exists. 6.1.2 Additional Rights. Expiration or termination of this Agreement shall not affect any right vested under law independent of this Agreement. 6.2 Approval Procedure: Recordation. The following procedure shall govern approval of this Agreement (which shall precede the execution hereof by the City): (a) The voters shall have approved Proposition __ approving this Agreement; (b) The Coastal Commission shall have approved this Agreement (including any revisions to this Agreement authorized by the Proposition); and (c) As provided in Section 65868.5 of the Development Agreement Act, following execution by the City, the City shall cause a copy of this Agreement to be recorded with the County Recorder within ten (10) days following the Commencement Date. Any recording costs shall be paid by E&B. 6.3 Cooperation and Implementation. City represents that it will cooperate with E&B to the fullest extent reasonable and feasible to implement this Agreement. Upon satisfactory completion by E&B of all of its preliminary actions and payments of appropriate fees, City shall promptly commence and diligently proceed to complete all steps necessary for the implementation of this Agreement and the development of the Property in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the processing and checking of any and all Project Approvals, agreements, covenants and related matters required under the conditions of this Agreement, building plans and specifications, and any other plans necessary for the development of the Property, requests for inspections and certificates of occupancy, filed by or on behalf of E&B. E&B shall, in a timely manner, provide City with all documents, plans and other information necessary for the City to carry out its obligations hereunder. - 20 - 6.4 Legal Challenges. 6.4.1 Defense. If any legal action or other proceeding is instituted by a third party or parties, other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of the Project Approvals, of the EIR or of this Development Agreement, E&B and the City shall cooperate in defending any such action. The City shall notify E&B of any such legal action against City within ten (10) days after the City receives service of process, except for any petition for a Temporary Restraining Order, in which case the City shall notify E&B immediately upon receipt of notice thereof. 6.4.2 Continued Processing. The filing of any lawsuit(s) by a third party (not a party to this Agreement) after the Approval Date against the City and/or E&B relating to this Agreement or to other development issues affecting the Project shall not delay or stop the processing or issuance of any permit or authorization necessary for development of the Project, unless the City in good faith determines that such delay is legally required. 6.5 Indemnity. 6.5.1 E&B Indemnity. To the fullest extent permitted by law, E&B hereby agrees, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, protect, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its elected officials, officers, attorneys, agents, employees, volunteers, successors, and assigns (collectively "Indemnitees") from and against any and all damages, costs, expenses, liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, proceedings, expenses, judgments, penalties, liens, and losses of any nature whatsoever, including reasonable fees of accountants, attorneys, engineers, consultants or other professionals and all costs associated therewith, arising or claimed to arise, directly or indirectly, out of, in connection with, resulting from, or related to any act, failure to act, error, or omission of E&B or any of its officers, agents, servants, lessees, employees, contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, suppliers or their officers, agents, servants, lessees, or employees, or arising or claimed to arise, directly or indirectly, out of, in connection with, resulting from, or related to this Agreement or Project Approvals, any construction permitted pursuant to this Agreement or Project Approvals, or any subsequent use of the Property, or any portion thereof, permitted by this Agreement or Project Approvals except for any actions resulting from the gross negligence or intentional acts of an Indemnitee. The City may elect to participate in the litigation, in which case E&B agrees to reimburse the City for its litigation costs and fees, including the retention of outside counsel. Neither party shall settle any such lawsuit without the consent of the other party. 6.5.2 Survival of Indemnity. The indemnity provisions contained in Sections 6.4 and 6.5 shall survive the termination of the Agreement and are in addition to any other rights or remedies which Indemnitees may have under the law. Payment is not required as a condition precedent to an Indemnitee's right to recover under these indemnity provisions, and an entry of judgment against an Indemnitee shall be conclusive in favor of the Indemnitee's right to recover under these indemnity provisions. E&B shall pay Indemnitees for any reasonable attorneys fees and costs incurred in enforcing these indemnification provisions. 6.6 Notices. All notices or other communications required hereunder shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered (including by means of professional messenger service), - 21 - or sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt required, or by electronic mail (provided the email transmission is followed by delivery of a "hard" copy), and shall be deemed received on the date of receipt personally, by registered or certified mail or by facsimile. Unless otherwise indicated in writing, such notice shall be sent addressed as follows: If to the City: City Manager City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 With a copy to: Michael Jenkins, Esq. Jenkins & Hogin 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 110 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Telephone: (310) 643-8448 Fax: (310) 643-8441 If to E&B: E & B Natural Resources Management Corporation [address] Telephone: Fax: With a copy to: [name] Telephone: Fax: 6.7 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties to this Agreement and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. - 22 - 6.8 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 6.9 Modification, Amendment or Extension. Subject to any notice and hearing requirements imposed by law, this Agreement may be modified, amended and/or extended from time to time by mutual written consent of the City Council and E&B as set forth in Government Code Sections 65867, 65867.5 and 65868 and the Approval Ordinance and Chapter 19.66 of the Municipal Code. 6.10 Conflicts of Law. In the event that state, regional or federal laws or regulations enacted after the Approval Date or the action or inaction of any other affected governmental jurisdiction prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the City, the parties shall (a) provide the other party with written notice of such state, regional or federal restriction, provide a copy of such regulation or policy and a statement of conflict with the provisions of this Agreement, and (b) E&B and the City staff shall, within thirty (30) days, meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement, but only to the minimum extent necessary to comply with such federal, regional or state law or regulation. Thereafter, regardless of whether the parties reach an agreement on the effect of such federal, regional or state law or regulation upon this Agreement, the matter shall be scheduled for hearings before the Council. Ten (10) days’ written notice of such hearing shall be given, pursuant to Government Code Sections 65090 and 65867. The Council, at such hearing, shall determine the exact modification or suspension which shall be necessitated by such federal, regional or state law or regulation. E&B, at the hearing, shall have the right to offer oral and written testimony. Any modification or suspension shall be taken by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the authorized voting members of the Council. Any suspension or modification may be subject to judicial review. The City shall cooperate with E&B in the securing of any permits which may be required as a result of such modifications or suspensions. If E&B and the City do not agree on the modification or suspension, either party may elect to terminate this Agreement. 6.11 Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought and referring expressly to this Section. No waiver of any right or remedy in respect of any occurrence or event shall be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect of any other occurrence or event 6.12 Successors and Assigns. Except as expressly provided to the contrary in this Agreement, the burdens and obligations of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to this Agreement and all successors in interest to the Property or any portion thereof or any interest therein, and shall be covenants running with the land. 6.13 Governing State Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 6.14 Constructive Notice and Acceptance. Every person who now or hereafter owns or acquires any right, title or interest in or to any portion of the Property is and shall be conclusively - 23 - deemed to have consented and agreed to every provision contained herein, whether or not any reference to this Agreement is contained in the instrument by which such person acquired an interest in the Property. 6.15 Statement of Compliance. Within thirty (30) days following any written request, in accordance with the notice provisions of this Agreement, which either party may make from time to time, the other party shall execute and deliver to the requesting party a statement certifying that: (a) this Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect or, if there have been modifications hereto, that this Agreement is in full force and effect, as modified, and stating the date and nature of such modifications; (b) that this Agreement is in full force and there are no current uncured defaults under this Agreement or specifying the dates and nature of any such defaults; and (c) any other information reasonably requested. The failure to deliver such statement within such time shall be conclusive upon the party which fails to deliver such statement that this Agreement is in full force and effect without modification except as may be represented by the requesting party and that there are no uncured defaults in the performance of the requesting party. Said statement(s) shall be in the form reasonably satisfactory to the City, E&B and to any purchaser, lender, title company, governmental agency, or other person reasonably requesting such statement(s) in connection with sale, use, development, construction, financing or marketing of the Property. The City and E&B, for their own respective uses, shall also be entitled to obtain a statement of compliance at any reasonable time. 6.16 Insurance. [Insurance requirements beyond those from the lease] 6.17 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. No party shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or injuring the right of the other parties to receive the benefits of this Agreement. 6.18 Covenant of Cooperation. E&B and the City shall cooperate with and assist each other in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement, including assistance in obtaining permits for the development of the Property or the Project which may be required from public agencies other than the City. E&B reserves the right to challenge any ordinance, measure, moratorium or other limitation in a court of law if it becomes necessary to protect the development rights vested in the Property pursuant to this Agreement. 6.19 Justifiable Reliance. The City acknowledges that, in investing money and planning effort in and to the Project and all public improvements and dedication offers required hereunder, and in undertaking commencement of the Project, E&B will be doing so in reliance upon the City's covenants contained in this Agreement and upon the enforceability of this Agreement, and the City agrees that it will be reasonable and justifiable for E&B to so rely. 6.20 Project Is Private Undertaking. It is specifically understood and agreed to by and between the parties hereto that: (1) the subject development is a private development; (2) except for the obligations of the City described herein, if any, the City has no responsibilities for or duty to third parties concerning any public improvement until such time and only until such time that the City accepts the same pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement; (3) E&B shall have full - 24 - power over and exclusive control of the development of the Project herein described subject only to the limitations and obligations of E&B under this Agreement and the Project Approvals; and (4) the contractual relationship between the City and E&B is such that E&B is not an agent of the City nor is City an agent of E&B. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed to waive or modify any otherwise applicable obligations the City, acting in its governmental capacity and not as a party to this Agreement, may have to E&B or any other party, under and in accordance with all applicable laws. 6.21 Further Actions and Instruments. The parties to this Agreement shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other parties to the extent contemplated in the performance of all obligations under this Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Agreement. Upon the request of any party, the other parties shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. 6.22 Section Headings. All Article and Section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 6.23 Enforced Delay (Force Majeure). (a) In addition to specific provisions of this Agreement, performance by any party hereunder, including making payments, shall not be deemed to be in default where delays or defaults are due to war, insurrection, strikes, walkouts, riots, floods, earthquakes, fires, casualties, acts of God, litigation (including without limitation, third party legal challenges to the Project, the Project Approvals or the environmental clearance for the Project Approvals and the Project), unavailability of materials, unforeseeable events beyond the control of E&B, governmental restrictions including moratoria imposed or mandated by governmental entities (but only as to delays or defaults on the part of E&B), enactment of conflicting state or federal laws or regulations (but only if the party claiming delay complies at all times with the provisions of this Agreement pertaining to such conflicting laws), delays caused by the delay or failure by any entity other than the party claiming such delay to provide financing for or construction of needed public facilities or infrastructure as contemplated or required by this Agreement, delays due to the enforcement of environmental regulations, litigation brought by third parties, or similar bases for excused performance. (b) An extension of time for any such cause including an extension of the Term (a "Force Majeure Delay") shall be for the period of the enforced delay and shall commence to run from the time of the commencement of the cause, if notice by the party claiming such extension is sent to the other parties within thirty (30) days of knowledge of the commencement of the cause. Notwithstanding the foregoing, none of the foregoing events shall constitute a Force Majeure Delay unless and until the party claiming such delay and interference delivers to the other party written notice describing the event, its cause, when and how such party obtained knowledge, the date the event commenced, and the estimated delay resulting therefrom. Any - 25 - party claiming a Force Majeure Delay shall deliver such written notice within thirty (30) days after it obtains actual knowledge of the event. The time for performance due to a Force Majeure Delay will be extended for such period of time as the cause of such delay exists (whether or not it extends beyond the Term or the Extended Term) but in no event for longer than for such period of time. (c) Notwithstanding the first sentence of paragraph (b), above, the following shall apply: (i) E&B shall be entitled to a Force Majeure Delay for a period longer than the period of enforced delay if the City Council determines that such longer period is reasonably required; and (ii) E&B shall be entitled to a Force Majeure Delay notwithstanding the fact that E&B may not have given timely notice to the City, if the City Council determines that such Force Majeure Delay is reasonably required. (d) A Force Majeure Delay shall not include the existence of any adverse or difficult market or economic conditions. 6.24 Emergency Circumstances. (a) If, as the result of specific facts, events or circumstances, the City believes that a severe and immediate emergency threat to the health or safety of the City or its residents, meeting the requirements of subparagraph (b), below, requires the modification, suspension or termination of this Agreement, the City will, after reasonable notice to E&B (in light of all the circumstances), hold a hearing on such facts, events or circumstances, at which E&B shall have the right to address the City Council. The City shall have the right to modify, suspend or terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, if, following such hearing, the City Council determines that such modification, suspension or termination is required in order to protect the health and safety of the City and its residents. (b) For purposes of this Section 6.24, an emergency must meet each of the following criteria: (i) it must be based on genuine health, safety and general welfare concerns (other than general growth management issues); (ii) it must arise out of a documented emergency situation, as declared by the President of the United States, Governor of California, or the Mayor or City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach; and (iii) based upon its terms or its effect as applied, it does not apply exclusively or primarily to the Property or the Project. To the extent possible, any such action by the City shall be taken in a manner so as to provide E&B with the rights and assurances provided under this Agreement. 6.25 Severability. Invalidation of any of the provisions contained in this Agreement, or of the application thereof to any person, by judgment or court order, shall in no way affect any of the other provisions hereof or the application thereof to any other person or circumstance, and the same shall remain in full force and effect, unless enforcement of this Agreement, as so invalidated, would be unreasonable or inequitable under all the circumstances or would frustrate the purposes of this Agreement and/or the rights and obligations of the parties hereto. 6.26 Interpretation. The language in all parts of this Agreement shall in all cases be construed simply, as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning and not strictly for or against any party. The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that this Agreement has been - 26 - prepared jointly by the parties and has been the subject of arm's length and careful negotiation over a considerable period of time, that each party has independently reviewed this Agreement with legal counsel, and that each party has the requisite experience and sophistication to understand, interpret and agree to the particular language of the provisions hereof. Accordingly, in the event of an ambiguity in or dispute regarding the interpretation of this Agreement, this Agreement shall not be interpreted or construed against the party preparing it, and instead other rules of interpretation and construction shall be utilized. 6.27 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in duplicate counterpart originals, each of which is deemed to be an original and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. 6.28 Entire Agreement. This Agreement consists of __ pages and ______________ exhibits (designated __ through __), which constitute the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have each executed this Agreement on the date first written above. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH E&B NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CORPORATION By:____________________________ By:___________________________________ Mayor President ATTEST: By: _____________________________ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ____________________________ By: _________________________________ City Attorney Attorneys for E&B Natural Resources - 27 - Management Corporation - 28 - EXHIBIT “A” PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION _______________________________, in the City of Hermosa Beach, County of Los Angeles, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book __, Pages __ and ___ of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. - 29 - EXHIBIT “B” PROJECT DESCRIPTION [DESCRIPTION] - 30 - EXHIBIT “C” PUBLIC BENEFITS OF PROJECT As consideration for the benefits provided to E&B through this agreement, E&B has agreed to provide the Public Benefits in addition to the Project’s benefits as noted in the Settlement Agreement. - 31 - EXHIBIT “D” PROJECT DEVELOPMENT FEES - 32 - EXHIBIT “E” CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 33 - EXHIBIT “E” MITIGATION MEASURES/MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN From: ------------------------------------- On Behalf Of Mr. Morley Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 4:31 PM To: Tom Bakaly; Ann Yang Subject: Definition and Location of Tidelands as promised 5/27 Hi Tom, At the 5/27 CC Meeting I promised to send the definition and location of Tidelands / Uplands border. Please provide this information to the Council Members, Staff and report preparers as appropriate. The attached files ; A. the 1957 maps faxed from the City of HB to the SLC per negotiated agreements. (qty 2) B. Todays Google Maps of HB south end tidelands/uplands. (qty 2) C. 1993 SLC agreements/memo (qty 3) D. Report MHTL Manhattan Beach Width Change from a Century of Images 1. Tidelands trust fund; Would the City like to join me in a rule interpretation from the State Lands Commission, External Affairs department? We can easily resolve this issue with the expert legal team specifically created and mandated to manage and monitor every Tideland Grant in the State. I'll be asking Sheri Pemberton these questions soon. http://www.slc.ca.gov/Division_Pages/EAD/EAD_Home_Page.html In preparing this memo, I determined that I need to inform the City that our State Lands Commission (SLC) MOU specifies the exact amount of revenue to be placed in the Tidelands trust is 11 2/3%. This must be the amount in the trust after any 'off the top' intentions expressed as an "untested interpretation" by Mr. Jenkins. The City is risking the 1919 grant itself by a breach of our trustee responsibilities and the 1994 SLC Lease approval for access to the tidelands. The MOU item #3 defines that 11 2/3% of oil value produced from the tidelands must be placed in Tidelands Trust. The MOU item #4 defines the "deposit of all royalty revenues" . Perhaps the solution, in light of these facts, is to place 11 2/3% into tidelands trust fund, 3.66% into Uplands account and 3.33% paid to Macpherson for all tidelands Oil value. I would be surprised if a 30 year oil and gas bureaucrat in Long Beach, with intimate familiarity with the public trust doctrine, could agree to any other conclusion drawn by the CBA team. 2. Tidelands border; The Tidelands border is established by the agreement between the City and the SLC. Based on the 1957 maps, the tideland/upland border line is located approximately 150 feet west of the Strand wall, on average for the entire City. I estimate this by comparison of the mapped sand area west of the strand to the equal strand facing distance of the five (5) southern- most strand parcels (5 x actual 30 feet wide ea.) The most recent google maps show at least twice and possibly triple the amount of sand as in 1957. The importance of the location of the tideland border impacts two main issues; 1. Revenue fund allocation, expenditures and limitations. 2. Oil Volume / Revenue may be reduced due to the required location of many of the 30 proposed wells (per the Lease and SLC MOU/Amendment). See amendment #8 below and section 12.g of Lease. This could limit well production for the life of the project. My estimation (per DEIR and DCBA) of the number of Protection wells which will be required on the Redondo Beach border (10) and on both sides of the Tideland / Upland border (20) based upon the Lease, City/SLC MOU and DOGGR regulations to prevent drainage. Typical industry standard spacing for such wells is placement every 10 acres (660 feet x 660 feet). Please note that the sand width is not as exact as the MHTL but is used to provide the observable comparisons. Case law indicates that accretion does not change the definition of the tidelands border, accretion only changes the tidelands subgroup from submerged lands to filled tidelands. Please see attached report on Manhattan Beach historical changes in 'wet sand width' with images and reasons for changes in the 1960's and 1970's. The extension of the Redondo Beach breakwater in 1960 began a massive buildup of our beaches with sand from the Marina del Rey dredging and projects in El Segundo. Previously much of the literal flow of material ended up in the Redondo Beach subsea canyon. Backup data summarized below; The City and SLC signed a MOU per the 04/30/1993 SLC Commissioners decision which conditionally approved the City's ability to enter into a Tidelands Oil and Gas Lease. Please see the 5/11/1993 cover memo from SLC noting the MOU and the immediate expectation for the hardcopy of the executed of the multipart Amendment. The MOU has 5 items which relate to production from the tidelands. In summary, #3 defines that 11 2/3% of oil value produced from the tidelands must be placed in Tidelands Trust. #4 "deposit of all royalty revenues resulting from the production of oil and gas from the tidelands. #4 "use in accordance with" specific 1919 granted purposes. #10 1957 mean high tide line shall serve as the baseline. (see two maps with 4/22/93 City fax timestamp) #11 The City agrees to amend Lease. The Amendment has 4 items which relate to production from the tidelands. In summary, #1 '...exclusively from the Drill Site or from another drill site located only in the uplands as approved by the vote of the people.' #3 "'Restricted royalty' is that royalty received by the City which must be deposited in a special tide and submerged lands account to be held in trust #3 and to be expended only in accordance with chapter 479, Statutes 1919, or as it may be amended." #8 obligations to drill protection wells to protect both the leased lands and the tidelands therein from drainage Best Regards, Tom Morley More detail of SLC text below; MOU #3 The Commission acknowledges and approves that royalty revenue from the tidelands due and payable under the Lease to the City, shall be allocated seven percent (7%) to the City General Fund for the use of the drill site and eleven and two thirds percent (11 2/3%) to the Special Tidelands Trust Account. #4 City shall establish a Special Tidelands Trust Fund for deposit of all royalty revenues resulting from the production of oil and gas from the tidelands for allowable use in accordance with Chapter 479, Statutes 1919, or as it may be amended. #10 The Commission and the City agree that the mean high tide line, as surveyed and described on that certain "Plat of the State Tidelands Boundary Along the Shore of the Pacific Ocean Within the City of Hermosa Beach, Los Angeles County, California, dated December 13, 1957 and signed by F. J. Hortig and prepared under W.O. 2771, shall serve as the base line for the allocation of the production between the tidelands trust and all other lands. The City further acknowledges that the mean high tide line is not a fixed boundary and that the City shall survey the mean high tide line from time to time in order to accurately allocate production between the tidelands and all other lands. #11 The parties acknowledge that certain amendments to the Lease will or are agreed to between the City and Operator to address comments and concerns of the Commission. SLC and City agreed lease amendments. Recitals B. In response to certain concerns raised by the State Lands Commission, the parties hereto desire to amend the Lease. Now Therefore, The parties hereto agree as follows; 1. Section 1.h. shall be added as follows; "h. Lessee's rights herein to prospect for , drill for, produce and take oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances from the leased lands and adjacent lands shall be to operate exclusively from the Drill Site or from another drill site located only in the uplands as approved by the vote of the people. .... 3. The second sentence of Section 2.b.(2) of the Lease is hereby deleted in its entirety and amended to read as follows; "'Restricted royalty' is that royalty received by the City which must be deposited in a special tide and submerged lands account to be held in trust and to be expended only in accordance with chapter 479, Statutes 1919, or as it may be amended." 8. The first paragraph of subsection 12.g shall be amended to read as follows; "g. ....[sic; Tideland and upland adjacency]....The City and Lessee have agreed that the Lessee shall have the following obligations to drill protection wells to protect both the leased lands and the tidelands therein from drainage, whether caused by the Lessee's own production operations on other lands or by producing operations conducted by others." end..tom m. From:---------------------------------------------- On Behalf Of Mr. Morley Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 11:12 AM To: Carolyn Petty; Michael DiVirgilio; Peter Tucker; Nanette Barragan; Hany Fangary Cc: Tom Bakaly; Ann Yang Subject: Fwd: Definition and Location of Tidelands as promised 5/27 Hi Tom and Ann, If possible, Please include this email and the May 30th email , plus the attachments, as a supplemental to tonight's 6/10/14 City Council agenda. Please obscure my email address. Regards, Tom Morley FYI, on May 30th I sent the attached email to the City Manager, I wanted you all to be informed. 1. Tidelands trust fund; 2. Tidelands border At issue is not just the 'off the top ' 3.33% of all oil value to Macpherson. Other additional unauthorized spending of tidelands trust funds are utilized in the CBA. Please note that on the 'Tidelands Trust' spending issue can be easily resolved by asking the dedicated legal team at the State Lands Commission, External Affairs Division. This Division was created in 2011 by the State Legislature and is staffed with a legal team which is dedicated solely to Tidelands Grant issues. Why not ask them immediately? http://www.slc.ca.gov/Division_Pages/EAD/EAD_Home_Page.html Tidelands funds can only be spent as approved by the State Lands Commission (SLC). A maximum of $646,000 is currently approved by the SLC to repay advances (per the Lease and MOU). The CBA projected tidelands trust reduction is $50 Million (77 times more than approved by SLC). The Lease, approved by the SLC, specified the actual dollar amounts ($646,000), to be spent from tidelands. see below. The CBA interprets these specific agreements as if an entire category of spending was approved. Worse, the CBA expands the content of those categories to include the E&B settlement payment. The City agreed with the SLC to have any changes to the Lease pre-approved by the SLC. I think this accounting procedure would be contrary to the SLC approval and would constitute an amendment to the Lease requireing prior approval by the SLC. The City is on the precipice of accepting accounting activities which are contrary to the Public Trust Doctrine and their Trustee Responsibilities under State Law. The SLC has the authority to make a different decision on the permission to access the tidelands oil if they become aware of the millions of additional $50 million dollars proposed to reduce the Tidelands Trust balance. The City risks losing the SLC approval to drill into the tidelands if this accounting gimmick is utilized. How is this happening? The Scope of Work for Kosmont only required the CBA team to review E&B's BRG report and that BRG report on page 34-35 suggests the exact interpretation used by Kosmont . see attached The CBA shows three SLC MOU allowed uses for spending of tidelands. The CBA (page 15) interpretation is that any amount 'advanced' by the Operator as loans can be paid back with 70% coming from tidelands funds. The CBA also assumes that the $3.5 Million settlement agreement payment to E&B can be paid with a split of tidelands dollars (without any support from the Lease or MOU terms). They note MOU #7 to allow tidelands fund spending 70/30 split of advances (loans) from Lessee. MOU#7 refers to section 13 of the Lease (13.d.4). Both points are incorrect. Here are the facts from the Lease. The State Lands Commission only approved specific values in the Lease for allowed 'advances' ; 13.a $21,000 for consulting services 13.c $75,000 for temp city yard move 13.d $500,000 for permanent City yard move 20.e $50,000 for environmental Cleanup of city yard __________ Total $646,000 The CBA is already using a higher number for advances (on page 75 and pg.101) of $8,260,000 including $3.5 Mil E&B settlement payment which qualify for the 70/30 split . (70% = $5,782,000) The Macpherson 3.33% settlement royalty would be $43.8 Million at CBA expected volume for the tidelands split. The CBA projected Tidelands Trust reduction is $49.6 Million (77 times higher than approved by SLC). Reductions of the tideland trust, under this logic, may be even higher with additional negotiated Development Agreement exactions. E&B is now suggesting in the Development agreement negotiations to adjust those 1992 dollars up to 2014 dollar value and to add other 'advances' to the City. The 'advances' could even be negotiated to include the total amount of all City expenses and losses (rent) and to bank the debt service which could add up to a total value from $15 Million to $50 million. The 'advances' could be even more if E&B agrees to loan or advance the Macpherson 3.33% as an 'advance'. Under this logic, if there is no limit to what can be called an 'advance', then the $85 Million to $175 Million of Carbon Offsets, per CBA section 13.5, could be purchased with a split of tidelands trust revenue in support of the City's carbon neutral public policy. Last, if the tidelands is not tapped for these funds for Macpherson royalty and the 'advances' then the General Fund pays the amounts. The City will not even meet cost breakeven if the spendable 'unrestricted' dollars will not cover the $30 million of City costs/expenses. It is very uncertain that much more oil volume (2x, 3x, 4x, 6.5x) than Redondo actually produced from 30 wells will be achieved. Larry Kosmont and Will both told the City Council last week that 'horizontal drilling' and other technical oil drilling improvements will not increase the volume of oil recovered. The techniques will only accelerate the rate of production into earlier years of the project. ...tom Note; In support of my previous email to Tom Bakaly, please see exhibit B of the Lease. This is another example of what the SLC approved as Tidelands Trust funding. It specifies 11 2/3% must be deposited in the special tidelands trust fund. see 2.b.ii EXHIBIT "B" ROYALTY PERCENTAGE 2. TIDELANDS ROYALTY PERCENTAGE The royalty for oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances resulting from the leased lands in the tidelands (i.e., all tide and submerged lands within the present boundaries of the City of Hermosa Beach situated below the line of the mean high tide of the Pacific Ocean and extending seaward one (1) nautical) which Lessee° shall pay to City shall be as follows: (a) Eighteen and two-thirds per cent (18-2/3%) of all oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances, excepting gasoline extracted from gas produced, saved and sold from the tidelands; (b) .Eighteen and two-thirds per cent (18-2/3%) of fifty per cent (50%) of all gasoline extracted from gas produced, saved and sold from the tidelands. Royalty and/or money from royalty shall be divided between the Special Tidelands Trust Fund and the City's general Lund as follows: (i) A share of the royalty or money equal to thirty-seven and one-half percent (37.5%) to the City's general fund as consideration for furnishing the Drill Site; (ii) A share of the royalty or money equal to sixty-two and one-half percent (62.5%) to the Special Tidelands Trust Fund. From: F.O. Huebscher [mailto:fred@politicalscientists.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 4:04 PM To: Ann Yang; Elaine Doerfling Subject: Item 7 (b) on 6/10/14 agenda This is a supplemental submission for the agenda item 7 (b) on tonight's city council agenda. It is astounding that the city council would waste time discussing shortening city council meetings because some of the recent meeting have lasted into the wee hours of the morning. There is a simple solution: have more meetings or start the council meetings at an earlier hour or both. There is nothing in the law that precludes the council meeting more than twice a month. The proposals outlined by the city manager violate Councilmembers's rights of free speech as well as limiting public comment by residents and other interested parties. There is no need to limit the amount of time that a city councilmember may speak. Our City Councilmembers knew full well when they sought election that meetings could be lengthy. If a person didn't want to put in the required time, that person should not be serving on the city council. I would suggest that if any current member finds that the job is too time consuming because of the job requirements including lengthy meetings that that member resign. Former Torrance City Councilmember Cliff Newmark resigned from the Torrance City Council in December 2013 to serve on the El Camino Community College Board; his reason was that the City Council job was taking too much time away from his being with his family. So the Council should stop wasting time talking about trivia like the length of meetings and work on solving some of the the real problems facing our city: decaying infrastructure and fighting crime. -- Fred Huebscher 310-374-0568 www.politicalscientists.com From: Michael Keegan [mailto:michaelkeegan@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 3:52 PM To: Ann Yang; Michael DiVirgilio; Peter Tucker; Hany Fangary; Nannette Barragan; Bill Brand Subject: Meeting Management item 7b on tonight's agenda Please copy: city council, city manager Dear City Council: I am unable to come to this evenings meeting so my comments on item 7b are below: I do not think you should limit the public speech or council speech. The city has managed to get through 107 years of city council meeting without a need to set time limits on elected officials opinions, questions or discussions. As our councilmembers you are elected representatives of the community and have earned the right to speak and to engage in lively debate. The best decisions usual come from active and sometimes detailed discussions. Watching and actively participating in Hermosa Beach council activities for 28 years gives me some perspective and experience in this area. Good decisions, good discussions don't have a stop watch on them. Your 3 minutes city council member discussion time limit is not needed or wanted by the public. If efficiency is the goal, start with the city hall organization chart and work from the bottom up. Ending meetings at 10pm is not a good idea unless you increase city council regular meetings to once a week. All of you were elected knowing meetings can go until midnight. If your goal was to end meetings at 10pm, you should have announced that intention while you were campaigning for office so the voters could use that as a way to evaluate your work ethic. Management of the agenda needs to come from the city manager, department heads with some council input. We had this area well managed in the past and I am sure that same program can continue once the oil issue goes to the ballot box. Don't change the city because of an oil drilling application. Hermosa Beach residents don't want to sign up to speak or have the clerk announce their names. For the 28 years witnessed and actively participated it has not been needed. If you want to stifle community input put up these roadblocks, but know you are not being a true Hermosa steward. That kinda stuff is for Redondo Beach and we have seen how that electorate responds with their low voter turnout. If your goal is less public input, implement the suggestions of your staff report. I would suggest you table these changes until after the oil issue is vetted. There will be no need for this type of discussion after the issue is settled. If you make these changes, only the ballot box will get them back to where they belong. -- Michael Keegan Hermosa Beach 310 213 2086 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH SPEAKER REQUEST CARD If you wish to address the City Council, please complete this form (one per agenda item) and submit it to the City Clerk, specifying the item you wish to address. When recognized by the Mayor, please come to the podium, state your name for the record, and make your comments. Please give careful attention to remarks made by previous speakers to avoid repetition. The amount of time per speaker, as well as the amount of total speaker time per item, may be limited. *MEETING DATE *AGENDA ITEM NUMBER *NAME *CITY OF RESIDENCE *If representing a group or individual other than yourself, specify (on the line above) the organization/business/client. *For Agenda Item #1 (Oral Communications), specify (on the line above) the topic(s) to be addressed by your comments. Phone (optional) Email (optional) *PLEASE NOTE: All information provided on this card is public information and may be disseminated.* *If you do NOT wish to speak but want the record to reflect your support for ___ or opposition to ___ the item specified above, please check  the appropriate space and write on the back of this form any relevant comments you wish to add. H2O 05302012 1 *Why is Manhattan Beach so much wider now than in the past? George M. Reppucci Westwind Engineering Redondo Beach, CA greppu@verizon.net 2012 H2O Conference San Diego, CA Determination of Manhattan Beach Width Change from a Century of Images* H2O 05302012 2 Introduction •Twenty seven Manhattan Beach images acquired over the past 100 years were used to determine beach width change. •All Images include Manhattan Beach Pier •Nourishment of upcoast beaches on Manhattan Beach width is summarized •Public awareness of beach width change to be enhanced by benchmarking the pier H2O 05302012 3 Methodology •Analyze beach width from 27 images that show the Manhattan Beach pier covering the period from 1913 to 2011 •Beach width was scaled from historical images using the known pier length. •Beach width determined from Google Earth images (1994 through 2011) used Google Earth “ruler” distance measuring tool •Measurements made from wet sand line (WSL) to east end of pier H2O 05302012 4 Images Show Narrower Beach 1921 New Concrete Pier WSL=178 ft 1913 Old Iron Pier WSL=186 ft Manhattan Beach Historical Society ( MBHS) image Ref 4 LA Pacific Roadbed Location Ref 3 1925 Aerial WSL = 135 ft MBHS image Most of pier is over water 1906 H2O 05302012 5 Sometimes Much Narrower! •Image shows buildings which were located west of the present day bike path and Strand at east end of Pier. •The waterline is lapping at building foundations and almost no beach width exists at high tide 1930s MBHS image H2O 05302012 6 1938 Was An Eventful Year •Ballona Creek North and South rubble jetties constructed (replaced wood pile jetties) •Hyperion Dune nourishes Dockweiler Beach (1.8 million cu yd); funded by WPA. •Redondo Beach King Harbor north breakwater construction underway •Twin storms (Feb 27-Mar 4th >10 in. rain; 22.5 in. mountains) flood LA area leading to concrete channelization of rivers and construction of more flood control dams H2O 05302012 7 Historical Images 1946 Aerial WSL =250 ft 1930 Aerial WSL = 177 ft June 12, 1938 US Army Corps of Engrs WSL=108 ft 1928 Pier w/extension WSL=157 ft Ref 4 MBHS image MBHS image H2O 05302012 8 1930-1945 Santa Monica Bay History •1930 – LA City Council directs City Engineer to study protection and development of the city’s beaches. •1934 & 1935 – Engineers recommend doubling beach width using 56 million cu yd of sand from city owned dunes (LAX & Hyperion). No action (Great Depression) •1940, Santa Monica breakwater blamed for Venice Beach erosion. Another report recommends 12 million cu yds be placed on beaches from Santa Monica to El Segundo. No action (too impractical/visionary) •1943/1945- Venice Beach small fill proves nourishment works. State Health Commission quarantines 10 miles of Santa Monica Bay Beaches (Hyperion raw sewage) •1945- The Commission secures court order to construct sewage treatment plant (Hyperion) (Ref 7 ) H2O 05302012 9 Historical Images 1986 CCRP (Image #198620174) 1972 Satellite Image 1954 US Army Corps of Engrs Ref 1 WSL=394 ft WSL=394 ft MBHS image 1961 US Army Corps of Engrs WSL=309 ft WSL=219 ft H2O 05302012 10 Google Earth Images of MB Pier Nov 14, 2009 May 25, 2009 March 6, 2002 WSL=454 ft WSL=434 ft WSL=436 ft May 31, 1994 WSL = 386 ft WSL = 436 ft H2O 05302012 11 Google Earth Image - Date 3/8/2011 H2O 05302012 12 Manhattan Beach Width From 27 Images WET SAND LINE (WSL) DISTANCE FROM PIER BASE(FT) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 YEARWSL DISTANCE (FT) H2O 05302012 13 LA River Primary Source of El Segundo Dune Field Sand (Pre-1825) San Gabriel Mountains Santa Monica Mountains San Gabriel Valley San Fernando Valley Malibu Marina Del Rey Downtown LA Post - 1825 To LA Harbor Redondo Submarine Canyon Manhattan King Harbor LAX Hyperion El Segundo Dockweiler Hermosa Santa Monica Venice Pasadena LA Harbor Ballona Creek Palos Verdes (Refs. 6,8,11,12) H2O 05302012 14 El Segundo Dunes Before and After Hyperion El Segundo Dune Field 1928 Hyperion & Scattergood Today Refinery Dune Field Hyperion Scattergood 1 mile Courtesy of MBHS Scattergood Power Plant Hyperion Treatment Plant LAX Airport Manhattan Beach El Segundo Refinery Palos Verdes Dockweiler Beach Dockweiler Beach H2O 05302012 15 Beach Nourishment North of Manhattan Date Placement Site Sand Source Sand Quantity cu yd 1938 Dockweiler Beach Hyperion 1,800,000 1945 Venice Beach Hyperion 150,000 1947 Venice-Dockweiler Beach Hyperion 13,900,000 1956 Dockweiler Beach Scattergood 2,400,000 1960-62 Dockweiler Beach Marina Del Rey 3.200,000 1963 Dockweiler Beach Marina Del Rey 6,900,000 1984 El Segundo Offshore 620,000 1988 Dockweiler Beach Hyperion 155,000 1988-89 El Segundo Hyperion 945,000 Total = 30 million cu yds (Refs 2,10,12,14) H2O 05302012 16 •Southward littoral transport of sediment from operations associated with: –Several Hyperion construction projects that salvaged sand from dunes west of El Segundo for placement on the beaches –Marina Del Rey construction and harbor entrance dredging operations –Scattergood steam plant site construction (Refs. 2, 5 ,9,10,12,14) Upcoast Nourishment Benefits Manhattan Beach H2O 05302012 17 Beach Nourishment North of Manhattan Beach Widens Manhattan Beach 250 Ft (approx.) Manhattan Beach Width 30 million cu yds of sand added to Venice and Dockweiler Beaches from 1947 to 1963 Manhattan Beach width increases by approximately 250 ft. from 1940s to 1970s Beach width has been relatively stable for 50 years H = Hyperion M = Marina Del Rey S = Scattergood BEACH NOURISHMENT VOLUME (Millions of cu yd) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020YEARVOLUME MILLIONS CU YDH H H S M M WSL DISTANCE (FEET) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 YEARWSL DISTANCE (FT) H2O 05302012 18 Why is Manhattan Beach width so stable? •Numerous breakwaters, groins, and jetties along the coast from Santa Monica to King Harbor were constructed in the last century •These structures have significantly reduced littoral sediment transport to the Redondo Submarine Canyon (Refs 5,10,12) H2O 05302012 19 Breakwaters & Groins Reduce Littoral Drift Dockweiler Beach Groins (1 of 6) Marina Del Rey / Ballona Creek Breakwater and Jetties El Segundo Marine Terminal Groin King Harbor Breakwater 1938 1948(extended) 1963/65 1959 1983/4 1937/39 1958/60 1964 1950s- & 60s ? Ballona Creek Marina Del Rey H2O 05302012 20 Manhattan Beach Future Width •Marina Del Rey dredging now underway (1 million cu yd) includes some Dockweiler Beach offshore nourishment (majority is unsuitable and goes to Port of Long Beach) •Natural sand sources such as Ballona Creek and Santa Monica Mountain Canyons provide insufficient sediment to (Ref 12) •Sea level rise as much as 4 ft (model ave.) by end of century (Ref. 13) •Manhattan Beach will likely narrow given reduced natural sediment nourishment and sea level rise •Except for the dunes west of LAX, dune fields that provided sand for beach nourishment are gone or exist beneath the beach cities •At some time in the future, harvesting LAX dunes may be the best option to maintain beach width H2O 05302012 21 LAX Dunes-Potential Future Sand Source LAX Dunes 1.5 miles (approx 25 Million cu yd) LAX Hyperion Treatment Plant Marina Del Rey (Refs. 7,12) H2O 05302012 22 Summary and Conclusions •Manhattan Beach width increased approximately 250 ft due to Venice and Dockweiler Beach nourishment operations conducted 50-70 years ago. •Increase persists because southward littoral drift is significantly reduced by coastline structures built in the last century. •Increased width is mainly due to human intervention and is a major coastal engineering success story •Close coordination by federal, state, county, and MB city is required so future nourishment opportunities, essential to maintain beach width, are not missed. H2O 05302012 23 MB PIER AS A BEACH WIDTH YARDSTICK (“Beach width measurement for the masses”) b i k e p a t h 700 200 100 400 500 600 800 180 430 WATER WET SAND LINE BEACH WIDTH Benchmarks allow Comparison of present measurement with the markers showing beach width in 1912 (180ft) and 2012 (430 ft) BENCHMARKS DRY SAND = Historical Markers for 1912 and 2012 H2O 05302012 24 BENCHMARK CONCEPTS •Etched granite (weatherproof) plaques embedded in pier deck, one every 50 feet from pier base to 800 feet west. •Plus two special Centennial plaques at 180 and 430 ft to show beach width in 1912 & 2012 180 FT BEACH WIDTH 1912 4 in H2O 05302012 25 800 ft 700 ft 600 ft 500 ft 400 ft 300 ft 200 ft 100 ft 150 250 350 450 550 650 2012 Historical Marker at 430 ft 1912 Historical Marker at 180 ft 0.0 ft MANHATTAN BEACH PIER BENCHMARKS MANHATTAN BEACH HISTORICAL SOCIETY ROUNDHOUSE X YOU ARE HERE USE BENCHMARKS TO DETERMINE THE DRY SAND BEACH WIDTH HOW WIDE IS THE BEACH TODAY? = BENCHMARK LOCATIONS 750 H2O 05302012 26 REFERENCES 1. Adelman, Kenneth and Gabrielle, California Coastal Records Project (CCRP): http://www.californiacoastline.org/ 2. Brodeur, SM and Walker JR, “The California Beach Nourishment Success Story”,; In 6TH National Conf. Proceedings; Tait L.S. editor; Feb. 1993; St Petersburg, Fl, Shore and Beach Preservation Association, p239-258 3. Dennis, Jan; “A Walk Beside The Sea”; A History of Manhattan Beach; 1987;Janstan Studio; Manhattan Beach CA 4. Dennis, Jan; “Images of America - Manhattan Beach Pier”; 2005; ; Arcadia Publishing Co.; San Francisco CA 5. Flick, Reinhard B.; “The Myth and Reality of Southern California Beaches”, July 1993; Scripps Institute of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA 92093-0209, California Department of Boating and Waterways 6. Gumprecht, Blake; ‘The Los Angeles River”; The Johns Hopkins University Press; Baltimore, MD.; p. 215; 1999 7. Johnson, A.G.; “Santa Monica Bay Shoreline Development Plans”, Proc. of 1st International Conf. on Coastal Engineering, Long Beach, CA. pp 271-276; October, 1950 8. Kenyon, Edgar B. Jr; “History of Ocean Outlets, Los Angeles Flood Control District”; Proc. 1st International Conf. on Coastal Engineering; Long Beach CA; pp 277-282, October, 1950, 9. Leidersdorf C.B., Hollar R.C. and Woodell G.l; “Beach Enhancement Through Nourishment and Compartmentalization: The Recent History of Santa Monica Bay”, 1993, Proc, 8th Annual Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management; American Shore & Beach Preservation Association, pp.71-85 10. Liedersdorf, C.B.; “Human Intervention With The Beaches of Santa Monica Bay”; Shore and Beach, Vol 62, No.3; July 1994, 11. Martoni, Rudi et al; ”Down Memory Lane The Los Angeles Coastal Prarie and Its Vernal Pools”; Presented at 2nd Interface Between Ecology and Land Development in California; Occidental College, April 18 &19, 1997 12. Weigel, Robert L, .”Ocean beach Nourishment on the USA Pacific Coast, Shore and Beach, January, 1994 13. State of California Interim Sea Level Rise Guidance Document, October, 2010 14. “California Beach Restoration Study”; Department of Boating and Waterways; January, 2002 , Sacramento, CA H2O 05302012 27 Acknowledgements •Dr. Craig Leidersdorf of Coastal Frontiers Corp. for generously sharing his technical expertise •Steve Meisenholder of the Manhattan Beach Historical Society for his helpful critiques and generous assistance providing many historical images used in this study. • •Joe Ryan of the US Army Corps of Engineers for his support in retrieval of archived images •Google Earth for providing easily accessible Manhattan Beach Pier satellite images complete with distance measuring tools MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING by and between CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH and CALIFORNIA STATE LANDS COMMISSION This Memorandum o Understanding ("Memorandum") is entered into this if day of 1993, by and between the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a California municipal corporation (hereinafter the "City") and the CALIFORNIA STATE LANDS COMMISSION, a commission of the State of California (hereinafter the "Commission"), This Memorandum is executed by the parties in reliance uponthe following facts: A. Since September 21, 1985, the City has had on file before the Commission an application for approval of an oil and gas lease for the exploration and production of hydrocarbon products from the tidelands area owned by the City and held in trust (the"tidelands"). B. In response to comments and direction from the Commission in December 1985, the City has subsequently reviewed and certified an environmental impact report for and approved and executed that certain Oil and Gas Lease No. 2 (hereinafter the "Lease") with Windward Associates and GLG Energy, L.P. (hereinafter together the "Operator") to, undertake the exploration and production of hydrocarbon products in both the tidelands and the uplands area within the jurisdiction of the City. C. In. response to further comments from the Commission regarding the Lease, City and Commission desire to enter into this Memorandum to set forth the understanding of each respective party for the City's implementation of and performance under the Lease. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The Commission has determined that there is drainage from the City tidelands and that the City has substantially complied with the bidding provisions as required under the California Public Resources Code._ Therefore, in accordance with Section 7061 of the Public Resources Code, the Commission hereby determines that it would be impractical to require the City to conduct further bidding procedures and hereby exempts the City in issuance of the Lease from further compliance with Sections 7058.5 and 7059 of said Code. 2. City shall make available, in a timely manner, to the Commission all plans, specifications, reports, studies and other related documents, as required by City for subsequent permits to be issued by City for oil and gas exploration and production, prior to issuance of any such permit by City in order to provide Commission a fair opportunity for comment and advice. Such information shall include, but is not limited to, a hazard footprint and proposedconditions under a conditional use permit. 3. The Commission acknowledges and approves that royalty revenue from the tidelands due and payable under the Lease to the City, shall be allocated seven percent (7%) to the City General Fund for use of the drill site and eleven and two thirds percent(11 2/3%) to the Special Tidelands Trust Account. 4. City shall establish a Special Tidelands Trust Fund for deposit of all royalty revenues resulting from the production of oil and gas from the tidelands for allowable use in accordance with Chapter 479, Statutes 1919, or as it may be amended. 5. The parties acknowledge and agree that the Minimum Royalty, as provided in Section 2.b.(1) of the Lease, is to secure Operator's timely performance of exploration and production of oil and gas in both the tidelands and the uplands. The Lease, in Section 2.b.(2), further limits Operator's source of funds for payment of the Minimum Royalty from restricted royalty to a maximum of $281,250 in each year. To the extent that the City receives payment of Minimum Royalty which is a direct result of production from the tidelands, City shall deposit all such revenue into itsSpecial Tidelands Trust Fund. 6. The Commission shall have access to the records related to Operator's performance under the Lease through the City. In accordance with the terms of Section 14 of the Lease, the City has 14252.03 2. the right to release information received from the Operator to "any governmental agency needing the data or information to regulate the leased lands or adjacent lands." The City has a vested interest in insuring the accuracy of these reports and will assiduously review and monitor the reports and records. The City shall fully cooperate in making relevant information available to Commission to anew the Commission to carry out its mandated oversight duties., - 7. The City's intent under Section 13.d.(4) is to prorate the repayment of the Advance from all sources of royalty revenue as received. City hereby agrees that the repayment of the Advance, as provided in Section 13.d.(4), shall be prorated on the basis of - a 70/30 allocation from City's receipts of royalty revenue from the tidelands and uplands, respectively, to the extent that such royalty revenues from each source are available. This provision shall not be construed to alter or change the repayment obligation of the City to Operator to apply 50% of all royalty revenue due toCity to the Advance as provided therein. 8. The City shall request that Operator name the Commission as an additional insured on insurance coverage provided by Operator under the Lease provided such additional coverage does not increase Operator's insurance premiums thereby. 9. The City shall fund its contribution to the Emergency Trust Fund under Section 18.d.(3) based upon a 70/30 allocation of royalty revenues received from the tidelands and uplands, respectively. To the extent that funds are released from the Emergency Trust Fund in accordance with the terms of the Lease, City shall deposit into the Special Tidelands Trust Fund such released funds as are attributable to royalty revenue from the tidelands plus a prorata portion of interest accrued thereto. 10. The Commission and the City agree that the mean high tide line, as surveyed and described on that certain "Plat of the State Tidelands Boundary Along the Shore of the Pacific Ocean Within the City of Hermosa Beach, Los Angeles County, California, dated December 13, 1957 and signed by F. J. Hortig and prepared under W.O. 2771, shall serve as the base line for the allocation of production between the tidelands trust and all other lands. The City further acknowledges that the mean high tide line is not a fixed boundary and that the City shall survey the mean high tide line from time to time in order to accurately allocate productionbetween the tidelands and all other lands. 14252.03 3. 11. The parties acknowledge that certain amendments to the Lease will be or are agreed to between the City and Operator toaddress comments and concerns of the Commission. IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Memorandum of Understanding as of the date and year first abovewritten. • Approved as to Form: City Attorney Oliver, Barr & Vose By 14252.03 Approved as to Form: Staff Counsel "City" By: "Commission" By: 4. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a California municipal corporation City Manager CALIFORNIA STATE LANDS COMMISSION Executive Officer 1 June 5, 2014 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach City Council June 10, 2014 STATUS REPORT ON E&B’S PROPOSED OIL DRILLING AND PRODUCTION PROJECT AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO SUBCOMMITTEE REGARDING NEGOTIATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Recommended Action: That the City Council receive and file this report. The Council may also wish to give its subcommittee direction pertaining to negotiation points of the Development Agreement. Final Environmental Impact Report • A postcard was mailed to residents, and will be included as a display advertisement in the Beach Reporter, Easy Reader and Daily Breeze, and is provided on the city’s website. • The City EIR team interacted with the applicant prior to the finalization of the EIR. • The Final EIR will be online on June 9th. A study session on the Final EIR with the Planning Commission is scheduled for June 18 at 6:00 p.m. Final Cost Benefit Assessment • Per Council direction on May 27, Kosmont Companies will respond to comments on the Cost Benefit Analysis, review pre-trial testimony, and review Historic Hermosa Beach Well Lot Data. The cost of the additional work authorized by Council was $50,000. The cost of the overages mentioned at the May 27, 2014 City Council meeting are $25,000, bringing the total cost of the Cost Benefit Analysis to $200,000. This is paid by the City. Kosmont expects to deliver the Final CBA to the City in July, 2014. Final Health Impact Assessment • The City’s consultant McDaniel Lambert/Intrinsik indicates the HIA will be available in July. At the May 27, 2014 Council meeting it was reported to Council that the parent company (Intrinsik) was taking the lead for the preparation of the new HIA. It was also reported that there would be a peer review conducted by an interdependent firm prior to the report being released by them. Development Agreement • On June 2nd, the City Development Agreement subcommittee, consisting of Mayor DiVirgilio and Councilmember Fangary, along with staff members Tom Bakaly and Michael Jenkins, met with representatives from E & B. E & B was very clear that they were not interested in negotiating public benefit items in the Development Agreement. They were willing to have the City present additional public benefits. They were willing to discuss the form of the Development Agreement and that is attached. 2 Public Benefits Proposed by E&B, As Modified By Discussion (Changes in bold): a) Expenditure of Oil Revenues by the City: E & B suggested that the City consider a public process to determine what revenues from the lease would be used for, to occur following a successful ballot measure. The City subcommittee expressed that this should occur through normal City processes rather than a contractually required process. b) Supplemental School Funding: E & B proposed additional funds for the schools to be provided by way of a separate agreement with the Education Foundation or other non-profit organization that would cover or offset the revenues from the lease that would go to the State. It is the City subcommittee’s position that it would not be part of the DA. The City subcommittee thought that it might be included in the statement of overriding considerations. E & B would now like this item addressed in both the DA and in the statement of overriding considerations. c) Remedial Action Plan: E & B proposed to pay the entire cost of soils remediation at the maintenance yard should the oil ban be lifted and the project move forward. E & B clarified that this would be the case if the project went to Phase III – full production. There was a discussion about what would happen if the ban was lifted, but the project did not go forward. The City would be responsible for cleaning up the site, the scope of such remediation dependent on the desired use. There was discussion, but not resolution, on whether E & B would assist in the clean-up in that instance. The City is researching the costs. At the May 27, 2014 City Council meeting, the suggestion was made that E&B pay 100% of soils remediation as required by the City’s RAP if the project doesn’t go forward. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting. This would require a separate agreement with E & B if the oil ban is not lifted by the voters. d) Temporary and Permanent Relocation of City Maintenance Yard: E & B proposed to advance more funds than the $50,000 (temporary) and $500,000 (permanent) called for in the lease. No specific figures were discussed. E & B clarified that would entail converting the figures above into current dollars. At the May 27, 2014 City Council meeting, the suggestion was made that E & B pay the entire cost of permanent and temporary relocation of the maintenance yard. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting. The also clarified that E & B could also suggest a viable option for the temporary relocation of the City yard. e) Timing of Revenues: E & B proposed that the minimum royalty to the City be paid after 1 year of drilling, rather than in the 4th year as is provided in the lease. E & B clarified that the minimum payment would be $500,000 per each year, 3 nonrefundable. At the May 27, 2014 City Council meeting, the suggestion was made to increase the amount of the accelerated Minimum Royalty from $500,000 to $2 million per year, to be available for City general fund purposes. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting with the caveat that it would be an advance from uplands revenue. f) E & B Matching Funds to Achieve City Goals: E & B proposed additional funds to the City, beyond the royalties, on a 50/50 matching basis for “off-set” projects such as converting the City fleet to be carbon neutral and undergrounding of utilities. E & B stated that it would refine this further and return with a more specific proposal. In response to comments from Council on May 27, 2014, the City subcommittee clarified that there might be interest in considering projects involving youth programs. g) Benefits to Nearby Property Owners: Similar to its project in Huntington Beach, E & B proposed setting up and funding an account that would stabilize proven impacts to property values for 5 years (during drilling) for properties in close proximity to the project. E & B clarified that the timeframe was undecided at this time. It further clarified that the residents would need to voluntarily apply for this program. A more detailed program proposal was promised. In response to comments from Council on May 27, 2014, the City subcommittee clarified that the term “proven impacts” would need to be precisely defined. Proposals by the City for inclusion in the Development Agreement: a) Acceptable limits of insurance coverage. b) An explicit ban on the practice of fracking. c) Inclusion of all mitigation measures from the FEIR and other conditions of approval. d) At the City Council meeting of May 27, 2014, it was suggested that if the ballot measure passes, E & B agree to forgive the $17.5M debt, even if E & B ultimately does not obtain other required approvals or proceed with the project. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting e) At the City Council meeting of May 27, 2014, it was suggested that E & B pay a street damage fee to compensate for asphalt wear and tear due to the anticipated truck traffic. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting f) The City’s legal counsel suggested that the City negotiate a condition requiring that upon expiration of the lease, the maintenance yard site be 4 returned to the City in a specified condition. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting. g) Expiration of Lease – The City subcommittee requested that if the voters did not lift the oil ban, then the lease would expire. Community Involvement • Staff and the consultants continue to be available to answer questions and meet with individuals and groups. Contact Community Development at (310)318-0242. • People are encouraged to sign up to receive information, on the City’s website at www.hermosabch.org, click on E-Notification Sign-Up. • Complete information is also available on the City’s website at http://www.hermosabch.org/, click on Proposed Oil Drilling and Production Project under “Spotlight.” • The City continues to work with Katie Casey in regards to the communication plan. Next Steps The meeting schedule hearing is attached. The Final HIA and CBA will be made available and discussed by City Council in July. Respectfully submitted; ______________________________ _________________________ Pamela Townsend, Senior Planner Ken Robertson, Director Community Development Department ________________________________ Tom Bakaly City Manager Attachments 1. Draft Development Agreement (No Exhibits) 2. Press Release and Schedule 1 June 4, 2014 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach City Council June 10, 2014 STATUS REPORT ON E&B’S PROPOSED OIL DRILLING AND PRODUCTION PROJECT AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO SUBCOMMITTEE REGARDING NEGOTIATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Recommended Action: That the City Council receive and file this report. The Council may also wish to give its subcommittee direction pertaining to negotiation points of the Development Agreement. Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) • A postcard was mailed to residents and will be included as a display advertisement in the Beach Reporter, Easy Reader and Daily Breeze; it is also provided on the city’s website. • The City EIR team interacted with the applicant prior to the finalization of the EIR in order to address their concerns that the FEIR had not sufficiently considered E&B’s comments and submittals on the draft EIR. • The City’s Parks and Recreation ((P&R) Commission on June 3rd was provided a Presentation on the Oil Project Draft Environmental Impact Report in Relation to Parks and Recreation by Ed Almanza, the City’s Project Manager. While the P&R Commission passed a motion that the Planning Commission recommend not certifying the Final EIR, staff notes that the matter was not agendized to allow action and this Commission has no jurisdiction with regard to CEQA. Therefore, staff advises that the P&R Commission’s action has no relevance or effect as regards the CEQA process. • The Final EIR will be online on June 9th at www.hermosabch.org. A study session on the Final EIR with the Planning Commission is scheduled for June 18 at 6:00 p.m., City Council Chambers. Staff will briefly highlight major EIR changes on June 10th. Final Cost Benefit Assessment (CBA) • Per Council direction on May 27, Kosmont Companies will respond to comments on the Cost Benefit Analysis, review pre-trial testimony, and review historic Hermosa Beach well lot data. The cost of the additional work authorized by Council was $50,000. The cost of the overages mentioned at the May 27, 2014 City Council meeting are $25,000, bringing the total cost of the Cost Benefit Analysis to $200,000. This is paid by the City. Kosmont expects to deliver the Final CBA to the City in July, 2014. Final Health Impact Assessment (HIA) • The City’s consultant McDaniel Lambert/Intrinsik indicates the HIA will be available in July. At the May 27, 2014 Council meeting it was reported to Council that the parent 2 company (Intrinsik) was taking the lead for the preparation of the new HIA. It was also reported that there would be a peer review conducted by an independent firm. Development Agreement • On June 2nd, the City Development Agreement subcommittee, consisting of Mayor DiVirgilio and Councilmember Fangary, along with staff members Tom Bakaly and Michael Jenkins, and outside counsel Tom Henry of the Stoel Rives firm met with representatives from E & B. E & B representatives made it clear that they do not believe that public benefits can be negotiated as long as the CBA and HIA are not final. They were willing to have the City present additional public benefits for their consideration and the City team did that. They were also willing to discuss the form of the Development Agreement with legal counsel. The current working version of the Development Agreement is attached, excluding exhibits. Public Benefits Proposed by E&B, As Modified By Discussion (Changes in bold): a) Expenditure of Oil Revenues by the City: E & B suggested that the City consider a public process to determine what revenues from the lease would be used for, to occur following a successful ballot measure. The City subcommittee expressed that this should occur through normal City processes rather than a contractually required process. b) Supplemental School Funding: E & B proposed additional funds for the schools to be provided by way of a separate agreement with the Education Foundation or other non-profit organization that would cover or offset the revenues from the lease that would go to the State. It is the City subcommittee’s position that it would not be part of the DA. The City subcommittee thought that it might be included in the statement of overriding considerations. E & B would like this item addressed in both the DA and in the statement of overriding considerations. c) Remedial Action Plan: E & B proposed to pay the entire cost of soils remediation at the maintenance yard should the oil ban be lifted and the project move forward. E & B clarified that this would be the case if the project went to Phase III – full production. There was a discussion about what would happen if the ban was lifted, but the project did not go forward. The City would be responsible for cleaning up the site, the scope of such remediation dependent on the desired use. There was discussion, but not resolution, on whether E & B would assist in the clean-up in that instance. The City is researching the costs. At the May 27, 2014 City Council meeting, the suggestion was made that E & B pay 100% of remediation as required by the City’s RAP if the project doesn’t go forward. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting. This would require a separate agreement with E & B if the oil ban is not lifted by the voters. d) Temporary and Permanent Relocation of City Maintenance Yard: E & B proposed to advance more funds than the $50,000 (temporary) and $500,000 (permanent) 3 called for in the lease. No specific figures were discussed. E & B clarified that would entail converting the figures above into current dollars. At the May 27, 2014 City Council meeting, the suggestion was made that E & B pay the entire cost of permanent and temporary relocation of the maintenance yard. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting. The subcommittee also clarified that E & B could also suggest a viable option for the temporary relocation of the City yard. e) Timing of Revenues: E & B proposed that the minimum royalty to the City be paid after 1 year of drilling, rather than in the 4th year as is provided in the lease. E & B clarified that the minimum payment would be $500,000 per each year, nonrefundable. At the May 27, 2014 City Council meeting, the suggestion was made to increase the amount of the accelerated Minimum Royalty from $500,000 to $2 million per year, to be available for City general fund purposes. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting with the caveat that it would be an advance from uplands revenue. f) E & B Matching Funds to Achieve City Goals: E & B proposed additional funds to the City, beyond the royalties, on a 50/50 matching basis for “off-set” projects such as converting the City fleet to be carbon neutral and undergrounding of utilities. E & B stated that it would refine this further and return with a more specific proposal. In response to comments from Council on May 27, 2014, the City subcommittee clarified that there might be interest in considering projects involving youth programs. g) Benefits to Nearby Property Owners: Similar to its project in Huntington Beach, E & B proposed setting up and funding an account that would stabilize proven impacts to property values for 5 years (during drilling) for properties in close proximity to the project. E & B clarified that the timeframe was undecided at this time. It further clarified that the residents would need to voluntarily apply for this program. A more detailed program proposal was promised. In response to comments from Council on May 27, 2014, the City subcommittee clarified that the term “proven impacts” would need to be precisely defined. Proposals by the City for inclusion in the Development Agreement: a) Acceptable limits of insurance coverage. b) An explicit ban on the practice of fracking. c) Inclusion of all mitigation measures from the FEIR and other conditions of approval. d) At the City Council meeting of May 27, 2014, it was suggested that if the ballot measure passes, E & B agree to forgive the $17.5M debt, even if E & B ultimately does not obtain other required approvals or proceed with the project. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting. 4 e) At the City Council meeting of May 27, 2014, it was suggested that E & B pay a street damage fee to compensate for asphalt wear and tear due to the anticipated truck traffic. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting. f) The City’s legal counsel suggested that the City negotiate a condition requiring that upon expiration of the lease, the maintenance yard site be returned to the City in a specified condition. The City subcommittee made this request at the June 2nd meeting. g) Expiration of Lease – the City subcommittee requested that if the voters did not lift the oil ban, then E&B would agree that the lease would expire. This would require a separate agreement with E & B if the oil ban is not lifted by the voters. As noted above, E&B representatives did not respond to the new (bolded) proposals. Community Involvement • Staff and the consultants continue to be available to answer questions and meet with individuals and groups. Contact Community Development at (310)318-0242. • People are encouraged to sign up to receive information, on the City’s website at www.hermosabch.org, click on E-Notification Sign-Up. • Complete information is also available on the City’s website at http://www.hermosabch.org/, click on Proposed Oil Drilling and Production Project under “Spotlight.” • The City continues to work with Katie Casey in regards to the communication plan. Next Steps The meeting schedule hearing is attached. The Final HIA and CBA will be made available and discussed by City Council in July. Respectfully submitted; ______________________________ ________________________________ Pamela Townsend, Senior Planner Ken Robertson, Director Community Development Department ________________________________ Tom Bakaly City Manager Attachments 1. Draft Development Agreement (No Exhibits) 2. Press Release and Schedule BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 1 Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach Jessi Hampton, Jonathan Ho, Jessica Leigh, David Limjoco, Steven Odom, Francis Villanueva, Adrian Salazar Advisor: Juan Matute June 2014 UCLA Environment 180 Senior Practicum 2013-2014 UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 2 Acknowledgements We would like to recognize and extend our gratitude to the individuals and organizations who have made this report and study possible. Special thanks to our Project Advisor, Juan Matute, for his expertise, guidance and continuous support throughout the project. Additional acknowledgements to Pamela Townsend, the City of Hermosa Beach, the City of Hermosa Beach City Council, Professor Travis Longcore and the UCLA Institute of the Environment. Who Are We? We are comprised of seven graduating seniors from the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. The goal of this research, performed over the course of the past six months, has been to examine methods of procuring decarbonized electricity for the City of Hermosa Beach. With the careful guidance under our advisor Juan Matute, we have produced a report that outlines the recommended next steps toward attaining carbon neutral electricity for the City of Hermosa Beach. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... 2 Who Are We? ......................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4 What Are the Options? ............................................................................................................... 5 Energy Efficiency .................................................................................................................... 5 Rooftop Solar ......................................................................................................................... 7 Green Tariff Shared Renewables ........................................................................................... 9 Community Choice Aggregation ............................................................................................12 Community Choice Aggregation via a Joint Powers Authority ............................................16 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................22 References ...............................................................................................................................24 BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 4 Introduction The City of Hermosa Beach aspires to be distinguished as the ‘leader in sustainability’ by becoming ‘a more livable and sustainable beach city’. Residents already know the City of Hermosa Beach as the “best little beach city” in the South Bay, but with progressive goals in sustainability, they are striving for more. The 1.43 square miles which comprises the city is home to nearly 20,000 residents with a median household income of $100,696. Together they consume approximately 78 GWh of electricity per year and are served by Southern California Edison (SCE), an investor owned utility (IOU).1 Over the past few years, the city has sought to integrate sustainability into its municipal operations and community as a whole. They have already led several successful ventures in order to reach their ultimate goal of becoming a carbon neutral municipality. This goal was set in 2010 by the City of Hermosa Beach to source all municipal and community operations from renewable sources. Other notable achievements in sustainability include becoming the first South Bay City to join the ‘Cool Cities’ Initiative, completing a municipal GHG (greenhouse gas) inventory, creating The Green Task Force, and more (see below). Table 1. A Timeline of the City of Hermosa Beach’s Notable Sustainability Achievements2 Year Accomplishment 2006 The City of Hermosa Beach was the first South Bay city to join the ‘Cool Cities’ initiative and endorsed the ‘U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement’ 2007 The Green Building Committee puts green issues on City’s agenda 2009 The Green Task Force was appointed by the City Council to advise on green initiatives and prepare a sustainability/climate action plan 2009/2010 Greenhouse gas emissions inventories were prepared 2010 The City Council supports the carbon neutral initiative 2011 A sustainability/climate action plan is presented by The Green Task Force 1 (ICF International, 2012) 2 (The City of Hermosa Beach, 2011) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 5 What Are the Options? Three subjects of concern became the focal point or our research and recommendations: Energy Efficiency, Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) and SCE’s Green Tariff Shared Renewables (GTSR) program. Energy Efficiency was considered as a means to reduce electricity use and thus the complications associated with introducing increased renewable resources to the power supply. Understanding the methods of electricity delivery and distribution was also necessary for determining how renewable energy can provide and maintain customers’ current standards. This topic examined more immediate steps that the City of Hermosa Beach can use to decarbonize electricity. The rest of the research was focused on two policy options: a CCA and SCE’s GTSR program. A CCA is a program that allows communities to choose their sources of electricity. Residents, along with their local governing boards, have the ability to select their energy sources, allowing for the possibility of a completely renewable electricity supply. The newly created GTSR program offered by SCE allows another opportunity for ratepayers to access a higher portfolio of renewable energy. This option works with the existing utility and infrastructure to provide decarbonized electricity at a premium price. The advantages, disadvantages and technical requirements of each option were carefully analyzed to ensure a suitable recommendation for the City of Hermosa Beach. Energy Efficiency Renewable energy resources alone are not enough to supply all electricity if energy use continues following current trends. Energy efficiency and renewable energies must grow together in order to make a significant difference in the carbon emissions associated with electricity generation. If more renewable energy is implemented without increasing efficiency, energy use will still continue to grow. This means that renewable energy use will only prevent a growth in carbon emissions as opposed to enabling energy companies to retire or curtail operations at generation facilities that produce electricity by burning fossil fuels3. Additionally, unlike the implementation of renewable energy sources, efficiency improvements usually result in a negative cost to the consumer because initial investments are paid off over time from the reduced electricity costs. Ultimately, decreasing current carbon emissions requires a combination of both renewable electricity generation and energy efficiency efforts. Property Assessed Clean Energy Electricity efficiency improvements can also become more viable through Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing programs. PACE provides financing for energy efficiency upgrades and renewable energy installation through property tax assessments. This is usually 3 (Prindle, Eldridge, Eckhardt, & Frederick, 2007) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 6 more manageable than fronting the entire cost. These costs also remain a part of the property taxes if the property is sold, so home and business owners do not have to worry about losing their investment if they move. LA PACE is an example of a PACE program available only to commercial buildings, such as offices, hotels, apartment buildings, etc. The City of Hermosa Beach is already eligible for the LA PACE program, so the next step would be encouraging local businesses to invest in these efficiency upgrades. The Home Energy Renovation Opportunity (HERO) program is an example of a newly created residential PACE program in California, which jointly finances energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy. This program operates by “using affirmative acknowledgements from the first lien holders, conservative underwriting requirements, and/or signed disclosures regarding FHF concerns and risks”4. The HERO program has been operating successfully in Riverside County since 2011. In June 2013, Orange County entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Western Riverside Council of Governments to facilitate the introduction of the HERO program there as well.5 Home Energy Renewable Opportunity HERO is also poised to become available in Los Angeles County in 2014. Initially, the renovations covered will include insulation, water and electricity efficiency improvements, windows and entry doors, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, HVAC and whole house fans, and photovoltaic solar panels6. As a part of Los Angeles County, the City of Hermosa Beach will be eligible to take advantage of the HERO program when it is implemented, which is expected soon. Also, as the program proves to be successful and economically profitable, as it has in Riverside County, it is possible that more energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy sources, such as thermal solar water heating systems, will become available for residents. These programs allow residents to lower their electricity use without being intimidated by a hefty price tag. Through these easily implemented changes, there is potential for great energy saving and even the possibility of a carbon neutral city. 4 Ibid. 5 (Association of California Cities, Orange County, 2013) 6 (HERO Financing, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 7 Rooftop Solar Geographical Information Systems analysis shows that if all residential units of the City of Hermosa Beach were to install rooftop solar panels, they would generate 56.8 GWh of electrical power in a year 7. This is more than two thirds of the city’s annual electricity demand. If all rooftops in the city, including residential units, were covered with solar panels, they would generate a total of 76.2 GWh per year, almost the entire city’s annual electricity demand.8 Rooftop solar has tremendous potential to provide carbon neutral electricity for the city, but there are also technical challenges that come with heavy reliance on rooftop solar. What is Distributed Generation? Localized energy, also known as distributed generation, is generally defined as energy- generating systems that are 20 MW or smaller, or interconnected on-site or close to the electricity demand. Localized energy can be constructed quickly with no new transmission lines, and typically have no environmental impact.9 California defines distributed generation as fuels and technologies that are accepted as renewable for purposes of Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), 20 MW or smaller, and located within low-voltage distribution grid or supply power directly to consumer. 10 Rooftop solar panels are an example of distributed generation. Why is Distributed Generation a Challenge to the Grid? With significant penetration of distributed generation, the distribution network is no longer a passive circuit supplying loads but an active system with power flows and voltages determined by the generation as well as the load.11 Due to the unpredictable behavior of renewable energy sources, the installation and connection of distributed generation units will affect system frequency. They will free-ride on the efforts of the grid operator to fix deviations and imbalances 7 (DeShazo, J,R,, Matulka, R., Wong, N., 2011) 8 Ibid. 9 (Shlatz, E., Buch, N., & Chan, M., 2013) 10 (Weisenmiller, R., 2014) 11 (Mahmud, M. A., Hossain, M. J., & Pota, H. R., 2011) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 8 of electricity supply and demand.12 Secondly, the introduction of bidirectional power flow in distribution lines with the installation of distributed generation is another challenge. Typically, power flows unidirectionally, from higher to lower voltage levels, in other words from generation to transmissions lines then finally to distribution lines.13 That is how the grid and all of its infrastructure is designed to operate, to supply electricity from power plants to consumers. However, distributed generation produces and exports electricity back into the grid. This scenario can be compared to introducing two-way traffic to a one-way street. The one-way street, with its traffic lights and signs, operate to coordinate one-way traffic only. The street will require modifications and improvements to safely and reliably handle two-way traffic. Similarly, the current grid system will need upgrades and modifications to reliably handle bidirectional power. For example, transformer’s must have tap- changers capable of operating with reverse power flow.14 A third challenge is a phenomenon known as the voltage rise effect. Given that distributed generation units can export electricity back into the grid, the voltage in a network with distributed generation is directly proportional to the amount of active power supplied by the distributed generators.15 In other words, heavy distributed generation penetration increases the voltage level in a local distribution network. This is problematic because the voltage level at each connection point of the load is very important for the electricity power quality. There is typically a defined steady-state voltage range, or a maximum permitted voltage variation in a distribution in a distribution network.16 Hence, the voltage rise effect caused by distributed generation could jeopardize power quality locally. What are the Challenges to Rooftop Solar? Southern California has plenty of sunshine and the City of Hermosa Beach is no exception, making rooftop solar a relatively popular choice for distributed generation. Solar insolation is the amount of energy received by the sun at the earth’s surface. On a clear day, approximately 1,000 watts per meter squared reaches the earth’s surface, perpendicular to the incoming radiation.17 Currently, it is thermodynamically impossible for solar panels to be more than a hundred percent efficient, meaning the highest possible energy a square meter of solar panels can generate will never be greater than 1,000 watts. In reality, the most common solar panels that are compliant with California’s SB1 guidelines are on average about 15% efficient.18 This means that under ideal weather conditions, a square meter of photovoltaic panels generates only about 150 watts of electricity. Furthermore, solar panels only generate electricity during the day. With these constraints, it is nearly impossible for a home to completely rely on rooftop solar alone, unless it is paired with battery storage or remains connected to the grid. 12 (Pepermans, G., Driesen, J., Haeseldonck, D., Belmans, R., & D’haeseleer, W., 2005) 13 Ibid. 14 (Mahmud, M. A., Hossain, M. J., & Pota, H. R., 2011) 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 17 (Kyle, G. A.) 18 (Roe, S., 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 9 Rooftop solar has been encouraged by SCE’s Net Energy Metering program. Under this program, homes install rooftop solar panels while remaining connected to the grid. During the day, rooftop solar panels generate electricity for the house and any surplus electricity not consumed is sent back onto the grid. At night when solar panels no longer generate electricity, the house is provided with electricity from the grid. This can also be used for commercial buildings. Under this program, even with rooftop solar, the buildings are still dependent on grid- supplied electricity. Since the rooftop solar panels are connected to the grid, the technical problems of distributed generation described previously apply as well. It is true that rooftop solar has tremendous potential, especially with the ample solar capacity in the City of Hermosa Beach. However, with current technology and existing infrastructure, significant integration of distributed generation into the grid could jeopardize reliability and power quality. What is the Pathway to Future Grid Improvements? The current electricity grid system is not well suited for high levels of distributed generation penetration. Various grid upgrades are required to allow the City of Hermosa Beach to efficiently and reliably utilize the locally available renewable energy sources. Once adequate grid upgrades are made, such as improving infrastructure to support bidirectional power and installing energy storage units, the city could take greater advantage of its estimated 76.2 GWh solar potential. Currently SCE owns the transmissions infrastructure and facilities that operate in the City of Hermosa Beach. It is unlikely that SCE will institute the necessary grid upgrades in the near future due to economic restrictions. However, the residents of the City of Hermosa Beach could vote to establish a municipal utility district (MUD), allowing the city jurisdiction over providing electricity to the district residents. Once a municipal utility district is formed, it can negotiate the purchase of SCE’s existing grid infrastructure in the city and make necessary upgrades to the system to allow for the integration of distributed generation sources. Green Tariff Shared Renewables Another option for the City of Hermosa Beach to decarbonize electricity deliveries is to turn to the newly created GTSR program by SCE. The Green Rate program is a brand new addition to SCE’s service plan mandated by California Senate Bill 43. As a requirement of this legislation, utilities will begin to offer programs equivalent to the Green Rate program outline. Each program offers ratepayers an opportunity to buy high-percentage renewable energy directly from their service provider. Currently, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is reviewing SCE’s program proposal to see if it meets the qualifications set by SB 43. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 10 Once approved, ratepayers in the City of Hermosa Beach can purchase fifty or one-hundred percent renewable power on the GTSR program. Demand from local residents will be filled with the 269 MW of power allocated to SCE for their service area. Enrollment in this rate begins twelve months after approval of the proposal by CPUC. Customers are free to cancel their subscription once enrolled, but must wait one year before re-enrollment. Four methods of enrollment will be provided: online web portal, SCE call center, paper form, or account manager. Customers who choose enrollment in the GTSR program are charged extra fees for electricity generation. These costs go to renewable integration, market participation, program administration, the green rate portfolio, and resource adequacy costs. Renewable Energy Certificates (REC) created from subscriptions shall be retired on behalf of the customer, which means the customer can claim the environmental benefits of renewable energy. In order to promote this new option, SCE proposes to market to households currently in Bundled Service as well as outreach to low income customers. Lastly, SCE intends to establish a Green Balance Account to separate extra costs incurred to the company from renewable energy procurement. Through this mechanism, SCE will determine Green Rate program prices accurately, without shifting expenditure costs onto non-participants. As it stands, the Green Rate program with SCE could provide an avenue for the City of Hermosa Beach to reach carbon neutral electricity generation. However, due to the price, structure, and the legislation’s sunset date this is not the best option for the city. Price is a primary concern voiced by groups tracking the progression of each utilities’ proposals including the Green Rate. The City of San Francisco cites concern over the generalized nature of the cost structure proposed by (Pacific Gas and Electric) PG&E and the Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC) demands a new rate design on the basis that program participants will bear a large cost for benefits ultimately shared with all ratepayers.19 20 These critiques, coupled with the fact that an amendment to the Green Rate was already filed by SCE, increases fees, clearly displays the high probability of rate fluctuation21. These rate fluctuations put the customers of the City of Hermosa Beach at the mercy of the utility. The relatively large cost premium may dissuade City of Hermosa Beach from joining the program, especially as prices will fluctuate in the future, minimizing enrollment and thus the amount of energy demanded from renewable sources.22 For this reason, it is recommended that city seeks an alternative solution. To clearly display the increase in premium to a rate-payer bill when switching to the Green Rate, take an average household using 329 kWh over a month period. See Table 2 below for a comparison of this customer’s bill on the general SCE service versus the Green Rate for a month period. 19 (Herrera, 2014) 20 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014b) 21 (Southern California Edison, 2014b) 22 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014c) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 11 Table 2. Additional Monthly Costs of a CCA in SCE Territory Program Delivery Charges Generation Charges Total Charges General Energy Plan Tier 1 314 kwh x 0.4165 = 13.08 314 kwh x 0.8592 = 26.98 Tier 2 15 kwh x 0.7286 = 1.11 15 kwh x 0.8592 = 1.29 TOTAL $42.46 Green Rate Tier 1 314 kwh x 0.4165 = 13.08 314 kwh x .12266 = 38.52 Tier 2 15 kwh x 0.7286 = 1.11 15 kwh x .12266 = 1.84 TOTAL $54.55 Though the customer receives service of 100% renewable energy directly from the utility on the Green Rate, they pay a significant premium each month. As shown in other sections of this report, there are ratepayers under CCA jurisdictions paying a much smaller premium, for the same service of renewable energy. Thus, it is recommended that residents of the City of Hermosa Beach pursue the formation of CCA to ensure a lower rate for renewable energy. What Does Senate Bill 43 Mean to the GTSR Program? Programs for renewable energy will be monitored by the CPUC, however they are ultimately run by the utility. SB 43 stipulates that each supervising utility procure renewable energy from local sources.23 However, the proximity from the source of generation to the customer is not defined by the legislation, therefore leaving it up to the utilities’ discretion. Surely this is an effort by legislators to make GTSR programs both economically and technically feasible for each utility, but it also concerns stakeholders. This could be an avenue for IOU’s to seek distant renewable sources rather than investing in local generation. According to SCE’s proposal, the utility plans to use its current renewable energy resources that are in excess to RPS goals to fill Green Rate subscriptions.24 IREC points out that this does not serve the mission of SB 43 because it does not create new resources for generation, unlike San Diego Gas and Electric’s (SDG&E) and PG&E’s procurement plan.25 This is just a singular example of how SCE’s control of the 23 (California State Legislature, 2013) 24 (Southern California Edison, 2014) 25 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 12 program could lessen the benefit of Green Rate subscriptions. In this situation, SCE also falls short of the other utilities again, displaying their resistance to these legislative changes. Their behavior should be accounted for as ratepayers within the limits of the City of Hermosa Beach will be subject to SCE’s business preferences. Considering the City of Hermosa Beach is opting to institute renewable energy as part of a larger sustainable mission, their choices could affect greater impact if made autonomously. SB 43 provides support for GTSR programs until January 1, 2019.26 Without continued support from the legislation it is unclear what will happen to established GTSR programs. The overall goal is to expand the supply of renewable resources for the future, however SB 43 runs out just before RPS goals in 2020.27 Any number of possibilities arises from after this deadline. For example, utilities could cease to offer their respective GTSR programs and reallocate these renewable resources to reach their RPS goal the next year. The fate of GTSR programs, including the Green Rate is unclear after SB 43’s deadline. An option with greater longevity would better serve the City of Hermosa Beach. Community Choice Aggregation The establishment of a CCA, allowed by the implementation of AB 117, is yet another method to possibly increase decarbonized electricity in the City of Hermosa Beach. Under a CCA, the community can specifically allocate sources of electricity generation. Thus, a CCA gives autonomy to the City of Hermosa Beach to select zero emissions energy and accomplish their goal of carbon neutrality. Furthermore, a CCA is structured such that the public utility would continue their role of long range transmission, community distribution, and billing. As a result, IOUs will continue with such duties and would charge a fee for their services. In order to offset the additional charges of IOUs’ services, the City of Hermosa Beach may consider implementing a Joint Powers Authority (JPA). The formation of a JPA will be beneficial as it will integrate progressive cities into the CCA to divide costs. Collectively, a CCA would give the City of Hermosa Beach control over its sources of electricity procurement, but a JPA is a plausible solution to mitigate the additional surcharges.28 Will A Community Choice Aggregation Raise My Taxes? No, a Community Choice Aggregation is completely revenue funded which will require zero tax 26 (California State Legislature, 2013) 27 Ibid. 28 (Lean Energy U.S., 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 13 dollars from customers or participating communities. A CCA is a local not-for-profit agency that is generally overseen by elected officials or their appointees and managed by a hired staff or a contracted service provider. What Are Benefits of a Community Choice Aggregation? The incorporation of city officials ensures that energy procurement decisions are made in light of the community’s goals. If the City of Hermosa Beach started a CCA, it would have a greater level of control in energy policies. CCA programs provide various benefits to the regions that they serve. These benefits are directly related to the nature of a CCA which allows local governments, rather than the IOU, to make decisions about power procurement. Currently, SCE performs the task of power procurement for the City of Hermosa Beach. In all areas of the state not served by an established CCA or a direct access agreement, customers do not choose from where and how their energy is produced. A CCA transfers the authority from the IOU to the community, so that community members along with their local governing board can decide how their electricity is purchased and generated. Further a CCA could provide competition for both lower rates and for a higher percentage of renewables in electricity generation. How Do CCA Rates Compare to IOU Rates? Due to the bulk power purchases a CCA makes, it possesses greater leverage upon the negotiation of rates with independent power producers (IPP). Therefore, there can be a potential expansion in the market for competitively priced renewable power generation. The two CCAs that are currently operational in California are Marin Clean Energy (MCE) and Sonoma Clean Power (SCP). Both CCAs were able to provide their customers with more renewable energy rates that are slightly lower than their IOU, PG&E. This is shown in Tables 2 and 3. Table 3. Marin Clean Energy vs. PG&E Rates29 PG&E MCE Light Green MCE Deep Green Renewables 19% 50% 100% Residential Total Cost $76.16 $75.70 $80.78 Commercial Total Cost $187.65 $185.20 $197.02 *Residential Based on 508 kWh/ E-1, Res-1; Commercial Based on 1,182 kWh/ A-1, Com-1 (Winter) as of 1/1/14 29 (Marin Clean Energy, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 14 Table 4. Sonoma Clean Power vs. PG&E Rates PG&E SCP CleanStart SCP EverGreen Renewables 20% 33% 100% Residential Total Cost $80.43 $75.80 $93.30 Commercial Total Cost $348.49 $329.41 $389.9130 *Residential Based on 500 kWh/ E-1, Commercial Based on 1,500 kWh/ A-1 as of 5/1/14 CCAs in California have proven to offer competitive rates compared to current energy providers while increasing the renewable energy load. However, customers do need to pay more than usual to receive energy from 100% renewable sources. Due to its longer existence, MCE has had more time to refine its program by establishing better financial practices and acquiring more energy procurement contracts, and therefore can offer a higher renewable portfolio standard for the cheaper option. Why is Public Engagement Crucial to a CCA? Public engagement is crucial for the operation of a CCA as it is established on the basis of community choice. The effectiveness of a CCA increases significantly with a larger customer base, thus this is a pivotal element of a successful program. In order to accomplish this, energy consultants from Navigant Consulting recommend “incorporation of a more comprehensive community engagement and education program to motivate residents and businesses to do their part in addressing climate change.”31 This means that outreach and education will be imperative to evoke participation. Through these programs, the public can learn the details of a CCA, including the process, impacts and benefits. For example, open council meetings offer opportunities for citizens to learn about the operation and establishment of a CCA while also voicing their concerns. These and other similar forums increase transparency and public awareness, allowing for a CCA to truly represent the popular interest. Additionally, the knowledge that individual input can significantly impact a city’s policy increases resident involvement and satisfaction. Therefore, when residents pay electricity bills, they feel confident that their money is spent locally in the way that they want. What Are The Customer Options Under a CCA? Once a CCA program is established, each customer has the option to participate or opt out. The two CCAs currently operating in California provide the opportunity for customers to decide between two levels of renewable energy usage. In the case of MCE, customers that do not opt- out of the program start at a base level of 50% renewable energy but have a choice of upgrading to 100% renewable energy usage. SCP customers default to 33% or choose 100%. 30 (Sonoma Clean Power, 2014) 31 (The County of Santa Barbara, 2012) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 15 Opting Out Under AB 117, when a CCA program is established in a community, all customers within its jurisdiction are transferred over to service by the CCA unless they opt out. If a customer chooses to opt out, they remain with the existing utility. Each customer must be given two notices of their opportunity to opt out of their community’s program before being enrolled and two notices after they are enrolled during the first two billing cycles. If the customer has not opted out after these four notices, no additional notices will be given and they will continue to be enrolled in the CCA. California law requires that there be no consequences to opting out. However, if a customer does opt out, they cannot return to CCA service until one and a half years have passed. Speaking with MCE account manager Ben Choi, he further explained that if an opt out occurs after the initial sixty days of service, such as 4 months into having service with MCE, then the re-enrollment waiting period would be in effect. If, however, the customer opts out before enrollment in MCE, or within the first couple of months of service, the customer would be eligible to enroll in MCE at any time.32 The information from Mr. Choi shows that customers that opt out before sixty days of service are able to opt in again before having to wait the full time period. This is important because some residents might later understand the financial and environmental benefits of participating in a CCA and wish to resume enrollment. Different Renewable Energy Options in the Program MCE customers have the option to choose between 50% and 100% renewables options, while SCP customers can choose between the 33% and the 100% renewables program. Offering an option with a lower portfolio of renewable resources allows the CCA to remain price competitive with the utility, however it decreases the amount of carbon mitigated by the CCA’s service (Refer to Tables 2 and 3 for price comparison). In the case of MCE, enrollment in the Light- Green option is much more significant compared to the Deep Green option, comprising 74.4% versus 1.44% of all ratepayers respectively.33 This means that most of MCE subscribers are demanding an energy load comprised of only half renewable energy, while the rest is supplied by non-renewable sources with significant emissions factors. Unfortunately, if the City of Hermosa Beach were to offer similar options, a high subscription rate to the less expensive plan is expected, resulting in a smaller reduction of carbon emissions. However, the amount of carbon emissions produced by CCA procurement is still less than created by SCE’s general energy mix because overall there is a higher content of renewable resources being provided. Nevertheless, the impact of CCA formation is still decreased because less carbon is mitigated through enrollment of a partial renewables plan as opposed to a completely renewable energy load. 32 (Choi, 2014) 33 (Marin Clean Energy, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 16 Table 5. Carbon emissions abated when switching to a CCA. Program Demand Emissions (MT of CO2) Total Emissions (MT of CO2) SCE Non-renewables 62.4 GWh Renewables 15.6 GWh Non-renewables 15,210 MT Renewables 0 MT 15,210 MT CCA* Opt-Out 19.97 GWh Light Green (50%) 56.91 GWh Deep Green (100%) 1.12 GWh Opt-Out 5,338 MT Light Green (50%) 3,894 MT Deep Green (100%) 0 MT 9,232 MT Difference (Abatement) 5,978 MT Abated Community Choice Aggregation via a Joint Powers Authority The analysis of CCAs shows that pursuing this option is the most feasible method of delivering zero emission energy to the City of Hermosa Beach at a cost competitive with existing electricity rates. Furthermore, the possibility of forming a JPA with other cities to minimize costs and risks borne by the City of Hermosa Beach makes the option more economically viable. A CCA grants a local authority decision-making powers over energy procurement. Under the existing utility model, SCE makes such procurement decisions. But under a CCA, control is given to the city, or cities in a JPA situation. Thus, the City of Hermosa Beach does not have to be under the scrutiny of SCE and can be more proactive in their decision making, potentially electing to only utilize carbon neutral electricity. For example, customers under SCE’s current BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 17 tiered rate system are subject to the fuel mix and costs that the utility offers. This is controlled by state legislation, the RPS, and CPUC regulation. However, a CCA can form contracts with IPPs that specify the sources of energy that should be utilized and the price the CCA is willing to pay. Thus the City of Hermosa Beach has more autonomy through formation of a CCA. Moreover, the Marin and Sonoma County CCAs have shown that delivering clean energy can be competitively priced compared to the conventional utility rate. In order to reduce the price premium of zero-GHG electricity, the City of Hermosa Beach should follow Marin and Sonoma’s footsteps and establish a JPA. The formation of a JPA with the City of Hermosa Beach and other cities interested in pursuing zero-GHG electricity would increase the CCA’s aggregate electricity demand. This will in turn give the CCA increased bargaining power and induce negotiations with a larger selection of potential IPPs to conjure power at competitive rates. Furthermore, the initial costs for the start up of a CCA will be divided among the cities involved; thus fixed costs such as staffing, promotion, and service fees will be partitioned accordingly. The formation of a CCA via a JPA may be the most cost-effective method of delivering carbon neutral energy to the City of Hermosa Beach because the fixed costs will be divided among the cities involved and the generation costs, which are variable, will be negotiated with increased bargaining power. What are the Disadvantages of Forming a CCA? Potential disadvantages in forming a CCA include excessive surcharges by the IOU, customers opting out of the program, and the potential for the relatively small City of Hermosa Beach to have their priorities diluted in a larger JPA. Existing JPAs are structured to give more votes and board members to the cities that have the largest energy demand. Thus if the City of Hermosa Beach is on the smaller scale of electricity consumption, their influence over decisions within the JPA will be reduced. Moreover, customers are legally allowed to opt-out of the CCA. If the CCA’s rates are high compared to SCE’s rates, they may choose to do so. In this case, the City of Hermosa Beach’s goal of having 100% carbon neutral electricity will be difficult. Thus, the City of Hermosa Beach should follow the examples of Marin and Sonoma, offering two rate options: a cost-competitive “light green” option in addition to a 100% renewable option. The City of Hermosa Beach, or the JPA it joins, can increase the percentage of renewables in the cost-competitive option over time, as Marin has done. In this way, the CCA can move customers toward a higher concentration of renewable energy. Why Should the City of Hermosa Beach Pursue a Joint Powers Authority? Despite these drawbacks of a CCA, we still recommend that the City of Hermosa Beach create a JPA. To mitigate the risk that competing priorities in a JPA would jeopardize the city’s long- term goal of carbon neutral electricity, the JPA and CCA charter could include certain provisions. For example, a provision requiring a 100% renewable option and that the JPA continually increase the percentage of renewables in the cost-competitive rate option, would ensure the City of Hermosa’s priorities are continually advanced . BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 18 The current regulation guiding CCA formation is far more attractive to establishing a viable electricity decarbonization pathway than the procedures for individual customers to join the GTSR program. The CCA option allows customers to opt-out of a CCA, while SEC’s Green Rate will require customers to opt-in. The percentage of customers who explicitly opt-out is far less than those expected to opt-in to the Green Rate. MCE currently has an opt-out rate of 23.6%.34 Thus 76.4% of the residents will be served by the CCA and will be provided with renewable energy, which is much greater participation in comparison with enrollment rates of opt in programs. Despite not having full participation, this formality of a CCA induces more participation than SCE’s Green Rate, an opt-in program which is projected to have an enrollment rate of 0.5%.35 This lack of participation stems from the fact that asking customers to actively reach out, making a choice different from the status quo, creates a barrier to enrollment in the program. This comes from the unwillingness of the customer to take the time and effort to switch from the default service. The Green Rate’s projected participation rate of 0.5% will not allow the City of Hermosa Beach to make meaningful progress toward its goal of 100% carbon neutral electricity. What Does Assembly Bill 2145 Mean for Community Choice Aggregation? A bill currently before the California State Legislature, AB 2145, would significantly change the regulation governing CCA program establishment. If passed and signed in its current form, AB 2145 would require all future CCAs to become opt-in programs. This would decrease CCA program participation rates, perhaps to levels similar to that projected for the GTSR program. Because CCAs would aggregate less electricity demand, they would have less bargaining power when negotiating contracts. This would all-but-eliminate the ability of CCAs to provide cost-competitive rates with higher renewable content as compared to the utility. The City of Hermosa Beach should consider formally opposing AB 2145 in order to preserve their options to decarbonize the city’s electricity in pursuit of aggressive GHG emissions reductions. AB 2145 passed the Assembly in late May. It still must be approved by the Senate and signed into law by the governor in order to take effect. The bill will apply to any customer not enrolled in a CPUC-approved CCA by January 1, 2015. Given time needed to establish a CCA and roll-out to customers, it will be extremely difficult for Hermosa Beach to establish or join a CCA so that customers default into a program before this date. The City of Lancaster The City of Hermosa Beach can further investigate the feasibility of a CCA by analyzing the City of Lancaster’s progress toward creation of a CCA. The City of Lancaster is similarly in SCE’s service territory. Thus the City of Hermosa Beach can monitor the proceedings in Lancaster, Their experience as the first CCA in SCE territory will reduce some costs and risks to Hermosa Beach, should the city decide to create a separate CCA in Lancaster’s footsteps. Perhaps a more attractive option for the City of Hermosa Beach is to join Lancaster as CCA pioneers in SCE territory. Lancaster, as of 2011, created a JPA titled the Lancaster Power 34 (Choi, 2014) 35 (California Energy Commission, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 19 Authority (LPA). Through the LPA, Lancaster seeks to establish a CCA. Currently, Lancaster has sent a Statement of Intent to the CPUC and is awaiting correspondence. Approval from the CPUC would allow Lancaster to move forward and begin enrolling customers as soon as May 2015. The project manager for the LPA stated that Lancaster is waiting for the outcome of AB 2145. Lancaster cannot expedite forming its CCA by enrolling customers before May 2015.36 This means much of Lancaster’s success hinges on the legislative outcome of AB 2145. All in all Lancaster could serve as an example or partner in renewable energy procurement for the City of Hermosa Beach. Lancaster is located in the Mojave Desert, near the Tehachapi Pass - two of the best areas for renewable generation in the state. This abundance of opportunity to build renewable energy infrastructure could work to power the energy needs of the larger Southern California area. However, Hermosa Beach may sacrifice some local control by joining a non-adjacent CCA, such as Lancaster. A multi-city CCA is governed by a JPA that must have public meetings. If these meetings are geographically remote to Hermosa Beach, public participation in the oversight process may be hindered. Furthermore, contiguous cities are more likely to have similar interests, problems, and future goals, whereas cities that are farther away may have different goals. Thus a non-contiguous CCA, such as the City of Lancaster’s, may not be as beneficial to the City of Hermosa Beach as a contiguous CCA in the South Bay. Who Are Possible Candidates for a Local JPA? If the City of Hermosa Beach created a JPA, the most likely candidates to join would be other cities in the South Bay area of Los Angeles County. 36 (Swan, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 20 Figure 1. Map of the South Bay Cities37 Within the South Bay, five cities stand out as the most likely to join a CCA based on voting in relevant propositions, proximity to the City of Hermosa Beach, energy load and other factors. Below is a projection of how the estimated $1.7 million in start-up costs could be spread among the communities in accordance to their electricity consumption and how much the City of Hermosa Beach would have to pay in this scenario. 37 (South Bay Cities, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 21 Figure 2. Pie Chart of CCA Start-Up Cost Split Amongst 5 Cities According to their Consumption A JPA for a CCA does not need to be contiguous and cities who are not connected to the City of Hermosa Beach geographically can be a part of a CCA. In addition to the CCA options in the South Bay, there are other cities that Hermosa Beach could look to in forming a JPA. Though creating a non-contiguous CCA may not be as beneficial, the possibility of their inclusion should not be dismissed. The cities below have either been proven to be environmentally progressive or have populations over 100,000 making them candidates in the forming of a CCA in the Greater Los Angeles area. Ultimately, the process to achieve carbon neutrality will take time and should not be rushed. In order to establish an effective CCA, the City of Hermosa Beach should invest adequate time and money to form a strong JPA and for a private company to produce a feasibility report. The creation of a CCA will take place over a period of years, but, as shown in Chapter 5, it will likely not take as long as previous programs in Marin and Sonoma. With the formation of each subsequent CCA in California, the amount of time required for establishment has reduced. This is shown in Table 4 below. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 22 Table 6. Significant dates in the creation of CCAs in Marin, Sonoma, and Lancaster. MCE38 SCP39 LCCA40 Feasibility Report 3/2005 10/10/2011 1st quarter of 2014 JPA Established 12/19/2008 12/4/2012 3/8/11 Implementation Plan Created 12/4/2009 8/22/2013 5/13/14 Implementation Plan Approved by CPUC 2/3/2010 10/4/2013 6/2014 (expected) Service Agreement established with IOU 2/17/2010 8/22/2013 9/30/14 (expected) Registration as a CCA Approved by CPUC 4/9/2010 1/21/2014 Date not given Program Launched 5/7/2010 5/2014 5/1/15 (expected) Conclusion After evaluating the options described above, our recommendation to the City of Hermosa Beach is to pursue energy efficiency and form a CCA via a JPA. After these measures have been carried out Hermosa Beach should pursue forming a MUD. This would require that the CCA generate enough funds to purchase the distribution system from SCE. This will allow the city to take advantage of their local solar potential by making the necessary grid upgrades. These options will assist the City of Hermosa Beach in reaching its goal of attaining carbon neutral electricity. 38 (Marin Energy Authority, 2012) 39 (Sonoma Clean Power, 2014) 40 (City Council of Lancaster, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 23 Figure 3. A possible roadmap for Hermosa Beach to achieve carbon neutral electricity. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 24 References Association of California Cities, Orange County. (2013). California HERO program in Orange County. Retreived April 5, 2014 from: http://www.accoc.org/california-hero-program-in- orange-county/ California Energy Commission. (2014). Utility Annual Power Content Labels for 2012 - Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs). Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/sb1305/labels/2012_labels/IOUs/. California State Legislature. (2013). Electricity: Green Shared Renewables Program. Public Utilities Code 2831. September 28. City Council of Lancaster. (2014). Community choice aggregation implementation plan. Retrieved on May 5th, 2014 from http://www.cityoflancasterca.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=24050 Choi, Ben. Personal interview. April 23, 2014. DeShazo, J,R,, Matulka, R., Wong, N. (2011). Los Angeles Solar Atlas. Retrieved June 9, 2014, from http://innovation.luskin.ucla.edu/content/los-angeles-solar-atlas HERO Financing. (2013). HERO financing program [video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63zc5MZHi_o. Herrera, Dennis. "Reply Comments of the City and County of San Francisco." Proc. of Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, San Francisco. 1-18. California Public Utilities Commission. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. Interstate Renewable Energy Council. (2014b). “Phase II Opening Brief of the Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Inc. Regarding the Application of Southern California Edison Company for the Approval of an Optional Green Rate”, CPUC Hearing:74380. 13 May. Interstate Renewable Energy Council. (2014c).”Phase II Reply Brief of The Interstate Renewable Energy Council , Inc.” CPUC Hearing: 74618. 14 May. Kyle, G. A. Solar Insolation. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://education.gsfc.nasa.gov/experimental/July61999siteupdate/inv99Project.Site/Page s/solar.insolation.html Lean Energy U.S. (2014). How it Works Final. Retrieved April 6, 2014 from: http://www.leanenergyus.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/how-it-works_final.jpg BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 25 Mahmud, M. A., Hossain, M. J., & Pota, H. R. (2011) Analysis of Voltage Rise Effect on Distribution Network with Distributed Generation. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://seit.unsw.adfa.edu.au/staff/sites/hrp/papers/mhp11a-c.pdf Marin Energy Authority. (2012). 2/12/2012 Meeting Packet. Retrieved May 16, 2014, from http://marincleanenergy.org/sites/default/files/board-meeting/2.2.12_MEA_Board_ Packet.pdf Marin Clean Energy. (2013). MCE: Integrate Resource Plan Update. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from https://mcecleanenergy.com/sites/default/files/PDF/2013_Integrated_Resource_ Plan.pdf Marin Clean Energy. (2014). MCE: Green Power Community Choices. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://marincleanenergy.org/sites/default/files/key- documents/MCEGeneralPresentation1.15.14_0. Pepermans, G., Driesen, J., Haeseldonckx, D., Belmans, R., & D’haeseleer, W. (2005) Distributed Generation: Definition, Benefits and Issues. Energy Policy, 33, 787-798. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421503003069. Prindle, B., Eldridge, M., Eckhardt, M., & Frederick, A. (2007). The twin pillars of sustainability: Synergies between energy efficiency and renewable energy technology and policy. American Council for an Energy-Efficiency Economy. Roe, S. (2014, January 1). Most Efficient Solar Panels Comparison. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://sroeco.com/solar/most-efficient-solar-panels Shlatz, E., Buch, N., & Chan, M. (2013, November) Distributed Generation Integration Cost Study. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/2013publications/CEC- 200-2013-007/CEC-200-2013-007.pdf Sonoma Clean Power. (2014) Implementation Plan. Chapter 5 - Program Phase In. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: http://2tgc4v3kjp5mrjtdo183d8716ao.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp- content/uploads/2013/12/Sonoma-Clean-Power-CCA-Implementation-Plan-2013-08- 20.pdf The City Council of Santa Barbara. (2012). Draft Santa Barbara Climate Action Plan. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8 &ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fservices.santabarbaraca.gov%2FCAP%2F%2 FMG104527%2FAS104531%2FAS104545%2FAS104550%2FAI108425%2FDO108426 %2F2.DOCX&ei=MI-WU-TKOIy6oQTz8oCgDg&usg=AFQjCNHoyWbT8D2- hJVfaQygpar3f_1Bag&sig2=xSg6uMGtjVm0nq8f3l8icg BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 26 South Bay Cities. (n.d.) Map. Retrieved May 16, 2014 from: http://www.southbaycities.org/about-us Southern California Edison (2014b). Amendments to prepared testimony of Southern California Edison Company in support of application for approval of optional green rate. CPUC Hearing 1401007. March 11. Southern California Edison. (2014). Powering Southern California for 125+ Years. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from https://www.sce.com/wps/portal/home/about-us/who-we- are/!ut/p/b1/rVRdT8IwFP0r-rDH0gvtvnyb0cCQYBSIri-k2- 7GDKxzK2L89RZCoia6QWIfmt7mnpPTc09KBX2mopRvRS51oUq53tfCWfa9YTAKZxA O59yG8HrgsuF1yOa3tmmITAP8sQI44P0h3I7G93v8A4OQPcB0FgQMwKFPVFCRlLrSK xo1CS4TVWos9RJLC45nC2Sstvpi21iwWymyQyJr3AMrmWOKTZGXhyopUhq5WcqBAy OZEyPhntsn0k58s6W2dNCL08w7ym7R1fLsG86P-JaGDtsOz-4wrss60SVyTEW- VvFhjFFQxszLqagxwxrr3rY21yutq- bKAuPrbtfLlcrX2EvUxoLfICvVaPr8s5NGxgn3TxV3Np19jUYmzPYTGZOBiw7hcQpEmik RHz2fY2pzCVkXIfw34eBswvEJ6SheXl9FYKK9j_C7sa0z2-06533- XedJIW8nXPT_m5CdTTg-4Xs538kfv0S1WWy8l-xu4jyOPib4RGTsAbOrt49JNp0eq3V-- QkMWT0J/dl4/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/ Swan, Heather. Electronic Mail. May 30, 2014. Weisenmiller, R. (Director) (2014, April 21). Robert Weisenmiller Lecture. Environment 188B: Challenge of Low-Carbon Electricity in California. Lecture conducted from University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles. ” “ Jessica Hampton, Jonathan Ho, Jessica Leigh, David Limjoco, Steven Odom, Francis Villanueva, Adrian Salazar Advisor: Juan Matute Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach How can the City of Hermosa Beach decarbonize its electricity? ●Immediately reducing a city’s emissions by 33% for $4.62 per month per household Introduction Reaching your goal.. ➢Rooftop Solar ➢Green Rate ➢Community Choice Aggregation Rooftop Solar The Potential ●Annual Rooftop Solar Potential: 76 GWh ●Annual Electricity Demand: 78 GWh The Problems ●Jeopardized Power Reliability ●Reduced Power Quality ●Infrastructure not ready for Bidirectional Power The Bad ●Price: $12.26 per month ●No Autonomy ●Sunset deadline in 2019 The Good ●Quickest fix ●Uses existing infrastructure Green Tariff Shared Renewables Program Assessing Community Choice Aggregation PG&E MCE Light Green MCE Deep Green Renewables 19%50%100% Residential Total Cost $76.16 $75.70 $80.78 Commercial Total Cost $187.65 $185.20 $197.02 Rates Comparison (Average Household Bill) GTSR Projected Enrollment Rate Marin Clean Energy Enrollment Rate 0.5%76.4% (1.44% of all customers in Deep Green) GTSR & CCA Enrollment Comparison Steps to Start a CCA CCA Establishment Timeline Costs of Starting CCA Creating CCA with other Cities via JPA Residential Service Agreements Non-Residential Service Agreements Marin 78,100 11,400 Richmond 31,600 3,300 Type of Load Marin (2010)Sonoma (2010) Non-Residential (GWh)716.66 1,520.57 Residential (GWh)705.54 1,354.34 Total (GWh)1,422.21 2,874.91 Suitable Size for a JPA ●Opt Out ●Different Renewable Energy Options in the Program Marin Clean Energy Light Green Renewable Percentage Customer Options in a CCA Program Demand Emissions (MT of CO2)Total Emissions (MT of CO2) SCE Nonrenewables 62.4 GWh Renewables 15.6 GWh Nonrenewables 15,210 MT Renewables 0 MT 15,210 MT CCA*Opt-Out 19.97 GWh Light Green (50%) 56.91 GWh Deep Green (100%) 1.12 GWh Opt-Out 5,338 MT Light Green (50%) 3,894 MT Deep Green (100%) 0 MT 9,232 MT Difference (Abatement) 5,978 MT Abated *We assumed MCE's enrollment rates, fuel mix, and light/dark green options. Enrollment 100% 75% 1.4% Carbon Mitigation vs Renewable Content ●Education ○Awareness ■Process, Impacts, Benefits ●Participation ○Open Council Meetings ○Transparency ➢Greater CCA Participation = More Purchasing Leverage Importance of Public Engagement ●Requires Default Opt In ●Deadline January 1st 2015 ●Recently Passed State Assembly (51:15) ●Pending Vote by Senate and Signing by Governor ●Greatly Affects CCA Enrollment Success What can Hermosa Beach Do? ●Register Opposition ●Track Progress ●Write to Government AB 2145 Phase Number of Accounts Phase 1: May 2015 640 municipal accounts Phase 2: November 2015 4,800 commercial accounts Phase 3: February and/or November 2016 37,500 residential accounts Type of Load Account Load Municipal (GWh) 640 38 Residential (GWh) 48,900 383.5 Commercial (GWh) 5,500 345 Lancaster CCA How can the City of Hermosa Beach decarbonize its electricity? ❖formation of a CCA ❖grid upgrades ❖energy efficiency Research Question: Answered Our Recommendation Questions?Questions? SCE Power Content Label (2011) Recovery of Costs by MCE after CCA Establishment ❏Rates will be initially higher ❏Cost Responsibility Surcharge Fluctuations ❏AB 2145 ❏Obtaining Start Up Capital ➢Higher Rates = Dissatisfied Customers = Opting Out Risks of Forming a CCA BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 1 Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach Jessi Hampton, Jonathan Ho, Jessica Leigh, David Limjoco, Steven Odom, Francis Villanueva, Adrian Salazar Advisor: Juan Matute June 2014 UCLA Environment 180 Senior Practicum 2013-2014 UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 2 Acknowledgements: We would like to recognize and extend our gratitude to the individuals and organizations who have made this report and study possible. Special thanks to our Project Advisor, Juan Matute, for his expertise, guidance and continuous support throughout the project. Additional acknowledgements to Pamela Townsend, the City of Hermosa Beach, the City of Hermosa Beach City Council, Professor Travis Longcore and the UCLA Institute of the Environment. Who Are We? We are comprised of seven graduating seniors from the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. The goal of this research, performed over the course of the past six months, has been to examine methods of procuring decarbonized electricity for the City of Hermosa Beach. With the careful guidance under our advisor Juan Matute, we have produced a report that outlines the recommended next steps toward attaining carbon neutral electricity for the City of Hermosa Beach. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 3 List of Acronyms CAISO California Independent System Operator CCA Community Choice Aggregation CEC California Energy Commission CEJA California Environmental Justice Alliance CES Community Energy Storage CPUC California Public Utilities Commission CRS Cost Responsibility Surcharge FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FHFA Federal Housing Finance Agency FIT Feed-in Tariff GHG Greenhouse Gas GTSR Green Tariff Shared Renewables HDPA High Desert Power Authority HERO Home Energy Renovation Opportunity IOU Investor Owned Utility IPP Independent Power Producer IRB Institutional Review Board IREC Interstate Renewable Energy Council JPA Joint Powers Authority LCCA Lancaster Community Choice Aggregation LMUD Lassen Municipal Utility District BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 4 LPA Lancaster Power Authority MCE Marin Clean Energy MUD Municipal Utility District PACE Property Assessed Clean Energy PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric PPA Power Purchase Agreement REC Renewable Energy Certificate RPS Renewable Portfolio Standard SCE Southern California Edison SCP Sonoma Clean Power SDG&E San Diego Gas and Electric SJVPA San Joaquin Valley Power Authority SMUD Sacramento Municipal Utility District BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 5 Table of Contents Acknowledgements: ................................................................................................................................................... 2 List of Acronyms ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 1: Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 8 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................... 13 Chapter 2: Options to Decarbonize Electricity...................................................................................................... 15 Rooftop Solar ........................................................................................................................................................ 15 Green Tariff Shared Renewables ........................................................................................................................ 15 Community Choice Aggregation ....................................................................................................................... 16 Chapter 3: Technical Assessment ........................................................................................................................... 17 Renewable Energy Sources ................................................................................................................................. 17 Solar Thermal ................................................................................................................................................... 17 Solar Photovoltaic ............................................................................................................................................ 20 Utility-Scale Wind Turbines ........................................................................................................................... 22 Architectural Wind .......................................................................................................................................... 24 Geothermal ....................................................................................................................................................... 25 Hydropower ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 Biomethane & Biomass .................................................................................................................................... 29 Hydrogen .......................................................................................................................................................... 30 Technical Fundamentals ...................................................................................................................................... 33 Introduction to Electrical Power .................................................................................................................... 34 Delivery and the Grid ...................................................................................................................................... 36 Grid Operation ................................................................................................................................................. 38 Grid Reliability ................................................................................................................................................. 40 Limitations of the Grid .................................................................................................................................... 41 Renewable Energy Sources and Grid Reliability ......................................................................................... 42 Battery Energy Storage System ...................................................................................................................... 43 Distributed Generation ................................................................................................................................... 45 The Challenge of Rooftop Solar ..................................................................................................................... 46 Technical Solutions: Smart Grid ......................................................................................................................... 47 Facilitating Bidirectional Power for Distributed Generation ..................................................................... 47 Energy Storage ................................................................................................................................................. 48 Microgrids ......................................................................................................................................................... 51 Chapter 4: Green Tariff Shared Renewables ......................................................................................................... 53 BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 6 Legislative Review of Senate Bill 43................................................................................................................... 53 Public Commentary on Proposals ...................................................................................................................... 55 Green Rate: Southern California Edison ........................................................................................................... 57 Southern California Edison Proposal ............................................................................................................ 57 Enrollment ........................................................................................................................................................ 57 Pricing ................................................................................................................................................................ 57 Renewable Energy Certificates....................................................................................................................... 58 Marketing Green Rate ..................................................................................................................................... 59 Green Rate Balance Account .......................................................................................................................... 59 Proposal Amendments .................................................................................................................................... 59 Public Commentary: Specific to SCE Proposal ............................................................................................ 60 Chapter 5: Community Choice Aggregation ........................................................................................................ 63 History ................................................................................................................................................................... 64 California State Assembly Bill 117 ................................................................................................................. 64 Attempted Community Choice Aggregation Programs in California...................................................... 64 Power Purchase Agreement ................................................................................................................................ 65 Benefits of Community Choice Aggregation .................................................................................................... 65 Starting a Community Choice Aggregation Program ..................................................................................... 66 1) Feasibility Study .......................................................................................................................................... 67 2) Joint Powers Authority ............................................................................................................................... 67 3) Implementation Plan ................................................................................................................................... 69 4) Statement of Intent ...................................................................................................................................... 71 5) Application for Registration ....................................................................................................................... 71 6) Building a Community Choice Aggregation Program ............................................................................. 71 Funding a Community Choice Aggregation .................................................................................................... 72 Staffing of a Joint Community Choice Aggregation Program ....................................................................... 73 Time Frame for Establishment ........................................................................................................................... 74 Community Choice Aggregation Program Roll-Out ...................................................................................... 75 Investor Owned Utility Opposition to Community Choice Aggregation .................................................... 76 Risks of forming a Community Choice Aggregation Program ...................................................................... 78 Customer-Related Issues ..................................................................................................................................... 79 The Importance of Public Engagement ............................................................................................................. 82 Customer Options ................................................................................................................................................ 82 Additional Requirements for Community Choice Aggregation Programs ................................................. 83 Cost Responsibility Surcharge ............................................................................................................................ 84 BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 7 Laws Relating to Community Choice Aggregation ......................................................................................... 84 2010 Proposition 16 .......................................................................................................................................... 84 Proposition 23 ................................................................................................................................................... 85 Assembly Bill 2145 ........................................................................................................................................... 86 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................. 89 Chapter 6: Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 90 Energy Efficiency .................................................................................................................................................. 90 Green Tariff Shared Renewables Program ....................................................................................................... 91 Community Choice Aggregation via a Joint Powers Authority .................................................................... 93 Possible Candidates for a Local JPA .............................................................................................................. 97 A Pathway to Future Grid Improvements ...................................................................................................... 102 References ................................................................................................................................................................ 106 APPENDIX .............................................................................................................................................................. 117 Case Studies ............................................................................................................................................................. 118 Lancaster Community Choice Aggregation ................................................................................................... 118 Marin Clean Energy (MCE) .............................................................................................................................. 122 Sonoma Clean Power (SCP) .............................................................................................................................. 126 BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 8 Chapter 1: Introduction The City of Hermosa Beach aspires to be distinguished as the ‘leader in sustainability’ by becoming ‘a more livable and sustainable beach city’. Residents already know the City of Hermosa Beach as the “best little beach city” in the South Bay, but with progressive goals in sustainability, they are striving for more. The 1.43 square miles which comprises the city is home to nearly 20,000 residents with a median household income of $100,696.1 Together they consume approximately 78 GWh of electricity per year served by Southern California Edison (SCE), an investor owned utility (IOU).2 Over the past few years, the city has sought to integrate sustainability into its municipal operations and community as a whole. They have already led several successful sustainability ventures in order to reach their ultimate goal of becoming a carbon neutral municipality. This goal was set in 2010 by the City of Hermosa Beach to source all municipal and community operations from renewable sources. Other notable achievements in sustainability include becoming the first South Bay City to join the ‘Cool Cities’ Initiative, completing a municipal greenhouse gases (GHG) inventory, creating The Green Task Force, and many more (see below). Table 1.1. A Timeline of the City of Hermosa Beach’s Notable Sustainability Achievements3 Year Accomplishment 2006 The City of Hermosa Beach was the first South Bay city to join the ‘Cool Cities’ initiative and endorsed the ‘U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement’. 2007 The Green Building Committee puts green issues on City’s agenda. 2009 The Green Task Force was appointed by the City Council to advise on green initiatives and prepare a sustainability/ climate action plan. 2009/2010 Greenhouse gas emissions inventories were prepared 2010 The City Council supports the carbon neutral initiative 2011 A sustainability/climate action plan is presented by The Green Task Force 1 (The U.S. Census Bureau, 2012) 2 (ICF International, 2012) 3 (The City of Hermosa Beach, 2011a) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 9 Table 1.2. The City of Hermosa Beach’s Environmental Sustainability Strides4 Sector Accomplishment Water Conservation & Landscaping · Uses recycled water for 75% of parks, greenbelt & medians · 1st in L.A. County to initiate Clean Beach Restaurant Program · Storm water infiltration system runs along Strand & Pier Avenue · Adopted water conservation & landscape ordinances · Ocean Friendly Garden demo project at 22nd St./The Strand Waste Reduction · Sponsors an annual beach clean-up day · City offers compost and worm bins at discounted prices · City cleaning supplies are environmentally friendly · Instituted Special Events sustainability requirements · Recycles all green waste (grass & tree trimmings) from city facilities Energy & Building · Converted all traffic signals to LED · Waives fees on solar energy system plan checks · Installed solar powered flashing red lights at 8 locations · Amended zoning code to allow small wind energy systems · Adopting sustainability measures in new CalGreen Building Code · Improved Pier Avenue to create vibrant pedestrian environment · Adopted form-based pedestrian oriented zoning for Pier Avenue · Initiated city program to replace gas vehicles with alternate fuels · Placed ‘Sharrow’ (share the lane) markings on Hermosa Avenue · Local Use Vehicle (electric vehicle) Program participant · Offers free metered parking to all electric vehicles Transportation · Improved Pier Avenue to create vibrant pedestrian environment · Adopted form-based pedestrian oriented zoning for Pier Avenue · Initiated city program to replace gas vehicles with alternate fuels · Placed ‘Sharrow’ (share the lane) markings on Hermosa Avenue · Local Use Vehicle (electric vehicle) Program participant · Offers free metered parking to all electric vehicles 4Ibid BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 10 Sector Accomplishment Notable Contributions by Hermosa Beach’s Green Task Force · Adopted water conservation and drought management ordinance (2010-2011)[iii] · Adopted water efficient landscape ordinance that exceeds state regulations · Adopted water efficient landscape ordinance that exceeds state regulations · Adopted water efficient landscape ordinance that exceeds state regulations · City distributes recycling guide to every house and business · Instituted Special Events sustainability requirements · Recommends ban on polystyrene take-out food containers (est. Completion June 2011) · Prepared Sustainability Plan BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 11 Figure 1.1. A picture of the City of Hermosa Beach’s Strategic Plan BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 12 In 2013, a group of seven graduating students from UCLA’s Institute of the Environment and Sustainability produced a carbon neutral scoping plan for the City of Hermosa Beach. The UCLA Practicum team in conjunction with the City of Hermosa Beach initiated a project which counted all GHG emissions associated with water, energy, and materials consumption and acquisition. From analysis of this data, they identified the sources and quantities of GHG emissions in the city. Using this information, three scenarios for reduction of total GHG emissions were produced, spanning a timeframe from 2015- 2075. These models varied in intensity, with the final recommendation that the City of Hermosa Beach pursue most aggressively, a combination of energy efficiency, implementing electricity from renewable energy sources, and purchasing carbon offsets.5 This year, the team, comprised of a new set of seven graduating seniors, continued research from the previous year’s conclusions. We focused centrally on electricity generation. This year’s report sets out to explain various avenues of attaining carbon neutral electricity and provide a final recommendation tapered to the specific needs of the City of Hermosa Beach. In order to provide the most sufficient and suitable recommendation, these two main topics of research were analyzed by financial cost and technical feasibility. The result of this research is a comprehensive recommendation for the City of Hermosa Beach to achieve carbon neutral electricity generation. First, we started by considering the efforts of energy efficiency to address the specific constraints electricity supply. Next, the goal was to increase the amount of renewable resources to the grid. Consequently, we set out to investigate methods of delivery and distribution of electricity from renewable sources. The bulk of the research is examining and determining the feasibility of two different energy policy options, a Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) and SCE’s version of a Green Tariff Shared Renewables (GTSR) program. A CCA is a system in which residents of a community can unite their demand for electricity and interactively decide from whom they purchase their power. Most importantly, residents, along with their local governing boards, have influence over the selection of the energy sources providing their electricity with this program. Secondly, the newly created GTSR program offered by SCE, allows ratepayers access to a higher portfolio of renewable energy procured by the utility for a premium price. With each respective energy policy, the advantages/disadvantages and technical requirements were carefully analyzed to ensure a suitable fit for the City of Hermosa Beach. 5 (Dickinson, Fan, Goh, Maki, Savarani, Shabnoor, & Trans, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 13 Methodology To provide the City of Hermosa Beach with options and recommendations to reach carbon neutrality in its electricity production and delivery system, we first developed expertise in the following areas: methods to increase energy efficiency, technical aspects of electricity generation, transmission and consumption, CCA programs, the GTSR program, and PPAs. We learned how the efficiency of electricity consumption can be increased in a city by reviewing literature and researching best market practices. We studied various approaches aimed to improve city- wide energy efficiency, including but not limited to, technological improvements and policies. In addition, we studied the structure and consequences of the existing Home Energy Renovation Opportunity (HERO) program. The HERO program is a policy designed to incentivize and help homeowners improve home energy efficiency by upgrading home structure and electronics. Technical components of electricity generation such as transmission and consumption are integral parts of understanding how to achieve carbon neutrality. They were investigated by reviewing scientific literature. We explored where and how exactly the City of Hermosa Beach could potentially get renewable energy. After this research, we were able to understand the current structure of the grid, its shortcomings, the technical challenges of integrating renewable sources of energy into the grid, and possible solutions to these challenges. We became familiar with CCA programs by reviewing literature, reviewing relevant legislations, and studying current practices. We studied the structure and operation of existing CCA programs, including examining the CCA feasibility reports of Berkeley and East Bay. We also explored the benefits of multiple municipalities forming a joint CCA program. Another option for providing carbon neutral electricity is the GTSR program. We began researching and reviewing Senate Bill 43, followed by an analysis of public comments on the legislation. Then we investigated SCE’s Green Rate Proposal and opinions surrounding its submission to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). To legally proceed with interviewing processes, the team had to go through Institutional Review Board (IRB) procedures. Every group member went through the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative. The interviewing aspect of the project was contingent on the approval of the research project by IRB. After becoming experts in the aforementioned topics, we analyzed the feasibility and applicability of various policies for the City of Hermosa Beach. We analyzed the technical situation, geographical factors and constraints, demographic factors, and political atmosphere of the City of Hermosa Beach. With these considerations, we assessed the feasibility of various options for Hermosa Beach. We calculated the possible benefits of each option and the relative costs of each option. The costs were calculated through estimation and extrapolation of the known costs of each option. After feasibility assessments and thorough cost-benefit analyses of the options were executed, we made a policy recommendation for the City of Hermosa Beach. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 14 Throughout the duration of the project, we worked under the guidance and supervision of our advisor Juan Matute. Our advisor acted as the intermediary between us and the client, the City of Hermosa Beach. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 15 Chapter 2: Options to Decarbonize Electricity This chapter presents brief overviews of what options the City of Hermosa Beach has in order to decarbonize electricity used in the city to achieve municipal carbon neutrality. The options consist of rooftop solar, SCE’s GTSR program, and a CCA program. Rooftop Solar GIS analysis shows that if all residential units of the City of Hermosa Beach were to install rooftop solar panels, they would generate 56.8 GWh of electrical power in a year, more than two thirds of the city’s annual electricity demand. If all rooftops in the city, including residential units, were covered with solar panels, they would generate a total of 76.2 GWh per year, almost the entire city’s annual electricity demand. Rooftop solar has tremendous potential to provide carbon neutral electricity for the city, but there are also technical challenges that come with heavy reliance on rooftop solar. These include, but are not limited to the following: threatening power reliability, locally jeopardizing power quality, current infrastructure not suitable for bidirectional power flow, and electricity generation only as long as sunlight is available. Green Tariff Shared Renewables One option for the City of Hermosa Beach to decarbonize electricity deliveries is to turn to the newly created GTSR program by SCE. The Green Rate program is a brand new addition to SCE’s service plan mandated by California Senate Bill 43. As a requirement of this legislation, utilities will begin to offer programs equivalent to the Green Rate program outline. Each program offers ratepayers an opportunity to buy high-percentage renewable energy directly from their service provider. Currently, the CPUC is reviewing SCE’s program proposal to see if it meets the qualifications set by SB 43. Once approved, ratepayers in the City of Hermosa Beach can purchase fifty or one-hundred percent renewable power on the GTSR program. Demand from local residents will be filled with the 269 MW of power allocated to SCE for their service area. Enrollment in this rate begins twelve months after approval of the proposal by CPUC. Customers are free to cancel their subscription once enrolled, but must wait one year before re-enrollment. Four methods of enrollment will be provided: online web portal, SCE call center, paper form, or account manager. Customers who choose enrollment in the GTSR program are charged extra fees for electricity generation. These costs go to renewable integration, market participation, program administration, the green rate portfolio, and resource adequacy costs. Renewable Energy Certificates (REC) created from subscriptions shall be retired on behalf of the customer, which means the customer can claim the environmental benefits of renewable energy. In order to promote this new option, SCE proposes to market to households currently in Bundled Service as well as outreach to low income customers. Last, SCE intends to establish a Green Balance Account to separate extra costs incurred to the company from renewable energy procurement. Through this mechanism, SCE will determine Green Rate program prices accurately, without shifting expenditure costs onto non- participants. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 16 Community Choice Aggregation The City of Hermosa Beach could form a CCA program in order to take control of its power procurement decisions in support of its carbon neutrality goal. The first CCA started in Massachusetts with the Cape Light Compact in 1997 and the idea has since spread to other states, most notably Illinois, but also California. Two CCAs are currently operating in Northern California and most recently a third is forming in the County of Los Angeles. A CCA would provide a medium for the City of Hermosa Beach to make decisions about power procurement, a function currently provided by their electric utility, SCE. SCE would continue to distribute electricity through their power lines and bill customers. Once a CCA program is established within the service territory, each customer is given an opportunity to opt out of the program and maintain service through their original electric utility. Those customers that do not opt out will become members of the CCA. The increase in decision-making power that a CCA program offers communities would allow the City of Hermosa Beach to increase the procurement of carbon neutral power delivered to the city. In this way, the city would be able to achieve its goals of GHG emissions reductions while taking greater control of the costs of pursuing these goals. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 17 Chapter 3: Technical Assessment The City of Hermosa Beach’s goal of obtaining carbon neutral electricity could be reached through various policies. But the entire operation of generating and transmitting electricity involves much more than just policy. This chapter serves to provide a fundamental understanding of: the process of producing electricity, the methods in which carbon neutral electricity could be generated, the basic functioning of the current electricity transmission and delivery system, and the incompatibility of distributed, incremental energy sources (including rooftop solar) with current infrastructure. The chapter ends with a brief discussion about possible solutions to mitigate technical challenges so that the City of Hermosa Beach can utilize renewable energy sources to a greater extent. Renewable Energy Sources Renewable energy is energy produced from a source that is either not depleted when converted to energy or can regenerate more quickly than needed to serve energy needs. Prior to industrialization and use of coal (and later oil and natural gas), most energy used was renewable. This section introduces the different types of renewable energy sources, with a focus on those available to the City of Hermosa Beach. Solar Thermal Figure 3.1. This graph compares the theoretical solar thermal energy production, with actual solar thermal energy production according to time of day.6 6 (Ascent Systems, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 18 Solar thermal systems generate electricity by utilizing thermal energy from solar radiation. Solar thermal energy collection depends solely on the heat generated by the sun, so it can still generate power on cloudy days when direct sunlight is not available.7 The dotted line in Figure 3.1 displays the theoretical solar thermal energy production according to the time of day, but due to delayed heat loss, the actual thermal energy production is represented by the solid orange line. Hence, solar thermal facilities can continue to produce electricity for some time after the sun goes down also. Therefore, electricity production from solar thermal is less variable than solar photovoltaic. Utility-scale solar thermal power plants, called high-temperature collectors, use mirrors or lenses to concentrate sunlight. This maximizes the amount of energy available for electricity production. Figure 3.2 illustrates how energy is produced in a parabolic trough solar thermal plant. First, collectors concentrate sunlight in order to heat a synthetic oil, which is then used to heat water and generate steam. Next, the steam is piped to an onsite turbine generator, which produces electricity to be transmitted to power lines. On days when heat from sunlight is not available, a supplementary natural gas boiler can be used in place of solar energy to produce steam.8 Solar thermal plants of the power tower design function in a similar fashion by also producing steam to operate a turbine generator. The largest of these plants is located in Southern California in the Mojave Desert. These systems increase in efficiency as temperature increases, making desert climates ideal locations for such electricity production. Figure 3.2. This diagram explains how parabolic trough solar thermal plants produce electricity9 7 (Lueken, Cohen, & Apt, 2012) 8 (NextEra Energy Resources, 2014a) 9 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 19 The Mojave Desert is a huge resource for solar energy in California and has been rapidly growing in the past years. This is assisted by funding provided by federal stimulus in order to achieve the standards set by California’s Senate bill, which requires 33% of the state’s energy to be provided by renewable sources by 2020. At the beginning of 2014, two solar thermal power plants began operation in the Imperial and Riverside Counties in the Mojave. Ivanpah is a solar thermal power plant of the power tower design and the largest operating solar thermal plant in the world. It produces 377 MW of energy by using over 300,000 mirrors to focus the sunlight towards three main towers that can reach up to 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit. The plant generates enough energy to provide electricity for over 100,000 homes.10 Both Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and SCE have signed contracts to purchase electricity provided by Ivanpah for twenty-five to thirty years.11 The price that SCE will pay for the electricity it is receiving from Ivanpah is not publicly available. However, BrightSource Energy, the company that constructed the Ivanpah plant, and SCE have said that the price is competitive. Figure 3.3 is an image of the Ivanpah plant. Figure 3.3. This is the Ivanpah solar thermal power plant in the Mojave Desert. It produces 377 MW of energy using a power tower design.12 The Genesis Solar Power Project is the second solar thermal power plant that began operating at the end of 2013. This project consists of two independent generating facilities each producing 125MW for a total output of 250MW of electricity. This solar thermal plant is of the parabolic trough design, consisting of troughs made of over 600,000 mirrors.13 PG&E currently holds a power purchase agreement (PPA) with the Genesis solar plant at an undisclosed price.14 Figure 3.4 is an image of the Genesis Solar Power Project. 10 (BrightSource Energy Inc., 2014) 11 (NRG Solar, 2014) 12 (U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 2014) 13 (NextEra Energy Resources, 2014b) 14 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 20 Figure 3.4. This is the Genesis Solar Power Project located in Riverside County. It produces 250 MW of electricity using a parabolic trough design.15 While both of these power plants have been lauded for creating jobs and offsetting carbon emissions, they have received some criticism from conservationists for potentially causing fatalities in bird species. Solar thermal plants are known to burn birds that fly over the plant due to the high temperatures that they conduct.16 Over half of the casualties caused by solar thermal plants were of water bird species typically found around ponds or streams. Biologists speculate that the birds may be mistaking the solar thermal plant’s reflective surfaces for water, thus attracting them to the site.17 While solar thermal plants can provide clean and renewable electricity, it is important to take into consideration their impact on wildlife too. Solar Photovoltaic Solar photovoltaic cells directly convert captured solar radiation into electricity. The cells operate at maximum efficiency at a temperature greater than 55° F, but high temperatures from extended exposure to concentrated sunlight can also decrease the efficiency of photovoltaic cells, thus sometimes requiring a cooling system. The greatest limitation of photovoltaic cells is that they only generate electricity when the sun is out. This contributes heavily to their high variability compared to both thermal solar and wind energy.18 Solar photovoltaic power plants are more common than their solar thermal cousins mostly due to the declining costs of photovoltaic solar cells. Since the 1950s the price of photovoltaic cells have dropped 15 (NextEra Energy Resources, 2014b) 16 (Hering, 2014) 17 (Clarke, 2013) 18 (Lueken, Cohen, & Apt, 2012) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 21 drastically, by a factor of 100.19 The increase in power plant size and efficiency has helped lower the costs of photovoltaics. Larger power plants are able to offset more of the base costs of construction by producing a greater profit from increased generation of electricity. Increased efficiency contributed to a decline in cost as more electricity is produced per square meter of photovoltaic material.20 Some solar thermal power plants have even been converted to photovoltaic power plants due to their comparative affordability21. An example of such a solar power plant is the Blythe Solar Power Project. Originally, the project was approved in 2010 to be a parabolic trough solar thermal plant with four adjacent plants each producing 250 MW of power for 1000 MW total. However, in 2011 it was announced that the project would use photovoltaic solar panels instead and consist of three plants producing 125 MW each and a fourth producing 110 MW for a total output of 485 MW22. The Blythe Project is currently in the compliance phase, producing an environmental impact statement, and construction is projected to begin by the end of 2014.23 Several other photovoltaic solar power plants are being constructed in the Mojave Desert with completion dates ranging from 2013 to 2015. However, all of these power plants already have PPAs arranged for when the plants are completed and ready for commercial use. One of such photovoltaic solar power plants is Desert Sunlight Solar Farm, which has an anticipated operational date of 2015. The project includes two separate phases, each backed by a PPA, the first with PG&E for 300 MW of electricity and the second with SCE for 250 MW.24 Though the Mojave Desert is within the SCE service territory, it is the state’s most efficient solar producing region. PG&E is an especially prominent figure in the photovoltaic solar energy market in the Mojave Desert as they hold exclusive PPAs with numerous power plants, such as Antelope Valley Solar Ranch for 230 MW and California Valley Solar Ranch for 250 MW.25 Many projects are supported by a PPA before construction even begins. 19 (Nemet, 2006) 20 Ibid. 21 (U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 2014) 22 (Montgomery, 2013) 23 (California Energy Commission, 2014) 24 (Renewable Energy World, 2011) 25 (Leone, 2011) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 22 Utility-Scale Wind Turbines Figure 3.5. This map shows California’s wind resources26 As of 2013, over five percent of California’s total electricity is provided by wind energy, but it continues to grow as a prominent renewable energy source.27 Figure 3.5 shows the wind potential in California. Major utility-scale wind farms in California are primarily located in three areas: Tehachapi (southeast of Bakersfield), San Gorgonio (east of Los Angeles near Palm Springs), and Altamont (east of San Francisco), as shown in Figure 3.6. These regions provide ninety-five percent of California’s wind energy supply, 26 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2003) 27 (American Wind Energy Association, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 23 each with the capacity of producing hundreds of megawatts of energy.28 This is convenient for Southern California and Los Angeles in particular as two of these three locations are within reasonable distance to supply electricity, allowing for a plentiful source of wind energy available to the City of Hermosa Beach. SCE currently holds over a dozen PPAs with wind energy producers in these areas; they include new projects with contracts not expiring until mid-2030, while others are due to expire within the next five years. Figure 3.6. This map shows regions where wind power facilities are located in California29 The Alta Wind Energy Center is a wind farm project in Tehachapi that was recently developed, earning the distinction of the largest wind facility in the nation. The total generation of the facility is projected to be 1,548 MW provided by several individually operating wind farms. The first phase already online is generating 1,320 MW.30 Some smaller projects in the same area that have been operating since the 1980s are due for renewal in the coming years, such as Project 251, Cameron Ridge, San Gorgonio, and more. Cameron Ridge recently underwent construction in 2013 to replace older turbines with a newer design, the Ogin Turbine, which is predicted to increase energy output by fifty percent.31 More details regarding these and other wind farms can be found in Table 3.1. The lifespan for wind turbines has been projected to be about twenty years, also conveniently the typical 28 (California Energy Commission, 2014) 29 (California Energy Commission, 2003) 30 (California Energy Commission, 2014) 31 (Ogin Inc., 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 24 length of a PPA. After this time, it is necessary for the turbines to be replaced. A recent study conducted in Scotland, however, suggests that this may actually be an overstatement. After ten years of operation, the average output of a wind farm had declined by one-third.32 In this case, the actual lifespan of an average wind turbine at approximately twelve to fifteen years, and after that time, would require a reevaluation of the operation and maintenance costs associated with wind turbine development. Offshore wind energy is also an option for the City of Hermosa Beach. Winds offshore are generally more reliable, strong and abundant than those onshore. This can be a particular advantage for California where the potential for wind power onshore is limited, but coastlines are plentiful. However, there are several complications that make offshore wind energy a less feasible option in today’s energy market. Wind turbines require a certain minimum distance from shore in order to optimize the power of the wind. But the construction of undersea transmission lines is an expensive endeavor and the price increases with distance offshore.33 Also, exposure to seawater increases the risk of corrosion to the wind turbines. Thus the offshore wind turbines must be designed more robustly to endure the conditions of the sea. They may also require additional maintenance, which is more expensive than traditional turbines as this requires transporting crews out into the ocean.34 Technology has been improving to make offshore wind more practical. Architectural Wind Figure 3.7. These are Aerovironment’s AVX400 architectural wind turbines35 Architectural wind turbines are small modular systems that can be constructed on existing buildings. AeroVironment’s architectural wind turbines take advantage of the natural acceleration of wind that 32 (Hughes, 2012) 33 (Dvorak, Archer, & Jacobson, 2009) 34 (Beaudry-Losique, Boling, Brown-Saracino, et al., 2011) 35 (Aerovironment, Inc., 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 25 results from a building’s aerodynamics using specific positioning and design. While architectural wind provides benefits that traditional turbines are lacking, there are drawbacks to this technology as well. Since the release of Aerovironment’s AVX400 turbines (as pictured in figure 3.7), energy production has not met the company’s original expectations.36 This is mostly due to the low energy output produced at slower wind speeds. While the turbine has the capacity to produce up to 400 W of energy, it usually operates at lower wind speeds and does not reach this potential. This reduces the cost effectiveness of these architectural wind designs compared to larger wind turbines. Aerovironment has since released a newer model of its architectural wind turbine, AVX1000, which has a capacity of 1,000 W. However, like the AVX400, reaching this rate of energy production requires wind speed of nearly 30 mph. At wind speeds of 10 mph or lower, the turbines will likely produce less than 50 W.37 Technologies surrounding architectural wind are still developing and improving, so this form of energy production may gain momentum in the future. However, it does not currently seem viable as a form of cost effective energy production. Geothermal California is unique in its bountiful reservoir of geothermal energy as it contains the second largest supply in the world.38 The untapped geothermal energy available in California could supply enough electricity to power the entire state’s needs. Geothermal energy is consistently available at all times because the Earth is constantly releasing heat. Therefore variability is not an issue as it is for some other renewable energy sources. The Salton Sea is the nearest geothermal extraction site to the City of Hermosa Beach located in the Imperial Valley. There are several geothermal power plants currently in operation serving areas of Los Angeles, San Diego and Tempe, Arizona. Eight of these plants are currently under a thirty-year PPA with SCE.39 This means that the infrastructure necessary to transport geothermal energy from the Imperial Valley to the City of Hermosa Beach is already existing. Each of the eight power plants providing energy for SCE have individual contracts with a range of expiration dates and rates. One of such contracts expires as soon as 2016, with all but one following through 2020.40 As recently as 2012, development of an additional geothermal plant was approved in the Salton Sea area for 49.9 MW of energy. It was already under contract with the Salt River Project from Arizona when production was halted due to an anticipated output that fell short of initial predictions.41 Besides this attempt, only one geothermal plant has been constructed in the last twenty years in the Imperial Valley and there are no current plans for any additional power plants. 36 (Wilson, 2009) 37 (Aerovironment, Inc., 2008) 38 (Glassley, 2011) 39 (CalEnergy Generation, 2014). 40 (CCE Generation, LLC, 2005) 41 (Abou-Diwan, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 26 Table 3.1. This graph shows operating solar, wind, and geothermal power plants in California that have either recently come online or have existing contracts that will expire in the next ten years. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 27 Hydropower In 2007, hydropower in California produced 43,625 GWh of electricity, 14.5% of the state’s total system power, making it one of the most utilized forms of renewable energy. 42 California’s has 400 hydro plants located in the eastern mountain ranges with a total capacity of 14,000 MW. Hydropower harnesses energy from water flowing into a turbine from a higher potential to a lower potential. It is important to note that hydropower is only renewable as long as water is available. Additionally, hydropower has significant impacts on the local environment. “The construction of hydropower plants can alter sizable portions of land” by “caus[ing] erosion along the riverbed upstream and downstream.”43 Also, since hydropower is highly dependent on rainfall, the amount of hydroelectricity may vary year to year.44 The closest hydro plants are small conduit plants approximately 50 miles east of the City of Hermosa Beach. Conduit plants are man-made structures such as existing canals, pipelines, and aqueducts fitted with electric generating equipment.45 Conduits are considered “small hydro, and are able to extract power from water without the need for a large dam or reservoir.” These include the Mojave Siphon Hydroelectric Facility and the Devil Canyon Hydroelectric Facility. Both of these conduit plants are part of the State Water Project, which transports water from Northern to Southern California through the California Aqueduct, and are operated by the California Department of Water Resources. The Mojave Siphon Hydroelectric facility features three turbines producing up to a total of 29.4 MW. The Devil’s Canyon Hydroelectric Facility is one of the larger facilities with four turbines producing a total of up to 276 MW. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the cost of a hydro plant entering service in 2019 would be $84.50 per MWh which includes levelized capital cost, fixed operation and maintenance, variable operation and maintenance, including fuel, and transmission investment.46 Figure 3.8 and 3.9 are maps that display the location of hydroelectric facilities. 42 (California Energy Commision) 43 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) 44 (Califonria Energy Almanac) 45 (National Hydropower Association) 46 (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 28 Figure 3.8. This map shows the location of hydroelectric facilities.47 Figure 3.9. This map shows the location of hydroelectric facilities.48 47 (California Energy Almanac, 2012) 48 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 29 Biomethane & Biomass According to the California Energy Commission (CEC), biomass produced over 6,236 GWh of electricity in 2007.49 Biomass plants generate energy from the burning of forest, agricultural, and urban organic matter. Figure 3.10 displays the various biomass fuels that can be used for electricity generation. Electricity production from burning biomass is considered carbon neutral because the carbon associated with the biomass fuel is regarded as part of the natural carbon cycle, as opposed to the combustion of fossil fuels. The City of Hermosa Beach is in close proximity to two natural gas power plants in El Segundo and Redondo Beach. The El Segundo Natural Gas Power Plant is owned and managed by NRG Energy Inc, and it has a generating capacity of up to “550 MW, enough to supply over 400,000 homes.”50 The Redondo Beach Natural Gas Power Plant operated by AES California is currently being renovated to be more efficient and to comply with regulations prohibiting once through cooling. Advanced technology has allowed natural gas plants the ability to utilize biomethane as their fuel. Biomethane is a biogas that is removed of its contaminants, and is conditioned to pipeline quality natural gas. Some European countries such as Ireland have already considered upgrading their natural gas plants to biomethane.51 If the City of Hermosa Beach decides to have their own generating facility, upgrading the El Segundo and Redondo Beach plants may be possible. The largest constraints of upgrading natural gas plants to biomethane plants is the high cost of acquiring a power plant that serves many times more than the load demand of the City of Hermosa Beach and sourcing sufficient quantities of renewable biogas to make the energy renewable and with zero GHG emissions. The City of Hermosa Beach is in the proximity of the Desert View Power Plant, one of the largest biomass plants in California located in Riverside County in the town of Mecca. The Desert View Power Plant produces up to 47 MW of electricity and currently sells this renewable energy to SCE. The average levelized cost of biomass energy is $102.60 per MWh.52 49 (California Energy Commision) 50 (NRG Energy Inc.) 51 (Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland) 52 (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 30 Figure 3.10. This figure shows the different types of biomass that can be used as fuel for electricity production. 53 Hydrogen Since molecular hydrogen (H2) is highly flammable, it is uncommon in nature. 95% of hydrogen used as energy is produced through industrial processes.54 The most common technology of producing hydrogen is through electrolytic processes which utilizes an electrolyzer to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. Alternately, photolytic technology, which is still in its research and development stage, utilizes sunlight to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. Photolytic technology is predicted to exhibit significant potential for sustainable hydrogen production with very little environmental impact. A hydrogen fuel cell works by harnessing the chemical energy from compressed hydrogen to generate electricity through a chemical reaction. When operating, hydrogen fuel cells emit only water vapor, warm air and hydrogen, making it a zero tailpipe emissions generation energy source. Hydrogen can be sustainably produced if the process is fueled by renewable energy. According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, “results have verified that there is abundant solar and wind 53 Ibid. 54(U.S. Department of Energy, 2006) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 31 energy resources to meet hydrogen transportation fuel for the entire country.”55 California is one of the few major hydrogen producing states in the nation along with Louisiana and Texas56. Hydrogen Energy California is planning to establish a low carbon power plant for baseload requirements for SCE. This plant would produce 400MW of electricity, using hydrogen as fuel. The plant is expected to recapture 90% of its CO2 emissions.57 The state has 13 research hydrogen fueling stations, 9 public stations, and 18 expected for future development.58 Currently, hydrogen fuel cells are being utilized primarily as a means to power vehicles in California. Due to the high energy content of hydrogen by weight but very low energy by volume, storing hydrogen is very challenging.59 Despite of this limitation, hydrogen can still be used as a means of storing energy. Currently, hydrogen can only be stored in high pressure tanks, and physical storage of cryogenic hydrogen (hydrogen cooled at -235 Celsius at pressures of 6-350 barr) in insulated tanks.60 Although hydrogen can be produced sustainably from renewable sources, the question remains as to why a city would use electricity to produce hydrogen, and in doing so experience energy loss, as opposed to using the electricity directly. New fuel cell innovations have brought about the creation of the Bloom Box or the Bloom Energy Server created by Northern California based startup company by the name of Bloom Energy. The Bloom Box serves to convert natural gas or biogas into electricity by using a “direct electrochemical reaction rather than combustion.”61 The fuel cell works with three pieces of equipment consisting of the anode and a cathode made of special ink with a solid oxide ceramic plate (the electrolyte) placed in between. The mechanism works by fuel passing over the anode and air passing the cathode which leads to the oxygen ions reacting with the fuel to create energy. The company seeks to generate energy on site by installing its fuel cells enclosed in a weatherproof shell at the customer site to ensure direct sustainable delivery to the customer. A Bloom Energy Server is quoted to be approximately $800,000 for the Bloom Box ES-5000 in 2010.62 Each Bloom Energy server provides about 100 kW and is set to take up as much space as a parking spot with the ability to power a 30,000 square foot office building or 100 average U.S. homes.63 Bloom Energy Servers are natural gas based systems that emit 773 lbs/MWh of carbon dioxide on average whereas a natural gas turbine powered by combustion releases about 1,314 lbs/MWh on average.64 The current constraints of the Bloom Box is that it is relatively new and that the solid oxide ceramic plates 55 Ibid 56 (U.S. Department of Energy) 57 (Hydrogen Energy California, 2010) 58 (California Environmental Protection Agency: California Air Resources Board) 59 (U.S. Department of Energy, 2011) 60 Ibid 61 (Bloom Energy, 2014) 62 (Seattle City Light, 2010) 63 (Bloom Energy, 2014) 64 Ibid BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 32 require temperatures up to 1,800o Fahrenheit for the chemical reaction to occur, which may reduce the durability of the material in the long term.65 It is estimated that current units will have a 10 year life as long as the fuel stacks are swapped out twice. Figure 3.11 describes the operation of a Bloom Box. Figure 3.11. This diagram explains the functioning of Bloom Energy Servers. 66 65 Ibid 66 (Schwartz, A., 2010) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 33 Table 3.2: Range for total system levelized costs (2012 $/MWh) for plants entering service in 2019. 67 Plant Type Minimum Average Maximum Dispatchable Technologies Conventional Coal 87 95.6 114.4 Natural Gas-Fired Conventional Combined Cycle 61.1 66.3 75.8 Conventional Combustion Turbine 106 128.4 149.4 Advanced Nuclear 92.6 96.1 102 Geothermal 46.2 47.9 50.3 Biomass 92.3 102.6 122.9 Non-Dispatchable Technolgies Wind 71.3 80.3 90.3 Wind- Offshore 168.7 204.1 271 Solar PV 101.4 130 200.9 Solar Thermal 1766.8 243.1 388 Hydro 61.6 84.5 137.7 Technical Fundamentals For the City of Hermosa Beach to reach its goal of obtaining carbon-neutral electricity, it will have to procure electricity from the sources described above. But bringing renewable electricity into the grid is easier said than done. There are technical challenges and limitations. This section describes the fundamentals of electrical power, grid operation, and the difficulties of incorporating renewable electricity into the grid. 67 (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 34 Introduction to Electrical Power Figure 3.13. This is a diagram of an atom 68 In order understand electricity, it is first necessary to understand atoms. Everything is made of atoms - they are the building blocks of the universe. Atoms are extremely small; millions can fit on the tip of a pin.69 Figure 3.13 shows the basic structure of an atom. At the center of the atom is the nucleus, made up of particles called protons and neutrons. Protons are positively charged while neutrons contain no charge. Surrounding the nucleus is a cloud of negatively charged electrons. In terms of mass, electrons are approximately two thousand times lighter than protons and neutrons. Electrons spin around the nucleus in orbital paths known as shells. The opposite charges of electrons and protons attract each other, which keeps the atom and its orbiting electrons intact. The shell closest to the nucleus can hold two atoms, the next shell can hold eight, and the outer shells hold even more electrons. Electrons can be pushed out of their orbits and a force great enough can even push electrons to move to another atom. Electricity is simply the movement or flow of electrons between atoms. Electricity is a secondary energy source, also referred to as an energy carrier.70 This means that there is no natural source of electrical power that we can tap into. It must be generated and converted using other sources of energy, such as fossil fuels, wind and solar power. One of the greatest advantages of converting energy into electricity is that it is relatively easy to transmit and deliver. Energy is typically measured in joules while electricity is measured in watts.71 Since electricity is a flow of electrons, watts measures the rate of energy transfer. A Watt is defined as one joule per second. A kilowatt hour (kWh) is equal to the energy of 1,000 watts transferred over the period of one hour. The amount of electricity generated by a power plant or consumed by a customer is usually measured in kilowatt hours. For example, when a 40-watt light bulb is lit for five hours, 200 watt hours, or 0.2 kilowatt 68 (Fastfission, 2005) 69 (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2013) 70 Ibid. 71 (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 35 hours, of electrical energy is used.72 Electrical power starts at the power plant, which typically consists of a spinning electrical generator. The steam turbine is the most commonly used spinning electrical generator in the United States. A turbine converts the kinetic energy of a moving liquid or gas to mechanical energy. In steam turbines powered by fossil fuels, such as coal and natural gas, the fuel is burned in a furnace to heat water in a boiler to produce steam. The steam is then forced against a series of blades mounted on a shaft, rotating the shaft connected to the generator. Generators take advantage of the relationship between magnetism and electricity to convert mechanical energy into electrical energy. Moving magnetic fields can pull and push electrons. Metals, such as copper, have electrons that are loosely held, and through the use of electromagnets and copper wires, generators create electricity.73 Figure 3.14 shows how a steam turbine generates electricity. Figure 3.14. This diagram explains how a turbine generator generates electricity.74 Most power plants burn various types of fuels to create steam, and use steam turbines to generate electricity. However, there are three types of electricity-generating techniques that are exceptions. First, 72 Ibid. 73 Ibid. 74 (Geothermal Education Office, 2000) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 36 hydropower relies on the movement of water to directly turn the turbine, generating electricity. Windmills rely on the movement of air to turn giant blades. As they move, they also turn the turbines that are behind the blades. Finally, solar photovoltaic technology directly converts sunlight into electricity as it directly strips electrons from incoming solar radiation. Delivery and the Grid Electricity is delivered to consumers by the following process: electricity is generated at power plants, then a transformer steps up the voltage of the electricity for transmission. This occurs so that the transmission lines’ full capacity is taken advantage of to transfer electricity more efficiently and reduce energy loss from transmission. Stepped-up electricity travels through transmission lines, which are large, high voltage power lines. In the U.S., the network of nearly 160,000 miles of these lines is known as the “grid”. These transmission lines deliver electricity to local substations. When the electricity reaches a local substation, the neighborhood transformer steps down the voltage to a level that it is safe and appropriate for consumer use. Finally, this low voltage energy is distributed to households via a local system of distribution lines. The grid is the assemblage of transmission lines over the U.S., interconnecting power plants, substations, and electricity consumers. It can be compared to a huge spider web covering the country. However, there is actually no national power grid, but there are three power grids operating in the 48 contiguous states. They are the Eastern Interconnected System for states east of the Rocky Mountains, the Western Interconnected System, from the Pacific Ocean to the Rocky Mountain states, and the Texas Interconnected System. These systems generally operate independently of each other with limited links between them.75 Figure 3.15 displays the three power grids in the contiguous United States. 75 (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2012) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 37 Figure 3.15. Map displaying the three power grids in the contiguous U.S.76 The grid did not come to exist until post-World War II era. Prior to that, at the beginning of the 20th century, there were over 4,000 individual electric utilities operating in isolation. Almost all of them served only the local customers through low-voltage connections from nearby power plants to the distribution lines. As the demand for electricity grew, particularly in the post-World War II era, electric utilities found it more efficient to interconnect their transmission systems. This way, they could build larger generators to serve the electricity demands at lower costs and could avoid building duplicate power plants. The interconnection also helped to provide more reliable service. To meet increasing demands, higher voltage interconnections were developed to transport electricity over longer distances. Over time, three large interconnected systems evolved in the United States.77 SCE is the largest subsidiary of Edison International. The company traces its origins to July 4th, 1886.78 On that day, the partnership of Holt and Knupp first used a steam engine to power the lights of Visalia during its evening celebration.79 Since then, the company was formed through mergers and acquisitions 76 Ibid. 77 Ibid. 78 Edison International, 2014 79 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 38 of numerous small predecessor companies, and SCE was officially incorporated in 1909.80 SCE has grown significantly. Today, it serves over 14 million people over a service territory of 50,000 square miles.81 It owns and maintains over 100,000 miles of power lines and over 700,000 transformers to deliver electricity to its customers.82 Grid Operation Through a complex network, the grid delivers power where it is needed. Once the electricity is generated, it will flow along whatever pathway is presented to it along the grid, much like water flowing downhill. Utilities provide and maintain the infrastructure that carries electricity to end users. Utility companies own the transmission infrastructure, but the electrical power they transform and transmit is bought from private companies on the wholesale power market.83 In California, this market is operated and managed by the California Independent System Operator (CAISO). CAISO ensures equal access to the state’s power lines, forecasts electrical demand, accounts for operating reserves, and dispatches the lowest cost power plant unit to meet demand while ensuring enough transmission capacity is available to deliver the power.84 CAISO’s responsibilities can be summed up as managing the supply and demand of electrical power on the grid, known as load balancing. CAISO have a critical role in the operation of the grid and help to ensure every customer in the state receives the electrical power needed at the right time and place. Electricity cannot be easily or efficiently stored over an extended period of time and is usually consumed momentarily after production. The real-time balancing of the supply and demand of electrical power in the grid is not an easy task. Figure 3.16. A load profile for California on a hot day in 1999 85 80 Ibid. 81 Southern California Edison, 2014 82 Ibid. 83 (Flex Alert, 2013) 84 Ibid. 85 (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2005) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 39 If represented graphically, the power demand over the duration of a twenty-four hour day is approximately a bell curve. Figure 3.16 is the load profile for California on a hot day in 1999. Electricity demand is relatively low during the night time, with demand peaking in the day. Hypothetically, if the load is to be supplied by a single power plant only, its capacity has to be equal to the peak load demand or more. However, such a power plant would be uneconomical since the peak load occurs only for a short duration of the day. Because of this dynamic and time-dependent demand of electrical power, it is optimal to have a mix of different power plants supplying base and peak loads. Hence, the coordination of different power stations is essential.86 There are three categories of power stations with differing purposes. First, base load plants provide an unvarying supply of electricity at nearly all times. Baseload electricity is the minimum amount of power that a utility must have available to customers, or the power needed to make minimum demand based on customer expectation.87 Some characteristics of base load power plants are low operating costs, the capability to operate for long periods of time, little maintenance, and few operating personnel.88 Nuclear power was a large fraction of SCE’s baseload generation, but with the loss of the San Onofre plant, SCE is strained for baseload energy. It is predicted that combined natural gas will replace the nuclear plant’s position in baseload generation. Alternately, peak load plants serve to satisfy the peak demand that is not met by the electricity produced by base load facilities. Peak load plants usually start operating quickly, synchronize quickly with the grid, and therefore have quick response to load variations. Figure 3.17 displays the generation profile of different resources. Figure 3.17. Electricity generation profile of different resources.89 86 (Electrical Engineering Tutorials) 87 (Cordaro, Matthew, 2008) 88 Ibid. 89 (EIA MER New England, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 40 Grid Reliability According to the North American Electric Reliability Council, reliability is “the degree to which the performances of the elements of the electrical system result in power being delivered to consumers within accepted standards and in the amount desired.”90 In other words, reliability refers to the ability of the power systems to deliver electricity to all points of consumption in adequate quality and quantity. Power quality is a subcategory of grid reliability, which describes the characteristics, in terms of continuity and voltage, of the electricity delivered to consumers.91 Not surprisingly, customers depend on and demand grid reliability and power quality. Reliability encompasses two concepts: adequacy and security.92 Adequacy is “the ability of the system to supply the total energy requirements to all consumers at all times”, which means that sufficient generation and transmission resources are available to meet needs at all times, including peak conditions, and with reserves for contingencies.93 Security is “the ability of the system to withstand sudden disturbances”, which means that the system remains intact even after outages and equipment failure. Efforts to address grid reliability must consider these two aspects. Reliability is measured by the frequency, duration, and extent of system disturbances and outages. A disturbance is any unplanned event, including an outage that produces an abnormal system condition. An outage is described in terms of frequency, duration, the amount of load, or the number of customers affected. Voltage disturbances can take forms in overvoltage and undervoltage.94 Overvoltage is the increase of the supply voltage by more than 10%, while undervoltage is the decrease in voltage by more than 10%. Extended periods can lead to brownouts and blackouts. A brownout occurs when the energy supplier intentionally reduces electrical voltage more than 10% for a sustained period, forcing consumers to use less power.95 Blackouts are long periods of complete loss of electrical power. If an area experiences a blackout, that particular area will be affected immediately, but the surrounding regions will be affected as well. A blackout, the absence of electrical power in a particular region of the grid, naturally creates a vacuum-like effect in the grid, drawing power from energy-rich regions to the energy-deficient blackout area. In addition, system operators can intentionally reduce the voltage in surrounding areas, causing a brownout, to provide at least some electricity to the blackout region. This is a typical occurrence in the event of a blackout. There are different strategies to ensure grid reliability. Grid reliability is the most threatened when electricity demand peaks. Hence methods to ensure the grid functions properly, even at high demands, are known as peak shaving. Peak load power plants, as described previously, run only when there is a high electricity demand. They can be thought of as backup, emergency generators. They act as a buffer against blackouts in times of high electricity demand. This is a supply-side strategy to ensure grid reliability. Demand response is a broad term that describes a demand-side strategy. According to the 90 (Osborn, J., & Kawann, c) 91 Ibid. 92 Ibid. 93 Ibid. 94 Ibid. 95 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 41 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), demand response is defined as “changes in electric usage by end-use customers from their normal consumption in response to the price of electricity over time, or to incentive payments designed to induce lower electricity use at times of high market wholesale prices or when system reliability is jeopardized”. Demand response strategies range from having high prices of electricity at peak periods, to programs that involve certain electrical appliances being shut down to reduce peak demand. Figure 3.18 is a graphical representation of demand response’s effect on the load profile. Figure 3.18. Demand response event shaves peak demand 96 Limitations of the Grid The grid has been revolutionary, but it is not without flaws. In 2011, an average of only about 93% of a generating station’s net electricity production is actually delivered for consumer use in the United States; 7% of the energy is lost in transformers and along transmission lines.97 There are two types of electricity loss along transmission lines: corona and ohmic. Corona loss occurs when the electric field at the surface of a bare wire becomes sufficiently large and electric charge is injected into the air near the wire. This charge moves in the electric field thereby creating a leakage current. Ohmic loss is resistive loss. It occurs because the carriers of electric charge within the conductors encounter resistance to their motion.98 When the energy source is close to the consumer, the loss can be tolerated, but if the energy source is located far 96 (EIA, 2011) 97 (Pickard, W. F., 2013) 98 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 42 from the consumer, the total electricity lost through transmission can be staggering. Transmission lines also have a specific and limited capacity. Grid congestion occurs when the flow of electricity over a line or a piece of equipment is constrained below desired levels.99 Simply put, congestion occurs when there is more electricity than certain transmission lines can carry, limiting the electricity supplied to the destination of the line. This restriction can be imposed either by physical or electrical capacity. Severe congestion conditions can impair grid reliability by reducing the diversity of electricity sources and making an area more vulnerable to unanticipated outages.100 The greatest limitation of the current grid is perhaps its incompatibility with renewable energy sources. Renewable Energy Sources and Grid Reliability When a switch is flipped to turn on the lights, it occurs instantly. This can be taken for granted as a seemingly mundane phenomenon, but in reality, many complex operations occur to make this possible. As described previously, electricity is produced and consumed virtually instantly, so at every given moment, the grid operator instantaneously matches supply and demand. As we flip on a switch, it is a signal that there is demand for electricity. The electricity is then manufactured instantly and delivered to the lights. With tedious control, just the right amount of electricity is delivered. If more than the needed electricity is delivered, the lights will burn out. If too little electricity is delivered, the lights will be dim or not turn on at all. This entire process takes only a fraction of a second. The key to making electricity available whenever and wherever it is demanded is tedious, precise control that instantly matches supply and demand. In order to be able to control the supply of electricity precisely, grid operators mainly rely on dispatchable power. Dispatchable generation refers to electricity sources that can be turned on and off or can adjust their power output on demand.101 Fossil fuel power plants are dispatchable power plants. The amount of power they can produce can be turned up or down and the plant itself can be turned on or shut down on demand. This is part of the reason why coal and natural gas are the most widely used sources for electricity generation. Hydropower is also dispatchable. As long as water is available, operators can decide when to let it flow to generate electricity. The intentions of replacing fossil fuels with renewable sources of energy are honorable, but renewables are difficult to incorporate into the grid system. Most renewable energy sources are non-dispatchable. Solar farms only generate electricity during the day, and wind turbines only generate electricity when the wind blows. The amount of energy generated cannot be controlled on demand. Renewable energy sources are also intermittent and the electricity produced varies.102 For example, cloud movements and weather affect solar radiation, while wind intensity and direction is impossible to accurately forecast. In short, the combined effects of the non-dispatchable and intermittent characteristics of renewable energy sources make them nearly impossible to control as an electricity source. With current technology and infrastructure, significant dependence on renewable sources for electricity generation could severely jeopardize reliability. Infrastructure upgrades will be required for substantial renewable energy sources 99 (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Electricity Delivery & Energy Reliability) 100 Ibid. 101 (Cooper, D., 2014) 102 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 43 penetration into the grid. Battery Energy Storage System Although high penetration of solar and wind energy threatens grid reliability, energy storage can act as a buffer between supply and demand. It can store energy when supply is greater than demand, and release energy when demand is greater than supply. Energy storage could help solve the reliability issues that renewables impose on the grid. However, current technology still has much room for improvement. The ideal battery energy storage system should be able to hold and retain huge amounts of electrical power efficiently. It should have high energy density, meaning it can hold lots of energy with very small volume. And the storage mechanism should also be safe and not contain hazardous chemicals that many batteries have. In the case of a leakage or breakdown of a storage mechanism with toxic chemicals, noteable health risks due to the scale of the storage system could occur. Figure 3.19. Storage ratings by technology type. 103 103 (KEMA, 2012a) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 44 Figure 3.20. Storage efficiency and lifetime by technology type.104 Figure 3.19 characterizes storage technology types according to rated power, which describes how much power a storage unit can provide, and discharge duration, which describes how long it can provide power for. Figure 3.20 illustrates the efficiency and lifetime of energy storage technologies. Lithium-ion batteries are one of the best battery energy storage systems available right now.105 These batteries have a relatively high energy density and slow discharge rate. They are commonly utilized in new models of electric vehicles. SCE’s $55 million Tehachapi Wind Energy Storage Project will test the effectiveness of lithium-ion battery storage.Though promising, lithium-ion batteries do have shortcomings. These batteries pose risks of combustion and catching fire. And the largest obstacle preventing more widespread use of the battery is its cost, as shown in Figure 3.21. Battery energy storage units are currently available. But technologically, they have much room for improvement, and the hope is that they will become more cost-effective in the near future. 104 (KEMA, 2012b) 105 (Kim, D., 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 45 Figure 3.21. Storage capital costs by technology type.106 Distributed Generation Localized energy, also known as distributed generation, is generally defined as energy-generating systems that are 20 MW or smaller, interconnected on-site or close to the electricity demand, can be constructed quickly with no new transmission lines, and typically have no environmental impact.107 California defines distributed generation as fuels and technologies that are accepted as renewable for purposes of Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), 20 MW or smaller, and located within low-voltage distribution grid or supply power directly to consumer.108 Rooftop solar panels are an example of distributed generation. Distributed generation poses challenges to the grid as well. With significant penetration of distributed generation, the distribution network is no longer a passive circuit supplying loads but an active system with power flows and voltages determined by the generation as well as the load.109 Because of the unpredictable behavior of renewable energy sources, the installation and connection of distributed 106 (KEMA, 2012c) 107 (Shlatz, E., Buch, N., & Chan, M., 2013) 108 (Weisenmiller, R., 2014) 109 (Mahmud, M. A., Hossain, M. J., & Pota, H. R., 2011) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 46 generation units will affect system frequency. They will free-ride on the efforts of the grid operator to fix deviations and imbalances of electricity supply and demand.110 Secondly, the introduction of bidirectional power flow in distribution lines with the installation of distributed generation is another challenge. Typically, power flows unidirectionally, from higher to lower voltage levels, in other words from generation to transmissions lines then finally to distribution lines.111 That is how the grid and all of its infrastructure is designed to operate, to supply electricity from power plants to consumers. However, distributed generation produces and exports electricity back into the grid. This scenario can be compared to introducing two-way traffic to a one-way street. The one-way street, with its traffic lights and signs, operate to coordinate one-way traffic only. The street will require modifications and improvements to safely and reliably handle two-way traffic. Similarly, the current grid system will need upgrades and modifications to reliably handle bidirectional power. For example, transformer’s must have tap-changers capable of operating with reverse power flow.112 A third challenge is a phenomenon known as the voltage rise effect. Given that distributed generation units can export electricity back into the grid, the voltage in a network with distributed generation is directly proportional to the amount of active power supplied by the distributed generators.113 In other words, heavy distributed generation penetration increases the voltage level in a local distribution network. This is problematic because the voltage level at each connection point of the load is very important for the electricity power quality. There is typically a defined steady-state voltage range, or a maximum permitted voltage variation in a distribution in a distribution network.114 Hence, the voltage rise effect caused by distributed generation could jeopardize power quality locally. The Challenge of Rooftop Solar Southern California has plenty of sunshine and the City of Hermosa Beach is no exception, making rooftop solar a relatively popular choice for distributed generation. Solar insolation is the amount of energy received by the sun at the earth’s surface. On a clear day, approximately 1,000 watts per meter squared reaches the earth’s surface, perpendicular to the incoming radiation.115 Currently, it is thermodynamically impossible for solar panels to be more than a hundred percent efficient, meaning the highest possible energy a square meter of solar panels can generate will never be greater than 1,000 watts. In reality, the most common solar panels that are compliant with California’s SB1 guidelines are on average about 15% efficient.116 This means that under ideal weather conditions, a square meter of photovoltaic panels generate only about 150 watts of electricity. Furthermore, solar panels only generate electricity during the day. With these constraints, it is nearly impossible for a home to completely rely on rooftop solar alone, unless it is paired with battery storage or remains connected to the grid. Rooftop solar has been encouraged by SCE’s Net Energy Metering program. Under this program, homes install rooftop solar panels while remaining connected to the grid. During the day, rooftop solar panels 110 (Pepermans, G., Driesen, J., Haeseldonckx, D., Belmans, R., & D’haeseleer, W., 2005) 111 Ibid. 112 (Mahmud, M. A., Hossain, M. J., & Pota, H. R., 2011) 113 Ibid. 114 Ibid. 115 (Kyle, G. A.) 116 (Roe, S., 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 47 generate electricity for the house and any surplus electricity not consumed is sent back onto the grid. At night when solar panels no longer generate electricity, the house is provided with electricity from the grid. This can also be used for commercial buildings. Under this program, even with rooftop solar, the buildings are still dependent on grid-supplied electricity. And since the rooftop solar panels are connected to the grid, the technical problems of distributed generation described previously apply as well. The CPUC-approved feed-in tariff program has also encouraged homeowners to install distributed generation systems. A feed-in tariff (FIT) is a program designed to accelerate the investment in renewable technologies by offering contracts to purchase electricity from renewable energy producers. A FIT program facilitates development of renewable energy sources by lowering the barriers to enter the wholesale electricity supply market by creating a price certainty, simplifying the procurement process, and expanding access to the distribution network. Small producers and non-commercial producers are able to participate in renewable resource production. It is true that rooftop solar has tremendous potential, especially with the ample solar capacity in the City of Hermosa Beach. However, with current technology and existing infrastructure, significant integration of distributed generation into the grid could jeopardize reliability and power quality. Technical Solutions: Smart Grid As described in the previous section, the current grid system is not well-suited for supporting distributed generation inputs. Updates and installations will be necessary for a greater integration of renewable sources into the grid. There is a need for a better electricity distribution system - a smart grid. However, a smart grid system cannot be installed overnight. Rather, it will be realized through many incremental updates and changes. This section discusses the necessary moves toward a smarter grid system and specifically elaborates on: facilitating bidirectional power, adding energy storage components and installing microgrids. Facilitating Bidirectional Power for Distributed Generation Rather than continuing with the traditional “power plant to grid” approach to electricity generation and delivery, a smart grid should include infrastructure suited for distributed generation systems. Distributed generation is carbon neutral and renewable, and the decreased distance between generation and consumption of electricity reduces the amount of energy lost through transmission. Distributed generation facilities can also serve to ease the pressure on the grid in the event that a power plant goes offline. Instituting bidirectional power would be a major step towards making the grid more suitable for distributed generation. The process is two-fold: building circuitry must support bidirectional flow of electrons and secondly, buildings will need smart meters to track outgoing and incoming electricity. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 48 There are two types of circuits commonly used to distribute electricity from the grid to buildings. Radial circuits connect once with the grid and then carry electricity to its final socket destination where it stops. The second type of circuit is looped circuits. These circuits initially carry electricity from the grid source to the socket and back again to the grid. Both circuits have their merits. Radial circuits are good for minimizing the length of electrical wire needed, thus lowering installation cost.117 On the other hand, looped circuits have the benefit of being able to facilitate bidirectional power.118 The circuitry must also contain transformers with tap-changers capable of operating with reverse power flow. Smart meters keep track of the electricity delivered by the grid and any electricity that distributed generation sources send back into the grid. Figure 3.22 is a chart from San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) that compares a smart meter with an analog meter. SDG&E, along with other utility providers are incentivizing the installation of smart meters to homes in their service area. Figure 3.22. Differences between a smart and analog meter.119 Energy Storage Although energy storage technologies have much room for improvement, they can help solve issues that renewable or intermittent generation devices may create on the grid. This is seen in applications where 117 (Whitfield, 2008) 118 (SCE, 2010) 119 (San Diego Gas & Electric, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 49 storage is being targeted towards increasing energy security, smoothing of renewable variability and ramp rates of renewables, and assisting with diurnal cycles of wind and solar projects.120 Community energy storage (CES) is an example of such applications. The concept of CES involves utility- owned storage systems that are distributed and located near consumers. Figure 3.23 is an image of a CES device. Figure 3.23. Community Energy Storage Device 121 The PureWave, a particular energy storage device, is produced by S&C Electric Co. and can hold between 25-75 kWh of energy.122 It can provide a supply of power when the the grid isn’t supply any electricity. Provided the average home in the U.S. uses 10,800 kWh/year, then each home could be calculated to use 3 kWh’s of energy in one hour. 123 Given the device has a charge of 50 kWh, then it would be able to power 17 homes for one hour before needed to be recharged. Thus it helps increase energy reliability. CES systems also help reduce the amount of energy used during peak periods.124 CES devices can be charged when electricity demand is low and release energy when needed. They can also be charged when renewable energy sources are producing more electricity than can be consumed at the moment, and therefore helping solve the dilemma of power dumping. Additionally, CES systems help mitigate the voltage fluctuation problems that distributed generation sources bring. The transformer can change the voltage of incoming energy accordingly; and if more voltage is needed, it can use energy from the battery to make up for the difference. 120 (KEMA, 2013) 121 (Thomas, 2011.) 122 (S&C Electric Co. 2014) 123 (Energy Information Administration, 2012) 124 (ESA, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 50 Table 3.2. is a table showing the companies that are key suppliers in energy storage.125 125 (KEMA, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 51 Microgrids Microgrids are generally defined as low-voltage networks consisting of distributed generation sources and local storage devices.126 They connect multiple customers to multiple distributed generation sources and storage devices.127 Intra-system cross-supply and communal management differentiate microgrids from a group of independent but physically proximate small-scale generators.128 The microgrid is a very versatile concept as it can accommodate various types of micro generators, such as wind turbines, photovoltaic arrays, wave generators, and diesel generators.129 Although they operate mostly connected to the distribution network, they can also be switched to the islanded mode, which is continuing to supply electricity in an independent manner disconnected from the main grid.130 This adds an extra measure to ensure reliability. Islanded microgrids can be later resynchronized and reconnect to the main distribution network.131 Within the main grid, a microgrid can be regarded as a controlled entity that can be operated as a single load or generator.132 Microgrids can function as grid support and provide ancillary service. Higher penetration levels of distributed generation alter grid structure and jeopardize reliable grid operation.133 The microgrid concept is introduced to manage distributed generators in small quantities so that more distributed generators can be employed in the grid and the negative effects of grid operation can be reduced.134 As Figure 3.24 explains, microgrids help balance energy loads and manage the input of distributed generation sources. 126 (Bayod-Rújula, 2009) 127 Ibid. 128 (Sanseverino, Luisa Di Silvestre, Giuseppe Ippolito et al., 2011) 129 (Selim Ustun, Ozansoy, & Zayegh, 2011) 130 (Bayod-Rújula, 2009) 131 Ibid. 132 Ibid. 133 (Selim Ustun, Ozansoy, & Zayegh, 2011) 134 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 52 Figure 3.24. A depiction of how microgrids balance energy load and balance distributed generation. 135 Microgrids are commonly used in areas where transmission lines cannot easily reach a specified location. In such locations it is usually economically infeasible to justify building transmission infrastructure to service a community for two reasons. First, the energy demand in that community might be very low and would not warrant building transmission lines. And secondly, geographic circumstance could make transmission line construction very expensive. Borrego Springs, California, in north east San Diego County, is one example of a community with such a small load that is serviced by a microgrid. There are only 3,429 residents, as compared Hermosa Beach’s population of 19,506.136 Also, a geographic circumstance warranting a microgrid may include servicing island communities. Catalina Island, which is just off the coast of Long Beach, is one such example of an area that is serviced by a microgrid. 135 (Shephard News Team, 2013) 136 (United States Census, 2010) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 53 Chapter 4: Green Tariff Shared Renewables This chapter introduces the GTSR program as outlined by California Senate Bill 43. This bill requires that utilities propose a plan for the implementation of off-site renewable energy generation to be available to ratepayers. In order to receive approval, these proposals must follow several specifications to ensure that consumer and environmental interests are upheld. The proposal submitted by SCE is the Green Rate program and is currently under review by the CPUC. The Green Rate program will offer SCE customers a choice of either fifty or one hundred percent renewable energy generation for a twelve-month period at an additional cost. This program would allow for energy users in Southern California to purchase renewable energy generation through the utility. Legislative Review of Senate Bill 43 The passage of California State Bill 43 by Governor Jerry Brown in September 2013 marked an impressive new opportunity for California residents to participate in shared renewable energy generation. Outlined in this bill are guiding standards for the formation of the GTSR program. Legislators and supporters of SB 43 believe GTSR programs will lead to the expansion of renewable energy resources providing benefits to the state, local communities, and individual households. Actions taken by each utility in submitting GTSR program proposals show their restraint in meeting the full requirements of the bill, which has led to strong concerns from interest groups and a ruling by the CPUC mandating further compliance. By these regulating methods, the programs offered by each utility to their customers should mirror the legislation. After taking a look at the causes for creation of this bill and its requirements, this paper will review CPUC rulings and several perspectives of current weaknesses in each proposal. Then the current proposal submitted by SCE, which covers Hermosa Beach’s energy demand, will be reviewed including most recent amendments. The outlining legislation for the GTSR program opens with a precursor, referencing the renewable energy self-generation program. This existing law allows households to receive a bill credit on their account for self-generated electricity exported to the grid.137 Opening the bill with this reference establishes the context and applicability for the new program, which the CPUC will govern in the same manner. The GTSR program will allow ratepayers to directly participate in eligible offsite renewable energy generation as defined by previous legislation through a program created by each utility. Each utility’s program application will be reviewed by the CPUC by July 1, 2014 and approved or modified as the commission determines. If the program is deemed reasonable the commission will allow opportunity for public comment before approval. Under penalty of law, each utility must follow the stipulations of their proposal as submitted for the lifetime of this bill, which will repeal the program on January 1, 2019.138 There will be no reimbursements to schools or local agencies for participation in this program. The first section of SB 43 cites reasons for establishing the GTSR program. First, the creation of more renewable generating facilities is favorable to the state by providing “financial, health, environmental, and workforce benefits.”139 The next subsection recounts the success of the California Solar Initiative, 137 (California State Legislature, 2013) 138 Ibid. 139 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 54 which stimulated the construction of 150,000 onsite solar energy systems.140 Following this success, the state expects progress when expanding support for renewable energy procurement. By implementing the GTSR program all ratepayers would have access to benefits similar to onsite generation and a variety of renewable resources systems would be built. Success of the newly proposed program is bolstered by the wide interest of large, institutional customers and the flexibility of participation. The GTSR program will similarly stimulate construction of shared generation facilities due to increased demand of renewable energy resources. Jobs, decreased GHG emissions, and further energy independence are all benefits of this construction, according to this section of the bill. Those institutional customers unable to fully meet their energy demand with onsite generation, due to space or net-metering limitations can use this new program to meet their demand. This bill mandates that non-participating ratepayers and electrical corporations not suffer losses due to implementation, so persons opting out of the program will not face any negative impacts. Instead this legislation should foster a sustainable market for eligible renewable energy facilities, properly compensate electrical companies for their services, and transfer no extra cost to non-participants. The next chapter of SB 43 describes the definitive deadlines for the GTSR programs. Utilities, defined as an electricity generation corporation with over 100,000 customers, must file their proposal by March 1, 2014 and the commission will report decisions on each application by July 1, 2014.141 After public comment the commission will approve programs that are consistent with legislation. If utilities have similar pre-existing programs offered to its ratepayers, they are exempt from this deadline. In order for the utilities’ proposed programs to be approved they must meet several qualifications as stipulated in SB 43. First, utilities must utilize eligible renewable energy generation with a “nameplate rated generating capacity not exceeding twenty megawatts” except in pre-designated, impacted areas.142 Next, tools and mechanisms of procurement used in the program must be commission approved in order for the renewable energy resources to be considered eligible. Also, all newly procured power for this program must meet the California Renewables Portfolio Standard. Other stipulations which proposals must include are, offering all customers under a utilities’ jurisdiction the option to purchase into the program at a tariff approved by the commission. This means the cost to consumer should be reasonable and not a venture to expand utility revenue. Participants may join the program until the maximum state limit of renewables is reached at 600 megawatts (MW). Each utility will receive a size proportional allocation of this total. Exceptions to size allocations are regions zone as environmental justice communities, with high pollution and socioeconomic vulnerability. The City of Davis is also an exception.143 In order to provide the largest benefit to communities, SB 43 contains several sections regarding residential procurement and environmental justice. It mandates at least 100 MW of power be reserved for residential customers and that local procurement options be offered to these participants. No individual may purchase more than one hundred percent of their energy demand in renewable power or two 140 Ibid. 141 Ibid. 142 Ibid. 143 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 55 megawatts. Government building users are exempt from this limit. Utilities are expected to purchase power in closest proximity to their service area and create a diverse portfolio of renewable energies.144 Utilities should specifically market to minorities and low-income community members. Customers generating qualifying forms of renewable energy will receive a bill credit equal to the cost of generation in the class of participation is which the customer belongs and adjusted considering time-of-use versus time-of-generation.145 Both the CPUC and the utility shall determine the tariff paid by participating customers to cover incurred cost to the utility for procurement of more renewables. Further costs or credits can be charged to the ratepayer, but must be approved by the commission. Utilities shall support further development of community based renewable resources. Finally, the commission guarantees customers fairness of pricing and cost indifference to those outside of the GTSR program. Therefore, each utility must track costs and revenue of the program in order to ensure transparency. Customers will be credited with any RECs earned, but if they fail to utilize these credits the utility may count them toward its RPS. Renewable energy not demanded by customers can be applied to the RPS of the utility and banked for future benefit of all customers. A utility must exclude kilowatt- hours of renewable energy resources provided to program participants when calculating its procurement requirements as mandated by the California RPS.146 Energy procured for this program must comply with the State Air Resources Board Voluntary Renewable Electricity Program, but GHG allowances earned with the program will be surrendered. Data regarding participation in the program and aggregate consumption will be made public and provided to the municipality. Community choice aggregators can offer a similar program to the GTSR. This entire program will conclude upon the repeal of the enabling legislation on January 19, 2019.147 The timeline of processing SB 43 through government approval caused the bill to be approved before CPUC made its ruling. Because legislative approval supersedes CPUC’s regulatory proceedings, the CPUC still lists an undetermined position on SB 43. However, as the bill states, the CPUC will be the governing body in monitoring GTSR Programs. As the commission proceeds in reviewing submitted proposals by the IOU’s, a variety of association file their comments as a further regulating measure in their interest. Public Commentary on Proposals As discussed, following the approval of SB 43 each large utility in California must devise a program for a GTSR under their jurisdiction. The Vote for Solar Initiative chronicles the CPUC’s current review of proposed programs, noting its ruling that PG&E must offer subscribers’ significant choice and flexibility in clean energy projects.148 The Vote Solar Initiative strongly supports this decision believing that increasing consumer choice will create greater success for the GTSR program. PG&E’s actions show resistance to this recent ruling, while SDG&E proposes half their program contain diverse procurement of renewables. This particular lobbyist group has some concerns with utilities’ programs moving forward, such as proper allocation of bill credits and construction of smaller clean energy projects in 144 Ibid. 145 Ibid. 146Ibid. 147Ibid. 148 (Churchill, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 56 disadvantaged communities, that they will continue to monitor.149 After the submission by PG&E of their preliminary GTSR program proposal, Marin Clean Energy (MCE) made public comment on issues the group felt were inadequately addressed. Among their comments, MCE states that the IOU has not assured non-participants protection from cost-shifting, instead their proposal breezes through the issue simply stating those customers will remain “indifferent.”150 No solid provisions are given to the stakeholders associated with MCE, as they will be non-participants in this program. The group holds that PG&E has made little effort to meet SB 43’s specific requirements and instead submitted a cursory update of their Green Option Settlement. By pointing out the full analysis of cost structure in SDG&E’s proposal, MCE establishes gaps in PG&E’s plan. MCE also voices concern about program participants no longer being subject to non-bypassable charges, specifically the Cost Allocation Mechanism.151 This charge is lacking in both SDG&E’s and PG&E’s proposed cost structure for program participants, yet it is a charge which should apply to all ratepayers. In all, MCE is not satisfied with the level of detail in PG&E’s proposal. In their opinion, it leaves significant chance their stakeholders will end up burdening incurred costs of the GTSR program, though they are not participants. This is strictly prohibited by SB43. The City of San Francisco lodges similar complaints with PG&E’s GTSR program proposal as MCE. Commentators specifically point out the lack of detail in the proposed cost structure and sight a misinterpretation of a section of SB 43, which the utility provides allows them to use non-participating ratepayers as a backstop to the GTSR program.152 By assessing the legislation in this manner, the City of San Francisco believes PG&E will be allowed to improperly shift costs to ratepayers outside of the program. The City of San Francisco also addresses a lack of opportunity for purchasing energy from local renewable sources, a stipulation of SB 43.153 In supporting the interests of both program participants and non-participants, the City of San Francisco makes note that PG&E does not explicitly state how renewable resources added for the GTSR program are in excess to the energy procured for California’s RPS. The commentary provided by California Utility Employees concerns both PG&E’s and SDG&E’s proposal. They support the efforts made by the utility, claiming that the programs are consistent with SB 43. Because PG&E’s GTSR program served as a model for SB 43, the group contends that it meets all of the legislation’s requirements. This statement of support is loosely worded, stating that PG&E’s program meets SB 43 “at face value” and at its core is “in the public interest.”154 Comparing this terminology to the very specific concerns of the previous interests groups shows the huge disparity in opinion between supporters and non-supporters of the utility’s proposal. Comments by California Utility Employees offer support of both programs based on the intent of each utility to provide more renewable energy to customers, rather than analyzing the specific operations required by SB 43. Environmental justice provisions written into SB 43 were included with the help of the California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA) and the California Environmental Protection Agency. As experts on this subject, CEJA comments reflect specific concern for these issues. The organization believes the 149 Ibid. 150 (Kelly, 2014) 151 Ibid. 152 (Herrera, 2014) 153 Ibid. 154 (Joseph, Mauldin, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 57 “disadvantages communities” referenced by SB 43 should be identified by a proven and publicly disclosed method.155 This way the 100MW allocation to these particular communities will be ensured, not subject to economically advantageous zoning by the providing utility. PG&E’s program glosses over its environmental justice requirements by stating often slighted by economic interests. CEJA’s full commentary seeks to champion this issue. Green Rate: Southern California Edison SCE's current proposal that is under revision by the CPUC covers 269 MW, their proportionate share of the 600 MW limitation established by SB 43.156 Customers with Bundled Service will be offered 50 or 100 percent of their energy consumption within twelve months of proposal approval. Each customer is limited to one hundred percent of their consumption or 2 MW. Enrollment for the Green Rate has no minimum load requirement. However, customers who enroll in the Green Rate program and later cancel must wait one year before re-enrollment.157 Southern California Edison Proposal The following information covers the proposal for the Green Rate and amendments made to the program submitted by SCE to the CPUC on January 10, 2014 and March 11, 2014 respectively. This reflects the most up to date information regarding enrollment, pricing, RECs, marketing, and program alterations that are pending approval by the commission. Enrollment Ratepayers under SCE's territory can enroll in the Green Rate through four avenues. They can visit the online web portal, call the SCE call center, submit a paper form, or contact their assigned account manager. Though there are many options to enroll, customers are unlikely to flock to the Green Rate. SCE expects only .05% of its customer base to enroll in the Green Rate.158 Pricing Two extra fees will be added to Green Rate participant’s bills. The Green Rate Charge covers renewable integration, market participation, program administration, the green rate portfolio, and resource adequacy costs. The Generation Credit encompasses fees from class average retail generation rate, indifference adjustment, time-of-delivery adjustment, resource adequacy adjustment, and other CPUC approved costs.159 These two charges will be in addition to the ratepayers otherwise applicable bill charges. 155 (Lin, 2014) 156 (Southern California Edison, 2014a) 157 Ibid. 158 Ibid. 159 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 58 Renewable Energy Certificates SCE proposes to retire the RECs generated from participation in the Green Rate on behalf of the customer to ensure this renewable energy is additional to RPS goals. However, the proposal also states that any procurement of renewables that is not used from Green Rate subscriptions will be "reincorporated back into SCE's renewables portfolio and count toward RPS goals."160 More renewable power will be procured by SCE to fulfill RPS goals if the energy reserved for Green Rate subscriptions is completely consumed. Taking a closer look at SB 43 in the context of various renewable energy regulations provides additional insight into the addition of renewable energy procured under SB 43. Additionality it refers to whether or not the energy would be produced if not for the enabling policy or financing, in this case SB 43. As previously stated, California utilities are mandated to reach 33% renewables by 2020. The intent of the SB 43 legislation is that electricity procured for compliance will be in acquired in addition to the 33% needed for this policy goal. Electricity used by the City of Hermosa Beach consumers under SCE’s Green Rate option will only be additional if three conditions are met: 1. Hermosa Beach customers enroll in the Green Rate program prior to 2020 2. These customers maintain their status in the program through 2020 3. The SB 43 is extended beyond its planned sunset in 2019 to 2020, Thus, there is some risk that the electricity produced for the consumers of the City of Hermosa Beach under SCE’s Green Rate will not lead to long-term reductions in GHG emissions needed to pursue carbon neutrality. Understanding international standards of GHG accounting will be key in order to determine the potential environmental benefit of switching to renewable energy with the Green Rate. As established by the World Resources Institute along with other stakeholders, the GHG Protocol’s Scope 2 guidance sets the standard for accounting an entity’s GHG from electricity.161 Until SCE begins the Green Rate program, it is not possible to determine if Hermosa Beach will be credited with GHG reductions of electricity from subscriptions. However, understanding the principles of GHG accounting will benefit the community in their decision process toward the decarbonization of electricity production. The most recent Scope 2 Accounting protocol considers many aspects of purchased renewable energy projects when calculating their emissions. These attributes include emissions from production and purchasing of instruments, identifying intended uses of instruments, assuring the quality of procured energy, preventing double counting of emissions attributes, surveying regional approaches to accounting, identifying the range of reporting, and creating appropriate calculations specific to the ownership of the renewable energy attribute.162 As different energies enter the grid they become indistinguishable, therefore the most important factor in 160 Ibid. 161(World Resources Institute, 2012) 162 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 59 determining emissions is tracking the source of energy production. Most notably, energy attribute certificates are logged and tracked for each unit of energy purchased. Generally these certificates are issued for renewable energy redeemed directly by the consumer participating in a voluntary program or by the utility. Through the use of RECs the utility can demonstrate their compliance with the California RPS and GTSR program demand. The GTSR program should in effect create a greater demand for RECs shifting the supply to less carbon-intensive energy. However, market analysis has shown that long-term contracts for RECs more effectively alter grid energy composition. This discrepancy in voluntary programs has led to greater vigilance in GHG reporting by the GHG Scope 2 Protocol. Now the guidance requires market-based method reporting, a recognition of a range of contractual instruments, all quality criteria be met, disclosure on regulatory relationships, and recommends purchase feature disclosure.163 All of these measures are in an effort to provide reliable data to the energy purchaser and protect the integrity of low carbon intensity energy. Because long-term REC contracts can have a greater effect on renewable energy generation and grid composition than short-term purchases, Hermosa Beach should look to see that either the CCA or SCE’s GTSR program offering use multi-year REC contracts in order to ensure real, additional renewable energy on the grid. Marketing Green Rate In order to utilize funds most efficiently, SCE will target marketing efforts to customers 'most likely' to enroll in the Green Rate. SCE defines this group as rate-payers currently in all Bundled Service.164 This section mentions making efforts to include low income customers, however no detailed plan of outreach and education is explained. In general, this section is vague and focuses only on an efficient budget and saving money. Green Rate Balance Account SCE intends to recover all extra costs from implementing the Green Rate subscription process.The utility intends to establish a Green Rate Balance Account where all differences in Green Rate related costs are recorded. Entries should only include actual cost, and will result in the calculated cost per kWh of the Green Rate annually. Furthermore, as yearly costs vary in procurement, SCE proposes to refund or recover costs from the account, once it is established. The account would be monitored by the CPUC.165 SCE recommends CPUC oversee its activity in the same method it reviews other balancing accounts and contracts. Proposal Amendments Due to an error in determining eligible facilities of renewable energy generation, SCE now forecasts different rates for customers opting into the Green Rate. Originally the utility projected 271 projects within their territory.166 Now they have corrected their statement to include only 214 projects causing adjustment to the 2015 Green Rate Portfolio Charge, Time-of-Delivery Adjustment, Generation Credit, and the revenue requirement for 2015. Listed below are the current estimated charges by SCE 163 Ibid. 164 (Southern California Edison, 2014a) 165 Ibid. 166 (Southern California Edison, 2014b) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 60 Component Charge Green Rate Portfolio Charge + 10.839 9.281 ¢ / kWh Renewable Integration and Market Participation Charge + 0.00002 ¢ / kWh Program Administration Charge + 0.7684 ¢ / kWh Resource Adequacy Charge + 0.6586 ¢ / kWh Green Rate Charge = 12.266 10.7080 ¢ / kWh Class Average Retail Generation Rate - 8.71 ¢ / kWh Indifferance Adjustment + 2.767 2.97 ¢ / kWh Time-of-Delivery Adjustment - 0.0 0.0005 ¢ / kWh Resource Adequacy Adjustment - 0.0063 0.0458 ¢ / kWh Other CPUC-approved Charges or Values - 0 ¢ / kWh Generation Credit = (-)5.9493 5.7863 ¢ / kWh Table 4.1. Projected Green Rate Pricing Components for Residential Schedule D-”G” Public Commentary: Specific to SCE Proposal Several third parties submitted responses to SCE’s Green Rate proposal. The Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC) filed several briefs with the CPUC in opposition to the proposals made by PG&E, SDG&E, and SCE. Their concerns center around the price structure dictated in these utilities' current plans. As a non-profit, IREC provides a third party insight to the proposal proceedings and offers a wealth of experience dealing with regulatory energy policy. Using this experience, IREC came to the conclusion that current proposal rates would hinder consumer access to renewable energy rather than support SB 43's legislative mission.167 Included in their briefs, are opposition to the utilities’ rate structure regarding non-participant indifference, price fluctuation, and total cost. The first aspect of rate design which the IREC takes issue with is in regards to ratepayer indifference. The IREC contends that non-participants will actually benefit, as the utility also stands as a non-participant. Currently charges listed as "resource adequacy value," administrative costs, and "renewable energy generation rate" are variable.168 This lack of stability and ultimate fluctuation in price could be used to benefit the utility, not provide economical access to low-impact energy. Essentially the IREC argues that non-participants are free riding off the benefits provided by GTSR program in the long-run. As California begins to standardize higher renewable energy requirements for utilities, projects attained for GTSR program subscriptions will become relevant to all ratepayers, therefore placing a burden of establishment costs on only participants while supplying the long-term benefit to everyone. Furthermore, program 167 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014a) 168 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 61 participants are "facilitating a strong renewable energy market" for future use.169 An SDG&E representative already expressed opposition to incorporating long term benefits into non-participant bill accounting. In further testimony, the SDG&E representative acknowledged that ratepayer indifference includes ensuring that all participants receive the full benefits associated with the costs they provide, but rejects the cost benefit methodology for distributed generation created by Decision D.170 Instead both utilities insist that costs and credits to participants should be determined by the Direct Access methodology. This is a short-term framework which IREC describes as designed to allow customers to purchase renewable energy at market-price, rather than a utilities generation supply.171 The intent of GTSR programs is to develop new renewable generation facilities, therefore long-term benefits to non- participants greatly exceeds the short-term Direct Access framework for indifference, leaving program participants with a loss of value. Next, IREC contends that each utility can provide a more stable rate structure for participants in GTSR programs. They reason that in general there are months where served customers pay more or less for services rendered on a normal electricity plan.172 Cost accuracy is currently imperfect. It is nonsensical to assume GTSR program accounts will avoid this if the utility fluctuates rates frequently. Furthermore for the utilities’ to contest fixed rates under the pretense they cannot support them is misguided. SCE must buy power on time scale of twenty years. They could not require suppliers to charge on a yearly basis according to short-term market fluctuations.173 For these reasons, IREC suggests a model for GTSR programs which includes fixed rates based on the term of a participant's commitment to make participation more financially accessible.174 Last, IREC establishes a price comparison between each utility, determining SCE’s proposal significantly more expensive, warranting a re-evaluation of its rate design. SCE’s current premium for the Green Rate is inappropriate proven by the fact that it is well in excess of the national and California average for green pricing programs, PG&E’s, and SDG&E’s proposed rates.175 See table for side by side comparison. 169 Ibid. 170 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014c) 171 Ibid. 172 Ibid. 173 Ibid. 174 Ibid. 175 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014b) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 62 Table 4.2. Additional Costs of Electricity Under a CCA176 Utility Program Name Additional Cost of Generation (¢/kwh) National Average Similar green pricing programs 1.1 California Average Similar green pricing programs 1.8 San Diego Gas & Electric SunRate ~2.7 Pacific Gas & Electric Enhanced Community Renewables Option ~2.7 Southern California Edison Green Rate ~4.2 176 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 63 Chapter 5: Community Choice Aggregation One option to bring carbon neutral electricity to the City of Hermosa Beach is the establishment of a CCA, allowed by the implementation of AB 117. Under a CCA, the community can specifically allocate sources of electricity generation. Thus, a CCA gives autonomy to the City of Hermosa Beach to select zero emissions energy and accomplish their goal of carbon neutrality. Furthermore, a CCA is structured such that the public utility would continue their role of long range transmission, community distribution, and billing. As a result, IOUs will continue with such duties and would charge a fee for their services. In order to offset the additional charges of IOUs’ services, the City of Hermosa Beach may consider implementing a Joint Powers Authority (JPA). The formation of a JPA will be beneficial as it will integrate progressive cities into the CCA to divide costs. Collectively, a CCA would give the City of Hermosa Beach control over its sources of electricity procurement, but a JPA is a plausible solution to mitigate the additional surcharges. This chapter explains the details of establishing a CCA. Figure 5.1. This graphic describes CCA to a customer.177 177 (Lean Energy U.S., 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 64 History The first CCA project occurred in Massachusetts in 1997 in Cape Cod which successfully led to the creation of Cape Light Compact. In a short period of time, the idea of CCA was able to expand to other states including Ohio and Illinois. In 1997, California’s electricity market was restructured in order to increase competition between electricity suppliers and reduce rates. This reform was not very effective as many customers failed to participate due to the cost and inconvenience of switching to another energy provider. In the early 2000’s California experienced an energy crisis which escalated the call for change in energy policy. The new pressure for increased energy options eventually led to the passage of California State Assembly Bill 117 (AB 117). California State Assembly Bill 117 AB 117 was passed in 2002. It sets the legal precedent for a CCA and it provides the guidelines for CCA programs in California. A CCA program can be formed by any community governing board that “elects to combine the loads of its residents, businesses, and municipal facilities in a community-wide electricity buyers’ program.” In addition, a group of cities, counties or both can form a CCA through the formation of a JPA with a Joint Powers Agreement.178 Attempted Community Choice Aggregation Programs in California There have been a number of communities in California where CCA options have been explored, two of which are operational while others are on the horizon. Table 5.1 is a list of governmental bodies that have explored the implementation of a CCA in their community and their current implementation status: Table 5.1. Governmental bodies that implemented CCAs. CCA Status San Joaquin Valley Power Authority Suspended (Created feasibility report) Marin Energy Authority (Marin Clean Energy) Operational (All customers phased in) Sonoma Clean Power Authority (Sonoma Clean Power) Operational (Phasing in customers) City and County of San Francisco (Clean Power S.F.) Suspended (Implementation plan submitted to CPUC) County of San Diego Suspended (Created feasibility report) Lancaster Power Authority (Lancaster Community Choice Aggregation) Implementation in progress (Expected 2015) 178 (Legalinfo.ca, 2002) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 65 Power Purchase Agreement If the City of Hermosa Beach establishes a CCA, it will have to procure electricity from independent power producers (IPP) through PPAs. A PPA is a contract between an IPP and a buyer that dictates electricity production, delivery, and payment. Through PPAs, buyers can selectively allocate the source of energy, thus most PPA’s correlate to solar production and other means of renewable energy. Most PPAs typically last 5-20 years. The main entities involved in a PPA are the IPP, buyer, and utility company. A buyer negotiates with the IPP to supply them with a certain amount of electricity. A contract then binds the IPP to the buyer for an arranged number of years. Through that contract, the IPP must supply all the agreed amount of electricity and must arrange a cost for the longevity of the contract. The utility company will deliver the electricity from the IPP to the buyer through its transmission lines. The utility company will charge a fee for its service and they will also bill the customer. The utility company is given this task because they can easily tell from their metering how much electricity each customer uses. Benefits of Community Choice Aggregation CCA programs provide various benefits to the regions that they serve. These benefits are directly related to the nature of a CCA which allows local governments, rather than the IOU, to make decisions about power procurement. Currently, SCE performs the task of power procurement for the City of Hermosa Beach. In all areas of the state not served by an established CCA or a direct access agreement, customers do not choose from where and how their energy is produced. A CCA transfers the authority from the IOU to the community, so that community members along with their local governing board can decide how their electricity is purchased and generated. Further, a CCA could provide competition for both lower rates and for a higher percentage of renewables in electricity generation. A CCA is a local not-for-profit agency that is generally overseen by elected officials or their appointees and managed by a hired staff or a contracted service provider. The incorporation of city officials ensures that energy procurement decisions are made in light of the community’s goals. If the City of Hermosa Beach started a CCA, it would have a much greater level of control in energy policies. Due to the bulk power purchases a CCA makes, it possesses greater leverage upon the negotiation of rates with IPPs. Therefore, there can be a potential expansion in the market for competitively priced renewable power generation. The two CCAs that are currently operational in California are MCE and Sonoma Clean Power (SCP). Both CCAs were able to provide their customers with more renewable energy rates that are slightly lower than their IOU, PG&E. This is shown in Table 5.2 and 5.3. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 66 Table 5.2. Marin Clean Energy vs. PG&E Rates179 PG&E MCE Light Green MCE Deep Green Renewables 19% 50% 100% Residential Total Cost $76.16 $75.70 $80.78 Commercial Total Cost $187.65 $185.20 $197.02 *Residential Based on 508 kWh/ E-1, Res-1; Commercial Based on 1,182 kWh/ A-1, Com-1 (Winter) as of 1/1/14 Table 5.3. Sonoma Clean Power vs. PG&E Rates PG&E SCP CleanStart SCP EverGreen Renewables 20% 33% 100% Residential Total Cost $80.43 $75.80 $93.30 Commercial Total Cost $348.49 $329.41 $389.91 *Residential Based on 500 kWh/ E-1, Commercial Based on 1,500 kWh/ A-1 as of 5/1/14 CCAs in California have proven to offer competitive rates compared to current energy providers while increasing the renewable energy load. However, customers do need to pay more than the general utility rate to receive energy from 100% renewable sources. Due to its earlier formation, MCE has had more time to refine its program by establishing better financial practices and acquiring more energy procurement contracts, therefore allowing them to offer a higher RPS for the cheaper option. Starting a Community Choice Aggregation Program Political action is crucial to the implementation of a CCA as there needs to be a simple majority to approve the program. First, the city will need to explore the feasibility of forming a new CCA by performing a calculated feasibility study. Once the analysis is complete the results are used to guide the town in their voting. After the vote, additional research and approvals are required to ensure the long- term success of the CCA. Many of these approvals come from the CPUC, who is in charge of overseeing and regulating energy companies as well as CCA programs. Table 5.4 shows the first steps to forming a CCA, which are further elaborated in the following sections, each of which require the approval of the city council. 179 (Marin Clean Energy, 2014a) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 67 Table 5.4. Steps to Start a CCA Steps to Start a CCA 1) Perform a feasibility study which assesses the potential of CCA in a given community 2) Establish a JPA with nearby communities to aggregate total demanded load (optional) 3) Write an Implementation Plan that fulfills the CPUC’s requirements 4) Submit a Statement of Intent (SI) to the CPUC and wait for correspondence 5) Once (SI) is approved, submit formal application for registration to the CPUC 6) Begin following through with Implementation Plan to build CCA 1) Feasibility Study In order to fully assess the economic impacts and viability of a CCA, the City of Hermosa Beach should consult with a third party to create a feasibility report. Navigant Consulting is an existing firm that has experience conducting the feasibility report for MCE. Furthermore, John Dalessi, a former senior management at Navigant, created his own firm called Dalessi Management Consulting. Thus John Dalessi has expertise in CCA cost analysis because of his association with the feasibility reports for both SCP and MCE. Due to the importance of an accurate feasibility study, the costs of the third party consultation may be significant. Sonoma stated that the cost of the study should not exceed $150,000, but due to service extensions and new agreements this limit has been exceeded by $101,000.180 The City of Hermosa Beach might not need to bear the full cost of a feasibility report if it joins with other cities or considers joining an existing CCA. For example, the City of Albany, CA is similar in size (1.8 square miles) and population (18,969 people) to the City of Hermosa Beach. Albany set aside $20,000 for a city-scale feasibility study in consideration of joining MCE.181 Thus costs to generate a feasibility report for a single city joining a JPA with an existing CCA may be significantly lower than if the city decides to establish a CCA alone. The cost of a city joining a JPA with an existing CCA may be closer to $20,000.182 This is significantly lower to the $251,000 that Marin County set aside for its county wide feasibility report.183 2) Joint Powers Authority The City of Hermosa Beach currently has a population of 19,773, and an annual electricity demand of 78 GWh. Due to the city’s small demand, bargaining power may be limited when negotiating with IPPs, leading to higher electricity costs per kWh. Simultaneously, this demand may be too large to be supplied by the excess electricity of an IPP. A possible solution for this size demand, is creation of a JPA with neighboring communities. 180 (County of Sonoma, 2011) 181 (City of Albany, 2013) 182 Ibid. 183 (County of Sonoma, 2011) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 68 A JPA is an entity that can jointly exercise power over the participating communities in order to combine resources and address a common issue. This would allow a CCA to aggregate the electrical loads of other communities in the area, thereby increasing the CCA’s power to negotiate low-cost renewable energy contracts from an IPP. In effect, this would increase the buying power of the City of Hermosa Beach, allowing for the formation of an effective CCA. Start-up costs can also be spread out causing the financial risk of a forming CCA to be mitigated for each participating city. Resources from each city in the JPA can be shared and used efficiently between all parties involved. Benefits of a Joint Powers Authority for a Community Choice Aggregation JPAs are beneficial as they promote synergism between cities in order to reach a common goal. JPAs work efficiently to ensure that the foundation of a CCA is centralized by hiring staff that will be representative of all cities in the JPA. As a result of a centralized system, overlapping services will be reduced and there will be a consistency of service amongst cities participating in the JPA. Once a JPA is established, the addition of cities into the JPA will be beneficial and less risky. Generally, as a JPA expands, the risk is lessened upon financing a CCA. A JPA also provides a way of mitigating risk for the cities involved by separating the budget and assets of a CCA from the general funds of the member cities. The debts and liability of a JPA do not extend to its member cities.184 A city can be a part of JPA, but not necessarily be serviced by its associated CCA. However, for those cities involved in the JPA, it is much easier for them to be incorporated into the CCA. For example the City of Richmond, California was a part of the JPA Marin Energy Authority since 2008, and recently in 2013 began receiving service from MCE. During an interview with Ben Choi, an account manager for MCE, he stated that there was little to no financial risk to Richmond as it entered into the established CCA.185 MCE was already established and running smoothly. There was no reason for Richmond to believe that entering the CCA would jeopardize their energy reliability. By joining Richmond was able to increase its renewable portfolio. At the same time, MCE was able to increase its purchasing power while decreasing the amount of overall financial risk from an increased load and customer base. Risks of a Joint Powers Authority and Potential Solutions Despite the increase in buying power that comes with a JPA, the voice of the City of Hermosa Beach may be overpowered in a JPA due to its small size, low electricity demand, and thus expected lesser influence in the JPA’s goals. If a JPA is established with neighboring cities, a JPA council must be created with representatives from each party. If a large scale JPA is implemented in the South Bay and the number of representatives in the JPA council is based on population size, the City of Hermosa Beach risks losing significant authority over JPA council actions. To counter this, the JPA can be structured in a similar way to MCE’s JPA: Marin Energy Authority. Marin Energy Authority partitions half of the voting shares equally to each member city and the other half of the voting shares according to each city’s annual energy usage.186 This helps ensure that representation is 184 (Lancaster Choice Energy, 2014) 185 (Choi, 2014a) 186 (Marin Energy Authority, 2012a) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 69 fair between each city, while still recognizing city size. The JPA can also be structured so that only founding cities have a say in the decision making. If desired, the charter can be expanded to include more cities. The City of Hermosa Beach’s goal is to achieve carbon-free electricity; consequently it should make sure to explicitly present this goal when forming a JPA, as other cities might not have this same objective. If the City of Hermosa Beach can form a JPA while meeting its goals of carbon neutrality, it should do so. Ideally, the JPA would be focused on providing 100% renewable electricity generation. Effective Joint Powers Authority Size for a Community Choice Aggregation An effective CCA is able to provide a higher amount of renewable energy to its customers at a competitive price. In order to do this, a CCA must have a large enough electricity demand to increase their purchasing power and reduce fixed costs as a percentage of total costs. Marin County and Sonoma County both run CCAs that are competitive with PG&E’s rates and provide a greater percentage of renewable energy. The JPA energy load size of Marin and Sonoma serve as examples from existing CCA programs. A comparison of the counties’ energy loads are shown in Table 5.5 to compare how large a newly created CCA should be. The estimates are the total load of the counties before opt-out rates are factored in. The chart depicts the load of the entire county regardless of enrollment. Some cities in both counties elected not to participate in the CCA, so these numbers can only serve as a rough estimate to the necessary load, but are useful for modeling. Table 5.5. Electricity load for Marin and Sonoma County.187 Type of Load Marin (2010) Sonoma (2010) Non-Residential (GWh) 716.66 1,520.57 Residential (GWh) 705.54 1,354.34 Total (GWh) 1,422.21 2,874.91 In comparison, the total load of the City of Hermosa Beach was 77.97 GWh during the same year. 3) Implementation Plan Another step that must be taken to start a CCA is the creation and submission of an Implementation Plan to the CPUC for approval. This plan would investigate feasibility and assess the benefits and challenges of a CCA in the specified area. In addition, the CPUC uses the plan to determine the cost responsibility surcharge (CRS).188 This surcharge prevents the existing electricity supplier from experiencing an increase in costs due to lost customers. The electricity supplier, namely the IOU, uses customer’s payments to finance the high cost of building transmission lines. The CRS is a measure used to protect the IOU from losing its initial investment needed to serve customers. According to AB 117, an Implementation Plan must include several attributes in order to reach approval at public hearing by the CPUC. 187 (California Energy Commission, 2010) 188 (California State Assembly, 2002) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 70 First, the Implementation Plan must explain the “organizational structure of the program, its operations, and its funding.”189 This includes how the CCA is run, as well as how the leaders in the CCA are chosen. It also outlines what each person’s duties are and how decisions are made. Second, the plan also entails rate setting and other costs to participants.190 This section can include a plan to keep rates stable, competitive with the IOU, and a plan to ensure that the CCA will be able to pay back its costs over time. AB 117 also requires provisions for transparency in determining rates and public disclosure when the CCA votes to adjust established prices.191 Third, the plan includes methods for entering and terminating agreements with other entities. “The rights and responsibilities of program participants, including, but not limited to, consumer protection procedures, credit issues, and shut off procedures.” All this means that the plan will include procedures for customer opt-outs and what happens if the whole CCA program is terminated. Fourth, the plan also includes a description of the third parties electricity suppliers. the description covers the information about financial, technical, and operational capabilities.192 Finally, an implementation plan should also include a statement of intent. The statement of intent should ensure universal access and equal treatment of all classes of customers within the CCA’s service area. Reliability of service should also be ensured and any additional requirements from state law or the CPUC concerning aggregated service should be addressed here. Examples of implementation plans can be found in Table 5.6. Table 5.6. Implementation plans of Marin, Sonoma, and Lancaster CCAs. Date of plan Link Marin October 4, 2012 http://marincleanenergy.org/sites/default/files/ key-documents/Implementation_Plan_w-Resolution _%26_JPA_Revised_1.22.13.pdf Sonoma August 26, 2013 http://2tgc4v3kjp5mrjtdo183d8716ao.wpengine .netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/ Sonoma-Clean-Power-CCA-Implementation-Plan -2013-08-20.pdf Lancaster May 2014 http://www.cityoflancasterca.org/Modules/ ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=24050 189 Ibid. 190 Ibid. 191 Ibid. 192 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 71 4) Statement of Intent A prospective CCA must submit a Statement of Intent to the CPUC in order to begin service. This filing includes a detailed Implementation Plan that the CCA is expected to follow if their application is accepted. The application will include any additional information that the CPUC requests, a service agreement with the serving utility, and evidence of insurance or bond. The insurance or bond value must cover costs such as potential re-entry fees into the IOU, penalties for failing to meet operational deadlines, and forecasting errors that may come with the CCA.193 5) Application for Registration The application for formal registering is the process that the CPUC uses to officially catalog the formation of a CCA. Through this application the CPUC is able to legally oversee the CCA to ensure that it is following mandates. Once the application is processed the CCA operation status will be officially active and the CCA can begin executing its tasks listed in the Implementation Plan. 6) Building a Community Choice Aggregation Program When first creating a CCA, involved governments must make many decisions that will be key determinants of future success. One of the more critical decisions is whether or not to join with other local governments to establish a joint CCA program with the formation of a JPA. As detailed above in the JPA discussion, establishing a joint program can reduce the City of Hermosa Beach’s control over future CCA decisions by spreading out control to many cities. To sidestep this risk, the City of Hermosa Beach can ask to have certain regulations written into the bylaws, or contract, of the JPA. Hermosa Beach should request that 100% renewable energy would be procured so that it may achieve its goal of decarbonizing electricity generation. The City of Hermosa Beach should request that specific bylaws be adopted into the JPA in advance in order to ensure that its wishes can be accommodated.194 Two important objectives that must be pursued early are, the RPS, and the entity that the renewable energy will be procured from. Without clearly stating these two objectives, directing the CCA would be difficult. Table 5.7. Objectives for a CCA once application is accepted by the CPUC: Administrative Recruit and hire staff Submit notification information to CPUC Customer Care Develop information and program marketing materials Establish call center for customer inquiries Contact key customers to explain program, obtain commitment and release customer information Send eligible customers notices and opt-out notices 193 Ibid. 194 (Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 72 Fiscal/Contracts Prepare short and long-term load forecast Develop capability or negotiate contracts for operational services (such as electronic data interchange with utility, customer bill calculations, schedule coordinator services etc.) Execute contracts for electric supply, identify generation projects and negotiate participation, if applicable Obtain financing for program capital requirements Execute service agreement with utility Funding a Community Choice Aggregation A CCA requires an initial investment for formation and thereafter the CCA is funded through revenues eventually resulting in the return of the initial investment. When Marin County was moving forward with its CCA in 2011, Shawn E. Marshall, a project consultant and vice chair of the Marin Energy Authority, estimated that forming a new CCA in California would cost approximately $1.5 to $2 million. This included planning, a feasibility report , the costs associated with the JPA formation, and working capital needed to cover initial operations. The costs of implementing a CCA according to SCP are shown in Table 5.9. MCE began providing electricity to it’s initial 8,100 customers in May 2010 and by 2013, the customer base has then significantly expanded to approximately 90,000 customers.195 During the developmental stage in 2009-2010, debt was issued to fund its operations. After MCE was able to secure a substantial amount of customers, revenues began to stabilize, resulting in a positive change in net position. With much success, in the 2010-2011 fiscal year, revenues have exceeded expenses by over $1.2 million causing net assets to increase from a $961,000 deficit to a positive $319,000.196 Thereafter, in the 2012-2013 fiscal year, revenues rose by nearly $4 million resulting a net position of almost $8 million by the end of the fiscal year in March.197 From MCE’s 2012-2013 financial statement, it’s economic outlook intends to continue its conservative use of financial resources and expects ongoing operating profits. Table 5.8. A table of MCE Net Asset and Revenue Increases from 2010 to 2013 Fiscal Year Net Position ($) Revenue ($) Number of Customers 2009-2010 -961,251 -788,786 8,100 2010-2011 318,838 1,280,089 8,100 2011-2012 3,917,925 3,599,087 13,900 2012- 2013 7,912,874 3,994,949 90,000 195 (Marin Energy Authority, 2010) 196 (Marin Energy Authority, 2011) 197 (Marin Energy Authority 2012) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 73 Figure 5.3. A graph of MCE Net Asset and Revenue Increases from 2010 to 2013 Table 5.9. Estimation of of CCA Start-up Costs198 Cost Amount Staffing and Professional Services $1,125,000 Marketing and Communications $180,000 Data Management $150,000 PG&E Service Fees $40,000 Misc. Administrative and General $150,000 Financial Security/ Bond Carrying Cost $3,000 Total $1,648,000 Staffing of a Joint Community Choice Aggregation Program A Joint Community Choice Aggregation Program is directed by a governing body which is made up of representative for each of the cities. The governing body essentially sets policy and directs staff to ensure the smooth day-to-day operations of the CCA. Table 5.10 is the staffing plan for MCE. 198 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 74 Table 5.10. Staffing Plan for Marin Clean Energy 199 Position Staff (Full Time Equivalents) Management Executive Officer 1 Resource Analyst 1 Data Analyst 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Clerk 1 Sales and Marketing Communications Director 1 Account Manager 1 Local Energy Programs Energy Efficiency Program Coordinator 1 Legal and Regulatory Legal and Regulatory Counsel 1 Regulatory Analyst 1 Total Staffing 10 Time Frame for Establishment The formation of a CCA may take place over several years. However, since the formation of MCE, California’s first CCA, the amount of time necessary to establish a fully functional CCA has reduced by more than half. This is evidenced in the cases of SCP and Lancaster Community Choice Aggregation (LCCA). The amount of time taken to form a CCA in each of these cases is compared in Table 5.11. The concept of a CCA was relatively new in California when Marin County first expressed interest in forming one. Their successful navigation of this formerly uncharted territory has served as an example for the formation of subsequent CCAs. One of the most noticeable differences between MCE and SCP is the time between the publishing of a feasibility report and the formation of a JPA. For MCE, this process took over three and a half years. In the case of SCP, however, the JPA was established in just over a year following the feasibility report. A possible explanation for this is that Marin’s example eliminated some of the doubt surrounding the risks associated with CCAs and JPAs, making other municipalities less skeptical to join in such an endeavor. Furthermore, comparisons of the total time needed to form CCAs in Marin, Sonoma, and Lancaster show undeniable evidence that practice increases efficiency. While MCE required five years from the time of the finalized feasibility report to the formation of a functional CCA, SCP took less than three. LCCA is anticipated to require even less time and is anticipated to launch in May 2015, just over a year following the feasibility report. From these examples it can be deduced that 199 (Marin Energy Authority, 2011) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 75 starting a CCA in the South Bay would not be as time intensive as the creation of other programs in the past. Table 5.11. Significant dates in the creation of CCAs in Marin, Sonoma, and Lancaster. MCE200 SCP201 LCCA202 Feasibility Report 3/2005 10/10/11 1st quarter of 2014 JPA Established 12/19/08 12/4/12 3/8/11 Implementation Plan Created 12/4/09 8/22/13 5/13/14 Implementation Plan Approved by CPUC 2/3/10 10/4/13 6/1/2014 (expected) Service Agreement established with IOU 2/17/10 8/22/13 9/30/2014 (expected) Registration as a CCA Approved by CPUC 4/9/10 1/21/14 N/A Program Launched 5/7/10 5/14 5/1/2015 (expected) Community Choice Aggregation Program Roll-Out Upon the enrollment of customers, CCA programs use the phase approach to enroll customers. It enrolls customers gradually in different phases to ensure operations run smoothly in order to identify issues on a smaller scale to prevent future occurrences. An issue of phasing may include losing the production of renewable energy from one of the contracted energy producers. However, with fewer customers initially enrolled there is more room to make mistakes without jeopardizing the provision of energy for customers. Additionally, phasing produces an advocacy base in enrolled customers that will increase public engagement and awareness. Specifically, it can restore confidence in residents and business owners that CCAs do have smooth management operations and that they can provide reliable and affordable renewable energy. Phasing allows a CCA to be more cost efficient by initiating phasing with municipal and commercial organizations that have a larger and more predictable load. The cost efficiency characteristics will allow the CCA to easily estimate larger electricity loads which will allow the CCA to recover a larger portion of costs than if they were to begin servicing residents with smaller loads. The first and smallest stage of phasing begins with the enrollment of municipal and commercial accounts. In the second phase, additional customers are enrolled, and in the third phase, the remaining customers are enrolled in the CCA. 200 Ibid. 201 (Sonoma Clean Power, 2014) 202 (City Council of Lancaster, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 76 Table 5.12. Marin Clean Energy Power Phases203 Phase Number of Accounts Phase 1: 2010 8,000 municipal and commercial accounts Phase 2 A&B: 2011&2012 89,000 commercial and residential accounts Phase 3: 2013-2014 All remaining customers and Richmond* *The City of Richmond was added to MCE in this year Table 5.13. Sonoma Clean Power Phases204 Phase Number of Accounts Phase 1: 2014 20,000 municipal and commercial accounts Phase 2: 2015 60,000 commercial and residential accounts Phase 3: 2016 All remaining accounts Table 5.14. Lancaster Community Choice Aggregation Proposed Phases205 Phase Number of Accounts Phase 1: May 2015 640 municipal accounts Phase 2: November 2015 4,800 commercial accounts Phase 3: February and/or November 2016 37,500 residential accounts Investor Owned Utility Opposition to Community Choice Aggregation IOUs may view CCAs as a threat as it introduces competition to what largely has been a natural monopoly. Any attempt to form a new CCA or join an existing CCA may face resistance from existing IOUs due to the loss of customers. The legislation that established a pathway for CCA formation in California, AB 117, requires that: "all electrical corporations shall cooperate fully with any community choice aggregators that investigate, pursue, or implement community choice aggregation programs."206 Due to AB 117, IOUs are legally bound to cooperate with the implementation and the operation of a CCA despite its opposition. However, the CCA-enabling legislation is subject to change. The San Joaquin Valley Power Authority (SJVPA) was one of the first agencies to officially explore the option of a CCA. In June 2007, SJVPA filed a complaint against PG&E with CPUC alleging that PG&E was actively opposing the creation of a CCA. Before this complaint, there were no other signs that an IOU 203 (Marin Energy Authority, 2012b) 204 (Sonoma Clean Power, 2013) 205 (City Council of Lancaster, 2014) 206 (California State Legislature, 2002) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 77 would oppose the formation of a CCA. In March 2009, SJVPA raised concerns with CPUC staff regarding PG&E actively attempting to convince customers to opt out of CCA service even though SJVPA had not informed customers that CCA service was beginning.207 In June 2009, SJVPA decided to suspend their efforts to establish a CCA program and “along with the tight credit market, the volatility in energy prices and the uncertainty with California’s energy regulations, SJVPA cited strong opposition from PG&E as one of the factors leading to its decision to suspend the program.”208 In the case of MCE, PG&E actively tried to convince customers in Marin that a CCA was not an option worth pursuing. According to the CPUC, PG&E has been cited for many violations of the rules and regulations governing IOU activities surrounding CCA formation. These violations include soliciting customers via telephone calls to opt out of the program and sending letters to residents that had received an opt-out notice in order to encourage customers to do so.209 According to PG&E, customer rates pay for normal utility functions, while some spending, known as “below the line” spending, is paid by shareholders. This spending is classified but may include “political activities and contributions, charitable contributions, brand image advertising”210 Many of these funds might have gone towards anti-CCA campaigns. However, without a formal audit, the validity of the complaints that the CPUC received cannot be verified. The table below depicts PG&E’s CCA related shareholder spending in three areas it serves at the time of considering or starting a CCA. Table 5.15. January 2007- August 2011 PG&E Shareholder Spending Related to CCA211 Shareholder Spending SJVPA $3,954,501 Marin County/MCE $4,226,703 San Francisco CCA $1,631,080 PG&E was the main proponent in favor of 2010 California Proposition 16, which if passed would have created additional barriers on the creation of a CCA program. According to the official campaign finance disclosures, PG&E provided $46.4 million of the $46.5 million in contributions to the campaign.212 The details of Proposition 16 are discussed in a later section. 207 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2011a) 208 Ibid. 209 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2010b) 210 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2011b) 211 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2011b) 212 (California Secretary of State) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 78 Risks of forming a Community Choice Aggregation Program Many of the risks related to CCA programs are associated with costs due to unanticipated events. These events include increasing costs of a CCA, a change in the CRS and the implementation of AB 2145. AB 2145 will be discussed in a later section. Most importantly financing remains a crucial impediment. One senior staffer with MCE commented on recommendations and feasibility of a CCA by saying, “There are three legs to the CCA stool, political, technical, and financial. And the greatest of these three is financial.”213 This is because CCAs do not begin generating ratepayer funds until power contracts have been approved and customers have been transferred from the incumbent utility.214 And once transferred, the CCA must be able to keep customers satisfied. If rates of energy imposed by the CCA are intolerably greater than those from the IOU, customers may become dissatisfied and return to the IOU. CCA’s are not for profit entities and do not have an excess pool of capital by which to sacrifice in the event that customer acquisition is unsuccessful. Dalessi Management Consulting, the consulting group which created the feasibility report for Sonoma County reports that “over the 20-year study period, consumers would pay between 3% and 8% more than PG&E rates.”215 Dalessi also stated that “projected rates will be slightly higher than PG&E’s to begin, then trended down below PG&E’s rates over time.”216 As initial rates may be at a premium, customers might logically return to the IOU for lower pricing. For this reason it is especially important to emphasize that customers enrolled with the CCA would be receiving a higher grade of energy from renewable sources and would be contributing to local community government, as opposed to private management. Another reason why rates may rise would be due to CRS fluctuations in accordance with the market price which will be explained further in the chapter. Additionally, the passing of AB 2145 poses a great risk to CCAs due to its opt-in clause which may significantly decrease program participation. If a CCA fails to secure enough customers they will potentially lose bargaining power when securing contracts. The large magnitude of lost customers can potentially dissolve a CCA by resulting in a CCA that fails to generate enough revenue to pay for its costs. Dalessi Management Consulting reports that CCAs are subject to additional risks such as: ● “A CCA could over-rely on long‐term contracts with fixed prices, potentially resulting in a high‐cost portfolio at a time when market prices are falling.217 ● “A CCA’s energy suppliers could default on supply contracts (credit risk) at times when energy spot markets are high, forcing the CCA to purchase energy at relatively high prices”218 213 (Marshall, 2010) 214 Ibid 215 Ibid 216 (Sonoma County Water Agency, 2011) 217 Ibid 218 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 79 ● “Customers could fail to pay the CCA’s charges, and the CCA’s credit policies and customer deposits may be insufficient to recover the uncollectible bills”219 ● “The IOU could make changes to rates that reduce the cost of generation and increase the costs of delivery services or that shift costs among customer classes in a manner that disadvantages the customer mix served by a CCA”220 Customer-Related Issues When a CCA is established in a community, all customers are enrolled in the CCA unless they choose to opt-out. Customers may not notice any direct effects due to the establishment of a CCA because the changes are mostly internal. Customers will still continue to pay their bills to the IOU as billing will continue to be handled by the IOU, but the generation service rates will be determined by the City of Hermosa Beach. Table 5.16 is SCE’s CCA handbook that explains the responsibilities of the CCA and the IOU. Figure 5.4 is a sample CCA bill from PG&E. Table 5.16. SCE CCA Handbook221 A CCA will be responsible for: SCE will be specifically be responsible for calculating: Energy Generation Charges Cost Responsibility Surcharge City Tax CCA Service Fee State Tax Transmission Distribution Existing Miscellaneous Fees 219 Ibid. 220 Ibid. 221 Ibid BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 80 Figure 5.4. A Sample CCA Bill from PG&E.222 222 (Marin Clean Energy, b) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 81 Figure 5.5. An Overview of (UDC) Consolidated Billing under CCA.223 223 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 82 The Importance of Public Engagement Public engagement is crucial for the operation of a CCA as it is established on the basis of community choice. The effectiveness of a CCA increases significantly with a larger customer base, thus this is a pivotal element of a successful program. In order to accomplish this, energy consultants from Navigant Consulting recommend “incorporation of a more comprehensive community engagement and education program to motivate residents and businesses to do their part in addressing climate change.”224 This means that outreach and education will be imperative to evoke participation. Through these programs, the public can learn the details of a CCA, including the process, impacts and benefits. For example, open council meetings offer opportunities for citizens to learn about the operation and establishment of a CCA while also voicing their concerns. These and other similar forums increase transparency and public awareness, allowing for a CCA to truly represent the popular interest. Additionally, the knowledge that individual input can significantly impact a city’s policy increases resident involvement and satisfaction. Therefore, when residents pay electricity bills, they feel confident that their money is spent locally in the way that they want. Customer Options Once a CCA program is established, each customer has the option to participate or opt out. The two CCAs currently operating in California provide the opportunity for customers to decide between two levels of renewable energy usage. In the case of MCE, customers that do not opt-out of the program start at a base level of 50% renewable energy but have a choice of upgrading to 100% renewable energy usage. SCP customers default to 33% or choose 100%. Opting Out Under AB 117, when a CCA program is established in a community, all customers within its jurisdiction are transferred over to service by the CCA unless they opt out. If a customer chooses to opt out, they remain with the existing utility. Each customer must be given two notices of their opportunity to opt out of their community’s program before being enrolled and two notices after they are enrolled during the first two billing cycles. If the customer has not opted out after these four notices, no additional notices will be given and they will continue to be enrolled in the CCA. California law requires that there be no consequences to opting out. However, if a customer does opt out, they cannot return to CCA service until one and a half years have passed. Speaking with MCE account manager Ben Choi, he further explained that if an opt out occurs after the initial sixty days of service, such as 4 months into having service with MCE, then the re-enrollment waiting period would be in effect. If, however, the customer opts out before enrollment in MCE, or within the first couple of months of service, the customer would be eligible to enroll in MCE at any time.225 The information from Mr. Choi shows that customers that opt out before sixty days of service are able to opt in again before having to wait the full time period. This is important because some residents might later understand the financial and environmental benefits of participating in a CCA and wish to resume enrollment. 224 (The County of Santa Barbara, 2012) 225 (Choi, 2014b) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 83 Different Renewable Energy Options in the Program MCE customers have the option to choose between 50% and 100% renewables options, while SCP customers can choose between the 33% and the 100% renewables program. Offering an option with a lower portfolio of renewable resources allows the CCA to remain price competitive with the utility, however it decreases the amount of carbon mitigated by the CCA’s service (Refer to Table 5.2 and 5.3 for price comparison). In the case of MCE, enrollment in the Light-Green option is much more significant compared to the Deep Green option, comprising 74.4% versus 1.44% of all ratepayers respectively.226 This means that most of MCE subscribers are demanding an energy load comprised of only half renewable energy, while the rest is supplied by non-renewable sources with significant emissions factors. Unfortunately, if the City of Hermosa Beach were to offer similar options, a high subscription rate to the less expensive plan is expected, resulting in a smaller reduction of carbon emissions. However, the amount of carbon emissions produced by CCA procurement is still less than created by SCE’s general energy mix because overall there is a higher content of renewable resources being provided. Nevertheless, the impact of CCA formation is still decreased because less carbon is mitigated through enrollment of a partial renewables plan as opposed to a completely renewable energy load. Table 5.17. Emissions Abated When Switching to a CCA Program Demand Emissions (MT of CO2) Total Emissions (MT of CO2) SCE Non-renewables 62.4 GWh Renewables 15.6 GWh Non-renewables 15,210 MT Renewables 0 MT 15,210 MT CCA* Opt-Out 19.97 GWh Light Green (50%) 56.91 GWh Deep Green (100%) 1.12 GWh Opt-Out 5,338 MT Light Green (50%) 3,894 MT Deep Green (100%) 0 MT 9,232 MT Difference (Abatement) 5,978 MT Abated *We assuemed MCE's enrollment rates, fuel mix, and light/dark green options. Additional Requirements for Community Choice Aggregation Programs If a CCA customer is involuntarily returned to the service of an IOU then all re-entry fees are the obligation of the CCA. One of the requirements for starting a CCA is that it must demonstrate sufficient insurance to cover these fees. The CPUC is responsible for determining the methodology by which re- entry fees will be calculated. The CCA must also be able to demonstrate that it has sufficient electrical 226 (Marine Clean Energy, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 84 generating capacity to meet the projected peak demand plus a 15% reserve. Cost Responsibility Surcharge In order for the IOU to service its existing customers without increasing rates, the IOU will charge a CRS to customers who join a CCA. The CRS will vary every year making it inversely related to the market price of electricity. For example, if the market price of electricity falls, the CRS will increase and vice versa. In order for a CCA to offer prices that are competitive with the IOU, the CCA would have to procure power below market prices. The initial CRS will be set at 2.0 cents per kWh which is “subject to true up to 18 months or sooner if the utilities forecast is 30% higher or lower than the amount.”227 Thereafter, the CRS will forecast and be trued on annual basis after 18 months by the CPUC. The CRS is determined by the CPUC and it consists of: ● Department of Water Resources Bond Charge: ○ Used to recover the interest and principal of DWR bonds ● Competition Transition Charge ○ Recovers the above market costs of utility generation ● Power Charge Indifference Adjustment ○ It is either a charge or credit designed to maintain bundled customer indifference associated with other customers departing bundled utility service. Laws Relating to Community Choice Aggregation 2010 Proposition 16 In June 2010, Proposition 16 was placed on the ballot in the California state election. If put into effect Proposition 16 would have changed the law by requiring a two-thirds majority of local voters, instead of city council vote, to vote in favor of changing the community energy provider. In effect this regulation would have restricted the development of CCAs by requiring this two-thirds majority vote in a municipality to approve any new CCA. Table 5.18. Comparison of Proposition 16 Changes to Current Law for CCAs228 Action Current Law Proposition 16 Establishing a CCA Public hearings and approval by the affected local governments Public hearings, approval by the affected local governments, and ⅔ voter approval Providing electricity service within the CCA’s territory Board approval; each customer may opt out Board approval and ⅔ voter approval; each customer may opt out 227 (Local Government Commision et al. 2009) 228 (Moren, Weissman, 2010) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 85 Expanding the CCA’s territory to a new city Board approval, public hearings in city, and approval by the city’s governing body Board approval, public hearings in the city, approval by the city’s governing body, and ⅔ voter approval (both by the CCA’s voters and the city’s voters) Expanding the CCA’s territory to an unincorporated territory Board approval and voter approval according to state annexation laws Board approval and ⅔ voter approval (both by the CCA’s voters and the unincorporated area’s voters) Issuing bonds board approval and ⅔ voter approval board approval and ⅔ voter approval 52.8% of voters opposed Proposition 16 and consequently the bill was not passed. This vote is indicative of the support that people in California have for CCAs. In many of the counties that currently have CCA programs, like Marin and Sonoma Counties, voters overwhelmingly opposed the proposition. A noteworthy aspect of the election was that PG&E was one of the heaviest supporters of the proposition, though in most of its service areas people voted no on the proposition (e.g. Sonoma and Marin Counties).229 Table 5.19. Proposition 16: Local Electricity Providers Votes Percent230 Yes (Percent) Yes (Votes) No (Percent) No (Votes) Total 47% 2,526,544 52.80% 2,820,135 LA County 46.80% 443,797 53.20% 503,546 Marin County 37.10% 27,224 62.90% 46,008 Sonoma County 33.00% 39,705 67.00% 80,381 Proposition 23 Proposition 23 was a ballot measure defeated in California in 2010 proposing to suspend AB 32, also referred to as the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and potentially delay the reduction of GHGs indefinitely. By analyzing the results of this ballot measure in cities surrounding the City of Hermosa Beach, it can be determined which municipalities might be interested in decarbonizing its electricity as well. All of the municipalities examined in the South Bay, with the exception of Rolling Hills, opposed Proposition 23 by a majority vote. Due to the significant opposition to Proposition 23, it shows there is a large support for environmental regulations in the areas surrounding the City of Hermosa Beach. 229 (Baker, 2010) 230 (California Secretary of State, 2010) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 86 However, if joining a CCA would result in higher utility cost for residents, it is possible that citizens of lower income municipalities might be hesitant to join. Figure 5.6. This graph shows the percentage of voters who opposed Proposition 23 in cities surrounding the City of Hermosa Beach. Municipalities with higher rates of opposition can be assumed to be more supportive of environmental issues and in favor of reducing carbon emissions. Assembly Bill 2145 AB 2145 known as “Electricity: community choice aggregation” is an act to amend Section 366.2 of the Public Utilities Code that was added by AB 117. In its current state AB 2145 would fundamentally change laws regarding CCA programs, requiring a customer to opt in to a CCA instead of opting out.231 This would require each customer to send notice to the CCA of their intent to opt in and could drastically decrease program participation in a CCA. The possibility of a CCA losing customers by the opt-in methodology greatly threatens the CCA’s ability to negotiate for competitive rates. If a CCA cannot secure the competitive rates, customers will choose not to enroll in a CCA and this positive feedback system will potentially dissolve a CCA due to the high costs and small customer pool. Currently AB 2145 is going through the California State Legislature's committees and is subject to change. In order to pass, the bill must receive a majority in the California Assembly and Senate and be signed into law by the Governor. On May 28, 2014 AB 2145 passed the assembly though is subject to change in the Senate. Table 5.19 is a list of registered supporters and opposition to the bill. 231 (California Legislature, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 87 Table 5.20. List of registered support and opposition to the bill 232 Registered Support Registered Opposition California Labor Federation 350 San Francisco Coalition of California Utility Employees (CCUE) (Sponsor) Alliance for Retail Energy Markets (AReM) Individual Letters (310) Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN) Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) Brad Wagenknecht, Napa County Supervisor, District 1 State Building and Trades Council California Solar Energy Industries Association (CALSEIA) California State Association of Counties (CSAC) Carbon Free Mountain View City of Richmond City of San Pablo City of Sunnyvale Climate Protection Campaign Community Environmental Council County of Marin Enlightenment Energy Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) Geenlining Institute Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council Individual Letters (31) League of California Cities LEAN Energy US Local Clean Energy Alliance of the San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Marin Clean Energy (MCE) 232Ibid BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 88 Marin County Board of Supervisors Monterey Regional Waste Management District (MRWMD) Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) Our City San Francisco OurEvolution Energy & Engineering Pacific Energy Advisors, Inc. Public Interest Coalition Resilient Neighborhoods San Diego Clean Energy San Francisco Clean Energy Advocates Alliance San Francisco Green Party Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors School Project for Utility Rate Reduction (SPURR) Shell Energy North America Sierra Club California Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) SolEd Benefit Corporation Sonoma Clean Power Sonoma County Board of Supervisors Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority (RCPA) Sonoma Water Agency Sungevity Sustainable Marin The Utility Reform Network (TURN) Thomas Cromwell, Mayor, City of Belvedere Town of Fairfax Western Power Trading Forum (WPTF) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 89 Conclusion CCAs can provide an opportunity for cities, especially the City of Hermosa Beach, to procure carbon neutral electricity. Programs can be designed to meet the needs and desires of specific communities. For the City of Hermosa Beach, this would mean increasing renewable energy resources up to 100%. As CCAs are relatively new to California, it is important to learn from programs that are already in existence. MCE and SCP provide valuable examples in the successful formation and operation of CCA programs. It is advisable that the City of Hermosa Beach join a JPA to alleviate associated risks. Also, as the process of creating a CCA becomes more practiced, the amount of time required to establish a fully functional program is reduced. This means that instituting a CCA for the City of Hermosa Beach should be relatively easy. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 90 Chapter 6: Recommendations This section presents the following recommendations: implement energy efficiency programs, establish a CCA via a JPA, and improving the electricity grid system. A discussion about the GTSR will also be presented. Energy Efficiency Renewable energy resources alone are not enough to supply all electricity if energy use continues following current trends. Energy efficiency and renewable energies must grow together in order to make a significant difference in the carbon emissions associated with electricity generation. If more renewable energy is implemented without increasing efficiency, energy use will still continue to grow. This means that renewable energy use will only prevent a growth in carbon emissions as opposed to enabling energy companies to retire or curtail operations at generation facilities that produce electricity by burning fossil fuels.233 Additionally, unlike the implementation of renewable energy sources, efficiency improvements usually result in a negative cost to the consumer because initial investments are paid off over time from the reduced electricity costs. Ultimately, decreasing current carbon emissions requires a combination of both renewable electricity generation and energy efficiency efforts. Electricity efficiency improvements can also become more viable through Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing programs. PACE provides financing for energy efficiency upgrades and renewable energy installation through property tax assessments. This is usually more manageable than fronting the entire cost. These costs also remain a part of the property taxes if the property is sold, so home and business owners do not have to worry about losing their investment if they move. However, PACE programs have faced a history of opposition from the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), specifically the mortgage lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This is because the liens associated with residential PACE financing take precedence over existing mortgages and in the event that the homeowner defaults, the outstanding PACE assessment is paid off first.234 For this reason, the FHFA deemed the residential PACE financing programs as a risk to lenders. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac issued letters to lenders stating that they would not purchase mortgages with outstanding PACE loans, thus a property with a Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac loan could not transfer the PACE assessment to a new owner.235 These issues still exist, but some programs have continued to operate or create residential PACE programs using individual approaches to the FHFA conflict.236 LA PACE is an example of a PACE program available only to commercial buildings, such as offices, hotels, apartment buildings, etc. The City of Hermosa Beach is already eligible for the LA PACE program, so the next step would be encouraging local businesses to invest in these efficiency upgrades. The HERO program is an example of a newly created residential PACE program in California, which jointly finances energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy. This program operates around the FHFA rules by “using affirmative acknowledgements from the first lien holders, conservative underwriting 233 (Prindle, Eldridge, Eckhardt, & Frederick, 2007) 234 (Kaatz & Anders, 2013) 235 Ibid. 236 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 91 requirements, and/or signed disclosures regarding FHF concerns and risks.”237 The HERO program has been operating successfully in Riverside County since 2011. In June 2013, Orange County entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Western Riverside Council of Governments to facilitate the introduction of the HERO program there as well.238 HERO is also poised to become available in Los Angeles County in 2014. Initially, the renovations covered will include insulation, water and electricity efficiency improvements, windows and entry doors, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, HVAC and whole house fans, and photovoltaic solar panels.239 As a part of Los Angeles County, the City of Hermosa Beach will be eligible to take advantage of the HERO program when it is implemented, which is expected soon. Also, as the program proves to be successful and economically profitable, as it has in Riverside County, it is possible that more energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy sources, such as thermal solar water heating systems, will become available for residents. These programs allow residents to lower their electricity use without being intimidated by a hefty price tag. Through these easily implemented changes, there is potential for great energy saving and even the possibility of a carbon neutral city. Green Tariff Shared Renewables Program As it stands, the Green Rate program with SCE could provide an avenue for the City of Hermosa Beach to reach carbon neutral electricity generation. However, due to the price, structure, and the legislation’s sunset date this is not the best option for the city. Price is a primary concern voiced by groups tracking the progression of each utilities’ proposals including the Green Rate. The City of San Francisco cites concern over the generalized nature of the cost structure proposed by PG&E and the IREC demands a new rate design on the basis that participants will burden a large cost for benefits ultimately shared with all ratepayers.240 241 These critiques, coupled with the fact that an amendment to the Green Rate was already filed by SCE, increases fees, clearly displays the high probability of rate fluctuation.242 These rate fluctuations put the customers of the City of Hermosa Beach at the mercy of the utility. Furthermore the price proposed by SCE is higher than the other utilities, as seen in Table 6.1. Clearly this premium is significantly larger than other IOU GTSR programs. The relatively large cost premium may dissuade the City of Hermosa Beach from joining the program, especially as prices will fluctuate in the future, minimizing enrollment and thus the amount of energy demanded from renewable sources.243 For this reason, it is recommended that city seeks an alternative solution. 237 Ibid. 238 (Association of California Cities, Orange County, 2013) 239 (HERO Financing, 2013) 240 (Herrera, 2014) 241 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014) 242 (Southern California Edison, 2014b) 243 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014c) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 92 Table 6.1. Additional Costs of Electricity Under a CCA244 245 Utility Program Name Additional Cost of Generation (¢/kwh) National Average Similar green pricing programs 1.1 California Average Similar green pricing programs 1.8 San Diego Gas & Electric SunRate ~2.7 Pacific Gas & Electric Enhanced Community Renewables Option ~2.7 Southern California Edison Green Rate ~4.2 To clearly display the increase in premium to a rate-payer bill when switching to the Green Rate, take an average household using 329 kWh over a month period. See the table below for a comparison of this customer’s bill on the general SCE service versus the Green Rate for a month period. Table 6.2. Additional Monthly Costs of a CCA in SCE Territory Program Delivery Charges Generation Charges Total Charges General Energy Plan Tier 1 314 kwh x 0.4165 = 13.08 314 kwh x 0.8592 = 26.98 Tier 2 15 kwh x 0.7286 = 1.11 15 kwh x 0.8592 = 1.29 TOTAL $42.46 Green Rate Tier 1 314 kwh x 0.4165 = 13.08 314 kwh x .12266 = 38.52 Tier 2 15 kwh x 0.7286 = 1.11 15 kwh x .12266 = 1.84 TOTAL $54.55 244 (Southern California Edison, 2014b) 245 (San Diego Gas & Electric, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 93 Though the customer receives service of 100% renewable energy directly from the utility on the Green Rate, they pay a significant premium each month. As shown in other sections of this report, there are ratepayers under CCA jurisdictions paying a much smaller premium, for the same service of renewable energy. Thus, it is recommended that the residents of City of Hermosa Beach pursue the formation of CCA to ensure a lower rate for renewable energy. Programs for renewable energy will be monitored by the CPUC, however they are ultimately run by the utility. SB 43 stipulates that each supervising utility procure renewable energy from local sources.246 However the proximity from the source of generation to the customer is not defined by the legislation, therefore leaving it up to the utilities’ discretion. Surely this is an effort by legislators to make GTSR programs both economically and technically feasible for each utility, but it also concerns stakeholders. This could be an avenue for IOU’s to seek distant renewable sources rather than investing in local generation. According to SCE’s proposal, the utility plans to use its current renewable energy resources that are in excess to RPS goals to fill Green Rate subscriptions.247 IREC points out that this does not serve the mission of SB 43 because it does not create new resources for generation, unlike SDG&E’s and PG&E’s procurement plan.248 This is just a singular example of how SCE’s control of the program could lessen the benefit of Green Rate subscriptions. In this situation, SCE also falls short of the other utilities again, displaying their resistance to these legislative changes. Their behavior should be accounted for as ratepayers within the limits of the City of Hermosa Beach will be subject to SCE’s business preferences. Considering the City of Hermosa Beach is opting to institute renewable energy as part of a larger sustainable mission, their choices could affect greater impact if made autonomously. Lastly, SB 43 provides support for GTSR programs until January 1, 2019.249 Without continued support from the legislation it is unclear what will happen to established GTSR programs. The overall goal is to expand the supply of renewable resources for the future, however SB 43 runs out just before RPS goals in 2020.250 Any number of possibilities arises from after this deadline. For example, utilities could cease to offer their respective GTSR programs and reallocate these renewable resources to reach their RPS goal the next year. The fate of GTSR programs, including the Green Rate is unclear after SB 43’s deadline. An option with greater longevity would better serve the City of Hermosa Beach. Community Choice Aggregation via a Joint Powers Authority The analysis of CCAs shows that pursuing this option is the most feasible method of delivering zero emission energy to the City of Hermosa Beach at a cost competitive with existing electricity rates. Furthermore, the possibility of forming a JPA with other cities to minimize costs and risks borne by the City of Hermosa Beach makes the option more economically viable. 246 (California State Legislature, 2013) 247 (Southern California Edison, 2014a) 248 (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2014b) 249 (California State Legislature, 2013) 250 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 94 A CCA grants a local authority decision-making powers over energy procurement. Under the existing utility model, SCE makes such procurement decisions. But under a CCA, control is given to the city, or cities in a JPA situation. Thus, the City of Hermosa Beach does not have to be under the scrutiny of SCE and can be more proactive in their decision making, potentially electing to only utilize carbon neutral electricity. For example, customers under SCE’s current tiered rate system are subject to the fuel mix and costs that the utility offers. This is controlled by state legislation, the RPS, and CPUC regulation. However, a CCA can form contracts with IPPs that specify the sources of energy that should be utilized and the price the CCA is willing to pay. Thus the City of Hermosa Beach has more autonomy through formation of a CCA. Moreover, the Marin and Sonoma County CCAs have shown that delivering clean energy can be competitively priced compared to the conventional utility rate. In order to reduce the price premium of zero-GHG electricity, the City of Hermosa Beach should follow Marin and Sonoma’s footsteps and establish a JPA. The formation of a JPA with the City of Hermosa Beach and other cities interested in pursuing zero-GHG electricity would increase the CCA’s aggregate electricity demand. This will in turn give the CCA increased bargaining power and induce negotiations with a larger selection of potential IPPs to conjure power at competitive rates. Furthermore, the initial costs for the start up of a CCA will be divided among the cities involved; thus fixed costs such as staffing, promotion, and service fees will be partitioned accordingly. The formation of a CCA via a JPA may be the most cost-effective method of delivering carbon neutral energy to the City of Hermosa Beach because the fixed costs will be divided among the cities involved and the generation costs, which are variable, will be negotiated with increased bargaining power. Potential disadvantages in forming a CCA include excessive surcharges, customers opting out of the program, and the potential for the relatively small City of Hermosa Beach to have their priorities diluted in a larger JPA. Existing JPAs are structured to give more votes and board members to the cities that have the largest energy demand. Thus if the City of Hermosa Beach is on the smaller scale of electricity consumption, their influence over decisions within the JPA will be reduced. Moreover, customers are legally allowed to opt-out of the CCA. If the CCA’s rates are high compared to SCE’s rates, they may choose to do so. In this case, the City of Hermosa Beach’s goal of having 100% carbon neutral electricity will be difficult. Thus, the City of Hermosa Beach should follow the examples of Marin and Sonoma, offering two rate options: a cost-competitive “light green” option in addition to a 100% renewable option. The City of Hermosa Beach, or the JPA it joins, can increase the percentage of renewables in the cost-competitive option over time, as Marin has done. In this way, the CCA can move customers toward a higher concentration of renewable energy. Despite these drawbacks of a CCA, we still recommend that the City of Hermosa Beach create a JPA. To mitigate the risk that competing priorities in a JPA would jeopardize the city’s long-term goal of carbon neutral electricity, the JPA and CCA charter could include certain provisions. For example, a provision requiring a 100% renewable option and that the JPA continually increase the percentage of renewables in the cost-competitive rate option, would ensure the City of Hermosa’s priorities are continually advanced. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 95 The current regulation guiding CCA formation is far more attractive to establishing a viable electricity decarbonization pathway than the procedures for individual customers to join the GTSR program. The CCA option allows customers to opt-out of a CCA, while SCE’s Green Rate will require customers to opt- in. The percentage of customers who explicitly opt-out is far less than those expected to opt-in to the Green Rate. MCE currently has an opt-out rate of 23.6%.251 Thus 76.4% of the residents will be served by the CCA and will be provided with renewable energy, which is much greater participation in comparison with enrollment rates of opt in programs. Despite not having full participation, this formality of a CCA induces more participation than SCE’s Green Rate, an opt-in program which is projected to have an enrollment rate of 0.5%.252 This lack of participation stems from the fact that asking customers to actively reach out, making a choice different from the status quo, creates a barrier to enrollment in the program. This comes from the unwillingness of the customer to take the time and effort to switch from the default service. The Green Rate’s projected participation rate of 0.5% will not allow the City of Hermosa Beach to make meaningful progress toward its goal of 100% carbon neutral electricity. Figure 6.1. Marin Clean Energy’s Opt-out Percentage253 251 (Choi, 2014) 252 (Shigekawa & Karlstad, 2014a) 253 (Choi, 2014) Opt-Out, 23.60% Served by MCE , 76.40% BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 96 Figure 6.2. Southern California Edison’s Projected Enrollment Rate for the Green Rate Program254 A bill currently before the California State Legislature, AB 2145, would significantly change the regulation governing CCA program establishment. If passed and signed in its current form, AB 2145 would require all future CCAs to become opt-in programs. This would decrease CCA program participation rates, perhaps to levels similar to that projected for the GTSR program. CCAs would aggregate less electricity demand because they would have less bargaining power when negotiating contracts. This would all-but-eliminate the ability of CCAs to provide cost-competitive rates with higher renewable content as compared to the utility. The City of Hermosa Beach should consider formally opposing AB 2145 in order to preserve their options to decarbonize the city’s electricity in pursuit of aggressive GHG emissions reductions. AB 2145 passed the Assembly in late May. It still must be approved by the Senate and signed into law by the governor in order to take effect. The bill will apply to any customer not enrolled in a CPUC-approved CCA by January 1, 2015. Given the time needed to establish a CCA and roll-out to customers, it will be extremely difficult for Hermosa Beach to establish or join a CCA so that customers can default into an opt in program. The City of Hermosa Beach can further investigate the feasibility of a CCA by analyzing the City of Lancaster’s progress toward creation of a CCA. The City of Lancaster is similarly in SCE’s service territory. Thus the City of Hermosa Beach can monitor the proceedings in Lancaster. Lancaster’s experience as the first CCA in SCE territory will reduce some costs and risks to Hermosa Beach, should Hermosa Beach decide to create a separate CCA in Lancaster’s footsteps. Perhaps a more attractive option for the City of Hermosa Beach is to join Lancaster as CCA pioneers in SCE territory. Lancaster, as of 2011, created a JPA titled the Lancaster Power Authority (LPA). Through the LPA, Lancaster seeks to establish a CCA. Currently, Lancaster has sent a Statement of Intent to the CPUC and is awaiting correspondence. Approval from the CPUC would allow Lancaster to move 254 (Shigekawa & Karlstad, 2014a) Will Enroll in Green Rate, 0.50% Will not Enroll, 99.50% BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 97 forward and begin enrolling customers as soon as May 2015. All this would be beneficial to the City of Hermosa Beach because the City of Lancaster could serve as an example or partner in renewable energy procurement. Lancaster is located in the Mojave Desert, near the Tehachapi Pass - two of the best areas for renewable generation in the state. This abundance of opportunity to build renewable energy infrastructure could work to power the energy needs of the larger Southern California area. However, Hermosa Beach may sacrifice some local control by joining a non-adjacent CCA, such as Lancaster. A multi-city CCA is governed by a JPA that must have public meetings. If these meetings are geographically remote to Hermosa Beach, public participation in the oversight process may be hindered. Furthermore, contiguous cities are more likely to have similar interests, problems, and future goals, whereas cities that are farther away may have different goals. Thus a non-contiguous CCA, such as the City of Lancaster’s, may not be as beneficial to the City of Hermosa Beach as a contiguous CCA in the South Bay. Possible Candidates for a Local JPA If the City of Hermosa Beach created a JPA, the most likely candidates to join would be other cities in the South Bay area of Los Angeles County. Depicted in the map and charts below are possible candidates to include in a JPA. The chart contains important information for considering the formation of a JPA. It includes information on the commercial and residential energy demand, the total demand, and the monthly usage of electricity per household is included. The viability of each city’s participation in a CCA is also assessed on the table with the percentage of citizens in each city who voted against California’s Proposition 16 and 23 from 2010. Proposition 16 would have imposed a “new two-thirds voter approval requirement for local public electricity providers.”255 If it would have passed, Proposition 16 would have made it very difficult to start a CCA in California. In effect the percentage of votes against Proposition 16 hints at the chances of starting a public utility or CCA program in a city. Proposition 23 would have suspended Air Pollution Control Law AB 32 which required major sources of emissions to report and reduce GHG emissions that cause global warming. By the percentage that a city voted against this proposition we can infer a city’s commitment to climate change mitigation policy and thus their propensity for joining a CCA in the future. 255 (California Secretary of State, 2010) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 98 Figure 6.3. Map of the South Bay Cities256 256 (South Bay Cities, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 99 Table 6.3. Potential JPA candidates in the South Bay. 257 Within the South Bay, five cities stand out as the most likely to join a CCA. These cities include citizens who voted against Proposition 16 and 23 by a wider margin and combined would have a large enough electric load to create an effective CCA. Below is a projection of how the estimated $1.7 million in start-up costs could be spread among the communities in accordance to their electricity consumption and how much the City of Hermosa Beach would have to pay in this scenario. 257 (Los Angeles Registrar, 2010) # City Residential Electricity (kWh) Commercial / Industrial Electricity (kWh) Total Consumption (kWh) Monthly kWh per Occupied Household % No on 16 % No on 23 1 Hermosa Beach 41,007,643 36,967,197 77,974,840 364 0.6233 0.6704 2 Manhattan Beach 91,548,042 24,308 91,572,350 541.5 0.6172 0.6403 3 Inglewood 142,303,056 234,394,496 376,697,552 325.1 0.5878 0.7726 4 Redondo Beach 127,946,783 73,774,968 201,721,751 373.6 0.576 0.6392 5 Palos Verdes Estates 37,665,360 25,109,166 62,774,526 638.5 0.5592 0.5533 6 Rancho Palos Verdes 114,945,124 52,607,910 167,553,034 636.7 0.5559 0.5804 7 Torrance 242,404,763 703,728,574 946,133,337 376.5 0.5274 0.588 8 Rolling Hills Estates 28,960,929 18,868,387 47,829,316 824.8 0.5207 0.517 9 El Segundo 31,830,933 4,237,140 36,068,073 364.3 0.52 0.599 10 Lomita 31,616,132 28,848,747 60,464,879 338.2 0.4855 0.578 11 Hawthorne 96,819,255 218,952,705 315,771,960 283.4 0.4833 0.696 12 Gardena 66,598,997 207,049,798 273,648,795 263.7 0.4805 0.702 13 Rolling Hills 24,696,938 16,112,129 40,809,067 3385 0.4793 0.439 14 Carson 155,513,973 301,856,331 457,370,304 520.4 0.4651 0.7037 15 Lawndale 28,445,764 31,583,974 60,029,738 240.9 0.4224 0.6623 BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 100 Figure 6.4. Pie Chart of CCA Start-Up Cost Split Amongst 5 Cities According to their Consumption258 Table 6.4. Table of CCA Start-Up Cost Split Amongst 5 Cities According to their Consumption City Total Consumption % of Total Consumption259 CCA Startup Cost Split Amongst 5 Cities260 City of Hermosa Beach 77,974,840 8.00% $135,498.35 Manhattan Beach 91,572,350 9.40% $159,127.00 Inglewood 376,697,552 38.50% $654,594.43 Redondo Beach 201,721,751 20.60% $350,535.69 Palos Verdes Estates 62,774,526 6.40% $109,084.48 Rancho Palos Verdes 167,553,034 17.10% $291,160.06 258 (Sonoma Clean Power, 2011) 259 Ibid. 260 (ICF International, 2012) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 101 A JPA for a CCA does not need to be contiguous and cities who are not connected to the City of Hermosa Beach geographically can be a part of a CCA. In addition to the CCA options in the South Bay, there are other cities that Hermosa Beach could look to in forming a JPA. Though creating a non-contiguous CCA may not be as beneficial, the possibility of their inclusion should not be dismissed. The cities below have either been proven to be environmentally progressive or have populations over 100,000 making them candidates in the forming of a CCA in the Greater Los Angeles area. Table 6.5. Table of Non-South Bay Cities Consumption Values and their Voting Percentages on Prop 16 and 23.261 Non-South Bay City Residential Electricity (kWh) Commercial/ Industrial Electricity (kWh) Total Consumption (kWh)262 Monthly kWh per Occupied Household % No on 16 % No on 23 City of Hermosa Beach 41,007,643 36,967,197 77,974,840 364 62.33% 67.00% Santa Monica 162,016,611 611,024,003 773,040,614 290.1 69.10% 79.90% West Hollywood 18,566,109 56,491,373 75,057,482 67.8 67.81% 82.80% Long Beach 638,254,139 378,349,425 1,016,603,564 328.5 55.60% 65.10% Culver City 49,619,296 97,352,937 146,972,233 245.1 68.58% 77.70% Claremont 77,457,398 2,308,840 79,766,238 577.7 66.22% 68.10% El Monte 104,567,170 271,167,977 375,735,147 315.8 40.51% 50.50% Downey 163,817,050 368,113,838 531,930,888 408.8 44.18% 63.50% Norwalk 129,525,144 203,595,957 333,121,101 389.6 39.90% 64.30% Ultimately, the process to achieve carbon neutrality will take time and should not be rushed. In order to establish an effective CCA, the City of Hermosa Beach should invest adequate time and money to form a strong JPA and for a private company to produce a feasibility report. The creation of a CCA will take place over a period of years, but, as shown in Chapter 5, it will likely not take as long as previous programs in Marin and Sonoma. With the formation of each subsequent CCA in California, the amount of time required for establishment has reduced. This is shown in Table 6.4 below. 261 (Los Angeles Registrar, 2010). 262 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 102 Table 6.5. Significant dates in the creation of CCAs in Marin, Sonoma, and Lancaster. MCE263 SCP264 LCCA265 Feasibility Report 3/2005 10/10/11 1st quarter of 2014 JPA Established 12/19/08 12/4/12 3/8/11 Implementation Plan Created 12/4/09 8/22/13 5/13/14 Implementation Plan Approved by CPUC 2/3/10 10/4/13 6/1/2014 (expected) Service Agreement established with IOU 2/17/10 8/22/13 9/30/2014 (expected) Registration as a CCA Approved by CPUC 4/9/10 1/21/14 N/A Program Launched 5/7/10 5/14 5/1/2015 (expected) A Pathway to Future Grid Improvements The current electricity grid system is not well suited for high levels of distributed generation penetration. Various grid upgrades are required to allow the City of Hermosa Beach to efficiently and reliably utilize the locally available renewable energy sources. Once adequate grid upgrades are made, such as improving infrastructure to support bidirectional power and installing energy storage units, the city could take greater advantage of its estimated 76.2 GWh solar potential.266 Currently SCE owns the transmissions infrastructure and facilities that operate in the City of Hermosa Beach. It is unlikely that SCE will institute the necessary grid upgrades in the near future due to economic restrictions. However the residents of the City of Hermosa Beach could vote to establish a municipal utility district (MUD), allowing the city jurisdiction over providing electricity to the district residents. Once a MUD is formed, it can negotiate the purchase of SCE’s existing grid infrastructure in the city and make necessary upgrades to the system to allow for the integration of distributed generation sources. The Municipal Utility District Act was passed by the California State Legislature in 1921, within the California Public Utilities Code. It authorized the formation and governance of a MUD. A MUD is a special-purpose district that provides public utilities to district residents. Local residents can vote to establish a MUD, after which they will be represented by a board of directors. Sacramento County and Lassen County have each created MUDs. In 1923, citizens of Sacramento voted to create Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) as a community-owned electric service provider. 263 (Marin Energy Authority, 2011) 264 (Sonoma Clean Power, 2014) 265 (City Council of Lancaster, 2014) 266 (DeShazo, J,R,, Matulka, R., Wong, N., 2011) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 103 However, the years following the creation of SMUD were filled with engineering studies, political battles, elections and court filings.267 In March 1946, the California Supreme Court denied PG&E’s final petition to halt the annexation and PG&E finally sold its distribution system at a price fixed by the Railroad Commission.268 SMUD is a public agency of the State of California, and therefore is not subject to the FERC’s jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act.269 In the 1980s, residents of Folsom voted to join SMUD. Despite efforts from PG&E to halt Folsom from joining, Folsom residents are now served by SMUD. In 2006, PG&E successfully convinced SMUD and Yolo County ratepayers to vote down a proposal that would have expanded SMUD’s service territory to include the cities of West Sacramento, Davis, Woodland and all the areas in between. SMUD serves 604,053 meters over a service territory of 900 square miles.270 Figure 6.3 is a map of SMUD’s service territory. SMUD has 2,007 employees and owns 10,257 miles of power lines.271 It is the sixth largest customer-owned electric utility in the nation.272 Figure 6.4 is SMUD’s 2013 projected power content label. 267 (Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2014b) 268 Ibid. 269 (Cornell University Law School) 270 (Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2014b) 271 Ibid. 272 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 104 Figure 6.5. Map of SMUD’s service territory. 273 273 (Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2014a) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 105 Figure 6.6. SMUD’s projected 2013 power content label.274 Lassen Municipal Utility District (LMUD) was voted into existence in 1986.275 In 1988, LMUD acquired electrical facilities from CP National Corporation and began serving residents of Lassen County.276 LMUD serves 10,500 meters over a service territory of 900 square miles.277 LMUD has 38 employees and owns over 500 miles of power lines.278 If the City of Hermosa Beach pursues the establishment of a MUD, opposition from SCE can be expected, just like what SMUD encountered from PG&E. In addition, difficulties in purchasing SCE’s infrastructure include determining a price that is acceptable for both parties and how the grid system is to be divided for sale since it cannot be done according to city boundaries. After a MUD has been successfully established, the City of Hermosa Beach will also need a team of skilled employees to operate, maintain and upgrade the local grid system. The entire process of establishing a MUD and purchasing SCE’s infrastructure can take years, as seen from the examples of SMUD and LMUD. These issues mentioned are significant challenges, but they are also necessary steps for the City of Hermosa Beach to take advantage of the city’s ample rooftop solar potential in pursuit of its noble long-term carbon neutrality goals. 274 (Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2014b) 275 (Lassen Municipal Utility District, 2014a) 276 Ibid. 277 (Lassen Municipal Utility District, 2014b) 278 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 106 References Abou-Diwan, A. (2014). Development of Hudson Ranch II geothermal plant suspended. Imperial Valley Press. Retrieved March 31 2014: http://www.ivpressonline.com/news/local/development-of-hudson- ranch-ii-geothermal-plant- suspended/article_78058770-9de4-11e3-8832-0017a43b2370.html Aerovironment, Inc. (2014). Architectural wind. Retrieved April 5, 2014 from: http://www.avinc.com/engineering/architecturalwind1 Aerovironment, Inc. (2008). AVX1000 building integrated wind turbine. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: http://www.avinc.com/downloads/AVX1000_online.pdf American Wind Energy Association. (2014). State wind energy statistics: California. Retrieved May 27, 2014 from: http://www.awea.org/Resources/state.aspx?ItemNumber=5232. Antelope Valley Press. May 12, 2014. City Seeks to Own Streetlights. Retrieved May 20, 2014 from:http://www.lancasterpower.com/news-articles/AVP%205-12- 14%20City%20seeks%20to%20own%20streetlights.pdf Association of California Cities, Orange County. (2013). California HERO program in Orange County. Retreived April 5, 2014 from: http://www.accoc.org/california-hero-program-in-orange-county/ Ascent Systems. (2013, October 8). Thermal Energy Production (KJ) vs. Time of day (hours). Ascent Systems - Connecting Technologies. Retrieved March 26, 2014from http://ascentsystems.blogspot.com/2013/10/connecting-technologies-part-2-or-what.html Balijepalli, V. M., Pradhan, V., Khaparde, S., & Shereef, R. (2011). Review of Demand Response under Smart Grid Paradigm. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://www.desismartgrid.com/wp- content/uploads/2012/07/review_of_demand_response_vskmurthy.pdf Bayod-Rújula, A. A. (2009). Future development of the electricity systems with distributed generation. Energy, 34(3), 377–383. Beaudry-Losique, J., Boling, T., Brown-Saracino, J., Gilman, P., Hahn, M., Hart, C., Johnson, J., McCluer, M., Morton, L., Naughton, B., Norton, G., Ram, B., Redding, T., & Wallace, W. (2011). A national offshore wind strategy: Creating an offshore wind industry in the United States. U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Breslin, Mike. January 2011. Trans Bay Cable Completed Under San Francisco Bay. Electrical Contractor. Retrieved May 15, 2014 from: http://www.ecmag.com/section/your-business/trans-bay- cable-completed-under-san-francisco-bay. BrightSource Energy, Inc. (2014). Ivanpah. Retrieved May 27, 2014 from: http://www.brightsourceenergy.com/ivanpah-solar-project BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 107 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (2014). Average energy prices, Los Angeles – Riverside – Orange County – March 2014. Retrieved April 1, 2014 from: http://www.bls.gov/ro9/cpilosa_energy.htm CalEnergy Generation. (2014). Imperial valley project. Retrieved March 25, 2014 from: http://www.midamericanrenewablesllc.com/imperialvalley_geothermal.aspx California Energy Commission. (2014). Blythe solar power project. Retrieved April 5, 2014 from: http://www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases/blythe_solar/ California Energy Commission. (2003). Wind resource areas in California [Map]. California Energy Commission. (2014). Utility Annual Power Content Labels for 2012 - Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs). Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/sb1305/labels/2012_labels/IOUs/. California Public Utilities Commission. (2010a). CPUC Puts PG&E On Notice Over Violations of Community Choice Rules. Retrieved on May 5th 2014 from http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/NEWS_RELEASE/117229.htm California Public Utilities Commision. (2010b). Letter to Pacific Gas and Electric. Retrieved May 5, 2014 from: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/677EC1E6-3420-42A8-BBF0- B8E69859A00E/0/PGELetter051210.pdf California Public Utilities Commission. (2011a). Issues and Progress on the Implementation of Community Choice Aggregation, First Quarterly Report. Retrieved on May 5th 2014 from http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/81BE8AA1-D87C-4EC4-9EB6- 866F1072E119/0/CCAReportthetheLegislatureJanuary312011.pdf California Public Utilities Commission. (2011b). Issues and Progress on the Implementation of Community Choice Aggregation, Fourth Quarter Report. Retrieved on May 5th 2014 from http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/3F8C54CF-C051-45FA-A7B1- EAAF9CD13775/0/CCAFourthQuarterLegislativeReportFINAL11311_v3.pdf California Public Utilities Commission (n.d.). California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/Renewables/ California Energy Commission. (2010). Electricity Consumption by County 2010. Retrieved May 16, 2014, from http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx California Legislative Information. February 20, 2014. AB-2145 Electricity: community choice aggregation. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB2145 California State Legislature. (2002). California State Assembly Bill No. 117. Retrieved on April 5th, 2014, from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/asm/ab_0101- 0150/ab_117_bill_20020924_chaptered.pdf BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 108 California State Legislature. (2013). Electricity: Green Shared Renewables Program. Public Utilities Code 2831. September 28. CCE Generation, LLC. (2005). Annual report pursuant to section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Choi, Ben. Personal interview. April 23, 2014a. Churchill, Susan. "California’s New Solar Program SB 43 Nears the Finish Line." The Vote for Solar Initiative, 5 Sept. 2013. Web. 4 Mar. 2014. City Council of Lancaster. (2014). Community choice aggregation implementation plan. Retrieved on May 5th, 2014 from http://www.cityoflancasterca.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=24050 City of Hermosa Beach. (2011). Selected ‘Green Project Activities’ 1970-2011. Retrieved May 25, 2014 from http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=681 City of Hermosa Beach. (2014). City facts. Retrieved April 20, 2014 from: http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=47 Clarke, C. (2013). Water birds turning up dead at solar projects in the desert. KCET. Retrieved April, 1 2014 from: http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/solar/water-birds-turning-up-dead-at-solar-projects-in- desert.html Cooper, D. (2014, January 1). Johnson's Energy Club Competes in Renewable Energy Case Competition. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://www.johnson.cornell.edu/Center-for-Sustainable-Global- Enterprise/News-Events/CSGE-Student-Article-Detail/ArticleId/1791/Johnson-s-Energy-Club- Competes-in-Renewable-Energy-Case-Competition.aspx Cornell University Law School. 16 U.S. Code & 824 - Declaration of policy; application of subchapter. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/824 Dickinson, L., Fan, J., Goh, V., Maki, A., Savarani, S., Shabnoor, T., and Trans, D. (2013). Hermosa Beach carbon neutral scoping plan. UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. Dvorak, M., Archer, C., & Jacobson, M. (2009). California offshore wind energy potential. Renewable Energy, 35, p. 1244-54. Edison International. (2014). A Look Back: Our History. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://www.edison.com/home/about-us/our-history.html#27764 EIA MER New England. (2013, January 29). Typical U.S. Power Supply and Demand Load Curves. The Energy Collective. Retrieved March 21,2014 from http://theenergycollective.com/jemillerep/178096/expanded-wind-and-solar-power-increase-need- natural-gas Electrical Engineering Tutorials. Base Load Plants - Peak Load Plant: Difference. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://electricalengineeringtutorials.com/base-load-plants-peak-load-plant-difference/ BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 109 Energy Storage Association. (n.d.). Community Energy Storage. Executive Summary. Retrieved April 15, 2014 from: http://energystorage.org/energy-storage/technology-applications/community-energy- storage Fastfission. (2005, January 21). Atom Diagram. Wikipedia. Retrieved March 21,2014 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Atom_diagram.png Flex Alert. (2013, January 1). Generation, Transformation, and Transmission. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://www.flexalert.org/energy-ca/grid Gamel, Jay. March 15, 2014. Get Ready for Sonoma Clean Power. Retrieved June 5, 2014 from: http://www.kenwoodpress.com/pub/a/7607?full=1 Geothermal Education Office. (2000). Turbine Generator. Retrieved March 26, 2014 from http://geothermal.marin.org/geopresentation/sld038.htm GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance: Draft for Public Comment. (2012) World Resources Institute. Washington D.C.3-35. Glassley, W. [CaliforniaIRES]. (2011). William Glassley, director, California geothermal energy collaborative. [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzClLcJuiPE. Google Maps. 2014. Sonoma County. Street map. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sonoma+County/@38.1153119,- 121.5736573,8z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x8084225d7dadb68f:0x494913200527a6fe Halstead, Richard. February 26, 2010. Coalition opposing Marin Clean Energy has strong ties to PG&E. Marin News. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: http://www.marinij.com/marinnews/ci_14480227 Hay, F. J. (2013). Economics of photovoltaic systems. University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Hering, G. (2014). 4 reasons the Ivanpah plant is no the future of solar. GreenBiz. Retrieved April 3, 2014 from: http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2014/02/19/largest-solar-thermal-plant-completed-ivanpah. Retrieved 3 April 2014. HERO Financing. (2013). HERO financing program [video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63zc5MZHi_o. Herrera, Dennis. "Reply Comments of the City and County of San Francisco." Proc. of Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, San Francisco. 1-18. California Public Utilities Commission. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. Hughes, G. (2012). The performance of wind farms in the United Kingdom and Denmark. Renewable Energy Foundation. ICF International (2012). Unpublished 2010 LA County Regional Inventory Summary. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 110 Interstate Renewable Energy Council. (2014a). “Opening Brief of the Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Inc.”, CPUC Hearing: 73199. 21 March. Interstate Renewable Energy Council. (2014b). “Phase II Opening Brief of the Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Inc. Regarding the Application of Southern California Edison Company for the Approval of an Optional Green Rate”, CPUC Hearing:74380. 13 May. Interstate Renewable Energy Council. (2014c).”Phase II Reply Brief of The Interstate Renewable Energy Council , Inc.” CPUC Hearing: 74618. 14 May. ISO New England. (2011, February 15). An Example: ISO-NE Electric Load, June 24, 2010. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Retrieved March 21,2014 from http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=130 Joseph, Marc and Mauldin, Jamie. “Reply Comments of the Coalition of California Utility Employees on Revised Testimony.” Proc. of Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, South San Francisco. 1-6. California Public Utilities Commission. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. Kaatz, J. & Anders, S. (2013). Residential and commercial property assessed clean energy (PACE) financing in California. California Center for Sustainable Energy. Kelly, Elizabeth. "Reply Comments of Marin Clean Energy." Proc. of Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, San Rafael. 1-15. California Public Utilities Commission. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. KEMA. (2012a). Storage Ratings by Technology Type. Market Evaluation for Energy Storage in the United States. Retrieved March 26, 2014 from http://www.copper.org/about/pressreleases/pdfs/kema_report.pdf KEMA. (2012b). Storage Efficiency and Lifetime by Technology Type. Market Evaluation for Energy Storage in the United States. Retrieved April 2, 2014 from http://www.copper.org/about/pressreleases/pdfs/kema_report.pdf KEMA. (2012c). Storage Capital Costs by Technology Type. Market Evaluation for Energy Storage in the United States. Retrieved April 2, 2014 from http://www.copper.org/about/pressreleases/pdfs/kema_report.pdf KEMA. (2013, July). Smart Grid Roadmap for Renewables Integration. Energy Research and Development Division Final Project Report. Retrieved June 3, 2014, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/2010publications/CEC-500-2010-029/CEC-500-2010-029.pdf Kim, D. (Director) (2014, April 14). Doug Kim Lecture. Environment 188B: Challenge of Low-Carbon Electricity in California. Lecture conducted from University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles. Kyle, G. A. Solar Insolation. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://education.gsfc.nasa.gov/experimental/July61999siteupdate/inv99Project.Site/Pages/solar.in solation.html BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 111 Lancaster Choice Energy. (2014). FAQs. Retrieved May 16, 2014, from http://www.lancasterchoiceenergy.com/faq-s.html LCCA Implementation Plan. NB 1 Attachment. New Business. Retrieved May 15, 2014 from: http://www.cityoflancasterca.org/index.aspx?recordid=4081&page=545 Lean Energy U.S. (2014). How it Works Final. Retrieved April 6, 2014 from: http://www.leanenergyus.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/how-it-works_final.jpg Leone, S. (2011). $4.5 billion in loans to support three first solar projects. Renewable Energy World. Retrieved April 5, 2014 from: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/07/4-5- in-loans-to-support-three- first-solar-projects?cmpid=WNL-Wednesday-July6-2011. Lin, Roger. “California Environmental Justice Alliance Reply Comments.” Proc. of Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, Oakland. 1-14. California Public Utilities Commission. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. Lueken, C., Cohen, G. E., & Apt, J. (2012). Costs of solar and wind power variability for reducing CO2 emissions. Environmental Science & Technology, 46, 9761 - 9767. Lassen Municipal Utility District. (2014a). About. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://www.lmud.org/about/ Lassen Municipal Utility District. (2014b). LMUD at a Glance. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://www.lmud.org/ Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. (2005). Aggregate (Community) Electricity Consumption. Electropaedia. Retrieved March 21, 2014 from http://www.mpoweruk.com/electricity_demand.htm Mahmud, M. A., Hossain, M. J., & Pota, H. R. (2011) Analysis of Voltage Rise Effect on Distribution Network with Distributed Generation. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://seit.unsw.adfa.edu.au/staff/sites/hrp/papers/mhp11a-c.pdf Marin Clean Energy. (2013). MCE: Integrate Resource Plan Update. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from https://mcecleanenergy.com/sites/default/files/PDF/2013_Integrated_Resource_Plan.pdf Marin Clean Energy. (2014a). MCE: Green Power Community Choices. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://marincleanenergy.org/sites/default/files/key-documents/MCEGeneralPresentation1.15.14_0.pdf Marin Clean Energy. (2014b). Deep Green 100% Renewable Energy. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: https://mcecleanenergy.com/sites/default/files/PDF/DG_Content_Label_2014.pdf Marin Clean Energy. (2014c). Sample Residential Cost Comparison. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: https://mcecleanenergy.com/rates-res BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 112 Marin Clean Energy. (2014d). Board of Directors Meeting. Retrieved June 2, 2014. http://marincleanenergy.org/sites/default/files/board- meeting/06.5.14_Supplemental_Packet.pdf Marin Clean Energy (2014e). MCE Service in Richmond. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: https://mcecleanenergy.com/richmond Marin Clean Energy Implementation Plan. October 2012. Chapter 5 Program Phase In. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: http://marincleanenergy.org/sites/default/files/key-documents/Implementation_Plan_w- Resolution_%26_JPA_Revised_1.22.13.pdf Marin Energy Authority. (2011). Revised community choice aggregation implementation plan and statement of intent. Marin Energy Authority. (2012a). Revised Community Choice Aggregation Implementation Plan and Statement of Intent. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from: http://marincleanenergy.org/sites/default/files/key-documents/Implementation_Plan_w- Resolution_%26_JPA_Revised_1.22.13.pdf Marin Energy Authority. (2012b). 2/12/2012 Meeting Packet. Retrieved May 16, 2014, from http://marincleanenergy.org/sites/default/files/board-meeting/2.2.12_MEA_Board_Packet.pdf Marshall, Shawn E. (2010). Forming a National Community Choice Aggregation Network: Feasibility ,Findings and Recommendations. Marin Energy Authority. Retrieved April 6, 2014 from http://www.galvinpower.org/sites/default/files/Community_Choice_Aggregation_Report_Final_ 1-4-11.pdf Montgomery, J. (2013). NextEra chops Blythe solar project proposal amid switch to solar PV. Renewable Energy World. Retrieved April 5, 2014 http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/04/nextera-chops-blythe- solar-project-proposal-amid-switch-to-solar-pv. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2003). California 50m wind resource map [Map]. Retrieved December 10, 2013 from: http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/maps_template.asp?stateab=ca National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2014). Genesis solar energy project. Retrieved April 3, 2014 from: http://www.nrel.gov/csp/solarpaces/project_detail.cfm/projectID=54 Nemet, G. (2006). Beyond the learning curve: factors influencing cost reductions in photovoltaics. Energy Policy, 34, 3218 - 3232. NextEra Energy Resources. (2014b). Genesis solar energy center fact sheet. NextEra Energy Resources. (2014a). Solar - How solar plants work. Retrieved 27 May, 2014 from: http://www.nexteraenergyresources.com/what/solar_works.shtml BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 113 NRG Solar. (2014). Ivanpah project. http://www.nrgsolar.com/projects/us-mainland/ivanpah-project/. Retrieved 5 April 2014. Ogin Inc. (2014). Our technology. http://oginenergy.com/our-technology. Retrieved 27 March 2014. Osborn, J., & Kawann, C. Reliability of the U.S. Electricity System: Recent Trends and Current Issues. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/REPORT%20lbnl%20-%2047043.pdf Pepermans, G., Driesen, J., Haeseldonckx, D., Belmans, R., & D’haeseleer, W. (2005) Distributed Generation: Definition, Benefits and Issues. Energy Policy, 33, 787-798. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421503003069. Pickard, W. F. (2013, October) The Limits of HVDC Transmission. Energy Policy, 61, 292-300. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513001845 Prindle, B., Eldridge, M., Eckhardt, M., & Frederick, A. (2007). The twin pillars of sustainability: Synergies between energy efficiency and renewable energy technology and policy. American Council for an Energy-Efficiency Economy. Renewable Energy World. (2011). DOE closes on four major solar projects. Retrieved 3 April, 2014 from: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/09/doe-closes-on-three-major-solar- projects?cmpid=SolarNL-Tuesday-October4-2011 Roe, S. (2014, January 1). Most Efficient Solar Panels Comparison. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://sroeco.com/solar/most-efficient-solar-panels Sacramento Municipal Utility District. (2014b). Company Profile. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from https://www.smud.org/en/about-smud/company-information/company-profile.htm Sacramento Municipal Utility District. (2014a). History. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from https://www.smud.org/en/about-smud/company-information/history/ Sacramento Municipal Utility District. (2014a). SMUD’s Service Territory. SMUD. Retrieved April 2, 2014 from https://www.smud.org/en/about-smud/company-information/board-of-directors/ward- map.htm Sacramento Municipal Utility District. (2014b). Power Content Label. Power Sources. Retrieved April 3, 2014 from https://www.smud.org/en/about-smud/company-information/documents/Power-Content- Label.pdf San Diego Gas & Electric. (2013). Update to Prepared Direct Testimony on behalf of San Diego Gas and Electric Company, CPUC Hearing 70876:. 6 Dec. San Diego Gas and Electric. (n.d.). Smart Meter Opt Out Program. Retrieved May 15, 2014 from: http://www.sdge.com/residential/smart-meter-opt-out/smart-meter-opt-out-program BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 114 The City Council of Santa Barbara. (2012). Draft Santa Barbara Climate Action Plan. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0 CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fservices.santabarbaraca.gov%2FCAP%2F%2FMG104527%2F AS104531%2FAS104545%2FAS104550%2FAI108425%2FDO108426%2F2.DOCX&ei=MI-WU- TKOIy6oQTz8oCgDg&usg=AFQjCNHoyWbT8D2- hJVfaQygpar3f_1Bag&sig2=xSg6uMGtjVm0nq8f3l8icg S&C Electric Company. (n.d.). PureWave® Community Energy Storage System. Ratings. Retrieved May 16, 2014 from: http://www.sandc.com/products/energy-storage/ces.asp Sanseverino, E. R., Luisa Di Silvestre, M., Giuseppe Ippolito, M., De Paola, A., & Lo Re, G. (2011). An execution, monitoring and replanning approach for optimal energy management in microgrids. Energy, 36(5), 3429–3436. Shlatz, E., Buch, N., & Chan, M. (2013, November) Distributed Generation Integration Cost Study. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/2013publications/CEC-200-2013-007/CEC-200-2013- 007.pdf Shephard News Team. (2013). Fort Bliss microgrid enters demonstration phase. Retrieved May 1, 2014 from: http://www.shephardmedia.com/news/mil-log/fort-bliss-microgrid-enters-demonstration- phase/ Selim Ustun, T., Ozansoy, C., & Zayegh, A. (2011). Recent developments in microgrids and example cases around the world—a review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(8), 4030–4041. SmartGrid.gov. Southern California Edison Company (Tehachapi Wind Energy Storage Project). Retrieved May 9, 2014, from https://www.smartgrid.gov/project/southern_california_edison_company_tehachapi_wind_energ y_storage_project Sonoma Clean Power. (2013). Community Choice Aggregation Implementation Plan and Statement of Intent. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from: http://2tgc4v3kjp5mrjtdo183d8716ao.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp- content/uploads/2013/12/Sonoma-Clean-Power-CCA-Implementation-Plan-2013-08-20.pdf Sonoma Clean Power. (2014) Implementation Plan. Chapter 5 - Program Phase In. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: http://2tgc4v3kjp5mrjtdo183d8716ao.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp- content/uploads/2013/12/Sonoma-Clean-Power-CCA-Implementation-Plan-2013-08-20.pdf Sonoma Clean Power. (n.d.). Residential Rates. Retrieved May 8, 2014 from: http://sonomacleanpower.org/for-my-home/rates/ Sonoma Clean Power. (n.d.) Residential Rates. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from: from:http://sonomacleanpower.org/for-my-home/rates/ South Bay Cities. (n.d.) Map. Retrieved May 16, 2014 from: http://www.southbaycities.org/about-us BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 115 Southern California Edison. (2010). Renewable power purchase and sale agreement between Southern California Edison Company and Caithness 251 Wind LLC. Southern California Edison. (2014). Powering Southern California for 125+ Years. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from https://www.sce.com/wps/portal/home/about-us/who-we-are/!ut/p/b1/rVRdT8IwFP0r- rDH0gvtvnyb0cCQYBSIri-k2- 7GDKxzK2L89RZCoia6QWIfmt7mnpPTc09KBX2mopRvRS51oUq53tfCWfa9YTAKZxAO59yG8Hrgs uF1yOa3tmmITAP8sQI44P0h3I7G93v8A4OQPcB0FgQMwKFPVFCRlLrSKxo1CS4TVWos9RJLC45nC 2Sstvpi21iwWymyQyJr3AMrmWOKTZGXhyopUhq5WcqBAyOZEyPhntsn0k58s6W2dNCL08w7ym 7R1fLsG86P-JaGDtsOz-4wrss60SVyTEW-VvFhjFFQxszLqagxwxrr3rY21yutq- bKAuPrbtfLlcrX2EvUxoLfICvVaPr8s5NGxgn3TxV3Np19jUYmzPYTGZOBiw7hcQpEmikRHz2fY2pz CVkXIfw34eBswvEJ6SheXl9FYKK9j_C7sa0z2-06533-XedJIW8nXPT_m5CdTTg-4Xs538kfv0S1WWy8l- xu4jyOPib4RGTsAbOrt49JNp0eq3V--QkMWT0J/dl4/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/ Southern California Edison (2014a). Applications of Southern California Edison Company for approval of optional green rate. CPUC Hearing 1401007. January 10. Southern California Edison (2014b). Amendments to prepared testimony of Southern California Edison Company in support of application for approval of optional green rate. CPUC Hearing 1401007. March 11. Southern California Edison. Understanding Your Energy Bill for Net Energy Metering Customers. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from https://www.sce.com/wps/wcm/connect/101d6d56-55b2-438c-bc79- 75b1fca5b2be/NEM_FactSheet01012012.pdf?MOD=AJPERES Southern California Edison Smartgrid Roadmap. (n.d.). Smart Grid Engineering and Architecture. Distribution System Design. Retrieved April 15, 2014 from: https://www.sce.com/NR/rdonlyres/BFA28A07-8643-4670-BD4B- 215451A80C05/0/SCE_SmartGrid_Strategy_and_Roadmap.pdf Swan, Heather. Electronic Mail. May 30, 2014a. Swan, Heather. Personal interview. May 26, 2014b. Terra-Gen Power (2008). Wind projects.Retrieved March 29, 2014 from: http://www.terra- genpower.com/Projects/Projects_Wind.aspx. The County of Sonoma. (2013). Second Amended and Restated Joint Powers Agreement. Retrieved on May 5th, 2014 from https://sonomacleanpower.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/SCPA-Second-Amended-Joint-Powers- Agreement-Approved-7-25-13.pdf Thomas, Paul. (2011). Community Energy Storage. American Electric Power. Retrieved May 1, 2014 from: https://www.smartgrid.gov/sites/default/files/doc/files/American_Electric_Power_Community_Energ y_Storage_201109.pdf BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 116 T.R. Ayodele et al., Vol.2, No.4, 2012. Challenges of Grid Integration of Wind Power on Power System Integrity: A Review. Retrieved April 1, 2014 from: http://www.ijrer.org/index.php/ijrer/article/viewFile/317/pdf U.S. Department of Energy (2003). California 50m wind resource map [Map]. Retrieved December 10, 2013 from: http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/maps_template.asp?stateab=ca U.S. Energy Information Administration. (n.d.). How much electricity does an American home use? Retrieved April 15, 2014 from: http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3 U.S. Energy Information Administration (2014). Levelized cost and levelized avoided cost of new generation resources in the annual energy outlook 2014. U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2013, February 27). Energy Explained, Your Guide To Understanding Energy. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=electricity_home U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2012, April 27). What is the Electric Power Grid, and What Are Some Challenges it Faces?. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/article/power_grid.cfm. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. (2014). Renewable energy projects approved since the beginning of calendar year 2009. Retrieved March 29, 2014 from: http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/energy/renewable_energy/Renewable_Energy_Projects_Approve d_to_Date.html United States Census. (2010.) Retrieved May 31, 2014 from: http://www.census.gov/2010census/ U.S. Department of Energy Office of Electricity Delivery & Energy Reliability. National Electric Transmission Congestion Studies. Retrieved May 8, 2014, from http://energy.gov/oe/services/electricity-policy-coordination-and-implementation/transmission- planning/national Whitfield, John. (n.d.). The Electricians Guide fifth edition. The Radial Circuit. Retrieved April 1, 2014 from: http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Book/6.3.3.htm Wilson, A. (2009). The folly of building-integrated wind. Environmental Building News. http://www2.buildinggreen.com/article/folly-building-integrated- wind?ip_login_no_cache=881cc2ad87392af394f4d8dedac46c87. Retrieved June 1, 2014. Wiser, R., & Bolinger, M. (2013). 2012 wind technologies market report. U.S. Department of Energy. Weisenmiller, R. (Director) (2014, April 21). Robert Weisenmiller Lecture. Environment 188B: Challenge of Low-Carbon Electricity in California. Lecture conducted from University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 117 APPENDIX BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 118 Case Studies Lancaster Community Choice Aggregation Lancaster is a city sixty miles north of Los Angeles and is known for its sunny days and open desert landscape. It is home to many photovoltaic projects and has quickly become recognized for the bounty of its renewable resources like wind and sunshine. As the city progresses towards its municipal goal of net zero status it seeks to do so primarily through forming a CCA. Lancaster is very unique in that it is the first city to begin forming a CCA in SCE territory. This case study will attempt to track its progress in hope of better understanding the necessary steps to establishing a CCA. Ms. Heather Swan, the senior project coordinator for the Lancaster Power Authority (LPA) was able to share information with the UCLA student group by commenting on the status of the LCCA. She began by explaining that the JPA that Lancaster formed, the LPA, did not originally form for the purpose of aggregating powers from outside the community. Rather, she explained that JPAs are typically formed so as to protect general operating funds. The LPA was formed so that the City of Lancaster, Lancaster Redevelopment Agency, and the Lancaster Housing Authority could financially support one another.279 The original intention of the LPA was not to aggregate other cities outside of Lancaster, but this is one possible application for the future. Table A.1. Lancaster’s Total Load for 2013 280 Type of Load Accounts Load in 2013 Municipal (GWh) 640 38 Residential (GWh) 48,900 383.5 Commercial (GWh) 5,500 345 Table A.2. Lancaster Community Choice Aggregation Phase Enrollment 281 Phase Number of Accounts Phase 1: May 2015 640 municipal accounts Phase 2: November 2015 4,500 commercial accounts Phase 3: February 2016 and/or November 2016 37,500 residential accounts 279 (Swan, 2014a) 280 Ibid. 281 (LCCA Implementation Plan, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 119 There are two joint power agreements that Lancaster is involved in. The first authorizes the High Desert Power Authority (HDPA) and the second establishes the previously mentioned LPA. Heather Swan shed some light on the difference between the two joint power agreements. Ms. Swan noted that the HDPA is made with Pittsburg, CA, while the LPA is currently only citywide. Pittsburg is located in the San Francisco Bay Area, forty miles northeast of the City of San Francisco. The sole reason that Lancaster is involved with Pittsburg is not for CCA purposes, but rather it is so that Lancaster may gain technical expertise.282 In 2007 the CAISO approved an energy transmission project proposed by the city of Pittsburg. The transmission project was to build a submersible 400 MW transmission line that would begin at the power generation facility in Pittsburg, run through the San Francisco Bay, and deliver power to the City of San Francisco.283 The City of Lancaster is particularly interested in this technical expertise because it is in the project phase of proposing a transmission line that would run east to west in north eastern Lancaster. The proposed transmission line would provide relief to the grid from electricity congestion.284 In unison with CCA efforts Lancaster is trying to acquire ownership of its 17,856 street lights from SCE. If successful, Lancaster would be able to save an estimated 1.5 million dollars on operating costs. The application will soon be sent to the CPUC.285 Any transfer of assets must be approved by the governing body that oversees any of the IOUs, which is the CPUC. According to Ms. Swan, the CPUC has not yet commented on this proposal and thus the acquisition is still awaiting approval. In the Antelope Valley Press, a Lancaster local newspaper, the author wrote that Lancaster officials desire to buy the lights from SCE because they believe that they can more cheaply supply energy to their street light system.286 As mentioned this purchase will decrease the amount paid to Edision by an expected 1.5 million dollars annually. The price tag for buying the streets lights is 12 million dollars. Lancaster expects the CPUC to respond within 9 to 12 months.287 Notably, Lancaster will be the first city serviced by SCE to purchase their street lights from the IOU.288 Hermosa Beach officials should take note of this attempted acquisition because if approved it could be one way for Hermosa Beach to decrease its expenditures in energy distribution. Once the CCA is formed, the City of Lancaster plans to enroll customers in 3 phases. Information is presented in the table below. Once the program starts, each phase will be supplied with 35% of its load coming from renewable sources. As found on the CPUC website California’s RPS was established in 2002 under Senate Bill 1078, accelerated in 2006 under Senate Bill 107 and expanded in 2011 under Senate Bill 2. The RPS program requires IOUs, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33% of total procurement by 2020.289 The Lancaster CCA will exceed this requirement at its inception in 2015 with a 35% renewables portfolio. 282 Ibid. 283 (Breslin, 2011) 284 (Swan, 2014b) 285 (Swan, 2014b) 286 (AVP, 2014) 287 (Swan, 2014b) 288 (AVP, 2014) 289 (CPUC, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 120 In February 2014, AB-2145 Electricity: community choice aggregation was introduced into the legislature. This bill specifically addresses CCAs in California. This bill states that after January 1st 2015 any CCA that is formed must no longer be an opt out program at its inception, but rather an opt in program.290 This could potentially make CCA registration much more tedious and detract potential members. When a new CCA forms all residents in the CCA’s territory would remain in contract with their IOU. This could pose a threat to the working capital that a CCA is dependent on for financing and operations. Ms. Swan, the LPA project manager, was asked if there is any rush to enroll members into the LCCA before the January 1st 2015 deadline. As of now the LCCA proposal of enrollment does not begin until May 2015 with Lancaster’s municipal accounts. Ms. Swan stated that the May 2015 enrollment date cannot feasibly be started earlier and thus Lancaster cannot rush to form their CCA before the January 1st 2015 deadline. Rather she noted that Lancaster city officials are trying to work with California legislative officials to rework AB 2145. The goal of this case study is to evaluate the necessary action required to best form a CCA. This case study is particularly important because also like the City of Hermosa Beach, the City of Lancaster also falls under the service of SCE. Ms. Swan mentioned that as of to date, SCE has posed no barriers for Lancaster’s energy independence. However the barriers that have been cumbersome for Lancaster mainly include financing. In the LCCA Implementation Plan some of the start up costs listed include hiring staff, acquiring power producer contracts, and general consulting costs. Another labor filled and time intensive undertaking is the feasibility report. Ms. Swan mentioned that as a city tries to find out how to pay for any energy independence programs it must also figure out if a CCA is the best option for its community. This is done using the feasibility report. When looking closely at table 9, as found on page 38 of the LCCA Implementation Plan, one may believe that under the LCCA residents would be paying more per kWh than. SCE charges $0.085 while the LCCA is projected to charge $0.10.291 Ms. Swan mentioned that $0.085 is only the baseload price for SCE. After SCE customers exceed the allotted baseload energy provided they are required to begin paying higher rates. This is part of SCE’s 4 tier pricing approach. In reality most SCE customers will pay more than $0.085 for kWh because they progress into the third and fourth tier.292 Ms. Swan said that typically SCE residents pay about $0.132 per kWh. And importantly, this means that the LCCA does project to offer a cheaper option for residential electricity than SCE. 290 (CA Legislative Info, 2014) 291 (LCCA Implementation Plan, 2014) 292 (Swan, 2014b) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 121 Table A.3. Comparison of SCE rates and LCCA draft rates293 Customer Segment SCE Specific Rate SCE ($/kWh) Initial Draft LCCA Rate Summer Winter Large and Medium Commercial TOU-8 (>500kW) On-Peak $0.34217 N/A Mid-Peak $0.1069 $0.05817 Off-Peak $0.03389 $0.03875 GS-3 (200kW<>500kW) On-Peak $0.30124 N/A Mid-Peak $0.10195 $0.05618 Off-Peak $0.03264 $0.03718 GS-2 (20kW<>200kW) On-Peak $0.30228 N/A $0.20 Mid-Peak $0.10641 $0.05979 $0.06 Off-Peak $0.03431 $0.03909 $0.03 Small Commercial GS-1 (<20kW) On-Peak $0.15038 N/A $0.20 Mid-Peak $0.10589 $0.08106 $0.08 Off-Peak $0.07631 $0.06971 $0.06 Residential Usage $0.08592 $0.08592 $0.10 Municipal Various Various Various $0.08 Street Lights (LS-1, LS-3) Various Various TBD 293 (LCC Implementation Plan, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 122 Marin Clean Energy (MCE) Marin County is connected to San Francisco County by the Golden Gate Bridge. It is 828 square miles, which is 600 square miles larger than San Francisco County.294 MCE is the CCA formed by Marin County. It was created in 2008, as the first CCA program in California, and began serving customers in 2010. MCE is technically able to service those parties through which it has partnership by the JPA, Marin Energy Authority. The thirteen parties that have been a part of the JPA since its birth include five towns, seven cities, and the County of Marin. Notably all parties are in close proximity to one another. Up until July 2013, only Marin County residents and businesses were serviced by MCE. Since July of 2013 the City of Richmond has begun receiving service by MCE through MCE’s Light Green option, which ensures that 50% of energy procurement is from renewable sources.295 Table A.4. Load Breakdown for Marin County296 Type of Load Marin (2010) Non-Residential (GWh) 716.66 Residential (GWh) 705.54 Total (GWh) 1,422.21 Table A.5. MCE Phase Enrollment297 Phase Number of Accounts Phase 1: 2010 9,000 municipal and commercial accounts Phase 2 A&B: 2011&2012 80,000 commercial and residential accounts Phase 3: 2013-2014 All remaining customers and Richmond* MCE Account Manager, Ben Choi, provided much of the information that is listed in this case study. He was contacted via telephone for an interview and via email for follow up questions. 294 (Google Maps, 2014) 295 (MCE, 2014a) 296 (California Energy Commission, 2010) 297 (MCE Implementation Plan, 2012) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 123 The reason the CCA formed was because Marin County did not have other opportunities instead of a CCA. Marin was proactive in combating climate change and took practical steps in doing so. One of those steps for example was replacing the municipal fleet of cars with a cleaner fleet. Deciding to form a CCA was not in opposition to another choice, rather deciding to form a CCA was the natural progression of tactics in decreasing the amount of carbon emissions brought about by Marin County.298 MCE provides two renewable energy plans for its customers. The first is the Light Green option which incorporates 50% of the energy procured from renewable sources and the Deep Green option which incorporates 100%. Although residents of Marin County and Richmond tend to be more concerned about environmental practices, price is still the chief factor in decision making. Costs for MCE and PG&E service are very close. Through inference, residents likely decided to remain enrolled in the CCA for reasons like: environmental concerns, wanting to take hold of energy independence, or simply doing it because it was recommended by a friend. Mr. Choi, explained that one of the most difficult barriers to forming a CCA were the pressures from PG&E. The relationship that Marin has had with PG&E has been an evolving one. In some ways they are competitors and in others they are collaborators.299 One way PG&E acted as a competitor was during the MCE’s attempt to enroll customers. PG&E spent millions of dollars trying to convince customers in Marin County that a CCA was not a good choice. For example PG&E sponsored the Coalition for Reliable and Affordable Electricity which sent a series of mailers to residents in Marin that spoke negatively about MCE.300 As of the 2008 tax returns, the president of the Coalition was Dan Richards. He was also the former senior vice president for public policy and government relations for PG&E.301 CCAs, also, do not have private stakeholders who can contribute funds, so financing their formation is a another large barrier. Table A.6. MCE Enrollment Percentage302 Opt-in % Opt-out % Overall MCE Enrollment% 76.40% 23.60% Marin MCE Enrollment% 74% 26% Richmond MCE Enrollment% 82.50% 17.50% 298 (Choi, 2014a) 299 Ibid. 300 (Halstead, 2010) 301 Ibid. 302 (Choi, 2014b) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 124 A majority of the renewable energy that MCE produces comes from wind. For example the Deep Green option is comprised of 100% wind energy.303 The way it works is that electricity that is produced via wind turbines is not funneled directly to MCE customers. The turbines contracted by MCE simply produce the energy and uploaded it onto the grid whenever the wind blows. In order for MCE to ensure that they can provide enough energy from renewable sources they have to make sure to consume as much as or less electricity than they produce. Companies in California are building infrastructure to harness renewable energy.304 This is adding more renewable energy as a part of the base load power. California as a whole will have to begin incorporating technologies and strategies to make this renewable energy more reliable. This means that there has to be a growth in battery storage, intelligent communications i.e. smart grid, and energy conservation. The staff at MCE is employed by the JPA, Marin Energy Authority. The staff is dedicated to accomplish the goals set out by the council members. Further, the council members are elected by the individual parties that comprise the JPA. For example the City of Richmond would elect a member to the council as representation for their city. Table A.7. Sample Residential Cost Comparison305 Cost per kWh Price for 508 kWh Service Fee Total MCE $0.08 $39.62 $5.89 $45.51 PG&E $0.09 $46.73 0 $46.73 MCE charges $0.078/kWh in the E-1/Res-1 category. For the same category PG&E charges $0.092/kWh. Although Marin is able to charge less there is an $5.89 added service fee towards MCE customers to cover the cost of using PG&E transmission lines. Given an energy bill of 508 kWh, the MCE customer would pay $0.72 less for that pay cycle than a PG&E customer.306 The benefit is that 50% of the energy MCE offers comes from renewable sources compared to 19% offered by PG&E. Given that prices are close to the same, it is likely that the reason why customers opt out is not because the CCA’s service is more expensive, but because they do not understand the function of a CCA. This highlights the importance of CCA awareness campaigns and public meetings that discuss the CCA’s environmental benefit. The primary way that MCE keeps costs down is by being a not-for-profit public agency with a fraction of the staff and costs of PG&E. Also, the primary reason for the upcoming generation investments, and FIT contracts is not to keep costs down, but rather to promote local renewable energy generation, and spur on 303 (MCE, 2014b) 304 (Choi, 2014a) 305 (MCE, 2014c) 306 Ibid. BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 125 the local green economy.307 The number one goal of MCE is to combat climate change by providing energy generated from renewable sources. One of the current topics of discussion for MCE is to potentially begin constructing its own renewable energy generation infrastructure.308 MCE has to contract power generation with IPPs, but now MCE is looking toward owning its own generation facilities leading to an even greater ability to provide reliable renewable energy. Opt out procedures have also been another area where change has been occurring frequently. The reasons why residents opt out is multi-faceted, however for whatever the reasons, they must wait for one and half years before joining the CCA again. The waiting period was initially three years, but the CPUC changed the ruling to benefit CCA programs. CCA programs would benefit most if residents could opt back in at anytime. This would logically increase enrollment. Speaking with MCE account manager Ben Choi, he further explained that if an opt out occurs after the initial sixty days of service, such as 4 months into having service with MCE, then the re-enrollment waiting period would be in effect. If, however, the customer opts out before enrollment in MCE, or within the first couple of months of service, the customer would be eligible to enroll in MCE at any time. In September of 2013, MCE received a letter from the County of Napa that expressed their interest in joining the CCA because of this MCE completed an analysis to assess the effects of Napa joining the program with Napa’s current customer size. In 2013 the County of Napa used 336,223 MWh of energy while MCE used 1,297,694 MWh. Using these numbers, adding the County of Napa would increase MCE’s demand by 25.9%. Through the analysis MCE discovered that adding Napa to the CCA would create a 3% reduction in rates to customers.309 If the City of Hermosa Beach residents or staff would like more information on financial documentation, it can be found online at: http://marincleanenergy.org/key-documents 307 (Choi, 2014a) 308 Ibid. 309 (MCE, 2014d) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 126 Sonoma Clean Power (SCP) Sonoma County is the next northernmost county from Marin County. It is home to the second operational CCA in California. SCP has followed in MCE’s footsteps by mimicking many of its decisions and operational tactics. For example SCP’s Implementation Plan is almost identical to that of MCE. It is apparent that both counties worked side by side to bring SCP online. Sonoma Clean Energy provides two renewable energy plans for its customers. The first is the CleanStart option which incorporates 33% of the energy procured from renewable sources and the EverGreen option which incorporates 100%. Costs for Sonoma and PG&E service are very close though the difference between PG&E’s service and EverGreen is a greater difference than that of MCE’s Deep Green Program. This means MCE’s customers pay less for 100% renewable energy. Currently they pay $12.52 less per month for 100% renewable energy when compared to SCP.310 SCP is working to bring customers to a 100% renewable energy rate while remaining competitive with PG&E in prices. They plan to increase their CleanStart option to 50% renewable energy by 2018.311 A majority of the renewable energy that SCP produces comes from geothermal. Additionally, the renewable energy procured by SCP is locally generated increasing green jobs and stimulating the local “green” economy. The CleanStart option incorporates 33% of energy generation from renewable sources and 37% from hydro power.312 In comparison PG&E claims 22% from renewable sources and 11% from hydro.313 All in all, SCP, like MCE is concerned primarily with increasing the amount of renewables that penetrate the energy market. Price for this energy is also a concern, but less important. The staff at SCP is employed by the JPA, Sonoma Clean Power Authority which was created specifically for SCP on December 4, 2012.314 Below are SCP’s rates in comparison to PG&E’s for each level of service. Table A.8. SCP vs. PG&E Rates315 PG&E SCP CleanStart SCP EverGreen Renewables 20% 33% 100% Residential Total Cost $80.43 $75.80 $93.30 Commercial Total Cost $348.49 $329.41 $389.91 310 (MCE, 2014) 311 (Sonoma Clean Power, 2012) 312 (Gamel, 2014) 313 Ibid. 314 (The County of Sonoma, 2013) 315 (Sonoma Clean Power, 2014) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 127 Table A.9. SCP Load Breakdown316 Type of Load Sonoma (2010) Non-Residential (GWh) 1,520.57 Residential (GWh) 1,354.34 Total (GWh) 2,874.91 Sonoma County’s load in 2010 is depicted in the chart above. Not all of the cities in Sonoma County are serviced by SCP. SCP has started phasing in municipal and commercial accounts. This is part of the enrollment first phase and started in May 2014. The first phase enrolled municipal and some commercial accounts because these two groups are less likely to opt out and their load can be better estimated. Correctly estimating load allows the CCA to more easily procure energy. The planned phases of enrollment for SCP customers are shown in the chart below. Table A.10. Sonoma Clean Power Phase Enrollment317 Phase Number of Accounts Phase 1: 2014 20,000 municipal and commercial accounts Phase 2: 2015 60,000 commercial and residential accounts Phase 3: 2016 All remaining accounts 316 (California Energy Commission, 2010) ← Same from CCA Section 317 (SCP Implementation Plan, 2013) BruiNeutral | Assessing Options to Deliver Carbon Neutral Electricity to Hermosa Beach | June 2014 128 June 2, 2014 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council June 10. 2014 STUDY SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING, 2014-15 BUDGET RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council consider the following items: 1. Sewer System, Upgrade and/or Possible Annexation to County Presentation by Jeff Cooper, PENCO Engineering (City Council received a bound copy at the workshop; it is attached here for purposes of the agenda.) 2. Review of 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan (begins on page 251 of the Budget) 3. Receive and file Answers to Councilmember Questions/Items from Workshop (attached as page 70) 4. Receive and File Questions, Comments Regarding CIP Program from Councilmember Tucker with Answers from Public Works Staff (attached as page 101) 5. Continue Review of Budget, Questions (review of the budget at the workshop ended on page 91 of the budget) BACKGROUND: A budget workshop was held on May 22, 2014. Presentations were given on: the Fiscal Health Model from the Center for Performance Based Budgeting; the city’s pension and other post- employment benefit (OPEB) obligations by independent actuary, John Bartel; and an overview of the budget. Councilmembers reviewed the budget and asked questions, leaving off on page 91 with the City Clerk’s department. A study session is being held tonight prior to the City Council meeting as well as a public hearing (with no adoption of the budget) during the regular meeting as well. Another public hearing will be held, with budget adoption planned, for June 24, 2014. ANALYSIS: Sewer System Report It is recommended that the City Council hear the presentation by Jeff Cooper, PENCO Engineering Consistent with City Council adopted policies for study sessions, the study session on June 10th is intended to focus on overall policy direction and guidelines relating to the future of the sewer system. Staff will provide options and make a recommendation on next steps for consideration by the City Council at the June 24, 2014 public hearing. Review of 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan (begins on page 251 of the Budget) Some members of the City Council expressed an interest in adding funds to the citywide Street Improvement CIP and to the 8th Street Safe Route to School Project, which is currently unfunded. Citywide Street Improvements. The City’s Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is currently 74.5. We are on a track to reach a PCI of 77 in five years with funding levels as budgeted. As a comparison, the Los Angeles client base of the Pavement Management Study consultant, Bucknam, has a PCI of 66.2; the Orange County client base has a PCI of 81.1. (see attached table on page 68.) Overall, 1 2 CITY OF HERMOSA BEAC H SEWER STUDY M AY 22, 2 0 1 4 P R E P A R E D B Y : P E N C O E N G I N E E R I N G , I N C . 1 6 8 4 2 V O N K A R M A N A V E N U E , S U I T E 1 5 0 I R V I N E , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 6 0 6 3 INLAND EMPIRE IRVINE LONG BEACH 255 E. Rincon Street, Suite 325 16842 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 150 100 Oceangate, Suite 1120 Corona, CA 92879 Irvine, CA 92606 Long Beach, CA 90802 951-736-2040 • Fax 951-736-5292 949-753-8111 • Fax 949-753-0775 562-264-1111 • Fax 562-264-1101 www.pencoeng.com May 22, 2014 Mr. Frank Senteno, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 SUBJECT: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, SEWER STUDY Dear Mr. Senteno: Enclosed please find our summary report for the City of Hermosa Beach, Sewer Study. The report covers primarily the following: 1) Agency Interviews 2) Sewer Fee Review of Adjacent Cities 3) Meeting with the County 4) Sewer Service Charge Study The details of each of the above items are located in the same numerical order in the Appendix. The highlights of the report are as follows: 1) The Single Family charge for 5 sample Cities and the County Single Family Unit $/year Manhattan Beach (2013) $341.25 El Segundo (2013) $ 97.59 Redondo Beach* (2013-2014) $159.00 Pico Rivera (Proposed 2014-2015) $ 50.50 West Hollywood (2013-2014) $ 38.67 County of Los Angeles (2013/2014) $ 47.50 2) The City can levy their own sewer charge by going through a Proposition 218 process or annex to the County and they will levy a sewer charge. 3) The City can annex to the County’s maintenance district but up to $14 million in improvements will have to be constructed by the City to get their sewers to County standards. 4) The budgeted cost for the City to maintain their own sewers is $339,454 for Fiscal Year 2014-2015. 4 5) If the County levied their charge of $50.50/year for a single family home in Hermosa Beach for Fiscal Year 2014-2015, it would generate approximately $520,000 in revenue for the County. 6) If the City levied their own charge, at an approximate rate of $31.75/year/single family home, it would generate $339,454 for the City of Hermosa Beach. 7) At the County rate of $50.50/year/single family home, the City could generate approximately $545,000 in revenue for the City of Hermosa Beach. We appreciate the assistance and cooperation the City of Hermosa Beach has shown us during the course of our work. If we can be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, PENCO Engineering, Inc. Jeffrey M. Cooper, P.E. Vice President 5 City of Hermosa Beach Summary Report I. Introduction Scope of Services: Task 1 – Agency Interviews Interviews (4-5) will be conducted with Cities that are currently utilizing the County for maintenance of sewers through the Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District. Interviews will be focused on their customer satisfaction – what has gone well, what hasn’t. It is planned that the interview will be conducted face to face. Proposed agencies to be interviewed are:  Pico Rivera  Lawndale  Rancho Palos Verdes  West Hollywood*  Irwindale* *Contract basis only Task 2 – Sewer Fee Review PENCO will determine what adjacent cities (4 to 5) to Hermosa Beach have sewer fees. The amount of the fees, rate and method and durations will also be determined. The scope of what the fee can be spent on will be determined also. In addition, we will determine what kind of sewer fee for Hermosa Beach can be established and what the process is for approval. What the state of California statutes allows on how the money can be spent will also be determined. Task 3 – County Meetings Prepare for meetings with the County (up to two meetings) to discuss how the details of the annexation process would work. This also includes assisting with negotiating better terms and conditions between the City and the County. This includes also the pros and cons analysis of the City keeping the sewer versus annexation to the County, including using a consultant instead of the County for plan preparation, construction services, etc., the merits of maintaining sewers by the City versus the County, and the cost of improving the sewer to the City standards versus County standards. Task 4 – Summary Report A summary report will be prepared summarizing the results of Tasks 1-3. PENCO will attend up to two City Council meetings to go over the summary report. 6 II. Task 1 Results – Agency Interviews Five cities were interviewed: Pico Rivera, Lawndale, Rancho Palos Verdes, West Hollywood, and Irwindale. Each interview was documented with a memo, summarizing the meeting. Each memo is attached in Appendix 1. Generally speaking all five cities are satisfied with the County staff – Service and equipment. Typically, sanitary sewer overflows (SSO) response times are in the 1 - 2 hour time frame. The City of Hermosa Beach SSO response times are currently 15 minutes. There were mixed results regarding the financial aspects of being with the County. Two cities, Lawndale and Rancho Palos Verdes, were just fine with the County levying the sewer charge and collecting the fee. These two cities never see the fees collected or the actual cost of the County services. The City of Pico Rivera has decided to leave the CSMD for financial reasons. Their analysis shows that they can net a savings of $400,000 per year by doing everything themselves. Next year in early spring they will be re-establishing a sewer fee levied and collected by the City. All sewer operation and maintenance will be done by that City themselves. The City of West Hollywood when they incorporated decided not to join the CSMD but to contract with the County for the same services. The City established their own sewer fee and went through a Prop 218 establishment process. The City likes that they have their own fee and have completed control of the financial aspects of the sewer fund. The City’s main complaint is that they have had a lot of problems with the County’s billings not being accurate and it is a hassle to get them fixed. They often get charged for time spent on other Cities. The City of Irwindale contract with the County and is not in CSMD. They do not levy their own fee. The County invoices the City for their services every month and the City pays the bill. The City said the County is often slow in billing the City and this is often inconvenient as it causes problems in their financial cycles. They often have to call the County and ask them to bill them. The final comment I received from at least two cities was about getting reports on the sewers required by other agencies. One City commented that they can’t get a report regarding just their City and the other commented that the County is just not set up to generate reports for individual cities. Task 2 Results – Sewer Fee Review Five Cities and the County were reviewed regarding their sewer fees: Manhattan Beach, El Segundo, Redondo Beach, Pico Rivera, and West Hollywood and the County of Los Angeles. The basic sewer fee per residential unit per year is as follows: 7 Single Family: Single Family Unit $/year Manhattan Beach (2013) $341.25 El Segundo (2013) $ 97.59 Redondo Beach* (2013-2014) $159.00 Pico Rivera (Proposed 2014-2015) $ 50.50 West Hollywood (2013-2014) $ 38.67 County of Los Angeles (2013/2014) $ 47.50 *Original $60.00/year in 2003 In each case, the basic unit is based upon the single family unit and all other fees are in proportion to the single family unit. The rate structures for the above listed agencies are attached in Appendix 2. Authority The California Health and Safety Code Section 5471 and California Government Code Section 54344 allows charges and collecting fees and charges providing service to users in a City to operate and maintain wastewater systems. The fees collected can be used for operation and maintenance sewer rehabilitation projects and meeting bond rate covenant requirements for water collection improvements. Establishment An establishment of a sewer fee or charge per the authority above shall follow the requirements of Proposition 218. The basic steps are as follows: 1) City Council orders a sewer fee rate report. The fee will be calculated and is based upon a characteristic of the property, such as the size of the parcel or the use to which the property is put to use. The fee to each parcel should be calculated either individually or by reference to a formula or schedule. 2) The City Council accepts the sewer fee rate report and sets a public hearing on the proposed fee. 3) The City shall provide a written notice by mail of the proposed fee or charge to the record owner of each identified parcels. The date of the hearing must be at least 45 days after the mailing. 4) Concluding the hearing, the City must consider all protests against the proposed fee or charge but only written protests are counted. If written protests against the proposed fee or charge are presented by a majority of owners of the identified parcels, the city shall not impose the fee or charge. 8 III. Task 3 Results – County Meetings A meeting was held on December 17, 2013 with the Los Angeles County Public Works and the City. The detailed minutes of the meeting are attached in Appendix 3. The highlights area as follows: 1) An estimated $14 million in improvements must be made by the City prior to releasing maintenance to LACPW. 2) Requirements to Annex Sewer Lines to LACPW: a. City to provide letter stating commitment to annex sewer system to LACPW b. City to state when and which sewer lines are going to be annexed to LACPW c. City Council to approve formal request (by way of City Resolution) d. Public hearing at LACPW Board meeting (held in downtown Los Angeles Office) 3) LACPW will require City to provide Public Outreach to residents, business owners, etc. (tentatively summer of 2014) 4) Entire process for sewer annexation is estimated at 6 months 5) If annexation is completed by August 2015, fee will take effect in property tax on November 2015. 6) LACPW prefers not to be contracted out for sewer O&M by a city 7) LACPW will not guarantee response to overflows within 1 hour of service request 8) The letter to LACPW can request terms and conditions that are more favorable to the City, such as an exemption on the 6 inch line replacement. The following Table I describes the pros and cons of the City annexation into the County’s Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District (CSMD). Table 2 illustrates the City’s sewer budgeted costs for operation and maintenance for the Fiscal Year 2014-15 and the actual costs for the last few years. If the City wanted to levy their own sewer service charge (as described in Appendix 4) to cover the budgeted cost of $339,454 for Fiscal Year 2014-15, the charge would be approximately $31.75/year/single family home. At the proposed rate of $50.50/year/single family home by the County, the City could generate approximately $545,000 in revenue. The difference of $205,546 could be used on a pay-as-you-go basis for sewer rehabilitation or funds could be borrowed against that revenue stream to make more sewer rehabilitation improvements more immediately. This difference is based upon budgeted costs. Actual costs could be less and therefore the difference could be greater. 9 Table 1 City of Hermosa Beach Annexation into the County’s Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District (CSMD) PROS CONS 1) Outsource operations and maintenance of the City’s sewers to the County. The City will no longer operate and maintain their sewers with savings going to the City. 1) City loses control over their sewers but still owns them. 2) Cities interviewed are happy with the services provided by the County. 2) Currently, response times to sewer overflows by the City are 15 minutes; County response times are 1-2 hours. One City interviewed said “they don’t treat us like a client.” 3) County would establish and collect a sewer fee to pay for O+M within the City. The rate for 2013-14 is $47.50/year/single family resident. The rate will be $50.50/year/single family resident for 2014-15. 3) If the City established the sewer fee, they control the amount, the cost and the revenue stream that could go to sewer improvement. If the County levees the fee, left over revenue stays with the County. The City of Pico Rivera is de-annexing from CSMD because of financial savings they will receive. 4) The County can generate reports required by federal and state reporting agencies. 4) The reports often are hard to get and are not separated into one City. 5) The County requires that $14 million in improvements be made to the City’s sewers to get them to County standards. Many of these improvements are needed and overdue. 5) If the City improved their sewers to City standards then the City could save approximately $2.5 million in improvements by not upgrading 6 inch sewers to 8 inch sewers as required by the County. 10 Storm 2014-15 Sewer Drain 160 Sewer Fund Budget Req 3102 Sewers/Storm Drains 3102-4100 Personal Services 3102-4102 Regular Salaries1 82,604 38,489 44,115 3102-4106 Regular Overtime 0 0 0 3102-4111 Accrual Cash In2 7,205 3,386 3,819 3102-4180 Retirement1 15,205 6,725 8,480 3102-4188 Employee Benefits1 19,452 8,514 10,938 3102-4189 Medicare Benefits1 1,211 565 646 3102-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits2 6,213 2,734 3,479 (OPEB) Total Personal Services 131,890 60,413 71,477 3102-4200 Contract Services 3102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 545,365 286,330 259,035 3102-4251 Contract Service/Govt 37,756 1,940 35,816 Total Contract Services 583,121 288,270 294,851 3102-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3102-4303 Utilities 994 994 0 3102-4309 Maintenance Materials 19,000 7,600 11,400 3102-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 667 267 400 3102-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 48,114 7,217 40,897 3102-4396 Insurance User Charges 42,459 16,984 25,475 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 111,234 33,062 78,173 Subtotal Sewers/Storm Drains 826,245 381,745 444,500 Remove one time budget items (130,000)(65,000)(65,000) Total Sewers/Storm Drains 696,245 316,745 379,500 11 715 Fund Equipment Replacement Fund- Sewer 3102 Sewers/Storm Drains 715-3102-4201 Crawler Maintenance 5,000 0 5,000 715-3102-4309 Maint. Materials 1,000 400 600 715-3102-4310 Motor Fuels/Lubes 5,825 2,330 3,495 715-3102-4311 Auto Maintenance 2,384 954 1,430 715-3102-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 2,032 2,032 0 715-3102-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 27,137 3,740 23,397 715-3102-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0 0 0 715-3102-5403 Vehicles 33,135 13,254 19,881 715 Fund Total Sewers/Storm Drains 76,513 22,709 53,804 Total Estimated Costs Operations & Maint.772,758 339,454 433,304 Sewer Capital Improvement Projects CIP Sewer Improvements - Various (Prior Year Carryforward) 251,675 251,675 0 CIP Sewer Improvements - Various 519,515 519,515 0 Total Capital Improvement Project Expenditures 771,190 771,190 0 Total Estimated Costs 1,543,948 1,110,644 433,304 1 'Salaries', 'Retirement' and 'Benefits' based on percentages derived from analysis of Public Works Crew Daily Worksheets for the last 12 months. 2 Allocation for 'Accrual Cash In' based on percentages derived for 'Salaries' and allocation for 'OPEB' based on percentages derived for 'Retirement'. 12 2013-14 Storm Yr. End Est Sewer Drain 160 Sewer Fund 3102 Sewers/Storm Drains 3102-4100 Personal Services 3102-4102 Regular Salaries1 110,970 52,156 58,814 3102-4106 Regular Overtime 0 0 0 3102-4111 Accrual Cash In2 9,671 4,545 5,126 3102-4180 Retirement1 17,622 7,754 9,868 3102-4188 Employee Benefits1 21,990 9,676 12,314 3102-4189 Medicare Benefits 1,691 744 947 3102-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits2 14,386 6,330 8,056 (OPEB) Total Personal Services 176,330 81,204 95,126 3102-4200 Contract Services 3102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 473,290 220,955 252,335 3102-4251 Contract Service/Govt 27,845 1,940 25,905 Total Contract Services 501,135 222,895 278,240 3102-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3102-4303 Utilities 941 941 0 3102-4309 Maintenance Materials 19,000 7,600 11,400 3102-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 667 267 400 3102-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 51,575 7,736 43,839 3102-4396 Insurance User Charges 35,545 14,218 21,327 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 107,728 30,762 76,966 Total Sewers/Storm Drains 785,193 334,861 450,332 13 715 Fund Equipment Replacement Fund- Sewer 3102 Sewers/Storm Drains 715-3102-4201 Crawler Maintenance 5,000 0 5,000 715-3102-4309 Maint. Materials 1,000 400 600 715-3102-4310 Motor Fuels/Lubes 5,825 2,330 3,495 715-3102-4311 Auto Maintenance 2,384 954 1,430 715-3102-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 2,032 2,032 0 715-3102-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 27,137 3,740 23,397 715-3102-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 1,075 430 645 715-3102-5403 Vehicles 70,023 28,009 42,014 715 Fund Total Sewers/Storm Drains 114,476 37,894 76,582 Total Estimated Costs Operations & Maint.899,669 372,756 526,913 Sewer Capital Improvement Projects CIP Sewer Improvements - Various 898,843 898,843 0 CIP Storm Drain Improvements - Various 0 0 0 Total Capital Improvement Project Expenditures 898,843 898,843 0 Total Estimated Costs 1,798,512 1,271,599 526,913 1 'Salaries', 'Retirement' & 'Benefits' based on allocation percentages derived from analysis of Public Works Crew Daily Worksheets for the last 12 months; and includes overhead of Associate Engineer 10%, Director 5%, Superintendent 10% 2 Allocation for 'Accrual Cash In' based on percentages derived for 'Salaries' and allocation for 'OPEB' based on percentages derived for 'Retirement' 14 2012-13 Storm Expended Sewer Drain 160 Sewer Fund 3102 Sewers/Storm Drains 3102-4100 Personal Services 3102-4102 Regular Salaries1 75,851 35,650 40,201 3102-4106 Regular Overtime1 37 17 20 3102-4111 Accrual Cash In2 4,231 1,989 2,242 3102-4180 Retirement1 17,334 7,627 9,707 3102-4188 Employee Benefits1 13,374 5,885 7,489 3102-4189 Medicare Benefits 1,172 516 656 3102-4190 Other Post Employment Benefits2 14,100 6,204 7,896 (OPEB) Total Personal Services 126,099 57,887 68,212 3102-4200 Contract Services 3102-4201 Contract Serv/Private 210,438 144,593 65,845 3102-4251 Contract Service/Govt 29,551 16,332 13,219 Total Contract Services 239,989 160,925 79,064 3102-4300 Materials/Supplies/Other 3102-4303 Utilities 865 865 0 3102-4309 Maintenance Materials 6,776 6,170 606 3102-4394 Building Maintenance Charges 667 267 400 3102-4395 Equip Replacement Charges 48,467 7,270 41,197 3102-4396 Insurance User Charges 42,140 16,856 25,284 Total Materials/Supplies/Other 98,915 31,428 67,487 Subtotal Sewers/Storm Drains 465,003 250,240 214,763 Remove one time budget items (14,811)(14,811)0 Total Sewers/Storm Drains (Actual)450,192 235,429 214,763 15 715 Fund Equipment Replacement Fund- Sewer 3102 Sewers/Storm Drains 715-3102-4201 Crawler Maintenance 0 0 0 715-3102-4309 Maint. Materials 0 0 0 715-3102-4310 Motor Fuels/Lubes 3,104 1,242 1,862 715-3102-4311 Auto Maintenance 6,052 800 5,252 715-3102-4901 Depreciation/Mach/Equipment 2,032 2,032 0 715-3102-4902 Depreciation/Vehicles 21,560 1,509 20,051 715-3102-5402 Equip-More Than $1,000 0 0 0 715-3102-5403 Vehicles 0 0 0 715 Fund Total Sewers/Storm Drains 32,748 5,583 27,165 Total Expenditures Operations & Maint.482,940 241,012 241,928 Sewer Capital Improvement Projects CIP Sewer Improvements - Various 478,374 478,374 0 CIP Storm Drain Improvements - Various 0 0 0 Total Capital Improvement Project Expenditures 478,374 478,374 0 Total Actual Expenditures 961,314 719,386 241,928 1 'Salaries', 'Retirement' and 'Benefits' based on percentages derived from analysis of Public Works Crew Daily Worksheets for the last 12 months. 2 Allocation for 'Accrual Cash In' based on percentages derived for 'Salaries' and allocation for 'OPEB' based on percentages derived for 'Retirement'. 16 IV. Steps Going Forward 1) The City decides to continue to operate and maintain their own sewers. They could start the process of levying their own sewer service charge. The rate and method of this charge would need to be determined and approved by City Council. Public outreach to residential business owners, etc. would be initiated for the public hearing on the service charge. Or 2) The City Council decides to annex to the LACPW CMSD. A letter proposal would need to be prepared stating the City’s commitment to annex into the CSMD, stating a commitment to make improvements to the sewer system and describe favorable terms and conditions the City would like to have with the County. 17 APPENDIX 1 TASK 1 – INTERVIEW MEMOS PICO RIVERA LAWNDALE RANCHO PALOS VERDES WEST HOLLYWOOD IRWINDALE 18 19 20 21 22 23 APPENDIX 2 TASK 2 – SEWER FEES MANHATTAN BEACH AS APPROVED EL SEGUNDO AS APPROVED REDONDO BEACH AS APPROVED PICO RIVERA AS PROPOSED WEST HOLLYWOOD AS APPROVED COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AS APPROVED 24 . Average consumption per 4 person family per day = 400 Gals/Day According to EPA 400 x 365 = 146000 gallons a year per 4 Person Family. 1 HCF = 748 Gallons 146000 Gals / 748 = 195.187 HCF Sewer fee for 4 person family per year: Calculation of Variable usage $1.27 x 195.19 HCF = $ 247.89 Per Year Typical water meter size for single family homes = 1” Fixed rate for single family home with 1” water meter: $15.56 x 6 = $93.36 Per Year Total sewer rate for single family home with 1” water meter: $247.89 + $93.36 = $341.25 per year 25 City of El Segundo 4/29/2014 RESIDENTIAL METER SIZE SEWER FEE TREATMENT FEE WASTER WATER FEE READI-RES 3/4" $00.50 X CONSUMPTION 10.58 MONTHLY 4.49 MONTHLY READI-RES 1" $00.50 X CONSUMPTION 13.45 MONTHLY 5.39 MONTHLY READI-RES 1.5" $00.50 X CONSUMPTION 14.55 MONTHLY 5.84 MONTHLY READI-RES 2" $00.50 X CONSUMPTION 15.45 MONTHLY 6.29 MONTHLY RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS ARE BILLED BI-MONTHLY SO THE TREATEMENT AND WASTEWATER FEE WILL BE DOUBLED Average consumption per 4 person family per day = 400 Gals/Day 400 x 365 = 146000 gallons a year per 4 Person Family. 1 HCF = 748 Gallons 146000 Gals / 748 = 195.187 HCF Sewer fee for 4 person family per year $00.50 x 195.187 HCF = $ 97.59 Per year On top of this Sewer fee, the bill includes; Readiness to Serve fee - based on the meter size Consumption fee – based on the water used in the billing period Treatment fee – based on the meter size Wastewater fee – based on the meter size 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 APPENDIX 3 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DECEMBER 17, 2013 MEETING MINUTES 50 1 City of Hermosa Beach MEETING MINUTES TITLE: Annexation into the County’s Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District (CSMD) Discussion DATE: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 TIME: 3:00 P.M. – 4:30 P.M. LOCATION: Los Angeles County Public Works - Building A9-E, Fourth Floor, Conference Room ATTENDEES: Nicholas Agbobu Los Angeles County Public Works Rajesh Patel Los Angeles County Public Works Martin Moreno Los Angeles County Public Works Robert Swartz Los Angeles County Public Works Jeffrey Bouse Los Angeles County Public Works Fernando Villaluna Los Angeles County Public Works Jeff Cooper GafCon Inc. Frank Senteno City of Hermosa Beach – Public Works Victor Chavez City of Hermosa Beach – Public Works ITEMS DISCUSSED: 1. City of Hermosa Beach (City) sewer system overview: a. Total sewer system is approximately 190,000 lineal feet b. Approximately 20% are 6” sewer lines c. Approximately 80% are 8” sewer lines d. City has video documentation of all sewer lines 2. Los Angeles County Public Works (LACPW) requested City to submit a draft proposal describing what is a typical sewer repair and describe which sewer lines will remain with the City 3. City Sewer Maintenance: a. Flushes out and the sewer lines yearly b. Appropriates $300,000 on cleaning, maintenances, and video documentation / per year c. Appropriates $400,000 for CIP Sewer Pipe-Bursting (6” to 8”) and Repair Projects / per year 51 2 4. LACPW would maintain sewer system and repairs (all inclusive) with the exception of upsizing 5. An estimated $14 million in improvements must be made by the City prior to releasing maintenance to LACPW 6. LACPW will consider providing Operations & Maintenance (O&M) services to all 8” sewer lines, and City to continue to maintain all 6” sewer lines 7. Majority of all 6” lines are in close vicinity of the beach 8. Current sewer projects consist of repairing clay sewer lines and lining concrete sewer lines 9. Requirements to Annex Sewer Lines to LACPW: a. City to provide a letter stating commitment to annex sewer system to LACPW b. City to state when and which sewer lines are going to be annexed to LACPW c. City Council to approve formal request (by way of City Resolution) d. Public hearing at LACPW Board meeting (held in downtown Los Angeles Office) e. Clarify if refund will be issued to residents/businesses on a 6” sewer line 10. LACPW will require City to provide Public Outreach to residents, business owners, etc. (tentatively summer of 2014) 11. Entire process for sewer annexation is estimated at 6 months 12. If annexation is completed by August 2015, fee will take effect in property tax on November 2015. 13. Approximate City sewer operations and maintenance fee at $47.50 / single family home (City must abide by Prop 218) 14. City is to provide condition (video documentation) for County to consider maintaining 6” concrete sewer lines 15. LACPW prefers not to be contracted out for sewer O&M by a city 16. LACPW will not guarantee response to overflows within 1 hour of service request 17. City has sewer overflow issues approximately 2 times per year, rarely sustains property damage litigation 18. LACPW agrees to coordinate repair/maintenance jobs with City CIP projects 19. LACPW will address and be responsible to litigate any SSO claims 20. City may informally notify LACPW of upcoming projects 21. Requirements to submit City owned sewer lines to LACPW (after the fact): a. LACPW will review all but capacity related studies b. Design for Plans and Specifications is available though not time efficient nor cost effective c. LACPW will review post repair/construction video documentation before acceptance d. LACPW will review construction plans for maintenance purposes, not design e. LACPW will not be involved with sewer construction f. LACPW will require copies of as-builts with red lines after City Council approval g. Sewer plans will be reviewed and approved by LACPW 22. LACPW sewer maintenance reports: a. Reports are not divided by city b. Quarterly reports provided to City c. LACPW will submit and certify Annual Reports d. LACPW will charge for SSMP reports 52 APPENDIX 4 SEWER SERVICE CHARGE STUDY SUMMARY REPORT 53 April 22, 2014 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH SEWER SERVICE CHARGE STUDY SUMMARY REPORT I. Introduction Scope of Services: Task 1 – Rate & Method The City Sewer Service Charge will be based on the concept of “Sewer Unit.” A single family residential property will be charged at the rate of “1 sewer unit.” All other land uses will have a Sewer Service Charge calculated at rates in the multiples of the sewer unit. These rates will be based upon the impacts of the various land uses on the sewer system. The Rate & Method will be similar to the West Hollywood and Pico Rivera’s Rate & Method. The formula will satisfy the “proportional cost” language of Prop 218. Task 2 – Revenue Generated at Different Rates Once we have an agreed upon Rate & Method with City staff, revenue estimates will be prepared at different single family rates. Results will be presented to the City. Task 3 – Revenue Generated by County Rate & Method We will take the current County Rate & Method for 2013-2014 and apply it to the City of Hermosa Beach’s database. The revenue generated will be determined and presented to the City. Task 4 – Summary Report A summary report will be prepared summarizing the results of Tasks 1-3. Task 5 – Meetings PENCO will attend three (3) meetings with staff and one (1) Council meeting. II. Task 1 Results – Rate & Method After further review of the West Hollywood service charge and Pico Rivera’s service charge, it was determined that the West Hollywood rate and method was prepared after the passage of Proposition 218 and was the best model for the City of Hermosa Beach. The Pico Rivera rate and method is the same as the County of Los Angeles that was approved before Proposition 218. The West Hollywood rate and method is attached in Appendix I. Also included in Appendix I is the County of Los Angeles’ rate and method. 54 A single family residential property will be charged at the rate of “1 sewer unit.” All other land uses will have a sewer service charge calculated at rates in multiplies of the sewer unit. These rates will be based upon the impacts of the various land uses on the sewer system. III. Task 2 Results – Revenue Generated at Different Rates The County currently charges $47.50 per sewage unit per year. For fiscal year 2014-2015, it will be $50.50 per sewage unit per year. Using the West Hollywood rate and method and applying it to the Hermosa Beach database supplied by City staff for various rates, revenue estimates were determined. At a rate of $50/year for a single family home, it is estimated that approximately $540,000.00 will be generated in revenue. The table below depicts estimated revenues at varying rates. IV. Task 3 Results – Revenue Generated by County Rate & Method The Los Angeles County formula as shown in Appendix 1 was applied to City of Hermosa Beach database supplied by City staff. At the rate of $47.50/unit per year, the County would receive approximately $490,000 in revenue for 2013-2014. In 2014-2015, the County rate will be $50.50/unit per year and will generate approximately $520,000 in revenue. $273,812.66 $547,625.66 $821,438.48 $1,095,251.31 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 25 50 75 100 RATE IN DOLLARS ($) PER YEAR REVENUE ($) 55 APPENDIX I 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Bucknam PCI Charts 67 68 69 QUESTIONS/ITEMS FROM 2014-15 BUDGET WORKSHOP May 22, 2014 1. Some City Councilmembers expressed an interest in meeting with John Bartel, independent actuary, for follow up questions to his presentation at the Budget Workshop. Meetings with actuary John Bartel are scheduled for Friday, June 6, 2014. John Bartel will also return, probably in August, when we have the new actuarial study for other post- employment benefits (OPEB) covering fiscal years 2015-16 through 2017-18. 2. On page 23 of the Preliminary Budget, in the Sales Tax by Comparison by Geographic Area chart, is the decrease in PCH revenue due to a decline in auto dealer sales tax revenue? Yes, the decrease in the auto dealer category ($43,814 – not shown on the chart) is actually more than the decrease in the PCH category ($21,308), so the change can be attributed to that category. Other PCH businesses actually made up for some of the decrease. 3. Is our TOT rate average compared to other cities? There was discussion regarding short term rentals and increasing the TOT rates. Staff was asked to provide a survey of TOT rates and the latest TOT report to Council. Our rates are below average at 10% vs. the 11.6% shown in the survey cities. See the attached survey, page 7 and copy of the TOT agenda item from 6/9/09, page 7. (it was part of the budget adoption item – only the TOT portion of the item is included herein.) 4. A question was asked if a policy discussion regarding increasing revenue required a public hearing. Staff indicated we would check with the City Attorney. The City Attorney indicates a public hearing is not required. Generally speaking, a discussion about whether to consider a revenue increase would be within the scope of the budget workshop or budget discussion. If there is consensus among the Council, staff would be directed to bring back a report for Council consideration at a noticed meeting. 5. How much revenue was received when meter rates were increased from $1.00 to $1.25? There was concern from one Councilmember that increased rates would affect businesses negatively. The increase in street parking meters rates from $1.00 to $1.25 was approved in 2008-09. Revenue increased by 10% or $152,605 from 2007-08 to 2009-10. If there is Council consensus, it is recommended that this item come back for discussion with the pilot free parking program in August. 6. Discussion of parking in one hour zones for business customers. There was concern from one Councilmember that these zones should be available for business customers. 70 If there is Council consensus, it is recommended that this item come back for discussion with the pilot free parking program in August. 7. Consider the Insurance Fund balance over goal amount of $3 million; spend excess on capital improvements. It is recommended that the City Council consider this item at midyear when actual fund balances are known. The fund balances in the budget are estimates at this point. The staff report for the budget does identify other funding options for capital projects. With respect to the Insurance Fund, staff will ask the City Council to make a decision on June 24, 2014 regarding the higher probability level for recording insurance claims which is discussed in the budget message on page 26-27. 8. The Mayor requested that a copy of the investment guidelines be distributed. See attached resolution DGRSWHLQJ the investment policy, page 9. Taxi franchise – how do our fees compare to other cities? See the attached comparison chart, page 10. Is the cost of plaza enforcement known? This is not something that has been tracked. It is the intent of the Police Department to begin tracking downtown deployment starting this fiscal year. 11. Increasing the amount in the budget for 50/50 audits was raised by one Councilmember. $12,000 is budgeted in the City Council budget on page 82. 12. It was requested that detailed information about City Council benefits and travel costs be provided at Midyear Review. Staff will include this item in the Midyear Review. 13. City Clerk – One City Councilmember asked if assistance with minutes was needed. Additional staff was not requested by the City Clerk for the new budget. A reclassification of existing staff was requested but was not recommended by the City Manager due to the fact that we are currently conducting a citywide classification and compensation study. 71 TOT Revenues As of 6/2/2014 Jurisdiction Current TOT Rate Considering TOT Increase? Beverly Hills 14%No Carson 9%No Culver City 14%No El Segundo 8%(10% Failed 11/2013) Gardena 11%No Hawthorne 12%No Hermosa Beach 10%₋ Inglewood 14%No Lawndale 9%No Long Beach 12%No Manhattan Beach 10%No Rancho Palos Verdes 10%No Redondo Beach 12%(14% Failed 4/2014)) Santa Monica 14%No Torrance 11%No Palos Verdes Estates N/A No West Hollywood 15.5%(From 14% 4/2104)) Avg.11.6%₋ 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 Franchise Fee Per Cab Registration Fee Per Cab Licensing Fee Cab Count Per Company Individual Driver Permit Fee Hermosa Beach 4 Franchise Companies $ 44,000 --40 - $ 1,100 per cab Manhattan Beach 4 Franchise Companies $ 26,940 -$ 1,486 30 - $ 898 per cab Redondo Beach 4 Franchis Companies $ 18,900 --35 $ 25 per driver $ 540 per cab Torrance 3 Franchise Companies $ 35,000 $ 100 -up to 120 $ 100 per driver Flat Fee Regular Annual Fees Additional Fees Jurisdiction Taxi Cab Fee Comparison 100 QUESTIONS AND COMENTS ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR 2014-15 FROM COUNCILMEMBER TUCKER, 6/4/14 Since the Capital Improvement Projects are specifically on the agenda for review, we are providing Councilmember Tucker’s questions and the answers from Public Works staff in case they are helpful to other Councilmembers. Page 1 of the budget agenda item does provide options for additional funding for capital improvement projects. 1. CIP 13-127, page 256, Is this a carryover from 2013-14? If so please clarify: Will these funds be added to 2014-15 improvement project improvements? The money indicated for CIP 13-127 on page 256 is approximately how much will be carried over to finish the project during FY 14-15. No additional monies have been requested for this project. A separate budget is requested for the design and completion of CIP 14-128. 2. CIP14-128, page 260, Can all the engineering (design work) be done at one time for the projects thru FY18-19 To save going out every year. Also it would be good to explain the PCI current rating and maybe what it was 5 years ago to show the improvements and at mid-year budget review the Council could put more funds in these yearly projects. Also sewers need to be also repaired or replaced that would impact street improvements Typically consultant charges are based on the number of sheets produced, so savings would not necessarily be recognized with consolidating the projects. However, savings in design may be recognized by increasing the construction scope that would require a marginal increase in consultant fees. Savings might also be recognized through savings in staff time by minimizing staff reports and meetings. A disadvantage to consolidating design; Plans are subject to change for a variety of reasons: i.e. funding, un-anticipated needs that require significant changes to the plans, coordinating plans with other projects, changes to meet actual field conditions at the time of construction. The savings that might have been achieved would be quickly offset by changes made to adapt the plans to meet changing field conditions. Staff does not have the specific design resources to make appropriate changes and may be prohibited to alter the engineer of record’s design. 3. CIP 11-141 page 262, Explain possible funding from COG and measure R mobility improvement funding passed at last Council meeting (May 27, 2014) This project was submitted to the SBCOG as a potential candidate for funding through the South Bay Measure R Highway Program Funds. The project must be able to demonstrate an improvement to mobility and a nexus to the South Bay’s regional transportation corridors. Gould Avenue/27th Street is identified as a major collector that feeds directly into PCH and Artesia Boulevard (Principal Arterials) as identified in Caltrans’ California’s Road System. The project is under review by the COG. Staff believes the project will increase mobility as it will incorporate living street elements such as pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle improvements. 101 The goal of the South Bay Measure R Highway Program (SBHP) is to improve the operations and safety of the South Bay highway and freeway network. The South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) is partnering with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and South Bay jurisdictions to fund transportation projects that in improve mobility, safety, and sustainability on transportation corridors in the South Bay. The SBCCOG serves as the program manager through its Measure R Oversight Committee to help develop and oversee the South Bay Measure R Highway Program of projects. 4. CIP 12-143 page 264, Explain possible funding from COG and Measure R mobility improvement funding request passed at last Council meeting (May 27, 2014) and other funding possibilities This project was submitted to the SBCOG as a potential candidate for funding through the South Bay Measure R Highway Program Funds. The project must be able to demonstrate an improvement to mobility and a nexus to the South Bay’s regional transportation corridors. PCH is identified as a Principal Arterial in Caltrans’ California’s Road System. The project is under review by the COG. Staff is working on developing the nexus on how the project can contribute to improve mobility, safety, and sustainability on this heavily travelled corridor. 5. CIP 12-160 page 270 Is this related to page 264 CIP 12-160 focuses on low-cost improvements that essentially involve retiming signals phasing, modifying the traffic signal at Pier Ave& PCH to improve mobility (introduces a pedestrian phase only), provide curb extension at N/W corner of Pier Ave. and 14th Street, extend s/b left turn lane at Aviation Ave., and reshape median islands for n/b traffic at Aviation Ave. and Artesia Street to slow turning vehicles. This project is partially funded with South Bay Measure R Highway Program Funds, since the intent of the improvements are to improve traffic relief to the 405 Freeway. CIP 12-143 is an overall complete streetscape design along PCH and Aviation within City Limit 6. CIP14-0163 page 272, What streets and could the City use same engineering plan as for the bollards on Pier Plaza and Hermosa Avenue. The funding request is to perform preliminary engineering to determine what methods may be feasible to deter errant vehicles onto The Strand while still maintain access to daily maintenance operations, emergency, and public safety vehicles. The bollards on the plaza were a “fixed” design for the specific purpose to prevent runaway vehicles from entering onto the plaza. Preliminary engineering might identify locations to benefit from a fixed bollard design. 7. CIP 14-168 page 274, More study required, school needs to look at plan (traffic) and approval from City Council More studies are needed for this project. 8. CIP 13-401 page 276, Need more funding for this year’s request. 102 CIP 13-401, page 276, indicates the approximate amount of money that will be used during FY 14-15 to complete the project. City Council can elect to increase funding and should be take into consideration the citywide capital repairs that also need to take place. 9. CIP 114-402 page 278, Can design (engineering) work be done for all project thru FY18-19 as on CIP14-128 SEWER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM page 317 needs to be presented in order to proceed with CIP 114-402 page 278 Similarly to the street improvement projects, there is possible savings in design by increasing the construction scope and consolidating future sewer improvements into one project. However, the disadvantage in designing the sewer improvements in advance is due to changes in repair practices, standards, and the varied (usage) deterioration of the sewer lines. The condition of city sewer lines is dynamic and can vary in a short period of time; therefore, altering the design and priority of sewer lines to be repaired. Changes in the design may also be prohibited without the involvement of the engineer of record. Scope of work for the Sewer improvements for CIP 14-402 will be determined on the current list of needed repairs identified in the City’s 2011 Sewer Master plan Report as well as the list of streets scheduled for repair for next year. 10. CIP 14-541 page 286 and CIP 11-602 page 288 Should electrical up grades be done first (CIP11-602) and then Energy Efficient upgrades (CIP14-541) Need new switch gear to power new lighting? CIP 11-602 is currently under design. CIP 14-541 will follow to upgrade poles and lights to be more energy efficient. The newly designed switchgear should be sufficient for the energy efficient lights 11. CIP 14-623 page 298 Project long overdue Fire personal should not be in a building that needs seismic upgrades since 2000!! CIP 14-623 has indicated an approximate cost for the demolition of the Fire Department Tower and is planned to be completed in FY 14-15. 12. CIP13-659 page 306 Needs to be funded (State Help!!) or the Pier might have to be closed until repairs are done. JMC2’s February 2012 report outlined a repair plan that consisted of performing repairs following a phased approach based on a level of damage. The report did not suggest closing the pier before repairs. However, the Pier will be closed during each phase of repairs. The requested funds allow a phased approach. We are currently designing the repairs for Phase II and seeking sources of new funds. 13. CIP10-661 page 308 Will City be reimbursed for staff time this was to a volunteer Committee?? 103 The reimbursement of staff time was not specified in the agreement prepared with the surf memorial trust. The funds are specific to construction/materials. 14. CIP13-664 page 310 This is needed repairs and/upgrades otherwise City facilities are unusable The study will include a needs and space planning analysis, seismic evaluation, ADA compliance and transition plan, building systems assessment (including major mechanical, electrical, plumbing), and an asbestos / lead-based paint survey. 15. Safe Route to School 8th Street page 315 Can the use of Edison undergrounding funds be used ($650,000 approx.) All utilities need to undergrounded or moved (Cal. Water, Verizon and Edison) they are currently encroaching into the area of a Safe Route sidewalk. This should be a high priority!! CAN’T BUILD A SIDEWALK WITH POWER POLES, FIRE HYDRANTS AND PEDISTALS (Verizon) IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. What is the progress in getting the Grant?? We cannot use SCE 20A Rule Funds for this project as they are earmarked towards major corridors. Survey and design will indicate whether poles will present an obstacle to SR2S. Past experience has shown that encroachments were more of the main obstacle and will need to be addressed. Results of the ATP Grant will be noticed in November 2014. I ask these questions in hopes that Staff will be able to answer them and hopefully speed the process at the City Council meeting on June 10, 2014. 104 Executive Summary Scope of Work 1) Agency Interviews 2) Sewer Fee Review of Adjacent Cities 3) Meeting with the County 4) Sewer Service Charge Study Agencies Interviewed Pico Rivera 1 Lawndale Rancho Palos Verdes West Hollywood 2 Irwindale 2 1 Deannexing 2 Contract basis only Sewer Fee Review Single Family (S.F.) Residential Unit charge for 5 sample Cities and the County S.F. Residential Unit $/year Manhattan Beach (2013) $341.25 El Segundo (2013) $ 97.59 Redondo Beach (2013-2014) $159.00 Pico Rivera (Proposed 2014-2015) $ 50.50 West Hollywood (2013-2014) $ 38.67 County of Los Angeles (2013/2014) $ 47.50 The Authority and Establishment California Health and Safety code Section 5471 California Government Code Section 54344 Allows a charge to operate and maintain wastewater systems Proposition 218 Establishment of a charge for a Sewer Program Public Relations Use of Revenue Maintenance and Operation of Sewer Equipment purchase and maintenance Salaries Contract Services Improvements needed for maintenance Los Angeles County Meeting $14 Million in improvements to join the CSMD Emergency overflow response time is 1 hour or more Will not contract to City for M&O as option to joining CSMD Requirements to annex sewer lines to Los Angeles County City to perform public outreach prior to joining the CSMD Sewer Service Charge Study 1) Rate & Method 2) Revenue Generated at Different Rates 3) Revenue Generated by County Rate & Method Revenue Generated at Different Rates Rate in Dollars ($) Per Year Revenue ($) Using the West Hollywood Rate and Method applying it to the Hermosa Beach database supplied by the City Revenue Generated At Different Rates The budgeted Cost for the City to maintain their own sewers is $339, 454 for Fiscal Year 2014-15 Using the West Hollywood Rate & Method $50.50 per S.F. Residential Unit = $545,000 per year in Revenue $31.75/year/S.F. Residential Unit = $339,544 in Revenue Revenue Generated by County Rate & Method Los Angeles County formula was applied to the City’s database $47.50/S.F. Residential Unit/Year = $490,000 per year in Revenue $50.50/S.F. Residential Unit/Year = $520,000 per year in Revenue Steps Going Forward City decides to continue to operate and maintain their own sewers - starts the process of establishing a sewer service charge for the City City Council decides to annex to LACO CSMD Executive Summary Scope of Work 1) Agency Interviews 2) Sewer Fee Review of Adjacent Cities 3) Meeting with the County 4) Sewer Service Charge Study Agencies Interviewed Pico Rivera 1 Lawndale Rancho Palos Verdes West Hollywood 2 Irwindale 2 1 Deannexing 2 Contract basis only Sewer Fee Review Single Family (S.F.) Residential Unit charge for 5 sample Cities and the County S.F.Residential Unit $/year Manhattan Beach (2013)$341.25 El Segundo (2013)$97.59 Redondo Beach (2013-2014)$159.00 Pico Rivera (Proposed 2014-2015)$50.50 West Hollywood (2013-2014)$38.67 County of Los Angeles (2013/2014)$47.50 The Authority and Establishment California Health and Safety code Section 5471 California Government Code Section 54344 Allows a charge to operate and maintain wastewater systems Proposition 218 Establishment of a charge for a Sewer Program Public Relations Use of Revenue Maintenance and Operation of Sewer Equipment purchase and maintenance Salaries Contract Services Improvements needed for maintenance Los Angeles County Meeting $14 Million in improvements to join the CSMD Emergency overflow response time is 1 hour or more Will not contract to City for M&O as option to joining CSMD Requirements to annex sewer lines to Los Angeles County City to perform public outreach prior to joining the CSMD Sewer Service Charge Study 1) Rate & Method 2) Revenue Generated at Different Rates 3) Revenue Generated by County Rate &Method Revenue Generated at Different Rates Rate in Dollars ($) Per YearRevenue ($)Using the West Hollywood Rate and Method applying it to the Hermosa Beach database supplied by the City Revenue Generated At Different Rates The budgeted Cost for the City to maintain their own sewers is $339, 454 for Fiscal Year 2014-15 Using the West Hollywood Rate & Method $50.50 per S.F. Residential Unit = $545,000 per year in Revenue $31.75/year/S.F. Residential Unit = $339,544 in Revenue Revenue Generated by County Rate & Method Los Angeles County formula was applied to the City’s database $47.50/S.F. Residential Unit/Year = $490,000 per year in Revenue $50.50/S.F. Residential Unit/Year = $520,000 per year in Revenue Steps Going Forward City decides to continue to operate and maintain their own sewers - starts the process of establishing a sewer service charge for the City City Council decides to annex to LACO CSMD