The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08-11-2020 - Agenda Pkg - CC Regular MeetingCity Council City of Hermosa Beach Regular Meeting Agenda - Final City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Mayor Mary Campbell Mayor Pro Tem Justin Massey Councilmembers Hany S. Fangary Michael Detoy Stacey Armato 5:00 PMTuesday, August 11, 2020 Closed Session - 5:00 P.M. Regular Meeting - 6:00 P.M. Duly Posted Online August 6, 2020 at 8:10 p.m. By E.S. 1 August 11, 2020City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final 5:00 P.M. - CLOSED SESSION CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT City Hall will be closed to the public until further notice. Virtual Meetings are held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom on March 17, 2020. Members of the public may email comments to Esarmiento@hermosabeach.gov or submit eComments until 3:00 p.m. on the meeting date. Members of the public may also participate by phone. JOIN THE VIRTUAL MEETING AT: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87032785286 OR PARTICIPATE BY PHONE: 1. Email Esarmiento@hermosabeach.gov to be added to the speaker list. Please indicate which item you would like to speak on. 2. Dial-in to meeting: •Toll Free: 877-853-5257 •Meeting ID: 870 3278 5286, then # •Participant ID: press # to bypass 3. ATTENDEES WILL BE MUTED UNTIL THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD IS OPENED. When you are called on to speak, press * 6 to unmute your line. Comments from the public are limited to 3 minutes per speaker. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION 1)20-0499 MINUTES: Approval of minutes of Closed Session held on July 14, 2020. 2)20-0518 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: Anticipated Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) and (e)(3) The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. One Matter: Claim of Sharon Papa, Workers Compensation, AdminSure Claim #18-138433 ADJOURNMENT OF CLOSED SESSION Page 2 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/27/2024 2 August 11, 2020City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final 6:00 P.M. - REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC PARTICIPATION City Hall will be closed to the public until further notice. Virtual Meetings are held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom on March 17, 2020. Members of the public may email comments to Esarmiento@hermosabeach.gov or submit eComments until 3:00 p.m. on the meeting date. Members of the public may also participate by phone. JOIN THE VIRTUAL MEETING AT: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87032785286 OR PARTICIPATE BY PHONE: 1. Email Esarmiento@hermosabeach.gov to be added to the speaker list. Please indicate which item you would like to speak on. 2. Dial-in to meeting: •Toll Free: 877-853-5257 •Meeting ID: 870 3278 5286, then # •Participant ID: press # to bypass 3. ATTENDEES WILL BE MUTED UNTIL THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD IS OPENED. When you are called on to speak, press * 6 to unmute your line. Comments from the public are limited to 3 minutes per speaker. Oral and Written Communication Persons who wish to have written materials included in the agenda packet at the time the agenda is published on the City's website must submit the written materials to the City Manager's office by email (esarmiento@hermosabeach.gov) or in person by noon of the Tuesday, one week before the meeting date. Written materials pertaining to matters listed on the posted agenda received after the agenda has been posted will be added as supplemental materials under the relevant agenda item on the City's website at the same time as they are distributed to the City Council by email. Supplemental materials may be submitted via eComment (instructions below) or emailed to esarmiento@hermosabeach.gov. Supplemental materials must be received before 4:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting to ensure Council and staff have the ability to review materials prior to the meeting. Supplemental materials submitted after 4:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting or submitted during the meeting will be posted online the next day. Submit Supplemental eComments in three easy steps: Note: Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information (i.e. phone numbers, addresses, etc) that you do not want to be published. 1. Go to the Agendas/Minutes/Video webpage and find the meeting you’d like to submit comments on. Click on the eComment button for your selected meeting. 2. Find the agenda item for which you would like to provide a comment. You can select a specific agenda item/project or provide general comments under the Oral/Written Communications item. 3. Sign in to your SpeakUp Hermosa Account or as a guest, enter your comment in the field provided, provide your name, and if applicable, attach files before submitting your comment. Page 3 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/27/2024 3 August 11, 2020City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION REPORT ANNOUNCEMENTS APPROVAL OF AGENDA PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS a)20-0501 INTRODUCTION OF FIRE STATION 100 B SHIFT CREW b)20-0500 COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER a)20-0506 COVID-19 UPDATE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Although the City Council values your comments, the Brown Act generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted agenda as a business item. 1. ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: If you wish to provide public comment, please fill out a speaker card to ensure names of speakers are correctly recorded in the minutes and where appropriate, to provide contact information for staff follow-up. This is the time for members of the public to address the City Council on any items within the Council's jurisdiction not on this agenda, on items on this agenda as to which public comment will not be taken (Miscellaneous Items and Reports – City Council and Other Matters), or to request the removal of an item from the consent calendar. Public comments on the agenda items called Miscellaneous Reports and Other Matters will only be heard at this time. Comments on public hearing items are heard only during the public hearing. Members of the audience may also speak: Page 4 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/27/2024 4 August 11, 2020City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final 2. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following more routine matters will be acted upon by one vote to approve with the majority consent of the City Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council member removes an item from the Consent Calendar. Items removed will be considered under Agenda Item 4, with public comment permitted at that time. a)REPORT 20-0502 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council approve the following minutes: 1. April 14, 2020 Regular Meeting 2. June 1, 2020 Emergency Closed Session Meeting 3. July 28, 2020 Adjourned Regular Meeting b)REPORT 20-0491 CHECK REGISTERS (Finance Director Viki Copeland) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council ratify the following check registers. c)REPORT 20-0512 ACTION MINUTES OF THE PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY RESOURCES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 7, 2020 Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of July 7, 2020. d)REPORT 20-0490 APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH JHD PLANNING, LLC TO PREPARE THE 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council approve a Professional Services Agreement with JHD Planning, LLC to prepare the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update. e)REPORT 20-0498 APPROVAL OF TRANSFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT AND HERMOSA BEACH AGREEMENT NO. 2020MP32 SAFE, CLEAN WATER PROGRAM - MUNICIPAL PROGRAM (Environmental Programs Manager Douglas Krauss) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Transfer Agreement between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District and the City of Hermosa Beach for Safe Clean Water Funds and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. Page 5 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/27/2024 5 August 11, 2020City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final f)REPORT 20-0496 REQUEST TO RENEW THE CROSSING GUARD SERVICES AGREEMENT (Chief of Police Paul LeBaron) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to renew the crossing guard services agreement with American Guard Services (AGS). 3. CONSENT ORDINANCES NONE 4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 6:30 P.M. NONE 6. MUNICIPAL MATTERS a)REPORT 20-0504 RECEIVE REPORT ON EMERGENCY ENFORCEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH PANDEMIC-RELATED HEALTH ORDERS FROM BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES HEALTH DEPARTMENT (City Manager Suja Lowenthal) (This report was published as a supplemental report in order to deliver the most current information available) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council receive the update on current enforcement efforts. b)REPORT 20-0510 REVIEW OF CITY’S PARKING ASSET RESTRICTIONS IN LIGHT OF ONGOING CHANGES TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY HEALTH ORDER (City Manager Suja Lowenthal) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file an update on the City's downtown parking assets. * *This has been a standing agenda item for Council consideration of modifications to the City's restrictions associated with downtown assets and parking facilities. Moving forward, this matter may be included in broader City Manager updates on pandemic response. Page 6 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/27/2024 6 August 11, 2020City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final c)REPORT 20-0519 CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT CONCEPTS FOR TEMPORARY LANE CLOSURES ON HERMOSA AVENUE TO FACILITATE FOOT TRAFFIC AND OUTDOOR DINING AND RETAIL OPTIONS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (Environmental Programs Manager Douglas Krauss and Environmental Analyst Leeanne Singleton) Recommendation:Staff recommends that City Council: 1. Discuss and provide direction on which, if any, design concepts should be implemented on a temporary basis to facilitate foot traffic, bicycle travel, and outdoor dining options within the public right-of-way along Hermosa Avenue, between 10th and 14th Streets; 2. Appropriate $46,000 in Capital Improvement Funds to fund implementation of lane reconfiguration and associated work on Hermosa Avenue, between 10th and 14th Streets, including traffic counts pre and post implementation; and 3. Authorize the City Manager to issue an executive order directing the reconfiguration and determine the project is categorically exempt under CEQA. d)REPORT 20-0509 ADOPT THE RESOLUTION PRELIMINARILY APPROVING ENGINEER’S REPORT AND DIRECTING RELATED ACTIONS FOR THE PROPOSED GREENWICH VILLAGE NORTH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (Public Works Director Marnell Gibson) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Adopt a Resolution No. 20-7252 approving the Preliminary Engineer's Report; 2. Set the date for the Public Hearing for Tuesday, October 13, 2020; 3. Authorize and direct the mailing of combined public hearing notices/assessment ballots; 4. Authorize the City Clerk to receive and tabulate the assessment ballots at the public hearing; and 5. Authorize the filing of the Boundary Map with the County Recorder. e)REPORT 20-0517 CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITIES OF HERMOSA BEACH, MANHATTAN BEACH, AND REDONDO BEACH REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATIONOF THE SOUTH BAY BEACH CITIES HOMELESSNESS PROJECT (Assistant to the City Manager Nico De Anda-Scaia) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving a memorandum of understanding between the cities of Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, and Redondo Beach regarding the implementation of the South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project. Page 7 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/27/2024 7 August 11, 2020City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final f)REPORT 20-0516 BROWN ACT DEMAND FILED BY CAMERON SAMIMI PERTAINING TO BEACH VOLLEYBALL POLES (City Attorney Michael Jenkins) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Receive and file report; and 2. Direct the City Attorney to send a letter pursuant to Government Code �54960.1(c)(2) communicating the City Council's determination that no Brown Act violation occurred, and therefore that the City Council will not take further action. g)REPORT 20-0514 BROWN ACT DEMAND FILED BY KEN HARTLEY PERTAINING TO CYPRESS DISTRICT ORDINANCE (City Attorney Michael Jenkins) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Receive and file report; and 2. Direct the City Attorney to send a letter pursuant to Government Code �54960.1 (c)(2) communicating the City Council's determination that the complaint was filed untimely and further that no Brown Act violation occurred, and therefore that the City Council will not cure or correct the challenged action. h)REPORT 20-0513 DESIGNATION OF CITY NEGOTIATOR (City Attorney Michael Jenkins) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 20-XXXX establishing a policy for identification of the City's designated representatives for purposes of conducting a closed session under Government Code section 54957.6 relative to negotiations with represented and unrepresented employees. 7. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL a)REPORT 20-0528 CONSIDERATION OF SLATE OF STATE HOUSING BILLS (Ken Robertson, Community Development Director) Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and provide direction regarding pending legislation from the 2020 California legislative related to housing and local authority over zoning and land use matters. b)20-0515 UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES AND STANDING COMMITTEE DELEGATES/ALTERNATES 8. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL a)20-0511 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the tentative future agenda items. ADJOURNMENT Page 8 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/27/2024 8 August 11, 2020City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final FUTURE MEETINGS AND CITY HOLIDAYS CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS: August 25, 2020 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting September 2, 2020 - Wednesday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 6:00 PM - Study Session September 8, 2020 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting September 22, 2020 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting October 7, 2020 - Wednesday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 6:00 PM - Study Session October 13, 2020 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting October 27, 2020 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting November 4, 2020 - Wednesday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 6:00 PM - Study Session November 10, 2020 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting November 12, 2020 - Thursday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 6:00 PM - Appointment of Mayor & Mayor Pro Tem November 24, 2020 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting December 2, 2020 - Wednesday - Adjourned Regular Meeting: 6:00 PM - Study Session December 8, 2020 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session, 6:00 PM - City Council Meeting December 22, 2020 - Tuesday - No Meeting (Dark) BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS: August 18, 2020 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting August 31, 2020 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee September 1, 2020 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting September 15, 2020 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting September 16, 2020 - Wednesday - 7:00 PM - Public Works Commission Meeting October 5, 2020 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee October 6, 2020 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting October 20, 2020 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting November 2, 2020 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee November 5, 2020 - Thursday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting November 17, 2020 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 2020 - Wednesday - 7:00 PM - Public Works Commission Meeting December 1, 2020 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting December 7, 2020 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee December 15, 2020 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting Page 9 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/27/2024 9 August 11, 2020City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final CITY OFFICES CLOSED FRIDAY-SUNDAY AND ON THE FOLLOWING DAYS: September 7, 2020 - Monday - Labor Day November 11, 2020 - Wednesday - Veteran's Day November 26, 2020 - Thursday - Thanksgiving Day Page 10 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/27/2024 10 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 20-0499 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Closed Session of August 11, 2020 MINUTES:Approval of minutes of Closed Session held on July 14, 2020. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 2/10/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™11 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 20-0518 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Closed Session of August 11, 2020 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL:Anticipated Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) and (e)(3) The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. One Matter:Claim of Sharon Papa, Workers Compensation, AdminSure Claim #18-138433 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 2/11/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™12 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 20-0501 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 INTRODUCTION OF FIRE STATION 100 B SHIFT CREW City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™13 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 20-0500 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™14 BCHD COVID-19 Health Update August 11, 2020 15 State of COVID-19 More information available at www.bchd.org/covidnumbers •Issues with state electronic lab system to be reconciled this week—backlog of cases expected •Cases, deaths and positivity rate stabilizing •COVID-19 hospitalizations across the county have decreased •Younger residents make up the majority of new cases, highest case rate among 30 to 49 16 State of COVID-19 17 State of COVID-19 18 State of COVID-19 19 Alert SouthBay COVID-19 Community Survey in partnership with Beach Cities Health District 1606 1424 403 20 How worried are you about the impact of COVID-19 on you personally? 16% 30% 37% 12% 5% 21 What are the top 3 biggest challenges you are currently facing? 58% Frustration with community members not following the health guidance 50% General uncertainty about the future 50% Social isolation/lack of places to go 31% New distance learning requirements, homeschooling, childcare 15% Lack of income/work 47% General anxiety about the impact of COVID-19 on my life 22 Do you think the coronavirus is: 23 What is your single greatest COVID-19 concern right now? 34% General health and well-being 25% Impact on the economy 18% Homeschooling and continuing education for my children 24 What resources would you like to see more of from your community? 43% General Reporting (COVID-19 Statistics) 53% COVID-19 information, testing, Health Officer Orders etc. 25 Safe in the South Bay 26 During this time of heightened health concern, BCHD is available to offer help and support. If you or someone you know in the Beach Cities needs assistance with errands, health-related information or referrals, please call our Assistance,Information & Referral line at 310-374-3426 ext. 256, seven days a week, 8:30 a.m. –5 p.m. Assistance, Information & Referrals 27 COVID-19 Safe in the South Bay Townhall August 25, 2020 5:00-6:30pm More info soon at www.bchd.org 28 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 20-0506 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 COVID-19 UPDATE City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™29 START: From: tony higgins <tony.higgins123@gmail.com> Date: August 7, 2020 at 12:19:13 PM PDT To: City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>, Suja Lowenthal <suja@hermosabeach.gov>, Paul LeBaron <plebaron@hermosabeach.gov>, Kelly Orta <korta@hermosabeach.gov>, tony higgins <tony.higgins123@gmail.com> Cc: Parks Commission <dg_parksreccommission@hermosabch.org>, Planning Commission <DG_PlanningCommission@hermosabch.org>, Michael Jenkins <MJenkins@localgovlaw.com> Subject: 300,000 Deaths By December? 9 Takeaways From The Newest COVID-19 Projections Dear Mayor Campbell Dear Suja Lowenthal Dear Chief LeBaron Dear Ms Orta I found the following story on the NPR iPhone App 300,000 Deaths By December? 9 Takeaways From The Newest COVID-19 Projections by Nurith Aizenman NPR - August 6, 2020 By Dec. 1, the U.S. death toll from COVID-19 could reach nearly 300,000. That's the grim new projection from researchers at the University of Washington's Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation — one of the more prominent teams modeling the pandemic. The new forecast, released Thursday, projects that between now and December, 137,000 people will die on top of the roughly 160,000 who have died so far.... https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/08/06/900000671/300-000- deaths-by-december-9-takeaways-of-the-newest-covid-19-projections? sc=17&f=1001&utm_source=iosnewsapp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=app 30 This is why we must get mask compliance in force citywide or at a minimum all points west of Manhattan Ave citywide... we must stem the tide of new infections This is why the emergency masks enforcement order must be enforced at all construction sites, especially large new home construction sites and very job large sites like North School City leaders know or should know that without getting mask compliance above the 90%-95% threshold, contact tracers are cannot hope to effectively respond given the current growth in infections far exceeds tracer capacity in Los Angeles County The City must also get diagnostic tests with 4-24 hour results done at all restaurants, construction job sites and places of employment for ALL employees citywide who have significant public contact. Without this contact tracers can’t do their job.... This is just common sense And besides the deaths... For people who are put on a mechanical ventilator, it's likely to be several months to a year before they recover full lung function, he explained. Some may never recover that functionality. “Holes in the lung likely refers to an entity that has been dubbed ‘post- COVID fibrosis,’ otherwise known as post-ARDS [acute respiratory distress syndrome] fibrosis,” said Dr. Lori Shah, transplant pulmonologist at New York-Presbyterian/Columbia University Irving Medical Center. ARDS occurs when fluid builds up in tiny air sacs in the lungs called alveoli. This reduces oxygen in the bloodstream and deprives the organs of oxygen which can lead to organ failure. Any organ... so besides 300,000 the deaths nationwide by December you have the potential lifelong serious long term health consequences for many who do survive In summary What is post-COVID fibrosis? 31 1. Amend mask enforcement citywide. 2. Ensure bi-weekly diagnostic tests are given to all employees of Hermosa businesses where employees have significant public contact or significant contact with other employees like at construction sites. 3. Get group activities at our parks and beaches under control and please spell out how you plan to enforce this The city should dedicate at least 1 FTE or hire a contractor full time to go to businesses and jobsites twice weekly to administer tests and verify that daily screening is done (eg temperature checks) In my view it’s reckless to bring more visitors into the downtown business before getting these things in place first Sometimes leadership has to have the courage to take unpopular actions, an never so more than now in the midst of both an unprecedented pandemic and the crash of the economy. But we all know we cannot safely and sustainably open the economy until we get the above in place. Thank you for considering... Anthony Higgins This is why we need a 32 Here is a second written com for next city council meeting START: From: tony higgins <tony.higgins123@gmail.com> Date: August 7, 2020 at 6:34:36 PM PDT To: Suja Lowenthal <suja@hermosabeach.gov>, Michael Jenkins <MJenkins@localgovlaw.com> Cc: City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>, Paul LeBaron <plebaron@hermosabeach.gov>, Planning Commission <DG_PlanningCommission@hermosabch.org>, Parks Commission <dg_parksreccommission@hermosabch.org> Subject: Masks Enforcement and signage requirements Dear Mr, Jenkins Dear Ms Lowenthal, I walked the strand for 5 blocks this morning at 630am and was passed by 50 people between 22nd and 15th Street of which 16 people were wearing masks. While it’s a significant improvement it’s still a woeful 32% compliance. And I just made my first lap around valley park at 5:11pm. I counted 68 people mand there was only one other person wearing a mask. Another senior citizen That’s a dismal 3% mask compliance. It got a little better at around 6pm with about 85 people and ~10% Mask compliance but there were 3 fairly large group activities including soccer and lacrosse where no one was wearing a mask. I sent those photos earlier Hermosa needs, and every city in LA county, needs to be at the 90-95% MASK compliance level according to many experts, to be able to slow the infection rate, especially because diagnostic testing and contact tracing resources do not exist and are unlikely to exist anytime soon to handle the current Covid Community spread infection rates. This is a simple to understand reality as is the need to contain the infection rate with a regimine of effective mask enforcement, screening, twice weekly antigen or PCR diagnostic tests with 4-24 hour maximum test results, contact tracing, daily screening and enforcement of special event and group gathering bans In our 33 cities and parks. Only then, once these containment measures are sustainably in place; only then can we begin to safely and sustainably reopen the economy. Only then can we begin to bring COVID death rates down, begin to ameliorate serious permanent or long Covid term injury If the person survives, reduce both the patient suffering and the suffering of their families and begin to manage the horrible unsustainable emotional and physical burden we have placed our health care workers. Banging pots and pans is not enough. I’ve been parroting the experts on this for months on all these points Still, I have yet to see city data on even on simple things to understand things like mask compliance rates and/or goals or trends. its very hard to manage mask compliance when there are NO published goals, measures and trends. And regarding the woefully low mask compliance rate i found on the strand this morning and at Valley Park this afternoon; well I did NOT see even one sign saying masks were required on the STRAND and I also didn’t see one sign referencing the fines even the emergency order to wear a mask. I did NOT see even one sign saying masks were required on the BEACH and I also didn’t see one sign referencing the fines for not wearing a mask or signs referencing the emergency order I did NOT see even one sign saying masks were required on the PLAZA and I also didn’t see one sign referencing the fines for not wearing a mask; except those posted at the entrance to restaurants that applied to private property. I did NOT see even one sign saying masks were required on the LOWER PIER AVE between hermosa Ave and Monterey. I also didn’t see one sign referencing the fines for not wearing a mask. I saw a couple of signs near the parking spaces that the city closed off for dining that encouraged distancing but made no reference to mask requirements!!!! I have to wonder if we are actually reaping the full benefits of the emergency order by delaying the posting of signs. I wonder if the the city is even if the city is ready to enforce the mask law or its its fines. There were no mask enforcement signs at least that you could read at VALLEY PARK. I couldn’t read the mobile sign at valley park because it’s unreadable in the 34 morning hours because the sun was shining directly on it. The Geeenbelt had no signs at the pier Ave North entrance nor did I see any signs posted on the greenbelt itself. NOW HERE IS THE CATCH! Where I did finally see 4 signs saying masks were required were all within 50 yards of city hall. And even these signs didn’t reference the emergency order or fines. You have to wonder what happened here. That’s not so great. Would you agree? Now I’m not perfect and I may have missed something but signs were not posted where I entered the strand or on the beach near the strand. And if i missed any signs they were not conspicuously posted and we are loosing Covid community containment in LA county. And since you opted to limit mask enforcement to selected areas it follows that signage is even more important. No? When will signs be posted? Where will these signs be posted? What must they say to provide adequate notification? what are the mask compliance goals? Where do we stand on this and how is this trending? If we can’t move the compliance dial quickly enough is the city willing to send a message by closing the beaches, strand and parks for a weekend and if that fails then for a week? What is quickly enough? How much regular antigen testing is being done at restaurants and construction job sites in hermosa as described above and what are the goals, measures and trends? Mr Jenkins, To enforce the mask laws with fines shouldn’t that require reasonable signage that at least clearly designates you are entering a mask enforcement zone and reference the emergency order? I apologize if you covered reasonable signage standards In the 29 July council meeting but closed captioning wasn’t working and I am hearing disabled. 35 Ms Lowenthal, I know sometimes talking runs ahead of doing and I’m as guilty as anyone. BUT I believe you said in the July 29th Council Meeting that you had the signage ready that would allow enforcement of the mask laws. With my hearing I can never be sure So I ask you when will those signs be posted at all required locations to enforce the Cities emergency order or do you consider that no additional signage is required? Normally I wouldn’t expect the city to have the signage in place within 10 days but this is an Emergency Order, the restaurants had no trouble acquiring and setting up the space for outside dining and the city seemed to be able to open up and configure the parking spaces for tables but priority seems to have not been given to proper signage to enforce the emergency order. Thank you for considering this. Anthony Higgins 36 AUGUST 11, 2020 CITY MANAGER COVID-19 UPDATE Please note that statement delivered during Council Meeting may vary due to frequent changes in COVID-19 information and restrictions. We are pleased to announce that another one of Hermosa Beach’s traditions is returning. The Friday Farmers Market at 11th Street and Valley Drive will resume from noon to 4 p.m. on Friday. The Rotary Club, which hosts the Friday Farmers Market, had closed the market in response to COVID-19 restrictions. The Rotary Club has since brought on a new market manager and has worked with Los Angeles County to reopen safely and in compliance with Los Angeles County’s Public Health Order and protocols for operating a Farmers Market. Please see Friday Farmers Market Facebook page for more information. In Hermosa Beach, I am sorry to say that we are continuing to see new confirmed cases of COVID-19. Our City continues to have the highest rate of total cases per 100,000 among the Beach Cities. This Council has recognized the continued spread of the virus in our community with the adoption of an urgency ordinance at its meeting on July 28. The urgency ordinance requires people to wear face coverings at all times in the most crowded parts of the City. That includes Downtown, Pier Plaza, the Strand, all City Parks and the Beach when out of the water. These are places where it is often impossible to reliably maintain the 6 feet of physical distance from others who aren’t members of your household that is required by public health orders. The City’s urgency ordinance imposed administrative fines for violations, which are $100 for the first offense, $200 for a second offense and $500 for all subsequent offenses within a 12-month period. As the Council directed, the City hired Health Enforcement Officers from a private consulting firm who began working on Saturday. They are patrolling the crowded parts of town where the urgency ordinance requires face masks at all times. In response to questions we have received, please know t hat the goal of this program is to get more people to wear face coverings -- especially in the parts of town where it is hard for people to reliably maintain the 6 feet of physical distance from people who aren’t members of their household. To accomplish this goal, the Health Enforcement Officers are patrolling Downtown, The Strand, Greenbelt and the parks. In these parts of town, they are approaching people who aren’t wearing face coverings to remind them that they must wear one. If the person doesn’t have a mask, the officer will provide one. People who refuse to wear a mask may be cited. Over this past weekend, the Health Enforcement Officers were busy. They contacted approximately 600 people and distributed about 150 masks. Most individuals who were contacted had a mask with them and put it on. They issued 8 citations with $100 fines on Saturday and Sunday. Anecdotally, we had several observers comment that they saw more people wearing face coverings after the enforcement officers began patrolling. 37 Two Health Enforcement Officers are working on weekdays and four on weekends. We may adjust this staffing in the future. The cost is $65 per hour. Our contract with the consulting firm is not to exceed $125,000. Seven days of service, which i s what we are currently providing, is $10,400 per seven-day period. Limiting that service to the weekends would be $4,150 for Saturday and Sunday staffing. We don’t expect the income from citations to cover the cost of enforcement. Instead, t he City is seeking reimbursement from the state government for all expenses related to COVID-19 expenditures, including the cost of hiring additional personnel to enforce face mask requirements. The City also conducted extensive outreach to educate the public about the new requirements. You may have seen the new signs that went up and the extensive media coverage over the weekend about the urgency ordinance’s requirements and the hiring of additional personnel. I thank the Police Department – especially Peter Ahlstrom and Xochitl Tipan – for all of their work to bring the Enforcement Officers on board so quickly to enforce these requirements. For our residents and visitors, we ask that you please adhere to our City’s ordinance and wear your face coverings whenever you are Downtown, in our parks and on Pier Plaza, the Strand, the Greenbelt or the beach. Also, please follow the Public Health Orders by wearing face coverings anywhere else in public where you cannot maintain that 6 feet of physical distance from non-household members. As our signs say: Wearing is Caring. So please show that you care for our community and the health of your loved ones by wearing a face covering in public. 38 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0502 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the following minutes: 1.April 14, 2020 Regular Meeting 2.June 1, 2020 Emergency Closed Session Meeting 3.July 28, 2020 Adjourned Regular Meeting Due to staffing shortages in the City Clerk’s office, the following minutes will be provided as soon as they become available. 1.April 22, 2020 Adjourned Regular Meeting (FY 20-21 CIP Study Session) 2.April 28, 2020 Regular Meeting 3.April 30, 2020 Adjourned Regular Meeting (COVID-19 Town Hall) 4.May 12, 2020 Regular Meeting 5.May 21, 2020 Special Meeting 6.May 26, 2020 Special Meeting 7.June 3, 2020 City Council Virtual Study Session (Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget) 8.June 9, 2020 Regular Meeting 9.June 23, 2020 Special Meeting Respectfully Submitted by: Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™39 Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Tuesday, April 14, 2020 Closed Session 6:00 P.M. Regular Session 7:00 P.M. Virtual Meeting via Zoom City Council Mary Campbell, Mayor Justin Massey, Mayor Pro Tem Stacy Armato, Councilmember Michael Detoy, Councilmember Hany Fangary, Councilmember CALL TO ORDER The City Council Regular Meeting of the City of Hermosa Beach met via a virtual meeting held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom March 17, 2020 on the above date. Meeting was called to order by Mayor Campbell at 7:01 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was led Mayor Campbell CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Michael Jenkins shared that closed session was held this evening. ANNOUNCEMENTS Councilmember Fangary thanked staff for all their hard work and the community for standing together during this difficult time. He then shared his concern with the lack of engagement with the Hermosa community. Councilmember Armato thanked the Chinese American Community and the greater South Bay for their donation of two 40 thousand masks for the Hermosa Police Department. Mayor Campbell also thanked the entire Hermosa community and Hermosa City staff for their efforts during this difficult time. She then shared some announcements. (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link. April 14, 2020 City Council Meeting). APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Armato moved to approve the agenda, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Massey. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS a. RECOGNIZING INTERIM POLICE CHIEF MICHAEL MCCRARY FOR HIS SERVICE TO THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH b. INTRODUCTION OF PAUL LEBARON AS HERMOSA BEACH’S NEW POLICE CHIEF BEGINNING APRIL 16, 2020 c. ORIGINAL SONG PERFORMANCE BY NICK SHATTUCK (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link. April 14, 2020 City Council Meeting). MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER a. CORNONAVIRUS PANDEMIC b. ALLOWED CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING PROGRESS UPDATES c. FAQs FOR EVICTION MORATORIUM d. NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLAN (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: April 14, 2020 City Council Meeting). 41 PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS The following person provided public comment: 1. John David (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: April 14, 2020 City Council Meeting) 1. ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Written communication was provided by Anthony Higgins, and a supplemental email was submitted by Michael Olivo. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Massey moved to receive and file written communications, seconded by Councilmember Armato. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell 2. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Councilmember Armato moved to approve the consent calendar, seconded by Councilmember Detoy. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None a. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES b. CHECK REGISTER c. APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF A REPORT FOR THE ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESMENTS WITHIN THE HERMOSA BEACH LANDSCAPING AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT DURING FY 2020-2021 d. APPLICATION FOR LOCAL EARLY PLANNING (LEAP) GRANT e. A LETTER TO THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD OPPOSING AN EXTENSION OF THE OPERATION OF THE AES REDONDO BEACH FACILITY 42 f. APPROVE SUBMITTAL OF CAL OES FORM 130- DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT’S AGENT RESOLUTION FOR NON-STATE AGENCIES 3. CONSENT ORDINANCE None 4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION None 5. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS a. UPDATE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF TEMPORARY BAN OF DOCKLESS SCOOTER AND BIKESHARE IN HERMOSA BEACH MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Massey moved to approve staff recommendation, seconded by Councilmember Armato. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None 6. MUNICIPAL MATTERS a. AMENDMENTS TO TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON FORCLOSURES AND RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL EVICTIONS FOR NONPAYMENT OF RENT DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC MOTION: Councilmember Armato moved to adopt and amend Urgency Ordinance 20- 1406U, seconded by Councilmember Detoy. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Council Member Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None 7. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL a. UPCOMING VACANCIES: THREE PLANNING COMMISSION TERMS 43 EXPIRE JUNE 30, 2020 AND TWO CIVIL SERVICE BOARD TERMS EXPIRE JULY 15, 2020 MOTION: Councilmember Detoy moved to approve staff recommendation, seconded by Councilmember Armato. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None b. UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES AND STANDING COMMITTEE DELEGATES/ALTERNATES Councilmember Armato gave an update on her LAX Roundtable meeting and mentioned proposed legislation aiming to improve airport and airplane noise conditions as well as corresponding pollution concerns. Mayor Pro Tem Massey reported that the Downtown Subcommittee conferred that Council’s prior direction was still the preferred alternative. Mayor Campbell reported that some recycling operations of the LA County Sanitation District have been interrupted due to COVID-19 safety concerns (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: April 14, 2020 City Council Meeting) 8. OTHER MATTERS – CITY COUNCIL a. TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS The following people provided public comment: 1. Dean Francois (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: April 14, 2020 City Council Meeting) Councilmember Fangary requested a COVID-19 related report to be included in all future City Council meetings. Councilmember Detoy seconded the request made by Councilmember Fangary. City Attorney Jenkins confirmed and clarified, that an abbreviated item will be included in the next City Council agenda. He also stated that he would review Council procedure policy to determine the difference between a majority vote versus a two-member vote when adding agenda items. 44 Councilmember Fangary then requested that the City Council begin holding weekly City Council meetings during the state of emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Councilmember Fangary’s request failed due to not receiving a seconded by any Councilmember. Mayor Campbell requested a status report item on the Plan Hermosa implementation. Councilmember Detoy seconded Mayor Campbells request to add the Plan Hermosa implementation status report for the next City Council Meeting. (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking on the following link: April 14, 2020 City Council Meeting). ADJOURNMENT Mayor Campbell adjourned the City Council meeting to Wednesday April 22, 2020 at 6 p.m. for a virtual study session on the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2020-21. Meeting concluded at 9:30 p.m. (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking on the following link: April 14, 2020 City Council Meeting). Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk 45 Hermosa Beach City Council Emergency Closed Session Meeting Minutes Monday, June 1, 2020 Closed Session 6:00 P.M. Virtual Meeting via Zoom City Council Mary Campbell, Mayor Justin Massey, Mayor Pro Tem Stacy Armato, Councilmember Michael Detoy, Councilmember Hany Fangary, Councilmember CALL TO ORDER The City Council Regular Meeting of the City of Hermosa Beach met via a virtual meeting held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom March 17, 2020 on the above date. Meeting was called to order by Mayor Campbell at 4:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell Absent: Councilmember Fangary CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Michael Jenkins provided a report from closed session. He shared that Closed session was called to order at 5 p.m. and no public comments were provided. He reported that not items were added to the closed session and there was no reportable action. 46 PUBLIC COMMENT None RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION Mayor Campbell recessed to closed session at 4:04 p.m. by general consent 1. THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OR FACILITIES Government Code Section 54957 Consultation with: Hermosa Beach Police Chief Paul LeBaron Mayor Pro Tem Massey addressed some of the concerns expressed during public comment by requesting clarification from City Attorney Michael Jenkins. (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: ADJOURNMENT City Council will adjourn to Wednesday June 3, 2020 at 6:00 p.m. for a virtual study session on the fiscal year 2020-21 preliminary budget. Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk 47 Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Tuesday, July 28, 2020 Closed Session Cancelled Regular Session 6:00 P.M. Virtual Meeting via Zoom City Council Mary Campbell, Mayor Justin Massey, Mayor Pro Tem Stacy Armato, Councilmember Michael Detoy, Councilmember Hany Fangary, Councilmember CALL TO ORDER The City Council Regular Meeting of the City of Hermosa Beach met via a virtual meeting held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom March 17, 2020 on the above date. Meeting was called to order by Mayor Campbell at 6:06 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was led Mayor Campbell CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Michael Jenkins shared that closed session was cancelled no there is no report to provide. Attorney Jenkins did provide an update to the City Council regarding a pending lawsuit filed by Dina Fangary against the City of Hermosa Beach alleging the City had violated the Brown Act. The court found in favor of Hermosa Beach and dismissed the claim. (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting). 48 ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Campbell shared some announcements (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link. July 28, City Council Meeting APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Detoy moved to approve the agenda, seconded by Councilmember Armato. Motion carried by majority consent. Councilmember Fangary stated that he will not be supporting the motion due to his disapproval of staff providing verbal staff reports. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: Councilmember Fangary PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS Jacqueline Sun and Tom Bakaly with Beach Cities Health District provided a COVID-19 presentation and update. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER City Manager Lowenthal provided an update on COVID-19 response. She also introduced Fire Station 100 B Shift Crew, but due to an emergency call, members of the B shift were not available. She closed out her report by introducing Los Angeles County West Vector Control Delegate Jim Fasola to provide an update. (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting) PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS The following people provided public comment: 1. Charles Sheldon 2. Mark Hopkins (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting) 49 1. ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Written communication was provided from Tony Higgins, and Ken Hartley MOTION: Councilmember Armato moved to receive and file written communications, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Massey. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell Mayor Pro Tem Massey commented that one of the written communications submitted was a cure and correct letter regarding the Brown Act. He then proceeded to ask City Attorney Jenkins if he had any information he could share in regarding the letter. City Attorney Jenkins responded that this item will be brought back for Council consideration under an agenized item. A staff report and recommendation will be provided to Council as customary with all Brown Act complaints. (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the Ci ty Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking on the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting). 2. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Fangary asked that item 2k be pulled from the consent calendar for separate consideration. MOTION: Councilmember Armato moved to approve the balance of the consent calendar, seconded by Councilmember Detoy. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell a. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES b. CHECK REGISTER c. REVENUE REPORT, EXPENDITURE REPORT, AND CIP REPORT BY PROJECT FOR JUNE 2020 d. CITY TREASURER’S REPORT AND CASH BALANCE REPORT 50 e. CANCELLATION OF CERTAIN CHECKS f. ACTION MINUTES OF PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 20, 2020 g. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT STATUS REPORT AS OF JULY 21, 2020 h. ACTION SHEET OF PLANNING COMMISSION i. PLANNING COMMISSION TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS j. APPROVE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND STAR EDUCATION TO PROVIDE CHILDCARE SERVICES FOR CHILDREN ENROLLED IN THE HERMOSA BEACH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT k. EASY READER 50TH ANNIVERSARY AD Item 2k was pulled from the consent calendar by Councilmember Fangary for separate consideration. 3. CONSENT ORDINANCE None 4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION 2k. EASY READER 50TH ANNIVERSAY AD Councilmember Fangary shared his reasons for pulling this item from the consent calendar, which include a possible conflict of interest. Mayor Pro Tem Massey asked City Attorney Jenkins if he had a response to the letter submitted by a community member regarding a possible conflict of interest with this agenda item. City Attorney Jenkins clarified that based on his review of current conflict of interest law no conflict exists in this matter. Ken Helen provided public comment for this item. (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be 51 accessed by clicking the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting). MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Massey moved to approve staff recommendation, seconded by Mayor Campbell. Motion was approved by majority consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell. NOES: Councilmember Fangary 5. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS a. C 42 #9 – CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A MURAL DISPLAY MEASUREING APPROXIMATELY 3,376 SQUARE FEET ON THE WEST FACING BUILDING WALL OF THE HISTORIC BIJOU BUILDING LOCATED AT 1221 HERMOSA AVENUE AND DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS CATEFORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 15301 AND 15061 (B)(3) UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) MOTION: Councilmember Fangary moved to approve staff recommendation, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Massey. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None 6. MUNICIPAL MATTERS a. ADOPTION OF AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, THAT REQUIRES MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO WEAR FACE COVERINGS; AND TO CONFIRM CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 2020-09 REGARDING SUSPENDING LOCAL ZONING REGULATIONS TO PERMIT SPECIFIED BUSINESSES TO OPERATE OUTDOORS AND TO PERMIT CERTAIN HOME OCCUPATIONS TO OPERATE WITHOUT A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS LOCATION DURING THE COVID-19 CRISIS (Verbal report, no vote required) The following people provided public comment: 1. Raymond Dussault 2. Dency Nelson 3. Lauren Nacano 4. Laura Pena 5. Dean Francois 6. John David 7. David Eperly 8. Angelina (no last name provided) 52 9. Chad (No last name provided) 10. Amanda (No last name provided) 11. Andrew Voguely 12. Dre (No last name provided) 13. Jessica Accamando 14. Jeff Davis (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking on the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting). MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Massey moved to approve staff recommendation, seconded by Mayor Campbell. Motion carried by majority consent. AYES: Council Member Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: Councilmember Fangary b. RECEIVE REPORT ON EMERGENCY ENFORCEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH PANDEMIC-RELATED HEALTH ORDERS FROM BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES HEALTH DEPARTMENT MOTION: Mayor Campbell moved to continue item 6b to the August 11 City Council Meeting, seconded by Councilmember Detoy. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Council Member Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None c. ADOPTION OF AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING AND EXTENDING THE DURATION OF THE TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON FORCLOSURERS AND RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL EVICTIONS FOR NONPAYMENT OF RENT DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem moved to adopt the Urgency Ordinance 1414U, seconded by Councilmember Armato. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Council Member Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None d. REVIEW OF CITY’S PARKING ASSET RESTRICTIONS IN LIGHT OF ONGOING CHANGES TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY HEALTH ORDER 53 MOTION: Councilmember Detoy moved to open Lot C to pre COVID-19 status, seconded by Mayor Campbell. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell. NOES: None MOTION TO EXTEND THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO 12:45 a.m. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Massey moved to extend the City Council meeting to 12:45 p.m., seconded my Mayor Campbell. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Masses, and Mayor Campbell. e. APPROVE CONTRACT WITH UNITED STORM WATER INC. TO PURCHASE AND INSTALL STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN SCREEN DEVICES ON CITY AND COUNTY-OWNED STORM DRAINS FOR CIP 419 Public comment was provided by: 1. Craig Cadwallder (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking on the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting). MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Massey moved to approve staff recommendation, seconded by councilmember Armato. Motion carried by majority consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None f. AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS TO PROVIDE ON- CALL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES MOTION: Councilmember Armato moved to approve staff recommendation, seconded by Councilmember Detoy. Motion carried by Majority consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: Councilmember Fangary g. DISSOLUTION OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN 54 THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH, THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, THE CITY OF TORRANCE, AND THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RELATED TO DESIGN OF JOINT REGIONAL PROJECTS WITHIN THE SMB 6-01 ANALYSIS REGION OF THE ENHANCED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROFRAM (EWMP) FOR THE BEACH CITIES WATERSHED MANAGEMENT GROUP Public comment was provided by: 1. Craig Cadwallder 2. David Grethen (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking on the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting). MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Massey moved to approve staff recommendation, seconded by Councilmember Armato. Motion carried by majority consent . AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: Councilmember Fangary MOTION TO EXTEND THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO 1:00 a.m. MOTION: Councilmember Detoy moved to extend the City Council meeting to 1:00 a.m., seconded my Mayor Campbell. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Masses, and Mayor Campbell. NOE: None 7. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL a. VACANCIES – BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS – EXPIRATION OF TERMS CIVIL SERVICE BOARD APPOINTMENTS MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Massey moved to approve the appointment of Vanessa Zimmer and Doug Collins to the Civil Service Board, seconded by Councilmember Armato. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None b. UPCOMING VACNCIES: THREE PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION TERMS 55 EXPIRE OCTOBER 31, 2020 MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Massey moved to approve staff recommendation, seconded by Councilmember Detoy. Motion carried by unanimous consent. AYES: Councilmembers Armato, Detoy, Fangary, Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None c. UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES AND STANDING COMMITTEE DELEGATES/ALTERNATES Mayor Campbell shared that the Economic Development committee will be meeting on Monday August 3, 2020. 8. OTHER MATTERS – CITY COUNCIL a. TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS MOTION: Councilmember Detoy moved receive and file, seconded by Councilmember Armato. AYES: Armato, Detoy, Fangary, and Mayor Pro Tem Massey, and Mayor Campbell NOES: None (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking on the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting). ADJOURNMENT Mayor Campbell adjourned the City Council meeting in memory of Danay DiVirgilio and provided comments about Ms. DiVirgilio and her life. Meeting concluded at 1:04 a.m. (Complete audio and video is available upon request at the City Clerk’s office or can be accessed by clicking on the following link: July 28, City Council Meeting). Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk 56 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0491 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 CHECK REGISTERS (Finance Director Viki Copeland) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council ratify the following check registers. Attachments: 1.Check Register 7/16/2020 2.Check Register 7/22/2020 3.Check Register 7/27/2020 Respectfully Submitted by: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™57 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95189 7/16/2020 ACCELA INC INV-ACC52143 ACCELA SUBSCRIPTIONS/JUL20-JUN2105817 715-1206-4201 32,136.12 Total : 32,136.1205817 95190 7/16/2020 ACCELA INC INV-ACC52089 UPGRADE/PROGRESS PMTS 15 & 16/MAY2005817 715-4201-4201 16,709.33 Total : 16,709.3305817 95191 7/16/2020 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CO OP 20051 TAXI VOUCHER PROGRAM/MAY2011437 145-3404-4201 1,234.30 Total : 1,234.3011437 95192 7/16/2020 ADVANCED IMAGING OF SO BAY Mat Req 874696 EMPLOYEE FIRST AID/JUN2014070 001-1203-4320 252.00 Total : 252.0014070 95193 7/16/2020 AGUILAR, MICHELLE Receipt 2002385.003 CANCELLED CLASS DUE TO COVID21918 001-2111 120.00 Total : 120.0021918 95194 7/16/2020 ASPEN ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP 3465.001-12 TRANSPAC FIBER OPTIC EIR/FEB20-MAR2008614 001-2108 15,770.00 TRANSPACIFIC FIBER OPTIC EIR/APR203465.001-13R 001-2108 8,326.25 Total : 24,096.2508614 95195 7/16/2020 BERLANT, ALISON C Parcel 4187-025-054 STREET LIGHT & SEWER TAX REBATE21917 001-6871 124.12 105-3105 24.61 Total : 148.7321917 95196 7/16/2020 BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENESEN 255784 LEGAL SRVCS/LABOR NEGOTIATIONS/MAY2020054 001-1203-4201 1,681.50 Total : 1,681.5020054 95197 7/16/2020 CANON BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, INC 4032979354 RECORDS COPIER 2/29/20-5/30/2010838 715-2101-4201 55.42 Total : 55.4210838 2b (1)58 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95198 7/16/2020 CDWG ZFD2155 KRAUSS/HUDSON/ADOBE ACROBAT09632 715-1206-4201 139.00 MAT REQ 874175/TONERZFP0309 001-2101-4305 223.76 001-3302-4305 594.13 Total : 956.8909632 95199 7/16/2020 CENTENO'S NURSERY & LANDSCAPE 33131 VALLEY PARK TREES07589 125-8546-4201 2,400.00 Total : 2,400.0007589 95200 7/16/2020 CHARM-TEX, INC.0221570-IN 10 TRIGGER SPRAY BOTTLES19277 001-2101-4305 12.90 001-2101-4305 12.00 Total : 24.9019277 95201 7/16/2020 CHOUEITI, CYNTHIA Covid-19 Refund SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND21870 001-2111 1,110.00 Total : 1,110.0021870 95202 7/16/2020 COMPLETES PLUS 01AE4690 to 9287 VEHICLE MAINT/REPAIR PARTS/JUN2009436 715-2101-4311 15.23 715-3104-4311 72.00 715-3302-4311 124.35 Total : 211.5809436 95203 7/16/2020 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 456048 MAT REQ 874695/FINGERPRINTING/JUN2000364 001-1203-4251 32.00 Total : 32.0000364 95204 7/16/2020 DEWEY PEST CONTROL Account 1233239 SEWER RAT ABATEMENT/JUL2011449 160-3102-4201 262.00 Total : 262.0011449 95205 7/16/2020 DUDEK 202002364 PW YARD REMEDIATION/MAR2020611 001-8615-4201 112.50 PW YARD REMEDIATION/APR20202003110 001-8615-4201 450.00 Total : 562.5020611 59 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95206 7/16/2020 DUNCAN SOLUTIONS, INC.1001109 CITATION PMT SYS FEES/MAY2020668 001-1204-4201 2,880.83 Total : 2,880.8320668 95207 7/16/2020 DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION 2167062149 REQ 008552/BEACH RESTROOM DOOR PAINT19935 001-4204-4309 271.15 Total : 271.1519935 95208 7/16/2020 EMPIRE PIPE CLEANING AND EQUIP 11938 SEWER TROUBLE SPOT CLEANING/JUN2007853 160-3102-4201 17,441.13 Total : 17,441.1307853 95209 7/16/2020 ESA PCR 154899 1221 HERMOSA CERT OF APPROPRIATENESS17096 001-2181 1,092.50 Total : 1,092.5017096 95210 7/16/2020 FAMILY THEATRE INC PO 35159 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT/CLASSES 8621/895316932 001-4601-4221 2,394.00 Total : 2,394.0016932 95211 7/16/2020 FLYING LION, INC.1130 JULY 4TH DRONE SRVCS/9 HOURS21402 153-2106-4201 2,700.00 Total : 2,700.0021402 95212 7/16/2020 FRONTIER 310-318-0113-1203155 EOC ANALOG LINES/JUL2019884 715-1206-4304 1,229.50 CASHIER TAPS LINE/JUL20310-318-8751-0128095 001-1204-4304 65.35 EOC CABLE & INTERNET/JUL20323-159-2268-0924145 001-1201-4304 295.58 Total : 1,590.4319884 95213 7/16/2020 GOLDEN TOUCH CLEANING, INC.67256 JANITORIAL/CITY-OWNED BLDGS/JUN2020627 001-4204-4201 9,111.00 Total : 9,111.0020627 95214 7/16/2020 GROH, MARK L.HB-007 CITATION HEARING EXAMINER/JUL2021597 001-1204-4201 96.00 Total : 96.0021597 60 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95215 7/16/2020 HARRIS & ASSOCIATES 44954 SEWER PHASE 2 CONSTRUCT MGMT/MAY2002102 160-8416-4201 890.00 SEWER PHASE 2 CONSTRUCT MGMT/JUN2045304 160-8416-4201 2,220.00 Total : 3,110.0002102 95216 7/16/2020 HARTZOG & CRABILL, INC.20-0122 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING/SKECHERS/FEB2014204 001-2131 315.00 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING/SKECHERS/JAN2020-0271 001-2131 210.00 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING/SKECHERS/APR2020-0271 001-2131 630.00 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING/SKECHERS/MAY2020-0324 001-2131 157.50 Total : 1,312.5014204 95217 7/16/2020 HDL SOFTWARE LLC SIN001686 BUS LIC SOFTWARE/CLOUD HOST 20/2111122 715-1206-4201 14,003.58 Total : 14,003.5811122 95218 7/16/2020 HOLMAN PROFESSIONAL INV2016212 EAP PROGRAM/PART-TIME STAFF/JUN2013909 001-1203-4189 224.48 Total : 224.4813909 95219 7/16/2020 I, MIRZA Receipt 2002384.003 REFUND/CLASS CANCELLED DUE TO COVID21919 001-2111 99.00 Total : 99.0021919 95220 7/16/2020 L.A. COUNTY PROSECUTORS ASSOC.PO 35160 2 YEAR MEMBERSHIP DUES 2020-202211422 001-1132-4315 100.00 Total : 100.0011422 95221 7/16/2020 LA CO SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT 203935BL MAT REQ 479468/PRISONER MEALS/JUN2000151 001-2101-4306 49.54 Total : 49.5400151 95222 7/16/2020 LEAGUE OF CA CITIES 3854 CITY MEMBERSHIP DUES/JUL20-JUN2104186 001-1101-4315 1,281.00 Total : 1,281.0004186 61 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95223 7/16/2020 LUIKS, LUDOVICA Parcel 4187-013-011 STREET LIGHT & SEWER TAX REBATE07847 001-6871 124.12 105-3105 24.61 Total : 148.7307847 95224 7/16/2020 M6 CONSULTING INC 1388-20 LAND USE PLAN CHECKS/MAY2019487 001-4202-4201 9,657.50 LAND USE PLAN CHECKS/SKECHERS/MAY201389-20 001-2131 1,402.50 LAND USE PLAN CHECKS/JUN201390-20 001-4202-4201 10,395.00 LAND USE PLAN CHECKS/SKECHERS/JUN201391-20 001-4202-4201 3,565.50 Total : 25,020.5019487 95225 7/16/2020 MANIACI INSURANCE SERVICES 933 BENEFITS CONNECT ADMIN/JUN2018312 001-1203-4201 599.76 Total : 599.7618312 95226 7/16/2020 MERCHANTS LANDSCAPE SERVICES 56268 GREENBELT/8TH & 11TH/TRIM CORAL TREES18071 001-6101-4201 3,600.00 GREENBELT/PLANT 50 TREES56269 125-8546-4201 5,540.00 CITYWIDE LANDSCAPING/PARKS/JUN2056285 001-6101-4201 21,200.00 CITYWIDE LANDSCAPING/MEDIANS/JUN2056286 105-2601-4201 3,600.00 GREENBELT WOODCHIP REPLACEMENT56363 001-6101-4309 2,400.00 REMOVE BROKEN PINE/GREENBELT56364 001-6101-4201 1,500.00 TRIM TREE CANOPY FOR WIFI SIGNAL56399 001-6101-4201 1,700.00 Total : 39,540.0018071 95227 7/16/2020 MINUTEMAN PRESS 26948 BUSINESS CARDS, 4 SETS OF 250~12055 001-1208-4305 289.00 001-1208-4305 27.46 62 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 316.46 95227 7/16/2020 MINUTEMAN PRESS12055 95228 7/16/2020 MUNISERVICES LLC INV06-009140 UTILITY USER TAX AUDIT/APR20-JUN2010324 001-1203-4201 2,500.00 Total : 2,500.0010324 95229 7/16/2020 NICASSIO, BETSY Rec 2002382003/3003 SUMMER CAMP REFUND DUE TO COVID21761 001-2111 775.00 Total : 775.0021761 95230 7/16/2020 NV5, INC 167612 GREENWICH/ASSESS ENGINEER/MAY2021033 001-2133 550.00 Total : 550.0021033 95231 7/16/2020 OFFICE DEPOT 100218557001 MAT REQ 874691/PENCILS13114 001-1203-4305 62.21 MAT REQ 874055/FACE MASKS100509583001 001-1208-4305 161.51 MAT REQ 874055/ENVELOPE MOISTENERS100509583001 001-1208-4305 2.17 MAT REQ 874692/OFFICE SUPPLIES100974041001 001-1203-4305 55.52 MAT REQ 874174/DVD-RS (100)509982941001 001-2101-4305 49.26 MAT REQ 708564/TISSUE/STAMPS/PENS511992629001 001-1121-4305 75.63 Total : 406.3013114 95232 7/16/2020 PIERCE, MARILYN Parcel 4184-025-097 STREET LIGHT & SEWER TAX REBATE13322 001-6871 124.12 105-3105 24.61 Total : 148.7313322 95233 7/16/2020 PINEDA, LUIS PO 35139 REIMB/TUITION/FEES/SUMMER '2020016 001-2101-4317 4,090.70 Total : 4,090.7020016 95234 7/16/2020 PITNEY BOWES INC 014509041 POSTAGE METER SCALE RENTAL/JUL19-DEC1913838 715-1208-4201 57.00 63 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 57.00 95234 7/16/2020 PITNEY BOWES INC13838 95235 7/16/2020 PROSUM TECHNOLOGY SERVICES SIN026095 IT SUPPORT SERVICES/JUN2011539 715-1206-4201 15,046.00 Total : 15,046.0011539 95236 7/16/2020 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 42520868 to 9284 YARD UNIFORMS, TOWELS, &/OR MATS/JUN2017676 001-2101-4309 99.24 001-3104-4309 72.54 001-3302-4309 89.34 001-4202-4314 364.60 001-4204-4309 239.88 715-4206-4309 59.04 Total : 924.6417676 95237 7/16/2020 PSOMAS 162379 SEWER IMPROVE DESIGN/APR2013608 160-8421-4201 14,247.80 SEWER IMPROVE DESIGN/MAY20163168 160-8421-4201 5,222.50 Total : 19,470.3013608 95238 7/16/2020 QUINLAN, MARILYN S.Parcel 4185-014-019 STREET LIGHT & SEWER TAX REBATE21400 001-6871 74.47 105-3105 24.61 Total : 99.0821400 95239 7/16/2020 RED SECURITY GROUP, LLC 66262/Mat Req 863147 8 STRAND RESTROOM LOCKS13255 001-4204-4309 998.28 MAT REQ 874176/DUPLICATE KEYS (10)66393 001-2101-4309 54.75 Total : 1,053.0313255 95240 7/16/2020 SAGECREST PLANNING AND ENVIRON 1959 SENIOR PLANNER/JUN2021406 001-4101-4201 10,120.00 Total : 10,120.0021406 95241 7/16/2020 SAPKUS, MARIUS Parcel 4181-024-015 SEWER & STREET LIGHT TAX REBATE20595 001-6871 124.12 105-3105 24.61 64 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 148.73 95241 7/16/2020 SAPKUS, MARIUS20595 95242 7/16/2020 SCHOONOVER, RICHARD V.Parcel 4186-017-008 STREET LIGHT & SEWER TAX REBATE20982 001-6871 124.12 105-3105 24.61 Total : 148.7320982 95243 7/16/2020 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 1391-1 MAT REQ 008551/BEACH RESTROOM PAINT17903 001-4204-4309 33.40 Total : 33.4017903 95244 7/16/2020 SIEMENS INDUSTRY INC 5620031010 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINT/MAY2007158 001-3104-4201 1,067.50 Total : 1,067.5007158 95245 7/16/2020 SMART & FINAL 3220630010356 REQ 479455/JAIL/BRIEFING/COFFEE SUPPLIES00114 001-2101-4306 65.23 001-2101-4305 65.24 MAT REQ 479457/JAIL/MILK3220630011895 001-2101-4306 10.74 REQ 479462/JAIL/BRIEF/CUPS/PLATES/CRMR3220630014616 001-2101-4306 48.58 001-2101-4305 48.58 MAT REQ 479453/JAIL/PLATES/CUPS3220630018844 001-2101-4306 29.52 REQ 437805/BASE 3/KITCHEN SUPPLIES3220630058690 001-3302-4309 116.65 MAT REQ 479458/JAIL/MILK/JUICE BOXES3220630059527 001-2101-4306 20.73 REQ 479452/WATER/EXTENDED SHIFTS33220630026160 001-2101-4305 25.14 Total : 430.4100114 95246 7/16/2020 SOUTH BAY CITIES COUNCIL OF PO 35140 CITY MEMBERSHIP DUES FY 20/2100341 001-1101-4315 12,067.00 Total : 12,067.0000341 95247 7/16/2020 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO 2-01-414-3747 ELECTRICITY/JUN2000159 105-2601-4303 21.18 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-23-725-4420 65 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 9 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95247 7/16/2020 (Continued)SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO00159 001-4204-4303 6,156.00 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-39-985-7812 001-4204-4303 1,410.64 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-41-090-1755 001-4204-4303 44.35 Total : 7,632.1700159 95248 7/16/2020 SPORTS CAMP MANAGEMENT PO 35161 INSTRUCT PMT/CLASSES 8917/8/27/8/3718036 001-4601-4221 9,910.60 Total : 9,910.6018036 95249 7/16/2020 THAYER'S DIST. & ELECTRICAL 7193 PW OFFICE ON BARD/GATE REPAIR21075 001-4204-4201 195.00 Total : 195.0021075 95250 7/16/2020 T-MOBILE Account 946625962 RECORDS/WATCH COMM/CELL PHONES/JUN2019082 001-2101-4304 26.40 YARD/CELL PHONES/HOTSPOTS/JUN20Account 954297746 001-4202-4304 285.21 Total : 311.6119082 95251 7/16/2020 TURBODATA SYSTEMS, INC.32631 CITATION WRITER WIRELESS FEES/JUN2020670 001-3302-4201 1,250.00 Total : 1,250.0020670 95252 7/16/2020 VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES 71509894 VOIP PHONES/BARD/MAY2018666 001-3302-4304 69.27 VOIP PHONES/YARD/MAY2071510066 001-4202-4304 143.84 VOIP PHONES/CITY HALL/PD/MAY2071510509 001-1101-4304 38.19 001-1121-4304 60.13 001-1132-4304 17.98 001-1141-4304 35.92 001-1201-4304 147.43 001-1202-4304 89.90 001-1203-4304 71.88 001-1204-4304 107.85 66 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 10 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95252 7/16/2020 (Continued)VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES18666 001-1208-4304 6.74 001-2101-4304 809.40 001-4101-4304 132.11 001-4201-4304 144.94 001-4202-4304 179.82 001-4204-4321 17.97 160-3102-4201 18.01 715-1206-4304 17.94 VOIP PHONES/COMM RES/MAY2071510696 001-4601-4304 141.20 VOIP PHONES/EOC GYMS/MAY2071511212 001-1201-4304 61.36 VOIP PHONES/BASE 3/MAY2071511406 001-3302-4304 107.89 Total : 2,419.7718666 95253 7/16/2020 WEBB, W. ROBERT Parcel 4181-016-014 STREET LIGHT & SEWER TAX REBATE09718 001-6871 124.12 105-3105 24.61 Total : 148.7309718 95254 7/16/2020 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC 88939 MAT REQ 987159/PERFORATED TUBES (25)01206 001-3104-4309 822.62 MAT REQ 987160/PERFORATED TUBES (15)88940 001-3104-4309 897.70 REQ 987161/STREET SIGN/6TH COURT89046 001-3104-4309 287.93 Total : 2,008.2501206 2072100722 7/6/2020 ADMINSURE AS AGENT FOR THE 7/16/20 Check Run WORK COMP CLAIMS REIMB/JUN2014691 705-1217-4324 10,203.75 Total : 10,203.7514691 Bank total : 308,592.54 67 Vouchers for bank code :boa 308,592.54Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 67 67 07/16/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 11 5:48:26PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages 1 to 11 inclusive, of the check register for 7/16/2020 are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date 7/16/2020 68 07/22/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 10:37:19AM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 610108744 6/15/2020 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET 65395781 VEHICLE FUEL 4/11/20-5/10/2010668 715-2101-4310 4,012.58 715-3104-4310 212.20 715-3302-4310 940.71 715-4204-4310 139.69 715-4206-4310 204.63 715-6101-4310 228.06 Total : 5,737.8710668 620138966 6/11/2020 PITNEY BOWES INC 7/22/20 Check Run POSTAGE METER REFILL/JUN2013838 001-1208-4305 1,000.00 Total : 1,000.0013838 780124417 6/29/2020 EXXON MOBIL BUSINESS FLEET 65935672 VEHICLE FUEL 5/11/20-6/10/2010668 001-1250 51.69 715-2101-4310 5,425.10 715-3104-4310 221.87 715-3302-4310 1,405.26 715-4201-4310 38.36 715-4204-4310 397.04 715-4206-4310 283.66 715-6101-4310 177.20 Total : 8,000.1810668 Bank total : 14,738.05 3 Vouchers for bank code :boa 14,738.05Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 3 2b (2)69 07/22/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 10:37:19AM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages 1 to 2 inclusive, of the check register for 7/22/2020 are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date 7/22/2020 70 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95255 7/27/2020 AFZALI, PARI Rec 2002425-8.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21958 001-2111 200.00 Total : 200.0021958 95256 7/27/2020 ALBRECHT, JACKIE Rec 2001938-40.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8927 REFUND21931 001-2111 243.00 CANCELLED BEACH CAMP REFUNDReceipt 2002397.003 001-2111 2,340.00 Total : 2,583.0021931 95257 7/27/2020 ALEMAN, EVA Receipt 2002123.003 REFUND FEES FOR REDUCED HOURS21946 001-2111 30.00 Total : 30.0021946 95258 7/27/2020 ALNES, MICHAEL Receipt 2001874.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8673 REFUND21864 001-2111 340.00 Total : 340.0021864 95259 7/27/2020 AMGRAPH GROUP, INC 8584011 JULY 4TH FLAG INSTALL/REMOVE17965 001-1101-4319 2,814.00 Total : 2,814.0017965 95260 7/27/2020 APWA SOUTHERN CA CHAPTER ID 65927 STAFF MEMBERSHIP/JAN20-DEC2012275 001-4202-4315 1,062.50 Total : 1,062.5012275 95261 7/27/2020 AT&T 310 796-6526 991 3 PD COMPUTER CIRCUITS/JUL2000321 001-2101-4304 123.80 PD COMPUTER CIRCUITS/JUL20960 461-1985 555 7 001-2101-4304 108.64 Total : 232.4400321 95262 7/27/2020 BAKAYA, VIMARSH Rec 2001902-3.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8671 REFUND21729 001-2111 680.00 CANCELLED CLASS 8746 REFUNDReceipt 2001928.003 001-2111 110.00 Total : 790.0021729 95263 7/27/2020 BARKER, CINDY Rec 2001878/9.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8673 REFUND21913 2b (3)71 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95263 7/27/2020 (Continued)BARKER, CINDY21913 001-2111 680.00 Total : 680.0021913 95264 7/27/2020 BARNETT, JODI Receipt 2002412.003 CANCELLED CLASS 8624 REFUND21811 001-2111 175.00 Total : 175.0021811 95265 7/27/2020 BEACH GIRL PROPERTIES LLC 254 PARKING METERS - 70 14TH STREET/MAY2016371 001-3842 650.00 PARKING METERS - 70 14TH STREET/JUN20255 001-3842 650.00 PARKING METERS - 70 14TH STREET/JUL20256 001-3842 650.00 Total : 1,950.0016371 95266 7/27/2020 BECK, ALEXANDRA Receipt 2001860.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8851 REFUND21765 001-2111 185.00 Total : 185.0021765 95267 7/27/2020 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP 880833 GENERAL CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES/JUN2020942 001-1131-4201 18,718.70 CITY ATTORNEY/NORTH SCHOOL MOU/JUN20880834 001-1131-4201 2,075.70 CITY ATTORNEY/INFILTRATION PROJECT/JUN20880835 001-1131-4201 255.10 ATTORNEY/PUBLIC RECORDS REQS/JUN20880836 001-1131-4201 2,006.00 CITY ATTORNEY/COVID-19/JUN20880837 001-1131-4201 8,085.88 CITY ATTORNEY/LAND USE/JUN20880838 001-1131-4201 6,900.30 CITY ATTORNEY/CROSSFIT HORSEPOWER/JUN20880839 705-1133-4201 2.00 CITY ATTORNEY/ROTH V TRAN/JUN20880840 705-1133-4201 1,587.90 CITY ATTORNEY/HERMOSA FITNESS/JUN20880841 705-1133-4201 239.80 CITY ATTORNEY/FANGARY/JUN20880842 72 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 3 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95267 7/27/2020 (Continued)BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP20942 705-1133-4201 2,641.60 CITY ATTORNEY/MUZATKO/JUN20880843 705-1133-4201 15,863.40 CITY ATTORNEY/PERSONNEL/JUN20880844 001-1203-4201 2,489.20 Total : 60,865.5820942 95268 7/27/2020 BOYLE, CHRISTINA PAULETTE Receipt 2002433.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND14324 001-2111 45.00 Total : 45.0014324 95269 7/27/2020 BRAUN LINEN SERVICE 1621152 to 1624715 PRISONER LAUNDRY/JUN2000163 001-2101-4306 229.35 Total : 229.3500163 95270 7/27/2020 BRUSSEAU, MARI Receipt 2001936.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8927 REFUND18307 001-2111 79.00 Total : 79.0018307 95271 7/27/2020 BURGESS, DAIDRE Receipt 2002399.003 CANCELLED CLASS 8600 REFUND21825 001-2111 405.00 Total : 405.0021825 95272 7/27/2020 CAPITAL WHOLESALE LIGHTING 428433 MAT REQ 874751/ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES21720 105-2601-4309 893.46 Total : 893.4621720 95273 7/27/2020 CAPRCBM PO 35157 MEMBERSHIP/JUL20-JUN2115505 001-4601-4315 250.00 Total : 250.0015505 95274 7/27/2020 CARLISLE, EUNJU Rec 2001907/8.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8671 REFUND18434 001-2111 680.00 Total : 680.0018434 95275 7/27/2020 CDWG XVZ4872 CITY MANAGER/WIRELESS KEYBOARD/MOUSE09632 715-1206-5401 55.80 715-1206-5401 5.30 MAT REQ 649688/PRINTER TONERZJR4521 73 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95275 7/27/2020 (Continued)CDWG09632 715-1206-4305 1,339.32 MAT REQ 649688/PRINTER TONERZJR6087 715-1206-4305 1,559.28 MAT REQ 874180/PRINTER TONERZJT5713 001-2101-4305 102.46 MAT REQ 874180/PRINTER TONERZJW8434 001-2101-4305 370.39 MAT REQ 874182/PRINTER TONER/LT OFFICEZKJ8006 001-2101-4305 47.67 Total : 3,480.2209632 95276 7/27/2020 COAR, CELESTE Rec 2002454-5.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND10614 001-2111 95.00 Total : 95.0010614 95277 7/27/2020 COLANTUONO, HIGHSMITH &42877 LEGAL SRVCS/UUT LAWSUIT/JUN2021871 705-1133-4201 165.97 Total : 165.9721871 95278 7/27/2020 COLE, SCOTT Receipt 2002392.003 CANCELLED CLASS 8640 REFUND21927 001-2111 115.00 Total : 115.0021927 95279 7/27/2020 CONWAY, KRISTINE Receipt 2001871.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8666 REFUND21905 001-2111 199.00 Total : 199.0021905 95280 7/27/2020 COTTON, DANI Receipt 2001945.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8917 REFUND21984 001-2111 81.00 Total : 81.0021984 95281 7/27/2020 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES C0009504 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES/AUG2020781 001-2202-4251 458,519.00 180-2202-4251 3,589.00 001-2202-5601 30,306.00 001-2202-4111 10,630.00 Total : 503,044.0020781 95282 7/27/2020 CPRS ID 118249 NICHOLS/MEMBERSHIP07700 74 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 5 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95282 7/27/2020 (Continued)CPRS07700 001-4601-4315 145.00 Total : 145.0007700 95283 7/27/2020 CURTO, SHARON Rec 2002446-8.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21763 001-2111 150.00 Total : 150.0021763 95284 7/27/2020 DEVINE, ALLY Rec 2001890-1.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8663 REFUND21973 001-2111 398.00 Total : 398.0021973 95285 7/27/2020 DLR GROUP INC 0177900 THEATRE NEEDS ASSESS/MAY2021716 301-8693-4201 18,676.55 Total : 18,676.5521716 95286 7/27/2020 DUGARY, STEPHANIE Receipt 2001930.003 CLASS 8570 WITHDRAWAL REFUND21942 001-2111 294.00 Total : 294.0021942 95287 7/27/2020 EASLEY, BETTY Receipt 2002453.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21771 001-2111 45.00 Total : 45.0021771 95288 7/27/2020 EELLS, AMY Rec 2002403/4.003 BEACH CAMP WITHDRAWAL DUE TO COVID21824 001-2111 775.00 Total : 775.0021824 95289 7/27/2020 ESZLINGER, PEARL Receipt 2002437.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21759 001-2111 45.00 Total : 45.0021759 95290 7/27/2020 FADHLI RAYMOND, AMY Receipt 2002394.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP REFUND21932 001-2111 390.00 Total : 390.0021932 95291 7/27/2020 FANOUS, STEPHANIE Receipt 2001926.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8930 REFUND21985 001-2111 380.00 Total : 380.0021985 75 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95292 7/27/2020 FEENY, ELSA Receipt 2001887.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8655 REFUND21975 001-2111 199.00 Total : 199.0021975 95293 7/27/2020 FOWLER, DEREK Covid-19 Refund CANCELLED SURF CAMP REFUND21978 001-2111 597.00 Total : 597.0021978 95294 7/27/2020 FRONTIER 209-188-4669-0714985 LANDLINES/COMPUTER LINKS/JUL2019884 001-3302-4304 73.86 001-2101-4304 716.44 001-4204-4321 228.40 001-4202-4304 59.76 001-4201-4304 168.32 001-3304-4304 61.70 001-1204-4304 57.62 PD COMPUTER CIRCUITS/JUL20209-190-0013-1206175 001-2101-4304 905.42 JAIL BREATHALYZER/JUL20310-318-9210-0827185 001-2101-4304 69.35 CHAMBERS EOC ANALOG LINES/JUL20310-318-9800-1204155 715-1206-4304 1,450.46 HUMAN RESOURCES/FAX LINE/JUL20310-372-6373-0311045 001-1203-4304 57.62 FIBER OPTIC LINE 7/13/20-8/12/20323-155-6779-0822065 715-1206-4201 215.98 Total : 4,064.9319884 95295 7/27/2020 GARCIA, MEGHAN Receipt 2001946.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8917 REFUND21969 001-2111 81.00 Total : 81.0021969 95296 7/27/2020 GEIGER, JESSICA Rec 2001900/1.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8671 REFUND21970 001-2111 680.00 Total : 680.0021970 95297 7/27/2020 GERBER, KATHLEEN Covid-19 Refund CANCELLED SURF CAMP REFUND21974 001-2111 567.00 Total : 567.0021974 76 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 7 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95298 7/27/2020 GIBSON, LISA Rec 2001896-8.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8671 REFUND21943 001-2111 1,020.00 CANCELLED CLASS 8927 REFUNDRec 2001933-5.003 001-2111 237.00 REFUND/CLASS 8930 OVER-ENROLL WITHDRAWReceipt 2001949.003 001-2111 790.00 Total : 2,047.0021943 95299 7/27/2020 GIBSON, SHARON Receipt 2002438.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21954 001-2111 45.00 Total : 45.0021954 95300 7/27/2020 GODOY, GEORGE Receipt 2002124.003 REFUND FOR REDUCED HOURS/CLASS 877821947 001-2111 30.00 Total : 30.0021947 95301 7/27/2020 GOEL, SUMEET Rec 2001875-7.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8673 REFUND21940 001-2111 1,020.00 Total : 1,020.0021940 95302 7/27/2020 GORZKOWSKI, ANNA Receipt 2002413.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8624 REFUND21936 001-2111 370.00 Total : 370.0021936 95303 7/27/2020 GROH, MARK LEE HB-006 CITATION HEARING EXAMINER/JUN2021597 001-1204-4201 168.00 Total : 168.0021597 95304 7/27/2020 GROSS, JOSHUA Receipt 20019443.003 CANCELLED CLASS 8917 REFUND21948 001-2111 81.00 Total : 81.0021948 95305 7/27/2020 HAWTHORNE, CITY OF 20-0601HBPD SOUTH BAY REGIONAL BEARCAT MAINT05345 715-2101-4311 814.82 Total : 814.8205345 95306 7/27/2020 HAYES, SUZAN Receipt 202452.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21960 001-2111 50.00 Total : 50.0021960 77 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 8 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95307 7/27/2020 HENSON, ANDREA Receipt 2002378.003 SURF CAMP 8937 WITHDRAWAL REFUND21820 001-2111 380.00 Total : 380.0021820 95308 7/27/2020 HOLDEN, ELENA Rec 2002443-5.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21767 001-2111 135.00 Total : 135.0021767 95309 7/27/2020 HOWE, AARON Receipt 2002395.003 CANCELLED SOCCER CLASS 8843 REFUND21929 001-2111 261.00 Total : 261.0021929 95310 7/27/2020 JACOBSON, EVELYN Rec 2001867/82/8.003 SURF CAMP REFUND21938 001-2111 567.00 Total : 567.0021938 95311 7/27/2020 JACOBSON, KRISTA Receipt 2002396.003 BEACH CAMP 8918 REFUND21930 001-2111 152.00 CAMP WITHDRAWAL DUE TO COSTReceipt 2002416.003 001-2111 760.00 Total : 912.0021930 95312 7/27/2020 JHD PLANNING LLC Invoice Dated 7/1/20 PLANNING SERVICES/NOV19-JUN2021491 001-4101-4201 5,100.00 Total : 5,100.0021491 95313 7/27/2020 JOHNSON, LYNN Receipt 2002429.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21957 001-2111 50.00 Total : 50.0021957 95314 7/27/2020 JONES, JULIE Rec 2001941/2.003 CANCELLED CLASS 8917 REFUND21949 001-2111 158.00 Total : 158.0021949 95315 7/27/2020 KELLEHER, JEFF Receipt 2002386.003 CANCELLED LEGO CAMP 8559 REFUND21876 001-2111 190.00 Total : 190.0021876 95316 7/27/2020 KING, LINDA J Parcel 4183-005-003 STREET LIGHT TAX REBATE18453 105-3105 24.61 78 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 9 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 24.61 95316 7/27/2020 KING, LINDA J18453 95317 7/27/2020 KRAMER, KATHLEEN A Parcel 4188-031-044 STREET LIGHT & SEWER TAX REBATE20476 001-6871 124.12 105-3105 24.61 Total : 148.7320476 95318 7/27/2020 LA CO SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT 203695BL MAT REQ 479463/PRISONER MEALS/MAY2000151 001-2101-4306 30.50 Total : 30.5000151 95319 7/27/2020 LAHMON, FABIANA Covid-19 Refund CLASS 8847/8778 WITHDRAWAL REFUND21906 001-2111 316.00 REFUND/REDUCED HOURS/CLASS 8778Receipt 2002126.003 001-2111 30.00 Total : 346.0021906 95320 7/27/2020 LAURA MECOY COMMUNICATIONS LLC 6-2020 PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER/JUN2020347 001-1201-4201 6,000.00 Total : 6,000.0020347 95321 7/27/2020 LAW, DAWN Receipt 2001046.002 RESIDENT DISCOUNT21937 001-2111 10.00 CANCELLED CAMP 8624 REFUNDReceipt 2002414.003 001-2111 175.00 Total : 185.0021937 95322 7/27/2020 LEVY, BRENDA Receipt 2002417/8.00 BEACH CAMP REFUND/SCHEDULE CONFLICT21780 001-2111 775.00 Total : 775.0021780 95323 7/27/2020 LEWIS, DONNA Receipt 2002451.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21952 001-2111 50.00 Total : 50.0021952 95324 7/27/2020 LOPATA, MIMI Receipt 2002387.003 CANCELLED LEGO CAMP 8559 REFUND21945 001-2111 190.00 Total : 190.0021945 95325 7/27/2020 LUCIC, BRITTANY Receipt 2002391.003 REFUND/CANCELLED SOCCER CLASSES21777 79 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 10 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95325 7/27/2020 (Continued)LUCIC, BRITTANY21777 001-2111 182.00 Total : 182.0021777 95326 7/27/2020 MAMBER, ERIKA Receipt 2002398.003 CLASS WITHDRAWAL DUE TO COVID21933 001-2111 380.00 Total : 380.0021933 95327 7/27/2020 MANCUSO, KELLY Receipt 2001895.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8671 REFUND21965 001-2111 340.00 Total : 340.0021965 95328 7/27/2020 MANCUSO, MARY JANE Receipt 2001863.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8669 REFUND21863 001-2111 189.00 Total : 189.0021863 95329 7/27/2020 MARTIN CHEVROLET 790119 & 790335 VEHICLE REPAIR PARTS/JUN2015912 715-2101-4311 181.52 Total : 181.5215912 95330 7/27/2020 MARTINS, DYAN Rec 2002439/40.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21951 001-2111 100.00 Total : 100.0021951 95331 7/27/2020 MCANDREWS, AMY Receipt 2001892.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8663 REFUND21972 001-2111 199.00 Total : 199.0021972 95332 7/27/2020 MCCARTNEY, EUNJUNG Rec 2002400/1/5.003 CANCELLED CAMPS 8843/8923/9/33 REFUND21816 001-2111 1,476.00 CANCELLED LEGO CAMP 8558 REFUNDReceipt 2002389.003 001-2111 200.00 Total : 1,676.0021816 95333 7/27/2020 MCCORMICK, MEGAN Receipt 2001925.003 CLASS WITHDRAWAL REFUNDS21790 001-2111 605.00 Total : 605.0021790 95334 7/27/2020 MEDINA, JULISSA Rec 2002441/2.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION21953 001-2111 100.00 80 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 11 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 100.00 95334 7/27/2020 MEDINA, JULISSA21953 95335 7/27/2020 MILLER, AMY Receipt 2001870.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8674 REFUND21980 001-2111 350.00 Total : 350.0021980 95336 7/27/2020 MILLER, MARCIA Receipt 202430.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21955 001-2111 50.00 Total : 50.0021955 95337 7/27/2020 MOKARRAM, SEDIGHE Parcel 4186-003-011 STREET LIGHT & SEWER TAX REBATE21488 105-3105 24.61 001-6871 124.12 Total : 148.7321488 95338 7/27/2020 MORENO, GEORGINA Receipt 2002390.003 CANCELLED LEGO CLASS 8559 REFUND21893 001-2111 190.00 Total : 190.0021893 95339 7/27/2020 MURGATROYD, KIMBERLY Receipt 2001943.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8917 REFUND21982 001-2111 79.00 Total : 79.0021982 95340 7/27/2020 NEBESAR, DARREN Receipt 2001927.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8942 REFUND21983 001-2111 780.00 Total : 780.0021983 95341 7/27/2020 OFFICE DEPOT 102205219001 MAT REQ 703605/HP INK/SANITIZER13114 001-4202-4305 56.34 MAT REQ 874177/OFFICE SUPPLIES103560230001 001-2101-4305 70.31 Total : 126.6513114 95342 7/27/2020 OKADA, KAYOKO Rec 2002408-11.003 SUMMER DAY CAMP CANCELLATION19621 001-2111 1,550.00 Total : 1,550.0019621 95343 7/27/2020 PARSLEY, MEGAN Receipt 2001924.003 CLASS 8558/8570 WITHDRAWAL REFUND21988 001-2111 494.00 81 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 12 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 494.00 95343 7/27/2020 PARSLEY, MEGAN21988 95344 7/27/2020 PAZZIA, JENNIFER Covid-19 Refund CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8671/6 REFUND21981 001-2111 700.00 Total : 700.0021981 95345 7/27/2020 PEETZ, JEREMY Receipt 2001904.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8671 REFUND21964 001-2111 350.00 Total : 350.0021964 95346 7/27/2020 PINEDA, LUIS PO 35139 Bal Due EDUCATION REIMB/BOOKS/SUMMER 202020016 001-2101-4317 67.34 Total : 67.3420016 95347 7/27/2020 PITNEY BOWES INC 1015972656 MAT REQ 874056/POSTAGE TAPES & INK13838 001-1208-4305 309.45 Total : 309.4513838 95348 7/27/2020 POLSKY-KEHAGAIRAS, CINDY Receipt 2001937.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8927 REFUND21812 001-2111 79.00 Total : 79.0021812 95349 7/27/2020 POLUN, MARIAN Receipt 2001864.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8676 REFUND21967 001-2111 350.00 Total : 350.0021967 95350 7/27/2020 RINDOVA, VIOLINA Receipt 2001906.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8671 REFUND21941 001-2111 340.00 Total : 340.0021941 95351 7/27/2020 RODRIGUEZ, ISABEL Rec 2002420-1.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND09745 001-2111 90.00 Total : 90.0009745 95352 7/27/2020 ROMERO, MICHELLE Receipt 2001881.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8673 REFUND21979 001-2111 350.00 Total : 350.0021979 95353 7/27/2020 ROYA NEHORAY, NANCY Covid-19 Refund CANCELLED SURF CAMP REFUND21966 001-2111 1,020.00 82 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 13 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 1,020.00 95353 7/27/2020 ROYA NEHORAY, NANCY21966 95354 7/27/2020 SADOWSKI, MARGARET A Parcel 4184-015-044 STREET LIGHT & SEWER TAX REBATE20547 105-3105 24.61 001-6871 124.12 Total : 148.7320547 95355 7/27/2020 SANTA MONICA PLASTICS, LLC Prepayment CITY HALL PLEXI-GLASS SHIELDS/DEPOSIT21848 001-4204-4201 5,183.99 Total : 5,183.9921848 95356 7/27/2020 SAVOIAN, LISSETT Rec 2002422-4.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21959 001-2111 150.00 Total : 150.0021959 95357 7/27/2020 SBCU VISA 00F0034513168 CC DRINKING WATER 5/13/20-6/12/2003353 001-2101-4305 422.02 56 BEACH RE-OPENING POSTERS11322 CC 001-1201-4201 1,960.00 001-1201-4201 186.20 HUDSON/SARMIENTO/YRLY MEMBERSHIPEmail CC 001-1121-4315 170.00 CONFERENCE LINE/MAY20IC30411-0520 CC 001-1201-4304 173.32 SENIOR CENTER MUSIC SUBSCRIP/JUL20Order ML06STB5B6 CC 001-4601-4328 9.99 WATCH COMMANDER AED BATTERYOrder No. 42612 CC 001-1201-4201 435.82 60 REUSABLE COTTON FACE MASKSPO 34895 CC 001-1214-4322 251.55 001-1214-4322 23.91 LAMINATING POUCHES FOR COVID SIGNAGEPO 34956 CC 001-1201-4305 158.37 POW/MIA FLAGS/REFUNDPO 34964 CC 001-4204-4309 -222.85 CHIEF/LT/CONF RM/ADMIN/WEB CAMSPO 35037 CC 001-2101-4305 551.94 001-2101-4305 52.44 FOUR LAPTOP CHARGERSPO 35039 CC 83 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 14 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95357 7/27/2020 (Continued)SBCU VISA03353 715-1206-4201 130.00 715-1206-4201 12.36 FIN DIR/CITY MGR/MICROPHONES/ASURIONPO 35041 CC 715-1206-5401 5.98 715-1206-5401 49.98 715-1206-5401 4.74 E-SIGNATURE SUBSCRIP 6/10/20-6/9/21PO 35066 CC 001-1121-4305 432.00 SBCCOG OUTGOING CHAIR/CITY PLAQUEPO 35073 CC 001-1101-4305 10.00 JULY 4TH DEPLOMENT/SUNSCREENPO 35113 CC 001-2101-4305 70.75 BCHD COVID TESTING/FOODPO 35124 CC 001-2101-4305 30.00 K9 KEEF MEMORIAL SERVICE/100 COOKIESPO 35128 CC 001-2101-4305 225.00 CERTIFICATE/PROCLAMATION FRAMES (4)PO 35133 CC 001-1201-4305 54.99 001-1201-4305 5.22 FLOWERS/FORMER CITY MANAGER'S FAMILYPO 35141 CC 001-1201-4305 55.99 001-1201-4305 5.32 COMPUTER CABLING FOR PDPO 35171 CC 715-1206-5401 55.74 715-1206-5401 5.31 CELL PHONE DATA STORAGE/JUN20PO 35184 CC 001-2101-4305 0.99 SSL SECURITY CERTIFICATE RENEWALS 19/20PO 35185 CC 715-1206-4201 689.95 ORAL BOARD LUNCHReceipt CC 001-1203-4201 73.24 CITY-RELATED ADS 5/11/20-6/10/20TransIDEnding8150 CC 001-1201-4201 61.29 Total : 6,151.5603353 95358 7/27/2020 SCHAUB, STEPHANIE Receipt 2001884.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8672 REFUND21977 001-2111 340.00 84 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 15 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 340.00 95358 7/27/2020 SCHAUB, STEPHANIE21977 95359 7/27/2020 SCHOLTEN, BECKY Rec 2001899/932.003 CANCELLED CAMPS 8927/8671 REFUND21925 001-2111 419.00 CAMP 8930 WITHDRAWAL REFUNDReceipt 2002380.003 001-2111 395.00 Total : 814.0021925 95360 7/27/2020 SETO, AUDREY Rec 2001947/8.003 CANCELLED CLASS 8917 REFUND21986 001-2111 162.00 Total : 162.0021986 95361 7/27/2020 SHOETERIA 0008604-IN REQ 453294/BOOTS/RODRIGUEZ/WILCOSKY20539 001-4202-4314 248.17 Total : 248.1720539 95362 7/27/2020 SILVA, ANGELA Receipt 2002388.003 CANCELLED LEGO CAMP 8559 REFUND21944 001-2111 190.00 Total : 190.0021944 95363 7/27/2020 SOCAL GAS Acct 011 004 5767 8 YARD BLDGS/NATURAL GAS/JUN2000170 001-4204-4303 26.37 Total : 26.3700170 95364 7/27/2020 SOTHERAN, SARAH Receipt 2001861.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8677 REFUND21834 001-2111 340.00 Total : 340.0021834 95365 7/27/2020 SOUTH BAY FORD 659506 MAT REQ 309686/SENSOR/VEHICLE HB810532 715-2101-4311 113.58 Total : 113.5810532 95366 7/27/2020 SOUTH BAY SHELL AND CAR WASH Mat Req 874183 CAR WASHES/APR20-JUN2018595 715-2101-4311 356.00 715-3302-4311 104.00 Total : 460.0018595 95367 7/27/2020 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BARRICADES 7363 BEACH BARRICADE RENT 5/29-6/15/2013544 001-3301-4201 458.75 85 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 16 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 458.75 95367 7/27/2020 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BARRICADES13544 95368 7/27/2020 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO 2-00-989-6911 ELECTRICITY/JUN2000159 105-2601-4303 74.35 ELECTRICITY/MAY/JUN20/PMT 26/852-00-989-7315 105-2601-4303 14,500.65 001-4204-4303 1,568.47 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-01-414-1071 001-4204-4303 3,253.04 105-2601-4303 275.59 ELECTRICITY/MAY20-JUN202-01-414-2152 001-6101-4303 1,664.47 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-01-414-3994 160-3102-4201 53.36 ELECTRICITY/MAY20-JUN202-01-414-4281 105-2601-4303 203.95 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-01-414-5106 001-3104-4303 536.71 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-01-836-7458 105-2601-4303 15.10 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-02-274-0542 001-6101-4303 11.80 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-08-629-3669 001-4204-4303 29.78 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-09-076-5850 105-2601-4303 106.38 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-20-128-4825 001-3304-4303 2,111.98 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-20-128-5475 001-4204-4303 357.56 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-20-984-6369 105-2601-4303 49.48 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-21-400-7684 105-2601-4303 19.09 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-23-687-8021 001-3104-4303 56.70 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-26-686-5930 105-2601-4303 338.15 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-31-250-3303 86 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 17 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 95368 7/27/2020 (Continued)SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO00159 001-4204-4303 43.56 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-36-722-1322 105-2601-4303 13.07 ELECTRICITY/JUN202-37-909-1838 001-4204-4303 1,130.54 Total : 26,413.7800159 95369 7/27/2020 SPARKLETTS 4472788 071620 MAT REQ 987274/DRINKING WATER/JUL2000146 001-4601-4305 48.50 Total : 48.5000146 95370 7/27/2020 SPCALA 2020-0630 ANIMAL SHELTERING SERVICES/JUN2018821 001-3302-4201 575.00 Total : 575.0018821 95371 7/27/2020 SPECTRUM BUSINESS 0049969071120 PD CABLE/JUL2020236 001-2101-4201 72.09 Total : 72.0920236 95372 7/27/2020 SPRINT 269424317-223 CSO TRUNK MODEMS/JUN2010098 001-3302-4304 455.77 Total : 455.7710098 95373 7/27/2020 SRK PROMOTIONAL ADVERTISING 4471 CUSTOM PARKING METER PAPER ROLLS15398 001-3302-4309 865.00 001-3302-4309 76.00 Total : 941.0015398 95374 7/27/2020 STERGAR, CATHERINE Receipt 2001916.003 LEGO CLASS 8558 WITHDRAWAL REFUND21939 001-2111 200.00 Total : 200.0021939 95375 7/27/2020 STILES, ASHLEY Receipt 2002393.003 CANCELLED CLASS 8634 REFUND21928 001-2111 230.00 Total : 230.0021928 95376 7/27/2020 SUNDQUIST, STACIE Receipt 2001862.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8669 REFUND21968 001-2111 189.00 87 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 18 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 189.00 95376 7/27/2020 SUNDQUIST, STACIE21968 95377 7/27/2020 SUNSTATE EQUIPMENT COMPANY 8514154-001 MAT REQ 703610/JULY 4TH LIGHT TOWER14019 001-3301-4201 366.94 MAT REQ 703609/JULY 4TH LIGHT TOWER8514156-001 001-3301-4201 216.94 MAT REQ 703608/JULY 4TH LIGHT TOWER8514157-001 001-3301-4201 366.94 Total : 950.8214019 95378 7/27/2020 TATE, JASMIN Receipt 2002125.003 REFUND/REDUCED HOURS/CLASS 877821935 001-2111 30.00 CANCELLED CLASS 8881 REFUNDReceipt 2002415.003 001-2111 200.00 Total : 230.0021935 95379 7/27/2020 TESLA, INC.PO 34817 2020 TESLA MODEL 3 FOR PD21672 715-2101-5403 62,769.56 Total : 62,769.5621672 95380 7/27/2020 THAYER'S DIST. & ELECTRICAL 7194 BARD ST GATE/EMERGENCY REPAIR21075 715-4204-4201 155.00 Total : 155.0021075 95381 7/27/2020 TOBIAS, ASHLEY Receipt 2002419.003 CANCELLED CLASS 8824 REFUND21963 001-2111 91.00 Total : 91.0021963 95382 7/27/2020 TRANSTECH ENGINEERS, INC 20202314 PLAN CHECKS/WIRELESS SUBMITTALS/MAY2015901 001-4202-4201 1,680.00 Total : 1,680.0015901 95383 7/27/2020 TUPPAN, BROOKE Receipt 2002379.003 CANCELLED CLASS NO. 8618 REFUND21926 001-2111 175.00 Total : 175.0021926 95384 7/27/2020 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 620200314 DIG ALERTS/JUN2008207 160-3102-4201 128.80 DIG ALERTS/STATE FEES/JUN20dsb20193400 160-3102-4201 42.66 88 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 19 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 171.46 95384 7/27/2020 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT08207 95385 7/27/2020 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFOR INV 20219/TR 840 MASSEY/SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT19952 001-1101-4317 250.00 Total : 250.0019952 95386 7/27/2020 UPTIME COMPUTER SERVICE 31807 MONTHLY PRINTER MAINTENANCE/AUG2004768 715-1206-4201 461.00 Total : 461.0004768 95387 7/27/2020 VCA COAST ANIMAL HOSPITAL 401444256 K9 CHARLIE/DENTAL CARE DOG FOOD 5 LBS09672 170-2105-4201 21.89 Total : 21.8909672 95388 7/27/2020 VCA HERMOSA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 919407726/919408407 REQ 479145/TWO BIRDS/MAR2000322 001-3302-4201 90.00 Total : 90.0000322 95389 7/27/2020 VERIZON WIRELESS 9858476856 COMM DEV/CELL PHONES/JUN2003209 001-4201-4304 169.42 EMERGENCY MANAGER CELL PHONE/JUN209858525415 001-1201-4304 626.04 Total : 795.4603209 95390 7/27/2020 VIZIA, ANTOINETTE Rec 2002456/7.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8942/57 REFUND21828 001-2111 775.00 Total : 775.0021828 95391 7/27/2020 WEIL, RICHARD Receipt 2001931.003 CANCELLED CAMP 8927 REFUND21934 001-2111 79.00 BEACH CAMP REFUND/SCHEDULE CONFLICTReceipt 2002406.003 001-2111 380.00 Total : 459.0021934 95392 7/27/2020 WHEAT, RACHAEL Rec 2002434-6.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21962 001-2111 150.00 Total : 150.0021962 95393 7/27/2020 WILCOX, DAWN Receipt 2001885.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8655 REFUND21976 001-2111 199.00 89 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 20 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total : 199.00 95393 7/27/2020 WILCOX, DAWN21976 95394 7/27/2020 WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES 010-44965R SPECIAL DISTRICT ADMIN/APR20-JUN2015188 135-1219-4201 363.68 139-1219-4201 344.76 Total : 708.4415188 95395 7/27/2020 WILLIAMS, JENNIFER Rec 2001893/4.003 CANCELLED SURF CAMP 8663 REFUND21971 001-2111 398.00 Total : 398.0021971 95396 7/27/2020 YAWN, COLLEEN Rec 2002449/50.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21956 001-2111 100.00 Total : 100.0021956 95397 7/27/2020 ZAPATA, SILVIA Rec 2002431-2.003 CANCELLED CATALINA EXCURSION REFUND21961 001-2111 100.00 Total : 100.0021961 95398 7/27/2020 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC 89096 MAT REQ 987163/STREET SIGN OVERLAYS (2)01206 001-3104-4309 138.53 Total : 138.5301206 Bank total : 755,443.80 144 Vouchers for bank code :boa 755,443.80Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report 144 90 07/27/2020 Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 21 5:16:13PM Page: Bank code :boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages 1 to 21 inclusive, of the check register for 7/27/2020 are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date 7/27/2020 91 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0512 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of July 7, 2020 ACTION MINUTES OF THE PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY RESOURCES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 7, 2020 Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of July 7, 2020. Attachments: Minutes of July 7, 2020 Approved: Kelly Orta, Community Resources Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™92 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING of the PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY RESOURCES ADVISORY COMMISSION July 7, 2020 – Council Chambers, City Hall 1315 Valley Drive – 7:00 P.M. Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission Jani Lange Lauren Pizer Mains Jessica Guheen Barbara Ellman Traci Horowitz ************************************************************************************************************************ THIS MEETING IS HELD PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE ORDER N-29-20 ISSUED BY GOVERNOR GAVIN NEWSOM ON MARCH 17, 2020. ANY OR ALL COMMISSIONERS MAY ATTEND AND PARTICIPATE BY TELECONFERENCE/VIRTUAL MEETING. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY PARTICIPATE BY TELECONFERENCE. ************************************************************************************************************************ Public Participation City Hall will be closed to the public until further notice. Members of the public may email comments to lnichols@hermosabeach.gov until 2:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting. Members of the public may also participate by phone. TO PARTICIPATE BY PHONE: 1. Email lnichols@hermosabeach.gov to be added to the speaker list by 5:00pm on the day of the meeting. Please indicate which item you would like to speak on. 2. Dial-in 10 minutes prior to the start of the meeting: • Toll-Free Dial-in: 1 (888) 475-4499 • Meeting ID: 867 1091 9400, then # • Participant ID: bypass by pressing # 3. ATTENDEES WILL BE MUTED UNTIL THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD IS OPENED. When you are called on to speak, press * 6 to unmute your line. Comments from the public are limited to 3 minutes per speaker. Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission agendas and staff reports are available for review on the City’s web site at www.hermosabch.org Written materials distributed to the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission within 72 hours of the meeting are available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the Community Resources Department during normal business hours from Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Lange, Pizer Mains, Guheen, Ellman and Horowitz. Recreation Coordinator Kambria Vint, Senior Recreation Supervisor Lisa Nichols and Community Resources Manager Kelly Orta. 93 4. Announcements 5. Presentations A. Introduction of Hermosa Beach Police Chief Paul Lebaron 6. Miscellaneous Items and Reports – Community Resources Manager A. Updates Regarding Items Previously on the Commission’s Agenda B. 2020 Special Event Calendar C. City Parks D. Recreational Facilities Re-opening E. Summer Day Camps F. Parks and Recreation Month 7. Public Comment Anyone wishing to address the Commission on items pertaining to parks and recreation that are not listed on the agenda may do so at this time. The Brown Act generally prohibits the Commission from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted agenda. Comments from the public are limited to three minutes per speaker. Please sign your name on the sign-in sheet at the conclusion of your comments. None. 8. Correspondence A. None 9. Consent Calendar A. Approval of the Regular Meeting Action Minutes of May 5, 2020 B. Approval of the April, May and June 2020 Activity Report Motion by Commissioner Ellman to approve Items A and B on the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Horowitz seconded the motion. Motion passed with a 5 -0 vote. 10. Items Removed from the Consent Calendar for Separate Discussion 11. Public Hearings A. None 12. Matters for Commission Consideration A. Implementation of a Temporary Pickleball Membership and Hourly Use Fee During COVID-19 Precautionary Measures Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission take the following action: • Recommend approval of the implementation of a temporary pickleball court membership fee in addition to an hourly use fee; and • Recommend setting these fees to the following: o Annual Membership Fee at $15; and o Hourly Use Fee at $8. Motion by Commissioner Horowitz to approve the implementation of a Temporary Pickleball Membership and Hourly Use Fee During COVID-19 Precautionary Measures. Commissioner Ellman seconded the motion. Motion passed with a 4-1 vote. Commissioner Guheen opposed. B. Modification to the ACTIVE Net Recreation Administrative Fee to 10% Recommendation: Staff requests that the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission recommend approval to: • Modify the per transaction administrative fee for ACTIVE Net registrations to 10% of the cost of the activity; and 94 • Authorize automatic increases to the administrative fee in the event of future ACTIVE Net transaction fee increases to continue to recuperate the full cost of these fees. Motion by Commissioner Ellman to approve the modification to the ACTIVE Net Recreation Administrative Fee to 10%. Commissioner Horowitz seconded the motion. Motion passed with a 3-2 vote. Commissioner Pizer Mains and Commissioner Guheen opposed. C. Review of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Chapter 12.20 Beach and Strand Regulations Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission: • Recommend approval of proposed language changes to various sections in Chapter 12.20 Beach and Strand Regulations of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code; and • Provide input on sections 12.20.180 and 12.20.330. Motion by Commissioner Ellman to approve the proposed language changes to various sections in Chapter 12.20 Beach and Strand Regulations of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code. Commissioner Pizer-Mains seconded the motion. Motion passed with a 4-0 vote. Commissioner Guheen abstained. Motion by Commissioner Horowitz requesting Staff to return to the Commission with further investigation and clarification based on the Commission’s input on 12.20.330 and to approve section 12.20.180 as proposed. Motion passed with a 4-0 vote. Commissioner Guheen abstained. D. Election of Officers Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission elect a Chairperson and Vice-chairperson to serve for a term expiring June 2021. Motion by Commissioner Horowitz to nominate Commissioner Pizer-Mains as Chairperson and Commissioner Ellman as Vice-chairperson for a term expiring June 2021. Commissioner Ellman seconded the motion. Motion passed with a 5-0 vote. 13. Commissioner’s Reports A. Sub-committees i. Special Event (Lange and Ellman) ii. Community Theatre (Lange and Pizer Mains) iii. Municipal Leases (Pizer Mains and Horowitz) iv. Community Resources Department Use Policies (Ellman and Guheen) v. Clark Building Improvements Subcommittee (Ellman and Pizer Mains) vi. Community Garden (Horowitz and Guheen) B. Commission Liaison Roles i. Surfers Walk of Fame ii. Access Hermosa iii. South Park 14. Items Requested by Commissioners A. None 15. Other Matters A. Resident Request to Relocate the Beach Tennis Courts The Commission requested Staff to add this topic as an agenda item at a future meeting for discussion. 16. Adjournment 95 Motion by Commissioner Ellman to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Horowitz seconded the motion. Motion passed with a 5-0 vote. 96 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0490 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH JHD PLANNING, LLC TO PREPARE THE 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a Professional Services Agreement with JHD Planning, LLC to prepare the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update. Executive Summary: The Housing Element is a state-mandated requirement of the General Plan.The 2021-2029 Housing Element Update will identify housing constraints and opportunities,as well as provide a detailed analysis of how the City can meet its 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allotment, which is currently anticipated to be 556 units. The Community Development Department released an RFP for the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and received two proposals.Staff recommends the selection of JHD Planning,LLC and the approval of the Professional Services Agreement. Background Since 1969,Housing Elements have been mandatory portions of local general plans in California because providing housing for all Californians is considered by the state legislature to be of vital statewide importance.A Housing Element provides an analysis of a community’s housing needs for all income levels,and strategies to respond to provide for those housing needs.It is a key part of the City’s overall General Plan.State Law establishes that each city accommodate its fair share of affordable housing as an approach to distributing housing needs throughout the state.The General Plan (Housing Element) is required by law to be updated every five years. In 2012, the City’s adopted the 2013-2021 Housing Element. Analysis City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™97 Staff Report REPORT 20-0490 Outline of 2021-2029 Housing Element Update Process The major steps include project management and coordination and project initiation (Task 1-2); Evaluation of the Current Housing Element (Task 3);Public Engagement (Task 4);Assessment, Analysis and Implementation (Task 5);Planning Commission and City Council Workshops (Task 6); Prepare the Draft Housing Element (Task 7);CEQA Compliance (Task 8);formal public hearing process and finalizing the housing element (Task 9-10);and Review by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (Task 11).The Project schedule is anticipated to start in late August 2020 and be completed by the State mandated deadline of October 2021. Consultant Selection On June 4,2020,the City released the RFP 20-03 for the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update.On July 16,2020,two proposals were received and evaluated by the City’s Community Development Department Staff.Proposals were evaluated on the firm’s approach and methods,relevant experience and expertise,and timeframe and cost.Based on these criteria,staff recommends JHD Planning, LLC. JHD Planning,LLC is recommended based on experience in managing and preparing Housing Elements to be consistent with the State and expertise in housing law and policy.John Douglas, owner of JHD Planning,LLC,has expertly managed the past two Housing Elements for the City of Hermosa Beach and offers great insight to the opportunities and challenges that the City faces with meeting the State RHNA goals. Community Outreach Community involvement would occur throughout the process with targeted workshops at key milestones,such as educational forums,ongoing outreach via a website designed for this process, outreach to community groups,and community workshops to inform and seek input.One of the consultant’s first tasks would be working with staff to refine the public engagement program that ensures inclusive opportunities for participation by a variety of stakeholders,such as residents, persons with special housing needs and affordable housing advocates to build broad community support. Community stakeholders would review draft materials,followed by broad community workshops,and Planning Commission/City Council review and direction on key products before moving to the next step in the process. Community involvement would include two community workshops,stakeholder interviews,Housing Element FAQs and other informational material for posting on the City website,a public survey questionnaire, and social media outreach. The scope of work proposed by JHD Planning,LLC would facilitate the State’s review and certification of the Housing Element before the October 2021 deadline. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™98 Staff Report REPORT 20-0490 General Plan Consistency: PLAN Hermosa,the City’s General Plan,was adopted by the City Council in August 2017.The General Plan (Housing Element)is a mandatory element and,when adopted,will be consistent with the remainder of PLAN Hermosa. Fiscal Impact: On April 14,2020,the City Council passed Resolution No.20-7231 approving an application for the Local Early Planning (LEAP)Grant Program Funds and authorizing the City Manager to execute the grant agreement.The proposed grant of $65,000 would be used to supplement the budget for updating the General Plan Housing Element to be consistent with the upcoming 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The FY 2020-21 Budget appropriated total funding of $150,000 to cover the cost of updating the Housing Element based on estimates at that time.This includes $65,000 in grant revenue,reducing the amount of City funds needed to complete the update. The estimated cost for preparing the Housing Element of $93,320 is well below the amount that was budgeted for this project.Also,as set forth in the budget,$65,000 would be reimbursed by the LEAP Grant in compliance with the Grant Agreement and the remaining amount funded through the General Plan Maintenance fees in the General Fund. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)is awarding the grant on an ongoing basis.Assuming the Grant Agreement is signed on September 1,2020,the $65,000 grant must be spent between September 1,2020 and December 31,2023 (FY 2020-21 through FY 2023- 24).The project would be completed by October 2021.The remainder of the estimated cost would be provided by the General Plan Maintenance fees,which are collected at the building permit stage expressly for updating the General Plan, including required updates to the Housing Element. Attachments: 1.City Council Resolution No. 20-7231 2.Link to April 14, 2020 City Council Meeting Agenda 3. Draft Professional Services Agreement with JHD Planning, LLC Respectfully Submitted by: Melanie Emas, Assistant Planner Concur:Nicole Ellis, Associate Planner Concur: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™99 Page 1 of 2 20-7231 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 RESOLUTION NO. 20-7231 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR, AND RECEIPT OF, LOCAL GOVERNMENT PLANNING SUPPORT GRANT PROGRAM FUNDS WHEREAS, pursuant to Health and Safety Code 50515 et. Seq, the Department of Housing and Community Development (Department) is authorized to issue a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) as part of the Local Government Planning Support Grants Program (hereinafter referred to by the Department as the Local Early Action Planning Grants program or LEAP); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach desires to submit a LEAP grant application package (“Application”), on the forms provided by the Department, for approval of grant funding for projects that assist in the preparation and adoption of planning documents and process improvements that accelerate housing production and facilitate compliance to implement the sixth cycle of the regional housing need assessment; and WHEREAS, the Department has issued a NOFA and Application on January 27, 2020 in the amount of $119,040,000 for assistance to all California Jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to apply for and submit to the Department the Application package. SECTION 2. In connection with the LEAP grant, if the Application is approved by the Department, the City Manager of the City of Hermosa Beach is authorized to submit the Application, enter into, execute, and deliver on behalf of the Applicant, a State of California Agreement (Standard Agreement) for the amount of $65,000.00, and any and all other documents required or deemed necessary or appropriate to evidence and secure the LEAP grant, the Applicant’s obligations related thereto, and all amendments thereto; and 100 Page 2 of 2 20-7231 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 SECTION 3. The Applicant shall be subject to the terms and conditions as specified in the NOFA, and the Standard Agreement provided by the Department after approval. The Application and any and all accompanying documents are incorporated in full as part of the Standard Agreement. Any and all activities funded, information provided, and timelines represented in the Application will be enforceable through the fully executed Standard Agreement. Pursuant to the NOFA and in conjunction with the terms of the Standard Agreement, the Applicant hereby agrees to use the funds for eligible uses and allowable expenditures in the manner presented and specifically identified in the approved Application. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall cause the original of the same to be entered among the original resolutions of the City Council; shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the minutes of the City Council meeting at which the same is passed and adopted; and shall transmit a copy of this Resolution to the Applicant. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of April, 2020. ________________________________________________________________________ PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk City Attorney 101 City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-3885 Page 1 of 9 Professional Services Agreement CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO _______Update the 2021-2029 Housing Element_________ BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND _JHD Planning, LLC This AGREEMENT is entered into this 11th day of August 2020, by and between the CITY OF Hermosa Beach, a general law city a municipal corporation (“CITY”) and JHD Planning, a limited liability company (“CONSULTANT”). R E C I T A L S A. The CITY desires to utilize the services of the CONSULTANT as an independent contractor to update the 2021-2029 Housing Element. B. The CITY does not have the personnel able and/or available to perform the services required under this agreement and therefore, the CITY desires to contract for consulting services to accomplish this work. C. The CONSULTANT warrants to the CITY that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities to perform properly and timely the services under this Agreement. D. The CITY desires to contract with the CONSULTANT to perform the services as described in Exhibit A of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the foregoing recitals, the City and the Consultant agree as follows: CONSIDERATION AND COMPENSATION As partial consideration, CONSULTANT agrees to perform the work listed in the SCOPE OF SERVICES, attached as EXHIBIT A. As additional consideration, CONSULTANT and CITY agree to abide by the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. As additional consideration, CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT a total of $93,320, for CONSULTANT’s services, unless otherwise specified by written amendment to this Agreement. No additional compensation shall be paid for any other expenses incurred, unless first approved by the City Manager or his/her designee. CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to CITY. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT all uncontested amounts set forth in CONSULTANT’s invoice within 30 days after it is received. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT will perform the services and activities set forth in the SCOPE OF SERVICE attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. 102 City of Hermosa Beach Page 2 of 9 Except as herein otherwise expressly specified to be furnished by CITY, CONSULTANT will, in a professional manner, furnish all of the labor, technical, administrative, professional and other personnel, all supplies and materials, equipment, printing, vehicles, transportation, office space, and facilities necessary or proper to perform and complete the work and provide the professional services required of CONSULTANT by this Agreement. PAYMENTS. For CITY to pay CONSULTANT as specified by this Agreement, CONSULTANT must submit an invoice to CITY which lists the time expended by major task, a description of the specific tasks performed during the invoice period, for work that includes deliverables, and the percentage of the task completed during the billing period in accordance with the schedule of compensation incorporated in “Exhibit A.” TIME OF PERFORMANCE. The services of the CONSULTANT are to commence upon receipt of a notice to proceed from the CITY and shall continue until all authorized work is completed to the CITY’s reasonable satisfaction, in accordance with the schedule incorporated in “Exhibit A,” unless extended in writing by the CITY. FAMILIARITY WITH WORK. By executing this Agreement, CONSULTANT represents that CONSULTANT has (a) thoroughly investigated and considered the scope of services to be performed; (b) carefully considered how the services should be performed; and (c) understands the facilities, difficulties, and restrictions attending performance of the services under this Agreement. KEY PERSONNEL. CONSULTANT’s key person assigned to perform work under this Agreement is John Douglas. CONSULTANT shall not assign another person to be in charge of the work contemplated by this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the City. TERM OF AGREEMENT. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon execution by both parties and shall expire on November 30, 2021, unless earlier termination occurs under Section 11 of this Agreement, or this Agreement is extended in writing in advance by both parties. CHANGES. CITY may order changes in the services within the general scope of this Agreement, consisting of additions, deletions, or other revisions, and the contract sum and the contract time will be adjusted accordingly. All such changes must be authorized in writing, executed by CONSULTANT and CITY. The cost or credit to CITY resulting from changes in the services will be determined in accordance with written agreement between the parties. TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER. CONSULTANT will provide CITY with a Taxpayer Identification Number. PERMITS AND LICENSES. CONSULTANT will obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement all necessary permits, licenses, and certificates that may be required in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement. TERMINATION. Except as otherwise provided, CITY may terminate this Agreement at any time with or without cause. Notice of termination shall be in writing. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement. Notice will be in writing at least 60 days before the effective termination date. In the event of such termination, the CONSULTANT shall cease services as of the date of termination, and all finished or unfinished documents, data, drawings, maps, and other materials prepared by CONSULTANT shall, at CITY’s option, become CITY’s property, and CONSULTANT will receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed up to the effective date of notice of termination. 103 City of Hermosa Beach Page 3 of 9 Should the Agreement be terminated pursuant to this Section, CITY may procure on its own terms services similar to those terminated. INDEMNIFICATION. CONSULTANT and CITY shall indemnify each other and their officials, officers, agents, employees and representatives from any losses incurred as a result of negligent acts, omissions, or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party, its officials, officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors in connection with the performance of the scope of work of this Agreement. The parties acknowledge that neither party has an up-front obligation to provide a legal defense to other party in connection with this indemnification obligation. In the event that either party incurs a loss resulting from the indemnifying party’s negligent acts, omissions, or willful misconduct, the indemnifying party shall reimburse the indemnified party for its reasonable defense costs proportionate to the finally determined percentage of liability based upon the comparative fault of the indemnifying party. CONSULTANT’s liability shall be limited to the amounts available under CONSULTANT’S professional liability insurance policy. ASSIGNABILITY. This Agreement is for CONSULTANT’s professional services. CONSULTANT’s attempts to assign the benefits or burdens of this Agreement without CITY’s written approval are prohibited and will be null and void. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. CITY and CONSULTANT agree that CONSULTANT will act as an independent contractor and will have control of all work and the manner in which is it performed. CONSULTANT will be free to contract for similar service to be performed for other employers while under contract with CITY. CONSULTANT is not an agent or employee of CITY and is not entitled to participate in any pension plan, insurance, bonus or similar benefits CITY provides for its employees. Any provision in this Agreement that may appear to give CITY the right to direct CONSULTANT as to the details of doing the work or to exercise a measure of control over the work means that CONSULTANT will follow the direction of the CITY as to end results of the work only. AUDIT OF RECORDS. CONSULTANT agrees that CITY, or designee, has the right to review, obtain, and copy all records pertaining to the performance of this Agreement. CONSULTANT agrees to provide CITY, or designee, with any relevant information requested and will permit CITY, or designee, access to its premises, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours for the purpose of interviewing employees and inspecting and copying such books, records, accounts, and other material that may be relevant to a matter under investigation for the purpose of determining compliance with this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain such records for a period of three (3) years following final payment under this Agreement. CONSULTANT will keep all books, records, accounts and documents pertaining to this Agreement separate from other activities unrelated to this Agreement. CORRECTIVE MEASURES. CONSULTANT will promptly implement any corrective measures required by CITY regarding the requirements and obligations of this Agreement. CONSULTANT will be given a reasonable amount of time as determined by the City to implement said corrective measures. Failure of CONSULTANT to implement required corrective measures shall result in immediate termination of this Agreement. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. A. The CONSULTANT, at the CONSULTANT’s own cost and expense, shall procure and maintain, for the duration of the contract, the following insurance policies: 1. Workers Compensation Insurance as required by law. The Consultant shall require all subcontractors similarly to provide such compensation insurance for their respective 104 City of Hermosa Beach Page 4 of 9 employees. Any notice of cancellation or non-renewal of all Workers’ Compensation policies must be received by the CITY at least thirty (30) days prior to such change. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the CITY, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the CONTRACTOR for City. 2. General Liability Coverage. The CONSULTANT shall maintain commercial general liability insurance in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. If a commercial general liability insurance form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. 3. Automobile Liability Coverage. The CONSULTANT shall maintain automobile liability insurance covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the CONSULTANT arising out of or in connection with the work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles, in an amount of not less than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) combined single limit for each occurrence. B. Endorsements. Each general liability and automobile liability insurance policy shall be issued by a financially responsible insurance company or companies admitted and authorized to do business in the State of California, or which is approved in writing by City, and shall be endorsed as follows. CONSULTANT also agrees to require all contractors, and subcontractors to do likewise. 1. “The CITY, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of work performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT, including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations.” 2. This policy shall be considered primary insurance as respects the CITY, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance maintained by the CITY, including any self-insured retention the CITY may have, shall be considered excess insurance only and shall not contribute with this policy. 3. This insurance shall act for each insured and additional insured as though a separate policy had been written for each, except with respect to the limits of liability of the insuring company. 4. The insurer waives all rights of subrogation against the CITY, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, or agents. 5. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the CITY, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, or volunteers. 6. The insurance provided by this policy shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, or reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days written notice has been received by the CITY. C. CONSULTANT agrees to provide immediate notice to CITY of any claim or loss against Contractor arising out of the work performed under this agreement. CITY assumes no obligation or liability by such notice but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve CITY. D. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the CITY. At the CITY’s option, the CONSULTANT shall demonstrate financial capability for payment of such deductibles or self-insured retentions. 105 City of Hermosa Beach Page 5 of 9 E. The CONSULTANT shall provide certificates of insurance with original endorsements to the CITY as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein. Certificates of such insurance shall be filed with the CITY on or before commencement of performance of this Agreement. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with the CITY at all times during the term of this Agreement. F. Failure on the part of the CONSULTANT to procure or maintain required insurance shall constitute a material breach of contract under which the CITY may terminate this Agreement pursuant to Section 11 above. G. The commercial general and automobile liability policies required by this Agreement shall allow City, as additional insured, to satisfy the self-insured retention (“SIR”) and/or deductible of the policy in lieu of the Consultant (as the named insured) should Consultant fail to pay the SIR or deductible requirements. The amount of the SIR or deductible shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney and the Finance Director. Consultant understands and agrees that satisfaction of this requirement is an express condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Agreement. Failure by Consultant as primary insured to pay its SIR or deductible constitutes a material breach of this Agreement. Should City pay the SIR or deductible on Consultant’s behalf upon the Consultant’s failure or refusal to do so in order to secure defense and indemnification as an additional insured under the policy, City may include such amounts as damages in any action against Consultant for breach of this Agreement in addition to any other damages incurred by City due to the breach. USE OF OTHER CONSULTANTS. CONSULTANT must obtain CITY’s prior written approval to use any sub-consultants while performing any portion of this Agreement. Such approval must include approval of the proposed consultant and the terms of compensation. FINAL PAYMENT ACCEPTANCE CONSTITUTES RELEASE. The acceptance by the CONSULTANT of the final payment made under this Agreement shall operate as and be a release of the CITY from all claims and liabilities for compensation to the CONSULTANT for anything done, furnished or relating to the CONSULTANT’S work or services. Acceptance of payment shall be any negotiation of the CITY’S check or the failure to make a written extra compensation claim within ten (10) calendar days of the receipt of that check. However, approval or payment by the CITY shall not constitute, nor be deemed, a release of the responsibility and liability of the CONSULTANT, its employees, sub-consultants and agents for the accuracy and competency of the information provided and/or work performed; nor shall such approval or payment be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility or liability by the CITY for any defect or error in the work prepared by the Consultant, its employees, sub-consultants and agents. CORRECTIONS. In addition to the above indemnification obligations, the CONSULTANT shall correct, at its expense, all errors in the work which may be disclosed during the City’s review of the Consultant’s report or plans. Should the Consultant fail to make such correction in a reasonably timely manner, such correction shall be made by the CITY, and the cost thereof shall be charged to the CONSULTANT. In addition to all other available remedies, the CITY may deduct the cost of such correction from any retention amount held by the CITY or may withhold payment otherwise owed CONSULTANT under this Agreement up to the amount of the cost of correction. NON-APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS. Payments to be made to CONSULTANT by CITY for services preformed within the current fiscal year are within the current fiscal budget and within an available, unexhausted fund. In the event that CITY does not appropriate sufficient funds for 106 City of Hermosa Beach Page 6 of 9 payment of CONSULTANT’S services beyond the current fiscal year, the Agreement shall cover payment for CONSULTANT’S services only to the conclusion of the last fiscal year in which CITY appropriates sufficient funds and shall automatically terminate at the conclusion of such fiscal year. NOTICES. All communications to either party by the other party will be deemed made when received by such party at its respective name and address as follows: CITY CONSULTANT City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 ATTN: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director PO Box 474 Shaver Lake, CA 93664 ATTN: John Douglas Changes may be made in the names or addresses of persons to whom notices are to be given by giving notice in the manner prescribed in this paragraph. A. SOLICITATION. CONSULTANT maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than CONSULTANT’s bona fide employee, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, CONSULTANT warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than CONSULTANT’s bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. Should CONSULTANT breach or violate this warranty, CITY may rescind this Agreement without liability. B. THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. This Agreement and every provision herein are generally for the exclusive benefit of CONSULTANT and CITY and not for the benefit of any other party. There will be no incidental or other beneficiaries of any of CONSULTANT’s or CITY’s obligations under this Agreement. C. INTERPRETATION. This Agreement was drafted in and will be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and exclusive venue for any action involving this agreement will be in Los Angeles County. D. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, and its Attachments, sets forth the entire understanding of the parties. There are no other understandings, terms or other agreements expressed or implied, oral or written. E. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION. Each Party had the opportunity to independently review this Agreement with legal counsel. Accordingly, this Agreement will be construed simply and in accordance with its fair meaning; it will not be interpreted strictly for or against either Party. F. AUTHORITY/MODIFICATION. The Parties represent and warrant that all necessary action has been taken by the Parties to authorize the undersigned to execute this Agreement and to engage in the actions described herein. This Agreement may be modified by written amendment with signatures of all parties to this Agreement. CITY’s city manager, or designee, may execute any such amendment on behalf of CITY. ACCEPTANCE OF FACSIMILE OR ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES. The Parties agree that this Contract, agreements ancillary to this Contract, and related documents to be entered into in 107 City of Hermosa Beach Page 7 of 9 connection with this Contract will be considered signed when the signature of a party is delivered by facsimile transmission or scanned and delivered via electronic mail. Such facsimile or electronic mail copies will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature. FORCE MAJEURE. Should performance of this Agreement be impossible due to fire, flood, explosion, war, embargo, government action, civil or military authority, the natural elements, or other similar causes beyond the Parties’ control, then the Agreement will immediately terminate without obligation of either party to the other. TIME IS OF ESSENCE. Time is of the essence to comply with dates and schedules to be provided. ATTORNEY’S FEES. The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that each will bear his or its own costs, expenses and attorneys' fees arising out of and/or connected with the negotiation, drafting and execution of the Agreement, and all matters arising out of or connected therewith. STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE. By executing this Agreement, CONSULTANT represents that it has demonstrated trustworthiness and possesses the quality, fitness and capacity to perform the Agreement in a manner satisfactory to CITY. CONSULTANT represents that its financial resources, surety and insurance experience, service experience, completion ability, personnel, current workload, experience in dealing with private consultants, and experience in dealing with public agencies all suggest that CONSULTANT is capable of performing the proposed contract and has a demonstrated capacity to deal fairly and effectively with and to satisfy a public agency. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. It is understood and agreed that the City shall own all documents and other work product of the Consultant, except the Consultant’s notes and workpapers, which pertain to the work performed under this Agreement. The City shall have the sole right to use such materials in its discretion and without further compensation to the Consultant, but any re-use of such documents by the City on any other project without prior written consent of the CONSULTANT shall be at the sole risk of the City. DISCLOSURE REQUIRED. (CITY and CONSULTANT initials required at one of the following paragraphs) By their respective initials next to this paragraph, CITY and CONSULTANT hereby acknowledge that CONSULTANT is a “consultant” for the purposes of the California Political Reform Act because CONSULTANT’S duties would require him or her to make one or more of the governmental decisions set forth in Fair Political Practices Commission Regulation 18701(a)(2) or otherwise serves in a staff capacity for which disclosure would otherwise be required were CONSULTANT employed by the CITY. CONSULTANT hereby acknowledges his or her assuming-office, annual, and leaving- office financial reporting obligations under the California Political Reform Act and the City’s Conflict of Interest Code and agrees to comply with those obligations at his or her expense. Prior to consultant commencing services hereunder, the City Manager shall prepare and deliver to consultant a memorandum detailing the extent of Consultant’s disclosure obligations in accordance with the CITY’s Conflict of Interest Code. CITY Initials ______ CONSULTANT Initials ______ 108 City of Hermosa Beach Page 8 of 9 OR By their initials next to this paragraph, CITY and CONSULTANT hereby acknowledge that CONSULTANT is not a “consultant” for the purpose of the California Political Reform Act because Consultant’s duties and responsibilities are not within the scope of the definition of consultant in Fair Political Practice Commission Regulation 18701(a)(2)(A) and is otherwise not serving in staff capacity in accordance with the CITY’S Conflict of Interest Code. CITY Initials ______ CONSULTANT Initials ______ IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this contract the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CONSULTANT Suja Lowenthal, City Manager By: John Douglas, Principal ATTEST: Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk Taxpayer ID No. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael Jenkins, City Attorney 109 City of Hermosa Beach Page 9 of 9 “Exhibit A” Scope of Work and Budget 110 Proposal to Assist in Preparing the 2021 Housing Element Update Submitted to: City of Hermosa Beach Ken Robertson, AICP, Community Development Director 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-3885 Submitted by: JHD Planning LLC Contact: John Douglas, AICP, Principal John@JHDPlanning.net July 2, 2020 111 PO BOX 474, SHAVER LAKE, CA 93664 TEL: 714-803-2860 E-MAIL JOHN@JHDPLANNING.NET JHD Planning, LLC Planning Consultants July 2, 2020 Ken Robertson, AICP, Director Community Development Department City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-3885 RE: 2021-2029 Housing Element Update Dear Mr. Robertson, I appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal to assist Hermosa Beach with its 2021 Housing Element update. The Governor and State Legislature have declared a “housing crisis” in California, and in the past few years extensive changes to State law have been adopted to address the problems of housing cost and homelessness. In addition to new State laws, some officials and housing experts have called for an end to single-family zoning and financial penalties on local governments that do not achieve housing production targets. The 6th cycle Housing Element update is expected to be a much more challenging process than the 5th cycle. Based on SCAG’s methodology, the RHNA allocation for Hermosa Beach is expected to be approximately 550 units compared to just 2 units in the 5th cycle. While the 6th RHNA allocation is far higher than the 5th cycle, you will recall that in the 4th Housing Element cycle the RHNA allocation for Hermosa beach was 562 units. It has been my privilege to work with you on the City’s two previous Housing Element updates, and I would appreciate having the opportunity to assist Hermosa Beach again on this important project. As an indication my personal commitment to the communities where I work, it is my policy to donate 10% of my consulting fees to local charities of the City’s choice. Yours truly, JHD Planning, LLC John Douglas, AICP Principal 112 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC July 2, 2020 Table of Contents 1. Firm Profile …..……………………….................................................................... 1 2. Project Understanding, Approach and Scope of Work ……….................... 2 3. Project Management Plan ………….……………………….……………………. 13 4. Experience and Qualifications ……..……………………………….................... 14 5. Required Forms ………………………………………………………………………. 17 6. Cost Proposal ………………………………………………. Separate Attachment 113 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -1- July 2, 2020 1. Firm Profile 1. Official name and address JHD Planning LLC PO Box 474 Shaver Lake, CA 93664 2. Name, address, email, and telephone number of the consultant’s primary point of contact John Douglas, AICP PO Box 474 Shaver Lake, CA 93664 John@JHDPlanning.net 714-803-2860 3. Type of business entity of consultant (corporation, company, joint venture, etc.). Please enclose a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement if entity is a joint venture Limited liability company 4. Federal Employer I.D. Number 83-0873130 5. Address, telephone numbers and fax numbers of each of the proposing firm’s locations See #2 above 6. Indication whether firm is totally or partially owned by another business organization (parent company) or individual John Douglas, owner 7. Number of years consultant has been in business under the present business name 2 8. Number of years of experience the consultant has had in providing required, equivalent, or related services 39 (John has prepared certified Housing Elements in all five update cycles that have occurred since the 1980 comprehensive overhaul of State Housing Element law) 9. Any failures or refusals to complete a contract, and explanation None 114 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -2- July 2, 2020 2. Project Understanding, Approach and Scope of Work Statement of Project Understanding The Governor and State Legislature have declared a “housing crisis” in California, and in the past few years extensive changes have been made in State law to address this crisis. In adopting SB 330 (the “Housing Crisis Act of 2019”) and other recent laws the Legislature has clearly indicated that cities are expected to play a major role in addressing housing problems. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is the process by which housing production targets are assigned to cities and counties. In the RHNA for the 6th planning cycle (2021-2029) HCD assigned a total housing need of more than 1.3 million housing units to the SCAG region – more than three times the RHNA for the previous cycle. Under SCAG’s draft RHNA methodology, the preliminary RHNA allocation for Hermosa Beach is 556 units compared to just 2 units in the 5th cycle. The unprecedented RHNA allocation for the SCAG region combined with new laws restricting “RHNA credit” for potential housing development sites and State threats of legal action for non-compliance will make the upcoming Housing Element process even more challenging than previous planning cycles. Typically, the most critical aspect of a Housing Element update is demonstrating adequate housing development capacity to accommodate the RHNA allocation in all income categories, and this is expected to be the focus of the 6th cycle Hermosa Beach Housing Element update. The City’s 2017 PLAN Hermosa General Plan update anticipates that a total of 300 additional housing units will be added to the city’s housing stock during the 2015-2040 period, with most of these in the Medium Density Residential (13-25 units/acre) and High Density Residential (25-33 units/acre) land use categories. A small number of housing units are also anticipated in the Neighborhood Commercial designation. (PLAN Hermosa FEIR, Table 3.0-3) One of the most noteworthy changes for the 6th Housing Element cycle is expected to be significantly more “RHNA credit” for potential accessory dwelling units (ADUs) due to recent changes in State law limiting cities’ ability to regulate ADU construction. The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is currently working with SCAG and local governments to analyze ADU development trends and determine an appropriate methodology to be used in establishing ADU RHNA credit, both for the number of potential ADUs and their expected affordability levels. Goal 5. Small beach town character is reflected throughout Hermosa Beach. Retaining the scale and community- oriented nature of Hermosa Beach is of the utmost importance. While it can be difficult to fully encapsulate what defines the character of Hermosa Beach, the City understands the various aspects associated with community character, and is committed to protecting the character defining features of Hermosa Beach. PLAN Hermosa, p. 57 115 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -3- July 2, 2020 Depending on the final RHNA allocation and the analysis of potential housing development, it is possible that sufficient capacity may be available to accommodate the RHNA based on current land use designations and potential ADUs. However, a more likely scenario appears to be that some changes to current land use designations will be needed to fully accommodate the RHNA allocation, particularly in the lower-income categories. One potential strategy for increasing housing capacity would be allowing mixed-use development in some non-residential land use categories, as occurred during the 4th Housing Element cycle. The analysis of potential housing development and the strategy for demonstrating adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA is discussed further in Task 5, below. Organizational Chart Mr. Douglas will personally complete all of the tasks described below in the Work Program under the direction of the City’s Project Manager unless the City determines that additional outside consulting assistance is necessary. Work Program Described below are the specific tasks and work products we propose for this assignment. Other optional tasks can also be provided if desired. Assumptions regarding information and assistance to be provided by City staff are also noted in each task. Task 1 Project Management and Coordination This task includes overall project management and coordination, including refinements to the scope of work, schedule, communications protocols, and ongoing monitoring to ensure the success of the project. Our approach to project management is to anticipate the City’s needs and take personal responsibility for the success of the project. The budget assumes that ongoing coordination with City staff will occur via telephone and email. Work Products • Ongoing coordination and monthly project management meetings via telephone and email • Monthly project status summaries Task 2 Project Initiation This task includes a project kick-off meeting to establish project management and communication protocols and refine the scope of work and project schedule as appropriate. The budget assumes that the kickoff meeting will be conducted remotely and that a tour of the City with City staff will not be necessary due to Mr. Douglas’s familiarity with the city gained during the previous two Housing Element updates. 116 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -4- July 2, 2020 Work Products • Project kick-off meeting Task 3 Evaluation of the Current Housing Element We will conduct an evaluation of the 2014-2021 Housing Element including the following: • Progress in implementing current housing programs and policies; • Comparison of projected results from the adopted Housing Element to actual accomplishments; • Evaluation of existing Housing Element in comparison to current State Housing Law. It is assumed that the City’s annual progress reports will provide a major portion of the information needed for this task. The results of this task will be summarized in an evaluation report. Work Products • Housing Element evaluation report (electronic copy) Task 4 Public Engagement Robust civic engagement is a long-standing priority in Hermosa Beach, and the Governance Element of PLAN Hermosa describes a variety of techniques to be used in designing and implementing City policies and programs. Upon project initiation, we will work with City Staff to identify a detailed public engagement program that ensures inclusive opportunities for participation by all stakeholders, such as residents, persons with special housing needs and affordable housing advocates, and builds broad community support. The public engagement program will identify goals, objectives, specific activities and a proposed budget for each phase of the outreach process. It is expected that the focus of public engagement efforts will be land use and zoning changes that may be required in order to accommodate the RHNA allocation and new State housing laws. Land use changes can be controversial, and because of the recent investment in public engagement for PLAN Hermosa, it will be essential that the Housing Element public engagement program build on that prior work to ensure that policy decisions are developed in full collaboration with community stakeholders. As noted in the RFP, this work program assumes that two community workshops, two Planning Commission/City Council Community Dialogue In 2013, the City of Hermosa Beach initiated a community dialogue process to facilitate a conversation across the community and all of its interests to determine the community’s values and priorities for the future. The six-month process included several public meetings, a working group, and development of a Quality of Life Report, a Fiscal Summary, and a Decision- Making Tool. The results of this Community Dialogue process provide a framework and process for decision- making by the City as well as individuals on important decisions regarding Hermosa Beach’s future. PLAN Hermosa, p. 45 117 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -5- July 2, 2020 workshops (see Task 6) and four public hearings (Task 9) will be held during the Housing Element update process. Depending on the status of COVID-19 conditions, public meetings may need to be conducted remotely. In addition to formal workshops and meetings, it is anticipated that the public engagement program will include materials such as a Housing Element Frequently Asked Questions document or policy option “white papers,” stakeholder interviews, web-based information sharing and opinion surveys, and/or social media outreach. State housing law has become increasingly complex over the past 40 years, and it must be recognized that cities generally have a narrower range of policy options with Housing Elements than with some other planning efforts such as General Plan updates. One of the most important issues for the public engagement program will be to clearly convey Housing Element legal constraints to stakeholders, such as RHNA and zoning requirements, and identify the range of policy options available to City decision-makers, the importance of Housing Element certification, and the potential consequences for non- compliance. In addition to his Housing Element expertise, Mr. Douglas is an experienced meeting facilitator and holds a Certificate in Alternative Dispute Resolution from UC Irvine. He is also a State- certified mediator. Work Products • Refined public engagement work program • Two community workshops • Stakeholder interviews (up to 10 interviews are assumed in the budget) • Housing Element FAQ and other informational materials for posting on the City website • Public survey questionnaire • Social media outreach Task 5 Assessment, Analysis and Implementation This task includes the research and analysis that will comprise the major components of the new Housing Element document. The following sub-tasks are proposed: 5.1 Needs Assessment. We will complete the housing needs assessment pursuant to State requirements and coordinate 118 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -6- July 2, 2020 with City staff to evaluate housing conditions using State- approved criteria. Where necessary to complete this task, we will analyze recent demographic and housing data. This data will be used to prepare the housing needs chapter of the Housing Element including the following information: • Population, household and employment trends; • Special housing needs (e.g. large families, seniors, persons with disabilities, homeless, etc.); • Housing stock characteristics, including at-risk units, housing conditions and vacancy rates; • Residential building permit activity; • Housing cost and affordability; • Projected housing needs as assigned in the RHNA The budget assumes that all information required for the needs analysis will be available from published sources or internal City data, and that no field work or original research will be necessary. SCAG is currently preparing a “Pre-approved Housing Element Data Package” that will include much of this information. 5.2 Sites Analysis. The sites analysis will include a land use inventory showing the relationship between the City's RHNA allocation and the realistic capacity for additional housing at a parcel-specific level based on current General Plan and zoning designations and existing conditions. It should be noted that significant changes to State requirements for the sites analysis have occurred since the preparation of the 5th cycle Housing Element update. Among the most significant changes are: • Site size - Sites smaller than 1/2 acre or larger than 10 acres are assumed to be unsuitable for lower-income housing absent evidence such as previous examples of affordable housing development on similar-sized parcels. • Sites listed in prior Housing Elements - Vacant sites identified in two prior housing elements, and non-vacant sites identified in the prior housing element may not be used to satisfy lower-income RHNA needs unless the site satisfies the minimum “default density” for lower-income housing and zoning allows by-right residential development if at least 20% of units will be reserved for 119 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -7- July 2, 2020 lower-income households. • Substantial evidence for underutilized sites - If non- vacant sites comprise 50% or more of the lower-income inventory, the existing use shall be presumed to impede additional residential development absent findings based on substantial evidence that the existing use is likely to be discontinued during the planning period. It is likely that this requirement will apply to Hermosa Beach. The analysis will consider HCD’s recently published guidance on what such “substantial evidence” must include. • No net loss - Changes to no net loss rules require that adequate sites be maintained throughout the planning period. Under State default density rules for small cities, any qualifying site with an allowable density of 20+ units/acre may be counted for 100% lower-income RHNA credit. However, since few housing developments are 100% affordable, it is possible that over the course of the 8-year planning period, more lower-income sites may be needed than indicated by the initial RHNA to offset sites that are developed during the planning period. The first step in preparing the sites inventory will be to update the 5th cycle inventory to reflect development activity, pending applications and changes to land use designations in PLAN Hermosa. The updated inventory will then be refined based upon the new criteria described above. We will coordinate with City staff to evaluate whether the updated sites inventory is sufficient to accommodate the 6th cycle RHNA. SCAG’s 3/5/2020 preliminary RHNA calculator tool estimates a RHNA allocation of 556 units for Hermosa Beach, with 357 of those in the very-low and low income categories. The City’s RHNA allocation in the prior cycle was 2 units. The budget for this task assumes that City staff will assist by providing the raw data necessary to update the sites inventory, including City zoning and General Plan designations, infrastructure availability, planning and building permit data, assessor parcel data, and other information that could satisfy “substantial evidence” requirements, such as communications with property owners regarding development interest or expiring leases. If additional land use surveys are needed to satisfy HCD requirements, such work can be provided as an optional task on a time-and-materials basis. If GIS work is required beyond the City’s resources, outside assistance will be 120 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -8- July 2, 2020 provided on a time-and-materials basis. Based upon the magnitude of the 6th cycle RHNA assigned to SCAG by HCD – over 1.3 million housing units compared to about 412,000 units in the previous cycle – we anticipate that potential accessory dwelling units (ADUs) will be an important component of the 6th cycle Housing Element sites inventory. One of the first tasks after project initiation will be a conversation with City staff regarding ADU regulations and development trends, and ensuring that a monitoring mechanism is in place to support Housing Element assumptions regarding future ADU development. If necessary, we will work with staff to identify potential zoning and development strategies to address any shortfall of housing capacity compared to the RHNA allocation (see also the optional tasks below). 5.3 Housing Resources and Opportunities. We will prepare an evaluation of housing resources, including programmatic, physical, and financial. Information provided by City staff regarding current housing programs will be an important component of this analysis. This section of the Housing Element will also include the sites analysis described in Task 5.2, above. 5.4 Housing Constraints. We will update the analysis of governmental and nongovernmental constraints based upon any changed circumstances such as PLAN Hermosa land use designations and zoning amendments, development review procedures, fees and infrastructure availability. If constraints are identified, we will recommend programs to mitigate or remove them, where feasible. 5.5 Goals, Policies, Programs and Quantified Objectives. Based upon the current Housing Element, the analyses described above, and input from City staff, decision-makers, stakeholders and HCD, we will recommend appropriate revisions to goals, policies, programs and quantified objectives. Work Products • Needs assessment • Resources analysis, including the sites inventory • Constraints analysis • Goals, policies, programs and quantified objectives (All documents provided as digital files) 121 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -9- July 2, 2020 Task 6 Planning Commission and City Council Workshops In addition to the public engagement process described in Task 4, Mr. Douglas will assist City staff in facilitating public workshops with the Planning Commission and the City Council (one each). The purpose of the workshops is to present a summary of issues, opportunities, constraints, and potential policy and program options and obtain direction from the Planning Commission and City Council. For each workshop, Mr. Douglas will provide a presentation and facilitate discussion as directed by the City’s Project Manager. We will also assist City staff in compiling a public notification list of interested parties, assist in preparing public meeting notices for publication by the City, and prepare supporting materials for each meeting. Work Products • Participation in Planning Commission and City Council public workshops (one each) Task 7 Draft Housing Element This task includes preparation and review of the 6th cycle Housing Element document consistent with the requirements of State law. The following sub-tasks are proposed: 7.1 Administrative Draft Housing Element. We will prepare an Administrative Draft Housing Element for internal Staff review. The budget assumes that the substance, level of detail, and format of the new Housing Element will be similar to the current element. The Housing Element will include all of the sections required by State law, as described in the tasks above. 7.2 Public Review Draft Housing Element. Based upon Staff comments, we will prepare a Public Review Draft Housing Element for City distribution. The Draft Housing Element must be submitted to HCD for review prior to adoption. We will assist Staff in coordinating with HCD and responding to questions and comments on the Draft Housing Element. Work Products • Administrative Draft Housing Element for review by City staff • Public Review Draft Housing Element incorporating staff comments for review by the community, the Planning Commission, the City Council and HCD Task 8 CEQA Compliance We will conduct an environmental review for the Housing Element update in compliance with CEQA. The budget assumes that either an Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) or an addendum to the PLAN Hermosa Final EIR will be 122 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -10- July 2, 2020 appropriate. The analysis will be programmatic in nature, and if the Housing Element identifies a need for land use and zoning amendments to provide adequate sites, potential impacts related to those amendments and future housing developments will be addressed at a conceptual level of detail. No technical studies are anticipated. If it is determined that land use changes are necessary to demonstrate adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA, we will work with staff to determine an appropriate course of action for those land use amendments and CEQA documentation, and assistance with those amendments, as well as any required housing-related Code amendments, can be provided as optional tasks (see below). Based on the nature of any required land use amendments, it is possible that more extensive analysis such as technical studies or an EIR may be necessary. It is not possible to quantify a budget for the CEQA analysis of land use changes until the nature and location of those changes are identified. After the close of the public comment period we will prepare draft responses to any comments received as well as revisions to the CEQA analysis (if necessary) and appropriate CEQA findings for review by the City. We will also prepare and file draft CEQA notices and assist Staff with Native American consultation requirements. The budget assumes that the City will be responsible for payment of all filing fees. It is assumed that the City will provide the distribution list for all CEQA notices as well as Native American tribes who have been contacted as part of other recent planning efforts. As with the Housing Element documents, the budget assumes that digital files will be provided for each work product. Work Products • Administrative draft IS/ND or Addendum for city review • Public review draft IS/ND or Addendum incorporating staff comments • Preparation and posting of CEQA notices, including Native American consultation notices • Final IS/ND or Addendum 123 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -11- July 2, 2020 Task 9 Public Hearings This task includes participation in two Planning Commission public hearings and two City Council hearings. Mr. Douglas will provide a presentation at each meeting as directed by the City’s Project Manager. We will also assist City staff in preparing public meeting notices for publication by the City, and prepare a draft staff report and supporting materials for each meeting. Work Products • Participation in four public hearings Task 10 Final Housing Element We will prepare a proposed final Housing Element, including any changes to the draft Element required by HCD, for Planning Commission review and City Council adoption. The due date for Housing Element adoption is expected to be October 15, 2021 and we will work closely with Staff to ensure that applicable deadlines and requirements are met. The budget assumes one Draft Housing Element submittal to HCD plus submittal of the adopted element. Work Products • Proposed Final Housing Element for Planning Commission and City Council review (electronic file) • Adopted Housing Element for submittal to HCD (electronic file) Task 11 HCD Review In consultation with City staff, we will facilitate HCD review and certification of the Housing Element. Two rounds of HCD review are required by State law – first for the draft element and then for the adopted element. Mr. Douglas will prepare a summary of HCD comments on the draft Housing Element and work with City Staff to prepare appropriate revisions to address those comments. If HCD has additional comments on the adopted element, we will work with City staff to resolve those issues. It must be noted that the Housing Element is a policy document and we will advise City staff and decision-makers regarding certification requirements. However, since the Housing Element is ultimately subject to approval by the City Council, certification will be contingent on City acceptance of any policy changes required by HCD. Work Products • HCD coordination on the draft and adopted Housing Elements 124 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -12- July 2, 2020 Optional Tasks Since the last Housing Element was prepared the State Legislature has adopted several significant changes to housing law, and additional changes continue to be introduced this year in Sacramento. The analysis of constraints (Task 5) will identify any City housing regulations that do not comply with current State requirements. As an optional task we can assist the City in drafting housing-related ordinances (such as ADU standards and accommodations for persons with disabilities or other special needs) that may be required based on current State law. Based on SCAG’s most recent draft RHNA methodology, it is possible that amendments to General Plan land use designations and zoning regulations could be required to demonstrate adequate sites to accommodate the new RHNA allocation. If desired, we will work with the City to prepare a detailed scope of work to address these additional topics to ensure that the City remains in full compliance with State Housing Element law. 125 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -13- July 2, 2020 3. Project Management Plan Proposed Schedule Under State law the due date for adoption of 6th cycle Housing Elements in the SCAG region is expected to be October 15, 2021. (Note: as of this writing, SCAG has submitted a request to the Governor and State Legislature to delay the Housing Element due date April 2022, but no response has been announced.) We will work closely with City staff to ensure timely completion of the project. The following preliminary milestone schedule would achieve the State Housing Element deadline; however, this schedule will be subject to refinement during the course of the project in consultation with City staff. Timeframe Milestone September 2020 Authorization to proceed Sept – December 2020 Review current Housing Element Monitor SCAG RHNA process Housing Element analysis Public outreach & workshops January – February 2021 Prepare Administrative Draft Housing Element Public outreach & workshops March 2021 Staff review of Administrative Draft Housing Element April 2021 Prepare Public Review Draft Housing Element April - June 2021 HCD review & consultation July - September 2021 Planning Commission & City Council hearings September 2021 Submit adopted Housing Element to HCD (90-day review) Communications Approach Our approach to project management is to anticipate the City’s needs and take personal responsibility for the success of the project. The budget assumes that ongoing coordination with City staff will occur via telephone and email. The frequency of communications will be dependent on the current work in progress – at critical times we may have several conversations in a short time span to resolve issues. Quality Assurance/Quality Control Approach As noted above, all of the work described in this proposal (with the exception of some document formatting and graphics) will be done personally by Mr. Douglas. As a result, the quality of our work is assured by having one person responsible for all aspects of the project. As demonstrated in Section 4, below, John is a recognized authority on Housing Elements as well as strategies for successful consensus-building, and is uniquely well- qualified to assist the City with this project. 126 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -14- July 2, 2020 4. Experience and Qualifications Having a knowledgeable project team will be critical to successfully navigating the 6th cycle Housing Element process. John Douglas, AICP is the owner and sole member of JHD Planning LLC. Over the past 40 years Mr. Douglas has prepared approximately 100 Housing Element updates spanning all five Housing Element cycles that have occurred since 1980. Every Housing Element he has prepared has been certified by HCD as compliant with State law. Beach communities present special challenges due to Coastal Commission requirements, and John has successfully assisted many coastal cities including Manhattan Beach, Seal Beach, Laguna Beach, San Clemente, Santa Barbara, Carpinteria, Goleta, Pacific Grove, Carmel-by-the-Sea and Oceanside with their Housing Element updates. While he was Principal Planner with the City of Newport Beach in the 1990s, John was the City’s liaison with the Coastal Commission on LCP and permitting issues. John is also a lecturer in the urban planning program at UC Irvine where he teaches a graduate-level course on Housing Elements. He is also an experienced meeting facilitator and a State-certified mediator. Unlike most planning consulting firms, we do not delegate work to junior staff. All of the work described in this proposal will be completed personally by Mr. Douglas. John’s planning experience includes 15 years in local government planning agency management positions as well as over 20 years as a consultant to local governments. He is currently working with several Southern California cities on Housing Element updates, implementation, annual progress reporting, and RHNA coordination in preparation for the 6th Housing Element cycle. While Mr. Douglas is a recognized authority on housing elements, his knowledge and experience includes a broad range of planning issues. As an example, he recently completed a comprehensive General Plan update and EIR for the City of Santa Paula in Ventura County. John was the principal author of both the General Plan and the EIR. Housing Element law contains increasingly complex requirements involving land use policies, plans, regulations, and procedures. John’s exceptional breadth of planning experience on “both sides of the counter” together with his thorough understanding of the political dynamics of local government planning enable him to help cities effectively integrate the Housing Element with the other General Plan Elements, zoning regulations and development review procedures. His combination and depth of expertise in Housing Elements, land use planning and CEQA is one of the most important characteristics that distinguishes him from other consultants. John approaches every Housing Element update with the goal of obtaining State certification in a manner that is consistent with City policy to the greatest extent feasible. 127 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -15- July 2, 2020 Summary of Relevant Projects and References Listed below are examples of projects completed personally by Mr. Douglas that are representative of the services to be provided for this project. All of the Housing Elements were certified by HCD as fully compliant with State law. A Summary of Qualifications and Mr. Douglas’s resume are provided on the following pages. All of the work, other than some document formatting and graphics, will be completed personally by Mr. Douglas. City of Hermosa Beach 4th & 5th cycle Housing Element updates, Code amendments & zone changes (2007-present) Ken Robertson, AICP, Community Development Director (310) 318-0242 krobertson@hermosabeach.gov City of Malibu 4th & 5th cycle Housing Element updates, Code amendments & zone changes (2007-present) Joyce Parker-Bozylinski, AICP, Planning Director (retired) 805-368-7236 jparkerbozylinski@gmail.com City of Santa Paula 4th & 5th cycle Housing Element updates, Code amendments & zone changes (2007-2014) Comprehensive General Plan update and Program EIR (2017-2020) Jeff Mitchem, Planning Manager 805-933-4214 x284 jmitchem@spcity.org Janna Minsk, AICP, Planning Director (retired) 805-644-2925 morandmi@aol.com Jurisdictions Mr. Douglas is currently assisting include the following: City of Aliso Viejo City of Beverly Hills City of Colton City of Covina City of Diamond Bar City of Goleta City of Grand Terrace City of Hermosa Beach City of Hidden Hills City of Laguna Niguel City of La Habra Heights City of La Palma City of Malibu City of Manhattan Beach City of Mission Viejo City of Santa Paula City of Seal Beach City of Villa Park 128 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -15- July 2, 2020 129 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -16- July 2, 2020 RESUME 130 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -17- July 2, 2020 5. Required Forms Please see forms on the following pages 131 132 133 134 135 2021 Housing Element Proposal JHD PLANNING LLC -18- July 2, 2020 6. Fee Schedule Our proposed budget for the Housing Element update is shown below. Additional tasks can be provided on a time-and-materials basis. Reimbursable expenses are billed at actual cost with no surcharge. We do not charge for travel expenses, and travel time to/from meetings is included in the budget for each meeting. We commit to donating 10% of our consulting fees to charities of the City’s choice that serve the communities where we work. Task Description JD WP Total Hours Cost 1 Project Management & Coordination 20 20 $3,000 2 Project Initiation 12 12 $1,800 3 Evaluation of the Current Housing Element 24 24 $3,600 4 Public Engagement 80 80 $12,000 5 Assessment & Analysis 200 40 240 $32,600 6 Planning Commission & City Council Workshops (2) 32 32 $4,800 7 Draft Housing Element 40 20 60 $7,300 8 CEQA Compliance 60 60 $9,000 9 Public Hearings (4) 64 64 $9,600 10 Final Housing Element 20 8 28 $3,520 11 HCD Review 40 40 $6,000 Total Labor 592 68 660 $93,220 Hourly Rate $150 $65 Reimbursable Expenses (See table below) $100 Total Labor + Expenses $93,320 JD = John Douglas, AICP, Principal WP = Graphics/word processing Reimbursable Expenses Travel/mileage No charge Postage/deliveries/printing/supplies $100 Total $100 Notes: 1) Travel time and expenses are included in the budget for each task. 136 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0498 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 APPROVAL OF TRANSFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT AND HERMOSA BEACH AGREEMENT NO. 2020MP32 SAFE, CLEAN WATER PROGRAM - MUNICIPAL PROGRAM (Environmental Programs Manager Douglas Krauss) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Transfer Agreement between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District and the City of Hermosa Beach for Safe Clean Water Funds and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. Executive Summary: In November 2018,Los Angeles County voters approved Measure W,the Safe Clean Water Program.This authorized a property tax to be charged to all Los Angeles County property owners. The estimated $300 million in annual revenue from this tax is dedicated to fund storm water projects with an emphasis on multi-benefit storm water infrastructure.The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors recently approved the transfer agreements for these funds.The City must now execute the transfer agreement and submit an annual plan to receive funds. Background: In July 2018,the L.A.County Board of Supervisors took action to place the Safe Clean Water (SCW) Program and Measure W on the ballot for consideration by voters on November 6,2018.The measure was passed with the approval of nearly 70%of the voters.Measure W implements a special tax of 2.5 cents per square foot of impermeable surface on property owners in Los Angeles County and will generate approximately $300 million per year of dedicated funding for municipal and regional stormwater programs.This tax is approximately $83 a year for the average single-family homeowner and exempts low-income seniors.The program is administered by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (District)and annual revenue will be distributed between:direct allocations to cities in proportion to the tax collected in each jurisdiction (40%),funding for regional projects (50%),and an administration fee for the District (10%).As a requirement of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit (MS4 Permit),each city is responsible for implementing storm water projects in their jurisdiction (distributed projects)such asCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™137 Staff Report REPORT 20-0498 responsible for implementing storm water projects in their jurisdiction (distributed projects)such as green streets and source reduction programs,as well as larger,multi-jurisdictional (regional)projects. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works has estimated that the total capital costs to implement these projects to comply with the MS4 Permit exceeds $20 billion for the County and cities.The SCW Program will assist cities in meeting water quality compliance regulations by helping fund various projects and programs with an emphasis on implementing multi-benefit stormwater infrastructure. Analysis: The City of Hermosa Beach is scheduled to receive approximately $160,000 annually from the SCW Program for its municipal share.This amount will vary depending on the number of exemptions granted and other adjustments to the assessments.This funding may be utilized for a variety of projects and programs that assist in achieving compliance with the MS4 permit.Multi-benefit projects and nature-based solutions are strongly encouraged. Upon receiving the transfer agreement from the District,it must be executed by the City Manager and returned along with an annual plan detailing how the funds would be spent for the year.The District will transfer the funding within 45 days after receiving the executed transfer agreement and annual plan.Cities must spend 70%of annual allocations and each year’s funds must be spent within 5 years of receipt.Cities must also submit expenditure reports at the end of each year detailing expenditures and maintenance and monitoring plans,as necessary.City staff has budgeted $140,000 of the $160,000 of anticipated initial funds for 2020-21 to support design and engineering of the Hermosa Avenue Green Street Project (CIP #164).The current project cost estimate is $137,500, which is the amount included on the SCW Program Annual Plan.The difference would be utilized for unanticipated costs or carried forward for future years. The transfer agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and is approved as to form.Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the transfer agreement and submit it to the District along with annual plan. Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description October 23, 2018 Approved Letter of Support for Measure W General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendation have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below: Infrastructure Goal 5.The stormwater management system is safe,sanitary,and environmentally and City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™138 Staff Report REPORT 20-0498 Goal 5.The stormwater management system is safe,sanitary,and environmentally and fiscally sustainable. Policies: ·5.1 Integration of stormwater best practices.Integrate stormwater infiltration best practices when initiating streetscape redevelopment or public facility improvement projects. ·5.5 Stormwater system maintenance.Maintain,fund,and regularly monitor the City’s stormwater infrastructure. ·5.8 Low impact development.Require new development and redevelopment projects to incorporate low impact development (LID)techniques in project designs,including but not limited to on-site drainage improvements using native vegetation to capture and clean stormwater runoff and minimize impervious surfaces. Fiscal Impact: The City will receive approximately $160,000 annually in SCW Funds.These funds are set aside in a separate fund,allowing tracking and potential audits.This amount will fluctuate with the number of exemptions granted by the District and other adjustments to the assessments. Attachments: 1.Transfer Agreement 2.Annual Plan Respectfully Submitted by: Douglas Krauss, Environmental Program Manager Concur: Marnell Gibson, Public Works Director Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™139 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 1 of 23 TRANSFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT AND HERMOSA BEACH AGREEMENT NO. 2020MP32 SAFE, CLEAN WATER PROGRAM – MUNICIPAL PROGRAM This Transfer Agreement, hereinafter referred to as “Agreement,” is entered into as of June 25, 2020 by and between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, hereinafter referred to as "District," and Hermosa Beach, hereinafter referred to as "Municipality." WHEREAS, District, pursuant to the Los Angeles Region Safe, Clean Water (SCW) Program ordinance (Chapter 16 of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code) and the SCW Program Implementation Ordinance (Chapter 18 of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code), administers the SCW Program for the purpose of funding Projects and Programs to increase stormwater and urban runoff capture and reduce stormwater and urban runoff pollution in the District; WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 16.04.A.2. of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code, forty percent (40%) of annual SCW Program tax revenues shall be allocated to Municipalities within the District, in the same proportion as the a mount of revenues collected within each Municipality, to be expended by those cities within the cities' respective jurisdictions and by the County within the unincorporated areas that are within the boundaries of the District, for the implementation, operation and maintenance, and administration of Projects and Programs, in accordance with the criteria and procedures established in this Chapters 16 and 18 of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code; WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 16.05.A.1. of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code, prior to their receipt of SCW Program funds, Municipalities must enter into an agreement with the District to transfer SCW Program funds; WHEREAS, the County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors has approved a standard template Agreement, as required by and in accordance with Section 18.09 of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code, for the transfer of SCW Program funds to Municipalities. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, mutual representations, covenants and agreements in this Agreement, the District and the Municipality, each binding itself, its successors and assigns, do mutually promise, covenant, and agree as follows: I. DEFINITIONS The definitions set forth in Sections 16.03 and 18.02 of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code shall apply to this Agreement. In addition, the following definitions shall also apply: 140 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 2 of 23 “Agreement” means this Transfer Agreement, including all exhibits and attachments hereto. “Annual Plan” means the plan referred to in Section 18.09.B.5 of the Code that includes the contents specified in Exhibit A. "Code" means the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code. “Days” means calendar days unless otherwise expressly indicated. “Fiscal Year” means the period of twelve (12) months terminating on June 30 of any year. “Safe Clean Water (SCW) Program Payment” means the Municipality's annual allocation of SCW Program funds as described in Section 16.04.A.2. of the Code disbursed by the District to the Municipality. “Year” means calendar year unless otherwise expressly indicated. II. PARTY CONTACTS The District and the Municipality designate the following individuals as the primary points of contact and communication regarding the Municipal Program and the administration and implementation of this Agreement. Los Angeles County Flood Control District Municipality: Hermosa Beach Name: Name: Address: Address: Phone: Phone: Email: Email: Either party to this Agreement may change the individual identified as the primary point of contact above by providing written notice of the change to the other party. III. EXHIBITS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE The following exhibits to this Agreement, including any amendments and supplements hereto, are hereby incorporated herein and made a part of this Agreement: EXHIBIT A – ANNUAL PLAN CONTENTS EXHIBIT B – GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS EXHIBIT C – NATURE-BASED SOLUTIONS (Best Management Practices) EXHIBIT D – OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT 141 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 3 of 23 IV. MUNICIPAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION A. The Municipality shall annually prepare and submit to the District, an Annual Plan. The Annual Plan for the 2020-21 Fiscal Year shall be submitted to the District no later than 45-days after the execution of this Agreement by the last party to sign. An Annual Plan for each subsequent Fiscal Year shall be submitted not later than 90-days prior to the start of the Fiscal Year for which the Plan is prepared. B. The Municipality shall utilize the SCW Program Payments in compliance with Chapters 16 and 18 of the Code. C. The Municipality shall comply with the terms and conditions in Exhibits B, C, and D, of this Agreement, and all applicable provisions of Chapters 16 and 18 of the Code, specifically including, without limitation, Section 18.06. V. SCW PROGRAM PAYMENTS TO MUNICIPALITIES A. The District shall disburse the Municipality's SCW Program Payment for the 2020 - 21 Fiscal Year within 45-days of the signed executed Agreement or within 14-days of the District’s receipt of the Annual Plan for 2020 -21 Fiscal Year in compliance with Exhibit A, whichever comes later. The initial disbursement of SCW Program Payments shall include the amount of revenue collected by the District at the time of Agreement execution; any additional funds that are subsequently collected will be disbursed by August 31, 2020. B. SCW Program Payments in subsequent Fiscal Years will generally be available for disbursement by August 31, provided a duly executed transfer agreement is in effect and subject to the Municipality's compliance with the conditions described in paragraph C, below; however the District may, in its discretion, change the date and number of the actual disbursements for any Fiscal Year based on the amount and timing of revenues actually collected by the District. C. For subsequent Fiscal Years, the District shall disburse the Municipality's SCW Program Payment upon satisfaction of the following conditions: (1) the District has received the Annual Progress/Expenditure Report required pursuant to Section 18.06.D of the Code; (2) the District has received Municipality's Annual Plan for that Fiscal Year, and (3) the Municipality has complied with the audit requirements of Section B-6 of Exhibit B. D. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, no disbursement shall be made at any time or in any manner that is in violation of or in conflict with federal, state, County laws, policies, or regulations. E. All disbursements shall be subject to and b e made in accordance with the terms and conditions in this Agreement and Chapters 16 and 18 of the Code. 142 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 4 of 23 VI. Term of Agreement This Agreement shall expire at the end of the 2023-24 Fiscal Year. The parties shall thereafter enter into a new agreement based on the most recent standard template agreement approved by the Board. VII. Execution of Agreement This Agreement may be executed simultaneously or in any number of counterparts, including both counterparts that are executed manually on paper and counterparts that are in the form of electronic records and are executed electronically, whether digital o r encrypted, each of which shall be deemed an original and together shall constitute one and the same instrument. The District and the Municipality hereby agree to regard facsimile/electronic representations of original signatures of authorized officers of each party, when appearing in appropriate places on this Agreement and on any addenda or amendments thereto, delivered or sent via facsimile or electronic mail or other electronic means, as legally sufficient evidence that such original signatures have been affixed to this Agreement and any addenda or amendments thereto such that the parties need not follow up facsimile/electronic transmissions of such documents with subsequent (non- facsimile/electronic) transmission of “original” versions of such documents. Further, the District and the Municipality: (i) agree that an electronic signature of any party may be used to authenticate this Agreement or any addenda or amendment thereto, and if used, will have the same force and effect as a manual signature; (ii) acknowledge that if an electronic signature is used, the other party will rely on such signature as binding the party using such signature, and (iii) hereby waive any defenses to the enforcement of the terms of this agreement based on the foregoing forms of signature. 143 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 5 of 23 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties hereto. HERMOSA BEACH By: ____________________________________ Name: Title: Date: __________________________________ LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT: By: ____________________________________ Name: Title: Date: __________________________________ 144 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 6 of 23 EXHIBIT A – ANNUAL PLAN CONTENTS A-1. Description of all projects anticipated to be funded using the SCW Program Payment. Include a discussion of how the projects will result in the achievement of one or more SCW Program Goals, including quantitative targets and corresponding metrics for subsequent reporting of all applicable parameters. A-2. Description of all programs anticipated to be funded using the SCW Program Payment. Include a discussion of how the programs will result in the achievement of one or more SCW Program Goals; including quantitative targets and corresponding metrics for subsequent reporting of all applicable parameters. A-3. Description of all operation and maintenance activities anticipated to be funded using the SCW Program Payment. Include a discussion of how those activities will result in the achievement of one or more SCW Program Goals. Additional operation and maintenance activities, even if funded by other sources, should be referenced to provide an overview of anticipated overall project approach. A-4. Description of the stakeholder and community outreach/engagement activities anticipated to be funded with the SCW Program Payment, including discussion of how local NGOs or CBOs will be involved, if applicable, and if not, why. Additional outreach/engagement activities, even if funded by other sources, should be referenced to provide an overview of anticipated overall project approach. A-5. Description of post-construction monitoring for projects completed using the SCW Program Payment. Additional post-construction monitoring activities, even if funded by other sources, should be referenced to provide an overview of anticipated overall project approach. A-6. Provide the status of any projects that have been awarded (or are seeking award of) Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI) verification, if applicable. A-7. Provide the budget for the activities described in provisions A1 through A -5 SCW Program Payment. 145 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 7 of 23 EXHIBIT B – GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS B-1. Accounting and Deposit of Funding Disbursement 1. SCW Program Payments distributed to the Municipality shall be held in a separate interest-bearing account and shall not be combined with other funds. Interest earned from each account shall be used by the Municipality only for eligible expenditures consistent with the requirements of the SCW Program. 2. The Municipality shall not be entitled to interest earned on undisbursed SCW Program Payments; interest earned prior to disbursement is property of the District. 3. The Municipality shall operate in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). 4. The Municipality shall be strictly accountable for all funds, receipts, and disbursements for their SCW Program Payment. B-2. Acknowledgement of Credit and Signage The Municipality shall include appropriate acknowledgement of credit to the District’s Safe, Clean Water Program for its support when promoting activities funded with SCW Program funds or using any data and/or information developed SCW Program funds. When the SCW Program Payment is used, in whole or in part, for construction of an infrastructure Project, signage shall be posted in a prominent location at Project site(s) or at the Municipality’s headquarters and shall include the Safe, Clean Water Program color logo and the following disclosure statement: “Funding for this project has been provided in full or in part from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District’s Safe, Clean Water Program.” At a minimum the sign shall be 2’ x 3’ in size. The Municipality shall also include in each of its contracts for work under this Agreement a provision that inco rporates the requirements stated within this paragraph. When the SCW Program Payment is used, in whole or in part, for a scientific study, the Municipality shall include the following statement in the study report: “Funding for this study has been provided in full or in part from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District’s Safe, Clean Water Program.” The Municipality shall also include in each of its contracts for work under this Agreement a provision that incorporates the requirements stated within this paragraph. B-3. Acquisition of Real Property - Covenant Any real property acquired in whole or in part with SCW Program funds shall be used for Projects and Programs that are consistent with the SCW Program Goals and with the provisions of Chapter 16 and 18 of the Code. Any Municipality that acquires the fee title to real property using, in whole or in pa rt, SCW Program funds shall record a document in the office of the Registrar -Recorder/County 146 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 8 of 23 Clerk containing a covenant not to sell or otherwise convey the r eal property without the prior express written consent of the District, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. B-4. Amendment Except as provided in Section II of the Agreement, no amendment or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties. No oral or written understanding or agreement not incorporated in this Agreement is binding on any of the parties. B-5. Assignment The Municipality shall not assign this Agreement. B-6. Audit and Recordkeeping 1. The Municipality shall retain for a period of seven (7) years, all records necessary in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles to determine the amounts expended, and eligibility of Projects implemented using SCW Program Payments. The Municipality, upon demand by authorized representatives of the District, shall make such records available for examination and review or audit by the District or its authorized representatives. Records shall include accounting records, written policies and procedures, contract files, original estimates, correspondence, change order files, including documentation covering negotiated settlements, invoices, and any other supporting evidence deemed necessary to substantiate charges related to SCW Program Payments and expenditures. 2. The Municipality is responsible for obtaining an independent audit to determine compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and all requirements applicable to the Municipality contained in chapters 16 and 18 of the Code. Municipality shall obtain an independent audit of their SCW Program Payments every three (3) years. Audits shall be funded with Municipal Program funds. 3. Municipality shall file a copy of all audit reports by the ninth (9th) month from the end of each three (3) year period to detail the preceding three (3) years of expenditures. Audit reports shall be posted on the District’s publicly accessible website. Every Third Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Audit Begins Audit Report Due to District 2020-21 7/1/2023 No later than 3/31/2024 4. Upon reasonable advanced request, the Municipality shall permit the Chief Engineer to examine the infrastructure Projects using SCW Program Payments. The Municipality shall permit the authorized District representative, including the Auditor-Controller, to examine, review, audit, and transcribe any and all audit 147 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 9 of 23 reports, other reports, books, accounts, papers, maps, and other records that relate to the SCW Program Payments. Examination activities are considered District administration of the SCW Program. 5. Expenditures determined by an audit to be in violation of any provision of Chapters 16 or 18 of the Code, or of this Agreement, shall be subject to the enforcement and remedy provisions of Section 18.14 of the Code. B-7. Availability of Funds District’s obligation to disburse the SCW Program Payment is contingent upon the availability of sufficient funds to permit the disbursements provided for herein. If sufficient funds are not available for any reason including, but not limited to, failur e to fund allocations necessary for disbursement of the SCW Program Payment, the District shall not be obligated to make any disbursements to the Municipality under this Agreement. This provision shall be construed as a condition precedent to the obligation of the District to make any disbursements under this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to provide the Municipality with a right of priority for disbursement over any other Municipality. If any disbursements due to the Municipality u nder this Agreement are deferred because sufficient funds are unavailable, it is the intention of the District t hat such disbursement will be made to the Municipality when sufficient funds do become available, but this intention is not binding. If this Agreement’s funding for any Fiscal Year is reduced or deleted by order of the Board, the District shall have the op tion to either cancel this Agreement with no liability occurring to the District or offer an amendment to the Municipality to reflect the reduced amount. B-8. Choice of Law The laws of the State of California govern this Agreement. B-9. Claims Any claim of the Municipality is limited to the rights, remedies, and claims procedures provided to the Municipality under this Agreement. Municipal expenditures of a SCW Program Payment that involves the District shall utilize a separate and specific agreement to that Project that includes appropriate indemnification superseding that in this Agreement. B-10. Compliance with SCW Program The Municipality shall comply with and require its contractors and subcontractors to comply with all provisions of Chapters 16 and 18 of the Code. B-11. Compliance with Law, Regulations, etc. The Municipality shall, at all times, comply with and require its contractors and subcontractors to comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules, guidelines, regulations, and requirements. 148 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 10 of 23 B-12. Continuous Use of Municipal Projects; Lease or Disposal of Municipal Projects The Municipality shall not abandon, substantially discontinue use of, lease, or dispose of all or a significant part or portion of any Project funded in whole or in par t with SCW Program Payments during the useful life (defined as 30 years unless specified otherwise in annual plans and subsequent reports) of the Project without prior written approval of the District. Such approval may be conditioned as determined to be a ppropriate by the District, including a condition requiring repayment of a pro rata amount of the SCW Program Payments used to fund the Project together with interest on said amount accruing from the date of lease or disposal of the Project. B-13. Disputes Should a dispute arise between the parties, the party asserting the dispute will notify the other parties in writing of the dispute. The parties will then meet and confer within 21 calendar days of the notice in a good faith attempt to resolve the dispute. If the matter has not been resolved through the process set forth in the preceding paragraph, any party may initiate mediation of the dispute. Mediation will be before a retired judge or mediation service mutually agreeable to the parties. All costs of the mediation, including mediator fees, will be paid one-half by the District and one-half by the Municipality. SCW Program Payments shall not be used to pay for any costs of the mediation. The parties will attempt to resolve any dispute through the process set forth above before filing any action relating to the dispute in any court of law. B-14. Final Inspection and Certification of Registered Professional Upon completion of the design phase and before construction of a project, the Municipality shall provide certification by a California Registered Professional (i.e., Professional Civil Engineer, Engineering Geologist) that the design has been completed. Upon completion of the project, the Municipality shall provide for a final inspection and certification by a California Registered Professional (i.e., Professional Civil Engineer, Engineering Geologist), that the Project has been completed in accordance with submitted final plans and specifications and any modifications thereto and in accordance with this Agreement. B-15. Force Majeure. In the event that Municipality is delayed or hindered from the performance of any act required hereunder by reason of strikes, lockouts, labor troubles, inability to procure materials not related to the price thereof, riots, insurrection, war, or other reasons of a like nature beyond the control of the Municipality, then performance of such acts shall be excused for the period of the delay, and the period for the performance of any such act shall be extended for a period equivalent to the period of such delay. 149 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 11 of 23 B-16. Funding Considerations and Exclusions 1. All expenditures of SCW Program Payments by Municipality must comply with the provisions of Chapters 16 and 18 of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code, including but not limited to the provisions regarding eligible expenditures contained in Section 16.05.A.2 and the provision regarding ineligible expenditures contained in Section 16.05.A.3. 2. SCW Program Payments shall not be used in connection with any Project implemented as an Enhanced Compliance Action ("ECA") and/or Supplemental Environmental Project ("SEP") as defined by State Water Resources Control Board Office of Enforcement written policies, or any other Project implemented pursuant to the settlement of an enforcement action or to offset monetary penalties imposed by the State Water Resources Control Board, a Regional Water Quality Control Board, or any other regulatory authority; provided, however, that SCW funds may be used for a Project implemented pursuant to a time schedu le order ("TSO") issued by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board if, at the time the TSO was issued, the Project was included in an approved watershed management program (including enhanced watershed management programs) developed pursuant to the MS4 Permit. B-17. Indemnification The Municipality shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the District, the County of Los Angeles and their elected and appointed officials, agents, and employees from and against any and all liability and expense, including defense costs, leg al fees, claims, actions, and causes of action for damages of any nature whatsoever, including but not limited to bodily injury, death, personal injury, or property damage, arising from or in conjunction with: (1) any Project or Program implemented by the Municipality, in whole or in part, with SCW Program Payments or (2) any breach of this Agreement by the Municipality. B-18. Independent Actor The Municipality, and its agents and employees, if any, in the performance of this Agreement, shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers, employees, or agents of the District. The Municipality shall not contract work with a contractor who is in a period of debarment from any agency within the District. (LACC Chapter 2.202) B-19. Integration This is an integrated Agreement. This Agreement is intended to be a full and complete statement of the terms of the agreement between the District and Municipality, and expressly supersedes any and all prior oral or written agreements, covenants, representations and warranties, express or implied, concerning the subject matter of this Agreement. 150 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 12 of 23 B-20. Lapsed Funds 1. The Municipality shall be able to carry over uncommitted SCW Program Payments for up to five (5) years from the end of the fiscal year in which those funds are transferred from the District to the Municipality. 2. If the Municipality is unable to expend the SCW Program Payment within five (5) years from the end of the fiscal year in which those funds are transferred from the District to the Municipality, then lapsed funding procedures will apply. Lapsed funds are funds that were transferred to the Municipality but were not committed to eligible expenditures by the end of the fifth (5 th) fiscal year after the fiscal year in which those funds were transferred from the District. 3. Lapsed funds shall be allocated by the Watershed Area Steering Committee of the respective Watershed Area to a new Project with benefit to that Municipality, if feasible in a reasonable time frame, or otherwise to the Watershed Area. 4. In the event that funds are to lapse, due to circumstances beyond the Municipality’s control, then the Municipality may request an extension of up to twelve (12) months in which to commit the funds to eligible expenditures. Extension Requests must contain sufficient justification and be submitted to the District in writing no later than three (3) months before the funds are to lapse. 5. The decision to grant an extension is at the sole discretion of the District. 6. Funds still uncommitted to eligible expenditures after an extension is g ranted will be subject to lapsed funding procedures without exception. Fiscal Year Transferred Funds Lapse After Extension Request Due Commit By 2019-20 6/30/2025 No later than 3/31/2025 No later than 6/30/2026 B-21. Municipal Project Access Upon reasonable advance request, the Municipality shall ensure that the District or any authorized representative, will have safe and suitable access to the site of any Project implemented by the Municipality in whole or in part with SCW Program Payments at all reasonable times. B-22. Non-Discrimination The Municipality agrees to abide by all federal, state, and County laws, regulations, and policies regarding non-discrimination in employment and equal employment opportunity. 151 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 13 of 23 B-23. No Third-Party Rights The parties to this Agreement do not create rights in, or grant remedies to, any third party as a beneficiary of this Agreement, or of any duty, covenant, obligation, or undertaking established herein B-24. Notice 1. The Municipality shall notify the District in writing within five (5) working days of the occurrence of the following: a. Bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or similar event of the Municipality; or b. Actions taken pursuant to State law in anticipation of filing for bankruptcy. 2. The Municipality shall notify the District within ten (10) working days of any litigation pending or threatened against the Municipality regarding its continued existence, consideration of dissolution, or disincorporation. 3. The Municipality shall notify the District promptly of the following: a. Any significant deviation from the submitted Annual Plan for the current Fiscal Year, including discussion of any major changes to the scope of funded projects or programs, noteworthy delays in implementation, reduction in benefits or community engagement, and/or modifications that change the SCW Program Goals intended to be accomplished. b. Discovery of any potential archaeological or historical resource. Should a potential archaeological or historical resource be discovered during construction, the Municipality agrees that all work in the area of the find will cease until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the situation and made recommendations regarding preservation of the resource, and the District has determined what actions should be taken to protect and preserve the resource. The Municipality agrees to implement appropriate actions as directed by the District. c. Any public or media event publicizing the accomplishments and/or results of this Agreement and provide the opportunity for attendance and participation by District representatives with at least fourteen (14) days’ notice to the District. B-25. Municipality’s Responsibility for Work The Municipality shall be responsible for all work and for persons or entities engaged in work performed pursuant to this Agreement including, but not limited to, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and providers of services. The Municipality shall be responsible for responding to any and all disputes arising out of its contracts for work on the Project. The District will not mediate disputes between the Municipality and any other entity concerning responsibility for performance of work. 152 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 14 of 23 B-26. Reporting The Municipality shall be subject to and comply with all applicable requirements of the District regarding reporting requirements. Municipalities shall report available data through the SCW Reporting Module, once available. 1. Annual Progress/Expenditure Reports. The Municipality shall submit Annual Progress/Expenditure Reports, using a format provided by the District, within six (6) months following the end of the Fiscal Year to the District to detail the activities of the prior year. The Annual Progress/Expenditure Reports shall be posted on the District’s publicly accessible website and on the Municipality’s website. The Annual Progress/Expenditure Report shall include: a. Amount of funds received; b. Breakdown of how the SCW Program Payment has been expended; c. Documentation that the SCW Program Payment was used for eligible expenditures in accordance with Chapters 16 and 18 of the Code; d. Description of activities that have occurred, milestones achieved, and progress made to date, during the applicable reporting period including comparison to the Annual Plan and corresponding metrics; e. Discussion of any existing gaps between what was planned and what was achieved for the prior year, include any lessons learned; f. Description of the Water Quality Benefits, Water Supply Benefits, and Community Investment Benefits and a summary of how SCW Program Payments have been used to achieve SCW Program Goals for the prior year, including graphical representation of available data and specific metrics to demonstrate the benefits being achieved through the years’ investments. g. Discussion of alignment with other local, regional, and state efforts, resources, and plans, as applicable. This includes discussion of opportunities for addressing additional SCW Program Goals, leveraging SCW Program Goals, and increasing regional capacity to supplement the SCW Program. h. Additional financial or Project-related information in connection with activity funded in whole or in part using SCW Program Payments as required by the District. i. Certification from a California Registered Professional (Civil Engineer or Geologist, as appropriate), that projects implemented with SCW Program Payments were conducted in accordance with Chapters 16 and 18 of the Code. 153 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 15 of 23 j. Report on annual and total (since inception of program) benefits provided by programs and projects funded by SCW Program Payment. This includes comparisons to annual plans and alignment with corresponding specific quantitative targets and metrics (note that SCW Reporting Module will facilitate calculation of benefits and graphical representation of pertinent data): i. Annual volume of stormwater captured and treated ii. Annual volume of stormwater captured and reused iii. Annual volume of stormwater captured and recharged to a managed aquifer iv. Annual creation, enhancement, or restoration of Community Investment Benefits. If none, discuss considerations explored and reasons to not include. v. Annual acreage increases in Nature-Based Solutions and claimed level of NBS (with matrix demonstrating determination of good, better, best, as outlined in Exhibit C). If none, discuss considerations explored and reasons to not include. vi. Annual expenditures providing DAC Benefits. If none, discuss considerations explored and reasons to not include. 2. Documentation of the Community Outreach and Engagement utilized for and/or achieved with the SCW Program Payment described in the Annual Plan Exhibit A. This information must be readily accessible to members of the public. 3. As Needed Information or Reports. The Municipality agrees to promptly provide such reports, data, and information as may be reasonably requested by the District including, but not limited to material necessary or appropriate for evaluation of the SCW Program or to fulfill any reporting requirements of the County, state or federal government. B-27. Representations, Warranties, and Commitments The Municipality represents, warrants, and commits as follows: 1. Authorization and Validity. The execution and delivery of this Agreement, including all incorporated documents, by the individual signing on behalf of Municipality, has been duly authorized by the governing body of Municipality, as applicable. Thi s Agreement constitutes a valid and binding obligation of the Municipality, enforceable in accordance with its terms, except as such enforcement may be limited by law. 2. No Violations. The execution, delivery, and performance by the Municipality of this Agreement, including all incorporated documents, do not violate any provision of any law or regulation in effect as of the date set forth on the first page hereof, or result in any breach or default under any contract, obligation, indenture, or other 154 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 16 of 23 instrument to which the Municipality is a party or by which the Municipality is bound as of the date set forth on the first page hereof. 3. No Litigation. There are no pending or, to the Municipality’s knowledge, threatened actions, claims, investigations, suits, or proceedings before any governmental authority, court, or administrative agency which affect the Municipality's ability to complete the Annual Plan. 4. Solvency. None of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement will be or have been made with an actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any present or future creditors of the Municipality. As of the date set forth on the first page hereof, the Municipality is solvent and will not be rendered insolvent by the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. The Municipality is able to pay its debts as they become due. 5. Legal Status and Eligibility. The Municipality is duly organized and existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of California. The Municipality shall at all times maintain its current legal existence and preserve and keep in full force and effect its legal rights and authority. 6. Good Standing. The Municipality must demonstrate it has not failed to comply with previous County and/or District audit disallowances within the preceding five years. B-28. Travel Any reimbursement for necessary ground transportation and lodging shall be at rates not to exceed those set by the California Department of Human Resources; per diem costs will not be eligible expenses. These rates may be found at http://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/Pages/travel-reimbursements.aspx. Reimbursement will be at the State travel amounts that are current as of the date costs are incurred by the Municipality. No travel outside the Los Ange les County Flood Control District region shall be reimbursed unless prior written authorization is obtained from the Program Manager. B-29. Unenforceable Provision In the event that any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable, the parties agree that all other provisions of this Agreement have force and effect and shall not be affected thereby. B-30. Withholding of Disbursements and Material Violations Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the District may withhold all or any portion of the SCW Program Payment for any Fiscal Year in the event that: 1. The Municipality has violated any provision of this Agreement; or 155 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 17 of 23 2. The Municipality fails to maintain reasonable progress in achieving SCW Program Goals, following an opportunity to cure. 3. Failure to remain in Good Standing, described in Section B -26 of Exhibit B. 4. Failure to submit annual reports on meeting SCW Program Goals. 156 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 18 of 23 EXHIBIT C – NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS (NBS) BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Municipalities shall consider incorporation of Nature-based solutions (NBS) into their projects. NBS refers to the sustainable management and use of nature for undertaking socio-environmental challenges, including climate change, water security, water pollution, food security, human health, and disaster risk management. As this environmental management practice is increasingly incorporated into projects for the SCW Program, this guidance document may be expanded upon to further quantify NBS practices based on benefits derived from their incorporation on projects. The SCW Program defines NBS as a Project that utilizes natural processes that slow, detain, infiltrate or filter Stormwater or Urban Runoff. These methods may include relying predominantly on soils and vegetation; increasing the permeability of Impermeable Areas; protecting undeveloped mountains and floodplains; creating and restoring riparian habitat and wetlands; creating rain gardens, bioswales, and parkway basins; enhancing soil through composting, mulching; and, planting trees and vegetation, with preference for native species. NBS may also be designed to provide additional benefits such as sequestering carbon, supporting biodiversity, providing shade, creating and enhancing parks and open space, and improving quality of life for surrounding communities. NBS include Projects that mimic natural processes, such as green streets, spreading grounds and planted areas with water storage capacity. NBS may capture stormwater to improve water quality, collect water for reuse or aquifer recharge, or to support vegetation growth utilizing natural processes. Municipalities are to include in each Annual Progress/Expenditure Report whether and how their project achieves a good, better, or best for each of the 6 NBS method s in accordance with the guidance below. Additionally, Annual Progress/ Expenditure Reports should include discussion on any considerations taken to maximize the class within each method. If at least 3 methods score within a single class, the overall proje ct can be characterized as that class. Municipalities must attach a copy of the matrix for each project with the good, better, or best column indicated for each method, to facilitate District tracking of methods being utilized. BEST BETTER GOOD 157 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 19 of 23 METHODS GOOD BETTER BEST Vegetation/Green Space Use of climate- appropriate, eco-friendly vegetation (groundcover, shrubs, and trees) / green space 5%-15% covered by new climate-appropriate vegetation Use of native, climate- appropriate, eco-friendly vegetation (groundcover, shrubs, and trees) / green space 16%-35% covered by new native vegetation Establishment of plant communities with a diversity of native vegetation (groundcover, shrubs, and trees) / green space that is both native and climate-appropriate More than 35% covered by new native vegetation Increase of Permeability Installation of vegetated landscape – 25%-49% paved area removed Redesign of existing impermeable surfaces and/or installation of permeable surfaces (e.g. permeable pavement and infiltration trenches) Installation of vegetated landscape – 50%-74% paved area removed Improvements of soil health (e.g., compaction reduction) Installation of vegetated landscape – 75%-100% paved area removed Creation of well- connected and self- sustained natural landscapes with healthy soils, permeable surfaces, and appropriate vegetation Protection of Undeveloped Mountains & Floodplains ● Preservation of native vegetation ● Minimal negative impact to existing drainage system ● Preservation of native vegetation ● Installation of new feature(s) to improve existing drainage system ● Creation of open green space ● Installation of features to improve natural hydrology Creation & Restoration of Riparian Habitat & Wetlands Partial restoration of existing riparian habitat and wetlands Planting of climate appropriate vegetation - between 11 and 20 different climate- appropriate or native plant species newly planted No potable water used to sustain the wetland ● Full restoration of existing riparian habitat and wetlands ● Planting of native vegetation - between 21 and 40 different native plant species newly planted No potable water used to sustain the wetland ● Full restoration and expansion of existing riparian habitat and wetlands Planting of plant communities with a diversity of native vegetation – between 41 and 50 different native plant species newly planted No potable water used to sustain the wetland 158 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 20 of 23 New Landscape Elements Elements designed to capture runoff for other simple usage (e.g. rain gardens and cisterns), capturing the 85th percentile 24-hour storm event for at least 50% of the entire parcel Elements that design to capture/redirect runoff and filter pollution (e.g. bioswales and parkway basins), capturing the 85th percentile 24-hour storm event from the entire parcel Large sized elements that capture and treat runoff to supplement or replace existing water systems (e.g. wetlands, daylighting streams, groundwater infiltration, floodplain reclamation), capturing the 90th percentile 24-hour storm event from the entire parcel and/or capturing off-site runoff Enhancement of Soil Use of soil amendments such as mulch and compost to retain moisture in the soil and prevent erosion Planting of new climate- appropriate vegetation to enhance soil organic matter Use of soil amendments such as mulch and compost that are locally generated to retain moisture in the soil, prevent erosion, and support locally based composting and other soil enhancement activities Planting of new native, climate-appropriate vegetation to enhance soil organic matter Use of soil amendments such as mulch and compost that are locally generated, especially use of next-generation design with regenerative adsorbents (e.g. woodchips, biochar) to retain moisture in the soil, prevent erosion, and support on-site composting and other soil enhancement activities Planting of new native, climate appropriate vegetation to enhance soil organic matter 159 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 21 of 23 EXHIBIT D – OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT Municipalities shall operate and maintain infrastructure projects for the useful lif e of the project and are to consider using the following guidance for operations and maintenance for infrastructure projects. Operational maintenance is the care and upkeep of Projects that may require detailed technical knowledge of the Project’s function and design. Project specific operational and maintenance plans shall consider the activities listed below and set forth specific activities and frequencies (not limited to those below) as determined to be appropriate by the Municipalities and best practices, including stakeholder engagement as applicable. Operational maintenance is to be performed by the operator of the Project with a purpose to make the operator aware of t he state of readiness of the Project to deliver stormwater and urban runoff benefits. 1. Litter Control • Regular removal of litter, nonhazardous waste materials, and accumulated debris near planted areas, rock areas, decomposed granite areas, rest areas, fence perimeters, adjoining access roads and driveways, drains, pedestrian trails, viewing stations, shelter houses, and bicycle pathways. • Regular inspection and maintenance of pet waste stations • Maintaining trash receptacles • Removal of trash, debris, and blockages from bioswales • Inspection and cleaning of trash booms • Inspection of weir gates and stop logs to clean debris, as required. 2. Vegetation Maintenance • Weed control o Recognition and removal of weeds, such as perennial weeds, morning glory, vine-type weeds, ragweed, and other underground spreading weeds. o Avoiding activities that result in weed seed germination (e.g. frequent soil cultivation near trees or shrubs) o Regular removal of weeds from landscape areas, including from berms, painted areas, rock areas, gravel areas, pavement cracks along access roads and driveways, drains, pedestrian trails, viewing stations, park shelters, and bicycle paths. • Tree and shrubbery trimming and care o Removal of dead trees and elimination of diseased/damaged growth o Prevent encroachment of adjacent property and provide vertical clearance o Inspect for dead or diseased plants regularly • Wetland vegetation and landscape maintenance o Installation and maintenance of hydrophytic and emergent plants in perennially wet and seasonal, intermittent habitats. o Draining and drawdown of wetland and excessive bulrush remova l 160 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 22 of 23 o Weed and nuisance plant control o Removal of aquatic vegetation (e.g. algae and primrose) using appropriate watercraft and harvesting equipment o Wildflower and meadow maintenance o Grass, sedge, and yarrow management o Removal of unwanted hydroseed 3. Wildlife Management • Exotic species control • Provide habitat management; promote growth of plants at appropriate densities and promote habitat structure for animal species • Protect sensitive animal species (e.g. protection during critical life stages including breeding and migration) • Avoid disturbances to nesting birds • Avoid spread of invasive aquatic species 4. Facility Inspection • Inspect project sites for rodent and insect infestations on a regular basis • Inspect for and report graffiti in shelter houses, viewing stat ions, benches, paving surfaces, walls, fences, and educational and directional signs • Inspect facilities for hazardous conditions on roads and trails (e.g. access roads and trails, decomposed granite pathways, and maintenance roads) • Inspect shade structures for structural damage or defacement • Inspect hardscapes • Inspect and maintain interpretive and informational signs • Inspect site furnishings (e.g. benches, hitching posts, bicycle racks) • Maintain deck areas (e.g. benches, signs, decking surfaces) • Visually inspect weirs and flap gates for damage; grease to prevent locking. • Inspect all structures after major storm events, periodically inspect every 3 months, and operate gates through full cycles to prevent them from locking up. 5. Irrigation System Management • Ensuring automatic irrigation controllers are functioning properly and providing various plant species with proper amount of water. o Cycle controller(s) through each station manually and automatically to determine if all facets are functioning properly. o Inspection should be performed at least monthly. o Recover, replace, or refasten displaced or damaged valve box covers. o Inspect and repair bubbler heads. 161 Municipal Program Agreement No.: 2020MP32 Page 23 of 23 o Repair and replace broken drip lines or emitters causing a loss of water (to prevent ponding and erosion). o Maintain drip system filters to prevent emitters from clogging. Inspection and cleaning should occur at least monthly. o Inspect and clean mainline filters, wye strainers, basket filters, and filters at backflow devices twice a year. o Maintain and check function of the drip system. • Keeping irrigation control boxes clear of vegetation • Operating irrigation system to ensure it does not cause excessively wet, waterlogged areas, and slope failure • Utilizing infrequent deep watering techniques to encourage deep rootin g, drought tolerant plant characteristics to promote a self-sustaining, irrigation free landscape • Determine watering schedules based on season, weather, variation in plant size, and plant varieties. At least four times a year (e.g. change of season), reschedule controller systems. • Turn off irrigation systems at the controller at the beginning of the rainy season, or when the soil has a high enough moisture content. • Use moisture sensing devices to determine water penetration in soil. 6. Erosion Management and Control • Inspect slopes for erosion during each maintenance activity • Inspect basins for erosion • Take corrective measures as needed, including filling eroded surfaces, reinstalling or extending bank protection, and replanting exposed soil. 7. Ongoing Monitoring Activities • Monitor controllable intake water flow and water elevation • Examine inflow and outflow structures to ensure devices are functio ning properly and are free of obstructions. • Water quality sampling (quarterly, unless justified otherwise) • Checking telemetry equipment • Tracking and reporting inspection and maintenance records 8. Vector and Nuisance Insect Control • Monitoring for the presence of vector and nuisance insect species • Adequate pretreatment of influent wastewater to lessen production of larval mosquitos • Managing emergent vegetation • Using hydraulic control structures to rapidly dewater emergent marsh areas • Managing flow velocities to reduce propagation of vectors 162 City of Hermosa Beach SCW Program Annual Plan 2020-2021: Budget For the upcoming fiscal year, the table below lists the expenditures, budgets for the expenditures, and total budget for the City's SCW Program Payment. Descriptions of the planned expenditures are included on the following pages. Estimated Return $160,000.00 Existing Projects (up to 30%)-Total budget New Projects $137,500.00 $137,500.00 Expenditure type Expenditure name Expenditure Budget Project 1 The Beach Cities Green Streets Project $127,500.00 Project 2 Project 3 Program 1 Program 2 Program 3 O&M activity 1 O&M activity 2 Post-construction monitoring 1 Stakeholder and Community Outreach/Engagement 1 The Beach Cities Green Streets Project $10,000.00 163 City of Hermosa Beach SCW Program Annual Plan 2020-2021: Description of Projects Project 1:The Beach Cities Green Streets Project Budget:$127,500.00 Description:The Beach Cities Watershed Management Group (WMG) will collaboratively implement the Project in the Cities of Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, and Torrance. The Project consists of the design and construction of structural control measures which will manage stormwater runoff from existing rights-of-way in the high priority Herondo (SMB 6-01) and 28th Street (SMB 5-02) subwatersheds and improve water quality in Santa Monica Bay. Two key intersections on Hermosa Avenue, between Herondo Street and 4th Street, will be reconstructed with structural control measures. The Project will include community outreach, which is described separately in Stakeholder and Community Outreach/Engagement. Discussion of SCW Program goals achieved Goal 1.Improve water quality and contribute to attainment of water-quality requirements. The goal to improve water quality and contribute to attainment of water-quality requirements will be achieved by the Project through capturing and treating stormwater. The Beach Cities Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP) identifies distributed green street structural control measures that when implemented together with regional watershed control measures and baseline and enhanced minimum control measures are predicted by the reasonable assurance analysis to acheive compliance with water quality based effluent limitations set forth in the MS4 Permit for the Beach Cities EWMP area. The design objectives of the Project are to retrofit existing impervious areas and parkways within public rights-of-way with green infrastructure to improve water quality by providing pollutant load reduction through capture, treatment, and where possible infiltration of stormwater and associated pollutant loads including the 303(d)-listed TMDL pollutants indicator bacteria, sediment-borne DDT and PCBs, and trash (debris), and reduce the peak runoff rate and total volume of stormwater discharged to the Beach Cities' Santa Monica Bay watershed from a combined 186-acre area of the Project area. The Project is anticipated to collect stormwater from 27% of the acreage (186 acres) which generates runoff in the Beach Cities (Torrance, Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, and Manhattan Beach). Proposed green street structural control measures include consideration of pervious pavement, bio- filtration and bio-retention, dry wells, and full-capture devices in catch basins to minimize trash from entering the catch basin. Project Design will commence in August 2020, with completion of the Final Design anticipated for March 2021. The stormwater quality design volume capacity of the structural control measures determined to be technically feasible to construct for the Project will be specified in the SCW Program Annual Plan 2020-2021. Goal 2.Promote green jobs and career pathways. The goal to promote green jobs and career pathways will be achieved by the Project through hiring an engineering consultant to conduct preliminary engineering investigations, geotchnical engineering analysis, hydrologic analysis, preliminary design and final design plans, and subconsultants to conduct community outreach, CEQA and permitting, and eventually monitoring and maintenance of the Project. Goal 3.Leverage other funding sources to maximize SCW Program Goals. The goal to leverage other funding sources to maximize SCW Program Goals will be achieved by the Project through funds granted by the California State Coastal Conservancy and the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission. The Project's design and construction is partially funded by the State Coastal Conservancy's Proposition 12 Santa Monica Bay Restoration Grant for $2,000,000, which represents approximately thirty-nine percent of the estimated total project costs of $5,145,000, and as such the balance of the total project cost must be provided as local or other non-State matching funds. The estimated total cost of preliminary engineering and final design is $1,100,000; Prop 12 SMBR grant funds will provide $550,000 and the Beach Cities will provide $550,000 in matching funds, where the City of Hermosa Beach will contribute a proportional responsibility 25% percentage share of $137,500. Goal 4. Goal 5. Goal 6. Goal 7. Goal 8. Goal 9. 164 City of Hermosa Beach SCW Program Annual Plan 2020-2021: Description of Projects Project 1:The Beach Cities Green Streets Project Budget:$127,500.00 Description:The Beach Cities Watershed Management Group (WMG) will collaboratively implement the Project in the Cities of Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, and Torrance. The Project consists of the design and construction of structural control measures which will manage stormwater runoff from existing rights-of-way in the high priority Herondo (SMB 6-01) and 28th Street (SMB 5-02) subwatersheds and improve water quality in Santa Monica Bay. Two key intersections on Hermosa Avenue, between Herondo Street and 4th Street, will be reconstructed with structural control measures. The Project will include community outreach, which is described separately in Stakeholder and Community Outreach/Engagement. Goal 10. Goal 11. Goal 12. Goal 13. Goal 14. Quantitative targets and corresponding metrics i. Annual volume of stormwater captured and treated: Metric - acre-feet (annual volume of stormwater captured and treated): The stormwater quality design volume capacity of the structural control measures determined to be technically feasible to construct for the Project will be specified in SCW Program Annual Plan 2021-2022. ii.Annual volume of stormwater captured and reused: Metric - acre-feet (annual volume of stormwater captured and reused): The stormwater quality design volume capacity of the structural control measures determined to be technically feasible to construct for the Project will be specified in SCW Program Annual Plan 2021-2022. iii.Annual volume of stormwater captured and recharged to a managed aquifer: Not applicable. The Project will not recharge a managed aquifer. iv. Annual creation, enhancement, or restoration of Community Investment Benefits. If none, discuss considerations explored and reasons to not include: Metric - acre-feet (annual enhancement of Community Investment Benefits) and metric tons (of carbon sequestered): The Project will annually enhance Community Investment Benefits through improvement to flood management, flood conveyance, and/or flood risk mitigation, which will be quantified by annual volume of stormwater captured. The stormwater quality design volume capacity of the structural control measures determined to be technically feasible to construct for the Project will be specified in SCW Program Annual Plan 2021-2022. The Project will also include a benefit to the community that improves public health by reducing the heat island effect, and planting of trees or other vegetation that increases carbon reduction/sequestration, and improve air quality. The Project's net greenhouse gas benefit can be estimated using the California Air Resources Board Quantification Methodologies and Calculator Tools (i.e. i-Tree Planting Tool), which provides the approximate metric tons (per 40-year period) of carbon sequestered. 165 City of Hermosa Beach SCW Program Annual Plan 2020-2021: Description of Projects Project 1:The Beach Cities Green Streets Project Budget:$127,500.00 Description:The Beach Cities Watershed Management Group (WMG) will collaboratively implement the Project in the Cities of Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, and Torrance. The Project consists of the design and construction of structural control measures which will manage stormwater runoff from existing rights-of-way in the high priority Herondo (SMB 6-01) and 28th Street (SMB 5-02) subwatersheds and improve water quality in Santa Monica Bay. Two key intersections on Hermosa Avenue, between Herondo Street and 4th Street, will be reconstructed with structural control measures. The Project will include community outreach, which is described separately in Stakeholder and Community Outreach/Engagement. v. Annual acreage increases in Nature- Based Solutions and claimed level of NBS (with matrix demonstrating determination of good, better, best, as outlined in Exhibit C). If none, discuss considerations explored and reasons to not include. Metric - acres (annual increases in NBS): The Project provides Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) that mimic natural processes by developing green streets and planted areas with water storage capacity, and will be estimated by annual acreage increase. The Project will utilize natural processes that slow, detain, infiltrate or filter Stormwater and/or Urban Runoff. The Project anticipates methods relying predominantly on soils and vegetation; increasing the permeability of Impermeable Areas; creating bioswales and parkway basins; and through planting trees and vegetation, with preference for native species. It is anticipated that the Project's claimed level of NBS will achieve a 'good' classification, which will be evaluated in the SCW Program Annual Progress/Expenditure Report 2020-2021, according to the six methods described in Exhibit C. The Project is also anticipated to provide additional benefits such as sequestering carbon and improving quality of life for surrounding communities. vi.Annual expenditures providing DAC Benefits. If none, discuss considerations explored and reasons to not include. Not applicable. The City is not located in or adjacent to a DAC community. If applicable: Status of Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI) verification Not Applicable. 166 City of Hermosa Beach SCW Program Annual Plan 2020-2021 Description of Stakeholder and Community Outreach/Engagement Stakeholder and Community Outreach/Engagement 1: The Beach Cities Green Streets Project Budget:$10,000.00 Description. Include a discussion of how local NGOs or CBOs will be involved, if applicable, and if not, why. Additional outreach/engagement activities, even if funded by other sources, should be referenced to provide an overview of anticipated overall project approach. Public stakeholder support of this Project is cruicial to project success and therefore business owners, residents, and other interested groups (i.e. NGOs and CBOs) will be involved during the inital stages of design. Conceptual level renderings will be prepared for the Project site for use during outreach activities. The following outreach activities are anticipated for the Project; Information Signs, Community Meetings, door-to-door Canvassing conducted by a team of bi-lingual organizers. 167 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0496 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 REQUEST TO RENEW THE CROSSING GUARD SERVICES AGREEMENT (Chief of Police Paul LeBaron) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to renew the crossing guard services agreement with American Guard Services (AGS). Executive Summary: The City contracts with AGS to provide crossing guard services at various locations throughout the City during the school year.The contract must be renewed annually,and if approved by Council,the City Manager would be authorized to renew the agreement through June 30, 2021. Background: The City entered into an agreement for crossing guard services with AGS on August 22, 2017. The City and AGS agreed to amend the original agreement for services as follows: ·First Amendment effective January 23, 2018, to clarify the total hours crossing guard services would be provided and to increase the hourly rate. ·Second Amendment effective October 23, 2018, to extend the contract for one additional one- year term through June 30, 2019, and establish the hourly rate of compensation. ·Third Amendment effective June 11, 2019, to extend the contract for one additional one-year term through June 30, 2020, and establish the hourly rate of compensation. ·Fourth Amendment effective February 25, 2020, to increase the number of crossing guard posts in the City to 14, and further clarify the total hours crossing guard services would be provided. The proposed Fifth Amendment would extend the agreement for one additional one-year term through June 30, 2021, and establish the hourly rate of compensation. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™168 Staff Report REPORT 20-0496 Discussion: The original crossing guard services agreement with AGS was approved by Council in 2017 for one year,and after two additional one-year extensions,the City would generally release a request for proposals to the crossing guard industry.A request for proposals was released on June 11,2020,and responses were due July 2,2020.The general conditions of the request for proposals clearly provides that the City maintains the right to reject any and all proposals,to waive technicalities or formalities,and to accept any proposal deemed to be in the best interest of the City.Given the current concerns and uncertainty regarding COVID physical distancing orders and school reopening schedules,staff believes that the City’s children would be best served by continuing crossing guard services with AGS by executing the proposed Fifth Amendment and closing the request for proposal process by rejecting all proposals. The pandemic and associated physical distancing requirements have created a historic period of uncertainty,and the inability to maintain continuity with the current crossing guard provider would only result in additional and unnecessary uncertainty.The AGS team understands the City’s service level expectations,know the City’s geography,and has established a rapport with the school staff, children,and parents they assist.When local schools return to in-person instruction,it is possible that the school day hours would be staggered and vary more frequently than past school years,and that new schedules may require an unusual level of coordination with the crossing guard provider.As of the drafting of this staff report,the Hermosa Beach City School District and Our Lady of Guadalupe School had yet to establish schedules for the new school year that were compliant with COVID related health guidelines. AGS has agreed to this proposed Fifth Amendment to continue providing services at the hourly rate set forth in the Third Amendment approved in June 2019,and provide 14 crossing guards as set forth in the Fourth Amendment approved in February 2020. Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description August 22, 2017 (Regular Meeting) Award of crossing guard services contract to American Guard Services. March 13, 2018 (Regular Meeting) Ratified First Amendment clarifying hours of service and hourly rate. June 12, 2018 (Annual Budget Adoption) Approved Second Amendment extending the agreement for one additional one-year term and establishing the hourly rate. June 11, 2019 (Annual Budget Adoption) Approved Third Amendment extending the agreement for one additional one-year term and establishing the hourly rate. February 25, 2020 (Midyear Budget Review 2019-20) Approved Fourth Amendment to increase the total number of crossing guard posts to 14, and clarify the hours of service.City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™169 Staff Report REPORT 20-0496 Meeting Date DescriptionAugust 22, 2017 (RegularMeeting)Award of crossing guard services contract to American Guard Services. March 13, 2018 (Regular Meeting) Ratified First Amendment clarifying hours of service and hourly rate. June 12, 2018 (Annual Budget Adoption) Approved Second Amendment extending the agreement for one additional one-year term and establishing the hourly rate. June 11, 2019 (Annual Budget Adoption) Approved Third Amendment extending the agreement for one additional one-year term and establishing the hourly rate. February 25, 2020 (Midyear Budget Review 2019-20) Approved Fourth Amendment to increase the total number of crossing guard posts to 14, and clarify the hours of service. General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendation have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below: Mobility Element Goal 3.Public right-of-ways supporting a multimodal and people-oriented transportation system that provides diversity and flexibility on how users choose to be mobile. Policies: ·3.1 Enhance public right-of-way.Where right-of-way clearance allows,enhance public right - of-way to improve connectivity for pedestrians,bicyclists,disabled persons,and public transit stops. ·3.2 Complete pedestrian network.Prioritize investment in designated priority sidewalks to ensure a complete network of sidewalks and pedestrian-friendly amenities that enhances pedestrian safety, access opportunities and connectivity to destinations. Fiscal Impact: The fiscal year 2020-21 budget allocates a total of $200,970 for crossing guard services, which was based on the prior regular school year. At this time, given the uncertainty of school schedules, it is difficult to determine the total amount of funds that wouldl be necessary to provide crossing guard services during the fiscal year. Agreement Request Request Amount FY 2020-21 Budget Dept. Account #Total Contract Amount $200,000 001-2102-4201 Not to exceed $200,000 Attachments: 1. Fifth Amendment to the Agreement for Crossing Guard Services Respectfully Submitted by: Peter Ahlstrom, Community Services Division Manager Concur: Paul LeBaron, Chief of Police Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™170 FIFTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR CROSSING GUARD SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND AMERICAN GUARD SERVICES This Fifth Amendment to the Agreement Between the City of Hermosa Beach and American Guard Services for crossing guard services is entered into by and between the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a municipal corporation (“CITY”), and AMERICAN GUARD SERVICES, INC., a California corporation (“CONTRACTOR”), as of ________________, 2020. RECITALS A. CITY and CONTRACTOR are parties to an Agreement for crossing guard services dated August 22, 2017. B. CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into the First Amendment to the Agreement dated January 23, 2018 to increase the rate for actual guard services. C. CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into the Second Amendment to the Agreement dated October 23, 2018 to increase the rate for actual guard services and extend the term of the Agreement through June 30, 2019. D. CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into the Third Amendment to the Agreement dated June 11, 2019 to increase the rate for actual guard services and extend the term of the Agreement through June 30, 2020. E. CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into the Fourth Amendment to the Agreement dated February 25, 2020 to increase the number of crossing guard locations to 14, and acknowledge an increase in actual hours of guard services per day. F. CITY and CONTRACTOR now desire to amend the Agreement for a fifth time in order to engage and compensate the CONTRACTOR for one additional one-year term and specify the rate for actual guard services. 171 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the Agreement is amended a fifth time as follows: 1. Section 1 of the Agreement entitled “TERM OF THE AGREEMENT” is amended to read as follows: TERM OF THE AGREEMENT. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon execution by both parties and shall expire on June 30, 2021, unless earlier termination occurs under Section 8 of this Agreement or this Agreement is extended in writing in advance by both parties. 2. Section 3 of the Agreement entitled “COMPENSATION” is amended to read as follows: COMPENSATION. The CITY agrees to pay CONTRACTOR for services rendered pursuant to the Agreement the sum of $26.80 per hour of actual guard services provided from July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021. It is understood and agreed that the cost of providing 2.75 hours of crossing guard services per school day at 14 crossing locations from July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021 shall not exceed $200,000. If, during the term of this Fifth Amendment, the State of California increases the minimum wage applicable to CONTRACTOR’S employees engaged in providing the CITY crossing guard services, CONTRACTOR shall notify the CITY in writing. A request by CONTRACTOR to increase the per hour rate for actual guard services due to a change in the applicable minimum wage shall be submitted to the CITY no less than ninety (90) days prior to the proposed effective date of the rate change. 172 Except as above modified, in all other respects the Agreement is hereby reaffirmed in full force and effect. AMERICAN GUARD SERVICES, INC. By TITLE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH By CITY MANAGER ATTEST: CITY CLERK 173 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0504 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 RECEIVE REPORT ON EMERGENCY ENFORCEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH PANDEMIC-RELATED HEALTH ORDERS FROM BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES HEALTH DEPARTMENT (City Manager Suja Lowenthal) (This report was published as a supplemental report in order to deliver the most current information available) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the update on current enforcement efforts. Executive Summary: Staff provided verbal updates at previous City Council meetings regarding enforcement measures to ensure compliance with Health Officer Orders for restaurants and alcohol-servicing establishments. The following report broadens the update to include other enhanced monitoring and enforcement measures related to the pandemic that have proved challenging.The report includes an update on the enforcement actions taken by the additional Health Order Enforcement Officers,who started patrolling designated areas on August 8, 2020. Background: Compliance with the local and County orders for wearing face coverings outdoors and gatherings on the beach, the Strand, Pier Plaza area and all city parks On June 18,2020,Governor Newsom and the State Public Health Officer issued a state-wide mandatory order requiring Californians to wear cloth face coverings.The Los Angeles County Public Health Officer issued a revised order on the same date to require mandatory face coverings when individuals leave their residence,and/or when one can be in contact with members outside of their household or cannot practice six feet of social distancing.“Face coverings,”as defined in the State and County orders are cloth masks,scarves,bandanas,tightly woven fabric such as cotton t-shirt, and some types of towels that cover the nose and mouth. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™174 Staff Report REPORT 20-0504 There are a few exemptions to wearing the face coverings: 1.Children younger than 2 years of age; 2.Persons who have been instructed by a medical provider not to wear a face covering due to a medical condition, mental health condition, or disability that prevents wearing a face covering; 3.Persons who are swimming or engaged in other water-based activities: and 4.Healthcare workers,first responders,and others whose work requires close contact with people who are ill. It is important to note that persons who are seated at a restaurant or other establishment that offers food or beverage service shall wear a cloth face covering over both the nose and mouth unless they are eating or drinking. The State and County Health Orders remain in effect.There is no anticipated date as to when the mandatory order to wear face coverings will be lifted. On July 28,2020 the City Council implemented Urgency Ordinance 1415U requiring face coverings to be worn in designated areas within the city limits.The Police Department,Community Development Department,and Community Resources Department continue to focus on areas of high concentration to encourage compliance with the County health orders and City Urgency Ordinances. Staff efforts emphasize education through personal interaction,the use of a public education campaign,and distribution of masks to those who are not wearing one.Additionally,staff efforts have been supplemented with Health Order Enforcement Officers who are working under the direction of the Police Department to enforce the mandatory face covering ordinance passed by City Council at the council meeting on July 28, 2020. Violations of City and County face covering ordinances continue to occur throughout Los Angeles County.Enforcement through citations was challenging for Police Department staff due to quality of life calls for service being reported that require staff attention.Over the past two weekends the Police Department responded to 580 calls for service,resulting in 64 police reports,22 arrests and 14 citations. Additionally, Officers conducted 53 traffic stops. Although the primary focus of the Police Department is public safety,the enforcement of COVID related orders was also emphasized.Officers issued 12 citations for alcohol related offenses,and most were connected to groups who failed to comply with social distancing orders.The Health Order Enforcement Officers assisted in this effort on Saturday and Sunday by contacting approximately 600 people,handing out approximately 150 masks and issuing 8 administrative citations for failure to wear face coverings in violation of Hermosa Beach Urgency Ordinance 1415U. Compliance with restrictions on group sporting activities and gatherings on the beach and in parks The Police Department,Community Development Department,and Community Resources Department have utilized various strategies to address the egregious violations of the City andCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™175 Staff Report REPORT 20-0504 Department have utilized various strategies to address the egregious violations of the City and County health order regarding compliance with permitting requirements for groups and sporting activities on the beach and in the parks.Staff met with key stakeholders to ensure understanding of the laws regarding group activities that are currently in place. Community Resources staff is taking a proactive role and identifying and contacting groups that are unpermitted,specifically in Valley Park and Clark Field to inform of the need for obtaining a permit, and referring to the Code Enforcement Officer on duty,or the Police Department should they continue to congregate.Further,should any group display disregard for social-distancing they will be contacted,warned once,and subject to citation.Police Department staff issued six citations over the weekend for alcohol-related violations involving large groups of people on the beach.Code Enforcement Officers from Community Development also issued two warning citations for organized sports in parks. Future enforcement strategies will include continued enforcement of egregious violations on the beach and any unpermitted groups and violations in the parks.Ongoing communication with neighboring jurisdictions to ensure best practices and consistency in messaging will also continue. Compliance with City and County orders for safety and physical-distancing at restaurants and other businesses The Police Department and Community Development Department,through field operations,continue to monitor activities of businesses in Hermosa Beach regarding compliance with City and County pandemic-related orders,in addition to monitoring compliance with all applicable laws.As verbally reported at the last two Council meetings,recent efforts have focused on restaurant and alcohol- serving establishments and included the multi-jurisdictional approach on July 4 weekend where the County Health inspectors teamed up with Code Enforcement Officers and visited over 100 establishments. Code Enforcement, on a typical weekend, averages 100 site visits. Officers continue to emphasize education and assistance to ensure compliance with new and changing orders,with written warning notices as the next step.At this time,all warnings about compliance issues have been corrected in a timely manner,and no business has had multiple violations that have led to any citations being written.Officers are also tracking the number of contacts and warning citations,with the intent to issue a citation if a business has three or more violations. The most recent amended County health order requires non-essential businesses to cease indoor operations.Staff is in direct contact with personal care and gym and fitness businesses to help educate and assist as they seek opportunities to conduct their business activities outdoors. Fiscal Impact: Staff has contracted additional Health Order Enforcement Officers at $65 per hour to assist with theCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™176 Staff Report REPORT 20-0504 Staff has contracted additional Health Order Enforcement Officers at $65 per hour to assist with the enforcement of mask wearing.Deployment will be assessed on a weekly basis to ensure high visibility and community awareness is maintained.The City will be seeking reimbursement to cover pandemic-related enforcement costs including any additional contract enforcement costs. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul LeBaron, Police Chief Concur: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Concur: Brandy Villanueva, Emergency Management Coordinator Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™177 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0504 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 RECEIVE REPORT ON EMERGENCY ENFORCEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH PANDEMIC-RELATED HEALTH ORDERS FROM BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES HEALTH DEPARTMENT (City Manager Suja Lowenthal) (This report was published as a supplemental report in order to deliver the most current information available) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the update on current enforcement efforts. Executive Summary: Staff provided verbal updates at previous City Council meetings regarding enforcement measures to ensure compliance with Health Officer Orders for restaurants and alcohol-servicing establishments. The following report broadens the update to include other enhanced monitoring and enforcement measures related to the pandemic that have proved challenging.The report includes an update on the enforcement actions taken by the additional Health Order Enforcement Officers,who started patrolling designated areas on August 8, 2020. Background: Compliance with the local and County orders for wearing face coverings outdoors and gatherings on the beach, the Strand, Pier Plaza area and all city parks On June 18,2020,Governor Newsom and the State Public Health Officer issued a state-wide mandatory order requiring Californians to wear cloth face coverings.The Los Angeles County Public Health Officer issued a revised order on the same date to require mandatory face coverings when individuals leave their residence,and/or when one can be in contact with members outside of their household or cannot practice six feet of social distancing.“Face coverings,”as defined in the State and County orders are cloth masks,scarves,bandanas,tightly woven fabric such as cotton t-shirt, and some types of towels that cover the nose and mouth. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 8/11/2020Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™178 Staff Report REPORT 20-0504 There are a few exemptions to wearing the face coverings: 1.Children younger than 2 years of age; 2.Persons who have been instructed by a medical provider not to wear a face covering due to a medical condition, mental health condition, or disability that prevents wearing a face covering; 3.Persons who are swimming or engaged in other water-based activities: and 4.Healthcare workers,first responders,and others whose work requires close contact with people who are ill. It is important to note that persons who are seated at a restaurant or other establishment that offers food or beverage service shall wear a cloth face covering over both the nose and mouth unless they are eating or drinking. The State and County Health Orders remain in effect.There is no anticipated date as to when the mandatory order to wear face coverings will be lifted. On July 28,2020 the City Council implemented Urgency Ordinance 1415U requiring face coverings to be worn in designated areas within the city limits.The Police Department,Community Development Department,and Community Resources Department continue to focus on areas of high concentration to encourage compliance with the County health orders and City Urgency Ordinances. Staff efforts emphasize education through personal interaction,the use of a public education campaign,and distribution of masks to those who are not wearing one.Additionally,staff efforts have been supplemented with Health Order Enforcement Officers who are working under the direction of the Police Department to enforce the mandatory face covering ordinance passed by City Council at the council meeting on July 28, 2020. Violations of City and County face covering ordinances continue to occur throughout Los Angeles County.Enforcement through citations was challenging for Police Department staff due to quality of life calls for service being reported that require staff attention.Over the past two weekends the Police Department responded to 580 calls for service,resulting in 64 police reports,22 arrests and 14 citations. Additionally, Officers conducted 53 traffic stops. Although the primary focus of the Police Department is public safety,the enforcement of COVID related orders was also emphasized.Officers issued 12 citations for alcohol related offenses,and most were connected to groups who failed to comply with social distancing orders.The Health Order Enforcement Officers assisted in this effort on Saturday and Sunday by contacting approximately 600 people,handing out approximately 150 masks and issuing 8 administrative citations for failure to wear face coverings in violation of Hermosa Beach Urgency Ordinance 1415U. Compliance with restrictions on group sporting activities and gatherings on the beach and in parks The Police Department,Community Development Department,and Community Resources Department have utilized various strategies to address the egregious violations of the City andCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 8/11/2020Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™179 Staff Report REPORT 20-0504 Department have utilized various strategies to address the egregious violations of the City and County health order regarding compliance with permitting requirements for groups and sporting activities on the beach and in the parks.Staff met with key stakeholders to ensure understanding of the laws regarding group activities that are currently in place. Community Resources staff is taking a proactive role and identifying and contacting groups that are unpermitted,specifically in Valley Park and Clark Field to inform of the need for obtaining a permit, and referring to the Code Enforcement Officer on duty,or the Police Department should they continue to congregate.Further,should any group display disregard for social-distancing they will be contacted,warned once,and subject to citation.Police Department staff issued six citations over the weekend for alcohol-related violations involving large groups of people on the beach.Code Enforcement Officers from Community Development also issued two warning citations for organized sports in parks. Future enforcement strategies will include continued enforcement of egregious violations on the beach and any unpermitted groups and violations in the parks.Ongoing communication with neighboring jurisdictions to ensure best practices and consistency in messaging will also continue. Compliance with City and County orders for safety and physical-distancing at restaurants and other businesses The Police Department and Community Development Department,through field operations,continue to monitor activities of businesses in Hermosa Beach regarding compliance with City and County pandemic-related orders,in addition to monitoring compliance with all applicable laws.As verbally reported at the last two Council meetings,recent efforts have focused on restaurant and alcohol- serving establishments and included the multi-jurisdictional approach on July 4 weekend where the County Health inspectors teamed up with Code Enforcement Officers and visited over 100 establishments. Code Enforcement, on a typical weekend, averages 100 site visits. Officers continue to emphasize education and assistance to ensure compliance with new and changing orders,with written warning notices as the next step.At this time,all warnings about compliance issues have been corrected in a timely manner,and no business has had multiple violations that have led to any citations being written.Officers are also tracking the number of contacts and warning citations,with the intent to issue a citation if a business has three or more violations. The most recent amended County health order requires non-essential businesses to cease indoor operations.Staff is in direct contact with personal care and gym and fitness businesses to help educate and assist as they seek opportunities to conduct their business activities outdoors. Fiscal Impact: Staff has contracted additional Health Order Enforcement Officers at $65 per hour to assist with theCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 8/11/2020Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™180 Staff Report REPORT 20-0504 Staff has contracted additional Health Order Enforcement Officers at $65 per hour to assist with the enforcement of mask wearing.Deployment will be assessed on a weekly basis to ensure high visibility and community awareness is maintained.The City will be seeking reimbursement to cover pandemic-related enforcement costs including any additional contract enforcement costs. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul LeBaron, Police Chief Concur: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Concur: Brandy Villanueva, Emergency Management Coordinator Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 8/11/2020Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™181 New eComment for City Council Virtual MeetingClosed Session - 5:00 P.M. Regular Meeting - 6:00P.M. Duly Posted Online August 6, 2020 at 8:10p.m. By E.S. Kelly Kinnon submitted a new eComment. Meeting: City Council Virtual Meeting Closed Session - 5:00 P.M. Regular Meeting - 6:00 P.M. Duly Posted Online August 6, 2020 at 8:10 p.m. By E.S. Item: a) REPORT 20-0504 RECEIVE REPORT ON EMERGENCY ENFORCEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH PANDEMIC-RELATED HEALTH ORDERS FROM BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES HEALTH DEPARTMENT (City Manager Suja Lowenthal) (This report was published as a supplemental report in order to deliver the most current information available) eComment: I walk through downtown almost every day. Mask use percentages are too low. Need some conspicuous signage at high traffic points and stepped up enforcement -- many people don't even have masks that they can pull up. Hate to have to cite, but I think if there is obvious signage and people still ignore, citations are the only way to get their attention. This is a serious issue and we should all be able to enjoy downtown as safely as possible. View and Analyze eComments This email was sent from https://granicusideas.com. Unsubscribe from future mailings 182 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0510 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 REVIEW OF CITY’S PARKING ASSET RESTRICTIONS IN LIGHT OF ONGOING CHANGES TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY HEALTH ORDER (City Manager Suja Lowenthal) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file an update on the City’s downtown parking assets. * *This has been a standing agenda item for Council consideration of modifications to the City’s restrictions associated with downtown assets and parking facilities.Moving forward,this matter may be included in broader City Manager updates on pandemic response. Executive Summary City staff has continued to monitor the use of the City’s parking assets in light of the reopening of Lot C (the parking structure)for use by the general public in anticipation of increased business activity in the downtown area. This item provides an update of the use of the City’s parking assets. Background: At City Council’s meeting on July 28,2020,City Council directed staff to reopen parking Lot C (the parking structure)for use by those that display a valid monthly parking permit,and for the general public with a maximum time limit of three hours per day.As of July 31st,the City’s downtown parking assets are operating under near normal conditions with the following exceptions: ·Parking Lot A is open for use by the general public for no more than three hours per day; and ·Parking Lot C is open for use by the general public for no more than three hours per day. During normal operations,Lot A and Lot C parking receipts can be purchased by the public in increments up to 24 hours. Previous Staff Reports: City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™183 Staff Report REPORT 20-0510 ·May 12, 2020 Council Report <https://hermosabeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx? ID=4523310&GUID=D59692CA-E6FB-4B8D-A83A-80C67D2D2C80> [Review of Downtown Asset Closures - Various] ·June 9, 2020 Council Report <https://hermosabeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx? ID=4555107&GUID=5185C6EC-F8DA-4846-A334-1922A21DB926> [Review of Downtown Parking Asset Restrictions] ·June 23, 2020 Council Report <https://hermosabeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx? ID=4577295&GUID=0C192C1C-9568-4E40-96B8-370CAE8C15BB> [Review of Parking Structure ‘Lot C’ Closure] ·July 1, 2020 Council Special Meeting Report <https://hermosabeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4582328&GUID=5242BC37- [Review of Downtown Assets and other Emergency Measures] ·July 14, 2020 Council Report <https://hermosabeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx? ID=4591294&GUID=FBC09242-DC78-4603-ABF4-7B5639DBF5FE> [Review of Lot C Closure and Downtown Parking Asset Restrictions] ·July 28, 2020 Council Report <https://hermosabeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx? ID=4606512&GUID=C7FDE8C3-0176-4E1D-B638-A88A0185AE49> [Review of Lot C Closure and Downtown Parking Asset Restrictions] General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendations have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below: Governance 1.6 Long-term considerations.Prioritize decisions that provide long-term community benefit and discourage decisions that provide short-term community benefit but reduce long-term opportunities. 2.6 Responsive to community needs.Continue to be responsive to community inquiries,providing public information and recording feedback from community interactions. 4.3 Collaboration with adjacent jurisdictions.Maintain strong collaborative relationships with adjacent jurisdictions and work together on projects of mutual interest and concern. Land Use 1.5 Balance resident and visitor needs.Ensure land uses and businesses provide for the needs of residents as well as visitors. Mobility 2.2 Encourage traffic calming.Encourage traffic calming policies and techniques to improve the safety and efficient movement of people and vehicles along residential areas and highly trafficked corridors. 7.1 Safe public right-of-ways.Encourage that all public right-of-ways are safe for all users at all times of day where users of all ages and ability feel comfortable participating in both motorized and non-motorized travel. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™184 Staff Report REPORT 20-0510 Parks and Open Space 4.2 Enhanced access points.Increase and enhance access to parks and open space,particularly across major thoroughfares,as well as access points that promote physical activity such as pedestrian- and bike-oriented access points. 6.5 Wayfinding and coastal access.Maximize all forms of access and safety getting to and around the Coastal Zone through infrastructure and wayfinding improvements. Public Safety 4.7 Communicate risks.Regularly evaluate,identify,and communicate new hazard risks and incorporate into planning and programs. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommendation at this time. Respectfully Submitted by: Assistant to the City Manager, Nico De Anda-Scaia Concur: Peter Ahlstrom, Community Services Division Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™185 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0519 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT CONCEPTS FOR TEMPORARY LANE CLOSURES ON HERMOSA AVENUE TO FACILITATE FOOT TRAFFIC AND OUTDOOR DINING AND RETAIL OPTIONS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (Environmental Programs Manager Douglas Krauss and Environmental Analyst Leeanne Singleton) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that City Council: 1.Discuss and provide direction on which,if any,design concepts should be implemented on a temporary basis to facilitate foot traffic,bicycle travel,and outdoor dining options within the public right-of-way along Hermosa Avenue, between 10th and 14th Streets; 2.Appropriate $46,000 in Capital Improvement Funds to fund implementation of lane reconfiguration and associated work on Hermosa Avenue,between 10th and 14th Streets, including traffic counts pre and post implementation; and 3.Authorize the City Manager to issue an executive order directing the reconfiguration and determine the project is categorically exempt under CEQA. Executive Summary: The City of Hermosa Beach has considered a series of temporary outdoor and open space programs that would safely facilitate foot traffic along Hermosa Beach business corridors and provide space within the public right-of-way to provide outdoor dining and/or shopping space during the COVID-19 pandemic while physical-distancing and safety protocols are in place.At the July 14th meeting,City Council provided direction to staff to work with a consultant to develop concepts for possible lane closures on Hermosa Avenue and Pier Avenue to help achieve these goals.Staff has worked with a consultant traffic engineer to develop three concepts for Hermosa Avenue between 10th and 14th Streets and seeks Council feedback on these concepts.Concepts for Pier Avenue are under development and staff will return to Council for discussion and direction on Pier Avenue at an upcoming meeting. Background: At the May 12,2020 City Council meeting,City staff brought before the Council an item describing a proposed Summer Streets program.The program was identified to explore opportunities to repurpose sections of public rights of way to improve multi-modal traffic safety and expand physical- City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 5 powered by Legistar™186 Staff Report REPORT 20-0519 repurpose sections of public rights of way to improve multi-modal traffic safety and expand physical- distancing options for the public and businesses per Los Angeles County Health orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic.The program included expanding bike lanes,converting parking spaces to outdoor dining areas,traffic calming associated with enhancing multi-modal transportation,and a number of other potential measures. At that meeting,Council provided direction to staff to work with the Economic Development Committee to explore aspects of the program that could directly benefit local businesses.At the following meeting,City Council approved an urgency ordinance to implement a temporary permit program to provide outdoor dining/seating and outdoor retail options in the public right-of-way. Currently,more than 39 businesses have taken advantage of this program,and many more have shown interest in applying.There has been further interest in the outdoor dining program since the State limited indoor dining. At the July 14th meeting,staff brought an item to Council seeking direction on potential closures of travel lanes on the downtown sections of Hermosa and Pier Avenues to encourage increased foot traffic and expand outdoor dining and retail opportunities in the public right-of-way.Council directed staff to secure the services of a traffic engineering consultant to develop plans for these potential lane closures.Staff has worked with one of the City’s on-call traffic engineering consultants to draft the three concepts provided in Attachment 1. Discussion: The three concepts attached address Hermosa Avenue between 10th and 14th Street.Each concept includes the closure of the second vehicle travel lane (closest to curb)but illustrate different approaches to parking configurations and bicycle travel.The table below summarizes the features of each concept: # of Parking Spaces (totals will vary with dining deck installations) Type of Parking Bike Travel Outdoor Dining/Retail Space (distance from curb) Existing 58 (12 occupied by dining decks - total of 46 currently available) Parallel Combined Sharrow/Vehicles in #2 travel lane 7 feet Concept 1 39 Reverse Angle Parking (Back-in diagonal parking) Dedicated Class 2 (painted) bike lane in former #2 travel lane 14 feet Concept 2 35 Head-In Angle Parking (Head-in diagonal parking) Dedicated Class 2 (painted) bike lane adjacent curb, between parking and sidewalk 14 feet Concept 3 61 Reverse Angle Parking (Back-in diagonal parking) Combined Sharrow/Vehicles in #1 Travel lane 17 feetCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 5 powered by Legistar™187 Staff Report REPORT 20-0519 # of Parking Spaces(totals will vary with diningdeck installations)Type of Parking Bike Travel OutdoorDining/RetailSpace(distancefrom curb) Existing 58 (12 occupied by dining decks - total of 46 currently available) Parallel Combined Sharrow/Vehicles in #2 travel lane 7 feet Concept 1 39 Reverse Angle Parking (Back-in diagonal parking) Dedicated Class 2 (painted) bike lane in former #2 travel lane 14 feet Concept 2 35 Head-In Angle Parking (Head-in diagonal parking) Dedicated Class 2 (painted) bike lane adjacent curb, between parking and sidewalk 14 feet Concept 3 61 Reverse Angle Parking (Back-in diagonal parking) Combined Sharrow/Vehicles in #1 Travel lane 17 feet As a temporary project, all three concepts rely primarily on restriping and the installation of signage. New bicycle parking areas have been incorporated where appropriate. No significant installation of new structures nor construction or removal of infrastructure would be necessary to implement these concepts. Businesses would be responsible for building their own decks and installing necessary barriers. Businesses with existing on-street decks can expand to fit the new configuration with no additional City permit fees. The three concepts were shared with the Economic Recovery and Resiliency Stakeholder Group at their August 5th meeting with preferences expressed for Concepts 1 and 3. Additional outreach on these concepts is being conducted by staff to Hermosa Avenue businesses. In response to the urgency of this project, staff is working to contact these businesses directly via email, phone and site visits and their feedback will be provided as a supplemental prior to the meeting. Staff is seeking Council selection and/or direction on these concepts so refinements can be made and final construction/traffic control plans developed. It is estimated that finalization of these plans would take approximately 1-2 weeks at which time staff would begin to solicit bids from potential contractors. Final implementation for this section of Hermosa Avenue could be complete by mid- September. Staff recommends the lane reconfigurations remain in place consistent with the authorization for outdoor dining and retail permits which Council authorized through at least January 23, 2021. The consultant has provided a rough estimate of approximately $29,000 for the costs of implementation. The consultant’s fees for developing these concepts and the final plans is estimated to be approximately $9,000. Corresponding traffic counts pre and post reconfiguration are estimated to cost $8,000. Consultation with the City Attorney’s office provided guidance that the project would be categorically exempt under CEQA guidelines and the City Manager’s authorization via an executive order would be sufficient to authorize the reconfigurations. Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description July 14, 2020 Direction to staff to proceed with development of lane closure plans City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 5 powered by Legistar™188 Staff Report REPORT 20-0519 Meeting Date Description July 14, 2020 Direction to staff to proceed with development of lane closure plans General Plan Consistency: The proposed program options match the model of “living streets”, also known as “complete streets”, and a key guiding principle of the General Plan Vision is to foster a vibrant local economy. A living street combines safety and livability while supporting ground floor and outdoor economic activities. This centers on designing streets that can be safely shared by both vehicular and non-vehicular traffic. A living street should also contribute to an engaging public realm and a vibrant local economy. Relevant Policies are listed below: Governance Goal 6. A broad-based and long-term economic development strategy for Hermosa Beach that supports existing businesses while attracting new business and tourism. Policies: •6.4 Business support.Support the Chamber of Commerce, retailers, tourist service businesses, artists, and other agencies to develop an aggressive marketing strategy with implementation procedures. •6.6 Pop-up shops. Develop plans and programs for underutilized spaces, such as vacant buildings, utility corridors, parkways, etc., for temporary retail, restaurant, and community promoting uses. Mobility Goal 1. Complete Streets (Living Streets) that serve the diverse functions of mobility, commerce, recreation, and community engagement for all users whether they travel by walking, bicycling, transit, or driving. Policies: •1.1 Consider all modes. Require the planning, design, and construction of all new and existing transportation projects to consider the needs of all modes of travel to create safe, livable and inviting environments for all users of the system. Mobility Goal 7. A transportation system that results in zero transportation-related fatalities and which minimizes injuries. Policies: City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 4 of 5 powered by Legistar™189 Staff Report REPORT 20-0519 •7.1 Safe public right-of-ways. Encourage that all public right-of-ways are safe for all users at all times of day where users of all ages and ability feel comfortable participating in both motorized and non-motorized travel. Fiscal Impact: The total cost for developing the final plans, implementing the reconfigurations, and performing associated traffic counts-estimated to be approximately $46,000-would be funded from appropriated Capital Improvement Funds. The City would also seek reimbursement from FEMA for these costs. Attachments: 1.Hermosa Avenue Concepts Respectfully Submitted by: Douglas Krauss, Environmental Program Manager and Leeanne Singleton, Environmental Analyst Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 5 of 5 powered by Legistar™190 BUSONLYHERMOSA AVENUE OUTDOOR DINING CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT 01 SCALE: 1"=40' ·REMOVE NB & SB #2 LANE ·PROPOSED NB & SB BIKE LANE ·PROPOSED REVERSE ANGLED PARKING ·PROPOSED OUTDOOR DINING AREA ·PROPOSED BICYCLE PARKING AREA W'LY R/W E'LY R/W 191 BUSONLYHERMOSA AVENUE OUTDOOR DINING CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT 02 SCALE: 1"=40' ·REMOVE NB & SB #2 LANE ·PROPOSED NB & SB BIKE LANE ·PROPOSED HEAD-IN ANGLED PARKING ·PROPOSED OUTDOOR DINING AREA ·PROPOSED BICYCLE PARKING AREA W'LY R/W E'LY R/W 192 BUSONLYHERMOSA AVENUE OUTDOOR DINING CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT 03 SCALE: 1"=40' ·REMOVE NB & SB #2 LANE ·PROPOSED REVERSE ANGLED PARKING ·PROPOSED OUTDOOR DINING AREA ·PROPOSED BICYCLE PARKING AREA W'LY R/W E'LY R/W 193 Dear Council members, 8-8-20 Please include me in any downtown renovation you are planning. I have lived here 50 years. I own the building at 934 Hermosa Ave, with 2 restaurants on it. This property is zoned C-2 Commercial, Downtown District. Exactly the same zoning as pier plaza. If you have lived here for a while you can see how the south side of downtown has been sort of forgotten. When lower Pier Ave was turned into a plaza 20 years ago, it turned my area into a ghost town compared to how it was before. There are 6 restaurants in my zone. Everyone was suffering even before the virus. You can see that 3 of the 6 restaurants are out of business or temporarily closed: Hot’s Kitchen, Ashley’s Deli and Banzai Beach. Another one is in serious trouble. 5 of the 6 restaurants are on my side of the street. If you are planning on letting the restaurants expand into the street, then I should be included too. This would give the restaurants a chance to survive and compete with the pier. Please include me because everyone in my downtown area needs the help. I have the same zoning and rights as pier plaza, C-2 Commercial. It would be terrible and unfair if you stop at the comedy club and are not including my property. I pay a fortune in property taxes. Now I have to pay for a new business license and I can’t even open because of the virus. I know you are letting all restaurants expand on the street now, but it is only temporary and cost a lot of money to build. I don’t want to do it if it’s not permanent. All you really need to do is add a few palm trees and give the restaurants the permanent outdoor street seating needed to survive. It would look uniform and inviting to customers. Please make it fair for everyone. I included a copy of my Business license and highlighted where it says Downtown Surcharge. Thank You, John Vilenica 934 Hermosa Ave Building and Restaurant Owner 194 August 10, 2020 Mayor Campbell and members of the Hermosa Beach City Council 1315 Valley Blvd. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: 6C—CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT CONCEPTS FOR TEMPORARY LANE CLOSURES ON HERMOSA AVENUE TO FACILITATE FOOT TRAFFIC AND OUTDOOR DINING AND RETAIL OPTIONS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY Dear Mayor Campbell and members of the City Council: The City Council has demonstrated great leadership in these difficult times and this project is an expansion on actions already taken to support businesses while enhancing safety and livability. We applaud the city’s efforts to reconfigure Hermosa Avenue to support more outdoor dining and create opportunities for people to walk and bike safely while adhering to physical distancing requirements during COVID-19. Beach Cities Health District has worked closely with the city of Hermosa Beach to enhance living streets concepts through our Blue Zones Project. We appreciate the collaboration with our city partners to elevate livability, health and wellbeing through projects and policies that promote active transportation, healthy and vibrant communities and enhanced social connections. The enhancements you are proposing on Hermosa Avenue achieve three important things: 1) promote economic recovery by supporting businesses that have been struggling with the closure of indoor operations due to COVID-19; 2) activate outdoor spaces to mitigate transmission risks and support physical distancing; and 3) enhance health through active transportation and improved traffic safety. Of the three options presented, we support Option 1, for the following reasons: - Expands space for outdoor dining - the sidewalk café/outdoor dining is the most powerful tool to enhance people’s desire to walk and spend time and money - Adds a dedicated bike lane – which promotes more bikers and less drivers, increases storefront sales and affords greater safety for pedestrians and bikers - Adds reverse angle parking – for speeds of about 25mph, on-street parking is the protective method of choice when paired with sidewalk dining. And diagonal parking slows drivers down, offers full line of site for cars exiting parking spaces and minimizes “getting doored” when cyclists are riding next to cars parallel-parked in on-street parking. As we plan for life in our cities after the pandemic, we have an extraordinary opportunity to focus on some long-term goals of creating more livable, equitable and resilient neighborhoods and communities. We applaud the Council on aggressively exploring and acting on these types of living streets solutions and would join you in any long-term projects or planning you wish to do to sustain these efforts including promotion of walkable density to promote healthier, more economically competitive, and more resilient communities, emerging mobility paradigms and the adoption of Hermosa Beach’s Living Streets Design Manual, which aligns with the principles and leadership the City has committed to during COVID-19 response and recovery. Sincerely, Tom Bakaly Chief Executive Officer Beach Cities Health District 195 From: kathryn dunbabin <kathydunbabin@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 11:54 AM To: Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org> Subject: Aug. 11 Hermosa Beach City Council Meeting, Item 6c Ann, Please add to e comments… and let me know you received… Thanks.. Hermosa Beach City Council Members.. If you look at current downtown Hermosa Beach Pier Avenue, you will see: 1.Parallel and Head In parking only. 2.Outdoor dining spaces in Parallel parking area-8’ distance from curb. 3.Outdoor dining spaces in Head In parking area-14’ distance from curb. 4.No Bike Lanes. Hermosa Avenue is also downtown Hermosa Beach and should be consistent with Pier Avenue. 1.Parallel or Head in parking only. 2.Outdoor dining spaces in Parallel parking area-8’ distance from curb. 3.Outdoor dining spaces in Head In parking area-14’ distance from curb. 4.No Bike Lanes. There are 2 solutions to Item 6C, August 11 HB City Council meeting which fit 196 this criteria. 1. Existing. Inexpensive. Outdoor dining spaces are 8’ distance from the curb because of Parallel parking area. 2. Concept 2 with no bike lane. The bike lane transitions take up too much parking space and the bike lane users would be unsafe in front of a car being parked. Hermosa Avenue, a SHARROWS street, has a parallel bike/pedestrian path on the Strand a block away. Outdoor dining spaces could be increased to 14’ distance from the curb. Life is already complex due to the virus. Why make downtown Hermosa Beach more complex? Please…. Be consistent in downtown Hermosa Beach. Parallel or Head In parking. No Bike Lanes added. Most important…. Temporary accommodations and space for outside dining. During this period…please keep downtown Hermosa Beach simple, energetic and most important-safe. Thank you. Kathy Dunbabin... 197 1007 Hermosa Avenue, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 www.hbchamber.net 310- 376-0951 August 11, 2020 Re: 8/11 HB City Council Meeting, Item 6c Dear Hermosa Beach City Council and City Manager, On behalf of the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau, we ask that you try to keep CONSISTENCY AND SIMPLICITY in Hermosa Beach Downtown during C-19. After careful review of the Hermosa Avenue parking spaces and looking at solutions in other cities that have parallel and head in parking, including Manhattan Beach, the Chamber would like to support the following two recommendations. We would prefer to keep the parking and lanes the way they are now, with the temporary outdoor dining as it exists, including approved areas, and we feel this would be the least costly, while fulfilling the need for outdoor dining which is our priority and the least disruption to our community. If we were to choose one of the concepts that were proposed, it would be concept #2, with no bike lane, on a temporary basis. The reasons for this would be that it offers a larger dining area than existing and has head in angled parking, which is strongly preferred, but we feel the bike lane would not be safe. In addition, the Chamber would like the City to investigate the possibility of widening the Strand and adding a bike path there. This would provide a safe space for both bicycles and pedestrians on the strand and be consistent with our surrounding cities. It would also help with the social distancing on the strand. Thank you for all your hard work and dedication to our beautiful City, businesses, and residents. Sincerely, Maureen Hunt Maureen Hunt President / CEO 198 August 11, 2020 – Hermosa Beach City Council Meeting Supplemental Information regarding additional community feedback on Item 6c – Lane Reconfiguration Concepts for Hermosa Avenue City Staff reached out to businesses in the downtown area concerning the draft concepts for a potential lane reconfiguration on Hermosa Avenue in the days leading up to the August 11, 2020 City Council meeting. This included direct emails to businesses located on Hermosa Avenue as well as additional sharing of the information by members of the Economic Development Committee stakeholder group. The concepts were presented to the stakeholder group by City staff at their August 5th meeting and reference to their feedback is mentioned in the Staff Report. Attached are emails and correspondence from a number of businesses and community members received since that meeting regarding the lane reconfiguration concepts. 199 -----Original Message----- From: Kathy Knoll <kathyknoll@earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 12:48 PM To: Suja Lowenthal <suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Douglas Krauss <dkrauss@hermosabeach.gov>; Mary Campbell <Drmarycampbell@gmail.com>; Ken Robertson <Krobertson@hermosabeach.gov>; City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov> Subject: Feedback from downtown businesses on street closures. Suja, Doug, Ken, Mayor Campbell, and City Council members. We put an email out to several of the downtown businesses especially those on Hermosa ave that will be affected by the street closure. I will try to recap however we have several differing opinions regarding all concepts. Most seemed interesting in concept 2 or 3 but pros and cons to both. Not one person liked concept 1. I also think people are confused on how the bike paths will actually work? Feedback. Concept 2. Pros Front in parking - most everyone prefers Bike path But some feedback in favor of concept 2 with no bike path Cons Bike path Less parking Less outdoor dining Concept 3 Pros More outdoor dining More parking Bike path Cons Back in parking -NEGATIVE INPUT FROM MAJORITY. There is major concern and pushback regarding reverse parking. Think you will get from residents as well. Here are a couple comments. There has been a lot of back and forth. Too much to put here. Losing a lane and waiting for people to back out is going to hurt the businesses. I as one will go down another street. You will lose me driving by. Ron Option 3 is definitely the best for businesses that want to use outdoor space. It will add 7+ feet of space to utilize. - Dave Davis I like concept 2. Reducing traffic to one lane will be enough of a dramatic change. Merging two lanes into one will slow down traffic but then also having cars stopping to back in for parking will cause further delay and will be a nightmare I also like idea of implementing second strand on beach for bike path. I 200 took pictures of man bch yesterday. Having the walking strand with median between bike path with plants is much classier and aesthetically pleasing. Probably increases property valued too. Think now is the time to get this going! - Kathy Knoll Here were some other suggestions: -Option 2 with no bike path -Close eastside of Hermosa Ave and make westside two lane. -All agree this would be a good time to look at adding a second strand for bike path on beach. -Pls extend plan - All concepts stop at 10th street and many of businesses south Ned help and would like to be included in the plan. I think you got a left from Radici. That part of town is often forgotten and needs help. As you can see it is very divided. May need to go back and come up with some alternatives. I’m sure you will get phone calls tonight as well. Hope this helps and is not too confusing. Kathy. Sent from my iPhone 201 1 Douglas Krauss From:Laura Francisco <enzo903@cox.net> Sent:Monday, August 10, 2020 10:23 PM To:Douglas Krauss Cc:Leeanne Singleton; Suja Lowenthal; kathyknoll@earthlink.net; City Council; Brian Cooley Subject:Re: Hermosa Avenue Lane Reconfigurations To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for including Radici on this email. I love the concept of the lane closure in Hermosa. It’s all so exciting and a breath of fresh air considering all the controversies and challenges we have been through this year. It’s like a rebirth of our community having gone through the horrific labor of Covid. This is a perfect opportunity for us to fully embrace all of downtown Hermosa Beach businesses, which also happens to include the businesses along 9th Street. It’s clear from the diagrams that we have not been included and yet, technically, we too are downtown Hermosa Beach. As such, we remain the forgotten Street. Please consider us in this evaluation before “another one bites the dust.“ By the way if anyone has information on the new establishment that took over Hots Kitchen and Hermosa Mexican cuisine, they should be included as well. Kind regards, Laura Francisco Sent from my iPhone On Aug 7, 2020, at 10:18 AM, Douglas Krauss <dkrauss@hermosabeach.gov> wrote: Dear Hermosa Avenue Business, The City has been discussing ways to enhance outdoor opportunities and foot traffic during the pandemic in the City's downtown corridors. At the July 14th meeting, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the development of plans to temporarily reconfigure both Hermosa Avenue between 10 th and 14th Streets, and Pier Avenue between Hermosa Avenue and Valley Drive with the goal of expanding space for outdoor business operations, increasing foot and bicycle traffic in the area, and generally providing opportunities for businesses to better utilize the public right-of-way during the COVID-19 pandemic while maintaining similar levels of on-street parking. Attached are three concepts that show possible reconfigurations, along with a table summarizing the differences between the concepts, for the Hermosa Avenue section. Concepts for Pier Avenue are still under development. These are just concepts at this time but we sincerely appreciate any feedback you have so that an option can be selected and refined into final construction plans. Each of these concepts consists primarily of striping and sign installation. Businesses will be responsible for constructing their decks and existing decks can be expanded to fit the new configurations under the businesses’ existing permits with no additional permit fees. We are reaching out to get your feedback on these concepts and hope you can let us know if you have a preference or concerns about any of the concepts proposed. Your feedback will then be shared with City Council at their August 11 meeting and will help to inform the final designs and potential 202 2 implementation of these temporary changes based on your input and City Council direction. Please email any comments or questions as soon as you are able. If you’d like to speak by phone, please send me your contact info and what times would be convenient for you to discuss. Thank you, <image003.jpg> Douglas Krauss Environmental Programs Manager | City of Hermosa Beach Phone: 310.750-3603 | Email: dkrauss@hermosabeach.gov COVID-19 updates: hermosabeach.gov/coronavirus As of Monday March 16, 2020, the City of Hermosa Beach has significantly altered City operations to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). We have canceled and postponed major events, suspended senior center and community programs and are limiting public access to City offices including City Hall and the Community Center. We are making these changes in compliance with Gov. Gavin Newsom’s and public health experts’ recommendations to cancel large gatherings and practice social distancing indefinitely. City staff and services will be transitioning to make services available by phone, email or online and there may be a delay in responding to your email as we work to make the transition. A list of City services and department contact information is available on the City Directory page of the website. Hermosa Beach police and other City staff that provide essential services outside City Hall – such as street repairs and other public works functions – will continue their work in the community, while taking additional precautions to reduce the risk of spread. We continue to evaluate impacts and changes to services from the City and our partners and will do our best to keep you updated about changes as information is made available. We appreciate your patience as we work through these changes and encourage you to check back frequently on our website to confirm the status of City services and events at: https://www.hermosabeach.gov/coronavirus. <Hermosa Ave 3 Concepts.pdf> <Hermosa Avenue Chart of Traffic Concepts.pdf> 203 1007 Hermosa Avenue, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 www.hbchamber.net 310- 376-0951 August 11, 2020 Re: 8/11 HB City Council Meeting, Item 6c Dear Hermosa Beach City Council and City Manager, On behalf of the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau, we ask that you try to keep CONSISTENCY AND SIMPLICITY in Hermosa Beach Downtown during C-19. After careful review of the Hermosa Avenue parking spaces and looking at solutions in other cities that have parallel and head in parking, including Manhattan Beach, the Chamber would like to support the following two recommendations. We would prefer to keep the parking and lanes the way they are now, with the temporary outdoor dining as it exists, including approved areas, and we feel this would be the least costly, while fulfilling the need for outdoor dining which is our priority and the least disruption to our community. If we were to choose one of the concepts that were proposed, it would be concept #2, with no bike lane, on a temporary basis. The reasons for this would be that it offers a larger dining area than existing and has head in angled parking, which is strongly preferred, but we feel the bike lane would not be safe. In addition, the Chamber would like the City to investigate the possibility of widening the Strand and adding a bike path there. This would provide a safe space for both bicycles and pedestrians on the strand and be consistent with our surrounding cities. It would also help with the social distancing on the strand. Thank you for all your hard work and dedication to our beautiful City, businesses, and residents. Sincerely, Maureen Hunt Maureen Hunt President / CEO 204 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0509 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 ADOPT THE RESOLUTION PRELIMINARILY APPROVING ENGINEER’S REPORT AND DIRECTING RELATED ACTIONS FOR THE PROPOSED GREENWICH VILLAGE NORTH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (Public Works Director Marnell Gibson) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1.Adopt a Resolution No. 20-7252 approving the Preliminary Engineer’s Report; 2.Set the date for the Public Hearing for Tuesday, October 13, 2020; 3.Authorize and direct the mailing of combined public hearing notices/assessment ballots; 4.Authorize the City Clerk to receive and tabulate the assessment ballots at the public hearing; and 5.Authorize the filing of the Boundary Map with the County Recorder. Executive Summary: The proposed City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District (Assessment District or District)is intended to finance the undergrounding of overhead utility lines and poles along Hermosa Avenue from 27th Street to north of 34th Street.The undergrounding project and establishment of the Assessment District were initiated at the request of residents along Hermosa Avenue within the proposed Assessment District boundaries.Under the California Public Utilities Commission's guidelines,applicants (property owners)for this class of project are responsible for the costs of the undergrounding.The actions proposed herein would continue the effort to form the assessment district. Background: On May 4,2017,the Public Works Department received a formal request from property owners within the proposed Assessment District boundaries asking the City to proceed with the formation of the Assessment District.The proposed Assessment District contains 99 parcels and includes Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 5 powered by Legistar™205 Staff Report REPORT 20-0509 Assessment District.The proposed Assessment District contains 99 parcels and includes Hermosa Avenue from the one power pole north of 34th Street to 27th Street as shown on the Boundary Map (Attachment 1).The power poles along Palm Drive and parcels on the east side of Palm Drive are not included in the Assessment District. In April 2017,the City adopted the “Underground Utilities Assessment Districts Guide (Initiated by Property Owners)”(Guidelines)(Attachment 2)to guide the formation of assessment districts for utility undergrounding projects.The Guidelines were updated in July 2019 to add clarity and better reflect the process set out under state law. On November 27th,2018,the City Council awarded a Public Service Agreement to NV5 for assessment engineer services.At the meeting,it was also reported that the Municipal Advisor NHA Advisors and Bond Counsel Jones Hall submitted proposals that were within the City Manager’s signature authority.These service agreements were executed in January 2019.The deposit from the property owners for the assessment engineer report was received on November 29,2018.Fees for the financial advisor and bond counsel are contingent on the sale of the bonds and would be paid from bond proceeds. The Assessment District is intended to be formed following Alternative 2 of the Guidelines,which provides that the assessments will be calculated based on an engineer’s estimate of the maximum possible project cost,and the design and construction would begin after the district is formed.Actual project construction bidding would occur after the District is formed and bonds are sold.To date, steps 1 through 8 of the Guidelines, summarized as follows, have been completed: 1.Process Initiation-the property owner serving as the neighborhood liaison and project proponent submitted a letter expressing interest in forming the district and showing the proposed district boundaries,which was supported by 60%of the property owners in the proposed district boundaries. 2.Boundary Map-City staff prepared the boundary map that was submitted to the utility companies,which prepared a feasibility analysis and preliminary cost estimate for the design and construction of the utility undergrounding project.These preliminary costs,which totaled $1,986,259.14,were provided to the property owners in a City letter dated November 20, 2017. 3.Letter of Continued Commitment-a letter of continued commitment signed by at least 60%of property owners was submitted to the City via email dated February 13th, 2018. 4.Consultant Services-the City retained the following consultants needed for the assessment district formation:NV5 as the Assessment Engineer,NHA as the Municipal Advisor,and Jones Hall as the Bond Counsel. 5.Formal Petition-the property owners submitted a petition to the City with at least 60%of the property owners in the undergrounding district supporting the petition.The Assessment Engineer certified the petition. 6.Resolution of Intention-City Council adopted the resolution of intention on July 23,2019 toCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 5 powered by Legistar™206 Staff Report REPORT 20-0509 6.Resolution of Intention-City Council adopted the resolution of intention on July 23,2019 to formally initiate the formation of the district and to direct NV5 to prepare the preliminary engineer’s report. 7.Preliminary Engineer’s Report-the Assessment Engineer prepared the preliminary Engineer’s Report and submitted it to the City Council for approval as part of this action. 8.Engineer’s Report-the Assessment Engineer generated the Preliminary Engineer’s Report and submitted it to the City Council for approval as part of this action. Analysis: The Assessment Engineer prepared the Preliminary Engineer’s Report (Attachment 3),which identifies the scope of the utility undergrounding project,estimates the total project cost ($4,031,600), specifies the method by which the project cost would be apportioned to each parcel in the Assessment District,and specifies the total assessment amount to be levied on each parcel based on the special benefits each parcel would receive from the undergrounding project. Upon approval of the attached resolution,the combined public hearing notice/assessment ballot ( Attachment 4)will be mailed to each of the assessed parcels in the District,the boundary map of the District will be recorded with the County recorder,and the date of the public hearing will be set where the City Council would take testimony from parcel owners in the District and the ballots will be counted.The public hearing is the deadline for property owners in the District to submit their signed assessment ballots to the City Clerk.The ballots specify the assessment amount for each parcel in the District.Each property owner then votes for or against the forming of the District.If more than 50%of the parcel owners’weighted ballots cast vote YES,then the City Council may choose to proceed with the formation of the District.If a majority of the weighted ballots cast vote NO,then the City Council may take no further action on the formation of the District.Should the District formation fail,the funds advanced by the property owners to date would not be reimbursed.If the City Council determines to establish the District,all property owners within the District would be responsible for the assessment amount regardless of a property owner’s individual vote.The public hearing takes place at least 45 days after approval of the resolution;the resolution sets the date for the Public Hearing for City Council meeting to be held on October 13, 2020. Information regarding the process for establishing the District is further outlined in a letter (Attachment 5)that will be distributed to all property owners along with the combined notice and ballot.Additionally,an informal question and answer virtual meeting has been scheduled for the property owners on September 10, 2020. The cost of project design and bidding specifications would be paid by the property owners after the Assessment District is formed,and once bids are received,bonds will be issued to fund the construction costs and reimburse the property owners for their deposit of the costs of project design. The Assessment Engineer is required to use a conservative estimate of the total project cost,City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 5 powered by Legistar™207 Staff Report REPORT 20-0509 The Assessment Engineer is required to use a conservative estimate of the total project cost, including a contingency,with the intent that the assessments are sufficient to cover the entire cost of the project.If the design and construction costs are lower than the estimates and total assessment amount contained in the engineer’s report,those actual costs will be used as the basis for the annual assessment levies.If actual design costs and construction bids are higher than these estimates and the final approved assessment amount,the property owners would be responsible for paying those additional costs,which may require either a cash contribution from the property owners or a supplemental assessment that would need to be approved by the property owners through a second assessment ballot process. The companies involved with the undergrounding effort include Southern California Edison (SCE), Frontier,and Crown Castle,with SCE as the lead company.All three companies require up-front payment for estimated design costs in order to begin the design phase,estimated to be $185,000. The neighborhood liaison has acknowledged receipt of this information (Attachment 6).The City will prepare a deposit agreement with the property owners to collect funds needed to pay these up-front costs. The agreement will be presented at the time of the Public Hearing. Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description November 27, 2018 City Council awarded Assessment Engineer Services for the Greenwich Village North Utility Underground Assessment District July 23, 2019 City Council adopted the Resolution of Intention to establish the Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District; and directed the Assessment Engineer to prepare the Preliminary Engineering Report. General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendations have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant policies are listed below: Governance Element: 2.6 Responsive to community needs.Continue to be responsive to community inquiries,providing public information and recording feedback from community interactions. 2.7 Major planning efforts.Require major planning efforts,policies,or projects to include a public engagement effort. 5.8 Public private partnerships.Pursue the use of public-private partnerships to implement projects and efforts that maintain character and benefit the community. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 4 of 5 powered by Legistar™208 Staff Report REPORT 20-0509 Parks + Open Space Element: 5.6 Signage and infrastructure.Encourage signage,infrastructure,and utilities that do not block or detract from views of scenic vistas. Infrastructure Element: 6.2 Below ground utilities.Encourage the phase out and replace overhead electric lines with subsurface lines to reduce visual obstructions and the need for utility poles which can impede sidewalk accessibility. This project falls within the Walk Street and Sand Section Neighborhoods of the City,where key priorities are maintaining the high-quality pedestrian connections through the walk streets,enhancing multimodal connectivity and retaining the form, scale, and orientation of buildings in this area. Fiscal Impacts: Because property owners are responsible for costs associated with this project,all costs of forming the Assessment District,and design and construction of the project,would be paid through a combination of the property owner deposits and the proceeds of the assessment bonds.None of these costs are the responsibility of the City or the General Fund. Attachments: 1.Boundary Map 2.Undergrounding District guidelines 3.Preliminary Engineer’s Report 4.Form of combined Public Hearing Notice/Assessment Ballot 5.Informational Letter to the Property Owners 6.Acknowledgement Letter of Design Cost Estimate 7.Resolution No.20-7252 Approving Preliminary Engineer’s Report and Directing Related Actions for the Proposed Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Respectfully Submitted by:Marnell Gibson, Public Works Director Concur:Lucho Rodriguez, Deputy City Engineer Noted for Fiscal Impact:Viki Copeland, Finance Director Noted for Legal Review:Lauren Langer, Assistant City Attorney Approved:Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 5 of 5 powered by Legistar™209 30thSt32thPl29thSt28thSt31thPl30thPl29thCt27thStNLongfellowAveM H E RMO S A A V E30TH PL26TH STGREENWICH VILLAGE28TH ST29TH ST30TH STMA N H A T T A N A V ELONGFELL O W AVE34TH PLH E RMO S A A V E34TH ST35TH ST33RD ST P A LM D R31ST ST27TH ST FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK OF HERMOSA BEACH, THIS ____DAY OF __________, 20___. __________________________ CITY CLERK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN MAP SHOWING PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF GREENWICH VILLAGE NORTH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF, HELD ON THE _____DAY OF ____________, 20___, BY ITS RESOLUTION NO. ______ FILED THIS _____ DAY OF _____________, 20___, AT THE HOUR OF____O'CLOCK _____M. IN BOOK_____OF MAPS OF ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS AT PAGE___, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. _________________________________________ COUNTY RECORDER OF COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES NOTE: FOR PARTICULARS OF THE LINES AND DIMENSIONS OF ASSESSOR'S PARCELS, REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE MAPS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY ASSESSOR, WHICH MAPS SHALL GOVERN FOR ALL DETAILS RELATING THERETO. LEGEND ON-SITE PARCEL OFF-SITE PARCELS POWER POLE TO BE REMOVED POWER POLE TO REMAIN IN PLACE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA BOUNDARY POWER LINE TO BE REMOVED POWER LINE TO REMAIN GUY WIRE TO BE REMOVED GUY WIRE TO REMAIN IN PLACE NEW RISER POLE OVERHEAD UTILITY GUY WIRE TO REMAIN ASSESSMENT NO. 1 inch = ft. GRAPHIC SCALE 40 BOUNDARY OF PROPOSED GREENWICH VILLAGE NORTH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STATE OF CALIFORNIA BOUNDARY LINE BOUNDARY LINE PARCELS: 99 TRENCHING IN STREET: 3,000 LF POWER POLES TO BE REMOVED: 18 210 1 Underground Utilities Assessment Districts Guide (Initiated by Property Owners) (Last revised July 2019) Most underground utility assessment districts are formed at the request of the local property owners. The multi-step, multi-year process for each alternative (Alternative 1 & Alternative 2) are explained below. Undergrounding utilities includes the involvement of Southern California Edison and local telephone, cable and other utilities. The City’s role is to facilitate meetings, coordinate tasks, and hire and manage consultants. Unless otherwise stated, or decided by the City Council at a time of district formation, all costs of formation of a district, related studies, undergrounding of overhead electrical and communications facilities, and lateral connections to each home are the responsibility of the homeowners. These Guidelines may be revised from time to time by the City of Hermosa Beach Director of Public Works. Alternative 1 1. The process is initiated by an interested property owner (proponent) who acts as a liaison between the City, utility companies, and neighbors. The proponent and other neighbors (interested parties) in support of undergrounding, submit a letter to the City expressing their interest in forming an Underground Utility Assessment District. The letter must include the proposed boundaries of the area for undergrounding and must be signed by owners representing at least 60% of the properties within the proposed district. 2. Based upon the interest letter, City staff prepares a boundary map and submits it to the appropriate utility companies who review and evaluate the map to ensure the boundaries are logical and feasible. Once the district boundaries are accepted by all parties, the utility companies provide the City with a preliminary cost estimate for the design and construction of the utility undergrounding project. 3. Once an estimated cost of preliminary design is known (which is deposited by the property owners in Step 8 below), and an estimate of the preliminary cost for the construction is known, the interested parties decide if there is continued support to pursue an assessment district, use a different payment option or agree to abandon the project. Should the interested parties wish to pursue an assessment district, a letter of continued commitment signed by 60% of property owners within the proposed district is submitted to the City. 4. The City retains the services of consultants, including a Financial Advisor, Bond Counsel and Assessment Engineer. Unless otherwise decided by the City Council, the City collects funds from the property owners to pay the non-contingent fees of consultants (i.e., those fees that are not paid from bond proceeds). Should the district ultimately fail, the funds advanced by the property owners will not be reimbursed. 5. The City, with the assistance of consultants, prepares a formal petition to be circulated by the proponents to all affected property owners within the proposed district boundaries. The petition states the approximate, estimated costs each property owner would be responsible for should the property owners vote in favor of forming the district and proceeding with the utility undergrounding project. The cost is based on the preliminary costs received from the utility companies. In order for the process to continue, at least 60% of the property owners must sign/express interest. This petition is a “show of interest” and does not bind the property owner to the district. (The interested parties are the ≥ 60% of the owners; that means that only those pay for the bond counsel and the 211 2 other consultants -- not the remaining ≤ 40%). The petition is certified by the retained Assessment Engineer. 6. The City Council adopts a Resolution of Intention to form the district. This resolution will direct the Assessment Engineer to prepare a Preliminary Engineer’s Report for the district. 7. The Assessment Engineer prepares a Preliminary Engineer’s Report identifying the benefits of the district, the scope of the utility undergrounding project, and the preliminary assessment amount to be levied on each parcel in the district, based on the special benefits of the project that each parcel will receive. 8. At this point the formal design of the project is undertaken by the Assessment Engineer, with input from Southern California Edison and the applicable local telephone, and cable utilities. This would each generate their final cost for construction based on their respective tariffs and franchise agreements. Design process begins once the utility companies receive the engineering and design fee. It usually involves the following steps: a) Base mapping b) SCE underground conduit and structures and electrical design c) Telephone and cable company design d) Cost estimate As with the cost for the consultants, unless otherwise decided by the City Council, the City collects funds from the property owners to pay for the design. Should the district fail, the funds advanced by the property owners will not be reimbursed. The duration of each step varies greatly depending on the number of other underground districts in queue, the size of the proposed district, and complexity of the design. According to SCE, as of 2014, estimated time to complete engineering and designs from all the utility companies is 18-24 months. 9. Once the design is complete and accepted by the City and utility companies, the utility companies provide a “guaranteed cost” or “cost of construction”. The Assessment Engineer will use the guarantee cost and all other costs incurred in the past (see Steps 4 and 8), or anticipated in the future, to generate the Preliminary Engineer’s Report. 10. Once the Preliminary Engineer’s Report is prepared, the City Council adopts a resolution approving the Preliminary Engineer’s Report, directing that assessment ballots be mailed to all of the assessed parcels in the district, directing recordation of the boundary map of the district with the County recorder, and setting the date of the public hearing where the City Council will take testimony from affected parcel owners in the district. The public hearing is the deadline for affected property owners in the district to submit their signed assessment ballots to the City Clerk. The public hearing takes place at least 45 days after approval of this resolution. 11. The assessment ballots are prepared by the City, working with Bond Counsel, specifying the assessment amount for each parcel in the district, which the City mails to each parcel owner. Each property owner then votes for or against forming the district. During the 45-day balloting period, one 212 3 or more informal property owner information meetings may be is also held prior to the public hearing to explain the details of the proposed district. 12. All ballots must be submitted to the City before the close of the scheduled public hearing, and will generally be tabulated at the same City Council meeting (unless the size of the district is such that the tabulation will take a significant amount of time, in which case the results will be announced at a subsequent City Council meeting). Each parcel’s vote is weighted in proportion to the dollar amount its respective assessment. 13. If a majority of the weighted ballots cast by the district property owners by the close of the public hearing vote YES (more than 50%), then the City Council may choose to proceed with the formation of the district. If a majority of the weighted ballots cast vote NO, then the City Council may take no further action on the formation of the district. Should the district fail, the funds advanced by the property owners will not be reimbursed. If the City Council determines to establish the district, all property owners within the district will be responsible for the assessment amount regardless of the property owner’s personal vote. 14. If the district is formed, the City will mail assessment notices to all property owners in the district informing them of their final lien amount and their right to prepay their respective assessments. Similar notices will be published in a local paper and recorded with the County recorder. 15. If the district is formed, the property owner will have two options to pay for the assessment. 30-Day Cash Payment Period: For at least 30 days after the mailing of assessment notices, each parcel owner will have the option to pay all or a portion of their applicable assessment amount. Bonds will be issued by the City for any unpaid portion of the assessment. Bonds: If the property owner elects to not pay during the 30-day cash payment period, the unpaid assessment will be financed through the issuance of bonds. All unpaid assessments will be payable in annual installments corresponding in number and proportionate amount to the principal and interest due on the bonds in each year. Bonds are typically amortized over a 15-20 year period, but can be amortized over as long a period as 39 years. The annual assessment installments will consist of each parcel’s share of maturing principal on the bonds, interest payable on the bonds, and administrative expenses, and will be collected on each parcel’s the regular property tax bill. 16. All unpaid assessments will constitute a lien on the affected parcels in the district. The assessments are not a personal obligation of the parcel owners, but rather an obligation of the parcel, and will run with the land to subsequent parcel owners until the bonds mature. An assessment lien will be recorded with the County recorder’s office on all parcels with unpaid assessments. 17. All upfront costs (whether incurred by the property owners or City) can be included in the Assessments and reimbursed from proceeds of the sale of bonds. Once the bonds are sold and all moneys are collected, the construction phase will commence. The construction duration will vary depending on the size of the district. In general, the construction phase lasts from 1 to 3 years. If the district fails, funds advanced by the property owners will not be reimbursed. 213 4 18. In areas outside of public right-of-way where no dedicated utility easement exists, each homeowner may be required to deed an easement to the utilities for the underground lines and structures. Legal costs related to the deeding and recording of these easements may be included in the Southern California Edison cost for the construction and if not, are the responsibility of the property owner. 19. When construction of the underground infrastructure is completed, all property owners are notified that it is time to implement their private conversions. Private conversions require property owners to hire a licensed electrician to connect the property’s existing overhead connection to the underground infrastructure and remove the above ground lines. The cost of the private conversion is not covered in the assessment amount. The assessment amount only covers work performed in the roadway easement and where utility easements have been obtained. Private conversions are mandatory for all property owners, regardless of their personal vote; the utility undergrounding project cannot be completed until all private conversions are completed. It is important to note that the average process can take approximately seven years, from initiation by property owners to final completion of the utility undergrounding project, depending on the size of the district. 214 5 Alternative 2 1. The process is initiated by an interested property owner (proponent) who acts as a liaison between the City, utility companies, and neighbors. The proponent and other neighbors (interested parties) in support of undergrounding, submit a letter to the City expressing their interest in forming an Underground Utility Assessment District. The letter must include the proposed boundaries of the area for undergrounding and must be signed by owners representing at least 60% of the properties within the proposed district. 2. Based upon the interest letter, City staff prepares a boundary map and submits it to the appropriate utility companies who review and evaluate the map to ensure the boundaries are logical and feasible. Once the district boundaries are accepted by all parties, the utility companies provide the City with a preliminary cost estimate for the design and construction of the utility undergrounding project. 3. Once an estimated cost of the design and construction is known, the interested parties decide if there is continued support to pursue an assessment district, use a different payment option or agree to abandon the project. Should the interested parties wish to pursue an assessment district, a letter of continued commitment signed by 60% of property owners within the proposed district is submitted to the City. NOTE: In this alternative the cost of design is paid after the assessment district is formed. However, this means that the assessment is based on an estimate of costs and the residents will be responsible for paying additional costs if the actual costs are greater than the estimate. See discussion in Step 21 below. 4. The City retains the services of consultants, including a Financial Advisor, Bond Counsel and Assessment Engineer. Unless otherwise decided by the City Council, the City collects funds from the property owners to pay the non-contingent fees of consultants (i.e., those fees that are not paid from bond proceeds). Should the district ultimately fail, the funds advanced by the property owners will not be reimbursed. 5. The City, with the assistance of consultants, prepares a formal petition to be circulated by the proponents to all affected property owners within the proposed district boundaries. The petition states the approximate, estimated costs each property owner would be responsible for should the property owners vote in favor of forming the district and proceeding with the utility undergrounding project. The cost is based on the preliminary costs received from the utility companies. In order for the process to continue, at least 60% of the property owners must sign/express interest. This petition is a “show of interest” and does not bind the property owner to the district. (The interested parties are the ≥60% of the owners; that means that only those pay for the Bond Counsel and the other consultants -- not the remaining ≤40%). The petition is certified by the retained Assessment Engineer. 6. The City Council adopts a Resolution of Intention to form the district. This resolution will direct the Assessment Engineer to prepare a Preliminary Engineer’s Report for the district. 7. The Assessment Engineer prepares a Preliminary Engineer’s Report identifying the benefits of the district, the scope of the utility undergrounding project, and the preliminary assessment amount to be levied on each parcel in the district, based on the special benefits of the project that each parcel will receive. 215 6 8. The Assessment Engineer will use this estimated cost and all other costs incurred in the past, and those anticipated in the future (e.g., the cost for Engineer’s Report and Bond Counsel, etc.) plus a significant contingency to try to account for the uncertainty of not having a completed design, to generate the Preliminary Engineer’s Report. This report will document the assessment amount each property owner within the district should be responsible for, should the district pass. All upfront costs incurred by the property owners or City could be folded into the assessment costs and paid from bond proceeds. If the district fails, then all costs incurred will be lost. 9. Once the Preliminary Engineer’s Report is prepared, the City Council adopts a resolution approving the Preliminary Engineer’s Report, directing that assessment ballots be mailed to all of the assessed parcels in the district, directing recordation of the boundary map of the district with the County recorder, and setting the date of the public hearing where the City Council will take testimony from affected parcel owners in the district. The public hearing is the deadline for affected property owners in the district to submit their signed assessment ballots to the City Clerk. The public hearing takes place at least 45 days after approval of this resolution. 10. The assessment ballots are prepared by the City, working with bond counsel, specifying the assessment amount for each parcel in the district, which the City mails to each parcel owner. Each property owner then votes for or against forming the district. During the 45-day balloting period, one or more informal property owner information meetings may be is also held prior to the public hearing to explain the details of the proposed district. 11. All ballots must be submitted to the City before the close of the scheduled public hearing, and will generally be tabulated at the same City Council meeting (unless the size of the district is such that the tabulation will take a significant amount of time, in which case the results will be announced at a subsequent City Council meeting). Each parcel’s vote is weighted in proportion to the dollar amount its respective assessment. 12. If a majority of the weighted ballots cast by the district property owners by the close of the public hearing vote YES (more than 50%), then the City Council may choose to proceed with the formation of the district. If a majority of the weighted ballots cast vote NO, then the City Council may take no further action on the formation of the district. Should the district fail, the funds advanced by the property owners will not be reimbursed. If the City Council determines to establish the district, all property owners within the district will be responsible for the assessment amount regardless of the property owner’s personal vote. 13. If the district is formed, the City will mail assessment notices to all property owners in the district informing them of their final lien amount and their right to prepay their respective assessments. Similar notices will be published in a local paper and recorded with the County recorder. 14. If the district is approved, the property owner will have two options to pay for the assessment. 30-Day Cash Payment Period: For at least 30 days after the mailing of assessment notices, each parcel owner will have the option to pay all or a portion of their applicable assessment amount. Bonds will be issued by the City for any unpaid portion of the assessment. Bonds: If the property owner elects to not pay during the 30-day cash payment period, the 216 7 unpaid assessment will be financed through the issuance of bonds. All unpaid assessments will be payable in annual installments corresponding in number and proportionate amount to the principal and interest due on the bonds in each year. Bonds are typically amortized over a 15-20 year period, but can be amortized over as long a period as 39 years. The annual assessment installments will consist of each parcel’s share of maturing principal on the bonds, interest payable on the bonds, and administrative expenses, and will be collected on each parcel’s the regular property tax bill. 15. All unpaid assessments will constitute a lien on the affected parcels in the district. The assessments are not a personal obligation of the parcel owners, but rather an obligation of the parcel, and will run with the land to subsequent parcel owners until the bonds mature. An assessment lien will be recorded with the County recorder’s office on all parcels with unpaid assessments. 16. Once the bonds are sold and all moneys are collected, the City forwards the payment to the utility companies to begin the design process. The remaining funds will be retained for construction. 17. Design process begins once the utility companies receive the engineering and design fee. It usually involves the following steps: a) Base mapping b) SCE underground conduit and structures and electrical design c) Telephone and cable company design d) Cost estimate The duration of each step varies greatly depending on the number of other underground districts in queue, the size of the proposed district, and complexity of the design. According to SCE, as of 2014, estimated time to complete engineering and designs from all the utility companies is 18-24 months. 18. In areas outside of public right-of-way where no dedicated utility easement exists, each homeowner may be required to deed an easement to the utilities for the underground lines and structures. Legal costs related to the deeding and recording of these easements may be included in the SCE “cost of design and of construction”, and if not, are the responsibility of the property owner. 19. The construction phase begins. The construction duration will vary and can range anywhere from 1 to 3 years. 20. When construction of the underground infrastructure is completed, all property owners are notified that it is time to implement their private conversions. Private conversions require property owners to hire a licensed electrician to connect the property’s existing overhead connection to the underground infrastructure and remove the above ground lines. The cost of the private conversion is not covered in the assessment amount. The assessment amount only covers work performed in the roadway easement and where utility easements have been obtained. Private conversions are mandatory for all property owners, regardless of their personal vote; the utility undergrounding project cannot be completed until all private conversions are completed. 217 8 21. If the actual costs for the undergrounding project exceed the total estimated costs set forth in the Final Engineer’s Report, the property owners will have to decide if there is continued support of the project or to disband the district. Continuing the project would require one of two options: a) The property owners can fund the costs exceeding the total amount reported in the Engineer’s Report, or b) A supplemental assessment district will be formed, and a second property owner vote will take place on the question of whether the supplemental assessment will be placed on the property in the district, generally following the process set forth above starting with task 9 of Alternative 2. It is important to note that the average process can take approximately seven years, from initiation by property owners to final completion of the utility undergrounding project, depending on the size of the district. 218 9 UNDERGROUNDING OF UTILITY LINES AND FORMATION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: What equipment will still be visible above ground? Transformers may be located above ground on concrete pads or will be located in subsurface vaults covered by manhole covers. Each vault requires two, 12-inch diameter by 30-inch high vents. Telephone systems may also require small above terminals to provide maintenance access. Will my electricity be out during the construction? NO. During construction there will be some disruption because the streets in the area will be dug up, but your electricity, cable TV, and telephone service should not be affected. Only after everyone in the project area has connected to the underground system will the overhead wires and poles be removed. Will property owners get a chance to review proposed locations of the equipment before they are cast in concrete? The locations of pad mounted equipment and vents will be marked on the ground after the plans have been completed so that the property owners can see the proposed placements. Locations for these structures will be placed in the roadway easement selected by both the City staff and utility companies for ease of utility operations and in consideration of the property owners. Location adjustments to these structures are typically not allowed after the designs are finalized. If a utility pole has a cell phone antenna, will it be removed? Cell phone companies will be notified by the utility company that the pole is going to be removed and that the antennas will need to be removed. What will happen to the streetlights? In most cases throughout the City, the streetlights are attached to the utility poles. The project will include the installation of new streetlights. Unless your neighborhood chooses to pay for more expensive decorative lights, standard concrete streetlight poles will be installed. If your project moves forward, City staff will meet with your neighborhood to discuss the various street lighting options. I’ve heard about new technologies like fiber optics coming to residential neighborhoods, how does utility undergrounding fit into all of this? New technologies such as fiber optics can exist, both on overhead poles or underground. Currently, when undergrounding projects take place, there is additional room for fiber optic cables to be laid down. How much does it cost? Costs vary substantially from district to district depending on the size, physical constraints, specific benefit of each property, how many overhead lines need to be placed underground, how many poles need to be removed, size and number of property owners within the undergrounding district, labor and material costs, and inflation. Costs estimated in a 2001 study for City-wide undergrounding project in Rolling Hills estimated per household cost between $52,000 and $62,000. Please note that the assessment amount does not include the private conversion portion of the project, conversion of your electrical panel, if necessary or the connection from your home to the street. Estimated cost for this work is at $9,000-$20,000 and will depend upon the terrain, type of soil and the distance from the house to the road easement and connection to the main conduit. Is there money available from other sources to help pay for undergrounding? Edison offers three options for undergrounding power lines. The first is where a municipality (City) organizes the project and it is paid for with money accumulated from a small surcharge on a utility bill, 219 10 called Rule 20A. The money from this source must be used on a project with a minimum of 600 linear feet and must be on main thoroughfares. The second option is where homeowners initiate the undergrounding and form a district. To qualify, the area to be undergrounded must be a minimum of 600 linear feet and all existing overhead communication and electric facilities within the area must be removed and all property owners served by the overhead facilities to be undergrounded agree in writing to have the wiring changes made on their premises necessary to allow service through the underground system. If the project meets these requirements, it may qualify for Rule 20B in which, Edison removes all of the utility poles at their own cost and a subsidy from Edison is available in the amount equal to building an equivalent overhead system, which SCE estimates is generally 20% of the cost of undergrounding. That subsidy is applied to SCE’s final invoice to offset the cost of constructing a new underground system. The third option for undergrounding is Rule 20C in which the property owner(s) pays the entire cost of the underground project including the removal of overhead facilities. Why can’t the City pay for a part of this project? The City of Hermosa Beach is supportive of neighborhood undergrounding projects, however, there are many competing infrastructure needs that must be met, such as repaving roads, repairing public buildings, and maintaining our parks. Why can’t the Utilities pay for this project? It’s their wires, right? Unfortunately, undergrounding is expensive and there is no legal requirement for them to underground their facilities. What costs are included in the assessment amount? The assessment amount includes district formation, design engineering, construction, legal, administration, and bond issuance costs. Upfront costs incurred by the owners can be reimbursed from the bonds as well. However, if an assessment district does not pass, the upfront costs are non- refundable. What costs are not included in the assessment amount? The assessment amount does not include the private conversion portion of the project, conversion of your electrical panel, if necessary, or the connection from your home to the street. Estimated cost for this work is at $9,000-$20,000 and will depend upon the terrain, type of soil and the distance from the house to the road easement and connection to the main conduit. How do property owners pay the assessment? The assessment can be paid in cash or through bond financing. Once the Assessment District has been approved by the City Council, property owners have a 30-Day Cash Payment Period to pay their assessment. After the 30-Day Cash Payment Period, any unpaid portion of the assessment will be financed through bond sales. If the property owner elects to finance the costs, annual installments of principal, interest, and administrative fees will be collected with the property tax bill. Can the assessment be paid partially in cash and partially go to bond? Yes, during the 30-Day Cash Payment Period, the property owner will save the additional costs that would be incurred in a bond issuance on the portion of the assessment paid. After this period, the property owner can at any time make cash payments to pay off the assessment by paying off any 220 11 outstanding delinquencies, a portion or the remaining principal amount, applicable bond redemption premium, interest to the next available bond call date, and an administrative fee fixed by the City. Any payments made after the 30-Day Cash Payment Period will not receive the savings, because the costs of a bond issuance will be incurred. Is the assessment tax deductible? Please direct any tax-related questions to your tax advisor or accountant. What is the term of the bond financing? Usually the bonds are financed over a 15-20 year term. However, the law permits bonds to be issued with terms up to 39 years. What is the rate of interest on the bonds? The bond financing reflects the market rate at the time of issuance. The City does not have the capability to predict such rates. What if I sell my home before the assessment is paid in full? This is a matter that can be negotiated between the buyer and seller. The lien is placed on the property and will remain with the property unless the assessment is paid in full, and will transfer to the new owners with the property unless paid off. This information should be disclosed to the buyer. What is the private conversion and what does it include? Private conversion involves undergrounding the service wires and equipment that are on private property - that connect from the main service conduit in the roadway easement to the property owner's home or business. This work includes trenching, installing service conduit, backfill, and modification or replacement of the customer’s electric panel to accept underground service. What is the private conversion portion of the project? Each property owner must connect his or her overhead utility lines to the underground utility system. It is recommended to obtain bids from licensed contractors to perform this work. This cost is not included in the assessment amount. What is the typical cost for the private conversion? It typically costs between $9,000 and $20,000 to convert overhead utilities to underground. The cost depends on the terrain of the lot, type of soil and the distance from the electrical panel to the main conduit in the roadway easement. These costs are not included in the assessment. Can the cost of the private conversion be added to my property tax bill as well? No. The cost of the private conversion is negotiated between you and your contractor. Each property owner pays for this service separately from the assessment. Who do property owners contact with questions or concerns regarding the project? Questions and concerns regarding the project should be directed to the Department of Public Works, by calling 310-318-0214. Property owners should not contact the utility companies directly with questions. 221 12 Myths and Facts of the process for undergrounding of utility lines and formation of assessment districts FORMATION AND COSTS Myth: The undergrounding of utilities is a City driven project. Fact: The assessment districts for the undergrounding of utilities are property owner driven projects. The City acts as a liaison between the utility companies and property owners Myth: Rule 20A money can be applied anywhere in the City. Fact: Generally, Rule 20A money can be applied to major thoroughfares only. Myth: Everything is included in the assessment costs. Fact: The assessment covers the district formation and construction costs to underground the utility lines. Property owners are responsible for hiring and paying a contractor to connect their property's utilities to the underground system. Myth: The City is not assessed for any City owned parcels. Fact: City property is assessed based on the same assessment methodology as other properties within the assessment district. Myth: The City withholds information from property owners. Fact: The City makes every effort in being transparent about the assessment process and welcomes any calls or inquiries. The utility companies should not be contacted directly with questions regarding the project. The property owners are welcome and encouraged to engage their own facilitator to act as a liaison to the utility companies on their behalf. Myth: I still have to pay the assessment if I sell my property. Fact: The City does not require the assessment to be paid off when a property is sold; however, the buyer may make the request. CONSTRUCTION Myth: I will not have access to my property during construction. Fact: Construction for a typically sized district takes 1 year but can last up to 3 years. The work area generally shifts each week. Access during working hours will be limited, but is reopened at the end of each work day. Myth: If the contractor/construction causes damage to my private property, it will not be repaired. Fact: The contractor is responsible for repairing all damages done during construction. Should any damage occur, please notify the project superintendent or city staff. Myth: The City has an approved list of electrical contractors to perform the private conversion. Fact: The City may provide a list of electrical contractors who conduct business within the City, but do not maintain a list of prequalified or approved contractors. Myth: A select few electrical contractors make arrangements with the City to perform private conversions prior to properties being released for conversion. 222 13 Fact: Private conversion should NOT be started prior to written notification from the Utility company, issuance of a building permit, and pre-inspection from the building inspector. Myth: My service panel will have to be replaced or upgraded. Fact: Service panel replacements are required if the existing panel is not compatible with the new underground system and is paid by the property owner. Myth: The electrical conversion process will disrupt electrical service to my property for a long period of time. Fact: The service conversion or "cut-over" to the underground system takes approximately 10-20 minutes to complete. Electrical service is restored after completion of the cut-over. 223 PREPARED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1913 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH August 11, 2020 224 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction and Certifications ........................................................................................ 1 PART I Plans and Specifications ................................................................................... 6 PART II Cost Estimate ................................................................................................... 7 PART Ill Assessment Roll and Method of Assessment Spread ....................................... 8 Table 1 - Assessment Roll .............................................................................. 10 Debt Limit Valuation ...................................................................................... 12 Exhibit 1-Method and Formula of Assessment Spread .................................. 13 PART IV Annual Administrative Assessment ............................................................... 19 PART V Diagram of Assessment District ..................................................................... 20 PART VI Description of Facilities.................................................................................. 24 Right-of-Way Certificate ................................................................................ 26 Certification of Completion of Environmental Proceedings .......................... 27 APPENDIX A. Assessment Calculations 225 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 2 PART III AGENCY: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PROJECT: GREENWICH VILLAGE NORTH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ASSESSMENT DISTRICT TO: CITY COUNCIL ENGINEER'S "REPORT" PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 2961 AND 10204 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE The purpose of this Assessment District is to provide financing to underground power, telephone and cable facilities in the area known as Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District. The proposed underground utility improvements will provide conversion to an upgraded utility system and will enhance neighborhood aesthetics, safety and reliability. The construction of these improvements will conform to existing City of Hermosa Beach, Southern California Edison, Crown Castle and Frontier standards. By virtue of such improvements, the proposed improvements are of special and direct benefit to these properties. Pursuant to the provisions of Article XIIID of the State Constitution, Part 7.5 of the "Special Assessment Investigation, Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931'', being Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, and the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of said Code, and the Resolution of Intention, adopted on July 23, 2019 by the City Council of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, State of California, in connection with the proceedings for Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District (hereinafter referred to as the “Assessment District”), I, Jeffrey M. Cooper, P.E., a Registered Professional Engineer and authorized representative of NV5, Inc., the duly appointed Engineer of Work, herewith submits the “Report” for the Assessment District, consisting of six (6) parts as stated below. PART I This part contains the plans and specifications which describe the general nature, location and extent for the proposed improvements to be constructed, and are filed herewith and made a part hereof. Said plans and specifications are on file in the Office of the Director of Public Works, who is acting as the Superintendent of Streets (the “Superintendent of Streets”). PART II This part contains an estimate of the cost of the proposed improvements, including capitalized interest, if any, incidental costs and expenses in connection therewith as set forth herein and attached hereto. This part consists of the following information: A. A proposed assessment of the total amount of the costs and expenses of the proposed 226 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 3 PART III improvements upon the several subdivisions of land within the Assessment District, in proportion to the special benefits to be received by such subdivisions from said improvements, which is set forth upon the assessment roll filed herewith and made a part hereof. B. The total amount, as near as may be determined, of the total principal sum of all unpaid special assessments and special assessments required or proposed to be levied under any completed or pending assessment proceedings, other than that contemplated for the Assessment District, which would require an investigation and report under the "Special Assessment Investigation, Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931" against the total area proposed to be assessed. C. The total true value, determined from the latest Assessor's roll, of the parcels of land and improvements which are proposed to be assessed. PART IV This part contains the proposed maximum annual administrative assessment to be levied upon each subdivision or parcel of land within the Assessment District to pay the costs incurred by the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, and not otherwise reimbursed, resulting from the administration and collection of assessments, from the administration and registration of any associated bonds and reserve or other related funds, or both. PART V This part contains a map showing the boundaries of the Assessment District, and a diagram showing the Assessment District, the boundaries and the dimensions of the subdivisions of land within said Assessment District, as the same existed at the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention. The Boundary Map and Assessment Diagram are filed herewith and made a part hereof, and part of the assessment. 227 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 4 PART VI This part shall consist of the following information: A. Description of facilities B. Right-of-Way Certificate C. Environmental Certificate This report is submitted on August 11, 2020 NV5, INC. _______________________________ JEFFREY M. COOPER, P.E. R.C.E. No. 31572 ENGINEER OF WORK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA 228 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 5 Preliminary approval by the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, on the _ day of , 2020. CITY CLERK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA Final approval by the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, on the _ day of , 2020. CITY CLERK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA 229 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 6 Part I Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications to construct the utility undergrounding improvements, and any ancillary improvements thereof, for the area generally described as Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District describe the general nature, location and extent of the improvements for the Assessment District are referenced herein and incorporated as if attached and a part of this Report. Said Plans and Specifications for the improvements are shown on the assessment diagram. Final plans and specifications will be prepared by the City in conjunction with the utility companies and will be on file in the office of the Superintendent of Streets when completed. 230 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 7 Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Final Utility Engineering & Construction Southern California Edison $1,330,000 -$ Frontier $999,000 -$ Crown Castle $90,000 -$ $2,419,000 -$ Contingency 40%$967,600 -$ TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $3,386,600 -$ INCIDENTAL EXPENSES Assessment Engineering $35,000 -$ Design Oversite & City Inspection $250,000 -$ City Administration $100,000 -$ Financial Advisor $30,000 -$ Bond Counsel $30,000 -$ Printing, Advertising, Notices $5,000 -$ Miscellaneous $10,000 -$ $460,000 -$ $3,386,600 -$ $3,846,600 -$ FINANCIAL COSTS Paying Agent $5,000 -$ Bond Reserve 2.5%$100,000 -$ Capitalized Interest 2.0%$80,000 -$ $185,000 -$ TOTAL ESTIMATE $4,031,600 -$ [1] Net cost, includes contribution for existing facilities - poles and wires removed Subtotal & Financial Costs Estimated Costs Subtotal Incidental Expenses Construction Subtotal Incidental Expenses & Construction Part II Cost Estimate 231 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 8 Part III Assessment Roll and Method of Assessment Spread WHEREAS, on July 23, 2019 the City Council of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, State of California, did, pursuant to the provisions of the 1913 Act "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 ", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code, of the State of California, adopt its Resolution of Intention No. 19-7203, for the installation and construction of certain public improvements, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work in connection therewith (the “improvements”), in a special assessment district known and designated as Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and WHEREAS, said Resolution of Intention, as required by Law, did direct the Engineer of Work to make and file a "Report", consisting of the following as required by Section 10204 of the Act: a. Plans and Specifications b. A general description of works or appliances already installed and any other property necessary or convenient for the operation of the improvement, if the works, appliances, or property are to be acquired as part of the improvement. c. Cost Estimates d. Assessment Diagram showing the Assessment District and the subdivisions of land therein; e. A proposed assessment of the costs and expenses of the works of improvement levied upon the parcels within the boundaries of the Assessment District; f. The proposed maximum annual assessment to be levied upon each subdivision or parcel of land within the Assessment District to pay the costs incurred by the City and not otherwise reimbursed resulting from the administration and collection of assessments or from the administration and registration of any associated bonds and reserve or other related funds. For particulars, reference is made to the Resolution of Intention as previously adopted. NOW, THEREFORE, I, JEFFREY M. COOPER, P.E., the authorized representative of NV5 Inc, pursuant to Article XIIID of the California Constitution and the “Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", do hereby submit the following: 1. Pursuant to the provisions of Law and the Resolution of Intention, I have assessed the costs and expenses of the works of improvement to be performed in the Assessment District upon the parcels of land in the Assessment District specially benefited thereby in direct proportion and relation to the special benefits to be received by each of said parcels. For particulars as to the identification of said parcels, reference is made to the Assessment Diagram, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. 2. As required by law, a Diagram is hereto attached, showing the Assessment District, as well as the boundaries and dimensions of the respective parcels and subdivisions of land within said 232 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 9 District as the same existed at the time of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, each of which subdivisions of land or parcels or lots respectively have been given a separate number upon said Diagram and in said Assessment Roll. 3. The subdivisions and parcels of land the numbers therein as shown on the respective Assessment Diagram as attached hereto correspond with the numbers as appearing on the Assessment Roll as contained herein. 4. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that bonds will be issued in accordance with Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the "Improvement Bond Act of 1915"), to represent all unpaid assessments, which bonds shall be issued in one or more series, each with a term not to exceed the legal maximum term as authorized by law, THIRTY-NINE (39) YEARS (expected twenty years) from the 2nd day of September next succeeding twelve (12) months from their date. Said bonds shall bear interest at a rate not to exceed the current legal maximum rate of 12% per annum. 5. By virtue of the authority contained in said "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", and by further direction and order of the legislative body, I hereby recommend the following Assessment to cover the costs and expenses of the works of improvement for the Assessment District based on the costs and expenses as set forth below: As Preliminary Approved As Confirmed Estimated Cost of Design, Construction and Contingency $3,386,600 Estimated Incidental Expenses: $460,000 Estimated Bond Costs: $185,000 Estimated Total to Assessment: $4,031,600 For particulars as to the individual assessments and their descriptions, reference is made to Table l (Assessment Roll) attached hereto. 6. The Method of Spread of Assessment is as set forth in the exhibit identified as Part III (Exhibit I), which is attached hereto, referenced and so incorporated. 233 Table 1 Assessment Roll City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 10 Asmt No. Assessor's Parcel Number Total True Value Existing Liens Assessments as Preliminarily Approved Assessments as Confirmed and Recorded Value To Lien Ratio 1 4181-034-002 710,656.00$ -41,319.79$ -17 2 4181-034-001 6,500,200.00$ -28,371.86$ -229 3 4181-034-007 6,710,580.00$ -24,133.56$ -278 4 4181-034-008 1,415,619.00$ -34,241.39$ -41 5 4181-034-009 10,500,000.00$ -30,338.08$ -346 6 4181-035-001 8,687,340.00$ -31,226.52$ -278 7 4181-035-002 2,694,919.00$ -31,707.15$ -85 8 4181-035-003 4,827,952.00$ -32,362.56$ -149 9 4181-035-004 6,639,815.00$ -66,764.16$ -99 10 4181-035-005 3,542,756.00$ -34,154.01$ -104 11 4181-035-006 1,777,094.00$ -35,013.32$ -51 12 4181-035-007 8,300,319.00$ -35,581.34$ -233 13 4181-035-008 1,897,007.00$ -36,061.97$ -53 14 4181-035-009 237,755.00$ -36,804.76$ -6 15 4181-035-010 6,402,655.00$ -37,285.40$ -172 16 4181-035-011 2,009,679.00$ -38,348.61$ -52 17 4181-035-025 7,722,997.00$ -39,076.84$ -198 18 4181-035-014 9,695,440.00$ -39,673.99$ -244 19 4181-035-015 2,562,041.00$ -40,285.71$ -64 20 4181-035-016 275,566.00$ -40,970.24$ -7 21 4181-035-017 1,168,379.00$ -41,450.87$ -28 22 4181-035-018 245,450.00$ -42,048.02$ -6 23 4181-035-019 9,340,797.00$ -42,761.69$ -218 24 4181-035-020 422,165.00$ -65,322.27$ -6 25 4181-035-021 7,218,977.00$ -66,793.29$ -108 26 4181-035-022 769,068.00$ -45,193.98$ -17 27 4181-035-030 12,481,473.00$ -58,243.87$ -214 28 4181-035-029 10,989,173.00$ -57,690.41$ -190 29 4181-035-024 1,403,914.00$ -71,366.58$ -20 30 4181-036-001 7,350,403.00$ -51,879.13$ -142 31 4181-036-002 14,074,805.00$ -96,053.59$ -147 32 4181-036-015 992,654.00$ -50,612.01$ -20 33 4181-036-005 5,623,298.00$ -51,500.45$ -109 34 4181-036-006 965,072.00$ -51,733.49$ -19 35 4181-036-007 14,471,153.00$ -67,259.36$ -215 36 4181-036-008 1,013,706.00$ -65,977.67$ -15 37 4181-036-009 8,384,126.00$ -77,440.02$ -108 38 4181-036-010 339,530.00$ -52,680.19$ -6 39 4181-036-011 9,620,335.00$ -79,406.24$ -121 40 4181-036-013 12,723,989.00$ -79,435.37$ -160 41 4181-036-014 422,457.00$ -83,513.46$ -5 42 4181-037-010 16,263,977.00$ -63,792.98$ -255 43 4181-037-009 9,384,000.00$ -37,824.29$ -248 44 4181-037-008 1,045,566.00$ -38,334.05$ -27 45 4181-037-007 1,416,902.00$ -39,105.97$ -36 46 4181-037-006 6,800,000.00$ -39,877.90$ -171 47 4181-037-005 7,118,404.00$ -40,416.79$ -176 48 4181-037-004 329,520.00$ -41,130.45$ -8 49 4181-037-003 10,539,620.00$ -41,814.99$ -252 50 4181-037-002 377,110.00$ -42,747.12$ -9 234 Table 1 Assessment Roll City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 11 Asmt No. Assessor's Parcel Number Total True Value Existing Liens Assessments as Preliminarily Approved Assessments as Confirmed and Recorded Value To Lien Ratio 51 4181-037-001 314,524.00$ -87,271.13$ -4 52 4181-025-013 227,367.00$ -36,338.70$ -6 53 4181-025-022 295,260.00$ -8,971.80$ -33 54 4181-025-023 959,650.00$ -8,971.80$ -107 55 4181-025-024 420,189.00$ -8,971.80$ -47 56 4181-025-025 558,848.00$ -8,971.80$ -62 57 4181-025-026 837,522.00$ -4,485.90$ -187 58 4181-025-027 293,389.00$ -8,971.80$ -33 59 4181-025-028 739,724.00$ -8,971.80$ -82 60 4181-025-003 147,824.00$ -29,245.73$ -5 61 Not Used ---$ -N/A 62 4181-025-001 2,541,591.00$ -16,924.07$ -150 63 Not Used ---$ -N/A 64 4181-026-018 549,062.00$ -9,838.39$ -56 65 4181-026-005 190,720.00$ -37,139.75$ -5 66 4181-026-004 3,697,529.00$ -37,285.40$ -99 67 4181-026-003 4,449,750.00$ -37,168.88$ -120 68 4181-026-002 359,513.00$ -37,168.88$ -10 69 4181-026-001 1,038,541.00$ -37,256.27$ -28 70 4181-027-006 4,880,494.00$ -37,081.49$ -132 71 4181-027-005 4,059,162.00$ -37,299.96$ -109 72 4181-027-004 1,183,432.00$ -37,110.62$ -32 73 4181-027-003 7,191,000.00$ -37,256.27$ -193 74 4181-027-002 401,702.00$ -37,183.44$ -11 75 4181-027-001 4,475,518.00$ -37,270.83$ -120 76 4181-028-005 2,234,851.00$ -43,417.10$ -51 77 4181-028-004 1,398,458.00$ -43,242.32$ -32 78 4181-028-003 144,106.00$ -43,460.79$ -3 79 4181-028-002 3,608,107.00$ -43,417.10$ -83 80 4181-028-017 2,633,888.00$ -11,156.49$ -236 81 4181-028-018 2,900,000.00$ -11,156.49$ -260 82 4181-029-005 3,772,562.00$ -17,361.01$ -217 83 4181-029-004 3,616,215.00$ -35,013.32$ -103 84 4181-029-003 1,526,547.00$ -35,071.58$ -44 85 4181-029-002 1,094,672.00$ -35,027.88$ -31 86 4181-029-001 4,425,509.00$ -34,896.80$ -127 87 4181-030-005 1,236,946.00$ -34,969.62$ -35 88 4181-030-004 851,725.00$ -35,086.14$ -24 89 4181-030-003 1,529,462.00$ -34,969.62$ -44 90 4181-030-002 2,090,484.00$ -35,100.71$ -60 91 4181-030-001 4,744,443.00$ -34,794.85$ -136 92 4181-031-005 143,685.00$ -18,533.46$ -8 93 4181-031-004 3,040,480.00$ -37,168.88$ -82 94 4181-031-003 5,814,000.00$ -37,183.44$ -156 95 4181-031-002 8,275,260.00$ -61,855.89$ -134 96 4181-031-001 1,091,906.00$ -49,519.67$ -22 97 4181-032-005 196,668.00$ -43,169.50$ -5 98 4181-032-004 2,688,306.00$ -37,198.01$ -72 99 4181-032-003 5,091,464.00$ -37,198.01$ -137 100 4181-032-016 2,032,785.00$ -80,382.07$ -25 101 4181-033-019 3,979,530.00$ -36,964.98$ -108 235 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 12 Table 2 Debt Limit Valuation A. ESTIMATED BALANCE TO ASSESSMENT (Not including city owned parcels) $4,031,600.00 B. UNPAID SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS $0 TOTAL A& B $4,031,600.00 C. TRUE VALUE OF PARCELS (Not including city owned parcels) $376,380,783.00 AVERAGE VALUE TO LIEN RATIO 93:1 * Unpaid Special Assessments shall consist of the total principal sum of all unpaid special assessments previously levied or proposed to be levied other than in the instant proceedings. ** True Value of Parcels means the total value of the land and improvements as estimated and shown on the last equalized roll of the County or as otherwise reasonably calculated. This report does not represent a recommendation of parcel value, economic viability or financial feasibility, as that is not the responsibility of the Assessment Engineer. CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned Assessment Engineer, do hereby certify that (i) the total amount of the principal sum of the special assessments proposed to be levied, together with the principal amount of previously levied special assessments, as set forth above, do not exceed one-half (1/2) the total true value of the parcels proposed to be assessed, and (ii) the amount proposed to be assessed upon any parcel does not exceed one-half of the true value of the parcel. EXECUTED ON August 11, 2020 NV5, INC. _______________________________ JEFFREY M. COOPER, P.E. R.C.E. No. 31572 ENGINEER OF WORK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA 236 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 13 Exhibit 1 Method and Formula of Assessment Spread Since the improvements are to be funded by the levying of assessments, the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913" and Article XIIID of the State Constitution require that assessments must be based on the special benefit that the properties receive from the works of improvement. In addition, Section 4 of Article XIIID of the State Constitution requires that a parcel's assessment may not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel. Section 4 provides that only special benefits are assessable and the local agency levying the assessment must separate the general benefits from the special benefits. It also provides that parcels within a district that are owned or used by any public agency, the State of California, or the United States shall not be exempt from assessment unless the agency can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that those publicly owned parcels in fact receive no special benefit. Neither the Act nor the State Constitution specifies the method or formula that should be used to apportion the costs to properties in any special assessment district proceedings. The responsibility for recommending an apportionment of the costs to properties which specially benefit from the improvements rests with the Assessment Engineer, who is appointed for the purpose of making an analysis of the facts and determining the correct apportionment of the assessment obligation. In order to apportion the assessments to each parcel in direct proportion with the special benefit which it will receive from the improvements, an analysis has been completed and is used as the basis for apportioning costs to each property within the Assessment District. Based upon an analysis of the special benefit to be received by each parcel from the construction of the works of improvement, the Assessment Engineer recommends the apportionment of costs as outlined below. The final authority and action rests with the City Council after hearing all testimony and evidence presented at a public hearing, and tabulating the assessment ballots previously mailed to all record owners of property within the Assessment District. Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council must make the final determination whether or not the assessment spread has been made in direct proportion to the special benefits received by each parcel within the Assessment District. Ballot tabulation will be done at that time and, if a majority of the returned ballots weighted by assessment amount are not in opposition to the Assessment District, the City Council may form the Assessment District. The following sections set forth the methodology used to apportion the costs of the improvements to each parcel. SPECIAL BENEFITS In further making the analysis, it is necessary that the properties receive a special benefit distinguished from general benefits conferred on real property located in the District or to the public at large. 237 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 14 The purpose of this Assessment District is to provide the financing to underground existing overhead electrical, telephone and cable facilities as well as rehabilitate the affected portions of streets and alleys within the District. These facilities are the direct source of service to the properties within the Assessment District. The proposed replacement of existing overhead utility facilities (power, telephone and cable facilities) with underground facilities and removal of the existing utility poles and the overhead wires will provide a special benefit to the parcels connected to and adjacent to, or in near proximity of, the facilities as follows: □ Aesthetics Benefit. This benefit relates to the improved aesthetics of the streetscape due to the removal of overhead wires and utility poles. For the purposes of this report, a street is defined as either a street or alley. The removal of guy wires and other support structures related to the overhead facilities are included in the definition of improved aesthetics. Properties that are directly adjacent to, or in proximity of, overhead facilities receive an aesthetic benefit. This benefit is based on the area of the parcel. □ Safety Benefit. This benefit relates to the additional safety of having the overhead distribution wires placed underground and having the power poles removed, which eliminates the threat of downed utility lines and poles due to wind, rain and other unforeseeable events. Falling facilities can lead to personal injuries and damage to structures, including fire. Furthermore, in compact communities like Hermosa Beach, the negative effects of falling lines and poles are more widespread including blocked driveways and alleys, and property damage due to impact. Properties that are adjacent to, or in proximity of, overhead facilities receive a safety benefit. This benefit is based on the average area of the parcels to be assessed. □ Reliability Benefit. This benefit relates to the enhanced reliability of service from the utilities being underground, due to having all new wires and equipment and having that equipment underground, which reduces the threat of service interruption from downed lines. When compared to overhead systems, fewer outages occur due to various acts of nature, reduced likelihood of corrosion, traffic collisions and obstructions. Properties that are connected to, or have the ability to connect to, the facilities proposed to be undergrounded receive a reliability benefit. This benefit is based upon connecting for each property. The benefit is based on the average area of the parcels to be assessed. By virtue of such special benefits, the proposed improvements will provide a higher level of service, increase the desirability of the properties and will specifically enhance the values of the properties within the Assessment District. Therefore, the proposed improvements are of direct and special benefit to these properties. 238 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 15 The following is a summary of each property with special consideration. Assessment Nos. 64, 80, 81, 82 and 92: the poles, wires, and guy wires to be undergrounded will benefit these properties, but the benefit is reduced by the poles, wires, and guy wires that will remain near the properties. Therefore, these properties will receive a half benefit. Assessment No. 57: the poles, wires, and guy wires to be undergrounded will benefit this property, but the benefit is reduced, as the property is in the back of the unit but gains access to the property from the front of the unit. Therefore, this property will receive a half benefit. GENERAL BENEFITS Section 4 of Article XIIID requires that the general benefits imparted by the utility undergrounding project be separated from the special benefits and that only the special benefit portion of the costs of the project be assessed against those parcels which are identified as receiving special benefits. Separating the general from the special benefits requires an examination of the facts and circumstances of the project and the property being assessed. In this particular assessment district, the streets and alleys along which the existing overhead utility facilities are being undergrounded function as local and collector streets. No other roadways are designated as an arterial, a major arterial or a scenic corridor in the Transportation Element of the City's General Plan. Furthermore, the City has an established network of arterial streets which appear to function as intended to provide for the movement of traffic around and through the community at large without the need to utilize local collector streets for such purposes. Under these circumstances, any use of the streets within the assessment district as ''through" streets is incidental. The properties situated within the assessment district are used almost exclusively as residential. Under this circumstance, the impacts, both visual and safety, are largely isolated to those properties (and the persons who inhabit them) which front on these local streets and alleys, with only incidental impacts on those who visit homes within the assessment district or who pass through the assessment district on trips originating outside the boundary and having a destination outside the boundary. Based on these facts and circumstances, any general benefits to the property within the Assessment District in general, to the surrounding community and to the public at large from the project of undergrounding these local overhead utility facilities on the local streets and alleys, such as to the general public visiting in cars, on bikes or on foot, are incidental and do not exceed five percent (5%) of the estimated project costs. This general benefit portion of the cost is more than offset by the approximate 20% percent utility company contribution. Therefore, the remainder of the project design and construction costs represents the local and special benefits to the parcels within the Assessment District. Because only the net amount of $4,031,600.00 is apportioned to the parcels within the District, no parcel is assessed more than its proportional share of the special benefits from the improvements. 239 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 16 Federal Income Tax Component of Contribution Tax (ITCC) has not been included. The ITCC is a tax assessed whenever private party contributions in aid of construction (CIAC) are made. To date, underground utility districts have not been assessed this tax as underground utility districts are viewed as providing public benefit by increasing community aesthetics and public safety. METHODOLOGY Based upon the findings described above, the special benefit received by the properties within the boundaries of the Assessment District is the conversion from an overhead to an underground utility system resulting in additional safety, enhanced reliability, and improved aesthetics to the adjacent properties. Based on these conditions, it is our conclusion that the improvements specially benefit all assessed properties in the Assessment District. To establish the benefit to the individual parcels within the Assessment District, the highest and best use of each property is considered. For example, a vacant property is considered developed to its highest potential and connected to the system. The more a property is developed, the more it benefits from the proposed improvements. Most of properties within this Assessment District are zoned residential and some have one or two dwelling units on them. There is a direct correlation between the size of a property and the extent to which a property may develop. Because parcel size is one of the main limiting factors for what can be built on a property, or the extent the property is developed, the size of each parcel is used as the base unit for measuring benefit. The area of a condominium is calculated by taking the area of the base parcel and dividing by the number of condominiums. The special benefits from the undergrounding of overhead utilities are categorized into the three (3) distinct benefits identified above. Parcels on the east side of Hermosa Avenue receive a greater aesthetics benefit than the parcels on the west side of Hermosa Avenue by observation in the field and because the removal of overhead wires and utilities impacts these parcels in a greater positive amount as they front these parcels. The parcels on the west side receive a greater safety benefit and reliability benefit because overhead wires and utility poles are adjacent to, or are in close proximity of, these parcels and because they also connect to the new system. It is the opinion of the Assessment Engineer that the benefits on the west side and the east side of Hermosa Avenue are approximately equal in total. Therefore, the assessed benefit for each parcel in the district is equal to the area of the parcel without any other benefit factors applied. 240 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 17 ASSESSMENT APPORTIONMENT Each parcel will be apportioned its fair share of the construction costs based on the Assessed Benefit Area calculated for each property. Incidental Expenses and Financial Costs have been assessed to the entire Assessment District on a prorata basis relative to the total construction cost allocations. The individual assessment calculations are provided in Appendix A. For particulars to the Assessment Roll, reference is made to Table 1 in Part III of this report. In conclusion, it is my opinion that the assessments for the referenced Assessment District have been spread in direct accordance with the special benefits that each parcel receives from the works of improvement. Dated: August 11, 2020 NV5, INC. ________________________ JEFFREY M. COOPER, P.E. R.C.E. No. 31572 ENGINEER OF WORK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA 241 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 18 I, as CITY CLERK of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA do hereby certify that the foregoing Assessment, together with the Diagram attached thereto, was filed in my office on the day of ________2020. CITY CLERK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA I, as CITY CLERK of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA do hereby certify that the foregoing Assessment, together with the Diagram attached thereto, was preliminarily approved by the City Council of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, on _____ day of ______ , 2020. CITY CLERK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA I, as CITY CLERK of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA do hereby certify that the foregoing Assessment, together with the Diagram attached thereto, was approved and confirmed by the City Council of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, on _ day of , 2020. CITY CLERK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA I, as SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA do hereby certify that the foregoing Assessment, together with the Diagram attached thereto, was recorded in my office on day of , 2020. SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA 242 Part IV City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 19 Annual Administrative Assessment A proposed maximum annual administrative assessment shall be levied on each parcel of land and subdivision of land within the Assessment District to pay for necessary costs and expenses incurred by the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, and not otherwise reimbursed, resulting from the administration and collection of assessments, from the administration or registration of any bonds and reserve or other related funds, or both. The maximum assessment is authorized pursuant to the provisions of Section 10204(£) of the Streets and Highways Code and shall not exceed 100 dollars ($100) per parcel per year, subject to an annual increase based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI), during the preceding year ending in January, for all Urban Consumers in the Los Angeles, Riverside, and Orange County areas. The exact amount of the administration charge will be established each year by the Superintendent of Streets. This administration assessment is separate from, and in addition to, (a) the per-parcel collection fee that may be added to each annual assessment under California Streets and Highways Code Sections 8682 (to cover expenses of collection) and 8682.1 (to cover bond administration costs), and (b) any fees payable to the City in connection with Assessment prepayments after the issuance of Bonds, apportionment of Assessments to reflect parcels splits or parcel mergers, and late charges and penalties for delinquent Assessment installments. The annual administrative assessment will be collected in the same manner and in the same installments as the assessment levied to pay for the cost of the works of improvement. 243 Part V City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 20 Diagram of Assessment A reduced copy of the Assessment Diagram is attached hereto. Full-sized copies of the Boundary Map and Assessment Diagram are on file in the Office of the City Clerk, of the City of Hermosa Beach. As required by the Act, the Assessment Diagram shows the exterior boundaries of the Assessment District and the assessment number assigned to each parcel of land corresponding to its number as it appears in the Assessment Roll contained in Part III Table I. The Assessor's Parcel Number is also shown for each parcel as they existed at the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention and reference is hereby made to the Assessor's Parcel Maps of the County of Los Angeles for the boundaries and dimensions of each parcel of land. 244 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 21 245 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 22 246 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 23 247 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 24 Part VI Description of Facilities Section 10100 of the Act provides for the legislative body of any municipality to finance certain capital facilities and services within or along its streets or any public way or easement. The following is a list of proposed improvements as allowed under the Act to be installed, or improved under the provisions of the Act, including the acquisition of required right-of-way and/or property. For the general location of the improvements to be constructed referenced is hereby made to the Plans and Specifications described in Part I of this report. The following improvements are proposed to be constructed and installed in the general location referred to as Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District. 1. Acquisition of any required easements or rights-of-way. 2. Construction of mainline underground power, telephone and cable conduit, with appurtenant manholes and pullboxes, and installation of cabling, wiring and other facilities. 3. Construction of service conduit laterals to the property line and appurtenances. 4. Removal of overhead resident service drops. 5. Removal of existing utility poles. The improvements will be designed by the Southern California Edison Company, Charter and Frontier. The utility companies will be responsible for inspecting the work for their facilities and the City of Hermosa Beach will inspect the work to ensure conformance to City standards and specifications where applicable. The Utilities will also construct additional pavement rehabilitation as needed for the project. Once completed, the underground facilities will become the property and responsibility of Southern California Edison Company, Charter, and Frontier. Each owner of property located within the Assessment District will be responsible for arranging for and paying for work on his or her property necessary to connect facilities constructed by the public utilities in the public streets and alleys to the points of connection on the private property. Conversion of individual service connections on private property is not included in the work done by the Assessment District. The estimated time for completion of the undergrounding of the utilities is 12 months after the sale of bonds. Property owners will be required to provide necessary underground connections within 150 days of the completion of the underground facilities. 248 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 25 Failure to convert individual service connections on private property may result in a recommendation to the City Council that the public utilities be directed to discontinue service to that property pursuant to Section 13.08.110 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code. Overhead facilities cannot be removed until all overhead service has been discontinued. 249 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 26 Right-of -Way Certificate STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH The undersigned hereby CERTIFIES UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY that the following is all true and correct. That at all time herein mentioned, the undersigned was, and now is, the authorized representative of the duly appointed SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA. That there have now been instituted proceedings under the provisions of Article XIIID of the California Constitution, and the "Municipal Improvements Act of 1913," being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the construction of certain public improvements in a special assessment district known and designated as Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"). THE UNDERSIGNED STATES AND CERTIFIES AS FOLLOWS: All easements or right-of-way necessary for the construction and installation of the public improvements of the Assessment District either have been obtained or are in process of being obtained and will be obtained and in the possession of the affected utility company, the City, the County of Los Angeles or the State of California prior to commencement of the construction and installation of such public improvements. EXECUTED this _ day of , 2020 at CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, California. SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH State of California By: _ ___________ ____________, PE 250 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 27 Certificate of Completion of Environmental Proceedings STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH The undersigned, under penalty of perjury, CERTIFIES as follows: 1. That I am the person who authorized to prepare and process all environmental documentation as needed as it relates to the formation of the special Assessment District being formed pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913" being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said special Assessment District known and designated as Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"). 2. The specific environmental proceedings relating to this Assessment District that have been completed are as follows: CEQA compliance review: The proposed project is Categorically Exempt (Class 2) from the provisions of CEQA (replacement or reconstructions). 3. I do hereby certify that all environmental evaluation proceedings necessary for the formation of the Assessment District have been completed to my satisfaction, and that no further environmental proceedings are necessary. EXECUTED this day of , 2020 at CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, California. By: _ __________ ___________ CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA 251 City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 28 APPENDIX A. Assessment Calculations 252 ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 29 Property Address Asmt No. Assessor's Parcel Number Parcel Area (sf) Total Construction Costs Incidental Expenses Financial Costs Preliminary Total Assessment 3417 HERMOSA AVE 1 4181-034-002 2,837 34,709.20$ 4,714.53$ 1,896.06$ 41,319.79$ 3411 THE STRAND 2 4181-034-001 1,948 23,832.75$ 3,237.19$ 1,301.91$ 28,371.86$ 3410 THE STRAND 3 4181-034-007 1,657 20,272.52$ 2,753.61$ 1,107.43$ 24,133.56$ 3405 THE STRAND 4 4181-034-008 2,351 28,763.25$ 3,906.90$ 1,571.25$ 34,241.39$ 3330 THE STRAND 5 4181-034-009 2,083 25,484.41$ 3,461.53$ 1,392.14$ 30,338.08$ 3320 THE STRAND 6 4181-035-001 2,144 26,230.71$ 3,562.90$ 1,432.91$ 31,226.52$ 3318 THE STRAND 7 4181-035-002 2,177 26,634.45$ 3,617.74$ 1,454.96$ 31,707.15$ 3310 THE STRAND 8 4181-035-003 2,222 27,185.00$ 3,692.52$ 1,485.04$ 32,362.56$ 3301 HERMOSA AVE 9 4181-035-004 4,584 56,082.82$ 7,617.70$ 3,063.64$ 66,764.16$ 3233 THE STRAND 10 4181-035-005 2,345 28,689.84$ 3,896.92$ 1,567.24$ 34,154.01$ 3231 THE STRAND 11 4181-035-006 2,404 29,411.67$ 3,994.97$ 1,606.67$ 35,013.32$ 3222 THE STRAND 12 4181-035-007 2,443 29,888.82$ 4,059.78$ 1,632.74$ 35,581.34$ 3220 THE STRAND 13 4181-035-008 2,476 30,292.56$ 4,114.62$ 1,654.79$ 36,061.97$ 3207 HERMOSA AVE 14 4181-035-009 2,527 30,916.51$ 4,199.37$ 1,688.88$ 36,804.76$ 3205 THE STRAND 15 4181-035-010 2,560 31,320.25$ 4,254.21$ 1,710.93$ 37,285.40$ 3133 THE STRAND 16 4181-035-011 2,633 32,213.37$ 4,375.52$ 1,759.72$ 38,348.61$ 3129 THE STRAND 17 4181-035-025 2,683 32,825.09$ 4,458.61$ 1,793.14$ 39,076.84$ 3124 THE STRAND 18 4181-035-014 2,724 33,326.70$ 4,526.75$ 1,820.54$ 39,673.99$ 3116 THE STRAND 19 4181-035-015 2,766 33,840.55$ 4,596.54$ 1,848.61$ 40,285.71$ 3108 THE STRAND 20 4181-035-016 2,813 34,415.57$ 4,674.65$ 1,880.02$ 40,970.24$ 3104 THE STRAND 21 4181-035-017 2,846 34,819.31$ 4,729.49$ 1,902.08$ 41,450.87$ 3100 THE STRAND 22 4181-035-018 2,887 35,320.92$ 4,797.62$ 1,929.48$ 42,048.02$ 3035 THE STRAND 23 4181-035-019 2,936 35,920.41$ 4,879.05$ 1,962.23$ 42,761.69$ 3033 THE STRAND 24 4181-035-020 4,485 54,871.61$ 7,453.18$ 2,997.47$ 65,322.27$ 3031 THE STRAND 25 4181-035-021 4,586 56,107.29$ 7,621.02$ 3,064.98$ 66,793.29$ 3007 THE STRAND 26 4181-035-022 3,103 37,963.57$ 5,156.57$ 2,073.84$ 45,193.98$ 3003 THE STRAND 27 4181-035-030 3,999 48,925.66$ 6,645.54$ 2,672.66$ 58,243.87$ 3001 THE STRAND 28 4181-035-029 3,961 48,460.75$ 6,582.40$ 2,647.27$ 57,690.41$ 2930 THE STRAND 29 4181-035-024 4,900 59,948.92$ 8,142.83$ 3,274.83$ 71,366.58$ 2918 THE STRAND 30 4181-036-001 3,562 43,579.19$ 5,919.34$ 2,380.60$ 51,879.13$ 2909 THE STRAND 31 4181-036-002 6,595 80,686.35$ 10,959.58$ 4,407.66$ 96,053.59$ 2840 THE STRAND 32 4181-036-015 3,475 42,514.79$ 5,774.76$ 2,322.46$ 50,612.01$ 2838 THE STRAND 33 4181-036-005 3,536 43,261.10$ 5,876.13$ 2,363.23$ 51,500.45$ 2831 HERMOSA AVE 34 4181-036-006 3,552 43,456.85$ 5,902.72$ 2,373.92$ 51,733.49$ 2826 THE STRAND 35 4181-036-007 4,618 56,498.80$ 7,674.20$ 3,086.36$ 67,259.36$ 2810 THE STRAND 36 4181-036-008 4,530 55,422.16$ 7,527.96$ 3,027.55$ 65,977.67$ 2806 THE STRAND 37 4181-036-009 5,317 65,050.69$ 8,835.80$ 3,553.53$ 77,440.02$ 2800 THE STRAND 38 4181-036-010 3,617 44,252.09$ 6,010.74$ 2,417.36$ 52,680.19$ 2728 THE STRAND 39 4181-036-011 5,452 66,702.35$ 9,060.14$ 3,643.75$ 79,406.24$ 2724 THE STRAND 40 4181-036-013 5,454 66,726.82$ 9,063.47$ 3,645.09$ 79,435.37$ 2702 THE STRAND 41 4181-036-014 5,734 70,152.47$ 9,528.77$ 3,832.22$ 83,513.46$ 2666 THE STRAND 42 4181-037-010 4,380 53,586.99$ 7,278.69$ 2,927.30$ 63,792.98$ 2654 THE STRAND 43 4181-037-009 2,597 31,772.93$ 4,315.70$ 1,735.66$ 37,824.29$ 2652 THE STRAND 44 4181-037-008 2,632 32,201.13$ 4,373.86$ 1,759.05$ 38,334.05$ 2648 THE STRAND 45 4181-037-007 2,685 32,849.56$ 4,461.94$ 1,794.47$ 39,105.97$ 2642 THE STRAND 46 4181-037-006 2,738 33,497.99$ 4,550.01$ 1,829.90$ 39,877.90$ 2634 THE STRAND 47 4181-037-005 2,775 33,950.66$ 4,611.50$ 1,854.62$ 40,416.79$ 2630 THE STRAND 48 4181-037-004 2,824 34,550.15$ 4,692.93$ 1,887.37$ 41,130.45$ 2621 HERMOSA AVE 49 4181-037-003 2,871 35,125.17$ 4,771.03$ 1,918.78$ 41,814.99$ 2617 HERMOSA AVE 50 4181-037-002 2,935 35,908.18$ 4,877.39$ 1,961.56$ 42,747.12$ 253 ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS City of Hermosa Beach Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 30 Property Address Asmt No. Assessor's Parcel Number Parcel Area (sf) Total Construction Costs Incidental Expenses Financial Costs Preliminary Total Assessment 2601 HERMOSA AVE 51 4181-037-001 5,992 73,308.96$ 9,957.52$ 4,004.65$ 87,271.13$ 2626 HERMOSA AVE 52 4181-025-013 2,495 30,525.01$ 4,146.20$ 1,667.49$ 36,338.70$ 2640 HERMOSA AVE 53 4181-025-022 616 7,536.44$ 1,023.67$ 411.69$ 8,971.80$ 2640 HERMOSA AVE 54 4181-025-023 616 7,536.44$ 1,023.67$ 411.69$ 8,971.80$ 2640 HERMOSA AVE 55 4181-025-024 616 7,536.44$ 1,023.67$ 411.69$ 8,971.80$ 2640 HERMOSA AVE 56 4181-025-025 616 7,536.44$ 1,023.67$ 411.69$ 8,971.80$ 2640 HERMOSA AVE 57 4181-025-026 616 3,768.22$ 511.83$ 205.85$ 4,485.90$ * 2640 HERMOSA AVE 58 4181-025-027 616 7,536.44$ 1,023.67$ 411.69$ 8,971.80$ 2640 HERMOSA AVE 59 4181-025-028 616 7,536.44$ 1,023.67$ 411.69$ 8,971.80$ 2643 PALM DRIVE 60 4181-025-003 2,008 24,566.82$ 3,336.90$ 1,342.01$ 29,245.73$ Not Used 61 N/A 0 -$ -$ -$ -$ 2650 HERMOSA AVE 62 4181-025-001 1,162 14,216.46$ 1,931.01$ 776.60$ 16,924.07$ Not Used 63 N/A 0 -$ -$ -$ -$ 2704 HERMOSA AVE 64 4181-026-018 1,351 8,264.39$ 1,122.55$ 451.46$ 9,838.39$ * 2712 HERMOSA AVE 65 4181-026-005 2,550 31,197.91$ 4,237.59$ 1,704.25$ 37,139.75$ 2716 HERMOSA AVE 66 4181-026-004 2,560 31,320.25$ 4,254.21$ 1,710.93$ 37,285.40$ 2722 HERMOSA AVE 67 4181-026-003 2,552 31,222.38$ 4,240.92$ 1,705.59$ 37,168.88$ 2728 HERMOSA AVE 68 4181-026-002 2,552 31,222.38$ 4,240.92$ 1,705.59$ 37,168.88$ 2732 HERMOSA AVE 69 4181-026-001 2,558 31,295.78$ 4,250.89$ 1,709.60$ 37,256.27$ 2804 HERMOSA AVE 70 4181-027-006 2,546 31,148.97$ 4,230.95$ 1,701.58$ 37,081.49$ 2812 HERMOSA AVE 71 4181-027-005 2,561 31,332.49$ 4,255.87$ 1,711.60$ 37,299.96$ 2818 HERMOSA AVE 72 4181-027-004 2,548 31,173.44$ 4,234.27$ 1,702.91$ 37,110.62$ 2824 HERMOSA AVE 73 4181-027-003 2,558 31,295.78$ 4,250.89$ 1,709.60$ 37,256.27$ 2828 HERMOSA AVE 74 4181-027-002 2,553 31,234.61$ 4,242.58$ 1,706.25$ 37,183.44$ 2836 HERMOSA AVE 75 4181-027-001 2,559 31,308.02$ 4,252.55$ 1,710.26$ 37,270.83$ 2902 HERMOSA AVE 76 4181-028-005 2,981 36,470.96$ 4,953.83$ 1,992.30$ 43,417.10$ 2910 HERMOSA AVE 77 4181-028-004 2,969 36,324.15$ 4,933.89$ 1,984.28$ 43,242.32$ 2920 HERMOSA AVE 78 4181-028-003 2,984 36,507.67$ 4,958.82$ 1,994.31$ 43,460.79$ 2924 HERMOSA AVE 79 4181-028-002 2,981 36,470.96$ 4,953.83$ 1,992.30$ 43,417.10$ 2930 HERMOSA AVE 80 4181-028-017 1,532 9,371.61$ 1,272.94$ 511.94$ 11,156.49$ * 2934 HERMOSA AVE 81 4181-028-018 1,532 9,371.61$ 1,272.94$ 511.94$ 11,156.49$ * 3002 HERMOSA AVE 82 4181-029-005 2,384 14,583.49$ 1,980.87$ 796.65$ 17,361.01$ * 3010 HERMOSA AVE 83 4181-029-004 2,404 29,411.67$ 3,994.97$ 1,606.67$ 35,013.32$ 3018 HERMOSA AVE 84 4181-029-003 2,408 29,460.61$ 4,001.62$ 1,609.35$ 35,071.58$ 3022 HERMOSA AVE 85 4181-029-002 2,405 29,423.91$ 3,996.63$ 1,607.34$ 35,027.88$ 3026 HERMOSA AVE 86 4181-029-001 2,396 29,313.80$ 3,981.68$ 1,601.33$ 34,896.80$ 3104 HERMOSA AVE 87 4181-030-005 2,401 29,374.97$ 3,989.99$ 1,604.67$ 34,969.62$ 3112 HERMOSA AVE 88 4181-030-004 2,409 29,472.85$ 4,003.28$ 1,610.01$ 35,086.14$ 3116 HERMOSA AVE 89 4181-030-003 2,401 29,374.97$ 3,989.99$ 1,604.67$ 34,969.62$ 3122 HERMOSA AVE 90 4181-030-002 2,410 29,485.08$ 4,004.94$ 1,610.68$ 35,100.71$ 3130 HERMOSA AVE 91 4181-030-001 2,389 29,228.16$ 3,970.04$ 1,596.65$ 34,794.85$ 115 LONGFELLOW AVE 92 4181-031-005 2,545 15,568.37$ 2,114.64$ 850.45$ 18,533.46$ * 3206 HERMOSA AVE 93 4181-031-004 2,552 31,222.38$ 4,240.92$ 1,705.59$ 37,168.88$ 3216 HERMOSA AVE 94 4181-031-003 2,553 31,234.61$ 4,242.58$ 1,706.25$ 37,183.44$ 3224 HERMOSA AVE 95 4181-031-002 4,247 51,959.81$ 7,057.67$ 2,838.41$ 61,855.89$ 3232 HERMOSA AVE 96 4181-031-001 3,400 41,597.21$ 5,650.13$ 2,272.33$ 49,519.67$ 3302 HERMOSA AVE 97 4181-032-005 2,964 36,262.98$ 4,925.58$ 1,980.94$ 43,169.50$ 3312 HERMOSA AVE 98 4181-032-004 2,554 31,246.84$ 4,244.24$ 1,706.92$ 37,198.01$ 3316 HERMOSA AVE 99 4181-032-003 2,554 31,246.84$ 4,244.24$ 1,706.92$ 37,198.01$ 3324 HERMOSA AVE 100 4181-032-016 5,519 67,522.06$ 9,171.48$ 3,688.53$ 80,382.07$ 111 34TH STREET 101 4181-033-019 2,538 31,051.09$ 4,217.65$ 1,696.23$ 36,964.98$ 281,788.00 3,386,600.00$ 460,000.00$ 185,000.00$ 4,031,600.00$ *Benefit reduced by half due to special considerations. Please see report for details. 254 NV5, Inc. 163 Technology Drive, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 585-0477 Jeffrey M. Cooper, PE Director of Infrastructure NV5 O: (949) 585-0477 Jeff.Cooper@nv5.com 255 NOTICE OF City Clerk PROPOSED NEW ASSESSMENTS City of Hermosa Beach and 1315 Valley Drive ASSESSMENT BALLOT Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 for the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Assessment No. ___ Assessor Parcel No. ____________ ASSESSMENT BALLOT:  IN FAVOR OF ASSESSMENT  OPPOSE ASSESSMENT Property Owner of Record: _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that I am the record owner, or the authorized representative of the record owner, of the parcel identified on this ballot. Proposed Assessment $________________ Signature of Record Property Owner Detach here, fold, seal in the provided envelope, and mail to the City Clerk at the above address - See Part 4 below - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH GIVES NOTICE that: 1. Purpose of Assessments The City is proposing to levy new assessments in the above Assessment District that includes your property. The purpose of the assessments is to fund the costs of installation of new, underground facilities to replace existing overhead utility lines, making all acquisitions and doing all work auxiliary to any of the work, acquisitions and improvements previously described and that are necessary to complete the same, and all related administrative and incidental costs, including the costs of forming the Assessment District. 2. About the Assessments. The total of all the assessments for the whole Assessment District is $4,031,600. The proposed assessment for your property is shown above. See the enclosed “Method of Assessment” for the way the proposed assessment is allocated. Please read it carefully. If the assessments are confirmed, the unpaid assessments, unless paid in cash, will continue to be collected against the properties in the Assessment District, including your property, on the property tax bill as long as needed to pay installments of principal and interest on the proposed bonds. If the assessment lien is confirmed, you will receive new notices telling you of your option to pay all or part of the final assessment lien in cash or allow it to go to bond over a period of not more than 40 years. Your annual installment payment will include repayment of a portion of the assessment lien amount shown above, plus interest, plus administrative charges. The above assessment does not include the cost of connecting your property to the new, underground system because those costs will vary with each property. 3. Public Hearing. Before taking final action on the proposed Assessment District and the assessments, the City Council will hold a Public Hearing at the Council Chambers, City Hall, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California, on Tuesday, October 13, 2020, at the hour of 6:30 p.m., to take final public testimony and hear protests. At this meeting the Assessment Ballots will be tabulated, the results will be announced, and the City Council will take final action on the assessments. 4. Assessment Ballot. Anytime before the end of the Public Hearing, you may submit the Assessment Ballot, which is the top of this Notice, to the City Clerk. To do so: cut off the Ballot portion above; mark the Ballot either “In Favor of Assessment” or “Opposed to Assessment;” sign the Ballot; fold and seal the Ballot in the enclosed return envelope; and mail or deliver it to the City Clerk. If you do not use the envelope provided, the return envelope used should have the words “OFFICIAL BALLOT ENCLOSED -- ASSESSMENT BALLOT -- DO NOT OPEN UNTIL PUBLIC HEARING” printed on the outside. The Ballot may be submitted, changed or withdrawn at any time before the end of the Public Hearing. If you need a replacement Ballot, call the “Contact Person” below. Any Ballot returned unmarked or unsigned, or not enclosed in a sealed envelope that conceals its contents, or not received by the City Clerk before the end of the public hearing, will be rejected and not counted. The assessment cannot be imposed if the Ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment exceed the Ballots submitted in favor of the assessment, with each Ballot weighted according to the dollar amount of the proposed assessment on property to which that Ballot relates. 5. Contact Person. For more information contact: Lucho Rodriguez, Deputy City Engineer, City of Hermosa Beach, City Hall, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254; telephone: (310) 318-0210; e-mail: lrodriguez@hermosabeach.gov. The Engineer’s Report, assessment diagram and other written material about the Assessment District, due to COVID-19 and closure of City Hall, are available for review the city’s website at https://www.hermosabeach.gov/greenwichuuad. Dated as of August 12, 2020 City Clerk, City of Hermosa Beach 256 EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District METHOD OF ASSESSMENT SPREAD (Attached) 257 City of Hermosa Beach Underground Utility Assessment District “Greenwich Village” Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 13 Exhibit 1 Method and Formula of Assessment Spread Since the improvements are to be funded by the levying of assessments, the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913" and Article XIIID of the State Constitution require that assessments must be based on the special benefit that the properties receive from the works of improvement. In addition, Section 4 of Article XIIID of the State Constitution requires that a parcel's assessment may not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel. Section 4 provides that only special benefits are assessable and the local agency levying the assessment must separate the general benefits from the special benefits. It also provides that parcels within a district that are owned or used by any public agency, the State of California, or the United States shall not be exempt from assessment unless the agency can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that those publicly owned parcels in fact receive no special benefit. Neither the Act nor the State Constitution specifies the method or formula that should be used to apportion the costs to properties in any special assessment district proceedings. The responsibility for recommending an apportionment of the costs to properties which specially benefit from the improvements rests with the Assessment Engineer, who is appointed for the purpose of making an analysis of the facts and determining the correct apportionment of the assessment obligation. In order to apportion the assessments to each parcel in direct proportion with the special benefit which it will receive from the improvements, an analysis has been completed and is used as the basis for apportioning costs to each property within the Assessment District. Based upon an analysis of the special benefit to be received by each parcel from the construction of the works of improvement, the Assessment Engineer recommends the apportionment of costs as outlined below. The final authority and action rests with the City Council after hearing all testimony and evidence presented at a public hearing, and tabulating the assessment ballots previously mailed to all record owners of property within the Assessment District. Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council must make the final determination whether or not the assessment spread has been made in direct proportion to the special benefits received by each parcel within the Assessment District. Ballot tabulation will be done at that time and, if a majority of the returned ballots weighted by assessment amount are not in opposition to the Assessment District, the City Council may form the Assessment District. The following sections set forth the methodology used to apportion the costs of the improvements to each parcel. SPECIAL BENEFITS In further making the analysis, it is necessary that the properties receive a special benefit distinguished from general benefits conferred on real property located in the District or to the public at large. 258 City of Hermosa Beach Underground Utility Assessment District “Greenwich Village” Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 14 The purpose of this Assessment District is to provide the financing to underground existing overhead electrical, telephone and cable facilities as well as rehabilitate the affected portions of streets and alleys within the District. These facilities are the direct source of service to the properties within the Assessment District. The proposed replacement of existing overhead utility facilities (power, telephone and cable facilities) with underground facilities and removal of the existing utility poles and the overhead wires will provide a special benefit to the parcels connected to and adjacent to, or in near proximity of, the facilities as follows: □ Aesthetics Benefit. This benefit relates to the improved aesthetics of the streetscape due to the removal of overhead wires and utility poles. For the purposes of this report, a street is defined as either a street or alley. The removal of guy wires and other support structures related to the overhead facilities are included in the definition of improved aesthetics. Properties that are directly adjacent to, or in proximity of, overhead facilities receive an aesthetic benefit. This benefit is based on the area of the parcel. □ Safety Benefit. This benefit relates to the additional safety of having the overhead distribution wires placed underground and having the power poles removed, which eliminates the threat of downed utility lines and poles due to wind, rain and other unforeseeable events. Falling facilities can lead to personal injuries and damage to structures, including fire. Furthermore, in compact communities like Hermosa Beach, the negative effects of falling lines and poles are more widespread including blocked driveways and alleys, and property damage due to impact. Properties that are adjacent to, or in proximity of, overhead facilities receive a safety benefit. This benefit is based on the average area of the parcels to be assessed. □ Reliability Benefit. This benefit relates to the enhanced reliability of service from the utilities being underground, due to having all new wires and equipment and having that equipment underground, which reduces the threat of service interruption from downed lines. When compared to overhead systems, fewer outages occur due to various acts of nature, reduced likelihood of corrosion, traffic collisions and obstructions. Properties that are connected to, or have the ability to connect to, the facilities proposed to be undergrounded receive a reliability benefit. This benefit is based upon connecting for each property. The benefit is based on the average area of the parcels to be assessed. By virtue of such special benefits, the proposed improvements will provide a higher level of service, increase the desirability of the properties and will specifically enhance the values of the properties within the Assessment District. Therefore, the proposed improvements are of direct and special benefit to these properties. 259 City of Hermosa Beach Underground Utility Assessment District “Greenwich Village” Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 15 The following is a summary of each property with special consideration. Assessment Nos. 64, 80, 81, 82 and 92: the poles, wires, and guy wires to be undergrounded will benefit these properties, but the benefit is reduced by the poles, wires, and guy wires that will remain near the properties. Therefore, these properties will receive a half benefit. Assessment No. 57: the poles, wires, and guy wires to be undergrounded will benefit this property, but the benefit is reduced, as the property is in the back of the unit but gains access to the property from the front of the unit. Therefore, this property will receive a half benefit. GENERAL BENEFITS Section 4 of Article XIIID requires that the general benefits imparted by the utility undergrounding project be separated from the special benefits and that only the special benefit portion of the costs of the project be assessed against those parcels which are identified as receiving special benefits. Separating the general from the special benefits requires an examination of the facts and circumstances of the project and the property being assessed. In this particular assessment district, the streets and alleys along which the existing overhead utility facilities are being undergrounded function as local and collector streets. No other roadways are designated as an arterial, a major arterial or a scenic corridor in the Transportation Element of the City's General Plan. Furthermore, the City has an established network of arterial streets which appear to function as intended to provide for the movement of traffic around and through the community at large without the need to utilize local collector streets for such purposes. Under these circumstances, any use of the streets within the assessment district as ''through" streets is incidental. The properties situated within the assessment district are used almost exclusively as residential. Under this circumstance, the impacts, both visual and safety, are largely isolated to those properties (and the persons who inhabit them) which front on these local streets and alleys, with only incidental impacts on those who visit homes within the assessment district or who pass through the assessment district on trips originating outside the boundary and having a destination outside the boundary. Based on these facts and circumstances, any general benefits to the property within the Assessment District in general, to the surrounding community and to the public at large from the project of undergrounding these local overhead utility facilities on the local streets and alleys, such as to the general public visiting in cars, on bikes or on foot, are incidental and do not exceed five percent (5%) of the estimated project costs. This general benefit portion of the cost is more than offset by the approximate 20% percent utility company contribution. Therefore, the remainder of the project design and construction costs represents the local and special benefits to the parcels within the Assessment District. Because only the net amount of $4,031,600.00 is apportioned to the parcels within the District, no parcel is assessed more than its proportional share of the special benefits from the improvements. 260 City of Hermosa Beach Underground Utility Assessment District “Greenwich Village” Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 16 Federal Income Tax Component of Contribution Tax (ITCC) has not been included. The ITCC is a tax assessed whenever private party contributions in aid of construction (CIAC) are made. To date, underground utility districts have not been assessed this tax as underground utility districts are viewed as providing public benefit by increasing community aesthetics and public safety. METHODOLOGY Based upon the findings described above, the special benefit received by the properties within the boundaries of the Assessment District is the conversion from an overhead to an underground utility system resulting in additional safety, enhanced reliability, and improved aesthetics to the adjacent properties. Based on these conditions, it is our conclusion that the improvements specially benefit all assessed properties in the Assessment District. To establish the benefit to the individual parcels within the Assessment District, the highest and best use of each property is considered. For example, a vacant property is considered developed to its highest potential and connected to the system. The more a property is developed, the more it benefits from the proposed improvements. Most of properties within this Assessment District are zoned residential and some have one or two dwelling units on them. There is a direct correlation between the size of a property and the extent to which a property may develop. Because parcel size is one of the main limiting factors for what can be built on a property, or the extent the property is developed, the size of each parcel is used as the base unit for measuring benefit. The area of a condominium is calculated by taking the area of the base parcel and dividing by the number of condominiums. The special benefits from the undergrounding of overhead utilities are categorized into the three (3) distinct benefits identified above. Parcels on the east side of Hermosa Avenue receive a greater aesthetics benefit than the parcels on the west side of Hermosa Avenue by observation in the field and because the removal of overhead wires and utilities impacts these parcels in a greater positive amount as they front these parcels. The parcels on the west side receive a greater safety benefit and reliability benefit because overhead wires and utility poles are adjacent to, or are in close proximity of, these parcels and because they also connect to the new system. It is the opinion of the Assessment Engineer that the benefits on the west side and the east side of Hermosa Avenue are approximately equal in total. Therefore, the assessed benefit for each parcel in the district is equal to the area of the parcel without any other benefit factors applied. 261 City of Hermosa Beach Underground Utility Assessment District “Greenwich Village” Preliminary Engineer's Report August 11, 2020 | 17 ASSESSMENT APPORTIONMENT Each parcel will be apportioned its fair share of the construction costs based on the Assessed Benefit Area calculated for each property. Incidental Expenses and Financial Costs have been assessed to the entire Assessment District on a prorata basis relative to the total construction cost allocations. The individual assessment calculations are provided in Appendix A. For particulars to the Assessment Roll, reference is made to Table 1 in Part III of this report. In conclusion, it is my opinion that the assessments for the referenced Assessment District have been spread in direct accordance with the special benefits that each parcel receives from the works of improvement. Dated: August 11, 2020 NV5, INC. JEFFREY M. COOPER, P.E. R.C.E. No. 31572 ENGINEER OF WORK CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA 262 City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-3885 City of Hermosa Beach Web Site: https://www.hermosabeach.gov/ August 12, 2020 Property Owner Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District Hermosa Beach, California RE: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PROPOSED GREENWICH VILLAGE NORTH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Dear Property Owner: The City of Hermosa Beach works cooperatively with property owners who wish to form special assessment districts to create improvement projects in their neighborhoods. At the request of property owners within your neighborhood, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach has initiated proceedings to consider the formation of an assessment district, designated as the Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District (the “Assessment District”), to finance conversion of the overhead electrical and communication facilities to underground locations with appurtenant work in connection therewith (the “Project”). These improvements are a special benefit to the properties within the boundaries of the proposed Assessment District. As part of these proceedings, the City Council will hold a public hearing and conduct an assessment ballot procedure on the formation of the assessment district (i.e., count all returned ballots received by the deadline and determine whether the Assessment District can be formed). If the Assessment District is formed and assessments levied, the Assessment District will finance the Project. Property owned by you is specially benefited by the improvements and is within the boundaries of the Assessment District. The amount of the proposed assessment for your parcel is shown on the enclosed Official Ballot. If the Assessment District is formed, you will be given the opportunity to pay your assessment as a lump sum by November 13, 2020, or annually plus interest over a period current estimated to be approximately 20 years. Please note that the assessment amount does not include the undergrounding work necessary to connect the utilities from the public right-of-way to your home or structure or any other improvements that may be required as part of this work. You will be responsible for such costs in addition to the assessment amount. The assessment only covers the public right-of-way portion of the project. The City Council has scheduled a public hearing to receive testimony either in favor of or in opposition to the proposed assessment. The public hearing will be PACKAGE CONTENTS Enclosed in this package you will find the following documents to assist you as the record owner in exercising your right to submit an assessment ballot regarding this proposed assessment: 1. Notice of Public Hearing and Official Property Owner Assessment Ballot (the OFFICIAL BALLOT) 2. Assessment Ballot Procedures 3. Self-addressed Return Envelope 4. Boundary Map 263 held at the City Council Chambers, 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California on Tuesday, October 13th, at 6:30 p.m. Enclosed with this letter you will find a copy of the Official Ballot, which constitutes the formal legal notice of this public hearing. The Official Ballot (a) contains important information regarding the rights of the record owners of property located within the proposed Assessment District to be heard regarding the formation of the proposed Assessment District and the imposition of assessments, and (b) is the official ballot for property owners to express their support of or opposition to the formation of the Assessment District and levy of assessments by submitting a signed, dated and marked Assessment Ballot to be received by the City Clerk no later than the close of the Public Hearing. . It is recommended that you read the entire Official Ballot carefully. The Official Ballot contains important information regarding the procedure for submitting the Official Ballot. The City will be authorized to form the Assessment District and impose the assessments only if a majority of the Official Ballots submitted are in favor of the levy of the assessments. The Official Ballots will be weighted based upon the amount of the assessment proposed to be levied against individual parcels. THEREFORE, WHETHER YOU ARE IN FAVOR OF OR OPPOSED TO THE ASSESSMENT, IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT ALL RECORD OWNERS COMPLETE AND SUBMIT THEIR OFFICIAL BALLOTS TO THE CITY SO THAT YOUR SUPPORT OF OR OPPOSITION TO THE ASSESSMENT WILL BE TABULATED. In order for your Official Ballot to be tabulated, it must be completed as described on the official ballot and RECEIVED on October 13, 2020 either by mail by 5:00 p.m., or in person prior to the close of the Public Hearing, at the address of the City Clerk, at the address set forth in the Official Ballot and shown in the sidebar to this letter. POSTMARKED PROPERTY OWNER ASSESSMENT BALLOTS NOT RECEIVED BY 5:00 p.m. ON THE DAY OF THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AND COUNTED. The Public Works Department has scheduled an informational Public Meeting (see sidebar) at which time detailed questions may be asked about the assessment calculations, the project in general or about your specific property. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, the assessment ballot, or the assessment ballot procedures, you may contact Lucho Rodriguez, Deputy City Engineer, at (310) 318-0210. Very truly yours, Marnell Gibson Marnell Gibson, Director of Public Works City of Hermosa Beach PUBLIC HEARING October 13, 2020 6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 BALLOTS MUST BE RETURNED TO City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 and RECEIVED on October 13, 2020 By 5:00 p.m. if submitting by mail -0r- By the close of the Public Hearing if delivered in person INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC MEETING Zoom Meeting Details for the virtual meeting can be found at: https://www.hermosabeach.gov/ greenwichuuad Thursday, September 10, 2020 5:30 pm – 7:00 pm 264 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS August 4, 2020 Ms. Vicki Patman 3010 Hermosa Ave. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Via E-mail: VPatman1@verizon.net Mr. James Anderson 3018 Hermosa Ave. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Via E-mail: JAnderson@andpacllc.com Dear Ms. Patman and Mr. Anderson: Subject: Acknowledgement of Design Costs for the Proposed Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District (District) The City of Hermosa Beach is requiring that the property owners within the boundary of the proposed subject matter District pay for design of the project. We are writing to notify you as the primary representatives that once the District is created, the utility companies involved will require the following payment amounts up-front in order to begin the design process: Crown Castle $10,000 Frontier $40,000 SCE $135,000 Total $185,000 Please note that these amounts are all estimates as provided by each company and that fees could be increased should any of the utility companies determine that their actual costs exceed these estimates. We will be working with you to develop an agreement with all of the details of the terms for the deposit of funds to pay for these up-front design costs, and this agreement will be presented to the City Council at the meeting for the public hearing, which will also be the meeting where the assessment ballots are opened and counted. If the ballots are in favor, the District may be formed by the City Council. However, as we prepare for the next meeting at which the City Council will establish the public hearing date, we are seeking acknowledgment from you (as the representatives of the District) that you have City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California 90254-3885 265 been notified of the amount and up-front payment requirement to initiate design should the District be formed. Please note that all amounts deposited will be refunded from the proceeds of the bonds if the District is successfully formed, which will be memorialized (along with further details) through an agreement with the property owners, and there is no obligation to pay these fees if the District is not formed. Please sign below acknowledging the up-front amount that will be required after the Public Hearing and formation of the District in order to begin the design of the project. Regards, Marnell Gibson __________________________________ Marnell Gibson, Director of Public Works Acknowledged by: _________________________ ________________________ Vicki Patman James Anderson 3010 Hermosa Ave. 3018 Hermosa Ave. 266 65270.00001\32180770.1 RESOLUTION NO. No. 20-7252 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PRELIMINARILY APPROVING ENGINEER’S REPORT AND DIRECTING RELATED ACTIONS FOR THE PROPOSED GREENWICH VILLAGE NORTH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ASSESSMENT DISTRICT SECTION 1. Recitals. 1. On July 23, 2019, the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of Hermosa Beach (the “City”), County of Los Angeles (the “County”), State of California, adopted its resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach of Intention to Make Acquisitions and Improvements for the Proposed Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District” (the “Resolution of Intention”) under the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of California (the “Act”) to initiate proceedings under the Act in and for the City’s proposed Greenwich Village North Underground Utilities Assessment District (the “Assessment District”) for the making of certain public improvements (the “Improvements”) as described in the Resolution of Intention. 2. The Resolution of Intention referred the acquisitions and improvements described therein to NV5, Irvine, California, the person designated therein as the engineer of work (the “Engineer of Work”) and directed the Engineer of Work to prepare and file with the City Clerk a report (the “Engineer’s Report”) pursuant to the Act and containing information set forth in the Resolution of Intention, to which reference is hereby made for further particulars. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach as follows: 1. Recitals. Each of the above recitals is true and correct and is adopted by the City Council. 2. Engineer’s Report Preliminarily Approved. The Engineer of Work has prepared and filed the Engineer’s Report with the City Clerk, and this Council with the aid of City staff has reviewed the Engineer’s Report, and hereby finds it to be sufficient for, and that it shall stand for purposes of subsequent proceedings for the Assessment District and the Engineer’s Report is hereby preliminarily approved. 267 Resolution No. No. 20-7252 Hermosa Beach City Council Page 2 of 4 3. Public Hearing. Pursuant to the Act, this Council hereby orders that a public hearing be held before this Council, in the regular meeting place thereof, Council Chambers, City Hall, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California, on Tuesday, October 13, 2020, at the hour of 6:30 p.m., for the purposes of this Council’s determination whether the public interest, convenience and necessity require the Improvements, whether the properties in the Assessment District are specially benefited by the Improvements, the tabulation of special assessment ballots and the determination of the existence of any majority protest and this Council’s final action upon the Engineer’s Report and the assessments therein. The public hearing may be continued from time to time as determined by the Council. 4. Notice. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of the hearing ordered under Section 3 hereof to be given to the record owner of each parcel in the Assessment District by mailing, postage prepaid, in the United States mail, and such notice shall be deemed to have been given when so deposited in such mail. On the face of the envelope mailed to the record owner, in which the notice and ballot are enclosed, there shall appear in no smaller than 16-point bold type the words "OFFICIAL BALLOT ENCLOSED," together with the name of the City and the return address of the City Clerk as the sender. The mailed notice shall be given to all owners of property proposed to be assessed within the Assessment District as shown in the Engineer’s Report by such mailing by name to those persons whose names and addresses appear on the last equalized assessment roll of the County or the State Board of Equalization assessment roll, as the case may be. The notice shall be mailed not less than 45 days before the date of the public hearing ordered under Section 3 hereof. The amount of the proposed assessment for each parcel shall be calculated and the record owner of each parcel shall be given written notice by mail of the proposed assessment, the total amount thereof chargeable to the entire Assessment District, the amount chargeable to the owner’s particular parcel, the anticipated duration of payments for the assessment if bonded, the reason for such assessment and the basis upon which the amount of the proposed assessment was calculated. 268 Resolution No. No. 20-7252 Hermosa Beach City Council Page 3 of 4 Each such mailed notice to owners shall contain a ballot which includes the property owner’s name, identification of the parcel and support or opposition to the proposed assessment. Each notice shall include, in a conspicuous place, a summary of the procedures applicable to the completion, return and tabulation of ballots, including a disclosure that the existence of a majority protest (whereby ballots submitted in opposition exceed those submitted in favor of the assessment, with ballots weighted according to proportional financial obligation of the affected property) will result in the assessment not being imposed. Each mailed ballot shall include a sealable return envelope with the City’s address for receipt of the completed ballot. 5. Ballots. The City Clerk is hereby designated as the impartial person, without a vested interest in the outcome of the assessment, responsible for overseeing the tabulation of the ballots. The City Clerk shall maintain a separate and secure file for the safekeeping of the assessment ballots as they are received and pending tabulation. Ballots shall be received up to the time of the close of the public hearing. Ballots shall remain sealed until the close of the public hearing and the beginning of the tabulation, provided that ballots may be submitted, or changed, or withdrawn by the person submitting the ballot prior to the conclusion of the public hearing. During and after tabulation, the ballots shall be disclosable public records under Section 6252 of the California Government Code. 6. Boundary Map. The proposed boundaries of the proposed Assessment District are hereby described as shown on a map thereof on file in the office of the City Clerk (the “Boundary Map”), which indicates by a boundary line the extent of the territory to be included in the proposed Assessment District; the Boundary Map shall govern for all details for further purposes of the proceedings for the Assessment District and reference is hereby made to the Boundary Map for further particulars. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to endorse upon the original and at least one copy of the Boundary Map the date of the filing thereof and date and adoption of this resolution and to cause a copy of the Boundary Map to be filed with the County Recorder of 269 Resolution No. No. 20-7252 Hermosa Beach City Council Page 4 of 4 the County within 15 days after the adoption of this resolution, but in no event later than 15 days before the date of the public hearing ordered under Section 3 hereof. The County Recorder shall endorse upon the Boundary Map the time and date of filing and shall fasten the same securely in a book of maps of assessment and community facilities districts which the County Recorder maintains. The County Recorder shall index the Boundary Map by the name of the City and by the distinctive designation of the proposed Assessment District. 7. Effective. This resolution shall be effective immediately. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall cause the original of the same to be entered among the original resolutions of the City Council; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the minutes of the City Council meeting at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach on this 11th day of August, 2020. ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ _________________________ City Clerk City Attorney 270 271 Greenwich Village Undergrounding Association (GVUA)August 11, 2020 Milestone Dates Met with Hamayoun Behboodi, HB Assoc Civil Engineer; He handed us guidelines January 23, 2014 First Neighborhood wide email and outreach to help solidify support March 1, 2014 SCE (Jeff Shellabarger) met with City: Discouraged from moving forward by City April 1, 2014 Met with Frank Senteno, HB Public Works Director - informed via email undergrounding districts are not a priority for the city June 4, 2014 First City Meeting June, 2014 City Manager suggests obtaining resident petition to present to City Council July 17, 2014 First Petition began Circulation in Greenwich Village District August 25, 2014 Public Works Dept meeting with Broyzna (Dir of Public Works and City Engineer), Behboodi (HB Assoc Civil Engineer) and utilities June 11, 2015 HB District Formation Process describes Need for Petitions July 7, 2015 SCE Design Cost Rule 20B - Residents Prepay for Utility Design April 20, 2016 Greenwich Village Underground Association ("GVUA") legally formed June 1, 2016 Broyzna resends UU District Guide September 24, 2016 City introduces GVUA to Jeff Cooper to review process for forming District December 5, 2016 First District Update Letter; Describes benefits, boundaries and approx. cost/parcel of $25,000 September 30, 2016 Jeff Cooper Presentation to Residents December 12, 2016 GVUA Request to City to Allow Cooper's Recommended Process December 26, 2017 City Provides New Guidelines April 19, 2017 City Suggest we Submit existing petitions to start process over May 2, 2017 GVUA Formally Submits Current Petitions and Map May 4, 2017 City Requests Boundaries and Cost Update from Edison May 22, 107 Updated Costs Submitted by City November 21, 2017 Second Round of Resident Signatures approving commitment to move forward December 3, 2017 SCE Confirms 42% Charge for their services to upgrade (informally say they don’t like to administer projects) December 20,2017 60% of Residents agree to move forward February 16, 2018 City Agrees to Send out RFP's for Consultants April 15, 2018 RFP's Released July 19, 2018 Response to RFP's to City Council November 27, 2018 Coordination Meeting with Jeff Cooper January 23, 2019 Third Cost Estimate by Utilities April 11, 2019 Request for Clarified or updated Petitions from Cooper April 24, 2019 Additional Petitions Submitted to Cooper and City May 7, 2019 Preliminary Assessment Engineer's Report submitted to City October 1, 2019 Preliminary Assessment Engineer's Report approved by City March, 2020 GVUA learned City Project Manager (Reed Salan) out on leave - project had stalled June, 2020 City Manager Lowenthal intervened to move project forward June 23, 2020 Marnell Gibson picked up project and initiated momentum June 30, 2020 City Council Hearing to Approve Engineer's Report and Distribute Ballots August 11, 2020 272 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0517 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITIES OF HERMOSA BEACH, MANHATTAN BEACH, AND REDONDO BEACH REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATIONOF THE SOUTH BAY BEACH CITIES HOMELESSNESS PROJECT (Assistant to the City Manager Nico De Anda-Scaia) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving a memorandum of understanding between the cities of Hermosa Beach,Manhattan Beach,and Redondo Beach regarding the implementation of the South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project. Executive Summary: As part of the City’s ongoing efforts to address homelessness locally and regionally,Hermosa Beach and its neighboring jurisdictions of Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach have partnered on various homeless initiatives which stand to serve our three communities.Individually,each of the three cities has developed and adopted their own City-specific Homelessness Plan.In a joint effort,the three cities then applied for and were awarded Measure H grant funding from the County of Los Angeles toward the collaborative implementation of these plans. A key component of plan implementation is the expansion of available resources and providing in- person outreach services for homeless individuals within the community.Toward this end,the three cities conducted a Request for Proposals (RFP)and engaged Harbor Interfaith Services (HIS)for the provision of local homeless services as part of a South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Program.To expedite the program,and as lead agency of the project,the City of Manhattan Beach approved a grant contract with the County of Los Angeles and a subcontract with HIS.The Resolution for City Council’s consideration this evening approves a memorandum of understanding between our three cities for the implementation of the South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project.This project will continue until February 28,2021,with the possibility of future extensions pending approval and future funding from the County of Los Angeles. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 6 powered by Legistar™273 Staff Report REPORT 20-0517 Background: In March 2017,the voters of Los Angeles County approved Measure H -legislation which raised the County sales tax in order to generate $355 million annually over a 10-year period toward funding homeless services across the County.Following passage of this legislation,and in an effort to bolster multi-jurisdictional partnerships,the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors allocated $2,000,000 in one-time funding from the County general fund to support coordination efforts of Councils of Governments,and planning efforts for cities in the Los Angeles Continuum of Care (a regional planning body that coordinates housing and services funding for our region’s homeless populations). In November 2017,the City of Hermosa Beach was one of 47 cities to be awarded County funding toward the development of a City Homelessness Plan.In July 2018,following a community-led effort over several months,the Hermosa Beach City Council unanimously adopted the City’s “Five-year Homelessness Plan”to serve as a comprehensive community road map for preventing and combating homelessness locally and regionally. In November 2018,as part of a ‘Beach Cities Partnership’,the cities of Hermosa Beach,Manhattan Beach,and Redondo Beach submitted a multi-jurisdictional proposal for joint Homelessness Plan Implementation grant funding through the County of Los Angeles. In April 2019,the Los Angeles County Homeless Initiative announced the award of ‘Measure H’grant funding to the ‘Beach Cities Partnership’totaling $330,666 for homeless resources coordination, training, and housing navigation services. In September 2019,as the lead agency for the program,the Manhattan Beach City Council approved a Grant contract with the County of Los Angeles.Thereafter,the three cities developed specifications for a Homeless Implementation Initiative,conducted a Request for Proposals (RFP)and engaged Harbor Interfaith Services (HIS)for the provision of local homeless and housing navigation services as part of a South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project.The Project’s specifications and tasks include but are not limited to: ·Providing a full-time Homeless Coordinator/City Liaison to leverage the cities’fiscal and administrative resources in order to systematize,coordinate and conduct various homeless efforts for enhancing and expanding regional access to services; ·Developing and implementing internal city-level homelessness response protocols and beach city regional response; ·Tailoring training materials and leading staff training sessions; ·Coordinating an annual tri-city homelessness stakeholder community meeting; ·Providing two full-time Homeless Case Managers to assist homeless individuals and families by completing Coordinated Entry System (CES)Assessments,maintaining case notes in Los City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 6 powered by Legistar™274 Staff Report REPORT 20-0517 by completing Coordinated Entry System (CES)Assessments,maintaining case notes in Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority’s (LAHSA)Homeless Management Information System (HMIS); and ·Preparing homeless clients to become “document ready”and successfully connecting individuals to interim housing, treatment centers, and permanent housing. To expedite the implementation of the program,and as lead agency of the project,the City of Manhattan Beach entered into a subcontract with the County of Los Angeles and Harbor Interfaith Services (included in Attachment 2).The project term with Harbor Interfaith Services will continue until February 28,2021,with the possibility of future extensions pending approval from the County of Los Angeles. Discussion: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) The Resolution for City Council’s consideration this evening approves a memorandum of understanding formalizing the partnership between the three beach cities for the implementation of the South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project (Attachment 1). The South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project aims to reduce homelessness in our three communities by leveraging shared resources and directly engaging individuals who are experiencing and/or at-risk of homelessness.Through regular outreach and engagement,HIS staff seek to establish meaningful connections between local individuals and essential supportive services with the ultimate goal of directing individuals into permanent supportive housing. Ongoing HIS Services HIS began providing services to the Beach Cities Partnership in January of this year.Attachment 3 of this report includes the most recent South Bay Beach Cities Program Report for the period of November 2019 through June 2020.As part of the initiative,staff from HIS and the partner cities meet regularly to monitor project deliverables,share information across agencies,and pivot services as necessary. While the current pandemic and closures of key state and county government offices have impacted the timeframe for delivery of some key service areas,HIS staff continue to serve our communities full -time and place individuals in temporary and permanent housing through various County resources. Community Meeting on Homelessness As a key deliverable of this program,the Beach Cities Partnership had scheduled a tri-City Community Meeting on Homelessness for March 19,2020 at the Joselyn Center in Manhattan Beach.Due to present circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic,this meeting was initially postponed City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 6 powered by Legistar™275 Staff Report REPORT 20-0517 Beach.Due to present circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic,this meeting was initially postponed to an undetermined date.City staff will pursue this event in a digital format and update the City Council once a date has been determined. 2020 Annual Homeless Count In January of each year,the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA)coordinates a County-wide Homelessness Count to identify critical information about our region’s homeless populations.Trended over time,this data helps shape local policy and the allocation of resources across the County’s 88 cities.The City of Hermosa Beach has participated as a regional deployment site for local homeless counts for several years. For the most recent point-in-time Count conducted on January 22,2020,4,560 people were identified as experiencing homelessness in the South Bay (SPA 8)region.Overall,homelessness rose by 3% in the South Bay,compared to a 12%increase in Los Angeles County overall.For the Beach Cities of El Segundo,Manhattan Beach,Hermosa Beach,and Redondo Beach,unsheltered homelessness specifically rose +5%from 239 persons in 2018 to 250 persons in 2020.Those living in vehicles in the Beach Cities continues to rise, with a +10% increase in the same time-frame. According to the latest Count,29 individuals were identified as experiencing homelessness in Hermosa Beach.Of this number,7 persons were identified as living on the street,with approximately 22 living in vehicles throughout the City.These figures indicate a slight increase in total homeless persons within the City’s borders from 2019. The table below illustrates Hermosa Beach homeless count results for the past five years.Overall homelessness in Hermosa Beach has remained relatively stable,with the City’s total homeless population among the lowest in the region on a per-capita basis.Vehicular homelessness is rising slightly, consistent across the South Bay. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 4 of 6 powered by Legistar™276 Staff Report REPORT 20-0517 1.Totals are approximations that include visibly identified homeless and a conversion factor for vehicles and shelters where no individuals may be counted. While fewer individuals may have been counted in-person, the conversion factor allows LAHSA statisticians to estimate the number of “hidden homeless” within communities by applying a standard formula to account for potential homeless individuals. To view a full analysis on LAHSA’s conversion factors and proportions for vehicles, tents and makeshift shelters, click on the following link: <https://www.lahsa.org/documents?id=3477-2019-greater-los-angeles-homeless-count-car-van-camper-rv-tent- 2.The following results are reported at the SPA level only: Domestic Violence Shelters, Youth Count results, and DPSS-issued motel vouchers. 3.Unaccompanied Minors on the Street data is only available at the SPA/Regional level. Despite this moderate fluctuation and low homeless count figures in comparison to other cities, due to our small size and high population density, homelessness in Hermosa Beach remains highly visible and a key issue among local stakeholders. As a popular beach town and key tourist hub in the area, the number of homeless individuals living in town fluctuates significantly throughout the year. For access to the County’s full 2020 Homeless Count Results, click on the following link: <https://www.lahsa.org/news?article=726-2020-greater-los-angeles-homeless-count-results> General Plan Consistency: This report and associated recommendations have been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below: Governance 1.6 Long-term considerations.Prioritize decisions that provide long-term community benefit and City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 5 of 6 powered by Legistar™277 Staff Report REPORT 20-0517 discourage decisions that provide short-term community benefit but reduce long-term opportunities. 2.6 Responsive to community needs.Continue to be responsive to community inquiries,providing public information and recording feedback from community interactions. 3.1 Increased access to services.Strive to provide access to facilities,programs,and services at times and locations that are convenient for residents and businesses. 4.3 Collaboration with adjacent jurisdictions.Maintain strong collaborative relationships with adjacent jurisdictions and work together on projects of mutual interest and concern. Public Safety 4.7 Communicate risks.Regularly evaluate,identify,and communicate new hazard risks and incorporate into planning and programs. 5.1 Crime deterrence.Regularly evaluate the incidence of crime and identify and implement measures to deter crime. 5.7 Collaborate with neighboring jurisdictions.Cooperate and collaborate with neighboring jurisdictions and social services to maximize public safety and emergency services. Fiscal Implications: There are no fiscal implications associated with the recommended action. Deliverables to be performed by Harbor Interfaith Services as part of the South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project are funded by a grant award from the County of Los Angeles and distributed via the City of Manhattan Beach, lead agency for the tri-city program. Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 20-XXXX 2. Memorandum of Understanding - South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project 3. South Bay Beach Cities Program Report (November 2019 -June 2020) Respectfully Submitted by: Nico De Anda-Scaia, Assistant to the City Manager Concur: Paul LeBaron, Police Chief Financial Analysis:Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 6 of 6 powered by Legistar™278 Page 1 of 2 20-XXXX 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 RESOLUTION NO. 20-XXXX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND THE CITIES OF MANHATTAN BEACH AND REDONDO BEACH FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOUTH BAY BEACH CITIES HOMELESSNESS PROJECT. WHEREAS, the City of Hermosa Beach, California adopted a Citywide Homelessness Plan in collaboration with the County of Los Angeles; and, WHEREAS, the City is desirous to establish a formal document to detail the procedures, scope of work and reporting structure for the South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby approves the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Hermosa Beach, the City of Manhattan Beach, and the City of Redondo Beach dated August 4, 2020, for implementation of the South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project; SECTION 2. The City Council hereby directs the City Manager to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City; and SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution; shall cause the same to be entered among the original resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which time same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 11 day of August, 2020. ________________________________________________________________________ PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California [Signatures continued on following page] 279 Page 2 of 2 20-XXXX 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ _____________________________ Eduardo Sarmiento - City Clerk Michael Jenkins - City Attorney 280 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH, THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, AND THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOUTH BAY BEACH CITIES HOMELESSNESS PROJECT AS REQUIRED BY COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES’S IMPLEMENTATION OF CITIES HOMELESSNESS PLAN This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) dated as of the 4th day of August, 2020, is between the City of Manhattan Beach, a municipal corporation; the City of Redondo Beach, a municipal corporation; City of Hermosa Beach, a municipal corporation; (the aforementioned cities are sometimes referred to herein individually as “City” and collectively as “Cities”). RECITALS A. The Cities and the County of Los Angeles have been working cooperatively to address issues related to homeless individuals and individuals at risk of homelessness. The Cities’ goal is to decrease homelessness in the three cities by engaging those individuals experiencing homelessness and directing them to essential supportive services to remove barriers and move them into permanent housing. B. Based on the 2020 Greater Homeless Count, the Cities have a combined homeless population of 219 and understand that homeless individuals frequently traverse the beach cities and that the Cities can assist people experiencing homelessness from increased coordination in their homeless efforts. C. The County of Los Angeles released the 2018 Cities Homelessness Plan Implementation Request for Proposals in September 2018. The Cities submitted a collaborative Priority Area 2 Proposal (the “Proposal”). D. The Priority Area 2 Proposal application proposed to implement three integrated activities that comprised a regional project to strengthen the Cities’ sub- regional homelessness response. These proposed activities complement County and City service systems by enhancing regional coordination, regional training and housing navigation. E. The Cities were awarded a grant under the 2018 Cities Homelessness Plan Implementation Program in the amount of $330,665 (the “Grant Funds”). F. The purpose of this MOU is to provide the basic understanding between the Cities with respect to the Grant Funds and to set forth basic provisions upon which the Cities will formally establish their partnership and collaboratively utilize a homeless services firm to assist their respective homeless populations. 281 AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants and promises herein contained, the Cities hereto agree as follows: I. Term: Term: This MOU shall be effective as of the date the last City has executed the same (“Effective Date”). This MOU shall remain in full force and effect until March 1, 2021 (“Term”), unless sooner terminated or extended, in whole or in part, as provided in the in Contract Number AO-19-630 (Exhibit A) as agreed to by the County of Los Angeles and the Cities. II. CITIES RESPONSIBILITIES: A. The Grant Funds will be used to establish and implement the South Bay Beach Cities Homelessness Project, including hiring a qualified homeless service provider to staff a full-time homeless City Coordinator/Liaison and two full-time case managers to assist homeless individuals and families in the Cities. B. Provide a City staff representative from each City to coordinate regional homeless efforts. The City staff representatives are collectively referred to as the “Cities Implementation Team.” C. To meet the Grant Funds requirements of the Priority Area 2 funding, each City has identified city matching funds to ensure that the components of the contracted programs are implemented. It is each City’s responsibility to insure that the city match requirements (consisting primarily of staff time) are met as set forth in Exhibit B1 of Contract Number AO-19-630. D. To meet the Grant Funds requirements, the cities will make in-kind contributions by providing office space, parking, etc. over the term of the grant met as set forth in Exhibit B1 of Contract Number AO-19-637. E. Each City hereby warrants, represents, and covenants that it will comply with all applicable local, state or federal guidelines, regulations, requirements and statutes and/or as required under the laws or regulations relating to the source of the Grant Funds to be transferred by the County to the Cities pursuant to this MOU, and will not use the Grant Funds for costs associated with activities in violation of any law or for any activity inconsistent with the requirements and purposes set forth in this MOU. F. Manhattan Beach will be the lead agency in respect to contracting with the County for the Grant Funds and administration of the Grant Funds. Manhattan Beach will process/submit reimbursement requests to the County, and submit quarterly and final reports to the County. 282 E. Each City shall maintain records related to the program operation and use of Grant Funds for five (5) years following the expiration of this MOU. III. CONTRACTOR SELECTION AND ADMINISTRATION: A. The Proposal identifies an individual from each City that will comprise the Cities Implementation Team. The members of the Cities Implementation Team will meet as often as necessary to review program implementation and to perform the scope of work set forth in the Proposal. B. The Cities Implementation Team has identified Harbor Interfaith Services (HIS) as the contracted provider (Exhibit C) of the following services: a. Staff a full-time homeless City Coordinator/Liaison to assist homeless individuals and families in the beach cities community. Leverage the cities’ fiscal and administrative resources to systematize, coordinate and help oversee multi-sectoral homeless efforts to enhance and expand regional access to services. Working in strong coordination with the Cities Implementation Team, the Homeless Coordinator/City Liaison will help develop and implement internal city-level homelessness response protocols; tailor training material and lead training sessions with staff; and plan and hold annual Homelessness Stakeholder Roundtable as required in Exhibit C. b. Staff two full-time Homeless Case Managers to assist homeless individuals and families by completing the CES Assessment; maintain case notes in Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority’s (LAHSA) Homeless Management Information System (HMIS); get participants “document ready”; and make successful referrals to interim housing, treatment centers, and permanent housing. C. The Cities, will ensure the contract terms in Exhibit A and C meet program requirements for the Grant Funds and address all required obligations, including but not limited to insurance, indemnification, and non-discrimination, prohibition on religious activity, recordkeeping, invoice procedures and program reporting. D. Any amendments to the contract term in Exhibit C regarding, amount, or scope of work will be discussed and agreed upon by the Cities. No City will authorize the Contractors to exceed the contracted costs without the prior written consent and approval of all three Cities. E. Should any of the Cities engage Harbor Interfaith Services to initiate a specific task unique to their organization, the financial obligation and project management for that specific task will be the sole responsibility of that City and will not 283 be covered under this MOU or the contract with Harbor Interfaith Services (i.e. Exhibit C). IV. THIRD PARTY LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION: A. Each City shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless each other City, including its elected and appointed officers, employees, agents, attorneys, and designated volunteers from and against any and all liability, including, but not limited to demands, claims, actions, fees, costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorney’s and expert witness fees), arising from or connected with the respective acts of each City arising from or related to this MOU. No City shall indemnify another City for that City’s own negligence or willful misconduct. B. In light of the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of California imposing certain tort liability jointly upon public entities solely by reason of such entities being parties to an agreement (as defined in Government Code Section 895), each of the City parties hereto, pursuant to the authorization contained in Government Code Sections 895.4 and 895.6, shall assume the full liability imposed upon it or any of its officers, agents, or employees, by law for injury caused by any act or omission occurring in the performance of this MOU to the same extent such liability would be imposed in the absence of Section 895.2. To achieve the above stated purpose, each City indemnifies, defends, and holds harmless each other City for any liability, cost, or expense that may be imposed upon such other City solely by virtue of Section 895.2. The provisions of Section 2778 of the California Civil Code are made a part hereof as if incorporated herein. V. MISCELLANEOUS A. This MOU shall be binding upon, and shall be to the benefit of the respective successors, heirs, and assigns of each Cities; provided, however, no Cities may assign its respective rights or obligations under this MOU without prior written consent of the other Cities. B. This MOU (including for the purpose of clarity, the recitals, to this MOU), contains the entire agreement between the Cities with respect to the matters herein, and there are no restrictions, promises, warranties or undertakings other than those set forth herein or referred to herein C. No alteration or variation of the terms of this MOU shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the authorized representative from each City; no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein shall be binding on any of the Cities. D. The Cities hereby certify compliance with Government Code Section 8355 in matters relating to providing a drug-free workplace as set forth in Exhibit 2, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 284 E. In the event a City defaults in the performance of any of its obligations under this MOU or materially breaches any of the provisions of this MOU, the non-breaching Cities may enforce this MOU through any available remedies. F. This MOU is not intended to be a third-party beneficiary contract and confers no rights on anyone other than the parties hereto. G. Notices or other communications, which may be required or provided under the terms of this MOU, shall be given to the individuals identified for each City in the Proposal as a member of the City Implementation Team. All notices shall be in writing and deemed effective when delivered in person or deposited in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid and addressed as above. Any notices, correspondence, reports and/or statements authorized or required by this MOU, addressed in any other fashion shall be deemed not given. City of Manhattan Beach: 1. City of Redondo Beach: City of Manhattan Beach 1400 Highland Avenue Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Attn: George Gabriel 2. City of Redondo Beach 1922 Artesia Blvd. Redondo Beach, CA 90278 Attn: John La Rock City of Hermosa Beach: 3. City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Attn: Nico De Anda-Scaia 4. H. In any action or proceeding to enforce or interpret any provision of this MOU, the Cities shall bear their own attorney’s fees, costs and expenses. I. The laws of the State of California and applicable local and federal laws, regulations and guidelines shall govern this MOU. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Contract, the laws of state of California shall apply and the Venue shall be Los Angeles County. J. Any City shall be excused from performing its obligations under this MOU during the time and to the extent that it is prevented from performing by an unforeseeable cause beyond its control, including but not limited to any incidence of fire or flood; acts of God; commandeering of material, products, plants or facilities by the federal, state or local government; national fuel shortage; or a material wrongful act or omission by the other Party; when satisfactory evidence of such cause is presented to the other City, and provided further that such nonperformance is unforeseeable, beyond the control and is not due to the fault or negligence of the City not performing. 285 K. Each City agrees that the insurance held by the other, whether commercial or self-insurance is sufficient for the purpose of this MOU. L. This MOU may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute the same agreement. M. Authority and Signatures: The individuals signing this MOU, and its exhibits, which are incorporated herein by reference, have the authority to commit the City they represent to the terms of this MOU, and do so commit by signing. (Signatures on Following Page) 286 CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH By: _____________________________________ Bruce Moe, City Manager ATTEST: By: _____________________________________ Liza Tamura, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: _____________________________________ Quinn M. Barrow, City Attorney Date: ____________________ CITY OF REDONDO BEACH By: _____________________________________ William C. Brand, Mayor ATTEST: By: _____________________________________ Eleanor Manzano, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: _____________________________________ Michael W. Webb, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: _____________________________________ Risk Manager Date: ____________________ 287 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH By: _____________________________________ Mary Campbell, Mayor ATTEST: By: _____________________________________ Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: _____________________________________ Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Date: ____________________ 288 Page 9 of 114 Exhibit A County Contract Number AO-19-630 289 Page 10 of 114 290 Page 11 of 114 291 Page 12 of 114 292 Page 13 of 114 293 Page 14 of 114 294 Page 15 of 114 295 Page 16 of 114 296 Page 17 of 114 297 Page 18 of 114 298 Page 19 of 114 299 Page 20 of 114 300 Page 21 of 114 301 Page 22 of 114 302 Page 23 of 114 303 Page 24 of 114 304 Page 25 of 114 305 Page 26 of 114 306 Page 27 of 114 307 Page 28 of 114 308 Page 29 of 114 309 Page 30 of 114 310 Page 31 of 114 311 Page 32 of 114 312 Page 33 of 114 313 Page 34 of 114 314 Page 35 of 114 315 Page 36 of 114 316 Page 37 of 114 317 Page 38 of 114 318 Page 39 of 114 319 Page 40 of 114 320 Page 41 of 114 321 Page 42 of 114 322 Page 43 of 114 323 Page 44 of 114 324 Page 45 of 114 325 Page 46 of 114 326 Page 47 of 114 327 Page 48 of 114 328 Page 49 of 114 329 Page 50 of 114 330 Page 51 of 114 331 Page 52 of 114 332 Page 53 of 114 333 Page 54 of 114 334 Page 55 of 114 335 Page 56 of 114 336 Page 57 of 114 337 Page 58 of 114 338 Page 59 of 114 339 Page 60 of 114 340 Page 61 of 114 341 Page 62 of 114 342 Page 63 of 114 343 Page 64 of 114 344 Page 65 of 114 345 Page 66 of 114 346 Page 67 of 114 347 Page 68 of 114 348 Page 69 of 114 349 Page 70 of 114 350 Page 71 of 114 351 Page 72 of 114 352 Page 73 of 114 353 Page 74 of 114 354 Page 75 of 114 355 Page 76 of 114 356 Page 77 of 114 357 Page 78 of 114 358 Page 79 of 114 359 Page 80 of 114 360 Page 81 of 114 361 Page 82 of 114 362 Page 83 of 114 363 Page 84 of 114 364 Page 85 of 114 365 Page 86 of 114 366 Page 87 of 114 367 Page 88 of 114 368 Page 89 of 114 Exhibit B State of California GOVERNMENT CODE Section 8355 8355. (a) Every person or organization awarded a contract or a grant for the procurement of any property or services from any state agency shall certify to the contracting or granting agency that it will provide a drug-free workplace by doing all of the following: (1) Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the person’s or organization’s workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violations of the prohibition. (2) Establishing a drug-free awareness program to inform employees about all of the following: (A) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace. (B) The person’s or organization’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace. (C) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs. (D) The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. (3) Requiring that each employee engaged in the performance of the contract or grant be given a copy of the statement required by subdivision (a) and that, as a condition of employment on the contract or grant, the employee agrees to abide by the terms of the statement. (b) (1) The certification requirement set forth in subdivision (a) does not apply to a credit card purchase of goods of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) or less. (2) The total amount of exemption authorized herein shall not exceed seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500) per year for each company from which a state agency is purchasing goods by credit card. It shall be the responsibility of each state agency to monitor the use of this exemption and adhere to these restrictions on these purchases. (Amended by Stats. 2005, Ch. 381, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2006.) 369 Page 90 of 114 EXHIBIT C SUBCONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH AND HARBOR INTERFAITH SERVICES 370 Page 91 of 114 371 Page 92 of 114 372 Page 93 of 114 373 Page 94 of 114 374 Page 95 of 114 375 Page 96 of 114 376 Page 97 of 114 377 Page 98 of 114 378 Page 99 of 114 379 Page 100 of 114 380 Page 101 of 114 381 Page 102 of 114 382 Page 103 of 114 383 Page 104 of 114 384 Page 105 of 114 385 Page 106 of 114 386 Page 107 of 114 387 Page 108 of 114 388 Page 109 of 114 389 Page 110 of 114 390 Page 111 of 114 391 Page 112 of 114 392 Page 113 of 114 393 Page 114 of 114 394 2020 Homelessness Counts MB HB RB Total 15 28 176 219 Assessments, Interactions MB HB RB Total MB HB RB Total Goal Progress Number of Clients 7 10 13 30 18 32 36 86 Number of Interactions 20 19 22 61 71 99 110 280 1 - 4 (Priority Score 1)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 - 7 (Priority Score 2)1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 8 - 11 (Priority Score 3)2 4 6 12 2 4 6 12 12 - 17 (Priority Score 3)2 9 10 21 4 9 10 23 Totals: 5 13 16 34 7 13 16 36 Clients Assessed (By Acuity Score): CES Surveys conducted with Clients by Beach Cities Outreach staff 1 - 4 (Priority Score 1)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 - 7 (Priority Score 2)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 - 11 (Priority Score 3)1 3 0 4 2 5 3 10 12 - 17 (Priority Score 3)0 1 0 1 3 6 4 13 Totals: 1 4 0 5 5 11 7 23 200 12% Case Managed & Previously Assessed:1 4 8 13 Grand Total:6 15 15 36 Document Ready MB HB RB Total MB HB RB Total Goal Progress Document Ready 0 1 0 1 4 5 5 14 Benefits Enrolled 1 4 2 7 4 4 6 14 Totals:1 5 2 8 8 9 11 28 120 23% Program Placements MB HB RB Total MB HB RB Total Goal Progress Interim Housing Referrals Made 2 0 0 2 7 14 22 43 % Attained:79% Interim Housing Referrals Attained 1 1 2 4 2 13 19 34 24 142% COVID-19 Project Room Key Referrals Made 2 0 0 2 4 6 6 16 COVID-19 Project Room Key Referrals Attained 1 1 2 4 1 6 6 13 COVID-19 Rec Center Shelter Referrals Made 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 12 COVID-19 Rec Center Shelter Referrals Attained 0 0 0 0 0 3 8 11 *Broken out from Interim Housing Referrals *COVID-19 Emergency Action Steps* Treatment Programs Referrals Made 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 % Attained:0% Treatment Program Referrals Attained 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0% Stable Housing Referrals 1 0 0 1 4 3 0 7 % Attained:57% Stable Housing Placements 2 0 0 2 3 1 0 4 22 18% This Month From Contract Start to Date Progress to Date Beach Cities Outreach Outcomes November 2019 - March 2021 This Month From Contract Start to Date Progress to Date Reporting Period: June 2020 Clients Case Managed: Ongoing engagement centered around a housing plan Documentation / Benefits Enrollment: Clients who have all necessary documents, and are enrolled in eligible DPSS programs This Month From Contract Start to Date Progress to Date Street Outreach Interactions by City: Contacts in the field between Outreach / Housing Navigators and Clients 395 Term Definition Assessment Standard set of questions used to determine a client's vulnerability. The vulnerability is quantified as the client's 'Acuity Score.' There is a separate assessment for each population: Single Adults, Families and Youth. Also known as a VI-SPDAT (Vulnerability Index - Service Prioritization Assistance Tool). Acuity Score The numeric outcome of an Assessment, measuring a client's vulnerability while experiencing homelessness. Certain programs and resources are only available to clients with a high enough Acuity Score. Priority Score A simplification of the range of Acuity Score values into a scale with scores 1 (Acuity Score 0-4), 2 (Acuity Score 5-7) and 3 (Acuity Score 8-17). Certain programs and resources are only available to clients with high enough Priority Scores. For example, only clients with a Priority Score of 3 are eligible for enrollment in a Housing Navigation program. CES Coordinated Entry System; a common set of protocols, including assessments and referrals, used by homeless service providers across Los Angeles County in order to connect people experiencing homelessness to various resources and services more efficiently. Documentation Ready A term meaning that a client has secured their California ID, Social Security Card, Verification of Income, and Verification of Homlessness. DPSS Benefits Enrollment Assistance with enrollment in approprate Department of Public Social Services programs including; General Relief, Cal Fresh, Cal Works, etc. Interim Housing This section includes Crisis and Bridge Housing. An interim facility is where individuals can be temporarily housed and continue receiving ongoing care for a specific reason, either medical or mental health related including recuperative care. This also includes the 3 tiers of COVID-19 related shelters. Project RoomKey COVID-19 Tier 1 - Utilizes hotel/motels for shelter, targeted for asymptomatic people experiencing homelessness (PEH) who are considered high-risk and need shelter. Includes seniors 65+ and/or those with underlying health conditions. Isolation and Quarentine Site COVID-19 Tier 2 - Consists of shelters for those who test positive, are symptomatic, or need isolation and quarantine while waiting for test results or access to testing, and PEH who are asymptomatic but may need isolation due to exposure to a COVID-19 positive individual. *Not utilized in this report* Recreation Center COVID-19 Tier 3 - LA City and County Recreation Centers utilized as general emergency shelter for asymptomatic PEH. Referral Made A request sent to a program to provide services to a client. Referral Attained A response to a 'Referral Made,' confirming that the program is able and willing to provide their services to the referred client. Dictionary 396 Treatment Programs Includes linkage to programs for mental health, Detox and substance use, and physical health care. Stable Housing Any housing that a client can stay housed in with no time limitation placed on their stay. Also known as Permanent Housing. 397 Meeting Participation And Training Outcomes This Month From Contract Start Goal Progress Notes Monthly Beach Cities Management 1 7 16 44% Beach Cities Hub Care Coordination 4 20 32 63% SBCCOG Homeless Task Force Bi-Monthly 0 4 8 50% Annual Community Stakeholder Roundtable 0 0 1 0% City Staff Training for Frequent Contact Staff 0 0 1 0% City Staff Training for remaining Staff 0 0 1 0% Reporting Period: June 2020 398 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0516 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 BROWN ACT DEMAND FILED BY CAMERON SAMIMI PERTAINING TO BEACH VOLLEYBALL POLES (City Attorney Michael Jenkins) Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1.Receive and file report; and 2.Direct the City Attorney to send a letter pursuant to Government Code §54960.1(c)(2) communicating the City Council’s determination that no Brown Act violation occurred, and therefore that the City Council will not take further action. Executive Summary A letter to the City Manager and to the City Council was received by email dated July 20,2020 alleging violations of the Brown Act.The Brown Act provides that any person may challenge an action taken by the City Council by filing a written demand to cure or correct the action alleged to have been taken in violation of the Brown Act.This written demand must be filed within a certain time period,in this instance,within 90 days of the alleged violation (Gov’t Code Section 54960.1(c)(1).)The complaint was filed within the required timeframe.This report will address the substantive allegations and conclude they are meritless. Background: A.The Brown Act The purpose of the Brown Act (which is found at Government Code section 54950,et seq.)is to ensure that the deliberations of local governmental bodies are conducted publicly,and their actions are taken openly.The City Council is subject to the Brown Act,and all City Council deliberations and actions,therefore,must be made in public.All meetings must be open,except for properly noticed “closed sessions”as allowed by the Brown Act.However,the Brown Act does not regulate the conduct of City employees,like the City Manager,who are not elected members of a local governmental body. Under the Brown Act,a meeting is broadly defined as “any congregation of a majority of members of City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 5 powered by Legistar™399 Staff Report REPORT 20-0516 Under the Brown Act,a meeting is broadly defined as “any congregation of a majority of members of a legislative body at the same time and place to hear,discuss,or deliberate upon any item that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body or the local agency to which it pertains.”At least 72 hours prior to a regular meeting,the City must post a meeting agenda.The meeting agenda must specify the time and location of the meeting as well as a “brief general description”of each item of business to be transacted or discussed including items to be discussed in closed session.(Gov. Code §54954.2(a)(1).)If the “meeting”has not been properly noticed,the Councilmembers will be in violation of the Brown Act. B.Samimi’s Demand for A Cure Cameron Samimi delivered a letter to the City Manager and to the City Council by email dated July 20,2020 alleging violations of the Brown Act.The Brown Act provides that any person may challenge an action taken by the City Council by filing a written demand to cure or correct the action alleged to have been taken in violation of the Brown Act.This written demand must be filed within a certain time period,in this instance,within 90 days of the alleged violation (Gov’t Code Section 54960.1(c)(1).) Mr.Samimi’s complaint was filed within the required timeframe.This report will address the substantive allegations and conclude they are meritless. Under the Brown Act,the City Council must determine within 30 days of receipt of demand whether it will cure or correct the challenged action.If the City Council does not act within 30 days,it is deemed to have determined not to take any corrective action.Tonight’s meeting is within the 30-day period for response.Pursuant to Government Code Section 54960.1(b),the Council may consider whether a violation occurred and, either way, whether to take corrective action regarding the alleged violation. A copy of Mr.Samimi’s letter is attached (Attachment 1).It asserts two (2)violations of the Brown Act: 1)That the City Manager violated the Brown Act by removing volleyball poles from the City’s beaches because she acted solely and independently of the City Council’s direction. 2)That,on July 14,2020,the City Council discussed the decision to remove the volleyball poles in closed session without including the required information on the closed session agenda. Analysis of the allegations: Allegation #1: Mr.Samimi’s demand letter arises from his belief that the City Manager removed volleyball poles from the City’s beach.As a preliminary matter,no volleyball poles have been removed.Nevertheless, City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 5 powered by Legistar™400 Staff Report REPORT 20-0516 Mr. Samimi’s letter begins by characterizing the alleged Brown Act violation as follows: “The City Manager has acted solely or without voting on the matter or hearing any comments from the members of the community.At no time was removal of the Volleyball poles which are privately owned in the city by residents ever voted on or brought to a vote.In fact no resident was made aware ahead of time of such vote and no vote took place within the city council.” Although,the poles have not been removed,if the City Manager does decide to remove them,she is authorized to do so in her capacity as Director of Emergency Services,under the authority granted to her by Municipal Code sections 2.56 et seq.If she were to take this action,as a City employee she also would not be subject to the Brown Act.Put simply,though she has not yet done so,the City Manager has the authority to remove the volleyball poles without adhering to the Brown Act’s open meeting requirements. The Brown Act regulates only meetings of and actions taken by “legislative bodies.”The City Manager is not subject to the Brown Act.Her actions on her own authority cannot constitute a violation of the Act. Allegation #2: Mr.Samimi’s second allegation asserts that the City Council or the City Manager violated the Brown Act’s agenda requirements for closed session meetings.In this section of his complaint,Mr.Samimi alleges the following: “The action occurred as the culmination of a discussion in closed session of a matter which the Act does not permit to be discussed in closed session (and/or)there was no adequate notice to the public on the posted agenda for the meeting that the matter acted upon would be discussed,and there was no finding of fact made by the Hermosa Beach City Council that urgent action was necessary on a matter unforeseen at the time the agenda was posted.” His claim that the removal of volleyball poles was discussed during closed session is factually untrue. Mr.Samimi is correct that the “Brown Act creates specific agenda obligations for notifying the public with a ‘brief description’of each item to be discussed or acted upon.”The City Council is mindful of these requirements,and the July 14,2020 closed session meeting agenda did include the following descriptions of each and every item discussed on that date: 1. 20-0399 MINUTES: Approval of minutes of Closed Session held on June 23, 2020. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 5 powered by Legistar™401 Staff Report REPORT 20-0516 2.20-0428 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL:Pending Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1).The City finds,based on advice from legal counsel,that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. a)Michael Frilot v.City of Hermosa Beach,et al.Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case Number: 20TRCV00045 b)Michael Frilot,Workers Compensation Case number ADJ11107965 and AdminSure Claim number 20-148189 c)Pamela Sargent,Workers Compensation Case number ADJ11290398 and ADJ13054828 3.20-0440 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL:Anticipated Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)and (e)(3).The City finds,based on advice from legal counsel,that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. One Matter:Claim of Richard Taylor,Workers Compensation,AdminSure Claim #19- 143843 ADJOURNMENT OF CLOSED SESSION These are the only items that the Council discussed in closed session on that date.The City Council never discussed or planned on discussing the removal of the volleyball poles during its July 14,2020 closed session.For this reason,the City Council did not and was not required to place a brief description of the item on the closed session agenda. Mr.Samimi offers no facts to support his second allegation that an improperly noticed discussion took place during closed session on July 14,2020.Rather he merely concludes without any explanation that such a discussion took place.This speculation is not a reasonable basis on which to allege a Brown Act violation. Mr. Samimi’s second allegation is also without merit. Conclusion Based on the foregoing,Mr.Samimi has not stated a Brown Act violation.Furthermore,no volleyball poles have to date been removed.No violation of the Brown Act occurred and no cure is required. Accordingly,I recommend that the Council receive and file this report and direct me to send the letterCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 4 of 5 powered by Legistar™402 Staff Report REPORT 20-0516 Accordingly,I recommend that the Council receive and file this report and direct me to send the letter attached to this staff report (Attachment 2) to Mr. Samimi. Attachments: 1.Complaint dated July 20, 2020 from Mr. Cameron Samimi 2.Proposed letter to Mr. Samimi Respectfully Submitted by: Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 5 of 5 powered by Legistar™403 From: Cameron Samimi <cameron@lyonstahl.com> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2020 1:14 PM To: Suja Lowenthal <suja@hermosabeach.gov>; City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov> Subject: Violation of Brown Act - Cure and Correct Presiding Officer Members Name of Legislative Body Name of Local Agency Dear City Council This letter is to call your attention to what I believe was a substantial violation of a central provision of the Ralph M. Brown Act, one which may jeopardize the finality of the action taken by the city manager. The nature of the violation is as follows: The City Manager has acted solely or without voting on the matter or hearing any comments from the members of the community. At no time was removal of the Volleyball poles which are privately owned in the city by residents ever voted on or brought to a vote. In fact no resident was made aware ahead of time of such vote and no vote took place within the city council. The action taken was not in compliance with the Brown Act it occurred as the culmination of a discussion in closed session of a matter which the Act does not permit to be discussed in closed session (and/or) there was no adequate notice to the public on the posted agenda for the meeting that the matter acted upon would be discussed, and there was no finding of fact made by the Hermosa Beach City Council that urgent action was necessary on a matter unforeseen at the time the agenda was posted. In the event it appears to you that the conduct of the Hermosa Beach City Council specified herein did not amount to the taking of action, I call your attention to Section 54952.6, which defines “action taken” for the purposes of the Act expansively, i.e. as “a collective decision made by a majority of the members of a legislative body, a collective commitment or promise by a majority of the members of a legislative body to make a positive or negative decision, or an actual vote by a majority of the members of a legislative body when sitting as a body or entity, upon a 404 motion, proposal, resolution, order or ordinance.” As you are aware, the Brown Act creates specific agenda obligations for notifying the public with a “brief description” of each item to be discussed or acted upon, and also creates a legal remedy for illegally taken actions —namely, the judicial invalidation of them upon proper findings of fact and conclusions of law. Pursuant to that provision (Government Code Section 54960.1), I demand that the Hermosa Beach City Council cure and correct the illegally taken action as follows: Please have all posts put back to their respective spots and provide the public the awareness and opportunity to comment of which it was deprived, e.g. the formal and explicit withdrawal from any commitment made, coupled with a disclosure at a subsequent meeting of why individual members of the legislative body took the positions — by vote or otherwise — that they did, accompanied by the full opportunity for informed comment by members of the public at the same meeting, notice of which is properly included on the posted agenda. Informed comment might in certain circumstances include the provision of any and all documents in the possession of the local agency related to the action taken, with copies available to the public on request at the offices of the agency and also at the meeting at which reconsideration of the matter is to occur. As provided by Section 54960.1, you have 30 days from the receipt of this demand to either cure or correct the challenged action or inform me of your decision not to do so. If you fail to cure or correct as demanded, such inaction may leave me no recourse but to seek a judicial invalidation of the challenged action pursuant to Section 54960.1, in which case I would also ask the court to order you to pay my seek court costs and reasonable attorney fees in this matter, pursuant to Section 54960.5. Respectfully yours, Cameron Samimi Hermosa Beach Resident Cameron Samimi First Vice President Lyon Stahl Investment Real Estate C: 310.259.7556 | F: 888.570.2610 cameron@lyonstahl.com | www.LyonStahl.com | DRE 02003570 405 406 Indian Wells (760) 568-2611 Irvine (949) 263-2600 Los Angeles (213) 617-8100 Manhattan Beach (310) 643-8448 Ontario (909) 989-8584 74760 Highway 111, Suite 200, Indian Wells, CA 92210 Phone: (760) 568-2611 | Fax: (760) 340-6698 | www.bbklaw.com Riverside (951) 686-1450 Sacramento (916) 325-4000 San Diego (619) 525-1300 Walnut Creek (925) 977-3300 Washington, DC (202) 785-0600 Michael Jenkins (310) 220-2174 Michael.Jenkins@bbklaw.com August ___, 2020 Mr. Cameron Samimi: The Brown Act demand that you delivered to the City Manager and City Council on July 20, 2020 was considered by the City Council at its meeting of August 11, 2020. A copy of the staff report delivered to the City Council is attached to this letter. For the reasons set forth i n the staff report, the Council has directed me to advise you that the Council has determined that the allegations raised in your complaint are without merit and deficient for lack of evidentiary support. The action, of which you complained, did not and has not occurred. Even if the City Manager were to have taken this action, she would have been within her authority as Director of Emergency Services to do so and, as a non-elected official, would not have been subject to the requirements of the Brown Act. Furthermore, the closed session discussions that you allege took place did not occur and you present no evidence or argument to the contrary. Hence, the City Council will not take any action to cure or correct the challenged actions. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins City Attorney City of Hermosa Beach 65270.00001\33142246.1 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0514 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 BROWN ACT DEMAND FILED BY KEN HARTLEY PERTAINING TO CYPRESS DISTRICT ORDINANCE (City Attorney Michael Jenkins) Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1.Receive and file report; and 2.Direct the City Attorney to send a letter pursuant to Government Code §54960.1 (c)(2) communicating the City Council’s determination that the complaint was filed untimely and further that no Brown Act violation occurred,and therefore that the City Council will not cure or correct the challenged action. Executive Summary: In a letter dated July 21,2020,Kenneth A.Hartley alleges violations of the Brown Act in connection with the Council’s consideration of a text amendment to the M-1 Light Manufacturing Zone allowing for limited event permits for Cypress District businesses.This report analyzes the allegations and legal contentions set forth in the letter and concludes that the demand from Mr.Hartley pertaining to the February 25 meeting is untimely and that no violation of the Brown Act occurred at the February 25 or June 23, 2020 City Council meetings. Accordingly, no action to cure is legally required. Background: To promote transparency and to comply with the Brown Act,City Council meetings are open and public.All business items to be addressed by the City Council generally must be included on a publicly posted agenda.To further promote the goal of accountable government,the statute allows interested persons to “demand”the City cure or correct an action alleged to have been taken without complying with the Brown Act.This procedure allows the City either to account for its actions or take corrective action. These written demands must be filed within 90 days from the date the action was taken or within 30 days if the action was taken at a public meeting on a non-agenda item.The Brown Act requires that the City Council determine whether it will cure or correct the challenged action within 30 days of receiving a timely demand (Government Code Section 54960.1(b)).If the City Council does not act within 30 days,the Council is deemed to have determined not to take any corrective action.No City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 8 powered by Legistar™418 Staff Report REPORT 20-0514 within 30 days,the Council is deemed to have determined not to take any corrective action.No lawsuit may be filed until after the City has a chance to respond to a demand to cure or correct. The City takes every Brown Act allegation seriously,even when an allegation appears on its face to be without merit.In a letter dated July 21,2020,Kenneth A.Hartley alleges violations of the Brown Act in connection with the Council’s consideration of a text amendment to the M-1 Light Manufacturing Zone allowing for limited event permits for Cypress District businesses (“agenda item”).The demand letter from Mr.Hartley is attached (Attachment 1).It is this demand letter that requires the City Council’s attention tonight. Analysis: To assist the Council in evaluating the claims and determining a course of action,this report first analyzes the allegations and legal contentions set forth in the letter and then suggests a recommended course of action.The letter asserts that violations of the Brown Act took place at the February 25, 2020 and June 23, 2020 City Council meetings. The alleged violations are as follows: 1)At both meetings,Mayor Campbell failed to properly disclose a financial interest in the agenda item. 2)On February 25,2020,Mayor Campbell improperly participated in the portion of the hearing wherein the Council voted to support the Mayor Pro Tem’s motion to continue the hearing so that he could obtain a determination letter from the FPPC. 3)During the February 25,2020 meeting,the Mayor Pro Tem did not allow the public to comment on the continuation of the agenda item. 4)Also on February 25,2020,the Mayor Pro Tem failed to disclose a financial interest in the agenda item and to then recuse himself. 5)At the June 23,2020 meeting,the Mayor Pro Tem failed to re-open public comment after Councilmember Fangary disclosed additional information regarding Mayor Campbell’s financial interest in the agenda item. For clarity’s sake,these allegations will be addressed below in chronological order and shall be divided between the two meetings. Allegation #1 In his letter,Mr.Hartley contends that,on February 25,2020,Mayor Campbell was required to disclose a financial interest in a business she owned by alleging the following: City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 8 powered by Legistar™419 Staff Report REPORT 20-0514 “First,given the fact that Mayor Campbell owned a business in the zone that the text amendment would most benefit,she should have properly disclosed her financial interest and recused herself before the hearing even began…In accordance with government code 87105,Mayor Campbell had a duty to publicly disclose her financial interest in detail sufficient for the public to understand, recused herself from the matter and leave the room.” In fact,on February 25,2020,the Mayor did not participate in a hearing on an agenda item as to which she had a conflict of interest.At the meeting’s outset,during the agenda item entitled “Approval of the Agenda,”the City Attorney recommended a continuance of the agenda item to allow time to obtain an FPPC opinion on an alleged conflict of interest on the part of Mayor Pro Tem Massey.The Council then voted to continue the item without comment or discussion.The agenda item was, in effect, removed from the agenda. Earlier in his letter,Mr.Hartley suggests that “Mayor Campbell and the Council opened the item, quickly discussed [the item]and then voted to continue to the hearing.”However,this statement is inaccurate.The public hearing item was never opened;as noted above,it was removed from the agenda during “Approval of the Agenda.”Hence,the Mayor never participated in a public hearing on or in a discussion of the agenda item. Mr.Hartley also suggests that Mayor Campbell may be subject to criminal penalties,under the Brown Act,for having attended a meeting “where action is taken in violation of any provision of [the Brown Act],and where the member intends to deprive the public of information to which the member knows or has reason to know the public is entitled under [the Brown Act].”(Cal.Gov.Code §54959.) However,as explained above,the item was removed from the agenda;hence,no action was taken on the matter on February 25, 2020. The reference to criminal prosecution is baseless. Allegation #2 Next,Mr.Hartley alleges additional violations by the Mayor at the February 25,2020 meeting,by way of the following: “[T]he Mayor improperly participated in the portions of the hearing on 2.25.2020.Instead of leaving,Mayor Campbell led the hearing and voted to support Mayor Pro Tem’s motion to continue the hearing so he could obtain a determination letter from the FPPC.” As discussed above,the agenda item was removed from the agenda and was not opened for consideration or discussion.Furthermore,her participation in the vote to exclude the matter from the agenda was not prejudicial because all four of the remaining Councilmembers also voted to continueCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 8 powered by Legistar™420 Staff Report REPORT 20-0514 agenda was not prejudicial because all four of the remaining Councilmembers also voted to continue the agenda item.A claim for nullification may stand only where prejudice can be shown.(Fowler v. City of Lafayette (2020)46 Cal.App.5th 360,371 [citations omitted];See also Cohan v.City of Thousand Oaks (1994)30 Cal.App.4th 547 [“Nonetheless,violations of the Brown Act do not invalidate a decision. [Citation omitted.] Appellants must show prejudice.”].) Allegation #3 Mr. Hartley’s third allegation is as follows: “Mayor Pro Tem on portions of the hearing on 2.25.2020 did not allow the public to comment as part of public participation.” Although it is not clearly stated,the only discussion of the matter to which Mr.Hartley refers was the approximately one and a half minutes during the approval of the agenda portion of the meeting,when in response to the City Attorney’s advice,the Council continued the agenda item.The Mayor Pro Tem was not presiding over the meeting at the time in question. Section 54954.3(a)of the Brown Act governs the circumstances under which the public must be allowed to address a local legislative body.This Section requires that local legislative bodies allow members of the public to address an agenda item “before or during consideration of an agenda item.” However,the agenda item was removed from the agenda and never considered.The Council is not required to take public comment on a purely housekeeping question of placing an item on or removing an item from its agenda.Coalition of Labor,Agriculture &Business v.County of Santa Barbara Bd.of Supervisors (2005)129 Cal.App.4th 205,209.Moreover,no person sought to speak on the item and therefore no one was denied that opportunity. Allegation #4 Mr.Hartley also accuses the Mayor Pro Tem of failing to disclose his financial interests and recuse himself at the February 25, 2020 meeting by stating the following: “[A]t the 2.25.2020 hearing Councilmember Massey whom also was required to disclose his financial interest and recuse himself,instead made no such disclosures,participated in the hearing and actually made the motion to stop the very hearing that he should not have been part of so he could have time to craft a letter to the FPPC in an effort to later allow him to participate.” As explained above,the agenda item was not opened for public hearing.The Mayor Pro Tem participated in a vote to continue the item so that he could seek an FPPC opinion.Just prior to the February 25 meeting,the City received a letter from Jed Sanford asserting that Mayor Pro TemCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 4 of 8 powered by Legistar™421 Staff Report REPORT 20-0514 February 25 meeting,the City received a letter from Jed Sanford asserting that Mayor Pro Tem Massey should recuse himself due to a conflict of interest.Mayor Pro Tem Massey elected to request an opinion from the FPPC.In an opinion dated May 15,2020 (Opinion No.A-20-040),the FPPC concluded that Mayor Pro Tem Massey did not possess a conflict of interest that would bar him from participating.Hence,Mr.Hartley’s allegations pertaining to a supposed conflict of interest on the part of Mayor Pro Tem Massey are without merit. In summary,I conclude that the allegations pertaining to the February 25 meeting are untimely under the Brown Act and,even so,because the only decision made on February 25 was not to hear the item by approving the agenda without the item, Mr. Hartley fails to raise a violation of the Brown Act. Analysis of June 23, 2020 Meeting Allegations Mr.Hartley also raises two allegations in his demand letter related to the June 23,2020 Council meeting.These allegations have been raised within the statutory timeframe.However,for the reasons set forth below, the allegations do not constitute a Brown Act violation. Allegation #4 The demand letter alleges that,during the June 23,2020 meeting,the Mayor did not adequately disclose her conflict of interest in and recuse herself from the hearing.Mr.Hartley characterizes this allegation as follows: “[A]t the 6.23.2020 portion of the hearing,Mary Campbell once again failed to properly disclose her financial interest in Shockboxx Gallery.Instead,she chose to mislead the public by stating she had previously recused on the previous hearing when in fact she did not,participated,and voted. Additionally,rather than disclose her financial interest in the business this text amendment was designed to help,the Mayor recused due to her personal residence’s proximity to the project.” First,as a factual matter,Mayor Campbell did not state that “she had recused”herself during the February 25,2020 meeting.As Mr.Hartley points out in his demand letter,the Mayor stated only the following:“I would like to announce that I continue to be recused on this item based on the proximity of my home to the area under discussion.”This statement merely reflects that a recusal under the Political Reform Act is for all purposes. Second,at the outset of the public hearing on the agenda item,Mayor Campbell announced that she had a conflict of interest.In accordance with FPPC regulations,she then left the virtual meeting room and did not participate in the matter.I agree with Mr.Hartley that the Mayor should have mentioned both reasons for her recusal and I know that the Mayor understands that now.But,the fact that Mayor Campbell did not disclose the second basis for her conflict of interest does not constitute aCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 5 of 8 powered by Legistar™422 Staff Report REPORT 20-0514 Mayor Campbell did not disclose the second basis for her conflict of interest does not constitute a violation of the Brown Act. In any event,the Mayor’s failure to announce the second basis of her conflict was not prejudicial.To the extent that the public has an interest in avoiding participation by members impaired by a conflict of interest,that interest was satisfied by Mayor Campbell’s recusal.Any action taken,therefore, would not be subject to nullification under Section 54954.3(a).Moreover,the second basis for her disqualification was documented in letters and emails that were part of the public record of the hearing.While not the ideal method of disclosure,this fact certainly helped the public be aware of the Mayor’s husband’s business interest.And,when the ordinance returned to the agenda for a second reading on July 14,Mayor Campbell announced the full extent of her conflict of interest prior to her recusal; no member of the public sought to speak at that time. Third,Mr.Hartley’s contention that the remaining,non-conflicted members of the Council were influenced by the well-known fact that Mayor Campbell’s husband was seeking the zone text amendment is speculation and also not a ground on which to allege a Brown Act violation.The Brown Act does not govern the outcome of City actions, just the manner by which business is conducted. Fourth,Mr.Hartley contends that the public was unaware of Mayor Campbell’s interest in Shockboxx and that their testimony might have been different had they known.The public was,however, informed of the Mayor’s second basis for conflict of interest in the agenda item by virtue of inclusion on the meeting agenda of the following public correspondence,all of which constituted public comment, commenting on Mayor Campbell’s husband’s ownership interest in Shockboxx: Email from Kent Allen dated February 25, 2020 Letter from Jed Sanford dated February 25, 2020 Letter from Jed Sanford dated March 10, 2020 Email from Gary Clark dated June 16, 2020 Email from Kent Allen dated June 23, 2020 Letter from Jed Sanford dated June 23, 2020 Thus,the agenda provided information readily available to the public as to the fact that the Mayor’s husband owns Shockboxx. Finally,the failure to disclose the second basis for recusal is not a matter governed by the Brown Act. The Brown Act does not address recusal requirements under the Political Reform Act.The Mayor’s the omission simply does not violate any provision of the Act. Allegation #5 The final allegation raised in Mr.Hartley’s demand letter relates again to the Mayor Pro Tem’s allegedCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 6 of 8 powered by Legistar™423 Staff Report REPORT 20-0514 The final allegation raised in Mr.Hartley’s demand letter relates again to the Mayor Pro Tem’s alleged decision not to open the hearing to public comment and is stated as follows: “[A]t the June 23,2020 hearing when key information regarding Mayor Campbell’s undisclosed financial interest was disclosed by Councilmember Fangary after public comment,Mayor Pro Tem Massey failed to re-open public comment given this new information.” The Council accepted public comment during the public hearing,which satisfies the Brown Act.Mr. Hartley’s concern that public comment was not re-opened after the allotted period for public comment on the agenda item had expired does not state a violation of the Brown Act’s public comment requirements. Under Government Code section 54954.3,the City may make reasonable regulations governing public participation,such as,“regulations limiting the total amount of time allocated for public testimony on particular issues and for each individual speaker.”(Gov.Code §54954.3(b)(1).)On June 23,2020,after receiving a report from the Community Development Director,the City Council opened this agenda item for public comment,and two members of the public spoke over the course of approximately six minutes.The Mayor Pro Tem asked repeatedly whether there were more individuals who wished to speak,and closed the public comment period only after having given every opportunity for such individuals to make themselves known.And,significantly,no member of the public requested to speak following Councilmember Fangary’s comment;hence,no member of the public was denied the opportunity to comment. In summary,I conclude that the allegations pertaining to the June 23,2020 meeting fail to raise a violation of the Brown Act. Conclusion: Based on the foregoing,I conclude that the demand from Mr.Hartley pertaining to the February 25 meeting is untimely and that no violation of the Brown Act occurred at the February 25 or June 23, 2020 City Council meetings. Accordingly, no action to cure is legally required. Recommendation: Receive and file this report and direct the City Attorney to send the letter to Mr.Hartley attached as Attachment 2 to this report indicating that the Council considered his letter and will not take further action with respect to his demand. In the alternative,although it is my opinion that a cure is not legally required,should the Council desire to undertake a cure,it would direct staff to place an item on a future agenda to repeal theCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 7 of 8 powered by Legistar™424 Staff Report REPORT 20-0514 desire to undertake a cure,it would direct staff to place an item on a future agenda to repeal the ordinance at issue and schedule a public hearing to reconsider it. Attachments: 1.Complaint dated July 2, 2020 from Mr. Ken Hartley 2.Proposed letter to Mr. Hartley Respectfully Submitted by: Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Concur: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 8 of 8 powered by Legistar™425 1 July 21, 2020 Hermosa Beach City Council City of Hermosa Beach Dear City Council, This letter is to call your attention to what appear to be substantial violations of the Ralph M. Brown Act that jeopardize the finality of the action taken by the Hermosa Beach City Council on June 23, 2020. The hearing, text amendment TA-19.1 “CONSIDERATION OF TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING ZONE INCLUDING A LIMITED EVENT PERMIT FOR CYPRESS DISTRICT BUSINESSES” began on February 25, 2020 and concluded with a vote to pass an amendment to the M-1 Light Industrial Zone on June 23, 2020. The public was deprived of key information that was necessary for it to properly and fully-participate in deliberation of the project. The public was deprived of the right to publicly participate before decision-making. The most blatant and extreme violation of the Brown Act was Mayor Campbell using her public position to circumvent transparency for her personal financial enrichment. The Mayor failed to disclose her substantial financial interest in the project, improperly participated and voted, provided misleading statements as to her recusal, and failed to provide the opportunity for public comment. Background At the meeting on February 25, 2020, the Hermosa Beach City Council public hearing listed item 5(a): “CONSIDERATION OF TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE M- 1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING ZONE INCLUDING A LIMITED EVENT PERMIT FOR CYPRESS DISTRICT BUSINESSES”. This item was initiated by the Mayor Pro Tem Massey at the request of the Mayor’s husband Michael Collins during public comment. Mayor Campbell and her husband Michael Collins own an art gallery business named Shockboxx Gallery in the Cypress District. Shockboxx Gallery is in the business of selling retail art and renting the space for events. Shockboxx Gallery has been operating illegally without proper zoning, permits, or approvals. City Council and City Staff tacitly approved of this illegal business, actively patronized it, and refused to take any corrective action against it until the issue was made public. The zoning code does not allow for retail sales or assembly uses in the M-1 zone., and Shockboxx Gallery would be required to close unless the City amended the 426 2 zoning code. This is the source of the City’s Council’s proposal for allowing “limited event permit” zoning text amendment would give the gallery the opportunity to hold 72 events over a two-year period. With the existing 12-event permit process already in place, this would now allow the art gallery to have events every weekend. Apart from a business owned in-part by a sitting City Council member, it is difficult to imagine any business in any district that would enjoy similar accommodation or such preferential treatment. As the initial hearing began on February 25th, the City Attorney initiated a discussion regarding a request that the City Council discuss and vote to postpone the hearing to another date. Mr. Jenkins wished to obtain a letter from the Federal Political Practices Commission to determine if Councilmember Massey could participate in the hearing due to his personal residence within 500ft of the project. Apparently, Mr. Jenkins either found out just before the hearing that Mayor Pro Tem Massey intended to not recuse himself or he was planning on allowing Councilmember Massey to participate regardless of the FPPC requirement and was caught off guard by a last minute written communication reminding Mr. Jenkins of this requirement. At Mr. Jenkins request, Mayor Campbell and the Council opened the item, quickly discussed and then voted to continue the hearing. Councilmember Massey made the motion, it was seconded and vote was taken to postpone the hearing. The public was not allowed to comment before the vote was taken. At the continuance of the hearing on June 23, 2020, the Hermosa Beach City Council reopening the item “CONSIDERATION OF TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING ZONE INCLUDING A LIMITED EVENT PERMIT FOR CYPRESS DISTRICT BUSINESSES.” With Mayor Pro Tem Massey now having a determination letter from the FPPC that seems to allow his participation in the hearing, Mayor Campbell now recused herself and said: “I would like to announce that I continue to be recused on this item based on the proximity of my home to the area under discussion.” The Mayor’s recusal meant that the Mayor Pro Tem would act as the Mayor for this hearing. During the hearing, after the staff report and public comment, another Councilmember stated his concerns about the Mayor’s disclosure: “I have concerns about the Mayor recusing herself today and mentioning the reason she is recusing herself is because of the proximity of the property to her residence and not the fact that she and her husband own a project in that district, that concerns me cause it’s not transparent. And it’s also my understanding that that business is not listed in the Mayors Form 700 disclosure”. The same Councilmember also expressed concern regarding the Mayor Pro Tem’s participation in the matter prior to his obtaining an FPPC determination and the motivation behind the unusual efforts to participate. 427 3 “Justin you also know that you recused yourself on two litigation matters specifically because these pertained to a property in the Cypress district but for inexplicable reasons you decided to postpone this meeting for about four months just so you can get a waiver from the FPPC so you can participate, which gives the perception that you are basically trying to do this just so you can back-up the Mayor and support her business…. you took action to support the Mayor and her business because the Mayor’s business happens to be in the district, that’s my position, you can disagree with it, but I think that is the only reason you make the exception in this case.” Having been notified of the obvious disclosure omission before public participation, the Mayor Pro Tem continued on without re-opening public comment given this new and important information. Ultimately a vote was taken to pass the text amendment allowing the special dispensation for the Mayor’s husband’s business. Violations First, given the fact that Mayor Campbell owned a business in the zone that the text amendment would most benefit, she should have properly disclosed her financial interest and recused herself before the hearing even began at both hearings. In accordance with government code 87105, Mayor Campbell had a duty to publicly disclose her financial interest in detail sufficient for the public to understand, recused herself from the matter and leave the room. The public was intentionally deprived of this information, which certainly was an important consideration in the creation of the text amendment. There are new regulations that bear directly on this situation (2 Cal. Code Regs. Section 18707), and it appears Mayor Campbell’s failure to properly disclose the reasons for her recusal are in direct violation of them. Additionally, Brown Act section 54949 states each member of a legislative body who attends a meeting of that where action is taken in violation of any provision of this chapter, and where the member intends to deprive the public of information to which the member knows or has reason to know the public is entitled under this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor. Clearly, at a minimum Mayor Campbell certainly knew the public was entitled to know about her financial interest in the project and intentionally deprived the public of that information. Perhaps the City Prosecutor or District Attorney’s Public Integrity Unit can decide whether this is something worth pursuing. Second, the Mayor improperly participated in the portions of the hearing on 2.25.2020. Instead of leaving, Mayor Campbell led the hearing and voted to support Mayor Pro Tem’s motion to continue the hearing so he could obtain a determination letter from the FPPC. 428 4 Third, Mayor Pro Tem on portions of the hearing on 2.25.2020 did not allow the public to comment as part of public participation. Fourth, at the 2.25.2020 hearing Councilmember Massey whom also was required to disclose his financial interest and recuse himself, instead made no such disclosures, participated in the hearing and actually made the motion to stop the very hearing that he should not have been part of so he could have time to craft a letter to the FPPC in an effort to later allow him to participate. Fifth, at the 6.23.2020 portion of the hearing, Mary Campbell once again failed to properly disclose her financial interest in Shockboxx Gallery. Instead, she chose to mislead the public by stating she had previously recused on the previous hearing when in fact she did not, participated, and voted. Additionally, rather than disclose her financial interest in the business this text amendment was designed to help, the Mayor recused due to her personal residence’s proximity to the project. Finally, at the June 23, 2020 hearing when key information regarding Mayor Campbell’s undisclosed financial interest was disclosed by Councilmember Fangary after public comment, Mayor Pro Tem Massey failed to re-open public comment given this new information. The City Council deprived the public of critical information that could have impacted this legislative action. Had Mayor Campbell properly and fully disclosed her financial interest in a business that would directly financially benefit her and her husband, the public may have had something to say about this self-serving process. The public was not aware of the Mayor’s financial interest is also supported by the fact that the Mayor omitted her financial interest in Shockboxx Gallery as required by the FPPC in Form 700. As you know, the very reason the FPPC requires financial disclosures in its Form 700 requirements is that “it provides transparency and ensures accountability in two ways: It provides necessary information to the public about an official's personal financial interests to ensure that officials are making decisions in the best interest of the public and not enhancing their personal finances.” Unfortunately, not only did Mayor Campbell not adequately disclose, she actively participated in guiding the hearing to directly benefit her. She both participated, as Mayor allowed a Councilmember who should have recused to participate and make motions, as well as voted on the item. Given the fact that Councilmember Massey was the councilmember that requested for the item to be agendized, Mayor Campbell understood that his participation in supporting the text amendment was to her financial benefit. This is a brazen example of a City official using her public office for personal enrichment. 429 5 As you are aware, the Brown Act creates specific agenda obligations related to an item to be discussed or acted upon, and also creates a legal remedy for illegally taken actions—namely, the judicial invalidation of them upon proper findings of fact and conclusions of law. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54960.1, I demand that the Hermosa Beach City Council cure and correct the illegally taken action as follows: (1) Hold a properly noticed hearing and require Mayor Campbell adequately disclose her financial interest in Shockboxx Gallery and allow the public an opportunity to comment of which it was deprived. (2) Provide a formal and explicit withdrawal from any commitment made, coupled with a disclosure at a subsequent meeting of why individual members of the legislative body took the positions — by vote or otherwise — that they did, accompanied by the full opportunity for informed comment by members of the public at the same meeting, notice of which is properly included on the posted agenda. Informed comment might in certain circumstances include the provision of any and all documents in the possession of the local agency related to the action taken, with copies available to the public on request at the offices of the agency and also at the meeting at which reconsideration of the matter is to occur. As provided by Section 54960.1, you have 30 days from the receipt of this demand to either cure or correct the challenged action or inform me of your decision not to do so. If you fail to cure or correct as demanded, such inaction may leave me no recourse but to seek a judicial invalidation of the challenged action pursuant to Section 54960.1, in which case I would also ask the court to order you to pay my court costs and reasonable attorney fees in this matter, pursuant to Section 54960.5. Respectfully yours, Ken Hartley 723 30th Street 430 Indian Wells (760) 568-2611 Irvine (949) 263-2600 Los Angeles (213) 617-8100 Manhattan Beach (310) 643-8448 Ontario (909) 989-8584 74760 Highway 111, Suite 200, Indian Wells, CA 92210 Phone: (760) 568-2611 | Fax: (760) 340-6698 | www.bbklaw.com Riverside (951) 686-1450 Sacramento (916) 325-4000 San Diego (619) 525-1300 Walnut Creek (925) 977-3300 Washington, DC (202) 785-0600 Michael Jenkins (310) 220-2174 Michael.Jenkins@bbklaw.com August ___, 2020 Mr. Kenneth A. Hartley: The Brown Act demand that you delivered to the Hermosa Beach City Council on July 21, 2020 was considered by the City Council at its meeting of August 11, 2020. A copy of the staff report delivered to the City Council is attached to this letter. For the reasons set forth in the staff report, the Council has directed me to advise you that the Council has determined that the allegations raised in your complaint are without merit and fail to state a violation of the Brown Act. The agenda item at issue in your complaint was never opened for a public hearing at the February 25, 2020 meeting. For this reason, disclosure of conflicts of interest by councilmembers and public comment on the item were both unnecessary. Furthermore, your allegations regarding the Council’s February 25, 2020 meeting are untimely. At the June 23, 2020 meeting, the item was opened for a public hearing. However, prior to the public hearing, the Mayor recused herself due to a conflict of interest. Any alleged failure by the Mayor to disclose additional conflicts of interest prior to her recusal was non-prejudicial and, in any event, not a violation of the Brown Act. After the Mayor’s recusal, the public was afforded an opportunity to comment on the agenda item, and no member of the public was denied an opportunity to speak at any point in the proceeding. For the aforementioned reasons and those set forth in the attached staff report, your complaint is untimely and alleges no violations of the Brown Act. Hence, the City Council will not take any action to cure or correct the challenged actions. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins City Attorney City of Hermosa Beach 431 July 27, 2020 Page 2 65270.00001\33155728.1 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 August 11, 2020 Hermosa Beach City Council City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Dear City Council, I see in your agenda packet for tonight’s meeting a response to my July 21, 2020 let-ter by the City Attorney. It is disappointing that the City has decided to simply avoid responding in a meaningful way to the issues I raised, but is instead ducking the very serious problems identified behind the assertion that the claims were not raised in time. First, the fact that the City Council, through the City Attorney, is refusing to re-spond to blatant and obvious abuses of power to benefit a business in which Mayor Campbell has a financial interest is downright disturbing. The fact that Shockboxx “gallery” was able to openly conduct business without any permits and approvals, serve alcohol without any licenses, hold events that spilled into the street with live, amplified music is truly unbelievable. No other business in the City would have been allowed to break the rules so blatantly, and for so long, without any repercus-sion. It speaks volumes that neither Mayor Campbell nor anyone else on the City Council wants to speak to these violations and are content to hide behind the City Attor-ney’s claims that I did not bring this wrongdoing to the public’s attention in time for the City Council to correct it. City Attorney’s letter does not address California Code of Regulations section 18707 concerning “Disqualification Requirements.” The regulation was designed to ad-dress the exact situation presented here. A City Council member, like Mayor Camp-bell, cannot recuse herself from a vote in which she has an obvious financial interest without disclosing to the public that she has an obvious financial interest. To do otherwise is misleading. Yet this is exactly what she did. Again, it is easier for Mayor Campbell and the City Council to hide behind the City Attorney’s determination that I did not raise the violation of the regulation in time for the City Council to correct it. I think I did, and this is another fig leaf to cover the Mayor’s actions. 443 Additionally, this makes me wonder if there are clear violations of law in which the City Council is engaged. If I don’t catch them in time, will they be dismissed and the illegality allowed to stand because City Attorney determines we were too late? Whatever the City Council and City Attorney think the definition of transparency is this is the opposite. The only thing transparent about this is that the City Council, with the aid of the City Attorney, is retroactively legitimizing something that was plainly and obviously illegal. The City Council should comply with the Brown Act and Regulations that apply here and be honest with the public about what’s happening. Hiding behind the City Attorney’s apron is no way for our elected official to act. Regards, Ken Hartley 444 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0513 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 DESIGNATION OF CITY NEGOTIATOR (City Attorney Michael Jenkins) Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 20-XXXX establishing a policy for identification of the City’s designated representatives for purposes of conducting a closed session under Government Code section 54957.6 relative to negotiations with represented and unrepresented employees. Background: Government Code Section 54957.6(a)provides that the City Council may hold a closed session for the purpose of giving direction to the City’s designated representative relative to negotiations with the City’s represented and unrepresented employees: (a)Notwithstanding any other provision of law,a legislative body of a local agency may hold closed sessions with the local agency’s designated representatives regarding the salaries, salary schedules,or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of its represented and unrepresented employees,and,for represented employees,any other matter within the statutorily provided scope of representation. However,prior to the closed session,the legislative body of the local agency shall hold an open and public session in which it identifies its designated representatives. Government Code Section 54954.5(f)provides that the City’s designated representative be identified on the closed session agenda and Government Code Section 54957.6 (a),quoted above,requires that the City’s designated representative be identified prior to the closed session. Analysis: The Brown Act provisions quoted above require “identification”of the City’s representative on the agenda but do not dictate the means by which the negotiator is selected.In October 2019, Councilmember Fangary expressed a preference for Council selection of the negotiator prior to City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™445 Staff Report REPORT 20-0513 identification of the negotiator on the closed session agenda. Rather than revisit this issue in the future,it is recommended that the Council adopt the resolution attached to this report to establish a policy on designation of the City’s representative.As noted in the policy, the Council reserves the right to change the designation if it chooses to do so. Attachments: 1.Resolution identifying designated city labor negotiator Respectfully Submitted by: Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Concur: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™446 RESOLUTION NO. 20-XXXX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA IDENTIFYING DESIGNATED CITY LABOR NEGOTIATORS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. California Government Code section 54957.6 allows the City Council to convene a closed session in order to meet with and give direction to its designated representatives with regard to labor negotiations. Subparagraph (a) of that section requires the Council to identify its designated representative in an open and public session prior to the closed session and Section 54954.5(f) requires that the City’s designated representatives be listed on the closed session agenda. SECTION 2. Unless the City Council determines otherwise, the City Manager is designated as the City’s representative in connection with closed sessions pertaining to labor negotiations with the City’s employee bargaining units. The City Clerk is directed to identify the City Manager as the designated representative on the closed session agenda for any closed session noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 for the City’s represented employees, unless the City Council has designated a different representative. SECTION 3. Unless the City Council determines otherwise, the Mayor is designated as the City’s representative in connection with closed sessions pertaining to labor negotiations with unrepresented employees. The City Clerk is directed to identify the Mayor as the designated representative on the closed session agenda for any closed session noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 for the City’s unrepresented employees, unless the City Council has designated a different representative. SECTION 4. Nothing in this policy shall be construed to relieve the City Council of its practice of convening in open session prior to recessing to closed session in compliance with the Brown Act. SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach on this __ day of _______________, 2020. 447 ___________________________ Mary Campbell Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ Eduardo Sarmiento City Clerk 448 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ) The foregoing Resolution No. ___ entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA IDENTIFYING DESIGNATED CITY LABOR NEGOTIATORS was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on _____________, 2020 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: __________________________ Eduardo Sarmiento City Clerk 449 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0528 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 CONSIDERATION OF SLATE OF STATE HOUSING BILLS (Ken Robertson, Community Development Director) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and provide direction regarding pending legislation from the 2020 California legislative related to housing and local authority over zoning and land use matters. Executive Summary: Several California State Assembly and Senate bills in various stages of the legislative process are under consideration to continue to address the housing affordability crisis in California.City Councils in neighboring cities have formally opposed certain bills and requested Hermosa Beach to consider opposition to support their efforts.The main concern is the continuing trend of the State usurping local authority over zoning and land use matters in a “one size fits all” approach. Background: Several pending bills have been identified as bringing up concerns with respect to housing and local authority. The list includes: ·AB 831 (Grayson)-Planning and zoning: Housing, development application modifications ·AB 953 (Ting)-Land use: accessory dwelling units ·AB 1279 (Bloom)-Housing Developments. High Resource Areas ·AB 2323 (Friedman)-California Environmental Quality Act Exemptions ·AB 2405 (Burke)-Right to safe, decent, and affordable housing ·AB 3153 (Rivas, Robert)-Parking and zoning: bicycle and car-share parking credits ·AB 3269 (Chui)-State and local agencies: homelessness plan ·SB 288 (Wiener)-California Environmental Quality Act: exemptions ·SB 899 (Weiner)-Planning and zoning:housing development:higher education institutions and religious institutions ·AB 725 (Wicks)-General Plans:housing element:moderate-income and above moderate- City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™450 Staff Report REPORT 20-0528 ·AB 725 (Wicks)-General Plans:housing element:moderate-income and above moderate- income housing: suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions ·AB 1851 (Wicks)-Religious institution affiliated housing development projects:parking requirements ·AB 2168 (McCarty)-Planning and zoning:electric vehicle charging stations:permit application: approval ·AB 2345 (Gonzalez)-Planning and zoning:density bonuses:annual report:affordable housing ·AB 2988 (Chu)-Planning and zoning:supportive housing:number of units:emergency shelter zones ·AB 3107 (Bloom)-Planning and zoning: General Plan: housing development. ·SB 902 (Weiner)-Planning and zoning: housing development: zoning ·SB 995 (Atkins)-Environmental Quality:Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2011: housing projects ·SB 1085-(Skinner)Density Bonus Law:qualifications for incentives or concessions:student housing for lower income students:moderate-income persons and families:local government constraints ·SB 1120-(Atkins) Subdivisions: tentative maps ·SB 1138-(Weiner) Housing Element: emergency shelters: rezoning of sites Attached are positions as expressed by various agencies and one lobbying group ‘Citizens for Local Control’, and the link to the City of Redondo Beach staff report: <https://redondo.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4581930&GUID=7317ED54-C363-430C- Analysis: Given the short notice for placing this item on the agenda, staff has not conducted any in-depth analysis of how these bills may affect Hermosa Beach. Therefore, staff looked to the South Bay Cities Councils of Governments, the Contract Cities Association, and adjacent cities for guidance on its potential direct and indirect effects and regional implications. These agencies’ positions on some of the bills are attached. Also, the following is a link to the League of California Cities web site which lists their positions on pending bills: <http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publish.aspx?id=1B8E7B0E-FF4A-4591-A329- DAA417F0CAEC> Based on the concerns expressed by our regional partners,the overall quality of life in Hermosa Beach could be potentially affected and the goals in PLAN Hermosa compromised with passage of some of these bills.In addition,these bills may continue the trend of the State Legislature of City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™451 Staff Report REPORT 20-0528 some of these bills.In addition,these bills may continue the trend of the State Legislature of imposing mandates that preempt local authority and which seek over-simplified “one size fits all” solutions to complex State problems.Considering that there are so many bills of this nature, unchecked,this trend may compromise planning efforts on both the local and regional levels to deal with these very same issues in their local context,particularly in the upcoming Housing Element update.As stated by the SBCCOG related to SB50 last year:“local governments are in the best position to determine politically acceptable siting and density of new housing in order to minimize GHG emissions (criteria pollutants and congestion)while meeting housing development goals”. Conversely,while some of these bills may impose standards on cities that are perceived as unreasonable and that may preempt local regulation,one may also argue that comprehensive statewide reform may be necessary in these areas to sufficiently and equitably combat the state’s rising housing and homelessness issues, among others. General Plan Consistency: Should local authority be compromised by any of the bills they would be potentially in conflict with many of the broad goals identified in PLAN Hermosa.Specifically,cooperation with our partners in the region to oppose continued efforts to preempt local authority would be consistent with the following goal(s): Goal 4:A leader and partner in the region.As a small community in a large metropolitan region, the City of Hermosa Beach understands and capitalizes on our role and responsibility to collaborate with other agencies and nearby jurisdictions on issues of mutual concern. 4.3 Collaboration with adjacent jurisdictions.Maintain strong collaborative relationships with adjacent jurisdictions and work together on projects of mutual interest and concern. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Attachments: 1.Assembly and Senate Housing-related bills summary 2.SBCCOG Legislative Positions Matrix 3.League of California Cities Bill Watch Matrix <http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publish.aspx?id=1B8E7B0E-FF4A-4591-A329- 4.Contract Cities Association Bill Watch Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Concur:Nico De Anda-Scaia, Assistant to the City Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™452 Staff Report REPORT 20-0528 Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™453 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0528 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 CONSIDERATION OF SLATE OF STATE HOUSING BILLS (Ken Robertson, Community Development Director) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and provide direction regarding pending legislation from the 2020 California legislative related to housing and local authority over zoning and land use matters. Executive Summary: Several California State Assembly and Senate bills in various stages of the legislative process are under consideration to continue to address the housing affordability crisis in California.City Councils in neighboring cities have formally opposed certain bills and requested Hermosa Beach to consider opposition to support their efforts.The main concern is the continuing trend of the State usurping local authority over zoning and land use matters in a “one size fits all” approach. Background: Several pending bills have been identified as bringing up concerns with respect to housing and local authority. The list includes: ·AB 831 (Grayson)-Planning and zoning: Housing, development application modifications ·AB 953 (Ting)-Land use: accessory dwelling units ·AB 1279 (Bloom)-Housing Developments. High Resource Areas ·AB 2323 (Friedman)-California Environmental Quality Act Exemptions ·AB 2405 (Burke)-Right to safe, decent, and affordable housing ·AB 3153 (Rivas, Robert)-Parking and zoning: bicycle and car-share parking credits ·AB 3269 (Chui)-State and local agencies: homelessness plan ·SB 288 (Wiener)-California Environmental Quality Act: exemptions ·SB 899 (Weiner)-Planning and zoning:housing development:higher education institutions and religious institutions ·AB 725 (Wicks)-General Plans:housing element:moderate-income and above moderate- City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 8/11/2020Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™454 Staff Report REPORT 20-0528 ·AB 725 (Wicks)-General Plans:housing element:moderate-income and above moderate- income housing: suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions ·AB 1851 (Wicks)-Religious institution affiliated housing development projects:parking requirements ·AB 2168 (McCarty)-Planning and zoning:electric vehicle charging stations:permit application: approval ·AB 2345 (Gonzalez)-Planning and zoning:density bonuses:annual report:affordable housing ·AB 2988 (Chu)-Planning and zoning:supportive housing:number of units:emergency shelter zones ·AB 3107 (Bloom)-Planning and zoning: General Plan: housing development. ·SB 902 (Weiner)-Planning and zoning: housing development: zoning ·SB 995 (Atkins)-Environmental Quality:Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2011: housing projects ·SB 1085-(Skinner)Density Bonus Law:qualifications for incentives or concessions:student housing for lower income students:moderate-income persons and families:local government constraints ·SB 1120-(Atkins) Subdivisions: tentative maps ·SB 1138-(Weiner) Housing Element: emergency shelters: rezoning of sites Attached are positions as expressed by various agencies and one lobbying group ‘Citizens for Local Control’, and the link to the City of Redondo Beach staff report: <https://redondo.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4581930&GUID=7317ED54-C363-430C- Analysis: Given the short notice for placing this item on the agenda, staff has not conducted any in-depth analysis of how these bills may affect Hermosa Beach. Therefore, staff looked to the South Bay Cities Councils of Governments, the Contract Cities Association, and adjacent cities for guidance on its potential direct and indirect effects and regional implications. These agencies’ positions on some of the bills are attached. Also, the following is a link to the League of California Cities web site which lists their positions on pending bills: <http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publish.aspx?id=1B8E7B0E-FF4A-4591-A329- DAA417F0CAEC> Based on the concerns expressed by our regional partners,the overall quality of life in Hermosa Beach could be potentially affected and the goals in PLAN Hermosa compromised with passage of some of these bills.In addition,these bills may continue the trend of the State Legislature of City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 8/11/2020Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™455 Staff Report REPORT 20-0528 some of these bills.In addition,these bills may continue the trend of the State Legislature of imposing mandates that preempt local authority and which seek over-simplified “one size fits all” solutions to complex State problems.Considering that there are so many bills of this nature, unchecked,this trend may compromise planning efforts on both the local and regional levels to deal with these very same issues in their local context,particularly in the upcoming Housing Element update.As stated by the SBCCOG related to SB50 last year:“local governments are in the best position to determine politically acceptable siting and density of new housing in order to minimize GHG emissions (criteria pollutants and congestion)while meeting housing development goals”. Conversely,while some of these bills may impose standards on cities that are perceived as unreasonable and that may preempt local regulation,one may also argue that comprehensive statewide reform may be necessary in these areas to sufficiently and equitably combat the state’s rising housing and homelessness issues, among others. General Plan Consistency: Should local authority be compromised by any of the bills they would be potentially in conflict with many of the broad goals identified in PLAN Hermosa.Specifically,cooperation with our partners in the region to oppose continued efforts to preempt local authority would be consistent with the following goal(s): Goal 4:A leader and partner in the region.As a small community in a large metropolitan region, the City of Hermosa Beach understands and capitalizes on our role and responsibility to collaborate with other agencies and nearby jurisdictions on issues of mutual concern. 4.3 Collaboration with adjacent jurisdictions.Maintain strong collaborative relationships with adjacent jurisdictions and work together on projects of mutual interest and concern. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Attachments: 1.Assembly and Senate Housing-related bills summary 2.SBCCOG Legislative Positions Matrix 3.League of California Cities Bill Watch Matrix <http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publish.aspx?id=1B8E7B0E-FF4A-4591-A329- 4.Contract Cities Association Bill Watch Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Concur:Nico De Anda-Scaia, Assistant to the City Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 8/11/2020Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™456 Staff Report REPORT 20-0528 Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 8/11/2020Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™457 SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 SB 902 THIRD READING Bill No: SB 902 Author: Wiener (D), et al. Amended : 5/21/20 Vote: 21 SENATE HOUSING COMMITTEE: 9-0, 5/26/20 AYES: Wiener, Caballero, Durazo, McGuire, Moorlach, Roth, Skinner, Umberg, Wieckowski NO VOTE RECORDED: Morrell, Bates SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 6/18/20 AYES: Portantino, Bradford, Hill, Jones, Leyva, Wieckowski NOES: Bates SUBJECT: Planning and zoning: housing development: density SOURCE: California YIMBY Habitat for Humanity California DIGEST: This bill permits a local government to pass an ordinance to zone any parcel up to 10 units of residential density per parcel, at a height specified by the local government in the ordinance, if the parcel is located in a transit -rich area, a jobs -rich area, or an urban infill site, as specified. ANALYSIS: Existing law: 1) Requires a local jurisdiction to give public notice of a hearing whenever a person applies for a zoning variance, special use permit, conditional use permit, zoning ordinance amendment, o r general or specific plan amendment. 2) Requires the board of zoning adjustment or zoning administrator to hear and decide applications for conditional uses or other permits when the zoning 458 SB 902 Page 2 ordinance provides therefor and establishes criteria for determining those matters, and applications for variances from the terms of the zoning ordinance. 3) Exempts the adoption of an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance by a city or county from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This bill: 1) Defines “transit rich area” as a parcel within one-half mile of a major transit stop or a parcel on a high quality bus corridor. Defines “high -quality bus corridor” as a corridor with a fixed -route bus s ervice that meets specified service interval times. 2) Defines “jobs -rich area” as an area defined by the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), in consultation with the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) that is high opportunity and either jobs rich or would enable shorter commuter distances based upon whether, in a regional analysis, the tract meets both of the following: a) The tract is high opportunity, meaning its characteristics are associated with positive educational and economic outco mes for households of all income levels. b) The tract meets either of the following criteria: i) New housing sited on the tract would enable residents to live near more jobs than is typical for tracts in the region. ii) New housing sited in the tract would enable shorter commute distances for residents, relative to existing commute patters for jobs -housing fit. 3) Requires HCD, beginning January 1, 2022, to publish and update, every five years thereafter a map showing “jo bs-rich areas” as described in 2) above. 4) Defines “urban infill” site as a site that satisfies all of the following: a) A site that is a legal parcel or parcels located in a city if, and only if, the city boundaries include some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster, or for unincorporated areas, a legal parcel or parcels wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster. b) A site in which at least 75% of the perimeter of the site adjoins parcels that are developed with urban uses. 459 SB 902 Page 3 c) A site that is zoned for residential use or res idential mixed -use development, or has a general plan designation that allows residential use or a mix of residential and nonresidential sues, with at least 2/3 of the square footage of the development designated for residential use. 5) Permits a local government to pass an ordinance, notwithstanding any local restrictions on zoning ordinances, to zone any parcel up to 10 units of residential density per parcel, at a height specified by the local government in the ordinance, if the parcel is located in one of the following: a) A transit-rich area. b) A jobs -rich area. c) An urban infill site. 6) Specifies that ordinances consistent with (5) above is not a project for purposes of CEQA. Comments 1) Author’s Statement. According to the author, “SB 902 is a thoughtful and balanced approach to California’s housing crisis that provides cities with a powerful new streamlining tool, if they choose to take advantage of it, for increasing density in non-sprawl areas to as many as 10 housing units per parcel. By allowing rezoning to occur in a sensible and streamlined way, SB 902 will help ease California’s housing crisis, spurred by a statewide shortage of 3.5 million homes and California ranking 49 out of 50 states in homes per capita. Given that cities face significantly increased housing production goals under the revised Regional Housing Needs Assessment and are required by the state Housing Element Law to complete rezonings to accommodate these goals, SB 902 is a timely and powerful new tool for cities to use in their comprehensive planning efforts.” 2) Housing needs and approvals generally. Every city and county in California is required to develop a general plan that outlines the community’s vision of future development through a series of policy statements and goals. A community’s general plan lays the foundation for all future land use decisions, as these decisions must be consistent with the plan. General plans are comprised of several elements that address various land use topics. Seven elements are mandated by state law: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open-space, noise, and safety. Each community’s general plan must include a housing element, which outlines a long-term plan for meeting 460 SB 902 Page 4 the community’s existing and projected housing needs. The housing elemen t demonstrates how the community plans to accommodate its “fair share” of its region’s housing needs. To do so, each community establishes an inventory of sites designated for new housing that is sufficient to accommodate its fair share. Communities also identify regulatory barriers to housing development and propose strategies to address those barriers. State law requires cities and counties to update their housing elements every eight years. 3) Zoning ordinances generally. Cities and counties enact zoning ordinances to implement their general plans. Zoning determines the type of housing that can be built. In addition, before building new housing, housing developers must obtain one or more permits from local planning departments and must also obtain approval from local planning commissions, city councils, or county board of supervisors. A zoning ordinance may be subject to CEQA if it will have a significant impact upon the environment. The adoption of ADU ordinances, however, are explicitly exempt from CEQA. There are also some several statutory exemptions that provide limited environmental review for projects that are consistent with a previously adopted general plan, community plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance. 4) Denser Housing in Single-Family Zoning . California’s high — and rising — land costs necessitate dense housing construction for a project to be financially viable and for the housing to ultimately be affordable to lower -income households. Yet, recent trends in California show that new housing has not commensurately increased in density. In a 2016 analysis, the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) found that the housing density of a typical neighborhood in California’s coastal metropolitan areas increased only by four percent during the 2000s. In addition, the pattern of development in California has changed in ways that limit new housing opportunities. A 2016 analysis by BuildZoom found that new development has shifted from moderate but widespread density to pockets of high-density housing near downtown cores surrounded by vast swaths of low-density single-family housing. Specifically, construction of moderately-dense housing (2 to 49 units) in California peaked in the 1960s and 1970s and has slowed in recent decades. A 2019 Zillow report found that even modest densification, such as duplexes and fourplexes could result in millions more homes. Across 17 metro areas analyzed nationwide, allowing 10% of single-family lots to house two units instead of one could yield almost 3.3 million add itional housing units to the existing housing stock. In the L.A. region, if one in five single-family lots were re-zoned to hold two homes, the local housing stock could be boosted by 461 SB 902 Page 5 775,000 homes. Allowing four homes instead of two on those same 20% of single-family lots could yield a housing stock increase of more than 2.3 million homes, or a 53.4% boost over the current stock when combined with homes already expected to be built. 5) Housing near Transit. Research has shown that encouraging more dense housing near transit serves not only as a means of increasing ridership of public transportation to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs), but also a solution to our state’s housing crisis. As part of California’s overall strategy to combat climate change, the Legislature began the process of encouraging more transit oriented development with the passage of SB 375 (Steinberg, Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008). SB 375 is aimed at reducing the amount that people drive and associated GHGs by requiring the coordination of transportation, housing, and land use planning. The McKinsey Report found that increasing housing demand around high - frequency public transit stations could build 1.2 – 3 million units within a half- mile radius of transit. The report notes that this new development would have to be sensitive to the community’s’ character, and recommends that local communities proactively rezone station areas for higher residential density to pave the way for private investments, accelerate land -use approvals, and use bonds to finance station area infrastructure. 6) Zoning not a project under CEQA. In an effort to encourage denser housing, this bill authorizes a local government to pass an ordinance for the construction of housing up to 10 units in “transit-rich areas” (near transit), “jobs -rich areas” (high opportunity neighborhoods), and on infill sites. The local government may set the height requirements, and this ordinance would override any restrictive local zoning ordinances that limit the ability to adopt zoning ordinances. The ordinance authorized by this bill is not considered a project for purposes under CEQA. This provision is similar to the exemption authorized for the adoption of ADU ordinances. Current law requires ministerial approval of one ADU and one ju nior accessory dwelling unit (JADU) per lot that is within an existing structure, as specified; one detached ADU within a proposed or existing structure or the same footprint as the existing structure, along with one JADU, as specified; multiple ADUs within existing multifamily structures; or two detached ADUs on a multifamily lot, as specified. The “jobs -rich” sites are intended to be similar to a mapping exercise that the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee in the State Treasurer’s Office 462 SB 902 Page 6 underwent to encourage low-income housing developments in high opportunity areas, with the goal of encouraging more inclusive communities in California. 7) Senate’s 2020 Housing Production Package. This bill has been included in the Senate’s 2020 Housing Pro duction Package. As such, the bill was amended to remove provisions related to by right approval of duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes, as specified, as well as the addition of coauthors. 8) Triple-referral. This bill was triple referred to the Committees on Governance and Finance and Environmental Quality. Please see the Senate Housing Committee analysis for comments from those committees. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:  HCD estimates total General Fund costs of $462,000 in the first year, and $329,000 annually thereafter as follows: o $262,000 in the first year and $249,000 annually thereafter for 1.25 PY of staff time to: produce guidance materials and provide technical a ssistance to local governments and developers; coordinate with the OPR and academic researchers to identify jobs -rich areas, perform IT services to publish maps; and update the jobs -rich data and mapping every five years. o $200,000 in the first year and $80,000 annually ongoing to contract with researchers to develop, host, and update the jobs -rich maps.  Unknown, likely minor costs for OPR to coordinate with HCD to identify high opportunity areas that are either jobs -rich or enable shorter commute distances, as specified. (General Fund) SUPPORT: (Verified 6/18/20) California YIMBY (co-source) Hab itat for Humanity California (co -source) 350 Sacramento All Home American Planning Association, California Chapter Bay Area Council Bay Area Housing Action Coalition California Apartment Association California Building Industry Association 463 SB 902 Page 7 California Community Builders Central City Association Chan Zuckerberg Initiative East Bay for Everyone Facebook, INC. Hollywood YIMBY House Sacramento League of Women Voters of California Livable Sunnyvale Monterey Peninsula Renters United New Pointe Communities Non-profit Housing Association of Northern California North County YIMBY Peninsula for Everyone San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Ass ociation San Luis Obispo County YIMBY Santa Cruz YIMBY Schneider Electric Silicon Valley At Home Silicon Valley Co mmunity Foundation South Bay YIMBY TechEquity Collaborative The Greenlining Institute TMG Partners Ventura County YIMBY Westside Young Democrats YIMBY Action YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County YIMBY Voice 1 individual OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/18/20) A Better Way Forward to House California California State Association of Electrical Workers California State Pipe Trades Council California Teamsters Public Affairs Council City of Dublin City of Livermore City of Newport Beach City of Pleasanton 464 SB 902 Page 8 City of Redondo Beach City of San Ramon City of Thousand Oaks International Union of Elevator Constructors, Local 8 International Union of Elevator Constructors, Local 18 Los Angeles County Division, League of California Cities New Livable California Dba Livable California Orange County Council of Governments San Francisco Tenants Union Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association South Bay Cities Council of Governments State Building and Construction Trades Council of CC Sustainable Tamalmonte Town of Danville Town of Hillsborough Western States Council Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation 19 Individuals ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Some writing in opposition are opposed to removing community driven planning processes and stakeholder involvement. Some are opposed to upzoning single-family neighborhoods and are concerned about the lack of affordable housing requirements. Many writing in opposition to this bill are opposed to provisio ns that are proposed to be stricken from the bill. Several labor groups write in opposition to this bill and request worker protections and training standards that include both prevailing wage coverage and skilled and trained workforce requirements so that any unintended consequence that exploits the workforce that will build the housing under this bill is not created. They write that these two requirements provide middle-class wages and benefits to construction workers as well as also help put loca l cons truction workers and apprentices to work. Prepared by: Alison Hughes / HOUSING / (916) 651-4124 6/19/20 16:41:07 **** END **** 465 South Bay Cities Council of Governments August 10, 2020 TO: SBCCOG Steering Committee FROM: Jacki Bacharach, SBCCOG Board of Directors RE: Bills to Monitor and for Action – Status as of August 7, 2020 Adherence to Strategic Plan: Goal B: Regional Advocacy. Advocate for the interests of the South Bay ACTION: RECONSIDER POSITION ON AB 570 – OPPOSITION LETTER ATTACHED FINANCE SB 795 (Beall) Economic development: housing: workforce development: climate change infrastructure. Would on appropriation by the Legislature, would make up to $2,000,000,000 available in each fiscal year for the purpose of providing emergency economic recovery and development, climate change, and disaster response. Of that amount, would require the Controller to allocate for each of those fiscal years $1,805,000,000 among various housing programs administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program, and for distribution by the California Workforce Development Board among local agencies to participate in, invest in, or partner with new or existing preapprenticeship training programs established as described above. Would require the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency to establish deadlines for applications and submitting final reports under the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program with respect to moneys allocated to programs under the bill . SUPPORT (5/28/20) (Ltr to Sen Approp. 6/4/20) SUPPORT (2/27/20) Assembly Appropriations Committee Hearing Date: 8/11/20 AB 725 (Wicks) General plans: housing element: moderate -income and above moderate-income housing: suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions. The purpose of this bill is to facilitate the development of more medium density housing at moderate and above -moderate incomes, akin to the requirement for very low- and low-income housing. It requires at least 25% of the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need for both moderate-income and above moderate-income housing be allocated to sites with zoning that OPPOSE (7/23/20) (Ltr to Sen Housing 7/27/20) 8/6/20 Senate Appropriations Committee 466 2 allows at least four units of housing, Such density would enable the production of medium-density housing on these sites that typically are subject to more restrictive zoning currently. For a typical jurisdiction, this bill would increase the minimum percentage of land zoned for multi-family housing from approximately 40% to 55%. AB 1851 (Wicks) Religious institution affiliated housing development projects: parking requirements. Allows a religious institution to develop an affordable housing project at a place of worship owned by the religious institution even if the development requires the religious institution to reduce the number of religious -use parking spaces available at the place of worship. Would authorize a local agency to require up to one parking space per unit for a religious institution affiliated housing development project . OPPOSE (7/23/20) (Ltr to Sen Gov & Fin 7/27/20) 8/6/20 Senate Appropriations Committee AB 2168 (McCarty) Planning and zoning: electric vehicle charging stations: permit application: approval - would require an application to install an electric vehicle charging station to be deemed complete if, 5 business days after the application was submitted, the building official of the city, county, or city and county has not deemed the application complete, as specified, and if the building official has not issued a one-written correction notice, as specified. The bill would require an application to install an electric vehicle charging station to be deemed approved if 15 business days after the application was deemed complete certain conditions are met, including that the building official of the city, county, or city and county has not approved the application, as specified, and the building official has not made findings that the proposed installation could have an adverse impact, as described above, and required the applicant to apply for a use permit. OPPOSE (7/23/20) Still in first house (Ltr to Asm Local Gov 7/27/20) LCC opposes 5/5/20 Assembly Local Government Committee AB 2345 (Gonzalez) Planning and zoning: density bonuses: annual report: affordable housing. - Revises Density Bonus Law to increase the maximum allowable density and the number of concessions and incentives a developer can seek. OPPOSE (7/23/20) (Ltr to Sen Housing 7/27/20) 8/6/20 Senate Appropriations Committee AB 3107 (Bloom) Planning and zoning: commercial zoning: housing development. Notwithstanding any inconsistent provision of a city’s or county’s general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, or regulation, would require that a housing development be an authorized use on a site OPPOSE (5/28/20) 7/21/20 Senate Housing Committee 467 3 designated in any local agency’s zoning code for commercial uses if certain conditions apply. Among these conditions, the bill would require that the housing development be subject to a recorded deed restriction requiring that at least 20% of the units have an affordable housing cost or affordable rent for lower income households, as those terms are defined, and located on a site that satisfies specified criteria. The bill would require the city or county to apply certain height, density, and floor area ratio standards to a housing development that meets these criteria. Would deem a housing development consistent, compliant, and in conformity with local development standards, zoning codes, and general plan if it meets the requirements of the bill. Would require a jurisdiction to comply with these requirements only until it has completed the rezoning, required as described above, for the 6th revision of its housing element. Would repeal these provisions January 1, 2030. (Ltr to Asm Approp 6/4/20) SB 902 (Wiener) Planning and zoning: housing development: density. Would authorize a local government to pass an ordinance, notwithstanding any local restrictions on adopting zoning ordinances, to zone any parcel for up to 10 units of residential density per parcel, at a height specified by the local government in the ordinance, if the parcel is located in a transit -rich area, a jobs- rich area, or an urban infill site, as those terms are defined. Would require the Department of Housing and Community Development, in consultation with the Office of Planning and Research, to determine jobs-rich areas and publish a map of those areas every 5 years, commencing January 1, 2022, based on specified criteria. Would specify that an ordinance adopted under these provisions is not a project for purposes of California Environmental Quality Act. OPPOSE (5/28/20) (4/23/20) (Ltr to Sen Approp. 6/4/20) (Ltr sent to Sen.Housing 5/4/20) Assembly Local Government Committee Hearing Date: 8/11/20 SB 995 (Atkins) Environmental Quality: Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2011: housing projects - would require a lead agency to prepare a master EIR for a general plan, plan amendment, plan element, or specified plan for housing projects where the state has provided funding for the preparation of the master EIR. MONITOR 8/6/20 Assembly Appropriations Committee SB 1085 (Skinner) AMENDED: Density Bonus Law: qualifications for incentives or concessions: student housing for lower income students: moderate-income persons and families: local government constraints - would require a city or county to grant that density bonus and those incentives or concessions if the developer agrees to construct a housing development that OPPOSE (7/23/20) (Ltr to Asm Housing Comm. Dev. 7/27/20) Assembly Appropriations Committee Hearing Date: 8/11/20 468 4 will contain that specified percentage of units for persons and families of low or moderate income, as specified. SB 1120 (Atkins) Subdivisions: tentative maps Would require a proposed housing development containing 2 residential units to be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or hearing, within a single family residential zone, if the proposed housing development meets certain requirements, including but not limited to, that the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the proposed housing development does not allow for the demolition of more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls, except as provided, and that the development is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district. OPPOSE (6/8/20) (Ltr to Sen Approp Comm 6/8/20) Assembly Local Government Committee Hearing Date: 8/11/20 SB 1138 (Wiener) Housing element: emergency shelters: rezoning of sites - requires localities that fail to adopt a legally compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline, to complete a rezone program within one year instead of the current three-year requirement. OPPOSE (7/23/20) (Ltr to Asm Housing Comm. Dev. 7/27/20) Assembly Appropriations Committee Hearing Date: 8/11/20 SB 1299 (Portantino) Housing Development. Incentives. Rezoning of Idle Retail Sites. Would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, require HCD to administer a program to provide incentives in the form of grants allocated as provided to local governments that rezone idle sites used for a big box retailer or a commercial shopping cent er to instead allow the development of workforce housing. It provides for 7 years of property tax based on commercial status if changed to housing. SUPPORT (5/28/20) (Ltr to Sen Approp. 6/4/20) LCC supports 8/3/20 Assembly 2nd Appropriations Committee SB 1385 (Caballero) Local Planning. Housing in Commercial Zones. This measure, the Neighborhood Homes Act, would deem a housing development project, as defined, an authorized use on a neighborhood lot that is zoned for office or retail commercial use under a local agency’s zoning code or general plan. Would require the density for a housing development under these provisions to meet or exceed MONITOR Assembly Local Government Committee Hearing Date: 8/11/20 469 5 the density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower income households according to the type of local jurisdiction, including a density of at least 20 units per acre for a suburban jurisdiction. PUBLIC SAFETY AB 1314 (McCarty) Law enforcement use of force settlements and judgements: reporting: Would require municipalities, as defined, to annually post on their internet websites specified information relating to use of force settlements and judgements, including amounts paid, broken down by individual settlement and judgment, information on bonds used to finance use of force settlement and judgment payments, and premiums paid for insurance against use of force settlements or judgements. OPPOSE (7/23/20) (Ltr to Sen. Pub Safety 7/27/20) 7/2/20 Senate Public Safety Committee TELECOMMUNICATIONS AB 570 (Aguiar- Curry) & Muratsuchi Communications: broadband services: California Advanced Services Fund. Current law specifies that moneys in the Broadband Public Housing Account are available for the Public Utilities Commission to award grants and loans to an eligible publicly supported community to finance a project to connect broadband network to that publicly supported community. Current law requires moneys in the Broadband Public Housing Account that have not been awarded by December 31, 2020, be transferred back to the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account. This bill would revise the goal of the program to provide that its goal is to approve funding by an unspecified date, for infrastructure projects that will provide broadband access to no less than 98% of California households in each consortia region, as identified by the commission on or before January 1, 2017. The bill would establish the State Agency Direct Allocation Account in the CASF and would specify that the moneys in the account, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for various purposes, SUPPORT (7/23/20) (Ltr to Sen Energy, Util. & Comm 7/27/20) RECOMMEND RECONSIDER- ATION OF POSITION 8/3/20 Senate Appropriations Committee 470 6 including upgrades to low-income census blocks to enable distance learning and telehealth and telemedicine. SB 1130 (Gonzalez) Telecommunications: California Advanced Services Fund. Would require the Public Utilities Commission to develop, implement, and administer the California Advanced Services Fund program to encourage deployment of 21st century-ready communications, as provided. Would provide that the goal of the program is to, n o later than December 31, 2024, approve funding for infrastructure projects that will provide high-capacity, future-proof infrastructure, as defined, based on current engineering and scientific information at the time of program application, as provided. Would require the commission, in approving infrastructure projects, to approve projects with a goal of providing high -capacity, future-proof infrastructure to households that are unserved areas, as defined, or unserved high-poverty areas, as defined. SUPPORT (7/23/20) LCC supports (Ltr to Asm Communication 7/27/20) Assembly Appropriations Committee Hearing Date: 8/11/20 FEDERAL HR 530 (Eshoo) Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Empowering Local Communities Act of 2019. Overturns the FCC's September order preempting local authority over small cell wireless infrastructure on January 14, the day the order took effect. Would SUPPORT & REQUEST CO- SPONSORS (2/11/19) 1/25/19 House Energy & Commerce Committee - Subcommittee on 471 7 not preclude future FCC or congressional preemption of c ities on wireless infrastructure, but it would halt the FCC's harmful preemption order, which ignored the input of hundreds of local governments. The bill also complements ongoing efforts to overturn the FCC order in federal courts, and the investigation by congressional leaders into alleged attempts by the FCC to thwart that litigation. Endorsed by NLC, NATOA, NAC Communications & Technology HR 763 (Deutsch) Energy Innovation & Carbon Dividend Act. Imposes a fee on the carbon content of fuels, including crude oil, natural gas, coal, or any other product derived from those fuels that will be used so as to emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The fee is imposed on the producers or importers of the fuels and is equal to the greenhouse gas content of the fuel multiplied by the carbon fee rate. The rate begins at $15 in 2019, increases by $10 each year, and is subject to further adjustments based on the progress in meeting specified emissions reduction targets. Imposes a specified fee on fluorinated greenhouse gases. SUPPORT (6/8/20) (Ltr to House Energy and Commerce 6/18/20) 1/25/19 House Ways & Means, Energy & Commerce, Foreign Affairs – referred to Subcommittee on Energy HR 1507 (Blumenauer) The Bicycle Commuter Act of 2019. Official summary in progress. Would allow cyclists to deduct more than $50 per month and write off bike-share memberships. MONITOR 3/5/19 House Ways and Means Committee 2020 Legislative Session Calendar DATES IN QUESTION: Aug. 7 Last day for policy committees to meet and report bills Aug. 14 Last day for fiscal committees to meet and report bills Aug. 17-31 Floor session only. No committee may meet for any purpose except Rules Committee, bills referred pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2, and Conference Committees Aug. 21 Last day to amend bills on the floor Aug. 31 Last day for each house to pass bills Final Recess begins upon adjournment Sept. 30 Last day for Governor to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature before Sept. 1 & in the Governor's possession on or after Sept. 1 Oct. 1 Bills enacted on or before this date take effect January 1, 2021. Nov. 3 General Election. Nov. 30 Adjournment sine die at midnight Dec. 7 2021-22 Regular Session convenes for Organizational Session at 12 noon. 472 8 473 Special Legislative Committee Agenda Wednesday, August 19, 2020, 3:00 – 4:00 PM Zoom Conference Call Details: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85636623755?pwd=ZERaYURFWnZ6L2E1WnJGNlRFV2VLZz09 (669) 900-6833 Meeting ID: 856 3662 3755 Password: 419337 One tap mobile: +16699006833,,85636623755#,,,,,,0#,,419337# I. Call to Order: Roll Call II. Action Items i. SB 902 ii. SB 1120 III. Other Discussion Items from the Committee IV. Adjournment: Next Meeting August 26, 2020 474 17315 Studebaker Road • Suite 210 • Cerritos, CA • 90703 Phone: (562) 622-5533 • Fax (562) 222-8135 1 Action Items I. SB 902 (Scott Wiener) - Planning and zoning: housing development: density Current Status: Assembly Local Government Committee - Hearing on August 11 Staff Recommendation: Oppose Additional Documents: Fact Sheet Summary: This bill would authorize a local government to pass an ordinance to zone any parcel for up to 10 units of residential density, at a height determined by a local jurisdiction, if the parcel is located within a transit-rich area, a jobs-rich area, or an urban infill site. The bill would require the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), in consultation with the Office of Planning and Research (OPR), to determine jobs -rich areas and publish a map of those areas every 5 years, commencing January 1, 2022, based on specified criteria. The bill would apply to all cities including, charter cities, specifying that an ordinance adopted under these provisions is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Comments: In June, the Association took a watch position. SB 902 was amended in May and removed provisions that would allow ministerial approval of duplexes and four-plexes. The key focus of this bill is to exempt projects from CEQA concerns, providing protections to local governments and housing developers from lawsuits or delays—an issue advocated by cities to produce additional housing. Application would focus increasing housing production near 3 vital corridors: transit-rich, jobs-rich, or an urban infill site—all of which would be determined by OPR and HCD. The Association supports legislation that reduces costs and spurs housing development to encourage new residential construction. However, local government groups, including the League have also raised concerns surrounding the measure’s ability to survive muster if the policy conflicts with a voter initiative. Several cities, including the LA Division of the League and Orange County Council of Governments oppose the legislation. I SB 1120 (Atkins) - Subdivisions: tentative maps Current Status: Assembly Committee on Local Government – August 11 Hearing Staff Recommendation: Oppose Additional Documents: Fact Sheet Summary: This bill would encourage small-scale neighborhood development by streamlining the process for a homeowner to create a duplex or subdivide an existing lot in all residential areas. This bill would require a proposed housing development containing 2 residential units to be considered ministerially-approved in zones where allowable uses are limited to single-family residential development. A subdivision of an existing lot can be no smaller than 1,200 square feet. 475 17315 Studebaker Road • Suite 210 • Cerritos, CA • 90703 Phone: (562) 622-5533 • Fax (562) 222-8135 2 If the proposed housing development meets certain requirements, including that the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration requiring evacuation or eviction of an existing housing unit that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low-income. Comments: In June, the Association voted to take a “watch” position. The Association supports legislation that provides flexibility for cities to exercise local control, however, this bill would allow state guidelines to overrule local control by allowing ministerial processing of housing developments and subdividing parcels no smaller than 1,200 square feet. Application of SB 1120 would allow property owners living in zones reserved for single-family housing who meet specified requirements to build duplexes and small apartment complexes, impacting public services and a city’s zoning. A number of cities and local government groups opposed the measure, however, the League of California Cities have submitted a support if amended letter, such as clear language to prevent construction of an accessory dwelling unit if a property owner subdivides or builds a second unit, prevention of SB 1120 be used in a high fire severity zone, retention of parking standards, and require adequate access for police and fire to enter the property. 476 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-79 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TORRANCE, CALIFORNIA, EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO PROPOSED HOUSING LEGISLATION AND EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR ACTIONS TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN LOCAL DEMOCRACY, AUTHORITY AND CONTROL WHEREAS, the legislature of the State of California, has proposed a number of bills addressing a range of housing issues; and WHEREAS, the majority of these bills usurp the authority of local jurisdictions to determine for themselves the land use policies and practices that best suit their cities and residents and instead impose mandates that do not take into account the needs and differences of jurisdictions throughout the State, as well as imposing unfunded mandates on jurisdictions for actions that are not in their best interests; and WHEREAS, for example, the ability of jurisdictions to determine for themselves which projects require review beyond a ministerial approval, what parking requirements are appropriate for various locales within their jurisdiction, what plans and programs are suitable and practical for each community rather than having these decisions imposed upon cities without regard to the circumstances of each individual city is a matter of great import to the City of Torrance, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Torrance feels strongly that our local government is best able to assess the needs of our community and objects to the proliferation of State legislation that deprives us of that ability; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TORRANCE HEREBY: Registers its strong opposition to the following pieces of State legislation that usurp local control and impose unfunded mandates:  AB 831 (Grayson) – Planning and zoning: housing: development application modifications.  AB 953 (Ting) – Land use: accessory dwelling units.  AB 1279 (Bloom) - Housing Developments. High Resource Areas.  AB 2323 (Friedman) – California Environmental Quality Act Exemptions.  AB 2405 (Burke) – Right to safe, decent, and affordable housing.  AB 3153 (Rivas, Robert) Parking and zoning: bicycle and car-share parking credits.  AB 3269 (Chui) State and local agencies: homelessness plan.  SB 288 (Wiener) California Environmental Quality Act: exemptions.  SB 899 (Weiner) Planning and zoning: housing development: higher education institutions and religious institutions.  AB 725 (Wicks) General Plans: housing element: moderate-income and above moderate- income housing: suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions.  AB 1851 (Wicks) Religious institution affiliated housing development projects: parking requirements.  AB 2168 (McCarty) Planning and zoning: electric vehicle charging stations: permit application: approval. 477 2  AB 2345 (Gonzalez) Planning and zoning: density bonuses: annual report: affordable housing.  AB 2988 (Chu) Planning and zoning: supportive housing: number of units: emergency shelter zones.  AB 3107 (Bloom) Planning and zoning: General Plan: housing development.  SB 902 (Weiner) Planning and zoning: housing development: zoning.  SB 995 (Atkins) Environmental Quality: Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2011: housing projects.  SB 1085 (Skinner) Density Bonus Law: qualifications for incentives or concessions: student housing for lower income students: moderate-income persons and families: local government constraints.  SB 1120 (Atkins) Subdivisions: tentative maps.  SB 1138 (Weiner) Housing Element: emergency shelters: rezoning of sites; and, Registers its equally strong opposition to the current practice of the State legislature of proposing and passing multitudes of bills that directly impact and interfere with the ability of Cities to control their own destiny through use of the zoning authority that has been granted to them; and Declares that, should the State continue to pass legislation that attacks local municipal authority, control and revenue, the City of Torrance will support actions such as a ballot measure that would limit the State ability to control local activities and strengthen local democracy and authority. INTRODUCED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 21st day of July, 2020. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mayor Patrick J. Furey PATRICK Q. SULLIVAN, City Attorney Tatia Y. Strader, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Rebecca Poirier, MMC, City Clerk 478 3 TORRANCE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2020-79 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss CITY OF TORRANCE ) I, Rebecca Poirier, City Clerk of the City of Torrance, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Torrance at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 21st day of July, 2020 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS Ashcraft, Chen, Goodrich, Griffiths, Kalani, Mattucci, and Mayor Furey. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS None. Rebecca Poirier, MMC Date: City Clerk of the City of Torrance 479 Wt" "t" S"- redondoBEACH Bill Brand [4ayor rel 310 372-1171 ext.2260 I 310 374-2039 415 Diamond Street, P.0 Box 270 Redondo 8each, C a lilorn ia 9027 7 -027 0 www.redondo.org July 7,2020 SB 902 SB 995 sB 1085 sB 1120 sB 1299 48725 Planning and zoning: housing development: density Environmental quality: Jobs and Economic lmprovement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 201 1 : housing projects Density Bonus Law: qualifications for incentives or concessions: student housing for lower income students: moderate-income persons and families: local government constraints Subdivisions: tentative maps Housing development: incentives: rezoning of idle retail sites General Plans: housing element: moderate-income and above moderate- income housing: suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions Planning and zoning: housing development: high-opportu nity areas Planning and zoning: density bonuses: annual report: affordable housing Local planning: regional housing needs assessment Planning and zoning: general plan: housing development AB 1279 AB 2345 AB 3040 AB 3107 Local Controls and Planninq Existing State law leaves zoning decisions exclusively to local governments-this is a major part of the home rule doctrine. Several of the housing bills proposed in the Senate and Assembly preempt local regulation for housing. our city is currently updating its General Plan to address many local housing related concerns. Since spring 2017, a 27-member citizens General Plan Advisory Committee has conducted 21 meetings, with 6 more scheduled, many where the focus has been on housing in Redondo Beach. The intent is to ensure that a broad range of housing RE: CITY OF REDONDO BEACH OPPOSES HOUSING BILLS THAT PREEMPT LOCAL REGULATORY CONTROLS Dear State Senate and Assembly Members: There are several bills that have been introduced in the Senate and Assembly this year related to housing and affordable housing. Although the City of Redondo Beach understands the intent to address the shortage of housing and affordable housing in the State of California, there are concerns with the potential consequences of many of these bills. The list of applicable bills is as follows: 480 CRB Opposition to Housing Bills July 7 , 2020 Page l2 types and densities are available. However, under numerous proposed housing bills this year, these robust planning efforts specific to our City would not be taken into consideration. Redondo Beach provides for a broad range of housing types and densities. The City has also taken action to zone for higher densities around high quality transit nodes and to some extent along transit corridors. The City's certified Housing Element identifies specific sites in strategic locations and includes specific programs for ensuring housing goals as required are achieved. Every area identified in the Housing Element has distinct challenges that require d ifferent approaches. Redondo Beach is a perfect example of a medium size coastal city striving to meet and address the housing needs of Southern California. We have every level and type of housing; srngles, 1 bedroom,2 bedrooms,3 bedrooms, multi-family housing, single- family housing, accessory dwelling units, and multi-million-dollar coastal homes. Fifty percent of the housing units in the community is rental. We also have a Housing Authority with over 500 vouchers issued for Section 8 housing. We have numerous senior living complexes in all areas of town. Like many communities in California, Redondo Beach is largely 'built-out' with worsening traffic, impacted schools, and water shortages. However, Redondo Beach's population continues to grow, along with average household size and the number of households. We have been averaging an additional 60 units per year for the last 15 years. Many of the outlying cities in the LA area such as ours have a severe housing/jobs imbalance where over 90% of the residents leave their town in the morning to go to work (recognizing that during the LA County Safer at Home Order addressing the public health emergency related to COVID-'19 and the curfews implemented recently this has been temporarily suspended but will return once orders are lifted). This creates huge impacts to our transportation sectors in one direction in the morning, to only reverse that impact during the evening commute. What these areas need is more job creating business centers to reverse some of that flow, not more housing that will only worsen the problem. Redondo Beach's population density is 11,000 residents per square mile. Our city is one of the most densely populated areas in California. Demographia.com rated Redondo Beach as 43rd in population density for U.S. Cities over 50,000 people after the 2000 census. With this population density, the City as a result has 11 Level of Service 'F' intersections and similar parking challenges. Nonetheless, the City of Redondo Beach is producing a wide variety of housing after carefully considering the suitability and impacts of each housing project. 481 CRB Opposition to Housing Bills )uly 7 , 2020 Yet, again, many of the proposed housing and affordable housing bills would exempt projects from local controls to appropriately plan, regulate, and provide infrastructure for housing in our community based on the community's needs and circumstances. One Size Does Not Fit All Despite the city's contemporary land-use planning policies and zoning designations, the proposed legislation would replace our strategically planned, locally appropriate areas of housing intensification with a blanket policy. This one size fits all approach to local land use regulation would have significant adverse impacts on our established community and its character, many bills having significant implications regarding traffic, parking, and other infrastructure that was designed decades ago for a suburban density. Land use decisions by communities and local officials are complex and take into account many different issues such as school capacity, financial sustainability, available park space, traffic, air pollution, water needs, sewer capacity, parking, affordability, street maintenance, commercial needs, industrial needs, access to emergency services, etc. A one size fits all approach dictated from the State will be a disaster for many communities by exacerbating impacts that will also have consequences with State-wide interest. Water needs will increase and studenUteacher ratios will deteriorate just to name two. Legislation that creates even bigger problems with State-wide interests will demand more rules and regulations to fix the problems they create. State legislation should not interfere with complex decisions best handled at the local level. Local land-use decisions should be left to local communities who must manage and maintain the towns they create. To address this concern, on July 7, 2020 the Redondo Beach City Council received a report and authorized this response to the housing bills listed above that propose significant detrimental impacts on local control. ln conclusion, although it is important to make housing development a priority in today's climate, housing development regulations and approvals should be left to the local agencies that are best equipped to evaluate the impacts of projects, and can require mitigations to protect the health and safety of the residents they serve. We oppose home rule preemption. Sincerely, William Brand Senator Benjamin Allen, 26ih State Senate District Assembly Member Al Muratsuchi, 66th Assembly Distrlct lvlichael J. Arnold, Michael J. Arnold & Associates City Council Members, City of Redondo Beach 4z:2. Page l3 Lt : 482 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California 90245-3813 Phone (310) 524-2302 Fax (310) 322-7137 July 30, 2020 The Honorable Ben Allen California State Senate State Capitol Building, Room 2205 Sacramento, CA 95814 The Honorable Autumn Burke California State Assembly State Capital Building, Room 5144 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: CITY OF EL SEGUNDO OPPOSES HOUSING BILLS THAT PREEMPT LOCAL REGULATORY CONTROLS Dear Senator Allen and Assemblymember Burke: The City of El Segundo understands that housing development is a priority, and the urgent need to address the shortage of housing and affordable housing in the State of California, but we have concerns with several bills as they are being proposed. Many of the listed housing, affordable housing and planning and zoning bills would exempt projects from local controls to appropriately plan, regulate, and provide infrastructure for housing in our community based on the community’s needs and unique circumstances. The City of El Segundo strongly urges you to oppose the following bills that have been introduced in the Senate and Assembly this year related to housing, affordable housing and planning and zoning that would potentially preempt local government regulatory controls:  SB 902 Planning and zoning: housing development density  SB 1085 Density Bonus Law: qualifications for incentives or concessions: student housing for lower-income students: moderate-income persons and families: local government constraints Elected Officials: Drew Boyles, Mayor Chris Pimentel Mayor Pro Tem Carol Pirsztuk, Council Member Scot Nicol, Council Member Lance Giroux, Council Member Tracy Weaver, City Clerk Matthew Robinson, City Treasurer ______________ Appointed Officials: Scott Mitnick, City Manager Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney ______________ Department Directors: Barbara Voss Deputy City Manager Joseph Lillio, Finance Chris Donovan, Fire Chief David Serrano Human Resources Charles Mallory, Information Systems Melissa McCollum, Library Services Sam Lee, Planning and Building Safety Bill Whalen, Police Chief Mark Watkins, Interim Public Works Meredith Petit, Recreation & Parks www.elsegundo.org www.elsegundobusiness.com www.elsegundo100.org Office of the Mayor 483 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California 90245-3813 Phone (310) 524-2302 Fax (310) 322-7137  SB 1120 Subdivisions: tentative maps  SB 1138 Housing element: emergency shelters: rezoning of sites  AB 725 General Plans: housing element: moderate-income and above moderate- income housing: suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions  AB 1851 Religious institution affiliated housing development projects: parking requirements  AB 1279 Planning and zoning: housing development: high-opportunity areas  AB 2168 Planning and zoning: electric vehicle charging station: permit application: approval  AB 2345 Planning and zoning: density bonuses: annual report: affordable housing  AB 3040 Local planning: regional housing needs assessment  AB 3107 Planning and zoning: general plan: housing development The residential area of El Segundo is entirely clustered within 1.5 square miles and bounded on three sides by LAX, the Pacific Ocean, and the Chevron refinery. With a population density of over 3,000 per square mile, several of the proposed bills would further increase density in an area that is already built-out at capacity. El Segundo does not oppose higher density in residential areas where it makes sense but is opposed where it would be utterly detrimental to the quality of life for everyone. We believe there should be incentives for cities to find ways to improve housing opportunities that suit the particular local situation. For these reasons, the City of El Segundo opposes all of the listed bills. Sincerely, Drew Boyles Mayor of El Segundo CC: City Councilmembers, City of El Segundo Scott Mitnick, City Manager, City of El Segundo Jeff Kiernan, League Regional Public Affairs Manager (Via email: Jkiernan@cacities.org) Meg Desmond, League of California Cities (Via email: cityletters@cacities.org) 484 Mission Statement California Citizens FOR Local Control Volunteer Organization Our mission is to spread awareness and enlist support to ensure that Cities can continue to manage their own land use and zoning issues. We must not allow the State Legislature to mandate changes to our Cities that will remove local control and be detrimental to our communities. We do this by reaching out to California City Elected Officials to educate and enlist them to our cause. Our activities include, but are not limited to, signing onto petitions, having Cities pass resolutions in support of our efforts, and seeking out allies for possible legal action against the State and/or to promote efforts for a ballot initiative to legislate the desired results. With this alliance of City Elected Officials working together as one, we stand a better chance of having our message resonate loud and clear to all groups that proclaim to support us. WE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS LOSS OF LOCAL CONTROL AND UNFUNDED MANDATES being imposed upon us by our State. 485 rrl! 415 Diamond Streel, P.0. BoX 270 Redondo Beach, Ca lifornia 90271-0210 www.redondo.org tel 310 372- 117l ext.2260 fax ll0 374'2039 "Yn"r''-t; Slra, redondo BCACH June 12,2020 Honorable Scott Wiener Chairman, Senate Housing Committee State of California, District 11 State Capitol, Room 4066 Sacramento, CA 95814-4900 RE: SB 902 - OPPOSITION Dear Senator Wiener: I am writing to advise you that the City of Redondo Beach opposes Senate Bill 902 Redondo Beach is a charter city and the residents voted in 2008 to adopt an initiative which governs land use and development in the City. 58902 disregards the voter- approved methodology the residents of Redondo Beach adopted to control land use. Additionally, 58902 would circumvent the legislative intent of CEQA, both in the protection of the environment and in providing a public process that considers the impacts on the environment. 58902 also seems to remove the standard that zoning and land use regulations should be consistent with the General Plan, bypasses CEQA, and ignores the local requirements for adopting land use regulations. This bill could have lasting significant negative impacts on communities, while offering minimal public input on the decision. Most importantly, SB 902 would allow any future city council to violate the terms of the locally adopted initiative by a simple majority vote of the city council. Three elected officials could act contrary to the wishes and the dictates of more than 50% of the voters in the city! Moreover, SB 902 is certainly u nconstitutional. The California State Constitution clearly states that "the people reserve to themselves the powers of initiative and referendum." (California Constitution, Article lV, Section 1.) The California Supreme Court has recognized: Accordingly, the initiative power must be liberally construed to promote the democratic process. lndeed, it is our solemn duty to jealously guard the precious initiative power, and to resolve any reasonable doubts in BillErand Mayor 486 favor of its exercise. Legislature v. Eu (1991) 54 Cal.3d 492, 501 (internal citations omitted). Simply put, the California Constitution does not allow the State Legislature to authorize a local government to pass an ordinance in contravention of restrictions enacted by a local voter initiative. SB 902 will result in considerable litigation, costing the State and local jurisdictions scarce resources which could otherwise be used to address other needs. Following review by the Redondo Beach City Council at its regularly scheduled meeting of June 9,2020, the City Council received public testimony and voted unanimously to oppose the passage of SB 902 for the reasons outlined in this letter Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Sincerely, Bill Brand Members of the Senate Committee on Housing State Senator, Ben Allen, District 26 Assembly Member, Al Muratsuchi, District 66 Michael J. Arnold, Michael J. Arnold & Associates City Council Members, City of Redondo Beach Joe Hoefgen, City Manager, City of Redondo Beach Michael Webb, City Attorney, City of Redondo Beach r'h ,/' cc. 487 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 20-0515 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES AND STANDING COMMITTEE DELEGATES/ALTERNATES City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™488 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 20-0511 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of August 11, 2020 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the tentative future agenda items. Attachments: Tentative Future Agenda City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/4/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™489 August 4, 2020 Honorable Mayor and Members Regular Meeting of of the Hermosa Beach City Council August 11, 2020 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS AUGUST 25, 2020 @ 5:00 PM INITIAL DATE CLOSED SESSION AUGUST 25, 2020 @ 6:00 PM PRESENTATIONS INTRODUCTION OF FIRE STATION 100 A SHIFT CREW LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE SERVICES AND MCCORMICK AMBULANCE SEMI-ANNUAL UPDATE FIRE STATION REOPENING RECOGNIZING LEADERSHIP HERMOSA BEACH GRADUATING CLASS OF 2020 COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS – CITY MANAGER COVID-19 Update CONSENT CALENDAR City Council Minutes City Clerk Ongoing Check Registers Finance Director Ongoing Revenue Report, Expenditure Report and CIP Report by Project Finance Director Ongoing City Treasurer’s Report and Cash Balance Report City Treasurer Ongoing Cancellation of Certain Checks City Treasurer Ongoing Public Works Project Status Report Public Works Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of August 18, 2020. Community Development Director Ongoing Planning Commission Tentative Future Agenda Items Community Development Director Ongoing Review of Submittal of the 2019 Hermosa Beach Housing Element Annual Progress Report Community Development Director Staff Request July 16, 2020 Los Angeles Fire Services and McCormick Ambulance Monthly Report for June 2020 Emergency Management Coordinator Ongoing South Bay Workforce Investment Board Quarterly Summary City Manager Quarterly MOU between the Beach Cities Watershed Group to Update the Enhanced Watershed Management Plan (EWMP) Environmental Programs Manager Staff Request June 1, 2020 MOU between the Beach Cities Watershed Group to continue the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Plan (CIMP) Environmental Programs Manager Staff Request June 1, 2020 Award of Contract to the Hermosa Beach Youth Basketball League for Implementation of Fall and Summer Youth Basketball Leagues Community Resources Manager Staff Request July 16, 2020 PUBLIC HEARINGS – 7:30 PM Amendments to HBMC Chapter 12.20 Beach and Strand Regulations to Require a 50-foot Distance from the Strand Wall for Recreational Activities Including Temporary Volleyball Courts; Prohibition of Recreational Activities from Blocking Beach Access Points or Emergency Lanes; and Additional Language Updates to Reflect Modern Uses of the Beach Community Resources Manager Staff Request July 9, 2020 Implementation of a Temporary Pickleball Membership and Hourly Use Fee During COVID-19 Precautionary Measures Community Resources Manager Staff Request July 9, 2020 Modification to the ACTIVE Net Recreation Administrative Fee from $15 Per Activity to 10% of the Activity Cost Community Resources Manager Staff Request July 9, 2020 490 2 AUGUST 25, 2020 @ 6:00 PM - CONTINUED MUNICIPAL MATTERS Receive report on emergency enforcement measures to ensure restaurants and alcohol serving establishments comply with LA County physical distancing and safety orders as they continue to reopen (verbal report) Police Chief/Community Development Director Council Direction June 23, 2020 Review of City’s parking asset closures and restrictions in light of ongoing changes to the Los Angeles County Health Order Assistant to the City Manager/Community Services Division Manager Ongoing North School Transportation Management Plan Environmental Analyst Council Direction Refund/Refinance of Oil Settlement Bonds Finance Director Staff Request July 29, 2020 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS – CITY COUNCIL Designation of voting Delegate and Alternate for the League of California Cities 2020 Annual Conference and consideration of the League of California Cities Annual Conference Resolutions Assistant to the City Manager Annual Updates from City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittees and Standing Committee Delegates/Alternates Councilmembers Ongoing OTHER MATTERS – CITY COUNCIL Tentative Future Agenda City Manager Ongoing 491 3 WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2020 @ 6:00 PM STUDY SESSION SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 @ 5:00 PM INITIAL DATE CLOSED SESSION SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 @ 6:00 PM PRESENTATIONS COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS – CITY MANAGER COVID-19 Update CONSENT CALENDAR City Council Minutes City Clerk Ongoing Check Registers Finance Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of August 4, 2020 Community Resources Manager Ongoing Los Angeles Fire Services and McCormick Ambulance Monthly Report for July 2020 Emergency Management Coordinator Ongoing Reappropriation of funds from 2019-20 to 2020-2021, Revenue Revisions related to the Reappropriations Finance Director Annual MUNICIPAL MATTERS Receive report on emergency enforcement measures to ensure restaurants and alcohol serving establishments comply with LA County physical distancing and safety orders as they continue to reopen (verbal report) Police Chief/Community Development Director Council Direction June 23, 2020 Review of City’s parking asset closures and restrictions in light of ongoing changes to the Los Angeles County Health Order Assistant to the City Manager/Community Services Division Manager Ongoing MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS – CITY COUNCIL Updates from City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittees and Standing Committee Delegates/Alternates Councilmembers Ongoing 2020 Local Agency Biennial Notice regarding the City’s Conflict of Interest Code City Clerk Biennial Upcoming Vacancy – Authorize the City Clerk to advertise and request applications for a Hermosa Beach representative to the Los Angeles County West Vector and Vector-Borne Control District Board, to be appointed at the Council meeting of January 12, 2021 for a two-year term ending December 31, 2022. City Clerk Biennial Response to Grand Jury on Organic Waste Environmental Programs Manager Staff Request July 20, 2020 OTHER MATTERS – CITY COUNCIL Tentative Future Agenda City Manager Ongoing 492 4 SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 @ 6:00 PM INITIAL DATE CLOSED SESSION SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 @ 7:00 PM PRESENTATIONS COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS – CITY MANAGER COVID-19 Update CONSENT CALENDAR City Council Minutes City Clerk Ongoing Check Registers Finance Director Ongoing Revenue Report, Expenditure Report and CIP Report by Project Finance Director Ongoing City Treasurer’s Report and Cash Balance Report City Treasurer Ongoing Cancellation of Certain Checks City Treasurer Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of July 15, 2020. Public Works Director Ongoing Public Works Project Status Report Public Works Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of September 15, 2020. Community Development Director Ongoing Planning Commission Tentative Future Agenda Items Community Development Director Ongoing MUNICIPAL MATTERS Receive report on emergency enforcement measures to ensure restaurants and alcohol serving establishments comply with LA County physical distancing and safety orders as they continue to reopen (verbal report) Police Chief/Community Development Director Council Direction June 23, 2020 Review of City’s parking asset closures and restrictions in light of ongoing changes to the Los Angeles County Health Order Assistant to the City Manager/Community Services Division Manager Ongoing Community Theatre Needs Assessment Presentation by the DLR Group Community Resources Manager Staff Request July 28, 2020 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS – CITY COUNCIL 2020 Local Agency Biennial Notice regarding the City’s Conflict of Interest Code City Clerk Biennial Updates from City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittees and Standing Committee Delegates/Alternates Councilmembers Ongoing OTHER MATTERS – CITY COUNCIL Tentative Future Agenda City Manager Ongoing THURSDAY, _________, 2020 JOINT MEETING WITH ALL BOARDS/COMMISSIONS 493 5 WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2020 STUDY SESSION OCTOBER 13, 2020 @ 6:00 PM INITIAL DATE CLOSED SESSION OCTOBER 13, 2020 @ 7:00 PM PRESENTATIONS COVID-19 HEALTH UPDATE FROM BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS – CITY MANAGER COVID-19 Update CONSENT CALENDAR City Council Minutes City Clerk Ongoing Check Registers Finance Director Ongoing Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of September 1, 2020 Community Resources Manager Ongoing Los Angeles Fire Services and McCormick Ambulance Monthly Report for August 2020 Emergency Management Coordinator Ongoing PUBLIC HEARINGS – 7:30 PM RTI Fiber Optic Cable PDP and EIR Community Development Director Staff Request July 16, 2020 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS – CITY COUNCIL Vacancies – Public Works Commission Term Expirations: Recommendation to schedule applicant interviews for a time certain prior to the regular meeting of November 10, 2020 with appointments to follow the regular meeting to fill three Public Works Commission terms that will expire October 31, 2020 City Clerk 4-year terms Updates from City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittees and Standing Committee Delegates/Alternates Councilmembers Ongoing OTHER MATTERS – CITY COUNCIL Tentative Future Agenda City Manager Ongoing 494 6 PENDING STRATEGIC PLAN ITEMS STATUS / TENTATIVE MEETING DATE Update Personnel Policies Human Resources Manager Beach Policy/Regulations (Continued from meeting of October 27, 2016) Community Resources Manager On hold by Council Alternative Fuel Transportation Report, Nov. 2016 Environmental Analyst CCA Direction, Dec. 2016 Environmental Analyst PENDING NEW ITEMS STATUS / TENTATIVE MEETING DATE Consideration of re-establishing, on an as needed basis, both funding and discretion for the director of Public Works to contract services to pump major beach storm outfalls drains prior to anticipated major storm events (supported by Duclos, Armato and Petty) Initiated by: Other Matters Feb. 14, 2017 Public Works Director Staff to provide an update on storm drain maintenance and provide details on hydrodynamic separators (CIP 435) at the following CIP study session Policy discussion regarding city responsibilities and expectations when donations are made to city Initiated by: Council Direction May 24, 2017 Finance Director Will be discussed at the Revenue Strategy Study Session Approval of the Municipal Lease Policy Initiated by: Staff Request Jun. 12, 2018 Community Resources Manager Document Retention Policy Initiated by: Staff Request Nov. 28, 2018 City Clerk Pending City Clerk Appointment Consent for use of “Lot B” for construction staging area for Pier/Strand project Initiated by: Staff Request Dec. 17, 2018 Community Development Director On hold per developer Landscape and Street Lighting District Assessment Adjustment (mail-in election authorization) Initiated by: Council Direction Jul. 9, 2019 Public Works Director Add to Revenue Strategy Study Session Final Parcel Map No. 82295 for a two-unit residential condominium project at 1602 Loma Drive. Initiated by: Staff Request Oct. 10, 2019 Community Development Director Pending Coastal Development Permit Public Records Request Guidelines Initiated by: Staff Request Oct. 14, 2019 City Clerk/Assistant to the City Manager Pending City Clerk Appointment Measure H Grant Acceptance/Beach Cities Memorandum of Understanding Initiated by: Staff Request Assistant to the City Manager Pending action by City of Manhattan Beach Emergency Services Municipal Code Chapter 2.56 Update Initiated by: Staff Request Jan. 15, 2020 Emergency Management Coordinator Waiting for State to review proposed language changes Return to Council to discuss a full ban on tobacco sales and to include all available data related to other communities who have adopted complete bans. Initiated by: Council Direction Jan. 28, 2020 Community Development Director Council directed staff to bring item back in June 2021 Consideration of licensing agreement/fees for use of City logo Initiated by: Council Direction Jun. 9, 2020 City Attorney Discussion on Potential Establishment of a City Council Subcommittee Regarding City Finances (supported by Detoy, Armato, Fangary) Initiated by: Other Matters Jun. 9, 2020 Finance Director/Assistant to the City Manager Electric Charging Stations Maintenance Contract Initiated by: Staff Request Jun. 15, 2020 Environmental Programs Manager 495