The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/26/87"Easy doesn't do it." -Al Bernstein LS'IJ� `A)St -\ AGENDA REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, May 26, 1987 - Council Chambers, City Hall Closed Session - 6:00 p.m. (7`o9 AA5 TPS Regular Session MAYOR John Cioffi MAYOR PRO TEM Etta Simpson COUNCILMEMBERS Tony DeBellis Jim Rosenberger June Williams ~All Council meetings are open Complete agenda materials are the Police Department, Public Clerk. - 7:30 p.m. (p46/1 -46A., ,4)'10'I, CITY CLERK Kathleen Midstokke CITY TREASURER Norma Goldbach CITY MANAGER Gregory T. Meyer CITY ATTORNEY James P. Lough to the public. PLEASE ATTEND. available for public inspection in Library and the Office of the City CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS MATTERS OF PERSONNEL, LITIGATION AND POTENTIAL LITIGATION UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 HELD FROM 6:00 P.M. TO 7:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: PROCLAMATION: Drug Free Education Week, June 1 - 5, 1987 Flag Day, June 14, 1987 INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES: Raul Saldana, Police Officer Ellsworth Freeman, Maintenance Public Works Department INTRODUCTION OF NEW CITY/COUNTY BRANCH LIBRARIAN, MR. RONALD E. SCHNEIDER ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION: I, CITIZEN COMMENTS Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any items on the Consent Calendar may do so at this time. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following routine matters will be acted upon by one vote to approve with the majority con- sent of the City Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless good cause is shown by a member prior to the roll call vote. (Items removed will be considered after Municipal Matters.).,.:.. (a) Approval of Minutes: Regular meeting of the City Coun- cil held on May 12, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve minutes. (b) Demands and Warrants: May 26, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. (c) Tentative Future Agenda Items. Recommended Action: To receive and file. '(d) City Manager Activity Report: Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated May 20, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (e) Building and Safety Department Monthly Activity Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. ommunity Zte's'iSur�cei Department Monthly Activity Report: April, 1987. tGET P eKio Recommended Acf4on: To receiv& and file. (g) Finance Department Monthly Activity Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (h) Fire Department Monthly Activity Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (i) General Services Department Monthly Activity Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (j) Personnel Department Monthly Activity Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. 2 (s) (t) Planning Department Monthly Activity Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Police Department Monthly Activity Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Public Works Department Monthly Activity Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Monthly Revenue Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Monthly Expenditure Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. City Treasurer's Report: April, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Authorization to enter into an agreement: Sanitary Sewer Replacement Target Area II Inspection and Administration Services (CIP 85-402). Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 18, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve and authorize Mayor to sign agreement for a cost not to exceed $42,680; au- thorize staff to issue addenda as necessary. Cost sharing proposal submitted by the Gould Terrace Homeowners. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 14, 1987. Recommended Action: Authorize City to participate in the cost sharing proposal submitted by the Gould Terrace Homeowners. Reallocation of Fund Account. Memorandum from Assistant City Manager Alana Mastrian dated May 15, 1987. Recommended Action: To appropriate $17,801 from the Park and Recreation Fund for CIP 85-501, Clark Field Restroom Remodel Project. General Plan review regarding dwelling units and popula- tion. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 18, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file report. 3 • (u) Request to appropriate funds for employee service pins. Memorandum from Personnel Administrator Robert Blackwood dated May 18, 1987. Recommended Action: To 1) reaffirm support for recog- nizing City employees by endorsing the re-initiation of the Employee Service Pin Program; and 2) appropriate $2,300 from Prospective Expenditures to Personnel Department Office Supplies for purchase of the pins. (v) Consideration of a traffic management plan ordinance. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated May 18, 1987. (w) Recommended Action: To refer to Planning Commission for study. Claims for Damages: 1) Ana Abarca, 2909 Strand, represented by Law Offices of Ramiro J. Lluis, 205 E. Broadway, Suite 1000, L.A., filed May 10, 1987; 2) Doris Martinez, 5843 W. 95th Street, #3, L.A., rep- resented by Law Offices of Ramiro J. Lluis, 205 E. Broadway, Suite 1000, L.A., filed May 12, 1987; 3) Julio Martinez, 5843 W. 95th St., #3, L.A., repre- sented by Law Offices of Ramiro J. Lluis, 205 E. Broadway, Suite 1000, L.A., filed May 12, 1987; 4) David & Ana Maria Cortez, 2909 Strand, represented by Law Offices of Ramiro J. Lluis, 205 E. Broadway, Suite 1000, L.A., filed May 14, 1987; 5) Automobile Club of So. Calif./Susannah Waddy, P. 0. Box 25001, Santa Ana, CA 92799, filed May 13, 1987. Recommended Action: To deny claims and refer to City's Claims Administrator. (z) Legislative advocacy position re. Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund: AB 166, AB 425 and SB 144. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated May 18, 1987. Recommended Action: To take a legislative advocacy position urging enactment of AB 166, AB 425 and SB 144; request City Clerk to so notify our Senate and Assembly representatives plus the authors of the bills and the League of California Cities. (y) Letter from City of El Monte dated May 15, 1987 seeking support for AB 1125 (Tanner) re. local nonpartisan cam- paign practices. Recommended Action: To support AB 1125 and request the City Clerk to so notify our Senate and Assembly representatives, the author and the League of California Cities. 4 • (z) Informational report regarding roller hockey.. Memoran- dum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated May 18, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file report. (aa) Report from Councilmember June Williams dated May 5, 1987 re. April 30 meeting of the Hermosa Beach Coor- dinating Council. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (bb) Report from Councilmember June Williams dated May 8 re. attendance at Association for Commuter Transportation (ACT) meeting May 7, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (cc) Report from Councilmember June Williams dated April 27 re. April 23, 1987 South Bay Steering Committee and South Bay Cities meetings. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (dd) Approval of agreement between City and Group Dynamics for Men's Pro V; \,•yball Tournament. �orandum from Community Re o,, es Director Alana MA an dated May 11, 1987 Recommended Action: Approve agr'ement for sponsorship of the Hermosa Beach Open Volleyball Tournament and au- thorize Mayor to sign. (ee) Cancellation of Warrants. Memorandum from City Treasurer Norma Goldbach dated May 20, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve cancellation of Warrant No. 022777. Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any item listed under Consent Ordinances and Resolutions may do so at this time. 2. (a) ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ORDINANCE NO. 87-884 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HER- MOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE FROM R- 1, C -POTENTIAL TO C-3 AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED TO THE REAR OF 1514 PACIFIC COAST HIGH- WAY, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE REAR ONE-HALF OF LOT 2, OF THE HEFFNER, FIORINI, ALLEN TRACT. For waiver of fur- ther reading and adoption. 5 • (b) ENCROACHMENT ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION UPDATE. Memoran- dum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 18, 1987. 1) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 85-821, AS AMENDED, IDENTIFYING THE APPROVAL PRO- CESS OF COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICA- TIONS. For waiver of full reading and introduction. 2) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 85-4885, AS AMENDED, TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL POLI- CIES FOR ENCROACHMENTS ON CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY AND AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 86-4932, AS AMENDED, CHANGING THE REQUIREMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL ENCROACHMENTS PER- MIT LIABILITY INSURANCE AND APPROVING CHANGES TO THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT EN- DORSEMENT. For adoption. (c) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING APPROVAL OF FINAL PARCEL MAP #18449 FOR A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED AT 1401 MANHATTAN AVENUE, HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA. For adoption. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1987. (d) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 80-4385 BY ADDING THERETO AN ADDITIONAL CURBSIDE PARKING STALL AND SPACE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF DISABLED PERSONS, PUR- SUANT TO SECTIONS 22511.7 AND 22511.8 OF THE CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE, AS HEREIN SET FORTH, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 321 PIER AVENUE. (PARKING STALL TO BE ON LOMA DRIVE AT PIER). For adoption. Memorandum from Public Works Di- rector Anthony Antich dated May 12, 1987. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 8:00 P.M. NONE Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any of the remaining items on the agenda may request to do so at the time the item is called. 6 MUNICIPAL MA'r rtatS 5. ESTABLISHING IN -LIEU SEWER CONNECTION FEE FOR HERMOSA PAVILION COMMERCIAL PROJECT. (Continued from 5/12/87 meeting.) Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated May 21, 1987. Recommended Action: Make policy determination setting the in lieu sewer connection fee for the Hermosa Pavil- ion commercial project. 6. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE. CONTINUED PARTICIPATION WITH SOUTH BAY REGIONAL COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY AND HAWTHORNE RECORDS. Memorandum from Public Safety Direc- tor Steve Wisniewski dated May 19, 1987. Recommended Action: 1) Instruct staff to begin prepara- tions for inhouse dispatch and record keeping as out- lined in alternative #4; 2) Not adopt a resolution ap- proving City participation in financing the proposed RCC enhancements; 3) Technical proceedings to be considered at quarter year budget review, October, 1987: a) notify RCC of City intention to withdraw effective 7/1/88, b) adopt resolution of intent to withdraw, c) notify Haw- thorne Police of intent to withdraw from Hawthorne Police Records System effective 7/1/88, d) appropriate not to exceed $53,000 for construction and equipment purchases, e) appropriate not to exceed $24,500 for hiring 5 dispatchers. 7. APPROVAL OF`PROPOSITION "A" DISCRETIONARY FUND APPLICA- TIONS FOR THE "WAVE" DIAL -A -RIDE PROGRAM, THE COMMUTER STUDY, AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW COMMUTER SERVICE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1987. Recommended Action: To 1) approve resolution endorsing an application for FY 87-88 Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Subregional Paratransit Incentive Pro- gram for the Hermosa/Redondo Beach joint Dial -A -Ride; and 2) approve resolution endorsing an application for FY 87-88 Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Subregional Paratransit and Service Restructuring Incentive Program for a commuter study and new commuter service. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT DRINKING IN PUBLIC PARKING LOTS. Memorandum from Public Safety Di- rector Steve Wisniewski dated May 19, 1987. Recommended Action: Direct staff to prepare an or- dinance to regulate alcohol consumption in parking lots. 7 9. PROPOSED COMMUNITY RECREATION AGREEMENT FOR COUNTY LIFEGUARD AND BEACH CLEANING SERVICES AT HERMOSA BEACH BETWEEN COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AND CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD COMMENCING JULY 1, 1987. Memo- randum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated May 20, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve agreement subject to indemnification language satisfactory to the City Attor- ney and authorize Mayor to sign. 10. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER (a) (b) (c) Interim report re. kiosk at Pierhead. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated May 7, 1987. (Con- tinued from 5/12/87 meeting.) Recommended Action: To make policy determination. Urgency matter recommending City Council endorse League of California Cities L.A. County Division amendments 1, 2 and 3 re. SB 2 and AB 18. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated May 11, 1987 with May 19 update. Recommended Action: To urge the California Senate Transportation Committee to make the following amend- ments re. SB2 and AB18: 1) enlarge new LACTC governing board from 11 to 13 members to provide 4 City Selection Committee appointments; 2) change effective date from January 1,`1988 to July 1, 1989 and permit use of local- ly elected officials as alternates; 3) request City Clerk to notify our Senate and Assembly representatives as to this legislative position and notify Assembly Mem- ber Katz and Senate Transportation Committee plus League of Cities re. our position. Proposed Sewer Connection Ordinance. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 20, 1987. Recommended Action: 1) Review and consider the proposed sewer connection fee ordinance; 2) set the proposed or- dinance for public hearing on June 23, 1987. 11. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Legal issues regarding placement of oil revenue limita- tion on November ballot. Memorandum from City Attorney James P. Lough dated May 4, 1987. (Continued from 5/12/ 87 meeting.) Recommended Action: To receive and file report. 8 • (b)Report of City Council/Planning Subcommittee meeting. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (c) Business Relations Subcommittee report regarding meeting with the Downtown Merchants Association on May 13,1987. Memorandum from General Services Director Joan Noon dat- ed May 18, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (d) Request by Mayor Pro Tem Simpson for City Council to consider defining the need for environmental review prior to issuance of a building permit. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1987. Recommended Action: City Council to make a policy determination. ,(e) Request by Mayor Pro Tem Simpson for resolution of sup- port for Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 34. Recommended Action: Direct staff to return with resolu- tion supporting adoption of Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 34 designating State Highway Route 105 as the Glenn Anderson Freeway. (f) Notice of meeting of Los Angeles County City Selection Committee Thursday, June 4, 1987 at 8:00 p.m. Recommended Action: Mayor to designate who will attend t e meeting. (g) Ballot Measure - Purchase of the Railroad Right -of -Way. Memorandum from City Clerk Kathleen Midstokke dated May 20, 1987. Recommended Action: Council to make policy determina- tion re. ballot measure. (h) Request by Mayor Cioffi to consider funding request from South Bay Union High School District Drug Free Education Program. Recommended Action: Make policy determination whether to provide funding from Prospective Expenditures. 12. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL 13. MEETING OF THE HERMOSA BEACH PARKING AUTHORITY. (Con- tinued from 5/12/87 meeting.) (a) CONSENT CALENDAR 9 1) Approval of minutes of February 24, 1987 meeting. (b) Proceeding with a Community Center Vicinity Parking Facility. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated April 22, 1987. Recommended Action: To 1) prepare a Master Plan for Community Ctr. and vicinity re. parking; 2) develop public parking facility plan that assumes such parking is operated with on-site attendant; 3) seek from Comm. Resources Comm. a proposed revision in tenant lease re- newals to include a parking surcharge so tenants will not have to pay for parking by the day; 4) develop park- ing plan that does not diminish currently available rec- reational facilities; 5) assume continuance of Alano Club as tenant at Center with responsibility for con- structing their own facility and members paying for parking; 6) to improve parking/circulation, examine ac- quiring adjacent gas station; 7) seek City Atty. opinion on any public parking facility restrictions in force and effect as result of Community Center grant deed from Hermosa Beach City Schools. APPEARANCE OF INTERESTED CITIZENS Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Council not elsewhere considered on the agenda may do so at this time. Citizens with complaints regard- ing the City management or departmental operations are requested to submit those complaints in writing to the City Manager. ADJOURNMENT 0(t\ct it 3vcrx „ALIJA-- cleAA o �1 \. 1 �ltk-1 Wim2` gkIllizAc;.c-„e441 0,AL h\ k.Ju Law,,,, j_ ()A uf.,„41 co„r„ puj ,i/v1,40() 3/(00.45 ►1h6r6 sf�� bg4,Q cit<y�i� SPL d'1 Where there is no vision the people perish... HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WELCOME! By your presence in the City Council Chambers you are participating in the process of representative government. Your government welcomes your interest and hopes you will attend the City Council meetings often CITY VISION A less dense, more family oriented pleasant low profile, financially sound community comprised of a separate and distinct business district and residential neighborhoods that are afforded full municipal services in which the maximum costs are borne by visitor/users; led by a City Council which accepts a stewardship role for community resources and displays a willingness to explore innovative alternatives, and moves toward public policy leadership in attitudes of full ethical awareness. This Council is dedicated to learning from the past, and preparing Hermosa Beach for tomorrow's challenges today. Adopted by City Council on October 23, 1986 NOTE: There is no smoking allowed in the Council Chambers THE HERMOSA BEACH FORM OF GOVERN Hermosa Beach has the Council -Manager form of government, with a City Manager ap-. pointed by and responsible to the City Council for carrying out Council policy. The Mayor and Council decide what is to be done. The City Manager, operating through the entire City staff, does it. This separation of policy making and administration is considsered the most economical and efficient form of City government in the United States today. GLOSSARY The following explanations may help you to understand the terms found on most agen- das for meetings of the Hermosa Beach City Council. Consent Items A compilation of all routine ratters to be acted upon by one vote; approval re- quires a majority affirmative vote. Any Cour.cilmember can remove an item from this listing thereby causing that matter to be considered under the category Consent Cal- endar items Removed For Separate Discussion. Public Hearings Public Hearings are held on certain matters as required by law, The Hearings afford the public the opportunity to appear and formally express their views regarding the matter being heard. Additionally, letters may be filed with the City Clerk, prior to the Hearing. Hearings Hearings are held on other matters of public importance for which there is no le -e regeirerient to conduct an advertised Public Hearing. Ordinances An ordinance is a law that regulates government revenues and/or public conduct. All ordinances require two "readings". The first reading introduces the ordinance into the records. At least one week later Council may adopt, reject or hold over the ordinance to a subsequent meeting. Regular ordinances take effect 30 days after the second reading. Emergency ordinances are governed by different provisions and waive the time requirements. Written Communications The public, members of advisory boards/commissions or organizations may formally communicate to or make a request of Council by letter; said letters should be filed with the City Clerk by the Wednesday preceeding the Regular City Council meeting. Miscellaneous Items and Reports - City Manager The City Manager coordinates departmental reports and brings items to the attention of, or for action by the City Council. Verbal reports may be given by the City iaeager regarding items not on the agenda, uat,ally having arisen since the agenda was peepared on the preceding Wednesday. Miac¢.l1aneous Items and Reports - City Council Members of the City Council may place items on the agenda for consideration by the full Council. Other Matters - City Council These are matters that come to the attention of a Council member after publication of the Agenda. Oral Communications from the Public - (Patters of an Urgency Nature Citizens wishing to addrees the City Council on an urgency matter not elsewhere con- sidered on the ngende may do eye at this times. Parking Authority The Parking Authority is a financially separate entity, but is operated as an inte- gral part of the City government. Vehicle Parking District No. 1 The City Council also serves as the Vehicle Parking District Commission. It's pur- pose is to oversee the operation of certain downtown parking lots and otherwise pro- mote public parking in the central business district. SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA - REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, May 26, 1987 - Council Chambers, City Hall CONSENT CALENDAR Item 1 (ff) Asphalt Street Repair (CIP 86-163) - 8th Street between Ardmore and Pacific Coast Highway. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 22, 1987. Recommended Action: That City Council appropriate $5,800 from the State Gas Tax Fund balance to CIP 86-163 to accomplish asphalt street repair work on 8th Street between Ardmore and Pacific Coast Highway. May 18, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of May 26, 1987 INFORMATIONAL REPORT REGARDING ROLLER HOCKEY RECCMENDATION: It is recanntended that City Council receive and file this report. ANALYSIS: At the May 12th City Council meeting, Council directed staff to return on May 26th with a report regarding "roller hockey" being played on the Strand. A survey was conducted of all of our officers who work in the area of the Strand. It was determined that the playing of roller hockey seams to be a new activity on the Strand. None of the officers contacted had seen this being played. There is currently a section in the City Code which addresses this type of activity (5-6). Officers have been informed and will be watching for any violations. NOTED: y T. Meyer, City Manager tted, Steve S. Wisniewski Director of Public Safety y"r"Ci',,jyY •t...."7;941F,":"--';t"4. ,a•..k:'-s«.}_ = _ :�9y��p�..�: •i ..� „t'a'm+' 4,77,-.....i.„.„'".---."--. a+r _, r-'ry1E'"-'; _y„.i-�.'Y� +-rl�' .. a .71Y ;?,sy - 4..�aG.'r -t �f •�-; •.�T- -."nf "►.Tys > -f . i, :.- s Y.�F�l.% T i r: 1 No person shall bring or maintain, under any circumstances or conditions, any dog, cat, domesticated animal or other ani- mal or reptile of any kind on or upon the beach, or ride or lead a horse, mule, burrow or donkey or other similar animal onto the beach or the Strand, or along the waters of the Pacific Ocean, and a violation of this section shall be an infraction. (Ord. No. N.S. 431, § 1, 10-24-72; Ord. No. 84-771, §§ 1, 3, 8-14-84) Sec. 5-6. Balls, etc., on beach and the Strand. (a) No person shall cast, bat, toss, throw, lack or ° roll any -ball, tube, boomerang, flying saucer, or any simi1Ar object, or use any volleyball or other athletic equipment, or conduct or participate in any sport or game at any place upon or over the beach or the Strand outside of an area provided therefor. Exception: This prohibition shall not apply to any ac- tivity which is part of a supervised sports event or recreational activity of the city, nor to any activity expressly approved by the park and recreation commis- sion or the city council. (b) No person shall conduct or participate in any sand throwing, blanket throwing, or any sport that constitutes a hazard to any person on the beach or strand. (c) No sport or throwing of missiles of any kind shall be permitted on the strand walkway. (d) A violation of any provision of this section shall be an infraction. (Ord- No. N.S. 431, § 1, 10-24-72; Ord. No. 84-771, §§ 1, 3, 8-14-84) tr- Sec. 5-7. Bathing. No person shall swim, bathe or immerse himself in the waters of the Pacific Ocean adjacent to the beach more than two hundred (200) yards from shore, except: (a) A person who is the owner of a vessel, or who acts at the request of such owner while engaged in servicing - Supp. No. 9.84 65 Y .. • aftharoom • ''_.'Y.__.4:.r_d. ytx_s.�.(cl � s.1.�r 1..:e . 9 +s Yi5w.iw.Fi+l.1.•} ✓�� 1 r a . � _ p 4 1,gwy.,-:,,,-,,.- -•7yt%..7f•r"'a+_e.w-tf.._..'L".r.r..r. • ,,."...k*, .........!.....r°,-.....,!. 14 ��1�• w��:..w v y ..MZ.�i �;'� y,. w••.` i Jf?- •sit:. :, . - -T. __y -.r. Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 18, 1987 City Council Meeting of May 26, 1987 CONSIDERATION OF A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council send the attached El Segundo Traffic Management Plan Ordinance to the Planning Com- mission for consideration as a part of the Commission's upcoming review of the General Plan's Transportation, Traffic and Parking Element review. BACKGROUND At the last Beach Cities meeting the City of El Segundo apprised the other cities of its ordinance requiring a traffic management plan for various developments. Attached is a copy of that document. ANALYSIS While Hermosa Beach does not, and will not, be dealing with potential developments on a scale like that experienced in El Segundo, the concept of the Traffic Management Plan is a good one. Staff feels that it is worthy of further discussion and formal consideration. In addition to the staff recommendation, other alternatives available to the City Council are: 1. Receive and file; 2. Make specific suggestions/comments before transmitting the El Segundo document to the Planning Commission. Grego. City_ Manager GTM/ld Attachment yer V V-4 cc Planning Director Schubach Public Works Director Antich City Attorney Lough C ORDINANCE NO. 1077 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA,. AMENDING TITLE 20 (THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO CHAPTER 20.08 (DEFINITIONS); CHAPTER 20.54 (ON-SITE PARKING AND LOADING); AND ADDING CHAPTERS 20.55 (DEVELOPER TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT) AND 20.56 (EMPLOYER/OCCUPANT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT) AND CERTIFYING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT THEREOF. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of El Segundo has conducted Study Sessions and a Public Hearing and has considered changes to the El Segundo Municipal Code in provisions related to Transportation Systems Management; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of El Segundo has recommended the within ordinance to the City Council of the City of El Segundo; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 20.08, "Definitions" of Title 20 (Zoning) of the El Segundo Municipal Code is hereby amended to add the following Sections: "20.08.027 AMENITIES. "Amenities" means employee -serving accessory uses such as restaurants, retail/personal service and recreation establishments which serve to reduce the need for employees to leave the workplace. 20.08.058 AVERAGE VEHICLE RIDERSHIP. "Average Vehicle Ridership" means the figure calculated by dividing the employee population (at a given worksite) by the number of vehicles which are driven by employees (to the worksite) arriving at the worksite between 6 a.m. and 9 a.m., excluding public transit vehicles and buses serving multiple worksites. 20.08.102 BUSPOOL/SHUTTLE BUS. "Buspool/Shuttle Bus" means sixteen or more preassembled and prepaid subscribers commuting on a regular basis to and from work following a relatively fixed route and schedule by means of a vehicle with a seating arrangement designed to carry more than fifteen adult passengerss 20.08.102 CARPOOL. "Carpool" means two to six persons commuting together to and from work on a regular basis in a light or medium -duty passenger vehicle. 20.08.121 COMMUTER MATCHING SERVICE. "Commuter Matching Service" means any system, whether by computer, manual, or mapping methods, which matches commuters residing in one common area, working in another common area, and having approximately the same work starting and stopping times. 20.08.177 EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR. "Employee - Transportation Coordinator" means an employee, tenant, property owner, property manager, contracted service, or an employer organization whose function is to promote carpools, vanpools and alternate commute modes. Coordinator shall have a permanent mailing address, daytime telephone and office convenient to the appropriate employment center. 20.08.244 HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE. "High Occupancy Vehicle" ("HOV") means a carpool or vanpool vehicle used for employee commuting purposes. 20.08.358 PERSONALIZED RIDESHARING PROGRAM. "Personalized Ridesharing Program" means a commuter matching service which provides personalized services, personal conversations and follow-up for employees served by the program. c - 2 - 20.08.362 PREFERENTIAL PARKING. "Preferential Parking" means parking spaces designated or assigned for carool and vanpool vehicles which are provided at a reduced cost and/or are in locations considered to be the best or most desirable, such as adjacent to a building entrance or within a covered or shaded area if such is not provided to all employees. "' '' 20".08.377 " RIDESHARING. ,_ "Ridesharing" means the cooperative effort of two or more people travelling together, usually to and from work. Carpools, vanpools, buspools, taxipools, trains and public transit are all methods of ridesharing. 20.08.482 TRANSIT. "Transit" means transportation service operated by a public or private agency for use by the general public that utilizes buses or railcars, following a fixed route and schedule. 20.08.483 TRANSIT SUPPORT FACILITIES. "Transit Support Facilities" means facilities including, but not limited to, transit shelters, bus transfer centers, bus bays, park-and-ride lots, and/or transit operating or fare subsidies to employees. 20.08.497 VANPOOL. "Vanpool" means seven or more. preassembled employees commuting on a regular basis to and from work in a van or similar motor vehicle with a seating arrangement designed to carry seven to fifteen adult passengers. Vanpools can be formed using private vans, company-owned vans, or third -party vans." SECTION 2. Section 20.54.003, "Applicability of Chapter for Sites with Transportation Systems Management Plans", of Chapter 20.54 (On -Site Parking and Loading) of Title 20 (Zoning) of the El Segundo Municipal code is hereby added to read as follows: . "20.54.003 APPLICABILITY OF CHAPTER FOR SITES WITH TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT PLANS. The number of required parking spaces (Section 20.54.020) and parking facilities location for non-residential uses (Section 20.54.060.C.(4)) may be modified subject to approval of a transportation systems management plan pursuant to the procedures and requirements of Chapter 20.55 or 20.56 of this Title." SECTION 3,. Chapter 20.55, "Developer Transportation Systems Management" of Title 20 (Zoning) of the El Segundo Municipal Code, is hereby added to Title 20 (Zoning) of the El Segundo Municipal Code, to read as follows: Sections "Chapter 20.55 Developer Transportation Systems Management 20.55.010 INTENT 20.55.020 APPLICABILITY 20.55.030 EXEMPT PROJECTS 20.55.040 REQUIREMENTS 20.55.050 PERMITTED PARKING REDUCTIONS 20.55.060 ALTERNATIVE TSM PLAN 20.55.070 ASSURANCES c 20.55.010 Intent The intent of this Chapter is to set forth requirements for major new developments to provide facilities to encourage and accommodate the use of ridesharing, transit, pedes- trian, and bicycle commuting as alternatives to single - occupant motor vehicle trips. A reduction in such trips can be expected to assist in reduced traffic congestion, air pollution and energy consumption impacts related to the new employment growth accommodated by new developments. 20.55.020 Applicability This Chapter shall apply to major new developments, defined as follows: (1) Any new office or industrial use located in the C-3, C -M, M-1 or M-2 zones which is expected to have 200 or more employees during daytime business hours. Em-- ployee counts shall be based on actual employee projections or, where none are available, on the following equivalent building size: Use Minimum (Gross Building Size Square -Feet) Office/R&D 48,000 Manufacturing/ Industrial/Warehouse 100,000 Employee to Floor Area Ratio 1/240 sq. ft.. 1/500 sq. ft. (2) The requirements shall also apply to any existing office or industrial use which proposes to increase its gross floor area by 25 percent or more above the floor area existing on the effective date of this Chapter, and which after expansion exceeds the minimum building size or employee base as defined in Section 20.55.020(1). This Chapter shall then apply to the entire development. (3) The Planning Director may, upon application and approval, grant an administrative waiver to the re- quirements of this Chapter where existing conditions make compliance infeasible. 20.55.030 Exempt Projects Projects which exceed the minimum building size or employment base as defined in Section 20.55.020, but which propose to mitigate project impacts by developing at less than 75% of the Code -permitted maximum building floor area, shall be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter. A 25% reduction is equivalent to the following floor area ratios (FAR): Zone C-3 2:1 FAR 1.5:1 FAR With TSM Allowable Density Code Maximum Without TSM Allowable Density 25% Reduction M-1 1:1 FAR 0.75:1 FAR M-2 1:1 FAR 0.75:1 FAR CM 7% to 15% 8.75% to 18.75% Open Space Open Space depending on depending on site size site size per Chapter 20.36 c Subsequent expansions, which result in a site exceeding the 75% density level, would require compliance with this Chapter. The exemption provisions shall be reviewed by the Com- mission after 1 year from the adoption of this Chapter. 20.55.040 Requirements The following minimum requirements shall apply to major new developments as defined in Section 20.55.020, except that Subsection (3) shall be waived for projects within 1,000 feet of an existing retail/shopping area, upon application to and approval by the Planning Director. (1) HOV Loading Areas A staging area shall be provided for high occupancy vehicles (carpools, vanpools) that provide adequate space for passenger loading, unloading and waiting, and does not interfere with on-site circulation patterns. Staging areas must provide points of ingress and egress which allow HOV's ease of entry and exit with little or no interference. If staging or parking for HOV's are inside- a structure, clearance for parking structure shall be at least 7'2" on at least the first level of the structure to allow vans to enter the parking facility. (2) Preferential Parking Projects shall reserve and, designate at least 15% of the total number of required parking spaces for preferential parking as defined in this Title. (3) On -Site Amenities or Shuttle In order to reduce the need for employees to drive personal vehicles for midday activities, the project shall provide any one or more of the following mea- sures which together shall be sized to accommodate during the course of the business day at least 20% of the on-site population: (A) On-site amenities, as defined in this Chapter. (B) Guarantee operation of a privately operated midday shuttle serving the project site for the life of the project. (4) Transit Support Facilities (Optional) Projects may provide facilities which will promote transit use. If transit facilities are provided, the number of preferential parking spaces may be reduced by up to 5%, and the total number of required spaces may be reduced as provided in Section 20.55.050(2), upon application to an approval by the Planning Director. (5) Showers, Lockers and Bicycle Parking (Optional) Projects may provide shower, locker and secure parking facilities for bicycle riders, motorcycle riders, and pedestrians. If these facilities are provided, the number of preferential parking spaces may be reduced by up to 3%, and the total number of required spaces may be reduced as provided in Section 20.55.050(3), upon application to and approval by the Planning Director. C 5 20.55.050 Permitted Parking Reductions A major new development which implements the above provisions may be permitted a reduction in vehicle parking requirements, upon application and approval by the Planning Director, as follows: (1) Preferential HOV Parking and Loading Areas Projects may reduce the total number of required parking spaces by one (1) vehicle space for every one (1) space which is marked and reserved for preferential parking, up to a maximum of 10%. (2) Transit Support Facilities A reduction in the total number of required parking spaces of up to 1% shall be permitted for provision of a bus transit facilities, up to 2-1/2% for rail transit. (3) Showers, lockers and Bicycle Lockers A reduction in the total number of required parking spaces of up to 1% shall be permitted, based on the extent of facilities. (d) Amenities A reduction in the total number of required parking spaces of up to 1% shall be permitted, based on the extent the amenities. 20.55.060 Alternative TSM Plan The requirements and reductions established pursuant to this Chapter are based on a situation where the tenants and therefore the TSM program measures are unknown at the time of development. If the tenant (employer) is known, the developer/employer may jointly submit an alternative TSM Plan which includes program as well as physical facility measures. The TSM Plan may include any reasonable combi- nation 'Of TSM measures, including but not limited to, employer -directed carpool, vanpool or buspool programs, subsidies to employees who rideshare, flex -time work hour programs, and parking reductions. A target trip reduction level shall be established as an informal standard for evaluating Alternative TSM Plans. The trip reduction level shall be either: a) 20 percent reduction in the base traffic generation level, projected for the project based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation 3rd Edition, or other source submitted by the applicant and approved by the Planning Director, or b) a target Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR) of 1.43 employees per commute vehicle, which represents a 20 percent increase in vehicle ridership from the estimated baseline AVR. The TSM Plan shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, the developer/tenant shall execute and record a written agreement as specified in Section 20.55.070. 20.55.070 Assurances Physical facilities shall be verified through the City's existing development review process. Initial enforcement shall consist of verification during plan check and field inspection prior to release of utilities/certificate of occupancy (to ensure that preferential parking spaces are marked, lockers are installed, etc.). c Subsequent enforcement shall be per the established Zoning Code procedures. For Alternative TSM Plans the City shall require, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, that the applicant shall enter into a written agreement with the City, providing that the applicant and all successors in interest shall implement and maintain the approved TSM Plan or a subsequently approved TSM Plan which complies with the intent of this Chapter for the life of the project. The agreement shall be in a form that may be recorded and contain covenants which run with the land." SECTION 4. Chapter 20.56, "Employer/Occupant Transportation Systems Management" of Title 20 (Zoning) of the El Segundo Municipal Code, is hereby added to Title 20 (Zoning) of the El Segundo Municipal Code, to read as follows: "Chapter 20.56 Employer/Occupant Transportation Systems Management Sections 20.56.010 INTENT 20.56.020 APPLICABILITY 20.56.030 MULTI -TENANT COMPLEXES 20.56.040 EXEMPT PROJECTS 20.56.050 REQUIREMENTS 20.56.060 PARKING INCENTIVES 20.56.070 IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION 20.56.080 OFF-SITE PARKING 20.56.010 Intent The intent of this Chapter is to set forth requirements for major employers and occupants to develop and implement Transportation Systems Management programs to encourage and accommodate the use of ridesharing, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle commuting as alternatives to reduce single - occupant motor vehicle trips associated with employee commuting. A reduction in such trips can be expected to assist in reduced traffic congestion, air pollution and energy consumption impacts related to employee commuting. 20.56.020 Applicability This ordinance shall apply to every existing or future employer/occupant of (i) 200 or more persons during daytime business hours at a common business location (a single building, group of buildings, or work locations at a single site or contiguous sites) and to (ii) less than 200 persons during daytime business hours at a common business location in a multi -tenant complex. 20.56.030 Multi -Tenant Complexes (1) Every multi -tenant complex which is the place of employment of 200 or more people shall have a Complex Coordinator (CC) designated by the property owner/ manager. The Complex Coordinator shall serve as liaison to any major employers in the complex, and shall be the central information, reporting and coordinating source for the complex. (2) Employers of 200 or more persons are required to comply with this Chapter individually, and shall coordinate with the Complex Coordinator, if there is one. c (3) 7 Employers of less than 200 persons, which are located within a multi -tenant complex which is required to comply with this Chapter, shall either: (A) Develop an individual TSM plan; (B) Participate in a Complex -Wide Plan; or (C) Undertake the following actions: i. Provide employees with the services of an Employee Transportation Coordinator, which may be the Complex Coordinator. ii. Provide information to employees regarding alternative ways to commute to work. iii. Provide a commuter matching service. iv. Provide and administer a program of preferential parking. 20.56.040 Exempt Projects Businesses which are not office or industrial uses, and neighborhood -serving businesses which are located in the C-2 or C -RS zones. In addition, employers occupying properties which have been developed at less than 75% of the code maximum building area shall be exempt. Temporary activities (less than 90 days). The exemption provisions shall be reviewed by the Commission after 1 year from the adoption of this Chapter. 20.56.050 Requirements Employers/occupants shall be required to prepare a TSM_ Plan for submittal to the Planning Director according to the compliance schedule established by the Planning Director (Section 20.56.070). The applicant shall have discretion to select among a range of program measures. However, the following minimum measures shall be included: c A. Employee Transportation Coordinator B. Informational and promotional programs C. Establish and administer preferential parking program D. Develop and administer a personalized ridesharing program with a target trip reduction of either 20% reduction in the base traffic generation level pro- jected for the worksite based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation 3rd. Edition, or other source submitted by the applicant and approved by the Planning Director, or a target Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR) of 1.43 employees per commute vehicle, which represents a 20 percent increase in vehicle ridership from the estimated baseline AVR. E. Monitoring and report to the Planning Director once every 3 years. The report shall include (but need not be limited to) (1) the name and phone number of the ETC; (2) the number of employees at the worksite during the normal business hours; (3) the estimated number of vehicles used for commuting (excluding public transit); (4) an identification of any objectives in the approved TSM Plan which have not been achieved; (5) a descrip- tion of proposed measures to remedy any deficiencies. c - 8 - 20.56.060 Parking Incentives Existing employers may petition the Planning Director for approval of parking reductions in on- and off-site loca- tions commensurate with the level of trip reduction proposed (up to a maximum of 15%). A condition of approval shall be submittal of a TSM Plan and that the applicant shallenter into a written agreement with the City, pro- viding that the applicant and all successors in interest shall implement and maintain the approved TSM Plan or a subsequently approved TSM Plan which complies with the intent of this Chapter for the life of the project. The agreement shall be in a form that may be recorded and contain covenants which run with the land. 20.56.070 Implementation and Administration Implementation shall be through a permit system admini- stered by the Planning Department. The Planning Director shall establish a phased compliance schedule with priority given to: (1) new businesses; (2) business license re- newals for companies employing 1,000 or more persons; (3) business license renewals with 500 or more employees; (4) business license renewals with 200 or more employees. Companies with more than one business address shall be permitted to file one TSM Plan to -cover all sites. The Planning Director shall also establish a compliance sched- ule for multi -tenant complexes, based on total complex size. The Planning Department shall mail notice of requirements to all businesses requiring a permit, based on the com- pliance schedule. Notified parties shall submit their proposed TSM Plan to the Planning Director within 45 days of receipt of notification. A filing fee may be estab- lished by Council Resolution to cover the cost of program administration. The Planning Director shall administra- tively review the TSM Plan and determine whether it reasonably complies with trip reduction objectives and standards specified herein. The Planning Director shall have the authority to require a compliance audit to be prepared by any employer or Complex Coordinator upon demonstration of a reasonable basis for complaint relative to noncompliance with an approved TSM Plan. No compliance audit shall be required more often than once every 12 months. Said audit shall be submitted to the Planning Director within 30 days of his request. 20.56.080 Off -Site Parking Employers may, upon application and approval of the Planning Director, use off-site parking as part of their TSM plans. Off-site parking shall comply, at a minimum, with the following requirements: 1. A minimum of 50% of all required parking must be provided on-site. 2. Transportation from the satellite lot to the workplace must be detailed as part of the TSM Plan. 3. Satellite lots must be tied to the site development that they are meeting the parking requirements of through a legal instrument, such as a covenant or deed restriction." -9 - SECTION 5. The City Council hereby certifies the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact filed in this matter. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective at midnight on the thirtieth day from and after the final passage and adoption hereof. SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance; shall cause the same to be entered in the book of original ordinances of said city; shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted; and shall within fifteen days after the passage and adoption thereof, cause the same to be pubished once in the El Segundo Herald, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated within said City of El Segundo and which is hereby designated for that purpose. 1985. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 19th day of November, C tviwt, Mayor of the City of El Segundo, Californi (SEAL) May 15, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of of the City Council May 26; 1987 REALLOCATION OF FUND ACCOUNT Recommendation It is recommended that City Council appropriate $17,801 from the Park and Recreation fund for CIP 85-501, Clark Field Restroom Remodel Project. Background City Council approved the expenditure of $17,801 for the above referenced project with the funds being appropriated from the General Revenue Sharing Fund. Analysis Per the guidelines for Genreal Revenue Sharing, expenditures must go through the Public Hearing process. As this was not done in a timely fashion for this project, we recommend that General Revenue Sharing funds not be used and Park and Recreation Facilty Tax Fund monies be used instead. All General Revenue Sharing Funds that are to be expended for next fiscal year will go through the Public Hearing process at the June 9th and 23rd meetings of the City Council. Concur: 411A.f Gre`ory T. eyer City Manager Respectfully submitted, Alana M. Mastrian Assistant City Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Administrator - 1 - 1 s 1 May 19, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of May 26, 1987 REPORT AND RECNIDATIONS REGARDING CONTINUED PARTICIPATION WITH SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY AIS.; THE -HAWI'HORNE RECORDS SY T 74 ed on the findings of`the attached study, it is recarmended that the City cil: 1.) Instruct staff to begin preparations for inhouse dispatching for Fire, Police and General Services and for providing inhouse records management services for Fire and Police as outlined in alternative #4 to became operational July 1, 1988 and to include: a. design, construct and remodel facilities as necessary to implement alternative #4; b. plan for, acquire and install equipment as specified; c. test for, select and train personnel necessary; Not adopt a resolution approving City participation in financing the proposed RCC enhancements. At the October budget review, implement the following actions: A. Adopt a resolution of intention to withdraw frau participation in RCC and notify the Executive Director of RCC and all participating agencies (Gardena, El Segundo, Manhattan Beach and Hawthorne) that the City of Hermosa Beach intends to withdraw frau participation in RCC effective July 1, 1988. B. Notify Hawthorne Police Department that Hermosa Beach intends to withdraw frau participation in the Hawthorne records system effective July 1, 1988 G. Appropriate an amount not to exceTd $53,000) for construction and equipment purchases during the 87-58 fiscal' ear. D. Appropriate an amount not to excee $24,500, or hiring 5 dispatchers in the month of April 1988. r BACKGROUND: The City of Hermosa Beach has been a participant in the Sout y Tonal Public Communications Authority (RCC) since its inception i .1975 A11 participants were required to remain with RCC for five years in the beginning. After this five year period, any participant could withdraw by following the procedures set forth in the Joint Powers Agreement. The City became a participant in the Hawthorne records system in 1984. All participants were required to remain a minimum of two years; thereafter, withdrawal procedures are set forth in the agreement. In the beginning, there were several other cities involved in RCC, Redondo Beach and Palos Verdes Estates were two that later withdrew frau participation in RCC and began inhouse dispatching. Monetary considerations and bad radio reception were of primary concern when Palos Verdes Estates withdrew. Control and accountability were the prime factors surrounding the withdrawal of Redondo Beach. RCC has recently proposed replacing and upgrading equipment at the center. The cost is estimated to be $987,680; Hermosa Beach would be responsible for $122,500 of that cost. Over the last eight years, the cost of participation in RCC has increased an average 12.13% per year. During those years, there have been only two reductions in cost; the largest being 14% in FY 86-87 following a threat of withdrawal frau RCC. The smallest increase, prior to this year, was 12% in FY FY 85-86. The increase for FY 87-88, including the upgrade of equipment, will be approximately 8%. In accordance with the contract with Hawthorne, the costs of participation remained constant during the first two years. Costs during the third, fourth and fifth years may be increased by an amount equal to the Consumer Price Index plus a proportional share of any increased maintenance costs. This being the third year, costs increased by 16.7% for FY 87-88. ANALYSIS: For the last two years, consideration has been given to withdrawal frau RCC for financial reasons. This idea surfaced in FY 85-86 and resulted in a recalculation of our assessment and a cost reduction of 14% for FY 86-87. Because of this reduction, Hermosa Beach continued participation with RCC. There is now a desire to upgrade and replace RCC equipment at a cost in of $987,680. to be spread over a seven year period. Hermosa Beach would be assessed $122,500. of that cost. Three cities, E1•Segundo, Gardena and Manhattan Beach, have given preliminary notice of commitment to approve this expenditure and share in the costs. Only Hermosa Beach and Hawthorne have declined to commit at this time. This means that Hermosa Beach must make a decision which will financially obligate the City to RCC for a minimum of seven years. Studies comparing the costs of contracting out our records and dispatch services were recently canpleted.(copies attached) These studies clearly show that Hermosa Beach can reduce its costs for dispatch and records keeping by a substantial amount each year by taking over the operation ourselves. 1 The recommendation to "Do it Ourselves" is for economic reasons only and has nothing to do with the level or quality of service frau RCC and Hawthorne. Both of these provide excellent service with few complaints. Procedures for withdrawal frau participation in RCC are set forth in the By Laws and Joint Powers Agreement and require a minimum 90 day notice by resolution. By giving everyone 12 months notice, there should be reduced impact caused by our withdrawal. This would allow adequate time for everyone to make arrangements and adjustments to canpensate for our withdrawal. Termination procedures are also set forth in the Hawthorne agreement. They call for a minimum 120 day notice so 12 months will be adequate. By giving this advanced notice, we will not be responsible for any additional payments to Hawthorne after July 1, 1988. During the 12 months, we would determine our best course of action and be able to bring everything on line, have it tested and ready to begin operations on July 1, 1988. Listed below are several viable alternatives to consider; each with different capabilities and cost savings: 1. Leave ROC; stay with Hawthorne; have no MDT capability: (save from $439,716 to $782,106 over 7 years) 2. Ldave ROC and Hawthorne; have no MCT capabi `ty-► (save frau $573,535 to $915,925 over 7 yf...4;s02) 3. Leave ROC; stay with Hawthorne; have MDT capability(Motorola-Disarm): (save frau $197,368 to 539,758 over 7 years) 3-A. Leave ROC; stay with Hawthorne; have MDT capability(HP-PSSI): (save frau $65,079 to 407,469.over 7 years) 4. Leave ROC and H L hear ' �i?d`have capability(Motorola-Disarm) : (save frau $331,187 to 673,577 over 7 years) 4 A. Leave RCC and Hawthorne and have MDT capability(HP-PSSI): (save frau $40,392 to 382,782 over 7 years) *Note: Alternatives 3 and 4 give us the same capabilities we now have. In order to obtain everything required to implement alternative #4, we estimate that there would need to be $53,000 appropriated as follows: 6 months lease payments for the canputer equipment and software, $38,000.; construction and remodel costs for the dispatch center, $15,000. An appropriation for the communications equipment would not be required because Motorola will deliver and install the equipment and delay billing until July 1988, at which time the lease would begin. It is possible that we may be able to obtain the same consideration for the computer equipment and software. The appropriation of $24,500 for salaries and benefits will enable us to hire and train the five dispatchers for two months. This will allow%adequate time for then to became familiar with the operation of the equipment and proper dispatch procedures. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Council may choose to continue the current arrangements for services provided by RCC and Hawthorne and enter into the certificate of participation to purchase the new equipment at RCC. The issuance of COP's requires the issuance of several documents: A. Installment Sales Agreement between the RCC and Security Pacific Merchant Bank (the bank purchases the equipment and then sells it to the RCC under the Installment Sales Agreement). B. Trust Agreement between Security Pacific National Bank as Trustee, Security Pacific Merchant Bank as Seller and RCC as Purchaser. (The Seller assigns its interest to the Security Pacific Merchant Bank as Trustee. The Trustee becanes responsible for receipt of funds from the purchasers of the COP's, project payments to vendors, receipt of lease payments frau RCC and disbursement of lease payments (principal and interest) to the purchasers of the OOP's. C. Service Agreement between RCC and City of Hermosa Beach. (The City agrees to pay RCC the base payments required in order for the RCC to meet seri-annual payments of principal and interest on the OOP's). D. Assignment Agreement. Security Pacific Merchant Bank as Seller assigns to Security Pacific National Bank as Trustee all of its right, title and interest as assignee of the Authority's right in the Service Agreement and installment payment rights under the Installment Sales Agreement to the Trustee for the benefit of the owners of the COP's. E. Agency Agreement. Security Pacific Merchant Bank appoints the Authority as its agent to carry out the delivery and installation of the equipment. F. Resolution of the RCC authorizing and directing execution of Installment Sale Agreement, Trust Agreement, Agency Agreenent and Service Agreenents with respect to equipment financing, approving sale of Certificates of Participation and authorizing official action. G. A resolution of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach approving, authorizing and directing execution of Service Agreement with South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority and authorizing official action. H. In aric9ition, the Bank has requested that the cities agree to remain in the ROC for a period of seven years and a resolution of the City that it is the intent of the City to issue less than $10,000,000 in debt in a calendar year. In return for designation of a financing as being within the $10,000,000 exemption, bank purchasers will offer lower interest rates. 2. Council may choose any of the other alternatives and direct staff to implement it. Ry ful y •. tea, Steve S. Wisniewski Director of Public Safety CONCUR: Greg ry T. Meyer, City ger FISCAL IMPACT NOTED: Vicki Copeland, Finance Administrator cc: Robert Benson, Executive Director, RCC City Manager, Police Chief and Fire Chief of: City of El Segundo City of Gardena City of Hawthorne City of Manhattan Beach Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association Hermosa Beach Firefighters Association Attachments: 3 RECAP AND OZMPARISON OF SEVEN YEAR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 1 Under alternative #1, we would withdraw frau RCC and do our own dispatching. We would continue contracting with Hawthorne for our records management. Under this alternative, we would not have MDT capability as we naw have. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Casts of alternative #1: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Hawthorne records 302,538 Potential savings over 7 years: 1,970,435 1,970,435 $ 439,716 to $ 782,106 SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR DISPATCHING OURSELVES DISPATCH - FIRE AND POLICE Personnel costs: Five(5) full time dispatchers: [salary range, based on area average, 1685-2027] salary @ $1769(lst step +5% for experience) each X 5 X 12 = $106,140 + benefits @ 40% of salary = $145,596. Year 1 - $145,596 Year 2 - $163,456 Year 3 - $179,802 Year 4 - $197,782 Year 5 - $217,560 Year 6 - $239,316 Year 7 - $263,248 (anticipated 10% increase in costs; 5% CPI,5% merit) n n n n n n n n n 11 n n n 11 11 11 n n n n n n 11 n n n It n n n n n n n n n n 11 n n n 11 n n n subtotal:$1,406,760 PERSONNEL COSTS FOR SEVEN BARS CYm un cations equipment costs: Complete, turnkey radio system on a five(5) year lease/purchase @8%. Total amount of system, $115,383 (includes tax and installation) Year 1 - $27,074 Year 2 - $27,074 Year 3 - $27,074 Year 4 - $27,074 Year 5 - $27,074 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal: $135,371 CCIMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT COST FOR SEVEN YEARS Maintenance costs: Annual maintenance costs, based on 10% of equipment costs = $11,538 X 7 years = $80,766 Construction and remodel costs: Covers cost of construction and remodel of carmunications roam = $15,000 Miscellaneous costs: Contingency amount for unforseen costs incurred = $30,000 TCYTAL SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR knit FiN: AND POLICE VOICE COMMUNICATIONS $1,667,897 SEVEN YEAR COSTS OF CONTRACTING FOR RECORDS AND DISPATCH HAWTHORNE RECORDS Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $25,200 ; the figures portray an annual increase of 6%. This •- p-otage is based on the anticipated increases of both the GPI figure o.V used in this .. t and the anticipation of annual maintenance •. /` n0. -easing .i 1% each year. Year 1 - $25,200 Year 2 - $26,712 Year 3 - $28,315 Year 4 - $30,014 Year 5 - $31,815 Year 6 - $33,724 Year 7 - $35,747 subtotal:$211,524 To this total we must add an additional $91,014 which is the amount we have left on an annual equipment lease for terminals and equipment for the Hawthorne system. subtotal : $302,538 RCC - DISPATCH, FIRE AND POLICE Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $241,963 ; The figures in column one portray an annual increase of 5.25%. This percentage is based on figures given to us by RCC. The figures in column two portray an annual increase of 10.45%. This percentage was formulated by taking an average of the last nine years actual experience of increases and decreases in the annual costs from RCC. 5.25% increases 10.45% increases Year 1 - $241,963 $241,963 Year 2 - 254,666 267,248 Year 3 - 268,036 295,176 Year 4 - 282,108 326,021 Year 5 - 296,919 360,091 Year 6 - 312,507 397,721 Year 7 - 328,914 439,283 subtotal: $1,985,113 $2,327,503 To these subtotals we must then add an additional $24,500 $122,500. This amount is for the proposed purchase of new RCC and is our porportional share of the total cost. subtotal- $2,107,613 $2,450,003 GRAND TOTAL FOR SEVEN YEARS: $2,410,151 $2,752,541 per year, or equipment for RECAP AND COMPARISON OF SEVEN YEAR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 2 Under alternative #2, we would withdraw from RCC and Hawthorne records. We would do our own dispatching and would have our own records management system. Under this alternative, we would not have MDT capability as we now have. We would have limited computer assisted dispatch capabilities. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Costs of alternative #2: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Records management 168,719 Potential savings over 7 years: 1,836,616 1,836,616 $ 573,535 to $ 915,925 SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR OUR OWN RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (MICRAPOINT - DISARM) MICROFILM AND COMPUTER FOR RECORDS; LIMITED DISPATCH Personnel costs: NONE Equipment costs: The equipment and software specified here is a Micrapoint III system and DISARM software coupled with Canon microfilm equipment. This is a stand alone system which is very reliable and efficient. The equipment and software are very user friendly, requires no additional or special staff to service, requires no spe- cial environment or air conditioning, is very expandable and performs all func- tions of records management that are required by Hermosa Beach. Staff has personal knowledge of this system through actual installation and operation. Complete records management system which would allow micro -filming of all records, generation of various reports, vehicle maintenance files for fire and police, crime analysis, hazardous materials management, property management, fire hydrant files, address verifications, limited CAD and a multitude of other functions. Total amount of system, $87,774.(includes tax and installation) Annual maintenance costs: Amount based on 10% of equipment cost: $8,777 X 7 years = $61,439 Lease payments: Year 1 - $35,760 Year 2 - 35,760 Year 3 - 35,760 Year 4 - -0- Year 5 - -0- Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal $107,280 MICROFILM AND COMPUTER EQUIPMENT COST TOTAL SEVEN YEAR COSTS OF EQUIPMENT AND MAINTENANCE $168,719 SEVEN YEAR COSTS MR DISPATCHING OURSELVES DISPATCH - FIRE AND POLICE Personnel costs: Five(5) full time dispatchers: [salary range, based on area average, 1685-2027] salary @ $1769(lst step +5% for experience) each X 5 X 12 = $106,140 + benefits @ 40% of salary =$145,596. Year 1 - $145,596 Year 2 - $163,456 (anticipated 10% increase in costs; 5% CPI,5% merit) Year. 3- $179,802 n n n fin n n n n Year 4- $197,782 " n n nn nn n n Year 5- $217,560 n sin nn n n n n Year 6- $239,316 " " ' " ' n Year 7- $263,248 " n n nn " 1n subtotal: $1, 406 , 760 PERSCRL COSTS FOR SEVEN YEARS Cam nications equipment costs: Canplete, turnkey radio system on a five(5) year lease/purchase @8%. Total amount of system, $115,383 (includes tax and installation) Year 1 - $27,074 Year 2 - $27,074 Year 3 - $27,074 Year 4 - $27,074 Year 5 - $27,074 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal• $135,371 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT COST FOR SEVEN YEARS Maintenance costs: Annual maintenance costs, based on 10% of equipment costs = $11,538 X 7 years = $80,766 Construction and remodel costs: Covers cost of construction and remodel of catmunications roan = $15,000 Miscellaneous costs: Contingency amount for unforseen costs incurred = $30,000 TOTAL SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR FIRE AND POLICE VOICE COMMUNIC TIC S $1,667,897 SEVEN YEAR COSTS OF CONTRACTING TING FOR RECORDS AND DISPATCH HAWTHORNE RECORDS Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $25,200 ; the figures portray an annual increase of 6%. This percentage is based on the anticipated increases of both the GPI figure of 5% used in this report and the anticipation of annual maintenance costs increasing by 1% each year. Year 1 - $25,200 Year 2 - $26,712 Year 3 - $28,315 Year 4 - $30,014 Year 5 - $31,815 Year 6 - $33,724 Year 7 - $35,747 subtotal•$2U,524 To this total we mast add an additional $91,014 which is the amount we have left on an annual equipment lease for terminals and equipment for the Hawthorne system: subtotal : $302,538 ROC - DISPATCH, FIRE AND POLICE Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $241,963 ; The figures in column one portray an annual increase of 5.25%. This percentage is based on figures given to us by ROC. The figures in column two portray an annual increase of 10.45%. This percentage was formulated by taking an average of the last nine years actual experience of increases and decreases in the annual costs from RCC. 5.25% increases Year 1 - $241,963 Year 2 - 254,666 Year 3 - 268,036 Year 4 - 282,108 Year 5 - 296,919 Year 6 - 312,507 Year 7 - 328,914 subtotal: $1,985,113 10.45% increases $241,963 267,248 295,176 326,021 360,091 397,721 439,283 $2,327,503 To these subtotals we must then add an additional $24,500 per year, or $122,500. This amount is for the proposed purchase of new equipment for ROC and is our porportional share of the total cost. subtotal: $22, 107,613 $2,450,003 GRAND TOTAL FOR SEVEN YEARS: $2,410,151 $2,752,541 RECAP AND CC PARISON OF SEVEN YEAR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 3 Under alternative #3, we would withdraw frau RCC and do our awn dispatching. We would continue contracting with Hawthorne for our records management. Under this alternative, we would obtain in house MDT capability as we now have. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Costs of alternative #3: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Mobile Data Terminals 242,348 Hawthorne Records 302,538 Potential savings over 7 years: 2,212,783 2,212,783 $ 197,368 to $ 539,758 SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR MOBILE DATA TERMIML CAPABILITY (MC:NORIA) MOBILE DATA TERMINAL CAPABILITY Equipment costs: Complete system which would provide officers the same functions and capabilities they now have. The system would also allow the dispatcher to communicate with the officers in the field. Total cost of the system, 137,300. (includes tax and installation) Year 1 - $32,224 Year 2 - 32,224 Year 3 - 32,224 Year 4 - 32,224 Year 5 - 32,224 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal $161,120 MOBILE DATA EQUIPMENT Annual maintenance costs: actual amount per year: $11,604. X 7 years = $81,228 The equipment and software specified here is a CAIS -30 system frau Motorola. The officers in the field will be provided with the same capability they now enjoy. The proposed costs include total replacement of seven(7) MDT units in the patrol cars. These units are priced at $4,100 each and include the radio transmitter and receiver. The MDT units we now have were purchased under a grant with RCC and the other users. When Redondo Beach and Palos Verdes Estates withdrew, they kept all of their equipment as provided in the bylaws of the authority. It is staff opinion that we will also be able to maintain possession of all equipment we now have. Provided the old MDT units we have are canpatable with the new system, we could realize an additional savings of $28,700. TO AL SEVEN YEAR COSTS OF EQUIPMENT AND MAINTENANCE $242,348 SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR DISPATCHING OORSEGVFS DISPATCH - FIRE AND POLICE Personnel costs: Five(5) full time dispatchers: [salary range, based on area average, 1685-2027] salary @ $1769(1st step +5% for experience) each X 5 X 12 = $106,140 + benefits @ 40% of salary = $145,596° Year 1 - $145,596 Year 2 - $163,456 (anticipated 10% increase in costs; 5% CPI,5% merit) Year 3- $179,802 n n n n n 1 Year 4- $197,782 n n n nn n n n n Year 5- $217,560 n n n nu nun n Year 6- $239,316 " n n ion "" Year 7- $263,248 n n n nn 11 11 subtotal:$1,406,760 PERSCNNII, COSTS FOR SEVEN YEARS Communications equipment costs: Complete, turnkey radio system on a five(5) year lease/purchase @8%. Total amount of system, $115,383 (includes tax and installation) Year 1 - $27,074 Year 2 - $27,074 Year 3 - $27,074 Year 4 - $27,074 Year 5 - $27,074 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal: $135,371 CONUNIC PTIONS EQUIPMENT COST FOR SEVEN YEARS Maintenance costs: Annual maintenance costs, based on 10% of equipment costs = $11,538 X 7 years = $80,766 Construction and remodel costs: Covers cost of construction and remodel of caumunications roam = $15,000 Miscellaneous costs: Contingency amount for unforseen costs incurred = $30,000 TOTAL SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR FIRE AND POLICE VOICE CCMMUNICATICNS $1,667,897 SEVEN YEAR COSTS OF CONTRACTING FOR RECESDS AND DISPATCH HAWTHORNE RE DS Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $25,200 ; the figures portray an annual increase of 6%. This percentage is based on the anticipated increases of both the GPI figure of 5% used in this report and the anticipation of annual maintenance costs increasing by 1% each year. Year 1 - $25,200 Year 2 - $26,712 Year 3 - $28,315 Year 4 - $30,014 Year 5 - $31,815 Year 6 - $33,724 Year 7 - $35,747 subtotal:$211,524 To this total we must add an additional $91,014 which is the amount we have left on an annual equipment lease for terminals and equipment for the Hawthorne system.' subtotal : $302,538 ROC - DISPATCH, FIRE AND POLICE Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $241,963 ; The figures in column one portray an annual increase of 5.25%. This percentage is based on figures given to us by ROC. The figures in column two portray an annual increase of 10.45%. This percentage was formulated by taking an average of the last nine years actual experience of increases and decreases in the annual costs frau ROC. 5.25% increases 10.45% increases Year 1 - $241,963 $241,963 Year 2 - 254,666 267,248 Year 3 - 268,036 295,176 Year 4 - 282,108 326,021 Year 5 - 296,919 360,091 Year 6 - 312,507 397,721 - Year 7 - 328,914 439,283 subtotal: $1,985,113 $2,327,503 To these subtotals we must then add an additional $24,500 $122,500. This amount is for the proposed purchase of new ROC and is our porportional share of the total cost. subtotal: $2,107,613 $2,450,003 GRAND TOTAL FOR SEVEN YEARS: $2,410,151 $2,752,541 per year, or equipment for RECAP AND COMPARISON OF SEVEN YEAR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 3-A Under alternative #3-A, we would withdraw from RCC and do our own dispatching. We would continue contracting with Hawthorne for our records management. Under this alternative, we would obtain in house MDT capability as we now have. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Costs of alternative #3-A: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Mobile Data Terminals with HP-PSSI 374,637 Hawthorne Records 302,538 Potential savings over 7 years: 2,345,072 2,345,072 65,079 to $ 407,469 SEVEN YEAR COSTS OF MOBILE DATA TERMINAL CAPABILITY (HP - PSSI) MOBILE DATA TERMINAL CAPABILITY Personnel costs: Bonus pay of $200 per month for three employees who would be responsible for operation and maintenance of the system. $200 X 3 X 12 X 7= $50,400 Camputer equipment costs: Complete, system comprised of Hewlett Packard hardware, PSSI software and all necessary accessories for dispatch. Includes seven new MDT units for the patrol cars @ 4,100 each. Total amount of system, $139,540 (includes tax and installation) Annual maintenance costs: based on 10% of equipment costs = $13,954 X 7 = $97,678 Microfilm equipment costs: Complete, system comprised of a planetary camera,reader/printer, and all necessary accessories for microfilm storage and retrieval of all Police records and reports. Total amount of system, $28,250' (includes tax and installation) Annual maintenance costs: based on actual budgetary figures = $2,681 X 7 = $18,769 Lease payments: Year 1 $41,558 Year 2 - $41,558 Year 3 - $41,558 Year 4 - $41,558 Year 5 - $41,558 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal. $207,790 EQUIPMENT COSTS FOR FIVE YEARS TOTAL EQUIPMENT, PERSONNEL AND MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR SEVEN YEARS $374,637. SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR DISPATCHING OURSELVES DISPATCH - FIRE AND POLICE Personnel costs: Five(5) full time dispatchers: [salary range, based on area average, 1685-2027] salary @ $1769(lst step +5% for experience) each X 5 X 12 = $106,140 + benefits @ 40% of salary = $145,596. Year 1 - $145,596 Year 2 - $163,456 (anticipated 10% increase in costs; 5% CPI,5% merit) Year 3- $179,802 " n 11 n n n n n n Year 4- $197,782 n n n nn "" Year 5- $217,560 " n n nn ,t Year 6 $239,316 " n n nn 11 Year 7- $263,248 nft n IT n n n n subtotal:$1,1406,760 PERSONNEL COSTS FOR SEVEN YEARS Communications cations equi meet costs: Complete, turnkey radio system on a five(5) year lease,/purchase @8%. Total amount of system, $115,383 (includes tax and installation) Year 1 - $27,074 Year 2 - $27,074 Year 3 - $27,074 Year 4 - $27,074 Year 5 - $27,074 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal: $135 ,371 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT COST FOR SEVEN YEARS Maintenance costs: Annual maintenance costs, based on 10% of equipment costs = $11,538 X 7 years = $80,766 Construction and model costs: Covers cost of construction and remodel of canminications roan $15,000 Miscellaneous costs: Contingency amount for unforseen costs incurred = $30,000 TOTAL, SEVEN YEAR Coors FOR FIRE AND PCILICE VOICE CQWIDNICATIONS $1,667,897 SEVEN MAR cams OF CONTRACTING FOR RECORDS AND DISPATCH HAWTHORNE RIECCRDS Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $25,200 ; the figures portray an annual increase of 6%. This percentage is based on the anticipated increases of both the GPI figure of 5% used in this report and the anticipation of annual maintenance costs increasing by 1% each year. Year 1 - $25,200 Year 2 - $26,712 Year 3 - $28,315 Year 4 - $30,014 Year 5 - $31,815 Year 6 - $33,724 Year 7 - $35,747 subtotal -$211 524 To this total we must add an additional $91,014 which is the amount we have left on an annual equipment lease for terminals and a uignent for the Hawthorne system: subtotal : $302,538 RCC - DISPATCH, FIRE AND POLICE Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $241,963 ; The figures in column one portray an annual increase of 5.25%. This percentage is based on figures given to us by ROC. The figures in column two portray an annual increase of 10.45%. This percentage was formulated by taking an average of the last nine years actual experience of increases and decreases in the annual costs from ROC. 5.25% increases 10.45% increases Year 1 - $241,963 Year 2 - 254,666 Year 3 - 268,036 Year 4 - 282,108 Year 5 - 296,919 Year 6 - 312,507 Year 7 - 328,914 subtotal: $1985,113 $241,963 267,248 295,176 326,021 360,091. 397,721 439,283 $2,327,503 To these subtotals we must then add an additional $24,500 per year, or $122,500. This amount is for the proposed purchase of new equipment for ROC and is our porportional share of the total cost. subtotal- $2,107,613 $2,450,003 'GRAND TCTAL FOR SEVEN YEARS: $2,410,151 $2,752,541 RECAP AND COMPARISON OF SEVEN YEAR C0S"TS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 4 Under alternative #4, we would withdraw frau RCC and Hawthorne records. We would do our awn dispatching with MDT capability and would have our awn records management systen. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Costs of alternative #4: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Records management 168,719 Mobile data terminals 242,348 Potential savings over 7 years: 2,078,964 2,078,964 $ 331,187 to $ 673,577 SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR MOBILE DATA TEEM+N,L CAPABILITY (MOTORMA) MOBILE DATA TERMINAL CAPABILITY Equipment costs: Canplete system which would provide officers the same functions and capabilities they now have. The system would also allow the dispatcher to cannunicate with the officers in the field. Total cost of the system, 137,300. (includes tax and installation) Year 1 - $32,224 Year 2 - 32,224 Year 3 - 32,224 Year 4 - 32,224 Year 5 - 32,224 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal $161,120 MOBILE DATA EQUIPMENT Annual maintenance costs: actual amount per year: $11,604. X 7 years = $81,228 The equipment and software specified here is a GMS -30 .system frau Motorola. The officers in the field will be provided with the same capability they now enjoy. The proposed costs include total replacement of seven(7) MDT units in the patrol cars. These units are priced at $4,100 each and include the radio transmitter and receiver. The MDT units we now have were purchased under a grant with RCC and the other users. When Redondo Beach and Palos Verdes Estates withdrew, they kept all of their equipment as provided in the bylaws of the authority. It is staff opinion that we will also be able to maintain possession of all equipment we now have. Provided the old MDT units we have are canpatable with the new system, we could realize an additional savings of $28,700. TOTAL SEVEN YEAR COSTS OF EQDIPMENT AND, MAINTENANCE $242,348 SEVEN YEAR COS'T'S FOR OUR OWN RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (MIC POINT - DISARM) MICROFILM AND COMPUTER FOR RECORDS; LIMITED DISPATCH Personnel costs: NC)NE Equipment costs: The equipment and software specified here is a Micrapoint III system and DISARM software coupled with Canonmicrofilm equipment. This is a stand alone system which is very reliable and efficient. The equipment and software are very user friendly, riires no additional or special staff to service, requires no spe- cial environment or air conditioning, ia. very . expandable and performs all func- tions of records management that are required by Hermosa Beach. Staff has personal knowledge of this system through actual installation and operation. Complete records managenent system which would allow micro -filming of all records, generation of various reports, vehicle maintenance files for fire and police, crime analysis, hazardous materials management, property management, fire hydrant files, address verifications, limited CAD and a multitude of other functions. Total amount of system, $87,774.(includes tax and installation) Annual maintenance costs: Amount based on 10% of equipment cost: $8,777 X 7 years = $61,439 Lease payments: Year 1 - $35,760 Year 2 - 35,760 Year 3 - 35,760 Year 4 - -0- Year 5 - -0- Year 6 - .-0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal $107,280 MICROFILM AND COMPUTER EQUIPMENT COST TOTAL SEVEN YEAR COS'T'S OF EQUIPMENT AND MAfNIENANC $168,719 SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR DISPATCEING OURSELVES DISPATCH - r• r uH; AND POLICE Personnel costs: Five(5) full time dispatchers: [salary range, based on area average, 1685-2027] salary @ $1769(lst step +5% for experience) each X5 X 12 = $106,140 + benefits @ 40% of salary = $145,596. Year 1 - $145,596 Year 2 - $163,456 Year 3 - $179,802 Year 4 - $197,782 Year 5- $217,560 Year 6 - $239,316 Year 7 - $263248 (anticipated 10% increase in costs; 5% CPI,5% merit) n n_ it n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n II n 91 n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n subtotal:$1,406,760 PERSONNEL COSTS FOR SEVEN YEARS Communications equipment costs: Canplete, turnkey radio system on a five(5) year lease/purchase @8%. Total amount of system, $115,383 (includes tax and installation) Year 1 - $27,074 Year 2 - $27,074 Year 3 - $27,074 Year 4 - $27,074 Year 5 - $27,074 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal: $135,371 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT COST FOR SEVEN YEARS Maintenance costs: Annual maintenance costs, based on 10% of equipment costs = $11,538 X 7 years = $80,766 Construction and remodel costs: Covers cost of construction and remodel of communications roam = $15,000 Miscellaneous costs: Contingency amount for unforseen costs incurred = $30,000 TOTAL SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR FIRE AND POLICE VOICE CCIUNIC7ITIMS $1,667,897 SEVEN YEAR COSTS OF CONTRACTING FOR RECORDS AND DISPATCH • HAWWHORIE REOCE DS Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $25,200 ; the figures portray an annual increase of 6%. This percentage is based on the anticipated increases of both the CPI figure of 5% used in this report and the anticipation of annual maintenance costs increasing by 1% each year. Year 1 - $25,200 Year 2 - $26,712 Year 3 - $28,315 Year 4 - $30,014 Year 5 - $31,815 Year 6 - $33,724 Year 7 - $35,747 subtotal:$211,524 To this total we must add an additional $91,014 which is the amount we have left on an annual equipment lease for terminals and equipment for the Hawthorne system. subtotal : $302,538 RCC - DISPATCH FIRE AND POLICE Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $241,963 ; The figures in column one portray an annual increase of 5.25%. This percentage is based on figures given to us by RCC. The figures in column two portray an annual increase of 10.45%. This percentage was formulated by taking an average of the last nine years actual experience of increases and decreases in the annual costs frau RCC. Year 1 - Year 2 - Year 3 - Year 4 - Year 5 - Year 6 - Year 7 - 5.25% increases 10.45% increases $241,963 254,666 268,036 282,108 296,919 312,507 328,914 $241,963 267 ,248 295,176 326,021 360,091 397,721 439,283 subtotal: $1,985,113 $2,327,503 To these subtotals we must then add an additional $24,500 $122,500. This amount is for the proposed purchase of new RCC and is our porportional share of the total cost. subtotal- $2,107,613 $2,450,003 GRAND TOTAL FOR SEVEN YEARS: $2,410,151 $2,752,541 per year, or equipment for RECAP AND COMPARISON OF SEVEN YEAR CCSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 4-A Under alternative #4-A, we would withdraw frau RCC and Hawthorne records. We would do our own dispatching with MET capability and would have our awn records managenen system. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Costs of alternative #4-A: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Records and canputer assisted dispatch 701,862 Potential savings over 7 years: 2,369,759 2,369,759 40,392 to $ 382,782 SEVEN YEAR C06TS OF C NTRACTING FOR RECORDS AND DISPATCH HAWTHORIE REOC&ZDS Annual costs: This year's annual cost is $25,200 ; the figures portray an annual increase of 6%. This percentage is based on the anticipated increases of both the GPI figure of 5% used in this report and the anticipation of annual maintenance costs increasing by 1% each year. Year 1 - $25,200 Year 2 - $26,712 Year 3 - $28,315 Year 4 - $30,014 Year 5 - $31,815 Year 6 - $33,724 Year 7 - $35,747 subtotal:$211,524 To this total we must add an additional $91,014 which is the amount we have left on an annual equipment lease for terminals and equipment for the Hawthorne system. subtotal : $302,538 RCC - DISPATCH, FIRE AND POLICE Annual costs: • This year's annual cost is $241,963 ; The figures in column one portray an annual increase of 5.25%. This percentage is based on figures given to us by ROC. The figures in column two portray an annual increase of 10.45%. This percentage was formulated by taking an average of the last nine years actual experience of increases and decreases in the annual costs from R. 5.25% increases 10.45% increases Year 1 - $241,963 $241,963 Year 2 - 254,666 267,248 Year 3 - 268,036 295,176 Year4 - 282,108 326,021 Year 5 - 296,919 360,091_ Year 6 - 312,507 397,721 Year 7 - 328,914 439,283 subtotal: $1,985,113 $2,327,503 To these subtotals we must then add an additional $24,500 per year, or $122,500. This amount is for the proposed purchase of new equipment for ROC and is our porportional share of the total cost. subtotal: $2,107,613 $2,450,003 'GRAND TCMAL FOR SEVEN YEARS: $2,410,151 $2,752,541 SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR DISPATCHING OURSELVES DISPATCH - FIRE AND POLICE Personnel costs: Five(5) full time dispatchers: [salary range, based on area average, 1685-2027] salary @ $1769(1st step +5% for experience) each Y:5 X 12 = $106,140 + benefits @ 40% of salary = $145,596. Year 1 - $145,596 Year 2 - $163,456 (anticipated 10% increase in costs; 5% CPI,5% merit) Year 3- $179,802 n n n n n n n n n Year 4- $197,782 n n n nn n n n n Year 5- $217,560 n n n all Ma e n Year 6- $239,316 n n n n n n n n n Year 7- $263,248 n n w n e n n n n subtotal:$1,406,760 PERSONNEL COS'T'S FOR SEVEN YEARS Communications cations ui nent costs: Complete, turnkey radio, system on a five(5) year lease/purchase @8%. Total amount of system, $115,383 (includes tax and installation) Year 1 - $27,074 Year 2 - $27,074 Year 3 - $27,074 Year 4 - $27,074 Year 5 - $27,074 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal• $135,371 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT COST FOR SEVEN YEARS Maintenance costs: Annual maintenance costs, based on 10% of equipment costs = $11,538 X 7 years = $80,766 Construction and remodel costs: Covers cost of construction and remodel of communications roan = $15,000 Miscellaneous costs: Contingency amount for unforseen costs incurred = $30,000 TarAL SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR kile, AND POLIO VOICE COMMUNICATIONS $1,667,897 SEVEN YEAR COSTS FOR OUR MN RECORDS MANAGMENP AND DISPATCH SYSTEM (HP - PSSI) COMPUTER AND MICROFILM FOR RECORDS MANAGEMENT AND DISPATCH Personnel costs: Bonus pay of $200 per month for three employees who would be responsible for operation and maintenance of the system. $200 X 3 X 12 X 7= $50,400 Computer equipment costs: Canplete, system comprised of Hewlett Packard hardware, PSSI software and all necessary accessories for records managenent. Includes seven new MDT units for the patrol cars @ 4,100 each. Total amount of system, $308,353 (includes tax and installation) Annual maintenance costs: based on 10% of equipment costs = $30,835 X 7 = $215,845 Microfilm equipment costs: Complete, system comprised of a planetary camera,reader/printer, and all necessary accessories for microfilm storage and retrieval of all Police records and reports. Total amount of system, $28,250 (includes tax and installation) Annual maintenance costs: based on actual budgetary figures = $2,681 X 7 = $18,767 Lease payments: Year 1 - $83,370 Year 2 - $83,370 Year 3 - $83,370 Year 4 - $83,370 Year 5 - $83,370 Year 6 - -0- Year 7 - -0- subtotal: $416,850 EQUIPMENT COSTS FOR SEVEN YEARS TOTAL EQUIPMENT, PERSONNEL AND MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR SEVEN YEARS $701,862. eo(L *-.?.1) 17 r ,17 -01 Q'11 BACKGROUND MATERIAL GITYgf gARDENA, MAY Y. DOI, City Clerk GEORGE KOBAYASHI, City Treasurer KENNETH W. LANDAU, City Manager MICHAEL J. KARGER, CityAttorney Mr. Gregory Meyer, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Mr. Meyer 1700 West 162nd STREET DONALD L. DEAR, Mayor JAMES W. CRAGIN, Mayor Pro Tem GWEN DUFFY, Councilmember MAS FUKAI, Councilmember PAUL Y. TSUKAHARA, Councilmember GARDENA CALIFORNIA 90247-3732 / (213) 217-9600 May 11, 1987 Attached for approval by your City Council is the financial documents regarding the financing for the South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority. Each' member city needs to adopt the _attached resolution which incorporates the approval of the service agreement. The resolution also authorizes the City Manager of each city to execute the service agreement at time of closing, as well as make minor additions and/or changes in the agreement. For your information, the Authority will be approving a similar resolu- tion, as well as the Assignment Agreement, Agency Agreement, Escrow Agreement, and Installment Sales Agreement which each city has reviewed and has been modified with the input of each city. Please advise me as to the date that your city council will be adopting the resolution. KWL/lg Enclosures Sincerely, enneth W. Landau City Manager PMT DATE -DUE 1 DEC 1, 1987 2 JUN 1, 1988 3 DEC 1, 1988 4 JUN 1, 1989 5 DEC 1, 1989 6 JUN 1, 1990 7 DEC 1, 1990 8 JUN 1, 1991 9 DEC 1, 1991 10 JUN 1, 1992 11 DEC 1, 1992 12 JUN 1, 1993 13 DEC 1, 1993 14 JUN 1, 1994 TOTALS: PRINCIPAL REPAYMENT $5,486.08 5,6'41.69 5, 905. 30 6, 126.62 6, 356.45 6, 594.79 6,842.04 7, 098.69 7, 364. 86 7, 641.03 7, 927.52 8, 224.92 8, 533.32 8, 853.24 $98, 646. 55 EXHIBIT A SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS INTEREST $3,699.225 3, 493.52 3, 280. 08 3, 058.63 2, 828. 88 2, 590.52 2, 343.21 2, 086.63 1, 820. 43 1,544.25 1, 257. 71 960.43 652. 00 332.00 $29,947.54 (1) SEMI-ANNUAL PAYMENTS DUE IN ARREARS BY: TITLE: DATE: PAYMENT (1) $9,185.33 9, 185.20 9, 185. 38 9, 185. 25 9,185.33 9, 185. 30 9, 185. 25 9, 185.33 9, 185. 29 9, 185. 29 9, 185. 23 9, 185. 35 9, 185. 32 9, 185. 24 $128, 594. 08 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH LEASE FUND $3, 699. 25 3, 699.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $7, 398. 49 NET PAYMENT $5, 486. 08 5, 485.96 9, 185. 38 9, 185.25 3,185. :3 9, 185.30 9,185.25 9, 185.33 9, 185.29 9,185.29 9,185.23 9, 185.35 9.185.32 9, 185.24 $121,195.59 29134-01 Whateveryouwant 05109/87 M5509 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority (the "Authority") proposes to purchase certain equipment consisting of a police communication system (the "Equipment") by purchasing the Equipment from Security Pacific Merchant Bank (the "Bank") pursuant to that certain Installment Sale Agreement, dated as of May 1, 1987, by and between the Bank and the Authority (the "Installment Sale Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the City, together with the Cities of Gardena, El Segundo, Hawthorne and Manhattan Beach, wishes to use the services provided by the Equipment, and for that purpose the City proposes to enter into that certain Service Agreement, dated as of May 1, 1987, by and between the City and the Authority, in substantially the form on file with the City Clerk (the "Service Agreement"), pursuant to which the Authority agrees to make the Equipment available to the City and the City agrees to make certain payments (the "Base Payments") necessary to amortize the City's proportionate share of the cost of financing the Equipment; and WHEREAS, the Bank intends to finance the costs of acquiring and installing the Equipment by entering into that certain Escrow Agreement, dated as of May 1, 1987, by and among the Bank, the Authority and Security Pacific National Bank, as escrow agent (thie "Escrow Agreement"), pursuant to which said escrow agent agrees to disburse funds for the acquisition of the Equipment to and to receive Base Payments from each of the Cities, and to disburse such payments to the Bank or its designee; and WHEREAS, the City Council approves the financing of the Equipment as described herein; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach as follows: Section 1. Service Agreement The City Council hereby approves the Service Agreement in substantially the form on file with the City Clerk, together with any additions thereto or changes therein hereafter approved by the City Manager, whose signature on the Service Agreement shall conclusively evidence such approval. The schedule of Base Payments shall be set forth in Exhibit A to the Service Agreement, and such Base Payments may not exceed $ in any fiscal year. The City Manageris hereby authorized and directed to execute, and the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to attest, the Service Agreement for and in the name and on behalf of the City. Section 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective from and after the date of its adoption. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach this day of May, 1987. MAYOR OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ATTEST: CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH -2- STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ) I, , City Clerk of the City of , do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of the City Council of the City of held on the day of , 1987, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: AND I FURTHER certify that the Mayor of the City of signed said Resolution No. on the day of , 1987. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of this day of , 1987. CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH -3- 88134-01 WHM:mim 0422/87 M5512 SERVICE AGREEMENT Dated as of May 1, 1987 between SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY and the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 M5512.TOC TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section 1. Definitions 1 Section 2. Acquisition of Equipment 4 Section 3. Use of Equipment; Term; Payments 4 Section 4. Payments 4 Section 5. Maintenance, Utilities, Taxes and Assessments 6 Section 6. Changes to the Equipment 6 Section 7. Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance 7 Section 8. Fire and Extended Coverage Insurance 7 Section 9. Disclaimer of Warranties 7 Section 10. Release and Indemnification Covenants 8 Section 11. Events of Default Defined 8 Section 12. Remedies on Default 8 Section 13. Agreement to Pay Attorneys' Fees and Expenses 9 Section 14. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver 9 Section 15. Abatement of Base Payments in Event of Loss of Use 9 Section 16. Right of Entry 9 Section 17. Compliance with Installment Sale Agreement 9 Section 18. Assignment; Amendment 10 Section 19. Title to and Possession of Equipment 10 Section 20. Law Governing 10 Section 21. Notices 10 Section 22. Binding Effect 10 Section 23. Severability 10 Section 24. Net Contract 11 Section 25. Further Assurances and Corrective Instruments 11 Section 26. Execution in Counterparts 11 Section 27. Authority and City Representatives 11 Section 28. Captions 11 1 a THIS SERVICE AGREEMENT, dated as of May 1, 1987, between the SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY, a public body organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California (the "Authority"), and the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a municipal corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California (the "City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Authority is a joint powers authority duly organized by and among the City, the City of Gardena, the City of El Segundo, the City of Hawthorne and the City of Manhattan Beach (together, the "Cities"), for the purposes, among others, of providing a consolidated regional public safety services Communication System services to the Cities; and WHEREAS, the Authority has arranged for the financing of certain equipment consisting of a police communication system to be used by the Cities, such financing to be accomplished pursuant to that certain Installment Sale Agreement of even date herewith, by and between the Authority and Security Pacific Merchant Bank, pursuant to which the Authority has agreed to purchase said equipment from Security Pacific Merchant Bank and pay as the purchase price certain semiannual installment payments; and WHEREAS, in order to induce said financing and provide the City's portion of the revenues to support said financing, and in order to provide for the use of said equipment by the City, the City and the Authority wish to enter into this Service Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises and of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Definitions. Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms defined in this Section 1 shall, for all purposes of this Agreement, have the meanings herein specified, the following definitions to be equally applicable to both the singular and plural forms of any of the terms herein defined Unless the context otherwise indicates, words importing the singular number shall include the plural number and vice versa. The terms "hereby", "hereof", "hereto", "herein", "hereunder" and any similar terms, as used in this Agreement, refer to this Agreement as a whole. "Acquisition Costs" means the contract price paid or to be paid therefor upon acquisition, delivery or installation of the Equipment or any component thereof in accordance with a purchase order or contract therefor. Acquisition Costs include the administrative, engineering, legal, financial and other costs incurred by the Bank or the Authority in connection with the acquisition, delivery, installation or financing of the Equipment, including but not limited to Delivery Costs, all applicable sales taxes and other charges resulting from such acquisition, delivery or installation. "Acquisition Fund" means the fund by that name established and held by the Escrow Agent pursuant to Article II of the Escrow Agreement. "Agreement" means this Service Agreement and any duly authorized and executed amendments hereto. "Assignment Agreement" means the Assignment Agreement, dated as of May 1, 1987, by and between the Escrow Agent and the Bank, and any duly authorized and executed amendment thereto. "Authority" means the South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority, a joint powers authority and public body organized and existing under and by virtue of the Joint Powers Agreement and Article 1 of Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the California Government Code. "Authority Representative" means the Executive Director of the Authority or any other person authorized to act on behalf of the Authority under or with respect to this Agreement, as evidenced by a resolution conferring such authorization, adopted by the governing body of the Authority. "Bank" means Security Pacific Merchant Bank, a national banking association duly organized and existing under the laws of the United States of America, its successors and assigns. "Base Payments" means the payments required to be made by the City to the Authority pursuant to Section 4(a) hereof. "Certificate of Completion" means a certificate of the Authority Representative stating that the Equipment has been acquired, delivered and installed in conformity with the requirements of the Authority. "City" means the City of Hermosa Beach, a municipal corporation and chartered city duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State. "City Representative" means the City Manager of the City or a person authorized by the City Council of the City to act on behalf of the City under or with respect to this Agreement, as evidenced by a resolution conferring such authorization, adopted by said City Council. "Closing Date" means the day when the Installment Sale Agreement, duly executed by the Authority, is delivered to the Bank. "Contractors" means the persons with whom the Authority or the Bank has contracted for the acquisition, delivery or installation of the Equipment or any component thereof. "Delivery Costs" means all items of expense directly or indirectly payable by or reimbursable to the Authority or the Bank relating to the financing of the Equipment, including but not limited to filing and recording costs, settlement costs, printing costs, reproduction and binding costs,, initial fees and charges of the Escrow Agent, legal fees -2- and charges, financial and other professional consultant fees, costs of rating agencies or credit ratings and charges and fees in connection with the foregoing. "Equipment" means the police communication system to be acquired by the Bank from moneys in the Acquisition Fund and sold to the Authority under the Installment Sale Agreement, as such equipment is described more fully in Exhibit B thereto. "Escrow Agent" means Security Pacific National Bank, Los Angeles, California, or any successor thereto acting as Escrow Agent pursuant to the Trust Agreement. "Escrow Agreement" means the agreement entitled "Escrow Agreement" and dated as of May 1, 1987, by and among the Escrow Agent, the Authority and the Bank, together with any amendments thereof or supplements thereto permitted to be made thereunder. "Fiscal Year" means the twelve-month period beginning on July 1 in any year and ending on June 30 in the next year. "Independent Counsel" means an attorney duly admitted to the practice of law before the highest court of the state in which such attorney maintains an office and who is not an employee of the Bank, the Authority, the Escrow Agent, the City or any of the other Participating Cities. "Installment Payment" means any payment due from the Authority to the Bank under Section 4.3 of the Installment Sale Agreement, as set forth in Exhibit A thereto. • "Installment Payment Fund" means the fund by that name established and held by the Escrow Agent pursuant to Article III of the Escrow Agreement. "Installment Payment Subaccount" means the City of Hermosa Beach Installment Payment Subaccount established and held by the Escrow Agent in the Installment Payment Fund pursuant to Article III of the Escrow Agreement. "Installment Sale Agreement" means the Installment Sale Agreement dated as of May 1, 1987, by and between the Bank and the Authority. "Net Proceeds" means any insurance proceeds or condemnation awards, paid with respect to the Equipment, remaining after payment therefrom of all expenses incurred in the collection thereof. "Participating Parties" means the City and the Cities- of Gardena, El Segundo, Hawthorne and Manhattan Beach. "Permitted Encumbrances" means (i) ad valorem taxes and assessments not then due and payable, or which the Authority may allow to remain unpaid pursuant to Section 5.1 of the Installment Sale Agreement; (ii) the Assignment Agreement; and (iii) any right or claim of any mechanic, laborer, materialman, supplier, vendor not filed or perfected in the manner prescribed by law, other than a lien arising through any of the Contractors. -3- "Proportionate Share" means, with respect to any amount, ten and one hundredths percent of such amount. "Service Agreement" means, collectively, (i) this Agreement; and (ii) each Service Agreement, dated as of May 1, 1987, by and between the Authority and a Participating City with respect to the use of the Equipment by such Participating City. "State" means the State of California. "Term of this Agreement" or "Term" means the time during which this Agreement is in effect, as provided for in Section 3 hereof. Section 2. Acquisition of Equipment. The Authority hereby agrees to purchase the equipment from the Bank subject only to Permitted Encumbrances, pursuant to and in accordance with the Installment Sale Agreement. The Authority agrees to enter into the Installment Sale Agreement and the Escrow Agreement and to take any and all other actions required to cause the funding of the Acquisition Fund. In accordance with the Escrow Agreement, moneys in the Acquisition Fund shall be disbursed for the purpose of paying all Delivery Costs and all Acquisition Costs. Section 3. Use of Equipment: Term: Payments. The Authority hereby agrees that at all times during the Term of this Agreement from and after the completion of the acquisition, delivery and installation of the Equipment (evidenced by the filing with the City and the Escrow Agent of the Certificate of Completion), the Equipment shall be available for use for the benefit of the City for the purposes for which the Equipment is designed. The Term of this Agreement shall commence on the Closing Date and shall end on May 1, 1994, unless such term is extended or sooner terminated as hereinafter provided. If on May 1, 1994, the Authority shall not have paid the Installment Payments in full, then the term of this Agreement shall be extended until the date on which all obligations of the Authority incurred to finance the acquisition of the Equipment shall be fully paid and retired and all Installment Payments shall have been paid in full. If prior to May 1, 1994, all obligations of the Authority incurred to finance the acquisition of the Equipment shall be fully paid and retired and the Installment Payments shall have been paid in full, the term of this Agreement shall end ten (10) days thereafter. It is contemplated that the Bank will complete the acquisition, delivery and installation of the Equipment, and the Certificate of Completion will be filed with the Escrow Agent and the Participating Cities on or before June 1, 1988, and that the Equipment will thereupon be available to the City hereunder.. If the Equipment, for any reason whatsoever, is not available to the City hereunder by June 1, 1988, this Agreement shall not be void or voidable, nor shall the Authority be liable to the City for any loss or damage resulting therefrom; but in that event no payments shall be due under Section 4 with respect to the period between June 1, 1988, and the time when the Equipment is available for use by the City hereunder. Section 4. Payments. The City agrees to pay to the Authority, its successors or assigns, in consideration of the services rendered to the City from the operation of the -4- Equipment hereunder, the following amounts at the following times (but subject to the provisions of Sections 3, 13, 20 and 24 hereof): (a) Base Payments. The City shall pay to the Authority as a- Base Payments, semiannually, the respective amounts on the respective dates set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. So long as no event of default shall have occurred and be continuing hereunder, any amount held in the Installment Payment Subaccount on any April 15 or October 15 payment date shall be credited towards the Base Payment then due and payable; and no Base Payment need be made on any April 15 or October 15 payment date if the amounts then held in the Installment Payment Subaccount are at least equal to the Base Payment then required to be paid. (b) Additional Payments. The City shall also pay to the Authority, in addition to the Base Payments, its Proportionate Share of such amounts in each Fiscal Year as shall be required by the Authority for the payment of all administrative costs of the Authority incurred in connection with the financing of the Equipment, including, but without limiting the generality of the foregoing, all expenses, compensation and indemnification of the Escrow Agent payable by the Authority under the Escrow Agreement, insurance premiums, fees of auditors, accountants, attorneys or engineers, and all other necessary administrative costs of the Authority or charges required to be paid by it in order to comply with the terms of the Installment Sale Agreement or of the Escrow Agreement. Such additional payments shall be billed to the City by the Authority from time to time, together with a statement certifying that the amount billed has been paid by the Authority for one or more of the items above described, or that such amount is then payable by the Authority for such items:. Amounts so billed shall be paid by the City within thirty (30) days after receipt of the bill by the City. Such payments of Base Payments and additional payments due hereunder in any twelve-month period beginning on May 1 and ending the next April 30 shall constitute the total payments due hereunder in such twelve-month period, and shall be paid by the City in eachtwelve-month period for and in consideration of the right of the use of the Equipment during each such twelve-month period. The parties hereto have agreed and determined that such total payments represents the fair consideration for the value of the services provided by the Equipment. In making such determination, consideration has been given to the cost of acquisition, delivery and installation of the Equipment, other obligations of the parties under this Agreement, the uses and purposes which may be served by the Equipment and the benefits therefrom which will accrue to the City and the general public. Each Base Payment hereunder shall be paid in lawful money of the United States of America to or upon the order of the Authority at the principal office of the Escrow Agent in Los Angeles, California, or such other payments place as the Authority shall designate. Any such payment due hereunder which shall not be paid when due shall bear interest at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum from the date when the same is due hereunder until the same shall be paid. Notwithstanding any dispute between the Authority and the City, the City shall make all payments when due and shall not withhold any payments pending the final resolution of such dispute. -5- The City covenants to take such action as may be necessary to include all Base Payments due hereunder and all additional payments estimated to be due hereunder in its annual budget and to make the necessary annual appropriations for all Base Payments. The City hereby agrees to furnish to the Authority and the Escrow Agent copies of each proposed and final budget of the City within thirty (30) days after the filing or adoption thereof. If in the opinion of the Escrow Agent the amounts so budgeted for any Fiscal Year are not adequate for the payment of the Base Payments due hereunder and all additional payments estimated to be due hereunder during such Fiscal Year, the City agrees to take such action as may be necessary to cause the annual budget for such Fiscal Year to be amended, corrected or augmented so as to include therein the full amount of the Base Payments required to be paid by the City in such Fiscal year and to notify the Escrow Agent of the proceedings then taken or proposed to be taken by the City for such purpose. The covenants on the part of the City herein contained shall be deemed to be and shall be construed to be duties imposed by law and it shall be the duty of each and every public official of the City to take such action and do such things as are required by law in the performance of the official duty of such officials to enable the City to carry out and perform the covenants and agreements in this Agreement agreed to be carried out and performed by the City. Section 5. Maintenance. Utilities. Taxes and Assessments. During such time as the Authority is in possession of the Equipment, all maintenance and repair of the Equipment shall be the responsibility of the Authority, and the Authority shall pay for or otherwise arrange for the payment of the cost of all maintenance and the repair and replacement of the Equipment resulting from ordinary wear and tear or want of care on the part of the Authority. The Authority shall also pay all taxes and assessments of any type or nature charged to the Authority or affecting the Equipment or the respective interests or estates therein. All costs and expenses of the foregoing shall be paid from additional payments made by the Participating Cities under Section 4(b) of each of the Service Agreements. Section 6. Changes to the Equipment. The Authority shall have the right during the Term of this Agreement to make alterations or improvements to the Equipment or any component portion thereof if the Authority determines that said alterations and improvements are necessary or beneficial for the use of the Equipment by the Participating Cities. Such additions, modifications and improvements shall not in any way damage the Equipment or cause it to be used for purposes other than those authorized under the provisions of state and federal law or in any way which would impair the tax-exempt status of the interest components of the Installment Payments; and the Equipment, upon completion of any additions, modifications and improvements made pursuant to this Section, shall be of a value which is not substantially less than the value of the Equipment immediately prior to the making of such additions, modifications and improvements. The Authority will not permit any mechanic's or other lien to be established or remain against the Equipment for labor or materials furnished in connection with any additions, modifications, improvements, repairs, renewals or replacements made by the Authority pursuant to this Section; provided that if any such lien is established and the Authority shall first notify or cause to be notified the Escrow Agent of the Authority's intention to do so, the Authority may in good faith contest any lien filed or established against the Equipment, and in such event may permit the items so contested to remain undischarged and unsatisfied during the period of such contest and any appeal therefrom and shall provide the Escrow Agent with full security against -6- any Toss or forfeiture which might arise from the nonpayment of any such item, in form satisfactory to the Escrow Agent. Section 7. Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance. The Authority shall maintain or cause to be maintained, throughout the Term of this Agreement, a standard comprehensive general insurance policy or policies in protection of the Authority, its members, officers, agents and employees. Said policy or policies shall provide for indemnification of said parties against direct or contingent loss or liability for damages for bodily and personal injury, death or property damage occasioned by reason of the acquisition, delivery, installation or operation of the Equipment. Said policy or policies shall provide coverage in the minimum liability limits of $1,000,000 for personal injury or death of each person and $3,000,000 for personal injury or deaths of two or more persons in each accident or event, and in a minimum amount of $150,000 for damage to property resulting from each accident or event, and may be subject to a deductible clause of not to exceed $25,000. Such public liability and property damage insurance may, however, be in the form of a single limit policy in the amount of $3,000,000 covering all such risks. Such liability insurance may be maintained as part of or in conjunction with any other liability insurance coverage carried by the Authority, and may be maintained in the form of self-insurance by the Authority. The Net Proceeds of such liability insurance shall be applied toward extinguishment or satisfaction of the liability with respect to which the insurance proceeds shall have been paid. Section 8. Fire and Extended Coverage Insurance. The Authority shall procure and maintain, or cause to be procured and maintained, throughout the Term of this Agreement, insurance against Toss or damage to the Equipment by fire and lightning, with extended coverage and vandalism and malicious mischief insurance. Said extended coverage insurance shall, as nearly as practicable, cover Toss or damage by explosion, windstorm, riot, aircraft, vehicle damage, smoke and such other hazards as are normally covered by such insurance. Such insurance shall be in an amount equal to 100% of the replacement cost of the Equipment or the outstanding principal amount of the Certificates, whichever is greater, and may be subject to deductible clauses of not to exceed $25,000 for any one Toss. Such insurance may be maintained as part of or in conjunction with any other fire and extended coverage insurance carried by the Authority, and may be maintained in the form of self-insurance by the Authority. The net proceeds of such insurance shall be applied as provided in Section 6.2(a) of the Installment Sale Agreement. Section 9. Disclaimer of Warranties. THE AUTHORITY MAKES NO WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION, EITHER • EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE VALUE, DESIGN, CONDITION, MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR FITNESS FOR THE USE CONTEMPLATED BY THE CITY OF THE EQUIPMENT OR ANY COMPONENT THEREOF, OR ANY OTHER REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY WITH RESPECT TO THE EQUIPMENT OR ANY COMPONENT THEREOF. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORITY BE LIABLE FOR INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, IN CONNECTION WITH OR ARISING OUT OF THIS AGREEMENT, THE INSTALLMENT SALE AGREEMENT OR THE ESCROW AGREEMENT, FOR THE EXISTENCE, FURNISHING, FUNCTIONING OR CITY'S USE OF THE EQUIPMENT. -7- Section 10. Release and Indemnification Covenants. The City shall and hereby agrees to indemnify and save the Authority harmless from and against all claims, losses and damages, including legal fees and expenses, arising out of (i) the use of the Equipment by the City, (ii) any breach or default on the part of the City in the performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement, (iii) any act or negligence of the City or of any of its agents, contractors, servants, employees or licensees with respect to the Equipment, or (iv) the acquisition, delivery and installation of the Equipment by the Bank or the authorization of payment of the Acquisition Costs by the Authority. No indemnification is made under this Section or elsewhere in this Agreement for willful misconduct, negligence, or breach of duty under this Agreement or the Installment Sale Agreement by the Bank, the Authority or their respective officers, agents, employees, successors or assigns. Section 11. Events of Default Defined. The following shall be "events of default" under this Agreement and the terms "events of default" and "default" shall mean, whenever they are used in this Agreement, any one or more of the following events: (i) Failure by the City to pay any Base Payment or other payment required to be paid hereunder at the time specified herein. (ii) Failure by the City to observe and perform any covenant, condition or agreement on its part to be observed or performed herein or otherwise with respect hereto, other than as referred to in clause (i) of this Section, for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice specifying such failure and requesting that it be remedied has been given to the City by the Authority, the Escrow Agent or the Owners of not less than five percent (5%) in aggregate principal amount of Certificates then outstanding; provided, however, if the failure stated in the notice cannot be corrected within the applicable period, the Authority, the Escrow Agent and such Owners shall not unreasonably withhold their consent to an extension of such time if corrective action is instituted by the City within the applicable period and diligently pursued until the failure is corrected. (iii) The filing by the City of a voluntary petition in bankruptcy, or the failure by the City promptly to lift any execution, garnishment or attachment, or adjudication of the City as a bankrupt, or assignment by the City for the benefit of creditors, or the entry by the City into an agreement of composition with creditors, or the approval by a court of competent jurisdiction of a petition applicable to the City in any proceedings instituted under the provisions of the Federal Bankruptcy Act, as amended, or under any similar acts which may hereafter be enacted. Section 12. Remedies on Default. Whenever any event of default referred to in Section 11 hereof shall have happened and be continuing, it shall be lawful for the Authority to exercise any and all remedies available pursuant to law; provided, however, that notwithstanding anything herein or in the Installment Sale Agreement or the Escrow Agreement to the contrary, there shall be no right under any circumstances to accelerate the Base Payments or otherwise declare any Base Payments not then in default to be immediately due and payable. Upon the occurrence and continuation of any event of default hereunder, the Authority shall have the option, upon written notice to the City and the Escrow Agent, to terminate this Agreement and the availability of the Equipment to the City. Each and every covenant hereof to be kept and performed by -8- the City is expressly made a condition and upon the breach thereof the Authority may exercise any and all rights hereunder. In the event of the termination of this Agreement by the Authority at its option and in the manner herein provided on account of an event of default by the City, the City nevertheless agrees to pay to the Authority all delinquent Base Payments and all costs, losses or damages howsoever arising or occurring as a result of such event of default. Each and all of the remedies given to the Authority hereunder or by any law now or hereafter enacted are cumulative and the exercise of one right or remedy shall not impair the right of the Authority to exercise any or all other remedies. Section 13. Agreement to Pay Attorneys' Fees and Expenses. In the event either party to this Agreement should default under any of the provisions hereof and the nondefaulting party should employ attorneys or incur other expenses for the collection of moneys or the enforcement or performance or observance of any obligation or agreement on the part of the defaulting party herein contained, the defaulting party agrees that it will on demand therefor pay to the nondefaulting party the reasonable fees of such attorneys and such other expenses so incurred by the nondefaulting party. Section 14. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. In the event any agreement contained herein should be breached by either party and thereafter waived by the other party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other breach hereunder. Section 15. Abatement of Base Payments in Event of Loss of Use. The amount of Base Payments shall be abated, during any period in which by reason of damage, destruction or eminent domain with respect to the Equipment there is substantial interference with the use of the Equipment by the City. The amount of such abatement shall be agreed upon by the City and the Authority such that the resulting Base Payments represent fair consideration for the remaining usefulness (if any) of the Equipment. Such abatement shall continue for the period commencing with such damage or destruction and ending with the substantial completion of the replacement or work of repair or reconstruction. In the event of any such damage or destruction, this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and the City waives any right to terminate this Agreement by virtue of any such damage and destruction. Section 16. Right of Entry. The Authority agrees that the City and any City Representative shall have the right to enter any premises upon which the Equipment is situated during reasonable business hours (and in emergencies at all times) (a) to examine and inspect the same, (b) for any purpose connected with the City's rights or obligations under this Agreement, and (c) for all other lawful purposes. Section 17. Compliance with Installment Sale Agreement. The Authority shall at all times during the Term of this Agreement faithfully observe and perform all of the covenants, conditions and requirements on its part to be observed and performed under the Installment Sale Agreement. The Authority shall not do or permit anything to be done, or omit or refrain from doing anything, in any case where any such act done or permitted to be done, or any such omission of or refraining from action, would or might -9- be a ground for cancellation or termination of the Installment Sale Agreement or constitute an event of default thereunder. Section 18. Assignment; Amendment. Except as provided in the Installment Sale Agreement, the Escrow Agreement, the Service Agreements and the Assignment Agreement, neither this Agreement, the Base Payments, the Equipment nor any interest of the Authority hereunder shall be mortgaged, pledged, assigned or transferred by the Authority by voluntary act or by operation of law or otherwise. The City and the Authority will not alter, modify or cancel or agree or consent to alter, modify or cancel this Agreement; excepting only as such alteration or modification may be permitted by Article VIII of the Escrow Agreement. Section 19. Titin to and Possession of Equipment. Title to and the right to possession of the Equipment and all components thereof and additions thereto shall remain solely in the Authority at all times following the acquisition thereof by the Authority from the Bank pursuant to the Installment Sale Agreement. The parties acknowledge and agree that the Base Payments and other payments required to be made by the City hereunder are solely in consideration of the use of the Equipment by the City, and are not intended and shall not be construed in any way to be in consideration of the acquisition by the City of legal or •equitable title in and to the Equipment or any possessory or other interest therein. Section 20. Law Governing. This Agreement shall be governed exclusively by the provisions hereof and by the laws of the State as the same from time to time exist. Section 21. Notices. All notices, certificates or other communications hereunder shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed to have been received 48 hours after deposit in the United States mail in registered or certified .form with postage fully prepaid: If to the City: If to the Authority: City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Attention: City Manager South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority 12227 Hawthorne Way Gardena, California 90250 The Authority and the City, by notice given hereunder, may designate different addresses to which subsequent notices, certificates or other communications will be sent. Section 22. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the Authority and the City and their respective successors and assigns. Section 23. Severability. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall -10- not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provision hereof. Section 24. Net Contract. This Agreement shall be deemed and construed to be a net contract and the City hereby agrees that the Base Payments shall be an absolute net return to the Authority, free and clear of any expenses, charges or set -offs whatsoever. Section 25. Further Assurances and Corrective instruments. The Authority and . the City agree that they will, from time to time, execute, acknowledge and deliver, or cause to be executed, acknowledged and delivered, such supplements hereto and such further instruments as may reasonably be required for correcting any inadequate or incorrect description of the Equipment or for carrying out the expressed intention of this - Agreement. Section 26. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument. Section 27. Authority and City Representatives. Whenever under the provisions of this Agreement the approval of the Authority or the City is required, or the Authority or the City is required to take some action at the request of the other, such approval or such request shall be given for the Authority by an Authority Representative and for the City by a City Representative, and any party hereto shall be authorized to rely upon any such approval or request. Section 28. Captions. The captions or headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and in no way define, limit or describe the scope or intent of any provisions or Section of this Agreement. -11- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority has caused this Agreement to be executed in • its name by its duly authorized officers; and the City has caused this Agreement to be executed in its name by its duly authorized officers, as of the date first above written. (S E A L) Attest: By Secretary (S E A L) Attest: SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY By Executive Director CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH By City Manager By City Clerk -12- EXHIBIT A SCHEDULE OF BASE PAYMENTS Base Payment Date Base Payment Amount • TO: CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH MEMORANDUM Y7/6 579• a O.- DATE: May 13, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council THROUGH: David J. Thompson, City Manager n1 FROM: Merle F. Lundberg, Director of Finance() f SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution and the Consummation of Agreement to Provide for the Acquisition and Installation of State -of -the -Art Computer for the South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority .� Background At the March 17, 1987 Council Meeting, City Council approved making a five-year commitment to continue participation in the South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority (also.known as the Regional Communications Center. or RCC) subject to certain conditions. This commitment was needed in order for the RCC to finalize financing arrangements for the upgrading of the existing computer-aided dispatch system. The City Managers of the participating cities have now finalized the financing arrangements with the form'of the financing to be the issuance of seven-year Certificates of Participation (COP's). Although the final coupon and net effective rates will not be known until the certificates are issued, a summary of the pertinent facts of the ;_x.$987,681 issue are attached for information. The issuance of COP's -requires the issuance of several documents: . r '1• %_ .0 • :4'.. •fi n.. • -,,,Installment Sales Agreement between the RCC and Security {' ?_:Pacific Merchant Bank (the bank purchases the equipment an "then sells it to the RCC under the Installment Sales Agreement). 2. Trust Agreement between Security Pacific National Bank as . Trustee, Security Pacific Merchant Bank.. as Seller and RCC as Purchaser. (The Seller assigns its interest to the Security Pacific Merchant Bank as Trustee. The Trustee becomes responsible for receipt of funds from the purchasers of the COP's, project payments to vendors, receipt of lease payments from RCC and disbursement of lease payments (principal and interest) to the purchasers of the COP's). 3. Service Agreement between RCC and City of Manhattan Beach. (The City agrees to pay the RCC the base payments required in order for the RCC to meet semi-annual payments of principal and interest on the COP's). 4. Assignment Agreement. Security Pacific Merchant Bank as Seller assigns to Security Pacific National Bank as Trustee all of its right, title and interest as assignee of the Authority's right in the Service Agreement and installment payment rights under the Installment Sales Agreement to the Trustee for the benefit of the owners of the COP'S. 1 5. Agency Agreement. Security Pacific Merchant Bank appoints the Authority as its agent to carry out the delivery and installation of the equipment. 6. Resolution of the RCC authorizing and directing execution of Installment Sale Agreement, Trust Agreement, Agency Agreement and Service Agreements with respect to equipment financing, approving sale of Certificates of Participation and authorizing official action. 7. A resolution of the City Council of the City of Manhattan Beach approving, authorizing and directing execution of Service Agreement with South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority and authorizing official action. In addition the Bank has requested that the cities agree to remain in the RCC for a period of seven years and a resolution of the City that it is the intent of the City to issue less than $10,000,000 in debt in a calendar year. In return for designation of a financing as being within the $10,000,000 exemption, bank purchasers will offer lower _:interest rates. . A draft copy of the documents and resolutions substantially in final :"form is available in the City Clerk's Office for review. Also • following this memo is a flowchart of the "Structure of Tax Exempt Certificates of Participation" and narrative description of :.Certificates of Participation as prepared by Security Pacific National Bank for informational :purposes. Alternatives • 1. Approve the documents substantially in final form for RCC to acquire State -of -the -Art Computer Equipment through the issuance of Certificates of Participation, adopt Resolution of Intent to limit the issuance of debt to less than $10,000,000 in a calendar year and adopt Resolution of Intent to remain in the South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority for seven years. 2. Do not approve the financing documents nor pass the requested resolutions. • Recommendation It is recommended that City Council approve the financing documents and adopt resolutions of intent to limit the issuance of debt to less than $10,000,000 in a calendar year, intent to remain in the South Bay Regional Communications Authority for seven years and approving, authorizing and directing execution of the service agreement with South Bay Regional Communications Authority subject to the following conditions: a. The computer-aided dispatch system will be enhanced and that the funding sought will be used solely for such purposes as the acquisition of necessary hardware and software. b. That the level of services presently provided the City of Manhattan Beach will remain consistent or be substantially improved. c. That the enhancement of the computer-aided dispatch system will not result in further cost increase for the delivery of service above those to be funded for the acquisition of equipment. d. Subject to City Attorney's approval. MFL/cb Att. . cc: • Agenda File 5/19/87 RCC Contract File Reading File _ MFL Desk File RCC FINANCING POLICE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM SEVEN (7) YEAR PRIVATE PLACEMENT LEASE PURCHASE Acquisition Cost: • Issue Size: Net Construction Fund: Term: Capitalized Interest: Debt Service Reserve: Financing Assumptions: Capitalized Interest Fund: Construction Fund: Debt Service Reserve Fund: Average Coupon: Net Effective Rate: Principal Payment Frequency: Interest Payment Frequency: Construction Draws: Rating: 9/1/87 11/1/87 12/1/87 2/1/88 4/1/88 5/1/88 6/1/88 $950,000 ++ $987,681 $903,423 Seven (7) Years Through June 1988 ($74,257) Not Required 5.85% 5.85% Not Applicable 6.94% 6.057 Semi -Annual Semi -Annual $10,000 (Bond Counsel) $ 30,000 30,000 • 75,000 400,000 317,500 17,700 79,800 $950,000 --Not Required 4 . RCC FINANCING POLICE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM PARTICIPANTS' REQUIRED PAYMENTS Gross Average Net Ayerage(1) Annual Debt Service Annual Debt Service Gardena - 22.00% $ 40,634 $ 38,3004( El Segundo 19.13 35,333 33,303 Hawthorne 29.31 54,135 51,026 Hermosa Beach 10.01 18,488 17,426 Manhattan Beach 19.55 36,109 34,035 TOTAL 100.00% $184,699. $174,090 (1) After consideration of interest earnings on acquisition fund. CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION Certificates of Participation (COPs) are a type of tax-exempt security which are issued by cities, counties, states and other special districts to finance equipment acquisitions and capital improvement projects. ,Two of the major advantages of COPs are (1) they are a method of financing projects without violating debt limitations, and (2) they can be issued through the authorization of the agency's governing body without the necessity of voter approval. COPs can be structured in a variety of ways to meet the financing needs of the issuer. The repayment period of COPs varies depending on the expected life of the equipment or projects being financed. Typically COP issues are repaid in 5 to 30 years. COPs can be structured so the annual lease payment obligation is equal throughout the life of the financing, or they can be structured so the lease payments increase at a given increment each year. The interest rates can be fixed throughout the financing term or variable based on interest rates which are determined daily, weekly, monthly or some other set period. COPs are usually presented to the one or both of the New York rating agencies if the finances of the government agency are strong enough to obtain an investment-grade rating (Baa/BBB or above). An investment-grade rating will allow the underwriter to market and sell the COPs to investors at more favorable (lower) interest rates. Often the government agency will insure the COP issue or back the COPs with bank letters of credit to obtain a higher credit rating and thus lower interest costs. It generally takes approximately 60 days to structure and close a COP financing. The first 30 days are devoted to preparing the COP documentation with the final 30 days devoted to obtaining proper authorization from the issuing government agency, obtaining a credit rating, pricing and selling the COPs to investors and delivering the funds to the issuer. COPs are structured with a number of legally binding agreements which are made by the government agency with a bank trustee, non-profit public benefit corporation or authority and an underwriter. For the purposes of this description of COPs, the parties involved in a COP financing will be referred to as the agency, trustee, corporation and underwriter. The agreements and the relationships among the parties involved are outlined in the attached diagram and discussed individually below. Lease and Agency Agreements The agency enters into a lease agreement with the corporation. Under the terms of the lease agreement, the corporation agrees to purchase the project with the funds received from the sale of the certificates and agrees to lease the project to the agency. The agency agrees to make lease payments to the corporation for the use of the project and, at the end of the term of the lease, the corporation agrees to sell the project to the agency, usually for $1.00. Certificates of Participation ,. .. Page Two - .- t . _,i , •_ . The agency agreement is between the agency and -the corporation. Under the terms of the agency agreement, the agency -agrees to purchase and oversee the project on behalf of the corporation. Assignment 'and Trust`Aoreements - ,The assignment,•_agreement is between the trustee and the corporation. Under the kit-erms =of the' assignment- agreement, -the 'co'rporation assigns' itsrights to tece i,ve J ease -payments: to, the trustee. The trust -agreement is "among ,the agency, trustee and corporation The trust agreement outlines the responsibilities of the trustee and instructs the trustee to actually issue the certificates of participation. The trustee is responsible for holding and itnvesting"the funds generated from the sale of the certificates, making principal and interest payments to the owners of the certificates, and making -payments for the acquisition of the projects: Purchase Agreement - The purchase agreement is between the, agency- and. the underwriter. Under the "terms of the purchase agreement, the underwriter agrees to purchase the :certificates of participation and deliver the funds to the trustee... The agency and underwriter_. agree upon :axpurchase price for the COPs- and negotiate the interest -rates 'Which. will `be paid on the COPs. Additional Information 'on COPs • While the corporation is essential in a COP financlng, It actually only serves to `facilitate. the COP 'financing •structure. 'The corporation is often established by the agency for the sole purpose of financing projects. We- above^`description of "'a'•COP financing has been simplified `to outline'_the basic structure of a COP issue. Additional documents include -the authorizing resolutions, various 'cer'tifications of the parties -involved 'in theefinancing, *it' a i.d i scl osu're'"statement . (offi Ctal "statement) which- i s prepared `'by the 1nvestinent bankers for .the tivestors. Investment bankers work with the issuing government agency. and are responsible for structuring the COP financing 'agreements 'so the certificates 'issued--can"be sold -to' investors at"taX exempt interest rates. The investment bankers give the issuing government agency advice and are responsible for the overall management of the COP structuring' Jprocess. !!• ter` - r.r n ._t: rr!�'I .. i u Lu Structure of Tax -Exempt Certificates of Participation Purchase Agreement Funds UNDERWRITER Funds Certificates of Participation INVESTORS Lease Payments Lease Payments Certificates of Participation TRUSTEE 4 4 4 - Trust Agreement Lease Agreement PUBLIC AGENCY Payment Requests Project Payments Assent Agreement A Agency Agreement CORPORATION Equipment/ Construction VENDOR/ CONTRACTOR - N - March 9, 1987 TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: DAVID J. THOMPSON, CITY MANAGER FROM: TED J. MERTENS, CHIEF OF POLICE 77/03/7 Z. SUBJECT: PARTICIPATION IN THE FIVE-YEAR FUNDING PROGRAM TO ENHANCE COMPUTER-AIDED DISPATCH - SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY Background The existing computer-aided dispatch system at the SBRPCA has been in service since the communications center was founded. Over the years, the system has been expanded to the point where it is now at its capacity. Recent changes in state law requiring fire departments and/or cities to maintain hazaradous materials documentation has placed an increased burden on the communications center. It became apparent at this time that the system has reached its capacity and can no longer be expanded. Discussion: For the last year, the Users Committee has been exploring alternatives to upgrade the existing- computer-aided dispatch system at the Regional Communications Center. A Request for Proposal was drafted and several responses were received relative to installing a new computer-aided dispatch system using state -of -the art computer hardware and software.. It was the intention of the proposals to provide for future system expansion at RCC as the needs were identified. A subcommittee of the Users Committee comprised of persons with technical knowledge and abilities was formed to evaluate the proposals submitted. This subcommittee is in the process of making its final recommendations to the Users Committee and eventually to the Board of Directors. As with any new program, the concern relative to funding necessary components was raised. This matter was then referred to .the city managers of the participating cities for their review and recommendations. The group of city managers has met and formulated four funding programs: Mayor and City Council March 9, 1987 Page 2 1. Private lease purchase (five years); 2. Private lease purchase (seven years); i . /3 3. Certificates of participation (seven years); and 4. State. program alternate. In order for the appropriate funding mechanism to be identified and eventually recommended to the city councils of the participating agencies, it is necessary to establish a conceptual commitment to continue participation in the SBRPCA by each agency. Once the cities have committed to continuing participation for the next five years, the city managers will then again meet to finalize the recommended funding plan. During my tenure as Chief of Police, I have found the SBRPCA to provide a viable communications service to the participants. I believe, at the present time, the continued participation in the SBRPCA is appropriate and indeed will continue to be so for the next five years. The Fire Chief also concurs in this assessment and believes that enhancement of the existing capability of the RCC relative to computer-aided dispatch and certain management - information systems is necessary and appropriate. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council make a 'commitment to continued participation in the SBRPCA for five more years predicated on the following: 1. The computer-aided dispatch system will be enhanced and that the funding sought will be used solely for such purposes as the acquisition of necessary hardware and software. 2. That the level of service as presently provided to the City of Manhattan Beach will remain consistent or be substantially improved. 3. That the enhancement of the computer-aided dispatch system will not result in further cost increase for the delivery of service above those to be funded for the acquisition of equipment. TJM:cg 29134-01 Whaleveryouwanl 05/09/87 M5510 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH BAY REGIONAL. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY Da - WHEREAS, the South Bay Regional Public Communication s•' Authority (the "Authority") proposes to purchase certain equipment consisting of a police communication system (the "Equipment") by purchasing the Equipment front' Security Pacific Merchant Bank (the "Bank") pursuant to that certain Installment Sale Agreement, dated as of May 1, 1987, by and between the Bank and the Authority (the "Installment Sale Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the City, together with the Cities of Gardena, El Segundo, Hawthorne and Hermosa Beach, wishes to use the services provided by the Equipment, and for that purpose the City proposes to enter into that certain Service Agreement, dated as of May 1, 1987, by and between the City and the Authority, in substantially the form on file with the City Clerk (the "Service Agreement"), pursuant to which the Authority agrees to make the Equipment available to the City and the City agrees to make certain payments (the "Base Payments") necessary to amortize the City's proportionate share of the cost of financing the Equipment and WHEREAS, the Bank intends to finance the costs of acquiring and installing the Equipment by entering into that certain Escrow Agreement, dated as of May 1, 1987, by and among the Bank, the Authority and Security Pacific National Bank, as escrow agent (the "Escrow Agreement"), pursuant to which said escrow agent agrees to disburse funds for the acquisition of the Equipment to and to receive Base Payments from each of the Cities, and to disburse such payments to the Bank or its designee; and herein; WHEREAS, the City Council approves the financing of the Equipment as described NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Manhattan Beach as follows: Section 1, Service Agreement The City Council hereby approves the Service Agreement in substantially the form on file with the City Clerk, together with any -additions thereto or changes therein hereafter approved by the City Manager, whose signature on the Service Agreement shall conclusively evidence such approval. The schedule of Base Payments shall be set forth in Exhibit A to the Service Agreement, and such Base Payments may not exceed $ in any fiscal year. The City Manageris hereby authorized and directed to execute, and the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to attest, the Service Agreement for and in the name and on behalf of the City. Section 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective from and after the date of its adoption. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Manhattan Beach this day of May, 1987. MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH ATTEST: • CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH -2- STATE OF CALIFORNJ.A. . ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH) City Clerk of the City of , do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of the City Council of the City of held on We day of , 1987, by the following vote of the members thereof: i/ AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: AND I FURTHER certify that the Mayor of the City of signed said Resolution No. on the day of , 1987. - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of this day of , 1987. CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH -JI • -3- f // F' ARTHUR E. JONES CITY MANAGER b el ge,pftybdo 350 MAIN STREET EL SEGUNDO. CALIFORNIA 90245 (213) 322-4670 March 31, 1987 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of El Segundo Gentlemen: Subject: Police/Fire Dispatching The police and fire computer-aided dispatch, operated through the South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority, went on line in 1976. This was one of the first multi -agency computer- aided dispatch systems in the United States and used then state- of-the-art technology that the Authority helped to develop through a grant from the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. The system was designed primarily for service to law enforcement, with additional capability for fire dispatching. However, the fire dispatching capability was limited, with no computer terminal installed in fire vehicles. The Authority has overcome the technical and operational problems it experienced during the first few years and now provides a very satisfactory level of service to its five member cities. The same level of service could not be dupli- cated individually by each city at the same cost. Both El Segundo Fire Chief Robert Marsh and Police Chief Ray Lewis have expressed satisfaction with the Authority and a desire to extend and enhance the service it provides. (See attached memos from Police and Fire Chiefs.) After ten years of operation, the initial computer hardware and software of the system are nearing the end of their useful life. Advances in computer technology now make available a wider range of services at reasonable cost. The Authority proposes to replace the existing system with an upgraded system that will provide a greatly enhanced fire dispatch system with the ability to handle hazardous material inventory and responses and both fire and police records systems. Proposals have been invited and a tentative decision made, after evaluation by the Authority Board of Directors and the fire and police chiefs of all five cities, to award purchase of the new system to PRC for an estimated cost of $950,000. El Segundo's share of this cost is equal to 19.13%. IP f 1 135c�tvL Subject: Police/Fire Dispatching March 31, 1987 Proposals for financing the purchase have been obtained, and the best option appears to be a seven-year private -placement lease/ purchase. The lease has been negotiated at an effective interest rate of 6.05%, provided the financing can be completed before May 1; 1987. Completion of the financing requires all five member City Councils to make a commitment to Authority membership for at least five or preferably seven years and enter into an operating agreement for the lease/purchase financing: Documents necessary to complete the purchase agreement will be -presented at the April 21 Council meeting. This matter is being presented to you in advance to obtain conceptual approval for commitment to the Authority and to the funding as outlined. Attached is a descrip- tion of the lease/purchase agreement, including the required lease payments for each of the five member cities. Mr. Robert Benson, Executive Director of the Authority, will be present at the April 7 meeting to assist in answering the Council's questions on this matter. Sincerely, -Arthur E. Jones City Manager Enclosures 4 v C CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 1NTER*DE 'ARTMENTAL CORRESPQNDENCE oaf. May 13, 1987 1m • Honorable City Council Members Fmm: Arthur E. Jones, City Manager. Subj.ct:. Financing of Computer -Aided Dispatch System Through SBRPCA The final financial documents to complete the financing of the new computer-aided dispatch system through the South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority have been received and are ready for Council action. The only action required of the Council is approval of the resolution which incorporates the approval of the service agreement. Copies of both have been received by the City Attorney and are attached for your considera- tion. The net average annual debt has been reduced from $33,303 to $33,087. This, in turn, reduced the City's total cost, including interest charges, from $233,121 to $231,615. I recommend Council approval of the resolution. AEJ:eh Arthur E. Jones City Manager SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION May 26, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of May 26, 1987 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING RCC AND HAWI'HORNE RECORDS Attached is a consolidation of the various alternatives as well as supplemental materials that list the various pieces of equipment which are specified in the proposal. It is important to note that there are many iters included in the cost that could be eliminated for futher savings with no effect on the capability to provide the dispatch and records services suggested. One of those iters is the equipment for the remote camera at the pier. Steve S. Wisniewski Director of Public Safety NOTED: k c Greg¢ry T. Me er, City ager 6 RECAP AND COMPARISON OF SEVEN YEAR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 1 Under alternative #1, we would withdraw frau RCC and do our own dispatching. We would continue contracting with Hawthorne for our records management. Under this alternative, we would not have MDT capability as we now have. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 Costs of alternative #1: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Hawthorne records 302,538 to $2,752,541 1,970,435 1,970,435 Potential savings over 7 years: $ 439,716 to $ 782,106 SEVEN YEAR COST'S ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 2 Under alternative #2, we would withdraw frau RCC and Hawthorne records. We would do our own dispatching and would have our own records management system. Under this alternative, we would not have MDT capability as we now have. We would have limited canputer assisted dispatch capabilities. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 Costs of alternative #2: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Records management 168,719 Potential savings over 7 years: to $2,752,541 1,836,616 1,836,616 $ 573,535 to $ 915,925 SEVEN YEAR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 3 Under alternative #3, we would withdraw frau RCC and do our own dispatching. We would continue contracting with Hawthorne for our records management. Under this alternative, we would obtain in house MDT capability as we now have. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Costs of alternative #3: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Mobile Data Terminals 242,348 Hawthorne Records 302,538 Potential savings over 7 years: 2,212,783 2,212,783 $ 197,368 to $ 539,758 4 RECAP AND CCr4PARISON OF SEVEN YEAR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 3-A Under alternative #3-A, we would withdraw frau RCC and do our own dispatching. We would continue contracting with Hawthorne for our records managenent. Under this alternative, we would obtain in house MDT capability as we naw have. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Costs of alternative #3-A: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Mobile Data Terminals with HP-PSSI 374,637 Hawthorne Records 302,538 Potential savings over 7 years: 2,345,072 2,345,072 65,079 to $ 407,469 SEVEN YEAR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 4 Under alternative #4, we would withdraw from RCC and Hawthorne records. We would do our awn dispatching with MDT capability and would have our own records management system. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Costs of alternative #4: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Records management 168,719 Mobile data terminals 242,348 Potential savings over 7 years: 2,078,964 2,078,964 $ 331,187 to $ 673,577 SEVEN YEAR COS'T'S ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERNATIVE # 4-A Under alternative #4-A, we would withdraw from RCC and Hawthorne records. We would do our own dispatching with MDT capability and would have our own records management system. Costs to contract for all services : $2,410,151 to $2,752,541 Costs of alternative #4-A: In house dispatch $1,667,897 Records and camputer assisted dispatch ,701,862 Potential savings aver 7 years: 2,369,759 2,369,759 $ 40,392 to $ 382,782 CITY OF HE2NDSA Bpi .POLICE/FIRE DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM ExE.:[TTIVE SCIMMRY : FIND STATIONS- Radio Backbone System .(PrimaryL • DISPATCH CONSOLE _ CAD, Teleoo, Radio, CCTV CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION Jail, Lobby, Parking Area Pier -Bead, Console Addition .MOBILE RADIOS (not included) PORTABLE RADIOS (not included) DATA TF12MIMLS (not included) Equipment Instalation $ 21,838.76 $ 1,550.00 32, 550.62 1,500.00 17, 505.30 4,935.00 25,814.28 3,338.00 TOTAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM $97,708.96 .$ 11,323.00 . Q I L rnt run w 'Iyais3ys auvaDaalz X Yi4I2id aI't ZfinZnw 'IOUINOO X YWI2�d (dnxObiS) •YJ. Ya. b2ib'WI2id Z . A0 :) 1V007- - - 3 ii I3 - 3J-I.'IO d_ - - a3-I'IO cv HO T HA;- • ad woo: oOiw iidW�O 1103 ilk ack.GZHSW sautT O3aTaq. alar: Ivasnw 'IYD rsOv,L AUVwIlid. 311.1-X L HDP 3HA 000ZUSW HO T 3HQ. OYU SOW_. . UVNIlid HOT aim 000 Z2iSW_ w3ZSxS 3H08?IOva OIava HO1138 Nf SOWH 3H 30 AZIO r POLICE PRIM ARY/tJ F: 1 Cti..PL 1 C74GSB3106 1 C182 _1 C83 1 C28 1 DSPD201. -'1 Dr 597-106' 1 RRX4024 C74GSB3106 C11 _ MS2737 'IDE5091 TDN6597-100' • CITY -OF H!RfDSA BEACH "POLICE/FIRE DEPARTMENT RADIO.BACKBONE SYSTEM MSR2000 Repeater Duplexer Omit wire line control Emergency Power _Revert Omni Antenna - 6db -Gain Transmission Line Lighting Suppresssion Kit •MSR2000.Oontrol Station -Time _out- Timer X11 Mxnt Kit Yagi antenna - 10db gain Transmission Line FIRE PRIMARY/Vii': 4 Ch. CSD .1 • 1 1 1 1 C73KSB1196 - C28 'IDD6481 ZDN6597 100'- RRX4024 1 1DN7294 1 ZDN7289 MSR2000 Base Station Emergency Power Revert Omni Antenna - 6db gain Transmission Line -_ Lighting Suppression Kit tergency=Battery 244 AH _Sack 2 step 24" 'IO'I ,L RADIO BACKBONE EOJIPMENT INSTALZATION . 6,079.34 1,156.70 - (363.00) 325.94 - 316.48 256:28 55.04 5,511.74 68.80 188.34 161.68 256.28 5,709.54 325.94 374.96 256.28 55.04 • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH _ -POLI CE/FIRE DEPARTMENT .DISPATCH `CENTRA -COM II CONSOLE • - E - •_ -�_ '--_ N _ .,,,._. 4 _CCT yUAL� . _ _ ..• CCTV -SWITCH � xzYAtI X31=. -C C.P. �I C ."P-. 3 B1604A 1 BDN6230 1 DBT350-3 3 O'IDB4018F01 1 .K751 1 •K752_.._._ 3 . -8125 1 B1233 1 ELN6317 • 1 .BLN6200 1 B1400 1 1(703 1 K570 1 K577 1 K385 1 K755 1 K572 .-1 n54 1 BKN6038 1 K103 1 K70 1 1435 1 K25 1 3(733 -1 :1(734 _1 31436 -1 1C347AB 1 K348 _- 1 K732 2 K363 2 K337 • CITY OF HERMISA BEACH POLICE/FIRE DEPARTMENT DISPATCH COLE Single "Bay 4 Panels 51" High Typewritter Table 40"L x 21"D x 26"H Writing Surface .w/round edge & recessed keyboard Mounting Brackets Both .Side .Panels Both Foot Supports Vert ;:Ming Mails Pencil Drawer Bezel -Mt. Kit Dual 9" Monitors AC Utility Strip .ILP Gooseneck -Mic -Handset Jack Tele Handset .Interface Pri. Supv. Dbl. Wide Label - _Fbot SW 100' 7 "Pr Cable Tele Handset Interface Cable 2nd Patch All Mate -Pri tarnel marker Alert "Tone 1 _ -..Alert-,brie 2 Alert ie 3 -- . Aux Mol. puik 'a11 -II Tbuch .-Code Sig/T11c==14an/itry Mul t. t: Select = APB $ 1,309.78 448.06 739.60 43.86 177.60- 106.64 49.02 102.34 215.00 59.34 3,441.72 165.98 138.46 230.48 N/C N/C 65.40 69.66 80.84 N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C = , N/C N/C sic N/C N/C N/C N/C $ 3,929.34 448.06 739.60 131.58 .177.60 106.64 98.04 102.34 215.00 59.34 3,441.72 165.98 138.46. 230.48 N/C N/C 65.40 69.66 80.84 N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C. N/C -.N/C N/C N/C 11/C N/C N/C_ N/C 1 81401 2 B1405 2 131409 2 K708 1 K121 4 K754 - 1 -K121BR 1 .B1448 1 BDM190 6 B1422 1 K139 1 B1460B 1 K7623 1 BLN6667 1 K153 1 TDN7010 1 27-133909K01 1 3780L1 2 8E05239 1 DONCO 2 K753 CITY OF IIERMSA BMC POLICE/FIRE DEPARTMENT DISPATCH CONSOLE CCP T1R1.COnt- Nbd. T4R4 Cont. Mod. Single -Button Page (Touch Code Primary/Backup) Main Stndby Button Custom Labeling Main Stndby Relay Call Check Control Md. Call Check Tank Base Interface Mod. DC Control $ 491.92 172.00 172.00 N/C CEB Extended -Warranty Spare .DC Control Module 50' 25 Pr. Cable - Data Term w/ Printer Mtng. Shelf for Printer 25 Line Call Director(plant eqpip.) Handset w/ quik disconnect _ Mtng. Wyse Term # WY -85 (Kit) Main/Alt Redundant Birs IOTAL CONSDLE ECUIPMENT - INSMILATION • •$ 491.92 344.00 344.00 N/C N/C N/C N/C 92.02 92.02 344.00 344.00 1,743.22 1,743.22 708.64 4,251.84 131.58 131.58 10,733.66 607.16 131.58 46.44 639.84 45.58 1,763.00 253.70 387.00 N/C 10,733.66 607.16 131.58 46.44 639.84 45.58 1,763.00 253.70 387.00 N/C $32,550.62 4 1,500.00 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT CCTV SYSTEM 11AL 9" MONITORS. 10 POSITION SWITCHER PARKING AREA ZAIL CELLS • .1 11901224 1 1285AA 1-VDN6O371 -- 1 -:V]116322 - 1-VDN6O93 ._:VD[si738 • 7 • W0023 1255AA 7- VDN6371- 7 VDN6093 _. °> 2 "VDN6316 2 _VDN6315 -.1 -MI16163: 4 VDN6132 -. .-- 5 - VDN6136 2 TDN7268 1 -1265 1 L/215 1-- = A6AA' _ 7.-SDM200 3 ` VDI lffr CITY OF HERNDSA BMC POLICE/FIRE DEPAKITENT CCIV SYSTEM- JAIL, LOBBY, PARKIN AREA Outdoor 2/3" Ultricon Camera V -Phase 'Transformer Sunshield ;:8mm :SND :Lens :mall Mount 1tero Camera V -Phase transformer -8 mm :SND Ldiis side angle -adapter , ':.Deluxe-Trunion -mall Nbunt -Ceiling Sousing :3 - 45 Housing _Drop Ceiling Kit -9" Rack 3itor Rack Kit - 10 Pos.:Switcher .3�ck Hbunt . =x:3000' :Coax [able - 500' 2 -Conductor Cable -TOTAL CCTV EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION $ 1,401.80 36.12 12:90 42.14 392 3.6 113.52 1,401.80 36.12 12.90 • 42.14 392.16 113.52 1,118.00 7,826.00 36.12 252.84 12.90 90.30 392.16 2,745.12 92.02 368.08 33.54 67.08 18.92 37.84 334.54 334.54 393.88 1,575.52 92.02 460.10 309.60 103.20 415.38 34.40 160.82 85.14 619.20 103.20 415.38 34.40 321.64 255.42 $17,505.30 $ 4, 935.00 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT PIER -HEAD CCTV 12'' MONITOR DIGITAL CONTROLLER -MICROPBONE VIDEO LINK* ROTDOOR CAMERF • ZOOM LENSE PAN/TILT 1:4 PUBLIC ADDRESE SPEAKER CONTROLLER DECODER *VIDEO LINK to be determined; 1) VOICE GRADE TELECO LINE 2) FIBER OPTICS TELECO LINE 3) AUDIO BASE BAND MICROS AVE CITY OF HE RMSA BEACEI POLICE/FIRE DEPARTMENT P IEHAAD CAMERA 1 V14007 Ipw Light Camera $ 9,455.70 1 SLN6534 Sun -Visor 110.94 1 VDN6323 Sunshield 110.94 1 VDN6014 16-160mm 10X Zoom Lens 4,237.22 _ 1 VDN6168. Heavy Duty Pan- Tilt 1,670.98 1 V78100 Digital Decoder 1,847.28 .-1 SLN6577- -Aute Scan Nodule - 105.78 1 SLN1114 PSK Demodulator 595.98 1 SLN1112 Audio Kit 10 watt 442.04 1 SLN6602 Outdoor Speaker 109.22 • 1 TDN7256 12" Rack Monitor 210.70 1 TDN7259 Rack Kit 111.80 1 S1265 Digital Encoder 1,858.46 1 SLN6592 Rack kit ' 108.36 1 SLN1113 PSK-flodulator 595.98 1 TMN1004 Microphone 71.38 1 VDN6745 480 HR Time Lapse VHS --- 2,537.86 2 VDN6187 Cassette Tape 16.00 TOTAL PIER -HED CCTV EQUIPIIENT $24,196.62 INSTALLATION $ 3,338.00 CONSOLE ADDITION 1 B1604A Single Bay 4 Panels 51" High $ 1,309.78 1 DBT350-1 Writing Surface w/round edge 215.00 1 OTD84018F01 Mounting Brackets 43.86 1 K125 Vert Mtng Rails 49.02 _= _ TOTAL CONSOLE ADDITION EQUIPMEyT $ 1,617.66 INSTALLATION Included GMS -f10 SYSTEM PRICING 1.0 MOBILE TERMINAL PACKAGED SYSTEM $ 125,000.00 Includes: * Five (5) Mobile Data Terminals including radio module * One (1) Communications.Encoder/Decoder * One (1) Processor Configuration * One (1) Dial-up Modem and 25 foot cable * One (1) Desk -top CRT with keyboard and 10 foot cable * One (1) 120 cps printer with 10 foot cable for Mobile DataTerminal message logging * One (1) Message Processing Software License * One (1) I.B.M. Bisynchronous (Point -to -Point Contention) State Interface * Capability .to initiate state and NCIC standard inquiries (Wanted Persons, VIN Number, Driver's License and License Plate checks), and state format supported "short form" inquiries from Mobile Data Terminal equipped units and system CRT positions * Capability to initiate inquiries and data base updates from system CRT's via those state sup- ported screen formats which are retrieved on a per -inquiry or update basis. * Capability to send/receive text transmissions between Mobile Data Terminal equipped units * Capability to send/receive text transmissions between system CRT positions * Capability to send/receive text transmissions GMS -(0 SYSTEM PRICING between Mobile Data Terminal equipped units and system CRT positions * 45W Digital 800 MHz Base Station including antenna and line kits * Two (2) synchronous modems and cables 2.0 OPTIONS; pricing is valid only when purchased with . packaged system: 2.1 .Unit Status Display Software License $ 4,.500.00 Includes: * Dynamic Status, PTT ID, and Emergency Alarm displays of the Mobile Data Terminal equipped units, on any system CRT's 2.2 Add -On Crt's $ 2,000.00 ea. Includes: * One (1) Desk -top CRT with keyboard and one (1) 10 foot interface cable * Inquiry capability equivalent to defined above for system CRT positions * Capability to send/receive text transmissions as defined above for system CRT positions * Dynamic Status, PTT ID, and Emergency Alarm displays for the Mobile Data Terminal equipped units,if the Unit Status Display Software option has been purchased GMS -S'0 SYSTEM PRICING 2.3 Add -On Logging Printers $ '.4,000.00 ea. Includes: * One (1) 120 cps printers and one (1) 10 foot interface cable * Capability to log Mobile Data Terminal messages Note: * The maximum number of Add-on CRT's is three (3) * The maximum number of Add-on Printers is three (3) * The maximum number of Add-on CRT's and Printers, combined, is four (4) 2.4 Additional Mobile Data Terminals $ 4,100.00 ea. Includes: * Capability to initiate inquiries as defined above for system KDT 480 terminals * Capability to send/receive text transmissions as defined above for system KDT 480 terminals * Data Only 800 MHz Radio Module 2.5 Mobile Standalone Printers $ 3,500.00 ea. Includes: * One (1) MLU -480 Mobile Logic Unit *' One 80 cps, 40 column, 12 VDC'powered printer * Capability to receive, and print text trans- missions originated by Mobile Data Terminals or system CRT's SYSTEMS INVESTMENT'SUMMARY MICRAPOINT III MODEL -6300 with $36,064.17 - Central Index Processing Unit - 3 Mbyte RAM '(for 1-16 users) - Back-up and Archive via 1/4" streaming -tape drive - Multiuser Unix - 6000 Workstation, quantity of two (2) - Micrapoint III automatic Filing System Software CF -100 Automation kit (for simultaneous filming/ data entry) - Canon/Micrapoint training, three (3) -days CANON Canofilmer 100 Camera with $ 4,570.00 Automatic Exposure Control. - Automatic Blip Indexing Automatic Frame or File Numbering - Automatic Film Cycling - Computer Interface R232C 20 Rolls Microfilm (for approximately 60 days) 20 'IME Trailer Locks and ANSI Magazines CANON NP 780FS Plain Paper Reader/Printer - FS "E" Carrier - Optical Image Rotation (Prism) Automatic Exposure Proper Lens - Paper Cassette letter, ledger - Blip Controller - Computer RS 232C Interface $ 171.00 $ 20.00 $16,585.00 One (1) carton toner with 2 cartridges $ 70.00 16mm Carrousel File System For 240 rolls $ 420.00 SYSTEM TOTAL INVESTMENT $57,900.17 Shipping, Tax, Service Agreements and options not included. SOFTWARE FOR RECORDS MANAGEMENT, MICROFILM AND LIMITED DISPATCH DISARM software frau Micrapoint Corporation in Salt Lake City, Utah. Allowance of $29,874. is being made in order to cover all costs necessary. Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 21, 1987 City Council Meeting of May 28, 1987 ESiBLISHING IN -LIEU SEWER CONNECTION FEE FOR HERMOSA PAVILION COMMERCIAL PROJECT With the concurrence of the developer this matter has been continued to your June 9 regular meeting. Yesterday we met with the developer. He has not yet completed his "survey" of comparability re the sewer connection fee for such a project in neighboring cities; we asked that he provide us with a plumbing fixture listing so that a connection fee calculation (based on the current Code provision) could be made. He has agreed to make this data available to the Building & Safety Director. A further meeting is set with staff for June 2; a final report will then be readied for your June 9 meeting. cc Hermosa Pavilion City Attorney Lough Public Works Director Antich Building & Safety Director Grove Planning Director Schubach 4" °() cri:0 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council General Plan Review Regarding Dwelling May 18, 1987 Regular Meeting of May 26, 1987 Units and Population Recommendation i l e Background At the City Council meeting of April 28, 1987, the City Council requested information regarding the population and the number of dwelling units projected in the General Plan in relationship to the current population and dwelling units. Analysis Population: The 1979 plan based projected population growth on the 1970 U.S. Census; average household size was estimated at 2.3 to 2.4 persons in the census. Using average household size and multiplying by the estimated total maximum number of dwelling units at buildout, the maximum population was projected to be 24,540. The 1980 U.S. Census estimates average household size to be 1.9 persons. `fir t 1 X16 cry,,, Dwelling Units: Using a figure (no source noted), the 1979 Pla 1,618 dwelling units could be designations; many of the d implemented through zoning. Ho -----would go to higher density and would result in down zoning, t direction. xisting dwelling units ted that an additional uilt under the General Plan signations have never been ever, examining how many areas omparing those areas to how many ere may not be any impact in any The dwelling unit computat'•n was based on net acreage which distorts the potential numb- of units that can actually be built since the City is completely subdivided. The potential number of units that can be built s generally less since the size of individual lots limits e number of units to less than the maximum density allowed. Since 1979, the Bui Department indicates that there has been a net increase of dwelling units (see attached report) bringing the total to ',060 units. qT\--6 1 1t V Attachments 1. Building Report 2. Corrected, up -dated & accurate General Plan Map CONCUR: Gr e�ory! T IM i- eyer City Manager R- pectfullysub Michael Schubach Planning Director c � DWELLING UNIT HISTORY 1979 TO PRESENT YEAR DWELLINGS BUILT DWELLINGS DEMOLISHED NET CHANGE 1979 100 13 +87 1980 53 24 +29 1981 84 43 +41 1982 35 24 +11 1983 31 5 +26 1984 57 19 +38 1985 104 14 +90 1986 178 78 +100 1987* 47 16 +31 TOTAL +453 * As of 5/7/87 Prepared by the Department of Building and Safety on 5/7/87 Li Dwelling Unit History 1979 to Present Dwellings Dwellings Built Demolished Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council 4.4rD Recommendation: May 18, 1987 City Council Meeting of May 26, 1987 Request for Appropriation to Fund Employee Service Pin Program It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Reaffirm its support for recognizing City Employees by en- dorsing the re-initiation of the Employee Service Pin Program, and 2. Appropriate $2,300 from Prospective Expenditures to Account No. 001-400-1203-4305, Personnel Department Office Supplies for the purchase of the Pins. Background: In 1966, the Civil Service Commission approved an Employee Ser- vice Pin Program. That same year the City Council endorsed the program and approved an allocation of funds for the purchase of the pins. The approved program is described in the attached memorandum dat- ed August 19, 1966, from W. H. Harris, City Manager, to the Civil Service Commission. The original conceptual drawings of the pin is also attached to this report. Inquiries from a number of current employees raised the question of what had happened to this program. Following a review of ex- isting records, it became clear that the program was not carried forward much past 1974. All current employees have been surveyed in order to ascertain whether they have ever received a service pin and for which years. On August 12, 1986, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 86-848 which authorizes awards to be made in recognition of public service. Analysis: As a result of the employee survey and a review of the records, it has been determined that the total number of pins required to bring the program up to date and continue it through 1988 is: 79 five year, 40 ten year, 21 fifteen year, 11 twenty year, 2 twenty-five year, 5 thirty year, and 1 thirty-five year. The basic cost of each pin is approximeatly $7.50. Pins representing the 10th and 15th year include either a synthetic ruby or sap- phire for an additional $3.50 ea. an additional years pins are adorned with a three to five point d-amond chip, or chips, at an additional $7.00/point. Of the total 159 pins required, 126 are for "catch-up", and 33 are for the 1987 and 1988 calendar years. It is intended that all employees who were eligible for a particular year pin, and did not receive it, will receive each pin to which they're entitled. Anticipated costs for future pin purchases will be calculated and included in the Personnel Department's budget each fiscal year. Following the purchase of the pins, an appropriate ceremony will be initiated before the City Council to make the awards. Respectfully submitt Robert A. Blackwood Personnel Administrator Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Administrator Concur: Greory T. Meyer City Manager it May 14, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members o Regular Meeting the Hermosa Beach City Council of May 26, 1987 COST SHARING PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY GOULD TERRACE HOMEOWNERS��! Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council authorize the City to participate in the cost sharing proposal submitted by the Gould Terrace Homeowners per Attachment A. Background: In October, 1986, Mr. Bert Skinner of 2805 Tennyson Place received an easement from Mr. Frank Richardson of 625 Gould Terrace to drain rain water across his property onto Gould Terrace. On March 11, 1987, the City Council received a petition from the Gould Terrace Homeowners to have Mr. Skinner's drain extended under Gould Terrace to drain in the green belt of Mr. Richardson's property to eliminate the mess the drainage is making on Gould Terrace, (see Attachment B). Mr. Frank Richardson has sent a letter to the City granting permission to extend the drain onto his property (Attachment C). Analysis: This drainage matter is a private property concern. In the interest of expediting a solution, the City (using Public Works Department personnel) could extend the drain under Gould Terrace to alleviate this drainage concern. Mr. Bert Skinner is willing to pay one-half of the total cost of $605.00. The Homeowners on Gould Terrace have requested that the City pay one-half of the remaining balance, and they will pay the other half of the remaining balance, as follows: Cost to extend drain $605.00 Amount to be paid by Mr. Skinner Amount to be paid by Homeowners Amount to be paid by the City Total $302.50 151.25 151.25 $605.00 With Council approval, project can commence upon receipt of monies from Mr. Skinner and the Gould Terrace Homeowners. Fiscal Impact: This work was not budgeted, but could be handled within the existing Public Works operating budget. No additional funding is anticipated. 1 Alternatives: Other alternatives considered by staff and available to City Council are: 1. Authorize the City Attorney to start legal proceedings against Mr. Bert Skinner for violation of Cidy Code, Sec. 20-2 (k) Nuisance Affecting Public Safety (Attachment D). This will take approximately 2 to 3 months and cost the City a great deal more money and time, plus the continued annoyance and potential safety concern to the homeowners on Gould Terrace. 2. Do Nothing. Respectfully submitted, < « z Gary eatbn Engineering Technician Concur: Gre Cit ory ' T. er Manager GWW:mv gould/m Attachments (4) 2 Concur: A!'31 y Antich Director of P bli Works Noted for Fiscal Impact: acc Viki Copeland Finance Administrator RECEIVED MAR 121987 PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. (3-7V1 31161° es7c r& TC Ne:ED 4-=91% 3/4v-1 March 9, 1487 PETITION TO HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL BY GOULD TERRACE HOMEOWNERS We the undersigned Gould Terrace homeowners hereby petition the City of Hermosa Beach in certain matters related to water and sand runoff as enumerated below: Whereas the City of Hermosa Beach was deeded an 18' roadway on November 26, 1940 (recorded in Book 17977 page 277, Los Angeles County Recorder) by Elizabeth and J. B. Vogelsang into and over certain portions of lots 1 to 11 inclusive of Tract 12554, also known as Gould Terrace, And whereas said deed was granted for the purpose of maintaining, preserving, protecting and improving its street system, And whereas said Gould Terrace homeowners hereby plead that water and sand drainage onto Gould Terrace from adjoin- ing lots to the north is causing an erosion of Gould Terrace and dangerous sand build up on Gould Terrace, And whereas said Gould Terrace homeowners believe that said water and sand condition contribute to and constitute a safety hazard to all persons who use the street, And whereas Gould Terrace never experienced the problems with said water and sand until the City of Hermosa Beach granted a permit. to Bert Skinner in October of 1986 whose property is at 2805 Tennyson Place to install a drain line ontp Gould Terrace, We therefore request the Hermosa Beach City Couuncil to consider corrective action as follows: 1. Cause homeowners from adjoining lots to the north who dump sand and other debris onto Gould Terrace to construct catch basins sufficient in size and design to prevent sand, chemicals, toxics and other garden debris from entering flood drain lines which currently flow onto or across Gould Terrace. 2. Allow drain lines which now empty onto the surface of Gould Terrace to be buried beneath Gould Terrace and empty onto the Gould Avenue greenbelt right of way where water can be absorbed into the ground, or onto the Gould Avenue gutter. ATTACHMENT A RECEIVED APR 2919B1 FDBLUC WORKS DEP3i KENNETH C. BERTOSSI CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT 629 GOULD TERRACE HERMOSA BEACH. CALIFORNIA 90254 April 28, 1987 Honorable Major John Coiffi City Council Members City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Re: Cost Sharing Proposal Applicable to Gould Terrace Homeowners Petition Dear Mayor Coiffi and City Council Members: At the March 24th city council meeting the Gould Terrace Homeowners Petition was submitted requesting the drain located at 625 Gould Terrace be extended onto the green belt of Gould Avenue. This problem was referred to the Public Works Director, Tony Antich, for analysis by him and his staff, particularly Gary Wheaton. We were informed lastweek that the city would perform this work for a total cost of $605. The breakdown of the cost is as follows: 24 man hours (3 men at 8 hrs. @ $15/hr.) $360 1 ton asphalt 25 1 roller 10 1 truck 20 1 back hoe 30 1 saw cut 60 1 ABS pipe 100 TOTAL 605 The Gould Terrace Homeowners are now concerned about how this amount is to be paid. We understand from Gary Wheaton that Bert Skinner will pay one-half of the amount. We feel that the remaining half should be split 50/50 by the Gould Terrace homeowners and the' City. This Petition therefore requests that the City Council consider splitting the remaining one-half of the cost ($302.50) 50% by the City of Hermosa Beach and 50% by the Gould Terrace Homeowners - or $151.25 each. 4 Page Two April 28, 1987 We would like this work to start immediately as there appears to be a hazard to all persons who use the street or sidewalk. As you are already aware, the constant sand and water running across the sidewalk constitutes a hazard to pedestrians. The sand and water on the asphalt affects automobile stopping distance. The ramp at the extreme west end of Gould Terrace is especially slippery and is used by numerous school students on their way to and from classes. All the water eventually ends in puddles at the inter- section of Gould and Ardmore where cars are attempting to stop and/or make turns. In anticipation of your favorable response to the proposed cost sharing arrangement, please advise where the homeowners are to deposit their share of the project costs. By copy of this Petition to Tony Antich, we are request- ing him to schedule this Petition for hearing at the May 12 FV? City Council Meeting and to present with it his staff report. We would appreciate a confirmation when this has been done. We sincerely thank you for your interest and support in keeping our city streets free from known hazards. Sincerely, 1,7)26/./ Marie Bertossi Representative for Gould Terrace Homeowners Phone: Work: (213) 879-3202 3. Cause the cost of corrective action to be borne by the propery owners from adjoining lots to the north whose property runoff is drained onto Gould Terrace or by the City of Hermosa Beach at its option. The following Gould Terrace homeowners respectfully request favorable action on this petition to the Hermosa Beach City Council. Name: Date 0/87 Address: Name: Address: Name: 2 9 &z.ir.e4C/421 _f_ Date , Date -2,? s - Address : (c ? e=r Cf - Name: .4 Date Address: Name: Address: Name: 74 r .,,` e Date Date _V, �`,' Address : r?2 Name: Date Address: 4, • QT car hRMOM )3E1[WZI CIVIC CENTER H+ERMOSA BEACH CALIFORNIA 90254 CITY HALL: (213) 376-6984 POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS: 3 7 6- 7 9 8 1 February 23, 1987 Mr. & Mrs. Bert Skinner 2805 Tennyson Place Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Easement and drainage to 625 Gould Terrace -Dear Mr. & Mrs. Skinner: _Thank you for your cooperation regarding the drainage problem through the easement at 625 Gould Terrace. Through the "experiment" last February 5, 1987 it appears that the drain is clear of the debris which apparently was the cause for this investigation. The City will attempt to monitor this situation carefully and hopefully without further incidents. Please. contact my office if you have any questions. Sincerely, F. Paul C Building 1 fficial cc: M/M Frank Richardson 625 Gould Ave. M/M Edward McDougal 605 Gould Ave. January 27, 1987 Mr. William Grove City of Hermosa Reach Building Department Hermosa Beacn, CA 90254 Dear Mr. Grove: 629 Gould 'terrace Hermosa beach, Ca 902.54 ;75/17 ZeiLvt We are residents of 629 Goiila Terrace in Hermosa Beach. Mr. tsert Skinner kwtio lives at 2805 Tennyson Place in Hermosa Beach) has been continuously contamina- ting Gould Terrace from a waste water drain he installed in November 01 1966. 'lease refer to the enclosed letter and drawing which were delivered to Gary Wheaton of your Public Works Department yesterday. The purpose of this letter is to find out what can be done to stop the improper use by Bert Skinner of this drain for any other purpose other than rain water overflow. He is not using the water drain for its intended purpose - which was for rain water only. but rather as a sewer. It appears that possi6Ty His §prinklers, gardening, pool drainage, service area drains, etc., are all connected to this water drain. A second matter we would like to bring to your attention is that Bert Skinner's rear wall which touches our property has a crack in it. Was this wall adequately inspected before the permit was granted? Will you please give this matter your immeniate attention. Possibly you can discuss this situation with Gary Wheaton as he is following up on this matter from the Public Works point of view and is currently trying to Ept in touch with bert Skinner. We appreciate anything you can do to help us. Our phone numbers to be contacted are:. Home - 374-2846; Work - Marie 553-0.110; Ken 568-6037. Sincerely, Marie Bertossi KENNETH /C. BERTOSSI Ctl�1ll[Q Pdlia- n3eowzi011� 1 !. 629 Gould Terrace Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 January 26, 1987 City of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Gentlemen: We are residents of 629 Gould Terrace in Hermosa Beach. Mr. Bert Skinner (who lives at 2805 Tennyson Place in Hermosa Beach). has been continuously contamina- ting Gould Terrace from a waste water drain he installed in November of 1986. See drawing enclosed. Is there any ordinance which would prevent Mr. Skinner from continuing to do the following onto Gould Terrace: 1. Dumping cleaning solvents from clean-up of paint brushes and pails. 2. Dumping cement and plaster contaminated water onto Gould Terrace.. 3. Draining pool water and chemicals onto street. 4. Washing sand and dirt onto street. The residents of Gould Terrace wish to know if there is any Hermosa Beach ordinance being violated by the above actions of Bert Skinner. He is not using the water drain for its intended purpose - which was for rain water only but rather as a sewer. It appears that all of his drains through- out his whole property are connected to this water drain. Will you please give this matter your immediate attention as we want to stop further contamination onto Gould Terrace as quickly as possible. Our phone numbers to be aintacted are: Home - 374-2848 Work - Marie 553-0310; ken 568-6037. Sincerely, % /au -{J Marie Bertossi KENNETH c: BERTOSSI C[l 11[x{ f ��[ ofbCOWIIJ/1t • Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth C. Bertossi 629 Gould Terrace Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 31y-DVyu SS 3-031c, C/l7AK.1E) 3 954,7-‘0 CkEd) illuv0 't1�1 t/M In 91s&M • - 17AL-1-E r - u H t 0 'I Z o U v A2omog.E- • l 21-11 HERMOSA BEACH CITY CODE .¢ 21-11 however, the oil wells now constructed or under construction or in actual operation in the city. (a) There shall also be excepted from the prohibition of this section 21-10, wells drilled from a site not to exceed one (1) acre in size at the present city maintenance yard, which yard is located at the corner of Valley Drive and 6th Street. The drilling of wells bottomed in the tidelands may produce revenue the use of which is limited by the state. General fund revenue for which tidelands revenue is substituted shall be used first to reduce any bonded indebtedness re- sulting from the enactment of Community Facilities Dis- trict No. 1, which district would acquire the South School site, the Seaview Parkette, and the railroad right-of-way; and, second, when the bonded indebtedness is paid, the acquisition, maintenance and improvement of available excess school or other properties for open space and parkland purposes. (b) There shall also be excepted from the prohibition of this section 21-10, wells drilled from a site not to exceed one (1) acre in size to be located along the north boundary of the playground area of the former South School site, which playground area is adjacent to Valley Drive. No wells drilled from this site may be bottomed within the tidelands. The revenue derived by the school district from this site shall be used only for educational purposes. (Ord. No. 506, § 1; Ord. No. 84-758, § 1, 11-6-84; Ord. No. 84-759, § 1, 11-6-84) Sec. 21-11. Same Spilling oil products, salt, etc., on certain pavements. ' It shall be unlawful for any person to spill, pour, drop or place, or to permit the spilling, pouring, dropping or placing upon any • asphalt or bituminous pavement laid upon any public street, court, alley or place within the city, and oil, petroleum, kerosene, benzine or other similar oil, or oily sub- stance, or liquid or any salt, rock salt, common salt, salt \,7 brine, acid, hemical• broken glass, or _any _injurious or de- structive_ material which might damage such pavement.(Ord. No. 123, §-IOrd. No. 466, § 1) s Supp. No. 6-85 292 w • MEMO From MARIE BERTOSSI LMc-LosELS All correspondence with • the City of Hermosa Beach, Ordinance of Hermosa Beach Letter from City of Hermosa Beach P.S. City of Hermosa Beach is putting in a drain to correct the problem on the property of Mr. and Mrs. Agajanian who live on Tennyson. The drain will empty onto Gould Avenue. City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 May 8, 1987 Attn: Gary Wheaton ATTACHMENT C 625 Gould Terrace Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Gentlemen: This letter is to formally advise the_ City of Hermosa Beach that I give my permission to, extend and modify the drain line on my property which drains the Bert Skinner property behind my lot. Please return an acknowledged copy of this letter to me for my files. fa- Fft:mb Very truly yours, —9/42.4 FRANK RICHARDSON ATTACHMENT D § 20-2 HERMOSA BEACH CITY CODE § 20-2 or allow individuals or groups to create unlawful or objection- able activities within the surrounding neighborhood. (Ord. No. N. S. 333, § 1, 8-6-68) Amendment note—Ord. No. N. S. 333, § 1, amended § 20-2 by adding (j.1). NUISANCES AFFECTING PUBLIC SAFETY : (k) Dangerous conditions, fire hazards, etc. Tolerating, allowing or permitting trees, hedges, vegetable growth or billboards, walls, fences or other structures to be so located with respect to driveways or street intersections so as to pre- vent clear view of approaching vehicles in sufficient time to bring any vehicle driven at a reasonable speed to full stop before such intersection or driveway approach is reached, or tolerating, allowing or permitting of hedges, trees, shrubs or other vegetable matter or other material of inflammable character within twenty feet of a dwelling used for human habitation; or tolerating, allowing or permitting buildings, walls and other structures which have been damaged by fire, decay or otherwise to such an extent that the same cannot be repaired so as to conform to the requirements of the Building Code in effect in the city, or tolerating, allowing or permit- ting buildings and alterations to buildings located within the fire limits established by the city in violation of the Building Code; tolerating, allowing or permitting waste matterirub- bish. zarbage. debris` excavations, pipeII ne; hose or other material or facility on, in or over and across any public str et, alley, sidewalk or other public grounds except under such cond�tinns and in such manner as is specificsy perml city ordinances; tolerating, allowing or permitting hang ng signs, awnings and other similar structures over the streets or sidewalks, or tolerating, allowing or permitting barbwire fences or limbs of trees, shrubs, hedges or vegetable growth, so situated or located as to endanger persons traversing the streets or sidewalks in the immediate area thereof; or toler- ating, allowing or permitting dangerous, unguarded ma- chinery in any business place or so situated or operated on private property as to attract members of the public;.tolerat- ing; allowing or permitting any other situation, condition, or Sump. No. 12-69 280' i 2072. NUISANCES § 20-2 reates or ma reasonabl be - ..ected to create t clear and prseent danger o injury or damage to any Jerson or property. Storage and use of explosives, etc. Storage or use of funpowder, dynamite, fireworks, explosive chemicals or other xplosive materials, unless permit has been granted therefor )y the chief of the fire department, upon application filed vith him and hearing held after at least forty-eight hours iotice to applicant of such hearing, unless notice is waived; )rovided, that if the application is denied, applicant may, vithin fifteen days from the date of such order of denial, Lppeal from such decision of the chief of the fire department o the city council, which shall hold a hearing thereon upon )otice to applicant in the same manner as the hearing before he chief of the fire department. (Ord. No. N. S. 330, § 2, 21-68; Ord. No. N. S. 444, § 2, 2-20-73) (m) Keeping reptiles or insects. Keeping or maintaining nakes or other reptiles, or bees or other insects within the ity, unless a permit therefor has been obtained from the ity council, on application regularly filed, setting forth the ocation and manner in which such reptiles or insects are o be kept. NUISANCES AFFECTING HEALTH : (n) Foodstuffs or materials dangerous to public health. The keeping or maintaining of decayed or unwholesome food, old or offered for sale to the public; or the accumulations of ianure, rubbish or debris or animal or vegetable matter of ny kind or character from which foul smells or odors manate or which provide or are likely to provide a breeding lace for vermin, insects or rodents of any kind; or the pollu- ion of any well, cistern, stream, creek or other body of water, y sewage, industrial wastes or other substances, which are ✓ may reasonably be expected to become detrimental to the ,ublic health, or the keeping or maintaining or permitting to e kept or accumulated on any private property, ponds or •ools of stagnant or waste water, oil or industrial wastes, or ermitting or allowing of noxious weeds and other rank rowth or vegetation on private property; or the production upp. No. 3-73 281 in Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 18, 1987 Regular Meeting of May 26, 1987 AGREEMENT FOR INSPECTION AND ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR SANITARY SEWER TARGET AREA II, CIP 85-402 Recommendation: CkA\p0.4 s recommended that City Council: Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the attached Agreement for Inspection and Administration Services for Sanitary Sewer (85-402) for a cost not to exceed $42,680. Authorize staff to issue addenda as necesary. ckround: On May 12, 1987, City Council authorized the Mayor to sign an agreement (in the amount of $527,925, plus a contingency not to exceed 1070)) with Christeve Corporation for the construction of the above -referenced project, and construction is scheduled to begin early July, 1987. This project will require inspection services currently beyond the staffing and level of expertise available within the department. Analysis: During March, 1987, staff mailed Request for Proposals to eight (8) consulting engineering firms. Proposals were due on April 23, 1987, and were submitted from five (5) consultants, as follows: Santina & Thompson $34,550 ASL Consulting Engineers $38,800 Barrett Consulting Group (Approx)..$40,000 (proposal incomplete) Charles Abbott & Associates $41,400 Willdan Associates $46,000 Each of these engineering firms was called back for an oral interview on May 1, 1987. Based upon their proposals, interview presentations and qualifications, ASL Consulting Engineers is the most qualified firm. Even though Santina & Thompson proposed the lowest cost, ASL's inspection experience record is more appropriate for this type of project. Staff recommends awarding the agreement to ASL. Coincidentally, ASL was also the design engineer for this project. This may prove to be advantageous to the City, since 1 1q the inspector will better understand the intent of the plans and specifications. Fiscal Impact: CIP 85-402 Agreement cost $38,800 1070 contingency 3,880 Total $42,680 Proposed FY 87-88 Amount Budgeted for Inspection/Administration $53,000 Amount of Agreement with ASL $42,680 This agreement is within the budgeted amount. Respectfully submitted, Deborah M. Murphy Assistant Engineer Concur: Gre oryceT. Meyer cmir Cit Manager DMM:m insadm Attachment: Agreement Construction Schedule 2 Concur: A ony Antich Director of Pu lic Works Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Administrator t PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT INSPECTION AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR SANITARY SEWERS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 85-402 THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 1987 by and between the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a Municipal Corporation hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and ASL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, hereinafter referred to as "ENGINEER". WITNESSET H: WHEREAS, CITY desires to retain ENGINEER to perform sani- tary sewer inspection and contract administration services as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein and 'by this reference made a part hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. CITY agrees to retain ENGINEER to perform inspection and contract administration services as herein set forth. 2. ENGINEER shall perform all work necessary to complete in a manner satisfactory to CITY the services set forth in Ex- hibit "A" entitled Proposal and attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein and made a part hereof. 3. All information, data, reports and records and maps as are existing and available from CITY, and necessary for carrying out the work outlined in Exhibit "A" shall be furnished to EN- GINEER without charge by CITY and CITY shall cooperate in every way reasonable in the carrying out of the work without delay. 4. ENGINEER represents that it employs, or will employ at is own expense all personnel required in performing the services required under this Agreement. 1 L 5. All of the services required hereunder will be per- formed by ENGINEER or under its direct supervision, and all per- sonnel engaged in the work shall be fully qualified and shall be authorized or permitted under state and local law to perform such services. 6. CITY's Director of Public Works (the "Director" or his designee) shall direct the ENGINEER to proceed and the work re- quired shall be completed within the time limit mutually agreed upon. ENGINEER shall have no claim for compensation for any ser- vices upon which the Director has not authorized ENGINEER to proceed. 7. The ENGINEER shall work closely and cooperate fully with the Director, or his designee, who shall be the liaison between ENGINEER and the CITY and who shall review and approve all details of the work as it progresses. 8. The CITY reserves the right to terminate or suspend the Agreement at any time upon seven (7) days written notice ef- fected by personal delivery or by a bona fide mail service, which shall be deemed communicated as of the date of receipt thereof, under any of the following circumstances: (a) The project, as described in the attached Exhibit "A", is to be abandoned or indefinitely postponed. (b) ENGINEER fails to prosecute the work within the time limits specified in the attached Exhibit "A". (c) Unsatisfactory performance by ENGINEER. 9. No change in the scope of the work to be performed by ENGINEER shall be made except in writing between CITY and EN- GINEER, which shall set forth the changes mutually agreed upon by 2 the CITY and the ENGINEER. 10. In accordance with State Compensation Laws, the ENGINEER shall carry Worker's Compensation insurance for all per- sons employed in the performance of services as set forth herein. The ENGINEER shall provide the CITY with a certificate verifying such coverage or endorsement acceptable to the CITY before com- mencing services under this Agreement. Such policy shall require thirty (30) days notice to the CITY in writing prior to cancella- tion, termination, or expiration of any kind. 11. The ENGINEER shall carry Professional Liability in- surance in an amount of not less than $1,000,000.00. The ENGINEER 'shall provide the City with certificates verifying such coverage or endorsement acceptable to the City before commencing services under this Agreement. Such policy shall require thirty (30) days notice to the City in writing prior to cancellation, termination or expiration of any kind. All insurance policies shall name the City of Hermosa Beach as additional insured. 12. If ENGINEER fails to maintain such insurance, the CITY may obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under this Agreement. 13. Nothing herein contained shall be construed as limit- ing in any way the extent to which ENGINEER may be held respon- sible to payment of damages to persons or property resulting from its operations or any operations of any subcontractors under it. ENGINEER will be required to indemnify and hold harmless CITY and its officers and employees from any claims, damages, or expenses, 3 ti including attorney's fees and court costs, arising out of CONSUL- TANT'S negligent performance under this agreement. 14. In the event that legal action is commenced to enforce or declare the rights created under this Agreement, the prevail- ing party shall be entitled to an award of costs and reasonable attorney's fees in the amount to be determined by the court. 15. The CITY agrees to pay ENGINEER for all the work or any part of the work performed under this Agreement at the rates and in the manner established in the attached Exhibit "A". 16. This Agreement shall begin upon execution and shall expire on the date shown on the Notice to Proceed unless extended 'in writing by mutual agreement of both CITY and ENGINEER. 17. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, but it shall not be assigned by the EN- GINEER without the written consent of the CITY. 18. The ENGINEER shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or otherwise) without the prior written approval of the CITY, provided, however, that claims for money due or to become due the ENGINEER from the CITY under this Agree- ment may be assigned to a bank, trust company, or other financial institution or to a Trustee in Bankruptcy, without such approval. Notice of any such assignment or transfer shall be furnished promptly to the CITY. 19. No member of the governing body of the CITY and no other officer, employee, or agent of the CITY who exercises any functions or responsibilities in connection with the, planning and carrying out of the program, shall have any personal financial 4 interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement; and the ENGINEER shall take appropriate steps to assure compliance. 20. The ENGINEER covenants that he presently has no inter - est and shall not acquire interest, direct or indirect, in the study area or any parcels therein or any interest which would conflict in any manner or degree wth the performance of his ser- vices hereunder. The ENGINEER further covenants that in the per- formance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed. 21. This agreement supercedes any and all other agreements, either oral or' in writing, between the parties hereto with 'respect to the employment of ENGINEER by CITY and contains all the covenants and agreements between the parties withrespect to such employment in any manner whatsoever. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreement or amendment hereto shall be effective unless executed in writing and signed by both CITY and ENGINEER. 22. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and all ap- plicable federal statutes and regulations as amended. 23. The invalidity in whole or part of any provision of this Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and all applicable federal statutes and regulations as amended. 24. ENGINEER agrees to comply with all Federal, State and 5 local laws and regulations as they pertain to the performance of this Agreement, but not limited to, the provisions attached here- to as Exhibit "A". IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first above written. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY 6 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH A Municipal Corporation By: MAYOR, City of Hermosa Beach By: ENGINEER ENGINEER ; T 7 I 4 1 1 Exp-/ /7-,4 ASL Consulting Engineers CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PROPOSAL INSPECTION SERVICES AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION FOR SANITARY SEWERS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CIP 85-401, 402, AND 403 April 13, 1987 1 i S 4 1 r L. SSL Consulting Engineers April 13, 1987 City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Room 203 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Attention: Subject: Gentlemen: City Clerk Proposal for Inspection and Contract Administration for Sanitary Sewers William D. Lewis President Douglas J. Reinhart Vice President Robert H. Reinen Vice Pres:cent Zareh G. Astourian Vice President Thomas N. O'Laughlin Vice President Paul R. Gilmore Senror Associate William E. Bennett SenrorAssociate Shahnawaz Ahmad Senior Associate Pamela J. Steinhart Senior Associate Dale E. Wah Associate Frank E. Alderman Funder Frank M. Swift Acorea In response to your request, we are pleased to submit our proposal to provide inspection services during the construction of approximately 4000 lineal feet of sanitary sewers for Capital Improvement Project CIP 85-401, 402, and 403 within Target Area 2. Plans and specifica- tions for this project were prepared by our firm. Since its inception, ASL Consulting Engineers has been committed to engineering excellence. We take pride in our ability to produce effi- cient designs completed on schedule and within budget. We invite you to contact our clients, many of whom we have served for over twenty years. We believe this long term relationship is indicative of the level of service we provide. ASL has been involved in the design and construction of water and sewer mains in the Southern California area for over 38 years. Our experience includes many projects with design considertaions similar to those that will be encountered in Hermosa Beach. We are enclosing the following items which will demonstrate our understanding of the project and our ability to perform the work. o Scope of Services o Project Team o Related Experience o Manhours and Fee We are prepared to begin work on this project immediately upon receipt of your notice to proceed. We find your project to be both interest- ing and challenging and one for which we consider ourselves uniquely qualified, both by virtue of our extensive experience and our intimate familiarity with the plans and specifications. 1/Corporate Office 3280 East Foothill Boulevard, Suite 160 Pasadena. California 91107-3197 (818) 792-3096 • (213) 682-2178 ❑ 2540 Red Hill Avenue, Suite C Santa Ana. California 92705-5542 (714) 250-5525 1112045 East Tahquitz-McCallum Way Palm Springs, California 92262-7003 (619) 320-4220 • T ASL Consulting Engineers April 13, 1987 City of Hermosa Beach Pace -2- Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal and present our qualifications. We look forward to working with you and would be happy to meet with you to further discuss our qualifications and approach to the project. Respectfully submitted, itab&&road Shahnawaz Ahmad •5� SA:jms F. • y ASL Consulting Engineers 1 F 1 1 i 4 SCOPE OF SERVICES Based on our understanding of the scope of work and our extensive experience in sewer inspection, we have developed a scope of services for the inspection of approximately 4000 feet of 6 -inch, 8 -inch, 10 -inch, and 15 -inch diameter sewers for Target Area 2 in the city of Hermosa Beach. Plans and specifications for the Capital Improvement Project CIP 85-401, 402, and 403 were prepared by our firm. The scope of work to be performed would be as follows: 1. The following Support Services During Construction would be pro- vided: o Interpretation of the plans and specifications, including the preparation of elementary sketches, if required, to clarify design details. o Review of shop drawings of fabricated and manufactured equipment submitted by contractors for substantial conformity with the intent of the contract plans and specifications. o Review of construction progress estimates and recommendations for the progress and final payments to contractors. o Correction of plans to show "as -built" conditions. 2. The following services would be included in Administration of the Construction Contract. o Meetings and negotiations with the contractor involving changes in the extent or amount of the contract, or changes in the approved design. o Process change orders. o Administration of construction contracts to insure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations and the plans and spe- cifications. o Maintenance of all records pertaining to project development and implementation. 3. The following Field Engineering Services would be provided. o Mill and shop inspection of manufactured and fabricated items. t 3 1 ASL Consulting Engineers o Field observation during construction. We would provide full time inspectors and supporting staff as required to provide field observation during construction of the projects. The inspectors to be employed on the project at any given time would be subject to the approval of the City. o Visits by office personnel to the site of the work when such additional visits have been agreed upon by the parties to the contract as being necessary or desirable. o Compaction testing during construction. 4. Provide construction staking necessary to construct this project. Set permanent benchmarks, as appropriate, near or on the site of the work; set permanent points establishing the location of major structures; and, set alignment and grade stakes for all outdoor pipelines larger than 8 inches in diameter. The contractor shall furnish all other lines and grades required for proper execution of the work. City Furnished Services The City of Hermosa Beach shall furnish pothole information at join points and where utility conflicts may exist. I ASL Consulting Engineers PROJECT TEAM The high quality of ASL's work derives largely from the competence of its individual employees and the blending of their talents to meet the requirements of each particular project. To assure this quality, it is company policy to staff each project with those who have the interest and skills, and to make all possible provisions for their interaction. In addition, ASL's support facilities have been deve- loped to efficiently provide up-to-date and definitive information in specific areas of expertise. The proposed organization of key personnel is indicated below. Resumes of each key member are also included in this section. Principal -in -Charge Registered Engineer Construction Observation Shahnawaz Ahmad C. Jerry Gantney Stanley B. Goodman L ASL Consulting Engineers Shahnawaz Ahmad, Principal -in -Charge Education: University of Karachi, Pakistan, B.E., Civil Engineering, 1969 University of California, Berkeley, M.S., Sanitary Engineering, 1971 Registration: Registered Civil Engineer, California No. 23712 Member: American Academy of Environmental Engineers, Diplomate American Society of Civil Engineers American Water Works Association California Water Pollution Control Association Los Angeles City, and County Engineers' Association Southern California Water Utilities Association Water Pollution Control Federation Prior to joining ASL in January, 1984, Mr. Ahmad had been responsible for projects relating to water system master planning; water resour- ces; water supply and treatment; water reuse; wastewater collection, treatment and disposal; storm drainage; design of water and wastewater treatment plants,.,,. pumping stations, storage reservoirs and water reclamation systems; studies of water and wastewater treatment pro- cesses; and industrial waste problems. In addition, Mr. Ahmad was responsible for the environmental review of several federally funded projects for the City of Alhambra. Some of these projects included sewer reconstruction, downtown improvements, housing rehabilitation, shopping centers, a senior highrise center, code enforcement, park restoration, a day care center, and public improvements. Each year the City receives approximately $1 million in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. The environmental review included preparation of environmental review records, environ- mental assessments, and statutory checklists. Mr. Ahmad also assisted the City of Alhambra in the HUD monitoring of the CDBG Projects. Mr. Ahmad has been responsible for the following projects: o Design of 6600 feet of sewers for City of Hermosa Beach for Target Area 1 and 2. o Design of approximately 20,000 feet of 8 -inch through 24 - inch diameter sewers for the City of Chino. The project also included an inverted siphon and a storm drain cross- ing. ASL Consulting Engineers o Design and construction of sewers for the San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District, Azusa, and the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, Walnut Creek, California. o Design of four wastewater treatment plants and three wastewater collection systems in Amman, Jordan. The construction cost of these facilities was approximately $100 million. o Design and construction of the storm drainage system for a 30 mgd water reclamation plant for the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District in Walnut Creek, California. o Design and construction of water pipelines for the Cities of Compton and Pomona. o Design and construction of water pumping stations for the Foothill Municipal Water District, City of Upland and the City of Pomona. o Design and construction of a reclaimed water system for the City of Pomona. The reclaimed water is utilized for landscaping, irrigation, landfill operations, and for two paper manufacturing plants. o Preparation of environmental impact report for a proposed water system master plan for the Victor Valley County Water District, California. 1 } ASL Consulting Engineers C. Jerry Gantney, Assistant Project Engineer Education: California State Polytechnic University at Pomona, B.S., Civil Engineering, 1981 Registration: Registered Civil Engineer, California No. 34674 Member: American Society of Civil Engineers Associate Member Volunteer Civil Engineer for the State of California, Office of Emergency Services Tau Beta Pi Mr. Gantney has an extensive background in public agency and private development projects. This includes the design of streets, sewers, storm drain, parking facilities, grading, and preparation of parcel maps. Mr. Gantney was principal design engineer for the preparation of the plans and specifications for construction of sanitary sewers in Target Area 2 for the City of Hermosa Beach. Mr. Gantney served as the principal design engineer on the Church of the Open Door relocation from downtown Los Angeles to the Glendora site, formerly the Azusa Pacific Hillside Campus. His respon- sibilities included assistance in preparation of the Environmental . /Impact Report, and the design of all on- and off-site improvements V including streets, sewers, water, grading, drainage, and parking alignment. Two other site development projects with which Mr. Gantney is pre- sently involved include a proposed condominium development in Altadena, California, and the new location of the Downey Municipal Court House for Los Angeles County Community Development Commission. These projects include extensive street design involving new construc- ,✓ tion and reconstruction, right-of-ways, property lines, grading, drainage and sewer facilities. Mr. Gantney is the principal design engineer for the Huntington Center Mall improvements. This project involves parking alignment, driveway relocation, and drainage facilities. Mr. Gantney served as design engineer on the recently completed Spyglass Homeowners Association project which involved a slope restoration for hillside condominium. ASL was responsible for the plans, specifications, construction cost estimate, and conducting the bidding process. ASL Consulting Engineers Stanley B. Goodman, Senior Construction Inspector Registration: Education: Registered Construction Inspector Division I, Engineering, California No. 1036 Special Inspector's Certificate of Registration, 1980 Type C (Concrete), I.D. No. 0210, Los Angeles County A.A. Degree at Pasadena City College Extension Courses: Electrical Inspection - P.C.C. Building Code Concrete Inspection I - P.C.C. Fundamentals - materials, mixes, types Water Treatment - P.C.C. Plant Operator Duties /Mr. Goodman has 26 years experience in design, construction inspec- tion, surveying and contract administration of civil engineering pro- jects. Past construction projects inspected by Mr. Goodman include bridge construction and rehabilitation, several concrete and steel reservoirs, elevated steel tanks, over 20 miles of transmission lines to 42 inches in diameter, collector and trunk sewers/pump stations, storm drains, street improvements, utility structures, offices, ware- house and shop buildings, parks and recreation facilities. Projects inspected by him include:. o $4.9 million Water System Improvement Project for La Habra Heights County Water District, including nearly 20 miles of V pipeline, two pump stations, and three steel tank reser- voirs. o Lining of 14,000 feet of the La Mirada Conduit and con- struction of 3200 feet of 24 -inch force main for the La Habra Heights County Water District. o Painting of 200,000 gallon elevated tank for the City of El Monte. ASL Consulting Engineers o Sewer replacement construction at Los Angeles Coliseum. Trunk sewer construction, consisting of over 12,000 feet of 10" - 21" gravity line and 7000 feet of 30inch ductile iron force main for City of Oxnard. o Two reinforced concrete sewer lift stations with fully automatic controls for the City of Oxnard. o Water Facilities Building for the City of El Segundo, a two-story structure with offices, control room, engineering room, male and female shower and locker room, supply room, and mechanical room. o Two concrete block pump stations with concrete roofs for Pico Water District. o Rehabilitation of an existing pump station building, and construction of two new pump stations, one concrete block construction, and the other rolling sheet metal for the City of El Monte. When not actively engaged in construction inspection, Mr. Goodman functions as a designer on civil engineering projects. Past projects included reservoirs, water transmission and distribution mains, sewerage systems, streets, storm drains, pump stations, retention basins and recreational facilities. His design experience complements his performance in the field with particular emphasis on attention to detail. Conversely, his awareness and anticipation of field condi- tions have made trim a most valuable communications link with the 4 design team in our organization. 1 r .ti ASL Consulting Engineers RELATED EXPERIENCE Founded in 1949 by Frank E. Alderman, the firm was incorporated in 1958 as Alderman and Swift, a California Corporation. Since 1970, the organization has been doing business as Alderman, Swift and Lewis with a corporate name change in 1978 to ASL Consulting Engineers. As an independent consulting engineering firm it is owned entirely by its active principals. In 1975, corporate operations were transferred to the second genera- tion for leadership. Thirty-one year veteran with the organization, William D. Lewis, is President of ASL Consulting Engineers. Headquartered in Pasadena, the firm operates satellite offices in Santa Ana and Palm Springs. ASL Consulting Engineers performs complete civil, structural, traffic and transportation engineering services for municipalities, public and private water agencies, flood control and sanitary districts, large industries, industrial, residential and commercial developers. Particular pride is taken in the fact that a great majority of our projects are for clients of long standing, many for more than ten years and several for over twenty years. From our Los Angeles County office, we have provided water works and sanitary engineering services to several cities, public agencies, and private clients in Ventura County. ASL's involvement in wastewater system planning, design, and construc- tion management has been extensive over our 37 year history. Our activities in this field include master planning of entire sewer systems, review and preparation of sewer design and construction manuals, design of trunk lines and collection systems, rehabilitation of existing and design of new lift stations, design of treatment faci- lities for industrial and domestic wastes, design of automated super- visory controls, and establishment of assessment districts to finance these facilities. We make extensive use of proprietary and state-of- the-art computer programs for the inventory, analysis, design, and financial reporting of wastewater collection and treatment systems, as well as for in-house resource management and construction management functions. ASL has taken a lead in the development of space -efficient and aesthe- tically attractive designs for lift stations ranging in capacities from a few hundred gpm to 11,500 gpm. We also specialize in state-of- the-art techniques for sewer pipeline rehabilitation. ASL Consulting Engineers Recent design efforts include below grade lift stations designed to be constructed at grade and lowered to their ultimate buried positions, in order to avoid high groundwater problems. Several rehabilitation and repair projects for sewer trunk lines and lift stations have also been recently completed, including lining in-place with polyethylene liner pipe. Following is a representative listing of projects completed by ASL. ASL Consulting Engineers EXPERIENCE IN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT ASL Consulting Engineers has provided construction management, inspec- tion, and contract administration for numerous projects involving a variety of public works construction. These projects have been funded through several different agencies including FmHA, HUD, EDA and California Department of Water Resources. Following is a list of recent projects and clients for whom we have performed these services. WASTEWATER City of Oxnard Western Trunk Sewer Hueneme Road Sewer and Lift Station Hemlock Street and Patterson Road Lift Station City of San Clemente Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee WATERWORKS La Habra Heights County Water District Rowland Water District City of El Monte Main Wastewater Pump Station Sewer Replacement at Los V Angeles Coliseum Water System Improvements Program, La Mirada Conduit Rehabilitation and Force Main Replacement Several steel and concrete reservoirs, pump stations, water main Drilling and development of wells, repainting elevated tank Orchard Dale County Water District Dominguez Water Corporation 1.5 M.G. rectangular concrete reservoir 20 -inch and 24 -inch water mains, reservoir repainting new reservoir construction City of Beverly Hills Reservoir roof rehabilitation ASL Consulting Engineers WATERWORKS -- continued City of Huntington Park City of Monterey Park City of Industry City of Santa Ana STREETS City of Irvine Drilling and development of wells, water mains Reservoir repainting Drilling and equipping wells Recoating of elevated tank and structural rehabilitation City of Rolling Hills Estates Bonita Canyon Road (construction staking) Hawthorne Boulevard, Palos Verdes Drive North Bike trail and equestrian trail (2 1/2 miles) City of South Gate Area -wide street rehabilitation (HUD funding) City of Rancho Palos Palos Verdes Drive South Verdes City of Bell Reconstruction of various streets and alleys (construction staking) City of Chino Central Avenue Street Improvements FLOOD CONTROL FACILITIES City of Chino Central Avenue Storm Drain City of Rolling Hills Palos Verdes Drive North Estates Big Bear Airport District Drainage Improvements LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION City of El Segundo El Segundo Recreation Park Tara Reservoir Pine Tree Park Palos Verdes Drive North City of Thousand Oaks City of Monterey Park City of Rolling Hills Estates ASL Consulting Engineers MANHOURS AND FEE We estimate that the completion of the inspection services during construction of the sewer lines in Target Area 2, in accordance with the Request for Proposal and the enclosed Scope of Services, will take the following manhours. PHASE MANHOURS NOT -TO -EXCEED FEE Inspection Services* 770 $35,400 Construction Staking 28 $ 3,400 TOTAL 798 $38,800 ASL's current Hourly Charge Rate and Expense Reimbursement Schedule is also enclosed. *Manhours and fee are for the work described under Items 1, 2, and 3 in the Scope of Services. Field observation is based on 8 manhours per day for eighty-six (86) working days in accordance with the Request for Proposal. Compaction testing is based on one test per 300 feet of sewer for the upper 3 feet of backfill. . --.4' ASL Consulting Engineers 1987 HOURLY CHARGE RATE AND EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT SCHEDULE Court Appearances, Expert Witness Testimony and Depositions $150.00* *Minimum $600.00 for half day plus expenses Short duration consulting assignments including preparation for court appearances and depositions $125.00 Senior Principal $110.00 Principal in Charge of Project $ 90.00 Project Manager $ 75.00 Project Engineer $ 68.00 Registered Engineer $ 58.00 Transportation Engineer $ 55.00 Engineer $ 48.00 Designer $ 48.00 Designer/Draftsperson $ 48.00 Construction Inspector $ 44.00 Draftsperson $ 44.00 CAD Operator $ 35.00 Wordprocessor $ 30.00 Technician $ 25.00 Two -Man Survey Party $120.00** Survey Travel Time $ 60.00 Survey Vehicle Allowance (per day) $ 20.00 Three -Man Survey Party Rates Quoted on Request Reproduction, special photography, printing and any other services per- formed by subcontractor, subject to prior approval by the Client, will be billed at cost plus 15%. Reimbursable In-house Costs: Photo Copies $0.20/Each Blueprints $0.25/sq.ft. Postage, Delivery Service, Express Mail At Cost Out of Area Telephone Calls At Cost Computer Time $10.00/hour Vehicle mileage, between engineer's office and project site and/or Client offices, will be billed at $0.30 per mile. ** Survey rate effective through July 31, 1987. NOTE: All other rates are effective through January 1, 1988 These rates are based on the attached Exhibit B - Standard Conditions of Service. Special insurance requirements carry a fee surcharge. 1/87 ASL Consulting Engineers EXHIBIT B - STANDARD CONDITIONS OF SERVICE APPLICABILITY In the absence of any formal agreement between client and ASL Consulting Engineers (ASL), the following standard conditions shall govern the pro- fessional ro- fessional services provided by ASL. The standard conditions apply to all letter proposal -agreements and any contracts incorporating same. STANDARD OF CARE Professional services performed by ASL under this agreement will be con- ducted in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions. No other warranty, express or implied is made. All field condition data obtained during the investigation phase and/or design phase are subject to confirmation of conditions encountered before or during construction. Underground utilities, connections to utilities, potential underground obstructions shall be exposed to verify their hori- zontal as well as vertical position before proceeding with construction to allow for adjustments. INSURANCE 4 1 ASL represents and warrants that it and its agents, staff and consultants z employed by it are protected by worker's compensation insurance and that ASL has coverage under public liability and property damage insurance poli- cies with an aggregate limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence. Costs of spe- cial insurance required by the client including, but not limited to, an increase in policy limits and naming additional insured parties on policies of ASL will be charged at cost plus 10%. Certificates for all such poli- cies of insurance will be provided to client upon written request. Within the limits and conditions of such insurance, ASL agrees to indemnify and save client harmless from and against any loss, damage, or liability arising from any negligent acts by ASL, its agents, and staff. ASL shall not be responsible for any loss, damage or liability arising from any acts by client, its agents, staff, and other consultants employed by it. 1 f ASL Consulting Engineers INVOICES ASL will submit invoices to client as stated in the proposal or periodi- cally and a final invoice upon completion of our services. Payment is due upon presentation of invoice and is past due thirty (30) days from invoice date. Client agrees to pay a finance charge of one and one-half percent (1-1/2%) per month, or the maximum rate allowed by law, on past due accounts. In the event that a dispute should arise relating to the collection of fees, and should these actions result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense or enforcement of the claim including staff time, court costs, attorneys fees, and other claim -related expenses. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY The client agrees to limit ASL's liability to the client, owner and all construction contractors and subcontractors on the project arising from ASL's negligent professional acts, errors or omissions, such that the total aggregate liability of ASL to all those named shall not exceed $50,000 or ASL's total fee for the services rendered on this project, whichever is less. The client further agrees to require the contractor and his sub- contractors to execute an identical limitation of ASL's liability for dama- ges suffered by the negligent professional acts, errors or omission. PROJECT SIGNS ASL's contribution to any project shall be recognized by the addition of the firm name on any project sign. In the absence of a project sign, ASL shall be permitted to prominently display its own sign on the project site. OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT All reports, design, drawings, field data and notes, laboratory test data, calculations, estimates and other documents prepared by ASL, as instruments of service, shall remain the property of ASL. Upon request in writing, ASL will provide reproducibles of drawings for client use on the designated project. Client agrees that all reports and other work furnished to the client or its agents, which are not paid for, will be returned upon demand and will not be used by the client for any purposes whatsoever. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE PROJECT NAME : �/-914 /77 T .u) - The -6 -e -T it?E41.zr ACCOUNT NUMBER : C /P LEGEND ' TENTATIVE SCHEDULE :,•11111111111111111 ACTUAL SCHEDULE X : 100% COMPLETE TASKS 1 JAN 1 FEB I MAR APR I MAY JUN JUL I AUG SEP OCT I NOV DEC Final design approval before advertising1II111I1111111 1 1 1 1 1 -1 for construction 1� 1 Prepare advertisement & set bid opening 1111 date �'L7rM S fY�i--- I I Advertising period (issue addendums as necessary) Accept sealed bids & public bid opening Review bids Award contract Sign contract (bonds,insurance & workers comp. cert.) Preconstruction meeting procedure Issue "Notice to Proceed" Construction Period Monitor progress & maintain records Progress payment and change order procedure Acceptance of work as complete Issusing and recording a "Notice of Completion" Retention Payment NProject close out • llllll 111 a IIII'llll 111 1 I I I -ill --I I I 1 11111111111111111111111111iilllii(Yl` 1 11111111l 111111111111111111111111111�Ii11Ul1! IIII`IIIIII II�IIIllllll�lltmllmtmiimrr--1 p.- -` (A_R«F �, ito q 4,1 ck-e ,q(0,ucrolc� Mayor and Members of the City council S ,}{O BALLOT MEAS RE - PURCHASE OF RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY May 20, 1987 City Council Meeting May 26, 1987 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council review the Background Materials provided and give staff further direction i.e., preparation of another "Advisory Measure" for the November ballot; or begin preparation for an actual bond measure for the ballot, which would have to placed at the next regular election date in April, 1988. BACKGROUND At the City Council Meeting of May 12, 1987, staff was directed to prepare a report regarding a legislative initiative on the November ballot for the purchase of the Railroad Right of Way. An "Advisory Measure" was placed on the Ballot in April, 1984 regarding this property. (Exhibit "A") It passed by 76%. It basically asked if the City should support a bond issue to buy the land, with a price range of $3,500,000 to $15,000,000 mentioned in the Impartial Analysis and Arguments. n November, 1984, the Railroad Property was combined with the South School Site in a proposed Mello -Roos District. (Exhibit "B"). This measure received 44% affirmative votes, and needed 2/3 for passage. ANALYSIS Basically, the electorate has already indicated supporting a bond measure in the price range of $3 to $15 million. A new bond issue could be presented to the electorate at the next regular election date. The other alternative available is to direct staff to prepare another "Advisory Measure" for the ballot, and give direction as to the nature of the question. Pckoa, t( -Up NOTED: — IS -.0 PP ELAAD kivAOXLtrk 6Q 4;0 Greg eyer, pity Manager Respectfully submitted, Kathleen Midstokke, City Clerk 11 g INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS: Insert the ballot card into the ballot punching device so that it lies FLAT in the tray. To vote for a candidate whose name appears on the ballot, move the punch unit over the X in the voting square next to the right of the candidates name and press the handle COMPLETELY down. Where two or more candidates for the same office are to be elected, repeat the punching process after the names of all candidates for that office for whom you desire to vote, not to exceed, however, the number of candidates who are to be elected. To vote for a qualified write-in candi- date, write the title of the office and his name in the blank space left for that pur- pose on the write-in ballot envelope. To vote on any measure, punch out the X in the voting square after the word "YES" or after the word "NO". All marks except the punch hole are for- bidden. All distinguishing marks or erasures are forbidden and make the ballot void. If you wrongly punch, tear or deface the ballot card, return it to the precinct board member and obtain another. After you have finished voting, RE- TURN the punch handle to the TOP of the slide, remove the card and insert in the ballot envelope and hand to the election officer at the ballot box. O z 41.14;i- "14-1-1 No. 1234 OFFICIAL BALLOT GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 1984 I HAVE VOTED — HAVE YOU? THIS BALLOT STUB SHALL BE REMOVED BEFORE BALLOT IS PLACED IN BALLOT BOX For MEMBER of the Vote for CITY COUNCIL No More Than Two JOEL SHAPIRO Businessman -Flight Instructor X ETTA SIMPSON Community Advocate X JOHN A. CIOFFI Businessman -General Manager X CHRISTOPHER L. FAIRCHILD Attorney at Law X TONY DeBELLIS Municipal Planning Director X For CITY CLERK Vote for One CHARLES BOWMAN Salesman " X KATHLEEN (KATHY) REVICZKY Businesswoman X For CITY TREASURER Vote for One NORMA GOLDBACH Incumbent I X MEASURE SUBMITTED TO VOTE OF VOTERS MEASURE A ADVISORY VOTE ONLY ' PROPOSED BOND ISSUE— RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY Shall the City support a bond issue to raise money to acquire the rail- road right-of-way for open space and parkland purposes? YES X NO X i IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY OF MEASURE A This measure asks the voter if he or she favors a city supported bond issue to raise money to acquire the railroad right-of-way for open space and parkland purposes. The measure is advisory. If it recei,ves a majority yes vote, the City is not required to act on it. If it does pass and is acted upon, the City would issue bonds in an amount necessary to acquire the right-of-way and become indebted to repay the amount. The cost of the land would be subject to negotiiation. The the owner, the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, land to the City for $15,000,000 in 1983. The City has counter offered $3,500,000. The railroad values the land according land the avalue u not to s adjacent to the right-of-way. The Cityvalues current open space zoning. Assuming the City and Santa Fe could agree upon a price, bonds could be repaid from sources such as: a) general funds of the city, b) General ion A Revenue Sharingbeenproposed, b t an increase could be included in the bond increase h proposal itself. The measure advises that, if acquired, the land should be used for open space and parkland purposes. The land is presently zoned open space. ited development, the ty, as owner, the n space zone compelled against itslw wishes to allow any development owner, could not be comp , on the land. CHARLES J. POST City Attorney ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE A Measure A deals with one of the most important issues to face the City of Hermosa Beach in the past twenty years. At stake is the question of the use of the Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way. Will the right-of-way be de- veloped to its full commercial and residential potentialwill the propfor erty be acquired by the City to be retained as open space/parkland the recreational use of the citizens of Hermosa Beach. The vote is advisory and asks the citizens of Hermosa Beach if they would be willing in the future to vote for a bond issue to provide the City with the money necessary to purchase the right-of-way. The actual cost is unknown but will probably vary from a low of $5,000,000 to a high of $15,000,000. The bonds would be paid off over a thirty year period through a combination of general revenues, rental revenues and special assess- ments as detailed in the bond issue. The council wants to know two things, first, does the public want City to acquire the property, second, is the public willing to pay for the purchase. We, the members of the City Council,'strongly urge a yes vote on Measure A. GARY L. BRUTSCH Mayor GEORGE G. BARKS Mayor Pro Tem EDIE WEBBER Councilwoman GEORGE J. SCHMELTZER Councilman JACK WOOD Councilman ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE A (None Filed) EXHIBIT "A" Page One of One CITY CLERK'S CLaff'IFICATF OF CANVASS I, Charlotte Malone, City Clerk of the City of Hermosa Beach, County of Los Angeles, State of California, duly authorized by Resolution No. 84-4669, adopted by the City Council of the City on January 10, 1984, do certify that I have canvassed the returns of the General Municipal Election held in said city on April 10, 1984, and find that the number of votes given at each precinct and the number of votes given in the City to persons voted for, the respective offices for which the persons were candidates and for and against the measure were as follows: DATED: April 13, 1984 Clerk of the City 6f Hermosa Beach FDR CITY IMBER OF COUNCIL THE FOR CITY CLERK FOR CITYVOTES TREASURERRIGHT-OF-WAY RAILROAD ADVISORY MEASURE "A" TOTAL CAST AT PRECINCT URAL BALLOTS CAST AT PRECINCT PRECINCT JOEL SHAPIRO ETTA • SIMPSON JOHN A. CIOFFI CHRISTOPHER L.FAIRCHILD TONY DEBELLIS CHARLES BOWMAN KATHLEEN (KATHY) REVICZKY NORMA GOLDBACH YES NO 1 153 205 201 104 287 65 350 340 376 94 2175. 520 4 105 143 169 111 191 63 262 262 293 63 1662 300 2 97 81 83 65 97 49 143 151 161 51 978 230 11 47 81 94 48 115 34 137 143 151 37 887 212 14 110 111 120 61 175 54 198 204 189 89 1311 305 16 7. MEM= 25 40 167 166 161 58 1048 244 TOTAL 588 712 791 429• 990 305 1257 1266 1331 392 8061 190 I VOTE45 64 51 42 55 22 100 05 32 48 604 139 TOTE' \, VOTES CAST 633 776 842 471 1045 327 1357 1361 1413 440 8665 2040 COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT Shall the City of Hermosa Beach be authorized to levy a special tax and to issue bonds for the purpose of acquiring real property for park and open space uses; said rate of tax shall not exceed $126 per dwelling unit per year for residential property and shall not exceed $.11 per square foot of land area per year for all other property; said bonds shall be in a principal amount not to exceed $13,500,000 for a term of not to exceed 30 years at an interest rate of not to exceed 12% per annum; all pursuant to Resolution No. 84-4746 of the City? YES NO The City Council hereby declares its intent to proceed with establishing the District in accordance with the terms of Resolution No. 84-4727; provided, however, Resolution No. 84-4727 is amended to provide that the public facilities proposed to be acquired are "the acquisition of all or part of 20 plus acres of unused Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way in the City of Hermo- sa Beach and 5 plus acres of surplus school property located at 446 Monterey Boulevard and .275 acres of surplus school property located at 19th and Prospect for park and open space uses consistent with Open Space Zoning" . An equivalent dwelling unit shall constitute 1,100 square feet of land area and the maximum rate of tax on commercial and industrial property shall not exceed $.11 per square foot of land area. The City Council hereby finds, determines and orders as follows: (a) It is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness in accordance with the terms of the City's Resolution No. 84-4728. (b) The bonded indebtedness will be incurred for the purpose of acquisition of all or part of the property described in Section 2 hereof for park and open space uses, and for the payment of all cost incidental to or connected with the accom- plishment of such purpose, including all costs permitted under Government Code Section 53345.3. (c) The whole of the District will pay for the bonded indebtedness. (d) The total amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred shall not exceed $13,500,000. (e) The maximum term the bonds to be issued shall run before maturity shall not exceed 30 years. (f) The maximum annual rate of interest to be paid, payable semiannually, shall not exceed 12%. Said tax to be levied on an equivalent dwelling unit basis. For residential property, said tax shall not exceed $126 per dwelling unit per year. For commer- cial and industrial property, the maximum annual rate of tax shall not exceed $.11 per square foot or portion thereof per year. Said bonds shall be in a principal amount not to exceed $13,500,000, for a term of not to exceed 30 years from the date of issue, at an interest rate of not to exceed 12% per annum to be repaid by the entire area of Community Facilities District No. 1. CITY ATTORNEY'S IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEASURE 0 This proposition has been placed on the ballot by the City Council pursuant to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. Under this act the City may form a district for the purpose of financing public capital facilities and services. The City has followed the procedures under the Act to form a City-wide district and to place before the voters the question of whether there shall be levied a special tax to secure bonds for the purpose of acquiring, for park and open space uses, all or part of the approximately 20 acres of the Santa Fe railroad right-of- way, the approximately 5 acres of surplus school property at 446 Monterey Boulevard (the South School site), and .275 acres of surplus school property at 19th Street and Prospect Avenue (the Seaview Parkette site). The special tax shall not exceed $126.00 per unit per year for residential property and not exceed $.11 per square foot per year for commercial and industrial property. The bonds shall be in a principal amount not to exceed $13,500,000 for a term not to exceed 30 yeats at an interest rate not to exceed 12% per year. Repayment is to be made by the entire area of the City-wide district. Two thirds of those voting at the election must vote in favor of the proposition for it to pass. ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE 0 A yes vote on this proposition is an investment in the future. It is your vote for public parks and open space. A yes vote is your vote against development of these properties. A yes vote is your vote to ensure that our community has parkland now and in the future. At the present time the City does not own the properties described in this proposition. It simply controls the zoning and general plan designation. This merely restricts the type and amount of development. It does not guarantee public access or use as a park or jogging path. Failure of this proposition will: 1. Deprive residents of parkland. 2. Make a portion of South School available for R-3 development. 3. Lead to possible development of the railroad right-of-way. 4. Ensure additional legal costs in defense of the City's open space zoning and general plan designation of the railroad right-of-way. Approval of this proposition will: I. Ensure public parks and a jogging path. 2. Prevent development. 3. Preserve open space. 4. Enhance property values and quality of life in Hermosa Beach. Now is the time to act! We have the opportunity to transform our desires for parkland and open space into reality. GARY BRUTSCH KAREN K. GALE Mayor H.B. Clerk H.B. School Board GEORGE BARKS LESLIE N. MURDOCK Mayor Pro Tem H.B. Pres. H.B. School Board JOHN A. CIOFFI Councilman H:B. ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE 0 (None Filed) cm ATTOANEY'S IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS Of MEAMJIIL P STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES. ) 88. I. CHARLES WEISSBURD, Registrar -Recorder of the County of Los Angeles, State of California, do hereby certify that the attached is a true and correct Canvass of the Votes Cast For and Against Propositions N. 0, P. Q and R for the City of Hermosa Beach Special Municipal Election consolidated with the General Election held on November 6, 1984. I further certify that the total Ballots Cast at the City of Hermosa Beach Special Municipal Election are as follows: PRECINCT BALLOTS CAST 8,485 ABSENTEE TOTAL BALLOTS CAST BALLOTS CAST 810 9,295 I further certify that the total votes cast on said Propositions N. 0, P. Q and R are as follows: PROPOSITION N Precinct Vote Absentee Vote TOTAL VOTE PROPOSITION 0 Precinct Vote Absentee Vote TOTAL VOTE PROPOSITION P Precinct Vote Absentee Vote TOTAL VOTE PROPOSITION Q Precinct Vote Absentee Vote TOTAL VOTE YES NO 5,990 1,286 528 108 '6,518 1.394 YES NO 3,131 3,988 234 419 3,365 4,407 YES NO 4.354 2.961 389 261 4,743 3,222 YES NO 3,667 3.592 342 297 4.009 3,889 (Continued on next page) Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 20, 1987 City Council Meeting of May 26, 1987 PROPOSED FIVE YEAR COMMUNITY RECREATION AGREEMENT FOR COUNTY LIFEGUARD AND BEACH CLEANING SERVICES AT q)"\ HERMOSA BEACH RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council Approve the attached five year agreement with the Los Angeles ounty Department of Harbors and Beaches for Lifeguard and Beach Cleaning services (subject to the City Attorney approving the language of the Indemnification clause) and authorize the_ Mayor to sign the Agreement; - ��- Authorize staff to refine the Citation surch ge concept with ounty staff, with the understanding that the s rcharge would not xceed $3/citation and that the combination of court construction and beach operation surcharges could not exceed $3; draft legis- lation to then be submitted back to City Council for endorsement and authorization to seek League support, utilization of lobbyist etc. BACKGROUND At your May 12th meeting you received a status report. Council direction was to "approve in concept a new 5 year agreement, sub- ject to 11 conditions". Additionally staff was instructed to: 1. Seek a modification in the trash pickup service, 2. Modify the Marketing clause from City Manager approval to City Council, 3. Continue to pursue with the County the possibility of a Citation surcharge for beach operations/capital income. ANALYSIS The attached Agreement is in conformance with the Council's May 12 instruction. It contains the following provisions:, 5 W IAC S -D o4., 1 1. A 5 year agreement subject to a one year cancellation clause; City and County to negotiate an extension (or a new Agreement) during the fourth year; 2. County to: A. Furnish all lifeguard services B. Furnish custodial maintenance services - 1. Restrooms 2. Rake and sanitize beach 3. Burial of kelp and dead animals 4. Refuse containers, at least 5 times/week during peak and at least 3 times in winter 5. Contour beach 6. Cleaning of lifeguard headquarters & towers 7. Minor repairs to restrooms (up to 8 hour jobs) 8. All maintenance and repairs to lifeguard head- quarters and towers 3. City to: A. B. C. Be responsible for Pier Furnish tree trimming services Provide animal control services on the beach D. Seek to implement a Litter Patrol service, commencing for summer 1988 E. Perform major repairs t� the restrooms (work requiring more than 8 hours word/project) F. Be responsible for Strand wall and systems G. Carry out its duties per Agreement Flood Control all lighting with County 4. City to notify County with 30 days notice of any public improvements being done on the beach 5. County to not undertake any physical construction/ on the beach (except at its own buildings or in dealing with an emergency) without consent of City 6. City to create a Beaches Asset Replacement Fund for the purpose of having a designated depository for grant monies to be used to repair/upgrade capital improvements 7. City has sole right to issue Special Event permits; County to be apprised of each and County may also be an applicant for such; County to be reimbursed for all actual expenses engendered by a Special Event 8. County Marketing program sanctioned, limited to tide - boards, refuse containers, trucks, uniforms, rescue boats and related lifeguard equipment, no alcoholic or tobacco products allowed. As directed by the City Council, there was further discussion re refuse pick up. It was agreed that the County would exercise due diligence and pick up refuse at whatever level is needed in order to maintain a safe and healthy beach. The 1970 contract specified a summer frequency of twice a week. The new contract contains an "at least 5 times/week for summer and at least 3 times/week during the winter" clause. This is a considerable improvement in establishing the minimum level of service. However, it is not the 7 days/week summer schedule desired by the City Council. County Beaches personnel have indicated an awareness of the need for maintaining cleanliness on the beach. All efforts will be made to do so, including refuse pick up more frequently than 5 days/week. However, contractually the County is not prepared to obligate at a higher level. One determinant is equipment and personnel - both are in limited supply. On the other hand, the number of refuse containers can be varied (i.e. in the winter some containers are withdrawn from service, during the summer more barrels can be added). We therefore ask that you approve Section 2.03 g) as described on page 3 of the Agreement. If cleanliness problems develop we will then deal directly with County operations personnel. SUMMARY The spirit and intent of this Argeement is to clearly establish areas of responsibility, minimize each agencies out of pocket expenses, and preserve Hermosa Beach as a premier, qualitative recreational facility. attachments NOTED FOR FISCAL IMPACT Viki L. Copeland Finance Administrator cc City Attorney Lough Assistant City Manager Mastrian Public Works Director Antich County Harbor & Beaches Department 3 COMMUNITY RECREATION AGREEMENT COUNTY LIFEGUARD AND BEACH CLEANING SERVICES AT HERMOSA BEACH THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1987. BY AND BETWEEN AND CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH hereinafter referred to as the "CITY," COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY," WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the CITY owns a public beach, hereinafter referred to as the "BEACH", bounded on the north by the City of Manhattan Beach, on the south by the City of Redondo Beach, on the east by the Strand, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and CITY are desirous of entering into an agreement whereby the COUNTY will provide lifeguard and beach cleaning services to the BEACH; and WHEREAS, Section 10900 et sem, of the California Education Code authorizes cities and counties to enter into agreements and to cooperate in promoting and preserving the health and general welfare of the people of the State; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM 1.01 The term of this agreement shall be for a period of five (5) years, commencing on July 1, 1987 and terminating on June 30, 1992. 1.02 This agreement may be terminated prior to June 30, 1992 by either party after giving 365 days written notice to the other party of its intent to cancel. 1.03 In the event that this agreement remains in force and effect for its full term, the parties agree to negotiate an extension of this agreement, or a new agreement, during the fifth year of the term. 2. OBLIGATIONS OF COUNTY 2.01 Subject to the availability of funds, personnel and equipment, the COUNTY shall furnish the services described in paragraphs 2.02 and 2.03. 2.02 The COUNTY shall furnish all necessary lifeguard services to the BEACH. 2.03 The COUNTY shall furnish all custodial maintenance to the BEACH. The custodial maintenance obligation of the COUNTY shall be limited to the following work: 2 a) Cleaning of the public restrooms at 2nd, 10th (just north of 10th and south of Pier Avenue), 15th, and 22nd Streets, including the furnishing of necessary cleaning and paper supplies, twice daily from Memorial Day weekend through Labor Day weekend, and once daily during the remainder of the year. b) Necessary daily raking and sanitizing of the sand areas of the BEACH. c) Raking and burial of kelp, and burial of dead animals, as needed. d) Furnish and empty all necessary refuse containers on the BEACH at least five (5) times per week between Memorial Day weekend and Labor Day weekend, and at least three (3) times per week during the remainder of the year. e) Contour the BEACH, by grading and leveling the sand, once each year. f) Cleaning of the lifeguard headquarters and towers on g) the BEACH. Minor repairs, meaning jobs that can be completed within eight hours of work, by the workforce customarily assigned to the job by the COUNTY, to the public restrooms at 2nd, 10th (north of 10th and'° south of Pier Avenue) 15th, and 22nd Streets. These repairs may include, by way of illustration and not limitation, fixing broken sinks, faucets, toilets, windows and doors; replacing light bulbs and fixtures; patching cracks and holes. h) All maintenance and repairs to the lifeguard headquarters and towers on the BEACH. 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY 3.01 Subject to the availability of funds, personnel, and equipment, the CITY shall furnish the services described in paragraphs 3.02 through 3.08. 3.02 The CITY shall be responsible for all maintenance, upkeep, and repair of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Pier, including the public restrooms, concession facilities, and refuse removal from the pier. 3.03 The CITY shall furnish all tree trimming services on the BEACH. 3.04 The CITY shall furnish all animal control services on the BEACH, including the removal of small dead animals, birds and fish. 3.05 The CITY shall support the COUNTY's goal of reducing the cost of the COUNTY's obligations by exercising the CITY's 4 best efforts to establish a beach litter patrol program, commencing July 1, 1988, as well as Court referral and other volunteer programs to reduce the COUNTY's need to provide beach maintenance labor. 3.06 The CITY shall furnish all major repairs, meaning repairs requiring more than eight hours to complete, to the public restrooms at 2nd, 15th, 10th (north of 10th Street and south of Pier Avenue) and 22nd Streets. These repairs shall include, by way of illustration and not limitation, repair or replacement of structural components, e.g., walls, floors, roofs, plumbing and lighting fixtures, and repainting of the interiors and exteriors of the buildings. 3.07 The CITY shall be responsible for all maintenance, upkeep, repair and -replacement of the Strand, the wall on the west side of the Strand, and any lighting systems appurtenant to the Strand, as well as for any playground equipment, volleyball courts, or similar facilities on the BEACH. 3.08 The CITY shall be responsible, under the terms of a separate agreement with the COUNTY, acting on behalf of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, dated December 30, 1986, for all maintenance of the BEACH adjacent to, and affected by, all storm drain outlets on the BEACH. 5 4. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS 4.01 The CITY shall provide the COUNTY with thirty (30) days written notice prior to any work of public improvement being done by the CITY, its agents or contractors, on the BEACH. 4.02 The COUNTY shall undertake no physical construction, alteration, or other work of public improvement on the BEACH, except such work as is described in Article 2 or any emergency work that may be required to protect the BEACH and facilities from storm damage, without the prior writtenconsent of the CITY.. 5. BEACH ASSET REPLACEMENT 5.01 The CITY shall create a Beaches Capital Asset Replacement Fund for the purpose of accumulating grants, donations, and other monies to be appropriated for preservation, repair, rehabilitation and replacement of. blic improvements, n e.g., restrooms, on the BEACH. 6. SPECIAL EVENTS 6.01 The CITY has the sole right to issue permits for special events on the BEACH. The CITY shall notify the COUNTY of all CITY permitted events. 6.02 The COUNTY shall be fully reimbursed by the CITY, within sixty (60) days of the CITY's receipt of a COUNTY invoice, for all costs, including overhead, incurred by the COUNTY in providing extraordinary services requested by the CITY for any special event. 6 6.03 The COUNTY may request CITY permission to conduct special events on the BEACH. CITY permission shall not be unreasonably withheld. 7. COUNTY MARKETING PROGRAM 7.01 The CITY authorizes the COUNTY to display marketing program sponsor or donor names, or their product names, on COUNTY tideboards, refuse containers, trucks, uniforms, rescue boats, and other lifeguard equipment. Name/product identification shall only be displayed on equipment that is involved in providing a public service and shall not directly solicit the sale of any product. The COUNTY shall not permit name/product identification displays involving alcoholic beverage or tobacco related products. The COUNTY shall not display the name of any marketing program sponsor or donor, or of their products, on any beach under this agreement, in any fashion other than as is described in this paragraph, without prior written approval from the CITY. 8. INDEMNIFICATION 8.01 COUNTY agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the CITY harmless from and against any and all liability and expense, including defense costs and legal fees, caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of the COUNTY, its agents, officers, and employees to the extent that such liability is imposed upon the CITY by the provisions of §895.2 of the Government Code of the State of California, including, but not limited to, personal injury, bodily injury, death, and property damage occurring on and within the BEACH, and arising out of any negligent or 7 wrongful act or omission in the performance of the custodial maintenance and lifeguard obligations that have been assumed by the COUNTY in this agreement. In addition when liability arises pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 2, Division 3.6 of Title 1, commencing with Section 830 of the California Government Code, by reason of (1) a dangerous condition of the public restrooms, lifeguard headquarters and towers on the BEACH that is created by an act or omission of the agents, officers and employees of the COUNTY in the performance of the custodial maintenance obligation that has been assumed by the COUNTY for these structures under the agreement, or (2) a dangerous condition of the public restrooms on the BEACH that is created by a condition of disrepair for which it is the obligation of the CITY under the agreement to protect, repair, remedy or correct, and of which the COUNTY has actual notice but fails to give the CITY notice of the condition of disrepair prior to the date the condition of disrepair causes injury or damage, the COUNTY agrees to assume the entire liability for the dangerous condition, and defend, indemnify and hold the CITY harmless from liability for the dangerous condition, including the alleged act or omission of the CITY, its agents, officers and employees, to protect against, repair, remedy, or correct the dangerous condition, to provide safeguards against the dangerous condition, or warn of the dangerous condition. It is understood and agreed by the CITY that the foregoing assumption of liability by the COUNTY for liability arising pursuant to Chapter 2, Division 3.6 of Title 1, commencing with Section 830 of the Government Code shall not be 8 deemed, to be either an expressed or implied, acceptance by the COUNTY of an obligation to.defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the CITY for liability arising pursuant to Section 830, et seq. of the Government Code, by reason of a dangerous condition of the beach that is created by a condition of the piers and groins or a natural condition or hybrid natural and artificial condition of the upland, the accretions to the upland, the tide and submerged land, and the ocean, including the alleged act or omission of the COUNTY, its agents, officers and employees, to protect against, repair, remedy, or correct the dangerous condition, to provide safeguards against the dangerous condition, or to warn of the dangerous condition. 8.02 CITY agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the COUNTY harmless from and against any and all liability and expense, including defense costs and legal fees, caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of the CITY, its agents, officers, and employees to the extent that such liability is imposed upon the COUNTY by the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of California, including, but not limited to, personal injury, bodily injury, death, and property damage occurring on and within the BEACH caused by the negligent act or omission of the agents, officers and employees of the CITY in the performance of the obligations assumed by the CITY in this agreement. In addition, when liability arises upon any cause of action pursuant to Section 830 et secl.,of the Government Code, by reason of a dangerous condition of the BEACH that is created by 9 either (1) a condition of the piers and groins or (2) a condition of the public restrooms for which it is the obligation of the CITY under the agreement to protect, repair, remedy or correct and of which the CITY has actual notice or of which the COUNTY has no actual notice, or (3) a natural condition, or a hybrid natural and artificial condition of the upland, the accretions to the upland, the tide and submerged land and the ocean, the CITY agrees to and shall assume liability and shall defend, indemnify, and hold the COUNTY harmless from liability for the dangerous condition, including but not limited to, any alleged failure of the COUNTY, its agents, officers and employees, to protect against, repair, remedy, or correct the dangerous condition, to provide safeguards against the dangerous condition,- or to warn of the dangerous condition. The term "Natural Condition" is defined to mean a condition of the land and ocean that has not been physically changed by some work of improvement having been made, such as by way of illustration and not limitation, cliffs, rocks, ravines, rip currents, shallow water, bottom slope, depressions, trenches, sand bars, wave break and refraction. The term "Hybrid Natural and Artificial Condition" is defined to mean a condition that is created by a combination of a Natural Condition of the land and water and an alleged act or omission of the COUNTY, its agents, officers and employees, that is either not performed or inadequately performed with respect to the protection, repair, remedy, correction, safeguard or warning of the Natural Condition. 8.03 Any dispute between the parites over their respective obligations for indemnification that cannot be resolved by mutual agreement of the parties shall be submitted for determination by arbitration under the California Arbitration Act or any amendments or reenactments of the Act over the term of the agreement. However, the foregoing notwithstanding, it is agreed that until a final determination has been made, the respective obligations for indemnity shall be performed in accordance with the provision of paragraph 8.03.01. Once the determination has been made, the arbitrator shall determine the rights of the parties to any reimbursement for the respective costs that are incurred pending final resolution of their dispute based upon whether there was a prevailing party in the arbitration to resolve the dispute, and if so, which party prevailed. 8.03.01 The costs of the judgement, settlement and defense of the third party tort claimant's claim and lawsuit inclusive of the costs of attorneys, witnesses, experts, investigation, discovery, trial and appeal, shall be equally shared between the parties with the COUNTY assuming fifty percent of the costs of the claim and lawsuit, and the CITY assuming the other fifty percent of such costs. The county counsel and the city attorney shall provide joint representation for the named party defendants in the litigation that is commenced and exercise joint control over the defense of the case in the trial and appellate courts. In the event of a disagreement between the two attorneys over how the defense of the case should be conducted in the trial and appellate courts, the disagreement shall be resolved by allowing the attorney who wishes to engage in the course of action on which there is disagreement to proceed at the sole cost of the party that the attorney customarily represents which in the case of the county counsel is the COUNTY and in the case of the city attorney is the CITY. However, the foregoing procedure for joint representation of named party defendants and joint control of litigation notwithstanding, the county counsel shall represent all named party defendants who have been named in the litigation that has been commenced, whenever the city attorney determines in the exercise of his sole discretion that it would be to the best interest of the CITY for the county counsel to represent all the named party defendants in the case. In the event of a representation of all the named party defendants by the county counsel, it is agreed by the COUNTY that the county counsel shall keep the city attorney advised on the status of the case, control the defense of the case in the trial and appellate courts subject to a right of consultation by the city attorney on the decisions that are made, obtain the prior before hiring private attorneys approval of the city attorney and expert witnesses to assist in the defense of the case, and pay for the costs of the defense as incurred; and, it is agreed by the CITY that the city attorney shall assist the county counsel in producing such witnesses and documents under the control of the CITY that may be required in the defense of the case, shall not unreasonably withhold his right of approval over private attorneys and expert witnesses selected by the county counsel, and shall approve all correct invoices submitted by the county counsel for reimbursement by the CITY of the City's proportionate share of the costs of defense that have been paid by the COUNTY. Any claim and lawsuit shall require the joint approval of the COUNTY and the CITY before an agreement for the release of the claim and a dismissal of the lawsuit can be made and entered with the third party tort claimant. In the case of settlements and final judgments each party shall pay its proportionate share of the total amount directly to the third party tort claimant. 8.04 The obligations assumed by the parties in article 8 shall survive the termination of the agreement, whether by expiration of term or otherwise, as to claims arising for personal injury, bodily injury, death or property damage, occurring on or before the date of termination. 8.05 The indemnity provided in 8.01 and 8.02 shall be excess to any other indemnity coverage protecting the parties from third party tort liability arising out of their acts or omissions and dangerous conditions on the BEACH. 8.06 In the event that there is indemnity for the third party tort liability under both paragraphs 8.01 and 8.02, it is agreed that the liability shall be equally shared between the parties with the COUNTY assuming fifty percent of the costs of the judgment, settlement and defense of the claim and lawsuit, and the CITY assuming the other fifty percent. It is further agreed that the control over the claims and lawsuits that are subject to the combined indemnity described in this paragraph shall be handled in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 8.03.01. 8.07 This agreement of indemnity shall supersede any and all other agreements of indemnity between the parties with respect to their liability for the BEACH by reason of their being parties to an agreement as defined in Section 895 of the California Government Code that is still in force and effect on the effective date of this amendment to this agreement. / / IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The CITY of Hermosa BEACH, by action of its CITY Council, has caused this agreement to be duly executed, and the COUNTY of Los Angeles, by order of its Board of Supervisors, has caused this agreement to be executed on its behalf by the Chairman of said Board and attested by the Clerk thereof on the day and year above first written. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH By Mayor ATTEST: KATHY MIDSTOKKE CITY Clerk By CITY Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: JAMES P. LOUGH CITY Attorney COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES By Chairman, Board of Supervisors ATTEST: LARRY J. MONTEILH Executive Officer -Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: DEWITT W. CLINTON COUNTY Counsel By By CITY Attorney DS:yp as2/14 Deputy. To: From: Subject: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF BEACHES AND HARBORS May 21, 1987 Each Supervisor Ted Reed, Director Department of Beaand Harbors HERMOSA BEACH AGREEMENT At your May 19, 1987 Board meeting, I promised to provide information on recommended terms for the new agreement for beach operations at Hermosa Beach. TED REED DIRECTOR ERIC BOURDON ASSISTANT DIRECTOR STAN WISNIEWSKI DEPUTY DIRECTOR County Obligations - Subject to the availability of funding, the County will provide lifeguard and custodial beach maintenance services, minor repairs to public facilities, and all maintenance of lifeguard facilities. City Obligations - The City will be responsible for the pier, major repairs and refurbishment of public facilities, tree trimming, and animal control. The City will establish a capital outlay fund for repair and replacement of public improvements and establish a summer litter patrol, court referral program, and other volunteer efforts to reduce the County's need to provide beach maintenance labor. Indemnification - The City will have liability for the pier, groins, natural conditions, and dangerous conditions of facility improvements. The County will be liable for negligent acts of its employees in providing lifeguard and custodial maintenance services. Revenue - The County currently receives no revenue from Hermosa Beach. The City will reimburse the County for all extraordinary services provided to special events permitted by the City and permit the County to pursue its marketing program. County Cost The City's assumption of responsibility for pier maintenance, major repairs to public facilities, tree trimming, and provision of a summer litter patrol and other services will reduce the County's cost of operating Hermosa Beach. New revenue (j 13837 FIJI WAY, MARINA DEL REY, CALIFORNIA 90292 (213) 823-4571/870-6782 Each Supervisor May 21, 1987 Page 2 generated by special events and the marketing program will further reduce our cost. These efforts will result in an annual decrease in net County cost of approximately $100,000 as detailed in the attachment. In a further effort to assist the County in reducing its beach operating costs, the City suggested that the County pursue State legislation which would add a surcharge on all parking citations issued in the coastal zone. This surcharge would be distributed to local governments for the sole purpose of providing lifeguard and maintenance services at public beaches in the jurisdiction where the citations were issued. Senator Alan Robbins has already agreed to introduce this legislation in January, 1988, and I believe we can expect coastal city support. Although we have no estimate of the impact of this legislation, it could generate significant revenue and greatly reduce the net County cost of beach operations. Our philosophy in ail contract negotiations has been to relieve the County of major liability, to gain approval to pursue our revenue generating programs, and to reduce County cost by any means available to the City. In the case of Hermosa Beach, I'm convinced we have achieved the best agreement possible considering resources available to the City. On May 12, 1987, the City Council approved the terms of the agreement in concept. It appears the City Council will give final approval on May 26, 1987, and I expect to submit the contract to the Board for approval before July 1, 1987. TR:be Attachment cc: Chief Administrative Officer County Counsel DEPARTMENT OF BEACHES AND HARBORS HERMOSA BEACH AGREEMENT PROJECTED COST REDUCTION 1987-88 Projection Current Proposed Expenses Agreement Agreement Current Operation $788,000 $788,000 Less: Pier Maintenance Restroom Repairs Litter Patrol Tree Trimming Total (39,000) (20,000) (10,000) (2,000) $788,000 $717,000 Revenue Current Operation $ -0- $ -0- Plus: Marketing City Events County Events Total 20,000 5,000 5,000 $ -0- $30,000 Net County Cost $788,000 $687,000 DRS:be 5/21/87 May 181987 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of May 26, 1987 • INFORMATIONAL REPORT REGARDING CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN PRIVATE PARKING LOTS RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Instruct staff to return June 9, 1987 with an ordinance amending HBMC, Section 21-23; Drinking on street or playground, in order to regulate drinking in private parking lots and a posting of notice requirement. BACKGROUND: At a regular meeting of City Council, Council directed staff to return on May 26 with a report regarding the consumption of alcoholic beverages in private parking lots. ANALYSIS: Currently, the City of Hermosa Beach does not have a Municipal Code Ordinance regulating open containers or consumption of alcohol on private parking lots. Several cities in the area were contacted to determine what actions have been taken in other cities. The cities of Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach have not addressed enforcement of this issue. The City of Torrance recently enacted ordinances governing open alcohol containers on the posted parking lots immediately adjacent to any establishment licensed to sell alcoholic beverages (attached). They simultaneously enacted legislation which mandates that those establishments must post their parking lots advising the public of the restrictions regarding open containers. Failure to do so would result in a misdemeanor filing procedure against the business (attached). fully ey Steve S. Wlsniewski Director of Public Safety itted, Noted: Aelouji GR GORY Ti NEYEv��]I / CI MANAGER BACKGROUND MATERIAL Council Meeting. March 10, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City Hall Torrance, California - Members of the City Council: SUBJECT: Regulation of Possession of Opened Alcoholic Beverage Container on Posted Premises of Off -Sale Alcoholic Beverage Licensee ABSTRACT Two Ordinances are presented; one which would prohibit possession of an opened bottle, can, or other receptacle containing any alcoholic beverage on a posted parking lot immediately adjacent to any retail package off -sale alcoholic beverage licensed premise and/or on any public sidewalk immediately adjacent to the licensed and posted premises; and a second which would require the above posting of the premises. ,.c BACKGROUND Until recently there was no enabling authority allowing cities to adopt local ordinances regulating possession of open alcoholic beverage containers on private property (parking lots) adjacent to off -sale premises. Since there was no existing State Law regulating this non-public land area, enforcement authority has been non-existent. The California Legislature added Penal Code Section 647e i which enables local agencies to regulate alcohol problems on ' specific private land areas. Penal Code Section 647e deals with: Alcoholic beverages; possession of opened container on premises of or on the sidewalk adjacent to premises of retail package licensee; regulation by local ordinance. Any person violating any provision of such an ordinance shall be guilty of an infraction. Any local ordinance adopted pursuant to this section shall require posting of the premises. The provisions of this section shall not apply to a private residential parking lot which is immediately adjacent to the posted premises. 11A ANALYSIS Uniformed police officers have for some time now been experiencing individuals who, while sitting in private vehicles parked in lots adjacent to off -sale premises, are in possession of open alcoholic beverage containers. Since currently there are no statutes allowing enforcement of such activities, officers cannot effectively deal with drinking in, .or out of, vehicles in off -sale parking lots. RECOMMENDATION The Police Department recommends adoption of both Ordinances. CONCUR: Stanley E. Remelmeyer Cis orney ILA/ Awilitv li r LeRoy kson City Mara • -r ectively su-; ittel, LD E. ••S Chief of Poli ORDINANCE NO. 3187 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TORRANCE ADDING SECTION 45.4.8. TO CHAPTER 5 OF DIVISION 4 OF THE TORRANCE MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATING THE POSSESSION OF AN OPENED ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTAINER ON POSTED PREMISES OF OFF -SALE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSEE The City Council of the City of Torrance does ordain as follows: SECTION 1 That a new Section 45.4.8 is hereby added to the Torrance Municipal Code to read in its entirety as follows: "SECTION 45.4.8 POSSESSION OF OPENED ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTAINER ON POSTED PREMISES OF OFF -SALE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSEE PROHIBITED. It shall be unlawful• for any person to possess any bottle, can or other receptacle containing any alcoholic beverage which has been opened, or a seal broken, or the contents of which have been partially removed, to enter, be, or remain on the posted premises of, including the posted parking lot immediately adjacent to, any retail package off -sale alcoholic beverage licensee licensed pursuant to Division 9 (commencing with Section 23000) of the Business and Professions Code, or on any public sidewalk immediately adjacent to the licensed and posted premises. The provisions of this section shall not apply to a private residential parking lot immediately adjacent to the - posted premises." - SECTION 2 Any provisions of the Torrance Municipal Code, or appendices thereto, or any other ordinances of the City inconsistent herewith to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, are hereby repealed. SECTION 3 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity - of the remaining portions of the ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4 Pursuant to the Penal Code of the State of California any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of an infraction. SECTION 5 This ordinance shall take effect thirty (38) days after the date of its adoption and prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the passage thereof shall be published at least once in the Daily Breeze, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Torrance. Introduced and approved this 10th day of March 1987. Adopted and passed this 17th day of March 1987. . ATTEST: /s/ Donald E. Wilson CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: STANLEY E. REMELMEYER CITY ATTORNEY By Assistant City Attorney' /s/ Katy GPissert Mayor of the City of Torrance aouerzol 30 tL4T3 aq4 ;o =1zat3 uosITM '3 PTEuoa /S/ • auoN : S11331431rI'IIONf 00 : NI'dISSV auoN : S2i38 IZI0NF100 : IN3S3y ' auoN : S?33sI31rPIIONnoo : S3ON • 1.zassTaO Pus gfzTM ' sTIsM ' ° 1s:1sM '430W ' uosTPzsg ' azeL- a Iddv : SZi337nIaI'IIONf10O : S31ITd :a.on Iteo t10z buTMotto3 sq; Sq 1/...86T 'goasW 30 XsP g4LT aq4 uo prat/ buTlaaw zetnSaz a 4e IT3111103 pies ILq passed pus pa}dope pus 'L961 'gozeN 3o XsP 1140T aq4 uo ptaq buTzaaat .zstnba.z s 4e aoue.zzol 30 XI -TO 3o tToun00 X4T0 aq4 Sq panozdds pus paonpoz4uT .Ltnp sem aoueuTp.O buT05az03 aq} 4sq4 4T4z30 .Lgazaq op 'eTuao3Tte3 'aousazol 3o A4T0 aq4 30 =1zat3 X4f3 'tsostTM '3 Ptsuoa 'I ss ( 30N OI 30 XIIO ( S3T35NY SO7 30 XJSNf103 ( YINU03I'IVO 3O =LIS L 8 T £ 'ON 33NVIIQ2i0 'II3Nf103 LLIO 3ON'dulira, r f ORDINANCE NO. 3188 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TORRANCE ADDING SECTION 45.4.9 TO CHAPTER 5 OF DIVISION 4 OF THE TORRANCE MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIRING THE POSTING OF PREMISES LICENSED FOR THE RETAIL OFF -SALE OF PACKAGED ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. The City Council of the City of Torrance does ordain as follows: SECTION 1 That a new Section 45.4.9 is hereby added to the Torrance Municipal Code to read in its entirety as follows: "SECTION 45.4.9 POSTING OF PREMISES LICENSED FOR THE RETAIL OFF -SALE OF PACKAGED ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES Every person owning or operating a business licensed for the retail off -sale of packaged alcoholic beverages pursuant to Division 9 (commencing with Section 23000) of the Business and Professions Code shall post and maintain a sign not less than seventeen (17) inches by twenty-two (22) inches in size with lettering not less than one (1) inch in height visible to the patrons of such business and the adjacent parking lot setting forth the prohibitions contained in Section 45.4.8." SECTION 2 - Any provisions of the Torrance Municipal Code, or appendices thereto, or any other ordinances of the City inconsistent herewith to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, are hereby repealed. SECTION 3 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each section, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4 Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction.thereof,- shall be subject to a fine not exceeding Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) or six (6) months in the County Jail of Los Angeles County, or by both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the Court. SECTION 5 This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of it adoption and prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the passage thereof shall be published at least once in the Daily Breeze, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Torrance. Introduced and approved this 10th day of March 1987. Adopted and passed this 17th day of March 1987. ATTEST: /s/ Donald E. Wilson • CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: STANLEY E. REMELMEYER CITY ATTORNEY By Assistant City Attorney /s/ Katy Geissert Mayor of the City of Torrance i TORRANCE CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. ^128 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss CITY OF TORRANCE I, Donald E. Wilson, City Clerk of the City of Torrance, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly introduced and approved by the City Council of the City of Torrance at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of March, 1987, and adopted and passed by said Council at a regular ❑meeting held on the 17th day of March, 1987, by the following roll :al'_ vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Applegate, Iiardison, Mock, Na'.:ano, Walker, Wirth and Geissert. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None . ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEIEERS: None. D /s/ Donald E. Wilson Clerk of the City of Torrance May 19, 1987 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of the Regular meeting of HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL May 26, 1987 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF PROPOSITION A DISCRETIONARY FUND APPLICATIONS FOR THE "WAVE" DIAL -A -RIDE PROGRAM, THE COMMUTER STUDY, AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW COMMUTER SERVICE. INITIATED BY: HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council take the following jjactions: lg> 1. Approve Resolution No. 87- endorsing an application for FY 87-88 Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Subregional Paratransit Incentive Program for the Hermosa/Redondo Beach joint Dial -A -Ride (see Exhibit A). 2. Approve Resolution No. 87- endorsing an application for FY 87-88 Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Subregional Paratransit and Service Restructuring Incentive Program for a commuter study and new commuter service (see Exhibit B). ABSTRACT The Cities of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach are sponsoring a demand response, curb to curb, Dial -A -Ride Program. Both Cities are eligible for Incentive Funds according to the Los Angeles Transportation Commission Guidelines. Also, the Cities of Hermosa Beach and Rancho Palos Verdes have joined in a cooperative effort to look into improving commuter service to El Segundo/Airport/Aerospace employment centers along the Coastal Corridor. The first phase will involve a study and the second phase will involve implementation of a new commuter service. As a condition of LACTC approval, the City Council must approve both applications. The proposed Resolutions fullfill this requirement. BACKGROUND - On April 23, 1987, Staff submitted applications for Subregional Incentive Funds to the Los Angeles Transportation Commission. On February 2, 1987, the City of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach commenced service of the "WAVE" Dial -A -Ride Program. On October 28, 1986, the City of Hermosa Beach entered into a three year contract with the City of Redondo Beach to operate the "WAVE" Dial -A -Ride Program. On March 17, 1987, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes authorized an application for Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Incentive Program for a commuter bus study and implementation of a commuter service. On March 10, 1987, City Council approved a final Request For Proposal for a transportation study to improve and expand the Hermosa Commuter Service and examine other services in the area. On December 2, 1986, the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council approved contributing funds to the study. ANALYSIS Redondo Beach Staff submitted an application for Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Subregional Paratransit Incentive Program for the joint Dial -A -Ride Program. The Incentive Program provides up to 20% of operating costs for paratransit systems. sponsored by two or more cities. Available Subregional Funds: $104,420 Hermosa Beach Receives: 52,210 (507 of above funds) Hermosa Beach Staff submitted two applications for Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Subregional Paratransit and Service Restructuring Incentive Program. One application is for the commuter study and the other is for a commuter service to be implemented. Because of the regional nature of the study, LACTC has informed Staff that they will fund up to 507 of the total costs of the commuter study with Incentive Funds in addition to dedicated Proposition A allocations. The total proposed cost of the study is $50,000; available Incentive Funds total $25,000. Upon completion of the study, a new commuter service will be implemented. The Incentive Program provides up to 207 of total operating costs for this program because two cities are committed to this program. Proposed operating budget is $325,000; available Incentive Funds total $70,000. - 2 ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 87- 2. Resolution No. 87- 3. Subregional Application for "WAVE" Dial -A -Ride 4. Subregional Application for the commuter study 5. Subregional Application for new commuter service CONCUR: Michael Schubach Planning Director 141144-='— Gre : ryI0r Cit Manager 3 Respectfully submitted, L Lisa Breisacher Planning Aide Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Administrator 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 RESOLUTION NO. 87- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH FOR FY 1987-88 PROPOSITION A DISCRETIONARY FUNDS UNDER THE SUBREGIONAL PARATRANSIT INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR THE "WAVE" DIAL -A -RIDE PROGRAM. WHEREAS the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California held a meeting on this matter and made the following Findings: A. The City of Hermosa Beach receives Proposition A Local Return Funds to operate local transit programs; B. The Cities of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach operate the "WAVE" Dial -A -Ride demand response service for the general public, senior citizens and disabled; C. The Cities of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach have been operating this joint venture Dial -A -Ride since February 2, 1987 and have executed an Agreement to continue service until FY 1989; D. The City of Redondo Beach as the lead agency applied for funds under the Subregional Paratransit Incentive Program equalling 20% of the FY 1987-1988 proposed "WAVE" Dial -A -Ride total operating budget in conformance with the guidelines of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City of Hermosa Beach authorizes the application by the City of Redondo Beach to the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission for FY 87-88 Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Subregional Paratransit Incentive Program for 207 of the FY 1987-88 total proposed budget. 2. The Cities shall restrict the expenditure of subregional Incentive Funds to not more than 20 percent (20%) ,of the FY 1987-88 proposed project's operating budget. "EXHIBIT A" 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. The City shall ' provide resulting shortfall in o operating expenses. 0-9 PASSED, APPROVED, and APPRO ED this rtionately for any enues or overruns in day of May, 1987. PRESIDENT of the City Council and the MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. ATTEST: APPROVED AS ORM: CI Y CLERK NET CITY ATTORNEY "EXHIBIT A" 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 RESOLUTION NO. 87- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SUBREGIONAL PARATRANSIT INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR A COMMUTER STUDY AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW COMMUTER SERVICE. WHEREAS the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California held a meeting on this matter on May 26, 1987 and made the following Findings: A. The City of Hermosa Beach in cooperation with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes desires to improve and expand commuter service along the Coastal Area to the El Segundo/Airport/Aerospace employment centers; B. Both Cities receive Proposition A Local Return funds to conduct the study and implement a new service; C. The City of Hermosa Beach applied for funds under the Subregional Paratransit and Service Restructuring Incentive Program equalling 5O7 of the FY 87-88 total operating budget for the commuter bus study and 20% of the FY 87-88 total operating budget for implementation of the new commuter bus service; D. The application is in conformance with the guidelines of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City Council shall authorize the filing of an application with the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission for FY 1987-88 Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Subregional Paratransit and Service Restructuring Incentive Program. The amount equals fifty percent (5070) of the FY 1987-88 proposed operating budget for the commuter bus study and twenty percent (2070) of the proposed operating budget for a new commuter bus service. 2. The Cities shall restrict the expenditure of the"Incentive Fund to not more than fifty percent (5070) of the operating budget for the new commuter bus service. "EXHIBIT B" • 1 2 3 4 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of May, 1987. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. ATTEST: 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 "EXHIBIT B". Eatitgrnuttb glairr.itt15 DESCRIPTION OF SUBREGIONAL PARATRANSIT SYSTEM A. Name of Applicant: City of Redondo Beach B. Authorized Contact Person Name: Cara Rice Title: Transportation Grants Manager Phone: (213 ) 372-1171 Ext. 453 C. Participating City, Transit Operator, or County: City of Redondo Beach D. Geographical Area of Service: 7.3 sq. miles E. Start-up Date of: Current Services: February 2, 1987 Proposed FY 1987-88 Services: July 1, 1987 F. Type(s) of Service(s) to be Provided in FY 1987-88: 100 % Demand -Responsive % Fixed -Route % User -Side Subsidy G. Service Parameters % Other Describe o Days and Hours of Transportation Services: Seniors, disabled 24 hours, 7 day a week General Public M -F 7 to 7; only o Eligible Riders (check appropriate category(ies)) General Public X Low Income Youth (age limit) Elderly (age limit) Handicapped X X X X . SECTION I Page•2 Other (describe) o Transfer arrangements with contiguous systems (fixed -route and demand -responsive) Sf.RTD, Torrance Transit, & Gardena Municipal Bus Lines are anticipated H. Service Provider o Operated directly by applicant o Service contracted* I. Vehicles Operated Owned Vans Owned Buses (351+) Leased Vans Leased Buses (35'+) 4 door Other (describe) Sedans GRAND TOTAL Check Box(es) Total No. No. w/Lifts 4 2 4 8 2 J. System Description: Briefly describe the type(s) of service (to be) provided including those provided through service contract (add sheets if needed). See page 7 *Transmit a copy of the executed contract to the LACTC. 5 SECTION "I I F . • TABLE 1 - SERVICE AND RIDERSHIP DATA (Subreaional Paratransit) OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS 1. Patronage Unlinked Passenoers Revenue Passengers Elderly Handicapped 2. Vehicle Miles Total Vehicle Miles Total Revenue Vehicles Miles 3. Vehicle Hours Total Vehicle Hours Total Revenue Vehicles Hours 4. Vehicle Occupancy Total No. of Vehicle Trips* No. of Exclusive Rides No. of Group Rides 5. Employees Total No. of Paid Employees Total Drivers 6. Fare Structure Base Zone Transfer (within system) Transfer (to other system) Handicapped Elderly Student Discount (other than E&H) Monthly Pass Other * Vehicle trip is defined as one-way. 02/19/85 Page 3 Audited FY 1985-86 Current FY 1986-87 Proposed FY 1987-88 Planned FY 1988-89 15,000 31,000 31,000 67,000 67,000 70,000 70,000 15,000 20,150 43,550 46,000 0 310 670 700 49,000 95,000 167,000 167,000 49,000 95,000 167,000 167,000 3,600 8.000 14,000 14,000 3,600 8.000 14.000 14,000 Y $1.00 $1.00 .50 .50 .50 .50 .50 .50 .50 .50 .75 .75 • RKM: iml �,�r•I i� SECTION II TABLE 2 - OPERATING EXPENSES (Subregional Paratransit) OPERATING EXPENSES OPERATIONS (If not included in contractor costs) a. Drivers & Dispatch b. Schedules & Psors. Counting c. Driver Supervisors 113. Subtotal MAINTENANCE (If not included in contractor costs) a. Fuel & Oil b. Mechanics & Management c. Materials & Supplies d. -Other 114. Subtotal ADMINISTRATION (If not included in contractor costs) a. General Management b. Lease c. Marketing & Vehicle Prep d. Planning & Coordination 115. Subtotal CONTRACT SERVICES a. Operations b. Maintenance c. Administration d. Other 116. Subtotal 120. Interest Expenses Leases and Rentals a. Vehicles b. Equipment: c. d. Other 121. Subtotal 125. TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 02/19/87 Page 4 Audited FY 1985-86 Current FY 1986-87 Proposed FY 1987-88 Planned FY 1988-89 49,118 49,118 49,118 4,123 7,380 7,380 25,000 15,000 15,000 14,672 14,672 14,672 92,913 86,170 86,170 153,120 375,145 393,902 • 24,882 60,960 64,009 13,398 32,825 34,466 191,400 468,930 492,377 284,313 555,100 578,547 VAR/I SECT I ON I I 1' w' • TABLE 3 - REVENUE SOURCES FOR OPERATING (Subregional Paratransit Services) OPERATING REVENUE SOURCES 142. Passenger Farebox Revenue 143. Special Rider Subsidies 144. Charter Service Revenues 145. Auxiliary Transportation Revenues Local Revenue 147. Proposition A Discr.(formula) 148.. Proposition A Discr.(incent.) 149. Proposition A Local Return 150. General Fund Subsidy 152. Other Hermosa Beach Contribution TDA Revenues 154. Article 4 155. Article 4,5 New Allocations Carryover Investment Income 156. Article 8 159. Other State Funds (specify) ' a. STA b. Federal Revenues 160. UMTA Section•3 Operating 161. UMTA Section 9 Operating 162. UMTA Section 8 Tech. Studies 165. Area Agency on Aging 166. Revenue Sharing 167. Community Dev. Blk. Grant 168. Other Federal Funds a. b. In-kind Contributions (Attach explanation) TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 02/19/87 Page 5 Audited FY 1985-86 Current FY 1986-87 Proposed FY 1987-88 Planned FY 1988-89 10,396 31,000 73,000 76,000 135,554 14,000 Fi ,800 308 000 77,000 105,000 452,000 23,000 110,000 473,000 35,000 64,000 RR ))nn 19,000 32,000 33,000 1,000 1,000 20,000 4,000 0 10,000 10,000 169,950 461,800 779,001 814,Q00 LACTC APPLICATION FOR INCENTIVE FUNDING (EXCLUDING SUBREGIONAL PARATRANSIT GRANTS) Applicant: City of Hermosa Beach 2. Principal Contact Person: Title: 3. Phone Number: Date: April 21, 1987 APP LoDngele sAs County Transportation Commission 403 West Eighth Street Suite 500 Los Angeles California 90014-3096 (213) 626-0370 Lisa Breisacher Planning Aide ( 213) 376-6984, Ext. 243 4. Incentive Project Type Service Restruc.turing" 5. Estimated Duration of Project September, 1987 6. Amount of Incentive Program Funds Requested $25,000' 7. What department will be responsible for monitoring the protect at the local level? City of Hermosa Beach Planning Deparment Cit • 8. List the program goals and objectives. (-use additional pages as necessary). (see attachment) . ..Incentive Project Description (a detailed description must be provided. Please reference the general and specific conditions .previously outlined; attach additional pages as necessary) Cities of Hermosa BEach and Rancho Palos Verdes seek to implement improved, effective commuter transit services along South Bav Corridor from the Palos Verdes area to the El Segundo employment Center. Also, other services will be evaluated to determine if the proposed commuter service could compliment or replace. those services. 10. Budget Breakdown — includes the major cost categories of Operations, Administration, and Maintenance and all funding sources. (complete all applicable lines) Authorizing Signature UMTA/I -16- Existing Service Proposed Service Year 1 - Costs Costs Funding Costs Sources Administration Planning -- Maintenance Other (specify) Operations Total Project Cost - To be determined • Proposition A Fund II 11LocalReturn..Fund 2)Incentive " Funds " w- • $50,000 . ' $25,000 Local Contribution $25,000 Incentive Program , Authorizing Signature UMTA/I -16- Goal and Objectives 1. Schedulings to serve more commuters. 2. Route restructuring and expansion to include more El Segundo firms and the Airport "B" Parking Lot. 3. Fare levels 4. Policy setting rates 5. Insurance coverage levels Hermosa Commuter Bus 1. Restructure and expand the Hermosa Commuter Bus route to serve more firms in the El Segundo employment area. 2. Examine -the feasibility of expanding the Hermosa Commuter Bus east of Pacific Coast Highway to T.R.W., other major employment centers, and the airport parking Lot "B". 3. Restructure the schedule of the Hermosa Commuter Bus to better meet start/end work times of the commuters. 4. Determine in what areas... ridership would be most generated for this commuter service. 5. Develop a marketing program to include: a. Utilize of El Segundo firms - b. Create promotional events c. Revise brochures and posters d. Design_ advertising for the local newspapers emphasizing pictures e. Develop free promotions program f. Develop better ticket sales program g. Develop letter for direct mailing to major employment center employees h. Other marketing techniques as deemed feasible 6. Determine how the Hermosa Commuter Bus could serve all the Peninsula Cities and determine how many commuters would be generated by serving that area. 7. Examine the feasibility of a Park -and -Ride program for the Peninsula Cities and perhaps for other participating cities in conjunction.. with the Hermosa Commuter Bus. 8. Determine the growth capacity of the.. Hermosa Commuter Bus if it were to serve the cities along the South Bay Corridor from the Palos Verdes Peninsula to the E1 Segundo Employment Center. 9. Examine the feasibility of corporate participation and partnership in promoting and operating the system. 10. Determine the possible and likely participation of other cities and what conditions and stipulations other cities might have whether or not to participate. . Commuter Bus Network Prepare a plan of commuter bus routes which: a) could serve as a replacement for the SCRTD lines where discontinued, and/or b) would complement and supplement the existing public bus routes in the area. This assessment should include consideration Hermosa Commuter Bus might assume this role. Implementation Plan • It is the firm intention of both Cities transit service be implemented in completion of this study. For the consultant shall prepare: 1. Estimate of service start-up costs and time. 2. Capital cost requirements. 3. Operating cost over five years and sensitivity to changes in ridership. 4. Estimation of ridership and revenue over five years. 5. Institutional and administrative responsibilities of commuter services to be provided. of how the that some type of this area upon above plans, the Schedule Prepare a detailed schedule showing phasing and coordination of all tasks and responsibilities including any interagency agreement that may need to be executed. Marketing Prepare a marketing program encompassing existing public transit, inter -system advertisements apd promotions, brochures and pamphlets, and a telephone information system. Monitoring Prepare procedures for systematics periodic reporting of costs and ridership and opportunities for service enhancements. DESCRIPTION OF SUBREGIONAL PARATRANSIT SYSTEM A. Name of App l i cant: City of Hermosa Beach B. Authorized Contact Person Name: Title: Lisa Breisacher Planning Aide Phone:(213)376-6984, Ext. 243 C. Participating City, Transit Operator, or County: peninsula Cit;Ps Interest from the following Cities: Redondo Beach, El Segundo, Manhattar Beach, Lawndale and the El Segundo Employee's Association D. Geographical Area of Service:_ _7 mi1Ps From the Palos Verdes area to the Airport Parking Lot "B" • E. Start-up Date of: Current Services: Proposed FY 1987-88 Services: ongoing September 1987 F. Type(s) of Service(s) to be Provided in FY 1987-88: - % Demand -Responsive X p Fixed -Route (commuter service) % User -Side Subsidy % Other Describe G. Service Parameters o Days and Hours of Transportation Services: Monday through Friday Peak Periods: early morning, noon, & late afternoon o Eligible Riders (check appropriate category(ies)) General Public X Low Income Youth (age limit) Elderly (age limit) Handicapped • . SECTION Page 2 Other (describe)Ser�eye� commuter._p�sGpngprG to and from the El Segundo Employment Center o Transfer arrangements with contiguous systems (fixed -route and demand -responsive) RTD lines in the arpa and Torrance Lines in the area H. Service Provider Check Box(es) - o Operated directly by applicant Q o Service contracted* �--r 1. Vehicles Operated Owned Vans Owned Buses (35'+) Leased Vans Leased Buses (35'+) Other (describe) GRAND TOTAL Total No. No. w/Lifts 8 8 J. System Description: Briefly describe the type(s) of service (to be) provided including those provided through service contract (add sheets if needed).. Commuter service from the Palos Verde .. _ . .. Lot "B". The service is designed transport- rnmm„tprp to the El Segundo Employment Center and the air_pnrt_ *Transmit a copy of the executed contract to the LACTC. SECTION II Page 3 TABLE 1 - SERVICE AND RIDERSHIP DATA (Subreaional Paratransit) OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS 1. Patronage Unlinked Passenaers Revenue Passengers Elderly Handicapped 2. Vehicle Miles Total Vehicle Miles Total Revenue Vehicles Miles 3. Vehicle Hous Total Vehicle Hours Total Revenue Vehicles Hours 4. Vehicle Occupancy Total No. of Vehicle Trips* No. of Exclusive Rides No. of Group Rides 5. Employees Total No. of Paid Employees Total Drivers 6. Fare Structure Base Zone Transfer (within system) Transfer (to other system) Handicapped Elderly Student Discount (other than E&H) Monthly Pass Other * Vehicle trip is defined as one-way. 02/19/86 Audited FY 1985-86 Current FY 1986-87 Proposed FY 1987-88 Planned FY 1988-89 to be determined pending tie of the stldy result 9,071 same 5,378 " same - _ n/a n/a - - n/a n/a - - .30,500 30.900 - - 23.550 23 50D - - 2,289, 1,635 - - 2,616 2,616 - - n/a _ n/a - - n/a n/a - - • 9 8 - - 8 7 - - • .50 .50 - - n/a n/a - - n/a n/a - - n/a n/a - - - n/a n/a - - n/a n/a - - n/a n/a - - n/a n/a - - • ,.11/a n/a - - RKM:1ml SECTION II TABLE 2 - OPERATING EXPENSES (Subreaional Paratransit) OPERATING EXPENSES OPERATIONS (If not included in contractor costs) a. Drivers & Dispatch b. Schedules & Psqrs. Counting c. Driver Supervisors 113. Subtotal MAINTENANCE (If not included in contractor costs) a. Fuel & Oil b. Mechanics & Management c. Materials & Supplies d. Other 114. Subtotal ADMINISTRATION (If not included in contractor costs) a. General Management b. Accounting Services- .- c. Marketing . d. Planning & Coordination 115. Subtotal CONTRACT SERVICES a. Operations b. Maintenance c. Administration d. Other 116. Subtotal 120. Interest Expenses Leases and Rentals a. Vehicles b. Equipment: c. Mix of uAns and d. Other uanp0015 121. Subtotal 125. TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 02/19/87 Page 4 Audited FY 1985-86 Current FY 1986-87 Proposed FY 1987-88 Planned FY 1988-89 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 123,107 143.235 350,000 400,000 1R,4S6 21,4Pc 52,500 _ 60,000• 141,573 164;720 402.,5o° 460,000 141,573 164,720 .1-402-)500 460,000 /j VAR/I SECTION II tt C Page 5 TABLE 3 - REVENUE SOURCES FOR OPERATING (Subregional Paratransit Services) OPERATING REVENUE SOURCES 142. Passenger Farebox Revenue 143. Special Rider Subsidies 144. Charter Service Revenues 145. Auxiliary Transportation Revenues Local Revenue 147. Proposition A Discr.(formula) 148. Proposition. A Discr.(incent.) 149. Proposition A Local Return 150. General Fund Subsidy 152. Other TDA, Revenues 154. Article 4 155. Article 4.5 New Allocations Carryover Investment Income 156. Article 8 159. Other State Funds (specify) a. b. Federal Revenues 160. UMTA Section 3 Operating 161. UMTA Section 9 Operating 162. UMTA Section 8 Tech. Studies 165. Area Agency on Aging 166. Revenue Sharing 167. Community Dev. Blk. Grant 168. Other Federal Funds a. b. In-kind Contributions (Attach explanation) TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 02/19/87 Audited FY 1985-86 Current FY 1986-87 Proposed FY 1987-88 Planned FY 1988-89 4,532.00 3,680.50 - - n/a n/a - - n/a n/a - - n/a n/a - • -• . *Please note- up2to -. _- 15, /50Q 70,000 80,000 115,284 125,823 l�n,nnn RRn,nQn n/a n/a n/a n/a ,119,816 145253 4nn np.11 .4tin.nnn — /2— 4 c c SECTION III Page 6 DESCRIPTION OF ORGANIZATION A. Goals and Objectives The goals of the Hermosa Beach Commuter Bus Program are to improve access to the El Segundo Employment Center and Airport Parking Lot "B", and decrease traffic congestion during the peak commuter hours in the South Bay Corridor particularly along Pacific Coast Highway. Program goals and objectives for FY 1987-88 are: 1. Offer an attractive, quality commuter service to residents in the South Bay Corridor. 2. Increase ridership through marketing strategies and route reschedulings. 3. Restructure and expand the Hermosa Commuter Bus to serve more firms in the El Segundo employment center including firms located east of Pacific Coast Highway. 4. Improve cost effectiveness. 5. Determine the potential participation of other cities located along the South Bay Corridor from the Palos- Verdes area to the airport area. 6. Examine the feasibility of utilizing corporate participation and partnership in promoting and operating the system. B. Setting Currently, the Hermosa Commuter Bus transports residents of Hermosa Beach to the El Segundo Employment Center. It is proposed that the new program incorporate participation from other cities in the South Bay Corridor to better relieve traffic congestion along Pacific Coast Highway and develop a more regional service. Pacific Coast Highway is a commuter corridor between the Palos Verdes Peninsula and El Segundo, encompassing approximately a 20 -mile stretch. The direction of traffic congestion is generally northbound in the morning and southbound in the afternoon. Cities impacted by this traffic congestion are: The Peninsula Cities, Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, El Segundo, Torrance, and Lawndale. C. Identification of Need A substantial number of residents from the cities mentioned above are employed in the El Segundo Employment Center. All of these cities are impacted by commuter traffic along Pacific Coast Highway. The City of El Segundo has enacted a transportation systems management ordinance which compels employers in the El Segundo Employment Center to encourage employees to use transit and to minimize trip generation from their facilities. Survey responses from riders indicate that the Hermosa Commuter Bus is preferred over RTD and automobiles because it is convenient and more amenable than other available systems. D. Coordination and Consolidation 'The Cities of Hermosa Beach and Rancho Palos Verdes have joined in a cooperative effort to look into improving the commuter service to the El Segundo Employment Center. A consultant will be hired to evaluate what improvements can be made to the service and how other services in the area could compliment the commuter service, particularly through transfer agreements. Cities impacted by traffic congestion been approached to participate in the study is completed, these cities will approached to participate in whatever determined feasible in the area. - in this area have study. When the again be service is E. Administration Currently, the City of Hermosa Beach is the lead agency in the administration of the program. As the program expands, participating cities will be ask to help in the administration of the program because the City of Hermosa Beach has an insufficient amount of staff members to administer the program entirely. However, the City of Hermosa Beach will remain the lead agency in the administration of the new program. The City of Hermosa Beach contracts with a transit operator for transportation services. It is the contractor's responsibility to provide the vehicles, drivers, maintenance, and other operating functions. F. Marketing Program The system will be marketed through major employers in El Segundo. These firms have a powerful incentive'to promote a commuter service in the area because they are subject to El Segundo's Systems Mangement Ordinance. �/9 - The following marketing strategies will be evaluated by the consultant: 1. Utilize the El Segundo firms to promote the program. 2. Create promotional events. 3. Revise brochures and posters. 4. Design advertising for the local newspapers emphasizing pictures. 5. Develop free promotions. 6. Develop better ticket sales program. 7. Develop letter for direct mailing to major employment center employees. G. Service Delivery The existing Hermosa Commuter Bus is a specialized fixed -route with an established schedule. Residents and non-residents are eligible to ride the service. The -expanded and improved will have the same characteristics and requirements. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 87- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH FOR FY 1987-88 PROPOSITION A DISCRETIONARY FUNDS UNDER THE SUBREGIONAL PARATRANSIT INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR THE "WAVE" DIAL -A -RIDE PROGRAM. WHEREAS the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California held a meeting on this matter and made the following Findings: A. The City of Hermosa Beach receives Proposition A Local Return Funds to operate local transit programs; B. The Cities of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach operate the "WAVE" Dial -A -Ride demand response service for the general public, senior citizens and disabled; C. The Cities of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach have been operating this joint venture Dial -A -Ride since February 2, 1987 and have executed an Agreement to continue service until FY 1989; D. The City of Redondo Beach as the lead agency applied for funds under the Subregional Paratransit Incentive Program equalling 20% of the FY 1987-1988 proposed "WAVE" Dial -A -Ride total operating budget in conformance with the guidelines of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City of Hermosa Beach authorizes the application by the City of Redondo Beach to the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission for FY 87-88 Proposition A Discretionary Funds under the Subregional Paratransit Incentive Program for 207 of the FY 1987-88 total proposed budget. _ 2. The Cities shall restrict the expenditure of subregional Incentive Funds to not more than 20 percent (20%) of the FY 1987-88 proposed project's operating budget. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION "EXHIBIT A" 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 3. The City shall provide funds proportionately for any resulting shortfall in operating revenues or overruns in operating expenses subject to City Council approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and APPROVED this day of May, 1987. PRESIDENT of the City Council and the MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY "EXHIBIT A" May 18, 1987 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of Regular Meeting of the HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL May 26, 1987 ENCROACHMENT ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION UPDATE Recommendation It is recommended that City Council: we 1. Introduce Ordinance No. 87- , An ordinance of the City of Hermosa Beach, California amending Ordinance No. 85-821; as amended, identifying the approval process of commercial encroachment permit applications. yl 2. Adopt Resolution No. 87- , A resolution of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, amending Resolution No. 85-4885; as amended to establish additional policies for encroachments on City right-of-way and amend Resolution No. 86-4932; as amended, changing the requirement for residential encroachments permit liability insurance and approving changes to the City of Hermosa Beach Encroachment Permit Endorsement. Background From August 13, 1985 through February 14, 1986, members of City Council and City staff prepared a policy regulating the placement of encroachments in the public right-of-way. Since the effective date of the Encroachment Ordinance on February 14, 1986, 21 residential encroachment permit applications and 3 commercial encroachment permit applications were processed. During review and after approval of these applications, staff became aware that some encroachment guidelines are difficult to interpret. These will be discussed in more detail in the analysis. The purpose of this report is to "clean up" the City's policies governing encroachments within the public right-of-way. Proposed revisions addressing areas of concern are: Concern 1. Concern 2. Concern 3. Concern 4. Streamlining Commercial Encroachment Permit application process. Policy for existing encroachments. Required amount of liability insurance for Residential Encroachment Permits. Update City of Hermosa Beach Encroachment Permit Endorsement. 1 2b. Analysis The following ordinance, resolutions and encroachment permit agreements are attached as reference material: 1. Resolution No. 85-4885 2. Ordinance No. 85-821 - pages 1 through 5 and page 16. There are no recommended amendments to pages 6 through 16. 3. Resolution No. 86-4932 - including: a. Residential Encroachment Permit Agreement, pages 3 and 4. There are no recommended changes to pages 1 and 2. CONCERN NO. 1 ORDINANCE 85-821 Ordinance 85-821 regulates the placement of encroachments within the public right-of-way. CONCERN: Staff is desirous of streamlining the Commercial Encroachment permit process. EXISTING WORDING: "Section 29.36. Commercial Encroachments. Approvals of all commercial encroachments shall be done under the Conditional Use Permit process and the rules and guidelines are set forth herein." DISCUSSION: The above statement does not clearly identify the process by which Commercial Encroachment Permit Applications shall be reviewed and approved. PROPOSED CHANGE: Recommended wording for the amendment to Ordinance 85-821 is as follows: Section 29.36. Commercial Encroachments. Approvals of all commercial encroachments shall be done in conjunction with the Conditional Use Permit process, shall be reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee and the rules and guidelines are set forth herein. 2 CONCERN NO. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 85-4885 Resolution No. 85-4885 establishes a policy for encroachments on to City right-of-way. CONCERN: No policy exists for improvements to existing encroachments when the adjacent structure is not remodeled or removed. EXISTING WORDING: The wording in Resolution No. 85-4885 states: SECTION 2. All existing encroachments shall become null and void if or when the building adjacent to the encroachment on private property is removed. SECTION 3. No building permit shall be issued for new construction or for remodeling of an existing structure exceeding 50% of the existing structure's square feet or 50% of the assessed valuation, whichever is less, until: a. The adjacent City right-of-way is determined to be in conformance with City standards. b. An encroachment permit has been approved. DISCUSSION: Several applicants wanted to improve just the existing encroachment, and the policy was not clearly defined to address this type of request. PROPOSED CHANGE: The recommended wording for the amendment to Resolution 85-4885 is as follows: Section 4. All existing encroachments on the public right-of-way shall become null and void if or when existing encroachments on the public right-of-way are removed, improved and/or remodeled. Section 5. No encroachment permit shall be issued for new construction or remodeling of an existing encroachment until: a. The adjacent City right-of-way is determined to be in conformance with City code. b. An encroachment permit has been approved. 3 CONCERN NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 86-4932 Resolution No. 86-4932 approved the Commercial Encroachment Permit Agreement (Exhibit A) and Residential Encroachment Permit Agreement (Exhibit B). Attached to both exhibits is the City of Hermosa Beach Encroachment Endorsement. CONCERN: Owners desiring a Residential Encroachment Permit have not been successful in securing the required $1,000,000 liability insurance naming the City as an additional insured. EXISTING WORDING: Existing wording calls for the amount of liability insurance to be $1,000,000 and name the City as an additional insured. DISCUSSION: The insurance industry recently made policy changes disallowing the practice of insuring homeowners for $1,000,000 naming another entity as an additional insured. However, the industry does allow liability coverage in the amount of $500,000 naming another entity named as an additional insured. PROPOSED CHANGE: Recommended wording follows: SECTION 4. The OWNER further agrees to insure the CITY against all risks of loss by reason of construction or maintenance of the encroachment by (1) naming the CITY as an additional insured on the OWNER'S public liability and property damage insurance policy carrying a combined single limit coverage of $500,000 against any injury, death or loss arising out of the encroachment, (2) filing the "City of Hermosa Beach Encroachment Permit Endorsement" duly executed by the OWNER'S insurance carrier, and (3) further agreeing that failure to maintain such insurance policy shall be grounds for cancellation of this permit. 4 1 CONCERN NO. 4 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ENCROACHMENT ENDORSEMENT CONCERN: The Encroachment Endorsement is used for both Residential and Commercial encroachments. Wording in the current Encroachment Endorsement needs updating. EXISTING WORDING: Item #4 and #5 read as follows: 4. Provide limits of liability of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage against any injury, death, loss or damage arising out of the encroachment. 5. Limited classifications, restricting endorsements, exclusions or other special provisions contained in the policy shall not act to limit the benefits of coverage as they shall apply to the City of Hermosa Beach as enumerated in this endorsement. However, nothing herein contained shall affect any right of the insurer against the insured. DISCUSSION: Wording of Item #4 in the Residential Encroachment Permit Agreement and City of Hermosa Beach Encroachment Permit Endorsement will need to be consistent. Item #5 can no longer be required by the City. PROPOSED CHANGE: It is recommended that one endorsement form be created for both Commercial and Residential Encroachment Permits. The recommended wording for Item #4 is as follows. 4. Provide the designated limits of liability combined single limit coverage against any injury, death, loss or damage arising out of the encroachment as follows: [ ] Residential [ ] Commercial $ 500,000 $1,000,000 It is recommended that Item #5 be removed from the Encroachment Permit Endorsement. 5 Alternatives Other alternatives considered by staff and available to City Council are: 1. Receive and file this report. 2. Make changes to the recommended wording. 3. Direct staff to return with additional information. Respectfully submitted Lys Stevens Administrative Aide -P1-- Gre ory T. Meyer Cit Manager COQ R: Ant- ony Antich Director of�u,blic Works 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 ORDINANCE NO. 87 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 85-821; AS AMENDED, IDENTIFYING THE APPROVAL PROCESS OF COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATIONS. WHEREAS, it is recommended that wording in Ordinance 85-821 be amended in an effort to clearly identify the Commercial Encroachment Permit Application process, WHEREAS, Ordinance 85-821, Section 29.36, "Commercial Encroachments." currently reads: Approvals of all commercial encroachments shall be done under the Conditional Use Permit process and the rules and guidelines are set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California does here by ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Section 29.36 Commercial Encroachments shall be amended to read as follows: Approval's of all commercial encroachments shall be done in conjunction with the Conditional Use Permit process, shall be reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee and the rules and guidelines are set forth herein. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance amending Ordinance 85-821 shall become effective and be in full force and operation from and after thirty days after its final passage and adoption. SECTION 3. PUBLICATION. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach. SECTION . CERTIFICATION. The City Clerk shall certify to 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 the passage and adoption of this ordinance; shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said City; shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 1987. PRESIDENT of the City Council, and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED AS IRM: 44. 40 2 Y ATTOEY 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 s&l RESOLUTION NO. 87- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 85-4885; AS AMENDED TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL POLICIES FOR ENCROACHMENTS ON CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY AND AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 86-4932; AS AMENDED, CHANGING THE REQUIREMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL ENCROACHMENTS PERMIT LIABILITY INSURANCE AND APPROVING CHANGES TO THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT ENDORSEMENT. WHEREAS, currently no requirements or guidelines exist for improvements to existing encroachments when the adjacent structure is not remodeled or removed, WHEREAS, residents of Hermosa Beach desiring a Residential Encroachment Permit have not been successful in securing the required $1,000,000 liability insurance naming the City as an additional insured, WHEREAS, wording in the current Encroachment Endorsement needs to be updated and deleted. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1. Amendment to Resolution No. 85-4885 shall read as. follows: "Section 4. All existing encroachments on the public right-of-way shall become null and void if or when existing encroachments on the public right-of-way are removed, improved and/or remodeled." "Section 5. No encroachment permit shall be issued for new construction or remodeling of an existing encroachment until: a. The adjacent City right-of-way is determined to be in conformance with City code. b. An encroachment permit has been approved." 1 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 SECTION 2. Section 4., of Exhibit B (Residential Encroachment Permit Agreement) of Resolution No. 86-4932 shall be amended to read as follows: "The OWNER further agrees to insure the CITY against all risks of loss by reason of•construction or maintenance of the encroachment by (1) naming the CITY as an additional insured on the OWNER'S public liability and property damage insurance policy carrying a combined single limit coverage of $500,000 against any injury, death or loss arising out of the encroachment, (2) filing the "City of Hermosa Beach Encroachment Permit Endorsement" duly executed by the OWNER'S insurance carrier, and (3) further agreeing that failure to maintain such insurance policy shall be grounds for cancellation of this permit." SECTION 3. Item #4 of the City of Hermosa Beach Encroachment Permit Endorsement shall read shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. SECTION 4. Item #5 of the City of Hermosa Beach Encroachment Permit Endorsement shall be deleted. SECTION 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1987. PRESIDENT of the City Council, and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED A TO FORM Y 2 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT ENDORSEMENT To be attached to and made a part of all policies insuring the liability of any person, firm, or corporation subject to regulations by the City Council because of the existence of an encroachment. Notwithstanding any inconsistent expression in the policy to which this endorsement is attached, or in any other endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, or made a part thereof, the protection afforded by said policy shall: 1. Include the City of Hermosa Beach as an additional insured. (To include the elected officials, appointed officials and employees). For the risks covered by this endorsement, this insurance will provide primary insurance to the City to the exclusion of any other insurance or self-insurance program the City may carry with respect to claims and injuries arising out of activities of the insured hereunder. 2. Indemnify and save harmless the City of Hermosa Beach against any and all claims which result from the existence of any encroachment existing as the result of the Named Insured's operations or activities. This hold harmless assumption on the part of the underwriters shall include all costs of investigation and defense. 3. Not be cancelled except by notice to the City Attorney of the City of Hermosa Beach at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of sudh cancellation. 4. Provide the designated limits of liability combined single limit coverage against any injury, death, loss or damage arising out of the encroachment as follows: [ ] Residential [ ] Commercial $ 500,000 $1,000,000 The limits of liability as stated above apply to the insurance afforded by this endorsement notwithstanding that the policy may have lower limits of liability applying elsewhere in the policy. Attached to and forming part of Policy No. of the Date: Expiration Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Duly Authorized Agent Agency: Name/Address/Phone CITY ATTORNEY 1 May 18, 1987 0 BACKGROUND MATERIAL 1. Ordinance No. 85-821, pages 1 through 5 and page 16. There are no recommended amendments to pages 6 through 16. 2. Resolution No. 85-4885. 3. Resolution No. 86-4932, including pages 3 and 4 of the Residential Encroachment Permit Agreement. There are no recommended amendments to pages 1 and 2. 4. Letter dated 4-29-87 from Edna McDonald, Insurance Agent and Claims Manager, Palos Verdes Insurance Agency. 5. Letter dated 4-29-87 from Stan Kingsberg, General Agent, Allstate Insurance Co. 1 'ON 30NVNIUI0 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 ORDINANCE NO. 85-821 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA REGULATING THE PLACEMENT OF ENCROACHMENTS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ESTABLISHING ARTICLE V ENTITLED "ENCROACHMENTS".. WHEREAS, encroachments are features normally located upon public right of way that serves a quasi private use and are not normally intended for public use. A public sidewalk would not be defined as an encroachment as it relates to this chapter whereas a deck used primarily by the adjacent property owner would' be defined as an encroachment. WHEREAS, an encroachment means and includes any obstruction, tower, pole, pole line, pipe, wire, cable, conduit, wall, fence, balcony, deck, stand or building, or any structure or object of any kind or character which is placed in, along, under, over or across public right-of-way. . WHEREAS, the City Council finds that a number of encroach- ments have ,been granted to residents which allow encroachment onto the public right-of-way. . WHEREAS, there currently exists no established procedure or policy on the issuance of encroachment permits. WHEREAS, the intent of establishing and dinance regarding encroachment will: 1. Provide an equal basis for denying such encroachments. adopting an or - evaluating, approving or 2. Provide for a periodic review to insure that the en- croachment continues to comply with the original approval. d 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. Establish guidelines for the installation and main- enance of an encroachment. 4. Reduce the City's potential liability. 5. Implements the General Plan of the City. WHEREAS, the General Plan approved by the Hermosa Beach City : ouncil in October 1979, contains an Open Space and Conservation., lement whose philosophy is to preserve and enhance theexisting reen areas. WHEREAS, the Open Space and Conservation Element notes: 'Streets comprise nearly one third of the City's area, and con- idering the small size of private lots and minimal yards, these treets provide much of the. 'elbow room' within the community. or this reason, these streets should not only be preserved but eveloped for maximum impact as green areas of landscaped ribbons hroughout the City." WHEREAS.. a goal of the Open Space and Conservation Element . To obtain, preserve and enhance green areas, such as street andscape strips and parkways as being necessary to the health nd well being of the community. . To provide room for, and adequate protection of, bikeways, edestrian routes and trails. . To provide for the retention and further beautification of treets as open spaces, and to encourage further use of same as edestrian walkways, malls and plazas. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA EACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: . - 2 - '0N 33NVNIGU0 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 SECTION 1. That Article V be added to Chapter 29 of the ermosa Beach City Code, Streets and Sidewalks as follows: ARTICLE V. ENCROACHMENTS Section 29.31. Definitions. 'Enroachments" are features normally located upon public right- of-way that serves a quasi private use and are not normally in- tended for public use. A public sidewalk would not be defined,as an encroachment as it relates to this chapter , whereas, a deck sed primarily by the adjacent property owner would be defined as an encroachment. "Encroachment" means and includes any obstruc- tion, tower, pole, pole line, pipe, wire, cable, conduit, wall, fence, balcony, deck, stand or building, or any structure or ob- ject of any kind or character which•is placed in, along, under, . over or across public right-of-way. "Pedestrian Walk Street" as defined by Council under a sepa- rate resolution. "Person" includes any individual, firm, co -partnership, joint venture, association, corporation, estate, trust, business trust, any district, any city, any county including this county, and all departments and bureaus thereof except the City of Hermo- sa Beach. "Shall and May". "Shall" is mandatory; "May" is permissive. "Structure" is as defined by the Unifotm Building Code as that which is built or constructed, an edifice•or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. 1 •ection 29.32. Permit. 2 Every person is required to obtain a permit from the Depart - 3 ent of Public Works Works before making or causing to be made 4 ny encroachment in the public right-of-way. 5 .ection 29.33. Commencement of work without permit. Permit 6 equired. Any person who shall commence any work, 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 for which a permit s required by the chapter, without first having obtained a per - it shall stop work and apply for such permit. The fee for the ermit shall be doubled. In addition, failure to stop con- titutes a misdemeanor and is defined in this Chapter. ection 29.34. Authority to grant. A permit to encroach into a planned or existing public right f way may be granted upon such terms and conditions as. are eemed necessary. The authority to grant or deny such permit pplication 3s vested in the Director of Public Works, unless therwise specified. Approval of encroachments which deviate from he established guidelines can only be granted with City Council pproval in an appeal process. ection 29.35. Residential Encroachments. Approvals of all residential encroachments is vested with he Director of Public Works and the rules and guidelines are set orth herein. ection 29.36. Commercial Encroachments. Approvals of all commercial encroachmepts shall be done nder the Conditional Use Permit process and the rules and guide- ines are set forth herein. ection 29.37. Findings necessary to grant an encroachment. • I38-58 '0N 30NVNI0b0 1 2 3 4 5 s 7 The Director of Public Works, in granting approval of an encroachment permit application, shall make a finding that in the evidence presented, all four (4) of the following conditions ex- ist in reference to the property being considered. Approval of encroachments which deviate from these established criteria can only be granted with City Council approval in an appeal process. (1) Because of special circumstances applicable to the sub - 8 ject property. including size, shape, topography, location, or g surroundings, the strict application of the provisions of this 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 :hapter would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed Dy other properties in the vicinity and identical zone =lassification; (2) Any encroachment granted shall be subject to such condi- :ions and shall not constitute a grant of special privileges in- :onsistent with the limitations placed upon other properties in :he vicinity and identical zone classification in which the sub- ject property is located; (3) The granting of the encroachment will not be materially letrimental to the public health, safety, convenience. and wel- fare or injurious to property and improvements in the vicinity and identical zone classifications in which the subject property is located; and i (4) The granting of such encroachment will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. Section 29.38. Guidelines and Conditions for Approval. These guidelines shall apply both to continuing and tem- porary encroachments; there being no permanent encroachments permitted. '0N NOILF10S3b 1 2 3 4 5 r 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 85-4885 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH. CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR ENCROACHMENTS ON TO CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHEREAS, encroachments are features normally located upon public right-of-way that serves a quasi private use and are not normally intended for public use. A public sidewalk would not be defined as an encroachment, whereas, a deck used primarily by the adjacent property owner would be defined as an encroachment. WHEREAS, the City finds that a number of encroachment per- mits have been granted for encroachment on to the public right- of-way. WHEREAS, there currently exists no established procedure or policy on the issuance or compliance of guidelines regulating encroachment permits. NOW, THEREFORE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFOR- NIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: SECTION 1. Existing encroachments onto the public right-of- way shall not be required to comply with new guidelines unless so directed by City Council. SECTION 2. All existing encroachments shall become null and void if or when the building adjacent to the encroachment on pri- vate property is removed. SECTION 3. No building permit shall be issued for new con- struction, or for remodeling of an existing structure exceeding - 1 - 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 07 of the existing structure's square feet or 507 of the asses - ed valueation, whichever is less, until: a. The adjacent City right-of-way is determined to be in conformance with City standards. b. An encroachment permit has been approved. SECTION 4. This resolution shall take effect immediately. PASSED, APPROVED PRESIDENT of the City Council, and MAYOR of the City of Her - moxa Beach, California.. -. 1985. ADOPTED this 16th day of December TTEST:` zLGZ,/LL' 7 CITY CLERK PPROVED AS • ORM: CITY ATTORNEY '0N NOIlfl1OS321 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 RESOLUTION NO. 86-4932 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AGREEMENT (EXHIBIT A) AND THE RESIDENTIAL ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AGREEMENT (EXHIBIT B). WHEREAS, on January 14, 1986 City Council approved Ordinance 86-821 Establishing Article V, Chapter 29 of the Hermosa Beach City Code, Streets and Sidewalks - regulating the placement of encroachments -within public right -o WHEREAS, "Section 29.40(f) - f -way. Mandatory conditions imposed upon all encroachments" requires that an encroachment permit agreement be recorded by the City in the office of the County Recorder. WHEREAS, after due consideration it is the finding of the City Council that the attached Encroachment Permit Agreements (Exhibit A and Exhibit B) are necessary to assure due protection of the public right-of-way for present and future citizens of the city. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The attached Commercial Encroachment Permit Agreement (Exhibit A) shall constitute the regulation for the implementation of encroachments onto public right-of-way for the purpose of commercial uses. SECTION 2. The attached Residential Encroachment Permit Agreement (Exhibit B) shall constitute the regulations for the implementation of.encroachments onto public right-of-way for the purposes of residential quasi -private uses. SECTION 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to.the passage - 1 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 1 15 ld 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 and adoption of this resolution; shall make an entry of the pas- sage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 13day of May , 1986. PRESIDENT of the City Council, and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. APPROVED A �.. (l •1^., ,ems 1 FORM: rr"�I %CITY ATTORNEY - 2 - RESIDENTIAL ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AGREEMENT e. This permit is issued to the OWNER only as legal owner of the real property hereinabove described in SECTION 1 of this agreement, which is the herein described contiguous parcel. f. OWNER shall perform all work in accordance with CITY policy, standard specifications, and ordinances. g• OWNER recognizes and understands that this permit may create a possessory interest subject to property taxation and, fur- ther, -OWNER agrees to make payment of any property taxes levied on such interest. h. OWNER shall be responsible for and maintain said encroach- ment including all associated costs. i. OWNER recognizes and understands that this permit is revok- able upon demolition of the property. Residential Properties: Upon sale of the above parcel, this encroachment permit shall not succeed to the new owner ex- cept upon review by the CITY and reissuance to the new owner upon said new owner's application. The Residential Building Report prepared on the property will indicate that an en- croachment permit is in force and instruct the OWNER to take steps to have the new owner apply for an encroachment permit or it must be abated within fifteen (15) days. In the event that the new owner does not apply for an encroachment permit for the continued use of the hereindescribed land as condi- tioned by this permit, the undersigned OWNER shall restore the land described herein within fifteen (15) days of recor- dation of the sale. j• SECTION 4. The OWNER further agrees to insure the CITY against all risks of loss by reason of construction or main- tenance of the encroachment by (1) naming the CITY as an addi- tional insured on the OWNER's public liability and,property damage insurance policy carrying a combined single limit coverage - 3 - EXHIBIT B of $1,000,000 against any injury, death or loss arising out of the encroachment, (2) filing the "City of Hermosa Beach Encroach- ment Endorsement" duly executed by the OWNER's insurance carrier,, and (3) further agreeing that failure to maintain such insurance policy shall be grounds for cancellation of this permit. SECTION 5. This agreement shall be recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Los Angeles County, State of California. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Owner MAYOR Owner ATTEST: - APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK (SEAL) STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) On this the day of CITY ATTORNEY ,19 , before me, , the undersigned Notary Public per- sonally appeared personally known to me to be the Mayor,of the City of Hermosa Beach and known to me to be the person who executed within instrument on behalf of the City of Hermosa Beach and acknowledged to me that such City of Hermosa Beach executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary's Signature (SEAL) STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) On this the day of , 19 ,before me, , the un ersigned Notary Public personally appeared [ ] personally known to me [ ] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) scribed to the witnin instrument and acknowledged that executed it. sub - WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary's Signature - 4 - (SEAL) EXHIBIT B C. Palos Verdes Insurance Agency City Hall of Hermosa Beach Public Works Dept. ATT: LYNN STEVENS 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach,.,CA. 90254 Dear Lynn, As per our telecon on adding the city as an the matter additional I have only one company that is Safeco Insurance Company. them for $500,000. liability letter issued to all writing confirm this. April 29, 1987 APRu prn tvon 198? ks Dell: of insurance companies insured. will add the city and this However they will only add . Attached is a copy of a agents for Safeco that will I write coverage with about five other companies and they will not add the city at all. My insured's just can't buy this coverage in todays market. If I can be of any help on any other matters please let me know. Insurance agent & Claims manager 314 VISTA DEL MAR • BOX 636 • REDONDO BEACH, CALIF. 90277 • 373-0505 SAFECO SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANIES PACIFIC SOUTHWEST REGION 17570 BROOKHURST STREET FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CA 92708 RECEIVED FEB 2 1 198? TELEPHONE (714) 963-0900 MAILING ADDRESS P.O. BOX C-25150 SANTA ANA. CA 92799-5150 February 1987 TO: ALL CALIFORNIA AND NEVADA PERSONAL LINES MANUAL HOLDERS HIGH LIABILITY LIMITS Extremely high jury awards, as well as the cost and availability of reinsurance hamper our ability to produce acceptable results at the higher limits of liability. Last year we restricted automobile and boat new business liability limits to a maximum of $500,000. Effec- tive upon receipt of this bulletin, the property lines are added to this restriction. For all new business, re -writes of existing accounts, and changes to existing accounts, the new maximum limits of liability are: BI - 500,000/500,000 or 500,000 CSL UM - 500,000/500,000 CPL - 500,000 OL&T - 500,000 In the near future we will contact you about lowering the limits on existing business to these levels. For now, we will continue to renew these accounts without change. Additional or replacement vehicles on auto policies may have limits which match the existing vehicles on the policy. Additional locations added to the homeowners or fire policies will also be allowed liability limits which match the other locations on the policy. Please be sure all of the people in your agency are notified of these changes immediately. Remember also, that our umbrella pro- gram, in most cases, can fill the need for those customers who still desire the higher limits. Greg Cover _Region Vice President Personal Lines Underwriting April 28, 1987 City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, Calif 90254 Stan Kingsberg General Agent 4200 Trabuco Road Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92720 Bus.: 714/ 552-6900 RECEIVED . APR 29 1987 PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. Attn: Lynn Stevens Re: Margaret Ames aka Peggy Marsh Enclosed is a copy of the city of Manhattan Beach's "construction or service contract endorsement". This form is similar to the city of Hermosa Beach's encroachment endorsement. According to my underwriter, Allstate Insurance has agreed to the use of this form in the past and has endorsed their personal liabil- ity policies to add the city as an additional named insured. The acceptability of the Manhattan Beach form as opposed to Hermosa's is due to the specificity of Manhattan's form as indicated in paragraph # 2. I must emphasize that because the enclosed endorsement has been used and approved by Allstate in the past does not guarantee that Allstate would approve its use in the future either for Ms. Ames or anyone else. Any insurance company, including Allstate, reserves the right to modify its underwriting policy. However, because this form has been acceptable in the recent past, the likelihood is good that I can get such an endorsement approved for Mrs. Ames. Without prior assurance from the city of Hermosa Beach that this form is acceptable, there is nothing more I can do for Ms. Ames. Should the city decide that the Manhattan Beach form is unacceptable, may I request that some effort be made by the city to assist Ms. Ames in locating an insurance broker with connections to a carrier which will provide the coverage you require. Sincerely, Stan Kingsber cc Margaret Ames .. • ATTACHMENT 13 CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH CONSTRUCTION OR SERVICE CONTRACT ENDORSEMENT (PRIVATE PROJECT) To be attached to and made a part of the City's self-insured retention level or policy insuring the liability of any person, firm, or corporation performing services under contract for the City of Manhattan Beach, or conducting activities on City property or conducting activities through City permit. Notwithstanding any inconsistent expression in the policy to which this endorsement is attached, or in any other endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, or made a part thereof, the protection afforded by said policy shall: 1. Include the City of Manhattan Beach as an additional insured on an "occurrence based policy" covering all operations of the insured or contractors and sub- contractors or anyone acting on their behalf under the contract with the City for work in or about said City whether liability is attributable to the insured or to the City, excepting sole negligence of the City (To include the elected officials, appointed officials and employees.) For the risks covered by this endorsement, this insurance will provide primary insurance to the City to -the exclusion of any other insurance or self-insurance program the City may carry with respect to claims and injuries arising out of activities of the Contractor and otherwise insured hereunder. A 2. Indemnify and save harmless the City of Manhattan Beach against any and all claims (see 15), excluding sole negligence of the City, resulting from the undertaking specified as the private improvements which include a retaining wall which does not exceed 54 inches maximum height, frmr rnnrrp4-0 rtopr, and a 25 -toot Melaleuca tree. This hold harmless assumption on the part of the underwriters shall include, all costs of investigation and defense until reasonable determination is made that the City is solely negligent. Any failure to comply with reporting pro- visions of the policy shall not affect coverage provided to the City. • 3. Not be cancelled except by notice to'the City Attorney of the City of Manhattan Beach at least thirty (30) days"prior to the date of such cancellation. )C 4. Provide minimum of limits of liability of five hundred thousand ($500,000) dollars, combined single limit coverage against any injury, death, loss or damage as a result of wrongful or negligent acts or omissions by the Contractor. 5. The policy affords coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office.form number GL002 (Ed 1/73), Comprehensive General Liability Insurance and ISO form number.GL0404, Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability Endorsement and Auto Liability ISO Form number CA0001 (Ed 1/78), Code 1 ("any auto"). The limits of liability as stated in this endorsement apply to the'insurance afforded by this endorsement notwithstanding that the policy may have lower limits of lia-' bility applying elsewhere in the policy. Attached to and forming part of Policy No. of the Date: Expiration Date: Duly Authorized Insurance Agent NOTE: Duly authorized agent to attach insurance Accord form to this endorsement. Updated 9/17/86