Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
02/13/90
r January 30, 1990 „- _ s/q (;<7,17., Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City Council Meeting of February 13, 1990 LOS ANGELES COUNTY BEACHES, WILDLIFE AND PARK LAND CONSERVATION ACT RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended by staff that City Council review the attached materials regarding the Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Conservation Act of 1990 and consider whether or not the City would be in support of this general obligation bond measure proposed for the November, 1990 County Ballot. If in support of this measure, staff further recommends that Council review and approve the tentative Hermosa Beach projects suggested by staff for inclusion in the Ballot measure. BACKGROUND: On January 25, 1990, representatives from the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority met with staff to discuss the proposed Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Bond Act. This general obligation bond measure would provide approximately $750 million to Los Angeles County beaches, wildlife, park land and cultural facilities (Attached). Specifically, these funds would be used to: • Improve County Beaches * Restore neighborhood parks and recreations facilities • Improve County parks and County arboreta • Acquire lands in Santa Monica/San Fernando Mountains • Renovate and improve museums in the County * Build trails for horses, hiking and bicycle use • Plant trees in urban areas * Protect historical and archaeological resources • Protect specific beach, wildlife, park and recreation areas If the measure passes (requires 2/3 voter approval), Hermosa Beach would receive a one time per capita grant of approximately $307,776 to be used to acquire, develop or improve real property for park and recreational purposes. Additional funding possibilities for Hermosa Beach include: 1) Funding for specific project(s): Competitive selection for projects submitted by local agencies to be included as part of the ballot measure. 2) Grant(s) following passage of bond measure: Competitive selection of projects submitted after the bond measure passes. 1 1m According to the County Treasurer's Office, to pay for the bond issue, the average property tax assessment would be $27 (based on the $125,000 median) and would be reduced by 40% ($16.20) by the second year with subsequent reductions thereafter (20 years ®total). Translated to account for varied property values, this works out to be approximately $.02 for every $100 assessed property value. ANALYSIS: If Council sees fit to support this Bond measure, staff suggests Council also approve two ideas as "specific projects" on behalf of Hermosa Beach (for inclusion in the Bond Act). 1) Hermosa Beach Waterfront Rehabilitation Project: To include replacing the City's Strand walkway and rehabilitation of the Municipal Pier. The cost of this dual project would be approximately $1.5 million and would include: Repair/replace Strand, examine/x-ray Pier and repair Pier underside, topside, underwater, deckings, railings and entryway. 2) Hermosa Valley Greenbelt Acquisition: To request funding for the purchase of the railroad right-of-way (currently being funded by utility user tax) at an approximate cost of $6 million (parcel A) and/or $1.5 million (parcel B). The City could request partial (i.e. $4 million) or full funding for this acquisition. In examining the criteria submitted by the Conservation Authority (see appendix A), these projects seemed to fair well. The Waterfront Restoration Project has as its criteria strengths: high regional use; it is non -controversial (i.e., Strand and Pier already exist) and it would not burden our City maintenance load beyond current levels. The Hermosa Valley Greenbelt Acquisition has strengths in that it has proven local political support (as evidenced by voters) and it is a sound environmental conservation project. If passed by the voters, the Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Conservation Act would guarantee Hermosa Beach the per capita appropriation and would provide a potential funding source for much needed repairs along our beach and/or for the Greenbelt acquisition. Clearly, for specific projects, the Conservation Authority will be seeking projects of regional significance. Hermosa Beach's widespread use by visitors places us in a positive light for this potential funding. In 1988, Hermosa Beach voters showed over 2/3 support (69%) for the State Wildlife, Coastal and Park Conservation Bond initiative which passed with a Los Angeles County approval rate of 71%. If Council chooses to support this measure, the Conservation Authority will request a resolution from Council in April, 1990 indicating such support. 2 Alternatives available to Council include: Support Ballot measure and; (A) Submit staff's suggested specific projects to Conservation Authority; or (B) Suggest alternative projects for submittal as specific projects; or (C) Do not submit any specific projects. Do not support Ballot measure and; (A) Submit staff's suggested specific projects; or (B) Suggest alternative projects for submittal as specific projects; or (C) Do not submit any specific projects. Respectfully submitted, Mary '. ,;Toney, Acting Director Dept o Community Resources Concur: Viki Copeland Finance Administrator Anthony Antich, Director Dept. of Public Works Kevin B. Northcr'aft City Manager CITY MANAGER COMMENT: The concept of this issue seems consistent with public sentiment in Hermosa Beach, as our citizens have approved initiatives and included taxes to preserve park lands. In a sense, the County measure applies Hermosa's successful concepts on a County -wide basis. Regardless of the decision on support for this issue, I recommend we submit our projects so that, if passed, a fair portion of the taxes that are generated from our City will be used in Hermosa. 3 CHO MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY RAN SNI 3750 Solstice Canyon Road i RECREATION ANORAAK Malibu, California 90265 - ^ OLSTAICT �� (213) 456-5046 • �— RORIE ANN SKEI ., .._ . — . Chairperson MICHAEL BERGER e. Vice Chairperson CAROLE B. STEVENS DON HUNT . • JOSEPH T. EDMISTON. AICD Executive Officer . . . TEX WARD Financial Officer LOS ANGELES COUNTY BEACHES, WILDLIFE AND PARK LAND CONSERVATION ACT OF 1990 Intent The Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Conservation Act is a general obligation bond measure that will provide approximately $750 million to preserve and improve beach, wildlife and park lands and cultural facilities throughout Los Ankeles County. The measure will include funds to all cities for local park and recreation needs. The measure is proposed for the November, 1990 ballot. Information Attached *Summary of Measure *Questions and Answers *Per Capita Funds to Cities *Voting Analysis *Criteria for Specific Projects *Questionnaire for Specific Projects *Form for Support Organizations *Form for other Local Organizations *Return Envelope The Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority (MRCA) is currently developing this proposed Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Conservation Act. The MRCA is a local government agency dedicated to preserving park and open space lands and providing recreational opportunities throughout Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. For more information, please contact Esther Feldman or Greg Townsend, Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority, 3750 Solstice Canyon Road, Malibu, . CA 90265. (213) 456-7807. A public entity of the State of California exercising joint powers of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. the Conejo Recreation and Park District and the Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District pursuant to Section 6500 et seq. of the Government Code. 4 MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY RANCHO sm 3750 Solstice Canyon Road f RECREATION ANO PoRK Malibu. California 90265 DISTRICT (213) 456 5046 LOS ANGELES COUNTY BEACHES, WILDLIFE AND PARK LAND CONSERVATION ACT OF I990 Summary RORIE ANN SKEI Chairperson MICHAEL BERGER Vice Chairperson CAROLE B. STEVENS DON HUNT JOSEPH T. EDMISTON. AICP Executive Officer TEX WARD Financial Officer The Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Conservation Act will provide approximately $750 million in general obligation bonds to preserve and improve beach, wildlife and park lands and cultural facilities throughout Los Angeles County. The measure will include badly -needed funds to improve local park and recreation facilities, county arboreta, regional parks and the Museum of Science and Industry, build trails and acquire critical park lands and wildlife habitat. The measure is proposed for the November 1990 ballot. Critical Need for Beach, Wildlife, Park and Museum Funds Our beaches, wildlife and park lands are vital to maintaining our quality of life in Los Angeles County. In this rapidly growing county of nearly nine million people, there are still beautiful beaches, canyons, streams and natural areas where we can find relief from the pressures of traffic, smog and urban congestion. These lands are disappearing rapidly as the county continues to grow, and we must act now if we want to preserve this part of our natural heritage for our children and grandchildren. Our beaches are among the most visited in the world. Deer, owls, bobcat and mountain lion still live in the mountains and canyons less than a one hour drive from downtown Los Angeles, and these lands help to protect our increasingly threatened air and water supplies. Our neighborhood parks provide vital recreation opportunities to millions of Los Angeles County residents, and inner city recreation areas provide youths with an important alternative to gang involvement. Our museums are vital to tourism and these aging facilities are sorely in need of renovation and repair. Content of Measure The Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Conservation Act will include funds for the following purposes: * Improve county beaches and public access * Restore neighborhood parks and recreation facilities * Improve county parks and County Arboreta * Acquire lands in the Santa Monica Mountains and in the mountains surrounding the San Fernando Valley * Renovate and improve museums in the county * Build trails for horses, hiking and bicycle use * Plant trees in urban areas * Protect historical and archeological resources * Protect specific beach, wildlife, park and recreation areas Voter Support Voter support for wildlife, coastal, park and other environmental bonds continues to increase dramatically in Los Angeles County; over 71% of county voters approved the 1988 state park bond act (the Wildlife, Coastal and Park Land Initiative). Los Angeles County voters continue to strongly support bonds for a wide variety of purposes. Recent poll results show that 76% of voters in Los Angeles County will support a county -wide beaches, wildlife and park land bond act. Voters continue to support bond acts for a wide variety of issues. For more information, contact Esther Feldman or Greg Townsend at the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority, 3750 Solstice Canyon Road, Malibu, CA 90265. 213-456-7807 A public entity of the State of California exercising joint powers of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. the Conejo Recreation and Park District and the Rancho Sirni Recreation and Park Distnct pursuant to Section 6500 et seq. of the government Code. RANCHO Svu RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 3750 Solstice Canyon Road Malibu, California 90265 (213) 456-5046 RORIE ANN SKEI Chairperson MICHAEL BERGER Vice Chairperson CAROLE B. STEVENS DON HUNT JOSEPH T. EDMISTON, AICD Executive Officer TEX WARD Financial Officer LOS ANGELES COUNTY BEACHES, WILDLIFE AND PARK LAND CONSERVATION ACT OF 1990 Allocation of Funds to Cities in Los Angeles County for Per Capita Grants The following pages contain an estimation of the dollar amount each city in Los Angeles County would receive from a proposed Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Bond Act. These figures are based on a total allocation of $120 million to the cities within Los Angeles County, excluding the unincorporated area of the county. Population figures are taken from the most recent California Department of Finance census. No city would receive less than $20,000. Funds could be used to acquire, develop or improve real property for park and recreation purposes. In addition to the funds listed here, competitive funds for trails, historical and archeological resources and urban tree -planting programs may also be available to local agencies. The Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority is currently working with the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to develop this county -wide park bond act for the November 1990 ballot. For more information, please contact Esther Feldman or Greg Townsend at 213-456-7807. PIease Note: The doIIar amounts Iisted here are preliminary estimates only. 1 A public entity of the State of California exercising joint powers of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. the Conejo Recreation arid Park District and the Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District pursuant to Section 6500 et seq. of the Government Code. City ALLOCATION OF FUNDS TO CITIES FOR PER CAPITA GRANTS Per Capita $ Population Agoura Hills 302,321 19,400 Alhambra 1,167,212 74,900 Arcadia 763,596 49,100 Artesia 232,975 14,950 Avalon 38,803 2,490 Azusa 596,073 38,250 Baldwin Park 986,442 63,300 Bell 440,237 28,250 Bell Gardens 596,852 38,300 Bellflower 949,041 60,900 Beverly Hills 534,517 34,300 Bradbury *20,000 930 Burbank 1,461,742 93,800 Carson 1,383,824 88,800 Cerritos _. 910,082 58,400 Claremont 569,581 36,550 Commerce 182,328 11,700 Compton 1,449,275 93,000 Covina 673,991 43,250 Cudahy 322,581 20,700 Culver City 638,148 40,950 Diamond Bar 841,514 54,000 Downey 1,352,656 86,800 Duarte 332,710 21,350 El Monte 1,486,675 95,400 El Segundo 245,442 15,750 Gardena 793,205 50,900 Glendale 2,588,436 166,100 Glendora 738,663 47,400 Hawaiian Gardens 192,457 12,350 Hawthorne 1,050,335 67,400 Hermosa Beach 307,776 19,750 Hidden Hills 30,388 1,950 Huntington Park 797,880 51,200 Industry *20,000 370 Inglewood 1,594,202 102,300 Irwindale *20,000 1,230 La Canada Flintridge 324,139 20,800 La Habra Heights 84,931 5,450 La Mirada 663,861 42,600 La Puente 522,830 33,550 La Verne 475,300 30,500 Lakewood 1,192,145 76,500 Lancaster 1,280,972 82,200 Lawndale 425,432 27,300 Lomita 316,347 20,300 Long Beach 6,541,995 419,800 Los Angeles 52,992,032 3,400,500 Lynwood 836,839 53,700 Manhattan Beach 547,764 35,150 Maywood 384,136 24,650 Monrovia 529,842 34,000 Montebello 906,966 58,200 *minimum agency PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES Citv Per Capita $ Population Monterey Park 1,006,701 64,600 Norwalk 1,414,991 90,800 Palmdale 714,508 45,850 Palos Verdes Estates 233,754 15,000 Paramount 692,691 44,450 Pasadena 2,060,152 132,200 Pico Rivera 892,940 57,300 Pomona 1,868,474 119,900 Rancho Palos Verdes 716,846 46,000 Redondo Beach 1,008,259 64,700 Rolling Hills 32,570 2,090 Rolling Hills Estates 122,721 7,875 Rosemead 743,338 47,700 San Dimas 506,467 32,500 San Fernando 322,581 20,700 San Gabriel 543,868 34,900 San Marino 215,054 13,800 Santa Clarita 1,803,023 115,700 Santa Fe Springs 255,571 16,400 Santa Monica 1,503,817 96,500 Sierre Madre 175,316 11,250 Signal Hill 127,006 8,150 South El Monte 291,413 18,700 South Gate 1,234,221 79,200 South Pasadena 381,798 24,500 Temple City 497,117 31,900 Torrance 2,215,988 142,200 Vernon *20,000 80 Walnut 411,407 26,400 West Covina 1,467,975 94,200 Wcst Hollywood 598,410 38,400 Westlake Village 125,058 8,025 Whittier 1,154,745 74,100 TOTALS 5120,000,000 7,697,900 *minimum agency PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES 4 .a RANCHO ,r $IMI REANDCREATIONP4RK Ij DISTRICT MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 3750 Solstice Canyon Road Malibu. California 90265 (213) 456-5046 RORIE ANN SI<EI Chairperson MICHAEL BERGER Vice Chairperson CAROLE B. STEVENS DON HUNT QUESTIONS about the JOSEPH T. EDMISTON. AICP Executive Officer LOS ANGELES COUNTY TEC WARD Financial Officer BEACHES, WILDLIFE AND PARK LAND BOND ACT OF 1990 What will the Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Bond Act do? It will provide funds to acquire, develop and renovate beaches, park and wildlife Iands and cultural facilities throughout Los Angeles County. Funds will be provided to restore aging park, recreation and museum facilities, acquire critical park and wildlife lands, restore beaches and acquire and build trails. Why do we need a beach, wildlife and park land bond act in Los Angeles County? Our beaches, parks and wildlife lands are vital to the quality of life in Los Angeles County. The population in Los Angeles County is growing at an increasing rate every year, and there is already a large unmet need for parks and recreation facilities throughout the county. Remaining park and open space lands are disappearing rapidly, and we must act now if we wish to protect some of these lands for our children. What would the funds be spent on? Funds would be provided for the following purposes: * Rehabilitate Los Angeles County Beaches * Improve neighborhood and regional park and recreation facilities * Acquire park and critical wildlife lands * Renovate regional museums * Improve County arboreta and botanical gardens * Protect lands in the Santa Monica Mountains and in the mountains around the San Fernando Valley * Acquire trails and provide public access * Protect creeks and streams * Plant trees in urban areas * Restore historical and cultural resources Who would spend these funds? Government agencies who are dedicated to the purposes listed above, including county agencies, city agencies and the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. Can the county afford such a measure? Yes. Los Angeles County has only one outstanding general obligation bond act. The County is fiscally sound, has good ratings from national rating agencies and has a debt service (percentage of total budget used to repay bonds and other debt) of less than 2%. A public ennry of the State of California exercising joint powers of the Santa :lion:ca. tfountams Cortsen+ancy. the Conejo Recreation and Park District and the Rancho Sinu Recreation a.:d Park Distract pursuant :o Section 6500 et seq. of the Government Code. November, 1989 MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 3750 Solstice Canyon Road Malibu. California 90265 (213) 456-5046 SUMMARY OF CALIFORNIA STATE BOND ACT VOTING HISTORY: 1978 through 1988 RORIE ANN SKEI Chairperson MICHAEL BERGER Vice Chairperson CAROLE B. STEVENS DON HUNT JOSEPH T. EDMISTON. AICP Executive Officer TEX WARD Financial Officer The following information shows that California voters continue to approve an increasing number and dollar amount of state bond acts. The percentage by which bond acts are approved also continues to increase, despite the increased number of bonds appearing on state ballots. This is particularly true for park and environmental resource bond acts, which were passed with passed with votes of 70% and above in 1988. The approval rates for these types of bonds has increased more than any other category of bond funds. Voters clearly choose the issues they wish to support. Los Angeles County voters consistently approve bonds by higher margins than state approval rates. Voters have approved a total of thirty-nine state bonds acts since 1978, totalling over fourteen billion dollars. Only one bond act has been defeated since 1978, and it was a controversial measure (Deddeh Transportation Bond Act of 1988). Summary of State Bond Acts: Year 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 Total: Bond Acts Adopted (2) (2) (6) (10) (8) (13) $875 million 1.035 billion 2.010 billion 2.655 billion 3395 billion 5528 billion $14.623 billion Bond Acts Defeated $350 million 580 million 0 0 0 1 billion $1.930 billion Detail of Bond Acts Passed and Defeated, in order of voter approval: 1978 1980 1982 Passed Veterans Clean Water total: $875 million Veterans Parks total: $1.035 billion Veterans Jails (2) Homebuyers Lake Tahoe Schools Lotal: $2.010 billion Defeated School Building Aid $350 million Renewable Resources Investment Program Lake Tahoe Acquisition $580 million none defeated 1 A public entity of the State of California exerctsing joint powers of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. the Conejo Recreation and Park District and the Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District pursuant to Section 6500 et seq. of the Government Code. total: $2.010 billion Year Bond Acts Adopted Bond Acts Defeated 1984 Water Quality (2) Hazardous Substance Cleanup Senior Centers Veterans Fish and Wildlife Parks Jails (2) Schools Senior Centers total: $2.655 billion 1986 Safe Drinking Water Veterans Water Quality County Jails Parks• Jails Schools (2) total: $3395 billion 1988 Safe Drinking Water Veterans Wildlife, Coast and Parks Clean Water Schools Earthquake Safety Water Conservation Schools jails Homeless Schools Youth Correctional Facilities Libraries total: $5528 billion none defeated none defeated Transportation $1 billion Change in Approval Rates of State Bond Acts by Los Angeles County Voters: Parks/ Natural Resources Water Quality Veterans Jails Schools 1978 0 54% 63% 0 0 1980 53% 0 66% 0 0 1982 56% 67% 71% 60% 55% 1984 66% 75% 69% 63% 62% 1986 70% 78-81% 78% 68-70% 63% 1988 71% 66-76% 78% 58-64% 62-69% Net increase approval rate, 1978-1988: 18% 22% 10% 4% 14% 2 MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 3750 Solstice Canyon Road Malibu. California 90265 (213) 456-5046 RORIE ANN SKEI Chairperson MICHAEL BERGER Vice Chairperson CAROLE B. STEVENS DON HUNT JOSEPH T. EDMISTON. AICP Executive Officer TEX WARD Financial Officer LOS ANGELES COUNTY BEACHES, WILDLIFE AND PARK LAND BOND ACT SPECIFIC PROJECTS In addition to the general categories of funds for parks, beaches, trails and other programs, the Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Bond Act will include funds for specific projects. These projects will be included in the measure with a specific funding amount for each project and general designation of the area in which the funds should be spent. These projects can include acquisition, development and/or rehabilitation of park, recreation, wildlife, coastal, trail or other open space lands anywhere in Los Angeles County. Every project must meet the minimum criteria listed below in order to be considered for inclusion in the bond act. CRITERIA FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS: 1) The project must be a sound environmental project of regional significance, with good reasons for being preserved: 2) The project must be absolutely non -controversial. and all parties involved (particularly landowners) must agree that the project should be carried out. 3) There must be willing sellers. 4) The project must be part of a local or county general plan. 5) The project must have local political support. Le; city council(s). 6) The project must have strong support from local conservation and/or neighborhood groups. 7) There must be an entity willing to operate and maintain the area once it is acquired and/or developed for park or wildlife use. Timeline: The bond act is being proposed for the November 1990 ballot. For more information, please contact Esther Feldman at 213-456-7807. A public entity of the State of California exercising joint powers of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. the Conejo Recreation and Park District and the Rancho Simi Recreanon and Park District pursuant to Section 6500 et seq. of the Government Code. November 1989 4 MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY f, RANCHO 3750 Solstice Canyon Road RECREATION ANO PARK Malibu, California 90265 DISTRICT (213) 456-5046 QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PROPOSED SPECIFIC PROJECTS for the RORIE ANN SKEI Chairperson MICHAEL BERGER Vice Chairperson CAROLE B. STEVENS DON HUNT JOSEPH T. EDMISTON. AICP Executive Officer TEX WARD Financial Officer LOS ANGELES COUNTY BEACHES, WILDLIFE AND PARK LAND CONSERVATION ACT Please answer the following questions in as much detail as possible. This information is essential to evaluating your proposed project for inclusion in the bond act. Please include: Project Name Your name and affiliation Address Telephone number 1. Description of the land to be acquired or proposed project if not acquisition. 2. Exact location (please enclose a map indicating location). 3. How many acres (approximately)? 4. What amount of funds is needed to acquire the property or carry out this project? ($) 5. How was this amount determined? Has the property been appraised? 6. Which governmental agency/agencies would acquire the property or receive funds to carry out the proposed project? 7. Who would operate and manage the property after acquisition? Have they agreed to do so? Note: The bond act cannot provide funds to operate and maintain lands or facilities. 8. Who are the current property owners? Are the current owners willing to sell? 9. Would the current property owners oppose the proposed project being included in the bond act? 10. Does the Board of Supervisors support the project and the designation of agencies for acquisition and management? 11. Does the City Council(s) support the project and the designation of agencies for acquisition and management? 12. Which local or state organizations SUPPORT the project? (Please list groups) 13. Which local or state organizations OPPOSE the project? Who might oppose the project? 14. Has there been any publicity about the above arca or project? Has it been positive or negative? - For additional information, please contact Esther Feldman or Greg Townsend at (213) 456-7807. A public entity of the State of California exercising joint powers of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. the Conejo Recreation and Park District and the Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District pursuant to Section 6500 et seq. of the Government Code. RANCHO SRN RECREATION 13750 Solstice Canyon Road AND PARR Malibu. California 90265 OaTR1CT MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY (213) 456-5046 Form for Support Organizations Please list the organizations and related groups in your area that would be supportive of, the Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Conservation Act. Feel free to attach additional pages. Return as soon as possible to Esther Feldman, MRCA, 3750 Solstice Cyn. Rd., Malibu, CA 90265. Please include: Group Name, Contact Person, Address, Telephone # and Membership. (i.e. Parks Groups, AYSO, Little League, Senior Groups, etc.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. RORIE ANN SKEI Chairperson MICHAEL BERGER Vice Chairperson CAROLE B. STEVENS DON HUNT JOSEPH T. EDMISTON. AICP Executive Officer TEX WARD Financial Officer A public entity of the State of California exercising joint powers of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. the Conejo Recreation and Park District and the Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District pursuant to Section 6500 et seq. of the Government Code. LW, IYAJ , " LLJJ LVT Recreation: Activit cOUnty. 199. i.-;- supervisors to put the 4 • • S70 -million measure(pn; •••• • the ballot. -The ruinas :-:.•would be Esed to impi-6ve .:7.-bea6hes,parks, • .17-r:!-PfP •,!!'• abltats-'an •.; Ey JACK CH BEV ERS - • • IMES STAF? WRITER , , ; `: r`.1.10:'! • • •,• In a Sunny office overlkhe Malibu coast, a ..::serious-ticed _young woman named Esthe'rTeld- - snan is • quietly helping lidUei a political game plan she hoc will result in voters passing wat is apparently the biggest bona "inea- . sure' in Los Angeles County fiisto- rY. . . • For up to 14 hours a day:Ye:id- :man, 23, confers with enviro-iten- .talists and city managersbusi- nessmen and labor actilsts, earnestly pitching the ne.e.c1 -for 3750 million in bonds to improve beaches, parks, wildlife haUtats and museums as a tonic Um'. the woes of urbanization. "This county is so appallingly behind in terms of providi4ade- quate park and recreation and open -space opportunities 1.6r .its residents," she said. sitting ii her office high on a Malibu ridge:..the gleaming Pacific visible WOnd the window. "The faster this county grOwS— , . and it hasn't. shown any sins of slowing down—the more extr_e'rZe the needs get," said Feldman;:who is public outreach director tor the Malibu -based Mountains Recrea- tion and Conservation Autho.ifttY, a state -local government 'agency which' provides recreation 7and ranger services for parks jiLos Angeles and Ventura counties2" 7. • But some county officialsI:liave raised questions about the massive park bond measure, which promot- ers are trying to persuade COL'inty 1 supervisors to place on the No- vember ballot- Officials arP. ers are trying to persuade u conty „., . supervisors to. place on t4:c2..1,To- ‘...7.eml?er :ballot: Officials. 'ai:e4Ou- ,Cerned that the bonds. indetirive ?. the county's debt ..too jebpardizethechances. for stage of other .bond :measureshe :same. *ballot, including .thot.Ifor :•.hospitals and jails. • f approved by .voters, tittot:id • revenues would be Split,iitang the county's 86 cities an4oi,in- :, ty-rhaintained beaches: m . botanical gardens and the: .nta Monica Mountains ConserVair .:The conservancjr $120 million, which could 41.:tised ...to buy.. more 'land inthcata • Monicas, as well as help coftifiIete .the proposed "Rim of .the Valley" .trail system, Feldman said. • Another $120 million would be earmarked for the cities, Wit'F',the money parceled out on a pergZapita basis. Los Angeles, with 3.4 million people, would get nearly $p:Lpi.il- lion, for example, while tin.35„Hid- den Hills, with just 1,950 re%ol,erits, would draw $30,000. -iilooi In addition, $50 million wo,yld be set aside for county beacheisoand $40 million to preserve bi,,scoric structures, construct hikirlg,and biking trails and plant, tr,ecs,. in urban areas. -.I Joel Segal, a spokesman. for County Chief Administratorgich- ard Dixon, said that the afeasure was the largest general obligation bond issue in county history:!:to the best of my knowledge." The,hext- largest was a $225-millionflood control issue in the late 1950.'he said. , • Please see PARKS: BIO MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on January 23, 1990, at the hour of 7:40 P.M. CLOSED SESSION - held pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) regarding potential litigation: Possible withdrawal from the Community Development Block Grant Program; Real Property negotiations with Hermosa Beach School District regarding surplus property, at the hour of 6:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Robert Blackwood, Personnel Director ROLL CALL: Present: Essertier, Midstokke, Wiemans, Mayor Creighton Absent: Sheldon CITIZEN COMMENTS Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street Jerry Compton - 832 Seventh Street 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: (a) Action: To approve the Consent Calendar recommendations (a) thru (k) with the exception of the following items which were pulled for discussion but are listed in order for clarity: (a), (b), (g), (h), (i) and (k) Midstokke Motion Midstokke, second Wiemans. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. Recommendation to approve the following minutes: 1) Regular meeting of the City Council held on January 9, 1990; 2) Adjourned regular meeting of City Council held on January 11, 1990; Addressing the Council was: Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place Action: To bring back to Council Meeting of February 13, 1990 with the following corrections: Minutes lal: (1) (Pg.6) A sentence indicating the items on the matrix of the Draft Circulation Element were for study only. (2) (Pg.2) Closed Session should be at the beginning of the meeting and change the authority under which oil was discussed to Real Property discussion with MacPherson Oil regarding City Yard instead of potential litigation. (3) (Pgs. 5, 8, & 9) Indicate closure of Public Hearings. Minutes 1a2: (1) (Pg.1) Carry over items from January 9, 1990 were continued to the meeting of January 23, 1990. (2) (Pg.2) Goal list #2 items (k) and (m) were repetitive, eliminate one. (3)(Pg.1) Council analyzed - 1 - Minutes 1-23-90 1a3 (b) (f) (g) the staff's goals and incorporated many of the sugges- tions into the new goals list. (4) (Pg.4) Goals 17 thru 30 need to be added to the list. (5) (last page) Betty Martin spoke, not Betty Ryan. Motion Midstokke, second Creighton. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. Recommendation to approve Demands and Warrants Nos. 32049, 32239 through 32399 inclusive, noting voided warrants 32244 through 32246 inclusive; 32281 through 32283 inclusive; and 32309 through 32311 inclusive. Action: To approve the Demands and Warrants. Motion Midstokke, second Creighton. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. Recommendation to receive and file December, 1989 City Treasurer's report. Recommendation to receive and file November, 1989 Revenue and Expenditure report. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated January 17, 1990. Recommendation to receive and file December, 1989 month- ly investment report. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary L. Brutsch dated January 9, 1990. Recommendation to adopt resolution approving draft Cir- culation, Transportation and Parking Element of the General Plan. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 16, 1990. Supplemental letters from Violet M. Isgreen, dated January 22, 1990, Jim Lis- sner, dated January 23, 1990 and David R. Suess, dated January 20, 1990. Addressing the Council were: Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street Proposed Action: To adopt Resolution No. 90-5339, which adopts the modifications, additions and deletions as noted within the Resolution to the Circulation Transpor- tation Parking Element and include the recommended lan- guage as set forth in the City Manager"s comments in the January 16, 1990 memo which are: "Local, residential streets include those streets predominately residential in terms of adjacent property use, that are intended to retain a residential character. Higher speeds and in- creasing traffic volumes are to be discouraged on such streets." (page 17-18) Motion Creighton, dies for lack of second. - 2 - Minutes 1-23-90 (h) (i) (7) (k) Final Action: To adopt Resolution No. 90-5339, enti- tled, "A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE MODIFICATIONS, ADDI- TIONS AND DELETIONS AS NOTED BELOW TO THE REVISED CIR- CULATION, TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN", with the amendment that when the General Plan, as revised per the Resolution, comes back for adoption, there be another Public Hearing. Motion Midstokke, second Wiemans. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. Recommendation to approve waiver of parking fees for the Sand and Strand Run on Sunday, February 11, 1990. Memo- randum from Acting Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 4, 1990. Action: To approve staff recommendation to waive parking fees and time limits for meters along Pier Avenue (from Manhattan Avenue to the Municipal Pier) and on Hermosa Avenue between 8th and 16th Streets during the Sand and Strand Run on Sunday, February 11, 1990 between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and Noon. Motion Essertier, second Midstokke. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. Recommendation to authorize Mayor to sign agreement for preliminary Engineering Services for Community Center Electrical Upgrade to John Snyder and Associates at a cost of $5,880. (Continued from January 9, 1990 meet- ing.) Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 16, 1990. Addressing the Council was: Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place Action: To Receive and File Motion Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. Recommendation to approve schedule for Environmental Impact Report, General Plan amendment, Conditional Use Permit, and Lease Agreement for oil production. (Con- tinued from January 9, 1990 meeting.) Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 17, 1990. Recommendation to receive and file the following 1988-89 Financial reports: 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial and Audit report, and 2) Management Letter. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated January 3, 1990. (Continued from January 9, 1990 meeting.) - 3 - Minutes 1-23-90 Action: To Receive and File. Motion Creighton, second Essertier. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES. (a) ORDINANCE NO. 90-1022 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADD GYMNASIUM/HEALTH AND FITNESS CENTER AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE C-2, RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL ZONE, WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND TO ESTABLISH PARKING STANDARDS FOR SAID USE AND THE ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRON- MENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION. For adoption. Action: To adopt Ordinance No. 90-1022. Motion Essertier, second Midstokke. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. ***************************************************************** SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS - MUNICIPAL MATTERS CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 9, 1990 MEETING: 9. PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON VALLEY DRIVE BETWEEN GOULD AND HERMOSA VALLEY SCHOOL. A. SIGHT DISTANCE AT 24TH STREET AND 24TH PLACE; Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 2, 1990. A memorandum from Tony Antich, dated January 17, 1990. A letter from Margaret Harrel, dated January 9, 1990. A staff report was presented by Director Antich. Addressing the Council on this item were: Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street Sam Harrel - 520 Twenty-fourth Street Mike Bradley - Twenty-fourth Street and Valley Drive Pricilla Atwell - 2431 Valley Drive Jerry Compton - 832 Seventh Street A point of order was called by Councilmember Midstokke requesting the City Clerk to set timer for speakers as per policy in past few years. Action: To make a policy that City Councilmembers will alternate imposing the time limit on speakers. Motion Creighton, second Essertier. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. Action: To send back to staff for recommendation from the Traffic Engineer regarding feasibility of stop sign in regards to Twenty-fourth Street and Twenty-fourth Place. Motion Midstokke, second Essertier. So•ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. - 4 - Minutes 1-23-90 B. CONSIDERATION OF BIKEWAY ON VALLEY DRIVE Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 2, 1990. A Letter from Joe Mark, Trustee of Hermosa Beach School District, dated October 22, 1989. A staff report was presented by Director Antich. Addressing the Council on this item were: Karen Bruns - 531 Pier Avenue Pricilla Atwell - 2431 Valley Drive Action: To Receive and File Motion Creighton, second Midstokke. So ordered, noting the absence of Sheldon. 11. REPORT ON RAMIFICATIONS OF WITHDRAWAL FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. Memorandum from City Attorney Charles S. Vose dated January 4, 1990. Sup- plemental letters from Councilmember Sheldon, dated January 18, 1990, Andrea Anderson, dated'January 18, 1990, Benita Lubes, dated January 10, 1990 and Julie Dorr Feys, Director of Project Touch, dated January 22, 1990 Action: To continue to the next meeting of February 13, 1990 for the benefit of a full Council. Motion Midstokke, second Wiemans. So ordered, noting the objection of Councilmember Essertier and the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. 12. RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION RELATIONS RESOLUTION. Memorandum from Personnel Direc- tor Robert Blackwood dated January 1, 1990. Proposed Action: To adopt Resolution No. 90- , enti- tled, ',A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE OR- GANIZATION RELATIONS." Motion Midstokke, second Essertier. Noting the objec- tions of Councilmember Wiemans and Mayor Creighton and noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon; the motion failed. Being a two to two vote, no action was taken on the matter and it was continued to the next meeting. ***************************************************************** 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. Items (a), (b), (g), (h), (i) and (k) were discussed at this time but are listed in order for clarity. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC - None - 5 - Minutes 1-23-90 PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. PROPOSED RESOLUTION ADJUSTING THE PARKS AND RECREATION IN -LIEU FEE. Memorandum from Building and Safety Direc- tor William Grove dated January 11, 1990. A staff report was presented by Director Grove. The Public Hearing was opened. Coming forward to speak were: Jerry Compton - 832 Seventh Street Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place The Public Hearing was closed. Action: To adopt Resolution No. 90-5340, entitled, SIA RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF THE IN -LIEU PARKS AND RECREATION FEE AT $4,290 PER DWELLING PURSUANT TO SECTION 29.5-13 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE." with the requirement that the expenditures be itemized the last two (2) to five (5) years. Motion Creighton, second Midstokke. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. The Meeting recessed at 9:05 P.M. The Meeting reconvened at 9:20 P.M. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 6. RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD BID FOR USER FEE STUDY. Memo- randum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated January 16, 1990. A staff report was given by Director Copeland. Mr. Pearl, representing David M. Griffith and Associ- ates, Ltd., answered the Council's questions regarding the study. Addressing the Council on this item was: Jerry Compton - 832 Seventh Street Proposed Action: To bring back at the next meeting of February 13, 1990 so consultant may verify what is in- cluded in the proposal. Motion Creighton, second Wiemans. Noting the objections of Councilmembers Essertier and Midstokke, and noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon; the motion failed. Action: Receive and File Motion Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. - 6 - Minutes 1-23-90 l 7. RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE HIRING OF A CONSULTANT FOR RELOCATION OF CITY YARD FEASIBILITY STUDY. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 17, 1990. Action: Receive and File. Motion Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered, noting the objection of Mayor Creighton and the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. The meeting recessed at 10:50 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 11:05 P.M. 8. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER (a) Annual report of activities for calendar year 1989. Memorandum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated -- January 16, 1990. A summary of the report was presented by City Manager Kevin Northcraft. Addressing the Council on this item was: Parker Herriott - 222 Twenty-fourth Street Action: To Receive and File. Motion Midstokke, second Creighton. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. 9. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Agenda for February 15, 7 p.m. joint meeting with Plan- ning Commission. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 16, 1990. Action: Mayor directed City Manager comments to be add- ed to agenda for joint Council and Planning Commission Meeting. They are as follows: Item 1 - Multi -use corridor wrap-up will be listed as number 7 on the agenda. Item 2 - Obtaining Coastal permitting authority will be listed as number 8 on the agenda. Item 3 - Current schedule of Planning projects will be listed as number 9 on the agenda (b) Agenda for February 22, 7:30 A.M. joint meeting with Chamber of Commerce. Memorandum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated January 17, 1990. Addressing the Council on this item were: Parker Herriott - 222 Twenty-fourth Street Jerry Compton - 200 Pier Avenue - 7 - Minutes 1-23-90 Action: Mayor requested that Councilmembers prioritize the list of fourteen (14) items and give to City Manager Northcraft to pass on to the Chamber for them to priori- tize prior to the meeting. 10. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: (a) Request by Councilmember Midstokke for discussion of rezoning and disposition of the Biltmore site. (Con- tinued from December 12, 1989 and January 9, 1990 meetings.) Addressing the Council on this item were: Parker Herriott - 222 Twenty-fourth Street Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place Jerry Compton - 200 Pier Avenue Action: To discuss the item. Motion Midstokke, second Creighton. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. Final Action: To adopt Resolution No. 90-5341, enti- tled, "A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION REQUESTING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY REZONING AND DISPOSITION OF THE BILTMORE SITE", with the following amendments: 1. Page 1 line 7 change low-density to residential 2. Page 1 line 19 change low-density to residential 3. Page 1 line 21 after the word "package" elimi- nate through line 24, "with the monies from the sale to be used for paying off the right-of-way making improvements to parking areas on the right-of-way (therefore replacing those lost on the Biltmore Site), and any other", and replace with, "using monies to acquire excess available properties for Open Space Parkland uses and any remainder to pay off the Railroad Right -of -Way". Motion Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. City Manager interceded with a point of policy regarding lateness of hour. Action: To continue with the meeting until the agenda is completed. Motion Creighton, second Wiemans. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. (b) Request by Councilmember Wiemans for discussion of requiring conditional use permit for new commercial developments such as hotels. (Continued from December 12, 1989 and January 9, 1990 meetings.) - 8 - Minutes 1-23-90 (c) Action: To have Staff come back with the complete report on Conditional Use Permits and present, to the current Council, items presented to the prior Council and not approved. Motion Wiemans, second Midstokke. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. Further Action: Mayor directed Staff to give copies to new Councilmembers for their review. Request by Councilmember Sheldon for discussion re. zoning standards in residential zones, i.e., lot coverage, parking, setbacks, etc.; and height limit, setbacks, parking and bulk in commercial zones. (Con- tinued from December 12, 1989 and January 9, 1990 meetings.) Action: To continue to the meeting of February 13, 1990. Motion Essertier, second Creighton. So ordered, noting the absence of Councilmember Sheldon. CITIZEN COMMENTS Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place James Taylor - 4700 Thirty-first, Hawthorne - recycling Jerry Compton - 200 Pier Avenue Irving Byrne - 4922 Paseo del Pavar, Torrance - signs Parker Herriott - 222 Twenty-fourth Street ADJOURNMENT The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California adjourned on Wednesday, January 24, 1990, at the hour of 12:20 A.M. to a Regular Meeting to be held on February 13, 1990 at the hour of 7:30 P.M. Chief Deputy City Clerk - 9 - Minutes 1-23-90 CITY HALL OPERATING HOURS MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY OPEN 7:00 A.M. TO 6:00 P.M. CLOSED FRIDAYS 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. It is the policy of the City Council that no discussion of new items will begin after 11:30 p.m., unless this rule is waived by the Council. The agendas are developed with the intent to have all matters covered within the time allowed. .C]TY 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 4 TEE'HERMOSA BEACH FORM OF GOVERNMENT Hermosa Beach bas 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 matters to be acted upon by one vote; approval re- quires a majority affirmative vote. Any Councilmember 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 legal requirement 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 Manager regarding items not on the agenda, usually having arisen sincethe agenda was prepared on the preceding Wednesday. Miscellaneous 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 - Matters of an Urgency Nature Citizens wishing to address the City Council on an urgency matter not elsewhere con- sidered on the agenda may do so at this time. 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. vI "Some people are always grumbling because roses have thorns. We are thankful that thorns have roses." -Alphonse Karr AGENDA REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, February 13, 1990 - Council Chambers, City Hall Closed Session - 6:30 p.m. Regular Session - 7:30 p.m. MAYOR Roger Creighton MAYOR PRO TEM Chuck Sheldon COUNCILMEMBERS Robert Essertier Kathleen Midstokke Albert Wiemans CITY CLERK Elaine Doerfling CITY TREASURER Gary L. Brutsch CITY MANAGER Kevin B. Northcraft CITY ATTORNEY Charles S. Vose All Council meetings are open to the public. PLEASE ATTEND. Complete agenda materials are available for public inspection in the Police Department, Public Library and the Office of the City Clerk. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: PRESENTATION OF OUTSTANDING EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER AWARD: Yu Ying Ting, Administrative Aide, Planning Department SPECIAL COMMUNITY PRESENTATION - RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION CITIZEN COMMENTS Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any items on the Consent Calendar may do so at this time. Citizens may request to speak during Public Hearings and items appearing under Municipal Matters at the time the item is called. Citizen comments on items not on the agenda but within the Council's jurisdiction will be provided time at the end of the agenda. Please limit comments to three minutes. Citizens with comments regarding City management or departmental operations are requested to submit those comments to the City Manager. 1. 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 (a) (d) (e) (f) 4i) (k) will be considered under Agenda Item 3.) Recommendation to approve the following minutes: 1) Regular meeting of the City Council held on January 9, 1990 (cont'd from January 23, 1990 meeting); 2) Adjourned regular meeting of City Council held on January 11, 1990 (cont'd from January 23 meeting); 3) Regular meeting of January 23, 1990 meeting. Recommendation to approve Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. Recommendation to receive and file the January, 1990 monthly investment report. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary L. Brutsch dated February 6, 1990. Recommendation to receive and file status of January 20, 1989 traffic safety recommendation by the University of California, Berkeley. Memorandum from Public Works Di- rector Anthony Antich dated January 23, 1990. Recommendation to award bid for type II ambulance for the Fire Department. Memorandum from Public Safety Di- rector dated February 5, 1990. Recommendation to approve renewal of Alano Club lease. Memorandum from Acting Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 31, 1990. Recommendation to terminate services of James Montgomery Engineers for preparation of sewer bond analysis. Memo- randum from Public Works Dir c ,or A thou Antich dated February 1, 1990. X `.t`p Recommendation to adopt resolution of intent for televi- sion consumer protection resolution. Memorandum from Acting General Services Director Henry L. Staten dated February 6, 1990. Recommendation to award design for basketball courts, CIP 89-512. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated February 5, 1990. Recommendation to approve amendment to Loreto Plaza agreement. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 22, 1990. Recommendation to approve Greenbelt locations for notices regarding dog defiling and on -leash laws. Memo- randum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated January 29, 1990. (n) Recommendation re. Los Angeles County Park Land Conser- vation Act. Memorandum from Acting Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 30, 1990. Recommendation to receive and file status report for information from the State Lands Commission. Memorandum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated February 7, 1990. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. 4. (a) (b) WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. Letter from Allright Parking regarding contract renewal for -computerizing parking lots. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Request from Los Angeles County regarding a spray can ordinance. Recommended Action: To receive and file. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 8:00 P.M. 5. APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SERVICE OF AL- COHOLIC BEVERAGES AT HOTEL LOCATED AT 2515 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated February 5, 1990. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 6. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE MITIGATION PLAN FOR HAZARDOUS BUILDINGS. Memorandum from Building and Safety Director William Grove dated February 5, 1990. 7. MID -YEAR BUDGET REVIEW. Memorandum from Finance Direc- tor Viki Copeland dated February 6, 1990. A. REVIEW OF ANNUAL BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS. B. REVIEW OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. 8. TENTATIVE BUDGET CALENDAR FOR 1990-1992. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated February 6, 1990. 9. PROPOSED RESOLUTION FOR DEFINITION OF HARDSHIP FOR FEE WAIVER. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated February 6, 1990. 10. PROPOSED REVISED NOISE ORDINANCE RELATING TO CONSTRUC- TION ACTIVITY. Memorandum from Building and Safety Di- rector William Grove dated February 5, 1990. 11. FEASIBILITY FOR STOP INTERSECTION ON VALLEY DRIVE AT 24TH STREET AND 24TH PLACE. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated February 5, 1990. 12. RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR SIDE- WALK REPAIRS, CIP 89-142. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 29, 1990. 13. RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION RELATIONS RESOLUTION. Memorandum from Personnel Direc- tor Robert Blackwood dated January 1, 1990. (Continued from January 23, 1990 meeting.) 14. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER 15. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Appointment of Beach Cities Coalition for Drug Free Youth representative. (b) Request of the Cable T.V. Board to hold a joint meeting with the City Council. 16. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: (a) Request by Councilmember Sheldon for discussion re. zoning standards in residential zones, i.e., lot coverage, parking, setbacks, etc.; and height limit, setbacks, parking and bulk in commercial zones. (Con- tinued from December 12, 1989, January 9, 1990 and January 23, 1990 meetings.) (a) Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to dis- cuss this item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by Council action tonight. Request by Mayor Creighton to discussion of a proposed ordinance for civil proceedings for bootlegs. Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to discuss this item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by Coun- cil action tonight. (b) Request by Mayor Creighton for discussion of receipts from motorcycle parking lot on 14th Street. Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to dis- cuss this item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by Council action tonight. CITIZEN COMMENTS - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Citizens wishing to address the Council on items not on the agenda but within the Council's jurisdiction may do so at this time. ADJOURNMENT TO JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1990 AT 7:00 P.M. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council January 31, 1990 Meeting of February 13, 1990 PRESENTATION OF OUTSTANDING EMPLOYEE AWARD The City of Hermosa Beach Employee Performance Award honors City employees who have displayed either sustained performance above expected levels or have performed. a one-time action which exceeds expectations. Nominations for the award may be made by citizens, City Council, Department heads and other employees. From the nominations, the Management Team selects the award recipient(s). For the Fiscal Quarter October thru December 1989, the Management Team has selected Planning Department Administrative Aide, Yu-Ying Ting as City of Hermosa Beach Outstanding Employee. Yu-Ying has been selected for her extraordinary diligence and ' efficiency in a position which is responsible for an extremely high volume of work. Yu Ying is also known throughout the city for her ingenuity. For example, many members of our Administrative support staff have gratefully acknowledged her for devising an ingenious shortcut for using the copier to duplex single copies of large documents. In addition to her Award plaque, Yu-Ying will be receiving two tickets to the Seventh Annual Gala Community Center Gala featuring Queen Ida. NOTED: Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager Respectfully submitted, ice Silver A•'uinistrative Aide NOTED: Robert A. Blackwood Personnel Director Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: February 5, 1990 City Council Meeting of February 13, 1990 SEISMIC HAZARD MITIGATION PROGRAM 1) Direct staff to prepare an ordinance that requires seismic strengthening of unreinforced masonry buildings (URM) pursuant to the following schedule: a) All 'assembly buildings with an occupant load in excess of 300 persons shall be strengthened by January 1, 1995. b) All -buildings undergoing significant renovations shall be strengthened at the same time renovations are accomplished. c) Any buildings not strengthened by virtue of item (b) above by January 1, 1995 shall be subsequently strengthened by January 1, 1997. 2) Direct the Planning Commission to study allowing zoning ,incentives (i.e. reduced parking standards) for the replacement of URM buildings. 3) Direct Public Works staff to explore options to strengthen the city -owned URM building at 861 Valley Drive. BACKGROUND Pursuant to Government Code Section 8875 et seq., all cities are required to identify unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings and to develop a program to mitigate the hazard these buildings represent during earthquakes. On April 25, 1989 the City Council approved an agreement with the firm of Melvyn Green and Associates to identify all URM buildings and prepare a seismic hazard mitigation program. To date, a field survey of URM buildings has been completed and the building owners notified. The results of that survey were reported to the City Council on December 12, 1989 and to the State Seismic Safety Commission. ANALYSIS The original list of sixty-five (65) URM buildings has been reduced to sixty (60) based on information provided by notified owners. One (1) city -owned building, the Clark Building at 861 Valley Drive, remains on the list of URM buildings. - 1 - 6 Current state law does not mandate that cities require URM buildings to be strengthened. These buildings do pose a very real hazard in earthquakes however and staff is recommending that the prudent course of action is to require these buildings to be strengthened. Therecommendation, as indicated in the Seismic Hazard Mitigation Report prepared by Melvyn Green & Associates, provide for mandatory strengthening of all URM buildings within the next seven (7) years. Further, all URM assembly buildings with a high occupant load (over 300 occupants) and URM buildings undergoing significant renovation would be strengthened within the next five (5) years. The proposed timetable will provide affected building owners adequate opportunity to explore options to either strengthen or demolish their URM buildings. In addition, since the city is probably not in a position to offer financial assistance to affected building owners, staff recommends that the Planning Commission be directed to study allowing zoning incentives to strengthen or replace URM buildings. An example of a zoning incentive would be to allow a URM building to be replaced with a new building without meeting the current parking requirements. Allowing such incentives would likely hasten removal of the hazard presented by URM buildings. An added benefit of such an incentive would be a building meeting all current building codes instead of only strengthened structurally. A more complete analysis of available seismic hazard mitigation programs and factors to consider are contained in the attached report prepared by Melvyn Green and Associates. Concur: Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager seismic/carole Respectfully submitted, uti\A__6__L,. (JO William Grove Director, Building & Safety Concur: ineer Brian Scott Emergency Preparedness Coordinator SB=5W7.Seismic. Hazard Mitigation Report Prepared for Department of Building and Safety City of Hermosa Beach by Melvyn Green and Associates, Inc. December, 1989 SB:54'7 Seismic Hazard Mitigation Report Prepared for Department of Building and Safety City of Hermosa Beach by Melvyn Green and Associates, Inc. December, 1989 1 TapleioftContents 1 Executive Summary Introduction 1 Terms Used in Report 4 Survey and Findings 5 1 Seismic Safety and Existing Buildings 7 ' Risk and Type of Construction 8 Occupancy Factors in Seismic Safety 9 1 Seismic Hazard Mitigation Programs 12 Cost Implications For Owner 15 Costs to the City for Implementation 16 Type Of Structure To Regulate gulate 17 1 Implications Of Regulations And SB 547 18 ' Mitigation Programs 19 Recommendations 21 1 1 1 1 1 1 Executive Summary Recent state legislation, SB 547(1986), requires local building departments to identify all unreinforced masonry wall buildings, to establish a mitigation program, and to file a report with the appropriate city or county legislative body and with the Seismic Safety Commission before January 1, 1990. The law does not contain provisions requiring repair. This report presents the fmdings of the building survey and presents approaches that fit the needs of the City of Hermosa Beach. It considers the requirements of SB 547 and also the specific issues relative to the building stock of the city. The preliminary survey found sixty-one unreinforced masonry buildings as defined under SB 547. Most were along Pier Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, but some were also on Pacific Coast Highway, Aviation, the Strand, and other streets. There are costs to the City and property owners for this program which are discussed in the report. A program of incentives is suggested to be made available to owners of these buildings. The report presents several options. The first is only notification of owners. The second is a passive program where owners must strengthen when the building undergoes major alterations which increase the economic life of the building. The third is an active program in which owners are mandated to retrofit their buildings for seismic safety. Each option has its advantages and disadvantages which are discussed in the report. The report recommends a combination of the passive and active programs. Structures with a large occupant load would be mandated to do the work within specified period. The number of structures in this category is estimated at less than five. Other buildings would have to do the seismic strengthening if they did major work on the building. The idea is to permit market forces to determine those structures that have economic viability. However at the end of a reasonable period the remaining buildings would be mandated to strengthen. It is recommended that a seismic retrofit ordinance be developed and an incentive program be established. The technical provisions of the ordinance should be based on the model ordinance proposed for the 1991 Uniform Building Codes which reflects the experience of the 1987 Whittier earthquake. A public information program to make building owners and the community aware of the hazards and how they can be mitigated is also recommended. Introduction ' — Under SB -547, (Chapter 12.2 (8875), Division 1 of Title 2 of the Government Code), all local jurisdictions in Seismic Zone 4 must do the following: 1. Identify all potentially hazardous buildings within the jurisdiction on or before January 1, 1990. ' 2. Establish a mitigation program for potentially hazardous buildings. 3. By January 1, 1990, all information regarding potentially hazardous buildings and all mitigation programs must be reported to the appropriate city or county legislative body and filed with the Seismic Safety Commission. This law is an attempt to correct as many seismically hazardous buildings as possible before the next major earthquake in California, believed by geologists and seis- mologists to be imminent. Potentially hazardous buildings are defined as unreinforced masonry wall buildings. Exempt structures include residential structures of five or fewer units and warehouses and similar structures not normally occupied. Historic structures are exempt from the listing of potentially hazardous buildings but are not exempt from the mitigation program. Buildings owned by local jurisdictions are not exempt from the provisions of this law. Communities throughout California are implementing mitigation programs for seismically hazardous buildings. Reasons for this increased activity are: A broadened awareness due to state mandated programs, research and disaster ' planning, of the potential for loss of life in an earthquake. An awareness of the impact of the loss to property on both the owner and the community. The costs to the community in the event of a major earthquake could be staggering. Within the past few years, cost effective methods of strengthening hazardous ' structures have become available, primarily as a result of research funded by the National Science Foundation under the Federal Earthquake Hazard Reduction Act. The interest in preservation of our historic resources and rehabilitation of buildings has also contributed to the interest in strengthening brick buildings. Recent state legislation, SB 547(1986), requires mandatory identification of hazardous buildings (defined as unreinforced masonry buildings, including those where URM is infill rather than structure) and notification of owners and tenants. ' It does not contain provisions requiring repair. Communities that have effectively implemented an ordinance provide other juris- dictions with models for enforcement approaches, costs and political realities of hazard mitigation. There are a number of reasons for undertaking a program of seismic hazard mitigation. Several of these are : 1. Experts consider unreinforced masonry structures the greatest single hazard to life in the event of a major earthquake. It is anticipated that there would be a five fold reduction in the anticipated casualties if these structures were strengthened. 2. Buildings that might otherwise collapse or be damaged beyond repair under moderate ground shaking could be expected to sustain moderate damage and remain serviceable. 3. Essential facilities needed to cope with the immediate effects of an earthquake would stand a much improved chance of surviving one in functional condition. Essential facilities include fire and police stations, emergency communications facilities, and storage buildings used for emergency supplies. 4. Buildings not worth repairing would eventually be demolished, conceivably making the land available for more productive use. 5. Rehabilitation of older buildings often stimulates remodeling, making them more competitive for tenants. There are also some disadvantages to doing this work, including: 1. Major expense for rehabilitation could cause an owner to demolish or abandon an otherwise serviceable building. Many owners may simply cease spending money to maintain the building. 2. Temporary relocation of tenants may be necessary when the work on residential buildings requires evacuation of the building. 3. Rents in affected buildings would have to increase to amortize the expense of repair. 4. There is the possibility of dissolution or bankruptcy of small businesses, with attendant loss of employment and tax base, if expensive repairs are forced on some commercial properties without a program of financial assistance. 5. Interruption of normal business to permit performance of remedial construction could work severe hardship on many small business, forcing layoffs and closures. This report discusses approaches that may fit the needs of the City of Hermosa Beach. It considers the requirements of SB 547 and also the specific issues relative to the building stock of Hermosa Beach. Potential hazards noted in the report, as they relate to existing buildings, are considered in the development of these recommendations. The report summarizes the activities of other cities throughout the state. An overview of building occupancy types is discussed in the context of potential death and injury. The recommendations in this report are based on a growing consensus of the engineering and building regulatory professions; on adopted ordinances such as those of Los Angeles, model codes and the California Seismic Safety Commission; and ultimately on observations and judgments of the consultant. TermsiUsed s i n } Report Active Program - A program of seismic repair in which government identifies hazardous structures and mandates correction. Passive Program - A program of seismic repair in which government mandates seismic upgrading when voluntary improvements are made to the building. Advisory Program - A program of informing property owners that hazards may exist in their buildings. Repair is voluntary. Notification - Notice delivered to the owner of record of a property in a manner that can be traced. Wall Anchors - A through the wall bolt and plate attached to a floor joist or roof rafter. These bolts are intended to prevent the wall from pulling away from the floors and roof. Potentially Hazardous Building (SB -547) - Includes the following: "Any building constructed prior to the adoption of local building codes requiring earthquake resistant design and constructed of unreinforced masonry wall con- struction." This includes both public and private buildings. Excluded are warehouses not used for human occupancy and buildings with five or fewer living units (unless part of a larger structure). Historic structures are exempted from the survey because they are regulated by the State Historic Building Code. Historic structures are not excluded from any mitigation program by this law. 4 Survey, and -Findings Faults and Earthquakes in Hermosa Beach and western Los Angeles County Hermosa Beach has been affected by numerous past earthquakes on the Inglewood - Newport, southern San Andreas, Malibu faults and other local faults. The city was affected by the 1933 Long Beach earthquake and the 1971 Sylmar event. Other events include the 1973 Malibu/Oxnard earthquake and other recent offshore earthquakes. Historically the big earthquakes along the San Andreas fault have affected Hermosa Beach. The earthquake damage possibilities for Hermosa Beach include the future earthquakes on the San Andreas and the Newport -Inglewood faults. Other smaller events, in the magnitude 4 to 6 range will no doubt occur in the region and possibly close enough to cause damage and building collapse within the city. Survey Findings In Hermosa Beach, a total of sixty-one buildings were identified in the survey as qualifying under the SB -547 definition of "potentially hazardous building". Unreinforced masonry buildings within the city include 38 one- story structures, 22 two story structures, and one three-story structure. Occupancy of these buildings varies from warehouses to dining establishments. The majority, 36 buildings, are retail stores. Twelve of the remaining buildings are restaurants, four are offices, one is a multi -family residential building with seven units. In addition, one church is in an unreinforced masonry building, as is one theater and a stadium. Thirty-one buildings, including twenty of the thirty-six retail stores and nine of the restaurants, have occupant loads estimated at more than one hundred people per building. Four buildings, including one retail store, two restaurants, and a church have occupant loads estimated at more than three hundred people. Potential Losses The Pier Avenue and Hermosa Avenue commercial areas contain a number of structures identified as being of unreinforced masonry wall construction. Severe and widespread damage is possible in these areas. If all the buildings were fully occupied at the time of an earthquake, more than 5,000 people would be at risk. Obviously the probability of this is remote. The actual number of persons affected would be from 50% to 75% of this amount. 5 The total assessed valuation of the buildings at risk is approximately $4.9 million. This is considerably lower than the actual value of the property. Seismic Safety and Existing Buildings Existing buildings may need seismic upgrading for several reasons. The first concern is protection of life and reduction of injuries. This is the minimum acceptable level of improvement. Further strengthening may be desirable to limit destruction of property. Usually, property protection is not a concern of government in retroactive code adoptions; however, for "essential services" such as police, fire service, and hospitals, government mandates a level of property protection that will keep selected facilities functional after an earthquake. As unreinforced masonry retroactive codes have evolved is a degree of property protection is built in, since life safety means the building must remain standing. The repair or demolish option becomes an economic decision by the owner after a disaster. Another consideration is post disaster recovery. Certain non- essential facilities need to be restored quickly. These include drug stores, markets, banks, and similar community establishments. Such facilities are not completely necessary, but if they are not functioning, a greater load will be placed on assistance organizations such as the Red Cross and the Salvation Amy. If the non -injured population does not need much assistance, emergency service organizations can concentrate on people who are injured or homeless. A community may wish to organize a program to upgrade such structures sooner than other occupancies. Another problem to consider is disruption of business and government as a result of interior damage such as collapsed lights and ceilings, fallen file cabinets, etc. Many businesses will not survive a protracted period of inability to function, and will never reopen. In general, however, the decision to protect the business by doing seismic repair is considered to be a private rather than a governmental decision. 7 Risk and Type of Construction Certain types of structures have been identified as hazardous based on past earthquake experience. All potentially hazardous buildings identified in Hermosa Beach are unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings. This type of structure has been the most common cause of death and injury in California earthquake ex- perience. URM bearing wall buildings are brick, concrete block, hollow clay tile and adobe structures with walls supporting the weight of a roof or floor(s) in addition to their own weight. Most URM buildings were constructed before 1934 when minimum statewide seismic standards were mandated. In addition, some cities did not adopt a building code until some time after 1934; in such areas, state regulations may not have been enforced either. Thus, some structures constructed since 1934 may also be unreinforced. URM bearing wall buildings do not have an adequate physical connection between the wall and the floor or roof elements. When the ground begins moving the roof and floor may separate from the walls and collapse. Falling walls also may injure passers-by. These buildings usually have a parapet; these are especially hazardous because they are likely to fall on occupants running from the building. Many unreinforced masonry buildings are commercial and apartment buildings, but other occupancies also may be of this construction type. 8 Occupancy -Factors in Seismic Safety It is not possible to eliminate all risk to building occupants in a seismic area. Seismic ordinances only attempt to limit risk to what is considered an acceptable level. One way of limiting risk is to strengthen the most hazardous buildings. Another method is to regulate building use so that level of risk is commensurate with acceptability of failure. The different building occupancies as described by the building code have varying specific risks. For example, a specific risk of a densely loaded assembly occupancy is panic. Such an occupancy is inherently more risky than an office, where the occupants are less densely packed and are familiar with the building's exit system. Buildings with higher occupancy -specific risks tend to be more closely regulated. Another reason for regulating some occupancies more than others is that some occupancies are vital to community recovery after an earthquake; a good example would be a hospital. In addition, certain non- essential activities need to be restored quickly. These were discussed to some extent in the previous section. A community may wish to organize a program to upgrade such structures sooner than other occupancies. A special problem with pharmacies was discovered after the Coalinga earthquake. The State of California regulates pharmacies and licenses them to operate at a specific address. If the records and stock are recoverable, but the building too damaged to use, the pharmacy cannot dispense medications. Since this is a very important function, unnecessary closure of pharmacies can only result in unnecessary loads placed on emergency service providers. Another problem to consider is disruption of business and government as a result of interior damage such as collapse of lights and ceilings, file cabinets falling over, etc. Many businesses will not survive a protracted period of inability to function, and will never reopen. The following discussion of individual occupancies parallels risk acceptability judgments contained in the Uniform Building Code. A Occupancies - This classification includes assembly buildings such as major theaters, churches, grandstands, and other buildings where people are closely packed in unfamiliar surroundings. Regulation of such buildings was one of the earliest tasks of building codes, prompted by a series of theater fire disasters in the early years of this century. Although some recent experience has suggested that users today are much less likely to panic, the social and political consequences of total collapse of a building with hundreds of occupants dictate maximum protection of such occupan- cies. 9 B Occupancies - In this group are business buildings, small restaurants, manufac- turing where no highly combustible or explosive materials are used, offices, fire and police stations, warehouses, aircraft hangars, and college -level educational buildings where occupant load is less than 50 people to a room. It is not possible to treat all these buildings the same. Police and fire facilities, obviously, must remain operational after an earthquake, so they require maximum protection. Large drinking and dining establishments should offer a high level of protection because occupant load is relatively high and occupants are probably unfamiliar with the building's exit system. Department stores might be almost as hazardous: although usually containing fewer occupants, they have considerable hazard due to high -piled stock. Moreover, department stores have, on occasion, occupant loads similar to that of an assembly building. Offices usually are much less densely occupied; most of the users are familiar with the building; and a recognized authority figure such as a supervisor might be able to direct building evacuation. Office safety is improved with drills and training. It should be pointed out, though, that B occupancy buildings may be in the older commercial areas of a city, and many are built of unreinforced masonry. In this report the term B-2 occupancy is used occasionally. This means the occupancies described above. E Occupancies - This group includes educational through the twelfth grade and buildings used for day care of children. For social and political reasons, failure of such buildings is considered unacceptable. Consequently, they are strongly regu- lated. Public schools are regulated by the state but private schools fall under the authority of the local jurisdiction. No URM buildings in this occupancy were identified in Hermosa Beach. H Occupancies - This group includes occupancies that are hazardous from a fire point of view. Some present special seismic hazards, others do not. Buildings housing operations using explosives, toxic chemicals that would present a public health hazard if the building collapsed, or severe fire hazards that would tie up emergency services personnel and equipment are among those for which a high level of seismic regulation is recommended. No URM buildings in this occupancy were identified in Hermosa Beach. I Occupancies - These buildings include institutional buildings such as jails, hospitals, and nursing homes. These facilities must remain relatively undamaged for post -earthquake use. No URM buildings in this occupancy were identified in Hermosa Beach. R Occupancies - This includes single family dwellings as well as apartments and hotels. Regulation philosophy for single family dwellings has in the past been that within very large margins, safety is a matter of private choice. This philosophy has resulted in comparatively high fire risk in single-family dwellings, with about eighty percent of fire fatalities occurring in this occupancy. Nevertheless, the potential for regulating this occupancy probably is not high. Fortunately, seismic risk for average 10 residential buildings probably is lower than fire risk since most dwellings are wood frame construction, not a high seismic hazard. Apartments and hotels, Occupancy Group R-1, are easier to regulate, probably involve higher risk levels, and certainly have higher occupant densities. One apartment building of unreinforced masonry construction was identified in the survey. Seismic+Hazard'Mitigation Programs This section summarizes existing retroactive code adoptions and other activities of selected jurisdictions throughout the state. The information contained in this section is based on a survey of every jurisdiction in California and of cities in other seismically active states. The purpose was to determine the extent of retroactive seismic provisions. We found no existing building ordinances outside of California. This survey was conducted in 1984 and has been kept current with information supplemented by personal contact with city officials. Many jurisdictions are now adopting regulations in response to SB -547. The 1989 San Francisco earthquake has resulted in many more communities considering and adopting mandatory strengthening programs, similar to the Los Angeles program described below. In general, most of the attention of local government has been directed toward the problem of unreinforced masonry (URM) structures. The reason for not retrofitting buildings other than URM buildings is basically cost, lack of research on low cost repair methods, the significant architectural effects of strengthening, and the un- popularity of retroactive ordinances. There is general agreement that retroactive regulations should address life safety only; thus, ordinances adopted to date do not attempt to control property damage. Adopted ordinances have attempted to caution the public on the expected results of seismic retrofit. The preamble to the Los Angeles and the State Model Ordinance states "The provisions of this section are minimum standards for structural seismic resistance established primarily to reduce the risk of life loss or injury and will not necessarily prevent loss of life or injury or prevent earthquake damage to an existing building which complies with this section." Requirements for other types of construction such as non -ductile concrete frame buildings have not been developed. The Structural Engineers Association of Southern California has an active committee responding to this need at this time. Specific ordinances have been adopted in the following jurisdictions: Los Angeles - Los Angeles's ordinance regulates all URM bearing wall buildings constructed before 1934. Residential buildings of fewer than five dwelling units are exempt. The Los Angeles ordinance went through extensive public hearings and review by the design professions. The original ordinance was known as Division 68. Later research revised some of the criteria. The later version including some reorganization of the Building Code is now called Division 88. The ordinance requires the building be upgraded based on anchorage, wall stability, diaphragm strength, parapets, and wall in -plane shear. Corrections are to be accomplished on a time schedule after notification by the city. The city originally scheduled the program over about a 15 year period. After the 12 Mexico City earthquake the program was accelerated. This ordinance has become the basis for most of the adopted regulations. An owner may choose to accomplish the work in two phases, the installation of anchor bolts being phase 1. This grants a two year extension for full compliance. This is attractive in a warehouse or other open building where finishes do not need to be removed to accomplish the work. Most owners appear to choose the full compliance option which is no doubt less disruptive and costly than doing the work in two phases. Los Angeles also adopted a zoning ordinance amendment that permits an owner to demolish a building and construct a new structure of the same square footage without meeting the current parking requirements. Long Beach - The Long Beach Ordinance followed a unique path for enforcement. It regulates all URM buildings using a hazard grading concept. This compares the seismic resisting system to the strength required for a new building. Buildings are then ranked by their hazard level which determines the schedule of retrofit. The Long Beach Ordinance does not recognize the recent research on URM wall stability used by Los Angeles. Therefore retrofitting buildings in Long Beach is much more costly than in Los Angeles. Palo Alto - The Palo Alto ordinance takes a different direction in seismic strengthen- ing. It regulates all buildings constructed prior to August 1, 1976 with exceptions based on occupant load. The ordinance is basically an identification tool. The analysis of URM buildings is based on the Los Angeles Ordinance. Other structures are to be investigated for structural inadequacies which could lead to a collapse or partial collapse during an earthquake. The focus of the ordinance is to determine the potential life threat to occupants, pedestrians, or occupants of adjacent buildings. It requires a report summarizing the engineering survey and analysis of structures. The building owner is required to notify all tenants, in writing, that an investigation has been conducted and the report is available for review at the Building Department. The owner is further required to submit a letter indicating the owner's intentions for dealing with the potential collapse hazards found to exist in the building. The building is evaluated using a capacity/demand ratio for the building and its elements. Special rules are directed toward non -ductile reinforced concrete frames, connec- tions in the precast concrete system and elements, assessing the effects on non-struc- tural elements such as infill walls, architectural elements, ceilings and a number of other items. Another section requires consideration of the site geology including the liquefaction potential and ground shaking. A new geotechnical investigation is not required. Palo Alto is using zoning incentives to obtain voluntary compliance. Owners may expand their structure without providing additional parking, if they strengthen their building. Anaheim - Anaheim used an interesting method to mitigate their URM buildings. The redevelopment agency purchased all of them and planned their demolition. There were numerous cries from citizens to save the buildings but at last report the agency prevailed. Gardena - Gardena has regulations for B-2 occupancies, offices, restaurants and small stores and R-1 apartment buildings that are URM structures. The ordinance contains some criteria similar to those of the Long Beach Ordinance. Their program is stated to be retroactive. Lancaster - The ordinance uses the provisions of the Uniform Building Code defining unsafe buildings to address URM structures. San Bernardino - The County of San Bernardino has adopted regulations based the Los Angeles Ordinance. The ordinance is for URM buildings only. Santa Ana - Santa Ana has adopted the original Los Angeles ordinance (Division 68). They have an active program to correct buildings, in cooperation with the redevelopment agency. Santa Rosa - Santa Rosa's ordinance reflects the disastrous earthquake of the late 1950's. The ordinance regulates all buildings constructed prior to 1958 except schools and single family dwellings. Buildings must be examined and an engineering report submitted. The ordinance contains design values for analysis and evaluation criteria. The State Historic Building Code (SHBC) -The SHBC contains criteria for en- gineering analysis and for evaluation of URM buildings. A number of jurisdictions regulate URM buildings through use of the SHBC. Uniform Code for Building Conservation (UCBC) - The UCBC is a recently adopted code promulgated by the International Conference of Building Officials. This code works with the Uniform Building Code, currently used by the city. This code contains model provisions for unreinforced masonry structures. It is based on the Los Angeles Ordinance with some modifications reflecting recent research. Cost Implications For Owner Strengthening buildings costs money. The cost estimates presented to the Los Angeles City Council varied from $6.22 per square foot for apartments to $12.08 per square foot for apartments and offices. These are based on 1980 construction costs, compared to replacement cost of approximately $40.00 per square foot. (Amounts quoted include all engineering and permit fees as well as contractor's profit and overhead.) Another group of cost estimates, prepared in 1987 for the California Seismic Safety Commission, showed seismic strengthening costs ranging from about $8.00 to $12.00 per square foot for most buildings. Our findings are that the cost estimates are for structures of several thousand square feet in floor area and greater. Smaller structures under 2000 square feet, such as those along Pier and Hermosa Avenues, may have a higher per square foot cost, perhaps in the range of $15.00 per square foot. This is due to the fact that these small structures have a greater wall length to floor area ratio than larger structures. One factor that distorts reported costs is that many building owners decide to do additional improvements when the contractor is on the site. This often includes new partitions, electrical work and roofing. In some communities the seismic upgrading cost cannot be recovered by rent increases, due to controls or market limitations. In other communities seismic strengthening has encouraged additional building remodeling, an element of neigh- borhood improvement programs. Cities have used a variety of loan and grant programs to encourage seismic improve- ments. These can also include the use of tax increment funds when in a redevelop- ment area. 15 Costsitoithe-Cityfor Implementation Implementation of a seismic improvement program will entail costs on behalf of the city. There is a significant technical and clerical effort to identify and notify properties and owners. There will be numerous inquiries requiring written or verbal response received from the public and building owners relative to a mitigation program. Not all of the plan check and inspection costs will be returned from building permit and plan check fees as currently established in the building code. Some staff increases, or additional use of consultants, may be necessary. A public information program is suggested to assist in smoothly implementing any hazard mitigation program. 16 I Type:Of Structure To Regulate Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Wall - As described above these are the buildings for which most cities, including Los Angeles, have required strengthening. Typical- ly, single family and small apartment buildings have been excluded from the requirements. Regulating unreinforced masonry bearing wall structures would include a number of older commercial structures such as those along Pier, Hermosa, and Pacific Coast Highway. No steel or concrete frame structures with unreinforced masonry infill were iden- tified. Implications. Of Regulations And SB 547 Cost for Construction - The rehabilitation of the buildings will cost the owners money. For the URM bearing wall buildings the costs are reasonably known. These are considered by lenders to be "non-productive" costs and special loan programs may be desirable. Possible Loss of Significant Structures - There is the option of demolition of the buildings by the owner rather than seismic retrofitting. In such cases there may be a significant effect on the City and the character of Hermosa and Pier Avenues. Cost for Regulation - There will be costs to the city as described earlier. The exact costs will be dependent on the program specifics. Costs can be charged against permit and other fees. Some jurisdictions are considering a "no fee" permit for seismic strengthening as an incentive. Disruption to Business, Tenants and Residents - There will be disruptions to businesses while structures are undergoing rehabilitation. Some marginal business may choose to close. Some occupants of apartments may be required to relocate on a temporary basis. Rehabilitation Technology - The techniques for strengthening of URM bearing. wall buildings currently exist and there are numerous contractors available to do the work. The fact that there are codes minimizes the liability of the design professional for work on structures that will suffer damage in an earthquake even after strengthen- ing. The code provisions proposed for Hermosa Beach are the same as that proposed for the 1991 Uniform Code for Building Conservation. These provisions reflect the experience of the 1987 Whittier Earthquake and the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. 18 Mitigation Programs There are several mitigation programs and options available to the City of Hermosa Beach relative to a seismic hazard mitigation program. A program may be either "active" or "passive" or a combination of the two. An active program is a program of mandatory retrofit of structures or a mandatory structural analysis and report on the seismic condition of structures. This involves notifying owners, setting deadlines for compliance and the necessary legal follow- up for those that do not comply. Usually the ordinance permits the city to abate the hazard through demolition of the structure if the owner takes no action. An active program treats all buildings of a class, type or occupancy equally. It may impose hardships on some owners. A passive program only requires retrofit of a structure if a permit is applied for, and then frequently only if the construction is above a certain cost, frequently this is when the "economic life" of the structure is extended. The philosophy here is that in time all buildings will be altered and will be included in the program. The unfairness of the passive program is that the owner who wishes to improve his structure is forced to meet all the regulations but the owner or an adjacent building, who lets a building run down, is not required to do anything. Some jurisdictions have passive programs for unreinforced masonry buildings. In this case when an owner applies for a major rehabilitation permit seismic upgrading is required. Other "passive" programs include those such as Palo Alto's. In this case the owners of certain types of buildings are required to have an engineering analysis prepared and the tenants notified of the findings. The apparent goal of such an ordinance is to bring pressure upon the owner to upgrade. This program also provides a data base for any future city activities. (As a result of the October, 1989 Earthquake, they are considering additional regulations such as a mandatory program.) There is a concern among some city attorneys that knowledge of a potential hazard and no action leaves the city in a position of potential liability. As aresult few jurisdictions are considering the option of notification or similar passive programs. As far as we know, an advisory program has never been formally defined. Such a program would inform owners that their structure may be hazardous; the owner may wish to take some action, but there will be no mandated program by the city. A phased program was used in Los Angeles. Owners who installed wall anchors, tension bolts, to the walls at the floor and roof lines were granted an additional two years for full compliance. 19 Option A - Minimum Program Under SB -547 The minimum requirements of SB -547 have been interpreted by some to only require a jurisdiction to survey, identify and notify the owners that they have a "potentially hazardous building." This program fulfills the stated requirements of the law. Some jurisdictions have stated that this is all they will do. There would be no further cost to the community for this program after notification. The mitigation program would be notification of owners. Several City Attorneys have expressed concern that, regardless of other state legislation, the City may have liability to know of these structures and not take a more assertive role in mitigation. There is also the fear that if local government does nothing then the legislature will mandate the program, details and schedule for local government. In light of the damage from the 1989 San Francisco earthquake, most jurisdictions are not looking favorably at this limited type of program. Option B - Passive Program A passive program would be the notification of owners and requiring them to strengthen the structure if construction or remodeling work is undertaken. As described above the passive program affects only those undertaking a significant alteration to a building, one which extends the building's economic life. This could have the effect of discouraging architectural rehabilitation of structures since owners may fear it would trigger major additional costs. Palo Alto has used economic incentives of additional floor space. This is dependent of the economic vitality of an area. Option C - Active Program An active program would be the mandatory strengthening of unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings. This option would be similar to the Los Angeles Ordinance. This program could be accomplished over a period of about three to ten years. The exact time schedule should be selected based on other local programs underway. Obviously this program would have the most significant effect on the buildings identified. It would also save the city and the owners much in the event of a moderate or large earthquake. An option in the active program is the installation of wall anchors (tension bolts). This would provide some interim strengthening that would assist in moderate earthquakes. Combinations mixing passive and active programs, initial parapet bracing and phased programs are possible. Recommendations It is recommended that the City of Hermosa Beach consider a combination of a Passive Program and an Active Program The following example of a plan of action is suggested: An ordinance should be developed that specifies that any structure altered, rehabilitated or modified and for which a building permit is required and in which the economic life of the structure is extended (major rehabilitation) shall be seismi- cally strengthened in accordance with the seismic retrofit ordinance to be adopted by the city. Such provisions shall apply until January 1, 1995. Any structures which have not been so upgraded by that date shall then be strengthened by January 1, 1997. (An active program.) Regardless of the passive program, all assembly buildings with an occupant load greater than 300 should be strengthened in accordance with the ordinance by January 1, 1995. The city completed a parapet bracing program in the 1960's. This program braced parapets over the public way and exits. Several deaths occurred in Santa Cruz from the Loma Priem earthquake due to falling parapets on adjacent structures. Any unreinforced masonry parapet more than ten feet above an adjacent building's roof should be braced. A time extension of two years should be given building owners who install wall anchors within eighteen months of notification of the requirements by the city. Several other communities have used incentives for seismic strengthening, including zoning incentives, financial incentives and grants through redevelopment; and free permits and engineering through building department programs. Most of this would probably be funded by using Community Development Block Grants. In light of the San Francisco earthquake it is possible that some state funded programs or even federal tax incentives may become available. We recommend that the city develop a public information program. Presentations should be made to service clubs and other citizen groups. 21 1 List+oftBuildings in Survey 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page No. 1 HERMOSA BEACH °02/01/90 BUILDING SURVEY VALUATION REPORT BUILDING ADDRESS OWNERS NAME AND ADDRESS HIST VALUE UNITS OCCUPANTS BLDG'S ** EMERGENCY - N 11TH PLACE „552 11TH STREET,SOUTH,58-60 1ST ST.,540, AVIATION BLVD.,1040, AVIATION BLVD.,1042, AVIATION BLVD.,914, BARD STREET „ 1319 HERMOSA AVE.,1040, HERMOSA AVE.,1046, HERMOSA AVE.,1048, HERMOSA AVE.,1112, HERMOSA AVE.,1120, STEVEN R. MITCHELL N 70876 0 38 1 865 MANHATTAN BEACH BLVD. MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 SIROON MANGURIAN 4519 NOELINE AVENUE ENCINO, CA 91316 N 8616 0 15 1 THOMPSON OF CALIFORNIA N 29129 0 38 1 700 15 ST. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 RONALD J. MICHEL N 17317 0 72 16158 MESQUITE ST. FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 OPAL BRYANT N 6658 0 35 1 513 S. HELBERTA AVE. REDONDO BEACH, CA 90277 EDMUND TALBOT N 505 0 100 1 P.O. BOX 7000-110 REDONDO BEACH, CA 90277 EDWARD GOOCH N 30171 0 11 1 15315 MAGNOLIA BLVD. SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403 JUAN AND MARY LACSON 441 7TH ST. SANTA MONICA, CA 90402 N 459000 0 218 1 CHARLES D. ABERLE ET AL N 23050 0 105 1 1350 SHADYBROOK DRIVE BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 PHILIP & BEATRICE GERSH N 23511 0 195 804 N. FOOTHILL RD. BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 YUTAKA TAMAKI N 18438 0 93 1 18802 HERKIN AVE. TORRANCE, CA 90504 JOHN R. WARREN 1128 HERMOSA AVE. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 N 32266 0 72 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page No. 2 HERMOSA BEACH 02/01/90 BUILDING ADDRESS BUILDING SURVEY VALUATION REPORT OWNERS NAME AND ADDRESS HIST VALUE UNITS OCCUPANTS BLDGS HERMOSA AVE.,1128, JOHN WARREN N 12145 0 63 1 1128 HERMOSA AVE. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 HERMOSA AVE.,1150, CHARLES D. ABERLE ET. AL. N 84236 0 140 1 1350 SHADYBROOK DR. BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 HERMOSA AVE.,1220, OLIVER & GLADIS ARNOLD (TRUST) N 53665 0 66 1 22535 OAK CANTON RD. SALINAS, CA 93908 HERMOSA AVE.,1227, MICHAEL NEUFIELD & J. NAUGHTON N 116013 0 262 1 P.O.BOX 3835 MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 HERMOSA AVE.,1238, NANCY COLVILLE,CHRISTIAN TITLE N 52317 0 37 1 1238 HERMOSA AVE. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 HERMOSA AVE.,1242, GEORGE BECK N 45721 0 378 1217 LAS F'ULGAS PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272 HERMOSA AVE.,1312, JEROME & HELEN HESS N 263880 0 91 1 P.O. BOX 1549 TORRANCE, CA 90505 HERMOSA AVE.,1320, JERRY HESS N 258706 0 300 1 P.O. BOX 1549 TORRANCE, CA 90505 HERMOSA AVE.,802, CAROL L. GERMAINE N 115 0 23 P.O. BOX 890 SANTA MONICA, CA 90406 HERMOSA AVE.,832, LAWRENCE M. DAVID N 21359 0 92 1 5 RANCHERO RD. ROLLING HILLS ESTATES, CA 90274 MANHATTAN AVENUE,1547, FIRST CHURCH.OF CHRIST SCIENST N 143707 0 1542 1 1547 MANHATTAN AVENUE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY,150, CROCKER NAT'L BANK C/O F. BIGO N 29391 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page No. 3 HERMOSA BEACH 02/01/90 BUILDING ADDRESS BUILDING SURVEY VALUATION REPORT OWNERS NAME AND ADDRESS HIST VALUE UNITS OCCUPANTS BLDGS P.O. BOX 6370 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94163 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY,210, ALFONZO FELDEER N 18417 0 36 1 838 2ND ST. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY,246, TEXAUS INV. CORP. N 271218 0 193 1 1553 VIA LOPEZ PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CA 90274 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY,322, ARMANDO & CONSUDO PEREZ N 37365 0 208 1 3847 TIFFANY COURT TORRANCE, CA 90505 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY,518, D'S FOREIGN AUTO PARTS N 10368 0 57 256 ROCKY POINT ROAD PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CA 90274 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY,705, CARMEN D. RASPE N 61886 0 116 1 925 24TH ST. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY,729, WESTWOOD MUSIC ASSOCIATION N 201837 0 142 1 6301 SUNSET BLVD., SUITE 206 LOS ANGELES. CA 90028 PIER AVE.,11, QUENTIN L. THELEN N 36994 0 71 1 3-11 PIER AVE. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PIER AVE.,111, SEYMOUR BILOWIT N 392646 0 621 1 1212 HERMOSA AVE. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 F'IER AVE.,112, PHILIP & BEATRICE GERSH N 85920 0 67 1 804 N. FOOTHILL BLVD. BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 PIER AVE.,117, SEYMOUR BILOWIT N 400498 0 153 1 1212 HERMOSA AVE. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PIER AVE.,127, JAMES LAPONT N 81071 0 127 1 2200 PACIFIC COAST HWY HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PIER AVE.,19, QUENTIN & JUANITA THELEN N 86593. 0 200 1 11 PIER AVE. Page No. 4 HERMOSA BEACH 02/01/90 BUILDING ADDRESS PIER AVE.,205, PIER AVE.,22-26, PIER AVE.,30, PIER AVE.,316, PIER AVE.,321, PIER AVE.,34, PIER AVE.,37, PIER AVE.,4, PIER AVE.,418, PIER AVE.,50, PIER AVE.,52, PIER AVE.,58, BUILDING SURVEY VALUATION REPORT OWNERS NAME AND ADDRESS HIST VALUE UNITS OCCUPANTS BLDGS HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 WON & K.ATSU}:O AHN N 95508 0 24 1 P.O. BOX 656 HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 ROY YEAGER P.O. BOX 728 LAWNDALE, CA 90260 N 135425 0 204 1 CRAIG KAUFMAN N 90266 0 255 1 461 30TH ST. MANHATTAN BEACH, CA JOE B. NOBLE N 28082 0 200 1 545 21ST ST. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 GLEN THOMSON 6875 UNION RD. PASO ROBLES, CA 93446 N 105560 0 115 1 PATRICK & GERARD DELVIN N 109500 0 53 1 • 330 MANHATTAN BEACH BLVD. MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 AURELIANO & GRAZIA UGOLINI N 58848 0 152 1 39 PIER AVENUE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 ESTATE OF ELENOR W. BOICE N 21224 0 75 1 P.O. BOX 590 ALHAMBRA, CA 91802 MORGAN RALLS & WILLIAM WALTERS N 52020 0 60 1020 MANHATTAN BCH BLVD MANHATTAN BCH, CA 90266 JTH ENTERPRISES, INC. 50 PIER AVENUE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 REMO BENIGNI 102 E. FLORIDA HEMET, CA 92343 REMO BENIGNI 102 E. FLORIDA HEMET, CA 92343 N 109500 0 180 1 N 53641 0 180 1 N 54713 0 90 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page Na. 5 HERMOSA BEACH 02/01/90 BUILDING SURVEY VALUATION REPORT BUILDING ADDRESS OWNERS NAME AND ADDRESS HIST VALUE UNITS OCCUPANTS BLDGS PIER AVE.,59, THOMAS & JOSEPH EGERER N 22688 0 117 1 19315 ARCHFIELD CIRCLE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 90648 PIER AVE.,65, PAULA SHEINWOLD N 19853 0 52 1 2625 ANGELO DR. LOS ANGELES, CA 90077 PIER AVE.,68, JIN & CHANG WI N 21814 0 180 1 2900 HERMOSA VIEW HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PIER AVE.,73, PAULA SHEINWOLD N 18938 0 146 1 2625 ANGELO DR. LOS ANGELES, CA 90077 PIER AVE.,74, GERARD & ALAIN DELIN N 44603 0 94 1 72 PIER AVE HERMOSA AVE, CA 90254 PIER AVE.,8-20, ELENOR W.BOICE (ESTATE OF) N 73263 0 324 1 F.O. BOX 590 ALHAMBRA, CA 91802 PIER AVE.,90, BANK OF AMERICA, SUSAN PARKER N 119934 0 50 1 555 S. FLOWER ST. LOS ANGELES, CA 90071 STRAND,1306, MICHAEL SIRES & WILLIAM ALLEN N 48434 0 75 1 2517 CREST DR. MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 STRAND,1318, HERMOSA BCH INVESTMENT CO. N 2040 0 113 1 BREWER & KELLY HARE 305 LYTTON AV., PALO ALTO, CA 94301 STRAND,1340, WILLARD & IMOGENE JAMES N 42276 0 100 1 60 10TH STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 STRAND,718, TAK & E. HIROMOTO, M. SAIKI N 58007 7 11 1 1 CRESTWIND DR. RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90274 VALLEY,861, CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH N 0 0 250 1 1315 VALLEY HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 Page No. 6 HERMOSA BEACH 02/01/90 BUILDING ADDRESS ** Subtotal ** *** Total *** BUILDING SURVEY VALUATION REPORT OWNERS NAME AND ADDRESS HIST VALUE UNITS OCCUPANTS BLDGS 4900422 7 9303 61 4900422 7 9303 61 1 1 1 1 1 REPORT TO SEISMIC SAFETY COMMISSION PAGE - 1 Date of Report - 01/31/90 City - HERMOSA BEACH County - LOS ANGELES Contact Person : Name - WILLIAM GROVE Street Address - 1315 VALLEY DRIVE City - Hermosa Beach Telephone - 231-318-0235 * Identifying Buildings * Number of Buildings Identified as "Potentially Hazardous Buildings" Type of Bldg by | Bldgs | Sq. Ft | |Type of Bldg by | Bldgs | Sq. Ft | Use(primary use) | | :Structural System | | | || } | RETAIL 36 121511 BEARING WALL 60 252380 OFFICE 4 13078 STEEL FRAME 0 0 RESIDENTIAL 1 3260 CONCRETE FRAME 0 0 SCHOOL: PRE-SCHOOL 0 0 OTHER 0 0 SCHOOL: K-12 0 0 • SCHOOL: COLLEGE 0 0 TOTAL ' 60 252380 HOTEL 1 7000 RESTAURANT 12 51819 THEATER 1 26297 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 WAREHOUSE 1 3375 GARAGE 1 3540 PUBLIC UTILITY 0 0 HOSPITAL 0 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT 0 0 ^ FIRE DEPARTMENT 0 0 JAIL 0 0 CHURCH 1 10800 OTHER 2 11700 TOTAL 60 252380 * Number of other buildings considered to be historic : Approximate Total Square Footage : 0 * Is field survey complete ? - YES If not, estimated date of completion : / / 0 REPORT TO SEISMIC SAFETY COMMISSION - CONTINUED MIGATING BUILDING HAZARDS Type of Bldg by :No. Bidgs | No. of | Use(primary use) |w/Notified: Migated| RETAIL OFFICE RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL: PRE-SCHOOL SCHOOL: K-12 SCHOOL: COLLEGE HOTEL RESTAURANT THEATER INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE GARAGE PUBLIC UTILITY HOSPITAL POLICE DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT JAIL CHURCH OTHER :Owners 1 Bldgs | | || O 0 O 0 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PAGE - 2 :Type of Bldg by |No. Bldgs | No. of | |Structur System |w/Notified: Migatedl :Owners | Bldgs BEARING WALL STEEL FRAME CONCRETE FRAME OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 * Number of historic buildings with owners identified * Number of historic buildings with hazards mitigated : * Have all owners been notified ? YES NO If not, estimated date of completion : /_ * : 0 0 Have hazards in all identified buildings been mitigated If not, estimated date of completion : / / NO 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 REPORT TO SEISMIC SAFETY COMMISSION - CONTINUED FIAGE - 3 MITIGATION PROGRAM * Did the jurisdiction have an existing mitigation program ? - NO * Did the jurisdiction adopt a mitigation program pursuant to URM Law ? - YES (If so, please summarize the type of mitigation program and attach a copy of the program) * Mitigation Requirements : (Check as many as appropriate) Engineers structural report Change of use/occupancy Wall anchors Postings of buildings Structural upgrade requiring more than Demolition wall anchors. Level of force based on : X Notice to owners Additional Description Other The City Council is reviewing other mandatory mitigation measures. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California held on Tuesday, January 9, 1990 at the hour of 7:35 P.M. CLOSED SESSION - held regarding Real Property: Discussion with MacPherson Oil regarding City Yard; Real Estate negotiations with Hermosa Beach School District regarding South School & Prospect Heights; and Personnel Matters, at the hour of 6:00 P.M. Present: Essertier, Midstokke, Sheldon, Wiemans, Mayor Creighton PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Steve Wisniewski, Public Safety Director ROLL CALL: Present: Essertier, Midstokke, Sheldon, Wiemans, Mayor Creighton Absent: None INTRODUCTION OF NEW POLICE OFFICER: Garth Gaines AND NEW CANINE OFFICER: Le Norbo De La Temerite (NORBO) Norbo's Handler/Partner, Officer Tom Eckert gave a talk about his background and a video was shown displaying Norbo's training. Officer Eckert also introduced Dr. Garcia, Norbo's veterinarian. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF DONATIONS TO THE CITY FOR CANINE PROGRAM, THE POLICE D.A.R.E. PROGRAM, NEW BADGES FOR -POLICE OFFICERS, AND DONATION OF TWO SIDEWALK SWEEPERS AND A TRAILER TO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. The list of donations was read by Public Safety Director Wisniewski. POLICE K-9 PROGRAM: Learned Lumber $ 1,200 Los Angeles County Lifeguard Association 100 Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association 1,000 Knights of Columbus (Manhattan Beach) 1,000 Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce 1,000 Hermosa Beach Kiwanis Club 1,000 Michael P. D'Amico 100 Wilma A. Burt 50 Normand and Carol Brewer 25 Olguin & Rutherford Development Corporation 100 Matthew D. Cruse 100 C.F. Bergesch Construction Company 500 Sandpipers Philanthrophy 2,000 Olympic Auto Center 200 Triangle Hardware 100 Michael and Patricia Roth 200 Granitize Products, Inc. 250 Autocraft of Torrance • 1,633 Burk M. Bussiere 100 John and Mary Ellen Workman 100 Rob Putz 10 Anonymous 10 Hermosa Beach Rotary Club 500 Miscellaneous cash donations 150 - 1 - Minutes 1-9-90 lal TOTAL CASH DONATIONS Expenses for the K-9 Program to date $11,428 ($ 7,061) Remaining funds for the program $ 4,367 Medical care for the K-9 is being donated free of charge by the Alondra Animal Hospital in Gardena. POLICE D.A.R.E PROGRAM: Cash Contributions Received to Date $ 5,292 Expenses for the D.A.R.E. Program to Date ($ 4,726) Remaining Funds for the Program $ 566 POLICE DEPARTMENT: New badges were designed and purchased for the Police Officers by reserve Police Officer Jack Berkus. This donation is valued at over $ 5,800. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Betty Martin donated two sidewalk sweepers and a trailer to the Public Works Department. CITIZEN COMMENTS Tom Morley - Hermosa Beach June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place Marie Horowitz - 531 Pier Avenue Michael Peaton - 729 Thirtieth 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Action: To approve the Consent Calendar recommendations (a) through (n) with the exception of the following items which were pulled for discussion but are listed in order for clarity: (c) Midstokke, (f) Essertier, (k) Wiemans, and (1) Wiemans. (a) Motion Sheldon, second Creighton. So ordered. Recommendation to approve minutes as follows: 1) Adjourned regular meeting of City Council held on December 9, 1989 at the hour of 12:04 P.M.; 2) Special meeting of the City Council and School Dis- trict Board of Trustees held at 4 p.m. on December 12, 1989; 3) Regular meeting of the City Council held at 7:30 p.m. on December 12, 1989. - 2 - ) Minutes 1-9-90 (b) Recommendation to approve Demands and Warrants Nos. 31924, 32032 through 32238 inclusive, noting voided warrants 32050 through 32052 inclusive; 32139 through 32141 inclusive and 32159. (c) Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. (f) (g) (h) (i) Action: To receive and file Motion Midstokke, second Creighton. So ordered Recommendation to receive and file the November, 1989 City Treasurer's Report. Recommendation to adopt resolution relative to the An- nual Statement of Investment Policy for the City of Her- mosa Beach for the year 1990. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary L. Brutsch dated December 18, 1989. Action: To adopt Resolution No. 90-5337, entitled, "A RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT AND FILING OF THE ANNUAL STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY FOR THE YEAR 1990.0 Recommendation to authorize Mayor to sign agreement for preliminary Engineering Services for Community Center Electrical Upgrade to John Snyder and Associates at a cost of $5,880. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated December 14, 1989. Action: To table until the next agenda to allow Coun- cilmembers to go over additional information requested. Motion Creighton, second Essertier. So ordered. Recommendation to approve renewal of lease agreement between City of Hermosa Beach and Hope Chapel for space at the Community Center. Memorandum from Acting Com- munity Resources Director Mary Rooney dated December 28, 1989. Recommendation to approve requests for Professional Beach Volleyball Tournaments to be held in Summer 1990 and authorize Mayor to sign contracts. Memorandum from Acting Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated December 20, 1989. Recommendation to confirm depositing of final proceeds of sale of Seaview property into the 4% UUT railroad right-of-way acquisition fund, and authorize disburse- ment from those funds of $3,949 to Coast Mortgage and Realty Investors. Memorandum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated December 26, 1989. - 3 - Minutes 1-D-90 (j) Recommendation to approve additional work on existing fire alarm system to bring up to current standards at a cost not to exceed $2,500; authorize staff to purchase fire equipment, at a cost not to exceed $4,600; reject all bids received at the June 27, 1989 meeting. Memo- randum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated December 6, 1989. (k) Recommendation to receive and file the following 1988-89 Financial reports: 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial and Audit report, and 2) Management Letter. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated January 3, 1990. (1) (in) Action: To continue to the meeting of January 23, 1990. Motion Wiemans, second Creighton. So ordered. Recommendation to approve schedule for Environmental Impact Report, General Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit, and Lease Agreement for oil production. Memo- randum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 3, 1990. Proposed Action: To adopt attached schedule with cor- rections as necessary. Motion Creigton, second Sheldon. Objecting: Midstokke, Essertier, Wiemans. Motion failed. Action: To send back to staff so City Attorney can make corrections and/or additions then place on the January 23, 1990 Agenda, on the Consent Calendar. Motion Creighton, second Essertier. So ordered. Tom Morley addressed the Council indicating he would make himself available as an expert at the joint Public Hearing/Workshop Meeting. Recommendation to deny the following claims for damages and refer to the City Attorney: 1) The Vons Companies, Inc., 618 Michillinda Ave., Arcadia, CA 91007-1734, filed January 2, 1990; al- leged failure to repeal Section 30-64 of Ordinance 86-837 (Utility Users Tax); 2) The Vons Companies, Inc. (TVCI), 618 Michillinda Ave., Arcadia, CA 91007-1734, filed January 2, 1990; alleged failure to process refund for 1988 Utility Users Tax. Memorandum from Risk Manager Robert A. Blackwood dated January 2, 1990. - 4 - Minutes 1-9-90 (n) Recommendation to authorize settlement of claim filed January 3, 1990 by Brian C. Rumble, for damage to his vehicle, in an amount not to exceed $4,500. Memorandum from Risk Manager Robert Blackwood dated January 4, 1990. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES - None 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. Items (c), (f), (k), and (1) were discussed at this time but are listed in order for clarity. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 8:00 P.M. 5. DRAFT CIRCULATION, TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN. (Continued from December 12, 1989 meeting.) Two Memorandums from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 2, 1990 and January 8, 1990. Supplemental letters from: Tina Winter,. dated January 4, 1990; Elli & John Horne, dated January 8, 1990; and Violet Isgreen, dated January 9, 1990. A staff report was presented by Director Schubach. Michael Meyer, representing DKS Associates presented a status report. A recess was called at 9:15 P.M. The Meeting reconvened at 9:26 P.M. The Public Hearing was opened. Coming forward to speak were: Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste - read a letter from Joanne Rectors, 615 Gould Jim Doty - 640 Gould Emily Mager - 451 Gould Clifford & Karen Peer - 662 Gould Patrick Killen - 652 Gould Shirley Kane - 531 Pier Avenue Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street Mary Anne Boyle - 142 Monterey Bill Sniff - 142 Monterey Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place Jan Carcher - 162 Monterey Wanda Smith - 144 Monterey Lance Widman - 1015 Fourth Street Wesley Bush - Secretary of Chamber of Commerce Jerry Compton - 200 Pier & 832 Seventh Street The Public Hearing was closed. - 5 - Minutes 1-9-90 The items on the following Matrix are all for study only. The following is a result of the straw votes by the Council: ISSUE YES NO Eliminate parking lane and add southbound lane along Pacific Coast Highway during peak hour traffic. 0 5 Add "no left turn" signs, as determined appropriate by staff, along Pacific Coast Highway to improve traffic flow. 1 Essertier 4 Widening of eastbound/westbound approaches at Prospect/Artesia to provide additional capacity. 0 5 Signalize following intersections: 1. Gould/Valley/Ardmore 2. Pier/Valley/Ardmore 3. Ardmore/21st Street 4. Hermosa/8th Street 5. Manhattan/27th/Greenwich Village 0 5 Eliminate street parking along east side of Ardmore for 80 feet prior to side streets - 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th for safety sake. 0 5 Study widening of Ardmore from Pier Ave. to 2nd St. in near future, and from 2nd St. to 1st St. after the completion of recently approved development. 0 5 Reclassify the following streets from local to collector based on traffic volume: 1. Valley Drive (Pier to north border) 2. Ardmore Avenue (Pier to 2nd St.) 3. Highland (Longfellow to north border) 4. Longfellow (Ardmore to Manhattan Ave.) 2 Creighton Sheldon 3 Cul-de-sac 4th St. just west of Ardmore; connect 5th St. to 3rd St. west of Ardmore as alternative (see figure 12) Parking for Ardmore east side. 0 5 One-waying of streets in general O 5 Gould Avenue, change from collector to local (study ok) 5 0 street designation. Prohibit left hand turn at peak traffic hours onto Prospect southbound from Aviation Blvd. O 5 Bike path along the greenbelt. O 5 - 6 - Minutes 1-9-90 Create limited truck routes along the following: 1. Gould Ave. (P.C.H. to Morningside 2. 27th St. (Morningside to Greenwich Village) 3. Hermosa Ave. (Greenwich Village to Pier Ave.) 4. Manhattan Ave. north City limit to 27th St. 0 5 Providing a parking structure downtown to enhance business possibly on northwest corner Manhattan/ (study ok) Pier Ave. north City limit to 27th St. 5 0 Provide residential parking structures to elevate parking deficiency in some neighborhoods. 0 5 Planning Commission request to change title "non- (study ok) residential" to "commercial" on page 71. 5 0 Traffic intrusion on Monterey/two-way traffic on (study ok) Valley between 2nd and Herondo (Refer to Exhibit "C") 5 0 Angle parking on Hermosa Ave. to improve parking and create bicycle lane. (study ok) 3 2 Midstokke Essertier The staff was directed to prepare a Resolution reflecting the straw votes on the above matrix items, for approval at the January 23, 1990 meeting on the Consent Calendar. A recess was called at 11:10 P.M. The Meeting reconvened at 11:27 P.M. 6. INTERIM ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE 17 FT. SETBACK THE PROVISION OF FOUR PARKING SPACES, AND TO WAIVE THE 17 FT. SETBACK FOR CERTAIN SMALL LOTS AND LOTS ON NARROW ALLEYS. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 2, 1990. An alternate Ordinance was submitted by Michael Schubach dated January 9, 1990. A staff report was presented by Director Schubach. The Public Hearing was opened. Coming forward to speak were: Chris Coppersmith - 3133 The Strand Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street Mike Sanders - 441 Thirty-first Street Keith Reeves - 429 First Street Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Avenue Jerry Compton - 837 Seventh Street Kari Person - 332 Thirty-first Street John Thomas - 335 thirty-first Street Joanne Bland - 2728 The Strand - 7 - Minutes 1-9-90 Jan Coppersmith - 3133 The Strand Bob Strokke - 3205 The Strand The Public Hearing was closed. Action: To direct staff to prepare a Resolution of In- tent, incorporating Council and Citizen comments with special attention to 30' x 70' lots, narrow alleys, turning radius and then bring back on the Consent Calen- dar at next meeting, January'23, 1990. Motion Midstokke, second Sheldon. So ordered, noting the objection of Wiemans. Final Action: To amend motion to Receive and File and direct City Manager to expedite. Motion Midstokke, second Sheldon. So ordered, noting the objection of Wiemans. 7. TEXT AMENDMENT TO ADD GYMNASIUM/HEALTH AND FITNESS CEN- TER TO THE PERMITTED USE LIST FOR THE C-2 ZONE, WITH ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 2, 1990. A staff report was presented by Director Schubach The Public Hearing was opened. Coming forward to speak were: Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street John Warren - 1120 Hermosa - submitted a petition w/600 signatures for other than a retail store at site. The Public Hearing was closed. Action: To introduce Ordinance No. 90-1022. Motion Essertier, second Sheldon. So ordered. Final Action: To waive full reading of Ordinance No. 90-1022, entitled, "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADD GYMNASIUM/HEALTH AND FITNESS CENTER AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE C-2, RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL ZONE, WITH A CONDITINAL USE PERMIT, AND TO ESTABLISH PARKING STANDARDS FOR SAID USE AND THE ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRON- MENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION." Motion Sheldon, second Creighton. AYES: Essertier, Midstokke, Sheldon, Wiemans, Mayor Creighton NOES: None 8. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO GRANT A MASTER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AUTO AGENCIES, INCLUDING STORAGE AND SALES OF PARTS AT 2771, 2851, 2901 AND 3001 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, VASEK POLAR AUTO DEALERSHIPS. Councilmembers Kathleen Midstokke and Albert Wiemans, appellants. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael - 8 - Minutes 1-9-90 l Schubach dated January 2, 1990. Supplemental letter from James Deutsch representing Citizen Concern Group of 30th Street, dated January 8, 1990. A staff report was presented by Director Schubach. The Public Hearing was opened. Coming forward to speak were: Jerry Compton - 200 Pier Avenue, representing Vasek Polak James Deutsch - 707 Thirtieth Street Jim Shad - 737 Thirtieth Street Larry Bryant - 2960 LaCarita Place Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street James Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Michael Peaton - 729 Thirtieth Street The Public Hearing was closed. Action: To adopt Resolution No. 90-5338, entitled, "A RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO GRANT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AUTOMOBILE AGENCIES, INCLUDING STORAGE AND SALES OF PARTS AT 2775, 2851, 2901 AND 3000 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 500 FEET OF LOT A, TRACT 1594 PLUS LOTS 124 THROUGH 127 INCLUSIVE, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CONVENTION HALL AND MARINE VIEW PARK TRACT." Motion Creighton, second Essertier. So ordered, noting the absence of Sheldon. Final Action: To make the following amendments to the Master Conditional Use Permit: 1. Condition #5 - make clear that there is to be no washing of vehicles in the street, only on the premises. 2. Condition #6 - Add, "vehicles used in conjunction with the businesses are allowed in an approved location; to be reviewed by the Planning Director." 3. Condition #9 - Amend to include "..as determined by the Planning Commission..." following the words "adequate on-site parking spaces". 4. Condition #12 - Amend to say, "fire lane shall be painted and identified by painted sign on the pavement." 5. Condition #13 - Change to read, "parking or stop- ping on the public right-of-way for the delivery of parts or vehicles to the subject property shall be prohibited." - 9 - Minutes 1-9-90 6. Condition #14 - Change by deleting third sentence that starts "no auto repair..." and ends, "..windows are closed". 7. Condition #15 - Sound Proof changed to Sound wall 8. Conditions 23 & 25 - Change time limit in both from from February 6, 1990 to February 20, 1990. 9. Add a sentence "E" to the first page of the Planning Commission Resolution that reads, "the City acknow- ledges that the dealerships involved are three (3) separate and distinct auto agencies and are grouped together under the Conditional Use Permit because of their contiguous proximity and common ownership. Motion Creighton, second Esertier. So ordered, noting the absence of Sheldon. Councilmember Sheldon left the dias at 2:05 A.M. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 9. PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON VALLEY DRIVE BETWEEN GOULD AND HERMOSA VALLEY SCHOOL. Supplemental information from Joe Mark submitted, January 9. 1990. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich, dated January 2, 1990. Supplemental letter from Margaret Harrell, dated January 9, 1990. A. Sight distance at 24th Street and 24th Place. B. Consideration of Bikeway on Valley Drive. This item was continued to the January 23, 1990 meeting. 10. CONSIDERATION OF ADJUSTMENT TO PARK AND RECREATION IN - LIEU FEE, WITH RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION. Memorandum from Building and Safety Director William Grove dated Decem- ber 26, 1989. This item was withdrawn prior to the meeting. 11. RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE REPORT ON RAMIFICA- TIONS OF WITHDRAWAL FROM CDBG. Memorandum from City Attorney Charles S. Vose. This item was continued to the January 23, 1990 meeting. 12. RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION RELATIONS RESOLUTION. Memorandum from Personnel Direc- tor Robert Blackwood dated January 1, 1990. This item was continued to the January 23, 1990 Meeting. - 10 - Minutes 1-9-90 1 13. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER This item continued to the January 23, 1990 Meeting. 14. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL This item continuted to the January 23, 1990 Meeting. 15. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: (a) Request by Councilmember Midstokke for discussion of allowable uses in the open space zones. (Continued from December 12, 1989 meeting.) Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated December 4, 1989. (b) (c) (d) This item was continued to the January 23, 1990 Meeting. Request by Councilmember Midstokke for discussion of rezoning and disposition of the Biltmore site. (Con- tinued from December 12, 1989 meeting.) This item was continued to the January 23, 1990 Meeting. Request by Councilmember Wiemans for discussion of requiring conditional use permit for new commercial developments such as hotels. (Continued from December 12, 1989 meeting.) This item was continued to the January 23, 1990 Meeting. Request by Councilmember Sheldon for discussion re. zoning standards in residential zones, i.e., lot coverage, parking, setbacks, etc.; and height limit, setbacks, parking and bulk in commercial zones. (Con- tinued from December 12, 1989 meeting.) This item was continued to the January 23, 1990 Meeting. CITIZEN COMMENTS - None ADJOURNMENT The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California adjourned on Wednesday, January 10, 1990, at the hour of 2:40 A.M.; to a Special Meeting to continue Goal Setting discussions, to be held on January 11, 1990 at the hour of 6:00 P.M. Chief Deputy' City Clerk Minutes 1-9-90 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on January 11, 1990, at the hour of 6:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Leroy Staten, Acting General Services Director ROLL CALL City Council Present: Essertier, Midstokke, Sheldon, Wiemans, Mayor Creighton Absent: None Staff Present: Antich, Blackwood, Copeland, Grove, Northcraft, Rooney, Schubach, Staten, Wisniewski Absent: None INTRODUCTION OF STAFF Acting General Services Director Staten Acting Community Resources Director Rooney Public Safety Director Wisniewski Finance Director Copeland Personnel Director Blackwood Planning Director Schubach Public Works Director Antich _Building Director Grove CARRY OVER ITEMS FROM JANUARY 9, 1990 COUNCIL AGENDA - Continued to the Meeting of January 23, 1990. REVIEW OF GOALS 1. The results of the Staff brainstorming on goals were reviewed. 2. The Council goals list was then reviewed. The meeting recessed at 7:15 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 7:30 P.M. GOALS LIST (NOT PRIORITIZED) - The Council analyzed the staff goals list and incorporated many of the suggestions into the following new goals list. 1. IMPROVE CITY FINANCIAL PICTURE a. Generate more funds for needed improvement. b. Improve audit/review procedures for telephone usage. c. Work with state elected officials to increase city share of taxes (without conditions beyond program and with City Council approval). d. Study "user -fee" structure. 1 Minutes 1-11-90 la? 2. ENHANCE PUBLIC COMMUNICATION AND AWARENESS a. Establish telephone access to City Hall with human interface and option for direct dial. b. Improve employees' public relations. c. Publish future agenda items list. d. Public information system for City Hall. e. Participation in "welcome wagon." f. "Welcome to city" brochure. g. "Welcome to meeting" brochure. h. Establish character generator capabilities from City Hall. i. Public information program for General Services Dept. j. Enhance television broadcasting capabilities for Council Chambers. k. Replay Council meetings on cable television. 1. Expand City newsletter for announcement of city activities. m. Display agenda on cable television. 3. EFFECTIVELY UTILIZE CABLE TELEVISION a. Local access City programming. b. Community forum on cable television for promoting City. 4. ENHANCE SENSE OF COMMUNITY a. Improve image of Hermosa Beach. b. More community events. c. New enforcement policy for parking enforcement and animal control (issue warning if violator present). d. Better maintenance of beach bathrooms. e. Phone etiquette training/standards for employees. f. Clean-up Council lobby. g. Make 1990 "Year of the Citizen as Customer." h. Better public and private medians/landscape within cost limitations. 5. REVIEW INCREASING POLICE FOOT PATROL DOWN TOWN' a. Consider use of asset forfeiture funds. 6. COMPLETE NEGOTIATIONS WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT (SO. SCHOOL PROP/PROSPECT HEIGHTS) 7. UPGRADE DOWNTOWN a. Active campaign to clean-up downtown. b. Implement use -change parking policy. c. Incentives for downtown business for facade changes. d. Consider closing off Pier Head (Hermosa to Pier) for pedestrian mall. e. Look at re-establishing VPD as separate body and returning Lot A, B, C, to Parking District. f. Improve property maintenance for downtown businesses. - 2 - Minutes 1-11-90 g. City Council to take more active role with Chamber. h. Review of Fiesta as to benefit to city vs. dollars expended. i. Do something "interesting" with pier (determine legal limits). j. Develop "consensus plan" for downtown. 8. REVIEW AUDIT SYSTEM FOR COLLECTION ON PARKING LOTS 9. BILTMORE SITE RESOLVED AT COUNCIL LEVEL 10. IMPROVE CITY COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES a. Provide more opportunity for public to speak. b. Form for public written comments included in brochure. c. Review other cities processes. d. Provide better access to agenda packet. e. Less chat from City Council members. f. Look at ways to avoid late City Council meetings (beyond midnight). 11. IMPROVE CITY INFRASTRUCTURE a. Analyze more timely completion of sewer upgrade. b. Analyze service level of street cleaning in city (toward increasing/making the city cleaner). c. Review need for 4 hr. No Parking restriction for sweeper. d. General upgrade of water lines and fire hydrants. e. Review adequacy of street lighting based upon complaints. f. Increase parking and parking requirements. 12. REGULAR, EQUAL & STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS & CUP'S a. Fire Dept. to include inspection of CUP's during Fire Code inspections. b. Establish City liaison with Restaurant Association. 13. IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE a. City beautification (trash enclosure). b. Plant trees. c. Amortize all CUP's. 14. IMPROVE STAFF ATTITUDE AND MORALE a. More social functions between Council and Staff (i.e. annual softball/volleyball contest). b. Increase accountability of staff. - 3 - Minutes 1-11-90 15. CHANGE BUDGET TO MAKE MORE UNDERSTANDABLE TO GENERAL PUBLIC a. Clarify goals of CIP budget. b. Improve understanding of where funds originate. 16. IMPROVE EFFICIENCY/EFFECTIVENESS OF OPERATIONS a. Increase service level of employees without increasing staff (compare to other cities). b. Computerize payroll & personnel function. c. Increase usefulness and reduce cost of computer system via master planning. d. Review cutting cost of parking enforcement and impact of implementation. e. Review integrating Police Department Records Management and computer operations with City computer operations. f. Reduce delay in Building Department. g. Analysis of contracting Police,, Fire, Parking Enforcement, Animal Control, and Parks Maintenance functions. h. Analysis by Building of costs of consultants vs. in-house plan -check. i. Review 4/10 schedule for City Hall. j. Attitude survey of employees. k. Better coordination of City Departments. 1. Expand use of volunteers. m. Evaluate department effectiveness. n. Search for "cost-effective" improvements for City departments. o. New system of management and staff follow-up procedures. 17. COMPLETE REVIEW OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL ZONING STANDARDS a. Review 17' setback. b. Review lot coverage. c. Review parking requirements. d. Review Open Space standards. d. Review set -back and height requirements. e. Establish review procedure for large projects. f. Provide incentive for renovation. g. Encourage upgrading of existing residences. h. Two -unit limit in R-2. i. Tree preservation. 18. IMPROVE USEFULNESS OF COMMUNITY CENTER a. City Council policy regarding priority of leases! b. Explore possibility of using space for City Hall essential services. c. Regular review of theater uses and income. d. Update financial analysis of Community Center. - 4 - Minutes 1-11-90 19. IMPROVE POLICE OPERATIONS BY MONITORING PERFORMANCE AND INCREASING ACCOUNTABILITY a. Establish productivity criteria for Police Department. b. Civilian Enforcement Officers. c. Look at L.A.P.D. performance review procedure. 20. INNOVATIVE METHOD FOR CURBSIDE RECYCLING OF TRASH 21. COMPLETE NEGOTIATIONS WITH MACPHERSON OIL COMPANY a. Speed up E.I.R. on oil lease. b. Public vote designation of oil revenue restricted to Open Space. c. Expand and explore uses of off -shore oil monies. 22. IMPROVE BUSINESS RELATIONS AND BUSINESS LICENSE/SALES TAX REVENUE 23. INVOLVE SCHOOL DISTRICT EARLY IN ANY PROJECT THAT INVOLVES THEM 24. NEW GENERAL PLAN 25. CONSIDER LIMITATION ON CONSTRUCTION TIED TO DEFICIENCY OF INFRASTRUCTURE IF NEEDED 26. COMPLETE COASTAL PERMIT PLAN a. Restore local permit authority. 27. EXPLORE SENIOR CITIZEN NEEDS 28. DEVELOP EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PLAN a. Develop Citywide volunteer bank. 29. INCREASE PARKING 30. EXPAND LEISURE SERVICES a. More summer community events. b. Skateboard park (review insurance requirements). c. Implement Master Plan for Parks and Recreation. PROCEDURES FOR PRIORITIZING GOALS 1. Council agreed a "bank" of points will be established torate each goal. 2. Staff would prioritize the list prior to submitting goals for Council prioritizing. - 5 - Minutes 1-11-90 CITIZEN COMMENTS Betty Martin - 257 Twenty-seventh Street The adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Thursday January 11, 1990, at the hour of 9:00 P.M. - 6 - Chief Deputy City Clerk Minutes 1-11-90 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council DEMAND LIST February 12, 1990 For the, Council Meeting of February 13, 1990 Due to a malfunction of the computer program for the Finance Warrant system, the following hand-written warrants were omitted from the Demand list. The problem has been referred to the computer software consultant for solution. Warrant# Date Vendor Name 32400 1/23/90 AALR & R 32401 1/24/90 Hermosa Beach Payroll Account 32402 1/24/90 Kane, Ballmer, Berkman 32403 1/25/90 Public Employees', Retirement System P.O.# Description 9792 Seminar Reg/Hassanally Payroll Adjustment/ 1-1 to 1-15-90 9146 Legal Sery/June 89 Legal Sery/June 89 Legal Sery/July 89 Legal Sery/Sept 89 Legal Sery/Oct 89 Credit Due/overpayment Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 Retirement/Dec 89 32404 1/29/90 CSULB FOUNDATION 10635 Seminar Reg/M. Flaherty 10635 Seminar Reg/D. Anderson - 1 - Account Number Amount 705-400-1217-4316 Warrant Total 001-202-0000-2030 Warrant Total 001-202-0000-2020 001-400-1131-4201 001-400-1131-4201 001-400-1131-4201 001-400-1131-4201 001-115-0000-1230 Warrant Total 001-400-1213-4180 001-400-1213-4180 001-400-1213-4180 105-400-2601-4180 110-400-3301-4180 110-400-3302-4180 705-400-1209-4180 705-400-1217-4180 145-400-3401-4180 145-400-3402-4180 145-400-3403-4180 155-400-2102-4180 160-400-3102-4180 Warrant Total 95.00 95.00 2,325.48 2,325.48 1,891.50 (201.25) 28.75 163.63 114.02 (158.00) $ 1,838.65 $ 85,329.98 (69,619.54) (16,237.83) 711.99 36.08 5,100.21 212.31 275.73 148.47 54.00 18.42 96.48 1,002.28 $ 7,128.58 001-400-6101-4316 $ 127.50 001-400-3103-4316 127.50 Warrant Total $ 255.00 32405 1/30/90 Ultrasystems 8617 Urban Drillsite EIR 001-202-0000-2020 $ 2,3194 8685 Urban Drillsite EIR 001-210-0000-2110 24,196.2.69 Warrant Total $ 26,509.63 32407 2/5/90 CDOA Region II TR281 Conference Reg/Ellingson 001-400-2101-4317 $ 95.00 210004 Warrant Total $ 95.00 32408 2/5/90 CDOA Region II TR280 Conference Reg/Thompson 001-400-2101-4317 $ 95.00 210004 Warrant Total $ 95.00 32409 2/5/90 Postmaster 10425 Bulk Mail Permit 001-400-4601-4305 $ 120.00 Warrant Total $ 120.00 32410 2/6/90 Contempo Vans 10178 Convert Police Van 001-400-2201-4309 $ 1,499.49 10178 Convert Police Van 001-400-2101-4309 1,500.00 10178 Convert Police Van 001-400-2701-4309 2,000.00 Warrant Total $ 4,999.49 32411 2/6/90 Circuit City 10422 Theatre Sound Equipment 001-400-4601-5401. $ 394.91 Warrant Total $ 394.91 32412 2/8/90 Public Employees' Retirement Advance/Jan 90 001-400-1213-4180 $ 67,413.63 Retirement System Warrant Total $ 67,413.63 - 2 - Hand-written Warrant Total $ 111,270.37 ..a • • J U • S J r • • 1► r C11Y OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE—SFA340 DEMAND LIST PAGE 0001 TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 DATE 02/12/90 PAY VENDOR NAME VND $ ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN $ AMOUNT INV/REFPO Si CHK * ; DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ $ ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP a 9 10 R A-1 COAST RENTALS 00029 145-400-8149-4201 00001 • $40.23 2.92.16.2_00011 32416 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 90 92162 01/31/90 CIP 90-149 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 ,4 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $40.23 1 a ,0 ACME VISIBLE RECORDS 01574 001-400-2101-4309. 00260 $155.50 11-743597-0000 10169 32417 70 REPAIR—RECORDS—PILES —0000 01/18/90 POLICE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02%08/90 21 22 *** VENDOR TOTAL***************************.***************************************** $155.50 24 2. 76 R ADAMSON UNIFORM EQUIP. CORP. 00138 001-400-2101.-4309 :.00261 $293.05 5240/5277 0.0012• 32418 20 _ MISC CHCS/JAN 90 /5277 01/31/90 POLICE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 -02/08/90_ z: 3r ,• *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $293.05 3 3 I R ADVANCED ELECTRONICS 00935 001-400-2101-4201 00517 , $1.061.20 3459 00070 32419 3- I•. RADIO MAINT/JAN 90 3459 01/31/90 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 1:_ R ADVANCED ELECTRONICS 00935 001-400-2201-4201 00117 $265.30 3459 00070 32419 4FI11 41J RADIO MAINT/JAN 90 3459 01/31/90 .FIRE ./CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/9047 431 *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************:.. . $1,326.50 45 R RAMON*ALVAREZ 03236 . 110-300-0000-3302 31589 $41.00 09297 32420 4R CITATION PAYMENT REFUND 01/31/90 /COURT FINES/PARKING $0.00 02/08/90 4.7 sr, 51 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** . $41.00 ]3 11 54 55 ' R AMERICAN STYLE FOODS 00857 001-400-2101-4306 00752 $118.00 00013 32421 56 .= MISC. CHARGES/JAN 90 POLICE .:...:. /PRISONER MAINTENANCE . ., . $0.00 02/08/90 '• 01/31/90;:' :.. ;,..:.. co ,., *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $118.00 3v GI F` ea 10 R ANTHONY *ANTICH 00030 001-400-4202-4316 00136 $29.50 10628 32422 84 t11 DEC 89/JAN 90 EXPENSES 01/31/90. PUB WKS ADMIN /TRAINING $0.00 02/08/90 L' e• 67 s' *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** ....$29.50 an LU 11 A .,4 R ASPA INSURANCE PLANS 02218 001-400-1212-4188 01638. $115.00 075050500464 09791 32423 72 , CITY HEALTH INS/CTY MGR 00464 01/23/90 EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 02/08/90 74 .G 75 • J 3 7 9 10 11 113 13 20 21 22 23 24 25 2I" 0 3 4 5 0 0 3 4 5 0 0 0 2 3 4 5 a 2 3 4 5 7 CITY OF HERMOSA.BEACH FINANCE—SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0002 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REFPO # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION - AMOUNT UNENC *** VENDOR TOTAL*******************************************x•************************ *115.00 R AUTOMOTIVE PAINT CENTER 01891 001-400-3104-4309 00393 *281.35 MISC.CHARGES/JAN 90 00014 32424 01/31/90 TRAFFIC SAFETY /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $281.35 $0.00 02/08/90 R BANNER SIGN COMPANY 00834 001-400-4601-4308 00255 R132-031 10418 32425 *88.00 REPAIR BANNER/COMM RES. 2-031 01/15/90 COMM RESOURCES /PROGRAM MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL*************************************************************+t******"' $88.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R GUY*BARTOLI 03242 001-210-0000-2110 03520 $75.00 AORKK—GUARANTET—REFUND 82555 02/01/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE • *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $75.00 82555 10517 $0.00 32426 02/08/90 R BAUER COATING & CHEMICALS 00251 001-400-3104-4309 00394 $288.12 44677 EPDXY GLUE GUNS/REFILLS 44677 01/25/90 TRAFFIC SAFETY /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS , *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** .. $288.12 - 10603 $288.12 32427 02/08/90 ' • R CAROL*BELSER 02896 001-400-4601-4317 00098 $100.00 TR282 00282 32428 PER DIEM ADVANCE TR282 02/08/90'.:•.,> COMM RESOURCES /CONFERENCE EXPENSE j R CAROL_*BELSER 02896 001-400-4601-4317 00099 • $160.00 TR282 $0.00 00282 - 02/08/90 32428 • REIMS CONFERENCE REG. TR282 02/08/90 COMM RESOURCES /CONFERENCE EXPENSE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** .. $260.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R BERIAN PRINTING SERVICE, INC. 02664 001-400-1121-4305 00137 $42.60 8312 09328 32429c BUS CARDS/E. DOERFLING 8312 01/16/90 CITY CLERK /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES R BERIAN PRINTING SERVICE, INC. 02664 001-400-1202-4305 00292 $85.40 8400 $42.60 09293 02/08/90 32429 _ ---6,, BUS—CAROS7SMACE A %DURAN 8400 01/31/90;:;, FINANCE ADMIN /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES .. R DERIAN PRINTING SERVICE, INC. 02664 001-400-1202-4305 00293 $366.05 —UNNUMBERED -5392 8392 $85.40 09274 02/08/90 32429_ 02/08/90 e e _ s _ ] ] PURCH ORDERS 01/25/90 FINANCE ADMIN /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $338.93• 2 ] 3 7 9 10 11 113 13 20 21 22 23 24 25 2I" 0 3 4 5 0 0 3 4 5 0 0 0 2 3 4 5 a 2 3 4 5 7 :n :0 53 5 •, CITU F HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE 0003 DATE 02/12/90 PAY VENDOR NAME VND M ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN $ AMOUNT INV/REF DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ 8 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PO * CHK M AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP __ '_ R _ BERIAN PRINTING SERVICE, INC.'' 02664 001-400-1208-4305..` 00718 $745.65 8392 09274 32429 NUMBERED PURCHASE ORDERS 8392 01/25/90 GEN APPROP /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES R BERIAN PRINTING SERVICE, INC. 02664 001-400-2101-4305 01173 $42.70 $0.00 8337 10703 02/08/90 32429 BUTCAT DM%T-110PEIR elj7 01/18/90 .. POLICE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1.282.40 $42.70 02/08/90 BLICKMAN, INC. 03092 001-400-4601-4201 00486 $385.00 10413 32430 HEATRE TECH/JAN 17-20 01/22/90 COMM RESOURCES /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************: $385.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R BLUE CHIP COMPUTER SYSTEMS 02912 001-400-4202-4305 00461 $502.09 15348 10089 32431 FONT CARTRIDGES/PUB WKS 15348 01/22/90 .• PUB WKS ADMIN /OFFICE. OPER SUPPLIES . *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** ..... $502.09 $497.09 02/08/90 R THOMAS*BOHLIN 00894 001-400-2101-4312 01153 $32.00 10241 32432 MEALS/CRIME CLASS 01/30/90 POLICE:;...: /TRAVEL. EXPENSE . POST *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** .:. $32.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R MARK*BRIGGS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 02478 140-400-4703-4201 00011 $1,519.38 403-6 08674 32433 CIBC ADMIN/DEC 89 403-6 12/31/89 ....:.....:..:.:: CDBG ADMIN /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** *1.519.38 $0.00 02/08/90 R BROOKES ELECTRIC 00355 160-400-3102-4309 00452 $55.00 9245 10641 32434 EMER. REPAIR/SEWER PUMP . 9245 01/18/90;::.:..:.. SEWER/ST DRAIN.../MAINTENANCE. MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** .. $55.00 $0.00 02/08/90 e R BROWNING & FERRIS INDUSTRIES 02076 001-300-0000-3859 00036 $689.50 09294 32435 -EFUSE LIENS/JAN 1990 02/05/90 /REFUSE LIEN FEE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $689.50::... $0.00. 02/08/90 ' R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-1121-4316 00029 $50.00 10526 32436 REIMB PETTY CASH/JAN 90 01/31/90 CITY CLERK /TRAINING $0.00 02/08/90 3 6 7 e 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1e 17 15 10 20 21 22 24 25 20 77 2 2 31 3 3 3 3 41 4 5 VIP 811. 418 Mir 7 .0 8 1 r 3 4 0 3 0 A C 2 3 4 5 41. 0 41♦' r.=1 J FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 07:22:11 PAY CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/13/90 • PAGE 0004 DATE 02/12/90 f VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PO # AMOUNT UNENC CHK # DATE EXP 1 In tt R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 - '001-400-1122-4201 00203: ...$2.25-. 1.0526 32436 12 --------REND-PETTY CASH/JAN 90 . Of/31/9b ELECTIONS /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 13 14 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER '02016 001-400-1202-4305 00291 $0.50 10526 32436 le REND—PETTY C'ASR77ANT90 01/31/90 FINANCE—WDMIN • /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 02/08/90 17 to R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-2101-4305 01172 $158.50 10526 32436 20 REIMS—PETTY—CA-SH7JAN-90 01731/90 POLICE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 02/08/90 21 ` 22 9 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-2201-4316 00208 $5.00 10526 32436 24 REIMS—PETTY—CASH/J-AN 90 01/31/90 - FIRE /TRAINING $0.00 02/08/90 23 26 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 . 001-400-3101-4309 00048 ' $25.00 10526 32436 20 REIMS PETTY CASH/JAN 90 01/31/990 MEDIANS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/08/90 20 31 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-4101-4305 00387 $18.10 . 10526 32436 3 REIMS—PETTY CASH/JAN 90 01/31/90,, PLANNING.. .-/OFFICE , : .. '.... OPER SUPPLIES .. $0.00 02/08/90 3 34 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-4201-4305 00520 $3.93 10526 32436 3 REIMS PETTY CASH/JAN 90 01/31/90 BUILDING /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 02/08/90 3 36 30 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY.TREASURER 02016 001-400-4202-4309 00026 $9.33 10526 32436 ' 40 REIMS PETTY CASH/JAN 90 . 01/31/90 ;: PUB WKS ADMIN /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/08/90 41 42 43 11 R___ ' .. GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-4204-4309 01562 $27.31 10526 32436 44 REIMD-PETTY CASI-7JAN 90 01/31/90 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/08/90 45 46 47 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-4601-4308 00257 $25.03 10526 32436 46 .I) REIMS—PETTY—CASH/JAN 90_ 01/31/90.. COMM RESOURCES /PROGRAM MATERIALS $0.00 02/08/90 46 SO 1L• ,. SI -1 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-6101-4309 ' 00811 $21.35 10526 32436 62 REIMS PETTY CASH7JAN-19O 01/31790 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/08/90 33 34 :1 55 .'z *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $346.30 56 13 ... .. 57 56 , R BSICONSULTANTS, INC. " - � °` 00630 ." 001-400-4201-4201 "- 00261 ." ' '$130.00 ' 1808 10309 32438 60 4-. PLAN FEE/3f6-MONTEREY 1808 12/14/89 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $130.00 02/08/90 62 47 63 16 R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. = 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00264 $807.56 1808 10305 32438 64 , PLAIT—CHECK/1301 CYPRESS 1808. 12/14/89: BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT . $807.56 02/08/90 66 66 :767 :1 R BSI CONSULTANTS,_ INC. • 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00265' $3,974.23 • 1808 10304 32438 6,1 PLAN-CHECKS/540760f1ST 1000 12/14/89 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $2,531.36 02/08/90 6" 70 'J 71 14 ,.. _- 72 ::3 .. 73 74 55 _ 75 29 J 0'' r t3 0 I FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 07:22:11 CITY OF HET'2MOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/13/90 •. PAGE DATE 0005 02/12/90 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION - PO # AMOUNT UNENC CHK # DATE EXP , R.. BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. PLAN CHECK.FEES/BUILDIN4 i. 00630 . 001-400-4201-4201° 00266: $2,346.24 1808 07584 32438 02/08/90 1800 12/14/89 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *2,341.24 R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00267 $1,348.88 1685 07579 32438 ESTIHTED—PLM—CRECK0 1685 11/15/89 .:...: BUILDING I /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $1.296.76 02/08/90 •R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00268... $1.705.34 12/14/89 1808 07587 32438 —EUILDIN0` PLAN—CHEzGRS — 180E BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $1.703.45 0208/90 R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. BUILD/ PLAN—CRECKS 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00269 $1,351.22 1808 07593 32438 1808 12/14/89. BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 • R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. PLAN CHECK/1038 00630 001-400-4201-4201 '. 00270 ' $865.28 '1907 10316 32438 7TH ST 1907 01/15/90 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $862.37 02/08/90 R 8SI CONSULTANTS, INC. 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00271 • $570.96 1907 10343 32438 PLAN CHECK /53 VALLEY 1907 01/15/90 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT . $570.96 02/08/90 R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00272 $772.98 1907 10337 32438 PLAN CHECK/703-05 1ST 1907 . 01/15/90 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $772.07 02/08/90 R BSI CONSULTANTS. INC. PLAN—ZHECK7704-00—FIRST 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00273 $758.42 1907 10336 32438 1907 01/15/90 BUILDING >:/CONTRACT. SERVICE/PRIVAT $757.80 02/08/90 R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC.. 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00274 $164.84 1907 07600 32438 PLAN CHECK7909 OWbSSO 1907 O,*/15/90 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $164.84 02/08/90 R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC 00630. 001-400-4201-4201 00275 $198.64 1907 10303 32438 PLAN CRECK7BUILDING 1907, 01/15/90 BUILDING /CONTRACT. SERVICE/PRIVAT $198.64. 02/08/90 R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. —PLAID 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00276 $518.18 1907 10302 32438 CHECK%3141 TENTH 1907 01/15/90 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $517.71 02/08/90 ' R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. 00630 001-400-4201-4201 00277 $541.84 1907 10301 32438 PLAN CHECK/1137 TENTH 1907 01/15/90 . , BUILDING: /CONTRACT.SERVICE/PRIVAT $541.20 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL**********************�r**************************** *************1H* 16, 054 61 e R BUILDING NEWS, INC. 00413 001-400-4202"4305 00462 $105.78 12702 10619 32439 e e e e PUBLICATION/PUBLIC WORKS 12702._ 01/27/90 : .... PUB WKS ADMIN -/OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $105.78 , 02/08/90 e *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $105.78 : c R C. C. U. G. 01573 001-400-2101-4315 00155 $25.00 10712 32440 7 DUES/POLICE RECORDs 01/17/90 POLICE /MEMBERSHIP $0.00 02/08/90 3 45 6 e 9 ,o „ ,4 ,e ,6 ,9 z0 i, 22 2: 24 2p 0 • y �L. la 8' J j FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 07:22:11 CITU—OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/13/90 PAGE 0006 DATE 02/12/90 . 2 a a. PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PO # AMOUNT UNENC CHK # DATE EXP • *** VENDOR TOTAL *********************************************** r***************x*** $25.00 12 ,4 1:7 R MATTHEW*CAHN 02626 001-400-2101-4312 01157 $39.78 10238 32441 io MILES7TRAFFIC TRAINING 01/30/90 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE . POST $0.00 02/08/90 in *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $39.78 20 2, 22 CAL R CAL POLY KELLOGG UNIT FOUND. 00677 001-400-2101-4313 00232 $233.15 10243 32442 23 TUITI-ON7W7—MOORS 01/30/90 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE. STC $0.00 02/08/90 24 20 R CAL POLY KELLOGG UNIT FOUND. --MEALS/HOTEL/W- 00677 001-400-2101-4313 00233 *261.58 10242 32442 __ zn • MOORE 01/30/90 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE, STC _ $0.00---02/06/90-- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $494.73 .^ 37 33. R CALIF D. A. R. E. OFCRS ASSOC.' 02133 001-400-2101-4315 00157 $25.00 10723 32443 354 DUES/OFCR THOMPSON 02706/90 210004 POLICE /MEMBERSHIP $0.00 02/08/90 37 3a R CALIF D. A. R. E. OFCRS ASSOC. 02133 001-400-2101-4315 00158 $25.00 10720 32443 3G 4n DUES7ELEINGSON fS 004 POLICE .... ../MEMBERSHIP $0.00 02/08/90 41 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** .'. -•. :'` $50.00 43 44 4. 45 R THE*CALIF PARK & REC. SOCIETY 00602 001-400-4601-4315 00055 $330.00 10414 32444 .a DUES70PRS AGENCY 01/22/90:. URCES /MEMBERSHIP $0.00 02/08/90 a0 50 *** VENDOR TOTAL*****************************************4*************************** ` $330.00 52 53 54 • R CALIF. POLICE CHIEFS ASSOC. 01263 001-400-2101-4315 00156 $65.00 10713 32445 55 56 . DUES/ALTFEED 01/17/90 PO k�C /MEMBERSHIPt;: $o. 00 02/08/90 S7 50 *** VENDOR TOTAL***********************.******************#*********tt************* 1."$65.00 52 co r, �d 62 R CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE Q00,16001,-4.00-3101-41303 QQ0,79. $459.35 00019 32446. 63 E4 17 WATER 5ICEYROS/JAN 90 . :.01./31/90 ;;., -, MEDIANS:..,, "/UTILITIES. - 02/08/9065 ,:,-..e.),—, ,$0..00 68 ' 67 •, R CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 00016 001-400-4204-4303 00363.; $456.44 32446 Gn WATER BILLINOVJAN 90 01/31/90 BLDG MAINT ' /UTILITIES q $0.00. 02/09/90 -"" 70 54 • I I . .. - 77 73 74 75 79 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0007 02/12/90 CHK # EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION • PO # AMOUNT UNENC DATE R CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 00016' 001-400-6101-4303 -`00292.'. :' $1,991.08 00019 32446 02/08/90_ _ WATER BILLINGS/JAN 90 01/31/90 PARKS /UTILITIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $2.906.87 $0.00 R CAREERTRACK. INC. 00148 001-400-4201-4316 00182 $39.00 -- ---- — 10346 32447 02/08/90 32447 SEMINAR-REG7COCKHART 01/29/90 BUILDING /TRAINING R CAREERTRACK, INC. 00148 001-400-4201-4316 00183 $39.00 $0.00 10346 $0.00 SEMINAR-REG/FEHSKENS 01/29/90 BUY -CUING /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $78.00 02/08/90 R CELLULAR DYNAMICS COMPANY '' 02449 001-400-2101-4304 00491 $418.39 01210 32448 02/08/90 MOBILE -PHONE CHGS7DEC-89 12/27/89 POLICE /TELEPHONE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $418.39 $0.00 R CERTIFIED OFFICE EQUIPMENT 00389- 001-400-4601-4305 00788 $36.83 1852 00111. 32449 MISC ZHGS7IAN-90 1 52 01/31/90..;.. COMM RESOURCES /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************.:;..:,::' .$36.83 $0.00 02/08/90 R CHAMPION CHEVROLET 00014 001-400-2101-4311 00799 $160.58 00112 $0.00 • 32450 02/08/90 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 90 . 01/31/90 POLICE ..: .:......./AUTO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL***************************************************************fir****.. $160.58. R CHEVRON USA, INC. 00634 001-400-1206-4317 00060 $29.05 01265 32451 MISC. CHARGES/DEC 89 12/31/89 DATA PROCESSING /CONFERENCE EXPENSE R CHEVRON USA. INC. 00634 001-400-2101-4310. 0022.9 $283.75 $0.00,.. 01265 02/08/90 32451 MNISC. CHARGES/DEC 89 12/31/89 POLICE /MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $312.80 $0.00 02/08/90 R COAST GLASS COMPANY 00325 001-400-4204-4309 01557 $14.46 00114 32452 MISC CHARGES/JAN 90 01/31/90 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/08/90 1\ 3 41 4 6 7 J► 8 D 10 11 J 1.' 14 '5 16 17 18 ID .J 711 21 2 y 24 z. X7.411 31 .41 3 ,41 3 3 41 4 45 4 44 5 71 MO 52 53 54 55 r 56 57 50 30 V 61 6: 63 V 64 65 66 67 W 88 010 70 71 ‘10 72 73 74 75 71,1 I .: I'. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 PAGE 0008 FOR 02/13/90 DATE 02/12/90 = 3 PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION . AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 6 e *** VENDOR TOTAL*****************************•�****************************•It***#***#* $14.46 o o 2 COAST IRRIGATION CO. 00354 001-400-8146-4309 00008 -, -•-$142.98 A37618. 10090 32453 SPRINKLERS -17b38 0 0 CIP 89-146 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $142.99 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $142.98 ,6 219 0 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1101-4304 00270 $6.91 2' 24 01015 32455 LONG-DISTANCE7OCT 89 10/31/89 CITY COUNCIL /TELEPHONE • $0.00 02/08/90 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1121-4304 00262 $8.72 01015 32455 23 70 pe LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89 CITY CLERK /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/90 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1141-4304 00283 $44.30 '01015 2' 3c 32455 LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89• CITY TREASURER /TELEPHONE. $0.00 02/08/90 COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1201-4304 00304 $11.80 3' 35 _ 01015 32455 LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89 CITY MANAGER /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/90 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1202-4304 00304 $66.26 ' 36 ?1:. 01015 32455 LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 • 10/31/89 FINANCE ADMIN .>/TELEPHONE . $0.00 02/08/90 COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1203-4304 00308 $23.97 01015 32455 R------LOW-DISTANCE/OCT 41 43 .< LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89 PERSONNEL /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/90 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-2101-4304 00495 $323.94 01015 43 46 47 11 `= 16 32455 LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89•. POLICE .- :. /TELEPHONE .. - $0.00 02/08/90 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-2401-4304 00280 $11.72 01015 32455 46 a9 5. s21. LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89 ANIMAL CONTROL /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/90 R . COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-4101-4304 00304 $26.60 01015 32455 33 4 3 LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89 : PLANNING /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/90 R COM SYSTEMS, INC. 00017 `'001-400-4201-4304 00294 $16:2401015 32455 36 S581.17 16 17 +, 5+ , LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89 BUILDING /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/90 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-4202-4304 00307 $49.00 01015 32455 6n 6+ 2 3 LONCDISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89 .. PUB WKS ADMIN ., /TELEPHONE ;,; $0.00 02/08/90 R_ COM_ SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-4601-4304 00351 $49.48 01015 32455_ e4 63 66 67 LONG` DISTANCE%OOT 89 10/31/89 COMM RESOURCES /TELEPHONE $0.00• 02/08/90 6" 6" ,o n ,2 15 ,� - --- '3 ,4 :6 C -TY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE—SFA340 DEMAND LIST PAGE 0009 • TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 DATE 02/12/90 1' 4 6 e PAY VENDOR NAME VND * ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN`#—• AMOUNT INV/REF PO M CHK * DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ * ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP :. :.. .. __ _ R _ COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-6101-4304 :_ >• 00202 $17.83 01015 32455 10 12 " 14 5 1IC • LONG DISTANCE/OCT 89 10/31/89 PARKS /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/90 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 0001.7 105-400-2601-4304 00134 $20.63 01015 32455 . LONG`—ITISTANCETOCT 89 10/31/89 :..<.. STREET LIGHTING /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/90 R COM SYSTEMS; INC 00017 110-400-3302-4304 00306 $56.30 01015 32455 17 le 9 120 22 ,. LONO—DISTANCE7OOT—BV 10/31/89 PARKING ENF /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/902' *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $733.70 R VIKI *COPELAND 00041 001-400-1202-4317 00062 `. $150.00 TR277 00277 32456 25 26 27 •' 31 3Z PER DIEM ADVANCE TR277 02/05/90 FINANCE ADMIN /CONFERENCE EXPENSE $0.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $150.00 •R COPY SUPPORT 01729 001-400-1121-4305 00136 $163.11 1037 09332 32457 33 34 15, u. 37 3" 3:i 4,, 41 42 43 44 43 46 47 4n PRINTING SERV/CTY CLERK 1037 01/29/90 CITY CLERK /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $163.11 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $163.11 R ADMINISTRATOR SECTION—*CPRS 03234 001-400-4601-4317 ' 00102 =$30.00 TR285 .00285. 32458 BANQUET REG./M. ROONEY TR285 02/08/90 COMM RESOURCES /CONFERENCE EXPENSE $0.00 02/08/90 1e *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $30.00 .., . ,;. _ n R CROSS BROTHERS, INC. 03222 001-400-3101-4309 00049 $725.90 90-0085 10633 32459 40 50 5� TIMER CONTROL BOXES —0085 01/30/90 MEDIANS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $725.90 02/08/90 42 • R CROSS BROTHERS, INC. 03222 001-400-6101-4309 00812 $725.90 90-0085 10633 32459 33 54 55 5e IJ TIMER CONTROL BOXES —0085 01/30/90... PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $725.90 02/08/90 1•i *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************-,._,:, $1,451.80 5e 59 60 40 R CSULB FOUNDATION 00349 001-400-4202-4316 00137 $255.00 10636 32460 el 67 64 SEMINAR/GENGLER/YATES01/23/90 :: PUB WKS ADMIN;. /TRAINING : $0.00 02/08/90 50 .1 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** `... $255.00 .. Ee en '.J 54 R DATA SAFE 00156 001-400-1206-4201 00674 $116.00 46941 00047 32461 69 70 7, 74 55 TAPE STORAGE/JAN 90 46941 01/17/90. DATA PROCESSING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 '6 .. '3 74 75 • • • • • • • .1411, • • • • :1 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE—SFA340PAGE DEMANDR LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 0010 DATE 02/12/90 �• PAY VENDOR NAME VND * ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # ° DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT -DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL *************************** r**********************************#*it*** $116.00 ,. q ,_ R DECILLIS ELECTRIC CO. 03228 001-210-0000-2110 03522 $1,575.00 82597 —--WORK 10516 32462 6 ' GUARANTEE REPU-ND -0$97 0001/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 02/08/90 0 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,575.00 -, 21 22 f _ R_ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 00267 001-400-3104-4251 00037 $1,131.91 111827 —HIGHWAY—MAINTENANCE7NOV 10620 32463 23 24 11827 12/28/89 TRAFFIC SAFETY /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT $0.00 02/08/90 26 R DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 00267 105-400-2601-4251 00104 $1,13.1.90 111827 ' • - _ 10620 $0.00 32463 02/08/90-- 27 :n 2'% HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE/NOV 11827 12/28/89 STREET LIGHTING /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT �• *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $2,263.81 32 7' R DIAL INSTANT PRINTERS - 01487 001-400-1207-4305 00188 $220.12 16496/16454 01793 32464 BUSINESS LICENSE FORMS 16454 01/24/90 BUS LICENSE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $220.11 02/08/90 - *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $220.12 l qr 41 42 R DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION 00269 001-400-2101-4201 00516 $832.20 248606490 - - 00068 32465 qq 45 COMPUTER MAINT/JAN 90 06490 01/12/90 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 qC R DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION 00269 001-400-2201-4201 00116 $554.80 248606490 00068 32465 41 COMPUTER—MAINT/JAN 90 064-990 01/12/90., FIRE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 q'• :a .. - 50 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,387.00 • 51 + 53 54 55 ,.. R DIVE N' SURF 00604 001-400-2201-4309 00815 $17.00 00120 32466 56 MISC. CHAR-G`ES/JAN 90 01/31/90. FIRE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/08/90 57 5° .4 *** VENDOR TOTAL*************************************#****************************** $17.00 0 ni ,1 62 63 R DUNBAR NUNN CORPORATION 01413 001-400-2401-4311 00175 $104.21 056288/056289 09931 32467 64 ,;, •EPA1R—RADIOS/AN CONTROL 56289•- 09/21/89: . ANIMAL CONTROL /AUTO MAINTENANCE $104.21 02/08/90 so G° 51 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** _ ..$104.21 aq 2 - 7n .q R EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY' 02840 001-400-1208-4201 00620 $367.13 006—M79961--01268 32468 71 72 25 BM—METER—USE/NGV S9 79961 01/07/90 GEN APPROP /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT • $0.00. 02/08/90 '' 74 75 1 ale 1.0 7 ir , PAGE DATE 0011 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP CITY—W—HERNOSA BEACH FINANCE—SFA34O DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 _ . . PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # • DESCRIPTION DATE INVC. PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION • AMOUNT UNENC _ . R EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY 02840 001-400-1208-4201 .00621 $255.00 006—M79961 ' --IBM 01268 $0.00 ' 32468 02/08/90 MAINTENANCE/DEC 89 79961 01/07/90 GEN APPROP /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT ---- 7 • *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $622.13 R EASTMAN, INC. 02514 001-400-1208-4305 00715 $744.25 00166 32469 02/08/90 HISC CHGS/DEC 89/JAN 90 01/31/90 GEN APPROP . /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES . *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $744.25 $0.00 . , • RIgDISON 02771 001-400-4601-4317 00096 . $170.00 TR283 00283 32470 02/08/90 RX: NFERENCE REG TR283 02/08/90 • COMM RESOURCES /CONFERENCE EXPENSE - *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $170.00 $0.00 _ . . .. .,,. • : .. - - ..y. ';'...,. -. R EFRAM MOBIL 01400 001-400-2101-4310 00231 ' $58.74 . 131498 ----GASOLINE/DEC 10711 32471 89 31498 01/01/90 POLICE /MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $58.74 $0.00 02/08/90 • R EL CAMINO COLLEGE 01469 001-400-2101-4312 01151 .' $7.50 ----TUITION/3 10246 32472_,,___ OFCRS 02/06/90 ' POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST R 'EL CAMINO COLLEGE 01469 001-400-2101-4312 01152 $7.50 $0.00 10247 02/08/90 4 4 32472 TUITION/3 OFCRS ' ' 02/06/90 ,..' Z. ' -POLICE:. •• , ' /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST • R EL CAMINO COLLEGE 01469. ' : 001-400-2101-4312 . 01155 ' $7.50 $0.00 10240 ., 02/08/90 5 n 32472 TUITON/3 OFCRS 01/30/90 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE i POST *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $22.50 $0.00 t 02/08/90 t ; •. •,,!:. _ . .. , .. ,:^ , • ''',, R STEVE*ENDOM ' , 01034 7:001-400-2101-4312 01150 - ."$96.00 - MEALS/CPT 10227 32473 CLASS 01/10/90 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST *** VENDOR TOTAL ***************************4**************************************** $96.00 $0.00 02/08/90 c R EXCEL PAVING COMPANY • 03117 150-400-8102-4201 '00050 ' $74,755.60 '10654 32474 HIGHLAND AVE PROJECT PMT 01/18/90 CIP 85-102 - /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 n 02/08/90 e 7 . , • 3 4 6 a • 30 IC 70 0 7 11 0 0 1 3 0 7 4 5 • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 07:22:11 CITY OF HERMOSA REACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0012 02/12/90 CHK * DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION VND * DATE INVC ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN * AMOUNT INV/REF • PO * PROJ Si ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION • AMOUNT UNENC *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** . . $74,755.60 • R GATES, MCDONALD & COMPANY 02538 705-400-1217-4201 00066 $1,333.34 02-024375 00044 32475 ETAS-SERVICES/JAN 90 24373 01/26/90 WORKERS COMP • /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,333.34 R GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY 00058 001-400-4204-4309 01560 $178.61 00124 32476 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 90 01/31/90 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS • $0.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************..,„.'"..\ $178.61 R MELVYN*GREEN AND ASSOC., INC. 0311.2 001-400-4201-4201 00262 $1,135.00 89205-1298 10325 32477 SEISMIC-SERV7tEg-NOV 89 -1298 . 12/05/89 • BUILDING . /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/990 R___ MELVYN*GREEN AND ASSOC.. INC. - 03112 . 001-400-4201-4201 00263 $960.00 8920512983 10338 32477 SEISMIC SERV%NOV 89 12983 01/16/90 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $2,095.00 R GTEL 01340 . 001-400-1101-4304 00269 $39.24 2132901 09963 32479__ - `- REPROGRAM SPEED NUMBERS 32901 01/28/990 CITY COUNCIL /TELEPHONE $39.24 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 001-400-1131-4304 00189 $13.08 2132901 09963 32479 -EPROGR EED NUMBERS 32901 01/28/90 ..' CITY ATTORNEY .t/TELEPHONE .. $13.08 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 001-400-1201-4304 00303 $13.07.. 2132901 09963 32479 REPROGRAM-SPEEDNUMBERS 32901 _01/28/90 CITY MANAGER /TELEPHONE $13.07 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 001-400-1203-4304 00305 $39.23 2132901 09963 32479 REPROGRAM SPEED NUMBERS 32901.;, 01/28/90:, .PERSONNEL . /TELEPHONE $91.53 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 • 001-400-1203-4304 00306 $39.23 V ' 2132901 09963 32479 _ __ REPROGRAM SPEED -LUMBERS 32901 01/28/90 PERSONNEL /TELEPHONE $0.00 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 001-400-1203-4304 00307 $13.07 2132901 09963 32479 REPROGRAM SPEED NUMBERS. 32901,..1;.:.;01/28/90.:'_;. .. PERSONNEL.. :../TELEPHONE "$0.00 .02/08/90 R GTEL_ 01340 001-400-2101-4304 00492 $93.12 1386468/94912 00226 32479_ EQUIPMENT RENTAL7FE13-�iD-44,'12 02/01/90 POLICE /TELEPHONE $0.00. 02/08/90 . 3 6 0 I8 10 70 21 27 23 24 25 26 27 20 31 5 3 41 42 43 44 45 47 46 46 5. 51 52 54 55 56 58 50 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 r,n ...1 70 71 72 73 74 75 7q 1 !7 • CIT7-0E—RERRCSA—DEACH FINANCE—SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0013 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN it AMOUNT INV/REF PO # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC - PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC R GTEL 01340 001-400-2101-4304 00493 4152.50 2053298 09943 32479 40.00 02/08/90 - - -- PHONE EQUIPMENT—CHANGES-53290 11/19789 POLICE 7TECEPHONE R GTEL 01340 001-400-2101-4304 00494 4137.35 2103947/57348 09941 32479 PRONE—EQUIPMENT CHANGES 57348 11/13/89 POLICE /TELEPHONE 40.00 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 001-400-2201-4304 00231 492.56 2130722 00226 32479 EQUIPMENT—RENTAE7FEB-90 30722 02/0T790 FIRE /TEEEP-R0NE 40.00 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 001-400-2401-4304 00279 4141.68 846422 09944 32479 PHONE—Ees ' ' *-1 - • 19/89 ANIMAL CONTROL /TELEPHONE 40.00-02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 001-400-4101-4304 00305 4149.00 0885312 09942 32479 — ---PHONE—EQUIPMENT—CRANGES-853I2 11715709 PLANNIND /TELEPHONE 40.00 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 001-400-4202-4304 00306 4305.72 2053297 09943 32479 PHONE EQUIPMENT CHANGES 532- - :- .1, 0, ., 1 .6 40.00 02/09/90 R GTEL 01340 110-400-3302-4304 00303 4141.68 . 846422 09944 32479 PHONE—EQUIPMENT—CRANGES 46422----10719789 PARKIFg—ENF /TELEPHONE • 40.00 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 110-400-3302-4304 00304 4100.00 2053298 09943 32479 PRONE—EQUIPRENTCRAUGEg-52298 11/19/89 PARKING ENF /TELEPHONE 40.00 02/08/90 R GTEL 01340 110-400-3302-4304 00305 413.08 2132901 09963 32479 REPROGRAM—SPEED—NUMBERS 32901 01728/90 PARKING ENF /TELEPHONE 413.08 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** 41.483.61 5 03224 001-400-4601-401 00032 41 576.69 2915 GUITAR CENTER , 10419 32480 HEATRESOUND—EQUIPMERT---2915 01/30/90 COMM RESOURCES /EQUIP—LESS THAN 4500 41,576.69 0 * ENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** 41.576.69 02/08/90 R FRANK B.*HALL & CO. OF CALIF. 03147 " 705-400-1210-4201 00047 ' 4606.00 09793 32481 BONDS/DOERFLING/COPELAND 01/30/90 ' AUTO/PROP/BONDS /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT 40.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL ****************************4*************************************** 4606.00 R HALPRIN SUPPLY COMPANY 00946 001-400-2201-4309 00813 476.13 24696 08371 32482 NOZZLES/GASKETS/FIRE DEP 24696 01/18/90 FIRE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 475.96. 02/08/90 61 r • 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 4 16 1 / 16 112 20 21 7.7 27 ;en 27, 2 7 1 ...I 3. 6) 3r 47 44 4, 4, 47 51 52 55 AO 56 5/ 50 •/.1 60 07 4 3 66 67 11 70 71 12 74 76 400 N00 •al CITY OF-AERMOSA-BEACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0014 02/12/90 _ CHK # DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PO # AMOUNT UNENC R HALPRIN SUPPLY COMPANY 00946 001-400-2201-4309 00814 $42.70 25601 08372 $42.60 32482 02/08/90 SPANNER WRENCH/FIRE 25601 01/29/90 FIRE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL•************************•*************•****************•*************** $118.83 R STEVE*HARTT 00896 001-400-2101-4312 01156 $52.00 -_-HILES%CHILI-ADUSE 10237 32483 CLASS 01/30/90 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $52.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R MS JODY*HATCH 03232 001-400-4102-4201 00239 • $28.9.00 08680 32404 _ 02/00/90 32484 02/08/90 SEC. SERV/i-3-90 01/10/90 PLANNING COMM /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT R MS 3JODY*HATCH 03232 001-400-4102-4201 00241 $293.25 -SEC-SERVJAN . $0.00 08683 $0.00 16,90 • 027155/90 PLANNING COMM /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $582.25 . R HERMOSA BEACH LITTLE LEAGUE 00820 001-400-4601-4201 00487 $1.725.00 10416 $0.00 32405 CONTRACT-PAYMENT7FY89-90 01722/90 COMM RESOURCES . /CONTRT-S`ERVICE7BRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL*********************•*********************************************** $1,725.00 02/08/90 R HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & ASSOC. 03131 001-400-1202-4201 00204 $900.00 1003 00075 $0.00 32486 02/08/90 SALES TAR-SERV7OCT-DEC89 1003 .01/19/90 FINANCE ADMIN /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************'::..:'.. $900.00 ' R HOWARD JOHNSON'S BALBOA PARK 03246 001-400-4601-4317 00097 $115.54 TR283 00283 $0.00 32487 02/08/90 OTEL ADVANCE TR283 _ 0278/90 • COMM RESOURCES /CONFERENCE EXPENSE *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************.._. $115.54 R ICBG EDUCATION DEPARTMENT 03055 001-400-4201-4316 00185 $180.00 10350 32488 77ROVE/WILLIAMS 02/07/90;:_; ,,,: „ ;,; BUILDING. • . .,;.r.'•./TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** • $180.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R INGLEWOOD TRANSMISSION 02095 001-40C-6101-4311 00209 $293.56 5593 10618 32489 IVERHAUL-TRUCK-TR O /24/90 PARKS /AUTO MAINTENANCE =< $293.56 02/08/90 3 3 6 a 10 11 12. 14 13 16 17 16 13 20 2. 22 23 24 23 26 27 20 31 34 33 if 3'2 3') AI 42 43 44 aG 47 40 49 30 31 54 33 SC 57 33 3.) IS 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 69 G9 70 71 72 '3 74 75 70 J a, • CITY-bF FiETMd3ABEACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0015 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT.DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $293.56 R INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC 02458 001-400-4204-4309 01556 $985.12 35818 LITHONIA FIXTURES 10045 32490 X18 11/03/89... BLDG MAINT. /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $985.12 $985.13 02/0890 L. R INTERNATIONAL CONF OF BLDG OFF 00781 001-400-4201-4305 00519 $64.05 C74496 10308 32491 PUBEI4TION7BUIC61NG-7 96 12/22/89 BUILDING . /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $64.05 $63.90 02/08/90 R INTERNATIONAL INST OF 00668 001-400-1121-4315 00036 $100.00 09333 32492 ANNUAL DUES/FY 90 • 01/23/90 CITY CLERK /MEMBERSHIP *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************: $100.00 • $0.00 02/08/90 R J C PAPER 03083 001-400-1208-4305 00717 $965.02 94104118 09273 32493 COPIER PAPER/STOCK 04118 .12/14/89; GEN APPROP ,::/OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** . $965.02 $0.00 02/08/90 R JIM'S PLUMBING 03229 001-210-0000-2110 03523 $1,575.00 82588 10515 , 32494 WORK GUARANTEE REFUND 82588 . 02/01/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,575.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R DONALD*JONES 02627 001-400-2101-4312 01154 $39.78 10239 32495 MILES/TRAFFIC TRAINING 01/30/90 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE ,. POST *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************`;: $39.78 $0.00 10709 02/08/90 32496 ; R KIWANIS CLUB OF HERMOSA BEACH 00211 001-400-2101-4315 00154 $120.00 DUES/OCT89-JAN90/ALTFELD 01/17/90,;;;,.,.. POLICE,::.;;.r,.. .. /MEMBERSHIP ._ *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $120.00 •. $0.00 02/08/90 • R SGT JOHN*KOEBSELL 00629 001-400-2101-4312 01149 $24.00 • 10228 32497 MEALS/TRAININQ CLASS 01/15/90 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST $0.00 02/08/90 ' 3 4 e 7 e 9 0 5 e 0 4) v 1 1 1 7 YI 5V aV' 3 V d 0 7 v Iv 3 d 5%1 r CITY or-PEAM]aA BEACH FINANCE-oFAn«m DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02,13/90 PAGE 0016 DATE 02/12r90 PAY VENDOR NAME VND w ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN w AMOUNT INV/REF DESCRIPTION DATE INVC pnoJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PO # AMOUNT UNENC CHK # DATE EXP ,`' �'! v *** VENDOR TOTAL ******** ************ ********** '*24.00 R L.A.co POLICE CHIEFS' ASSOC. 02428 001-400-2101-4315 00153 *oo.00 10719 *o.00 32498 - zemIsnoKi 01/15/90 POETCE . /MEMBERSHIP *** vswoon TOTAL ***************°***********°***°************************************ *on.00 02r09/90 R COMMANDER MICHAEL*LAVIN 00792 001-400-2101-4316 00505 *oo.sm 10725 *o.00 32499 02/08/90 wszrB-noopSrspnzwo 90 01/29/90 POLICE /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL **°**********°**********°******************************************* *80.96 n SHERRIA*LAWRENCE 03044 001-400-1207-4316 00044 $83 .53 01797 32500 'Ezna-nooms7SPRImo 90 02/05/90 BUS LICENSE /TRAINING - ^ *** VENDOR TOTAL ************************°***************************************o*** � ` *ao.00 *m.00 0e/08/90 R LEAGUE or CALIFORNIA CITIES 00842 001-400-1101-4315 00094 w2.432.00 12788 09145 32501 ANNUAL DUES/TV/0 12788 01/01/90`'_ CITY COUNCIL /MEMBERSHIP , ` ' ^ *** VENDOR TOTAL **********°***°***********°**v************************v*°*********** *2.432.00 $0.00 02/08/90 . R LEGAL nooxeToRs, INC. 01511 001 -*00-2101-4305 01170 *361.23 10185 • 32502 psmA[-CODE-COPIES o1/1a/9u� POLICE , /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL ********************o***************°***********w***°*************** *361.23 • *361.23 02/08/90 R nTsys*LsGAns 00734 001-210-0000-2110 03525 *1.575.00 82595 10520 32503 -WORK-GUAR ANTEE REFUND 82595 02/01/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** *1.575.00 . $0.00 ' 02/08/90 . . , n ����z�O� �237 110-300-0000-3302 31590 $41.00 846490 09296 32504 TArzom-p7rrMswr REFUND 46490, 01/31/90 /COURT FINES/PARKING` . *** VENDOR TOTAL **********°***. **************o* $41.00 *0.00 02/08/90 ° R COUNTY OF *Loa ANGELES 00e87 001-400-4101-4305 00385 $36 .00 `,, ' 865 08679 32505 AF-RsVISImNS7UAw 90 865 01/05/90 PLANNING /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES ' $0.00 02/08/90 4 5 6 , 8 " " . , 3 ° 15 � ° ° ^ ^ , S. 0 . " 3 55 56 "' 50 59 = "' "` 63 64 � ° � ~ • C I TV—f3 lEP OSA BEACH FINANCE—SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE 0017 DATE 02/12/90 ? n PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN-.# AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 9 10 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** ....;. $36.00 1: 14 R COUNTY OF*L0S ANGELES 00587 001-400-1203-4251 00129 $2,372.22 —PERSONNEL—SERV7OCT=DEt89 432 00076 32506 i4 452 01/09/90 PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT $0.00 , 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $2,372.22 20 21 27 R MANERI SIGN CO., INC. 01255 001-400-3104-5499 00037 $83.26 "NO 0714 10625 32507 2. SKATEBOARD" SIGNS 0714 01/26/90 TRAFFIC SAFETY /NON—CAPITALIZED ASSETS • $0.00 02/08/90 R MANERI SIGN CO., INC. 01255 001-400-6101-5499 00005 $653.84 "LEASH 0470 10097 32507 YOUR PET" SIGNS 0470 01/02/90 PARKS /NON—CAPITALIZED ASSETS __ 1653.85-02/08/90 2' *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $737.10 21 R MANHATTAN FORD 00605 001-400-2201-4311 00311 $33.98 00137 32508 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 90 01/31/90 FIRE /AUTO MAINTENANCE __ $0.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $33.98 --R MARKON COMPUTER SCIENCE, INC. .. 02985 001-400-1206-4201 00675 $984.99 ' ' 7143 00072 32509 �< PRINTER MAINT/JAN—MAR 90 7143 01/10/90 DATA PROCESSING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 '^ *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $984.99 47 R MERRIMAC PETROLEUM, INC. 03080 001-141-0000-1401 00072 $3,103.13 0470 10627 32510 51 CITY YARD GASOLINE 0470 01/24/90 /GASOLINE INVENTORY $0.00 02/08/90 53 54 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $3.103.13 55 ., 50 5, R MICHAELS 03167 001-400-4601-4308 00256 $40.46 3691 10410 32511 4o SAFETY PINS/SAND & STRAN 3691 01/18/90 COMM RESOURCES /PROGRAM MATERIALS $40.46 02/08/90 61 . c2 *** VENDOR TOTAL****************************-tt'*************************************** $40.46 en e4 417 156 67 1 R MOBIL OIL CREDIT CORPORATION 00388 001-400-2101-4316 00504 . 162.08 00163 32512_ 00 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 90 01/31/90 210005 POLICE /TRAINING $0.00 02/08/90 '' 7J 71 " 77 .. 77 f 74 .. .. .. 75 \J ♦J U 4,4 kal CY1?Th 11ERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0018 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC R MOBIL OIL CREDIT CORPORATION 00388 • 110-400-3302-4310 00117 $16.51.. .. ... .... .. 00163 $0. 00 _ 32512 02/08/90 _ MISC: CHARGES/JAN 90 01/31/90 PARKING ENF /MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $78.59 --- R VALERIE*MOHLER 00956 001-400-1202-4316 00284 $85.41 -- ------ 09295 32513 REIMBB00KS/SPRINU-[-990 62/05/90 FINANCE ADMIN /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** 385.41 $0.00 02/0890__ _ R WALLACE*MOORE 00516 001-400-2101-4312 01148 324.00 10225 32514 02/08/90_ MEALS/TRAINING-CLASS 01/10/90 POLICE • ' /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $24.00 30.00 .\ R MUNI. IMMUNITY LAW BULLETIN 02814 705-400-1209-4316 00024 $49.84 09794 32515 - --PUBLICATIONS PUBLICATIONS 02/01/90 LIABILITY INS /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $49.84 $0.00 02/08/90 R NATIONAL EMBLEM 01494 001-400-2101-4187 00322 $508.10 01.63448 10196 32516 POLICE SHOULDER PATCHES 63448 01/31/90 POLICE /UNIFORM ALLOWANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $508.10 $519.00 02/08/90 R OLGUIN-RUTHERFORD 01917 001-210-0000-2110 03518 .' $350.00 82563 10521 32517 :WORK GUARANTEE REFUND 82563 02/01/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $350.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR '& VOSE 02892 001-400-1131-42011 00549: $3,829.00 09141 32518 LEGAL SERV%DEC 89 12/31/89 CITYIATTORNEY: /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL**********************.********.************************************** $3,829.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R RICHARD*OLSON 01194 001-210-0000-2110 03521i $1,575.00 I 82569 10519 32519 ____ 02/08/90 ------WORK GUARANTEE -REFUND 82569 02/01/90 . ..I, /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE 30.00. :0: 2 - 3 4 7 6 9 10 12 5 6 7 23 24 75 211 211 3, 32 3: 35 3^ 3 7 41 42 43 44 4'S 40 47 45 49 51 52 53 54 55 54 5i 50 59 00 of 67 63 64 05 06 67 00 10 7, 72 73 74 75 70 • 1 -.7 1 3 :4 • 30 .4/ CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0019 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF DESCRIPTION DATE INVC- PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PO # AMOUNT UNENC *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** , - *1.575.00 R P & L DEVELOPERS 03241 001-210-0000-2110 03519 4375.00 82586 10518 32520 WORK-GURANTEEEFUND 82586 02/01/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** *375.00• $0.00 02/08/90 R PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE 00321 001-400-2101-4304 00490 $162.57 00036 32521 COMPUTER-HOOKUP/JAN 90 01/31/90 POLICE /TELEPHONE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** *162.57 $0.00 02/08/90 R PAK WEST 00519 001-400-4204-4309 01558 $113.89 00140 32522 MISC-tHARGES/JAN 90 01/31/90 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** *113.89 $0.00 02/08/90 R GERMAINE*PAYNE 03240 001-210-0000-2110 03517 4100.00 82587 10523 32523 WORK GUARANTEE -REFUND 82587 02/01/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE R GERMAINE*PAYNE 03240 160-300-0000-3829 00259 $15.00 82587 $0.00 10523 02/08/90 32523 --- ---- SEWER PERMIT REFUND 82587 02/01/90 /SEWER DEMOLITION FEE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $115.00 $0.00 . 02/08/90 R PEHA & ASSOCIATES 02212 001-210-0000-2110 03524 41,550.00 78535 10513 32524 02/08/90 WORK GUARANTEE REFUND 78535 02/01/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $1,550.00 $0.00 R PENNYSAVER 03037 001-400-1203-4201 00652 460.00 3041 09785 $60.00 32525 _ 02/08/40 EMP. AD/CROSSING GUARD 3041 01/08/90 PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $60.00 R PRIMA 02495 705-400-1209-4315 00007 420.00 09782 32526 ANNUAL DUES/BLACKWOOD 01/01/90 LIABILITY INS /MEMBERSHIP $0.00 02/08/90 3 4 5 6 7 I0 11 12 13 14 15 10 17 16 ID 0 21 2 .1 20 27 70 79 31 30 33 .14 3. 319 1 73¼) 41 43 44 45 40 47 •161 •n 40 517 51 52, 5.3 54. 55 114,1 50 57 30 59 lb./ 60 01 elvd 04 GO 07 lb) 71 66,/ 72 73 '5-" lb+ FINANCE-SFA340 TIME PAY 07:22:11 CitY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0020 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP +• a 6 6 VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION • VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION • AMOUNT UNENC u *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $20.00 II 14 R PRINTMASTERS 00350 001-400-2401-4201 00225 $88.55 21110 09964 32527 10 ADMIN HEARING-STGNS%PKG-21110 01719/90 ANIMAL CONTROL- /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 10 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $88.55 10 21 R RADIO SHACK -MISC. 01429 001-400-1205-4305 00073 $36.38 00143 32528 24 CHARGES7JAN 90 01/31/90 CABLE TV /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 02/08/90 27, .6 R . .RADIO SHACK 01429 . 001-400-2101-4305 01171 $43.85 00143 _ 32528 02/08/90 ?. MISC.- CHARGESTJAN_ 96 01/3[790 POLICE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 R RADIO SHACK 01429 001-400-4204-4309 01561 $5.74 00143 32528 ,, MISC'CHARGES7UAN-90 d17 T790 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/08/90 " *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $85.97 . 35 ,-, .1C R RAINBOW CAMERA & VIDEO 00173 001-400-2101-4306 00751 $430.25 01244 32529_ 3r. ,•. MISC-CNARGES/DEC 89 127789 POLICE /PRISONER MAINTENANCE $0.00 02/08/90 41 4.[ R RAINBOW CAMERA & VIDEO 00173 001-400-2101-4306 00754 ' $131.95 5966 10722 32529 4.3 44 FILM/PROCESSING/POLICE 5966 02/017790 POLICE /PRISONER MAINTENANCE $0.00 02/08/90 45 45 R RAINBOW CAMERA & VIDEO 00173 001-400-2201-4305 00323 $22.07 01244 32529 ,, MISCCHARGES7DEC 89 12/31/89 FIRE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 02/08/90 4i 0 R RAINBOW CAMERA & VIDEO 00173 001-400-3103-4309 ' 00943 $21.33 01244 32529 51 5, MISC:-CHARGES/DEC-89 12/31789 ST MAINTENANCE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/08/90 54 R RAINBOW CAMERA & VIDEO 00173 001-400-4101-4305 00386 $17.08 01244 32529 5,- MISC-CHARGE87DEC-89 12/31/99. PLANNING ../OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 02/08/90 50 59 15 , R RAINBOW CAMERA & VIDEO 00173' •'-150-400-8102-4201 00051 $10.91 01244 32529 o0 MISC: CHARGES/DEC 89 12/31/89 CIP 85-102 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 61 6]. 3 1.1 *** VENDOR TOTAL************•tt***************4*************************•tt************* $633.59 64 65 70 bf 11 R READICARE-DANIEL FREEMAN 02390 _ "001-400-1203-4201 00653 - $291.00- 94-31804 09789 32530 67 PRE -EMP PHYSICALS7DEC-89 3[804 0i708790- PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00,02/08/90 _ 1 70 71 54 72 77 74 f. 15 ,g CTTV—br—F1SRROSA 'MACH ', FINANCE—SFA340 DEMAND LIST PAGE 0021 TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 DATE 02/12/90 2• 4 PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRI'! # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT ,DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 6 A *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $291.00 6 to 11 12 R CITY OF*REDONDO BEACH 01763 145-300-0000-3854 00045 $2.472.85CR 08678 32531 it 14 5 .n' "WAVEn— AREBOrRECOVERY —01709/46 /FARES. DIAL A RIDE $0.00 02/08/90 R CITY OF*REDONDO BEACH 01763 145-400-3401-4201 00178 $27.085.50 08678 32531 ' .222 I� IG IA 20 .t. "WAVE" COSTS7JUL=SEP 99 01709/90 SPUTTE /DIAL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $24.612.65 2. R REGISTRAR—RECORDER 00225 001-400-1122-4201 00202 $1.384.25 432—F 09334_ 32532 _ 2'5 26 2] :n -----CANDIDATE STATEMENTS 432-F 12/14/89 ELECTIONS /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/9 0 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,384.25 21 31 3: R RMRS SYSTEMS00300 001-400-1208-4305 00716 $2,000.00 10596518 08021 32533 3.) 14 35 3. RESET 'POSTAGE METER— 96518 01/i090 GEN.APPROP !OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $2.000.00 ... R MARY C. *ROONEY 00302 . 001-400-4601-4317 00100 $35.00 TR285 00285 32534 41 42 4J 4g PER DIEM ADVANCE TR285 02/08/90 COMM RESOURCES /CONFERENCE EXPENSE $0.00 02/08/90 R MARY C. *ROONEY 00302 001-400-4601-4317 00101 $105.00 TR285 00285 32534 97. 46 42 4n REIMD—CONFERENCE REG TR285 02/08/90 COMM RESOURCES /CONFERENCE EXPENSE ' $0.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL**********************************************************.********** . ... $140.00 51 :2 R ED*RUZAK & ASSOCIATES 01578 001-400-3104-4201 00050 $1,112.50 89482 10614 32535 53 54 5^ 56 ENGINEERTNO SRT DEC 99 89402 — 01/10/90 . TRAFFIC SAFETY. /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************', $1.112.50 5' 5n 6, R SAFEWAY SIGN COMPANY 00021 001-400-3104-5499 00036 $66.36 36400 10608 32536 61 62 6.1 a•I BIKE—MUTE—SI-ORS 36400, 01/25/90 TRAFFIC SAFETY /NON—CAPITALIZED ASSETS $66.36 02/08/90 R SAFEWAY SIGN COMPANY 00021 001-400-6101-5499 00004 $97.04 36485 10604 32536 6, 6r. HERMOSA BEACH PIER SIGNS 36485 01/29/90 PARKS /NON—CAPITALIZED ASSETS $97.04 02/08/90 `` ]U 21 72 J3 74 15 , ..J .A I• 11 :2 •"S 73 54 6 CITY OP HERMOST-BEACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0022 02/12/90 CHK it DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO 0 DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ 0 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC *** VENDOR TOTAL*****************•x**********•*************************************** . .$163.40 R SUSAN*SAXE-CLIFFORD,PH D 00839 001-400-1203-4320 00295 $275.00 0-0111-1 -- --PSYCH-EVAE7POLICE 09790 32537 111-1 01718/90 PERSON - PTOYMENT EXAMS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $275.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R SENTINEL SIGNAL SYSTEMS 01025 001-400-4204-4201 00359 $300.00 10656 $0.00 32538 FIRE-ALARM-SER07FEB-=APR 02/03/90 BLDG MAINT /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************.:..` $300.00 02/08/90 _ R SEPULVEDA BLDG. SUPPLY 02655 001-400-8146-4309 00007 $350.36 17130/17791 10630 32539 PLANTER-BOXES7HERMOSA AV -17791 02/05/90 CIP 09-146 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS R SEPULVEDA BLDG. SUPPLY 02655 145-400-8149-4309 00003 $356.34 18002/18005 --------- -BENCHES -18005 $366.69 10615 02/08/90 32539 02/08/90 SUPPLIES FOR BUS 01746790 CIP 96=T49 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $706.70 $372.24 R JIMMIE LEE*SHAW 00960 001-400-2101-4310 " 00230 $20.80 10706 32540 MILES/TRAINING"CLASS 01/08/90 POLICE /MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $20.80 $0.00 02/08/90 R SIGNS, ETC. 03205. .' 001-400-1101-4305 00298 $122.76 2588 - `--__`- 09139 32541 COUNCIL CHAMBERS/GNS 258E# 01729710 CITY COUNCIL /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $122.76 $122.76 02/08/90 R SINCLAIR PAINT CO_. .. 01399 001-400-4204-4309 01559 $12.65 00146 32542 CHARGES7JAN 90 01/31790 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS R SINCLAIR PAINT CO. 01399 145-400-8149-4309 00004 $60.21 $0.00 00146 __MISC. 02/08/90 32542 MISC7-CHARGES7JAN 90 .01/31/90 ". CIP 90-149 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $72.86 "$0.00 02/08/90 R SIR SPEEDY 00361 110-400-3302-4309 00640 $215.68 10542 09961 *213.00 32543 02/08/90 ENFORCEMENT-DECACE7PKG 10542 12/05/89 PARK!NQ ENF- /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 3 13 14 15 i6 111 <0 70 41 2" 23 24 20 26 29 31 3: 30.1 41 43 44 45 42 4ti 50. 5 52 53 54 5r, 5, 50 59 60 Ji 62 C] 64 65 66 67 oga 7, 72 ;3 !4 25 411. .J •C 42 3 11 I:. 17 1n 51 • •:1 110 i7 CITTW-RERHOGA ' ACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0023 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF. PO # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** 4215.68 R SMART & FINAL IRIS COMPANY 00114 001-400-2101-4306 00753 366.20 00147 32544 1IISC7-CFIARGES/JAN 90 01/31/90 POLICE /PRISONER MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** 366.20 30.00 02/08/90 R SO CALIF RAPID TRANSIT DISTR.. 00843145-400-3403-4251 00063 $1,325.00 49529 09966 32545 BUS PASSSAE S/N0V-84-49529 12/14/89 BUS PASS SUBSDY /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,325.00 30.00 02/08/90 _ R SO. CALIF CHAPTER, IAEI 03231 001-400-4201-4316 00184 330.00 10340 32546 SEMINAR REG7TGEORGINO 01/23/90 BUILDING.: /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** . 330.00 . $0.00 02/08/90 R SOFTWARE GALERIA 02652 001-400-4202-4305 00460 374.06 12281 10622 32547 FLOPPY DISCS/PUBLIC WORK 12281 01/31/90 PUB WKS ADMIN /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** 574.06 372.06 02/08/90 R SOO HAN 03233 001-210-0000-2110 03526 5100.00 88871 10527 32548 REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT 88871. 01/05/90 ..::.:.... /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** 5100.00 30.00 02/08/90 R SOURISSEAU SUPPORT SERVICES 02075 001-400-2101-4201 00518 31,125.00 VARIOUS 10714 32549 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION RIOUS 01/17/90 . POLICE . .. /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,125.00 50.00 02/08/90 R SOUTH BAY FIRE EXTINGUISHER 00113 001-400-2201-4309 00816 376.88 00148 32550 MISC. C . S/JAN 90 01/31/90 FIRE ./MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $76.88 30.00 02/08/90 R SOUTH BAY JUVENILE DIVERSION 01731 140-400-4705-4201 00006 5237.80 08686 30.00 32551 02/08/90 CONTRACT PKTTTDEC 89 01/25/90 JUVENILE DIVSN /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT J 6 7 0 2 17 113 19 7,, 21 74 271 `.1 In 11. J. 3, 4: \/ 4 q.. 4L 47 \! an 49 50 51 57 53 134 55 56 57 :0 54 60 G1 02 6:N./ 04 cs 06 c7 en 69 7c iI ) 72I 731 74 75:410 v V • CITY OF' HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0024 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT PO # UNENC *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $237.80 R SOUTH BAY MUNICIPAL COURT 00400 110-300-0000-3302 31591 4136.00 -CITATION-COURT-N1L 09974 32552 02/01/90 •, /COURT FINES/PARKING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $136.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R SPARKLETTS DRINKING WATER CORP 00146 001-400-4601-4305 00787 $30.20 1236387 00033 32553 "ATER COOLER RENT/DEC 89 36387 12/31/89 COMM RESOURCES /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $30.20 $0.00 02/08/90 R SUPERSTRIPES UNLIMITED 03206 001-400-2101-4311 00797 4106.75 5165 10701 32554 TINT-WINDOWS7POLTCE CAR 5165 01/20/90 210005 POLICE /AUTO MAINTENANCE _ R_ _ SUPERSTRIPES UNLIMITED ._ 03206 001-400-2101-4311: 00798 $320.25 5165 *106.75 10701 02/08/90 32554 TINT WINDOWS/POLICECAR 5165 01/20/90 210005 POLICE /AUTO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** 4427.00 $320.25 02/08/90 R TODD PIPE & SUPPLY 00124 001-400-6101-4309 00810 $85.19 00157 32555 MISC-CHARGES/JAN 90 01/31/90 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $85.19 $0.00 02/08/90 R TOP NOTCHERS 03238 001-210-0000-2110 03315 4100.00 88831- 10525 32556 DAMAGE DEPOSITREECJND 888 02/01/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $100.00 $0.00 02/08/90 _ _R CITY OF*TORRANCE 00841 145-400-3402-4201 00144 43,831.00 ------ 100674 08682 32557____ 3RD OTR SHARE/COMM. BUS 00674 01/11/90 COMMUTER BUS /CONTRACT SERVICES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $3,831.00 • $0.00 02/08/90 _ R RALPH*TURKOLU 03239 001-210-0000-2110 03516 450.00 89861 10524 32558_ ANIMAL TRAP REFUND 89861 02/01/90 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 02/08/90 2. 3 7 9 10 11 14 15 IC 10 19 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 20 4U 31 32 33 34 3, 3f. 37 30 34 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 40 49 50 51 52 53 54 50 56 57 50 50 00 61 C2 63 64 65 65 67 0113 0 70 71 72 74 74 75 i, J V 1) • 5 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE—SFA340 DEMAND LIST ITIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 PAGE DATE 0025 02/12/90 CHK # DATE EXP • PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC *** VENDOR TOTAL•****************************•****•*************e********************** $50.00 32559 R AURELIANO*UGOLINI 02296 001-300-0000-3406 00252 $108.50 86838 10411 REFUND THEATRE RENTAL 86838 10/18/89... /COMM CTR THEATRE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $108.50 *0.00 02/08/90 R VANIER GRAPHICS 01302 110-400-3302-4305 00652 $470.88 70868-11 09949 32560 PARKING` PERMITRENEWALS 68-11 12/13/89 PARKING ENF /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $470.88 $457.07 02/08/90 R WELDON WILLIAMS & LICK 00311 110-400-3302-4305 00651 $2,182.90 9168/9169 09948 32561 PARKING PERMITS/TAGS /9169 01/05/90 PARKING ENF /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $2,182.90 $2.094.88 02/08/90 R WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY 00141 001-400-1131-4201 00548 $449.00 09331 32562 PUBLICATIONS 01/11/90 CITY ATTORNEY /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $449.00 02/08/90 R WESTERN ALLIANCE OF ARTS ADMIN 00313 001-400-4601-4315 00056 $105.00 10423 1 32563 DUES/MONEY 02/01/90 COMM RESOURCES /MEMBERSHIP *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $105.00 $0.00 02/08/90 R WESTERN GOVTL RESEARCH ASSOC. 01110 001-400-1203-4201 00651. $142.35 8566 09761 32564 EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING 8566 01/22/90. .. PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT. $120.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** *142.35 02/08/90 R SALLY A. *WHITE 00140 001-400-4102-4201 00240 $340.00 08684 32565 1 SEC SERV/DEC 5.89 01/24/90.;:;•; PLANNING COMM.. /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** .. $340.00 02/08/90 R WILCO PUBLISHING CO. 03243 001-400-4601-4305 00786 $71.32 10424 32566 ART LIBRARY/COMM. RES. 01/30/90 COMM RESOURCES /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 02/08/90 2 3 • 5 6 7 e 9 0 7 ti 2 • 47 46 46 5• 51 5. 53 54 55 56 5, 50 59 647: 61 02 63 64 65 66 67 66 eu /v 71 72 ,] 74 ,5 CITY OF H --FINANCE-SFA340 DEMAND LIST PAGE •0026 TIME 07:22:11 FOR 02/13/90 DATE 02/12/90 3 , PAY* VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # . AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 4 a *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************fit*********** $71.32 „ 12 14 R WILLDAN ASSOCIATES 03230 001-400-4101-4201 00065 $3,760.00 6019292 08676 32567- PLANNING SERV/MAY 89 19292 01/03/90 PLANNING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/08/90 IA 1/, *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $3.760.00 'Q' R STEVE*WISNIEWSKI 01364 001-400-2101-4316 00506 $164.78 10708 32568 ': SEP 89 TO JAN 90 EXPENSE 12/31/89 POLICE /TRAINING $0.00 02/08/90 04 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $164.78 27 :n R XEROX CORPORATION 00135 001-400-1208-6900 00215 $321.83 524556376 00049 32569 LEASE,PMT/FEB 90 56376 02/02/90 GEN APPROP /LEASE PAYMENTS $0.00 02/08/90 ,:. 3.. R XEROX CORPORATION 00135 001-400-1208-6900 00216. $238.72 524556375 .00050 32569 ',° LEASE PMT/FEB 90 56375 02/02/90 GEN APPROP /LEASE PAYMENTS $0.00 02/08/90 ,r. • R XEROX CORPORATION 00135 001-400-2201-6900 00104 $47.74 - 524556372 00053 32569 J° LEASE PAYMENT/FEB 90 56372 02/02/90 FIRE /LEASE PAYMENTS $0.00 02/08/90 R XEROX CORPORATION 00135 001-400-2401-6900 00057 $56.15 524556373 00051 32569 4' LEASE PMT/FEB 1990 56373 02/02/90 ANIMAL CONTROL /LEASE PAYMENTS $0.00 02/08/90 ., 45 R XEROX CORPORATION 00135 110-400-3302-6900 00142 $114.40 5214556373 00051 •32569' A4 LEASE PAYMENT/FEB 90 56373 02/02/90 PARKING ENF /LEASE PAYMENTS '$0.00 02/08/90 'an *** VENDOR TOTAL********************************************************************. $778.84 s. 53 R ZUMAR INDUSTRIES 01206 001-400-3104-4309 00392 $448.35 12953 10610 32570 '.' ST SIGN RIVETS 12953 01/24/90 TRAFFIC SAFETY /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $448.35 02/08/90 5.1 Si , *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** . $448.35 �n as *** PAY CODE TOTAL#***************************#****####*****#*******#****#****#***** $198,953.06 u, en I HEREBY CEgI1EY�y�uy�E—DEMANDS-THE EM COVERED Ei THE WARRANTS LISTED ON PAG PAGE,S1_ OF E. '� *** TOTAL WARRANTS*#**#********************#*********#***#***#*******#*****#********� �'.� �.' $198. 953. 06 WARRANT REGISTER FOR •"1 ACCURATE e 1ANDJUNDS ARE-AVAILABLE-7OR PAI' ENT THEREOFRE iq BY FINANCE AD VII NISTRAT 71 .:.3 /71 54 hhrc !,: 7s )4 February 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and For the Meeting of Members of the City Council February 13, 1990 CANCELLATION OF WARRANTS Please consider the following request for cancellation of the warrants listed below. #031670 - 11/14/89 - Gail Brown-Koebsell - $393.75 - Account Number 001-400-2101-4312. Employee ill and unable to attend training. #031758 - 11/14/89 - Regional Training Center - $237.00 - Account Number 001-400-2101-4312. Employee ill and unable to attend training. #031764 - 11/14/89 - Sheriffs' Dept. Adv. Officer Training Bureau - $174.00 - Account Number 001-400-2101-4312." The warrant was for tuition for two officers. The tuition for the training class was changed from $87.00 per person to no fee. #032205 - 1/9/90 - So. California Assoc. of Code Enforcement Officials - $15.00 - Account Number 001-400-4101-4315. Employee resigned. #032330 - 1/23/90 - Joyce Long - $312.80 - Account Number 001-400-1206-4217 - $29.05 and 001-400-2101-4310 - $283.75. Incorrect vendor number entered in computer at time of warrant preparation. Warrant never mailed. Concur: evin Northcr City Manager (74f/- Gary Brut c City Treasurer Noted for fiscal impact Viki Copeland • February 6, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of February 13, 1990 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Responsible Agent February 22, 1990 - 6:30 p.m. (Special Meeting) Presentation of Parks and Rec. Master Plan Community Resources Report on ramifications of withdrawal from CDBG program City Attorney February 27, 1990 Introduction of RUHS Academic Decathlon Team Contract for pavement management system Public Works Director Criteria for sidewalk installation along suggested route to school Disposition of ladder truck Public Information Program Results of sewer bond analysis CIP 89-407 Public Works Director Accept as complete, Highland Ave. CIP 85-102 Public Works Director Award of computerized maintenance management system Public Works Director Resolution supporting competition in the Cable T.V. industry No golf/archery on parks ordinance Public Hearings Text amendment re. view blockage and height measurement method Planning Director City Goals City Manager March 8, 1990 - 6:00 p.m. Preliminary Budget workshop Public Works Director Public Safety Director General Services Director General Services Director Community Resources Dir. City Mgr./Finance Dir. lc March 13, 1990 Community Center revenue & expendi- tures Accounting of revenue and expendi- tures Park & Rec. Tax Resolution - preparation of report Street Lighting District Resolution - preparation of report Crossing Guard District RFP for consultant services to prepare a records management system Update of Community Center lease rates FY 90-91 CDBG (if necessary) Public Hearings Public Hearing on Cable television consumer protection ordinance March 15, 1990 (Special Meeting) Public Hearing workshop on oil EIR with School District March 27, 1990 Audit request for proposal Fire Sprinkler Ordinance Community Center revenue and expenditures Accounting of revenue and expenditures - Rec. & Park Tax April 10, 1990 1st quarter General Plan amendment 1) Park & Rec. Master Plan amendment to open space element 2) General Plan amendment for oil drilling Text amendment to Zoning Code for oil drilling Certification of oil drilling EIR Slurry sealing, call for bids CIP 89-170 Community Resources Dir. Community Resources Dir. Public Works Director Public Works Director General Services Dir. Comm. Resources Director Planning Director General Services Director Planning Director Finance Director Public Safety Director Community Resources Dir. Finance Director Planning Director Planning Director Planning Director Public Works Director Overlay Valley/Ardmore/Prospect agreement with County Report on results of 6th St. storm drain cleaning April 24, 1990 Street Lighting District Assessment reso. approving report & setting public hearing Crossing Guards District Assessment reso. approving report & setting public hearing May 22, 1990 CIP 88-406 Call for Bids - Sewers Target Area 4 May 24, 1990 - 6:00 p.m. Budget and Capital Improvement Program study session June 7, 1990 Second budget study session if needed June 26, 1990 Public Hearing/Budget Adoption Public Works Director Public Works Director Public Works Director Public Works Director Public Works Director ***************************************************************** Upcoming Items Not Yet Calendared Caltrans utility maintenance agrmt. Power Street drainage and grading Vehicle parking on pedestrian streets Historic Preservation Ordinance (with Land Use Element) New marquee proposal Public Works Director Public Works Director Public Works Director Planning Director Community Resources ***************************************************************** Initiated by Party Date City Mgr. 11/7 Revision of Handbill ordinance Public Safety Director • Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council February 6, 1990 City Council Meeting of February 13, 1990 MONTHLY STATUS REPORT OF INACTIVE PUBLIC DEPOSITS FOR HERMOSA BEACH Attached is a report of all Inactive Public Deposits for the month of January 1990. Respectfully submitted, 6/2 .73/?L(ZI,r, Gary Bruts h City Trea urer NOTED: City Manager 1d INSTITUTION TOTAL INVESTMENT REPORT - JANUARY 1990 DATE OF INVESTMENT DATE OF MATURITY INTEREST LAIF BALANCE 1/01/90 Withdrawal Investment BALANCE 1/31/90 $2,910,000.00 <400,000.00> 300,000.00 $2,810,000.00 LACPIF Railroad Right-of-WayAccount BALANCE 1/01/90 Investment BALANCE 1/31/90 General Account BALANCE 1/01/90 BALANCE 1/31/90 $ 288,657.30 106,219.78 394,877.08 $2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT: Union Federal S&L Investment City National Bank Investment $ 500,000.00 $ 500,000.00 1/30/90 1/10/90 3/7/89 3/30/89 1/10/90 3/7/90 3/23/90 8.685% 8.73% 8.73% 9.50% 10.30% City National Bank Investment City National Bank Investment CORPORATE NOTES: Ford Motor Credit Co. Investment Merrill Lynch & Co.. Investment $ 500,000.00 $ 500,000.00 $ 500,000.00 $ 500,000.00 U.S. TREASURY NOTE: Investment $ 500,937.94 Investment $1,025,032.92 FHLMC: Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. Investment $ 248,733.64 INVESTMENT TOTAL $9,979,581.58 SEATTLE 1ST NATL. BANK TRUST U.S. Treasury Note U.S. Treasury Note 24,634.28 500,000.00 4/25/89 4/25/90 5/22/89 5/17/90 5/19/88 5/20/93 6/30/88 1/2/90 2/22/89 1/29/90 3/26/87 10.00% 9.45% 9.10% 8.35% 1/31/91 9.20% 2/15/91 8.22% 3/1/17 8.0% 9/27/89 3/1/90 9/27/89 8/15/94 7.8% 8.3% TICOR BALANCE 1/01/90 BALANCE 1/31/90 TRUSTEE TOTAL GRAND TOTAL $ 10,000.00 10,000.00 $ 534,634.28 $10,514,215.86 Respectfully Submitted, Gary Brutsc City Treasurer January 23, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 STATUS. OF FEBRUARY 14, 1989 TRAFFIC SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY Recommendation It is recommended that City Council: 1. Receive and file this status report Background On February 14, 1989 Council considered a report from the Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Berkeley presented an analysis of the City's Traffic Safety Programs. This analysis was performed at no cost to the City. This report to Council is a followup to the Febraury 14, 1989 meeting which outlines the Police and Public Works Departments' progress in implementing the Institute's recommendations. Analysis This report is divided as follows: 1. Enforcement Evaluation and Status 2. Engineering Evaluation and Status 1. ENFORCEMENT EVALUATION AND STATUS During 1989 City staff worked towards implementing the following recommendations. Recommendation #1: Consider deploying resources based on the potential to save lives, mitigate injuries and reduce the loss of citizens' property: Description: This recommendation suggests that the Department create a designated traffic unit. Status: A designated traffic unit has been formed. Recommendation #2: Consider formalizing an annual traffic safety goal setting process: Description: This recommendation suggests that the Department set annual traffic safety goals. Status: Traffic goals for the 1989/90 fiscal year were established. 1 Recommendation #3: Consider the options for delegating traffic safety responsibility to one supervisor. Traffic safety program management may be a collateral duty. Description: This recommendation suggests that one supervisor be designated the responsibility of traffic safety as a collateral duty if a dedicated supervisor could not be available. Status: A patrol sergeant was given the collateral duty of traffic safety. Recommendation #4: Consider the options for assigning a traffic field supervisor. Description: The recommendation suggests that a supervisor be dedicated to the traffic unit. Status: As part of the designated traffic unit, a sergeant was assigned full time. Recommendation #5: Consider two or three news media, warning and enforcement campaigns each year. Status: Participatedin area wide "Holiday DUI" program. Conducted a successful DUI checkpoint in Hermosa Beach. Recommendation #6: Consider the value of an annual report which contains a traffic safety section. Status: Our current monthly and annual reports contain traffic safety information. Recommendation #7: Management consider reviewing the accident investigation policy and procedures. Description: Recommendation suggests revision of investigation policies and adoption of new forms. Status: The traffic unit has been given the responsibility to implement use of the short form report and will develop new policies for accident investigation. Recommendation #8: Consider the value of a Staff Traffic Safety Committee. Status: There have been discussions regarding the formation of a committee, but one has not been formed yet. The newly created traffic unit will be responsible for further consideration of this committee. Recommendation #9: Consider enhancing the Department's long-term traffic law enforcement capabilities by increased traffic safety training. Description: Recommendation is to increase training of all officers in regards to accident investigation, DUI Recognition and Defense Driving. Status: Several officers have received training, all others are being scheduled. 2. ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND STATUS During 1989 City staff worked towards implementing the following recommendations. Recommendation #1: Improve Legal Basis for Traffic Engineering Description: This recommendation suggests that Hermosa Beach consider delegating the responsibility for traffic regulations and devices to the City Traffic Engineer and reserve to City Council the function of acting as a court of appeal. Status: In progress. A draft revision to the Municipal Code (Chapter 19) is underway. The draft has been circulated to the City Attorney, the Automobile Association of America, the Police, General Services and Planning Departments. A final draft is due by the end of February. Recommendation #2: Improve High Accident and Surveillance Program Description: (a) This recommendation suggests the Police Department consider increasing the reporting level of property damage accidents to provide a good data base for an engineering traffic safety program. (b) It is recommended that the City consider providing adequate resources to allow the Department of Public Works to conduct a high accident identification and surveillance program on a continuing basis. Status: (a) Done. The Police Department has increased its level of reporting property damage. (b) In Progress. On July 25, 1989, the State Office of Traffic Safety denied a request for financial assistance because available funds were given to other cities where a higher potential for immediate reduction in accidents exists. Should the City still need funding assistance, the State will consider the proposal in 1990. 3 Recommendation #3: Improve Traffic Count Program Description: This recommendation suggests the City investigate the possibility of using traffic signal detector loops on Hermosa Avenue to provide information for a master counting station program. Status: Done. Loops not practical for Hermosa Beach. Tube count program implemented instead. Recommendation #4: Improve Pedestrian Safety Program Description: This recommendation suggests reviewing City policy regarding installation of sidewalks. Status: In progress. The suggested route to school program implemented; and the annual review of flashing yellow beacons and the adult crossing guards program has been completed. A criteria for sidewalk installation is being developed. Recommendation #5: Improve Sight Distance Ordinance Description: This recommendation suggests consideration of an ordinance which would restrict parking of tall vehicles near corners. Status: Done. This is included as part of recommendation #1. Recommendation #6: Improve Work Zone Traffic Control Description: This recommendation suggests that Hermosa Beach • contact the Institute of Transportation Studies Extension Program to provide a cost-free workshop in work zone traffic control for city crews that work in street areas. Status: In progress. The Institute of Transportation Studies has been contacted. The class is scheduled in the near future Employees are scheduled to attend. Recommendation #7: Improve Coordination Among Traffic Agencies Description: This recommendation suggests establishing a Staff Traffic Committee, for the purpose of discussing traffic problems. Status: Done. The Public Works Directors of Manhattan and Redondo Beach meet to discuss traffic safety issues. City staff has: a) worked with Redondo Beach to improve bicycle operation at Herondo Street and Hermosa Avenue. b) work with Manhattan Beach to resolve a concern with bicycle safety near Hermosa Avenue. c) participated in a study to help better coordinate traffic signals county wide. d) requested the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission consider funding of bicycle path repairs on the Strand. Recommendation #8: Improve Traffic Sign Program Description: This recommendation suggests: a) updating of its traffic sign inventory on regularly scheduled process. b) consider a bi-annual nighttime sign inspection program to determine what signs no longer have reflectivity. request Caltrans to provide supplemental street name signs at the signalized intersections of the Pacific Coast Highway. d) consider a program of field identification of traffic signs both as to ownership and date of installation. Status: a) and b) In progress. The Public Works Department is updating the traffic signs and identifying deficiencies by visual inspection (night and day). For maintenance purposes, the City was divided into six zones. City field crews have completed work in zones 1 and 2 and are working in zone 3. Each zone is averaging 3 months and is being done as fill in work. c) In progress. d) A test area is underway to determine the cost effectiveness of this program. Recommendation #9: Improve Pavement Marking program Description: This recommendation suggests a) utilizing aerial photographs as an inventory for pavement markings. b) investigating the painting cycle to see if it can be lengthened. c) investigating its program of painting red curbs to see if much of this can be eliminated. Status: a) Done. The City's 1986 aerial photographs are being used for pavement markings inventory. b) Done. Test results of thermoplastic markings show excellent durability and good wet -night visibility. Thermoplastic markings installed on Highland Avenue. Will continue to install on new construction, overlays and other areas where deemed appropriate based on pavement conditions. c) In progress. Investigations have been conducted in cooperation with the General services Department to reduce maintenance cost. 1. Test area to remove red curbs between parking meters on Hermosa Avenue from 22nd to 27th Street successful. City crews no longer painting red between parking meters. 2. Test area on alley red lines in progress. In addition crosswalk markings have been upgraded to provide for greater visibility. Recommendation #10: Improve Traffic Signal Program Description: This recommendation suggests: a) keeping a record of the traffic signal timing and traffic signal hardware of every signalized intersection in the Department of Public Works office. b) analyzing the maintenance logs for traffic signals to determine whether scheduled relamping and lens cleaning would be a viable option. c) discuss with the consultant preparing the plans for traffic signal update as to whether all signals will be interconnected on Hermosa Avenue. Status: a) Done. Signal plans and signal timing stored in Public Works Department. b) Done. Respe tfully submitte Ant'* ny Antich Director of Public Works pworks draft Concur: Kevin B. Nort City Manager Steve Wisniewski, Director of Public Safety SEE ATTACHED CITY MANAGER COMMENTS CITY MANAGER COMMENT: The cumulative impacts of this audit and the actions taken pursuant to its recommendations represent significant at- tempts to improve the safety of our City, as citizens' chanc- es of being injured or incurring property loss are nearly two times greater from traffic than from crime. February 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of February 13, 1990 RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD BID FOR TYPE II AMBULANCE FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Award the bid for purchase of the ambulance to C.R.S. Coach, Inc.; 2. Authorize the purchase of the 1990 Ford ambulance with diesel engine which was the alternate bid from C.R.S. Coach, Inc.; and 3. Authorize appropriation of $5,841 from Prospective Expenditures for purchase of the ambulance and payment of sales tax. BACKGROUND: The purchase of the ambulance was authorized and $25,000 was appropriated in the 89-90 adopted budget. The current equipment for paramedic response and patient transport consists of a 1982 Ford modular ambulance and a 1969 Ford pickup as the back-up unit. Both of these units have been experiencing ever increasing mechanical problems. The 1969 unit is being kept together and running one day at a time. The 1982 unit has been out of service for repairs on an increasingly frequent basis. When the 1982 unit is out of service, all of the paramedic equipment is trans- fered to the 1969 unit so the paramedics can respond to calls for service. When the 1982 unit is out of service, we have no transport capability for patients and outside services must be called. The purchase of the new ambulance will allow the department to place the new unit into service as the primary response unit and place the 1982 unit as the back-up unit complete with transportation capability. There were plans in the budget to construct an emergency preparedness trailer to be outfitted with various traffic control devices, flares, emergency generator, etc. in order to have all of the necessary equipment and materials to respond and control various emergency sitivations. Instead of a trailer, staff feels that the 1969 pickup can be outfitted in a similar manner and would be suitable for response as needed. 1 11 ANALYSIS: Five (5) ambulance manufacturers were contacted by mail and a notice inviting bids was placed in the Easy Reader. Two (2) bids were submitted by the deadline of February 1, 1990. At the bid opening on February 1, 1990, the following bids were received: C.R.S. Coach, Inc. 1990 Dodge Type II with gasoline engine $25,890 6.75% tax 1,748 $27,638 1990 Ford Type II with diesel engine $28,890 6.75% tax 1,951 $30,841 First Response, Inc. 1990 Dodge Type II with gasoline engine $30,448 6.75% tax 2,055 $32,503 The Fire Department mechanic recommends that the Ford ambulance with the diesel engine be purchased instead of the gasoline for the following reasons: * Diesel engines require less maintenance arid have more reliability, * Diesel engines come with longer factory warranty (5 years), * The chassis of the Ford is heavier duty and it has more equipment * Fuel mileage on a diesel is better than gasoline. Based on these considerations, staff recommends the purchase of the Ford equipped with the diesel engine. ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION: Council may choose to: 1. Award the bid to C.R.S. Coach, Inc. for the purchase of the 1990 Dodge with gasoline engine, and 2. Authorize appropriation of an additional $2,638 for the purchase of the ambulance and payment of sales tax. Concur: evin B. ortht ft, City Manager Noted for fiscal impact: Viki Copeland, Director of Finance 2 Res ully Su6m'; ted, Steve S. Wisniewski Director of Public Safety ERNS COACH EMERGENCY VEHICLES JANUARY 8, 1990 Dean D.inecton ob Pubtic Safety: Aiten canebut nev.Lew o6 the Apec.i“catLon negand.ing the 4ot.ic.itatLon dated Febnuany 1, 1990 on a 1990 Dodge B-350 type II made by CRS Coach, Inc. Thio pn.ice 4eAtect4 a bid pn.ice F.O.B. Mcate4ten with a pno j ected de.2.iveny o b 21 da yz a�ten receipt o6 chazza and depo4it. Should you nequ.ine any ctan.ib.icat.ion our bid pteaze 6eei bnee to contact th.c4 obgLce at (918) 426-5005. ONE 1990 DODGE B-350 TYPE II BID PRICE $ 25,890.00 AMBULANCE TO BE BUILT TO YOUR SPECIFICATION ALTERNATE BID ONE 1990 FORD E350 TYPE II BID PRICE $ 28,890.00 AMBULANCE BUILT TO KKK SPEC. C -1822C (918) 426-5005 • P.O. BOX 323 Thanh.you Banny Barstow CRS COACH, INC. McALESTER, OKLAHOMA 74502 JANUARY 8, 1990 SUBJECT: AMBULANCE PROPOSAL ONE (1) NEW 1990 DODGE 8-350 MAXIVAN HIGHTOP (PROSPECTOR 4) AMBULANCE MADE BY CRS COACH, INC. OF MCALESTER OKLAHOMA. CHASSIS SPECIFICATIONS: A. 360 CID ENGINE B. AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION C. POWER STEERING D. HEAVY DUTY COOLING E. HEAVY DUTY SUSPENSION (8510 G.V.W.) F. HEAVY DUTY ALTERNATOR (120 AMP) G. STABILIZER BAR H. RADIAL TIRES I. 35 GALLON FUEL TANK J. H.D BATTERY (100+ CCA) K. FACTORY AIR CONDITIONING L. LOW MOUNT BREAKAWAY MIRRORS M. POWER WINDOWS N. POWER DOOR LOCKS O. AM/FM RADIO CONVERSION SPECIFICATIONS: A. BASIC LIFE SUPPORT CABINETRY B. 63" INTERIOR HEADROOM C. STEEL ROLL CAGE D. FORMICA COVERED CABINETS E. PIPED OXYGEN SYSTEM (2) OUTLETS F. ELECTRICAL SUCTION G. 115-2 COT CATCH H. IV HOLDER I. REAR AIR CONDITIONING J. FRONT/REAR CONTROL PANELS WARNING AND AUDIBLE WARNING DEVICES A. S.V.P. MODEL SA -400 ELECTRON SIREN B. (1) 100 WATT SPEAKER (GRILLE MOUNTED) C. 11 FLASHING LIGHTS D. (2) SCENE LIGHTS ON EACH SIDE E. BELT STRIPE WITH PINSTRIPING (STANDARD COLOR PREFERENCE) F. AMBULANCE DECALS G. BACK UP ALARM H. HAND HELD SPOTLIGHT PRICE: $25,890.00 PLUS LICENSE AND TAX IF APPLICABLE F.O.B. CRS COACH, INC. PLANT MCALESTER OKLAHOMA DELIVER: 14-21 DAYS OF PRODUCTION TIME AFTER RECIPT OF CHASSIS AND DEPOSIT SUBJECT: AMBULANCE PROPOSAL JANUARY 8, 1990 ONE (1) NEW 1990 FORD E-350 DIESEL SUPERVAN HIGHTOP AMBULANCE, MADE BY CRS COACH INC. OF MCALESTER OKLAHOMA. CHASSIS SPECIFICATIONS: A. 7.3 LITER DIESEL ENGINE B. 9,000 G.V.W. ONE (1) TON CHASSIS C. AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION W/4.10 LIMITED SLIP AXLE RATIO D. POWER STEERING E. HEAVY DUTY ENGINE COOLER F. AUXILIARY TRANSMISSION COOLER G. HEAVY DUTY SUSPENSION H. 165 AMP LEECE-NEVILLE ALTERNATOR (INTERNAL REGULATED) I. FRONT STABILIZER BAR J. RADIAL TIRES (5) K. 38 GALLON FUEL CAPACITY L. HEAVY DUTY DUAL BATTERIES M. FACTORY AIR CONDITIONING N. LOW MOUNT BREAKAWAY MIRRORS O. VOLTAGE MONITOR CONVERSION SPECIFICATIONS: A. BASIC LIFE SUPPORT CABINETRY (OPTIONAL DESIGNS AVAILABLE) B. 63" INTERIOR HEADROOM C. STEEL ROLL CAGE D. FORMICA COVERED CABINETS E. PIPED OXYGEN SYSTEM (2) OUTLETS (REAR STANDUP 02) F. IMPACT ELECTRIC SUCTION G. 175-2 COT CATCH H. IV HOLDER I. REAR AIR CONDITIONING J. FRONT/REAR CONTROL PANELS WARNING AND AUDIBLE WARNING DEVICES: A. S.V.P. MODEL SA -400 ELECTRONIC SIREN B. (1) 100 WATT SPEAKER (GRILLE MOUNTED) C. 11 FLASHING LIGHTS D. (2) SCENE LIGHTS ON EACH SIDE E. BELT STRIPE WITH PINSTRIPING (STANDARD COLOR PREFERENCE) F. AMBULANCE DECALS G. BACK UP ALARM H. POST MOUNTED SPOTLIGHT I. SHORELINE PRICE: $ 28,890.00 PLUS LICENSE AND TAX IF APPLICABLE F.O.B. CRS COACH INC. PLANT IN MCALESTER OKLAHOMA DELIVERY: 14-21 DAYS OF PRODUCTION TIME, AFTER RECEIPT OF CHASSIS AND DEPOSIT. REQUEST FOR BID The City of Hermosa Beach is soliciting bids from qualified firms to: Provide to the City of Hermosa Beach a type II Ambulance with standard basic life support configuration and equipment as specified in Exhibit 1. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Proposals -must be on file in the office of the City Clerk on or before 2:00 on Thursday February 1, 1990. The City of Hermosa Beach reserves the right to extend any time frame. No late proposals will be accepted. Late proposals, if received, will be returned unopened. Proposals are to be submitted in a sealed envelope with "Ambulance Proposal" written or typed in the lower left hand corner of the envelope. For additional information and other particulars regarding this bid, contact: Director of Public Safety 540 Pier Ave. Hermosa Beach, CA. 90254 (213) 318-0300 EVALUATION OF PROPOSAL AND BASIS FOR AWARD 1. The City of Hermosa Beach intends to make an award to the responsible vendor meeting all the requirements of the RFP whose proposal is most advantageous to the City of Hermosa Beach. 2 The City of Hermosa Beach reserves the right to negotiate with the overall lowest responsible vendor. 3. The City intends to make an award within 30 days of the bid closing date. 4. The City reserves the right to reject any and all bids, and to waive any informalities. 1 EXHIBIT 1 One (1), new 1989 or 1990 hightop van meeting the following minimum specifications: CHASSIS: Standard white 127 inch wheelbase - 8510 G.V.W. 360 EFI gasoline engine - Automatic transmission Power steering Heavy duty cooling - Heavy duty suspension (8510 G.V.W.) - Heavy duty alternator (120 Amp) - stabilizer bars - heavy duty radial tires (8 ply) 35 gallon fuel tank - Heavy duty battery (700+ CCA) Factory air conditioning Low mount breakaway mirrors - Power windows Power door locks - High back bucket seats Chrome bumpers CONVERSION SPECIFICATIONS: - Basic life support cabinetry 63" interior headroom - Steel roll cage Formica covered cabinets - Piped oxygen system (2) outlets - Electrical suction - 175-2 cot catch - IV holder - Rear air conditioning Front/rear control panels - Squad bench with inside storage Locking compartment in bulkhead - Heavy duty vinyl floor covering - Rear attendant seat with storage Red belt stripe with pinstriping Ambulance decals Electronic siren 100 watt speaker (grille mounted) Rear loading lights Back up alarm 2 scene lights on each side Emergency lighting conforming with California Vehicle Code (no clear beacons) 2 Notice of Bids sent to the below listed Ambulance Manufacturers on 12-28-89 CRS Coach P.O. Box 323 McAlester, Oklahoma 74502 Excellance 543 Lanier Rd. Madison, Alabama 35758 First Ambulance Center of Tennessee, Inc. P.O. Box 172 Shelbyville, Tennessee 37160 First Response, Inc. 4788 Hwy 42 Ellenwood, Georgia 30049 Collins Ambulance Corp. P.O.Box 2828 Hutchinson, Kansas 67504 January 31, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of February 13, 1990 ALANO CLUB LEASE RECOMMENDATION: The Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Commission recommends that Council review and approve a 5 year lease (with a termination clause permitting either party to withdraw with 6 months notice after the first year of the term) with Alano of the South Bay to begin on June 1, 1990. BACKGROUND: The City owns the property at 702 11th Place (adjacent to the Community Center) which has been leased to the Alano Club for 5 years. In the past, this lease agreement has been administered by the City Manager's Office. In the interests of continuity, the City Manager turned this lease over to the Department of Community Resources as we administer leases for the Community Center facilities. Attached you will find a copy of the lease currently in force which will expire on May 31, 1990. As you can see, past practice has their rate rising by 5% per year. Their current payment is set at $1206.07 per month which factors at approximately $.44/sq. ft. Our FY 89-90 lease rate for Community Center rooms is $.74/sq. ft. Attached also for your review is a letter submitted by the Alano of the South Bay to the Commission dated January 11, 1990. ANALYSIS: The recommended lease agreement is attached and would include a lease rate of $1266.37 per month beginning on June 1, 1990 and increasing by 5% per year for 5 years thereafter. Additionally, after the first year, with 6 months advance notice in writing, either party may terminate the lease agreement. The Alano Club has presented a well -attended, vital social service function in the South Bay for a number of years. In addition to serving an important community need, the club has virtually rebuilt the facility from a blighted building to a usable and warm place for people to meet. Al). of this work has been done by volunteers and according to Alano Club representatives, at a cost (real dollars and in kind services) of close to $100,000. 1 lg Clearly the issue at hand has three important considerations: What Council wants to do with this property; What is an equitable lease rate; and What are the appropriate lease terms. On the first consideration, the Commission feels that regardless of what plans the City may have for the property in the future, the out clause in the lease agreement will enable us to keep options open. Specifically, if the City determines that the land will be used for something else, with 6 months advance notice, the lease can be terminated. Next, in looking for an equitable lease rate, staff initially considered what our rates are for current Community Center tenants ($..74/sq. ft.). The difficulty in applying this rate to the Alano Club, however, stems from the fact that they are unique. in that none of the other tenants "built" their own facility. Also, the Alano Club provides and pays for all of their own maintenance and utilities. Applying Community Center lease rates to the Club would also result in a dramatic ($1,998.00 or over 60%) increase over this year's monthly fee of $1206.07. Therefore, the Commission is recommending a lease rate that stays with the 5% increase per year as used in past practice. If approved, the rate will be as follows: Fiscal Year Lease Rate/Month 1990-1991 1991-1992 1992-1993 1993-1994 1994-1995 $1266.37 $1329.68 $1396.16 $1465.96 $1539.25 The Commission and Alano of the South Bay (see attached letter) support the 5 year term for the lease. In light of the out clause, this does not seem an objectionable time frame. Approving this lease agreement will insure that Hermosa Beach is able to address our community's need for programs and meeting places for a wide range of 12 -step programs including AA, Alanon, Alateen and more. 2 Other alternatives available to Council include: 1) Deny lease renewal. 2) Charge a lease rate in accordance with policy established for Community Center rooms. 3) Increase or decrease recommended lease rates. 4) Increase or decrease recommended length of lease. 5) Impose additional lease terms. 00 40/1" Concur: e44.1-1;4/ Kevin B. Noricraft City Manager Charles S. Vose City Attorney CITY MANAGER COMMENT: Respectfully submitted, Mary C.Rooney, 'ctiig Director Dep . of Community Resources Noted for Fiscal Impact: v.� Viki Copeand Finance Administrator The Alano Club has an excellent reputation of aiding those in need in the South Bay, and the programs and their public benefit should be encouraged. This lease potentially has a $75,000 value, and I feel more effort should be made to make sure the lease rate is justified for both parties. For example, the Alano Club utilizes a substantial portion of the parking that does not seem fully reflected in the rate. I recommend the Council review and comment, then direct staff to perform a more thorough study of appropriate lease rates. 3 This. Leasing Agreement is made and entered into on this, the 1 st day of ,T„nr. , 19_21.3 by ana between the City of Hermosa Beach,._ a Municipal_-Corporation :-(.Cit_y}_ and =South Bay Alano (Lessee). RECITALS: 1. The City is the owner of property commonly known as: 702 llth Place, Hermosa Beach. The Lesse desires to use the facility on the terms and conditions set out herein. 2. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: A. TERM. The term of this lease shall be for a maximum period of five (5) years commencing on the 1st day of June, 1985, and ending on the 31st day of Mav , 1990. This lease. shall allow for termination by either party,' after the second year of the term, upon the giving of six (6) months written notice by either party. B. DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES. The Lessee is leasing from the City that facility legally described as: THE WESTERLY 88 FEET OF LOT 38 IN BLOCK 78 OF SECOND ADDITION TO HERMOSA BEACH, IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 3 PAGES 11 AND 12 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. C. RENT. Lessee agrees to pay to the City rent according to the following schedule: $992.25 per month. Payable on the first day of the month. If this lease commences on a day other than the first day of the month, then the Lessee shall pay upon the commencement of the lease the rental on a pro rata basis for the remainder of that month and commence a full rental payment on the first day of the following month. Said rent shall be increased annually by five percent (5%) over each previous year during the term of this lease. D. OTHER CONDITIONS. The following additional conditions are agreed to by the Lessee: 1. Lessee shall not mark, drill or deface any walls, ceilings, floors, wood or iron wcrk without Lessor's written consent. -1- 2. No signs or awning, shall be erected or maintained upon or attached to the outside of the premises except such signs showing the business of the Lessee. A11 'such signs shall be in accordance with the policy established by the Lessor. 3. USE. The Lessee agres to use the premises for the following purpose or purposes: Meetings, and for no other purpose without the express written consent of the City. • 4. INSURANCE COVERAGE A. INSURANCE LIABILITY. Lessee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this agreement Comprehensive General and Automobile Liability insurance protecting Lessee in amounts not less than $1,000,000 for personal injury to any one person, $1,000,000 for injuries arising out of any one occurrence, and $1,000,000 for property damage or a combined single limit of $1,000,000. Such insurance shall name City of Hermosa Beach and their officers, employees, elected officials and members of Boards or Commissions as additional insured parties. Such insurance shall not be cancelled or materially changed without a thirty (30) day prior written notice to City. B. WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE. Lessee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this agreement Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability insurance and furnish the City with a certificate showing proof of such coverage. Such insurance shall not be cancelled or materially changed without a thirty (30) day prior written notice to: City Manager, City of Hermosa Beach. C. INSURANCE COMPANIES. Insurance companies must be rated (B:XIII) or better in Best's Insurance Rating Guide. 5. CONDITION OF THE PREMISES UPON -2- TERMINATION OF THE LEASE. Lessee agrees to keep and maintain,, the premises in good condition and repair and to return to the City the premises upon termination of this lease .in the same condition as when ---Lesee took possession of :the premises 'excepting any repairs or alterations which were approved by the. City, reasonable wear and tear excepted, and does promise to pay the City upon demand the reasonable sums to repair the premises in the event of a violation of this provision. 6. CONSTRUCTION. Lessee is prohibited from making any alterations or performing any construction whatsoever on the premises without the expressed written approval of the City. Any such approval shall include provisions to protect the City from potential liens of labor and material persons. 7. DESTRUCTION, PARTIAL DESTRUCTION OR NECESSITY TO REPAIR BECAUSE OF CONDITIONS CAUSED BY OTHER THAN LESSEE. The City has no duty or obligation to reconstruct the premises in the event of destruction or partial destruction of the premises. The City at its option may reconstruct or repair the premises, whereupon this lease shall remain in full force and effect except that no rent will be owing to the City during said period of reconstruction or repair if such reconstruction or repair interferes with the tenancy created herein to the extent that the premises cannot be used for the purposes intended. In the event the City at its sole discretion determines not to reconstruct or repair the premises then either party at its option may cause this lease to be terminated and neither party shall have any liability each to each other. 8. HOLD HARMLESS. Lesse promises to hold the City harmless from any claims, causes of actions or damages of any nature whatever arising from Lessee's use of the premises and will pay the City any monies to which the City may become obligated because of Lessee's use of the premises. Lessee shall, if so instructed by the City, cause any occupants of the premises to execute a -3- document in a form prepared by- the City wherein that occupant shall .expressly waive any right of action against the City for damages for any injury •sustained because of Lessee's use of the premises. . RULES, REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES. The Lessee agrees to comply strictly with all applicable Federal, State and local laws. 10. TAXES AND CHARGES. Lessee agrees to pay when due any and all taxes, assessments or charges levied by any governmental agency on or to the lease -hold premises. 11. DEFAULT. Should Lessee fail to pay any monies due pursuant to this lease within three days after written notice from the City or to perform any other obligation required pursuant to the terms of this lease within thirty days after notice from the City, City may immediately cause this lease to be terminated and thereafter take any action and pursue all remedies available under the laws then existent in the State of California. 12. NOTICE. Any notice required to be made or given pursuant to the provisions of this lease may be either personally served upon the party or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, LESSOR: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CITY HALL 1315 VALLEY DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 LESSEE: SOUTH BAY ALANO 702 11th PLACE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 Any notices so given pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph will be deemed served twenty-four hours after the deposit thereof in the,United States mail. 13. ATTORNEYS FEES. The parties agree that in the event any action is instituted concerning any of the provisions of this lease agreement, the prevailing party may in the discretion of the court be granted as an additional item of damages its attorneys fees. -4- 14. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING. Lessee may not assign or sublease all or any portion of the premises without the written consent of the City, which consent may be granted or denied at the exclusive and total discretion of the City. 15. SUCCESSORS. Subject to prior provisions, this lease is binding upon the heirs, assigns and successors of interest of the parties. WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Lease Agreement at Hermosa Beach on the day hereinabove set forth. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a Municipal Corporation, Lessor APPROVED AS TO FO Y ATTORNE LESSEE: /4161TH BAY ALANO -5- Telephone 374-9571 aLatu) _ .the sough _ bay 702 1lth Place - -Hermosa Beach, California 90245 January 11, 1990 MARY C. ROONEY, Coordinator COMMUNITY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT 710 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-3885 Re: Lease with Alano of the South Bay at 702 llth Place, Hermosa Beach, CA Dear Ms. Rooney: Enclosed with this letter please find copy of our present lease dated June 1, 1985 to May 31, 1990. This is notice that the Alano Club wishes to renew the existing lease for a period of five (5) years on the same terms and conditions contained in that aforementioned lease. Our representatives, Eric Blore and Larry Larkin, are looking forward to completing the discussion of that agreement on Wednesday night, January 24th, in Room 12 at the Community Center. Thank you for your courteous and professional consideration. Your trul CHER TOWNSEND-CRAIG, Chairperson, Board of Directors ALANO OF THE SOUTH BAY HERMOSA BEACH COMMUNITY CENTER LEASE AGREEMENT This Leasing Agreement is made and entered into on this, the 10th day of May 1990 , by and between the City of Hermosa Beach, a Municipal Corporation (City) and South Bay Alano (Lessee). RECITALS: 1. The City is the owner of property commonly known as: 702 - 11th Place, Hermosa Beach. The Lessee desires to use the facility on the terms and conditions set out herein. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: A. TERM. The term of this lease shall be for. a period of 5 year commencing on the 1st day of June ,1990 , and ending on the 31st day of May ,1995 This lease shall allow for termination by either party upon the giving of six (6) months written notice by either party after one year. B. DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES. The Lessee is leasing from the City facility legally described as: THE WESTERLY 88 FEET OF LOT 38 IN BLOCK 78 OF SECOND ADDITION TO HERMOSA BEACH, IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 3 PAGES 11 AND 12 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. THIS BUILDING CONSISTS OF 2700 SQUARE FEET. C. RENT. Lessee agrees to pay to the City rent ac- cording to the following schedule: $1,266.37 per month. Payable on the first day of the month. If this lease commences on a day other than the first day of the month, then the Lessee shall pay upon the commencement of the lease the rental on a pro rata basis for the remainder of that month and commence a full rental pay- ment on the first day of the following month. Said rent shall be increased annually by five percent' (5%) over each previous year during the term of this lease. D. OTHER CONDITIONS. The following additional condi- tions are agreed to by the Lessee: 1. Lessee shall not mark, drill or deface any walls, ceilings, floors, wood or iron work without Lessor's written consent. 2. No signs or awning shall be erected or maintained upon or attached to the outside of the premises except such signs showing the business of the Lessee. All such signs shall be in accordance with the policy established by the Lessor. 3. Lessee shall maintain the exterior areas of the facility in a condition satisfactory to Lessor. 4. USE. The Lessee agrees to use the premises only for the following purpose or purposes: Meetings And for no other purpose without the express written consent of the City. 5. INSURANCE LIABILITY. Lessee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this agreement Comprehensive General and Automobile Liability insurance protecting Lessee in amounts not less than $1,000,000 for personal injury to any one person, $1,000,000 for injuries arising out of any one occurrence, and $1,000,000 for property damage or a com- bined single limit of $1,000,000. Such insurance shall name City of Hermosa Beach and their officers, employees, elected officials and members of Boards or Commissions as additional insured parties. Coverage shall be in accordance with the sample certificates and endorsements attached hereto and must include the coverage and provisions indicated. Lessee shall file and maintain the required certificate(s) of insurance with the other party to this agreement at all times during the term of this agreement. The certificate(s) is to be filed prior to the commencement of the work or event and should state clearly: (1) The additional insured requested; (2) Thirty day prior notice of change or cancellation to the City of Hermosa Beach; (3) Insurance is primary to that of the Additional Insured; (4) Coverage included; (5) Cross -liability clause. WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE. Lessee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this agreement Work- er's Compensation and Employers Liability insurance and fur- nish the City with a certificate showing proof of such coverage. Such insurance shall not be cancelled or material- ly changed without a thirty (30) day prior written notice to: City Manager, City of Hermosa Beach. INSURANCE COMPANIES. Insurance companies must be rated (B:XIII) or better in Best's Insurance Rating Guide. 6. CONDITION OF THE PREMISES UPON TERMINATION OF THE LEASE. Lessee agrees to keep and maintain the premises in good con- dition and repair and to return to the City the premises upon 2 termination of this lease in the same condition as when Les- see took possession of the premises excepting any repairs or. alterations which were approved by the City, reasonable wear and tear excepted, and does promise to pay the City upon de- mand the reasonable sums to repair the premises in the event of a violation of this provision. 7. CONSTRUCTION. Lessee is prohibited from making any al- terations or performing any construction whatsoever on the premises without the expressed written approval of the City. Any such approval shall include provisions to protect the City from potential liens of labor and material persons. 8. DESTRUCTION, PARTIAL DESTRUCTION OR NECESSITY TO REPAIR BECAUSE OF CONDITIONS CAUSED BY OTHER THAN LESSEE. The City has no duty or obligation to reconstruct the premises in the event of destruction or partial destruction of the premises. The City at its option may reconstruct or repair the prem- ises, whereupon this lease shall remain in full force and effect except that no rent will be owing to the City during said period of reconstruction or repair if such reconstruc- tion or repair interferes with the tenancy created herein to the extent that the premises cannot be used for the purposes intended. In the event the City at its sole discretion determines not to reconstruct or repair the premises then either party at its option may cause this lease to be termi- nated and neither party shall have any liability each to each other. 9. HOLD HARMLESS. Lessee shall hold harmless and indemnify the City, its officers, agents and employees from every claim or demand which may be made by reason of any injury and/or death to persons and/or injury to property caused by any di- rect or indirect act or any omission of the lessee, its of- ficers, agents and employees arising out of the lessee's use of said premises. The lessee, at its own cost, expense and risk shall defend any and all actions, suits or other pro- ceedings that may be brought or instituted against the City on any such claim or demand, and pay or satisfy any judgment that may be rendered against the Lessor on any such action, suit, or legal proceedings as a result hereof. 10. RULES, REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES. The Lessee agrees to comply strictly with all applicable laws and regulations adopted by the City Council. 11. TAXES AND CHARGES. Lessee agrees to pay when due any and all taxes, assessments or charges levied by any governmental agency on or to the lease -hold premises. 12. DEFAULT. Should Lessee fail to pay any monies due pur- suant to this lease within three days after written notice from the City or to perform any other obligation required pursuant to the terms of this lease within thirty days after notice from the City, City may immediately cause this lease to be terminated and thereafter take any action and pursue all remedies available under the laws then existent in the State of California. 13. NOTICE. Any notice required to be made or given pur- suant to the provisions of this lease may be either personal- ly served upon the party or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, LESSOR: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CITY HALL 1315 VALLEY. DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 LESSEE: South Bay Alano 702 - 11th Place Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Any notices so given pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph will be deemed served twenty-four hours after the deposit thereof in the United States mail. 14. ATTORNEYS FEES. The parties agree that in the event any action is instituted concerning any of the provisions of this lease agreement, the prevailing party may in the discretion of the court be granted as an additional item of damages its attorneys fees. 15. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING. Lessee may not assign or sublease all or any portion of the premises without the writ- ten consent of the City, which consent may be granted or de- nied at the exclusive and total discretion of the City. 16. SUCCESSORS. Subject to prior provisions, this lease is binding upon the heirs, assigns and successors of interest of the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Lease Agreement at Hermosa Beach on the day first hereinabove set forth. ATTEST: 1 APPRO ED S TO F RM: DATE: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a Municipal Corporation, Lessor By CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY LESSEE: February 1, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 SEWER BOND ANALYSIS Recommendation: 1. Terminate the services of James Montgomery Engineers. 2. Authorize staff to re -advertise for services. Background: On May 23, 1989, City Council awarded a contract not to exceed $15,950 to James Montgomery Engineers for the purpose of providing the City with an analysis of different payment alternatives to pay for the rebuilding and repair of the City sanitary sewer system. To date, no money has been paid to James Montgomery Engineers. Analysis: After repeated unsuccessful attempts to get the consultants to complete the contracted work, it is recommended to terminate the contract. Res tfully submitted, ALALASIAi dt Anw nyAntich 'Kevin B. Northgraft Director of Publ c Works City Manager Concur: my/termjm - 1 - February 6, 1989 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CATV BOARD TO ADOPT THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ADOPT CONSUMER PROTECTION STANDARDS, AND, SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution of Intent, stating the rules, regulations, and standards to be considered for adoption. , Background: At your regularly scheduled meeting of September 27, 1988, your Honorable Body approved the recommendation of the CATV Board that a consumer protection ordinance be developed and drafted, and that a consultant be hired to assist the Board in drafting said ordinance. On January 10, 1989, Council approved the Board's recommendation to hire Communications Support Corporation to review the CATV Franchise Documents and assist the board in completing the duties assigned to them. Subsequently, at your regularly scheduled meeting of July 11, 1989, your Honorable Body accepted the CATV Board's recommendation to consider implementation of the recommendations [by the consultant] as specified on pages 39 through 44 of the consultant's report, regarding technical, operational, document review, and legal enforcement action plan. The Cable TV Board has reviewed the consumer rules and regulations of several neighboring cities, and is recommending incorporation into the franchise, specific rules and regulations as modified from those of the cities of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, and Santa Cruz. This Resolution of Intent, and attached rules, regulations, policies and guidelines, are submitted in response to the Council's direction of September 27, 1988, the consultant's recommendation to consider amending the franchise to include consumer protection standards, and the City Council's acceptance of that recommendation. Analysis: The Cable Television industry, over the past 20 years, has dramatically changed from a group of small, fledgling companies, to a multi -billion dollar industry. In 1984 cable TV was available in about 54.5 million TV households in this country, which represent over 65% of all homes with TV sets. It was predicted that by 1988, cable will have passed 8370 of TV households; about 76 million homes. 11 In the last few years, with new, up and coming companies, and conglomerates wishing to diversify entering the arena, changes in the industry and demands from subscribers have dictated the necessity to establish written standards to protect the consumer and insure service. In addition to the amendment powers provided by the CATV Ordinance, the Franchise Agreement specifically reserves to the City the "...right under the Franchise granted hereunder to adopt subscriber rules, regulations and standards for operation of the CATV system..." (Ordinance No. 78-596, Section 7) Although such standards and procedures must not "...materially alter the content of the franchise without the consent of the grantee...", the City can adopt the substantive or procedural rule or regulation by passing a resolution of intent, publishing notice thereof, holding a public hearing thereupon, and adopting said rule and regulation by resolution. (Chapter 7.5-16(B)(3) As part of their recommendation to adopt consumer protection standards (attached), Communications Support Corporation, supplied examples of standards from the cities of Los Angeles and Beverly Hills. They are attached for your review. The City has been communicating with the CATV operator over the last few months, with considerable cooperation, to work on implementing the specific recommendations made by the consultant concerning operational standards. Although all of our requests are being honored, the Board desires to formally establish attached standards. Alternatives: 1. Seek additionalconsumer protection standards for review and consideration. 2. Modify, as necessary, the recommended document. 3. Receive and file this report. CONCUR: L. Sta ""n, Acting Gen-ral Services Director in B. Northcraft City Manager Respectfully submitted, Henry L. Staten, Acting Director Michele D. Tercero, Staff Liaison, CATV by 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. A RESOLUTION OF INTENT, OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, TO AMEND CHAPTER 7.5, CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEMS, BY ADOPTING CONSUMER PROTECTION STANDARDS WHEREAS, the City Council held a meeting on September 27, 1988 approving the development and drafting of Cable TV consumer protecticn standards; WHEREAS, the City Council further accepted the CATV Board's recommendation to consider implementation of the recommendations of the CATV consultant to adopt consumer protection standards; WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the community to adopt such consumer protection standards; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council, of the City of Hermosa Beach, does hereby set for public hearing, the consumer protection standards for consideration to adopt, on March 13, 1990. SECTION 2. That prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this resolution to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach. SECTION 3. That the office of the City Manager shall mail a copy of the same to the franchisee at least thirty (30) days prior to the time fixed for hearing thereon. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 13th day of February, 1990. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY ////(MDT) 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. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF, THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING CONSUMER PROTECTION STANDARDS WHEREAS, the City Council at their regularly scheduled meeting of September 27, 1988, approved the recommendation of the CATV Board that a consumer protection ordinance be developed and drafted; WHEREAS, the City Council, at their regularly scheduled meeting of July 11, 1989, further accepted the recommendation of the Cable TV consultant to implement specific consumer protection standards; WHEREAS, it has become common practice for consumer protection standards to be included as a part of Cable TV Franchises; WHEREAS, Section 7.5-16. Subscriber rules and regulations, subsection (B)(3), provides for a procedure to adopt new rules and regulations or standards; WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Hermosa Beach to adopt and enforce consumer protection standards for the operation of a Cable TV system; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the City Council does hereby adopt the attached consumer protection standards. 1 CONSUMER PROTECTION STANDARDS Section 1. Subscriber complaints and Service Personnel. (1) The grantee shall maintain a local office in the city which shall be open during normal business hours, but in no case less than forty (40) hours per week, and shall include telephone service for the receipt of toll-free telephone calls from subscribers at any time of the day or night. The grantee shall connect a telephone caller to a live personal representative of the Grantee within two minutes, during regular business and peak viewing hours, Monday through Saturday. In the event the Grantee establishes to the City's satisfaction that the above standard relating to peak viewing hours and/or Saturday's is unnecessary and materially burdensome, the City may, in its sole discretion, waive that requirement in writing. During abnormal events which directly affect five percent (5%) or more of the Grantee's subscriber base in the City, the Grantee shall be excused from compliance with the foregoing requirement, if the Grantee provides to telephone callers during such period, pending connection with a live personal representative, a recorded message. Such recorded message shall be mutually agreed upon in writing by the Grantee and the City prior to is use. The grantee shall notify the subscribers of the procedures for requesting service calls or reporting complaints regarding the operation of the cable system. (2) The grantee shall provide sufficient service personnel as reasonably necessary to respond to the service calls and complaints of the subscribers. The Grantee shall maintain a 2 force of technicians capable of responding within twenty-four (24) hours after receipt of a request for repairs relating to a service outage and forty-eight (48) hours excluding Sundays for all other complaint and requests for repair. No charge shall be made to the subscriber for such service or repair except as provided in the Franchise Agreement. Requests from subscribers for repair and maintenance services must be acknowledged by the Grantee within 24 hours. Verification of the problem, and if possible, resolution, must occur within forty-eight (48) hours; and in any event, resolution must occur within one (1) week. Those matters requiring additional maintenance, repair of technical adjustments that are documentable as necessitating an excess of one (1) week to complete, must be finally resolved within thirty (15) days of the initial complaint. (3) The grantee shall maintain the following records regarding subscriber complaints and substantial system failures: (a) The grantee shall maintain a written record of all complaints received from individual subscribers (other than complaints regarding substantial system failure), which shall show the date and time of the complaint and the name, address and telephone number of the complainant, the information given to the complainant as to how the complaint would be resolved, the action taken to resolve the complaint and the date and time the complaint was resolved. Complaints not resolved within forty-eight (48) hours of receipt shall be listed in a log of "Delayed Action on Complaints" which shall give the information above and add the detailed reasons for non -resolution within the 3 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 forty-eight (48) hour period. Section 2. Customer Service Standards and Procedures (A) Customer Service Criteria. (1) Dwelling units passed by cable and dwelling unit history shall be categorized and filed in computer -compatible form. (2) Customer Service Representatives shall be trained to analyze customer complaints to distinguish between those that are system -related and those that are subscriber equipment -related. (B) Information to Customers. The Grantee shall, at the time service is initiated provide each new customer written information covering: (1) The time allowed to pay outstanding bills. (2) Grounds for termination of service. (3) The steps the Grantee must take before terminating service._ (4) That consumers are entitled to receive an estimate of the cost for a "nonstandard installation" should a standard installation not be possible. A consumer may petition the City's Cable Television Franchise Administrator if they believe that the estimate given by the company was unfair, unreasonable 4 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 and discriminatory. The determination of the City's Franchise Administrator may be appealed to the City Council. (5) How the customer can resolve billing disputes. (6) The fact that customers shall have the right to speak with a supervisor, and if none is available, a supervisor shall return the customer's call within one (1) working day. (7) Provide complete information to the complainant regarding his ability to take his complaint to the Grantor's representative if it is not resolved by the Grantee. (C) Billing Practices (1) Billing envelopes shall be individually marked to indicate the date mailed. The metering strip shall include the date on which the bill was delivered to the U.S. Post Office. This postmark date shall constitute proof of the date of issuance. (2) The Grantee shall provide at least five (5) days written notice prior to discontinuance of service to any subscriber of the Cable System. Where the Grantee has improperly discontinued Cable System service to any such subscriber, it shall provide free reconnection to the Cable System to such subscriber. (3) The Grantee shall afford each subscriber of the Cable System with a three day right of rescission for ordering the services of the Cable System; Provide that such right of 5 rescission may end upon initiation of physical installation of the Cable System equipment on such subscriber's premises. (4) All personnel, agents and representatives of the Grantee, including subcontractors, shall wear photo -identification badges, prominently displayed, when acting on behalf of the Grantee in the City. (5) The Grantee shall provide significant advance notice in writing to the owner and the resident of any private property within the City prior to entry onto such property whenever the Grantee desires that any of its personnel, agents or representatives should enter such property; provide that the Grantee shall only be required to provide significant advance notice when it reasonable under the circumstances at the time and shall not be required to provide such notice in emergencies. Violation of this Subsection by the Grantee shall not constitute a material breach of this Agreement unless such violation is repeated or willful. (6) The Grantee shall provide subscribersrof the Cable System, and potential subscribers, with a complete list of service offerings, options, prices and credit policies associated with the Cable System. (7) Before providing initial service to each consumer , the Grantee must advise the consumer, in writing of: 28 (a) The method by which the consumer will be notified of any changes in rates, services, and equipment, and company practices and procedures related to service to consumers; (b) The address and telephone number of the Grantee's office to which complaints and inquiries may be reported and the manner in which complaints will be addressed. Such number and address shall be prominently displayed on the first page of each monthly bill and identified as such, and shall be listed in the telephone directories serving the City of Hermosa Beach. (8) Whenever possible, the Grantee shall notify each subscriber of the Cable System in advance of the expected of any service visit to such subscriber's premises. Such notification shall specify whether the anticipated service visit will be before or after noon. The Grantee shall accommodate each subscriber of the Cable System with respect to such Subscriber's expressed preference for a morning or afternoon service visit. Violation of this Subsection by the Grantee shall not constitute a material breach of this Agreement unless such violation is repeated or willful. time (D) Disputed Bills: (1) In the event of a dispute between the customer and the Grantee regarding the bill, the Grantee shall promptly make such investigation as is required by the particular case and report the results to the customer. In the event the dispute is not resolved to the satisfaction of both parties, the Grantee shall inform the customer of the complaint procedures of the Grantor. 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 23 If the customer wishes to obtain the benefits of paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection, notification of the disputed bill must be given to the Grantee within five (5) days after due date. (2) The customer shall not be required to pay the disputed portion of the bill until the earlier of the following: (a) Resolution of the dispute, (b) Expiration of a fifty-five (55) day period beginning on the date of issuance, provided that the procedures established in subsection (D)(1) above have been followed. (3) Pending resolution of the bill dispute, no termination notices shallbe issued for the disputed portions of the bill, nor shall any other collection procedures be initiated for said amount. Any such activity may be interpreted as an attempt to avoid the provisions of these rules and shall constitute violation of the regulations. (E) Referral of Accounts to Collection Agencies. (1) Uncollected accounts may be referred to private collection agencies for appropriate action if the bill has not been paid by the earlier of (a) fifteen (15) days following the date of involuntary terminationor (b) the fifty-sixth (56th) day following the date of issuance of the original uncollected amount, provided no notification of billing dispute has been made, or if procedures for resolution of billing disputes have not been followed as required above. 8 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 (2) If the account was voluntarily terminated for any reason, the account may not be referred to a collection agency until at least fifteen (15) days following rendering of the final bill. If notification of a billing dispute is made, all collection procedures shall be delayed as required in paragraph (D)(3) above. Referral to collection agent shall then occur no sooner than the fifty-sixth (56th) day following issuance of the original uncollected amount. (F) Refund. (1) When a subscriber voluntarily discontinues service, Grantee shall refund the unused portion of any advance payment after deducting any charges currently due through the end of the present billing period. Unused payment portions shall be the percentage of time for which subscriber has paid for service and will not receive it because of his discontinuation of service. (G) No person shall be denied cable television services on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual preference, age, disability, income or the area in which they live. (H) Maximum practical availability of the services and facilities shall be provided to handicapped persons. At a minimum, the Grantee shall provide, at no additional cost, a remote control device to those subscribers who are paraplegic or quadriplegic. 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 (I) Equipment which is not otherwise readily available shall be provided to facilitate the reception of all basic services for the hearing impaired. In addition, the company must have TDD (or equivalent) equipment at the Grantee's office that will allow hearing impaired consumers to contact the Grantee. SECTION 2. This Resolution shall be in full force from and after its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of March, 1990. PRESIDENT of the City Council and Mayor of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY - 10 - BOARD OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSIONERS CHARLES N. WINNER Homogw LANCE E. ORUMMOND LANCE BRISSON NINA M. FRAZIER TRACY A. WESTEN CITY OF Los ANGELES CALIFORNIA TOM BRADLEY ' MAYOR FRANCHISEE FRANCHISEE ADDRESS DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS 120 5. S•" PEo o Sc?TA Surf( GOO LOSA..onES. CA 90d12 SUSAN HERMAN •05.2066 ORDINANCE NUMBER TEEM OF FRAKIE SE Effective August, 1987 FRANCHISE INFORMATION SHEET Attached is a summary of the City's requirements as stated in the franchise agreement relating to the rights and privileges of the consumer: 1. Cable company offices must be adequately staffed and able to respond to consumers not less than 54 hours per week, with a minimum of 8. hours per day on weekdays and a 4 hour day on Saturdays. 2. Telephone lines and main offices must be openand adequately staffed to respond to consumers in at least 4 ways: IMF ONO to accept payments (Monday through Saturday); to exchange or accept returned converters (on Saturday the company has the option of accepting or exchanging converters at its office or in the field); to answer subscriber inquiries; and to schedule and conduct service or technical calls; on Saturday the company must have the ability to schedule emergency service or emergency technician calls. 3. Telephone lines, either adequately staffed or with answering capability, providing at least emergency referral information, must be operational 24 hours a day, including weekends and holidays. 4. The company shall provide a pre -designated 4 to 5 hour block of time for subscriber service appointments to be scheduled either in the morning hours or the afternoon hours (i.e. 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. or 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.). Priority for service appointments on the next day, or next "available time" must be given to those subscribers who require a different scheduled time. 5. Requests from subscribers for repair and maintenance service must be acknowledged by the company within 24 hours (excluding weekends and holidays). Verification of the problem, and if possible, resolution, must occur within 48 hours; and in any event, resolution must occur within 1 week. Those matters requiring additional maintenance, repair or technical adjustments that are documentable as necessitating an excess ofone week to reasonably complete, must be finally resolved within 30 days of the initial complaint. 6. Technicians employed by th•e company must be capable of performing emereencv repairs and maintenance 24 hours a day, 7. The cable system must be constructed and operated so as to provide service to any person requesting such service within the franchise area boundaries. Consumers are entitled to receive an estimate of the' cost for a "nonstandard installation" should a standard installation not be possible. A consumer may petition the Department if they believe that the estimate given by the company was unfair, unreasonable and discriminatory. The determination of the Department may be appealed to the Board of• Telecommunications Commissioners and the City Council. 8. Before providing initial service to each consumer, the company must advise the consumer, in writing, of: -- the equipment and services currently available (including parental lock -out devices) and the fees and/or deposits which apply; the method by which the consumer will be notified of any changes in rates, services, and equipment, and company practices and procedures related to service to consumers; the address and telephone number of the company office to which complaintsand inquiries may be reported and the manner in which complaints will be addressed; and the company's practices and procedures for protecting against invasions of subscriber privacy. 9. No person shall be denied cable television services on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual preference, age, disability, income or the area in which they live. 10. Maximum practical availability of the services and facilities shall be provided to handicapped persons. At a minimum, the franchisee shall provide, at no additional cost, a remote control device to those subscribers who are paraplegic or quadriplegic. 11. Equipment which is not otherwise readily available shall be provided to facilitate the reception of all basic services for the hearing impaired. In addition, the company must have TDD (or equivalent) equipment at the company office that will allow hearing impaired consumers to contact the company. 12. In those areas where the utility lines are now or subsequently may be underground, the company shall install or relocate its system facilities underground. The Board of Public Works may approve the placement of amplifier boxes, pedestal mounted terminal boxes and other incidental appurtenances above ground, but they must be located so as not to be unsightly or hazardous to the public. The Department of Telecommunications is available to respond to inquiries as well as to assist in resolving complaints that the cable company may not have been able to resolve. Furthermore, for your information, effective January 1, 1987, federal law restricts the authority of the City to regulate rates; however, if you feel you have been charged discriminatory rates, we may be able to assist you. You may reach our office by writing or calling: Department of Telecommunications 120 S. San Pedro Street, Suite 600 Los Angeles, Ca. 90012 (213) 485-2751 C { Section 5.5. Service Standards. The Franchisee shall establish consumer service and grievance standards which shall be subject to the written approval of the City Manager, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Such stan- dards shall become effective no later than September 16, 1987, and shall, _at minimum, provide for the following: 5.5.1. The Franchisee shall provide a local, toll-free ("800") telephone service for consumer com- plaints. 5.5.2. The Franchisee shall connect a tele- phone caller to a live personal representative of the Franchisee, within two minutes during regular business and peak viewing hours, Monday through Saturday. In the event the Franchisee establishes to the City's satisfac- tion that the above standard relating to peak viewing hours is unnecessary and materially burdensome, the City may, in its sole discretion, waive that requirement in writing. During abnormal events which directly affect five percent (5%) or more of the Franchisee's subscriber base in the City, the Franchisee shall be excused from compliance with the foregoing requirement, if the Fran- chisee provides to telephone callers during such period, pending connection with a live personal representative, a recorded message. Such recorded message shall be mutual- ly agreed upon in writing by the Franchisee and the City prior to its use. 5.5.3. The Franchisee shall respond to com- plaints made by the City or subscribers of the Cable System promptly and, if possible, shall resolve com- plaints made by the City or subscribers of the Cable System not more than twenty-four (24) hours following receipt of the complaint by the Franchisee. The Franchi- see shall maintain complete, detailed records relating to its maintenance and operation of the Cable System which shall be available for inspection by representatives of the City at any time during normal business hours of the City, and upon the City's request shall respond in writing twenty-four (24) hours following receipt of such request by the Franchisee to the City regarding any com- plaint which takes longer than one week to resolve, and which delay is._not occasioned by a written request of the complainant. 5.5.4. The Franchisee shall provide credit to a subscriber of the Cable System in proportion to such subscriber's subscription fees for the Cable System whenever the Franchisee is aware that a significant outage has taken place at said subscriber's premises. 18 c 5.5.5. The Franchisee shall provide at least five (5) days' written notice prior to discontinuance of service to any subscriber of the Cable System. Where the Franchisee has improperly discontinued Cable System service to any such subscriber, it shall provide free reconnection to the Cable System to such subscriber. 5.5.6. The Franchisee shall afford each subscriber of the Cable System with a three-day right of rescission for ordering the services of the Cable System; provided that such right of rescission may end upon initiation of physical installation of Cable System equipment on such subscriber's premises. 5.5.7. All personnel, agents and representa- tives of the Franchisee, including subcontractors, shall wear photo -identification badges, prominently displayed, when acting on behalf of the Franchisee in the City. 5.5.8. The Franchisee shall provide signifi- cant advance notice in writing to the owner and the resident of any private property within the City prior to entry onto such property whenever the Franchisee desires that any of its personnel, agents or representatives should enter such property; provided that the Franchisee shall only be required to provide significant advance notice when it is reasonable under the circumstances at the time and shall not be required to provide such notice in emergencies. Violation of this Subsection by the Franchisee shall not constitute a material breach of this Agreement unless such violation is repeated or willful. 5.5.9. The Franchisee shall provide subscrib ers of the Cable System, and potential subscribers, with a complete list of service offerings, options, prices and credit policies associated with the Cable System.-' It. shall provide a City "hotline" number for Cable System subscriber complaints, which number shall be prominently displayed on the first page of each monthly bill and identified as such, and shall provide monthly schedules of programming on PEG access channels to all subscribers of the Cable System. 5.5.10.. Whenever possible, the Franchisee shall notify each subscriber of the Cable System in advance of the expected time of any service visit to such subscriber's premises. Such'notification shall specify whether the anticipated service visit will be before or after noon. The Franchisee shall accommodate each subscriber of the Cable System with respect to such subscriber's expressed preference for a morning or after- noon service visit. Violation of this Subsection by the 19 C C Franchisee shall not constitute a material breach of this Agreement unless such violation is repeated or willful. 5.5.11. The Franchisee shall comply with the service standards and complaint procedures set forth in Sections 7-5.21 and 7-5.24, respectively, of the Cable Ordinance. Section 5.6. Reports and Enforcement of Standards. Until the Franchisee receives approval of its service stan- dards required by Section 5.5 above, the standards set forth in Subsections 5.5.1 through 5.5.11, inclusive, shall be applicable. The Franchisee's service standards shall first be approved in writing by the City. In the event no service standards are approved by the City for the Franchisee, the standards set forth in Section 5.5 above shall apply. The Franchisee shall make a detailed written quarterly report to the City describing its compliance with these service stan- dards by the thirtieth day of each March, June, September and December, commencing September 30, 1987. Upon any breach of the Franchisee's service standards, the City may invoke the liquidated damages provisions set forth in Section 6.1 below without prejudice to any other remedy otherwise available to the City to the extent permitted by law. Section 5.7. Performance Review. Pursuant to Section 7-5.32 of the Cable Ordinance, the City will conduct periodic Performance Evaluation Sessions ("Sessions") with the Franchisee and the citizens of the City relating to the Fran- chise. In lieu of the periods specified in the Cable Ordi- nance, the City may conduct such Sessions commencing in the fourth, seventh and twelfth years subsequent to the date hereof. The Franchisee agrees to incur one-half of the reasonable cost of the City's ascertainment of the current cable -related needs and interests of the City's residents, up to a total payment by the Franchisee of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000) per Session, and/or one-half of other reasonable outside costs incurred by the City incidental to any review of the Franchisee's Franchise, up to an additional payment by the Franchisee of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) per Franchise review; provided that the total assessment to the Franchisee under this Section 5.7 shall be no greater than Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000) per Session. The Franchisee further agrees that__such costs are in addition to and not to be deducted from the Franchise fees due the City. In addi- tion, the Franchisee shall provide the City with five copies of (i) the Franchisee's audited consolidated annual financial statements each year so long as the Franchise remains in effect within ten (10) days after it becomes available from the Franchisee's auditors, (ii) the Franchisee's annual financial statements certified to be true and correct by an authorized officer of the Franchisee each year so long as the 20 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 5, 1990 Regular Meeting of February 13, 1990, AWARD OF DESIGN AGREEMENT FOR BASKETBALL COURTS AT CLARK FIELD, CIP 89-512 Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Award a professional services agreement to Harris & Associates at a cost not -to -exceed $7,480. 2. Authorize staff to issue addenda as necessary. Background: This project proposes to install two full-size basketball courts immediately north of the tennis courts at Clark Field based on recommendations of the Community Resources Commission. The site was formerly used as a bowling green but has not been used for that purpose for approximately ten years. The project is funded through a State Grant; the funds must be committed by June 30,• 1990. On November 28, 1989, Council authorized staff to seek proposals for design services. Twelve firms received a request for proposal, and on January 18, 1990, five proposals were submitted to the Public Works Department. Analysis: This section is divided as follows: 1. Scope of Work 2. The Firms. 3. The Tentative Choice 4. Fiscal Impact 1. Scope of Work The scope of work for this project includes the following: 1. Demolition of the existing block wall, fencing, benches, concrete and wood borders. 2. Grading of the existing soil. 3. Installation of a handicapped drinking fountain. 4. Installation of lighting for night time playing. 5. Asphalt covered with an acrylic playing surface and two inch striping. 6. Blackboards and netting, plus two practice backboards. 7. Two benches seating six people at each court. 8. Chain link fence with three pedestrian entrances and one vehicle entrance. 2. The Firms The firms submitting proposals were: Time to Cost Complete Design 1. Harris & Associates $ 6,800 45 days 2. Joncich, Sturm & Associates 8,500 30 days 3. SA Associates 9,200 60 days 4. Craig Weber & Associates 9,360 30 days 5. BSI, Inc. 17,250 30 days All proposals are available for review in the City Clerk's office. 3. The Tentative Choice All five firms submitting proposals are qualified to do the work. The desired end result is a proper design and a clear set of plans and specifications from which a contractor can construct the basketball courts. Therefore, cost is the overriding consideration for this design and Harris & Associates is the tentative choice. There are no adverse impacts in selecting Harris & Associates as they have performed satisfactorily for previous City jobs. 4. Fiscal Impact Proposed Amount $ 6,800 Contingency 680 Amount Not -to -Exceed $ 7,480 Funding Source: Per Capita Grant $58,000 Note: Preliminary construction estimates indicate that the scope of work may have to be limited to stay within budget for this project. For example, the lighting or other items may have to be installed at a later time and with other funding. Alternatives: Other alternatives considered by staff and available to City Council are: 1. Award agreement to a different firm. 2. Perform design in-house. Given the current workload this would delay the design until the middle of the FY 89-90 4th quarter; thereby, risking the loss of funding. This is not. a preferred alternative. 3. Drop the project. Respectfully Submitted, Brian Gengler Assistant Engineer Noted For Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: LynnA. Terry Deputy City Engineer ' I An f y A tich Director of Publ Works TCevin B. Northcraft, City Manager Mary O'T' y, Act g Director of Community Res•urces August 1, 1988 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of of the City Council August 9, 1988 APPROVAL IN CONCEPT OF OUTDOOR BASKETBALL COMPLEX RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Community Resources Advisory Commission the City Council approve in concept the construction of an outdoor basketball complex on the north lawnbowling green at the Clark Field Recreation Complex. BACKGROUND Over the past couple of years the staff and Commission have been asked to increase the number of outdoor basketball courts in the City. As part of the parks study and tours, the Commission is prepared to bring their recommendation to the City Council this evening. ANALYSIS The Commission has spoken informally to the members of the Lawnbowling Club of Hermosa Beach to determine whether or not the second green is actually used and/or needed. The response is that the court is not usable due to the poor condition of the green but that it really did not matter, as the number of people in the Lawnbowling Club is declining rapidly, and the green is not used or needed. The Commission also toured the outdoor basketball courts located around the perimeter of Clark Field. Those courts are not regulation size, and it is most difficult to play basketball while softball and baseball games are taking place. It is not a good mixed use of the area as it stands now. However, it was the only space available at the time for basketball courts. The Commission would like to design a basketball complex on the north lawnbowling green in order to address the lack of adequate outdoor basketball courts in the City. Part of the process will be inviting all interested people to speak to this matter at a Commission meeting in order to receive and hear everyone's concerns. The Commission feels this would be a major development for the City and would welcome all citizen comments. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION However, before beginning this long process, the Commission would like City Council's conceptual approval. If approved, the Commission will begin its task and return to the City Council at a later date with specific details on how to accomplish the task. Respectfully submitted, Alana M. Mastrian, Director Dept. of Community Resources Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager CITY MANAGER COMMENT: This proposal to convert an unused recreational facility to a usable one is a valid one. On a larger scale, staff recommends that the Council seek the Commission's participation in review- ing the City's long term recreational facilities needs. These needs then can be incorporated into the CIP. 2 U0' ' September 2 BASKETBALL COURTS AT CLARK FIELD Alternative No.1 Do Nothing Alternative No. 2 5, 1987 Estimated Cost -0- Resurface Existing Courts Estimated Cost $3,500 to $15,000 depending on area to resurface This would be achieved by re -slurrying the esisting courts and filling cracks and depressions. Courts would remain the same size, but court surface would be more playable. Alternative No. 3 Enlarge Existing Courts Estimated Cost $10,000 This would be achieved by removing basketball courts 1 and 2 per drawing and extending the asphalt surface approximately 10 to 15 feet out to the field. The drainage gutter would be re -directed. Existing surface would be re -slurried and repaired to tie into new asphalt surface. Poles would be re -centered. Results: One (1) olympic (regulation) size court, removal of a court. Alternative No. 4 Create new courts on ling green #2. Estimated Cost $30,000 This would be achieved by removing bowling green #2 and covering it with an asphalt surface. Results: Two basketball courts (regulation site 94' x 50') and two backboards for practice. Contact: Great American Backyard Norm Sanoff (213) 838-3101 BASKETBALL COURT NO. 1 Comments: Length 47.5' Width 35.0' Key Width 12.2 (12') Backboard Metal Height of hoop 9' Playing surface Asphalt Shooting line 12' 1 Surface condition: rough - gutter through court Lighting: Some from field Natural boundaries: N - 4' to retaining wall, 10' to E retaining wall, 0' to E field, 10' to west court. Other: Net is bad BASKETBALL COURT NO. 2 Length 70'. Width 35' Key width 12' Backboard metal Height of hoop 10' Playing surface asphalt Shooting line 17.7 Comments: Surface condition: leveling bad - root upgrowth, large depression west end. Lighting: One street light near center court field lights. Natural boundaries: N - 4' to retaining wall, E 10' to next court, 0' south to field, 10' to restrooms Other: nets replaced, drinking fountain west end BASKETBALL COURT NO. 3 Length 60' Width 25' Key width 8.7' . Backboard metal Height of hoop 10' Playing surface asphalt Shooting line 13.7 Comments: Surface condition: old Lighting: Field Natural boundaries: 2.5' w retaining wall, 4.8' s court #4, 1' E - gutter 2.7' E retaining wall & fence. Other: 2 BASKETBALL COURT NO. 4 Length 60.7' Width 24.5' Key width 8.5 Backboard metal Height of hoop 10' Playing surface asphalt Shooting line 14' Comments: Surface conditions: cracks, old Lighting: one light south end, field lights Surrounding boundaries: 4' N court, 1' E to gutter, 2.8' E to retaining wall, 2.5' to retaining wall, 4.6' S to court 5 Other: nets BASKETBALL COURT NO. 5 Length 40.5' Width 25' Key width 6.3' Backboard metal Height of hoop 9' Playing surface: asphalt Shooting line 10' Comments: Surface conditions: old, cracking, some depressions Lighting: one light north end of field Surrounding boundaries: 1' E to gutter, 2.8' E to wall, 4.6' N to court 4, 2.5' W to retaining wall Other: BOWLING GREEN NO. 2 Length 130' Width 130' Depth 7' 10" difference between backboard Fencing: 6' high concrete block & cyclone fencing Lighting: Little - street & field Comments: Single access - 4'2" wide concrete walk - benches (would need repair) 4 ' V. Sitlif 1.-14 ..i..e.;.k14•T!‘.; .-. ,,..i• 4:••,•:.; -• i :‘ • edi',04:',;,1 .-?;:"'-'t.• ••••••;,..'i -:::-..-:'z,-.--..,-:''', . ..ry..fa ,:f.1.)4q,-,-;.;4- 4 #'-:gAil;:e 'z • •,..:!!..: ..y:..,e.,f--rtfvfl- .1F •v ••-.\-4-V*f-c.- 2.1.41A • 4;14104 t? 1.4kt.,.,_4,': . .77•`27".z?•'• • .10:,.,.. 4 .1,0, -:. rf„-.,1 , ;-.,--..- ..e .41iLio.tv 4, , „ •' 5 :70.— '1'4'. .......-: r„..i. PI -'1•CAPi4fl. l' 41 c I i3 .'t.-...'''.!' i%. •••• It4.—•• •'• • Ft.":7,!.. % .: 1 V....•,, , 1/41 oil ./qt^..'4,:$•:' 1F77724••••• -s on': e• J,1 .4 - ,....; • ... . v .41;p44,1 ) • ,••#,I.,iree, 1... .04 Vtittik I:. A lif tior, Al, •••• i:1?% • t!T, . r Avti• '4•4 ' gi k. . },t Vf' 4,t JP-POLS:4,4:- 4t,'• *.:1 ' gl"' :filt.1)Ziji;.,_„v4?...:Vo !„.^ . r• \ STe¢gGtr •� �'� Roo"1.44• efGar-e4e-K- ^l sL::;k .Jk X. X: XXStx'.ICXXX X K4C?C>C:X::7c tiiec3"... BLUACIItRS DOGets- co.4castete./ ST'.., • . ex.v-SToE WCrf 4ANK r a J"! GLLAc,IEtS (SA5►CET(SALL (out -TS Eltiot WALL. 5ou-r , . PSAtiI1C CIIAIfJ LINK FENCE, LA\/,/N AREh "Ti r— c �ocikt LAw,J BoLai L1r (3 off ICE EL.E c'T RatA (. d StiAcK PAIzKS TooL • 5►IAcK 2 ! e PCTif GANx REST Room 5 BASKE7h^LL (OJ firs WooDEn1 FEOC.6 (jnRR1UnE • VALVe.. L/1�.JN L AL) 14 1 /(LEA AREA LiNG GREEn/ • CLARK FIELD'. MAP , u rf� < Ke\K-K (r; • L-LIH1-iL4 ) . • \/At 1 n O T10I\/f= LA wN M *.cA • LAuld AREA rrf Z • r) 1" 20' 50' 0 /ZZt/ 1 3o' -o / Ae/D6s- IZZ/// OP1.0101A. 1 11 0000•110% 1 Alterations to LORETO PLAZA 49-53 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, Calif. siDewspoc ei ER AVENWE- William C. (Bill) Farish IV, P.E. Consulting Engineer LORETO PLAZA 49-53 Pier Ave. - Hermosa Beach Dec. 1989 SHEET DR•23b 8188 Printed in USA 4 STA-/eS $RIDGE it u WALkWAY TOwER. BUILDING PLAN 1/8" = 1'_0" WAL/C WAY STAIRS BRIDGE NEW I301'i Ta ec (''i la-go)0A/ - 7 b OVEN/N4 (r/A) �pFE5S1p, / L FA/S/, <, \ No. C 3012R3 - E7t-• I2 •;i -a At f"� , CMI Q �P '-OF CAO. William C. (Bill) Farish IV, P.E. Consulting Engineer LORETO PLAZA 49-53 Pier Ave. - Hermosa Beach Dec. 1989 SHEET DR -23b 8196 Printed in USA: REPLACE T7PPIN6 (E n/orE-s) REMOVE f REpLACi= -50. F/r gEmovEMOD/PY BLOCK/NG ADD 2x 8 x /2' LONG TO EACH zx /o 14✓//7i 3443 ..a ? - LA6 s /2" O.C. STAGGERED CANTILEVER JOIST REINFORCING 1-1/2" = 1'-0' REMOVE' REPi.ACE CE'/UNG William C. (Bill) Parish IV, P.E. Consulting Engineer LORETO PLAZA . 49-53 Pier Ave. - Hermosa Beach Dec. 1989 SHEET )R -23b EiBe Printed in USA General Notes. 1. Contractor to verify the existing conditions match these plan ; before and during construction 2. Existing walkway and bridges are to have their decking ref. ired as follows: - existing concre e and wire mesh topping is to be removed - any plywood de .king that is rotting or degradcd shatbe replaced. - new topping sh .ill be the multi -layer system,"Mer-K- Weather Deck" by Mer-Kote Products, Ton 'ince, Calif. - Mer -Ko installation instructions must be followed. - Contractor mus': assure that the new deck drains as well .is the existing one. 3. All structure sha`.. be adequately braced and shored before the removal of any members. Shoring shall be tacked up to level any sagging members before '.he new structure is added. 4. Materials, unless otherwise shown: - Lumber. No.2 D :iuglas Fir -Larch (WWPA). - Connectors Simpson "Strong Tie" with appropriate to ::teners. - Concrete: 3000 psi @ 28 days. - Reinf.Bar. Grad: 40 min. - Existing mater:31s: any soffit. ceiling, trim. etc. that must be removed to perform the work shown s tall be replaced with equivalent quE Pity products should the originals be ur; usable. 5. All construction oust conform to local ordinances and °:ractices. REPLACE Toptomi (sem- n/oTE5) i ,EDD 6x S RoclGAI 13011-1 ; REMOVE soff/T R-TBEAr1 ADD .5x6 ,QOUGH-1 PoST (2. PLACES) (12,,.) NEW BEAM AT STAIRS 1-1/2" = 1'-0" 18//5Q.--1 J/ ECG66 (R0I1 ') -2 EA. CB66 (eou61-9 Z EA CONG. , nNG W /T// 2- # g BARS Cil. Y • William C. (Bill) Farish IV, P.E. Consulting Engineer LORETO PLAZA 49-53 Pier Ave. - Hermosa Beach Dec. 1989 SHEET 011•23b 586 Printed In USA r..--• • '` January 22, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 LORETO PLAZA REQUEST TO IMPROVE CITY -OWNED "PLAZA" AREA Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. approve the plans for the renovation of the City -owned plaza area at Loreto Plaza. These plans are available for review in the Office of the City Clerk. 2. Approve the attached Easement Agreement Amendment relating to the insurance requirement, and 3. authorize staff to make amendments as necessary. Background: Loreto Plaza is located at 49, 51 and 53 Pier Avenue. Two of the three parcels (49 & 53 Pier Avenue) are separated by a City -owned parcel (51 Pier Avenue). Under a 1975 easement agreement that involved a land swap, the owner of "Loreto Plaza" agreed to maintain 51 Pier Avenue as a pedestrian access from parking lots B & C on 13th Street to Pier Avenue. City Owned Lot 22 Lot 23 Lot 24 49 Pier Ave. Easement 53 Pier Ave. Lot 24 53 Pier Ave. City Owned Lot 23 Easement Lot 22 49 Pier Ave. II iii11UI c� �I � � HIHhl111ll1» SIC' PIER AVENUE BACK VIEW The easement agreement requires the owners of 49 and 53 Pier Avenue to maintain improvements approved by City Council. Loreto Plaza sold in 1987 and the new owners want to improve the pedestrian access plaza (51 Pier Avenue). The proposed improvements require City Council approval. 1 - Analysis: The analysis is divided as follows: 1. Events Leading to this Report 2. Proposed Changes a. General Renovation b. Removal of Bell Tower 3. Changes to the Easement Agreement 4. Summary 1. Events Leading to this Report March 16, 1989: City received letter from the owners of the commercial property at 49 and 53 Pier Avenue asking the City to make certain repairs to the easement area. It was also asked that the City consider removing the Bell Tower because it creates a health problem by attracting nesting pigeons. It was also noted in the letter that there were some cracks in the tower and concern was expressed whether or not it was seismically sound. April 10, 198.9: Building Department Staff inspected the Bell Tower in April 1989. Several cracks were found in the structure; however, staff did not declare the tower structurally unsound. It has been noted, on more than one occasion, that the nesting of pigeons has created an unsightly and potentially unhealthy condition. This continues to be a condition that is nearly impossible for the owners of Loreto Plaza to abate. It was also indicated in the letter that changes to the pedestrian plaza would be a matter for City Council decision. January 18, 1990: The City received a letter (attached) from the owners of Loreto Plaza requesting permission to do renovation work in the easement area between their commercial buildings at 49 and 53 Pier Avenue. 2. Proposed Changes 2a. General Renovation: The proposed changes to the Plaza Area (City property) are as follows: a. Removal of the tower b. Removal of tree on Pier Avenue c. Repaving of Plaza (per plans) d. Retiling ribbon areas in concrete e. Addition of raised planters with seating for the public f. Addition of.public drinking fountain g. Addition of two permanent bicycle racks h. Installation of permanent irrigation system for planters i. New signs for commercial tenants. Staff agrees with applicant that a general renovation is in order. The plans were reviewed by Staff and the improvements are reasonable and meet City Code. Prior to actual work the applicant must obtain a permit from the Public Works Department. The plans are available for review in the Office of the City Clerk. 2 2b. Removal of Bell Tower: The Historical Society and the Sister City Association was contacted regarding the removal of the Bell Tower. The applicants have stated in their January 18, 1990 letter that the entire Board of Directors of the Sister City Association has endorsed the plans. The Bell Tower holds no historical significance. The owners want to remove the Bell Tower and according to plans, space is reserved for an appropriate monument to our Sister City, Loreto, B. C. 3. Changes to the Easement Agreement The existing Easement Agreement, dated July 7, 1975, required liability insurance in the amount of $300,000. Even though the present owners of the adjacent property have liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000, naming the City as an additional insured, staff believes it is important to amend the agreement to reflect the current insurance requirement. The attached amendment has been reviewed by both the City Attorney and owners of the property. The parties agree. 4. Summary Improvements to the downtown area have been discussed by City Council, the Chamber of Commerce and concerned residents. A downtown property owner wants to improve the downtown at no expense to the taxpayer. The proposed improvements will enhance the downtown area, are reasonable and should be encouraged. Res•- tfully submitte Ant': y Antich V Public Works Dire tor cc: Sister City Association Historical Society Owners of. 49 & 53 Pier Avenue Concur: evih B. North aft City Manager (t) C1VAPt, William Grove Building & Safety Director i Michael Schubach Planning Director Attachment: January 18, 1990 Letter from Owners of 49 & 53 Pier Avenue Plan for Renovation Easement Agreement. TELECOPIER (213) 376-3531 NEWTON AND NEWTON 555 PIER AVENUE, SUITE 4 HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 TELEPHONE (213) 372-4636 January 18, 1990 Mr. Anthony Antich Director of Public Works City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Re: Proposed Repairs and Renovations Loreto Plaza Dear Tony: WESTWOOD OFFICE 10880 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD SUITE 1900 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024 (213) 208-7300 As you know, Jerry and I have decided to make a major investment in the repair and renovation of Loreto Plaza. We are committed, as downtown commercial property owners, to do our part in helping revitalize downtown Hermosa Beach. Hopefully, once the process starts, other downtown property owners will follow suit. Loreto Plaza, as you know, is a unique property. We own the buildings, and the city owns the plaza area, with an easement granted to our property. We want to improve, at our own expense, both our buildings and the city -owned plaza area. Our overall plan, some of which has already been done, includes the following: 1. Repairs to Commercial Buildings (Newton property) a. Extensive termite work (completed); b. Roof repairs (completed); c. Installation of twelve new exterior doors (four installed to date); d. Reinforcement of cantilevered walkway per attached plans; e. Removal of concrete paving on cantilevered walkways and bridges and resurfacing with seven (7) coat waterproofing process per attached plans; January 18, 1990 Mr. Anthony Antich Director of Public Works Re: Loreto Plaza Page Two f. Installation of exterior light fixtures in existing outlets; g• Installation of new ceramic tile on stairs and stair landings; h. Installation of new canvas awnings on front of both buildings pursuant to plans submitted to Building Department; i. Repair of tongue and groove wood paneling in stairwells and storage areas under stairwells; and j. Painting and staining of both buildings, including walkways and bridges. These are primarily exterior repairs. As we enter into new leases with new tenants, we are also renovating the interior of the buildings, as evidenced by the work done for our new tenant, Penthouse Salon. 2. Renovation of Plaza Area (City property) Per the attached landscape plans, we would propose to open the plaza up to more use by the general public, as follows: a. Removal of the tower. The current tower creates a severe pigeon problem and obstructs light to the plaza. In its place will be space provided to erect an appropriate monument to our Sister City, Loreto, B.C., plus new landscaping. b. Removal of tree on Pier Avenue. The tree's root system poses a problem for the concrete, plaza, as well as the sidewalk. January 18, 1990 Mr. Anthony Antich Director of Public Works Re: Loreto Plaza Page Three c. Repaving of plaza, per attached plans; d. Retiling ribbon areas in concrete; e. Addition of raised planters with seating for the public; f. Addition of public drinking fountain; g. Addition of two permanent bicycle racks; h. Installation of permanent irrigation system for planters; i. Installation of new lighting in planters; j. New signage for commercial tenants. The signs are still in the design process. Plans will be sub- mitted to the building department. While this work constitutes a renovation and improvement of city property, nevertheless Jerry and I will bear all the expense. With respect to this project, we have solicited the comments and input of Rick Learned of The Historical Society, Betty Ryan and Jerry Compton of The Chamber of Commerce, and the entire Board of Directors of the Sister City Association. All of these groups and/or individuals have enthusiastically endorsed our plans. I understand from my conversation with you that the City Attorney would like to modify the existing easement so as to raise the insurance maintained on the plaza from $300,000 to $1 million. Since we bought the property from Jack Wise in 1987, we have always maintained $1 million in coverage and provided the city with a certificate of insurance. However, we would be happy to meet with January 18, 1990 Mr. Anthony Antich Director of Public Works Re: Loreto Plaza Page Four the City Attorney to discuss any other modifications he might be thinking of. Quite frankly, there are some we would like. However, I do not want to link these discussions with our current plans. We have the financing in place, the contractors hired and are ready to go. Given the disruption the work will cause to our commercial tenants, we are anxious to begin immediately so the work is completed prior to the busy summer season. Finally, Jerry and I will be present when this project appears on the calendar at the February 13, 1990 council meeting as a consent item, should there be any questions or concerns. I want to thank you for your help, assistance and suggestions. Please feel free to share this letter with the council members, and please call us if you or the council have any questions. LAN:ga Enclosure cc: Mr. William Grove Very truly yours, T LV -(-11-1t7 -9-fl E. 'L- f to t.1I'i -- WA1// c .rNiv1t.I kv-t4 slzt; P7'f R.61'‘<,1• i:.- O c,--, A V/////t �F1P#'F� V-xC_.F-.1 14M-IgNtA 94\e6TkA IZALEA L -I Klo r MA616AJZI A.., --0a.1._. cwr=-- L.#47 -f- I%A 1-Y\ H NLY V�I \ AZAI ft ' W P1INCK ' t31a Ku LILY Tug -K- 15 G/•L 15 Lia�t- 5 CIA I elk_ 4' poi 2. 2 8 29 Zoo 4' r Mi. la' 0. c. • I 1 /44. 1- jjl.A.14TI NG p,REA V - - E p WrrH 6/ML1- size- Pa�2tL . WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER EASEMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT The original Easement Agreement was entered into on July 1, 1975 between the City of Hermosa Beach as Grantor and Jack O. Wise as Grantee was recorded in the official records of Los Angeles County on July 10, 1975 at 8:00 a.m. in Book D6721, Page 675. WHEREAS, said easement agreement runs with that land and shall bind grantor and grantee's successors in interest. WHEREAS, Paragraph 2 of Page 2 shall read as follows: Grantee shall, at his own cost and expense, procure a policy or policies of comprehensive public liability and property damage insurance policy for the Servient and Dominant Tenement, $1,000,000 against any injury, death or loss arising out of the use of this easement. Grantor shall be named as an additional insured. Grantor shall always be a named insured under the policies of comprehensive public liability and property damage insurance covering the Servient and Dominant Tenements in accordance with the foregoing. Certificates of said insurance, together with the receipt for the payment of premiums for the terms thereof, shall be delivered to Grantor upon the signing of this amendment and prior to the recordation of the same. Said policies shall contain a non -cancellation -without -notice clause be sent to the grantor. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this amendment to the Easement Agreement this day of BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY ATTEST CITY CLERK lor/pworksl GRANTOR THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH MAYOR GRANTEE January 29, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of February 13, 1990 APPROVAL OF DOG RELATED NOTICES ON THE GREENBELT Recommendation: That the City Council approve the staff recommended plan for plac- ing of notices on the Greenbelt regarding the City's dog leash and defiling ordinance provisions. Background: Prior to the 1989 ballot measures regarding dogs on or off leash on the Greenbelt, the City Council voted to affirm enforcement of dog defiling and on -leash provisions of existing ordinances on October 25, 1988. At that time, due to the sensitive nature of the Green- belt, the Council also specified the frequency (every two hundred feet) and nature (temporary) of the notices. Analysis: Staff is proposing to follow the existing City practice in other large open space areas by a limited use of the "be a good neighbor" dog related notices. Similar notices are in use in the Strand and beach area, and in every major park of the community. The notices were developed as an adaptation from a picture of a sign used in Canada that was submitted as a suggestion by Hermosa citizen Arthur Mazirow. The style of the notice has since been accepted by Man- hattan Beach and is in use in their community as well. Staff feels there is a need to provide such a notice both to make new residents and visitors aware of our requirements, as well as remind recurring users. Lack of such notice could be a problem with enforcement because 1) all other large public areas are prop- erly noticed, 2) the right-of-way in Manhattan Beach is well signed, and 3) the enforcement has changed from past practice of allowing dogs off -leash and not requiring clean up of dog excre- ment. Given these factors, it may well seem unfair to a citizen if he or she were to receive a citation without any posted notice. Given the passive, natural nature of the Greenbelt and a strong desire to maintain that condition, it seems appropriate to post the notices only where there is already a break in the Greenbelt. There are six general locations of such breaks - 30th Street, Gould, Pier, 8th Street, 2nd Street, and Herondo. This would result in eleven notices being placed over the 19-1/2 acres. / gf- /// Kevin B. Nort City Manager cc: Public Works General Services 11 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH INTER—OFFICE MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS DATE: FEBRUARY 12, 1990 OF THE CITY COUNCIL RE: CORRECTION FROM: MARSHA ERNST COMMUNITY RESOURCES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** Please note on the agenda item "Los Angeles County Beaches, Wildlife and Park Land Conservation Act" (1m) in your current packet, ( Feb. 13th meeting) has a reproduction error. The second page of the newspaper article entitled "Bonds for Parks --a Big Push" is incorrect. The correct second page is attached to this memo. I am sorry for this inconvenience. SUPPLEMENTAL • INFORMATION` IN { Contnued;f=om bonds ,_ general r d by co inty prop . s ""° d be secured§ '' r revenues and paid off 01,!. ears ;According to Feld p thhey.,would cost _? $ Tage � ,� � yy and about half that to Q 7 eat • t'r f "fir a 'n P `` ve yeara'd n Feldman, promote. the. bo a . Feld ing ofther organizers at bedfellows coalitionlwhose; . r e from Sierra Club. ran- i activists '' who ,,, `�' ise relief for ds torn d ,. a e the bon rp : b gangs an dealers z . ,, 'then leader 1n the bond cam ° ri'Alvarez=an immigra- ,tt la y rRwho, hes s the rids `Y le for;Parks-sa!i heavily t1 easecotflict in many ti"kPc�v,? s =over what ting ;neighborhood its -On be played in local parks g ough mostparks are no.w set ie�n°orne1Y foCr soft�lnbabebaslh�al d rude , socer;fieds.'makith l'attractive ,tmos, 4 ` a�. aunched ;their ,. "a backers } _._ o fter .about a year as , av` $15,� opinion ; nissioning ti w �, .for Pou test voter11 a for 'with`: e The po a1 p b funds,by.,the Conservancy p a k agencies, and -two anialler o fie¢ county's, Tfound that `76% ,, -,: #vote' ior registered' voters vi'ould o b the bonds, sald Feldmday o�gani .Much of the day Feldman,, .. g is 'being done by culture; '' former AUC extension 1stant ed as 5.1, r A teacher 'who 'sere u - ane no ;paw t February 7, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of February 13, 1990 STATUS REPORT ON REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FROM THE STATE LANDS COMMISSION Recommendation: It is recommended that this report be receivedand filed. Background: Council will recall that, in the fall of 1989, the City requested the staff of the State Lands Commission to respond to sixteen questions regarding use of tideland oil revenues. Staff has been in contact with the Commission encouraging an expeditious response. Analysis: After severalmonths, a letter was received from the staff at the State Lands Commission that did not respond to our inquiry, but raised a point that the question of whether the tidelands oil field has current drainage may make moot answering the City's questions. The letter was immediately discussed with Commission staff, who indicated they were unaware that our project was still in process, and had very sketchy information. Accordingly, they asked that the letter not be circulated and that additional information be provided so that they can be updated and form a more informed opinion. City staff then met with the Commission staff and with the City's lessee, Macpherson Oil Company, to update them on the status of the oil project in Hermosa Beach, and provide them additional information on the drainage issue. The Commission staff indicated when they had reviewed additional drainage information to be supplied by Macpherson Oil, they will determine whether or not their recent concerns are eliminated. It should be noted that their recent concerns represent a reversal of prior written findings by the Commission staff. Regardless of the current research going on regarding drainage into Redondo Beach, which has had years of oil operations, it is likely that the City's program for upland drilling will create drainage of tidelands revenue into the uplands oil field in Hermosa Beach. The more significant issue appears to be meeting the criteria of finding the project in the best interests of the state. This requirement is what caused the necessity for the environmental 1 in impact report, that is just now being completed. Our contacts in Sacramento indicate that this finding will be difficult to obtain, will involve a lengthy process, but stands a good chance of success if appropriately handled and concerns that are raised are adequately resolved. As these matters affect our negotiations with Macpherson Oil regarding extension and expansion of current lease agreement on the City Yard site, as well as eventual negotiation of the lease for tidelands drilling, it is appropriate to discuss in detail the points that form the City's negotiating posture in closed session. t f e Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager KBN/ld cc: State Lands Commission Hermosa Valley School District Planning Department Macpherson Oil Company 1 February 4, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of of the City Council February 13, 1990 REQUEST FROM ALLRIGHT CAL., INC., FOR AN EXTENSION OF CONTRACT TO MANAGE THE CITY OWNED PARKING LOTS Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this request, until the future status of the Vehicle Parking District is determined, sometime later this year. Background: The City Council made inquiry regarding computerization of the cash accounting system at the three parking lots (lots A, B, and C) in the Vehicle Parking District, owned by the City and operated by Allright Cal., Inc., parking systems. Subsequent to that inquiry, a proposal was received by Allright Parking, offering to install, at their expense, the "WATCHDOG" System, predicated on an extension of their contract.. The current contract with Allright, expires in May, 1991. Their proposal asks for a five (5) year extension. The City has contracted with Allright parking (previously Olympic Parking) since 1985. Analysis: Although Allright's proposal seems a viable solution to the City's concerns, it may be premature in light of the possible reorganization of the Vehicle Parking District. Should the City not implement the reorganization, consideration of Allright's proposal should be undertaken. Alternatives: 1. Take under consideration Allright's proposal at this time. 2. Wait until expiration of Allright's contract to negotiate for an upgrade. CONCUR: Henlry L. Staten, Acting General Services Director even B. or cra t, City Manager Respectfully submitted, Henry L. Staten, Acting General Services Director By 1-644.44-1V— Michele -F.c- .44-1V"Michele D. Tercero, Administrative Aide. ALLRIGHT PARKI,'YG® ALLRIGHT CAL., INC. / 610 SOUTH MAIN, SUITE 217 / LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90014 213/627-5481 January 8, 1990 Michele Tercero City of Hermosa Beach General Services 1315 Valley Dr. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Computerized revenue control system for City lots A,B, and C. Dear Ms. Tercero, Allright Cal., Inc., in exchange for a Five year extension of the lease and the right to negotiate a new lease at the end Of the initial lease term, will install at its own expense, a computerized revenue control system, on the City owned lots in Hermosa Beach. (Also known as lots A, B, and C.) Allright's "WATCHDOG" system is a proprietary computerized revenue control system developed by Allright's Research and Development team. Allright's R&D department provides periodic updates to enhance and keep the system state-of-the- art. The "WATCHDOG" was developed and proven for use in high turn locations. It utilizes a barcoded machine readable ticket that makes each transaction faster and more accurate. The ,computer keeps track of each ticket as it is dispensed. When the customer presents the ticket upon exiting, the cashier scams the ticket and the computer instantly figures the time and correct rate to charge. The cashier does not. have to manually figure time or charges in their head. The computer will also keep track of each and every time the gate is opened. This will allow the supervisor to monitor free entrance/exits into the lot. Daily revenue reports", monthly parker list and special reports such as peak usage reports and up to the minute lot counts are also available. I have enclosed a "WATCHDOG" brochure with some further information. If you should have any questions or require any further information regarding the "WATCHDOG" please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, oger A. Schneider Vice President enc. .• Allright Auto Parks, Inc., the world's largest parking company is privileged to introduce to you the Hotel Watchdog System. It is a revolutionary new parking control system which provides your patrons with the highest standards of service, security, and convenience. While streamlining your parking facility management, it also unlocks previously inaccessible hidden revenues. At Allright, we understand the issues involved in hotel parking. In addition to performing parking consultation services for numerous hotels, we help park hotel guests by the millions each year. We currently operate hotel owned and hotel oriented parking in 26 cities located in 19 states and provinces of the United States and Canada. This background gives us the experience regarding the unique problems that hotels face, and the qualifications to solve them. You have an entire hotel operation to run, the last thing that you need are worries regarding the hotel parking facility. So, too often, parking complaints or disputes are settled as quickly as possible. Usually the settlement is at a loss to the hotel by following the adage, "the customer is always right". This "courtesy" given to the hotel guest, is the cause of substantial revenue losses to you. We have found a way to protect you from these losses while, at the same time, boosting customer satisfaction. The Hotel Watchdog System very successfully addresses your special needs and requirements. It carefully orchestrates all aspects of the parking facility. The Hotel Watchdog System keeps track of every detail, makes sure the parking facility runs smoothly, and it collects and carefully guards every last penny of parking revenue as if it were it's own. Best of all, this is accomplished with a minimum of care or supervision. With Allright's Hotel Watchdog System, you can sleep easy. You may even forget you have a parking garage unless you look at your favorable bottom line! After development in-house over a two year period at a cost exceeding a million dollars, the Hotel Watchdog System is now in full operation at such prestigious hotels as the Ottawa Westin Hotel and VIP Hotels' Sutton Place in Toronto. The Hotel Watchdog System is the only comprehensive parking management system that specifically addresses the needs and requirements of a hotel parking facility. This means that you will not be faced with a product that is designed for just a regular parking garage environment. Our in-house developed software, coupled with an innovative use of barcode technology allows the Hotel Watchdog System to offer the following features: • Charge parking fees to a banquet bill or to a room account upon checkout. This eliminates unnecessary hassles and headaches for your patrons. It thus allows all hotel expenses to be settled at the same time. • Keep a complete inventory of your parking facility. This not only increases security for your guests, in the process, it also lowers your liability. • Provide itemized accounts of each guest's parking activity over the period of his stay. This serves to verify to each guest, the accuracy and fairness of his expense. • Utilizes disposable barcoded passcards to identify facility users. This is not only less costly than other systems currently on the market, the one -customer -to -one -number feature enhances garage security and prohibits passback. • Can tell the difference between hotel guests and local patrons and charge accordingly. This eliminates abuse of your parking facility by non -hotel guests who take advantage of non -applicable lower rates. • Begins charging hotel guests your regular parking rate after checkout. This eliminates the common airport problem of guests taking advantage of lower parking rates after checkout. • Complete tracking of every transaction. There are daily reports of every shift's activity, combined cash report, and a listing showing customers name, room number and the assigned ticket number. In addition, if desired, the last 32,000 transactions can be reviewed by a chronological listing, by individual tickets, or by individual passcards. • Complete statistics of the parking facility such as instantaneous and peak car counts can be generated at any time. • Front desk controls authorization to bill guest room account. • Built-in employee security access levels. Personnel cannot gain access to areas of the system program unless authorized by a management's security level program list. This prevents "hanky panky." • Modular hardware design allows easy field replacement by local operator. No need for expensive service calls by factory service representatives. The hardware selected for use in the Hotel Watchdog System is sturdy, reliable, and can be depended on for long service without problems. • Twenty-four hours -a -day, seven -days -a -week, hot line service keeps your system up and operating 365 days -a -year! • And much, much more. We know that it's easy to make claims about performance, ease of use, and cash generation. On the following pages, you will find a letter from one of our satisfied users, a diagram showing the basic operation of the Hotel Watchdog System and a sampling of some of the reports generated each day. These will help you understand how you will be able to use the Hotel Watchdog System in your hotel operation. We can't show how much revenues you will add by installing the Hotel Watchdog System, since every hotel's operation will be unique. We can state that current operations in Ottawa and Toronto have proven that the Hotel Watchdog System will pay for itself with added revenues as well as increased customer satisfaction and decreased management headaches. There are a number of ways that you can obtain the advantages of the Hotel Watchdog System. The choice is yours, each is good for varying reasons. To determine which would be best for your application, give us a call so we can help you decide the Watchdog for you to buy. ALLRIGHT AUTO PARKS, INC. Research And Development Division 1919 Smith Street, Suite 1200 Houston, Texas 77002 Phone (713) 222-2505 Telex 775918 THE WESTIN HOTEL Ottawa Timothy Whitehead General Manager August 13, 1986 Mr. Gerald J. Girard Ltd. Eastern Allright Packings C.P. 363 Succ. Desjardi 5 Complexe Desjardins Montreal, Quebec H5B 1B5 Dear Mr. Girard, the services This will confirm that we have been Garage sinceusing October 1985.uest of theWtinroht Parking reviously had many unfortunate g Them Westin Hotelin previously problems as well as a very pooroomects relating to p cost revenue area which needed to be addressed. The alternate approach we have pursued with Allright Parking has made a marked improvement in both these areas aassistancehave fromnthesatisfied managementwith team.cooperation are still so roved and we feel confident thatroe areasuw that can be improved them will enable us to our working relationship make changes for the enhanceeest of this service to the mutual benefit of both pa Yours sincerely, / I t /t) TW/ah 11 Colonel By Drive. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1 N9H4 (613) 560-7000 Telex 053-4855 GUEST Customer drives up to parking garage and a spitter dispenses a. barcoded ticket. If customer gives car to valet, valet scans barcoded ticket and gives to customer. In both cases, computer reads barcode and logs time ticket is issued. CASE1 The non -hotel guest keeps the barcoded ticket obtained either from the spitter or parking valet. The computer notes the time of ticket issuance for rate calculation. Variable, early bird, evening, or other special rate structures are easily put into the watchdog program and subsequently applied and calculated by the computer. This automatic calculation removes the possibility of human errors. If customer is a hotel number is input int( during checkin. The c6 of the ticket from case Guest can now use tht exit the garage during The heart of our PC/XT computer. It tickets, whether fo; guests. When the pa: for cash customers, guest parking, and , parking for free. The cash customer exi. barcoded ticket to the ticket. The computer ca and displays it at the sa. fee display and cashier', of the entire transaction: Sr st, the barcoded ticket ,e computer terminal nter changes the status stomer to hotel guest. rcoded ticket to enter/ stay at the hotel. in is the dependable 's track of all dispensed h customers or hotel leaves, it calculates fee ?rates billing for hotel ents non or ex -guests the garage and gives the cashier, who scans the ulates the correct charge e time on the customer's erminal. A complete file s stored in the computer. At hotel checkout, the computer gives a guest a moderate amount of time to exit the garage using the barcoded ticket. After the grace period of time has elapsed, guest will no longer be able to exit without going to a cashier lane. ClUER'El F61 E Here a guest has left his car in the garage for a considerable period of time after hotel checkout before trying to exit the garage. _The computer has refused to let him exit using theguest lane. He has now come to the cashier lane and is required to pay for the overtime parking period. TOTAL HOTEL PARKING CHARGES PAGE 1 0 - Hotel Systems Proprietary 12/03/86 2:28 PM ht Parking Inc. 1985 All Rights Reserved. ALLRIGHT PARKING O Copyright Allri9CHARGESTICKETI' TOTAL HOTEL PARKING TOTAL CASH CAR IH/OUT 98857" POSTED CHECK IN/OUT 3:08 PM .00 $ .00 81001 NAME IN 10/31/86$ $ 7.00 0 $ 7.00 21,00 1001 WILLIAMS IN 10/31/86 3:15 PM $ 14.00 $ 22.00 $ 7 00 11/01/86'12:00 AM $ $ 14.00 11/03/86 2:11 PM 2 00 5 24.00 11/03/86 3:43 PM $ 4.00 $ 28.00. O $ .00 11/03/86 5:10 PM $ $ 2.00 05 AM $ 7.00 $ 35.00 $ 4.00 11/04/86 9: $ 14.00 $ 35.00 $ 7.00 11/05/86 12:01 AM $ 28.00 $ 77.00 $ 14.00 11/07/86 12:00 AM $ 28.00 $ 105.00 O 1 $ 28.00 11/11/86 12:00 AM $ 7.00 $ 112.00 98857 $ 28.00 11/16/86 12:00 AM $ 112.00 $ 7 00 11/16/86 12:00 AM15 DAYS 8 HR 52 MIN 11001 WILLIAMS $ 112.00 0 98952 IN 11/03/86 3:59 PM $ .00 $ ,00 1024 BURKOWITZ IN 11/03/86 4:00 PM 1.00 $ 1.00 O OUT 11/03/86 4:00 PM .00 $ 1.00 j 1.00 11/03/86 5:10 PM 0 DAYS 1 HR 11 MIN $ 1.00 98952 1024 BURKOWITZ $ 1.00 O 1024 ROGERS IN 11/05/86 4:44 PM 50146 IN 11/05/86 4:45 PM $ .00 $ .00 $ 11.00 11/07/86 12:00 AM $ 14.00 5 14.00 O $ 28.00 11/11/86 12:00 AM 5 28.00 $ 42.00 $ 27.00 11/15/86 12:00 AM $ 28.00 $ 70.00 $ 7.00 11/16/86 12:00 AM $ 7.00 $ 77.00 1024 ROGERS 10 DAYS 7 HR 16 MIN $ 77.00 50146 O . 1028 ABRAMS IN 11/01/86 2:08 PM 98974 IN 11/04/86 2:09 PM $ .00 $ .00 O OUT. 11/04/86 2:10 PM $ 1.00 $ 1.00 • IN 11/04/86" 2:10 PM $ 7.00 11/05/86 12:01 AM $ 6.00 $ 7.00 $ 11.00 11/07/86 12:00 AM $ 14.00 5 21.00 $ 28.00 11/11/86 12:00 AM $ 28.00 $ 49.00 5 28.00 11/15/86 12:00 AM $ 28.00 $ 77.00 $ 7.00 11/16/86 12:00 AM $ 7.00 $ 84.00 1028 ABRAMS 5 81.00 11 DAYS 9 HR 52 MIN $ 84.00 98974 �gl,�a7►`� . 0. • ; 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 This report shows the parking charges for each hotel guest. Each account is broken down into individual charges. Note room 1024, which shows both the present and previous guests. There is no way for the charges of these guests to be mixed since the barcoded ticket number is unique to each. This detailed breakdown shows the barcoded ticket number, guest name, room number, check in and out times, and parking charges per parked time period. 0 DAILY REPORT 3:00 1p/25/g6 1 Systems P g5 Allt R 9h0 Reserved LtIG Copyright p1lYN 9ht patkin9 DAILY. REPORT Westin Hotel 48 LOT: 202 Westin RICK 3410 3398 12 0 0 CITY• RICK SUPERVISOR: NUMBER: CLOSING NUMBER. STARTING PRINTERS ERRETS: SKIPPED TICK PROCOLLECTSISTAR T• COLLECTS END: DEAD VIOLATORS: : ACCOUNTABLE TKTS: 3 2 3 1 2 1 1 1.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 1,00 14.00 12 21 19 1 0 13 3.00 6.00 12.00 5.00 12.00 7.00 14.00 13 59.p0 00 FORAL TIMONEY /MONEY NO ONEY 0 0.0,00 METER MONEYVERTIME VALIDATION O 0 p 00 TRANSFER OUTS PROCESSED TS 0 59.00TOTAL TICKETSTSSEDS TICK 3 10 0.00 REFUNDS, OUTSIDETODA S TICKETS 10 3 59.00 PARKING INCOME FOR TODAY CASH PARKING: OVERTIME VALIDATION: METER MONEY: MONTHLY MONEY: PARKING INCOME: SALES TAX: TOTAL TO ACCT FOR: DRAW: PAID OUT: ACCOUNTED FOR: OVERL 1/HORTL VAL NON-CASH REVENUE:TICKET: AVERAGE PER MANUAL ADJUSTS: 15 CAR COUNT REPORTED 59.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 59.00 0.00 59.00 0.00 0.00 59.00 0.00 0 4.54 0 0.00 0.00 AM 0 •i • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 1 • This report reconciles all tickets dispensed, cash received from cash customers, and shows any refunds given. It does NOT show any charges for hotel guests. - MASTER TICKETS REPORT ALLRIGHT PARKING Hotel Systems Proprietary 8:39 AM 10/17/86 Copyright Allrig ht Parking Inc. 1985 All rights Reserved MASTER TICKETS REPORT ------ CAR IN 5/24/86 ROOM N ___ ]:10 PM TICKET M _-- 5:42 PM 5/24/86 0 ------ 1124 MCKAGUE. 10/07/26 ]371 2310 DOBBINS 9:20 PM 10/07/86 1417 2112 VASBINDER 10:18 PM 10/07/86 19879ROBERTSAN10:32 PM 123110/07/86 O 1993 DORMAN 11:31 PM 2305 8:37 AM 10/09/ 1994 816 WELTERS 2:12 PM 10/08/86 2043 1602 PATTERSON 8:37 AM 10/09/86 202649 17 7 MURREY 10/08/86 20 1727 BULGERLAFOSS 5:15 PM 10/08/86 3:57 PM 2051 1SILBERE 4:42 PM ]0/08/8b 1518 5;17 PM 10/08/86 2053 152720POMERST.ONE 5.17 PM 10/08/86 2059 2056 1202 POLGATEAU 5 20 PM 10/08/86 20601 1127 RILEYTI 5:33 PM 10/08 /86 122296 6:13 10/08/86 2061 916 LESSR D 6;14PM 10/08/86 2063 626 VVAL EED 6;13 PM 10/08/86 2065 1917 ELLIOTTL7.14 PM 10/08/86 2066 809 EIOgall PM 10/08/8E6 20697 SOYECHAL 26 PM 10/08/86 2070 1405 ROY 10:05 PM 10/08/86 2072 14128 CIANCIOTTA 10:06 PM 10/08/86 2073 1708 CELLE ]0:36 PM 10/08/86 2076208014302009 HILLER 10/08/8(i 2077 2009 LUIN 10:40 PM 10/pg/86 1113 LYSEK 11:58 PM 10/8 /86 2081 2206 FERRON ]2;39 AM 10/9 /g6 2:57 PM 2091 1126 DUNCAN 10/09/86 21 8 1014 GIMES 4:41 PM 10/09/86 2147 1014 JAMES 3:39 PM 10/11/St 2158 1307. AUMAIS ]1:20 AM 10/11/8 2171 1501 FOOR 2:09.PM 10/]1/ 86 2365 ]115 NESBITTROGERS5;25 PM 10/12/8b 5:39 PM 86 2392 2105 EOMM10/13/ '• 2411 1817 WHITFIELD 3:24 PM 10/13/86 2489 2305 5:57 PM 10/13/86 2511 2319 KREVER 10:26 PM 10/]3/86 2528 1525 DOMIANO ]0:50 PM ]0/14/86 2545 1623 BORD 6:24 PM 10/15/86 25496818301ROACH 3;41 PM 2613 913 GLADWELL 2682 0 0 0 0 is H This listing shows all hotel guests currently in the Hotel Watchdog System. It shows them by barcode ticket number, room number, name, and also shows when they entered the parking facility. 0 0 0 o' 0 0 1 o HOTEL CHECK-OUT LISTS BY TIME PAGE 1 10/17/86 8 30 AM - Hotel Systems Propriet Parking Inc. 1985 All Rights Reserved f pLLRIGHT PARKINGOUT LISTS BY TIME 0 Copyright Allright P HOTEL CHECK- ------------------ CHECK OUT IN 4:09 AM TICKET * ----- 8;13 AM 10/16/86 8:03 AM NAME -----_-- 10/11/86 10/16/86 8;03 AM 0 ROOM 8-- CHARGES------------------- 2349' 10/11/86 3:55 PM 10/16/86 BALAOUIE 2402 10/12/86 5:01 PM 10/16/86 8:03 AM 03 AM 1609 $ 7.00 PORTER 2402 10/12/86 5:24 PM 10/16/86 1012 $ 7.00 BOLLARD 2522 10:29 PM 8:02 AM 7.00 10/12/86 11:29 10/16/86 :03 9:40 AM 0 1417 $ 7.00 TURNER 2546 10/12/86 10/16/86 1123 $2551 1:47 PM 10/16/86 4:39 AM 7.00 BALLANTYNE 10/13/86 5:31 PM 7:47 AM 1614 $ 7 00 REYNOLDS 2584 10/13/8610/16/86 8:04 AM 617 $ 7.00 LEBLANC 2604 10/14/86 8:08 AM 10/16/86 1921 $STAFFEN 2611 10/14/86 9:43 AM 10/16/86 8:03 AM 0 1821 $ 7.00 7777 2617 8:06 PM 10/16/86 8:03 AM 9002 $ 5.00 BURTON 2622 10/14/86 10/l 6/86 10/15/86 11:22 AM 12:34 PM 2209 $ 6.00 TRICK ARD 2627 10/15/86 8:19 PM 1227 $ 7.00 BLANCHO'NEILL 2670 0 ---191 $ 7-- TRICKSY--------_` 16257.00------- --------- 13 OTOTAL $ 90.00 r mb.-•. r• 1.� T This listing shows all guests who have checked out in the last 24 hours. It shows all charges. It gives room number, guest name, charges due, barcode ticket number, and guest check-in and out times. 0 0 0 0 • TICKETS STILL IN SYSTEM ALLAIGHT PARKING Hotel Systems Proprietary 10/17/86 8:29 AM ht Allright Parking Inc. 1985 A11 Rights Reserved Copyright TICKETS STILL IN SYSTEM INGATE TICKET* 0 2734 2795 2796 2797 2799 2801 2802 2803 INDATE 10/11/86 10/16/86 10/17/86 10/17/86 1.0/17/86 10/17/86 10/17/86 10/17/86 10/17/86 INTIME 9:39 AM 5:00 AM 12:15 AM 12:17 AM 12:17 AM 6:28 AM 7:58 AM 8:14 AM 8.:27 AM LOT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TOTAL 9 2 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 FORCED \o'. 0 1 0 This shows all tickets currently active for cash customers. The cars associated with the ticket numbers are in the parking facility at this time. ALLRIGHT FARKHG® *"WATCHDOG" is a service mark of Allright Auto Parks, Inc. CITY MANAGER COMMENT: The Public Safety Director advises that this would be an unnecessary ordinance for our community and an example of over- regulation. Staff recommends receiving and filing. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 383 HALL OF ADMINISTRATION / LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90012 LARRY J. MONTEILH, EXECUTIVE OFFICER (213) 974-1411 January 19, 1990 The Honorable Roger D. Creighton Mayor City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD PETER F. SCHABARUM KENNETH HAHN EDMUND D. EDELMAN DEANE DANA MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH RECEIVED JAN 2 21990 Dear Mayor Creighton: At our meeting held January 16, 1990, we adopted the enclosed Ordinance No. 90-0013, which adds Section 13.12.055 to the County Code, imposing regulations upon the sale of aerosol paint containers of six ounces or less. In addition, we are requesting that all Cities within Los Angeles County adopt a similar ordinance. Sincerely yours, PETER F. SCHABARUM CHAIRMAN SUPERVISOR, 1st DISTRICT KENNETH HAHN SUPERVISOR, 2nd DISTRI:T DEANE DANA SUPERVISOR, LACM.Shl EDMUND D. EDELMAN SUPERVISOR, 3rd DISTRICT MI EL D. A ONOVICH 4th DISTRICT SUPERVISOR, 5th DISTRICT 4b ANALYSIS State law permits local governments to regulate the. sale of aerosol paint containers weighing six ounces or less. This ordinance would require all business estab- lishments open to the public and offering aerosol paint containers weighing six ounces or less to keep, store and maintain such containers in secure areas which are not avail- able to the public except upon request. MD:jrw 4md:SP.ATi Ordinance No. 90-0013 An ordinance amending Title 13 of the County Code imposing regulations upon the sale of aerosol paint con- tainers of six ounces or less. The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows: Section 1. Section 13.12.055 of the Los Angeles County Code is added to read as follows: Section 13.12.055. Sale of aerosol paint containers - Storage requirements. Any business or establishment offering for sale to the public aerosol paint containers of six (6) ounces or less shall keep, store and maintain such aerosol paint containers in a place that is locked and secure, or otherwise made unavailable to the public. 4md:SP.ORD Section 2 . This ordinance shall be published in Metr . . .1 t a newspaper printed and published in the. County of Los Angeles. (), Chairman ATTEST: Ex'eeIve Officer Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles I hereby certify that at its meeting of January 16. 3990 the foregoing ordinance was adopted by the Board of Supervisors of said County of Los Angeles by the following vote, to wit: Ayes: Noes: Supervisors Kenneth Hahn Supervisors None Edmund D. Edelman Michael D. Antonovich Peter F. Schabarum ut vi a Officer Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles Effective Date February 16. 1.990 AXIXIMAKILIMIcaucrax APPROVED TO FORM: DEW - NTON Count By ERALD . CR Chief Assista t County Counsel Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 5, 1990 Regular Meeting of February 13, 1990 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-14 LOCATION: 2515 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, TRACT 33744 IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH APPLICANT: HENRY CHANG (HERMOSA BEACH HOTEL) 12936 CHELSWORTH LANE CERRITOS, CA 90701 APPELLANTS: COUNCILMEMBERS.ESSERTIER AND WIEMANS APPEAL: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO GRANT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ON -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES TO HOTEL GUESTS IN THE "MEETING ROOM" Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council confirm the Planning Commission decision to allow on -sale general alcoholic beverages subject to conditions. Background The applicant requested permission to serve alcoholic beverages to guests from a wet bar located in the Meeting Room adjacent to the Lobby in the Hermosa Hotel (currently under construction). The beverages would be consumed in the Meeting Room or in the guest rooms. No additional parking is proposed as the service is for guests only. The Planning Commission, at their meeting of December 5, "1989, approved the applicant's request for a Conditional Use Permit, allowing the sale of alcoholic beverages, subject to conditions, limiting the sale of such beverages to guests only. The conditions specifically require that drinks can only be purchased by charging them to guest rooms, that a room key must be shown to order a drink, that drinks shall only be served and consumed in the Meeting Room and/or guest rooms, and that outside advertising shall be prohibited. Analysis The Planning Department's staff report to the Planning Commission recommended against the request, and suggested that the Planning Commission consider allowing the sale of alcoholic beverages in factory sealed containers only, available in guest rooms. The Planning Commission, however, by a vote of 4:1 chose the other alternative recommended by staff to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages, subject to strict conditions limiting sales to guests only. 1 The Planning Commission made their decision based on public testimony received at the public hearing, and based on their judgement that the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit would mitigate the concerns noted by residents and staff. Staff does not believe that there is sufficient reason to reverse the decision of the Commission. To summarize the parking situation, 70 spaces are required for an 80 -room "hotel" based on the parking requirement of Section 1152(H) of the zoning ordinance. The subject hotel will have 71 parking spaces. Although staff believes it is questionable whether this parking is adequate for the hotel, staff does not anticipate that serving alcohol to guests would aggravate the parking situation. // if r /Yen Ro ertsonf Associate Planner ;7 CONCUR: Michael Schubach Planning Director even Northcrq:t City Manager Attachments 1. Proposed Resolution 2. Resolution P.C. 89-84 3. P.C. Minutes 12/5/89 4. Correspondence 5. Application a/pcsr2515 2 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 90- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO ALLOW SERVING OF GENERAL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT 2515 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY "HERMOSA BEACH HOTEL," LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, TRACT 33744 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 5, 1989.to receive oral and written testimony regarding the conditional use permit and approved said conditional use permit subject to conditions; WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on February 13, 1990, to receive oral and written testimony on the appeal of the subject conditional use permit and made the following findings: A. The sale and consumption of general alcoholic beverages would be conducted within a meeting rooms in a proposed hotel establishment currently being constructed; B. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses; C. Strict compliance with the conditions of approval will mitigate any negative impact resulting from the issuance of the conditional use permit; D. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby affirm the Planning Commission's decision to approve a Conditional Use Permit and Negative Declaration to allow the serving and sale of general alcoholic beverages at 2515 Pacific Coast Highway subject to the conditions as contained in RESOLUTION P.C. 89-84. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED, this day of February, 1990 PRESIDENT, of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: CITY CLERK 3 7P/.11.11P14/ CA/00Y9.110P8 November 28, 1989 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach Planning Commission December 5, 1989 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-14 LOCATION: 2515 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, TRACT 33744 IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, FILED IN BOOK 907, PAGE 65 APPLICANT: HENRY CHANG (HERMOSA BEACH HOTEL) 12936 CHELSWORTH LANE CERRITOS, CA 90701 REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ON -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES TO HOTEL GUESTS, IN THE "MEETING ROOM" Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the request, and instead allow liquor to be provided only within individual guest rooms in factory sealed containers and a Negative Declaration subject to the conditions in the attached resolution. Project Description Zoning: C-3 General Plan Designation: General Commercial (GC) Present Use: Vacant Project Area: 480 Square Feet Parking Required: 6 Spaces Background On April 26, 1989, the applicant obtained a building permit for construction of a hotel, which is currently under construction. On October 5, 1989, the Staff Environmental Review Committee recommended a negative declaration for on -sale alcoholic beverages. Analysis The applicant is requesting to serve general alcoholic beverages in the Meeting Room next to the Lobby on the first floor for hotel guests while the room is not being used for meeting purposes. Alcoholic beverages would be prepared in the Wet Bar of the Meeting Room and would also be served and consumed in the hotel's guest rooms. The Meeting Room and Wet Bar together comprise 480 Square feet in area. Essentially this situation constitutes a bar or cocktail lounge which the City has not approved except in conjunction with bona fide eating t establishments in many years. The existing bars were approved prior to requiring a Conditional Use Permit. Staff believes that would be no way to effectively enforce limiting the use of the meeting room to hotel guests only, or to limit the liquor service to only one room as the lobby and garden area could too easily also be used. Typically when motels offer liquor, it is provided in individual rooms along with soft drinks, etc. Staff believes this approach would be more appropriate. In the behavioral sense, hotel guests will buy liquor at the nearby liquor store, or supermarket, if they desire to drink, and therefore having it available in the room will simply be a convenience. It should be noted that weddings and/or receptions are an assembly use requiring additional parking. Also, outdoor activities of this nature are prohibited by the zoning ordinance; activities are required to be conducted within a building. Further, considering the proximity of the garden area and and the hotel itself to residential development, and the lack of parking beyond the required parking for the hotel except for six extra spaces, other activities beyond the hotel use could have a negative impact, particularly if a disc -jockey or live band, etc. are included. A precedent could be set by granting this Conditional Use Permit as requested. Alternative If the Planning Commission desires to approve this request and allow the use of the meeting room for service of alcoholic beverages to guests of the hotel only, staff has included an alternative resolution which would establish strict conditions to limit the use of the bar for this purpose. The recommended conditions include requiring that drinks could only be purchased by charging them to guest rooms, that a room key would have to be shown to order a drink, the drinks could only be served and consumed in the Meeting Room and/or guest rooms, and that no advertising of the bar would be allowed. In staff's judgement this alternative is not preferable because of the nature of these conditions makes them difficult to effectively enforce. - 1 /7 Michael Schubach Planning Director Attachments 1. Resolution P.C. 89-84 2. Alternative Resolution 3. Application 4. Staff Review Minutes of October 5, 1989 5. Public Notice Affidavit a/pcsr2515 6 198 9 AVE 'Diagrammatic depicts approrimatc dimensions. units in the (ol Imnnq Condominium i rights and interest, n the common •n deeds of rcrord. Common Arca ract No. 33744 NIF, Lots Unit; Subdivisior of Airspace Shts. 2 d 3 AR TES IA BLVD. t Ai..4VIEW TRACT M.B. 10 —40 1ONTMARIE M.B. 9-135 •0 PREV. ASSMT. SEE: 160 —1 1 4169 -37 4 CONDOMINIUM TRACT NO.,33744 Ln 0 v 4.708;4 69060306 8/1104d07 ASSESSOR' 3 ti&P nnu•r+•r nr .^. ...n.. -. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 • 25 ( 26 27 28 RESOLUTION P. -C. 89-84 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSTON OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A.• CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO ALLOW SERVING OF GENERAL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT 2515 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY "HERMOSA BEACH HOTEL" AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, TRACT 33744, IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, FILED IN BOOK 907, PAGE 65 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 5, 1989 to receive oral and written testimony regarding an application for a Conditional Use Permit and made the following findings: A. The sale and consumption of general alcoholic beverages would. be conducted within a meeting rooms in a proposed hotel establishment currently being constructed; B. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses; C. Strict compliance vOth the conditions of approval will mitigate any negative impact resulting from the issuance of the conditional use permit; D. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California does hereby approve a Conditional Use Permit and Negative Declaration to A'ilow the serving and sale of general alcoholic beverages at 2515 Pacific Coast Highway subject to the following conditions: -. 1. The hours of operation shall be limited to 10:00 A.M. to 2:00 A.M. daily. 2. The establishment shall not adversely affect the welfare of residents, and/or commercial establishments nearby. 3. The business shall provide adequate management and supervisory techniques to prevent loitering, unruliness, and boisterous activities of the patrons outside the business or. in the immediate area. 4. Alcoholic beverages shall only be sold to individuals over the age of 21 years old; any violations of this condition may be considered automatic revocation of this permit. 5. Alcoholic beverages shall only be served and consumed in the "Meeting Room" only, limited in size to 480 square feet, 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 located on the first floor and in the guest rooms of the hotel. 6. Signs shall be posted in a conspicuous location warning patrons of the illegality of open alcohol containers in the Lobby Area, any sidewalk, the garden, parking lot and beach area. 7. Any advertisement for the bar outside of the hotel building through sign, local newspapers, or other means is prohibited. 8. No "Happy Hour" specials on alcoholic drinks shall be permitted in the meeting room. 9. No cash exchanges shall be permitted at the bar for alcoholic beverages. The beverages shall be charged to the applicable guest room. 10. A bar customer must show the room key from his/her guest room before ordering liquor. 11. Bar service shall be provided by a maximum of only one employee. a. Employees of the hotel shall park on site. 12. Use of the outdoor garden area beyond passive purposes (sitting) including the consumption of alcohol shall be prohibited. 13. A manager or clerk who is aware of the conditions of this conditional use permit shall be on the premises during business hours. a. Each manager shall be given a copy of the conditional use permit and shall acknowledge by signature that the conditional use has been read and understood.;; 14. Noise emanating from the establishment shall be within the limitations prescribed by the city's noise' ordinance and shall not create a nuisance to the surrounding residential neighborhoods, and/or commercial establishments. 15. All alcoholic beverages shall be served in non -throw -away glass containers, including beer and wine. 16. Measures shall be taken to control loitering on the premises at all times. 17. The police chief may determine that a continuing police problem exists and may require the presence of a police approved doorman and/or security. personnel. 18. Any violation of the conditions and/or vio.lation of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code shall be grounds for an immediate revocation hearing and/or citation. 19. Any changes to the exterior or interior design shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. 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 a. Bar stools are strictly prohibited. 20. Prior to the conditional use permit being in effect, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Department, a signed and notarized "Acceptance of Conditions" form. 21. A conditional use permit shall be recorded with the deed, and proof of recordation shall be submitted with the Planning Department. 22. The Planning Commission may review the, conditional use permit and may amend the subject conditions or impose any new conditions if deemed necessary to mitigate detrimen°tal effects on the neighborhood resulting from the subject use. VOTE: AYES: Comms.Ingell,Ketz,Moore,Chmn.Rue NOES: Comm.Peirce ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. 89-84 is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, Californi1 at their regular meting of December 5, 1989. Rue, Chairman Michael` Schubach, Secretary / WI° Date/ -9 A/per2515a C . Rue suggested that the previous motion be reconsidered and a vote taken to contin the projects so that the architect can work with staff to resolve this matter. Tom M. ley, 516 Loma Drive, addressed the issue of downzoning and recycling • older properties ' • the City. He asked for comments on this philosophical issue. He thoug that the goal was to . ve projects meet the City's new code requirements. Chinn. Rue stat • that that issue will be discussed when the housing element is .: dressed. Public Hearing close. by Chmn. Rue. MOTION by Chmn. Rue, seconded by Comm. Ingell, to WITHDRAW r'' E PREVIOUS MOTION DENYING THE PROJECT 1502 LOMA DRIVE. - Comm. Ingell stated that by the applicant separating the projec : completely, it is possible that the nice courtyard will be lost. e felt it would be a shame o have two maxed out projects which are not cohesive, and he fe that putting a wall do the middle would substantially change the project. He questioned hether the additio .i one foot on each side is worth the potential loss of the courtyard. AYES: Comms. Ingell, Ketz, . ore, Pe' e, Chmn Rue NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None MOTION by Chmn. Rue, seconded by C. • • Peirce, o continue to the meeting of January 16, 1990, the projects at 1502 and 1508 .ma Drive so . t the architect can work with staff to resolve the problems. Comm. Ingell questioned whet. -r it wouldn't be better to a• 'rove the project as submitted, noting concern that the Co.. ••: ssion will be presented with eve . ess in the future. Mr. Ferguson stated that • - would hate to see this project destroyed. Mr. Schubach, in re sone to the applicant's concerns, stated that f will work with the designer on this pr• ect. _ AYES: Comms. Ketz, Moore, Peirce, Chmn. Rue NOES: Comm. Ingell ABSTAIN: None ABSENT None Co be . Ingell stated that he voted against the motion, explaining that he felt the p re the Commission was a good project. osal CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ON -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT 2515 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. HOTEL HERMOSA Mr. Schubach gave staff report dated November 28, 1989. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission deny the request and instead allow liquor to be provided only within individual guest rooms in factory sealed containers, and a negative declaration, subject to the conditions specified in the proposed resolution. This project is located in the C-3 zone, with a general plan designation of general commercial: The present use is vacant. The project area is 480 square feet, and six parking spaces are required. - P.C. Minutes 12/5/89 /o — On April 26. 1989, the applicant obtained a building permit for construction of a hotel, which is currently under construction. On October 5, 1989, the staff environmental review committee recommended a negative declaration for on -sale alcoholic beverages. ,. The applicant is requesting to serve general alcoholic beverages in the meeting room nextto the lobby on the first floor for hotel guests while the room is not being used 'for meeting purposes. Alcoholic beverages would be prepared in the wet bar of the meeting room and would also be served and consumed in the hotel guest rooms. The meeting room and wet bar together comprise 480 square feet in area. Essentially, this situation constitutes a: bar or cocktail lounge which the City has not approved, except in conjunction with bona fide eating establishments, in many years. The existing bars were approved prior to requiring a conditional use permit. Staff felt there would be no way to effectively enforce limiting the use of the meeting room to hotel guests only, or to limit the liquor service to only one room, as the lobby and garden area could too easily also be used. Typically, when motels offer liquor, it is provided in individual rooms along with soft drinks. et cetera. Staff believes this approach would be more appropriate. In the behavioral sense, hotel guests will buy liquor at the nearby liquor store or supermarket, if they desire to drink; therefore, having it available in the room will simply be a convenience. It should be noted that weddings and/or receptions are an assembly use requiring additional parking. Also, outdoor activities of this nature are prohibited by the zoning ordinance; activities are required to be conducted within a building. Further, considering the proximity of the garden area and the hotel itself ,to residential development, and the lack of parking beyond the required parking for the hotel except for six extra spaces, other activities beyond the hotel use could have a negative impact, particularly if a disc -jockey or live band is included. A precedent could be set by granting this conditional use permit as requested. As an alternative, if the Planning Commission desired to approve this request and allow the use of the meeting room for service of alcoholic beverages to guests of the hotel only, staff has included an alternative resolution which would establish strict conditions to limit the use of the bar for this purpose. The recommended conditions include requiring that drinks could only be purchased by charging them to guest rooms, and that a room key -would have to be shown to order a drink, the drinks could only be served and consumed in the meeting room and / or guest rooms, and no advertising of the bar would be allowed. • In staffs judgment, this alternative is not preferable because the nature of these conditions makes them difficult to effectively enforce. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Rue. Henry Chang, 12936 ' Chelsworth, Cerritos, applicant, addressed the Commission. He introduced Betty Ryan as his friend and the agent who sold him the property. Mr. Chang said that the neighborhood has been very cooperative, and he thanked the residents very much. Mr. Chang stated that he is constantly attempting to upgrade the hotel and said that he will build a very beautiful Japanese garden which will include a waterfall, pond, pagoda, and many other enhancements. He has hired an interior designer, and the lobby will be decorated as well P.C. Minutes 12/ 5 / 89 — //— as the elevator. He stressed that this is a very high-quality hotel, not a common motel. In order to attract businessmen, it is necessary to serve liquor in the guest rooms as well as in the meeting room. He acknowledged that the lot is small; however, he wanted to make the businessmen feel as though they were at home. He is confident that the City and residents will be happy to have this hotel in Hermosa Beach. Mr. Chang asked that he be allowed to serve liquor to hotel patrons and their guests only. This will allow the hotel to be more competitive with other local hotels. Ms. Ryan stated that she is available to answer questions. Comm. Peirce noted that when the hotel was built, no restaurant was included. Mr. Chang replied that that is correct. He explained that continental breakfasts will be served in the meeting room. When businessmen finish their business, it would be nice for them to be able to have a drink. Comm. Peirce noted that other hotels mentioned by the applicant all have restaurants. Ms. Ryan stated that this lot would not accommodate an 80 -room hotel as well as a restaurant, as far as the economics are concerned. She said that there must be a certain minimum number of rooms to support a restaurant. Comm. Peirce asked whether there are any hotels within a ten- to fifteen -mile radius which serve liquor in the meeting room but which have no restaurant. Mr. Chang explained that other hotels are much larger. He said that this meeting room will have only 400 square feet, with only four or five tables. Ms. Ryan said that the bar will serve guests only. not outsiders. Mr. Chang stressed that liquor will not be served to walk-in customers who have no room key. Chmn Rue asked about providing liquor and ice in the rooms and questioned whether a guest couldn't just take his drink down to the meeting room. Mr. Chang stated that many businesswomen have visitors whom they do not want to have in their rooms, explaining that it is more preferable to have a drink in the meeting room. Comm. Moore commented on the use of the outdoor garden for parties and receptions and stated that, with or without liquor, there could be a noise problem. He stated that the conditions proposed by staff would seem to severely restrict the use of the outdoor garden area. Mr. Chang said that the liquor will be allowed only in the meeting room and guest rooms, not in the lobby or the Japanese garden. Comm. Moore referred to Condition No. 6: "Use of the outdoor garden area beyond passive purposes (sitting) including the consumption of alcohol shall be prohibited." He noted that that condition would not allow wedding receptions. Mr. Chang stated that he does not intend to have wedding receptions in the outdoor garden area. He said that area will be used for hotel guests for rest purposes. Gerry Compton, 200 Pier Avenue, addressed the Commission and stated that the City has attempted to control the number of liquor outlets in certain areas of the City; however, since that is not a problem in this particular area, there is no problem. He stated that he would like to see flexibility for this business, noting that the purpose of a CUP is to impose conditions on P.C. Minutes 12 / 5/ 89 — /2— businesses. He said that this is a novel idea. and one does not often see 80 -room hotels. He asked that the owner be allowed to operate his business somewhat differently than usual. Wilma Burt, 1152 7th Street, stated that she recently stayed in a similar type hotel in Yuma. She stated that. even though she does not drink, it was quite pleasant to have their meeting in the meeting room. as opposed to taking the others to her private room. She found the arrangement quite pleasant. She felt that there are too many liquor establishments in the City; however, she did not oppose this particular request, so long as conditions are;; imposed and enforced. Howard Longacre, 1221, 7th Place, addressed the Commission and asked where this issue was noticed, stating that he saw no notice. He noted that this building is not even completed. He said that this project has bothered him from the start, explaining that this type of project in any other city would have required a total review. He noted concern over the height and bulk of this project. He said that when he previously asked about the project, he was told that there would be nothing but rooms at the hotel. To have the applicant now requesting alcohol sales, without having to previously appear before the Commission, caused him a great deal of concern. He said approval of this request would be a disgrace, especially since the Commission has not even reviewed any plans for this project. Jim Lissner, 2715 El Oeste, addressed the Commission and stated that this area is in fact heavily impacted by liquor outlet(s), especially P.J. Brett's. He noted concern over the fact that a bar at this hotel could force cars out of the hotel parking lot and onto the street. He said that the hotel has 71 parking spaces, and the minimum required number of spaces for the hotel is 70, leaving one space for the bar. If this hotel were built in Manhattan Beach, without a bar, 91 parking spaces would be required. He further noted that Torrance would require more parking, and he continued by giving the formula used in that city. He noted concern that people using this bar will be in his area, and he said there are already enough problems without adding to it. He said that he does not oppose drinking; however, he does oppose additional parking problems which could be created by this approval. If this proposal is approved, he suggested that alternative parking plans be addressed. Mr. Chang stated that other much larger chains were very interested in this site, even though it is very small. He said that he is very proud of the project. He said that other hotels informed him that at night or during bad weather, people do not want to leave a hotel to go out for a drink. He said people like to relax in the evening in their hotel. He noted that room at this hotel will start at $75 per night. He stressed that there will not be a large kitchen or bar equipment. Liquor will be factory packaged, and the only other items which will be available are glasses and ice. No other services will be provided. Mr. Chang discussed the parking concerns, stating that the plan has been approved. He was told only 65 spaces were needed and the hotel will have 71 parking spaces. He said that, until today, he had received no information that there was a problem with the parking; therefore, he has not prepared any detailed information addressing the parking. Ms. Ryan said that up until tonight, it was Mr. Chang's understanding that the hotel required 65 parking spaces. When the project was originally designed there were 76 spaces; however, several spaces were used for electrical apparatus, leaving a total of 71 spaces which is shown on the plans. She explained that neither Mr. Chang nor his architect had received any information regarding a problem with the number of parking spaces. No hint of a problem was given until this evening; therefore, a parking problem cannot be addressed. Mr. Schubach stated that even though the current code defines this project as a "hotel," his professional judgment deems it to be a "motel." A motel would require one parking space per unit; however, the project meets the parking requirements for a "hotel" with one additional space. A motel requires one space per unit. He did not feel, however, that parking is at issue at this time because the proposal involves service of alcohol only to guests at the hotel, not others coming to the hotel for bar service. - /3 - P.C. Minutes 12/5/89 c Mr. Chang showed plans to the Commission and explained how the interior will be decorated. He noted that the comfort of guests is the main objective. Public Hearing closed by Chmn. Rue. Comm. Ingell stated that even though he initially objected to this proposal, he now feels it would be a shame to limit guests at a quality project such as the one being proposed. He wanted to see a quality hotel such as this survive and succeed. Noting that there have been problems with establishments offering liquor in the past, he feels that the conditional use permit is the mechanism by which to control the use. He did not think this service constitutes a "bar." Comm. Ketz did not feel that the alcohol service would create additional traffic or parking problems. She noted that it is not the intent of the applicant to have outsiders coming in to order drinks; the service would merely be a convenience to guests. She did note, however, that the meeting room should be limited to the small size of 480 square feet. Comm. Moore agreed, stating that he is in support of the project. He stated that offering food service to an intoxicated person does not make a person less intoxicated. He felt that the hotel project as designed makes a lot of sense. He noted some concern about the outdoor area, but noted that the applicant desires to use that as a rest area. He wanted to ensure that a future owner does not turn this hotel into a "teenage getaway" ; however, he felt that the conditions imposed are sufficient to avoid such a use. Comm. Peirce stated that he would vote against approval, stating that if the applicant desired • to have an entertainment room, he should have applied for a permit for that use; however, he did not do that. Also, he felt that the parking is inadequate, noting that cars will probably overflow onto the street. He said this is no different from someone building a maxed out shoebox condominium, and it will aggravate on -street parking problems. He felt that even though this is called a "hotel," it is a "motel." MOTION by Comm. Ingell, seconded by Comm. Ketz, to approve staffs alternative Resolution, P.C. 89-84, approving a conditional use permit and environmental negative declaration to allow serving of general alcoholic beverages at 2515 Pacific Coast Highway, "Hermosa Beach Hotel." Chinn Rue asked whether there is employee -allocated parking at this project. Mr. Schubach replied in the negative, explaining that the code makes a distinction between "hotels" and "motels." He continued by discussing the requirements for hotels versus motels, but noted that the code makes no distinction between guest parking and employee parking. Chmn. Rue asked whether a condition can be imposed requiring on-site employee parking in order to preclude employees from parking on the street. Comm. Moore did not think such a condition could be enforced. Comm. Peirce agreed, stating that most guests will arrive by car and will want to park in the lot. Mr. Chang stated that many guests arrive without cars; and since there is no restaurant, additional parking is not necessary. Comm. Moore noted that parking does seem to be inadequate; however, adding a condition to require employees to park on site would not solve the problem. Chmn. Rue said that the applicant can encourage his employees to either park on site, or to carpool. P.C. Minutes 12/5/89 AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION by Chmn. Rue, accepted by Comms. Ingell and Ketz, as maker and second, to add a condition requiring that employees must park on site. AYES: Comms. Ingell, Ketz, Moore, Chmn. Rue NOES: Comm. Peirce ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None Chmn. Rue stated that the decision of the Planning Commission can be appealed by writing to., the City Council within ten days. ITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PARKING PLAN AMENDMENT TO REDUCE THE SIZE TH EALERSHIP AND THE PARKING ARRANGEMENT AT 840 PACIFIC COAST HIG :1' AY. A E ED AR Mr. Schu Planning Co conditions in ch gave staff report: dated November 27, 1989. Staff recommend - d that the 'ssion approve this amendment to the conditional use permit, - bject to the e proposed resolution, and to approve repealing parking plan 8 -2. On January 6,-19: , the Planning Commission approved a conditional us permit, Resolution 87-2, for new and us - , automobile sales. On May 19, 1987, the P permit amendment, Resolu for Casey's new and used car Commission approved a parking . r . and a conditional use ns P.C. 87-30 and P.C. 87-32, to pro ' • e 15 off-site parking spaces es dealership. Casey's Isuzu has a history of vio ,. tion of its conditional u permits. City staff identified the violations in a field check and sent everal notices to the •usiness owner. In proceeding with the code enforcement procedure on A. _ust 15, 1989, • e staff gave a citation to the business manager. This project is located in the C-3 zone, with The lot size is 9600 square feet. Ten parking auto sales. The environmental determinatio The subject property is a rectangular -s the east, surrounded by a commerci west, 8th Street to the south, and a is accessed by 8th Street and con with four service bays. The applicant is requestin business size reduction, in different business. Thi square feet. Since n decreased, and the With this mo site, which in Hermos square fe ten par ge ' eral plan designation of general commercial. s , . ces are provided: The current use is used car is ategorically exempt. ed parcel • 0.22 acres, with a slope from west up to etail store to .e e north, Pacific Coast Highway to the sidential single -f. : y dwelling to the east. The property a two-story office b ► ' ding and a prefabricated building o modify the current conditional e hich "Not Part of Lease" area shown on property transfer reduced Casey's car deal car services are abandoned too, the volume o siness activities have been limited to only used car s permit as a result of the e site plan was leased to a lot area down to 9600 business activities is s. ation, the applicant is able to meet Hermosa Beach parking es the parking plan unnecessary. Parking requirements for au each Zoning Ordinance, Section 1152(B) is one parking space fo of the site area. The subject property has 9600 square feet and therefo spaces. quirements on - mobile sales each 1000 requires Th- applicant is providing ten parking spaces: seven are located in the southeast portion o p sperty, and three are in the service bays. The fourth space in the service bay will be used etailing. P.C. Minutes 12/5/89 c CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH MEMORANDUM DATE: December 4, 1989 TO: Planning Commission fl i FROM: City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft RE: CUP Number 89-14 - On -sale Alcoholic Beverages at the Hermosa Beach Hotel ********************************************************************* 1989 It is certainly proper for the Planning Commission to receive all the opinions of the staff on a particular project, even when those opinions are not in complete agreement. Accordingly, it has not been my practice to censure the staff opinion; rather, on occasion I ex- press a differing viewpoint. The purpose of this memo is to exercise this policy in regard to the above noted application. On this application, the staff and Planning Commission have to sepa- rate legitimate concerns regarding the number of alcohol related problems we have in our community, from what might be considered punitive restrictions that only serve to restrict businesses and pre- vent success in a competitive market. Obviously, it is difficult to determine where the line between these two actions can be placed. I feel that the alternatives presented in the staff report, dated De- cember 5, 1989, sufficiently addresses the potential for alcohol re- lated problems. They also allow the applicant to offer competitive services to potential customers. The applicant proposes to use a small area next to the meeting rooms to serve pastries in the morning and refreshments, including alcohol, during other hours. The applicant indicates that the professional advice from a major chain suggests that he will need to make these services available to customers in order to be competitive. As you may know, the applicant is appealing to business travelers in a very competitive market - he is offering an extra telephone in every room, a business area in the loft units, a tranquil Japanese garden set- ting, and a glass elevator to expose the panoramic views.,. He is agreeable to all the restrictions listed in the staff report, which are designed to be easily enforceable, especially in regards to the restrictions on signing and charging to the rooms only. I have discussed the matter with the Public Safety Director, who concurs that, as long as there is no dancing or live entertainment, the al- ternative will not attract customers beyond the hotel guests. Accordingly, I would recommend that the Planning Commission consider the alternative in the Planning Department's memo as a good balance between concerns about alcohol problems in our community and an interest in promoting a healthy business climate. evin B. Northcr"laft City Manager cc: Planning Department Public Safety Department James Lissner 2715 El Oeste Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 (213) 376-4626 19$9 December 4, 1989 Planning Commission City Of Hermosa Beach City Hall Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Hotel Hermosa CUP (liquor) Hearing, December 5, and later action to revise parking requirements for hotels and bars. Honorable Commissioners: This is my second letter to you today. The first letter was opposing a bar at Hotel Hermosa. This letter is contains a suggestion as to what we can do about the fait accompli at Hotel Hermosa, plus a general comment about our parking requirements for hotels and bars. First, about hotel parking requirements. Hotel Hermosa (HH) has built only 71 spaces, 1 space more than the absolute miminum, for 80 guest -rooms. Royal Pacific Inn (RPI), in Manhattan Beach, has 53 spaces for 45 rooms - 1 space for each guest room plus 8 spaces for employees. Calculating the same way and allowing 6 more employee spaces due to its greater size, HH would have to have 95 spaces in order to have the same level of parking as RPI. This says to me that HH's extra 24 cars are going to be parked in front of my house, with three shift changes a day. Even though it's too late to get HH to add more spaces on site, there is a remedy you can apply. When you do approve some kind of liquor permit for HH, even a permit as innocent as "service in guest rooms," I hope you will. condition it on a requirement that (1) they may not valet park, or otherwise move, guest cars out onto the public street, (2) they must provide an assigned parking place (perhaps in an off site lot) for each employee vehicle and company vehicle and ensure that these vehicles are never parked on the public street. For the future, I hope that you will require all new hotels and motels to have at least 1 space per guest room plus a reasonable allotment for staff parking, and gradually phase-in these higher parking requirements on all existing hotels and motels, perhaps over the next five years, whether they apply for a new CUP or not. This city's bar parking requirements do not provide sufficient parking either, at least in my experience - in my previous letter today I cited the P.J. Bretts problem this neighborhood has. I hope you will look into requiring more parking, perhaps one space for each 40 square feet (gross), for all new bar projects, and also look at a phase-in of this requirement for all existing bars - unless the bar can show that their parking never spills over into residential neighborhoods, not even during Monday night football. I live in this town and know that it's important for Hermosa to have a base of successful businesses. I do not wish to bankrupt any business by making them build parking - but I also don't see how a bar or hotel can be successful if they don't have sufficient quantities of secure & easy parking close by. A requirement for adequaf'e parking is in the best interest of our businesses, their guests, and the future of Hermosa. Sincerely, James Lissner 2715 El Oeste Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 (213) 376-4626 December 4, 1989 Planning Commission City Of Hermosa Beach City Hall Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 DEC ie Re: Hotel Hermosa CUP (liquor) Hearing, December 5 Honorable Commissioners: I live about 400 feet from Hotel Hermosa, 2515 P.C.H. Please do not approve a bar at Hotel Hermosa. Once the bar has its foot in the door, they will come back to you every six months or so, as my neighbor P.J. Bretts did, asking to add a little bit to the bar each time. First it will be a request for more square footage, then a request for longer hours, then a request for live music, perhaps another request for more footage... Right now, because the parking formula requires only one space for each 80 sqaure feet, we get a lot of spillover parking from P.J. Bretts, and we expect to get more due to your action two weeks ago removing curbside parking from PCH. We really don't need any more cars crowding our neighborhood due to a bar at Hotel Hermosa. Hotel Hermosa claims that they won't be able. to make it financially if they can't offer their guests a bar on the premises - that a hotel always has a bar. But I know of no recently built hotel in Hermosa or Manhattan that has a bar. The Royal Pacifc Inn, on Sepulveda in Manhattan, is a recent project of similar size, and they don't have a bar. If you call 'them and ask if they have a bar, they suggest that you could go next door to the Red Onion. The absence of a bar does not seem to have hurt their business at all. I suggest that if Hotel Hermosa does not have a bar, they could refer their guests over to P.J. Bretts, which is a 2 minute walk away, offers food, and is a much more interesting place (especially to a visitor from overseas) than any hotel bar could ever be. I do not object if Hotel Hermosa wishes to provide liquor service to their guests in their rooms, but please don't let them open a bar. Sincerely, 4A'a1/Tt r N/S-CLIzc1J1.,47 /°f9%/'/,VG /fEG»U/t/?IE/t/r- 4C7'v,q . GUEST ON1 /Z Qom/ HeNT /'S 70 SP/1c . /Y /We - 0 Alt/ e0Alt/ / xr,A s%fl c�:: ,_ai �i f' 2 / Vr „- ( t i- )DE § 1152 4 1152 1, and business uses. aggregate amount of ided for various uses entertainment, sports .lic assembly for more i seats, permanent or uare feet of gross floor greater. each 1,000 square feet :e plus 1 space for each except bowling alley s, rooming and board- :ig sleeping and guest Wiest rooms: in dormito ;idered a guest room, 2 est room with kitchen ace for each 80 square Bch 100 square feet of fools: 1 space for each ea. : 1 space for each 250 Bch 250 square feet of c utilities: Government Is of contact with the f employees, including c offices, public social notor vehicle offices: 1 APPENDIX A—ZONING 4 1152 space per 75 square feet of gross floor area for the first 20,000 square feet of the building(s), plus 1 space per 250 square feet of gross floor area for the remaining floor area. 7. Offices, medical: 5 spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. 8. Restaurants (other than walk-up, drive-through and drive-in: 1 space for each 100 square feet of gross floor area. 9. Restaurants, walk-up, drive-through and drive-in with- out adequate dining room facilities: 1 space for each 50 square feet of gross floor area, but not less than 10 spaces. 10. Retail, general retail commercial uses: 1 space for each 250 square feet of gross floor area. (F) Hospitals: 2 spaces for each patient bed. (G) Hospitals (mental), convalescent homes, guest homes, rest homes, sanitariums and similar institutions: 1 space for each 3 beds. (11) Hotels: 1 space for each unit for the first 50 units; 1 space per 1'/ units after 50; and 1 space per 2 units after 100 units. Hotels with facilities including restaurants, banquet rooms, conference rooms, commercial retail uses and sim- ilar activities shall provide parking for the various uses as computed separately in accordance with the provisions of this article. (I) Industrial uses: The parking requirements of this subsec- tion apply only to industrial uses; parking for commercial and other permitted uses in industrial zones shall provide the number of spaces asotherwise specified by this part. 1. Industrial uses of all types; except, public utility facil- ities and warehouses: 1 space for each vehicle used in conjunction with the use; plus, 1 space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area. 2. Warehouses, buildings or portions of buildings used exclusively for warehouse purposes: 1 space for each 1,000 square feet for the first 20,000 square feet; plus, Supp. No. 5-88 OF HERMOSA Bir'� PROJECT ADDRESS ..2...57/J' fp, C- /-/ pcgm em g H.. SEP 1Ar 1318! • 'Project Name (If applicable) il4CmosA 86 -4c -t -I Lor Z, of Tigi-cT 3374f 4I l TNC c!T y• LEGAL DESCRIPTION Gt'H 1r?s� ar-4 FfC6-1.) iN Fte c79r p zy e, ZONING 6- 3 ,4 -.df f6 APPLICANT INFORMATION: Name (s) /-/�i✓IZy G' Ef4'4 r Mailing Address /2-93g C�/2RiToS cett, 9 7ty -Phone (2/3) 929 -i-? -2 Applc.iant's Relationship totProper • APPLICANT•' S SIGNATURE - DATE 9 —4'/ PROJECT REQUEST Conditional Use Permit -Commercial _ Conditional Use Permit -Condominium Number of Units Development Agreement Environmental Staff Review 'Final Subdivision (Parcel/Tract Map) General Plan Lot Line Adjustment Lot Split Parking Plan Precise Plan Specific Plan Specific Plan Amendment Tentative Subdivision (Parcel/Tract Map) Zone Change Zone Variance TOTAL FEES S-�v FOR OFFICE USE ONLY- Date of submittal: Received by: DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT %o SERVG Li 4 R. P2 /fors -L C i . r$ G0nl✓ rc-acG (,rJ2 /vrf -77? L 'J 4 y o"/ THE - - FL o/ • ra-RATIN ffG&2s : /0;04 4M TO 2: 00 A, M) /N ¶HH- 146 (attach additional pages if necessary) OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT* We/I .. HE0✓12.. CffW6 being duly sworn, depose and say that _we/I' - are/am the dwner of the property involved in this application and that. the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are true and,correct to the best of our/my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this 27M, day o f g..`7"" 1 Qdt , 19412_. NOTARY 'UBLIC in and for the County State of California. * Signature requiied from ,, Signed i Owner's Address: /2i3� !i;-/sroPrlf• .OFFI _ Qs- -,4 . i.70 . . LNMWMaIhon NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN . • LOS ANGELES COUNTY •'.I ._ My Comm x1993 .•.<,.,;:^.'•,::'•. tlrre . i< P.APrl19; 'i.,.:.• -.' _:..:':<"::X': t:i+':':.::•...: -tY.�'?'+� . not owner �` a_,.. nesrow.."iia i (SEAL) I, the undersigned, do declare under penalty of perjury that I did on the ,._;)94-4 day of fa2� , 1947cdeposit into the United States postOffice, first class postage prepaid, a copy of the public notice attached as Exhibit "A" to each and every person attached as Exhibit "B". I warrant that the persons named on Exhibit "II" are all the persons required by applicable law to receive the public notice attached as Exhibit "A". • I understand and agree that it is my responsibility to cause these public notices to be made in an accurate and timely. fashion and agree to hold the City harmless against any liability whatsoever for any defect of said notice or notices. In the event an action is instituted in a court of com= petent jurisdiction which questions the legality of the public notices, then the City may in its exclusive discretion suspend all hearings or cause the cessation of any construction or of any use which was permitted as a result of a hearing which was held in accordance with the public notice. In the event that the court declares the notice or noticing procedure to be effective, then the City may in its exclusive discretion revoke any permits granted and cause any approvals given pursuant to those public notices to be declared null and void and I agree on behalf of myself and my heirs, assigns or successors-in-interes to hold the City harmless in connection therewith. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. I -have executed this declaration on this the day of , 1990 at IIermosa Beach, California. ZS -it— A ,c*EtAr Yimer 77Afcr // (name) f�. State 'of California ) County of Los•Angeles ) SS On this the 40114 day of me, Li r) g A „inn LE Public, personally appeared proved to me on the basis of _she, a1ti,. fa ! ory' evi. enc /to be the person(s) whose name(s) h oe subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. � (��.gnat ) (Capacity) , 19,0, before dersigne. Notary SGS �,�,� LINDA RIDDLE ,.e^ NOTAQ. .PUBLIC CALIFORNIA i ,�� va.,. ,%.I ..riicE IN 4�io J Lf . F. I.• MINTY My Comm. [><D. Aptll 9. 1993 • —22. February 6, 1990 Honorable Mayor and City Council Meeting Members of the City Council of February 13, 1990 MIDYEAR BUDGET REVIEW 1989-90 Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council approve the revisions to estimated revenue, appropriations and budget transfers as presented in the "City of Hermosa Beach Budget Summary, Midyear Review 1989-90", attached as Exhibit C. It is also recommended that the City Council approve the revision in the method of interest distribution. Background The City has conducted a Midyear Budget Review annually since fiscal year 1981-82. The review is a good tool to ensure that assumptions and estimates originally used to prepare the budget ten months earlier remain realistic. It also gives the City Council an opportunity to review fund balances that include actual balances left from the prior year in place of estimates used in budget preparation. All actions taken by Council in the first six months of the year that affect revenue, appropriations, transfers and fund balances are incorporated in the midyear presentations. Analysis The actual fund balances for the start of this fiscal year are higher than those assumed in the original budget by $1,215,277, primarily due to lower expenditures last year than budgeted and projects that carried forward into this budget year. Midyear revisions result in overall revenue increasing by 5% and total appropriations decreasing by 9%. The combined total of all funds, however, does not represent amounts that can be spent for general purposes so the focus of the analysis will be the General Fund, which is the main operating fund of the City. Keep in mind that all City Council actions approved after the adoption of the budget in June are incorporated in the Fund Summary (Exhibit C) so the amounts differ from the original budget. Revenue Excluding the proceeds from the sale of surplus lots (which was transferred to the Park, Recreation Facility Tax Fund and designated for open space acquisition), General Fund revenue estimates increase slightly by $67,608. Exhibit A presents all line item revenue accounts by fund with the recommended revision to estimates and an explanation for the revision. - 1 - 7 a Interest Allocation Currently, interest earned on investments is distributed to all funds on a proportional basis according to cash balance. It is recommended that three funds (CDBG Fund, Grant Fund, Insurance Fund) be exempt from this distribution, thereby increasing the interest for the other funds. Since the CDBG projects and other current grant projects are reimbursable, there is no requirement to apportion interest to those funds. Both the CDBG and Grant Fund have required advances from the General Fund to avoid a deficit position due to the fact that funds must be spent before grant funds are drawn down, therefore it seems inappropriate for those funds to accumulate interest. Insurance Fund costs are funded by charges to all departments. There is no requirement that this fund receive interest and in fact, including interest as revenue for the fund complicates the calculation of departmental charges. If no interest is received by the fund, all expenditures can be distributed to the departments without allowing for interest projections and adjustments. The City Treasurer concurs in this recommendation. Appropriations General Fund appropriation revisions result in a decrease of $159,775. Requests were submitted for increases of $91,707. This request for additions was reduced to $39,324, which, when combined with reductions of ($199,099) equals the decrease of $159,775. The revisions are reflected in Exhibit B which is organized by fund and department. Transfers Each department budget includes amount for the departments share of Insurance Fund costs. Since the appropriations for insurance are being reduced, the departments are receiving a reduction in their budgeted amount. This "credit" is achieved through transfers. The transfer from the Parking Fund to the General Fund is also being adjusted by $15,090 due to higher estimated net income in the Parking Fund. Fund Balance/Designations The revised fund balance in the General Fund is $2,063,266 for the end of fiscal year 1989-90, which is higher than the original budget by $378,464. As indicated, the actual beginning balance was higher than anticipated. Designations are amounts "reserved" by City Council for special purposes. The term "designation" is used rather than "reserve" because GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles) requirements specify that reserves must represent actual commitments rather than planned actions. 2 The City Manager previously presented to City Council a plan for funding of the purchase of surplus school property. It is recommended that funds now be formally designated for surplus school property in the following manner: General Fund Park, Recreation Facility Tax Fund $ 700,000 $ 550,000 $1,056,506 ($50,000 previously designated for Prospect Park plus $500,000) Proceeds of surplus lot sale Also, pending review by the City Attorney and response from the County to a request for a more specific accounting of the court fines owed to the County of Los Angeles, it is recommended that the amount of $104,305 be designated for Court Fines. The Contingency Designation represents the "savings" account or cushion for economic uncertainties. The amount of $659,159 is less than originally contained in the budget, however given the fact that the City is setting aside funds for a major acquisition, the amount is still reasonable at almost 7% of appropriations. All of the designations are entirely discretionary and may be amended or deleted by the City Council. A recap of the General Fund Designation is shown below: Asset Replacement $ 120,000 Capital Improvements 367,971 Contingency 659,159 Affordable Housing 111,831 Surplus School Property Purchase 700,000 Court Fines 104,305 Concur: Kevin B. Northd aft City Manager 3 $2,063,266 Viki Copeland Finance Director GENERAL FUND Taxes 3101 Current Year Secured 3102 Current Year Unsecured 3103 Prior Year Collections 3106 Supplemental Roll $8813 3107 Transfer Tax 3108 Sales Tax 3110 Cable TV Franchise 3111 Electric Franchise 3112 Cas Franchise 3113 Refuse Franchise 3114 Transient Occupancy 3115 Business License Licenses and Permits 3202 Dog Licenses 3203 Bicycle Li 3204 Building Permits 3205 Electric Permits 3206 Plumbing Permits 3207 Occupancy Permits 3209 Garage Sales 3210 Bingo Permits 3211 B Permits 3212 Animal /Foul Permits 3213 Animal Redemption Fee 3214 Amplified Sound Permit Fines & Forfeitures 3301 Vehicle Code Violations 3303 Court Fines/Police Dept Use of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 3402 Rents & Concessions 3403 Pier R 3404 Comm Ctr Leases 3405 Coes Ctr Rentals 3406 Coen Ctr Theatre 3411 Other Facilities 3412 Tennis Courts Intergovernmental/State 3504 In Lieu Off Highway 3505 In Lieu Motor Vehicle 3507 Highway Maintenance 3509 Homeowner Prop Tx Relief 3510 Post 3511 Stc-Svc Off Training 3514 Cigarette Tax 3515 Supplemental Subvention ESTIMATED REVENUE 12-31-89 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1989-90 MIDYEAR BUDGET REVIEW REVENUE WORKSHEET MIDYEAR REVISION INCREASE (DECREASE) JUSTIFICATION $2.557,596.00 $183,850.00 $220,000.00 $60,000.00 $129.087.00 $1,790,309.00 $101.678.00 $36.641.00 $33,973.00 $127,000.00 $176,814.00 $445,000.00 $5,861,948.00 $2,759,738.00 $183,850.00 $50,000.00 $60,000.00 $129,087.00 $1,790,309.00 $101,678.00 $36,641.00 $33,973.00 $140,000.00 $154,278.00 $410,000.00 $5,849,554.00 $202,142.00 ACTUAL COUNTY LEVY INCREASED OVER ESTIMATE! $0.00 BUT MOST OF INCREASE OFFSET BY AUDITOR - ($170,000.00) DIRECTED ACCOUNTING PROCEDURAL CHANGE $0.00 RELATED TO PRIOR YEAR COLLECTIONS. AS $0.00 NOTED IN AUDIT, AMOUNTS NOT EXPECTED IN $0.00 60 DAYS ARE NOT ACCRUED. $0.00 $0.00. $0.00 $13,000.00 REFLECTS JULY'89 BFI RATE INCREASE(10.87%) ($22,536.00) FIRST HALF LESS THAN ANTICIPATED; LOWER ($35,000.00) CROSS RECEIPTS REPORTED, FEWER OUT OF CITY LICENSES ($12,394.00) $14,000.00 $17,000.00 $3,000.00 CANVASSING $200.00 $300.00 $100.00 INCREASED LICENSING BY D.A.R.E. OFFICERS $170.000.00 $170,000.00 $0.00 $38,000.00 $38,000.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $0.00 $65.00 $65.00 $0.00 $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 $1,800.00 $1,360.00 ($440.00) FEWER REQUESTS $150.00 $650.00 $500.00 MORE PERMITS ISSUED $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $0.00 $390.00 $390.00 $0.00 $264,205.00 $267,365.00 $3,160.00 $130,000.00 $110.000.00 $45.000.00 $40.000.00 $175,000.00 $150,000.00 $145,820.00 $189,105.00 $1,450.00 $1,450.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $68,000.00 $80,000.00 $47,000.00 $47,000.00 $34,000.00 $34,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 ($20,000.00) TRAFFIC DIVISION STARTUP DELAYED ($5.000.00) DUE TO VACANCIES ($25.000.00) $43,285.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $0.00. $0.00 $12,000.00 REVISION REFLECTS CURRENT LEASES $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $376,770.00 $432.055.00 $55,285.00 $393.00 $393.00 $708,891.00 $708,891.00 $3.500.00 $3,500.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $14,000.00 $48,000.00 $8,500.00 $8,500.00 $47.323.00 $47,323.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $34,000.00 REIMBURSEMENTS FROM STATE FOR NEW $0.00- HIRES AND ACTIVE TRAINING PROGRAM $0.00 $0.00 $847.607.00 $881,607.00 $34,000.00 Exhibit A Current Service Charges 3801 Residential Inspection 3802 Sign Review 3803 Environmental Impact 3806 Board of Appeals 3808 Zone Variance Review 3809 Tentative Map Review 3810 Final Map Review 3811 Zone Change Review 3812 Conditional Use Review 3813 Plan Check Fees 3814 Planning/Zoning Appeal 3815 Public Works Services 3817 Special Curb Marking 3818 Police Services 3819 Jail Services 3820 Trusty Admin Fee 3821 Fingerprint Service 3823 Special Event Security 3824 Vehicle Inspection Fees 3825 Public Notice Posting 3826 Roc Programs/Classes 3827 Library Grounds Plaint 3831 Street Cut Inspection 3834 Encroachment Permit 3836 Fumigation Inspect Fee 3837 Returned Check Charge 3838 Sale of Map/Publications 3839 Photocopy Charges 3840 Ambulance Transport 3841 Police Towing 3856 General Plan Amendment 3857 Parking Plan Application 3858 Tenant Refuse Billing 3859 Refuse Lien Fee 3861 Hazardous Matl Permit 3862 Alarm Permit Fee Other Revenue 3901 Sale of Real/Per. Property 3902 Refund./Reimb Prev Yr 3903 Contribution. Non Govt 3904 General Miscellaneous 3913 City Office. Recycling FUND TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE 12-31-89 MIDYEAR REVISION INCREASE (DECREASE) JUSTIFICATION $15,000.60 $700.00 $7,590.00 $300.00 $3.520.00 $5,400.00 $1,500.00 $1,800.00 $19,520.00 $115,000.00 $2.398.00 $10,000.00 $300.00 $15,000.00 $23,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $15,000.00 $3.000.00 $100.00 $30,650.00 $4,517.00 $15,000.00 $17.616.00 $7.500.00 $800.00 $2.000.00 $700.00 $8,500.00 $26,500.00 $900.00 $960.00 $200.00 $500.00 $2,500.00 $0.00 $363,971.00 $5.000.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $180.00 $6,680.00 $7,896,181.00 $11,000.00 $900.00 $4,230.00 $300.00 $1,280.00 $5,400.00 $3,050.00 $1,800.00 $23,856.00 $115,000.00 $2,398.00 $10,000.00 $300.00 $18,000.00 $10,200.00 $187.00 $3,000.00 $45,000.00 $3,000.00 $100.00 $30.650.00 $4,517.00 $15,000.00 $17,616.00 $7,500.00 $800.00 $1.000.00 $1,000.00 $8,500.00 $26,500.00 $900.00 $960.00 $200.00 $500.00 S1.000.00 $1,000.00 $376,644.00 $1.061,669.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $64.00 ($4,000.00) SLOWER RESIDENTIAL SALES $200.00 MORE REQUESTS ($3,360.00) FEWER PROJECTS 1ST HALF $0.00 ($2,240.00) FEWER REQUESTS $0.00 $1,550.00 MORE PROJECTS $0.00 $4,336.00 MORE PROJECTS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 INCREASE IN POLICE REPORT REQUESTS ($12,800.00) STAFF REDUCTION /D.U.I. OFFENDERS ONLY ($2,813.00) COURT DISCONTINUED PROGRAM $0.00 $30,000.00 INCREASE IN SUMMER FILM REQUESTS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ($1,000.00) BASED ON 1ST HALF SALES $300.00 MORE REQUESTS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 (S1.500.001 PR(N:RAMS IMPLEMENTED LATER THAN ANTICIPATED $1,000.00 ALARM PERMITS PROGRESSING WELL $1,063.233.00 $9,020,458.00 PAGE 2 $12.673.00 $1,056.669.00 REFLECTS SALE OF 1ST ST/2ND ST LOTS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ($116.00) COST OF TRANSPORTING TOO HIGH DONATING TO SCHOOL $1.056,553.00 $1,124,277.00 LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND Taxes 3101 Current Year Secured 3103 Prior Year Collections Use of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income FUND TOTAL PARKING FUND Fines & Forfeitures 3302 Court Fines/Parking Use of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income 3407 Parking Lot Rental 3409 Lot B 3413 VPD Lease Current Service Charges 3842 Parking Meters 3843 Parking Permits: Annual 3844 Daily Parking Permits 3845 VPD Lot Permits/Daily 3846 VPD Lot Permits/Monthly 3847 Validation Stamps 3848 Driveway Permits 3849 Guests Permits 3850 Contractor's Permits Other Revenue 3902 Refunds/Reimb Prev Yr 3904 General Miscellaneous FUND TOTAL STATE GAS TAX FUND Use of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income Intergovernmental/State 3501 Section 2106 Allocation 3502 Section 2107 Allocation 3503 Section 2107.5 Allocation 3522 TDA Article 3 (SB821) FUND TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE 12-31-89 MIDYEAR REVISION INCREASE (DECREASE) JUSTIFICATION $322,094.00 $322,094.00 $26,000.00 - $26,000.00 $348,094.00 $61,230.00 $409,324.00 $348,094.00 $81,550.00 $429,644.00 $1,585,746.00 $1,427,568.00 $18,830.00 $16,707.00 $22,990.00 $70,000.00 $23,057.00 $18,792.00 $22,990.00 $70,000.00 $128,527.00 $134,839.00 $600,000.00 $185,000.00 $1,658.00 $6,200.00 $8,680.00 $15,000.00 $250.00 $900.00 $2,000.00 $819,688.00 $50.00 $50.00 $100.00 $2,534,061.00 $700,000.00 $185,000.00 $1,000.00 $8,000.00 $10,000.00 $22,000.00 $600.00 $900.00 $1,500.00 $929,000.00 $4,230.00 $50.00 $4,280.00 $2,495,687.00 $18,685.00 $23,963.00 $85,690.00 $85,690.00 $176,184.00 $176,184.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $10,764.00 $5,568.00 $276,638.00 $271,442.00 $295,323.00 $295,405.00 PAGE 3 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $20,320.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $20,320.00 ($158,178.00) $4,227.00 $2,085.00 A & H LOT RENTAL,ALANO CLUB INCREASE $0.00 $0.00 $6,312.00 $100,000.00 FIRST HALF REVENUES HIGHER $0.00 ($658.00) FEWER PERMITS SOLD $1,800.00 BASED ON FIRST HALF SALES $1,320.00 BASED ON FIRST HALF SALES $7,000.00 BASED ON FIRST HALF SALES $350.00 NEW ORDINANCE, MORE SOLD $0.00 ($500.00) FEWER SOLD $109,312.00 $4,180.00 ALANO CLUB BACK RENT $0.00 $4,180.00 ($38,374.00) $5,278.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ($5,196.00) ACTUAL ALLOCATION AVAILABLE ($5,196.00) $82.00 ESTIMATED MIDYEAR REVENUE REVISION 12-31-89 INCREASE (DECREASE) JUSTIFICATION COUNTY GAS TAX FUND Use of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income $1,745.00 Intergovernmental/County 3601 County Aid to Cities $48,000.00 FUND TOTAL $49,745.00 PARK & RECREATION FACTY FUND Taxes 3116 Park Rec Facility Tax Use of Money 6 Property 3401 Interest Income $50,000.00 $25,405.00 Other Revenue 3910 Perk/Recreation in Lieu $175,000.00 FUND TOTAL $250,405.00 UUT RAILROAD R/W FUND Taxes 3120 Utility User Tax $816,508.00 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income $20,525.00 FUND TOTAL $837,033.00 67. UTILITY USER TAX FUND Taxes 3120 Utility User Tax $1,224,762.00 Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income $2,890.00 FUND TOTAL $1,227,652.00 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLK GRT FD Use of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income $0.00 Intergovernmental/Federal 3713 Housing Rehabilitation 3714 Project Toucfh 3715 CDBC Administration 3716 So Bay Free Clinic 3717 Juvenile Diversion 3718 So Bay Coalition Alive 3719 1736 House FUND TOTAL $92,072.00 $7,670.00 $12,276.00 $4,200.00 $3,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,544.00 $122,762.00 $122,762.00 $2,145.00 $0.00 $2,.145.00 $17,500.00 $46,167.00 $240,000.00 $400.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT ($48,000.00) COUNTY TO DO PROJECT FUNDS DIRECTED TO COUNTY ($47,600.00) ($32,500.00) DECREASED APARTMENT CONSTRUCTION $20,762.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $65,000.00 INCREASED CONDO CONSTRUCTION; FEE INCREASE 1-23-90 INCORPORATED $303,667.00 $53,262.00 $816,508.00 $0.00 $31,455.00 $10,930.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $847,963.00 $10,930.00 $1,224,762.00 $0.00 $4,765.00 $1,875.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $1,229,527.00 $1,875.00 $1,638.00 $1,638.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $92,072.00 $7,670.00 $12,276.00 $4,200.00 $3,000.00 $253.00 $2,544.00 $122,015.00 $123,653.00 PAGE 4 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ($747.00) DROPPED OUT OF PROGRAM $0.00 ($747.00) $891.00 PROPOSITION A' FUND Taxes 3117 Proposition A Transit 3121 Subregnl Incentive Funds Use of Money 6 Property 3401 Interest Income C Service Charges 3854 Fares Dial A Ride 3855 Bus P FUND TOTAL GRANT FUND Use of Money 6 Property 3401 Interest Income Inters 1/State 3517 Office of Traffic Sfty 3528 Per Capita Grant 3529 Wildlife Grant Intergovernment/Federal 3701 Federal Aid Urban 3712 Fed F.erg Mgmt Agency FUND TOTAL CROSSING GUARD FUND Taxes 3101 Current Year Secured 3103 Prior Year Collections Use of Money 6 Property 3401 Interest Income FUND TOTAL SEWER FUND Use of Money 6 Property 3401 Interest Income Intergovernmental/County 3602 Beach Outlet Maintenance Current Service Charges 3828 Serer Connection Fee 3829 Sever Demolition Fes 3832 Serer Lateral lnstalltn FUND TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE 12-31-89 i MIDYEAR REVISION INCREASE (DECREASE) JUSTIFICATION $200.000.00 $200.000.00 $16,331.00 $16,331.00 $216.331.00 $216.331.00 $12,270.00 $17.463.00 $7.800.00 $7.800.00 $4.000.00 $4.000.00 $11,800.00 $11.800.00 $240,401.00 $245,594.00 $2,315.00 $3,340.00 $45.500.00 $0.00 $60.000.00 $58,000.00 $20.204.00 $20,204.00 $125,704.00 $78.204.00 $585.520.00 $200.000.00 589,738.00 $89,738.00 $675,258.00 $289,738.00 $803,277.00 $371,282.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,193.00 ACCRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,193.00 $1,025.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT (545.500.00) GRANT NOT APPROVED ($2.000.00) ACTUAL GRANT AMOUNT $0.00 ($47.500.00) COUNTY TO DO PROJECT; ($385.520.00) FUNDS DIRECTED TO COUNTY $0.00 ($385,520.00) ($431,995.00) $73,495.00 $73,495.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $5.000.00 $0.00 $78.495.00 578,495.00 50.00 $1.010.00 $1,561.00 $551.00 $79,505.00 $80.056.00 •$551.00 $60.610.00 $81,500.00 $20.890.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT 55.000.00 55,000.00 $0.00 525,000.00 $18,000.00 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $3,000.00 $1,500.00 FEWER PROJECTS WITH INCREASE ($7.000.00) IN DENSITY, DEMOLITION CREDIT $0.00 ($1.500.00) REDUCED ACTIVITY BY CITY CREWS; USING PRIVATE CONTRACTORS $29,200.00 $20,700.00 ($8,500.00) $94,810.00 $107.200.00 512,390.00 PAGE 5 4 ASSETS SEIZURE/FORFEITURE FUND Fines & Forfeitures 3304 Forfeited Funds Use of Money and Property 3401 Interest Income ESTIMATED MIDYEAR INCREASE REVENUE REVISION (DECREASE) JUSTIFICATION 12-31-89 $200,000.00 $5,900.00 FUND TOTAL $205,900.00 FIRE PROTECTION FUND Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income Other Revenue 3912 Fire Flow Fee FUND TOTAL INSURANCE FUND Use Of Money & Property 3401 Interest Income ' $4.980.00 $200,000.00 $0.00 $7,810.00 $1,910.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $207,810.00 $1.910.00 $9.533.00 $4.553.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $130.000.00 $100.000.00 $134,980.00 $109,533.00 $37.785.00 FUND TOTAL $37.785.00 GRAND TOTALS ($30,000.00) DEMOLITION CREDIT, FEWER PROJECTS WITH INCREASE IN DENSITY ($25.447.00) $44,948.00 $7,163.00 AGGRESSIVE CASH MANAGEMENT $44,948.00 $7,163.00 $15,219,144.00 $15.914,572.00 $695,428.00 PAGE 6 DEPARTMENT/ ACCOUNT GENERAL FUND City. Prosecutor/ Contract Services 1989-90 MIDYEAR REVIEW SUMMARY OF APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS AMOUNT Increase/ (decrease) JUSTIFICATION Additional funds, new code enforcement $ 10,000 prosecutor. Assumes twelve office hours per month plus approximately thirty five hours of court time or other hours Finance/Contract Services $ (30,000) User fee study, action by City Council to receive and file Business License/ Salaries Police /Uniforms /Radio Maintenance $ (22,206) Reduction of administrative aide posi- tion to clerk typist. Vacancy for first half of year $ 3,600 Purchase of flat badges to improve morale and image. Sale of old badges to officers will generate $1,410 $ 1,500 Unanticipated repairs to old radios. Appropriation should be adequate for remainder of year /D.A.R.E. Program $ 1,581 Appropriation of funds donated for D.A.R.E. program. Funds were deposited to revenue account for contributions. /K-9 Program $ 8,323 Appropriation of funds donated for K-9 program. Balance of donations, $3,105, will be appropriated when needed. Donations were deposited to revenue account for contributions. Community Resources /Vacation Sick Payoff $ 4,885 Payment to departing director for accrued time. /Accrual cashout $ 2,435 Higher cashout of accrued time per Teamster Memorandum of Understanding Exhibit B — 1 — r /Contract Services CIP 141 Street Rehabilitation CIP 610 Theatre Air Conditioning CIP 615 Community Center Fire Alarm System CIP 604 Various Building Improvements LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND CIP 202 Hermosa Avenue Lighting PARKING FUND Parking Enforcement /Salaries /Employee benefits /Retirement STATE GAS TAX FUND $ 4,000 Increased instructor fees due to high class enrollment $(100,000) Project to be done in 90-91 after pur- chase of pavement management system $ (6,905) Project completed under budget $ (39,988) Project scope, cost reduced $ 3,000 Rooftop air conditioner or cooler for jail area; adjust heat per Grand Jury recommendation ($ 159,775) $ (14,500) Project completed under budget $ (14,500) $ (31,100) Recommending reduction of two author- ized General Service Officer positions. Amount represents remainder of fiscal year $ ( 3,276) Benefits related to above $ ( 4,636) Benefits related to above $ (39,012) CIP 160 Concrete Street Repairs $ (79,493) Project start next fiscal year, to be bid summer 1990 $ (79,493) •P UUT RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY Lease payments, Parcel A $ 145,545 February 15 payment relating to cer- tificates of participation for purchase of Parcel A CIP 514 Purchase of Right -of -Way $1,468,004 Reflect appropriation for purchase of Right -of -Way (in addition to C.O.P proceeds) CDBG FUND South Bay Coalition Alive PROP A FUND CIP 149 Bus Benches GRANT FUND CIP 137 Overlay Valley and Ardmore $1,613,549 $ (747) Withdrew from program $ (747) $(30,000) Eliminated bus shelters, reduced cost of bus benches $(30,000) $(486,034) County Aid to Cities and FAU funds to be assigned to county for project ad- ministration CIP 151 Traffic Engineering $( 45,500) Office of Traffic Safety grant not funded by State CIP 512 Basketball Courts $( 2,000) Final amount approved by State ($58,000) $(533,534) SEWER FUND CIP 405 Sanitary Sewer Target Area 3 $( 20,808) Project completed under budget CIP 406 Sanitary Sewer Target Area 4 $(2,120,592) Project design completion 4/90, construction funds not needed until next fiscal year 3 r` '1 • CIP 407 Sewer Bond Issue $( 10,500) Project estimated to be completed under budget $(2,151,900) ASSET SEIZURE/FORFEITURE FUND Special Investigations Unit/Motor Fuels $ 6,000 Funds for gasoline not budgeted for the narcotics unit when placed into operation $ 6,000 INSURANCE FUND Liability Insurance /Contract Services $(166,822) Release of budgeted reserve premium per ICRMA (insurance pool) requirements. May be released if not used by 1/1/90 /Claims Settlements /Equipment Worker's Compensation/ Contract Services GRAND TOTAL 2,590 Increase in claims administrator contract $ 10,000 Additional tort defense costs. $40,000 currently owed for attorney fees and costs. Current budget $50,000 $ 42,000 $25,000 in deductible billing recently received from 1981-83 to be appropri- ated pending exploration of options with City Attorney . $17,000 due to larger number of claims $ 400 Lateral files to accommodate transfer of claims files from City Clerk's office to Risk Manager $( 21,000) Reduction in excess Worker's compen- sation premium realized due to change to ICRMA (insurance pool) and change in self-insured retention from $250,000 to $300,000 $(132,832) $(1,522,244) CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BUDGET SUMMARY 1989-90 MIDYEAR REVIEW GENERAL LIGHTING PARKING STATE GAS COUNTY GAS PARK REC FUND FUND FUND TAX FUND TAX FUND FAC. TAX FUND ESTIMATED REVENUE Taxes $5,849,554 $348,094 EO SO EO $17,500 Licenses/Permits $267,365 SO $0 $0 SO SO Fines/Forfeitures $150,000 SO $1,427,568 SO SO SO Use of Money/Property $432,055 $81,550 $134,839 $23,963 $2,145 $46,167 Intergovernmental/State $881,607 SO $0 $271,442 SO SO Intergovernmental/County SO SO $0 SO SO SO Intergovernmental/Federal SO SO SO $0 SO SO Current Service Charges $376,644 SO $929,000 SO SO $0 Other Revenue $1,063,233 SO $4,280 SO SO $240,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE $9,020,458 1429,644 $2,495,687 $295,405 $2,145 $303,667 ACTUAL FUND BALANCE 7/1/89 $2,672,870 $1,316,778 $1,261,704 $288,571 $37,084 $638,187 INTERFUND TRANSFERS IN $1,772,875 $492 $3,033 $10,000 $1,056,506 TOTAL ESTIMATED FUNDS AVAILABLE $13,466,203 $1,746,914 $3,760,424 $593,976 139,229 $1,998,360 PROPOSED APPROPRIATIONS Operating Budget $8,776,330 1320,296 $936,893 Capital Outlay 5492,984 $2,000 $111,739 Capital Improvements $399,792 $32,000 $15,000 1373,524 $86,570 SUBTOTAL PROPOSED APPROPRIATIONS $9,669,106 1354,296 $1,063,632 $373,524 $86,570 INTERFUND TRANSFERS OUT $1,733,831 $20,463 $1,430,908 $47,272 15,000 $5,000 TOTAL FUNDS APPROPRIATED $11,402,937 $374,759 $2,494,540 5420,796 $5,000 $91,570 . ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE $2,063,266 * $1,372,155 $1,265,884 ** $173,180 *** $34,229 $1,906,790 6/30/90 **** *DESIGNATED FOR: ASSET REPLACEMENT $120,000 CAP IMPROVEMENTS $367,971 CONTINGENCY $659,159 AFFORD HSG $111,831 SURPLUS SCHOOL $700,000 PROPERTY PURCHASE COURT FINES $104,305 **RETSD EARNINGS **** RESERVED $14,846 DESIGNATED FOR AND FIXED ASSETS SURPLUS SCHOOL *** RESERVE PROPERTY PURCHASE BIKE PATH $550,000 11,056,506 (LOT SALE PROCEEDS) Exhibit C 4 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BUDGET SUMMARY 1989-90 MIDYEAR REVIEW UUT RR RIGHT 6%UUT CDBG PROP A GRANT OF WAY FUND FUND FUND FUND FUND ESTIMATED REVENUE Taxes $816,508 $1,224,762 EO $216,331 SO Licenses/Permits SO $0 SO SO SO Fines/Forfeitures 50 SO SO $0 $0 Use of Money/Property $31,455 $4,765 $1,638 $17,463 $3,340 Intergovernmental/State SO SO SO $0 $78,204 Intergovernmental/County SO SO $0 SO SO Intergovernmental/Federal $0 SO $122,015 SO $289,738 Current Service Charges SO SO SO $11,800 Other Revenue $O SO SO $0 TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE $847,963 $1,229,527 $123,653 $245,594 $371,282 ACTUAL FUND BALANCE 7/1/89 $1,511,468 $166,297 SO $257,968 $212,276 INTERFUND TRANSFERS IN $340 $16,388 TOTAL ESTIMATED FUNDS AVAILABLE $2,359,431 $1,395,824 $123,653 $503,902 $599,946 PROPOSED APPROPRIATIONS Operating Budget Capital Outlay $145,545 Capital Improvements $1,578,004 SUBTOTAL PROPOSED APPROPRIATIONS INTERFUND TRANSFERS OUT TOTAL FUNDS APPROPRIATED ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE 6/30/90 $1,723,549 $15,000 $1,738,549 $620,882 * *DESIGNATED FOR OPEN SPACE $200,000. S14354,771 $1,354,771 541,053 *ATSF PURCHASE (SEAVIEW PROCEEDS) $296,683 $122,015 $243,099 $25,000 $122,015 $268,099 $1,015 $269,114 $1,638 $234,788 $345,530 $345,530 $345,530 $254,416 ti CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BUDGET SUMMARY 1989-90 MIDYEAR REVIEW CR GRD SEWER ASSET FORF FIRE PROTECT INSURANCE FUND FUND FUND FUND FUND ESTIMATED REVENUE TOTAL Taxes ,578,495 0 0 SO SO $8,551,244 Licenses/Permits SO 0 50 50 50 5267,365 Fines/Forfeitures SO 0 5200,000 SO $0 51,777,568 Use of Money/Property 51,561 581,500 57,810 $9,533 544,948 $924,732 Intergovernmental/State 50 SO SO SO SO S1,231,253 Intergovernmental/County SO $5,000 $0 SO 50 55,000 Intergovernmental/Federal SO SO SO SO SO 5411,753 Current Service Charges SO 520,700 SO SO 50 $1,338,144 Other Revenue SO SO SO 5100,000 SO $1,407,513 TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE 580,056 5107,200 5207,810 $109,533 $44,948 S15,914,572 ACTUAL FUND BALANCE 7/1/89 540,811 $1,107,250 $134,028 $251,784 $161,841 $10,058,917 INTERFUND TRANSFERS IN S303 $1,155,753 SO 5768,100 54,783,790 TOTAL ESTIMATED FUNDS AVAILABLE $121,170 S2,370,203 5341,838 5361,317 5974,889 S30,757,279 PROPOSED APPROPRIATIONS Operating Budget $59,483 S136,668 S195,612 $170,792 $768,100 S11,729,288 Capital Outlay S9,070 $29,600 5790,938 Capital Improvements 5248,500 $3,103,920 SUBTOTAL PROPOSED APPROPRIATIONS 559,483 5394,238 5225,212 S170,792 $768,100 515,624,146 INTERFUND TRANSFERS OUT $6,314 530,540 S14,515 5325 $118,836 54,783,790 TOTAL FUNDS APPROPRIATED S65,797 $424,778 S239,727 S171,117 5886,936 $20,407,936 ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE S55,373 S1,945,425 S102,111 $190,200 $87,953 * S10,349,343 6/30/90 *CONTINGENCY $50,000 r c 3 .1 5 6 7 6 G 10 II 12 :4 17 111 19 21 • 23 r f • • r z4 25 26 27 79 30 31 32 3 34 3 37 36 39 12 43 44 45 46 47 46 49 50 5, 52 53 55 50 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE—FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) TIME 14:13:29 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 3 e PAGE 0001 DATE 01/22/90 50. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREAL1ZED FUND 013J DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3100 TAXES 3101 /CURRENT YEAR SECURED 2, 557, 596. 00 1, 115, 046. 35 1, 115, 046. 35 1, 442, 549. 65 43. 5 3102 /CURRENT YEAR UNSECURED 183, 850. 00 0. 00 167, 852. 33 15, 997. 67 91. 2 3103 /PRIOR YEAR COLLECTIONS 220, 000. 00 3, 726. 15 160, 072. 09 59, 927. 91 72. 7 3106. /SUPPLEMENTAL ROLL SB813 60, 000. 00 3, 614. 26— 31, 447. 92 28, 552. 08 52. 4 3107 /TRANSFER TAX 129, 087. 00 7, 341. 67 56, 086. 53 73, 000. 47 43. 4 3108 /SALES TAX 1, 790, 309. 00 231, 629. 71 967, 022. 28 823, 286. 72 54. 0 3110 /CABLE TV FRANCHISE 101, 678. 00 0. 00 54, 958. 58 46, 719. 42 54. 0 3111 /ELECTRIC FRANCHISE 36, 641. 00 0. 00 0. 00 36, 641.00 0. 0 3112 /GAS FRANCHISE 33, 973. 00 0. 00 0. 00 33, 973. 00 0. 0 . 3113 /REFUSE FRANCHISE 127, 000. 00 28, 353. 45 71, 743. 90 _ 55, 256. 10 56. 4 3114 /TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY 176, 814. 00 0. 00 91, 238. 16 85, 575. 84 51. 6 3115 /BUSINESS LICENSE 445, 000. 00 27, 081. 31 169, 584. 62 275, 415. 38 38. 1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5, 861, 948. 00 1, 409, 564. 38 2, 885, 052. 76 2, 976, 895. 24 49. 2 • 3200 LICENSES AND PERMITS 3202 /DOG LICENSES • 14, 000. 00 1, 259. 50 14, 333. 00 333. 00— 102. 3 3203 /BICYCLE LICENSES 200. 00 9. 00 192. 85 7. 15 96. 4 3204 /BUILDING PERMITS 170, 000. 00 10, 058. 63 79, 831. 82 90, 168. 18 46. 9 3205 /ELECTRIC PERMITS 38, 000. 00 2, 763. 00 26, 325. 50 11, 674. 50 69. 2 3206 /PLUMBING PERMITS 30, 000. 00 2, 547. 00 19, 699. 00 10, 301. 00 65. 6 3207 /OCCUPANCY PERMITS 6, 000. 00 225. 00 1, 950. 00 4, 050. 00 32. 5 3209 /GARAGE SALES 65.00 6.00 45.00 20.00 69.2 3210 /BINGO PERMITS 100. 00 0. 00 0. 00 100. 00 0. 0 3211 /BANNER PERMITS 1, 800. 00 100. 00 200. 00 1, 600. 00 11. 1 3212 /ANIMAL/FOWL PERMITS 150. 00 100. 00 550. 00 400. 00— 366. 6 3213 /ANIMAL REDEMPTION FEE 3, 500. 00 385. 00 2, 777. 00 723. 00 79. 3 3214 /AMPLIFIED SOUND PERMIT 390.00 60. 00 210. 00 180. 00 53. 8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 264, 205. 00 17, 513. 13 146, 114. 17 118, 090. 83 55. 3 3300 FINES & FORFEITURES 3301 /VEHICLE CODE VIOLATIONS 130, 000. 00 0. 00 42, 256. 73 87, 743. 27 32. 5 3303 /COURT FINES/POLICE DEPT 45, 000. 00 0. 00 19, 983. 59 25, 016. 41 44. 4 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 175, 000. 00 0. 00 62, 240. 32 112, 759. 68 35. 5 3400 USE OF MONEY 1., PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 145, 820. 00 3, 569. 56— 71, 260. 81 74, 559. 19 48. 8 3402 /RENTS E, CONCESSIONS 1, 450. 00 71. 56 871. 63 578. 37 60. 1 3403 /PIER REVENUE 10, 500. 00 476. 10 6, 882. 10 3.617. 90 65. 5 3404 /COMM CTR LEASES 68, 000. 00 5, 921. 00 41, 873. 00 26, 127.00 61. 5 3405 /COMM CTR RENTALS 47, 000. 00 2, 833. 00 27, 636. 50 19, 363. 50 58. 8 3406 /COMM CTR THEATRE. 34, 000. 00 3, 229. 50 15, 618. 00 18, 382. 00 45. 9 3411 /OTHER FACILITIES 60, 000. 00 4, 591. 00 40, 507. 00 19, 493. 00 67. 5 3 6 10 II 14 15 16 5, ]+I 1 f' 2 9 FINANCE-FA484 TIME 14:13:29 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION 001 GENERAL FUND 10 14 15 16 DEPARTMENT 0000 n Ib 19 z0 21 z z; 26 27 20 9 30 31 32 33 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE PAGE 0002 DATE 01/22/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3412 /TENNIS COURTS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL/STATE 3504 3505 3507 3508 3509 3510 3511 3514 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 10, 000. 00 376, 770. 00 847. 75 14, 400. 35 5. 751. 00 210, 400. 04 UNREALIZED BALANCE 4, 249. OG 57.5 _ 166, 369. 96 55. 8 /IN LIEU OFF HIGHWAY /IN LIEU MOTOR VEHICLE /HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE /MANDATED COSTS /HOMEOWNER PROP TX RELIE /POST /STC -SVC OFF TRAINING /CIGARETTE TAX 3800 CURRENT SERVICE CHARGES 3801 /RESIDENTIAL INSPECTION 3802 /SIGN REVIE.J 3803 /ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 3006 /BOARD OF APPEALS 3808 /ZONE VARIANCE REVIEW 3809 /TENTATIVE MAP REVIEW 34 35 36 3810 3811 3812 30 39 3813 3814 3815 40 41 42 3817 3818 3319 43 44 45 46 1, 40 49 0 51 3820 3821 3823 3824 3825 3826 52 3 54 55 56 7 r• 3827 3831 3834 3836 3337 3838 393. 00 708, 891. 00 3, 500. 00 0. 00 65, 000. 00 /FINAL MAP REVIEW /ZONE CHANGE REVIEW /CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW /PLAN CHECK FEES /PLANNING/ZONING APPEAL /PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES /SPECIAL CURB MARKING /POLICE SERVICES /JAIL SERVICES /TRUSTY ADMIN FEE /FINGERPRINT SERVICE /SPECIAL EVENT SECURITY /VEHICLE INSPECTION FEES /PUBLIC NOTICE PDSTING /REC PROGRAMS/CLASSES /LIBRARY GROUNDS MAINT /STREET CUT INSPECTION /ENCROACHMENT PERMIT /FUMIGATION INSPECT FEE /RETURNED CHECK CHARGE /SALE OF MAPS/PUBLICATIO 14, 000. 00 B, 500. 00 47, 323. 00 84'7, 607. 00 15, 000. 00 700. 00 7,590.00 300. 00 3, 520. GO 5,400.00 1, 500. 00 1,800.00 19, 520.00 115, 000. 00 2,398.00 10, 000. 00 300. 00 15, 000. 00 23, 000. 00 . 3,000.00 3,000,00 15, 000. 00 3, 000. 00 100. 00 30, 650. 00 4, 517.00 . 15, 000.00 17, 616. 00 7, 500. 00 800.00 2, 000. 00 0. 00 41, 044. 15 0. 00 0. 00 9, 868. 43 7, 714. 25 0. 00 4, 073. 59 63, 500. 42 680. 00 100. 00 230. 00 75. 00 0. 00 225. 00 125. 00 450. CO 640. 00 13, 515. 17 266. 50 137. 04 0. 00 1, 162. 50 680. 00 0. 00 121. 50 500. 00 144. 00 10. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2. 325. 00 1. 597. 50 479. 40 50. 60 19. 80 203. 83 139. 17 339, 683. 93 369, 207. 07 1, 043 48 2, 456. 52 6, 755. 00 9, 868. 43 27, 377. 77 6, 755. 00- 55, 131. 57 13, 377. 77- 3, 000. 00 5, 500. 00 22, 506. 32 24, 816. 68 410, 438. 76 . 437, 168. 24 5, 120. 00 525. 00 • 2, 160. 00 225. 00 640. 00 3, 150. GO 2, 050. 00 770. 00 13, 120. 00 55, 222. 96 349. 50 3, 807. 37 0. 00 9, 074. 25 4, 930. 00 186. 50 1, 285. 00 36, 879. 80 1, 407. 00 30. 00 6, 700. 00 0. 00 6, 720. 90 6, 672. 50 3, 683. 00 401. 80 490. 70 9, 880. 00 175. 00 5, 430. 00 75. 00 2. 880. 00 2. 250. 00 550. 00- 1, 030. 00 6, 400. 00 59, 777. 04 1, 548. 50 6, 192. 63 51. 47. 9 29. 8 0. 0 15. 1 195. 5 35. 2 47. 5 48. 4 34. 1 75. 0 28. 4 75. 0 18. 1 58_3 136. 6 42. 7 67. 2 48.0 35. 4 38. 0 300. 00 0. 0 5, 925. 75 60. 4 18, 070_00 21. 4 2, 813. 50 6. 2 . 1, 715. 00 42. 8 21. 879. 80- 245. 8 1, 593. 00 46. 9 70. 00 30. 0 23, 950. 00 21. 8 4, 517. 00 0. 0 8, 279. 10 44. 8 10, 943. 50 ' 37. 8 3, 817. 00 49. 1 398. 20 50. 2 1, 509. 30 .24,_5 6 a y'.. Ici 111 Ir 141 131 ly' 11 1s. 44 n ii. 6-1 CC 2 FINANCE-FA484 TIME 14:13:29 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION 001 GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3800 CURRENT SERVICE 3839 /PHOTOCOPY CHARGES 3840 /AMBULANCE TRANSPORT 3641 /POLICE TOWING CHARGES 3856 /GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 3857 /PKG PLAIN APPLICATION 3858 /TENANT REFUSE BILLING 3859 /REFUSE LIEN FEE 3861 /HAZARDOUS MAT PERMIT 3862 /ALARM PERMIT FEE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3901 /SALE OF REAL/PERS PROP 3902 /REFUNDS/REIMB PREV YR 3903 /CONTRIBUTIONS NON GOVT 3904 /GENERAL MISCELLANEOUS 3913 /CITY OFFICES RECYCLING 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 3956 /RESDL EQUITY TRSFR IN OBJECT SUBTOTAL DENT 0000 TOTALS 7C0. 00 8, 500. 00 26. 500. 00 900. 00 960. 00 200. 00 500. 00 2, 500. 00 O. 00 363, 971. 00 5, 000. 00 500. 00 500. 00 500. 00 180. 00 1, 639, 949. 00 118, 836. 00 1, 764, 465. 00 40. 00 215. 00 1, 785. 00 450. 00 0. CO 10. 00 2, 758. 03 0. 00 150. 00 28, 942. 04 PAGE - 0003 DATE 01/22/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 610. E,5 2, 884. 00 12, 582. 50 450. 00 320. 00 150. 00 2, 750. 03 0. 00 560. 00 186, 424. 46 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 8. 90 0. 00 135, 329. 08 9, 903. 00 145, 240. 98 1, 056, 669. 14 416. 41 7, 055. 73 763. 77 63. 81 826, 974. 48 59, 418. 00 1, 951, 361. 34 9, 653, 966. 00 1, 679, 161.30 5, 852, 031. 85 UNREALIZED BALANCE-- / - 81. 35 5, 616. 00 13, 917. 50 450. 00 3 d 7 u 28. 3 33. 9 47. 4 50. 0 640. 00 33. 3 50.00 75.0 2, 258.03- 551. 6 2, 500. 00 0. 0 560. 00- 0. 0 177, 546. 54 51. 2 1, 051, 669. 14- 21133. 3 83. 59 83. 2 6, 555. 73- 1411. 1 263. 77- 152. 7 116. 19 35. 4 811, 974_52 50.4 59, 418. 00 50. 0 186, 896. 34- 110. 5 3, 801 ; 934. 15 by -6 FUND TOTAL 9, 653, 966. 00 1, 679, 161. 30 5, 852, 031. 85 3, 801, 934.15 60. 6 • 2 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH F/NANCE—FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) ' PAGE 0004 . TIME 14:13:29 . FROM 12/01/89 TO.12/31/89 DATE ••• a 01/22/90 . 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION UNREALIZED , EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE -- 13 103 LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND . • ,' "•••. IL, - , 2 13 ' 14 15 16 . , II DEPARTMENT 0000 I 3100 TAXES . 3101 /CURRENT YEAR SECURED 322, 094. 00 130, 805. 06 130, 805. 06 191, 288. 94 40.6 3103 /PRIOR YEAR COLLECT IONS 25, 000. 00 544. 49 14, 596. 73 - 11, 403. 27 56. 1 : OBJECT SUBTOTAL 348, 094. 00 131, 349. 55 145, 401. 79 202, 692. 21 41.7 I • 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPER TY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 61, 230. 00 2, 566. 28 37, 838. 57 23, 391. 43 61.7 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 61, 230. 00 2, 566. 28 37, 838. 57 23, 391. 43 — •—id.. --7-------- — 3900 OTHER REVENUE L4 25 25 27 2U 3955 /OPERAT I NG TRANSFERS IN 492. 00 0. 00 492. 00 0. 00 100. 0 • OBJECT SUB TOTAL 492. 00 0. 00 ' 492. 00 0. 00 100.0 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 409, 816. 00 133, 915. 83 183, 732. 36 226, 083. 64 44. 8 FUND TOTAL 409, 816. 00 133, 915. 03 183, 732. 36 226, 083. 64 44. 8 3' 32 33 33 • 5 G , '.: 3 0 so 40 41 42 . I • 43 44 45 47 40 45 50 52 53 54 • :.% ' .: .1 7i51 ,11 55 56 '?....' • • -• r r • r- 44, i • 23 4 FINANCE—FA484 TIME 14:13:29 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 5 6 7 FUND . OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE PAGE Op05 DATE 01/221/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED • e 0 10 11 12 110 PARKING FUND PARTMENT 0000 DE BALANCE 3300 FINES & FORFEITURES 3302 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 13 r 14 15 .6 r 17 /COURNES/PARKING 340 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY •� 20 • • r- • • • 21 3401 3407 3409 3413 .OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 585. 746. 00 1, 585, 746. 00 110, 642. 00 110, 642. 00 685, 975. 53 685, 975. 58 • 899, 770. 42 899, 770. 42 43. 2 43. 2 /INTEREST INCOME /PARKING LOT RENTAL /LOT D /VPD LEASE 18, 830. 00 16. 707. 00 474. 10 800. CO 22, 990. 00 70, 000. 00 128, 527. 00 23 24 25 26 27 3000 CURRENT 3842 3843 2e 30 3, 32 33 34 3,, 37 30 39 3844 /DAILY PARKING PERMITS 3845 /VPD LOT PERMITS/DAILY 3846 /VPD LOT PERMITS/MONTHLY 3847 /VALIDATION STAMPS 3848 /DRIVEWAY PERMITS 3849 /GUEST PERMITS 3850 /CONTRACTOR'S PERMITS 1, 915. 84 3. 720. 48 6, 910. 42 7.386.40 9. 161. 25 11, 495. 04 40, 408. 54 68, 451. 23 11, 443. 60 7, 545. 75 11, 494. 96 29, 591. 46 SERVICE CHARGES /PARKING METERS /PARKING PERMITS: ANNUAL OBJECT SUBTOTAL 600, 000. 00 185, 000. 00 1, 658. 00 6, 200. 00 8, 680. 00 15, 000. 00 250. 00 900. 00 2, 000. 00 819, 688. 00 13, 937. 08 830. 50 0. 00 037. 20 1, 035. 00 1, 678. 61 113. 00 95. 00 - 0. 00 18. 526. 39 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3902 /REFUNDS/REIMB PREV YR /GENERAL MISCEL.L.ANEOUS 3955 /BUDGETED TRANSFERS IN OBJECT SUBTOTAL 50. 00 i1 42 3 44 46 47 40 40 n50 51 52 r 53 54 55 56 50. 00 3, 033. 00 3, 133. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 357, 432. 63 17. 541. 50 885. 00 4, 607. 59 4, 788. 45 15, 305. 93 504. 00 608. 00 600. 00 402, 273. 10 0. 00 0. 00 3, 033. 00 3, 033. 00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 2, 537, 094. 00 136, 078. ©1 1, 159, 732. 91 FUND TOTAL 2, 537, 094. 00 136, 078. B1 1, 159, 732. 91 39. 2 54. 8 50. 0 57. 7 60, 075. 77 53. 2 242, 567. 37 59. 5 167, 458. 50 9. 4 773. 00 53. 3 1,592.41 74.3 3, 891. 55 55. 1 305.93— 102.0 254. 00— 201. 6 292. 00 67. 5 1, 400. 00 30. 0 417, 414. 90 49. 0 50. 00 50. 00 0. 00 100. 00 1, 377, 361. 09 1, 377, 361. 09 0. 0 0. 0 100. 0 96. 8 45. 7 45. 7 1' 2 3 7 7 • • •21" 4 a 7 0 0 15 20 21 22 FINANCE-FA484 • TIME 14:13:29 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION 115 STATE GAS TAX FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PAGE 0006 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) DATE 01/22/90 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE EST REV UNREAL I ZED MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME OBJECT SUB TOT AL 3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL/STATE 18.685. 00 681.49 18, 685. 00 681. 49 3501 /SECTION 2106 ALLOCATION 85o 690. 00 . 3502 1 /SECTION 2107 ALLOCATION 176, 184. 00 3503 /SECT 2107. 5 ALLOCATION 4, 000. 00 3522 /TDA ARTICLE 3 (SB821) 10, 764. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 276, 638. 00 23 24 25 27 28 f. 20 30 31 72 36 33 15 37 30 39 40 a • 411 4D • - 51 52 53 54 55 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 10, 000. 00 OD JEC T SUB TOTAL 10, 000. 00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 305, 323. 00 Bo 451. 92 17. 749. 98 0. 00 0. 00 26, 201. 90 416. 67 9, 936. 58 9, 936. 58 8, 748. 42 53. 1 8, 748. 42 53. 1 37, 315. 03 48,374.97 43. 5 76, 577. 35 99, 606. 65 43. 4 4, 000. 00 0. 00 100. 0 0. 00 10, 764. 00 0. 0 117, 892. 38 158, 745. 62 . 416.67 27, 300. 06 FUND TOTAL 7, 500. 02 7, 500. 02 2,499.98 2,499.98 135, 328. 98 169,994.02 305, 323. 00 27,300. 06 135, 328. 98 169, 994. 02 42. 6 75. 0 75.0 44.3 ., 44. 3 f r 57 4- 0 • r • A 12 3 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE '0007 TIME 14:13:29 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 01/22/90 4 5 6 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 7 0 __. __ __ 120 COUNTY GAS TAX FUND 10 II 12 DEPARTMENT 0000 ... 3400 USE OF MONEY 1 PROPERTY 13 14 16 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 1,745.00 41. 56 721. 77 1,023.23 41. 3 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 745. 00 . 41. 56 721. 77 . 1. 023. 23 41. 3 17 1U 3600 INTERGOVERNMENTAL/COUNTY 3601 /COUNTY AID TO CITIES 48, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 48, 000. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL. 48, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 48, 000. 00 0. 0 � 11:, 1 ::5 20 27 20 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 49, 745.00 41.56 721.77 49, 023.23 1.4 FUND TOTAL 49, 745. 00 41.56 721. 77 49, 023. 23 I. 1. 4 29 30 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 I:. 41 42 43 44 45 16 47 40 I' I_ 40 50 51 I.. 51 53 54 . 55 56 Z7 I. • FINANCE.-FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) TIME 14:13:29 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 6 r6 10 rt1 i2 IJ r1. r 17 70 2 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV 125 PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 YEAR TO DATE PAGE 0008 DATE 01/22/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED BALANCE 3100 TAXES 3116 OBJECT SUBTOTAL /PARK REC FACILITY TAX 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 OBJECT SUBTOTAL /INTEREST INCOME 50, 000. 00 50, 000. 00 25, 405. 00 25, 405. 00 22 • •20 7 r r • • 27 3, 500. 00 3, 500. 00 3, 281. 93 3, 281. 93 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3910 3956 OBJECT SUBTOTAL /PARK/RECREATION IN LIEU /RESDL EQUITY TRSFR IN 175', 000. 00 6, 534. 00 1, 056, 506. 00 1, 231, 506. 00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 1, 306, 911. 00 0.00 6, 534. 00 16, 568. 00 16, 568. 00 42, 632. 95 42, 632. 95 78, 408. 00 1, 056, 505. 60 1, 134, 913. 60 33, 432. 00 33. 1 33, 432. 00 33. 1 17,227.95- 17,227.95- 78, 7,227.95- 17,227.95- 167. 8 167. 8 96, 592. 00 44. 8 0. 40 99. 9 96, 592. 40 92. 1 13, 315. 93 1, 194, 114. 55 112, 796.45 91.3 3 4 011. 29 30 21 32 33 IC 37 30 30 40 4, 42 43 FUND TOTAL 1, 306, 911. 00 13, 31 5. 93 1, 194, 1 14. 5 5 112, 796.45 91.3 44 45 At, 17 40 49 50 53 54 55 �7 a • %• r.. • • • 4 FINANCE—FA484 TIME 14:13:29 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 7 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV 12 126 UUT RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3100 TAXES 14 17 10 a 21 MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE PAGE 0009 DATE 01/22/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED BALANCE 3120 OBJECT SUBTOTAL /UTILITY USER TAX 816, 508. 00 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 816, 508. 00 37, 340. 80 37, 340. 80 373, 294. 31 373, 294. 31 ' 443, 213.69 45.7 443, 213.69 45.7 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 20, 525. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 20, 525. 00 0.00 0. 00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 837, 033. 00 37, 340. 80 17, 772. 25 17,772.25 391, 066. 56 2,752.75 2,752.75 86. 5 86. 5 445. 966. 44 . 46. 7 FUND TOTAL 837, 033. 00 .3 20 20 13 31 33 34 35 36 37 30 30 II 43 44 45 37, 340. 00 391. 066. 56 _ 445, 966. 44 46. 7 1• 2 3 7 1r. I7 1 y It. 2_ 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 5p• • 2 0 3 4 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH :,' FINANCE—FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) . PAGE 0010' TIME 14:13:29 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 01/22/90 r 5 6 7 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE % 11 10 ^ , t 12 • 127 67UTILITY USER TAX FUND , -:,•, • ; • '.'. ., — • . , , , DEPARTMENT 0000 3100 TAXES _.- 13 n 14 15 ' 17 te 3120 /UTILITY USER TAX 1,224,762.00 56,011.18 . 559,941.41 . 664,820.59 45.7 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1,224,762.00 56,011.18 559,941.41 664,820.59 45.7 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 2,890.00 198.64 3,315.12 425.12— 114.7 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2,890.00 198.64 3,315.12 425.12— t 21 0 23 2, • ZE 27 20 114.7 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 1,227,652.00 56,209.82 563,256.53 664,395.47 45.8 FUND. TOTAL 1,227,652.00 56,209.82 563,256.53 664,396.47 45. 8 29 30 31 I,: .14 3G 37 • • 311 39 40 - , 41 42 43 44 41. • 4G 47 40 • 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 . 7 • , r 1 • • AM. • R • • FINANCE-FA484 TIME 14:13:29 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0011 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 01/22/90 EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE 11 140 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND 10 12 13 14 15 DEpA�2TMENT 0000 50. 07. OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREAL I ZED BALANCE 7.. 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401- //NTEgE$fi INCOME OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3700 INTERGOVERNMENT/FEDERAL 20 29 0 31 32 33 34 35 36 !7 39 40 41 42' 43 46 47 40 49 50 51 0. 00 247. 08 0. 00 247. 08 3,267.34 3,267.34 3.267.34- 3,267.34- 0. 0 0. 0 3713 /HOUSING REHABILITATION 92,072.00 3714 /PROJECT TOUCH 7,670.00 3715 /CDBG ADMINISTRATION 12,276.00 3716 /SO BAY FREE CLINIC 4,200.00 3717 /JUVENILE DIVERSION 3, 000. 00 3718 ASO BAY COALITION ALIVE 1,000 00 3719 /1736 HOUSE -2, 544. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 122, 762. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 235. 00 • 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 235. 00 0. 00 0. 00 92, 072. 00 7, 670. 00 10, 041. 00 4, 200. 00 3, 000. 00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 122, 762. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 235. 00 2, 482. 08 0. 00 0. 00 2, 235. 00 5, 502. 34 1, 000. 00 2, 544. 00 120, 527. 00 0. 0 0. 0 18. 2 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 1. 8 117, 259.66 4.4 FUND TOTAL 122, 762. 00 2, 482. 08 5, 502. 34 117, 259.66 4.4 54 55 r 56 r 0(12 3 7,- F I NANCE-F A4(34 TIME 14:13:29 CITY OF HERMOSA. BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/09 PAGE 0012 DATE 01/22/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED 6 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE % 7 • 6 B 9 145 PROPOSITION 'A FUND - , • . • . . 1 in DEPAP.TMENT 0000 1 ' 1 1 1 12 3100 TAXES .._ 13 6 14 3117 /PROPOSITION A TRANSIT 3121 =.00, 000. 00 20, 033. 00 107, 895. 00 92, 105. 00 53.9 1 ' SUBREGNL INCENTIVE FUNDS OBJECT 16, 331. 00 0. 00 0. 00 16, 331. 00 0. 0 1 SUBTOTAL 216, 331. 00 . 20, 033. 00 107, 895. 00 108, 436. 00 49. 8 ' 7 3400 USE OF MONEY tt PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 12, 270. 00 643. 49 9, 560. 28 2, 709. 72 77. 9 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 12, 270. 00 643. 49 9, 560. 28 2, 709. 72 77. 9 21 3800 CURRENT SERVICE CHARGES. 2,! ,.., 3854 /FARES, DIAL A RIDE 3855 /BUS PASSES OBJECT SUBTOTAL 7, 800. 00 4, 000. 00 0. 00 581. 00 0. 00 2, 718. 00 7, 800. 00 0. 0 1, 282. 00 67.9 11, aoo. 00 581. 00 2, 718. 00 9, 082. 00 23. 0 • 25 , J II 26 3900 OTHER REVENUE . • -.. 27 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN OBJECT 340. 00 0. 00 340. 00 . 0. 00 100. 0 3 28 20 SUBTOTAL 340. 00 0. 00 340. 00 0. 00 100. 0 30 DEPT 0000 . TOTALS 240, 741. 00 21, 257. 49 120, 513. 28 120, 227. 72 50. 0 5 J • • .• FUND .._ .,. TOTAL 240,741.00 21, 257. 49 120, 513. 28 120, 227. 72 50.0 • 30 6- .. 37 . 30 1 39 40 4' .12 • 43 44 40 • . • _ _ 40 --, 49 50 51 • 52 53 54 55 5.6 • R.7 r r r r • • • (1. 4 1 *EN c 10, • 2 r r-. • e 9 11 FINANCE-FA484 TIME 14:13:29 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0013 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 01/22/90 50.07 OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION UNREALIZED EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 7. •150 GRANT FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 16 3401 /INTEREST INCOME OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL/STATE 2. 31 5. 00 94. 52 2, 315. 00 94. 52 1, 670. 27 11670. 27 . 644. 73 72. 1 644. 73 72. 1 3517 /OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFET 45, 500. 00 O. 00 0.00 3528 /PER CAPITA GRANT 60,000.00 3529 /WILDLIFE GRANT 20, 204. 00 0. 00 0. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 125, 704. 00 O. 00 O. 00 3700 INTERGOVERNMENT/FEDERAL 45, 500. 00 60, 000. 00 20, 204. 00 125, 704. 00 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 3701 /FEDERAL AID URBAN 3712585, 520. 00 /FED EMERG MGMT AGENCY 89, 738. 00 2.3 27 23 20 30 31 32 33 .14 35 36 37 38 39 10 41 47.1 • 14 • 1'r 40 49 " 51 52 53 54 55 r OBJECT SUBTOTAL 675, 258. 00 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 64,388.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 64, 380. 00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 867,665.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 585, 520. 00 89, 738. 00 675, 258. 00 5,365.67 5,365.67 32. 194. 02 32, 194. 02 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 32, 193. 98 32, 193. 98 5, 460. 19 33, 864. 29 833, 800. 71 50. 0 50. 0 3. 9 FUND TOTAL 867, 665. 00 5, 460. 19 33, 864. 29 833, 800. 71 • 1. r r r • • r'2 r rll r •23 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0014 2 TIME 14:13:29 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/09DATE 01/22/90 6 50. 07. OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED " FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE % 2 G 155 CROSSING GUARD FUND • II IU 12 • DEPARTMENT 0000 I• i 3100 TAXES 13 13 ' 14 Ic 17 I :. 3101 /CURRENT YEAR SECURED 73, 495. 00 29, 897. 83 29, 897. 83 ' 43, 597. 17 40. 6 17 3103 /PRIOR YEAR COLLECTIONS 5,000.00 89. 69 3, 191. 87 1, 808. 13 63.8 t°' OBJECT SUBTOTAL 78, 495. 00 29,987.52 987. 52 33, 089. 70 45, 405. 30 42.1 .n � 3400 USE OF MONEY A PROPERTY 21 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 1,010.00 ¢2.22 1,012.22 2.22- 100.2 i 20 21 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 010. 00 68. 22 1, 012. 22 2. 22- 100. 2 3900 OTHER REVENUE 22 24 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 303. 00 0. 00 303. 00 0. 00 100. O - OBJECT SUBTOTAL 303. 00 0. 00 303. 00 •0. 00 100, 0 25 126 27 20 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 79, 808. 00 30,055. 74 34, 404. 92 45, 403. 08 43.1 ,I 0 30 FUND TOTAL 79, 808. 00 30, 055. 74 34, 404. 92 45, 403. 08 43. 1 31 32 33 34 33 36 ,1. l l i.. sl 37 30 30 j. 40 it 42 43 44 45 40 • • 40 50 51 y„ CL . 52 53 54 55 56 .57 • • r • r • • r r •r; • 12 3 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) TIME 14: 13:29 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 PAGE 0015 DATE 01/22/90 , 3 3 5 6EST FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION7 REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE 50.07 OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED BALANCE % 5 ` c 160 SEWER FUND u 1{, DEPARTMENT 0000 11 ' 12 3400 USE OF MONEY E. PROPERTY 1. 13 14 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 60, 610. 00 2. 587. 95 38. 592. 51 22, 017. 49 63. 6 15 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 60, 610. 00 2. 587. 95 38, 592. 51 22, 017. 49 63. 6 1G 3600 INTERGOVERNMENTAL/COUNTY 17 10 3602 /BEACH OUTLET MAINTENANC OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5, 5. 000. 000. 00 00 0. 0. 00 00 623. 623. 00 00 4. 4, 377. 377. 00 00 12. 12. 4 419 2 3800 CURRENT SERVICE CHARGES 2 3828 /SEWER CONNECTION FEE 25, 000. 00 - 0. 00 4, 008. 33 20. 991. • 3829 /SEWER DEMOLITION FEE 3832 1. 200. 00 30. 00 638. 54 561. 67 46 16. 53. 0 2 24 /SEWER LATERAL INSTALLTN OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3. 29, 000. 200. 00 50. 00 200. 00 2, 800. 00 6. 6 3' 00 80. 00 4, 84b. 87 24, 353. 13 16. 5 :5 ::a 3900 OTHER REVENUE i. 27 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 1, 155, 753. 00 96. 230. 92 • 578. 367. 52 577, 385. 48 50. 0 26 2'1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 155, 753. 00 96. 230. 92 578. 367. 52 577, 385. 48 50. 0 30 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 1. 250, 563. 00 90, 998. 87 622, 429. 90 620. 133. 10 49. 7 31 32 33 4 r 35 FUND TOTAL 1. 250, 563. 00 98. 898. 87 622. 429. 90 628, 133. 10 _ 49. 7 36 37 30 3,, 40 41 42 43 _. 44 41 . C. 49 49 50 51 5; 53 54 55 56 z f c r r r r r r • • A 1 12 3 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE—FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND> • PAGE 0016 TIME 14:13:29 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/39 DATE 01/22/90 6 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE is 7 8 0 ;i 1, 12 170 ASSET SEIZURE/FORFEITURE FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3300 FINES & FORFEITURES 3 14 15 3304 /FORFEITED FUNDS 200, 000. 00 13, 243. 63 39, 772. 78 160, 227. 22 19. 8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 200, 000. 00 13, 243. 63 39, 772. 78 160, 227. 22 19. 8 16 17 ,1, 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 1 /INTEREST INCOME 5,900.00 222.90 3,439.44 2,460.56 58.2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5,900.00 222. 90 3,439.44 2,460.56 58. 2 i.,0 73 :4 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 205, 900. 00 13, 466. 53 43, 212. 22 162, 687. 78 20. 9 FUND TOTAL 205, 900. 00 13, 466. 53 43, 212. 22 162, 687. 78 20. 9 25 126 27 20 20 30 31 r. 36 3, 30 x, 30 43 44 17 40 40 5.0 51 53 54 55 56 IN 2 3 4 5 1, „ 2. 21, 31111,, • 1 rr • • r• �= 73 A rll CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE—FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0017 TIME 14:13:29 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 ' DATE 01/22/90 , a 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE. UNREALIZED FUND OB.) DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE % i 6 11J 1G 180 FIRE PROTECTION FUND. ,. DEPARTMENT 0000 1 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 13 14 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 4,980.00 602.32 • 8,591.26 3,611.26— 172.5 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4,980.00 602. 32 8,591.26 3,611.26— 172. 5 `-9- 7 0 OTHER REVENUE • 3912 /FIRE FLOW FEE 130, 000. 00 6, 553. 55 50, 792. 93 79, 207. 07 39. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 130, 000. 00 6, 553. 55 50, 792. 9.3 79, 207. 07 39. 0 25 126 z7 a.0 LU 30 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 134, 980. 00 7,155.87 59, 384. 19 75, 595. 81 43. 9 FUND TOTAL 134, 980. 00 7, 155. 87 59, 384. 19 75, 595. 81 43. 9 31 J:1 34 I 1 1. 1 35 36 37 30 3U 40 41 33 14 45 47 all '3 50 51 5L 53 54 56 '7 1.1 7 4 • • r r • • /1 - 0 2 3 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH —N FINANCE—F4484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0010 3 TIME 14:13:29 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 01/22/90 4 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 5 UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE is e 7 a 9 0 705 INSURANCE FUND ; • °I :,.,‘... 19 2 DEPARTMENT 0000 5 4 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY r. 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 37, 785. 00 908. 26 13, 220. 00 24, 565. 00 34.9 ;e OBJECT SUBTOTAL 37, 785. 00 908. 26 13, 220. 00 24, 565. 00 34. 9 :e 3900 OTHER REVENUE, 2 2: 3902 /REFUNDS/REIMB PREV YR 0. 00 0. 00 40, 708. 94 40, 783. 94— . 0. 0 • 2: 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 1, 764. 00 0. 00 1, 764. 00 0. ,i, 1 : 0 00 100. 0 3957 /TRANSFER IN—DEPT INS SVS 899, 168. 00 74, 930. 89 449. 585. 78 449, 582. 22 50. 0 2, OBJECT SUBTOTAL 900, 932. 00 74, 930. 89 492, 138. 72 408. 793. 28 54. 6 ;.,1 . I DEPT 0000 TOTALS 933, 717. 00 75, 839. 15 505, 358. 72 433, 358. 28 53. 8 .311 25 26 27 .1"... _ FUND TOTAL 938. 717. 00 75, 839. 15 ' 505. 358. 72 433, 358. 20 53. 8 20 20 '10 REPORT TOTALS 20, 168, 676. 00 2, 337. 980. 03 10, 904, 655. 37 9, 264, 020. 63 54. 0 i d 31 32 13 14 tn lc J7 30 39 4: 41 4:. •C 40 42 '..ti41 Z• 43 44 46 47 40 :•: ... .... 40 50 51 . • . • 52 53 `../ . . 4.. ‘Z' • ;S: . Jr. .vy 1 Th • r r- • • r r r • • (7- CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH •EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0001 - '1 411 3 . _......__ . .. . ME 11: r-6 : 10 •,,,.: . -Et'? FROM 12/01/89 !: TO 12/31 : : : • i ..: :, : , • :: , , :, : - :: ._, .,.;:•• DATE 02/01/90 Q:,:;•::: ,:c. ,,''''''' 50. 07. OF YEAR : COMPLETE. ':'•;.::: 3 a 4 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % 5 e 5 i 7 8 001 GENERAL FUND a 5 1101 CITY COUNCIL . DEPT: :LEGISLATIVE - . ,. ... , , ,r „, :-, ,, a o la •, tr- io 4102 REGULAR SALAR I E./MI C .1, ....40. 00 1, 228. 04 10, 935. 32 0. 00 10, 604. 68 50.7 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 0. 00 111. 15 111. 15 0. 00 111. 15- - 0. 0 2 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 431. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 431. 00 0. 0 18 41- I" FTC -CRP ALri H IN 431. 00 0. 00 1, 146. 06 : . 0. 00 715. 86- 266. 0 14 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 18, 000. 00 2, 122. 25 8, 573. 25 : -.. 0. 00 9, 426. 75 47. 6 ig 15 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 40, 402. 00 4, 061. 44 20, 766. 58 . . 0. 00 ' 19, 635. 42 . 51. 3 20 6 21 17 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 22 2Z 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PR I VATE 6, 000. 00 0. 00 6, 000. 00 0.00. O. 00 100.0 : 24 19 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 6, 000. 00 0. 00 6, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 100. 0 25 20 16 21 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER ,, , 27 26 22 4304 TELEPHONE 200.00 0.00 81.45 0.00 118. 55 40. 7 21.• 23 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 9, 000. 00 327. 24 5. 288. 65 1, 030. 84 2, 600. 51 70. 2 24 .4315 MEMBERSHIP 5, 900. 00 1, 000. 00 ° 3, 805. 00 0. 00 2, 095. 00 64. A 25 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 5, 250. 00 - 66. 35- : 954. 00 • 0. 00 4 296. 00 : 18.1 33 26 4319 SPECIAL EVENTS 1, 000. 00. . 116. be : , . :' 222. 59 -f' 0. 00 .: • , - 777. 41 - ' 22. 2 34 27 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS UGER CHCS 3, 519. 00' r ' ' 294. 00 1. 763. 94., 0. 00 1, 755. 06 50. 1 . 20 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 24, 869. 00 1, 671. 57 1., 115. 63 1, 030. 84 11, 722. 53 52. 8 37 20 ( . 2..., 3:.. 30 5400 EQUIPMENT 4G 31 5401 EGUIPMENT-LESS THAN $500 100. 00 0. 00 0. 00 ;:: , : . 0. 00 100. 00 0. 0 41 32 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 100. 00 0. 00 0. 00 - : ' 0. 00 : 100. 00 0. 0 43 33 . 44 34 ..,. 35 DIVISION TOTAL 71, 371. 00 5, 733. 01 . 38, 882. 21 1, 030. 84 31, 457. 95 55.9 4.. 47 38 411 37 1121 CITY CLERK DEPT: LEGISLATIVE; - . , 51 39 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES .t 40 4102 REGULAR SALAR I ES/M I SC 27, 815. 00 , 2, 371. 00 13, 589. 00 0. 00 ' 14, 226. 00 48.8 52 41 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 556. 00 ' 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 556. 00 0. 0 1.4 55 42 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 556. 00 0. 00 .0.00 0. 00 556. 00 0. 0 43 4112 PART TIME/TEMPOP.ARY 12, 000. 00 0. 00 4, 949. 99 0. 00 7, 050. 01 41. 2 57 44 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 40, 927. 00 2, 371. 00 18, 538. 99 : 0. 00 22, 388. 01 45. 2 5:. 51: 45 . ' • 1' ' 60 46 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 61 47 42.01 CONTRACT SERVICE/PR I VATE 20, 300. 00 0. 00 100. 00 0. 00 20, 200. 00 0. 4 Ls 48 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 20, 300. 00 0. 00 100. 00 0. 00 20, 200. 00 0. 4 e4 49 65 50 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER . G.: 51 4304 TELEPHONE 831. 00 0. 00 466. 87 •67 ' - 0. 00 364. 13 56. 1 52 4305 OFFICE OPER 2, 006. 00 83. 69 414. 78 112. 13 1, 479. 09 26.2 ... 53 .SUPPLIES . 71 54 7: 55 7.) 56 • 24 7 , LS ' ^-1 • F I NANCE -FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 2 _ PAGE 0002 1 -ME 11: 26: 10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 : , :. : -,:- :,-.. . . DATE 02/01/90 . - • ., 50. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE IN 3 4 ., a FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EJPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNEUC BALANCE % 001 GENERAL FUND 4 5 a 7 0 % .. ., .' . ' ... 1121 CITY CLERK DEPT:' LEGISLATIVE . - ''' - • ._.•.. . , : .,,., ..,- n v in 11 l0 2 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4315 MEMBERSHIP 220. 00 O. 00 105. 00 O. 00 115. 00 47. 7 4316 TRAINING 450.00 0.00 0.00 0.-00 450.00 0. 0 12 ,.., 15 14 15 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE • , ' m 600 00 ..;:!i•k*,!;',,]:. ' 0. 00;,:i.'a 296. 80 • :•:,: r* (3, 00 ',,.,:::: : 303. 20. ': 49. 4 .: ' 4323 PUBLIC NOTICING - ' • , 8, 800 00 72 00- 3i 659. 240. 00 '','':. 5, 140. 76 ... ' 41. 5 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 2, 950. 00 - : '' .' 246. 00- ' - 1, 475. 85 - ' :''' -, - 0.00 1, 474. 15 50.0 15 17 IC IS 16 ,,. OBJECT SUBTOTAL 15, 857. 00 257. 69 6, 418. 54 112. 13 9. 326. 33 41. 1 5400 EQUIPMENT 20 21 22 3 19 20 21. 22 5401 EGUIPMENT-LESS THAN $500 513. 00 . O. 00 H,, 367. 32 . O. 00 145. 68 71. 6 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 513. 00 O. 00 . 367. 32 . - O. 00 , 145. 68 71. 6 .., ...3 23 24 25 . DIVISION TOTAL . 77, 597. 00 2, 628. 69 25, 424. 85 112. 13 52, 060. 02 32.9 1122 , I 31 , 26 27 ELECTIONS DEPT: LEGISLATIVE k: .:, ,,,,- ::,... .- . . _ . . • . • . • , .• ' 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES • 32 33 34 28 29 30 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PR I VATE 20, 650. 00 0. 00 1, 339. 51- 395. 10 21, 594. 41 4. 5 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 20, 650. 00 0. 00 1, 339. 51- 395. 10 21, 594. 41 4. 5 . 3.'. 37 3.3, 31 32 33 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER • . 4304 TELEPHONE 287. 00 O. 00 ' - 287. 00 O. 00 O. 00 100. 0 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 894. 00 0. 95 • 694. 96 199. 31 41. d 41., 49 34 35 36 37 O. 27- 100 0 4316 .TRAINING 263.00 O. 00 0.00 0.00 263. 00 0.0 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 300.00 O. 00 411.60 O. 00 111.60- 137. 2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 744. 00 O. 95 11393. 56 199. 31 151. 13 91. 1 , 1. 4. 47 38 39 40 3 . 2 . DIVISION TOTAL 22, 394. 00 O. 95 54. 05 594. 41 21, 745. 54 . 49 tO 51 41 42 2. 8 1131 CITY ATTORNEY DEPT: LEGISLATIVE t.3 :,. 43 4'200 CONTRACT SEP V ICES 4,1 45 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 150, 000. 00 ' 11, 933. 00 . ' 48, 572. 49 0. 00 101, 427. 51 32.3 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 1, 400. 00 766. 45 55 46 912. 05 ' O. 00 487. 95 65. OBJECT SUBTOTAL 47 48 1 151. 400. 00 . 12, 699. 45 49, 484. 54 0. 00 101, 915. 46 32. 6 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 5, 1..1 40 ---41.14TELEP1RNE 50 51 2, 4op. oo O. oo . 135. 10,:.. . . - - - - - 0 00 . . 2, 264. 90 5.6 .,,. . O. 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES . 1, 650. 00 4. 80 ' 48. 70 ' 1, 459. 31 11. 5 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE - 1, 000. 00 0. 00 64 37 52 0. 00 O. 00 1, 000. 00 O. 0 OuJErT-SOBTOTAL 53 54 fIll 5, 050. 00 4. GO 277. 09 48. 70 4, 724. 21 6. 4 • 70._ /1 55 56 74- 7. 73 r r r- r - r. • • 1 9 r r FINANCE-FA454 4" ---TIME 11:26:10 2 5 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0003 FROM 12/01/89". TO 12/31/89 DATE 02/01/90 • FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. 001 GENERAL FUND 50.07 OF YEAR COMPLETE 1� 3 ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE a 9 DIVISION TOTAL 156, 450. 00 12, 704. 25 1132 CITY PROSECUTOR DEPT: LEGISLATIVE 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 3 17 a 10 • 'o 1-- 22" ,� 24 4112 PART TIME/TEPMPORARY OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 49, 761.63 48. 70 106, 639. 67 31. 8 25, 440. 00 25, 440. 00 2, 120. 00 2, 120. 00 12, 720. 00 0.00. 12, 720. 00... ....; . 0. 00 12, 720. 00 12, 720. 00 50. 0 50. 0 15, 600. 00 15, 600. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 144. 00 1, 144. 00 DIVISION TOTAL 42, 184. 00 1141 CITY TREASURER DEPT: LEGISLATIVE 95. 00 95. 00 570. 31 570. 31 2, 215. 00 13, 290. 31. 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 15, 600. 00 15, 600. 00 0. 0 0. 0 573. 69 49. 8 573. 69 49. 8 a 9 10 11 li IJ 14 15 ,0 ,7 ,0 19 21 2_ 28, 893. 69 ' 31. 5 20 30 3, f'' 32 33 r 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR. SAL.ARIE5/MISC 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 34 36 37 30 39 40 41 42 43 4 45 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 12, 207. 00 500. 00 256. 00 256. 00 9, 000. 00 22, 819. 00 1, 070. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 750. 00 1, 820. 00 6, 280. 00 501. 99 0.00 247. 00 4. 500. 00 11, 52B. 99 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 6, 527. 00 49. 0 1. 99- 100. 3 256. 00 0. 0 9. 00 96. 4 4. 500. 00 50. 0 1 1, 290. 01 50. 5 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE. 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 46 7 40 49 0 51 52 3 54 55 4315 MEMBERSHIP 4316 TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 000. 00 2, 000. 00 700. 00 1, 400. 00 185. 00 250. 00 500. 00 2, 083. 00 5, 118. 00 0. 00 0. 00 83. 50 83. 50 0.00 84. 76 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 174. 00 25B. 76 184. 58 670. 71 0. 00 0•. 00 0. 00 1, 043. 59 1, 898. 28 5400 EQUIPMENT • 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 800. 00 600. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 56 a7 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 916. 50 1, 916. 50 515. 42 729. 29 185. 00 250. 00 500. 00 1. 039. 41 3, 219. 12 4. 1 4. 1 26. 3 47. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 50. 1 37. 1 800. 00 0. 0 800. 00 0. 0 o, c 74 FINANCE-FA454 r CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMAR 2 TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 1 02 000-. /01/90 DATE 50. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE I. 3 4 5 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % ' 0 6 001 GENERAL FUND 7 a a u DIVISION TOTAL • • 30, 737. 00 .. 2, 078.' 76 - 13, 511. 37 : O. 00 17, 225. 63 43 9 ;, 10 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 400, 733. 00 25, 360. 66 140, 924. 42 1, 786. 08 258, 022. 50 35. 6 '' II ,. 12 1201 CITY MANAGER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT lb3 m 17 14 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 18 15 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MI SC 101, 616. 00 ' 8. 132. 02 48, 919. 53 - O. 00 52. 696. 47 48. 1 ;- 16 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1, 848. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 1, 848. 00 0. 0 2, 17 1e 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 1, 848. 00 3, 900. 00 O. 00 210. 00 1, 146. 68 409. 50 O. 00 O. 00 701. 32 3, 490. 50 62.0 10. 5 Zj 10 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 109, 212. 00 8, 342. 02 50, 475. 71 • 0. 00 58, 736. 29 46. 2 20 -" 21 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES - ..= 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 300. 00 0.00 138. 50 O. 00 161. 50 46. 1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 300.00 0.00 138. 50 .0. 00 161, 50 46. 1 2431] 25 43O0-F1A7II}2IAL5/S7PPLi£S/OTFIF_k 26 4304 TELEPHONE • B00. 00 O. 00 215. 14 O. 00 584. 86 26. 8 27 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 1, 500. 00 56. 67 997. 29 0. 00 502. 71 66. 4 .I. 2u au 431-5 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 4315 350. 00 125. 00 15. 57 O. 00 86. 12 90. 07 O. 00 O. 00 263. 88 34. 93 24. 6 72. 0 :, "` 30 MEMBBERSHIP 1. 150. 00 0. 00 531. 38 O. 00 618. 62 46. 2 31 4316 TRAINING 3, 500. 00 O. 00 93. 95 O. 00 3, 406. 05 2. 6 '• 32 73 34 _ 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 2, 900. 00 6, 544. 00 O. 00 545. 00 1, 094. 86 3, 270. 31 O. 00 O. 00 1, 805. 14 3, 273. 69 37. 7 49. 9 4' 4: 4, OBJECT SUBTOTAL 16, 869. 00 617. 24 6, 379. 12 O. 00 10, 489. 88 37. 8 35 30 j 3, 30 DIVISION TOTAL_ 126, 381. 00 8. 959. 26 56, 993. 33 O. 00 69. 367. 67 45. 0 39 1202 FINANCE ADMIN DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 40 41 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 42 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MI SC 191, 120. 00 14, 111.00 92, 012. 92 O. 00 99, 107. 08 48. 43 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 2.523. 00 64.04 1.798. 37 0.00 724.63 1 71.2 .' 44 •, 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 4111 3, 855 00 0. 00 . ': 101. 83 O. 00 3, 753. 17 2. 6 45 ACCRUAL CASH IN 3, 855. 00 0. 00 2, 338. 91 0. 00 1, 516. 09 60. 6 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY OBJECT 5, 000. 00 1, 975. 67 4, 086.08 0. 00 913. 92 81. 7 46 47 4,1 SUBTOTAL 206, 353. 00 16, 151. 51 100, 338. 11 0. 00 106, 014. 89 48. 6 s., 49 4200 CLNTR7 T SERVICES • I " 50 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 81, 910. 00 375. 00 26, 606. 17 O. 00 55, 303. 83 32. 4 `" 51 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 81. 910. 00 . 375. 00 26, 606. 17 0. 00 55, 303. 83 32. 4 53 54 55 56 • r r r r r • • A r r • 41, FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH • �1 EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (13Y FUND) 4 ----TIME 11:2,:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 2 3• FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION 001 GENERAL FUND PAGE 0005 DATE 02/01/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE MONTHLY EXP YTD jXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 3 .+ 7 1202 FINANCE ADMIN DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT' X300 RATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 17 10 3 24 25 4304 TELEPHONE 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 4315 MEMBERSHIP 4316 TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5400 EGUIPMENT 2, 563. 00 10, 772. 00 225. 00 2, 460. 00 1, 700. 00 9, 256. 00 26, 976. 00 0. 00 333. 73 0. 00 358. 50 150. 00 645. 00 4, 943. 67 145. 00 1, 400. 83 247. 01 771. 00 1,613.23 4,626.29 12, 007. 80 0. 00 106. 50 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 106. 50 1, 918. 00 5, 721. 83 80. 00 1, 059. 17 1,452.99 4, 629. 71 14, 861. 70 25. 1 46. 8 64. 4 56. 9 14. 5 49. 9 44. 9 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 400.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 400. 00 0. 00 110. 76 0. 00 110. 76 DIVISION TOTAL 315, 639. 00 18, 139. 74 6 27 211 2a -.0 31 1203 PERSONNEL 36 37 30 35 DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 4110 VACATION/SSICK PAY OFF 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY OBJECT SUBTOTAL • 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 40 42 9J 4 45 40 7 40 4 0 31 52 53 54 55 56 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 4315 MEMBERSHIP 4316 TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4320 MEDICAL EXAMS 4376 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS -OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0. 00 289. 24 0. 00 289. 24 139, 062. 84 106. 50 27. 6 27. 6 176, 469. 66 44. 0 53, 729. 00 1, 043. 00 1, 043. 00 3, 900. 00 59, 715. 00 15, 480. 00 1 1, 320. 00 26, 800. 00 4,419.35 0.00 0. 00 210. 00 4, 629. 35 1, 085. 00 0. 00 1, 085. 00 26, 835. 25 0. 00 541. 20 409. 50 27, 785. 95 6, 284. 42 O. 00 6, 284. 42 .0. 00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 197_61 0. 00 1, 197. 81 26, 893. 75 1, 043. 00 -501. 80 3, 490. 50 31, 929. 05 7, 997. 77 11, 320. 00 19, 317. 77 49. 9 0. 0 51. 8 10. 5 46. 5 48. 3 0. 0 27. 9 If 12 1, 14 15 16 1., 13 16 21 22 24 r 2/ 31 3,. 33 30 900. 00 5, 000. 00 710. 00 3, 625. 00 1, 070. 00 22, 500. 00 2, 722. 00 36, 527. 00 5400 EGUIPMEI•JT 5401 EGUIPMENT-LESS THAN $500 5402 EQUIPI'IENT•-MORE THAN $500 0.00 253. 33 0.00 125. 00 0. 00 275. 00 . 227. 00 880. 33 300. 19 2, 007. 59 597. 50 892. 00 517. 00 3, 125. 92 1,361.79 8, 801. 99 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 400. 00 800. 00 0. 00 10. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 599. 81 2, 992. 41 112. 50 2, 733. 00 553. 00 19, 374. 08 1, 360. 21 27, 725. 01 0. 00 33.3 40. 1 84. 1 24. 6 48. 3 13. 8 50. 0 24. 0 390. 00 2. 5 800. 00 0. 0 4: 5, OIL • F I NANCE—FA454 r CITY OF HERMOSA DEACH I IM!ao.pv n, DrDT , r.v r I2 3 r YAl>t 0006 TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/39 DATE 02/01/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE '•\ 4 5 6 FUND DIV UIIJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % 001 GENERAL FUND o 7 7 ° 5400 EQUIPMENT° OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 200. 00 'O 00 10. 00 O. 00 1, 190. 00 0. 8 ° 0 10 II 12 13 14 Is . DIVISION TOTAL 124, 242, 00 6, 594. 68 42, 882, 36 1, 197, 81 80, 161, 83 35.4 126 A -B -CE TV DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT •17 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES- - 4 5 0 10 16 17 10 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MI SC 25, 261. 00 1, 290, 60 10, 604. 34 O. 00 14, 656, 66 41.9 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 489. 00 0.00 563. 93 O. 00 74. 73— 115.3 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 489. 00 O. 00 O. 0023 o. 00 489. 00 0. 0 4112 21 72 19 20 21 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 2, 000. 00 241. 50 1, 032. 50 O. 00 967. 50 51.6 ODJECT SUBTOTAL 28, 239. 00 1, 532. 10 12, 200. 77 O. 00 16. 038. 23 ' - 43. 2 .,c 2, 22 23 24 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES . 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 1, 000. 00 O. 00 3, 610. 00— O. 00 4, 610. 00 361. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1,'000. 00 0. 00 3, 610. 00— O. 00 4, 610. 00 361. 0 •- 3" 3 25 _° v 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER - .. 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES700. 00 21. 16 88. 80 • 300. 00 34 2:, 2 30 311. 20 55.5 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 1, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 000. 00 0. 0 4315 MEMBERSHIP 600. 00 0.00 45. 00 O. 00 555. 00 7. 5 4316 TRAINING 350. 00 85. 0i0— 0. 00 O. 00 ,q 3/ 3`, 31 32 33 350. 00 O. 0 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 500. 00 0.00 . 437.00 0.00 63. 00 07. 4 4396 TRSFR OUT—INS USER CHCS 597. 00 50.00 299.72 0.00 297. 28 50.2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3, 747. 00 13. 84— 870. 52 300. 00 2, 576. 48 31. 2 41 34 35 36 5400 EGUIPMENT 5402 EQUIPMENT—MORE THAN $500 5, 000. 00 O. 00 0. 00 37 30 30 0, 00 5, 000. 00 O. 0 DBjEUT SUB ii`ASL 5, 000. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 5, 000. 00 ' 0. 0 4�I 40 41 42 DLVI SION TOTAL 37, 986. 00 1, 518. 26 9, 461.29 300. 00 28, 224. 71 25.6 1206 DATA PROCESS INGDEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT s; __ 43 44 45 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MI SC 83, 320. 00 5, 949. 00 39, 074. 99 46 O. 00 44, 245. 01. 46. 8 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 47 40 300.00 0.00 231. 72 0. 00 68.28 77.2 -" 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1, 650. 00 0. 00 . 563. 93 O. 00 1, 086, 07 34. 1 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 1, 650. 00 O. 00 O. 00 49 50 51 0. 00 1, 650. 00 0. 0 OBvECT SOit'TD fAL 86, 92f'. 00 5, 949. 00 39, 870. 64 O. 00 47, 049. 36 45.•8 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES ,. 52 ,326I CONTR TRA-CT—GER VIi:E'7PRIVATE 53 54 107, 416. 00 115. 00 30, 205. 57 1, 070. 34 76, 140. 09 29. 1 '>- ` /1 55 56 ... • A r r r r • • r• • r FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND)• 0007 TME 2 11:26:10 FNM 12/01/89 TO 12/31-71339 • DATE 50.07 OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE i s 001 I ' •C• •_ R GENERAL.. FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP `/TD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 1206 DATA PROCESSING DEPT: •MGMT/SUPPORT . • 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES OBJECT SUBTOTAL 107, 416. 00 115. 00 30, 203. 57 1, 070. 34 76, 140. 09 29. 1 3 4;1U0fiA VER.S7 .F� 4304 TELEPHONE 3, 000. 00 O. 00 926. 34 - O. 00 2, 073. 66 30. 8 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 11, 348. 00 28. 00 1, 762. 12 1, 451. 60 8, 134. 28 2B. 3 43-0 ThAINTENANCE MATERIALS 3, 000. 00 O. 00 513. 47 41. 54 2, 444. 99 18. 5 4315 (MEMBERSHIP 670. 00 0.00 120. 00 O. 00 550.00 17. 9 4316 TRAINING 3, 300. 00 0. 00 2, 518.'77 O. 00 781. 23 76. 3 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 850. 00 0.00 395.00 O. 00 455.00 46. 4 4396 TRSFR OUT --INS USER CHCS 2, 677. 00 223. 00 1, 333. 10 O. 00 1, 338. 90 49. 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 24, 845. 00 251. 00 7, 573. 20 1, 493. 14 15, 778. 06 36. 4 5400 EGUIPMENT 5401 EGUIPMENT-LESS THAN $500 O. 00 0. 00 442.29 0. 00 442. 29- O. 0 5402 EQUIPMENT-M'IORE THAN $500 19, 518. 00 O. 00 1, 965. 82 O. 00 17, 552. 18 10. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 19, 518. 00 0. 00 2, 408. 11 • 0. 00 17, 109. 89 12. 3 DIVISION TOTAL 238, 699. 00 6, 315. 00 80, 058. 12 2, 563. 48 156, 077. 40 34. 6 1207 BUS LICENSE DEPT: IIGIIT/SUPPORT 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES . 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 84, 206. 00 . 4, 112. 58 24, 401. 68 O. 00 59, 804. 32 28. 9 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 4110 500. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 500. 00 0. 0 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1, 664 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 664. 00 O. 0 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 1, 664. 00 O. 00 • O. 00 0. 00 1, 664. 00 O. 0' OBJECT SUBTOTAL 88, 034. 00 • 4, 112. 58 24, 401.68 O. 00 63, 632. 32 27. 7 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 4251 52. 00 O. 00 26. 78 O. 00 25. 22 51. 5 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 160. 00 0.00 37. 95 0.00 122.05 • 23. OBJECT SUBTOTAL 212.00 0.00 64.73 0.00 147.27 7 30. 5 - 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 4305 OFFICE 500. 00 0.00 140.29 O. 00 359. 71 28. 0 OPER SUPPLIES 4310 FUELS I•.,c 40 MOTOR Fl?c. o AND LUDES 4, 000. 00 350. 00 292. 09 O. 00 1; 830. 38 113. 93 266. 97 O. 00 1, 902. 65 231. 07 52.4 c 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE. 4315 MEMBERSHIP 400. 00 50.00 0. 00 0.00 12. 00 40.00 O. 00 0.00 328. 00 10. 00 33. 9 3. 0 BO. 0 ,. 4316 TRAINING 600. 00 242. 50 257. 50 O. 00 342. 50 42. 9 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 600. 60 0. 00 492. 57 0. 00 107. 43 82. 0 7 2 A , r. r r 3 3 3 3 3 41 43 • 4 4,4 4 4 f .5 5, 5. 53 5a 55 r 50 3 4 5 0 9 c 11 12 1.3 14 15 1,3 1, 1L' 14 21 z_ 24 25 27 3.. 31 3; J: w r..l c. 1.; O • r r • • r r- • • • n r • FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) 0008 2 3 TIME 11:26:10 • FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 50. O% OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE `, 4 6 7 e • 5 6 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 001 GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % e 1207 BUS LICENSE . DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT • lli itn 0 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 13 „ 12 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5, 560. 00 12, 060. 00 463. 00 997. 59 2, 778. 37 5, 670. 04 0. 00 266. 97 2, 781. 63 6, 122. 99 49. 9 49. 2 ,� 16 13 7 14 L' I19 15 DIVISION TOTAL -' 100,306.00 5, 110. 17 - 30, 136.45 -` 266.97 69,902. 58 30.3 20 16 21 17 1208 GEN APPROP DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT Is z3 24 19 10ONAL SERVICES_ __ 20 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 21, 926. 00 1, 941. 00 11, 350. 73 :. 0. 00 10, 575. 27 51. 7 `a 21 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 469. 00 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 469. 00 O.0 27 222 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN OBJECT 469. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 469. 00 O. 0 - 13 24 SUBTOTAL 22, 864. 00 1, 941. 00 11, 350. 73 0. 00 11, 513. 27 49. 6�'� 3_ 25 420 CONTRACT SERVICES 33 26 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 21, 520. 00 O. 00 5, 491. 34 - 0. 00 16, 036. 66 25.5 34 27 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 21, 33 528. 00 O. 00 5, 491. 34 O. 00 16, 036. 66 25.5 3: 2J 37 .9 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 3:: 30 4304 TELEPHONE 250.00 0.00 127. 75 O. 00 122.25 51. 1 4r. 31 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 300. 00 4, 101. 62- 25, 774. 64- 0. 00 26, 074. 64 8591. 5 d1 32 4316 TRAINING 250. 00 O. 00 98. 00 0.00 152.00 39.2 4, 33 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 2, 135. 00 178. 00 1, 067. 93 O. 00 1.067. 07 50. 0 4: 4 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 935. 00 3, 923. 62-- 24, 480. 96- 0. 00 27, 415. 96 834. 1 4. s 38 5400 EQUIPMENT 47 37 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 319.00 0.00 310.44 O. 00 0. 56 99. 8 , 36 39 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 319.00 0. 00 . 318. 44 0.00 O. 56 99. 8 s� 40 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 41 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 18, 156. 00 O. 00 7, 514. 00 0. 00 10, 641. 20 41. 3 42 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 18, 156. 00 0. 00 7, 514. 80 O. 00 10, 641. 20 41. 3 '' 43 44 .,: 45 DIVISION TOTAL 65, 802. 00 1, 982. 62- 194. 35 O. 00 65, 607. 65 O. 2 53 1,:• 49 �1 47 1212 EMP BENEFITS DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT • 4U C. 49 4100 PERSDNAL LRVICES - C, 6. 30 4158 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS - . 544. 52. 00 44, 276. 66 231, 142. 36 O. 00 313, 386. 64 42. 4 51 OBJECT SUBTOTAL. 544, 529. 00 44, 276. 66 231, 142. . 36 0. 00 313, 386. 64 42. 4 . 52 GI, 53 34 55 56 '1 O • r r r 3 4 5 7 8 9 11 14 15 16 ,7 ,8 u • 20 21 22 • 23 24 25 A2 r r r 27 2C 2D 3 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 30 40 41 42 43 • 44 45 46 • 47 n r 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0009 -26:10 O • FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/69. • DATE 02/01/90 50.0/ OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND / DIVISION . TOTAL • 544, 529 00 ' . 44, 276. 66 231; 142, 36 0. 00 313, 386: 64 42. 4 1213 RETIREMENT DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4160 RETIREMENT 822, 159. 00 71, 038. 95 356, 967. 83 .. O. 00 465, 191. 17 43. 4 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 822, 159. 00 '71, 038. 95 . 356, 967, 83 0. 00 , .465, 191. 17 43. 4 DIVISION TOTAL 822, 159. 00 71, 038. 95. 356, 967. 83 O. 00 465, 191. 17 43. 4 1214 PROSP EXP DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT . 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4322 UNCLASSIFIED 27, 871. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 27, 871. 00 O. 0 4397 2. 5% ANTICIPATED SAVINGS 241, 620. 00- O. 00' O. 00 O. 00 241, 620. 00- 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 213, 749. 00- O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 213, 749. 00- O. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 213, 749. 00- O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 213, 749. 00=- O. 0 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 4300 MAI ERTALS/SUPPCTiS/OTHER 4398 RESDL EQUITY TRSFR OUT 1, 056, 506. 00 O. 00 ' 1, 056, 505. 60 . O. 00 O. 40 99. 9 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 6, 914. 00 O. 00 6, 914. 00 O. 00 0. 00 100. 0 05-JECT-SUBTOTAL 1, 063, 420. 00 0. 00 1, 063, 419. 60 O. 00 O. 40 99. 9 ' DIVISION TOTAL 1, 063, 420. 00 O. 00 1,063, 419.60 O. 00 O. 40 99. 9 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 3, 225, 414. 00 159, 970. 10 2, 010, 318. 53 4, 434. 76 1,1210, 660. 71 62. 4 2101 POLICE DEPT: POLICE 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 500, 237. 00 37, 677. 15 231, 490. 44 . .0. 00 268,746. 56 46. 2 4103 REGULAR SALARIES/SAFETY 1, 551, 397. 00 120, 166. 44 724, 625. 00 0. 00 826, 772. 00 46. 7 4105 SPECIAL DUTY PAY 19, 920. 00 1, 100. 00 9, 148. 75 O. 00 10, 771. 25 45. 9 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 7, 500. 00 3, 115. 90 15, 122. 08 0. 00 7, 622. 08- 201. 6 4107 PREMIUM OVERTIME 90, 000. 0C) 6, 764. 14 483, 447. 05 O. 00 41, 552. 95 53. B 4109 COURT TIME 20, 500. 00 1, 318. 30 7, 827. 16 0. 00 12, 672. 84 38. 1 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 41, 547. 00 O. 00 1, 002. 05 0. 00 40, 544. 95 2. 4 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 41, 547. 00 1, 940. 10 30, 769. 70 0. 00 10, 777. 30 74. 0 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 43, 482. 00 1, 038. 24 13, 104. 30 0. 00 30, 377. 70 30. 1 t1 51 5" 5. E_^1 6.. G: cc /1 I l5 • • r 2 5 e 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 52 53 54 55 6 FINANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SU e TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO _ _ 12/31/89 fS4G 3313 DATE 02/01/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV ODJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE i 001 GENERAL FUND 2101 POLICE DEPT:. POLICE 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES , 4114 POLICE RESERVES 13, 500. 00 2, 068. 50 12, 683. 12 O. 00 816. 88 93. 9 2 4117 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 9, 318. 00 458. 52 3, 447. 96 0. 00 5, 870. 04 37. 0 5 41TS—MELD TRAINING OFFICER 10, 000. 00 355: 32 3, 773. 16 O. 00 . 6, 226. 84 37. 7 . 4127 UNIFORMS 33, 825. 00 - 3, 469. 39, ' •21. 237. 03 534, 03 12, 053. 94 64. 3 S OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 382, 773. 00 179, 472. 00 1, 122. 677. 80 '. 534. 03 1, 259, 561. 17 47. 1 , , , 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 91, 085. 00 3, 732. 63 39, 220. 66 811. 85 51, 052. 49 43. 9 , 425Y—CU+FJTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 37, 757. 00 0. 00 11, 248. 95 - O. 00 26, 508. 05 29. 7 , i OBJECT SUBTOTAL 128, 842. 00 3, 732. 63 50, 469. 61 811. 05 77, 560. 54 39. 8 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER . 4304 TELEPHONE 22, 500. 00 666. 07 10, 083. 57 0. CO 12, 416. 43 44. 8 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 32, 650. 00 • 1, 654. 42 17, 668. 04 1, 442. 99 13, 538. 97 58. 5 4306 PRISONER MAINTENANCE 6, 525. 00 572. 83 . 3. 048. 07 962. 80 2, 513. 33 61. 4 4307 RADIO MAINTENANCE 1, 500. 00 40. 00 1,•534. 89 390. 15 425. 04— ,128. 3 , 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 8. 500. 00 147. 50 1, 711. 51 2, 199. 48 4, 589. 01 46. 0 5 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LURES 17, 500. 00 1, 392. 82 11, 831. 10 0. 00 5, 668. 90 67. 6 , 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 21, 000. 00 241. 54 4, 620. 41 1, 228. 07 15. 151. 52 27. 8 4312 TRAVEL EXPENSE POST 17, 500. 00 700. 22 12, 335. 26 0. 00 4, 664. 74 73. 3 4313 TRAVEC— EXfNS ThTc 8, 500. 00 591. 12— 2, 651. 03 0. 00 5, 848. 97 :}1. 1 4315 MEMBERSHIP . 1, 535. 00 25. 00 447. 50 0. 00 1, 087. 50 29. 1 4316 TRAINING 10, 000. 00 0. 00 9, 657. 17 0. 00 342. 83 96. 5 4317—CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4396 4, 000. 00 227. 50 1, 794. 88 O. 00 2, 205. 12 44. 8 TRSFR OUT—INS USER CHCS OBJECT 399, 149. 00 33,'232. 00 199, 557. 20 0. 00 199, 591. 80 49. 9 SUBTOTAL 550, 859. 00 38, 303. 78 277, 441. 43 6. 223. 49 267, 194. 08 51. 4 , 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT—LESS THAN $500 1, 537. 00 O. 00 326. 74 0. 00 1, 210. 26 21. 2 5402 EGUIPMENT—MORE THAN $500 5403 25, 000. 00 O. 00 2, 343. 00 2, 371. 54 20, 285. 46 18. 8 VEHICLES OBJECT 16, 125. 00 5, 395. 00— 6, 000. 00 32, 500. 00 22, 375. 00— 238. 7 ' SUBTOTAL 42, 662. 00 5, 395. 00— 8, 669. 74 34, 871. 54 879. 28— 102. 0 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 143, 640. 00 O. 00 112, 430. 77 O. 00 31, 209. 23 78. 2 DTVIST0TT 143, 640. 00 O. 00 112, 430. 77 O. 00 31, 209. 23 78. 2 2 (0tAL 3, 248, 77t. 00 216, 118. 41 1, 571, 689. 35 . 42, 440. 91 1, 634, 645. 74 49.6 2 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 3, 248, 776. 00 216, 118.41 1, 571, 689. 35 42, 440. 91 1, 634, 645. 74 49.6 a 2201 FIRE DEPT: FIRE , 41G3 PCNUiTlAL—SENICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 38, 674. 00 3, 193. 75 17, 591. 25 0. 00 ` 21, 002. 75 45.4 4 5 67 e • n 14 i5 .r, n e ,a �3 2, 22 2:, 2. 2C 21 3.. : 33 335 4 1 0 1. 4 • • • r r r r • 2 • 2 2 rig r 3: r- 3 3: r r r 3 3 3 3 3 41 4 4 4 4 • ns r r 51 52 53 55 56 FINANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPO —TIKE 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/69 --Tb i2/31/89 • .DATE 50.0% OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 001 GENERAL.FUND APPP.OPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE • UNENC BALANCE 2201 FIRE DEPT:. ; FIRE. .:...: .. .... ,. ' 4 U'rfUUFEITSONAL SERVICE'a' 4103 REGULAR SALARIES/SAFETY 846, 306. 00 69, 781. 17 422, 076. 04 O. 00 424, 229. 16 49. 8 2 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME - 96, 000. 00 5, 511. 68 43, 160. 56 O. 00 47, 839. 44 50. 1 3 4108 rETA OVERTIME 55, 000. 00 3, 040. 70 29, 166. 28 . 0. 00 25, 833. 72 53. 0 e 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 15, 871. 00 O. 00 • O. 00 .'. O. 00 15, 071. 00 O. 0 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 15, 871. 00 O. 00 9, 889. 66 O. 00 5, 981.34 62. 3 4187 UNIFORMS 12, 840. 00 212. 47 3, 003. 62 5, 492. 07 4, 344. 31 66. 1 7 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 080, 562. 00 81, 739. 77 529, 2E38. 21 5, 492. 07 545, 181. 72 49. 5 4200 cD MATT—MN I C E S > 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 20, 349. 00 919. 97 12, 178. 26 O. 00 8, 170. 74 59. 8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 20, 349. 00 919. 97 12, 178. 26 0. 00 8, 170. 74 59. 8 1 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 3, 500. 00 .92. 56 1, 472. 57 O. 00 2, 027. 43 42. 0 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 3, 500. 00 147. 63 2, 025. 39 O. 00 1, 474. 61 57. 8 4309 MAINTENANCE •M:=.TERIALS 7, 200. 00 442. 85 2, 056. 45 ' 1, 640. 45 3, 503. 10 51. 3 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 3, 000. 00 181. 58 11473. 88 O. 00 1, 526. 12 49. 1 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 3, 500. 00 O. 00 392. 18 O. 00 • 3, 107. 82 11. 2 4315 MEMOERSHIP 650.00 0.00 135. 00 O. 00 515.00 20. 7 4316 TRAINING 3, 800. 00 O. 00 769. 65 O. CO 3, 030. 35 20. 2 4317 CONFEREM.,E EXPENSE 1, 900. 00 O. 00 183. 13 O. 00 1, 716. 87 9. 6 4396 TRSFR OUT—INS USER CHCS 112, 787. 00 9, 399. 00 56, 393. 91 0. 00 56, 393. 09 50. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 139, 237. 00 10, 263. 62 64, 902. 16 1, 640. 45 73, 294. 39 47. 5 5400 EGUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT—LESS THAN $500 1, 225. 00 O. 00 715. 15 O. 00 509. 85 58. 3 5402 EGUIPMENT—MORE THAN $500 10, 157. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 10, 157. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 11, 382. 00 O. 00 715. 15 0. 00 10, 666. 85 6. 2 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 138, 881. 00 0. 00 42, 779. 00 0. 00 96, 102. 00 30. 8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 138, 881. 00 • O. 00 42, 779. 00 0. 00 96, 102. 00 30. 8 DIVISION TOTAL 1, 391. 011. 00 92, 923. 36 650, 462. 78 7, 132. 52 733, 415. 70 47. 2 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1, 391, 011. 00 92. 923. 36 650, 462. 78 7, 132. 52 733, 415. 70 47. 2 2401 ANIMAL CONTROL DEPT: ANIMAL RECULTN 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MI SC 89, 291. 00 6, 749. 71- 42, 354. 83 0. 00 46, 936. 17 47. 4 23 4 5 e 9 ,0 ,3 ,4 ,5 ,0 w 1B ,o • 20 21 2. 2: 24 25 26 2: 3, 3, 33 3Y , c • • 2 3 4 r 7 9 r • • • • A 2 2 3 :, 3 34 3 3 32 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 4(i 47 40 49 50 51 5: 53 54 55 56 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) 0012 TTME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 50. 07.. OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION 001 GENERAL FUND MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 2401 ANIMAL CONTROL DEPT:.'. ANIMAL REGULTN • 41OU-PERSONAL SERVICES 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 1, 000. 00 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1, 770. 00 114. 66 0. 00 398. 34 O. 00 1, 1, 046. 57 563. 93 014. 34 5. 10 •' O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 46. 206. 755. 994. 57- 07 66 90 104. 6 31. 8 57. 3 0. 5 431T-ATCROAL CASH IN 1, 770. 00 4117 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 1, 000. 00 .• 4187 UNIFORMS 471. 00 18. 76 112. 56 ' O. 00 358. 44 23. 6 UU-JECT SUBTOTAL 95, 302. 00 7, 281. 47 45, 097. 33 O. 00 50, 204. 67 47. 3 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SER-JICE/PRIVA1E 1, 600. 00 0. 00 939. 05 0. 00 860. 95 52. 1 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT " 5, 000. 00 634. 71 2, 231. 51 0. 00 2, 768. 49 44. 6 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 6, 800. 00 634. 71 3, 170. 54 O. 00 3, 629. 44 46. 6 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 450. 00 0.00 212. 43 O. 00 237. 57 47. 43T5 0r -Fm: Of €R SUPPLIES 1. 800. 00 11. 75 1, 132. 08 45. 69 622. 23 65. 4 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 700.00 0.00 218. 43 183. 78 297. 79 57. 4 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUDES 1, 400. 00 200. 11 679. 83 O. 00 720. 17 48. 5 4-3-11 AOT MAXTENANCE 2, 500. 00 O. 00 853. 58 291. 65 1, 354. 77 45. 8 4315 MEMBERSHIP 50. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 50. 00 O. 0 4316 TRAINING 350. 00 -CONFERENCE 0. 00 O. 00 , 0. 00 350. 00 0. 0 4317 EXPEN- E 550. 00 0. 00 104. 96 0. 00 445. 04 19. 0 4396 TP.SFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 12, 469. 00 1, 039. 00 6, 234. 11 0. 00 6, 234. 89 49. 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 20, 269. 00 1, 250. 86 9, 435. 42 521. 12 10, 312. 46 49. 1 5400 EGUIPMENT 5401 EOUIPME:NT-LESS THAN $500 1, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 000. 00 0. 0 5403 VEHIZ:LES 13, 000. 00 • O. 00 13, 394. 89 O. 00 394. 89- 103. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 14, 000. 00 0. 00 13, 394. 89 O. 00 605. 11 95. 6 6900 TEA-SE-ITAI ENT S 6 900 LEASE PAYMENTS 680. 00 O. 00 280. 75 O. 00 399. 25 41. 2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 680.00 0.00 280. 75 0.00 399. 25 41.2 DIVISION TOTAL 137, 051. 00 9, 167. 04 71, 378. 95 521: 12 65, 150. 93 52. 4 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 137, 051. 00 -Z70 9, 167. 04 71, 378. 95 521. 12 65, 150. 93 52. 4 1 CI'•JIL DEFcf1S1=- DEPT: DISASTER PREP 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES -SACARIE57$4FETY 4103 REGULAR 24, 532. 00 2, 083. 24 12, 611.38 0. 00 11, 920. 62 51. 4 1 23 6 r. 1 3 6 '7 6 20 2, 22 23 :.4 2! 2, 31 3: o 34..k‘ 35 ll: 37 4.: 4, 51 57 :.J v • • r r r r FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SU 3 TIME 11:26:10 J 6 o FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89.: VV l . DATE 02/01/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EX ND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND 2701 CIVIL DEFENSE DEPT: .DISASTERPREP 4T PERSDNAL SERVICES 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 491. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 491. 00 0. 0 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 491. 00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 491. 00 0.0 T 7 ONIFt3 FT 231. 00 14.58 87. 48 ' 0. 00 143. 52 37. 88 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 25, 745. 00 2, 097. 82 12, 698. 86 0. 00 13,•046. 14 49. 3 _e• •N R ICES 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 4, 648. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 4, 648. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 648. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 4, 648. 00 0. 0 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 50. 00 0. 00 ' 0.00 0.00 50.00 0. 0 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES '4309 500. 00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 500.00 0.0 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS .200. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 000. 00 1, 800. 00- 1000. 0 4316 TRAINING 3, 600. 00 0. 00 646. 00 0. 00 2, 954. 00 17. 9 '396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 3, 484. 00 290. 00 1, 740. 31 . 0. 00 1, 743. 69 . 49. 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 7, 834. 00 290. 00 2, 386. 31 2, 000. 00 . . 3, 447. 69 55. 9 5400 EQUIPMENT 5402 EQUIPMENT -•MORE THAN $500 OBJECT. 4, 500. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 4, 500. 00 0. 0 SUBTOTAL 4, 500. 00 0. 00 0. 00. 0. 00 4, 500. 00 0. C) • DIVISION TOTAL 42, 727. 00 2, 387. 82 15, 085. 17 2, 000. 00 25, 641. 83 39. 9 DEPARTMENT TOTAL _ 42. 727. 00 2, 387. 82 15, 085. 17 2, 000. 00 25, 641. 83 39. 9 O1 (MEDIANS DEPT: ST/HWY/ST. DRAIN 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 4106 44, 697. 00 3, 1314. 40 22, 559. 71 0. 00 22, 137. 29 50. 4 REGULAR OVERTIME 4110 300. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 300. 00 0. 0 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 894. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 894. 00 0. 0 4111 . ACCRUAL CASH. IN OBJECT 894. 00 0. 00 503. 73 0. 00 .390. 27 56. 3 SUBTOTAL 46, 785. 00 3, 814. 40 23, 063. 44 0. 00 23, 721. 56 49. 2 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 4251 47, 630. 00 3, 150. 00 12, 600. 00 0. 00 35, 030. 00 26. 4 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 1, 260. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 260. 00 0 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 48, 8911. 00 3, 150. 00 . 12, 600. 00 0. 00 36, 290. 00 25. 7 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER . 4303 UTILITIES 8, 764. 00 631. 33 4, 224. 91 0. 00 4, 539. 09 • 48. 2 4 5 e e 1 1 r' r r • • r•_ (- 2 31 32 3. 34 3 3 3 3 4 41 4 43 44 45 46 47 40 40 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 23 7 e 12 0 15 16 17 10 0 20 21 22 2.1 11. i;. s , n ,4 1 l 1..... r r • O n r' FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1 • A 2 TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 . GE 0014 DATE 50. 07 OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE �l • 0 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 001 GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ,a ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE l `o 0 3101 MEDIANS DEPT: ST/HWY/ST. DRAIN 5, 000. 00 900. 00 - 1, 299. 19 14. 44 - 1, 725. 19 164. 33 O. 00 O. 00 3, 274. 81 735. 67 34. 5 18. 2 g 11 I0 1 12 13 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER13 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUDES 4311 AUTO . 14 15 lb MAIN 1 •!Af•! 4396 TRSFR OJT -INS USER CHGS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 720. 00 5, 701. 00 21, 085. 00 U. 00 475. 00 2, 419. 96 O. 00 2, 375. 07 8, 489. 50 0. CO 0. 00 - O. 00 720. 00 3, 325. 93 12, 59 5. 50 O. 0 41. 6 40.2 Ic 17 0 10 ' n l0 5400 EOUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 BOO. 00 U. 00 O. 00 0. CO 800.00 0.0 : 3 21 23 2 25 27 2. 31 IY 1 20 21 OBJET-5LDTOTAL 800. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 800. 00 0. 0 22 23 24 I,e Z7 DIVISION TOTAL 3103 ST MAINTENANCE DEPT: 117, 560. 00 ST/HWY/ST. DRAIN 9, 364. 36 44, 152. 94 0. 00 73, 407. 06 37. 5 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES33 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 142, 856. 00 11, 277. 20 66, 130. 41 - 0. 00 76, 725. 59 46. 2 34 .20 20 30 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME • 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 500. 00 2, 843. 00 2, 848. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 98. 90 O. 00 1, 594. 18 0. 00 0. 00 0. CO • 401. 10 2, 848. 00 1, 253. 82 19. 7 0. 0 55. 9 ,. :1 3.. 31 32 33 34 35 3u OBJECT -SUBTOTAL 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 149, 052. 00 1 1.277. 20 67, 823. 49 0. UO 81, 228. 51 45.5 4' 4_ . 1, 4% 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 84, 877. 00 84, 877. 00 O. 00 O. 00 25, 051. 76 25, 051. 78 O. 00 0. 00 59, 825. 22 59, 825. 22 29. 5 29. 5 ,. 30 30 .o 41 42 -4370-FFATt RIAL 11SUPPCYEB/OTHEF: 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 20, 000. 00 3, 500. 00 15. 37 252. 63 5, 272. 41 1, 999. 04 0. 00 0. 00" : 14, 727. 59 26. 3 '-1311 AUTO- fIATRT`ENAFICE182. A316 TRAINING 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 600. 00 68, S41. 00 1057-941. UO 0. 00 5, 737. 00 '6, 187. 90 299. 00 34, 421. 75 46, 710. 88 0. 00 0. 00 3, 206. 72 5500.9657.00, 074. 60 301. 00 34, 419. 25 56, 023. 40 60. 9 49. 8 50. 0 47. 1 "" 3.; 43 44 45 OBJECT SUB1 PJ 1 AL 5400 EQUIPMENT 40 47 40 5401 EQ0IPMENf-LESS-THAN $500 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 150.00 150. 00 0.00 0. 00 149.05 149. 05 0.00 C. 00 0.95 0. 95 99. 3 99. 3 49 50 51 52 &lJU LEA;iE Pi ENE S -VI 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS OBJECT SUBTOTAL, 20, 844. 00 20, 844. 00 O. 00 0.'00 . 10, 420. 68 10, 420. 68 O. 00 • O. 00 10, 423. 32 10, 423. 32 49. 9 53 54 55 49. 9 56 t7 hl FINANCE-FA454 r 2 3 4 7 16 r I1 12 r r r I r r r r ri • • r r 13 14 15 16 17 IB 10 20 21 22 23 24 TIME 11:26:10 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 001 GENERAL FUND CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH • EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (DY FUND) .• FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 . APPROPRIATION PAGE 0015 DATE. 02/01/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE DIVISION • TOTAL • 360, B64. 00 17, 465. 10 = T AFE DEPT: ST/HWY/ST.DRAIN 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 26 27 97, 216. U0 500. 00 1, 927. 00 1, 927. 00 101. 570. 00 150,.155. 88 3,206.72 . . 207, 501.40 42.4 3 4 14 IDI 7, 286. 30 108. 15 0. 00 0. 00 7, 394. 45 43, 107. 32 - : 225. 50 O. 00 1, 272. 46 44, 605. 28 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 54, 108. 68 274. 50 1, 927. 00 654. 54 56, 964. 72 44. 3' 45. 1 0. 0 66. 0 43. 9 4201 CONTRACT. SERVICE/PRIVATE 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4303 UTILITIES 20 22 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 30 .39 40 4, 42 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 4315 MEMBERSHIP 4316 TRAINING 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5400 EQUIPMENT 24, 348. 00 6, 500. 00 30, 848. 00 6, 000. 00 33, 652. 00 1, 000. 00 600. 00 150. 00 250. 00 6, 781. 00 53, 433. 00 167. 50- 0. 00 167. 50- 0. 00 1, 405. 78 127. 93 0. 00 120. 00 0. 00 565. 00 2, 218. 71 1, 795. 00 1, 904. 41 3, 699. 41 1, 037. 50 0. 00 1, 037. 50 21, 515. 50 4, 595. 59 26, 111.09 11.6 29. 2 15. 3 2, 198. 37 13, 269. 91 549. 44 255. 37 186. 25 0. 00 3, 865. 07 20, 924. 41 0. 00 492. 63 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 492. 63 3, 801. 63 24, 289. 46 450. 56 344. 63 36. 25- 250. 00 2, 915. 93 32, 015. 96 36. 6 37. 1 54. 9 42. 5 124. 1 0. 0 56. 9 . 40. 0 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 5403 VEHICLES 5499 NON -CAPITALIZED ASSETS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 127. 00 721. 00 2, 000. 00 0. 00 3. 848. 00 43 44 40 46 49 49 50 51 52 3 54 55 36 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS OBJECT SUBTOTAL DIVISION TOTAL • DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1 1 , 000. 00 1 1, 000. 00 0. 00 783. 24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 • 4, 470. 34 9. 167. 51 4, 470. 34 9, 950. 75 0.00 0. 00 5, 047. 74 5, 047. 74 0.00 0. 00 0.00 3, 567. 54 3. 567. 54 4101 PLANNING 4100 PERSO1AL SERVICES 200, 699. 00 679, 123. 00 DEPT: PLANNIN!1 343. 76 721. 00 2, 000. 00 12, 735. 05- 9, 670. 29- 69, 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 351. 3 0. 00 5, 952. 26 45. 8 . 0. 00 5. 952. 26 45. 3 13, 716. 00 40, 765. 46 84, 227. 59 5, 097. 67 278, 536. 41 8, 304. 39 111, 373. 74 44. 5 392, 282. 20 • 42. 2 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MI SC 187,731.00 12, 195. 66 79, 975. 49 0. 00 107, 755. 51 42. 6 10 17 IC I f. 21 22 22 74 J.., O O. • r • • r• r r • • r) 2 j 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4' <1 4 4 5 51 5 5 54 56 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH • TIME 11:26:I0 2 3 FROM _ __......... ..�. �... �.,•.,,. 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 • PAGE 0016 DATE 02/01/90 50.07 OF YEAR COMPLETE 4 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR e 001 GENERAL. FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE • UNENC BALANCE v. 7 5 4101 PLANNIN•!G DEPT:- ' PLANNING • 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 1 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 2 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 700.00 3, 749. 00 0.00 0. 00 103. 14 O. 00 0.00 O. 00 596.26 14. 7 . 3, 749. 00 0. 0 3 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 5 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3, 749. 00 2, 210. 00 198, 139. 00 O. 00 302. 50 12, 498. 16 1, 999. 44 1, 834. 62 .' 83, 912. 69 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 • 1, 749. 56 53. 3 375. 38 83. 0 114, 226. 31 42. 3 a 7 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES a 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 9, 978. 00 O. 00 251. 00 O. 00 9, 727. 00 2. 5 y OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 9, 978. 00 O. 00 251. 00 O. 00 9, 727. 00 2. 5 4304 TELEPHONE 3 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 4, 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 1, 600. 00 16, 265. 00 200.00 0. 00 363. 21 11.96 481. 56 4, 482. 91 81. 65 O. 00 1, 367. 00 0. 00 1, 118. 44 30. 0 10, 415. 09 35. 9 118. 15 40. 9 5 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 5 4315 MEMBERSHIP . 7 4316 TRAINING 500. 00 623. 00 2, 000. 00 O. 00 0.00 31. 00 176. 36 •s 200. 00 448. 50 0. 00 0.00 O. 00 323. 64 ' 35. 2 423:00 32. 1 1. 551. 50 22. 4 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 450. 00 9, 464. 00 32, 102. 00 O. 00 ' 789. 00 1, 195. 17 O. 00 4, 733. 68 10, 604. 86 O. 00 0. 00 1, 367. 00 1, 450. 00 O. 0 4, 730. 32 50. 0 20, 130. 14 37. 2 ! 5400 EGUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 350. 00 O. 00 1, 083. 11 O. 00 733. 11- 309. 4 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 350. 00 O. 00 1, 083. 11 O. 00 733. 11- 309. 4 DIVISION TOTAL 4102 PLANNING COMM DEPT: 240, 569. 00 PLANNING 13, 693. 33 95, 851. 66 1, 367. 00 143, 350. 34 40. 4 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 5, 304. 00 357. 00 2, 499. 00 0. 00 2, 805. 00 47. 1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL __ _4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER ------------4365 'isGS OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 5. 304. 00 357. 00 21499. 00 0. 00 2, 805. 00 47. 1 • 4316 TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4. 800. 00e 454.00 1, 200. 00 85. 09 15. 50 0. 00 1, 507. 26 27.99 O. 00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 3, 292. 14 31. 4 426.01 6. 1 1. 200. 00 0. 0 17• OBJECT SUBT'OT'AL 6, 454. UO 100. 59 1. 535. 85 O. 00 4, 918. 15 23. 7 DNISTON-iOTAL 11, 758. 00 457. 59. 4, 034. 85 O. 00 • 7, 723. 15 34.3 r 3 0 1r 11 1< 15 I0 9 0 1 3 ;•.ai ` ~Y ,I".1 • FINANCE-FA454 • z r r r • • • • 3 4 5 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (13Y. FUND) 0017 TIME 11: L'6: 10 3 mom 12/01/89 TO 12/31/E39 ':; DATE 50.07. OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 001 GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE DEPARTMENT TOTAL 252, 327. 00 14, 150. 92 99, 886. 51 `' 1, 367. 00 151, 073. 49 40. 1 4201 BUILDING DEPT: CONST/ENGIN/ENF 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 RE-'UULAR SALARIES/MISC 225, 767. 00 17. 896. 36 101. 868. 71 •• O. 00 123, 898. 29 45. 1 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 200. 00 O. 00 • . X14. 61 ':.: '' O. 00 185. 39 7. 3 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 4, 455. 00 O. 00 O. 00 • 0. 00 4, 455. 00 O. 0 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4, 455. 00 1, 713. 07 1, 713. 07 O. 00 2, 741. 93 38. 4 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 234, 877. 00 19, 609. 43 103, 596. 39 O. 00 131, 280. 61 44. 1 20 IVrkACT SEK'VICES 42.01 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 47. 400. 00 O. 00 5. 171. 36 15. 762. 90 26, 465. 74 44. 1 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 700.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 700.00 0.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL • 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 48. 100. 00 O. 00 5. 171. 36 15, 762. 90 27, 165. 74 43. 5 4364- TELEPHONE 2. 500. 00 O. 00 762. 24 O. 00 1. 737. 76 30. 4 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 6. 500. 00 826. 47 3, 410. 59 198. 47 . . 2, 890. 94 55. 5 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 1. 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 1, 000. 00 0. 0 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 1. 000. 00 35. 70 243. 69 O. 00 756. 31 • 24. 3 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 1. 200. 00 O. 00 169. 46 O. 00 1, 030. 54 14. 1 4315 MEMIBERSHIP 645. 00 175.00 250. 00. O. 00 395.00 38. 7 4316 TRAINING 3, 000. 00 110. 00 876. 00 0. 00 2. 124. 00 29. 2 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 1. 500. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 500. 00 0. 0 4396 TP.SFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 17. 993. 00 1, 499. 00 8, 994. 43 O. 00 8, 998. 57 49. 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5400 EQUIPMENT 35. 338. 00 2. 646. 17 14, 706. 41 198. 47 20, 433. 12 42. 1 5401 EOUIPME1T-LESS THAN $500 1. 200. 00 O. 00 864. 68 O. 00 335. 32 72. O 5403 VEHICLES 10. 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 10. 000. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL . 11, 200. 00 O. 00 864. 68 0. 00 10, 335. 32 7. 7 DIVISION TOTAL 329, 515. 00 22, 255. 60 124, 338. 04 15, 961. 37 189, 214. 79 42. 5 4202 PUD WKS ADMIN DEPT: CONST/ENGIN/ENF:. 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MSC 155, 170. 00 13, 378. 70 75, 445. 00 0. 00 79, 725. 00 48. 6 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 2, 988. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 988. 00 0. 0 4111 ACCRUAL_ CASH IN . 2, Y[1i. 00 170. 80 1, 586. 11 O. 00 1, 401.89 53. 0 4112 PART TIME/TEMPOP.ARY 5, 000. 00 O. 00 1, 891. 44 O. 00 3, 108. 56 37. 8 4187 UNIFOP.MS 7, 000. 00 O. 00 . 2, 298. 05 O. 00 4. 701. 95 32. 8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 173, 146. 00 13, 549. 50 81, 220. 60 0. 00 91, 925. 40 46. 9 0 2 2 2 2 31 33 34 35 36 37 30 39 40 41 42 4 4 45 4 47 40 49 50 31 52 53 54 55 56 4 3 4 5 7 9 IV 11 14 14 10 17 IG 1 21 �.. 24 2 3� y, 31 34 3.. 47 41 1 4 •1 r • r r • • i. FINANCE-FA454 CITY (3F HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) oo1a I 2 • Tyne II, 26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 50. 0% OF 02/01/90 'h YEAR COMPLETE '+ e FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION 001 GENERAL FUND MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE e 7 e 4202 PUB WKS ADMIN DEPT: CONST/ENGIN/ENE. ° in 11 10 11 12 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 9, 600. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 9, 600. 00 O. 00 O. 00 218. 12 218. 12 O. 00 0. 00 9, 381. 88 n 9, 3p 1. LO 2. 2 2. 2 „ 14 15 1L 13 14 15 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 5, 200. 00 ' O. 00 _ 1, 584. 05 O. 00 ' 3, 615. 95 30.4 17 1e 1° .3 16 17 1e I° 20 21 4305 O JPPLI 9 9, 500. 00 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS O. 00 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 800. 00 667. 28 O. 00 52. 71 4, 128. 69 889. 14 - 476. 71 0. 00 214. 39 O. 00 5, 371. 31 1, 103. 53- 323. 29 43. 4 O. 0 59.5 21 22 23 24 431T-ATTO-RATOTENANCE 800. 00 4315 MEMBERSHIP 650. 00 4316 TRAINING 2, 900. 00 -CON-Fn -EX O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 316. 14 _ 669. 00 - 114. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 483. 86 19.00- 2, 786. 00 39. 5 102. 9 3. 9 26 2/ •" 3`' 31 333. 34 3.'. 22 4317 EWE PENSE 1, 400. 00- 4376 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 47, 823. 00 • OBJECT SUBTOTAL 66, 273. 00 O. 00 3, 985. 00, 4, 704. 99 0. 00 23, 910. 21 32, 087. 94 0. 00 0. 00 214. 39 1, 400. 00- 23, 912. 79 33, 970. 67 O. 0 49. 9 48. 7 • 25 26 z> 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 1, 550. 00 , 232. 48 540. 00 O. 00 1, 010. 00 34. 8 20 ° 30 5402-EOUIPHEfT=MORE THAN -$50 -G ---"2-5011-M., OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3, 550. 00 O. 00 232. 48 _ . O. 00 540. 00 O. 00 O. 00 2, 000. 00 3, 010. 00 0. 0 15. 2 • 3.. it � ,;1 .17 31 32 33 3. 35 3e 37 38 39 DIVISION TOTAL 252, 569. 00 18, 486. 97 114, 066. 66 214. 39 138, 287. 95 45.2 4264-BED-O-MATN I DEP!: CON51 /ENGIN/ENF 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES -SAC7A - -,I'02-REGULA- iEc, o • 5, . 00 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 2, 000. 00 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 2, 892. 00 12, 1 d 68. 52 O. 00 70, 287. 54 521. 89 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 74, 727. 46 1, 478. 11 .. 2, 892. 00 48.4 26. 0 0. 0 .J 51 40 41 42 411 F cC-7 RUSH IN 2, 892. 00 4112 PART TIME/ TEMPORARY O. 00 4127 UNIFORMS 300. 00 0. 00 O. 00 16. 68 - 2, 408. 69 2, 317. 50 100. 08 0. 00 O. 00 O. CO 483. 31 2, 317. 50- 199. 92 83. 2 0. 0 33. 3 r.:143 -, .... 44 45 OBJECT-SUBTO H 53, 099. 00 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 12, 284. 80 75, 635. 70 O. 00 '77, 463. 30 -» 49. 4 ie 47 411 49 50 51 57 53 5. 42017-CONTRACT-SER9TUE PRIVATE 17, 860. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 17, 860. 00 1, 325. 00 1, 325. 00 464. 26 • 3, 531. 07 50. 64 5, 866. 27 5, 866. 27 30, 576. 20 ' 12, 117. 51 360. 69 3, O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 932. 04 0. 00 11, 993. 73 11, 993. 73 49, 423. 80 28, 950. 45 639. 31 32. 8 32.8 38. 2 35.6 "'' 03 8. a,' • ,. � 4360-MATERIALS/SOP LIES/O-hHER 4303 UTILITIES 80, 000. 00 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 45, 000. 00 4ji0 MuTC)M FUELS AND LUBES 1,060.-00 36. 0 55 58 \' ofti 1 2 2 A2 r r- • • • n r r 2 2 2 3 31 32 3 3a 35 36 37 30 39 40 4, 42 43 44 45 46 47 40 4D 50 5, 52 53 544 55 56 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0019 1IME 3 1I: ...67-10 FROM 12/01/69 TO 12/31/09 DATE 02/01/90 50. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND 4204 BLDG MAINT DEPT: • CONST/ENGIN/ENF..:' • 4301U-RATl RIAL=0125-FErEg7OTFER 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 1, 200. 00 O. 00 63. 21 O. 00 1, 136. 79 5. 2 4316 TRAINING 500. 00 0.00 0. 00 O. 00 500. 00 0. 0 432T -BUILDING, SAFETV70ECURITY 9, 500. 00 O. 00 1, 149. 67 538. 69 7, 811. 64 17. 7 4396 TRSFR OUT --INS USER CHCS 26, 224. 00 2, 185. 00 13, 110.31 O. 00 13, 113. 69 49. 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 163, 424. 00 6, 231. 77 57, 377. 59 • 4, 470. 73 101, 575. 68 37. 8 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 475. 00 0.00 234.25 0.00 240. 75 49. 3 OIIDEC-`TSUBTOTAL 475. 00 0: 00 234.25 0.00 . 240. 75 49.3 DIVISION TOTAL 334, 858. 00 19, 841.57 139, 113. 81 4, 470. 73 • 191, 273. 46 42. 8 4205 EQUIP SERVICE DEPT: CONST/ENGIN/ENF 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 94, 031. 00 7, 715. 35 44, 979. 26 O. 00 49, 051. 74 47. 8 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 1, 150. 00 120. 30 1, 224. 82 O. 00 74. 82- 106. 5' 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 2, 017. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 2, 017. 00 O. 0 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 2, 017. 00 O. 00 736. 05 0. 00 1, 280. 95 36. 4 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 6.300.00 O. 00 6,291.87 0.00 8. 13 7,9.8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 105, 515. 00 7, 835. 65 53, 232. 00 O. 00 52, 283. 00 50. 4 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 4, 700. 00 O. 00 1, 751. 42 95. 00 2. 853. 58 39. 2 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 1, 500. 00 29. 70 421. 90 392. 15 685. 95 54. 2 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 3, 000. 00 O. 00 1. 254. 47 0. 00 1. 745. 53 41. 8 4316 TRAINING 200.00 0.00 0.00 O. 00 200. 00 0. 0 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 8, 311. 00 693. 00 4, 157. 61 0. 00 4, 153. 39 50. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5400 EGUIPMENT 17, 711. 00 722. 70 . 7, 585. 40 487. 15 9, 630. 45 45. 5 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 2, 000. 00 O. 00 . 1, 267. 36 O. 00 732. 64 63. 3 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 2, 000. 00 • O. 00 O. 00' O. 00 2, 000. 00 0. 0 5403 VEHICLES 5, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 5, 800. 00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 9, 800. 00 O. 00 1, 267. 36 O. 00 8, 532. 64 12. 9 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 5, 01i. 00 O. 00 2, 507. 76 O. 00 2. 508. 24 49. 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5, 016. 00 O. 00 2, 507. 76 O. 00 2, 500. 24 49. 9 • DIVISION TOTAL 138, 042. 00 8, 558. 35 64, 592. 52 487. 15 72, 962. 33 47. 1 23 5 67 e 9 :0, ,2 u ,6 ,6 ,7 ,6 20 21 2i 2' 3., 33', 27 4(4. 4, 47 5, 4 r'. • • • r r • • r- • • r - F I NANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0020 (I TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 02/01/90 • . . 2 , • 50. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 3 . 2 3 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR. APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % 5 a 001 GENERAL FUND '; 8 7 . , . ' • . . ,, . • - a DEPARTMENT TOTAL ' 1, 054, 984, 00 ' 69, 142. 49 ' ,• 442, 111. 83 - 21, 133. 64 5911738. 53 • 43. 9 9 . In II II) 4601 COMM RESOURCES DEPT: COMM PROMOTION • II 12 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES lb' 16 17 ilou :0 21 22'3 24 13 4 I (.42 REGULAR S,1L AR I Eb, MTSC 1/79d. 00 15, 259. 10 . 84, 851. 91 , , . O. 00 88, 146. 09 49. 0 14 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 500. 00 i • O. 00 104 46 0 00 395. 54 20. 8 .:..,,. . 15 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 3, 374. 00 12, 759. 74 12, 759. 74 . ': 0.00 9, 385. 74— - 378.1 16 4111 ACCRUAL CASITTN37374. 00 O. 00 3, 809. 48 O. 00 435. 48— 112.9 17 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 50, 000. 00 3, 551. 41 24, 519. 32 O. 00 25, 480. 68 49.0 ,c, OBJECT SUBTOTAL 230, 246. 00 31, 570. 25 126, 044. 91 O. 00 104, 201. 09 54. 7 19 20 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES . , 21 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 81, 078. 00 1, 623. 00 47, 796. 09 • • O. 00 33, 281. 91 58. 9 25 26 27 21: 3: 22 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 81, 078. 00 1, 623. 00. 47, 796. 09 O. 00 33, 281. 91 58. 9 23 24• 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 25 4302—AIWERTMTNG 7, 500. 00 3, 033. 12 3, 033. 12 .:. . . 95. 85 4, 371. 03 41. 7 26 4304 TELEPHONE ' 4, 000. 00 . ' O. 00 1, 367. 27 O. 00 2, 632. 73 34. 1 27 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 12, 190. 00 2, 663. 74— 1. 758. 50 O. 00 10, 431. 50 14. 4 3. 331 . ,1 :1 3, 4, 20 4308 PROGRAM—FiXTERIALS 13, 890. 00 324. 10 . 2, 025. 59 471. 94 • 11, 392. 47 17.9 20 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUDES • 350. 00 27. 29 198.98 O. 00 151. 02 56. 8 30 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 100.00 24. 24 24.24 O. 00 75. 76 24. 2 31 4315—MEMBERSRIP 6=5. 00 O. 00 20. 00 0.00 605. 00 3. 2 32 4316 TRAINING 1, 000. 00 .. 7. 50 781. 49 O. 00 218. 51 78. 1 33 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE • . 1, 600. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 600. 00 O. 0 41 4, 34 43v TRSFR—OUT=T14S—DS'ER—Z HOS 17, 766. 00 1, 481. 00 8, 885. 54 O. 00 8, 880. 46 ' 50.0 35 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 59, 021. 00 2, 233. 51 18, 094. 73 567. 79 40, 358. 48 31. 6 36 4, •,.) 5, !.2 _r ..., 50 ;,. 0:. 6. 37 5400 EQUIPMENT 30 5401 EQUIPMENT—LESS THAN $500 5, 000. 00 O. 00 181. 00 2, 069. 39 2, 749. 61 45. 0 30 5402 EQUIPMENT—MORE THAN $500 2, 500. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 2, 500. 00 O. 0 40 54u3 VEHICLES 8, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 8, 000. 00 O. 0 41 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 15, 500. 00 O. 00 181. 00 2, 069. 39 13, 249. 61 14. 5 42 43 L'Y0O—LLA.4; PAWIENTb . 44 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS - 2, 300. 00 O. 00 946. 05 O. 00 1, 353. 95 41. 145 OBJECT 'SUBTOTAL 2, 300. 00 O. 00 946. 05 O. 00 1, 353. 95 41. 1 46 -,7 40 DIVISION TOTAL 388, 145. 00 35, 426. 76 193, 062. 78 2, 637. 18 192, 445. 04 50. 4 40 . 50 DEPARTMENT TOTAL ' , 388, 145. 00 35, 426. 76 193, 062. 78 2, 637. 18 192, 445. 04 50. 4 51 • J ,. 7: 52 6101 r,ARKS DEFT7--FARKS/REC 53 54 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 55 410d REGULAR SALAWTE-S7ff I c,C 72, 632. 00 5, 728. 80 33, 687. 60 O. 00 3E1..944. 40 46. 3 56 Th 0 • • r r r- 3 5 6 7 6 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 •20 2 2 5 A26 r r r r 27 20 29 30 31 32 33 34 15 6 7 30 39 40 2 43 • 44 • n r 4s 47 40 49 50 51 52 53 55 56 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0021 TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89",. • DATE 50.0% OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE. FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. / ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND 6101 PARKS DEPT: PARKS/REC . 41(10 PERSONAL SERVICES 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 500. 00 O. 00 22. 64 O. 00 477. 36 4. 5 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1, 453. 00 O. 00 ' O. 00 O. 00 1, 453. 00 O. 0 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 1, 453. 00 . O. 00 . ' .,. • 699. 71 ;:_ ..:;;; ,: ; O. 00 . 753. 29 48. 1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 76. 038. 00 • 5, 728. 80 34, 409.. 95, ., 0. 00 41, 628. 05 45. 2 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 157, 606. 00 10, 025. 62 . 46, 130. 48 4, 750. 00 106, 725. 52 32. 2 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 12, 600. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 12, 600. 00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 170, 206. 00 10, 025. 62 46, 130. 48 4, 750. 00 119, 325. 52 29. 8 4303 UTILITIES 38. 036. 00 2, 595. 96 22, 761. 24 O. 00 15, 274. 76 59. 8 ,4304 TELEPHONE 125. 00 0.00 96. 50 O. 00 28. 50 77. 2 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 10,-800. 00 21. 51 4, 590. 21 O. 00 6, 2.09. 79 42. 5 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 700. 00 50.41 .291.45 O. 00 • 408.35 41. 6 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 1, 000. 00 . O. 00 • 134.40 O. 00 • 865. 60 13. 4 4315 MEMBERSHIP 500. 00 0. 00 • 488. 00 0. CO 12. 00 97. 6 4316 TRAINING 500. 00 O. 00 299. 00 O. 00 201. 00 59. 8 4376 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 10, 246. 00. 854. 00 5, 123. 04 O. 00 5, 122. 16 50. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 61, 907. 00 3, 521. 88 33, 784. 04 O. 00 28, 122. 16 54. 5 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 ESUIPMEiNT-LESS THAN $500 1, 000. 00 0. 00 223. 44 O. 00 776. 56 22. 3 5402 EOUIP?IENT-MARE THAN $500 1, 200. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 200. 00 O. 0 5499 NON -CAPITALIZED ASSETS O. 00 0.00 0.00 653.85 653. 85- 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 200. 00 O. 00 223. 44 653. 85 1, 322. 71 39. 8 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 4, 200. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 4, 200. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 200. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 4, 200. 00 0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 314, 551. 00 19, 276. 30 1 14, 548. 71 5, 403. 85 194, 598. 44 38. 1 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 314, 551. 00 19, 276. 30 114, 548. 71 5, 403. 85 194, 598. 44 38. 1 8141 CIP 89-141 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 125, 040. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 125, 000. 00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 125, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 125, 000. 00 0. 0 1\ 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 0 11 4 0 17 16 10 21 3 41 4., c. n1 • • r r r 2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 • 2 2 • 2 A r r r • • n 3 3. 3: 30 39 I1 42 43 44 45 4e 47 40 49 5 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMAR 00'5 - TINE 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/B9 DATE 02/01/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 001 GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD E?ND. ENCUMBRANCE • UNENC BALANCE DIVISION TOTAL 125, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 . 0. 00 125, 000. 00 0. 0 8146 CIP 89-146 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES STREET/SAFETY 20, 000. 00 20, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 : O. 00 20, 000. 00 20, 000. 00 O. 0 O. 0 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 175. 73 175.73 175. 73- 175. 73- O. 0 O. 0 ' DIVISION TOTAL 20, 000. 00 O. 00 ' O. 00 ' 175. 73 19, 824. 27 0. 8 8176 'CIP 86-176 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 70, 468. 00 70, 468. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 70, 468. 00 70, 468. 00 0. 0 0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 70, 468. 00 O. 00 O. 00. O. 00 70, 468. 00 0. 0 8177 CIP 87-177 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 4200-t OKI TRACT' --ERV ICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE ' OBJECT SUBTOTAL 40, 000. 00 40, 000. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 40, 000. 00 40, 000. 00 O. 0 0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 40, 000. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 40, 000. 00 O. 0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 255, 468. 00 0. 00 0. 00 175. 73 255, 292. 27 0. 0 8&O1 CIP 86-.601 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES BLDGS & GROUNDS 42b1 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 000. 00 4, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 065. 00 865. 00 206. 24 206. 24 2, 928. 76 2, 928. 76 26. 7 26. 7 DIVISION TOTAL ' 4, 000. 00 O. 00 865. 00 206. 24 2, 928. 76 26. 7 _ _ 8604 CIP 86-604 DEPT: 4;.:00 CONMACT SERVICES BLDGS & GROUNDS 4 0i CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 16, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 16, 000. 00 0. 0 3 5 6 6 9 11 14 15 e 1e 10 21 2.2 23 25 2l: 3: 31$ • 4: 4. 4.; 521 'r l 5 5.1. • • f r r FINANCE-FA454 EXPENDIT CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 'TIME 11:26:10 FROM e 12/01/89 TO 2/31/89 DATE 02/01/90 50.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION 001 GENERAL FUND MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 7. 4200 C OBJECT SUBTOTAL 16, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 16, 000. 00 . 0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 16, 000. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 16.000. 00 0.0 8606 CIP 87-606 DEPT: BLDGS & GROUNDS 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES " w • 8, 50. 00. OBJECT SUBTOTAL 8, 550. 00 17. 50 17. 50 17. 50 17.50 0. 00 0. 00 8, 532. 50 8, 532. 50 0. 2 0. 2 DIVISION TOTAL 8, 550. 00 17. 50 17. 50 0. 00 8, 532. 50 0. 2 8609--CIP--81:7=-609 DTP1T BEIGS.GROUNDS 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 42UI-00NTR -' /n4 q • , • • • . I • OBJECT SUBTOTAL 30, 000. 00 . 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 30, 000. 00 30, 000. 00 0. 0 ..0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 30, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 30, 000. 00 0. 0 8610 CTF28 ,0 DEPT: BLDG. & GROUNDS 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT-SERVICE/PPRIVATE 13, 905. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 13, 905. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 236. 50 2, 236. 50 0. 00 0. 00 11, 668. 50 11, 668. 50 16. 0 16. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 13, 905. 00 0. 00 2, 236. 50 0. 00 11, 668. 50 16. 0 8612i;/F-8383=612 DEPT: BLDGS & GROUNDS 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES -4201 CONTRACTSERVICE/PRIVATE 16, 700. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 16, 700. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 16, 700. 00 16, 700. 00 0. 0 0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 16, 700. 00 -P_9-613 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 16, 700. 00 0. 0 Ei61 7P DEPT: BLDGS I.,GGRUUNDS 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 8, 000. 00 0. 0 4:e.01 CONTRACT SEP.VICE/PRIVATE 8, 000. 00 4 7 s 2 • 2 s r r • • I r 2 7 2 2 2 31 J 3. J: a 3 3 J 4 41 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 51 52 53 4 5 56 2 3 5 6 7 e V 10 11 14 15 17 1L to 21 22 ]1 37 .3 r r FINANCE-FA454 ;Ty OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY /C-TTME 2 3 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO . _ . . ___ . 12/31/89 • r, -,,..m DATE 50. 0% OF l.J.Je‘i 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE 4 . 5 6 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION 001 GENERAL FUND MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % 7 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES OBJECT " -. - a SUBTOTAL 8, 000. 00 O. 00 %, ' O. 00 , O. 00 8, 000. 00 • 0. 0 10 12 DIVISION TOTAL 2, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 8, 000. 00 O. 0 —5EP-Tr- • 13 8614 CIP 00-614 DGS GROUNDS . . 14 15 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 16 4201 CONTRACT SE ICE/PRIVATE 136, 074. 00 O. 00 96, 643. 89 O. 00 39, 430. 11 71. 0 17 1,3 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 136, 074. 00 O. 00 96, 643. 89 O. 00 39, 430. 11 71.0 19 120. DIVISION TOTAL 136, 074. 00 • 0. 00 96, 643. 89 ' :- O. 00 39, 430. 11 71. 0 22 8 613751?89-615 DEPT: BLDGS & GROUNDS 12) 24 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 25 26 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 49, 988. 00 OBJECT 0.00 . O. 00 0.00 49, 988. 00 0.0 27 SUBTOTAL 49. 988. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 49, 988. 00 O. 0 28 ZO 30 DIVISION TOTAL 49, 980. 00 0.00 O. 00 0.00 49, 988. 00 0.0 31 32 ' DEPARTMENT 1 OTAL 283, 217. 00 17. 50 99, 762. 99 206. 24 183, 247. 87 n5. 2 4 33 ' 8703 GIP 89-703 DEPT: OTHER PROJECTS • 34 35 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES . 36 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 5, 000. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 5, 000. 00 O. 0 37 30 . • OTJL'rr subrOIAL 5, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 5, 000. 00 0. 0 39 .10 41 DIVISTON TOTAL 5, 000. 00 O. 00 0.00 O. 00 5, 000. 00 0.0 • 42. 43 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 5, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 5, oob. 00 0. 0 44 4n FUND TOTAL 11, 678, 527. 00 • 684, 706. 82 5, 687, 768. 33 97, 543. 42 5, 893, 215. 25 49. 5 .- 46 47 40 6, 40 / 50 • ,.. 51 52 53 54 55 56 ‘Z.! 1 r r • • ft r. • • • r r r r • • A r • • 1 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0025 r----TME-T1726: 10 2 3 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 50, DATE 0/ OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE 1 23 4 4 5 6 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 105 LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 7. 6 a 7 Y IU e 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER • DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT'",' 11 9 ... ... 1 l0 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 1. 11 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 12, 275. 00 1, 022. 92 6, 137. 52 0. 00 6, 137. 48 50. 0 _ 14 2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 12, 275. 00 1, 022. 92 6, 137. 52 0. 00 6, 137. 48 50. 0 15 16 3 17 10 ' .. ... ...'. ::..' `. 14 15 DIVISION TOTAL 12, 275. 00 1, 022. 92 6, 137. 52 0: 00 6. 137. 48 50. 0 20 6 21 14 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 12, 275. 00 1, 022. 92 6. 137. 52 0. 00 6, 137. 48 50. 0 21 16 2< 19 26+53 -$TP ET -ET TfTNG DEPT: STREET LIGHTING - 20 _.. 2 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES �. :2 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 77, 099. 00 5, 406. 70 35, 710. 11 0. 00 41, 388. 29 ,46.3 •' 23 • 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 1, 000. 00 0, 00 11. 30 0. 00 , 988. 70 1. 1 31 2.1 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1, 533. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 533. 00 O. 0 3- -' 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 1, 533. 00 269. 44 1, 494. 26 0. 00 38. 74 97. 4 3:4 26 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 4, 000. 00 0. 00 915. 00 0. 00 3, 085. 00 22.8 34 27 4180 RETIREMENT 9, 699. 00 1, 010. 59 4, 604. 90 0. 00 5, 094. 10 47. 4 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 8, 932. 00 780. 84 3, 738. 02 0. 00 • 5. 143. 98 42. 4 3J 29 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 103, 796. 00 7, 467. 57 46, 523. 59 0. 00 57, 272. 41 44. 8 Z:, 30 31 400 CONTRACT SERVICES 4' 32 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 14, 300. 00 0. 00 6, 000. 00 0. 00 8, 300. 00 41. 9 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT - 9, 350. 00 0. 00 1, 904. 39 0. 00 7, 445. 61 20. 3 3.1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 23, 650. 00 0. 00 7, 904. 39 0. 00 15. 745. 61 33. 4 35 30 1300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER , 37 4303 UTILITIES 170, 000. 00 0. 00 58, 173.'87 0. 00 111, 826. 13 34.2 •'• 3e 4304 TELEPHONE 150. 00 0.00 85.36 0.00 64.64 . 56.9 39 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 10, 200. 00 242. 12 2, 152. 0,0 3. 111.93 4, 936, 07 51.6 40 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 2, 500. 00 153. 73 1, 796. 72 0. 00 703. 28 71.8 41 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 9, 500. 00 0. 00 657. 48 607. 15 ' 8, 235. 37 1-3. 3 42 4316 TRAINING 500. 00 0. 00 50. 00 0. 00 450. 00 10. 0 43 4396 TRSFR OUT --INS U:EPCHGS 9, 225. 00 771. 50 4, 614. 00 0. 00 4, 611. 00 50. 0 44 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 202, 075. 00 1, 167. 35 67, 529. 43 3, 719. 08 130, 826. 49 35. 2 .15 46 5400 EGUIPMENT 47 5403 VEHICLES 2, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. OC) 2, 000. 00 0. 0 ,.., 4e OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 000. 00 0. 0 1,• 4G 50 51 DIVISION TOTAL 331, 521. 00 8, 634. 92 121, 957. 41 3, 719. 08 205, 844. 51 37. 9 52 53 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 331, 521. 00 8, 634. 92 121, 957. 41 3, 719. 08 205, 044. 51 37. 9 54 55 . . 56 �2 j 044 ,41 • • • r. r • • FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUNfi) PAGE 0026 . I AIM- AA • C‘I,. .Il 1., ,, 1-Kuri.1/U1/Y - IU 12/31/S9 . . DATE 02/01/90 50. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE ,\ ; . ... 1, FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EX? YTD EYIND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE5 105 LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND . . 8201 CIP 85-201 DEPT:: STREET LIGHTING • _ . • . lc, 11 12 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 30, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 30, 000. 00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 30, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 30, 000. 00 O. 0 ' 1 3 16 13 1 4:.: ,. : DIVISION TOTAL 30, 000. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30, 000. 00 O. 0 17 :.1 16 17 *0 8202 CIP 85-202 DEPT: STREET LIGHTING 2, 2: 25 2.1 - :!1 -3- 1. 19 . 21 4056-MaTR AC T SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 16, 500. 00 0.00 825. 00 0.00 15, 675. 00 ' 5. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 16, 500. 00 O. 00 825, 00 O. 00 15, 675. 00 5. 0 22 A 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 0.00 0.00 814.94 0.00 814. 94- 0.0 25 27 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0. 00 0.00 814.94 O. 00 814. 94- 0.0.10 5400 EQUIPMENT .1. 3. 3. 3; 3c ,IL 15 79 30 5499 NON -CAPITALIZED ASSETS O. 00 O. 00 340. 80 O. 00 340. 80- . O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL O. 00 O. 00 340. eo o. 00 340. 80- O. 0 , 31 32 33 • DIVISION TOTAL 16, 500. 00 0.00 1.98074 O. 00 14. 519. 26 12. 0 - 4s 45 4 : 34 J5 36 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 46, 500. 00 O. 00 1, 980. 74 O. 00 44, 519. 26 ' 4. 2 FUND TOTAL 390, 296. 00 9, 657. 84 130, 075. 67 3, 719. 08 256, 501. 25 34. 2 17 4: 10 S.ts 5, :I 1 ,.., 57 5:1 37 30 39 • • 40 41 42 43 44 45 . . • 46 47 44 0: 64 ec: 49 50 st • / . _ _. _ . . . 5-2 53 54 ',..1. 73 /4 55 56 • r r f r r FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY RE 2 3 (''a 6:10 FROM 12/01/89. TO 12/31/89. DATE 02/01/90 50. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 4 s 6 9 9 9 ■cJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE Y. 110 PARKING FUND 5 6 7 6 7• 10 1 12 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER' DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 9 Ic 12 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 1, 373, 000. 00 114, 416. 67 686, 500. 02 0. 00 . 686, 499. 98 50. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 373, 000. 00 114, 416. 67 686, 500. 02 0. 00 686, 499. 98 50.0 1;, 14 le. 1 4 3IE 15 DIVISION TOTAL 1, 373, 000. 00 114, 416. 67 686, 500. 02 O. 00 686, 499. 98 50.0 17 19 20 16 n IS DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1, 373, 000. 00 114, 416. 67 686, 500. 02 0. 00 686, 499. 98 50. 0 21 22 24 19 120 21 22 123 2. 25 27 3303-CTE1T-PK-a-DIST DEPT: PKG FACILITIES 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES _„ 27 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 16, 667. 00 286. 80 5, 723. 19 0. 00 10, 943. 81 34.3 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 312. 00 0, 00 751. 89 0. 00 439. 89- 240.9 ' 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IPJ 312. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. CO 312. 2v 3:` 31 00 O. 0 4130 RETIREMENT 4, 006. 00 51. 54 858. 71 0. 00 3, 147. 29 21.4 4138 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 746. 00 13. 48 329. 39 0. 00 416. 61 44. 1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 22, 043. 00 351. 02 7, 663. 18 0. 00 - 14, 379. 82 34. 7 3:s ''` 29 :0 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 44, 361. 00 0. 00 16, 046. 52 0. 00 27, 514. 48 37. 9 3. 31 33 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 44, 361. 00 0. 00 16, 846. 52 0. 00 27, 514. 48 37. 9 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 41 a:. °= j4 35 36 4304 TELEPHONE 250. 00 0. 00 40. 00 0. 00 210. 00 16. 0 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 300. 00 11. 94 111.04 O. 00 188. 96 37. 0 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 1, 000. 00 0. 00 978. 74 0. 00 21. 26 97. 8 a' " 4i 37 36 30 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 1, 028. 00 85. 65 513. 90 0. 00 514. 10 49. 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 578. 00 97. 59 1, 643. 68 0. 00 934. 32 63. 7 sl 0 41 °2 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 0. 00 0. 00 10. 00 0. 00 10. 00- 0. 0 5402 EQUIPMENT --MORE THAN $500 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 489. 37 43 44 45 489. 37- 0. 0 5420 DEPRECIATION/EQUIP&VEH 350. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 350. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 350. 00 0.00 10.00 489.37 149. 37- 142. 6 07 46 47 40 5600 BUILDINGS/IMPROVF..MENTS 5620 DEPRECIATION/ DL.DGS&IMPRV 2, 700. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 700. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 700. 00 0. 00 0. 00 . 0. 00 2, 700. 00 0. 0 40 50 51 DIVISION TOTAL 72, 032. 00 449. 41 26, 163. 38 489. 37 45, 379. 25 37. 0 52 63 54 3302 _PARKING ENF DEPT: PKG FACILITIES .. 55 56 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SAL ARIES/MISC 554, 849. 00 42, 389. 42 258, 831. 52 0. 00 296, 017. 48 46. 6 evi 4 '~1 1 0 • FINANCE-FA454 TIME 4 ' `36 C CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 002 2 3 1.� .10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 02/01/90 50. O% OF YEA!? COMPLETE i\ 2 3 4 4 5 6 i e s FUND 110 DIV OBJT DESCR PARKING FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % ' 6 7 o 3302 PARKING ENF DEPT:•. PKG FACILITIES w IG , 1G 1] .4. 12. 12 13 14 is 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 12, 000. 00 11, 065. OU 136. 96 2, 419. 78 4, 396. 43 3, 701. 28 0. 00 0. 00 7, 603. 57 7, 363. 72 36. 6 33.4 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 4117 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 11, 065. 00 49, 160. 00 5, 350. 00 1, 460. 20 2. 075. 78 410. 42 3, 911. 18 21, 778. 93 2, 261. 34 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 7, 153. 22 27, 381. 07 3, 088. 66 35.3 44.3le 42.2 13 IL zc. 16 17 ,12 4180 RETIREMENT . 4187 UNIFORMS 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 71, 756. 00 8, 000. 00 84. 028. 00 5, 282. 30 131. 32 3. 938. 71 26, 241. 95 1, 681. 11 21, 921. 90 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 45, 514. 05 6, 318. 89 62, 106. 10 36. 5 21. 0 26. 0 2 is 20 2' OBJECT SUBTOTAL - 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 807, 273. 00 58, 244. 89 344, 725. 64 0. 00 462, 547. 36 42. 7 22 •-• '` 3, 22 23 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 11, 000. 00 11, 000. 00 150. 72 150. 72 2, 144. 36 2, 144. 86 0. 00 0. 00 8, 855. 14 8, 855. 14 19. 4 19.4 2e 27 4300 MATERIALS:SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 3, 000. 00 45, 000. 00 0. O() 174. 99 1. 200. 05 11, 723. 70 0. 00 6, 791. 00 1, 799. 15 26, 485. 30 40. 0 41. 3: 3.> 34 s 30 4307 RADIO MAINTENANCE 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 3, 370. 00 15, 000. 00 3, 000. 00 305. 50 0. 00 422. 44 1, 527. 50 5, 021. 25 4, 002. 53 0. 00 2, 453. 41 0. 00 1, 850. 50 7, 525. 34 3, 997. 1 45. 2 49. 8 3` 42 3. 32 33 4311-AUTOi9KI TENANcE 4315 MEMBERSHIP 4316 TRAINING -CONFERENCE 12, 000. 00 300.00 2, 000. 00 0. 00 0.00 295. 00 2, 243. 78 0.00 751. 764" 1, 082. 53 0. 00- 99. 00 47 8. 673. 69 300. 00 1, 149. 24 50. 0 37. 7 0. 0 42.5 i1 4' 4: 4 35 3s 4317 EXPETISE 4376 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 000. 00 49, 611. 00 139, 289. 00 0. 00 4, 154. 40 5, 352. 33 78. 00 24, 816. 40 51, 365. 77 0. 00 0. 00 10, 425. 94 922. 00 24, 794. 60 77, 497. 29 7. 8 50.0 44. 3 42 20 30 • 5400 EVUIPMENT 5401 EGUIPMENT-LESS THAN $500 '. 1, 589. 00 0. 00 611. 69 0. 00 977. 31 42 sa s. 40 41 42 43 44 4] 5402 ECoUIPhirar7R0RE THAN $500 5420 DEPRECIATION/EGUIP&VEH 5499 NON -CAPITALIZED ASSETS tinJE'Cr-SUBTOTAL 53, 500. 00 20, 000. 00 30, 100. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 . 1, 651.39 O. 00 0. 00 489. 37 0. 00 29, 315. 07 51. 359. 24 20, 000. 00 784. 93 39.4 4. 0 0. 0 97. 3 2 °•' `• El C.5 /1 r 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS_, LEASE .105, 189. 00 0. 00 2, 263. 08 29, 804. 44 73, 121. 48 30. 4 46 47 40 .6/00 PAYMENTS OBJECT SUBTOTAL -3. 500. 00 3, 500. 00 0. C)0 0. 00 570. 00 570. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 930. 00 2, 930. 00 16. 2 16. 2 4Y 50 DIVISION TOTAL '. 1, 066, 254. 00 , 63, 747. 94 401, 069. 35 . - 40, 230. 38 624, 951.27 41. 3 ' 22 ]3 53 24 DEP-AR TMEN- TOTAL 1, 138, 283. 00 64. 197. 35 427, 232. 73 40, 719. 75 670, 330. 52 41. 1 ]] ]B • • r r r r r • • r-: • • 2 r r r r 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 402 21 22 • :3 24 r1 26 27 26 r29 r • • 1- r r• 3 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 a3 44 45 46 47 40 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0029 TIME 11:26:10 .FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 02/01/90 50.0/ OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 110 PARKING FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD E�PND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 8148 CIP 89-148 DEPT: .STREET/SAFETY 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 10, 000. 00 10, 000. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 10, 000. 00 10, 000. 00 O. 0 0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 10, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 10, 000. 00 0. 0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 10, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 10, 000. 00 O. 0 8701 CIP 89-701 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES OTHER PROJECTS 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5, 000. 00 5, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 5, 000. 00 5, 000. 00 0. 0 0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 5, 000. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 5, 000. 00 0. 0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL FUND TOTAL 5, 000. 00 2, 526, 283. 00 O. 00 178, 614. 02 O. 00 1, 113, 732. 75 O. 00 40, 719. 75 5, 000. 00 1, 371, 830. 50 0. 0 45. 6 23 4 8 6 9 10 11 li 13 1a Is Io 17 16 I9 2f. 21 27 24 25 27 3, 34 34 31 3,; 41 4. 4, • h 0 •; • 2 r r r • • • r r r • • r'* 3 4 6 6 9 0 II 2 n 14 15 16 17 10 13 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 30 3, 32 33 34 35 36 37 36 39 40 4, 42 43 44 45 41. 47 41) 49 50 SI 52 53 54 55 56 FINANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FAG TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/09 DATE 02/01/70 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 115 STATE GAS TAX FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. , ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 7. 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 47, 272. 00 47, 272. 00 3, 939. 33 3, 939. 33 23. 635. 98 23, 635. 98 0. 00 O. 00 23, 636. 02 23, 636. 02 49. 9 49. 9 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT OBJECT SUBTOTAL DIVISION TOTAL 47, 272. 00 3. 939. 33 23, 635. 98 0. 00 23, 636. 02 49. 9 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 4.7, 272. 00 3, 939. 33 . 23, 635. 98 O. 00 23, 636. 02 ' 49. 9 8150 CIP 897.71-50 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES STREET/SAFETY 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE , OBJECT SUBTOTAL 15, 000. 00 15, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 15, 000. 00 15, 000. 00 0. 0 0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 15, 000. 00 O. 00' O. 00 O. 00 15, 000. 00 0. 0 8160 CIP 85-160 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES STREET/SAFETY 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 79, 493. 00 79, 493. 00 . O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 79. 493. 00 79, 493. 00 0. 0 O. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 79, 493. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 79, 493. 00 O. 0 83'70 CIP 87-170 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES STREET/SAFET'V 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 337, 219. 00 337. 219. 00 . O. 00 O. 00 136. 32 136. 32 O. 00 O. 00 337, 082. 68 337, 082. 68 0. 0 O. 0 DIVISION TOTAL 337, 219. 00 O. 00 136. 32 0. 00 337, 082. 68 0. 0 8171 CIP 87-171 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES STREET/SAFETY 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 21, 30'. 00 21, 30 :. 00 O. 00 O. 00 136. 32 136. 32 O. 00 O. 00 21, 168. 68 21, 168. 68 0. 6 0. 6 . DIVISION TOTAL 21, 305. 00 O. 00 136. 32 O. 00 21, 168. 68 O. 6 1• 5 9 9 IO 11 12 I3 14 15 I6 17 10 IL 21 22 23 24 25 27 ') } •ql -y 3t. is 31 32 33 37 32 .w. 44 41 .r, Th 45 40 50 51 51 ~t. FINANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH • /,r I 2 A ^ f /^ 1 r TI1IE TI726: 10 ,R1 Iu3 rvrvu� PAGE 0031 FUND DIV FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/69 DATE 02/01/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 :f 0 7 5 e 7 UDJT.DESC� 115 COUNTY GAS TAX FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE. UNENC BALANCE 7. 8171 CIP 87-171 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY e 9 ,0 11 "e 9 10 17 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 11I3 IA 12 13 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 453, O17. OU O. UO t 7r.. 64 0. 00 452, 744. 36 O. O 15 14 FUND TOTAL 500, 289. 00 3, 939. 33 23. 908. 62 O. 00 476, 380. 38 4. 7 ,e 17 1e 19 14 20 21 17 -- I9 24 p 1 3 21 2.5 2 4 25 31 7 3. 30 31 4. .•' Al 3 4- 34 35 36 37 4.' 4v 36 3 9 5' 40 AI 42 43 44 44 47 411 44 50 31 52 53 54 55 ,I 56 7 • • 44, 1 0 r r r r r • • F I NANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) . • PAGE 0032 2 3 . -• t- ur1 12/U1/8v 10 12/31/09 DATE 02/01/90 50.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE T1\ 3 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE a 8 e 120 COUNTY GAS TAX. FUND a 4 8 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT - 1G 0 10 4300 MATER IALS /SUP PLIES/O"fHER 1: 12 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 53, 000. 00 53, 000. 00 4, 000. 00 4, 000. 00 29, 000. 00 29. 000. 00 ' 0. 00 O. 00 • 24, 000. 00 24, 000. 00 54. 7 54. 7 ;; 1r: 13 17 14 IU 15 DIVISION TOTAL 53, 000. 00 4, 000. 00 29, 000. 00• O. 00 24, 000. 00 ' 54.7 106 20 la 17 10 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 53, 000. 00 4, 000. 00 29, 000. 00 O. 00 24, 000. 00 54. 7 23 24 10 20 FUND TOTAL 53, 000. 00 4, 000. 00 29, 000. 00 O. 00 24, 000. 00 54. 7 , 21 22 23 2n 3'1 25 26 3.. 3d 34 27 20 ri 29 .` 30 4, 4' 31 41 32 ' 4: 33 4.: r. JJ 35 Ji. 38 J; 37 30 J: , 39 .1 40 41 42 44 45 :u 48 47 411o,. . dY • 50 / / 51 52 53 54 55 /: 58 r, • I. •1 r r r r 3 4 5 e 7 e u 10 3 14 20 .2: 24 25 A26 27 20 r r O • r 20 30 31 32 37 :3 36 37 30 30 40 11 42 43 44 45 46 47 40 40 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0033 -TIME 11:26:10 FROM.12/01/89 TO 12/31/89. DATE 02/01/90 .50.0/ OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 125 PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. / ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER. DEPT: • MGMT/SUPPORT . 5, 000. 00 5, 000. 00 416. 67 416. 67 2, 500. 02 2, 500. 02 O. 00 O. 00 2, 499. 98 2, 499. 98 50. 0 50. 0 430if MATERIALS/SUPP-DES/OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT OBJECT SUBTOTAL DIVISION TOTAL 5, 000. 00 416. 67 2, 500. 02 O. 00 2, 499. 96 50. 0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 5, 000. 00 416. 67 2, 500. 02 O. 00 2, 499. 98 50. 0 U.,06 LIP 86-506 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES PARKS 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE • OBJECT SUBTOTAL 26, 570. 00 26, 570. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 26, 570. 00 26, 570. 00 0. 0 0. 0 43-00 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5,000.00 5,000.00 • 3,706.20 3,706.20 4,846.81 4,846.81 0. 00 0. 00 153. 19 153. 19 96. 9 96. 9 DIVISION TOTAL 31, 570. 00 3.706.20 4,846.81 0. 00 26, 723. 19 15. 3 8508 CIP 87-508 DEPT: PARKS 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL. 52, 500. 00 52, 50.0. 00 1,873.59 1,873.59 10, 536. 59 10, 536. 59 0. 00 0. 00 41, 963. 41 41, 963. 41 20. 0 20. 0 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIESS/OTHER 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 2,500.00 0. 00 2,379.29 0. 00 120. 71 95. 1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2,500.00 0. 00 2,379.29 0. 00 120. 71 95. 1 DIVISION TOTAL DEPARTMENT TOTAL 55, 000. 00 86, 570. 00 1,873,59 5,579.79 12, 915. 88 17, 762. 69 0. 00 0. 00 42, 084. 12 68, 807. 31 23. 4 20. 5 FUND TOTAL 91, 570. 00 5,996.46 20, 262. 71 0. 00 71, 307. 29 22. 1 I' 23 5 7 8 i is it 13 4 15 lu 17 u 10 20 21 20 :, 31 34. 3 34 31 4., 5c. 51 4/ "1 • •, r r • n r r • • n FINANCE-FA454 • :.4.61., _�:..,:-�.+rili..tir u:t:Wr�.+4WL!ra.�i- - ' y:i• ti:r.4:�..rC ic_.. .w�:vr.w .... :-.::i•...�.:..aa�. . • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPO I 2 3 TIME -Tr -76:10 FROM 12/01/89. TO 12/31/89 nluG V V ).t DATE 02/01/90 50.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 4 5 8 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 126 UUT RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY FUND• APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD E1,PND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 7 6 7 6 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT vl IJ 10 11 12 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT OBJECT SUBTOTAL '15,000.00 15, 000. 00 0:00 O. 00 15,000.00 15, 000. 00 0.00 O. 00 0.00 O. 00 _ 100.0 100.0 13 14 S 16 13 14 15 DIVISION TOTAL 15, 000. 00 O. 00 15, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 100.0 17 I0 19 70 16 17 16 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 15, 000. 00 O. 00 - 15, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 100. 0 41 22 23 '' 19 20 21 8514 C I P 89-514 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES PARKS 25 26 27 3G 31 3: 22 23 24 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL O. 00 O. 00 110, 000. 00- 110, 000. 00- O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 0 O. 0 2s 26 27 5500 LAND 5501 LAND OBJECT SUBTOTAL 110, 000. 00 110, 000. 00 1, 574, 559. 59 1, 574, 559. 59 A., 574, 559. 59 ' . 1, 574, 559. 59 0. 00 O. 00 1, 464, 559. 59- 1, 464, 559. 59- 1431.4 1431.4 3i 34 33 20 20 30 DIVISION TOTAL 110, 000. 00 1, 464, 559. 59 1, 574, 559, 59 O. 00 1, 464, 559, 59- 1431.4 35 37 3u 3c 4r. 31 32 33 34 35 36 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 110, 000. 00 1, 464, 559. 59 1, 574, 559. 59 O. 00 1, 464, 559. 59- 1431.4 41 4. 43 FUND TOTAL 125, 000. 00 1, 464, 559. 59 11, 589, 559. 59 0. 00 1, 464, 559. 59- 1271. 6 41 45 4,: 4;• 37 30 39 .3 40 41 42 5:. 5": 0.1 S7 r..:, iii 0. 04 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 / .. C'.: 66: G7 /3 52 53 54 55 5<: "1 r�' • FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH • 2 3 •20 136 PAGE 0035I T1110 11: 2b: 10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89. DATE 02/01/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE . IN 2 4 4 6 6 7 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 7. 127 6% UTILITY USER TAX FUND 5 6 7 'el 9 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT:MGMT/SUPPORT fl 9 IO 1I 10 'II 12 13 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/O1HER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 1.354,771.00 112, 897. 58 677, 385.48 0.00 677. 385.52 49.9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 354, 771. 00 112, 897. 58 677, 385. 48 0. 00 677, 385. 52 49.9 12 17 14 ' 14 ] 16 DIVIS IOPJ TOTAL 1, 354, 771.00 112, 897. 58 677, 385. 48677,385.52f 0. 00 49.9 115 6 17 16 17 9 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1, 354, 771.00 112, 897.58 677, 385.48 0.00 677. 385. 52 49.9 20 21 22 2_ 2 FUND TOTAL 1, 354, 771. 00 112. 897. 58 677, 385. 48 0. 00 677, 385. 52 49. 9 24 22i; '23 2 4 25 31 10 3" 3 20 30 31 • Ji 31 33 74 41 I' d.i 3] 36 37 ,+ .1 .. 30 39 40 51 41 42 43 J5 J6 5 ]C 47 46 40 50 51 52 C; 73 ]4 55 • ... 7;. ]6 ,5 1 • • F I NANCE-FA454 • • • ••• . •• • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH • EXPENDITURE _SUMMARY REPORT B /Th A 2 __ TIME 11: 26: 10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 : DATE 02/01/90 .. . • 50. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE il FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE ,. 6 . 7 140 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GR 6 0 a 4701 HOUSING REHAB DEPT: OTHER • I.• ii 12 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 3 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 92, 072. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 92, 072. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 92, 072. 00 0. 00 O. 00 - O. 00 92, 072. 00 O. 0 6 3 4 15 . . 17 . z. 10 16 DIVISION TOTAL 92, 072. 00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 92, 072. 00 0. 0 16 17 1U 21 4702 PROJECT TOUCH DEPT: OTHER I I/ 20 21 24 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 25 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 7, 670. 00 0. 00 1, 450. 00 0. 00 6. 220. 00 18.9 2.Z. 2/ OBJECT SUBTOTAL 7, 670. 00 0. 00 1, 450. 00 0. 00 6, 220. 00 18. 9 22 .!3 24 ..... .11 DIVISION TOTAL 7, 670. 00 O. 00 1, 450. 00 O. 00 6, -'20. 00 18.9 1. 25 26 27 28 29 30 4.1 4703 CDBG ADMIN DEPT: OTHER 34 4200-CURTgArT-SERVICES 3 1 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 12, 276. 00 O. 00 3, 850. 08 0. 00 8, 425. 92 31. 3 3:) OBJECT SUBTOTAL 12, 276. 00 O. 00 3, 050. 08 0. 00 8, 425. 92 31. 3 4e 31 32 33 34 35 16 41 . DIVISION TOTAL 12, 276. 00 O. 00 3, 850. oa 0. 00 8. 425. 92 31. 3 4704 S. B. FREE CLINIC DEPT: OTHER , 37 30 39 40 41 42 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 4, 200. 00 1. 050. 00 1, 050. 00 0. 00 3, 150. 00 25. 0 ,-, OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 200. 00 1, 050. 00 , 1, 050. 00 0. 00 3, 150. 00 25. 0 ... DIVISION TOTAL 4, 200. 00 1, 050. 00 1,050. 00 O. 00 3, 150. 00 25. 0 43 44 45 . .. 4705 JUVENILE DIVSN DEPT: OTHER 46 47 46 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 61 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 3, 000. 00 55. 15 55. 15 O. 00 2, 944. 85 1. 8 -. 013,1ECT SUBTOTAL 3. 000. 00 55. 15 55. 15 O. 00 ' 2, 944. 85 1. 8 4U 50 51 . .- DIVISION TOTAL 3, 000. 00 55. 15 • 55. 15 0. 00 2, 944. 85 1..8 c ti2 53 54 4706 S. B. COAL ALIVE DEPT: OTHER , 1 55 56 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES d 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 1. 000. 00 0. 00 252. 68 O. 00 747. 32 25. 2 ' 1 • • • r •Th 1 r r 02 2 2. 2 fp 2 r 2 3 3 • FINANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ! 1 TIME 11: 26: 10 , FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 , . IAUL , - -' DATE . ,. 50. 0% OF 0031 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE 1 s FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 140 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD E/PND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE : 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES OBJECT SUB TO TAL 1, 000. 00 O. 00 : 252. 68 .. O. 00 747. 32 25. 2 : DIVISION TOTAL 1, 000. 00 O. 00 252. 68 O. 00 ' 747. 32 25. 2 3 5 4707 1736 FAM CR CTR DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES OTHER . 6 : 4201 CONTRACT SERV I CE / PR I VATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 544. 2, 544. 00 00 O. 00 O. 00 2, 2, 544. 544. 00 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 100.0 ' 100. 0 9 D DIVISION TOTAL 2, 544. 00 O. 00 2, 544. 00 O. 00 O. 00 100. 0 3 DEPARTMENT TOTAL ' FUND TOTAL 122, 762. 122,762. 00 00 1, 1, 105. 15 105. 15 . 9, 9, 201. 201. 91 91 O. 00 O. 00 113, 113, 560. 09 560. 09 7. 4 7. 4 I 1 , . ' ..:. 5 5 . 6 E. / C 6 7 7 / . I ! , 1 36 3 3 41 4 4 45 4 48 4 51 52 53 54 55 3 5 a 7 a 9 10 1 13 14 15 16 7 9 0 4 7 7 1 7 1 a /•• c • • • n r FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HE.RMOSA BEACH A 2 • 1 _ _.•.•.•••,• �,., Jnr rurv,�i PAGE 0038 TIFIE 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 02/01!90 _____, 50.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD E)(PND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE %' ! 145 PROPOSITION 'A FUND `e 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT •1U 4300 ,1i ` 11 12 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL O. 00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 1^ 13 14 4 1a 15 0.0 DIVISION TOTAL • O. 00 O. 00 0.00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 0 .15 r: .7 10 10 7 10 19 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0.00 0.022 3401 DIAL A RIDE 21 23 I 20 21 DEPT: PUBLIC TRANSIT 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 24 25 26 27 22 23 2• 4IU REb` L-Tg-SrEARIES/MISC 14, 958. 00 1, 169. 16 7, 572. 93 O. 00 7, 385. 07 50. 6 .4180 RETIREIIEhT'1' 1, 888. 00 151. 54 795. 41 O. 00 1, 092. 59 42. 1 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 1, 439. 00 110. 03 319. 23 0. 0031 _';I 25 126 27 1, 597. 43 22. 1 U ECT 50 _ 1 , 285. 00 1, 429. 75 8/ 687. 57 O. 00 9, 597. 43 47. 5 -33 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 3:. 3., 20 4 U2 1 CGNTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 3] 20 30 J1 136, 094. 00 O. pp U. 00 0. 00 136, 094. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 136, 094. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 136, 094. 00 0. 0 • 4300 3+. :n 'L 3'i 32 33 3• MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 50. 00 0. 00 16. 64 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 0.00 33. 36 .30.0 500. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00•' •0 •1 .2, 35 3s 37 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 88. 00 8. G9 500. 00 0. 0 44. 74 0.00 43. 26 50. 8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 639. 00 8. 29 61 • 38 O. 00 576. 62 9. 6 <: �' °� 38 39 40 DIVISION TOTAL 155, 017. 00 1, 438. 04 8, 748. 95 0. 00 146, 268. OS g. 6 3402 COMMUTER BUS �� °•O' •1 42 DEPT: PUBLIC TRANSIT 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES �i 53 5 ; 63 =i1G2 REGULAR f -J ,LAR IES/MISC 44 45 5, 403. 00 438. 24 2, 704. 48 " 4180 RETIREMENT 681. 00 0. 00 - 2, 698. 32 42.3 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 55. 123.60 O. 00 425.41 22. 5 549. 00 �. 5' 46 15 38. 123. 60 OBJECT SUBTOTAL O. 00 516. 23 46. 5,, 47 46 6, 633. 00 5 531. 40 3, 116. 77 O. 00 3, 516. 23 46.9 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES ' 61 61 6: ... 49 ,-16f-CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 6.: 50 51 49, 000. 00 0. 00 7, 528. 98 OBJECT SUBTOTAL O. 00 41, 471. 02 15. 3 49, 000. 00 O. 00 7, 528. 98 O. 00 41, 471. 02 15.3 s' 64 Sz 6^ 4360 HATERTAES7NOFPLIES/OTHER 53 54 • 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 56. 00 4. 64 27. 64 /ol._ 0. 00 28. 16 49.7 55 SB • /'i H 44. ..1 i •. r r • r r FINANCE-FA454 • ,L. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0039 + '5 6 r A •-••- -.•-• -., 1-11ur1 1z/u1/Hi TO 12/31/89 • • DATE 02/01/90 50.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE tN 4 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR - 145 PROPOSITION 'A FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE a 7 e 0 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/UfHER OBJECT SUBTOTAL 56. 00 .. 4.64 .27.84: .. _ 0. 00 28. 16 49. 7 1h 1 1 :: to 12 DIVISION TOTAL 55, 689. 00 536. 04 10, 673. 59 0. 00 45, 015. 41 19. 1 u + 5 6 13 3403 BUS PASS SUBSDY DEPT: 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES PUBLIC TRANSIT 17 ICs 19 2- 16 17 e 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MI SC 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 4180 RETIREMENT 1, 664. 00 0. 00 216. 00 64. 20 0.00 18. 42 218. 66 0. 61 27. 02 0. 00 0. 00 O. GO 1, 445. 34 0. 61- 128. 98 13. 1 0. 0 40.2 21 2` 2_ 24 2. 1 4 19 120 21 4108 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 149.00 2, 029. 00 10.65 93. 27 65.06 371. 35 0.00 0. 00 , 83.94 1, 657. 65 43.6 18. 3 22 1.23 24 4200 CONTRACT SEP.VICI_S 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 12, 773. 00 12, 773. 00 1, 407. 00 1, 407. 00 3, 394. 00 3, 394. CO 0. 00 0. 00 9, 379. 00 9, 379. CO 26. 5 26. 5 25 '6 ?7 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER" 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 1, 110. 00 92. 53 555. 18 0. 00 554. 82 50.0 3: 20 20 30 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 110. 00 92. 53 555. 18 0. 00 554. 82 50. 0 3J 31 3 2 33 DIVISION TOTAL 3406 CIRC ELEMENT DEPT: 15, 912. 00 PUBLIC TRANSIT 1, 592. 80 4, 320. 53 0. 00 11, 591. 47 27.1 4h 41 4: 4:' e� • _.. 5. 51 34 35 36 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 17, 735. 00 12. OO 12. CO 0. 00 17, 723. CO O. 0 37 30 30 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 'TOTAL 17, 735. 00 12. 00 . 12. 00 0. 00 17, 723. 00 0. 0 40 41 42 DIVISION DEPARTMENT TOTAL 17, 735. 00 244, 353. 00 12. 00 3, 578. 88 12. 00 23, 755. 07 0. 00 . 0. 00 17, 723. 00 220, 597. 93 0. 0 9. 7 s. 55 , 5f"' G. �.. �' 67 E, " 7: 7, 74 . 75 3 44 45 8149 CIP 90-149 DEPT: .. •. STREET/SAFETY.7 46 a7 48 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 55, 000. 00 55, 000. 00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. CO 55, 000. 00 55, 000. CO 0. 0 O. 0 a0 50 51 DIVISION TOTAL 1 55, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 55, 000. 00 O. 0 52 53 54 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 55, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 55, 000. 00 0. 0 55 50 7 • r•' • • FINANCE—FA454 EXP CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 ' 2 3 ^ 1 /' 1 TIME 11:26:10 FUND DIV FROM APPROPRIATION 12/01/89 TO MONTHLY 12/31/89 • EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE PAGE 0040 DATE 02/01/90 50. 07. OF YEAR COMPLETE UNENC BALANCE 7. IN 2 4 5 5 , 5 is OBJ7 DESCR 145 GRANT FUND 7 6 8149 CIP 90-149 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 0 a I,; • 1. 10 II 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 1.f 2 FUND TOTAL 299, 353. 00 3, 578. 88 23, 755. 07 O. 00 275, 597. 93 7. 9 13 14 16 17 • 1 15 100 16 1 7 21 22 10 23 19 - 24 25 21 22 1. 24 23. 7' ]. I26 1 33 27•3a 20 3•i V 20 3% 30 31 • 4•i 32 41 33 4::..4. 34 3: 36 37 30 4... 39 40 31 41 5:1 42 43 44 JCI 45 46 ' SJ C 47 tiI 40 62 03 40 .. La 6.. 50 51 52 33 54 71 ^ 55 50 O �t • r r r r • n f r FINANCE-FA454 EXPENDIT CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH G r' r (''7 • rn VVY1 TIhfc : • .FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 02/01/90 50. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 1� z 3 4 4 ' R FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE i 150 GRANT FUND7 6 a •'8 8102 CIP 85-102 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY • .. ., .. 1u 10 11 12 .. .. 4-2.035--C Onn ACT SERV ICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 188, 051. 00 5. 86 45, 366. 79 O. 00 142, 684. 21 24. 1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL15 188, 051. 00 5. 06 45, 366. 79 O. 00 142, 684. 21 24.1 . 13 14 11: 13 ' 14 5 .. .. �. DIVISION TOTAL 188, 051. 00 5. 86 45, 366. 79 O. 00 142, 684. 21 24.1 17 10 4 16 18 8137 CIP 85-137 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY22 1 2.: 19 azo z1 4205 t NTRACT ;.iERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 554, 400. 00 O. 00 • 0. 00 0. 00 554, 400. 00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 554, 400. 00 0. 00 - 0. 00 • O. 00 554, 400. 00 0. 0 22 _3 24 • DIVISION TOTAL 554,400. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 554, 400. 00 0. 0 21 31 31 25 126 27 8151 CIP 89-151 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY J, 34 20 29 30 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 45, 500. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 45, 500. 00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 45, 500. 00 • O. 00 O. 00. O. 00 45, 500. 00 O. 0 31 , DIVISION TOTAL 45, 500. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 45, 500. 00 O. 0 ::1 J4 35 6 37 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 787, 951. 00 5. 36 45, 366. 79 0. 00 742, 584. 21 - 5. 7 d512 J' 47 30 30 CIP 89-512 DEPT: PARKS 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 'i 453 51 40 41 41 42 43 4.201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 60, 000. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 60, 000. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 60, 000. 00 00 O O.O. 00 0. 00 60, 000. 00 0. 0 '''l ' -i 44 a5 _. DIVISION TOTAL 60, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 60, 000. 00 0. 0 -' 46 47 40 8516 CIP 89-516 DEPT: PARKS 5400 EGUIPMENT c:: 49 5O 51 5402 EQUIPMENT --MORE THAN $500 7, 951. 00 O. UO U. 00 U. 00 7, 958. 00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 7, 958. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 7, 956. 00 0. 0 L_ ' 52 53 54 55 DIVISION TOTAL 7, 958. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 7, 958. 00 O. 0 56 4 iS iy n r C •: r • • • r r • • FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) OF /1 '250.0% 3 TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 02/01/90 OF YEAR COMPLETE ,N 4 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % 6 150 GRANT FUND 6 e 8517 CIP 89-517 DEPT: PARKS 17 10 5400 EQUIPMENT 11 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 8, 742. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 8, 742. 00 O. 0 ;; 12 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 8, 742. OQ O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 8, 742. 00 0. 0 16 13 • 17 14 la 15 DIVISION TOTAL 8, 742. 00 O. 00 • O. 00 , O. 00 8, 742. 00 0. 0 113 :0 16 21 17 8518 CIP 89-518 DEPT: PARKS -- 1 U 23 24 19 5400 EMUIPMIENT 25 20 5402 EQUIPMENT-PTORE THAN $500 12, 305. 00 O. 00 O. 00 • O. 00 12, 305. 00 O. 0 21 0DJECT SUBTOTAL 12, 305. 00 O. 00 - O. 00 O. 00 12, 305. 00 O. 0 2267 z;: 22 2•J 24 DIVISION TOTAL 12, 305. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 12, :305. 00 O. 0 31 3: 25 33 2G 8519 CIP 89-519 DEPT: PARKS - 34 2.7 ]5 2d 5400 EQUIPMENT 3 29 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 2. 108. 00 0. 00 • 0. 00 0. 00 2.10e. 00 0. 0 3_ 30 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 100. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 2, 108. 00 O. 0 • 39 40 31 41 32 - 4: 33 DIVISIOh•i TOTAL 2, 108. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 2, 108. 00 0. 0 43 34 .,: 45 35 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 91, 113. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 91, 113. 00 4` 36 0 C. .17 37 30 FUND TOTAL 879, 064. 00 5. 86 45. 366. 79 O. 00 833, 697. 21 5. 1 4'- 39 11 .10 5? 41 5.1 4 2 :. 43 44 50 45 59 ,.L 41 46 . 4'/ 4 U 6; u4 49 50 51 4:7 Cc 52 . G• 53 54 71 ]: 55 73 56 74: 7 5 44't �l 1 1 l 1' FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH TIFlc- 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/69VAUt 0043 DATE 02/01/90 • 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 1\ 4 6 FUND DIV UBJI DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 7. 155 CROSSING GUARD FUND 7 `6 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT • Y w 11 II z 13 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 4, 500. 00 375. 00 2, 250. 00 O. 00 2 250. 00 50. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 500. 00 375. 00 2, 250. 00 O. 00 2, 250. 00 50. 0 14 16 I 6 • 14 ] I6 DIVISION TOTAL 4, 500. 00 375. 00 2, 250. 00 O. 00 2, 250. 00 50. 0 17 IC 0 17 16 s DEPARTMENT TOTAL 4, 500. 00 375. 00 2, 250. 00 O. 00 2, 250. 00 50. 0 2102 zI 20 21 12 CROSSING GUARD DEPT: POLICE 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES " 3 � ` 24 25 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MI SC 12, 145. 00 752. 99 5, 402. 87 O. 00 6, 742. 13 44. 4 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME O. 00 O. 00 15. 24 0. 00 15. 24- O. 0 4110 VAC ATION/ST CK PAY OFF 23^0. 00 O. 00 18.7. 98 O. 00 50. 02 78.9 " 0=6 27 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 233.00 318.67 318.67 O. 00 80.67- 133. 2 4113 CROSSING GUARDS 33, 321. 00 1, 404. 19 9, 464. 55 O. 00 23, 856. 45 20. 4 4180 RETIREMENT 2, 765. 00 100. 35 639. 20 ,:d 3 29 30 O. 00 2, 125. 80 23. 1 4137 UNIFORMS 1, 000.-00 O. 00 O. 00 O. CO 1, 000. 00 0. 0 4138 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 876. 00 53. 27 384. 34 O. 00 491. 66 43. 8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 50, 583. 00 2, 629. 47 ' 16, 412. 85 0. 00 34, 170. 15 32. 4 „ 13 34 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 8, 400. 004- O. 00 2, 000. 00 O. 00 6, 400. 00 23. 8 35 36 37 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 500. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. CO 500. 00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 8, 700. 00 0. 00 2, 000. 00 0. 00 6, 900. 00 ' 22. 4 - 36 39 40 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 2, 172. 00 181. 00 1, 086. 01 0. 00 1, 085. 99 50.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 172. 00 181. 00 1, 086. 01 0. 00 1, 085. 99 50.0 41' ac 5U - - 41 42 43 DIVISION TOTAL 61, 655. 00 2, 810. 47 19, 498. 86 O. 00 42, 156. 14 d4 45 31. 6 DEPARTMENT TOTAL_ 61, 655. 00 2, 810. 47 19, 498. 86 O. 00 42, 156. 14 31. 6 40 • FUND 47 40 40 TOTAL 66, 155. 00 3, 185. 47 21, 748. 86 O. 00 44, 406. 14 32. 8 ;o 51 52 , ,.. 53 5 4 5.5 /1 56 �7 /4 /4 w • • FINANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 1 REPORT (DY FUND) 4 2 3 TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/09 F''TE Vu9+ DAATE 02/01:90 50.07 OF YEAR COMPLETE i\ 2 3 4 4 .5 a FUND DIV ODJT DESCR 160 SEWER FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % ' a o a 0 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER . DEPT:. MGMT/SUPPORT 3, 289. 00 3, 289. 00 274. 17 274. 17 1, 645. 02 1, 645. 02 0. 00 0. 00 1, 643. 98 i, 643. 98 50. 0 50.0 0 r• 112 3 4 s ,6 1u 12 4300 MATERIALS/S7FPLIES/OTHER 439 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 13 1.5 16 DIVISION TOTAL 3, 289. 00 274. 17 1, 645. 02 0. 00 1, 643. 98 50.0 17 20 16 17 0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 3, 289. 00 ST/HWY/ST. DRAIN 94, 302. 00 1, 500. 00 1, 878. 00 2, 329. 00 11, 361. 00 8, 923. 00 274. 17 7, 158. 50 137. 04 O. 00 O. 00 1, 003. 16 396. 89 1, 645. 02 41, 024. 68 879. 66 • O. 00 2, 328. 98 4, 828. 84 2, 936. 55 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 1, 643. 90 53, 277. 32 62.0. 34 1, 878. 00 0. 02 6, 532. 16 5, 986. 45 50. 0 43.5 58.6 0. 0 99. 9 42.5 32. z1 2' 23 24 5 26 27 ='- 3c' J1 3; 3' 74 19 1 20 21 5, 23 24 310.. SEWER /ST DRAIN DEPT: 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR CARIES/MISC 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 25 26 27 43T?`0`I?DAL tT+S-H .IN 4100 RETIREMENT • 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 2u 29 3o OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 120, 293. 00 8, 695. 59 51, 998. 71 O. 00 ' 68, 294. 29 9 43. 2 ,- J7 36 30 31 32 33 4201 ..ONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 700. 00 2, 850. 00 5, 550. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 .662. 42 O. 00 662. 42 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 2, 037. 58 2, 850. 00 4, 887. 58 24.5 0.0 11.9 40 •11 42 43 34 35 36 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4303 UTILITIES 500. 00 O. 00 181.23 O. 00 318. 77 46 47 37 38 39 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 7, 500. 00 800.00 . 2, 025. 00 1. 91 57.92 O. 00 3, 074. 76 397. 20 1, 784. 69 3, 772. 42 O. 00 150. 97 652. 82 402.80 39. 34 36.2 91. 2 49.6 95. 5 40 5O' 40 41 42 4316 TRAINING0. 4396 TRSFR OUT—INS USER CHCS OBJECT SUBTOTAL_ 00 33, 737. 00 44, 562. 00 O. 00 2, 014. 00 2, 873. 83 O. 00 16, 869. 13 22, 307. 01 O. 00 O. 00 3, 923. 39 O. 00 16, 867. 87 18, 331. 60 0. 0 50. 0 58. 8 52 53 7 6, 5) 61, 43 44 45 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS •61 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS OBJECT 9, 070. 00 O. 00 4, 489. 92 0. 00 4„580. 08 49.5 46 4763 40 SUBTOTAL 9, 070. 00 O. 00 4, 489. 92 0. 00 4, 580. 08 49. 5 U1 J.. 49 50 31 DIVISION TOTAL DEPARTMENT TOTAL 179, 475. 00 179, 475. 00 11, 569. 42 11, 569. 42 79, 458. 06 79, 458. 06 - 3, 923. 39 3, 923. 39 96, 093. 55 96, 093. 55 46.4 46. 4 6. 63 7 32 53 6 4 8405 CIP 86-405 DEPT: 4200 SANITARY SEWER 71 7:. 55 566 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 174, 808. 00 700. 00 151, 983. 75' 0. 00 22, 824. 25 86.9 73 J4 75 'Y r et r r r • • '1 1 1 O r • n r FINANCE—FA454 CITY• OF HERMOSA BEACH 4 i fur rvrvui PAGE 0045 ti ML 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 02/01/90 50. 07. OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT 1` 3 6 DESCR4 APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE % 160 SEWER FUND e 7 7 " 6 5 'C 6JT 4200 CORACT SERVICES OBJECT SUBTOTAL 174, 808. 00 700. 00 151, 983. 75 0. 00 22, 824. 25 86 9 . 6 5 It, 1 11 Iz 13 DIVISION TOTAL 174, 808 00 700.00 151, 983.75 0.00 22, 824.25 86. 9 ` 1: 14 e 14 Is — 06 DEPT: SANITARY SEWER ' 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 IO 1 I6 14 '17 18 9 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 2, 200, 592. 00 0. 00 U. 00 0. 00 2, 200, 592. 00 C. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 200, 592. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 200, 592. 00 0. 0 `1 21 zt 20 zI == DIVISION TOTAL 2, 200, 592. 00 0. 00 .0. 00 0. 00 2, 200, 592. 00 0. 0 24 25 8407 CIP 88-407 DEPT: SANITARY SEWER 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 31 X26 7 25 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 25, 000. 00 0. 00 .: 0. 00 0. 00 25, 000. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 25, 000. 00 0. 00 ' 0. 00 0. 003. 25, 000. 00 O. 0 i5 '25 .7o DIVISION TOTAL 25, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 25. 000. 00 0. 0 3L 31 DEPARThIENT 3z 33 34 TOTAL 2, 400, 400. 00 700. 00 151, 983. 75 O. 00 2, 248, 416. 25 ' 6. 3 FUND TOTAL 2, 583, 164. 00 12. 543. 59 233, OBb. 83 3, 923. 39 2, 346, 153. 78 9. 1 41 41 35 36 37 4.1 4_ 4., 4! 38 39 40 I:. 31 41 42 43 5.. 44 45 46 �] 56 47 48 40 ul CI Sc, 61 5z L. 6' .. 53 64 64 0.1 55 56 417 2, /5 4 ... Il/ A a 1 o -, • FINANCE-FA454 • 2 r r r 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1( 11 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0046 -TIRE 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 50. 0/ OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 170 ASSET SEIZURE/FORFEITURE FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. / ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: • MGMT/SUPPORT 4MU-R TERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT OBJECT SUBTOTAL. O. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. 00 O. 00 0.00 O. 00 0.00 O. 00 O. 0 0. 0 DIVISION TOTAL • 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. 00 0.0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 0.00 POLICE 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. 00 0.0 210:1 SPEC IP4OEST73TFTS DEPT: 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 41(S REGULAR SALARIES/MISC ,4103 REGULAR SALARIES/SAFETY 4105 SPECIAL DUTY PAY O. 00 158, 692. 00 10, 560. 00 0.00 10, 301. 00 660. 00 0.00 60, 316. 50 3, 740. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 92, 375. 50 6, 820. 00 O.0 38. 0 35. 4 4107 PREMIUM OVERTIME 4107 UNIFORMS OBJECT SUBTOTAL O. 00 2, 800. 00 172, 052. 00 1, 611. 78 175. 02 12, 747. 80 13, 360. 05 1, 050. 12 78, 466. 67 O. 00 . O. 00 0. 00 13, 360. 05- 1, 749. 88 93, 585. 33 0. 0 37. 5 45. 6 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES• 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 8, 000. 00 549. 54 5, 214. 78 O. 00 2, 785. 22 65. 1 OBJECT SUB TOTAL 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 8, 000. 00 - 549. 54 5, 214. 78 O. 00 2, 785. 22 65. 1 4304 TELEPHONE 4322 UNCLASSIFIED 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 4, 560. 00 5, 000. 00 15, 591. 00 0. 00 15, 000. 00 1, 302. 88 O. 00 15, 684. 42 7, 797. 28 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 4, 560. 00 10, 684. 42- 7, 793. 72 O. 0 313. 6 50. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5400 EGUIPMENT 25, 151. 00 16, 302. 08 23, 481. 70 O. 00 1, 669. 30 93. 3 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 5403 VEHICLES OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 000. 00 25, 600. 00 29, 600. 00 O. 00 5, 395. 00 5, 395. 00 127. 00 23, 637. 68 23, 764. 68 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 3, 873. 00 1, 962. 32 5, 835. 32 3. 1 92. 3 80. 2 6900 LEASE. PAYMENTS 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 0.00 0.00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O.0 OBJECT SUL4 i OTAL 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 DIV r i ION TOTAL DEPARTMENT TOTAL 234, 803. 00 234, 803. 00 34, 995. 22 34, 995. 22 130, 927. 83 130, 927. 83 .0. 00 O. 00 103, 875. 17 103, 875. 17 55. 7 55. 7 FUND TOTAL 234, 803. 00 34, 995. 22 130, 927. 83 0. 00 103, 875. 17 55. 7 3 14 • 2U 21 22 • :13 24 26 r-. • • 27 211 29 30 3, 32 34 5.5 36 37 313 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 40 47 4,, 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 3 5 67 6 9 II 1: 14 15 6 17 1 106 21 26 27 31 3: 33 34 35 1D • 5U 51 53 5.1 5J f r - r F I NANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) TI11E 11:26:10 3 4 e fi e 6 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 • rll, . 0047 DATE 02/01/90 50.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 180 FIRE PROTECTION FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT OBJECT SUBTOTAL_ O. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 0 O. 0 DIVISION TOTAL O. 00 0.00 0.00 O. 00 0.00 0.0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL O. 00 0.00 O. 00 0.00 0.00 0. 0 2202 HYDRANT UPGRADE DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES FIRE 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 170, 792. 00 170,.792. 00 6, 200. 00 6, 200. 00 18, 554. 94 18, 554. 94 O. 00 .0. 00 152, 237. 06 152, 237. 06 10. 8 10. 8 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 325.00 325.00 27.00 27.00 162.06 162. 06 0. 00 O. 00 162.94 • 162. 94 49.8 49.8 DIVISION TOTAL 171, 117. 00 6, 227. 00 18, 717. 00 0. 00 152, 400. 00 10. 9 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 171, 117. 00 6, 227. 00 18, 717. 00 O. 00 152, 400. 00 10. 9 FUND TOTAL 171, 117. 00 6, 227. 00 18, 717. 00 O. 00 152, 400. 00 10. 9 L L 7 7 7 7 7. 7 2 • 2: 2 2 A2 r • • 2, 2 71 3 3 3 4 41 4 4 4 4 4 47 40 46 50 51 52 53 54 55 58 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 16 11 14 I. 15 17 18 21 2: z7 31 • • r. 7 • A .4, rs r • • r • • F I NANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) . • , ii— TIME 11: 26: 10- ) . FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 ' . DATE 02/01/90 50.0% CF YEAR COMPLETE IN 3 FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 705 INSURANCE FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE .._. % 5 6 7 8 8 1209 LIABILITY INS DEPT: 0 . MGMT/SUPPORT . , . . -. • ;' 9 11 14 1, 16 10 4100 PERSONAL. SERVICES, 4102 REGULAR SALAR I ES/ M I SC 12 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 21, 094. 00 407. 00 1. 680. 25 O. 00 ' 10, 269. 73 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 ' 10, 224. 27 407. CO 48.4 O. 0 13 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 14 4180 RETIREMENT 15 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 407. 00 2, 654. 00 2, 025. 00 O. 00 212. 83 241. 58 -: . 541.20 S — 1, 090. 42 . 816.22' O. 00 O. CO ' O. CO 134. 20— 1, 563. 52 2, 008. 18 132. 9 41. 0 29. 9 17 1J 10 ,6 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 111 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 27, 387. 00 2, 134. 66 12, 718. 17 O. 00 14, 662. 23 46. 4 23, 2.1 10 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 20 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 21 451, 680. 00 451, 680. 00 O. 00 O. 00 230, 180. 50 230, 180. 50 O. 00 O. 00 221, 499. 50 221, 499. 50 50. 9 50. 9 2..., 11 31 .1.1 4300 MATER I ALS / SUP PL I ES /OTHER 3 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 4315 MEMBERSHIP 500. 00 176.00 11.84 O. 00 71. 12 168. 00 0.00 O. 00 423.38 8. 00 14.2 95.4 4316 TRAINING 26 4324 CLAIMS/SETTLEMENTS 27 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 275. 00 30, 000. 00 30, 951. 00 O. 00 O. 00 11. 84 98. 12 25, 793. 60 26, 130. 84 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 176. 88 4, 206. 40 4, 820. 16 35. 6 85. 9 84. 4 J.. 4:: 30 DIVISION TOTAL 510, 018. 00 2, 146. 50 269, 029. 51 0.00 , 240, 982. 49 52.7 31 32 1210 AUTO/PROP/BONDS DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT — 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES -, 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PR IVATE ,c OBJECT SUBTOTAL 30, 850. 00 30, 850. 00 O. 00 O. 00 4, 487. 70 4, 487. 70 O. 00 O. 00 26, 362. 30 26, 362. 30 14. 5 14. 5 4 : .... 37 .1, t 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 33 4324 CLAIMS/SETTLEMENTS 8, 000. 00 O. 00 233. 24 756. 97 7, 009. 79 12. 3 43 5j !!I A ..; - . •:, 1,1 :.i 40 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 41 42 8, 000. 00 O. 00 233. 24 756. 97 7, 009. 79 12. 3 43 DIVISION TOTAL 44 45 1215 UNE-MPLOYMENT DEPT: 38, 850. 00 MGMT/SUPPORT O. 00 4, 720. 94 756. 97 33, 372. 09 14. 1 47 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES .i, 4136 UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS 25, 577. 00 4, 474. 06 7, 283. 28 a 00 18, 293. 72 22. 4 49 OBJECT' SUBTOTAL t.0 • 51 25, 571 00 25, 577. 00 4, 474. 06 4, 474. 06 7, 283. 28 7, 283. 28 .0. 00 O. 00 18, 293. 72 . 18, 293. 72 28. 4 28. 4 .: 71 /:, 52 bilTnriTOP---OTAL 53 54 55 56 44 r 4 5 7 6 9 to ✓ 11 12 13 ✓ 14 15 6 r17 19 • 2O 21 22 111'3 I4 25 • _6 r' r r r r • • A C. r 27 20 3 3t .t3 34 35 36 37 30 39 4 4, 42 43 44 45 46 47 40 49 50 51 52 53 55 56 57 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH . EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (DY FUND) PAGE 0049 TIME 11:26:10 FROM 12/01/89 TO 12/31/89 DATE 50.0% OF 02/01/90 YEAR COMPLETE FUND DIV OBJT DESCR 705 INSURANCE FUND APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD EXPND. • ENCUMBRANCE UNENC BALANCE 1217 WORKERS COMP. DEPT: .• MGMT/SUPPORT_ • 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES - 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 26, 752. 00 520. 00 2, 184. 51 0.00 13, 184. 79 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 13, 567. 21 520. 00 49. 2 0. 0 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4180 RETIREMENT 4182 WORKERS COMP CURRENT YR 520. 00 3, 366. 00 207, 000. 00 0.00 276.25 O. 00 1, 74, 541. 20 393. 63 376. 38 0.00 O. 00 0. 00 1, 132, 21.20- 972. 37 623. 62 104.0 41. 4 35. 9 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 225. 00 242, 383. 00 2, 358. 34 819. 10 1, 90, 327. 10 823. 10 O. 00 O. 00 2, 151, 897. 90 559. 90 31. 4 37. 4 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 49, 605. 00 49, 605. 00 0.00 O. 00 17, 17, 896. 00 896. 00 O. 00 0. 00 ,31, 31, 709. 00 709. 00 36. 0 36. 0 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 200. 00 0.00 3. 66 O. 00 196. 34 1. 8 4316 TRAINING OBJECT ,SUBTOTAL 1, 220. 00 1, 420. 00 O. 00 O. 00 48. 99 52. 65 O. 00 0. 00 1, 1, 171. 01 367. 35 4. 0 3. 7 DIVISION TOTAL 293, 403. 00 2, 819. 10 108, 771. 75 0. 00 • 184, 636. 25 37. 0 f T8 HECICAF?(= DEPT: 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES MGMT/SUPPORT 4109 MEDICARE BENEFITS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 33, 079. 00 33, 079. 00 2, 2, 306. 70 306. 70 15, 15, 255. 76 255. 76 O. 00 0. 00 17, 17, 823. 24 023. 24 46. 1 46. 1 DIVISION TOTAL 33, 079. 00 2, 306. 70 15, 255. 76 O. 00 17, 823. 24 46. 1 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: 4300 MATER IALS /SUPPLIES/OTHER MGMT/SUPPORT 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 O. 00 0.00 .0. 00 0.00 O. 0 0.0 . DIVISION TOTAL O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL FUND TOTAL 900, 932. 00 900, 932. 00 11, 1 1, 746. 36 746. 36 405, 405, 061. 24 061. 24 756. 97 756. 97 495, 495, 113. 79 1 13. 79 45. 0 45. 0 REPORT TOTALS 21, 977, 086. 00 2, 537, 759.17' 10, 159, 558. 68 146, 662. 61 11,670, 864. 71 46. 8 23 4 5 6 7 6 9 1u 11 11 13 14 15 IG n 1C 19 22 24 25 26 27 31 32 33. at 4. C. tiJ /J 1 "1 1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 6, 1990 Regular Meeting of February 13, 1990 SECOND QUARTERLY REPORT OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council receive and file this report. Background: On June 13, 1989, City Council adopted the FY 89-90 Capital Improvement Program. This is the second status report of that program. Analysis: The report is organized to show the following for each project: - Project description - Project status as of January 31, 1990 - Major funding source - The budget as approved by Council - Proposed midyear revision - Expenditures through December 31, 1989 - Anticipated expenditures by June 30, 1990 - Budget Page Respectfully submitted, ynn A. Terry P.E. Deputy City Engineer ted: An 7 y Antich Director of Pub is Works evin B. North raft City Manager CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM City Managers Comment: It is suggested that the mid -year review be limited to current projects in the current fiscal year, as projects for the next five (5) years will be reviewed in Spring, 1990. The page numbers refer to pages in the Capital Improvement Program where more detail and the funding source can be found. Projects funded from the City's major descretionary fund, the General Fund are so noted. The Capital Improvement Program (hereafter referred to as CIP) is a planning tool for short and long-range capital acquisition and development. It links Hermosa Beach's General Plan and the fiscal planning process to physical development and the highest priority maintenance needs of the City's facilities and infrastructure. It provides the mechanism for estimating capital requirements, identifying appropriate funding sources, scheduling all capital projects over a fixed period, coordinating the activities of various departments to meet completion target dates, and monitoring and evaluating the progress of capital projects. The CIP is a five year plan of capital related revenues and expenditures that is updated one year at a time. Although the CIP constitutes a five year plan, funds are appropriated only. for the upcoming year. The CIP (starting with FY 89-90) is designed to be on-going and continuous. The projects for the next four years are based on future needs and revenues, not appropriations. This plan consists of projects that are major expenditures for a specific plan or design of permanent public improvements such as a building, street, sanitary sewer rehabilitation, or acquisition of real property, or major equipment. The purpose of these projects is to: - Implement the General Plan - Preserve public health and. safety - Improve the environment - Increase efficient operation of the City - Improve the comfort and enjoyment of residents. The capital projects included in this document span five fiscal years from 1989-1990 through 1993-94. The City projects total capital improvement needs for FY 89-90 of $23.3 million, but only funding for $3.3 million. In addition, $6 million is proposed as bonded indebtedness to fund the lease purchase of the AT&SF Railroad right of way. Over the five year period from FY 89-90 through FY 93-94, total capital improvement needs are over $31 million which includes approximately $10,000,000 bonded indebtedness for sanitary sewers while funding is estimated to be available for only 13.8 million. The City needs to increase its funding sources in order to complete and pay for all projects. Projects are presented in this document in seven categories and are organized into the following groups: Street and Safety Improvements - Street Lighting Improvements Storm Drain Improvements - Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Park Improvements - Public Buildings and Grounds Improvements - General Capital Improvements Summary: This Five -Year Capital Improvement Program provides a framework for planning the maintenance and replacement of existing capital equipment and facilities as well as new acquisitions. It is intended to address the highest City priorities for improvement and maintenance of the City's infrastructure while reflecting citizens' needs and wishes with regard to shaping their community. CIP 85-102 Description: Status: Funding: CIP 85-137 Description: Status: Funding: PROJECT STATUS AS OF JANUARY 31, 1990 STREET AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS FAU. WIDEN HIGHLAND AVE.. FROM LONGFELLOW TO 35TH STREET This project proposes to widen Highland Avenue (curb to curb width) from 30' to 40'; thereby providing an 8' parking lane on each side of the street. In progress. On January 24, 1989 City Council awarded a contract to Excel Paving at a cost not to exceed $134,593. Construction was completed on December 19, 1989. Final costs have to be determined and completion has to be approved by City Council. 150 Grant Fund (Multiple Sources) Budget (12/31/89) Expenditure (12/31/89) Midyear budget (2/13/90) Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) Budget Page: 62 FAU. OVERLAY VALLEY AND ARDMORE $188,051 $ 45,367 $188,051 $188,051 Preparation of plans, specifications and estimates leading to the resurfacing of portions of Valley and Ardmore, including the Gould Avenue intersections. In progress. This project was combined with CIP 88-173. (AC overlay for portions of Valley/Ardmore). The County has begun work and is scheduled to advertise for bids during the Spring of 1990. 150 Grant Fund (Multiple Sources) Budget (12/31/89) $554,400 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 68,366 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 68,366 Budget Page: 64 CIP 89-141 STREET REHABILITATION Description: This project proposes to rehabilitate asphalt concrete and portland cement concrete streets, City-wide. Status: In progress. On September 26, 1989, Council authorized staff to seek proposals for a computerized pavement management system. On November 13, 1989 the City received six proposals and the Public Works staff is presently reviewing those proposals. The company should be selected sometime during January 1990 and approved by the City Council in February. Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $125,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 25,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 25,000 CIP 89-142 Budget Page: 66 SIDEWALK REPAIRS Description: This project proposes to repair deteriorated: sidewalks, driveways and curbs at various locations, City-wide. Status: In progress. The plans and specifications were completed during December 1989. Award of contract to be ready for submittal to City Council for approval in February 1990. Funding: Unfunded Budget (12/31/89) $ -0- Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ -0- Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $328,064 Budget Page: 68 CIP 89-146 Description: Status: Funding: CIP 89-148 Description: Status: Funding: STREET MEDIAN UPGRADES This project proposes new planting and irrigation for street medians at various locations, City-wide. This project is to be under construction during the 3rd quarter of this year. 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 20,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 20,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 20,000 Budget Page: 76 TRASH ENCLOSURES DOWNTOWN This project proposes to improve the trash enclosures in the downtown area. In progress. This project was prepared for City Council review and considered at the meeting of October 24, 1989. The trash enclosures are being redesigned with upgraded improvements to the original proposed gates. One site at Lot "A" will be constructed first as a prototype and construction is to begin as soon as the new bus benches have been installed under CIP 90-149. 110 Parking Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 10,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 10,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 10,000 Budget Page: 80 CIP 90-149 NEW BUS BENCHES Description: This project proposes to install new bus shelters and benches at bus stops along bus routes. Status: In progress. City Council approved the installation of the new bus benches but deleted the shelters. City staff is constructing the bus benches at this time. Funding: 145 Proposition "A" Funds Budget (12/31/89) $ 55,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 25,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 25,000 Budget Page: 82 CIP 89-150 MISCELLANEOUS TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS Description: Preparation of plans and specifications leading to: 1. New type of traffic signal on Pier Avenue allowing egress and ingress for Fire Department emergency vehicles. 2. Existing pedestrian traffic signal at 18th and Prospect to be relocated to Valley at 16th Street allowing for school children and pedestrian crossing in front of the school. Status: In progress. Engineering staff is revising the plans for the school crossing at this time. Comments will be requested from the school district before construction is begun. Construction is to take place after the downtown trash enclosure at Lot "A" is completed under CIP 89-148. Funding: 115 State Gas Tax Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 15,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 15,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 15,000 Budget Page: 84 CIP 89-151 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PROGRAM Description: The following work is proposed: 1. Develop a high accident location and surveillance program using traffic accident data. 2. Conduct a study and develop a detailed residential neighborhood traffic control plan to reduce commuter traffic intrusion. Status: Project cancelled. No State Grant funds provided by the State for this project. Funding: 150 Grant Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 45,500 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ -0- Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ -0- CIP 85-160 Budget Page: 86 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS & APPURTENANCES Description: This on-going project consists of repairing damaged concrete streets City-wide. Status: In progress. The repair work will be held up until the pavement management system reviews the streets and sets priorities. Funding: 115 State Gas Tax Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 79,493 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ -0- Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ -0- Budget Page: 86-b CIP 89-170 SLURRY SEALING Description: This project proposes slurry sealing asphalt surface streets west of Valley Drive to increase skid resistance and prolong pavement life. This work also includes minor repair prior to sealing, crack sealing and spot repairs. Status: In progress. The slurry sealing is to be held up until the proposed pavement management system reviews the streets and helps set priorities. Funding: 115 State Gas Tax Fund Budget (12/31/89) $337,219 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ 136 Midyear budget (2/13/90) $337,219 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $337,219 Budget Page: 90 CIP 87-171 ASPHALT STREET REPAIRS Description: This on-going project consists of repairing damaged asphaltic streets City-wide. Streets east of Ardmore Ave. were repaired and slurry sealed during the spring of 1989. Status: In progress. The next action is to have the pavement management system review the streets and set priorities. Funding: 115 State Gas Tax Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 21,305 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ 136 Midyear. budget (2/13/90) $ 21,305 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 21,305 Budget Page: 92 CIP 88-174 REHABILITATION OF PROSPECT AVENUE Description: Preparation of plans, specifications and estimates leading to the resurfacing of Prospect Avenue from Aviation Boulevard to the southerly City Boundary. Status: In progress. Los Angeles County Public Works Department is preparing plans and specifications for this project at this time. Funding: 115 State Gas Tax Fund (currently unfunded) Budget (12/31/89) $ -0- Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ -0- Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $246,000 Budget Page: 94 CIP 86-176 TRAFFIC CONTROL PRE-EMPTION Description: This project will install traffic control pre-emption devices on all PCH signals at 2nd, 5th, 8th and 21st Streets, Pier Avenue, and Aviation and Artesia Boulevards. Status: Postponed. On June 27, 1989 City Council rejected all bids due to a conflict with a Caltrans project on Pacific Coast Highway. This project is to be re -bid after Caltrans completes its traffic interconnect project. This project is proposed to begin construction in the 4th quarter of this year. Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 70,468 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 70,468 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 70,468 Budget Page: 96 CIP 89-177 DESIGN VALLEY/ARDMORE/PIER Description: This project proposes to provide preliminary engineering to evaluate various design alternatives to improve the intersections at Pier/Valley/Ardmore intersections. Status: On hold. Design is proposed to begin in the 4th quarter of this year. Funding: 001 General Fund (Developer contribution) Budget (12/31/89) $ 40,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 40,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 40,000 Budget Page: 98 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS CIP 88-201 STREET LIGHT UPGRADES Description: This project proposes the installation, upgrading and conversion to high pressure sodium lights throughout the City. Status: In progress. Hermosa Avenue between 28th Street and 35th Street and north Strand, between 30th Street and 35th Street are scheduled next for change out. Funding: 105 Street Lighting Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 30,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 30,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 30,000 Budget Page: 100 CIP 85-202 HERMOSA AVENUE/PIER AVENUE LIGHTING Description: Replace lighting poles on Pier Avenue from Hermosa Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway. Status: Project complete. Installation began in April 1989 and was performed by the Street Lighting Division of the Public Works Department. Work was completed in August 1989. No further expenditures are anticipated. Funding: 105 Street Lighting Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 16,500 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ 1,981 Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 2,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 2,000 Budget Page: 102 CIP 86-405 Description: Status: Funding: CIP 88-406 Description: Status: Funding: SEWERS/STORM DRAINS SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS. TARGET AREA 3 Completion of sanitary sewer deficiencies in Target Area 3. Project complete. 160 Sewer Fund Budget (12/31/89) $174,808 Expenditure (12/31/89) $151,984 Midyear budget (2/13/90) $154,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $154,000 Budget Page: 106 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS. TARGET AREA 4 Preparation of plans and specifications leading to construction and completion of deficiencies of sanitary sewers in Target Area 4. In progress. City Council awarded the preliminary design agreement to Harris & Associates on January 10, 1989 in an amount not to exceed $94,050. The City Council accepted the preliminary design report on October 24, 1989, and increased the project from 10,000 feet to 15,146 feet. The consultant has begun final design on the project. 160 Sewer Fund. Budget (12/31/89) $2,200,592 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 80,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 80,000 Budget Page: 108 CIP 88-407 SANITARY SEWER BOND ISSUE Description: Preliminary engineering leading to a $5 to $10 million bond issue. Status: In progress. City Council awarded a contract to James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. at a cost not to exceed $15,950 for the preliminary engineering. Funding: 160 Sewer Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 25,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 14,500 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 14,500 Budget Page: 110 PARK IMPROVEMENTS CIP 89-506 VARIOUS PARK IMPROVEMENTS Description: New tree planting, benches, landscaping, irrigation purchases, trash can, playground equipment, picnic tables, etc. for Community Resources Commission recommended locations. Status: In progress. To date no other improvements have been recommended by the Community Resources Commission. City staff is installing the improvements at this time. Funding: 125 Park and Recreation Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 31,570 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ 4,847 Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 31,570 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 31,570 Budget Page: 112 CIP 88-508 PARK IRRIGATION REHABILITATION Description: Restoration of various City Park irrigation systems. Status: Project complete. Rehabilitations to be scheduled after Council adoption of the parks master plan. Funding: 125 Park and Recreation Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 55,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ 12,916 Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 55,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 55,000 Budget Page: 114 CIP 89-512 Description: Status: BASKETBALL COURTS Install new basketball courts at Clark Field just north of the existing tennis courts. In progress. On November 28, 1989, a request for design proposals. The been received by the City and award design contract is proposed to take February, 1990. Council approved proposals have of the place in Funding: 150 Grant Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 60,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 58,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 58,000 CIP 89-514 Description: Status: Funding: Budget Page: 122 PURCHASE OF ATSF RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY Purchase the land between Valley Drive and Ardmore Drive from Herondo Street to Longfellow Avenue, approximately 15.4 acres. Project complete. Deed was recorded 21, 1989. 126 UUT Railroad Right -of -Way Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 110,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $1,574,560 Midyear budget (2/13/90) $1,578,004 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $1,578,004 Budget Page: 126 on December CIP 89-516 SIXTH STREET AND PROSPECT PARK Description: The scope of work is amended to include installation of an irrigation system ($4,900) and purchase of new sod ($858), picnic tables ($1,000), aggregate trash cans ($800) and drinking fountain ($400) at subject park. Status: In progress. Application for State grant funds is being processed at this time. Funding: 150 Grant Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 7,958 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 7,958 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 7,958 Budget Page: 128-b CIP 89-517 RECREATION FACILITIES Description: The scope of work is amended to include the purchase of playground equipment ($8,050) and park drinking fountains ($692). Status: In progress. Application for State grant funds is being processed at this time. Funding: 150 Grant Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 8,742 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 8,742 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 8,742 CIP 89-518 RECREATION FACILITIES Description: The scope of work is amended to include the purchase of playground equipment. Status: In progress. Staff has determined the types of equipment to order. Application for State grant funds is being processed at this time. Funding: 150 Grant Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 12,305 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 12,305 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 12,305 Budget Page: 128-f CIP 89-519 HERMOSA PARRS Description: The scope of the work is amended to include the purchase of picnic tables. Status: In progress. Staff has determined the types of tables to order. Application for State grant funds is being processed at this time. Funding: 150 Grant Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 2,108 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 2,108 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 2,108 Budget Page: 128-h PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS CIP 89-601 FUEL TANKS Description: Bring existing gasoline dispensing at the City Yard into conformance with State law by annual testing for leaks. Status: In progress. Plumbing repair is required due to a small leak in the plumbing outside one of the three existing tanks. Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 4,000 $ 865 Expenditure (12/31/89) Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 4,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 4,000 Budget Page: 130 CIP 89-604 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS, Description: This project proposes construction of Capital Improvements for the following departments: 1. Police Department - Air conditioning in emergency $10,000 services computer room 2. Community Center - Room 8 Wall Repair $2,000 - Miscellaneous $2,500 Room 7 Water Heater Room 8 Carpeting Refinish portable stairs Water Fountain, North & South Wings 3. Roof top air conditioner or cooler for Police jail area. $3,000 Contingency $1,500 Status:' In progress. The air conditioning needs for the computer room in the basement are being reviewed. An air conditioning company is preparing an estimate for the proposed needs. Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 16,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 19,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 19,000 CIP 87-606 POLICE DEPARTMENT REMODEL Description: Demolition and modification of part of existing police facility, remodel of dispatching center. Status: Remodel Project Complete. Additional minor maintenance type work still required. Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 8,550 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ 18 Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 8,550 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 8,550 Budget Page: 138-b CIP 89-609 POSSIBLE CITY HALL EXPANSION Description: Plans, specifications and estimates for proposed increased floor area for City Hall offices and new air conditioning for basement of Police Department and General Services Department. FY 89-90, modular furniture, $ 25,000 and new council chairs, $ 5,000. Status: The Police Department is coordinating the purchase of new Council chairs. No work to date on modular furniture. Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 30,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 30,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 30,000 Budget Page: 142 ri CIP 88-610 COMMUNITY CENTER AIR CONDITIONING Description: Installation of air conditioning in the Community Center. Status: Project complete. Due to a noise concern, the final costs have not been paid to the architect. The mechanical engineer is working on the correcting the noise concern at this time. Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 13,905 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ 2,236 Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 7,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 7,000 Budget Page: 142-b CIP 89-612 CITY-WIDE SIGNS Description: This proposes to install consistent City-wide signing including City parks and entrance signs. Status: This work is proposed for the 3rd quarter of this year and is being handled by Community Resources Department. Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 16,700 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 16,700 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 16,700 Budget Page: 146 CIP 89-613 COMMUNITY CENTER ELECTRICAL UPGRADE Description: Plans and specifications leading to upgrading electrical services to Community Center buildings to meet current code requirements. Status: On hold. City Council decided on no action at this time Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 8,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 8,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 8,000 Budget Page: 148 CIP 88-614 MUNICIPAL PIER REPAIRS Description: This project was to assess the damage, prepare any needed design and reconstruct or repair any damage to the Hermosa Beach Municipal Pier caused by the January 17, 1988 storm. Status: Project complete. Construction was completed on September 25, 1989. The final payments have not yet been paid to the design engineer. Funding: 001 General Fund plus Grant Fund Budget (12/31/89) $136,074 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ 96,644 Midyear budget (2/13/90) $136,074 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $136,074 Budget Page: 150 CIP 89-615 COMMUNITY CENTER FIRE ALARMS Description: As recommended by the Fire Department, this project proposes to design and install a fire alarm system in the Community Center complex which will be connected to the dispatch room in the Police Department. Status: In progress. A review of the system requirements was completed in the 2nd quarter of this year and the upgrading of the system is to begin in the 3rd quarter of this year. Funding: 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 49,988 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 10,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 10,000 Budget Page: 152 CIP 89-701 Description: Status: Funding: CIP 89-703 Description: Status: Funding: GENERAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CITY PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS Upgrade City parking lots to include repairing pavement and walls, parking bumpers and new planting. In progress. Construction is to take place in the 3rd quarter of this year. 110 Parking Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 5,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 5,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 5,000 Budget Page: 154 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS TRAILER This project proposes to construct and equip an emergency trailer with emergency lights, generators, signs, flares, and small tools for use by the Fire, Police and Public Works Departments. Police Department is exploring alternate plans, such as retrofitting the Fire Department pick up. Work on this project is to begin during the 4th quarter of this year. 001 General Fund Budget (12/31/89) $ 5,000 Expenditure (12/31/89) $ -0- Midyear budget (2/13/90) $ 5,000 Anticipated Expenditure (6/30/90) $ 5,000 Budget Page: 156 REVISED AS OF 12-31-89 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY89-90 12/31/89 PROJECT PROJECT FY 89-90 I JUL I .AUG I SEP I OCT I NOV I DEC I JAN I FEB I MAR I APR I MAY I JUN NO. DESCRIPTION BUDGET 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. 12 13 14 15 1617 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 I__I__I__I__I__I__I__I__I__1__1__1__I__I__I._I__I__I__I__I__I__I__1__I__I__I__I__I__I__I__I__I__I__1__I__I__I__I__I__I__i__I__I__I__I__I__I__I_I__I__I__ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1-+-1-1-+-1-}-+-1- 1 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1-1-1-1-1-1-4-1-1-1-1-1---1---1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I-1-4 - I -1'-+4-1-+4-1--4-$--4- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 STREETS & SAFETY * 85-102 Widen Highland Ave. 85-137 Overlay Valley & Ardmore 89-141 Street Rehabilitation 90-142 Sidewalk Repairs 89-146 Street Median Upgrades 89-148 Trash Enclosures Downtown 90-149 New Bus Shelters 89-150 Misc. Traffic Signal Improv. * 89-151. Traffic Engineering Program 85-160 Rdwy Improvmnts & Appurtenances 89-170 Slurry Sealing 87-171 Asphalt Street Repairs 88-174 Overlay Prospect 86-176 Traffic Signal Pre-emption 87-177 Design Valley/Ardmore/Pier STREET LIGHTING 88-201 Street Lighting Upgrades * 89-202 Hermosa Ave. Lighting * 87-405 88-406 89-407 SANITARY SEWER Target Area 3 Target Area 4 Sewer Bond Issue PARKS 89-506 Various Park Improv. * 88-508 Park Irrigation 89-512 Basketball Courts * 89-514 Purchase ATSF RR right-of-way 89-516 6th Street & Prospect Park 89-517 Recreational Facilities 89-518 Recreational Facilities 89-519 Hermosa Parks 188,051 554,400 125,000 0 20,000 10,000 55,000 15,000 45,500 79,493 337,219 21,305 0 70,468 40,000 30,000 16,500 PROJECT DROPPED PROJECT DELAYED 11111111111111' 1 41 1 1 1 k 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ..}..}..}..}..+..}..}..}..}..}....F..F..F..F..F..F..F..F..F..F..I...F 11 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1--1-I- .4-1-+-1 F..F..F..F..I..+.+.+......{.......---i..}..}..t--}..}..}..}..}, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11'+-1-1'--++ 1 A 1 1 1 1 1 1-1-+-1-1-+-t-1-1- 4-4-1-4-4-1-4-4-� 174,808 2,200,592 25,000 -4-4--F•-F-4-4-4-4• 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 31,570 55,000 60,000 125,000 7,958 8,742 12,305 2,108 BUILDINGS & GROUNDS * 89-601 Fuel Tanks 4,000 89-604 Various Building Improv. 16,000 * 87-606 Police Dept. Remodel 8,550 89-609 City Hall Expansion 30,000 * 88-610 Comm. Center Air Conditioning 13,905 89-612 City Wide Signs 16,700 89-613 Comm. Ctr. Elect. Upgrade 8,000 * 89-614 Pier Repairs 136,074 89-615 Comm. Ctr. Fire Alarm Sys. 49,988 GENERAL 89-701 City Parking Lot Improvements 5,000 89-703 Emergency Preparedness Trailer 5,000 * PROJECT COMPLETED 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -ON HOLD 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1•-I--f-I-f-+ 1 I 1 1 I 11111111111111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LEGEND: PROPOSAL DESIGN BIDDING CONSTRUCTION REVISED AS OF 12-31-89 February 6, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 Tentative 1990-92 Budget Calendar It is recommended that the City Council accept and file the attached Budget Calendar for the 1990-92 Budget. The dates important to the City Council will be the first workshop in March and the last three dates on the calendar. If there are no objections, these dates will be used for budget workshops and hearings. It is recommended that a date for the first workshop be set, perhaps to coincide with the joint meeting with the Cable TV Board. Preparation of a two year budget is proposed to cover fiscal years 1990-91 and 1991-92. Preparation of a. two year document allows the City to plan for a longer 'period of time, provides a plan for funding of projects that span two or more fiscal years and may result in time savings if adjustments are minimized. The two year plan would be presented in May 1990. A normal midyear review would occur in February 1991, with another review between fiscal years in place of the usual budget preparation. Another midyear review would take place in February 1992. Concur: Kevin Northcra City Manager 1 Viki Copeland Finance Director 1990-92 BUDGET CALENDAR EARLY MARCH 1990 Preliminary workshop, City Council/Staff. MARCH 15, 1990 Budget instructions to departments. MARCH 20, 1990, 12:00 NOON Revenue projections due to Finance Department. MARCH 27, 1990, 12:00 NOON Department budget requests and Capital Improvement Program due to Finance Department. APRIL 12, 1990, 7:00 A.M. - 11:00 A.M. Staff review of budget requests, Room 12 , Community Center APRIL 16-17, 1990 Department meetings with City Manager/Finance Director. APRIL 18, 1990 Revisions due to Finance Department, 6:00 P.M. MAY 8, 1990 Budget to printer. MAY 15, 1990 Budget to City Council. MAY 24, 1990 Budget and Capital Improvement Program study session with City Council, 6:00 P.M. JUNE 7, 1990 Second study session if needed. *JUNE 26, 1990 Public Hearing/Budget Adoption. *Depending on the results of the study session, adoption and public hearing may be scheduled for June 12, 1990 if time permits. February 6, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 SUBJECT: SPECIAL STUDY 89-12 AND RESOLUTION PURPOSE: TO PROVIDE A DEFINITION OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP FOR THE WAIVER OF FEES IN CONJUNCTION WITH APPEALS TO CITY COUNCIL INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL Recommendation Staff recommends basing financial hardship on the L. A. County's designated very low and lower income levels: No. in 50% of Median 80% of Median Family Very Low Lower 1 $13,950 $21,300 2 $15,950 $24,300 3 $17,950 $27,350 4 $19,950 $30,400 5 $21,550 $32,300 6 $23,150 $34,200 7 $24,750 $36,150 8 $26,350 $38,000 Lower income should pay half, and very low income nothing. Background Because of a lack of definition as to what constitutes a hardship, the City Council requested that this matter be studied and a standard be set to be used in conjunction with Section 2-2.26 of the Municipal Code allowing the City Council to waive appeal fees. Analysis The proposed income levels are based on the median income in the County. Coincidentally the City estimated median income is only slightly lower. It may seem that the median income for the City should be higher; however, staff believes that because of the large percentage of renters, the overall income level is brought down. Since the lower and very low income levels are periodically updated for L. A. County by Housing and Community Development, the City would always have a built-in way of adjusting the 1 9 r figures. If the City used its own estimated median income, only every 10 years when the U.S. Census was prepared, could the figures be adjusted. By using lower and very -low income levels for the County, it is estimated that some senior citizens would qualify. Those who do not qualify, however, should be considered with those that have an adequate income to pay the fee. Although it should be noted that the City Council has the power to appeal when at least two members make a request, and need not pay the fee. In some unusual cases, where two Council Members believe a hardship exists even though it does not meet the income criteria, three Council Members could make an exception. These unique instances are difficult to provide for with specific written standards, and therefore should be considered on a case by case basis. It should be noted that staff does not suggest granting waivers in this fashion on a regular basis, but only when Council Members strongly believe a hardship definitely exists. The method for determining income will be the use of the most recent income tax records. The applicant will be required to submit this information and the information will be maintained confidential. Staff contacted other cities in the South Bay and found that most cities do not officially waive the fees. However, El Segundo indicated that unofficially fees have been waived; Inglewood has a committee to which cases are referred, but have no official standards; and Rancho Palos Verdes by City Council direction can waive fees for non-profit organizations, but have no specific standard. Refer to the attachment. Attachments 1. Proposed Resolution No. 90- 2. Survey of other cities CONCUR: Kevin B. North 'aft City Manager p/ccsrfee :Respect ulllysubmittpd, ichael Schubach Planning Director 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. 90 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO DEFINE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP IN CONJUNCTION WITH SECTION 2-2.26 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE ALLOWING THE CITY COUNCIL TO WAIVE APPEAL FEES IN HARDSHIP CASES. WHEREAS, the City Council held a meeting on February 13, 1990 and made the following Findings: A. Individuals with lower or very low income may be unable to afford the appeal fees; B. A waiver of appeal fees should be allowed when it is determined a financial hardship exists; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby resolve the following: 1. Financial hardship for the waiver of appeal fees shall be based on Los Angeles County's lower and very low income levels. "Lower" shall mean eighty percent (80%) of the median income for Los Angeles County. "Very Low" shall mean fifty percent (50%) of the median income for Los Angeles County. 2. Persons with lower incomes shall pay a maximum of one-half (1/2) of the appeal fee; persons with very low income shall pay nothing. 3. Proof of annual income shall be based on the most recent income tax records, including W-2 forms, and shall be submitted by the applicant. All income information shall be kept confidential. 4. An appellant who does not meet the criteria may submit in writing to the City Council a request for waiver stating the reasons for said request, and at a City Council meeting three or more City Council members may agree that a financial hardship exists and waive the appeal fees. 5. The City Clerk shall notify appellants who oppose paying the appeal fee of the requirements for waiver; when a waiver request is made, the appeal shall be accepted as valid until the determination of financial hardship can be made. 6. If the request for financial hardship status is denied, the appellant has the option of paying the fee within two working days, or the appeal will be voided. 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 --Continued RESULUTION NO. 90 - PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1990. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: [ j VP CITY ATTORNEY 2 P/ccrsfee February 6, 1990 Hardship --Waiver of Fees Information Gathered from Other Cities The following Cities have indicated that they do not have any provisions in their code book which allows fees to be waived because of financial hardship: City of Gardena City of Hawthorne City of Lawndale City of Redondo Beach City of Torrance City of Lomita City of Carson The Cities listed below have indicated the following: City of El Segundo --The City does not have any such provision formally written, however, fees have been waived on one occasion due to financial hardship. City of Rancho Palos Verdes --The City has no formal standard for waiving fees. However, via City Council, fees may be waived for non-profit organizations. City of Inglewood --The City has a Hardship Committee which determines the waiving of fees for mostly non-profit organizations. However, there are no formal written standards for waiving fees due to financial hardship. In addition, the City has indicated that determination is done on a Case -by -Case basis. City of Long Beach --Generally, The City does not charge a fee for the appeal process. However, a project applicant pays a fee for the appeal process and there are no formal provisions which state that fees may be waived due to financial hardship. City of Rolling Hills Estates --The City does not have a formal standard for allowing fees to be waived; however, fees may be waived at the discretion of the Planning Commission and City Council. February 12, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMENTS FROM CITY CLERK'S OFFICE RE HARDSHIP FEE WAIVER The item before Council defines specific criteria for determining financial hardship and outlines a procedure for processing appeal fee waiver requests. The proposal, as presented, appears to have minimal effect on the workload in the Clerk's office. As a point of information, aside from the obvious loss of revenue to the City's General Fund, which is relatively minor, anytime an appeal is processed without a fee, whether the appeal is filed by two members of Council or whether an appellant's fee is waived, it does impact this department's budget, since a portion of the appeal fee ($72) goes directly into the Clerk's budget to offset the expenditure for public noticing. While an occasional waiving of fees should not pose a problem, a large number of appeals with no fee in any given year could have a significant impact on the Clerk's budget. For example, 12 such appeals would represent a loss of $864, or 10 percent of the FY 1989-90 allocation ($8,800) for public noticing. This is in no way meant as an objection to the proposal, which in itself should not adversely affect the Clerk's budget; it is only to make Council aware of the potential for budget difficulties if there were ever a significant number of appeals with no fee in any given year, and of the possible need for budget modification if it were to become necessary. Respectfully submitted, Elaine Doerflinf City Clerk •SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 9' Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council February 5, 1990 City Council meeting of February 13, 1990 REVISED NOISE ORDINANCE RELATING TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council waive further reading and introduce the attached ordinance. BACKGROUND The City Council, at the meeting of November 14, 1989, directed staff to prepare an ordinance requiring posting of signs with allowable work hours at construction sites. Staff was also directed to review regulations regarding cleanup and blocking of sidewalks, etc. at construction sites. ANALYSIS Current municipal regulations adequately address cleanup of construction sites and blocking of sidewalks and streets. Section 27A-6 H.B.M.C. contains provisions indicating that it is unlawful to allow refuse or debris to be scattered or accumulate upon public rights-of-way and upon adjacent property. It is also unlawful to allow refuse to accumulate at any place for a period in excess of one week. Violations are an infraction. Obviously all construction sites will have construction debris and some judgement is necessary in determining whether a site is in such a condition as to warrant a citation. Section 29-1, et seq..H.B.M.C. contains provisions indicating that it is unlawful to make any excavation or to remove any material from a public street or public place without first obtaining a permit. It is also unlawful to allow any obstruction of any kind to remain on any public street, alley or public way. Violations are a misdemeanor. Current construction noise regulations are inadequate in that it is necessary to prove that the noise exceeds the decibel level established for the zone in which the noise occurs. This requires the use of sophisticated noise monitoring equipment that does not lend itself well to the type of intermittent noise generated from construction sites. The act of setting up the monitoring equipment and establishing ambient noise levels would likely signal a violator to cease activity rendering a successful citation impossible. 1 10 The proposed ordinance would establish certain construction activities that are prohibited within established hours regardless of the decibel level of that activity. This revision will allow contractors, residents and enforcement personnel alike to readily determine if a violation exists. The ordinance also requires that the allowable hours of construction activity remain posted on the site. There is no proposed change to the hours during which construction is regulated. Violation of the noise ordinance is an infraction with an escalating fine schedule for second and subsequent offenses. Concur: Concur:. "Kevin B. North raft City Manager Respectfully submitted, William Grove Director of Bldg. & Safety Steve Wisniewski Public Safety Director 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. 90 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE F THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO HOURS OF CONSTRUCTION WITHIN AND ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL ZONES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 19.5-10 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Sec. 19.5-10 Construction of buildings and projects. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person within a residential zone, or within a radius of five hundred (500) feet therefrom, to operate equipment or perform any construction or repair work of any kind upon, or excavating for, any buildings, structures, or projects for which a building permit may be required pursuant to this municipal code, or to operate any pile driver, steam shovel, pneumatic hammer derrick, steam or electric hoist,'air compressor, power -driven drill, excavator, riveting machine or other construction type device which makes a loud noise audible at the subject property boundary between the hours of 7:00 p.m. of one day and 8:00 a.m. of the next day, unless beforehand written permission, as set forth herein, has been duly obtained from the Director of Building and Safety. No permit shall be required to perform emergency. work as defined in Article I of this chapter. 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 (b) Prior to performing any building construction activity as set forth in subsection (a) above and as a condition to maintaining a valid building permit, there shall be posted and at all times maintained at a prominent location adjacent to the public right of way next to the construction site a notice, to be provided by the City at the time of issuance of a building permit, in substantially the following form: 'Construction activity prohibited except between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. of each day. [HBMC Sec. 19.5-10 (a)]' Failure by the property owner and/or contractor to post and maintain this notice after receiving twenty-four hours written or oral notice from the City or the violation of subsection (a) above, shall constitute, severally, for each and every violation, an infraction, punishable as provided in this municipal code, except that after the second violation cif such provision may, in the discretion of the City Attorney or City Prosecutor, be prosecuted as a misdemeanor pursuant to this municipal code. (c) The provisions of this section do not apply to any person who performs any construction, repair, or excavation pursuant to the express written 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 permission of the Director of Building and Safety. Upon receipt of an application in writing therefor, stating the reasons of the request and the facts upon which such reasons are based, the Director of Building and Safety may grant such permission if he finds that: 1. The work proposed to be done is in the public interest, or 2. Hardship, or injustice or unreasonable delay would result from the interruption thereof during the hours and days specified above,or 3. The building or structure involved is. devoted or intended to be devoted to a use immediately incident to the public defense. Any person dissatisfied with the decision of the Director of Building and Safety°may forthwith appeal to the City Council. (d) The provisions of this section do not apply to the construction, repair or excavation during prohibited hours as may be necessary for the preservation of life or property when such necessity arises during such hours as the offices of the city are closed or where such necessity requires immediate action prior to the time at 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 (e) which it would be possible to obtain the aforementioned permits, provided, that the persons doing such construction, repair or excavation obtain a permit therefor within one day after the Office of the Director of Building and Safety is first opened subsequent to the making of such construction, repair or excavation. The provisions of this section do not apply to construction, repair, or excavation by a public utility which is subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission and where such work is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety or welfare and where such necessity makes it necessary to construct, repair or excavate during the prohibited hours." SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its final passage and adoption. SECTION 3. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, 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, in the manner provided by law. 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 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of February 1990. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City Hermosa Beach, California. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ri: •-..-i City Clerk CITY ATTORNEY carole/hours February 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 FEASIBILITY FOR STOP SIGNS ON VALLEY DRIVE AT 24TH STREET AND 24TH PLACE Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Should, as a matter of policy, not consider the placement of stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place. 2. Should consider minor improvements of the paths on the Greenbelt at 24th Street and 24th Place, or other locations. Background: At the January 9, 1990 meeting, staff presented a report, in response to Council and resident concerns about the intersections on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place. Staff's recommendation was to paint red curb from approximately 24th Street to 25th Street to improve sight distance. A copy of the January 9th report is available for review in the office of the City Clerk. After hearing concerns by residents in the vicinity of 24th Street and Valley Drive, City Council ordered the preparation of a stop sign feasibility report.' City Council also expressed a concern about the existence of a dirt foot path across the greenbelt at 24th Street used by pedestrians to get to the beach and that a stop sign may better serve the public. City Council's final action was to send this matter back to staff and to return with a recommendation from the traffic engineer regarding the feasibility of stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place. In addition, staff was to look at a ramp and crosswalk. Analysis: The analysis is divided as follows: 1. Feasibility for stop sign placement 2. Ramp and crosswalk consideration 3. Summary - 1 - '11 1. Feasibility for Stop Sign Placement Feasibility for stop signs placement on Valley at 24th Place or 24th Street (known as a "multiway stop" sign installation according to the State of California Traffic Manual) may be useful at some locations. The traffic manual contains material that is intended to serve as an aid in the solution of various traffic situations. It is not intended to be a substitute for engineering knowledge, experience or judgment. A multiway stop sign should ordinarily be used only where the volume of traffic on the intersecting streets is approximately equal. Placement of stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street or 24th Place may result in the following actions: Pro: 1. Satisfies concerns of local residents 2. Does not eliminate parking 3. Provide some sense of safety Con: 1. Stop sign locations result in higher noise levels and pollution because of vehicles stopping/acceleration thereby becoming a nuisance to adjacent property owners 2. "Roll through" traffic 3. Unwarranted stop sign may result in accidents 4. Create a false sense of security in that a driver or pedestrian crossing Valley Drive may think even though they legally have the right of way that a moving vehicle will obey the stop sign. 5. Inconvenience and delay to motorist on Valley Drive According to the traffic manual, any of the following conditions may warrant a multiway stop sign installation: Is the condition met Condition on Valley Drive at 24th Street? 24th Place? 1. Where traffic signals are warranted No No and urgently needed, the multiway stop may be an interim measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installations. 2. An accident problem, as indicated No by five (5) or more reported accident within a 12 month period of a type susceptible to correction by a Is the condition met (Cont.) Condition on Valley Drive at 24th Street? 24th Place ? multiway stop installation. Such accidents include right and left -turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions. 3. Minimum traffic volumes (a) The total vehicular volume entering No No the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day, and (b) The combined vehicular and pedestrian No No volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour, but (c) When the 85 -percentile approach speed No No of the major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, the minimum vehicular volume warrant is.70 percent of the above requirements. The traffic engineer has reviewed and compared these locations with the conditions necessary for a multiway stop sign. The conditions for these two intersections are not satisfied. The traffic engineer recommends (based on both national and statewide recognized standards for multiway stop sign installations) that stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place are not feasible and should not be installed. 2. Ramp and Crosswalk Consideration A search of records for the last three years indicates no pedestrian accidents in this vicinity. The number of pedestrians crossing Valley Drive at either 24th Street or 24th Place is low when compared to the traffic manual condition listed above. There is evidence of foot traffic crossing the Hermosa Valley Greenbelt adjacent to Valley Drive - at both 24th Street and 24th Place. There are other foot path crossings all along the Greenbelt, including some between intersections. Ramps may be desired to delineate or control where pedestrians cross Valley Drive. Crossings, similar to the crossings at 16th Street and 21st Street, are possible to construct and could cost up to $5000. This would require an appropriation of funds. I have observed people crossing at numerous random locations from the greenbelt without difficulty. There are more observed pedestrians crossing at 16th and 21st Streets. Ramps at 24th Street or 24th Place are not recommended because there is no observed concentration of pedestrian usage. 3. Summary The capability of successfully placing stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place has been reviewed. Stop sign placement is a Council policy decision. The traffic engineer has compared the conditions at these locations with the conditions listed in the traffic manual and recommends that stop signs not be placed at these locations. Ramps may be desirable at these locations but would require an appropriation. There is no observed concentration of pedestrian crossings at 24th Place or 24th Street to support the placement of ramps. Alternatives: The preferred alternative considered by staff and available to City Council is: 1. Consider adoption of a resolution painting red curb from approximately 24th Street to 25th Street so as to improve sight distance. Respectfully submitted, '/?(/)--(17-1 n Anthony Antich/ Director of Pu.blic Works Concu Ed Ruzak City Traff c Eng neer Concur: evin Northcr City Manager cc: Steve Wisniewski, Director of Public Safety CITY MANAGER COMMENT: There are several clearly defined, east -west paths along the Greenbelt for which some simple improvement should be considered, such as rail- road ties. The paths currently are not secure footing, are subject to erosion, and do not provide a safe place for pedestrians to wait for traffic prior to crossing Valley Drive. February 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 FEASIBILITY FOR STOP. SIGNS ON VALLEY DRIVE AT 24TH STREET AND 24TH PLACE Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Should, as a matter of policy, not consider the placement of stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place. 2. Should consider minor improvements of the paths on the Greenbelt at 24th Street and 24th Place, or other locations. Background: At the January 9, 1990 meeting, staff presented a report in response to Council and resident concerns about the intersections on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place. Staff's recommendation was to paint red curb from approximately 24th Street to 25th Street to improve sight distance. A copy of the January 9th report is available for review in the office of the City Clerk. After hearing concerns by residents in the vicinity of 24th Street and Valley Drive, City Council ordered the preparation of a stop sign feasibility report. City Council also expressed a concern about the existence of a dirt foot path across the greenbelt at 24th Street used by pedestrians to get to the beach and that a stop sign may better serve the public. City Council's final action was to send this matter back to staff and to return with a recommendation from the traffic engineer regarding the feasibility of stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place. In addition, staff was to look at a ramp and crosswalk. Analysis: The analysis is divided as follows: 1. Feasibility for stop sign placement 2. Ramp and crosswalk consideration 3. Summary 1 11 1. Feasibility for Stop Sign Placement Feasibility for stop signs placement on Valley at 24th Place or 24th Street (known as a "multiway stop" sign installation according to the State of California. Traffic Manual) may be useful at some locations. The traffic manual contains material that is intended to serve as an aid in the solution of various traffic situations. It is not intended to be a substitute for engineering knowledge, experience or judgment. A multiway stop sign should ordinarily be used only where the volume of traffic .on the intersecting streets is approximately equal. Placement of stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street or 24th Place may result in the following actions:. Pro: 1. Satisfies concerns of local residents 2. Does not eliminate parking 3. Provide some sense of safety Con: 1. Stop sign locations result in higher noise levels and pollution because of vehicles stopping/acceleration thereby becoming a nuisance to adjacent property owners 2. "Roll through" traffic 3. Unwarranted stop sign may result in accidents 4. Create a false sense of security in that a driver or pedestrian crossing Valley Drive may think even though they legally have the right of way that a moving vehicle will obey the stop sign. 5. Inconvenience and delay to motorist on Valley Drive According to the traffic manual, any of the following conditions may warrant a multiway stop sign installation: Is the condition met Condition on Valley Drive at 24th Street? 24th Place? 1. Where traffic signals are warranted No No and urgently needed, the multiway stop may be an interim measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installations. 2. An accident problem, as indicated by five (5) or more reported accident within a 12 month period of a type susceptible to correction by a Is the condition met (Cont.) Condition on Valley Drive at 24th Street? 24th Place ? multiway stop installation. Such accidents include right and left -turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions. 3. Minimum traffic volumes (a) The total vehicular volume entering No No the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day, and (b) The combined vehicular and pedestrian No No volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour, but (c) When the 85 -percentile approach speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, the minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 percent of the above requirements. The traffic engineer has reviewed and compared these locations with the conditions necessary for a multiway stop sign. The conditions for these two intersections are not satisfied. The traffic engineer recommends (based on both national and statewide recognized standards for multiway stop sign installations) that stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place are not feasible and should not be installed. 2. Ramp and Crosswalk Consideration A search of records for the last three years indicates no pedestrian accidents in this vicinity. The number of pedestrians crossing Valley Drive at either 24th Street or 24th Place is low when compared to the traffic manual condition listed above. There is evidence of foot traffic crossing the Hermosa Valley Greenbelt adjacent to Valley Drive - at both 24th Street and 24th Place. There are other foot path crossings all along the Greenbelt, including some between intersections. Ramps may be desired to delineate or control where pedestrians cross Valley Drive. Crossings, similar to the crossings at 16th Street and 21st Street, are possible to construct and could cost up to $5000. This would require an appropriation of funds. I have observed people crossing at numerous random locations from the greenbelt without difficulty. There are more observed pedestrians crossing at 16th and 21st Streets. Ramps at 24th Street or 24th Place are not recommended because there is no observed concentration of pedestrian usage. 3. Summary The capability of successfully placing stop signs on Valley Drive at 24th Street and 24th Place has been reviewed. Stop sign placement is a Council policy decision. The traffic engineer has compared the conditions at these locations with the conditions listed in the traffic manual and recommends that stop signs not be placed at these locations. Ramps may be desirable at these locations but would require an appropriation. There is no observed concentration of pedestrian crossings at 24th Place or 24th Street to support the placement of ramps. Alternatives: The preferred alternative considered by staff and available to City Council is: 1. Consider adoption of a resolution painting red curb from. approximately 24th Street to 25th Street so as to improve sight distance. Respectfully submitted, Anthony Antich/ Director of P lic Works Concu Ed Ruzak City Traff c Eng neer Concur: evin Northcr City Manager cc: Steve Wisniewski, Director of Public Safety CITY MANAGER COMMENT: There are several clearly defined, east -west paths along the Greenbelt for which some simple improvement should be considered, such as rail- road ties. The paths currently are not secure footing, are subject to erosion, and do not provide a safe place for pedestrians to wait for traffic prior to crossing Valley Drive. Honorable Mayor and Members of January 29, 1990 Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 13, 1990 AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR SIDEWALK REPAIRS, CIP 89-142 Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with Damon Construction Company at a cost not -to -exceed $328,064 and authorize staff to issue addenda as necessary, within budget limitations. 2. Appropriate $328,064 from the General Fund, Designation for Capital Improvements to CIP 89-142 3. Authorize staff to direct the contractor to install the sidewalk on the north side of 21st Street between Pacific Coast Highway and Ardmore Avenue. Background: This project will remove and replace deteriorated sidewalk, curb and gutter at various locations throughout the City. Also included in this project is a new sidewalk on 21st Street between Pacific Coast Highway and Ardmore Avenue. At their February 28, 1989 meeting, City Council discussed a report assessing present sidewalk, driveway, curb and gutter damage. That report analyzed the following elements as a first step toward adopting a City policy for repairs: - Criteria for damage - City-wide inventory by address of existing damage. including cost - Repair options - Who shall pay City Council referred this matter back to staff for further study with particular emphasis on who should pay and why. May 9, 1989: The Public Works Department prepared a report analyzing three payment options. - City pays in full - Owner pays in full - City/Owner share cost After discussion, City Council ordered repairs to be paid from the general fund or other appropriate sources. 1 1 alk Repairs resulting from cable company and utility company damage are estimated to cost $42,144 and were included in the repair contract. Staff will seek reimbursement for repair of cable company or utility company damage. August 22, 1989: City Council directs that a sidewalk be installed for school children on the south side of 21st Street from Pacific Coast Highway to Armore. December 12, 1989: City authorized staff to call A copy of all background the City Clerk's office. Analysis: The analysis is divided into the following sections: Council approved specifications and for bids for sidewalk repair City wide. information is available for review in 1. The Bids 2. Reference Check 3. The Lower Cost Responsible Bidder 4. Inspection 5. 21st Street Sidewalk 6. Fiscal Impact 1. The Bids Twenty companies received plans and specifications for this project. Two sealed bids were received by the City Clerk on January 25, 1990, were publicly opened and read aloud. The bid results were as follows: 1. Damon Construction Co. 2. B-1 Enterprise Corp. Engineer's Estimate $ 298,240.00 $ 459,393.50 (+42%) $ 324,325.00 (- 8%)* * Percent difference from the Engineer's estimate. All bids are available for review in the City Clerk's office. Attachment "A" is compares the contractor's bids. After the bids were opened, staff contacted some of the plan holders to determine why they did not bid this project. The following reasons were given: 1. The work load on other projects was too high to take on new projects. 2. The market for sidewalk repairs is too specialized to compete in; only a few companies do it. 3. The size of the job was too small for some. 2. Reference Check At least three references were questioned for each of the two bidders to determine their qualifications. Both contractors have a valid "A" License (General Engineering Contractor) with the State of California; no violations have been filed against the firms. 3. The Lower Cost Responsible Bidder Damon Construction Company is the lower cost bidder. The reference questionnaire indicates that the firm is qualified to do this type of work, finishing on schedule (90 calendar days), within budget and producing quality work. 4. Inspection Inspection for this project will be performed in-house by the Public Works Department. Staff has the expertise and resources available to inspect this project. 5. 21st Street Sidewalk On August 22, 1990, City Council directed that a sidewalk be installed on the south side of 21st Street, between Pacific Coast Highway and Ardmore Avenue. The main reason for the south side was that the estimated cost was less. However, the low bidder proposed. $8,300 for the north side and $8,280 for the south side. Staff recommends installing sidewalk on the north side because there would be less disruption to residents' landscaping and it would line up with existing cross walks. 6. Fiscal Impact: Contractor Amount Not to Exceed Contractor Bid 10o Contingency $ 298,240 29,824 Not to Exceed Amount $ 328,064 FUNDING SOURCE: This project is currently unfunded. The proposed funding source is, the General Fund, Designation for Capital Improvements. Estimated Balance Available Through 6/30/90 $ 367,971 Less: Estimated Project Cost ( 328,064) Estimated New Balance $ 39,907 Alternatives: Other alternatives considered by staff and available to City Council are: 1. Reject the low bidder. 2. Rebid the project. 3. Drop the project; however, this does not repair sidewalks. 4. Reject all bids and consider smaller projects over a period of time (i.e., 5 years). Respectively Submitted, Brian Gengler Assistant Engineer Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: Lyn . Terry Deputy City Engineer An 40ony Antich Director of Pub is Works even B. Nor c aft City Manager Attachments: Attachment "A" Bid Comparison ty/asr CITY MANAGER COMMENT: The project convenience maintenance large cost, by the most improvement is very necessary for safety, liability, and public reasons, and will largely eliminate a major deferred item in the City's infrastructure. While it is a' it is a one-time "catch up", recommended to be done cost effective means, and will be a visible public in every area of the City. 4 CIP 89-142, SIDEWALK REPAIRS BID COMPARISON ENGINEER'S DAMON B-1 ESTIMATE CONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISE ITEM UNIT UNIT UNIT NO. ITEM` QUANTITY PRICE COST PRICE COST PRICE COST 1 Sidewalk 43600 5.65 246,340 4.85 211,460 8.00 348,800 2 Driveway 2200 6.00 13,200 6.00 13,200 8.50 18,700 3 Curb w/o gutter 1900 30.00 57,000 30.00 57,000 38.00 72,200 4 Curb with gutter 0 0 0 0 5 21st St. - N. Side 2075 2.14 4,450 4.00 8,300 5.70 11,828 6 21st St. - S. Side 1380 2.42 3,335 6.00 8,280 5.70 7,866 TOTALS 324,325 298,240 459,394 PERCENT 'ABOVE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE -8% 42% Attachment "A" January 1, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Meeting the Hermosa Beach City Council of January 9, 1990 ADDENDUM TO RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION RELATIONS RESOLUTION (EEOR) At the November 14, 1989 City Council meeting, the Council elec- ted to hold action on the attached item until the January 9, 1990 meeting. The stated purpose of this action was to allow the "new" Council to consider this matter. At that November 14, 1989 meeting, the Council heard testimony from Mr. Michael Hannon representing the Hermosa Beach Police Officers' Association (POA). Mr. Hannon requested that the Coun- cil include a provision for "Last Best Offer Arbitration" as part of the impasse resolution procedures in the EEOR. Mr. Hannon has submitted the attached letter dated December 26, 1989 in support of the POA's position (attachment "A"). At the time the Council held this item over, the City Attorney was requested to prepare an analysis of the legality of a General Law city adopting a provision providing for interest arbitration. That analysis (attachment "B") concludes; "Pursuant to the Bagley case and Government Code 36506, decisions involving "wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment" have been determined by state law as legislative acts. Therefore, the Council's policy decisions cannot be delegated to an arbitrator and the resolution cannot contain a binding arbitration clause." The proposed EEOR does offer a modification to the current prac- tice of settling negotiation impasse issues by including the op- tion of Mediation (Article IV, Section 17, page 20). In the ab- sence of the EEOR, the process of deciding issues at impasse in- cludes only submitting the issue to the legislative body (City Council). The Council considers the matter, and, if there is no change in the City position, the Council takes unilateral action. Again, the proposed EEOR adds the option of Mediation as an addi- tional step in the impasse resolution process. Under this provi- sion of the EEOR, the parties can agree to submit the issue(s) in dispute to a mediator from the State of California Mediation Ser- vices. If the attempts of the mediator fail to resolve the dis- pute, the issue is then submitted to the Council, who "may take such action regarding the impasse as it in its discretion deems appropriate as in the public interest" (Article IV, Section 17 (b), page 21). Staff continues to oppose binding arbitration as an impasse resolution procedure. Several excerpts from the League of Cal- ifornia Cities Employee Relations Service Newsletter are attached (attachment "C"). These excerpts highlight recent actions regarding attempts by Employee Organizations to have binding iq arbitration implemented and the League's reaction to these at- tempts. Staff concurs with the League's reasons for opposing binding arbitration as expressed in the attached League newslet- ter excerpts and will not reiterate those here. To add a per- spective to the discussion, it should be noted that, depending on the bargaining group, a 3% difference in bargaining positions could represent $80,000 or more. This is important to consider in that it is the Council that establishes the fiscal priorities for the City and that, while an Arbitrator may not view an addi- tional 3% increase in contract cost significant, that award could cause some other project to be postponed or delayed. It is deci- sions such as this that should remain with the Council. Also, the Council has recognized that City salaries are below the market and has publicly stated that it is a goal to pay more com- petitive salaries. The ability to, and the time -table for, ac- complishing this is a determination that also also remain with the Council and not a third party. A survey of the surrounding cities indicates that they do not have arbitration (binding or advisory) as part of their EEOR or other impasse resolution procedures. None of the directors in the cities which were contacted could identify a city with bind- ing interest arbitration. In recognition that some of the newly elected members of the Council have not yet had an opportunity to experience contract negotiations with the City's Employee Organizations, staff has also attached a copy of a California Public Employee Relations (CPER) article entitled Unilateral Action on Bargainable Issues: What is Authorized, What is Not (attachment "D"). Respectfully submitted, Concur: Robert A. Blackwood Kevin B. Nortl4'craft Personnel Director City Manager HANNON, PARK & LENNON ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3550 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 860 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90010 (213) 384-0078 MICHAEL HANNON HEESOK PARK GERALD E. LENNON December 26, 1989 Hon. Roger Creighton, Mayor, and Members of the City Council 540 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach CA 90254 Re: E.E.R.O. Dear Mr.Creighton and Councilmembers: This letter is on behalf of the Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association to request that you do not adopt the proposed E.E.R.O. without including interest arbitration as previously recommended by the Civil Service Board. Tt had been objected that the case of Bagley v. City of Manhattan Beach (1976) 18 Ca1.3d 22, 132 Cal.Rptr 668, precludes the use of an arbitrator to fix salaries or working conditions in a general law city. The Police Officers Association agrees that under the majority opinion in that split decision a general delegation of such power to an arbitrator's unfettered discretion would be unlawful. However, Bagley did not deal with the question of "Last Best Offer Arbitration" and such an arbitration plan would work to the great advantage of both the city and the union and would not be subject to the same objections as the scheme in Bagley. The Police Officers Association therefore urges you to adopt such a provision. "Last Best Offer. Arbitration" works as follows: The parties bargain as they do now and, if possible, reach agreement. If they cannot reach, agreement, deadlock is broken by an arbitrator who must choose the last, best and final offer made by one of the parties and cannot choose anything else. This places great pressure to insure that their'final position is reasonable, fair, and fiscally sound, on both bargaining parties. Not to do so would insure that the arbitrator would take the •.v Hon. Roger Creighton, Mayor, and Members of the City Council Re: E.E.R.O. December 26, 1989 Page 2 other party's last best offer. This pressure greatly reduces the length of negotiations and contributes to a spirit of mutual resolution of problems. Unlike general arbitration, it provides an incentive to reach an agreement without resort to an arbitrator. "Last Best Offer Arbitration" avoids the problem of the unlawful delegation of wage setting powers spoken of in the Bagley case because with this kind of arbitration plan the Council exercises its discretion in two ways. First, it controls the course of bargaining and thuscontrols the city's last best offer. Second, the city has already exercised the discretion the legislature gave it by providing a simple mechanism for settling a limited question and enacting that mechanism into law. In Kugler v. Yocum (1968) 69 Cal.2d 371, 71 Cal.Rptr 687, the court was faced with a similar problem where a general law city created a formula whereby its employee's wages would float automatically to the average paid by a fixed list of other jurisdictions. Again, it was argued that this was an unlawful delegation of the Council's discretion but this time the Court held that the plan was proper saying that the Council had already exercised its discretion in making the plan and that the operation of the plan was no more than the carrying out of that discretion. The Association wishes to - ank the Mayor and each of the Members of the Council for t -:courtesy in considering this proposal and respectfully •es them to adopt it. Sincerel CHAEL HANNON Attorney for Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association MH:lt cc: Robert Blackwood THOMAS W. STOEVER WILLIAM B. BARR CHARLES S. VOSE CONNIE COOKE SANDIFER ROGER W. SPRINGER EDWARD W. LEE HERIBERTO F. DIAZ JAMES DUFF MURPHY JANICE R. MIYAHIRA To From : Date : LAW OFFICES OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 1000 SUNSET BOULEVARD LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012 (213) 250-3043 MEMORANDUM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 1990 Members of the City Council Charles S. Vose, City Attorney December 29, 1989 Re Arbitration Clause/Employer-Employee Organization Relations Resolution TELECOPIER (213) 482-5336 This memorandum is in response to the Personnel Director's request that a legal opinion be rendered regarding the exclusion of a binding arbitration clause within the Employer -Employee Organization Relations Resolution. Pursuant to the California Supreme Court's decisions in Kugler v. Yocum (1968) 69 Cal. 2d. 371, 71 Cal. Rptr. 687; Bagley v. City of Manhattan Beach (1976) 18 Cal. 3d. 22, 132 Cal. Rptr. 668, Government Code Section 36506 and current affirming authority, it is this office's opinion that inclusion of a binding arbitration clause would be prohibited by law. In the landmark case of Kugler v. Yocum (1968) 69 Cal. 2d. 371, 71 Cal. Rptr. 687, the California Supreme Court explained what is known as the "doctrine prohibiting delegation of legislative power." The Kugler Court stated: "This doctrine rests upon the premise that the. legislative body must itself effectively resolve the truly fundamental issues. It cannot escape responsibility by explicitly delegating that function to others or by failing to establish an effective mechanism to assure the proper implementation of its policy decisions" (See, Kugler v. Yocum (Supra.) at p. 376-377). 3a OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE Memo to City Council Re: Arbitration Clause December 29, 1989 Page 2. The case Bagley v. City of Manhattan Beach (Supra.) involved an appeal following the City's refusal to place an initiative on the ballot providing that unresolved disputes between the City and recognized fireman's employee organization shall be submitted to arbitration and the arbitrator's award shall be final and binding. The arbitration requirement applied not only to unresolved disputes pertaining to the interpretation or application of contract, but also to all disputes as to wages, hours and terms of employment. The Supreme Court determined that the state legislature has provided that compensation of all officers and employees is a legislative act through it's enactment of Government Code Section 36506 which reads: Compensation of appointive officers and employees: Tenure of office By resolution or ordinance, the city council shall fix the compensation of all appointive officers and employees. Such officers and employees hold office during the pleasure of the city council. Citing the Kugler case, the Court concluded that since the Council's policy making power cannot be delegated to a third party unless authorized by statute, binding arbitration for matters of employment and compensation are prohibited by law. Following the Bagley decision, the Supreme Court concluded in Taylor v. Crane (1979) 24 Cal. 3d. 442, 155 Cal. Rptr. 695, that an arbitration clause contained in a charter city's M.O U. was not prohibited because it did not involve arbitration of general policy matters and was not prohibited by charter or ordinance. In this case, the M.O.U. provided binding arbitration when an employee's grievance involved the interpretation or application of City rules or regulations governing personnel practices or working conditions. The Court distinguished this case from Bagley and stated: r,' OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE Memo to City Council Re: Arbitration Clause December 29, 1989 Page 3. "Grievance arbitration does not involve the making of general public policy. Instead the arbitrator's role is confined to interpreting and applying terms which the employer itself has created or agreed to andwhich it is capable of making more or less precise (Grodin, California Public Employee Bargaining: The MMB Act in Relation to Local Charters and Ordinances (1978) Cal. Pub. Employee Rel. No. 36, at p.7) In view of the more restricted role of arbitration in this case, this Court finds no unlawful delegation of municipal powers of the kind existing in Bagley ... " Bagley continues to be the decisive test when delegation of legislature power becomes an issue (See, Hewitt v. Rincon de Diablo Municipal Water Dist. (1980) 107 Cal. App. 3d 78, 165 Cal. Rptr. 545 (Water Code Sections 71722 and 71723 specifically authorize Water District's delegation of power to operate water works to municipality. Bagley does not prohibit delegation of legislative power unless specifically prohibited by statute); American Fed. of Teachers v. Bd. of Education (1980) 107 Cal. App. 3d 838, 166 Cal. Rptr. 89 (As a general rule, powers conferred on public agencies and officers which involve the exercise of judgment or discretion are in the nature of public trusts and cannot be surrendered or delegated, to subordinates in the absence of statutory authorization. On the other hand, public agencies may delegate the performance of ministerial tasks); County of Kern v. P.G. & E (1980) 108 Cal. App. 3d 418; 166 Cal. Rptr. 506 (Upheld franchise grants pursuant to Government Code Section 26001 citing both Bagley and Kugler cases); Highland Development Co. v. City of Los Angeles (1985) 170 Cal. App. 3d 169, 215 Cal. Rptr. 881 (States that decision under Bagley can also operate to disqualify not only a subordinate agency but also a local legislative body from interference with functions elsewhere vested; 64 Atty. Gen. Ops 47 (1981) (Arbitration to settle dispute arising from any contract is OK per C.C.P. 1281. Rationale is that resolution of dispute is confined by the parameters of the contract itself, and neither. requires nor permits the exercise of judgment or discretion with respect to the policy or purposes which underlie the agreement). Under Section 1. Statement of Purpose of the proposed EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION RELATIONS RESOLUTION it states: OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE Memo to City Council Re: Arbitration Clause December 29, 1989 Page 4. "It is the purpose of this Resolution to provide procedures for meeting and conferring in good faith with Recognized Employee Organizations of the employees' working unit regarding matters that directly affect and primarily involve the wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment of employees in appropriate units and that are not preempted by Federal or State law. Pursuant to the Bagley case and Government Code 36506, decisions involving "wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment" have been determined by state law as legislative acts. Therefore, the Council's policy decisions cannot be delegated to an arbitrator and the resolution cannot contain a binding arbitration clause. cc: Kevin B. Northcraft Robert Blackwood i i;c,t i=. et -nes, �sc.e vc"At v OFNov, �. cS, �rV1�•�i,�lCt= (�(.}il�cvs S�-r;.��c� Na. �2 • Noo v. i�tb`i BINDING INTEREST ARBITRATION. We are very pleased to report that Governor FIREFIGHTERS. SB 1127. Deukmejian, for all the right reasons, has vetoed SB 1127 which would have authorized binding interest arbitration for fire- fighters. This so-called "authorization" would have included the use of the initiative process by firefighter unions in order to mandate binding interest arbitration on governing bodies of counties, cities and districts. Fortunately, the Governor saw through the superficial argument that this was purely permissive legislation and in.his veto message he states: "This bill would provide for binding interest arbitration procedures for fire- fighters at the option of the local public agency. Although the provisions of this measure are intended to be permissive, I am concerned that local agencies could be forced into compliance with this measure by employee sponsored initiatives, an action which would remove a large portion of city and county budgets from the control of locally elected officials. In addition, I am concerned that the enactment of this measure would diminish the possibility of good faith collective bargaining, and in- fringe upon the discretion of fire department administrators to establish and enforce policy or disciplinary standards." We are grateful to our readers who urged the Governor to veto a bad government bill and suggest they may now want to thank him for his action. c . BINDING INTEREST ARBITRATION The sun never really sets on the activities AND MORE. FIREFIGHTERS. of firefighter unions. They are active at FEDERAL LEGISLATION. all levels of government -- Congress, State Houses, County Court Houses, City Halls and Fire Districts. They are well repre- sented in both litigation and legislation. They are easy to represent because the members are heroic, respected and lovable people even when there are no earthquakes, fire storms or other major catastrophes. It is easy to want to comply with requests from those who are there when we need them most and who come when called. It is very different to have to balance their requests against other needs such as police protection, safe transportation, water supplies, sewage and refuse disposal, protection of the environment, planned growth, education, etc. The list of high priorities is endless. However, elected representatives who must balance these needs against revenues have to have absolute discretion to repre- sent all demands fairly. H.R. 2204 by Congressman Clay would guarantee the right of professional firefighters to organize and bargain collectively. It is modeled after the NLRA except for two major items. It prohibits strikes and provides for binding interest arbitration. Firefighters have had the right to organize in California since 1959 and to collec- tively bargain since 1968. They have been prohibited from striking since 1959. All H.R. 2204 would change in California is what the Governor has just vetoed in SB 1127. It would be mandatory; it would tie the hands of state and local legislative bodies; and it would give non -elected, non -responsible arbitrators the authority to write collective bargaining agreements which should be negotiated. (-CAC-44E a C FcC6tra c► i1es-. PLA: / sez-q « N SA- , , BINDING INTEREST ARBITRATION. It is apparent that police and fire- fighter unions will continue to press for binding interest arbitration at the state level and that they will endeavor one by one to pick off both charter and general. law cities with initiative charter amend- ments directly providing for binding interest arbitration or initiative ordinances effecting the equivalent thereof in general law cities. The equivalent is an initiative ordinance that establishes average wage and fringe benefits paid in near- by communities and these wages and benefits become a floor for the Council no matter what other budget demands there are. The Council loses all discretion except to pay more or provide more fringe benefits. Locally there is a reasonable alternative the governing body can submit to the voters on the same ballot that can neutralize such efforts. So far the League, the County Supervisors Association, the Association of Special Districts and others have been able to defeat state mandatory binding interest arbi- tration. The cost to the state of such a state mandate has been a helpful deterrent. Locally, however, police and firefighter unions have a tremendous advantage in initiating binding interest charter amendments in charter cities or initiative ordi- nances in general law cities. These proposals which include a strike prohibition are sold on the simple basis that they will guarantee "labor peace" and quick settle- ment of disputes with these two essential safety services. The sympathy of the electorate is with the membersof these two services some of whom unquestionably encounter danger to their lives on a daily basis. It is easy for police and fire- fighter unions to gather signatures on initiative petitions. These proposals are well financed and almost impossible ':o defeat. Public agencies cannot spend money to defeat such measures but may only use public funds to advise the electorate on the meaning and impact of such proposals. The police and firefighter unions simply tell the petition signers and the electorate that they willingly give up the right to strike in order to permit a disinterested person to settle a dispute between the city and the union when an impasse is reached over wages, fringe benefits and condi- tions of employment. The fact that firefighters have been statutorily prohibited from engaging in a strike since 1961 or that a strike by the law enforcement offi- certs generally is an immediate threat to public health and safety, and can be en- joined, is not the kind of a response that persuades voters. At the time of the election little thought is given by the voters to the fact that they are giving up to a private person not responsible to them at the polls the authority to determine - 3 - about 3C': of the pclice and firefighter operating budgets which generally are over half the cost of running the city. Mayor Coleman Young of Detroit was a State Senator in Michigan wno supported bind- ing interest arbitration for local agencies in that state. When he became the Mayor of Detroit and had the actual experience of going through binding interest arbitration he had a much better understanding of what it means and the hundreds of millions of dollars it would cost when he said: "We now know that compulsory arbitration has been a failure. ... We have calculated that the costs of awards since enactment of the law are now $50 million or more per year for the City of Detroit. ... If police and fire employees had received wage increases similar to those increases negotiated with the city's other employees, the city's costs would be $50 million per year less than they are now. ... our offers to police and fire employees were more than fair. If they had been adopted by the arbi- trators, our police and fire employees would have been the highest paid in the nation. ... (Compulsory arbitration) was a noble experiment but we now know it is a disaster. ... police and fire unions and arbitrators say we must have arbitration. They know a golden goose when they see it: I say, if that is the choice, one or the other, let it be the right to strike --exactly in the format used in the private sector." Instead of attempting to raise private funds to fight these proposals, we suggest and recommend to city councils that when confronted with these initiative petitions that they respond as did the City of Alameda where the City Council placed on the same ballot and at the same time a.measure which indicated that if an arbitrator's award was going to bring about an increase in municipal costs that the voters would also have to approve a tax to produce the essential revenue. The section added to the Alameda City Charter is an alternative that will bring about balance be- tween the police and firefighter unions on the one hand and the city council and the taxpayers on the other. It provides: "SEC. 17-17. No additional financial burdens may be imposed on the tax- payers of the City as a result of binding fact finding, arbitration or parity without approval of the voters as set forth in this section. Any other provision of this Charter notwithstanding, no wages, benefits or employee related expenses shall be paid by the City that have not been approved by a resolution of the City Council until additional revenues and appropriations therefor have been approved by a vote of the people pursuant to Proposition 13 (Cal. Const. Art. XIIIA, Sec. 4) and Propo- sition 4 (Cal. Const. Art. XIIIB, Sec. 4). The City Council shall not be required to call such an election more than once a year and may con- solidate said elections with elections held for other purposes. Your City Attorney can suggest the appropriate rewording in a general law city in connection with initiative ordinances. While a city should continue to advise voters on the impact of such a charter amendment or orinance, the council also should make it clear that the "Alameda" neutralizer will be on the same ballot. Tax conscious voters will 'find it difficult to hand arbitrators a blank check when they have a method of keeping spending down. 4 California Public Employee Relations A Periodical of Employee Relations in the Public Sector C Unilateral Action on Bargainable Issues: What Is Authorized, What Is Not C An Analysis of 1981-83 Strikes in California's Public Sector C Two Years of State Bargaining: A Description and Analysis E Healdsburg and San Mateo: The Final Chapter E Open Forum: More on Compulsory Arbitration . E Recent Developments in California Public Jurisdictions MI Public Employment Relations Board C Log: Neutrals' Actions Institute of Industrial Relations University of California, Berkeley March 1984 No. 60 2/ Unilateral Action on Bargainable Issues: What Is Authorized, What Is Not By John Liebert and Siona D. Windsor, Liebert, Cassidy & Frierson, Los Angeles Fiscal austerity and a lean bargaining atmosphere for public agencies in the last few years have brought to the forefront questions regarding a public employer's right to implement changes in bargainable employment conditions in the absence of a negotiated agreement. This article re- views the guidelines set down by the courts, California's Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) as to whether, when, and how a public employer may take action on negotiable matters in the absence of having reached agreement with the union. Questions as to the legality of employer unilateral action can arise either when the em- ployer acts without having bargained at all or without having completed bargaining, or when the employer acts after an impasse. Each of these will be discussed, with emphasis on unilateral ac- tions when an impasse in negotiations has occurred. The General Rule: Unilateral Actions Prohibited It is a fundamental tenet of labor law that it is a violation of the duty to bargain for an employer to unilaterally change a term or condition of employment that falls within the manda- tory scope of negotiations without first having given the certified union an opportunity to bar- gain regarding the Change and then having participated in negotiations in good faith. Absent some legally recognized defense, failure of the employer to comply with these obligations constitutes, in and of itself, a so-called "per se" violation of the duty to negotiate.' Exceptions to the General Rule There are four legally recognized defenses to employer unilateral action: Union waiver of the right to bargain, necessity, expiration of the collective bargaining agreement, and impasse. In;::.much as the essence of collective bargaining is bilateralism, courts and labor boards apply these exceptions reluctantly and construe them narrowly.2 Waiver Defense An exclusive representative may waive its right to negotiate in two ways: (1) by failing to respond to a proper notice that afforded the opportunity to bargain concerning negotiable Editor's note: When may an employer take unilateral action on a matter within the scope of bargaining? Liebert and Windsor point out that there are few exceptions to the duty to negotiate in good faith and that they are narrowly construed by the courts and labor boards. The authors describe the four legally recognized defenses to employer unilat- eral action — union waiver of the right to bargain, necessity, expiration of prior contract, and impasse. They emphasize impasse situations and the obligation to proceed in good faith' through the negotiating and impasse procedures before a change (which has been offered to and rejected by the union) can be implemented by an employer. CPER No. 60 *March 1984 changes that the employer proposes to make, and (2) by agreeing to waive its right to bargain during the term of the agreement.3 The employer has the obligation to provide the union with clear advance notice of its proposed action. It is then up to the union to signify its desire to negotiate to the employer by some means — though the request need not be specific nor be communicated in any particular form.4 Where the union is on notice of the intended action, but the employer takes the position that the contemplated action is not subject to negotiations and therefore does not intend to negotiate the matter, the union's failure to demand negotiations cannot constitute a waiver.5 Insofar as contract waiver is concerned — that is, waiver by the union of the right to bar- gain during the term of the labor agreement — the contract language constituting the alleged waiver must be "clear and unmistakable" so as to indicate that the union knowingly agreed to waive its bargaining right.6 For example, where the employer refused to negotiate into a contract a provision dealing with the identity of the health insurance administrator, and the contract contained a "full under- standing" clause that the agreement incorporated all understandings and constituted the entire agreement, the court held that the employer's unilateral change of administrators was unlawful because silence in a contract on an issue previously in dispute does not constitute the requisite "clear and unmistakable" waiver.' Similarly, a "zipper" clause that in general terms extinguishes the employer's duty to bar- gain during the term of the contract will not be held to constitute the requisite clear and unmis- takable waiver unless the "zipper" language is specific and references one or more particular sub- jects. General "zipper" clauses serve only to "shield" the employer from union requests to nego- tiate during the term of the contract;8 they do not provide the employer with the "sword" to unilaterally implement changes in employment terms.9 Even a management rights clause that reserves to the employer the "exclusive" right with respect to a list of specified employment conditions is not held a sufficiently clear and unmis- takable waiver allowing unilateral employer action. Thus, it has been held that there had not been the requisite waiver allowing unilateral changes in shift assignments where the contract reserved to the county the exclusive right to assign employees.' ° Necessity Defense Employers' assertions of the defense that extraordinary circumstances required them to act unilaterally in order to maintain the integrity of their operations have not fared well. Claims that the fiscal emergency engendered by the Proposition 13 property tax initiative justified the employer in taking unilateral action were rejected by PERB in the San Mateo and San Francisco Community College cases.' Those decisions were consistent with the holding of the state Supreme Court in the Proposition 13 Sonoma County case, which suggested that con- tractual monetary commitments could only be deferred if the fiscal emergency was so disastrous that the agency would be forced to cease operations if the crisis was not resolved.' 2 In a case involving the Oakland School District, PERB held that unilateral deferral of a tax-sheltered annuity was not authorized on the basis of necessity where the district did not be- come aware that it was facing a multimillion dollar budget deficit until the state finance bill was acted on at the end of July, and the district was required to submit a balanced budget to the county superintendent by September 7. The PERB pointed to the five weeks that were available in which to negotiate the matter.' 3 CPER No. 60 • March 1984 4/ However, a PERB hearing officer upheld the necessity defense where the school district unilaterally adopted a school calendar in August for the school year beginning in September and �+ ;ere the district did so contingent on continued negotiations.' ° Clearly the necessity defense to unilateral employer action will be recognized by the courts and labor boards only in the most exigent of circumstances, and then only if no other viable alternative is 'available, and the employer's action is as limited as possible and made contin- gent on continuing negotiations. Expiration of Prior Contract As a general rule, the employer is prohibited from unilaterally changing the terms and conditions of employment as set forth in the expired agreement until the negotiating and impasse process has been fully completed.'s However, under the NLRA, union organizational rights as distinguished from individual employee rights have been generally held to exist only during the term of the labor agreement.' 6 Therefore, under the NLRA, it is well settled that the purely contractual duty of dues (and agency shop fee) checkoff is extinguished with the expiration of the collective bargaining agreement.' However, California public employees are given the right of payroll deduction of organizational dues by statute,' 8 and thus it is unlikely that a public employer would be ac- corded the same freedom of unilateral action to discontinue checkoffs as his private sector coun- terpart. With respect to agency shop service fees, as distinguished from membership dues, the par- ties to school and community college district contracts are authorized by statute to negotiate that these may be deducted from unit employees' pay warrants without authorization by the em- ployee.' 9 Since the obligation to automatically deduct these service fees derives from the collec- tive bargaining agreement, it is most likely that the school district employer's obligation to deduct the service fees would not survive the expiration of the agreement. There has been some wavering by the courts as to whether, under the NLRA, the union's right to take a grievance to the contractual arbitration process is extinguished by expiration of the contract. The current state of private sector law is that the union may carry to arbitration a grievance that arises out of a right "arguably created" by the expired contract unless there is clear evidence of an intention by the parties that the duty to arbitrate was to have terminated with the agreement.' ° PERB has followed this law both with respect to binding and advisory contractual grievance arbitration procedures.� 1 Impasse If the public employer negotiated in good faith, and if the parties reached a bona fide im- passe, and if the employer acted correctly and in good faith in exhausting its impasse procedure obligations, then, and only then, may the agency employer make certain unilateral changes in em- ployment terms and conditions. Were there good faith negotiations? The question of good or bad faith is primarily a fac- tual determination based on the totality of circumstances. Good faith requires a genuine desire to reach agreement. But that is not to say that remaining firm in refusing to make a concession con- stitutes bad faith. Thus an adamant insistence on altering firefighters' duty hours from a 24-hour to an 8 -hour shift schedule does not in itself establish lack of good faith.22 Does a bona fide impasse exist? The state's public employment bargaining laws for public schools, higher education, and state employees define the term "impasse." So also do most local CPER No. 60 • March 1984 422 agency employer-employee relations ordinances enacted pursuant to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA), which does not define the term. The definition contained in the Educational Em- ployment Relations Act provides:23 "Impasse" means that the parties to a dispute over matters within the scope of representation have reached a point in meeting and negotiating at which their differences in positions are so substantial or prolonged that future meetings would be futile. PERB regulations set out guidelines for determining whether an impasse exists:24 (c) In reaching a determination about the existence of an impasse, the Regional Director may consider the number and length of negotiating sessions between the parties, the time period over which negotiations have occurred, the extent to which the parties have made counter- proposals to each other, the extent to which the parties have reached tentative settlement on issues during the negotiations, the extent to which unresolved issues remain, or other relevant data. Clearly, the existence of a bona fide impasse is a question of fact that must be determined on a case-by-case basis.2 s And, as pointed out above, there can be no bona fide impasse where the employer has been found to have negotiated in bad faith.26 Impasse procedure obligations exhausted? In the private sector, under the NLRA, there are no mandatory impasse procedures. When a bona fide impasse has been reached, the union is free to strike and the employer is free to lock out employees and/or to take certain unilateral ac- tions. Not so in the California public sector. Local agencies, based on their local procedures under the MMBA, generally have an impasse meeting/governing body hearing procedure, and some in addition provide for mediation27 and/or factfinding. The Educational Employment Relations and Higher Education Employer -Employee Relations Acts include provisions requiring mediation and factfinding.2 8 In the case of local agency procedures which provide for an impasse meeting and for sub- mission of the disputed issues to the governing body for determination (with or without an inter- vening mediation step2 9 ), the agency must strictly adhere to its own procedure. For example, consider the following factual situation where the court ruled against the employer: The city's procedure stated that "unresolved" issues were to be determined by the city council after a hearing. The parties had tentatively agreed on all but two items -= the city's con- tribution to the health plan and disposition of retirement plan savings. A hearing was held on the unresolved issues. The council adopted the city's position on the disputed issues, but in addition changed from October to February the effective date for retroactive salaries and medical insur- ance. This date had already been tentatively agreed on by the parties at impasse and had been adopted for all other employee groups (who had not gone to impasse on any issues). The court ordered the city to pay the employees for the loss in retroactivity in their sala- ry and medical insurance increases between October and February; it held that the employer had violated its own impasse procedure and had unlawfully discriminated against the employees and their organizational representative for the exercise of rights guaranteed them by MMBA.3° What are the requirements where the procedure includes mandatory factfinding, as is the case under EERA, HEERA, and some local agency procedures? .. For at least 10 years it has been clear that the employer cannot take unilateral action until the factfinding procedure has been completed.3 t Recently this requirement has been more CPER No. 60 • March 1984 • specifically defined by the appellate court and the PERB in a case out of the Modesto City Schools.' 2 The Modesto district had maintained that its duty to negotiate was exhausted automati- cally following the publishing of the factfinders' report. The court and PERB did not agree, and held that the statutory impasse procedures are exhausted only when the factfinders' report has been considered in good faith, and then only if it fails to change the circumstances and provides no basis for settlement or movement that could lead to settlement. Changed circumstances "are those movements or conditions which have a significant impact on the bargaining equation." Among the circumstances which will restore the obligation to negotiate is a concession or series of concessions by one of the parties. The concessions need only indicate that further fact -to -face bargaining might be fruitful. Since the purpose of the factfinders' recommendations is to change circumstances, there is the duty of at least examining the factfinders' report in good faith to de- termine whether the report suggests the possibility that renewed bargaining could lead to settle- ment. PERB held in Modesto that if one party makes significant concessions after issuance of the factfinders' report, the duty to bargain is reactivated and the other party commits an unfair practice should it refuse to participate in the negotiation process.' 3 However, where the duty to bargain has been reactivated after factfinding and the parties again reach impasse, PERB held in Modesto that it has no authority to recertify impasse or reinvoke the impasse procedures.34 The employer is then in the same position as if no post -impasse procedure existed, and is free to take certain unilateral actions. What unilateral changes are authorized? Once the negotiations and impasse processes have been duly complied with and exhausted, the employer may implement unilateral changes consis- tent with offers it made to and which were rejected by the union.' 5 The changes implemented need not be exactly those offered during negotiations, but must have been reasonably compre- hended within the prior proposals.36 As PERB held in Modesto:37 Thus matters reasonably comprehended within preimpasse negotiations include neither proposals better than the last best offer, nor proposals less than the status quo which were not previously discussed at the table. Without offering proposals or bargaining at the table, an em- ployer provides no notice that it is contemplating changes or positions less than the status quo. Implementation of such unilateral changes, therefore, constitutes a refusal to negotiate and cir- cumvented the bargaining process as much as does a flat refusal to negotiate.38 Left unanswered by Modesto, is the ability of an employer to unilaterally implement a term and condition of employment different from one tentatively agreed to by the parties, or refuse entirely to implement a tentative agreement which was not part of the impasse process.' 9 Conclusion The duty to offer to bargain on changes that the employer wishes to make in negotiable employment terms is a continuing duty. It continues in effect during the term of the labor agree- ment. Implementing such changes without in good faith having exhausted the negotiating and re- quired impasse processes constitutes a per se violation of applicable state employer-employee re- lations law. While there are exceptions to this general rule — waiver, necessity, and contract expira- tion — these exceptions are narrowly construed. Employers would therefore be well advised to use much care and hesitation in relying on them. 6/ CPER No. 60 • March 1984 Once the employer has negotiated in good faith to a bona fide impasse, and has adhered to the applicable impasse procedure — including further negotiations based on the factfinding recommendations where that process was utilized — the employer may, notwithstanding lack of agreement, implement changes that had been offered to and rejected by the union. 1 See NLRB v. Katz , 369 U.S. 736 (1962); Davis Unified School Dist. , 4 PERC 11031 (Dec. No. 116, 1980). The duty of the employer and exclusive representative to negotiate in good faith regarding mandatory subjects of bargaining is codified at Government Code Sec. 3543.5(c) and 35443.6(c) of the Educational Employ- ment Relations Act (public education employees); Government Code Sec. 3571(c) and 3571.1(c) of the Higher Education Employer -Employee Relations Act (CSU and U.C. system employees); Government Code Sec. 3519(c) and 3519.5(c) of the State Employer -Employee Relations Act (state employees); Government Code Sec. 3505 of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (local public employees); and 29 U.S.C. 158(a)(5) and 158(b)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act (private sector employees). 3Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. v. NLRB, 379 U.S. 203, 211 (1964). Barring a contract waiver, the duty to bargain continues during the term of an agreement. NLRB v. Jacobs Mfg. Co., 169 F.2d 680, 30 LRRM 2098 (1952). 4Newinan-Crows Landing Unified School District, 6 PERC 13162 (Dec. No. 223, 1982). 5Oakland Unified School District, 6 PERC 13201 (Dec. 236, 1982); and the NLRB cases there cited in n. 6. 6lndependent Union of Public Service Employees v. County of Sacramento, 147 Cal. App. 3d 482. 195 Cal. Rptr. 206 (1983); Amador Valley Joint Union School District, 2 PERC 2192 (Dec. 74, 1978.). Oakland Unified School Dist. v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 120 Cal. App. 3d 1007, 175 Cal. Rptr. 105 (1981), citing Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. NLRB, 325 F. 2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963). 8The issue of "zipper" clause waiver is to be distinguished from the situation where an employer is not obli- gated to bargain about action it takes pursuant to a comprehensive provision negotiated into the labor agreement. Thus, where the contract contains a comprehensive layoff procedure, there is no obligation to renegotiate layoff issues when employees are laid off. So. San Francisco Unified School District, 7 PERC 14243 (Dec. 343, 1983). 9Newark Unified School District, 6 PERC 13164 (Dec. 223, 1982). ' °Independent Union of Public Service Employees v. County of Sacramento, 147 Cal. App. 3d 482, 195 Cal. Rptr. 206 (1983). 1'San Mateo County Community College District, 3 PERC 10080 (Dec. 94, 1979); San Francisco Communi- ty College District, 3 PERC 10127 (Dec. 105, 1979). 12Sonoma County Organization of Public Employees v. County of Sonoma, 23 Cal. 3d 296, 152 Cal. Rptr. 903 (1979); the court referring to Subway -Surface Supervisors Ass'n. v. New York City Transit Authority, 44 N.Y. 2d 101, 375 N.E. 2d 384 (1978), which arose out of the New York City fiscal crisis. 13Oakland Unified School District, 6 PERC 13201 (Dec. 236, 1982). 14Palos Verdes High School District, 2 PERC 2041 (1978). The hearing officer's decision was appealed to PERB on other issues. 3 PERC 10097 (Dec. 96, 1979). 15Davis Unified School District, 4 PERC 11031 (Dec. 116, 1980). "Marine Shipbuilding Workers v. NLRB, 320 F. 2d 615, 53 LRRM 2878 (1963); NLRB v. Haberman Constr. Co., 618 F. 2d 288, 105 LRRM 2059, 2068, n. 16 (1980). "Robins Door & Sash Co., 109 LRRM 1 181 (1982). 18Education Code Secs. 45060 (K-12 certificated employees), 87833 (community college certificated em- ployees) and 45168 (classified school employees). See also, MMBA, G.C. Sec. 3508.5 (local agencies); SEERA, G.C. Sec. 3515.6 (state); SERA, G.C. Sec. 3543.1(d) )(public schools); HEERA, G.C. Sec. 3585 (higher education). 19E.C. Secs. 45061, 87834, and 45168. 20Nolde Bros., Inc., v. Local 358, Bakery and Confectionary Workers Union, 430 U.S. 243, 94 LRRM 2753 (1977). Digmore Equipment Co., 261 NLRB 176, 110 LRRM 1209 (1982); Geo. Day Construction Co., Inc., v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 354, _ F 2d ._ 84 Daily Journal D.A.R. 168 (Jan. 4, 1984). 'California School Employees Ass'n., Chapter 54, v. Anaheim City School District, _ PERC _ (Dec. 364, Dec. 14, 1983). 22Placentia Fire Fighters, Local 2147, v. City of Placentia, 57 Cal. App. 3d 9, 129 Cal. Rptr. 126 (1976), citing NLRB precedent. PERB applies the same totality of conduct standard. See, e.g., Oakland Unified School District, 5 PERC 12149 (Dec. 178, 1981). 23G.C. Sec. 3540.1(f). 248 Cal. Admin. Code Sec. 36030(c). 25Compare Marin CCD, 6 PERC 13097 (Dec. Ad -126, 1982): impasse found to exist where parties met on 17 occasions for a total of 85 hours without meaningful progress; with Mt. San Antonio CCD, 6 PERC 13023 (Dec. Ad -124, 1981): impasse held not to exist where parties met on 9 occasions for a total of 38 hours, and where there was no evidence that the parties engaged in meaningful discussions or offered counterproposals. 26NLRB v. Herman Sausage Co., 275 F. 2d 229, 45 LRRM 2829 (1960). CPER No. 60 • March 1984 27The MMBA in G.C. Sec. 3507.1 authorizes but does not require the use of mediation. An agency's refusal to submit an impasse to mediation does not constitute lack of good faith. Alameda County Employees'Ass'n. v. Alameda County, 30 Cal. App. 3d 518, 106 Cal. Rptr. 441 (1973). 28G.C. Secs. 3548-3548.4 and 3590-3594. The State Employer -Employee Relations Act, like the MMBA, merely provides for voluntary mediation. G.C. Sec. 3518. 2 "Mediation remains fundamentally a bargaining process, albeit with the assistance of a neutral third par- ty." Moreno Valley Unified School District, 6 PERC 13107 (Dec. 206, 1982). "Campbell Municipal Employees Ass'n. v. City of Campbell, 131 Cal. App. 3d 416, 182 Cal. Rptr. 461 (1982). 3 Certificated Employees Council v. Richmond Unified School District, 43 Cal. App. 3d 435, 117 Cal. Rptr. 921 (1974). 32PERB v. Modesto City Schools District, 136 Cal. App. 3d 881, 186 Cal. Rptr. 634 (1982); Modesto City Schools, 7 PERC 14090 (Dec. 291, 1983). 33PERB's determination that the duty to bargain after reaching impasse arises if there are "changed circum- stances" is consistent with the NLRB precedent holding that almost any changed circumstance will reactivate the duty to bargain which was temporarily suspended by reaching impasse. However, a mere willingness to continue to bargain without modifying one's bargaining position does not break impasse. Empire Terminal Warehouse, 151 NLRB 1359 (1965). A strike alone may or may not break an impasse depending on all circumstances surrounding the strike and the impasse. 347 PERC 14090, at p. 352. 357 PERC 14090, citing NLRB v. Compton Highland Mills, 337 U.S. 217, 695 S. Ct. 960 (1948). 36Taft Broadcasting Co., 64 LRRM 1386, 1388. 377 PERC 14090, at pp. 353-54. 38Where proposals less than the status quo were in fact the subject of bargaining, caution must nevertheless be exercised in unilaterally implementing such "take-aways". Certain benefits are deemed by the courts to be vested rights, such as pensions, longevity pay, vacation and sabbatical leave policies, and other benefits that ac- crue based on years of employment. See Cal. League of City Employee Associations, SEIU Local 660. v. Palos Verdes Library Dist., 87 Cal. App. 3d 135, 150 Cal. Rptr. 739 (1978); and, with respect to pension rights, Olson v. Cory,27 Cal. 3d 203, 164 Cal. Rptr. 217 (1980). 3 The answers will undoubtedly be influenced by the negotiating ground rules that had been agreed to in the particular case. '8/ CPER No. 60 • March 1984 February 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of of the City Council February 13, 1990 REQUEST FROM CATV BOARD, TO SCHEDULE JOINT MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL AND CATV BOARD Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve a date for a joint meeting between the Cable TV Board, and the City Council, as requested. Background: The City Council has previously held joint meetings with the Planning Commission, and has plans to hold joint meetings with such entities as the Chamber of Commerce and the School District. Since no such meetings have previously taken place between the CATV Board and the City Council, it would seem prudent to schedule such a meeting. Analysis: The Board was appointed on October 27, 1987 for an initial period of six months, to serve as an advisory body to the City Council in all matters pertaining to the Cable TV Ordinance and the grantee's performance thereunder. The Board's tenure has since been extended to meet with the operator (MultiVision) on an as needed basis. With the franchise renewal window opening in October of this year, and the recent election of new Council members, the Board desires to discuss future plans and goals, and the possibility of increasing the number and tenure of the Board, to meet the demands of the renewal process. It would be of benefit to the City Council, the CATV Board, and the citizenry of the City of Hermosa Beach, to conduct such joint meeting, as the interests of the community could best be served by discussing and establishing future plans and goals concerning. Cable TV. The CATV Board has presented for adoption, a Resolution of Intent to adopt Consumer Protection Standards, to be scheduled for Public Hearing on March 13, 1990. It is suggested that the City 1 15 b Council consider a meeting prior to that public hearing, in order to take advantage of the meeting to ask questions, or make recommendations. Suggested dates are Monday, March 5th or Wednesday, 7th, 1990 at 7:30 pm in the Council Chambers at City Hall. CONCUR: enrL. Staten, Acting General Services Director evin B. Nort City Manager a t, 2 Respectfully submitted, Henry L. Staten, Acting General Services Director By 44-c46,&_;b. Michele D. Tercero, Administrative Aide Staff Liaison, CATV TO: Kevin B. Northcraft DATE: February 12th, 1990 FROM: Henry L Staten RE: Collections of Lot H ***************************************************************** COLLECTIONS FROM LOT H (MOTORCYCLE) Since the creation of the Motorcycle lot there has only been a need to collect this lot three times. 1. May 25th, 1989 in the amount of $109.10 2. September 6th, 1989 in the amount of $320.23 3. January 31st 1990 in the amount of $87.95 The total amount collected to date is $517.28 In the calendar year of 1989 we only collected approximately 6% of the estimated potential annual revenue. I suggest that we try expanded noticing on the location and benefit from the use of this lot by people who drive "Motorcycles". I will continue to monitor this lot, and I will report any information that you might request from me. ef 7,411 L • Staten Acting G.S. Director CITY MANAGER COMMENT: I have noticed that a vacant lot next to the former Strand Bath House serves as a free motorcycle parking lot. When this lot is no longer available, use of the City lot should increase. 18D. Beach Cities Coalition For Alcohol and Drug -Free Youth January 23, 1990 320 Knob Hill, Redondo Beach, California 90277 0 (213) 372-1171 x 457 Mayor Roger Creighton Hermosa Beach City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 ✓44/291990 Dear Mayor Creighton: The purpose of this letter is to ask you to select a member of your city council to representative the City of Hermosa Beach on the Executive Committee of the Beach Cities Coalition for Alcohol and Drug Free Youth. June Williams has served on our committee in the past. The Executive Committee of the Beach Cities Coalition for Alcohol and Drug Free Youth is made up representatives from the city councils of Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach, and Manhattan Beach, a elementary school district representative, a high school representative, a law enforcement representative, a community-based organization representative, and a civic/business representative (see attachment). The purpose of the Beach Cities Coalition for Alcohol and Drug Free Youth is to educate the Beach Cities Community about the dangers of alcohol and others drugs and to coordinate funding and programs that in the areas of prevention and treatment of chemical abuse (see attached goal statement). Please let me know who you select. The next meeting of the Coalition is scheduled for February 15, 1990 at 8:00 a.m., 320 Knob Hill, Redondo Beach. If you need any further information, please call me. I am the Executive Director of the South Bay Juvenile Diversion Project in addition to being the Chairperson of the Coalition. My office phone number is 372-1171 ext. 2457. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, Dan Smith Chairperson 15 a