No preview available
1997 FEB 18 CC PACKETAGENDA EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 350 Main Street The City Council, with certain statutory exceptions, can only take action upon properly posted and listed agenda items. The Public can participate in the discussion of any item listed on the Agenda. To facilitate your presentation, please place a check mark ✓ beside each item you would like to address on the Agenda provided by the City Clerk, preferably PRIOR to the start of the meeting. Any other item not listed on the Agenda that is within the jurisdiction of the City Council may be directly addressed during Public Communications. Before speaking to the City Council, please come to the podium and give: Your name and address and the organization you represent, if desired. Please respect the time limits. Members of the Public may place items on the Agenda by submitting a Written Request to the City Clerk or City Manager's Office at least six days prior to the City Council Meeting (by 2:00 p.m. the prior Tuesday). The request must include a brief general description of the business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact City Clerk, 607 -2208. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL February 18,1997 - 5:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Wernick ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Only - 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total.) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council. Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250. CLOSED SESSION: The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code §54950, et 5p q.) for the purposes of conferring with the City's Real Property Negotiator; and/or conferring with the City Attorney on potential and/or existing litigation; and/or discussing matters covered under Gov't Code §54957 (Personnel); and/or conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators as follows: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) None CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov't Code §54956.9(a)) 1. Coalition for Economic Equity (CEE) v. Pete Wilson, et al., C96 -4024 TEH 2. Bue et al v. City of El Segundo, LASC Case No. BC 137060 3. Siadek et al. City of El Segundo, LASC Case No. YCO25264 4, Rinebold/Hawk v. City of El Segundo, LASC Case No. YCO25220 5. Harrison v. El Segundo, USCA, 9th Cir., Case No. 95- 56106.:` 02- 18- 97.5pm CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov't Code §54956.9(b): o -2- Code §al cases 9(c) further public statement is required at this time); Initiation of litigation pursuant DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS (Gov't Code §54957). None CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR - (Gov't Code §54957.6) - Selection of Negotiator. REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required) PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to Citv Business Only - 5 minute limit) Individuals who have received value themselves prioor to addressingtthehCityttCouncil.` Failure tlo doso shall be a misdemeanor and punishablle byta fine of $250. must so identify t P ADJOURNMENT POSTED: DATE ; TIME j NAME 1 2 02- 18- 97.5pm AGENDA EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 350 Main Street The City Council, with certain statutory exceptions, can only take action upon properly posted and listed agenda items. The Public can participate in the discussion of any item listed on the Agenda. To facilitate your presentation, p lease p lace a check mark ✓ beside each item you would like to address on the Agenda provided by the City Clerk, preferably PRIOR to the start of the meeting. Any other item not listed on the Agenda that is within the jurisdiction of the City Council may be directly addressed during Public Communications. Before speaking to the City Council, please come to the podium and give: Your name and address and the organization you represent, if desired. Please respect the time limits. Members of the Public may place items on the Agenda by submitting na the prior Request Tuesday). the City request must City include Manager's brief Office at least six days prior to the City Council Meeting (by p• p general description of the business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting. p g lease contact City Clerk, 607 -2208. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, p Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18,1997 - 7:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4000 Next Ordinance # 1268 CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION - Bishop Lloyd Carlson, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Wernick CHARACTER COUNTS - "Trustworthiness" - Councilman Mike Gordon PRESENTATIONS ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Only - 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council. Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250. 1. Presentation by Acting United States Postmaster Patrick McCloskey regarding mail delivery services in El Segundo. 2. Discussion by Mark Wirth, of U. S. Congresswoman Jane Harman's office regarding mail services in El Segundo. A. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS 1. Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on this A enda b title only. Recommendation - Approval. B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS - 1. Public Hearing to allow Sepulveda Boulevard access to the recently approved Ralph's Supermarket project at the southeast corner of Sepulveda Boulevard and Mariposa Avenue, thereby superseding previous restrictions prohibiting access to the property from Sepulveda Boulevard. (Environmental Assessment EA -397, SUB 96 -8 /TPM No. 24631). Applicant: New Grou and PTR Homestead Villa e Inc. Recommendation - 1) Hold Public Hearing; 2) Discussion; 3) Reading of Resolution by title only; and, 4) By motion, adopt Resolution No. 2. Public Hearing to amend the 1996 -1997 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program to add previous program year's unspent CDBG funds to current year's public service projects, or consider utilizing said funds to implement an American with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance project; and, consider minor changes to the Minor Home Repair and RSI rojects included within the 1997 -1998 CDBG ro osed list of ro'ects. Recommendation - 1) Hold Public Hearing; 2) Discussion; 3) Direct staff to either utilize unspent 1996 -1997 CDBG funds totaling approximately $55,000 to: (1) increase existing CDBG public service project budgets, (2) implement an American with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance project, or (3) utilize alternative funding sources to accommodate severely curtailed 1997 -1998 CDBG public service activities, or some combination thereof, 4) Authorize Staff to expand the scope of the 1997 -1998 CDBG Minor Home Repair and Residential Sound Insulation projects to include all eligible low and moderate income homeowners; and, 5) Provide other direction to Staff regarding the CDBG Program as City Council deems appropriate. ��'ClUU" C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Dis osition of the $1.012 298 out -of -court settlement from LAX. Recommendation - 1) Discussion; and, 2) Possible Action. 2. Review of optional strategies for Compliance w'ThamSCAQa Peak Commute Trip RedOcton Vehicle Scrapping, Air Quality Investment Prog , and Pro am. - Recommendation 1) Review on Rule 2202 compliance strategies; and, 2) Provide direction to staff for possible action. 3. Consideration by the City Council to take a voluntary act related to the City's hiring and contractin ractices. Recommendation -The Council may act to state its direction to hire employees based ity's Merit System and in accordance upon their qualifications only as stated by the C with state and federal anti - discrimination laws and regulations contrac consider other qual cah'onble bidder unless required by state or federal Attached is a Resolution to accomplish this voluntary act. D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS - NONE E. CONSENT AGENDA All items listed are to be adopted by one motion without discussion ed individual passed under the next heading of business. discussion of an item is made, the item(s) will be consider Y 1, Warrant Numbers 236565- 236732 on Demand Register Summary Number 31 in total amount of 398 316.44. Recommendation - Approve Warrant Dhecksachegks released early lduet staff contracts or Ratify: Payroll and Employee Benefit checks; agreements; emergency disbursements and /or adjustments. 2. Warrant Numbers 236733 - 236914 on Demand Register Summary Number 32 in total amount of 388 710.37 and Wire Transfers in the amount of 911 641.56. Recommendation - Approve Warrant hemksd checks released earlylduet staff contracts or Ratify: Payroll and Employee Benefit , agreements; emergency disbursements and /or adjustments; and wire transfers from 01/29/97 to 02/11/97. 3. Cit Council meetin minutes of February 4 1997. Recommendation - Approval. on nor, 4. Modification to Grant Application to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Authority for additional funds for the Sepulveda Boulevard Widening Project (grant amount million . Recommendation - Receive and file information. CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA F. NEW BUSINESS - CITY MANAGER - - -- Recommendation - 1) Accept Presentation; 2) Authorize Budgetary Adjustments; 3) Discuss and provide direction, concerning continued financing of PERS unfunded liability; and 4) Discuss long range forecast and direct staff to proceed with FY 97 -98 Budget Process based upon Mid -Year assumptions and /or alternate direction, if revised. 2. Discussion of possible actions by City Water Utility to comply with changes mandated by Proposition 218. Recommendation - 1) Hear Staff presentation. 2) Provide guidance to Staff. G. NEW BUSINESS - CITY ATTORNEY - NONE H. NEW BUSINESS - CITY CLERK - NONE 1. NEW BUSINESS - CITY TREASURER - NONE J. NEW BUSINESS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCILMEMBERS Councilman Gordon - NONE 1, Discussion and consideration of revenues generated by charging for ambulance trans ort services to non - residents and insured residents. Recommendation - Discussion and possible action. Councilman Weston - Discussion and consideration of Aerospace Corporation performing air pollution studies of H erion and the Ai 3ort. Recommendation - Discussion and possible action. 4 Qn(: �) +' Councilwoman Friedkin - 1 Presentation of Commendation to Leah J. Jeffries, recently Deane Daneaposition as Deputy to Retired 4th District Los Angeles County Supervisor recognizing her service and dedication to the 4th district cities and continuing community participation. 2. Consider initiation of a Zone Text Amendment encroach ntolanduiredesetbacks_such as fountains arbors er olas and statu to Recommendation - Discussion and direct staff and bt he Planning Commission to consider a Zone Text Amendment as soon as p a Mayor Pro Tem Wernick - Status report on how the Proposition "A" Los Angeles County Park Bond Act funds will be used b El Sel 11 undo for ark facility im rovements. Recommendation - Discussion and possible action. 1. 2. Discussion about H erion landsca in roblems in the dunes area. Recommendation - Discussion and possible action. Mayor Jacobs - NONE PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business OnIY - 5 minute limit) Individuals who have City Council received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council. Failuretlo doso shall be a employees isdemeanor and punishable hablle by a fine of $250. must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City MEMORIALS - Adjournment in Memory of R.S.V.P. Officer Harold Hays and Douglass G. Somers CLOSED SESSION The City Council may move into a cl se osed session pursuant to bwith the City's Real Property Act (Government Code Sec. 54960, et .) for the purposes of conferring Negotiator; and/or conferring with the City Attorney on potential and/or existing litigation; and/or discussing matters covered under Government Code section 54957 (Personnel); and/or conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators; as follows: Continuation of matters listed on the City Council Agenda for 5:00 p.m., February 18, 1997 under "Closed Con Session" (if needed). REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required) ADJOURNMENT �j TIME: �3 - O S"" NAME: POSTED: DATE: – 0'7- '�' —�— GC'0j's TRUSTWORTHINESS Trustworthiness involves four major qualities -- integrity, honesty, promise- keeping and loyalty. Each of these qualities yields principles that tell us how a trustworthy The sec ond n bearaves. The first two, integrity and honesty were presented at the last meeting. promise Keeping - Based on the concept of promise- keeping trustworthy people keep their word �' P promise, we need to remind ourselves to think and honor their commitments. Before making a about what could happen that would make it difficult, undesirable, or impossible to keep my word. Loyalty - Napoleon pointed out there are two kinds of loyalty dog Where dut loyalty s cone ern d loyalty. outr highest yry are loyal to their masters while o institutions loyal to other than wr gdoing individuals. loyalty should be to the house, EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: MEETING DATE: February 18, 1997 ,ial Order, of Business - Public Hearing AGENDA AGENDA DESCRIPTION: roved Ralph's Supermarket project at the to allow Sep hereby superseding previous restrictions prohibiting Public Hearing Sepulveda Boulevard access to the recently app ast corner of Sepulveda Boulevard and Mariposa Ave Avenue, e Boulevard. (Environmental Assessment EA -397, SUB 96-8/TPM No. 24631 . south Sepulveda Bo access to the property from Sep e, Inc. Applicant: New Group and PTR Homestead Villag RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Hold Public Hearing; 2) Discussion; title only; and, 3) Reading of Resolution by 4) By motion, adopt Resolution No. — INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: roving EA -399 and Subdivision 96- On January 30 1997, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution Ralph's h's up r southeast corner of Sepulveda 1 for 43,206 square foot Ralph's Supermarket and 4,900 square foot 8/Tentative Parcel Map No. 2463 parcel of Ian roval included a from retail/restaurant building osa Avenue in he on a Gene?alaCommercial (C -3) Zone. Part of the app Boulevard and P Council review and approve the installatiad be n prohibited access previous project Subdivision recommendation that the City C from Sepulveda Boulevard h Sepulveda Boulevard. Access to this property approvals for the property. DISCUSSION: The property owner, PTR The New Group is the applicant for the Ralph's Supermarket and retail /restaurant separate, project request Supermarket and . is proposing Sepulveda Boulevard access Boulevard access. The Ralph's repquest since a previous Homestead Village, Inc., P rohibited Sepulveda 30, 1997 and no appeal was subdivision approval, in the 1980's, p retail /restaurant building project was approved by the Planning Commission on ro al of Sepulveda Boulevard access filed; so the approval became final and effective on February 11, 1997. APP requires review and a recommendation from the Planning Commission to the City Council, and the City Council will take final action on the request. (Continued... on next page) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1) Draft Resolution No. 2) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2387 3) Letter from applicant, dated October 10, 1996 4) Caltrans letter of approval, dated January 18, 5) Plans FISCAL IMPACT: None. ORIGINATED: / Bret B. Bern rd, AIC , Dir REVIEWE :) ACTION 1997 M. a ntn 7 Date: reorual y I 1 , - - Date: \ ro ects\a- 399 \ea399.ais February 11, 1997 2:28 pm p: p 1 00010 Ralph's Supermarket Sepulveda Access \ EA -399 (continued...): Commission Resolution No. 2032 approved a four lot subdivision (SUB 82 -2) of a 4 acre On July 14,1983, Planning C which included the Ralph's property as part of one of the four new parcels. The parcel of land (Tract Map No. 15115), roved the original subdivision of y the El either allowing p Report EIR for this subdivision, which app Environmental Impact Rep ( ) hibitin access altogether. This mitigati n measure ion of the ter included as a mitigation measure the limiting of access from Sepulveda Boulevard any p Research Cen Real access only with an acceleration /deceleration lane or p ecific prohibition on access incorporated into Planning Commission Resolution No. also incorporated a sp 24, 1984 Boulevard. This language was also Council Resolution No 3247, adopted January 24, No. site from Sepulveda ee applicant via City Property ( royal of the Subdivision 84-5/Parcel AARP) between the City and the (Instrument No. 84- 313091). The prohibition was continued with the approval (EA-383, SUB 96- 3/Tentative Parcel a 24, 1985. This subdivision further divided hefour parcels of land creating the parcel al 16543, approved on January roved for Parcel 2 of Parcel elaMa oNo.423641 part ave fSep Sepulveda Boulevard which was subsequently divided again as part of the Homestead Vi ag project Map No. 24495). A two lot split was app (Tentative Parcel Map No. 23641). Both parcels of Tentative Par P 1 the Ralph's Supermarket parcel, is proposed to include access from Sepulveda Boulevard. than frontage, but only Parcel ,which was more t have I hs development, prohibiting access to Sepulveda a Boulevard subject Property ave Due to the scale of development propose Rda t the time of the original subdivision of the property, three times the density of the proposed p was intended to be primarily office uses which ndanttonconvenient access from served an important function of forcing traffic onto Mariposa Avenue. The original development and the El Segundo Research Center Sepulveda Boulevard for economic reasons. Retail development is much more eP ro erties, was to major thoroughfares to b e successful. One of the reasons the subject parcel ffi office as the ignated as surrounding ounding prop Commercial in the 1992 General Plan and 1993 Zoning Code, instead of Corporate Se ulveda Boulevard location for possible commercial he Zoning Code. Given the current narrow sleet take advantage of its p Supermarket proposes much less development than what is permitted request is re for Sepulveda Boulevard access and ' osa Avenue a second access from Sepulveda Boulevard is recommended. The Police, Fire, Public frontage on Mariposa Works and Economic Development Departments have all reviewed s jurisdiction For over Sepulveda Boulevard a State will not be detrimental to Sepulveda Boulevard traffic flow. For any commercial use to be viable on the agree that it Caltrans, who parcel Sepulveda access will be necessary. a No. 1, has approved the curb cut which includes a an fireclaneoth through he Ralph's parcel to herHomestead Highway Boulevard driveway also will serve the purpose of providing e Se ulveda Boulevard access, the Homestead Village Village project. The Fire Department required this acce s to provide an emergency vehicle access lane an two access p 1 access points to the Homestead Village Project. Without project would not have optimal Fire Department access. rove an In order to supersede the previous the City Council must app would require the applicant to submit Sepulveda aIB'n DraftrResoultion No.ibitions, royal on amendment to the AARP. A condition of App an amended AARP to the City for approval. The aesthetics oand the impacts ut orithe pPoposed acloess on the existing the driveway access to address issues such landscaping on the site. p: \projects\a- 399 \ea399.ais February 11, 1997 2:28 pm t?Cr'i RESOLUTION NO. — UTION OF THE CITY COUNCI p� DAATY OF EL A gESOL TO SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SE AVENUE FOR A 3.52 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE SIPOSAEA� CORNER OF SEPULVEDA BOULEVARD AND MAR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. PETITIONED BY NEW GROUP COMME STEAD VILLAGE INC.. AND PTR HOME e Inc. tion has been rd PTR Homestead Village WHEREAS, an application received from New Group ann approved development ulveda Boulevard to a requesting the lifting of prohibitions on access from Sep 900 square foot retail/restaurant building Ralph's Supermarket, and a 4, of a 43,206 sq uare foot t located at 1910 E. Mariposa Avenue in the General Commercial development on a 3.52 acre property (C -3) Zone; and including a Draft Initial Study and WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment (E mpacts for the Ralph's Supermarket and has been prepared and circulated to all Mitigated Negative Declaration Sepulveda Boulevard lac ess, comment in the time and manner retail/restaurant building an P ublic agencies for review and com interested parties, staff, and affected p prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application and supporting evidence with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Q� tion of tthet Cal for(n a Guidelines, and the City of El Segundo Guidelines for the Imp em Environmental Quality Act (Resolution No. 3805); and - Subdivision 96 -3, Homestead WHEREAS, an addendum to a Traffic Impact Study (EA 383, re ared to evaluate transportation and circulation impacts associated with the Village Hotel), wasp P application; and and the proposed access from Sepulveda Boulevard, and submitted with the app project a P S on January 30, 1997, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a duly WHEREA , d public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber anner prescribed by law; and Street, an advertise p was given in the time, form and notice of the public hearing S opportunity was given to all persons present to speak arcel Map No. 24631); ands of WHEREA , PP Environmental Assessment EA -399, and Subdivision 96 -8 (Tentative 18,1997 the Cit y Council did hold, p ursuant to law, dui - advertised WHEREAS, on February public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, a 50 Main Street, and notice of hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law; an WHEREAS, at said hearing the following facts were established: Subdivision Commission adopted Resolution No. 2032 on July 14, 1983, approving parcels i land. 1, The Planning roved the original 82 -2 (Tract Map No. 15115) to subdivide an forsthis subdivision,ewh which approved P The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) allowing access only with an division of the El Segundo Research Center, included as a mitigation measure the limiting sub either of access from Sepulveda Boulevard by acceleration/deceleration lane or prohibiting access altogether. This mitigation measure was 1 (lCn y 1. 14, 1983, as a specific Commission Resolution No. 2032 Sepulveda Boulevard. This language was incorporated into Planning ortion of the site from Sep Property (AARP) between the City prohibition on access to any P Affecting Real Prop Y also incorporated into a recorded Agreement and the applicant (Instrument No. 84- 313091). 24, 1985, approving adopted Resolution No. 2097 on January parcel original The Planning Commission adop portion of one of the foul eda Boulevard 2. No. 16543, to subdivide a p from Sep Subdivision 84- 5/Parcel Map prohibition on access to the property anting the City the created by Subdivision 82 -2. Thep laced on the Parcel Map granting was continued and e s owners Statement was p right to restrict ac roving EA- ted Resolution No. 2384 on September 12, 1996, are 3. The Planning Commission adopted 24995) to subdivide an existing 6.7 acre Parcel into a 150 -room extended stay business PhotC l (Homestead 2 cres) Village) on 383, Subdivision 96 -3 (Tentative Parcel Map t`,�,o (2) Parcels and construct Parcel 1 (3.18 acres) and one of six development alternatives on 997 approving EA -399, 1 P 4. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution N . subdivide Par 12� of Tentative Parcel arket an Subdivision 96- 8(Tentative Parcel Map 2 square foot Ralph s Supermarket parcels for the development of a 43,206 is proposing access from Sep 24995 into two (2) P The app a 4,900 square foot retail/restaurant building. Boulevard to the protect site and the construction of an acceleration/decelerationlanB to facilitate access. royal of the lifting of the The Planning Commission, in Resolution No. 2387, recommended project site f om Sepulveda Boulevard. 5• s to developments on the j restrictions prohibiting acces project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Study and Mitigated 6• The proposed prof accordance with State guidelines r d and and al require for ninterdepartmental and affected geo an Negative Declaration was prep use planning, transportation/circulation, hazards, review. No significant adverse impacts were identified which could not a mitigated insignificant level, including impacts to la P public services, and aesthetics. roved the design ) has rev 7. The California Department of Transportation (oC l access and accele at on/deeleration lane on of the Sepulveda Boulevard (State Highway January 18, 1997 (Permit No. 796 -6CS- 1130). of proposed SOLVED that after considering Counccil makes the NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RE trictions City the following findings: modifications to Sepulveda Boulevard access res C � a design and improvements of the Subdivision are consistent with the General 1. The proposed map, Plan Land Use designation of General Commercial. ent, since it is level, 2. The site is Physically suitable for the proposed type and density of developm Y bl flood hazards, or a fault rupture study zone. and is not located in an area of unstable topography, h arcels created by the proposed subdivision have adequate frontage on public streets, excee The p 2 the minimum parcel size established for the C -3 Zone, and are well below the allowed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) or density. ' ision and improvements, specifically the acceleratio d health safety, 3. The design of the Subdivision acts to public and Sepulveda Boulevard access, are not likely to cause serious imp and welfare. an emergency vehicular access easemento ill provide adequate access 4. With the provision of improvements Parcel Map 24495, the proposed subdivision and i through and use of the subdivision. 5. The subdivision is consistent with the approval of EA -383, Subdivision 96- 3/Tentative Parcel Map 24495. XT,.rn rn11F C�I� (General Commercial), which permits retail uses, hotels, motels, medical - 1 The site is zoned C -3 (G general offices not exceeding dental offices, public uses, recreational facilities, restaurants and permitted under the existing 5,000 square feet at a FAR of 1.0. The proposed land uses are Zoning designation. or Parcels 1 and 2 would be 0.31, well below the 1.0 FAR limit. The FAR for 2. The combined FAR f Parcel 1 is proposed at 0.33 and Parcel 2 will not exceed 0.23 FA R ,� »n ,► r yr e�T ('ONSI T�N�' tent with the following General Plan Boulevard access is consis 1 The proposed Sepulveda evelo ment Goals and Policies: ED 1 -2.1, ED 1-2.2, needs, targeting 1-2.3, ndustries that Economic D P expanding the retail and commercial base to meet diverse economic development and quality of life goals, and balancing development with resource balance and infrastructure capacity. Se ulveda Boulevard access is consistent with thL following LU 7 1 2 and LU 7 -2 3. 2. The proposed p U 7-2 Use Goals, Objectives, and Policies: LU 4 -1, LU 4 -1.1, LU 4 1.4, to ent, providing These issues relate to promoting high quality retail in proximity to major employment, nste to seismic safety and conformance with environmental regulations, and landscaping, insuring ound utilities. requiring adequate public facilities and underground wing proposed Sepulveda Boulevard access is consistent -1 15 the e fall , C 2 1.4e C 3-1, PC 3- 3. The P acts and Objectives and Policies related to Circulation. C 1 -1.13, 1.1, C 3 -1.5, and C 4 -2.4. These policies require full amina ental genies, adeiquate right-of- , mitigation, encourage cooperation with of g way, provision of sidewalks for all new projects, full mitigation of all project - related circulation ensure roadway improvements maintain acceptable levels of service, and requiring impacts, developers to pay for mitigation measures. E BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council approves the lifting of NOW, THEREFORE ' tions to Tentative Parcel Map 24631 from Sepulveda Boulevard, subject to the following access restric conditions and mitigation measures: 3 applicant shall develop plans which indicate that the Tans, the app roved and on file with the Department of 1 Prior to approval of the building P plans app as approved shall be project is in substantial conform y Subsequent modification to the project arding the need Planning and Building Safety. Safety for a determination reg referred to the Director of Planning and Building ission review of the proposed modification. for Planning Comm Real Property (Instrument to th Bement Affecting Safety to the Director of planning and Building Y 2. The applicant shall sub don January 24, amendment 1984 e Agreement pr on Sepulveda No. 84- 313091), approve d City Attorney for review. The amendment shall eliminate the City Council and recorded an Y subject property and must app P for the Ralph's Boulevard access to the subj P P whichever comes first. County Recorder's Office Prior to issuance of a Certificate of occupancy with the or the retail/restaurant building, Supermarket building the amended Agreement Affecting Real Property The applicant shall pay the City Attorney's costs ired r reviewing 3' or any such agreements req , public right -of- -way shall be in accordance with tEl edition of the 4 All work within the City p Sepulveda Boulevard public right -of -way Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and City Specifications. No work shall be performed in the Sep ermit . without first obtaining a Public Works approval and a Caltrans p 11 certify to the passage and adoption of this shall make a minute of the SECTION 1: The City Clerk sha fY the same in the book of original the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said passage and adoption thereof in which the same is passed and adopted. City, in the minutes of the meeting 1997• PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED thish. day of FebX3UM7 , ATTEST: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mark eH nsley, City Attorney Sandra Jacobs, Mayor of the City of El Segundo, California EA399- cc.res 4 L�u�J RESOLUTION NO. 2387 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OOFITME�TY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ENVIR ASSESSMENT EA-399 AND SUBDIVISION 96 -8, (TENTATIVE NO.24631), CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE PARCEL MAP IMPACTS AND ADOPTING DECLA►TION OF ENVIRONMENTAL TO ALLOW A 43,206 A MITIGATION MONITORING pR RM R T 9 A MAX"" 4 +� SQUARE FOOT RALPH'S STAURANT BUILDING, A TWO (2) LOT AND SQUARE FOOT RETAIIJIIERIPOSA AVENUE, AND SUBDIVISION AT 1910 EAST RECOMMENDING TOO THE pR,OJEC PETIT PETITIONED B NEW CITY SEPULLVEDA ACCESS T �,LAGE, INC.. GROUP AND PTR HOMESTEAD irequestng approval roval of an WHEREAS, an application has been received from New Group, t building development on a 3.52 acre property Environmental Assessment and footdretail/res retail/restaurant a development of a 43, 206 square foot Ralph s Supermarket, and a 4,900 square located at 1910 E. Mariposa Avenue in the General Commercial (C -3) Zone; and estead Village Inc., REAS, a request has been received from PTR Teo from Sepulveda Boulevardeandg the WHE ro osed project removal of the prohibition on access to the p p including a Draft Initial Study and 5 an Environmental Assessment acts fo9th� a proposed use, has been prepared and WHEREAS, staff, and affected public agencies for review and comment in the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmenal Imp circulated to all interested parties, and time and manner prescribed by application and supporting evidence CEQA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the with the authority and criteria contained in the California Env I pl menttationyof cthetCal California Guidelines, and the City of El Segundo Guidelines Environmental Quality Act (Resolution No. 3805); and transportation and circulation impacts associated with the WHEREAS, an addendum to Traffi trams Impact Study (EA -383, Subdivision 96 -3, Homestead Village Hotel), was prepared to evaluate cation; and project and submitted with the app proposed project to evaluate WHEREAS, a Phase I and II Site Assessment was conducted for the all potential subsurface environmental hazards associated with the current and past uses of the property and submitted with the application, and WHEREAS, on January 30, 1997, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised public hearing on such vent inithe time,�forrm and manner prescribed by law; and Street, and notice of the public hearing was give AREAS, opportunity was given to all persons present to speak for or against the findings of Environmental Assessment EA -399, and Subdivision 96 S (Tentative Parcel Map No. 24631); and WHEREAS, at said hearing the following facts were established: 1. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2384 on September 12, 1996, approving EA- 383, Subdivision 96-3 to business hotel (Homestead Village) on Parcel Parcels (3 a 150 -room extended stay y 18 acres) and one of six development alternatives on Parcel 2 (3.52 acres). 2, The environmental impacts of the following six potential land use options had been analyzed and approved in EA -383 for Parcel 2 (the subject parcel), they were all environmentally equivalent, (approximately and one of the six thigh-trip igwould retail use (i.e., supermarket), supermarket), 36,800 1105 room are foot hotel(app o store, a 45,000 square foot 65,000 square feet), f u0,000 clud including ao43f OOOlsquare foot hi h t00p square foot etail use and quality 6,000 square and a combination foot general retail use. would not exceed three stories e number of parking stalls and l ading spaces prod fPre 2would be dependent on the associated land use option chosen for the site. commercial and urbanized environment and is bordered by offices and 3 The site is situated within a highly To the south are 4 -story office office uses. To the east will be a 150sro�i with face parking. Village Hotel, and 3-4 rstory ends Hotel, Research and Development facilities west, across Sepulveda Boulevard, is the buildings with surface parking. room full service hotel. To the north acros�MParrcel surroundsla one -story a 7- story, 640 ound parking. sa Avenue commercial center with surface and undergr Great Western Bank (550 N. Sepulveda Boulevard) on the southeast corner of Mariposa commercial development along d Sepulveda Boulevard. The nearest rresidential e site y existing commercial is located west of development Sepulveda osa an P blocked fr om the prod ' Boulevard, mainly roximately .4 miles to the east of the project site. etro Sepulveda Boulevard. The located appn Line Light Rail, and the closest sta ion a Avenue and Nash Street, is 4 Although the site is currently vacant, previous uses include agricultural uses, and the Chevron h of the site is essentially level and contains no Gough of the El Segundo Oil Field Arena. aW Well Gough number 10, an abandoned Oil well, is g located on proposed Parcel I. The top gr P unique geologic features. Landscaping is currently located along all the sites boundaries roved the subdivision of the property in 1985, allows the City 5 parcel Map No. 16543, which app Sepulveda Boulevard. The applicant is requesting an of El Segundo to restrict access off of Sep ulveda Boulevard access which Commission and the City acceleration/deceleration lane for Sep roval by the Planning the previous approval and review and app Council. Act (CEQA)• In ibject to the California Environmental 6. The proposed project is delines and local requirements, a Draft Initial al St dy and Mitigated accordance with State gu interdepartmental and affected agency Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated for id which p o land use planning, transportation/circulation, hazards, review. No significant adverse impacts we identified which could not be mitigate to an insignificant level, including impacts public services, and aesthetics. of proposed the above facts and study P P NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering No. 24631), the findings and certifies the Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental Assessment EA -399 and Subdivision 96 -8 (Tentative Parcel eg Planning Commission makes the following of Environmental Impacts: -MEwTTAi eGR SMUT affcted agencies and for public 1, The Draft Initial Study was made availae to all local by law. Thee In ti al Study concluded that review and comment in the time and manner prescribed the proposed project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration oA vironm ;and al Impact will be prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality ct The proposed project is consistent with one of the six land use options approved for Parcel 2 of quare foot EA -383, Subdivision 96 -3: a 43,000 square foot high -trip retail use and a 6,000 s 2, general retail use. Less than significant impacts involving seismic ground shaking, changes in topography from grading, changes in water absorption, drainage and runoff, access ato the site, creation vehicle generation, hazard to safety from design standards, emergency of potential health hazards, exposure and glare mpag were allzwithin the altered scope of the oanalysis services and utilities, and lag which is prepared in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration analysis3 or EA1383,oth which i stated, the mitigation measures are based on the p incorporated herein, by reference. the whole record, there is no evidence that the project will have the 3. That when considering ul environme nte and because on which the wildlife depends, potential for an adverse effect rban because the project is in a built-out and 4. That the Planning Commission thereby authorizes and directs the Director of Piton and de Building Safety to file with the appropriate agencies a Certificate g Fee Exemption minimus finding pursuant to AB 3158 and the California Code of Regulations. Within ten (the days of the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts, the applicant shall submit tothis certificate a ongdwith the required Notice of Determination. As Angeles for the filing of approved in AB 3158, the statutory requirements of CEQA will not be met and no vesting shall occur until this condition is met and the required notices and fees are filed with the County. Ap�rTremFN Y ���... I^ :r'�" O "- 'L'�`�'� m a General 1 The proposed map, design and iprovements of the Subdivision are consistent with t Plan Land Use designation of General Commercia • of development, since it is level, proposed type and density rupture study zone. 2 The site is physically suitable For the propo yP flood hazards, or aefaault exceed subdivision have adequate frontage ublic streets, and is not located in an area of unstable topography, The parcels created by the proposed ' 'mum arcel size established for the C -3 Zone, and are well below the allowed Floor Area the minimum P Ratio (FAR) or density. to cause serious public health rovements are not likely Sanitation District sanitary 3 The design of the Subdivision and imp plant, which has nected to the problems since the project ill direct d o to D strict's Carson sewage treatment sewer system and w project wastewater flow. sufficient capacity to serve this p ro j ent to serve Parcel I of provision of an emergency vehicular access aments will provide adequate access Parcel Map 24495, the proposed 4. With the Pr ro osed subdivision and improve trough and use of the subdivision. subdivision is consistent with the approval of EA -383, Subdivision 96- 3/Tentative Parcel 5, The subdivi Map 24495. .r,.rr� rnilF CONSI� —N� 1. The site is zoned C -3 (General Commercial), which permits retail uses, hotels, motels, medical - dental offices, public uses, recreational facroposed land uses ts and general offices not exceeding are permitted under the existing 5,000 square feet at a FAR of 1.0. Thep p Zoning designation. 2. The combined FAR for Parcels 1 and 2 would be 1.0 FAR limit. The FAR for o.31, well below the not exceed 0.23 FAR. Parcel 1 is proposed at 0.33 and Parcel w nr AAr rnN�TENCY are consistent with the following 1. The proposed Ralph's Supermarket Vials and Policies uses ED 1 -2.1, ED 1 -2.2, and ED 1 -2.3, General Plan Economic Development which relate to preserving and maintaining a viable and stable downtown area, expanding the ind retail and commercial base to meet de and dbalanc targeting g de elopment with 1 resource oanld development and quality of 1 g oals, infrastructure capacity. following 2. The proposed Ralph's Supermarket and retail/restaurant uses are consistent LU4 2e LU 4-1.1, General Plan Land Use Goals, Objectives, and Policies: LU-4, LU 1-4, LU 4 -1, LU 4 -1.2, LU 4 -1.4, LU 7 -1.2 and LU 7-2.3. vil landscaping, nsur ng seismic usafety retail in proximity to major employment, providing conformance with environmental regulations, and requiring adequate public facilities and underground utilities. 3. The proposed Ralph's Su and Policies related for Circulation: C 1-1.13, Cl1-1 15, C 1-1.17, C 1-3.2, General Plan Objectives C 3 -1, C 3-1.1, C C 2 -1, C 2 -1.1, C 2 -1.2, C 2 -1.3, C 2 -1.4, C 2 -2.3, C 2 -2.8, C 2 -3.3, C 2 -5, C 2 -5.1, 3 -1.2, C 3 -1.5, C 3 -1.7, C 3 -2.1, and C 4 -2.4. These policies require full ofloff- street loading traffic impacts and complete mitigation, adequate right -of -way, incorporation facilities, providing safe and convenient pedestrian circulation pedestrian linkage l to to Green minimizing pedestrian/vehicular conflicts, requiring sidewalks, circulation impacts, Line, implementation of TDM standards, full mitigation di all ervironmentsrequiring developers integration of transportation with land uses and surrounding to pay for mitigation measures, adequate pedestrian and bicycle access, and providing sufficient on -site parking. retaillrestaurant uses are co AQ 10 -1 and AQ 10- 4. The proposed Ralph's olic es and Obje fives related to air quality: AQ 3-1.1, nt with the following General Plan Goals, plans, requiring paved parking lots and requiring 1.3, which relate to requiring TSM p q conformance with the SCAQMD PM10 standards. 00013 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission approves NOW, THEREFORE, No. 24631) subject to Environmental Assessment EA1�9 aand n measures: 96 -8 (Tentative Parcel Map the following conditions and m g Tans which indicate that the tans, the applicant shall develop p lane 1 prior to approval of the building p Project is in substantial conformance subsequent plans erinarket and retail/restaurant l�In of Planning and Building Safety. Any Ralph's Sup and Building approved and on file with the Dep proposed modification to the Project as approved shall be referred to the ml mission rpevi w of the prop Safety for a determination regarding the need for Planning modification. integration possible, but not require, lot of the Sepulveda Boulevard) parking lot with the parking 2, Modifications to the plans in order to accommodate the Mariposa Avenue shall be reviewed eway on of the Great Western Bank (550 N. Sep If the modifications are found by proposed project and elimination of the baand Building Safey. and approved by the Director of planning Building di beneficial to the overall circulation of the the Director of Planning and Building Safety, project and Mariposa Avenue, the proposed modifications do not have to be forwarded tot the prod Planning Commission for review• applicant shall pay a one -time Library the app building. per gross square foot of building floor area for every g• prior to issuance of a Certificate of occupancy, Services Mitigation Fee of $0.03 p a one -time Fire Services the applicant shall pay building. 4 Prior to issuance of a Certificate of occupancy, uare foot of building floor area for every Mitigation Fee of $0.14 per gross sq Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall pay a one -time Police Services 5• er gross square foot of building floor area for every building. Mitigation Fee of $0.11 p gr royal of the building plans, the applicant shall submit a Security the Crime 6. Prior to app plan and photometric study, Prevention Plan, including a complete exterior lighting p Department for review and approval, which shall address, but not be limited to, the following: A. Monument Directional Signs; B. Addressing; C. Lighting; D. Telephones; E. Landscaping; F. Security Cameras; G. Security Hardware; and H. Supermarket Office. dr issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or The security measures shall be instal implemented prior to operation, as appropriate. roval of the building plans, the applicant shall submit a Fire/Life Safety Plan to the Prior to app Fire Chief which includes, but is not limited to, the following: A. Fire lane signage; 2 and Parcel 1 of Tentative B. Fire lane access easement between or Parcel den document to the satisfaction oParcel he City 24495 (Homestead Village) Attorney; and C. Fire lane accessability. All Fire/Life Safety Plan requirements must be installed and operational, and any required easements or documents recorded, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. g, The applicant shall pay the City Attorney's costs for preparing or reviewing the fire lane access easement, reciprocal access easement, or any such easements or agreements required. g. A Landscaping and Irrigation Plan shall be submitted by the applicant to the Director of Planning and Building S Th Director apes Plans hall be revised to include 1 tree forevery approval of the building plans. with a 3,000 square feet of Vehicular Use a ( ys em and shall be permanently pmaintan d in a permanent automatic watering a o pro ert stalled along the Sepulveda Boulevard p P y clean manner. Mature trees to replan those removed, shall be incorporated ro isions neat and irrigation Plan and shall be Landscaping and Irrig applicant, if feasible, shall incorporate P frontage and Irrigation Plan. Director f Recreation e and balanced throughout the site. The aPP Safety, for the use of reclaimed a Director of Planning and Building the applicant prior to the reviewed and approved by per the approved plans by and Parks, and Police Chief, and installed p issuance of a Certificate of Occup licant shall submit a Master Sign Plan Occupancy, app 10. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occup The Master Sign compatibility with the surrounding impede traffic or pedestrian trian safety es hand Police to ensure P s do not imp Plan, as well as to ensure that sign nor to issuance of a Certificate of of the Director of Planning and Building Safety Plan shall be subject to the approval per the approved plan p pole sign on Sepulveda Chief and all signs shall be installed p e and one pole LUM Occupancy. The Master Sign Plan shall iermark t and o her assoc ated signag Boulevard with advertising for Ralph's Sup h's Supermarket and the multi- tenant sign on Mariposa for Ra1P be no taller than the Great osa Avenue with advertising on Mariposa Avenue may pole sign on Sepulveda retail/restaurant building. The pole sign Sepulveda Boulevard and the p One monument Western Bank building located at 550 N. d Ralph's Supermarket building. ro posed Boulevard may not be taller than the prop permitted for the p P a maximum of 10 feet emus be architecturally compatible sign on Sepulveda Boulevard, a e All sign retail/restaurant building and associated sign g with the proposed buildings. by the Director of 11. The app Safety, Director of Public Works, the Fire Chief and the Police Chief, licant shall submit a Circulation Plan, to be reviewed an approved Planning and Building the following provisions; which contains, but is not limited to, Sepulveda Boulevard, to the A. Restriping and signing of Mariposa Avenue, east of Sep Homestead Village Driveway; in center parking B. Retaining the currently permitted left turn movement into the shopping lot at 600 -630 N. Sepulveda Boulevard from eastbound Mariposa Avenue; Mariposa Avenue, at the C. Installation of a "break area" in the central left-turn event blocking by vehicles waiting to proposed mariposa Avenue project driveway to p turn left from westbound Mariposa Avenue to proceed south on Sepulveda Boulelevard• D. An acceleration/deceleration lane for access to the project site from Sepulveda Bou and E. Integration of the Great Western Bank parking lot with the proposed project and elimination of the bank driveway on Mariposa Avenue, if feasible; All required Circulation Plan elements either Parcel 1 or Parcel 2. prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for development on Occupancy for Ralph's of the Certificate of onths 12. A maximum of the m Committee swill review the need to limit the hours that left turns are Supermarket, onto Mariposa Avenue. The applicant shall permitted or prohibit left turns out of the driveway submit actual traffic counts of the Mariposa Avenue driveway the Traffic Committee. The Traffic Committee shall submit a report with their findings a and recommendations for the Planning Commission to review and approve. for Ralph's six months after issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy 13. A maximum f protected left turn phasing warrant study for westbound Mariposa Avenue traffic Supermarket, P the applicant and submitted to the at the Sepulveda Boulevard intersection shall be prepared by PP City and concurrently to Caltrans for review and approval. The study shall address additional left turn phasing with or without ad itiona westbound Mariposa time" Avenue to at Sepulveda Boulevard. Avenue, and dual left turn Additional relevant information may be included in the study as deemed hall prow de d al left and Caltrans. If Caltrans approves the left turn phasing, the app rove the left turn turn lanes within a time period approved by the City. If Caltrans dovedit the Circulation Plan phasing, a single non - protected left turn lane shall remain as app required by Condition #11. Supermarket, market, the applicant shall for the Ra1P acce table to the City Attorney, in the amount of $75, for the 14. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy provide a bond or other suretWa .rant study identified in Condition #13 and the construction of cost of the left turn phasing circulation improvements in the public right -of- -way identified in Condition by the Director but is not limited to, joint -use parking and 15. The applicant shall submit a re cipr`oNChl access icludes but, for review limited of Planning and Building Safety, of the proposed project, the reciprocal the bank pedestrian and vehicular access between Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. If the Great Western an P ated into the parking circulation access parking is integr joint parking and pedestrian and vehicular access easement must also incorporate j P property. on Parcel 2 may not exceed The restaurant portion of the proposed retaiUrestaurant building 16 spaces required for restaurants. If 2,50ncludera 2,500 square feet, due to the number of parking P feet of restaurant area is developed, the proposed retaiUrestaurant building may maximum of 500 square feet of retail uses. proposed for the retail/restaurant ificant a.m. peak hour traffic islare propo peak hour traffic P 17, If a restaurant(s) with sign applicant shall provide an analysis review and approval prior to building on Parcel 2, the app and Building Safety generation, to the Director of Planning improvements for the restaurant(s), to determine if the issuance of a building permit for tenant imp ed for Planning Commission review of the proposed potential impact on traffic requires additional mitigation measures. The Director of Planning an P Safety shall determine the Building Y modification. site shall be enclosed by a six -foot high chain link fence. ublic right-of-way. A fencing plan shall be is. During construction, the entire project the Director .Planning and Building Gates for site fencing shall not open over sidewa by submitted by the applicant and reviewed and approved Safety prior to installation. public right -of- -way shall be in accordance with the latest Standard lg. All work within the City p of El Segundo Standard Specifications w rk shall be performed in the public right-of-way without first obtaining a Specifications. Public Works permit. posed utilities shall be 20. Prior to approval of the building plans, plans shall indicate that all pro placed underground to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The applicant shall assume the costs for the relocation of all utilities, includin but not projected to' light poles, electrical vaults, and fire hydrants which are affected by the proposed 21. Encroachment permits must be obtained from the Engineering Division of the Publi permit t for Department for demo encroachment permit for grading obtained s also at equired when import or export demolition is issued. grading is maybe listed on one encroachment of dirt exceeds fifty (50) cubic yards. Demolition and grading permit. 22. Prior to approval of the building plans, plans shall show the location of all proposed trash Police enclosures to the satisfaction of that Dthe trash area will in o porate adequate space e for the and Building Safety and Chief. Plans shall also indicate collection of recyclable materials. shall be a e ". Each lateral 23. If new sewer laterals inches inside diameter. Material shall be 'vitreous clay Piet they are l minimum of s shall have a six (6) inch clean -out brought to grade at the property line and securely Capp All planned sewer B9 size box shall be placed around the C.O. for protection. The box shall have a cover emblazoned with the word "sewer ". If in a traffic area, cover shall be onstruc approved. n. Existing sewer laterals connections shall be checked for elevation prior d to starting at the property line. Existing six (6) inch wyes shall be plugged at the sewer mainline and capp may be reused if approved by the Director of Public Works. 24. No material storage is allowed in the public right -of -way except by permit issued by the areas, as long as safe Engineering Division of the Public Works areas and street parking gar is allowed in the publicright -of way it shall be confined to parkway these and adequate pedestrian andvhiic quires prioriapproval of thetPlublmWe Storage rime t and areas in the public right-of-way eriod of 24 hours. shall be limited to a maximum p t 25. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, new curbs, sidewalk, driveway approaches, wheelchair ramps avement, including alleys, shall be constructed/reconstructed as required by the and A.C. p driveways and other concrete work not to be incorporated into Director of Public Works. Existing laced with standard curb and sidewalk. the construction shall be removed and rep pre the unrecorded archeological or cultural resources be encountered during 26. Should any p :stopped and the Department of Planning and construction re the project, all work will be stopp Building Safety will be notified immediately. At the ante owner's of the find,aand his findings o hall be be consulted to determine the potential sign rior to the commencement of work. submitted to the Director of Planning and Building Safety p applicant shall submit the appropriate documentation to show conformance with or 27. The app Control Board's National Pollution Discharge exemption from the State Water Quality Elimination System (NPDES) Periniifof construction he building lding Plans.d s��water run -off to the Director of public Works prior to the approva alerts and suspended 28 During construction dust control measures during first-stage rsmoge with the have Dads Control Ordinance. Grading will be discontinued during periods of high wind (i.e. elow the sideboards t hour), minimize dust hauling trucks shall covered or wetted and loaded PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of January, 1997- JBreB. 4ernd, AICP, ong and Build ing Safety, and Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of El Segundo, California YOT .S Boulgarides - Aye Crowley - Absent Palmer -Aye Wycoff - Aye Yeagley -Aye Robert Yeagley, Chairman of the Planning Commission of the City of El Segundo, California EA399.res 000 >� HomeSt Q d % October 10, 1996 Mr. James W. Morrison City Manager CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 -0989 RE: .02 Dear lames: Homestead for a two -lot subdivision submitted b Boulevard pending application for a Tentative Parcel map approvals of the Sep Relative to the pe applications for development app Sepulveda Boulevard to village Incorporated, and anticipated future PP ` `o. nta a of the subject property, we wish to request thattheipprobiibittiien against es Certificate" on del ' redo, fro g b and be the City of El Sep: the property be eliminated' This access Bement Affecting Real property y 16543, and in paragraph 1.1.2 of the Afire ration, dated January 25, 1984. California and Chevron U.S.A. Inc., a California corporation, din that, since this restriction was created by City Council Resolution No. 3247, dated January It is our understanding, 24, 1984, it will require another City Council Resolution to eliminate it. it essential that this In order to achieve our mutual goal of realizing commercial development at this property. imposed when the property was anticipated to be developed for high density office.industnal restriction, which was Po Bement Affecting Real eliminated to permit the convenient customer circulaotion�t� a regUeth � t � Therefore, as successor to uses, be Segundo pr pe interest to Chevron U.S.A. Inc., and to such actions as might be necessary to Permit access to the property prop" be amended, and that the City request to remove the restriction of access be processed under a Pe in center from Sepulveda Boulevard. h is our desire that our rap this week se separate application by us, but concurrently with the s application wasmsubmitted to the ccity a retail shopping P on Sepulveda Boulevard. Th PP on the front Property P please call me if you have any questions or comments. I look forward to your support of this request Best regards, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED � P. - gs vice President M Mr. Bret Bernard, Planning Director Ms. Laurie Jester, Senior Planner Mr. Jim Hansen, Economic Development Dept. Mr. Bill Crigger, The New Group Ms. Pat Stitzenberger, Urban Planning Consultants 25 B Tech -4.0 Dr""- S"Ad F1W • lrt4u. C.:.,. ^"n 9 ?7 1 t • (;1 a) 719- 1 - 00 .0i_'3 CIN CLtjr4IH5 ASSOC • - 3103270175 13:11 DAB Jan 30 , 12s14 P.01 AISTRICT 7,- pFtMIi3 Fax :2138970420 ._ _...- ._... - ?{SMO 7, 110 % *& W- ST• Z / NMA CA S rd (zssJ WO-46" january 18, 1997 125 L W0 n Avg San% PC, r(aw ivZ ACA 87541 A= ',Mr. Br9ft P. Griggs 796- 6"jC$TEa3��' 38 A71A- 001 - 25.30/25. m it tbt constriction of DeV Mr. Qrlggs: �plicatian far at Ping quad iast$llaiao o Of l 1 review ' the abs co cr sidrwaik, reap g,� osa Avarua. in the oitl+ We have co%plated Our yew,% lavard (Roate Xi+ south of Mer►P s,coelerationldacela�an m along sepu sips and irrigation syste �,� of ail conditions SegtmdO. ermit will be issue u,D°n final app, t of encroachment p will be wo�it apP roved by Cat s, An taro Mtge is ccopo of work witltiin tie» �e State ri - sod Prapos� of E1 Seg�Q�. In the event of w�+alaa� of the Pte' check and estfm msy In "WA wiy addif�cnsl pphi be eckaya l p or s86 of CaIMA# Permit calculated and sh P questions, please contact the undeisiguad at (213)897.4668 - If you ha ve Buy CC: B, Dwara' -Citx of EL Segundo Z.Plotmk- 7ulcin Cumm.ifis AUaciates 5 + ABD4iLA- ANSAAI pemit s4ifteer AEL GENDA II EM STATEMENTIL MEETING DATE, 18 February 1997 AGENDA HEADING: Special Order of Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: projects, or consider utilizing said funds 19g6_19g7 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program to add previous Public hearing to amend the ears public service p 1 program year's unspent CDBG funds to current year's project; and, consider minor changes to t implement an American with Disabilities Act (ADA) list of projects. Home Repair and RSI projects, included within the 1997 -1998 CDBG proposed RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1, Hold public hearing; increase 2. Discussion; utilize unspent 1996 -1997 CDBG funds to approximately $sties to: 1) 3. Direct Staff to either u 2) implement an American with Disabilities Act (ADA) existing CDBG public service project budgets, sources to accommodate severely curtailed 1997 -1998 compliance project, or 3) utilize alternative funding and Residential Sound CDBG public service activities, or some combination thereof; le low and moderate income homeownedeems�appropriate. 4. Authorize Staff to expand the scopelbof the 1997 -1998 CDBG Minor Home Repair Insulation projects to include a eligible R Provide other direction to Staff regarding the CDBG Program as City Council INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: n of 07 January 1997, Staff was directed to funds to the existing 1CDBG pubCD6Grvic Staff At the City Council meets g unspent CDBG program to add approximately $55,000 d previously as O tion A under the Discussion section this fundsepOption Bwould use this the option, unds for projects which is shown P unspent CDBG has developed two other options to utilize past year's unsp projects and Option C would entail utilizing Gal mon a nd monies, for staffing the Recreation implementing ADA p j lement CD and Parks Department Outreach Office, and to supp (Continued on next page) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None FISCAL IMPACT: option A - CDBG funds only - $55,000. Option B - CDBG funds only - $40,000 for an ADA Project. Option C - Potential use of $10,000 in General Fund monies. w ORIGINATED: Bret B. Bern REVIEWED ACTION T Date: i i revs uai y Planning and B jilding Satet Date: I) � I DISCUSSION: r cure - 7 r Current 1996 -1997 -nr�r, Buda et Proposed Inca Dif— erenS� -- ,b;i SPn�ice Proiect r $40,000 +$24,000 +$16,000 Home Delivered Meals $16,000 $24,500 $40,500 $26,000 +$1�4 In -Home Service 'on $11,000 $55,000 Juvenile Diverse g_1997 CDBG program year ends 30 J June 1997 betautomat tally placed sintol Please be aware that the current 199 CDBG public service project expenditures be closed, and any unspent CDBG fundt S mainined that all cron inuing C b ranted the same (future) projects. At this time public service limit of twenty -five percent (unless a waiver is g Thus, increasing these project budgets proposed for 1997 -1998 cannot exceed the p ear 01 July b the Los Angeles County Community Development Commission [CDC])• ex erience between Y It in roviding greater funds for these p hocrtfaltls these projects may program p ( projects rests now does not directly result p for the City's current public service prove 1997 - 30 June 1998). It will, however, help to offset any budget public service limit, which now and 30 June 1997. Finally, any budget increases proposed rove additional expenditures in excess of the existing p upon the CDC willingness ated hey would not look favorably upon. the CDC has presently .,T�.,�� Q• AAA Proiect to utilize unspent CDBG Alternatively, the City Council may wish to consider a Public Works m liance are eligible under the CDBG amps WO Department has suggested that CDB Gffundsbsince CDBG funds wtll replace Gas fundst Projects that address Americans with Disability Act (ADA) compliance guidelines. The Public effective use of CD along various City streets. This will be a highly these designated funds for an alternative use. Gas Tax Tax monies set aside for this project, thus freeing up his fiscal year's City budget has set aside $40,000 hen be used to fund projects which are currently 0O funded with General Fund monies, thereby used in its monies could t as much as $55,0 reducing General Fund expenditures by opportunity to enjoy gas tax savings above projects. The Public Works Depart Id not be an opped that more monies could e e earlier for ADA compliance on -going ADA compliance program; however, there would the $40, 000 amount. The CDC and Federal government have currently set no limits, as indicated m report, for "physical" development CDBG projects. „oT�nti r Outreach Office Fund�Sl yr � �.. tion resented for your consideration addresses alternative funding sources for the. upcoming 1997 The next op p 1997 City Council meeting, discusson ensued 1998 CDBG public service projects. During the 07 January Y regarding the twenty -five percent limit on public service 'ec se Home Delivered greatest d Meals, In -Home Service, and ffice sufficiently sufficiently fund the three 1997 -1998 public service p 1 supporting the salaries City ary responsibility hs torcoeordinatee mplemOutreach ent, and monitor Juvenile Diversion), while supp 9 is presently staffed with part-time personnel whose primary $10,000 the Home Delivered Meals and In -Home Service projects. sery services are delivered daily. work Apph the services Homers and local volunteers to ensur ged t the City's G program public to administer the Home Delivered Meals and annually in Staff costs is charged to the CDBG p 9 Service projects. s the Gas Tax As previously mentioned, if CDBG dffor alternative a paojects which ch may haverrequiirredlGene al Fund expenditures monies could potentially be utilize perhaps consideration (up to $55,000 in General Fund savings). If General Fund monies are support the (administrative costs associated could be given to utilizing approximately $10,000 in general funds to supp This $10,000 then could be used for the actual meals and services with the CDBG public service programs. b the Home Delivered Meals and In -Home Se P without interrupting ng ould curgr eatseravice levelsontinuation provided Y of the Home Delivered Meals and In -Home Service projects Is Insulation 7th City Council meeting, Staff requested HomehReplai and Residential Sound ding nsulation Finally, at the January Y current and upcoming year's project scope for the CDBG Minor However, with these restrictions placed up II eligible low e eligible low and moderate income homeowners. Presently, only elderly and severely g projects to include ;�L! pa ants in these programs. scope to include handicapped persons may p Thus, broadening these projects' I success. Staff the market of available participants is dwindling. generate more applications, thus continuing the projects and moderate income homeowners, may g seeks direction on this program expansion, as well as the other options outlined above. p\agendas \02 -18 97•ais 3 UCO�'+ AGENDA I EMCSTATEMENTL EL SEGUNDO e zi,1, MEETING DATE: 18 February 1997 AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business REGt�mmr_j,§ ..— - and, 1) Discussion (if desired); 2) Possible Action. of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Superior Court against the City and others. As Segundo filed suit in Los Ang Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners (BOAC), settled out - On 30 June 1995, nt f Airports DOA), the Los of 4 February 1997, LAX and the City Angeles Department of Airp ( Council meeting noted in the Staff Report for this item at the City of -court in El Segundo's favor, for $1,012,298. 012,298, several assumptions possible options for the disbursement of the out -of -court settlement for $1' General Fund for the cost in outlining p tions are listed bet uire and will have been made. Those as does not req funded program, preparation that the FAA expenditures. The Council would want to reimburse monies "borrowed" from the City's 1' ation in the LAX /FAA fun p of preparation for particip Analysis has specific amounts and types o Approximately $50,454 not fund. The attached RSI Program Cost reimburse the General Fund for the cast of tby the FAA mItthe is LAX /FAA 2 The Council would want to 80% of this cost will b p ram Cost funded program to the Homeowner /FAA funded program. Approximately $34,089 remaining 20% be paid through the settlement "windfall ". The attached RSI Program recommended that the re es of expenditures. fees resulting from the Analysis has specific amounts and types specific amounts and types of expenditures. 3. The Council would also want t t reimburse sis has speneral Fund for the legal Approximately $130,000 LAX litigation. The attached RSI Program Cos Y App The support the City Council desires the balance, approximately $797,755, of the settlement to 4' attached Concepts for Settlement Disbursement and associated Computations for Various City's RSI Program. The atta vide various strategies for the disbursemen of the balance of the settlement. No other Disbursement Concepts pro disbursement of the settlement. assumptions have been made regarding if any of the above assumptions prove incorrect, the "designated,' monies could be added to the monies in Number 4., above, the overall RSI Program. A expenditures which are not reimbursable through an Council supports the assumptions in the Discussioctiopn above, the General Fund would receive If the p approximately $214,543 in reimbursements for out-of-pocket t, 55 will these funds could be effectively used general c or means. The balance of the settlement, $97,755 will have no direct impact on the I esidents. to other agency ending on the Council s plan for disbursement, finances; however, depending ram, thereby maximizing noise relief for many El Segundo r motivate maximum participation in the program, ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Computations for Various Disbursement RSI Program Cost Analysis, Concepts for Settlement Disbursement, Comp ate: 1 ebruary 1 Concepts ;oi en, Special Protects Add RfVjEV ED BY: / )ann�ing Bret B. Bernard, Direct r of er nd Building Safety ry Z _/3_ ° I w. Morrison, City Man mi c� M TAKEN: {� RSI PROGRAM COST ANALYSIS (February 1997) The Settlement: 7 February : $1,012,298 The City has received from the City of Los Angeles, on Friday, 1, LAX Specific Costs, Unrefundable through the FAA: and Grant Implementation Plans (GIP): Preparation of the Airport Noise Mitigation (ANMP) 28 852 CottonBeland and Associates, map and table preparation: 14,125 Staff development of the ANMP and GIP: 5,250 Staff development of funds from make changesn�o DOA's Staff efforts to collect 2,227 matching grant program, and Letter Agreement: 50,454 - 50,454 Sub - total: 961,844 2, Transition Costs, Expenditures not Related Directly to Phase 5: program Twenty percent of the cost of the tran sito °bor partially by the City. The remaining was to a partially homeowner funded program 80% will be paid for by FAA grant funds. Transition costs include those expenses incurred by the City in attempting to acquire grant funds allocated by the lann nC new port of a new homeowner supported including legal fees, City's staff support (rewriting consultant contracts, , program, program, evaluating community sup Tannin and marketing the program), operation acquiring Council approval, planning and maintenance of the Demonstration House. draft e transition ANMP and extends tfrom ctober 1994, the submission date of the fina l May 1996, when the Council approved a new, modified contract with Wyle Laboratories which described the new RSI program. 15,562 10/94 -06/95 Costs including Staff, consultant demo house +18,627 07/95 - 05/96 " 34,089 - 34,089 Sub - total: 927,755 3, Legal Fees: Legal fees accumulated in support of the LAX litigation. Legal Fees: Sub - total: 4, RSI Program Balance: 1ax$$c0m.p04 1 + 130,000 - 130,000 797,755 n Q00-r PPORTUNITIES FOR SETTLEMENT DISBURSEMENT (February 1997) FAA Basis for Participation in the RSI Program: Report submitted with and t decision on whether a home is in the LAX Airpo e oNoise Impact Area, and therefore The FAA bases its rant support, on the Noise R p lication was the eligible for receipt of sound insulation g pp application for participation in the Part 150 program. The Report at Nos e Report there were units included in El 4th Quarter Noise Monitoring Report for 1989. According dwelling units. Subsequent surveys approximately 10,177 single family (SFD)and 16,242 auof -�� 4i19 dwelling (MFD) Segundo's portion of the LAX noise impact area, a to have refined the numbers and types of dwelling units impacted in EoSegundo, use. however, Our owntlatest noise from the 4th tr Noise Monitorin Re ort for 1989 that the FAA c contour data, 4th Qtr Noise Monitoring Report for 1994, states that there aea ,533 SFDs and 1,759 MFDs, a total of 3,292, not 26,419, dwellings in the LAX airport noise impact options provide--- In order to select a settlement distribution plan that has stronger roots in reality, the op below will use our own "current" numbers for impacted dwellings, not those used by e FAA. from a low of $1,320 For reference, the estimated cost of participation varies for program participants for a MFD in the 65dB CNEL contour, to a high of $8,960 for a SFD. in the would CNEL contour. ximatelyf every home were treated it is estimated that the average coosttoof participation would e app e ry $2,750. The following pages provide some disbursement Option 1: Every Impacted owner R ceivesuEgn l A m un area an equal amount from the in Provide every dwelling owner settlement, approximately $242.33 each. son -one amount. 100% of eligible receive grant. Pro: Equitable in terms of one per Con: Little relief and small incentive to participate option 2: Adjusted for 40% Cost Differential Between selement but differentiate Dwelling between Single I Op Provide every dwelling unit owner an amount typically on Family Dwellings (SFDs) and Multi- Family Dwellings (MFDs bec provide $357 for eacth SFD unit and $143 for y se the cost of about about 40% of the cost of retrofitting a SFD. This approach each MFD unit. Pro: More equitable, in that difference in typical cost to insulate SFDs and MFDs is considered. 100% of eligible receive grant. Con: Little relief and relatively small incentive top participate Option 3: Adjust for Differences in Homeowner Costs Based on Home's Location in Impact Area area Consider the different fiscal impact each zone of the e of est impact 960) s on homeowners . 70 SFD units in the 75dB zone each get -- $536 (of est. $7,460) 630 SFD units in the 70d6 zone each get -- $445 (of est. $3,670) 547 MFD units in the 75dB zone each get -- $220 (of est. $3,205) 833 SFD units in the 65dB zone each get -- $ 245 673 MFD units in the 70d6 zone each get -- $166 (of est. $2,760) 549 MFD units in the 65dB zone each get -- $ 80 (of est. $1,320) 1ax$$com.p04 1 �► Pro: Most equitable, in that difference nl typical noise insulate are Dons considered. of eligible and typical differences in cost due to a home's location receive grant. Con: Little substantial relief and relatively small incentive to participate Option 4: Incentive Program A; Equitable Distribution While equitable, the programs described in Concept 1 through 3 provide little relief to the Program participant and do next to nothing to motivate participation f the potential cost of this ltprogram. Rather than otrying pto he fact that the $1 million settlement is only about 1 reach everyone with what may be perceiveda s a "token oviding treatment for 130 of the va ious types of homes n teach relief. The program below is relatively equit , p of the three impact areas. The program also takes into account the 40% differential between SFDs and MFDs and the differential between impact area contours. 780 homeowners can be assisted in paying their 20% share in accordance with the following matrix: Type Home 75dB SFD 130 homes at $2,000 $ 8,960 Est. HO Contrib. - 2.000 Relief 6,960 New Contrib. Amt MFD 130 homes at $820 $ 3,670 Est. HO Contrib. - 820 Relief 2,850 New Contrib. Amt. Contours 70dB 130 homes at $1,660 $ 7,460 Est. HO Contrib. - 1.660 Relief 5,800 New Contrib. Amt. 130 homes at $620 $ 2,760 Est. HO Contrib. 620 Relief 2,140 New Contrib. Amt. 65dB 130 homes at $720 $ 3,205 Est. HO Contrib. - 720 Relief 2,485 New Contrib. Amt. 130 homes at $300 $ 1,320 Est. HO Contrib. - 300 Relief 1,020 New Contrib. Amt. Pro: Provides significant and equitable relief to participants in all noise contours, and a substantial incentive to potential future participants. east impacted l lbaslsWlanld on alfirst-come-first-served basis. Little flexible and provides grant funds on a most additional administrative burden. Significant relief limitations largest participants, 8 Con: Not everyone II benefit due to the of the settlement -- of all eligible. Option 5: Incentive Program B; Equitable Among adMhe FAA pact ed, 7 dB, Only impacted Given the amount of the out-of-court . There homes first, it would be reasonable to consider funding Monitoring Report. If weanBclude the ct strdifferentiale 617 homes in this impact area in the 4th Qtr 1994 � between single and multi - family units the following plan emerges: All 70 SFD,D7 75dB CNEL unit owners would owners receive $2,714 each receive $1 113 eacho(of est. st.. $7,460) All 547 M F , Pro: Provides significant relief for the most impacted -- nearly 19% of all eligible Con: Excludes 81% of eligible participants (ltlil�.i lax$$com.p04 2 Option 6: Reimbursement Program for Existing Program Participants This Concept would pay 100% of the costs of the current participants in Phase 5. If executed this concept would leave a reserve of approximately $269,115 for follow -on program phase(s). Current Phase 5 Participants 26 75dB SFD homeowners would receive $8,960 12 75dB MFD homeowners would receive $3,670 30 70dB SFD homeowners would receive $7,460 08 65 db SFD homeonwers would receive $3,205 Pro: Provides 100% relief for approximately 100 homeowners Con: Grant would conform primarily to the concept of first- come -first -served rather than the concept of most -to -least impacted. Would only assist about 100 homeowners -- 3% of all eligible. Option 7: Base Grant on Financial Need of Homeowner This Concept would provide that the grants be administered as are the Community Development Block Grants. A maximum grant of $2,750 could be provided to any participant who qualified on the basis of financial need. A scale relating the number of family members to cumulative adjusted gross income (as provided on IRS 1040) could be developed by staff. Rule of providing assistance from most to least impacted will continue. Grants would be provided from program phase to phase until funds were exhausted. Approximately 290 homeowners could be assisted under this concept. Pro: Provides significant relief to those with least funds. Con: Significant increase in administrative burden. Some who qualify may not be able to participate due to limits of the settlement. 00032 Jax$$com.p04 COMPUTATIONS FOR VARIOUS DISBURSEMENT CONCEPTS (February 1997) Option 1: Every Impacted Owner Receives Equal Amount 797,755 divided by 3,292 (fm LAX 4th Qtr 1997 Noise Monitoring Report = approximately $242.33 each. Option 2: Adjusted for 40% Cost Differential Between Single & Multi Dwelling This approach would provide $357 for each SFD unit and $143 for each MFD unit. 1,533 SFDs 40% of 1,759 = 704 MFDs 797,755 divided by 2,237 = $357 ea for SFDs 1.759 MFDs +1.533 SFDs __1_400/- 3,292 Total Dwellings 2,237 Total $143 ea for MFDs 1,533 SFDs 1,759 x 357 x 143 547,281 + 251,537 = 798,818 (cost of this plan) - 797,755 ($$ available) _ $1,063 (Reserve) Pro: More equitable, in that difference in typical cost to insulate SFDs and MFDs is considered Con: Little relief and no incentive to participate Option 3: Adjust for Differences in Homeowner Costs Based on Home's Location in Impact Area Consider the different fiscal impact each zone of the noise impact area has on homeowners. It costs SFD owners in the 75+ dB impact area an estimated $8,960, It costs SFD owners in the 70 - 75dB impact area an estimated $7,460 It costs MFD owners in the 75+ dB impact area an estimated 3,670 per unit It costs SFD owners in the 65 - 70dB impact area an estimated $3,205 It costs MFD owners in the 70 - 75dB impact area an estimated 2,760 per unit It costs MFD owners in the 65 - 70dB impact area an estimated 1,320 per unit Base Cost = $8,960/75dB SFD, 70 units x 100% = 70 x 536 = 37,520 divided by 280,328 70 = $536ea 630 = $445ea $7,460/70dB SFD, 630 units x 83% 41% = 523 x 536 = = 224 x 536 = 120,064 547 = $220ea $3,670/75dB MFD, $3,205/65dB SFD, 547 units x 833 units x 36% = 381 x 536 = 204,216 833 = $245ea $2,760/70dB MFD, 673 units x 31% = 209 x 536 = 112,024 43.952 673 = $166ea 549 = $ 80ea $1,320/65dB MFD, 549 units x 15% = 82 x 536 = 1,489 (eligible 788,104 ( -9,651 overage for units adjusted rounding) for cost differential) 797,755 divided by 1,489 (adjusted eligible units) = 536 (base per unit payment) 001)33 lax$$com.p04 Option 4: Incentive Program A; Equitable Distribution 780 homeowners can be assisted in paying their 20% share in accordance with the following matrix: Type Home 75dB SFD 130 homes at $2,000 Base contribution amt. $ 8,960 Est. HO Contrib. - 2.000 Relief 6,960 New Contrib. Amt. MFD 130 homes at $820 (41% of $2,000) $ 3,670 Est. HO Contrib. - 820 Relief 2,850 New Contrib. Amt Contours 70dB 130 homes at $1,660 (83% of $2,000) $ 7,460 Est. HO Contrib. - 1.660 Relief 5,800 New Contrib. Amt. 130 homes at $620 (31% of $2,000) $ 2,760 Est. HO Contrib. - 620 Relief 2,140 New Contrib. Amt 65dB 130 homes at $720 (36% of $2,000) $ 3,205 Est. HO Contrib. 720 Relief 2,485 New Contrib. Amt. 130 homes at $300 (15% of $2,000) $ 1,320 Est. HO Contrib. - 300 Relief 1,020 New Contrib. Amt. Option 5: Incentive Program B; Equitable Among Most Impacted Only 70 SFDs at an estimated Unit cost of $8,960 70 units 547 MFDs at an estimated Unit cost of $3,670 547 units x 41 %294224 units units $797,755 divided by 294 = $2,714 for each SFD unit X2,714 $1 547 x 41% + 608,811 = 798,791 $1,113 for each MFD unit 189,980 Option 6: Reimbursement Program for Existing Program Participants Current Phase 5 Participants 26 75dB SFD homeowners would receive $8,960 12 75dB MFD homeowners would receive $3,670 30 70dB SFD homeowners would receive $7,460 08 65 db SFD homeonwers would receive $3,205 $797,755 Available grant funds -528.640 100% payment for current Phase 5 homeowners 269,115 Reserve for Phases 6 onward Phase 5 Participants 26 SFDs at 75dB x 100% 12 MFDs at 75dB x 41% 30 SFDs at 70dB x 83% 08 SFDs at 65dB x 36% $797,755 Available grant funds - 528,640 269,115 Reserve for next Phase lax$$com.p04 26 $8,960 75dB SFD HO Cost 05 __&59 equivalent units 25 528,640 estimated cost to provide $100% reimbursement 03 59 equivalent units 2 00034 Option 7: Base Grant on Financial Need of Homeowner This Concept would provide that the grants be administered as are the Community Development Block Grants. A maximum grant of $2,500 could be provided to any participant who qualified on the basis of financial need. A scale relating the number of family members to cumulative adjusted gross income (as provided on IRS 1040) could be developed by staff. Rule of providing assistance from most to least impacted will continue. Grants would be provided from program phase to phase until funds were exhausted. Approximately 399 homeowners could be assisted under this concept. Pro: Provides significant relief to those with least funds. Con: Significant increase in administrative burden. Some who qualify may not be able to participate due to limits of the settlement. 000.35 lax$Scom.p04 MEETING DATE: February 18, 1997 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL — AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Review of optional strategies for Compliance Peak Commute Tnp Reduction ding Old Vehicle Scrapping, Air ct on Program Quality Investment Program, and a RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1. Review SCAQMD Rule 2202 compliance strategies; and, 2. Provide direction to Staff for possible action. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The City received approval of its 1 June South 21996. This lapprolval Management valid for one year. On Rule and emission reduction strategies on J December 3, 1996, the City Council ceasna the r desharet reimbursements offered Ro empaoyees;gand, in t those meetings, Staff had suggested increasing conjunction, presented a selection of options for compliance with Rule 2202 in order to reduce the Staff time an resources required to comply with the Rule. Under Rule 2202, enacted December credit towards our Emission n Reductio Targets (ERT' ) rEmission sredu strategies that may be implemented to receive c Scrapping, Clean On -road Clean Off -road Mobile Equipment, Remote strategies include Old Vehicle Vehicles, Sensing, Air Quality Investment Program, Emission Reduction Credits from Stationary Sources, and Other Mobile Source Credit Programs. Trip reduction Work-related in Trip Reduction, on, Vehicle Mlles Traveled (VMT) Programs, y used by the City for compliance), Other and Alternative Fuel Vehicles. Fe City ram which hressent essentially the ompletetmcenti a based Rideshare Plan which Employee Commute Reduction g was required under the previousnSCAQMD Regulation XV and Rule 1501. Attached is a full description of each strategy, prepared by the SCAQ D DISCUSSION: Staff has again reviewed the strategy options provided in Rule 2202 and has determined that two emission reduction strategies options (Old Vehicle Scrapping, and the Air Quality Investment Program) and one trip reduction strategy (Peak Commute Trip Reduction) which could provide effective means of compliance with Rule 2202 ERT's and reduce the amount of Staff resources required to implement the Rule. These options could be used individually or in combination as well. Continued on next page) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1. Re On-road Vehicle 1ines. 2. P op o ed rvised EmployeeRide ha e Mitigation dated Decembers 5, 1996 FISCAL IMPACT: O -rating Budget: X Capital Improv. Budget: Depends on options selected. Funding- Existing Air Pollution Reduction Fund plus minimal administrative expenses from General Fund. ORIGINATED: / Bret B. Bernard, Al REVIEWED BY: James W. Morriss ACTION TAKEN: (Check one) p Amount Requested: Project/Account Budget: $13,11414 WE 1-1 ni��96 Project/Account Balance: $9.690 _ Date: — Account Number: 58A� Project Phase: -Appropriation Required - Yes_ No�C _ Date: February 11, 1997 ninq and Bu Date: 2 _/ 7 _ q'-�7 00033 February 18,1997 Page 2 (Continued) •'�' °' ^" REDU TG ION STRATEGIES Old Vehicle Scrapping - This new strategy, which was included in the City's FY 96/97 Budget to be implemented primary in conjunction with Peak Commute Trip Reduction, if required city ewould contract with a specialized auto we eck ng strategy for compliance with Rule 2202. Simply p company who would purchase the old vehicles, destroy them and prepare the documentation required by SCAQMD. Staff would be The to oversee the such a program tis estimated two page 500. Rule his would drachieve ERTrm once a year to SCAQMD. Th compliance for three years, with would be born in the firs first year because scrapping companies require payment ta cost for three years of compliance for the acquisition and destruction of the required number of vehicles in the first year. Non - General Fund (A 2766) money can be used to pay for this program, but there is not currently a sufficient account balance in the B 2766 fund ($13,924 existing balance) to cover the cost of full implementation of a Old Vehicle Scrapping and, therefore, this option could (likely) impact the City's General Fund. Money could be "loaned" from the General Fund for a year or so to pay for the entire three year program. The General Fund would then be reimbursed when the next years AB 2766 funds were received. It is worth noting, however, that the use of Old Vehicle Scrapping as the sole ERT strategy would not Weolpdreduce c necessarily be from it of El Segundo and the surrounding area as the vehicles removed from the road Air Quality Investment Program - The SCAQMD has established this program as an option for employers who would rather contribute money to SCAQMD instead of implementing local programs. The City could pay SCAQMD $60.00 per year, in lode 0 triennially, of ourmunicipal employees. The City would then have no other responsibilities 0.00 am) -- this would include most under Rule 2202. Thus, virtually no Staff resources would be required for Rule 2202 compliance. SCAQMD, in turn, distributes these funds to other organizations who propose programs to reduce mobile source emissions. With approximately 240 employees reporting to work during the peak window, the City's cost would be $14,400 annually or $30,000 triennially. Staff has been informed by SCAQMD that the guidelines established for the use of AB 2766 funds by SCAQMD, do permit the use of AB 2766 funds to contribute to the Air Quality Investment Program. The City's annual AB 2766 allocation is approximately $16,000. Therefore, General Fund money should = be impacted to implement this strategy. Based on conversations with SCAQMD staff, the City can not stipulate where the money is spent that is contributed to SCAQMD through the Air Quality Investment Program. SCAQMD re- distributes investment funds based on competitive proposal submitted to them by various organizations. Those project with the greatest potential emission reductions, with minimal regard for their location, are generally awarded the funding. The City could apply for these discretionary funds if a specific project were identified that the City desired to implement. It is worth noting that private companies and organizations (i.e. Hughes Aircraft, Northrop- Grumman, El Segundo Employers Association, etc.) may also apply for the AB 2766 discretionary fund grants. Staff reviewed the other emission reduction strategies permitted by Rule 2202, and believes that none would offer the opportunity for complete compliance with Rule 2202. Briefly, for instance, there are not likely to be a sufficient number of older gross polluting vehicles owned by the City and its employees, which could be repaired in a cost effective manner to reduce emissions, to make Remote Sensing a viable option. Coordination of a remote sensing program would require considerable staff resources as well. The immediate replacement of existing City vehicles with Clean On -road Vehicles and Clean Off -road Equipment would be cost prohibitive and interfere with the City's equipment Rule f ld vehicles les wee replaced with strategy, the orn low-emission vehicles could (necesary contribute toward meeting Rule 2202, if o TRIP REDUCTION STRATEGIES Peak Commute Trip Reduction - Of the various trip reduction strategies, Peak Commute Trip Reduction appears to be a viable option for compliance with Rule 2202. A Peak Commute Trip Reduction Program is designed to reduce trips to work by employees during the morning peak congestion period of 6:00 am to 10:00 am by creating incentives for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes. Staff resources administering such a program include conducting an annual employee survey to determine the Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR) to verify if ridesharing has taken place, and record keeping for financial incentives earned by employees who carpool, vanpool, bicycle, walk, or use public transportation to get to work. While not required by Rule 2202, incentives can 00037 February 18,1997 Page 3 (Continued) be financial rewards or non -m -monetary en used as part of additional Pe k Comm Commute Trip Redparticipation ction Program to' encourage program. Financial incentives alternative transportation modes incentives the current and 1past Employee Rideshare fPrograms have nseem ugly work. In El Segundo, financial contributed to the City's AVR increasing ca nin from 1.22 to 1.40 over include pQ incentives attallll. It is coinciding know period without ndesha rideshare employer Commute Trip Reduction Program monetary incentives, full attainment of the City's ERT would be expected to continue. The City may wish to consider suspending financial incentives to determine if they are the primary factor in the AVR's increase, or simply contributory. There are approximately 5 hours contains financ alincentives. of f Over the years Staff 'has developed tracking forms and Trip Reduction Program that procedures to effectively monitor the payment of financial incentives in the City's Employee Rideshare Programs. Partially due to the use of AB 2766 funds to support the Employee Rideshare Program, or any other program, Staff time is required for record keeping to comply with auditing requirements of the use of the funds. As presented at the previous Council meeting, the proposed Employee Rideshare Program contained 18 incentives. As indicated in earlier reports, Staff has reviewed the proposed program and proposed to reduce the number of incentives to the 7 most important strategies to maintain our AVR and reduce City resources that would be required to implement the program. The Rideshare Program is fully supported by non - General Fund AB 2766 money received from the State. The approved budget amount for the rideshare incentives for FY 96/97 is $5,924. Contained in the revised Employee Rideshare Program is a request to increase the rideshare reimbursements by a total of $3,000 for FY 96/97. Increasing the amount of the allowance will encourage more people to participate and provide an incentive that is keeping pace with the increasing costs of fuel and other commuting expenses. It will also help to improve our AVR, which is necessary to maintain compliance with Rule 2202. Rule 2202 is designed with an ERT that increases each year in order to require to be the continuous reduction in mobile source emissions until the region reaches Federal air quality standards projected CONCLUSION: Each of the three strategies which have been rdescribed al level ofStaff used upport, it will place compliance financial on While Old Vehicle Scrapping would require a the City due to its costs. The Air Quality Investment Program would require even less Staff support and should not place a burden on the City's finances. The revised Peak Commute Trip Reduction Program will not require General Fund revenues, but does require minimal Staff resources. The level of Staff support could be reduced from its current level due to the elimination of some of the incentives as described above. If a Peak Commute Trip Reduction Program does not meet the annual ERT, other Rule 2202 strategies, such as Old Vehicle Scrapping, can be used in combination with Peak Commute Trip Reduction to reach the total required ERT. This combination strategy is what was described and budgeted for in FY96/97. Fortunately, due to an increase in the City's AVR, Old Vehicle Scrapping was not necessary this year. Finally, the emission reduction strategies and trip reduction strategies in Rule 2202 do provide the City several different options for achieving compliance and contributing to improved air quality in the region, as well as reducing traffic congestion and air pollution in the City of El Segundo; but, each strategy presents unique challenges to the City to achieve compliance, to keep Staff resources at a minimum, and to protect the General Fund. ADDITION NIL IL NFORMATION: Staff and Council members have met with representatives of SCAQMD to determine the implications and constraints for the City's Rideshare Program posed by Rule 2202, and attended a Legislative Summit at SCAQMD Headquarters to provide input on the future direction of SCAQMD policy and regulations . However, the discussions at the Legislative Summit did not provide specific guidance on the implementation of Rule 2202 by the City. In discussions with SCAQMD, Staff and Council members raised concerns with the emissions associated with Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). SCAQMD currently does not regulate the emissions associated with aircraft operations at the LAX. They have established an Ad -Hoc Committee which is beginning to review the emissions associated with the expansion of LAX. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is also beginning a public consultative process on reducing emissions at airports and marine ports. Staff will monitor the progress of these processes and report to the Council on a regular basis. pArideshar\2202 -5.ais 0 e033 SOUTH COAST. AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT RULE 2202 ON -ROAD MOTOR VEHICLE MITIGATION OPTIONS IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES Deputy Executive Officer Office of Planning, Transportation and Information Management Barry R Wallersteln, D.Env. Transportation Programs Director Office of Planning, Transportation and Information Management Catherine Wasikowski Mobile Sources and Transportation Programs Manager Office of Planning, Transportation and Information Management Laki Tisopulos, Ph.D., P.E. Program Supervisor Office of Planning, Transportation and Information Management Connie Day AUTHOR: SHASHI SINGEETHAM - TRANSPORTATION SPECIAUST REVIEWED BY: BARBARA BAIRD - DISTRICT COUNSEL 1?MAS GL- FINAL.DOC o e o 3 o Chapter I Background L BACKGROUND A. Summary Rule 2202 has been designed to reduce emissions from mobile sources. The rile provides employers with a menu of .options that they can choose from to implement and meet the emission reduction target (ERT) for their worksite. The purpose of this document is to provide guidelines for compliance with the provisions of Rule 2202. The various emissions reduction strategies and trip reduction strategies currently contained in the rule that employers can implement and receive credit towards their ERT's are listed in the Table below. Emission Reduction Strategies • Old Vehicle Scrapping • Clean on -road vehicles • Clean off-road mobile Equipment • Remote Sensing • Other Mobile Source Credit Programs • Air Quality Investment Program • Emission Reduction Credits from Stationary Sources Trip Reduction Strategies • Peak Commute Trip Reduction • Other Work - Related Trip Reduction • Vehicle Miles Traveled OW Programs • Alternative Fuel Vehicles Table I -1: Emission Reduction Options. As an alternative to meeting the ERT at their workmte the rule allows the employers optional implementation of an Employee Commute Reduction Program. Implementation details of this strictly optional program are included in the Employee Commute Reduction Program Guidelines. This document outlines the framework, calculation methodology, and criteria used in determining emission reductions credits and vehicle trip emission credits (VTECs) that can be applied towards meeting emission reduction targets (ERT December 1995 0 001 }0 RULE 2202 Guidelines B. Emission Reduction Target (ER"I) Employers subject to Rule 2202 are required to implement an emission reduction program and meet an annual Emission Reduction Target (ERT) for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), Oxides of Nitiogen (NOx) and Carbon Monoxide (CO). Figure 1 -1 outlines the equation used to determine the emissions reduction target for each pollutant. A complete discussion on emissions reduction is contained in Appendix A- Emission Employee Emission - [VrEC] Reduction Target = " X Reduction Factor Obs / year) Figure I -1. Emissions Reduction Target Determination- For father explanation of the above formula refer to Appendix A C. Pollutants Considered Vehicle trips are responsible for the emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO). Most trip reduction programs reduce emissions by similar relative amounts. Emission reduction strategies, however, aimed primarily at reducing emissions rather than trips, may reduce emissions by differml relative amounts. rRule 22021 design greater to reduce emissions of VOC, NOx, and CO, by an equal achievable through trip reduction. Rule 2202 allows employers to -select and implement a combination of emission reduction strategies and meet the site - specific ERTs for VOC, NO. and CO. December 1995 2 0 ea4 Chapter 11 Emissions Reduction Strategies II. EMISSION REDUCTION STRA'T'EGIES The emission reduction strategies considered in this document include, old vehicle scrapping, clean on -road vehicles, clean off-road vehicles, remote sensing, other mobile source emission credits, emission reduction credits (ERC) from stationary sources and air quality investment, In addition, companies can meet the emission reduction requirements, in whole or in part, by obtaining sufficient VTECs. A. Old Vehicle Scrapping The concept behind old vehicle scrapping programs relies on the disproportionate impact of gross polluting vehicles on air quality Some inventory estimates place responsibility for as much as half of the mobile source emissions on earlier model vehicles, which represent less than one fifth of the overall vehicle population. Substantial emission reductions would therefore be gained by retiring h polluting older vehicles and replacing them with cleaner ones. AQMD adopted Rule 1610 - Old Vehicle Scrapping, on January 8, 1993, as a Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credit ( MSERC) program. Under this rule, amended on October 13, 1995, stationary sources are allowed to purees and scrap pre -'82 vehicles, which meet minimum qualifying criteria, for the purpose of obtaining MSERCs. These MSERCs could then be used to comply with the AQMD's stationary source rules, including RECLAIM and Rule 2202. The MSERCs are issued according to the model year of the vehicles scrapped, with more credits issued for the earliest years (pre -'72). Rule 2202 offers employers the opportunity to obtain VTECs from the implementation of the following optional trip reduction strategies. These VTECs, obtained through peak-commute trip reductions, other work - related trip reduction, alternate fuel vehicle offsets, vehicle miles traveled (VM'1) offsets or employee commute reduction programs, can be applied towards meeting an employer's ERT. The old vehicle scrapping results in different relative emission reductions of VOC, NOx and CO compared to work commute trips. Employers that implement old vehicle scrapping and end up with surplus emission reductions with respect to some of the pollutants can bank these credits for up to five years and use them towards their finure ERT, or trade them to other employers. Alternatively, employers that have a shortfall in meeting their ERTs can purchase surplus MSERCs from other employers. 3 December 1995 OCC'42� RULE 2202 Guidelines . B. Clean On -Road Vehicles Rule 1612 - Credits for Clean On -Road vehicles provides opportunities to generate NOx, VOC, CO, PM10, and Sox mobile source emission credits ( MSERC) that can be used for compliance with District regulations. Employers subject to Rule 2202 can use MSERCs obtained pmt to Rule 1612 towards meeting an emission reduction target. These credits would be generated based on voluntary emission reductions created by the operation of low- or zero- emission on -road vehicles within the boundaries of the �Ddistnf�� re 0� emission reductions beyond those required by local, state C, Clean Off -Road Vehicles Clean Off-Road vehicles may be implemented, in accordance with District Rule 1620 - Credits for Clean off-Road vehicles, to obtain and apply Mobile Source Emission Credits (M SERCs) towards meeting an i emission reduction target. Rule PMIa, and SOx 1620 provides opportunities to generate NOx, VOC, CO, ons. These credits MSERCs that can be used for compliance with District regulati would be generated based on voluntary emission reductions created by the ent within the jurisdiction of operation of low or zero- emission off -mad equipm by local, the District that result in emission reductions beyond those required state, and federal regulations. D. Remote Sensing Remote sensing devices are emissions monitoring devices that are used in conjunction with an emissions limitation standard. Remote sensing can be used to enhance the effectiveness of existing tailpipe standards, and can also be used to identify "gross Polluters-" The emissions reduction potential of this strategy results from the subsequent vehicle maintenance performed on the identified high- improves emitting vehicles. Remote sensing efficiency of inspection maintenance programs. Credit for any improved inspection and maintenance program would have to go beyond the requirements of existing state and federal programs to avoid "double- counting" the emission reductions. Emission reductions generated through the implementation of remote sensing at the employer's worksite as well as other sites can be credited towards the employer's emission reduction target Under Rule 2202, employers are to submit to the AQMD Executive officer, for emissions reduction quantification methodology. The appro� a proposed . Pollutant reductions methodology will include baseline emissions estimates and Po after repair. Employers have � option to either track actual Mileage accumulation or use AQMD prove default annual mileage accumulations by December 1995 4 nCn45 Chapter II Emissions Reduction Strategies vehicle age, to quantify emissions reductions. These are shown in the Table:VI -5 (Appendix B). Post- Repair Miles Emissions Pre - Repair Emission Reductions = Emission Rate - x Travelled (Ibs 1 year) (Ibs 1 mile) Rate (Miles) (Ibs /mile) k' if Pre- Repair = Measured emission rate prior to repair work. Post - Repair = Measured emission rate immediately following repair work - Miles Traveled = Number of miles traveled following repair work until the next regularly scheduled California Inspection and Maintenance Smog Check. Fig II -1. Emission Reduction Generation from Remote Sensing E. Other Mobiile Source Emission Reduction Programs Employers will be able to use MSERCs generated from other future Regulation Xvi_programs towards meeting the ERT for their site. F. Emission Reduction Credits (ERC) from stationary sources Any person may elect to use Emission Reduction Credits (ERC) generated by stationary sources after January 1, 1996, in accordance with the provisions of Regulation X M - New Source Review. Regulation XIII sets forth the requirements that proposed new or modified stationary sources must meet before construction can take place. These requirements are in addition to those specified by other rules and include use of Best Available Control Technology, and use of ERC to offset any emission increases. Employers may reduce emissions through the installation of air pollution control technologies, process modifications, or equipment shutdowns and generate ERCs and apply them towards meeting the ERT for their site or trade them to other employers or stationary sources. G. Air Quality Investment The concept of an air quality investment program is based on relative cost effectiveness. Employers may participate in the air quality investment program by submitting an air quality investment, to be place in a restricted fund as follows: 5 December 1995 �'nn4. RULE 2202 Guidelines (A) Annually submit $60 for each employee reporting to work in the peak window, or - in the peak (B) Triennially submit $ 125 for each employee reporting to window. The AQMD Executive Officer will recommend to the AQMD Governing Board, for approval, on a quarterly basis, the release of monies from the restricted find that achieve equivalent emissions reductions. for emissions reductions programs Proposals for using monies from the restricted find will be accepted by the AQMD Executive Officer on an ongoing basis. The AQMD Executive Officer will determine the amount of mobile source �O� reductions be achieved � demonstrate equivalent emissions reductions by the proposal. The Executive Officer will then recommend the most cost - effective proposals that achieve equivalent mobile source emissions reductions. In addition, the Executive Officer.will recommend that the all beon of ffundn g for proposals that reduce equivalent emissions within each county Proportiol to the contribution level of employers within each county. On a quarterly basis, the Executive Officer will Provide to the AQMD Governing Board a status report on program effectiveness and the balance of monies in the fund. a) Ezample Programs Some of the programs or strategies that could be considered for receiving Rule 2202 Air Quality, Investment Program funding include the following: 1. Transportation Technology Improvements (Vans, Shuttles, Commercial A, Alternative Fuel Vehicle Deployment (V Vehicles, School Buses, etc.) B. Subsidized Alternative Fuel Vehicle In i-astructure 2. Transportation/Transit Improvements A Subsidized Alternative Fuel Shuttle Services B. Subsidized Transit Passes C. Infrastructure Improvements 3 Off -Site Alternative Emissions Reduction Programs A. Remote Sensing 1 Transportation and Transit Improvements can be provided by Transportation Management Associations or Transportation Management Organizations (TMAs/TMOs). December 1995 R OCO45 Chapter ii Emissions Reduction Strategies B. Old Vehicle Scrapping 4. Air Quality Improvement Measures b) Emission Reductions Any proposed program seeking Air Quality Investment program fimdmg should contain an emissions or trip quantification methodology which follows the general format outlined in Appendix A. AQMD will evaluate pro 2sure and they produce emissions or trip reductions that are real, surplus, quantifiable, enforceable. c) Real Reductions "Real" reductions are opposed to accounting, or "paper reductions." The key test in detaining whether a strategy will result in real reductions is in establishing a proper emissions or trip baseline level. If, for example, facility XYZ has reduced emissions in excess of those required by the Emissions Reduction Target (ERT), no "real" reductions will result from the establishment of (ERT) as a performance standard. Therefore, all quantification methodologies will be required to establish a standardized baseline condition, or use a default condition established by the Executive Officer, from which to calculate real emissions or trip reductions. d) Surplus Reductions "Surplus" reductions occur when an action is taken beyond existing and planned regional, state, and federal requirements. Obtaining surplus emission reductions means the benefit of a control strategy is not "double counted." In many cases, the proposed strategy requirements overlap completely with another rule, regulation, statute, or legislation. However, by revising the strategy to become more stringent, the action would become partially creditable, or surplus. To meet this surplus criterion, all quantification methodologies will be required to include a mechanism for subtracting any regulatory overlaps with the standardized baselines established to meet the "real" criterion described earlier. e) Quantifiable Reductions Although TCM strategies involve some degree of variance and uncertainty, creditable actions can be quantified through use of assumptions that are based either on case studies or on transportation supply and demand theories. Each assumption that is used to assign effectiveness or efficiency should be matched with either a case study, or on some measurable parameter. Basic "intuition," especially for indirect actions such as general education, "goodwill," or other December 1995 RULE 2202 Guidelines "good faith efforts," is not sufficient. Quantifiability is the main criterion used to determine the extent of any credit discounting. Those actions which are more easily quantified, with strong assumptions, would have limited discounting applied, while the more "intuitive" actions would need to be discounted to a much greater extent. In addition, each proposed program should include a recordkeeping mechanism for compliance verification, as outlined in Chapter I Any proposed Program may be submitted in combination with other programs, including a remote sensing, old vehicle scrapping, or work - related trip reduction program- December 1995 8 G'C0147 Chapter III Trip Reduction Strategies III, TRIP REDUCTION STRA'T'EGIES Rule 2202 offers employers the opport mitY to obtain VTECs from the implementation of the following optional trip reduction strategies. These VTECs, ob Wned through Peak commute trip reductions, other work - related trip reduction, alternate fuel vehicle offsets, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) offsets or employee commute reduction Programs, can be applied towards meeting an employer's ERT. A. Peak Commute Trip Reductions The main focus of Rule 1501 has been the employee commute trip. Rule 2202 provides the option to obtain credit for reducing such trips. Specifically, employers can reduce trips to work that occur during the morning peak congestion period (or "Peak Window") by creating incentives for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes. VTECs shall be calculated using the formula in Figure M -1. Emasson Factor (EF)1 VTEC = [ Creditable Commute Vehicle Reductions (CCVR) l X ens / year J where CCVR = The daily average of total commute vehicle reductions that are real, surplus, and quantifiable. EF = Emission Factor (Appendix B) Figure III -1. Vehicle Trip Emission Credit Generation for Work-Related Trip Reduction Programs B. Other Work-Related Trip Reductions Employers may receive additional VTECs from employee commute reductions that occur outside of the peak window or from non - commute vehicle usage. VTECs from other work - related Trip Reductions can be calculated using the formula in Figure III -2. The conversion factor is used to convert vehicle trip reductions to commute vehicles reductions and accounts for the return trip home, and includes an additional adjustment to account for other vehicle usage reduction during and outside the peak window. Appendix A contains a complete discussion on the generation of VTECs. Creditable Trip CF Reductions (CTR) I Emission Factor (EF)1 VTEC = J " lbs / year 1 9 December 1995 0 0 0 4 3 RULE 2202 Guidelines where CTR = The daily average of to one-way are real, and quantifiable. A ro m p iconsidered to be two one-way trips CF = 2.0 for A.M. Peak Window 2.3 for Other Trips EF = Emission Factor (Appendix) Figure III -2. Vehicle Trip Emissions Credit Generation for Peak - Commute Trip Reduction Programs C. Alternative Fuel Vehicles Employers may receive VTECs from the use of original equipment (OEM) or from converted natural gas-, methanol -, propane -, or electric fueled vehicles that have been certified and/or approved by the California Air Resources Board to have met the transitional low - emission vehicle (TLEV), low-emission vehicle (LEV), ultra -low- emission vehicle (ULEV), or zero emission vehicle (ZEV) emission standards. Alternative Fuel Vehicle Credit can be obtained for the use of those vehicles for commute as well as other work - related trips according to the following formula and table: Vr(N :(EF)I+ IVT(Ps)x0.80x(EF)]+ VT(ZEVs)x(EF)1 VTEC = [ Cormrsion Factor (CF) J Where VT(GN�) = Number of Vehicle Trips from eempFessed natural gas vehicles VT(Ms) = Number of Vehicle Trips from flexible fuel vehicles operated by Methanol VT(Ps) = Number of Vehicle Trips from Propane 9r LPG Vehicles VT(ZEVs) = Number of Vehicle Trips from Zero- Emission Vehicles VT = Vehicle Trips EF = Emission Factor (Table B-4) CF = 2.0 for AM Peak Window Trips; and 2.3 for other trips Figure 111-3. VTEC Generation from the use of alternative Fuel Vehicles. As an alternative to tracking vehicle trips for VTEC generation, employers can track Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) by the vehicle and use a default average trip length of (15) miles per trip to convert VMT to vehicle Trips (VT). December 1995 10 0Un04 D Chapter III Trip Reduction Strategies D. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Programs Employers may elect to implement VMT reduction programs and receive VTECs toward their ERT. Reduction of annual employee commute VMT that may result from employment center relocation, video - conference centers, telecommuting centers or other alternative programs approved by the Executive Officer or designee. The Executive Officer shall not approve any VTEC program for VMT reduction unless it includes baseline VMT estimates and demonstrates that VMT reductions result in quanti5able, and surplus emission reductions. See Appendix- B formulas required for these calculations. L Parldng Cash -Oat Program Employers may elect to implement a Parking Cash -Out Program to reduce employee commutes and receive VTEC toward meeting their ERT. Parking Cash -Out is a program where an employer offers to provide a cash allowance to an employee equivalent to the parking subsidy that the employer would otherwise pay to provide the employee with a parking space. VTEC calculation formula for this program is same as the one used for Other Work - Related Trip Reductions F. Employee Commute Reduction Programs Details of this exemption are provided elsewhere in a companion guidance document titled "Employee Commute Reduction Program Guidelines." 11 December 1995 C, 0 1 J a Chapter IV Program Administration IV. pROGRAM ADNIINISTRATION A. Registration Companies participating in the On -Road Vehicle Emissions Mitigation Options program required by proposed Rule 2202 are required to notify the AQMD of which option or options are selected through registration. Company registration serves the purpose of both notifying the AQMD of the intent to implement options provided in the program, and also serves to identify the goals of the chosen options, including any demonstrations required. Registration shall be renewed annually. B. Registration Form Companies should identify which options will be used to attain their emissions reduction target (ERT). The notification must include information which identifies the company and the worksites affected by the emissions reduction program, including the number of employees reporting to the worksite during the morning peak congestion period and the total employee count at the worksite. C. VTEC Calculations Employers claiming VTECs from the implementation of the optional Vehicle Trip Reduction strategy shall include as a part of their registration all VTEC calculations. All supporting documents shall be maintained on site for three years. Emission factors (i.e.; pounds of pollutant per vehicle -year) to be used in the calculations are provided in this document D. Air Quality Investment AQMD Executive Officer will determine the amount of mobile source emissions for air quality investment programs when proposals are submitted for approval. Individual companies seeking this safe harbor alternative are not responsible for demonstrating emissions reduction equivalency; they are only responsible for keeping records of employment, and of "in -lieu fee" submittal. 13 December 1995 0 o o 5 i RULE 2202 Guidelines E. Recordkeeping The enforceability component of the On -Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options program requires that all records, sufficient to demonstrate compliance, be maintained by participating companies for a period of no less than three (3) years and made available to the AQMD upon request in order to determine compliance. Specifically, participating companies should maintain a copy of the following records: Registration Form VTEC data and calculations Fee Form F. Compliance Compliance with an alternative emission reduction program will be determined through an employer review process conducted by the AQMD. Compliance requirements for the "Employee Commute Reduction" exemption are included in an independent guidance document. Examples of violations of Rule 2202 would include: failure to maintain records; fabrication of records; or failure to obtain the amount of VTECs or emissions reductions identified as part of the company's registration submittal. In addition, failure to submit air quality investment "in -lieu" fees would be constituted as a violation of Rule 2202 for employers selecting this option. December 1995 14 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EMPLOYEE RIDESHARE PROGRAM Prepared by Paul Garry, Assistant Planner Sara R. Mosleh, Assistant Planner December 3, 1996 City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo CA 90245 (310) 322 -4670 RDESHARE -\Fft, Keep El Segundo Moving 0C)r.5 Year: 1996 Page.l of CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EMPLOYEE RIDESHARE PROGRAM A. Nam&Mtle of Incentive r RIDESHARE ALLOWANCE New 13 Current /Unchanged 13 Revised ul B. What Transportation Mode(s) are impacted by this incentive? Description of incentive. Carpooling WaUdng Varpooling Bicycling Transit (bus/rail) Not Applicable C. Description of incentive: The objective of this program is to give recognition to those City employees who rideshare. Employees who carpool, vanpool, walk, and bicycle will receive a financial reward for each day they carpool. There will no longer be a minimum number of 3 days a week. This program will award employees with financial compensation for ridesharing occasionally and consistently. The cash award is based on the number of week days per month one rideshares and the distance from work one rideshares. The program has been redesigned to encourage a reduction in Vehicles Miles Traveled (VMT) and provide additional motivation for the long distance commuter to rideshare. Five zones have been established, based on zip codes, with radii of approximately 7.5, 15, 25, and 40 miles. Carpools within the first zone will receive $1.00 per day. The second zone is worth $1.25 per day; the third is worth $1.50 and the fourth zone is worth $1.75. Carpoolers in the fifth and farthest zone will receive $2.00 for each day. Carpools with three occupants will receive a bonus of $0.50 per day per employee. Carp000ls with four or more occupants will also be eligible for a $0.25 per occupant bonus in addition to the $0.50 bonus. The allowance will be awarded to employees quarterly through payroll. D. Monitoringrrracking Claim forms Driver's or operators records Parking permit distribution Other E. Monetary Value: minimum F. Monthly Participation: Current Participants G. Implementation schedule: This incentive will be Time cards or other forms of self- reporting El Parking lot or building entry checkpoint El Electronic badges Observation (e,g, bike rack counts, reserved perking $ 40.0 per month (range) maTimum 36 Target Participation 65 implemented no later than L. �� days after plan approval. 0ClC1) i Year 1996 Page 2, of t CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EMPLOYEE R.IDESHARE PROGRAM A. Name/Title of Incentive I TRANSIT ALLOWANCE New 11 Current/Unchanged @ Revised E] B. What Transportation Mode(s) are impacted by this incentive? Description of incentive. Carpooling Walling Vanpooling Bicycling Transit (bus/rail) Not Applicable C. Description of incentive: This program is designed to encourage City employees to take advantage of all the public transportation services, including new commuter rail services that are becoming operational, as an alternative means of traveling to work. This includes the Metro Rail Blue Line, Green Line (when operational), and Metrolink lines. The City's Employee Transportation Coordinators will work with the Metropolitan Transit Authority, Torrance Transit, MAX Commuter Express, and the City's Dial -A -Ride Program staff, as well as other transportation agencies, to provide City employees with discounts on bus passes. The City will offer a subsidy payment for h& the cost of an employee's monthly public transportation costs to and from work. This includes regular MTA monthly passes, express bus stickers, Metro Rail passes, and Metrolink rail passes. Eligible employees will receive this allowance based on the following criteria: 1. An employee must ride the bus to and from work at least 3 times a week or 60% of ones working days for one consecutive month. 2. Regular MTA bus passes should be purchased through the Finance Department. Employees will have to submit receipts to the Employee Transportation Coordinator from other transit operators in order to be reimbursed through petty cash. D. Monitoring/Tracking @ Claim forms Time cards or other forms of self - reporting 0 Driver's or operators records Parking lot or building entry checkpoint 0 Parking permit distribution Electronic badges 0 Other 0 Observation (e,g, bike rack counts, reserved parking) E. Monetary Value: $ 21.00 $ 80.00 per month (range) minimum mazimum F. Monthly Participation: Current Participants U Target Participation G. Implementation Schedule: This incentive will be implemented no later than © days after plan approval. aeo55 Year. 1996 Pw-j of Z CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EMPLOYEE RIDESSARE PROGRAM A. Name/Title of Incentive I AWARD ANM RECOGNITION PROGRAM New ❑ Current/Unchanged to Revised ❑ B. What Transportation Mode(s) are impacted by this incentive? Description of incentive. Carpooling Wallrin Vanpooling Bicycling Transit (bus/rail) Not :applicable C. Description of incentive: This program will recognize employees for their participation and contribution to the rideshare program. Cash or prizes will be awarded up to $25.00. A drawing will be held every month with prizes for those who are enrolled in the various incentive programs. Employees who carpool, bicycle, walk, vanpool, bus, and shuttle on a occasional and consistent basis as an alternative to the solo driving commute will be eligible for this program. D. Monitoring/Tracking ❑ Claim forms Time cards or other forms of self- reporting ❑ Driver's or operators records ❑ Pa.-k .g lot or building entry checkpoint ❑ Parking permit distribution ❑'^nic badges ❑ Other ❑ Observation (e,g, bike rack counts, reserved parking) E. Monetary Value: (' $ s (_� per month (range) minimum wsxw� F. Monthly Participation: Current Participants C� Target Participation 12 G. Implementation Schedule: This incentive will be implemented no later than days after plan approval. 0 0055 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EMPLOYEE RIDESHARE PROGRAM AL B. C. Name/Title of BUCK -A -BIKE PROGRAM Incentive New [:] CurrentfUnchanged ❑ Revised What Transportation Mode(s) are impacted by this incentive? Description of incentive. Carpooling Walking Vanpooling Bicycling Transit (bus/rail) Not Applicable Description of incentive: Year: 1996 PSV.L oft 1:4 In an effort to reduce the number of motorized vehicles arriving at City worksites, the City will sell bicycles to employees to use as an alternative commute mode. The City will sell impounded bicycles, for the sum of $1.00 to employees who commit to cycling to work an average of three days per week for a minimum of six months. Ownership of the bicycle will be transferred to the employee once he/she has participated in the Buck -A -Bike program by riding to work a minimum of 72 days. The purpose of the Buck -A -Bike Program is to motivate employees to ride a bicycle to work without the expense of purchasing a bicycle. The program will encourage employees not to drive automobiles for local trips during the work day to help improve air quality. D. MonitoringArracking minimum F. Monthly Participation: Current Participants: $ 45.00 per bike (range) • maammn Target Participants G. Implementation Schedule: This incentive will be implemented no later than 90 days after plan approval. • (includes repair costs) 0 005 7 Claim forms n Time cards or other forms of self- reporting Driver's or operators records 0 Parking lot or building entry checkpoint Parking permit distribution o Electronic badges 0 Other Observation (e,g, bike rack counts, reserved parking) E. Monetary Value: minimum F. Monthly Participation: Current Participants: $ 45.00 per bike (range) • maammn Target Participants G. Implementation Schedule: This incentive will be implemented no later than 90 days after plan approval. • (includes repair costs) 0 005 7 Year: 19% Page-L of-L CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EMPLOYEE RIDESHARE PROGRAM A. Name/Title of Incentive GUARANTEED RIDE HOME PROGRAM New El Current/Unchanged 5a Revised B. What Transportation Mode(s) are impacted by this incentive? Description of incentive. Carpooling Walking Vanpooling Bicycling Transit (bustrail) Not Applicable C. Description of incentive: In order to support the City's efforts to promote carpooling and vanpooling, the City will offer emergency rides home to those employees who carpool and vanpool. The City will provide vouchers to be used for taxicabs or rental car for those who live out of town and the City's Dial -A -Ride service will be utilized for employees who live in El Segundo. The City will pay the full cost for three emergency rides per year per employee. The employee will have to reimburse the City if additional vouchers are required. D. Monitoring/Tracking Claim forms Driver's or operators records 0 Parking permit distribution n Other E. Monetary Value: minimum F. Monthly Participation: Current Participants G. Implementation Schedule: This incentive will be Time cards or other forms of self - reporting Parking lot or building entry checkpoint Electronic badges D Observation (e,g, bike rack counts, reserved parking) $ 15 per month (range) maximum 1 J Target Participation implemented no later than t J days after plan approval. (1(�n� 5 Year: 1996 Paged oft CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EMPLOYEE RIDESHARE PROGRAM A. Name/'lmtle of Incentive I COMPRESSED WORK WEEK SCHEDULES New 0 Current/Unchanged W Revised ❑ B. What Transportation Mode(s) are impacted by this incentive? Description of incentive. Carpooling Walking Vanpooling Bicycling Transit (bus/rail) Not Applicable C. Description of incentive: The objective of this program is to reduce the number of days per week some employees report to work by extending the employee's hours worked per day. Work schedules which would create this reduction are 9/80 and 4/40 plans. The 9/80 plan requires the employee to work 8 nine -hour days and 1 eight -hour day during the two week pay period with the tenth day off. The 4/40 plan requires the employee to work 4 ten hour days per week with one day off during the week. In both plans the day off does not have to be the last day of the week or pay period. The City has provided its management and supervisory staff with information on compressed work schedules. Each department has been asked to allow employees to utilize a compressed work week schedule whenever feasible. D. Monitoringfrracking U Claim forms o Driver's or operators records El Parking permit distribution Other E. Monetary Value: minimum [0 Time cards or other forms of self- reporting El Parking lot or building entry checkpoint Electronic badges Observation (e,g, bike rack counts, reserved parking) $ L _�� per month (range) maximum F. Monthly Participation: Current Participants 9/80: 39* Target Participation 9/80: 40 Current Participants 4/10: 28* Target Participation 4/10: 25 G. Implementation Schedule: (�n This incentive will be implemented no later than �� days after plan approval. * The City's 54 firefighters work ten 24 hour shift per month but are not credited because only 9/80, 4140, and 3/36 schedules are recognized for compressed work week credit. 0C, 050 Year: 1996 PaeqL of Z CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EMPLOYEE RIDESHARE PROGRAM A. Name/Title of Incentive PREFERENTIAL PARHING PROGRAM New 11 Current(Unchanged @ Revised 0 B. What Transportation Mode(s) are impacted by this incentive? Description of incentive. Carpooling Walking Vanpooling Bicycling Transit (bustrail) Not Applicable C. Description of incentive: Preferential parking has been established to provide reserved, close parking for carpoolers and vanpoolers. There are currently 11 spaces designated as reserved for carpoolers and vanpoolers. As the need develops, the City will continue to establish reserved parking for carpoolers and vanpoolers. D. Monitoring/Tracking E F. G. Claim forms Time cards or other forms of self- reporting Driver's or operators records Parking lot or building entry checkpoint rt Parking permit distribution Electronic badges El Other Observation (ex, bike rack counts, reserved parking) Monetary Value: $ C� $ per month (range) minimum maximum Monthly Participation: Current preferential parking spaces available: Current Participants: Carpool: 11 Vanpools: Target Participation: Carpool: 30 Van poo ls: I- i Implementation Schedule: r This incentive will be implemented no later than C� days after plan approval. 0 00 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 18, 1997 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration by the City Council to take a voluntary act related to the City's hiring and contracting practices. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: The Council may act to state its direction to hire employees based upon their qualifications only as stated by the City's Merit System and in accordance with state and federal anti- discrimination laws and contract with the lowest responsible bidder unless required by state or federal regulations to consider other qualifications. Attached is a Resolution to accomplish this voluntary act. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: On November 5, 1996, the voters enacted Proposition 209 which was labeled by its sponsors as the California Civil Rights Initiative." On November 6, 1996, actions were filed with various courts to implement Prop 209 and to stop the implementation of Prop 209. At its December 4, 1996 meeting the City Council instructed the city attorney to prepare an ordinance enacting the language of Prop 209 into law in the City at its January 21, 1997 meeting or as soon thereafter as the city attorney could issue a legal opinion about such an ordinance. DISCUSSION: On December 23, 1996, Judge Thelton Henoerson or the unaeo estates uisu ;L ;-.uw t ul t1 lu Northern District issued a Preliminary Injunction enjoining defendants Governor Pete Wilson, Attorney General Dan Lungren and the University of California from enforcing or implementing Prop 209. As the result of an Order Certifying Defendant Class also acted upon by Judge Henderson, the City of El Segundo and all other public agencies in the state are prohibited from enforcing or implementing Prop 209. Judge Henderson goes on in his ruling to state the following . "The aforesaid preliminary injunction shall not preclude the following: 1. all defendants, including members of the defendant class, from identifying, reviewing and analyzing existing affirmative action programs.ss ss The preliminary injunction does not, of course, interfere with the ability of any defendant or member of the defendant class to voluntarily adopt, retain, amend or repeal an affirmative action program. It does preclude any defendant or member of the defendant class from taking any action with respect to an affirmative action program in order to enforce, implement, or otherwise comply with, Proposition 209." Accordingly, if the City Council desires to voluntarily state its position that the City's Merit System of employment be the criteria for hiring and that the lowest responsible bidder be awarded contracts except for those where the state or federal government mandates to the contrary, it can do so. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Relevant portion of Preliminary Injunction Resolution # FISCAL IMPACT: (Check one) Operating Budget: Capital Improv Amount Requested: Project/Account Budget: Budget: Project/Account Balance: Date: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required - Yes_ No ORIGINATED: James W. Morrison, City Manager Mark Hensley, City Attorney BY: TAKEN: uate: January Zr, -I yaI Date: 97 - /z- y7 0 C,, 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 r 28 k. and give clear guidance with respect to Proposition 209. This request, of course, is neutral with respect to the granting or denial of the present motion. Nonetheless, the Court believes the preservation of the pre - election status quo not only serves the public need for plain guidance, but also harmonizes that interest with the compelling interest in remedying discrimination that underlies existing constitutionally - permissible state - sponsored affirmative action programs threatened by Proposition 209. VL CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, this Court rules that: (1) Plaintiffs have standing to' bring this action. (2) Plaintiffs have demonstrated a probability of success on-their claimthat Proposition 209 violates the Fourteenth Amendment's . equal protection guarantee to full participation in the political life of the community. (3) Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on their claim that Proposition 209 violates the Supremacy Clause because it conflicts with, and thus is preempted by, Titles VI and IX of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. (4) Plaintiffs have demonstrated a likelihood of success on their claim that Proposition 209 violates the Supremacy Clause because it conflicts with, and thus is preempted by, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, It. (5) Plaintiffs have demonstrated that a preliminary injunction is necessary to protect the plaintiff class from the possibility of irreparable injury. - Accordingly, and good cause appearin& it is HEREBY ORDERED pursuant to FED. R. Ctv. P. 65 that defendants Governor Pete Wilson and Aumey General Dan Lu ngren and all members of the defendant class that they represent, and their officers, agentk servants, employees and attorney and. those in active; concert or participation with them, are resaWned and egjohwd. pig trial or 6S OCL6 "Is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 is 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 iA E3 final judgment in this action, from implementing or enforcing Proposition 209 insofar as said amendment to the Constitution of the State of California purports to prohibit or affect affirmative action programs in public employment. public education or public contracting. The aforesaid preliminary injunction shall not preclude the following: 1. all defendants, including members of the defendant class, from identifying, reviewing and analyzing existing affirmative action programs." 2. all defendants, including members of the defendant class, from defending private actions seeking remedies under Article 1, section 31 of the California Constitution. 3. proceedings in pending state court actions related to Article 1, section 31, including, Wilson v. State Personnel Bd. Sacramento County Superior Court No. 96 CS01092 and Californians Against Discrimination and Preferences. Inc. v. The Bd of Governors of the Calif. Community Colleges, Sacramento County Superior Court, No. 96 CS030.10, and " The preliminary i iunctioo does not, of course, interfere with the abdity of any defendant or member of the defendant class to vnlwrtcaily adopt, retain, -mead or repeal an - native action progmm. It does preclude any defendant or member of the defendant cim from tiilong any action with respect to an aff native action program in order to ai&M implemart, or odwrwiw comply with. Proposition 209. '� 0r" ICI 6IS 1 -.A RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ADOPTING AN EMPLOYMENT AND PUBLIC CONTRACTING POLICY WHEREAS, the City of El Segundo currently has a merit based hiring ordinance (No.586) which was passed by the citizens of El Segundo on April 10, 1962; WHEREAS, the City of El Segundo does not currently have an affirmative action program with respect to hiring; WHEREAS, the City of El Segundo is desirous of complying with all state and federal laws with respect to receiving federal and state public contract funds; WHEREAS, the City of el Segundo is desirous of voluntarily adopting an employment and public contracting policy; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of El Segundo does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. Unless otherwise required by federal or state law, the City of El Segundo in its hiring and public contracting practices shall not discriminate or grant preferential treatment on the basis of race, sex, color, age, religion, sexual orientation, disability, ethnicity or national origin. ection 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this resolution; shall enter the same in the book of original resolutions of the City of El Segundo; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption hereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council, in the minutes of the meeting of which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of . 1997. Attested: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney LAX2:173396.1 Sandra Jacobs, Mayor OC' 64 FB i 01 t ! M 1 21 1, MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL February 4, 1997 - 5:00 P.M. CALLED TO ORDER at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Jacobs. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE led by Mayor Sandra Jacobs ROLL CALL Mayor Jacobs Present Mayor ProTem Wemick Present Councilwoman Friedkin Present Councilman Weston Present Councilman Gordon Present PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Only - 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total.) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalyof another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council. Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250. One Individual addressed the City Council. Gerhardt VanDrie, resident complained about mail delivery and commented on complaints made to the Postal Master. He asked Council for assistance in clearing up the situation of not getting their mail. CLOSED SESSION: The City Council moved into a closed session at 5:15 p.m. pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code §54950, et se g.) for the purposes of conferring with the City's Real Property Negotiator, and /or conferring with the City Attorney on potential and /or existing litigation; and /or discussing matters covered under Gov't Code §54957 (Personnel); and /or conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators as follows: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) None CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov't Code §54956.9(a)) City of El Segundo v. LAX, LASC Case No. BC 130859 (RSI) Coalition for Economic Equity (CEE) v. Pete Wilson, et al., C96 -4024 TEH Bue et al v. City of El Segundo, LASC Case No. BC137060 Siadek et al . City of El Segundo, LASC Case No. YCO25264 Rinebold /Hawk v. City of El Segundo, LASC Case No. YCO25220 Shapiro v. Burris, LASC Case No. BC152859 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov't Code §54956.9(b): -2- potential cases (no further public statement is required at this time); Initiation of litigation pursuant to Gov't Code §54956.9(c): -2- matters. DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS (Gov't Code §54957). None CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR - (Gov't Code §54957.6) - Selection of Negotiator. REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required) PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Oniv - 5 minute limit) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf cf their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council. Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250. NONE ADJOURNED at 7:00 P.M. Lora Freeman, Deputy City Clerk 00065 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1997 - 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Jacobs at 7:10 P.M. INVOCATION - Rev. Dr. J. H. Greer - Pacific Baptist Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Councilman Mike Gordon CHARACTER COUNTS - "Trustworthiness' - Mayor Sandra Jacobs ROLL CALL Mayor Jacobs Present Mayor ProTem Wernick Present Councilwoman Friedkin Present Councilman Weston Present Councilman Gordon Present PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Only - 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council. Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250. Three (3) individuals addressed Council 1. Nancy Cobb presented the Chamber of Commerce - Request for continuation of the Heritage Walk Bench Program pursuant to guidelines established by Recreation & Parks Department and approved by the City Council on May 7, 1996. (Copy of guidelines included). MOVED by Councilwoman Friedkin SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Wernick to approve the request for continuation of the Heritage Walk Bench Program pursuant to all but number 5 guidelines established by Recreation & Parks Department and approved by the City Council on May 7, 1996. MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE. AYES: MAYOR PROTEM WERNICK, COUNCILWOMAN FRIEDKIN. NOES: MAYOR JACOBS, COUNCILMAN GORDON, AND COUNCILMAN WESTON 2/3 MOVED by Councilwoman Friedkin SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Wernick to approve the request for continuation of the Heritage Walk Bench Program pursuant to guidelines established by Recreation & Parks Department and approved by the City Council on May 7, 1996. MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE AYES: MAYOR JACOBS, COUNCILMAN GORDON, AND COUNCILMAN WESTON. NOES: MAYOR PROTEM WERNICK, AND COUNCILWOMAN FRIEDKIN 3/2 2 Jack Kenton, 835 Dune; spoke regarding the lack of maintenance on the hyperion landscaping along the dunes. 1 00 3 John McCarty, resident; spoke regarding Boeing Co. decision not to produce the "super Jumbo" airliner and the consequences on the airport. A. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS 1. Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on this Agenda by title only. MOVED by Councilwoman Friedkin SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Wemick to approve reading all ordinances and resolution on this agenda by title only. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0. B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS - 1. Continued Public Hearing to review environmental impacts of the use of Hydrogen and Compressed Dry Air (CDA) in pipelines to be constructed in the public right -of -way on Grand Avenue and Kansas Street in conjunction with a Nitrogen gas and other Pipeline License Agreement approved by the Council on October 1, 1996, and on private property at 222, 233 and 330 Kansas Street and 1521 East Grand Avenue. (Environmental Assessment EA -397). Applicant: Air Products, Inc. Mayor Jacobs announced this wail a public hearing to review environmental impacts of the use of Hydrogen and Compressed Dry Air (CDA) in pipelines to be constructed in the public right -of -way on Grand Avenue and Kansas Street in conjunction with a Nitrogen gas and other Pipeline License Agreement approved by the Council on October 1, 1996, and on private property at 222, 233 and 330 Kansas Street and 1521 East Grand Avenue, (Environmental Assessment EA -397), Applicant: Air Products, Inc.. She asked whether proper noticing was done in a timely manner and whether any written communications had been received. Clerk Mortesen stated noticing was done by the Planning and Building Safety Department and no written communications had been received by the Clerk's Office. Bret Bernard, Director of Planning and Building Safety, and Steve Tsumura Fire Department gave a brief staff report. Mayor Jacobs oper..ed the public hearing for comments. No individuals addressed Council Council consensus to close the Public Hearing. City Attorney Mark Hensley read the following: RESOLUTION NO. 3997 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA -397, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, TO ALLOW THE USE OF PIPELINES FOR HYDROGEN GAS AND COMPRESSED DRY AIR AT 222, 233, AND 330 KANSAS STREET, AND 1521 EAST GRAND AVENUE. MOVED by Councilman Weston SECONDED by Councilwoman Friedkin to adopt Resolution no. 3997 2 0067 approving Environmental Assessment EA -397, certifying a mitigated negative declaration of environmental, impacts and adopting a mitigation monitoring program, to allow the use of pipeline for hydrogen gas and compressed dry air. MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE AYES: MAYOR JACOBS, MAYOR PROTEM WERNICK, COUNCILWOMAN FRIEDKIN AND COUNCILMAN WESTON. NOES: COUNCILMAN GORDON 4/1 2. Public Hearing and Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the construction of a 20 -inch nominal diameter, high density polyethylene, subsurface pipeline in the Open Space (OS) zone; to transfer digester gas produced at the City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant to jthe City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Scattergood Steam Generating Station, where it will be used to produce energy (EA -379, CUP 96 -2). Mayor Jacobs stated this is the time and place hereto fixed for a public hearing and appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a 20 -inch nominal diameter, high density polyethylene, subsurface pipeline in the Open Space zone; to transfer digester gas produced at the City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant to the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Scattergood Steam Generating Station, where it will be used to produce energy. She asked whether proper noticing was done in a timely manner and whether any written communications had been received. Clerk Mortesen stated noticing was done by the Planning and Building Safety Department and no written communications had been received by the Clerk's Office. MOVED by Mayor ProTem Wernick SECONDED by Councilwoman Friedkin to continue to public hearing, per the applicant's amended request, to the regular City Council meeting of March 18, 1997. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 3. Public Meeting concerning proposed fees for Industrial Waste, Underground Tanks, and Hazardous Waste Regulatory programs (fiscal impact - estimated $60,565.14 increased annual revenue). Mayor Jacobs stated this is the time and place hereto fixed for a Public Meeting concerning proposed fees for Industrial Waste, Underground Tanks, and Hazardous Waste Regulatory programs. She asked if proper notice of the public meeting was done and if any written communications had been received. Clerk Mortesen stated proper noticing was done the Public Works Department and now written communications had been received. Jim Morrison, City Manager, gave a brief staff report MOVED by Councilwoman Friedkin SECONDED by Councilman Gordon to close the public meeting. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Assume responsibi;;ity for underground tank and hazardous waste regulatory programs. 3 0 006 S a . . City Attorney Marl, Hensley read the following: ORDINANCE NO. 1264 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 6.22 (UNIFIED HAZARDOUS WASTE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL MANAGEMENT REGULATORY PROGRAM) TO TITLE 6 (HEALTH AND SANITATION OF THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE, AND DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE AS THE CERTIFIED UNIFIED PROGRAM AGENCY FOR A STATE - MANDATED UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK REGULATORY PROGRAM. MOVED by Councilwoman Friedkin SECONDED by Councilman Gordon to adopt Ordinance No. 1264, Adding Chapter 6.22 (Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous material management regulatory program) to Title 6, and designating the City Manager or his designee as the certified unified program agency for a state - mandated underground storage tank regulatory program. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. S/0 D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 1. Park Vista Management Peter Freeman, and Keith Covington of the Senior Housing Board presented a brief report. MOVED by Mayor ProTem Wernick SECONDED by Councilwoman Friedkin to approve the addendum to the Management Agreement, to approve the funds in the budget to cover till December 31, 1997, and direct the Board and Staff to develop a new RFP for Park Vista Management MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE S/0 E. CONSENT AGENDA All items listed are to be adopted by one motion without discussion and passed unanimously. If a call for discussion of an item is made, the item(s) will be considered individually under the next heading of business. Warrant Numbers 236302- 236439 on Demand Register Summary Number 29 in total amount of $148,535.11. 2. Warrant Numbers :236440- 236564 on Demand Register Summary Number 30 in total amount of $123,014.19, and Wire Transfers in the amount of $307,659.59. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCILMAN WESTON 4. Amend the minute;; of December 17, 1996 to reflect the correct Ordinance Number of 1266. 5. PULLED FOR DLiCUSSION BY COUNCILMAN GORDON 4 0006'1 6. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY MAYOR PROTEM WERNICK. 7. Acceptance of furnishing and installing a 3rd pump and engine for storm drain pumping plant No. 17, Project No. PW95 -10. (Final contract amount $241,284). 8. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY MAYOR PROTEM WERNICK MOVED by Councilwoman Friedkin SECONDED by Mayor Pro Tern Wernick to approve consent agenda items 1, 2, 4, and 7. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA 3. City Council meeting minutes of January 21 and January 22, 1997. Councilman Weston requested that a name be added after Councilwoman on page one of the January 21, 1997 5:00 P.M. minutes. MOVED by Councilman Weston, SECONDED by Councilwoman Friedkin to approve the minutes of January 21, and 22, 1997 with corrections. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 5. Grant application to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) for additional funds for the Sepulveda Boulevard Widening Project (grant amount: $1.2 million). Councilman Gordon requested information on how the grant monies were to be spent. MOVED by Councilman Gordon SECONDED by Councilman Weston to approve of submitting a grant application for funds for the Sepulveda Boulevard widening project. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 6. Monthly lease agreement between the City of El Segundo and Emery Air Freight Corporation to lease a portion of City property at 630 South Douglas Street. (Annual revenue of $22,280.04). Mayor ProTem Wernick requested if more income could be received for this property. MOVED by Councilman Weston SECONDED by Councilwoman Friedkin to approve Contract no. 2488, a lease agreement between the City of El Segundo, and Emery Air Freight Corporation. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 8. Disposition of the $1,012,298 out -of -court settlement from LAX Mayor ProTem Wernick requested the staff to work with the Council Liaison to develop a report on alternatives for discussion and action MOVED by Councilman Weston SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Wernick to direct the staff to develop a report on alternatives for discussion at the February 18, 1997 meeting. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 F. NEW BUSINESS - CITY MANAGER 1. Presentation relative to LAX Master Plan Alternatives. City Manager Jim Morrison gave a brief presentation. 5 00070 Public Comments: 1. Nancy Rapp, 323 Virginia Street; stated at previous LAX meeting questions were not answered, and asked the Council when will the City step in and demand answers and demand some level of accountability from the airport. 2. Doug Mier, 1506 E. Palm; spoke as a City of Los Angeles Employee and his dealing with the Hyperion and LAX, and emphasizes his concerns for the Council to consider and demand accountability. 3 Bill Manning, 309 W. Sycamore; advised Council to take advantage of the recent airport decision to extract penalties and ensure compliance with the airport. 4. Liz Garnholtz, resident; thanked residents who participated and presented new views and ideas. 5. Mark Rener, 1212 E., Walnut; stated El Segundo need to take care of itself and the people must be involved. 6. Resident; encouraged people to attend and reported on what citizens response was to this meeting. Council needs to let the community know where they stand. 5. Frank Wong, resident; spoke regarding the LAX Master Plan and Pollution related problems. 2. Amendment to contract between the Board of Administration of the Public Employees Retirement System and the City Council of the City of El Segundo, providing Section 21573 (Third Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits) for local Fire members as required by the El Segundo Firefighters Association 1996 -97 Memorandum of Understanding. Fiscal Impact: The current surplus of assets in this benefit account is projected by PERS to be sufficient to pay the employer cost for 13 years. City Attorney Mark Hensley read the following: RESOLUTION NO. 3998 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC' EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO MOVED by Mayor ProTem Wernick SECONDED by Councilman Gordon to adopt Resolution No. 3998 approving an amendment to contract between the Board of Administration of the Public Employee' Retirement system and the City Council of the City of El Segundo. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE VO City Attorney Mark Hensley read the following: j ORDINANCE NO. 1267 AN ORDINANCN OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF 6 0007i DRAFT THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Mayor ProTem Wernick introduced the Ordinance MOVED by Mayor ProTem Wernick SECONDED by Councilwoman Friedkin to direct the Mayor to sign the Agreement pooling 1959 Survivor Benefits Assets and Liabilities. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 50 3. Staff requests Council guidance regarding an application for 80% MTA grant funding for a bicycle station at the Nash Street Green Line Station. Bret Bernard, Director of Planning and Building Safety gave a brief report. MOVED by Councilman Weston SECONDED by Councilwoman Friedkin to direct staff to apply of 80% grant funding for a bicycle station at the Nash Street Green Line Station, and accept the grant only if Business will provide the other 20 % funding. MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE. AYES; MAYOR JACOBS, COUNCILMAN GORDON, COUNCILWOMAN FRIEDKIN, AND COUNCILMAN WESTON. NOES: MAYOR PROTEM WERNICK 4/1 4. Consideration by the City Council to take a voluntary act related to the City's hiring and contracting practices. City Manager requested this item be withdrawn. G. NEW BUSINESS - CITY ATTORNEY - NONE H. NEW BUSINESS - CITY CLERK - 1. Consideration of a Resolution and letter in support of "California First" sponsored by the Legislative Subcommittee of the Southern California Association of Governments. City Attorney Mark Hensley read the following: RESOLUTION NO. 3999 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA SUPPORTING THE "CALIFORNIA FIRST" LEGISLATIVE LEADERSHIP SUMMIT Council consensus to adopt Resolution No. 3999 supporting the "California First " Legislative Leadership Summit, an approve of a letter in support being sent to our legislators. I. NEW BUSINESS - CITY TREASURER - NONE J. NEW BUSINESS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCILMEMBERS 0 0 r:1 Councilman Gordon - Thanked the public for their participation and encourage everyone to attend the LAX Meeting February 5, 1997 Councilman Weston - Requested to agendize the aero space study regarding pollution for the next meeting Councilwoman Friedkin - Reported on the meeting she attended, and spoke regarding the upcoming LAX Master Plan Meeting. Mayor Pro Tern Wernick - Request to agendize a follow -up on the LA County grant of $74,000 for parks, and the landscaping problems at the Hyperion dunes. Mayor Jacobs - Set March 25, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. for a special meeting with Supervisor Knabe. Commented on the scheduled LAX Master Plan Meeting and the AQMD. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Only - 5 minute limit) Indtviduals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on beha(ja their employer, must so iden4jfy themselves prior 'o addressing the City Council. Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $25o. Four (4) individuals addressed Council 1. Mark Rener, 12123 E. Walnut; spoke regarding Prop 209 and the consequences of implementation. 2. Liz Garnholtz, resident; spoke regarding affirmative action. 3. Resident; stated everyone should look at the noise contour maps presented by the airport. He stated the numbers are incorrect. 4. J. Wilson, resident; urged everyone to attend the LAX and Hyperion meetings. MEMORIALS CLOSED SESSION ROLL CALL NOTM 10:27 P.M. Mayor Jacobs Present Mayor ProTem Wernick Pres -ant Councilwoman Friedkin Pres -.nt Councilman Weston Pres .-nt Councilman Gordon Pres -.nt The City Council moved into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code Sec. 54960, e: M.) for the purposes of conferring with the City's Real Property Negotiator; and/or conferring witli the City Attorney on potential and/or existing litigation; and/or discussing matters covered under Government Code section 54957 (Personnel); and/or conferring with the 8 City's Labor Negotiators; as follows: Continuation of matters listed on the City Council Agenda for 5:00 p.m., February 4, 1997 under "Closed Session" (if needed). REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION - NONE ADJOURNMENT 10:42 P.M. to February 18, 1997 5:00 P.M. Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk 9 0007,111 1• e a w e� w eM .. o a /p o W W I+ V h N << < 460 2 N O W L IC O N O W ' W O r r O M wI M + I r•N{AOOI%O�MM000U1 �•110.46 O a y100 w w N.• 00 — w O �Oiao.iol- s- riwaiririri�oloe 1- r O to r .O lA F Ov u1 M o M w In a s = MoNva-m0w0w ;•�MrvM Iii. A wwP MM i►r A 0 en NCO eOm � N D N N N Ora o M S'Q0 n O a , ,ao vli Ln Hern0 0. N N Z "y _ co 42% JJ ` OLnLn%o 10 O en Cn N ! [�•� F N N a j Q Q On . � Uf en u1 Ln N 10 %0 10 - �(.N xmen(n ri N N N' W I ci c)'n n n .o 0 en NCO eOm � N D N N N Ora o M , "y _ a v° i z // F • 0. • O1 Y ic J FO i A c. 1. C Y D �_ r p o a w co i « see*.4r 0 O •• I •v f 1i.t0.«31.M v 30b 16 + 7 �r N f.Cr +c000 Mr ~ f 7Mr Ili rP F^ = w �t • Cw ..� M OL• fwM r Y cf w C O. Y s w A • r A r L> ■• w p I' '�•, ~ Y i O • U O.riM�UL�OOL O t ZLLLZZ :O D c Ctt M ' z 1 I L C O O .~iM f+ V r41 U1M.> +•004 7r z m » F ZWtj O U A r . •w 7 i. MJi w • •u OZlO1066 v A O r c f `rONH<�+SF W >ZOOC wr. v•• c r + r- w • • •• >• v• t OfIl1! <F�/ -OZ OLO: <IL1. 0 NAr••fY�/O •" \ S< r -N <.+W •SWWN YO:OJI- LI- 0.w�i -1q W t7 r [ u r •r f • c n 1. • • • • A A A• r C • a OW ILNNU06.M<WZIL<W mew a6 w' • O L ac r • U4 9. 3-� N • .�vr•OLrd• •A uOOd•HVP" JZZOV ■a • a Cc XWI- JOZS��OtA` MO�w ~ t UO >^+C64 ^�� •v c<-NWmz c"C -6Z ~W6 •1-P .+C L U 1.0 c t. • W O++ • • O M r 1C • 0 6 n'OCZO. N f f r o • 6 • c.r 6••+ Y Ur w > 0 OWASI -aLLOJ OLWW ILwWNWI- Z �wFZV Wmw M� v%. a. r P6 L< A O v 0.7 ■ • r • o. • r �w Mu AO ` PI «• O> s t i Z <ILWlt�00J1- �W000<W Yli �. O • t • 6 U v • • O.+.0 L 6 • JN < w pt • w►+ <�•+ LN WOO f A� M aru L c P-b i L M� • L• r rL • 6 y ii H WFOW L64.W WM�+WMYMWw wo-OwLOOL66ua 4 c O U O as • •w c■ o U u c c W • r > r L 0 4 c c r 4 c r• W• �' =N;:Ww o • r L L u • • A • 0 D •• r L O c i L r C r • W I- wwONNO>• «<00 W X� 9. c 0 P• r PO L P■ C r u s.•. • r c p1 V1O «u6L = =40C WZNWO O U 216. u V 6L Lu • r• U• 6s u r , MY • • r w U Ur iAOa ■ o L• f • 6 r r• .� ■ 1-N e< • wr• O L r u 6 W r •+ r .-. • a. D L r C r L r 1 ML a r O L 7vCLOC•O.•• O M '+ a L f f r sr D 7 W NL 1 �rOA.- Nr:Op�y1'..M..MOF .<. W LO t• 7 P i Co. A ■ 6�. O eooe��.- �eeooeoeo2 Zt! O r■ • O L r f• 7 L• Z •9 K ..MO{A�O.OI►1 -1►a' o< Ci o A �� c L u o•• u 66• s• z rW of N < L ■+r w w M 6 -SO W 3 ! J A O u w ' f / u real < u< A~ or �^ 19 40 c .. L i °s it K L W N • ►W- Z i L 1 a<L 0. <W LL1 • • i 42 qV V/ «� O 0 0 Lr O u 1c f• < p 00`r� = v 30 i V d O ,O CL j N 6 O O ! M Q I ^ py w.l N H F N N PSI M. N 94 mmLncOmr,%rv0,mmfu 1 f rhPt ?O O• .0- ?4) ee • • .+ P1 P1 Q N a0 O 4)Nh ^oiLMN W 00.0 'f p co N N N 6 N N D 0• of N ? In N - U. M N N N N N N O >. Z to O LO 7 Yl C Z I LD J W N F o v, u M \ G J V C r N W u 13 W W .V. 00 \ L 0. o 7 C 3 b 7 r ~ LL Z r. i O 6 « T• 4) A q b V 7 u C , � O ter. V YI 7 V L�«i C. r 7. 0: z .0 0 N .Nn 6 v N C Nom+ bL N \ P C A b L A L r 3 L = LL r r O L A b L b U A w f� �M+ • q O A L) Is b O. I. E T > C A • C N •b U D b C b N b W Z O b 1� r C C G «P z w G • 0 CL m N Yi n C aZ O = r O N G N •« N+ « ro O L r w C a U Y b U« E b b C ] O 9 • > L b E M • -_ N b U u e A d zLL2Z Z I • C 7 �+ u G bV b N++' V G L T r 2 0 » — L b ro 0 A u r u N U L> -• • CL 7w 2020�••� 24. LL \D 7 u A 41 7 L Ni» A MV O2ar+r0 W Z L•+ N C L4 MG >m b« zD al r s 2 r >> w �- 'a T O A C ro « r L E A C C OrLLL9<F -f-O zOOCtL 9�r• C r•••+� ••10 Ib A > b '0 b C o m L L O; T N b b'E U A P L O W W`10:O J r L Oyr b E V N b r A b L b b A • V LL 0:Cu OCLOQ WLL W4) aN b at « ro V3 + C T T T• N b'C M U700_NtA LD> 0:0 u AL A X W rJ4yZ 2-0> 0: • b O O b E b T> m L b•+ c C PC L 0G OQO: ►+mzd►.rCrO.r ro >� C a,ro 7 C 2F W d0 Cc •+= ^+ C G ~ U LO C L b W L« ab O ro T b� O OU. -jix =LJO W A'A « O b a b �+ U U r q b LLY)W0:Wr 2 uJ 71 Y_ T PCL >• D O.7 x A N •+ > L Qr0> 7Z r m « @ b r LQ O b O. •r 7'+ WV y O M J0<U.Wdu00J7t0a uLL O G V q•+ O - r A L U « b L �' ro r u \ O, ro 0- M U + b L CL I u 0: Wur�z c JiO;rOCW2 AY- TY- to L C T•+ @ L N� b L ror «c A O. wF-O W =D.O. W W►+W YW C O U O �t b bw U U W d« > r L C-� r W A d cn to Z o o= a 0 �- o n O 7 b U C E O C C C N A C« b ro : W i-• J) UN 0 0: 0: 0 y- a a O X L L L b b T d 7 Gr • r L O C a C r C N r u N Q . , • v Q V d d== u= 2 W C O 7 b OE C u 0 T - A o uG aL C-u ro «• u f w d c s y _. U U r L O b y m z r b N« a r r '. E i E a1 N« G If L b T O. @ O r•, E W A L r A r U O. W« r' A T 9 C r C N L r ,J = 7 C 7 O 7'0 O. O C b O. • b S N W' , .O [0 M M F� r W L O L W 7 O, b N L O. A ••• 7 L @@ N 0 7 V N O O O O ^ ^^ 0 0 0 0 2 z G O « •• O. r- L O Z', I O—^ ^^ M UI •O 1- a OL Z Y- b T • O L C C A O L N E• 7 L A L A� a 0 6 C G O A C U 7 •+ O LL U O A b 6 U O. Q. - A s A Z! •� r. .o v a r 1 JI M N L A f^ QQ 6� A O ro 11 N LL; M J V ♦ > b O. s W w Fa LL O 4- N L O I 0 ac s wo o 0 v ab r Q 2 • �z ' uw au w ¢ LL UCU(J w' W `cz aw �a �r • a� u L o L I m. r 1 Y r a• r 0 '► O O O O �+' IC S W LL '- N (� .r O LL v u w Y LL a m 3 O I I I I 1 h O T i j lu cy o W W a sa', a CL C3 X W LL d O ,O CL j N 6 O O ! M Q I ^ py w.l N H F N N PSI M. N 94 mmLncOmr,%rv0,mmfu 1 f rhPt ?O O• .0- ?4) ee • • .+ P1 P1 Q N a0 O 4)Nh ^oiLMN W 00.0 'f p co N N N 6 N N D 0• of N ? In N - U. M N N N N N N O >. Z to O LO 7 Yl C Z I LD J W N F o v, u M \ G J V C r N W u 13 W W .V. 00 \ L 0. o 7 C 3 b 7 r ~ LL Z r. i O 6 « T• 4) A q b V 7 u C , � O ter. V YI 7 V L�«i C. r 7. 0: z .0 0 N .Nn 6 v N C Nom+ bL N \ P C A b L A L r 3 L = LL r r O L A b L b U A w f� �M+ • q O A L) Is b O. I. E T > C A • C N •b U D b C b N b W Z O b 1� r C C G «P z w G • 0 CL m N Yi n C aZ O = r O N G N •« N+ « ro O L r w C a U Y b U« E b b C ] O 9 • > L b E M • -_ N b U u e A d zLL2Z Z I • C 7 �+ u G bV b N++' V G L T r 2 0 » — L b ro 0 A u r u N U L> -• • CL 7w 2020�••� 24. LL \D 7 u A 41 7 L Ni» A MV O2ar+r0 W Z L•+ N C L4 MG >m b« zD al r s 2 r >> w �- 'a T O A C ro « r L E A C C OrLLL9<F -f-O zOOCtL 9�r• C r•••+� ••10 Ib A > b '0 b C o m L L O; T N b b'E U A P L O W W`10:O J r L Oyr b E V N b r A b L b b A • V LL 0:Cu OCLOQ WLL W4) aN b at « ro V3 + C T T T• N b'C M U700_NtA LD> 0:0 u AL A X W rJ4yZ 2-0> 0: • b O O b E b T> m L b•+ c C PC L 0G OQO: ►+mzd►.rCrO.r ro >� C a,ro 7 C 2F W d0 Cc •+= ^+ C G ~ U LO C L b W L« ab O ro T b� O OU. -jix =LJO W A'A « O b a b �+ U U r q b LLY)W0:Wr 2 uJ 71 Y_ T PCL >• D O.7 x A N •+ > L Qr0> 7Z r m « @ b r LQ O b O. •r 7'+ WV y O M J0<U.Wdu00J7t0a uLL O G V q•+ O - r A L U « b L �' ro r u \ O, ro 0- M U + b L CL I u 0: Wur�z c JiO;rOCW2 AY- TY- to L C T•+ @ L N� b L ror «c A O. wF-O W =D.O. W W►+W YW C O U O �t b bw U U W d« > r L C-� r W A d cn to Z o o= a 0 �- o n O 7 b U C E O C C C N A C« b ro : W i-• J) UN 0 0: 0: 0 y- a a O X L L L b b T d 7 Gr • r L O C a C r C N r u N Q . , • v Q V d d== u= 2 W C O 7 b OE C u 0 T - A o uG aL C-u ro «• u f w d c s y _. U U r L O b y m z r b N« a r r '. E i E a1 N« G If L b T O. @ O r•, E W A L r A r U O. W« r' A T 9 C r C N L r ,J = 7 C 7 O 7'0 O. O C b O. • b S N W' , .O [0 M M F� r W L O L W 7 O, b N L O. A ••• 7 L @@ N 0 7 V N O O O O ^ ^^ 0 0 0 0 2 z G O « •• O. r- L O Z', I O—^ ^^ M UI •O 1- a OL Z Y- b T • O L C C A O L N E• 7 L A L A� a 0 6 C G O A C U 7 •+ O LL U O A b 6 U O. Q. - A s A Z! •� r. .o v a r 1 JI M N L A f^ QQ 6� A O ro 11 N LL; M J V ♦ > b O. s W w Fa LL O 4- N L O I 0 ac s wo o 0 v ab r Q 2 • �z ' uw au w ¢ LL UCU(J w' W `cz aw �a �r • a� u L o L I m. r 1 Y r a• r 0 '► O O O O �+' IC S W LL '- N (� .r O LL v u w Y LL a m 3 O CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER 01/29197 THROUGH 02/11197 Date Payee Amount Description 02/10/97 IRS 135,635.40 Federal Payroll Taxes P/R # 16 02/10/97 Emp. Dev. Dept. 24,670.26 State Payroll Taxes P/R # 16 02/10/97 W.B.M.W.D. 751,085.90 December Purchase 02/11/97 Federal Reserve 250.00 Employee Bonds P/R # 16 Total by Wire: 911,641.56 DATE OF RATIFICATION: 02/18197 TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE: 911,641.56 Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by City Treasur ii Date % L,2 Finai City Date Dale /_ -11 --7;7 Information on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of El Segundo. -IT EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 18,1997 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Modification to Grant Application to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Authority (MTA) for additional funds for the Sepulveda Boulevard Widening Project (grant amount 1.5 million) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Receive and file information INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: On February 4, 1997, the City Council authorized staff to submit a grant application to the MTA for $1.2 million to finance the additional costs for the overhead utility undergrounding work and for landscaping the raised median islands in conjunction with the Sepulveda Boulevard Widening Project. DISCUSSION: There is a current MTA grant of $5 million which has been allocated for financing the City's obligation for the undergrounding work and for relocating facilities owned by Chevron and Allied Signal to accommodate the highway widening. Based on preliminary information from Allied Signal, $100,000 had been allocated from the current MTA grant for relocating Allied's facilities. On February 12, 1997, staff was informed by the El Segundo Employer's Association that the most current estimate by Allied Signal is $400,000 which is $300,000 more than the originally budgeted amount. In order to cover this shortfall, staff has submitted an application to the MTA for the revised grant amount of $1.5 million. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: FISCAL IMPACT: Grant Amount of $1.5 Million (Check one) Operating Budget: Capital Improv. Budget: Amount Requested: Project/Account Budget: Project/Account Balance: Date: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required - Yes_ No ORIGINATED: Date:A /` EWerd Schroder, Director of Public Works REVIEWED BY: Date: Man N: \MTAGRANT.2 /13/97 ,r EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 18,1997 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: New Business City Manager AGENDA DESCRIPTION: FY96 -97 Mid -Year Budget Review and Revised Long -Range Financial Forecast RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1. Accept Presentation; 2. Authorize Budgetary Adjustments; 3. Discuss and provide direction, concerning continued financing of PERS unfunded liability; and 4. Discuss long range forecast, and direct staff to proceed with FY97 -98 Budget Process based upon Mid -Year assumptions and /or alternate direction, if revised. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: On July 16, 1996, the City Council adopted the FY96 -97 operating budget and Capital Improvement Plan. Included in the budget message was a long range financial forecast indicating that in subsequent years expenditures were expected to exceed revenues, and that budgetary adjustments would be required to avoid a full depletion of undesignated reserves within the next 4 years. On November 19, 1996 a first quarter budget review updated the forecast and assumptions based upon actual financial information through September 30, 1996. This report again provides revised forecasts and assumptions based upon the actual financial information through December 31, 1996 for most revenues and activities. Additional analysis through January and February were utilized where significant activity occurs subsequent to December 31st (Business License Taxes, Franchise Taxes, and Property taxes.) The attached summary schedules and graphs have been updated to reflect the most recent actual financial information, a revised forecast for the current fiscal year, and the impact of these changes on long range projections. DISCUSSION: (Continued) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1) Summary of Estimated Revenues — General Fund for FY96 -97 2) Summary of Estimated Expenditures — General Fund for FY96 -97 3) General Fund Trend Forecast as of December 31, 1996 4) General Fund Reserves Projected Trend as of December 31, 1996 5) Forecast Assumptions for General Fund Revenues as of December 31, 1996 6) Forecast Assumptions for General Fund Expenditures as of December 31, 1996 7) Forecast Assumptions for General Fund Reserves as of December 31, 1996 -Primary Assumptions 8) Forecast Assumptions for General Fund Reserves —Water System Retention Alternative 12/31/96 9) Summary of Recommended Budgetary Adjustments FY96 -97 FISCAL IMPACT: (Check one) Operating Budget: X Capital Improv. Budget: Amount Requested: This is a status report on the operating budget Project/Account Budget: Project/Account Balance: Date: Account Number: See Schedule 9 Project Phase: Appropriation Required - Yes X No ORIGINATED: Date: Eunice Kra nce Director / REVIEWED Date: James W. on C' Man ager ACTION TAK N: Compensation Fund Reserve and $1,021,000 to the Liability Fund Reserve) are anticipated to eliminate the current deficit in each fund and to provide adequate funding for the increased current year claims expense ($90,000) so that the June 30, 1997 balance will be adequate to cover the reserve requirements in each fund. It should be mentioned that claims recovery of $145,000 has mitigated the increase partially. A current year operating surplus of $773,304 (Table 7) is now forecast for the General Funds, excluding the operating transfers between funds within the general funding group. This includes the recommended $500,000 and $1,021,000 respectively to the Workers Compensation Fund Reserve and the Liability Fund Reserve which are retained as accumulated reserves with the special purpose designation. This means that in order to fund the $1,521,000 Reserve transfer and other supplemental appropriations, only $718,895 of Accumulated General Undesignated Reserves will be used. This may be even less should actual expenditures come in below this current forecast and /or the revenues exceed current projections. As stated earlier, the actual expenditure of these funds is dependent upon the success in resolving pending litigation. The reserve transfer does not result in any cash outlay at this time. General Fund Reserves are projected to increase by $773,304 for FY96 -97 as depicted in Table 4. Next Year (FY97 -98) Revised Assumptions and Impact on General Funds Fire Station Number #2 Deferred. Design costs were excluded from the Fiscal Year 1997 -98 long range forecast ($350,000) but had been included in the long range forecast at budget adoption. Revised Revenue and Expenditure Forecasts for FY96 -97 are used as the basis to increase next years' (and subsequent years) forecasts proportionately. Revised Hyperion Cost Estimates provided November 8, 1998 from City of L.A. indicate an additional savings of $750,000 in FY97 -98. (It should be emphasized that the only firm cost we have is through June 30, 1995.) All other estimates have been furnished reluctantly and subject to change.) The Water System is assumed to remain primarily under city operations with partial contractual arrangements for reclaimed water. The forecast therefore assumes continued cost recoveries of the annual administrative fee ($718,000 for FY96 -97) for direct and indirect services in the General Funds. This assumes an alternate contractual arrangement is made for reclaimed Water Fund operations, retaining the full city operations for treated water and the associated Administrative Charge assessed to cover those indirect costs allocable to the Water Fund. If the water department is fully leased, then a substantial change in projections would occur, increasing the cumulative shortfall in this forecast by $2.959.000 and in excess of $3.7 million over a 5 year contractual arrangement. It is too early to assess what reduction in expenditures, if any, would occur from this elimination during the next few years although long term reductions could be expected. Increased water costs for all City operations would partially offset any reductions in direct staffing, direct staffing costs of other city functions would likely increase due to bumping rights of tenured employees replacing less tenured employees, and indirect staffing (ie x% of various central operations) would fall back for funding by the General Fund. -4 , FIN -I -003 Lona Range Forecast Revised Assumptions and Impact (throuah 20011 Cost Savings/Revenue Increases identified for the current and next fiscal year adjust the base upon which the outyear forecast assumptions are based, thus reducing the budgetary shortfall in each subsequent year. Revised Hyperion Cost Estimates result in an overall cumulative savings of $90,000 over the cumulative estimates provided at the time of the budget. However, the forecasts from year to year vary with significant savings in FY97 -98 but additional costs in the remaining three years shown. FY2000 -01 Estimates have been added. The forecast assumes that Property tax declines bottom out to generate $2,000,000 annually for secured property and that all refunds are paid off by 1999 -00, utility rates and UUT bottom out the same year, and that the sales tax refunds are paid in full, the modest 2% assumption of Inflation and economic growth combined with a sustained 8% growth in sales tax. Although economic recovery indicators are suggesting increases in excess of 2 %, the long range forecast continues to reflect a 2% growth for several reasons: (1) our assessed values continue to reflect declines due to our heavy concentration in commercial /industrial space dedicated to industries in transition; and (2) recently announced aerospace losses on major contracts and the acquisition of Hughes Aircraft, our major defense contractor which is currently in progress. While we continue to be hopeful that recent sales of two major properties may result in upward reassessments that will accelerate the recovery of property tax revenues, the Assessor's backlog on appeals and reassessments for sales continues, and a prompt increase in cash revenues is not anticipated. Such increases could improve the current forecast over the five year horizon. Budgetary shortfalls as currently forecast would peak in Fiscal Year 1998 -99 at $1,361,541 and in subsequent years, revenues begin to move closer to the break -even (Table 7). The cumulative shortfall during the five year horizon is $2,617,292, with shortfalls of $3,390,596 offset by the surplus projected in the current fiscal year of $773,304. These calculations exclude the transfers or redesignation of surplus fund balance to general reserves such as Liability, Workers Compensation, and Infrastructure Replacement which result in the City retaining the funds with the option to redesignate since no external commitment is associated with the transfer. This forecast assumes gradual, sustained economic local recovery that lags the overall recovery. Since our revenue declines from the local downturn lagged behind the overall downturn, a more rapid recovery overall would probably indicate that the shortfalls would begin to disappear more rapidly in the final two years depicted. However, the tax base of our major revenues (property taxes and business license taxes) is directly attributable to last year's prosperity— property values and workforce expansion. Thus a built in lag exists between recovery for the economy and recovery for the General Funds. For these reasons, we can anticipate that through FY98 -99, we will continue to experience deflated revenues growing modestly. Increased PERS rates for Public Safety benefits will become effective July 1, 1997, and a $300,000 increase in operating expenditures has been identified in the long range forecast. PERS rates are adjusted annually based upon an actuarial evaluation of the City's actual experience in pension costs compared to the actuarial assumptions of future pension benefit obligations. When contractual changes occur such as those implemented in 1994 -95, the costs associated with accumulated service credit are calculated and an "Unfunded Liability" is estimated which is normally amortized over 10 to 25 years. In our case, the City is paying off an unfunded liability of $2,037,699 at 8.5% interest through June 30, 2011. This amounts to approximately $173,000 annually. While most cities do not have sufficient reserves to pay off the unfunded liability, the Council may wish to consider using reserves to provide a direct payment to our PERS accumulated pension reserves, thereby reducing the increased expenditures over the next 14 years and the associated interest. Since we are paying 8.5% to PERS and we are only earning 5.5% on the reserves if we retain the cash in our pooled funds, we will reduce interest revenues by $112,073 but we will reduce expenditures by $173,204, for a net budgetary savings of $61,131 annually. FIN -I -004 FIN -I -007 00085 0 W) 00 (0 � � Z 04 c O 0 �- O t 7 L A� 0� 0� (Q0 �� L� O LQ� N O� O O O1--�(VU)f�OC14 4M' f L, vONN N coo no t7 a. L I 0 0 0 0 O O u.) O O Q am 1 f) O � O � to M0000 oOvoo 0� 0) O O 0 c O O O L n 0 L A 0— 0 0 O � V- O O p O 0LA 0h N S O N 00 Ln - O to ...v 0 M C Of y _ � vv � v� �N ti - 0 U 0 U Z m O ++ •' Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N NOOOOONOCOOO N O O 0O O Vi Q 3 C -00 M O O O O O h O C CL M L n L n— l n M O O OOO O O N O N 4) (� W)C Lw 0LOP-N8wL(j(T00mm vO�LOf�M�NODOhNMVN �p �T 0000 0 vv0 t0 N t Y L aDOO V VI OD CD W) 00 f-- C14 MLO N YO tT L) Nv��(V ON -7 V- O W N H c L O O CO (O O O V t0 O co O co O 0) -�M O O O a0 O C N .- (Of�r OMMMMfA OOOLnOOOAUi MN V MNNN00 4 0000 MONO 0) 0) !' 0 OLnONNOITV LnLn(O V NOO<O t0 t0000 N 0 O _ N 00 M In LO LO W r- 00 e- 00 00 v 1) ('M t0 LO IW N O 0O � V /�tO�hM(ONOhe- N0Nf- N �Ntn '7 N v '- N 00 N r r - N Gi N � E N N Q O O U _G Y c Q O C 0. LO v CO CO LO LO 00 M Ln CD Ln to LO Ln N t0 0 0 coo O ` O N >. U a LnM000tn(OCOLD V e CO��sf M -(0 0o Ln000 V 0)r-sf V NV r- -V N 00N0 to (p 4) d— >, E O Mf-O(O(OOhf-(V hM(V X000 0) � I- f� f- 00 00 0 Ln v v N N (O Cl) 00000 N f- N LO r 0o 0. CQ C (D m O 4) a t C tO M M M 00 M N M LO v Cr) 0O t0 N N > .0 Q > a- 04 r .- O C O N U 7 G — N (D U N p >>_0MOOOONO�00�0 NQ Ot�000 M 000 0 � � : U CD (D CM OOLAOf'LnOOOMLALn�M 0o r- ONO - (D c `) CL "p Q LO 0 0 0 N CD N d' 00 fV GO � LO 00 N CtA00e- Or(OLnNOD1�M�h O (0 0 0 0 LO V N0 P �- N o (D O. L fn d��'C c > �� ° 000(�f�0M00 000 ar 0 r �NLO V) �•� m r- N 3 C O N y m Q N v N T- 0) O m 'y U U O N 0 3 0 `o o N N c y U m a 4? C r E c o L N U) C YC O V C - tT O 7� � 'p '7 CD U (D $A m C N C .0 O d0y aw x O n c� 'O C 0 � X N N> N cWQ ice � N O H U 0 Q Qrniv1aQW _ L L L L L L L � 4-- X U NMVLn01�000 LL X c m E y tiD UC9 E E E E Cl o O W �o m O� LL U. U_w at� 0000 w L L z E w w w �.. 0) a� ) L >, E Q O V) 0 V) >. �. C N C C m Y tT 1/) 0) w— ` �_ C w y a N N m C C c C U fA O m m rn `U anLLt -»m =CAaii3'. =X1 ���-f- FIN -I -007 00085 N 41 l4 F- U) 0 Z O AV V W C W Z C N 2 0 V LL Nrn c 7 ED C 0 C LL Q N (O V M V) < C,4 N � L _ a 0 7 CL Qm W w .00 g co) C 15 H d w- C E Co O ,Ec0 V cn WNOIt M0Ot-000InUn00 r-00 0 00000 O (0 Upt- N� W0t-0000Or- 0r O M 00000 O M MI._ 1A 1n oT- rl VV 0 V )W) V M W 0 0 00000 O 0 N0 gNLo0 0 1�- S 00 O 1-Mr -0 0 0 a N 0 Or- OO r M r - =,.Oomw r­o W OIl_M wNO w 8004004 O8004004 O (0 r rM MInMM(OM r-�MM NI�Un 00 Un OUnr- N O r CO (0 N r- r- IT 0> r- y M M Nr-r- rr oe LL _ O O O O O O 0 O O O N O O O O O 3 ��p (8 N U� pl U)I�-M r-MO -WNW Owt-0oo0v00 q(VNO CNwQ 00000 0 E a) o OI,O "lNM NO 00 1 CL C 9 O 000''o . . . 6600,066 0 0 O O coo O 0000 O O O 00 O O 0000 O 0000 00 N (R. C O N 000 V) MUnNO 000 r-O r- T_ r-:(0N M N (v (o I­ r- O m O N N (moo °�' Vi M v v U 0 N aoi - (o � m ILILJ v v � N WNOIt M0Ot-000InUn00 r-00 0 00000 O (0 Upt- N� W0t-0000Or- 0r O M 00000 O M MI._ 1A 1n oT- rl VV 0 V )W) V M W 0 0 00000 O 0 N0 gNLo0 0 1�- S 00 O 1-Mr -0 0 0 a N 0 Or- OO r M r - =,.Oomw r­o W OIl_M wNO w 8004004 O8004004 O (0 r rM MInMM(OM r-�MM NI�Un 00 Un OUnr- N O r CO (0 N r- r- IT 0> r- y M M a1 y LL _ N N F- U)I�-M r-MO -WNW (0r -qT (V 000 00 O O E a) o OI,O "lNM NO 00 (0 (o(DUn r-000) CL C O O C OMMOr -OMVM MOMM toN8O OO O O O r Or -UnNM V 0oN MNNN 0O 0 0 N co PI_ N N IT M 0 CO 0 r- M N N CM (o m 0 r to O rr r-:(0N M N a' Ec� UF-U c¢ c v T_ N (moo °�' Vi F- o � G o m o w 0 UUUUW U3: LZ(nILEw:j aoi - (o � m ILILJ N O H N tn(p(0 M LO0IW N O WtiN (oMUn e� 00 � � O O l7 Q NOOr - O Ln V Tr M OMON r -(000 MON(o IoNO act V SO �nV V N 00 00 O O O O N W) V MUn000)r-Nr- O(pr-V Nr-(V UA �OOr- 00 O O Ufl Un Un U) C14 r-V t� r' MtnO O! Mln (o d' 1' r- r- N r- m M v r- (0 (o (o M 0 Un N 00 M M r: M w i► 00N0ITV V M 001,- 0 000Un00 r-0)O (0 OO � � O O co Unt- Nr M W OOUn1�-0000Unr Or - OU'M OO O O M MUnUn Unr-O r- I,tt0ItUnUn V M00C 1t CL C O O p NON V) 004wW0vWm0 0 0 0 N 00 O N O 00 N P r-MMM 80 'UT r- r- , - M M Un M 0 W M r- (V ('7 N 00 Un P- U) r- (0 r 00 0 N r r- tt 0; r- r r Cl) N v 00086 a) f0 U c O C O 0 M m c to ='E � C (CQ > 0) w C 0 goy 4) c c N .�. N a w (D a (T O y .0 m c -6 T to w O w E U) CL N a) E 0 = o o :x w F- U' LL(DU)in �(1I CV) IT aNi 0 Z FIN -I -008 y '� C a1 y LL _ C F- T c O vim+ E a) o O N o .. c _ m U 0 E C >. a) C N a w e 'a w 4l CD N w C X w —�' d°�'TO 4) 15 rn� (D 0 o6 c Fo E � � caw oa) mo ,� a� (n V � ~ c 'o E m °U' a~ ��o �' o w a' Ec� UF-U c¢ c v m N M'C U -1- (moo °�' Vi F- o � G o m o w 0 UUUUW U3: LZ(nILEw:j aoi - (o � m ILILJ m �: m O (oc U CJ�LL O H 00086 a) f0 U c O C O 0 M m c to ='E � C (CQ > 0) w C 0 goy 4) c c N .�. N a w (D a (T O y .0 m c -6 T to w O w E U) CL N a) E 0 = o o :x w F- U' LL(DU)in �(1I CV) IT aNi 0 Z FIN -I -008 W, rI co E-4 08 t FIN-I-009 00 Lq O C) C> O ON ON C*A F-I k�j O a OO w � Q Cl% z ON all C7N CN CN C) 9% C) C) C) C) C) C) qtt C) f% ON 00 C, H 6R 69 6s 08 t FIN-I-009 00 O O O OO rr 08 t FIN-I-009 00 L dft Aw Q Fes. T C .y� U E a C 9 co cc M (0 �U M C_ 'C O O O 675 O O V ER CO L � O a� w C� U C S E N 0) O Q. ti E U y W W LL r N w O) O PIA FIN -I -0011 N d O N r Z N1�0)000OOrOI�OrMOpNr O MOON ((7 f.- VV - MN V W)W01-1-aa0 r0 00 d'000 N OpM(Od'tO1�(000d'I1Or1tCCL I N NOOM 00 IA r �OO�OiM�O(OO�ONOMN (O O000 01 d O MMrMetO1O00M(ONOrM(OLO V CDva0 1() 001OrOet001-1n(OM MNI- NM 1w rrrN M 00 r(O NN Mr r r M N H N N N 00 M V O O r V O r 0W f t 00 r N r x 0 0 0 a O O0 r r M O t- t0 M 00 0 r 00 M W) 00 r N O O O M O) st(O N�OM0001"OM0 W CL 0) M It 00 rOOr ((pp 0 0 0 Oct eF CD r st 00 r O M V N V N M M M W N 000OOId 00LAU)(OM Nrt- NM (O ti O st O t0 rrrN t. M r r(OrNN Mr r r c r iA CO) P7 h Co O UO O 00 O it O tO 00 O M V) r N M O O O O M 1-- NNNIW0cv) OLnLOO (OMMOO Nr, OOI'I'OOct rte. R r v000 (A a) t+NMM 0 00 0) le kOI- CO N � � N 00 N 0 N M (D 0000 O O� (D 0p �MOPN(Mt-NrMN00(O(OLOM tONM V'00('M1-(OM 04 et U) OlwCD O) M r1-NN tn d1 �- r M V- V- r rCO) 1/! P V1 0400000d'0000(OOOOON P9 0000 9) M O L O 0 L 0 0 1- 0 (O O O co r M M r 000 O r go NONONOMVI�MOOOM Ost M 0000 M NIt st(001-NcMC1N)ANN000 V 00 04 000 00 h 000 V CqLOMMrMrN00VLO Vt- O) 0 V 0 co OA MrMMV00rM LC) M Nrt - NN Cl) rrrN M M r N Lf) C14 M 17 r- r M M H V1 LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1- 04 N 0 0 0 0 0 O NOOOOONO00 OOr(00 (h 0000 V MOOOOOPO00 Mtn�r10 O OONO N tO O to O K1 1- N (0 00 to M O ►O Cl M 40 0 0 0 0 (O 40 VOrLO1-('MrN00M t - N(MVW V Od'st0 N m 0000 et1�et000r1O00 rrfl- NN r rr('MtO N r v C'4 ON r r M N u► M rs C O a E Uacii U) w C C (Q O v M (CC j s v) > (D c c �c w N � � ~ x U y LL D li � Cf F -C9UC9 V% cm d N c ; 0 W C 0 N O yN? (� 12 o � L� c m� (vim L � �n °�_ c3 E�C9 y E E c c E V} /0 IL O C F- x aa... a� a�� LLr (0 N C H N 1T U N C y �ww L L L L O O rl-t a>» y c CD 3 O cat w� ID a aNi c c � L v c �° U e N to to fq C C C C O Nl y _ N O- a � , , 7 r + O � � � (4 .N. C U J Q - avo1�E- »m5ma.:51z3:.sE �F -F-H- C .y� U E a C 9 co cc M (0 �U M C_ 'C O O O 675 O O V ER CO L � O a� w C� U C S E N 0) O Q. ti E U y W W LL r N w O) O PIA FIN -I -0011 IA td s •- � N Z pppp����MpMCC�p�p�ppppprr_pppp(pp 58 M 8 M CD r. CA��I'�ChC'70NI�IAC70 f'7v l'7 m QIn GD to Q CD CD CN��v M N CrMf r IA M ONE f� 0 1 cc 00 ' 00 , O� Dt O ht�O�I�CO ��hA ACA Ip�tA COhcC�h GCiN 88 ON O 8N8 M CO CD CO l'7 Of �C�MIM CVCOMONCO OP IA ch f�Q Cl) C'�v OD.-M M �f C(D O 11- c0 K CO WCN M N N V! pNCp������oN -r�CNNCpp �CC�ppVt�Cpp p�po� pp 8888pNCpp �Dr�yS � tp Cp O NCO CD N O N M N N C O Z M- � cr 8 pp CC) pN N CO N�p N N pp n p N 8 8 M 00 N p (O Nt�lh Mao MNIA§§ §M N 00 O Cp 7 ti C'7 O CR 0 v llf"�77 N Co IA M pt 0p C% �+ rD iD N M Os fV c § V N 5� QQ 5� S2 5� 5Q� N ifi y C c°�w 2525 25 Go 25 25252525 2S oMi r co co co c9t N LL fn ° Eg C C. Cn L 7 EE C CL c Cr U TO C V 0 � C LA- C1 U O ° fp E a '° o rn N N= w' c m e y 4 L caw e E w c a `B� w d E 7 : a v E �w o$aw W. a �c m o x E_ N d a.Q E a� m �cv�o d iEs< dmE m W R a 3S c oaIQ O ° gym av) RW a U2 ~ �, i 5 w 2: �� x o c o o U e E c —� x zaa ° = o �. S � a 2�a",st'g�g. ga a !B Via~ P g a ~ w 0 J a W c.�L)L)uw0xwzaww a0 Mm �xo, c� cix_ =�3Um 1- 3 z 00P. L- ca a) U U) CY N o N 0) N O M N N a0 L M t. LO N Lf) U) O O t0 CO) c0 f. O ctt c O m M C) M � t0 M V O t> M M O O ~ fR N LO +L' v- OMO ( N ac � 8 cc C 01 M a O a O LA r r M M r E9 64 � O N fR N ... .. .. X C O O LO 4m r 0 N N O T LO a0_ M " It r CO N O M M N a) CD > 0�0 tOA C) 0 N tf} M 04 CO) tfi = is N w W co V- ti CN w N t7 p M Cl C) t0 c co 0 to t0 t�La cc Go �' M 2 W M O M M y Z O ,w M Cl) r N CD C. M X O O It co O O O O 7 O N O N 0) M M co Q 1 c0 N tV 4 ^ vi � vi 2 y a) tw0 0) E 69 M m N C C a c t m � c as CU C N O Z N O: cn C L O Q N d } E U U. cc a� �w O >, ii a� ° m � C" 0.0 N 7 C L O a) E' a N v _ !_ U N w t0 CD C O II N U- w W C r g H ;a ai — a .0 t Z 5 44 N � LX � E N N t Cc 7 O O y = y co Q y y 00 m as iiJ y _ t1J a) - W > > R W U �► d O C C O C 'a C 01 C 7 y y N _ 7 3 y O CI > CL '� > E E O vi a m � 6 w ` Ix v v z 00 n Cc) v L q.d Q C c 7 � h Q � n O N co N e) N N O oo f.- co co Q) ono to r � ti O N r O C O 1n M O tG O Go O 0 O ~ O Eft M M h O 6N9 v = LO n n n Ln Go Go 1- co O OMO C ti � co L C i co CD O) w d' f— co r O w Go co O M co O W M co w O) It N N N 64 64 0M O N M 69 X C O O qw LO .-. �) .-. O t� O 1A M O r O V C) co co co Go c N �d v > N O 69 csi _ M M e �eQ 44- M a) E ca ~ co V- r- 't c c C Q M m co Of cNo M tOA O M e O C --i co O M O M ~ i O ti LO co O C C Q) M Q C M 6N�R 6N�9 N X N CD O N N M V 0 CD M O co � n U1 eD coo O W) W) d O) cl M r O M N C t N � � O O O N Z N c ^ Cf Z LL y y H U CL 0 w y c C om 0 O LL y Q C O :, L7 4) 7� a}i �c W EL = v '= N MO. t0 O V LL K — N cc Ca'm Z H to x �W y N O 3 d N v O 0 O Z ..� M tN CM v� H� O C/) CO E � W d C � j W w eo D E v cm +-' m A O u r- C c N c d C O N LL R m m w w a`m U U z 00 n Cc) v 0, 9 bi OoOOOOOOOOOO Oo Oo 000000 Sri 00000000 vi c acct O O 0) N W M $ H N T0 N W 1% N Q O y C Z O U �lL C C 0 0� 07 O co N} N J O IL 0) C a CL J U J�a.cc ayi a 950 V� Q Z E� o m U g Q I cm E J v C �+ d c c c c a qy� Wy E a O Q ca O W O J I— F— I— U- ..� 000 0 N N ���ppp O C 0 0 0 0 m 0 ca 000 c6 W Q �i(D0)00)� N H O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 Q M 0 0 0 coOOOOO It OOO L O O � C) C C� O O c —MOO.- O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� O N V- 0) V) 0 0 � 0 00 O M C`�'(�h 4 '*'r N C4° O O ... �.. N c N M A CL ^0 'p r Qo E O M U y O m N c L Q N O a, CA LL c� o w 0 c � N y �CD ~ y > >OcLo� c }cQ� CL (D c E. W c a�i 0LL8€ yy EEo 0 E LL ~ °�, °� •• v CL cc � �: E �Low LLO Q C HL aci (D c Ur yc1l,NyUi —cO V �nN'�n N M y N c c C �_ c c cc E.S 0 Q �°O w is _ ._ U- co U- �- LLiTLMCL 0 �LL W J! 0 N 000 OOO cm m 0 M M O M 0 C 0 0 A M 0 0 c v c c.c.c.r c.c 000 .y. co LL Q »i> »0)00)00) H 0, 9 bi EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 18, 1997 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: New Business - City Manager AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Discussion of possible actions by City Water Utility to comply with changes mandated by Proposition 218. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1. Hear Staff presentation. 2. Provide guidance to Staff. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: On November 5, 1996, the voters of California approved the Right to Vote on Taxes Act (Proposition 218). The Act established new guidelines for changing and increasing fees related to ownership of property. One of the first areas identified by Staff which is subject to Proposition 218 is water rates. DISCUSSION: On November 5,1996, the California electorate approved Proposition 218, the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act ". Proposition 218 was approved by 59% of the electorate in El Segundo. The Proposition applies to taxes, assessments and property related fees and charges. continued on next page ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1. Right to Vote Act. 2. Draft Request for Proposal and Agreement for Lease of Water System. 3. Draft Request for Proposal and Agreement for Lease of Reclaimed Water System. FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: Capital Improvement Budget: Amount Requested: Project/Account Budget: Project/Account Balance: Date: Account Number. Project Phase: Appropriation Required: RIGI TED BY: Date: 2 /g % rk ey, i ttor ey I 4 �&Publrkc uaA Schroder. er r'ec or Works E WED BY: Date: Z_1�� nr�r � , Page 1 of 3 PW- FEB18.01 (2/12/97 9:00 am) Page 1 of 3 PW FEB18.01 (2112197 9:00 am) DISCUSSION: (continued) At the October 1, 1996 Council Meeting the City Attorney gave a presentation on Proposition 218. The City Attorney stated because of the passage of City Measures H and I and the lack of any assessment districts within the City, that of all the new requirements imposed by the Proposition, the requirements relating to the imposition of fees and charges would potentially have the greatest impact on the City. Proposition 218 provides that a public agency cannot impose new or increase existing fees and charges, except for electrical, gas and development fees and charges, "... imposed by an Agency upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, including user fees for a property related service" prior to conducting a majority protest hearing. The protest hearing requires that the record owners of properties within the City be given notice of a proposed fee forty -five (45) days prior to a public hearing on the fee. Moreover, the Proposition provides that if written protests against the proposed fee are presented by a majority of the property owners the fee cannot be imposed. In addition to the above majority protest procedure, with respect to new or increased fees and charges other than those related to water, sewer and refuse service, such fees and charges must also be approved by either the majority of the property owners or two - thirds of the electorate at an election held no sooner than forty -five (45) days following the public hearing on the proposed increase. Another significant requirement of Proposition 218 is that by July 1, 1997 all fees and charges affected by 218 must meet the following criteria: 1. Revenue derived from the fee or charge must not exceed the funds required to provide the property related service; 2. Revenue from the fee or charge must not be used for any purpose other than that for which the fee or charge is imposed; 3. The amount of a fee or charge imposed upon any parcel or person as an incident of property ownership must not exceed the proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel. 4. The fee or charge may not be imposed for service unless the service is actually used by, or immediately available to, the owner of the property in question. Fees or charges based on potential or future use of a service are not permitted. Standby charges must be classified as assessments and shall not be imposed without compliance with requirement for assessments. 5. No fee or charge may be imposed for general governmental services such as police, fire, ambulance or libraries, where the service is available to the public in substantially the same manner as it is to property owners. The City Attomey believes there is a significant potential that all, or a portion of, the fees and charges collected by the City's water and sewer utilities are subject to the above Proposition 218 requirements. Staff is particularly concerned about the potential effects of Proposition 218 on the City's current water rate structure as such provides for "life -line" rates and an inverted rate structure whereby those customers (typically commercial customers) which consume the highest quantities of water pay a higher amount per unit than those consumers which consume less (typically residential customers). Accordingly, an argument can be made that the higher volume consumers are subsidizing the rates of the lower volume consumers which is not allowed, pursuant to the Proposition, after July 1, 1997. As a result of the passage of the Act, the City must change the billing and/or operation of the Water Utility. Three (3) of the most significant requirements of the City in relationship to water are: 1. The fee imposed cannot be greater than the cost of providing the service; 2. The fees cannot be increased if there is a majority protest; and 3. The City must be in compliance by July 1, 1997. -- C„� JJ Page 2 of 3 PW FEB18.01 (2/12197 9:00 am) DISCUSSION: (continued) City Staff working in conjunction with the City Attorneys office has already investigated several ways the City may choose to respond to the Act. Five (5) possible actions have been identified for discussion with the Council. They are: 1. Maintain current method of operation; 2. Establish flat rates in compliance with Proposition 218; 3. Contract for operation of entire City Water System; and 4. Contract for operations of City Reclaimed Water System. 5. Direct City Attorney to file Declaratory Relief Action related to obligations under Proposition 218. An analysis of the first 4 possible actions is attached. The figures stated are estimates and are consistent on each analysis for comparison purposes. Staff will be available to answer any questions. V, 1. MAINTAIN CURRENT METHOD OF OPERATION If the City chooses to do nothing, the requirements of the Act become effective on July 1, 1997. At that time, since water rates must be uniform and the City has not legally approved a rate increase, water must be sold at the lowest present rate of $1.1356 per unit and $1.32 per month meter charge. Estimated 1997 -98 Water Budget $11,029,800 Potable Water Revenues (6,534,000 units) 7,426,100 Reclaimed Water Revenue (1,568,160 units) 863,000 Other Revenues (interest, leased water rights) 240,000 Total Estimated Loss in 1997 -98 $ 2,500,700 The source of funds to make up the deficit would be at the Council's discretion. No effect on typical residential customer since residential bills are usually at the lowest rate. Small commercial /industrial customers' will experience a 19% decrease or a reduction in cost of $41.33 per month. Large commercial /industrial customers" will experience a 20% decrease or a reduction in cost of $462.97 per month. NAWATERWATER.NTH 2112197 2 inch meterusing 150 units of water per month. Cost using present water rates = $212.99. "6 inch meter using 1600 units of water per month. Costing using present water rates = $2,281.25. rlC' 0 of 2. ESTABLISH FLAT RATES IN COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION 218 • Reclaimed Water (3600 AF or 1,568,160 units) Purchase Cost 3600 x $225 / AF = Administration & Billing Cost 279,000 x.19 = Total Cost = $ 863,000 Unit Cost = 863,000 / 1,568,160 = $0.5503 / unit Decrease to typical reclaimed customer (.8221 - .5503) = 33% decrease .8221 • Potable Water Revenue (15,000 AF or 6,534,000 units) $11,029,800 Estimated 1997/98 Budget - 863,000 Reclaimed Revenue - 240,000 Other Revenue $ 9,926,800 Potable Water Revenue $9,926,800 / 6,534,000 = $ 1.5192 / unit • Increase to typical residential customer (1.5192 - 1.2233) / 1.2233 = 24% increase or from $18.35 / month to $ 22.79 / month • Increase to small commercial /industrial customers (1.5192 - 1.4199) / 1.4199 = 7% increase or from $212.99 / month to $227.89 / month • Increase to large commercial /industrial customers (1.5192 - 1.4258) / 1.4258 = 7% increase Q from $2,281.25 / month to $2,451.84 / month NAWATERWATER.FLT 2/12197 3. CONTRACT FOR OPERATION OF ENTIRE CITY WATER SYSTEM • Impact on Water Rates - unknown • Advantages A Allows for continuation of existing progressive rates structure thereby continuing philosophy of large users pay more than small users. B. Continuation of existing Life -line program and fire stand -by charges. C. Water rates and future rate adjustments are defined in lease agreement and thereby minimizing uncertainty. • Disadvantages A Water system is operated by large private water company. B. Water rates are subject to PUC approval. C. City Water Employees, vehicles, and equipment are transferred to private water company. • Lease must be executed before July 1, 1997. NAWATERWATER.CNT 2/12197 v 4. CONTRACT FOR OPERATIONS OF CITY RECLAIMED WATER SYSTEM • Reclaimed Water (3600 AF or 1,568,160 units) Reclaimed Water Revenue 1,568,160 units x 0.8221 = $1,290,000 (based on existing rates) Purchase Cost 3600 x $225 / AF = 810,000 Water Operating Revenue 480,000 Administration & Billing Costs - 53.000 Revenue into Water Fund $ 427,000 • Potable Water Revenue (from Flat Rate Analysis) $9,926,800 Reclaimed Revenue Offset - 427.000 Net Potable Water Operating Cost $9,499,800 Revised Potable Water Rate $9,499,800 / 6,534,000 units = $1.4539 / unit Increase to typical residential customer (1.4539 - 1.2233) / 1.2233 = 19% increase or from $18.35 / month to $ 21.81 / month Increase to typical small commercial /industrial customer (1.4539 - 1.4199) / 1.4199 = 2% increase or from $212.99 / month to $218.09 / month Increase to typical large commercial /industrial customer (1.4539 - 1.4258) / 1.4258 = 2% increase or from $2,281.25 / month to $2,326.21 / month NAWATERMATER.REC 2/12/97 0 1 RIGHT TO VOTE ON TAXES ACT SECTION 1. ZTTLE. This Act shall be known and may be cited as the Right to Vote on Taxes Act. SECTION 2. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS. The People of the State of California hereby find and declare that Proposition 13 was intended to provide effective tax relief and to require voter approval of tax increases. However, local governments have subjected taxpayers to excessive tax, assessment, fee and charge increases that not only frustrate the purposes of voter approval for tax increases, but also threaten the economic security of all Californians and the California economy itself. This measure protects taxpayers by.limiting the methods by which local governments exact revenue from taxpayers without their consent. SECTION 3. VOTER APPROVAL FOR LOCAL TAX LEVIES. Article X111C of the California Constitution is hereby added: SEC. 1. Definitions. As used in this Article: (a) 'General tax" means any tax imposed for general governmental purposes. (b) 'Local government" means any county, city, city and county, including a charter city or county, any special district, or any other local or regional governmental entity. (c) 'Special District' means an agency of the state, formed pursuant to general law or special act, for the local performance of governmental or proprietary functions with limited geographic boundaries including, but not limited to, school districts and redevelopment agencies. (d) "Special tax" means any tax imposed for specific purposes including taxes imposed for specific purposes which are placed into a general fund. SEC. 2. Local Government Tax Limitation. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution: (a) All taxes imposed by any local government shall be deemed to be either general taxes or special taxes. Special purpose districts or agencies, including school districts, shall have no power to levy general taxes. 010 - 00034 ;fight to Vote on Taxes Act "age 2 (b) No local government may impose, extend or increase any general tax unless and until such tax is submitted to the electorate and approved by a majority vote. A general tax shall not be deemed to have been increased if- it is imposed at a rate not higher than the maximum rate so approved. The election required by this subdivision shall be consolidated with a regularly scheduled general election for members of the governing body of the local government except in cases of emergency declared by a unanimous vote of the governing body. (c) Any general tax imposed, extended or increased, without voter approval, by any local government on or after January 1, 1995, and prior to the effective date of this Article, shall continue to be imposed only if approved by a majority vote of the voters voting in an election gn the issue of the imposition, which election shall be held within two years of the effective date of this. Article and in compliance with subdivision (b) of this section. (d) No local government may impose, extend or increase any special tax unless and until such taz is submitted to the electorate and approved by a two - thirds vote. A special tax shall not be deemed to have been increased if it is imposed at a rate not higher than the maximum rate so approved. SEC. 3. Initiative Power For Local Taxes, Assessments, Fees and Charges. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, including, but not limited to, Article II, Sections 8 and 9, the initiative power shall not be prohibited or otherwise limited in matters of reducing or repealing any local tax, assessment, fee or charge. The power of initiative to affect local taxes;, assessments, fees and charges shall be applicable to all local governments and neither the legislature nor any local government charter shall impose a signature requirement higher than that applicable to statewide statutory initiatives. SECTION 4. ASSESSMENT AND PROPERTY RELATED FEE REFORM. Article XIIID of the California Constitution is hereby added: SEC. 1. Application. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the provisions of this Article shall apply to all assessments, fees and charges whether imposed pursuant to state 00035 Right to Vote on Taxes Act Page 3 statute or tool government charter authority. Nothing in this Article or Article XIIIC shall be construed to: (a) provide any new authority to any agency to impose a tax, assessment, fee or charge; (b) affect existing laws relating to the imposition of fees or charges as a condition of property development; or (c) affect existing laws relating to the imposition of timber yield taxes. SEC. 2. Definitions. As used in this article: (a) "Agency" means any local government as defined in Article XIIIC,- Section 1(b). (b) "Assessment" means any levy or charge upon real property by an agency for a special benefit conferred upon .the real property. "Assessment" includes, but is not limited to, "special assessment," "benefit assessment,' 'maintenance assessment" and "special assessment tax." (c) 'Capital cost" means the cost of acquisition, installation, construction, reconstruction or replacement of a permanent public improvement by an agency. (d) "District" means an area determined by an agency to contain all parcels which W11 receive a special benefit from a proposed public improvement or property- related service. (e) 'Fee' or 'charge' means any levy other than an ad valorem tax, a special tax or an assessment, imposed by an agency upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property ownership, including user fees or charges for a property related service. (f). 'Maintenance and operation expenses' means the cost of rent, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, fuel, power, electrical current, care, and supervision necessary to properly operate and maintain a permanent public improvement. nn I 0003 6 fight to Vote on Taxes Act -age 4 (g) "Property ownership" shall be deemed to include tenancies of real property where tenants are directly liable to pay the assessment, fee, or charge in question. (h) " Properry- related service" means a public service having a direct relationship to property ownership. (1) "Special benefit' means a particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large. General enhancement of property value does not constitute "special benefit.". SEC. 3. Property Taxes, Assessments, Fees and Charges Limited. (a) No tax, assessment, fee or charge shall be assessed by any agency upon any parcel of property or upon any person as an incident of property ownership except: (1) The ad valorem property tax imposed pursuant to Article Xlll and - - Article XIIIA of this Constitution. (2) Any special tax receiving a two- thirds vote pursuant to Article XIIIA, Section 4 of this Constitution. (3) - Assessments as provided by this Article. (4) Fees or charges for property related services as provided by this Article. (b) For purposes of_this Article, fees for the provision of electrical or gas service shall not be deemed charges or fees imposed as an incident of property ownership. SEC. 4. Procedures and Requirements for All Assessments. (a) An agency which proposes to levy an assessment shall identify all parcels which will have a special benefit conferred upon them and _ upon which an assessment will be imposed. The proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel shall be determined in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of a public improvement or the maintenance and operation expenses of a public improvement or for the cost of the property related 00037 Right to Vote on Taxes Act Page 5 service being provided. No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel. Only special benefits are assessable, and an agency must separate the general benefits from the special benefits conferred on a parcel. Parcels within a district that are owned or used by any agency, the State of California or the United States shall not be exempt from assessment unless the agency can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that such publicly owned parcels in fact receive no special benefit. (b) All assessments must be supported by a detailed engineer's report prepared by a registered professional engineer certified by the State of California. (c) The amount of the proposed assessment for each identified parcel shall be calculated and the record owner of each parcel shall be given written notice by mail of the proposed assessment, the total amount thereof chargeable to the entire . district, the amount chargeable to the owner's particular parcel, the duration of such payments, the reason for such assessment and the basis upon which the amount of the proposed assessment was calculated, together with the date, time, and location of a public hearing on the proposed assessment. Each notice shall also include, in a conspicuous place thereon, a summary of the procedures applicable to the completion, return and tabulation of the ballots required pursuant to subdivision Id), including a disclosure statement that the existence of a majority protest, as defined in subdivision (e), will result in the assessment not being imposed. (d) Each such notice mailed to owners of identified parcels within the district shall contain a ballot which includes the agency's address for receipt of any such ballot once completed by any owner receiving such notice whereby each such owner may indicate his or her name, reasonable identification of the parcel and support or opposition to the proposed assessment. (e) The agency shall conduct a public hearing upon the proposed assessment not less than 45 days after mailing the notice of the proposed assessment to record owners of each identified parcel. At the public hearing, the agency shall consider all protests against the proposed assessment and tabulate the ballots. The agency shall not impose an assessment If there is a majority Qf911-0.� 00038 p)ght to Vote on Taxes Act Page 6 protest. A majority protest exists if, upon the conclusion of the hearing, ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in favor of the assessment. In tabulating the ballots, the ballots shall be weighted according to the proportional financial obligation of the affected property. (f) In any legal action contesting the validity of any assessment, the burden shall be on the agency to demonstrate that the property or properties in question receive a special benefit over and above the benefits .conferred on the public at large and that the amount of any contested assessment is proportional to, and no greater than, the benefits conferred on the property or properties in question. (g) Because only special benefits are assessable, electors residing within the district who do not own property within the district shall not be deemed under this Constitution to have been deprived of the right to vote for any assessment. If a court determines that the Constitution of the United States or other federal law requires otherwise, the assessment shall not be imposed unless approved by a two- thirds vote of the electorate in the district in addition to being approved by the property owners as required by Section 4(e). SEC. 5. Effective Date Pursuant to Article 11, Section 10(a), the provisions of this Article shall become effective the day after the election unless otherwise provided. Beginning July 1, 1997, all existing, new or increased assessments shall comply with this Article. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the following assessments existing on the effective date of this Article shall be exempt from the procedures and approval process set forth in Section 4: (a) any assessment imposed exclusively to finance the capital costs or maintenance and operation expenses for sidewalks, streets, sewers, water, flood control; drainage systems or vector control. Subsequent increases in such assessments shall be subject to the procedures and approval process set forth in. Section 4; (b) any assessment imposed pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment is initially imposed. Subsequent increases in such assessments shall be subject to the procedures and approval process set forth in Section 4; 00039 Right to Vote on Taxes Act Page 7 (c) any assessment the proceeds of which are exclusively used to repay bonded indebtedness of which the failure to pay would violate the Contract Impairment Clause of the Constitution of the United States of America; or, (d) any assessment which previously received majority voter approval from the voters voting in an election on the issue of the assessment. Subsequent increases in such assessments shall be subject to the procedures and approval process set forth in Section 4. SEC. 6. Property Related Fees and Charges. (a) Procedures for New or Increased Fees and Charges. An agency shall follow the procedures pursuant to this section in imposing or increasing any fee or charge as defined pursuant to this Article including, but not limited to, the following: (1) The parcels upon which a fee or charge is proposed for imposition shall be identified. The amount of the fee or charge proposed to be imposed upon each parcel shall be calculated. The agency shall provide written notice by mail of the proposed fee or charge to the record owner of each identified parcel upon which the fee or charge is prcpased for imposition, the amount of the fee or charge proposed to be imposed upon each, the basis upon which the amount of the proposed fee or charge was calculated, the reason for the fee or charge, together with the date, time, and location of a public hearing on the proposed fee or charge. (2) The agency shall conduct a public hearing upon the proposed fee or charge not less than 45 days after mailing the notice of the proposed fee or charge to the record owners of each identified parcel upon which the fee or charge is proposed for imposition. At the public hearing, the agency shall consider all protests against the proposed fee or charge. If written protests against the proposed fee or charge are presented by a majority of owners of the identified parcels, the agency shall not impose the fee or _ charge. (b) Requirements for Existing, New or Increased Fees and Charges. A fee or charge shat! not be extended, imposed or increased by any agency unless it meets all of the following requirements: 0001 Right to Vote an Taxes Act Page 8 (1) Revenues derived from the fee or charge shall not exceed -the funds required to provide .the property related service. (2) Revenues derived from the fee or charge'shali not be used for any purpose other than that for which the fee or charge was imposed. (3) The amount of a fee or charge imposed upon any parcel or person as an incident of property ownership shall not exceed the proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel. (4) No fee or charge may be imposed for a service unless that service is actually used by, or immediately available to, the owner of the property in question. Fees or charges based on potential or future use of a service are not permitted. Standby charges, whether characterized as charges or assessments, shall be classified as assessments and shall not be imposed without compliance with Section 4 of this Article. (5) No fee or charge may be imposed for general- governmental services including, but not limited to, police, fire, ambulance or library services where the service is available to the public at large in substantially the same manner as it is to property owners. Reliance by an agency on any parcel map including, but not limited to, an assessor's parcel map, may be considered a significant factor in determining whether a fee or charge is imposed as incident of property ownership for purposes of this Article. In any legal action contesting the validity of a fee or charge, the burden shall be on the agency to demonstrate compliance with this Article. (c) Voter Approval for New or Increased Fees and Charges. Except for fees or charges for sewer, water, and refuse collection services, no property related fee or charge shall be imposed or increased unless and until such fee or charge is submitted and approved by a majority vote of the property owners of the property subject to the fee or charge or, at the option of the agency, by a two-thirds vote of the electorate residing in the affected area. The election shall be conducted not less than 45 days after the public hearing. An agency- may adopt procedures similar to - those for increases in assessments in the conduct of elections under this subdivision. (d) Beginning July 1, 1997, all fees or charges shall comply with this Section. 00.'kU s 00041 Right to Vote on Taxes Act Page 9 SECTION S. UBERAL CONSTRUCTION. The provisions of this Act shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purposes of limiting local government revenue and enhancing taxpayer consent. . SECTION S. SEVERABIUTY. if any provision of this Act, or part thereof, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining sections shall not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable. 00 0 0'42. DRAFT CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA LEASE OF WATER SYSTEM REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) [ @@Date] City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, California 90245 LAX:174339.4 Draft Water System RFP CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA LEASE OF WATER SYSTEM REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) I. RFP HIGHLIGHTS A Overview d this RFP 111' 01C I L44 I 101Z fl The City of El Segundo, California ( "City ") seeks proposals to lease and operate either its entire water system or a geographic portion of the City's water system for a five (5) year period. Under this lease arrangement, the lessee would have complete responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the City's water system or a portion of the water system. The successful proposer would not only operate and maintain the system, it also would bill customers, comply with all applicable water quality, water quality reporting and other environmental requirements, and be responsible for all other aspects of the system, including the funding of certain capital improvements, as provided in Exhibit 1y' of the Draft Water System Lease Agreement ( "Draft Agreement "). The City would set a cap on water rates, as set forth in Exhibit "C" of the Draft Agreement. (Proposers are encouraged to propose lower caps.) The successful proposer's charges would be subject to the City's cap. The successful proposer would bear the risk of litigation and adverse determinations that rates which could be charged were subject to the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" (Proposition 218). The Successful Proposer would be required to contribute on an annual basis to the completion of certain specific capital improvements as indicated in Exhibit D of the Draft Agreement. In seeking proposals, the City wishes to minimize the cost of water to customers while continuing the scheduled replacement of system components for the period of the lease. The City's goal is to provide the best possible service for water customers. The existing City Water Rate Structure was established by City of El Segundo Resolution No. 3922 dated June 6, 1995. It is the City's desire to maintain the existing rate structure, but allow the lessee to collect the revenue required to operate, maintain, and improve the water system, as prescribed in the lease documents. The proposed rate structure will be used as part of the City's determination of best proposer and the award of the lease. LAX:174339.4 UQ.1 i i Draft Water System RFP Under this RFP, the City of El Segundo may award one lease agreement for the entire system, or it may award separate lease agreements, for one or more portions of the City, or it may determine to continue to operate all or selected portions of the system. The lease agreements would be for initial periods of 5 years. C. About this RFP Further information regarding the system, the lease and further information about this RFP are provided in the following sections and in the Draft Water Lease Agreement, which, by this reference, is incorporated into and made a part of this RFP. The City invites proposals for the lease of the water system from proposers without regard to the prospective proposers' places of business or prior service areas in an effort to attract proposals from the widest possible range of qualified proposers. The City seeks proposers to propose how the system could be leased and the water system services could be provided by the successful proposer in a high quality, cost - effective, safe, and efficient manner which protects public health and safety. One (1) mandatory Pre - Proposal Conference will be held, although the City reserves the right to hold additional mandatory conferences. The Quality Service and Financial Proposals called for in this RFP will be considered to be public information and will be available for public inspection, once the deadlines for submission of Quality Service and Financial Proposals, respectively, have passed. Recomnendatiais for m to the RFP or the Draft Agreemer ft or to the El Segundo Municipal Code which will result in of idency and economy are welcome, but should be specific and should propose substitute language when modifications are suggested. All recommendations shall be submitted in writing. II. GENERAL INFORMATION The City of El Segundo is a general law city located in the County of Los Angeles, California. LAX:174339.4 Draft Water System RR EL EAsting Water System The City of El Segundo's water system serves approximately 4,600 customers. The City purchases water from the Metropolitan Water District through West Basin Municipal Water District. The service area of the system covers approximately the total area within the City's limits (5.47 square miles). A very small portion of the City, east of Aviation Boulevard, is served by Southern California Water Company, and that portion of the City is not within this RFP. The City's water system includes a 3.3 acre water maintenance facility including a 5,500 square foot building, two (2) surface reservoirs with a total storage capacity of 9,300,000 gallons, three (3) booster pumps, and elevated tank which controls the hydraulic grade line in the system, two (2) MWD connections of 80 ds capacity, and the pipeline distribution system totalling fifty -two (52) miles of pipeline. More detailed system information is available upon request to the City. The City owns annual pumping rights to 953 acre feet of groundwater. Please understand that the data contained in this RFP is for general informational purposes only. Proposers should not rely on this information for developing Proposals. Instead, prospective proposers have the responsibility of ascertaining all facts upon which they rely in preparing and submitting their respective proposals. Further, the City makes no warranty as to the accuracy of the information in this RFP and disclaims any responsibility for any factual statements which may be incomplete or inaccurate. LM:174339.4 3 Draft Water System RFP C. City Goals and Objectives - General The City's goal is to lease the City's system to a proposer who will provide quality water service in compliance with all applicable laws, in a cost - effective manner and will contribute to the implementation of capital improvements to the Water System. III. GENERAL REQUIRENIENTS A General In brief, City seeks to lease its water system, and to have water services, using equipment owned by the City and maintained by the Successful Proposer, provided at a high level of quality and low cost. IV. RFP PROCESS Given the scope of this Request for Proposals (RFP) and the City's desire to award contracts in a timely manner and free of contention, the City has created and instituted Process Integrity Guidelines for Proposers, as set forth in this Section IV.A of this RFP. These Process Integrity Guidelines for Proposers govern interactions between Proposers and the City, and apply to prospective proposers upon receipt of this RFP and until the City's staff recommendations are submitted to the City Council. All contacts between the Proposer and the City, except as to legal matters, are to be through Eduard Schroder, Public Works Director clo City of El Segundo, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California 90245, telecopier (310) 322 -7137. Contacts by counsel or on legal matters are to be submitted in writing to the City Attorney, Mark Hensley, who may be reached at the same address as given for the City and at Burke, Williams & Sorensen, 611 West Sixth Street, 25th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90017, telecopier (213) 236- 2700. All substantive questions (i.e., other than questions about time and place of conferences, interviews, etc.) shall be submitted in writing, or asked at the pre - proposal conference. Any evidence which indicates a Proposer has failed to comply with the Process LAX:174339.4 El 0 0 114 Draft Water System RFP Integrity Guidelines set forth in this Section IV.A of this RFP may result in that Proposer's disqualification and forfeiture of the Proposer's Proposal Bond. Any questions regarding the Process Integrity Guidelines shall be in writing and shall be transmitted by telecopier and mail to City Attorney Mark Hensley, cto City of El Segundo at the addresses listed above. Any written communication from the City to a prospective Proposer will be transmitted simultaneously to all Proposers along with answers to written questions submitted. (Prospective Proposers must facilitate this process by providing their telecopier numbers to the City). a RFP Schedule The schedule for the RFP process is: Activity Date • Mandatory Pre - Proposal Conference 10 a.m. - Noon, Pacific Time , 1997 • Final written questions due from proposers 11997 • City sends written 11997 responses to questions • Quality Service proposals Due , 1997 3 p.m., Pacific Time • City completes initial , 1997 evaluation and develops Proposer interview list • Financial Proposals Due , 1997 3 p.m., Pacific Time • City conducts , 1997 Proposer interviews • Agreement(s) to City 11997 Council for approval LAX:174339.4 Draft Water System RFP Start of Water System operations by Successful proposer pursuant to new Agreement July 1, 1997 NOTE: CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CHANGE THE SCHEDULE. Failure to take exception to the RFP and the Draft Agreement and to propose recommendations for modifications to the RFP or the Draft Ageement or the ruff icipal code shall be deemed approval and acceptance of these documents and shall be deemed a voiver of the right to object to the terms of these agreements. Proposers' Questions must be submitted in writing in accordance with the Schedule above, or be asked at the Pre - Proposal Conference. The City will not be responsible for or be bound by any oral instructions, statements, interpretations or oral explanations issued by the City, any officers, agents or representatives. •••W �- «- One mandatory Pre - Proposal Conference will be held. At that time, any Prospec- tive Proposer may ask questions. Questions will be answered to the degree possible at the Pre - Proposal Conference, but, as stated above, the City will not be responsible for or be bound by any oral instructions, statements, interpretations or oral explanations issued by the City, any officers, agents or representatives at the pre - proposal conference. Written answers will be provided after the Pre - Proposal conference to each Proposer at- tending the Pre - Proposal Conference. NOTE: Attendance at the Pre- Proposal Conference is mandatory for All Proposers. Prospective Proposers whose designated representative(s) do not attend the Pre - Proposal Conference will not be allowed to continue in this RFP process. Their Proposals, if submitted, shall be disqualified. If a joint Proposal is to be submitted, a representative from each firm with a substantial interest (representing more than thirty -three percent (33 %) of the total interest) must attend the Pre - Proposal Conference. This RFP calls for the submission of two proposals. The first proposal is a Quality LAX:174339.4 u OC?.1-i Draft Water System RFP Service Proposal. If, following the City's review of Quality Service Proposals, the City, in the exercise of its discretion, determines that a proposer would provide a high level of service, the City may request a Financial Proposal from one or more proposers. Quality Service proposals must be sub rit6ed no latter bran the time specified in the above schedule. Proposers' Quality Service Proposals will be evaluated by the City, which, in the exercise of its sole discretion, will review proposers' experience, record of compliance with all laws governing operation of municipal water systems, financial stability, quality of personnel who would perform the services called for by this RFP, and quality of proposed services. The City, in the exercise of its sole discretion, will select proposals which the City determines to meet best the City's needs for Quality Service. Selected proposers may be invited to participate in the Financial Proposal step, discussed below. Financial Proposals may be solicited by the City from all Proposers whose proposals appear to meet the requirements of the City for the effective use of the City's water system in provision of high - quality water service and contribution to the completion of specified capital improvements. Solicitation of a Financial Proposal from a Proposer should in no way be construed to mean that its service proposal was judged to be technically equal to any other Quality Service proposal. All criteria given in Section IV of this RFP will be used as a basis of evaluation. Proposers selected to submit Financial Proposals must subrnk their initial Financial Proposals no latter than the time specified in the above schedule. Proposers will be allowed and encouraged to amend their Financial Proposals to make them more competitive, at any time thereafter, until the City Council, at a meeting, sets a deadline for submission of amended Financial Proposals, as explained below. Each original Proposal and ten (10) copies should be firmly sealed in packaging that is clearly marked on the outside "EL SEGUNDO WATER SYSTEM REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)" and mailed or delivered to: LAX:174339.4 Ms. Cindy Mortesen City Clerk City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, Ca 90245 Telephone (310) 322 -4670, extension 218 7 ti�3 Draft Water System RFP The City will consider all Quality Service proposals aril Financial Proposals to be public information, once the deadine for sub Tission of the Quality Service proposals and Financial Proposals, respectively, have passed F. Proposal Evaluation - Quality Service Proposal Review of Proposals Proposers will be evaluated by Individual Proposal Criteria. The Individual Proposal Criteria will be used to identify the relative strengths and weaknesses of each Proposal. • • • •10 i Lem - The Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the following criteria, which are not listed in any order of precedence or importance: Service Capability. a. Operation and maintenance of a quality water system of at least 5,000 service connections. Include locations of all such water systems. b. Design and construction of comprehensive capital improvement and replacement schedule. Include total size of capital planning for all systems operated. C. Routine and major repair and maintenance. Detail your systematic view of repair and maintenance, and the resources, cost and manpower that you dedicate to both routine and major repair and maintenance. d. State - certified Water Quality Laboratory. Provide information detailing capabilities of in -house laboratory facilities and personnel. e. Engineering. Provide resumes of primary engineering personnel. Describe experience installing and utilizing automated technologies such as supervisory control and data acquisition systems. LAX:174339.4 Operating cooperatively with California municipalities, and intergovernmental agency coordination. Please provide specific sites, dates, type of cooperative effort involved, and names, addressees and telephone numbers of references who may be contacted. Detail your experience working in Draft Water System RFP coordination with municipalities on water issues and programs, e.g. fire department, building permits, plan checks, and city projects. g. Compliance with all federal and state water system operational requirements and reporting laws. h. Experience with operation and maintenance of a water system under an O&M Agreement or a joint powers authority. Include all systems and municipalities in which such agreements are maintained, and names, addresses and telephone numbers of municipal points of contact. Customer Service Program. Provide detail of both external and internal customer service programs, including response to customer service inquiries, tum -on/off service procedures, and payment accon rrodations. j. Emergency response capability. Demonstrate ability to provide 24 -hour on- call response to emergency calls, including natural and man -made disasters. Equipment: Documented ability to provide any necessary equipment as evidenced by prior record of timely equipment procurement and by vendor verification that Proposer's selected equipment can be delivered on Proposer's schedule. Start-up: Demonstrated ability to provide the necessary services in a smooth transition. i• Service Costa Cost of water services. • •, • OrgarizA n: Organization and qualifications of the Proposer. This includes an explanation of how the local management and corporate structure are linked; how the company(ies) foster innovation and high performance; and demonstration of corporate ethics. (Note that City may disqualify a proposer which has been convicted of criminal misconduct in connection with water service activities.) LAX:174339.4 E Draft Water System RFP Current City Water System Employees: Proposers should state whether, and on what general terms, they would hire or lease current City water system employees. Procedural Compliance: Proposer's compliance with RFP requirements. Environrnental Responsibility: Proposer's practices which demonstrate environmental responsibility, including compliance with laws and regulations governing water systems. Customer Service: Demonstrated ability to implement and operate high quality customer services. Public Education: Demonstrated ability to provide education leading to water conservation. Financial and Risk Factors Financial Background: Financial projections, strategy and capability of the Pro- poser. Proposer shall also provide audited financial statements. A Proposer's financial information which the Proposer seeks to be held confidential must be clearly identified as such by the Proposer. With the exception of Proposers' confi- dential financial information, Quality Service and Financial Proposals will be considered to be public information and will be available for public inspection, once the deadlines for submission of Quality Service and Financial proposals, respectively, have passed. Risks: Demonstrated capacity to handle risk factors in the contract including but not limited to: Compliance with current and new laws and regulations regarding water system operation, including testing and reporting; Possible constraints on rate increases stemming from the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" (Proposition 218). Protection and indemnification of the City and provision of cash bonds or letters of credit adequate to protect the City. Financial Reporting: Demonstrated record and capability of consistent and LM :17433 9.4 10 Draft Water System RFP accurate financial reporting. 2. interviews/Selection Process After the City's evaluation of the timely submitted Quality Service proposals, the City may issue invitations to one or more proposers to submit financial proposals and to interview with the City. Based on the contents of the Quality Service Proposals, the interviews and any other information requested by the City one or more Proposers may be selected for consideration at a City Council meeting. The purpose of the City Council meeting will be to select the successful proposer. City Staff will present the Quality Service and Financial Proposals submitted by each of the selected proposers. At the City Council meeting, as Financial Proposals will be considered along with Quality Service proposals, proposers will be allowed and encouraged to amend their Financial Proposals to make them more competitive. Amended Financial Proposals must be a minimum 0.1% change from the previous proposal. The procedure will remain open until all other remaining proposers whose Quality Service proposals were selected for consideration at the City Council meeting decline to amend their proposals below the last stated financial factor. Upon closing of RFP process, the City will determine whether, and if so to which proposer, to award the lease. The existing City Water Rate Structure was established by City of El Segundo Resolution No. 3922 dated June 6, 1995. It is the City's desire to maintain the existing rate structure, but allow the lessee to collect the revenue required to operate, maintain, and improve the water system, as prescribed in the lease documents. by the percentage indicated by the lessee. This figure will be used as part of the City's determination of best proposer and the award of the lease. G. General Terms The cost of preparing and submitting a Proposal is the sole responsibility of the Proposer and shall not be chargeable in any manner to the City. The successful proposer will be required to reimburse the City for the City's expenses of preparing this RFP, the Agreements to be entered into by City and the Successful Proposer(s), any necessary or appropriate revisions to the El Segundo Municipal Code and for negotiations and staff time, including attomeys' and consultants' fees and expenses. LAX:174339.4 11 001 i Draft Water System RFP Each proposer shall submit with its Financial Proposal a bond executed by a surety company licensed to do business in the State of California or a certified check or a cashier's check payable to the City in the amount of TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($20,000.00). Proposal Bonds and checks will be returned to all unsuccessful Proposers no later than thirty (30) days after the signing of contracts with successful Proposers. The City will return Proposal Bonds and checks of the successful Proposer no later than 30 days after the start of services pursuant to the Agreements. • • • ' - • Upon conclusion of the RFP process, agreements will be awarded and executed as described. The City's rights include but are not limited to the following: a. Issuing addenda to the Request for Proposals, for any purpose including ex- tending or otherwise revising the time for submittal and changing the requirements of the RFP, including the services sought; b. Withdrawing or modifying the Request for Proposals; C. Reissuing the RFP. d. Requesting clarification and/or additional information from any Proposer at any point in the procurement process; e. Executing an agreement or agreements with one or more Proposers, on the sole basis of the original Proposal or any negotiated additions to Proposal submissions; and f. Rejecting any or all Proposals, waiving irregularities in any Proposal or requirements of the RFP, accepting or rejecting all or any part of any Proposal and waiving any requirements of the Request for Proposals, as may be deemed to be in the best interest of the City. 5. ConMuence of Submission of Proposal a. City shall not be obligated to respond to any Proposal submitted nor be bound in any manner by the submission of a Proposal; LAX:174339.4 12 n 00J.l» Draft Water System RFP b. Submission of a Proposal to the City obligates the Proposer to enter into an agreement with the City as proposed; C. The Agreement shall not be binding or valid against the City unless and un- til it is executed in writing by the City (after approval by the City Council) and the selected Proposer, and the Proposer(s Cash bonds and insurance have been accepted by the City. The submission of a Proposal shall be deemed a representation and warranty by the Proposer that the Proposer has investigated all aspects of the RFP, that the Proposer is aware of the applicable facts pertaining to the RFP process, its procedures and require- ments and that the Proposer has read and understands the RFP. No request for modrficatlon of the provisions of a Proposal, or of the provisions of the Draft A reement or this RFP shall be considered after its submission on the gmurxfs that the Proposer was not fully informed as too any fact or condffim The City makes no warranty as to the accuracy of any data which may be contained in this RFP, or any addenda or the response of City; the City disclaims any responsibility for any such information which may subsequently be incomplete or inaccurate. 7. Rejection of Proposal for Financial Proposal Inaccuracies The City reserves the right to reject any Proposal containing errors or inconsisten- cies. Errors include, among other things, support information that is inconsistent with total cost estimates or any other error by the Proposer. The City will not be responsible for or be bound by any oral instructions, statements, interpretations or oral explanations issued by the City, or any of its officers, agents or representatives. The Successful Proposer(s) will submit Cash and Performance Bonds as provided in the Agreements. LAX:174339.4 13 0 0 .1 Draft Water System RFP H. Formal Bid Process Not Applicable. This procurement is an RFP, not a bid process. Formal bid principles, such as selection Of 'lowest responsible bidder" as set forth in the Public Contracts Code for construction projects, are not in any way applicable to this process. The City reserves complete discretion to select a firm it believes is best qualified to provide the services sought, in light of a number of factors to be considered as part of this RFP. In addition to all its other rights to withdraw or modify this RFP, the City also reserves the right to reject all proposals, at its sole discretion. V. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF PROPOSAL The City will use a two-step procurement process to solicit Quality Service and Financial Proposals separately. This section describes the desired Proposal format. The inclusion of additional information by the Proposer is encouraged. A. Proposal Preparation The Quality Service proposal shall consist of seven (7) sections (see Table V -1). Proposals must include a cover letter signed by an officer or agent of the Proposer who is duly authorized to bind the Proposer, along with a copy of the corporate resolution or other document establishing that the person submitting the proposal is authorized to do so. The original plus ten (10) copies of the Quality Service proposal must be submitted. The Financial Proposal shall consist of two (2) sections (see Table V-1). It must be accompanied by a cover letter signed by an officer or agent of the Proposer who is duly authorized to bind the Proposer, along with a copy of the corporate resolution or other document establishing that the person submitting the proposal is authorized to do so. The original plus ten (10) copies of the Financial Proposal must be submitted in accordance with the requirements of this RFP. Br Proposal Format The following Proposal format must be used by the Proposer. Failure to include any item or to adequately address any topic may result in Proposer's removal from the RFP process. LAX:174339.4 TABLE V-1 Contents of Quality Service and Financial Proposals 14 Draft Water system RFP WIT017 • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Financial Proposal 1 2 1M Transmittal letter Executive Summary Description of Proposed Services Project Organization and Qualifications Proposer Risks and Contractual Obligations Exceptions Proposer's Financial Data Representations and Certifications Transmittal letter Financial Proposal Submission Forms Description of Proposed Cost Of All pages of each Proposal must be numbered consecutively through the document starting with the first page of the transmittal letter as page one. C. Quality Service Proposal Content 1. Executive Summary In this section, the Proposer should discuss briefly, or outline, the highlights of your Proposal. 2. Description of Proposed Services In this section explain how you propose to provide water services as contemplated in this RFP. 3. Project Organization and Qualifications of Proposer This section should tell us about your company: describe the Proposer's expertise and experience, or how the proposer would obtain the expertise needed to design, manage and operate the water system. The following information should be included: a. Corporate/Agency Registry. Where is your firm incorporated? How long has your firm been providing service in California? If it has not provided service in California, state how it will become familiar with California LAX:174339.4 15 I- �1��J Draft Water System RFP requirements for water service. Provide information on other states, if any, Mere you are incorporated, and what state and in what year your parent company was incorporated. Please provide a copy of the California Articles of Incorporation, if any. b. General description of the experience of the firm(s); C. Experience, including description of up to three (3) relevant projects, degree of involvement, names of clients and names and telephone numbers of client contact persons. d. Tell us about yourselves: Relevant service experience of key personnel and a description of their backgrounds. e. Tell us about your organization of the proposed project, including overall staffing, and percent commitment to Program, of specific staffing (such as management, operations, mechanics and financial), including names of staff and titles, specify whether staff is new or existing. Tell us about your claims, complaints, indictments, Notice(s) of Violation ( "NoVs "), settlements, arbitrations and litigation, civil and criminal, in which the firm or principals have been involved since January 1, 1992. The Proposer must also include details of all pending litigation, including notices of violation, and pending criminal investigations against the Proposer or its parent or sister companies or joint venture company(ies) by any governmental entity against the Proposer or its parent for services relating to water system management, and all litigation against all governmental en- tities by the Proposer or its parent company or joint venture company(ies). Proposers which have submitted SEC Section 10 K filings shall include a copy of their most recent Section 10 K filing. The City requires that certain risks and contractual obligations be addressed in the Proposal. The City views protection against related litigation as a matter of great importance. Please describe your approaches to: LAX:174339.4 Compliance with current and new laws and regulations regarding water system operation, including testing and reporting; Possible constraints on rate increases stemming from the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act' (Proposition 218). i[: Draft Water System RFP Protection and indemnification of the City and provision of cash bonds or letters of credit adequate to protect the City. 7717M- The Proposer must: a. warrant that it has reviewed the requirements of the project as described in Ns RFP and the Draft Agreement and any addenda; and b. specify and discuss any berms of the RFP and Draft Agreement that the Proposer cannot or does not propose to meet a. Provide copies of your financial statements for the entity which is proposed to sign the contract, for the most recent three fiscal years and through the most recently completed quarter of the current fiscal year. . b. What, if any, is your firm's investment grade credit rating? C. Provide your total corporate assets. Provide total California assets in addition to corporate assets. d. Provide your average gross corporate revenue in each of the last five (5) years. In addition, provide total average gross California revenue for the same period. e. Provide positive net corporate operating income in each of the last five (5) years. Provide the net California operating income for the same period. Explain any extenuating circumstances. If the entity which will sign the contract has a parent company or is proposing a joint venture, the parent company and joint venture compa- ny(ies) must also provide income and balance sheets for the most recent three fiscal years and for the most recently completed quarter of the current fiscal year. The parent company must provide a statement indicating the extent to which the owners or parent company of the proposed entity would provide financial assurance of performance. g. If the entity which will sign the contract has been in existence for less than LM:174339.4 17 Draft Water System RFP one (1) year, Proposer must provide sufficient financial data to substantiate to the City's satisfaction the financial capability and viability of the entity. h. The Proposer must provide a statement from its Chief Financial Officer indi- cating that there has been no material change in the financial circumstances of the proposing entity (or its parent or owners if they are providing financial assurance of performance) since the date of the last financial statements. Financing of the project is to be the sole responsibility of the Proposer. The Proposer must provide a financing plan which describes the sources and uses of funds, the financing structure and all assumptions used in the formulation of the strategy. The Proposer must demonstrate that it can provide the required financing from either: 1) internally generated funds; or 2) commitments from external sources. City makes no representation that it will be able to maintain the confidentiality of proposers' financial information. A Proposer who subs is financial inforrna*m wlvch it asks to have treated as confidential should submit a statement justifying its treatrnent as confidential and label it as a separate exhibit; dearly identified as confidential and cross - referenced in the proposal. IT-7071114MW5 Me Each Proposer must complete and sign EXHIBIT 1, THE REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS FORM. The form must be signed by an officer or agent of the Proposer duly authorized to bind the Proposer and must be notarized. The Proposer must include a copy of the corporate resolution or other documentation showing that the person signing the Representations and Certifications is so authorized. D. Financial Proposal Content 1. Proposal Content Completed Financial Proposal Submission Forms signed by an officer or agent of the Proposer who is duly authorized to bind the Proposer must be included as the first page of the Financial Proposal submittal. In signing the form, Proposer: 1) agrees that terms of both the service and Financial Proposals are firm for a period of 180 days from the Financial Proposal due date; and 2) assures that a Cash Bond will be issued seventy -two (72) hours after approval of contract by the City Council. LAX:174339.4 18 S ;,r. I jrraft 2. Descdplion of •p1• 2d Financial A• -1 Based on the service description of the proposed services, a breakdown of the financial implications must be provided. Note that the Financial Proposal Forms require that the Proposer provide full disclosure of estimated costs including all assumptions used to make projections and estimates. E. Subs *Ww Guidelines for (duality Service and Financial Proposals One Original Proposal must be submitted typed or printed on both sides of 81/2" x 11" paper. Each page of your Proposal must be numbered and each section should be identified dearly. 2. Ten (10) stapled or bound copies, typed or printed on both sides of 8-1/2" x 11" recycled content paper must also be submitted. 3. The Proposal and all attachments shall be complete and free of ambiguities, alter- ations and erasures. The Proposal shall be executed by the Proposer or the Proposer's duly authorized officer or agent. In the event of conflict between words and numerals, the words shall prevail. F. FINANCIAL STATEMENT INFORMATION 1. Corporate/Agency Registry Where is your firm incorporated? How long has your firm been providing service in California? If it has not provided service in California, state how it will become familiar with California requirements for water service. Provide information on other states where you are incorporated, and what state and in what year your parent company was incorporated. Please provide a copy of the California Articles of Incorporation, if any. VI. TERM OF CONTRACTS, CONTRACT EXTENSION A Term of Contracts - n • .• - •i Five years. LAX:174339.4 a (1nI>' -i Draft Water System RFP VII. COMPENSATION A General. The Successful Proposer(s) will receive compensation for Services through reve- nues from water service by Successful Proposer(s), subject to the City's cap on rates as discussed in the Draft Agreement. Bk Financial Proposal Submission Forms. Proposed costs are to be submitted on Financial Proposal Submittal Forms, described in EXHIBIT 2. Financial Proposals which do not include complete and accurate ate infonnation may be considered non - responsive. All proposals must be in units of one cent ($0.01). Fractions less than one cent ($0.01) will be adjusted downward. LAX:174339.4 0 n? �,' Draft Water System RFP EXHIBIT 1 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS FORM The "Representations and Certifications" consist of two parts. The first is a statement as follows: III i inseri n �. _-x�� ,:.i��lt,lQl C/lR,u 111 lu l I IG Representation and Certificationl, represent and certify, on behalf of [insert name of entity or entities submitting Q uality Service propgsall that I am familiar with the information presented in the Quality Service proposal, and that it is true an correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I am authorized to execute this Representa- tion and Certification. Signed The second part of the Representation and Certification is a copy of the corporate resolution or other document establishing that the person making the Representation and Certification was authorized to do so. LAX:174339.4 1 -1 OC1 Draft Water System RFP EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO FINANCIAL PROPOSAL FORMS Each form shall be signed by an officer or agent of the Proposer who is duly authorized to bind the Proposer, and a copy must be included with the Financial Proposal submittal. In signing the form, Proposer: 1) agrees that terms of both the technical and Financial Proposals are firm for a period of 180 days from the Financial Proposal due date; and 2) assures that a Cash Bond will be submitted to the City seventy -two (72) hours after approval of contract by City Council. The proposal shall be submitted on the attached Proposal Sheet. The Proposal Sheet shall be filled out as follows: A. Purchase of Supplies, Tools, Vehicles and Equipment. Lessee agrees to buy from the City all supplies, tools, vehicles, and equipment listed on Exhibit C of the Lease Agreement for the Lump Sum Price of $ B. Water Rate Adjustment Factor. The existing City Water Rate Structure was established by City of El Segundo Resolution No. 3922 dated June 6, 1995. It is the City's desire to maintain the existing rate structure, but allow the lessee to collect the revenue required to operate, maintain, and improve the water system, as prescribed in the lease documents. by the percentage indicated by the lessee. This figure will be used as part of the City's determination of best proposer and the award of the lease. C. Proposer's Contribution to Completion of Capital Improvements specified in Exhibit D. I.AX:174339.4 2 -1 it v 1 .l DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR LEASE OF WATER SYSTEM BETWEEN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ( DATE 1 LAX2:174338.4 DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR LEASE OF WATER SYSTEM THIS LEASE AGREEMENT ( "Lease ") is made as of 1997, by and between the CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ( "City) ", a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, and, a corporation ( "Lessee "). W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, City provides for the residential and commercial water needs of approximately 4,600 customers ( "Water Service ") in the service area set forth in Exhibit A ( "Service Area "); and WHEREAS, City is the owner of a water system consisting of real property and facilities described on Exhibit B ( "Water System "); and WHEREAS, City has adjudicated rights to 953 acre feet of groundwater annually under the amended judgment in California Water Service Company, et al, v. City of Compton, et al, Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. 506,806 ( "Groundwater "); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the amended judgment in the California Water Service Company, et al v. City of Compton, et al. case, the Watermaster administers the City's rights to the Groundwater; and WHEREAS, Lessee represents that Lessee is qualified to provide the Water Service and to maintain and repair the Water System. LAX2:174338.4 2 ON 31; DRAFT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Lease of Water System. City hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee hereby leases from City the Water System. The Water System is leased in its "as is" condition. Neither City nor any of its agents has made any representation or warranties with respect to the Water System except as specifically set forth in this Lease. Section 2. Lease of Groundwater. City hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee leases from City, the Groundwater. City agrees to take all lawful and feasible actions which the Water Replenishment District of Southern California or the Watermaster reasonably requests to enable the Lessee to use or sublease the Groundwater. This lease of Groundwater is granted subject to the following conditions: A. At the expiration or termination of this Lease, all rights to the Groundwater shall automatically revert to City. LAX2:174338.4 B. During the term of this Lease, Lessee shall pay any and all assessments levied by the Water Replenishment District of Southern California on the pumping of or right to pump Groundwater, and the Watermaster costs attributable to the pumping or right to pump the Groundwater. C. Lessee shall comply with all rules and regulations of the Water Replenishment District and the Watermaster in connection with the use or assignment of the Groundwater. 3 0 0135 DRAFT Section 3. Term. The term of the Lease shall be for five (5) years unless earlier terminated as provided in this Lease (the "Term "). The Term of this Lease shall commence on 1997 ( "Effective Date ") and shall terminate on IF 2002. Section 4. Use. Subject to the provisions of this Lease, Lessee agrees to use the Water System exclusively for the purpose of furnishing Water Service to customers. Section 5. Rent. The annual rent for the Water System shall be the total of $ ( "Base Rent ") plus percentage of gross revenues generated by Lessee from (i) providing Water Service and (ii) subleasing the Groundwater ( "Percentage Rent "). Base Rent shall be paid annually in advance commencing upon execution hereof and on or before July 1st of each succeeding year of the Lease term. Percentage Rent shall be paid annually commencing September 1, 1997, and shall be for the year period ending June 30, 1997 and each year thereafter. This Lease is a net lease and the Lessee shall be liable for and pay all taxes and assessments, maintenance, repairs, utility charges, insurance premiums, and all other costs and expenses related to the Water System or Groundwater. For any partial years, rent shall be prorated on a daily basis. Section 5. Repair Maintenance and Operation. Lessee at its own expense throughout the Term of the Lease, shall keep and maintain the water system facilities and improvements, and all 1.AX2:174338.4 T 0913 5 DRAFT appurtenances, in first class condition, in good order and repair, and in safe and clean condition. Lessee shall comply with all laws applicable to the Water System, including laws imposing water quality and reporting requirements. Section 6. Additional Required Maintenance._ In addition to the Repair, Maintenance and Operation required by Section 5 above, the Lessee at its own expense throughout the term of this Lease shall perform the following maintenance: 1. Exercise all water values annually, 2. Flush all water mains annually, unless precluded from doing so because of draught conditions, 3. Convert existing galvanized services to copper at a rate of at least 130 services annually, 4. Repair or Replace at least 400 meters annually, and 5. Replace 30 system valves annually. Lessee shall pay all costs and expenses associated with the completion of the required maintenance under this section. Section 7. Rates and Charges. The rates and charges imposed by the Lessee to each customer in the Service Area shall in no event exceed those rates, including increases, as set forth in Exhibit "C." Section 8. Customer Billing and Collections. A. Lessee shall bill and collect water charges from customers receiving water through the Water System. B. In addition, Lessee shall bill and collect on behalf of LAX2:174338.4 A 00137 DRAFT City from customers in the Service Area any additional amounts which City may assess as a utility user's tax or sewer service fee on such customers and shall promptly pay all such amounts collected to City. C. City and Lessee shall jointly read the meters of all customers in the Service Area one (1) business day prior to (a) the Effective Date and (b) the expiration or termination of this Lease. All monies due or collected for services rendered and water sold or delivered prior the Effective Date and after the expiration or termination of this Lease shall be the property of the City. All monies due or collected for services rendered and water sold or delivered after the Effective Date and during the Term of this Lease shall be the property of Lessee. City and Lessee shall cooperate with one another to facilitate the collection of each party's accounts receivable. Section 9. Capital Improvements. A. "Capital Improvements" shall mean any improvements deemed to be capital improvements under generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"), including, but not limited to, pipeline replacements, construction of or major improvements to the reservoirs, major improvements to the treatment plant, new wells, meter replacements and similar items. Capital Improvements shall not mean maintenance activities in accordance with customary utility practices, including, but not limited to, repair of pipeline leaks, painting or coating of the interior or LAX2:174338.4 11 a n , ., 1`,0 DRAFT exterior of reservoirs, repair of defective meters, repair of pumps and controls, and similar items or required maintenance [other than meter replacement] as specified in Section 6. B. Lessee shall construct and install the Capital Improvements as set forth in Exhibit "D" in the time frame identified. It is the intent of the City that $ annually be spent by Lessee during each fiscal year for Capital Improvements to the Water System as set forth in Exhibit "D." If Lessee shall fail to spend up to $ during each fiscal year, Lessee shall remit to City on or before September 1 of the following year the difference between $ and the amount spent on Capital Improvements. C. Except in case of emergency, Lessee shall obtain prior approval of City before making Capital Improvements to the Water System. Lessee shall present a description of the proposed Capital Improvements) to City for review. Capital Improvements shall conform in all respects to City specifications and requirements for such work, and final plans and specifications shall be subject to approval by the Director of Public Works or his designee. Such Capital Improvements shall become part of the Water System and title shall vest in City immediately upon completion of construction. D. Lessee shall construct and install any Capital Improvements in accordance with all requirements, including, but not limited to, competitive bidding and prevailing wage rates, LAX2:174338.4 7 ()01 39 DRAFT that would be applicable if City carried out the work as a public improvement. E. on or before each September 1, Lessee shall prepare and submit to City an annual report describing the Capital Improvement(s) constructed during the preceding fiscal year, including the actual costs of each Capital Improvement and the total for the fiscal year. The report shall include such documentation of the costs as City may request. Capital Improvements installed by Lessee but paid for by a third party or from the proceeds of insurance, shall not be calculated for Lessee's obligations to provide Capital Improvements. Expenditures in excess of $ per year may be carried over and applied to subsequent years' Capital Improvements requirements. Section 10. Employees. [This term will be revised based on information provided by Proposers. For discussion purposes only, the following provision is included]. Lessee agrees to offer to hire the current employees of City who work with the LAX2:174338.4 City Water System in comparable positions, at or above current total City compensation, including pay and benefits., as employees of Lessee and otherwise upon terms and conditions applicable to employees of Lessee in similar positions. Those employees who worked for City will be utilized to the maximum extent possible to provide service to the E1 Segundo area and in any event will be utilized in the Los Angeles Basin, including 8 oe�I DRAFT the South Bay service area, unless voluntarily transferred to another service area. Section 11. Insurance. [Needs Review by Risk Management at City] A. Obligations of Lessee. During the term of this Lease, Lessee at its own cost and expense shall maintain insurance, issued by a carrier or carriers acceptable to City, as follows: (1) Commercial general liability insurance in the single limit amount of not less than $5,000,000, written on an occurrence basis. Such insurance shall include coverage for injury (including death) or damage to persons and /or property arising out of the operations of Lessee pursuant to this Lease. The policy shall include coverage for liability assumed under this Lease for personal injury, property damage and all other insurable claims as an "insured contract" for the performance of Lessee's indemnity obligations under this Lease. LAX2:174338.4 ** What about earthquake insurance? * ** (2) Workers' compensation insurance, or a certificate of self insurance, insuring against liability under the Workers' Compensation Insurance and Safety Act now in force in California, or any act hereafter enacted as an amendment or supplement thereto or in lieu thereof. Such insurance shall fully cover all persons employed by Lessee in connection with its operations under this Lease for claims of death or bodily injury arising in connection with their employment by Lessee pursuant to its 7 DRAFT operations under this Lease. (3) Automobile (vehicle) liability insurance on an occurrence basis for bodily injury and /or property damage in a single limit amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000). B. All policies of insurance shall contain an endorsement in favor of City and its officers, agents and employees listing them as additional insureds. C. The parties shall periodically review the insurance required hereby for the purpose of agreeing on increases in the minimum limits of such insurance, from time to time, to amounts which may be reasonable and customary for similar facilities of like size and operation. D. All insurance shall be effected under policies issued by insurers of recognized responsibility, licensed or permitted to do business in the State of California and reasonably acceptable to City. E. All policies of insurance issued by the respective insurers shall provide that such policies shall not be cancelled or materially changed without at least thirty (30) days' prior written notice to Lessee and to City. Copies of such policies shall be deposited with City, together with appropriate evidence of payment of the premiums therefor, prior to the Effective Date. Copies of all renewed or new policies, together with evidence of payment, shall likewise be deposited with City prior to LAX2:174338.4 10 t DRAFT expiration dates of expiring or non - renewed policies. F. The limits of insurance required by this Lease or as carried by Lessee shall not limit the liability of Lessee nor relieve Lessee of any obligation hereunder. G. Lessee shall cause each insurance policy obtained by it to provide that the insurance company waives all rights of recovery by way of subrogation against City in connection with any damage covered by any policy. Section 12. Liens and Encumbrances. Lessee agrees to keep the Water System and the Groundwater free and clear of all liens, security interests and encumbrances, except for those consented to by the City. At the expiration of the Lease, City shall assume control of the Water System free and clear of any and all liens, security interests and encumbrances entered into by the Lessee during the Lease Term. Section 13. Surrender Upon Expiration or Termination. Upon expiration or termination of this Lease, Lessee agrees that it shall surrender to City the Water System facilities and LAX2:174338.4 improvements, and all appurtenances, in first class condition, in good order and repair, and in safe and clean condition. Section 14. Events of Default. The occurrence of any one or more of the following events (hereinafter called "Events of Default "), shall constitute a material default and breach of this Lease by Lessee: a. The vacating or abandonment of the Water System or 11 () n 14 LAX2:174338.4 DRAFT the failure to provide Water Service. b. The failure by Lessee to make any payment of rent or any other payment required to be made by Lessee hereunder, as and when due. C. The failure by Lessee to observe any of the covenants, conditions or provisions of this Lease to be observed or performed by Lessee, other than the payment of money, where such failure shall continue for a period of ten (10) days after written notice hereof from City to Lessee, provided, however, that if the nature of Lessee's default is such that more than ten (10) days are reasonably required for its cure, then Lessee shall not be deemed to be in default if it commences such cure within said 10 -day period and thereafter diligently prosecutes such cure to completion. d. (i) The making by Lessee of any general arrangement or assignment for the benefit of creditors; (ii) Lessee becomes a "debtor" as defined in the then - applicable United States Bankruptcy Code (unless, in the case of a petition or order filed against Lessee, the same is dismissed within thirty (30) days); (iii) the appointment of a trustee or receiver to take possession of substantially all of Lessee's assets located at the Water System or of Lessee's interest in this Lease, where possession is not restored to Lessee within thirty (30) days; or (iv) the 12 �1 .S 4 A DRAFT attachment, execution or other judicial seizure of substantially all of Lessee's asserts located at the Water System or of Lessee's interest in this Lease, where such seizure is not discharged within thirty (30) days. 15. Remedies in the Event of Lessee Default. City shall have the following remedies if Lessee commits a default. These remedies are not exclusive; they are cumulative in addition to any remedies now or later allowed by law. a. Termination. Upon occurrence of an Event of Default, City, in addition to any other rights or remedies available to City at law or in equity, shall have the right to immediately terminate this Lease and all rights of Lessee hereunder, by giving Lessee written notice that this Lease is terminated. If City so terminates this Lease, then City may recover from Lessee the sum of all damages incurred by City by reason of Lessee's default, including, but not limited to, those provided by California Civil Code Section 1952.2. b. Continuation of Lease. Should an Event of Default occur and if City does not elect to terminate this Lease, City may, from time to time, without terminating this Lease, either (i) recover all rent and other amounts payable hereunder as they become due or (ii) relet the Water System or any part thereof on behalf of City for such term or LAX2:174338.4 13 LAX2:174338.4 DRAFT terms, at such rent or rents and pursuant to such other provisions, as City, in its sole discretion, may deem advisable, all with the right, at Lessee's cost, to make alterations and repairs to the Water System. C. Re- entry. Upon an Event of Default, City shall have the right, with or without terminating this Lease, to re -enter the Water System and remove all persons and property from the Water System, upon three (3) days' written notice of intent to exercise City's right of re -entry hereunder. Any three (3) day Notice to Quit or similar notice under the laws of unlawful detainer shall be sufficient to satisfy this Section. d. No Constructive Termination. None of the following remedial actions, singly or combination, shall be construed as an election by City to terminate this Lease, unless City has in fact given Lessee written notice that this Lease is terminated: Any act by City to maintain or preserve the Water System; any efforts by City to relet the Water System; any re- entry, repossession or reletting of the Water System by City; the appointment of a receiver, upon the initiative of City, to protect City's interest under this Lease; or exercise of any other right or remedy provided for herein or under applicable laws. If City takes any of the foregoing remedial actions without terminating this Lease, City may nevertheless at any time after taking 14 P rII14J LAX2:174338.4 DRAFT any such remedial action terminate this Lease by written notice to Lessee. e. Lessee's Right to Cure. After an Event of Default, City, in addition to or in lieu of exercising any other remedies, may (but without any obligation so to do) cure the breach underlying the Event of Default for the account and at the expense of Lessee; provided that City by prior notice shall first allow Lessee a reasonable opportunity to cure, except in cases of emergency, where City may proceed without prior notice to Lessee. Lessee shall, upon demand, immediately reimburse City for all costs (including costs of settlements, defense, court costs and attorney's fees) which City may incur in the course of any such cure. f. Remedies Cumulative. The rights, privileges, elections, and remedies of City herein are cumulative and no one of them shall be exclusive of the other, and City shall have the right to pursue any one or all of such remedies or any other remedy or relief which may be provided by law, whether or not stated in this Lease. No provision of this Article shall be deemed to limit or negate City's rights under this Lease to indemnification from Lessee for any liability asserted against or imposed upon City, whether before or after termination of this Lease, which liability is based upon matters occurring prior to the termination of 15 1 .J DRAFT this Lease. 16. City's Default. City shall not be in default unless City fails to perform obligations required of City within a reasonable time, but in no event later than thirty (30) days after written notice by Lessee to City specifying wherein City has failed to perform such obligation; provided, however that if the nature of City's obligation is such that more than thirty (30) days are required for performance, then City shall not be in default if City commences performance within such 30 -day period and thereafter diligently prosecutes the same to completion. 17. Damage or Destruction of Premises. If the improvements on the Water System are partially damaged or destroyed, or should the leasehold improvements be damaged or destroyed by fire, casualty, or hazard, and if damage is so slight as not to interfere substantially with the Lessee's use of the Water System, then this Lease shall not terminate but shall continue in full force and effect and there shall be no abatement of rent. All insurance proceeds collected for destruction of the Water System shall be applied to the cost of repairs. Should there be a total or substantial destruction of the leasehold improvements so that the Water System or portions thereof are rendered unusable, either party shall have the right to terminate this Lease upon written notice within sixty (60) days after the event of total or substantial destruction. LAX2:174338.4 Section 18. Assignment and Subletting. The City is 16 00143 DRAFT entering into this Lease in substantial part because of the unique experience and qualification of Lessee. Lessee shall not transfer, assign, sublet, change ownership or hypothecate this Lease or Lessee's interest in and to the Water System without first procuring the written consent of City. City's consent may be withheld for any reason. Notwithstanding the above, Lessee may sublease or assign its leasehold interest in the Groundwater at fair market rates with the consent of the City, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. Section 19. Discharge of Liens. Lessee agrees to pay and discharge all claims for materials, parts, labor, water, power and other consumables and supplies furnished at Lessee's instance or request upon or to the Water System and to keep the Water System free and clear of all liens resulting from such claims. City agrees to pay and discharge all claims and obligations for materials, parts, labor, water, power and other consumables and supplies furnished at City's instance or request upon or to the Water System prior to the commencement of the Term of this Lease. LAX2:174338.4 Section 20. Indemnity of City. Lessee, upon demand of the City, made by and through the City Attorney, shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents from and against any and all losses, liabilities, fines, penalties, claims, causes of action, damages, liabilities or judgments, including City's or any prevailing party other than the City, attorneys' fees and 17 DRAFT costs, arising out of or relating to the Lease, including without limitation any challenge to the Request for Proposals process which resulted in the Lease and any and all challenges to the validity of the Lease [including without limitation challenges based upon Article XIII of the California Constitution], except tort -based claims arising out of the sole negligence or willful acts of the City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents or contractors for actions committed prior to the Effective Date of this Lease. Section 21. Law to Govern; Venue; Jury Waiver. The law of the State of California shall govern this Lease without regard to any otherwise governing principles of conflicts of laws. In the event of litigation between the parties, venue in state trial courts shall lie exclusively in the County of Los Angeles. In the event of litigation in a U.S. District Court exclusive venue shall lie in the Central District of California. Lessee waives its right to jury trial. Section 22. Notices. All notices, statements, demands, requests, consents, approvals, authorizations, offers, agreements, appointments or designations hereunder by either party to the other shall be in writing and shall be sufficiently given and served upon the other party, if sent by United States registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: City: City of E1 Segundo LAX2:174338.4 1 g DRAFT City Clerk City Hall 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 Lessee: or at such other address as either party shall later designate for such purpose by written notice to the other party. Mailed notice shall be deemed given on the date of delivery shown on the receipt card. Section 23. Waiver. The waiver by City of any breach by Lessee of any term, covenant or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition hereof. The waiver by Lessee of any breach by City of any term, covenant or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition hereof. Section 24. Nondiscrimination. Lessee covenants by and for itself, its officers and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through it, and this Lease is made and accepted upon and subject to the following conditions: that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons, on account of sex, race, color, creed, national origin, or ancestry, in the leasing, transferring, use, or enjoyment of the Water System nor shall Lessee itself, or any person claiming under or through it, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation. LAX2:174338.4 19 DRAFT Section 25. Counterparts. This Lease may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original, but all together shall constitute but one and the same Lease. Section 26. Amendments. This Lease may be amended or modified only in writing signed by the parties thereto. Section 27. Taxes and Assessments; Possessory Interest. Lessee shall pay all taxes, assessments, fees, levies, charges, license or permit fees and other governmental charges of any kind or nature which are or may be at any time or from time to time during the Term of this Lease levied, charged, assessed or imposed upon or against the Water System or the Groundwater or the leasehold estate created hereby or which may be imposed upon any interest of Lessee acquired pursuant to this Lease. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Lessee acknowledges that this Lease may create a possessory interest which may be subject to property taxation and that Lessee may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest. Any such tax shall be the sole responsibility of Lessee. Section 28. Supplies Tools, Vehicles and Eauipment, Lessee agrees to buy from City the supplies, tools, vehicles and equipment listed in Exhibit "E" for the lump sum of $ Section 29. Attorneys' Fees. If any party to this Lease commences legal proceedings or arbitration to interpret this Lease, LAX2:174338.4 20 'J� DRAFT to enforce any of its terms or for damages for its breach, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees. Section 30. Compliance with Law. Lessee warrants that it will comply with all applicable laws and implementing regulations, as they, from time to time, may be amended, specifically including, but not limited to applicable laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, the County of Los Angeles, ordinances of the City and the requirements of all other agencies with jurisdiction. Section 31. Hazardous Substances. A. Lessee will not cause or permit to occur any release, generation, manufacture, storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal of Hazardous Substance (defined below) on, in, under, or from the Water System or the Groundwater or any portion of it in violation of Applicable Laws. If any release or disposal of any Hazardous Substance occurs on, in, or under the Water System or any portion of it, Lessee, at its own cost and expense, will immediately take such action as is necessary to detain the spread of and remove the Hazardous Substance to the complete satisfaction of City and other appropriate governmental authorities. Lessee shall promptly notify City of any release or disposal (of which Lessee has knowledge or becomes aware) of any Hazardous Substance on, in, under or from the Water System or the Groundwater. B. In addition to the defense and indemnity obligations set LAX2:174338.4 21 p.D J DRAFT forth in Section 20 of this Lease, Lessee shall indemnify, defend, protect and hold harmless City, its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers, agents, assigns and any successor or successors to City's interest from and against all claims, actual damages (including but not limited to special and consequential damages) , natural resources damages, punitive damages, injuries, costs, response, remediation and removal costs, losses, demands, debts, liens, liabilities, causes of action, suits, legal or administrative proceedings, interest, fines, charges, penalties and expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' and expert witness fees and costs incurred in connection with defending against any of the foregoing or in enforcing this indemnity) of any kind whatsoever paid, incurred or suffered by, or asserted against, City or its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers or agents arising from or attributable to any repair, cleanup or detoxification, or preparation and implementation of any removal, remedial, response, closure or other plan (regardless of whether undertaken due to governmental action) concerning the Water System which is or has been transported, transferred, processed, stored, disposed of which has otherwise come to be located by Lessee, or its activities pursuant to this Lease result in a release of a Hazardous Waste into the environment. This indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant to § 107(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, "CERCLA ", 42 U.S.C. § 9607(e), and LAX2:174338.4 22 UQ15', DRAFT California Health and Safety Code S 25364, to defend, protect, hold harmless and indemnify City from all forms of liability under CERCLA, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( "RCRA ") , 42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 et seq. or other similar federal, state or local law or regulation for any and all matters addressed in this section. This provision shall survive the expiration of the period during which services are to be provided under this Lease. C. For purposes of this Lease, "Hazardous Substance" means any substance, material or waste which is defined as a "hazardous waste," "hazardous material," "hazardous substance," "extremely hazardous waste," "restricted hazardous waste" or similar term under any provision of any federal, state or local law and includes, without limitation, hydrocarbons, petroleum, gasoline, crude oil or any products, by- products or fractions thereof. Section 32. City's Access. City and City's agents shall have the right to enter the Water System at any time in the case of an emergency, and otherwise at reasonable times and on reasonable prior notice for the following purposes (i) to determine whether the Water System is in good condition as required by this Lease and whether Lessee is complying with its obligations under this Lease; (ii) to serve, post or keep posted any notices required or allowed by law or under this Lease, and (iii) as City may otherwise reasonably deem necessary. 33. Successors and Assigns. All of the covenants, agreements, conditions, and undertakings contained in this Lease LAX2:174338.4 23 _� J •l DRAFT shall extend and inure to, and be binding upon, the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the respective parties hereto. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to grant to confer upon any person or person, firm, corporation, or governmental authority, other than the parties hereto, any right, claim, or privilege by virtue of any covenant, agreement, condition, or undertaking contained in this Lease. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Lease to be executed and attested by their proper officers thereunto duly authorized, and their official seals to be hereto affixed, as of the day and year first above written. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective officers. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO By Mayor, City of E1 Segundo LAX2:174338.4 24 By Its APPROVED AS TO FORM: By City Attorney r. D- R -A -F -T CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA RECLAIMED WATER SERVICES REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) [@ @Date] City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, California 90245 LAX2:174543.2 Draft Water System RFP CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA RECLAIMED WATER SERVICES REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) I. RFP HIGHLIGHTS A. Overview of this RFP INTRODUCTION: The City of El Segundo, California ( "City ") seeks proposals to provide reclaimed water services for a five (5) year period. The successful proposer would provide reclaimed water services. The successful proposer's charges would be subject to a limit as indicated in the Draft Agreement. The successful proposer would bear the risk of litigation and adverse determinations that rates which could be charged were subject to the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" (Proposition 218). The City's goal is to provide the best possible service for reclaimed water customers. The Successful Proposer would rent the ability to provide Reclaimed Water Services from the City for a flat rental fee per year, plus a percentage of the Successful Proposer's gross revenues generated from providing reclaimed water services. B. Contracts to be Awarded Under this RFP, the City of E1 Segundo may award one agreement to provide reclaimed water services. LAX2:174543.2 The agreement would be for 5 years. C. About this RFP Further information regarding Reclaimed Water Services, and further information about this RFP are provided in the following sections and in the Draft Reclaimed Water Lease Agreement, which, by this reference, is incorporated into and made a part of this RFP. The City invites proposals for the lease of the reclaimed water services from proposers without regard to the prospective proposers' places of business or prior service areas in an effort to attract proposals from the widest possible range of qualified proposers. The City seeks proposers to propose how reclaimed water services could be provided by the successful proposer in a high quality, cost - effective, safe, and efficient manner which protects public health and safety. 1 ( ), r..), 57 Draft Water System RFP One (1) mandatory Pre - Proposal Conference will be held, although the City reserves the right to hold additional mandatory conferences. The Quality Service and Financial Proposals called for in this RFP will be considered to be public information and will be available for public inspection, once the deadlines for submission of Quality Service and Financial Proposals, respectively, have passed. Recommendations for modifications to the RFP or the Draft Agreements, or to the El Segundo Municipal Code which will result in efficiency and economy are welcome, but should be specific and should propose substitute language when modifications are suggested. All recommendations shall be submitted in writing. II. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Area Description The City of E1 Segundo is a general law city located in the County of Los Angeles, California. B. Existing Reclaimed Water Services The City of E1 Segundo currently serves 20 reclaimed water customers, with total sales of about 3,600 acre feet /year. The City obtains reclaimed water under contract from the West Basin Municipal Water District. A very small portion of the City, east of Aviation Boulevard, is served by Southern California Water Company, and that portion of the City is not within this RFP. The City provides reclaimed water services through a pipeline distribution system owned by WBMWD. More detailed system information is available upon request to the City. LAX2:174543.2 Please understand that the data contained in this RFP is for general informational purposes only. Proposers should not rely on this information for developing Proposals. Instead, prospective proposers have the responsibility of ascertaining all facts upon which they rely in preparing and submitting their respective proposals. Further, the City makes no warranty as to the accuracy of the information in this RFP and disclaims any responsibility for any factual statements which may be incomplete or inaccurate. 6 Draft Water Syatem RFP C. City Goals and Objectives - General The City's goal is to lease the City's Water Services to a proposer who will provide quality reclaimed water service in compliance with all applicable laws, in a cost - effective manner. III. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS A. General In brief, City seeks to lease its reclaimed water services, and to have reclaimed water services provided at a high level of quality and low cost. IV. RFP PROCESS A. Process Integrity Guidelines for Proposers Given the scope of this Request for Proposals (RFP) and the City's desire to award contracts in a timely manner and free of contention, the City has created and instituted Process Integrity Guidelines for Proposers, as set forth in this Section IV.A of this RFP. These Process Integrity Guidelines for Proposers govern interactions between Proposers and the City, and apply to prospective proposers upon receipt of this RFP and until the City's staff recommendations are submitted to the City Council. L.AX2:174543.2 • All contacts between the Proposer and the City, except as to legal matters, are to be through Eduard Schroder, Public Works Director c/o City of E1 Segundo, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California 90245, telecopier (310) 322 -7137. • Contacts by counsel or on legal matters are to be submitted in writing to the City Attorney, Mark Hensley, who may be reached at the same address as given for the City and at Burke, Williams & Sorensen, 611 West Sixth Street, 25th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90017, telecopier (213) 236 -2700. • All substantive questions (i.e., other than questions about time and place of conferences, interviews, etc.) shall be submitted in writing, or asked at the pre - proposal conference. Any evidence which indicates a Proposer has failed to comply with the Process Integrity Guidelines set forth in this Section IV.A of this RFP may result in that Proposer's disqualification and for- feiture of the Proposer's Proposal Bond. Any questions regarding the Process Integrity Guidelines shall be in writing and shall be K, (� n J U , Draft Water System RFP transmitted by telecopier and mail to City Attorney Mark Hensley, c/o City of E1 Segundo at the addresses listed above. Any written communication from the City to a prospective Pro- poser will be transmitted simultaneously to all Proposers along with answers to written questions submitted. (Prospective Proposers must facilitate this process by providing their telecopier numbers to the city) . B. RFP Schedule LAX2:174543.2 4 0016- The schedule for the RFP process is: Activity Date • Mandatory Pre - Proposal Conference 10 a.m. - Noon, P a c i f i c T i m e 1997 • Final written questions due from proposers , 1997 • City sends written , 1997 responses to questions • Quality Service proposals Due , 1997 3 p.m., Pacific Time • City completes initial , 1997 evaluation and develops Proposer interview list • Financial Proposals Due 1997 m 3 p.., Pacific Time • City conducts , 1997 Proposer interviews • Agreement(s) to City , 1997 Council for approval • Start of Reclaimed Water Services operations by Successful proposer pursuant to new Agreement July 1, 1997 NOTE: CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CHANGE THE SCHEDULE. C. RFP Exceptions and Questions LAX2:174543.2 4 0016- Draft Water System RFP Failure to take exception to the RFP and the Draft Agreement and to propose recommendations for modifications to the RFP or the Draft Agreement or the municipal code shall be deemed approval and acceptance of these documents and shall be deemed a waiver of the right to object to the terms of these agreements. Proposers' Questions must be submitted in writing in accordance with the Schedule above, or be asked at the Pre - Proposal Conference. The City will not be responsible for or be bound by any oral instructions, statements, interpretations or oral explanations issued by the City, any officers, agents or representatives. D. Pre - Proposal Conference One mandatory Pre - Proposal Conference will be held. At that time, any Prospective Proposer may ask questions. Questions will be answered to the degree possible at the Pre - Proposal Conference, but, as stated above, the City will not be responsible for or be bound by any oral instructions, statements, interpretations or oral explanations issued by the City, any officers, agents or representa- tives at the pre - proposal conference. Written answers will be provided after the Pre - Proposal conference to each Proposer at- tending the Pre - Proposal Conference. NOTE: Attendance at the Pre - Proposal Conference is mandatory for All Proposers. Prospective Proposers whose designated representatives) do not attend the Pre - Proposal Conference will not be allowed to continue in this RFP process. Their Proposals, if submitted, shall be dis- qualified. If a joint Proposal is to be submitted, a representative from each firm with a substantial interest (representing more than thirty -three percent (33 %) of the total interest) must attend the Pre - Proposal Conference. LAX2:174543.2 E. Proposal Submittal This RFP calls for the submission of two proposals. The first proposal is a Quality Service Proposal. If, following the City's review of Quality Service Proposals, the City, in the exercise of its discretion, determines that one or more proposers would provide a high level of service, the City may request a Financial Proposal from one or more proposers. Quality Service proposals must be submitted no later than the time specified in the above schedule. Proposers' Quality Service Proposals will be evaluated by the City, which, in the exercise of its sole discretion, will review 5 0 0162 Draft Water system RFP proposers' experience, record of compliance with all laws governing operation of municipal reclaimed water systems, financial stability, quality of personnel who would perform the services called for by this RFP, and quality of proposed services. The City, in the exercise of its sole discretion, will select proposals which the City determines to meet best the City's needs for Quality Service. Selected proposers may be invited to participate in the Financial Proposal step, discussed below. Financial Proposals may be solicited by the City from all Pro- posers whose proposals appear to meet the requirements of the City for the effective use of the City's reclaimed water services in provision of high - quality reclaimed water service. Solicitation of a Financial Proposal from a Proposer should in no way be construed to mean that its service proposal was judged to be technically equal to any other Quality Service proposal. All criteria given in Sec- tion IV of this RFP will be used as a basis of evaluation. Proposers selected to submit Financial Proposals must submit their initial Financial Proposals no later than the time specified in the above schedule. Proposers will be allowed and encouraged to amend their Financial Proposals to make them more competitive, at any time thereafter, until the City Council, at a meeting, sets a deadline for submission of amended Financial Proposals, as explained below. Each original Proposal and ten (10) copies should be firmly sealed in packaging that is clearly marked on the outside If EL SEGUNDO RECLAIMED WATER SERVICES REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) 11 and mailed or delivered to: L.AX2:174543.2 Ms. Cindy Mortesen City Clerk City of E1 Segundo 350 Main Street E1 Segundo, Ca 90245 Telephone (310) 322 -4670, extension 218 The City will consider all Quality Service proposals and Financial Proposals to be public information, once the deadline for submission of the Quality Service proposals and Financial Proposals, respectively, have passed. F. Proposal Evaluation - Quality Service Proposal Review of Proposals. Proposers will be evaluated by Individual Proposal Criteria. The Individual Proposal Criteria will be used to identify the M. 00165 Draft Water System RFP relative strengths and weaknesses of each Proposal. 1. Individual Proposal Criteria The Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the following criteria, which are not listed in any order of precedence or importance: LAX2:174543.2 Service Service Capability. a. Operation and maintenance of a quality reclaimed water system. Include locations of all such reclaimed water systems. b. State - certified Water Quality Laboratory. Provide information detailing capabilities of in -house laboratory facilities and personnel. C. Engineering. Provide resumes of primary engineering personnel. Describe experience installing and utilizing automated technologies such as supervisory control and data acquisition systems. d. Operating cooperatively with California municipalities, and intergovernmental agency coordination. Please provide specific sites, dates, type of cooperative effort involved, and names, addressees and telephone numbers of references who may be contacted. Detail your experience working in coordination with municipalities on reclaimed water issues and programs, e.g. fire department, building permits, plan checks, and city projects. e. Compliance with all federal and state reclaimed water system operational requirements and reporting laws. f. Experience with operation and maintenance of a reclaimed water system under an O &M Agreement or a joint powers authority. Include all systems and municipalities in which such agreements are maintained, and names, addresses and telephone numbers of municipal points of contact. g. Customer Service Program. Provide detail of both external and internal customer service programs, including response to customer service inquiries, turn -on /off service procedures, and payment accommodations. h. Emergency response capability. Demonstrate ability to provide 24 -hour on -call response to emergency calls, 7 () n 1 6 Draft Water System RFP LAX2:174543.2 including natural and man -made disasters. Start -up Capability Equipment: Documented ability to provide any necessary equip- ment as evidenced by prior record of timely equipment procure- ment and by vendor verification that Proposer's selected equip- ment can be delivered on Proposer's schedule. Start -up: Demonstrated ability to provide the necessary services in a smooth transition. Cost Service Cost: Cost of reclaimed water services. Operations organization: Organization and qualifications of the Proposer. This includes an explanation of how the local management and corporate structure are linked; how the company(ies) foster innovation and high performance; and demonstration of corporate ethics. (Note that City may disqualify a proposer which has been convicted of criminal misconduct in connection with reclaimed water service activities.) Procedural Compliance: Proposer's compliance with RFP require- ments. Environmental Responsibility: Proposer's practices which demonstrate environmental responsibility, including compliance with laws and regulations governing reclaimed water systems. Communications Customer Service: Demonstrated ability to implement and operate high quality customer services. Public Education: Demonstrated ability to provide education leading to reclaimed water conservation. Financial and Risk Factors Financial Background: Financial projections, strategy and capability of the Proposer. Proposer shall also provide audited financial statements. A Proposer's financial information which the Proposer seeks to be held confidential must be clearly identified as such by the Proposer. With the exception of Proposers' confidential financial information, Quality Service and Financial Proposals will be considered to Draft Water Syatan RFP be public information and will be available for public inspec- tion, once the deadlines for submission of Quality Service and Financial proposals, respectively, have passed. Risks: Demonstrated capacity to handle risk factors in the contract including but not limited to: • Compliance with current and new laws and regulations regarding reclaimed water system operation, including testing and reporting; • Possible constraints on rate increases stemming from the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" (Proposition 218). • Protection and indemnification of the City and provision of cash bonds or letters of credit adequate to protect the City. Financial Reporting: Demonstrated record and capability of consistent and accurate financial reporting. 2. Interviews /Selection Process After the City's evaluation of the timely submitted Quality Service proposals, the City may issue invitations to one or more proposers to submit financial proposals and to interview with the City. Based on the contents of the Quality Service Proposals, the interviews and any other information requested by the City one or more Proposers may be selected for consideration at a City Council meeting. The purpose of the City Council meeting will be to select the successful proposer. City Staff will present the Quality Service and Financial Proposals submitted by each of the selected proposers. At the City Council meeting, as Financial Proposals will be considered along with Quality Service proposals, proposers will be allowed and encouraged to amend their Financial Proposals to make them more competitive. Amended Financial Proposals must be a minimum 0.1% change from the previous proposal. The procedure will remain open until all other remaining proposers whose Quality Service proposals were selected for consideration at the City Council meeting decline to amend their proposals below the last stated financial factor. Upon closing of RFP process, the City will determine whether, and if so to which proposer, to award the lease. LAX2:174543.2 G. General Terms 1. Proposal Development and Acceptance Costs The cost of preparing and submitting a Proposal is the sole D 0 r Draft Water System RFP responsibility of the Proposer and shall not be chargeable in any manner to the City. The successful proposer will be required to reimburse the City for the City's expenses of preparing this RFP, the Agreements to be entered into by City and the Successful Proposer(s), any necessary or appropriate revisions to the E1 Segundo Municipal Code and for negotiations and staff time, including attorneys' and consultants' fees and expenses. 2. Proposal Bond Each proposer shall submit with its Financial Proposal a bond executed by a surety company licensed to do business in the State of California or a certified check or a cashier's check payable to the City in the amount of TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($20,000.00). Pro- posal Bonds and checks will be returned to all unsuccessful Proposers no later than thirty (30) days after the signing of contracts with successful Proposers. The City will return Proposal Bonds and checks of the successful Proposer no later than 30 days after the start of/ services pursuant to the Agreements. 3. General Description of Award Upon conclusion of the RFP process, agreements will be awarded and executed as described. 4. Rights of the City The City's rights include but are not limited to the following: LAX2:174543.2 a. Issuing addenda to the Request for Proposals, for any purpose including extending or otherwise revising the time for submittal and changing the requirements of the RFP, including the services sought; b. Withdrawing or modifying the Request for Proposals; C. Reissuing the RFP. d. Requesting clarification and /or additional information from any Proposer at any point in the procurement process; e. Executing an agreement or agreements with one or more Proposers, on the sole basis of the original Proposal or any negotiated additions to Proposal submissions; and f. Rejecting any or all Proposals, waiving irregularities in any Proposal or requirements of the RFP, accepting or re- jecting all or any part of any Proposal and waiving any requirements of the Request for Proposals, as may be deemed to be in the best interest of the City. 10 Draft Water system RFP 5. 6. Conseauence of Submission of Proposal a. City shall not be obligated to respond to any Proposal submitted nor be bound in any manner by the submission of a Proposal; b. Submission of a Proposal to the City obligates the Proposer to enter into an agreement with the City as proposed; C. The Agreement shall not be binding or valid against the City unless and until it is executed in writing by the City (after approval by the City Council) and the selected Proposer, and the Proposer's Cash bonds and insurance have been accepted by the City. Certification of Proposal The submission of a Proposal shall be deemed a representation and warranty by the Proposer that the Proposer has investigated all aspects of the RFP, that the Proposer is aware of the applicable facts pertaining to the RFP process, its procedures and requirements and that the Proposer has read and understands the RFP. No request for modification of the provisions of a Proposal, or of the provisions of the Draft Agreement or this RFP shall be considered after its submission on the grounds that the Proposer was not fully informed as to any fact or condition. The City makes no warranty as to the accuracy of any data which may be contained in this RFP, or any addenda or the response of City; the City disclaims any responsibility for any such information which may subsequently be incomplete or inaccurate. 7. Rejection of Proposal for Financial Proposal Inaccuracies The City reserves the right to reject any Proposal containing errors or inconsistencies. Errors include, among other things, support information that is inconsistent with total cost estimates or any other error by the Proposer. 8. Oral Statements and Interpretations Not Bindin The City will not be responsible for or be bound by any oral instructions, statements, interpretations or oral explanations issued by the City, or any of its officers, agents or representa- tives. 9. Performance Bond LAX2:174543.2 11 P9 11 6 Draft Water Syat= RFP The Successful Proposer(s) will submit Cash and Performance Bonds as provided in the Agreements. H. Formal Bid Process Not Applicable. This procurement is an RFP, not a bid process. Formal bid principles, such as selection of "lowest responsible bidder" as set forth in the Public Contracts Code for construction projects, are not in any way applicable to this process. The City reserves complete discretion to select a firm it believes is best qualified to provide the services sought, in light of a number of factors to be considered as part of this RFP. In addition to all its other rights to withdraw or modify this RFP, the City also reserves the right to reject all proposals, at its sole discretion. V. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF PROPOSAL The City will use a two -step procurement process to solicit Quality Service and Financial Proposals separately. This section describes the desired Proposal format. The inclusion of additional information by the Proposer is encouraged. A. Proposal Preparation The Quality Service proposal shall col tions (see Table V -1). Proposals must inclu by an officer or agent of the Proposer whc bind the Proposer, along with a copy of the other document establishing that the person is authorized to do so. The original plus Quality Service proposal must be submitted. isist of seven (7) sec- le a cover letter signed is duly authorized to corporate resolution or submitting the proposal ten (10) copies of the The Financial Proposal shall consist of two (2) sections (see Table V -1). It must be accompanied by a cover letter signed by an officer or agent of the Proposer who is duly authorized to bind the Proposer, along with a copy of the corporate resolution or other document establishing that the person submitting the proposal is authorized to do so. The original plus ten (10) copies of the Financial Proposal must be submitted in accordance with the requirements of this RFP. B. Proposal Format The following Proposal format must be used by the Proposer. Failure to include any item or to adequately address any topic may result in Proposer's removal from the RFP process. TABLE V -1 LAX2:174543.2 12 runs �;,; Draft Water System RFP Contents of Quality Service and Financial Proposals Section Contents Quality Service proposal Transmittal letter 1 Executive Summary 2 Description of Proposed Services 3 Project Organization and Qualifica- tions of Proposer 4 Risks and Contractual Obligations 5 Exceptions 6 Proposer's Financial Data 7 Representations and Certifications Financial Proposal Transmittal letter 1 Financial Proposal Submission Forms 2 Description of Proposed Cost All pages of each Proposal must be numbered consecutively through the document starting with the first page of the transmittal letter as page one. C. Quality Service Proposal Content 1. Executive Summary In this section, the Proposer should discuss briefly, or outline, the highlights of your Proposal. 2. Description of Proposed Services In this section explain how you propose to provide reclaimed water services as contemplated in this RFP. 3. Project Organization and Qualifications of Proposer LAX2:174543.2 This section should tell us about your company: describe the Proposer's expertise and experience. The following information should be included: a. Corporate /Agency Registry. Where is your firm incorporated? How long has your firm been providing service in California? If it has not provided service in California, state how it will become familiar with California requirements for reclaimed water service. Provide information on other states, if any, where you are incorporated, and what state and in what year your parent company was incorporated. Please provide a copy of the 13 0 0 1 f Draft Water System RFP LAX2:174543.2 California Articles of Incorporation, if any. b. General description of the experience of the firm(s); C. Experience, including description of up to three (3) rele- vant projects, degree of involvement, names of clients and names and telephone numbers of client contact persons. d. Tell us about yourselves: Relevant service experience of key personnel and a description of their backgrounds. e. Tell us about your organization of the proposed project, including overall staffing, and percent commitment to Program, of specific staffing (such as management, opera- tions, mechanics and financial), including names of staff and titles, specify whether staff is new or existing. f. Tell us about your claims, complaints, indictments, Notice(s) of Violation ( "NoVs ") , settlements, arbitrations and litigation, civil and criminal, in which the firm or principals have been involved since January 1, 1992. The Proposer must also include details of all pending litiga- tion, including notices of violation, and pending criminal investigations against the Proposer or its parent or sister companies or joint venture company(ies) by any governmental entity against the Proposer or its parent for services relating to reclaimed water system management, and all litigation against all governmental entities by the Proposer or its parent company or joint venture compa- ny(ies). Proposers which have submitted SEC Section 10 K filings shall include a copy of their most recent Section 10 K filing. 4. Risks and Contractual obligations The City requires that certain risks and contractual obliga- tions be addressed in the Proposal. The City views protection against related litigation as a matter of great importance. Please describe your approaches to: • Compliance with current and new laws and regulations regarding reclaimed water system operation, including testing and reporting; • Possible constraints on rate increases stemming from the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" (Proposition 218). • Protection and indemnification of the City and provision of cash bonds or letters of credit adequate to protect the City. 14 Draft Water System RFP 5. Exceptions The Proposer must: a. warrant that it has reviewed the requirements of the project as described in this RFP and the Draft Agreement and any addenda; and b. specify and discuss any terms of the RFP and Draft Agreement that the Proposer cannot or does not propose to meet. 6. Proposer's Financial Data LAX2:174543.2 a. Provide copies of your financial statements for the entity which is proposed to sign the contract, for the most re- cent three fiscal years and through the most recently completed quarter of the current fiscal year. . b. What, if any, is your firm's investment grade credit rating? C. Provide your total corporate assets. Provide total California assets in addition to corporate assets. d. Provide your average gross corporate revenue in each of the last five (5) years. In addition, provide total average gross California revenue for the same period. e. Provide positive net corporate operating income in each of the last five (5) years. Provide the net California operating income for the same period. Explain any extenuating circumstances. f. If the entity which will sign the contract has a parent company or is proposing a joint venture, the parent compa- ny and joint venture company(ies) must also provide income and balance sheets for the most recent three fiscal years and for the most recently completed quarter of the current fiscal year. The parent company must provide a statement indicating the extent to which the owners or parent compa- ny of the proposed entity would provide financial as- surance of performance. g. If the entity which will sign the contract has been in ex- istence for less than one (1) year, Proposer must provide sufficient financial data to substantiate to the City's satisfaction the financial capability and viability of the entity. 15 Draft Water System RFP h. The Proposer must provide a statement from its Chief Fi- nancial Officer indicating that there has been no material change in the financial circumstances of the proposing en- tity (or its parent or owners if they are providing fi- nancial assurance of performance) since the date of the last financial statements. i. Financing of the project is to be the sole responsibility of the Proposer. The Proposer must provide a financing plan which describes the sources and uses of funds, the financing structure and all assumptions used in the formu- lation of the strategy. The Proposer must demonstrate that it can provide the required financing from either: 1) internally generated funds; or 2) commitments from ex- ternal sources. City makes no representation that it will be able to maintain the confidentiality of proposers' financial information. A Proposer who submits financial information which it asks to have treated as confidential should submit a statement justifying its treatment as confidential and label it as a separate exhibit, clearly identified as confidential and cross - referenced in the proposal. 7. Representations and Certifications Each Proposer must complete and sign EXHIBIT 1, THE REPRE- SENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS FORM. The form must be signed by an officer or agent of the Proposer duly authorized to bind the Pro- poser and must be notarized. The Proposer must include a copy of the corporate resolution or other documentation showing that the person signing the Representations and Certifications is so authorized. D. Financial Proposal Content 1. Proposal Content Completed Financial Proposal Submission Forms signed by an officer or agent of the Proposer who is duly authorized to bind the Proposer must be included as the first page of the Financial Proposal submittal. In signing the form, Proposer: 1) agrees that terms of both the service and Financial Proposals are firm for a period of 180 days from the Financial Proposal due date; and 2) assures that a Cash Bond will be issued seventy -two (72) hours after approval of contract by the City Council. 2. Description of Proposed Financial Agreement LAX2:174543.2 16 1 CEOs 7 Draft Water System RFP Based on the service description of the proposed services, a breakdown of the financial implications must be provided. Note that the Financial Proposal Forms require that the Proposer provide full disclosure of estimated costs including all assumptions used to make projections and estimates. E. Submission Guidelines for Quality Service and Financial Proposals 1. One Original Proposal must be submitted typed or printed on both sides of 8 1/211 x ill' recycled content paper. Each page of your Proposal must be numbered and each section should be identified clearly. 2. Ten (10) stapled or bound copies, typed or printed on both sides of 8 -1/211 x 11" recycled content paper must also be sub- mitted. 3. The Proposal and all attachments shall be complete and free of ambiguities, alterations and erasures. The Proposal shall be executed by the Proposer or the Proposer's duly authorized officer or agent. In the event of conflict between words and numerals, the words shall prevail. B. FINANCIAL STATEMENT INFORMATION 1. Corporate /Agency Registry Where is your firm incorporated? How long has your firm been providing reclaimed water service in California? If it has not provided service in California, state how it will become familiar with California requirements for reclaimed water service. Provide information on other states where you are incorporated, and what state and in what year your parent company was incorporated. Please provide a copy of the California Articles of Incorporation, if any. VI. TERM OF CONTRACTS, CONTRACT EXTENSION A. Term of Contracts 1. Base Term of Contract Five years. LAX2:174543.2 VII. COMPENSATION 17 Draft Water System RFP A. General. The Successful Proposer(s) will receive compensation for Services through revenues from reclaimed water service by Successful Proposer(s), subject to the City's cap on rates as discussed in the Draft Agreement and rates set by the CPUC. B. Financial Proposal Submission Forms. Proposed costs are to be submitted on Financial Proposal Submittal Forms, described in EXHIBIT 2. Financial Proposals which do not include complete and accurate information may be considered non - responsive. All proposals must be in units of one cent ($0.01). Fractions less than one cent ($0.01) will be adjusted downward. LAX2:174543.2 EE:7 Draft Water System RFP EXHIBIT 1 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS FORM The "Representations and Certifications" consist of two parts. The first is a statement as follows: rinsert name of proposer's rF; ,,; �, e.,or• „+-; nn tha Renresentation and Certif icationl , represent and certify, on behalf of Service proposall that I am familiar with the information presented in the Quality Service proposal, and that it is true an correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I am authorized to execute this Representation and Certification. Signed MM The second part of the Representation and Certification is a copy of the corporate resolution or other document establishing that the person making the Representation and Certification was authorized to do so. LAX2:174543.2 - r Draft Water System RFP EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO FINANCIAL PROPOSAL FORMS Proposal Content Each form shall be signed by an officer or agent of the Proposer who is duly authorized to bind the Proposer, and a copy must be included with the Financial Proposal submittal. In signing the form, Proposer: 1) agrees that terms of both the technical and Financial Proposals are firm for a period of 180 days from the Financial Proposal due date; and 2 ) assures that a Cash Bond will be submitted to the City seventy -two (72) hours after approval of contract by City Council. The proposal shall be submitted on the attached Proposal Sheet. The Proposal Sheet shall be filled out as follows: A. Annual fee to City of $ (Minimum of $427,000, and proposers are encouraged to propose a higher annual fee.) B. Percentage of Gross Revenues, per year, from E1 Segundo Reclaimed Water Services Operations to be paid to City: per cent. LAX2:174543.2 2-1 �! i DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR LEASE OF RECLAIMED WATER SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO AND ( DATE ) LAX2:174614.1 DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR LEASE OF RECLAIMED WATER SERVICES THIS LEASE AGREEMENT ( "Lease ") is made as of 1997, by and between the CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ( "City) ", a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, and, a corporation ( "Lessee "). W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, City currently provides reclaimed water and related services for customers ( "Reclaimed Water Services ") as set forth in Exhibit "A" in the service area as set forth in Exhibit "B" ( "Service Area "); and, WHEREAS, City desires to lease its Reclaimed Water Services to customers in the Service Area; and, LAX2:174614.1 WHEREAS, the City's Reclaimed Water Services serve 20 customers, with total current sales of about 3,600 acre feet /year; and, WHEREAS, the City obtains reclaimed water from the West Basin Municipal Water District ("WBMWD") pursuant to an agreement which is attached as Exhibit "C" ( "WBMWD Agreement "); and, WHEREAS, the City provides Reclaimed Water Services through a pipeline distribution system owned by WBMWD; and, WHEREAS, Lessee represents that Lessee is qualified to provide Reclaimed Water Services to the Services Area. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and Fd DRAFT agreements herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Lease of Reclaimed Water Services. City hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee hereby leases from City the Reclaimed Water Services in the Service Area. Neither City nor any of its agents has made any representation or warranties with respect to the Reclaimed Water Services except as specifically set forth in this Lease. Section 2. Term. The term of the Lease shall be for five (5) years unless earlier terminated as provided in this Lease (the "Term "). The Term of this Lease shall commence on 1997 ( "Effective Date ") and shall terminate on 2002. Section 3. Use. Subject to the provisions of this Lease, Lessee agrees to use the Reclaimed Water Services exclusively for the purpose of furnishing reclaimed water to customers in the Service Area. Section 4. Rent. The annual rent for the Reclaimed Water Services shall be the total of $ ( "Base Rent ") plus percentage of gross revenues generated by Lessee from providing Reclaimed Water Services ( "Percentage Rent "). Base Rent shall be paid annually in advance commencing upon execution hereof and on or before July 1st of each succeeding year of the Lease term. Percentage Rent shall be paid annually commencing September 1, 1997, and shall be for the year period ending June 30, 1997 and each year thereafter. This Lease is a net lease and LAX2:174614.1 3 001 "0 DRAFT the Lessee shall be liable for and pay all taxes and assessments, maintenance, repairs, utility charges, insurance premiums, and all other costs and expenses related to the Reclaimed Water Services. For any partial years, rent shall be prorated on a daily basis. Section 5. Rates and Charges. The rates and charges imposed by the Lessee to each customer in the Service Area shall in no event exceed those rates, including increases, as set forth in Exhibit "D." Section 6. Customer Billing and Collections. A. Lessee shall bill and collect water charges from customers receiving Reclaimed Water Services. B. In addition, Lessee shall bill and collect on behalf of City from customers in the Service Area any additional amounts which City may assess as a utility user's tax or sewer service fee on such customers and shall promptly pay all such amounts collected to City. C. City and Lessee shall jointly read the meters of all customers in the Service Area one (1) business day prior to (a) the Effective Date and (b) the expiration or termination of this Lease. All monies due or collected for services rendered and water sold or delivered prior the Effective Date and after the expiration or termination of this Lease shall be the property of the City. All monies due or collected for services rendered and water sold or delivered after the Effective Date and during the inx2:174614.1 4 onl DRAFT Term of this Lease shall be the property of Lessee. City and Lessee shall cooperate with one another to facilitate the collection of each party's accounts receivable. Section 7. Insurance. [Needs Review by Risk Management at City] A. Obligations of Lessee. During the term of this Lease, Lessee at its own cost and expense shall maintain insurance, issued by a carrier or carriers acceptable to City, as follows: (1) Commercial general liability insurance in the single limit amount of not less than $5,000,000, written on an occurrence basis. Such insurance shall include coverage for injury (including death) or damage to persons and /or property arising out of the operations of Lessee pursuant to this Lease. The policy shall include coverage for liability assumed under this Lease for personal injury, property damage and all other LAX2:174614.1 insurable claims as an "insured contract" for the performance of Lessee's indemnity obligations under this Lease. ** What about earthquake insurance? * ** (2) Workers' compensation insurance, or a certificate of self insurance, insuring against liability under the Workers' Compensation Insurance and Safety Act now in force in California, or any act hereafter enacted as an amendment or supplement thereto or in lieu thereof. Such insurance shall fully cover all persons employed by Lessee in connection with its operations 5 rrll n S) �' DRAFT under this Lease for claims of death or bodily injury arising in connection with their employment by Lessee pursuant to its operations under this Lease. (3) Automobile (vehicle) liability insurance on an occurrence basis for bodily injury and /or property damage in a single limit amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000). B. All policies of insurance shall contain an endorsement in favor of City and its officers, agents and employees listing them as additional insureds. C. The parties shall periodically review the insurance required hereby for the purpose of agreeing on increases in the minimum limits of such insurance, from time to time, to amounts which may be reasonable and customary for similar facilities of like size and operation. D. All insurance shall be effected under policies issued by insurers of recognized responsibility, licensed or permitted to do business in the State of California and reasonably acceptable to City. E. All policies of insurance issued by the respective insurers shall provide that such policies shall not be cancelled or materially changed without at least thirty (30) days' prior written notice to Lessee and to City. Copies of such policies shall be deposited with City, together with appropriate evidence of payment of the premiums therefor, prior to the Effective Date. LAX2:174614.1 R fit' ^ DRAFT Copies of all renewed or new policies, together with evidence of payment, shall likewise be deposited with City prior to expiration dates of expiring or non - renewed policies. F. The limits of insurance required by this Lease or as carried by Lessee shall not limit the liability of Lessee nor relieve Lessee of any obligation hereunder. G. Lessee shall cause each insurance policy obtained by it to provide that the insurance company waives all rights of recovery by way of subrogation against City in connection with any damage covered by any policy. Section 8. Liens and Encumbrances. Lessee agrees to keep the Reclaimed Water Services free and clear of all liens, security interests and encumbrances, except for those consented to by the City. At the expiration of the Lease, City shall assume control of the Reclaimed Water Services free and clear of any and all liens, security interests and encumbrances entered into by the Lessee during the Lease Term. Section 9. Events of Default. The occurrence of any one or more of the following events (hereinafter called "Events of Default "), shall constitute a material default and breach of this Lease by Lessee: a. The failure to provide Reclaimed Water Services. b. The failure by Lessee to make any payment of rent or any other payment required to be made by Lessee hereunder, as and when due. I_AX2:174614.1 7 LAX2:174614.1 DRAFT C. The failure by Lessee to observe any of the covenants, conditions or provisions of this Lease to be observed or performed by Lessee, other than the payment of money, where such failure shall continue for a period of ten (10) days after written notice hereof from City to Lessee, provided, however, that if the nature of Lessee's default is such that more than ten (10) days are reasonably required for its cure, then Lessee shall not be deemed to be in default if it commences such cure within said 10 -day period and thereafter diligently prosecutes such cure to completion. d. (i) The making by Lessee of any general arrangement or assignment for the benefit of creditors; (ii) Lessee becomes a "debtor" as defined in the then - applicable United States Bankruptcy Code (unless, in the case of a petition or order filed against Lessee, the same is dismissed within thirty (30) days); (iii) the attachment, execution or other judicial seizure of substantially all of Lessee's assets from Lessee's interest in this Lease, where such seizure is not discharged within thirty (30) days. 10. Remedies in the Event of Lessee Default. City shall have the following remedies if Lessee commits a default. These remedies are not exclusive; they are cumulative in addition to any remedies now or later allowed by law. a. Termination. Upon occurrence of an Event of 8 LAX2:174614.1 DRAFT Default, City, in addition to any other rights or remedies available to City at law or in equity, shall have the right to immediately terminate this Lease and all rights of Lessee hereunder, by giving Lessee written notice that this Lease is terminated. If City so terminates this Lease, then City may recover from Lessee the sum of all damages incurred by City by reason of Lessee's default; b. Continuation of Lease. Should an Event of Default occur and if City does not elect to terminate this Lease, City may, from time to time, without terminating this Lease, either (i) recover all rent and other amounts payable hereunder as they become due or (ii) relet the Reclaimed Water Services or any part thereof on behalf of City for such term or terms, at such rent or rents and pursuant to such other provisions, as City, in its sole discretion, may deem advisable. C. No Constructive Termination. None of the following remedial actions, singly or combination, shall be construed as an election by City to terminate this Lease, unless City has in fact given Lessee written notice that this Lease is terminated: Any act by City to maintain or preserve the Reclaimed Water Services; any efforts by City to relet the Reclaimed Water Services; the appointment of a receiver, upon the initiative of City, to protect City's interest under this Lease; or exercise of any other right or E �)n 18,-) LAX2:174614.1 DRAFT remedy provided for herein or under applicable laws. If City takes any of the foregoing remedial actions without terminating this Lease, City may nevertheless at any time after taking any such remedial action terminate this Lease by written notice to Lessee. d. Lessee's Right to Cure. After an Event of Default, City, in addition to or in lieu of exercising any other remedies, may (but without any obligation so to do) cure the breach underlying the Event of Default for the account and at the expense of Lessee; provided that City by prior notice shall first allow Lessee a reasonable opportunity to cure, except in cases of emergency, where City may proceed without prior notice to Lessee. Lessee shall, upon demand, immediately reimburse City for all costs (including costs of settlements, defense, court costs and attorney's fees) which City may incur in the course of any such cure. e. Remedies Cumulative. The rights, privileges, elections, and remedies of City herein are cumulative and no one of them shall be exclusive of the other, and City shall have the right to pursue any one or all of such remedies or any other remedy or relief which may be provided by law, whether or not stated in this Lease. No provision of this Article shall be deemed to limit or negate City's rights under this Lease to indemnification from Lessee for any 10 00 ilTi1 DRAFT liability asserted against or imposed upon City, whether before or after termination of this Lease, which liability is based upon matters occurring prior to the termination of this Lease. 11. City's Default. City shall not be in default unless City fails to perform obligations required of City within a reasonable time, but in no event later than thirty (30) days after written notice by Lessee to City specifying wherein City has failed to perform such obligation; provided, however that if the nature of City's obligation is such that more than thirty (30) days are required for performance, then City shall not be in default if City commences performance within such 30 -day period and thereafter diligently prosecutes the same to completion. Section 12. Assignment and Subletting. The City is entering into this Lease in substantial part because of the unique experience and qualification of Lessee. Lessee shall not LAX2:174614.1 transfer, assign, sublet, change ownership or hypothecate this Lease or Lessee's interest in and to the Reclaimed Water Services without first procuring the written consent of City. City's consent may be withheld for any reason. Section 13. Indemnity of City. Lessee, upon demand of the City, made by and through the City Attorney, shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents from and against any and all losses, liabilities, fines, penalties, claims, causes of it 0�� � DRAFT action, damages, liabilities or judgments, including City's or any prevailing party other than the City, attorneys' fees and costs, arising out of or relating to the Lease, including without limitation any challenge to the Request for Proposals process which resulted in the Lease and any and all challenges to the validity of the Lease [including without limitation challenges based upon Article XIII of the California Constitution], except tort -based claims arising out of the sole negligence or willful acts of the City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents or contractors for actions committed prior to the Effective Date of this Lease. Section 14. Law to Govern; Venue; Jury Waiver. The law of the State of California shall govern this Lease without regard to any otherwise governing principles of conflicts of laws. In the event of litigation between the parties, venue in state trial courts shall lie exclusively in the County of Los Angeles. In the event of litigation in a U.S. District Court exclusive venue shall lie in the Central District of California. Lessee waives LAX2:174614.1 its right to jury trial. Section 15. Notices. All notices, statements, demands, requests, consents, approvals, authorizations, offers, agreements, appointments or designations hereunder by either party to the other shall be in writing and shall be sufficiently given and served upon the other party, if sent by United States registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and 12 Il (1 DRAFT addressed as follows: City: City of E1 Segundo City Clerk City Hall 350 Main Street E1 Segundo, CA 90245 Lessee: or at such other address as either party shall later designate for such purpose by written notice to the other party. Mailed notice shall be deemed given on the date of delivery shown on the receipt card. Section 16. Waiver. The waiver by City of any breach by Lessee of any term, covenant or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition hereof. The waiver by Lessee of any breach by City of any term, covenant or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, LAX2:174614.1 covenant or condition hereof. Section 17. Counterparts. This Lease may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original, but all together shall constitute but one and the same Lease. Section 18. Amendments. This Lease may be amended or modified only in writing signed by the parties thereto. Section 19. Taxes and Assessments; Possessory Interest. Lessee shall pay all taxes, assessments, fees, levies, charges, 13 DRAFT license or permit fees and other governmental charges of any kind or nature which are or may be at any time or from time to time during the Term of this Lease levied, charged, assessed or imposed upon or against the Reclaimed Water Services or the leasehold estate created hereby or which may be imposed upon any interest of Lessee acquired pursuant to this Lease. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Lessee acknowledges that this Lease may create a possessory interest which may be subject to property taxation and that Lessee may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest. Any such tax shall be the sole responsibility of Lessee. Section 20. Attorneys' Fees. If any party to this Lease LAX2:174614.1 commences legal proceedings or arbitration to interpret this Lease, to enforce any of its terms or for damages for its breach, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees. Section 21. Compliance with Law. Lessee warrants that it will comply with all applicable laws and implementing regulations, as they, from time to time, may be amended, specifically including, but not limited to applicable laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, the County of Los Angeles, ordinances of the City and the requirements of all other agencies with jurisdiction. Section 22. Hazardous Substances. A. Lessee will not cause or permit to occur any release, 14 DRAFT generation, manufacture, storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal of Hazardous Substance (defined below) on, in, under, or from the Reclaimed Water Services or any portion of it in violation of Applicable Laws. If any release or disposal of any Hazardous Substance occurs on, in, or under or any portion of it, Lessee, at its own cost and expense, will immediately take such action as is necessary to detain the spread of and remove the Hazardous Substance to the complete satisfaction of City and other appropriate governmental authorities. Lessee shall promptly notify City of any release or disposal (of which Lessee has knowledge or becomes aware) of any Hazardous Substance on, in, under or from the Reclaimed Water Services. B. In addition to the defense and indemnity obligations set forth in Section 13 of this Lease, Lessee shall indemnify, defend, protect and hold harmless City, its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers, agents, assigns and any successor or successors to City's interest from and against all claims, actual damages (including but not limited to special and consequential damages) , natural resources damages, punitive damages, injuries, costs, response, remediation and removal costs, losses, demands, debts, liens, liabilities, causes of action, suits, legal or administrative proceedings, interest, fines, charges, penalties and expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' and expert witness fees and costs incurred in connection with defending against any of the foregoing or in enforcing this indemnity) of any LAX2:174614.1 15 00119 1 DRAFT kind whatsoever paid, incurred or suffered by, or asserted against, City or its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers or agents arising from or attributable to any repair, cleanup or detoxification, or preparation and implementation of any removal, remedial, response, closure or other plan (regardless of whether undertaken due to governmental action) concerning the Reclaimed Water Services which is or has been transported, transferred, processed, stored, disposed of which has otherwise come to be located by Lessee, or its activities pursuant to this Lease result in a release of a Hazardous Waste into the environment. This indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant to § 107(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, "CERCLA ", 42 U.S.C. § 9607(e), and California Health and Safety Code § 25364, to defend, protect, hold harmless and indemnify City from all forms of liability under CERCLA, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 et seq. or other similar federal, state or local law or regulation for any and all matters addressed in this section. This provision shall survive the expiration of the period during which services are to be provided under this Lease. C. For purposes of this Lease, "Hazardous Substance" means any substance, material or waste which is defined as a "hazardous waste," "hazardous material," "hazardous substance," "extremely hazardous waste," "restricted hazardous waste" or similar term under any provision of any federal, state or local law and LAX2:174614.1 16 0 nl:� DRAFT includes, without limitation, hydrocarbons, petroleum, gasoline, crude oil or any products, by- products or fractions thereof. 23. Successors and Assigns. All of the covenants, agreements, conditions, and undertakings contained in this Lease shall extend and inure to, and be binding upon, the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the respective parties hereto. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to grant to confer upon any person or person, firm, corporation, or governmental authority, other than the parties hereto, any right, claim, or privilege by virtue of any covenant, agreement, condition, or undertaking contained in this Lease. 24. Expansion of Use. Lessee shall not expand the provision of Reclaimed Water Services under this agreement beyond the level as set forth in Exhibit "E" without the prior written consent of the City which may be withheld for any reason. 25. Termination. In addition to the additional termination provisions as set forth above, in the event that the WBMWD Contract terminates prior to the expiration of this Lease, this Lease shall terminate and City shall have no obligation or liability whatsoever to Lessee. LAX2:174614.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Lease to be executed and attested by their proper officers thereunto duly authorized, and their official seals to be hereto affixed, as of the day and year first above written. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this 17 0 ntC DRAFT Agreement to be executed by their respective officers. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO By Mayor, City of E1 Segundo LAX2:174614.1 18 By Its APPROVED AS TO FORM: By City Attorney 1 1 t i 3103226005 FEB 12 '97 12 :13PM GORDON & SCHWENKMEYER MEMORANDUM TO: JIM MORRISON CITY MANAGER CITY OF EL ,SEGUNDO FROM: COUNCILMAN MIKE GORDON RE: AGENDA TOPIC DATE; FEBRUAR'Y' 12, 1997 P.2 /2 The purpose of this memorandum is to ask that you add under my name the following subject matter. The City Council directs the City Manager to develop a plan to bill individuals, both residents and non- residents, the actual costs associated with the Fire Departments emergency transporting to area hospitals. Currently, the City of El Segundo bills non - residents $175 and residents $0 for emergency transporting. In an analysis of neighboring cities, most cities bill on average approximately $400 per transport (this is a figure that averages the typical costs associated with transporting) . In the City of El Segundo, we transport approximately 60 -90 people per month, with approximately two - thirds of these individuals being residents of El Segundo. Assuming we implement this plan, our anticipated annual revenue could be as great as $350,000- $450,000. At a time when we must look for revenue in order to pay for City services, we cannot afford to provide this service, which has direct expense to the City, for a minimal expense or free. In order to avoid any hardship, I would recommend our plan does not require residents to pay for fees above what normally would be covered by their medical or automobile insurance coverage. MEMORANDUM February 12, 1997 TO: City Council FR: Liam Weston Jane Friedkin RE: Aerospace Study on Agenda The previous City Council analyzed the various methods available for tracking plumes and sources of pollution over our city. Among the companies interviewed was the Aerospace Corporation here in El Segundo. As you may already know, the Acrsopacc Corporation is a non- profit quasi - government organization commonly known in the defense industry as an FFR17C. We discovered the Aerospace Corporation's capabilities in the area of remote sensing and spectral analysis far exceeded even the technologies known to the AQNM and other environmental agencies. We initially approached the Aerospace Corporation about providing information regarding emissions from Hyperion and especially what are known m "fugitive emissions" that may be coming yet unidentified sources on the facility. We have placed this item back on the agenda for discussion and adoption to begin a study of the pollution over El Segundo. The purpose of the study is to determine a baseline of particulants in the air over our city as a result of both the Hyperion and the airport. The specialty of the Aerospace defense technology is the passive sensor's ability to track the source of a plume thus determining the cause of the pollution. Aerospace Corporation also owns proprietary software that provides real time analysis of the various signatures put out by different chemical substances. We believe this scientific data will be invaluable to the city if we need to oppose the expansion of LAX on the basis of the increase in pollution over El Segundo. We would also like to request the City Council approve an additional $10,000 for an environmental consultant (as determined by staft) to evaluate the data, collect samples from roof tops and swimming pools and also provide a report. The consultant's report can provide us the comparative data required to make an informed decision as to the severity of the problem. I believe the Aerospace quote for the Hyperion/Airport analysis is $35,000. The total cost of both efforts would be capped by the City Council not to exceed $45,000. The staff can be given direction to hire the consultant and negotiate the terms of the analysis by Aerospace Corporation. {fin, `� . �ommenDation tit? of et otpnbo Carff oraia WHEREAS, Leah J. Jeffries after retirement from an executive position with Pacific Telephone Co., was appointed by County Supervisor Dean Dana to the position of Deputy, representing him in El Segundo, Torrance, Lomita, Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Estates, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates and Rancho Palos Verdes; and WHEREAS, Leah J. Jeffries has been an active participant in activities in the City of El Segundo by her attendance at community functions such as the Holiday Parade, Chamber of Commerce Installation Dinner, retirement of City elected officials, and numerous City Council meetings , to mention a few, and WHEREAS, Leah J. Jeffries, while representing Supervisor Dana, was active in numerous groups in the South Bay such as the Torrance Area Chamber of Commerce, Torrance Volunteer Center, RSVP, the American Heart Association, American Red Cross, South Bay Senior Citizens, Palos Verdes Arts Center Business Council, South Bay Republican Womens Club, Coordinating Councils of Redondo Beach, Pala Verdes and Hermosa Beach; and WHEREAS, Leah J. Jeffries, was a tireless advocate for the 4th district cities to ensure that they reosived their fair share of county services; and WHEREAS, Leah J. Jeffries, although retired from nearly fifteen years of county services, maintains her involvement in the 4th district communities and was recently appointed by Supervisor Don Knabe to serve on the La Angeles County Beach Commission regarding beach and coa rad issues. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of El Segundo on behalf of the People of El Segundo, hereby commend Leah J. Jeffries for her past and continued dedication and exemplary record of leadership, citizenship and service to the 4th district cities, and especially, El Segundo, and wish her much sugaess, good health and happiness in hex retirement. �o°olulcc�ina� � ns %�aetosz IMP<< CITY OF EL SEGUNDO INTERDEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE DATE: February 11, 1997 TO: City Council FROM: Jane Friedkin, Councilwoman SUBJECT: Agenda Item for February 18, 1997 Meeting AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consider initiation of a Zone Text Amendment to allow landscape features, such as fountains, arbors, pergolas and statuary, to encroach into required setbacks. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Discussion and direct staff and the Planning Commission to consider a Zone Text Amendment as soon as possible. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The City Zoning Code, Title 20 of the El Segundo Municipal Code, requires that all structures respect the required setbacks, which range from 0 feet (CRS Zone) to 30 feet (MU Zone) in the commercial and industrial zones. A 25 foot front and street side setback is typically required in most zones. DISCUSSION: The definition of a structure (Section 20.08.855) is very broad, and all structures must respect the required setbacks, with a few minor exceptions for encroachments (Section 20.12.070). These provisions are primarily intended for buildings and other large structures, and do not accommodate landscape features which may greatly enhance the appearance of a project. Small, open landscape features such as fountains, arbors, pergolas and statuary can compliment the design of a project and benefit the public if they are placed closer to the street, in locations that are more visible and accessible to the public. I would suggest that the Council consider allowing landscape features to encroach into setbacks for commercial and industrial zones only, and discuss the possibilities in residential zones at a later date. Additionally, a minimum setback, such as 5 feet, or a minimum percent of the setback required in the particular zone should also be considered. By this memo, I would request that the Council discuss this matter at our February 18, 1997 meeting and consider initiating a Zone Text Amendment which would allow landscape features to encroach into required setbacks. pAagendas\2- 18 -97.# 20.08.850 STRUCTURE. "Structure" means that which is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts jointed together in some definite manner. 20.12.070 OPEN SPACE AREAS AND ENCROACHMENTS. A porte cochere (open carport) may be placed over a driveway in the front twenty feet of one side yard setback, outside of the front yard setback, or attached to the front twenty feet of one dwelling unit closest to the front lot line, provided the structure is not more than one story in height, is unenclosed on three sides, and is entirely open except for the necessary supporting columns and architectural features. Every required yard shall be open and unobstructed from the ground up, except the following intrusions may project 2 feet into required yards, provided the required yard shall not be reduced to less than 3 feet in width: A. Cornices, belt courses, sills, eaves or similar architectural features. Eaves may project 6 inches into any nonconforming side yard which is 3 feet in width; B. Fireplace structures not wider than 8 feet measured in the general direction of the wall of which it is a part, but may not encroach into an interior side yard setback; C. Uncovered porches and platforms which do not extend above the floor level of the first floor; D. Planting boxes or masonry planters not exceeding 42 inches in height; E. Guard railing for safety protection around ramps; F. Mechanical equipment, such as pool heaters, water heaters, and air conditioners not wider than 8 feet measured in the general direction of the wall of which it is a part, and adequately soundproofed, but not encroaching into the front yard setback; G. Bay windows, only on the first floor, not wider than 8 feet measured in the general direction of the wall of which it is a part; and, H. Greenhouse windows (Ord. 1245). CITY OF EL SEGUNDO INTER OFFICE MEMO DATE: February 5, 1997 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Jim Fauk, Recreation and Parks Director Ll - /J SUBJECT: Proposition "A" Los Angeles County Regional Park Bond Act Mayor Pro -Tem Wernick asked that council be provided information at the February 18 City Council meeting regarding Proposition "A" Los Angeles County Park Bond Act. This measure which was passed on November 5, 1996, provides the City of El Segundo with $74,535 to be used for park facility improvements. The county anticipates that the grant procedural guide and application material will be available in April 1997. While the funds are earmarked for us, there is still a grant application process which must be approved by the Los Angeles County Regional Park and Open Space District. Past recreation projects funded with county bond acts have included Richmond Lighting, Holly - Valley Park, Recreation Park game court lighting, and outdoor swimming pool refurbishment. The procedure in the past has been for the Recreation and Park Commission to forward to the City Council projects that were felt to be needed to enhance the City recreation facilities. One of the provisions of grant is the City Council must pass a resolution for any project that is submitted for approval. These funds must be expended or committed for expenditure prior to June 30, 2003. .JF:mt Pk- Bond.prop A 001 ?,()1 To: City Council Date:February 11, 1997 From: Nancy Wernick, Mayor Pro-Tern Subject Agenda Item on Dunes Landscaping Problems Background: As early as 1992, we began a series of problems with the City of Los Angeles and the expansion of the Hyperion Plant. A citizens group naming itself SEE (Save El Segundo Environment) was formed consisting of approximately 350 citizens. An overflow crowd at the Gordon Clubhouse had met with representatives from LA and it was determined that the citizens group, the City and the Hyperion reps. would hold meetings to resolve the disputes arising from the obvious incursions on residents. 1 0m sure we all remember "Balloon Day ", where we had our local State Assemblyman present and extensive coverage to display the heights of the new "digester" needed to fulfill LAs ever increasing sewage problems. The City knew that homes had been built and sold at a higher price for ocean views and that construction of power lines to generate the power to run the new expansion would begin the blocking of those views. We, as a city, were unaware of the impact of the high "digester" and their impact on a large number of our citizens. Under a Dispute Resolution Plan we arrived at the MMIP we now have in place. Construction started and from the beginning, so did the disputes. What was meant to lessen the odor impact, became a nightmare of construction problems, lawsuits and finally the partial destruction of the dunes that had acted as a quasi -berm insulating the residents from the sight of the inner workings of a now much larger sewage treatment area. As a compromise, the Citizens Hyperion Committee met with El Segundo City Officials and LA reps and formed a "landscaping plan" to help restore that which had been destroyed and hopefully create coverage of the view of the plant. There was a design plan and plantings of trees, shrubs and other plants were to be installed to veil the plant. Money was allocated from Los Angeles to accomplish this feat. As early as October 1993, citizens began to appear at the podium with complaints about the delays and problems with the promised construction. Monthly meetings under the MMIP plan were set up and continue to this day, to give the City and it's citizens an oversight of sorts on the Hyperion and the many problems it imposes on a large number of our residents. These committee meetings are now the liaison assignment of Councilman Gordon and me. At a recent meeting we were shocked to learn we were paying in the ares of $600.00 0020 a month for maintenance and final plantings. Listening to the concerns of the citizens of a lack of planting and maintenance, we Investigated the areas only to find that indeed had not fulfilled the agreement as originally planned and that there seemed to be no oversight on the contractor. There has been vandalism and our Police and Fire Departments have responded well to the citizens alerts of these, but the planting has not lived up to it's promise and the upkeep is so poor in both dead plant and weed removal that it makes a great haven for trash, clubhouses and other hidden activities. The most important aspect is that it has not kept the promise of screening the view or restoring what was not legally removed. The money is there, the contract with the contractor is up in two years and the performance of the contractor is in question. At our most recent meeting with the citizen sub - committee, mitigation monitors and staff, it was concluded that we can best achieve our objectives with a two pronged effort. 1) We will meet Saturday February 22nd at 10 am at the end of Sycamore to break into two groups. One will include representatives from RBF. our staff, Councilman Gordon and any interested citizens to physically walk the berm. The second group will have a similar make up including home owners with access view and myself, to communicate with the first group so that proper markings can be made for additional promised planting. The entire council is invited as well as residents who wish to participate and familiarize themselves with this area. 2) We will institute a diligent verification that the work promised by the agreement and the contractor is indeed preformed in a timely manner and report back to Council at its completion. The Hyperion is an ever expanding LA neighbor, much like LAX and as it grows it effects more and more of our residents. Before entering into any other agreements with Hyperion, I think it is best that we complete those in existence to prove that we can trust each other to preform up to the letter of our word. on?