Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
2018 Sep 04 - 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. Any writings or documents given to a majority of the City Council regarding any matter on
this agenda that the City received after issuing the agenda packet are available for public inspection in
the City Clerk's office during normal business hours. Such Documents may also be posted on the City's
website at www.elsegundo.org and additional copies will be available at the City Council meeting.
Unless otherwise noted in the Agenda, the Public can only comment on City -related business that is
within the jurisdiction of the City Council and/or items listed on the Agenda during the Public
Communications portions of the Meeting. Additionally, the Public can comment on any Public Hearing
item on the Agenda during the Public Hearing portion of such item. The time limit for comments is five (5)
minutes per person.
Before speaking to the City Council, please come to the podium and state: Your name and residence
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. Playing of video tapes or use of visual aids may be permitted during meetings if
they are submitted to the City Clerk two (2) working days prior to the meeting and they do not exceed five
(5) minutes in length.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to
participate in this meeting, please contact City Clerk, 524-2305. Notification 48 hours prior to the
meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this
meeting.
MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2018 — 5:00 PM
5:00 P.M. SESSION
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC COMMUNICATION — (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.
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
CLOSED SESSION:
The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including
the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54960, et seq.) 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
Government Code Section §54957 (Personnel); and/or conferring with the City's Labor
Negotiators; as follows:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov't Code
§54956.9(d)(1): -5- matters
1. Achambault v. City of EI Segundo, WCAB Case Nos. 79049(39, 53 and 56)
2. James v. City of EI Segundo, WCAB Case No. ADJ 10523289
3. Turnbull v. City of EI Segundo, WCAB and Cal PERS Matter
4. Houston v. City of EI Segundo, Los Angeles County Civil Service
Commission
5. Simpson v. City of EI Segundo, WCAB Cases No. ADJ10970131,
ADJ10970130
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(d)(2): -1-
matters.
Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9 (d)(4): -1- matters.
DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS (Gov't Code §54957): -2- matters
1. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
Title: City Manager
2. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
Title: City Attorney
VA
E
APPOINTMENT OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEE (Gov't. Code § 54957): -0- matter
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT (Gov't Code § 54957) -0- matter
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8): -0-
matters
CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957.6): -8-
matters
1. Employee Organizations: Police Management Association; Police Officers
Association; Police Support Services Employees Association; Fire Fighters
Association; Supervisory, Professional Employees Association; City Employee
Association; and Executive and Management/Confidential Employees
(unrepresented groups).
Agency Designated Representative: Irma Moisa Rodriquez, City Manager, Greg
Carpenter and Human Resources Director.
3
3
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. Any writings or documents given to a majority of the City Council regarding any matter on
this agenda that the City received after issuing the agenda packet, are available for public inspection in
the City Clerk's office during normal business hours. Such Documents may also be posted on the City's
website at www.elsegundo.org and additional copies will be available at the City Council meeting.
Unless otherwise noted in the Agenda, the Public can only comment on City -related business that is
within the jurisdiction of the City Council and/or items listed on the Agenda during the Public
Communications portions of the Meeting. Additionally, the Public can comment on any Public Hearing
item on the Agenda during the Public Hearing portion of such item. The time limit for comments is five (5)
minutes per person.
Before speaking to the City Council, please come to the podium and state: Your name and residence
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. Playing of video tapes or use of visual aids may be permitted during meetings if
they are submitted to the City Clerk two (2) working days prior to the meeting and they do not exceed five
(5) minutes in length.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to
participate in this meeting, please contact City Clerk, 524-2305. 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, SEPTEMBER 4, 2018 - 7:00 P.M.
7:00 P.M. SESSION
CALL TO ORDER
INVOCATION — Pastor Rob McKenna, The Bridge Church
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Nicol
n
PRESENTATIONS
a) Presentation — Treasury Department's Quarterly Investment Portfolio Report.
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. While all comments are welcome, the Brown Act does not allow Council to
take action on any item not on the agenda. The Council will respond to comments after Public
Communications is closed.
CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS — (Related to Public Communications)
A. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS
Consideration of a motion
Agenda by title only.
Recommendation — Approval.
to read all ordinances and resolutions on the
B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS (PUBLIC HEARING)
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Consideration and possible action to 1) approve the Residential Waste
Collection Request for Proposals (RFP) and authorize staff to issue the
RFP, and 2) approve the Notice of Public Hearing and Proposition 218
Ballot to establish a maximum $20.00 monthly fee upon eligible residential
dwellings for solid waste collection services.
�scalImpact: $10,000.00)
Recommendation — 1) Approve the Residential Solid Waste Collection Request
for Proposals and authorize staff to issue the RFP; 2) Approve the Notice of
Public Hearing and Proposition 218 Ballot to establish a maximum $20.00
monthly fee upon eligible residential dwellings for solid waste collection services;
3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
5
6i
D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS
2. Consideration and possible action to review the
proposals in response to RFP #18-02 related
management, and improvements at The Lakes at
conducted by the The Lakes RFP Task Force.
(Fiscal Impact: None)
evaluation results of
to future operations,
EI Segundo Site as
Recommendation — 1) Discuss and determine how the City Council would like to
proceed in making a final selection; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other
action related to this item.
3. Consideration and possible action to adopt a Resolution approving the
Economic Development Advisory (EDAC) Bylaws, as amended.
Fiscal Impact: None
Recommendation — 1) Adopt a Resolution approving the proposed Economic
Development Advisory Council (EDAC) By -Laws, as amended; 2) Alternatively,
discuss and take other action related to this item.
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.
4. Warrant Numbers 30222452 through 3022629 on Register No. 22 in the total
amount of $998,425.77 and Wire Transfers from 8/13/18 through 8/26/18 in
the total amount of $856,846.30.
Recommendation — Approve Warrant Demand Register and authorize staff to
release. Ratify Payroll and Employee Benefit checks; checks released early due
to contracts or agreement; emergency disbursements and/or adjustments; and
wire transfers.
5. Special City Council Meeting Joint with the Technology Committee Minutes
of August 8, 2018, Special City Council Meeting Minutes of August 14, 2018
(Budget Session II) and Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of August 21,
2018.
Recommendation — 1) Approval
0
C:
6. Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute
amendments to License Agreements with EI Segundo Youth Sports
Organizations, to extend the term of the agreements for 3 years.
(Fiscal Impact: $25,000 Revenue)
Recommendation — 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute amendments to the
License Agreements in a form approved by the City Attorney with each EI
Segundo Youth Sports Organization identified in the Youth Sports Council
Athletic Field/Facility Use and Allocation Policy, to extend the term of the
agreements for 3 years; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to
this item.
7. Consideration and possible action to award a standard Public Works
Contract to Corral Construction & Development Inc. for the Library Wi-Fi
and Reading Lounge Renovation Project, Project No. PW18-04.
Fiscal Impact: $127,551.36)
Recommendation — 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute a standard Public
Works Contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Corral
Construction & Development Inc. in the amount of $38,805.31 and approve an
additional $7,000 for construction -related contingencies; 2) Alternatively, discuss
and take other action related to this item.
8. Consideration and possible action regarding Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 Third
Quarter Financial Review of the General Fund (GF) and Enterprise Funds
(Fiscal Impact: None
Recommendation — 1) Receive and File FY 2017-18 Third Quarter Financial
Review; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
9. Consideration and possible action regarding Environmental Assessment
No. EA -1228, Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 18-03 to add Chapter 30 to
Title 15 (Zone Regulations) of the Muncipal Code to require a discretionary
Site Plan Review Permit for specified types of development. Adopting the
proposed ordinance does not have the potential to cause significant effects
on the environment and, therefore, is exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 Cal. Code Regs. §
15061(b)(3). (Applicant: City of EI Segundo)
(Fiscal Impact: $None)
Recommendation — 1) Waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. for
Environmental Assessment No. EA -1228 and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA
18-03; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
7
7
10. Consideration and possible action regarding approval of Environmental
Assessment No. EA -1210 and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 17-08 to
amend various sections of the EI Segundo Municipal Code (ESMC) Title 15
(Zoning Code) to: (1) update and introduce new definitions related to
measuring building height, (2) establish new zoning code standards for
measuring the maximum height of buildings, and (3) allow the Director to
approve an adjustment to the maximum building height by up to 5 feet,
pursuant to ESMC Chapter 15-24.
Adopting this Ordinance is categorically exempt from further CEQA review
under CEQA Guidelines § 15303 as a Class 3 (new construction or
conversion of small structures), § 15304 as a Class 4 (minor alteration to
land), and does not constitute a "project" that requires environmental
review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3), because the
proposed zone text amendment establishes new definitions and provisions
for measuring building height. (Applicant: City of EI Segundo)
(Fiscal Impact: None with this action
Recommendation — 1) Waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. for
Environmental Assessment No. EA -1210 and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA
17-08; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
11. Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to enter
into Memorandum of Agreements (MOAs) for 1) Administration and Cost
Sharing for Implementing the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Programs
(CIMPs) and Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMPs) for the
Dominguez Channel Watershed and for the Santa Monica Bay
Jurisdictional Groups 2 & 3 Watershed, and 2) Santa Monica Bay Dry & Wet
Weather Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Loads Coordinated Shoreline Water
Quality Monitoring Program.
(Fiscal Impact: FY 17/18 $4,492.495 FY 18/19 $53,311.26, FY 19/20
$51,566.08, FY 20/21 $59,728.06, FY21/22 $45,479.33, FY 22/23 $43,792.00
plus $12,362.00 for contingency)
Recommendation — 1) Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Memorandum
of Agreement of five years, in a form approved by the City Attorney, between the
Cities of Los Angeles, Carson, EI Segundo, Hawthorne, Inglewood, Lawndale,
and Lomita, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the County of Los
Angeles, and the South Bay Cities Council of Governments for $111,319 for
Administration and Cost Sharing for Implementing the Coordinated Integrated
Monitoring Program (CIMP) and Enhanced Watershed Management Program
(EWMP) for the Dominguez Channel Watershed; 2) Authorize the City Manager
to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement of five years, in a form approved by
the City Attorney, between the Cities of Los Angeles, EI Segundo, and Santa
Monica, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, and the County of Los
Angeles for $123,199 plus $12,362 of contingency for Administration and Cost
Sharing for Implementing the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program (CIMP)
and Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP) for the Santa Monica
Bay Jurisdictional Groups 2 & 3 Watershed; 3) Authorize the City Manager to
enter into a Memorandum of Agreement of five years, in a form approved by the
FP
City Attorney, between the Cities of Los Angeles and EI Segundo for $23,851.22
for Santa Monica Bay Dry & Wet Weather Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Loads
Coordinated Shoreline Water Quality Monitoring Program; 4) Alternatively,
discuss and take other action related to this item.
12. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of Ordinance No.
1567 to prohibit gatherings where underage drinking or illegal marijuana
use occurs, and adoption of Resolution No. establishing the schedule
of fines for administrative citations when there are violations of Ordinance
No. 1567.
(Fiscal Impact: None)
Recommendation —
Adopt Resolution
related to this item.
F. NEW BUSINESS
1) Waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1567; 2)
o. ; 3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action
13. Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute
a contract amendment with The Company of Others — Los Angeles, LLC
(dba The Phelps Group) for expanded economic development and
hospitality and tourism marketing services.
(Fiscal Impact: FY 17-18 - $596,500.00 in Economic Development
Advertisin and Publishing budget and Chevron Grant Fund expendituresL
Recommendation — 1) Upon approval of the FY18-19 budget, authorize the City
Manager to execute a contract amendment with The Company of Others — Los
Angeles, LLC (dba The Phelps Group) in a form approved by the City Attorney,
for expanded economic development and hospitality and tourism marketing
services; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
14. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of a Resolution
adopting the proposed inter -fund loan policy for the City of EI Segundo.
(Fiscal Impact: None)
Recommendation — 1) Adopt the proposed Resolution adopting an Inter -Fund
Loan Policy; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
F. REPORTS — CITY MANAGER
G. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY
H. REPORTS — CITY CLERK
9
J. REPORTS — CITY TREASURER
K. REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Pimentel —
Council Member Nicol —
Council Member Brann —
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk —
Mayor Boyles —
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS — Related to City Business Only — 5 minute limit per
person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have receive 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. While all comments are welcome, the Brown Act does not allow Council to
take action on any item not on the agenda. The Council will respond to comments after Public
Communications is closed.
MEMORIALS —
CLOSED SESSION
The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act
(Government Code Section §54960, et sec.) 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 Government Code Section §54957 (Personnel); and/or conferring with
the City's Labor Negotiators.
REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required)
ADJOURNMENT
10
POSTED:
DATE: g.,m.�g
TIME: �2 3sJ
NAME: V G�
11
11
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Presentation of Investment Portfolio Report
(Fiscal Impact: None)
MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA HEADING: Presentation
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Receive and File
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Investment Portfolio Report — June, 2018
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: 5 Champion Economic Development & Fiscal Sustainability
Objective: 3 The City will maintain a stable, efficient, and transparent financial
environment
ORIGINATED BY: Dino Marsocci, Deputy City Treasurer II 61
REVIEWED BY: Crista Binder, Treasurer ep6&
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The Treasury Department presents the June, 2018 Investment Portfolio Report which provides a
status of Treasury Investment activities and related economic indicators.
This report will be created and submitted to Council on a quarterly basis. The report will also be
posted to the City's web site under the Treasury Department.
12
11kSIGUNRoi
evil -Maio a SW"4
effl%w &&/ Ywajaw->r
Date: September 4, 2018
From: Office of the City Treasurer
To: EI Segundo City Council
RE: Investment Portfolio Report — As of June 30, 2018
Introduction:
This report will serve as a summary for the City of EI Segundo's Treasury Department investment reporting,
compliance, investment environment and future plans; as well as subsidiary schedules which will support the
Portfolio Summary and provide additional analysis of our investments.
Investment Summary:
The investments as of June 30, 2018 are as follows:
Security Type
Government
Municipal Bonds
Corp. Bonds
SUPRA's
CD's
Union Bank Trust
LAIF Immediate
LAIF Sr. Housing
LAIF - LAWA
LAIF Subtotal
Total Invested
Trust Acct. Cash
Chase Bank - Cash
Total Portfolio
Page I 1
June Portfolio Summary
Cost
19,846,037.45
546, 362.50
11,023,222.62
1,980,113.00
14,409,638.95
47, 805, 374.52
5,007,484.86
23,197, 764.82
1,110, 068.90
10,436,557.30
34.744.391.02
Market value
19,623,724.50
550,014.00
10,855,690.43
1,961,555.00
14,129,081.10
47,120,065.03
5,007,484.86
23,197,764.82
1,110, 068.90
10,436,557.30
34.744.391.02
1.92%
Market
% Yield
% of Total
1.64%
20.80%
3.08%
0.58%
2.33%
11.51%
2.05%
2.08%
2.03%
14.98%
1.92%
49.95%
1.82%
5.31%
1.85%
24.59%
1.85%
1.18%
1.85%
11.06%
1.85%
36.83%
87,557,250.40
86,871,940.91
1.90%
92.09%
10,447.38
10,447.38
0.00%
0.01%
7,447,133.25
0.55%
7.89%
_7,447.133.25
95,014,831.03
94,329,521.54
1.90%
100.00%
13
The portfolio Breakdown by Short Term (< 1 year) and Long Term is:
The interest income received during the period was:
Short Term
Long Term
Total
Portfolio Value Market
50,420,981
36,461,407
86,882,388
Effective Yield
1.759%
2.105%
1.904%
Average Wtd. Maturit
45 Das j
2.57 Years
1.15 Years
The interest income received during the period was:
* Note: the monthly fluctuation is because interest on most bonds is paid semi-annually, with LAIF paid quarterly, and some investments paid monthly.
Compliance:
It is the intention of the City Treasurer's office to ensure that our investments are in compliance with the maturity
time limits and percentage allocation limits with all of our investments. The City is currently in compliance as
demonstrated below:
Partial List of Allowable Investment Instruments for Local Agencies
Interest
Ma)dmum
Month
Invested Cost
Received
% Yield
April
89,604,146
166,935.40
2.24%
May
90,701,815
52,324.95
0.69%
June
87,557.250
100,932.49
1.38%
Avg[Total *
89,287,737
320,192.84
1.43%
* Note: the monthly fluctuation is because interest on most bonds is paid semi-annually, with LAIF paid quarterly, and some investments paid monthly.
Compliance:
It is the intention of the City Treasurer's office to ensure that our investments are in compliance with the maturity
time limits and percentage allocation limits with all of our investments. The City is currently in compliance as
demonstrated below:
Partial List of Allowable Investment Instruments for Local Agencies
Ma�dmum
Ma)dmum
Minimum Quality
City of EI
In
Investment Type
Maturity
Specified % of
Requirements
Segundo
Compliance
Portfolio
Invlest-nents
0.58%
Y/N
Y
Local Agency
5 years
None
None
Bonds
U. S Treasury
5 years
None
None
o
0.00 /o
Y
Obligations
US Agency
Obligations
5 years
None
None
20.80%
Y
Negotiable
Certificates of
5 years
30%
None
14.98%
Y
Deposit
Medium Term
5 years
15%
"A" Rating
11.51%
Y
Notes
Collateralized
5 years
None
None
5.31%
Y
Bank Deposits
.... ................. -
Local Agency
Investment Fund
N/A
None
None
36.83%
Y
LAI F
SUPRA Nationals
5 years
10%
"A A A" Rating
2.08%
0.00%
Y
Commercial
5 years
10%
"A -1/A" Rating
Y
Paper
-
...... ._.................
Multiple
Joint Powers
N/A
30%
0.00%
Y
Authority Pool
Page 12
14
Investment Type. Medium Term Notes, 8u ranationals, CD's & Commercial Paper - As of. June 30, 2018
Investment Type
Issuer
Maximum
% of
Portfolio
Minimum
Quality
Requirements
Rating
Investments
City of EI
Segundo
In
Compliance MARKET VALUE
Y/N
Medium Term Notes
TOTAL
15%
"A" Rating
11.51%
Y
10,855,690
Medium Term Notes
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE
3%
"A" Rating
A+
1.05%
Y
986,770
Medium Term Notes
APPLE INC
3%
"A" Rating
AA+
0.51%
Y
481,715
Medium Term Notes
BANK OF AMERICA
3%
"A" Ratin
A- 1
0.52%
Y
493,140
Medium Term Notes
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
3%
"A" Rating
A
0.53%
Y
497,950
Medium Term Notes
BARCLAYS BANK PLC
3%
"A" Ratin
A
0.52%
Y
493,930
Medium Term Notes
CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SVCS
3%
"A" Rating
A
0.51%
Y
484,955
Medium Term Notes
CISCO SYSTEMS
3%
"A" Rating__AA-
1.05%
Y
993,760
Medium Term Notes
DANAHER CORP.
3%
"A" Rating-_
A
0.52%
Y
494,040
Medium Term Notes
HSBC USA, INC.
3%
"A" Rating
A
0.50%
Y
472,780
Medium Term Notes
IBM CORPORATION
3%
"A" Rating
A+
0.45%
Y
423,067
Medium Term Notes
JOHNS HOPKINS HEALTH SYS
3%
"A" Ratin
AA-
0.15%
Y
14Q883
Medium Term Notes
MICROSOFT CORP
3%
"A" Rating__AAA
0.52%
Y
492,155
Medium Term Notes
NEW YORK LIFE GLOBAL
3%
"A" Rating
AA+
0,51%
Y
48Q745
Medium Term Notes
ORACLE CORPORATION
3%
"A" Rating
AA-
0.50%
Y
476,210
Medium Term Notes
PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP
3%
"A" Rating
A+
0.53%
Y
501,100
Medium Term Notes
TOYOTA
3%
"A" Rating
AA-
0.52%
Y
492,970
Medium Term Notes
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
3%
"A" RatingAA-
0.52%
Y
490,610
Medium Term Notes
US BANK NA
3%
"A" Ratin
AA-
0.52% 1
Y
495,090
Medium Term Notes
WALT DISNEY CO
3%
"A" Rating
A+
0.52%
Y
488,835
Medium Term Notes
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY 1
3%
"A" Ratin
A+/A-
1.03%
Y
974,985
Supranational Obl.
TOTAL
10%
"AAA" Rat nq
2.08%
Y
1,961,555
Supranational Obl.
IADB-INTER-AMERICAN DEV
BANK
3%
"AAA" Rating
AAA
1.55%
Y
1,463,940
Supranational Obl.
IBRD -INTERNATIONAL BANK
FOR REON & DEV
3%
"AAA" Rating
AAA
0.53%
Y
497,615
Commercial Paper
TOTAL
10%
"A -1/A" Rating
0.00%
Y
-
Commercial Paper
3%
"A-VA"Rating
A-1+
0.00%
Y
-
CD'S
TOTAL
30%
1 1
14.98%
Y
14,129,081
City of EI Segundo - Treasury Department
Continuing Education Tracking - As of June 30, 2018
Requirement YTD Hours Excess/(Deficit
5.00 21.90 16.90
Deputy City Treasurer II 5.00 11.90 6.90
Investment Environment:
GIOA - March, 2018,
NACHA - April, 2018
GIOA - March, 2018
During the second quarter of 2018, rates up to five years increased slightly, slowly continuing the trend from the
prior quarter. As of August 22nd the rates up to five years have increased from where they were at June 30th, most
significantly in the 1-2 year range. The FOMC raised the Federal Funds Rate at the June meeting to 1.75-2.00%, and
at this time there is a high probability that the Fed may raise rates two more times in 2018. The current expectation
is for gradual increases, but this could change depending on the current economic data and the new Federal Reserve
Chairperson.
The graphs and charts below show some of the key interest rates on items we invest in. As rates are expected to rise
over the next few years, we want to time our investments to take advantage of the increases as they occur.
Page 13
15
US Treasury Bonds Yield Curve as of 6/30/18
3.00
2.50 Z.
2.3
Z. 09
2.00
1. .93
1.77 M .73
°G -T--C3
1.50
1.00
M
9
0.00 i i ,
1 Mo 3 Mo 6 Mo 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 5 Yr
13/30/2018 -*-6/29/2018
2.56
Page 14
irp
New Investment Yields vs. Treasury Yield Curve
4.00
3.50
• 3.29
rg 3.85
• 3.12
• 3-15
3.00
• 3.0 8
- - •�00
• 2.90
• 2.72
a 2.60 2.60
2.50
252
2.475
2.56
2.33
_ - - -' 2.39
2.27
v 2-00
s
1.50
I
1.00
0.50
0.00
1
2 3 4
5
Duration X6/29/2018 3/30/2018
r YTM ® Cos[
Page 14
irp
Composite Bond Rates (as of 6/30/18)
US Treasury Bonds Rates
Maturity
Yield
Yesterday
Last Week
Last Month
3 Month
1.93
1.93
1.93
1.93
6 Month
2.11
2.11
2.11
2.08
2 Year
2.52
2.52
2.56
2.40
3 Year
2.63
2.60
2.65
2.54
5 Year
2.73
2.73
2.77
2.68
Source: http:_/Jfinance. ahoo.com bonds com osite bond rates
Cash Flow Analysis:
The chart below shows the historical cash flow for the last 12 months. We can see that the majority of our funds are
received in the second quarter of the fiscal year, January thru March, primarily due to Business License Renewals and
the annual Chevron Payment. We also receive Sales and UUT taxes during the first few months of the year as well.
Our investments will be purchased with the liquidity relative to our cash flow needs.
18,000,000
16,000,000
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8
E
a 8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
A
Page 15
Rolling 12 Month Cash Flow Analysis Total Receipts
-Total Disbursements
Jul -17 Aug -17 Sep -17 Oct -17 Nov -17 Dec -17 Jan -18 Feb -18 Mar -18 Apr -18 May -18 Jun -18
17
This chart shows the net change in Cash as related to the Cash Flow Analysis above. Some of the larger
disbursements occur in the third and fourth quarters of the fiscal year. During Q-3, March to June, we have
a significant payment to CalPers for our Other Post -Employment Benefits, and in Q-4, July- September, a
payment to ICRMA for our citywide insurance premiums, a large payment to CalPers for the pension
Unfunded Accrued Liability, and a large infrastructure payment for roadwork which was completed several
years ago. We have added the prior year to highlight the changes that have occurred this year. The first
large CalPers payment for the Unfunded Accrued Liability was made in July of 2017 in the amount of
$7,019,291, accounting for most of the negative change from the prior year.
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
0
(5,000,000)
(10,000,000)
(15,000,000) -----
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR
Additional Economic Indicators:
Economic Pro ections from September Meeting
Rolling 12 Month Net Change in Cash FY -2016/2017
--!:-FY-2017/2018
APR MAY JUN
The Economic Indicators presented below are key items that the Federal Reserve will look at in deciding
whether or not to change interest rates going forward.
The GDP, or Gross Domestic Product, represents the market value of all goods and services produced by
the economy during the period measured, including personal consumption, government purchases, private
inventories, paid -in construction costs and the foreign trade balance (exports are added, imports are
subtracted). This is a key indicator the Federal Reserve will look at when deciding on interest rate changes.
The target level for GDP is in the 2.5% to 3.5% range.
The Unemployment Rate shows the percentage of the labor force that is unemployed but seeking work.
The target level for Unemployment is around 5.6%.
Page 16
UP
The PCE Inflation is the Personal Consumption Expenditures rate of inflation. This index is essentially a
measure of goods and services targeted toward individuals and consumed by individuals. The longterm
inflation target is around 2% per year. Core PCE Inflation excludes items such as food and energy due to
the nature of their potential price swings.
Fed Economic Projections (central tendencies as of June 2018)
Variable
Change in real GDP
2018
2019
2020
Longer run
2.7-3.0
2.2-2.6
1.8-2.0
1.8-2.0
March projection
2.6-3.0
2.2-2.6
1.8-2.1
1.8-2.0
Unemployment rate
3.6-3.7
3.4-3.5
3.4-3.7
4.3-4.6
March projection
3.6-3.8
3.4-3.7
3.5-3.8
4.3-4.7
PCE inflation
2.0-2.1
2.0-2.2
2.1-2.2
2.0
March projection
1.8-2.0
2.0-2.2
2.1-2.2
2.0
Core PCE inflation
March projection
Memo: Projected appropriate policy path
Federal funds rate
March projection
1.9-2.0
2.0-2.2
2.1-2.2
1.8-2.0
2.0-2.2
2.1-2.2
2.1-2.4
2.9-3.4
3.1-3.6
2.8-3.0
2.1-2.4
2.8-3.4
3.1- 3.6
2.8-3.0
Unemployment
4.7
4.
4.2
3.7
01/17 03/17 05/17 07/17 09/17 11/17 01/18 03/18 05/18
M onth
Source: htt data.his. ovc i -bin serve most?bls
Page 17
WE
Inflation:
3.5
3
2.5
2
o�
1.5
1
0.5
O
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
(0.5)
(1.0)
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Inflation Rates by Month � 20172018
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Average Inflation Rates by Year
Source:_http:Hwww.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates
Page 18
WE
410,000
405,000
400,000
395,000
390,000
385,000
380,000
375,000
370,000
365,000
360,000
355,000
Retail Trade & Food Services, ex Auto, US Total
Seasonally Adjusted Sales (Millions of $)
2017 2018
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Source: United States Census Bureau - http://www.census.gov/retail/index.html
Investment strategy:
It is the City and City Treasurer's policy to invest funds in accordance with the Investment Policy and to meet all legal
requirements regarding the safeguarding of funds.
In the past we maintained a higher cash balance at the bank in order to offset our bank fees since our Earnings Credit
rate was higher than the LAIF rate. Now that the LAIF interest rate exceeds our Earnings Credit rate we have lowered
our bank balance and invested more short term funds in LAIF. We will now pay bank fees but earn more interest
income, and will continue to monitor our cash flow needs in order to determine which investments will maximize
return while providing the proper level of liquidity.
The Liquidity Schedule provides an overview of when our current investments are due to mature. We will plan our
future investments to coordinate with these maturities in order to ensure a liquidity balance to our portfolio. The
Investments by Security Type schedule provides an additional breakdown of how our funds are presently allocated.
The Portfolio Summary for the month is included as an attachment to this report.
Additional Notes:
The City has funds of $1,110,068.90 which belong to the EI Segundo Senior Citizens Housing Fund and is now shown
as its own LAIF balance. There are also LAWA RSI (Los Angeles World Airports Residential Sound Insulation) funds of
Page 19
21
$10,436,557.30 included in the City's LAIF balances. The applicable interest for these accounts is posted quarterly in
the same manner as the regular City LAIF interest posting.
In June of 2018 the City Council approved Resolution No. 5094 which now allows the City to invest in a Joint Powers
Authority Pool with a maximum of 30% of the total portfolio. The City has established an account with the California
Asset Management Program — CAMP, and funded the account with a $7,000,000.00 deposit on August 23, 2018.
The City of EI Segundo utilizes the following Brokers/Dealers to conduct investment trades:
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co.
CastleOak Securities, L.P
Higgins Capital Management, Inc.
Multi -Bank Securities, Inc.
Mutual Securities, Inc.
Vining Sparks IBG, L.P.
Wells Fargo Securities, LLC
Page 1 10
22
City of EI Segundo
I nvestment Advisory Committee
Liquidity Schedule
As of: June 30, 2018
Item Availability
Par Value
Cash in Bank
$42,201,971.65
Chase Immediate
7,447,133.25
Union Bank - Trust Account Immediate
10,447.38
Cash in Bank - Total
$7,457,580.63
L.A.I. F. (State of California) LAW Immediate
$23.197,764.82
Cash Immediate
$30.655,345.45
L.A. I. F. - Senior Housing Fund LAIF Immediate
1,110,068.90
L.A I. F. - LAWA (Restricted) LAIF Immediate
10,436,557.30
Pacific Prem Bank CBD
5,007,484.86
Portfolio Investments: < 30 Days
$0.00
31 to 90 Days
$2,745,000.00
91 to 180 Days
$2,245,000.00
181 to 365 Days
$5,725,000.00
1 to 2 Years
$13,763,000.00
2 to 3 Years
$10,900,000.00
3 to 4 Years
$8,940,000.00
4 to 5 Years
$3,615,000.00
Subtotal
64,487,111.06
Grand Total
$95,142,456.51
Investment Portfolio subtotal
$87,695,323.26
$25,000,000.00
$20,000,000.00 �.
$15,000,000.00
I_
$10,000,000.00
$5,000,000.00
$0.00
Cumulative
% of Total % of Total
Cumulative Balances Assets Assets
$7,457,580.63 7.84% 7.84%
$30,655,345.45 32.22% 24.38%
$31,765,414.35
33.39%
1.17%
$42,201,971.65
44.36%
10.97%
$47,209,456.51
49.62%
5.26%
$47,209,456.51
49.62%
0.00%
$49,954,456.51
52.50%
2.89%
$52,199,456.51
54.86%
2.36%
$57,924,456.51
60.88%
6.02%
$71,687,456.51
75.35%
14.47%
$82,587,456.51
86.80%
11.46%
$91,527,456.51
96.20%
9.40%
$95,142,456.51
100.00%
3.80%
100.00%
Investments by Maturity Date
■ Market Value
5?- Ne c°� Z`�� �� A`' �y'30 4a�`' qac' �
Ao
r.' dao Q-F�'�Dy- �O c0ti
CPQ ��k �iNhec` 3�q'-9 �9 ^•
Page 1 11
23
City of EI Segundo
Investment Advisory Committee
Investments by Security Type
As of: June 30, 2018
Grand Total $94,329,521.64
Investment Portfolio subtotal $86,882,388.29
INVESTMENTS BY SECURITY TYPE
Cash Immediate,
Bonds, $10,855,690 $7,457,581
SUPRA's, 1,961,
Municipal Bonds,
550,014.00
Gov't Obligations,
19,623,724.50
Plaza Bank CBD,
$ 5,007,485
Page 112
100.00%
LAIF Immediate,
$23,197,765
41F. -Senior Housing,
$1,110,069
WA,
., ,557
24
Cumulative
% of Total
% of Total
Item
Availabilily
Market Value
Cumulative Balances
Assets
Assets
Cash in Bank
Chase
Immediate
7,447,133.25
Union Bank - Trust Account
Immediate
10 447.38
Cash in Bank- Total
$7,457,580.63.
$7,457,580.63
7.91%
7.91%
L.Al. F. (State of California)
LAIF Immediate
$23,197,764.82
$30,655,345.45
32.50%
24.59%
Cash Immediate
$30,655,345.45
L.A.I.F. - Senior Housing Fund LAIF Immediate
1,110,068.90
$31,765,414.35
33.67%
1.18%
L.Al. F. - LAWA (Restricted)
LAIF Immediate
10,436,557.30
$42,201,971.65
44.74%
11.06%
Plaza Bank CBD
5,007,484.86
$47,209,456.51
50.05%
5.31%
Portfolio Investments:
CD's
14,129, 081.10
$61,338,537.61
65.03%
14.98%
Godt Obligations
19,623,724.50
$80,962,262.11
85.83%
20.80%
Municipal Bonds
550,014.00
$81,512,276.11
86.41%
0.58%
SUPRA's
1,961,555.00
$82,923,817.11
87.91%
2.08%
Bonds
10, 855, 690.43
$93,779,507.54
99.42%
11.51%
Subtotal _
$63,674,176.09
Grand Total $94,329,521.64
Investment Portfolio subtotal $86,882,388.29
INVESTMENTS BY SECURITY TYPE
Cash Immediate,
Bonds, $10,855,690 $7,457,581
SUPRA's, 1,961,
Municipal Bonds,
550,014.00
Gov't Obligations,
19,623,724.50
Plaza Bank CBD,
$ 5,007,485
Page 112
100.00%
LAIF Immediate,
$23,197,765
41F. -Senior Housing,
$1,110,069
WA,
., ,557
24
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to (1) approve the Residential Solid Waste Collection Request for
Proposals and authorize staff to seek bids, and (2) approve the Notice of Public Hearing and Proposition
218 Ballot to establish a maximum $20 monthly fee upon eligible residential dwellings for solid waste
collection services. (Fiscal Impact: $10,000)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Approve the Residential Solid Waste Collection Request for Proposals and authorize staff to
seek bids;
2. Approve the Notice of Public Hearing and Proposition 218 Ballot to establish a maximum $20
monthly fee upon eligible residential dwellings for solid waste collection services; or,
3. Alternatively, take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Notice of Public Hearing and Proposition 218 Ballot
Request for Proposals
FISCAL IMPACT: $10,000 (estimated)
Amount Budgeted: $0
Additional Appropriation: $0
Account Number(s): 001-400-4206-6206 (Solid Waste Recycling Contractual Services)
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: IA El Segundo provides unparalleled service to internal and external
customers.
Objective: 2 City services are convenient, efficient and user-friendly for all residents,
businesses, and visitors.
PREPARED BY: Ken Berkman, Director of Public Works SQ
/pt -
Mark Hensley, City Attorney
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager.
BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION:
At the July 17, 2018 meeting, the City Council directed staff to proceed with a Request for Proposals
process to procure the next Residential Solid Waste Collections services provider, as well as a
Proposition 218 process that would require eligible residential dwellings to pay a maximum of $20 per
month for the services. Additionally, Council directed staff to include both manual and automated
services as base bid options, and to exclude 3- and 4 -unit multi -family complexes from the services, in
accordance with the City's municipal code which requires the City to provide refuse service to "single-
family and two-family unit residences, not including condominiums or stock cooperatives".
25
The last time the City released an RFP for residential solid waste collection services was February 2011.
That RFP included multi -family properties of up to four units, which totals to 3,981 distinct service
addresses, and Republic was selected to provide the services for seven years, through October 31, 2018.
Council authorized a month-to-month extension of Republic's contract for up to six months at the July
17th meeting as the RFP and Franchise award process is completed, at a rate of $16.55 per month per
eligible dwelling.
Under the current Agreement, the City pays Republic $9.88 per unit per month for a total cost of
approximately $472,000 per year. Additionally, 12 City facilities and the City's downtown area are
serviced under the Agreement, and others are listed below. They also provide asphalt and street
sweeper debris collections for the City at an estimated $15,000 and $32,550 per year, respectively. The
amount charged is based upon the actual tonnage collected.
Staff is recommending a term of seven years for the agreement. The proposed services the prospective
haulers must provide in their bids include:
Automated Collections Bid
Base Bid Items:
• Weekly collection of Trash, Recyclables, and Green Waste with hauler -provided carts
• Four bulky item pick-ups per year (Six items per pickup maximum)
• Holiday tree collection
• Abandoned item collection in public right-of-way
• Five City -sponsored events/year*
• Outreach and education
• Two annual cleanup weeks for bulky items (Alternate Bid)
• Two annual document shredding events (Alternate Bid)
* 4th of July Fireworks Show, Concerts in the Park, Hometown Fair, Richmond St. Fair, Holiday Parade
Manual Collections Bid
Base Bid Items:
• Weekly unlimited waste - residents provide containers
• Weekly unlimited green waste — residents provide containers
• Weekly Unlimited recyclables - hauler provides 1-32 or 2-16 gallon containers, or equivalent
• Four bulky item pick-ups per year (Six items per pickup maximum)
• Holiday tree collection
■ Abandoned item collection in public right-of-way
■ Five City -sponsored events/year (as noted above)
• Outreach and education
• Two annual cleanup weeks for bulky items (Alternate Bid)
• Two annual document shredding events (Alternate Bid)
El Segundo is the only city in LA County that uses curbside, manual collection for its solid waste.
There is no legal requirement to provide automated services; however, when compared to manual
26
service, automated services are more effective, efficient, cleaner, will inherently encourage residents to
reduce their waste stream, and will provide a specific green waste container that can also accept organic
material (food waste). The automated system will also facilitate compliance with the State's solid waste
regulations that are managed by the California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery
(CalRecycle).
The lack of a residential green waste program was identified as a "gap" in the City's Solid Waste
Program by CalRecyle, who placed the City in its Jurisdictional Compliance Unit. Currently, residents
can dispose of green waste by self -hauling to a container located in the Public Works Yard. Providing
green waste curbside service will address that "gap" and allow the City to more accurately report on
residential green waste disposal. Organics regulations have been passed into law by the State for multi-
family properties of five or more. Food waste regulations are expected to eventually impact single-
family residential units in the future. Having an established automated green and organics waste
collection program will assist the City in regaining compliance status with CalRecycle.
The schedule going forward is estimated to be as follows:
Present RFP and Prop 218 Package to Council for Approval
Pre -Proposal Conference
Deadline for Proposer Questions
Prepare Addenda and Receive Proposals
Evaluate Proposals and Select Hauler, Commence Negotiations
Present Negotiated Agreement to Council for Approval
Execute Agreement and Order Equipment/Materials
Outreach Campaign
Initiate Rollout of New Service
Proposition 218
Tonight
September 2018
September 2018
October 2018
November 2018
December 2018
January 2019
February/March 2019
no later than May 1, 2019
On June 19, 2018, in consideration of the facts that the City pays for solid waste collection services for
eligible residential dwellings out of the General Funds (at the aforementioned cost of $472,000 per
year), and that El Segundo is the only city besides San Diego and Commerce where residents do not
directly pay for the services, the City Council directed staff to commence the process to assess a
maximum $20 per month fee on the residential units that are eligible to receive solid waste collection
services.
Although no California court has yet addressed the issue directly, the solid waste collection fees being
considered are arguably subj ect to the State's Proposition 218 "maj ority protest" ballot process - i.e. if a
majority of the properties to be subject to the fee protest the fee, then it may not be imposed.
Proposition 218 protest ballots are required to be sent to property owners and customers (tenants that
directly pay for the service). In El Segundo, since residents do not pay for the service, staff can only
identify property owners but not customers that may be tenants. The City Attorney's Office has advised
staff that only the property owners shall be noticed of the proposed rates for the service; thus, the Notice
of Public Hearing (Notice) and Protest Ballot (Ballot) shall be sent to the property owners of the eligible
single-family and two -unit dwellings that will receive the services. The Notice and Ballot are attached
for Council's consideration and approval.
Proposition 218 requires a minimum 45 -day written notice prior to Council holding a public hearing on
a proposed rate increase. A protest to a proposed rate increase must be filed by the close of the public
27
hearing. If a majority of the parcels file written protests with the City prior to the close of the public
hearing, Proposition 218 states that the City cannot implement the proposed fee. If a majority of the
parcels do not protest the proposed increase, the Council has the authority to implement the proposed
fee. The selected hauler will be required to collect the $20 (maximum) fee from the eligible dwelling
owner.
With approval of the Notice and Ballot, along with the 45 -day noticing requirement, staff expects to
hold the Public Hearing to open the Ballots on November 6, 2018. The communications plan includes
an educational postcard mailer to be sent prior to the Notice and Ballot packages, as well as website and
City Facebook postings. The postcard will be similar to the one for the City's recent Measure C
proposition, and the website/Facebook posts will include general information and Frequently Asked
Questions (FAQ), which will be updated based upon inquiries staff receives.
Potential Fiscal Impact
The elimination of the 3- and 4 -unit properties (671 individual dwellings), coupled with the estimated
$20/month per dwelling cost, provides for an estimated annual savings of $160,000 to the General Fund.
With 3,230 eligible single-family and two -unit dwellings receiving the services and the monthly fee of
$20, it is estimated that the General Fund liability would be reduced by approximately $775,000 on an
annual basis, for a combined total annual General Fund burden reduction of $935,000.
Lifeline Assistance
Lifeline financial assistance for water and sewer fees has been in effect since 1995, when the City
Council adopted Resolution No. 3922. Currently, there are 44 residential properties who qualify
according to the following household size and income requirements:
1-2 $32,920 or less
3 $41,560 or less
4 $50,200 or less
5 $58,840 or less
6 $67,480 or less
7 $76,120 or less
8 $84,760 or less
$8,640 for each additional person
These participants receive a water rate reduction of 50% for the first 1,000 cubic ft/month used and a
50% reduction of their total sewer fees. Water use above 1,000 cubic ft is charged at the fully loaded
rate.
At the July 17th meeting, Council also directed staff to include the Lifeline 50% reduction of this
proposed fee, resulting in a $10 per month fee for eligible participants. If there is not a majority protest
and the fee will be implemented, the Lifeline 50% fee reduction for qualifying households will also be
implemented.
Staff respectfully recommends the City Council approve the RFP, Notice of Public Hearing and
Proposition 218 Ballot and authorize staff to seek bids for the residential solid waste collection services
included in the RFP. Approval requires a simple majority Council vote.
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
NOTICE TO PARCEL OWNERS OF A
1� E PROPOSED
SOLID WASTE (TRASH) RATE INCREASE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of EI Segundo (City) proposes to consider and potentially establish a
monthly fee (Fee) for solid waste disposal (Trash) and the fee rates for a five-year time period (Rates) applicable to the
Assessor Parcel Number (APN) for which you are shown as the property owner of record based on the County of Los
Angeles 2018/2019 Secured Tax Roll.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that on November 6, 2018, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as may be heard,
at 350 Main Street, EI Segundo, CA 90245 in the City Council Chambers, the City Council will conduct a public hearing
on the proposed Rate increases.
At the time of the public hearing, the City Council will hear and consider all persons interested in these matters and will
consider and may adopt the proposed Fee and Rates or impose a Fee and/or Rates in an amount less than those
proposed as set forth below. If the City receives, prior to the closing of the public hearing on November 6, 2018, written
protests against the proposed Fee and Rates from a majority of the parcels eligible to receive Trash services, the City
cannot impose the proposed Fee and Rates.
There is a Protest Form included for Trash service that allows property owners to protest the proposed Fee and
Rates. Any property owner interested in protesting must complete the following:
Y Check the box indicating that you wish to protest the proposed Fee and Rates:
Y Print and sign your name on the enclosed protest form; and,
Mail to: City Clerk, Room 5, City of EI Segundo, 350 Main Street, EI Segundo CA, 90245 or hand deliver the
form in the pre -addressed envelope provided to the City Clerk's office so that the form is received by the City
Clerk prior to the closing of the public hearing on November 6, 2018.
Protest forms received after the close of the public hearing shall not be considered. The forms can be hand
delivered or mailed to the City Clerk's Office Room 5 at 350 Main Street, EI Segundo, California, 90245. Forms
must be signed in order to be tabulated.
If adopted, the Fee and Rates will be effective on or after February 1, 2019.
Please read further for a summary of the reasons and methodology for the proposed Fee and Rates that are the subject
of the public hearing:
Solid Waste Disposal (Trash)
In the 1980's the City established a solid waste "franchise" for single family residential properties with two or fewer units.
This means the City has the authority to mandate that either the City or its contract hauler have the exclusive right to
collect solid waste from those properties. The property owners are required to use the services provided by the City or
they can decide to "self -haul" their solid waste.
The City currently pays 100% of the cost for single family residential properties (with four or fewer units) solid waste
collection and contracts with Republic for collection and disposal. The Republic contract expires in April 2019, The City
is currently requesting proposals for the next solid waste collections contract. The City Council has voted to cap the
potential monthly rate at $20.00 per eligible residential dwelling regardless of the cost proposals received. This means
those who receive the services will pay the lesser of the actual amount for providing the service or $20 per eligible
residential dwelling for solid waste collection and disposal services.
The initial $20 cap rate may be increased annually, for a five year period, based on the percentage change in the Consumer
Price Index (CPI) (for Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA for All Urban Consumers, All Items) for the prior 12 -
month period. However, the rate will continue to be the lower of the actual cost of providing the service or the CPI
increased rate.
WE
Lifeline Assistance Program
The Lifeline Assistance Program will be available to those property owners that qualify based on household size and
income if there is not a majority protest and the solid waste service fees are implemented. For qualifying households,
solid waste service rates would be reduced by fifty percent (50%) resulting in a maximum rate of $10 per month per unit
beginning on or after February 1, 2019.
The following tables indicate existing and proposed solid waste service rates for single family residential:
Single Family Residential (two units or fewer)
Solid Waste Collections Service Charges
-_
-
Current
Not to Exceed Proposed Maximum*
On or After On or After On or After
On or After
On or After
Service Type
Charges
February 1, February 1, February 1,
February 1,
February 1,
2019 2020* 2021*
$20.00 $20.60 $21.22
2022*
2023*
Total Residential Basic
$0.00
$21.86
$22.52
Bye
Additional Refuse Container
No Charge
No Charge No Charge No Charge
No Charge
No Charge
Additional Yard Waste
No Charge
No Charge No Charge No Charge
No Charge
No Charge
Additional Recyclable
No Charge
No Charge No Charge No Charge
No Charge
No Charge
Bulky Item Collection
(maximum 4 pick-ups per
No Charge
No Charge No Charge No Charge
No Charge
No Charge
year, maximum 6 items per
pick-up)
"The actual rate will be increased by the increase in CPI, the rates in the table have been increased by 3% for example purposes only.
If you have any questions or would like additional information regarding the rates or the protest procedure,
please call the City's Proposition 218 consultant at 888-510-0290 for further information.
WE
<<APNFMT>>
<<OWNER 1>>
<<OWNER 2>>
<<OWNER 3>>
<<MAILING 1>>
<<MAILING 2>>
City of EI Segundo
Solid Waste Disposal (Trash) Fee and Rates
Protest Form
Service Address: «SITUS»
If you wish to protest the implementation of the solid waste disposal (trash) service Fee and
Rates, you must 1) check the box indicating that you protest the proposed solid waste disposal
(trash) rate increase, 2) sign your name on the lines provided, and 3) deliver the signed protest
form in the pre -addressed envelope provided to the City Clerk before the close of the public
hearing scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on November 6, 2018 by one of the following methods: U.S. mail
addressed to City Clerk Office Room 5, City of EI Segundo, 350 Main Street, EI Segundo, CA
90245 or hand delivered to the City Clerk's Office Room 5 at the same address.
0 1 protest the proposed solid waste disposal (trash) Fee and Rates.
I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that I am the record owner of the parcel listed above
Print Legibly — Full Name (Required)
Signature (Required)
Only completed and signed original protest forms will be counted. Unsigned
protest forms or non -original protest forms will not be counted.
«Code Yes»
31
Request for Proposals No. 18-08
Residential Solid Waste Collection,
Recycling, and Disposal Services and
Civic Solid Waste Services for the
City of EI Segundo
City of EI Segundo
350 Main Street
EI Segundo, CA 90245
310-524-2356
01217299.00 1 September 2018
438 S. Marengo Ave.
Pasadena, CA 91101
626-792-9593
32
Table of Contents
Section Page
1.0
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1
1.1
Procurement Scope and Objectives.................................................................................1
1.2
Procurement Approach.............................................................................................................1
1.3
Term of Agreement....................................................................................................................1
1.4
Draft Franchise Agreement......................................................................................................1
2.0
RFP PROCESS...................................................................................................................................2
2.1
Proposers List..........................................................................................................................2
2.2
Mandatory Pre -proposal Meeting............................................................................................2
2.3
Schedule....................................................................................................................................2
2.4
General Requirements.............................................................................................................3
2.5
Verification of Information........................................................................................................3
2.6
Consequence of Submission of a Proposal............................................................................3
2.7
Proposal Costs..........................................................................................................................4
2.8
Proposal Submission /deadline..............................................................................:................4
3.0
BACKGROUND INFORMATION...........................................................................................................5
3.1
Existing Solid Waste System....................................................................................................5
4.0
SCOPE OF PROPOSED SERVICES AND KEY CONTRACT TERMS......................................................6
4.1
Residential Services.......................:........................................................................................6
4.1.1 Automated Collection Option...................................................................................6
4.1.2 Manual Collection Option...........................................................................................7
4.2
Civic Solid Waste Services (Services to city facilities)...............................................................8
4.2.1 City Sponsored Events..............................................................................................9
4.2.2 Abandoned Item Collection in Public Right-of-Way....................................................9
4.2.3 Street Sweeping Debris and Asphalt Debris Disposal...............................................9
4.2.4 Bulky Item Cleanup Weeks (Alternate Bid)...............................................................9
4.2.5 Document Shredding Events (Alternate Bid).............................................:...............9
4.3
Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regulations............................................................10
4.4
Fee Collection........................................................................................................................
10
LifelineAssistance .......................................................................................................
10
5.0
PROPOSAL
REQUIREMENTS...........................................................................................................11
5.1
Cover Letter/ Executive Summary.........................................................................................12
5.2
Proposer Information.............................................................................................................
12
5.2.1 Business Structure...................................................................................................
12
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page
33
Table of Contents
Section
Page
5.2.2 Municipal Collection Experience..............................................................................12
5.2.3 Key Personnel............................................................................ ..........................
13
5.2.4 Service Transition Experience..................................................................................
13
5.2.5 Litigation History and regulatory compliance..........................................................
13
5.2.6 Safety Record............................................................................................................
13
5.2.7 Financial Information...............................................................................................14
5.3
Technical Proposal.................................................................................................................15
5.3.1 Automated Collection Services........................................:.....:.................................15
5.3.2 Manual Collection Services......................................................................................15
5.3.3 Diversion Requirements...........................................................................................16
5.3.4 Collection Vehicles....................................................................................................16
5.3.5 Billing and Customer Service..........................................................................:........
16
5.3.6 Customer Education and Outreach.........................................................................17
5.3.7 Transition Plan..........................................................................................................17
5.3.8 Employment of Prior Contractor Employees...........................................................17
5.3.9 Facilities....................................................................................................................17
5.3.10 Office and Maintenance Facilities.........................................................................
18
5.3.11 Optional Additional Information or Proposal Enhancements..............................19
5.4
Exceptions to Draft Franchise Agreement.............................................................................19
5.5
Rate Proposal Forms.............................................................................................................19
6.0 RFP
SUBMITTAL PROCESS..............................................................................................................
20
6.1
Proposer registration.............................................................................................................
20
6.2
Interim Inquiries and Responses, Interpretaion or Clarifications .......................................
20
6.3
Addenda.................................................................................................................................
20
6.4
Withdrawl, Cancellation, or Modifcation of a Proposal.......................................................
21
7.0 SELECTION CRITERIA AND PROCESS.............................................................................................21
7.1
Proposer's Experience and Qualifications............................................................................21
7.2
Implementation Plan..............................................................................................................
21
7.3
Exceptions to the Terms and Conditions.................................................................... ........
21
7.4
Financial Resources..............................................................................................................
22
7.5
Cost and Value.......................................................................................................................
22
7.6
Employment............................................................................................................................22
7.7
Award......................................................................................................................................22
RFP -Residential
Solid Waste
Services
Page ii
34
Table of Contents
Section Page
8.0 GENERAL INFORMATION, DISCLAIMERS, DISCLOSURES & PROPOSAL FORMS ......................... 22
8.1 Insurance....................................................................................................... .................... 23
8.2 City's Reservation of Rights.................................................................................................. 23
Tables
Table1. RFP Schedule........................................................................................................................2
Table2. Proposal Requirements..................................................................................................... 11
Appendices
AppendixA. Rate Proposal Forms........................................................................................................... 24
Appendix B. Draft Franchise Agreement. ........................................................................................... ... . 25
AppendixC. City Facilities........................................................................................................................ 26
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page iii
35
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of EI Segundo (City) is requesting proposals from qualified solid waste companies to provide
solid waste collection, transportation, recycling, processing, and disposal services for residential
premises in the City, along with civic solid waste services. The residential solid waste Franchise
Agreement (Agreement) with the City's current company, Republic Services (Republic), will expire on
October 31, 2018. On July 17, 2018, the City Council directed staff to prepare an RFP for residential
solid waste collection services. The City is soliciting proposals for both manual and automated
collection services consistent with the specifications herein set forth.
1.1 PROCUREMENT SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES
The services to be procured shall be provided to single-family and two-family unit residences, which
currently totals 3,230 units.
The City's objectives of this procurement are to:
1. Conduct a fair, transparent, competitive procurement process to obtain the greatest
value in solid waste handling services for the City and its residents.
2. Provide the City with the flexibility to either:
a. Award an exclusive contract to provide manual collection to residential premises.
b. Award an exclusive contract to provide automated collection services to
residential premises.
1.2 PROCUREMENT APPROACH
To achieve these procurement objectives, the City has prepared rate proposal forms (included in
Appendix A) that enable proposers to offer price proposals for manual or automated collection. The
City is requesting that proposers submit separate price proposals for each type of service, manual or
automated. A separate price proposal should be completed for the civic solid waste services.
The purpose for gathering this information from proposers is to give the City the information it needs
to negotiate a franchise agreement that represents the greatest value to the City.
1.3 TERM OF NEW AGREEMENT
The current agreement was to end October 31, 2018. The City has approved a six-month extension
to the agreement to allow sufficient time for the procurement process. The new agreement will have
a term of seven years, and is expected to commence on May 1, 2019 and expire on April 30, 2026.
The City may extend the agreement for up to 36 months at its sole option.
1.4 DRAFT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
To provide proposers with an understanding of the contract terms under which they will provide
service, the City has prepared a draft franchise agreement, which is included in Appendix B.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 1
36
2.0 RFP PROCESS
This RFP outlines the City's procurement process, provides background information about the City,
summarizes the scope of services and key contract terms, and describes the information that
proposers must include in their proposals.
2.1 PROPOSERS LIST
Potential proposers who are interested in receiving amendments and/or answers to questions
related to this RFP should register for this procurement by sending an email to Ken Berkman at
kberkmanCwelsegundo.a, t and request to be placed on the list.
2.2 MANDATORY PRE -PROPOSAL MEETING
All proposers must attend a pre -proposal meeting on The pre -proposal meeting will
be held in ,. Proposals from firms that do not attend the pre -proposal meeting will not be
considered. The City requests that interested proposers RSVP for the mandatory pre -proposal
meeting to kberkman@elsegundo.org by MR.
2.3 SCHEDULE
The City intends to procure new solid waste collection services according to the schedule shown in
Table 1.
Table 1. RFP Schedule
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 2
37
City releases RFP
September xx, 2018
Proposers RSVP for mandatory pre -proposal
meeting
September xx. 2018
City conducts mandatory pre -proposal meeting
September xx, 2018
Prepare Responses to questions at pre -proposal
meeting and questions submitted in writing and
issue Addenda
October xx, 2018
Proposers submit proposals
October xx, 2018
Evaluation committee reviews proposals and
interviews shortlisted proposer(s)
November, 2018
Authorization to enter negotiations with the
selected Company to City Council.
November, 2018
City completes ne otiations with contractor
December 2018
Award of Franchise Agreement to City Council
December 2018
Execute Agreement
January 2019
Conduct outreach campaign to residents
February/March 2019
Rollout of New Service
May 2019
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 2
37
2.4 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
By submitting a proposal, a proposer represents that:
■ The RFP is sufficient in scope and detail to indicate and convey reasonable
understanding of all requirements, terms, and conditions for performance of the work
required in this project.
• The Proposer has exercised all necessary due diligence in making investigations and
inquiries, examining documents, and inspecting City sites and facilities.
• The Proposer is fully familiar with— and has fully considered— all facts, conditions,
circumstances, and matters that may affect, in any way, the Proposer's services or costs.
• The Proposal is an irrevocable offer for a period of at least one hundred eighty (180)
calendar days following City's opening of all Proposals.
• The Proposer is, and will be, in compliance with the RFP's requirements, terms, and
conditions.
The City's rights include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Withdrawing, reissuing or modifying the RFP.
• Requesting clarification and/or additional information from any proposer at any point in
the procurement process.
• Executing any or all of the draft agreements with a proposer on the basis of the original
proposals and/or any other information submitted by the proposers during the
procurement process.
• Rejecting any or all proposals, waiving irregularities in any proposals, or waiving any
requirements of the RFP.
• Negotiating with more than one proposer or other service provider, either sequentially or
simultaneously, for all or any of the services, in this RFP.
• Accepting a proposal that may not offer the lowest cost but offers the best overall value
to the City.
2.5 VERIFICATION OF INFORMATION
The City, and its consultants or legal counsel, may be conducting reference checks on
proposers that may involve contacting municipalities currently or previously served by proposer,
as well as contacting regulatory agencies involved in the oversight of proposers' facilities and
operations. In addition, the City may review the proposers' litigation history, regulatory actions,
safety records, and diversion history. The proposer's submission of a proposal shall constitute
an agreement to cooperate with such a review.
2.6 CONSEQUENCE OF SUBMISSION OF A PROPOSAL
The submission of a proposal shall not be deemed an agreement between the proposer and the City.
The proposal is a contractual offer by the proposer to perform services in accordance with the
proposal. Acceptance of a proposal by the City obligates the proposer to enter into good faith
negotiations based on the proposal submitted. Any agreement shall not be binding on the City
unless and until it is executed by the City and the selected proposer, and any conditions precedent to
its effectiveness have been satisfied.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 3
38
2.7 PROPOSAL COSTS
The cost of investigating, preparing and submitting a proposal is the sole responsibility of the
proposer. The City will not reimburse any proposer for any costs associated with the preparation and
submission of a proposal.
2.8 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION /DEADLINE
All questions or requests for information regarding this RFP must in writing and sent via email to the
City's contacts for this RFP
-. To preserve the integrity of the RFP process and to ensure that all proposers are
provided consistent information, interested parties are prohibited from contacting City staff (besides
Mr. Berkman), City consultants, or elected or appointed officials of the City. The City reserves the
right to reject proposals from proposers who contact City staff, City consultants, or elected or
appointed officials of the City after the date this RFP is issued
All proposals must be received by the City Clerk's office at the address below no later than -.
on r0q. Proposals received after this time and date will be returned unopened. Please place your
proposal materials in packaging marked "Proposal for EI Segundo Residential Solid Waste Collection
Services", addressed or hand -delivered to:
City Clerk
City of EI Segundo
350 Main Street
EI Segundo, CA 90245
Proposer shall submit:
• One (1) bound, fully executed original
Four (4) bound copies
• One (1) flash drive with a PDF copy of the proposal and the Excel workbook with the
completed rate proposal forms
The package shall be clearly labeled:
Name of Proposer:
Address:
Contact Person:
Cell Phone Number:
Oral, telephonic, facsimile, telegraphic or electronically transmitted proposals are invalid and the City
will not accept or consider them. Proposers mailing their proposals should allow sufficient time to
ensure receipt of their proposals by the time specified.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 4
39
3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The City of EI Segundo was incorporated in 1917. It is home to 17,000 people, and is known as a
major aeronautical and industrial business center, home to the Los Angeles Air Force Base, Chevron
Oil Refinery, Mattel, Los Angeles Times, and other major businesses.
In the 1980's, the City established a solid waste "franchise" for the one- and two -unit residential
properties. This means that the City has the authority to mandate that either the City or its contract
Company have the exclusive right to collect solid waste from those properties. The owners or
occupants of these units are required to use the services provided by the City or they can decide to
"self -haul" their solid waste.
Initially the City decided that it would provide solid waste service free of charge to all residents that
resided in multi -family complexes of six units or fewer and single family residential units. In 2011,
the City scaled back on this free service, and now provides it to multi -family units of four units or
fewer, and single family residences.
CalRecycle's Local Assistance and Market Development (LAMD) Branch conducts a compliance
review of the City every four years. In March 2017, under the recommendation of the LAMD, the
CalRecycle Board referred the City to CalRecycle's Jurisdiction Compliance Unit (JCU) due to the City's
program "gaps", including mandatory commercial recycling monitoring and implementation,
residential green waste program effectiveness and oversight, and Construction and Demolition
(C&D) debris recycling program. Staff has been working cooperatively with JCU staff to assist with
their review of the City's program. JCU staff findings are expected to be delivered to staff after a year
of their review, in summer 2018.
The last time the City released an RFP for residential solid waste collection services was February
2011. That RFP included single family and multi -family properties of up to four units, which totals
3,981 distinct service addresses. Republic Services was selected to provide the services for seven
years, through October 31, 2018.
3.1 EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEM
The City is the only city in Los Angeles County that uses curbside, manual collection for its residential
solid waste collection. The existing contract includes the following services:
• Weekly unlimited trash - residents provide containers.
• Weekly unlimited recyclables - Republic provides 2-16 gallon, or 1-32 gallon
container.
• Weekly unlimited bulky item collection.
• Green waste drop-off at the City Yard.
• Two annual cleanup weeks for bulky items.
• Two annual document shredding events.
• Holiday tree collection.
• Abandoned item collection in public right-of-way.
• Five City -sponsored events/year.
• Outreach and education.
Under the current Agreement, the City pays Republic $9.88 per unit per month for a total cost of
approximately $472,000 per year. Additionally, 12 City facilities and the City's downtown area are
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 5
WE
serviced under the Agreement. Republic also provides asphalt and street sweeper debris disposal for
the City, at an estimated cost of $15,000 and $32,550 per year, respectively. The amount charged
is based upon the actual tonnage disposed.
4.0 SCOPE OF PROPOSED SERVICES AND KEY CONTRACT
TERMS
The City is requesting proposals for the services described below, including options for automated
and manual collection. A more comprehensive description of these services is found in the draft
franchise agreement, included as Appendix B of this RFP.
4.1 RESIDENTIAL SERVICES
4.1.1 Automated Collection Option
Base Bid Items
Weekly collection of Trash, Recyclables, and Organics, with Company -provided carts
Four bulky item pick-ups peryear (six items per pickup maximum)
Holiday tree collection
Outreach and education
Automated Trash Cart Collection
Residential customers will receive weekly automated trash service under this option.
Automated Recycling Cart Collection
Residential cart customers will receive once per week automated recycling collection on the same
day as their trash collection. Customers may request additional recycling carts.
Automated Organic Materials Cart Collection
Residential cart customers will receive weekly automated organic materials collection on the same
day as their trash collection. Customers may request additional organics carts.
Senate Bill 1383, titled "Short -Lived Climate Pollutants: Methane Emissions: Dairy and Livestock:
Organics Waste: Landfills" establishes targets of a 50 percent reduction in the level of statewide
disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. This
Bill also establishes an additional target that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible
food is recovered for human consumption by 2025. SB 1383 gives CalRecycle the regulatory
authority to achieve and enforce these targets. Currently, CalRecycle is drafting the Short -Lived
Climate Pollutants Regulations, with an expected final draft to be released in early 2019. Company
shall provide all customers required to participate in these programs with compliant programs such
as organic waste collection and recycling services, coordination with food rescue organizations to
promote edible food recovery, education and outreach, reporting, contamination monitoring and
enforcement.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 6
41
Carts
Residents are to be provided trash, recycling, and organic materials carts by the Company. All
residential customers will have an opportunity to request one cart exchange at no charge each year.
Subsequent cart exchanges are to be requested in accordance with the approved rate schedule.
Carts shall comply with color and labeling requirements specified by the City. The Company will be
responsible for Cart repair and maintenance, and replacing lost, stolen or damaged Carts within
three business days at no additional charge to the Customer or to the City.
Holiday Tree Collection
Company will operate the annual holiday tree collection and recycling program at no additional
charge. The program will include curbside collection from residential customers, starting from the
first collection day after December 25 and ending on the second Saturday in January. All collected
trees will be diverted from disposal.
On -Call Bulky Item Pickup
Company will be required to provide on-call bulky item pickup service to all customers. Residential
customers are entitled to four bulky waste pickups (six items per pickup maximum) per dwelling unit
per year at no additional charge (additional pickups will be subject to the rate schedule).
Outreach and Education
Company shall assist City in gathering required Customer data, performing site visits, public
outreach, and other requirements in order to comply with State requirements and regulations such
as AB 939 and SB 1383, The parties acknowledge that CalRecycle is in the process of implementing
SB 1383 (Public Resources Code Section 42652 et seq.), which establishes targets to achieve a 50
percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of Organic Waste from the 2014 level by
2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. The law grants CalRecycle the regulatory authority
required to achieve the organic waste disposal reduction targets and establishes an additional target
that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption
by 2025.
4.1.2 Manual Collection Option
Base Bid Items
Residential Services
Weekly unlimited trash - residents provide containers
Weekly unlimited organic materials - residents provide containers
Weekly unlimited recyclables - Company provides 1-32 gallon container or 2-16 gallon
containers, or equivalent
Four bulky item pick-ups peryear (six items per pickup maximum)
Holiday tree collection
• Outreach and education
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 7
42
Manual Trash Collection
Residential customers will receive weekly, unlimited, manual trash service under this option.
Residents will provide their own containers.
Manual Recycling Collection
Residential customers will receive once per week unlimited recycling collection on the same day as
their trash collection. The Company will provide 1-32 gallon container or 2-16 gallon containers, or
equivalent.
Manual Organic Materials Collection
Residential customers will receive weekly unlimited organic materials collection on the same day as
their trash collection. Residents will provide their own containers. Company shall provide all
customers required to participate in SB 1383 programs with services to ensure compliance, such as
organic materials collection and recycling services, coordination with food rescue organizations to
promote edible food recovery, education and outreach, reporting, contamination monitoring and
enforcement.
Holiday Tree Collection
Company will operate the annual holiday tree collection and recycling program at no additional
charge. The program will include curbside collection from residential customers, starting from the
first collection day after December 25 and ending on the second Saturday in January. All collected
trees will be diverted from disposal.
On -Call Bulky Item Pickup
Company will be required to provide on-call bulky item pickup service to all customers. Residential
customers are entitled to four bulky waste pickups (six items per pickup maximum) per dwelling unit
per year at no additional charge (additional pickups will be subject to the rate schedule).
Outreach and Education
Company shall assist City in gathering required Customer data, performing site visits, public
outreach, and other requirements in order to comply with State requirements and regulations such
as AB 939 and SB 1383, The parties acknowledge that CalRecycle is in the process of implementing
SB 1383 (Public Resources Code Section 42652 et seq.), which establishes targets to achieve a 50
percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of Organic Waste from the 2014 level by
2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. The law grants CalRecycle the regulatory authority
required to achieve the organic waste disposal reduction targets and establishes an additional target
that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption
by 2025.
4.2 CIVIC SOLID WASTE SERVICES (SERVICES TO CITY FACILITIES)
Company will collect and dispose of all solid waste generated and recyclable materials and organic
materials accumulated at premises owned and/or operated by the City (including bulky waste items).
Such premises include, but are not limited to, offices, parks, street maintenance operations, and
street litter containers. See Appendix C for the current list of facilities and service levels. The
Company will provide these services regardless of whether the city chooses the automated or
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 8
43
manual option for its residential services. The cost for civic solid waste services is to be separately
bid in the proposal as these costs will be borne by the city and not passed along to residential
customers. Base bid items must include service to city offices, parks, streets, maintenance
operations, and street litter containers as listed in Appendix C. Base bid items must also include the
following:
Abandoned item collection in public right-of-way
• Five City -sponsored events per year
• Street sweeping debris and asphalt debris disposal
• Two annual bulky item cleanup weeks (Alternate Bid)
• Two annual document shredding events (Alternate Bid)
These items are more fully described in the following sections.
4.2.1 City Sponsored Events
Company will collect and dispose of all solid waste generated and recyclable materials and organic
waste accumulated at five city sponsored events per year. Such events include: 4th of July
Fireworks Show; Concerts in the Park; Hometown Fair; Richmond St. Fair; and Holiday Parade. Note
that these events may vary over the term of the new agreement.
4.2.2 Abandoned Item Collection in Public Right -of -Way
Company will collect items abandoned in the public right-of-way anywhere in the city within 24 hours
of notification to Company's customer service department or by the City. Items to be collected will
be limited to those items that two collection staff can lift. Two alternative bids shall be provided.
One will be a flat rate unit price bid for each abandoned item collection completed at the city's
request, without regard to the size or nature of the item collected. The second will be a flat rate bid
for annual abandoned item collection with no limit on the number of service requests.
4.2.3 Street Sweeping Debris and Asphalt Debris Disposal
At the request of the City, Company must provide solid waste containers for the collection and
disposal of asphalt and street sweeping debris from the City Yard. Pricing to be provided as
indicated on the rate proposal form.
4.2.4 Bulky Item Cleanup Weeks (Alternate Bid)
Company will promote and conduct two Community Drop-off events for collecting bulky items and E -
waste from residential customers. Company will be responsible for selecting the location, obtaining
all applicable permits, traffic control, on-site security, and public information, as well as collection,
packing, transportation and safe disposal of all waste collected.
4.2.5 Document Shredding Events (Alternate Bid)
Company will promote and conduct a shred day twice per year, whereby Residents can deliver paper
for confidential shredding. Company must provide onsite and offsite trucks at event so that if the
onsite shredding truck fills up during event hours there is a truck accepting offsite shredding
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 9
44
documents for participation. Each shred event must take place for a minimum of three consecutive
hours.
4.3 COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS
AB 939
The Company will be responsible for conducting data collection, information and record keeping, and
reporting activities needed to comply with Applicable Laws and regulations and to meet the reporting
and Solid Waste program management needs of City, and in particular, reporting obligations
imposed by AB 939. Company shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against all fines
and/or penalties imposed by CalRecycle if the source reduction and Recycling goals, or any other
requirement of AB 939, are not met by City with respect to the waste stream Collected under this
Agreement.
SB 1383 COMPLIANCE
In September 2016, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383), titled "Short -Lived Climate
Pollutants: Methane Emissions: Dairy and Livestock: Organics Waste: Landfills." This Bill
establishes targets of a 50 percent reduction in the level of statewide disposal of organic waste from
the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. This Bill also establishes an additional
target that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human
consumption by 2025. SB 1383 gives CalRecycle the regulatory authority to achieve and enforce
these targets. Currently, CalRecycle is drafting the Short -Lived Climate Pollutants Regulations, with
an expected final draft to be released in early 2019. Company shall provide all customers required to
participate in these programs with compliant programs such as organic waste collection and
recycling services, coordination with food rescue organizations to promote edible food recovery,
education and outreach, Company will provide all customers required to participate in an organic
waste diversion program under SB 1383 with a compliant program.
4.4 FEE COLLECTION
Company shall direct bill each residential customer (currently 3,230 units) for the cost of the
proposed services. The City may, at its option, choose to subsidize a portion of the cost of service, in
which case Company will directly bill each customer for the unsubsidized portion of the cost of
service, and will bill the City for the remainder of the costs on a quarterly basis.
Lifeline Assistance
Lifeline financial assistance for water and sewer fees has been in effect since 1995, when the
City Council adopted Resolution No. 3922. Currently, 44 residential properties qualify according
to the following household size and income requirements:
1-2: $32,920 or less
3: $41,560 or less
4: $50,200 or less
5: $58,840 or less
6: $67,480 or less
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 10
45
7: $76,120 or less
8: $84,760 or less
$8,640 for each additional person
A 50% reducedfee shall be collectedbytheCompanyfromproperdesthat are eligible forth e Lifeline Program,
as determined by the City.
5.0 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
This section describes the information that proposers must include in their proposals. Proposals
must be organized according to the outline in Table 2.
Table 2. Proposal Requirements
Title Page
Cover Letter/ Executive Summary
Table of Contents
Proposer Information
Business Structure
Municipal Collection Experience
Key Personnel
Service Transition Experience
Litigation History and Regulatory Compliance
Safety Record
Financial Information
Technical Proposal
Collection Services
Automated Collection Services
Manual Collection Services
City Facilities Services
Diversion Requirements
Collection Vehicles
Billing and Customer Service
Customer Education and Outreach
Transition Plan
Employment of Prior Contractor Employees
Transfer, Disposal, and Processing Facilities
Office and Maintenance Facilities
Optional Additional Information
Exceptions to Draft Franchise Agreement
Rate Proposal Forms
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 11
46
5.1 COVER LETTER/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Provide a cover letter that will serve as an executive summary of the proposal. The cover letter
should include:
■ The name, title, address, telephone, and e-mail of the key contact person. An officer who
is duly authorized to bind the proposer must sign the cover letter.
• A written statement warranting that the proposer has reviewed the draft agreement, the
RFP, and all of its addenda; and has conducted all necessary due diligence to investigate
and confirm the material facts upon which the proposal is based.
■ A written statement acknowledging the validity of the proposed terms and rates for a
period of 180 days after the submission deadline.
■ A brief summary of the most significant attributes of the proposal, and the unique
qualifications that distinguish the proposer from its competitors.
5.2 PROPOSER INFORMATION
5.2.1 Business Structure
Provide information about the entity with which the City will enter into an agreement, including the
following:
Identify the legal entity that would execute the franchise agreement. State whether the
entity is a sole proprietorship, partnership, or corporation. If the entity is a corporation,
identify the state and year of incorporation.
If proposer is a corporation, provide a copy of the corporation's "Certificate of Good
Standing" with the State of California or state of incorporation and the most recent
"Statement by Domestic (or Foreign) Stock Corporation" as filed with the California
Secretary of State or state of incorporation. If Proposer's most recent Statement has only
the "No change in information" box checked, the Proposer must also submit the most
recent endorsed "Statement of Information", which includes a list of corporate officers.
The "Statement of Information" must list the corporate officers.
Provide all the names of entity's owners or shareholders with greater than a 10%
ownership share.
5.2.2 Municipal Collection Experience
Describe the proposer's experience providing residential solid waste collection services to
jurisdictions in Southern California. The description for each jurisdiction should include:
• The name of the jurisdiction, the year service was first begun, and term of the
agreement.
• Whether the service is exclusive or non-exclusive.
• The customer sector(s) served (residential, commercial, etc.).
The type of service provided (e.g., automated, etc.).
The name, address, and telephone number of the jurisdiction representative responsible
for administering the agreement.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 12
47
5.2.3 Key Personnel
Provide an organization chart for key personnel and brief descriptions of the qualifications and
experience of the individuals who will administer the franchise agreement, including the:
• General manager
• Chief financial officer
• Operations manager
• Route supervisor
• Customer service manager
• City reporting specialist
• Public outreach coordinator
5.2.4 Service Transition Experience
Provide three (3) reference projects for which the proposer initiated a new collection contract or new
collection services. Include the following for each reference project:
• The name of the jurisdiction and the month and year of the service transition.
• A description of the service initiation performed (i.e., rollout of new carts, takeover of
previous service provider, etc.).
• The name, address, and telephone number of the jurisdiction representative responsible
for overseeing the service transition.
• The number of residential customers involved in the transition.
• Any notable challenges that occurred during the service transition, and the solutions
implemented to address the challenges.
5.2.5 Litigation History and regulatory compliance
Disclose any litigation or regulatory non-compliance within the last five (5) years. For each case,
provide name of the case, a description of the issue, the status of the case (e.g., pending, settled,
judgment for defendant, etc.), the agency of jurisdiction, and the case reference number. Proposers
may include any mitigating facts or circumstances.
Describe any past or pending civil and criminal actions (including arrests, indictments, litigation,
grand jury investigations, etc.) now pending or that have occurred in the past five (5) years pg,�insl
the propasaer, or any owners, officers, or key personnel (as identified by the proposer in this RFP) that
were (or are) filed in Los Angeles county, or in the US District Court for the Central California District.
Each proposer must also describe any civil litigation, pending or resolved within the past five (5)
years, with any city, county or special district in Los Angeles County with which the proposer was
contracted, franchised, or permitted to perform solid waste collection service.
Describe any and all notices of violations, corrective action notices, enforcement actions, or permit
violation notices that the proposer received in the past five (5) years from public agency for any
maintenance, processing, composting, transfer, or disposal facilities in Los Angeles County, which
are owned or operated by the proposer, or its affiliates.
5.2.6 Safety Record
Provide information about the proposer's safety record. Proposers must provide:
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 13
48
The proposer's two (2) most recent CHP Safety Compliance Reports (BIT inspection
reports) for the fleet maintenance facility that will service the vehicles used in the City.
The most recent workers compensation Annual Rating Endorsement (or other insurance
document) that shows the proposer's most recent workers compensation Rating Plan
Modifier (also known as an 'experience modification factor').
Proposers are requested to provide the following safety metrics. These are the safety metrics the City
would prefer to use to compare the safety records of the proposers. If the information used to
calculate these metrics is not readily available, the proposer may provide alternate safety metrics
along with an explanation of how the proposer's alternate safety metrics can assist the City in
comparing the proposer's safety record to those of other companies in the solid waste industry.
Total Recordable Injury Rate (TRIR) for the most recent five calendar years. The TRIR is
the rate of recordable workplace injuries, normalized per 100 workers per year. The
factor is derived by multiplying the number of recordable injuries in a calendar year by
200,000 (100 employees working 2,000 hours per year) and dividing that number by the
total person -hours actually worked in the year. A'Recordable Incident' is defined as:
Occupational death, nonfatal occupational illness, and those nonfatal occupational
injuries which involve one or more of the following: loss of consciousness, restriction of
work or motion, transfer to another job, or medical treatment (other than first aid).1
The proposer's Vehicle Accident Recordable Rate (VARR) for the most recent five (5)
calendar years. The VARR is the number of Recordable Vehicle Accidents per 1,000,000
miles driven. The factor is derived by multiplying the number of Recordable Vehicle
Accidents by 1,000,000 and dividing that number by the actual number of miles driven. A
'Recordable Vehicle Accident' is defined as: as an occurrence involving a commercial
motor vehicle operating on a highway in interstate or intrastate commerce which results
in: 1) a fatality, 2) bodily injury to a person who, as a result of the injury, immediately
receives medical treatment away from the scene of the accident, or, 3) one or more
motor vehicles incurring disabling damage as a result of the accident, requiring the motor
vehicle(s) to be transported away from the scene by a tow truck or other motor vehicle. It
excludes occurrences involving only boarding and alighting from a stationary motor
vehicle or involving only the loading or unloading of cargo. 2
5.2.7 Financial Information
Submit financial statements for the most -recently completed fiscal year for the legal entity that
would execute the franchise agreement. Proposers that operate on a nationwide basis may submit
the financial statements of their parent company. However, if the proposer is a wholly owned
corporation of a nationwide company, the City may require a parental guarantee as part of any
franchise agreement.
1 For a more complete definition of Recordable Incident, please refer to the Bureau of Labor Statistics website at:
htto'//www.bls-qov/iif/oshdef_htm
2 See definition of 'accident' in Section 390.5 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Act at: http;llwww.fmcsa.dot.govlrules-
regulationslad ministration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.aspx?req=390.5
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 14
49
In the event that any proposer believes that their financial statements constitute "confidential
information," the proposer shall note "CONFIDENTIAL" on each page of the financial statements.
5.3 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
5.3.1 Automated Collection Services
Trash
Proposers shall describe the format of trash collection, and the type of containers proposed.
Recyclables
Proposers shall describe the format of recyclables materials program, including the type of
containers proposed, customer in-house preparation of recyclables prior to collection, and a list of
recyclables that are acceptable and not acceptable in the program.
China recently implemented trade barriers that limit the import of contaminated recyclable
commodities and increases inspections of recyclable commodity imports starting in 2018. The ban
may affect proposer's recycling efforts. In consideration of China's trade barriers, proposers shall
specify all materials that can be recycled through the residential curbside recycling program, and
how proposer will accommodate potential future trade restrictions imposed by China.
Organic Materials
Proposers shall describe the format of the organic materials recycling program including type of
containers proposed. Proposers should include detailed information on customer in-house
preparation of material prior to disposal (e.g. bag or no bag requirements), include a comprehensive
list of foods/materials (e.g., soiled paper, wood waste) that are acceptable in the program and a
comprehensive list of foods/materials that are not accepted in the program. In addition, proposers
are requested to submit at least two samples of outreach materials already distributed to customers
in a city with a similar program in place if proposer has implemented such program.
Please describe your intended approach and activities related to SB 1383 organic waste collection
and recycling services, education and outreach, capacity planning, procurement of organic waste
products, reporting, contamination monitoring, and other compliance activities.
Automated Carts
The City requires that carts include recycled content and be recyclables. Proposers should indicated
the percentage of recycled content that will be included in the carts and the manufacturer of the
carts proposed, along with a color photograph of the proposed carts.
5.3.2 Manual Collection Services
Trash
Proposers shall describe the format of manual trash collection.
Recyclables
Proposers shall describe the format of recyclables materials program, including the type of
containers proposed, customer in-house preparation of recyclables prior to collection, and a list of
recyclables that are acceptable and not acceptable in the program.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 15
50
China recently implemented trade barriers that limit the import of contaminated recyclable
commodities and increases inspections of recyclable commodity imports starting in 2018. The ban
may affect proposer's recycling efforts. In consideration of China's trade barriers, proposers shall
specify all materials that can be recycled through the residential curbside recycling program, and
how proposer will accommodate potential future trade restrictions imposed by China.
Organic Materials
Proposers shall describe the format of the organic materials recycling program. Proposers should
include detailed information on customer in-house preparation of material prior to disposal (e.g. bag
or no bag requirements), include a comprehensive list of foods/materials (e.g., soiled paper, wood
waste) that are acceptable in the program and a comprehensive list of foods/materials that are not
accepted in the program. In addition, proposers are requested to submit at least two samples of
outreach materials already distributed to customers in a city with a similar program in place if
proposer has implemented such program.
Please describe your intended approach and activities related to SB 1383 organic waste collection
and recycling services, education and outreach, capacity planning, procurement of organic waste
products, reporting, contamination monitoring, and other compliance activities.
Food Rescue
Proposers shall describe their proposed efforts to assist the City and its customers with a food
rescue and donation program to comply with SB 1383, which establishes a target that not less than
20 percent of currently disposed edible food, is recovered for human consumption by 2025.
Company shall also assist with Food Waste recovery at the City sponsored events.
5.3.3 Diversion Requirements
Proposer shall describe how they will ensure the City complies with AB 939 diversion requirements,
and diversion requirements under SB 1383. Proposers should demonstrate how they plan to divert
the sufficient waste to reach diversion requirements. Company should describe any additional
diversion programs proposed that are over and above those required by this RFP
5.3.4 Collection Vehicles
Please provide the following information for each vehicle to be used under the collector agreement.
1. Make
2. Model
3. Model Year
4. Type of fuel to be used (e.g. LNG, CNG)
5. Waste stream(s) to be collected (e.g. trash, recycling, organics)
5.3.5 Billing and Customer Service
Provider will be responsible for direct billing of residential customers. City may choose, at its option,
to subsidize a portion of the cost of service, in which case Provider will direct bill customers for the
unsubsidized portion of the cost of service (the "customer rate") and the City will be billed for the
remainder of the costs. The amount of the subsidy provided by City, if any, and the effective
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 16
51
customer rate will be determined prior to execution of the franchise agreement. The portion of the
cost of service that is subsidized by the City, if any, will be billed to the City on a quarterly basis.
Residential customers have not been billed for services previously. Proposers must describe the
method they will use to identify the residential customers and accounts, and billing system to be
used. Proposers must describe the method they will use to bill the City for the remainder, if any, of
the residential charges.
Customer service is very important to the City. When a customer has a request for, or an issue with,
solid waste service, the customer's first contact with the solid waste provider is the company's call
center. Describe the company's call-in center procedures, including how each call is initially
answered (e.g. phone tree, live operator). Include all geographical locations customer service calls
will be answered from (e.g., out-of-state, international call centers, or California based). Describe the
company's ability to monitor the average time customer is on hold and response time to complete a
work order from time of request
Indicate procedures taken to ensure that each resident will receive information accurate to the City's
contract. Describe procedures to respond satisfactorily to common customer complaints.
5.3.6 Customer Education and Outreach
Proposers shall describe the methods they will use to assist City in gathering required Customer
data, performing site visits, public outreach, and other requirements in order to comply with State
requirements and regulations such as AB 939, Electronic Annual Report (EAR), Mandatory Organics
Recycling, and control of short-lived climate pollutants. Proposers may include any additional efforts
(such as one-time, first year efforts), and examples of public outreach pieces applicable to
agreement requirements that demonstrate the quality of the materials proposed to be used in the
City.
5.3.7 Transition Plan
The City anticipates an award of this agreement in January 2019, and implementation by May 1,
2019. In consideration of this timeline, proposers should provide a transition schedule that
demonstrates that your company has the ability to implement the services in accordance with the
service start date, including meeting equipment, personnel, administration, maintenance, public
outreach plan, and a timeline showing how the proposer would implement billing services. Proposers
should describe the assumptions regarding City staff's participation and (if appropriate) the current
Company's participation. City staff participation should be minimal.
5.3.8 Employment of Prior Contractor Employees
In accordance with Labor Code Sections 1070, 1072, 1075, and 1076, please indicate if proposer
will offer employment to existing employees of the current contractor that may be displaced if the
current contractor is not retained. Please describe your procedures for offering such employment
and any limitations.
5.3.9 Facilities
Transfer Stations
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 17
52
For each transfer station if any, intended to be used by the Company, provide the following
information
• The name and address of the facility
• Statement regarding any relationship between the proposer and the facility
owner/operator (if any)
The price per ton for transfer and disposal of trash
Estimated date for start of operation, if facility is not currently in operation
• Indicate any solid waste facility capacity guarantees being offered.
Disposal Facilities
Proposers must identify in their proposals the facilities they plan to use to dispose of trash. For each
disposal facility to be used by Company, provide the following information:
• The name and location of the facility
A statement regarding any relationship between the proposer and the facility
owner/operator (if any)
The price per ton
• Indicate any solid waste facility capacity guarantees being offered.
These four items must be included for each facility to be used.
Processing Facilities
Proposers must indicate in their proposal the facilities they intend to use for the following:
Processing of commingled recyclables
• Processing of green waste (especially after January 1, 2020, due to AB 1594 regulations)
• Processing of mixed waste
• Transformation of trash/waste-to-energy (if applicable)
Processing of food waste
For each facility, provide the following information:
• The name and location of the facility
• A statement regarding any relationship between the proposer and the facility
owner/operator (if any)
• The material to be processed (green waste, food waste, commingled recyclables, mixed
waste)
• The price per ton
Indicate any solid waste facility capacity guarantees being offered.
• Estimated diversion rate for processing of residential recyclables and organic materials.
5.3.10 Office and Maintenance Facilities
Proposers must indicated any operating facilities they intend to use for this agreement, including:
• Yard address for equipment and personnel staging and arrangements for maintenance
of equipment;
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 18
53
® Office address for customer service, public relations, billing, and franchise
administration; and,
Other operating facilities to be used in providing service under this agreement.
5.3.11 Optional Additional Information or Proposal Enhancements
If the proposer has submitted a proposal that meets all of the minimum requirements of this RFP,
the proposer may also offer additional enhancements that exceed the requirements of this RFP and
the franchise agreement. Any such enhancements shall be listed by number under this section in the
RFP, or it may be omitted from the proposal evaluation. Proposers should include the following
information for each enhancement:
The additional charge, if any, to City or ratepayer for enhancement
How the enhancement exceeds RFP requirements
How the enhancement benefits the City and how it would be incorporated into the
contract service requirements or rate schedule.
5.4 EXCEPTIONS TO DRAFT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
The City has included a draft franchise agreement in Appendix B. The purpose of the draft franchise
agreement is to provide a clear understanding of the rights and obligations of the contractor and the
City. The proposer is required to review the franchise agreement prior to submittal of its proposal.
The City expects the draft franchise agreement will be executed by the selected contractor(s) in
substantially the same form as presented in Appendix B.
Proposer must document any proposed exceptions to the draft franchise agreement. For each
exception, proposer shall identify the exception (cite the section reference in the draft agreement),
explain its concern, and provide alternative language for consideration by the City.
The City will assume that the proposer accepts and agrees to all provisions of the draft franchise
agreement that have not been noted as exceptions in the proposal. If the City chooses to enter into
negotiations with a proposer, the noted exceptions and recommended alternative language will serve
as a starting point for discussions. The City reserves the right to determine if the exceptions are
reasonable.
5.5 RATE PROPOSAL FORMS
Rate proposal forms are included in Appendix A. A corresponding Excel workbook will be provided to
all potential proposers. Detailed instructions on completing the forms are included within the forms
in Appendix A. Proposers are required to submit all of the forms whether or not they are proposing to
provide both automated and manual services. If a proposer is only proposing automated or manual
service, it should submit all the forms, but leave the non -applicable forms blank.
Proposers must include printed hard copies of the completed rate proposal forms in their proposal.
Proposers must also include an electronic copy of the Excel workbook of the completed rate proposal
forms on the thumb drive they submit with their PDF copy of their proposal
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 19
54
6.0 RFP SUBMITTAL PROCESS
6.1 PROPOSER REGISTRATION
Each proposer who plans to submit a proposal shall register to ensure receipt of all updates. To
register, email the following information to Ken Berkman at kberkman@else undo.org.
• Firm/Company/Entity name
• Name and title of Proposer's designated contact person
• Address, telephone, facsimile number, and email address of main contact
6.2 INTERIM INQUIRIES AND RESPONSES, INTERPREATION OR
CLARIIFCATIONS
If a proposer has any question about this RFP, the proposed Agreement, or the scope of work— or if a
proposer finds any error, inconsistency, or ambiguity in the RFP, or the proposed Agreement, or
both— the Proposer must make a "Request for Clarification" before submitting its Proposal. Proposer
questions should clearly identify the relevant section of the RFP and page number(s) related to the
question being asked. Copies of all questions and the City's responses will be emailed to all
registered proposers.
Requests for Clarification will be accepted only by Michelle Leonard at nif onard@scsengiiieers.com.
Request for Clarification must be received on or before 5:00 p.m., on 0
If necessary, the City will make clarifications, interpretations, corrections, or changes to the RFP, or
the proposed Agreement, or both, in writing by issuing Addenda, as described in Section 6.3 below. A
Proposer must not rely upon, and the City is not bound by, purported clarifications, interpretations,
corrections, or changes to the RFP and the proposed Agreement, that are made verbally or in a
manner other than a written advisory from the City.
6.3 ADDENDA
The City will issue Addenda in writing/email only. The City will make reasonable efforts to deliver
Addenda to all registered proposers whom the City knows have received a complete set of the RFP
documents and have provided an email address for receipt of Addenda. The City cannot guarantee
that all Proposers will receive all Addenda.
At any time before the proposal deadline, the City may issue Addenda withdrawing the RFP or
postponing the Proposal Deadline. However, if any Addenda results in a material change to this RFP,
or the proposed Agreement, or both, the City will extend the Proposal Deadline by not less than
seventy-two (72) hours. The City will treat transmittal of Addenda to potential contractors by U.S.
mail, fax, or e-mail as sufficient notice of the changes made by the City.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 20
55
6.4 WITHDRAWL, CANCELLATION, OR MODIFCATION OF A
�IIOITAN
Before the proposal deadline, a proposer may withdraw and then modify a proposal, by giving written
notice, signed by the proposer. A withdrawal request must be addressed as follows and delivered to:
City of EI Segundo
City Hall
350 Main Street
EI Segundo, CA 90245
Attn: Ken Berkman
For a withdrawal to become effective, the City must receive the proposer's request for withdrawal
before the proposal deadline. The City will not accept or consider a Proposer's verbal request for
modification or withdrawal of a proposal. If a proposer withdraws its proposal, the withdrawal will
not prejudice the proposer's right to submit a new proposal, if the new proposal is submitted: (a) in
accordance with the RFP's requirements, and (b) before the proposal deadline.
After the proposal deadline, a proposer must not withdraw, cancel, or modify its Proposal for a period
of at least 180 (180) calendar days, subject to the exception described in the next sentence below.
The City may extend the 180 day period upon the City's written request and upon the affected
proposer's written approval.
7.0 SELECTION CRITERIA AND PROCESS
The proposal will be objectively evaluated based on criteria that may include, but is not limited to,
the following factors.
7.1 PROPOSER'S EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS
General Experience - Demonstrated experience providing similar services to other jurisdictions, and
experience of key personnel.
Jurisdiction Satisfaction -Satisfaction of proposer references with services received, including but
not limited to, implementation, customer services, reporting, assistance, developing diversion
programs, and working cooperatively with City staff. Customer service is of utmost importance to the
City.
7.2 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Reasonableness of implementation schedule and ability to meet deadlines (equipment procurement
schedules and personnel available), ability and resources to manage a service transition.
7.3 EXCEPTIONS TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Exceptions to the draft franchise agreement - Number and nature of the exceptions.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 21
56
7.4 FINANCIAL RESOURCES
Financial Stability - Comparison of additional revenue from this franchise to company's current
revenue stream, financial stability of proposer based on its financial ratios.
Insurance - Demonstrated ability of proposer to obtain adequate insurance.
7.5 COST AND VALUE
Cost of Service, as Measured by Rate Revenues - Cost competitiveness relative to other proposals.
Reasonableness of Costs - Logically consistent relationship between costs and operational
assumptions.
7.6 EMPLOYMENT
Willingness to retain existing contractor's employees that may be displaced if the current contractor
is not retained.
7.7 AWARD
To be considered, proposals must be complete and must conform to the requirements of this RFP as
to form and content. The franchise will be awarded for the proposal that offers the greatest value to
the City. The City, however, reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to accept or reject any
one or more items of a proposal, or to waive any minor irregularities or informalities in the proposal.
It is anticipated that all services will be purchased. However, the City reserves the right to change
such service descriptions prior to award.
8.0 GENERAL INFORMATION, DISCLAIMERS, DISCLOSURES &
PROPOSAL FORMS
Responses to the Request for Proposal shall be made in recognition and in conformance with the
following:
Each Proposer understands and agrees that the City of EI Segundo, its departments, their officers,
employees or agents will NOT be liable for:
• Any costs incurred by the Proposer in the preparation, delivery, or presentation of the
qualifications and/or proposals.
■ Any pre -contractual expenses, which are defined as expenses incurred by the Proposer
prior to the date of award of the Contract for this RFP.
• Any costs incurred by the Proposer in meeting the criteria, as a result of making or
submitting a proposal and/or entering into a formal Agreement with the City.
• Any errors, inaccuracies or misstatements related to the information or data supplied to
any Proposer by the City. The use of such information or data provided by the City, its
officers, employees or agents is intended to be used at the sole discretion and risk of the
Proposer in the preparation of a proposal pursuant to the RFP.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 22
57
It is the Proposer's responsibility to carefully examine the requirements expressed in the RFP and
educate themselves regarding the quality and character of services required. All responses to the
RFP will become the property of the City and will be retained or disposed of accordingly. The City
reserves the right to reject any or all submittals and to modify the RFP and re- solicit submittals.
The terms and scope of the Agreement will be determined based on professional negotiations
between the City and the highest ranked Proposer. If the City and the highest ranked Proposer fail to
reach an agreement, the City may commence negotiations with any other qualified Proposer.
The Proposer shall conform to all Federal, State, County and City of EI Segundo laws, codes, and
ordinances, as well as any other applicable laws and regulations.
8.1 INSURANCE
Specific insurance requirements are included in the Draft Agreement (Appendix B). Certificates of
insurance and additional insured endorsements must be submitted in compliance with said
requirements no later than the time the Agreement is executed. The Proposer does not need to
submit proof of insurance to submit its proposal, but must be prepared to meet all City insurance
requirements with no additional cost to City.
8.2 CITY'S RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
This RFP and the proposal evaluation process do not:
Obligate the City to accept or select any Proposal;
Constitute an agreement by the City that it will actually enter into any contract with any
Proposer. When it best serves the City's interests, the City may do any one or more of the
following:
— Reject any Proposal or all Proposals at its sole discretion.
— Extend the deadline for accepting Proposals.
— Accelerate the pace of the RFP process if only one or a handful of Proposals is
received.
— Waive any or all information, defects, irregularities, or informalities in a Proposal.
— Accept amendments to Proposals after the Proposal Deadline.
— Amend, revise, or change the RFP's evaluation or selection criteria.
— Cancel, withdraw, amend, revise, change, or negotiate the terms of this RFP, the
proposed Agreement, or both.
— Reissue a Request for Proposals.
— Conduct oral interviews.
— Visit Proposer's facilities or business.
— Examine financial records of Proposer to the extent necessary to ensure financial
stability.
— Make a partial award.
— Negotiate with one or more Proposers.
— Award contracts to one or more Proposers.
— Require a best and final offer from one or more Proposers.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 23
58
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Appendix A. Rate Proposal Forms
Page 24
M
Appendix B. Draft Franchise Agreement
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 25
60
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Appendix C. City Facilities
Page 26
61
1
Location
City Hall
1R
Bin
iIS,
Size
��
2
Police Dept.
1S, IR
3
Fire Station 1
1S, 111
4
Fire Station 2
IS, 111
5
Library
1S, 1R
1A with on call
collection
6
Public Works Maintenance
Yard
2S, 1R
ISS with 2x per
week collection
2G with on call
collection,
2R* with
weekly and on
call collection
7
Water Yard
1S
8
Parks Maintenance Yard
4S, 1R
9
Park Vista
2S, IR
10
The Lakes Golf Course
3S, 113
11
Campus ES Soccer Field
1S, 1R
12
Boy Scout House
1S
Hinged
Covers; S= Solid Waste: R= Recvcled
Materials Waste- A= AGnhalt wacta• r= rYPP►,
Waste; SS= Street Sweeping Waste; Collection is 3 times per week unless otherwise indicated.
RFP -Residential Solid Waste
Services
Page 27
62
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Reports of Committees,
Commissions and Boards
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to review the evaluation results of proposals in response to RFP #18-
02 related to future operations, management, and improvements at The Lakes at El Segundo Site as
conducted by The Lakes RFP Task Force. (Fiscal Impact: None)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
Discuss and determine how the City Council would like to proceed in making a final
selection; or,
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Vision/Success Criteria
2. Scoring Criteria
3. Financial Summary of Proposals
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: 4A El Segundo's physical infrastructure supports an appealing, safe and
effective community
Objective: 1 The City optimized its physical resources
PREPARED BY: Meredith Petit, Director of Recreation and Parks
REVIEWED BY: Meredith Petit, Director of Recreati n and Parks "
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manage
BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION:
Background
The City Council established The Lakes RFP Task Force ("Task Force") on November 7, 2017. The
Task Force members were identified by November 30, 2017, and included a selection of City staff
representing Recreation and Parks, Planning, Finance, and Public Works, as well as six voting members
representing the City's Planning Commission, Economic Development Advisory Council, Recreation
and Parks Commission and the Golf Course Subcommittee. The first meeting was held in December
2017 with regular and recurring meetings scheduled about every other week through June 2018, for a
total of thirteen meeting sessions. The meetings were open to the public.
63
The purpose of the Task Force was to help the City Council establish evaluation criteria for future
operations, management and improvements at The Lakes at El Segundo, draft the Request for Proposals
document, and evaluate the proposal submissions to present findings to the City Council. Throughout
the process, the Task Force returned to City Council multiple times for further direction, clarification
and to provide periodic status updates. The City sought consulting services to assist in this process and
engaged the services of Carol Beck Golf Properties starting in January 2018. The City Council approved
the RFP document on April 3rd and it was released to the public on April 5'h. On April 24" a Mandatory
Site Visit was conducted for all interested bidders and over 30 individuals and companies were
represented. Ultimately, nine proposals were received on the June 14th deadline.
Task Force Activities
Some of the major work activities and factors that the Task Force conducted and considered included
review of sample RFPs, comprehensive review of the financial history of the golf course enterprise fund
including details related to the inter -fund loan from the Finance Department, review of the Golf Course
Manual and previous community survey results. The Task Force developed and implemented an
updated Parks and Recreation Facilities Needs Assessment Survey to specifically collect data and
feedback related to "unmet recreation facility needs". The goal of the survey was to determine if the
property currently being used as a golf course and driving range should be repurposed into another
outdoor public recreation use that may better meet the needs of El Segundo residents. The results of the
survey indicated a demand for more athletic fields within the City. Additionally, the Task Force and
staff engaged third party subject matter experts as well as other City departments to review the current
facility conditions of the clubhouse/restaurant building, driving range, and golf course, to identify,
prioritize, and estimate costs associated with needed capital improvements.
The Proposals
The nine proposals represent three distinct categories: (1) Golf As -Is, (2) Golf Alternative, and (3) Non -
Golf. All of the "Golf As -Is" and "Golf Alternative" include significant capital improvements to the
course, range and clubhouse consistent with the prioritized needs identified in the RFP. A financial
summary is attached for more details (Attachment #3). Additional summarized fact sheets on each
proposal are forthcoming under separate distribution.
Golf As -Is
Billy Casper Golf
Lease
CSC Golf LLC
Lease
Touchstone Golf
Management
KemperSports Management
Lease
Lane Donovan Golf Partners LLC
Management
Golf Alternative
Topgolf/Centercal
Lease
Drive Shack
Lease
Flying Tee
Lease
Non -Golf
Sanford Ventures
Lease
All nine proposals as well as video recordings of the five in-person presentations can be viewed online
at: litips : //www. e l seg u iid o. o rg,/d e p t s/recreation/tliel ake s tas k f'o rc e. as p.
Evaluation Process
Prior to the proposal deadline, the Task Force established Scoring Criteria using the Vision/Success
Criteria identified by City Council (Attachment #1) as a guideline to ensure that the City's priorities
were captured within the evaluation process. The five scoring criteria and weights were as follows:
25% - Financial Impact
25% - Experience & Capability
20% - Resident/Community Involvement
15% - Business/Operating Plan
15% - Capital Improvement Plan
After the proposal deadline, each Task Force member individually reviewed each of the nine proposals
and, using the abovementioned scoring criteria, scored each proposal. The Task Force reconvened in an
open meeting to discuss their initial evaluations and through discussion came to consensus to narrow the
field down to five bidders to be invited for in-person presentations. Following the presentations that
were conducted on July 12th and July 13th, the Task Force members once again individually reviewed
their scores and rankings and at a Special Meeting on July 25th discussed the proposals and gave their
final rankings of all nine proposals. The rankings were compiled and calculated to reveal an overall
average ranking as follows:
Final Task Force Evaluation Rankings
Proposal Name
Average Rank
Topgolf
1.83
Drive Shack
2.83
Billy Casper Golf
3.33
Flying Tee
4.17
Sanford Ventures
5.00
CSC Golf LLC
5.67
Kemper Sports
6.17
Touchstone Golf
7.17
Lane Donovan
7.83
Finally, the Lakes RFP Task Force is recommending these "Top 4" proposals to City Council as viable
options to pursue for future operations, management and improvements at The Lakes at El Segundo:
Task Force Evaluation Results
Proposal Name
Rank
Topgolf
1
Drive Shack
2
Billy Casper
3
Flying Tee
4
65
Next Stens
The City has engaged the services of Keyser Marston Associates ("KMA") to conduct a review and
evaluation of financial statements and financial wherewithal to undertake the proposed programs, for
each of the nine proposals. This evaluation is underway and a draft report is expected on or about close
of business September 4t". Secondarily, KMA could also review financial pro formas and the likelihood
that gross revenues and projected rents to the City will be achieved for one or more of the proposals in
which the City Council desires to pursue.
At this point, the Task Force has completed their task by determining their Top 4 proposals and turning
the process over to City Council to decide how best to proceed with making a final selection. The City
Council should discuss and provide direction to staff and the City Attorney. The Council could pursue
one or more (or none) of the proposals, through further presentations, interviews and/or negotiations.
Vision / Success Criteria
(1) Incorporates Recreation & Parks Values
(a) Golf Course Manual (i.e. safe, all ages, clean & well maintained, learning opportunities)
(b) Degree to which the facility meets the need of EI Segundo residents
(2) Compliant with existing Grant Deed from Chevron
(a) Golf Course & Driving Range & Supporting Amenities
i. Management Contract
ii. Lease Arrangement
a. Pricing Structure/Affordability
iii. Restaurant, Bar & Banquet Facilities
iv. Pro-Shop/Retail
(b) Other Outdoor Public Recreation
(3) Financial Performance is "Self Sustaining"
(a) Achieves Enterprise Fund Expectations (Operations + Future Capital Improvements)
(b) Sufficient Cash Flow
(c) Ability to service existing debt (loan repayment to City)
(4) Capital Investment & Facility Improvements
(a) Minimal City investment
(5) Risk Assessment & Track Record
67
The Lakes RFP Scoring Criteria
Financial Return to City -0-25 pts.
• Ability to service existing debt and future capital improvements
Experience/Capability — 0-25 pts.
With similar operations as proposed
• With other municipalities
References — relative landlord and other municipal references
Comprehensive Resident/Community Involvement -0-20 pts.
• Golf and non -golfers benefits/programs
• The degree to which it meets the needs of E.S. residents
Business/Operating Plan — 0-15 pts.
Does it adhere to Grant Deed
• If proposed as golf related, does it adhere to Golf Course Manual
Length and structure of contract
Capital Improvement Plan — 0-15 pts.
Contribution to upfront capital needs
• Addresses long term capital improvements
•:
P.
Attachment 3 - page 1/2
THE LAKES PROPOSALS FINANCIAL SUMMARY & NOTES
For Purposes of this evaluation, the various calculations have been made for the initial proposed terms only; proposals did not provide applicable data for option periods
Leas
Monooement Agreements
Initial Term
Base Rent to
Incentive
Total
Capital Investment by
Notes
Notes
Lane Donovan
City for Initial
Fees for
Rent/Fees to
Proposer
W/O mini -golf: $1,877,297
$75k/year capex reserve from operations; Optional: miniture golf
JII
Term
Initial Term
City
KemperSports
10 yr
$10,000
$206,000
$216,000
$250 yr 1; (need to clarify-
City pays Property taxes & operating costs not reported in
operations
Touchstone Golf
stated in proforma but
historicals (need detail)
$95,110
$515,110
$1,304,475
To be funded through operations; 3% of total revenue set aside
Incentive fee is 15% EBITDA
describes bunker work as
annually before net income to city ($300,481 total per proforma)
well)
CSC Golf LLC
20 yr
$5,850,000
versus % of
$5,850,000
$1.5M yrl; up to additional
Only 10 yrs of projections provided; Landscapes Unlimited
revenue but
$4.5M w/ options in future;
funding capex
proforma; City admin costs
not
plus 3% of rev = $585,608 for
included before net income
explained
first 10 yrs
Billy Casper Golf
20 yr
See notes
$8,508,055
$1.8M in yrs 1 & 2; plus 4% of
Base rent is $250k/yr starting in 2020, but made up in
golf rev = $1,330,856 over
subsequent yrs if not met; total rent denotes projections per
term
proforma
FlyingTee
20 yr
$24,554,519
$12,185,556
$36,740,074
$38.210; plus $2M for golf
Includes lesser rent of $240k during construction; need to clarify
course improvements or other
timing; proforma only shows 1 yr
If City desires; $382k/per
year($7.64M total) for capex
fund
Drive Shack
20 yr
$27,253,000
Great of min
$27,253,000
$25-30M
Min rent est. $250k/yr during construction for 29-38 mos; used
or 3% but
36 mos for approximation
notreached
during initial
TopGolf
20 yr
$30,166,500
$8,000,000
$38,166,500
$5.4M ($3M spent to date w/
Numbers reflect driving range only; City controls golf course;
$35M to TopGolf faciltiy and
does term commence open const completion? Need to clarify;
$3.3M for golf course)
Incentive rent based on $200k floor & could be higher based on
bA; Additional $200k/yr is "fund contribution"; need to clarify
uses; assuming several permits,etc already approved per
timeline
Sanford
50 yr
$360,000,000
$13,125,000
$373,125,000
$30M; plus $262,500/per year
States 50 yrs -all initial term? Incentive is $1/ticket estimated at
Ventures-
($13,125,000 total) for capex
262,500; same calculation for captex fund; Course closed for IS -
8-Amphitheater/P
Amphitheater/ P
fund
24 mos.; is rent full $600k during closure? Need to understand
ublic Park
"Park Management of $1.125M as consideration to City?
Monooement Agreements
NOTE: `This is an initial summary of the proposals which needs to be reviewed carefully for purposes of properly evaluating all of the details of each proposal."
Initial Term
Base Fee paid
by City for
Initial Term
Incentive
Fees for
Initial Term
Total Fees to
City
Net Income to City
Capital Investment by Proposer
Notes
Lane Donovan
5 yr
$540,000
$0
$540,000
W/O mini -golf: $1,877,297
$75k/year capex reserve from operations; Optional: miniture golf
City admin costs not
W/ mini -golf: $2,027,297
- $350-400k; financed by LD and debt service paid through
aciddressed
operations
Touchstone Golf
5 yr
$420,000
$95,110
$515,110
$1,304,475
To be funded through operations; 3% of total revenue set aside
Incentive fee is 15% EBITDA
annually before net income to city ($300,481 total per proforma)
improvement over prior
year; calculation based on
proforma; City admin costs
included before net income
to city
NOTE: `This is an initial summary of the proposals which needs to be reviewed carefully for purposes of properly evaluating all of the details of each proposal."
Attachment 3 - page 2/2
THE LAKES PROPOSALS FINANCIAL SUMMARY - "Top 4" Proposals
NOTE: `This is an summary of the proposals which needs to be reviewed carefully for purposes of properly evaluating all of the details of each proposal."
O
Initial Term
Base Rent to
Incentive Fees
Total Rent to
Total Revenue
Total EBITDA
Rounds Projected
Capital Investment by
Comments
City for Initial
for Initial Term
City for Initial
Projected
Projected
Through Yr 5
Proposer
Term
Term
Through Yr5
Through Yrs
Gaf AS K
CSC Golf LLC
20 yr
$6,150,000
N/A
$6,150,000
$11,236,777
$1,789,272
Stub Yr - 8,000
$1.5M yr1; plus 3% of total
Total Revenue through yr 5 incl stub year 2018 plus 5 full years;
Yr 1- 30,000
rev = $1,546,605 over term
EBITDA is cash flow after rent and before capex fund; All fees
Yr 2 - 33,500
commencing 2021
and projections based on completion of Phase I improvements
Yr 3 - 34,003
TOTAL: $3,046,605
only; up to an additional $4.5M w/ options in future
Yr4-34,513
Yr 5 - 35,030
Billy Casper
20 yr
See
See Comments
$8,508,055
$18,361,228
$2,598,500
Stub Yr - 11,456 Yr
$1.8M in yrs 1 & 2; plus 4% of
Total Revenue through yr 5 incl stub year 2018 plus 5 full years;
Golf
Comments
1-37,500
golf rev = $1,330,856 over
EBITDA is cash flow after rent and before capex fund; base rent
(w/ multi-
Yr 2 - 38,625
term commencing 2022
is greater of $250k/yr or percentage starting in 2020, but made
purpose field)
Yr 3 - 39,398
TOTAL: $3,130,856
up in subsequent yrs if not met; guaranteed rent (worst case
Yr 4 - 40,185
scenario) is $1M through yr 5; total rent for the initial term
Yr 5 - 40,587
based on proforma projections
Galf
Rfremative
FlyingTee
20 yr
$24,554,519
$12,185,555
$36,740,074
$125,550,000
$25,843,802
N/A
$38.2M; plus $2M for golf
All rent, incentive fees and revenues reflect driving range only
course improvements;
upon completion of construction; City controls golf course and
$382k/per year ($7.64M total)
retains net income plus $240k guaranteed rent during
for capex fund
construction
TOTAL: $47,840,000
Drive Shack
20 yr
$27,253,000
Great of minor
$27,253,000
$25-30M
Min rent est. $250k/yr during construction for 29-38 mos; used
3% but not
36 mos for approximation; *Proforma details have been
reached during
requested.
initial term
TopGolf
20 yr
$30,166,500
$5,136,270
$35,302,770
$137,010,094
$35,164,266
N/A
$40.4M ($35M to TopGolf
All rent and incentive fees reflect driving range only upon
facility - $3M spent to date -
completion of construction; City controls golf course and retains
and $5.4M for golf course);
net income
plus $200k/yr ($4M total) for
Annual Fund - available for
any use
TOTAL: $44,400,000
NOTE: `This is an summary of the proposals which needs to be reviewed carefully for purposes of properly evaluating all of the details of each proposal."
O
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 04, 2018
AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Reports of Committees,
Commissions and Boards
Consideration and possible action to adopt a Resolution to approve the proposed Economic
Development Advisory Council (EDAC) Bylaws. (Fiscal Impact: None)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Adopt a Resolution to approve the proposed EDAC bylaws.
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Draft resolution adopting revised Economic Development Advisory Council (EDAC)
bylaws
2. Economic Development Advisory Council (EDAC) Revised bylaws
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: 1 Champion Economic Development and Fiscal Stability
Objective: lb The City will implement a comprehensive economic development
strategy to ensure the City encourages a vibrant business climate that is
accessible, user-friendly and welcoming to all residents and visitors.
ORIGINATED BY: Megan Covarrubias, Economic Development Intern M
REVIEWED BY: Barbara Voss, Economic Devel ent Manager RV
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager
1 .1WTQ X" 3/11 CACI 1XIn*14111.&I0IzF
The El Segundo City Council adopted the first Economic Development Advisory Council
(EDAC) Bylaws on July 15, to establish rules and expectations for members appointed. During
the August 15, 2018 EDAC meeting, the advisory council unanimously voted to approve and
recommend an amendment to the EDAC bylaws. The amendment would allow the following
changes:
Increase the maximum number of EDAC members from 18 to 19.
• Establish a term of service (3 years). At the completion of the first term, a member may
request to be reappointed by EDAC. At the completion of the second term, the member's
seat is vacated and the individual must apply for a new appointment and be appointed by
71
the City Council. After the completion of the third term and any successive terms, the
member is reappointed by either EDAC or City Council following the same process as
the first and second term.
o The term of service for EDAC members who were appointed before January 1,
2015 will expire on January 1, 2018. These EDAC members may request to be
reappointed by City Council.
o The term of service for EDAC members who were appointed after January 1,
2015 and before January 1, 2016 will expire on January 1, 2019. These EDAC
member may request to be reappointed by City Council.
o The term of service for EDAC members who were appointed after January 1,
2016 and before January 1, 2018 will expire on January 1, 2021. These EDAC
member may request to be reappointed by a majority of EDAC.
• Change the requirement from 10 to 8 members to constitute a quorum.
The purpose of the increase in the number of members would allow greater representation from
the El Segundo business community. The establishment of a term of office will offer EDAC and
City Council the opportunity to assess member performance and EDAC progress at the
completion of each three year term. Due to the composition of EDAC, many members serve in
executive level positions and on occasion may miss all or portion of a monthly meeting. The 8
member quorum will allow EDAC to make timely decisions and carry on with EDAC business
in the event that a full majority is not present.
72
RESOLUTION NO. _
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL
SEGUNDO ADOPTING THE BY-LAWS FOR THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL AS AMENDED.
The City Council of the City of EI Segundo does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: Recitals:
A. The EI Segundo City Council adopted the Economic Development Advisory
Council (EDAC) by-laws on July 15, 2014.
B. On August 15, 2018, EDAC approved an amendment to its by-laws to
increase the maximum number of EDAC members from 18 to 19; to
establish a term of service (3 years) and to change the requirement from 10
to 8 members to constitute a quorum, and requests that the City Council
adopt the EDAC amended by-laws.
C. The City Council now desires to adopt the Economic Development Advisory
Council (EDAC) proposed by-laws, as amended.
SECTION 2: Adoption of the By-laws; Implementation of Terms of Service. The by-laws
recommended for adoption by the Committee and attached as Exhibit A are hereby
adopted. To effectuate the change to the bylaws as to terms of service, the City Council
approves of the following schedule for existing EDAC members:
The term of service for EDAC members who were appointed before
January 1, 2015, will expire on January 1, 2019. On that date, the seats
will be deemed vacated and those individuals currently serving as
members may request to be reappointed by the City Council.
The term of service for EDAC members who were appointed between
January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017, will expire on January 1, 2020.
On that date, the seats will be deemed vacated and those individuals
currently serving as members may request to be reappointed by the City
Council.
The term of service for EDAC members who were appointed after January
1, 2018, will expire on January 1, 2021. On that date, the seats will be
deemed vacated and those individuals currently serving as members may
request to be reappointed by a majority of EDAC.
SECTION 3: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and
remain effective unless superseded by a subsequent resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2018.
Page 1 of 2
73
ATTEST:
Tracy Weaver, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley
City Attorney
Drew Boyles, Mayor
Page 2 of 2
74
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL
BYLAWS
ARTICLE I - NAME
The name of this organization shall be the Economic Development Advisory Council otherwise
known as EDAC.
ARTICLE II - PURPOSE
The purpose of the EDAC is to provide support and guidance to staff and to advise the City
Council on business attraction and retention as well as the implementation of the City's
Economic Development Program. The EDAC shall serve as a forum for effective collaboration
leading to the identification of responsible development strategies
ARTICLE III - QUALIFICATIONS
Members of the EDAC shall represent a cross section of the community including both residents
and non-residents who are actively conducting business within the City of El Segundo.
ARTICLE IV - MEMBERSHIP
The EDAC shall be composed of a minimum of twelve (12) members and a maximum of nineteen
(19) members appointed by the City of Council. EDAC membership is not limited to Residents of
El Segundo however, non-residents should represent a business actively engaged in the City of El
Segundo. The purpose of the EDAC requires that its members represent a broad and diverse
cross section of business and residents including but not limited to the following areas and/or
organizations:
Real Estate Development
Smoky Hollow
■ Retail and Restaurant
• Hotel
• Commercial Real Estate
■ Manufacturing (Large & Mid size)
■ Aerospace
• High Growth/Technology
■ Fortune 100
■ Chamber of Commerce
The City Council shall appoint two (2) members of the City Council to serve as liaison members
to the City Council and shall have no voting rights.
Section I - Selection of members
The City of El Segundo shall advertise and solicit applications to fill any vacant position
that might occur. After the application period has closed the Chair and two (2) members
75
Fuge 12
of the EDAC shall review the applications with the sole purpose of making
recommendation for selection to the Mayor and members of the City Council. The City
Council shall make final selection and appointments.
Section II - Term of Office
Term of office shall be three (3) years. At the completion of a member's term, a
member may request to be re -appointed as follows:
1. If the member has completed an odd -numbered term (i.e., first term, third term,
etc.), at the completion of such term, the member's seat is vacated and the
member may request to be reappointed by EDAC, with the reappointment to be
approved by a majority vote.
2. If the member has completed an even -numbered term (i.e., second term, fourth
term, etc.) at the completion of such term, the member's seat is vacated and the
individual must apply for a new appointment and be appointed by the City
Council.
Section III - Compensation
EDAC members shall serve without compensation
Section IV - Removal
Members are expected to attend all meetings. When any member has three or more
absences in a 12 month -period, the EDAC shall forward this information to the City
Council for review and possible removal of the member.
ARTICLE V - MEETINGS
All meetings shall be open and public pursuant to the Government Code of the State of California.
Section I - Regular Meetings
Regular meetings of the Board Shall be monthly, meeting on the third Wednesday at
4:30 PM
Section II - Special Meetings
Special Meetings of the Board may be held at any time upon the call of the Chairman or by
a majority of the voting members or the City Council following at least 48 hours notice to
each member. The Chairman or a majority of the EDAC shall determine the time and
place of the Special Meeting.
Section III - Study Sessions/Workshops/Seminars
The EDAC may be convened as a whole or as a committee of the whole in the same
manner as prescribed for the calling of a special meeting for the purpose of holding a
study session, workshop or attending a seminar provided that no official action will be
taken and no quorum shall be required.
Section IV - Annual Meeting
There shall be an annual meeting of the EDAC at the regular meeting in January of each
year.
76
Page 13
Section V- Quorum
Eight members of the EDAC shall constitute a quorum. A quorum is necessary for
action by the EDAC
Section VI - Voting
Each member shall have one vote.
Section VII - Meeting Procedures
Except as otherwise provided by these Bylaws or City Council Resolutions the EDAC will
follow the latest edition of Robert's Rules of Order for the orderly conduct of meetings.
ARTICLE VI - OFFICERS
Officers of the EDAC shall be a Chairman, a Vice Chairman and a Secretary who shall serve at the
pleasure of the EDAC. Term of office shall be for one (1) year. Duties of the officers shall
conform to the regular parliamentary duties as set for by Robert's Rules of Order. Revisedunless
otherwise stated.
Section I - Chairman
The Chairman shall preside over the meetings of the EDAC
Section II - Vice -Chairman
During the absence, disability, or disqualification of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman shall
perform all the duties and be subject to all the responsibilities of the Chairman. The Vice
Chairman shall succeed the Chairman if he/she vacates the office before the term expires.
A new Vice Chairman shall be elected at the next regular meeting.
Section III - Secretary
The Secretary shall be responsible for the minutes of all actions of the EDAC.
Section IV - Duties of the Economic Development Advisory Council
It is intended that the EDAC shall be an advisory body to the City Council. Nothing herein
contained shall be construed as a limitation on the power of the City Council or the
administrative staff of the City in their supervision or authority over property or
personnel under their jurisdictions.
ARTICLE VII - OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Section I - Minutes
Minutes of all meetings shall be prepared and maintained with the EDAC records. Copies
shall be distributed to each EDAC Member, City Council Member and to the City Clerk.
Section II - Distribution of Documents
Preparation and distribution of EDAC documents to the members, City Council and City
Clerk shall be the responsibility of a designated employee as identified by the City
Manager.
ARTICLE VIII - CONDUCT OF MEMBERS
77
Pale 14
Section I - Personal
EDAC members shall make no personal commitment to speak on behalf of the EDAC
without majority approval.
Section II - Conflict of Interest
Members of the EDAC shall abstain from participating in any matter to come before the
EDAC in which he or she has any direct or indirect economic interest. Should conflict of
interest exist, the EDAC member shall remove himself/herself from discussions and
abstain from voting. A yearly Conflict of Interest Statement shall be filed with the City
Clerk.
ARTICLE IX - ASSISTANCE OF STAFF
The City Manager of the City of El Segundo shall provide the EDAC with such information and
staff assistance as the EDAC may from time to time request subject to the limitations imposed by
the City Council. The staff member designated by the City Manager shall attend meetings of the
EDAC and submit such reports as said EDAC may request and as deemed necessary or desirable,
subject to limitations imposed by the City Council.
ARTICLE X - AMENDMENTS
These Bylaws as well as any operating procedures may be amended by simple majority of those
voting at any legal meeting of the Economic Development Advisory Council (EDAC) meeting
subject to approval by the City Council
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Economic Development Advisory Council (EDAC) on August 15,
2018
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the El Segundo City Council
WP
3022452 - 3022629
TOTAL WARRANTS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
WARRANTS TOTALS BY FUND
585,760 84
9,04680
1,638.54
225.00
1401
5,698.50
162,080 82
20,067.42
46,892.41
16,000.00
60,824.22
44,58716
3,71729
2,49101
19,125 00
7,635.27
$ 996,425.77
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Iniarm.-.i: n on actual expenditures is available in the Director of Finance's office in the
City of EI Segundo.
I certify as to the accuracy of the Demands and the availability of fund for payment thereof.
For Approval: Regular checks held for City council authorization to release
CODES:
R = Computer generated checks for all non-emergency/urgency payments for materials, supplies and
services in support of City Operations
For Ratification:
A = Payroll and Employee Benefit checks
B - F = Computer generated Early Release disbursements andfor adjuslrrlents approved by the Cit'
Manager. Such as: payments for utility Services, petty cash and employee travel expense
._I
DATE OF APPROVAL:
AS OF SEPTEMBER 04. 2018 REGISTER # 22
VOID CHECKS DUE TO ALIGNMENT:
N/A
VOID CHECKS DUE TO INCORRECT CHECK DATE:
VOID CHECKS DUE TO COMPUTER SOFTWARE ERROR:
NOTES
\� reimbursements, various refunds, contract employee services Consistent with current con
agreements, instances where prompt payment discounts Can be obtained Or Wte payment penalties
can be avoided or when a situation arises that the City Manager approves.
H = Handwritten E rt� disbursements and/or adjustments approved by the City Manager
FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER
DATE:
1i DATE � Q
�� �Z— 1 � C ' o
04
GENERALFUND
104
TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND
106
STATE GAS TAX FUND
108
ASSOCIATED RECREATION ACTIVITIES FUND
109
ASSET FORFEITURE FUND
111
COMM- DEVEL. BLOCK GRANT
112
PROP "A" TRANSPORTATION
114
PROP "C" TRANSPORTATION
115
AIR QUALITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM
116
HOME SOUND INSTALLATION FUND
117
HYPERION MITIGATION FUND
118
TDA ARTICLE 3 - SB 821 BIKEWAY FUND
119
MTA GRANT
121
FEMA
120
C.O.P.S. FUND
122
L.A.W A. FUND
123
PSAF PROPERTY TAX PUBLIC SAFETY
202
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT#73
301
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
302
INFRASTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT FUND
405
FACILITIES MAINTENANCE
501
WATER UTILITY FUND
502
WASTEWATER FUND
503
GOLF COURSE FUND
601
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
602
LIABILITY INSURANCE
603
WORKERS COMP. RESERVE/INSURANCE
701
RETIRED EMP. INSURANCE
702
EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND - DEVELOPER FEES
703
EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND - OTHER
708
OUTSIDE SERVICES TRUST
TOTAL WARRANTS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
WARRANTS TOTALS BY FUND
585,760 84
9,04680
1,638.54
225.00
1401
5,698.50
162,080 82
20,067.42
46,892.41
16,000.00
60,824.22
44,58716
3,71729
2,49101
19,125 00
7,635.27
$ 996,425.77
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Iniarm.-.i: n on actual expenditures is available in the Director of Finance's office in the
City of EI Segundo.
I certify as to the accuracy of the Demands and the availability of fund for payment thereof.
For Approval: Regular checks held for City council authorization to release
CODES:
R = Computer generated checks for all non-emergency/urgency payments for materials, supplies and
services in support of City Operations
For Ratification:
A = Payroll and Employee Benefit checks
B - F = Computer generated Early Release disbursements andfor adjuslrrlents approved by the Cit'
Manager. Such as: payments for utility Services, petty cash and employee travel expense
._I
DATE OF APPROVAL:
AS OF SEPTEMBER 04. 2018 REGISTER # 22
VOID CHECKS DUE TO ALIGNMENT:
N/A
VOID CHECKS DUE TO INCORRECT CHECK DATE:
VOID CHECKS DUE TO COMPUTER SOFTWARE ERROR:
NOTES
\� reimbursements, various refunds, contract employee services Consistent with current con
agreements, instances where prompt payment discounts Can be obtained Or Wte payment penalties
can be avoided or when a situation arises that the City Manager approves.
H = Handwritten E rt� disbursements and/or adjustments approved by the City Manager
FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER
DATE:
1i DATE � Q
�� �Z— 1 � C ' o
04
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER
8/13/18 THROUGH 8/26/18
T Date
Payee
Description
8/13/2018
IRS
258,911.04
Federal 941 Deposit
8/13/2018
Employment Development
57,149.07
State PIT Withholding
8/13/2018
Employment Development
4,274.75
State SDI payment
8/14/2018
Cal Pers
4,400.49
EFT Retirement Safety-Fire-PEPRA New 25020
8/14/2018
Cal Pers
6,439.64
EFT Retirement Safety-Police-PEPRA New 25021
8/14/2018
Cal Pers
23,270.12
EFT Retirement Misc - PEPRA New 26013
8/14/2018
Cal Pers
49,281.06
EFT Retirement Misc - Classic 27
8/14/2018
Cal Pers
75,006.76
EFT Retirement Safety Police Classic - 1 st Tier 28
8/14/2018
Cal Pers
50,780.37
EFT Retirement Safety Fire- Classic 30168
8/14/2018
Cal Pers
4,129.59
EFT Retirement Sfty Police Classic -2nd Tier 30169
8/14/2018
Cal Pers
200.00
Admin Fee - Late Payroll Reporting
8/14/2018
State of CA EFT
1,552.67
EFT Child support payment
8/15/2018
Cal Pers
2,313.61
2018 Replacement Benefit Contributions
8/15/2018
Cal Pers
4,400.49
EFT Retirement Safety-Fire-PEPRA New 25020
8/15/2018
Cal Pers
7,202.99
EFT Retirement Safety-Police-PEPRA New 25021
8/15/2018
Cal Pers
24,594.10
EFT Retirement Misc - PEPRA New 26013
8/15/2018
Cal Pers
48,973.07
EFT Retirement Misc - Classic 27
8/15/2018
Cal Pers
74,105.25
EFT Retirement Safety Police Classic - 1st Tier 28
8/15/2018
Cal Pers
50,909.35
EFT Retirement Safety Fire- Classic 30168
8/15/2018
Cal Pers
4,246.73
EFT Retirement Sfty Police Classic -2nd Tier 30169
8/17/2018
Health Comp
402.00
Weekly claims
8/24/2018
Manufacturers & Traders
24,260.53
457 payment Vantagepoint
8/24/2018
Manufacturers & Traders
500.00
ROTH IRA payment Vantagepoint
8/24/2018
Nationwide NRS EFT
30,690.72
EFT 457 payment
8/16/2018
Lane Donovan Golf Ptr
24,960.52
Payroll Transfer
8/1/18-8/5/18
Workers Comp Activity
0.00
SCRMA checks issued
8/6/18-8/12/18
Workers Comp Activity
0.00
SCRMA checks issued
8/13/18-8/19/18
Workers Comp Activity
23,711.78
SCRMA checks issued
8/6/18-8/12/18
Liability Trust - Claims
0.00
Claim checks issued
8/13/18-8/19/18
Liability Trust - Claims
0.00
Claim checks issued
8/6/18-8/12/18
Retiree Health Insurance
179.60
Health Reimbursment checks issued
8/13/18-8/19/18
Retiree Health Insurance
0.00
Health Reimbursment checks issued
DATE OF RATIFICATION: 8/24/18
TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE:
Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by:
Deputy City Treasu er II Date
856, 846.30
a f6
Date
Date
Information on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of EI Segundo.
856,846.30
P:\City Treasurer\Wire Transfers\Wire Transfers 10-01-17 to 9-30-18 8/2,80018 1/1
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL AND THE EL SEGUNDO
TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 8,2018,5:00 P.M.
W promote
2100 East Grand Ave., EI Segundo, CA 90245
(Strategic Technology Visioning Workshop)
5:00 P.M. SESSION
CALL TO ORDER — Technology Committee Chair, Chad Hahn at 5:10 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Mayor Boyles -
Present
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk -
Present
Council Member Brann -
Absent
Council Member Pimentel -
Present
Council Member Nicol -
Present
Elected Officials
Tracy Weaver - Present
Technology Committee Members
Present
Member Lindsey Breeden -
Present
Member Brian Hauer -
Absent
Member Tori Davis -
Present
Member Tom Vanek -
Absent
Member David Froemke -
Absent
Member Matthew Knox -
Absent
Member Timothy Dodd -
Present
Member Mike Lipsey -
Absent
Member Jessica Davis _
Absent
Vice Chair Madelon Smith -
Present
Chair Chad Hahn -
Present
Department Heads/City Staff
Greg Carpenter, City Manager -
Present
Charles Mallory, Information Systems Director -
Present
Joseph Lillio, Finance/Acting HR Director -
Present
Chris Donovan, Fire Chief -
Present
Bill Whalen, Police Chief -
Present
Melissa McCollum, Library Director -
Present
Sam Lee, Planning & Building Safety Director -
Present
Ken Berkman, Public Works Director -
Present
Meredith Petit, Recreation & Parks Director -
Present
Barbara Voss, Economic Development Manager-
Present
David King, Assistant City attorney -
Present
51
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS — (Related to City Business Only) — 5 minute limit per person, 30
minute limit total)
This meeting was an interactive workshop in which members of City Council, the Technology
Committee, the City Department Heads, and Members of the Public communicated with one
another to define a long-term vision for the City's use of technology.
Assistant City Attorney David King advised the workshop participants that conflict of interest
policies applied for this workshop and that they should not comment on anything that may
violate these restrictions.
A. NEW BUSINESS
Introduction and welcome: Chad Hahn welcomed all participants and explained the
objective of the workshop was to form a long-term vision for the City's use of technology.
Mr. Hahn explained that the workshop will begin with all participants generating ideas for
technology they would like to see the City incorporate. Once all ideas were placed,
participants will then vote on the ideas they believe in the most. Once the idea list was
narrowed down to 4-6 ideas, the participants will break out into small groups to determine
what would need to be true for the item to work for the city. After the small group
discussions each group would select a representative to present their findings to the large
group and open the floor for questions and comments.
a. History of the City's Technology — City Manager Greg Carpenter gave a brief overview on
the history of the technology at the City of EI Segundo and commented that within the last
years, the City has begun the process of updating the City's technology infrastructure.
b. Current state of the City's Technology- Information Systems Director Charles Mallory gave
an overview of the City's current technology status and advised the workshop participants of
the 21 technology related projects that the City is currently working on.
c. Ground rules for session -
Chad Hahn listed the following three guidelines for the workshop:
i. "Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
ii. One person at a time
iii. Be here now
Mr. Hahn then advised of the following five Innovation Disciplines to consider during the
workshop:
i. Understand what is most important to customers
ii. Leverage collective intelligence
iii. Build shared understanding
iv. Focus on performance drivers
V. Hold people accountable to their peers
VA
2. Large Group Exercise- All participants wrote down their ideas for areas they would like to
see the City implement technology advances on sticky notes and placed them on the wall at
the front of the room. All participants were then given six sticky dots to vote on the different
ideas. Participants were allowed to spread out their votes as they pleased, including using
multiple votes on one item. The categories with the most votes after the first vote were as
follows:
• Communications
• HR
■ Efficiency
Virtual City Hall
• Productivity
■ Social Media
■ Wi-Fi
■ Marketing
• Data
• Presentation
The workshop participants were then given four sticky dots to vote on the top 10 categories.
The categories with the most votes after the second vote were as follows:
■ Communications/Social Media
■ Virtual City Hall and Efficiency
• Data
• Marketing
• HR
e Productivity
3. Small Group Exercise- Workshop participants broke into small groups to discuss the
remaining six categories. Each group focused on one of the categories and the participants
were allowed to choose which group they wanted to be a part of. The groups were asked to
answer the following question about their category: What would have to be true for the item
to work for the City?
4. Small Group Report Backs- A representative from each group reported the findings their
group came up with about their assigned category.
Public Works Director Ken Berkman; Social media/ Communication- Mr. Berkman
reported to the large group that his small group determined the following would have
to be true for this item to work for the City:
• Computer program/app for disaster and emergency notification
• Training
• Effective website, comprehensive and opt -in preferences
• Communications Plan/Protocol
• Create social media platform with record retention
■ Centralized management and responsibility
• Inter -departmental collaboration (must)
• Proactive/timely (must)
■ Interesting, informative, relevant and consistent
RI
Police Chief Bill Whalen; Virtual City Hall & Efficiencies- Chief Whalen reported to the
large group that his small group determined the following would have to be true for
this item to work for the City:
• Systems support
• Funding
• One stop shop (City-wide/holistic view)
• Community support & participation (buy -in)
• Staff Buy -in/ labor support
■ City Council buy -in
• Implementation plan
• Virtual meetings (Internal/External)
• Re-evaluate business processes/model
Recreation and Parks Director Meredith Petit; HR- Ms. Petit reported to the large
group that her small group determined the following would have to be true for this
item to work for the City:
• Standardized protocol on time keeping
• HR department fully and properly staffed/department re -organized (outsource
if needed)
• Automated benefit management and payroll
• Personnel evaluations and strategy- automation
• Standardized training
• Streamline workers compensation practices/comprehensive review
• Proactive vs. reactive
• Resources- Staff and money
■ Expand recruitment platforms
Technology Committee Member Lindsey Breeden; Marketing- Member Breeden
reported to the large group that his small group determined the following would have
to be true for this item to work for the City:
• Centralized events calendar
City Brand Manager
o Businesses (Where big ideas take off)
o Residents
o Staff
• Need awareness of the quality of EI Segundo
• Social listening to speak to what is important to the people
• Bring businesses and residents together
Council Member Scot Nicol; Data- Council Member Nicol reported to the large group
that his small group determined the following would have to be true for this item to
work for the City:
• Leverage Data
• Capture and categorize data/define what we have (tech/ process)
• Standardize and structure data (process)
• Integration and compatibility (tech)
• Have "data stewards" — departments/employees (people)
Have training on data awareness (people)
RE
Upgrade and maintain infrastructure (tech)
• Stability for trending (process)
Awareness and commitment to privacy and security best practices
(people/process)
■ Encourage/promote department buy -in (people)
5. Closing- Chad Hahn advised the workshop participants that the information and ideas that
were presented during the workshop would be brought back to the City where they would be
complied into themes and used to help the Technology Committee form a long-term vision
for the City's use of technology.
ADJOURNMENT at 7:08 PM
Shantae Duren
Information Systems Department
Administrative Specialist
59,
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 2018
EL SEGUNDO COUINCIL CHAMBER — 350 MAIN STREET
2:30 PM
(Budget Study Workshop #2 for FY 2018-19)
2:30 P.M. SESSION
CALL TO ORDER — Mayor Boyles at 2:32PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Mayor Boyles
Present
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk
Present at 2:36 PM
Council Member Brann
Present
Council Member Pimentel
Present
Council Member Nicol
Present
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS — (Related to City Business Only) — 5 minute limit per person, 30
minute limit total) None
SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS:
1. Consideration and possible action regarding a budget study workshop resulting in City
Council receiving and filing of staff's discussion, analysis, and recommendations in
preparation for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-2019 budget. Staff will present on the following
matters:
A. Public Comments - None
B. Recap of the July 17th Budget Study Session — Greg Carpenter, City Manager,
gave an overview of today's meeting proceedings. Joe Lillio, Finance Director,
Review of revised Strategic Plan Document which summarizes the
Council's priority items for Fiscal Year 2018-19. Provide direction to
staff regarding finalizing the Plan (Exhibit A) - Joe Lillio, Finance
Director.
Council discussion and questions answered.
Review of the Commission's, Committee's, and Board's survey
(Exhibit B) — Joe Lillio, Finance Director presented on the item.
Council discussion and questions answered.
C. Overview of Preliminary FY 2018-19 Budget
:.
Recessed at 3:48 PM
Reconvened at 3:50 PM
Continue Department Overviews (proposed changes, work plan
highlights, requested budget increases, & discussion regarding
department personnel vacancies)
1. Charles Mallory, IT Director — gave presentation. Council
consensus not approving the FTE at this time, but ok with
consultants to manage the many upcoming projects.
2. Barbara Voss, Economic Development Manager — gave
presentation. Council discussion, no Council decision at this
time.
3. Chris Donovan, Fire Chief — gave presentation. Fire Prevention
Laserfiche, Council consensus not approving, asked to place the
item under the IT Department Umbrella, check if pricing changes
with the combination of services.
4, Melissa McCollum, Library Director — gave presentation. Council
discussion, no Council decision at this time.
5. Sam Lee, Planning and Building Safety Director — gave
presentation. Council discussion, no Council decision at this
time.
6. Bill Whalen, Chief of Police — Council consensus to use funds
from Asset Forfeiture for the Purchase of the Swat Van. Other
items not decided at this time.
7. Meredith Petit, Recreation & Parks Director — gave presentation.
Council discussion, no Council decision at this time.
8. Ken Berkman, Director of Public Works — Changed Exhibit C,
gave a new handout to Council and the Public. No Council
decision at this time on Public Work's items.
9. Joe Lillio, Finance Director — presented overview of upcoming
financial decisions/reserves for FY 2018-2019.
Council began the process of allocating the items asked for by each department. However, due to
time and further questions and answers needed, Council decided to postpone this portion of the
meeting until September 4, 2018 Regular City Council meeting.
Council Member Brann would like to add funding for Litigation with LAWA and additional funds for
the Aquatics center.
Council to discuss options on the Action Plan at the September 4, 2018 Council meeting.
Review of proposed Capital Improvement Budget (Exhibit C) — Ken
Berkman, Public Works Direction gave a presentation. Council
discussion, no decisions by Council made at this time.
D. Council to discuss and provide direction on potential uses of General Fund
Unallocated Fund Balance for FY 2018-19 (Exhibit D) — Council discussion and
questions answered. This will be brought back to the September 4, 2018 City
Council meeting.
E. City Council additional priorities and direction
F. Wrap Up and Next Steps
2. Council may raise other issues relating to staff's preparation of the FY 2018-2019 Budget
Study Session.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS — (Related to City Business Only) — 5 minute limit per person, 30
minute limit total) None
ADJOURNMENT at 5:37PM
Tracy Weaver, City Clerk
Lili Sandoval, Deputy City Clerk I
RUP
MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 21, 2018 — 5:00 PM
5:00 P.M. SESSION
CALL TO ORDER — Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk at 6:01 PM (Opened at 6:00 PM due to a
lack of quorum at 5:00 PM).
ROLL CALL
Mayor Boyles
Absent
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk
Present
Council Member Brann
Present
Council Member Pimentel
Present
Council Member Nicol
Present
PUBLIC COMMUNICATION — (Related to City Business Only — 5 minute limit per
person, 30 minute limit total) None
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk announced that Council would be meeting in closed session
pursuant to the items listed on the Agenda.
CLOSED SESSION.-
The
ESSION:
The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including
the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54960, et seq.) 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
Government Code Section §54957 (Personnel); and/or conferring with the City's Labor
Negotiators; as follows:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov't Code
§54956.9(d)(1): -4- matters
1. Achambault v. City of EI Segundo, WCAB Case Nos. 79049(39, 53 and 56)
2. James v. City of EI Segundo, WCAB Case No. ADJ 10523289
3. Turnbull v. City of EI Segundo WCAB and Cal PERS Matter
4. Houston v. City of EI Segundo, Los Angeles County Civil Service Commission
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(d)(2): -1-
matters.
Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9 (d)(4): -1- matters
DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS (Gov't Code §54957): -1- matters
1. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
Title: City Manager
APPOINTMENT OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEE (Gov't. Code § 54957): -0- matter
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT (Gov't Code § 54957) -0- matter
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8): -0-
matters
CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957.6): -8 -
matters
1. Employee Organizations: Police Management Association; Police Officers
Association; Police Support Services Employees Association; Fire Fighters
Association; Supervisory, Professional Employees Association; City Employee
Association; and Executive and Management/Confidential Employees
(unrepresented groups).
Agency Designated Representative: Irma Moisa Rodriquez, City Manager, Greg
Carpenter and Human Resources Director.
Adjourned at 6:55 PM
0
WE
REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 21, 2018 - 7:00 P.M.
7:00 P.M. SESSION
CALL TO ORDER — Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk at 7:00 PM
INVOCATION — Pastor Chuck Brady, St. John's Lutheran Church
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Pimentel
PRESENTATIONS
a) Presentation by Chief Donovan introducing Firefighter Matthew Goodenough.
b) Proclamation read by Nicol, recognizing Jose Zambrano's for his incredible
efforts, dedication, endurance, physical and mental toughness and his
compassion towards the 19 Granite Hotshots killed in the line of duty. Jose ran
from Los Angeles to Yarnell, Arizona to honor the Hotshots.
c) Presentation by Chief Whalen will introduce the EI Segundo Police Department
Cadets; Michael Drohan, Nicole Reppucci, Anthony Gomez, Tanner Griffin,
Ahmed Faraz, Tommy Tran, Jonathan Pena, Joseline Heredia and Brandon
Mendoza.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Boyles
Absent
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk
Present
Council Member Brann
Present
Council Member Pimentel
Present
Council Member Nicol
Present
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS — (Related to City Business Only — 5 minute limit per
person, 30 minute limit total)
Ron Swanson, resident, commented on the quality of our Fire and Police Departments
and mentioned he watched Jose Zambrano's run via the internet. Mr. Swanson also
invited the City employees and Council to a luncheon on September 11, 2018 to honor
our employees and to honor the lives lost on 9/11.
Paul Lanyi, resident, commented on item #5, the Social Host Ordinance and asked
Council to vote `yes' on the Ordinance.
Chris Cagle, representative with the SBWIB (South Bay Workforce Investment Board),
gave a quarterly report.
Joy Akoi, resident and Heal the Bay volunteer, mentioned EI Segundo Beach had a #1
rating this year! Ms. Akoi also invited the community to the National Coastal Clean -Up
event to be held on Saturday, September 15, 2018.
Cheryl Smith, resident and ES Council PTA President, commented on item #5, the
Social Host Ordinance and encouraged the Council to vote 'yes' on the Ordinance.
3
91
CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS — (Related to Public Communications)
A. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS
Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on the Agenda by title
only.
MOTION by Council Member Brann, SECONDED by Council Member Nicol to read all
ordinances and resolutions on the agenda by title only. MOTION PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 4/0
B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS (PUBLIC HEARING)
ITEMS #1 AND #2 OPENED SIMULTANEOUSLY
Council Member Nicol recused himself from the dais due to possible conflict of interest.
Consideration and possible action regarding Environmental Assessment No. EA -
1011, General Plan Amendment No. GPA 13-01, Zone Change No. ZC 13-01,
and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 13-01 for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
update project. (Applicant: City of EI Segundo)
Address: Smoky Hollow
(Fiscal Impact: None with this action)
2. Consideration and possible action regarding City Council approval of
Environmental Assessment No. EA -1198 and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA
17-06 to establish a parking in -lieu fee program in the Smoky Hollow area and
adopt a parking in -lieu fee. (Applicant: City of EI Segundo) Address: Citywide
(Fiscal Impact: None with this action)
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk stated this was the time and place to conduct a public hearing
regarding Environmental Assessment No. EA -1011, General Plan Amendment No. GPA
13-01, Zone Change No. ZC 13-01, and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 13-01 for the
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan update project and regarding City Council approval of
Environmental Assessment No. EA -1198 and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 17-06 to
establish a parking in -lieu fee program in the Smoky Hollow area and adopt a parking
in -lieu fee.
Clerk Weaver stated that proper notice had been given in a timely manner and that no
written communication had been received in the City Clerk's office.
Greg Carpenter, City Manager, introduced both items.
Gregg McClain, Planning Manager, gave a presentation and answered Council
questions on both items.
0
'A
Genevieve Sharrow, Project Manager, with MIG, Inc. gave a presentation regarding the
Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
Recessed at 8:33 PM
Reconvened at 8:38 PM
Public comment:
Ron Swanson, resident and property owner in Smoky Hollow, commented on the
removal of the R3 Overlay and how it will effect his property.
Geri Bauer, Smoky Hollow property owner, asked for clarification on the Parking In -Lieu
program.
Colonel Yori, resident on Grand Ave., commented on the residents that live on Grand
Ave. should be able to park on the street during the week without parking restrictions.
Kim Christensen, representing Sandstone Properties, stated they are in favor of the
Smoky Hollow plan, as well as the Community Benefit Program.
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk asked Ryan Baldino, Planning Commission Chairman to speak
on behalf of the proposed Smoky Hollow Specific Plan.
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk closed the public hearing.
Council Discussion
Council Member Pimentel asked Brian Marchetti, AICP, VP/Senior Planner with KOA to
speak regarding speed concerns on EI Segundo Blvd. and how the parking plan would
influence this and speak to the topic of North/South parking and the extra spaces it
would create.
Council consensus directed staff to reevaluate the 50' height component, the possibility
of parking on EI Segundo Blvd. and to reinstate the R3 Overlay for buildings/properties
on the North side of Grand Ave. Due to this direction; Council will continue the public
hearing to the September 18, 2018 Council meeting.
MOTION by Council Member Brann, SECONDED by Council Member Pimentel to
continue the public hearing regarding items #B1 and #B2 to the September 18, 2018
regular City Council Meeting. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 3/0
Council Member Nicol returned to the dais.
ITEM #C5 MOVED BETWEEN THESE TWO ITEMS FOR SAKE OF TIME
3. Consideration and possible action to amend various sections of the EI Segundo
Municipal Code (ESMC) Title 15 (Zoning Code) to: (1) update and introduce new
definitions related to measuring building height, (2) establish new zoning code
standards for measuring the maximum height of buildings, and (3) allow the
Director to approve an adjustment to the maximum building height by up to 5
feet, pursuant to ESMC Chapter 15-24. Adopting this Ordinance is categorically
5
93
exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines § 15303 as a Class 3
(new construction or conversion of small structures), § 15304 as a Class 4 (minor
alteration to land), and does not constitute a "project" that requires environmental
review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3), because the
proposed zone text amendment establishes new definitions and provisions for
measuring building height. The proposed Ordinance constitutes an action that
does not have the potential to cause significant effects on the environment and is
therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA. (Applicant: City of EI Segundo).
(Fiscal Impact: None)
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk stated this was the time and place to conduct a public hearing
regarding amending various sections of the EI Segundo Municipal Code (ESMC) Title
15 (Zoning Code) to: (1) update and introduce new definitions related to measuring
building height, (2) establish new zoning code standards for measuring the maximum
height of buildings, and (3) allow the Director to approve an adjustment to the maximum
building height by up to 5 feet, pursuant to ESMC Chapter 15-24. Adopting this
Ordinance is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines §
15303 as a Class 3 (new construction or conversion of small structures), § 15304 as a
Class 4 (minor alteration to land), and does not constitute a "project" that requires
environmental review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3), because the
proposed zone text amendment establishes new definitions and provisions for
measuring building height. The proposed Ordinance constitutes an action that does not
have the potential to cause significant effects on the environment and is therefore
exempt from the provisions of CEQA. (Applicant: City of EI Segundo).
Clerk Weaver stated that proper notice had been given in a timely manner and that no
written communication had been received in the City Clerk's office.
Greg Carpenter, City Manager, introduced the item.
Gregg McClain, Planning Manager, gave a presentation and answered Council
questions on the item.
Public comment:
Mark T (unable to determine last name), spoke on behalf of his client and the need to
change the height definition, in order to underwrite the 400 car parking garage his client
plans to build.
Kim Christensen, representing Sandstone Properties, in favor of the plan zone changes
to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan.
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk closed the public hearing.
Council Discussion
Mark Hensley, City Attorney, read by title only:
ORDINANCE NO. 1571
n.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE EL SEGUNDO
MUNICIPAL CODE (ESMC) IN TITLE 15 TO REDEFINE HOW BUILDING HEIGHT IS
MEASURED, AND TO ALLOW THE DIRECTOR TO APPROVE ADJUSTMENTS TO
THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING HEIGHT.
Council Member Brann introduced Ordinance No. 1571. The second reading and
adoption of the Ordinance is scheduled for September 4, 2018 at the regular meeting of
the City Council.
4. Consideration and possible action regarding Environmental Assessment No. EA -
1228, Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 18-03 to add Chapter 30 to Title 15
(Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code to require a discretionary Site Plan
Review Permit for specified types of development. (Fiscal Impact: None)
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk stated this was the time and place to conduct a public hearing
regarding Environmental Assessment No. EA -1228, Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA
18-03 to add Chapter 30 to Title 15 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code to
require a discretionary Site Plan Review Permit for specified types of development.
Clerk Weaver stated that proper notice had been given in a timely manner and that
written communication had been received in the City Clerk's office.
Greg Carpenter, City Manager, introduced the item.
Gregg McClain, Planning Manager, gave a presentation and answered Council
questions on the item.
Public comment: None
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk closed the public hearing.
Council Discussion
Mark Hensley, City Attorney, read by title only:
ORDINANCE NO. 1572
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
APPROVING ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. ZTA 18-03 ADDING CHAPTER 30 TO
TITLE 15 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REQUIRE A
DISCRETIONARY SITE PLAN REVIEW PERMIT FOR SPECIFIED TYPES OF
DEVELOPMENT.
Council Member Nicol introduced Ordinance No. 1572. The second reading and
adoption of the Ordinance is scheduled for September 4, 2018 at the regular meeting of
the City Council.
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
INA
95
MOVED IN BETWEEN ITEMS #132 AND #B3 AT THE REQUEST OF
MAYOR PRO TEM PIRSZTUK.
5. Consideration and possible action to introduce Ordinance No. 1567 to prohibit
gatherings where underage drinking or illegal drug use occurs.
(Fiscal Impact: None)
Greg Carpenter, City Manager, introduced the item.
Bill Whalen, Police Chief, reported on the item.
Council Discussion
Mark Hensley, City Attorney, read by title only:
ORDINANCE NO. 1567
AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 13 TO TITLE 7 OF THE EL SEGUNDO
MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING THE HOSTING, PERMITTING OR ALLOWING OF
GATHERINGS AT WHICH PERSONS UNDER 21 YEARS OF AGE ARE CONSUMING
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES OR USING MARIJUANA ILLEGALLY.
Council Member Nicol introduced Ordinance No. 1567. The second reading and
adoption of the Ordinance is scheduled for September 4, 2018 at the regular meeting of
the City Council.
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING ORDINANCE HISTORY TO CITY COUNCIL
1567 06/05/18 (FIRST READING)
06/13/18 (SECOND READING CONTINUED TO 07/17/18)
07/17/18(SECOND READING CONTINUED TO 08/21/18)
08/21/18(2 11D FIRST READING (SIG1N11-IGANT CHANGES TO ORDINANCE TO
CAUSE 2ND FIRST READING))
No vote on the proposed Resolution at this time. Resolution will be brought back for
adoption at the second reading scheduled for September 4, 2018.
D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS
6. Consideration and possible action to announce the appointment to the Arts and
Culture Advisory Committee.
(Fiscal Impact: None)
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk announced Tyler Leisher to a partial term expiring June 30,
2019 to the Arts and Culture Advisory Committee.
E. CONSENT AGENDA
W
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.
7. Approve Warrant Numbers 3022268 through 3022451 and 9000494 through
9000532 on Register No. 21 in the total amount of $826,135.56 and Wire
Transfers from 7/30/18 through 8/12/18 in the total amount of $3,585,445.01.
Ratified Payroll and Employee Benefit checks; checks released early due to
contracts or agreement; emergency disbursements and/or adjustments; and wire
transfers.
8. Approve Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of July 17, 2018, Special City
Council Joint with the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC)
Minutes of July 18, 2018 and Regular City Council Minutes of August 7, 2018.
9. Accept as complete the Recreation Park Picnic Shelter and authorize the City
Clerk to file a Notice of Completion in the County Recorder's Office. Project No.
PW 16-15.
(Fiscal Impact: $90,448.00)
10. PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER NICOL
11. Approve a budget appropriation of $8,500 and transfer from the General Plan
Maintenance Fund (GPMF) to provide additional environmental services related
to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Update Project and authorize the City
Manager to execute an amendment no. 4664C to the existing agreement with
MIG, Inc. (Fiscal Impact: $8,500.00)
MOTION by Council Member Brann, SECONDED by Council Member Nicol approving
Consent Agenda items 7, 8, 9, and 11. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE
VOTE. 4/0
PULLED ITEMS:
10. Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to a) increase
the Planning and Building Safety Department budgets for professional/technical
services by $120,000, and b) increase the contract amounts of the following
consultants: J Lee Engineering, Inc. (Building Safety) amendment no. 3790P for
$70,000 and Michael Baker International (Planning) amendment no. 4959E for
$50,000, which are necessitated by an unexpected high volume of plan checks
and building permits. The additional funding is proposed to come from revenue
generated by plan check and permit fees, which are projected to be
approximately $600,000 over the budgeted estimate by the end of the fiscal year.
(Fiscal Impact: $120,000.00)
Council asked staff questions concerning the item. Greg Carpenter, City Manager and
Sam Lee, Planning and Building Safety answered the questions of Council.
9
97
Council discussion
MOTION by Council Member Nicol, SECONDED by Council Member Pimentel,
approving the $120,000.00 increase in professional/technical services for J. Lee
Engineering, Inc. and Michael Baker International for the Planning and Building Safety
department. MOTION PASSED BY VOICE VOTE. 3/1 Yes: Pimentel Pirsztuk No:
Brann
F. NEW BUSINESS
F. REPORTS — CITY MANAGER - Passed
G. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY — Next meeting will bring forward information on
solid waste legislation and regulations and will also give an update on bills that
will be coming out of Sacramento in the coming months.
H. REPORTS — CITY CLERK — Passed
I. REPORTS — CITY TREASURER — Not Present
J. REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Pimentel — Thanked staff for the their hard work on recent Agenda
items and the future items coming up in the next few meetings and thanked all that
contribute to all the "cool" City events.
Council Member Nicol — Thanked all who were involved the Main Street Car Show over
the weekend and mentioned the School Bond Measure ES will be on the ballot in
November.
Council Member Brann — Passed
Mayor Pro Tem Pirsztuk — Congratulated the Art Walk on a successful summer event,
thanked the POA and others for a great Main Street Car Show and mentioned surfing is
now the official sport of California.
Mayor Boyles — Absent
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS — (Related to City Business Only — 5 minute limit per
person, 30 minute limit total)
Colonel Yori, resident, commented on the Art Walk, loved it and would like to make it an
event until December, possibly one a month from September to December.
MEMORIALS — None
ADJOURNMENT at 10:20 PM
Tracy Weaver, City Clerk
10
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute 3 -year amendments to
License Agreements with El Segundo Youth Sports Organizations (Fiscal Impact: $25,000 Revenue)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Authorize the City Manager to extend the License Agreements in a form approved by the City
Attorney with each El Segundo Youth Sports Organization identified in the Youth Sports
Council Athletic Field/Facility Use and Allocation Policy; and,
(2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
(1) Youth Sports Organizations - Annual Payment History
(2) Youth Sports Organizations - Residency Rates
FISCAL IMPACT:
Amount Budgeted: $25,000 Revenue
Additional Appropriation: None
Account Number(s): 001-300-0000-3879
ORIGINATED BY: Arecia Hester, Recreation Superintendent
REVIEWED BY: Meredith Petit, Director of Recr ion and Parks
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager
BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION:
The Youth Sports Council was established in 2008 as an advisory body established and appointed by
the Recreation and Parks Department Commission. The committee is comprised of representatives of
various youth sports organizations and works cooperatively with each other and Recreation and Parks
staff on field allocation/scheduling, identifying and resolving any field allocation issues, and
discussing maintenance requests and other policies related to youth sports use of City fields. All
decisions made by the Youth Sports Council are considered recommendations for the Recreation and
Parks Commission.
The Recreation and Parks Fee Analysis Task Force was created on September 18, 2012, and was
tasked with analyzing and recommending fees associated with programs and services offered through
the Recreation and Parks Department, with cost -recovery and sustainability as a primary focus. The
Task Force recommended that the eight El Segundo Youth Sports Organizations identified in the Field
Allocation Policy pay an annual fee for use of the fields, based on $10 per resident player and $30 per
non-resident player within each youth sports organization, based on their primary season roster. City
Council approved the fee on May 20, 2014, and the fee was implemented in Fiscal Year 2014/2015.
Initial License Agreements with each youth sports organization were for the term of 3 -years, expiring
in 2017/2018. City staff recommends City Council approve amending the license agreements for
additional three-year terms each which will allow the Youth Sports Council Members to continue
using the fields and facilities at the current rate of $10 for El Segundo resident player and $30 per non-
resident player.
Annual Payments by Group
Fiscal Year
2013/2014
2014/2015
2015/2016
2016/2017
2017/2018
AYSO
$ 15,010
$
14,480
$
14,770
$
14,000
$
12,510
Babe Ruth
$ 1,090
$
1,270
$
1,090
$
1,340
$
1,090
Girls Softball
N/A
$
2,650
$
2,680
$
2,720
$
2,970
Lacrosse
N/A
$
1,290
$
840
$
610
$
650
Little League
N/A
$
2,530
$
2,760
$
2,060
$
2,440
Hockey
N/A
$1,370
$
1,230
$
1,570
$
1,660
Flag Football
N/A
$
1,490
$
2,250
$
1,270
$
1,300
USYVL
N/A
$
1,100
$
1,120
$
660
$
1,120
FISCAL YEAR TOTAL
$ 16,100
$
26,180
$
26,740
$
24,230
$
23,740
Residency Rates by Group
101
Resident
Non -Res
Resident %
AYSO
FY13/14
778
241
76%
FY14/15
743
235
76%
FY15/16
739
246
75%
FY16/17
701
233
75%
FY17/18
744
169
81%
BABERUTH
FY13/14
64
15
81%
FY14/15
61
22
73%
FY15/16
61
16
79%
FY16/17
56
26
68%
FY17/18
64
15
81%
ESGS
FY14/15
139
42
77%
FY15/16
145
41
78%
FY16/17
146
42
78%
FY17/18
129
56
70%
LACROSSE
FY14/15
78
17
82%
FY15/16
60
8
88%
FY16/17
46
5
90%
FY17/18
52
4
93%
ESLL
FY14/15
187
22
89%
FY15/16
201
25
89%
FY16/17
149
19
89%
FY17/18
187
19
91%
ESIHA
FY14/15
44
31
59%
FY15/16
63
20
76%
FY16/17
49
36
58%
FY17/18
55
37
160%
FLAG FOOTBALL
FY14/15
86
21
80%
FY15/16
99
42
70%
FY16/17
52
25
68%
FY17/18
52
26
67%
USYVL
FY14/15
59
17
78%
FY15/16
58
18
76%
FY16/17
36
30
55%
FY17/18
58
18
76%
101
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to award a standard Public Works Contract to Corral
Construction & Development Inc. for the Library Wi-Fi and Reading Lounge Renovation
Project, Project No. PW18-04. (Fiscal Impact: $127,551.36)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a standard Public Works Contract, in a form
approved by the City Attorney, with Corral Construction & Development Inc. in the
amount of $38,805.31 and approve an additional $7,000 for construction -related
contingencies.
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible actions related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT: Included in Adopted Budget
Amount Budgeted: $153,000
Additional Appropriation: No
Account Number(s): $90,000 from 301-400-8201-8417 (Library Wi-Fi Zone)
$17,000 from 601-400-6101-8104 (Library Equipment
Replacement)
$46,000 transferring from 001-400-6101-4101(Library
Salary Fulltime) to 301-400-8201-8417 (Library Wi-Fi
Zone)
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: 4 Develop Quality Infrastructure and Technology
Objective: (a) El Segundo's physical infrastructure supports an appealing, safe,
and effective City
Goal: I Enhance Customer Service and Engagement
Objective: 2 City services are convenient, efficient and user-friendly for all
residents, businesses, and visitors
ORIGINATED BY: Arianne Bola, Senior Associate Engineer R16
REVIEWED BY: Ken Berkman, Public Works Director L,1, +r kPM.
Melissa McCollum, Library Director ,W,)A
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager
102
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The three greatest assets of any library are the staff, the collection and the physical space. As
libraries advance forward, library systems evolve to embrace its ability to keep up with the
technology in terms of how efficiently information from the internet and other digital resources
can be accessed. Modern libraries are clearing away old, unneeded bookshelves to make room
for practical spaces that support and enhance navigation and exchange of these new forms of
information. To that end, staff developed this remodel project in the City Library that will
repurpose the now -underutilized reference shelf area into a reading and Wi-Fi lounge area.
On July 17, 2018, City Council waived the bidding process and authorized the City Manager to
issue a purchase order to J.K. Miklin Inc. dba Yamada Enterprises; piggybacking on an existing
County of San Bernardino FAS Standard Contract No. 16-153 to purchase furniture in the
amount not to exceed $66,246.05. Staff has initiated the process and will coordinate the delivery
of the furniture once the reading and Wi-Fi lounge area remodeling at the City Library is
completed. That evening Council also adopted plans and specifications for the Library Wi-Fi
and Reading Lounge Renovation Project (Project No. PW 18-04) and authorized staff to
advertise for construction bids.
On August 7, 2018, the City Clerk received and opened two (2) bids as follows:
1. Corral Construction & Development Inc. $38,805.31
2. Nahed Abed Cinbad Industry, Inc. $42,222.00
The lowest responsive and responsible bidder is Corral Construction & Development Inc., whose
bid is below engineering cost estimate of $50,000. Staff checked the Contractor's license status
and references, and found them to have satisfactorily completed similar projects for other public
agencies, and was satisfied with work they have done in the past for the City.
Staff respectfully recommends that City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a
standard Public Works Contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Corral
Construction & Development Inc. in the amount of $38,805.31 and approve an additional $7,000
for construction -related contingencies.
Project Cost Estimate:
Design Plans and Specifications $14,550.00
Advertise for bids $ 950.00
Furniture $66,246.05
Demo and Construction $45,805.31
Total Estimated Project Cost $127,551.36
Construction is anticipated to commence in October and be completed in January 2019. Any
remaining funds will be returned to the Library Equipment Replacement Fund.
103
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 Third Quarter Financial
Review of the General Fund (GF) and Enterprise Funds. (Fiscal Impact: none)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Receive and File FY 2017-18 Third Quarter Financial Review.
(2) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: $0
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): None
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: 5(b) Champion Economic Development and Fiscal Sustainability:
El Segundo approaches its work in a financially disciplined and
responsible way
Objective: 1 The City will maintain a structurally balanced budget
2 The City will maintain a stable, efficient, and transparent financial
environment
ORIGINATED BY: Jude Lee, Accountant
REVIEWED BY: Joseph Lillio, Director of Finance
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
Third Quarter Financial Review Fiscal Year 2017-18
Staff has reviewed all revenues and expenditures for the third quarter of FY 2017-18, with an
emphasis on the General Fund, to determine if all sources and uses are on target with the
originally adopted budget. As we review the third quarter results, the City continues to
experience steady economic growth, as well as financial challenges related to funding
infrastructure and rising Ca1PERS pension costs.
Overall, the economy is showing signs of steady growth statewide. While we are projecting
1
104
E009
moderate growth in many City revenues, the concentration of revenues coming from the business
and industry sector creates a higher level of volatility in our core tax revenues that is difficult to
forecast. These core revenues will be closely observed during the next quarter and staff will be
able to better estimate the performance to budget at year-end.
General Fund Revenues
The following is a list of major General Fund revenues and the performance of each source
through the third quarter:
Table 1: 3rd Quarter Top 10 General Fund Revenue Sources Prior Year Comparisons
(Through June 30th of each year)
Business License Revenues
' Transient Occupancy
Current Year Secured
Sales & Use Tax
Tax Resolution Agreement (TRA)
2 Franchise Tax
3 Gas Utility Tax
Plan Check Fees
Electric Utility Tax
VLF Swap
Other Revenues
Total General Revenues (Net of Transfers)
Transfers In
53.3 59.7 '11.9%
0.3
Total General Fund Revenues 53.3 60.0 12.6%
The large increase in Transient Occupancy Tax Revenue is largely reflective of new hospitality business
growth in the city and driven by the increased occupancy.
Franchise tax was mainly driven by SoCal Gas Co's annual surcharge collection payment. The main
2 driver of increase in surcharge collection is due to significant increase in procurement gas price (15%)
compared to prior fiscal year.
3 Average core procurement gas price has increased 15% compared to prior fiscal year. On average, it
was 26.98 cents per therm. in FY2017 and 31.02 cents per therm. in FY2018.
2
105
11.2
11.3
7.0
8.7
+'=t
6.6
7.4
7.5
7.3
?.0':%
6.6
6.3
-5.`3`o
2.7
3.7
;
1.0
2.0
1.6
1.9
19. ;I(
1.4
1.7
19.5,%
1.4
1.6
'1=
Graph 1: 3rd Quarter Top 10 General Fund Revenue Sources Prior Year Comparisons
(Through June 30th of each year)
3rd Quarter General Fund Revenue PY Comparison
(S in millions)
Prior Year Audited FY 2016-17 ■ Current Year Unaudited FY 2017-18
12.0 11 211.3
10.0
8.7
7.9
8.0
7.4
7.57.3
7.0
6.6
6.66.3
6.2
6.0
4 0
3.7
2.7
2.0 g
2.0
1.6
1.41.7 1.41.6
1.0
0.0
Business Transient
Current
Sales &
Tax Franchise
Gas Utility Plan Check
Electric VLF Swap
Other
License Occupancy
Year
Use Tax
Resolution Tax
Tax Fees
Utility Tax
Revenues
Revenues
Secured
Agreement
(TRA)
Table 2: 3rd Quarter General Fund % of Budget Received Analysis (Through June 3011,2018):
millions)Revenue Source �FY2017-18
-
-.
Business License Revenues 11.5 11.3 98.3%
Transient Occupancy 13.5 8.7 64.1%
Current Year Secured 7.0 7.4 105.4%
Sales & Use Tax 11.8 7.3 61.6%
Tax Resolution Agreement (TRA) 6.3 6.3 100.0%
' Franchise Tax 2.9 3.7 127.2%
2 Gas Utility Tax 1.7 2.0 118.4%
Plan Check Fees 2.0 1.9 97.4%
Electric Utility Tax 2.1 1.7 79.3%
VLF Swap 1.5 1.6 106.5%
Other Revenues 11.4 7.9 69.1%
Total General Revenues (Net of Transfers) 71.7 59.7 83.3%
3
MR
Transfers In
0.3 0.3 100.0%
Total General Fund Revenues 72.0 60.0 83.3%
Franchise tax was mainly driven by SoCal Gas Co's annual surcharge collection payment. The main
driver of increase in surcharge collection is due to significant increase in procurement gas price (15%)
compared to prior fiscal year.
2 Average core procurement gas price has increased 15% compared to prior fiscal year. On average, it
was 26.98 cents per therm. in FY2017 and 31.02 cents per therm. in FY2018.
Graph 2: 3rd Quarter General Fund % of Budget Received Analysis
(Through June 30th, 2018):
3rd Quarter General Fund % of Budget Received Analysis
(S in millions)
FY2017-18 Revised Budget Current Year Revenues Received
16.0
14.0
13.5
11.5
11.8
12.0
11.3
11.4
10.0
8.7
7.9
8.0
7.07 .4
7.3
6.36.3
6.0
3.7
4.0
2.9
1
1.7 2.0
2.01.9 2.1
2.0
1.7
1.51.6
1
L i
I
0.0
Business
Transient
Current
Sales &
Tax
Franchise
Gas Utility
Plan Check Electric
VLF Swap
Other
License
Occupancy
Year
Use Tax
Resolution
Tax
Tax
Fees Utility Tax
Revenues
Revenues
Secured
Agreement
(TRA)
Business License Tax is the City's third largest General Fund revenue source, accounting for
15.9% of its total estimated revenues. The majority of this revenue stream is collected in January
and February. The revenue received through June 30 is on target with the budget. The prior
actual includes a large late penalty of $600,000. This penalty has impacted the current year's
budget as our ordinance will credit part of the penalty paid last year (50%) to the amount due this
year for the business license. This amount has been built into the budget.
E
107
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) is the largest General Fund revenue source, accounting for
18.7% of total estimated revenues. This revenue has been rebounding as the economy improves
due to increased occupancies and room rates. On April 12, 2016 a proposed change in the City
of El Segundo's T.O.T. rate appeared on the ballot as "Measure B." Measure B gave registered
voters the opportunity to approve or disapprove a rate increase in the T.O.T. from 8% to 12%.
The Measure passed with a 71.8% approval from voters. This is the reason for the increased
revenue quarter to quarter and prior year actual to current budget. TOT is projected to be in line
with budget.
Property Tax is 11.5% higher than the same period last year and is anticipated to come in higher
than the amount budgeted. The bulk of property tax revenue is received from the County in four
large payments that occur in December, January, March and April of each year.
Sales & Use Tax is the City's second largest revenue source, accounting for over 16.4% of the
General Fund revenues. Sales and Use Tax receipts for the third quarter of the current fiscal year
are 3.0% lower than the same period last fiscal year. The total sales tax revenue for FY 2017-18
is anticipated to be in line with the amount budgeted.
Franchise Tax is another one of the City's major revenue sources that is always impacted by the
price of natural gas, its consumption demand, the price of electricity and its demand. The annual
payments from Southern California Edison and The Gas Co are received in April of each year.
The Gas Co. payment is calculated using the average price of natural gas for the prior calendar
year. We are seeing a higher increase in the natural gas price which is driving our Franchise
Taxes higher than anticipated. Franchise Tax anticipated to end the fiscal year $800,000 over
budget.
Gas Utility User's Tax is also trending upward due to the increased price (avg. —15.5% +) on
natural gas compared to last fiscal year. We are anticipating Gas UUT to come in higher than the
amount budgeted. Staff will continue to closely monitor this category and provide an update at
year-end review.
Plan Check Fees. We are seeing a slightly higher than prior fiscal year trend on Plan Check
Fees. At third quarter, it is 19.6% higher than prior fiscal year and 97.4% of budgeted received.
Staff will continue to closely monitor this category and provide an update at year-end review.
Electric Utility Tax is trending slightly higher than previous fiscal year third quarter with 79.3%
of budgeted revenues received. Staff anticipates Electric Utility Tax revenues to track with
budgeted revenues for the fiscal year.
61
Table 3: 3rd Quarter General Fund Expenditures Prior Comparison
(Through June 30th of each year)
Total General Fund
Expenditures (Net of Transfer) 45.2 49.1 8.6%
Transfers Out 3.5 2.8 -19.4%
Total General Fund
Expenditures 48.7 51.9 6.6%
Police department expenditures changes show +5.5% salaries, +22% overtime, +18.9% CaIPERS
(-600K+additional payment towards Unfunded Accrued Liability)
2 Fire department expenditures changes show +151.9% Overtime, +29.5% Leave Replacement,
+51.1 % CalPERS (-680K+additional payment towards Unfunded Accrued Liability)
3 Non -department expenditures changes show +976.3% PARS expense (-1 M+ additional payment
towards PARS Section 115 Pension Trust)
4 Planning & Building Safety expenditures changes show +11.2% salaries & benefits
5 Information Systems expenditures changes show +34.7% salaries & benefits,
+323.5% computer supplies, +54.2% professional & technical, +131.3% telephone
5 City Attorney expenditures changes show +25.5% in legal counsel, +24.1 % labor negotiation
Gol
Police
14.9
15.9
6.4%
2
Fire
10.2
11.9
16.6%
3
Non -department
4.5
4.9
7.8%
Public Works
4.4
4.4
-0.4%
Recreation & Parks
3.3
3.5
7.3%
4
Planning & Building Safety
1.8
2.1
18.8%
Library
1.6
1.6
-2.0%
Finance
1.4
1.6
11.1%
City Manager
0.9
1.0
13.4%
5
Information Systems
0.6
1.0
47.4%
Human Resources
0.6
0.5
-15.1%
6
City Attorney
0.3
0.4
35.0%
City Clerk
0.3
0.3
19.7%
City Treasurer
0.2
0.2
-13.3%
City Council
0.2
0.2
-6.5%
Total General Fund
Expenditures (Net of Transfer) 45.2 49.1 8.6%
Transfers Out 3.5 2.8 -19.4%
Total General Fund
Expenditures 48.7 51.9 6.6%
Police department expenditures changes show +5.5% salaries, +22% overtime, +18.9% CaIPERS
(-600K+additional payment towards Unfunded Accrued Liability)
2 Fire department expenditures changes show +151.9% Overtime, +29.5% Leave Replacement,
+51.1 % CalPERS (-680K+additional payment towards Unfunded Accrued Liability)
3 Non -department expenditures changes show +976.3% PARS expense (-1 M+ additional payment
towards PARS Section 115 Pension Trust)
4 Planning & Building Safety expenditures changes show +11.2% salaries & benefits
5 Information Systems expenditures changes show +34.7% salaries & benefits,
+323.5% computer supplies, +54.2% professional & technical, +131.3% telephone
5 City Attorney expenditures changes show +25.5% in legal counsel, +24.1 % labor negotiation
Gol
Graph 3: 3rd Quarter General Fund Expenditures Prior Comparison (Through dune 301h)
3rd Quarter General Fund Expenditures PY Comparison
($ in millions)
Audited FY 2016-17 ■ Unadjusted FY 2017-18
2.0 4.0 8.0 10.0 14.0 16.0 18.0
Police
Fire
Non,department
Public Works
Recreation 8...
Planning &-
Library
Finance
CityManager
Information_.
Human -
City Attomey ...,
City Clerk
City Treasurer
City Council n
Table 4: 3rd Quarter General Fund % of Budget Expensed Ana
Police
22.1
15.9
72%
Fire
16.0
11.9
74%
Non -department
7.4
4.7
63%
Public Works
7.8
4.4
57%
Recreation & Parks
5.3
3.5
66%
1 Planning & Building Safety
2.7
2.1
77%
Library
2.3
1.6
69%
Finance
2.1
1.6
74%
City Manager
1.7
1.0
57%
Information Systems
2.0
1.0
47%
Human Resources
0.9
0.5
51%
2 City Attorney
0.6
0.4
77%
City Clerk
0.5
0.3
62%
City Treasurer
0.3
0.2
66%
City Council
0.3
0.2
64%
7
110
Total General Fund Expenditures (Netof
Transfer) 72.1 49.1 68%
Transfers Out 2.9 2.8 95%
Total General Fund Expenditures 75.0 51.9 69%
Graph 4: 3rd Quarter General Fund % of Budget Expensed Analysis
(Through June 30th, 2018)
3rd Quarter General Fund Expenditures PY Comparison
($ in millions)
FY 2017-18 Revised Budget ■ FY 2017-18 Expenditures
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
Police
Fire
Non -department
Public Works
Recreation &_
Planning &..��
Library
Finance
CityManager
Information...:
Human..m
CityAttorney #
City Clerk ■
CityTreasurer
CityCouncil ,
General Fund Expenditures
Third quarter Comparison — FY 2017 v. FY 2018
In comparison to prior fiscal year, we are currently seeing a generally increase of 8.6% in
total expenditures at the department level. This is primarily due to increases in PERS pension
costs compared to the prior year. Currently, we are seeing total percentage of budget expensed
from first quarter (Q1) thru third quarter (Q3) at a slightly lower than projected budgeted rate at
68% versus 75%. Overall, the City is tracking under the adopted budget for total expenditures
primarily due to numerous vacancies that exist throughout the organization; approximately 30 at
8
111
June 30. Staff will continue monitoring expenditures and will report any changes to the budget
estimates during the year-end review.
Notable annual changes in expenditures include Police department +6.4%, Fire
department +16.6%, Non -department +7.8%, Planning & Building Safety +18.8%, Information
Systems +47.4%, City Attorney +35.0%. The increases are largely resulted from additional
funding towards Pension liabilities (Ca1PERS normal cost plus Liabilities/UAL), having
positions filled in Planning and IS, and an increase in the City Attorneys contract rate as well as
an increase in billable hours due to ongoing projects that have required additional City Attorney
time to address.
General Fund Overall Summa
In summary, General Fund revenues at third quarter review are tracking 12.6%
above the same period last fiscal year and staff is currently estimating revenues to trend with the
revised mid -year budget. Expenditures are at 69% of budget and are estimated to trend below
budget; resulting in estimated year-end expenditures of —$70M, or $5M below the revised
budget.
Estimated Revejiues and Expenditures for Enterprise Funds
Table 5: 3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund Revenues Prior Year Comparison (Through June
30th of each year)
Water Fund Revenues 21.3 20.5 -3.7%
Sewer Fund Revenues 3.1 3.3 5.8%
Golf Fund Revenues 1.1 1.1 0.6%
Total Enterprise Fund Revenues 25.5 24.9 -2.4%
Graph 5: 3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund Revenues Prior Year Comparison
(Through June 30th of each year)
E
112
3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund Revenue PY Comparison
($ in millions)
Audited FY 201E-17 ■ Unaudited FY 2017-18
25.0
21.3
20.5
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
3.1 3.3
Water Fund Revenues Sewer Fund Revenues Golf Fund Revenues
Table 6: 3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund % of Budget Received Analysis
(Through June 30th, 2018)
Water Fund Revenues
29.6
20.5
69%
Sewer Fund Revenues
3.6
3.3
92%
Golf Fund Revenues
1.9
1.1
61%
Total Enterprise Fund Revenues
35.1
24.9
71%
Graph 6: 3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund % of Budget Received Analysis
(Through June 30th, 2018)
113
3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund % of Budget Received Analysis
(S in millions)
FY 2017-18 Revised Budget ■ FY 2017-18 Revenues
35.0
29.6
30.0
25.0
20.5
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0 0
Water Fund Revenues
3.6 3.3
Sewer Fund Revenues
1.9 EE
Golf Fund Revenues
Table 7: 3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund Expenditures Prior Year Comparison
(Through June 30th of each year)
Water Fund Expenditures 20.2 19.7 -2.2%
Sewer Fund Expenditures 3.0 5.0 67.6%
Golf Fund Expenditures 1.3 1.2 -1.3%
Total Enterprise Fund Expenditures 24.4 25.9 6.3%
11
114
Graph 7: 3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund Expenditures Prior Year Comparison
(Through June 30th of each year)
25.0
20.0
15.0
li tell;
5.0
3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund Expenditures PY Comparison
($ in millions)
Audited FY 2016-17 ■ Unaudited FY 2017-18
19.7
Water Fund Expenditures
5.0
3.0 11
Sewer Fund Expenditures
1.3 1.2
P qv
Golf Fund Expenditures
Table 8: 3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund % of Budget Expensed Analysis
(Through June 30th, 2018)
Water Fund Expenditures 33.0 19.7 60%
Sewer Fund Expenditures 10.8 5.0 46%
Golf Fund Expenditures 1.9 1.2 67%
Total Enterprise Fund Expenditures 45.6 25.9 57%
12
115
Graph 8: 3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund % of Budget Expensed Analysis
(Through June 30th, 2018)
3rd Quarter Enterprise Fund % of Budget Expensed Analysis
($ in millions)
FY 2017-18 Revised Budget
35.0 33.0
30.0
IAA]
19.7
20.0
15.0
10.8
10.0
Water Fund Expenditures Sewer Fund Expenditures Golf Fund Expenditures
Water Utility Enterprise Fund
Revenues in the Water Utility Fund are 3.7% lower than the previous year and largely due to a
timing issue of bills due in the current year. Overall, the revenues appear to be on track to meet
budget at year-end. Expenditures are anticipated to be slightly below budget due to salary
savings and a reduction in operating costs. There are three pending large capital projects: water
infrastructure replacement, water main replacement and AMR meters that total $5.7 million.
Sewer Utility Enterprise Fund
Revenues in the Sewer Utility Fund are 5.8% higher than the same period last fiscal year with
92% of budget received. Revenues are anticipated to be higher than the budgeted amount.
Expenditures are anticipated to be in line with Budget. There are three pending large capital
projects: annual sewer main repair, sewer pump station #1, and force main and pump stations for
a total of $6.4 million.
The Golf Course Fund is currently at 61% of revenue budget received. Revenue at the Golf
Course typically increases in the spring and summer but most likely this fund will end the year
below the adopted revenue budget of $1,854,112. Expenditures are at 67% of budget and
anticipated to be on track with the budgeted amount.
13
116
5.0
5.0
1.9
1.2
Water Fund Expenditures Sewer Fund Expenditures Golf Fund Expenditures
Water Utility Enterprise Fund
Revenues in the Water Utility Fund are 3.7% lower than the previous year and largely due to a
timing issue of bills due in the current year. Overall, the revenues appear to be on track to meet
budget at year-end. Expenditures are anticipated to be slightly below budget due to salary
savings and a reduction in operating costs. There are three pending large capital projects: water
infrastructure replacement, water main replacement and AMR meters that total $5.7 million.
Sewer Utility Enterprise Fund
Revenues in the Sewer Utility Fund are 5.8% higher than the same period last fiscal year with
92% of budget received. Revenues are anticipated to be higher than the budgeted amount.
Expenditures are anticipated to be in line with Budget. There are three pending large capital
projects: annual sewer main repair, sewer pump station #1, and force main and pump stations for
a total of $6.4 million.
The Golf Course Fund is currently at 61% of revenue budget received. Revenue at the Golf
Course typically increases in the spring and summer but most likely this fund will end the year
below the adopted revenue budget of $1,854,112. Expenditures are at 67% of budget and
anticipated to be on track with the budgeted amount.
13
116
Discussion on Debt Service Fund
The Debt Service Fund records the City's facility lease activity for the Douglas Street Gap
Closure. On September 1, 2005, the City entered into a facility lease agreement with the
California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (CIEDB) whereby CIEDB issued
bonds in the amount of $10,000,000 to finance the Douglas Street Gap Closure Project. The City
will make lease payments over a 30 -year period, which began on February 1, 2006. The interest
rate on the bonds is 2.87% per annum. Payments on the lease obligation are due February 1 and
August 1 of each year. The debt service fund is on target to meet the revenue, funded by traffic
mitigation fees, and expenditure budgets.
Conclusion
At the Department level, the City has been spending under budget with 69% of budget expensed
by the third quarter. All expenses are trending with the adopted budget, with average department
percentage of budget expensed of 65%, which is close to what the staff anticipated due to the
large number of vacancies. This represents spending that is trending under the budgetary plan.
Overall, revenues are tracking in line with the revised mid -year budget, even with the volatility
of certain revenues sources. The year-end General Fund revenues are anticipated to be —$2M
greater than the year-end General Fund expenditures.
14
117
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding Environmental Assessment No. EA -1228, Zone
Text Amendment No. ZTA 18-03 to add Chapter 30 to Title 15 (Zoning Regulations) of the
Municipal Code to require a discretionary Site Plan Review Permit for specified types of
development (Fiscal Impact: None)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. for Environmental Assessment No.
EA -1228 and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 18-03; and/or,
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Ordinance No.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
STRATEGIC PLAN: N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Gregg McClain, Planning Manager
REVIEWED BY: Sam Lee, Planning & Building fety Director
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manage
On August 21, 2018, the City Council introduced an Ordinance amending certain sections in Title
15 of the El Segundo Municipal Code pertaining to require a discretionary Site Plan Review Permit
for specified types of development.
The Council may waive second reading and adopt the Ordinance. If the Ordinance is adopted by
the City Council, the effective date of the Ordinance will be October 4, 2018, which is 30 days
from the adoption date.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The ordinance does not have the potential to cause significant effects on the environment and,
therefore, is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 Cal.
Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3). The Ordinance amends the El Segundo Municipal Code to require a
discretionary land use permit for specified types of development which, in some cases, do not
currently require a discretionary land use permit. The addition of the discretionary permit
requirement will trigger the application of CEQA and allow the City to analyze the potential
environmental consequences of a proposed development project before making a decision on the
E01
118
merits of an application. The Ordinance does not portend any development or changes to the
physical environment. Following an evaluation of possible adverse impacts, it can be seen with
certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance will have a significant effect on the
environment. Rather, the primary purpose of the proposed Ordinance is to provide a mechanism
that will allow the City to require a CEQA evaluation of future development proposals meeting
specified thresholds.
119
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL
SEGUNDO APPROVING ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. ZTA 18-03
ADDING CHAPTER 30 TO TITLE 15 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE TO REQUIRE A DISCRETIONARY SITE PLAN
REVIEW PERMIT FOR SPECIFIED TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT
The City Council of the City of EI Segundo does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. With the exception of a site plan review requirement in the C-4 Zone and
in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Area, the EI Segundo Municipal Code
currently does not require a discretionary land use permit for the
development of uses permitted by right in the City's various zoning
districts.
B. A discretionary land use permit requirement provides a number of
advantages for the City including, without limitation, the following:
It allows the City to ensure that proposed development is consistent
with the overall goals, policies and objectives of the General Plan and
Zoning Code;
2. It allows the City to ensure that new development is functionally and
visually compatible with neighboring properties and the area in which
it is located;
3. It ensures that the subject development is reviewed in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (unless otherwise
exempt by law), thereby providing the City with a mechanism to
require the mitigation of environmental impacts caused by a project;
4. It allows the City to place conditions on new development necessary
to ensure the preservation of the public health, safety and general
welfare.
C. It is in the best interest of the City to subject all significant new
development to a site plan review process that will provide the City with a
mechanism to ensure that each developer bears the cost of mitigating
impacts directly caused by his/her/its proposed development, and allow
the City to ensure the preservation of the public health, safety and general
welfare.
D. On July 26, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed hearing
on the proposed Ordinance, received and considered a staff report and
1
120
oral and written testimony from the public, and adopted Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2844 recommending that the City Council
adopt the proposed Ordinance as set forth herein.
E. On August 21, 2018, the City Council held a duly -noticed hearing where it
received and considered a staff report, the Planning Commission's
recommendation, and oral and written testimony from the public.
SECTION 2: General Plan Findings. As required pursuant to Government Code
section 65860, the City Council finds that the proposed amendments to the EI Segundo
Municipal Code are consistent with the General Plan as follows:
A. This ordinance does not make any changes to zoning or development
standards in the city; rather, it adds a discretionary land use permit
requirement that allows the city to ensure development projects are (1)
consistent with the overall goals, policies and objectives of the General
Plan and the Zoning Code, (2) consistent with the development standards
set forth in the Zoning Code, (3) functionally and visually compatible with
neighboring properties and the area in which they are located, and (4)
conditioned, whenever necessary, to guarantee that the public health,
safety and welfare are maintained.
B. Considering all its aspects, the proposed ordinance will further the
objectives and policies of the General Plan and will not obstruct their
attainment.
SECTION 3: Zone Text Amendment Findings. In accordance with ESMC Chapter 15-
26 (Amendments), and based on the findings set forth in Sections 1 and 2, the City
Council finds that the proposed ordinance is consistent with and necessary to carry out
the purpose of the ESMC as follows:
A. The ordinance is consistent with the purpose of the ESMC, which is to
serve the public health, safety, and general welfare and to provide the
economic and social advantages resulting from an orderly planned use of
land resources.
B. The ordinance requires a discretionary land use permit for new
development projects that meet specified thresholds. This discretionary
review will trigger application of the California Environmental Quality Act
(unless the proposed project is otherwise exempt by law) and allow the
city to analyze the potential environmental impacts of a project before
reaching a decision on the merits. When necessary and appropriate, this
will allow the City to impose mitigation measures and conditions on
projects to ensure that the developers bear the burden of mitigating
impacts directly caused by their projects.
2
121
C. The discretionary site plan review contemplated by this ordinance will
provide a mechanism for the city to ensure that proposed developments
are compatible with properties in the area in which they are located.
D. The discretionary site plan review contemplated by this ordinance will
allow the City to place conditions on new development to ensure that the
public health, safety and welfare are maintained.
SECTION 4: Chapter 30 is added to Title 15 of the ESMC to read as follows:
Chapter 30
SITE PLAN REVIEW
15-30-1:
PURPOSE
15-30-2:
APPLICABILITY
15-30-3:
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS
15-30-4:
REVIEW PROCESS
15-30-5:
EXPIRATION
15-30-6:
REVOCATION
15-30-1: PURPOSE:
A site plan review is a discretionary land use permit that is required for any
proposed project that meets the criteria set forth in section 15-29-2. The purpose
of the site plan review process is to:
A. Ensure that the project is functionally compatible with the area in which it
is located;
B. Allow all city departments the opportunity to review development
proposals and place reasonable conditions to ensure that the public
health, safety and welfare are maintained.
15-30-2: APPLICABILITY:
Except in the C-4 Zone, which has its own site plan review requirements, a site
plan review pursuant to this chapter is required for development that meets any
of the following criteria:
A. Single-family residential development of more than 10 residential units;
B. Multi -family residential development of more than 10 units;
C. New commercial, institutional or industrial development that includes
structures which have a combined gross floor area of more than 50,000
square feet (not including parking structures);
3
122
D. Additions to existing structures if the combined total additions exceed
50,000 square feet of gross floor area, but not including parking
structures;
E. For projects with a mix of residential and commercial, institutional or
industrial uses, if any criteria above applies, the entire project is subject to
site plan review.
15-30-3: APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS:
An application for a site plan review must be made on a form supplied by the
Planning and Building Safety Department, and must be accompanied by the
following:
A. A site plan showing the location of all structures, landscape and
hardscape areas, parking areas, walks, internal circulation, access,
adjacent streets, signs, and fence or wall type and placement;
B. Dimensioned and scaled building elevations for each proposed structure.
The building elevations must show all sides of the building and call out
exterior building materials, window and door types, and roof materials;
C. A radius map showing the project site and all lots lying in whole or in part
within a 300 -foot radius of the project site, address labels for the owners of
all properties within the 300 -foot radius together with any other individuals
that have requested notice (this information is available from the City), and
a Certified Property Owners List Affidavit;
D. Application fees in the amount established by resolution of the City
Council;
E. Any other pertinent information, exhibits or materials deemed necessary
by the Director or designee. With the exception of the application fee, the
Director may waive or modify any of the application requirements deemed
unnecessary for a particular application.
15-30-4: REVIEW PROCESS:
A. The Director or designee will determine whether the application is
complete. An application is complete when it complies with the
requirements of section 15-30-3. If an application is found to be
incomplete, the applicant will be notified by mail as to why the application
is incomplete and how the application can be made complete.
B. After an application is determined to be complete, it will be reviewed in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and an
appropriate determination will be made. While the CEQA process is
underway, the application will be distributed to the appropriate city
4
123
departments, and to professional consultants if necessary, for review,
comment and recommendations regarding appropriate conditions. The
applicant is responsible for the actual and reasonable costs incurred in
preparing the appropriate CEQA document and all associated studies and
reports. The city may require the applicant to deposit funds in a
designated project -related account which the city can draw upon as costs
are incurred.
C. Following the environmental determination, the application will be
scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission. The
Director or designee will give public notice of the hearing as provided in
Chapter 27 of this Title and consistent with applicable law.
D. The Planning Commission may approve or conditionally approve a site
plan review if it makes the following findings:
The proposed development is consistent with the goals, policies and
objectives of the general plan, any applicable specific plan, and the zoning
code;
2. The project is functionally compatible with the area in which it is located;
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the general welfare of
the City.
E. If the Planning Commission approves or conditionally approves a site plan
review, the approval will become effective upon expiration of the appeal
period in section 15-25-3. If an appeal is perfected with the prescribed
time period, the Planning Commission's decision shall be stayed pending
final action of the City Council.
F. Appeals. An aggrieved party may appeal the decision of the Planning
Commission pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 25 of this
Title.
G. Scope of Hearing on Appeal. Appeals shall be reviewed de novo. The
City Council is not bound by the decision that has been appealed or
limited to the issues raised on appeal.
15-30-5: EXPIRATION AND EXTENSIONS:
A site plan review will lapse and become null and void 2 years following the
effective date of the site plan review approval unless, prior to the expiration date
(a) a building permit is issued and construction is being diligently pursued toward
completion, or (b) a certificate of occupancy is issued for the construction that
was the subject of the application. One-year extensions may be granted by the
Director for good cause upon written request of the applicant received prior to
expiration of the site plan review approval, provided there are no changes
5
124
proposed to the previously -approved project. An application for extension
involving any significant change from the original plan or the conditions of
approval, as determined by the Director, shall be subject to all of the provisions
of this Title and shall require a new application. Additional conditions may be
imposed as deemed necessary to ensure that the development plan will be in
compliance with city standards in effect at the time the extension is granted.
15-30-6: REVOCATION:
A. Grounds for revocation. A site plan review may be revoked for any of the
following reasons:
The approval was obtained by fraud;
2. The application included inaccurate, erroneous, or incomplete information
and the City finds that accurate and complete information would have
caused additional or different conditions on the site plan review or denial
of the application;
3. The project is being constructed contrary to the approved plans,
conditions of approval, or in violation of any statute, ordinance, law or
regulation.
B. If the Director finds that grounds for revocation exist, he or she may
suspend a site plan review pending a hearing before the Planning
Commission, which must be held within 30 days of the suspension. The
hearing before the Planning Commission must be noticed in the manner
required by Chapter 27 of this Title and consistent with applicable law. The
decision of the Planning Commission is subject to appeal to the City
Council pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 25 of this Title.
SECTION 5. California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council finds that this
Ordinance does not have the potential to cause significant effects on the environment
and, therefore, the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3). The Ordinance amends the EI
Segundo Municipal Code to require a discretionary land use permit for specified types
of development which, in some cases, do not currently require a discretionary land use
permit. The addition of the discretionary permit requirement will trigger the application
of CEQA and allow the City to analyze the potential environmental consequences of a
proposed development project before making a decision on the merits of an application.
The Ordinance does not portend any development or changes to the physical
environment. Following an evaluation of possible adverse impacts, it can be seen with
certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance will have a significant effect on
the environment. Rather, the primary purpose of the proposed Ordinance is to provide
a mechanism that will allow the City to require a CEQA evaluation of future
development proposals meeting specified thresholds.
6
125
SECTION 6. Construction. This Ordinance must be broadly construed in order to
achieve the purposes stated herein. It is the City Council's intent that the provisions of
this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that
facilitates the purposes set forth herein.
SECTION 7. Severability. If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed
invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intended that such invalidity
will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this
end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.
SECTION 8. The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this
Ordinance, cause it to be entered into the City of EI Segundo's book of original
ordinances, make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting,
and, within 15 days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause a summary
thereof to be published or posted in accordance with California law.
7
126
SECTION 9. This Ordinance will go into effect thirty days after its passage and
adoption.
2018. PASSED AND ADOPTED this _ day of
Drew Boyles, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
I, Tracy Weaver, City Clerk of the City of EI Segundo, California, do hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing
Ordinance No. was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting
held on the day of 2018, and was duly passed and adopted by said
City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at
a regular meeting of said Council held on the day of , 2018, and the
same was so passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Tracy Weaver, City Clerk
0
127
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding approval of Environmental Assessment No. EA -1210
and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 17-08 to amend various sections of the El Segundo Municipal
Code (ESMC) Title 15 (Zoning Code) to: (1) update and introduce new definitions related to
measuring building height, (2) establish new zoning code standards for measuring the maximum
height of buildings, and (3) allow the Director to approve an adjustment to the maximum building
height by up to 5 feet, pursuant to ESMC Chapter 15-24.
Adopting this Ordinance is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA
Guidelines § 15303 as a Class 3 (new construction or conversion of small structures), § 15304 as
a Class 4 (minor alteration to land), and does not constitute a "project" that requires environmental
review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3), because the proposed zone text
amendment establishes new definitions and provisions for measuring building height. The
proposed Ordinance constitutes an action that does not have the potential to cause significant
effects on the environment and is therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA. (Fiscal Impact:
None with this action.) (Applicant: City of El Segundo).
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. for Environmental Assessment
No. EA -1210 and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 17-08; and/or,
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Ordinance No.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: Enhance customer service and engagement.
Objective: City services are convenient, efficient and user-friendly for all residents
and businesses.
PREPARED BY: Maria Baldenegro, Assistant Planner
REVIEWED BY: Gregg McClain, Planning Manager
Sam Lee, Planning and Building Safety Nrectore
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager
128
10
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
On August 21, 2018, the City Council introduced an Ordinance amending various sections of the
El Segundo Municipal Code (ESMC) to: (1) update and introduce new definitions related to
measuring building height, (2) establish new zoning code standards for measuring the maximum
height of buildings, and (3) allow the Director to approve an adjustment to the maximum building
height by up to 5 feet, pursuant to ESMC Chapter 15-24.
The Council may waive the second reading and adopt the Ordinance. If the Ordinance is adopted
by the City Council at its September 4th meeting, the effective date of the Ordinance will be
October 4, 2018, which is thirty (30) days from the adoption date.
129
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE EL
SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE (ESMC) IN TITLE 15 TO
REDEFINE HOW BUILDING HEIGHT IS MEASURED, AND TO
ALLOW THE DIRECTOR TO APPROVE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE
ALLOWABLE BUILDING HEIGHT.
The City Council of the City of EI Segundo does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. On October 9, 2017, staff initiated an application for Environmental
Assessment No. EA -1210 and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 17-08 to
amend the City's regulations affecting building height;
B. The City reviewed the project's environmental impacts under the California
Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et
seq., CEQA) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California
Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., CEQA Guidelines).
C. On June 28, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to
receive public testimony and other evidence regarding the proposed
amendment, including information provided by City staff and public
testimony;
D. On June 28, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2840
recommending the City Council approve Environmental Assessment No.
EA -1210 and Zone Text Amendment No. ZTA 17-08;
E. On August 21, 2018, the City Council held a public hearing, considered the
Planning Commission's recommendation, and information provided by City
staff and public testimony regarding this Ordinance; and
F. The Ordinance and its findings are made based upon the administrative
record including, without limitation, testimony and evidence presented to the
City Council at its August 21, 2018, hearing, and the staff report submitted
by the Planning and Building Safety Department.
SECTION 2: General Plan Findings. As required under Government Code Section
65860, the ESMC amendments proposed by the Ordinance are consistent with the EI
Segundo General Plan as follows:
A. The proposed zone text amendment is in conformity with the Land Use
Element goals, objectives and policies. Specifically, the zone text
amendment is consistent with Land Use Element Goal LU3 and Objectives
130
LU3-1 and LU3-2 in that the amendment will facilitate the construction,
remodel, and expansion of residential land uses in the City;
B. The proposed amendments are also consistent with Land Use Element
Goal LU4, Objective LU4-1, Policy LU4-1.2, in that they will promote the
maintenance of commercial buildings to meet environmental regulations;
C. The proposed amendments are consistent with Land Use Element Goal
LU4, Objective LU4-2, and Policy LU4-2.1, in that they will help revitalize
and upgrade commercial areas in the City. The proposed amendments will
accomplish this by providing clarity concerning building height regulations;
D. The proposed amendments are consistent with Economic Development
Element Goal ED1, Objective ED1-1, and Policy ED1-1.1, in that it will help
to development and maintain businesses for its residents throughout the
City.
SECTION 3: Zone Text Amendment Findings. In accordance with ESMC Chapter 15-26
and based on the findings set forth in Section 2, the proposed zone text amendment is
consistent with and necessary to carry out the general purpose of ESMC Title 15 because
it serves the public health, safety, and general welfare and provides the economic and
social advantages resulting from an orderly planned use of land resources.
SECTION 4: Environmental Assessment. This Ordinance is exempt from further
environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public
Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code
of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.), because it involves minor revisions and clarifications
to existing zoning regulations related to building height. The proposed zone text
amendment is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines §
15303 as a Class 3 (new construction or conversion of small structures), and § 15304 as
a Class 4 (minor alteration to land). Accordingly, the proposed Ordinance does not
constitute a "project" that requires environmental review in accordance with CEQA
Guidelines § 15061(b)(3), because the proposed zone text amendment establishes new
definitions and policies for measuring building height. The proposed Ordinance
constitutes an action that does not have the potential to cause significant effects on the
environment and is therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA.
SECTION 5: The following definitions are amended or added to ESMC Section 15-1-6
(Title; Interpretation; Definitions: Definitions) as follows (strikethro irrh is language to be
deleted, and underlined is language to be added):
BASEMENT: Any floor level below the first story in a building that is more than four feet
(4} 4 feet below !lgade! Grade for more than fifty--peroe^+ 49,D-) 50 percent of the total
perimeter, or is more than e+94#-feet0'-) 8 feet below "grade" at any point.
Old
131
BUILDING HEIGHT OR STRUCTURE HEIGHT: is the vertical distance measured from
the Grade Plane to the highest point of the roof or parapet. See features listed in ESMC
Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height. a"eirttsTefhe--ham pg t -G# �f„a-#.lat
roof; t leek4ne ef-a-�aaar�sar�d aof-o"G he-ave+age height bet e n f ya�te a 44he
4d9e_of-g�le - pitGhed rar �. �Gefs } rie direGtlY-beJ0W. Th"dge�f�-�kjFe—, ped
',..,.'�^ yy, � � ,„ a ,.� ,, „,,
Gr-lltnn o--Fi-l�r}d--a-�f7axi,-rrurFn--vim ix foal lL:4 abGye4he--mom iinuni--1 Egght4rr:lt
permitted in t e acne Irt ��1i�irrnvn cr�'re4uiWni� Ir.r,.-ted
Top of Shed Roof
of Flat Roof
Grade Plane
Top of Gable Roof
Top of Barn Roof
Top of Saw -tooth Roof Top of Mansard Roof
��l - 4
Grade Plane
FLAT ROOF: _A roof surface which slopes 10 percent or less.
GRADE: .The elevation of the surface of the ground of a property; pry€ses-areex4stirg
or-finishedi i
whicheves ower in elev-atie-n.
GRADE DIFFERENTIAL: The difference in ground elevation between the Grade Plane
and the lowest point of the Finished Grade adjacent to the exterior walls „of the building_
A Grade Differential is exempt when measuring the height „of a building or structure. Any
portion below the Gracie Plane which exceeds the maximum permitted Grade Differential
for the zoning district is included in calculating the vertical height of the building. See
Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to building height.
GRADE EXISTING: The surface of the ground or avement at a stated location as it
exists prior to disturbance in preparation for aProject at the site.
GRADE, FINISHED: The elevation after the land is cleared, th «Il Vler4-aif cut,
filled, graded, or associated -with construction improvements are completed, including but
not limited to, pathways, pavements, hardscape or landscaping are complete.
GRADE, PREEXISTING NATURAL: The ground elevation o€a-promises which existed
prior to excavation, cut, -,fill., or landscaping improvements the origifla erastRwAior+-eaf-4he
buiidi,ng er_stFuGture. lfenGe } de on-adjuvui t..properties may be utilized to r.nr.ir.i
132
iR--esta4Shing pre&X-iSt4Rg-g'-ade-w4e-n4-1e-pFeSERGe Of S id-gr-ade is not readily-appaFept
en -the -subject preff4ses, The Director may assist in establishing the existing —Natural
Grade, based on the surrounding undisturbed Existinq Grade on other portions of the site,
or based on ad'acent properties to the site or the level of the finished sidewalk.
GRADE PLANE: is a horizontal reference plane representing the average elevation
between the highestand lowest point of the Natural Grade prior to excavation, fill or
construction, measured immediately below or adjacent to the exterior perimeter walls „of
a_building or structure.
ME
pa
k High Point
Grade Differential
Finished Grade , Grade Plane
Fill
Natural Grade
Low Point
HIGH POINT OF NATURAL GRADE: is the highest point of the Natural Grade adjacent
to the exterior walls of a building, planned or built where it is situated on a sloping lot.
LOW POINT OF NATURAL GRADE: is the lowest point of the Natural Grade adjacent to
the exterior walls of a building, planned or built, where it is situated on a sloping lot.
SEGMENTED GRADE PLANE: is multi le horizontal Grade Planes adjacent to different
portions of the exterior walls of a single building. Segmented Grade Planes are used for
measuring the height of structures on sites with significant a ,Natural Grade slope
0
133
Segment 1
on
Segment 2 x
on
...... -
Segment 1 High Point
Segment 1 Grade Plane
Grade Differential Segment 1 Low Point &
Finished Grade Segment 2 High Point
Segment 2 Grade Plane
Natural Grade
Fill Segment 2 Low Point
TOP OF BUILDING: is the highest point of a pitched roof or the parapet on a building.
SECTION 6: ESMC Section 15-2-3 (General Provisions: Exceptions to Building Height)
is amended as follows:
15-2-3: EXCEPTIONS TO BUILDING HEIGHT:
Penthouses or roof structures for the housing of elevators, stairways, solar panels and
related equipment, or mechanical or and similar equipment required to operate and
maintain a building, fire escapes, fire --G- e#-wa#s, open-work guardrails, skylights,
clock towers, church_ steeples and other similar architectural elements, flagpoles,
chimneys, smokestacks, radio antennas, televi-s4en +nastsr-adar and other similar
structures may be erected above the height limits prescribed in this title. Light standards
or other light fixtures may be mounted on the roof of a parking -structure and must be
designed_to control glare. Non -permanent accessories, such as furniture, barbeques, or
umbrellas placed on a roof deck may be erected up to a maximum eight -feet -(-8-') 8 feet
above the height limits prescribed in this title. No such penthouse, structure or accessory
is allowed for the purpose of providing additional floor space. Any such structures in
residential zones shall be for noncommercial purposes only.
An increase in the maximum allowable Building Height, up to 5 feet, may be granted by
the Director, subject to the approval of an Adjustment pursuant to Chapter 15-24.
SECTION 7: ESMC Chapter 15-4, Article A (Single Family Residential (R-1) Zone),
Section 6 (Site Development Standards for Lots Wider than Twenty Five Feet),
Subsection B (Height) is amended as follows:
5
134
B. Height: The-heiry t-of-a4i- buitdi gs-m- us c�e �e x—feet426T Ind-4wo42j
stories.
13 e■ _ -1. FftTCjr
1. The height of all buildings or structures with a pitched roof must not exceed 32 feet
and two stories. Buildin. s or structures with a Flat Roof must not exceed 26 feet and
two stories.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 6 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical hei ht
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential is included in measuring the maximum
Building Height. On sloped lots a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied to different
pc�rti�ns of a building.
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height,
Average of
Highest Gable
6' Marc
SECTION 8: ESMC Chapter 15-4, Article A (Single -Family residential (R-1) Zone),
Section 6-1 (Site Development Standards for Lots Twenty Five Feet or Less), Subsection
B (Height) is amended as follows:
B. `- • _ _
StGries. T eight- _ o.
a ges, m ay not e -- --
The height of all buildings or structures with a pitched roof must not exceed 32 feet
and two stories. Buildings or structures with a Flat Roof must not exceed 26 feet and
two stories.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 6 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential is included in measuring the maximum
135
Building Height. On sloped lots a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied to different
ortions of a building.
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Buildina Heiaht.
Average of
Highest Gable
6.
rm �....,
f
Owell[ng Unit
SECTION 9: ESMC Chapter 15-4, Article B (Two -Family Residential Zone (R-2)), Section
6 (Site Development Standards), Subsection B (Height) is amended as follows:
1. The height of all buildings or structures with a pitched roof shall not exceed 32 feet
and two stories. Buildings or structures with a Flat Roof must not exceed 26 feet and
two stories.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 6 feet is permitted on sloping lots The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring the
maximum Building Height. On sloped lots a Segmented Grade Plane may y be applied
to different portions of a building.
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height
Average of
Highest Gable
SECTION 10: ESMC Chapter 15-4, Article C (Multi -Family Residential (R-3) Zone),
Section 5 (Site Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
7
136
C. Height: Tie -height of aJ ldings aae1ures hall Ret exGeed4weRty-si*4ee"2�
1, The height of all buildings or structures with a pitched roof shall not exceed 32 feet
and two stories. Buildings or structures with a Flat Roof must not exceed 26 feet and
two stories.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 6 feet is permitted on sloping lots The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring the
maximum Building Height. On slo ed lots a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied
to different portions of a building.
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height.
3rade
dt
Gable
SECTION 11: ESMC Chapter 15-5, Article A (Downtown Commercial (C -RS) Zone),
Section 7 (Site Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
C. Height:
137
1. Buildings and structures shall not exceed the height of#v#�Gt-(45') 45 feet.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet is permitted on sloping lots The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring the
maximum Building Height. On sloped lots a_ Segmented Grade Plane may be applied
to different or -tions of a buildin .
3. See Section „15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height
SECTION 12: ESMC Chapter 15-5, Article B (Neighborhood Commercial (C-2) Zone),
Section 7 (Site Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
C. Height:
1. Buildings and structures shall not exceed a height of twenty-eight feet -(2-8') 28 feet.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in meas gyring the
maximum Buildiriq Height. On sloped lots a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied
to different portions of a building,
3. See ESMC 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height
SECTION 13:. ESMC Chapter 15-5, Article C (General Commercial (C-3) Zone), Section
7 (Site Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
C. Height:
0
138
1. East of Sepulveda Boulevard: No building or structure shall exceed two hundred feet
r''� 200 feet.
2. West of Sepulveda Boulevard: No building or structure shall exceed fort„ five foo+
(4,54 45 feet.
3. If the subject property abuts residentially zoned property, no building or structure
shall exceed forty4eet-(40') 40 feet.
4. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring the
maximum Building Height. On sloped lots, a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied
to different portions „of a building.
5. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height.
West of Sepulveda Boulevard East of Sepulveda Boulevard
SECTION 14: ESMC Chapter 15-5, Article D (Corporate Office (CO) Zone), Section 7
(Site Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
C. Height:
1. East of Sepulveda Boulevard: No building or structure shall exceed two hundred4eet
„� 200 feet.
2. West of Sepulveda Boulevard: No building or structure shall exceed forty fivefeet
45 feet_
3. If the subject property abuts residentially zoned property, no building or structure shall
exceed ferty-feet (40') 40 feet.
4. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring_ the
maximum Building Height. On sloped lots, a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied to
different portions of a building.
10
139
5. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions „to Building Height.
West of Sepulveda Boulevard East of Sepulveda Boulevard
SECTION 15: ESMC Chapter 15-5, Article E (Urban Mixed Use North (MU -N) Zone),
Section 7 (Site Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
1. Buildin s and structures shall not exceed a height of 175 feet.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical hei ht
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring the
maximum Buildinq Height. On sloped lots a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied
to different portions of a building.
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height.
11
140
SECTION 16: ESMC Chapter 15-5, Article F (Urban Mixed Use South (MU -S) Zone),
Section 8 (Site Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
15-5F-8: SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
C. Height:, Buildings and stF6ist+cs shall-44et-e-x--.4-a 4eig-ht-Gf�ee44Ufld-ped--seventy
fide feet (175').
1. Buildings and structures shall not exceed a height of 175 feet.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring the
maximum building height. On sloped lots a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied
to different portions „of a building_
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height.
SECTION 17: ESMC Chapter 15-5, Article G (Commercial Center (C-4) Zone), Section 6
(Site Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
C. Height:
1. No building or structure may exceed sixty -five -feet} 65 feet.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring the
maximum building height. On sloped lots a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied to
different portions of a building,
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height.
12
141
SECTION 18: ESMC Chapter 15-6, Article A (Light Industrial (M-1) Zone), Section 7 (Site
Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
feet -(2004.
C. Height: l�u+la�,�s- "anri +r, .G+, ,rare shall ercee�! a ei #�l c wGkx adr�.� ��
1. Buildings and structures shall not exceed a height of 200 feet
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet is permitted on sloping lots The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measurinq the
maximum Building Height. On sloped _lots, a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied to
different portions of a buildin__
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height.
SECTION 19: ESMC Chapter 15-6, Article B (Heavy Industrial (M-2) Zone), Section 7
(Site Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
C. Height:. Ru*Ungs and strurture E; shall RGt eXGeed a height Oft-.- hundre44eet
00
1. Buildings and structures shall not exceed a height of 200 feet.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical hei ht
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring the
m different portinaximum Building Height. On sloped lots, a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied
m
ns of a building
13
142
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building.Height.
SECTION 20: ESMC Chapter 15-8 (Open Space (O -S) Zone), Section 5 (Site
Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
C. Height:-B-uitdings-e-tid--strticti-ires-sliali+nat-e-xceed-a-height-of twenty-si fee 2RR
1. Buildings and structures with a pitched roof shall not exceed a height of 32 feet.
Buildings and structures with a Flat Roof shall not exceed 26 feet
2. A maximum_ Grade Differential of 8 feet „is_permitted in sloping lots, measuring from
the Grade Plane to the lowest Finished Grade immediately adjacent to the _exterior
walls of the building. The vertical height which exceeds the maximum Grade
Differential limit is included in measuring the maximum Building Height, On sloped
lots a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied to different portions of a building.
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height
SECTION 21: ESMC Chapter 15-9 (Automobile Parking (P) Zone), Section 5 (Site
Development Standards), Subsection C (Height) is amended as follows:
C. Height: -Buildings -a Rd s#wct
v raj �u sr 7
1. Buildings and structures with a pitched roof shall not exceed a height of 32 feet.
Buildings and structures with a Flat Roof shall not exceed 26 feet
2. A maximum Grade Differential of 8 feet „is permitted in sloping lots, measuring from
the Grade Plane to the lowest Finished Grade immediately adjacent to the exterior
walls of the building. The vertical height which exceeds the maximum Grade
Differential limit is included in measuring the maximum Building Height. On sloped
lots a Segmented Grade Plane may be applied to different portions of a building.
14
143
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exce tions to Building Hei ht.
SECTION 22: ESMC Chapter 15-10 (Public Facilities (P -F) Zone), Section 5 (Site
Development Standards), Subsection B (Height) is amended as follows:
B. Height: T1ae-pef*ssible-height-lirnit-shall be the aver g&.height of ol! z-enes Which
ab6t-�r-Gj
1. The permissible height „limit shall be the average height of all zones which abut
the property.
2. A maximum Grade Differential of.8 feet is permitted on sloping lots. The vertical height
which exceeds the maximum Grade Differential limit is included in measuring the
maximum Buildin Hei ht. On slo ed lots a Se mented Grade Plane may be applied
to different taortions of a building.
3. See Section 15-2-3 for exceptions to Building Height.
SECTION 23: ESMC Chapter 15-24 (Adjustments), Section 1 (Granting) is amended by
adding the following:
1. Building Height to exceed the maximum allowable hei ht by not more than 5 feet.
SECTION 24: CONSTRUCTION. This ordinance must be broadly construed in order to
achieve the purposes stated in this ordinance. It is the City Council's intent that the
provisions of this ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a
manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this ordinance.
SECTION 25: ENFORCEABILITY. Repeal of any provision of the EI Segundo Municipal
Code does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude
prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this ordinance's
effective date. Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining
action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 26: VALIDITY OF PREVIOUS CODE SECTIONS. If this entire ordinance or its
application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or
amendment of the ESMC or other city ordinance by this ordinance will be rendered void
15
144
and cause such previous ESMC provision or other ordinance to remain in full force and
effect for all purposes.
SECTION 27: SEVERABILITY. If any part of this ordinance or its application is deemed
invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity
will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this
end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable.
SECTION 28: The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this
ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of EI Segundo's book of original ordinances;
make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within 15
days after the passage and adoption of this ordinance, cause it to be published or posted
in accordance with California law.
16
145
SECTION 29: This Ordinance will become effective on the thirty-first day following its
passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of September, 2018.
Drew Boyles, Mayor
TEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 1
I, Tracy Weaver, City Clerk of the City of EI Segundo, California, do hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing
Ordinance No. was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting held
on the 21st day of August, 2018, and was duly passed and adopted by said City Council,
approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at a regular
meeting of said Council held on the 4th day of September, 2018, and the same was so
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Tracy Weaver, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
17
146
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to enter into
Memorandum of Agreements (MOAs) for 1) Administration and Cost Sharing for
Implementing the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Programs (CIMPs) and Enhanced
Watershed Management Program (EWMPs) for the Dominguez Channel Watershed and
for the Santa Monica Bay Jurisdictional Groups 2 & 3 Watershed, and 2) Santa Monica
Bay Dry & Wet Weather Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Loads Coordinated Shoreline
Water Quality Monitoring Program. (Fiscal Impact: FY 17/18 $4,492.49, FY 18/19
$53,311.26, FY 19/20 $51,566.08, FY 20/21 $59,728.06, FY21/22 $45,479.33, FY 22/23
$43,792.00 plus $12,362.00 for contingency)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement of five years,
approved in form by the City Attorney, between the Cities of Los Angeles, Carson, El
Segundo, Hawthorne, Inglewood, Lawndale, and Lomita, the -Los Angeles County Flood
Control District, the County of Los Angeles, and the South Bay Cities Council of
Governments for $111,319 for Administration and Cost Sharing for Implementing the
Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program (CIMP) and Enhanced Watershed
Management Program (EWMP) for the Dominguez Channel Watershed;
2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement of five years,
approved in form by the City Attorney, between the Cities of Los Angeles, El Segundo,
and Santa Monica, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, and the County of Los
Angeles for $123,199 plus $12,362 of contingency for Administration and Cost Sharing
for Implementing the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program (CIMP) and Enhanced
Watershed Management Program (EWMP) for the Santa Monica Bay Jurisdictional
Groups 2 & 3 Watershed;
3. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement of five years,
approved in form by the City Attorney, between the Cities of Los Angeles and El Segundo
for $23,851.22 for Santa Monica Bay Dry & Wet Weather Bacteria Total Maximum Daily
Loads Coordinated Shoreline Water Quality Monitoring Program; or,
4. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible actions related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
• Dominguez Channel Watershed CIMP/EWMP MOA
■ Santa Monica Bay Jurisdictional Groups 2 & 3 Watershed CIMP/EWMP MOA
• Santa Monica Bay Dry & Wet Weather Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Loads
Coordinated Shoreline Water Quality Monitoring Program MOA
• Santa Monica Bay Shoreline Monitoring Cost Spreadsheet
FISCAL IMPACT: FY 17/18 $ 4,492.49 FY 18/19 $53,311.26 FY 19/20 $51,566.08
FY 20/21 $59,728.06 FY21/22 $45,479.33 FY 22/23 $43,792.00
Plus $12,362.00 for contingency for a total of $270,731.22
147
Amount Budgeted: To be included in each FY Annual Budget
Additional Appropriation: None
Account Number(s): 001-400-4301-6206 (Storm Drain Contractual Services)
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: 4 Develop Quality Infrastructure and Technology
Objective: (a) El Segundo's physical infrastructure supports an appealing, safe, and
effective City
ORIGINATED BY: Lifan Xu, City Engineer L -&-
REVIEWED BY: Ken Berkman, Public Works Director � )kvl tar 14v -s
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program (LIMP) and Enhanced Watershed
Management Program (EWMP)
In 1990, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) adopted
Order 8, No. 90-079, which set in motion requirements for municipalities located in Los Angeles
County to comply with provisions of the Clean Water Act for contaminated discharges (commonly
called stormwater and non-stormwater runoff discharges) into Municipally Separate Storm Sewer
Systems (MS4). This action was followed in 1992 by a provision requiring all Phase I cities
(populations greater than 100,000) to begin implementing best available technologies to reduce or
eliminate contaminated discharges. The Regional Board adopted new stormwater permits in 1996
and 2001, and approved four amendments for the 2001 permit between 2006 and 2010.
On November 8, 2012, the Regional Board adopted a new stormwater permit, Order No. R4-2012-
0175, which includes and expands upon the provisions called for in earlier permits. That order is
still in effect today and provides Permitees the flexibility to develop Enhanced Watershed
Management Programs (EWMPs) to implement the requirements on a watershed scale. An
EWMP allows collaboration among other Permittees and partners on a macro -watershed level and
thus efficiencies of scale for implementation and costs.
El Segundo is part of two separate watersheds - the Santa Monica Bay and the Dominguez Channel
receiving waters. Previous stormwater permits focused on implementation of pollution control
measures, while the latest permit focuses on achieving adopted water quality standards (referred
to as total maximum daily loads, or TMDLs) for the receiving waters. Confirmation of permit
compliance will be substantially determined through monitoring of receiving water bodies to
determine whether pollutant thresholds/limits are being achieved. This comprehensive monitoring
program is referred to as a Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program (CIMP), which is a primary
component of an Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP). The watershed members
have organized the CIMP structure in a cost sharing agreement. Certain agencies, such as the City
of Los Angeles, will construct, operate, and maintain equipment and perform services needed to
conduct the monitoring and sampling required by the permit. The other entities, such as the City
of El Segundo, will only contribute financially. This arrangement allows the larger agencies and/or
.•
the agencies with the particular geographic strategic knowledge perform the work, and share the
data and reporting on behalf of the other watershed member agencies.
On April 21, 2016, the Regional Board approved the Dominguez Channel Watershed EWMP and
on June 1, 2016, approved the Dominguez Channel Watershed LIMP. On April 5, 2016, Council
authorized staff to enter into the Dominguez Channel Watershed CIMP administration and cost
sharing MOA covering fiscal years 15/16, 16/17, and 17/18.
On November, 23, 2015, the Regional Board approved the Santa Monica Bay Watershed CIMP,
and on April 21, 2016, the Santa Monica Bay Watershed EWMP. On April 5, 2016, Council
authorized staff to enter into the Santa Monica Bay Watershed CIMP administration and cost
sharing MOA covering fiscal years 15/16, 16/17, and 17/18.
Both of these CIMP MOAs are set to expire and the watershed members have drafted the attached
successor MOAs to continue the program another 5 years. Final cost tables by year have been
inserted into this Staff Report. Specific cost detailing is available in the attached MOAs and in the
fiscal impact summary table below at the end of the report. With these MOAs, the City of El
Segundo agrees to:
• Continue to participate and implement Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program and
Enhanced Watershed Management Program at each watershed
+ Retain the City of Los Angeles to perform the CIMP monitoring
• Share the cost of the CIMP monitoring and EWMP administration services for fiscal years
2018-19 through 2022-23 based on tributary area
Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacterial TMDLs' Coordinated Shoreline Monitoring Plan
On January 24, 2002, the Regional Board adopted Resolution No. 2002-004, establishing the limit
for the Bacteria TMDL during dry -weather for Santa Monica Bay Beaches. On December 12,
2002, the Regional Board adopted Resolution No. 2002-022, establishing the limit for the Bacteria
TMDL during wet -weather for Santa Monica Bay Beaches. The Bacteria TMDLs address
documented bacteriological water quality impairments at forty-four (44) beaches from the Los
Angeles/Ventura County line to Outer Cabrillo Beach (just south of the Palos Verdes Peninsula).
The Bacteria TMDLs identify the responsible agencies as the County of Los Angeles and the Cities
of Los Angeles, Malibu, Calabasas, Santa Monica, El Segundo, Rancho Palos Verdes, Palos
Verdes Estates, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Manhattan Beach, Hermosa
Beach, Culver City, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Agoura Hills, Thousand Oaks, Westlake
Village, Inglewood, Torrance, as well as the State of California through its Department of
Transportation (Caltrans), as dischargers of bacteria into the Santa Monica Bay Beaches.
The Regional Board approved the monitoring plan entitled, "Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacterial
TMDLs Coordinated Shoreline Monitoring Plan", to be prepared collectively by the agencies.
Since this watershed limits is a larger footprint than the localized EWMP/CIMP footprint discussed
in the previous sections, a specific MOA arrangement must be constructed for the monitoring and
reporting of this specific TMDL (bacteria), separate from the monitoring and reporting
requirements of other pollutants that only pertain to the cities in the EWMP/CIMP agreements.
Similar to the CIMP agreement structure, certain agencies, such as the City of Los Angeles, will
perform the work, while the City of El Segundo only contributes financially.
149
The most recent cost sharing agreement covered fiscal years
Bacteria Monitoring MOA has expired and the watershed
successor MOA to continue the program another 5 years.
the attached MOA.
Fiscal Impact Summary
13/14, 14/15, 15/16, and 16/17. This
members have drafted the attached
Specific cost detailing is available in
The fiscal impact of the above three MOAs are summarized in the following table. The total fiscal
im act from FY17-18 thru FY 22-23 is $270,731.22, including $12,362 for contin ency.
Staff respectfully recommends Council approve the required actions to ensure compliance with
the State and Federal stormwater regulatory programs.
150
ES
MOA
Portion
FY 17-18
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
FY20-21
FY21-22
FY22-23
of Total
Cost
Dominguez
Channel
2.48%
N/A
$26,670
$19,441
$ 24,426
$20,074
$20,708
CIMP/EWMP
Santa Monica
_
J2&3
4.70%
N/A
$22,014
$27,359
$30,393
$20,349
$23,084
CIMP/EWMP
Santa Monica
Bay
1.32%
$4,492.49
$4,627.26
$4,766.08
$4,909.06
$5,056.33
N/A
Shoreline
Monitoring
Annual Total
1
$4,492.49
$53,311.26
$51,566.08
$59,728.06
$45,479.33
$43,792
Staff respectfully recommends Council approve the required actions to ensure compliance with
the State and Federal stormwater regulatory programs.
150
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, THE CITY OF CARSON, THE CITY OF EL
SEGUNDO, THE CITY OF HAWTHORNE, THE CITY OF INGLEWOOD, THE CITY OF
LAWNDALE, THE CITY OF LOMITA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL DISTRICT, AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, AND THE SOUTH
BAY CITIES COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION AND COST SHARING FOR IMPLEMENTING
THE COORDINATED INTEGRATED MONITORING PROGRAM (CIMP) AND
ENHANCED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (EWMP)
FOR THE DOMINGUEZ CHANNEL WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AREA
This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), made and entered into as of the date of the
last signature set forth below by and between THE SOUTH BAY CITIES COUNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS (SBCCOG), a California Joint Powers Authority, and THE CITY OF
LOS ANGELES (CITY), a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF CARSON, a municipal
corporation, THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF
HAWTHORNE, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF INGLEWOOD, a municipal
corporation, THE CITY OF LAWNDALE, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF
LOMITA, a municipal corporation, LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
DISTRICT (LACFCD), a body corporate and politic, and the COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES (COUNTY), a political subdivision of the State of California. Collectively,
these entities shall be known herein as PARTIES or individually as PARTY.
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, for the purpose of this MOA, the term PARTIES shall mean the
Cities of Los Angeles, Carson, EI Segundo, Hawthorne, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita,
Los Angeles County Flood Control Districts (LACFCD), the County of Los Angeles
(COUNTY); and the term CITY shall mean only the City of Los Angeles; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board),
have classified the Greater Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System (MS4) as a large MS4 pursuant to 40 CFR section 122.26(b)(4) and a major
facility pursuant to 40 CFR section 122.2; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Board adopted National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System MS4 Permit Order No. R4-2012-0175 (MS4 Permit); and
WHEREAS, the MS4 Permit became effective on December 28, 2012, and
requires that the LACFCD, the COUNTY, and 84 of the 88 cities (excluding Avalon,
Page 1 of 30
151
Long Beach, Palmdale, and Lancaster) within the County comply with the prescribed
elements of the MS4 Permit; and
WHEREAS, the MS4 Permit identified the PARTIES as MS4 permittees that are
responsible for compliance with the MS4 Permit requirements pertaining to the
PARTIES' collective jurisdictional area in the Dominguez Channel Watershed
Management Area as identified in Exhibit E of this MOA; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES elected voluntarily to collaborate on the development
of an Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP) and a Coordinated
Integrated Monitoring Program (CIMP) in accordance with the MS4 Permit for a portion
of the Dominguez Channel Watershed Management Area as identified in Exhibit E of
this MOA to comply with all applicable monitoring requirements of the MS4 Permit; and
WHEREAS, the EWMP was submitted to the Regional Board by the PARTIES on
June 25, 2015—and revised to include Carson and Lawndale on February 26, 2016—
and was approved by the Regional Board on April 21, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the CIMP was submitted to the Regional Board by the PARTIES on
June 26, 2014 and was conditionally approved by the Regional Board on December 11,
2015; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed for the CITY to perform and coordinate
the MONITORING SERVICES of the CIMP and the EWMP-RELATED TASKS on the
PARTIES' behalf, and the PARTIES have agreed to pay the CITY for their services as
indicated in Tables 1A -1E of Exhibit A and Tables 1-8 of Exhibit B, respectively, of this
MOA; consistent with the requirements of the approved plans and pursuant to the MS4
Permit; and
WHEREAS, the CITY retains the right to outsource some or all of the elements of
the MONITORING SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED TASKS, at a cost not to exceed
those shown in Tables 1A -1E of Exhibit A and Tables 1-8 of Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES desire to have the SBCCOG: (a) invoice and collect
funds from each of the PARTIES to cover the costs of MONITORING SERVICES and
EWMP-RELATED TASKS and pay the CITY; (b) administer this MOA; and (c)
negotiate, enter into agreements with, and collect funds from individual NPDES permit
holders for cost-sharing of MONITORING SERVICES; and (d) negotiate, enter into
agreements with consultant(s) to execute services to uphold the SERVICES and
TASKS of this MOA; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed that the total cost for this MOA shall not
exceed $6,321,367 as shown in Table 1 of Exhibit C; and.
Page 2 of 30
152
WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed to cooperatively share and fully fund the
estimated costs of the implementation of the CIMP and EWMP based on the Distributed
Cost contained in Tables 1A-1 E of Exhibit A and Tables 1-8 of Exhibit B, respectively, of
this MOA; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES agree that each shall assume full and independent
responsibility for ensuring its own compliance with the MS4 Permit despite the
collaborative approach of the MOA; and
WHEREAS, individual NPDES permit holders that are not PARTIES may wish to
participate in the MONITORING SERVICES for individual permit compliance; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES contemplate allowing such individual NPDES permit
holders to participate in the MONITORING SERVICES without being a party to this
MOA, in order to minimize the costs of preparing and implementing the CIMP to each of
the PARTIES; and
WHEREAS, the SBCCOG can enter into individual separate agreements with
such individual NPDES permit holders (which shall not become parties to this MOA) for
MONITORING SERVICES cost-sharing purposes only; and
WHEREAS, if other individual NPDES permit holders participate in the cost
sharing relating to the MONITORING SERVICES, the PARTIES contemplate that the
invoicing table in Exhibit C will be modified as appropriate and each PARTY's
proportional payment obligation reduced accordingly to reflect other individual NPDES
permit holders' payments.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived by the
PARTIES, and of the promises contained in this MOA, the PARTIES, and SBCCOG
agree as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and fully
incorporated into this MOA.
Section 2. Purpose. The purpose of this MOA is to cooperatively fund the
MONITORING SERVICES and TASKS of the Dominguez Channel Watershed
Management Area Group CIMP and EWMP and to authorize the SBCCOG to
administer the cost sharing.
Section 3. Cooperation. The PARTIES and the SBCCOG shall fully cooperate with
one another to attain the purposes of this MOA.
Section 4. Voluntarv. This MOA is voluntarily entered into for the implementation of
the CIMP and EWMP.
Page 3 of 30
153
Section 5. Term. This MOA shall become effective on the last date of execution by
either a PARTY or the SBCCOG and shall remain in effect for five (5) years from the
effective date or until June 30th, 2023, or whichever is later. The MOA may be
extended, through an amendment, for an additional three (3) years.
Section 6. Commitment. Once effective, all cooperating PARTIES and the SBCCOG
agree to uphold the promises contained in this MOA for the duration of the agreed upon
term.
Section 7. THE PARTIES AND SBCCOG AGREE:
a. Monitoring Services. The CITY will perform the MONITORING SERVICES to
support the PARTIES' submittal of the MS4 Permit Annual. The CITY reserves
the right to modify this MOA, through an amendment approved by all PARTIES,
when conditions, such as, but not limited to, expansion of CIMP requirements,
additional EWMP-RELATED TASKS impact annual costs.
b. Reporting. The PARTIES authorize the CITY to prepare and submit semi-annual
and annual analytical monitoring reports to the Regional Board as described in
the CIMP as well as electronic files if requested by the Regional Board. The CITY
shall distribute the semi-annual and annual reports to the PARTIES fifteen (15)
businesses days prior to submittal to the Regional Board. The PARTIES may
review the monitoring report and submitted comments to the CITY prior to its
submittal to the Regional Board.
c. Invoicinq. The SBCCOG will invoice the PARTIES in annual amounts not
exceeding the invoice amounts shown in Table 1 of Exhibit C except the CITY.
SBCCOG will pay the CITY, the difference of funds collected minus the sum of
administrative costs and CITY portion of shared cost for MONITORING
SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED TASKS. The annual invoices will be issued in
May of each calendar year in anticipation of the expected monitoring cost for the
fiscal year. The CITY shall provide SBCCOG an accounting of the MONITORING
SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED TASKS completed during each annual
payment term by October 31St of the following year. Contingency and other funds
shall be retained by SBCCOG to be used at the discretion of the watershed
group. The PARTIES will form a TAC subcommittee to verify the accounting,
monitoring and other work completed and the amount of the invoices before the
SBCCOG remits payment back to CITY.
d. Additional Studies. The PARTIES agree that conducting additional necessary
special studies, preparing grant applications, and/or conducting watershed -wide
special studies, monitoring with other watershed groups, conducting other
collaborative activities for the purpose of complying with the MS4 Permit may be
funded by the Parties subject to the terms of this MOA, provided that there are
available excess contract funds or contingency funds available to fund these
Page 4 of 30
154
activities. Prior to the performance of any such activities, all PARTIES much
provide written approval of the activities and revise Tables 1A -1E of Exhibit A
and/or Tables 1-8 of Exhibit B showing which PARTIES will be funding the
activities and in what amounts.
a. Contracting. The PARTIES contemplate allowing other individual NPDES permit
holders to participate in the MONITORING SERVICES without being a party to
this MOA, in order to minimize the costs of preparing and implementing the CIMP
to each of the PARTIES. In the event that another NPDES permit holder wants to
participate in the MONITORING SERVICES, the SGCCOG may enter into an
individual separate agreement with such individual NPDES permit holder (which
shall not become a party to this MOA) for MONITORING SERVICES cost sharing
purposes. If other individual NPDES permit holders participate in the cost sharing
relating to the MONITORING SERVICES, the invoicing tables in Exhibit C shall
be modified as appropriate and each PARTIES' proportional payment obligation
reduced accordingly to reflect other individual NPDES permit holders' payments.
Section 8. Pint.
a. Annual Payment. The PARTIES shall pay the SBCCOG for their proportional
share of the estimated cost for MONITORING SERVICES EWMP-RELATED
TASKS including SBCCOG fees as shown in Table 2 of Exhibit A and B, within
sixty (60) days of receipt of the invoice from the SBCCOG. The SBCCOG will
remit payment to the CITY within sixty (60) days of receipt of payments from the
other PARTIES, noting any delinquent payments that remain due after deducting
the SBCCOG's administrative fixed fee fee as set forth in Table 2 of Exhibit A
and B and twelve hundred and thirty dollars ($1230) per individual permittee
agreement. The invoicing amounts presented in Exhibit C have been agreed
upon by the PARTIES and are subject to change, through an amendment,
pursuant to unforeseen challenges.
b. Pro ram Management Fee. The costs of MONITORING SERVICES in Exhibit A
and EWMP-RELATED TASKS in Exhibit B include a Program Management Fee
for facilitation of this MOA by the SBCCOG in the combined amount of $50,000
per year as shown in Table 2 of Exhibit A and B.
c. Contingency_ The CITY and the SBCCOG will attempt to notify the PARTIES if
actual expenditures for MONITORING SERVICES and/or EWMP-RELATED
TASKS are anticipated to exceed the cost estimates contained in Exhibit A and
B. Inasmuch, the MONITORING SERVICES may be adaptable to sampling
events during an event that may preclude the CITY from notifying the PARTIES,
and the CITY may incur cost greater than the contract estimates contained in
Exhibit A. The PARTIES agree to pay the CITY (through SBCCOG) for their
proportional share of these additional expenditures at an amount not to exceed
Page 5 of 30
155
ten percent (10%) of their proportional annual cost as shown in Tables 1 of
Exhibit C. Any costs which exceed this ten percent (10%) contingency will require
an amendment to this MOA. These funds will be held by SBCCOG until such
time as they are needed.
d. Reconciliation of this MOA. Any unexpended funds held by SBCCOG at the
termination of this MOA will be reimbursed or credited to the PARTIES by the
SBCCOG, as requested in writing by each PARTY and in accordance with the
distributed cost formula set forth in Tables 1 of Exhibit C or PARTIES may elect
to roll-over unexpended costs to cover monitoring expenses in the subsequent
MOA. At the end of the MOA, the SBCCOG will provide the PARTIES with an
accounting of actual expenditures within ninety (90) days.
e. Late Payment Penalty. Any payment that is not received within 60 days following
receipt of the SGCCOG invoice shall be subject to interest on the original amount
from the date that the payment first became due. The interest rate shall be equal
to the Prime Rate in effect when the payment first became due plus one percent
(1%) for any payment that is made from one (1) to thirty (30) days after the due
date. The Prime Rate in effect when the payment first became due plus five
percent (5%) shall apply to any payment that is made from thirty one (31) to sixty
(60) days after the due date. The Prime Rate in effect when the payment first
became due plus ten percent (10%) shall apply to any payment that is made
more than sixty (60) days past the due date. The rates, shall nevertheless, not
exceed the maximum allowed by law.
f. Delinquent Payments. A PARTY's or PARTIES' payment is considered to be
delinquent one hundred eighty (180) days after receipt of the invoice from the
SBCCOG. The following procedure may be implemented to attain payments
from the delinquent PARTY or PARTIES: 1) verbally contact/meet with the
manager(s) from the delinquent PARTY or PARTIES; 2) submit a formal letter to
the delinquent PARTY or PARTIES from SBCCOG counsel; and 3) notify the
Regional Board that the delinquent PARTY or PARTIES are no longer a
participating member of the CIMP or EWMP. If the PARTY or PARTIES remain
delinquent after the above procedures, then that PARTY's participation in this
MOA will be deemed terminated, and the remaining PARTIES' cost share
allocation shall be adjusted in accordance with the cost allocation formula in
Exhibit C.
Section 9. THE PARTIES FURTHER AGREE:
a. Payment. The PARTIES agree to pay the CITY, through the SBCCOG, for the
MONITORING SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED TASKS not exceeding the
amounts shown in Tables 1 of Exhibit C, based on the distributed cost formula in
Page 6 of 30
156
Tables 1A -1E of Exhibit A, and Tables 1-8 of Exhibit B, attached hereto and
made a part of this MOA by this reference.
b. Documentation. The PARTIES agree to provide all requested information and
documentation in their possession and available for release to the CITY that is
deemed necessary by the PARTIES to perform the MONITORING SERVICES
and EWMP-RELATED TASKS at no cost to the CITY.
c. Each PARTY shall allow reasonable access and entry to the CITY, on an as -
needed basis during the term of this MOA, including but not limited to the
PARTY's storm drains, channels, catch basins, and similar properties
(FACILITIES) to achieve the purposes of this MOA, provided, however, that prior
to entering any of the PARTIES FACILITIES, the CITY shall provide written
notice seventy-two (72) hours in advance of entry to the applicable PARTY, or in
the cases where seventy-two (72) hour advanced notice is not possible, such as
in cases of unforeseen wet weather, as early as reasonably possible. LACFCD,
being a member of this MOA, agrees to provide a "no -fee" Access Permit to their
facilities/structures which require access to perform the MONITORING
SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED TASKS by the CITY. This Access Permit
does not cover any fees that may be required for Construction Permits for the
installation of permanent monitoring equipment. The CITY shall secure any
required necessary permits prior to entry.
d. Each PARTY agrees that due to certain monitoring activities, such as toxicity
testing, the total cost of this MOA is not inclusive of those activities that may be
required to successfully complete the analyses. Thus, the PARTIES agree to
fund the required additional work when the CITY notifies them that the activity
has taken place. The PARTIES agree to pay the CITY (through the SBCCOG)
for their proportional share of these additional expenditures at an amount not to
exceed their proportional annual cost plus the ten percent (10%) contingency as
shown in Exhibit A. No PARTY will be obligated to pay for additional
expenditures which exceed this amount absent an amendment to this MOA.
e. Reporting. The City of Los Angeles shall distribute the semi-annual and annual
reports to the PARTIES 15 days prior to its intended date of submittal to the
Regional Board. The PARTIES may review the reports and submitted
comments to the City of Los Angeles prior to its submittal to the Regional Board.
The City of Los Angeles has control of the submittal but shall discuss the
PARTIES' comments as they apply to the report.
Section 10. Indemnification
a. Each PARTY and the SBCCOG shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless each
other PARTY, including its special districts, elected and appointed officers,
employees, agents, attorneys, and designated volunteers from and against any
Page 7 of 30
157
and all liability, including, but not limited to, demands, claims, actions, fees,
costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorney's and expert witness fees),
arising from or connected with the respective acts of each PARTY arising from or
related to this MOA; provided, however, that no PARTY shall indemnify another
PARTY for that PARTY'S own negligence or willful misconduct.
b. In light of the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of
California imposing certain tort liability jointly upon public entities solely by reason
of such entities being parties to an agreement (as defined in Section 895 of said
Code), each of the PARTIES hereto, pursuant to the authorization contained in
Section 895.4 and 895.6 of said Code, shall assume the full liability imposed
upon it or any of its officers, agents, or employees, by law for injury caused by
any act or omission occurring in the performance of this MOA to the same extent
such liability would be imposed in the absence of Section 895.2 of said Code. To
achieve the above stated purpose, each PARTY indemnifies, defends, and holds
harmless each other PARTY for any liability, cost, or expense that may be
imposed upon such other PARTY solely by virtue of said Section 895.2. The
provisions of Section 2778 of the California Civil Code are made a part hereof as
if incorporated herein.
Section 11. Termination
a. Any PARTY including the SBCCOG may withdraw from this MOA for any reason,
in whole or part, by giving the other PARTIES and the Regional Board thirty (30)
days written notice thereof. Withdrawing PARTIES shall remain wholly
responsible for their share of the costs of MONITORING SERVICES and EWMP-
RELATED TASKS for the extent of the effective term of this MOA. Each PARTY
shall also be responsible for the payment of its own fines, penalties or costs
incurred as a result of the non-performance of the CIMP and/or EWMP. Upon
withdrawal by the SBCCOG, the PARTIES shall meet and confer to designate an
alternate organization to accept the SBCCOG's responsibilities under this MOA.
b. The SBCCOG shall notify in writing all PARTIES within fourteen (14) days of
receiving written notice from any PARTY that intends to terminate this MOA.
c. If a PARTY fails to comply with any of the terms or conditions of this MOA, that
PARTY shall forfeit its rights to the work completed through this MOA, but no
such forfeiture shall occur unless and until the defaulting PARTY has first been
given notice of its default and a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged
default.
d. EQUIPMENT Ownership - Devices such as, automatic sampling stations
inclusive of a cabinet, sampling equipment, ancillary devices, power supplies
(EQUIPMENT) may be installed to implement the CIMP. Any member of the DC
Watershed group voluntarily terminating membership will not be entitled to a
Page 8 of 30
158
refund for the portion of the share paid to acquire and to operate the
EQUIPMENT nor for the remaining value of the EQUIPMENT, if any. The
operational life of such EQUIPMENT is approximately seven years, and after
which it may be obsolete or may require major remodel or replacement of
electrical and mechanical components costing equivalent to a purchase of a new
EQUIPMENT. The remaining members of the DC watershed group agree to
own, operate and maintain and or replace the EQUIPMENT.
Section 12. General Provisions
a. Notices. Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports relating to this MOA, and any
request, demand, statement, or other communication required or permitted
hereunder shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the representatives of the
PARTIES and/or SBCCOG at the addresses set forth in Exhibit D attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PARTIES and SBCCOG shall
promptly notify each other of any change of contact information, including
personnel changes, provided in Exhibit D. Written notice shall include notice
delivered via e-mail or fax. A notice shall be deemed to have been received on
(a) the date of delivery, if delivered by hand during regular business hours, or by
confirmed facsimile or by e-mail; or (b) on the third (3) business day following
mailing by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested) to the addresses
set forth in Exhibit D.
b. Administration. For the purposes of this MOA, the PARTIES including SBCCOG
hereby designate as their respective representatives the persons named in
Exhibit D. The designated representatives, or their respective designees, shall
administer the terms and conditions of this MOA on behalf of their respective
entities. Each of the persons signing below on behalf of a PARTY or the
SBCCOG represents and warrants that he or she is authorized to sign this MOA
on behalf of such entity.
c. Relationship of the Parties. The parties to this MOA are, and shall at all times
remain as to each other, wholly independent entities. No party to this MOA shall
have power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of any other party
unless expressly provided to the contrary by this MOA. No employee, agent, or
officer of a party shall be deemed for any purpose whatsoever to be an agent,
employee, or officer of another party.
d. Binding Effect, This MOA shall be binding upon, and shall be to the benefit of the
respective successors, heirs, and assigns of each party to this MOA; provided,
however, no party may assign its respective rights or obligations under this MOA
without the prior written consent of the other parties.
Page 9 of 30
159
e. Amendment. The terms and provisions of this MOA may not be amended,
modified, or waived, except by an instrument in writing signed by all non -
delinquent PARTIES and the SBCCOG. Such amendments may be executed by
those individuals listed in Exhibit D or by a responsible individual as determined
by each PARTY.
f. Law -to Govern. This MOA is governed by, interpreted under, and construed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In the event of
litigation related to this MOA, venue in the state trial courts shall lie exclusively in
the County of Los Angeles.
g. No Presumptio i in Drattb . The parties to this MOA agree that the general rule
that an MOA is to be interpreted against the party drafting it, or causing it to be
prepared shall not apply.
h. Severability. If any provision of this MOA shall be determined by any court to be
invalid, illegal, or unenforceable to any extent, then the remainder of this MOA
shall not be affected, and this MOA shall be construed as if the invalid, illegal, or
unenforceable provision had never been contained in this MOA.
i. Entire Aqreement. This MOA constitutes the entire agreement of the parties to
this MOA with respect to the subject matter hereof.
Waiver. Waiver by any party to this MOA of any term, condition, or covenant of
this MOA shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant.
Waiver by any party to this MOA of any breach of the provisions of this MOA
shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor a waiver of any
subsequent breach or violation of any provision of this MOA.
k. Counterparts. This MOA may be executed in any number of counterparts, each
of which shall be an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute but
one and the same instrument, provided, however, that such counterparts shall
have been delivered to all parties to this MOA.
All parties to this MOA have been represented by counsel in the preparation and
negotiation of this MOA. Accordingly, this MOA shall be construed according to
its fair language. Any ambiguities shall be resolved in a collaborative manner by
the PARTIES and SBCCOG and shall be rectified by amending this MOA as
described in Section 12(e).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES and SBCCOG hereto have caused this
MOA to be executed by their duly authorized representatives and affixed as of the date
of signature of the PARTIES:
Page 10 of 30
.e
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Mark Pestrella, Director of Public Works Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mary C. Wickham
County Counsel
Deputy
Page 11 of 30
Date
161
LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
Mark Pestrella, Chief Engineer Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mary C. Wickham
County Counsel
:Z
Deputy
Page 12 of 30
Date
162
CITY OF CARSON
By
Kenneth C. Farfsing,
City Manager
ATTEST:
By:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By
City Attorney
Page 13 of 30
Date
Date
163
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
Greg Carpenter
City Manager
ATTEST:
Tracy Weaver
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley
City Attorney
Page 14 of 30
Date
Date
Date
164
CITY OF LAWNDALE
Date:
ATTEST:
Bernadette Suarez
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
in
Tiffany J. Israel
City Attorney
Page 15 of 30
Robert Pullen -Miles
Mayor
165
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
Date:
ATTEST:
Holly Wolcott
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Michael N. Feuer
City Attorney
Adena Hopenstand
Assistant City Attorney
By-
Kevin James, President
Board of Public Works
Page 16 of 30
166
CITY OF HAWTHORNE
Arnold Shadbehr
Interim City Manager
ATTEST:
Norbert Huber
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
in
Russell Miyahira
City Attorney
Page 17 of 30
167
CITY OF INGLEWOOD
Date:
ATTEST:
By:
Yvonne Horton
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By.
Kenneth R. Campos
City Attorney
LIM
Page 18 of 30
James T. Butts
Mayor
.:
CITY OF LOMITA
Date:
ATTEST:
By.
Sandra Medina
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM;
By:
Christi Hogin
City Attorney
At
Page 19 of 30
Jim Gazeley
Mayor
We
South Bay Cities Council of Governments
Date:
ATTEST:
in
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
in
Counsel for the SBCCOG
Page 20 of 30
170
EXHIBIT A
Dominguez Channel Enhanced Watershed Management Area CIMP Implementation
Costs
Table 1A. CIMP Implementation Cost
Dominguez Channel Watershed Management Area CIMP Summary Table
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total over 5
Agency 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 years
Total Cost of DC WMA CIMP
$984,557
$933,564
$993,929
$931,323
$927,998
$4,771,371
LACFCD
$54,781
$52,342
$55,362
$52,232
$52,066
$266,783
City of Los Angeles
$369,881
$355,957
$370,602
$355,139
$360,023
$1,811,601
County of Los Angeles
$139,047
$130,557
$141,024
$130,227
$128,398
$669,253
City of EI Segundo
$15,826
$14,487
$15,938
$14,500
$13,399
$74,149
City of Inglewood
$49,092
$44,938
$49,441
$44,979
$41,563
$230,013
City of Hawthorne
$49,189
$45,027
$49,538
$45,067
$41,645
$230,466
City of Lomita
$77,574
$75,753
$79,6821
$75,152
$81,311
$389,472
City of Lawndale
$15,918
$14,572
$16,0 2_$14,5851
$40,294
$13,477
$74,583
City of Carson
1 $213,249
$199,931
$216,310
$199,444
$196,117
$1,025,050
Total Cost = Universal Costs (Shared Items) + Dominguez Channel Watershed Costs + Machado Lake Watershed Costs + LA Harbor Costs + COG fees.
Table 1 B. Universal CIMP Costs
Universal Costs (Shared Items)
Agency
Area (acres)
% of Total
Area
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Total over 5
years
Universal Costs (shared)
50,444.88
100%
$549,748
$528,378
$534,201
$528,903
$528,903
$2,670,133
LACFCD l
$27,487
$26,419
$26,710
$26,445
$26,445
$133,507
City of Los Angeles
19,243.21
7,699.69
38.15%
$199,227
$191,482
$76,617
$193,593
$77,461
$191,673
$76,693
$191,673
$76,693
$967,647
$387,180
County of Los Angeles
15.26%
$79,716
City of EI Segundo
1,252.18
2.48%
$12,964
$12,460
$12,597
$12,4721
$12,472
$62,966
City of Inglewood
3,884.28
7,70%
$40,214
$38,651
$39,077
$38,689
$38,689
$195,321
City of Hawthorne
3,891.93
7,72%
$40,294
$38,727
$39,154
$38,766
$38,766
$195,706
City of Lomita
1,227.70
2.43%
$12,710
$12,216
$12,351
$12,229
$12,229
$61,735
City of Lawndale
1,259.51
2.50%
$13,040
$12,533
$12,671
$12,545
$12,545
$63,335
City of Carson
11,986.38
23.76%
$124,096
$119,272
$120,587
$119,391
$119,391
$602,736
! LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the Universal Costs, which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other agencies.
Page 21 of 30 171
Table 1C. Dominguez Channel Watershed Monitoring Costs
Dominguez Channel Watershed Monitoring Cost Distribution
% of Total Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total over 5
Agency Area (acres) Area 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 years
Dominguez Channel
Monitoring 33,785.82 100% $64,539 $40,822 $78,145 $40,838 $9,564 $233,908
LACFCD'
Agency
--
$3,227
$2,041
$3,907
$2,042
$478
$11,695
City of Los Angeles
5,986.68
17.72%
$10,864
$6,872
$13,155
$6,874
$1,610
$39,375
County of Los Angeles
6,755.80
20.00%
$12,260
$7,755
$14,845
$7,758
$1,817
$44,434
City of EI Segundo
1,252.18
3.71%
$2,272
$1,437
$2,7511
$1,438
$337
$8,236
City of Inglewood
3,884.28
11.50%
$7,049
$4,459
$8,535
$4,460
$1,045
$25,547
City of Hawthorne
3,891.93
11.52%
$7,063
$4,467
$8,552
$4,469
$1,047
$25,598
City ofLawndale
1,259.51
3.73%
$2,286
$1,446
$2,768
$1,446
$339
$8,284
City of Carson
10,755.44
31.83%
$19,518
$12,346
$23,633
$12,3501
$2,892
$70,740
' LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the Dominguez Channel Watershed Cost which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other agencies.
Table 1 D. Machado Lake Watershed Monitoring Costs
Machado Lake Watershed Monitoring Cost Distribution
Agency
Area (acres)
% of Total
Area
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year I
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Total over 5
years
Machado Lake
Watershed Monitoring'
5,228.39
100%
$291,692
$285,669
$302,886
$282,885
$310,834
$1,473,966
LACFCD2
-
$14,585
$14,283
$15,144
$14,144
$15,542
$73,698
City of Los Angeles
1,998.43
38.22%
$105,918
$103,731
$109,983
$102,720
$112,869
$535,220
County of Los Angeles
809.66
15.49%
$42,912
$42,026
$44,559
$41,617
$45,728
$216,843
City of Carson
1,207.37
23.09%
$63,9911
$62,670
$66,447
$62,059
$68,191
$323,358
City of Lomita 1,212.93 23.20%
Wilmington Drain Bed Sediment Monitoring (LACFCDJ
$64,286
$62,959
$66,753
$62,345
$68,505
$324,847
$5,845
$5,962
$5,964
$5,964
$5,964
$29,699
Page 22 of 30 172
Table 1E. LA Harbor Watershed Monitoring Costs
LA Harbor Monitoring Cost Distribution
Agency
Area (acres)
% of Total
Area
100%
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Total over 5
years
LA Harbor Monitoring
11,392.33
$47,733
$47,733
$47,733
$47,733
$47,733
$238,665
LACFCD1
--
--
$2,387
$2,387
$2,387
$2,387
$2,387
$11,933
City of Los Angeles
11,258.10
98.82%
$44,812
$44,812
$44,812
$44,812
$44,812
$224,060
County of Los Angeles
134.23
1.18%
$534
$534
$534
$534
$534
$2,671
' LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the LA Harbor Cost which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other agencies.
Notes
LA Harbor Monitoring includes the cost of monitoring the Main Ship Channel (Hw-07).
Monitoring for the LA Harbor Bacteria TMDL at Cabrillo Beach (CB -01 and CB -02) is the sole responsibility of City of Los Angeles.
Monitoring for the Greater Harbors portion of the Dominguez Channel Toxics TMDL is funded under a separate MOA.
The cities of Carson (23.57 ac) and Lomita (14.77 ac) have small portions of land within the LA Harbor sub -watershed,- but are not included in the cost sharing.
Table 2. South Bay Cities Council of Governments Fee
SBCCOG Fees
Agency
Area (acres)
%of Total
Area
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year i
22-23
Total over 5
years
Universal Costs (shared)
50,444.88
100%
$25,000
$25,000
$25,000
$25,000
$25,000
$125,000
LACFCDI
--
--
$1,250
$1,250
$1,250
$1,250
$1,250
$6,250
City of Los Angeles
19,243.21
38.15%
$9,060
$9,060
$9,060
$9,060
$9,060
$45,300
County of Los Angeles
7,699.69
15.26%
$3,625
$3,625
$3,625
$3,625
$3,625
$18,125
City of EI Segundo
1,252.18
2.48%
$590
$590
$590
$590
$590
$2,948
City of Inglewood
3,884.28
7.70%
$1,8291
$1,829
$1,829
$1,829
$1,829
$9,144
City of Hawthorne
3,891.93
7.72%
$1,832
$1,832
$1,832
$1,832
$1,832
$9,162
City of Lomita
1,227.70
2.43%
$578
$578
$578
$578
$578
$2,890
City of Lawndale
1,259.51
2.50%
$593
$593
$593
$593
$593
$2,965
City of Carson
11,986.38
23.76%
$5,643
$5,643
$5,643
$5,643
$5,643
$28,217
' LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the Universal Costs, which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other agencies.
Page 23 of 30 173
EXHIBIT B
Dominguez Channel Enhanced Watershed Management Plan
Implementation Costs
Table 1. EWMP Implementation Cost
CITY
% Drainage
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
FY 20-21
FY 21-22
FY 22-23
5YR Total
Area
City of Los Angeles
38 15%
$ 166,811
$ 76,205
$ 130,568
$ 85,742
$
112,447
$
571,773
Carson
2376%
$ 103,891
$ 47,461
$ 81,319
$ 53,401
$
70,033
$
356,103
EI Segundo
2.48%
$ 10,844
$ 4,954
$ 8,488
$ 5,574
$
7,310
$
37,169
Hawthorne
7.72%
$ 33,756
$ 15,421
$ 26,422
$ 17,351
$
22,755
$
115,704
Inglewood
7 70%
$ 33,668
$ 15,381
$ 26,353
$ 17,306
$
22,696
$
115,404
Lawndale
2.50%
$ 10,931
$ 4,994
$ 8,556
$ 5,619
$
7,369
$
37,469
Lomita
2.43%
$ 10,625
$ 4,854
$ 8,317
$ 5,461
$
7,162
$
36,420
LACFCD
--
$ 17,750
$ 5,250
$ 12,750
$ 5,250
$
10,250
$
51,250
LA County
1526%
$ 66,724
$ 30,482
$ 52,227
$ 34,297
$
44,979
$
228,709
T-ital
- -.1
$ 455,000
$205,000
$ 355,000
$ 230,000
$
305,000
$ 1,550,000
Table 2. SBCCOG Management Funds
CITY
% Drainage
FY
18-19 FY
19-20
FY 20-21
FY
21-22
FY 22-23
Area
City of Los Angeles
38.15%
$
9,061 $
9,061
$ 9,061
$
9,061
$
9,061
Carson
2376%
$
5,643 $
5,643
$ 5,643
$
5,643
$
5,643
El Segundo
2.48%
$
589 $
589
$ 589
$
589
$
589
Hawthorne
7 72%
$
1,834 $
1,834
$ 1,834
$
1,834
$
1,834
Inglewood
7.70%
$
1,829 $
1,829
$ 1,829
$
1,829
$
1,829
Lawndale
2.50%
$
594 $
594
$ 594
$
594
$
594
Lomita
2.43`,
$
577 $
577
$ 577
$
577
$
577
LACFCD
--
$
1,250 $
1,250
$ 1,250
$
1,250
$
1,250
LA County
15.26%
$
3,624 $
3,624
$ 3,624
$
3,624
$
3,624
Total
100.00%
$
25,000 $
25,000
$ 25,000
$
25,000
$
25,000
Table 3. Annual Report Funds
CITY
% Drainage
FY
18-19 FY
19-20
FY 20-21
FY
21-22
FY 22-23
Area
City of Los Angeles
38.15%
$
38,150 $
38,150
$ 38,150
:>
38,150
$
38,150
Carson
2376%
$
23,760 $
23,760
$ 23,760
5
23,760
$
23,760
EI Segundo
2.48%
$
2,480 $
2,480
$ 2,480
$
2,480
$
2,480
Hawthorne
7 72%
$
7,720 $
7,720
$ 7,720
$
7,720
$
7,720
Inglewood
7 70%
$
7,700 $
7,700
$ 7,700
$
7,700
$
7,700
Lawndale
2 50%
$
2,500 $
2,500
$ 2,500
$
2,500
$
2,500
Lomita
243%
$
2,430 $
2,430
$ 2,430
$
2,430
$
2,430
LACFCD
LA County
1526%
$
15,260 $
15,260
$ 15,260
$
15,260
$
15,260
Total
100.00%
$ 100,000 $
100,000
$ 100,000
$
100,000
$
100,000
Page 24 of 30
174
Table 4. Adaptive Management Funds
CITY
% Drainage
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
FY 20-21
FY 21-22
FY 22-23
City of Los Angeles
Area
$
27,182 -_ --
Carson
23.76%
$
16,929
EI Segundo
2.48%
$
City of Los Angeles
38.15%
$
27,182
$ -
$
54,364
$
5,486
$
36,243
Carson
23 76%
$
16,929
$
$
33,858
$
$
$
22,572
EI Segundo
2.48%
$
1,767
$
$
3,534
$
$
2,356
Hawthorne
7.72%
$
5,501
5
$
11,001
$
$
7,334
Inglewood
770%
$
5,486
$
$
10,973
$
$
7,315
Lawndale
2 50%
$
1,781
$
$
3,563
$
$
2,375
Lomita
2.43%
$
1,731
$
$
3,463
$
$
2,309
LACFCD
-.
$
3,750
$
$
7,500
$
$
5,000
LA County
15,26%
$
10,873
$
$
21,746
$
$
14,497
Total
100.00%
$
75,000
$ -
$
150,000
$
-
$
100,000
Table 5. ROWD Funds
CITY
% Drainage
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
FY 20-21
FY
21-22
FY 22-23
Area
City of Los Angeles
38.15%
--
--
--
$
9,538
--
Carson
23 76%
-
$
5,940
--
EI Segundo
2.48%
$
620
Hawthorne
7.72%
$
1,930
Inglewood
7.70%
$
1,925
--
Lawndale
250%
$
625
--
Lomita
2.43%
$
608
LACFCD
LA County
1526%
--
--
--
$
3,815
Total
100.00%
$0
$0
$0
$
25,000
Table 6. Non-Stormwater Funds
CIT
% Drainage
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21
Area
City of Los Angeles
38.15%
$
27,182 -_ --
Carson
23.76%
$
16,929
EI Segundo
2.48%
$
1,767
Hawthorne
772%
$
5,501
Inglewood
770%
$
5,486
Lawndale
2.50%
$
1,781
Lomita
2.43%
$
1,731
LACFCD
•-
$
3,750
LA County
15.26%
$
10,873 -- --
Total
100.00%
$
75,000 $0 $0
Page 25 of 30
FY 21-22 FY 22-23
$0 $0
175
Table 7. SQO/Regional Bight Funds
CITY ` Irainage Area FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
City of Los Angeles
38.15%
$
36,243 -- - -- -
Carson
23.76%
$
22,572
EI Segundo
2.48%
$
2,356 --
Hawthorne
7.72%
$
7,334
Inglewood
7.70%
$
7,315 -
Lawndale
2.50%
$
2,375
Lomita
2.43%
$
2,309 -
LACFCD
--
$
5,000 -
LA County
15.26%
$
14,497 -- -- --
Total
100.00%
$
100,000 $0 $0 $0
Table 8. Special Studies Funds
CITY
% Drainage
28,994
FY 18-19
28,994
Area
28,994
18,058
City of Los Angeles
38.15%
$
28,994 $
Carson
23.76%
$
18,058 $
EI Segundo
2.48%
$
1,885 $
Hawthorne
7.72%
$
5,867 $
Inglewood
770%
$
5,852 $
Lawndale
2.50%
$
1,900 $
Lomita
2.43%
$
1,847 $
LACFCD
--
$
4,000 $
LA County
15.26%
$
11,598 $
Total
100.00%
$
80,000 $
Page 26 of 30
FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
28,994
$
28,994
$
28,994
$
28,994
18,058
$
18,058
$
18,058
S
18,058
1,885
$
1,885
$
1,885
S
1,885
5,867
$
5,867
$
5,867
S
5,867
5,852
$
5,852
$
5,852
5
5,852
1,900
$
1,900
$
1,900
5
1,900
1,847
$
1,847
$
1,847
$
1,847
4,000
$
4,000
$
4,000
$
4,000
11,598
$
11,598
$
11,598
$
11,598
80,000
$
80,000
$
80,000
$
80,000
176
4
EXHIBIT C
Dominguez Channel Enhanced Watershed Management Area
CIMP and EWMP Invoicing Schedule
Table 1. CIMP/EWMP implementation Annual Implementation Costs
CITY % Drainage Area July 2018 July 2019 July 2020
July 2021 July 2022
City of Los Angeles
38.15%
$
536,691
$
432,161
$
501,169
$
440,880
$
472,470
Carson
23.76%
$
317,139
$
247,392
$
297,628
$
252,844
$
266,150
EI Segundo
2.48%
$
26,670
$
19,441
$
24,426
$
20,074
$
20,708
Hawthorne
7.72%
$
82,944
$
60,448
$
75,960
$
62,418
$
64,399
Inglewood
7.70%
$
82,760
$
60,319
$
75,794
$
62,284
$
64,259
Lawndale
2.50%
$
26,850
$
19,565
$
24,588
$
20,203
$
20,846
Lomita
2.43%
$
88,200
$
80,607
$
87,999
$
80,613
$
88,474
LACFCD
--
$
72,531
$
57,592
$
68,112
$
57,482
$
62,316
LA County
15.26%
$
205,772
$
161,039
$
193,252
$
164,524
$
173,376
Total
100.00%
$
1,439,556
$
1,138,563
$
1,348,928
$
1,161,322
$
1,232,997
Page 27 of 30
EXHIBIT D
Dominguez Channel EWMP/CIMP Responsible Agencies Representatives and
SBCCOG Contact
Agency Address
City of Los Angeles
Department of Public Works
Bureau of Sanitation,
Protection Division
1149 S. Broadway
Los Angeles, CA 90015
Agency Contact
Shahram Kharaghani
E-mail: Shahram.Kharaghani(d)[acity.org
Watershed Phone: (213) 485-0587
Fax: (213) 485-3939
County of Los Angeles
Department of Public Works
Stormwater Quality Division, 11th Floor
900 South Fremont Avenue
Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
Los Angeles County Flood Control District
Department of Public Works
Stormwater Quality Division, 11 th Floor
900 South Fremont Avenue
Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
City of Carson
Office of the City Manager
701 E. Carson Street
Carson, CA 90749
City of EI Segundo
350 Main Street
EI Segundo, CA 90245-3895
City of Hawthorne
4455 West 126th Street
Hawthorne, CA 90250-4482
Paul Alva
E-mail: palva(cbdpw.lacounty.gov
Phone: (626) 458-4325
Fax: (626) 457-1526
Paul Alva
E-mail: palva@dpw.lacounty.gov
Phone: (626) 458-4325
Fax: (626) 457-1526
Kenneth C. Farfsing, Interim City
Manager
E-mail: kfarfsing@carson.ca.us
Phone: (310) 835-7261
Lifan Xu
E-mail: IxuCcDeIsequndo.orq
Phone: (310) 524-2368
Doug Krauss
E-mail: dkrauss(c-�cityofhawthorne.org
Phone: (310) 349-2987
Arnold Shadbehr, P.E., Interim City
Manager
E-mail: ashadbehr aacityofhawthorne.oM
Phone: (310) 349-2980
Page 28 of 30
178
City of Inglewood
1 W. Manchester Blvd. 3rd Floor
Inglewood, CA 90301-1750
City of Lawndale
Office of the City Manager
14717 Burin Avenue
Lawndale, CA 90260
City of Lomita
24300 Narbonne Avenue
Lomita, CA 90717
South Bay Council of Governments
20285 S. Western Ave., #100
Torrance, CA 90501
Lauren Amimoto
E-mail: lam imoto@cityofinglewood.org
Phone: (310) 412-5192
FAX: (310) 412-5552
Louis A. Atwell, Public Works Director
E-mail: latwell _ cityofinglewood.org
Phone: (310) 412-5333
Steve Mandoki
E-mail: smandoki(aD-lawndalecity.org
Phone: (310) 371-3202
Fax: (310) 371-8877
Ryan Smoot, City Manager
E-mail: r.srnoot@lomita.city.com
Phone: (310) 325-7110 ext. 115
Fax: (310) 325-4024
Jacki Bacharach
E-mail: Jacki(aDsouthbaycities.org
Phone: (310) 293-2612
Page 29 of 30
179
EXHIBIT E
Dominguez Channel Enhanced Watershed Management Area Group
1.1(I .1:N M;1L'S
gtach
Ilrno,• i 1+� i h
LEGEND
Derrtr"x Channel
DomwjQ wx Channel
Fl"d COnlroa D41nel Tiarte
t?pmtvwQwir-41 Yt74,ro,on o
DCApanvot
• PaNapNrq EY4AtP
Ovw DC Aporlcea not
' Panlapo"EVMP
Y9S►7e�fha0?Wfl220e e.%Amy floe*
Dom"L*z CrahMl
Wbbl hod
flat haat 1 x 44 WITO FVO0
L4.LB Harbors Walarshed
h- Dominguez Channel
''.,. ..., WMA 4raup
.ter\
!.t
14,
00
M
^� Dominguez Channel Watershed Management Area Group
bRAywdw OArECRCAIED Ct4h�0aY WERYNSED
EMOUECZAMV'AA
OPiE .TOR
IJr 616 t7 DP 1. 17 14
EVK14 d K\�'41M
CIAI
'+. -+r r. wr ...«-+. +r+r..w r.. r, AN Mr w......rw.r r ti... �wpt
MAPJdt p4ARAC4
•yyr rr+Prw.tarJM-+q tlP.s4 .1 r\. int MIMUMrr1
PfYJG'ifAY MI.tiK.(RIR
- .. i. _.......
��ni•�
PRL)f CC"i I.U;1
54i,faa44D D\IQIf �iKw ��5 LJ1
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
CITY OF LOS ANGELES, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, LOS ANGELES
COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, AND CITIES OF EL SEGUNDO
AND SANTA MONICA
REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION AND COST SHARING OF
IMPLEMENTING THE COORDINATED INTEGRATED MONITORING
PROGRAM AND ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
ENHANCED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR
JURISDICTIONAL GROUPS 2 AND 3 OF THE SANTA MONICA BAY
WATERSHED
This Memorandum of Agreement ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of the date of the
last signature set forth below by and between: the City of Los Angeles, a municipal corporation;
the County of Los Angeles, a political subdivision of the State of California; the Los Angeles
County Flood Control District (LACFCD), a body corporate and politic; the City of El Segundo,
a municipal corporation; and the City of Santa Monica, a municipal corporation. Collectively,
these entities shall be known herein as "Parties" or individually as "Party".
RFCTTAT C
WHEREAS, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region ("LARWQCB")
adopted the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System Permit No. R4-2012-0175 ("MS4 Permit") on November 8, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the MS4 Permit became effective on December 28, 2012 and requires that the
County of Los Angeles, the LACFCD, and 84 of the 88 cities (excluding Long Beach, Avalon,
Palmdale, and Lancaster) within Los Angeles County comply with the requirements of the MS4
Permit; and
WHEREAS, the MS4 Permit identified the Parties as permittees that are responsible for
compliance with the MS4 Permit requirements pertaining to Jurisdictional Groups 2 and 3 of the
Santa Monica Bay Watershed; and
WHEREAS, the Parties prepared a Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program (LIMP) in
accordance with the MS4 Permit for Jurisdictional Groups 2 and 3 of the Santa Monica Bay
watershed that was approved by the LARWQCB on November 23, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the Parties prepared an Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP) in
accordance with the MS4 Permit for Jurisdictional Groups 2 and 3 of the Santa Monica Bay
watershed that was approved by the LARWQCB on April 21, 2016; and
181
\arta Monica Bm ,I1 1', Al atcncctl \IU.A
I'Lwc'o1'Ib
WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed to collaboratively implement certain requirements of the
CIMP ("CIMP Monitoring Services") and EWMP ("EWMP Administration Services"); and
WHEREAS, the CIMP Monitoring Services include sample collection, in-situ measurements,
laboratory analyses, source investigations, and water quality data reporting as provided in the
CIMP, as well as the preparation of Annual Reports for the MS4 Permit that are due in
December 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023; and
WHEREAS, the CIMP Monitoring Services do not include bacterial monitoring along the
shoreline of Santa Monica Bay per the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDL, as these
costs will be cost -shared in a separate agreement; and
WHEREAS, the EWMP Administration Services include development of MS4 Permit Annual
Reports, adaptive management, reasonable assurance analysis, and other program components
outlined in the EWMP; and
WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles has the expertise and equipment to perform the CIMP
Monitoring and EWMP Administrative Services consistent with the CIMP and EWMP; and
WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed to cooperatively share and fully fund the estimated costs for
implementation of the CIMP Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services for fiscal years
2018-19 through 2022-23, as contained in Exhibit A of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed to retain the City of Los Angeles to perform the CIMP
Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services on their behalf, the Parties have agreed to pay
the City of Los Angeles for their share of the estimated costs of these services, and the City of
Los Angeles is willing to provide, perform, and be reimbursed for such services on behalf of the
Parties as indicated in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles may elect to use a professional services contract with a
consultant ("Consultant") to implement part or all of the CIMP Monitoring and EWMP
Administration Services; and
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that each shall assume full and independent responsibility for
ensuring its own compliance with the MS4 Permit despite the collaborative approach of this
Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein,
the Parties do hereby agree as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are fully incorporated as part of this
Agreement.
Section 2. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to cooperatively fund the
implementation and to coordinate the payment of the CIMP Monitoring and EWMP
Administration Services.
Y,
tinnr,i AUnica E�a� I�' I ; 11 alci,hc(I NK )A
Poet : ,I 16
Section 3. Cooperation. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another to attain the
purposes of this Agreement.
Section 4. Voluntary Nature. This Agreement is voluntarily entered into for the
implementation of the CIMP Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services.
Section 5. Term. This Agreement shall become effective on the date of final execution
by the Parties and it shall remain and continue in effect until June 30, 2023.
Section 6. Cost sharing of Services Prior to Execution of this Agreement. The Parties
agree that any substantiated costs incurred by the City of Los Angeles for performing CIMP
Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services prior to the execution date of this Agreement be
cost -shared under this Agreement according to the amounts specified in Exhibit A and shall be
included in the first invoice.
Section 7. The City of Los Angeles agrees.
a) CIMP Monitoring Services — The City of Los Angeles will perform the CIMP
Monitoring Services in accordance with the CIMP and its applicable provisions in the MS4
Permit. Any changes in the CIMP Monitoring Services as a result of new requirements of the
LARWQCB will require approval by all Parties.
b) Water Quality Data Reporting — The City of Los Angeles will submit water quality data
to the LARWQCB as required by the MS4 Permit. In addition, the City of Los Angeles will
submit to the Parties the data used to prepare the reports. This data will be transmitted
electronically in a format that contains the table structure and syntax agreed upon by the Parties,
e.g., California Environmental Data Exchange Network format.
C) EWMP Administration Services — The City of Los Angeles will perform the EWMP
Administration Services specified in Table 2 of Exhibit A in accordance with the EWMP and
applicable provisions in the MS4 Permit. Any changes in the EWMP Administration Services as
a result of new requirements of the LARWQCB will require approval by all Parties.
d) Invoicing — The City of Los Angeles will annually invoice the Parties as shown in Table
7 of Exhibit A.
e) The City of Los Angeles will credit the County of Los Angeles the amounts shown in
Table 6 of Exhibit A for performing trash assessments on Venice Beach on behalf of the City of
Los Angeles.
Section 8. The Parties agree.
a) Payment — The Parties agree to pay the City of Los Angeles for the CIMP Monitoring
and EWMP Administration Services not exceeding the amounts shown in Table 7 of Exhibit A
within sixty (60) days of receipt of the invoice from the City of Los Angeles.
183
\Il
i :4ol1(1
b) Documentation — The Parties agrees to provide the City of Los Angeles at no cost with all
requested information and documentation that is available for release and deemed necessary to
perform the CIMP Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services by the City of Los Angeles.
C) Access — The Parties shall allow reasonable access and entry to the City of Los Angeles
or its Consultant, on an as needed basis during the term of this Agreement, to their storm drains,
channels, catch basins, and similar properties to achieve the purposes of this Agreement, with no
access or permitting fees and charges to the City of Los Angeles. Prior to entering any of a
Party's facilities, the City of Los Angeles shall obtain all necessary permits and provide that
Party with a written notice 72 hours in advance of entry when feasible.
d) The County of Los Angeles agrees to conduct trash and data collection on Venice Beach
on behalf of the City of Los Angeles and according to the procedures specified in the City of Los
Angeles Trash Monitoring and Reporting Program. Data analysis and reporting will be the
responsibility of the City of Los Angeles.
Section 9. Invoice and Payment.
a) Annual Payment — Each Party shall pay the City of Los Angeles for its proportional share
of the estimated cost for CIMP Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services as shown in
Table 7 of Exhibit A within sixty (60) days of receipt of the invoice from the City of Los
Angeles. The cost estimates presented in Exhibit A have been agreed upon by all Parties, and are
subject to changes in the CIMP and EWMP and pursuant to LARWQCB new requirements. Any
changes of annual invoices are subject to sections 9(c) and 12(e) of this Agreement.
b) Invoicing — The City of Los Angeles will invoice the Parties the amounts shown in Table
7 of Exhibit A. The annual payments for the period of July 2018 — June 2023 will be invoiced in
January of each year starting January 2019 or upon the execution of this Agreement, whichever
is later.
C) Contingency — The City of Los Angeles will notify the Parties a minimum of thirty (30)
days in advance of invoicing if actual expenditures for CIMP Monitoring and EWMP
Administration Services are anticipated to exceed the cost estimates contained in Tables 1 and 2
of Exhibit A, respectively, and obtain written approval of such expenditures from all Parties.
Upon approval of the additional expenditures, the Parties agree to pay the City of Los Angeles
for their proportional share of these additional expenditures in the next annual invoice at an
amount not to exceed 10 percent of the original cost estimate for CIMP Monitoring and EWMP
Administration Services as shown in Tables 7 of Exhibit A. The 10 percent contingency will not
be invoiced, unless actual expenditures exceed the original cost estimate for CIMP Monitoring
and EWMP Administration Services. Expenditures that exceed the 10 percent contingency will
require an amendment of this Agreement.
d) Reconciliation of this Agreement — The City of Los Angeles will provide an accounting
upon termination of this Agreement within 90 days of said termination. At the completion of the
accounting, the City of Los Angeles shall return any unused portion of all funds deposited with
the City of Los Angeles within 180 days of said termination. Subject to agreement by the City of
' ;tmt,t Aloniea B,n .I'•I, A\ ittei,Iicd \IU;A
Pace f 10
Los Angeles, any funds which are to be reimbursed to a Party may be reimbursed through credits
towards future invoices and agreements, if requested in writing by that Party. At the end of each
fiscal year, the City of Los Angeles will provide the Parties with a statement of the actual
expenditures.
Section 10. Indemnification.
a) Each Party shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless each other Party, including its
special districts, elected and appointed officers, employees, and agents, from and against any and
all liability, including but not limited to demands, claims, actions, fees, costs, and expenses
(including attorney and expert witness fees), arising from or connected with the respective acts
of each Party arising from or related to this Agreement; provided, however, that no party shall
indemnify another party for that party's own negligence or willful misconduct.
b) In light of the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of
California imposing certain tort liability jointly upon public entities solely by reason of such
entities being parties to an agreement (as defined in Section 895 of said Code), each of the
Parties hereto, pursuant to the authorization contained in Section 895.4 and 895.6 of said Code,
shall assume the full liability imposed upon it or any of its officers, agents, or employees, by law
for injury caused by any act or omission occurring in the performance of this Agreement to the
same extent that such liability would be imposed in the absence of Section 895.2 of said Code.
To achieve the above stated purpose, each Party indemnifies, defends, and holds harmless each
other Party for any liability, cost, or expense that may be imposed upon such other Party solely
by virtue of said Section 895.2. The provisions of Section 2778 of the California Civil Code are
made a part hereof as if incorporated herein.
Section 11. Early Withdrawal or Termination of Agreement.
a) Each Party may withdraw from this Agreement for any reason, in whole or part, by
giving the other Parties thirty (30) days written notice thereof. The withdrawing Party shall
remain wholly responsible for its proportional share of the cost that was incurred up to the date
of withdrawal. Completed work shall be owned by the Party or Parties who fund the completion
of such work. Rights to uncompleted work by the Consultant still under contract will be held by
the Party or Parties who fund the completion of such work.
b) The City of Los Angeles shall notify in writing all Parties within fourteen (14) days of
receiving written notice from any Party that elects to withdraw from cost sharing of CIMP
Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services before the end of the term of this Agreement.
C) The City of Los Angeles may notify the LARWQCB of any Party that has elected to
withdraw from this Agreement before its end of the term. Each Party shall be responsible for the
payment of its own fines, penalties, and costs incurred as a result of that Party's non-performance
of the CIMP or EWMP.
d) This Agreement may be terminated before the end of the term if agreed upon by all
Parties to this Agreement.
185
ti.II1 ! AIIi, a L�:n j' I; A\,ache,I \IU.A
Section 12. General Provisions.
a) Notices — Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports relating to this Agreement, and any
request, demand, statement or other communication required or permitted hereunder shall be in
writing and shall be delivered to the Representative of the Party at the address set forth in Exhibit
B. Parties shall promptly notify each other of any change of contact information, including
personnel changes, provided in Exhibit B. Written notice shall include notice delivered via email
or fax. A notice shall be deemed to have been received on (a) the date of delivery, if delivered
by hand during regular business hours, or by confirmed facsimile or by email; or (b) on the third
(3) business day following mailing by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested) to the
addresses set forth in Exhibit B.
b) Administration — For the purposes of this Agreement, the Parties hereby designate as
their respective Party Representatives, the persons named in Exhibit B. The designated Party
Representatives, or their respective designees, shall administer the terms and conditions of this
Agreement on behalf of their respective Party. Each of the persons signing below on behalf of a
Party represents and warrants that they are authorized to sign this Agreement on behalf of such
Party.
C) Relationship of Parties — The Parties are and shall remain at all times as to each other,
wholly independent entities. No Party to this Agreement shall have power to incur any debt,
obligation, or liability on behalf of another Party unless expressly provided to the contrary by
this Agreement. No employee, agent, or officer of a Party shall be deemed for any purpose
whatsoever to be an agent, employee, or officer of another Party.
d) Binding Effect — This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of each
Party to this Agreement and their respective heirs, administrators, representatives, successors and
assigns.
e) Amendment — The terms and provisions of this Agreement may not be amended,
modified or waived, except by an instrument in writing signed by all non -delinquent Parties. For
purposes of this subsection, a Party shall be considered delinquent if that Party fails to timely pay
an invoice as required by Sections 8(a) and 9(a), or withdraws pursuant to Section I I(a). Such
amendments may be executed by those individuals listed in Exhibit B or by a responsible
individual as authorized by the governing body of each Party.
f) Waiver — Waiver by any Party to this Agreement of any term, condition, or covenant of
this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant. Waiver
by any Party to any breach of the provisions of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of
any other provision, nor a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of any provision of this
Agreement.
g) Law to Govern; Venue — This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed, and governed
according to the laws of the State of California. In the event of litigation between the Parties,
venue in the state trial courts shall lie exclusively in the County of Los Angeles.
I' I; \1uier,Ii,.d 1( 'A
h) No Presumption in Drafting — The Parties to this Agreement agree that the general rule
that an Agreement is to be interpreted against the Party drafting it, or causing it to be prepared
shall not apply.
i) Entire Agreement — This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties with
respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous agreements,
whether written or oral, with respect thereto.
j) Severability — If any term, provision, condition or covenant of this Agreement is declared
or determined by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the
remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and this Agreement shall be
read and constructed without the invalid, void, or unenforceable provision(s).
k) Counterparts — This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of
which shall be an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute but one and the same
instrument, provided, however, that such counterparts shall have been delivered to all Parties to
this Agreement.
1) All Parties have been represented by counsel in the preparation and negotiation of this
Agreement. Accordingly, this Agreement shall be construed according to its fair language. Any
ambiguities shall be resolved in a collaborative manner by the Parties and shall be rectified by
amending this Agreement as described in Section 12(e).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on
their behalf, respectively, as follows:
187
Santa Monica Bay J2U3 Watershed MOA
Page 8 of 16
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
Date:
Kevin L. James, President
Board of Public Works
ATTEST:
Holly L. Wolcott
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Michael N. Feuer
City Attorney
LIN
Adena M. Hopenstand
Deputy City Attorney
') umta A om,:a Bm 2 J : Al �aer,h,ed \I()
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
Date:
Rick Cole, City Manager
ATTEST:
IRA
Denise Anderson -Warren
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Lane Dilg
City Attorney
•
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
Date:
ATTEST:
Tracy Weaver
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
LE
Mark D. Hensley
City Attorney
Date:
Date:
Santa \4onica BaN 33\33 Watershed A10A
Page 10 of 16
Greg Carpenter
City Manager
190
LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
Mark Pestrella
Chief Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mary C. Wickham
County Counsel
Deputy
Santa Monica Bav 12V3 Watershed MOA
Date
Date
Pale I I of 16
191
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Mark Pestrella
Director of Public Works
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mary C. Wickham
County Counsel
Deputy
Santa Monica Ba% J2W Watershed NIOA
Pa -e 121 of 16
Date
Date
192
\Lon!,:.i B.1\ .P I ; \\ at i l r i \I0 \
EXHIBIT A
Total Estimated Cost -Sharing and Invoicing for Santa Monica Bay Jurisdictions 2 and 3
CIMP Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services
Table 1. Total Estimated Cost of CIMP Monitoring Services.
CIMP Component (1), (2)
5 Year Total
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23
Receiving Water Monitoring
$
475,000
$ 95,000
$
95,000
$ 95,000
$
95,000
$ 95,000
Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$
197,500
$ 39,500
$
39,500
$ 39,500
$
39,500
$ 39,500
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$
77,500
$ 15,500
$
15,500
$ 15,500
$
15,500
$ 15,500
Reporting & Data Management (l5%ofMonitoringCosts)
$
112,500
$ 22,500
$
22,500
$ 22,500
$
22,500
$ 22,500
Capital Expenses
$
72,390
$ 14,478
$
14,478
$ 14,478
$
14,478
$ 14,478
Operation & Maintenance Expenses
$
21,000
$ 4,200
$
4,200
$ 4,200
$
4,200
$ 4,200
Contracted Services
$
700,000
$ 140,000
$
140,000 1
$ 140,000
$
140,000
$ 140,000
Program Management (5% of All Expenses and Costs)
$
82,795
$ 16,559
$
16,559
$ 16,559
$
16,559
$ 16,559
General Monitoring Cost (Sub -Total)
$ 1,738,685
$ 347,737
$
347,737
$ 347,737
$ 347,737
$ 347,737
Annual Escalation (2%)
S
107,146
$ 6,955
$
14,049
$ 21,284
$
28,665
$ 36,193
Annual Monitoring Cost (Total)
$ 1,845,830
$ 354,692
$
361,785
$ 369,021
S 376,402
S 383,930
(1) Cost in FY 2017-23 dollars.
(2) Cost excluding contingency.
Table 2. Total Estimated Cost of EWMP Administration Services
EWMP Component (1), (2)
5 Year Total
18-19
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
20-21
21-22
22-23
Annual Rep orting (non -CIM P)
$
200,000
$ 40,000
$ 40,000
$
40,000
$ 40,000
$ 40,000
Report of Waste Discharge
$
44,400
$ 19,400
$ -
$
-
$ -
$ 25,000
Adaptive Management
$
1509000
$ 50,000
$
$
50,000
$ -
$ 50,000
Reasonable Assurance Analysis
$
300,000
$ -
$ 150,000
$
150,000
$ -
$ -
EWMP Time Extension
$
20,000
$ 20,000
$ -
$
-
$
$ -
Time Schedule Orders (SMB Bacteria TM DL)
$
80,000
$ -
$ 40,000
$
40,000
$ -
$
Santa Monica Bay DDT / PCBs TMDL Re -opened (DDT only)
$
30,000
$ -
$ -
$
$ 30,000
$ -
Administrative Fee (5%)
$
41,220
$ 6,470
$ 11,500
$
14,000
$ 3,500
$ 5,750
EWMP Cost (Sub -Total)
$
865,620
$ 135,870
$ 241,500
$
294,000
$ 73,500
$ 120,750
Annual Escalation (2%)
$
49,096
$ 2,717
$ 9,756.60
$ 17,995.15
$ 6,058.76
$ 12,567,76
EWMP Cost (Total)
$
914,716
$ 138,587 1
$ 251,257 1
$
311,9951
$ 79,559 1
$ 133,318
(1) Cost in FY 2017-18 dollars.
(2) Cost excluding contingency.
Table 3. Total Estimated Cost of CIMP Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services.
Cost
5 Year Total
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
CIMP Monitoring Services Total Cost
$ 1,845,830
$ 354,692
$ 361,785
$ 369,021
$ 376,402
$ 383,930
EWM P Program Management Total Cost
$ 914,716
$ 138,587
$ 251,257
$ 311,995
$ 79,559
$ 133,318
Total Watershed MOA Cost
$ 2,760,545
1$ 493,279
$ 613,042
1 $ 681,016
1 $ 455,960
$ 517,247
193
"t111LI Montcl B3 iv .I? I; A\ ,ucl,hcd Vt l \
Pu��I l of It,
Table 4. LACFCD Contribution to CIMP Monitoring and EWMP Administration Services.
Cost
5 Year Total Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
1
Fiscal Year
Contingency
Fiscal Year
21-22
18-19 19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
(to %)
Total Watershed MOA Cost
$ 2,760,545 $ 493,279 $ 613,042
$ 681,016
$ 455,960
$ 517,247
$ 276,055
LACFCD contribution (5 %)
$ 138,027 $ 24,664 S 30,652
$ 34,051
S 22,798
$ 25,862
$ 13,803
Reinainingcost for Santa Monica Bay J2/J3 WMG
$ 2,622,518 $ 468,615 $ 582,390
$ 646,966
$ 433,162
$ 491,385
$ 262,252
Table 5. Contribution of Other Agencies to CIMP Monitoring ad EWMP Administration
Services.
Agency
Acres
% of Area
Total Cost
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Contingency
(10%)
City
of Los Angeles
18,934 64
75021/.
$ 1,967,516
$ 351,573
S 436,932
S 485,379
$ 324,975
$ 368,656
$ 196,752
County of Los Angeles
13040
052%
$ 13,550
$ 2,421
$ 3,009
$ 3,343
$ 2,238
$ 2,539
$ 1,355
City
of Santa Monica
4,98747
19760N
$ 518,253
$ 92,606
$ 115,090
S 127,851
$ 85,600
S 97,106
$ 51,825
City
of El Segundo
1.185 631
470%
$ 123,200
$ 22,014
$ 27,359
S 30,393
$ 20,349
$ 23,084 1
$ 12.320
Total 25,238.14
100%1
S 2,622,515 1
S 468,615
S 582,390
5 646,966
S 433,162
S 491385 1
S 262,252
Table 6. Annual cost of Venice Beach Monitoring (by County of Los Angeles for City of
Los Angeles)
Table 7. Final Invoicing by City of Los Angeles.
.Agencl Acres %of Area Total Coal Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
18-19(l) 19-20(t) 10.21(1)
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
Agency
197,424 $
Total Cost
County of Los Angeles 130,40 032% S 1,832 $ 161 $ 703 $ 834
18-19
19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23
Annual Cost Venice Beach Monitoring
$ 2,260
$ 2,306 $ 2,352 $ 2,399 $ 2,447 $ 11,764
Table 7. Final Invoicing by City of Los Angeles.
.Agencl Acres %of Area Total Coal Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
18-19(l) 19-20(t) 10.21(1)
Fiscal Year IDscal Year Contingency Total +Contingency
21.22 (1) (3) 22-23(1) (10%) (2)
,City of Los Angeles 18,934.64 75.02% 51,979,280 $ 353,833 $ 439,238 S 487,731
S 327,374 $ 371,103 $
197,424 $
2,176,704
County of Los Angeles 130,40 032% S 1,832 $ 161 $ 703 $ 834
$ - $ 92 S
1,360 S
3,192
City of Santa Monica 4,987.4 19.76% S 518,253 $ 92,606 $ 115,090 S 127,851
$ 85,600 S 97,106 $
52,002 $
570,255
City of Fl Segundo 1,185.63 4.70% $ 123,200 $ 22,014 1 $ 27,359 1 S 30,393
S 20,349 $ 23,084 $
12362 S
135,562
S 34,051
LACFCD $ 138,027 S 24,d��
$ 22,798 $ 25,862 $
13,803 $
151,830
Total 15,238.41 100%1 S 2,760,591 S 493,S 680,86q S 456,121 1 S 517,247 S
276,951 1 S
3,037,542
(1) In voicing hill be January of each fiscal year, oration the execution of this Agreement, whichever comes later.
(2) Contingency will not be invoiced unless there is a need for using it as agreed upon by all Parties. The contingency amounts are from Tables 4 and 5.
(3) In FY 21-22, the City of Los Angeles ores $163 to the County of Los Angeles. This amount has been subtracted from the FY 20/21 invoice
194
ti�naa NI,1m,:a BaN ;uer.hc(I \Ill, -A
Pao -e I � of I o
EXHIBIT B
Santa Monica Bay Jurisdictional Groups 2 and 3
Party Representatives
City of Los Angeles
Watershed Protection Division
1149 South Broadway Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90015
Mail Stop: 1149-756
Party Representative: Hubertus H.J. Cox
Hubertus.Cox@lacity.org
Phone No.: (213) 485-3984
Fax: (213) 485-3939
2. County of Los Angeles
Department of Public Works
Stormwater Compliance Division, 11 th floor
900 South Fremont Ave.
Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
Party Representative: Paul Alva
palva@dpw.lacounty.gov
Phone No.: (626) 458-4325
Fax: (626) 457-1526
3. Los Angeles County Flood Control District
Department of Public Works
Stormwater Compliance Division, 11th Floor
900 South Fremont Ave.
Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
Party Representative: Paul Alva
palva@dpw.lacounty.gov
Phone No.: (626) 458-4325
Fax: (626) 457-1526
4. City of Santa Monica
Office of Sustainability & the Environment
17174 1h Street, Suite 100
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Party Representative: Neal Shapiro, Watershed Management Coordinator
Neal. Shapiro@smgov.net
Phone No.: (310) 458-8223
Fax: (310) 393-1279
195
5. City of El Segundo
Public Works Department
350 Main Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
Party Representative: Lifan Xu, City Engineer
lxu@elsegundo.org
Phone No.: (310) 524-2368
',mii i Vonic;i Lin% 1' 1? 1l uaei;h«I \I11 1
P,iLc I of IG
196
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
AND
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
SANTA MONICA BAY DRY AND WET WEATHER BACTERIA TOTAL MAXIMUM
DAILY LOADS COORDINATED SHORELINE WATER QUALITY MONITORING
PROGRAM
This Memorandum of Agreement ("MOA") is made and entered into by and between the City of
Los Angeles, a municipal corporation, and the City of El Segundo ("El Segundo'), collectively
referred to herein as the "Parties" or individually as "Party".
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2002, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los
Angeles Region ("LARWQCB") adopted Resolution No. 2002-004 ("Resolution 2002-004"),
establishing the limit for the Total Maximum Daily Loads for bacteria during dry -weather for
Santa Monica Bay Beaches; and
WHEREAS, on December 12, 2002, the LARWQCB adopted Resolution No. 2002-022
("Resolution 2002-022"), establishing the limit for the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
for bacteria during wet -weather for Santa Monica Bay Beaches; and
WHEREAS, Resolutions 2002-004 and Resolution 2002-022 are jointly referred to herein as
"Bacteria TMDLs"; and
WHEREAS, the Bacteria TMDLs became effective on July 15, 2003, and
WHEREAS, the LARWQCB adopted National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit Order No. R4-2012-0175
(MS4 Permit) on November 8, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the MS4 Permit became effective on December 28, 2012 and requires that El
Segundo, and 84 of the 88 cities (excluding Avalon, Long Beach, Palmdale, and Lancaster)
within the County of Los Angeles comply with the prescribed elements of the MS4 Permit,
including the provisions of Bacteria TMDL; and
WHEREAS, the Bacteria TMDLs address documented bacteriological water quality
impairments at forty-four (44) beaches from the Los Angeles/Ventura County line (to the
northwest) to Outer Cabrillo Beach (just south of the Palos Verdes Peninsula); and
197
MOA- City of Los Angeles and City of El Segundo
Santa Monica Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Page 2 of 9
WHEREAS, the Bacteria TMDLs identify as responsible agencies and jurisdictions, the County
of Los Angeles, City of Los Angeles, Malibu, Calabasas, Santa Monica, El Segundo, Rancho
Palos Verdes, Palos Verdes Estates, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates,
Manhattan Beach, Hermosa Beach, Culver City, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Agoura Hills,
Westlake Village, Inglewood, Torrance, and the State of California through its Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) (collectively herein referred to as Agencies, or individually as
Agency); and
WHEREAS, the monitoring plan entitled, "Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacterial TMDLs'
Coordinated Shoreline Monitoring Plan ("Monitoring Plan") was prepared by the Agencies and
approved by the LARWQCB on April 28, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the agencies responsible for cost share of shoreline monitoring performed by the
City of Los Angeles Environmental Monitoring Division (EMD), are listed in Exhibit A: and
WHEREAS, in 2010, El Segundo entered into an agreement with the City of Los Angeles to
continue with the Monitoring Program, and said agreement expired on June 30, 2013; and
WHEREAS, in 2015, El Segundo entered into another subsequent agreement with the City of
Los Angeles to continue with the Monitoring Program, and said agreement expired on
June 30, 2016; and
WHEREAS, El Segundo entered into an extension of the MOA per the provision stated in
Article V, Section 4, on July 1, 2016 and set to expire on June 30, 2017; and
WHEREAS, City of Los Angeles has the expertise and equipment to perform monitoring
services consistent with the Monitoring Plan (hereinafter referred to as Monitoring Services); and
WHEREAS, El Segundo desires to enter into a new agreement to continue the Monitoring
Services being performed by City of Los Angeles; and
WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles will enter into separate new agreements with all of the
Agencies listed in Exhibit A to continue the Monitoring Services; and
WHEREAS, El Segundo has agreed to provide its share of funding, subject to annual budget
approval, to the City of Los Angeles for its performance of Monitoring Services on El Segundo's
behalf at locations identified in Exhibit A and the City of Los Angeles is willing to provide the
Monitoring Services and to be reimbursed in accordance with Article IV and Exhibit B of this
MOA.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits and of the promises herein
contained, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
2
198
MOA- City of Los Angeles and City of El Segundo
Santa Monica Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Page 3 of 9
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
ARTICLE I — Purpose of MOA
1. Purpose of MOA — The purpose of this MOA is to memorialize El Segundo's and City
of Los Angeles' willingness to coordinate the payment for and performance of
Monitoring Services that are consistent with the provisions of the Monitoring Plan and
the Bacteria TMDLs.
2. Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacterial TMDLs Coordinated Shoreline Monitoring
Plan (Monitoring Plan). The approved Coordinated Monitoring Plan (CMP) identifies
three monitoring agencies to perform sampling and analysis of the shoreline monitoring
stations along the Santa Monica Bay. Exhibit A shows monitoring stations that are
assigned to the City of Los Angeles Environmental Monitoring Division to be monitored
at the specified frequency.
ARTICLE II— Responsibilities of City of Los Angeles
1. Monitoring — City of Los Angeles will perform all Monitoring Services consistent with
the time frames set forth in the Monitoring Plan and Bacteria TMDLs at locations as
indicated in Exhibit A on behalf of El Segundo.
2. Cost per monitoring location — City of Los Angeles, in consultation with the Agencies,
has established each Agency's share of cost for the Monitoring Services based on its
jurisdictional land area in Exhibit A. The cost allocation percentages among Agencies
and the estimated cost for each monitoring location are shown in Exhibit A.
3. Reports — City of Los Angeles will submit monitoring reports to the LARWQCB each
month and forward a copy to El Segundo.
4. Exceedance — City of Los Angeles will conduct accelerated monitoring according to
existing Los Angeles County Department of Health Services protocol at each location
where exceedance is detected. Exceedance will be determined according to the
Monitoring Plan. The City of Los Angeles will provide additional accelerated monitoring
at the request of El Segundo. This MOA does not include any research or investigation of
the reason(s) or source(s) that caused the exceedance.
ARTICLE III — Responsibilities of El Segundo
1. Documentation — El Segundo agrees to provide all requested information and
documentation to the City of Los Angeles that is deemed necessary to perform the
Monitoring Services at no cost to City of Los Angeles.
3
199
MOA- City of Los Angeles and City of El Segundo
Santa Monica Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Page 4 of 9
2. Grant of Access Rights — During the term of this MOA, El Segundo grants City of Los
Angeles the right of access and entry to, but not limited to, all El Segundo -accessed storm
drains, channels, creeks, beaches, and existing monitoring stations at beaches subject to
this MOA (the "Property") at all reasonable times for the purpose of performing the
duties and obligations described in this MOA. However, should City of Los Angeles
require access to the El Segundo's facilities (storm drains, channels, creeks, and existing
monitoring stations), City of Los Angeles shall obtain right of access and entry under a
Permit from, or a separate agreement with, El Segundo. The City of Los Angeles shall
indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of El Segundo and its elected and
appointed officers, employees, and agents, from and against any and all liability,
including but not limited to demands, claims, actions, fees, costs, and expenses (including
attorney and expert fees), arising from or connected with the entry onto the Property.
This indemnification is in addition to the other indemnities made herein.
3. Cost Reimbursement — El Segundo agrees to pay the City of Los Angeles for the
amount as shown in Exhibit B annually for the systematic weekly or daily monitoring,
and accelerated monitoring.
ARTICLE IV — Invoice and Payment
1. Annual Payment — El Segundo shall pay the City of Los Angeles its respective share of
cost for Monitoring Services as shown in Exhibit B within 45 days of receipt of the
invoice from the City of Los Angeles. The total annual monitoring costs shown in Exhibit
B are estimates that have been agreed upon amongst the City of Los Angeles and the
Agencies listed in Exhibit A. The Annual Payment will be increased by 3% for inflation
annually, beginning Fiscal Year 2018-19.
2. Invoice — The City of Los Angeles will invoice El Segundo for the annual payment in
January of each year for the period of July 2017 — June 2022, beginning January 2018, or
upon the execution of this Agreement, whichever is later.
3. Reconciliation of this Agreement — Unexpended cost at the termination of this MOA
will be returned to El Segundo based on the cost allocation formula in Exhibit A. Within
90 days of the end of each fiscal year, the City of Los Angeles will provide the Agencies
with a statement with the actual expenditures and a reimbursement of any proportional
unexpended cost.
ARTICLE V — Term of MOA
1. This MOA shall become effective on the date of execution by the last Party and it shall
remain and continue in effect until June 30, 2022, El Segundo agrees that any costs
incurred by the City of Los Angeles for monitoring performed between July 1, 2017 and
the execution date of this MOA be cost -shared by the Agencies, and El Segundo agrees
to pay its proportional share of these costs. The costs and invoicing amount for the
4
200
MOA- City of Los Angeles and City of El Segundo
Santa Monica Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Page 5 of 9
period of July 2017 — June 2022 as contained in Exhibit A are based on continuation of
the Monitoring Services as of July 1, 2016.
2. During the unexpired term of this MOA, a Party may request that the other Party
negotiate, in good faith, modifications to the MOA that may be reasonably necessary
because of any of the following changed circumstances:
A. There is a material change in the regulatory framework for stormwater and
urban runoffs;
B. There is a proposed change, either addition or deletion of monitoring
locations, tests and frequency of tests.
C. There is a material change in the cost of providing monitoring in the
approved locations;
3. Either Party may elect to terminate this MOA for any reason in whole or in part upon
30 -days written notice to the other party. The terminating Party shall remain responsible
for its proportionate share of the costs for Monitoring Services performed up to the
effective date of termination. The City of Los Angeles shall notify in writing all
Agencies within fourteen (14) days of receiving written notice from any Party that
intends to terminate this MOA. If one of the Agencies elects to withdraw from cost
sharing of Monitoring Services before the end of the term of this MOA, the remaining
cost share may be distributed among the other Agencies based on the existing cost
allocation formula, subject to advance written amendment of Exhibits A and B agreed
upon by the remaining Agencies.
4. This MOA shall continue on a month to month basis after the expiration date as stated in
Article V, Section 1 above until either El Segundo requests Los Angeles in writing to
cease the Monitoring Services or a new MOA is executed for employing City of Los
Angeles to perform the Monitoring Services on behalf of El Segundo, but not to exceed
twelve (12) months. The cost for the monthly monitoring shall be one- twelfth of the
previous annual cost.
ARTICLE VI — General Provisions
1. Notices — Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports relating to this MOA, and any request,
demand, statement or other communication required or permitted hereunder shall be in
writing and shall be delivered to the Representative of the Party at the addresses set forth
below. Parties shall promptly notify each other of any change of contact information
provided below. Written notice shall include notice delivered via email. A notice shall
be deemed to have been received on (a) the date of delivery, if delivered by hand during
regular business hours, or by confirmed facsimile or by email; or (b) on the third business
5
201
MOA- City of Los Angeles and City of El Segundo
Santa Monica Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Page 6 of 9
day following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid to the addresses set forth
below:
City of Los Angeles:
Invoice:
City of Los Angeles
Bureau of Sanitation
Public Works Building
1149 S. Broadway, 91h floor
Los Angeles CA 90015
Attention: Financial Management Division
Fax No.: 213-485-4269
Others:
Hyperion Treatment Plant
Bureau of Sanitation
12000 Vista Del Mar
Harry Pregerson Technical Support Facility
Playa Del Rey CA 90293
Attention: Environment Monitoring Division
Fax No.: (310) 648-5731
E-mail address: emd@san.lacity.org
El Segundo:
Invoices -
City of El Segundo
Department of Public Works
350 Main Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
Attention: Lifan Xu, City Engineer
(310)524-2368
2. Relationship of the Parties — The Parties are and shall remain at all times as to each
other, wholly independent entities. No Party to this MOA shall have power to incur any
debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of another Party or otherwise act as an agent of
another Party except as expressly provided to the contrary by this MOA.
6
202
MOA- City of Los Angeles and City of El Segundo
Santa Monica Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Page 7 of 9
3. Cooperation, Further Acts — Parties shall cooperate fully with one another to attain the
purposes of this MOA.
4. Amendments — All amendments to this MOA must be in writing and executed by the
Parties in the same manner as this MOA.
5. Indemnification
a) Pursuant to Government Code Sections 895.4 and 895.6, each Party shall each
assume the full liability imposed upon it, or any of its officers, agents or
employees, by law for injury caused by any negligent or wrongful act or omission
occurring in the performance of this Agreement.
b) Each Party indemnifies and holds harmless the other party for any loss, costs, or
expenses that may be imposed upon such other party by virtue of Government
Code Section 895.2, which imposes joint civil liability upon public entities solely
by reason of such entities being parties to an agreement, as defined by
Government Code Section 895.
c) In the event of third -party loss caused by negligence, wrongful act or omission by
more than one Party, each Party shall bear financial responsibility in proportion to
its percentage of fault as may be mutually agreed or judicially determined. The
provisions of Civil Code Section 2778 regarding interpretation of indemnity
agreements are hereby incorporated.
6. Governing Law — This MOA is governed by, interpreted under and construed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
7. Severability — If any provision of this MOA shall be determined by any court to be
invalid, illegal or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this MOA shall not be
affected and this MOA shall be construed as if the invalid, illegal or unenforceable
provision had never been contained in this MOA.
8. Entire Agreement - This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties with
respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous
agreements, whether written or oral, with respect thereto.
7
203
MOA- City of Los Angeles and City of El Segundo
Santa Monica Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Page 8 of 9
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed on behalf of City of El Segundo
on the day, month, and year indicated on the following page. On behalf of City of Los Angeles,
the Board of Public Works executed this Agreement and attested by the City Clerk as of the date
specified below.
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
Attest:
By:
Holly L. Wolcott Kevin James, President
City Clerk Board of Public Works
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mike Feuer, City Attorney
Laurie Rittenberg
Assistant City Attorney
Date:
Date:
204
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
A general law city
Greg Carpenter
City Manager
Date:
Approved as to Form:
Mark D. Hensley
City Attorney
Date:
0
MOA- City of Los Angeles and City of El Segundo
Santa Monica Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Page 9 of 9
Attest:
Tracy Weaver
City Clerk
Date:
205
EXHIBIT B
ESTIMATED ANNUAL MONITORING S ERVICE COST BY AGENCY -Excl V-1
IEMD-iew)
-wIN m4nka1698M
-iw cw 6loea cenlnldn ndaaa19m4 Sx am. nlunmOn9
f'enbwiw.SYww ftma u�hdi.a ny
an6rae
o5 u.q wee.0 Sana
.,dli.uule
0M aLmnaSrn
ury wcre
an
0, 4-nl
�Mw1a.....0
xry o�,55vnn
uryw w.unu.m
uryw n�uw..lue.
113
I -o6
1 -OB
to
1-1_
113
114
1 16
1-11
'I -IB
6680.1
s1.LLw1
nl
_+1_
_4
-1
SIO
X11
_13
snwo-1
sA16o.5
JJ
JJ
.t-�
W5
Y6
AIC_
6Tob I
�9 5�•d 1e611r,5y [..._
_
WW
5!]35
51735
@135
577.
51135
51735
57]35
51135
51735
516876
V7 35
51135
55363
54363
55363
526913
55363
55363
55363
514.
S14W
518101
$16107
$16107
53210
.221
S7 SO
Q614
low
WW
#457
#45]
#451
#457
.45T
#457
#451
#451
II4 ST
512267
II45T
#4.
$16463
51.63
516463
562317
516463
516463
Sl -5963
.526
(4526
558600
558000
5%600
5117.
511180
.365
X.
WGO
ani
3000
St 525.
425.
St 52518
51525.
51,525.
$152509
St@S.
51525.
$152509
$762543
5152509
St 525®
SO.
SOW
WW
WW
W W
WW
W W
WW
WW
W W
W W
W.
WW
WW
.1940
524921
.CO
_
5000
5321
5]21
1327
$327
5327
5321
532]
5321
5327
51634
5927
$127
55.46687
55,45667
5546667
#734334
5546667
5546867
.,46661
$15.2]
5150327
$1416350
11476350
514,76350
5295283
#952]0
WW
S113A10
5000
W.
52038
52039
#039
$2038
52039
52039
52039
52030
12039
H0194
$2039
$2039
5900
5000
W00
SOW
W 00
WW
W W
50W
5000
W 00QW
W 00
WOD
WW
WGO
5334615
53,614
SD.
5000
WW
5000
SOW
SOW
5000
5000
SOW
5000
W W
W OD
$38011
530051
.#0051
5-mm5000
53W 51
-51
1-51
5104.
510460
W W
W W
W.
WW
WW
WW
W.IS".5
5000
__
WW
5000
WW
5000
W.
WW
WW
9300
W W
SOW
SOW
W W
W W
50666
565 fib
5%86
...
SM 66
#666
566 fib
52362
$2382
51596351
51596351
51596351
.15670
419670
WW
/rflw!
X.
WW
5900
WW
5000
WW
SOW
SOW
. W
SOW
WW
W W
W W
SO.
WW
WW
SOW
W W
WW
W W
W00
WW
W W
11
WW
WW
WW
H92325
..9Z5
5900
5800
5900
5000
5000
5000
SO.
W.
5000
SO W
SOW
$0W
W W
W W
WW
WW
SOW
WW
W W
W W
WW
WW
W W
SOX
WW
SOW
WW
H0515A
H,052
WOD
5000
SO.
..
5000
5000
5000
SDW
SO W
SOW
WW
SO.
SO W
SO.
SOW
SOW
WW
W W
W.
W W
0
WW
W W
W W
WW
WW
WW
@1.91
II,TO
E�SOOOCw
..
SO.
SO.
9300
5000
1900
SO.
SOW
SOW
SOW
W W
W W
SOW
SOW
WW
1DW
W W
WGo
W W
WW
WW
W W
W W
WW
WW
WW
_1
SII
5000
WW SOW mW le:
lw1W u4 SSWM 1Cw
W79
nw
1
1555
5024
.4W
53131
51103
WO)
MW
.21
5942
50.
5000
5900
5900
5000
%W
5000
W.
5000
SO.
5000
WW
w122 wM uS % MZ
tSV )1 mm %{U%S SOW
WW
lfw
pM
]1171
W20
5942
SOLO
RW
WW
WW
5000
AW
WW
MW
SOW
ww
FEW
5900
=11 a "W" =T-
MOl
MV
533123 S1TW .May L N
a
SIW
L991
MS1
1'05
LOC
SOW
low
MW
WW
MW
SOW
wW
WW
SOW
33123 5660 .,.389 595%
V4
Pan
M1l
MOS
MSp'
-WW7
WW
MW
SPw
WW
M06
533123 $1020 .,.389 514303
$236
1041
lbU
57"-
12555
W11
SOM
1000
1@ W
m W
10W
9PW
W w
MW
WIM
wW
5331 23 ..0 ..0. .1.
W w
WW
w W'
AW
#3123 SOW H,.389 SOW
SOW
MW
W00
10..
5300
WOO
WW
S105
WW
SOW
MW
SO.
5165614 WW #321947 WW
SOW
W 97
SOW
WW
WW
SOW
W W
WW
W W
5331 23 $17. .64308 $23636
5120
$0.
$7829
.131
W 1T
SOOT
W W
SD W
W W
W co
SOW
W W
W.
W.
533123 ..0 ..84369 59535
5139
#21
5042
5000
W W
9300
W W
W.
1.123 513. 314726 5605
1842
11265
SOW
SOW
522443
544916
StSW
#125
5358
ST 12
5000
SOW
5O.
W.
#3123 S2]20 $14726 51210
S4
1166
SOW
W.
W.
WW
WW
SOW
533123 $1020 $14726 .S4
H82
SO 00
W00
WW
116643
WW
St172
51563
#67
W.
WW
WW
SOW
W.
WW
WW
5185614 WW #3631 WW
WW
.21
SOW
W W
5331 23 S13 W 114726 W.
5642
5000
522456
.W
W co
WW
W 56
W00
W W
WW
W W
WW
W W
WW
533123 WW 514726 WW
WW
5332
WW
#344
WW
W W
m
533123 #040 514726 5907
EOS1
51W
W W
WM
533561
MW
W W
WW
WW
W 34
WW
WOO
W
W W
mW
W OO
WW
WW sp 46 WW
WW
WW
Wo
NO
.1. W. .040 WW
SOW
W W
UW
SOW
WA)
W W
Lw
pLp
WN
W 00
WW
5] W
MW
W W
5165614 W W W. SOX
W W
W W
SOW
W W
W W
W W
11
5185614 W W SOX W W
W W
WW
SOX
WW
.SSE
WW
SOW
WW
W OO
W00
MM
WW
tem
nW
S1b5614 WW WW WW
3 W
WW
WW
WW
WW
WW
WW
.3123 WW WW WW
WW
WW
WW
S3eo
WW
WW
#29)3
WW
WW
IDW
WW
SOW
WW
593123 II3W WW WW
#32
WW
I.
$21220
WW
$1,617
WW
WW
.
I$..
WW
WW
W
5185814 WW 51556315 W.
$16012 5161 f%,566 51.154
WW
WW
5252
SOW
50
WW
H
WW
M
H6?99]1 .;>W.66
II,i0eeJ
..59191
$25,100
1115,OM
W,@91
HA#A9
556,5.
e6
.A2S96
.95158
Se21e
-wIN m4nka1698M
-iw cw 6loea cenlnldn ndaaa19m4 Sx am. nlunmOn9
an60xc«mnocou
wrmnon
an..a9.nc1.. w111 e..n.y.e raarwep
565reen wecarr0rwala
Swwawwl6wdfr4rww�nievrw�w�rna+l.lnsa,�rslS
a.0rnr.a
an
ea++e aa6a
w95
=Mar WK CNw dNa
engan raw s waew
".. Ow+1p
M1
G1rK
GrykN crra O10w11.p T +Swn
a,-
coral aMl
611
rt1T•1 � H5a16H Su.5c0
#ioa.6k fAm.T
aS510!
r5.{5vp q.05f,5F fi
t65/Y.W�HaS54i� II,7a 91 H2.1
11 515J61 511401
f;lfee�
L
TS$ff 54Ya
>N
Su n ftirn fi,ef5 ar
/rflw!
�
7u
I #n .D6
rm91! i1i 01Ma~ $101_-n1
emit'.
na6ea11 Nha
�i15~
rcr+d S. BKS[ M661
Auad
FO.S]!r MNA eSbS
Yea aL:..
N
O
0)
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No.
1567 to prohibit gatherings where underage drinking or illegal marijuana use occurs, and
adoption of Resolution No. establishing the schedule of fines for administrative citations
when there are violations of Ordinance No. 1567. Fiscal impact: None
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1567;
2. Adopt Resolution No. ;
3. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Ordinance No. 1567; and
2. Resolution No.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: El Segundo is a safe and prepared city.
Objective: The City has a proactive approach to risk and crime.
PREPARED BY: Bill Whalen, Chief of Police
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
On June 5, 2018, the City Council introduced the first reading of Ordinance No. 1567 to prohibit
gatherings where underage drinking or illegal marijuana use occurs. At a special meeting held on
June 13, 2018, the City Council considered Ordinance No. 1567 on second reading. Following
further consideration of the Ordinance, the City Council directed staff to engage the community
regarding the specifics of the Social Host Ordinance (SHO). These community engagement
sessions occurred on June 29, 2018 and July 31, 2018. Based upon community input, staff drafted
a revised Social Host Ordinance.
On August 21, 2018, the City Council considered the revised ordinance at a regular meeting.
I. Social Host Liability Ordinance ("Chapter 7-13").
Ordinance No. 1576, if adopted, would establish a new Chapter 7-13 in the El Segundo Municipal
Code. The new chapter would hold persons responsible who encourage, are aware of or should be 12
207
aware of the consumption of alcohol or marijuana by minors on premises they are responsible for,
however, fail to take reasonable steps to prevent it. Penalties for a violation of Chapter 7-13 would
subject the violator to an administrative citation, which would obligate the citee to pay civil
penalties or complete community service hours established by City Council resolution. The
proposed fines for a violation of Chapter 7-13 are $1,000 for a first offense, $2,000 for second
offense, and $5,000 for a third offense within a 12 -month period. Any "new" violation which
arises more than 12 -months from the date of the first violation would be considered a "first"
violation and would trigger the escalating fines indicated above, starting with $1,000. Any "first"
violation is eligible for community service in lieu of the fine at the discretion of the Chief of Police.
II. Resolution Regarding Fine Amounts.
The attached Resolution No. establishes the schedule of fines for administrative citations
when there are violations of Chapter 7-13. The schedule represents the City Council's direction
during deliberations about this proposed Chapter. The Resolution is presented to the City Council
for adoption and would take effect on the date the Ordinance would go into effect, if adopted.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Council:
1. Waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1567;
2. Adopt Resolution No. ,
3. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
ORDINANCE NO. 1576
AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 13 TO TITLE 7 OF
THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING THE
HOSTING, PERMITTING OR ALLOWING OF
GATHERINGS AT WHICH PERSONS UNDER 21 YEARS
OF AGE ARE CONSUMING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES OR
USING MARIJUANA ILLEGALLY
The City Council of the City of EI Segundo does ordain`as1ollows:
SECTION 1: Findings.
A. Minors often obtain or possess marijuana or consume alcoholic beverages
at parties held on private property and under the control of a person who
knows or should know of this conduct but fails to prevent it.
B. Underage use of marijuana or consumption of alcoholic beverages poses
an immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare in that it
increases alcohol abuse by minors, physical altercations, violent crimes
(including rape and other sexual offenses), accidental injury, neighborhood
vandalism and excessive noise disturbance, all of which may require
intervention by the Police or Fire Departments.
C. The City's municipal code prohibits the consumption or possession of
alcohol in certain public places, including public streets, parking lots, City
parks and the beach, but does not have any rules to address underage
drinking on private property (SSMC §§ 7-6-8, 10-1-4, 10-3-11).
D. State law prohibits the possession of marijuana by a minor under certain
circumstances. (Health & Safety Code §§ 11357, et seq.) State law also
prohibits persons 21 years or older from possessing, processing,
transporting, purchasing, obtaining, or giving away recreational marijuana
to persons 21 years or older under certain circumstances. (Health & Safety
Code §§ 11357, et seq.) There are no rules instate law or the ESMC which
address underage marijuana use on private property (ESMC Chapters 13B
and 4-14).
E. The prohibitions proposed by this ordinance are reasonable and intended
to deter use of marijuana or consumption of alcoholic beverages by minors
by holding responsible those persons who encourage, are aware of or
should be aware of this illegal conduct by minors but fail to take reasonable
steps to prevent it.
SECTION 2: Chapter 13 (Social Host Regulations) is added to Title 7 (Nuisances and
Offenses) of the EI Segundo Municipal Code to read, in its entirety, as follows:
"CHAPTER 13
SOCIAL HOST REGULATIONS
WE
7-13-1: PURPOSE:
7-13-2: DEFINITIONS:
7-13-3: GATHERING AT WHICH MINORS USE MARIJUANA OR CONSUME
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES PROHIBITED:
7-13-4: EXEMPTIONS:
7-13-5: VIOLATION; PENALTY:
7-13-1: PURPOSE:
A. The purpose and intent of this chapter is:
1. To facilitate the enforcement of.lavvs prohibiting�the use of marijuana
by minors and the service and consumption of alcoholic beverages
by minors, in an effort to 'deter, and to promote:`the reduction of,
underage drinking and drug use;
2. To protect public health, safety and welfare and quiet enjoyment of
property and properties neighboring the location of gatherings at
which minors use marijuana or are served and consume alcoholic
beverages; and
3. To establish a duty of persons 21 years of age or older having control
over any premises, who knowingly host, permit or allow a gathering
at the premises to take reasonable steps to prevent the service and
consumption of alcoholic beverages or use of marijuana by minors.
Reasonable steps include, but are not limited to, controlling the
access to and provision of marijuana and alcoholic beverages to
minors, and monitoring the responsible, safe and lawful conduct of
minors on the premises.
S. This chapter should not be construed as adding any additional authority for
any law enforcement officer or government official to either enter private
property or subject any property or person to search or seizure that does
not otherwise exist independent of the provisions of this chapter.
C. It is not the intent of this chapter to impose strict liability against a parent or
legal guardian whose best intentions and reasonable efforts to prevent the
service and consumption of alcoholic beverages or use of marijuana by
minors at a gathering are circumvented by the actions of any person to
obtain alcoholic beverages or marijuana at the premises or to bring
concealed alcoholic beverages or marijuana to the premises.
7-13-2: DEFINITIONS:
Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the following definitions
will govern the construction of words and phrases used in this chapter:
210
ALCOHOL: Means ethyl alcohol, hydrated oxide of ethyl, or spirits of wine, from whatever
source or by whatever process produced.
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE: Includes alcohol, spirits, liquor, wine, beer, and every other
liquid or solid containing alcohol, spirits, wine or beer, and which contains one-half of one
percent or more of alcohol by volume and which is fit or beverage purposes either alone
or when diluted, mixed, or combined with other substances.
GATHERING: Means a party, gathering, or event where three or more persons have
assembled or are assembling for a social occasion or social activity.
MARIJUANA: Means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L ,.whether growing or not;
the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of thea -plant; and every compound,
manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant;. its seeds or resin.
MINOR: Means any person under 21 years of age.,
PREMISES: Means a home, yard, apartment, condominium, hotel or motel room, or other
dwelling unit, or any commercial, business or industrial site, hall or meeting room, whether
occupied on a temporary or permanent basis, and whether owned, leased, rented or used
with or without compensation.
RESPONSIBLE ADULT: Means a person 21 years of age or older who owns, rents,
leases or otherwise has control of the premises where the gathering occurs.
RESPONSIBLE PERSON: Means:
A. The person in charge of the premises when the gathering occurs; or
B. The person who organized the gathering.
7-13-3: GATHERING AT WHICH MINORS USE MARIJUANA OR CONSUME
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES PROHIBITED:
It is unlawful and a public nuisance for either a responsible person or responsible adult to
cause or allow a gathering to take place at the premises whenever the responsible person
or responsible adult knows or reasonably should have known alcoholic beverages or
marijuana are being unlawfully consumed or used by minors. Liability for a violation of
this section will be imputed to either a responsible person or responsible adult, but not
both.
A. Prima. facib�:bvidence that a responsible person had the knowledge, or
sho a11d have had the knowledge, necessary to establish a violation of this
chapter',; include those situations where:
Minors are consuming alcoholic beverages or using marijuana and
there is a minor present on the premises who is obviously under the
influence of alcohol or marijuana; or
2. A warning has been issued to the location within the last 12 months
regarding alcohol or marijuana use by minors at the premises.
211
B. Prima facie evidence that a responsible adult had the knowledge, or should
have had the knowledge, necessary to establish a violation of this chapter
include those situations where:
1. A responsible adult is present at the premises during a gathering
where minors are consuming alcoholic beverages or using
marijuana; or
2. A warning has been issued to the location within the last 12 months
regarding alcohol or marijuana use by minors at the premises.
C. A warning for a violation of this section will only be issued where the
responsible adult was not present at the premises during a gathering where
minors are consuming alcohol or using marijuana and there is no evidence
that a minor is present on the premises who is obviously under the influence
of alcohol or marijuana.
7-13-4: EXEMPTIONS:
This chapter does not apply to:
A. Any California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control licensee at any
premises licensed and regulated by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage
Control.
B. Conduct involving the use of alcoholic beverages which occurs exclusively
between a minor child and his or her parent or legal guardian, including the
possession or consumption of an alcoholic beverage in connection with a
cultural or religious activity. This exemption does not include any conduct
that would contribute to the delinquency of a minor (a violation of Penal
Code section 272).
C. Conduct which the city is expressly preempted from prohibiting under state
law, specifically, the Medicinal and Adult use Cannabis Regulation and
Safety Act.
D. A responsible person or responsible adult who called 911 and reported that
a minor was in need of medical attention due to alcohol consumption or
marijuana use, was the first person to make the 911 call, and when reporting
that a minor was in need of medical assistance, remained on the scene with
the minor until that medical assistance arrived and cooperated with medical
assistance and law enforcement personnel on the scene.
E. A responsible person or responsible adult who requests immediate
assistance from the police department to remove any person who refuses
to abide by the requesting person's performance of duties imposed by this
chapter, or to terminate the gathering because of the requesting person's
ability to prevent minors from consuming alcoholic beverages or using
marijuana despite having taken reasonable steps to do so, as long as such
request is made before any other person makes a complaint about the
gathering.
212
7-13-5: VIOLATION; PENALTY:
A. The City Council may adopt a resolution establishing a schedule of
administrative fines and community service hours for a violation of this
chapter.
B. In addition to the administrative fines described in this chapter, the
responding law enforcement officer may issue an order requiring the
gathering to be disbanded and may cite and arrest any violators under any
other applicable ordinances and statutes.
C. For any responsible person who is a juvenile, each parent or legal guardian
of the juvenile will be considered a responsible person liable for any fines,
penalties and fees imposed pursuant to this chapter. The parents or
guardians of a juvenile found to have violated this chapter may request to
have that juvenile serve community service as described in subsection (E),
below, and pay City administrative fees, if any, as an alternative penalty to
paying the applicable civil penalty.
D. Nothing in this chapter is deemed to prevent the city from commencing a
civil or criminal proceeding to abate a public nuisance or from pursuing any
other means available- under any other statute, ordinance or law (civil or
criminal), to correct conduct regulated by this chapter in addition to or as
alternatives to the procedures set forth herein. This chapter in no way limits
the authority of the police department to make arrests for any criminal
offense arising out of conduct regulated by this chapter.
E. The responsible person or responsible adult may perform community
service and pay City administrative fees, if any, as an alternative to paying
the civil penalty with the prior written consent and approval of the Police
Chief or designee. The Police Chief or designee retains the discretion to
approve the community service requested by the responsible person/adult.
Upon approval of the Police Chief or designee to perform community
service, the responsible person/adult must complete the required hours
within one year of approval and must submit proof of completion to the
Police Chief or designee. Failure to receive approval to perform community
service or failure to complete the required hours of service will result in the
imposition of the applicable civil penalty, which is immediately payable. No
reduction in the penalty is authorized for completion of less than the
required hours of community service unless approved by the City Manager
or designee. Community service will only be approved for the first citation
issued within a one-year period.
F. Violations of this chapter are not subject to the response cost
reimbursement provisions outlined in Sections 1-2A-28, et seq. of this
Code."
213
SECTION 3: Environmental Analysis. Because of the facts set forth in Section 1, this
Ordinance is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§21000, et seq., "CEQA")
and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq.), because it
consists only of minor revisions and clarifications to existing regulations and procedures.
It does not have the effect of deleting or substantially changing any regulatory standards
or findings required thereof. The Ordinance is an action that does not have the potential
to cause significant effects on the environment. Accordingly, this ordinance is exempt
from further environmental review pursuant to 14 Cal. Code Regs. §15168(c)(2).
SECTION 4: CONSTRUCTION. This ordinance must be broadly construed in order to
achieve the purposes stated in this ordinance. It is the City Council's intent that the
provisions of this ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a
manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this ordinance.
SECTION 5: ENFORCEABILITY. Repeal of any provision of the El Segundo Municipal
Code does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude
prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this ordinance's
effective date. Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining
action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 6: VALIDITY OF PREVIOUS CODE SECTIONS. If this entire ordinance or its
application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or
amendment of the ESMC or other city ordinance by this ordinance will be rendered void
and cause such previous SSMC provision or other ordinance to remain in full force and
effect for all purposes.
SECTION 7: SEVERABILITY. If any part of this ordinance or its application is deemed
invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity
will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this
end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable.
SECTION 8: The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this
ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of EI Segundo's book of original ordinances;
make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within 15
days after the passage and adoption of this ordinance, cause it to be published or posted
in accordance with California law.
SECTION 9: This Ordinance will become effective on the thirty-first day following its
passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of
2018.
Drew Boyles, Mayor
214
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
I, Tracy Weaver, City Clerk of the City of EI Segundo, California, do hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing
Ordinance No. was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting held
on the day of '2018, and was duly passed and adopted by said City
Council, approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at a
regular meeting of said Council held on the day of 2018, and the same
was so passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Tracy Weaver, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
215
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ESTABLISHING
THE ADMINSTRATIVE FINES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER
7-13 OF THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE.
The City Council of the city of EI Segundo does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. On July 1, 2003, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 1364
("Citation Ordinance") which adds Chapter 2A, entitled
"Administrative Citations" (consisting of §§ 1-2A-10 to 1-2A-270), to
Title 1 of the EI Segundo Municipal Code ("ESMC") and allows the
City enforcement officers to issue administrative citations for ESMC
violations. The Administrative Citation Ordinance allows fine
amounts to be adopted by City Council resolution, pursuant to
Government Code § 53069.4(a)(1).
B. On July 1, 2003, the City Council adopted the fine amounts attached
as Exhibit "A" to Resolution No. 4313 as the City's fine schedule for
purposes of imposing fines pursuant to Chapter 2A of Tile 1 of the
ESMC.
C. On August 21, 2018, the City Council introduced Ordinance No.
1567, which adds Chapter 7-13, entitled "Social Host Regulations" to
Title 7 of the ESMC and allows City enforcement officers to issue
administrative citations for a violation of Chapter 7-13.
D. The City Council finds that such fines are necessary to preserve the
health, safety and welfare of the City by deterring the conduct
proscribed in Chapter 7-13.
SECTION 2: The fine amounts attached as Exhibit A for a violation of Chapter 7-
13 of the EI Segundo Municipal Code are hereby adopted and will take effect on
the effective date of Ordinance No. 1567.
SECTION 3: This Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.
SECTION 4: The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of _,2018,
-1-
216
Drew Boyles,
Mayor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 1
I, Tracy Weaver, City Clerk of the City of EI Segundo, California, hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of the City is five; that the
foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City
Council, approved and signed by the Mayor of said City, and attested to by the City
Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the day
of , 2018, and the same was so passed and adopted by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Tracy Weaver,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley,
City Attorney
-2-
217
EXHIBIT A
FINE SCHEDULE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS
A. Except as otherwise provided, violations of the ESMC for which
administrative citations are issued will have fines imposed as follows:
1. A fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100.00) for the first
violation;
2. A fine not exceeding two hundred dollars ($200.00) for a second
violation of the same provision within one year;
3. A fine not exceeding five hundred ($500.00) for each additional
violation of the same provision within one year of the first
violation.
B. Notwithstanding Section A, violations of Chapter 7-12 of the EI
Segundo Municipal Code are subject to an administrative fine in the
following amounts:
1. A fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred ($2,500) for the
first violation;
2. A fine not exceeding five thousand ($5,000) for a second
violation of the same provision within 12 months;
3. A fine not exceeding seven thousand five hundred ($7,500) for
each additional violation of the same provision within 12 months
of the first violation.
C. Notwithstanding Section A, violations of Chapter 7-13 of the EI
Segundo Municipal Code are subject to an administrative fine in the
following amounts:
1. A fine not exceeding one thousand ($1,000) for the first violation
or a total of 75 hours of community service (pursuant to Section
7-13-5 of the EI Segundo Municipal Code);
2. A fine not exceeding two thousand ($2,000) for a second
violation of the same provision within one year;
3. A fine not exceeding five thousand ($5,000) for each additional
violation of the same provision within one year of the first
violation.
-3-
218
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA HEADING: New Business
Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with
The Company of Others — Los Angeles, LLC (dba The Phelps Group) for expanded economic
development and hospitality and tourism marketing services. (Fiscal Impact: FY 17-18 - $596,500 in
Economic Development Advertising and Publishing budget and Chevron Grant Fund expenditures.)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Upon approval of the FYI 8-19 budget, authorize the City Manager to execute a contract
amendment with The Company of Others — Los Angeles, LLC (dba The Phelps Group) in a
form approved by the City Attorney, for expanded economic development and hospitality
and tourism marketing services;
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Integrated Marketing Communications Scope of Work
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: Champion Economic Development & Fiscal Sustainability
Objective: Implement a comprehensive economic development strategy to ensure the City
encourages a vibrant business climate that is accessible, user-friendly and welcoming to all
residents, businesses, and visitors.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Amount Budgeted FY 18-19: TBD
Additional Appropriation: $0
Account Numbers: 001-400-2401-6201 (ED Advertising and Publishing)
702-200-2401-2609 (Chevron rant Fund)
ORIGINATED BY: Barbara Voss, Economic Development Manager
REVIEWED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manager
BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: In April 12, 2016, voters approved a proposition, Measure B,
which increased the City's Transient Occupancy Tax ("TOT") from 8% to 12%. As part of the
discussions regarding the Measure B, both the Economic Development Advisory Council (EDAC) and
the Chamber of Commerce Hotel Committee requested that a portion of the increased TOT revenue be
used to form a hospitality and tourism marketing fund to increase hotel occupancy and stimulate related
visitor -serving businesses.
On August 14, 2017 the City entered into an agreement with the Phelps Group to develop and
implement a comprehensive marketing strategy. The objective of the marketing strategy was to create
219
an enhanced brand identity to be executed across a comprehensive and integrated branding effort, to
ensure that key economic revenue drivers in the city consistently receive marketing support to promote
growth and success. These revenue drivers include business license taxes, sales taxes, and TOT taxes.
In FY 17-18, Phelps successfully completed the development and positioning of El Segundo's
hospitality and tourism marketing effort by performing extensive target audience research, developing a
detailed messaging strategy for the hospitality and tourism brand, and creating a new logo and signage
to promote the new branding. Phelps consulted on design and developed content for new hospitality and
tourism website (DestinationElSegundo.com), and performed social audits and optimizations to
promote the social media sector. They also enhanced the City's existing new business attraction efforts
by optimizing the messaging in the SOAR newsletter, updating and monitoring the economic
development website (E1SegundoBusiness.com), and developing and posting social media content.
Proactive and targeted public relations efforts have resulted in 47 pieces of media coverage, with
258,000 estimated views. Phelps designed a citywide pole banner program, print advertising materials
and other signage, and the covers of the El Segundo Chamber Business Directory and Downtown
Guide. Phelps also coordinated events including the Champions of Business Celebration, the Chan
Soon-Shiong Institute for Medicine grand opening and the John Van Hamersveld mural press event.
Phelps has built relationships with local businesses and has successfully built awareness of the Smoky
Hollow district, Downtown District and the City's attractions, including ESMoA, Old Town Music Hall
and the Automobile Driving Museum.
At the August 15, 2018 EDAC meeting, Phelps presented a draft marketing plan and budget for FY 18-
19. EDAC approved the proposed plan and budget. Due to the uncertainty of future grant funding to
support the City's marketing efforts, EDAC advised that the City consider increased contributions to
these efforts in the future.
The proposed FY 18-19 marketing plan will continue the City's new business attraction marketing
efforts, and introduce the new "Start Here" creative campaign across social and digital channels. This
will ensure that key economic revenue drivers in the City consistently receive marketing support to
promote growth and success. The goal of this strategy is to:
• Continue and enhance existing marketing and branding efforts with focus on commercial and
industrial business attraction;
■ Implement a comprehensive hospitality and tourism marketing effort (hotel, retail, restaurants,
arts/culture and recreation);
• Position and promote the new branding to gain more awareness amongst our key targets; and,
• Gain exposure and promote the new branding across different markets/targets/key targets
• Ensure one "voice" for all economic development and hospitality and tourism marketing efforts.
This comprehensive outreach strategy will be achieved using a focused and efficient campaign,
including: new collateral materials, enhanced public relations, special events, enhanced social media
engagement, paid search and paid social media, digital advertising, account strategy and analytics,
maintain and update both websites (DestinationElSegundo.com and E1SegundoBusiness.com), and
account leadership services.
In FY 16/17 and FY 17/18, the City received economic development grants in the amounts of
$185,000.00 and 125,000.00, respectively, from the Chevron Products Company. Staff was informed
by the Chevron Products Company that additional funding of $125,000.00 was awarded and should be
220
presented to the City in September of 2018. The FY 17/18 year-end balance in the Chevron grant fund
will be $280,000.00 (not including the $125,000 awarded for FY 18/19). Staff recommends that these
funds be utilized to continue and enhance the existing economic development and hospitality and
tourism marketing efforts with focus on business attraction and enhancing the City's brand as atourism
destination.
Upon approval of the FY18-19 budget, staff requests City Council to formally authorize the City
Manager to approve a contract amendment with The Company of Others — Los Angeles (dba The Phelps
Group) in a form approved by the City Attorney, for $596,500 for marketing services to include
hospitality and tourism and economic development marketing. A complete scope of work is attached.
221
Pa%
h�l
All Communications Orae Voce,
City of El Segundo
Integrated Marketing Communications Scope of
Work
FY19 (October 2018 — September 2019)
Prepared for Barbara Voss
August 27, 2018
© 2018 Phelps
222
IrlirlAps
All Communications.
One Voice.
The following Scope of Work (SOW) details services and deliverables based on our current understanding of
your marketing needs and goals. This document is intended to align our planned services on your behalf and to
provide a budget estimate for required efforts, in order to achieve defined objectives and deliverables.
I.Situation Analysis
The City of EI Segundo is currently engaged in marketing and branding efforts aimed to drive awareness and
interest in support of two initiatives: new business attraction ("NBA") and hospitality and tourism ("HT"). The
ultimate goal being to stimulate related business- and visitor -serving businesses and increase tax revenue.
Marketing support is needed to increase the momentum of the NBA efforts to date and raise awareness
among key HT targets and roll out the 2017-18 "Start Here" campaign.
II. Marketing Goals
NBA:
• Highlight the competitive advantages of doing business in EI Segundo to potential targets
■ Grow awareness of the city's offerings among brokers, developers and targeted business industries
• Build positive word-of-mouth and endorsements from influencers
HT:
• Establish EI Segundo as a "go -to" destination for LAX -bound travelers and Angeleno day-trippers, complete
with the latest in hotels, restaurants, retailers and attractions
■ Increase interest in the amenities of the greater community by business travelers
• Build positive word-of-mouth and endorsements from influencers
III. Target Audiences
Primary Target: Commercial and industrial real estate brokers, current and potential business owners, foreign
direct investment
Secondary Target: business travelers, LAX -bound tourists, Angelenos, sports enthusiasts
12121 Bluff Creek Dr. Playa Vista, CA 90094 1 P 310.752.4400 1 phelpsagency.com © 2017 Phelps
223
Phelps All Communications.
One Voice.
IV. Integrated Marketing Services
Phelps has outlined the following impactful and budget conscious integrated marketing tactics for October 1,
2018 through September 30, 2019.
• Public and Media Relations
A strategic approach is needed to bring EI Segundo top -of -mind to key reporters and influencers in Los
Angeles and beyond for NBA and HT. With so many great stories to be told; outlets and angles can be
tailored to capture the attention of the journalists and influencers, while keeping EI Segundo considered
for future stories. Media relations can be utilized to tell multiple stories across a variety of outlets.
Press Materials:
Refresh and update key press materials, as needed.
o Industry -specific one sheets and media fact sheets
o Gather assets such as photos, videos, graphs, logos
o Create press releases, media alerts and new business announcements
Media Lists:
Phelps will refine targeted media lists for use in strategic and proactive outreach to the consumer and
trade media in Los Angeles and other key markets. The agency's tools include Cision, a media
database and editorial calendar subscription service; ProfNet, which provides daily leads from working
journalists looking for resources.
Media Pitches:
Develop timely, compelling and newsworthy pitches, both angle and outlet focused. Optimize immediate
story prospects and cultivate longer lead media opportunities.
Events, Local Media FAMs and Relationship Building:
• Concierge Program
■ Elite Yelp Event
• Steller Event
• Develop and execute 3-5 local media and influencer events/FAMs
• Pursue possible partnership opportunities for international and national media FAMs
• Additional timely event support as needed
Deliverables: Monthly reporting of media outreach efforts and status, recap of coverage results with
channel metrics
Includes purchase of 5-10 broadcast clips (up to a maximum of $750).
• Display Banners Creative Production
A. Creative Concepting
Phelps will develop campaign concepts with a distinct look and feel indicative of our "Start Here" positioning.
Development includes:
• Concept, design and presentation of up to two creative directions to bring the positioning to life
• Incorporating brand tone and attitude
12121 Bluff Creek Dr. Playa Vista, CA 90094 1 P 310.752.4400 1 phelpsagency.com © 2017 Phelps
224
Phelps All Communications
One Voice.
• Develop visuals and messaging to identify the focus of the brand personality and visual direction
• Add additional typography and color palette to complement the brand identity
Deliverables: Up to two (2) creative concepts to choose from
Client Requirements: Provide timely feedback and approvals
Scope: Up to two rounds of revisions on chosen creative direction
B. Campaign Creative Development
Understanding the media channels, and once the creative concept and key art are locked in, the campaign will
be versioned into multiple sizes for digital placement.
Based on our current knowledge and understanding of goals, Phelps proposes that campaign development will
include:
Copywriting
Phelps will develop all required copy including headlines and CTAs for the selected campaign.
Deliverables: copy deck for all ad sizes
Client Requirements: Provide timely feedback and approvals
Scope: Two (2) copy versions for testing, two rounds of feedback
Digital Display Ad Units
Development of one static display ad unit concept for required sizes with analytic tracking
Deliverables: designed banners and static .jpgs
Client Requirements: Provide timely feedback and approvals
Scope: HTML banners, sized as noted above, with up to (1) round of design revisions
Y Paid Media
is Paid Search
o Develop a campaign focused on LA with agreed upon search terms for NBA (directing
to the "new" elsegundobusiness.com) and HT audience when HT website is live
o Includes discovery of competitive spend, strategy and creative, goal setting,
copywriting, performance monitoring and ongoing optimization
o KPIs for NBA are inquiry form completions, SOAR email newsletter sign-ups, Smart
Business Move guide pdf downloads
o KPIs for HT are TBD
• Paid Social
o HT -focused paid Facebook or Instagram campaign, to commence when HT site is live
o Includes discovery of competitive spend, strategy and creative, goal setting,
copywriting, management of image library (existing photo assets and selection of
royalty -free stock images), targeted performance monitoring and ongoing optimization
Q Display Banners Campaign Execution
12121 Bluff Creek Dr. Playa Vista, CA 90094 1 P 310.752.4400 1 phelpsagency.com © 2017 Phelps
225
Phelps All Communications,
One Voice.
o Includes discovery of competitive spend, media strategy, and goal setting
o Manage and optimize spend for efficiency
o Performance monitoring and ongoing performance optimizations
o Tracking implementation
Deliverables: Monthly performance reporting
Paid Media Hard Costs: HT $120, 000 (estimated 12 months), NBA $48, 000 (estimated 12 months).
Total: $168, 000
• Owned Social
• NBA- and HT -focused Facebook and/or Linkedln campaign, depending on audience
• Includes topic recommendations, copywriting, photo/video asset management, monthly
calendaring, semi -daily posting, ongoing engagement monitoring
Deliverables: Monthly content calendar and performance reporting
HT Newsletter strategy and list -building
Communications strategy development, including target recommendations, CTA
recommendations and content ideas
• Recommendation on how to build the subscriber list
Email template design and copywriting, up to 10 event emails.
• SOAR Email Newsletter
Content strategy, copywriting, photo asset management, updating of existing layout for each
issue with new content, list management, link tagging for tracking, email blasting, monitoring
and reporting for each issue
Includes email distribution hard costs ($5 per send + $.015 per email)
• Website Management
• Update key facts and information as needed on EI SegundoBusiness.org and visitelseg undo. org
■ Ongoing website functionality monitoring and troubleshooting on both sites
HT City Map
• Develop one EI Segundo HT -focused map/brochure
o Will be a combination of map including all tourism destinations and areas of interest
(hotels, restaurants, retail, attractions, points of interest, parking, etc.) and listings of
events and visitor amenities
o To be coordinated with stakeholders and city officials
o Includes 1-2 concepts, based on client input, and 2 rounds of revisions
Note: Client to provide complete business list and contact information. Does not
include printing or distribution.
12121 Bluff Creek Dr. Playa Vista, CA 90094 1 P 310.752.4400 1 phelpsagency.com © 2017 Phelps
226
,l All Communications.
PSOne Voice.
Deliverables: One print -ready layout and one pdf version for posting to destinationelsegundo.com and
electronic use.
Account Leadership, Strategy and Management
■ Account management of all activities pertaining to the above referenced services including team
management, client meetings, recommendations, communications, correspondence, budget
management, estimating and scope development for planned initiatives
• Ongoing strategic counsel for all marketing efforts
• Stewardship of the brand to ensure consistent and appropriate messaging, content and
environment
Attendance with client at stakeholder and committee meetings, as needed
Regular status meetings and reporting
Champions of Business Event
• Champions of Business:
o Creative updating and execution of 5 emails (Save the Date, Invitation, Sold Out,
Sponsor Thank You, Event Thank You); event digital & physical signage design;
program design and event program collaboration with committee
• Does not include hard costs or printing for Champions of Business 2019
Video production including concept, script development, shooting and editing. Note: this project
will be funded by event sponsorships and scoped separately.
• Contingency Budget
• Phelps will set aside a small bucket of hours for each Hospitality and Tourism and New
Business Attraction to accommodate on going account needs not described above. This budget
can be used for one-off requests, PowerPoint presentations or otherwise unforeseen marketing
needs that arise throughout the fiscal year.
V. Measurement and Assessment
Program elements have built-in measurements in order to assess those components that are most
successful. Measurement and reporting will include the following:
• Earned media placements and readership: Recap of coverage and reach in key online sites and
blogs, national and regional magazines, newspapers and any broadcast segments
Social media and paid search metrics and reporting; impressions, clicks CTR, CPC,
engagement rate, most viewed/searched terms, recommendations for optimization
VI. Client Participation
A key benefit of Phelps is the personal approach, responsiveness and commitment to excellence that we
provide our clients. Our strong, talented team of marketing experts service our clients' needs across all
12121 Bluff Creek Dr. Playa Vista, CA 90094 1 P 310.752.4400 1 phelpsagency.com © 2017 Phelps
227
�6I
All Communications.
One Voice,
disciplines of an integrated marketing communications plan. To meet the project goals, we anticipate the
following client participation:
• Access: express with your team the importance of working with us, encourage your associates to
proactively provide resources, time, knowledge, ideas and vision
• Availability: marketing is deadline oriented, please set aside time to be available, provide approvals and
decisions, as needed
• Alerts: keep us apprised of anything that may materially affect the success of the project
• Brainstorming: bring all your ideas to the table, they could translate into marketing concepts
• Feedback: always let us know immediately if there is something we can improve upon and we request your
response to our client satisfaction surveys to allow us to continuously improve our processes and
relationships on your behalf
■ Over communication: provide us with plenty of information on your organization at all times, it will help us
create a more attractive and stronger picture of your brand
• Respect: mutual consideration of confidential and other proprietary materials and approaches
VII. Budget
Based on the scope outlined, the following budget is recommended-
FY18 (October 2019 — September 2019):
Campaign Creative Production
Creative production for digital campaign banner ads, incl. copywriting and design
$30,000
Media Spend
Media hard cost
$120,000
(Google, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, programmatic)
Media Strategy & Reporting, ongoing
Ongoing budget, performance monitoring and goal setting, copywriting, asset management
$48,000
and optimiang for target audience.
Newsletter strategy, list -building, 1 O send
Communications strategy development, list -building plan, "Events & Updates" email template
$35,000
design and content development, up to 10 event emails.
Webstte management, updates
Ongoing website functionality monitoring, updates and hosting internally to then transition to
$12,000
communications staff
City Map
Map to Include all tourism destinations and areas of interest (hotels, restaurants, retail, attractions,
$18,000
points of interest, parking, etc.) and listings of events and visitor amenities.
Owned Social Media Strategy,
Facebook and Instagram: topic recommendations, copywriting, asset management, calendaring,
$6,000
Management, Analytics
daily/semi-daily posting, ongoing engagement monitoring and monthly reporting to client. Transition
to communications staff.
Public Relations
Main client contact for public relations efforts; responsible for coordination of pr team members,
$54,000
creating, updating and implementing press materials and monitoring coverage, ongoing pitch
planning and writing, press release and media alert writing, coordinating to post latest coverage
on website. Press conference and event planning/attendance, as needed. Ongoing relationship
building with all EI Segundo stakeholders.
Main contact for client; responsible for coordination of all team members, leadership and brand
$36,000
Project & Account Management /Strategic Planning
strategy of overall account; facilitating all new and ongoing projects, atte ndance with client at
stakeholder and committee meetings, finances, regular status meetings and rei)omiig.
Total (Including $10,000 contingency)
$369,000
12121 Bluff Creek Dr. Playa Vista, CA 90094 1 P 310.752.4400 1 phelpsagency,com © 2017 Phelps
228
Phelps All Communications.
One Voice.
4ew Business Attraction
Ion
Website management, updates
Ongoing website functionality monitoring, updates and hosting internally to then transition
$12,000
to communications staff
SOAR Business Newsletter Development
Content strategy, copywriting, asset management, list management, layout updating, link tagging
$12,500
& Analytics
for GA tracking, blasting, monitoring and reporting for each. Goal is list building, increased traffic.
Reduce sends to 6x year and focus rest of budget on list building. Attract broader base of
businesses. To then transition to communications staff.
Event Collateral
Champions of Business (2019) Creative Concepting; Design and Execution of 5 Emails
$25,000
(Save the Date, Invitation, Sold Out, Sponsor Thank You, Event Thank You); Event Digital
& Physical Signage; Program design, to decrease event detail coordination with committee.
Media Spend
Media hard cost
$48,000
(Google, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, programmatic)
Media Strategy & Reporting, ongoing
Ongoing budget, performance monitoring and goal setting, copywriting, asset management and
$24,000
optimiring for target audience.
Owned Social Media Strategy,
Facebook and Linkedln: topic recommendations, copywriting, asset management, calendaring,
$6,000
Management, Analytics
daily/semi-daily posting, ongoing engagement monitoring and monthly reporting to client. To then
transition to communications staff.
Public Relations
Main client contact for public relations efforts; responsible for coordination of pr team members,
$54,000
creating, updating and implementing press materials and monitoring coverag6, ongoing pitch
planning and writing, press release and media alert writing, coordinating to post latest coverage
on website. Press conference and event planninglattendance, as needed. Ongoing relationship
building with all EI Segundo stakeholders.
Project & Account Management /Strategic Planning
Main contact for client; responsible for coordination of all team members, leadership and brand
$36,000
strategy of overall account; facilitating all new and ongoing projects, attendance with client at
stakeholder and committee meetings, finances, regular status meetings and reporting,
Total (Including $10,000 contingency) $227,500
TOTAL BUDGET: $596,500
Terms: Services to be billed monthly, with Net 30 terms, per the terms of the Professional Services
Agreement.
All services related to FY19 (October 1, 2018 -September 30, 2019) not specifically listed in this
document will be billed separately under another scope to be determined.
This is a budget allocation recommendation. The amount of additional research, strategy sessions, revisions and timing, will
impact the budget. Budget assumes rounds of revisions as defined herein. It is flexible based on client requirements, timeline
and deliverables. Any changes to scope may incur additional budget and impact schedule.
Incidentals and hard costs are not included, unless as specified. Incidentals may include materials, research, market data,
stock photography, fonts, photo shoots, production crews, talent, voiceover, edit bay fees, language translation, webtools, e -
communication distribution, shipping, delivery, travel, printing, tax, third -party costs, and other related expenses. Any
incidental exceeding $500 will be estimated separately for approval.
12121 Bluff Creek Dr, Playa Vista, CA 90094 1 P 310.752,4400 1 phelpsagency,com © 2017 Phelps
229
Phelps All Communications.
One Voice.
VIII. Acceptance and Signature
This Scope of Work may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. This Scope of
Work is governed under by the terms and conditions of the Professional Services Agreement entered into by
and between the parties.
The contents of this document are considered confidential in nature and protected under The Phelps Group as
proprietary information. Any use of this material without consent or engagement is strictly prohibited.
The parties have caused this Scope of Work to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as
identified below.
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO THE COMPANY - LOS ANGELES (DBA PHELPS)
Authorizing Authorizing
Name Name
Title Title
Date Date
12121 Bluff Creek Dr, Playa Vista, CA 90094 1 P 310.752.4400 1 phelpsagency.com © 2017 Phelps
230
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 4, 2018
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: New Business
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of a Resolution adopting the proposed inter -
fund loan policy for the City of El Segundo. (Fiscal Impact: None)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Adopt the proposed Resolution adopting an Inter -fund Loan Policy; and/or,
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Resolution and Proposed City of El Segundo Inter -fund Loan Policy
FISCAL IMPACT: None - (No direct fiscal impact, although the Policy will add controls and help
ensure the timely repayment of inter -fund loans.)
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal: 5b El Segundo approaches its work in a financially disciplined and
responsible way.
Objective: 2 The City will maintain a stable, efficient, and transparent financial
environment.
ORIGINATED BY: Joseph Lillio, Director of Finance
fL--
REVIEWED BY: City Attorney's office
APPROVED BY: Greg Carpenter, City Manage
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
Inter -fund loans involve the lending of cash from one City fund to another for a specific purpose
with a requirement for repayment. The practice of inter -fund loans is a recognized and necessary
aspect of municipal finance. Such loans are typically short-term in nature, but also may be long-
term, and constitute the allocation of resources between individual funds for working capital
purposes.
The proposed City of El Segundo Inter -fund Loan Policy (attached) documents the methods used
by the City to demonstrate prudent financial management over inter -fund loan(s). The policy:
Requires City Council approval of inter -fund loans, except for short-term (less than 12
months) working capital loans,
231
Permits short-term inter -fund loans for working capital to cover Council -approved
reimbursable grants and projects and other temporary timing differences in cash flows,
and
• Prohibits inter -fund loans from being used to solve ongoing structural budget issues or
hindering the accomplishment of any function or project for which the lending fund
was established.
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the proposed inter -fund loan policy to ensure long-term
(one year or more) loans are properly approved and paid back in a timely manner. Staff believes
inclusion of this Policy will ensure adherence and compliance with municipal finance best
practices as recommended by Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) and most
importantly, will provide authority for inter -fund loans.
232
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN INTER -FUND LOAN POLICY.
The City Council of the City of EI Segundo does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: Recitals:
A. Inter -fund loans involve the lending of cash from one City fund to another
for a specific purpose with a requirement for repayment;
B. The practice of inter -fund loans is a recognized and necessary aspect of
municipal finance;
C. The proposed City of EI Segundo Inter -fund Loan Policy documents the
methods used by the City to demonstrate prudent financial management
over inter -fund loans;
D. The City Council desires to adopt the policy.
SECTION 2: Adoption and Authorization. The City Council hereby adopts the "City of EI
Segundo Inter -fund Loan Policy," attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by this
reference. The City Manager or his designee is authorized to take any actions needed to
effectuate this resolution or the policy.
SECTION 3: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and
remain effective unless superseded by a subsequent resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of
ATTEST:
Tracy Weaver, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley
City Attorney
Drew Boyles, Mayor
Page 1 of 1
, 2018.
233
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO INTER -FUND LOAN POLICY
(adopted by the City Council on _
A. All inter -fund loans, other than short-term inter -fund loans (as defined), require City Council
approval by resolution. Any long-term inter -fund loan must be documented by a formal
agreement that specifies the following terms and conditions of the loan:
1. Purpose of Inter -fund Loan and Documentation Requirements
Loan purpose, amount, term, and repayment source will be identified any time a loan
is recommended. Loans will be coordinated with the City Attorney's Office to ensure
compliance with the Municipal Code and will be approved by the City Council via
resolution. Payments made on outstanding loans shall be reflected in the Proposed
and Adopted Budget and Annual Financial Report, as applicable. A summary of all
outstanding loans will also be included in the annual Proposed and Adopted
Operating Budget and the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The
CAFR will also consistently include the loan term, rate of interest, and the interest
amount due in its calculation of the total liability associated with the loan.
2. Identification of the source fund
a. Availability of unrestricted funds in the source fund;
b. The borrowing fund has the capacity to repay the debt;
c. The lending fund has the capacity to lend the funds, beyond its own operating and
capital needs; and
d. The loan does not violate any debt covenants, regulatory requirements or other
provisions of the borrowing and lending funds.
3. Repayment of Inter -fund Loan
a. Repayment must have a payment source and funding stream;
b. Specific repayment schedule (term of the loan);
c. Interest is imposed at a rate equal to at least investment earnings if loan did not occur;
d. Interest is to be accrued monthly and paid quarterly;
e. The interest expense paid on inter -fund loans is to be treated as user fund expense,
while the interest income is to be treated as interest revenue to the loaning fund; and
f. There is no prepayment penalty on an inter -fund loan.
4. Other Considerations
a. Internal controls to monitor repayment; and
b. The inter -fund loan is callable by the lending fund if needed to ensure that the lending
fund has sufficient operating funds.
Page 1 of 2
234
B. For purposes of this policy, "Short-term inter -fund loans" are defined as those loans made
from one City fund to another that will be repaid within less than 12 months. Short-term
inter -fund loans may be made for working capital to provide cash for Council -approved
reimbursable grants and projects. Short-term inter -fund loans are also permitted for
temporary timing differences in cash flows when expenditures are incurred before revenue is
collected. Short-term inter -fund loans may be approved by the City Manager or Finance
Director and do not require City Council approval.
C. Prohibited Uses:
1. Inter -fund loans must not be used to solve ongoing structural budget issues; and
2. Inter -fund loans must not hinder the accomplishment of any function or project for
which the lending fund was established.
Page 2 of 2
235