Loading...
Agenda Packet 2011-06-14City Con e1*1 Tony Ferrara, Mayor Caren Ray, Mayor Pro Tem Joe Costello, Council Member Jim Guthrie, Council Member Tim Brown, Council Member Steven Adams, City Manager Timothy J. Carmel , City Attorney Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk AGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 14, 2011 7:00 P.M. Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers 215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. FLAG SALUTE 4. INVOCATION 7:00 P.M. ARROYO GRANDE VALLEY KIWAN IS PASTOR ROBERT BANKER OPEN DOOR CHURCH 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 5.a. Honorary Mayor's Commendation Recognizing the Lions Club for receiving the "District 4 -A3 Number One Club" Award 5.b. Honorary Mayor's Commendation Recognizing Arroyo Grande High School Graduate Hunter Norton on his U.S. Military Academy/West Point Appointment 6. AGENDA REVIEW 6.a. Move that all ordinances presented for introduction or adoption be read in title only and all further readings be waived. AGENDA SUMMARY —JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 2 7. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present issues, thoughts, or suggestions on matters not scheduled on this agenda. Comments should be limited to those matters that are within the jurisdiction of the City Council. The Brown Act restricts the Council from taking formal action on matters not published on the agenda. In response to your comments, the Mayor or presiding Council Member may: ♦ Direct City staff to assist or coordinate with you. ♦ A Council Member may state a desire to meet with you. ♦ It may be the desire of the Council to place your issue or matter on a future Council agenda. Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council: ♦ Comments should be limited to 3 minutes or less. ♦ Your comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not directed to individual Council members. ♦ Slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member or member of the audience shall not be permitted. 8. CONSENT AGENDA: The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. The recommendations for each item are noted. Any member of the public who wishes to comment on any Consent Agenda item may do so at this time. Any Council Member may request that any item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to permit discussion or change the recommended course of action. The City Council may approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda on one motion. 8.a. Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification (KRAETSCH) Recommended Action: Ratify the listing of cash disbursements for the period May 16 2011 through May 31, 2011. 8.b Consideration of Fiscal Year 2011 -12 Appropriation Limit (KRAETSCH) Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution establishing the appropriation limit from tax proceeds for Fiscal Year 2011 -12. 8.c. Consideration of Approval of the City of Arroyo Grande Investment Policy (KRAETSCH) Recommended Action: Approve the City of Arroyo Grande Investment Policy. 8.d. Consideration of Confirmation of Assessments for Tracts 1158, 1769 2310, and 2236 (KRAETSCH) Recommended Action: 1) Adopt a Resolution confirming landscaping assessments for all parcels within Tract 1158; 2) Adopt a Resolution confirming landscaping and lighting assessments for all parcels within Tract 1769; 3) Adopt a Resolution confirming the assessments for the Parkside Assessment District for all parcels within Tract 2310; and 4) Adopt a Resolution confirming the assessment for the Grace Lane Assessment District for all parcels within Tract 2236. AGENDA SUMMARY —JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 3 8. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd) 8.e. Consideration of Approval of Minutes (WETMORE) Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the Regular City Council/ Redevelopment Agency meeting of May 24, 2011; the Special City Council meeting of May 26, 2011; the Special City Council /Redevelopment Agency meeting of May 26, 2011, and the Special Joint City Council /Planning Commission meeting /study session of May 31, 2011, as submitted. 8.f. Consideration of Council Appointment to Parks and Recreation Commission (WETMORE) Recommended Action: Approve the recommendation of Council Member Joe Costello to appoint Roxanne Shankland to the Parks and Recreation Commission. 8.g. Consideration of Letter to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC Regarding the SmartMeter Program (ADAMS) Recommendation Action: Authorize the Mayor to submit a letter to the CPUC urging approval of a Pacific Gas and Electric SmartMeter opt out program at no additional cost to the customer. 8.h. Consideration of Cancellation of July 26, 2011 City Council Meeting (ADAMS) Recommended Action: Cancel the regularly scheduled Council meeting of July 26, 2011. 8.i. Consideration of Request from Planning Commissioners Keen and Sperow for Consecutive Absences from Planning Commission Meetings (McCLISH) Recommended Action: Consent to three consecutive absences by Planning Commissioners Keen and Sperow during the summer months. 8.j. Consideration of a Resolution Accepting Improvements for Parcel Map AG 04- 0123 Located at 154 Pine Street Constructed by Robert Del Campo (McCLISH) Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution accepting improvements for Parcel Map AG 04 -0123 located at 154 Pine Street constructed by Robert Del Campo. 8.k. Consideration of Acceatance of the Well No. 10. Phase II Rehabilitation Proiect. PW 2010 -02 (McCLISH) Recommended Action: 1) Accept the project improvements as constructed by R. Baker, Inc. in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Well No. 10, Phase II Project; 2) Direct staff to file a Notice of Completion; 3) Appropriate an Additional $6,000 for the project budget from the Water Availability Fund; 4) Approve a Second Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services with Garing, Taylor & Associates in the amount of $2,150; and 5) Authorize release of the retention, thirty - five (35) days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded, if no liens have been filed. AGENDA SUMMARY —JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 4 8. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd) 8.1. Consideration of Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Portions of Title 13 and Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Relating to the Establishment of Water Efficient Landscape Requirements; Development Code Amendment Case No. 11 -002 (McCLISH) Recommended Action: Adopt an Ordinance amending portions of Title 13 and Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code relating to the establishment of water efficient landscape requirements. 8.m. Consideration of a Resolution Accepting Open Space, Trails, Public Access and Slopes for Tract 2236 (McCLISH) Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution accepting offers of dedication and improvements for open space, trails, public access and slopes for Tract 2236. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 9.a. Consideration of Development Code Amendment 11 -003: Proaosed Ordinance Amending Regulations Regarding Temporary Signs; Citywide (MCCLISH) Recommended Action: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council introduce an Ordinance amending portions of Chapter 16.60 of Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code regarding temporary banners and signs. 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS: None. 11. NEW BUSINESS: 11.a. Consideration of South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Presentation (ADAMS) Recommended Action: Receive presentation and communicate concerns and questions. 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: This item gives the Mayor and Council Members the opportunity to present reports to the other members regarding committees, commissions, boards, or special projects on which they may be participating. (a) MAYOR FERRARA: (1) San Luis Obispo Council of Governments /San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLOCOG /SLORTA) (2) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD) (3) Brisco /Halcyon /Hwy 101 Interchange Project Subcommittee (4) Other AGENDA SUMMARY —JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 5 12. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS (cont'd) (b) MAYOR PRO TEM RAY: (1) Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC) (2) California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) (3) Tourism Committee (4) Other (c) COUNCIL MEMBER COSTELLO: (1) Zone 3 Water Advisory Board (2) Air Pollution Control District (APCD) (3) Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) (4) Other (d) COUNCIL MEMBER GUTHRIE: (1) South County Area Transit (SCAT) (2) Community Action Partnership (CAPSLO) (3) Homeless Services Coordinating Council (HSOC) (4) Other (e) COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN: (1) Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA) (2) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) (3) Other 13. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS: The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by a Council Member who would like to receive feedback, direct staff to prepare information, and /or request a formal agenda report be prepared and the item placed on a future agenda. No formal action can be taken. None. 14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS: The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by the City Manager in order to receive feedback and /or request direction from the Council. No formal action can be taken. None. 15. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Correspondence /Comments as presented by the City Council. 16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: Correspondence /Comments as presented by the City Manager. AGENDA SUMMARY —JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 6 17. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present issues, thoughts, or suggestions. Comments should be limited to those matters that are within the jurisdiction of the City Council. The Brown Act restricts the Council from taking formal action on matters not published on the agenda. 18. ADJOURNMENT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** All staff reports or other written documentation, including any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the City Council within 72 hours of a regular meeting, relating to each item of business on the agenda are available for public inspection during regular business hours in the City Clerk's office, 300 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande. If requested, the agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. To make a request for disability - related modification or accommodation, contact the Legislative and Information Services Department at 805 - 473 -5414 as soon as possible and at least 48 hours prior to the meeting date. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** This agenda was prepared and posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2. Agenda reports can be accessed and downloaded from the City's website at www.arroyogrande.orq * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** City Council /Redevelopment Agency Meetings are cablecast live and videotaped for replay on Arroyo Grande's Government Access Channel 20. The rebroadcast schedule is published at www.slo- span.org CITY OF LIFORI Mayor's c ommendation Presentedto arroyo Grande Lions Club The City of .Arroyo Grande recognizes the .Arroyo GrandAelfam Chid as the recipient of the District 4 -A3 WUMber One Chid Awar4 the highest award avaiCa6le to a I ions Club. We ti►+ouCd Czke to extencfour carcgratuCatiorrs to your dedicated members ardare very gratefulf'or your service to the ,arroyo Grande Community. Datedthis ztLday0f J=e 2011 ; 1111111111111 1 WCORPORATED M JULY 10. 7911 Tiony Ferrara, Nayor t / FF r 0 jk \ Agenda Item 5.a. Page 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Agenda Item 5.a. Page 2 � CITY Amok :01-9 LIFOR Mayors I Commendation jDresentedto (unter Vance Xmlow In reco8n,ition of your CongressloonaCMamlonatIAM andsu6secruent Ayyointment to the UnitedStates Mititary .academy. On Befiagof the .Arroyo Grande City Counci� ^We are oudof your camyCtshm-ents andtivish you the very best of tuck at 'West Point. Datedthis nth day JUne zou 0 . !L k Ft OY O mcopipoRxm (.) rv _ rn 71f JULY 14. loll � Agenda Item 5.b. Page 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Agenda Item 5.b. Page 2 INCORPORATED JULY 10, 1911 1 F O MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: ANGELA KRAETSCH, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESJJ : TRICIA ME ERS, SENIOR ACCOUNT CLERK SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CASH DISBURSEMENT RATIFICATION DATE: JUNE 149 2011 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for the period May 16 through May 31, 2011. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is a $1,062,039.07 fiscal impact that includes the following it rns: • Accounts Payable Checks 149820 - 149987 $ 599,230.04 • Payroll Checks & Benefit Checks 402 BACKGROUND: Cash disbursements are made weekly based o the submission of all required documents supporting the invoices submitted for payment. Prior to payment, Administrative services staff reviews all disbursement documents to ensure that they meet the approval requirements adopted in the Municipal Code and the City's Purchasing Policies and Procedures Manual o February 2000. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The attached listing represents the cash disbursements required of normal and usual operations during the period. The disbursements are accounted for in the FY 2010-11 budget. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: • Approve staff recommendation; • Do not approve staffs recommendation; Provide direction to staff. Agenda Item 8.a. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF CASH DISBURSEMENT RATIFICATION JUNE 14, 2011 PAGE 2 ADVANTAGES: 0 The Administrative Services Department monitors payment of invoices for accountability, accuracy and completeness using standards approved by the Council. 0 Invoices are paid in a timely manner to establish goodwill ith merchants. Discounts are taken where applicable. DISADVANTAGES* No disadvantages have been identified as long as City Council confirms all expenditures are appropriate. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental revie w is required for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, .tune g, 2011. The Agenda and report were posted on the City's webite on Friday, ,Jane 10, 2011. No public comments were received. Attachments: 1. May 1 — May 31,, 2011 — Accounts Payable Check Register 2. May 20, 2011 — Payroll Check & Benefit Checks Register Agenda Item 8.a. Page 2 ATTA HME IT 1 Page: 1 apkHist Che History Listing 0610612011 1 : 4AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bark code. boa Check # Date Vendor Statue DlearN id Date Invoice Irv. Date Amount Paid Check Taal ` 149820 0511312011 008249 NICK E POKRAJAC INC 0513112011 per 2010 -1 0511312011 E 350.5435.7001 35,171.40 35 35,1 71.40 149821 0511712011 000039 CHEVR & TE CARD C 0513112011 29799 149822 9511812011 000072 US POSTAL SERVICE 149323 9511912011 008455 CLAUDIA ACO 149824 05/19/2011 000033 AG C HAMBER O F 149825 0511912011 003175 AQ SMILES 0513112011 051311 051 011 051 211 0513112011 0037510 -i1 0510012011 E 01 0.4201.560 8 114.07 114.07 0511312011 E 0 10.442 1.5504 1,64.4 1,047.48 0511012011 R 01 0.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 05/12/2011 E 01 0.4424. 5353 1 1,350.00 05/01/2011 E 040.4712.5207 3 114.07 1,047.48 30.00 1,350.00 D 3t0.0 t� 149820 0511 912011 000043 ARROYO GRANDE GLASS & C 0513112011 1 537 0412112011 CL E 010.4213.5004 05.00 0 05.00 c� M 00 wh) Page: 1 ap kHi t Check History Listing 3678 Page: 2 06/0612411 1 : 4A ! CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank co boa 147.81 Check Date Vendor Status Clear# oi Date Invoke Inv. Date Amount Pa Check Total 149827 05!19!2011 005507 AT&T C 05!3112011 5/7 -0183 05!07!2011 E 01 0. 4145.5403 785.06 128.24 785.06 C 05/31/2011 5/7-3956 -3956 05/07/2011 05!3112011 3671 04/20!2011 E 220.4303.5303 31.38 E 010-4213.6401 31.38 C 05!3112011 5/7 - 3959 05!07!2011 122.1 C E 640- 31.33 31.38 847.82 1 49828 05/19!2011 001055 A VCO FIFE EXTINGUISHER C 05!3112011 3678 04/20!2011 E 010.4213.6401 147.81 147.81 C 05!3112011 3672 04/20!2011 E 010-4213.6401 128.24 128.24 C 05!3112011 3671 04/20!2011 E 010-4213.6401 122.1 122.1 C 05!3112011 3680 0412012011 E 010A213-6401 102.1 102.10 05!3112011 3670 04/20!2011 E 0 1 0 A213.6401 61.05 61.05 05/3112011 3073 04/20!2011 E 010.4213.6401 20.00 t> 2. 05/31/2011 3075 44/20!2011 CL E 010.4213.6401 20.00 20.00 t� M 00 44-iD Page: apCkHi t Che History Listing P 0610612011 10:64AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE B ank cod boa C heck # Date Vendor Statue ClearlVoid Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 0613112011 3674 0412012011 E 010.4213.6401 16.00 16.00 05/3112011 3676 0412012011 E 010.4213.6401 16.00 16.00 0613112011 3679 0412012011 E 0 1 0.4213.6401 12.00 12. 0513112011 3677 04/20/2011 E 01 0.4213.6401 6.00 8.00 653.30 149629 0511912011 000053 B & B STEEL & SUPPLY, INC 0613112011 363503 149830 0511912011 000065 BRENDA BARR O 0613112011 061211 04/1912011 E 010.4420.6605 109.79 109.70 100.70 05/12/2011 E 010.44 24.62 2 222.8 E 010.4426.5255 74.57 E 010.4423.6253 26.64 326.03 14983' 0511912011 002909 DEBRA BLACK c� c� CL 0 c� M 00 CA 0 0613112011 1309 149832 0611912011 000087 BREMEN PEST CONTR C 05/31/2011 139644 04/25/2011 E 21 7.4460.6366 1 1,260.05 05/0612011 E 01 0.4213.6303 109-00 109.00 326.03 1,260.00 Page: a pCkHIst Check History Listing Page: 06/0612011 10: 4AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor Statue ClearNoid Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total C 05/31/2011 1 30064 05!06!2011 E 010.4213.5303 30.00 0. 189-00 140333 05!10!2011 000000 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER C 05!31!2011 147302 04/21/2011 E 01 0.4213.5604 9 05.53 05.53 140334 05!10!2011 005812 BROUGH CONSTRUCTION C 05/31/2011 PW 2011 -02 05!13/2011 E 350.5422.7001 66,664.13 66,604.13 66, 664.13 1 40335 05/1 9/2011 000005 BUR E AND PACE O AG C 05/31/2011 2415873 04/01/2011 E 640.4712.5610 201.43 201.43 C 05/31/2011 2416774 04/22/2011 E 350-5632.7005 1 55.03 1 55.03 C 05/31/2011 2416138 04!07!2011 E 350.5632,7005 144.00 144.00 C 05/31/2011 241 6254 04/11/2011 E 350,5632.7005 21.75 21.75 C 05/31/2011 2415033 04/04/2011 E 350.5632.7005 13.02 D 13.02 C 05/31/2011 2416387 04/13/2011 CL E 640.4712.561 4.40 0 4.40 540.62 c� M 00 Page: 4 p kHist Check History Listing E 350.5829.7501 Pa ge: 06/06/2011 '10 :54AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE 0413012011 Bank code: boa 375.00 375.00 Check # Date Vendor Status Clear/Vold Date Invoice Inv, Date Amount Paid Check Total 149836 05/19/2011 003456 KAREN BURKE C 0513112011 051 011 05/10/2011 R 01 0.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 30.00 149337 0511912011 000129 CA ST EMPL REVEL C 0513112011 050911 0510912011 E 010.4425.5142 4.00 E 640.4712.5142 1,1 07.00 E 010.4301.5142 1 E 010.4 1.5142 324.00 E 010.4301.5142 4 B 010.0000. 1111 995.00 B 010.0000. 1111 -3.o 8 149833 0511912011 003353 CALIFORNIA LI 0513112011 7043 0412612011 E 010.4213.5004 74.24 74.24 3,530.10 74.24 0313112011 E 010.4420.5005 100.00 100.00 100.00 c� c� CL 0 c� M 00 149330 05/1912011 000143 AR ON AI BY WELDIN II 149840 0511012011 005390 CANNO 0513112011 7371 0513112011 50700 0513112011 50771 05/31/2011 50770 0413012011 E 350.5829.7501 025.00 025.00 0413012011 E 012.461 0.5303 375.00 375.00 0413012011 E 612.4610-5303 250.00 250. Page: a pCkHi t Check History Listing P 0610612011 1 :64AM CITY OF ARROYO RANDB Bark code: boa Check # Date Vendor Status DlearfVold Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 1 149841 0511 912011 000603 CAR QUEST AUTO PARTS C 8513112811 7314 - 481232 05102/2011 E 220.4383.5603 146.50 146.50 C 0513112011 7314 - 479149 0412112011 E 81 0.4428.5603 144.07 144.07 C 0513112011 7314 - 4821 0510612811 E 010.4305.5601 30.97 .7 321.54 149 842 8511 912811 003854 CCMF - CA CITY T 051211 0511212011 E 010.4181.5503 400.00 480.00 400.00 149843 0511 912011 007794 CENTENNIAL CELE B TI I C 0513112811 051 911 0511 912011 B 010.0008.2229 5,080.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 1 49844 8511912811 008160 CHAPARRAL C 0513112811 332278 8510212011 E 010.4421.5602 120.00 E 0 18.4421.5602 48.58 168.58 168.58 149845 8511912811 000174 COASTLINE C 0513112011 2941 8511212011 D E 220.4383.5608 731.81 t� 731.81 C C 8513112011 27586 04120/2811 E $40.471 2.5683 484.64 484.64 1,216.45 M 00 00 iD Page: app I H1 t Check History Listing P a g e: T 0610612011 1 : 4AM CITY OF ARROYO RANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor Status learl id Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total EMENEEMEEMEM mmw� 149846 0511912011 008457 KRITY COLE C 0513112011 051011 0511012011 R 010.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 30.00 im i•/ � M V 00 149847 0511912011 008467 CR CONSTRUCTION C 0513112011 PW 2010 -11 149848 0511912011 000195 CRYSTAL PRI I WATER C 0513112011 4130 - 014273 C 0513112011 5/3-070931 C 0513112011 513- 003949 0511212011 E 350.5910-7001 156 156, 049.87 04/30/2011 E 0 10.4421-52 01 40.89 40.89 0510312011 E 010.4420.5605 24.94 E 01 2.401 0.5303 24. 9 0510312011 102.76 E 010.4430.5605 15.97 15.97 149849 0511912011 007548 CSG SYSTEMS INC C 0513112011 71865 C 05/31/2011 72241 0412012011 E 640.471 1 1 5 6 4.3 2 1,564.32 04/26/2011 E 640.4710.5303 3 E 01 2.401 0.5303 80.00 E 640.4710.5555 102.76 E 61 2.461 0.5555 25.69 528.45 149850 05119 /2011 008286 DATAARC LLC C 0513112011 1161 05105120 11 E 350.5436.7301 1 1 1 092.26 156,049.87 81.80 2,092.77 Page: 7 p kH i t C 05/31/2011 3183 03/03/2011 Che History Listing 2 P 0610612011 1 : 4A 1 C 05/31/2011 8190 04/12/2011 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE E 350.5422.7501 1 ,780.00 Bank code: boa �F Check # Date Vendor Status Clear/Vold Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 1,092.26 149351 0511912011 005091 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES C 0513112011 5765661 0510212011 E 0 1 0.4420.5605 69.17 69.17 C 05/31/2011 57665230 05/03/2011 E 010.4420.5605 66.30 66.30 C 05/31/2011 57647818 05/02/2011 E 0 1 0.4420.5605 25.45 25.45 C 05/31/2011 57526326 04/21/2011 E 010.4420-5605 3.63 3.68 16 149352 05/19/2011 003453 KR1ST1 DIBBERN C 05/31/2011 050311 05/03/2011 R 010-0000.4605 60.00 60 60 149353 0511 912011 007928 THE D CUTEAM C 0513112011 W01 18575 0412512011 E 010.4145.5303 90.00 90.00 90.00 149354 0511912011 007985 WILLIAM R DYER C 0513112011 3194A 0510612011 E 350.5422.7501 4 4 D C 05/31/2011 3183 03/03/2011 E 350.5422.7501 2 2,597.30 CL C 05/31/2011 8190 04/12/2011 E 350.5422.7501 1 ,780.00 1,780.00 �F o� Page: ap kHi t Check History Listing P 06/06/2011 10: 4AM CITY OF ARROYO RA IDE Bank code: boa C heck # Date Vendor Statue ClearNoid Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 05/31/2011 8194E 05/06/2011 E 350.5422.7501 1 1,310.00 9 149855 05/19/2011 008096 ENNIS PAINT IN 149856 05/19/2011 000262 FRANK'S L FEY 149858 0511912011 000605 THE GAS COMPANY 05/3112011 10195226 04/18/2011 E 220.4303.5613 2,015-68 2,015.68 0511 012011 2 0513112011 31956 0412712011 71.18 E 010.4430.5601 18.49 051111201'1 18.49 0513112011 31870 0411212011 E 010.4420.5605 3.26 3.26 2'1.75 05131 12011 050211 0510212011 B 010.0000.22'1 0 1 1,200.00 1,200.00 0513112011 5111-1375 0513112011 5110 -200 013112011 511'1350 0511112011 E 010.4145.5401 120.66 120.66 0511 012011 E 010.4145.5401 71.18 1 051111201'1 D E 010.4145.5401 68.00 68.00 CL 0513112011 516 -111 0510612011 E 010.4145.5401 21.11 2'1.11 �F Page: D c� c� CL 0) c� �00 N� a p kH!st Check History Listing Page: 10 06/06/2011 10: 4AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor status ClearlVold Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 95/31/2911 5/10 -1500 95/1012011 E 019.4145.5401 15.78 15-78 05/ I11 -919 05/11/2011 E 919.4145.5491 1.0 1.06 297.79 149859 05/19/2011 092813 GRAIN INC C 95/31/2011 9524460921 04/28/2911 E 040,4712.5255 78.00 70.00 78.60 1 49800 05/19/2011 000280 CITY OF GROVER BEACH C 05/31/2011 0 1711 05/1 7/2011 E 010.4424.5351 40.00 48.00 48.00 149001 05/19/2011 008459 HEATHER HARRIS 051011 05/10/2011 010.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 30.00 149802 05/19/2011 000331 INTL TRAINING RESOURCES, 051911 05/19/2011 E 919.4291.5501 450.00 450.00 450.00 149003 05/19/2011 000844 IRON 1 OU NTAI N C 05/31/2011 DJT2 69 04/30/2011 E 010.4002,5303 150.12 150,12 150-12 149004 05/19/2011 005201 JAS PACIFIC BI 10784 05/04/2011 E 010.4212.5303 4 4,512.00 Page: 10 pDkHl t Check History Listing Page: 11 0810812011 10:64 AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor Status DlearrfV 'ld Dame Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 4 , 512.99 149865 05/19/2011 093949 KERN'S PAPER C 0513112911 39403 0412812011 E 010.4102.5255 233.54 233.54 05/31/2011 39333 04/25/2011 E 010.4102.5255 186.83 186.83 420.37 149866 05/19/2011 008381 KAFI LAIC 0513112911 051811 05/18/2011 E 010.4425.5303 E 010.4425.5303 37.50 149867 05/19/2011 000393 LIMA MAR MINIFIED SCHOOL C 0513112011 11 0544 149868 05/19/2011 008198 MANGANO HOLIES IN 03/14/2011 E 91 0.4425.5303 051211 0511 212011 B 0 1 0.0000.221 5 211 0510212011 B 010.0000.221 050 111 05/01/2011 B 010.0000.221 72.14 72.14 1,525.00 1,525.00 1,525.90 1, 200-00 t� 0502 05/19/2011 tD B 91 0.0900.221 1,200-00 CL 1,200.00 ,.� 4 c� 00 w� Page: 11 apCkHist Check History Listing Page: 12 0610612011 10: 4AM CITY OF ARROYO I ANDE Banc code: boa Check # Date Vendor Statue ClearfVold Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 149869 05/19/2011 0640 (LEAN ROOFING INC 0513112011 3396 04/13/2011 E 350.5689.7001 1,633.00 E 350.5433.7001 1.632. CL 0 1T M w ■ 3,265.00 149870 05/19/2011 000426 MIER BS LANDSCAPE C 0513112011 176389 C 0513112011 1 0410512011 E 350.5632.7005 14,90 147.90 0410512011 E 350.5632.7005 147,90 147,9 149671 05/1912011 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, IIAF E, C 0513112011 K57933 C 0513112011 K99551 0513112011 K666 0513112011 K99511 C 0513112011 K451 0513112011 K71966 0412212011 E 220.4303.5255 206.1 206.19 0412612011 E 10.4420.5605 92.40 92.40 0510312011 E 010.4213-56D4 52.57 52.57 04/28/2011 E 01 0.421 3.5604 61.98 61.96 04/21/2011 E 010.4424-5252 60.57 60.57 04/13/2011 E 640.4712.5610 55.41 55.41 3,265.00 295.60 Page. 12 a pDkHi t Check History Listing P 1 06/06/2011 10: 4AM CITY OF ARROYO AIDE Bonk code. boa Check # Gate Vendor Status ClearNoid Date Invoice C heck Total Inv. Date Amount Paid Page: 1 C 0513112011 K586 0412812011 E 010.440.0 5 40.06 40.0 C 0513112011 K7 0312412011 E 640.4712.5610 36.1 36 .1 3 C 0513112011 K 73736 0510312011 E 010.4213-5604 . 35.88 C 0513112011 K72537 0412112011 E 640.4712-5610 30.41 30.41 C 0513112011 K58933 0413012011 E 010.4430.5603 8.26 2 8.2 6 C 05/31/2011 K58388 0412612011 E 010.42 1 .504 8.26 '' 28.26 C 0513112011 K69205 03/10/2011 E 40.471.10.40 26 .4 9 C 0513112011 K75 0511712011 E 220.4303.5255 26.19 26 .19 C 05/31/2011 K 7 3 7 2 7 0510312011 E 010.42 1 .504 15.21 15.21 C 0513112011 K 7 36 74 0510312011 D E 010.42 1 .504 11.9 c� 1 1.92 C 0513112011 K75232 05112!2011 E 640.47 1 2.561 0 10.85 c� 10.85 ( � M F ♦� V ■ ice/ Inv. Date Amount Paid Page: 1 D t� c� CL 0) c� �F a� 0) a pkHist Check History Listing P 14 0610612011 10 :64AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor status ClearNold Date Invoice Inv. Data Amount Pald Check Total 0513112011 K7231 0 0412512011 E 010.4213,5604 9.73 9.73 C 0513112011 K57933 0412212011 E 010.4430-5605 7,59 7.59 C 0513112011 K73732 0510312011 E 010.4213.5604 -14.36 -14.36 661.79 149372 9511912911 994441 MULL HEY FORD C 0513112011 50651 0410712011 E 010.4420.5601 474.22 474.22 474.22 149373 9511912911 994333 NATIVE SONS NURSERY, INC C 9513112911 94976 03123/2011 E 010.4420.5605 135.04 135.04 C 9513112911 94100 0312412011 E 010.4420-5605 45.66 45.66 230.72 149374 0511912011 999456 NAIL REC & PARK ASSN C 0513112011 050311 0510312011 E 010.4421.5503 60.00 E 010.4421.5503 60.00 E 010.4421.5503 60.00 E 010.4421.5503 69.99 E 010.4421.5503 60.00 300.00 149375 9511912911 000464 NEWMAN TRAFFIC SIGNS, C 0513112011 T1- 0233333 04129!2011 E 220.4303.5613 6 2 713.47 300.00 Page: 14 ap kHjst Check History Listing P 1 0610612011 1 :4AM CITY O F ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor Status Clear ord Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 6,71 3.47 149876 0511912911 999466 NOBLE SAW, INC C 9513112011 110490 0411112011 E 220.4303.5603 246.71 246.71 C 0513112011 199355 0410512011 E 220.4303.5603 245.75 245.75 492.46 149377 9511912911 999468 OFFICE DEPOT C 0513112911 553713575991 0411912011 E 01 259.48 259.48 C 9513112011 558322422991 0411912011 E 010.4130.5201 259.48 259.48 C 9513112911 561 722955901 0412012011 E 010.4101.5201 88.43 88.48 C 9513112011 589997839991 0411312011 E 010.4301.5201 43.47 43.47 149373 0511912911 993978 MARINA ORTI C 0513112911 951911 0511012011 R 010.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 823.87 30.00 D c� c� CL 0 c� �F ft-4 0 149379 9511912011 999481 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC C 0513112911 4119 - 194997 0411912011 E 010.4304.5402 14,313.87 14,813.37 Page: 1 ap kHEst Check History Listing P U 06/06/2011 10:54A1 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank c ode: boa Check # Dane Vendor Status ClearNoid Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total C 0513112011 8532991684944 0412912011 E 010.4304.5402 1 E 040.47 12.5402 3 E 040.4711.5402 1 E 012.4010.5402 1 E 010.4145.5401 5 E 217.4460-5355 18.62 12,222.00 C 0513112011 5/11-620838 0511112011 E 01 2.4010.5402 231.43 231.43 C 0513112011 5/11- 0511112011 E 01 0.4145.5401 13.07 19.07 143880 05/19/2011 001739 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC C 05/31/2011 LE POINT ST 05113/2011 E 350.5422.7301 14, 513.53 14,513.53 27,291.37 14,513.53 149331 0511312011 008401 JIM P E N E L L C 0513112011 051 011 05110/2011 R 01 0.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 30.00 D c� c� F 0 ice/ 143882 05/19/2011 000498 PITNEY BOWES, IN 143383 0511912011 007698 STEPHEN P LLA I 855.00 372.00 C 0513112011 7058355 -MY 11 C 0513112011 051911 03113!2011 E 010.4101.5002 855.00 855.00 05/19/2011 E 220.4300.5554 372.00 372.00 Page: 1 apCkHist Check History Listing Page: 17 06/06/2011 1 : 4AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: b Check # Date Vendor Status ClearNoid Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 149884 05/19/2611 062670 F IC H LEASH C 05/31/2611 9376411 64/23/2611 E 0 16.4421.5602 1 76.55 176.55 1 76.55 D t� c� CL 0 c� � �, 1 49885 65/1 9/2611 068466 SACRAME REGIONAL 149886 6511 912011 062142 SAN LUIS PAPER C 051911 05/19/2011 E 61 0.4261.5561 112.60 112.00 C 6513 112 611 624921 C 05/31/2011 624922 C 0513112611 626668 C 05/31/2011 622781 C 6513112611 626666 C 05/31/2011 622016 -66 C 05/31/2011 622976 C 05/31/2011 622016 -61 6412912611 E 616.4426.5665 645.36 645.36 64/29/2611 E 61 0.421 3.5664 599.69 599.69 6212312611 E 916.4213.5664 591.06 591.66 63/36/2611 E 616.4213.5604 512.06 512.66 6212612011 E 616.4420.5665 453.72 453.72 03/16/2011 E 616.421 3.5664 467.76 407.76 04/01/2011 E 616.4426.5605 327.27 327.27 03/21/2011 E 616.4213.5604 212.66 212.06 112.66 Page: 17 Page: 18 apCkHist C he c k History Listing Page: 1 06106/2011 10:64AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa C heck # Date Vendor status ClearlVold D ate Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 05/31/2011 622969 0410512011 E 010.4213.5604 104.31 194.31 3,973.39 149337 0511912011 005367 SERVPRO OF FIVE CITIES C 0513112011 2695753 0411212011 E 010.4213.5303 2,906.36 2,906.86 2,906.86 149888 0511912011 008462 KEISHA SHOEMAKER C 0513112011 051011 0511012011 010.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 30.00 149889 0511912011 000553 SLO COUNTY C 0513112011 051711 0511812011 E 350.5678.7501 70.00 70.00 70.00 149890 0511912011 000562 SLO COUNTY TAX C 0513112011 050411 0510412011 E 350.5678.7501 629.00 629.00 629.00 149891 0511912011 000562 SLO CO UNTY TAX C 0513112011 051 711 0511812011 E 350.5678.7501 73.00 73.00 73.00 D 140302 0511912011 003641 SOUTH COUNTY SANiTARY C 0513112011 52733 0510112011 E 010.4213.5303 1 c� ^ � ii 1 0513112011 3300003 0510112011 E 010.4213.5303 212.32 212.32 N ■A, 0 � Page: 18 ap kHi t Check History Listing Page: 1 06/06/2011 10: 4AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor Status Dlear111oId Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Tot I C 05/31/2011 3300330 C 05/31/2011 3200660 C 05/31/2011 3300557 05/01/2011 149693 05/19/2011 000602 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT C E 010.421 3.5303 112.16 04/28/2011 112-16 05/01/2011 E 010.421 3.5303 112.1 E 612.4610.5303 112.16 05/01/2011 E 010.421 3.5303 5.01 5.01 2,140.16 Page: 1 149693 05/19/2011 000602 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT C 05/31/2011 FOG INSPECTION 04/28/2011 E 612.4610.5303 3,386.83 3,386.63 05/31/2011 FOG INSPECTION 04/26/2011 E 612.4610.5303 707.05 707.05 4,003.66 149804 05/10/2011 004 393 SP MAINTENANCE C 05/31/2011 34563 04/01/2011 E 220.4303.5303 2 E 010.4303.5303 4 7,074.40 C 05/31/2011 34643 05/01/2011 E 220.4303.5303 03.60 E 010.4303.5303 146.40 240.00 7,314.40 D 149895 05/10/2011 000613 STATEWIDE DE SAFETY & C 05/31/2011 1175 05/05/2011 c� E 640.4712.5255 83.14 CL 83 .14 c� Page: 1 ap kHist 0610612011 10: AM Check History Listin CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE P a ge: Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor Status ClearNoid Date Invoice 140806 0511912011 000624 SUPERIOR F UALITY 149897 05/19/2011 008465 SCOTT TAYL 140808 0511912011 002370 TITAN INDUSTRIAL IAL C 0513112011 37278 C 0513112011 051811 C 0513112011 1045239 C 0513112011 1045288 Inv. Date Amount Paid 0312512011 E 010.4212.5602 125.00 140800 0511912011 004609 TROESH RECYCLING, , INC C 0513112011 16184 140000 0511912011 006551 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC. C 0513112011 076616 1,113.46 D c� ^ CL ice/ c� N o0 N 0 140001 0511912011 000660 USA BLUE BOOK C 0513112011 387067 0510412011 E 640.4712.5303 1 1 0412912011 E 612.4610.5255 58.53 58.53 53.53 140002 0511012011 003420 CAR IE VAN BE1 EF EN C 0513112011 051111 05111/2011 E 010.4425.5250 28.38 28.38 Page: Check Total 125.00 1 25.00 0511812011 1 010.0000.4607 45.00 45.00 45.00 0412512011 E 010.4420.5255 211.53 211.53 0412712011 E 220.4303.5255 2.88 2.33 214.41 0412612011 E 350.5422.7001 200.78 200.78 200.78 0510412011 E 640.4712.5303 1 1 0412912011 E 612.4610.5255 58.53 58.53 53.53 140002 0511012011 003420 CAR IE VAN BE1 EF EN C 0513112011 051111 05111/2011 E 010.4425.5250 28.38 28.38 Page: Check Total ap kHi t Check History Listing P 21 0610612011 10 :5 AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa C heck 0 Date Vendor Status ClearNoid Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 28.38 149903 0511912011 008463 CRAIG VA IDERZWAA 051011 0511012011 R 010.0000.4354 3. D c� c� CL 0 c� w� 30.00 149904 0511912011 003407 SHERRY VASQUE 149905 0511912011 002137 VERIZON WIRELESS 051 011 05/10/2011 R 010.0000.4354 30.00 30. 05/17/2011 E 010.4305-5403 44.63 44.63 04/28/2011 E 010.4420.5308 81.42 81.42 05/10/2011 R 01 0.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 05120!2011 E 010.4201.5501 30.00 0513112011 0971 065583 149906 0511912011 000688 WEST COVINA N URSERIES C 0513112011 342529 149907 05/19/2011 008464 PATRICK WILLIAMS 149908 0512012011 006702 JASON CASTILL 0513112011 051 011 0513112011 052011 30.0 149915 0512712011 008471 SANDY FRIEDE K 30.06 30.06 44.63 51.42 30.66 36.11 0513112011 R e f OOO 05125/2011 B 640.0000.2301 36.11 36.11 Page: 21 CL ^ ice/ M N ■^' ice/ pCkHI t Check History Listing Page: 22 0610612011 10:54AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code. boa Check # Date Vendor Status ClearNold Date Invoke Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 149916 0 12712011 008476WILLIAM L GRID R f000111873 0512512011 B 640.0000.2301 24.37 24.37 24.37 149917 0512712011 006473 JBA I IE HA A I R f000111870 0512512011 B 640.0000.2301 39.82 39.62 39.62 149918 0512712011 006477 MAR HERITA JE IBE I R f000111 74 0512512011 B 640.0000.2301 6.31 3.31 3.31 149919 0512712011 006475 DEBORAH & DOUGLAS R f000111872 0512512011 B 640.0000.2301 9.66 9.66 9.66 149920 0 12712011 006478 OCEAN OAKS R f00011187 0512512011 B 640.0000.2301 30.00 30.00 30.00 149921 0512712011 008472 PATTY BALAB Rf000111 869 0212011 B 640.0000.2301 84.17 64.17 84.17 149922 0512712011 006474 ERIKA 11 AR IE R f000111871 0512512011 B 640.0000.2301 32.39 32.39 32.39 Page: 22 D t� c� CL A i) /Y / W0 ' ■AA,' V , i) apCkHist 0610612011 10 :4AM Check History Listing C ITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Page: Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor 1 49923 05/27/201 001259 AGP VIDEO, IN 149924 0512712011 004815 AIRGAS WEST I 149925 05/27/2011 005160 APEX OUTDOOR PAVE S tatus Cle arNold Date Invoice 13112011 4434 Inv. Date Amount Paid 0510412011 E 211.41 01.5330 2.662.50 0513112011 103135194 04/30/2011 E 010.4420.5255 3131 0410612011 E 010.4430.5605 31327 0411212011 E 01 0.4430.5605 2 36.79 36.79 65.03 34.75 149926 0512712011 001133 ARROYO GRANDE LIONS 149927 05/27/2011 005507 AT & T 052511 0512512011 E 010.4424-5252 1 99.79 E 010.4001.5504 99.66 E 010.4201.5504 99.66 399.55 517 -7460 0510712011 E 010.4201.5403 63.72 63.72 149923 0512712011 006607 AT&T 2315156 0412512011 E 010.414. 403 3 3,464.67 Check Total 2,662.50 36.79 99.76 399.55 63.72 Page: apCkH!st Check History Listing Page: 24 0610612411 1:84 11 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check Date Vendor Statue Clear/Vold Date invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Cheer Total 2314362 4412512411 E 414.4145.5443 16.33 1 6.33 3,541.24 ^ CL ice/ M N ■^' ice/ 1 49929 4512712411 444458 BANK OF AMERICA C 05/31/2011 513 -7762 4514812411 E 414.4425.5259 271.91 E 41 4.4424.5252 658.49 E 414.4423.5253 22.75 952.75 C 45/3112411 513 -2459 4514812411 E 414.4241.5641 141.96 E 414.4241.5541 122.46 E 414.4201.5541 602.71 1 866.77 C 4513112411 518 -4915 4514812411 E 414.4441.5541 187.94 167.94 C 4513112411 518 -6736 4514612411 E 354.5435.7441 16 162.44 C 4513112411 5/8-2083 4514612411 E 414.4134.5241 19.12 E 414.41 34.5543 74.99 E 414.4140.5642 65.23 155.34 C 4513112411 518 -2454 45146!2411 E 010.4421.5201 45.44 E 414.4425.5255 33.94 414.442 3.52 53 22.22 E 41 4.4424.5257 35.79 137.31 Page: 24 D c� c� CL 0) c� N o0 w-40) apkHist 05/05/2011 10:541 Check History Listi CITY OF ARROYO F ANDE Bank code. boa C heck # Date Vendor 149930 05/27/2011 00191 BOB'S EXPRESS ESS 1 ASH 149931 05/27/2011 003734 ADRIAN B I JA 149932 05/27/2011 000122 CA ST B OF 149033 05/27/2011 005601 MARY CANNON Statue ClearNold Data Invoice Inv. Date 05/31/2011 I - 9444 05/31/2011 I -4272 05/31/2011 I -9436 05/02/2011 05/31/2011 5I -2581 Inv. Date Amount Paid 05/08/2011 E 010.4101.5201 36.90 36.90 05/08/2011 05/02/2011 E 010.4120.5316 64.54 64.54 05/08/2011 E 010.4101.5201 43.48 163.00 43.48 05/08!2011 E 350.5433.7301 36.92 P C heck Total Page: 25 36.9 2,693.95 20160 05/02/2011 E 010.4201.5601 163.00 163.00 168.00 052611 05/26/2011 E 010.4424.5353 500.00 500.00 500.00 051611 05/1 / 011 E 235.4103.5303 500.00 500.00 500.00 052511 05/25/2011 E 010.4423.5253 80.00 30.00 80.00 Page: 25 apCkHlst Chef History Listing Page: 06 106/2011 1 :54AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa C heck # Date Vendor Status Clear/Vold Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 140034 05!27!2011 003033 CENTRAL COAST A27679 03/24/2011 E 010.4420.5605 259.00 259.00 250.00 140035 05!27!2011 000160 CHAPARRAL C 05!31/2011 332413 05!04/2011 E 010.4102.5602 150.00 E 010.4102.5602 161.20 311.20 311.20 140036 05/27/2011 002 800 CHIEF SUPPLY C 05/31/2011 300 376 04/26!2011 E 010.4201.5272 30.69 E 010.4201.5272 8.09 30.63 39.68 140037 05/27/2011 008470 SHANNON DOLBY C 05/31/2011 082311 05/23/2011 010.0000.4354 105.00 105.00 105.00 140033 05/27/2011 007723 SCOTT DRAIB 052511 05/25!2011 E 010.4424.5352 77.00 77.00 77.00 140030 05/2712011 003 362 RICH D EI I N 052 511 05!25!2011 E 01 0.4424.5352 40.00 D 40.00 40.00 CL 140040 0512712011 000203 J B DEIAF, INC 780992 0413012011 E 010.4201. 5608 01.13 t� 91.13 N 0o 91.13 000 Page: ap kHi t Check History Listing Page: 27 0610612011 10: 4AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor Status ClearNoid Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 14994' 05/27/2011 007129 TERRY ENDER 052511 05/25/2011 E 010 , 4424.5352 44.00 44.00 44.00 149942 05/27/2011 000240 FARM SUPPLY CO 599047 0410512011 E 010.4430.5005 105.92 105.92 590277 0410112011 E 010.4201.5322 04.15 04.15 599382 0410512011 E 010.4430,5005 50.57 58.57 015220 0411912011 E 010.4201.5322 48.93 48.93 817397 0412112011 F E 010.4430.5005 33.83 33.83 309.40 149943 0512712011 004104 FEDE 7-470-33929 0412212011 E 010.4145.5208 17.52 17.52 17.52 140944 0512712011 004142 STAN GAXIOLA 052511 0512512011 E 010.4424.5352 103.00 1 98.00 198.00 CL 0 149945 0512712011 008488 GRAND BOUQUET 13052 0313112011 E 010.4001.5504 85.25 N co 05.25 Page: 27 D t� c� CL 0) c� w 0 o0) apCkHist 0810812011 10: 4AM Check History Listing CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE 0510512011 E 010.4201.5606 E 010.4201.5606 Bank code: boa Check 0 Date Vendor 149946 05/27/2011 006058 RDI EY G RAY 1 49947 0512712011 002358 GREAT WESTERN ALARM 149948 0512712011 000330 GSA-INF TECH 149949 0512712011 008480 DAVID HANSO 149950 0512712011 002405 CHARLES HARE 149951 0512712011 004188 EDDIE HARRIS 149952 0512712011 006461 KAREN IRIII Status ClearNoid Date Invoice 052511 Inv. Dante Amount Paid 05/25/2011 E 010.4424.5352 110.00 0513112011 110402323101 0510112011 E 01 0.4201.5604 502 052311 0513112011 052511 0513112011 052511 052311 0512312011 R 010.0000.4354 0512512011 E 0 1 0. 4424. Page: 28 Check Taal 110-00 28.00 28.00 236.06 424.54 30.00 30.00 66.00 88.00 1 80.00 180.00 30.00 0512612011 E 010.4424.5352 05123/2011 R 0 10. 0000.4 3 54 65.25 119.00 28.00 424.54 30.00 66.00 1 60.00 30.00 Page: 28 D t� c� CL 0) c� w 0 p kHist Check History Listing Pag 2 0610612011 10: 4A 1 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code. boa Check # Date Vendor Status Clean old Date Invoice Inv, Date Amount Paid Check Total 149953 0512712011 008482 DAN KAISER LLC 052411 0512412011 E 01 0,4212.5501 100.00 100.00 100.00 140054 0512712011 007200 G ASTON KETTING O LIVIER C 0513112011 052511 0512512011 E 010.4424.5352 242.00 242.00 242.00 149055 0512712011 005511 CHRISTOPHER LINTNER 052511 0512512011 E 010.4424.5352 132-00 E 010.4424.5352 66.00 198.00 108.00 149956 0512712011 001136 DOUGLAS LIITIEI C 0513112011 052511 0512512011 E 01 0.4424. 5352 44.00 44.00 44.00 140057 0512712011 008483 CHRISTINA A 4ACDO ALD 052311 0512312011 010.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 30.00 140058 0512712011 008387 COREY MATE 052511 0512512011 E 010.4424.5352 88.00 88.00 88.00 140950 0512712011 008484 RYAN 4ER ITT 1100280 0512012011 B 010.0000.2020 20.00 20.00 20.00 Page: 2 CL ^ ice/ M W ■^' N ice/ a pCkHist 06/06/2011 1 :4AM Check History Listing CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Page: Bank code: boa Check # Data Vendor 149960 95/27/2911 090425 MIER BR OS LANDSCAPE 149961 95/27/2011 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, AI E, ::sail Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 04/09/2911 E 919.4429.5695 93/93/2011 E 910.4429.5695 94/96/2911 E 010.4429.5693 :fe* �s11 149952 05/27/2011 000468 OFFICE DEPOT 149 963 05/27/2011 000481 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRI 55746091 03/30/2011 E 919.4991.5291 282.75 282.75 92.39 5/11-853299 05/11/2011 E 640.4711-5402 5/18 - 154503 05/1 8/2011 E 010.4145.5401 5/12 -19031 05/12/2011 E 919.4145.5491 28.24 25.83 25.83 1,234.21 8 149954 05/27/2011 007453 PLANNING MPA Y ASS Status ClearfV Date Invoice 176 588 982 04/30/2011 E 350.5642.7701 5,000-00 5 9 000-00 282.75 120.63 25.83 2,206.27 5 1 000- 00 Page: 30 apCkHi t Check History Listing Page: 31 06/06/2011 10:64AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank coda: boa Check # Date Vendor Status ClearNoid Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 149905 0512712011 008485 S LEDAD R JAS C 0513112011 052311 0512312011 R 010.0000. 30.00 30.00 30.00 Page: 31 149960 0512712011 004633 STEPHEN ROW 052511 0512512011 E 010.4424.5352 66.00 00.00 66.00 149907 0512712011 000530 GREG ROSE 052511 05/2512011 E 010.4424.5352 22.00 E 010.4424.5352 100.00 162.00 182.00 1 49908 05/27/2011 002932 RUTA I & TUCKER, LLP 007389 0411212011 E 284.4103.5303 3,373.50 3 007372 0411212011 E 284.41 03.5303 1,287.00 1,287.00 007373 0411212011 E 285.4502.5303 916-50 9 16.50 607383 0411212011 E 285.4502.5303 156.00 156.00 5,733.00 149969 0512712011 000080 I IARTI IA SARMIE IT C 0513112011 052511 0512512011 E 010.4424.5352 176.00 176.00 176.00 w 0 w� Page: 31 D c� c� CL 0) c� w 0 pc k H it 06!06!2011 10: 4AM Check History Li ti n CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor 149970 05!27!2011 003024 MARK S H FFEF 149971 05!27!2011 007792 TIM SHERIDAN 149972 05!27!2011 001727 SHERIFF'S DVI O Y Status clear) old Date Invoice 052511 05!31!2011 052511 052511 50.00 149973 05/27/2011 008363 PYTDI SMALL 149974 05!27!2011 007229 DONALD SNYDEF 149975 05!27!2011 000602 SOUTH SLO CO UNTY SANIT 052511 052511 Inv. Date Amount Paid 05!25!2011 E 010.4424.5352 1 80.00 05/25/2011 E 010.4424.5352 0 2011 E 010.4201.5501 05/25/2011 E 010.4424.5352 E 010.4424.5352 05/25/2011 E 010.4424.5352 Page: Check To tal 180.00 40.00 40.00 50.00 180.00 40.00 50.00 50.00 83.00 260.00 260.00 43011 04/30/2011 B 760.0000.2304 1 32,1 51.43 B 760.0000.2305 4,950.00 E 010.4145.5401 15.30 E 010.4145.5401 15.30 137 t 132.03 83.00 260.00 1 37,1 32.03 Page: Page: pCkHi 06/06/2011 10: 4A ! Check History Listing CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Page: 33 Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor Status Clear/Void Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 149976 0512712011 004393 S MAINTENANCE 34907 0510112011 E 220.4303.5303 2 E 10.4303.5303 4, 31 5.38 7, 074.40 7, 074.40 149977 0512712011 000609 BOB SPEAK 052511 0512512011 E 010-4424.5352 1 54.00 1 54.00 1 54 .00 149978 0512712011 000620 STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY C 0513112011 S 1187 389, 001 0412912011 E 010.4213.5604 50.97 50.97 50.97 14 997 9 0512712011 007699 TIEF RA WEST AD1 IS 0 RS I N C AG-0411 0511212011 E 284.4103.5303 4 4,878.75 4,878.75 149980 0512712011 007236 LESLIE TI L LEY 052311 0512312011 R 010.0000.4354 30.60 30.00 30.00 149981 0512712011 006551 UNITED S TAFFING ASSOC. 076830 0511112011 E 640.4712.5303 1 1,163.28 D 1,1 83.26 ca 149982 0512712011 0084861 VENTURA POLICE 051711 0511712011 CL E 010.4201.5501 100.60 160.00 1 00.00 c� w 0 Page: Page: pCkHIst Check History Listing Page: 34 06/06/2011 10 :64AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor Status Clear/Vold Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 149963 05/27/2011 000665 WALLACE GROUP A CALIF 31566 04/13/2011 E 350.5910.7501 11 11 31 644 05/09/2011 E 350.5676.7501 3 3,325.50 31506 04/07/2011 E 350.5676.7501 2,534.52 2 17,009.06 149964 05/27/2011 007695 ROBIN WALTON 052311 05/23/2011 010.0000.4354 30.00 30.00 30.00 149965 05/27/2011 007599 WATER SYSTEMS C 05/31/2011 0247A 02/26/2011 E 640.4710.5303 3 3,759.00 C 05/31/2011 0247 02/26/2011 E 640.4710.5303 2,126.66 2 C 05/31/2011 0236 01/31/2011 E 640.4710.5303 1 ,07'1.95 1 C 05/31/2011 0236A 01/31/2011 E 640.4710.5303 960.75 960.75 7,920-56 ^D^ .l.i 149960 05/27/2011 006467 TIM WEADON 1100249 05/19/2011 CL B 01 0.0000.2029 100.00 1 00.00 1 00.00 w 0 a*) 0 Page: a pCkHist Check History Listing Page: 06/06/2011 1 : 41alM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Bank code: boa Check # Date Vendor status ClearNold Date Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Total 149987 05/27/2011 007927 SHIRLEY LEY 1 I LLM TT 052511 05/25/2011 E 010.4424.5352 77.00 f r .UU 77.00 c� c� CL 0 c� wF0 ft-4 0 162 checks in this report boa Total: 599 Total Checks: 500 *Check 149820 in the a mount o f $35,'171.40 was not included in prior months check history listing report. This item was processed on 05113111 as a quick check and recorded on 05119111. P ATTACHMENT CITY of ARROYO AI DE DEPARTMENTAL TAL LABOR DISTRIBUTION PAY PERIOD 412912011 - /1212011 05120111 FUND 010 305 FUND 217 12.72 FUND 219 159.69 FUND 220 17 FUND 226 1,893.40 FUND 234 745.63 FUND 235 1 FLUID 290 107 FUND 612 6 FUND 640 20,655.31 9 462,809.03 OVERTIME BY DEPARTMENT: Admin. Support Services - Community Development Police 11,1 63.02 Fire 6 ovrnrnent Bldg Maint. 8 Engineering Comp Pay Fleet Maintenance 5115 Parrs 2,564.33 Recreation - Admn PEE S Retirement Iec - Special Events - Children In Motion - Soto Sport Complex 255.36 Public Works Maintenance 987.1 State Disability Ins. 1 9 5101 Salaries Full time 214 5102 Salaries Part -Tune - PPT 17 5103 Salaries Part -Tune - TPT 30,781.07 5105 B lames OverTime 19,056.74 5107 Salaries Standby 334.13 5108 Holiday Pay 2,933.35 5109 Sick Pay 9 5110 Annual Leave Buyback - 111 Vacation Buyback- 5112 Sick Leave Buyback - 113 Vacation Pay 8 114 Comp Pay 3 5115 Annual Leave Pay 2,564.33 5121 PEE S Retirement 76,219.28 5122 Social Security 21,427.10 5123 PARS Retirement 618.87 5126 State Disability Ins. 1 5127 Deferred Compensation 633.21 131 Health Insurance 44 5132 Dental Insurance 4 5133 Vision Insurance 1 5134 Life Insurance 458.76 5135 Long Terra Disability 851.06 5143 Uniform Allowance - 144 Car Allowance 675.00 5146 Council Expense - 5147 Employee Assistance 217.36 5148 Boot Allowance - 149 Motor Pay 150.00 10 Bi- Lingual Pay 125.00 5151 Cell Phone Allowance 352. 50 462,809.03 Agenda Item 8.a. Page 38 R 0 �6 0 INORPrOAATED Z; MEMORANDUM DUM AK JULY 10. 1911 4 d14 I F I To: CITY COUNCIL FROM: ANGELA K AETSCH, DIRECTOR of SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION of FISCAL YEAR 2011-1 APPROPRIATION LIMIT DATED JUNE 14 2011 RECOMMENDATIO It is recommended the City Council adopt the attached Resolution establishin the appropriation limit from tarn proceed for Fiscal Year 2011-12. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact BACKGROUND: Annually, the City is required to cal the expenditure appropriation limit from tax proceeds to determine compliance with Propositions (Gann Initiative) and 111 (Spending Limitation Act of 1990). This calculation is based on the previous year's appropriation limit ($16,462,168) multiplied by the per capita p income percentawge increase (1.0251 % ) awnd multiplied awgarin by the pop uIawtion percentarge chawnge 1.01267% . The State D e pawrtment of Finarnce provid es both the population change and the per capita personal income change for the previous fiscal year. ANALYSIS of ISSUES: The City is responsible for dividing citywide revenues revenue and applying the formula to the cumulativ Fiscal Year 201 1-12, the appropriation limit has $17 between tax and non-tax appropriation limit. For been calculated to be This calculation means than the City cannot re ceive more than $17,089,162 in tax-based revenues in Fiscal Year 201 1-12. The estimated tax-based revenues for Fiscal Year 201 1 -12 have been calculated to be $11,323,211, approximately $5 .8 million less than the appropriation limit. Therefore, the City is in compliance with Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. Agenda Item 8.b. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION F FISCAL YEAR 2011-12 APPROPRIATION LIMIT JUNE 14, 2011 PAGE ALTERNATIVES: ES: The following arlternartives are provided for City Council consideration: - Adopt the Resolution t establish the appropriation limit for Fiscal Year 2011-12; Do not adopt the Resolution; Provide direction t staff. ADVANTAGES: By adopting the Resolution t establish the appropriation limit for Fiscal Year 2011 -12, the City will be in compliance with Propositions 4 and 111. DISADVANTAGES: There is no disadvantage Identified in relation to this recommendation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental revie w is required for this item. PUBLIC N 'rIFICATI N AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, ,June 9, 2011. The Agenda and report were posted on the City's website on Friday, June 10, 2011. No public comments were received. Attachment: 1 . Categorization of Estimated Revenue Agenda Item 8.b. Page 2 RESOLUTION Flo, A RESOLUTION of THE CITY COUNCIL of THE CITY of ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A TALC PROCEEDS EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-12 WHEREAS, Sections 7900 et seq. of the Government Code provide for the effective and efficient implementation of Article X111B of the California Constitution; and WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 7901 through 7914 provide that each year, the governing body of each local jurisdiction shall, by resolution adopted at a regularly scheduled meeting, establish the annual adjustment factors to be used and the tarn proceeds expenditure appropriation limit. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, ED, by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande as follows: 1. The California per capita income and the population of San Luis Obispo County, California are recognized as the annual adjustment factors for Fiscal Year 2011-12. 2. The appropriation limit for Fiscal Year 201 1 -12 is hereby set at seventeen million, eighty -nine thousand, and one hundred and sixty-two dollars ($17,089,162). 3. Documentation used in the determination of the tarn proceeds expenditure appropriation limit is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. 4. This Resolution is effective on its date of adoption. On motion of Council Member AYES: NOES: ABSENT* , seconded by Council Member an d on the following roll call vote, to it: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of 12011. Agenda Item 8.b. Page 3 RESOLUTION CVO. PAGE 2 TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST. KELLY 1 ETM RE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: T: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CAR PEL, CITY ATTORNEY Agenda Item 8.b. Page 4 Exhibit CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CALCULATION OF A PP R OPRIA TION LIMLT FROM TAX PROCEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 -12 Appropriation limit for 2010 -11 Multiplied by the appropriation limit charge `actors: Per Capita Personal Income Change. Conversion to ratio: 2.51% 2 .51% + 100 16A62,1 1.0251 100 Population Change 2010 1'1,145 2011 17 1.2669% Change 220 Conversion to ratio: 220 1.2669+100 1.01267 17 100 APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-12 17 ESTIMATED 2011-12 PROCEEDS OF TAXES SUBJECT T APPROPRIATION LIMIT 11,323,211 Agenda Item 8.b. Page 5 Attachment I CITE' OF ARROYO RAID CA AEG 0 RIZA TI ON OF ES TIM-A TED RE YEN UE Proceeds Revenue Sou Fr om Taxes Taxes Property Tax Sales Tax Sales Tax - Safety Transient Occupancy Tax Business License Tax Other Taxes Licenses and Permit Building Dept. Permits Other Licenses and Permits Fines M.V. Code Fines Local Ordinance/Parking Use of Prom Rent IF Fees /r.Bur.oll. Aid From Other Govt nci M. V. License Fees Homeowners Prop.Tax Relief P...T. Reimb. Other Subventions Mandated Cost Recovery P.1 . fficer rant haring Other Grants Gas Tax Streets Revenues Charges For Current Services Community Development Fees Safety Impact Fees Recreation Program Fees Public Access Fees Sever Utility Billings Park Development Fees District Assessments Traffic Signal Assessment Transportation Facility Impact Water Neutralization Impact Fees In -lieu Affordable Housing Other Current Services 3,648,000 4,17,000 500,000 80,000 540,000 1,285,000 34,000 466,000 108,365 Non Proceeds From Taxes 110,000 1221 82,7 58,000 27,000 278,310 2,200 5,000 9,000 76,000 740 107,600 75,00 523,650 38,000 922,000 41 72,300 10po 25X0 35,000 0 52 Agenda Item 8.b. Page 6 Attachment I CITY F ARROYO GRANDE CA TEGORIZA TION OF ESTIMATED RE VENUE Proceeds R evenue Sources From Taxes Charges For Current Services Severer Facility Charges Hydrant Water Water Utility Billings Meter Installations Water Avail. har es Lopez Utility Billings Water DistriblMain Charges Taxi Coupon Sales Assessments-Parking District Sales of Yroperty Expenditure Recovery Miscellaneous Other Revenue Taal Revenue, Not Including Interest 11,268,365 Interest Percentage 54.22% Interest % Applied 54 Taal Revenue Including Interest 11 ,323,211 Grand Taal Budget City Revenue in QQ Q Iron Proceeds F Taxes 10 3,200 3,44 ,1 0 5,000 25,000 2,489,000 20,000 0 8,300 1,0 65,000 20,000 5,600 9,513,310 45.78% 46,304 9,559,614 Agenda Item 8.b. Page 7 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Agenda Item 8.b. Page 8 0 Sk 01 0 (: 090" INCORPORATED 52:_:: rrr MEMORANDUM AK JULY 10, 1911 fF Ovt TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: ANGELA KRAETSCH, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SEF VICE SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION F APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE I I' V ESTM ENT POLICY DATE: JUNE 1 , 201'1 RECOMMENDATION: MMENRATION It is recommended the City Council approve the City of Arroyo Grande Investment Policy. FINANCIAL iMPACT: There is no funding impact to the City related to this policy. However, the City does receive interest revenue based on the type of investments it pursues. BACKGROUND: Attached is the City's Investment Policy, which was reviewed by the City Council on May 25, 2010. In the past, California Government Code Section 53646 required that an Investment Policy be presented to the Council on an annual basis. Beginning January 1 2007, it was no longer required by statute that the treasurer or chief financial officers of local government entities annually submit a statement of investment policy to their governing body. However, it is highly recommended by both the Association of Public Treasurers of the United States & Canada and the Government Finance Officers Association GFA. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: It is in the best interest of the City if staff continues to prepare the policy and present it to the Council on an annual basis for revie w. The City's Investment Policy authorizes only the more conservative investments, requires monthly investment reports to City Council, and requires that the due diligence of a "Prudent person" be followed in the investment of City funds. The purpose of the Investment Policy is to identify various policies and p rocedures that enhance opportunities for a prudent and systematic investment process and to organize and formalize investment- related activities. The ultimate goal is to enhance the economic statues of the City of Arroyo Grande while protecting its cash resources. The investment policies and practices of the City of Arroyo Grande and the Arroyo Grande Redevelopment ment Agency are based on State laver and prudent money Agenda Item 8.c. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of THE CITY INVESTMENT POLICY JANE 14, 2011 PAGE management. All funds will be ingested in accordance with the City's Investment Policy and the authority governing investments for municipal governments as set forth in the California Government Code. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for City Council consideration: Approve the Investment Policy; Do not approve the Investment Policy; - Modify Investment Policy and approve; Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: The Investment Policy provides staff with guidance when pursuing investment opportunities. In addition, the policy establishes the specific investment goals of the City which are safety, liquidity and yield. DISADVANTAGES: There are no identified disadvantages related to the approval of this policy. However, there is some legal of risk in any investment transaction. To minimize such risks, diversification of the investment portfolio by institution and by investment instruments when possible is recommended in the City's Investment Policy. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review i required for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted in front of City Half on Thursday, June 9, 2011. The Agenda and report were posted on the City's web site on Friday, June 10, 2011. No public comments were received. Attachment: - City of Arroyo Grande Investment Policy Agenda Item 8.c. Page 2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE f INVESTMENT POLICY JUNE 14, 2011 Prepared by the Administrative Services Department Agenda Item 8.c. Page 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Inves rn ■A■ 1■ tment Poll .................. Fry.i#.. y....##.............. r...rr.rrrrrrrrrrrrrrtt##.......##.....ss ..............................■ • estmV t O Frr..y #....y Pru ..... ............................... s ....... ............................... s ......... ............................... ■ Areas of Investment Policy: I. A Control, and Care ......................... # # # # ................. s s ........................ # . # # F i ... II. Portfolio Diversification Eligible Financial Institutions ......................................... F.. F ............................... Code Authorized Instruments and Portfolio Limitations #F #....... i. i... i.....F #F #.y F.■ Safe ing cf Securities ........................ ..............ss............ ............................... City Placement Practice .............................#• F. FyFFyyyy###.......... ...........FF # #FFF..i # * i....... III. Cash Management and Maturities ■ .. ............................. # F .... s .. ............................... . Investment Reporting, Policy Review an Effeefive Policy Term ............................................ Agenda Item 8.c. Page 4 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY Investment Polic The purpose of this document is to identify various policies and procedures that enhance opportunities for a prudent and systematic investment process and to organize and formalize investment-related activities. The ultimate goal is to enhance the economic status of the City of Arroyo Grande while protecting its cash resources. The investment policies and practices of the City of Arroyo Grande and the Arroyo grand Redevelopment Agency are based on state law and prudent money management. All funds will be invested in accordance with the City's investment Policy and the authority governing investments for municipal govenu bents as set forth in the California Government Code. Investment Ob"ective The investment objective of the City of Arroyo Grande is to optimize the following goals: o Safety o Liquidity o Yield Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the City. Investments shad be undertaken in a manner that seeps to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. Investment decisions should not incur unreasonable credit or market risks in order to obtain current investment income. Credit risk is the risk of loss due to the failure of ` the security issuer or broker. Market et ri sly is the risk that the market value of securities in the portfolio will fall due to changes in general level of interest rates. The City's investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet its cash flow requirements. Liquidity of the investments guarantees the City's ability to meet operating expenditures. The City's investment portfolio shad be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return on its' investments consistent with the constraints imposed by its safety objective and cash flow considerations. Yield is to be a consideration only after the basic requirements of safety and liquidity have been met. Optimization means striving to achieve a balance between all three objective goals. Should a demand be perceived to prioritize the three goals, they are listed in preferred order. Agenda Item 8.c. Page 5 Prudence Standard The standard of Prudence to be used by the Treasurer and/or deputy shall be the "prudent person rule' and shall be applied in the context of managing City investments. Persons acting in accordance with written procedures and exercising clue diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for are individual investment loss, provided that deviations are reported in a timely fashion, and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. Areas of Investmenti Authorities, Control and Care: 1. The City Treasurer may appoint a Deputy with the responsibility for the individual placement of monies in deposit investment transactions. 2. The Director of Admim'strative Services has been authorized, via resolution 44005, to establish deposit and investment agreements and undertake deposit investment transactions on behalf of the City of Arroyo Grande. 3. The Administrative Services Department is responsible for implementing this policy, and maintaining a system of internal control designed to prevent employee error or imprudent actions, misrepresentation by parties to an investment agreement, fraud, or unexpected changes in the financial market place. 4. State of California Government Code Sections 53600 et sect. 53683 and 16429.1 regulate the deposit/investment activities of general law. cities (See Sec. 53635 and 16429.1). Based upon the relatively small size of the City's portfolio, the City sloes not utilize a professional investment manager. rather, Arroyo Grande's investment program is simply a part of the City's financial management activity. 5. The Treasurer and/or deputy shall use good judgement and care, as a "prudent person' would, when entering contracts for deposits and investments, and when placing individual investment transactions. Such care is that which would be exercised by a person concerning his/her own affairs; not for speculation, out for safe investment and earned interest. Some level of risk is present in any investment transaction. Dosses could be incurred due to market price charges, technical cash flow complications such as the need to withdraw a non- negotiable Time Certificate of Deposit early, or even the default of an issuer. To mina' ni e such risks, diversification of the investment portfolio by institution and by investment instnu nts vn*ll be used as much as is practical and prudent. 2 Agenda Item 8.c. Page 6 Portfolio Diversification: 1. Eligible Financial Institutions: Government Code Section 53635 distinguishes between "deposits" and "investments'. It provides that "as far as possible" City monies shall be "deposited" in Mate or National barks, or State or Federal savings and loan associations; ar may be "invested" in specified instruments. Thus, eligible financial institutions would include: A. Barks plus savings and loam, primarily rily for active demand deposits (checking accounts and passbook savings) and inactive deposits (non- negotiable Time Certificates), also for investment instraments. See Goverment Code Sec. 53638 for maximum deposit limitations for banks and savings and loans, involving bank paid up capital and saving and loan net worth. B. Brokers and issuers, for various investment in t- uments listed below. 2. Code Authorized Instruments and Portfolio Limitations: A. Instruments and Portfolio Limitations are authorized as provided in Goverment Code Section 53635 and 16429. 1, as follows: 1 Bonds issued by the City of Arroyo Grande. No limit. 2) U.S. Treasury Notes, bonds, bills, or other certificates of indebtedness. The maximum maturity shall not exceed five years. 3 California Mate registered notes, bonds, or warrants. Maximum maturity of five years. 4 Other local agencies within California, bonds, notes, warrants, or other indebtedness. Five year maximum maturity. 5 Obligations issued by Federal agencies such as Federal Horne moan Bank ( FHLB ) , Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (IFHLMC), Federal Farm Credit Bank FFCB , etc. Limited to a five year maximum maturity. 6) Banker's acceptances (bills of exchange or time drafts) drawn on and accepted by a commercial bank, and which are eligible for purchase by the Federal Deserve System. These are limited to 4 percent of the City's surplus funds, and limited to 180-day maximum maturities. 7 Commercial paper of "prime" quality, as rated by Moody's Investor Service or Standard and Poor's Corporation. These are limited to 25 percent of the City's Agenda Item 8.c. Page 7 portfolio, and limited to 270-day maximum maturities, plus some other qualifications. 8) FDIC insured or filly collateralized time certificates of deposit in financial institutions located in California, including United Mates branches of foreign banks licensed to do business in California. The maximum maturity of a time deposit shall not exceed five years. 9 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit, issued by either a National r Mate bank or a state or federal savings and loan provided that the senior debt obligations of the issuing institution are rated "AX' or better by Moody's or Standard Poor's. The maximum maturity of a negotiable certificate of deposit shall not exceed five years. Purchase of negotiable certificates of deposit may not exceed 20 percent of the book value of the City's portfolio. l o Repurchase agreements or reverse repurchase agreements, whereby the seller of securities will repurchase them on a specified date and for a specified amount. The maximum maturity of a time deposit shall not exceed one year. 1 l) Local Agency Investment Fund, Mate of California, per Government Code Sec. 16429. 1. Pooled monies of various agencies within California. Account size is limited to a minimum of $5,000 (unless bond proceeds) and a maximum limit of $50 million. Safekeepiuz of Securities; To protect against fraud or embezzlement or losses caused by collapse of an individual securities dealer, all securities owned by the City shall be held in safekeeping by a third party bank trust department. Designated third party shall act as agents for the City under the terms of a custody agreement. AB trades executed by a dealer will settle delivery vs. payment VP) through the City's safekeeping agent. Investment officials shall be bonded to protect the public against possible embezzlement or malice. Securities held in custody for the City shall be independently audited on an annual basis to verify investment holdings. City Placement Practice: 1. The following financial institutions will be used by the City of Arroyo Grande, for non- negotiable Time Certificates of Deposit: a Commercial banks having offices in the Mate of California. b Savings and loans maintaining offices in the Mate of Califomia. Agenda Item 8.c. Page 8 2 . The State of California Local Agency Investment Fund L. .I.F. will be utilized, to pool current surplus City monies for demand deposit earrings. 3 For other investment instruments, three institutions may be selected from a list of qualified primary or regional bro qualifying under SEC rule 156-1 (uniform net capital rule). Broker /dealers must be licensed in the Mate of California and be headquartered or maintain a branch office in the Mate of California. All brokers /dealers shall carry Errors and Omissions insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Proof of existence of said insurance shall be provided to the City at its request and the City shall be notified if the policy is cancelled or coverage is reduced below 1 4. Prior to establishing a contract for deposit of monies per Sec. 53649, or placing an individual investment, the credit - worthiness of each financial institution Will be determined. As a minimum, the ratio of net worth equity to total assets shall be 3.0% or more. 5. No more than 0% of the City's available surplus shall be placed with any one financial institution (excluding the State L.A.I.F. and government agency issues). 6.. No more than 0% of the Cit available surplus shall be placed with savings and loan institutions. +7, The City, as authorized in Government Code Sections 53635 and 16429.1, may use all deposit and 'investment instruments; except repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements shall not be used. However, non - negotiable time certificates with commercial banks s and savings and loans, plus deposits in the Mate Local Agency Investment Fund, will be the primary instruments used by the City, along with possible U.S. Treasury bills and banters acceptances. 8. Collateral security on Certificates of Deposit will be provided in accordance to Government Code Sections 5365 I and 53653 by the commercial banks and savings and loans, a t 110% when government securities are used, or at 10% when promissory notes secured by I st mortgages or I st trust deeds on improved residential real property located in California are used. 9. Individual placements of deposits and investments will be made based upon highest rate quotes, in most instanees. 10. within the context of any portfolio limitations and quoted rates, deposits shall be distributed between institutions as evenly as practical or possible. 5 Agenda Item 8.c. Page 9 Cash Management and Maturities 1. A maximum investment of all City monies, not needed to meet current cash flow needs, will be maintained as closely as practical. A sufficient compensating balance will also be provided, regarding the City's banking service agreement. 2. All monetary resources will be pooled for investment purposes, to mu', interest earnings, which will be periodically allocated to the various funds of the City based upon average cash balances at month ends. No interest will be credited to individual accounts within the various funds. 3. Time deposits and investments will be held to maturity, unless it is absolutely necessary to sell an investment early dine to an unexpected liability. 4. Maturities of deposits and investments will be scheduled in such a manner as to provide steady stream of available cash to meet cash flow needs. The California Mate Local Agency Investment Fund deposits of the City of Arroyo Grande are available on a same - day /next -day telephone call basis. Investment ReDortine, Pokey evie w and Effective Policy Term Are Investment Policy is no longer required by statute. However, it is highly recommended by both the Association of Public Treasurers of the United Mates & Canada and the Government Finance Officers Association GFA. It is in the best interest of the City to prepare, present and discuss the Investment Policy with the City Council on an annual basis. In addition, a monthly report is submitted to the City Council, providing the following information: 1. Type of investment. 2. financial institution (bank, savings and loan, broker, etc). 3. Date of maturity. 4. Principal amount. 5. Rate of interest. 6. Current market value for all securities having a maturity of more than 12 months. 7. Relationship of the monthly report to the annual statement of investment policy. The City's independent certified public accountant shall review and make recommendations, when appropriate, regarding the City of Arroyo Grande's investment policy. D Agenda Item 8.c. Page 10 R A. IFJ RP RI T MEMORANDUM MTI -1K J LY 10, 1911 0 1% TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: ANGELA I RAETSCH DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CONFIRMATION F ASSESSMENTS FOR TRACTS 1158, 1769 2310 AND 2236 DATE: JUNE 1 , 2011 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council; 9 Adopt a Resolution confirming landscaping assessments for all parcels within Tract 1158; 0 Adopt a Resolution confirming landscaping and lighting assessments for all parcels within Tract 1769; 0 Adopt a Resolution confirming the assessments for the Park side Assessment District for all parcels within Tract 231 Pre side Village Subdivision); 0 Adopt a Resolution confirming the assessments for the Grace Lane Assessment District for all parcels w ithin Tract 2236 (Grace Lane Subdivision). FINANCIAL IMPACT: The City entered into agreements with four assessment districts to provide lighting and landscaping maintenance. The assessments are placed on the taxpayers' tarn roll each year. The total amount of revenue to be received from the assessment districts in Fiscal Year 201 1 -12 is $74,470. BACKGROUND: O June 9, 1992, Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District No. 1 was created to provide landscaping and lighting improvements and maintenance for Tract 1 769. The annual assessment was 100 per parcel located within Tract 1769 a total of $3,000). The Tract 1769 landscaping and lighting assessment must be confirmed by the Council each year. On May 28, 199 at the request of the homeo wners within Tract 1158, the City agreed to provide landscaping and related maintenance to a portion of the greenbelt and appurtenances located on Oak Park B oulevard for the benefit of parcels located within Agenda Item 8.d. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF CONFIRMATION OF ASSESSMENTS JUNE 14, 2011 PAGE 2 Tract 1158. The City Council and parcel owners agreed to an annual 40 per parcel City charge (for a total of $2,800) for this service. On November 8, 2005, at the request of Parkside V illage LLC, the sole owner and developer of the Parkside Village Subdivision (Tract 2310), the City Council approved the formation of the Parkside pillage Assessment District. This assessment is adjusted annually by the April Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI for 2011 is 3.3%. The annual assessment varies from $618 per parcel to $974 per parcel for a total of $58,682 annually. This is an increase of $1,807 above the prior year. On November 28, 200 6, at the request of Vista Roble LLC, the sole owner of the Grace Lane Subdivision (Tract 2236), the City Council approved the formation of the Grace Lane Assessment District. This assessment is also adjusted annually by the April Consumer Price Index (CPI) or 3.3% in 2011. The annual assessment ranges from $492 to $652 per parcel for a total annual assessment of $9,988. This is an increase of $305 above the prior gear. ANALYSIS of ISSUES: All of the listed assessments must be confirmed each year. The assessments will be added to the tax roll of the affected property owners and collected by the San Luis Obispo County Tax Collector. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are presented for the City Council's consideration: - Approve staff recommendations; - Do not approve staff recommendations; - Modify staff recommendations and approve; - Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: TAGES By confirming the assessments, the City will continue to receive the funding to maintain the landscape districts. DISADVANTAGES: There is no disadvantage identified in this recommendation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this item. Agenda Item 8.d. Page 2 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF CONFIRMATION F ASSESSMENTS JUNE 14 2011 PAGE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: MENTS: The Agendas was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, June 9, 2011. The Agenda and report were posted on the City's website on Friday, June 10, 2011. No public comments were received. Agenda Item 8.d. Page 3 RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION of THE CITY COUNCIL of THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CONFIRMING A LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT FOR TRACT 1158 WHEREAS, EAS, on May 28, 1996, the Arroyo Grande City Council approved an Amendment to Cove narnts, Conditions, and Restrictions trictions for Tract 11 58 (Oak Pa rk Villas) whereby the City of Arroyo Grande agreed to provide certain specified landscaping and related maintenance on real property located along Oak Park Boulevard adjacent to Tract 1158, Arroyo Grande, California, which maintenance was previously provided by the homeowners in Tract 1158 and administered by the Dark Park Villas Homeowners Association; and WHEREAS, the owners of Lots 1 through 70, Tract 1158, agreed to pay an annual assessment of $4g per parcel, in exchange for the City's agreement to provide said maintenance services. NOW, THEREFORE, E, BE IT RESOLVED IED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Gra nde ans follows: 1. That the above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein. 2. That the assessment for the 2011-12 fiscal year shorn on Exhibit "A ", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are confirmed as true and correct. 3. Immediately after adoption, an certified copy of this Resolution shall be filed with the County Auditor. 4. The assessment shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as County taxes are collected, and all laws providing for the collection and enforcement of County taxes shall apply to the collection and enforcement of the assessments. After collection by the County, the remaining amount of the assessments, after deducting compensation due the County for collection, shall be paid to the City. On motion by Council Member and on the following roll call Grote, to grit: , seconded by Council Member AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2011. Agenda Item 8.d. Page 4 RESOLUTION NO, PAGE TONY Y FER AFAA, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY Agenda Item 8.d. Page 5 EXHIBIT "A" SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY TAX SYSTEM TRACT115BASSESSMENTS FOR TAX ROLL YEAR 2011-12 Fund Assessment # Ch era Fund Assessmen Charge 1764 007773001 40.00 1764 007773036 40.00 1 764 007773002 40.00 1 764 007773037 40.00 1764 007773003 40.00 1764 007773038 40.00 1 764 007773004 40.00 1 764 007773039 -40.00 1 764 007773005 40.00 1 764 007773040 4. 1 764 007773006 40.00 1 764 007773041 40.00 1 764 007773007 40.00 1764 007774001 4. 1 764 007773008 40.00 1764 007774002 40.00 1 764 007773009 40.00 1 764 007774003 40.00 1764 007773010 40.00 1764 007774004 40.00 1764 0077730 11 40.00 1 764 007774005 40.00 1764 007773012 40.00 1764 007774006 40.00 1764 007773013 40.00 1764 007774007 40.00 1 764 007773014 40.00 1 764 007774008 40.00 1 764 007773015 40.00 1 764 007774009 40.00 1764 007773016 40.00 1764 007774011 40.00 1764 007773017 40.00 1764 007774012 40.00 1764 007773018 40.00 1764 007774013 40.00 1 764 007773019 40.00 1 764 0077740 14 40.00 1 764 007773020 40.00 1 764 007774015 4. 1 764 007773021 40.00 1 764 007774016 4. 14 007773022 40.00 14 007774017 40.00 1764 007773023 40.00 1764 007774018 40.00 1 764 007773024 40.00 1 764 007774019 40.00 1764 007773025 40.00 1764 007774020 40.00 1 764 007773026 40.00 1 764 007774021 40.00 1 764 007773027 40.00 1 764 007774022 40.00 1 764 007773028 40.00 1 764 007774023 40.00 1764 007773029 40.00 164 007774024 40.00 1764 007773030 40.00 1764 007774025 40.00 1 764 007773031 40.00 1 764 007774026 40.00 1 764 007773032 40.00 1 764 007774027 40.00 1 764 007773033 40.00 1 764 007774028 40.00 1 764 007773034 40.00 1764 007774029 40.00 1764 007773035 40.00 1764 007774030 40.00 Total $2 Agenda Item 8.d. Page 6 RESOLUTION N . A RESOLUTION F THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY F ARROYO GRANDE CONFIRMING A LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT FOR TRACT 1769 WHEREAS, on ,June 9, 1992, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande ordered the formation of Arroyo Grande Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District No. 1, within Tract 1769, containing 30 single- family home sites located at Farr ll Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande to levy assessments totaling $3,000 ($100 per assessable parcel) for Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District Flo. 1 for the Fiscal Year 2011-12. NOW, THEREFORE, I E, E IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande as follows: 1. That the above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein. 2. That the assessments shown on Exhibit "A " , attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are confirmed as true and correct. Immediately after adoption, a certified copy of this Resolution shall be filed with the County Auditor. 4. The assessment shall be collected at the same time and in the sane manner as County taxes are collected, and all lags providing for the collection and enforcement of County taxes shall apply to the collection and enforcement of the assessments. After collection by the County, the remaining amount of the assessments, after deducting compensation due the County for collection, shall be paid to the City. On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2011. Agenda Item 8.d. Page 7 RESOLUTION NO, PAGE 2 TONYFERRARA,MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WET RE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITE MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J, CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY E Agenda Item 8.d. Page 8 EXHIBIT "A" SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY TALC SYSTEM TRACT 1769 ASSESSMENTS FOR TAX ROLL YEAR 2011 -12 Fund Assessment ## Char e 1 765 077253001 100.00 1765 077253002 100.00 1765 0772 100.00 1765 077253004 100.00 1 765 077253005 100-00 1 765 077253006 100.00 1 76 0772 100.00 1 765 077253008 100-00 1 765 077258009 100.00 1765 077253010 100.00 1 765 0772 580 11 100. 1 765 0772 580 12 100.00 1 765 077258018 100.00 1 765 077258014 100.00 1 765 07725801 100-00 1 765 07725801 100-00 1 765 077253017 100.00 1 765 077253018 100.00 1 765 077258019 100-00 1 765 077258020 100.00 1 765 077258021 100-00 1765 077258022 100,00 1 765 0772 58028 100-00 1 765 0772 58024 100.00 1 76 077253025 100.00 1 765 077258026 100.00 1765 077258027 100.00 1 765 077258028 100.00 1 765 0772 58029 100.00 1 765 077258080 100.00 TOTAL $3 Agenda Item 8.d. Page 9 RESOLUTION ISO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE PARKSIDE VILLAGE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (TRACT 2310) WHEREAS, EAS, the owner Parkside Village, LLC of Lots 1 through 67, Tract 2310 requested the City form a maintenance assessment district commonly referred to as the Parside pillage Assessment District to provide means to finance the costs of maintenance, operation, and service of certain specified improvements; and WHEREAS, EAS, on November 8, 2005, the Arroyo Grande City Council adopted Resolution No. 3888 ordering the formation of the Par side Village Assessment District, confirming assessments, assessment district diagram, and approving the levying of assessments for Tract 2310 Parkside V illage); and WHEREAS, EAS, assessments for the Parkside Village Assessment District must be confirmed by the City Council for each fiscal year. OW, THEREFORE, F E, E IT RESOLVED LVE by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande as follows: 1. That the above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein. 2. That the assessment for the 2011-12 fiscal year shorn on Exhibit "A ", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are confirmed as true and correct. 3. Assessments shall be adjusted annually by modifying the adopted value up or down in conformance with the Consumer Price Index for the Los Angeles region. The factor for the adjustment of the assessments shall be calculated using the April index and established by the Director of Administrative Services, utilizing the following formula: Factor = 1 + Current Index — Prior Year Index Prior Y ear Index 4. Immediately after adoption, a certified copy of this Resolution shall be filed with the County Auditor. 5. The assessment shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as County takes are collected, and all lavers providing for the collection and enforcement of County takes shall apply to the collection and enforcement of the assessments. After collection by the County, the remaining amount of the assessments, after deducting compensation due the County for collection, shall be paid to the City. Agenda Item 8.d. Page 10 RESOLUTION NO. PACE On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member and on the following roll call Grote, to grit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution w s passed and adopted this day of , 2011. Agenda Item 8.d. Page 11 RESOLUTION . PAGE TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST. KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK{ APPROVED AS TO CONTENT. STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CA EL, CITY ATTORNEY Agenda Item 8.d. Page 12 EXHIBIT "A° SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY TAX SYSTEM TRACT 2310 ASSESSMENTS FOR TALC ROLL YEAR 2011-12 Fund Assessment # Charge 1 893 077255002 618.00 1893 077255003 618.00 1 893 077255004 618-00 1 893 077255005 618.00 1 893 077255006 618.00 1 893 077255007 618.00 1893 077255008 618.00 1 803 077255000 618.00 1 893 077255010 618.00 1893 077255011 618.00 1 803 077255012 618.00 1803 077255013 618.00 1 803 077255014 618.00 1803 077255015 074.00 1 893 077255016 074.00 1 893 077255017 074.00 1893 077255018 074.00 1 893 077255019 074.00 1803 077255020 974.00 1 803 077255021 074.00 1 803 077255022 074.00 1 803 077255023 074.00 1893 077255026 074.00 1 893 077255027 074.00 1893 077255028 074.00 1893 077255020 074.00 1 803 077255030 074.00 1803 077255031 974.00 1893 077255032 074.00 1803 077255033 074.00 1803 077255034 974.00 1833 077255035 074.00 1 803 077255036 074.00 1803 077255037 074.00 1893 077255038 974.00 1803 077255030 074.00 1893 077255040 974.00 1803 077255041 074.00 Agenda Item 8.d. Page 13 EXHIBIT "A" 1893 077255042 974.00 1893 077255043 974.00 1893 077255044 974.00 1893 077255045 974.00 1893 077255046 974.00 1893 077255047 974.00 1893 077255048 974.00 1 893 077255049 974.00 1893 077255050 974.00 1 893 077255051 974.00 1 893 077255052 974.00 1893 077255053 974.00 1893 077255054 974.00 1893 077255055 974.00 1 893 077255056 974.00 1893 077255057 974.00 1893 077255058 974.00 1893 077255059 974.00 1893 077255060 974.00 1 893 077255061 974.00 1 893 077255062 974.00 1 893 077255063 974.00 1893 077255064 974.00 1893 077255065 974.00 1893 077255066 974.00 1893 077255067 974.00 1 893 077255068 974.00 TOTAL $58 Agenda Item 8.d. Page 14 RESOLUTION No. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE GRACE LANE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (TRACT 2236) WHEREAS, the o wner (Vista Roble, le, LLC ) of Lots 1 through 19, Tract 2236, petitioned the City to form a maintenance assessment district, commonly referred to as the Grace Lane Assessment district to provide means to finance the costs of maintenance, operation, and service of certain specified improvements; and WHEREAS, EAS, on November er 2 , 2006, the Arroyo Grande City Council adopted Resolution Igo. 39 ordering the formation of the Grace Lane Assessment district, confirming assessments, assessment district diagram, and approving the levying of assessments for Tract 2236 (Grace Lane Subdivision); and WHEREAS, assessments for the Grace Lane Assessment district must be confirmed by the City Council for each fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, E, E IT RESOLVED y the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande as follo ws: 1. That the above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein. 2. That the assessment for the 2011 -12 fiscal year shown on Exhibit "A ", attached hereto and incorporated herein b y this reference, are confirmed as true and correct. 3. Assessments shall be adjusted annually by modifying the adopted value up or down in conformance with the Consumer Price Index for the Los Angeles region. The factor for the adjustment of the assessments shall be calculated using the April index and established by the director of Administrative Services, utilizing the following formula; Factor = 1 + Current Index — Prior Y Index Prig Year Index 4. Immediately after adoption, a certified copy of this Resolution shall be filed with the County Auditor. 5. The assessment shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as County takes are collected, and all lavers providing for the collection and enforcement of County takes shall apply to the collection and enforcement of the assessments. After collection by the County, the remaining amount of the assessments, after deducting compensation due the County for collection, shall be paid to the City. Agenda Item 8.d. Page 15 RESOLUTION Igo. PAGE On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member and on the following roll call Grote, to wit: AYES. NOES: ABSENT. the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2011. Agenda Item 8.d. Page 16 RESOLUTION N . PAGE T N F E I IAA IAA, III A l ATTEST: KELLY I ETMO E, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY NEY Agenda Item 8.d. Page 17 EXHIBIT "A" SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY TAX SYSTEM TRACT 2236 ASSESSMENTS FOR TALC ROLL YEAR 2011-12 Fund Assessment Charge 1 835 00701 9002 432.00 1 835 007013003 432.00 1 835 007013004 432.00 1835 007013005 432.00 1835 007013006 432.00 1835 007013007 432.00 1835 007013008 432.00 1835 007013003 432.00 1835 007013010 432.00 1 835 337019011 432.33 1835 007019012 492.00 1835 007019014 492.00 1895 007019015 432.00 1895 007013016 432.00 1895 007019017 492.00 1 835 007019018 652.00 1 835 007019019 652.00 1835 007019020 652.00 1895 007019021 652.00 TOTAL .00 Agenda Item 8.d. Page 18 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY C UNCIUREDEVEL PME T AGENCY TUESDAY, MAY 24,2011 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 216 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor /Chair Ferrara called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Council /RDA: Council /Board Member Joe Costello, Council /Board Member Jim Guthrie, Council /Board Member Tim Brown, Mayor Pro Tem Vl e Chair Caren Ray, and Mayor/Chair Tony Ferrara were present. City Staff Present: City Manager Steven Adams, City Attorney Tim Carmel, Deputy City Clerk Ditty Norton, Community Development Director Teresa MClish, Chief of Police Steve Annibali, Recreation and Maintenance Services Director Doug Perrin, Administrative Services Director Angela Kraetsh, and Associate Planner Kelly Heffernn were present. 3. FLAG SALUTE Mayor/Chair Ferrara led the Flag Salute. 4. INVOCATION Reverend Valerie Valle, St. Barnabas Episcopal Church, delivered the invocation. 6 . SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 6.a. Honorary Proclamation Declaring May 2011 as "Building safety Month". Mayor Ferrara read and presented the Proclamation to Jonathan Hurst, City of Arroyo Grande Building Official. 8. AGENDA REVIEW 8.a. Ordinances Read in Title Only. Council /Board Member Brown moved, Council /Board Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed unanimously that all ordinances presented at the meeting shall be read by title only and all further readings be waived. 7. CITIZENS! INPUT, COMMENTS., AND SUGGESTIONS The following members of the public spoke during Citizens' Input, Comment and Suggestions: Bob Lund; Aaron Henkel, S. Alpine; Pa#tr Welsh, Pradera Court; D Margaret Carmen; Barry Hague; Kristina Agne; Jeff Pinak and Brad Snook, Surfrider Foundation. 8. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor/Chair Ferrara invited members of the public who wished to comment on any Consent Agenda Item to do so at this time. Speaking from the public was Nancy Underwood, Short Street, regarding Item 8.g. Agenda Item 8.e. Page 1 Minutes: City / rifl r rf er i Agen Pager T May 24, 2011 Mayor/Chair Ferrara requested Item 8.d. be pulled, Council /Board Member Guthrie requested Item 8.g.be pulled. Action: Council /Board Member Brown moved, and Council /Board Member Guthrie seconded the motion to approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.i., with the exception of Items 8.d. and 8.g., with the recommended courses of action. The motion passed on the following roll -call Grote: AYES: Brown, Guthrie, Costello, Ray, y, Ferrara NOES: None ABSENT: None 8.a. Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification. Recommended mmended Action: Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period May 1, 2011 through May 15, 2011. 8.b. Consideration of statement of Investment Deposits. Recommended Action: Received eived and filed the report listing the current investment deposits of the City, as of April 30, 2011, as required by Government Code Section 53646(b). 8.. Consideration of Approval of Minutes. Recommended mmended Action: Approved the action minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings of May 10, 2011, as submitted. 8.e. Consideration of Amendment No. I to the Agreement with Water systems Consulting, Inc. for the 2010 Upd ate to the Urban Wate r Management Plan. Recommended mmended Action; 1 ) Approved Amendment No. 1 to the Consultant Services Agreement with Water Systems Consulting, Inc. in the amount of $17,920 for the 2010 Update to the Urban Water Management Plan; 2 ) Authorized the Mayor to sign the amendment to the agreement with Water Systems Consulting Inc.; and Appropriated $9,000 from the Water Fund into the Water and Severer Master Plan project. 8.f. Consideration of an Award of Contract to rugh Construction, Inc. for the El Camino Real Rehabilitation and Enhancement Project, P1128 -. [CCIRDA) Recommended Action: 1 ) Awarded a contract for the El Camino Real Rehabilitation n and Enhancement Project to Baugh Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1,900,572; 2 Authorized the City Manager to approve change orders for approximately 15% of the contract amount, $285,086 for unanticipated costs during the construction phase of the project: Adopted Resolution No. 4362 entitled: `A RESOLUTION F THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROWNG PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 012-N TO ADMINISTERING AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT NO. 05-5199R FOR THE L CAMINO REAL REHABILITATION AND 1 HANG ME T PROJECT"- Adopted Resolution n N . 4363 entitled: "A RESOLUTION F THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO RA AUTHORIZING PA TICIPA TIN I THE APCD/MOVER GRANT PROGRAM FOR THE L CAMINO REAL REHABILITATION AND 1 HANG ME T PRO J CT "; Adopted Resolution No. 4364 entitled: " RESOLUTION F THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING A FUNDING AGREEMENT Y AND TWEE THE CITY AND THE ARROYO GRA REDEVELOPMENT A NC Y, AND MA KJ THE FINDINGS REQUIRED Y HEALTH & SAFETY CODE SECTION 33445, FOR AGENCY CY FUNDI F A PORTION F THE L CAMINO REAL REHABILITATION Agenda Item 8.e. Page 2 Minutes: City Councilll edevelopment Agency Tuesday, May 24, 2011 Page AND ENHANCEMENT PROJECT, P W 2008- ".. and Adopted Redevelopment Agency Resolution No. FDA 11-02 entitled: "`A RESOLUTION OF THE ARROYO GRANDE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING A FUNDING AGREEMENT Y AND BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND THE CITY OF ARROYO RA1 E, Al MAKING THE FINDINGS REQUIRED Y HEALTH & SAFETY CODE SECTION 33445, FOR AGENCY FU II F A PORTION OF THE EL CAMINO REAL REHA IL I TA TI 1 AND ENHANCEMENT PROJECT, PW 2008-09 . 8.h. Consideration to Authorize Chief of Police to Execute License Agreements for Hosting Video surveillance Cameras. Recommended mended Action: Authorized the Chief of Police to execute all license agreements for hosting video surveillance c ameras. 8.i. Authorize sole source Procurement of Mobile Data Computer Equipment/Software and Upgrade to PSNet Records Management System/Computer Aided Dispatch system. Recommended Action: Approved the procurement of Mobile Data Co mputers (MDC) from Hub- Data911 and ruggedi ed tablets from Xpl re Technology, and approve upgrading the Executive Information Services {EIS} PSI et Records rds Management System (RMS) and Computer Aided Dispatch System (CAD) along with the necessary hard warels ft are /professional services for placement in police department patrol, traffic, command and investigations vehicles. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT T AGENDA 8.d. Consideration of a Cooperation Agreement Between the County of San Luis Obispo and the City of Arroyo Grande for .Joint Participation in the Community Development Block Grant Program, the HOME Investment Partnerships Program the Emergency shelter Grant Program, the American Dream Downpayment Initiative Program, and the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS HPIIA Program for Fiscal Years 2072 through 2074. Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution appr ving the Cooperation Agreement. Mayor Ferrara provided an update regarding the Federal budget and proposed cuts to many programs, including the HOME Investment Partnerships program. Action: Mayor Ferrara moored to adopt Resolution I . 4365 entitled " "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO RA1 COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THE CITY OF ARROYO RAl FOR JOINT PARTICIPATION IN THE COMMUNITY E L ME T BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM,, AM,, TH HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM., THE EMERGENCY SH L TER GRANT PROGRAM, THE AMERICAN I AM DOWNPAYMENT INITIATIVE TIVE PROGRAM, AND THE HOUSING I TU ITI S FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS H A PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2012 THROUGH 2014'. Council Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll -call Grote: AYES: Ferrara, Guthrie, Costello, Brown, Flay NOES: None ABSENT: None Agenda Item 8.e. Page 3 Minutes: City CouncillRedevelopment Agent Tuesday, May 24, 2011 Page 8.g. consideration of Adoption of an Ordinance Amending section 9.04.020 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal code Regarding Alcoholic Beverage service and Consumption In certain Areas. Recommended Action: 1 Adopt an Ordinance amending Section 9.04.020 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code; and Adopt a Resolution permitting the service and consumption of alcohol sold on -site at Heritage Square Park in designated areas during the 2011 pillage Summer Concert Series. In response to an inquiry by Council Member Guthrie, staff clarified the language in the proposed Ordinance, as well as in the proposed Resolution, which would permit the service and consumption of alcohol at Heritage Square Park in designated arrears during the 2011 Centennial Summer Concert Series. City Manager Adams explained that any future events would require Council approval by Resolution. Mayor Ferrara invited public comment. Speaking from the pudic was Nancy Underwood, Short Street, regarding pudic notification for any future events that would allow the service and consumption of alcohol at Heritage Square Park. Mayor Ferrara requested that any future events should be placed on the Agenda as a new business item with public notification. City Attorney Carmel recommended ar minor modification to the operative phrase of the Resolution to state: "Consumption of alcohol shall be limited to designated areas." Action: Council Member Guthrie moored to adopt Ordinance No. 632 entitled: 119 AN ORDINANCE of THE CITY COUNCIL of THE CITY of ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING SECTION . 04.020 OF THE A RRO Yo GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE S R VIC AND CONSUMPTION IN CERTAIN AIWAS as modified to include language that consumption of alcohol shall be limited to designated areas. Council Member Brown seconded and the motion passed on the following roll -call Grote. AYES: Guthrie, Brown, Costello, Fury, Ferrara NOES: None ABSENT: None Action: Council Member Guthrie moved to adopt Resolution No. 4366 entitled: "" R SOLU71ON of THE CITY COUNCIL of THE CITY of ARROYO GRANDE ALLOWING THE SERVICE AND CONSUMPTION of ALCOHOL AT HERITAGE SQUARE PAR DURING THE 2011 WLLAGE SUMMER CONCERT SERIES PURSUANT To ORDINANCE NO. 632 as modified to Include language that consumption of alcohol shall be limited to designated areas. Council Member Brown seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll -call Grote: AYES: Guthrie, Brown, Costello, Fury, Ferrara NOES: None ABSENT: None Agenda Item 8.e. Page 4 Minutes: City CouncillRedevelopment Agency Tuesday, May 24, 2011 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS GS Page 9.a. Appeal of Planning Commission's Approval f Conditional Use Permit Case No. 11-002 for an Interim Regional Transit Authority /South County Area Transit TA/SCAT Parking and Storage Facility Located at 800 Rodeo Drive. Community Development Director McClish presented the staff report and recommended the Council adopt a Resolution denying the appeal and upholding approval of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 11 -002 for an interim I TA SCAT parking and storage facility located at 800 Rodeo Drive. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing. Speaking from the public in support of the appeal were Bob Do kerty, appellant; Mark Vasquez; Mike Furman, Ilia Vaquero; and Mike Freese, Ilia Vaquero. Speaking in opposition of the appeal was Ed Ding, representing F TA SCAT. No farther public comments were received and the public hearing was closed. Action Council Member Guthrie moved to adopt Resolution No. 4367 entitled "' RESOLUTION THE CITY COUNCIL THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING APPEoqL AND UPHOLDING APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL US SIT CASE NO. 11 -002 FOR AN INTERIM I I TAISCA T PARKJNG AND STORAGE AGILITY AT 800 RODEO DRIVE OF as modified to include the addition of three conditions of approval, as follows: 1 that the hours of operation shall be from 5.00 a.m. to 10.00 p.m.; that no more than eight buses shall be located on site at any one time; and that pnor to commencing operation on the site, a nose mitigation plan shall be submitted by the applicant and approved by the Community Development Department. Mayor Pro Tern Ray seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: Guthrie, Ray, Brown, Costello, Ferrara NOES: None ABSENT: None Mayor Ferrara called for a break at 9:06 p.m. The Council reconvened at 9:20 p.m. 9.. Consideration of an Ordinance Amending Portions of Title 13 and Title 15 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Relating to the Establishment of Water Efficient Landscape Requirements; DeveI o pm ent Code Amendment Case I I o. I 1 -002. Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and recommended the Council introduce an Ordinance amending portions of Title 13 and Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Relating to the Establishment of Water Efficient Landscape Requirements. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing. Speaking from the public and providing comments on the proposal were Patter Welsh, Pradera Court; and Aaron Henkel, S. Alpine Street. No farther public comments were received, and the public hearing was closed. Action: Council Member Costello moved to introduce an Ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING PORTIONS OF TITLE 13 AND TITLE 15 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING T Agenda Item 8.e. Page 5 Minutes: City Count llRedevelopment Agency Page 6 Tuesday, May 24, 201 THE ESTABLISHMENT OF WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS' i Council Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call Grote: AYES: Costello, Guthrie, Brown, Flay, Ferrara NOES: None ABSENT: None 9.c. Consideration of Development Code Amendment 11-003; Proposed Ordinance Amending Regulations Regarding Temporary signs; Citywide. Community Devel pment Director McClish presented the staff report and stated the Planning Commission recommended the City Council introduce an Ordinance amending portions of Sections 16.60.050 and 16.60.060 of Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code regarding temporary banners and signs. Mayor Ferrara o pened the public hearing. speaking from the public and providing comments on the proposal were Patty Welsh, Pradera Court; Aaron Henkel, S. Alpine; Kristin Barnei h, Planning Commissioner; and John been, Planning Commissioner. No further public comments were received, and the pudic hearing was closed. Action Council Member Guthrie moored to tiring back at the next regular City Council meeting a reprised Ordinance to include the Planning Commission recommendations with the following exception: to include a grace period program of 90 days for portable (sandwich board) signs to be approved if they meet certain criteria as approved by the Community Development Director: and to include two different alternatives relating to human signs for full o partial prohibition. In addition, staff was directed to tiring back in the future a reprised table 16.60.040a so that it can be s implified and put in brochure format with illustrations to include examples of appropriate and inappropriate signa e. Council Member Brown seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call Grote: AYES: Guthrie, Brown, Costello, Flay, Ferrara NOES: None ABSENT: None 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS None. 11. NEW BUSINESS 11.a. Consideration of Police Building site Alternatives. Mayor Ferrara announced that he would remain at the dais until discussion began regarding the C urtland site, at which time he would step down from the dais due to a conflict of interest. Recommended Action: 1) Receive information regarding Police building site alternatives; 2) Direct staff to prepare a feasibility study of co-locating the Police Station at the Corporation Yard site; and 3) Delay selection of a preferred alternative until the feasibility of use of the Corporation Yard is determined and the Council receives a presentation on updated project alternatives for the East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street site. Agenda Item 8.e. Page 6 Minutes: Cit Count 111 edevelopment Agency Page Tuesday, May 24, City Manager Adams and Craig Atkinson, BFGC Architects, presented the proposed buildin site alternatives, with the exception of the Curtlarnd Street site. Council questions and comments ensued regarding the proposed sites. Mayor Ferrara stepped down from the dais for the presentation and discussion regarding the alternative site on Curtlarnd Street due to ar conflict of interest associated with his primar residence which is lamed within 500 feet of the subject site. Mayor Pro Tern Ray tools over as Presiding Officer and noted than pursuant to Council policy, the Council must vote unanimously to continue the meeting past midnight. Council Member Guthrie moved, Mayor Pro Tem Ray seconded, and upon voice vote, with Council Member Brown dissenting, the motion did not pass. City Manager Adams and Craig Atkinson, BFGC Architects, presented the alternative for the Curtlarnd Street site. Following discussion, Council directed staff to work with the architect on a feasibility study for use of the Corporation 1 acrd site. No f action was taken on this item. Mayor Ferrara returned to the dais. 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS f TS Council reports were tabled to the next regular meeting. 13. CITY COUNCIL ICI E ICI BE ITEMS None. 14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS None. 1. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS None. 16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS None. 17. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS None. 18. ADJOURNMENT Mayor/Chair Ferrara adjourned the meeting at 12:01 a.m. to the Special Budget Meeting of Thursday, May 26, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 215 E. Branch Street. Agenda Item 8.e. Page 7 Minutes: City CouncillRedevelopment Agency Page Tuesday, May 24, 201 Tony Ferrara, Mayor/Chair ATTEST: Kitty Norton, Deputy City Clerk/Agency Secretary (Approved at CC Mtg Agenda Item 8.e. Page 8 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL THURSDAY, MA Y 26 2011 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH CH STF EET ARROYO Y GRANDE, CALIF F NIA 1. R CALL: Mayor Ferrara called the special meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. Council Member Joe Costello, Council Member Jinn Guthrie, Council Member Tim Brown, City Manager Steven Adams, Human Resources Manager Karen Sisk o, and City Attorney Tim Carmel were present. Mayor Pro Tern Ray was absent. 2 . PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 3. CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION: a. CONFERENCE ENCE ITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6: x Agency Negotiator: Steven Adams, City Manager Represented Employees: Service Employees International Union SEIU Local 620 b. CONFERENCE ITH LABOR #E TIAT R pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6: Agency Negotiator: Steven Adams, City Manager Represented Employees: Arroyo Grande Police Officers' Association (AGPOA C. CONFERENCE ENCE ITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6: Agency Negotiator: Steven Adams, City Manager Unrepresented Employees: Management Employees 4 . RECONVENE NVENE T OPEN SESSION: Mayor Ferrara announced that them was no rep action from the closed session. 5 . ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6 : 10 p. m. Agenda Item 8.e. Page 9 Minutes of City C ouncil Special Meetin May 2 , 201 Page 2 Tony Ferrara, Mayor ATTEST: Kelly Wetmore, re, City Clerk (Approved at CC Mtg ) Agenda Item 8.e. Page 10 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPM EI T AGENCY THURSDAY, MAY 26 2011 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor /Chair called the Special Meeting of the City Council/ Redevelopment Agency to order at 6:'16 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Mayor/Chair Tony Ferrara, Mayor Pro Tem ice -Chair Caren Flay, Council /Board Member Joe Costello, Council /Board Member Jim Guthrie, and Council/Board Member Tim Brown were present. Staff members present were City Manager Steven Adams, Chief of Police Steve Annibaili Director of Legislative and Information Service /City Clerk Kelly Wetmore, re, Community Development Director Teresa McCli h, Recreation n and Maintenance Services Director Doug Perrin, and Administrative Services Director Angela Kraet ch. 3. FLAG SALUTE Mayor /Chair Ferrara led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4 . CITIZENS' INPUT COMMENTS., MEN TS AND SUGGESTIONS There were no public comments. 5. NEW BUSINESS 5.a. Fiscal Year 2010-11 Third Quarter Budget Report. Director Kraetch presented the staff report and recommended the City Council /Agency Board: 1 Approve detailed budget adjustments listed in the Third Quarter budget report; Approve Schedule Aa and 3 Approve requests for additional adjustments in the General Fund. Brief discussion ensued regarding the City's insurance program through the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority CJPIA and the need to review the program to determine if it is still cost efficient for the City. No public comment was received. Action Council/Board Member Costello moored to approve detailed budget adjustments listed in the Third Quarter budget report; approve Schedule A; and approve requests for additional adjustments in the General Fund. Council/Board Member Brown seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll caul Grote: AYES: Costello, Brown, Guthrie, Ray, Ferrara NOES: None ABSENT: None Agenda Item 8.e. Page 11 Special City Coun illJ edevelop ent Agency Meeting Minutes May 26, 201 P age 5.b. Consideration of Preliminary FY 2011 -1211= 2012-13 Biennial Budget. Director Kraetsch presented the staff report which included a review of the biennial budget calendar; a summary of the Preliminary Budget for FY 2011 -12 and 2012-13 including General Fund revenue and expenditure projections and estimated budget shortfalls; budget strategies to address the shortfall in FY 2011 -12; and an overview of other funds pater, severer, Redevelopment pment Agency, streets, Capital Improvement Program). Director Perrin provided a summary of major City projects, and Director M cClish provided a summary of major street, drainage, and water projects. City Manager Adams explained that there were three unfunded projects (Car Corral, Fair Oaks, and Ella street improvements) and that the budget strategy was to apply any savings from other projects to these projects. Brief discussion ensued regarding sidewalk damage due to tree roots and the priority for fining all sidewalks within the City, with an emphasis on the pillage. No public comments were received. Council/Board Member comments ensued regarding sidewalk repairs; negotiation of labor agreements; sales and gas tax revenue assumptions from the County; street improvements as it relates to mi r surfa ing versus slurry seal; repairs needed on James Way; street maintenance for E. Grand Avenue; and the importance of maintaining the City Council's reserve fund goal of 20%, not falling below 15%, and that the first priority is to increase the reserve fund. No formal action was taken. 6 .A D JOURNMENT Mayor/Chair Ferrara adjourned the special Meeting at 7:09 p.m. Tony Ferrara, Mayor/Chair ATTEST: Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk/Agency Secretary {Approved at CC Mtg ) Agenda Item 8.e. Page 12 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER SPECIAL *JOINT MEETING/STUDY SESSION CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, MAY 31, 2011 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GYG GF ANDE, CALIFORNIA Mayor Pro Teri Ray r Called the special meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Council: Planning Commission: City Staff_ 3. FLAG SALUTE Council Members ,Joe Costello, ,Jinn Guthrie, Tim Brown, and Mayor Pro Tern Caren Far were present. Mayor Tong Ferrara was absent. Commissioners ,John Teen, Lisa B perw, and Vice-Chair Kristen Barneich were present. Commissioner ,Jennifer Martin and Chair Elizabeth Ruth were absent. City Manager Steven Adams, City Attorney Tim Carmel, City Clerk Kelly r Wetmore, Community Devel pment Director Teresa MCClish, and Associate Planner Fran Foster were present. Mayor Pro Tern Ray led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. EAST GLAND AVENUE AND CGUF TLAND PROJECT The purpose of the study session is to* 1 provide the applicant with are opportunity to present alternative Concepts for development of the parcel at the southwest Corner of E. Grand Avenue and C urtland Street; provide an opportunity for discussion, questions, and feedback from the City Council and Planning Commission regarding issues, preferred options and feasibility of other development Concepts; and 3 allow the public to ask questions and provide Comments. Carol Florence, representing Nick Tompkins, pr vided introductory Comments. Nick Tompkins, applicant, provided an overview of development efforts to date regarding the parcels on E. Grand Avenue and C urtland Street with public outreach and tenant searches; provided a history of the C urtland Place project dating back to 2007; Commented on the state of the local Commercial real estate market; et; reviewed previously proposed site plans; and then presented fire new alternative site plans. Mr. Tompkins ins then responded to questions from the Planning Commission and City Council members. Mayor Pro Tern Ray r invited members of the public to ask questions or provide Comments on the material presented. The following members of the public spore: Richard Duffin, Newport Avenue; Debbie Collins, Santa Maria; Aaron Henkel, S. Alpine; Del Clegg, Cookie Crock Warehouse Manager; and Bernadine Duflin, Newport rt Avenue. Agenda Item 8.e. Page 13 Minutes of City Council Special Meetin May 10, 2011 Page Commissioner Barneioh provided the following comments: - Liked Michael's and Fresh Market alternatives; - Did not believe there was a duplication of uses; - Does not favor a bank in the alternatives; - Could accept one drive -thru use; - Likes the loading dock area; - Church use is ok, but seems a waste of prime commercial space; - Noted that a future landscape plan would address open space issue. Commissioner Keen provided the following comments: - Likes Michael's and Fresh Market; - Expressed concern about Walgreens drug store; opposes drive- thru's; - Likes truck access and dock; - Opposes a church at this location; property is located at City's gateway and is prune rnrnerial space. Commissioner Sperow provided the following comments: - Referred to nearby residents and would like more input from there; - Likes Michael's; acknowledged that Fresh Market is different; - Troubled by two proposed drive- thru's; - Proposals shover promise. Mayor Pro Tern Flay provided the following comments: - Agreed with most of Commissioner Barnei h's comments; - Referred to E. Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan; - Alternatives presented did not appear to be bide or pedestrian oriented; - Concerned with two drive- thru's; could accept one drive -thru; - Does not believe there is a duplication of uses; - Does not like a drug store with a drive -thru; - Complimented truck access redesign; - Concerned about mass /scale of rear building; encouraged facade to make it look like two buildings; - Does not support a church at this location; - Acknowledged that public improvements and traffic circulation will need to be addressed when a specific project application comes forward. Council Member Brown provided the following comments - Acknowledged the site was previously two separate pro perty owners/ parcels which made proposed development challenging; - Referred to E. Grand Avenue as it relates to truck traffic and stated he does not want to modify the existing medians; - Believes there is some duplication of uses and some amount of sales tax transfer; - Concerns regarding drive- thru's and truck circulation will be key issues; - Acknowledged staff for Engineering peer review study previously conducted. Council Member Costello provided the following comments: Noted that grocery stores /markets are not typically pedestrian friendly uses; Commented on green space issues; - Stated that the back building should be two smaller buildings; one building is too big; Agenda Item 8.e. Page 14 Minutes of city council Special Meeting May 1, 2011 Page Must be careful on design for truck access as it relates to wall separating the commercial and residential uses; Does not support two drive thru's; Other issues regarding traffic and truck circulation are not going away. Council Member Guthrie provided the following comments: - In response to public comment regarding a hotel on the site, this is a poor location as hotels file to locate in a resort area or next to industrial uses; - Does not support a church at this location as this is prime commercial land; - Does not support drive -thru, although placement behind buildings is better than the front; believes there is a conflict in the site plan with the truck access and the drugstore; - Acknowledged that the Chase Bank without drive -up ATM is successful in other locations; - Concern about size of trucks making deliveries to the Varlet; lies the access through the back; - Suggested that there are ways to address the mass /scale of the back building such as offsetting two buildings; - Stated number one concern as the big trucks on Courtland and the gall separating the commercial use from the residential use; - Hesitant to base decisions on proposed tenants; - Noted that most business plans include locating next to similar uses; - commented that if building to accommodate big trucks, then City needs to address standards Citywide - Not opposed to drugstore or bank; tenant mix is off; - Alter drive- thru's radically. Mr. Tompkins briefly responded to the issue of breaking up the large building and suggested that a deed restriction could address that issue. There was also brief discussion regarding the likelihood of a proposed Police Station on the site and it was noted that the council would be conducting a Joint Meeting with Grover Beach City council within the next month to discuss related issues. Council /Commission comments concluded and Mayor Pro Tern Flay thanked everyone who attended and participated in the study session. 5. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pro Tern Flay adjourned the special meeting at 8 :00 p.m. in honor and memory of former Council Member Thomas F unefs, who passed away on Sunday, May 29, 2011. Caren Ray, Mayor Pro Term ATTEST: Kelly Wetmore, city clerk (Approved at CC Mtg ) Agenda Item 8.e. Page 15 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Agenda Item 8.e. Page 16 IN ORPORATE0 " "' MEMORANDUM Ac JI)L-Y 10. 19 11 , T: CITY COUNCIL FROM: KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE AND INFORMATION SERVICESICITY CLERK 0i Y: DITTY NORTON, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANTIDEPUTY CITY CLERIC SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION N CAF COUNCIL APPOINTMENT LENT TC PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION N DATE: JUNE 14 2011 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Council approve the recommendation of Council Member Joe Costello to appoint Roxanne Sh nl l nd to the Parks and Recreation C rr mi i n. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact from this archon. BACKGROUND: On January 14, 1997, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 481 amending the composition of applicable Commissions, Boards, and Committees from seven to five members and also adopted Resolution No. 3192 establishing Council policy as it relates to the appointment procedure to the Commissions,, Boards and Committees. The Ordinance starter that the Mayor and each respective member of the Council shark recommend a representative to the various Commissions, Bands and Committees, subject to the approval by ar majority vote of the Council. All Commission, Board, and Committee Members serve at the pleasure of the Council. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: An unscheduled vacancy occurred on the Parrs and Recreation Commission when Shannon Kessler resigned, effective March 7, 2011. Her term does not expire until January 31, 2015, A Notice of Vacancy the Parrs and Recreation Commission was posted on March 1 , 2011 pursuant to Government Code Section 54974 (Attachment 1). Two ppli anti ns have been received and are attached for Council's information (Attachment 2. Council Member Costello has recommended this vacancy be filled by Roxanne Shn4lnd. Agenda Item 8.f. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENT To PARKS AND F EC EATIO I COMMISSION JUNE 14, 2011 PACE 2 ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: A pprove the recommended mended a p poi ntment; R o not approve the recommended mended appointment; Provide di re do n to staff. ADVANTAGES: This appointment will provide for a full membership of the Parks and Recreation reation Commission. DISADVANTAGES: TAGES: N disadvantages are identified as long as the appointment reflects the desired community representation on this Commission ion bar the City Council. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION I AID COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thur da ,, June 9, 2011. The Agenda and report were posted on the City's web site on Friday, June 10, 2011. No public comments were received. ttarhment: 1. Notice of Vacanc 2. Applications Agenda Item 8.f. Page 2 A �. CITY of ATTACHMENT I AIM -. - Ilnl.11 ;:lfl1:[I:lII[I.:. CITY OF A G ,i YCALIFORN NOTICE of VACANC March 1 11 Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Section 54374 of the California Government Code, that one unscheduled vacancy has occurred on the following city commission; NAME IE of COMMISSION; Parks and Recreation Commission PURPOSE: The Perks and Recreation tion Corr mi ion shall have the responsibility to; A . Act in an advisory capacity to the council and the recreation director in all matter pertaining to Perks and public recreation and to cooperate with other governmental agencies and civic groups in the advancement of sound park and recreation planning and programming; B. Formulate policies on recreation services for approval by the council,- C. Meet with the council when necessary to discuss proposed policies, programs, budgeting, future needs, or other mafters requiring joint deliberation,- D. Advise with the recreation director on problems of administration, development of recreation areas,, facilities, programs, and improved recreation s ervices; E. (lake periodic inventories of recreation services that exist or may be needed and interpret the needs of the public to the council and to the recreation director; F. Aid in coordinating the recreation s ervices with the programs of other governmental agencies and voluntary organizations; G. Interpret the policies and functions of the parks and recreation department to the public; and H. Advise the recreation director in the preparation of the annual parks and recreation budgets and a long -range recreation capital improvement program; and I* Adopt rules and regulations for the use of recreation areas and facilities in accordance with the laws of the city. MEETINGS: Meetings are held on the 2nd Wednesday of each month at 6:30 pm to the City Council Chambers, 215 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande. Special meetings may be called as needed. TERM: Through ,January 31, 2015. For further information or an application, please contact: Ditty Norton, Deputy City Clerk, 300 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande CA 93420, o 3- 404 4 fie / Wetmore. Director of Legislative and Information ServiceslCity clerk, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Vacancy was posted in accordance with Section 54974 of the California Govern meat code. Agenda Item 8.f. Page 3 ATTACHMENT CIW OF A GRANDE . . "' eB rvoir o f Citizens to S erve ;• ,-; ;-, ._. ,••* Ij k , 214 Ee Branch bvet i Arroyo Grand CA 93420 App li ion t o Board, Committee, o r commission PLEE PLACE A CHECK MARK N EXT TO THE BOARD 011 MME MM1 ON FOR WHICH YOU ULD LIKE TO APPLY (You mart' make amore th one selac#ion ): Planning Commission Viral RaNgw Lamm= e Parks and Romention Commission Historical Resouraw Cornmotte e Traffic Commission - pedal Subcommittem Downtown ParlQng AdNisory Board Deft of lkatio � Name ho r7 /Oin ot Last First Home A dd A6 Dome orSdWhone f 1 81ho Phone E -mail adds (tonal) MM Do you seside within the City limft of rro�ra Grande? Yes No Are you a r iebered voter Yes Igo 11111 ...... .... is-/- Community i PT� . Tla Lis# miani ation memberships and com . amdgnnien Please deecribe any background, trainin , education or inters �u I you as an appowtee 0 0 . 7 4- h ff � (Flews at&N* p2Vw Agenda Item 8.f. Page 4 What do you see as the obi es and goals of the advisory board, committee ee or commission for whk h you are a pptoug- oat,( y o .00, No G PIBa6e list three (3} Arroyo rande I'+�fFJr�lCeS. PLEASE OBTAIN PERMESS[Ol�i FROM INDMDUALS BEFORE LISTIIMG THEN AS A REFERENCE N ame Nana Name Curt meeflng schedules are indite below: Planning Commission, 1 st and 3rd Tuesday of each month, f:BB p.m. Parks and Recreation reaction Corr mission, 2rA Wednesday of each month, 6:30 p.m. Traffic Commission, Monday before the 3rd Tuesday of each month, :BB p.m. Downt Parking- Ad viso ry Board, Qu a►rte rly,. 4 th Wednesd , 7 3 0 a.m. Architectural Review Committee, 1 st Monday of each month, 2:38 p.m. Historical Resources urces Corr mittee, 2nd Friday of each month, I OPOO a.m. Are you willing to commit to the time neammary to fulfill the obligations of an a ppointment to a Board, Co mmhfte or Commission? Yw No i he��eb�r dadare that the oing IMortnatlon is true and oompleba to the best of my Imovrledge and Applicant n , re Date NQ= to Aoofican I. Applicants appointed by the City Coundl are required to take an Oath of ice, 2 . State law -and the CRYs Co flktt of Inberest CD requires that Board Membem, Co mmitte e embers.. and Commissioners file Starts of Economic Intel (Form 7DB ) upon assuming office, annually, and upon leaving an appointed office (e.g. sources of Income, loans, gib In a bn r s, Interests in real property within the City). 3 . This application is a rrmat w of public record and portions tivreof are subject to disclosure pursuant to te Callfbm Public Records AcL Please m compl! at P d APpllca on to: M MARA OFFICE 214 Ei Branch Stivat Anv" Grand C A 93420 Agenda Item 8.f. Page 5 CrrY OF ARROYO GRANDE # , "'Rewrvoir of Citizens to SerW , } Soo East Branch Street ` Arroyo Grande, CAA 93420 Application to Board, Committee, or Commission PLEASE PLACE A CHECK MARK NEXT TO THE B AR.D COMM TTEE C MMLW1 N TOR WHICH YOU WOULD LIKE TO APPLY (You may make more than one s+ekcdon ): _Planning C ommission Parks and Recreation Commission ,2� Traffic Commission nvntown Peridng Advisory Board ArchlbwW al R aWew Comrnitbae �Hlstorlcal Ilesour m Comm itbee .,Spedal Subcommittees Date of Application �,�`'� _ �] . F- k L Name v��-- N �: � L,ast First Home Address Horne or Ceti Phone.. Buslness Phone E addss (Optional) Do you reside within the City limits o Arroyo Grande's fifes 2 Igo Are you a regiftwed gofer? Y is ?'- No. Dcnu on ��� r - -, K-_ - A - - - .,: Esnplon►er Edison {Include oral or vo Menses or ca fioses� C ommunky involveism t (List organization memberships and committee asaignments Please describe any bsdtground, traini ng, education or Irteresb that qualify you as an appointee c rJ ��-5 L t4 V. V'-s -� {Please athmb addlbkwa If nec�wA Agenda Item 8.f. Page 6 What do you ne as the an goals of the board, comm are applying? r t UZ Page 2 o� nmission !or which you p G Plc list three 3 Arroyo [G rande brIMCM, P OEMAIN PERMT N FROM INDIMUM BE OU H+r AS A CE11 Wq'� k. e- i Nanw: Add 4'�. �W_-- o'J-� Marne: Add Name: d. A Current meeting scheduke are Indicated below: Planning Commission, 1 ",and 3rd Tuesday of each month,, 6:00 p.m. Parks and Recreation Commission, 2 nd Wednesday of each month, 630 p.m. Traffic C ommission, Monday before the 3rd Tuesday of each month, 7:00 p.m. Downtown Parking Advisory Board, Quarterly, 4th Wednesday, 7:30 a.m. Architectural Review w ommitt e, 1 st Monday of each month, 2:30 p.m. Historical Resources Committee, 2nd Friday of each month, 1 0:00 a.m. Are yo willing to commit to the time nacmery to fulfill the obligations of an appointment to a Board, h Committee or C ommission? Yea No I hereby declare that the i'oregoing infonfnatlon Is true and complete to the beat of my knowledge and belief. a 0 Applicant Signature Date Notice to AmAlca .0 t. Appikants appointed by the aty Council are required to take are Oath of Office. 2 . Mate law and the CWs C onflict of Interest Code requires that Board Members, Co mmittee Members and Commissioners file Statements of Economic Interests (Foam 700) upon assuming office, annually, and upon leaving an appointed office e.g. sources of income, loans, gifts, inveAments, Interests In real property within the My). 3 . This application is a m atter o f public record and portions thereof are subject to disdosure p ursuant to the California Public Rec Act. P ane return completed Application to: Crier CLERICS OFF IE 300 F.aet Bmnch Street Arroyo [Grande CA 93420 Agenda Item 8.f. Page 7 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Agenda Item 8.f. Page 8 RO WCORPORATED 41 JULY 1D. 1011 MEMORANDUM Cti I T: CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF LETTER TO THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION REGARDING THE SMARTMETER PROGRAM DATE: JUNE 14 2011 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council authorize the Mayor to submit the attached letter to the California Public Utilities Commission CPUC urging approval of a Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) SmartMeter opt out program at no additional cost to the customer. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no known fiscal impact to the City regarding this item. BACKGROUND: At the January 11, 2011 meeting, Mayor Ferrara requested staff, and Council concurred, to make arrangements with PG&E for a presentation regarding the SmartMeter program. According to PG&E, the program was driven by the California CPUC in response to the 2000 -2001 energy crisis. The CPUC authorized PG&E to deploy SmartMeter technology in July 2006. As a result, a presentation was made by a PG&E representative at the February 8, 2011 meeting. No additional direction was provided by the City Council at that time. However, since that meeting, the City Council has received a number of comments from the public regarding concerns about SmartMeters. In response, the Council subsequently requested the item be placed on an agenda for consideration. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The SmartMeter system collects electric usage data from homes and businesses and transmits it to PG&E aria a wireless communication network. The goals of the program are to allow for price structures that Crary by time of day to encourage off -peak usage of electricity, provide automated meter reading for all customers, and to provide a platform for innovative technologies, such as home energy automation, distributed generation Agenda Item 8.g. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION of LETTER To THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION REGARDING THE SMARTMETER PROGRAM AM ,JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 2 and storage, and plug -in- hybrid electric vehicles capability. PG&E has argued that it will decrease energy costs by reducing meter reading costs and enabling consumers to reduce consumption during peak load times. Many public concerns have arisen about the meters. The most common one expressed is that the meters can be harmful to residents' health duce to radio frequency graves sent out by the meters. Like cell phones, these meters send out their information through radio graves and many have argued than they are harmful to the health of users. A recent report by the California Council of Science and Technology stated that these meters produce much less radio graves then other more common household items like microwaves and cell phones. Ho wever, a significant amount of conflicting information and contention exists regarding this issue. It has also been argued that the meters don't decrease costs for consumers duce to the cost of implementation and new peak load rules. Others believe the meters are an invasion of privacy because they provide o much information about people's energy consumption so quickly. At the request of the CPUC, PG&E has proposed a new plan to the CPUC that allows people to opt out of having a SmartMeter installed. For people that have had these meters installed already, the radio function would be shun off. However, people who decide to opt out of these meters will be charged fees depending on the household. #rhey will have the choice to pay an upfront fee, which could be up to about $270 or ar fined monthly fee of about $20. Customers are also provided the option of hawing the meter relocated on the property to avoid potential health risks. Input provided at prior Council meetings has most recently focused on a desire for the opt out program to be offered at no cost to the customer. Therefore, a letter is attached for Council's consideration that would request the CPUC to approve a PG&E program than would provide customers the option to decline use of a SmartMeter at no additional cost. A similar letter was recently approved by the City of Grover Beach City Council. There have been some jurisdictions than have adopted moratoriums on SmartMeter installation. However, staff has confirmed than the City does not have the authority to implement a moratorium since PG&E is regulated by the CPUC. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: Authorize the Mayor to send the attached letter to the CPIJC urging approval of ar PG&E SmartMeter opt out program at no add itional cost to the customer; - Modify and approve the letter; - Direct staff to prepare a moratorium for consideration; - Do not take any action regarding the SmartMeter program; - Request additional analysis; or - Provide staff other direction. Agenda Item 8.g. Page 2 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF LETTER TO THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION F EGARC ING THE SI IARTMETER PROGRAM .JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 3 ADVANTAGES Requesting an opt out program a t no cost to the consumer will best design a program to meet each resident's needs and address concerns that have been expressed by many people. DISADVANTAGES: Smart Meter opt out provisions will impact the cost efficiencies of the SmartMeter program by requiring some to be read manually, and costs created by those not wanting to participate will be passed on to other customers if no fee is charged for the opt out. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: : No environmental review is required by the City for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, Tune 9, 2011 and on the City's website on Friday, Tuna 10, 2011. One citizen has previously contacted the City with concerns regarding the program, who was notified of the meeting. No additional public input was received. Attachments: 1. Letter to CPUC Agenda Item 8.g. Page 3 Z S A & CITY of :'• a w _ IT e C L 1 F 0 R N J& �. CITY OF AR Royo GRAND � CALIFORNIA ATTACHMENT 'I June 1, 2011 Michael Peevey, President California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van bless Avenue San Francisco, California 94102 Dear Mr. Peevey: O n behalf of the City of Arroyo Grande, I urge you to approve a Pacific Gas & Electric PG&E option program that provides a clear and fair choice for the customer regarding SmartMeters. Therefore, the City urges the Commission to approve a SmartMeter program for PG&E where the customer has the option to decline participation at no additional cost. It is the City's understanding that the California Public Utilities Commission authorized PG&E to complete the installation of the SmartMeter Program throughout its territory. It is also the City's understanding that PG&E recently submitted a proposal that would gyre residential customers the option to have the radios in their SmartMeters turned off, but a fee would be charged to exercise this option. This option would enable the meters to be manually read and was in response to the Commission's request for a proposal from PG&E to deal with public concerns regard the program. Based on our revie w of the material and testimony presented, the City wants to communicate to the Commission that our City Council supports an option program that provides a clear choice for the customer regarding SmartMeters, but believes the customer should bear no cost for his or her decision regarding participation in the option program. Additionally, the Council is of the opinion than the customer should have the option of making an initial and informed decision early in the process and prior to the installation of the SmartMeter, thus avoiding the actual installation of the meter if participation is not desired by the customer. Thank you for your consideration of our input. Please contact us if you have questions or request additional information. Sincerely, T ony Ferrara M ayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR • 300 East Branch Street • Arro Grande, California 93420 Phone. (805) 473-5400 • Fax. ( o ) 473-0386 • E -mail: agcity@arroyogrande. • W b it ~ nd . or Page 4 INCORPORATED JWLY 10, 1911 4 1FOR MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: C NSIDEF A'rI N OF CANCELLATION OF JULY 26, 2011 CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JUNE 14 2011 RECOMMENDATION: 1 IMENRATION: It is recommended the Council cancel the regularly scheduled Council meeting of July 26, 2011. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: On August 1, 2007, the City Council considered the concept of establishing a policy of designating a summer month for cancellation of Council meetings. The purpose was to designate a month "dark" " fr m Council meetings in the summer so the City Council and staff could coordinate their vacations during this period. Staff recommended the month of July because it was the only full month in which school is not in session and it includes the July 4 th holiday. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The City Council wrests twice a month on the second and fourth Tuesdays. When the Council established the policy of designating a summer month for cancellation, concerns were expressed regarding the impact on other meeting agendas and potential delays to important items. Therefore, it was suggested that one meeting be cancelled in July as a compromise. The City Council concurred and a policy was established to cancel the first meeting in July of each year. At the request of one of the council members, it was changed to the second meeting in July last year. Given labor negotiations and budget t issues, it is recommended that it again be designated as the second meeting in July since the first meeting in July may be necessary to finalize any items related to the Fiscal Year 2011 -12 budget. t. Agenda Item 8.h. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF CANCELLATION OF JULY 26 2011 C117Y COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 1 , 201'1 PAGE 2 Additionally, it will be difficult for Council or staff to plan vacations in early July this year given preparations for the Centennial Celebration. ALTERNATIVES: ES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: 1. Cancel the July 26, 2011 City Council Fleeting; 2. Cancel the July 12, 2011 City Council Fleeting; 3. Direct staff to marks changes to the current policy; or 4. Provide other direction t0 staff. ADVANTAGES: B cancelling the July 26, 2011 meeting, the Council will be able to meet on July 12, 2011 to approve any remaining items related to the FY 2011 -12 budget. Additionally, it provides the City Council and staff an opportunity to pram a vacation during the summer months without being absent from a meeting or being concerned about missing an item that is important for their vote or input. DISADVANTAGES. Cancellation of a regular meeting may result in heavier arg ndas at the prior and following meetings. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, June 9, 2011 and on the City's website on Friday, June 10, 2011. Agenda Item 8.h. Page 2 IN ORP RATED " MEMORANDUM 4K JULY , o, 191 1 To: CITY COUNCIL ol�v FROM: TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT T DIRECTOR BY: DEBBIE WEICHINGER, ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION of REQUEST FROM PLANNING COMMISSIONERS KEEN AND SPERO II FOR CONSECUTIVE ABSENCES FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS DATE: JUNE 1 , 2011 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council consent to three consecutive absences by Planning Commissioners been and Sperow during the summer months. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no cost impact from this item. BACKGROUND: According to Municipal Code Section 2.18.060, three consecutive absences from regular Planning Commission meetings constitute a resignation, unless the City Council consents to such absences. Planning Commissioners Keen and Sperow have requested City Council consent for absences from three consecutive, regular meetings. ANALYSIS of ISSUES: Requirements in the Municipal Code regarding Commission meeting absences are designed to encourage steady attendance. However, Commissioners been and Sperow have demonstrated an ongoing record of excellent attendance, are considered valued members of the Planning Commission, and do not currently plan on absences beyond the three that will be required for their planned vacation /commitments. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: • Consent to the absences, • Do not consent to the absences, or • Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Consenting to the absences will maintain valuable members of the Planning Commission and avoid the potential need to fill vacancies. Agenda Item 8.i. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FROM PLANNING COMMISSIONERS KEEN AND SPEROW FOR CONSECUTIVE ABSENCES FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS JUNE 1, 2011 PAGE DISADVANTAGES: No disadvantages have been identified. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, June 9, 2011. The Agenda and staff report were posted on the City's weite on Friday, June 10, 2011. No public comments were received. Agenda Item 8.i. Page 2 A INCORPORATE JULY 10, t9I1 .1440500 MEMORANDUM IAA To: CITY COUNCIL l SRO IAA• T EI ESA McCLISH oMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Y: LES E ANS, PROJECT ENGINEER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION ATION of A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP AG 04-.0123 LOCATED AT 1 PINE STREET CONSTRUCTED BY ROBERT DEL CAM PO DATE: JUNE 14,2011 RECOMMENDATION: ATIoN It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution accepting improvements for Parcel Map AG 04-0123 located at 154 Pine Street constructed by Robert Del Campo. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There are minor financial impacts in that maintenance of these facilities will be funded from City maintenance funds in future years. The Developer will provide a one -year warranty bond insuring any defects that may appear in the improvements. BACKGROUND: The City Council approved Final Parcel Map AG 04-0123 on May 22, 200 7, subject to conditions of approval. The conditions included requirements from the Community Development and the former Building and Fire Parks, Recreation and Facilities, and Public Works Departments. The project also required the installation of an underground storm grater filtration system to be privately maintained. ANALYSIS of ISSUES: As a condition of the development, the applicant was required to provide the following public improvements along the project frontage at 154 Pine Street; 0 Install approximately 120 lineal feet of curb and gutter 0 Install approximately 1,330 square feet of asphalt paving The improvements have been completed and inspected. Agenda Item 8.j. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP AG -0123 LOCATED AT 1 PINE STREET JUNE '1 , 201 '1 PAGE 2 ALTERNATIVES: The following arlt rnartiv s are provided for the Council? s consideration: - Adopt the resolution accepting improvements. - Do not adopt the resolution accepting improvements. - Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: TAGES: By accepting the public improvements the City will have ownership of facilities in the public right-of-way ray and within dedicated easements. DISADVANTAGES: VAl TAGES: No disadvantages have been identified. ENVIRONMENTAL TAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: MENTS: The agenda for this meeting was posted at City Hall on Thursday, .dune 9, 2011 and the agenda and staff report were posted on the City's website on Friday, .dune 10, 2011. As of the writing of this staff report no public comment had been received. Agenda Item 8.j. Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of THE CITY COUNCIL of THE CITY of ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP AG -0123 LOCATED AT 154 PINE STREET CONSTRUCTED BY ROBERT DEL CAMPo WHEREAS, the City Council approved Final Parcel harp AG 04 -0123 located at 154 Pine Street on May 22, 2007; and WHEREAS, the project was conditioned to offer ar dedication of easements and to construct certain public improvements; and WHEREAS, the developer has offered the easements and constructed the improvements required by the conditions of approval for Parcel Map AG 04- 0123; and WHEREAS, staff has inspected the improvements and finds they are constructed in accordance with the approved plans for the project; and WHEREAS, the developer has provided the 10% warranty security as required by the conditions of approval, to be released at the conclusion of the one -gear warranty period, provided the improvements are still in satisfactory condition. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED than the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande does hereby accept the following for Parcel Map AG 04- 01 23: 1. Street tree planting and maintenance easement shogun on Parcel Map 04-0123. 2. Public utility easement shogun on Parcel harp 04-0123. 3. Curb and gutter installation at 154 Pine Street. 4. Water services and devices installation. On motion of Council Member Council Member , seconded by Council Member : and by the following roll call vote, to grit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this dary of 2011. Agenda Item 8.j. Page 3 RESOLUTION CVO. PACE TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETM RE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: T: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J* CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY Agenda Item 8.j. Page 4 14t.Ro Y64�4 Z; E s dp ' my F MEMORANDUM To: CITY COUNCIL FROM: TERESA MccLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BY. MIKE LINN, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION of ACCEPTANCE of THE WELL NO. 10, PHASE II REHABILITATION PROJECT, PW 2010- DATE: . JUNE 14,2011 RECOMMENDATI It is recommended the City Council: 1. Accept the project improvements as constructed by R. Baker, Inc. in accordance with the plans and specifications for the hell Igo. 10, Phase II Project; 2. Direct staff to file a Notice of Completion; 3 . Appropriate an additionaf $6,000 for the project budget from the Mater Availability Fund; 4 . Approve a Second Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services with Daring, Taylor & Associates in the amount of $2,150; and 5 . Authorize release of the retention, thirty -five days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded, If no hen have been filed FINANCIAL IMPACT; The Capita( Improvement Budget included $655,626 for the entire project (Phase I and Phase II The actual total Phase fl construction project cost, including authorized construction changes, is $2 The total Phase 11 cost of the project, including all design, construction, contract administration and testing costs is approximately $336,789. B ACKGROUND: The well site is located on property at the southwest corner of Deer Trail Circle and Equestrian Way. It was originally acquired in 19 as part of conditions of approval for the pillage Glen Project. Due to the nature of well development and environmental concerns, the project was split into two separate phases: Agenda Item 8.k. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION of ACCEPTANCE of THE WELL No. 10, PHASE 11 PROJECT PW 2010 -02 JUNE 1 , 20'1'1 PAGE Phase I - Test Well Construction Drilling and development of the well. Includes testing of the actual production capacity of the well and the water quality to perform the design of the Phase II project. Phase 11- Site Work, Pump & Pipeline Installation Construction of a filter back -flush pipeline, site grading, construction of a masonry retaining wall and pump building, and the installation of treatment plant equipment. Upon satisfactory completion and water quality testing, the contractor shall perform a permanent tie -in from the well to the city's water system. On March 13, Zoo, council accepted the Well [o. 10, Phase I Project. On August 10, 2010, Council awarded a construction contract to perform the Well N. 10, Phase 11 Project to R. Baker, Inc. for $221, 30 and authorized the city Manager to approve change orders in the amount of $22,153. O September 14, 2004, council approved a consultant Services Agreement with wring, Taylor & Associates in the amount of $73,950 for design and construction services for Phase I and Phase II. On [November 10, 2009, council approved a Fiat Amendment to the consultant Services Agreement for an additional $54,180 for additional design and construction services. ANALYSIS of ISSUES: The contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Them are no outstanding issues. During the construction of the Phase II Project, staff directed additional construction support services from Daring, Taylor & Associates that have exceeded the approved budget. Staff requests authorization of a Second Amendment in the amount of $2,150 to facilitate payment of the outstanding invoices. ALTERNATIVES: - rhe following alternatives are provided for the council's consideration: - Approve staffs recommendations; - Do not accept the project; - Accept the project, but do not authorize release of retention; or - Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: The project is complete. Accepting the improvements will allow staff to close out the project and return any remaining funds to the fund balance. Agenda Item 8.k. Page 2 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION of ACCEPTANCE of THE WELL CVO. 10, PHASE II PROJECT PW 201 0. JUNE 1 , 2011 PAGE 3 DISADVANTAGES: The disadvantage of accepting the improvements would be if subsequent deficiencies in the work are identified. However, the contract documents include a one -year warranty period for the contractor to add any construction defects that may arise. ENVIRONMENTAL R E I E': On April 13, 2010, Council adopted a resolution for a Negative Mitigated Declaration in accordance Frith CE QA guidelines. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION A ID COMMENTS: MEI' TS: The Agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, June 9, 2011. The Agenda and report were posted on the City's webite on Friday, June 10, 2011. No public comments were received. Attachment: 1. Notice of Completion 2. GTA Second Amendment Agenda Item 8.k. Page 3 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TD: CITY CLERK CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE P.O. BOX 550 ARROYO GRANDE, CA 93421 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: ATTACHMENT 'I 1. The undersigned is owner or agent of owner of the interest or estate or the property hereinafter described as stated below. 2. The FULL NAME of the DINER is: ' e r LA Grande . The FULL ADDRESS of the OWNER is: 300 Fast Branch Street, Arrovo G rande, California 93420 4. The NATURE OF THE INTEREST or ESTATE of the undersigned is: in fee THE FULL NAME and FULL ADDRESS of ALL PERSONS, if any, who hold such interest or estate with the undersigned as JOINT TENANTS or as TENANTS IN C are: NAMES ADDRESSES Non 6. THE FULL NAMES and FULL ADDRESSES of the PREDECESSOR'S in interest of the undersigned if the property was transferred subsequent to the commencement of the work of improvements er ents herein referred to: NAMES ADDRESSES Norge 7. All work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was COMPLETED May 20, 2011 8. The NAME OF THE ORIGINAL CONTRACTOR, if any, for such work of improvement is: R. Baker n, 9. The street address of said property is: Norge 10. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is rn the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, and is described as follows: Well No. 10, Phase II Pre, 8010 -0 Verification of NON-INDIVIDUAL owner: I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that I am the Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities of the aforesaid interest or estate in the property described in the above notice; that I have read the said notice, that I know and understand the contents thereof, and the facts stated therein are true and correct. Teresa Mc li h, Community Development Director June 15, 2011, Arroyo Grande, California -- END OF DOCUMENT __ Agenda Item 8.k. Page 4 ATTACHMENT CONSULTANT SEF ICES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. This Second Amendment "Second Amendment") to Consultant's Services Agreement ("CSA") by and between the CITY F ARROYO GRANDE and GAMING, TAYLOR ASSOCIATES, is made and entered into this day of .June, 2011, based on the following facts: WHEREAS the parties entered into a CSA dated September 14 t 2004, for Well N o. 1 Design and Support Services; and WHEREAS, EAS, the parties entered into a First Amendment to CSA dated November 10, 2003, for additional Design and Support services; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to modify the CSA as set forth herein. NOW THEREFORE, E, for valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. To include the additional services at the increased cost as specified in Exhibit it "A„ attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Except as modified herein, all other terms and conditions set forth in the CSA, as amended, shall remain unchanged. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, E F, CITY and CONSULTANT have executed this First Amendment the day and year first above written. GAFFING, TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES B: CITY OF ARROYO f GRANDE B; Steven Adams City Manager Agenda Item 8.k. Page 5 PPP Civil Engineering EXHIBIT A Surveying Project Development �ASSOq��S ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO PRODUCTION WELL # 10 PROJECT NO, PW- 2004 -07 June 9,, 2011 Michael Linn, P.E. Assistant City Engineer City of Arroyo Grande P.O. Box 550 208 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande,, CA 93421 Dear Mr. Linn: Daring, Taylor and Associates would like to request are additional $2,150-00 for Construction Management Services spent to assist in the completion and imp(emenfafion the Cify's Municipal hater Well #10. The amount is based on actual time required and is being billed l at our published 2008 rate schedule. The project is considered complete and there will be no further killing to the City. W e appreciate the opportunity to work with you and your associates. Ma ny th R espectfully submitted, GA I G, TAY ASS INC. r Danny Ja mes Project Manager A 0 - 245Vinal,da 141 South Elm Street • Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 • 805/489-1 • Fax 8051489 -6723 Agenda Item 81.k. Page 6 4 4 4 1 1 1 r r r i r CORPIOgATE • T ,0. 1 911 * MEMORANDUM Vp Fy \1� a TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: TERESA McCLISH, C IIAMUN11 Y DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR B: . BELLY HEFFERNN, ASSOCIATE PLANNER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PORTIONS OF TITLE 1 AND TITLE 1 F THE ARROYO GRAN MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF HATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS; DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 11-002 DATE: JUNE 14 2011 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council adopt an ordinance entitled: "AID ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARR GRANDE AMENDING PORTIONS OF TITLE 13 AND TITLE 16 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT T F WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS P) FINANCIAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact is identified at this time. There will be additional staff time necessary to review water efficient landscape plans and materials. BACKGROUND: In 2006, the State Legislature adopted the "Water Con rvation in Landscaping Act" (Assembly Bill 1881), requiring the Department of Wat Resources DIIR to update the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance WEL . The updated model ordinance contains several new landscape and irrigation design requirements aimed at reducing water consumption and waste in landscape irrigation. All local land use agencies were required to adopt the model ordinance, or develop an ordinance that is at least as ff ctiv by January 1, 2010. Because the City took no action on adopting a local ordinance by the deadline, the updated MWELO went into effect as if it wer officially adopted by the City. The proposed City Wat Efficient Landscape Ordinance will be incorporated into a new Chapter 16.84 of Title 1 (Development Code) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. The City Council introduced the proposed Ordinance at its meeting of May 24, 2011. Agenda Item 8.1. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO, 11-002 .JUNE 14 2011 PAGE OF 3 ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The purpose of the State's model ordinance is to achieve increased landscape water use efficiency in new development. If a City adopts its own local ordinance, it must be at least as effective in achieving water use efficiency as the model ordinance. The intent of AB 1881 is to require all cities in California to reduce the amount o water used to irrigate landscaping; promote the values and benefits o water efficient landscapes, as well as the need to invest water efficiently; establish a structure for planning, designing, installing and managing water efficient landscapes; and set a Maximum Applied Water Allowance as an upper limit. The City o Arroyo Grande has an opportunity to adopt its own ordinance that would better suit the community while still requiring a reduction in water use. It is anticipated that the City's ordinance would be as effective in achieving water conservation as the State's model, but be much simpler to comprehend and implement, mating it less onerous on property owners and developers and less expensive to implement (reduce costs for new homes and reduce the City's administrative costs as compared to the State's requirements). The detailed and costly plans, audits, and irrigation system requirements required by the State's model ordinance would result in high costs and hardship for hmebuyer and builders. In addition, the City does not currently, and would not in the future, have sufficient staff to check and evaluate plans and audits for all new single family, multi - family and non - residential projects. Therefore, the City's draft ordinance requires detailed plans and irrigation audits only for new and retrofitted landscapes that are one 1 acre or larger in size. instead, for landscapes that are less than one 1 acre, the City's draft ordinance would simply limit the amount of turf to ar percentage of the landscaped area, and require adherence to certain landscape and irrigation system design standards including Breather -based irrigation control systems. This will simplify landscape plan development and review, limit the amount of high water use turf, and achieve significant reductions in overall landscape water use. ALTERNATIVES: ES: The following arlternartive are presented for City Council's consideration: 1. Adopt the ordinance, as proposed; 2. Modify and re- introduce the ordinance; 3. Do not adopt the ordinance; or 4. Provid other direction to staff. Agenda Item 8.1. Page 2 CITY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE No, 11 -002 JUNE 149 2011 PAGE 3OF3 ADVANTAGES: I Adopting the proposed ordinance would have the following advantages: 1. Bring the City into conformance with State requirements with a local ordinance that befter suits the community; 2. Streamline the approval process; and 3. Minimize costs for applicants, homeowners and the City. DISADVANTAGES: There are no obvious disadvantages to adopting the proposed local ordinance as opposed to the State's M EL . ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: : Staff has reviewed this project in compliance with the California Environmental Q uality Act (CEQA), the CEA Guidelines and the City of Arroyo Grande Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CE A. Based on the review, staff has determined that the project is exempt pursuant to CE QA Guidelines Section 15307. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: An Ordinance Summary was published in The Tribune on - rhursday, June 2 2011 pursuant to State laver. The Agenda was posted at City Hall on Thursday, June 9, 2011 and the Agenda and staff report were posted on the City's wet site on Friday, June 10, 2011. No public comments were received at the time of preparation of this staff report. Agenda Item 8.1. Page 3 ORDINANCE No, AN ORDINANCE of THE CITY COUNCIL of THE CITY of ARROYO o o GRANDE AMENDING PORTIONS of TITLE 1 AND TITLE 1 of THE ARROYO o o GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING To THE ESTABLISHMENT of WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS WHEREAS, the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (Government Code Sections 65591 et seq.) requires cities to adopt landscape water conservation ordinances by January 1 1 2010; and WHEREAS, in accordance with this law, the California Department of Water Resources prepared a Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance WEL ; and WHEREAS, all cities and counties had until January 1, 2010 to either adopt the State's MWELO or their own local water efficient landscape ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City took no action on adopting its own local water efficient landscape ordinance by the deadline and therefore the State's MWELO went into effect as if it were officially adopted; and WHEREAS, a draft local ordinance has been prepared and provides requirements that are as effective at achieving water savings as the MWELO, reduces the costs for new homes compared to the State's requirements, and reduces the City's administrative costs compared to the State's MWELO approach; and WHEREAS, this Development Code Amendment would include a new Chapter 16.84, Water Efficient Landscape Regulations, and amends portions of Title 13 and Title 16 to refer to this new Chapter; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on May 3, 2011, the Planning Commission considered the facts and analysis, as presented in the staff report prepared for this project, conducted a public hearing to obtain public testimony, and recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance; and WHEREAS, based on consideration of information received at its meeting of May 24, 2011, the City Council considered the facts and analysis as presented in the staff report prepared for this project, and conducted a public hearing to obtain public testimony. NOW, THEREFORE, F E, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande, as follows: SECTION 1: The Council finds that: a. It is necessary to amend Title 16 of the Municipal Code in order to comply with the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (Government Code Sections 65591 et seq.; b. The proposed code amendment would meet the City's policy to promote the conservation and efficient use of water and to prevent waste of this valuable resource; Agenda Item 8.1. Page 4 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE C. Consistent with California Laver, the purpose of this ordinance is to promote the values and benefits of landscapes while recognizing the need to invest water and other resources as efficiently as possible; d. Consistent with California Laver, the purpose o f this ordinance is to establish a structure for planning, designing, installing, maintaining, and managing water efficient landscapes in new construction and rehabilitated projects. e. The proposed ordinance is estimated to be at least as effective as the State's Model Water Efficient Landscape and Irrigation Ordinance as a result of the turf limitations and limitations on overhead spray irrigation for all projects including single family residential. SECTION : The above recitals and findings are true and correct. SECTION : Section 13.05.010 of Chapter 13.0 Water Conservation) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby amended, as follows: 13.05. 010 - Water conservation measures established. Mandatory water conservation measures are hereby established as set forth in this Chapter. Please refer to Chapter 16.84, Water Efficient Landscape Requirements, for rules and regulations regarding landscape and irrigation, including limitations on the percentage of turf lawn that can be placed in landscape areas. SECTION : Subsection 1 .1 .030.D.3 b i of Chapter 16.16 (Specific Plan Adoption and Amendments) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby amended, as follows 1 .1 .030.D.3 b ix Identification of any project phasing, if applicable. All major infrastructure, including parks and landscaping adjacent to roadways or major elements of the specific plan, shall be installed in the fiat phase of development. Please refer to Chapter 16.84, Water Efficient Landscape Requirements, , for rules and regulations regarding landscape and irrigation, including limitations on the percentage of turf lawn that can be placed in landscape areas. All parrs and roadways required to service each phase shall be completed prior to occupancy. The responsibility of the developer, the city, and any other agencies shall be discussed in the phasing section of the document. Any and all agreements that require city participation, developer contribution, or construction of facilities shall be discussed. SECTION 5: Subsections 16.32.050.8.4. and 16.32.050.B.5. of Chapter 16.32 (Residential Districts) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code are hereby amended, as fo I rovers : Agenda Item 8.1. Page 5 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE 16.32-050. .4 Developments f five o more dwelling units in the SF, MF, MFA and MFVH districts shall be required to pr front and street side yard landscaping consisting of predominantly drought resistant plant materials, except for necessary walks, drives and fences. Please refer to Chapter 16.84, hater Efficient Landscape Requirements, uirements, for rules and regulations regarding landscape and irrigation, including limitations on the percentage of turf lawn that can be placed in landscape areas. 1.32.0.. In the MF, MFA and MHP districts, a minimum of thirty -five 3 percent of the site area shall be landscaped, consisting of predominantly drought resistant plant materials, and/or provided with an adequate underground irrigation system. Please refer to Chapter 16-84, hater Efficient Landscape Requirements, uirements, for rules and regulations regarding landscape and irrigation, including limitations on the percentage of turf /lawn that can be placed In landscape areas. The required landscaping shall include required setback areas and may include outdoor recreation areas. SECTION 6: Subsection 16.36.020.L.5. cf Chapter 16.36 ( Commercial and Mixed Use Districts) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby amended, as follows: 1.3.2.L. In all mixed use or commercial districts, required front and street side building setback areas shall be landscaped. The landscaping shall consist predominantly of plant materials except for necessary walks and drives. A minimum landscaped area five feet in depth shall be provided between the property line and the off- street parking area, with additional landscaped area between the parking area and the building, unless otherwise approved by minor use permit. Please refer to Chapter 16.84, hater Efficient Landscape Req uirements, for rules and regulations regarding landscape and irrigation, including limitations on the percentage of turf /lawn that can be placed in landscape areas. SECTION : Subsections 16-44.010.D.2(d) and 1 6.44.030. . f of Chapter 16.44 (Special Districts) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, are hereby amended, as follows: 16.44. 010. D. 2 d Landscaping plans, in detail, excepting typical single - family lot residential areas of ten thousand 10,000} square and over. The street tree planting requirements of the city may be waived; provided, that the development plan or covenants provide adequate alternatives to the satisfaction of the planning commission and city council. Please refer to Chapter 16.84, hater Efficient Landscape Requirements, for rules and regulations regarding landscape and irrigation, including limitations on the percentage of turf /lawn that can be placed in landscape areas. Agenda Item 8.1. Page 6 O RDINANCE lCE N . PAGE 16. unifying landscape design which is cleanly identified and included as pant of the specific plan is required and shall enhance the building design, enhance public views and spaces and provide buffers and transitions. Landscaping shall provide for s access and for shade to facilitate energy c Where appropriate, landscape design features such as color accents, specimen tree planting and decorative harrdscarpe shall be provided to enhance roadway intersections, driveway approaches, pedestrian walkways, and building entries. A discussion of plant materials, minimum sizes, nu mber of plants, placement and anticipated landscape budget for the project is required. Please refer to Chapter 16.84,, Water Efficient Landscape Requirements, for rules and regulations regarding landscape and irrigation, including limitations on the percentage of turf /lawn that can be planed in landscape areas. SECTION 8: Section 16-56-130 of Chapter 1 6.56 (Parking and Loading Requirements) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby amended, as follows: 16.56.1 30 — Landscaping for off- street parking facilities. Off- street parking arrears containing five o more parking spaces sharp be subject to the following landscaping requirements. Prior to the issuance of ar building permit, a landscape plan shall be submitted and appr by the direct of recreation and maintenance services. The plan shall show the location, size, variety of plantings, water suppler and similar designations. Please refer t o Chapter 16.84, eater Efficient Landscape Requirements, for rules and regulations regarding landscape and irrigation, including limitations on the percentage of turf that can be planed in landscape arrears. SECTION : Chapter 16.84 entitled 'Water Efficient Landscape Requirements" is hereby added to Title 16 o f the Arroyo Gra nde M u n ici par l Code as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. SECTION 10 if any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause of this Ordinance o any pant thereof is for any reason held to be unlawful, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any pant thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, o clause thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause be declared unconstitutional. SECTION 11: A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in ar newspaper published and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five days prior to the City Council meeting at which the proposed O rdinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full tent of the proposed O rdinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk. Within fifteen 1 damns after adoption of the Ordinance, the summary with the names of those City Council Members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be Agenda Item 8.1. Page 7 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE published again, and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted Ordinance. SECTION 12: This Ordinance s hall take effect thirty 3 days after its adoption. On motion by Council Me ber by the foilo ing roll call vote, to wit , seconded by Council Member , and AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Ordinance was adopted this day of , 2011. Agenda Item 8.1. Page 8 ORDINANCE N. PAGE TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST. KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERIC APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARM E L, CITY ATTORNEY Agenda Item 8.1. Page 9 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE Exhibit A Chapter 16.8 WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS Sections-. 16.84.010 Purpose 16.84.020 Definitions 1 6.84.030 Applicability 16.84.040 Turf Limitations for New Construction and Rehabilitated Landscapes 16.84.050 Landscape and Irdgati n System Design Requirements 16.84 - 01 Purpose. Consistent with Calif mia State Laver, it is the purpose of this Chapter to: a promote the values and benefits of landscapes while recognizing the need to use water resources as efficiently as possible; h establish a structure for planning, designing, installing, maintaining, and managing water efficient landscapes in new construction and rehabilitated projects. 1 6.84.020 Definitions. A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this section is to ensure precision in interpretation of this Chapter. The meaning and construction of words and phrases defined in this Section applies throughout this Chapter, except where the content of such words or phrases clearly indicates a different meaning or construction. B. Definitions. "Certificate of completion" means the document required under Section 16.84.050.B.4. "Landscape architect" means a person who holds a license to practice landscape architecture in the State of California as described in the business and Professionals Code, §561 5. "Landscaped area 1; means all the planting areas, turf areas, and water features in a landscape design plan subject to the Maximum Applied Water Allowance calculation. - rhe landscape area does not include footprints of buildings or structures, sidewalks, driveways,, parking lots, decks, patios, gravel or store walks, other pervious or non- pervious hard cape , and other non - irrigated areas designated for non - development ( e.g., open spaces and existing native vegetation). Agenda Item 8.1. Page 10 ORDINANCE NO. PACE 8 =`Landscape contractor' means a person licensed by the state of California to construct, maintain, repair, install, or subcontract the development of landscape systems. "Landscape Documentation Package (LDP)" means the documents required under Section 16.84.050.B.3. "Landscape project means total area o f landscape in a project as defined in "landscape area" for the purposes o f this Chapter. "Mulch" means any organ material such as leaves, bark a nd straw or in organic mineral materials such as rocks, gravel, and decomposed granite left loose and applied to the soil surface for the beneficial purposes of reducing evaporation, regulating soil temperature, decreasing erosion, preventing the freezing of roots, and suppressing geed. The decomposition of organic mulches also serves as soil amendments. "Multi-family residential" means two or more attached residential units. Landscape areas for multiple detached units on one parcel will be considered single family units for the purposes of this Chapter. "New construction means, for the purposes of this Chapter, a new building with a landscape or other new landscape, such as a park, playground or greenbelt without an associated building. "Permit" means an authorizing document issued by local agencies for new construction or rehabilitated landscapes. "Pervious" means any surface or material that allows the passage of water through the material and into the underlying soil. "Project applicant" means the individual or entity submitting a Landscape Documentation Package required under Section 16.84.050.83, to request a permit, plan check, architectural review, or design review from the local agency. A project applicant may be the property owner or his or her designee. "Rehabilitated landscape" means ay re- landscaping project that requires a permit, plan check, architectural revie w, or design review. "Runoff' means water that is not absorbed by the soil or landscape to which it is applied and flows from the landscape area. For example, runoff may result from water that is applied at too great a rate (application rate exceeds infiltration rate) or when there is a slope. "Single family residential means one home on one lot, or multiple ltiple detached units on one lot (not attached) . Agenda Item 8.1. Page 11 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE "Soil moisture sending device or "soil moisture sensor" means a device that measures the amount of water in the soil. The device may also suspend or initiate an irrigation event. "Turf" means a ground cover surface of mowed grass. Annual bluegrass, Kentucky bluegrass, Perennial ryegra, Red fescue, and Tall fescue are cool - season grasses. Bermudagrass, Kikuyugrass, Seashore Pa palum, St. Augustinegrass, Zoysiagrass, and Buffalo grass are warm- season grasses. "Valve" means a device used to control the flog of water in the irrigation system. Mater conserving plant species' means a plant species identified as having a lover plant factor. 16.84.030 Applicability. The requirements within this Chapter apply to new construction and rehabilitated landscapes for commercial, industrial and residential projects that are subject to the development review process and/or a building permit. A. Development Review iew Process In conjunction with the submittal of a project for development review (specific plan tentative tract map, tentative parcel ,nap, planned unit development, conditional use permit, architectural review, design review), conceptual landscape plans shall be provided that demonstrate that the design of the landscaping complies with the standards within this Chapter. These plans shall be reviewed by City staff during the development review process. B. Building Permit In conjunction with the submittal of a project for building plan check, final landscape and irrigation plans, in compliance with this Chapter, shall be submitted with the project. After plan check review by the Community Development Department for compliance with this Chapter, a building Permit may be issued. Fees consistent with the fees established for building plan check will be applied for staff revie w of the landscape and irrigation plan. C. Certificate of Completion Once the landscape and irrigation plans and necessary documentation has been provided in substantial compliance with the Landscape Development Package (LDP), a Certificate of Completion may be issued. A Certificate of Completion shall be issued prior to the project receiving a Certificate of Occupancy by the Building Division. Agenda Item 8.1. Page 12 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE '1 D. Landscape and Irrigation Installation For all projects, the landscape and irrigation shall be installed per the approved plans prior to the issuance of ar Certificate of Occupancy or "final" of the building /project. For phased development projects, all landscape improvements, including creek bank and setback area restoration and enhancement and trail construction, shall be installed in the first phase of development. E. Landscape Bond For projects that have a landscape area of one 1 acre or greater and rewire LDP ar bond may be posted than would allow ar building to be fnarled and ar Certificate of Occupancy to be issued prior to the site landscape and irrigation being completed. The bond shall be based on an estimate for labor and materials to complete the landscape and irrigation project per the approved plains, plus an additional 25-percent. The applicant shall fill out the Landscape Bond Security Agreement along with the necessary bonding information, to the Community development Department for review and approval t determine the specific bond a ! • unt• For projects than have a landscape area of less than one 1 acre, which does not require the LDP, the Community Development Director or his o her designee may approve a bond to be posted that would allow ar building to be finarled and a Certificate of Occupancy to be issued prior to the landscape and irrigation being completed. 16.84.040 Turf Limitations for New Construction and Rehabilitated Landscapes. A. All new construction projects (residential, commercial, industrial) shall comply with the following limitations 1 Turf areas less than eight feet in width in any direction are prohibited, unless subsurface irrigation is used and maximum turf areas do not exceed the percentages outlined in this Chapter. 2. Turf shall be prohibited within the public right -of -wary, including parkways. 3. Development shall be graded to maximize the on-site distribution of runoff to planted areas. 4 For non -turf arrears, drip irrigation methods and low waiter use plaints are recom mended. 5 Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ns CC& s shall not rewire turf landscaping nor have the effect of prohibiting low -water use landscaping and shall include by reference and/or attachment a copy of Chapter 16-84. B. Commercial and Industrial projects: 1 . The area planted in turf grass and irrigated with spray irrigation shall be limited to 10 percent o f the d eve l pment's landscaped area. 2. Exceptions: This section does not apply to Cemeteries, plant collections as part of botanical gardens and arboretums open to the public, City parks, and school sports fields. Agenda Item 8.1. Page 13 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE 11 C. Single Family Residences: es: 1. Turf grass installed with spray irrigation in residential front yards shall be limited to 25 percent of the landscaped area. 2. The common arrears in residential subdivisions planted in turf (including landscape and lighting district acres ) shall be limited to 10 percent of the landscaped area (excluding active play acres such as ball fields, playgrounds, and picnic rears. D. Nadel Homes; 1. Turf grass shall be prohibited in the front yards of model homes, and shall be limited to bg percent for the landscaped area in back and side yards. 2. Model homes shall be used to educate future home owners about water efficient landscape and irrigation techniques. Education features for Model homes shall include: (a) The installation of interpretive landscape information signs that describe the principles of water efficient landscapes including features such as hyd ro ones, appropriate irrigation equipment and other techniques that contribute to the overall water efficient irrigation theme. (b) Information shall be provided to new home o wners that include techniques on designing, installing, managing and maintaining water efficient landscapes. E. Multi-family Residential l Projects: 1. Turf grass sharp be limited to 20 percent of the total landscaped area. The 20 percent limitation shall be exclusive of areas designed as active play surfaces e.g. bail fields, playgrounds, picnic arrears). F. Rehabilitated ted Landscapes: 1. Rehabilitated landscapes shawl comply with the turf limitations outlined in Sections -E above, as appropriate to the property type. 1 .84.050 Landscape and Irrigation System Design and Information Requirements. A. All project landscaping and irrigation plans /designs shall comply with the following standards: 1. Rain sensors, either integral or auxiliary, that suspend irrigation during and after rainfall events, shall be required on all irrigation control systems. 2. Prohibit turf on slopes greater than 20 percent where the toe of the slope is adjacent to an impermeable hard scarpe where 20 percent means one foot of vertical elevation change for every fire feet of horizontal length rise divided by run times one hundred). 3. Water features shall use recirculating water systems. 4. Prohibit overheard spray irrigation within 24 inches of non-permeable surfaces such as, but not limited to, concrete sidewalks s and driveways. Subsurface irrigation may be used as long as other requirements of this Chapter are met. Allowable irrigation within the setback from non- Agenda Item 8.1. Page 14 ORDINANCE AI CE Igo. PAGE 1 permeable le surfaces may include drip, drip line, or other low -flow non-spray type of systems. The setback area may be planted or non - planted. The surfacing of the setback may be mulch, gravel, cobie , or other porous material. These restrictions may be modified if the landscape area is adjacent to permeable surfacing, and no runoff occurs or the adjacent non- permeable surface drains entirely to landscaped areas. 5. Irrigation systems shall be designed and constructed to achieve a minimum efficiency of 71 percent. 6. Apply minimum two inch 2" lager of m on all exposed soil surface of planting areas. 7. The architectural guidelines and Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions of common interest developments shall not have the effect of prohibiting the use of low - grater use plants or requiring turf grass in landscaped areas. B. Projects that have a landscape area equal to or greater than one acre shall submit the following information: Dote that the landscape area for new residential subdivisions will be calculated on an individual lot basis as each lot develops, not for the total of landscape areas prior to s ubdivision. Therefore, a residential subdivision generally will not require an LDP for individual lot landscaping. However, if there are common areas, or areas within a Landscape and Lighting District that have landscape areas of one acre or greater, there will be a requirement for an LDP for those areas to be completed prior to the recordation of the final map. 1. All of the items identified in Section A above. 2. Weather -based irrigation controllers, soil moisture -based controllers, or other self - adjusting irrigation controllers shall be required for irrigation scheduling. 3. The following documents and plans shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building Permit for the associated project (refer to the Landscape Irrigation Design Guide for specific forms and criteria): 0 Project Information 0 Water Efficient Landscape Worksheet 0 Soil Management Report 0 Landscape Design Plan 0 Irrigation Design Plan 0 Grading Design Plan 4. The following documents and plans shall be completed and the landscape and irrigation project shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the associated project (refer to the Landscape & Irrigation Design Guide for specific forms and criteria): 0 Irrigation Scheduling 0 Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance Schedule 0 Irrigation Audit, Irrigation Surrey and Irrigation Water Use Analysis 0 irrigation Efficiency 0 Stor water Management Agenda Item 8.1. Page 15 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Agenda Item 8.1. Page 16 RO INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM JULY 10, 19tt T: CITY COUNCIL FROM: TER ESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY MUNIT DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BY: LES E ANS, PROJECT ENGINEER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING OPEN SPACE, TRAILS, PUBLIC ACCESS AND SLOPES FOR TRACT 2236' DATE: JUNE 14,2011 RECOMMENDATION: MMENRATION: It is recommended the Council adopt a Resolution accepting offers of dedication and improvements for open space, trails, public access and slopes for Tract 2236. FUNDING: There is no fiscal impact at this tune. Maintenance of these facilities is funded from the Grace Lane Assessment District approved by the City Council on November 28, 2006. DISCUSSION: On November 28, 2006, the City Council approved Final Tract Map 2236. The subject tract is located north and west of Rodeo Drive, southwest of Grace Bible Church, south of Rancho Grande Park, and southeast of Avenida de Diamante. The map subdivided 2 9.5 acres into nineteen (1 9) residential parcels, including four affordable restricted parcels, ranging in size from 6,037 square feet to 50 square feet. In addition there is an open space parcel of 15.74 acres and are open space /drainage parcel of 16,903 square feet. Also on November 28, 2006, the City Council established the Grace Lane Assessment District to fund the maintenance of the open space, trails, slopes and the street searing the affordable units. The Assessment District has been collecting annual assessments of $9,334.95 since 200 7. On September 14, 2010 the City Council accepted easements and completed public improvements as follows: ■ Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk, ■ Public utilities, ■ eater and sewer, ■ Safety rail and fencing Agenda Item 8.m. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING OPEN SPACE, TRAILS, PUBLIC ACCESS AND SLOPES FOR TRACT 2236 JANE 14 2011 PAGE ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: At the time of approval of the Final Map, the City "rejected without prejudice" easements and public improvements pending the completion of the project. The public streets, sidewalks and utilities were accepted on September 14, 2010. The remaining easements and improvements are all related to trails, slopes and open space. Staff finds them ready to accept at this tune. ALTERNATIVES- The following alt rnativ s are provided for the Council's consideration: 0 Approve staffs recommendation; 0 Do not approve staffs recommendation; 0 Modify staff s recommendation as appropriate and approve; o 0 Provide other d irection t staff. ADVANTAGES: The public will have legal access to maintained trails and open space. The City will be able to ensure that the areas are maintained in a safe condition. DISADVANTAGES. Maintenance of large open space areas and trails is difficult and can be costly. Although an Assessment District has been established to bear the cost of this maintenance, there is some risk that the funds will not be adequate at some point in the future. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: : No environmental review is required for this item per CE QA Guidelines Section 15 061 b ) (3). PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted in front of City Hall o Thursday, June g 2011. The Agenda and report were posted on the City's website on Friday, June 10, 2011. No public comments were received as of the publishing of this report. Agenda Item 8.m. Page 2 RESOLUTION I O, A RESOLUTION of THE CITY COUNCIL of THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING OPEN SPACE, TRAILS, PUBLIC ACCESS AND SLOPES FOR TRACT 2236 CONSTRUCTED BY MANGANO HOMES WHEREAS, EAS, the City Council approved Final Tract Map 2236 on November 28, 200 6; and WHEREAS, EAS, the project was conditioned to complete certain public improvements pursuant to Resolution No. 3732 adopted by the City Council on ,January 13, Zoo; and WHEREAS, EAS, the developer has constructed the improvements and offered the easements required by the conditions of approval for Tract 2236; and WHEREAS, EAS, staff has inspected the improvements and finds they are constructed in accordance with the approved plans for the project. Noll', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of A rroyo Grande does hereby accept the following offers of dedication and improvements for Tract 2236: 1. Trail and Public Trail Easement shorn on the Final Tract Map. 2. Blanket Open Space Easement Lot B and slope easements as shorn can the Final Tract flap. 3. All slope easements and landscape maintenance easements included in the Grace Lane Assessment District approved by the City Council on November 28, Zoo. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member and by the following roll call Grote, to grit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of 2011. Agenda Item 8.m. Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 TONY FER Af A, MAYOR ATTEST* KELLY I ETMO E, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: T: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J, CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY Agenda Item 8.m. Page 4 RRO INCORPORATE D JMV ID. 191 w MEMORANDUM T: CITY COUNCIL FROM: TERESA MCCLISH, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 11-003; PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING REGULATIONS REGARDING TEMPORARY SIGNS; CITYWIDE DATE: JUNE 14 2011 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council introduce an Ordinance of the City of Arroyo Grande amending portions of Chapter 16.60 of Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code regarding temporary banners and signs. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No financial impact is projected, BACKGROUND: In July 2009, at the Council's request, staff presented an analysis and the Council discussed regulations regarding temporary banners and signs. There were conflicting opinions regarding implementation of more stringent requirements versus more lenient requirements given the difficult economic circumstances that many small businesses are experiencing. As a result staff was directed to obtain feedback from the Chamber of Commerce. since then, staff has met on multiple occasions with the Chamber of Commerce Legislative Committee regarding this issue and they conducted a surrey of their membership. At the April 12, 2011 meeting, City Council considered staff's recommendations and directed staff to draft an Ordinance for Planning Commission and City Council consideration to implement the proposed changes. The recommendations were based largely on the Chamber of Commerce input, as well as discussions with all staff involved in the code enforcement process. Temporary signs are currently allowed no more than 30 days prior to an event and no more than 60 calendar days per year. Sandwich board signs are not allowed as temporary signs, but there has been a significant proliferation of them in the public right -of -way. There are conflicting provisions regarding flags, pennants, balloons and Agenda Item 9.a. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 11 -003 JUNE 14, 2011 PAGE sail and wing signs. They are treated as exempt signs in one section of the Municipal Code, but require a temporary use permit in another. At one tune, staff proactively enforced temporary sign violations. Enforcement has been more sporad in recent months given staff vacancies and consideration of changes to the regulations. Off -site real estate and garage sale signs are not currently allowed in the public right - of -way, except for provisions allowing three off -site advertising signs for newly approved subdivisions. The Police Department has recently assigned staff to remove garage sale signs and excessive real estate signs from the public right -of -way during weekend days. Neighborhood Services procedures recently approved by the City Council specified the following guidelines for enforcement: • Enforcement of violations in response to complaints; • Proactive enforcement of illegal construction and secondary units, temporary banners, and other issues identified as a priority; and • Proactive enforcement of flagrant code violations. The Architectural Review Committee (AFDC) reviewed the proposed changes on May 2 2011 and the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed changes on May 3, 2011. Both the AFDC and PC discussed signage concerns that have come before them during project review in recent years, including obstruction of City right -of -way, untidiness of window signage, disorderly banner placement, proliferation of wing signs and balloons, and visual clutter of signage in general and the potential detriment on the business community. Also discussed was the potential hardship on businesses and the desire to find a balance that would allow businesses flexibility for temporary signage as well as promote temporary signs that are neat in their appearance and placement. Additionally, time periods for temporary signage was discussed, and it was suggested that temporary signs are more noticeable by providing for a shorter duration of time period i.e. signs are most noticeable when they are first put up or when they change and less noticeable if they remain in place for months at a time). The City Council reviewed the proposed changes on May 24, 2011. After considerable discussion, and by a unanimous vote, the item was continued so that staff could include the following in the proposed ordinance: 1. A go day grace period for sandwich board signs. This allows businesses with sandwich board signs to seek revision of their sign program to include a sandwich board sign with no fee. The grace period is reflected in the recitals Agenda Item 9.a. Page 2 CITY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT "1 "1 -003 JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 3 of the proposed ordinance since it simply describes the enforcement strategy of the new code provision. 2. Criteria under the proposed regulations that sets forth approval of sandwich board signs in the sign program., which include: a. Cannot block doorway, access, or Americans with Disabilities access b. Must be constructed from wood or plastic and have a professional appearance c. Only one is allowed per business d. It cannot be located on any public right - -era 3. Two options for the ordinance — one that maintains current regulations regarding hand geld signs and one that prohibits them from private property. 4. The Council directed staff to reprise Table 16.60.040-A and bring it back later in the year to clarify permanent signage requirements. The proposed Ordinance reflects the recommended amendments of both the ARC and Planning Commission, as well as the City Council provisions outlined above. Additionally, staff met with representatives of the Arroyo Grande Chamber of Commerce to discuss the proposed granges to the regulations. Although serious concerns were expressed about the sign regulations in general due to the difficult economic climate, the proposed grace period for portable signs and registration process for temporary signs were supported. Additionally, potential incentives were discussed to encourage businesses to register their temporary signs such as acknowledging a business who registers a sign on the City's segment on Channel 20. ANALYSIS SIS of ISSUES: The goals of the recommendations were to establish regulations that 0 Are more clear; Balance the need to be "business friendly" with maintaining an attractive business environment; Are more feasible to enforce; and then Enforce them on a more p roactive and consistent basis. The recommendations discussed below are reflected in the draft Ordinance. The original recommendations presented by staff would have allowed sail and wing signs for up to three 3 days each month and banners up to for up to 60-days each per year. Window Siq-n,s The proposed Ordinance includes the following provisions regarding window signs; Agenda Item 9.a. Page 3 CITY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT '1'1 -003 JUNE '14 2011 PAGE 4 Shall not exceed 20% of window area or twenty -four 24 squ are-feet, whichever is less per each street-facing window. A number of conflicts have been Identified in the Code regarding window signs — when they are considered accessory, exempt, tem rarrily permitted or permanently permitted. Permanent window signage up to 10% of total window area is exempt per Section 16.60.030.E (Accessory Signs) and does not count toward total sign area allowed per sign permit. Otherwise, window signage between 1 % arnd 20% i allowed permanently if approved as part of a sign permit. Temporary window signs can be planed without a permit if the total area does not exceed 20 %. Finally, Section 16.60.050. B. specifies that up to 20% of window area is allowed for permanent signs limited to hours o operation, address and emergency information. After review, staff has also identified difficulties in how to enforce the time limit proposed by the Planning Commission that are important to bring to Council's attention. Since window signs typically involve multiple small temporary signs and posters that are displayed at varying times, often due to the timing of events and activities, there is no rarcticarl wary to monitor start and ending times necessary in order to enforce the -day time limit. Therefore, staff recommends amending Sections 16.60.050. A., 16.60.050. B. and 16.60.030. E., which together would exempt window signs up to 20% of the window area or twenty -four 24 square feet (whichever is less) from sign permit requirements. Banners The proposed Ordinance includes the following provisions regarding banners: Shall not exceed twenty -four 24 square-feet. Shall be professionally printed on vinyl or plastic. Shall be firmly attached to the building, below the roofline. Shall not be displayed for more than thirty days in any ninety g day period (this is less than the 60-day time limit recommended by staff). Pennants. Harpoons and Flan The proposed Ordinance includes the following provisions regarding pennants, balloons and flags: Shall not contain any tent or other advertising message. Shall not be displayed for more than three days in any thirty day period. Prohibited Temporary Sins The proposed O rdinance includes the following provisions recommended by the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Committee (AFDC) regarding prohibited tem signs: Agenda Item 9.a. Page 4 CITY COUNCIL CIL DEVELOPMENT T CODE AMENDMENT 11-003 JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 5 0 Signs held o supported by a person. 0 Inflatable (including Ilylar ) oo fan- signs. 0 Sail or gyring signs. 0 Sandwich board signs, unless otherwise permitted under the provisions of Section 16.60.040 of this Chapter. Portable Signs ("Sandwich Board Sin }' The proposed Ordinance includes the following additional provisions to be added in Section 16. for a portable sign that is approved as part of a sign permit: 0 Cannot block doorway, access, or Americans with Disabilities access 0 Must be constructed from wood or plastic and have a professional appearance 0 Only one is allowed per business 0 It cannot be located on any public right -of -gray 0 Portable signs that are proposed for a store or restaurant located in shopping centers must be located immed lately adjacent to that business. Portable signs are not proposed to be a llowed as temporary signage due to the more permanent nature these signs and their placement. The proposed Ordinance simply continues to allover these signs as part of the (permanent) sign permit process. Portable signs are allowed in most commercial areas of the City. Grace Period for Portable Si -qn The Council directed staff to implement a 90-day enforcement grace period applicable for portable signs (sandwich board signs.) Since there are many portable signs that have not been permitted, the grace period allows business o wners to amend their sign permits, with no fees imposed, in order for staff to review proposed portable sign placement with the new criteria proposed in this ordinance. Businesses with portable signs that meet the criteria will be notified of the grace period. Staff will continue to enforce provisions regarding portable signs that do not meet the criteria. Sail or Vying Signs Sail or wing signs are currently prohibited unless approved through the Temporary Use Permit process upon recommendation by the Architectural Review Committer (ARC) per Section 16.60.060 0. Both the ARC and Planning Commission have recommended that Section 16.60.060 0. be amended to prohibit sail or wing signs. This recommendation is reflected in the proposed Ordinance. Handheld Signs Handheld signs are currently allowed on private property only regulations approved by the Council in 2007 (Section 1 6.60.060 V.). has been actively enforced by the Police Department, which in response to The provision has effectively Agenda Item 9.a. Page 5 CITY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT '1'1 -003 JUNE 14 2011 PAGE 6 eliminated the proliferation of handheld signs on street corners — the purpose of establishing the regulations at that time. Both the AFDC and Planning Commission recommend amending Section 1 . g.g g V. to prohibit all commercial handheld signs, as refl ected in Section 4 of the proposed Ordinance. The primary concern identified with this recommendation is that it would preclude non - profit groups from displaying signs for fundraisers frequently held at the car wash at Elm Street and East Grand Avenue if enforced consistently. An alternative proposed by staff is to adopt the proposed Ordinance, striping Section 4, which would leave Section 16.60.060 V. as is and continue to allover handheld signs o n private property. Public Education and Enforcement If the proposed Ordinance is approved, it is proposed that a public is ed ucati n effort initially be implemented, which would include a letter from the Police Department to every b usiness address. The Neighborhood Services Technician will patrol the commercial areas o n a periodic basis and maintain a log of temporary signs that have been registered. Business owners will be contacted and provided a violation letter for banners not removed after 30 days. They will b e requested to correct the violation within 72 hours, an accelerated time frame for voluntary compliance when compared to other types of code enforcement violations since there should be little work required to remove a temporary sign. Staff is also establishing a standardized citation process to expedite and compel compliance when voluntary means are unsuccessful. Sign Feistratin for Temporary Signs In order to provide businesses an opportunity to comply with the reprised sign ordinance and clarify current requirements, staff recommends implementing a registration process for temporary banners. This will consist of a web-based registrar, as well as a registration by phone o in person. Banners and all other allured temporary signage can b registered so that time periods can b tracked or verified if a complaint is received. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for City Council consideration: 1. Introduce the proposed Ordinance: or 2. Introduce the proposed Ordinance, striping Section 4 regarding handheld signs; 3. Modify the proposed Ordinance to include the recommendation of the Planning Commission regarding temporary window signs; or 4. Modify as appropriate and introduce the proposed Ordinance; 5. Do not intr the proposed Ordinance; o 6. Provide direction to staff. Agenda Item 9.a. Page 6 CITY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 11-003 JUNE '1 , 201'1 PAGE 7 ADVANTAGES: The Ordinance will establish a process that allows staff to monitor the display of temporary signs and clearly define the number, type and duration that temporary signs may legally be displayed. Stricter sign regulations will improve the appearance of the City's commercial arrears by minimizing visual clutter. The grace period proposed to amend sign permits to include portable "sandwich beard" signs should allow for a n educational opportunity for the revised sign code, as well as more consistency in enforcement for these types o f signs. DISADVANTAGES: The Ordinance will initially require additional staff time to conduct public education and abate illegal temporary signs, particularly concerning time limits placed on temporary window signs. Enforcement o f the proposed provisions, particularly those related to time limits for temporary signs, prohibition of sandwich board signs (unless permitted in accordance with Municipal Code Section 16.60.040) and prohibition of sail or wing signs will likely result in complaints from business owners. The alternative to prohibit handheld signs will restrict community youth groups than promote charity car washes a t Elm Street and East Grand Avenue, which will inhibit fundraising and may negatively impact community relations. The proposed provisions only partially reflect the input provided by the Chamber of Commerce, which may negatively impact the ability to seek voluntary compliance. Additionally, time limits on window signs will be difficult to enforce. ENVIRONMENTAL EI TAL F E IIE ' : In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CE QA) A Guidelines, staff has determined that the draft Ordinance is categorically exempt per Section 15308 of the Guidelines (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment). PUBLIC NOTIFICATION A D COMMENTS: A notice of public hearing was published in the Tribune on Friday, ,June 3, 2011 pursuant to State law. The agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, June g, 2011 and on the City's website on Friday, June 10, 2011. Agenda Item 9.a. Page 7 ORDINANCE N. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 16-60 OF TITLE 1 F THE ARR GRANDE M ICIPAL CODE REGARDING TEMPORARY BANNERS AND SIGNS WHEREAS, the purpose of the city's sign regulations is to protect the character quality of life, and economic health of the city by maintaining the suitability and appropriateness o f allo signs in a manner that benefits the public and minimizing visual clutter; and WHEREAS, the city has determined that use of temporary signs are suitable and appropriate to advertise business activities under certain limitations and requirements; a nd WHEREAS, temporary signs are exempted from the administrative sign permit, administrative sign program and planned sign program requirements subject to certain limitations and requirements; and WHEREAS, after consideration of all testimony and all relevant evidence, the city Council has determined that the following Development code Amendment findings can be made in an affirmative manner: A. The proposed changes to chapter 16.60 will help allow temporary signs that are limited to those appropriate and suitable to protect the character, quality of life and economic health of the city. B, The proposed changes to chapter 16.60 will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare. C. The proposed changes to chapter 16.60 are consistent with the purpose and intent of Title 16, satisfies the intent of Chapter 16-60 of the Municipal code and provides for internal consistency. D. As disclosed in the Negative Declaration, the potential environmental impacts of the proposed changes to Chapter 16.60 are insignificant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande as follows: SECTION 1 : The above recitals and findings are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION : A rr o yo Grande Municipal code Subsection 16.60.050. A. is hereby repealed and replaced in its entirety as follows: Agenda Item 9.a. Page 8 i i i t i+ i, i< As o ff" i i # i W OYAKIIII #� M i i i i< i< i A6 ** * i ■ i w Ahl i* s w i W r r • f � W MY- i< i i X w j - -N A i 1 ■ LW71��� IIIIIIIII &I i Agenda Item 9.a. Page 8 O RDINANCE NO. PAGE F WEN f s — a N t _ — # w -II w j! -I WAL 1111 i i i t i + i * * a i i # • i f w I E M 0 1111 a 111 L f I L� 4 it # a f : : W do! : s it MI i IN # it i i iF i • ■' * # i i i i +• ft 9.m f t w w w ; a f i III A i i ■ I � M s A. Temporary banners, decorations and searchlights in accordance with the followinci provisions: 1. Banners a. Shall not exceed twenty -four 2) square -feet. b. Shall be pr r)rinted on grin I or plasti C . Shall be firmly attached to the building, below the roofline. d. Shall be registered with the Community Development Department p ri o r to d is la e. Shall not be dismal ed for more than thirty a days in any ninety (90) day peri 2. Pennants, Balloons and Flags a. Shall not contain anv text o other advertising message. b. Shall not be displayed for more than three 3 dams in any thirty PO) day period. 3. Searchlights a. Shall be directed upwards into the shy and not at any point o n land. b. Shall not be dls la ed for more than three days in any thi (3 day peri Section 3: Arr Grande Municipal Code Subsection 16.60.050. B. is hereby amended as follows: B. Permanent window signs ri ,� , ,� �� G arn to n n A nann . ;� infix m:atic%n provided- that all f the following are met: 1 . The total area o f such signs does not exceed twenty 2 percent o f the window area. 2 . The sign is no greater than twee -four square -feet. Agenda Item 9.a. Page 9 O RDINANCE NO. PAGE 3 3. Sin a is limited to street-facing windows. Section : Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Subsection 16.60.060 0. is hereby amended as follows 0. # * . iF i i i i • i * i %WON # # 11 f f r f f f i s r th # ## +w +` •i i. i i i s ## i + i i A i� i� + i t i * i it * ii ii 1 i�J tlli l# iS 1 i# ! # Section : Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Subsection 16.60.060 V. is hereby amended as follow V . J II I II I Ier iQl signs., T 1 1! MA 1 11. l�" "C -"i!' ht- Cif- 1A1 =V -- he ld o r supported by a person. Section 6: Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Subsection 16.60-030.E is hereby amended as follows: E. Accessory Signs. Signs that advertise products sold or services provided o the premises, such as beer signs or an automated teller machine ATM signs, shall be considered accessory signs and do not count towards the permitted signage listed in Tablel 6.60.040 -A if they are restricted to ten 1 percent or less of the or wall area on which it is placed. Accessory signs between ten 1 and terry 2 percent f the wall area can be allowed with a recommendation from the architectural review committee, however areas greater than ten 1 percent shall be considered toward total permitted sign area. The design, number, location and size o accessory signs shall be reviewed and approved as part of an administrative sign permit, administrative sign program, o planned sign program by the architectural review committee if the following findings are made: 1. The proposed general design, arrangement, texture, colors, and lighting placement are consistent with the purposes and regulations of this chapter and any applicable design guidelines; and 2. The appropriateness of the proposed accessory signs are compatible with other signs and other structures on the premises and contiguous area and do not exceed twenty percent of the wall area on which they are placed. Section : Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Subsection 16.6 is hereby added a fo G. Portable Sin "Sandwich Board Signs") that are allowed D er Section 16.60.04 Table 16.60.040. A., rust meet the following criteria: Agenda Item 9.a. Page 10 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE 1. Portable Si cannot block doorwav, access or Americans with Disabilities access. 2. Portable Signs must be constructed from wood or plastic and have a professional appearance. 3. Only one portable si n is allowed oer business. 4. Portable signs cannot be located on any public right-of- 5. Portable signs that arersed for a store or restaurant located in shopping centers must be located immediately adiacent to than business. Section : If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unlawful, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares than it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause be declared unconstitutional. Section 9: Upon adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall file a Notice of Exemption. Section 10: A summary o f this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at leant five b days prior to the City Council meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full tent of the proposed Ordinance shark be posted in the office of the City Clerk. Within fifteen (115) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the su rn mary with the names of those City Council Members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be published again, and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full tent of such adopted Ordinance. Section 11: This Ordinance shall take effect thirty 3 days from the dame of adoption. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on the following roll call vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing Ordinance was adopted this day of June, 2011. Agenda Item 9.a. Page 11 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE TONY FE IAAFAA, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY 11 ETMO E, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY Agenda Item 9.a. Page 12 e" �F A. INCORPORATED .JULY 10, 1911 F M EMORANDU M TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF SOUTH SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT PRESENTATION DATE: .JUNE 14 2011 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Council receive the presentation from representatives of the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District and communicate concerns and questions. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact of the presentation. BACKGROUND: Mayor Ferrara is currently the City's representative o n the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District's ("District") Board of Directors. Council Member Guthrie i s the alternate. A Notice of Violation was received by the District from the State Water Resources urce Control Board, which was issued after the District filed a report concerning the flood event of December 19, 2010. The Council previously received a presentation from the District on the flood event and the resulting spill. A Grand .Jury Rep was also released o n .June 3, 2011, which identifies conflict o f interest and other issues. A copy of the Grand .Jury report is attached. The Council has received public comment on several occasions regarding these and other concerns. As a result, Mayor Ferrara previously recommended District representatives provide a presentation to update the Council on these issues. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District representatives, Administrator and District Counsel will provide a presentation at the ,June 14, 2011 meeting on the current status of District activities. The District has responded to the Notice of V i o lati o n received from the State Water Resources urce Control Board with documentation on May 31, Agenda Item II.a. Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION of SOUTH COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT PRESENTATION JUNE 149 2011 PAGE 2 2011 and a copy of the response letter is attached for the Council's information. As a result of the State Board's review of the Plant Superintendent's previous interview, personnel changes to operations staff` have also been made. wrhe District Administrator will discuss the current staffing changes that have been implemented. As to the Grand Jury report, District Counsel will discuss the steps that the District has taken to address their concerns and what the District is doing to respond. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: 1. Receive the presentation; 2. Provide input to the City's Board representative and alternate regarding Board activities; or 3. Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: The presentation provides an opportunity for the Council to receive detailed information regarding the issues that have occurred, to ask questions and seek clarification, and to communicate concerns and input. DISADVANTAGES No disadvantages regarding the presentation have been identified. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, June g, 2011 and on the City's website on Friday, dune 1 , 2011. Attachments: 1. June 3, 2011 Grand Jury Report 2. May 31, 2011 Technical Report Responding to Notice of Violation Agenda Item II.a. Page 2 ATTACHMENT 1 THE SOUTH SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT INTRODUCTION The Grand Jury initiated this investigation as the result of several citizen complaints amd numerous published articles and editorials in local newspapers alleging mismanagement and otter problems at the South Sari Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (District). During its investigation, the Grand Juror learned that the State water Resources Board (Water Board) was also investigating some o f the allegations. The Grand Jury subsequently learned that the water Board had issued various reprimands to the District and was actively engaged in monitoring District remedial actions. Other allegations concerning the District were the subject o f ongoing legal proceedings. The Grand Juror decided not to pursue further the allegations that were already being investi o l in o ther f However, the Grand Jury's initial review o the multiple allegations concerning the District revealed other concerns that warranted further investigation. Three major issues emerged: 1. The District Administrator has a conflict of interest in his dual, simultaneous roles as administrator of the District's faci lities and operations, an as the m ajority o wner of company, wallas Group, that su a major share of contracted services t o the District without benefit of co mpetitive bidding for such services. 20 10-2011 San Luis Obispo C ounty Gran Jury P age � Agenda Item 11.a. Page 3 2. The District's Board of Directors (Board) has failed to recognize the existence of this conflict of interest, which has resulted in a further failure of the Board to take action necessary either to eliminate or properly mitigate the conflict. 3. The contract under which the District Administrator and his majority-owned company perform saris for the District is 25 years old. During this period, the contract has never been evaluated, re-bid or modified in any way, except for approved increases in the hourly billing rates that can be charged by the District Administrator and his employees for services provided to the District. The Grand Jury also learned that the Board had hired an investigator to review some of the allegations of misconduct. The investigator's report indicated he had found the allegations to be false. The Board viewed this as evidence that District operations were quite satisfactory. The Grand Jury's review f this same investigation determined it had been ineptly performed and the investigator's conclusions were not substantiated. The Grand Jury concludes that the Board and the District are exposed to a number of financial, legal and public trust issues. These issues are a result of the District Administrator's conflict of interest, the Board's failure to recognize and eliminate or mitigate the conflict, and the Board's failure to evaluate, re-bid id r m dif r its contract wiffi the District Administrator for more than years. The Grand Jury recommends that the Board consider hiring independent management and that it evaluate and compare and evaluate organizational and operational alternatives for the District. In addition, as long as the District Administrator's conflict of interest continues to exist, the Grand Jury recommends that the Board demand sufficient budget and cost detail to ll it to mitigate this conflict. The Grand Jury further recommends that an independent audit of the District's accounts and records be performed by the County of Saxe Luis bisp 's Audit Division. 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page 4 This report describes the Grand Jury investigation, its conclusions and findings, and includes TecommcndationsfOTactions the Board should take or consider. Addendum to Introduction: This report is the result of a long and detailed Grand Jury investigation and analysis of the South Scan Luis Obispo County Sanitation District. The investigation and report were completed in April, 2011. While the report was being edited and reviewed for final publication, the Grand Jury received several unsolicited letters from District representatives describing various changes that have been or will be made in District policies, procedures andlor operations. The letters indicate that changes are being made as a result of District ".se - examination "after considering the issues raised and questions asked by the Grand Jury during its investigation. The Grand Jury acknowledges the receipt of these letters but will not otherwise describe or respond to them in this report. The letters appear to be an attempt by the District to influence rn or modify the Grand Jury report before it is published. Such an attempt reflects .s a misunderstanding of the Grand Jury process. State law requires orpermits the Grand. ury to investigate the operations ofgovernmental agencies. It is then authorized to issue reports that include the findings ridings of its investigations and such recommendations concerning the operations of the governmental agency as the Grand Jury deems proper and f a . Tf and when the Grand Jury publishes its report, State law then mandates the manner and form in which the governmental agency is required to respond to any findings ridings are recommendations of the Grand Jury. This report .sets forth the findings findings and recommendations ions of the Grand Jury concerning the operations of the District as they were being conducted during the time of the Grand Jury investigation. The required responses of the District to these ridings and recommendations care the proper place for the District to describe what, if ny changes it has made or will make to its policies, procedures or operations in response to the Grand Jury findings findings and recommendations. The public will have to decide the validity of these Grand Jury findings an recorr menda ions and the adequacy of the District's required responses. 2010 -2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .... I TABLE of CONTENTS ................................................................. ... PROCEDURE ii...i......... ii. ii.i...i• ...............■......................,.......... 6 BACKGROUND ■.. ii■. 6 Formation of the District ................................................................... ..............................■ 6 District Board of Directors: Structure and Composition .............. ............................... 6 NARRATIVE s.. s........... r ..........................ss.....................,...... s...... ............................... Current operation and Structure of the District ................................ ............................... g Roleof the Board ................................................................. ............................... g Delegation of Management to the District Administrator ...... ............................... g District Administrator Contract Terms and Scope ................ ............................... g Additional Roles Assigned to the District Administrators ........ ............................'11 Functions Performed by Wallace Group Employee .............. ............................'11 Functions Performed by District operations Employees ....... .............................'1 Use of Competitive Bidding .................................................. .................L.......... #.1 Issues Identified in Current Operations .................................... ...........f..........,........ 1 Board Dependence on the District Administrative for Information ..................... 1 Di tdct Administrator Conflict of interest .... LL..a#...a... ..L..a L. L. L.. LL.. LLL....LLL.........■ 1 Inadequacy of the Budget/Payment Process to Ensure the Conflict of Interest is Mitigated ■#■■■■....... L ......................■. ■ ■........... ... ...... 1 The 0 & M Part of the Budget ..... Lt ...................................... ..............................■ 16 The Capital Projects Part of the Budget ............................. ............................... 16 What Happens When the Board Asks for More Budget Detail? .... . ....... . ... ........ 19 The Budget/Payment Process inadequacies in Summary ........................ g Consequences of the Failure of the Board to Recognize 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item 11.a. Page 6 theConflict of Interest ...............w.. ............................... ..................... Inadequacy of the Investigation to Determine the Reasonableness nablene f Wallace Charges .............................................. ............................... 21 Responsibility to Audit the District's Accounts and Records 2 CONCLUSIONS ..... ■ ■ i ...F * .. r i . i i ■ i i ... i i ........... i ........ i ................. * M . i .. i ..................... ■ .... ■ * * * ... ■ FINDINGS ■..... * RECOMMENDATIONS ................* ................... 7 REQUIREDRESPONSES ■...... iii ..........................................a.. ii... ... ■........................... ATTACHMENTS .................. .............F................. iii.i..#.i.#.....#■ f...■ .i ■.......... ■........ ■ ■....... g 2010-2011 Sari Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page 7 PROCEDURE The Grand Jury obtained information for this report from the following sources: • Interviews with the three members of the District Board of Directors • Interview with the District Administrator • Tour of the District wastewater processing plant • Attendance at District Board meetings • Extensive documentation provided by the District Board and the District Administrator. • The redacted Thomas Consulting investigation report, together with documents referenced in the report that were provided separately to the Grand Jury by the District legal counsel • The District's audited financial statements • Documents obtained from the State water Resources Board concerning District operations • Documents obtained from the County of San Luis Obispo Office of the Auditor- Controller BACKGROUND Formation of the District The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors formed the District in 1963. The District provides wastewater treatment and disposal t aprimately 9, residents f Arroyo r Grover Beach and Oceano. The plant facilities consist of a wastewater processing plant located in Oceano, t lines that carry wastewater from the three communities to the processing essin plant, and a 4 -foot pipe that discharges the processed wastewater into the ocean. District Board o Directors: Structure and Composition A Board of Directors oversees District operations. The current Board consists of three members, one from each city or community the District serves: Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach and Oceano. 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page 8 Each Director is an elected official of his or her respective city or community. Directors are appointed under state law governing sanitation districts; they are not selected because they have any special knowledge or qualifications regarding operation of a county sanitation district or wastewater plant. Over the past 10 years, there have been 15 different directors on the Board, of whom served only 1 year or less. District Board duties are not the primary activity for any of the current Board members. In addition to their City Council or Community Services District activities, Board members have other public and private organization memberships, duties, and/or employment. 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page 9 NARRATIVE Current Operation and Structure of the District The table below graphically summarizes the services performed to Operate and manage the District. The remainder Of this section Of the report describes in more detail the various roles and services that are required to Operate and manage the District. It further explains who executes the roles and provides the services, and describes how those services are provided to the District. Summary Table Of Services Performed to Operate and Manage the District 1 SERVICE PERFORMED BY Set Policies Board of Directors; Advised by District Administrator Goals & Objectives Board Of Directors; Advised by District Administrator Set Customer Rates Board Of Directors; Adv. by Distr. Admin. & Consultant Develop Budget District Administrator Approve Budget & Amendments Board of Directors; Advised by District Administrator Approve Expenditures Board of Directors; Advised by District Administrator Engineering Services District Administrator Wallace Group Administration District Administrator/ Wallace Group Contract Administration District Administrator/ Wallace Group Maintain Budget & Expense Records District Administrator/ Wallace Group Chief Finance Officer District Administrator Treasurer District Administrator r Operation of Wastewater Facility District Employees/ District Administrator Supervises Major Engineering Projects/ Studies Formally Bid, Sometimes Assigned to Wallace Group Capital Project Construction Bid out- Some Small Projects to District Empipyce 1 Sourccs for this chart include the following: SSLOCSD Fiscal Year Budget 2010 -2011, Table of Organization, p.1 l and Exhibit A, p. 97; SSLOCSD Sewer S ystem Management Plan, adopted July 15, 2009; SSLOCSD Bylaws approved March 2., 2011 2010 -2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item 11.a. Page 10 Role of the Board The Bylaws of the District explain the responsibilities of the Board of Directors: "'The primary responsibility of the Board of Directors is the formulation and evaluation of policy. Routine ratters concerning the operational aspects of the District are to be delegated to professional staff members of the District."' trict."' In addition, the Board is responsible for approval of the budget and expenditures in conformity with the budget. The Board meets twice a month. Until recently, the Board meeting duration was an hour or less. Board members are paid 100 per meeting. Board members are almost totally dependent on the District Administrator for the day-to-day management decisions, engineering, planning, budgeting, and administration of the District. A the Bylaws state, there are no expectations that the Board members have the time or expertise to become involved in daily management of District trict operations. The District Administrator provides management and is the conduit through which the Board receives most District information. Delegation of Management to the District Administrator District Administrator Contract Terms and Scope The District contracts for the services of a District Administrator who is the Chief Executive Officer of the District. Twenty -five gears ago, John L. Wallace signed a 3-page contract with the District to provide these services (Attachment 1). According to an interview, the only revisions to this contract during the last 25 years have been periodic increases in the hourly rates charged by Mr. Wallace and employees of The Wallace Croup for services provided to the District. There is no available evidence indicating that the structure, cost or effectiveness of this contract has ever been reevaluated or reconsidered by the Board o r a qualified independent consultant. The contract is between the District and Mr. Wallace as an individual. The stated purpose of the contract is to engage the services of Mr. Wallace to act as the District Admini tra►t r. Mr. Wallace has also been appointed to serve the District in other capacities, including District 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page I I Engineer, District Finance Officer and Treasurer. Where are n o written agreements between him and the District for his services in any of these other capacities. The services provided by Mr. Wallace under the contract are very broad and include the ll in : General administration and management of the District • General supervision and direction of District staff` (District staff is not defined in the Agreement but presumably includes all employees of the District) • General engineering advice to and on behalf of the District staff` ign, d ument preparation, contract admini trati n, and i Des for District projects including, but not limited to, water, sever, drainage, and wastewater treatment projects While the word "design" is also not defined in the contract, it appears to 'include engineering for the defined utility and public works projects. The breadth of the contract essentially gives Mr. Wallace the right to provide all administration, management and engineering services required by the District. The only services he does not provide are the services required actually to operate the District's wastewater treatment plant. District employees who are managed and supervised by Mr. Wallace provide these services. The contract authorizes Mr. Wallace to engage the services of his company's employees as "H MAY DEEM PROPER' [emphasis added]. Absent any other limitation, this provision gives Mr. Wallace unlimited discretion to assign the performance of any or all of the services under the contract to his own company employees. In addition, Mr. Wallace is authorized to charge the cost of these services at hourly rates specified in the contract and its subsequent amendments. The only contract provision that limits or regulates the number of hours that may be charged is the statement, "Services rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall he at the direction and request of the District's Board of Directors." The contract has no term and remains in effect `ect ind finit ly 2 SSLOCSD Bylaws approved March 2, 2011, p. ; Fiscal Year Budget 2010-2011, Exhibit A, p. 97 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jur Page 1 Agenda Item 11.a. Page 12 unless o until terminated by either party. Either party with thirty clays prior written notice to the other party can terminate the contract. Additional boles assigned to the Distract Administrator In addition to the ngineen*ng and administrative services described in the contract, the District Bylaws describe other responsibilities of the District Administrator: "The District Administrator shall be responsible for all of the fllwin: • The implementation of the policies established by the Board o f Directors for the operation of the District • The appointment, supervision, discipline, and dismissal of the District's employees, consistent with the District's Personnel Policies as tal li h d by the Board of Directors • The Supervision of the District"s facilities and services • The supervision of the District' finances" As part of his administrative duties, the District Admini trat r provides the Board with an annual budget, subject to its approval, as well as the subsequent budget and expenditure reports that the Board reviews and approves. Functions rf rmed by Wallace Group Employees The District Administrator assigns many of the engineenhig and administration services for which he is responsible to Wallace Group employees. To illustrate the financial significance of these assignments, information provided to the Grand Jury by the District Administrator indicates that the Wallace Group charged the District $836,000 for its services in Fiscal Year 2009-20 10. The personnel expenses for the District's nine employees in this same period totalled 2 1) 004 . Therefore, approximately one -half of the District's total labor costs in FY 2009 -2 10 were either paid to Mr. Wallace or resulted from his assignment of services to Wallace Group employees. 3 SSLOCSD Bylaws approved lurch 2, 2011, p. 4 Fiscal Year Budget 20 10-2 011, ac teal personnel expenses for 2 009-20 10, p. 21 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury 'age 11 Agenda Item II.a. Page 13 Functions Performed by District Operations Employees Nine District employees handle the day-to-day wastewater plant operations and maintenance and may also undertake smaller projects that otherwise would have to be completed by an outside vendor or contractor. This employee group is under the general supervision of the District Administrator; it also includes a Plant Superintendent responsible for supervision of the other eight employees. Use of Competitive Biddin Construction work is competitively bid. If a job or project requires specialized expertise that the Wallace Group does not have, it is always put out to bid. Large -scale studies or projects, for example, are normally competitively bid. There is no dollar limit policy for what is assigned to the Wallace group and what is competitively bid. For example, the District Administrator assigned much of the engineering and administration work for a recent centrifuge project to the Wallace Group rather than putting it out for competitive bid. As of November 2010, Wallace Group costs for this uncompleted project were $336,000 Attachment 2). Issues Identified in Current Operations Board Dependence on the District Administrator for Information The Board is dependent on the District Administrator for the information it reviews in order to fulfill its oversight role and make policy decisions. He gathers and provides the critical budget and cost information to the Board. The Board, however, has limited knowledge or ability to independently verify or evaluate information from this single source. This situation is a matter of concern because independent information is particularly important when the primary source of information has a conflict of interest. The District Administrator manages, controls or assigns virtually every service performed for the District and is the primary 5 SSLOCSD Fiscal Year Budget 2010 -2011, Table of Or p. 11 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 12. Agenda Item II.a. Page 14 source of information for the Board about these activities. This dependency is increased by the fact that the Wallace Group performs so much of the District's wort. The District Administrator, who is the majority over of the Wallace Group, then evaluates this wort. In addition, when outside consultants are used, the District Administrator guides the Board in determining who is hired. Under the Brown Act, Board members can only discuss amongst themselves District activities at Board meetings. Therefore, by observing the interaction between the Board members and the District Administrator at these meetings, one can observe the extent to which the Board depends on the District Administrator for information. District Administrator Conflict of Interest A conflict of interest exists when are individual is in a position to exploit a professional capacity for his or her personal or corporate benefit. Someone with a conflict of interest may deny that a conflict exists because he or she did not act improperly. However, the conflict still exists because the conflict of roles still exists. Such a conflict should either be eliminated or mitigated. Mitigation requires that internal controls be in place to ensure that the conflict does not have a detrimental impact on the entity affected by the conflict. The District Administrator has a conflict of interest between his personal. financial interest, as the majority owner of the Wallace Group to whom he assigns much of the District's work, and his duty as the District Administrator to control and minimize the administrative and engineering costs of the District. However, neither the Board's current Chairman nor its legal counsel recognizes that a conflict of interest exists. In addition, they do not recognize that the District Administrator does not provide the Board with the detailed information required in order to control or mitigate the conflict of interest. As a result, the Board has neither the inclination nor the information needed to control or manage the conflict of interest. 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 1 Agenda Item 11.a. Page 15 The statements that follow underscore the publicly stated positions of the District Board Chairman and the Di s tri t s legal counsel. The Board minutes of January 5, 2 011 include the following: "Chairman Nicholls stated that while he could appreciate that there were those who might believe there is are appearance of conflict of interest, he had not seen any conflict himself with the way the contract is currently written." In a letter dated july 22, 2010, responding to a public information request, the District's legal counsel stated: "... the District Administrator has very limited ability to self-direct work to Wall Group. Rather, any work that is going to be performed by Wallace Group as a part of any function at the District is approved by the Board of Directors and they are kept apprised of [sic] each meeting in regards to the costs associated with each project." The only safeguard in the contract that could mitigate the conflict of interest is the provision that services will only be provided by Mr. Wallace or his employees at the "direction and request" of the Board. However, the Board's budget and payment controIs are effective mitigation of conflict of interest only if: 1 the Board fully understands what Wallace Group costs are in the budget; the Board determines that these costs are reasonable for the work required; and the Board determines that amounts paid to the Wallace Group conform to the budget. Such controls are ineffective o do not exist. The financial protection that was intended to be provided for the District by requiring the Board to "direct and request"' Wallace Group services is illusory. The facts show that the Board is not being provided with the information necessary to mitigate the Wallace conflict of interest and that the Board is not focused on managing conflict of interest. The facts also demonstrate that the District Administrator has considerable ability to 44 1f= direct work to Wallace Group," despite the statement of District legal counsel to the contrary. 2010-2011 Sari Luis Obispo County Grand .fury Page 1 Agenda Item 11.a. Page 16 Inadequacy of the Budget /Payment Process to Ensure the Conflict of Interest is Mitigated The Board's approval of the budget and the invoice payments made in accordance with the budget are the internal controls by which the Board could manage the Wallace Group costs and mitigate the conflict of interest. The Grand Jury has concluded that the intended internal controls are riot effective because the Board has nether the interest nor the information necessary to carry out this responsibility. The budget is composed of two parts: an operations and maintenance (O &M) expense budget and a capital projects (Major Budget Items) budget comprised of major facilities replacement and expansion projects. The cost control reporting problems in these budgets are as follows: &M budget section: Cumulative monthly and annual cost reports do not specify Wallace Group costs in each account • Capital project budget sections: Costs for multi -year capital projects are not presented in a moray that allows the Board to sec the c umulative Wallace Group costs for each project. Pr*or year Wallace Group costs simply drop from sight Pen'odic budget reviews and adjustment requests provide little if any information about Wallace Group cost overa within any account or capital project to a normal situation, where the District Administrator does not assign District work to his own company, the budget detail provided to the Board is probably adequate, with the exception of the lack f prior cost information for multi -year projects. In this situation, however, it is crucial that the cost accounting fully documents the cumulative charges billed by the District Administrator and his company to each account by month, fiscal year and capital project or expense account. This is the information that matters for the Board i t ensure that the Wallace conflict of interest is not financially detrimental to the District. To illustrate this, the following discussion will examine the budget presentation and payment of Wallace Group costs for the most recently completed FY 2009-2010. 2010 -2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 1 Agenda Item II.a. Page 17 The table below is based upon information provided to the grand Jury by the District Administrator and indicates actual FY 2009 - 20 10 Wallace Group charges: Administration expense account S 1 69,000 (original budget 150,000) Engineering expense account 109,000 (original budget $90,000) Other O &M accounts charged by Wallace Group 159 5 000 Capital Project costs 399,000 Total FY 2009 - 2010: Wallace Group $836,000 The O&M Part of the Budget Even though the 5278,000 for Administrative and Engineering accounts exceeded the original budget, the budget made it clear these were Wallace group CoSt However, the $ charged to various other O&M accounts is a different matter. There is no detail in the approved budget that would identify these charges as Wallace Group costs. The explanation provided t o the Grand Jury by the District Administrator for this was as follows: "Other line items are not specifically budgeted between Wallace group and others but are executed by Wallace Group o an as nee ded o Board directed basis." In o ther wor there are do llar amounts scattere throughout the budget than the District Administrator, at his discretion, assigns to the Wallace Gr The Board approves such payments because there is money in the budget. There is n budget o r expense summary report than informs the Board how many of these budget dollars have subsequently been allocated to Wallace Group work. The Capital Projects Part of the Budget W allace Group costs charged to capital projects for Fiscal Year 2009- 10 totaled S 399,000. There is nothing in the individual capital projects in the Annual Budget than id the Wallace Group cost m n nt.� The explanation provided t the brand fury by the Dist ri t 6 Fiscal Year Budget 2010-2011, District Administration, Engineering expenses for 2009 -2 10, p. 22 7 F iscal Year B 2009 -2 1 20 10-2011 San Lu bid County Grand Jury Page 1 Agenda Item II.a. Page 18 Administrator was as follows: "Budgets for Design and Contract Administration services to be r vWed by Wallace Group are determined when the Major Budget Item (MBI) is presented to the Board for authorization to initiate project award of consultant and constmction contracts, etc." The Grand Jury agrees it is a reasonable budget practice to have a plaeehlder aunt in the capital budget until the project is actually initiated. At that time, the Board approves a detailed project budget. It then becomes crucial to manage Wallace Group costs to that detailed budget and it is here the District's capital budget process fails to meet the Board's needs. The Grand Jury has a particular concern that the budget payment process does not inform the Board of the total Wallace Group costs for multi -gear projects. The documents the Grand Jury reviewed simply dropped Wallace Group cost detail for prior years. One of these projects is the District's project to replace a centrifuge. This project is still ongoing. As of November 2 1, the Wallace Group charges to this project were $336,000. (Attachment 2 In February, the Grand Jury asked the Board to explain how the District Administrator kept it apprised of Wallace charges to multi -gear projects. In March, the Board provided a response prepared by the District Administrator that included the explanation given in the following two paragraphs "In FY 2009 -1 , in are effort to provide a more comprehensive presentation o each MBI , a total budget (all years) was introduced into the District Budget. Staff' gathered expenditures from FY 06-07 through F -9 to develop the past project costs. The past project costs added to the projected project costs is what makes up the total budget (all years). This format was carried forward and in in the FY 2010-2011 District Budget." "when an action item for an M I is presented to the Board for consideration, a table is included under the funding section of the staff report that outlines expenditures to date, proposed expenditures, and resulting totals. Therefore, no additional special reports are 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 1 Agenda Item II.a. Page 19 created to review multi -year cumulative project costs versus budget from inception to completion. The District Budget and M I staff reports continue to present this information t0 the Board as the MBI's progress throug project development."' In Order to validate this response, the Grand Jury examined the March staff report the District Administrator had provided to the Board for the Centrifuge project. This report is included here as Attachment 3. A review Of this document shows that it is impossible t0 tell the Wallace Group charges for this project total at least $336,000. The total budget number is a single amount Of 1,904,081, shown On page 2, without details as t0 what portion represents Wallace Group costs. In other words, it showed the explanation the Board had provided the Grand Jury was incorrect. The Grand Juror notes with a sense Of irony that there is a section on page two Of this same staff' report that provides very detailed budget information On $36,959 Of Outside contractor costs charged to this project. The Wallace Group prepared this budget detail, which exemplifies the type Of detail needed but not provided t0 the Board for the Wallace Group's Own charges. It is noteworthy that in April the District Administrator revised the report format and now provides detailed cumulative costs similar to what the Board told the Grand Jury it had started doing a year ago (Attachment . This revised format reveals the Centrifuge project actual Contract Administration costs are $70,557 and the Design and Survey costs are $479,665, for a total Of $550,222. Are these two accounts composed totally Of Wallace Group charges and/or d0 some Of the other accounts listed also include Wallace Group charges? Even with this new format, it is impossible for the Board t0 determine. Therefore, it is unclear if the Centrifuge project includes Wallace Group charges Of $336,000 or $550,222, something in between Or something more. Had the Board realized the extent of these charges and allowed this work not to be competitively bid, it would indicate a relationship between the Board and the District Administrator that is too comfortable, to the possible 2010 -2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Juror Page 1 Agenda Item II.a. Page 20 detriment of ratepayers. At the least, the evidence examined by the Grand Jury shows the budget/payment process fails to provide the Board with the Wallace Group information it needs. Capital budget issues of concern are not limited to multi -year projects. The Grand Jury saw no evidence that actual Wallace Group charges to a capital project are explicitly identified as long as the project total cost stays within the project budget. This lack f transparency allows the possibility of Wallace Group cost overruns in any project that is under budget. The information reviewed by the Board during the budget/payment process would not reveal any such overrun. What Happens When the Board Asks for More Budget Detail? The Grand Jury observed at a Board meeting what happened when a Board member asked for more detail about the budget process from the District Administrator. The following exchange is from the minutes of the December 15 , 20 10 Board meeting: "Director Hill questioned the Wallace Group invoice with regards to the line item for Major Budget Items. Administrator Wallace replied that the charges incurred were for Major Budget Item expenses previously approved through the 2010/2011 budget process and through subsequent Board authorizations for projects. He added that detailed invoices for all warrants (authorizations to pay) are available for review at the meetings. Director Hill stated that his specific question was whether the engineering services performed by Wallace Group for individual projects were included in the budget amount as a line item or just assigned. Administrator Wallace replied that the work performed by Wallace group is approved through directions from the Board and the overall contract the District has with Wallace Group. The majority of the work entails smaller projects with major engineering work contracted out to other engineering firms such as Kennedy /Jenks Consultants."' The grand Jury concluded that the District Administrator simply did not answer the question asked regarding where the Wallace group charges were included in the budget. It is certainly an interesting non - response to direct question from a Director who has an obligation to mitigate or even eliminate the District Administrator's conflict of interest. 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 1 Agenda Item II.a. Page 21 The BudgetlPayment Process Inadequacies in Summary many Although Wallace Group receives individual payments on the basis that the money is "in the budget," the Board has no clear idea what the Wallace Group budget is by line item, by capital project or in total. This deficiency of budget information and the lack of a subsequent budget tracking process allow the District Administrator vide flexibility to assign District work to his company without reasonable scrutiny. The District Administrator's assertion of Board approval of Walla Group charges is misleading. The Board approval process does not mitigate the conflict of int r st because it is not based on are informed approval. Consequences of the Failure of the Board to Recognize the Conflict of-Interest If the Board does not recognize the conflict of interest and it is not eliminated or mitigated, the District is exposed to a number of risks, as follows: • A long -term contractual relationship that is never subject to competitive bid or other evaluation and enables a continuing conflict of interest that is not mitigated may result in a "too comfortable" situation that lacks the rigorous oversight and reasonable controls the District ratepayers deserve • Over the -year period of the contract, the District organization may have been molded to conform t the services provided by the District Administrator and the Wallace group If the information and analysis the Board requires to fulfill its stewardship obligations come primarily from or through a conflicted source, the Board is at risk for making inappropriate decisions • The Board may lack the independent information necessary to evaluate the Wallace Group's performance • The District may not obtain the best duality and reasonable cost from contract service providers • The Board may be subject to continuing public mistrust • The Board may be ubj t to legal liability for not properly falf fling its stewardship obligations • The conflicted party has the potential to act improperly 2010-2011 Sari Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page 22 Inadequacy of the Investigation to Determine the Reasonableness of Wallace Group Charges A Word document found on a District computer contained allegations that the Wallace Group had done unnecessary work on two capital projects. The document was given to the Board, which responded by hiring a private investigator to investigate the charges. The resulting investigation report i included here as Attachment 5. There were redactions in the original report released to the public by the District. The Cram Jury has further redacted the names of individuals who were not a subject of this investigation. The Grand Jury addresses this investigation in its report for two reasons. One is the Cram Jury's strong impression that the Board believes the investigation report is proof that the Wallace Croup charges are reasonable and appropriate, and therefore no conflict of interest exists. The other is that a careful examination of the evidence reveals another example where the budget /payment process did not inform the Board of the aggregated Wallace Group charges for the project investigated, resulting in an uninformed Board approval of Wallace Group costs. The capital project of interest to the Grand Jury was repainting the roof of the maintenance building. The painting job was competitively bid and the contract was completed in 2009 at a cost of approximately $39,000. The private investigator found that the Wallace Group had charged the District S 16,921 related to the paint job for specifications and structural review, bidding tasks and contract management. His investigation report reached the following conclusion: "This investigation found no reason to suspect that (Wallace) or his firm would tat advantage of the District ire billing unnecessary work." The report states that the sources of the facts uncovered in this investigation were interviews with the Plant Supr'ntndnt and the District Administrator, as well as the available related documentation. The Plant Superintendent is quoted by the investigator as saying h "...has never questioned the need for the work performed." That left the District Administrator as the only interviewed source of evidence regarding the necessity of the work he assigned to his o n company. 2010-2011 San Buis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 21 Agenda Item II.a. Page 23 The investigator also failed to evaluate whether the Board was provided the information to determine if Wallace Group charges to this project were reasonable le and appropriate. The final section of the report titled General Comments states: "... the arrangement of Join Wallace being both the District Administrator and his firm providing engineering and project management services to the District presents an easy target to critics n District triet Staff and the community), and can provide the 'appearance' of a conflict of interest," The report then deals with the Board's management of this potential conflict in a single sentence: 4 7he investigation into this matter reveals that the project was completed within regulations and District policy with full Board approval." The facts indicate something quite different. The $16,921 paid to the Wallace Croup was made in a series of seven individual payments occurring over a two fiscal year period. The project was budgeted and the Board authorized payments as follows: Budget Actual Charges Fiscal Year 2007-08: Original budget $40,000 Wallace Croup charges 1 0 Total Charges: FY 2008-09 $10,007 Fiscal Year 2008-09: Amended budget $47,672 Wallace (group charges 6, 914 Total painting contract 38- Total Miscellaneous charges 1 1 Budget $47,672 Total Charges: FY 2008-09 $47,620 Total: All gears "7, 2'7 As can be seen from this table, the project total charges exceeded the amended budget by approximately 1 0,000. However, the Board did not realize this because, when approving the $47,672 as the amended budget in FY 2008-09, it was not given the information that $10,007 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 22 Agenda Item II.a. Page 24 had been paid the prior year to the Wallace Group. The budget and payment process never informed the Board at any point in time that total Wallace Group costs were S 16,9.1. The investigation states the Wallace Group payments were made with "full Board approval," but fails to recognize or understand that the budget and payment process did not inform the Board what the total Wallace Group actual charges were. meaningful investigation is one performed by an independent expert who is technically qualified to loom at the design and management work the Wallace Group performed and render an opinion whether the worm and related billings are appropriate and reasonable. That is precisely what this investigation did not do. Responsibility t Audit the District's Accounts and Records rd Among the primary functions of the County of Sari Luis Obispo f fic of Auditor - Controller (Audit Division) is the audit of accounts and records of County Special Districts. Its recent years, the Audit Division has fulfilled this responsibility by obtaining a copy of the District's financial statements as certified by an eternal auditor and maintaining a copy of the statements in its files. The Audit Division is authorized to conduct an audit of the District, if it chooses to do so, in order to carry out this responsibility. The same principal auditor has audited the District's financial statements since 1998. Federal law Sarbanes -Oxley act of 2002) mandates that the principal auditor be rotated every five years. Although this mandate applies to publicly owned companies, local government agencies have also followed this standard. One of the reasons for this is o that a longer -term association does not compromise the auditor's independence. 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page 25 CONCLUSIONS Three issues emerged from the Grand Jury's investigation of District operations. The first issue is the District Administrator's conflict of interest and conflict of roles between his duties as District Administrator and his simultaneous role as majority owner of the Wallace Croup. The second issue is the Board's failure to acknowledge that this conflict of interest exists. As a result, it has not taken the steps necessary to eliminate, control or mitigate the conflict. The Board may have high regard for the personal integrity of the District Administrator, but that regard is not adequate to safeguard the interests of the District ratepayers. The third issue is that the 25 year -old contract to manage the District may not provide the best organizational alternative for the District and there has been no independent evaluation of the situation. After examining the facts related to these issues, the Grand Jury has reached the following conclusions: 1. The District Administrator, John Wallace, and his company, the Wallace Group, have a pervasive presence in all facets of the District's operation, from executing Board policy and exercising oversight responsibility for daily operation and to providing numerous financial services, including budget preparation and financial reporting. There are few District activities that the District Administrator or the Wallace Group does not manage, provide or control. 2. The Board should consider independent management for the District. An independent District Administrator could become familiar with District operations and finances, and then develop and recommend to the Board an organizational structure and plan to transition to the new organization. 3. As long as the District Administrator's conflict of interest exists, the Board must demand and receive a level of infonnation that allows It to manage and mitigate the conflict. 2010 -2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 24 Agenda Item II.a. Page 26 Because this conflict of interest has not been a focus of the Board, the current budget and budget tracking process is not adequate to mitigate it. The budget and budget monitoring process provides inadequate information about Wallace Croup charges. Appropriate controls should be designed, independent of the District Administrator. The District Administrator has had 2 years to put appropriate budget controls in place and has not done so. 4. The Board should evaluate and compare operational alternatives for the District. This would include a review of all services provided to operate the District below the level of the Board. The District and Wallace Croup have been molded together for 2 years, with no independent evaluation of what has evolved. This review should be done independently of the involvement or influence of the District Administrator because of his conflict of interest. 5. The County's Audit Division would provide considerable benefit to the District and the public if it were to conduct an audit. The result would be an independent professional opinion regarding the adequacy of the District's internal controls to mitigate a conflict of interest. FINDINGS 1. The service contract between the District and the District Administrator has been in effect since 1986 and has not been modified except to increase the hourly billing rates. 2. The District Administrator is the majority owner of the Wallace Group. 3. The contract allows the District Administrator to provide the District with Engineering and Administrative services by means of assigning work to the Wallace Croup. 4. The District Bylaws provide that the District Administrator also supervises the District's facilities and services, and supervises the District's finances. 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 2, Agenda Item II.a. Page 27 5 . The District Administrator maintains the budget and expenditures records, and provides the Board with the budget and budget tracking information it uses to manage the budget. 6. The District's Board is dependent on the District Administrator for the information it reviews in order to make policy decisions. The Board has limited resources to verify or evaluate this information independently. 7. The District Administrator has a conflict of interest because of his dual simultaneous roles with the District and the Wallace Group. 8. The contract provides the District with some ability to mitigate a conflict of interest by means of the following clause: "Services rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be at the direction and request of the District's Board of Directors." 9. The budget and payment processes do not currently provide the information necessary for the Board to mitigate the 1tnt Administrator's conflict of interest. 10. The Board does not recognize that the dual roles of the District Administrator create a conflict of interest. 11. The Investigation Report commissioned by the Beard to investigate allegations of unnecessary Wallace Group work being charged to a District project concluded the allegation was false. 12. The limited facts presented in the Investigation Report were not adequate to support the report's conclusion. 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page 26 Agenda,ltem II.a. Page 28 1. The Investigation Report supporting documentation includes evidence that the budget process did not inform the Board of the total Wallace Group costs charged to the maintenance building roof capital project. 14. The County of San Luis bispo's Audit Division has the right to audit the accounts and records of the District. 15. The same audit principal has audited the District's financial statements since 1995. RECOMMENDATIONS I . As long as the District Administrator has a conflict of interest, the District's budget/ payment process should be modified to provide the Board with the specific Wallace Group information it needs to mitigate the conflict. (Addresses Findings -13 2. The budget/payment process changes required and the manner and timing of reporting Wallace Group charges must be determined independently of the District Administrator. (Addresses Findings 2 -13) 3. The Board should consider hiring independent management for the District in order to eliminate the current District Administrator conflict of interest and to begin the process to review and evaluate the organizational structure of the District. (Addresses Findings 1 -, and 10) 4. The Board should evaluate and compare all operational alt rnativ s for the District. This review should include all services provided to the District below the level of the state- mandated Board of Directors. (Addresses Findings 1-7) 5. The Board must review operational alternatives independently of the District Administrator because of his conflict of interest. .Add resses Findings 1-7 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page 29 6. The County of San Luis bispo's Audit Division should consider conducting an audit of the District that would include an independent professional assessment of whether the District has the controls in place to mitigate the financial risks inherent in a conflict of iterest. (Addresses Findings 5, 9, and 14 7. The Board should adopt the practice o rotating the District's principal auditor every five years. (Addresses Finding 15) REQUIRED RESPONSES The South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Board of Directors is required to respond to all Findings and Recommendations with the exceptions of Finding 14 and Recommendation 6. The responses shall be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Sari Luis Obispo County Superior Court by August 29, 2011. Please provide a paper copy and an electronic version of all responses to the Grand Juror The County of San Luis Obispo Office of Auditor-Controller is required to respond to Finding 14 and Recommendation 6. The responses shall be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court by August 2, 2011. Please provide a paper copy and an electronic version of all responses to the Grand Jury. The mailing addresses for delivery are: Presiding Nudge Grand Jury Presiding Judge Charles S. Crandall San Luis Obispo bounty brand Jury Superior Court of California 1050 Monterey street San Luis Obispo, CA 93402 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 The email address for the Grand Jury is: GrandJurrgco. 2010-2011 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Page Agenda Item II.a. Page 30 ATTACHMENT 1 Agenda Item 11.a. Page 31 Z£ a •e l, l, well epue6v Glow toad s -T -[q - Pu'2 X4 F7[TZtl Puy u s x u J V 2 - -V a 1 U O -4 - 2,X'2 d x d_ a P'F u � E q s x - 4a purer sipamad Guvjd Isdrarm snoTaP ; auTX zrq PWQ MV7A 3 J 13 04 OT 43aa - Ep P g - .1maws5eusm P * -e S u „pT AO xd 7[ Coal .� T SO .Q ` u s s - cm.0ad tq g Q a. - moor ,pixie skuaaq 9144 04 qu sa cl ' L - K L j jG Zgqj ri' ; ,a u SIE Wm - -z HISSSE I 0 poaaag;�Ia qt '� my; r r i g . Other c= r i es as requested bar DISTRICT and mutually agree able to both parties. 5 tber e :t- nt it a onabl. r ne-cessaxy to enable ENGINEER to perform hi duties b4�&exu i ,a; khQ 8N � -R s hiall be .authorized to. euga a the s it s ia : a,s s ie t;&rrt~s or a lo es wbicb he may deem proper. The .0ast. c1f. Flo vi z�tz t-( the DISTRICT of .9u ph assistants or employees hail ble Gt4VffegV?1e to thLe DISTRICT ih a tddn a with the schedule df fr G�ftd hawri hlazain cLr as mutually Ag.reeabie to DISTIL-I T and ENGINEER. 1 -Mm 2� RT: . M v xqes � Tta'� t� t -t i.sp �: erfaexut s b3a at the cli cvtlan aha 6& the 0,1stri t r s Baerd of Dire t rs . T TON 4 _ a! F� The Dj M.T Usr ag m- eiRs to pa3t t E_T as ccapensation at his serviceis, Veers; auzb d rjq to t t f B IL r im = a . Pjrj_zT3 4 6-1 a M a # a a a a. dF W $4 5. 0 0 hr i o - red- 0 g i a r _ _ 3-7. 50 h d lns tor. * $ 30.001h r . e. L € l� t sca 1 ar�d 0't 1 _t K to la-e r i n g - f y T Mall Sll r o • r a • ■ • w s • ■ 80. 0 0 # g. e retaa:� `U k ? q/Vaud o ek -s irrg $ 25. 00 Ih i?. i Autnal casIm - f d1rect e av es Incurrad for work re - basted thie DISTRICT f LTJ alilding tit ticLt; try ; a4d el i urarr a-Veld if - q5- -recd- by th-a i le at .a l 16diainq evil m dla Lp tq dis tAnce elepho *e, telegraph get dot o f- ire praf s iana -1 consultants required ifyr x Wic -3 .* i-f ice -a - tned and pepi4 5o by EI I B R vin D16TtICT behalf, plus I % aamini trati a c osts faatexiadry required for the j db and u -tech in drafting and eliiad activities, inaiudIn printing and i� p3 oaduation costs. Agenda Item II.a. Page 33 C r sEc TiaN s . LNR �zmk, `' — n 1 T -IC's &greas to d pi ., indemni-fy indemnify arid hold harmless ENGINEER from amy and all lalms , dlspt�t s , coiTtroversies or laws ualts arising Ercau o r xplAL-' t b work of s r-r ices perf o wed by ENGINEER p ur uam t bo the � a� -s re vdent while he. is spay vin g• in t cap acity of the a i - i s•t r i. -t �T 1 rr t� t e p'i� x the a e axis rk g t r the DISTRICT a.ai include the ENGINEER i d• r a-my Of ioews• anC Di a tors insurance policy it may obtain �Ls agWedMe supa-rsadas a a4ld all oth r agreements f either r i-I iii ri � vrt r m- dip, paxti 3� t :.th rospect t the jt ` t' rot =t i` ho, a n with - r rRx a ont { tart an , or promise � ter, i; t-a tip , = , je-a- .t ,Lte-* .o.f this Agreemerit which is not con -tainted die r _m, ; s.h i v i l ire � q; . SECT- IM AN Tra TO AjG T ' Ta a x rI'm .ti t j h the mutual pr any sk i o -b 1. �.c� t o r� s h r eux� *c�. e r Sam axe lwtLi' � by t1re E M gR w1thout the p wr itten co nsent o f . - B' Ti'' Zither g -a-rt mad t =tri t trAiq Ag�eae ie t w Lth thirty ( 30) days px r i - ften noti e.: p'� �rlck td the othe party. uT M of. jaw or in equity is br ug o enforce or Inter- -P = s17. the W t i• ns of th i& grey r t , the prevailing_ party shall cx r s b attoxnay' s fetes im addit on to Any other e O li may r-c t 1 t;iO t ra given r ,uA t to thp terms and pro- s ha+ an writing and s dj . -eYTt by f inst -.ass SQL OQ aD B.60 Dimt. 335 a rLd to the Eli I ASE ER at 13 29 Chor S et San Luis Obis.joo CA 93 401 Agenda Item II.a. Page 34 I WITNE WHEREOF, DISTRICT and the ENGINEER have executed this A eerfi nt of the day and year first her inabo a set forth. SSLD By: _ auk B a~ t f Chairmam, boazd o boa Dire-at-ors - B ai I F kn WhI & nd As sae i at e�g �-2 Gerald S hip8ey , Asti' t Attorne t Agenda Item II.a. Page 35 ATTACHMENT 2 Agenda Item II.a. Page 36 RECAP OF CENTRIFUGE xE PROJECT BUDGET AND ACTUAL COSTS BY FISCAL YEARS *Note: 2 0 10 costs are as November, 20 1. All budget and actual cost figures were provided b the Wallace Gr u . Agenda Item 11.a. Page 37 WALLACE BUDGET BUDGET GROUP OTHER TOTAL FISCAL YEAR NUMBER ER AM UI T COST COST COST 20 C16 1,5 000 $1 2 9 428 12 2007 C14 1 $39,868 $438 $40 2008-09 05MBI06 $499 $76 $2 154 $78 2009-10 MBI 6 155199340 $150,048 $368 $518, 2010-11* 5MBI 6 1,1 4 , 1 422 $57, $15, $734 TOTAL 3 $38 $ 7234 , 274 *Note: 2 0 10 costs are as November, 20 1. All budget and actual cost figures were provided b the Wallace Gr u . Agenda Item 11.a. Page 37 ATTACHMENT 3 Agenda Item II.a. Page 38 v SOUTH SAN Luis OBISPO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Post Office Box 339 Oceanq California 93475 -0339 1600 Aloha Oceano, Caiiforrua 93445-9735 Telephone (805) 4$9 -6566 FAX (805) 489-2765 - Staff Report To: Board of Directors From: John Wallace, Dis ria dr finis tt ]ate March h , 2011 - S ubject: N ew Centrifuge 2A, B rough Construction Progress Pa No 4 and payment to Earth Sytma Pacific Recommendation* 1. Approve Progress Payment No. 4 to Drough Construction, Inc. in the amount of $36,959.50. ( S3 3 ,263.55 without retention) -. Approve Payment to Earth Systems Pacific in the amount of S758aS. F unding: The FY 2010 B includes the Maj or Budget Item 05 MBI o — N ew Cenirifuge 2A — in the amount of $1,104,422. Brough Construction was retained by a September 1 2010 Board action for the lump sum amount of S827,134.00 to provide construction services for the project_ The.revised contract amount after C bange Orders 1, 2 , 3 4 and 6 is $852902.00 (Change order No. 5 was not accepted. Furth Systems Pacific was retained by a N ovember 17, 20 Board action for the time and materials contra t to p rfornn materials testing services during construction of the C enftifuge 2A Project The submitted invoices totaling S758aS are for professional services including: concrete sampling, concrete c mPr ssion strength t sthi , and for bolt inspection. Agenda Item II.a. Page 39 Expenditures to ' Proposed Totals date FY ; Oil 1 a pendltu res .budget i,I4,42.00 - 1 00 E quipment Expenditures B Design expenditures 46 6,479.1 Testing/Troubleshooting 1 4,218.13 758 4X6 Co rLstructioa expen $ 323 7 886.42 $ 36 - 50 $ 360,845.92 PG&E Utility Services F $ 15 $ - $ 15 A. expenditures 5 57 8 S $ 57,914.19 Ret aina g e -. J- 109/6) (32,388.64) S (3v695.95) $ ( 36,o &4 -5 9). . P a ra n t s (B+C+D+E+F+G-M $ 415,768.53 768.53 $ 3 449,790-33 Subtota ( I)-, (B+C+D+E+F+Gj 448,157.17 S 37, 717.75 S 521,959.51 ( indudes relain J e 'lance t or, P eti - T + S �[ 656,264.83 S ,32,462.49 Agenda Item II.a. Page 39 S taff eporl — Marc h 2 2010 Meeting — New Ce ntr ifuge 2A Bro ugh Cons&wl ion Progress Payment No. Page Expenditures to Proposed Balance to �a�(Total Pry ect Expenditures Complete Total Project Date, Budget -- All S 1, $ 1,233 $ 37,717.75 S 5 S,462. Fisca Y ears D iscussion: l ornthlyprogre s payment No. 4 includes payment fbr the month of February on work associated with this contract. Based upon the work that has been completed by Brough Staff believes this payment is equivalent to the amount of work performed during this period_ Tasks and percentage complete for this period ale listed in the f ollowing table. S taffhas closely monitored work performed under this contract and believes the invoice reflects the actual work performed by B rough Cbnstruction. Item Descripdon Quantity Unit Unit Price Contract Amount % Complete is Cost Th is Pen 1crnr�ed Concrete 147 LF x . 00 ° o $132.00 R etaining Bin Wall CMU Flood Wall 150 LF $62.50 $9,375.00 100% $9,375 * 00 Pre-Engineered M etal By ldin I LS $54, 940.00 $54, 840.00 1 O° $5 3" Clasp Lined Sludge P IMF $ 1,543.00 $3,086.00 25 % $771. Sl FeM Pump, V Parcel and 1 LS $10 10 % $2. App u rtenances Local Power D istribution Panel l LS . $14 $1 4,770.00 10 % $1, Power and Communications Wiring l LS S20 00. 0 �� $1,02O.00 (R &M Buildin Power and Communications Wiring I LS S17 $17 % $5 ( W/ In Ne B Design Install and test SCA Sy stern i LS $102,000.00 $1O2�OOO.0O 10 % $f O, OO.00 rtotai ( Job to date $36,959-50 taiia O'Da . -Net Total $ 336 Staff` r=mmends approval of Progress Payment No. 4 in the amount of S36,959.50. A 10% retaina e o 53,695.95 is withheld resulting in a net payable amount of S33g6155. Agenda Item II.a. Page 40 ATTACHMENT 4 Agenda Item 11.a. Page 41 SOUTH SAN LUIS OB PO COUNTY SANUATION D TRJCT Post Office Box 339 Uceaao, California 93475-0339 1600 Aloha Occano, California 93445 -9735 'telephone (845) 489-"66 FAX ($45) 489 -2765 hCtQ:LLSSfaCSC[AX'�I Staff Report To: B owd of Dim t ra Fromm: Jo st W allace, Dis&id h is Date: Apdl 6, 2011 Subject: New Cettrifiige 2A, Brough Construction Progress Payment No. eeendtin: I . Approve Pm grew Payment No. 5 to Brougb Ccmtrucdon, Inc. in the amount of 6�3 . 0# (S77,700.42 with motion deducbd , authorize thrw Contract Change Orders CC No. 13 in the mount 18,700,90, CC No. 14 in the amount of # * il and CCO No. 16 in the amount of S 9 2 . 0 0, for a na 000traot charge of d. 2. Approve, payment to Eartb SysW= P acific In th e amount of S 7 0 for inspecfion services ccwnpleted. Funding: Th FY 201011 Budget includes the Wjor Budget Item 05 MB10 —New Cenfr&ge 2A -- in the am n t of 1 The ov=W t budget fnr all fiscal ycus is $1,904,081. ro g�h Consftuction was retained by a Septwnber 1, 2010 ward acSon for Ow lump suet amount of SM to provide eoniftuctiar sa for the projeet.''na revised contract amount air CCOs 1 13 , 14 and 16 is S899 See attachments far a list of pOs . Prior . Current. FIf Tat # Prod This Rrs es of 03-26-11 Ail F s Staff Report Budget f ' L104 '422 1,90 r 0;81 Emeodftres I i $ - 1 $ Capital Egt:ipment 320 - - .920,814 tudWs - - $ Testing TroubleshooUng - ,p976 $ 4 $ 287 Detn & Survey 4 S 46A79 47 - 6 6 5 $ - Contract Administration $ 3, 67 70 12 .000 Cotes Con- ti i es $ - $ 40 0 , 764 $ 40,764 $ 16p307 PG&E Utility Se ce $ $ 15, �5 59 � $ Co nstruction 2 652 28 997 49 $ 70,027 Total E pendltur 799,659 $ 459 $ 1,259,005 98 R erNnatnIn g Bu dget W,996 546,375 Agenda Item II.a. Page 42 ATTACHMENT 5 Agenda Item II.a. Page 43 WORKP I GATIONS Date: April 2,, 2010 To: Michael Selz Attorney -- SLCSD From: Richard Thomas — Thomas Consultin Re: Investigation of Allegations — Maintenance Roof Coating, and Chemical Tank Replacements Thomas Consulting (T C) was retained by Milchaei Seitz, Attorney for the S LO SD, to Investigate two allegations contained In a Microsoft Word document (Doc ) found on one of the SSLOC D computers. The computer is located in an area at the plant office that is accessible by all employees. r The document was titled "Dear Board ~Members" and is fire pages in length and contains a gran signature box with the words "Thank You, Regards, . The source of the document has not been verified as actually being written by T The following are excerpts from the document: Allegation I: Maintenance Roof Coating Allegation 2-: Chemicad Tanks :.. A few examples of these would be the recent Purchase of two District chemical tanks, one entirely handled in house and purchased at a cost to the tax payers of approximately $.16,000. This was placed ire service as the new Sodium Hypos hlor ate tank. It was then observed the District was in need of a new Ferric Chloride tunk which the Wallace Croup unnecessarily handled. This was the same basic tank however the cost to the tax payers was some $32,000. There wos no reason to lengineer' another tank purchose__." ( Excerpt from bottom page 3 and top pope 4 o Doc ). An Investigation into these two allegations was conducted and the result of that investigation follows. Contained with this report is a series of documents related to these issues that were gathered In the course o ttrl investigation. The documents are labeled Document ] -] and will be referred .to throughout this report. Thomas Consulting 30 Oriole St. Ojai, CA 93023 i805i 640-1666 Office (805) 640 -1246 Fax P1 uc. No. 23388 - Page 1 of 5 Agenda Item II.a. Page 44 W O�]K�'L1�CE INV�S'7CIGA`�'Y�I�TS Allegation 1* Maintenance Roof Coating I inter iewed the Plant uperintendant and the District Administrator about this allegation; I also . av o related to this proje, Both Mand Wallace told me that th e Maintenance Building roof was in need of recoating and the project was induded in the annual budget and approved by the Board -- MBI No. C24 ($40,000). After it was determined a formal [aid process was required, Wallace Group initiated the necessary advertising and processing of the bids. Two bids were received_ The lowest [aid was rejected as non - responsive to the totality of the work required for the project (see Doc 8c — Board Meeting minutes dated 5 /21108 and Doc 8b — Staff port dated 5/21/08), and the proj ff ect was awarded to Ingham Painting in the amount of $38,812. The project commenced on July 7, 2008 and was completed on August 1, 2006 (see Doc 8c Board minutes dated 8/20/06). This was an ext ensive pro)ect which included power washing the roof surfaces, repairing a corner section of the roof si ding an then applying two layers of an industrial coating system. In addition to the work com pleted the contractor - In harp PaintFn& there was other work and charges related to this project. These costs are detailed in the following table. The total cost of the project was 58.027 ;1. Thomas Consulting 306 Oriole St. Ojai, C'A 30 3 (805) 640-1666 Office (805) 640 -1246 Fax Pl Uc. No. 23388 Page 2of5 Agenda Item II.a. Page 45 WORKPLACE INVESTIGATIONS Maintenance Building Roof Coating Charge I cost T Wallace pup WG through March 078 FY $ 2,5 WG April 078 FY $ 2,244.42 WG May 07-08 FY 4,848.71 WG June 078 FY $ 974.00 WC 8/20/08 -5 W /l $ 867.05 WG 1/21/09 467.S0 Su b -total $ 16,pML23 $ 16 SLO Newsp apers 5/23/08 $ 980.20 $ 980 *0 Bobcat Rain Cutters Inc. 914.00 $ 914.00 Ingham Painting 94 Ingham Painting $ 9,881.00 S ub-to t al , ,911.80 38 Project Total 57,627.23 All documents collected by TC that relate to the roof coating can be found under Tab 8_ Adle 2: Chemical Tanks The District replaced two chemical tanks. The allegation purports that the Sodium Hypochlorite tank was handied entirely by the District Staff` at a cost of $16,000 and the Ferric Chloride tank, handled by the Wallace Croup, cost $92,000 for essential ly the sage basic tan . The allegation insinuates that becauLse Wallace Group was involved In the second purchase, the engineering fees charged, doubled the cost of the project. The facts contained in the allegation are not support 6d by the evidence gathered by TC. 1n ..taking this determMation l Interviewed the Plant Supenintenda nt and the t i rict Administrator abort this allegation. I also 'Interviewed the District's B kke per Secreta and collected documents from bath Wallace Group and the District_ The documents collected are filed under Tabs 9 and 10. Thomas COnSulfMg 306 Oriole St. Ojai, CA 93023 (SOS) 640-1666 Office (805) 64G-1246 Fax Pl tic. Ova. 2-3388 Page 3 of 5 Agenda Item II.a. Page 46 W ORKPLACE ENVE-,STIGAUONS The investigation details follow. S odium ypochlorite Tank John Wallace stated the tank was showing signs of deterioration including the failure of one of the lifting points, and District Staff recommended the tank be replaced. District Staff initiated an informal bidding process and reefed three quotes. The lowest bid from Harrington Plastics in the amount of 11 was award . w -„ - Plant Superintendent stated that the bid process was handled by District Staff, and the tank did require replacements The Board minutes from 9/3/08 reflect the appr ov I for the purchase of the Sodium H pochlor'ite tank o ut of the FY 20W-09 budgetary funds. The accompanying staff report prepared by Wallace shows the three bids received by District Staff ranged from $11,331.91 to IL1 with Harrington as the lowest hid. District records con rm (see tab 9) the bid amounts, and Harrington Plastics was paid $11,556.44 on 11/07/2 According to Spears the $224.53 above the quoted price covered the cost to protective wrap the tank for shipping. T were no charges from Wallace Group associated with this project. Ferric Chloride Tan The District Staff recognized the need to replace the Ferric Chloride Tank and included a major budget item in the 2008-2009 FY Budget — 08 I► BI 23 Chemical Tank Replacement. initially District Staff' (Scott i ascolo) set about getting quotes to replace the existing 4000 gallon tank. He received two quotes; one from Harrington Industrial Plastics and the other from Keith Ballet' (Snyder). Records related to this first round of quotes are contained in a set of documents received from John Wallace (labeled 10a). Following the receipt of these two quotes it was determined that the District would benefit from replacing the 40DO gallon tank with a 6600 gallon tank. Plant Superintendar explained that a 4000 gallon tank is not able to accept a 'full load's of ferric chloride and it world he more economical for the District to have a 6600 gallon tank that could wept a full load. District Staff then sought quotes for a 6600 gallon tank. Three quotes were included in a set of documents (labeled 10d) received from Ham ton Indus al Plastics Core- Rosion Products, and Snyder Direct furnished quotes and Oore ion was the lowest at $10,996.43. then forwarded a Staff Report dated 3/24/09 (contained in the set of documents labeled 10d) to John Wallace. The staff report was presented by Wallace to the Board on 4/1 and the purchase from Gore- Rosion was approved. The Board also approved an additional cost of approximat l $200 to have the tank protection wrapped for shipment (see set of documents labeled 10b). District records r e.i• d-ka n• indicate the total project expenses related to they ..rreplacement_of.the-Ferric Chlorite tank totaled $11,,586.51 Doc 10c). ors- F�oslon Products was paid 11 ,17 of that amount, There were no payments to Wa il ace Group.• l Thomas Consulting 306 Oriole S Ojai, CA 93023 (805) 640-I6 Office (8 640-1246 Fax Pl Lic. No. 23388 Page 4 of 5 Agenda Item II.a. Page 47 W o��,r�c� r�rv�����A�r�o�s ire regard t th legation.thath re- .were,va cant -charg -f r-Wallace. rpv p services;jhgA is Ise. Further, records from the District and from 1 ailace Group show the project, including quotes, was handled by District Staff and Wallace Group engineering staff played no role in the purchase or installation of the Ferric Chloride tank, No charges for the Ferric Chloride tank were paid to Wallac Croup. Wallace Croup charges were related to preparing spedflcations, bidding tasks, contract administration, moral review and miscellaneous expenses. Waltace G roup furnished an accounting of th eir ex ( see Doc d). In determining the costs associated with this project, ` collected records from both W allace Group, 0 and from SLCSD Bookkeeper . The records from both sources are consistent, a ace The statements made by Appleton and 1 regarding this project are also consistent. The investi ption into this matter reveals that the project was completed within regulations and District policy with full Board approval. The matter related to the initial inform aI bid by a relative of a District employee was addressed as an internal personnel matter. Conclusion - Allegation The allegations contained in the document suspected to be written by are false. The replacement of both tanks was handled by District Staff with no fees paid to Wallace Group. The amounts cited in the allegation are inaccurate. Both tanks were replaced for approximately $11,,SM each. i hese. amounts do not include the, District taff time dedicated. to developing specifica loins, collecting quotes, selecting the vendor, administering the contracf payments, and installing the tanks erter l Comments Mr. John Wallace and his firm Wallace Croup enjoy a great reputation. This Investigation found no reason to suspect that Wallace or his firm would take advantage of the District In billing unnggessa work. The Plan uperintendant is very complimentary of Wallace Group and the services they provide and states that he has nearer questioned the need for the work performed, stated that Wallace is one of the most ethical men I know. O n the other hand, the arrangement of John Wallace being both the District Administrator and his firm providing engineering and project management services to the District presents an easy target to critics (on District Staff' and the community), and can provide the 'appearance' of a conflict of interest. The decision to contract with John Wallace as District Administrator and with his firm to proin*de engineering and project management services is within the purview of the Districts Board of Directors. Clearly this is not a unique arrangement but may subject the District to continuing questions of impropriety. It must be stated though, that nothing in this investigation has lead TC to question the veracity of John Wallace or his flan, Wallace Group. Th om as Consulting 306 Oriole S Ojai, CA 93023 (805) 640-1555 Office (805) 64G-1246 Fax PS tic. pia. 2-3388 Page 5 of 5 Agenda Item II.a. Page 48 ATTACHMENT SOUTH SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Post Office Box 339 Oceano, California 43475 -0339 1600 Aloha Street, Oceano, California 93445 -9735 Telephone (805) 489 -6666 FAX (SQS) 489 -2765 http: / /www.sslocsd.or&/ May 31, 2011 Reed Sato, Director Office of Enforcement aliforn'a State water Resources Control Board 10011 Street, 16 Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 .J w { $ E i _ k d Subject: Technical Report responding to Notice e of Violation for Unauthorized Discharge Letter Dated Agri 1 18, 2011 Dear Mr. Sato: Enclosed please find the District's response to the State water Resources Control Board and Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board's written Investigative Order dated April 18 2011, relating to So uth San Luis Ob 1 s o County Sancta ion District No ti of io lation for Unauthorized Discharge of Untreated Sewage to Waters of the State on December 19, 2010. Pursuant to section 1 3267 of the California Water Code W , the District hereby submits this technical report and associated appendices consistent with the conditions outlined 'within the written order and accompanying letter. It is our understanding that this technical report is required to enable the Central Coast water Board and State Water Board staff to effectively evaluate the nature, circumstances, extent, and g ravity of the unauthorized discharge of untreated sewage. This report is therefore intended to fuller address the subject violation and answer all questions raised in the investigative order. To better facilitate ease of use, we have formatted the enclosed technical report to follow the outline of the Investigative Order. For your convenience, each requirement of the investigative order has been individually restated, followed immediately by our specific response. In many yes, additional information is referenced within the appropriately labeled birder sections that follow. Due to the overall combined size of the budget reports, separate binders are included with our submission to facilitate your request for: 1. i Copies o f the Discharger - s a nnual ra i fiscal year budget report ( discussion o fmain budget items for proposed pro j ects) since year 2000. Please feel free contact me with any questions or to request additional information. Agenda Item II.a. Page 49 Page 2 This report was prepared by me, a registered Civil Engineer* 1 certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments werc prepared under my dU' =tion or supervision m accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel gath and evaluate th onnation submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, o r those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I axe aware that here are significant penalties for submitting False information, , inc luding the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. Sincerely, 1 eA&X'� John Wallace., RCE 33965 District Administrator cc: SSLOCSD Board of D irectors / cCO � 2 o �g � p \ \F CALtF��`� District Legal Counsel Central Coast Regional water Quality Control Board A ttachments: VOLUME 1 A ppendix 1— Causes and Circumstances of the Unauthorized Discharge of Unftrated Sewage A ppendix 2 — ischarger's Response to the Unauthodzed Discharge of Untreated Sewage A ppendix 3 — Monitoring and Analysis of the Unauthorized Discharge of Unfir rated Sewage VO LUME A ppendix 4 — Impacts of the Unauthorized Discharge of Untreated Sewage Appendix 5 — Additional I ormation VOLUM SS L O CSD Budgets: FY 1999/2000 dough 2004 /2005 VO LUME SSL Budgets: FY 2005/2005 dough 2010 /2011 Agenda Item II.a. Page 50 Page Technical Report — Response to NOV, April 18, 2011 1. Causes and Circumstances of the Unauthorized Discharge of Untreated Sewage: a. A complete, detailed explanation of how and when the discharge of untreated sewage from the Di harger's severer collection system was discovered. Response: Please find enclosed in Appendix I .a. the timeline and narrative of how the discharge was discovered. It is important to note that at the time of the event on December 19, 2010, the area was experiencing severe flooding not only in areas outside of the treatment plant but also within the plant itself. The severity of the flooding, and more specifically its impact on the Oceano Lagoon area (Le. Meadow Creek Lagoon) located adjacent to the treatment plant, made national news, and ultimately led to the evacuation of area residents by emergency personnel during the early afternoon hours of December 19, 2010. During the period of time between midnight on December 18, 2010 and :00 All on December 20, 2010, over sic inches of rain tell in the Oceano and Arroyo Grande area. This was preceded by other storms that saturated the upper watersheds of Arroyo Grande and Meadow Creek, which are tributary to and /or impact the Ocea no Lagoon area. By the afternoon of December 19, 2010, flood waters were already up to three feet deep on the roadways and had inundated the majority of the homes in that area. A Proclamation of Local Emergence was made by the County Administrator and Director of Emergency Services, Jim Grant, on December 21, 201 retroactive to D ecember 1 g, 2010), and a P roclamaticn of State Emergency was issued by State Governor Schwa r enegger on Decernber 21, 2010 (retroactive to December 19, 2010). In summary, the events leading up to the discovery of the sewage discharge occurring December 19, 2010 began when a plant staff member arrived on site in response to a common alarm at the Emergency generator at approximately 07:35. At that time he discovered that the site was experiencing the early stages of the flooding described above, as water levels in Meadow C reek lagoon area began to rise as the result of storm water accumulation. Additional staff was called in to help address the issue at approximately 07:50 and at 08:30. At 10:26 am on December 19 2010 the #4 Influent Pump shorted due to water in the windings and tripped. When this motor tripped it also shut down the remaining three Influent pumps. Influent arriving at the headwors structure immediately following the shutdown of the primary pumps began to accumulate within the headwor s as the trunk lines began consuming available storage capacity within the lower reaches of the trunk system. Immediate attempts to restart the influent pump motors tailed. As a result, the diesel driven influent bypass pump was started but did not initially function to full capacity due to the fact that one of the discharge valves located within the head w r s structure was closed. The Plant Superintendent was able to partially open the valve before it was completely submerged with influent, which allowed for a portion of the influent to pass into the treatment portion of the plant while the remainder continued to till available storage within the trunk system. The trunk system began to back up and began to spill at approximately 11:00 am. b. A diagram showing the location of the actual sewage overflows, including, but not limited to, the location of the influent pump electrical faiiure, location of Agenda Item 11.a. Page 51 Page impacted waters, and discharge locations from sewer Imes, laterals and connections, cleanuts, sewer relief valves, or other assets owned by the Discharger, including discharge locations from all known assets not oWned or operated by the Discharger affected by the SSO event. Response: Please find attached a GIS drawing in Appendix 1.b. that indicates the location of the overflows as well as the location of the headworks, and impacted waters. There were a total of 21 overflow locations that were discovered using the methods described in Section 1.c of this technical report- 3 within the plant, 7 located on the District's trunk sewer and 11 located in the collection system owned by the Ocean Community Services District. The District is also aware from interviews with homeowners in the affected area of 5 possible instances of laterals backing up into homes serviced by the Oceano Community Services District Collection System. This is the extent of overflows that the District is aware of, based upon photographic evidence, physical evidence at the ,manholes and surrounding areas, interviews with a number of residents affected, and through information received as part of the District's community outreach which included numerous public forum requests for information. We have included copies of the interviews and photographic evidence in Appendix 1.b. . A detailed report of the total volume of untreated sewage discharged, including the engineering methods, diagrams, ,models, references, calculations and assumptions used in estimating the total volume of untreated sewage discharged. This should include, at a minimum, tabular and graphical summaries of the daily total influent flows of untreated sewage received by the treatment plant one week before and one week after the SS O. Additionally, submit total daily influent and effluent flows of untreated sewage received by the treatment plant for the past three years. Response: Please find attached in Appendix 1.c, the volume estimate of untreated sewage that was discharged from the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District and Oceano Community Services District manhole locations identified in section 1.b. of this technical report. Three methods of calculation are included: (1) An analysis of individual manholes based upon calculation methods contained in Hvd raulics and Its Apolication by A.H. Gibson (Constable Co. Limited) as referenced In Collection Systern Collaborative Benchmarking Group Best Practices for Sanitary Sever Overflows (SSO) Prevention and Response Plan, published and distributed by California Muter Environment Association — 2004. This document utilizes the height of the water column corning out of ,manhole pick holes and covers as well as calibrated reference photos to estimate sewage spill volumes, (2) An analysis based upon on historic diurnal curves for the plant to estimate flows for periods when the Parshail Flume ,metering system was inoperable during the spill event, and (3) An approximate analysis performed by the Plant Superintendent estimating a worst case scenario had influent flow to the treatment plant increased or remained constant from the time of the start of the spill to the end of the spill event. The Agenda Item 11.a. Page 52 Page Superintendents bass and associated calculations is included in Appendix I.c. In addition an analysis of the basis and volume calculation is also Included. Given the daily diurnal flog cycles, it is our determination that Influent flow to the treatment plant did net increase or remain constant from the start of the spill to the end of the spill and therefore believe that the Superintendent's report is not an accurate estimation of spill volume. In addition please find in Appendix 'I .c. daily total influent flows of untreated sewage received by the treatment plant one week before and one week after the SS O,, provided in both tabular and graphical format. This information includes December 19, 2010 (spill event), but it should be noted that the Parshall flume metering device was inoperable during much of the spill event making ing the number provided non - representative of total flog for that day. Also included are the daily influent flows of sewage received by the treatment plant for the past three years. Untreated effluent flogs have not been included due to the fact that the plant does not discharge untreated effluent, d. A detailed description of the causes of the electrical problem/failure related to the treatment plant influent pumps, standby generator /pump, including any analyses or forensic studies performed by the Discharger or its consultants to determine the reasons for the electrical failures. Response: Based upon the investigation conducted by the District, the District's contractor, and the District's Electrical Engineering consultant, the cause of the electrical problem /failure was floodwater entering the underground electrical conduits within the plant. Given the flooding in the plant on December 19, 201 O grater traveled in the influent pump conduits from, in all likelihood, one or more flooded pull boxes, to an electrical junction box in the headrorks and then through electrical conduits to each of the influent pump motors. The cause was confirmed when the terminal boxes at the rotors were opened and were found to be full of water. Floodwater entered the motors and caused a short in the motor for influent pump . This short caused the main breaker feeding all the influent pumps to trip as well as the sub breaker that feeds pump #4. A preliminary investigation by Thoma Electric indicated that the instantaneous trip on the main breaker was set to trip faster than the sub - breaker for the #4 pump motor. This resulted in the breaker coordination issue that caused the main breaker to trip as well as the pump motor breaker. This is being addressed currently with a breaker coordination study being performed by Thorna Electric. The study was approved b the Board on March 2, 2011 (enclosed in Appendix I.d.. It is anticipated that the study will be completed by the end of ,June 2011. Enclosed in Appendix 1.d., are the motor teardo rn reports from Perry Electric indicating the presence of grater in the motor housing of influent pump motor #4 causing a short in the grindings. Three other influent pump motors including a spare motor had moisture in them as well* One pump motor #3 was not affected and was run later in the day. During the response to the overflow, a maintenance contractor that was on site tested the motor c onductors via megger to determine if the conductors had failed. The reggers indicated than the conductors were serviceable and not damaged by the floodwater. Backup documentation regarding this is also Agenda Item II.a. Page 53 included In Appendix 1A New conductors were also installed and connected to all four pump motors in the evening of December 19, 2010 as a precaution. 'age The original installation date and any subsequent rebuild dates of the treatment plant influent pumps, including design and construction standards specifications, and recommended operations and maintenance procedures by the manufacturer. Response; The original installation and rebuild dates of the pumps are as follows: Influent Pump #1 — 1965 Influent Pump #2 rt- 1965 Influent Pump #3 — 1979 Influent Pump #4 —1991 Design and construction standards and plans associated with the installation projects are enclosed In Appendix 1.e. as well as operations and maintenance procedures. t'. Documentation discussing any planned or proposed capital or O&M projects for the head works facility and/or ancillary equipment, such as but not limited to any upgrades such as pump /motor rebuilds, electrical system and /or equipment upgrades, etc, 1'nluding any proposed budgets generated for consideration of any upgrades since year 2000. Response: As included in Appendix 1.f, since 2000 the following projects have been identified in the annual budgets for the 1'--ieadw rl s: FY-02/03 Influent Pumps VFD upgrade $15,000 — Completed FY-04105 Influent Line to Pumping Plant Design and Replacement $45,000 — I n itiated Standby Generator upgrade $280,000 — Initiated Electrical System upgrade $200,000 — Initiated Emergency Influent Bypass Pump 100,000 — Initiated FY 05/05 Influent Flood Wall Replacement $118,309 — Initiated Influent Pump Gate Valve $5,000 — Initiated Influent Lire Replacement $45,000 — Carry Over Emergency Influent Bypass Pump $135,000 — In Fabrication Standby Generator upgrade $308,000 — Garay Over Electrical System Upgrade $200,000 — Garay Over FY 06!07 Electrical System Upgrade $260,000 — Garay Over Influent Flood Wall Replacement $220,000 — In Design Emergency Influent Bypass Pump $140,000 — In Fabrication Standby Generator Upgrade $308,000 — In Construction Influent Line Replacement $4250,000 — Garay over and combine projects FY 07/08 Emergency Influent Bypass Pump $140,000 — Project Completed Influent Flood Wall Replacement $10,000 — Project Completed Agenda Item 11.a. Page 54 Page► Influent Line Upgrade $260,000 — Combination of Splitter Box Valve project and influent line upgrade — Initiated and became part of the FY 09/1 o "1 nfl u en t Pumps Gate and Dheck Valves" Influent Pump Room m Exhaust Fan $7,000 — Initiated Electrical System Upgrade $250,000 — Carry Over Standby Generator Upgrade $10,000 — Project Completed FY 08/00 Influent Pumps Gate and Check Valves $261 ,000 — Carry Over Influent Pump Room Exhaust Fan $7,500 — In Design Electrical System Upgrade $285,000 -- Carry O ver FY 09/10 Influent Pump Room Exhaust Fan $ , coo — Completed Influent Pumps Gate and Check Valves $244,000, Phase I completed, Phase II Completed, design of Phase III — In progress Electrical System Upgrade $425, 000 — In Design FY 10/11 Influent Pumps Gate and Check Valves $416,000 — Scope increased; addition of sliplining. Electrical System Upgrade $500,000 — In Design . Recommended mmended operations and maintenance procedures supplied by the manufacturer for the influent pump motor variable frequency drives (VFDs), circuit breakers and other associated electrical equipment, including documentation for the upstream power supply and associated circuit breaker that provides electrical power for all four VFD knits. Response: Please find enclosed in Appendix 1.g. the following information: • Main head works breaker and sub breaker • Influent Pump Motors • Influent Pump VFDs O&M Manual Toshiba and Baldor • Headworks single line diagram h. Historical maintenance records for the past three years for any wort performed on the influent pump motor VFDs, circuit breakers and other associated electrical equipment, including any maintenance records for the upstream power supply and associated circuit breaker that provides electrical power for all four VFD units. Res Please find enclosed in Appendix 1.h. the following information: • Annual Maintenance Records for the Motor Control Center • Semi Annual Maintenance Records for the Influent Pumps and Motor i. Copies of the Dischargees annual operating/fiscal year budget report (discussion of main budget items for proposed projects) since year 2000. Response: nse: Please find enclosed in Appendix 1.i. the following information: • The District budgets for Fiscal Year 2000/ 2001 through Agenda Item II.a. Page 55 2010/2011. Included in each budget is a list of Major Budget items and their corresponding descriptions. 2. Discharger's Response to the Unauthorized Discharge of Untreated Sewage: Page 8 a. A detailed chronological description of all actions taken by the Discharger t o terminate the discharge, divert sewage flows from the headw rks including any bypass, and mitigate the impacts from the discharge. The narrative description must include an evaluation of the results of these actions. Response: Please find enclosed in Appendix 2.a. the timeline and narrative of how the discharge was terminated. It is important to note that the response to the unauthorized discharge was hampered by the evacuation order given by the County of San Luis Obispo due to the potential of the Arroyo Grande Creels levee failing behind the plant coupled with severe flooding in the surrounding area, as well as within the plant. Floodwaters of up to two to three feet cove red a number of manholes that were potentially spilling. As a result, it was not possible to stop or contain the spilling of wastewater in some locations outside the plant. The sludge drying beds and biosolids storage area within the plant were used to contain untreated influent spilling within the plant and to contain rain water and flooding entering the plant from the neighboring street and Oc eano Airport to the greatest extent possible. It is also important to note that all water processed through the plant met permit requirements. The milestones of the response were the following with the discharge terminated incrementally over the course of 11-1/2 hours with all discharge terminated by :00 on December 1 g, 2010. • 10:35 est — The diesel influent pump was started but was not pumping due to a closed discharge block valve. 16.50 est — The pump block valve was partially opened, and the pump was pumping 2.8 MGD. 11:60 est — The SSO begins. 11:30 est — Pumping began to the drying beds and biosolids storage area. 14:30 est — The diesel pump block valve was open completed, and the pump was pumping 5.2 MGD. 18:06 ,-- The supplemental diesel pump from Pismo Beach was operational with both pumps collectively pumping 6.3 MGD. 20&20 The #3 influent pump is started, and with the two diesel pumps, the collective pumped flow is 8.64 MGD. 22:00 — The SSO from all manholes Is stopped. Included in the narrative is an evaluation of the results of these actions. In Agenda Item 11.a. Page 56 Pagel summary, the diesel pump is rated to pump the influent flows that the plant encountered on December 19, 2010. The deficiencies include not having the pump discharge valve locked open and not being able to operate the diesel pump at its maximum design speed. If the pump discharge valve was open and the pump operated at design speed, the probability of a sewer overflow would have been very low. b. A copy of the Discharger*s approved and certified Sanitary Sewer Management Plan (SSMP), including evidence of DischargeFls Board approval, prepared in accordance with the SSSWDF s. Please describe how the procedures detailed in the Discharger's Overflow Emergency Response a Plan were implemented during the mitigation and response activities associated with the SSo event, including any suggested changes planned to Improve the plan as a result of the 12/19/2010 SSO event. Response: Please find enclosed in Appendix .b. a copy of the District's SSMP, which was approved by the Board of Directors on July 15, 2009. The District recently reprised the SSMP to reflect staffing changes and incorporate lessons learned from the SSO event. Revision ion 1 of the District's SSMP is also included. The estimated stark time of the SSO event was 1 1:00 AM. Notifications by District staff of the required agencies RWQC , County Health, DalE 1A, etc.) were made in accordance with the SSMP, and despite the error in the SSMP, which stated the notification must be made within 24 hours (this has been corrected in Revision ion 1 ), the required notifications were made within the two 2 hour timeframe mandated by Order Igo. WQ 2008 - 0002 -EXEC. The District's OERP called for District staff to secure the area and post warning signs. At approximately 1 7:00, District staff went out and marked potential SS locations with traffic cones and written information regarding the SSO and the need for the Public to avoid contact with floodwater in the area. A photo of one of the warning sign posted on December 19, 2010 is included in Appendix 2.b. The OERP additionally called for the District to spread lime over the affected area and clean up dirt for disposal offsite. This plan was implemented with chlorine, but only on the one area identified by District staff as having an odor and risible material to clean up. The flooding that occurred during the SSO took the 'majority of the spilled sewage through the Oc eano Lagoon to the mouth of Arroyo Grande Creek and, ultimately, to the Pacific Ocean at Oceano State Beach, leaving normal flood related debris and no odor at the beach. After the floodwaters receded and it was deemed safe, District staff cleaned and disinfected the area around manhole G13-115, which is located on l for wing Drive near Meadow Lagoon, on December 20, 2011 and again on December 28, 2010. Enclosed in Appendix 2.b, is a list of changes that were recommended based upon our review of the response to the SSO event. These changes are included in the reprised OERP, which is also enclosed as part of Revision ion 1 of the SSMP. . A detaile d description of the final corrective actions, including are update of the status of the final repair, documentation of associated costs involved Agenda Item II.a. Page 57 Page 10 Response: As part of the report submitted on January 3 2011 a list of corrective actions were included. These corrective actions are enclosed in Appendix 2.c. A total of 20 corrective actions were identified. The task list that identifies 20 items is attached. To date 10 have been or will be completed within a month. The remaining 10 are in process with some to be completed as early as this summer. The costs associated or anticipated to complete the actions are included where appropriate. d. A detailed description of the Dischar per's Sewer Reserve Fund including the Discharger's criteria for utilization of that fund for emergency projects, and an annual accounting of the monies available in than reserve from 2008 to the present, Response: The District does not specifically identify a sewer reserve fund, but rather since it is a Sanitation District, all fund balances not specifically budgeted are considered reserve funds. (inclosed in Appendix 2.d. are the fund balances for the District. . A diagram of the affected lagoons and creel, Pismo State Beach, and the Pacific ocean showing the areas of these waters that were closed or restricted to the public as a result of the untreated sewage discharge, including the dates these areas were closed to public use and communication logs informartion with state and local regulatory agencies., Response: Please find enclosed in Appendix 2.e. a diagram of the affected water bodies as well as where and when they were closed. Given the storm conditions at the time, public access to the beach was restricted by the State Parks depar and access to the Meadow Creek lagoon was not possible due to the fact it had flooded its banks and inundated the surrounding neighborhoods. In fact, we understand that the San Luis Obispo County Sherriff was considering evacuating the neighborhoods due to the imminent threat of failure of the Arroyo Grande Creek levee. The information associated with communication to the state and local regulatory agencies includes the following: 11:40 Grover Beach lire Dept, Capt. Searb y notified 11: SLO Co. Sheriffs Dept Dispatch notified 11. Office of Emergency Services, Patricia Reynolds lds notified 12:00 CAL -E A notified, Certification #10 -7627 12:15 Ca. Dept. of Fish and Game notified left message 12:20 Regional Water Quality Control Board notified left message f. Copies of any field response documents during and/or after the SSo event, including site photos, interview notes and information related to sewer backups into structures. Response: Included in Appendix 2.f. are field notes taken by ,John Wallace and Torn Zehnder on the state of event, the plant logs for December 18-20, and interviews conducted with plant staff in the days following the event. In addition, enclosed are interviews and phone logs of contact with the general public. Agenda Item II.a. Page 58 3. Monitoring and Analysis of the Unauthorized Discharge of untreated Sewage: Page I I , A description of all water quality sampling activities conducted by the Discharger or other agencies associated with the sewage spill, analytical results, and an evaluation of the results. Response: The District did not conduct additional water quality sampling activities immediately following the SSO due to the San Luis Obispo SL County Flood Advisory issued on December 20, 2010. As stated in the District's SSIP under section 6.12, the District utilized the SLO County Environmental Health EH Department for the service o f water quality monitoring after the SS. SLO County EH conducts weekly ocean sampling at the Oceano State Beach at sampling stations OC B11, OCB 1 , and OCB 1 , which are located 571 yards south of Pier Ave., at the end of Pier Ave., and 350 yards north of Pier Ave., respectively. On December 2, 2010, the County issued a Flood Advisory for all of the beaches in its jurisdiction, and, therefore, did not sample at Oceano State Beach the week of the December 19, 2010 due to safety precautions and the need to avoid dangerously high surf. The County also posted signs warning the public of the sewage spill and rain advisory at all main beach entrances and on all beach advisory boards. The weekly ocean sampling schedule was reinstated the next week when SLO County EH conducted their next scheduled sampling event on December 28, 2010. SLO County EH monitors for total coliform, fecal c lif rm, and enteroco ous which are the same pollutants the District is required to monitor for under NPDES Permit No. CA0048003, Order No. R3-9009-0046. The single sample maximum limits for these three pollutants are the same for SLO County EH and the District. These Deceiving Water limits are derived from the California Ocean Plan and are given in the following table; Pollutant Single sample Maximum Limit Total Coliforrn 10,000 per 100 ml Fecal Coliform 400 per 100 ml Enterococcus 104 per 100 ml An evaluation of the results from SLO County PH's December 28, 2011 monitoring is show below: Agenda Item 11.a. Page 59 Nee 1 SLO Environmental Health Oceano state Beach Water Quality Monitoring Results December 28, 2010 Monitorin . Mon Total Coliforrr► f=ecal Coliforn� �nterococc�s Results Within ( MPN/1 00 Receiving g L MP/1 001 l (MPN/100 m rrrl ) Water limit (Yes/No C B 1 1 1 720 10 10 `des O CB12 2247 20 31 `des O CB13 2247 31 42 `des *MPN: Most Probable Number Upon return and evaluation of the water quality results, SLO County EH lifted the beach advi on December 29, 2010. During this time, all plant effluent was monitored in accordance with the District 1PDES Permit. No violations of effluent limits occurred on December 19, 2010 or for the remainder of the month of December. b. A description of the Discharger's accelerated or additional monitoring provisions developed as part of the Overflow Emergency response Plan in the Discharger's SSMP {section 6.f). Response: The District did not conduct additional effluent monitoring under the NPDES Permit as the WVVTP was operating normally once it began to receive raver influent. As stated in section 3 .a. above, San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health conducted water quality monitoring and results were within the Receiving wing Water limits. Please find attached the updated Overflow Emergency Response Plan ERP) in Appendix .b. The OERP was updated as a result of lessons learned during the SS O. . A detailed location map for any subsequent water quality sampling and reference points. Response: Please find attached in Appendix 3.c. the location neap. d. Historical records (past three years) of the influent quality received by the Discharger's wastewater treatment plant for the following: 1) conventional pollutants - total suspended solids, settleable solids, turbidity, oil and grease, pH and fecal conform bacteria and toxic pollutants (see gable 6 of I PDES Permit No, CA00 600 , Order No. R3 Response: i PD S Permit i o.CA00 600 , Order I o.F - 2009 -0046, requires the District to perform influent monitoring for the following pollutants: I. Total Suspended Solids (TSS) - weekly 2. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) - weekly 3. Settleable Solids (S5) - monthly Please find the 2006 2009, 2010, and January through April 2011 influent Agenda Item II.a. Page 60 monitoring results for TSB and SS enclosed in Appendix 3A Page 1 The District is not required by NP ES Permit No.CA0048003, Order Flo. R3-2009- 0046, to sample influent for tonic pollutants. As a result, this technical report does not contain the requested influent monitoring results for these pollutants. 4. Impacts of the Unauthorized Discharge of Untreated Sewage. An assessment of the potential short- and long -term Impacts of the discharge on public health, animal and plant communities (including sensitive and /or endangered species), and on the overall ecosystem downstream of the discharge. The assessment must include: Response: We have contacted Douglas I ischbieter with the Mate Water Quality Control Board. Nor. Iischbieter prepared a monitoring report entitled Lower Arroyo Grande Creek and La_ n Fishery and A Luatio Resources Summary ..2006 M nitorrn lie ort attached in Armendix 4, a . This is the only assessment of the ecosystem that has been prepared that we are aware of based upon our research. Mr. I ischbieter is on vacation for the month of May. We have contacted him aria phone and email (attached in Appendix .a. ) and seek to contract with him to complete an additional assessment related to the discharge. If Mr. Iichbreter is not available to complete an additional assessment, we will contact another qualified consultant. i, A summary of all threatened and endangered species located downstream of the spill site within or adjacent to Arroyo Grande creek on strand Way, ooeano lagoon along Maul Circle, Aloha Place, Pismo Mate Beach and the Pacific ocean. Response. Based upon a review of Mr. I ischbieter's report, the lower Arroyo Grande Creek may contain the following threatened and endangered species: Tidewater Goby and Bteelhead Trout. Based upon a review of the Arroyo Grande Creek Channel Waterway Management Program AGWMP Environmental Impact Report (EIR sections 4.3.1.5-7 included in Appendix ra. the following special status wildlife species were identified that potentially could be present in the Arroyo Grande Creek Channel: • Tidewater Goby • steelhead Trout • California red legged frog Coast range newt Southwestern pond turtle Coast horned lizard Two- striped garter snake 0 Cooper's hawk 0 sharp - shinned hark e Western yellow- billed cuckoo e Yellow warbler o White tailed kite 0 Purple martin 0 Least bell's vireo 0 Southwestern willow flycatcher 0 Pallid bat 0 Townsend "s big -eared hat Agenda Item 11.a. Page 61 Page ] • other nesting birds and roosting birds ii. A description of all observations and sampling activities conducted by or on behalf of the Discharger associated with potential short -tenn and long -term impacts to human health, vegetation and wildlife from the spill and an evaluation of these limpa ts_ F p ns : We have voluntarily initiated and completed two sampling events of the Meadow Creek Lagoon and mouth of Arroyo Grande Creek and have enclosed the results and sampling locations in Appendix 4.a.11. We will complete further sampling as recommended by Cllr. I is hbieter. b. This assessment must be prepared by a technical professional qualified to evaluate the short and long term impacts of the discharge on ecological receptors. Response: It is our intent to contract with Cllr_ l is hbieter, given his background and prior research, or other qualified professional if Mr. I ws hbieter is not available. . A detailed discussion of the Dis harger's efforts to date to obtain the necessary permits, develop mitigation plans, and restore any environmental impacts as a result of the untreated sewage discharge. This discussion shall include any correspondence or applications submitted to other res ur elregulat ry agencies. Response: To date no environmental impacts have been identified and, as a result, no permits, mitigation plans or restoration of environmental impacts has occurred. Based upon the findings of Mr. Rischbieter, the District will address any identified environmental impacts moving forward. In the meantime, the County Flood Control District and Public Works s Department recommended various actions pertaining to the operation of Arroyo Grande Creek flap gates and the Oceano Lagoon area. These efforts are more drainage related, but they also impact our plans for future operations of the District's trunk sewer system and flood improvements to the plant. We will continue to work with the County and other resource agencies to alleviate flooding conditions in the area and to continue to improve coordination efforts with agencies and residents alike. Agenda Item II.a. Page 62 6. Additional information Page 1 Completion of attached Collection System Questionnaire (both in hard copy and electronic Microsoft word format - E3oard staff will send electronic questionnaire via email). Response: The District completed the Collection System Questionnaire ( Questionnaire) and attached the Questionnaire and the supporting documents requested in Part 2 Section 1 of the Questionnaire in Appendix 5-a. The Questionnaire is currently in draft format and under review by the State Water Resources Control Board. The District completed the Questionnaire in its entirety as it was written and revised on April 5, 2011. b. Copies of collection system service calls records, logs of complaints received from service area customers, and maintenance records (including any invoices received by outside contractors conducting maintenance, cleaning, and /or repairs) over the past 24 months. Response (Call Records): The Cities of Grover Beach, Arroyo Grande, and the ceano Community Services District Member Agencies) each retain individual ownership and direct responsibility for wastewater collection within their respective community boundaries. The District owns a large diameter trunk sewer system to transport the Wastewater collected within each of the Member Agencies to the treatment plant. With the Member Agencies each retaining ownership and responsibilities for wastewater collection within their respective boundaries the District does not receive many calls from public members directly. While there are a limited number of service laterals connected directly to the District's trunk system throughout the system, the District is not immediately aware of receiving any service cards or complaints specific to the trunk system over the last 24 months other than those provided in Appendix .b. Of those provided in Appendix ,b., one 1 is related to financial assistance for flood related damages on December 19, 2010, one 1 is related to sewage backing up into a home on the Grover Beach collection system, two were calls from the front gate telephone reporting released flood waters resulting from culvert work completed by Caltrans that followed the same drainage path through the ceano Airport adjacent to the treatment plant, as during the December 19, 201 rain event, one 1 was related to a housing assistance request after a home was evacuated by the Sheriff in Oceano as a result of flooding, and one 1 was related to a call from the Fire Department on behalf of a resident than wanted to know more about events on December 19, 2010 at the treatment plant. Response Maintenance Records): Please find enclosed copies in Appendix 5.b. of maintenance records for the District Trunk Line over the past 6 years (including invoices received by outside contractors conducting maintenance, cleaning, and /or repairs). Please note that the Investigative Order inciuded with the Water Beard's NOV only required such records over the prior 24 month period. Ho wever, we feet it more appropriate to provide such records over the prior 6 year period in order to be more consistent with the requirements and frequencies defined within Element Agenda Item 11.a. Page 63 Page 1 (Operations and Maintenance) of the District's approved SSMP, and to more effectively demonstrate the level of due diligence provided by the District with respect to fiscal and economic responsibility of owning and maintaining a large diameter trunk system. Section 4 of our approved SSMP defines among other things, our regulatory requirements for providing: resource and budget, mapping, preventative maintenance, inspection, cleaning, system assessment, short and long terra rehabilitation, and replacement to the Trunk Line system. For your convenience the maintenance records provided in Appendix _b. are categorized into the following areas: 1 Video Inspection, Assessment Cleaning, Hot Spot Assessment and Maintenance, and Rehabilitation and Repair, and are discussed in detail in the following paragraphs. At the beginning of the section we have provided a District Trunk Line map to assist in locating the areas to which work has been performed. Video Inspection: During the past 5 years, the District Trunk Line has been video inspected in its entirety. Currently the frequency stated within Section 4 of the District's approved SSMP is once every 6 years. Pith each inspection, the District has received narrated color videos and detailed written fogs of the existing conditions found at the time of inspection. Upon receipt of the of the videos and written inspection logs, District Engineering Staff has performed subsequent review and assessment, documenting the general condition of the pipe and rioting any system deficiencies and /or abnormalities for consideration in future rehabilitation and replacement projects, The following table identifies the frequencies and locations of video inspection occurring within the District Trunk Line over the prior 5 year period. Agenda Item II.a. Page 64 Upper Sewer Farm September 19, 2007 2007 Trunk System 3 ft Bal eman Lane Staff (Manhole B -1 2a to o. rani) Report to the Board B22 Grover Beach Trunk December 5, 2007 2007 Lire 11 $ 0 0 ft Grover Beach Staff (Manhole GB -1 to GB- .1 rani) Report to the Board 4 South Side Trunk May 21, 2008 gunk 2008 System 20 ft Line Video Inspection ( Manhole A- I to C- i Staff Report to the Board Lower Sewer Farm May 21, 2008 Trunk Trunk System 5 ft Line Video Inspection ( Manhole A -9a to B- 1.0 mi Staff Report to the 12b) Board Agenda Item II.a. Page 64 Page 1 In addition to the times identified above, the system was also video inspected in January 200 4, following the San Simeon Earthquake occurring December 2003. Please note that the majority of the Inspections listed above were completed immediately following issuance of the State Water Resource Control Board Order No. 2006 -0003, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewers and prior to the mandated time for implementation of Phase 11 video inspection requirements. While reviewing the May 21, 2008 Trunk Line Inspection Staff Report for video inspection completed in 200 8, you will find the overall objective to be: Satisfy the requirement of State Water er Resources Control Board Order No. 2006 -0003, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewers, which requires owners and operators of sanitary sewer systems greater than one mile in length to perform regular visual and TIC inspection of the manholes and sewer pipes as well as develop a system for ranking their condition and for scheduling needed rehabilitation of any noted abnormalities andor deficiencies. 2 To follo w through with recommendation made to the Board by District Staff in the staff report dated September 19, 2007, entitled Bakeman Lane Trunk Line Analysis update. Those recommendations included the need for further video inspection of the remaining Trunk System prior to initiating rehabilitation of the deficiencies noted in the area of Bakeman Lane Trunk Line. Within the Recommendation section of the same staff report you will also find: Upon conclusion of the work, District Staff will perform an Engineer's Assessment of the results. This assessment will aid in developing a rehabilitation and replacement plan to identify and prioritize system deficiencies and implement short-term and long -term rehaabilitedon actions to address each deficiency. In general video inspection of the District Trunk has identified that the system is in overall good condition. various short- terra and long -term rehabilitation items were identified as discussed in the following categories, previously defined. Assessment As mentioned previously within this section, upon receipt of the narrated color videos and detailed written logs District Staff performs assessment of the existing conditions. For your convenience and revie w, a copy of a recent Power Point presentation prepared for the SSLCSD District Board detailing the findings and assessment of prior video inspection has been included within Appendix 5.b. These types of assessments assist the District in determining future budget requirements Agenda Item II.a. Page 65 Cherry Ave. Trunk May 27, 2008 Trunk 2008 System 4830 ft Line Video Inspection (Manhole C -50 to C -71) (0.9 mi) Staff Report to the Board In addition to the times identified above, the system was also video inspected in January 200 4, following the San Simeon Earthquake occurring December 2003. Please note that the majority of the Inspections listed above were completed immediately following issuance of the State Water Resource Control Board Order No. 2006 -0003, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewers and prior to the mandated time for implementation of Phase 11 video inspection requirements. While reviewing the May 21, 2008 Trunk Line Inspection Staff Report for video inspection completed in 200 8, you will find the overall objective to be: Satisfy the requirement of State Water er Resources Control Board Order No. 2006 -0003, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewers, which requires owners and operators of sanitary sewer systems greater than one mile in length to perform regular visual and TIC inspection of the manholes and sewer pipes as well as develop a system for ranking their condition and for scheduling needed rehabilitation of any noted abnormalities andor deficiencies. 2 To follo w through with recommendation made to the Board by District Staff in the staff report dated September 19, 2007, entitled Bakeman Lane Trunk Line Analysis update. Those recommendations included the need for further video inspection of the remaining Trunk System prior to initiating rehabilitation of the deficiencies noted in the area of Bakeman Lane Trunk Line. Within the Recommendation section of the same staff report you will also find: Upon conclusion of the work, District Staff will perform an Engineer's Assessment of the results. This assessment will aid in developing a rehabilitation and replacement plan to identify and prioritize system deficiencies and implement short-term and long -term rehaabilitedon actions to address each deficiency. In general video inspection of the District Trunk has identified that the system is in overall good condition. various short- terra and long -term rehabilitation items were identified as discussed in the following categories, previously defined. Assessment As mentioned previously within this section, upon receipt of the narrated color videos and detailed written logs District Staff performs assessment of the existing conditions. For your convenience and revie w, a copy of a recent Power Point presentation prepared for the SSLCSD District Board detailing the findings and assessment of prior video inspection has been included within Appendix 5.b. These types of assessments assist the District in determining future budget requirements Agenda Item II.a. Page 65 for necessary repair and rehabilitation. Page 1 Through recent video inspection the District has been able to identify and repair /rehabilitate numerous manhole locations found to be paved below asphalt, locate severer hotspots consisting of root penetrations and grease accumulations requiring more frequent cleaning frequencies, locate and remove debris causing potential flow restrictions, become more akin to actual cleaning requirements based on observation, and identify finer deficiencies which may lead to long -term degradation of the concrete pipe. Cleanin Within Appendix 5.b. please find a copy of the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Trunk Server System Inspection and Cleaning Zone Frequency map. The map identifies the trunk server cleaning frequency and provides visual reference to the section included in each phase. Budget estimates were prepared in 2009 and considered for future fiscal year budget allocation under the Trunk Line Operations and Maintenance Budget. As stipulated within Section 4 of the approved District SSIl P, cleaning occurs at recurring 3 year intervals, with the entire system being cleaned every 6 years. Currently Phase 1 cleaning is due by 2012. The District has yet to implement system -ride cleaning since approving the final District SSIl P. The District does recognize that the hydraulic scour c aused by the high -flow trunk system requires different consideration than smaller diameter municipal lines when determining cleaning frequencies and may change the frequency in the future to match the needs of that which is observed through video inspection observation and actual debris removal quantities during future cleanings. Historical records of prior cleaning efforts occurring in years 2007 -2009 are included In Appendix 5.b. under the Cleaning heading as well as the Htot heading. Hot r) t By proactively providing the video inspection services previously mentioned, the District has become aware of various trunk segments, which have become classified as system "hotspots ", placing these locations on an increased cleaning and observation frequency. Identifying these locations has allowed the District to retain the professional services of outside vendors to address the concerns caused by these hotspot. Please find in Appendix .b. a memorandum darted August 1 2009 entitled Evaluation and Maintenance a of SSLO SD Trunk Lure "hot Spots" between C-56 and C-50. This memorandum provides the details of the primary hotspot located on the trunk system and includes historical and photographic record of the actions taken by the District to remedy the deficiencies noted at this location. Additionally, please find signed purchase orders to the City of Arroyo Grande public Works and Mainline Utility Company darted September 1, 2009 and October 11, 2010 for ongoing work associated with system cleaning, de- rooting, and video inspection services . Agenda Item 11.a. Page 66 Page 1 One additional hotspot is located at between Manhole C and D - 71. This location consists of a steel pipe bridge passing over the Arroyo Grande Creel. The pipe bridge was constructed in 1965 as part of the original collection system during construction of the Waste Water Treatment Plant in O ceano. The 146 ft long Pipe Bridge crosses the Arroyo Grande just east of the grillage between Nelson Street and Bast Branch Street in Arroyo Grande. The bridge is constructed of - and -in standard lap welded wrought steel pipe members in a triangular truss configuration which in turn supports an 1 -inn diameter steel sewer pipe which is integral to the bridge superstructure. Do cumentation describ the Di strict's efforts to ma this structure are included in Appendix S.b. under the Hotspots heading. Rehabilitation and Repair Do cuments suppo rting the District's recent e ff ort s to date to re habilitate and re pair the District trunk sewer are provided in Appendix 5.b. under the heading of Rehabilitation and Repair. As discussed preciously, these deficiencies were noted during prior video inspection within the District trunk severer. Primarily the repairs and rehabilitation have consisted of locating and raising manhole previously paved over or non - identified, recoating of manhole interiors ( see Staff R T District Board dated December 6, 2007 under the heading of Video Inspection in Appendix 5.b.), and design consideration and implementation for the relining of asbestos cement pipe within the District trunk sewer. c. Any other pertinent information that will assist the state Water Board state in eva!ti ing the n ti,r , clor r��x rfr� � t mt, d r vi� f t � tintre- t s ewage di scharge* Response: ponse: Gi ren that the SSO occurred during a major storm event that threatened to cause the Arroyo Grande c reek levee, which runs adjacent to the plant, to overtop and fail, as well as flooding of the plant and surrounding neighborhood when the Meadow Creel lagoon overflowed, it is difficult to definitively calculate the actual volume of influent that was spilled and its dilution with the very large flows from the upstream watershed. This is compounded by the fact that the influent meter was flooded, which prevents calculating the flows entering the plant. To better understand the nature of the events surrounding the SS O, the following information is enclosed in Appendix .c.: Spill Report Sent to CRWQCB The District sent the California Regional Water Q uality Control Board, Central Coast Region, a spill report in response to the December 19 2010 spill, as required by the Standard Provisions attached to the District's Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) Order No. R3-2009-0046. The spill report contains the following information: 1 , A chronological description and tuning of events that lead up to and followed the December 19 g'l sewage spill event- Staffing levels at the District's wastewater treatment plant VIIVVTP and actions taken between the morning o December 18, 2010 and the time the WW P was fully operational and in compliance with the VD R; Agenda Item 11.a. Page 67 3 _ All available wastewater flog data (influent and effluent) for this time period; 4. An estimate of the sewage spill volume and duration; and Page 5. A summary ► of proposed actions, upgrades, repairs, etc. required to protect the header ors influent pump station from future failures as a result of flooding. • ceano Flood Photographs The photographs enclosed in Appendix 5.c- compare the status of sites in ceano during and after the flooding, in order to illustrate the extent to which the floodwater affected the public and the District on December 19, 2010. • San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors Emergency Proclamation O December 28, 2010, the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors held an emergency meeting and approved extending the emergency Proclamation 14 more days. The emergency proclamation had been in effect since December 21, 201 , and was originally scheduled to rd t pry on December 28, 2010. Enclosed in Appendix _c. are the Meeting Minutes, which recorded this Board decision. The emergency proclamation given on December 21, 2010 is also enclosed in Appendix 5 .c. • Member Agency and District PowerPoint Presentations and Meeting Minute District Staff presented PowerPoint presentations discussing the events which occurred December 19, 2010 at each of the Member Agencies' City Council meetings and to the District Board of Directors meeting. The PowerPoint presentations, each Member Agencies' Meeting Minutes, and the Board of Directors Meeting Minutes from the meeting at which the PowerPoint presentations were made are enclosed in Appendix 5.c. * San Luis Obispo County Community Meeting San Luis Obispo County and approximately ten other resource agencies, including the District, held a Community Meeting in Oceano in order to receive further public comment on the flooding, which occurred on December 19 2010. The invitation the District received for the event, a newspaper article discussing the Community Meeting, the PowerPoints presented by the County and the District, and photographs of the event are enclosed in Appendix 5.c. SSL CSD also provided attendees a tape home flyer, which discusses SSL CSD's role and function in the community, and included the flyer in Appendix 5.c. SLO County Board of Supervisors " ceano Community Drainage and Flooding Issues F eport On May 24, 2011, San Luis Obispo County's Utilities Director submitted a Report, which discussed and evaluated the Oceano Community drainage and flooding events and issues than occurred in December 2010 and continue to be addressed, to the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors. The District Administer provided testimony at this hearing. The Report and May 24, 2011 County Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes are enclosed in Appendix 5.c. • OCSD Board of Supervisors NOV Response a Presentation Agenda Item II.a. Page 68 Page 21 District Staff presented a P werP int presentation at the Oceano Community Services District Board o f Supervisors meeting regarding the December 19, 2010 spill and the Notice of Violation the State Water Resources Control Board required in response to the event. A copy of the presentation is enclosed in Appendix Sx. End of responses Agenda Item II.a. Page 69 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Agenda Item II.a. Page 70 PAR >0 NV FiP RATED Ax y 10, 1911 C %,4 d q SOZ MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ,JUNE 14 2011 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 8.g. — LETTER T CPUC REGARDING SMARTIII'IETER PROGRAM DATE: ,JUNE 1, 2011 Attached is correspondence received today r rdin Item 8. relating to the SmartMeter Program. : City Attorney City Clerk G Cif From: allinda930@netzero.com Sent: Tuesday, June 1 4, g1 '1 3:14 P1 To: AG City object: SmartM t r Agenda Item 6/14/11 ttachment ; Arroyo grande City oun il.d ; OPPOSITION TO WIRELESS SMART METERS.doc Dear City Council Members, Thank you for taking the time to read the attached in related to smartmeters . I will also be forwarding are email I received a friend of nine April 8th: a picture taken in the Bair area Larch 19th and another taken 3 weeps later (April - -F a healthy bush that died after 18e smartmeters were installed. Linda Ikeda Get Free Email with Video bail & Video Chat! http://www.netzero.net/ I To: Arroyo Grande City Council agcity a�arroyogrande.org From: Linda Ikeda Date: 6/14/11 SmarrtM t r — Agenda 6/14/11 Please enact an urgent ordinance banning the installation of wireless SmartM t rs for 1 year in the city of Arroyo rand . They are not safe. We need to keep our analog rasters with an extras fee. I am one o f the 3% of people (according to the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance acrd, the federal ar n y than administers the American with Disabilities Act.) se verely sensitive to wireless and dirty electricity, result of overexposure and a head injury Au 2005. People than study this, like Magda dar Navas from Canada, says than up t o 50% may be hyper sensitive mardarharvar.r /tarp /multiple - sclerosis. Manny do not make the connection between their symptoms and pulsed high frequencies in the air girl o r on the wiring as produced by wireless SmarrtM t r . In Europe, 30,000 doctors signed the Friburr Appal observing the connection in their patients to pulsed high frequencies and the many health problems than resolve or improve when removed from than environment. NMI The heard injury I had, occurred wh I was on the phone and DSL, was activated for high speed int rn t. Apparently the filters w not functioning properly and I felt ar strong heating come through the phone's receiver. From than moment on, it felt like I had had ar bad burn inside my heard, from my ears across through my sinuses to the other side of my head. Thereafter, cell phones o n standby 50 feet away caused piercing ear pain. A television turned on 40 feet away caused rapid heartbeat f ll ow d by such severe weakness I felt like I was dying. fly allergies wr severely w plus 3 of ar page of other s ymptoms. Before this injury, I did not make the connection that my disability had anythin to do with high frequencies from my cordless phone o on my electricity, etc. often was so weak, it was hard to walk. After the injury, all I wanted to do is find something non-pharmaceutical to relieve the pain in my head. I tried various products. To my surprise, some of the products than reduced the pain in my head immediately caused the weakness to vanish! l did not expect that and no one told me that than might happ I didn't kn what else to d. I w to the doctor but he was clueless; went to my chiropractor and he produced information about my condition. Finally, someone arranged for my c hiropractor and I to talk with George Carlo, previous head o ONR one of the largest, if not THE largest study n cell phones and their biological effects. H told u what t do and h w the various products I tried worked a t the cellular level 1 was once a cell biology tutor) — use theta and stay away from wireless, etc. When I did that, every health problem I agar had began t disappear. Later, I was told that there was possible nerve damage and that that takes a long time repair. When the SmartMeters were installed in our neighborhood, I had already healed a lot (no piercing ear pain, no err weakness, often unable to feel a cell phone, etc) but was still healing and continue to need residence without wireless. I do not have a SmartM t r. When the Smartmeters care to my neighborhood, I and others a t the sam time, began to h insomnia and other symptoms. One neighbor all of a sudden had a flare up of flbr my l i . I had much increased pressure in ray head where I had had the injury described ab None of us had gotten SmartMeters yet. W didn't know w that about a week before our troubles, SmartMeters had been installed o n the streets nearby. N ow, where do I go to get away from wirel These meters feel very strong and different than other wireless. It turns out that these meters can transmit 1/ mile to er r 2 miles and pulses are exceptionally strong compared to other wireless devices. Some meters are stronger than others. They also produce high frequencies o the wiring called ,�%Mw dirty electricity. Later I tarred to a retired engineer about ]pow strong the pulses felt and how they g o right through shielding materials and he told me about "power density." Cindy Sage, coeditor of the Bi initi ti report study of 30 gears of research o n wireless) said the power density from SmartMeters could be 1000 times stronger than a cell phone http: www. tb y pr .corms/ yr b r - m rtm t r - dangerous - too /Content id= 'I 939740 . Dan Hirsch ( whistleblower for the nuclear industry) using figures from the California Council o n Science and Technology report on health effects from Sm rtM t r determined that they are 100 times stronger mfftyntwrl.r /'gip= 3946). Other people who are sensitive attest to the fact that they are very strong pulses, worse than anything they have felt before. PG&E minimizes the pulse by using instruments that a v e rage the pulse. Others h found strong pulses with their instruments. http: //www. tb y pr .corn yr b /are- m rtm t r -d n r u - t Cunt nt' id = 939740 . And I 's of these exceedingly strong, quarter mile to two-mile signals transmit as often as every couple of seconds to an average f every seconds in a locale from each home. want to leave Atascadero, only to be free from the SmartMeters and the pressure /pain in my sinuses, ears and head, the insomnia, nausea and fatigue that these meters h caused. For me, they have ruined our wonderful c ity. When I go to many areas of San Luis Obispo, the Srn rtMeter discomfort goes awa When 1 come b to Atder, the discomfort returns. Already, PG&E has hurt thousands of people with Srnertl leter (over 2000 health complaints to the California Public Utilities Commission) and they continue to rush deployment. This technology has met with huge public outcry; its safety is clearly questionable. (See emfsafetynetwork.org for health and safety complaints.) Experts warn of a dverse public health and safety impacts. Studies show that wireless and dirty electricity cause ill health and contribute t healthy people becoming sensitive to wireless and other electromagnetic fields produced by computers and other gadgets we enjoy. ( sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?page — id=282) Ma 1, 201'1, The World H a�lth organization declared radio frquencies to be possible carcinogen along with lead and DDT And the utilities want to put three Smrtmeters on each home plus added wirel from the Ho Applian Network with wireless tra nsm itters on washers computers and ether appliances. Even if you thinly this is all safe, the controversy in the scientific arena is enough evidence to wait and NOT N%W allow the installation of a technology not proven safe by independently- funded research! Our communities need to stop Sm rtMeter deployment until they male it safe. Other contentions included violations of the FCC code in certain applications (see sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?page nonprofessionals with two weeks training installing meters, (also an FCC violation) increasing the risk of fires traced back to the meters. We want to Deep our original analog meters with no e charge. For these and numerous other reasons (high bills, privacy, damaged electronics, etc.), please enact an urgent ordinance banning the installation of wireless SmartMeters in Arroyo Grande. Thank you so much for your Consideration in this very important matter. Linde Iked 5000 El V er a no Avenue Atsdero, CA 93422 805-461-0954 3 OPPOSITION TO WIRELESS SMART METERS nfsaf tyn twor . 42 C local governments (Cities and Counties) formally oppose WI smart meters, including San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors (318111) and SLO County Health Commission; 10 have passed ordinances (law) prohibiting the meters. World Health Organization declared radio fr qu u i s (R-F possible carcinogen along with lead and DDT May 31, 2011. RF is elTuitted from Sm artMeters, cordless phones, cell phones, wifi, etc. Sax Francisco Chapter of the Sierra Club opposes wireless smart meters. http:llstopsmartm t rs.org Public Citizen (Ralph leader's consumer advocate organization) has a national campaign exposing that smart meters don't save energy, just profit PE's bottom line. http: . citizen. org /do u-Tn nt En r In st ntFoniTnPr s.pdf public Citizen, AARP, Consumers Union, National Consumer Law Center and the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates www.ncic.org/images/Pdflenergy utility_t l om/additi The Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA), an independent consurner advocacy division of the California Public Utilities Conunission (CPU C), and the C alifornia Small Business Association BA , a non - profit small business advocacy. http:llyuban t. ora/ alifornia/DRA.- and -- BA - Request -R h f- fro -- N ew- l tri -Pricing- theme - That - Will - aus - Disrup -to- 5 00-000-PG-E-Small- - ustoers.php fndiana regulators rejected the meters: The cost outweighs potential benefits to cousumers. http://www.businessweek.cora/magazine/content/10 The Karolinska Institute, Stockholm (Gives the Nobel Prizes) warns against wireless smartmetrs, et .:http:llww .seribd.eom/doe /4 14 4 / arolin ka- Institute- Press - Release The Government Accountability Office (the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress) warns of security risks from ybrattaks - -- hackers being able to remotely shut off power: http:llne wateh.typepad. orEVmedial o1110llsnmrt Teter- security -is -a- growing - on em.htrt l Dan Hirsch, Professor of Nuclear Polley at UC CaLfornia warns that continuous whole body exposure from a smart meter may be 100 times worse than that from cell phones "...a very large experiment on a very large population." enfsafetynetwork.orgl?p =3946. Elihu I Richter Nom, MPH medical epidemiologist from Israel "... we are no longer talking about mere precaution of uncertain risk, but about prevention of highly probable and known risk ...an unethical exercise... it is now fairly certain that there will be widespread adverse public health impacts." http-.//emfsafetynetwork.org/?page EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT AGENCY, are agency of the European Union that advises 32 countries on public policy, is calling for FOR LOWERING EXPOSURE TO ENE Electron agnetie Fields "Waiting for high levels of proof before taking action to prveut well known risks can lead to very high health and economic costs, as it did with asbestos, leaded petrol and smoking." http:ll lossar .en.eea.europa.eu terminology /sitesea.reh?teim - childr +an +ernfr Dr. David Carpenter, Harvard trained NOD who headed up ICY State Dept of Pubh Health 18 yrs & Dean of the School of Public Health at the University at Albany, New York "We have id nc ...th t exposure to radiofrequeney radiation...iner eas the risk of cancer, increases damage to the nervous system, causes eleetrosensitivity, has adverse reproductive effects and a variety of other effects on different organ cyst i . There is no justification for the statement that SmartMet have no adverse health effects." http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?p-3946 emfsafetynetwork.org Top wireless radiation scientists in the world at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco 11 / 18/10): CELL DAMAGE, DNA BREAKS and BREACHES IN THE BLOOD -BRAIN BARRJER (increased ns s of cancer and a him ar from low levels of pulsed RF signal radiation as emitted by Wireless smart meters: VIDEO - http : / /eleutromagnetiehealth.org /electromagnetic - health - log /uu- video/ TRENT rN EUROPE TOWARD NVERED and AWAY A FROM WERELESS TECHNOLOGIES: cmmn/French Government advise against i -fi and French libraries removed wi -fi. Spain removed some cell towers. Fr iburg r Appeal 2002 signed by 3 0, 000 doctors observe correlation of disease and wireless technologies. emfsafetynetwork.org/?p=l 1 Insurance Companies won't insure the health problems from wireless smart meters and do not sacrifice insurance premiums without good reason. TAT MEWS VDD - minutes): http://eon3emfblog.net/?p=382 Wireless smart meters constantly transmit pulsed digital microwave radiation (RF) 24/7, up to 22,500 pulses per day. P G&E minimi the transmitting time stating its only 45 seconds per day, however these pulses are between 2-20 Millisecond bursts. In addition this duty cycle does not include what the Smart Meters are further intended for- wireless data ti ansixiissin for new RF enabled appliances. Cindy Sage, coeditor of The l i initiative Report www. ioinitiativereport.org states that "Wireless smart meters are unique in that they transmit 24/7 without shut off and without relief. Hurn ns can recover from significant adversity and stress, but 24/7 pulsed transmissions from wireless smart meters dominates the sleep time for human recovery, and the pulsed signal radiation from the wireless meters dominates the Mural lo- electronic communications originating in the brain. " http://sagereports.com/smart-meter- rV?page 114ft' URGENT LETTER CAMPAIGN A Public Utilities Commission: public. advisor@a advisor@cpuc.ca.gov 505 Van Mess Avenue, Room2103, San Francisco, CA 94102; or call 1-- 849 -8390 REQUEST To KEEP E39STING ANALOG METER, OR IF ALREADY TAKEN, HAVE IT REPLACED AT PG&E EXPENSE. CUSTOMERS CAN REPORT THEIR ENERGY BY CONTACTING PG&E MONTHLY. PG&E CAN VERIFY USAGE EVERY 6 MoNHTS. Governor Brown: govemor@govemor.ca.gov a.gov Email Senator Blakeslee, Assemblymember Achadiian: Legislature website: http://leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.litTfl SPEAK AT YOUR CITY COUNCIEL MEETINGS AND ASIA OTFIERS To SEND LETTERS! Delay Installation of S rtMeter i Call P E at 877-743-7378 Document the call, the employee name and request they note: "I want to keep or restore) m y analog meter at no costa' Then ask for a confirmation number to be sent to you. If you received a letter from PG&E to install a Smart Meter', also call wellington (the installation company) at 1-866-671-1001. If they have a work order for your location, tell them you don't want a SmartMe ter. 3 -4 business days later, call P E to be sure they received back the work order from wclhn ton. Also, pint signs on electric /gas meters (homemade or downl actable from www. mfsafetyn t work.or AG City From: allinda930@netzero.com Sent: Tu June 1 4, 20 3 Phi T: AG City � ubj t: Fr : photos of shrub in front of 1 martM t r ,,tta hment : TT131381.htm; redwood gardens smart meters shrub before .jp9; redwood gardens smart meters shrub after .jp9; redwood gardens smart meters shrub before .jp ; redwood gardens smart meters shrub after •jp9 Hi, This is aura opening about the safety of these meters Linda Ikeda Please note: forwarded massage attached From: M arti Kheel ma rtin arti h 1. com To: SmartWarriorMarinpgooglegroups. Subject: photos of shrub in front of 180 meters Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:58:38 -0700 Year Old Mom Loo 71 Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors! http: thirdpartVoff r, n t ro. n t T L 41/4df7dd l 7 4c 4fb t lvuc 1 5V 41h * F ipp lop lk k k l it , It I All to N4 ki Aj . p e. -I k 1 0 c w 40 " I dt J IL City council, 1 am asking for you to delay the smart meters from coming into our town for one year. The reason 1 ask this is because they want to charge $270.00 to opt out, and then $20.00 a month to have someone come read the meters. The opt out fee is just ridiculous and is much to high. If you have solar panels on your house you are not charged the $270.00 but if you are the only one on the block with solar they then charge you the $20.00 a month. They have nothing in place if a few people opt out and a couple more have solar panels. Everyone still pay the $20.00 a month. But if you have a few people who have solar panels they will then waive the $20.00 a month. This needs to be better thought out by PG and E prior to the installation. PG and E also state the meters only run for 45 seconds a day, but from what 1 have read else where that is not true. 1 just want more time to find out the facts before 1 allow this on my house. To many times we are told things are safe only to find out later that was not true. PG and E is just now trying to get information out about these meters. 1 personally feel this should have been done a long time ago, not right before they install there. Thankyou, s 4 r Patty Welsh . t Kitty Norton From: Carole [onegoodgalQuno-com] Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2011 1:27 AM To: Tony Ferrara; Caren Flay; Joe Costello; Jinn Guthrie; Tim Brown; Kitty Morton Subject; SLO City Council requests immediate suspension of Smart Meter installation Distinguished Arroyo Grande City Council members, Are you aware that the City Council of San Luis Obispo has recently requested of the CPUC that PG &E immediately suspend the installation of Smart Meters in the City of San Luis Obispo until azero -cost opt -out is finalized and made available to the public? With this request they have addressed the "forced compliance" portion of the problem, and for that we are thankful. They also mentioned the health, privacy, safety and environmental risks associated with Smart Meter technology, but they only addressed the opt- out in their letter, We are asking you to take it one step farther and request a one -year moratorium based on the same concerns that were mentioned by the City Council of San Luis Obispo. Thank you for your time. I'm sure you'll do the right thing. Carole Good onegoodizal(a,L upo. com VitaCost discount vitamins and mare) can be fauna at bttT://mvi!oodhealthvfood.co I Kim Norton From: Carole [ n dal @a jun . m] Sent: Sunday, Jane 12, 2011 :00 PM To: Tony Ferrara; Caren flay; Joe C Jim Guthrie; Tim Brown Cc: Kitty Norton Subject: Electromagnetic Pollution and Smart Meters Good morning, distinguished member of the Arroyo Grande City Council: I write to you again today with additional information on Electromagnetic Pollution, which includes Smart Meters. I'd like to start off with information from Dr. John Mercola. If you are not familiar with Dr. Mercola, here is his partial Woo. First and foremost, I am an osteopathic physician, also known as a DO. DOs are licensed physicians who, similar to lVlDs, can prescribe medication and perform surgery in all 50 states. DOs and lVlDs have similar training requiring four years of study in the basic and clinical sciences, and the successful completion of licensing exams. But DOs bring something extra to the practice of medicine. Osteopathic physicians practice a "whole person" approach, treating the entire person rather than just symptoms. Focusing on preventive health care, Des help patients develop attitudes and lifestyles that don't dust fight illness, but help prevent it, too. I am also board - certified in family medicine and served as the chairman of the family medicine department of St. Alexius Medical Center for five years. I am trained in both traditional and natural medicine. Dr. john Mercola has prepared a good overview of the entire ENT (Electromagnetic Field) pollution issues regarding its effects on various life forms: especially human beings. I recommend this article as the best starting point for learning about this entire field: httn: / /emf.mercola.com / sites /emf /archive/ 2011 /02/ 16 /raisin- awareness- about- ele tr ma�eti - ll tion. x Next, I thought you might like to know that Dr. Samuel Milham, an M.D. and retired epidemiologist, has written an excellent book on the subject, Dirty Electricity: Electrification and The Disease of Civilization. His research shows that most, if not al[, of the maladies of civilization (cancer, diabetes, depression, ADD, stress - related diseases, etc.) follow quickly on the heels of electrification wherever it has occurred in the world. (This, of course, does not by itself prove that it is the AC electricity that is causal. However, there is much follow -up research from other researchers that does strongly indicate that dirty electricity, and other EMF pollution, is directly causal.) Dr. Milham's web site is hgp And Lastly a commentary from, Karl Maret, MD, Physician and Electrical and BioMedical Engineer. If you are not familiar with Dr. Maret, here is his partial bio: For the record, my qualifications are that I hold a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering, a Master of Engineering degree in BioMedical Engineering, and a Medical Doctor degree and have additionally completed a four year post - doctoral fellowship in physiology. I have been interested in the health effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) for many years and given lectures about the potential health impacts of non - ionizing radiations, both in Europe and the United States. I am president of anon- profit foundation interested in energy medicine, a sub - specialty within the field of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) as defined by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), a center within the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH ). The following link http: / /saizereports.com/ smart- meter -rf / ?p =368 is a commentary by Dr. Maret on the California Council on Science and Technology (COST) report, "Health Impacts of Radio Frequency from Smart Meters" published January 2011. Dr. Maret submits that the CCST report, written in response to health concerns expressed by Assembly Members of the California Legislature, contains inaccuracies and minimizes the biological effects and health impacts of non - thermal radio - frequency radiation, such as those produced by wireless technologies including Smart Meters. Dr. Maret's specific concerns with the report are as follows: 1. The minimization ation f the problem of non- thermal microwave radiation; 2. The minimization of the need for lower exposure standards; 3. The increase in radiation levels at potential local hot spots through reflection; 4. The lack of information about the impact of pulsed radiation from Smart Meters; 5. The lack of information on the health impacts of night -time radiation from Smart Meters; 6. The lack of modeling or actual measurements of the contribution from Smart Meters to the existing background microwave radiation; 7. The lack of health and environmental consideration by the CPUC when the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) was approved. Until these issues are more fully addressed it is recommended that the current Smart Meter deployment using radio - frequency radiation (RFR) be halted pending a more unbiased reassessment of the potential health issues associated with these meters, including a reassessment of the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AM[) program approved by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) without any environmental impact assessment. Further, that the California public be offered the option to opt out of this program, which at present is mandatory for every dwelling. 2 I totally agree with Dr. Maret's assessment and I hope you will as well. I'm asking that the Arroyo Grande City Council send a letter to the CPUC, and the Governor of the State of California, expressing Dr. Maret's concerns (shown in red above) and request a one -year moratorium on the installation of Smart Meters, allowing time for unbiased research to be per Thank you for taking the time to research this most important topic. I thank you and your family, friends and neighbors thank you too (whether they realize it or not). Carole Good onegoodaalC&,iuno.com Kitty Norton From: Carole [onegoodgarl a@juno.00m] Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 12.52 AM To: Tony Ferrara; Caren Ray; Joe Costello; Jim Guthrie; Tim Brown; Ditty [Norton Subject: Intem tional Experts' Perspective on EMF and RF (Smart Meters) Hello again... from Carole Good. This is quick road. If you want more details visit www.maizdahavas.com From Magda Navas, Phi - International Experts' Perspective n EMF and R Subject: International Experts' Perspective on the Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields and Electromagnetic Radiation For Distribution: Junell,11. Below are some of the key resolutions /appeals released by expert scientific groups around the world since 1998 regarding the biological and health effects of both low frequency electromagnetic fields EMF associated with electricity and radio frequency (RF ) electromagnetic radiation (EiR ) generated by wireless devices. Anyone who reads these cannot be left with the illusion (r delusion) that this form of energy is without adverse biological and health consequences at levels well below exis ting guidelines. Children are particularly vulnerable. It is irresponsible of governments to maintain the status quo in light of thousands of studies that have been published and statements by these experts. Here are the resolutions /appeals /reports in reverse chronological order. These are presented in more detail and links are provided for each one at www.ma vas.c m "Int rrrational xp rts' Perspective on the Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields and Electromagnetic Radiation ". 1. May 31, 2011: International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARQ and world Health Organization V3 reclassified radio frequency electromagnetic fields as a Mass 2B carcinogen (possibly carcinogen to humans). 2. May 2011* The Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe (FACE) released Resolution 1815 on the Potential Dangers of Electromagnetic Fields and their effect on the Environment. 3 . April 2011; The Russian National Committee on Non - Ionizing Radiation Protection (RN NIRP ) released their Resolution entitled " lectroma neticf gilds from Mobile Phones. Health Effect on Children and na ers ", 4. oio: Seletun Statement, Norway: The International FJectromagnetic Field Alliance (IEMFA ) released their report entitled 'cientif Parcel on Electromagnetic Field Health Risks: Consensus Points, Recommendations, mendations, and Rationales following a scientific meeting at Seletun Norway November 2009. , 5 . 2 oo : EU Parliament Electromagnetic Report and Resolution entitled.-European Parliament Resolution on health concems associated with electroma netr` f elds, was adopted February 1 7, 2009 with 29 recommendations. 6 . ; Porto Alegre Resolution, Brazil. Scientists and doctors recognize electrohypersensitivity and are concerned that exposure to electromagnetic fields may increase the risk of cancer and chronic diseases; that exposure levels established by international agencies (IEEE, ICNIRP, ICES) are obsolete; and that wireless technology places at risk the health of children, teens, pregnant women and others who are vulnerable. 7. oog: Venice Resolution, Italy, International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety ICEMS Scientists recognize biological effects at non- thermal levels, that standards are inadequate, that electro- sensitivity exists and that there is a need to research mechanisms. g. 2007: Biolnitiative Report, USA. In response to statements that there are no scientific studies showing adverse biological effects of low level electromagnetic fields and radio frequency radiation, a group of researchers produced the iolnitiatie Report that documents 2000 studies showing biological effects of extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic fields and radio frequency (RF) radiation and calling for biologically based exposure guidelines. 9. 20o6: Benevento Resolution, Italy. The International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety ICEMS organized a conference entitled: The Precautionary MFA roc : Rationale, Legislation and Imple mentation .Scientists at this conference signed the Benevento Resolution that consists of 7 major statements. 10, 200 5: Helsinki Appeal, Finland. Physicians and researchers presented the Helsinki Appeal to the European Parliament. 11. 2 oo : Irish Doctors' Environmental Association (IDEA), Ireland. Members of IDEA wrote a position paper on electromagnetic radiation. Doctors recognize electrohyperensitivity EH is increasing and request advice from government on how to treat EHS. 1# 2002. Catania Resolution, Italy. This resolution was signed by scientists at the international conference 'State of the Research on Electromagnetic Fields - Scientific and Legal Issues ". 1. 2002 : Freiburg Appeal, Germany. Physicians request tougher guidelines for radio frequency exposure. This document was endorsed by thousands of healthcare practitioners, 1 4. 200 2: Salzburg Resolution, Austria. The Salzburg Resolution on Mobile Telecommunication Base Stations makes four recommendations including preliminary guidelines of o.1 icroW cm for suns of all emissions from mobile phone stations. 1, 5 . z oo: Stewart Report, UIC The Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones IE iP produced a report, Mobile Phones and Health, than 'is commonly referred to as the Stewart Report, named after its Chairman Sir William Stewart. 16, 1998: vxenna EMF Resolution, Austria. Workshop on Possible Biological and Health Effects of RF Electromagnetic Melds. Based on these resolutions and appeals from international groups of physicians and scientists immediate action is required to protect public health from continued increasing exposure to radio frequency radiation and electromagnetic fields. I call on r 1, regulators around the world to reexamine exis ting guidelines for both EMF and EMR and to reduce them to the lowest possible levels to protect the public and workers. values above 4 milliauss (low frequency magnetic fields); above oa microw cm (power density for radio frequency radiation) and above 4o GS units (dirty electricity) have been associated with adverse health effects in peer reviewed scientific publications! . government agencies responsibility for the location of both base stations and power lines to keep distances at least 400 meters (base stations) and loo meters (transmission lines) from residential properties as well as school and health care facilities. 3. utilities (water, gas, electricity) to reconsider the use of wireless smart meters and provide wired options for those who are sensitive, for those who do not want to be exposed, and for those in densely populated settings, 4. ma uwfa Wrers who are providing technology that uses electricity and/or emits radio frequency radiation to re- engineer their products to provide the minimum radiation possible. This includes light bulbs, computers, wireless home devices like baby monitors and cordless phones, cell phones, smart meters, plasma TVs, among others, 5. architects, builders, ele i ians, and plumbers to design and construct buildings that are based on principles of good electromagnetic hygiene. This includes using materials that absorb or shield building interiors from microwave radiation especially near external sources of this radiation and in multi -unit buildings; to provide wired alternatives to wireless devices; to properly wire and ground buildings to minimize low frequency electromagnetic Melds and to eliminate ground current problems; and to install filters on electrical panels and/or throughout the building to ensure good power quality. 6. local, state, federal health authorities to educate medical professions about the potential biological effects of both low frequency and radio frequency electromagnetic energy; about the growing number of people who have electrosensitivity ) or electrohypersensitivity H and to alert therm on how they can help their patients in terms of minimizing their exposure and promoting their recovery. 7. hospitals and health care centres to review their policy on wireless technology and to provided electromagnetically -clean areas within these centres for those who are sensitive to this radiation. 8. school hoards to reopen their policy on the preference of wiFi (wireless technology) over wired internet access and not allow towers /antennas within 400 meters of their school property. 9 . parents to practice good electromagnetic hygiene especially in the bedroom and especially for their children. This involves using wired rather than wireless devices in the home, keeping electric appliances away from the bed, turning off /unplugging devices when not in use. io. the media to provide information to the public about the health and safety of using this technology; to rely on "independent experts" who do not receive funding or other benefits based on the outcome of research studies; and to identify experts funded by the industry as "industry representatives", The integrity of many of these scientists leaves much to be desired. Dr. Magda Havas Trent University, Peterborough, ON, Canada www.magdahavas.com __ VitaCost discount vitamins (and more) can be found at :rn oodhealth food,orn lJtRO�6 47 W RP RATED F 'qN 'e % . %1W FS MEMORANDUM Ti CITY COUNCIL FROM: KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR F F LEGISLATIVE AND INFORMATION SERVICES/CITY CLER SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INF RMA711O JUNE 1 � 2011 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 8.e. — APPROVAL OF MINUTES DATE; JUNE 14, 2011 Attached are corrections to Page 1 of the Special City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting mi nutes of M 26, 2011 to s how that Mayor Pro Tern Ray y wa absent. c: City Ma nager City Attorney City Clerk MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING of THE CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT T AGENCY THURSDAY, MAY 26,2011 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH CH ST EET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor/Chair called the Special Meeting of the City Council /Redevelopment Agency to order at 6:16 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Mayor/Chair Tony Ferrara, Council/Board Umber Joe Costello, Council /Board Member Jim Guthrie, and Council /Board Member Tim Brown were present. Mavor Pro Tem Ray was absent. Staff members present were City Manager Steven Adams, Chief of Police Steve Annibli Director of Legislative and Information Services /City Clerk Kelly Wetmore, Community Development Director Teresa McCli h, Recreation and Maintenance Services Director Doug Perrin, and Administrative Services Director Angela Freth. 3 . FLAG SALUTE Mayor/Chair Ferrara led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. CITIZENS* INPUT, COMMENTS, AND SUGGESTIONS There were no public comments. 5. NEW BUSINESS 5.a. Fiscal Year 2010 -11 Third Quarter Budget Report. Director Kraeth presented the staff report and recommended the City Council /Agency Board: 1 Approve detailed budget adjustments listed in the Third Quarter budget report; 2 Approve Schedule A: and Approve requests for additional adjustments in the General Fund. Brief discussion ensued regarding the City's insurance program through the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority C JPIA and the reed to review the program to determine if it is still cost efficient for the City. No public comment was received. Action Council /Board !Member Costello moved to approve detailed budget adjustments listed in the Third Quarter budget report; approve Schedule A; and approve requests for additional adjustments in the General Fund. Council/Board Member Brown seconded, and the motion parsed on the following roll call vote: AYES: Costello, Brown, Guthrie, F NOES: Pone ABSENT: te ary