Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-02-2015 Council Agenda Packet
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo Tuesday, June 2, 2015 4:00 PM SPECIAL MEETING Council Chamber 990 Palm Street CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jan Marx ROLL CALL: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx PUBLIC HEARING PH1. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE REGULATING EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE FOOD CONTAINERS AND PRODUCTS - ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION (JOHNSON/HERMANN - 60 MINUTES) Recommendation Introduce an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adding Chapter 8.06 to the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code regulating expanded polystyrene food containers and products.” BUSINESS ITEM B1. REVISIONS TO PURCHASING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES - RESOLUTION - ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION (CODRON/DAVID - 30 MINUTES) Recommendation 1. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, updating Purchasing Guidelines.” 2. Introduce an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Municipal Code Chapter 3.24, Article I, to add language to Purchasing Policies governing emergency purchasing, hiring on-call consultants, and environmentally preferred purchases.” ADJOURN TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 2, 2015 San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of June 2, 2015 Page 2 6:00 PM REGULAR MEETING Council Chamber 990 Palm Street CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jan Marx ROLL CALL: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Christianson PRESENTATION P1. MAYOR’S AWARD FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE (MARX - 10 MINUTES) Presentation of the Mayor’s Award for Community Service to San Luis Obispo High School students for completing eighty hours or more of community service. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (not to exceed 15 minutes total) The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council by completing a speaker slip and giving it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Council on items that are not on the agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items. CONSENT AGENDA A member of the public may request the Council to pull an item for discussion. Pulled items shall be heard at the close of the Consent Agenda unless a majority of the Council chooses another time. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the three minute time limit. C1. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Recommendation Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of June 2, 2015 Page 3 C2. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OF MAY 5 AND MAY 12, 2015 (MEJIA) Recommendation Approve the Minutes of the City Council meetings of May 5 and May 12, 2015. C3. ACCEPT A DONATION TO PLAN AND CONSTRUCT A COMMUNITY GARDEN AT THE LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE (STANWYCK/MUDGETT/ SETTERLUND) Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation 1. Accept a donation from the Kiwanis Club of San Luis Obispo Morning and One Cool Earth in the amount of $15,200 to provide funding and in-kind labor to plan and construct a Community Garden at the Laguna Lake Golf Course. 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute a donation acceptance agreement with the Kiwanis Club of San Luis Obispo Morning and One Cool Earth for the community garden donation. C4. 2015-17 SAN LUIS OBISPO DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT (CODRON/L. JOHNSON) Recommendation Approve, and authorize the Mayor to execute, a two-year agreement with the San Luis Obispo Downtown Association for use of funds collected through the Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment with no changes other than the term of the agreement. C5. JUSTICE AND MENTAL HEALTH COLLABORATION PROGRAM GRANT (STALEY/STORTON) Recommendation Authorize the Police Department to participate as a co-lead in a grant application process with the San Luis Obispo County Behavioral Health as the lead for a Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program (JMHCP) Grant. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of June 2, 2015 Page 4 C6. SINSHEIMER POOL RE-PLASTER AND RE-TILE, SPECIFICATION NO. 91208 (GRIGSBY/GUZMAN) Recommendation 1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Sinsheimer Pool Re-Plaster and Re-tile Project, Specification No. 91208. 2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids, and authorize the City Manager to award the contract if the lowest responsible bid is within the Engineer’s Estimate of $443,000 and the 2015-16 budget appropriations is approved by Council. 3. Authorize change orders for project acceleration if funding is available, in conformance with the City’s Change Order policy limits. C7. CONTINUED FIRE DEPARTMENT PARTICIPATION IN REGIONAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESPONSE TEAM - RESOLUTION (OLSON) Recommendation Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the Amended and Restated San Luis Obispo Regional Hazardous Materials Cooperative Agreement.” C8. AUTHORIZATION FOR COUNTY COLLECTION OF FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY INSPECTION FEES - RESOLUTION (OLSON/MAGGIO) Recommendation Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the San Luis Obispo Auditor to collect fees for 2015-16 Fire and Life Safety Inspections of Multi-Dwelling Properties containing three or more dwelling units on the secured property tax roll pursuant to California Government Code Section 54988, Et Seq.” C9. WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENT (MATTINGLY/HIX) Recommendation 1. Approve a budget amendment for the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Energy Project in the amount of $285,000. 2. Approve the transfer of $285,000 from the WRRF completed projects account to the WRRF Energy Project Capital Improvement Project Account. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of June 2, 2015 Page 5 C10. MICROSURFACING 2015, SPECIFICATION NO. 91309 (GRIGSBY/CARRILLO) Recommendation 1. Approve plans and specifications for the Microsurfacing 2015 Project, Specification No. 91309. 2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the City Manager to award the contract if the lowest responsible bidder is within the Engineer’s Estimate of $882,000. C11. CONTINUITY OF FIRE MUTUAL AID REIMBURSEMENT - RESOLUTION (OLSON) Recommendation Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, identifying the terms and conditions for Fire Department response away from their official duty station and assigned to an emergency incident.” C12. AUTHORIZATION FOR COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES - RESOLUTION (JOHNSON/SCHNEIDER) Recommendation Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the San Luis Obispo County Auditor to assess amounts due on delinquent administrative fines as special assessments against properties pursuant to California Government Code Section 53069.4(a).” PUBLIC HEARING PH2. REVIEW OF AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION’S DECISION TO APPROVE THE DESIGN OF FOUR SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENCES AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED AT 323 AND 353 GRAND AVENUE - RESOLUTION (JOHNSON/CARLONI – 60 MINUTES) Recommendation Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, denying an appeal (filed by Linda White and Karen Adler) of the Architectural Review Commission’s design approval; thereby granting final design approval of four single family residences and associated site improvements, as represented in the staff report and attachments dated June 2, 2015 (323/353 Grand Avenue, R-1 Zone, File No. 25-13).” San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of June 2, 2015 Page 6 PH3. DROUGHT RESPONSE STRATEGY – RESOLUTIONS – ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION (MATTINGLY/FLOYD/ELKE/MUNDS – 60 MINUTES) Recommendation 1. Approve the drought response strategy for the City of San Luis Obispo, as outlined in the Council Agenda Report. 2. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, declaring a local drought emergency.” 3. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, deferring or requiring alternative landscape planting during the declared drought emergency.” 4. Introduce an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Section 13.07.030 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code regarding restrictions on outdoor irrigation of ornamental landscapes or turf with potable water.” (This ordinance includes provisions for a two-day-a-week and time of day restrictions for outdoor watering.) 5. Conceptually approve an incentive program for high efficiency toilets and washing machines. 6. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, establishing a permit fee and regulations for the use of the Corporation Yard non-potable well.” 7. Approve the augmentation of the 2015-16 proposed budget for Utilities Services by $179,000 for expenditures related to the drought response strategy. BUSINESS ITEM B2APPOINTED OFFICIALS’ EVALUATIONS AND COMPENSATION - RESOLUTION (MARX/IRONS - 10 MINUTES) Recommendation 1. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adjusting compensation for the City Manager.” 2. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adjusting compensation for the City Attorney.” 3. Authorize the Mayor to execute amended contracts of employment with the City Manager and City Attorney. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of June 2, 2015 Page 7 COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS (not to exceed 15 minutes) Council Members report on conferences or other City activities. Time limit—3 minutes. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (not to exceed 15 minutes) At this time, any Council Member or the City Manager may ask a question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on his or her activities. In addition, subject to Council Policies and Procedures, they may provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2) ADJOURNMENT Adjourn to a Special Meeting to be held on June 9, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of reviewing the preliminary 2015-17 Financial Plan relative to the General Fund Operating Programs. A subsequent Special Meeting will be held on June 11, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of reviewing the preliminary 2015-17 Financial Plan relative to the Capital Improvement Plan. The next Regular Meeting will be held on June 16, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. A public hearing will be conducted regarding the 2015-17 Financial Plan relative to Enterprise Funds including parking, transit, water and sewer. An Adjourned Regular Meeting will be held on June 23, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering adoption of the 2015-17 Financial Plan. A subsequent meeting may be held on June 30, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. regarding adoption of the 2015-17 Financial Plan, if necessary. LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available for the hearing impaired-—please see City Clerk. The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107. City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda related writings San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of June 2, 2015 Page 8 or documents provided to the City Council are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, during normal business hours, and on the City’s website http://www.slocity.org/agendas. Persons with questions concerning any agenda item may call the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100. June 2, 2015 PH1 FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By: Greg Hermann, Special Projects Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE REGULATING EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE FOOD CONTAINERS AND PRODUCTS RECOMMENDATION Introduce an Ordinance adding Chapter 8.06 to the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code prohibiting the use of expanded polystyrene food or drink containers and the retail sale of non-encased expanded polystyrene products. REPORT IN BRIEF The City Council previously provided direction via a study session to draft an ordinance to prohibit retail food providers within the City from providing food or drink in containers made from EPS and prohibit the retail sale of EPS products which are not wholly encapsulated or encased within a more durable material. In California, over 80 cities and counties have introduced regulations focused on restricting the use of food and drink containers made from EPS all citing the environmental effects of EPS as a basis for regulation. EPS is made of non-renewable petroleum products and is uniquely problematic as litter as EPS is a lightweight, durable material that is not biodegradable. The City is situated entirely within the 84 square mile San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed and a significant amount of EPS is found and discarded during creek cleanups. In order to develop a draft ordinance staff reviewed existing policies, researched approaches by other jurisdictions and gathered input from the public including the business community. The ordinance prohibits food providers from using disposable food or drink containers made of EPS and requires that disposable food and drink containers that are recyclable, compostable, or biodegradable be used as an alternative. The ordinance also prohibits the retail sale of products made of EPS not wholly encapsulated or encased in a more durable material. There are also exemptions if the ordinance creates an undue hardship for food providers. Undue hardship exemptions may be granted because alternatives are not available or because the alternatives are not affordable. An exemption for the retail sale of EPS products is included for packing materials which have been collected for reuse. The ordinance will take effect six months after final adoption with warnings occurring for an additional six months. The ordinance also provides an in-lieu fine program which allows receipts for acceptable products to presented in-lieu of paying an initial fine. DISCUSSION Council Direction At the March 4, 2014, City Council meeting, concerns were raised during public comment regarding the use of expanded polystyrene (EPS) products in the City. The City Council directed staff to address the consideration of regulations for EPS products at a future meeting. PH1 - 1 Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products Page 2 On September 2, 2014, the City Council hosted a study session to review relevant policies, research from other agencies, and implementation and policy options (Attachment 1). After reviewing the information provided, receiving comments by the public and discussion by the City Council, direction was provided to draft an ordinance to prohibit retail food providers within the City from providing food or drink in containers made from EPS and prohibit the retail sale of EPS products which are not wholly encapsulated or encased within a more durable material. Background In California, over 80 cities and counties have introduced regulations focused on restricting the use of food and drink containers made from EPS. Some of those agencies have taken the additional step of prohibiting the retail sale of most EPS products within the city. Most agencies cite in their ordinances the environmental effects of EPS as a basis for regulation. First, EPS is made of non-renewable petroleum products. Secondly, food and drink containers made from EPS are uniquely problematic when they become litter as EPS is a lightweight, durable material that is not biodegradable. Its foam structure allows it to break easily into small pieces, making it difficult and expensive to remove from the environment. Additionally, these pieces can be harmful to fish and wildlife as it is often mistaken as food and ingested. According to the California Department of Transportation, EPS comprises approximately 15% of storm drain litter. It can be difficult, however, to approximate the exact amount of EPS in storm drains, waterways and oceans due to the small size of the material when broken down. A study published in 2011 found that 71% of all the plastic flowing through the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers is foam. It is the second most common form of beach debris in California, according to a study conducted in Orange County. Also, several studies approximate that plastic products, including expanded polystyrene, make up 80-90% of floating marine debris. The City is situated entirely within the 84 square mile San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed and a significant amount of EPS is found and discarded during creek cleanups. In addition to reducing the amount of harmful litter entering local waterways, cities also typically cite the improved potential for recycling opportunities and diverting trash from landfills as a basis for an ordinance. EPS products are challenging to recycle due to a lack of recycling facilities and difficulties with recycling EPS that has been in contact with food. EPS products are not currently recycled at the Cold Canyon landfill. There is also a clear, non-expanded form of polystyrene used in food service called “oriented” or “rigid” polystyrene. These polystyrene containers are recycled at the Cold Canyon landfill even after having been in contact with food. Policy Analysis In order to develop a draft ordinance staff reviewed existing policies, researched approaches by other jurisdictions and gathered input from the public. Each of these steps is discussed below. 1. Existing Policies While concerns expressed by the community served as the catalyst for pursuing an EPS ordinance, there is also a significant policy foundation for such action. There are three City documents that either directly reference EPS or have policies regarding waste, recycling and sustainability that would support and ordinance of this type. Those documents are: PH1 - 2 Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products Page 3 General Plan - Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) Section 5 of the COSE establishes goals for the City related to the use of materials. These goals include using materials efficiently and minimizing the undesirable effects that can result from the use of potentially toxic materials. The policies developed in support of these goals include operational considerations such as avoiding materials which inhibit recycling, and purchasing products which incorporate recycled materials. Policies in this section also establish the role of the City to coordinate and participate in waste-reduction and recycling efforts, as well as the City’s responsibility to expand public education regarding conservation and sustainability. Climate Action Plan The Climate Action Plan identifies solid waste strategies to increase the community’s waste diversion rate, which is the amount of material diverted from the landfill to be recycled, composted or reused. One waste diversion strategy explicitly states that “(a)n ordinance that requires biodegradable food packaging in restaurants and other food vendors can reduce the amount of non- recyclable [plastic foam] that is sent to the landfill.” Implementation of this ordinance would accomplish this objective of the Climate Action Plan by increasing the amount of food containers which are recycled and thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with solid waste disposal at the Cold Canyon landfill. Storm Water Management Plan The City’s Storm Water Management Plan does not directly address EPS, but does have related elements that involve public education and outreach for reducing pollutants and increasing recycling of materials that may enter storm drains. In addition, there are specific strategies aimed at pollution prevention which would include materials such as EPS. It should also be noted that the San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA) briefly discussed the issue of regulating EPS at their March 2014 Board Meeting. The outcome of that discussion was a determination that IWMA has no plans to consider a regional policy regulating EPS at this time. 2. Approaches from Other Agencies A wide range of cities and counties with adopted EPS ordinances were reviewed to study the scope of their regulations and methods for implementation and enforcement. These agencies were selected based on proximity, best practice ordinances or status as a benchmark city with San Luis Obispo. Most cities and counties focus on the environmental concerns of EPS food and drink containers as the basis for an ordinance. The major concerns cited include the fact that EPS is lightweight, and can be easily blown out of waste receptacles and into storm drains and waterways. Most communities also site the fact that EPS is not economically feasible to recycle. The ordinances reviewed had several common key elements including: • Prohibiting the use of EPS food and drink containers by food providers; • Including an “undue hardship” exemption for unique cases; o Many agencies also include an exemption for economic hardship defined as a 15% increase in cost for replacement products; PH1 - 3 Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products Page 4 • Exemptions for packaging of uncooked food and food prepared or packaged outside of the city limits; • Timeframes for implementation after adoption ranging from 30 days to one year. Some cities and counties further the scope of their ordinance with additional elements. These elements include a requirement that replacement food and drink containers and products be recyclable, compostable, or biodegradable. There are also some jurisdictions that have included prohibiting the sale of most retail products made of EPS, such as small coolers and packing peanuts. Some ordinances also include an “in lieu of fine” program, where “in lieu” of paying a fine, the purchase of acceptable products can be made for the same amount. More information on approaches from other agencies can be found in the September 2, 2014 City Council study session staff report (Attachment 1). 3. Community Outreach Over the past several months, staff gathered input and solicited feedback from community stakeholders as well as the general public. Staff facilitated meetings with the Foam Free SLO (which includes representatives from local environmental groups), the Chamber of Commerce, affected business owners and other community members. In addition, staff used the Open City Hall tool on the City’s website to solicit additional feedback on the issue. This forum was advertised through the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Association, City website notification and postcards mailed to over 250 businesses. The Open City Hall topic had 61 visitors and 25 statements posted or the equivalent of 1.3 hours of public comment. A complete report of statements from Open City Hall on this topic is included as Attachment 3. In general, those who were supportive of regulations for EPS stated: • Concern regarding negative environmental effects of EPS; • Concern of potential negative health effects of EPS; • Interest in reducing the amount of waste that ends up in landfills; and • General support for community sustainability. In general, those who were not supportive of regulations for EPS stated: • Concern regarding the additional cost of alternatives; • Concern performance of alternative products (e.g. rigidity, insulating properties, etc.); and • General concern over increased regulations. Proposed Ordinance The proposed ordinance was developed using City Council direction, best practice approaches by other jurisdictions and feedback from the community outreach. The ordinance has three main sections. The first section prohibits food providers from using disposable food or drink containers made of EPS. Second, the ordinance requires that all food providers use disposable food and drink containers that are recyclable, compostable, or biodegradable. The last section of the ordinance prohibits the retail sale of products made of EPS which are not wholly encapsulated or encased in a more durable material such as cups, plates, bowls, coolers and packing peanuts. PH1 - 4 Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products Page 5 The ordinance also includes several exemptions. First, any food provider may file for an exemption if they can provide documentation of an undue hardship created by the ordinance. Undue hardship exemptions may be granted because alternatives are not available or because the alternatives are not affordable. For the purposes of this ordinance, affordable is defined as no more than 15% higher in cost then the product being replaced. Exemptions also apply to foam trays for uncooked meats and food prepared or packaged outside of the City. There are also certain exemptions to the prohibition of the retail sale of EPS products. These exemptions include products that contain EPS, but are wholly encapsulated in a more durable material such as coolers encased in hard plastic, construction materials made of EPS, and items related to public health and safety or a medical necessity. An additional exemption is included for packing materials which have been collected for reuse. The specific language for each of these sections can be found in the proposed ordinance (Attachment 3). Potential Impacts to Businesses The most frequently cited impact to businesses is cost. To better understand this, below is a cost comparison of EPS products to alternatives developed by the City of San Jose in 2012 as a part of a county-wide effort to regulate EPS. The results of that analysis are shown in the following table. Material Cups Plates Clamshell Container EPS $0.035 $0.056 $0.09 Rigid Plastic $0.026 $0.083 $0.25 Paper $0.055 $0.02 $0.28 Molded Natural Fiber n/a $0.064 $0.22 Compostable Plastic $0.07 $0.15 $0.33 Alternatives to EPS cups ranged from 26% less expensive to 50% more expensive. The range for plates was 35% less expensive to 63% more expensive for EPS alternatives. Alternatives to EPS clamshell containers ranged from 59% to 73% more expensive. Staff compared the results of the City of San Jose analysis to some local prices and found general concurrence with the findings. In addition, as a part of the September 2, 2014 City Council Study session a business survey was distributed with the assistance of the Chamber of Commerce. The results of the survey along with additional information on other potential impacts to business are included in the study session staff report (Attachment 1). It should be noted, that the Chamber of Commerce, after consideration by their Issues Evaluation Committee, voted to unanimously support the proposed ordinance. Potential Benefits to the Environment It is equally important to consider potential benefits to the environment from an ordinance regulating EPS. Classification of litter can be very time intensive and expensive. As a result, there is relatively little data on the outcomes of EPS ordinances. There are, however, some observational studies that have documented results. Those include: PH1 - 5 Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products Page 6 • The City of Santa Cruz observed a 50% decrease in EPS food and drink containers picked up during annual beach and river cleanups between 2007-2012. • One year after implementation of the City of San Francisco ordinance that prohibits EPS food and drink containers, the City’s litter audit showed a 36% decrease in EPS litter. Implementation and Enforcement The ordinance is designed to take effect six months after final adoption and warnings will occur for an additional six months. This would allow businesses up to a year if necessary to make the transition to alternative products. During this time, City staff would send additional notification to affected businesses and make additional information available on the City’s website regarding compliance with ordinance. Enforcement of the recommended changes would continue through the existing operations and resources of Code Enforcement and Community Development Department staff. The ordinance also includes an in-lieu fine program which allows receipts for acceptable products to presented in-lieu of paying an initial fine. CONCURRENCES A team of staff from the Community Development, Utilities and Administration departments participated in the development and review of the draft ordinance. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed ordinance is exempt from the environmental review requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. Further, the proposed Ordinance is exempt from CEQA on the separate and independent ground that it is an action of a regulatory agency (the City) for the protection of the environment because, among other things, it will regulate the use and sale of expanded polystyrene products and reduce the amount of expanded polystyrene products that enter local landfill and waterways. Thus, this Ordinance is categorically exempt from the requirements of CEQA under Section 15308 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations as an action by a regulatory agency for the protection of the environment. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed Ordinance adds additional regulations to the City’s Municipal Code. All complaints of this type are currently investigated and enforced by Code Enforcement staff. At this time, the impacts of implementing and enforcing the additional elements of the ordinance can be incorporated into existing resources. Additional resources may be required if further outreach is desired during implementation. ALTERNATIVES 1. Amend the proposed ordinance. The City Council may modify the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code. Specific direction should be given to staff regarding any modifications. PH1 - 6 Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products Page 7 2. Continue the proposed ordinance. The City Council may continue action, if more information in needed. Direction should be given to staff regarding additional information needed to make a decision. 3. Reject the proposed ordinance. The City Council may reject the proposed ordinance although public testimony and current research demonstrate that an ordinance is needed. ATTACHMENTS 1. September 2, 2014 City Council Study Session Staff Report 2. Open City Hall Report 3. Proposed Ordinance T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-06-02\Expanded Polystyrene Ordinance (Johnson-Hermann)\ECAR- Expanded Polystyrene.docx PH1 - 7 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH1 - 8 CityofSanLuisObispo, CouncilAgendaReport, MeetingDate, ItemNumber FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By: GregHermann, Special Projects Manager SUBJECT: REVIEW OF EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE FOOD CONTAINER AND PRODUCT REGULATIONS RECOMMENDATION 1. Receive a presentation on expanded polystyrene food container and product regulations and policy options. 2. Provide direction to staff regarding initiation of an ordinance. REPORT IN BRIEF On March 4th, 2014, the City Council directed staff to exploreoptions for establishing regulations for expanded polystyrene (EPS). This reportprovides a review of existing relevant policies, research from other agencies, and implementation and policy choices for the City Council to consider when providing direction to staff. In California, over 80 cities and counties (listed in Attachment 1) have introduced regulations focused on restricting the use of food and drink containers made from EPS, commonly referred to as Styrofoam™ or plastic foam. Some of those agencies have taken the additional step of prohibiting the retail sale of most EPS products within the city. Most agencies cite in their ordinancesthe environmental and potential healtheffects of EPS as a basis for regulation. EPS is made of non-renewable petroleum products and manufactured with a monomer called Styrene, which may have adverse effectson human health. EPS food and drink containers have been shown to leach this potentially carcinogenic chemical into food and drinks when heated or when coming into contact with hot foods.1 Food and drink containers made from EPS are also uniquely problematic when they become litter as EPS is a durable material that is not biodegradable. Its foam structure allows it to break easily into small pieces, making it difficult and expensive to remove from the environment. Additionally, these piecescan be harmful to fish and wildlife as it is often mistaken as food andingested. Accordingto the California Department of Transportation, EPS comprises approximately 15% of storm drain litter.2 It can be difficult, however, to approximate theexact amount of EPS in storm drains, waterways and oceans due to the small size of the material whenbroken down. A study 1 Food and Chemical Toxicology, Volume 33, Issue 6, Pages 475–481 (1995). Available at: http://ac.els- cdn.com/027869159500009Q/1-s2.0-027869159500009Q-main.pdf?_tid=1d125fac-2177-11e4-ad09- 00000aacb35d&acdnat=1407775800_19aeb4101043c117eb2842c55b96e237 2 California Integrated Waste Management Board, Useand Disposal of Polystyrene in California, 2004. Available at: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/Documents/Plastics/43204003.pdf 9/2/14 SS1 SS1 - 1 Attachment 1 PH1 - 9 Polystyrene Study Session Page 2 published in 2011 found that 71% of all the plastic flowing through the Los Angeles and San GabrielRivers is foam.3 It is the second most common form of beach debris in California, according to a study conducted in Orange County.4 Also, several studies approximate that plastic products, including polystyrene, make up80-90% of floating marinedebris. The City does not currently have data on theamount of EPSpresent in our storm drains or creeks, but can consider some methods of documentation during the next Creek Day. In addition to reducing the amount of harmful litter entering local waterways, cities also typically cite the improvedpotential for recycling opportunities and diverting trash from landfills as a basis for an EPS ordinance. EPS products are challenging to recycle and are not currently recycled at the Cold Canyon landfill through San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management. There is also a clear, non-expanded form of polystyrene used in food service called oriented” or “rigid” polystyrene. These rigid polystyrene containers are recycled in San Luis Obispo County even afterhaving been in contact with food. Food service based businesses are often mostimpacted by these types of ordinances. Frequently cited concerns are the additional cost of alternatives and performance of alternative products e.g. rigidity, insulating properties, etc.). DEFINITIONS In order to ensure a common understanding of terms being used in thediscussion that follows, definitions are offered below. A. “Foodcontainer” means a container that is used to hold prepared food or drinks. Food containerincludes cups, bowls, plates, trays, cartons or clamshell containers that are intended for single use. B. “Food provider” generally means anyvendor, business, organization, entity, group, or individual that offers food or beverages to the public for consumptionon or off premises, regardless of whether there is a charge for the food. “Food provider” typically includes restaurants, retail food establishments, caterers, cafeterias, stores, shops, sales outlets, grocery stores, delicatessens, itinerant restaurants and mobilefood vendors. C. “Foodservice ware” includes cup lids, straws, stirrers, forks, spoons, knives, napkins, trays, and otheritems primarily designed for use in consuming food. D. “Expanded Polystyrene” or “EPS” means a foammaterial made of blown polystyrene, and expanded and extrudedfoams (sometimes calledStyrofoam™) which are thermoplastic petrochemical materials utilizing a styrene monomer whichis often used to hold prepared food (pictured below). EPS is not recycled in San Luis Obispo County. 3 Journal of Integrated Coastal Zone Management, Volume11, Issue 11, Pages 65-73 (2011). Available at: http://www.cleanwateraction.org/files/publications/C%20Moore%20et%20al%202%20urban%20rivers.pdf 4 Composition and Distribution of Beach Debris in Orange County, California. Available at: http://www.cleanwateraction.org/files/publications/Beach%20Debris%20Orange%20County%20Study.pdf SS1 - 2 Attachment 1 PH1 - 10 Polystyrene Study Session Page 3 E. "Polystyrene" means a thermoplasticpetrochemical material utilizing styrene monomers. Polystyrene includes the foammaterial as well as clear, rigid polystyrene also called oriented polystyrene" (pictured below). Rigid polystyrene is recycled in San Luis Obispo County. F. “Prepared food” means any food, including beverages, which is served or prepared for consumption, including ready-to-eat and takeout food. POLICY REVIEW General Plan Policies The General Plan does not contain policies that explicitly address EPS. There are, however, three Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) policies that address reuse and recycling of materials in and by the City. SS1 - 3 Attachment 1 PH1 - 11 Polystyrene Study Session Page 4 COSE Policy 5.5.2: The City will manage its operations to foster reuse and recycling for: A. Avoiding using inks, papers, and plasticsthat inhibit recycling or that produce pollutants in preparation for recycling. B. Purchasing products incorporating recycledmaterials.” COSE Policy 5.5.3: The City will coordinate local, and participate in regional, household and business waste-reduction and recycling efforts.” The Conservation and Open Space Element also contains a policy intended to expand public education regarding conservation and sustainability. COSE Policy 5.5.6: The City will expand its public education outreach efforts to raise public awareness of energy and material conservation goals, sustainable technology, benefits and incentives.” These policies recognizethe City’s responsibility for efficient use of materials and recycling while also acknowledging its role in encouraging residentsand business to do so as well. Climate Action Plan The San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan identifies solid waste strategies to increase the community’s waste diversion rate, which is theamount of material diverted from the landfill to be recycled, composted or reused. These strategies help reduce the amount of greenhouse gas GHG) emissions associated with transport and organicdecomposition. A description of the Increase Waste Diversion (WST 1) strategy indicates: An ordinance that requires biodegradable food packaging in restaurants and other food vendors canreduce theamount of non-recyclable Styrofoam™ that is sent to the landfill. Successfulexamples in other California cities will be explored.” Implementation of this strategy includes several actions, one of which is WST 1.8 which calls for the City to: Evaluate the effectiveness of a FoodPackagingOrdinance that requires biodegradable containers.” Implementation of this action would accomplish the objective of the Climate Action Plan to reduce GHG emissions by decreasing thenumber of vehicle trips associated with solid waste disposal at Cold Canyon landfill. Storm Water Management Plan The City’s Storm Water ManagementPlan does not directly address EPS, but does have related elements that involvepublic education and outreach for reducing pollutants and increasing recycling of materials that may enter storm drains. In addition, there are specific strategies aimed at pollution prevention whichwould include materials such as EPS. SS1 - 4 Attachment 1 PH1 - 12 Polystyrene Study Session Page 5 In addition, The State Water Quality Control Board has proposed to adopt amendments to Statewide Water Quality Control Plans to control trash. These amendments are currently pending an adoption hearing by the State Board. Dependent on the outcome of that hearing and the final language of the amendmentsthere may be additional requirements for the City to take action to prevent trash from entering storm drains and waterways. San Luis Obispo CountyIntegrated Waste Management The San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA) briefly discussed the policy issue of regulating EPS at their March 2014 Board Meeting. The outcome of that discussion was a determinationthat IWMA has no plans to consider regulating EPSat this time. ORDINANCES FROMOTHER AGENCIES A wide range of cities and counties with adoptedEPS ordinances were reviewed to study the scope of their regulations and methods for implementation and enforcement. Information on11 agencies is presented in this report. Those agencies were selected based on proximity, best practice ordinances or status as a benchmark city. Most cities and counties focuson the environmental concerns of EPS food containers as the basis for an ordinance including: EPS is a lightweight material that canbe blown out of wastereceptaclesand into storm drains and waterways. EPS breaks down into small pieces, which allow it to spread easily through aquatic environments and is mistaken as food by fish and wildlife. EPS, in its broken down form, is difficult and expensive to clean up. EPS is generally not economically feasible to be recycled. Most ordinanceshaveseveral key elements including: Language expressly prohibiting the use of EPS food and drink containers provided by food providers. Specific definitions thatexclude or include polystyrene food service ware items such as straws, lids for cups, and utensils from the scope of the ordinance. An “undue hardship” clause providing exemptions for cases wherealternativeswere either too costly or their container needs could not be met by alternatives. o 15% was often used as the threshold for determining an undue economic hardship. An exemption for packaging of uncooked food items such as raw fish andmeat. An exclusion of foods prepared or packaged outsidethe city and sold inside the city limits. Inclusion of an emergency clause for public health and safety or medical necessity. An implementation time frameafteradoption, usually ranging from 30 days to one year. SS1 - 5 Attachment 1 PH1 - 13 Polystyrene Study Session Page 6 Some cities and counties have additional elements which further specify the ordinance’s scope including: A section stating that all non-recyclable containers are to be prohibited in favor of recyclable, compostable, or biodegradable materials. The addition of other products made of EPS. This includesitems such as small coolers, pool toys, and packing “peanuts” for shipping. An “in lieu of fine” program, wherethe proof of purchase of acceptable products is accepted instead of a fine for the first offense. Other considerations addressed by individual agencies include: Capitola and Santa Cruz amended andexpanded initial ordinances to include a wider range of items including the retail sale of polystyrene products. Carpenteria has included that each foodprovider file a signed certification that they are aware of the ordinance and will comply with it. Thisis to bedoneat the beginning of each year. SS1 - 6 Attachment 1 PH1 - 14 CityofSanLuisObispo, CouncilAgendaReport, MeetingDate, ItemNumber EXPANDEDPOLYSTYRENE FOODCONTAINER AND PRODUCT REGULATIONS Page 7 The chart below compares the key elements of ordinances from the agenciesselected for research. City and Ordinance Adopted EPS Food and Drink Containers All Non- Sustainable Containers Straws, CupLids, and Utensils Other EPS Products coolers, peanuts") Affordability exclusion of 15% Purchase In lieu of fine program Enforcement Santa Cruz - Environmentally Acceptable Packaging and Products 2007/ 2012 X X X X X X Director of Public Works Santa Monica - Banning Non- recyclable PlasticDisposable Food Service Containers 2007 X X Environmentaland Public Works Director Capitola - EPS and Biodegradable and Compostable Food Service Ware 2009/ 2011 X X X X City Manager or designee Monterey - Environmentally Acceptable Food Packaging 2009 X X X X Deputy City Manager Carpenteria - Food Container Regulations 2008 X X City Manager or designee Ojai - Environmentally Acceptable Packaging and Products 2014 X X X X X X Code Enforcement Salinas - Environmentally Acceptable Food Packaging Ordinance 2011 X X X X X City Manager or designee Newport Beach - Use of Expanded Polystyrene Disposable Food Service Ware 2008 X City Manager or designee Cupertino - Polystyrene FoamDisposable Fo od Service Ware 2014 X City Manager or designee County of Monterey - Use of Polystyrene FoamFood Packaging by FoodProviders 2010 X X Director of Health County of Santa Clara - Expanded Polystyrene Food and Beverage Containers 2012 X X Agricultureand Environmental Director SS1 - 7 Attachment 1 PH1 - 15 CityofSanLuisObispo, CouncilAgendaReport, MeetingDate, ItemNumber EXPANDED POLYSTYRENEFOODCONTAINER AND PRODUCT REGULATIONS Page 8 ISSUES & IMPACTS Business Perspective Food-based businesses are typically the groupmost affected by EPSordinances. City staff worked with the Chamber of Commerce to contact several localfood-basedbusinesses to better understand their perspective on this issue. Initially, a small group of businesses were contacted directly to discuss the issues. Based on those conversations, a survey wasdeveloped that was sent to a largergroup of businesses in the City. In total, feedback was received by 20 local businesses. The businesses were grouped into threecategories for analysis. Group1: Businesses thatno longer use EPS food containers, but had in the past. Group2: Businesses that have not used EPS food containerssince the businessbegan. Group3: Businesses that currently use EPS food containers. Businesses in Group1 generallycitedowner/managementpreference as the main reason for switching away from EPS food containers. Also, those businesses saw an approximate15-60% increase in cost associated with switching to another product. Those businesses noted increased customer satisfaction as well as increased consumer prices as the main effects of switching. Group2 businesses chose not to use EPS food containers for a variety of reasons including owner/managementpreference, customerpreference and environmental and health concerns. Businesses in Group3 generally use EPS food containers because it is less expensivethan alternatives. Some businesses also indicated concerns with the performance of alternative containers. The concerns involve both the rigidityof the containers with hot foods orliquids and poor insulating properties. Concerns about an EPS ordinance from thesebusinesses included increased costs and additional regulationson private business. This outreach effort was intended to be illustrative and not exhaustive of the issues and concerns of the business community on this issue. If desired, additional, in-depthoutreach to the business community canbe included as a part of the City Council direction on this issue. Thesurvey and results are included as Attachment2. SS1 - 8 Attachment 1 PH1 - 16 Polystyrene Study Session Page 9 Cost Comparison In 2012, the City of San Jose completed a cost comparison of EPS products to alternatives as a part of a county-wide effort to regulate EPS. The results of that analysis are below: Material Cups Plates Clamshell Container EPS $0.035 $0.056 $0.09 Rigid Plastic $0.026 $0.083 $0.25 Paper $0.055 $0.02 $0.28 Molded NaturalFiber n/a $0.064 $0.22 Compostable Plastic $0.07 $0.15 $0.33 Alternatives to EPS cups ranged from 26% less expensive to 50% more expensive. The range for plateswas 35% less expensive to 63% more expensive for EPS alternatives. Alternatives to EPS clamshell containers ranged from 59% to 73% more expensive. Staff comparedtheresults of the City of San Jose analysis to some local prices and found generalconcurrence with the findings. Outcomes of Regulation Classification of litter canbe verytime intensive and expensive. As a result, there is relatively little data on theoutcomes of EPSordinances. There are, however, some observational studies that have documented results. Those include: The City of Santa Cruz observed a 50% decrease in EPS food and drink containers picked up during annual beach and river cleanupsbetween 2007-2012. One year afterimplementation of the City of San Franciscoordinance that prohibits EPS food and drink containers, the City’s litter audit showed a 36% decrease in EPS litter. POLICY TYPES As referenced in the research section, there are severalelements that may be included in ordinances regulating EPS. Tofacilitate discussion, staff has grouped those various elements into four policy types. Below is a graphic illustrating those policy types and the associatedscope of the regulations listed in order of increasing level of affectedproducts. SS1 - 9 Attachment 1 PH1 - 17 Polystyrene Study Session Page 10 Type 1: The first type of ordinance focuses only on food and drink carrying EPS containers. This would notinclude clear, rigid polystyrene containers. This would also notinclude any food serviceware items such as straws, cup lids, or utensils. Type 2: The second type of ordinance is a restriction on EPS food and drink containers as well as all other food containers that are non-recyclable, non- compostable or non-reusable. This would not include clear, rigid polystyrene containers as it recyclable in the County. This would also notinclude any food service ware items such as straws, cup lids, or utensils. Type 3: The nexttype of ordinance is one that prohibits EPS food and drink containers as well as all other food containers that are non-recyclable, non- compostable or non-reusable. In addition, this type of ordinance includes restrictions on straws, cup lids, utensils and other similar products. Type 4: The last type of ordinance includes all of the previously stated restrictions, but also prohibits the retail sale of any product that is made with EPS that is not wholly encapsulated or enclosed. This generally includes foam plates, cups, packing peanuts”, smaller foam ice coolers (those not clad in plastic), pool toys and other products that maynot be directly associated with food service. IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT The following implementation and enforcement strategies were common among cities and counties with EPS ordinances of all types: Type 1: EPS food and drink containers Type 2: EPS and non-sustainable food and drink containers Type 3: Above and non-sustainable food service ware Type 4: Above and retail sale of EPS containersand other non-enclosed products SS1 - 10 Attachment 1 PH1 - 18 Polystyrene Study Session Page 11 Several cities held initial stakeholder meetings and included current restaurant product suppliers andwaste haulers in addition to neighborhood associationsand food vendors. Clear definition of items covered by the ordinance isimportant for effective implementation. This allows for clarity to vendors affected andmakes enforcement easier. Gradual implementation of an ordinance, up to a year in length, increased effectiveness. This allows for outreach and a phase-in timeto providefood vendors and others timeto use up their existing stock of containers. Sending mailings to affected vendors to inform them of ordinance’s scopecanincrease compliance andreduce theamount of enforcement needed. In addition to thehearing process, these mailings were sent out between the passing of ordinance and its implementation, as well as at least one mailing after the implementation date. Workshops were held to inform affected businesses and included vendors of alternative products. This was helpful for educational purposes, but can also help establish relationships betweenthe affected businesses and thesuppliers of the needed replacements. In the case of the ordinance having multiple parts or categories, staggering the implementation has proved to be effective. In some cities, a purchasing co-op was created so that small businesses can take advantage of having access to bulk suppliers. Smaller local businesses often are more affected by the increased costs of alternative products, and this can help offset the overall cost. Different strategies for implementation, comprised of the above options, for the different types of ordinances can range from 40 to 1000 staff hours to complete. On-going enforcement is typically complaint based andcan account for 10% of the time for a full time employee for Type1 ordinances and 50% or more of the time for a full time employee for Type4 ordinances. SS1 - 11 Attachment 1 PH1 - 19 Polystyrene Study Session Page 12 FOCUS QUESTIONS FOR COUNCILDIRECTION In conclusion, staff has provided the following table with focusedquestions tofacilitate Council direction: Questions for Council Direction Yes No Pursue an ordinance regulating the use of EPS Include EPS food containers Include all non-recyclable, non-compostable, non-reusable food containers Include all non-recyclable, non-compostable, non-reusable food serviceware utensils, cup lids, straws, etc.) Include the retail sale of EPS products (coolers, packing “peanuts,” etc.) Include exception for undue hardship Include an “in lieu of fine” program The staff presentation on September 2, 2014, will include a similar decision matrix to help focus Council direction. FISCAL IMPACT It is estimated that the workto prepare an Ordinance using the traditional outreach and public engagement approach would be approximately 250 hours or $10,500 in staff and public outreach costs which can be absorbed through existing resources. Costs for implementation and on-going enforcement are dependent on City Councildirection and the scope of an adopted ordinance and may require additional resources. ALTERNATIVES 1. Continue the study session if more information is necessary in order to providedirection to staff onpreparing an EPS ordinance. 2. Bring an ordinanceback to the City Council as soon as possible and limit public outreach efforts. Thisis not recommended as the City’s public outreach efforts bring valuable input to the Ordinance preparation process andhave become an integral and expected component of any such effort. ATTACHMENTS 1. California Cities and Counties with Polystyrene Ordinances 2. Business Survey chstore6\team\council agenda reports\2014\2014-09-02\environmentally friendly food container (johnson-hermann)\polystyrene study session agenda report.docx SS1 - 12 Attachment 1 PH1 - 20 Attachment 1 California Cities and Counties with VariousPolystyrene Ordinances Alameda (2008) Albany (2008) Aliso Viejo (2005) Belmont (2012) Berkeley (1988) Burlingame (2011) Calabasas (2008) Capitola (2012) Carmel (1989) Carpenteria (2008) Cupertino (2014) Dana Point (2012) Del Ray Oaks (2010) El Cerrito (2014) Emeryville (2008) Fairfax (1993) Foster City (2012) Fremont (2011) Half Moon Bay (2011) Hayward (2011) Hercules (2008) Hermosa Beach (2012) Huntington Beach (2005) LagunaBeach (2008) Laguna Hills (2008) Laguna Woods (2004) Livermore (2010) Los Altos (2014) Los Altos Hills (2012) Los Angeles City (2008) Los Angeles County (2008) Malibu (2005) Manhattan Beach (2013) Marin County (2010) Marina (2011) Mendocino County (effective 2015) Menlo Park (2012) Millbrae (2008) Mill Valley (2009) Monterey City (2009) Monterey County (2010) MorganHill (2014) Mountain View (2014) Newport Beach (2008) Novato (2013) Oakland (2007) Ojai (2014) Orange County (2006) Pacific Grove (2008) Pacifica (2010) Palo Alto (2010) Pittsburg (1993) Portola Valley (2012) RedwoodCity (2013) Richmond (2014) Salinas (2011) San Bruno (2010) San Carlos (2012) San Clemente (2011) San Francisco (2007) San Jose (2014/2015) San Juan Capistrano (2004) San Leandro (2012) San Mateo City (2013) San Mateo County (2008/2011) San Rafael (2013) Santa Clara County (2013) Santa Cruz City (2012) Santa Cruz County (2012) Santa Monica (2007) Sausalito (2008) Scotts Valley (2009) Seaside (2010) Sonoma City (1989) Sonoma County (1989) South San Francisco (2008) Sunnyvale (2013) Ventura County (2004) Walnut Creek (2014) Watsonville (2009/2014) WestHollywood (1990) Yountville (1989) SS1 - 13 Attachment 1 PH1 - 21 Polystyrene Business Survey 1 11 38.46%5 61.54%8 Q1 Has your business ever used or does it currently use polystyrene or Styrofoam™ for food or drink containers? Answered:13 Skipped:0 Total 13 Yes No 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices Responses Yes No Attachment 2 SS1 - 14 Attachment 1 PH1 - 22 Polystyrene Business Survey 2 11 60.00%3 40.00%2 Q2 Do you still use polystyrene or Styrofoam™for food ordrink containers? Answered:5Skipped:8 Total 5 Yes No 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices Responses Yes No SS1 - 15 Attachment 1 PH1 - 23 Polystyrene Business Survey 3 11 50.00%1 50.00%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 Q3 What was your main reason for switchingto another product? Answered:2 Skipped:11 Total 2 Owner/managemen t preference Customer preference Environmental concerns Health concerns 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices Responses Owner/management preference Customer preference Environmental concerns Health concerns SS1 - 16 Attachment 1 PH1 - 24 Polystyrene Business Survey 4 11 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 50.00%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 50.00%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 Q4 What was the approximate percentage increase in costs associated with switching? Answered:2 Skipped:11 Total 2 No increase 10%or less 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% 40-50% 50-60% 60-70% 70-80% 80-90% 90-100% More than 100% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices Responses No increase 10%or less 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% 40-50% 50-60% 60-70% 70-80% 80-90% 90-100% More than100% SS1 - 17 Attachment 1 PH1 - 25 Polystyrene Business Survey 1 1 Q5 Has the change hadany positive or negative effects on your business? Answered:2 Skipped:11 Responses Date 1 Pros cons Attractiveto environmental conscience customers but increased costs 8/17/2014 4:29 PM 2 raised prices 8/7/2014 4:41 PM SS1 - 18 Attachment 1 PH1 - 26 Polystyrene Business Survey 6 11 100.00%1 100.00%1 100.00%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 100.00%1 100.00%1 Q6 Please provide your contact information if you'd like to stay updated on the status of the City's research on this topic. Answered:1 Skipped:12 Answer Choices Responses Name: Company: Address: Address 2: City/Town: State: ZIP: Country: Email Address: PhoneNumber: SS1 - 19 Attachment 1 PH1 - 27 Polystyrene Business Survey 7 11 100.00%5 20.00%1 0.00%0 Q7 What are your main reasons for using polystyreneor Styrofoam™for food or drink containers? Answered:5Skipped:8 Total Respondents:5 Less expensive than... Alternative productsdo No interest in switching 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices Responses Less expensive thanalternatives Alternativeproducts do not meetneeds No interest in switching SS1 - 20 Attachment 1 PH1 - 28 Polystyrene Business Survey 1 1 Q8 What concerns would you have should an ordinance be passed? Answered:3 Skipped:10 Responses Date 1 Taking away freedom of choice.8/17/2014 4:30 PM 2 Increased Costs 8/6/2014 8:19 PM 3 More regulations on privet business.8/1/2014 9:33 AM SS1 - 21 Attachment 1 PH1 - 29 Polystyrene Business Survey 9 11 100.00%1 100.00%1 100.00%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 100.00%1 100.00%1 Q9 Please provide your contact information if you'd like to stay updated on the status of the City's research on this topic. Answered:1 Skipped:12 Answer Choices Responses Name: Company: Address: Address 2: City/Town: State: ZIP: Country: Email Address: PhoneNumber: SS1 - 22 Attachment 1 PH1 - 30 Polystyrene Business Survey 10 11 81.82%9 36.36%4 36.36%4 9.09%1 Q10 Do you have any specific reasons for notusing polystyreneor Styrofoam(TM) food and drink containers? Answered:11 Skipped:2 Total Respondents:11 Owner/managemen t preference Customer preference Environmental concerns Health concerns 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices Responses Owner/management preference Customer preference Environmental concerns Health concerns SS1 - 23 Attachment 1 PH1 - 31 Polystyrene Business Survey 11 11 100.00%2 100.00%2 100.00%2 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 100.00%2 100.00%2 Q11 Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey.Please provide your contact information if you'd like to stay updated on the status of the City's research on this topic. Answered:2 Skipped:11 Answer Choices Responses Name: Company: Address: Address 2: City/Town: State: ZIP: Country: Email Address: PhoneNumber: SS1 - 24 Attachment 1 PH1 - 32 All Statements sorted chronologically As of May 18, 2015, 1:27 PM As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is voluntary. The statements in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials. All Statements sorted chronologically As of May 18, 2015, 1:27 PM http://www.peakdemocracy.com/2708 Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products What do you think of the proposed ordinance to regulate the use of expanded polystyrene food containers and products? Attachment 2 PH1 - 33 As of May 18, 2015, 1:27 PM, this forum had: Attendees:62 All Statements:25 Hours of Public Comment:1.3 This topic started on April 30, 2015, 12:00 PM. All Statements sorted chronologically As of May 18, 2015, 1:27 PM http://www.peakdemocracy.com/2708 Page 2 of 7 Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products What do you think of the proposed ordinance to regulate the use of expanded polystyrene food containers and products? Attachment 2 PH1 - 34 Name not available (unclaimed)May 13, 2015, 4:53 PM I think it's another opportunity for SLO to prove that we are moving towards a sustainable community. We have been a leader in so many environmental efforts. Let's add another to our list of accomplishments. Good substitutes exist and will contribute greatly to a cleaner community/planet. It's time and I am all for it! Jackie Crane, SLO Name not available (unclaimed)May 13, 2015, 3:43 PM Yes, get rid of these products for our children's future. Help our environment. Name not shown inside Neighborhood 6 (on forum)May 13, 2015, 3:16 PM I am all for this ordinance. There really is no reason anyone should be using these items when alternatives are available. We should all be doing what we can to keep our planet clean. Name not available (unclaimed)May 13, 2015, 3:14 PM This is long overdue. In a town where I can't get a plastic bag (good call), it feels stupid filling up my styrofoam cup with soda when I'm out for lunch. Name not available (unclaimed)May 13, 2015, 2:29 PM I'm Alex from chili peppers and I am against the foam ban. The decision wold hurt my business because I'm already paying so many taxes. Intstead of hurting businesses, why don't we promote businesses? The city should look for. A solution that works for both of us like allowing us to recycle the foam instead. Name not available (unclaimed)May 13, 2015, 2:27 PM I'm Alex from chili peppers and I am against the foam ban. The decision wold hurt my business because I'm already paying so many taxes. Intstead of hurting businesses, why don't we promote businesses? The city should look for. A solution that works for both of us like allowing us to recycle the foam instead. Name not available (unclaimed)May 7, 2015, 3:07 PM There's absolutely no reason why this shouldn't happen. It is not a sustainable product nor recyclable, and Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products What do you think of the proposed ordinance to regulate the use of expanded polystyrene food containers and products? All Statements sorted chronologically As of May 18, 2015, 1:27 PM http://www.peakdemocracy.com/2708 Page 3 of 7 Attachment 2 PH1 - 35 there's plenty of alternatives. Businesses can retort there's an issue with costs, but I think customers would be happy to pay 5-10 cents more so they don't get their food in polystyrene. I will actually avoid taking out at restaurants if I know they use polystyrene. Chili Peppers actually warms up your food in polystyrene, so I have stopped going there. Banning these food containers is a positive step forward, and one that is in sync with what makes SLO, SLO! Name not available (unclaimed)May 7, 2015, 12:44 AM Thank you addressing this pollutant. 'Cheap' doesn't solve societal issues, good planning and foresight is our focus. Please support this new regulation. Name not shown outside Neighborhoods (on forum)May 6, 2015, 9:06 PM I support this ordinance. We all need to do more to cut down on trash that goes into the landfill, especially if it does not break down. Name not available (unclaimed)May 6, 2015, 5:07 PM I'm so glad this passed and that the regulations will reflect the Council approval of the strictest kind of ban. I just wish other cities in the County were on board, but we'll work on that after the regulations are passed. Name not shown inside Neighborhood 5 (on forum)May 6, 2015, 2:09 PM I believe this is a good idea the City should adopt to work in conjunction with the plastic bag ban as we all become more "green". However, I would suggest that for every new regulation passed, another regulation that is deemed to be ineffective, unnecessary, or cost/time prohibitive be removed from the books. The genius of this strategy is that it will eliminate the worst regulations, even if only to create new ones. It would diminish and/or stop the increase in regulation and that would be a huge step in the right direction. Name not available (unclaimed)May 6, 2015, 1:33 PM This is a no-brainer. Now how to get the entire county on board. I bring my own container when eating out so if I have left overs I do not need to ask for a container. Please educate the county on this. Barry Rands inside Neighborhood 12 (on forum)May 6, 2015, 10:40 AM Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products What do you think of the proposed ordinance to regulate the use of expanded polystyrene food containers and products? All Statements sorted chronologically As of May 18, 2015, 1:27 PM http://www.peakdemocracy.com/2708 Page 4 of 7 Attachment 2 PH1 - 36 I am all for it. I try to avoid styrofoam products as much as possible, knowing that much of this horrible stuff ends up in our creeks and oceans. And even if it is disposed of properly, it ends up in landfill, because it is not recyclable. Bravo to the City Council for having the foresight to get this ban implemented! Janine Rands inside Neighborhood 12 (on forum)May 6, 2015, 10:11 AM I'm thrilled that our SLO CIty Council has fully endorsed the ban of Styrofoam! Being a coastal city, we should not be contributing to the trash that feeds into our creeks, river and ultimately the Ocean. I have spoken to many restaurants and people who serve/eat out of Styrofoam, and most are totally unaware why Styrofoam is bad to eat out of: one of the components - Styrene, a known carcinogen, leaks into the food, particularly when it is hot, acidic or oily. Along with the birds and wildlife, we too are being poisoned! Janine Kennel Rands SLO FOAM FREE Chair Name not available (unclaimed)May 6, 2015, 9:36 AM I'm thrilled we are finally going to potentially ban polystyrene containers! There are alternatives that are sustainable, affordable, protect the environment, and ultimately our health. If any thing I would say we are behind the curve, many cities have banned the use of polystyrene with little or no impact on commerce. This is a no brainer. Name not available (unclaimed)May 6, 2015, 9:19 AM I am all for this sort of ordinance. Please take this action - it is environmentally responsible. Name not available (unclaimed)May 6, 2015, 9:17 AM No to Styrofoam! There are many better options: foil, cornstarch, even recyclable plastics are better than that toxic stuff. Come on, SLO county - we can do better! Name not available (unclaimed)May 6, 2015, 8:50 AM I am all for the banning of polystyrene food containers in San Luis Obispo and believe it is in line with the ideals of helping the local environment, and the health and well being of the citizens as a whole. Mary Wood inside Neighborhood 10 (on forum)May 6, 2015, 8:32 AM Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products What do you think of the proposed ordinance to regulate the use of expanded polystyrene food containers and products? All Statements sorted chronologically As of May 18, 2015, 1:27 PM http://www.peakdemocracy.com/2708 Page 5 of 7 Attachment 2 PH1 - 37 I am all for it. Thank you for taking this action. Name not shown inside Neighborhood 11 (on forum)May 6, 2015, 7:57 AM I think this is a wonderful idea. We shouldn't be using materials that are non recyclable, and can damage our environment further. Jennifer randall outside Neighborhoods (on forum)May 6, 2015, 7:34 AM This seems like a no brainer. There are alternative containers and products to use instead of something that is clearly a polluting substance and not recyclable in this area! I would gladly pay 10 cents more for a sustainable container, something recyclable when one is needed. Just like bags. These are important forward steps in a better community and healthier earth and population. I always refuse styrofoam wherever I go. If that's all a restaurant has, I usually go somewhere else or bring my own container. Styrofoam is bad! Nancy Terrell outside Neighborhoods (on forum)May 6, 2015, 7:31 AM I absolutely agree with this proposal. It is a travesty to see all that styrofoam go in the trash. I actually think this does not take it far enough, by allowing some companies to continue to use it. It should be gone altogether. Unless we were able to start recycling it here. I know that is possible elsewhere, but not here for some reason. My company switched many years ago and the cost increase was minimal. I think it actually encourages customers we would not have had otherwise. I personally don't like take out from places that currently use styrofoam. I think they are just uninformed and wouldn't mind switching if they knew the harm they were doing. Name not available (unclaimed)May 6, 2015, 6:32 AM I welcome the switch to products that replace the use or expanded polystyrene and am glad that our city is looking into implementing an ordinance to require it. Name not available (unclaimed)May 6, 2015, 6:17 AM I am all for a ban on polystyrene. Many other communities have one so. This product is bad for people and bad for our environment. It is also ugly and does not add to the experience of eating here in San Luis Obispo. Having all restaurants be held to the same standard would make it more fair for all. Thank you for considering this regulation. Name not shown inside Neighborhood 5 (on forum)May 5, 2015, 4:57 PM Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products What do you think of the proposed ordinance to regulate the use of expanded polystyrene food containers and products? All Statements sorted chronologically As of May 18, 2015, 1:27 PM http://www.peakdemocracy.com/2708 Page 6 of 7 Attachment 2 PH1 - 38 Why not do this? There are a number of alternatives available and many businesses have already made the switch. Protection of creeks and open spaces as well as environmental sustainability are core values for our community and I'm glad to see policies come forward that support that. I'm fully in favor of this ordinance. Expanded Polystyrene Food Containers and Products What do you think of the proposed ordinance to regulate the use of expanded polystyrene food containers and products? All Statements sorted chronologically As of May 18, 2015, 1:27 PM http://www.peakdemocracy.com/2708 Page 7 of 7 Attachment 2 PH1 - 39 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH1 - 40 Attachment 3 ORDINANCE NO. #### (2015 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADDING CHAPTER 8.06 TO THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATING EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE FOOD CONTAINERS AND PRODUCTS WHEREAS, The City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) has the police power to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community, including the ability to protect and enhance the natural environment; and WHEREAS, according to the California Department of Transportation, EPS comprises approximately 15% of storm drain litter. A study published in 2011 found that 71% of all the plastic flowing through the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers is foam. It is the second most common form of beach debris in California, according to a study conducted in Orange County. Also, several studies approximate that plastic products, including expanded polystyrene, make up 80-90% of floating marine debris; and WHEREAS, the City is situated entirely within the 84 square mile San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed. The City’s watershed and creek system are important natural resources as exemplified in various policies of the City’s General Plan. As part of the City’s natural resource program, the City performs regular creek clean-ups. During these clean-ups, the City finds and discards a significant amount of expanded polystyrene products such as clamshell containers, cups and plates. These products break apart into small pieces and ultimately flow to the Pacific Ocean contributing to concerns related to water quality and habitat protection both within the creek system as well as the marine environment; and WHEREAS, items made from expanded polystyrene are not biodegradable, compostable, or recyclable locally. Expanded polystyrene breaks into small pieces and because it is lightweight, may be picked up by the wind even when it has been disposed of properly; and WHEREAS, expanded polystyrene as litter is highly durable. Expanded polystyrene litter is present in City parks and public places, streets and roads, waterways and storm drains which may ultimately float, or be blown, into the Pacific Ocean; and WHEREAS, marine animals and birds often confuse expanded polystyrene with pieces of food, and when ingested, it can impact their digestive tracts, often leading to death; and WHEREAS, expanded polystyrene is manufactured from petroleum, a non-renewable resource; and WHEREAS, expanded polystyrene is not recycled at the Cold Canyon Landfill and there are no current plans to recycle it; WHEREAS, take-out food packaging that is biodegradable, compostable, and recyclable is the most responsible and sustainable choice for the City’s tourist economy, its citizenry and its PH1 - 41 Attachment 3 environment. When products are recycled, natural resources are spared, less energy is used for the production of new products, and landfill space is preserved; and WHEREAS, regulating the use of expanded polystyrene products will maximize the operating life of landfills; and WHEREAS, regulating the use of expanded polystyrene products within the City will help protect the City’s natural environment from contamination and degradation; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a study session in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September 2, 2014, and directed staff to develop an ordinance to prohibit the use of expanded polystyrene food or drink containers and the retail sale of non-encased expanded polystyrene products; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on June 2, 2015, for the purpose of considering the addition of Chapter 8.06 to the Municipal Code to prohibit the use of expanded polystyrene food or drink containers and the retail sale of non- encased expanded polystyrene products; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference as the findings of the City Council. SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The proposed ordinance is exempt from the environmental review requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. Further, the proposed Ordinance is exempt from CEQA on the separate and independent ground that it is an action of a regulatory agency (the City) for the protection of the environment because, among other things, it will regulate the use and sale of expanded polystyrene products and reduce the amount of expanded polystyrene products that enter local landfill and waterways. Thus, this Ordinance is categorically exempt from the requirements of CEQA under Section 15308 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations as an action by a regulatory agency for the protection of the environment. SECTION 3. Action. Chapter 8.06, establishing regulations to prohibit the use of expanded polystyrene food or drink containers and the retail sale of non-encased expanded polystyrene products, is hereby added to the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as follows: PH1 - 42 Attachment 3 Chapter 8.06 – EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE 8.06.010 - Definitions. The following words and phrases, whenever used in this chapter, shall have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise: A. “Affordable" means that a biodegradable, compostable or recyclable product may cost up to 15 percent more than the purchase cost of comparable EPS alternatives. B. “ASTM Standard” means meeting the standards of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) International Standards D6400 or D6868 for biodegradable and compostable plastics, as those standards may be amended. C. “Biodegradable” means Compostable (separately defined) or the ability of organic matter to break down from a complex to a more simple form through the action of bacteria or to undergo this process. D. “City Facility” means any building, structure or vehicle owned and operated by the City of San Luis Obispo, its agents, agencies, and departments. E. “City Contractor" means any person or entity that enters into an agreement with the City to furnish products or services to or for the City. F. “Compostable” means all the materials in the product or package will break down, or otherwise become part of, usable compost (e.g. soil-conditioning material, mulch). Compostable disposable food containers must meet ASTM Standards for compostable materials. G. “Disposable Food Container" is interchangeable with “to go” packaging and “food packaging material” and means all containers that are used to hold Prepared Food or drinks. Disposable Food Containers include clamshells, bowls, plates, trays, cartons, and cups that are intended for single use, including without limitation, food containers for takeout foods and/or leftovers from partially consumed meals prepared by Food Providers. This does not include single-use disposable items such as straws, cup lids, or utensils, nor does it include single-use disposable packaging for unprepared foods. H. “Events Promoter” means an applicant for any event permit issued by the City or any City employee(s) responsible for any City-organized event. I. “Expanded Polystyren e” or EPS means blown expanded and extruded polystyrene or other plastic foams which are processed by any number of techniques including, but not limited to, fusion of monomer spheres (expanded bead plastic), injection molding, foam molding, and extrusion-blown molding (extruded foam plastic). Expanded polystyrene and other plastic foam is generally used to make cups, bowls, plates, trays, clamshell containers, meat trays, ice chests, shipping boxes and packing peanuts. PH1 - 43 Attachment 3 J. “Expanded Polystyrene Products” means any item such as coolers, ice chests, cups, bowls, plates, clamshells containers, shipping boxes, or any other merchandise made from expanded polystyrene that is not wholly encapsulated or encased by a more durable material. K. “Food Provider” Means any establishment located within the City, that is a retailer of Prepared Food or beverages for public consumption including, but not limited to any store, supermarket, delicatessen, restaurant, shop, caterer or mobile food vendor. L. “Person” means an individual, business, Event Promoter, trust, firm, joint stock company, corporation, non-profit, including a government corporation, partnership, or association. M. “Prepared Food” means food or beverages, which are served, packaged, cooked, chopped, sliced, mixed, brewed, frozen, squeezed or otherwise prepared within the City. Prepared Food does not include raw, butchered meats, fish and/or poultry sold from a butcher case or similar food establishment. N. “Recyclable” means any material that is specified in the franchise agreement with the City’s solid waste removal provider including, but not limited to aluminum, tin and bi-metal cans, clear and colored glass containers, High Density Polyethylene (HDPE), Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET), clear or rigid polystyrene, corrugated cardboard and mixed paper. O. “Vendor” means any store or business which sells or offers goods or merchandise, located or operating within the City of San Luis Obispo, including those referenced in and “Food Provider.” 8.06.020 – Expanded Polystyrene Disposable Food Containers Prohibited. A. Food Providers within the City of San Luis Obispo may not provide Prepared Food in or provide separately any Disposable Food Container made from Expanded Polystyrene , except as exempted in Section 8.06.050. B. Disposable Food Containers made from Expanded Polystyrene are prohibited from use in all City Facilities. C. City Contractors in the performance of City contracts and Events Promoters may not provide Prepared Food in Disposable Food Containers made from Expanded Polystyrene. 8.06.030 - Required Biodegradable, Compostable, or Recyclable Disposable Food Containers. A. All Food Providers within the City utilizing Disposable Food Containers shall use Biodegradable, Compostable or Recyclable products. B. All City Facilities utilizing Disposable Food Containers shall use Biodegradable, Compostable or Recyclable products. C. City Contractors and Events Promoters utilizing Disposable Food Containers shall use Biodegradable, Compostable, or Recyclable products while performing under a City contract or permit. PH1 - 44 Attachment 3 8.06.040 - Prohibited Sales. No Vendor or Events Promoter in the City may sell or otherwise provide any Expanded Polystyrene Product which is not wholly encapsulated or encased within a more durable material, except as exempted in Section 8.06.050. This specifically includes, but is not limited to, cups, plates, bowls, trays, clamshells and other products intended primarily for food service use, as well as coolers, containers, ice chests, shipping boxes, packing peanuts, or other packaging materials. 8.06.050 – Exemptions. A. The City Manager or designee, may exempt a Food Provider from the requirements set forth in section 8.06.020(A) of this ordinance for a one-year period upon the Food Provider showing, in writing, that this ordinance would create an undue hardship or practical difficulty as evidenced by no alternatives being available or such alternatives are not Affordable. The City Manager or designee shall put the decision to grant or deny a one-year exemption in writing, and the decision shall be final. B. Exemptions to allow for the sale or provision of Expanded Polystyrene Products may be granted by the City Manager or designee, if the vendor can demonstrate in writing a public health and safety requirement or medical necessity to use the product. The City Manager or designee shall put the decision to grant or deny the exemption in writing and the decision shall be final. C. An exemption application shall include all information necessary for the City Manager or designee to make a decision, including but not limited to documentation showing factual support for the claimed exemption. The City Manager or designee may require the applicant to provide additional information. D. The City Manager or designee may approve the exemption application in whole or in part, with or without conditions. E. Foods prepared or packaged outside the City and sold inside the City are exempt from the provisions of this chapter. F. Raw meat, fish and other raw food trays are exempt from the provisions of this chapter. G. Products made from Expanded Polystyrene which are wholly encapsulated or encased by a more durable material are exempt from the provisions of this chapter. Examples include surfboards, life preservers, and craft supplies which are wholly encapsulated or encased by a more durable material, and coolers encased in hard plastic. H. Construction products made from Expanded Polystyrene are exempted from this ordinance if the products are used in compliance with San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction and Chapter 12.08 Urban Storm Water Quality Management and PH1 - 45 Attachment 3 Discharge Control and used in a manner preventing the Expanded Polystyrene from being released into the environment. I. In a situation deemed by the City Manager to be an emergency for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, City Facilities, Food Providers, City Contractors and Vendors doing business with the City shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter. J. Expanded Polystyrene packaging products which have been received from sources outside the City may be reused to be kept out of the waste stream. 8.06.060 Violations. A. Any violation of the provisions of this chapter by any person is subject to administrative fines as provided in Chapter 1.24 of this code, which may be appealed pursuant to the procedures in that Chapter 1.24. B. For the first violation, the City Manager or designee may allow the violating Food Provider, in lieu of payment of the administrative fine, to submit receipts demonstrating the purchase after the citation date, of Biodegradable, Compostable, or Recyclable products in an amount equal to the amount of the citation. C. Food Providers or Vendors who violate this chapter in connection with City permitted special events shall be assessed fines as follows: 1. A fine not to exceed $200 for an event of 1 to 200 Persons 2. A fine not to exceed $400 for an event of 201 to 400 Persons 3. A fine not to exceed $600 for an event of 401 to 600 Persons 4. A fine not to exceed $1,000 for an event of 600 or more Persons B. In addition to other remedies provided by this chapter or by other law, any violation of this chapter may be remedied by a civil action brought by the city attorney, including but not limited to administrative or judicial nuisance abatement proceedings, civil or criminal code enforcement proceedings, and suits for injunctive relief. The remedies provided by this chapter are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. SECTION 4. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this ordinance, or any other provisions of the city’s rules and regulations. It is the city’s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable. SECTION 5. Effective Dates. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of six (6) months after its final passage. A copy of the full text of this PH1 - 46 Attachment 3 ordinance shall be on file in the Office of the City Clerk on and after the date following introduction and passage to print and shall be available to any member of the public. INTRODUCED on the _____ day of _____________ 2015, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the _____ day of ____________ 2015, on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Anthony J. Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH1 - 47 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH1 - 48 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager Prepared by: James David, Principal Analyst SUBJECT: REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 3.24 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE: PURCHASING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES RECOMMENDATION Amend the Municipal Code, Purchasing Ordinance (MC 3.24), Purchasing Guidelines and any related internal policies by: 1. Revising purchasing authority and procedures for Public Works projects to be more consistent with Public Contract Code; 2. Revising purchasing authority and procedures for consultant services to keep pace with the current market; and 3. Adding language governing on-call professional services, environmentally preferred purchases, and emergency purchasing. DISCUSSION Background One of the City’s adopted Financial Plan objectives states that the City will link resources with results by “proposing objectives for improving the delivery of program services” (2013-15 Financial Plan, Objective A5, Pg. H-4). Based on organization-wide feedback, it appears that some of the existing policies and procedures that govern purchasing activities are hindering staff’s ability to deliver services in an efficient and timely manner. With each required level of purchasing authority comes additional time, resources and review before a purchase can be made and related service delivered. In some circumstances, the additional levels of scrutiny do not appear to create additional value in terms of ensuring proper conduct, compliance with regulations, or other quality control benefits. Staff has identified several opportunities to reevaluate purchasing authority levels or bidding procedures to keep pace with the current market and streamline the delivery of program services. This systematic review of operations is consistent with adopted Financial Plan budget policies governing productivity, and specifically responds to guidance for “Analyzing system and procedures to identify and remove unnecessary review requirements” (2013-15 Financial Plan, #A, Pg. H-26). On December 16, 2014, the Council adopted a new budget policy in the Productivity section (Pg. H-26) of the 2013-15 Financial Plan that reiterates this commitment to efficient purchasing policies and procedures (new language in italics): 06/02/15 B1 B1 - 1 Purchasing System Changes Page 2 …the City will constantly monitor and review our methods of operation to ensure that services continue to be delivered in the most cost-effective manner possible. This review process encompasses a wide range of productivity issue, including… H. Maintaining City purchasing policies and procedures that are as efficient and effective as possible. As part of this policy change, Council gave staff direction to return with analysis of existing purchasing practices, including comparison with other benchmark cities, and provide recommendations for improvement. The following sections describe this analysis and corresponding recommendations. Benchmark comparison The City uses a set of benchmark cities when comparing municipal operations: Monterey, Santa Cruz, Palm Springs, Napa, Santa Maria, Davis, Paso Robles and Santa Barbara. Research was conducted to compare purchasing policies and procedures (Attachment 2, Benchmark Purchasing Comparison). In general, San Luis Obispo’s purchasing policies and levels of purchasing authority are aligned with most benchmark cities. There are a few cities that do things a little differently, which has led to the recommendations that follow. Allow more public projects to use informal bidding procedures per Public Contract Code The cities of Davis and Santa Maria use the State’s Public Contract Code to establish alternative bidding procedures governing Public Works projects (Section 22032): (a) Public projects of forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000) or less may be performed by the employees of a public agency by force account, by negotiated contract, or by purchase order. (b) Public projects of one hundred seventy-five thousand dollars ($175,000) or less may be let to contract by informal procedures as set forth in this article. (c) Public projects of more than one hundred seventy-five thousand dollars ($175,000) shall, except as otherwise provided in this article, be let to contract by formal bidding procedure. San Luis Obispo elected to follow the Public Contract Code as well in 2003 (Attachment 3, Council Ordinance 1435). Formal bidding procedure (noted as letter “c” above) is the Request for Proposals (RFP) process, which requires notices inviting bids be published in the newspaper at least thirty calendar days before the date of opening the bids (MC 3.24.150.B2). Informal bidding procedure (noted as letter “b” above) is a streamlined process that allows notices inviting bids to be mailed to a list of qualified contractors and construction trade journals at least ten calendar days before bids are due (MC 3.24.150.B3). A distinct departure from the Public Contract Code was made by the City in 2003 when the purchasing guidelines were revised: instead of $175,000 or more being the criterion for formal bidding procedures the City opted for criterion of $25,000 or more (Attachment 5, Purchasing Resolution). This means that most public projects valued $25,000 or more are going through the formal, and more time consuming, RFP process. Staff recommends the Council amend the B1 - 2 Purchasing System Changes Page 3 purchasing guidelines to be more consistent with the Public Contract Code by raising the threshold for informal bidding procedures to public projects valued $100,000 or less. This will result in a streamlined process that reduces the calendar days for bidding periods, and reduces staff time spent on the process of getting things constructed, which will enhance our service delivery to the community. Staff is also recommending that the Finance Director or their designee be given the authority to award contracts for public contracts valued $45,000 or less. This is consistent with Public Contract Code (letter “a” above) and will streamline the City’s internal processes for delivering small-scale public projects. Increase City Manager spending limit on consultants to keep pace with the market The City continues to rely on consultants to augment staff resources. The City Manager/Designee’s consultant services spending limit in Monterey ($35K), Santa Cruz ($100K), Davis ($50K), Santa Barbara ($35K) and Santa Maria ($75K) are all higher than San Luis Obispo ($25K). The last change to San Luis Obispo’s City Manager/Designee consultant services spending limit was in 2003. Organization-wide feedback indicated that consultant costs often exceed $25,000 in today’s market. Staff recommends the Council amend the purchasing guidelines to raise the purchasing authority of the City Manager/Designee to procure consultant services to $50,000. This is a reasonable increase consistent with other benchmark cities that will have a significant efficiency impact. The result will be a streamlined process that reduces staff and Council time spent on the process of hiring consultants to work on budgeted projects and programs. Add purchasing language that enhances efficiency and environmental responsibility There are three other areas the City could strengthen their purchasing policies and procedures: (1) on-call professional services, (2) environmentally preferred purchases, and (3) emergency purchasing. These are areas where the City has adopted best management practices but has not formally included policy language in applicable sections of the Municipal Code and related purchasing guidelines. 1. On-call professional services Multiple City departments maintain lists of Council-approved qualified consultants that can provide professional services on various projects. However, the Municipal Code does not provide direction on how to create and maintain these lists. Staff recommends the Council amend the Municipal Code to require a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process be followed to solicit on-call consultants at least every five years. This will enhance transparency and formalize the process of establishing and maintaining these lists. 2. Environmentally Preferred Purchases The City adopted a “Recycled product procurement policy” in 1990 (Council Ordinance 1178). Many benchmark cities have expanded policies that include preference for equipment, supplies, and services that cause less harm to the natural environment, and are not solely focused on recycled products. Staff recommends the Council expand upon the City’s recycled product B1 - 3 Purchasing System Changes Page 4 policy in the same manner to demonstrate a commitment to purchasing equipment, supplies and services that use less harmful materials, employ recycled or recovered materials, and utilize techniques intended to result in less impact on the environment that other available methods. 3. Emergency Purchasing The Purchasing Ordinance contains minimal provisions for emergency purchasing (MC 3.24.060B). Staff recommends that Council amend the Municipal Code to define “emergency purchasing” and set guidelines for when the City Manager/Designee can authorize an emergency purchase that cannot be made through normal purchasing procedures. Future direction on local vendor preference Another purchasing policy found in many benchmark cities is a preference for local vendors. Most benchmark cities adopted a separate ordinance that defines “local vendor” and indicates what type of preference a qualifying local vendor is eligible to receive. In some cases a local vendor’s bid is given an advantage up to five percent of their net bid amount, which means that a local vendor does not necessarily have to be the lowest bidder to secure the contract. In other cases local vendors are given an advantage equal to the amount of local sales tax that would be generated if they were the winning bidder. In all cases a determination is made that the local product is of the same quality as the lowest bidder. Staff has received inquiries from Council members about a potential local vendor preference policy. The City’s Purchasing Ordinance contains language that allows for local preference if quality, price, service and all other relevant factors are equal (MC 3.24.130B, 3.24.190B). If the Council majority desires to explore expanding local vendor preference to incorporate additional advantages, staff will return with a separate item on a future agenda for Council review and potential adoption. CONCURRENCES Administration staff conducted 11 brainstorming sessions with various City departments that focused on existing process, issues and ideas. Each meeting was attended by analysts, program managers, Department Heads, and other representatives. These meetings resulted in process improvements to a variety of internal processes, and in almost every case the purchasing authority limits and procedures were seen as an area where additional process improvements are needed. The Finance Department is the lead on purchasing polices and their staff concurs with the recommendations in this report as well. FISCAL IMPACT Streamlining purchasing procedures means less time spent on process. This will free up staff time to focus on other projects and programs, which indirectly reduces overall staff costs because less staff resources are needed. B1 - 4 Purchasing System Changes Page 5 ALTERNATIVES 1. Do nothing. This is not recommended because the City’s purchasing policies and procedures will continue to lose pace with industry and market practices. Furthermore, budget policies to enhance productivity and efficiency will not be met. 2. Recommend different monetary limits for Public Works project bidding procedures and/or City Manager/Designee spending limits on consultant services. This is not recommended because the proposed changes are justified by benchmark analysis and have been vetted internally by staff. ATTACHMENTS 1. Existing and Proposed Purchasing System Overview 2. Benchmark City Purchasing Comparison 3. Ordinance 1435 (2003): Use Public Contract Code for Public Construction Projects 4. Measure L-02 Language and Voting Results (2002) 5. Resolution 9444 (2003): Update Purchasing Guidelines 6. Legislative Draft Financial Management Manual Sections 7. Draft Resolution: Update Purchasing Guidelines 8. Draft Ordinance: Amend Municipal Code Purchasing Ordinance T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-06-02\Purchasing Authority Changes B1 - 5 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK B1 - 6 Purchasing System Overview Exhibit 201-B Type Category Features Over-the-Counter No specific requirements; competitive bidding to be used whenever practical. Less Than Bid award by department via voucher or $7,500 purchase order. Job Order Contract (JOC) Task Orders by the City Engineer. Open Market Department solicits at least 3 proposals; $7,500 to (may be verbal with written quotes). $25,000 Bid award by Finance via purchase order or contract (or JOC Task Order by the City Engineer). GENERAL PURCHASES Formal Formal Bid or RFP documents. Advertising for sealed bids or proposals. Includes supplies, Greater Than (Mailed notice in the case of construction projects.) equipment, operating or $25,000 City Manager approves soliciting for bids or maintenance services proposals and awards the contract and construction projects. (or approves JOC Task Order). Same as above except the Council approves Bid/RFP documents and soliciting Greater Than for proposals; contract award generally $100,000 delegated by Council to the City Manager. City Manager authorized to approve all JOC Task Orders, not to exceed Council-approved annual limits. No specific requirements; Less Than proposals to be solicited whenever practical. $7,500 Proposal award by Department via voucher or purchase order. Proposals solicited whenever practical. CONSULTANT $7,500 to Contract negotiated by Department. SERVICES $25,000 Contract award by City Manager via purchase order or contract. Includes advisory Formal services from professionals Formal RFP document. such as engineers, Greater Than Council authorizes staff to request architects, attorneys and $25,000 proposals and generally delegates contract other specialized award to the City Manager. consultants. Note: These are general guidelines; the evaluation and selection process for consultant services may vary on a case-by-case basis. Formal Bid or Proposal Process 201-5 Attachment 1 B1 - 7 GENERAL PURCHASES Supplies, equipment, operating or maintenance services Less than $7,500 $7,500 to $25,000 $25,000 to $100,000 More than $100,000 No specific requirements; competitive bidding when practical Award by Department Solicit 3 written quotations and submit summary Award by Finance Director/Designee Purchasing Authority authorizes advertising for sealed bids; Request for Proposals (RFP) Award by Purchasing Authority Council authorizes advertising for sealed bids (RFP) Award generally delegated by Council to Purchasing Authority PURCHASING SYSTEM OVERVIEW1 2 Construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, renovation, improvement, demolition, painting, repainting, and repair work involving any publicly owned, leased, or operated facility (Public Contract Code 22002c). PUBLIC PROJECTS2 Less than $7,500 $7,500 to $45,000 $45,000 to $100,000 More than $100,000 No requirements; competitive bidding when practical Award by Department Job Order Contract (JOC) Task Order by City Engineer Solicit 3 written proposals and submit summary Award by Finance Director/Designee JOC Task Order by City Engineer Notice inviting informal bids from list of qualified contractors Award or JOC Task Order by Purchasing Authority Council authorizes advertising for sealed bids (RFP) Award generally delegated to Purchasing Authority JOC Task Order by Purchasing Authority (within annual limits) CONSULTANT SERVICES3 Less than $7,500 $7,500 to $50,000 More than $50,000 No requirements; solicit proposals when practical Award by Department Solicit 3 written proposals and submit summary Contract negotiated by Department Award by Purchasing Authority Council authorizes advertising for sealed bids (RFP) Award generally delegated to Purchasing Authority 3 Finance Director can execute purchase orders for approved on-call consultant services in an amount not-to-exceed the project budget (MC 3.24.070C). 1 All monetary limits shown are for the cumulative value of the purchase, project or contract. Attachment 1 B1 - 8 Benchmark Cities Purchasing Policy Comparison 04/07/15 Item Limit Staff Procedure San Luis Obispo All 7,500$ Department Head No requirements General Purchases (Incl. PW projects)25,000$ Finance Director 3 quotes General Purchases (Incl. PW projects)100,000$ City Manager RFP General Purchases (Incl. PW projects)100,000+Council RFP Consultant Services 25,000$ City Manager No requirements Consultant Services 25,000+Council RFP Monterey All 3,500$ Department Head No requirements Purchases, Services 35,000$ Finance Director 3 written quotes Purchases, Services 35,000+Finance issue, Council award RFP CIPs and Fleet 60,000$ Finance Director 3 written quotes CIPs and Fleet 60,000+Finance issue, Council award RFP Napa Non-Budgeted Purchases 5,000$ Purchasing Officer Request for Quotes Non-Budgeted Purchases 50,000$ City Manager Request for Quotes Budgeted Purchases 75,000$ CM/Purchasing Officer Request for Quotes Budgeted Purchases 75,000+CM/Purchasing Officer RFP Personal Services 25,000$ City Manager Request for Quotes Personal Services 25,000+Council Quotes/RFP Palm Springs All 2,500$ Department Head No requirements All 5,000$ Procurment Director No requirements All 25,000$ City Manager 3 quotes Professional Services 25,000+Council (or delegate)On-call list Public Projects 100,000$ Council (or delegate)On-call list Non-Professional Services, Supplies 100,000$ Council (or delegate)6 quotes All 100,000+Council RFP Santa Cruz All 10,000 Purchasing Manager (or designee)No requirements All 100,000$ Purchasing Manager (or designee)3 quotes All 100,000+Council RFP Attachment 2 B1 - 9 Benchmark Cities Purchasing Policy Comparison 04/07/15 Davis Supplies, Services, Equipment 1,000$ Department Head No requirements Budgeted Supplies, Services, Equipment 50,000$ City Manager (or designee)Written quotes Supplies, Services, Equipment 50,000+Council RFP Public Projects (Public Contracts Code)45,000$ City Manager No requirements Public Projects (Public Contracts Code)175,000$ City Manager On-call list Public Projects (Public Contracts Code)175,000+Council RFP Paso Robles All 5,000$ Department Head No requirements All 10,000$ CM/Designee 3 quotes All 20,000$ CM/Designee RFP All 20,000+Council RFP Santa Barbara Goods, services 2,500$ Department Head No requirements Goods, services (except consultants and construction projects)10,000$ Department Head with Gen. Svcs. Concurrence 3 quotes Goods, services (except consultants and construction projects)25,000$ General Svcs Manager 3 quotes Maintenance and repair of City equipment and facilities 75,000$ General Svcs Manager 3 quotes Goods, services (except consultants and construction projects)25,000+General Svcs Manager RFP Consultant Services and Construction projects 35,000$ City Manager 3 quotes Consultant Services and Construction projects 35,000+City Manager RFP Santa Maria All 10,000$ Department Head No requirements Purchases, Services 75,000$ Department Head 3 quotes Budgeted Purchases, Services 75,000+Admin Svcs Manager RFP Non-Budgeted Purchases, Services 75,000+CM issue, Council award RFP Public Projects (Public Contracts Code)45,000$ CM/Designee, PW Director No requirements Public Projects (Public Contracts Code)175,000$ CM/Designee, PW Director On-call list Public Projects (Public Contracts Code)175,000+Council RFP Attachment 2 B1 - 10 ORDINANCE NO . 1435 (2003 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O AMENDING CHAPTER 3 .24, ARTICLE III OF THE MUNICIPAL COD E TO PROVIDE FOR THE USE OF JOB ORDER CONTRACTING AND ALTERNATIVE BIDDING PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC CONSTRUCTIO N PROJECT S WHEREAS, the citizens of San Luis Obispo approved Measure L-02 on November 5 , 2002, which amended the City Charter to authorize the use of job order contracting fo r maintenance-related projects as provided under Section 20128 .5 of the Public Contract Code an d alternative bidding procedures as provided under Section 22000 of the Public Contract Cod e ("Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act") for public construction projects ; an d WHEREAS, Section 901 (E) and (F) of the City Charter states that the Council shal l establish by ordinance guidelines for the use of such contracts and procedures . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obisp o as follows : SECTION 1 . Article III of Chapter 3 .24 of the Municipal Code of the City of San Lui s Obispo is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit A . SECTION 2 . A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together wit h the names of the Council members voting for and against it, shall be published at least five day s prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City . Thi s ordinance will go into on effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage . INTRODUCED on April 15, 2003 AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of th e City of San Luis Obispo on May 6, 2003 on the following roll call vote : AYES : Council Members Ewan, Schwartz, and Settle, Vice Mayor Mulholland, an d Mayor Romero NOES : None ABSENT : None The foregoing ordinance was adopted this 6 `h day of May 2003 . Mayor David F . Romero i Lee Price,.M .C. City Clerk 0 1435 Attachment 3 B1 - 11 Ordinance No . 1435 (200Series)S Page 2 APPROVED AS TO FORM filbert A .Trujillo,Acting City Attorney Attachment 3 B1 - 12 Ordinance No . 1435 (2003 Series ) Exhibit A Amendment To Formal Contract Procedure s Chapter 3 .24 of the Municipal Cod e ARTICLE III . FORMAL CONTRACT PROCEDUR E 3 .24.140 Requirements for purchase . Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, purchases and contracts for supplies , services, equipment and construction projects, which are equal to or in excess of the bi d requirement amount specified by council resolution, shall be by written contract with the lowes t responsible bidder pursuant to the procedures prescribed in this article . 3 .24.145 Job order contracting . As provided in Section 901 (E) of the Charter, the city may perform maintenance-relate d construction projects for repair, remodeling or other repetitive work under a unit-price contrac t for all necessary labor, materials and equipment, subject to the following conditions : A.Such contracts are secured on a competitive basis in accordance with the procedure s set forth in this Article ; B.No new construction will be performed under such contracts ; C.The specifications for such contracts provide for unit-price terms for all work that wil l typically be performed under individual Task Orders ; D.The specifications for such contracts establish any limits on the amount of individua l Task Orders to be issued under the contract ; or on any minimum or maximum cumulative amounts of Task Orders to be issued under the contract . E.The council will specify limits on the authority to approve individual Task Orders b y resolution . 3 .24.150 Bids - Notice of invitation and submission . A . Notices inviting bids shall include, but not be limited to, the following : 1.A general description of the item(s) or service(s) to be purchased, or the publi c work to be constructed or improved ; 2.The location where bid blanks and specifications may be secured ; 3.The time and place assigned for the opening of sealed bids ; 4.The type and character of bidder's security required, if any ; an d 5.The location and deadline for submission of bids . B . Notices inviting bids shall be made as follows : 1 . For supplies, services and equipment, notices inviting bids shall be published a t least once in the official newspaper of the city, with the first publication occurring at least te n calendar days before the date of opening the bids . Attachment 3 B1 - 13 Ordinance No . 1435 (2003 Series ) Exhibit A Amendment To Formal Contract Procedure s 2.For construction projects below an amount specified by council resolution , notices inviting bids shall be mailed to a list of qualified contractors, identified according t o categories of work, at least ten calendar days before the bids are due . The City Engineer i s responsible for developing and maintaining this list based on the criteria determined by th e California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission (hereinafter referred to a s Commission in this Chapter). Notices shall also be mailed within ten calendar days before th e bids are due to all construction trade journals as required by the Commission . If the city does no t have a list of qualified contractors for the particular type of work to be performed, notice s inviting bids will only be sent to the construction trade journals as required by the Commission . If the product or service is proprietary in nature and can only be obtained from a certai n contractor or contractors, notices inviting bids will only be mailed to such contractor o r contractors . 3.For construction projects above an amount specified by council resolution , notices inviting bids distinctly describing the project be published at least once in the officia l newspaper of the city, with the first publication occurring at least fourteen calendar days befor e the date of opening the bids . Notices inviting bids distinctly describing the project shall also b e mailed at least thirty calendar days before the date of opening bids to all construction trad e journals as required by the Commission . 4.The city may also give such other notice as it deems appropriate . C . Sealed bids shall be identified as bids on the envelopes and shall be submitted to th e purchasing authority . 3.24.160 Bids - Security requirement . Bidder's security may be required when deemed necessary by the purchasing authority . Bidders shall he entitled to return of bid security . However, a successful bidder shall forfeit hi s bid security upon refusal or failure to execute a contract within fifteen days after notice of awar d of that contract, unless the city is responsible for the delay . The contract may be awarded to th e next lowest responsible bidder upon the refusal or failure of the successful bidder to execute th e contract within the time herein prescribed . 3 .24 .170 Bids - Opening and retention . Sealed bids shall be opened in public at the time and place stated in the notice invitin g bids . A tabulation of all bids received shall be made available for public inspection until th e award of a contract . All bids shall be retained on file for a period of not less than two years . 3 .24 .180 Bids - Rejection . The purchasing authority may reject : A . Any bid that fails to meet the bidding requirements in any respect ; or Attachment 3 B1 - 14 Ordinance No . 1435 (2003 Series ) Exhibit A Amendment To Formal Contract Procedure s B.All bids, for any reason whatsoever, and may readvertise for new bids or abandon th e purchase . C.In the case of construction projects, the council may, by passage of a resolution by a four-fifths vote, declare that the project can be performed more economically by employees o f the city and may have the project done by force account . 3 .24.185 Bids — None received . If no bids are received, the purchase may be made through negotiated contract or othe r process approved by the purchasing authority, including, in the case of construction projects , performing the work by employees of the city by force account . 3 .24.187 Bids for construction projects — In excess of limit. In the event that all bids received for a construction project are more than the maximu m allowed under Section 22034(f) of Public Contract Code, and bids were invited pursuant to th e provisions of Section 3 .24.150(B .2), the Council may, by adoption of a resolution by four-fifth s vote, award the contract, in an amount not to exceed the maximum set forth in Section 22034(f ) of Public Contract Code, to the lowest responsible bidder, if it determines that the cost estimat e was reasonable . Otherwise, the bids shall be rejected ; and if the agency decides to go forwar d with the project, shall be re-bid in accordance with the procedures set forth in Sectio n 3 .24.150(B .3). 3 .24 .190 Contract award . Subject to the prior approval of the city administrative officer, contracts shall be awarde d by the purchasing authority to the lowest responsible bidder, except as follows : A.If, at the time of bid opening, two or more bids received are for the same total amoun t or unit price, quality and service being equal, and if in the discretion of the purchasing authorit y the public interest will not permit the delay of readvertising for bids, then the purchasin g authority may accept the one she or he chooses or the lowest bid obtained through subsequen t negotiation with the tie bidders . B.Sellers, vendors, suppliers and contractors who maintain places of business locate d within the limit of the city shall be given preference if quality, price, service and all other factor s are equal . 3 .24 .200 Requiring bond of successful bidder . The purchasing authority may require as a condition to executing a contract on behalf o f the city, a performance bond or a labor and material bond, or both, in such amounts as th e purchasing authority shall determine appropriate to protect the best interests of the city . The form and amounts of such bond(s) shall be described in the notice inviting bids . Attachment 3 B1 - 15 Ordinance No. 1435 (2003 Series) Exhibit A Amendment To Formal Contract Procedure s 3 .24 .210 Determination of lowest responsible bidder . In addition to the bid or quotation price, criteria for determining the lowest responsibl e bid or quotation, for the purposes of the Charter and this chapter, shall include, but not be limite d to, the following : A.The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the bidde r (this may include an analysis of previous work performed for the city); B.The ability of the bidder to perform the contract, or provide the supplies, equipment o r services required, within the time specified, without delay or interference ; C.The ability of the bidder to provide future maintenance, repair parts and replacemen t of purchased equipment or supplies ; D.Compliance by the bidder with federal acts, executive orders and state statute s governing nondiscrimination in employment ; an d E.The results of any evaluation relating performance and price, such as testing, life-cycl e costing, and analysis of service, maintenance and technical data . Attachment 3 B1 - 16 CERTIFICATE OF THE COUNTY CLERK RESULTS OF CANVASSOF ALL VOTES CAS T NOVEMBER 5,2002 CONSOLIDATED GENERAL ELECTION CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO MEASURE L-02 STATE OF CALIFORNI A COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O I, JULIE L .RODEWALD,County Clerk-Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo, d o hereby certify that pursuant to law I did canvass the returns of the votes cast at the above reference d election in the City of San Luis Obispo on November 5, 2002, and that a photocopy of the Statemen t of Votes Cast to which this certificate is attached, shows the number of votes cast in said city for an d against Measure L-02 and that the totals shown for and againstsaid measure in said city and in eac h of the respective precincts therein, are full, true and correct . MEASURE L-02 : Shall City Charter Section 901 be amended to allo w maintenance related projects to be performed using a uni t price contract awarded on a competitive bid basis consisten t with the provisions for unit price contractscontained i n Section 20128 .5 of the Public Contract Code ; and other publi c works contracts to be awardedconsistent with the Uniform. Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, Section 22000, e t seq of the Public Contract Code ? WITNESS, my handand Official Seal this 2 0th day of November, 2002 . 3 i JU IE L . RODEWALD, County Clerk-Recorde r ss Attachment 4 B1 - 17 Statement of Votes Cas t GENERAL ELECTION HELD NOVEMBER 5, 200 2 SOVC For Jurisdiction Wide, All Counters, All Race s OFFICIALET 1 ' U :. OTS Reg . Voters Vote For Cas t Ballots Tota l Votes Time s Blan k Voted Time s Over Voted Number ofUnder Votes YES N O CONGRESSIONAL DISTRIC T 23RD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02 % 22ND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 - Multiple Districts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 - Total 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02 % STATE SENATE DISTRIC T 15TH SENATORIAL DISTRICT 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02% Total 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76.98%2517 23 .02 % STATE ASSEMBLY 33RD ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02 % Total 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02 % STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATIO N STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION DIST 1 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02 % Total 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02 % SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT S 1ST SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 2ND SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 6160 0 3661 2910 751 0 0 2224 76 .43%686 23 .57 % 3RD SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 11911 0 68745528 1344 2 0 4279 77,41%1249 22 .59 % 4TH SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 541 0 365289 76 0 0 232 80 .28%57 19 .72 % 5TII SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 6041 0 2714 2080 634 0 0 1582 76 .06%498 23 .94 % MultipleDistricts 266 0 160 129 31 0 0 102 79 .07%27 20 .93 % Total 24919 0 13774 I0936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02 % CITIES CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 - CITY OF GROVER BEACH 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 -0 CITY OF MORRO BAY 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 - CITY OF PASO ROBLES 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 -_ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02 % CITY OF PISMO BEACH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CITY OF ATASCADERO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - UNINCOPORATED 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - No Matching District 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 - Total 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02% Date :1 1121/0 2 Time :10 :32 :3 7 Page :104 of 124 L-02 SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY CHARTER AMENDMEN T Attachment 4 B1 - 18 Statement of Votes Cas t GENERALELECTION HELD NOVEMBER 5, 200 2 SOVCFor CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, All Counters, CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O OFFICIAL ELECTION RESULTS-ALL BALLOTS L-02 SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY CHARTER AMENDMENT Reg . Voters Vote For Cas t Ballots Tota l Votes Times Blan k Voted Time s Over Voted Numbe r of Unde r Votes YES N O Jurisdiction Wid e CON 222-29 919 1 654 514140 0 0 399 77 .63%115 22 .37% CON 223-29 1126 1 574 447127 0 0 342 76 .51%105 23 .49 % CON 224-75 752 1 408 319 89 0 0 258 80 .88%61 19 .12 % CON 225-30 923 1 480 387 93 0 0 294 75 .97%9324 .03 % CON 226-31 1169 1 700 564 136 0 0 4I7 73 .94%147 26 .06 % CON 227-31 1267 1 844 678 166 0 0 513 75.66%165 24 .34 % CON 301-32 509 1 252 205 47 0 0 151 73 .66%5426 .34 % CON 302-33 940 1 537 457 80 00 351 76 .81%106 23 .19% CON 303-34 751 1 469378 91 00 274 72 .49%104 27 .51°/ CON 304-37 1134 1 610 502 108 00 359 71 .51%143 28 .49% CON 305-37 1204 1 799 649 150 00 526 81 .05%123 18.95 % CON 306-35 980 1 519 406 113 00 299 73 .65%107 26.35 % CON 307-36 1148 1 776 625 149 2 0 511 81 .76%114 18 .24% CON 308-35 1060 1 676 528 148 00 424 80 .30%104 19.70 % CON 309-38 1226 1 661 526 135 0 0 398 75 .67%128 24.33 % CON 310-38 1148 1 547 41 ,4 133 0 0 321 77 .54%9322 .46 % CON 311-34 818 1 428 323 105 0 0 25278.02%7121 .98 % CON 312-40 990 1 600 515 85 0 0 413 80.19%102 19 .81 % CON 401-36 541 1 365 289 76 0 0 232 80.28%5719 .72% CON 520-40 734 1 327 258 69 0 0 188 72.87%70 27 .13% CON 521-73 1113 1 529 417 112 0 0 317 `76.02%100 23 .98% CON 522-74 W96 1 632 490 142 0 0 391 79.80%99 20 .20% CON 523-75 950 1 436 335 101 0 0 237 70.75%98 2925 % CON 524-76 944 1 250 160 90 0 0 120 75 .00%4025 .00% CON 525-77 592 1 159 114 45 0 0 93 81 .58%21 18 .42 % CON 526-77 612 1 381 306 75 0 0 236 77 .12%70 22 .88 % AVPCT BT 43160 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 AVPCT BT 47 4 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 100.00%0 0 .00% AVPCT BT 53161 266 1 160 129 31 0 0 102 79.07%2720 .93%0 AVPCT BT 56 3 1 00 0 0 0 0 -0 Total 24919 0 13774 10936 2836 2 0 8419 76 .98%2517 23 .02%. Date :11 /2110 2 Time :14 :20 :2 3 Page :3 of 3 tk, Attachment 4 B1 - 19 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK B1 - 20 RESOLUTION NO. 9444 (2003Series )A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP OUPDATINGPURCHASINGGUIDELINESWHEREAS, in the course of conducting City operations it is necessary to purchase a broad range o fgoodsandservices ; andWHEREAS, the Council has adopted purchasing policies and procedures as set forth in Chapter3 .24 of the Municipal Code that require the Council to specify by resolution the dollar amount of purchase sandcontractsrequiringtheuseofeitheropenmarketorformalbiddingprocedures, and the level of authorit yrequiredtoauthorizeinvitationsforbids (or requests for proposals), award contracts or approve Job Orde rContractTaskOrders ; and WHEREAS,the Council desires to update existing guidelines to reflect current conditions an d implement improved procedures, including electing to become subject to the uniform construction cos t accounting procedures set forth in the Public Contract Code, commencing with Section22010, a s required by the State in order to use the alternative bidding procedures for construction projects set fort h in Section22032 of the Public Contract Code . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that : SECTION 1 . Resolution No . 8239 (1993 Series) is hereby rescindedand the updated purchasin g guidelines set forth in Exhibit A are hereby adopted . SECTION 2 . The construction change order policy set forth in Exhibit B is hereby amended . SECTION 3 . The City hereby elects to become subject to the uniform construction cos t accounting procedures set forth in the Public Contract Code . On motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Council Member Ewan, and on the followin g roll call vote : AYES :Council Members Ewan, Settle and Schwartz, Vice MayorMulholland, and Mayo r Romero NOES :None ABSENT :None the foregoing resolution wasadopted on April 15, 2003 . MayorDavid F . Romero Lee Price, C .M .C . City Clerk Gilbert A . Trujillo, Acting City Attorney R 9444 Attachment 5 B1 - 21 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK B1 - 22 Exhibit AResolutionNo .. 9444 (2003 Series )PURCHASINGGUIDELINE SInaccordancewiththepolicyframework set forth in Chapter 3 .24 of the municipal code, Cit ypurchasesandcontracts (including those for rentals and leases, butexcluding those for realproperty) will be made pursuant to these guidelines . Applicable competitive bidding categories ,authorization limits or contract award procedures will be based on unit cost, total purchase cos tforconsolidatedbiditemsorfiscalyearaggregatesinthecaseofblanketpurchaseordersorsimilarongoingpurchasingarrangements . Staging of purchases in order to avoid thes ecompetitivebiddingproceduresorauthorizationlimitsisprohibited . GENERAL PURCHASE S Purchases and contracts for supplies, equipment, operating and maintenanceservices, an d construction projects will be made pursuant to the following guidelines . A .Over-the-Counter .Purchases of less than $5,000 may be authorized by the Departmen t Head. Although no specific purchasingrequirements are established for thislevel o f purchase, competitive bidding should be used whenever practical . B . Open Market .Purchases between $5,000 and $25,000 $000 may be authorized byth e Director of Finance (or designee) pursuant to the open market bidding proceduresestablishe d in Chapter 3 .24 (Article II) of the municipal code. C .Formal Bids or Proposals.Purchases in excess of S25000 $080 will be made pursuan t to the formal bidding requirements established in Chapter 3 .24 (Article III) of the municipa l code . Authority to approve specifications, invite bids or request proposals and awar d contracts will be as follows : 1.For purchases with an approvedbudget and a costestimate of $100,000 $-50,000 or less , the City Administrative Officer is authorized to invite bids or request proposals, approv e specifications and award the contract . 2.For purchases in excess of $100,000 $50,000, Council approval of the specifications an d authorization to invite bids or request proposals is required . The Council may authoriz e the City Administrative Officer to award the contract if the selected bid or proposal is les s than or equal to the Council-approved costestimate and there are no substantive change s to the specifications . Otherwise, Council award of the contract is required . D .jobOrder Contracts :Construction Projects.Under the Job Order Contact provisions of Chapter124 (Article jib of the municipal code formaintenance-related construction protects,individualTask Orders up to $2.5,000 may be approved by the City Engineer ., Individual Task Orders in excess of$25,000 requireapprovalby .the CityAdministrativ e Officer . CONSULTANT SERVICE S Contracts for consultant services will be awarded pursuant to the following guidelines . 1 - Attachment 5 B1 - 23 Exhibit AResolutionNo .. 9444 (2003 Series )PURCHASINGGUIDELINE SA.Contracts for consultant services estimated to cost less than $5,000 may be awarded by th eDepartmentHead . Although no specific purchasingrequirements are established forthi slevelofcontract, proposals should be solicited whenever practical .B.Contracts for consulting servicesestimated to cost between $5,000 and $25,000 $4-57000 maybeawardedbytheCityAdministrativeOfficer . Proposals from at least three firms should b esolicitedwheneverpractical . C.Contracts for consultant services estimated to cost more than $25,000 $15,000 will generally be awarded pursuant to the following guidelines ; however, it is recognized that the City's need for consultant services will vary from situation to situation, and accordingly, flexibilit y will be provided in determining theappropriate evaluation and selection process to be used i n each specific circumstance . 1 . The Council should generally approve request for proposal (RFP) documents before the y are issued . The Council may authorize the City Administrative Officer to award th e contract if it is less than or equal to the Council-approved costestimate and there are n o substantive changes to theapproved workscope . Otherwise, Council award of th e contract is required . 2 . In theevent that the timely evaluation and selection of a consultant precludes Counci l approval of theRFP before it is issued, theRFP may be approved and distributed byth e City Administrative Officer ; however, award of the contract will bemade by the Council . 3 . Cost will not be the sole criterion in selecting the successful bidder. Consultant proposal s will be evaluated based on a combination of factors that result in the best value toth e City, including but not limited to : a.Understanding of the work required by the Cit y b.Quality and responsiveness of the proposa l c.Demonstrated competenceand professional qualifications necessary for satisfactor y performance of the work required by the Cit y d.Recent experience in successfully performing similar service s e.Proposed methodology for completing the wor k f.Reference s g.Background and related experience of the specific individualsto be assigned to th e projec t h.Proposed compensatio n 4 . If it is determined that it is in the best interest of the City for services to be provided by a specific consultant with contract terms, workscope and compensation to be determine d based on direct negotiations—contract award will be made by the Council . 2- Attachment 5 B1 - 24 Exhibit BResolutionNo . 94442003 Serie sCONSTRUCTIONCONTRACTCHANGEORDERSOVERVIEWWhentheCityawardsaconstructioncontract, the need for contract change orders (CCO's) is no tunusual . CCO's are required whenever the scope of work changes from that in the origina lcontractoranunknownconditionofthesiterequiresachangeinthescopeofwork . Usually acontingencyamountisestablishedwhentheprojectbudgetisfinalizeduponcontractawardtoaccommodatelimitedCCO's . The purpose of this policy is to establish limits of authority fo rapprovingconstructionprojectCCO's . GOALS 1.Ensure appropriate authority and accountability in the approval of change orders . 2.Minimize the time needed to approve a CCO in order to avoid project delays . 3.Establish a system under which the organizational level at which approval is given i s commensurate with thesize of CCO andsize of project . 4.Eliminate the potential for approval of a CCO when contingency funds are insufficient. POLICIE S Conditions for Approvalof CCO's by Staf f 1.Sufficient contingencyfunds are budgeted and available in order for the Public Work s Director or City Administrative Officer (or CAO-approved designees) to approve a CCO . 2.The nature of work in the CCO is not significantlydifferent from that in the contract . 3.Authorization limits are based on an individual CCO amount, not the aggregate amount of al l CCO's . 4.Authorization limits apply to CCO's for increases in contract amounts only . 5.When the aggregate amount of CCO's reaches 75% of the contingency, the awardin g authority shall be informed of the status of the project and the sufficiency of funding t o complete the project . 6.Work will not be brokenup into multiple CCO's in order to circumvent this policy . 7.All CCO's must be in writing and approved by theappropriate contract parties consistent with the authorized limits established in this policy . 1 Attachment 5 B1 - 25 O Exhibit BResolutionNo . 94442003 SeriesCONSTRUCTIONCONTRACTCHANGEORDERS8 . A copy of each approved CCO will be transmitted promptly to theFinance Department .9 . The CAO may grantapproval of CCO's in excess of $100,000 $50,000 under the followin gcircumstances (all three factors must be present):a.Immediateapproval of the CCO is necessary toavoid delay .b.The CCO is an integral and mandatory component of the project . c.The costsassociated with delay of the project would be excessive . The Project Manager is responsible for carrying out this policy. 10 .TheCAO .isalso authorized to approve CCO's inexcess of $1 00,000 relatedtoJobOrder ContractTaskOrders. Authorization Limits 1.PublicWorks Director/Approved Designee Notto exceed $25,00 0 2.City Administrative Officer Notto exceed $100,000 $50;000 3.City Council Greater than contract or $100,000*$50,000 See circumstances above where the CAO may approve CCO's in excess of $100,000 . Originally Approved by the Council on August 3, 1993 ; Revised by theCouncil on April 15, 2003 Attachment 5 B1 - 26 Financial Management Manual June5 Attachment 6 B1 - 27 Section 201 INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW The purpose of this chapter is to guide staff members in purchasing goods and services on behalf of the City by establishing responsibilities and authorization levels, outlining statutory requirements, and setting forth the policies and procedures that govern purchasing activities. These guidelines are not intended to address every issue, exception or contingency that may arise in the course of purchasing activities. Accordingly, the basic standard that should always prevail is to exercise good judgment in the use and stewardship of City resources. PURCHASING SYSTEM OBJECTIVES Along with three other key policy documents— the City Charter, purchasing ordinance (Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code) and purchasing resolution—the policies and procedures set forth in this chapter form the City's purchasing system. This system has been developed in order to achieve the following objectives: Secure goods and services at the lowest cost possible commensurate with quality requirements. Establish authority, responsibility and accountability for purchasing activities conducted on behalf of the City. Ensure competition and impartiality in all purchasing transactions to the maximum extent possible. Standardize procedures where appropriate to ensure that organization-wide policies and goals are achieved. Maintain department responsibility, initiative and flexibility in evaluating, selecting and purchasing goods and services. Implement simple yet effective internal control procedures that appropriately support planning, maximize productive use of public funds and protect City assets from unauthorized use. Coordinate organization-wide purchasing activities for commonly used items. Communicate organization-wide purchasing goals, policies and procedures to departmental staff involved in purchasing activities. Decentralize decision-making to the maximum extent possible consistent with prudent review and internal control procedures. 201-1 Attachment 6 B1 - 28 Introduction PURCHASING AUTHORITY The City's purchasing ordinance delegates purchasing authority to the City Manager as well as any other representatives designated by her or him. Purchasing authority responsibilities include: Developing and prescribing such administrative policies, forms and files as may be reasonably necessary for the internal management and operation of City purchasing policies and procedures. Purchasing or contracting for supplies, equipment, services and construction projects as required by the operating departments in accordance with City purchasing policies and procedures. Negotiating and recommending execution of contracts. Procuring needed quality in goods and services at minimum expense. Ensuring as full and open competition as possible on all purchases. Consolidating department orders for similar items, ensuring quantity discount pricing whenever possible. Developing and maintaining department awareness of purchasing and pricing principles, marketing conditions and new products. Inspecting supplies and equipment delivered, as well as contractual services performed, to determine their conformance with the specifications set forth in orders and contracts; and, in this connection, having the authority to require chemical, physical or other tests of samples submitted with quotations or bids, or of delivery samplings, which may be necessary to determine quality and conformance with specifications. Establishing procedures for, and assigning duties to, staff engaged in receiving, storing and issuing purchased supplies, ensuring that supply levels are consistent with usage requirements. Facilitating the transfer of surplus or unused supplies and equipment among departments as needed. Selling or exchanging surplus supplies and equipment (subject to Charter Section 906), provided that they cannot reasonably be used by any department. PURCHASING ORGANIZATION As provided in the purchasing ordinance, responsibility and accountability for purchasing activities has been delegated by the City Manager throughout the organization. As noted under purchasing system objectives, maintaining department responsibility, initiative and flexibility in 201-2 Attachment 6 B1 - 29 Introduction purchasing activities and decentralizing decision-making to the maximum extent possible, are specific objectives of the City's purchasing system. However, this can only occur when organization-wide guidelines are clearly set forth and then followed. General responsibilities for setting and implementing purchasing system policies and procedures are summarized in Exhibit 201-A. PURCHASING SYSTEM OVERVIEW Regardless of the type of item or service being acquired, virtually every purchase transaction goes through seven distinct stages in varying degrees: Assessing and determining resource needs. Developing specifications. Soliciting and evaluating quotations, bids or proposals. Selecting the best proposal. Awarding the contract or purchase order and authorizing work to proceed. Receiving and inspecting goods or services to ensure they conform with specifications. Paying the vendor when contract terms have been met. The type of purchase as well as its estimated cost determine the formality with which each stage is completed and documented. For this purpose, the City has identified two three basic types of purchases: General Purchases. Contracts and purchases for supplies, equipment, operating or& maintenance services and construction projects. Public Projects. Construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, renovation, improvement, demolition, painting, repainting, and repair work involving any publicly owned, leased, or operated facility (Public Contract Code 22002c). Consultant Services. Professional advice work provided to the City by specially trained and experienced individuals or firms regarding economic, financial, engineering, planning, architectural, environmental, legal or administrative matters. Procedural categories, purchasing authority levels and features for each of these purchase types are summarized in Exhibit 201-B. 201-3 Attachment 6 B1 - 30 Purchasing System Responsibilities Exhibit 201-A Voters Approve City Charter City Council Adopt purchasing ordinance. Adopt resolution setting purchasing guidelines. Approve Invitation for Bid (IFB) and Request for Proposal (RFP) documents for general purchases and public projects with cumulative costs in excess of $100,000 and consultant services with cumulative contract costs in excess of $2550,000. Delegate authority to award contracts if they are within budget to the City Manager. Award contracts if they exceed the budget. City ManagerPurchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee) Implement purchasing policies. Delegate purchasing authority. Award major contracts. Approve IFB’s/RFP’s for general purchases with cumulative costs between $25,000 and $100,000;, public projects with cumulative costs between $45,000 and $100,000, and consultant services with cumulative contract costs between $7,500 and $2550,000. Director of Finance & ITFinance Director/Designee Develop and implement purchasing guidelines. Monitor and evaluate system performance. Set payment schedule. Approve purchase orders for general purchases with cumulative costs between $7,500 and $25,000, and public projects with cumulative costs between $7,500 and $45,000. City Engineer Approve Job Order Contract (JOC) task orders for public projects with cumulative costs that are $45,000 or less. Department Heads Develop and implement departmental purchasing procedures. Delegate departmental purchasing authority. Approve major departmental purchases. Authorized Employees Purchase, receive and pay for goods and services in accordance with City and departmental guidelines. Maintain required purchasing records. Manage departmental inventories. 201-4 Attachment 6 B1 - 31 GENERAL PURCHASES Supplies, equipment, operating or maintenance services Less than $7,500 $7,500 to $25,000 $25,000 to $100,000 More than $100,000 § No specific requirements; competitive bidding when practical § Award by Department § Solicit 3 written quotations and submit summary § Award by Finance Director/Designee § Purchasing Authority authorizes advertising for sealed bids; Request for Proposals (RFP) § Award by Purchasing Authority § Council authorizes advertising for sealed bids (RFP) § Award generally delegated by Council to Purchasing Authority PURCHASING SYSTEM OVERVIEW1 2 Construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, renovation, improvement, demolition, painting, repainting, and repair work involving any publicly owned, leased, or operated facility (Public Contract Code 22002c). PUBLIC PROJECTS2 Less than $7,500 $7,500 to $45,000 $45,000 to $100,000 More than $100,000 § No requirements; competitive bidding when practical § Award by Department § Job Order Contract (JOC) Task Order by City Engineer § Solicit 3 written proposals and submit summary § Award by Finance Director/Designee § JOC Task Order by City Engineer § Notice inviting informal bids from list of qualified contractors § Award or JOC Task Order by Purchasing Authority § Council authorizes advertising for sealed bids (RFP) § Award generally delegated to Purchasing Authority § JOC Task Order by Purchasing Authority (within annual limits) CONSULTANT SERVICES3 Less than $7,500 $7,500 to $50,000 More than $50,000 § No requirements; solicit proposals when practical § Award by Department § Solicit 3 written proposals and submit summary § Contract negotiated by Department § Award by Purchasing Authority § Council authorizes advertising for sealed bids (RFP) § Award generally delegated to Purchasing Authority 3 Finance Director can execute purchase orders for approved on-call consultant services in an amount not-to-exceed the project budget (MC 3.24.070C). 1 All monetary limits shown are for the cumulative value of the purchase, project or contract. Exhibit 201-B (Only new graphic shown) 201-5 Attachment 6 B1 - 32 Section 225 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS OVERVIEW When the City awards a construction contract, the need for contract change orders (CCO’s) is not unusual. CCO’s are required whenever the scope of work changes from that in the original contract or an unknown condition of the site requires a change in the scope of work. Usually a contingency amount is established when the project budget is finalized upon contract award to accommodate limited CCO’s. The purpose of this policy is to establish limits of authority for approving construction project CCO’s. GOALS 1. Ensure appropriate authority and accountability in the approval of change orders. 2. Minimize the time needed to approve a CCO in order to avoid project delays. 3. Establish a system under which the organizational level at which approval is given is commensurate with the size of CCO and size of project. 4. Eliminate the potential for approval of a CCO when contingency funds are insufficient. POLICIES Conditions for Approval of CCO's by Staff 1. Sufficient contingency funds are budgeted and available in order for the Public Works Director or City Manager (approved designees) to approve a CCO. 2. The nature of work in the CCO is not significantly different from that in the contract. 3. Authorization limits are based on an individual CCO amount, not the aggregate amount of all CCO’s. 4. Authorization limits apply to CCO’s for increases in contract amounts only. 5. When the aggregate amount of CCO’s reaches 75% of the contingency, the awarding authority shall be informed of the status of the project and the sufficiency of funding to complete the project. 6. Work will not be broken up into multiple CCO’s in order to circumvent this policy. 7. All CCO's must be in writing and approved by the appropriate contract parties consistent with the authorized limits established in this policy. 225-1 Attachment 6 B1 - 33 Construction Change Orders 8. A copy of each approved CCO will be transmitted promptly to the Finance Division. 9. The City ManagerPurchasing Authority may grant approval of CCO's in excess of $100,000 under the following circumstances (all three factors must be present): a. Immediate approval of the CCO is necessary to avoid delay. b. The CCO is an integral and mandatory component of the project. c. The costs associated with delay of the project would be excessive. The Project Manager is responsible for carrying out this policy. 10. The City ManagerPurchasing Authority is also authorized to approve CCO’s in excess of $100,000 related to Job Order Contract Task Orders. Authorization Limits 1. Public Works Director/ Designee Not to exceed $2545,000 2. Purchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee) Not to exceed $100,000 3. City Council* Greater than contract or $100,000 * See circumstances above where the City ManagerPurchasing Authority may approve CCO’s in excess of $100,000. Originally Approved by the Council on August 3, 1993; Revised by the Council on April 15, 2003 and June 2, 2015 225-2 Attachment 6 B1 - 34 Section 255 AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENTS After contract award—whether by voucher, purchase order or formal contract—amendments may be needed to reflect changes in the scope of goods or services to be provided. The following summarizes what is required to authorize and document contract changes. DOCUMENTING WORKSCOPE CHANGES Attached is a sample “Amendment to Agreement” that can be used in approving contract changes. It is applicable for almost all types of purchase agreements (supplies, equipment, operation & maintenance services, consultant services) except construction contracts: as set forth in Section 225, separate procedures have been established for managing construction change orders. Amendments should be numbered. This boilerplate document has been installed on the City Hall “Everyone” (I) Drive as follows: File Folder: Financial Management Templates and Forms File Subfolder: Agreements File Name: Amendment to Agreement AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT CHANGES Construction Contracts Authorization levels for approving construction contract change orders are set forth in Section 225 of this manual. Supplies, Equipment, Maintenance & Operation and Consultant Service Contracts The specific authority for approving contract amendments is usually set forth in the agreement itself (Section 5 of our standard agreement format). As a general rule, contracts where the bid or Request for Proposal (RFP) documents were approved by the City ManagerPurchasing Authority should be amended by the City ManagerPurchasing Authority; and contracts where the bid or RFP documents were approved by the Council should be amended by the Council. General Policy. Staff has the authority to amend agreements to the cumulative contract amount that they are otherwise authorized to award contracts. In those cases where the original contract was awarded by a higher purchasing authority, then they have the authority to amend those contacts by a cumulative amendment amount that they are otherwise authorized to award contracts. Budget Constraints. In all cases, however, staff authorization to increase contract amounts is subject to existing budget availability. Staging of Contract Costs and Amendments. Using the amendment process in order to avoid competitive bidding or higher authorization levels at the contract award stage is prohibited. E-Access to City Hall Everyone in the City, regardless of location, has easy access to the City Hall “Everyone” Drive. Call Information Technology if you are located at another facility and you do not know how to do this. 255-1 Attachment 6 B1 - 35 Amendments to Agreements The following provides general guidelines for authorization levels in approving changes to purchase orders and agreements. Department Heads Contract originally awarded by the Department Head. Not to exceed a cumulative amended contract cost of $5,07,500. Contract originally awarded by a higher purchasing authority (Finance ManagerDirector/Designee, City ManagerPurchasing Authority or Council). Not to exceed a cumulative amendment cost of $5,07,500. If amendments beyond these limits are needed, it will require the approval of either the Finance ManagerDepartment, City ManagerPurchasing Authority or Council, depending on the type of contract, the amount of the amendment and the cumulative cost of the contract. Moreover, depending on the procedures used in awarding the original contract, amendments may not be possible due to competitive bidding requirements. Finance ManagerDirector or Designee For supplies, equipment or operation & maintenance services: Contract originally awarded by the Department Head or Finance ManagerDirector/Designee. Not to exceed a cumulative amended contract cost of $25,000. Contract originally awarded by a higher purchasing authority (City ManagerPurchasing Authority or Council). Not to exceed a cumulative amendment cost of $25,000. If amendments beyond these limits are needed, it will require the approval of either the City ManagerPurchasing Authority or Council, depending on the type of contract, the amount of the amendment and the cumulative cost of the contract. Moreover, depending on the procedures used in awarding the original contract, amendments may not be possible due to competitive bidding requirements. City ManagerPurchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee) Contract or Bid/RPP package originally approved by the Department Head, Finance Manager Director/Designee or City ManagerPurchasing Authority. Not to exceed a cumulative contract cost (including amendments) of $100,000 for supplies, equipment and operation & maintenance services; and $2550,000 for consultant services. Bid/RPP package or contract originally approved by the Council. Not to exceed a cumulative amendment amount from the original contract cost of $100,000 for supplies, equipment and operation & maintenance services; and $2550,000 for consultant services. 255-2 Attachment 6 B1 - 36 Amendments to Agreements If amendments beyond these limits are needed, it will require the approval of the Council. Moreover, depending on the procedures used in awarding the original contract, amendments may not be possible due to competitive bidding requirements. Council Any amendment that cannot be approved by the staff as outlined above. Exceptions If greater discretionary authority at the Department Head or City ManagerPurchasing Authority level is desired than indicated above, this should be clearly identified in the City Manager or Council Agenda Report approving bid/RFP documents or awarding the contract. DOCUMENTATION Amendment requests (such as the City Manager or Council Agenda Report) should include a cost summary of the original contract amount, any amendments to-date, the proposed amendment and the revised contract total. Revised September 2, 2003 to reflect changes in the City’s Purchasing Guidelines approved by the Council on April 15, 2003, and again on June 2, 2015.. 255-3 Attachment 6 B1 - 37 Amendments to Agreements AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. THIS AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT is made and entered in the City of San Luis Obispo on [date], by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as City, and [CONTRACTOR NAME], hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on [date] the City entered into an Agreement with Contractor for [generally describe the original agreement workscope] per Specification No. [xxxxxx]; and WHEREAS, the City desires to amend the scope of services to include [generally describe the proposed change in the workscope] and Contractor has submitted a proposal for this purpose that is acceptable to the City. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The scope of services and related compensation is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. [Attach proposal letter or other itemization of proposed work and agreed upon compensation referencing the Amendment Number] 2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first written above. ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ____________________________________ By: ____________________________________ City Clerk Purchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee]) APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR _____________________________________ By: ____________________________________ City Attorney 255-4 Attachment 6 B1 - 38 Section 290 PURCHASING ORDINANCE Chapter 3.24 PROCEDURES FOR PAYMENT OF CLAIMS AND PURCHASES Article I. General Provisions 3.24.010 Applicability of provisions. 3.24.020 Purpose of provisions. 3.24.030 Purchasing authority designated - Powers and duties. 3.24.040 Purchasing manual. 3.24.050 Purchase documents. 3.24.060 Bidding procedures - Use of not required when. 3.24.070 Authority to hire consultants. 3.24.075 Recycled product procurement policy. Article II. Open Market Purchase Procedure 3.24.080 Purchase authorization. 3.24.090 Quotations - Notice of invitation. 3.24.100 Quotations - Submission in writing - Recordkeeping. 3.24.110 Quotations - Number required. 3.24.120 Quotations - Rejection. 3.24.130 Award of purchase orders. Article III. Formal Contract Procedure 3.24.140 Requirements for purchase. 3.24.145 Job order contracting 3.24.150 Bids - Notice of invitation and submission. 3.24.160 Bids - Security requirement. 3.24.170 Bids - Opening and retention. 3.24.180 Bids - Rejection. 3.24.185 Bids- None received. 3.24.187 Bids for construction projects – In excess of limit. 3.24.190 Contract award. 3.24.200 Requiring bond of successful bidder. 3.24.210 Determination of lowest responsible bidder. Article IV. Payment Procedure 3.24.220 Payment requirements. 3.24.230 Warrant preparation - Accounting documents required. 3.24.240 Payment date. 3.24.250 Warrants - Director of Finance and Information Technology (IT) to sign - Payment. 3.24.260 Disbursement record inspection. Article I. General Provisions 3.24.010 Applicability of provisions. All expenditures by the city for supplies, services, equipment and public works projects not controlled by the Charter shall be made only in accordance with and pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.1) 3.24.020 Purpose of provisions. A purchasing control system for the city is adopted in order: A. To secure those items set out in Section 3.24.010 at the lowest possible cost commensurate with quality requirements; B. To ensure effective financial control over expenditures; C. To clearly define authority and accountability for the purchasing function; D. To minimize the written documentation, administrative actions and expense of processing purchase transactions; E. To assure the quality of purchases made on behalf of the city; and F. To facilitate accurate forecasting and planning of department needs and expenditures. (Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code § 2950.2) 3.24.030 Purchasing authority designated - Powers and duties. The city administrative officer, or his designated representative(s), shall be the purchasing authority whose functions shall include the following powers and duties: A. To develop and prescribe, for the departments, such administrative policies, forms and files as may be reasonably necessary for the 290-1 Attachment 6 B1 - 39 Purchasing Ordinance internal management and operation of these purchasing procedures; B. To purchase or contract for those items listed in Section 3.24.010 and required by departments in accordance with these purchasing procedures; C. To negotiate and recommend execution of contracts for purchase of those items listed in Section 3.24.010; D. To procure the needed quality in supplies, services, equipment and public works projects not controlled by the Charter, at minimum expense; E. To ensure as full and open competition as possible on all purchases; F. To consolidate department orders for like items, ensuring quantity discount pricing whenever possible; G. To develop and maintain department awareness of purchasing and pricing principles, marketing conditions and new products; H. To inspect supplies and equipment delivered, as well as contractual services performed, to determine their conformance with the specifications set forth in the orders and contracts; and, in this connection, to have the authority to require chemical, physical or other tests of samples submitted with quotations or bids, or of delivery samplings, which may be necessary to determine quality and conformance with specifications; I. To establish procedures for, and assign duties to, personnel engaged in receiving, storing and issuing purchased supplies, thereby ensuring that supply levels are consistent with usage requirements; J. To facilitate the transfer of surplus or unused supplies and equipment among departments as needed; and K. Subject to Charter Section 906, to sell or exchange surplus supplies and equipment; provided, that the same cannot reasonably be used by any department. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.3) 3.24.040 Purchasing manual. Pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the city administrative officer shall approve and implement a manual of purchasing policies and procedures and shall make such manual available to the Council for inspection. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.4) 3.24.050 Purchase documents. All departments shall expend money for those items set forth in Section 3.24.010 only in such manner, at such times and by submission of such purchase documents as the purchasing authority shall prescribe. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.5) 3.24.060 Bidding procedures - Use of not required when. Purchase of those items listed in Section 3.24.010 shall be by bid procedures set forth in this chapter. Such procedures may be dispensed with, at the discretion and judgment of the purchasing authority as to the best interests of the city, as follows: A. When the amount to be expended is less than the bid requirement amount which shall be specified by resolution of the Council; B. When an emergency requires that an order be placed with the nearest available source of supplypurchase is made to address a situation that creates an immediate and serious need for equipment, supplies, or services that cannot be met through normal purchasing procedures and where the lack of such equipment, supplies or services would seriously threaten the functioning of City government, the preservation of property, or the health or safety of any person; C. When the item(s) to be purchased can be obtained from only one vendor or supplier; D. When supplies or equipment have been uniformly adopted in the city or otherwise standardized; E. When the purchase will be made cooperatively with one, or more, other units of government, or from a local dealer within the city limits that can provide the same brand, model and configuration of item(s) identified in cooperative purchase agreement(s) at or below 290-2 Attachment 6 B1 - 40 Purchasing Ordinance the cooperative purchasing net cost within the same terms and conditions; F. When reasonably necessary for the preservation or protection of public peace, health, safety or welfare of persons or property; or G. When, given the indeterminate nature of the city’s need, a request for proposal will result in a more favorable and efficient comparison of supplies, equipment and/or services. (Ord. XXXX § X, 2015; Ord. 1608 § 1, 2014; Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.6) 3.24.070 Authority to hire consultants. The restrictions and provisions of this chapter shall not apply to contracts involving the acquisition of professional or specialized services such as, but not limited to, those rendered by architects, attorneys, engineers and other specialized consultants. Selection for such services will be made using one of the following criteria: A. An evaluation of proposals solicited from capable professionals, and approved by the purchasing authority, whenever the cost of the work to be performed is of an estimated value by an evaluation of proposals solicited from capable professionals, and approved by the Council, whenever the cost of the work to be performed is of an estimated value in excess of the amount specified by Council resolution. This section shall not prohibit the purchasing authority from requiring proposals for work with an estimated cost of less than the Council specified amount if, in the discretion of the purchasing authority, selection based upon the evaluation of proposals would better serve the interest of the city. B. by aAn evaluation of proposals solicited from capable professionals, and approved by the Council, whenever the cost of the work to be performed is of an estimated value in excess of the amount specified by Council resolution. A.C. Selection from an approved list of on- call consultants that is established by a formal Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process. The Council shall approve the RFQ, and the Purchasing Authority is authorized to execute agreements with selected consultants. The Finance Director is authorized to execute and amend purchase orders for individual consultant services contracts in an amount not-to-exceed the authorized project budget. On-call consultant lists shall be renewed at least every five years by a new RFQ process. ( Ord. XXXX § X, 2015; Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.7) 3.24.075 Recycled product procurement policyEnvironmentally Preferred Purchases. A. It is the intent of the city Council that the City of San Luis Obispo take a leadership role not only in recycling its waste products but also in the purchase of recycled products for use in the delivery of city services. It is the purpose of this section to provide direction to the city administrative officer in the procurement and use of recycled products. For the purpose of this section, recycled materials are defined as any materials (e.g., glass, paper, plastic, etc.) that are separated by type, reprocessed by industrial methods, and used as raw materials for the manufacture of new products. B. It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to purchase and use recycled products whenever possible to the extent that such use does not negatively impact health, safety, or operational efficiency. C. It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to encourage the purchase of products which can be recycled or reused. D. The City will purchase and use recycled paper for masthead stationery, envelopes and printing purposes. In addition, recycled paper shall be purchased and used in all copy machines which will accept it. City staff will encourage the copier industry to develop high- speed copiers which will accept recycled paper. E. City departments shall examine their purchasing specifications and, where feasible, restructure them to encourage the use of products which incorporate recycled materials in their manufacture purchase equipment, supplies, and services that result in less harm to the 290-3 Attachment 6 B1 - 41 Purchasing Ordinance natural environment. This involves the purchase of equipment, supplies, and services in a manner that uses less harmful materials, employs recycled or recovered materials (where appropriate and available), and utilizes techniques intended to result in less impact on the environment than other available methods.. F. A ten percent preference, not to exceed one thousand dollars per contract, may be given to recycled products. The fitness and quality of the recycled product must be at least equal to unrecycled products as determined by the city. The preference percentage shall be based on the lowest bid or price quoted by the supplier or suppliers offering nonrecycled products. G. Price preferences may be offered in excess of the ten percent ceiling established in this section, if it can be shown that purchase of a recycled product or material will result in greater long-term savings to the city. Award of a bid in excess of the ceiling, however, requires the approval of the city administrative officer or city Council as established in the city’s purchasing manual. (Ord. XXXX § X, 2015; Ord. 1178 § 1, 1990) Ord. No. 1178 added § 3.24.080, which the editor has renumbered § 3.24.075 since the chapter already contained a § 3.24.080. Article II. Open Market Purchase Procedure 3.24.080 Purchase authorization. Purchases of supplies, equipment and contractual services, except those controlled by the Charter, having an estimated value less than that specified by Council resolution for bid may be made by the purchasing authority in the open market without observing the formal contract procedures set out in Article III of this chapter. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2951.1) 3.24.090 Quotations - Notice of invitation. The purchasing authority shall invite, either by verbal or written request, quotations from prospective sellers, vendors, suppliers or contractors. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2951.2) 3.24.100 Quotations - Submission in writing - Recordkeeping. Written quotations shall be submitted to the purchasing authority, who shall keep a record of open market quotations and orders for a period of ninety days after the receipt of such quotations. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2951.3) 3.24.110 Quotations - Number required. Open market purchases shall be based, whenever reasonably possible, on at least three quotations. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2951.4) 3.24.120 Quotations - Rejection. The purchasing authority may reject: A. Any quotations which fail to meet the specific purchase requirements in any respect; or B. All quotations, for any reason whatsoever, and may invite new quotations. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2951.5) 3.24.130 Award of purchase orders. Purchase orders shall be awarded by the purchasing authority to the person submitting the lowest responsible quotation, except as follows: A. If two or more quotations are received for the same total amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, and if, at the discretion of the purchasing authority, the public interest will not permit the delay of inviting new quotations, then the purchasing authority may accept the lower quotation obtained through negotiation with the persons submitting the tie quotations; B. Sellers, vendors, suppliers and contractors who maintain places of business located within the limit of the city shall be given preference if quality, price, service and all other relevant factors are equal; or C. If no quotations are received the purchasing authority may make the required purchase without further notice. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2951.6) Article III. Formal Contract Procedure 290-4 Attachment 6 B1 - 42 Purchasing Ordinance 3.24.140 Requirements for purchase. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, purchases and contracts for supplies, services, equipment and construction projects, which are equal to or in excess of the bid requirement amount specified by Council resolution, shall be by written contract with the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to the procedures prescribed in this article. (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003: Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code § 2952.1) 3.24.145 Job order contracting. As provided in Section 901(E) of the Charter, the city may perform maintenance-related construction projects for repair, remodeling or other repetitive work under a unit-price contract for all necessary labor, materials and equipment, subject to the following conditions: A. Such contracts are secured on a competitive basis in accordance with the procedures set forth in this article; B. No new construction will be performed under such contracts; C. The specifications for such contracts provide for unit-price terms for all work that will typically be performed under individual task orders; D. The specifications for such contracts establish any limits on the amount of individual task orders to be issued under the contract; or on any minimum or maximum cumulative amounts of task orders to be issued under the contract; E. The Council will specify limits on the authority to approve individual task orders by resolution. (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003) 3.24.150 Bids—Notice of invitation and submission. A. Notices inviting bids shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. A general description of the item(s) or service(s) to be purchased, or the public work to be constructed or improved; 2. The location where bid blanks and specifications may be secured; 3. The time and place assigned for the opening of sealed bids; 4. The type and character of bidder’s security required, if any; and 5. The location and deadline for submission of bids. B. Notices inviting bids shall be made as follows: 1. For supplies, services and equipment, notices inviting bids shall be published at least once in the official newspaper of the city, with the first publication occurring at least ten calendar days before the date of opening the bids. 2. For construction projects below an amount specified by Council resolution, notices inviting bids shall be mailed to a list of qualified contractors, identified according to categories of work, at least ten calendar days before the bids are due. The city engineer is responsible for developing and maintaining this list based on the criteria determined by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission (hereinafter referred to as Commission in this chapter). Notices shall also be mailed within ten calendar days before the bids are due to all construction trade journals as required by the Commission. If the city does not have a list of qualified contractors for the particular type of work to be performed, notices inviting bids will only be sent to the construction trade journals as required by the Commission. If the product or service is proprietary in nature and can only be obtained from a certain contractor or contractors, notices inviting bids will only be mailed to such contractor or contractors. 3. For construction projects above an amount specified by Council resolution, notices inviting bids distinctly describing the project be published at least once in the official newspaper of the city, with the first publication occurring at least fourteen calendar days before the date of opening the bids. Notices inviting bids distinctly describing the project shall also be mailed at least thirty calendar days before the 290-5 Attachment 6 B1 - 43 Purchasing Ordinance date of opening bids to all construction trade journals as required by the Commission. 4. The city may also give such other notice as it deems appropriate. C. Sealed bids shall be identified as bids on the envelopes and shall be submitted to the purchasing authority. (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003: Ord. 1291 § 1, 1996; Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code §2952.2) 3.24.160 Bids—Security requirement. Bidder’s security may be required when deemed necessary by the purchasing authority. Bidders shall be entitled to return of bid security. However, a successful bidder shall forfeit his bid security upon refusal or failure to execute a contract within fifteen days after notice of award of that contract, unless the city is responsible for the delay. The contract may be awarded to the next lowest responsible bidder upon the refusal or failure of the successful bidder to execute the contract within the time herein prescribed. (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003: Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code § 2952.3) 3.24.170 Bids—Opening and retention. Sealed bids shall be opened in public at the time and place stated in the notice inviting bids. A tabulation of all bids received shall be made available for public inspection until the award of a contract. All bids shall be retained on file for a period of not less than two years. (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003: Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code § 2952.4) 3.24.180 Bids—Rejection. The purchasing authority may reject: A. Any bid that fails to meet the bidding requirements in any respect; or B. All bids, for any reason whatsoever, and may readvertise for new bids or abandon the purchase; C. In the case of construction projects, the Council may, by passage of a resolution by a four-fifths vote, declare that the project can be performed more economically by employees of the city and may have the project done by force account. (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003: Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code § 2952.5) 3.24.185 Bids—None received. If no bids are received, the purchase may be made through negotiated contract or other process approved by the purchasing authority, including, in the case of construction projects, performing the work by employees of the city by force account. (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003) 3.24.187 Bids for construction projects—In excess of limit. In the event that all bids received for a construction project are more than the maximum allowed under Section 22034(f) of Public Contract Code, and bids were invited pursuant to the provisions of Section 3.24.150(B)(2), the Council may, by adoption of a resolution by four-fifths vote, award the contract, in an amount not to exceed the maximum set forth in Section 22034(f) of Public Contract Code, to the lowest responsible bidder, if it determines that the cost estimate was reasonable. Otherwise, the bids shall be rejected, and if the agency decides to go forward with the project, shall be re-bid in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 3.24.150(B)(3). (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003) 3.24.190 Contract award. Subject to the prior approval of the city administrative officer, contracts shall be awarded by the purchasing authority to the lowest responsible bidder, except as follows: A. If, at the time of bid opening, two or more bids received are for the same total amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, and if in the discretion of the purchasing authority the public interest will not permit the delay of readvertising for bids, then the purchasing authority may accept the one she or he chooses or the lowest bid obtained through subsequent negotiation with the tie bidders. B. Sellers, vendors, suppliers and contractors who maintain places of business located within the limit of the city shall be given preference if quality, price, service and all other factors are equal. (Ord 1435 § 1 (part), 2003: Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code § 2952.6) 290-6 Attachment 6 B1 - 44 Purchasing Ordinance 3.24.200 Requiring bond of successful bidder. The purchasing authority may require as a condition to executing a contract on behalf of the city, a performance bond or a labor and material bond, or both, in such amounts as the purchasing authority shall determine appropriate to protect the best interests of the city. The form and amounts of such bond(s) shall be described in the notice inviting bids. (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003: Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code § 2952.7) 3.24.210 Determination of lowest responsible bidder. In addition to the bid or quotation price, criteria for determining the lowest responsible bid or quotation, for the purposes of the Charter and this chapter, shall include, but not be limited to, the following: A. The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the bidder (this may include an analysis of previous work performed for the city); B. The ability of the bidder to perform the contract, or provide the supplies, equipment or services required, within the time specified, without delay or interference; C. The ability of the bidder to provide future maintenance, repair parts and replacement of purchased equipment or supplies; D. Compliance by the bidder with federal acts, executive orders and state statutes governing nondiscrimination in employment; and E. The results of any evaluation relating performance and price, such as testing, life-cycle costing, and analysis of service, maintenance and technical data. (Ord. 1435 § 1 (part), 2003: Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code § 2952.8) Article IV. Payment Procedure 3.24.220 Payment requirements. All purchases not otherwise provided for in the Charter shall be made by requisition, or other prescribed document, signed by the purchasing authority and paid by warrant signed by the Director of Finance and IT. Payment will only be made upon the satisfaction of the Director of Finance and IT that: A. Sufficient moneys have been appropriated for the purchase; B. The expenditure is in accordance with budget authority; and C. The proposed expenditure is legal. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2953.1) 3.24.230 Warrant preparation - Accounting documents required. The Finance and IT Department shall prepare a warrant after receiving properly completed accounting documents as prescribed by the Director of Finance and IT and the purchasing authority. Such accounting documents include, but are not limited to, purchase authorizations, purchase orders, receiving reports and vendor invoices. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2953.2) 3.24.240 Payment date. The Director of Finance and IT shall determine and assign the dates of warrant preparation, the frequency of which shall be no less than twice each month. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2953.3) 3.24.250 Warrants - Director of Finance and IT to sign - Payment. The Director of Finance and IT shall sign each warrant, which shall be honored if there is sufficient money in the city’s account. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2953.4) 3.24.260 Disbursement record inspection. Following each disbursement a copy of the warrant register, including all warrant numbers and dollar amounts, will be made available for inspection by the Council and the City Manager. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2953.5) 290-7 Attachment 6 B1 - 45 Section 295 PURCHASING GUIDELINES In accordance with the policy framework set forth in Chapter 3.24 of the municipal code, City purchases and contracts (including those for rentals and leases, but excluding those for real property) will be made pursuant to these guidelines. Applicable competitive bidding categories, authorization limits or contract award procedures will be based on unit cost, total purchase cost for consolidated bid items or fiscal year aggregates in the case of blanket purchase orders or similar ongoing purchasing arrangements. Staging of purchases in order to avoid these competitive bidding procedures or authorization limits is prohibited. GENERAL PURCHASES Purchases and contracts for supplies, equipment, operating and or maintenance services, and construction projects will be made pursuant to the following guidelines: A. Over-the-Counter. Purchases with cumulative costs of less than $7,500 may be authorized by the Department Head. Although no specific purchasing requirements are established for this level of purchase, competitive bidding should be used whenever practical. B. Open Market. Purchases with cumulative costs between $7,500 and $25,000 may be authorized by the Director of Finance & Information Technology (or designee) pursuant to the open market bidding procedures established in Chapter 3.24 (Article II) of the municipal code. A bid summary shall be submitted to the Finance Department. C. Formal Bids or Proposals. Purchases with cumulative costs in excess of $25,000 will be made pursuant to the formal bidding requirements established in Chapter 3.24 (Article III) of the municipal code. Authority to approve specifications, invite bids or request proposals and award contracts will be as follows: 1.For purchases with an approved budget and a cumulative cost estimate of $100,000 or less, the Purchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee)City Manager is authorized to invite bids or request proposals, approve specifications and award the contract. 2.For purchases with cumulative costs in excess of $100,000, Council approval of the specifications and authorization to invite bids or request proposals is required. The Council may authorize the Purchasing AuthorityCity Manager to award the contract if the selected bid or proposal is less than or equal to the Council-approved cost estimate and there are no substantive changes to the specifications. Otherwise, Council award of the contract is required. PUBLIC PROJECTS Contracts for public projects are governed by the Public Contract Code including the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (Section 22000), which allows alternative bidding procedures and job order contracting (Council Ord. 1435, 2003). A. Over-the-Counter. Public projects with cumulative costs of less than $7,500 may be authorized by the Department Head. Although no specific purchasing requirements are established for this level of purchase, competitive bidding should be used whenever practical. 295-1 Attachment 6 B1 - 46 Purchasing Guidelines B. Open Market. Public projects with cumulative costs of $45,000 or less may be authorized by the Director of Finance & Information Technology (or designee) pursuant to the open market bidding procedures established in Chapter 3.24 (Article II) of the municipal code. A bid summary shall be submitted to the Finance Department. C. Informal Bidding. Public projects with cumulative costs of $100,000 or less may be let to contract by the Purchasing Authority pursuant to informal bidding procedures as set forth in the Public Contract Code and Chapter 3.24.150.B2 of the municipal code. D. Formal Bids or Proposals. Public projects with cumulative costs of more than $100,000 shall be let to contract by the Council pursuant to formal bidding procedure as set forth in the Public Contract Code and Chapter 3.24.150.B3 of the municipal code. Job Order Contracts. Under the Job Order Contact provisions of Chapter 3.24.145 of the municipal code for maintenance-related construction projects, individual Task Orders with cumulative costs up to $45,000 may be approved by the City Engineer. Individual Task Orders with cumulative costs in excess of $45,000 require approval by the Purchasing Authority. CONSULTANT SERVICES Contracts for consultant services will be awarded pursuant to the following guidelines. A. Contracts for consultant services estimated to cost less than $7,500 cumulatively may be awarded by the Department Head. Although no specific purchasing requirements are established for this level of contract, proposals should be solicited whenever practical. B. Contracts for consulting services estimated to cost between $7,500 and $2550,000 cumulatively may be awarded by the Purchasing AuthorityCity Manager. Proposals from at least three consultants shall be solicited whenever practicaland a summary submitted. C. Contracts for consultant services estimated to cost more than $2550,000 cumulatively will generally be awarded pursuant to the following guidelines; however, it is recognized that the City’s need for consultant services will vary from situation to situation, and accordingly, flexibility will be provided in determining the appropriate evaluation and selection process to be used in each specific circumstance. 1. The Council should generally approve request for proposal (RFP) documents before they are issued. The Council may authorize the Purchasing AuthorityCity Manager to award the contract if it is less than or equal to the Council-approved cost estimate and there are no substantive changes to the approved workscope. Otherwise, Council award of the contract is required. 2. In the event that the timely evaluation and selection of a consultant precludes Council approval of the RFP before it is issued, the RFP may be approved and distributed by the Purchasing AuthorityCity Manager; however, award of the contract will be made by the Council. 295-2 Attachment 6 B1 - 47 Purchasing Guidelines 3.Cost will not be the sole criterion in selecting the successful bidder. Consultant proposals will be evaluated based on a combination of factors that result in the best value to the City, including but not limited to: a.Understanding of the work required by the City b.Quality and responsiveness of the proposal c.Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of the work required by the City d.Recent experience in successfully performing similar services e.Proposed methodology for completing the work f.References g.Background and related experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to the project h.Proposed compensation 4.If it is determined that it is in the best interest of the City for services to be provided by a specific consultant—with contract terms, workscope and compensation to be determined based on direct negotiations—contract award will be made by the Council. Adopted by the Council on September 4, 2007, Resolution No. 9926, and amended by Council on June 2, 2015, Resolution No. XXXX. 295-3 Attachment 6 B1 - 48 GENERAL PURCHASES Supplies, equipment, operating or maintenance services Less than $7,500 $7,500 to $25,000 $25,000 to $100,000 More than $100,000 No specific requirements; competitive bidding when practical Award by Department Solicit 3 written quotations and submit summary Award by Finance Director/Designee Purchasing Authority authorizes advertising for sealed bids; Request for Proposals (RFP) Award by Purchasing Authority Council authorizes advertising for sealed bids (RFP) Award generally delegated by Council to Purchasing Authority PURCHASING SYSTEM OVERVIEW1 2 Construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, renovation, improvement, demolition, painting, repainting, and repair work involving any publicly owned, leased, or operated facility (Public Contract Code 22002c). PUBLIC PROJECTS2 Less than $7,500 $7,500 to $45,000 $45,000 to $100,000 More than $100,000 No requirements; competitive bidding when practical Award by Department Job Order Contract (JOC) Task Order by City Engineer Solicit 3 written proposals and submit summary Award by Finance Director/Designee JOC Task Order by City Engineer Notice inviting informal bids from list of qualified contractors Award or JOC Task Order by Purchasing Authority Council authorizes advertising for sealed bids (RFP) Award generally delegated to Purchasing Authority JOC Task Order by Purchasing Authority (within annual limits) CONSULTANT SERVICES3 Less than $7,500 $7,500 to $50,000 More than $50,000 No requirements; solicit proposals when practical Award by Department Solicit 3 written proposals and submit summary Contract negotiated by Department Award by Purchasing Authority Council authorizes advertising for sealed bids (RFP) Award generally delegated to Purchasing Authority 3 Finance Director can execute purchase orders for approved on-call consultant services in an amount not-to-exceed the project budget (MC 3.24.070C). 1 All monetary limits shown are for the cumulative value of the purchase, project or contract. Note: Only new graphic shown Attachment 6 B1 - 49 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK B1 - 50 ATTACHMENT 7 RESOLUTION NO. ________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL UPDATING PURCHASING GUIDELINES WHEREAS, in the course of conducting City operations it is necessary to purchase a broad range of goods and services; and WHEREAS, the Council has adopted purchasing policies and procedures set forth in Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code that require the Council to specify by resolution the dollar amount of purchases and contracts requiring the use of either open market or formal bidding procedures, and the level of authority required to authorize invitations for bids (requests for proposals), award contracts or approve Job Order Contract Task Orders; and WHEREAS, the Council adopted Resolution No. 9444 (2003 Series) and Ordinance No. 1435 (2003 Series) electing to become subject to the Public Contract Code and Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, which allows alternative bidding procedures and job order contracting; and WHEREAS, adopted budget policies in the Productivity section call for analyzing system and procedures to identify and remove unnecessary review requirements; and WHEREAS, on December 16, 2014 Council amended the Productivity section of the City budget policies to include “Maintaining City purchasing policies and procedures that are as efficient and effective as possible”; and WHEREAS, the subject changes to the Purchasing Guidelines will streamline the purchasing process for public projects and consultant services – while maintaining appropriate checks and balances – thereby making delivery of services to the community more expedient and efficient; and WHEREAS, the City analyzed several benchmark cities’ purchasing procedures, and the subject changes are consistent and keep pace with the current market. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the San Luis Obispo City Council that: 1. Resolution No. 9444 (2003) is hereby rescinded and the updated purchasing guidelines set forth in Exhibit A are hereby adopted. 2. The updated Construction Change Order policy set forth in Exhibit B is hereby adopted. Upon Motion of Council Member _________, seconded by Council Member _________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: B1 - 51 ATTACHMENT 7 The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of June, 2015. ____________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________ Anthony J. Mejia, MMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney B1 - 52 Section 295 PURCHASING GUIDELINES In accordance with the policy framework set forth in Chapter 3.24 of the municipal code, City purchases and contracts (including those for rentals and leases, but excluding those for real property) will be made pursuant to these guidelines. Applicable competitive bidding categories, authorization limits or contract award procedures will be based on unit cost, total purchase cost for consolidated bid items or fiscal year aggregates in the case of blanket purchase orders or similar ongoing purchasing arrangements. Staging of purchases in order to avoid these competitive bidding procedures or authorization limits is prohibited. GENERAL PURCHASES Purchases and contracts for supplies, equipment, operating or maintenance services will be made pursuant to the following guidelines: A. Over-the-Counter. Purchases with cumulative costs of less than $7,500 may be authorized by the Department Head. Although no specific purchasing requirements are established for this level of purchase, competitive bidding should be used whenever practical. B. Open Market. Purchases with cumulative costs between $7,500 and $25,000 may be authorized by the Director of Finance & Information Technology (or designee) pursuant to the open market bidding procedures established in Chapter 3.24 (Article II) of the municipal code. A bid summary shall be submitted to the Finance Department. C. Formal Bids or Proposals. Purchases with cumulative costs in excess of $25,000 will be made pursuant to the formal bidding requirements established in Chapter 3.24 (Article III) of the municipal code. Authority to approve specifications, invite bids or request proposals and award contracts will be as follows: 1.For purchases with an approved budget and a cumulative cost estimate of $100,000 or less, the Purchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee) is authorized to invite bids or request proposals, approve specifications and award the contract. 2.For purchases with cumulative costs in excess of $100,000, Council approval of the specifications and authorization to invite bids or request proposals is required. The Council may authorize the Purchasing Authority to award the contract if the selected bid or proposal is less than or equal to the Council-approved cost estimate and there are no substantive changes to the specifications. Otherwise, Council award of the contract is required. PUBLIC PROJECTS Contracts for public projects are governed by the Public Contract Code including the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (Section 22000), which allows alternative bidding procedures and job order contracting (Council Ord. 1435, 2003). A. Over-the-Counter. Public projects with cumulative costs of less than $7,500 may be authorized by the Department Head. Although no specific purchasing requirements are established for this level of purchase, competitive bidding should be used whenever practical. 295-1 Exhibit A Attachment 7 B1 - 53 Purchasing Guidelines B. Open Market. Public projects with cumulative costs of $45,000 or less may be authorized by the Director of Finance & Information Technology (or designee) pursuant to the open market bidding procedures established in Chapter 3.24 (Article II) of the municipal code. A bid summary shall be submitted to the Finance Department. C. Informal Bidding. Public projects with cumulative costs of $100,000 or less may be let to contract by the Purchasing Authority pursuant to informal bidding procedures as set forth in the Public Contract Code and Chapter 3.24.150.B2 of the municipal code. D. Formal Bids or Proposals. Public projects with cumulative costs of more than $100,000 shall be let to contract by the Council pursuant to formal bidding procedure as set forth in the Public Contract Code and Chapter 3.24.150.B3 of the municipal code. Job Order Contracts. Under the Job Order Contact provisions of Chapter 3.24.145 of the municipal code for maintenance-related construction projects, individual Task Orders with cumulative costs up to $45,000 may be approved by the City Engineer. Individual Task Orders with cumulative costs in excess of $45,000 require approval by the Purchasing Authority. CONSULTANT SERVICES Contracts for consultant services will be awarded pursuant to the following guidelines. A. Contracts for consultant services estimated to cost less than $7,500 cumulatively may be awarded by the Department Head. Although no specific purchasing requirements are established for this level of contract, proposals should be solicited whenever practical. B. Contracts for consulting services estimated to cost between $7,500 and $50,000 cumulatively may be awarded by the Purchasing Authority. Proposals from at least three consultants shall be solicited and a summary submitted. C. Contracts for consultant services estimated to cost more than $50,000 cumulatively will generally be awarded pursuant to the following guidelines; however, it is recognized that the City’s need for consultant services will vary from situation to situation, and accordingly, flexibility will be provided in determining the appropriate evaluation and selection process to be used in each specific circumstance. 1.The Council should generally approve request for proposal (RFP) documents before they are issued. The Council may authorize the Purchasing Authority to award the contract if it is less than or equal to the Council-approved cost estimate and there are no substantive changes to the approved workscope. Otherwise, Council award of the contract is required. 2.In the event that the timely evaluation and selection of a consultant precludes Council approval of the RFP before it is issued, the RFP may be approved and distributed by the Purchasing Authority; however, award of the contract will be made by the Council. 3.Cost will not be the sole criterion in selecting the successful bidder. Consultant proposals will be evaluated based on a combination of factors that result in the best value to the City, including but not limited to: 295-2 Attachment 7 B1 - 54 Purchasing Guidelines a. Understanding of the work required by the City b. Quality and responsiveness of the proposal c. Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of the work required by the City d. Recent experience in successfully performing similar services e. Proposed methodology for completing the work f. References g. Background and related experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to the project h. Proposed compensation 4. If it is determined that it is in the best interest of the City for services to be provided by a specific consultant—with contract terms, workscope and compensation to be determined based on direct negotiations—contract award will be made by the Council. Adopted by the Council on September 4, 2007, Resolution No. 9926, and amended by Council on June 2, 2015, Resolution No. XXXX. 295-3 Attachment 7 B1 - 55 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK B1 - 56 Section 225 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS OVERVIEW When the City awards a construction contract, the need for contract change orders (CCO’s) is not unusual. CCO’s are required whenever the scope of work changes from that in the original contract or an unknown condition of the site requires a change in the scope of work. Usually a contingency amount is established when the project budget is finalized upon contract award to accommodate limited CCO’s. The purpose of this policy is to establish limits of authority for approving construction project CCO’s. GOALS 1.Ensure appropriate authority and accountability in the approval of change orders. 2.Minimize the time needed to approve a CCO in order to avoid project delays. 3.Establish a system under which the organizational level at which approval is given is commensurate with the size of CCO and size of project. 4.Eliminate the potential for approval of a CCO when contingency funds are insufficient. POLICIES Conditions for Approval of CCO's by Staff 1.Sufficient contingency funds are budgeted and available in order for the Public Works Director or City Manager (approved designees) to approve a CCO. 2.The nature of work in the CCO is not significantly different from that in the contract. 3.Authorization limits are based on an individual CCO amount, not the aggregate amount of all CCO’s. 4.Authorization limits apply to CCO’s for increases in contract amounts only. 5.When the aggregate amount of CCO’s reaches 75% of the contingency, the awarding authority shall be informed of the status of the project and the sufficiency of funding to complete the project. 6.Work will not be broken up into multiple CCO’s in order to circumvent this policy. 7.All CCO's must be in writing and approved by the appropriate contract parties consistent with the authorized limits established in this policy. 225-1 Exhibit B Attachment 7 B1 - 57 Construction Change Orders 8. A copy of each approved CCO will be transmitted promptly to the Finance Division. 9. The Purchasing Authority may grant approval of CCO's in excess of $100,000 under the following circumstances (all three factors must be present): a. Immediate approval of the CCO is necessary to avoid delay. b. The CCO is an integral and mandatory component of the project. c. The costs associated with delay of the project would be excessive. The Project Manager is responsible for carrying out this policy. 10. The Purchasing Authority is also authorized to approve CCO’s in excess of $100,000 related to Job Order Contract Task Orders. Authorization Limits 1. Public Works Director/ Designee Not to exceed $45,000 2. Purchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee) Not to exceed $100,000 3. City Council* Greater than contract or $100,000 * See circumstances above where the City Manager may approve CCO’s in excess of $100,000. Originally Approved by the Council on August 3, 1993; Revised by the Council on April 15, 2003 and June 2, 2015 225-2 Attachment 7 B1 - 58 ATTACHMENT 8 O _____ ORDINANCE NO. _______ (2015 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 3.24, ARTICLE I, TO ADD LANGUAGE TO PURCHASING POLICIES GOVERNING EMERGENCY PURCHASING, HIRING ON-CALL CONSULTANTS, AND ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASES WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1178 (1990 Series) instituting a recycled product procurement policy; and WHEREAS, the Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan contains goals, policies and programs that call for the City to use materials with reduced environmental impacts; and WHEREAS, adopted budget policies in the Productivity section call for analyzing system and procedures to identify and remove unnecessary review requirements; and WHEREAS, on December 16, 2014 Council amended the Productivity section of the City budget policies to include “Maintaining City purchasing policies and procedures that are as efficient and effective as possible”; and WHEREAS, the subject changes to the Municipal Code will streamline the purchasing process for hiring consultants – while maintaining appropriate checks and balances through a formalized Request for Proposal process – thereby making accomplishing projects and related delivery of services to the community more expedient and efficient; and WHEREAS, the City analyzed several benchmark cities’ purchasing ordinances, and the subject changes are consistent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Article I of Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code of the City of San Luis Obispo is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit A. SECTION 2. Effective Dates. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. SECTION 3. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this ordinance, or any other provisions of the city’s rules and regulations. It is the city’s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable. B1 - 59 Ordinance No. (2015 Series) ATTACHMENT 8 Page 2 INTRODUCED on the 2nd day of June 2015, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ___ day of ___ 2015, on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney B1 - 60 Chapter 3.24 PROCEDURES FOR PAYMENT OF CLAIMS AND PURCHASES Article I. General Provisions 3.24.010 Applicability of provisions. All expenditures by the city for supplies, services, equipment and public works projects not controlled by the Charter shall be made only in accordance with and pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.1) 3.24.020 Purpose of provisions. A purchasing control system for the city is adopted in order: A. To secure those items set out in Section 3.24.010 at the lowest possible cost commensurate with quality requirements; B. To ensure effective financial control over expenditures; C. To clearly define authority and accountability for the purchasing function; D. To minimize the written documentation, administrative actions and expense of processing purchase transactions; E. To assure the quality of purchases made on behalf of the city; and F. To facilitate accurate forecasting and planning of department needs and expenditures. (Ord. 954 § 2 (part), 1983: prior code § 2950.2) 3.24.030 Purchasing authority designated - Powers and duties. The city administrative officer, or his designated representative(s), shall be the purchasing authority whose functions shall include the following powers and duties: A. To develop and prescribe, for the departments, such administrative policies, forms and files as may be reasonably necessary for the internal management and operation of these purchasing procedures; B. To purchase or contract for those items listed in Section 3.24.010 and required by departments in accordance with these purchasing procedures; C. To negotiate and recommend execution of contracts for purchase of those items listed in Section 3.24.010; D. To procure the needed quality in supplies, services, equipment and public works projects not controlled by the Charter, at minimum expense; E. To ensure as full and open competition as possible on all purchases; F. To consolidate department orders for like items, ensuring quantity discount pricing whenever possible; G. To develop and maintain department awareness of purchasing and pricing principles, marketing conditions and new products; H. To inspect supplies and equipment delivered, as well as contractual services performed, to determine their conformance with the specifications set forth in the orders and contracts; and, in this connection, to have the authority to require chemical, physical or other tests of samples submitted with quotations or bids, or of delivery samplings, which may be necessary to determine quality and conformance with specifications; I. To establish procedures for, and assign duties to, personnel engaged in receiving, storing and issuing purchased supplies, thereby ensuring that supply levels are consistent with usage requirements; J. To facilitate the transfer of surplus or unused supplies and equipment among departments as needed; and K. Subject to Charter Section 906, to sell or exchange surplus supplies and equipment; provided, that the same cannot reasonably be used by any department. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.3) 3.24.040 Purchasing manual. Pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the city administrative officer shall approve and implement a manual of purchasing policies and procedures and shall make such manual available to the Council for inspection. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.4) 3.24.050 Purchase documents. All departments shall expend money for those items 290-1 Attachment 8 Exhibit A B1 - 61 Purchasing Ordinance set forth in Section 3.24.010 only in such manner, at such times and by submission of such purchase documents as the purchasing authority shall prescribe. (Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.5) 3.24.060 Bidding procedures - Use of not required when. Purchase of those items listed in Section 3.24.010 shall be by bid procedures set forth in this chapter. Such procedures may be dispensed with, at the discretion and judgment of the purchasing authority as to the best interests of the city, as follows: A. When the amount to be expended is less than the bid requirement amount which shall be specified by resolution of the Council; B. When an emergency requires that an order be placed with the nearest available source of supplypurchase is made to address a situation that creates an immediate and serious need for equipment, supplies, or services that cannot be met through normal purchasing procedures and where the lack of such equipment, supplies or services would seriously threaten the functioning of City government, the preservation of property, or the health or safety of any person; C. When the item(s) to be purchased can be obtained from only one vendor or supplier; D. When supplies or equipment have been uniformly adopted in the city or otherwise standardized; E. When the purchase will be made cooperatively with one, or more, other units of government, or from a local dealer within the city limits that can provide the same brand, model and configuration of item(s) identified in cooperative purchase agreement(s) at or below the cooperative purchasing net cost within the same terms and conditions; F. When reasonably necessary for the preservation or protection of public peace, health, safety or welfare of persons or property; or G. When, given the indeterminate nature of the city’s need, a request for proposal will result in a more favorable and efficient comparison of supplies, equipment and/or services. (Ord. XXXX § X, 2015; Ord. 1608 § 1, 2014; Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.6) 3.24.070 Authority to hire consultants. The restrictions and provisions of this chapter shall not apply to contracts involving the acquisition of professional or specialized services such as, but not limited to, those rendered by architects, attorneys, engineers and other specialized consultants. Selection for such services will be made using one of the following criteria: A. An evaluation of proposals solicited from capable professionals, and approved by the purchasing authority, whenever the cost of the work to be performed is of an estimated value by an evaluation of proposals solicited from capable professionals, and approved by the Council, whenever the cost of the work to be performed is of an estimated value in excess of the amount specified by Council resolution. This section shall not prohibit the purchasing authority from requiring proposals for work with an estimated cost of less than the Council specified amount if, in the discretion of the purchasing authority, selection based upon the evaluation of proposals would better serve the interest of the city. B. by aAn evaluation of proposals solicited from capable professionals, and approved by the Council, whenever the cost of the work to be performed is of an estimated value in excess of the amount specified by Council resolution. A.C. Selection from an approved list of on- call consultants that is established by a formal Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process. The Council shall approve the RFQ, and the Purchasing Authority is authorized to execute agreements with selected consultants. The Finance Director is authorized to execute and amend purchase orders for individual consultant services contracts in an amount not-to-exceed the authorized project budget. On-call consultant lists shall be renewed at least every five years by a new RFQ process. ( Ord. XXXX § X, 2015; Ord. 954 § 2(part), 1983: prior code § 2950.7) 290-2 B1 - 62 Purchasing Ordinance 3.24.075 Recycled product procurement policyEnvironmentally Preferred Purchases. A. It is the intent of the city Council that the City of San Luis Obispo take a leadership role not only in recycling its waste products but also in the purchase of recycled products for use in the delivery of city services. It is the purpose of this section to provide direction to the city administrative officer in the procurement and use of recycled products. For the purpose of this section, recycled materials are defined as any materials (e.g., glass, paper, plastic, etc.) that are separated by type, reprocessed by industrial methods, and used as raw materials for the manufacture of new products. B. It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to purchase and use recycled products whenever possible to the extent that such use does not negatively impact health, safety, or operational efficiency. C. It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to encourage the purchase of products which can be recycled or reused. D. The City will purchase and use recycled paper for masthead stationery, envelopes and printing purposes. In addition, recycled paper shall be purchased and used in all copy machines which will accept it. City staff will encourage the copier industry to develop high- speed copiers which will accept recycled paper. E. City departments shall examine their purchasing specifications and, where feasible, restructure them to encourage the use of products which incorporate recycled materials in their manufacture purchase equipment, supplies, and services that result in less harm to the natural environment. This involves the purchase of equipment, supplies, and services in a manner that uses less harmful materials, employs recycled or recovered materials (where appropriate and available), and utilizes techniques intended to result in less impact on the environment than other available methods.. F. A ten percent preference, not to exceed one thousand dollars per contract, may be given to recycled products. The fitness and quality of the recycled product must be at least equal to unrecycled products as determined by the city. The preference percentage shall be based on the lowest bid or price quoted by the supplier or suppliers offering nonrecycled products. G. Price preferences may be offered in excess of the ten percent ceiling established in this section, if it can be shown that purchase of a recycled product or material will result in greater long-term savings to the city. Award of a bid in excess of the ceiling, however, requires the approval of the city administrative officer or city Council as established in the city’s purchasing manual. (Ord. XXXX § X, 2015; Ord. 1178 § 1, 1990) Ord. No. 1178 added § 3.24.080, which the editor has renumbered § 3.24.075 since the chapter already contained a § 3.24.080. 290-3 B1 - 63 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo Tuesday, May 5, 2015 Regular and Special Meeting of the City Council CALL TO ORDER A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx. Council Members Absent: None City Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney, Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager, and Anthony Mejia, City Clerk, were present at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes. STUDY SESSION SS1. REVIEW OF WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM INFRASTRUCTURE RENEWAL STRATEGY Utilities Director Mattingly, Utilities Deputy Director Hix, and Wastewater Collection Supervisor Nance narrated a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy” and responded to Council inquiries. Following discussion, City Council received and filed an update on the Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy. C2 - 1 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 5, 2015 Page 2 SS2. REVIEW 2015 POTABLE WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM OPERATIONS MASTER PLAN Utilities Director Mattingly, Utilities Deputy Director Floyd, and Water Distribution Supervisor Thomas narrated a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Potable Water Distribution System Operations Master Plan” and responded to Council inquiries. Following discussion, City Council received and filed an update on the 2015 Potable Water Distribution System Operations Master Plan. RECESS Council recessed at 5:26 p.m. CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx. Council Members Absent: None City Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney, Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager, and Anthony Mejia, City Clerk, were present at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Ashbaugh led the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENTATION P1. PROCLAMATION - OLDER AMERICANS MONTH Mayor Marx presented a Proclamation to Julie Cox, Randy Harris, and Joyce Ellen Lippman, representing the Central Coast Commission for Senior Citizens - Area Agency on Aging, declaring May 2015 as “Older Americans Month.” C2 - 2 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 5, 2015 Page 3 P2. PROCLAMATION - MUNICIPAL CLERKS WEEK Mayor Marx presented a Proclamation to Anthony Mejia, representing the San Luis Obispo City Clerk’s Office, declaring May 3 -9, 2015 as “Municipal Clerks Week.” INTRODUCTION OF NEW HIRES Public Works Director Grigsby introduced the following newly-hired employees: • David Athey, Supervising Civil Engineer • Jeff Brown, Parking Manager • Robert Greenlaw, Construction Engineering Manager • Jeff Hendricks, Parks Maintenance Supervisor • Nicole Lawson, Supervising Administrative Assistant PUBLIC COMMENT Alice Loti, San Luis Obispo, thanked Council for its support of the Area Agency on Aging; summarized the purpose and mission of the California Senior Legislature, noting that it is an advocacy group for senior issues. Monica Grant, Chief Executive Officer of the YMCA, Shell Beach, expressed gratitude to the Council for its partnership with the YMCA; noted that the City and civic leaders assisted with the repaving of the parking lot serving the YMCA. Dominic Tartaglia, Downtown Association, urged Council to allocate funding for the Palm- Nipomo parking structure Environmental Impact Report and to move forward with construction Carolyn Smith, San Luis Obispo, requested that Council agendize the unruly gathering ordinance for possible revision; voiced concerns that the subject ordinance is inconsistently and ineffectively enforced. Peter Williamson, SLO Regional Rideshare, San Luis Obispo, noted that May is National Bike Month; reported on the variety of community activities being held in May to help encourage bike ridership and improve bicycle safety. Linda White, Co-Chair of Monterey Heights Neighbors, San Luis Obispo, urged Council to agendize review of the unruly gathering ordinance; opined that the ordinance has not effectively curbed large parties. Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, spoke on the importance of public notification and government transparency to ensure that residents are informed of government decisions. Mila Vujovich-LaBarre, San Luis Obispo, requested that Council agendize reconsideration of the Land Use and Circulation Elements, water availability for future development, and the unruly gathering ordinance. Arnold Ruiz, San Luis Obispo, advised that he desires to meet with the City Manager or City Attorney to discuss his recommendations for improving Laguna Lake. C2 - 3 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 5, 2015 Page 4 Steve Barasch, San Luis Obispo, opined that a heightened police presence along the Cal Poly perimeter would discourage large parties. In response to public comment, City Manager Lichtig advised that the Palm-Nipomo parking structure assessment is included in the Capital Improvement Plan, noting that staff will evaluate the feasibility of accelerating the project. Council Member Ashbaugh requested a tray memo regarding the number of unruly gathering citations issued and an analysis of the ordinance’s effectiveness. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0, to approve Consent Calendar Items C1 thru C9, with Item C7 pulled for separate discussion. C1. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0, to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate. C2. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 21, 2015 MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the Minutes of the City Council meeting of April 21, 2015. C3. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR UPDATES TO THE CITY’S SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0, to: 1. Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposal for consultant services to assist staff in updating the City’s Subdivision Regulations. 2. Authorize the City Manager to award a consultant services agreement in an amount not-to-exceed $50,000 to assist staff with revisions to the Subdivision Regulations. C4. REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE 2014 GENERAL PLAN ANNUAL REPORT City Manager Lichtig advised that future General Plan Annual Reports will be agendized as a Consent Calendar Item in Financial Planning years and a Business Item on alternating years. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0, to accept the 2014 Annual Report on the General Plan. C2 - 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 5, 2015 Page 5 C5. APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2353-2 (408 PRADO ROAD, TR 120-13) - RESOLUTION MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt Resolution No. 10612 (2015 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the Final Map for Tract 2353-2 (408 Prado, TR 120-13).” C6. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE SLO HAPPENINGS PROMOTIONAL PLAN AND SERVICES, SPECIFICATION NO. 91357 MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0, to: 1. Approve the issuance of a Request for Proposal for the “SLO Happenings Promotional Plan and Services, Specification No. 91357.” 2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract for the SLO Happenings Promotional Plan and Services, based on the recommendation of the Promotional Coordinating Committee, and provided that the 2015-16 Community Promotions budget is approved as part of the 2015-17 Financial Plan. C7. CITY HALL ADMINISTRATION REMODEL, SPECIFICATION NO. 91290 MOTION BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, FAILED 2-3 (COUNCILMEMBERS CARPENTER AND CHRISTIANSON AND MAYOR MARX VOTING NO), to allocate the unallocated project budget of $16,500 for the installation of public art for the City Hall interior hallways which are accessible to the public. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, CARRIED 5-0, to: 1. Approve plans and specifications for the “City Hall Administration Remodel, Specification No. 91290.” 2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the City Manager to award the contract if the lowest responsible bidder is within the Engineer’s Estimate of $132,000. Vice Mayor Ashbaugh noted for the record his support for the project, pointing out his disappointment that it will not include installation of public art nor an elevator. C2 - 5 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 5, 2015 Page 6 C8. ALLOCATION OF FUNDING FOR THE PURCHASE OF A PRODUCTION QUALITY CAMCORDER AND EQUIPMENT MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0, to authorize the transfer of $14,000 from the Public, Education, and Government Access (PEG) funds to the City Clerk’s Equipment Account No. 20100-7227, for the purchase of a production quality camcorder, wireless microphone system, associated accessories, and protection plan. C9. ORDINANCE NO. 1615 (SECOND READING) – CODE AMENDMENT TO REMOVE COMPENSATION FOR THE CITIZENS’ REVENUE ENHANCEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARPENTER, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt Ordinance No. 1615 (2015 Series) entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, to remove compensation of Citizens’ Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission (REOC).” (Intro. on 04/21/2015) PUBLIC HEARING PH1. RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM - RESOLUTIONS - ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION Community Development Director Johnson, Chief Building Official Schneider, and Building and Safety Supervisor Cornejo narrated a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Rental Housing Inspection Program” and responded to Council inquiries. RECESS Council recessed at 8:00 p.m. and reconvened at 8:13 p.m., with all Council Members present. Mayor Marx opened the public hearing. Sharon Whitney, San Luis Obispo, urged Council to adopt the Rental Housing Inspection Program (RHIP); opined that the program will enhance neighborhood wellness and improve living conditions for renters. Mary Kimble, San Luis Obispo County, voiced opposition to the RHIP as proposed; suggested that all residences should be subject to health and safety inspections. Michelle Tasseff, San Luis Obispo, conveyed opposition to the proposed RHIP; pointed out that the program will not solve the shortage of affordable housing; opined that the cost of implementing the program has been underestimated. Dave Baldwin, San Luis Obispo, expressed opposition to the RHIP, opining that the City should focus on education and outreach efforts regarding tenant and landlord rights. C2 - 6 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 5, 2015 Page 7 Jacob Rogers, representing Associated Students, Inc., San Luis Obispo, recommended that a one-year sunset clause be added to the proposed ordinance; requested that Council assure that the program will not be used as a tool to target students. Anne Brown, Avila Beach, spoke against the proposed RHIP, opining that program fees may result in increased rent for tenants; stated that Cal Poly and Cuesta College should take a proactive role in educating students about their tenant rights. Carolyn Smith, San Luis Obispo, conveyed support for the RHIP; opined that landlords are running profitable businesses and inspections are a cost of business. Stephanie Teaford, representing Cal Poly President Armstrong, spoke in support of the RHIP; stated that the program is a strategy for maintaining housing standards. Mike Baumberger, San Luis Obispo, urged Council to oppose the ordinance; asserted that the program would be discriminatory, invade tenant privacy, and will result in higher rents. Mary Lou Johnson, San Luis Obispo Board of Realtors, San Luis Obispo, urged Council to deny the RHIP; opined that the City has inadequate information about rental units to enforce the program successfully. Susie Brans, San Luis Obispo, voiced opposition to the RHIP, citing concerns that it contains inadequate notification procedures. Linda White, San Luis Obispo, urged Council to ensure that the RHIP will be sufficiently funded and fully implemented; spoke on the City’s previous attempts to improve neighborhood wellness. Dave Ernst, San Luis Obispo, expressed opposition to the RHIP as presented, suggesting exploration of an alternative program requiring the license and registration of landlords. Steve Caminiti, San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition to the RHIP; opined that an oversight committee should be established if the program moves forward; voiced concern that the RHIP will be overly intrusive on property owner rights. Steve Barasch, San Luis Obispo, voiced opposition to the RHIP; suggested that a sunset clause be added to the ordinance and an oversight commission be established to oversee the program. Leslie Halls, San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition to the RHIP, asserting that it would be duplicative and an unnecessary addition of staff. Karen Adler, San Luis Obispo, voiced support for the RHIP, pointing out that it will improve health and safety conditions for renters and will improve property conditions. Victoria Wood, San Luis Obispo, expressed opposition to the RHIP; opined that the proposed program as well as the City’s business license program are flawed. C2 - 7 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 5, 2015 Page 8 Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition of the RHIP; asserted that neighborhoods are failing due to lack of neighborhood involvement. Brandi Morann, San Diego County, property owner in San Luis Obispo, spoke against the RHIP, opining that it violates peoples’ right to privacy; stressed that inspectors should only take note of building code violations, not high-occupancy issues. Kesha Toler, Paterson Realty, Atascadero, urged Council to reject or delay the RHIP to seek additional input from realty groups. Tim Townley, San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition of the RHIP; stated that the program will not address the underlying issue of a lack of affordable housing; suggested that the City focus on landlords that do not maintain their property. Charlene Rosales, Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of allowing property owners to self-certify their rental property; stressed the importance of an education and outreach program on tenant and landlord rights. Oriana Bardinelli, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the RHIP; voiced concern that students are living in substandard housing; asserted that landlords and property management companies are taking advantage of students. Victor Montgomery, Avila Beach, property owner in San Luis Obispo, objected to the proposed ordinance, citing concern that inspectors would enter private residences; pointed out that the Building Code is frequently updated and it would be difficult for inspectors to apply the code appropriately. Donna Lewis, Chamber of Commerce, San Luis Obispo Association of Realtors, Local Government Relations Committee, Work Force Housing Coalition Board, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns regarding the RHIP as proposed, suggesting that inspections be completed on a 5-7 year cycle and to allow for self-certification. Graham Updegrove, San Luis Obispo, conveyed opposition to the RHIP, voicing concern that the program may discriminate against property owners; opined that Cal Poly should house more students on campus. Stewart Jenkins, San Luis Obispo, asserted that the RHIP violates the State and Federal Constitutions; asserted that the proposed RHIP fees are actually a tax and should be subject to voter approval. Steve Delmartini, San Luis Obispo, voiced opposition to the RHIP; suggested that the program include a three-year sunset clause and that inspection notification periods be increased from 15 days to 30 days Sandra Rawley, Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN), San Luis Obispo, expressed support for the RHIP; pointed out inspectors will only be concerned about structural issues, not personal belongs. C2 - 8 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 5, 2015 Page 9 Paul Rys, San Luis Obispo, spoke on the importance of Cal Poly increasing the number of students housed on campus. Kyle Jordon, San Luis Obispo, suggested that Council defer action on the matter until the public’s input has been analyzed; voiced concern regarding the potential displacement of students. There being no others desiring to speak on this item, the public hearing was closed. Following discussion, MOTION BY VICE MAYOR ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY MAYOR MARX, CARRIED 3-2 (COUNCIL MEMBERS CARPENTER AND RIVOIRE VOTING NO), to: 1. Introduce an Ordinance No. 1616 (2015 Series) entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Title 15 of the Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.10 and establishing a Rental Housing Inspection Program,” with the following modifications:. a. Section 15.10.060(A) shall read as “The Building Official shall mail a notice of scheduled inspection to the Owner of each Residential Rental Dwelling Unit to the address provided on the registration form. The Owner, or any authorized agent or legal representative thereof, shall permit an inspection of each Residential Rental Dwelling Unit by the Inspector upon fifteen (15) business days’ thirty (30) calendar days’ notice of the time and date of the scheduled inspection. An extension to a scheduled inspection may be granted by the Inspector. b. Section 15.10.070 shall read as “The Owner shall pay an annual non-refundable Rental Registration and Administration Fee. The fee is intended to cover a portion of the cost of administration of the rental housing inspection program for a fiscal year, exclusive of the costs covered by the Inspection, Re-inspection or Self- Certification Fees, and shall be billed and payable annually with the Business License Fee. Payment of a Business License Fee without payment of a Rental Registration Fee shall be deemed a violation of this chapter. c. Section 15.10.090(B) shall read as “HUD Section 8 Housing Units or equivalent housing units.” 2. Adopt Resolution No. 10613 (2015 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending the City’s Master Fee Schedule to add Rental Housing Inspection Program Fees.” 3. Adopt Resolution No. 10614 (2015 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, establishing an amnesty period for property owners that voluntarily seek permits for unpermitted construction for single family and duplex dwelling units subject to the City’s adopted Rental Housing Inspection Program.” C2 - 9 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 5, 2015 Page 10 LIAISON REPORTS Council liaison reports were received from Vice Mayor Ashbaugh and Mayor Marx. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS By Consensus, Council agreed that it would be unnecessary to agendize consideration of replacing the utility box art at the corner of Pismo and Broad Streets because scheduled utility box maintenance will require the artwork to be replaced. ADJOURNMENT Special and Regular City Council Meetings are scheduled for Tuesday, May 19, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., respectively, in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. __________________________ Anthony J. Mejia, MMC City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/XX C2 - 10 Tuesday, May 12, 2015 Special Meeting of the City Council CALL TO ORDER A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on May 12, 2015 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx . ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx. Council Members Absent: None Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney, Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources, Greg Zocher, Risk Manager, Heather Goodwin, Deputy City Clerk, Rick Bolanos, of Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, were present at Roll Call. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION Leandra Funkhouser, representing Law Offices of David P. Warren, distributed hard copy materials regarding Police Chief Gesell; stated that she is uncertain whether Mr. Warren intends the documents to be available for public review. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6. Agency Negotiators: Monica Irons, Katie Lichtig, Michael Codron, Greg Zocher, J. Christine Dietrick, Rick Bolanos Represented Employee Organizations: San Luis Obispo City Employees’ Association (SLOCEA) San Luis Obispo Police Officer’s Association (POA) San Luis Obispo Police Staff Officer’s Association (SLOPSOA) International Association of Firefighters Local 3523 Unrepresented Employees: Unrepresented Management Employees Unrepresented Confidential Employees C2 - 11 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 12, 2015 Page 2 B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: One case. A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the local agency on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the local agency. The existing facts and circumstances exposing the City to litigation include potential obligations arising out of the separation of a public employee from employment. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Dietrick stated that during this afternoon’s Closed Session, Council provided direction to staff regarding the two agendized Closed Session items, but did not take any reportable actions. ADJOURNMENT Special and Regular City Council Meetings are scheduled for Tuesday, May 19, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., respectively, in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. __________________________ Anthony J. Mejia, MMC City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2015 C2 - 12 &LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&RXQFLO$JHQGD5HSRUW0HHWLQJ'DWH,WHP1XPEHU FROM .DWLH/LFKWLJ&LW\0DQDJHU Prepared By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ackground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etter of Intent from Kiwanis and OCE ,QWKHSURSRVHGGRQRUVPHWZLWK&LW\VWDIIDERXWWKHLUGHVLUHWREXLOGDQHZFRPPXQLW\ JDUGHQLQ6DQ/XLV2ELVSR$VDUHVXOWRIWKHVHFRQYHUVDWLRQVWKH.LZDQLV&OXERI6DQ/XLV 2ELVSR0RUQLQJDQG2&(VXEPLWWHGDOHWWHURILQWHQWWRVSRQVRUDQHZFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQ $WWDFKPHQW±/HWWHURI,QWHQW 7KHOHWWHURILQWHQWRXWOLQHGWKHGRQRUV¶LQWHQWWRFRPPLWJUDQW IXQGLQJDQGGRQDWLRQVLQNLQGVHUYLFHVIRUYROXQWHHUODERUDQGPDWHULDOVWRGHVLJQDQGFRQVWUXFW DQHZFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQ7KHRULJLQDOGRQDWLRQ/HWWHURI,QWHQWZDVIRUDSURMHFWEXGJHWRI 6LQFHWKHQSURMHFWFRVWVKDYHLQFUHDVHGWR,IWKHGRQDWLRQLVDSSURYHGWKH GRQRUVKDYHH[SUHVVHGZLOOLQJQHVVWRUDLVHWKHDGGHGIXQGV7KHGRQDWLRQDJUHHPHQWKDVEHHQ XSGDWHGWRLQFOXGHWKHFXUUHQWSURMHFWEXGJHWDPRXQWRI &3 C3-1 ACCEPTANCE OF LLGC COMMUNITY GARDEN DONATION Page 2 7KHQHZFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQZRXOGEHFRQVWUXFWHGRQ&LW\RZQHGSURSHUW\E\.LZDQLVDQG2&( YROXQWHHUODERU*UDQWIXQGLQJUDLVHGE\WKH.LZDQLVDQG2&(DVZHOODVLQNLQGGRQDWLRQV ZRXOGEHXVHGWRSXUFKDVHJDUGHQPDWHULDOVDQGHTXLSPHQWQHHGHGIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKH FRPPXQLW\JDUGHQ2QFHEXLOWWKLVQHZJDUGHQORFDWLRQZRXOGEHGRQDWHGWRWKH&LW\DQGEHFRPH DSDUWRIWKH&LW\¶V&RPPXQLW\*DUGHQSURJUDPZLWKRQJRLQJVXSSRUWDQGPDLQWHQDQFHSURYLGHG E\&LW\VWDII Community Garden 7KHQRUWKHUQHGJHRIWKH/DJXQD/DNH*ROI &RXUVHSURSHUW\ERUGHULQJ/RV2VRV9DOOH\ 5RDGSURYLGHVDQXQGHUXWLOL]HGSXEOLFVSDFH WKDWFRXOGDFFRPPRGDWHDQHZFRPPXQLW\ JDUGHQRIWKHHQYLVLRQHGVFRSHDQGVL]H7KH ORFDWLRQLVLGHQWLILHGLQ)LJXUHDQGDV $WWDFKPHQW±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valuation of Proposed Donation Site $WWKLVWLPHWKH&LW\GRHVQRWKDYHDPDVWHUSODQIRUWKHH[SDQVLRQRILWV&RPPXQLW\*DUGHQ 3URJUDP$VSDUWRIWKHFRQYHUVDWLRQVZLWKWKHSURSRVHGGRQRUVVWDIIFRQGXFWHGDQHYDOXDWLRQRI &LW\SDUNVDQG&LW\RZQHGSDUFHOVIRUSRVVLEOHH[SDQVLRQRIWKHJDUGHQSURJUDP&ULWHULDXVHGWR LGHQWLI\WKHPRVWVXFFHVVIXOJDUGHQORFDWLRQVLQFOXGHWKHIROORZLQJDVSUHVHQWHGEHORZLQ)LJXUH )LJXUH 9LFLQLW\0DS/RV2VRV9DOOH\5RDGJ \S \ C3-2 ACCEPTANCE OF LLGC COMMUNITY GARDEN DONATION Page 3 )LJXUH (YDOXDWLRQ&ULWHULD 2IWKHVLWHVHYDOXDWHGWKH/DJXQD/DNH*ROI&RXUVHZDVLGHQWLILHGDVWKHEHVWSURSHUW\ LPPHGLDWHO\DYDLODEOHWRHQKDQFHWKHH[LVWLQJSURJUDPQH[WWRDUHVLGHQWLDODUHDZLWKOLPLWHGDFFHVV WRDQHDUE\FRPPXQLW\JDUGHQ7KHSURSRVHGJDUGHQORFDWLRQLVDGMDFHQWWRDFRQGRPLQLXP FRPSOH[*ROI&RXUVH0RELOH+RPH3DUNDQGWKH/DJXQD0LGGOH6FKRRO,QDGGLWLRQWKH/DJXQD /DNH*ROI&RXUVHVLWHPHWDOORIWKHHYDOXDWLRQFULWHULDIRUFRQVLGHUDWLRQ Available Water Source and Use of Recycled Water 7KHDUHDLGHQWLILHGIRUWKHSURSRVHGFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQVLWHLVQRWFXUUHQWO\VHUYHGE\ZDWHUEXWLV ORFDWHGQH[WWRDUHF\FOHGZDWHUVRXUFH8WLOLWLHVVWDIIKDYHGHWHUPLQHGWKDWWKHJROIFRXUVH¶V UHF\FOHGZDWHUFDQVHUYHWKHDGGHGXVDJHRIWKHFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQDVSURSRVHG7RGD\UHF\FOHG ZDWHULVXVHGWRZDWHUFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQVLQ&DOLIRUQLDDVZHOODVFURSVLQWKH&HQWUDO9DOOH\7KH GRQRUV.LZDQLV&OXEDQG2&(KDYHLQFRUSRUDWHGERWKFRPPXQLW\DQG&LW\VWDIIIHHGEDFNLQWR DGHWDLOHGLUULJDWLRQSODQDVZHOODVDVLWHSODQWKDWLQFOXGHVVLJQDJHDERXWWKHXVHRIUHF\FOHG ZDWHUIHQFLQJDQGWKHSODQQHGLQVWDOODWLRQRITXLFNFRXSOHUVIRUKRVHDWWDFKPHQW,IWKLVGRQDWLRQ LVDSSURYHGE\&RXQFLOWKHQHHGHGUHF\FOHGZDWHUSHUPLWDSSURYDOVZLOOEHREWDLQHG Neighborhood Outreach and Support 7KHGRQRUVSDUWQHUHGZLWK&LW\VWDIIWRHQJDJHWKH&RPPXQLW\DQGLQSDUWLFXODUWKHDGMDFHQW QHLJKERUVDERXWWKLVSURSRVHGGRQDWLRQ7KUHH&RPPXQLW\:RUNVKRSVZHUHKHOGRQ6HSWHPEHU WKWKDQG2FWREHUUGDWWKH*ROI&RXUVHDQGWKH&LW\&RXQW\/LEUDU\UHJDUGLQJWKH SURSRVHGFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQDWWKLVVLWH1RWLFHVRIWKHVHPHHWLQJVZHUHVHQWWRDOOQHLJKERUV LQFOXGLQJWKHQHLJKERULQJFRQGRPLQLXP+RPHRZQHU¶V$VVRFLDWLRQ0RELOH+RPH3DUN FRPPXQLW\DQGWKH/DJXQD0LGGOH6FKRROWRGLVFXVVSRWHQWLDOLPSDFWVWRWKHVXUURXQGLQJ QHLJKERUKRRGV7RGDWHVWDIIKDVUHFHLYHGPRVWO\SRVLWLYHLQSXWIURPVHYHUDOPRELOHKRPHSDUN UHVLGHQWVQHLJKERUV/DJXQD0LGGOH6FKRROVWDIIDQGWKHJROIFRXUVHFRQFHVVLRQDLUH $FKLHYHPHQW+RXVH ZKRH[SUHVVHGJUHDWH[FLWHPHQWDERXWWKLVQHZRSSRUWXQLW\6RPHQHJDWLYH IHHGEDFNKDVEHHQUHFHLYHGIURPWKHDGMDFHQW&RQGRPLQLXP+RPHRZQHUV¶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age 4 Donation Policy 3HUWKH&LW\ V'RQDWLRQ3ROLF\DOOGRQDWLRQVH[FHHGLQJLQYDOXHPXVWEHDFFHSWHGWKURXJK DZULWWHQDJUHHPHQWFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKH&LW\¶VGRQDWLRQSROLF\JXLGHOLQHVDQGDSSURYHGE\WKH&LW\ &RXQFLO VHH$WWDFKPHQWIRUWKH&LW\¶VDSSURYHG'RQDWLRQ3ROLF\ $GGLWLRQDOO\LQNLQGFDSLWDO GRQDWLRQVUHPDLQVXEMHFWWRQRUPDO&LW\UHYLHZSHUPLWWLQJLQVSHFWLRQDQGLQVXUDQFH UHTXLUHPHQWV Parks and Recreation Commission Review and Concurrence 2Q-XO\WKH35&ILUVWUHYLHZHGWKH.LZDQLVDQG2&(SURSRVHGGRQDWLRQ2QHUHVLGHQW IURPWKHVXUURXQGLQJQHLJKERUKRRGDWWHQGHGWKHPHHWLQJDVGLGWKHUHSUHVHQWDWLYHVIURPWKH .LZDQLV&OXEDQG2&(DQGSURYLGHGLQSXWRQWKHSURSRVHGJDUGHQVLWH6HYHUDOFRPPXQLW\ ZRUNVKRSVZHUHKHOGLQ6HSWHPEHUDQGDQXSGDWHZDVSURYLGHGWRWKH&RPPLVVLRQRQ2FWREHU $VDGLUHFWUHVXOWRIFRPPXQLW\HQJDJHPHQWDQGIHHGEDFNUHFHLYHGFKDQJHVZHUHPDGHWR WKHJDUGHQGHVLJQWRPLWLJDWHFRQFHUQVUDLVHG2Q)HEUXDU\WKH35&XQDQLPRXVO\ UHFRPPHQGHGWKDWWKH&LW\&RXQFLODFFHSWWKHGRQDWLRQIURPWKH.LZDQLV&OXEDQG2&(DQG DSSURYHWKH/DJXQD/DNH*ROI&RXUVHIRUWKHORFDWLRQRIWKHQH[WFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQDVSURSRVHG $WWDFKPHQW FISCAL IMPACT 7RGDWHWKH.LZDQLV&OXERI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR0RUQLQJDQG2&(KDYH UDLVHGRIWKHFRPPLWWHGIXQGVDQGLQNLQGVHUYLFHVWRZDUGV FUHDWLRQRIWKLVQHZFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQ7KHZRUNVFRSHDQGSURMHFW FRVWVKDYHVLQFHEHHQUHYLVHGWREULQJWKHSURMHFWEXGJHWWR 7KHGRQRUVKDYHLQGLFDWHGWKHLUZLOOLQJQHVVWRFRQWLQXHUDLVLQJIXQGV QHFHVVDU\WRFRPSOHWHWKHSURMHFWIXQGLQJEXWUHPDLQKHVLWDQWWRVHHN DGGLWLRQDOIXQGUDLVLQJZLWKRXWWKH&LW\&RXQFLO¶VVXSSRUWDQG DFFHSWDQFHRIWKHGRQDWLRQ ,IDSSURYHGFRQVWUXFWLRQZLOOQRWEHJLQRQWKHQHZFRPPXQLW\JDUGHQ XQWLOWKHGRQRUVKDYHUDLVHGDOOQHFHVVDU\IXQGVUHTXLUHGWRIXOO\VXSSRUWWKHSURMHFW¶VFRQVWUXFWLRQ 7KHGRQDWLRQDJUHHPHQWLVSURYLGHGDV$WWDFKPHQW Proposed Community Garden Donation Proposed Project Budget 'HVLJQDQG&RQVWUXFWLRQ Total Proposed Budget$15,200 Grant Funding & Project Donations &RPPXQLW\)RXQGDWLRQRI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&RXQW\ 7KH.LZDQLV&OXERI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR0RUQLQJ 7KH1RRQ7LPH.LZDQLV&OXERI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR Total Funding Raised To-Date $10,000 Funding Still Needed Prior to Construction $5,200 *Project costs revised from the original budget of $13,000 to include current scope and material costs. Revised Project Budget is $15,200. C3-4 ACCEPTANCE OF LLGC COMMUNITY GARDEN DONATION Page 5 Ongoing Maintenance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¶V RSHUDWLQJEXGJHW)XQGLQJIRUDOOORQJWHUPJDUGHQUHSDLUSURMHFWVZLOOEHLGHQWLILHGDVQHHGHG DQGZLOOEHUHTXHVWHGDVSDUWRIWKH&LW\¶VDSSURYHG)LQDQFLDO3ODQQLQJSURFHVVIRUPLQRUFDSLWDO SURMHFWV ALTERNATIVES Not Accept Proposed Donation. 7KH&LW\&RXQFLOFRXOGFKRRVHQRWWRDFFHSWWKH GRQDWLRQIURPWKH.LZDQLVRI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR0RUQLQJDQG2QH&RRO(DUWK7KLV DOWHUQDWLYHLVQRWUHFRPPHQGHGGXHWRWKHFRPPXQLW\¶VH[SUHVVHGGHVLUHIRUPRUHJDUGHQ SORWVLQWKH&LW\H[LVWLQJJDUGHQZDLWOLVWRIFLWL]HQVDQGWKHFXUUHQWODFNRIJHQHUDOIXQGV DYDLODEOHWRFUHDWHQHZJDUGHQLQKRXVHZLWKLQWKHQH[WVHYHUDO\HDUV Study Other Sites for Feasibility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chstore7\parksrec\everyone\community services\council notes & reports\council agenda reports\car_lagunagolfcorsecommunitygarden.docx C3-5 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C3 - 6 C3 - 7 ATTACHMENT1 C3 - 8 ATTACHMENT1 VICINITY MAP LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE 11175 LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 C3 - 9 ATTACHMENT2 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C3 - 10 CA R M I C H A E L E N V I R O N M E N T A L LI C N O . 8 8 3 0 0 5 Ph o n e : ( 8 0 5 ) 8 0 1 - 6 9 5 6 F a x : ( 8 0 5 ) 9 8 0 - 4 2 8 8 ww w . c a r m i c h a e l e n v i r o n m e n t a l . c o m 5ECNG Ä LA G U N A C O M M U N I T Y G A R D E N SHEET 1 5/7/15ANDREW CRAIG DESIGN 1649 NIPOMO AVENUE LOS OSOS, CA. 93402 2#%+(+%#8'07' Notes: Raised Beds (4) Raised ADA Beds - ADA Pathways & Beds to be constructed according to ADA guidelines. ( Path widths around ADA beds depicted on plan.)(13) 8 x 10 x 6” - Dashed line depicts bed division allowing for multiple occupants. (12) 4 x 8 x 6” (42) Total Plots * Central Gathering Space - Herb Spiral Place Marker; (Final design & install to be completed by the San Luis Obispo Permaculture Design Course) 36 in. 60 i n . COMPOST C3 - 11 ATTACHMENT3 Ca r m i c h a e l E n v i r o n m e n t a l l i c . n o . 8 8 3 0 0 5 Ph o n e : ( 8 0 5 ) 8 0 1 - 6 9 5 6 F a x : ( 8 0 5 ) 9 8 0 - 4 2 8 8 ww w . c a r m i c h a e l e n v i r o n m e n t a l . c o m Pressure Line Trenching Detail = PVC Union = 18” for sizes 2” and smaller in planter areas Ύ/ŶĚŝĐĂƟŶŐ^ŽƵƌĐĞŝƌĞĐƟŽŶ POC /ƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶ>ĞŐĞŶĚ End Of Drip Tube Quick Coupler Hose Bibs WŽŝŶƚKĨŽŶŶĞĐƟŽŶ džŝƐƟŶŐ^ssĂůǀĞƐ >ĂƚĞƌĂůƌŝƉdƵďĞ; ƐƟŵĂƚĞĚ Path Depicted) 1 1/4” Mainline ĂůůsĂůǀĞ LA G U N A C O M M U N I T Y G A R D E N IR R I G A T I O N P L A N EKd ^͗ * Quick coupler hose bibs will remain under lock and key at all ƟŵĞƐ͘;ϮͿŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶďŽdžŬĞLJƐƚŽĂĐĐĞƐƐƋƵŝĐŬĐŽƵƉůĞƌƐǁŝůůƌĞŵĂŝŶ ŽŶͲƐŝƚĞĂƚĂůůƟŵĞƐƵŶĚĞƌůŽĐŬĂŶĚŬĞLJƚŚĞŵƐĞůǀĞƐ͘ ĂĐŚŵĞŵďĞƌ ǁŝůůďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚǁŝƚŚĂƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞŬĞLJƚŽĂĐĐĞƐƐƚŚĞŽŶͲƐŝƚĞŝƌƌŝŐĂ- ƟŽŶŬĞLJƐ͘ Ύ^ŝŐŶĂŐĞǁŝůůďĞĚŝƐƉůĂLJĞĚĂƚƚŚĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƉŽŝŶƚƉĞƌĐŝƚLJƐƚĂŶ- ĚĂƌĚƐ;^ĞĞĮŐƵƌĞϯ͘ͿĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĂƚĞĂĐŚƋƵŝĐŬĐŽƵƉůĞƌŚŽƐĞďŝď ůŽĐĂƟŽŶ͘ N Los Osos Valley Road >Ă Ő Ƶ Ŷ Ă ' ƌ Ğ Ğ Ŷ Ɖ Ă ƌ ƚ ŵ Ğ Ŷ ƚ Ɛ hƟůŝƚLJ^ŚĞĚ La g u n a G o l f C o u r s e P a r k i n g L o t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aguna Community Garden 06/09/14 Botanical Name:Arbutus 'Marina' Common Name:Marina Strawberry Madrone Plant Type:IrregularHabit:Tree Plant Size:12-25' 25-40'Leaf Color:Dark green Flower Color:Pink Flower Season:Summer Fall Sun:Full sun Water:Light water Soil Type:Sandy soil Loam soil Rocky soil Average soil Rich soil Well-drained soil Dry The 'Marina' has gorgeous bark, with leaves that are smaller and not as glossy as Pacific Madrone. Its flowers are pink, borne in pendant clusters in the summer. The fruit is large, red and quite ornamental. The plant should be grown in sun to part shade, with little or no summer watering when established. The 'Marina' prefers good drainage. -Monterey Bay Nursery Botanical Name:Chitalpa X tashkentensis 'Pink Dawn' Common Name:Chitalpa Pink Dawn Plant Type:Arching Irregular UprightHabit:Tree Plant Size:25-40'Leaf Color:Green Flower Color:Pink Flower Season:Spring Summer Fall Sun:Full sun Water:Medium water Soil Type:All soils Average soil Poor soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH Basic pH This medium size deciduous tree grows rapidly to 30' x 30'. It has wide, long, pointed, deep green leaves. Upon these leaves grow the pale-lavendar to pink trumpet-shaped flowers with pale yellow throats. Over a long bloom season, these flowers will appear in showy clusters. Can tend toward leaf burn if not given some protection from hot desert winds. Botanical Name:Citrus X 'Improved Meyer' Common Name:Improved Meyer Lemon Plant Type:BroadHabit:Tree Plant Size:3-6'Leaf Color:Green Flower Color:White Flower Season:Intermittent Sun:Full sun Water:Medium water Extra summer water Soil Type:Loam soil Average soil Rich soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH Improved Meyer Lemon is an evergreen tree that grows 3'-6' tall and 3'-6' wide; it has year around leaves that are glossy green. This tree likes well drained loam soil, with full sun; medium watering is required. It has white flowers and yellow edible fruit. Needs protection from the winter cold. Consider using as a potted tree which can brought inside in the winter. Botanical Name:Citrus sinensis Common Name:Sweet Orange cultivars Plant Type:BroadHabit:Tree Plant Size:6-12' 12-25'Leaf Color:Dark green Flower Color:White Flower Season:Spring Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Medium water Soil Type:Loam soil Rich soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH This tree will grow 20'-30' high and 10'-15' wide; it produces sweet, tasty oranges. It has shiny green, leathery foliage and produces clusters of fragrant white flowers that bloom in the spring. 1Created with GardenSoft PlantMaster - www.gardensoft.com C3 - 16 ATTACHMENT3 Laguna Community Garden 06/09/14 Botanical Name:Ficus carica Common Name:Edible fig Plant Type:BroadHabit:Tree Plant Size:12-25'Leaf Color:Light green Flower Color:n/a Flower Season:n/a Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Medium water Soil Type:Loam soil Rich soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH This small tree produces wonderful figs that are a brownish red color. Botanical Name:Malus 'Golden Delicious' Common Name:Apple Golden Delicious Plant Type:Broad RoundHabit:Tree Plant Size:12-25' 25-40'Leaf Color:Dark green Flower Color:Pink White Flower Season:Spring Sun:Full sun Water:Medium water Extra summer water Soil Type:Sandy soil Loam soil Average soil Rich soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH This apple cultivar is the most widely planted variety in the world. Heavy and regular cropping. Sweet, refreshing flavour. Fairly frost resistant. Botanical Name:Morus alba Common Name:White or Silkworm Mulberry Plant Type:BroadHabit:Tree Plant Size:12-25'Leaf Color:Green Flower Color:Green Flower Season:Spring Sun:Full sun Half sun Shade Water:Light water Medium water Extra summer water Soil Type:All soils Average soil Rich soil Poor soil Well-drained soil Dry soil Acid pH This fast-growing, fruitless shade tree grows to 35' tall, has large leaves, and takes heat and drought well. Botanical Name:Olea europaea Common Name:Olive, Edible Olive Plant Type:BroadHabit:Tree Plant Size:12-25' 25-40'Leaf Color:Grey green Flower Color:n/a Flower Season:n/a Sun:Full sun Water:Light water Soil Type:Sandy soil Loam soil Rocky soil Average soil Poor soil Neutral pH Basic pH This broad tree will grow to 40' tall and has small, gray green leaves with fleshy black fruit that appears in fall. 2Created with GardenSoft PlantMaster - www.gardensoft.com C3 - 17 ATTACHMENT3 Laguna Community Garden 06/09/14 Botanical Name:Prunus cerasifera 'Atropurpurea' Common Name:Purple-Leaf Plum Plant Type:Round UprightHabit:Tree Plant Size:25-40'Leaf Color:Bronze Red Purple Flower Color:White Flower Season:Spring Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Medium water Soil Type:All soils Average soil Rich soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH 25-35 feet tall & wide. New growth coppery-red, becoming deep to dark purple, and then red in the winter. Very aesthetic plant. single white flowers, abundant red fruit, 1-1.5 inches in size. Botanical Name:Punica granatum 'Wonderful' Common Name:Pomegranate Wonderful Plant Type:VaseHabit:Tree Plant Size:6-12'Leaf Color:Green Yellow green Flower Color:Orange Red Flower Season:Summer Sun:Full sun Half sun Shade Water:Light water Soil Type:Sandy soil Loam soil Average soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH This relatively small tree will grow 20' high and 15' wide; it produces red flowers that bloom in the spring. The red orange fruit appears in September and ripens in October and November. Botanical Name:Ceanothus 'Ray Hartman' Common Name:Ray Hartman California Lilac Plant Type:Broad UprightHabit:Tree Shrub Plant Size:12-25'Leaf Color:Dark green Green Flower Color:Blue Flower Season:Spring Summer Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Drought tolerant Light water Soil Type:All soils Well-drained soil Neutral pH Growing vigorously as either a large shrub or small tree, the Ray Hartman has big leaves and medium blue, delicate flowers in 3"-5" clusters. It grows to 12' high and 8'-10' wide. This cultivar has good tolerance for heat; it needs occasional deep waterings with good drainage. It attracts hummingbirds, butterflies and beneficial insects. - Cornflower Farms Botanical Name:Heteromeles arbutifolia Common Name:Toyon, Christmas B erry, Calif. Holl Plant Type:RoundHabit:Tree Shrub Plant Size:6-12' 12-25'Leaf Color:Dark green Flower Color:White Flower Season:Spring Summer Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Drought tolerant Soil Type:All soils Average soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH Toyon is a California native evergreen shrub that grows 8'-15' high and spreading 2'-3'. It has leathery toothed leaves, white summer flowers and clusters of red winter berries. It tolerates full sun or partial shade, heat, smog, wind and heavy or light soils. It is drought tolerant, attracts beneficial insects and hummingbirds. - Cornflower Farms 3Created with GardenSoft PlantMaster - www.gardensoft.com C3 - 18 ATTACHMENT3 Laguna Community Garden 06/09/14 Botanical Name:Penstemon heterophyllus Common Name:Foothill Penstemon Plant Type:UprightHabit:Shrub Plant Size:1-3'Leaf Color:Green Flower Color:Blue Flower Season:Spring Sun:Full sun Water:Light water Soil Type:Sandy soil Loam soil Average soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH This perennial will grow 1.5'-2' tall and 2'-3' wide. It has glossy, blue green foliage with flowers that vary in color and bloom from spring through early summer. Botanical Name:Phormium cultivars Common Name:New Zealand Flax selections Plant Type:Arching RoundHabit:Shrub Plant Size:3-6' 6-12'Leaf Color:Dark green Green Flower Color:Red Yellow Flower Season:Summer Sun:Full sun Half sun Shade Water:Light water Soil Type:All soils Poor soil Moist soil Neutral pH New Zealand Flax is a large, bold plant with stiffly vertical, sword-like, green leaves that arise from its base. It should be grown under full sun for best color. Varieties will offer different growth habits and leaf color. Botanical Name:Salvia clevelandii 'Winnifred Gilman' Common Name:Winifred Gillman Blue Sage Plant Type:MoundHabit:Shrub Plant Size:3-6'Leaf Color:Green Grey green Flower Color:Lavender Violet Flower Season:Summer Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Drought tolerant Soil Type:Sandy soil Loam soil Rocky soil Poor soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH The ' Winifred Gillman' Sage is a dense, compact sub-shrub that grows to 4'-5' tall and wide, and has a round form. It has blue flowers in spikes above the foliage in the spring and summer. This sub-shrub is native to California and is drought tolerant. -Cornflower Farms Botanical Name:Sambucus mexicana Common Name:Blue Elderberry Plant Type:UprightHabit:Shrub Plant Size:12-25'Leaf Color:Light green Flower Color:White Flower Season:Spring Summer Sun:Full sun Water:Light water Soil Type:Sandy soil Loam soil Rocky soil Average soil Poor soil Well-drained soil Dry The Blue Elderberry is a deciduous shrub that grows 4'-10' tall or tree that reaches up to 40' high. The leaves of this plant have 5-9 leaflets with white spring flower clusters developing into blue berries. The Blue Elderberry is a native to California, is drought tolerant and is a beneficial insect plant. 4Created with GardenSoft PlantMaster - www.gardensoft.com C3 - 19 ATTACHMENT3 Laguna Community Garden 06/09/14 Botanical Name:Vitis vinifera 'Flame Seedless' Common Name:Flame Seedless Grape Plant Type:Upright TwiningHabit:Vine Plant Size:6-12' 12-25'Leaf Color:Green Flower Color:White Flower Season:Spring Sun:Full sun Water:Medium water Extra summer water Soil Type:Sandy soil Loam soil Average soil Rich soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH Flame Seedless has medium size clusters of round red berries. Vines are heavy producers. Early season ripening. Good backyard variety. This vine requires a long, warm growing season. Prefers valleys and hillsides. It has excellent flavor. Botanical Name:Cynara scolymus Common Name:Artichoke Plant Type:Mound UprightHabit:Perennial Plant Size:3-6'Leaf Color:Grey green Silver Flower Color:Blue Purple Flower Season:Spring Sun:Full sun Water:Medium water Soil Type:Loam soil Rich soil Neutral pH This perennial will grow 4' tall and 6'-8' wide. It has silvery green leaves with bluish purple flowers that bloom in spring. Artichoke is a favorite fruit/vegetable of California kitchens but it is a great ornamental plant often overlooked for color contrast. It is very tolerant of little water when planted for ornamental purposes. Botanical Name:Erigeron glaucus 'Wayne Roderick' Common Name:Seaside Daisy, Beach Fleabane Plant Type:MoundHabit:Ground cover Perennial Plant Size:1-3'Leaf Color:Green Flower Color:Lavender Flower Season:Spring Summer Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Light water Medium water Extra summer water Soil Type:Sandy soil Loam soil Average soil Well-drained soil Dry soil Neutral pH This perennial grows 1' tall and 1.5' wide. It has deep green foliage and lavender flowers that bloom continuously if spent flowers are removed. It does well in coastal areas. Botanical Name:Juncus patens Common Name:California Gray Rush Plant Type:Mound UprightHabit:Perennial Plant Size:1-3'Leaf Color:Grey green Blue green Flower Color:n/a Flower Season:n/a Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Light water Medium water Extra summer water Soil Type:Sandy soil Clay soil Loam soil Average soil Rich soil Moist soil Dry soil Although a wetland plant, Juncus patens can tolerate fairly dry conditions. It will slowly clump to 2'-3' wide and a height of 2'-2.5'. There are many selections of this species available with different heights and widths. It is carefree, with little to no maintenance. It provides great upright structure to many styles of landscapes. 5Created with GardenSoft PlantMaster - www.gardensoft.com C3 - 20 ATTACHMENT3 Laguna Community Garden 06/09/14 Botanical Name:Salvia greggii Common Name:Autumn or Texas Sage Plant Type:Mound UprightHabit:Perennial Plant Size:1-3'Leaf Color:Green Flower Color:Pink Red White Flower Season:Spring Fall Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Light water Medium water Soil Type:All soils Average soil Well-drained soil Basic pH Evergreen sprawling shrub grows quickly to 2' x 2'. Red pink or white flowers appear in spring and fall. Prefers filtered shade in Phoenix. Attracts hummingbirds. Botanical Name:Tagetes lemmonii Common Name:Perennial Marigold, Copper Canyon D Plant Type:Round UprightHabit:Perennial Plant Size:3-6'Leaf Color:Light green Flower Color:Yellow Flower Season:Winter Spring Summer Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Light water Soil Type:All soils Average soil Rich soil Well-drained soil Dry soil Neutral pH This larger perennial will grow to 6' tall and has small, light green leaves with yellow mustard colored flowers that bloom in winter and spring. Cut back to within 6" of the ground in summer if needed to refresh and reduce the size of the plant. This plant is a riot of color! Botanical Name:Calamagrostis X acutiflora 'Karl Foerste Common Name:Feather Reed Grass Plant Type:UprightHabit:Grass Plant Size:3-6'Leaf Color:Dark green Green Flower Color:n/a Flower Season:Summer Sun:Full sun Half sun Water:Medium water Extra summer water Soil Type:Sandy soil Clay soil Loam soil Average soil Well-drained soil Neutral pH This ornamental perennial grass grows 4'-6' tall and 1'-1.5' wide; it has semi-evergreen foliage that is green in spring and summer but turns green/brown in fall. The flowers bloom in mid June and emerge a light green but quickly turn to pink/purple. Tall grasses are highly combustible. 6Created with GardenSoft PlantMaster - www.gardensoft.com C3 - 21 ATTACHMENT3 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C3 - 22 City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) MEMO 1 Date: October 1, 2014 Subject: Laguna Lake Golf Course Proposed Community Garden Donation Prepared By: Shelly Stanwyck, Director of Parks and Recreation Dave Setterlund, Recreation Supervisor Recommendations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orkshop #1 'DWH :HGQHVGD\6HSWHPEHU 7LPH SP /RFDWLRQ /DJXQD/DNH*ROI&RXUVH&OXE+RXVH/RV2VRV9DOOH\5RDG +LJKOLJKWVRIZRUNVKRS &UHDWHODUJHUEXIIHU]RQHQHDUFRQGR 5HORFDWHFRPSRVWDZD\IURPFRQGR 3URYLGHORFNLQJJDWH *DUGHQFRXOGSRWHQWLDOO\EHDQDWWUDFWLRQIRUWUDQVLHQWSRSXODWLRQ (VWDEOLVKKRXUVRIRSHUDWLRQ QRWGDZQWLOOGXVN 'HHUIHQFLQJ C3 - 23 3-1 ATTACHMENT4 City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) MEMO 2 2Q6DWXUGD\6HSWHPEHUWKWKH&LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSRKRVWHGWKHVHFRQG/DJXQD*ROI&RXUVH &RPPXQLW\*DUGHQZRUNVKRS1RFRPPXQLW\PHPEHUVDWWHQGWKH6DWXUGD\6HSWHPEHUZRUNVKRS Workshop #2 'DWH 6DWXUGD\6HSWHPEHU 7LPH DP /RFDWLRQ 6/2&RXQW\3XEOLF/LEUDU\&RPPXQLW\5RRP 3DOP6WUHHW +LJKOLJKWVRIZRUNVKRS 1RFRPPXQLW\PHPEHUVDWWHQGHGWKH6DWXUGD\6HSWHPEHUWKSXEOLFKHDULQJZRUNVKRS1R DGGLWLRQDOLQSXWUHFHLYHG C3 - 24 3-2 ATTACHMENT4 Community Workshop SEPTEMBER 10 | 7:00 P.M. Laguna Lake Golf Course Clubhouse proposed ATTENTION Laguna Lake Golf Course Neighbors New Community Garden Please join us for a discussion regarding the proposal of a new community garden near the entryway of the Laguna Lake Golf Course. ŝƚLJŽĨ^ĂŶ>ƵŝƐKďŝƐƉŽWĂƌŬƐĂŶĚZĞĐƌĞĂƟŽŶĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ &ŽƌŵŽƌĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶ call 780-7300 or visit ǁǁǁ͘ƐůŽĐŝƚLJ͘ŽƌŐͬƉĂƌŬƐĂŶĚƌĞĐƌĞĂƟŽŶ͘ All residents are invited to share thoughts and ideas. SEPTEMBER 13 | 10:00 A.M. County Library Conference Room & C3 - 25 3-3 ATTACHMENT4 Community Workshop OCTOBER 23 | 7:00 P.M. LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE 11175 Los Osos Valley Road proposed ATTENTION Laguna Lake Golf Course Neighbors New Community Garden Please join us to discuss an UPDATED site plan for a community garden near the entryway of the Laguna Lake Golf Course. ŝƚLJŽĨ^ĂŶ>ƵŝƐKďŝƐƉŽWĂƌŬƐĂŶĚZĞĐƌĞĂƟŽŶĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ &ŽƌŵŽƌĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶ ĐĂůůĂǀĞ^ĞƩĞƌůƵŶĚĂƚϳϴϭͲϳϬϲϳ ŽƌǀŝƐŝƚǁǁǁ͘ƐůŽĐŝƚLJ͘ŽƌŐͬƉĂƌŬƐĂŶĚƌĞĐƌĞĂƟŽŶ All residents are invited to share thoughts and ideas. update! C3 - 26 ATTACHMENT4 Section 760 DONATION POLICY 745-1 C3 - 27 ATTACHMENT5 Donation Policy 745-2 Donation Policy 745-2 C3 - 28 ATTACHMENT5 C3 - 29 ATTACHMENT6 C3 - 30 ATTACHMENT6 C3 - 31 ATTACHMENT6 Wednesday, October 1, 2014 5:30PM Regular Meeting Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER: Chair Davis ROLL CALL: Commissioners Ryan Baker, Steve Davis, Craig Kincaid, Ron Regier, Jeff Whitener, Susan Updegrove and Michael Parolini Public Comment Period. At this time, you may address the Commission on items that are not on the agenda but are of interest to the public and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Parks and Recreation Commission. The Commission may not discuss or take action on issues that are not on the agenda other than to briefly respond to statements made or questions raised, or to ask staff to follow up on such issues. &RQVLGHUDWLRQRI0LQXWHVRI5HJXODU0HHWLQJRI6HSWHPEHU 0HPRUDQGDIRU&RPPLVVLRQ5HYLHZ questions posed at meeting if needed D 0HDGRZ3DUN/LJKWLQJ5HSODFHPHQW&DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQW3URMHFW 0LNH0F*XLUH (QJLQHHU,,, E 6WDWXVRI&RPPXQLW\*DUGHQDW/DJXQD/DNH*ROI&RXUVH3XEOLF2XWUHDFKDQG:DWHU 5HVHDUFK 'DYH6HWWHUOXQG5HFUHDWLRQ6XSHUYLVRU /DJXQD/DNH*ROI&RXUVH2SHUDWLRQDO5HYLHZ 3URYLGH$GGHG'LUHFWLRQ5HJDUGLQJ5HTXHVW IRU3URSRVDO3URFHVVDQG&RQWHQW $VKOH\9LOODUUHDO$QDO\VW±PLQXWHV 5HYLHZDQG$SSURYH6DQ/XLV2ELVSR6HQLRU&HQWHU&RPPXQLW\3DUWQHUVKLS$JUHHPHQW 'DYH6HWWHUOXQG5HFUHDWLRQ6XSHUYLVRUPLQXWHV 'LVFXVV$GYLVRU\%RG\*RDOV 6WHYH'DYLV&KDLU±PLQXWHV 'LVFXVV&RPPLVVLRQ5HWUHDWDQG)ROORZ8S0DWHULDOV 6WDQZ\FN'LUHFWRU±PLQXWHV 'LUHFWRU¶V5HSRUW±+LJKOLJKWV 6KHOO\6WDQZ\FN'LUHFWRU 0HOLVVD0XGJHWW5HFUHDWLRQ 0DQDJHU±PLQXWHV 6XEFRPPLWWHH/LDLVRQ5HSRUWV 7UHH&RPPLWWHH±%DNHU*ROI±:KLWHQHU 1DWXUDO5HVRXUFHV±.LQFDLG%LF\FOH&RPPLWWHH5HJLHU -DFN+RXVH&RPPLWWHH±8SGHJURYH'DPRQ*DUFLD&RPPLWWHH±3DUROLQL 6FKRRO'LVWULFW±3DUROLQL<RXWK6SRUWV'DYLV &RPPXQLFDWLRQV Adjourn to Regular Meeting November 5, 2014 APPEALS: Administrative decisions by the Parks and Recreation Commission may be appealed to the City Council in accordance with the appeal procedure set forth in Chapter 1.20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including the disabled in all of its services, programs, and activities. Please contact the Clerk or staff liaison prior to the meeting if you require assistance. C3 - 32 ATTACHMENT6 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 1 &RXQFLO+HDULQJ5RRP 3DOP6WUHHW 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ :HGQHVGD\)HEUXDU\ SP CALL TO ORDER: &KDLU'DYLVFDOOHGWKHPHHWLQJWRRUGHUDW SP ROLL CALL:&KDLU6WHYH'DYLV9LFH&KDLU-HII:KLWHQHUDQG&RPPLVVLRQHUV5\DQ%DNHU &UDLJ.LQFDLG0LFKDHO3DUROLQL5RQ5HJLHUDQG6XVDQ8SGHJURYH ABSENT: 9LFH&KDLU:KLWHQHU COUNCIL: 1RQH STAFF:6KHOO\6WDQZ\FN0HOLVVD0XGJHWW'HYLQ+\ILHOG5LFK2JGHQ-HII +HQGULFNV'DYH6HWWHUOXQG5RQ0XQGV-HQQLIHU0HW]$GDP%DVGHQ Public Comment 7LP5RVV6/2UHVLGHQWDGGUHVVHGWKH&RPPLVVLRQHUDERXWDPHQGLQJWKH&LW\¶VRUGLQDQFHWRUHPRYH WKHSURKLELWLRQRIVODFNOLQLQJLQWKHRSHQVSDFHDQGVHHNLQJGLUHFWLRQIURP&RPPLVVLRQWRDJHQGL]HWKLV LWHP&KDLU'DYLVUHVSRQGHGWKDWWKH&LW\&RXQFLOLVUHVSRQVLEOHIRUPDNLQJDPHQGPHQWVWR*HQHUDO 3ODQ&RQVHUYDWLRQRI2SHQ6SDFH(OHPHQWDQGPXQLFLSDOFRGH7KHUHFHQWDPHQGPHQWH[SDQGHGWKH XVHRIVODFNOLQLQJLQPRVWFLW\SDUNV7KH&RPPLVVLRQZRXOGGLVFXVVIXUWKHUXQGHUWKH &RPPXQLFDWLRQVVHFWLRQWRGHWHUPLQHLIWKLVLWHPVVKRXOGEHSODFHGRQDIXWXUHDJHQGD'LUHFWRU 6WDQZ\FNUHPLQGHGWKH&RPPLVVLRQWKDWVODFNOLQLQJLVSURKLELWHGRQ%LVKRS¶V3HDNDQGLQWKH&LW\¶V RSHQVSDFH7KHH[LVWLQJFOLPELQJEROWVDQGDQFKRUVRQ%LVKRS¶V3HDNIRUVODFNOLQLQJKDYHEHHQ UHPRYHG CONSIDERATION OF MINUTESRI5HJXODU0HHWLQJRI-DQXDU\ MOTION: .LQFDLG%DNHU $SSURYHWKH0LQXWHVRI-DQXDU\DVDPHQGHG Approved: 6 yes: 0 no: 1 absent COMMUNITY INPUT FOCUS: TURF/DAMON GARCIA (Hyfield/Ogden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eeting Minutes Parks and Recreation Commission C3 - 33 ATTACHMENT6 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 3 -HURPH-RQHV<0&$DVNHGDERXWIXWXUHSODQQLQJWRGHYHORSODQGIRUWKHSXUSRVHRIH[SDQGLQJ \RXWKVSRUWVZLWKLQWKHFRPPXQLW\&RPPLVVLRQHU3DUROLQLHQFRXUDJHGWKHSXEOLFWRSDUWLFLSDWHLQ WKH&LW\¶V6SHFLILF$UHD3ODQVVXFKDV0DUJDULWDDQG$LUSRUW$UHD8VH'LUHFWRU6WDQZ\FN UHPLQGHG&RPPLVVLRQRILWV$GYLVRU\%RG\*RDOVZKLFKLQFOXGHGDQXSGDWHRI3DUNVDQG 5HFUHDWLRQ(OHPHQWIRULGHQWLILFDWLRQRIDPDVWHUSODQIRUIXWXUHUHFUHDWLRQIDFLOLWLHV&KDLU'DYLV DFNQRZOHGJHGWKDWWKHUHLVDODFNRIFRPPXQLW\VSRUWVILHOGV¶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etterlund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ity of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 4 SORWVDQGDQDFFHVVLEOHIWSDWKZD\+HZRXOGOLNHWRVHHDODUJHUEXIIHU]RQHDQGRUVDIHW\ HTXLSPHQW VXFKDVEROODUGV LQVWDOOHG'LUHFWRU6WDQZ\FNUHVSRQGHGWKDWWKH&LW\¶V%XLOGLQJDQG 3ODQQLQJGHSDUWPHQWZRXOGUHYLHZDQGSURYLGHFRPPHQWVIRUDOOSRWHQWLDOQHZFRQVWUXFWLRQ MOTION: .LQFDLG8SGHJURYH 5HFRPPHQGDWLRQ&RXQFLOFRQVLGHUDWLRQRIWKHSURSRVHG/DJXQD /DNH&RPPXQLW\*DUGHQ'RQDWLRQDVSUHVHQWHGE\2QH&RRO(DUWKDQG0RQGD\1RRQWLPH.LZDQLV &OXE Approved: 6 yes: 0 no: 1 absent 4.REVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT LAYOUTS FOR SINSHEIMER PARK PLAY EQUIPMENT (Lief McKay, Principal Landscape Architect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³GRWV´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³&LW\´DQGWKH.LZDQLV &OXERI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR0RUQLQJDQG2QH&RRO(DUWKQRQSURILWRUJDQL]DWLRQVKHUHLQDIWHUUHIHUUHGWRDV³'RQRUV´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³'RQDWLRQ´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’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¶V6WDQGDUG/LDELOLW\,QVXUDQFHDQG,QGHPQLILFDWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWVDV VSHFLILHGE\WKH&LW\¶V5LVN0DQDJHU CITY’S OBLIGATIONS7KH&LW\VKDOOSHUIRUPDVIROORZV D 7KH&LW\VKDOOFRRUGLQDWHDQGSURYLGHRYHUVLJKWWRWKHSURMHFWWRHQVXUHWKDWWKHSURMHFWFRQIRUPVWR&LW\ SROLFLHVUHJXODWLRQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQV E 7KH&LW\VKDOODVVLVWWKH'RQRUVLQVKHSKHUGLQJWKHSURMHFWWKURXJKWKH&LW\¶VUHYLHZDQGDSSURYDO SURFHVV RECOGNITION.7KH'RQRUVVKDOOEHUHFRJQL]HGLQWKHIROORZLQJPDQQHU D 7KH'RQRUVVKDOOEHSHUPLWWHGZLWK&LW\DSSURYDOWRLQVWDOODSODTXHRQRUQHDUWKHJDUGHQFRQWDLQLQJWKH QDPHVRI'RQRUV E 'HGLFDWLRQRI&RPPXQLW\*DUGHQ $WVXFKWLPHDVWKHFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHJDUGHQLVFRPSOHWHGWKH&LW\ LQFROODERUDWLRQZLWKWKH'RQRUVVKDOOKROGDFHUHPRQ\DWZKLFKWKHJDUGHQZLOOEHLQWURGXFHGWRWKH FRPPXQLW\DQGGRQRUVVKDOOUHFHLYHDSSURSULDWHUHFRJQLWLRQ TAX STATUS OF CITY &LW\KHUHE\FRQILUPVWKDW&LW\LVDQRUJDQL]DWLRQGHVFULEHGLQVHFWLRQ F DQG E $ Y RIWKHLQWHUQDO5HYHQXH&RGHWRZKLFKFRQWULEXWLRQDUHGHGXFWLEOHIRUIHGHUDOLQFRPHWD[ SXUSRVHVWRWKHH[WHQWSURYLGHGLQ6HFWLRQDQGDOORWKHUDSSOLFDEOHVHFWLRQRIWKH&RGH'RQRU DFNQRZOHGJHVDQGXQGHUVWDQGVWKDWKHVKHVKRXOGFRQVXOWZLWKKLVRUKHUWD[FRQVXOWDQWDVWRWKHGHGXFWLELOLW\ RIWKHGRQDWLRQIRU)HGHUDO,QFRPH7D[SXUSRVHV AMENDMENTS.$Q\DPHQGPHQWPRGLILFDWLRQRUYDULDWLRQIURPWKHWHUPVRIWKLVDJUHHPHQWVKDOOEHLQ ZULWLQJDQGVKDOOEHHIIHFWLYHRQO\XSRQDSSURYDOE\WKH3DUNVDQG5HFUHDWLRQ'LUHFWRUIRUWKH&LW\RI6DQ /XLV2ELVSR COMPLETE AGREEMENT7KLVZULWWHQ$JUHHPHQWLQFOXGLQJDOOZULWLQJVVSHFLILFDOO\LQFRUSRUDWHG KHUHLQE\UHIHUHQFHVKDOOFRQVWLWXWHWKHFRPSOHWHDJUHHPHQWEHWZHHQWKHSDUWLHVKHUHWR1RRUDODJUHHPHQW XQGHUVWDQGLQJRUUHSUHVHQWDWLRQQRWUHGXFHGWRZULWLQJDQGVSHFLILFDOO\LQFRUSRUDWHGKHUHLQVKDOOEHRIDQ\ IRUFHRUHIIHFWQRUVKDOODQ\VXFKRUDODJUHHPHQWXQGHUVWDQGLQJRUUHSUHVHQWDWLRQEHELQGLQJXSRQWKHSDUWLHV KHUHWR NOTICE.$OOZULWWHQQRWLFHVWRWKHSDUWLHVKHUHWRVKDOOEHVHQWE\8QLWHG6WDWHVPDLOSRVWDJHSUHSDLGE\ UHJLVWHUHGRUFHUWLILHGPDLODGGUHVVHGDVIROORZV &LW\ 3DUNVDQG5HFUHDWLRQ'HSDUWPHQW $WWQ 3DUNVDQG5HFUHDWLRQ'LUHFWRU 1LSRPR6WUHHW 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ 'RQDWRUV .LZDQLV&OXERI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR0RUQLQJ 2FHDQDLUH'U 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ 2QH&RRO(DUWK 32%R[ 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT%RWKWKH&LW\DQG'RQRUVGRFRYHQDQWWKDWHDFKLQGLYLGXDO H[HFXWLQJWKLVDJUHHPHQWRQEHKDOIRIHDFKSDUW\LQSHUVRQGXO\DXWKRUL]HGDQGHPSRZHUHGWRH[HFXWH $JUHHPHQWVIRUVXFKSDUW\ C3 - 38 ATTACHMENT7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theSDUWLHGKHUHWRKDYHFDXVHGWKLVLQVWUXPHQWWREHH[HFXWHGWKHGD\DQG\HDUILUVWDERYH ZULWWHQ $77(67 &,7<2)6$1/8,62%,632$0XQLFLSDO&RUSRUDWLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB%\ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB $QWKRQ\0HMLD&LW\&OHUN.DWLH/LFKWLJ&LW\0DQDJHU $33529('$672)250 '21$7256 BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB%\ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB -&KULVWLQH'LHWULFN&LW\$WWRUQH\3UHVLGHQW.LZDQLV&OXERI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR0RUQLQJ %\ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB *UHJ(OOLV'LUHFWRU2QH&RRO(DUWK C3 - 39 ATTACHMENT7 Exhibit A to Agreement SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. Donors. Kiwanis Club of San Luis Obispo Morning and One Cool Earth. 2. Project Summary. The Donors will design, plan and construct a community garden at the entrance of the Laguna Lake Golf Course. The proposed facility includes approximately 42 garden plots. Donors will utilize and provide signage for recycled water. 3. Funding. The Donors will raise funds of $15,200 before the construction of the community garden. If funding falls short Donors agree to raise the necessary funds to complete the project. 4. Insurance. The Donors shall acquire all necessary insurance required by the City. 5. Permits. The Donors will receive all California State Water Control Board permit approvals for use of recycled water in the garden. 6. Waivers. The Donors shall require of their volunteers to sign liability waivers as required by the City. 7. Timeline. The Donors shall complete construction of this project within six (6) months from the start date of the project’s construction. 8. Materials. The Donors shall provide for the purchase of all construction materials for the project’s construction. 9. Labor. The Donors will furnish all labor (volunteer and/or paid) to construct the new community garden at the Laguna Lake Golf Course. 10. Transportation. The Donors shall be responsible for providing all volunteer and garden material transportation to and from the construction project site. 11. Communication. Donors shall meet weekly with the City representative during construction of the garden to discuss project schedule, progress and concerns. 12. Reporting. Donors shall report to the City in writing any issues with the construction of the garden. 13. Notification. City Kiwanis of San Luis Obispo Morning One Cool Earth Parks and Recreation Director President, Kiwanis of SLO Morning Director, One Cool Earth 1341 Nipomo Street 1552 Oceanaire Drive P.O. Box 150 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 C3 - 40 ATTACHMENT7 CA R M I C H A E L E N V I R O N M E N T A L LI C N O . 8 8 3 0 0 5 Ph o n e : ( 8 0 5 ) 8 0 1 - 6 9 5 6 F a x : ( 8 0 5 ) 9 8 0 - 4 2 8 8 ww w . c a r m i c h a e l e n v i r o n m e n t a l . c o m 5ECNG Ä LA G U N A C O M M U N I T Y G A R D E N SHEET 1 5/7/15ANDREW CRAIG DESIGN 1649 NIPOMO AVENUE LOS OSOS, CA. 93402 2#%+(+%#8'07' Notes: Raised Beds (4) Raised ADA Beds - ADA Pathways & Beds to be constructed according to ADA guidelines. ( Path widths around ADA beds depicted on plan.)(13) 8 x 10 x 6” - Dashed line depicts bed division allowing for multiple occupants. (12) 4 x 8 x 6” (42) Total Plots * Central Gathering Space - Herb Spiral Place Marker; (Final design & install to be completed by the San Luis Obispo Permaculture Design Course) 36 in. 60 i n . COMPOST C3 - 41 ATTACHMENT7 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C3 - 42 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager Prepared By: Lee Johnson, Economic Development Manager SUBJECT: 2015-17 DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT RECOMMENDATION Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a two-year agreement with the San Luis Obispo Downtown Association (SLODA) for use of funds collected through the Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment with no changes other than the term of the agreement. DISCUSSION Background In 1975, the City joined with the Downtown merchants and property owners to create an assessment district to provide funding for special benefits to the Downtown. This district was created pursuant to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1965 (California Streets and Highway Code (§36000-36081) by adoption of Ordinance Number 649 (1975 Series). The law provided the City Council with the sole discretion as to how the revenue derived from the assessment is to be used within the scope of the purposes spelled out in the 1965 State law. The boundaries of the Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area (DPBIA) were defined by the Ordinance encompassing the heart of the Downtown business district bounded generally by Santa Rosa and Beach Streets, and by Palm and Marsh Streets as more specifically shown on the boundary map (Attachment 1). The Downtown Association (DA), originally created as an advisory body to the City Council, now operates as an independent 501(c)(6) not-for-profit corporation (SLODA) and has an annual budget of approximately $600,000, about a third of which is derived from the Area assessment on the approximately 600 SLODA members. The City of San Luis Obispo now contracts with the DA for the use of DPBIA assessment funds, as described below. Prior Agreements On July 1, 2008, the City Council entered into a one-year agreement with the newly formed not- for-profit SLODA for the provision of services in return for distribution of all DPBIA assessment revenues. To facilitate a smooth transition from advisory body status to contractor status, the City and the DA formed a transition team that examined the services provided by the City to the DA, and services provided by the DA for the benefit of the City. This analysis informed preparation of the initial contract that enumerated provision of specific services primarily including three events: Holiday Activities, Concerts in the Plaza and Thursday Night Promotions (also commonly referred to as Farmers’ Market). The Agreement also listed on-going services that the DA had traditionally provided, including but not limited to working closely with City staff to address issues of parking, construction, downtown maintenance, economic vitality and long term strategies for the viability and health of the SLODA. 06-02-2015 C4 C4 - 1 2015-17 Downtown Association Contract Page 2 In the years since 2008, two-year contracts have been utilized in recognition of the commitment to the Downtown by both the City and the SLODA. In both 2009-11 and 2011-13 Financial Plan periods, two year contracts were approved by Council with only minor adjustments to the terms in recognition of the outstanding work of the SLODA. In May of 2013, the Council approved a new contract for 2013-15 which had a series of minor changes and several improvements. The 2015-17 contract is the same as the 2013-15 contract with changes to reflect the new time period. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed agreement does not anticipate changes to the City’s relationship with the DA and the provision of services to meet each other’s mutual goals. As envisioned in the agreement, the City will continue to collect the approximately $200,000 in Area assessment revenues and will pass these funds to the SLODA for services provided in accordance with this Agreement. In addition, the City will continue to provide support for the special events that the SLODA provides in under the Agreement. As a result, the proposed agreement has no fiscal impact on the City’s General Fund. ALTERNATIVES Do not renew the Agreement with the SLODA. The Council could direct staff to explore alternatives to contracting with the SLODA for the services provided by this organization. Due to the ongoing nature of the activities produced by the SLODA that have become hallmarks of our community, this alternative is not recommended. ATTACHMENTS 1. Downtown Business Improvement Area Map 2. Proposed 2015-17 Agreement T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-06-02\Downtown Association Contract Renewal (Codron-Johnson)\Council Agenda Report- Downtown Association Contract Renewal 2015- 17.docx C4 - 2 C4 - 3 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C4 - 4 Attachment 2 1 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of this first day of July, 2015, by and between the SAN LUIS OBISPO DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION, a 501(c)(6) non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of California, with a place of business at 1108 Garden Street, San Luis Obispo, California 93401 ("SLODA"), and the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation and charter city ("City"). RECITALS: A. On October 6, 1975, the City Council adopted, and subsequently amended on various occasions, Ordinance 649 (1975 Series) (collectively, "the Ordinance") creating the Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area ("DPBIA") in the downtown area of San Luis Obispo, and levying the authorized assessment on all businesses within the area, and B. The City and SLODA have benefited from a close working relationship for the benefit of business and tourism in the downtown area of San Luis Obispo since the inception of the Downtown Business Improvement Area in 1975 and desire to continue their relationship for the betterment of tourism and business; and C. SLODA is uniquely qualified to provide the services contemplated under this contract due to its intimate knowledge of Downtown, unique connection to businesses in the Downtown, and its long experience producing and providing promotional services for the benefit of Association members; and D. The SLODA has historically added substantial value to the events produced under contract with the City by utilizing the financial resources of its membership and dedication of its staff that in total far exceed the DPBIA assessment revenues; and E. The SLODA brings experienced and competent management of the subcontractors that it hires for the contracted events; and F. Both parties acknowledge that the Thursday Night Promotions, Concerts in the Plaza and Holiday Activities are unique events that bring vibrancy to the Downtown city streets and public areas; G. Having determined that promotional activities to benefit business and tourism activities in the Downtown area of San Luis Obispo are an appropriate use of DPBIA assessment proceeds, since such activities are expected to maintain and increase revenues derived by the City from the Downtown area and to preserve and enhance the unique character of the Downtown for the special benefit of Downtown area businesses, and further, having determined that SLODA is able to conduct such promotional activities, the City Council desires to contract with SLODA to conduct promotional activities in the Downtown area of San Luis Obispo; and C4 - 5 Attachment 2 2 H. The City is authorized to enter into a contract to provide services to the members of the DPBIA and to administer the assessment collected for that purpose; the SLODA, a 501(c)(6) organization, wishes to enter into this contract with the City to provide agreed upon services to the DPBIA members. NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE as follows: 1. Scope of Services. SLODA will conduct promotional activities to benefit business and tourism activities in the Downtown area of the City, more specifically set forth in this Agreement as the Scope of Services, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated as if fully set forth herein, as limited by State law and the Ordinance, and subject to any modifications approved in writing by the City Manager. During the term of the contract, the Scope of Services, Exhibit A may be amended by mutual consent of the parties. The City Manager is hereby authorized to approve periodic amendments to Exhibit A without further consent by Council to the extent that any such amendments do not result in the elimination of required Special Events, as set forth in Exhibit A. 2. Financial Reporting. SLODA will prepare and file with City, consistent with City policy, quarterly financial reports within 60 days after the end of the quarter showing qualifying expenditures made by SLODA and shall, upon request by City, produce supporting invoices, receipts, vouchers and statements showing how the DPBIA revenues have been expended consistent with this Agreement. Such financial reports shall include a line-item schedule that matches expenditures with specific, budgeted amounts and activities. The reports will be filed with the City Finance Director consistent with the City’s financial reporting policies and practices, and as reasonably requested by the Finance Director. In addition to interim quarterly reports, the SLODA shall contract with an independent certified public accountant to prepare an annual compilation of the SLODA financial operations related to qualifying revenues and expenses. Said compilation shall be completed every year, at the end of the contract period and shall show the purposes to which the DPBIA funds were put such as the name and date of the event and the allocation of TPBID funds relative to the costs of the event. The compilation shall be conducted in accordance with accounting standards generally accepted in the United States. The objective of a compilation is to assist management in presenting financial information in the form of financial statements without undertaking to obtain or provide any assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements. The SLODA fiscal year shall be July 1 to June 30; and the compilation shall be completed and submitted to the City’s Finance Director within 180 days of the fiscal year end. The City reserves the right to request an audit of the SLODA financial statements and the SLODA agrees to comply with such a request, in intervals no more often than every four years nor less often than every six years. C4 - 6 Attachment 2 3 3. Quarterly Activity Reports. At the time the interim quarterly financial reports are filed, SLODA will also file with the City Manager a report of the activities of SLODA and its subcontractors and the respective accomplishments of each during the period specified in the financial report. 4. Term. The term of this Agreement will commence July 1, 2013 ending on June 30, 2015 to match the two year budget cycle of the City. The contract may be renewed upon approval of the Agreement, including the Scope of Services, by the City Council. The City or the SLODA may terminate this Agreement and any rights, duties and liabilities accruing in this Agreement at any time by giving written notice of election to terminate to the other party at least thirty (30) days prior to the end of the fiscal year. 5. DPBIA Funding Restrictions. The parties acknowledge that DPBIA funds shall be used exclusively for activities within Exhibit A and that all DPBIA funds allocated by the City shall be subject to the restrictions imposed on DPBIA monies by the Ordinance and State law. 6. Limited Use of DPBIA Funds. SLODA will use none of the funds it receives from this Agreement for any purpose not enumerated in the Ordinance, including but not limited to, any expense (including administration and overhead) in support of a SLODA Political Action Committee or any other political entity or activity. The City recognizes that the SLODA may engage in such activities on behalf of its members, independent of its contract with the City and does not attempt through this Agreement to limit those activities, so long as such activities do not utilize DPBIA funds. 7. Accounting for DPBIA Assessments. DPBIA funds may be used to finance fund-raising activities intended to generate additional revenue for use by the SLODA. However, the sum of all DPBIA funds used for this purpose shall be accounted for and proceeds from the fund-raiser equal to that sum shall be used for purposes stated in the Ordinance and conforming to the purposes of the assessment as defined by State law. Further, such use of DPBIA funds shall be specifically described in the periodic reports described in paragraph 2 of this Agreement. 8. City Support for SLODA Activities. The City will continue to provide staff support and services in accordance with the SLODA Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A. The SLODA shall pay to the City the sum of One Hundred Thirty Two Dollars and 60/100 ($132.60) per market for set up and removal of barricades during the 2013-14 fiscal year. Said sum shall be adjusted each July 1 by the Consumer Price Index-All Urban Areas (CPI-U) for February as published annually in March by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, all cities average for the prior calendar year. It is also agreed that SLODA will reimburse City for all costs incurred by City in providing services during the term of this Agreement relating to other SLODA events or promotional services not addressed in this contract. These costs will be determined and certified in accordance with City policies applicable to other non-profit organizations and C4 - 7 Attachment 2 4 City will provide SLODA with invoices for such services, which will be due and payable by SLODA consistent with standard City policies and practices. 9. Monthly Remittance of DPBIA Funds to the SLODA. The City will cause to be paid to SLODA the total amount of DPBIA funds collected by the City during each month within thirty (30) days of the end of the month. The City recognizes that the SLODA relies on the City to collect the assessment and to enforce the payment of the assessment via its business license process. To insure compliance with the Business Tax and License rules, the City and the Downtown Association collaborate to encourage compliance. All business within the City are subject to the same rules and same enforcement procedures. 10. City Staff Rights to Attend SLODA Board Meetings. SLODA shall continue to notify the City via the City Manager or his/her appointed representative of all regular meetings of the Board of Directors and shall have the right to attend all such regular meetings. 11. Independence of SLODA. Neither the City nor any of its officers or employees will have any control over the conduct of SLODA or any of its employees, except as provided above, and SLODA expressly warrants not in any manner or at any time to represent that its officers, agents, servants or employees are in any manner the officers, agents, servants or employees of the City, it being distinctly understood that SLODA is and at all times will remain as to the City, an independent contractor, and the obligations of SLODA to the City is solely as prescribed by this Agreement. 12. Electricity and Tree Lighting Program. The City and the SLODA have agreed to work toward accomplishing additional goals set forth in Exhibit B relating to electricity for Thursday Night Promotions (TNP) and tree lighting. These provisions are separate and distinct from the Exhibit A Scope of Services for which DPBIA funds are provided. Furthermore, the provisions of Exhibit B shall survive termination of this contract. 13. Dispute Resolution between SLODA and its Subcontractors. SLODA shall include a dispute resolution clause in all contracts with subcontractors furnishing services related to contracted events. The dispute resolution clause shall provide a clear and concise process for resolution of disputes that arise between the SLODA and its subcontractors. 14. Assignment. This Agreement contemplates that SLODA will render special services that it is uniquely able to provide, and it is recognized by the parties that an inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was, and is, the ability of SLODA to render these special services. Neither this Agreement nor any interest in this Agreement may be assigned by SLODA, except that SLODA may, on written consent of the City Manager or designee obtained in advance, assign any moneys due, or to become due, to SLODA for purposes consistent with this Agreement. SLODA agrees not to subcontract any portion of the performance contemplated and provided for in this Agreement, except C4 - 8 Attachment 2 5 that SLODA may enter into subcontracts for the sole purpose of carrying out promotional activities within the scope of the Ordinance with the consent of City. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to or will be construed as preventing SLODA from employing or hiring as many employees as it may deem necessary for the proper and efficient execution of this Agreement. 15. Insurance. SLODA shall obtain and maintain insurance as set forth in Exhibit C hereto, the requirements of which are incorporated herein. Each insurance policy shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided or canceled by either party except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice to City, and shall be primary and not contributing to any other insurance or self-insurance maintained by City. SLODA shall deliver to City certificates of insurance and original endorsements for approval as to sufficiency and form prior to the start of performance hereunder. The certificate and endorsements for each insurance policy shall contain the original signature of a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. "Claims made" policies of insurance are not acceptable unless the City Risk Manager determines that "occurrence" policies are not available in the market for the risk being insured. If a "claims made" policy is accepted, it must provide for an extended reporting period of not less than one hundred eighty (180) days. Such insurance as required herein shall not be deemed to limit SLODA's liability relating to performance under this Agreement. City reserves the right to require complete certified copies of all said policies at any time. Any modification or waiver of the insurance requirements herein shall only be made with the approval of the City Risk Manager. The procuring of insurance shall not be construed as a limitation on liability or as full performance of the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. To the extent that SLODA subcontracts certain activities pursuant to paragraph 14 of this Agreement, SLODA may comply with the requirements of this paragraph 15 by providing certificates of insurance naming SLODA and the City of San Luis Obispo as separate “additional insured” under the subcontractor's insurance, providing that the subcontractor's insurance meets or exceeds the insurance requirements of this paragraph 15, all subject to the approval of the City Risk Manager. 16. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. SLODA shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold City, its officials, employees, and agents (collectively in this Section referred to as "City") harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages, and liabilities, whether or not reduced to judgment, which may be asserted against City arising from or attributable to or caused directly or indirectly by SLODA, SLODA's employees or agents in the performance of work under this Agreement, or any alleged negligent or intentional act, omission or misrepresentation by SLODA, SLODA's employees or agents, which act, omission or misrepresentation is connected in any way with performance of work under this Agreement. If it is necessary for purposes of resisting, adjusting, compromising, settling, or defending any claim, demand, cause of action, loss, damage, or liability, or of enforcing this provision, for City to incur or to pay any expense or cost, including attorney's fees or court costs, SLODA C4 - 9 Attachment 2 6 agrees to and shall reimburse City within a reasonable time. SLODA shall give City notice of any claim, demand, cause of action, loss, damage or liability within ten (10) calendar days. 17. Notice. Any notices to be given under this Agreement, or otherwise, may be given by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, addressed to the party intended to receive the same, at its address and by depositing the same in the U. S. Postal Service as regular mail, postage prepaid. When so given, notice will be effective from the time of mailing of the notice. For these purposes, unless otherwise provided in writing, the address of the City and the proper person to receive any notices on its behalf is the City Manager, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo and the address of the SLODA is 1108 Garden Street, Suite 210, San Luis Obispo, California 93401. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement this _____ day of , 2015. SAN LUIS OBISPO DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION, A 501(c)(6) Corporation. By: Dominic Tartaglia, Executive Director, SLO Downtown Association CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By: Jan Howell Marx, Mayor ATTESTATION: By: Anthony Mejia, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Christine Dietrick, City Attorney C4 - 10 Attachment 2 7 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES I. SPECIAL EVENTS: The events and/or activities set forth and defined below are Special Events the continuation of which the City considers integral to the fulfillment of SLODA’s obligations under the Agreement. As such, the City agrees to continue to provide, at the mutually agreed cost to the SLODA, the enumerated municipal services that have traditionally been provided to the SLODA in conjunction with the events/activities as set forth below and the SLODA shall continue to provide the following Special Events and related services to the Downtown: 1) Holiday Activities: Holiday Activities include some of the County’s most popular holiday events including: a) The Annual Holiday Parade, a free event that features nearly 100 entries and winds its way through the Downtown streets early in the holiday season; b) Santa’s House in Mission Plaza, a free service opening the day after Thanksgiving and operating daily through Christmas Eve. Thousands of children visit the House from all over the county and beyond; c) Classic Carousel in Mission Plaza, a contracted activity by the Downtown Association. Each year, an independent operator brings in a full sized carousel that is set up adjacent to Santa’s House and operates the same hours as the House. 2) Concerts in the Plaza: Concerts in the Plaza are held in Mission Plaza showcasing local (tri county area) bands, providing the highest level of quality in all aspects of the production such as stage and sound, promotional marketing materials, a high level of staffing and security, dozens of volunteers and quality food and beverage vendors. The Downtown Association will be given priority in Mission Plaza for the Friday night concert series beginning the first Friday in June and ending on the thirteenth contiguous Friday hence, subject to the following: a) In those instances where the concert conflicts with Mission College Preparatory School graduation activities that take place in Mission Plaza, the series will begin on the second Friday in June allowing Mission College Preparatory School priority use of the plaza for graduation. b) In years when the series starts on the second Friday in June, it will still run the full thirteen contiguous Fridays. 3) Thursday Night Promotions: (TNP): an event that showcases Downtown and Downtown businesses to visitors, both locals and tourists, and offers opportunities for Downtown businesses, other eligible non-Downtown businesses, produce vendors, non-profit organizations and other community groups to sell their products and services, fundraise, or provide information. TNP is also often generically referred to C4 - 11 Attachment 2 8 as “Farmers Market,” “the market,” “Thursday night,” or other various combinations of those names. City Services in Support of Special Events City services in support of the above events have traditionally included the following, which will continue uninterrupted: 1. Public safety support at levels determined appropriate by the City, including holiday parade escort. 2. Placement and removal of street barricades and coordination of street closures for holiday activities and TNP 3. Placement and removal of City-owned portable restrooms for TNP. 4. Banner placement and advertising at 50% of standard City fees. (Note: SLODA shall retain its priority position with regard to the placement of street banners that promote activities that benefit tourism and business in the district, in addition to the Special Events above, within the scope of the Agreement, but shall be charged fees consistent with City policy for the placement of such banners) 5. Special Events Permit processing at 50% of standard City fees 6. Street clean-up following Special Events 7. Holiday tree placement and removal unless and until alternatives for a live tree are completed and a live tree is installed. 8. Free rental of Mission Plaza for placement of Santa’s House and carousel and for Concerts in the Plaza. SLODA Services in Support of Special Events: SLODA services in support of the above events have traditionally included the following, which will continue to enhance the success of the events: 1. Booth space at TNP for City departments at no cost subject to space availability 2. Noticing via meter flyers for TNP 3. Marketing and coordination of City-related events at TNP at no cost including but not limited to: a. Fire Prevention Night b. Law Enforcement Night c. Public Works Night d. Arbor Day activities e. City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation activities f. City of San Luis Obispo Utilities activities g. San Luis Obispo Transit activities h. City of San Luis Obispo tourism activities II. ONGOING SERVICES: In addition to the Special Events set forth above, SLODA shall provide, as needed, the following Ongoing Services to the Downtown. The costs of any City services required or requested in support of these Ongoing Services shall be allocated to the SLODA C4 - 12 Attachment 2 9 consistent with City policies applicable to other not for profit entities and pursuant to the terms of the Agreement. 1. Parking/Transportation a. Distribute employee and customer parking brochures to targeted groups. b. Work closely with City staff to analyze and make recommendations to the City Council on ways to address employee parking issues. c. Work closely with City staff on the development of downtown construction public information programs. d. Work closely with City staff on parking management plan and any parking and access programs that benefit the community. 2. Downtown Maintenance a. Work closely with City staff to give input on sidewalk scrubbing schedule. b. Disseminate cleanliness and safety information to members through publications and presentations. c. Work with City staff to get trash and recycling receptacles cleaned. d. Continue Downtown Forester program in assisting with tree maintenance. 3. Economic Development Issues a. Work closely with City staff to implement the City’s Economic Development Strategic Plan to maintain Downtown retail health. b. Work closely with City staff on issues related to undesirable and/or criminal behaviors in the Downtown, such as aggressive panhandling, graffiti, and drunk-in- public behaviors. c. Continue to coordinate with City and Chamber of Commerce to get information to visitors on Downtown retail/shopping opportunities. d. Continue collaboration efforts with the Chamber of Commerce and other business and visitor groups to increase effectiveness of local and regional marketing. e. Get word out to Downtown retailers and restaurants when conferences/events are in town and encourage them to do direct marketing/outreach as provided to the SLODA via the City’s tourism efforts. 4. Organizational Capacity Keep the City apprised of and included in the process of any update to the SLODA’s long term strategy for the fiscal sustainability, including strategies to: a. Maintain economic vitality and independence of the organization b. Identify options for development of other funding sources to be considered, pursued, and/or secured to supplement the organization’s activities; c. Evaluate internal organization, and committee structure, and allocation of resources to identify changes needed to most effectively implement SLODA’s mission and goals. C4 - 13 Attachment 2 10 EXHIBIT B ELECTRICITY AND TREE LIGHTING Electrical Wiring in Higuera Street for Future Electrical Connections In 2008 and 2012 the City facilitated the installation of electrical conduit and service connections in Higuera Street to provide electrical connections for use by Thursday Night Promotions vendors. A further capital project will be required to facilitate additional connections. The City and SLODA have agreed to work toward accomplishing the connections over the term of the Agreement. However, the parties recognizes that the completion of such a project will require additional funding and the parties agree that the cost allocation relating to the provision of such connections and post-installation maintenance issues, such as electrical service costs, are subject to further negotiation. Tree Lighting Program On January 24, 2012, in return for the City’s issuance of a temporary revocable encroachment permit, SLODA executed an agreement for encroachment within the public right-of-way for the SLODA Tree Lighting and Power Project. Furthermore, on June 14, 2012, the City and SLODA amended their contract for services dated July 1, 2011, under which the SLODA was allowed to conduct a Tree Lighting and Power Project consisting of installation of string lights in trees, installation of electrical boxes to provide the lights with electricity per City standards, and installation a commemorative plaque to acknowledge tree lighting donors. The Tree Lighting and Power Project shall meet the following requirements: 1. The Tree Lighting and Power Project will be allowed on street trees along Higuera Street between Morro and Garden Streets (the “Project Area”) All areas outside the Project Area are reserved for the City’s commemorative tree program as established per Resolution No. 10151 (2010 Series) until such time as the commemorative tree program is eliminated or the Project Area modified. 2. Trees in the Project Area that have commemorative plaques granted prior to June 14, 2012, in accordance with the City’s planting and commemorative plaque program, are excluded from the Tree Lighting and Power Project unless written approval of the commemorative donor to allow inclusion in the Tree Lighting and Power Program has been obtained by the SLODA. 3. The SLODA may charge a fee to cover the costs of installing, maintaining, operating (including electricity) and replacing the lighting and plaques otherwise administering the Tree Lighting Project. 4. SLODA will be entirely responsible for all costs associated with the Tree Lighting and Power Project and shall comply with the following conditions: C4 - 14 Attachment 2 11 a. install, maintain, operate, replace, and remove tree lighting in the Program Area upon revocation of the encroachment permit issued for the Tree Lighting and Power Project (unless otherwise agreed in writing by City); b. purchase, place, maintain, and remove all plaques associated with its Program upon revocation of the encroachment permit issued for the Tree Lighting and Power Project (unless otherwise agreed in writing by City); c. remove any damaged or hazardous plaques when needed or upon request by the City; and d. provide lighting of the existing commemorative trees in the Program Area. e. Plaques shall be no larger than 5” x 6” and shall have wording appropriate to a public location. f. All tree lighting shall be placed in accordance with guidance of the City Arborist to minimize impacts to pruning and other maintenance operations. g. Any expansion of the Program Area requires the prior written approval of City before implementation by SLODA. City will use reasonable caution when completing work in the vicinity of SLODA facilities, but is not responsible for any damage to SLODA facilities resulting from maintenance activities or tree pruning. SLODA shall repair any such inadvertent damage to its tree lighting or plaques or other facilities. In the event the City must remove any plaque to complete work, the City will return the plaque to SLODA. SLODA shall reinstall the plaque at SLODA’s expense. C4 - 15 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C4 - 16 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Chris Staley, Acting Chief of Police Prepared By: Keith Storton, Police Captain SUBJECT: JUSTICE AND MENTAL HEALTH COLLABORATION PROGRAM (JMHCP) GRANT RECOMMENDATION Authorize the Police Department to participate as a co-lead in a grant application process with the San Luis Obispo County Behavioral Health as the lead for a Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program Grant. DISCUSSION In March of 2015 the San Luis Obispo County’s Behavioral Health Department (BHD) made a proposal to the California Justice Administrators Association (CJAA) looking to partner with law enforcement in a FY 2015 Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program Grant. The grant requires that BHD collaborate with a law enforcement entity. CJAA includes executive level managers from all fourteen law enforcement entities in the County and two University/College Police Departments. CJAA voted in support of the grant application. BHD was identified as the lead agency that would apply and administer the grant. The SLO County Sheriff’s Department and the San Luis Obispo Police Department were identified as co-leads as they have the personnel and resources to effectively team with BHD for a successful grant implementation. The other agencies will provide limited support through the duration of the grant. If awarded, the grant would operate for an eighteen month period from Oct. 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017. The proposal will include BHD hiring a JMHCP Coordinator who will be designated as the primary employee working directly with BHD, SLOPD and the Sheriff’s Department. This employee will plan, develop, implement and conduct all activities for the grant. In addition BHD will hire a half-time Administrative Assistant position that will work directly with the JMHCP coordinator to provide administrative support for the many grant activities including recording and developing documents, and the gathering of statistics and outcome data from the various stakeholders. All grant obligations and reporting requirements will be managed through BHD and the JMHCP Coordinator along with the Administrative Assistant. Background County of San Luis Obispo Behavioral Health, along with its collaborating agencies, the San Luis Obispo Police Department and the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff’s Department, are seeking to apply and implement an FY 2015 Justice and Mental Health Collaborative Program grant offered by the Federal Department of Justice. June 2, 2015 C5 C5 - 1 Justice & Mental Health Collaboration Grant Page 2 The grant application is entitled as a Category 1: Collaborative County Approaches to Reducing Prevalence of Individuals with Mental Health Disorders in Jail project. The County Jail currently has a designated Mental Health Unit to house mentally ill offenders. These offenders make up approximately 12% of the total jail population. Our county jail has one of the highest rates (percentage of population) of jail deaths in the nation. Grant funding will help conduct a targeted analysis of the prevalence of people with mental disorders in the county jail. With a review of existing resources this identification will assist in the implementation of policy and practice changes to minimize contact and involvement with individuals that have mental illness or co-occurring substance use disorders within the criminal justice system. The planning proposed by BHD, along with its criminal justice co-lead agencies, will facilitate collaboration among the criminal justice and mental health systems to increase access to treatment services for individuals with mental illness or co-occurring substance use disorders. The County has never before used an integrated data system to track how individuals with mental disorders move through the local justice system and the grant will assist in achieving this goal. Council is familiar with the San Luis Obispo Police Department’s Community Action Team (CAT). CAT consists of two special Crisis Intervention Trained Officers who work closely with the homeless and mentally ill population that are on the streets. CAT is practiced in identifying trends and addressing concerns regarding the transient population. They help to coordinate local homeless outreach and facilitate access to mental health services for those in need. Over the years CAT has developed a caseload of frequent contacts and criminal offenders, many of which have mental health illness or co-occurring substance use disorders. CAT has developed a solid working relationship with a variety of social service, mental health and court service providers and can seamlessly help in achieving grant objectives. Additionally, CAT’s knowledge and experience can be provided as a resource to other law enforcement entities as all will have some involvement in providing resources or data collection for the benefit of the grant. The San Luis Obispo Police Department, with the assistance of other law enforcement partners, would be committed to provide the following support for the grant proposal: 1. Require and support staff participation in the JMHCP grant 2. Conduct and participate in planning activities associated with the grant 3. Provide information and data as needed during the planning activities 4. Ensure the grant goals and objectives are met 5. Work together to submit accurate and timely quarterly PMT and bi-annual Narrative reports 6. Finalize the Implementation and Planning Guide 7. Conduct and coordinate sustainability activities to move to the implementation phase C5 - 2 Justice & Mental Health Collaboration Grant Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT BHD will provide existing and new personnel resources to maintain grant oversight to include management and expenditure of the $150,000.00 grant award. BHD will be expending approximately another $41,000.00 to supplement the grant funding in order to meet objectives. Other than staff time in providing CAT resources, who already work in a collaborative capacity and the compilation of statistics to help meet the grant objectives, there will be no cost to the City of San Luis Obispo as the workload can be absorbed as traditional functions within our operating budget. ALTERNATIVES In order to meet grant filing deadlines on April 13, 2015 Chief Gesell drafted a letter of support offering San Luis Obispo PD to co-lead the grant. Should Council decide not to support the grant, another local law enforcement agency could co-lead, however, this option is not recommended as other locals agencies do not have the experience or infrastructure to support the multifaceted needs of the grant. Additionally, the grant application process is time sensitive and identifying another agency at this time may jeopardize the opportunity in submitting a successful application. ATTACHMENTS 1. Grant Program Narrative 2. Grant Budget Summary 3. SLOPD Letter of Commitment t:\council agenda reports\2015\2015-06-02\justice and mental health collaboration grant (Staley-Storton)\.docx C5 - 3 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C5 - 4 (1) Purpose: The Budget Detail Worksheet is provided for your use in the preparation of the budget and budget narrative. All required information (including the budget narrative) must be provided. Any category of expense not applicable to your budget documents, statistical records, and all other records pertinent to the award shall be retained by each organization for at least three years following the closure of the audit report covering the grant period. General Instructions Resources&View Budget Summary Budget Detail Worksheet may be left blank. Indicate any non-federal (match ) amount in the appropriate category, if applicable. (4) Record Retention: In accordance with the requirements set forth in and, all financial records, supporting OMB APPROVAL NO.: 1121-0329 EXPIRES 7/31/2016 (5) The information disclosed in this form is subject to the Freedom of Information Act under 5 U.S.C. 55.2. (2) For each budget category, you can see a sample by clicking (To View an Example, Click Here) at the end of each description. 28 CFR Parts 66 70 (3) There are various hot links listed in red in the budget categories that will provide additional information via documents on the internet. ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 5 A. Personnel – List each position by title and name of employee, if available. Show the annual salary rate and the percentage of time to be devoted to the project. Compensation paid for employees engaged in grant activities must be consistent with that paid for similar work within the applicant organization. Include a description of the responsibilities and duties of each position in relationship to fulfilling the project goals and objectives. (Note: Use whole numbers as the percentage of time, an example is 75.50% should be shown as 75.50)To View an Example, Click Here PERSONNEL (FEDERAL) Name Position Computation Salary Basis Percentage of Time Length of Time Cost Michele Tobares-Nolan Administrative Assistant III $1,577.00 Month 50.00 18 $14,193 FEDERAL TOTAL $14,193 PERSONNEL NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) The Administrative Assistant III will provide general data management and clerical support to the JMHCP collaborative process. The Administrative Assistant III will also plan and set-up meetings, take notes, and ensure good communication for all partners. The Administrative Assistant III will spend 50% of her time on this project and projected to spend a 1,560 hours on the project. ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 6 PERSONNEL (NON-FEDERAL) Name Position Computation Salary Basis Percentage of Time Length of Time Cost Star Graber Project Director $9,203.00 Month 5 18 $8,283 Irma Perez Evaluation - ASO I $5,128.00 Month 5 18 $4,615 Teresa Pemberton Clinical Supervisor $6,919.00 Month 10 18 $12,454 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $25,352 PERSONNEL NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) The Project Director will provide general program oversight and will be the liason between County Behavioral Health Department and BJA. The Project Director will spend 5% of her time or 156 hours on the program. This position will be provided in-kind by the County. The Administrative Services Officer (ASO) will provide data analyses and outcomes review, submit timely and accurate quarterly BJA PMT activities and bi-annual narrative reports. The Evaluator will spend 5% of her time or 156 hours on the program. This position will be provided in-kind by the County. The Clinical Supervisor will provide Clinical oversight of the forensic mental health criminal justice caseload and programs, ensures appropriate participation in JMHCP, and will be provided in-kind by the County. The Clinical Supervisor will spend 10% of her time or 312 hours on the program. TOTAL PERSONNEL $39,545 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 7 B. Fringe Benefits – Fringe benefits should be based on actual known costs or an by a Federal agency. If not based on an approved negotiated rate, list the composition of the fringe benefit package. Fringe benefits are for the personnel listed in budget category (A) and only for the percentage of time devoted to the project. Fringe benefits on overtime hours are limited to FICA, Workman’s Compensation and Unemployment Compensation. (Note: Use decimal numbers for the fringe benefit rates, an example is 7.65% should be shown as .0765)To View an Example, Click Here approved negotiated rate FRINGE BENEFITS (FEDERAL) Description Computation Base Rate Cost Administrative Assistant III - Michele Tobares-Nolan $14,194.00 0.6154 $8,735 $0 $0 FEDERAL TOTAL $8,735 FRINGE BENEFITS NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) Fringe benefits are paid at County established rates and amount to 61.54% of salaries and cover the following items: Employer's FICA 6.20% Medicare 1.50% Workers Compensation 5.80% Medical Benefits 15.16% Retirement Benefits 32.80% Unemployment Insurance 0.08% ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 8 FRINGE BENEFITS (NON-FEDERAL) Description Computation Base Rate Cost Project Director - Star Graber $8,283.00 0.6154 $5,097 Evaluation - ASO I - Irma Perez $4,615.00 0.6154 $2,840 Clinical Supervisor - Teresa Pemberton $12,454.00 0.6154 $7,664 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $15,601 FRINGE BENEFITS NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) Fringe benefits are paid at County established rates and amount to 61.54% of salaries and cover the following items: Employer's FICA 6.20% Medicare 1.50% Workers Compensation 5.80% Medical Benefits 15.16% Retirement Benefits 32.80% Unemployment Insurance 0.08% TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $24,336 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 9 C. Travel – Itemize travel expenses of staff personnel by purpose (e.g., staff to training, field interviews, advisory group meeting, etc.). Describe the purpose of each travel expenditure in reference to the project objectives. Show the basis of computation (e.g., six people to 3-day training at $X airfare, $X lodging, $X subsistence). In training projects, travel and meals for trainees should be listed separately. Show the number of trainees and the unit costs involved. Identify the location of travel, if known; or if unknown, indicate “location to be determined.” Indicate source of Travel Policies applied Applicant or Federal Travel Regulations. Note: Travel expenses for consultants should be included in the “Contractual/Consultant” category.To View an Example, Click Here TRAVEL (FEDERAL) Purpose of Travel Location Computation Cost Key Program Staff Training Washington, DC Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging $190.00 Night 3 3 1 $1,710.00 Meals $54.00 Day 4 3 1 $648.00 Mileage Mile $0.00 Transportation: Taxi Service $105.50 Round-trip 1 3 1 $316.50 Local Travel $0.00 Other Air Fare $850.00 1 3 1 $2,550.00 Subtotal $5,224.50 $5,225 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 10 TRAVEL (FEDERAL) Purpose of Travel Location Computation Cost Project Meetings and Activities San Luis Obispo County Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging Night $0.00 Meals Day $0.00 Mileage $0.575 Mile 78 40 $1,794.00 Transportation: Round-trip 1 $0.00 Local Travel $0.00 Other $0.00 Subtotal $1,794.00 $1,794 FEDERAL TOTAL $7,019 TRAVEL NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) Three key members will attend training in Washington DC related to Criminal Justice/Mental Health & Substance Use Treatment. We are following our own written County's travel policy guidelines. Travel to attend training is set at accepted county travel reimbursement rates and include the following items: Lodging at high cost area of $190 per night, Per diem for meals of $54, round trip transportation to airport for each of $105.50 which includes taxi service to and from airport, and airfare set at the average cost of $850 round trip from Los Angeles airport to Washington D.C. Local mileage reimbursement to attend meetings and project activities is projected to 40 miles per week (for 18 months) at the County approved reimbursement rate of $.0575, accepted county travel reimbursement rate. ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 11 TRAVEL (NON-FEDERAL) Purpose of Travel Location Computation Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging Night $0.00 Meals Day $0.00 Mileage Mile $0.00 Transportation: Round-trip 1 $0.00 Local Travel $0.00 Other $0.00 Subtotal $0.00 $0 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $0 TRAVEL NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) NONE TOTAL TRAVEL $7,019 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 12 D. Equipment – Listitems that are purchased (Note: Organization’s own capitalization policy for classification of equipment should be used). items should be included in the “Supplies” category. Applicants should analyze the cost benefits of purchasing versus leasing equipment, especially high cost items and those subject to rapid technological advances. Rented or leased equipment costs should be listed in the “Contractual” category. Explain how the equipment is necessary for the success of the project, and describe the procurement method to be used.To View an Example, Click Here non-expendable Expendable EQUIPMENT (FEDERAL) Item Computation Quantity Cost Cost $0 FEDERAL TOTAL $0 EQUIPMENT NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) None Requested ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 13 EQUIPMENT (NON-FEDERAL) Item Computation Quantity Cost Cost $0 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $0 EQUIPMENT NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) None TOTAL EQUIPMENT $0 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 14 E. Supplies – List items by type (office supplies, postage, training materials, copying paper, andequipment items costing less than $5,000, such as books, hand held tape recorders) and show the basis for computation. Generally, supplies include any materials that are expendable or consumed during the course of the project. To View an Example, Click Here expendable SUPPLIES (FEDERAL) Supply Items Computation Quantity/Duration Cost Cost General Office Supplies 18 $55.00 $990 FEDERAL TOTAL $990 SUPPLIES NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) Office supplies are needed for general operation of the project and will include, but not limited to, paper, pens, ink cartridges and copies. General office supplies will be used by the Administrative staff for this project. Office supplies are based at 18 months at $55 per month. This amount was determined based on other programs of this size. ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 15 SUPPLIES (NON-FEDERAL) Supply Items Computation Quantity/Duration Cost Cost $0 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $0 SUPPLIES NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) None TOTAL SUPPLIES $990 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 16 To View an Example, Click Here F. Construction – Provide a description of the construction project and an estimate of the costs. As a rule, construction costs are not allowable. In some cases, minor repairs or renovations may be allowable. Minor repairs and renovations should be classified in the "other" category. Consult with the program office before budgeting funds in this category. CONSTRUCTION (FEDERAL) Purpose Description of Work Cost FEDERAL TOTAL $0 CONSTRUCTION NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) None ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 17 CONSTRUCTION (NON-FEDERAL) Purpose Description of Work Cost NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $0 CONSTRUCTION NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) None TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $0 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 18 G. Consultants/Contracts – Indicate whether applicant’s formal, written Procurement Policy or the To View an Example, Click Here Consultant Fees: For each consultant enter the name, if known, service to be provided, hourly or daily fee (8-hour day), and estimated time on the project. Consultant fees in excess of $450 per day or $56.25 per hour require additional justification and prior approval from OJP. Federal Acquisition Regulations are followed. CONSULTANT FEES (FEDERAL) Name of Consultant Service Provided Computation Fee Basis Quantity Cost Hourly $0 SUBTOTAL $0 CONSULTANT FEES NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) None ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 19 CONSULTANT FEES (NON-FEDERAL) Name of Consultant Service Provided Computation Fee Basis Quantity Cost 8 Hour Day $0 SUBTOTAL $0 CONSULTANT FEES NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) None ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 20 Consultant Expenses: List all expenses to be paid from the grant to the individual consultants in addition to their fees (i.e., travel, meals, lodging, etc.). This includes travel expenses for anyone who is not an employee of the applicant such as participants, volunteers, partners, etc. CONSULTANT EXPENSES (FEDERAL) Purpose of Travel Location Computation Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging Night $0.00 Meals Day $0.00 Mileage Mile $0.00 Transportation: Round-trip 1 $0.00 Local Travel $0.00 Other $0.00 Subtotal $0.00 $0 SUBTOTAL $0 FEDERAL TOTAL $0 CONSULTANT EXPENSES NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) None ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 21 CONSULTANT EXPENSES (NON-FEDERAL) Purpose of Travel Location Computation Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging Night $0.00 Meals Day $0.00 Mileage Mile $0.00 Transportation: Round-trip 1 $0.00 Local Travel $0.00 Other $0.00 Subtotal $0.00 $0 SUBTOTAL $0 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $0 CONSULTANT EXPENSES NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) None TOTAL CONSULTANTS $0 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 22 Contracts: Provide a description of the product or service to be procured by contract and an estimate of the cost. Applicants are encouraged to promote free and open competition in awarding contracts. A separate justification must be provided for contracts in excess of $100,000. A sole source contract may not be awarded to a commercialsole source organization that is ineligible to receive a direct award. CONTRACTS (FEDERAL) Item Cost Program Coordinator - To be Determined $117,000 FEDERAL TOTAL $117,000 CONTRACTS NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) The JMHCP Coordinator will be contracted for 18 months up to 30 hours per week at $50 per hour. Contracted hourly rate to include all costs for providing services. The JMHCP Coordinator will provides coordination for all of the participants in the JMHCP (establishing the team), develop and ensure completion of the CSG Justice Center Planning and Implementation Guide. Formal Request for Proposal will be obtained following the County Contract for services policy. ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 23 CONTRACTS (NON-FEDERAL) Item Cost NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $0 CONTRACTS NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) None TOTAL CONTRACTS $117,000 TOTAL CONSULTANTS/CONTRACTS $117,000 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 24 H. Other Costs – List items (e.g., rent ( To View an Example, Click Here arms-length transaction only ), reproduction, telephone, janitorial or security services, and investigative or to rent. The basis field is a text field to describe the quantity such as square footage, months, etc. confidential funds) by major type and the basis of the computation. For example, provide the square footage and the cost per square foot for rent or provide a monthly rental cost and how many months OTHER COSTS (FEDERAL) Description Computation Quantity Basis Cost Length of Time Cost $0 FEDERAL TOTAL $0 OTHER COSTS NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) None ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 25 OTHER COSTS (NON-FEDERAL) Description Computation Quantity Basis Cost Length of Time Cost $0 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $0 OTHER COSTS NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) None TOTAL OTHER COSTS $0 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 26 I. Indirect Costs – Indirect costs are allowed only if the applicant has a Federally approved indirect cost rate. A copy of the rate approval, (a To View an Example, Click Here agreement ), must be attached. If the applicant does not have an approved rate, one can be requested by contacting the applicant’s fully executed, negotiated cognizant Federal agency , which will review all documentation and approve a rate for the applicant organization, or if the applicant’s accounting system permits, costs may be allocated in the direct costs categories. (Note: Use whole numbers as the indirect rate, an example is an indirect rate of 15.73% should be shown as 15.73) INDIRECT COSTS (FEDERAL) Description Computation Base Rate Cost 9% of requested Federal Salaries & Benefits $22,922.00 9 $2,063 FEDERAL TOTAL $2,063 INDIRECT COSTS NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) Indirect costs include the cost of various supportive services including Information Technology, Human Resource, Accounts Payable, Facility and Grounds, and Administration departments. SLO Behavioral Health does not have a negotiated indirect cost rate agreement and has elected to charge a de minimus rate of 9% of Federal salaries and benefits for the indirect cost rate. ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 27 INDIRECT COSTS (NON-FEDERAL) Description Computation Base Rate Cost $0 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $0 INDIRECT COSTS NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS $2,063 ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 28 Budget Summary – When you have completed the budget worksheet, transfer the totals for each category to the spaces below. Compute the total direct costs and the total project costs. Indicate the amount of Federal funds requested and the amount of non-Federal funds that will support the project. Budget Category Federal Request Non-Federal Amounts Total A. Personnel $14,193 $25,352 $39,545 B. Fringe Benefits $8,735 $15,601 $24,336 C. Travel $7,019 $0 $7,019 D. Equipment $0 $0 $0 E. Supplies $990 $0 $990 F. Construction $0 $0 $0 G. Consultants/Contracts $117,000 $0 $117,000 H. Other $0 $0 $0 Total Direct Costs $147,937 $40,953 $188,890 I. Indirect Costs $2,063 $0 $2,063 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $150,000 $40,953 $190,953 Federal Request $150,000 Non-Federal Amount $40,953 Total Project Cost $190,953 Public Reporting Burden Paperwork Reduction Act Notice: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a current valid OMB control number. We try to create forms and instructions that are accurate, can be easily understood, and which impose the least possible burden on you to provide us with information. The estimated average time to complete and file this application is four (4) hours per application. If you have comments regarding the accuracy of this estimate, or suggestions for making this form simpler, you can write the Office of Justice Programs, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, 810 Seventh Street, NW, Washington, DC 20531; and to the Public Use Reports Project, 1121-0188, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. ATTACHMENT 1 C5 - 29 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C5 - 30 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 31 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 32 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 33 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 34 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 35 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 36 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 37 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 38 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 39 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 40 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 41 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 42 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 43 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 44 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 45 ATTACHMENT 2 C5 - 46 ATTACHMENT 3 C5 - 47 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C5 - 48 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Director of Public Works Prepared By: Manny Guzman, Engineer III SUBJECT: SINSHEIMER POOL RE-PLASTER AND RE-TILE SPECIFICATION NO. 91208 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approve plans and specifications for the Sinsheimer Pool Replaster and Retile Project, Specification No. 91208. 2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids, and authorize the City Manager to award the contract if the lowest responsible bid is within the Engineer’s Estimate of $443,000 and the 2015-16 budget appropriation is approved by Council. 3. Authorize change orders for project acceleration if funding is available, in conformance with the City’s Change Order policy limits. DISCUSSION Background and Reasons for Project at this Time The Sinsheimer Pool (Pool) was last re-plastered and re-tiled in 1998. A good pool re-plaster is expected to provide a 10 to 15 year life span. The existing pool plaster is now 17 years old and has deteriorated significantly. Degradation can be seen on several areas of the Pool’s “shell” where the plaster is pockmarked with a roughened surface. Without a re-plastering of the Pool’s concrete shell, its structural integrity will be compromised. The plaster provides a protective layer between the pool water and the reinforced concrete structure, protecting it from damage. Unfortunately, worn, rough plaster also provides a foothold for bacteria and algae growth, a potential health issue to the Pool’s users. The consequences of which would be a pool closure. Prior to the 1998 re-plastering, the San Luis Obispo Public Health Department (SLOPHD) notified the City of a potential pool closure due to the deteriorated condition of the Pool’s shell plaster. Other significant maintenance will occur with this re-plastering project. The existing underwater lights, original to the Pool’s construction (35 plus years old), are no longer repairable. The lights will be replaced. Failure of the lights result in a dark and unsafe facility particularly for users in the early hours of the day and at night resulting in much shorter hours of operation during certain times of the year. Additionally, upgrades to the existing drain system are necessary to meet Federal law (the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act (Safety Act)), which went into effect on December 19, 2008. The Safety Act requires that all public pools be equipped with anti-entrapment drain covers. Without the necessary upgrades to the existing drain system, the County Department of Health will not issue the needed permits to complete this project. Project Scope This project consists of plaster and tile removal and replacement, structural repair to the Pool shell, drain inlet modifications, and light replacement. Plaster replacement is expected to protect the June 2, 2015 C6 C6 - 1 Sinsheimer Pool Replaster and Retile, Specification No. 91208 Page 2 pool’s concrete shell for another 15 years. The tile and marker replacement includes upgrading the tile to a slip resistant surface, which is required by the building code. The upgrade of the existing drain system will meet the requirements of the Safety Act and eliminate the potential for a swimmer to be held under water by the suction power of the drain system. Lastly, a total of 28 new LED lights that illuminate the inside of the pool will be installed. The new LED Fixtures use less power and last longer than the conventional fixtures. Impact of Pool Closure On Users The rehabilitation of the City’s pool is scheduled to start at the end of August, with work extending into December. This will impact all of the City’s aquatics programs including lap swimming, swim lessons, San Luis Obispo and Mission College Prep high school programs, the San Luis Obispo Seahawks swim team, and SCUBA on a daily basis. August is the traditional time for the SLO Swim Center to close, upon completion of lessons and recreation swimming. Typically, the closure will last about two weeks and is scheduled to miss the peak summer use period. Users have been notified of this potential impact by staff with promises of precise date upon construction contract award. The therapy pool is planned to remain open to the public during the Pool’s construction period. This will allow patrons to utilize the therapy pool for some private youth swim lessons and other general therapeutic uses. This will also allow the Parks and Recreation staff to retain some lifeguards for when the Pool reopens – as it is important to retain trained and experienced guards. Since the duration of the closure is four months, Parks and Recreation staff anticipates that some users may shift to other area facilities and that we could experience some customer base changes at reopening. While this type of lengthy maintenance project has a disruptive impact on the regular users of SLO Swim Center, it is essential to preventing an emergency shutdown of the facility in the event of a pool shell failure or bacterial contamination. This project has been scheduled in an attempt to minimize the number of users affected. The City has a number of dedicated year- round swimmers, so any closure for necessary maintenance will impact members of the public. The project specifications include some elements to expedite the project, including liquidated damages of $800 for each day work continues past the scheduled project finish date. The amount accounts for the cost of staffing the project longer and the lost revenue resulting from the extended pool closure. Staff is requesting authorization to pay for project acceleration via a change order, in the event bids come in sufficiently low to leave adequate funds for that effort. Staff will work with the contractor, after schedule submittal, to determine where acceleration is feasible and effective in providing an earlier finish date. Staff believes restoring pool availability as soon as possible is important to all the affected programs and users, in addition to retaining the pool’s clientele. Costs associated with acceleration would be handled within the City’s purchasing policy guidelines for construction contract change orders. Impacts of a Pool Closure During the Drought The Pool contains approximately 600,000 gallons of water. One of the first tasks during construction will be to drain the Pool’s water into the City’s sanitary sewer. During this current C6 - 2 Sinsheimer Pool Replaster and Retile, Specification No. 91208 Page 3 drought year this could understandably be perceived by the public as a significant and avoidable loss of water. Unfortunately, although the Pool’s chlorine amounts can be reduced, the water has a very high salt concentration as a result of the chemical stabilization used to keep it clean and clear for swimming. This high salt level is detrimental to most vegetation, including turf, and can kill some plants. Pools are typically drained to the sanitary sewer, which is what is planned for this project. The City’s advanced treatment capabilities will enable the water to be returned to the community for use through the recycled water program. Although the Pool requires 600,000 gallons to be full and operational, it should be noted that the biggest user of water at the SLO Swim Center is not the pool itself but the users who shower before and after their swims. The City is expected to save over 1.5 million gallons of water during the closure of the main pool through the construction period. This savings is the result of reduced shower and some Pool water use that ordinarily occurs. While swimmers will obviously be impacted by a temporary loss of this facility, the water savings will help the City comply with the State mandated water cut backs, and make up for the loss of the 600,000 gallons emptied from the pool. The net impact is therefore an expected savings of 900,000 gallons of water. CONCURRENCES The scheduling of this project has the concurrence of the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. The project has received a Notice of Exemption and is categorically exempt from environmental review as it is a repair of an existing facility. FISCAL IMPACT This project is identified on pages 3-425 to 3-427 of the 2013-15 Financial Plan. The project includes a construction budget of $255,000 and $55,000 for construction management services. Additional construction funding of $266,000 and $24,000 is proposed in the 2015-17 Financial Plan to support this project. If approved, this additional funding will bring the total funding available to $521,000 for construction and $79,000 for construction management services. The estimated project cost increase for this project is due to a more thorough and detailed cost analysis. It is not uncommon for preliminary cost estimates to increase as the design progresses. In addition, the final estimated project cost for this project includes additional work not identified in the preliminary estimate. The proposed project will not be awarded until after the start of the new fiscal year. If Council approves the additional funding for this project requested in the 2015-17 Financial Plan, the award of the project will be processed. If the additional funding is not approved or if funding is approved but not sufficient to support this project’s needs, staff will recommend rejection of bids. The project is recommended for approval to advertise in advance of final budget adoption to allow the start of construction to occur during the month of August. This start date coincides with the annual routine maintenance of pool equipment and is when swim center usage is lowest. C6 - 3 Sinsheimer Pool Replaster and Retile, Specification No. 91208 Page 4 Estimated Project Cost Construction Estimate:$443,000 Contingencies:$74,000 Material Testing:$3,500 Printing:$500 Total Estimates Project Cost:$521,000 Sinsheimer Pool Replaster and Retile Project (91208) ATTACHMENTS Vicinity Map AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE Plans and Specifications t:\council agenda reports\2015\2015-06-02\sinsheimer pool replaster and retile spec. 91208(grigsby-guzman)\91208 advertise - sinsheimer pool replaster & retile.doc C6 - 4 C6 - 5 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C6 - 6 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Garret Olson, Fire Chief SUBJECT: CONTINUED FIRE DEPARTMENT PARTICIPATION IN REGIONAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESPONSE TEAM RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an Amended and Restated San Luis Obispo Regional Hazardous Materials Cooperative Agreement. DISCUSSION Background The San Luis Obispo Regional Hazardous Materials Response Team (the Team) was established in 1993 through a Cooperative Agreement (the Agreement) signed by the governing bodies of the different fire agencies within the county. The creation of this specialized Team provides the most effective use of the combined local resources and participating agencies. The primary function of the Team is to respond and mitigate hazardous material emergencies. Operationally, and upon notification of an incident involving hazardous materials, three team members respond to the incident as an Assessment Team. Based upon their observations, the Assessment Team makes recommendations to the Incident Commander to upgrade or downgrade the incident in terms of additional hazardous materials personnel and resources required for safe incident mitigation. The Team is responsible for responding to incidents throughout the county and depending on the situation can take action to assess or mitigate threats. All Team members are employees of agencies belonging to the Cooperative Agreement (Fire, Corrections, Environmental Health, and others) and who have volunteered to serve on the Team. The fire service provides the greatest number of Team members and administrative support. The Team is composed of dedicated members with a history of success, and receives strong support from member agencies. Member agencies are not charged an addition fee for responses to their community or jurisdiction. Managed through a Board of Directors, the Team has been funded through an annual assessment of $1,000 charged to each member agency, 16 agencies in total. The total annual operating budget for the Team has remained unchanged for over 22 years. The Team has benefited from significant grant funding to provide the initial training and equipment needs necessary to begin safe operations. Grant funding has become less available for the types of expenses necessary to maintain and replace specialty equipment, including disposable and durable goods. Many of the specialized gas and chemical detectors essential to the Team’s operations are nearing the end of their usable lifespan. Additionally, the cost of maintenance and replacement of these goods has increased over the last 22 years as well as the increased complexity of the nature of hazardous materials response requirements. June 2, 2015 C7 C7 - 1 Regional Hazardous Materials Team Participation Page 2 The new cooperative Agreement provides for sustainability of operations for this regional response time. Additionally, the new Agreement varies the contribution of participating agencies from a low of $2,000 to a high of $10,000. The City of San Luis Obispo has been assessed a $5,000 annual contribution based on our size and designation. The annual contribution of participating agencies is based on creating long-term sustainability of services, including the need to replace specialized meters and protective equipment. The City of San Luis Obispo, as well as all participating agencies, have the benefit of realizing the value of pooling resources and trained personnel. In many regions, individual communities maintain and fund similar Teams without cost sharing relationships. CONCURRENCES The Police Department concurs with the recommendations made in this report. FISCAL IMPACT The annual contribution by the City for a continued cooperative agreement with our County partners would increase from $1,000 to $5,000. This increase has already been accounted for in the FY 2015-2017 Financial Plan in the event that Council approves this request. ALTERNATIVES 1. a) Dissolve the Joint Powers Agreement and create a Joint Powers Authority, b) utilize a new tax base of the established Authority to provide sustainable and reliable funding, and c) create an effective operational and administrative leadership structure for the Team. While this would create sustainable funding, it would also result in the creation of an additional taxing authority, the cost of carrying out this option would be substantial. 2. a) Dissolve the Team and assign all responsibility for hazardous materials response to the County, with voluntary participation by local fire departments, b) create an effective operational and administrative leadership structure for the Team, under the sole authority of County Fire, and c) require County to fund under one agency. Under this alternative the City would need to invest substantially greater funds to maintain the same level of response. 3. a) Dissolve the Team, and return all hazardous materials responsibilities to the local fire agencies and County Environmental Health, b) all funding would be the responsibility of each individual agency, and c) all operational and administrative structures would be the responsibility of each individual agency, with ICS governing unified operations. Under this alternative the City would need to invest substantially greater funds to maintain the same level of response. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution approving the Amended and Restated Cooperative Agreement 2. Amendment and Restatement of SLO Regional Hazardous Materials Cooperative Agreement \\chstore7\team\council agenda reports\2015\2015-06-02\hazmat team amendment and extension (olson)\car hazardous materials team amendment and extension.docx C7 - 2 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. ______ (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE AMENDED AND RESTATED SAN LUIS OBISPO REGIONAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, each of the following public agencies, County of San Luis Obispo, City of Arroyo Grande, City of Atascadero, City of Grover Beach, City of Morro Bay, City of Paso Robles, City of Pismo Beach, City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo Special Service Districts; Los Osos, Avila Beach, Cambria, Cayucos, Oceano, San Miguel, Santa Margarita, and Templeton, California Department of Corrections (California Men’s Colony State Prison), California Department of State Hospitals (Atascadero State Hospital), California Military Department (California Army National Guard, Camp Roberts), and California State University (California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo), (hereinafter, “Public Agencies" or “Parties”), is at risk of a hazardous materials release or incident from the threatened release of hazardous materials which is transported along the major highways, railroads, and petroleum pipelines in the County or is stored within the County for local use; and WHEREAS, many of the Public Agencies participate in the California Master Mutual Aid Agreement and the San Luis Obispo County Fire Services Mutual Aid Operation Plan, and such plans provides for mutual aid response to hazardous materials emergencies; and WHEREAS, each of the Public Agencies provides the necessary public funds for the protection of life and property against the releases or incidents involving hazardous materials; and WHEREAS, the creation of a specialized team (“Team”) of personnel to respond to hazardous material emergencies or potential emergencies in the City of San Luis Obispo would provide the most effective use of the combined local resources and would benefit each of the Public Agencies; and WHEREAS, consistent with Government Code Section 6502.7, each of the Public Agencies has authority to respond to hazardous materials emergencies and to operate and maintain equipment for hazardous materials response; and WHEREAS, the Public Agencies are authorized to contract with each other for the joint exercise of any common power pursuant to Article I Chapter 5, Division 7, of Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, a Cooperative Agreement (“Agreement”) was entered into between the Parties on December 31, 1993; and WHEREAS, the Parties now desire to amend and restate the Agreement in its entirety. C7 - 3 RESOLUTION NO. _____ PAGE 2 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that City Council hereby adopts approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Amended and Restated San Luis Obispo Regional Hazardous Materials Cooperative Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A. On motion of _______________, seconded by _______________, and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this _____ day of ________________, 2015. Jan Marx, Mayor ATTEST: Anthony Mejia, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney C7 - 4 Attachment 2 AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT SAN LUIS OBISPO REGIONAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, each of the following public agencies, City of Arroyo Grande, City of Atascadero, City of Grover Beach, City of Morro Bay, City of Paso Robles, City of Pismo Beach, City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo, Special Service Districts: Los Osos, Avila Beach, Cambria, Cayucos, Oceano, San Miguel, Santa Margarita, and Templeton, California Department of Corrections (California Men's Colony State Prison), California Department of State Hospitals (Atascadero State Hospital), California Military Department (California Army National Guard, Camp Roberts), and California State University (California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo) (hereinafter, "Public Agencies" or "Parties"), is at risk of a hazardous materials release or incident from the release of hazardous materials which are transported along the major highways, railroads, and petroleum pipelines in the County or are stored within the County for local use; and WHEREAS, many of the Public Agencies participate in the California Master Mutual Aid Agreement and the San Luis Obispo County Fire Services Mutual Aid Operation Plan, and such plans provide for mutual aid response to hazardous materials emergencies; and WHEREAS, each of the Public Agencies provides the necessary public funds for the protection of life and property against releases or incidents involving hazardous materials; and WHEREAS, the creation of a specialized team ("Team") of personnel to respond to hazardous material emergencies or potential emergencies in the County of San Luis Obispo would provide the most effective use of the combined local resources and would benefit each of the Public Agencies; and WHEREAS, consistent with Government Code section 6502.7, each of the Public Agencies has authority to respond to hazardous materials emergencies and to operate and maintain equipment for hazardous materials response; and WHEREAS, the Public Agencies are authorized to contract with each other for the joint exercise of any common power pursuant to Article I Chapter 5, Division 7, of Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California; and Page 1 of 10 C7 - 5 Attachment 2 WHEREAS, a COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT was entered into between the Parties on October 4, 1993 ("Agreement"); and WHERAS, the Parties now desire to amend and restate the Agreement in its entirety. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the Parties hereby agree, amend and restate the Agreement in its entirety as follows: 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT, COMMON POWER TO BE EXERCISED As a supplement to the San Luis Obispo County Fire Services Mutual Aid Operation Plan, the Parties enter this Agreement for the purpose of providing for the creation and establishment of a Regional Hazardous Materials Response Team (hereinafter "Team"). The Team shall carry out the abatement and emergency control of hazardous conditions and stabilize the same, until these conditions can be turned over to the appropriate authority, for further disposal. 2. NO ENTITY SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE PARTY ENTITIES The Parties agree that the purpose of this Agreement may be accomplished without creating an entity separate and apart from the Parties; therefore, the Parties expressly decline to create an entity separate and apart from the Parties to this Agreement. 3. MEMBERSHIP OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS A Regional Hazardous Material Response Team Board of Directors (hereinafter "Board") shall be established to oversee the operation of the Team, establish Team policies and procedures in accordance with the Purpose of this Agreement, and manage the Team's finances and property utilized by the Team. The Board shall consist of six voting members selected by the following procedure: A. There shall be three standing members on the Board: (1) The Fire Chief of the City of San Luis Obispo; (2) The Fire Chief of San Luis Obispo County; and (3) A representative of the County's Environmental Health Department. B. There shall be one member representing each of the following three geographic areas: Page 2 of 10 C7 - 6 Attachment 2 (1) North County, which includes San Miguel, Paso Robles, Templeton, Atascadero, Santa Margarita, Atascadero State Hospital and Camp Roberts; (2) South County, which includes Arroyo Grande, Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, Avila Beach, and Oceano; and (3) Coastal, which includes Morro Bay, Cambria, South Bay, Cayucos, California Men's Colony, and Cal Poly. Each of these members shall be a Fire Chief elected by the Fire Chiefs of the communities that are represented by that area. Each electee shall serve a term of two years. He or she may be re-elected for an unlimited number of terms. 4. BOARD MEETINGS The Board shall establish the time and place for its meetings and shall hold at least one annual meeting. A special meeting may be called by the Chairperson, or upon demand of two-thirds of the six members of the Board, by noticing each Board member at least 48 hours before the time of such meeting. The notice shall specify the time and place of the meeting and the business to be transacted. All meetings of the Board shall be open to the public, except for those sessions which may by law be closed. The Board shall cause its Secretary/Treasurer to maintain minutes of open meetings, which shall be public documents available for inspection at the County of San Luis Obispo Office of Emergency Services at all times during regular business hours of San Luis Obispo County. No compensation shall be received by any member of the Board for his or her services. No business shall be transacted without the presence of a quorum of the Board. A quorum shall consist of four or more Board members. A majority vote of the quorum shall be required to transact business 5. BOARD OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES The Board shall elect officers, by majority vote, to serve as Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. The Secretary/Treasurer shall be a non-voting member of the Board and shall be a member of the County of San Luis Obispo Office of Emergency Services. The Board will employ a "Business Manager" under their direction to handle Team business such as maintaining records, recording meetings on behalf of the Secretary/Treasurer, preparing staff reports, preparing a budget for approval by the Board and other business matters requested by the Board. The Business Manager may Page 3 of 10 C7 - 7 Attachment 2 be paid a monthly salary. The Business Manager will not have any oversight of the Team's emergency response activities. The Board will also select a Team Leader, who will be a full-time employee of a Member Agency from the parties of this agreement and who will complete his/her Team Leader roles while on-duty and at no additional cost to his/her agency or to the Team. The position will be rotated every two years among Member Agencies in order to share the workload. The Team Leader will: • Manage operational and training programs. • Coordinate the efforts of Member Agencies and Team Members. • Function as the Team's primary technical expert and advise the Board of Directors accordingly. • Oversee committees for Training, Policy, Equipment/IT, and Marketing and for other programs. Responsible for developing and maintaining Standard Operating Guidelines (SOG's), determining equipment needs, and taking on related tasks. • Provide leadership to the Team, so that the Team can achieve the goals and objectives established by the Board and ensure the safe and successful mitigation of hazardous materials incidents to which the Team responds. • Serve as the official representative of the Team to the public, news media, and other governmental agencies. • Delegate these duties to other Team Members or employees of Member Agencies, when deemed appropriate by the Team Leader. 6. FINANCING Use of the equipment, materials, and facilities of the Parties shall be in accordance with rules and regulations approved by the Board. The Board shall prepare an annual fiscal year budget for the needs of the Team. The Board shall maintain an equipment replacement/contingency fund for the continued operation of the Team. The Secretary/Treasurer shall bill each of the Parties annually or at more convenient intervals determined by the Secretary/Treasurer. All funds shall be deposited into a separate account to be maintained as the Regional Hazardous Materials Response Team Account (hereinafter "Account"). The Board shall have access to the Account upon signature of any two Board members. In the event any Party fails to contribute its equal share of the budget, as determined by the Secretary/Treasurer, such Party may be terminated from participation on or assistance by the Team by a majority vote of the Board. Page 4 of 10 C7 - 8 Attachment 2 A. Any excess in federal, state, or local funds in the Account at the end of any fiscal year shall be transferred to the next fiscal year's budget. B. During the first year, a fund shall be established by the Board and funded by each of the Parties contributing an amount to the Account as designated in the following table: Parties Amount to Contribute First Year Total First Year County (1) $10,000 $10,000 Cities (7) $ 5,000 $35,000 Special Districts and other agencies (12) $ 2,000 $24,000 $69,000 C. During each successive budget year the Board may through a majority vote increase the contribution amount to the fund by a percentage not to exceed the previous year's Consumer- Price Index (CPI) for the Los Angeles Region. D. Upon majority approval of the Board, the fund may be expended for the purchase of equipment, training needs, equipment repair, and other expenses determined necessary by the Board. E. Funds shall not be budgeted for or disbursed from the Account in a manner which creates a deficit at any time. 7. AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT The Board by a 2/3 majority vote may amend, delete or add additional sections to this Agreement except that any changes to the financial contributions by member Parties must comply with section 6C of this Agreement. 8. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect until such time as a majority of the Board shall vote to terminate this Agreement and each of such majority Board member's Public Agency ratifies his or her vote. Each Party may individually terminate its involvement in this Agreement, and thereby withdraw from participation on or assistance by the Team, by providing 90 days written notice of termination to anyone of the members of the Board. A party individually terminating involvement in this Page 5 of 10 C7 - 9 Attachment 2 Agreement shall not be entitled to any refund of funds previously paid to the Account. In the event this Agreement is terminated by a majority vote of the Board ratified by the majority's Public Agencies, the following shall occur: A. All equipment and/or material donated by any agency for use by the Team shall be returned to the agency without compensation for either ordinary wear and tear, or replacement. B. All property utilized exclusively by the Team shall be sold at fair market value and the funds received shall be deposited in the Account. C. The Secretary/Treasurer shall pay any outstanding accounts, invoices, and Board- approved claims from the Account. D. Any grant monies which have not been expended shall be returned to the grantor. E. The Account shall be disbursed proportionally to those Public Agencies which participated in this Agreement at the time of the Board's majority vote for termination. 9. REPORTS The Secretary/Treasurer shall maintain the financial records of the Team in an accurate and organized manner at all times and shall reconcile the Account on a monthly basis. The Secretary/Treasurer shall prepare, or cause to be prepared an annual fiscal year report. This shall include the yearly budget; the amount, date, and source of all receipts; the amount, date, recipient, and purpose of all disbursements; the Account balance at the beginning of the fiscal year; the Account balance at the end of the fiscal year; and an inventory of all equipment and material owned by the Team. A copy of the annual report shall be distributed to each Party within thirty days of the end of the fiscal year. The Secretary/Treasurer shall furnish such other reports and data as may from time to time be requested by the Board. All financial records shall be available for inspection by an authorized representative of each Party upon written request and by arrangement with the Secretary/Treasurer or other members of the Board. 10. TEAM SUPPORT AND PARTICIPATION Each of the Parties agrees to support the Team in the following areas: Page 6 of 10 C7 - 10 Attachment 2 A. TRAINING The Parties shall provide persons to attend various levels of training of the Team and continuing education requirements consistent with Government Code section 8574.19 et seq. and other applicable laws, regulations, and Team standards set forth for operations. Each Party shall host and support training activities. B. STAFFING The Parties shall provide persons to participate as members of the Team for response to incidents or to support the Team's response. C. INSURANCE Each of the Parties shall provide Worker's Compensation Insurance for its fire persons while such persons are involved with the Team. Government Code sections 50925 et seq. (Extraterritorial Activities of Firemen) and other applicable Worker's Compensation, liability, and/or benefits laws are incorporated into this Agreement by reference. D. EQUIPMENT Each Party shall support the Team with resources whenever possible and with regard to other Team Members be responsible for any damage or loss to such party's resources which occurs while being used pursuant to this Agreement. E. MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS Medical examinations for each Party's Team members shall be provided by that Public Agency (pursuant to CFR 1910.120 et seq.) The Parties will work cooperatively to secure the most cost-effective approach to medical examinations. F. COMPENSATION TO THE PARTIES The Parties agree that their participation in this agreement is without regard to any reimbursement or compensation, and further agree as follows: • The Team will actively pursue grants and donations to reduce financial dependence on participating Public Agencies. Page 7 of 10 C7 - 11 Attachment 2 • The Parties will fully support the Team and, when possible, assign their employee(s) to serve as Team Members regardless of receiving any reimbursements or compensation. • Obtaining reimbursement for services provided by the Team is a high priority, and that it is the responsibility of the Agency Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) to pursue such reimbursements from persons or entities responsible for hazardous materials incidents. • When the AHJ is a Party to this agreement, any reimbursements received by the AHJ for an incident to which the Team responds will be equitably distributed among those Parties who have actually incurred costs related to the incident. o When such reimbursement is received, the Party who is the AHJ will notify the Business Manager and the Secretary/Treasurer of the reimbursement amount, incident name and incident number. o The Business Manager will, within seven days, notify all Parties of the reimbursement and ask the Parties to submit reimbursement requests to the Business Manager. o Parties wishing to be reimbursed must provide a letter requesting reimbursement within 30 days of the notification by the Business Manager, and must include documentation of costs. o If the Team itself incurred any costs on the incident, the Business Manager will submit a reimbursement request on behalf of the Team, according to the same requirements listed above. o After 30 days have elapsed, the Business Manager will consolidate requests received into a reimbursement plan, which will equitably distribute the reimbursement among the Parties, and will present the reimbursement plan at the next Board of Directors meeting for approval. o If the reimbursement received is less that the total of all reimbursement requests, each Party will receive a proportionate share of the reimbursement based on their proportion of the total of all reimbursement requests received. o If the reimbursement received is more than the total of all reimbursement requests, each Party shall be fully reimbursed and the balance of the reimbursement will be paid to the Team itself for future use as determined by the Board of Directors. Page 8 of 10 C7 - 12 Attachment 2 11. NON-PARTICIPATION Any Public Agency named in the first "WHEREAS" Clause of this Agreement that chooses not to sign the Agreement can avail itself of the Team's services; however, that Public Agency must pay all costs of such Team services as "Assistance for Hire" at the rates determined by the Board. 12. COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute the same Agreement. 13. EXECUTION Each Public Agency that signs this Agreement shall promptly notify the County of San Luis Obispo Office of Emergency Services and shall simultaneously forward to such office an executed copy of its Counterpart Signature Page of this Agreement by hand-delivery to such office. Every Public Agency desiring to participate in this Agreement must submit its executed copy of its Counterpart Signature Page to the County of San Luis Obispo Office of Emergency Services prior to July 1, 2015. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective authorized officers. This Agreement is deemed to be signed and executed as of the last date a Public Agency executed this Agreement which is the _____ day of ________________, 2015. C7 - 13 Attachment 2 Page 9 of 10 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By: _____________________________ Jan Marx, Mayor ATTEST: Anthony Mejia, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney C7 - 14 Attachment 2 Page 10 of 10 Approved by the Board of Supervisors on ___________________, 2015 ATTEST: ________________________________ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL EFFECT: RITA L. NEAL County Counsel By: ______________________ Chief Deputy County Counsel Date: _______________________ C7 - 15 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C7 - 16 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Garret Olson, Fire Chief Prepared By: Rodger Maggio, Fire Marshal SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY’S COLLECTION OF FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY INSPECTION FEES RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution enabling the continued collection of multi-dwelling property fire and life safety inspection fees via the secured property tax roll administered by the County. DISCUSSION In May 2005, the Council approved a cost recovery program for State-mandated fire and life safety inspections for multi-dwelling properties with three or more units. As part of this program, on June 7, 2005, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 1472 authorizing the collection of annual fees for these inspections through the secured County property tax roll as the most cost efficient method for fee collection. In April, 2007, the Council approved a reduction in fees for apartment buildings, as reflected in Exhibit A to the attached resolution. Staff is not recommending any further changes in the current fees for 2015-16. However, the County requires an annual resolution adopted by the Council authorizing the continued collection of these fees on the property tax roll. Staff is recommending that the fee collection continue to be done through the secured property tax roll in 2015-16 and is requesting that Council adopt the required resolution to authorize that collection. CONCURRENCES Finance & Information Technology Department concurs with the recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT In fiscal year 2014-15, the City is scheduled to collect $193,000. Projected revenue for fiscal year 2015-16 is $194,000. ALTERNATIVE 1. Do not adopt the resolution and go to a less cost effective billing system by the Finance Division. ATTACHMENT 1. Resolution adopting the staff recommendation 06/02/15 C8 C8 - 1 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C8 - 2 Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO. (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AUTHORIZING THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AUDITOR TO COLLECT FEES FOR 2015-16 FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY INSPECTIONS OF MULTI-DWELLING PROPERTIES CONTAINING THREE OR MORE DWELLING UNITS ON THE SECURED PROPERTY TAX ROLL PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54988, ET SEQ. WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo is required by California Health & Safety Code Section 17921 annually to inspect multi-dwelling properties containing three or more dwelling units, including apartments, certain residential condominiums, hotels, motels, lodging houses and congregate residences; and WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 13146.2 authorizes cities to charge property owners in recovering the reasonable costs of providing these annual inspections; and WHEREAS, in accordance with this policy, the Council adopted Resolution Nos. 9799 (2006 Series) and 9889 (2007 Series) updating the master fee schedule, as specifically set forth in “Exhibit A” hereto, and authorizing the collection of these fees on the secured property tax roll; and WHEREAS, the Council desires to continue collection of these fees on the secured property tax roll for 2015-16: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Section 13146.2(b) and Municipal Code Section 3.50, the Council hereby authorizes and directs that Fire and Life Safety Inspection fees shall be collected on the secured property tax roll by the San Luis Obispo County Auditor-Controller for fiscal year 2015-16. A listing of fees by assessor’s parcel number shall be provided to the County Auditor-Controller for collection on the 2015-16 secured property tax roll in accordance with their schedule and data format requirements, pursuant to California Government Code 54988, et seq. Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: C8 - 3 Resolution No. (2015 Series) Page 2 the foregoing resolution was adopted on June 2, 2015. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Howell Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Mejia Anthony, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ Christine Dietrick, City Attorney Attachment 1 C8 - 4 Resolution No. (2015 Series) Page 3 EXHIBIT A Multi-Dwelling Fire and Life Safety Inspection Fee Schedule Apartment Houses $28.00 per unit per year Administrative fee of $65.00 per year per facility $10,000 maximum per property Fees are waived for units that are built, owned and managed by the San Luis Obispo Housing Authority, other governmental agencies or not-for-profit housing organizations. Hotels, Motels, Lodging Houses, Bed & Breakfast Facilities, Youth Hostel Facilities, Senior Facilities, Sororities, Fraternities and Other Congregate Residences 1 to 30 units $200 per year per facility 31 to 80 units $300 per year per facility More than 80 units $400 per year per facility These fees are applicable to all multi-dwelling units in the City based on the following definitions as set forth in the 2013 California Building Code, Chapter 2: Definitions and Abbreviations, Section 202 and Chapter 3, Section 310. Apartment house is any building, or portion thereof, which contains three or more dwelling units, including R-2 residential condominiums. Congregate residences are any building or portion thereof that contains facilities for living, sleeping and sanitation, as required by this code, and may include facilities for eating and cooking, for occupancy by other than a family. A congregate residence may be a shelter, convent, monastery, dormitory, fraternity or sorority house, but does not include jails, hospitals, nursing homes, hotels, or lodging houses. Dwelling unit is any building or portion thereof that contains living facilities, including provisions for sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation, as required by this code, for not more than one family, or a congregate residence for ten or less persons. Hotel is any building containing six or more guest rooms intended or designed to be use, or which are used, rented or hired out to be occupied, or which are occupied for sleeping purposes by guests. Lodging house is any building or portion thereof containing not more than five guest rooms where rent is paid in money, goods, labor or otherwise. (A lodging house includes bed & breakfast facilities and hostels, but excludes single family dwellings). Motel shall mean the same as hotel as defined in this code. Attachment 1 C8 - 5 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C8 - 6 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director Prepared By: David Hix, Deputy Director Utilities – Wastewater SUBJECT: WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY (WRRF) ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENT 1. Approve a budget amendment for the WRRF Energy Project in the amount $285,000; and 2. Approve the transfer of $285,000 from the WRRF completed projects account to the WRRF Energy Project CIP account. DISCUSSION Background On May 7, 2013, City Council approved the Energy Efficiency Project for the construction and installation of nine energy conservation measures at the WRRF. Total project cost of $9,479,000 was approved by Council on October 1, 2013. The project employs the triple bottom line as a guide for the replacement and design of inefficient equipment, and utilizes design/build contracting that expedites construction, controls costs, ensures on-schedule completion and guarantees systems are performing as specified. To date, the project has proceeded smoothly with construction on schedule, excellent workmanship, and energy and operational savings that have met or exceeded original estimates. The project is approximately 85% complete. The Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) portion of the project is set to begin in June with completion scheduled for late August 2015. Design Change During the 100% design meeting in April of 2014, it was discovered that several pieces of equipment would not be adequate and required changing. It was also realized that some redesign would be required along with construction changes. The specialized nature of this project and the related equipment required purchase orders be placed well ahead of the beginning of construction to guarantee prices and timely installation. The equipment, redesign and related construction was for the co-generation unit, the headworks (bar screens and grit separator), solids de-watering and the return activated sludge (RAS) pumps. At the design meeting with PG&E and its subcontractor AECOM Engineers, it became clear that there was a miscommunication by all the parties regarding these specific equipment components and design. Despite the project team’s best work, some project components had been overlooked which would result in some processes not being optimal; they would not meet the WRRF’s requirements. Specifically, the designed headworks equipment was not adequate for removing the inert solids that enter the plant, lacked redundancy and was close to the existing capacity, while solids de-watering lacked a necessary thickening tank and required more maintenance than originally estimated. Also, the co-generation unit and RAS pumps did not offer the level of controls necessary for optimized operations and required some redesign of electrical, gas and structural elements. June 2, 2015 C9 C9 - 1 WRRF Energy Project Budget Amendment Page 2 After identifying the needed equipment changes and redesign, all members of the project team (AECOM, PG&E and the City) took responsibility and worked closely together to ascertain costs and compromise fittingly to preserve the project’s original intent. The team negotiated the best costs with equipment vendors, and then performed a value engineering analysis on the construction that reduced the cost by an additional $66,890. Redesign was performed by AECOM within the existing contract. This change was estimated to cost $285,000 (Attachment 1). After the project team had secured the lowest possible cost and after careful analysis of the benefits of the redesign at this critical juncture, City staff decided to move forward with the changes to equipment and necessary associated construction improvements by utilizing the project’s contingency of $300,000 and any savings in the project to pay for the difference in cost. This decision was based wholly within the scope of the approved project and its intent to meet the triple bottom line. The replacement of the badly failing equipment with the appropriate replacements, process and operational optimization, additional reduced maintenance and to realize the efficiency savings with the energy project were the driving factors. Installation of the originally specified equipment would have resulted in operations and control problems, no redundancy for grit removal, higher maintenance requirements and inefficiencies. Deferring the additional work or equipment to a later date would have resulted in much higher costs. The project team has reviewed this issue and worked painstakingly to continue to reduce costs. During construction of the project, several justified unforeseen conditions were encountered that have resulted in the majority of the contingencies being expended. Due to misunderstanding related to the accounting for project contingency spending, staff did not realize the contingency funds were being expended on these other items and thought the necessary equipment changes and related construction costs noted above were covered under the contingency. Unfortunately, staff must return to Council to request a project budget amendment to amend the project budget to cover the additional cost of this equipment and construction that has been completed. Typically, City projects of this nature have a 10% contingency; this project had a very low contingency of slightly less than 3% because of the extensive planning and work done prior to 100% design. The project team had worked hard to dial in costs so it seemed possible to keep under this very low contingency. Because of the complicated nature of this project the project team now realizes that a larger contingency would have been more appropriate for this project. No additional budget amendments will be requested for this project. Additional Realized Operational Savings and Benefits The WRRF energy project is already exceeding its original estimated annual operational savings of $168,000. Specifically, the changes related to the budget amendment have resulted in additional savings and benefits. Below is a brief synopsis: 1. Additional saving for hauling costs. Grit, rags and other debris being removed by the redesigned headworks are dryer and more compact than estimated, hauling costs have been further reduced by $12,000 annually. C9 - 2 WRRF Energy Project Budget Amendment Page 3 2. Grinder maintenance. The headworks redesign resulted in the reduction of two grinders and the further removal of inert and abrasive material. The removal of two grinders and reducing the overhaul frequency of the remaining grinders will save $25,300 annually. This saving would not have been achieved without this redesign. 3. Extending digester cleaning intervals. The improved removal efficiencies of rags and grit by the redesigned headworks equipment have reduced the material collecting in the digesters. This unanticipated benefit will allow for extended digester cleaning intervals from five years to seven, possibly ten year intervals. Digester cleaning projects cost $250,000 each and a conservative simple amortized savings for the three digesters has been estimated at $42,500 annually. 4. Operational Control. Enhanced and optimized control for the RAS and Co-Gen will result in more efficient operations of the aeration basins and maximum generation of electricity respectively. Presently the aeration basins consume a large portion of the WRRF’s electrical costs and this redesign allows for smoother operations of the basins resulting in better effluent quality and electrical savings. The original proposed controls for these processes were unacceptable and offered little improvement over existing. 5. Significant reduction in odor and flies. The new equipment produces drier, more compact material and covers previously open processes which have resulted in markedly reduced odors and flies. Since the short period of time since the start-up of eight of the nine energy conservation measures, as expected, staff has seen noticeable operational savings. Savings are also being experienced for the filter media replacement, solids de-watering and lighting. Process optimization continues and will be enhanced with the installation of the SCADA system which will offer comprehensive control of related processes and equipment. After commissioning is complete, and the project finalized, applications for incentives and rebates will be submitted. Staff is optimistic that rebates will exceed original estimates given the performance of the project. FISCAL IMPACT This budget amendment will cost $285,000 and represents a three percent increase in the total project budget. This project was brought to Council as a fixed price contract with no change orders. Unfortunately contingencies were unable to cover necessary changes and staff is returning to request a budget amendment to increase project funding to cover the costs. There is adequate funding for this request in the sewer fund completed projects account. Any remaining contingencies or cost saving at the end of the project may be applied to future debt service or returned to the wastewater fund’s working capital. C9 - 3 WRRF Energy Project Budget Amendment Page 4 Fiscal Impact Summary Costs by Type Total Budget $9,519,000 Proposed Budget Amendment $285,000 Total $9,804,000 ALTERNATIVES Do not amend project budget. Council could choose not to amend the budget. This would result in project funding not meeting projects costs and result in unknown future consequences. The equipment is installed and the City is receiving the benefit of the efficiencies. ATTACHMENTS 1. Cost Estimate T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-06-02\WRRF Energy Project Budget Amendment C9 - 4 Attachment 1 ECM Equipment ManufacturerProposal Contractor Adds Proposal 1 150 kW cogen 2G 389,762.00$ 2G 391,206.00$ 1,444.00$ 1 Install Adds 20,529.00$ 4,350.00$ 2,000.00$ 24,827.00$ 2 Bar Screen JWC 355,800.00$ HUBER 324,104.00$ (31,696.00)$ 2 Install Adds 11,360.00$ 27,400.00$ 2 Grit Hydro int 236,800.00$ HUBER 221,720.00$ (15,080.00)$ 2 Install Adds 1,825.00$ 15,840.00$ 54,100.00$ 3,340.00$ 4 Solids Dewater sys HUBER 409,000.00$ FKC 482,200.00$ 73,200.00$ 4 install Adds 36,510.00$ 35,327.00$ 39,399.00$ 25,064.00$ 5 RAS pumping 2,175.00$ 19,970.00$ 351,884.00$ (7,390.00)$ (26,000.00)$ (3,000.00)$ (4,000.00)$ (1,500.00)$ (25,000.00)$ 284,994.00$ Subtotal Total City of SLO SST WWRF 100% design /VE meeting (4/20/14) Potential VE items Consolidate Grit to a single controller Conduit 3/4 min relaxed from 1" where appropriate Remove Glass lines Pipe ingrit process Eliminate curb -Solids bldg IGA Equipment /Final Numbers Post IGA 100% Design Cost Delta Upgrade manhole to Halliday Hatch Electrical increases-final vault relocated/meter upgrades 1W water based on location in Screen Bldg Potential No Trench and use exist conduit Demo/ add new purpose built pad Bury DG lines and temp flare Add Access Ramp from containment road Electrical adds- controller/infrastructure upgrades Dumpster ramp/ light relocation Electrical adds Coupled with Grit expantion Structural need for new equipment (rebar and concrete) Mechanical work for new equip Electrical adds Site Earthwork drainage/containment upgrade Added Demo / earth work /trenching Double pad size w/ contain curbs Additional mechanical piping Equipment installation Extra Piece of equipment C9 - 5 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C9 - 6 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Director of Public Works Prepared By: Gerardo Carrillo, Engineer II SUBJECT: MICROSURFACING 2015, SPECIFICATION NO. 91309 RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve plans and specifications for the Microsurfacing 2015 Project, Spec No. 91309. 2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the City Manager to award the contract if the lowest responsible bid is within the Engineer’s Estimate of $882,000. DISCUSSION Background The City’s Pavement Maintenance Plan (Pavement Plan) was adopted by the City Council on April 14, 1998. The Pavement Plan was subsequently updated in 2009 to provide additional emphasis on arterial street maintenance. The key element of the Pavement Plan is the establishment of a rotating and methodical approach to ensuring all areas of the City receive regular preventative or corrective maintenance. Most recent practice is to perform maintenance in two neighborhood Pavement Areas one year, then focus on critical arterial street work the following year, alternating between neighborhood areas and arterials each year. This provided some cost savings in bid prices on the last neighborhood project, due to the larger quantities. California Blvd was completed in 2013, and Areas 6 and 7 were completed last year (Attachment 1). The 2015 Microsurfacing Project includes Microsurfacing of Johnson Avenue and Osos Street (Attachment 2). Microsurfacing is a mixture of polymer modified emulsion, graded aggregates, mineral filler, water and additives. Instead of breaking and curing via evaporation, like a traditional slurry seal, a chemical reaction causes the material to cure. The quality of the microsurfacing is dependent on the quality of the raw materials. For this reason, a minimal amount of potable water will need to be used to supplement the water lost during the emulsion heating process. However, staff is investigating the use of recycled water as a supplement and will require the contractor to use this source if it meets the raw material requirements. Completion of the 2015 Microsurfacing Project will enable the City to make progress towards the Council’s established goal to maintain at least 70% of streets in good condition and have no less than 7% of the City’s streets in bad condition. In anticipation of this year’s roadway sealing project, the City’s Street Maintenance staff has performed crack sealing on the streets included within the project scope. This preparatory work will increase the long-term effectiveness of the seal application and reduce construction costs. Also included with this project is the upgrade of existing street corner ramps along Osos Street to improve access. Federal ADA standards require ramp upgrades since street surface rehabilitation, including microsurfacing, is considered an alteration and therefore subject to the 6/2/15 C10 C10 - 1 Microsurfacing 2015 (91309) Page 2 ADA’s requirements. The project also includes isolated pavement repairs in failed areas, curb and gutter repairs, maintenance of existing bicycle facilities, and new pavement stripes and markings to alert drivers of the need to share the road with cyclists. CONCURRENCES This project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines (Existing Facilities) since it is a maintenance and replacement project. A Notice of Exemption has been filed through the Community Development Department. FISCAL IMPACT There is currently a balance of $290,190 in the Construction Phase of the Street Reconstruction and Resurfacing Master Account (90346). Additional construction funding of $1,436,817 is proposed in the 2015-17 Financial Plan Capital Request to augment the Master Account and provide adequate funding for the annual pavement project. If the budget is approved as proposed, the additional funding will be available July 1, 2015, bringing the total funding available balance to $1,727,007 for Construction. The 2015 Microsurfacing project will be awarded after final adoption of the 2015-17 Financial Plan. If the funding is not approved, staff will recommend rejection of bids and staff will reduce the project to remain within the current available funding balance. This project is 100% funded through the one-half percent sales tax measure approved by the City’s residents. Estimated Project Cost Microsurfacing 2015 Project (91309) Construction Estimate: $881,480 Contingencies: $132,222 Material Testing: $4,500 Printing: $500 Total Project Cost $1,018,702 ATTACHMENTS 1. Pavement Area Map 2. Project Vicinity Map AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE Plans and Special Provisions t:\council agenda reports\2015\2015-06-02\microsurfacing 2015\91309 council agenda report.docx C10 - 2 ATTACHMENT 1 C10 - 3 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C10 - 4 C10 - 5 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C10 - 6 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Garret Olson, Fire Chief SUBJECT: CONTINUITY OF FIRE MUTUAL AID REIMBURSEMENT RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution s securing the City’s ability to continue to seek full reimbursement for reimbursement-eligible mutual aid responses to fires and other disasters. REPORT-IN-BRIEF The San Luis Obispo Fire Department participates in out-of-county mutual aid responses when requested. Typically these requests come through a State of California Coordination Center. With few exceptions, responses to disasters in other counties are eligible for reimbursement through the State or Federal government. When responding sworn personnel, the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department incurs costs from “portal to portal,” meaning from the moment that our personnel are activated to respond until they return to the City and are relieved of responsibilities related to the non-local disaster. This report recommends adoption of a resolution that will allow the City to continue seeking reimbursement for all eligible expenses. DISCUSSION Background In a letter dated January 23, 2015, State Fire and Rescue Chief Kim Zagaris notified all mutual aid providers, including the City of San Luis Obispo, of a change in the assumptions regarding reimbursement eligibility. Absent the resolution attached to this report, “local agencies will be reimbursed for actual hours worked” (Attachment 2, p. 2). The net impact of this changed assumption would severely impact our local finances and/or our ability to provide critical mutual aid support to other communities during their disasters. Here is a brief and typical example of the rationale for portal to portal reimbursement for sworn personnel: A large forest fire occurs in another county in California which exhausts local and regional fire resources. A regional coordination center forwards a request for assistance to a State Coordinating Center. A San Luis Obispo regional strike team of Type I fire engines is requested by the State Coordinating Center to respond to the fire. Included in this resource order is Office of Emergency Services (OES) Engine 271, an apparatus staffed and maintained by the City of San Luis Obispo. On-duty City Fire personnel respond to the fire on Engine 271, while simultaneously off-duty personnel are recalled to fill their assignments in the City so we can continue to provide local emergency response operations. Fire Administration tracks all expenses related to personnel and apparatus for the duration of this deployment. When our personnel return, Fire Administration submits reimbursement which covers the cost of deployed personnel, the cost of back-fill personnel, fees for use of apparatus and equipment, and an administrative fee based on the calculation of City overhead to support these functions. June 2, 2015 C11 C11 - 1 Continuity of Fire Mutual Aid Reimbursement Page 2 In this example and under the new State assumptions for reimbursement, the City would not receive reimbursement for the off-duty personnel who return to ensure continuity of local emergency response capacity. Nor would the City receive reimbursement for any of the compensable time when our deployed personnel are at the non-local disaster while not in an operational position, even when they are still on our local payroll clock. Adopting the attached resolution would confirm the City’s “portal to portal” practice, thus allowing the City to continue to support other communities in need without an adverse local financial impact. CONCURRENCES Human Resources Department Finance and Information Technology Department FISCAL IMPACT If adopted, the attached resolution would result in continued “portal to portal” reimbursement and administrative fee revenue to the City for our role in processing non-local, reimbursement- eligible disaster responses. ALTERNATIVES A) Do nothing and allow the State’s new reimbursement assumptions to apply to City of San Luis Obispo mutual aid responses, and B) budget General Fund dollars to cover non-reimbursed operating expenses which will exceed revenue (State reimbursement). This is not recommended as our inaction would leave eligible reimbursement on the table. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution for continuity of Fire mutual aid reimbursement 2. January 23 2015 notice from Chief Zagaris "T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-06-02\Reimbursement for statewide mutual aid Fire (Olson)\CAR Continuity of Fire Mutual Aid Reimbursement.docx" C11 - 2 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. _______ (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, IDENTIFYING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT RESPONSE AWAY FROM THEIR OFFICIAL DUTY STATION AND ASSIGNED TO AN EMERGENCY INCIDENT WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) is a public agency located in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, and WHEREAS, it is the City’s desire to provide fair and legal payment to all its employees for time worked; and WHEREAS, the City employs fire emergency response personnel including: Battalion Chiefs, Fire Captains, Engineers, Firefighters; and WHEREAS, the City and its Fire Department participates in mutual aid responses to emergencies outside the City and County; and WHEREAS, the City incurs staffing costs for Battalion Chiefs, Fire Captains, Engineers, Firefighters from portal to portal when these employees are responding to a mutual aid request for assistance; and WHEREAS, the City will compensate its employees portal to portal while in the course of their employment and away from their official duty station and assigned to an emergency incident, in support of an emergency incident, or pre-positioned for emergency response; and WHEREAS, the City will compensate its employees overtime in accordance with their current Memorandum of Understating while in the course of their employment and away from their official duty station and assigned to an emergency incident, in support of an emergency incident, or pre-positioned for emergency response; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo will seek reimbursement for qualifying mutual aid responses such that all City costs, including but not limited to personnel, apparatus, equipment, and administrative costs, such that responses to reimbursement-qualifying mutual aid responses do not have a net negative impact on the City’s financial position. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: 1. Personnel shall be compensated according to Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), Personnel Rules and Regulations, and/or other directive that identifies personnel compensation in the workplace. C11 - 3 ATTACHMENT 1 2. In the event a personnel classification does not have an assigned compensation rate, a "Base Rate" as set forth in an organizational policy, administrative directive or similar document will be used to compensate such personnel. 3. The San Luis Obispo Fire Department will maintain a current salary survey or acknowledgement of acceptance of the "Base Rate" on file with the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services, Fire Rescue Division. 4. City Fire Department response personnel will be compensated (portal to portal) beginning at the time of dispatch to the return to jurisdiction when equipment and personnel are in service and available for agency response. 5. Fire Department response personnel include: Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Chief, Battalion Chief, Fire Captain, Engineer, and Firefighter. Upon motion of Council Member _______________, seconded by Council Member _______________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this ___ day of ____, 2015. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: _______________________ Anthony J. Mejia, MMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney C11 - 4 ATTACHMENT 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________________, __________. _______________________ Anthony J. Mejia, MMC City Clerk C11 - 5 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C11 - 6 EDMUND G. BROWN JR. GOVERNOR MARK S. GHILARDUCCI DIRECTOR 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX January 23, 2015 Dear Mutual Aid Providers: The California Fire Assistance Agreement Committee has conducted both the 5 year review of the recitals portion of the California Fire Assistance Agreement (CFAA), as well as the yearly review of the exhibits. After several extensions of the agreement and numerous meetings and conference calls over the last year and a half, negotiations have been finalized on the rates, methodologies and formulas of this agreement. Outlined below (referencing clauses and page numbers), you will find the most relevant changes to the CFAA effective January 1, 2015. PLEASE familiarize yourself with the changes to the CFAA prior to dispatch to an incident/event, as the changes can significantly impact your agency’s reimbursement. Recital In the previous CFAA, the definition pages resided within the recital portion of the agreement, and began on page 4. The definition pages now reside within the exhibits portion of the agreement as Exhibit I, Page I1-I4. We have added numerous definitions consistent with other agreements and have enhanced on defining many other references within the CFAA for clearer context. Exhibit A – General Page A1-A2 Clause A-5 12 Hour Free Period Exception: Department of Interior Agencies will reimburse from time of dispatch. There will be no 12 hour free period. Department of Interior Agencies include: BLM, NPS, FWS and BIA. USFS and CAL FIRE still require a 12 hour free period. Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)/Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)/Governing Body Resolution (GBR) or equivalent for portal to portal: For routine responders (now referred to as Suppression Personnel), it was stated in the previous agreement that if the duration of the response exceeds 12 hours, reimbursement for personnel and emergency apparatus shall cover the entire time of commitment, beginning at the time of initial dispatch from home base to the time of return to home base. C11 - 7 2015 CFAA January 23, 2015 Page 2 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX In the current agreement, if the duration of the response exceeds 12 hours, and local agencies have an existing MOU/MOA/GBR or equivalent that indicates compensation for all hours worked, reimbursement for personnel and emergency apparatus shall cover the entire time of commitment, beginning at the time of initial dispatch from home base, to the time of return to home base. If local agencies do not have an existing MOU/MOA/GBR or equivalent that indicates compensation for all hours worked, local agencies will be reimbursed for actual hours worked. Exhibit A – Personnel Reimbursement Page A-3 Clause A8-A9 Initial method for receiving personnel reimbursement for Suppression (formerly categorized as routine responders), Non Suppression (formerly categorized as civilians) and Supplemental Personnel (formerly categorized as Civilians): A-8 A committee will establish a standard reimbursement formula for local agency personnel with Base Rates applicable to all jurisdictions. The default reimbursement will be at the Base Rate for actual hours worked on the incident. Agencies can be reimbursed at a rate that is higher than the Base Rate, and/or for more than actual hours worked (up to 24 hours per day), as follows: A-8.1 A committee will establish a standard reimbursement formula for local agency personnel with Base Rates applicable to all jurisdictions. The default reimbursement will be at the Base Rate for actual hours worked on the incident. Agencies can be reimbursed at a rate that is higher than the Base Rate, and/or for more than actual hours worked (up to 24 hours per day), as follows: A-8.2 Any agency seeking reimbursement for personnel for more than actual hours worked on the incident (portal-to-portal) must file an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent with Cal OES Fire and Rescue Division. The MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent shall indicate how personnel will be compensated. A-8.3 Any agency seeking reimbursement for its supplemental personnel will accept rates as outlined in NWCG#004-2009, Attachment D, which states that supplemental personnel will be reimbursed using General Schedule tables with locality pay applied for actual hours worked. Reimbursement shall be in accordance with Clause A-16. A-9 The above required documentation for rates and hours shall be based on actual costs to the responding agency, and not contingent upon reimbursement from the State of California or Federal Fire Agencies at a rate that exceeds what the agency will pay its personnel. C11 - 8 2015 CFAA January 23, 2015 Page 3 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX Reimbursements will be based on the salary survey and any applicable MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent that is on file at the time of the initial dispatch. Any MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent is subject to review by the Committee. Local government will be formally notified of the determination. Page A-4 Clause A-11 Reimbursement for fractional hours: In the previous agreement, reimbursement for fractional hours was taken to the next whole hour. Reimbursement for fractional hours will now be taken to the next quarter hour. Exhibit A – Formula for Personnel Reimbursement Using Base Rates Page A-4 Clause A-13 The Committee has established a standard Base Rate reimbursement formula for local agency personnel who do not wish to seek reimbursement higher than the Base Rate set by the Committee. Both formulas for portal to portal and actual hours are provided dependent on your agency policy: California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System Agencies will be reimbursed at the established Engine Company Base Rate for personnel responding on emergency apparatus or as overhead personnel at or below the Strike Team/Task Force Leader Trainee level. Strike Team/Task Force/Unit Leader level or above personnel will be reimbursed at the established Overhead Base Rate. Clause A-14 California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System Agencies that have not submitted a Salary Survey for rates above the established Base Rates will be reimbursed using one of the following formulas: The formula for the total invoice claim with an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (portal to portal) is: [(B x H1) + (B x H1 x W) + (B x H1 x U)] = Total Personnel Reimbursement The formula for the total invoice claim without an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (actual hours) is: [(B x H2) + (B x H2 x W) + (B x H2 x U)] = Total Reimbursement C11 - 9 2015 CFAA January 23, 2015 Page 4 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX B= Base Rate H1 = All Hours (portal to portal) H2= Actual Hours Worked W= Workers’ Compensation Percentage Rate U= State Unemployment Percentage Rate The Established Base Rate (B) is based on the average of the CAL FIRE Fire Captain or Fire Apparatus Engineer Base Rates and the USDA Forest Service emergency hire rates for these positions applied to a 168 hour week, with 40 hours at straight-time and 128 hours at overtime. The total amount is then divided by 168 hours resulting in a blended rate. Exhibit A – Formula for Suppression Personnel Reimbursement Using Average Actual Rates Page A-5 Clause A-15 The Committee has established reimbursement formulas for agency personnel who seek reimbursement at a rate higher than the Base Rate. Both formulas for portal to portal and actual hours are provided, dependent on your agency policy: The California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System Agencies may submit Average Actual Rates to Cal OES Fire and Rescue Division for any personnel dispatched to an incident. The personnel who are dispatched to an incident will first be classified and reimbursed as described in Clauses A-15.1 through A-15.3. The submission of Average Actual Rates shall be on file with Cal OES Fire and Rescue Division prior to the time of personnel dispatch. Page A-6 Clause A-15.1 California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System Agencies that have submitted Average Actual Rates to Cal OES Fire and Rescue Division at or below the Battalion Chief level shall be reimbursed using one of the following formulas: The formula for the total invoice claim with an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (portal to portal) is: [(A x H1 x 1.5) + (A x H1 x 1.5 x W) + (A x H1 x 1.5 x U)] = Total Reimbursement The formula for the total invoice claim without an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (actual hours) is: [(A x H2 x 1.5) + (A x H2 x 1.5 x W) + (A x H2 x 1.5 x U)] = Total Reimbursement C11 - 10 2015 CFAA January 23, 2015 Page 5 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX A= Average Actual Rate H1 = All Hours (portal to portal) H2= Actual Hours Worked W= Workers’ Compensation Percentage Rate U= State Unemployment Percentage Rate The Average Actual Hourly Rate (A) is the average hourly rate of all personnel in the specific rank (e.g.: Captain, Engineer, Firefighter) within each individual jurisdiction. Exhibit A – Formula for Suppression Personnel Reimbursement Using Average Actual Rates Page A-6 Clause A-15.2 California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System Agencies that have submitted Average Actual Rates to Cal OES Fire and Rescue Division above the Battalion Chief level shall be reimbursed using the following formulas: The formula for the total invoice claim with an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (portal to portal) is: [(A x H1) + (A x H1 x W) + (A x H1 x U)] = Total Reimbursement The formula for the total invoice claim without an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (actual hours) is: [(A x H2) + (A x H2 x W) + (A x H2 x U)] = Total Reimbursement A = Actual Average Rate H1 = All Hours (portal to portal) H2 = Actual Hours Worked W = Workers’ Compensation Percentage Rate U = State Unemployment Percentage Rate Page A-7 Clause A-15.3 If personnel above the Battalion Chief level have an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent that indicates they are to be paid above straight time, the reimbursement will be calculated using one of the following formulas. The MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent is subject to the provisions in Clause A-9, and must not be contingent on this agreement or executed on the sole basis that there is reimbursement from Cal OES, CAL FIRE, or the Federal Fire Agencies. C11 - 11 2015 CFAA January 23, 2015 Page 6 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX The formula for the total invoice claim with an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (portal to portal) and MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for above straight-time is: [(A x H1 x 1.5) + (A x H1 x 1.5 x W) + (A x H1 x 1.5 x U)] = Total Reimbursement The formula for the total invoice claim without an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (actual hours) and with an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for above straight-time is: [(A x H2 x 1.5) + (A x H2 x 1.5 x W) + (A x H2 x 1.5 x U)] = Total Reimbursement A = Actual Average Rate H1 = All Hours (portal to portal) H2 = Actual Hours Worked W = Workers’ Compensation Percentage Rate U = State Unemployment Percentage Rate Exhibit A - Formula for Non-Suppression (formerly referred to as “Civilians”) Personnel Reimbursement Using Average Actual Rates Page A7-A8 Clause A-15.4 In the previous agreement, personnel referred to as “Civilians” that were compensated for actual hours worked, had to provide two rates. Those two rates consisted of an overtime rate for overtime hours worked, and a straight time rate for straight time hours worked. The Committee has changed the two rate practice and requirement, and has provided the same formulas and methods in which suppression personnel are to be compensated for portal to portal or actual hours worked, dependent on your agency policy: California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System Agencies that have submitted Average Actual Rates to Cal OES Fire and Rescue Division for Non-Suppression Personnel shall be reimbursed for actual hours worked using the following formula: The formula for the total invoice claim without an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (actual hours) is: [(A x 1.5 x H2) + (A x 1.5 x H2 x W) + (A x 1.5 x H2 x U)] = Total Reimbursement A = Average Actual Rate H2 = Actual Hours Worked W = Workers’ Compensation Percentage Rate U = State Unemployment Percentage Rate C11 - 12 2015 CFAA January 23, 2015 Page 7 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX The Average Actual Rate (A) is the average hourly rate of all personnel in the specific rank (e.g., Dispatcher, Heavy Equipment Mechanic, and Inspector) within each individual fire agency. Non-Suppression Personnel, who have an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent that indicates they are to be paid portal to portal according to Clause A-8.2, will be reimbursed in accordance with the following Formula for Personnel Using Average Actual Rates: The formula for the total invoice claim with an MOU/MOA, governing body resolution, or equivalent for all hours (portal to portal) is: [(A x H1 x 1.5) + (A x H1 x 1.5 x W) + (A x H1 x 1.5 x U)] = Total Reimbursement A= Average Actual Rate H1 = All Hours (portal to portal) W= Workers’ Compensation Percentage Rate U= State Unemployment Percentage Rate The Average Actual Hourly Rate (A) is the average hourly rate of all personnel in the specific rank (e.g., Dispatcher, Mechanic, and Inspector) within each individual jurisdiction. The 1.5 multiplier in the formula represents an hourly rate, which includes benefits for straight time, and an overtime rate for overtime hours. Exhibit A - Supplemental Fire Department Resource Reimbursement Using NWCG#004-2009 Page A8-A9 Clause A-16 In the previous agreement, personnel referred to as “civilians” that were overhead tied to a local fire department generally by agreement who are mobilized primarily for response to incidents/wildland fires outside of their district or mutual aid zone are now defined as “Supplemental Personnel”. Supplemental Personnel are not a permanent part of the local fire organization and are not required to attend scheduled trainings, meetings, etc., of the department staff; therefore, The Committee provided a reimbursement process separate from Suppression and Non Suppression Personnel: California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System Agencies seeking reimbursement for Supplemental Fire Department Resources will accept rates as outlined in NWCG#004-2009, Attachment D, which states that Supplemental Fire Department Resources will be reimbursed using General Schedule tables with locality pay applied for actual hours worked. California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System Agencies that roster or sponsor Supplemental Fire Department C11 - 13 2015 CFAA January 23, 2015 Page 8 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX Resources shall be reimbursed at the rate of the position being filled on the incident. California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System Agencies shall identify their Supplemental Fire Department Resources separately on the Supplemental Fire Department Resource section of the Cal OES Salary Survey and not include them under the Suppression responder categories. They are not a permanent part of the local fire organization. They are mobilized primarily for response to incidents/wildland fires outside of the fire agency’s jurisdiction. Supplemental Fire Department Resources shall be paid a regular compensation rate for all hours worked plus an overtime compensation rate for actual overtime hours worked, including travel. Base hourly rate shall be no more than step 5 of the appropriate GS wage adjusted for locality pay at the location of the fire department’s jurisdiction. Rates can be found on the Office of Personnel Management website, http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay- leave/salaries-wages/2015/general-schedule/. Reimbursement costs shall not include portal to portal pay or the employee portion of benefits. Backfill is not reimbursable for personnel hired as Supplemental Fire Department Resource. Approved travel costs will be in accordance with Clause A-35. Exhibit A – Requesting Reimbursement Page A-13 Clause A-37 The Committee has developed a NEW Emergency Activity Record (F-42): In the current agreement, this clause reads you will complete and prepare either an OES Form F-42 or F-78, and will be the basis for your reimbursement. However, all personnel will use the newly created Emergency Activity Record (F-42). We have combined the need to capture all hours worked (portal to portal) and actual hours worked onto one 8 ½ x 14 form. The F-78 Shift – Civilian Personnel Emergency Activity Record will be discontinued once the NEW form is released to the fire service. Exhibit G – Reimbursement Policy and Procedures for Outside the State of California Assignments Page G-1 In the previous agreement, travel cost for lodging and per diem for local agency personnel were reimbursed at the rates and methods established by the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA). In the current agreement, reimbursement of personnel, emergency apparatus, and support equipment will be consistent with Exhibit A Reimbursement Policy and Procedures, with the following exceptions: C11 - 14 2015 CFAA January 23, 2015 Page 9 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX 1.Travel costs for lodging and per diem for personnel shall be reimbursed at the rates and methods established within Exhibit H, limited to the California State Standard Per Diem Rates in effect at the time of the response. Lodging expense will follow the “all counties/cities located in California” up to $90.00 per night, plus tax. Exceptions will be handled case by case with formal documented and written approval. Exhibit H – In State Travel And Incident Related Expenses Page H-1 The previous agreement did not outline a process for approval and reimbursement for rental vehicles. The Committee added language in the current agreement for rental vehicle reimbursement for further clarification and understanding as noted: Rental vehicles authorized on the resource order do not need additional incident approval. The cost of the rental vehicle, if incurred by the local agency, and the fuel purchased to operate the rental vehicle must be submitted on the In State Travel and Incident Related Expense Log with receipts taped or photo copied. Rental vehicles that are not authorized on the resource order must receive th e formal written approval from the incident. This year the Committee has provided two new additional forms pertaining to the Annual Salary Survey. These forms are designed to capture and create uniformity for Non-Suppression Personnel and Supplemental Personnel. If you fall under one, both or all three categories within your agency, please utilize the salary survey forms consistent with the definitions and instructions for Suppression, Non-Suppression and Supplemental Personnel. I have provided the links for viewing and downloading of the January 1, 2015 CFAA, 2015 Rate Letter and Sample Resolutions. 2015 CFAA 2015 CFAA Agreement w/Signatures 2015 Rate Letter 2015 CFAA Rate Letter v2 Sample Resolution(s) Sample Resolution #1 Sample Resolution #2 C11 - 15 2015 CFAA January 23, 2015 Page 10 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE, MATHER, CA 95655 FIRE AND RESCUE DIVISION (916) 845-8711 TELEPHONE (916) 845-8396 FAX As we move forward with the new agreement and changes within, we understand the importance and the need for training to implement these changes. In the next couple of months, we are set to conduct multiple training/workshops within every one of the six California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid Regions. Notifications from Cal OES Fire and Rescue Division on dates and venues will follow within the next several weeks. If you have additional questions, or need clarification on the above information, please contact Lori Lopez at lori.lopez@caloes.ca.gov, or by phone at 916-845-8722. Thank you always for your continued support of the California Fire Assistance Agreement, and the California Fire Service and Rescue Emergency Mutual Aid System. Sincerely original on file Kim Zagaris State Fire and Rescue Chief C11 - 16 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By: Anne Schneider, Chief Building Official SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 2) authorizing the collection of delinquent code enforcement fines by the San Luis Obispo County Auditor by means of special assessments on the secured property tax role. DISCUSSION The Building & Safety Division enforces building, housing, zoning, stormwater and property maintenance provisions contained in the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code through its Code Enforcement Neighborhood Wellness Programs. When violations are confirmed, a Notice of Violation is issued to the property owner describing the violation(s) and providing a time period for correction. This is preceded by an effort to contact the property owner to discuss the violation(s) and obtain voluntary compliance through the issuance of a Notice to Correct. When the initial Notice of Violation is not effective in gaining compliance, an Administrative Citation may be issued pursuant to SLOMC Chapter 1.24. Fines associated with Administrative Citations range from $50, $100, and $200 per violation for the first, second and third citations, respectively, issued for property maintenance related violations. For other violations of the Municipal Code the fines are $100, $200, and $500 for the first, second and third citations, respectively. Each day a violation exists is considered a separate and distinct violation; therefore fines may be assessed on a daily basis for continuing violations beyond the third citation or in very delinquent or serious cases (ref: SLOMC 1.24.050 D). Code Enforcement Administrative Citation fines are issued to property owners who fail to correct violations within a reasonable time period after issued a Notice of Violation. The property owner is afforded the right to appeal both the Notice of Violation and the Administrative Citation itself. Unpaid fines become delinquent after sixty (60) days and, pursuant to SLOMC Section 1.24.140, Government Code sections 53069.4, and 38773.5, unpaid fines may be collected by a special assessment pursuant(Attachment 1). Special assessments require certification of the amount of the fines by the City Council. The proposed Resolution (Attachment 2) authorizes the San Luis Obispo County Auditor to assess the amounts due on delinquent fines as special tax assessments against the properties listed. A list of the outstanding fines for each property is attached hereto as Attachment 3. Each property owner has been sent a Notice of Proposed Special Assessment 10 days prior to the June 2, 2015 C12 C12 - 1 Collection of Delinquent Code Enforcement Fines Page 2 hearing, which notifies them of the time and date of the Council Meeting when the assessment is to be considered and providing them an opportunity to pay the delinquent fines prior to the hearing. The Community Development Department utilized extensive cross-checking with our tracking spreadsheet and Energov payment and billing records to identify those fines that were outstanding. Each case was then reviewed for accuracy, proper notice and service, and the completion of any appeal submitted prior to inclusion in the resolution. CONCURRENCES This process is consistent with the procedure prescribed in Municipal Code Section 1.24.140. FISCAL IMPACT Projected revenue from the collection of delinquent fines by the County Auditor for Fiscal Year 2015-16 is expected to be $2,350.00. ALTERNATIVES Do not adopt the resolution and continue to forward unpaid fines to a collection agency. This is not recommended as it typically does not result in fines being paid in an amount to cover the fine, but more importantly placing liens does have the potential effect of causing the correction of persistent violations as owners typically do will want the lien cleared and pay the fines in addition to addressing the violation. ATTACHMENTS 1. SLOMC 1.24.040 2. Resolution 3. List of properties T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-06-02\Resolution Authorizing Collection of Delinquent Code Enforcement Fines\CAR-June 2 2015.docx C12 - 2 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 3 1.24.140 Collection of unpaid fines. A. City Remedies. The city, at its discretion, may pursue any and all legal, equitable, and administrative remedies for the collection of unpaid civil administrative fines. 1. Remedies Cumulative. Pursuit of one remedy does not preclude the pursuit of any other remedies until the total fines owed by a person under this chapter have been collected. 2. Refusal to Issue Permits. A city department may refuse to accept an application for a city permit or license or to refuse to issue, extend, or renew to any person, who has unpaid delinquent fines, liens, or assessments, any city permit, license, or other city approval pertaining to the property that is the subject of a notice of violation and/or an unpaid administrative citation. 3. Suspension of Issued Permits. Notwithstanding any other provision of the code, any permit, license, or any type of land use approval issued by the city to a person who has unpaid administrative citations totaling five hundred dollars or more which remain delinquent for thirty days or longer may be suspended by the department which issued the permit or other entitlement. The suspension becomes effective ten days after the date the notice of the suspension is placed by the issuing department in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the person, and continues until the administrative delinquency is paid in full. The person may request an appeal or review hearing pursuant to the specific permit, license, or other city approval procedures or ordinance if such a request is filed before the ten-day period ends. 4. Criminal Remedies. The city attorney, at his or her discretion, may also issue a criminal citation or complaint (infraction or misdemeanor) to any person for a code violation when the applicable fine has not been paid. B. Violations Constitute a Public Nuisance. The director may pursue the remedies described in this section whether or not the city is pursuing any other action to terminate an ongoing code violation that was the basis for an administrative citation or to otherwise abate the violation or sanction the property owner. To compel code compliance, the city may also seek to collect C12 - 3 Attachment 1 Page 2 of 3 assessed fines by means of a nuisance abatement lien or special assessment against the property where a property related violation occurred in accordance with the procedures in Government Code Sections 38773.1 and 38773.5. C. Lien Conditions. To recover any delinquent administrative fines as a lien or special assessment on real property, the following conditions must be met: 1. The director must submit to and receive approval from the city council for a resolution certifying the amounts of the liens and special assessments sought to be collected from each property owner; and 2. The total amount of the delinquent fine against the property owner must be delinquent for sixty days or more. D. Lien Collections. The director is authorized to take any steps necessary to enforce collection of the lien or special assessment, including but not limited to the following: 1. Request the county recorder to record a notice of any lien or special assessment certified by resolution of the city council. 2. Request the county tax collector on behalf of the city to collect any special assessments certified by resolution of the city council. E. Notice of Lien Collection Procedures. All administrative citations shall contain a notice that unpaid fines are subject to the assessment and lien collection procedures of this chapter. This notice shall satisfy the notice requirements of Government Code Sections 38773.1 and 38773.5 when an administrative citation is served on the person. In addition, the director shall by first class mail send notice to each property owner at least ten days before the city council considers the resolution to certify the amounts of the liens and special assessments stating the date, time, and location of the meeting. The lien or special assessment shall be imposed on the date the administrative citation for the code violation is issued to the responsible person and shall become effective upon the recording of a notice of lien or special assessment by the County Recorder. F. Contesting Certification of a Lien. A person may contest the amount or the validity of any lien or special assessment for a civil fine at the public hearing when the city council considers the resolution to certify the liens or assessments. Such contests shall be limited to the issue of the C12 - 4 Attachment 1 Page 3 of 3 amount or validity of the lien or assessment and may not consider whether the underlying code violation occurred. Pursuit of such a contest by a person is necessary to exhaust the administrative remedies concerning a legal challenge to the validity of any such lien or special assessment. (Ord. 1576 § 1 (part), 2012) C12 - 5 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C12 - 6 Attachment 2 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AUTHORIZING THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AUDITOR TO ASSESS AMOUNTS DUE ON DELINQUENT ADMINISTRATIVE FINES AS SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST THE PROPERTIES PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 53069.4(a). WHEREAS, Government Code Section 53069.4(a) authorizes the City to adopt an ordinance that governs the imposition, enforcement, collection and administrative review of administrative fines arising out of violations of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.4(a), the City adopted Chapter 1.24 of the Municipal Code, which has been subsequently amended; and WHEREAS, Section 1.24.140 of the Municipal Code provides that the City may request that the County Assessor collect, on behalf of the City, any administrative fines which are more than 60 days delinquent, and which are certified by the City Council as special assessments; and WHEREAS, The City Council of San Luis Obispo finds that all of the fine amounts for the referenced properties listed below are at least 60 days delinquent; and WHEREAS, the property owners responsible for the violations were notified of the violations and received citations and were subsequently notified in writing by a notice mailed May 1, 2015 pursuant to Section 1.24.140 of the Municipal Code of this hearing and their right of appeal; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference as the findings of the City Council. Section 2. Action. The City of San Luis Obispo hereby authorizes the San Luis Obispo County Auditor to assess the amounts due on delinquent accounts as special assessments against the properties listed on the attachment. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: C12 - 7 Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 2 The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2015. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney Attachment 2 C12 - 8 Attachment 3 Attachment to RESOLUTION NO._______(2015 Series) LIST OF PROPERTIES Name of Property Owner Assessors Parcel No. Property Address Amount/Cite Karen Traver Tre 004-441-022 1527 Oceanaire Dr., San Luis Obispo, CA $150.00 AC2014100, AC2015012 Linda Davenport 053-242-019 1035 Cortez Ct., San Luis Obispo, CA $700.00 AC2015018, AC2014114, AC2014101 Cassie & Michael Gann 004-442-031 1520 Gulf St., San Luis Obispo, CA $100.00 AC2015006 Peter Burtness 004-781-067 2675 Johnson Ave. San Luis Obispo, CA $1400.00 AC-2014095, AC-2014096 C12 - 9 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C12 - 10 FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By:Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner SUBJECT:REVIEW OF AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEWCOMMISSION’S DECISION TO APPROVE THE DESIGN OF FOUR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED AT 323 & 353 GRAND AVENUE RECOMMENDATION:Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1)thatdenies the appeal of the Architectural Review Commission’s approval, thereby granting final design approval to the project based on findings of consistency with the Community Design Guidelines and applicable City standards; subject to conditions as set forth in Attachment 1. SITE DATA Applicant PB Companies Representative Steve Rigor, Arris Studio Architects Submittal Date March 9, 2015 Complete Date March 17, 2015 Zoning R-1 (Low-Density Residential) General Plan Low Density Site Area 0.53 Acres (23,132 square feet) Environmental Status Negative Declaration adopted by Planning Commission (ER 25-13) on August 14, 2013. SUMMARY The project is a request for Architectural Review approval to allow construction of four single-family residences and associated site improvements. The proposed project was approved by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) on April 6, 2015 and was subsequently appealed to the City Council by Linda White and Karen Adler based on concerns over consistency with some of the requirements of Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5 (ResidentialProject Design); mainly related to the scale/massing and compatibility of the project with the existing neighborhood. Over the course of two public hearings,the ARC considered the design of the subject project and directed modifications (scale/square footage reduction and site plan revisions) to the design for compatibility with the existing neighborhood and consistency with Community Design Guidelines. As approved by the ARC and discussed in section 2.0 below, the design of the proposed homes are compatible with the existing neighborhood by incorporating existing architectural characteristics and providing compatible scale, siting, detailing, and overall character with the neighborhood, consistent with the Community Design Guidelines. 06/02/15 PH2 - 1 PH2 323/353 Grand AvenueAppeal – File No. 25-13 Page 2 1.0BACKGROUND 1.1Site Information/Setting Site Size ~23,000 square feet Present Use & Development Two R-1 parcels with one single-family residence each Topography Flat: ~4 percent cross slope Access Grand Avenue Surrounding Use/Zoning North: Single-Family Residence (R-1 zone) South: Single-Family Residence (R-1 zone) East: Grand Avenue + Single Family Residences (R-1 zone) West: Single Family Residences (R-1-Planned Development zone) The project site currently encompasses two parcels; 323 Grand Avenue (12,032.63 square feet) and 353 Grand Avenue (11,099.33 square feet). The Planning Commission approved a tentative parcel map to divide the two parcels into four in August, 2013 (see section 1.3 below for more details). The project site is located on the west side of Grand Avenue between McCollum and Fredericks Streets. The two parcels are in the Low-Density Residential (R-1) zone and are encompassed by R-1 zoning with single- family residences. The project site is gently sloping (approximately 4% average cross slope) and is developed with two single-family residences (to be demolished); one per parcel. Each parcel has a driveway providing access from Grand Avenue and minimal other improvements. Attachment 2, Project Plans, Sheet A0.2 illustrates the sites existing conditions (structures, trees, hardscape). 1.2Project Description The proposed project includes the following significant features (Attachment 2, Project Plans): 1.Construction of four detached single-family residences (two story homes): a.Lot 1: 1,995 square foot 1 4-bedroom, 3-bath residence b.Lot 2: 2,379 square foot1 4-bedroom, 4-bath residence c.Lot 3: 2,364 square foot1 4-bedroom, 3-bath residence d.Lot 4: 1,963 square foot1 4-bedroom, 3-bath residence 2.Common access driveway (porous pavers) providing access to lots 2, 3, and 4 with guest parking spaces: a.11 parking spaces are provided to meet Zoning Regulations requirements and the project site accommodates an additional 14 parking spaces in guest spaces and driveways. 3.Tree removals: The City Arborist and the ARC approved tree removals 2 that are within the footprint of the proposed residences. Trees outside of the footprints and access way need to be maintained to the maximum extent feasible or approved for removal by the Tree Committee. No removal of heritage treesproposed (Attachment 3, Existing Site Plan, indicates tree types and sizes). 1 The square footage calculation does not include garages (502 square foot average size) or porch/decks (294 square foot average size).2 Approximately 27 proposed tree removals(Citrus, California Walnut, Alder, Fern Pine, Victorian Box, Loquat, Sweet Gum) ranging in size from 4-inch to 14-inch. PH2 - 2 323/353 Grand AvenueAppeal – File No. 25-13 Page 3 4.Craftsman architectural style: a.Horizontal siding (4 or 6-inch siding) with decorative wainscoting (8-inch siding) and board and batten gable accenting with craftsman style architectural detailing. b.Covered porches with tapered columns and brick bases. Table 2.2: Project Statistics Item Proposed 1 Ordinance Standard 2 Street Yard Setback 20 feet 20 feet Other Yard Setback (sides and rear) Compliant (6’-6” to 20’)Varied (5’ to 8’ minimum) Max. Height of Structure(s) 24’-6” feet 25 feet Building Coverage (footprints) ~31% average 40% Parking Spaces (total) 11 (plus 14 guest & driveway spaces) 11 Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans 2. City Zoning Regulations 1.3Previous Review & Entitlement Path August 14, 2013:the Planning Commission (PC) approved a subdivision of the project site allowing four parcels to be created from two existing parcels. The subdivision included exceptions from the Subdivision Regulations due to substandard lot depths (mean lot depth reduction of 18 feet) and substandard lot areas (mean lot area reduction of 762 square feet per lot). This approval is not under appeal. January 21, 2015:the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) took staff’s recommendation and continued the project with direction to the applicant to revise the on-site circulation and reduce the size/scale of the proposed homes on the front lots to approximately 2,000 square feet (sf) and the homes on the rear lots to approximately 2,400 square feet.(Attachment 6, 01-21-15 ARC Direction, Minutes, & Staff Report) April 6, 2015:the ARC reviewed the applicant’s site plan revisions and reduction to the size and scale of the proposed residences.The applicant reduced the mass of the homes by adding further articulation to the upper stories and reducing the square footage of the homes on the front lots to 1,995 sf (previously 2,258 sf = 263 sf reduction) and 1,963 sf (previously 2,425 sf = 462 sf reduction)and the homes on the rear lots to 2,379 sf (previously 2,866 sf = 487 sf reduction) and 2,364 sf (previously 2,650 sf = 286 sf reduction). The ARCgranted design approval of the projectbased on consistency with ARC directionand the Community Design Guidelines.(Attachment 7, 04-06-15 ARC Approval Resolution, Minutes, & Staff Report) April 15, 2015:the ARC’s design approval was appealed by Linda White and Karen Adler noting concerns with Community Design Guidelines compliance as discussed in section 2.0 below. (Attachment 4, ARC Appeal) PH2 - 3 323/353 Grand AvenueAppeal – File No. 25-13 Page 4 2.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS The following details the appeal of the ARC’s decision to approve the design of the proposed project and provides staff’s response to the reasons for appeal. **Please note: The applicant has provided a letter in response to the appeal (see Attachment 5). 2.1Reason for Appeal:The submitted appeal (Attachment 4) indicates that the “project does not abide with Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5: 5.1, 5.3 A & B”. The referenced sections are provided below and are followed by a staff response: Community Design Guideline 5.1 Goals for Residential Project Design: These guidelines are intended to encourage well designed residentialneighborhoods that people enjoy living in, which: reduce the visual dominance of the automobile; promote pedestrian activity; create variety and interest in the appearance of residential streets; provide community open space; and protect significant features of the natural environment. Community Design Guideline 5.3.A General principles. Infill residential development should: 1.Be compatible in scale, siting, detailing, and overall character with adjacent buildings and those in the immediate neighborhood. This is crucial when a new or remodeled house is proposed to be larger than others in the neighborhood. When new homes are developed adjacent to older ones, the height and bulk of the new construction can have a negative impact on adjacent, smaller scale buildings. 2.Continue existing neighborhood patterns. For example, patterns such as front porches and entries facing the street, finished floor height, and garages located at the rear of lots. Community Design Guideline 5.3.B Building design: An infill residential structure should incorporate the traditional architectural characteristics of existing houses in the neighborhood, including window and door spacing, exterior materials, roof style and pitch, ornamentation and other details. Staff Response: a)ARC Reduced Home Sizes for Neighborhood Compatibility.Over the course of two public hearings the ARC considered the design of the subject project. Related to the appeal and in consideration of neighborhood compatibility, the ARC (January 21st hearing) directed the applicant to reduce the overall square footage and mass of the proposed homes, and the applicant revised the project as directed. b)Homes Sizes Consistent/Compatible with Existing Adjacent Homes.With the ARC approved size reduction, the homes on the front lots (fronting Grand Avenue) are now smaller in square footage than the adjacent homes fronting Grand Avenue and the homes on the rear lots are smaller than, or similar in square footage to, the existing adjacent residences to the west and north (see Attachment 5, Applicant Response, Exhibit C). Consistent with the Community Design Guidelines, the proposed homes are compatible with existing home sizes in the neighborhood. c)Project Detailing Consistent/Compatible with Existing Adjacent Homes. Consistent PH2 - 4 323/353 Grand AvenueAppeal – File No. 25-13 Page 5 and compatible with the existing neighborhood, the project incorporates low-sloped hip and gable roofs with composite roofing, vertical and horizontal siding, stucco (lot 4), covered porches/entrances with tapered columns and brick bases, and visible garage access; these elements are commonly found within the existing neighborhood. The proposed home designs create variety and interest while also remaining compatible with the existing neighborhood (see Attachment 5, Applicant Response, Exhibits D & E). d)Project consistent with Community Design Guidelines.As discussed above, the proposed homes are harmonious with the existing neighborhood by incorporating the neighborhoods architectural characteristics and are compatiblein scale, siting, detailing, and overall character with homes in the immediate neighborhood as required by the Community Design Guidelines. 3.0FISCAL IMPACT When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Accordingly, since the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact.There is no fiscal impact associated with the approval of this project. 4.0 ALTERNATIVES 1.Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues. 2.Deny the projectby upholding the appealof the ARC’s approval, based on findings of inconsistency with the Community Design Guidelines,and applicable City regulations (Attachment 8, Draft Project Denial Resolution). This alternative is not recommended because the applicant’s revisions to the project (in response to ARC direction) have reduced the scale and massing of the project in a manner that is consistent with the Community Design Guidelinesand the design and detailing of the project is compatible with the neighborhood. 5.0ATTACHMENTS 1.Draft Resolution 2.Project Plans 3.Existing Site Plan 4.ARC Appeal (White & Adler) 5.Applicant Response to Appeal (PB Companies) 6.01-21-15 ARC Direction & Minutes Note:ARC Staff Report (01-21-15) available in the Council Reading File 7.04-04-15 ARC Approval Resolution & Minutes Note:ARC Staff Report (04-06-15) available in the Council Reading File 8.Draft Project Denial Resolution (upholding the appeal) \\chstore7\Team\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-06-02\Appeal ARC Design Permit-323 Grand Street (Johnson-Carloni)\E-CAR 323.353 Grand Avenue (25-13).docx PH2 - 5 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH2 - 6 Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO. (2015Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYINGAN APPEAL (FILED BY LINDA WHITE AND KAREN ADLER) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION’S DESIGN APPROVAL; THEREBY GRANTING FINAL DESIGN APPROVAL OF FOUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED JUNE 2, 2015 (323/353 GRAND AVENUE, R-1 ZONE, FILE NO. 25-13) WHEREAS, on January 21, 2015, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo, California,for the purpose of design review for four new single-family residences and associated site improvements (the “Project”)instituted under ARC 25-13, PB Companies (“Applicant”) and continued the project to a date uncertain with five directional items for modifications to the Project; and WHEREAS,on April 6, 2015, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamberof City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, and granted design approval for the Project; and WHEREAS,on April 15, 2015, Linda White and Karen Adler filed an appeal of the Architectural Review Commission’s approval of the design of the Project; and WHEREAS, on June 2, 2015, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering the April 15, 2015 appeal of the Architectural Review Commission’saction; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of the Architectural Review Commissionhearing and actions, testimony of the applicant,interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1.Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings: 1.That the Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity since the proposed project is consistent with the site’s zoning designation and will be subject to conformance with all applicable building, fire, and safety codes. PH2 - 7 Resolution No. _______________ (2015 Series) Attachment 1 Page 2 2.That, consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines, the Project iscompatible in scale, siting, detailing, and overall character with buildings in the neighborhood. 3.That, consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines, the Project incorporates articulation, massing,and a mix of color/finish materials thatare compatible with the neighborhood. SECTION 2.Environmental Review. The Planning Commission adopted a Negative Declaration (ER 25-13) of Environmental Impact on August 14, 2013 finding the Project to not have the potential for significant effects on the environment. SECTION 3.Action. The City Council hereby denies the appeal (filed by Linda White and Karen Adler) of the Architectural Review Commission’s approval of the design of the Project, and hereby approves the Project (File No. 25-13) subject to the following conditions: Planning Department – Community Development Department Condition(s) 1.Density for this project is limited to four 4-bedroom residences.A “Conditions of Use of Structure” agreementthat stipulates that each dwelling shall have no more than four bedrooms, as defined in the Zoning Regulations, will need to be signed in the presence of a notary and submitted prior to construction permit issuance.This agreement shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney. 2.Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the ARC. A separate full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit that list all conditions, and code requirements of project approval as Sheet No. 2. Reference should be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate. 3.Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed building surfaces and other improvements on elevation drawings. Plans shall clearly note that all stucco surfaces are not a sprayed-on product and have a smooth hand-troweled or sand finish appearance to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 4.Plans submitted for a building permit shall include window details indicating the type of materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other related window features. 5.The locations of all lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path lighting, shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All wall- mounted lighting shall complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the building shall include a graphic representation ofthe proposed lighting fixturesand cut- PH2 - 8 Resolution No. _______________ (2015 Series) Attachment 1 Page 3 sheets on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to insure that light is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s Night Sky Preservation standards contained in Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations. 6.Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With submittal of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building, which clearly show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If any condensers or other mechanical equipment isto be placed on the roof, plans submitted for a building permit shallconfirm that parapets and other roof features will adequately screen them. A line-of-sight diagram shall be included to confirm that proposed screening will be adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements. 7.Final landscape design and timing of installation shall be subject to the final approval of the Community Development and Utilities Directors. During this period of “drought emergency” the Director may defer installation of the final landscaping plan in-lieu of an alternative drought-tolerant landscape plan or a temporary landscape plan designed to control dust/erosion and maintain property aesthetics. a.A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department along with working drawings (installations may be required to be deferred as indicated above). The legend for the landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans. b.Any proposed landscape lighting shall be shown on plans submitted for a building permit and plans shall clearly indicate lighting to utilize a narrow cone of light (no brighter than approximately 15 watts) for the purpose of confining the light to the object of interest. c.Subject to the final approval of the Community Development Director, front yard areas shall include a landscape layout similar to that found along this portion of Grand Avenue which generally includes more open front yards which are not designed as primary outdoor space. The proposed 30 inch hedge shall be replaced with alternate landscaping. d.Front yard landscaping, but mainlylandscaping along the common access way, shall be of a sufficient height/density to screen parking spaces beyond (approximately 3 feet minimum height). 8.Plans submitted for a building permit shall include a final fencing plan indicating the fencing style, locations, and heights. 9.Final monument sign design and location shall be shown on plans submitted for a construction permit and shall be to the final approval of the CommunityDevelopment Director. If the sign is proposed to be illuminated, detailed plans for sign illumination shall PH2 - 9 Resolution No. _______________ (2015 Series) Attachment 1 Page 4 be included with the sign design and lighting shall be designed for consistency with the City’s Night Sky Preservation Ordinance and designed for durability. 10.The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipmentproposed. Where possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20 feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, the back flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street yard and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community Development Directors. 11.The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval by the City of this project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim, and City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim. 12.Plans submitted for a building permit shall include a minimum of five short-term bicycle parking spaces, subject to approval by the Community Development Director. Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development Department Condition(s) 13.The building plan submittal shall show compliance with all subdivision conditions of approval for the project. 14.The existing driveway approach that is to remain shall be verified as complying with ADA and City standards for accessibility. If not accessible, the approach shall be altered or upgraded to comply with current standards. The current City and ADA standard requires a 4’ sidewalk extension behind the ramp. 15.The building plan submittal shall show all required changes to the site plan for parking circulation to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. a.The proposed parallel parking space in front of Lot 1 shall be removed in favor of landscaping. The driveway/curb design for the common accessway between Lots 1 and 4 shall widen from 20-feet to a minimum of 24-feet, symmetrically. b.An additional parking space shall be provided in between Lots 3 and 4 (to account for the removal of the parallel parking space referenced in 1a above). The two parking spaces shall be lengthened to 24-feetfrom the property linealong the common access way. This dimension can assume 30-inches for vehicle overhang. PH2 - 10 Resolution No. _______________ (2015 Series) Attachment 1 Page 5 c.The two parking spaces in between Lots 1 and 2 shall be lengthened to 22-feet from the property linealong the common access way.This dimension can assume 30-inches for vehicle overhang. 16.The City Arborist shall approve all proposed tree removals prior to building permit issuance, demolition permits, and/or grading permit approvals. The trees may be removed if they are in decline, are creating damage to infrastructure, can’t be reasonably protected during demolitions, or are in areas of new construction and new tree plantings. The site development plan and parking layout shall consider potential tree preservations in the final design. 17.Trees located within the building footprints are approved for removal in conjunction with an approved building permit. The other existing sideyard trees shall be retained unless otherwise approved for removal by the City Arborist and Community DevelopmentDirector. A tree removal proposal may require a report from a certified arborist with a summary of why the trees can’t be saved. If approved for removal, compensatory tree planting(s) may be required to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. 18.The building plan submittal shall show all existing and proposed trees. Off-site trees with canopy or root systems located in the area of the new construction shall be shown for reference. The plan shall show all trees to remain and shall include appropriate tree preservation notes. 19.The final landscape plan shall agree with the architectural site plan and engineered grading and drainage plan. Plantings proposed for detention basin areas shall be evaluated and approved by the landscape designer and the City of San Luis Obispo. 20.One 15-gallon street tree shall be required for each 35 linear feet of frontage. The City Arborist shall approve the tree species, planting requirements, and whether the street trees shall be planted in tree wells in the sidewalk area or behind the back of walk in the front yard. 21.Tree protection measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The City arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection measures prior to commencing with any demolition, grading, or construction. Any safety pruning or cutting of substantial roots shall be approved by the city and completed by a city-approved arborist. Code Requirement(s) 22.Projects involving the construction of new structures requires that complete frontage improvements be installed or that existing improvements be upgraded per city standard. MC 12.16.050 23.Any section of damaged or displaced curb, gutter, sidewalk, or driveway approach shall be repaired or replaced to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. PH2 - 11 Resolution No. _______________ (2015 Series) Attachment 1 Page 6 24.Development shall comply with Parking and Driveway Standards for dimension, maneuverability, slopes, drainage, and materials. Alternative paving materials are recommended for water quality and/or quality control purposes and in the area of existing or proposed trees and where the driveway or parking area may occur within the dripline of any tree. Alternative paving materials shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. Fire Department Condition(s) 25.Condition: In addition to the address numbers on the buildings, a monument sign showing the address of each building shall be prominently located as to be clearly visible from Grand Avenue. Code Requirement(s) 26.Approved address numbers shall be placed on all new buildings in such a position to be plainly visible and legible from the street fronting the property. Numbers shall be a minimum of 5" high x 1/2" stroke and be on a contrasting background. 27.Fire protection systems shall be installed in accordance with the CFC and the California Building Code. An approved NFPA 13D systems will be required for each project building. Shop Drawings and Specifications shall be submitted for review and approval prior to installation. At least one pilot head will be required in the attic. 28.All new structures shall have ignition resistant siding, Class ‘A’ roof coverings, and eave and attic vent protection from ember intrusion complying with Chapter 7A of the building code/327R of the CRC in conformance with the City’s General Plan –Safety Element and adopted in the City Fire Code. 29.Buildings undergoing construction, alteration or demolition shall be in accordance with Chapter 14 of the CFC. Utilities Department Condition(s) 30.Sheet C-1 does not currently show the sewer laterals that serve either Lot 1 or Lot 4. Sheet C- 1 does not show how water service will be extended from the meter to either Lot 2 or Lot 3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include a plan that delineates the location of the property’s existing and proposed water meter(s), water services, and sewer laterals to the points of connection at the City water and sewer mains. 31.The property’s existing sewer laterals to the point of connection at the City main must pass a video inspection, including repair or replacement, as part of the project. The CCTV inspection shall be submitted during the Building Permit Review Process for review and approval by the Utilities Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit. PH2 - 12 Resolution No. _______________ (2015 Series) Attachment 1 Page 7 32.Private utility easements shall be provided for water and sewer infrastructure that is proposed to cross property lines (including water service and sewer lateral that crosses Lot 1 to serve Lot 2 and that crosses Lot 4 to serve lot 3). Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of June 2015. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH2 - 13 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH2 - 14 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 15 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 16 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 17 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 18 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 19 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 20 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 21 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 22 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 23 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 24 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 25 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 26 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 27 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 28 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 29 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 30 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 31 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 32 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 33 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 34 76+-8<=)4 )6,;+)8-!4)6 ' ' ' ' ! " %#!& #--!-41516):A:),16/!4)6 #" # # #$"$$"# #! #!#!" $( # %# #! #$ "# #" " !$## &! " %##%"# (" $(! ("$ $(! #$"$$"!% %$ $## $ !4)6<16/-;1/6 7<-; )6,;+)8-,-;1/6;0)44+7584A?1<0<0-1<A7.#)6 =1; *1;87 %61.7:5-;1/6:1<-:1) 44!4)6<5)<-:1)4;-4-+<-,;0)440)>-47?<75-,1=5?)<-::-9=1:-5-6<; 8-:'% #?1<0<0--@+-8<1767.<0-4)?6 $0-5)@15=5)8841-,?)<-: )447?)6+- ')6,-;<15)<-,?)<-:=;-$'%0)>-*--6+)4+=4)<-, $0-$'%1;4-;;<0)6<0- ';--;0--< 4484)6<16/*-,;;0)440)>-)51615=5 4)A-:7.7:/)61+5=4+0<0:7=/07=< <71587:>-?)<-::-<-6<17616;714 )',& '- ) "7;5):16=;7..1+16)41;0A*:1,; $-=+:1=5+0)5)-,:A; #)6<7416)+0)5)-+A8):1;;=; #)6<7416)>1:-6; 8<-61) )',& '- )#& *#&* )++0):1;814=4):1; "1*-;>1*=:61.741=5 ):-@;88 #,%%$$ )' $ # ,',*) )/6741) )2-;<1+-)=<A !4)<)6=;@)+-:1.741) )! # ,',*) !4)<)6=;@)+-:1.741) 4-,1<;1)<:1)+)6<07;-16-:51;0A*:1, #,%%$$ )' $ ') # ,',*) !1;<)+1)+016-6;1; !A:=;+)44-:A)6) :*=<=; ):16) %$$ &+) )/6741) 1<<4--5 )/-:;<:7-51).)=:-10A*:1, 01<)48)<);03-6<-6;1; "), * ) &&#$*.#+" '$') )>-6,-:;88 ):8-6<-:1)+)41.7:61+) -:*-:1;;88 1-<-;>-/-<) #)4>1)4-=+)6<0) #)4>1)/:-//11 -127);-447?1)6) :1/-:76/4)=+=; +0144-);88 -=+0-:);88 ) &"), * (()'/#%+ " #!"+ ")80174-81;16,1+)0A*:1, :->144-)0A*:1, :+<7;<)80A47;7?):, + 166 "0)56=;+)41.7:61+)>-);- 74-76-5)8=4+0:=5 A:1+)+)41.7:61+) *-41)@/:)6,1.47:) ! "), * " #!"+%/#%,% =76A5=;2)8761+=;#14>-:!:16+-;; =@=;;-58-:>1:-6; )<-:*-:/ A:<=;+755=61;?):. ) &+"* !7:7=; 8<176; -+7587;-,:)61<- !-):)>-4 !7:7=;!)>-:; $ $ $ $ : ) 6 , > - 6 = - 7:<0 #+)4- ):+0 ! " !! $0-"-;1,-6+-;)<:)6,>-6=- #)6 =1; *1;87)41.7:61) $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 35 ->E8 (?1>? ->E81?7@;< >-:0B1%1?,&!#$>1859)!#!#' 8:0?/</-8/ D8? %.'6.%5)%9006%.22.-)(#%5)3..18%0')#%0(45-/%5)( 15%.#%5)3!4) #! -5: 5%5)$-2 ';01@1>95:152<8-:@5:3?->1!;C";01>-@1;> 534C-@1>>1=A5>191:@<8-:@??111<@;2)-@1> %1?;A>/1?&<1/51?B-8A-@5;:!5?@4@@< CCC ?8;/5@E ;>3 A@585@51? 0;C:8;-0 ;A@0;;>/;: #%..104 15%.%0(4'%2)3)% #!0-54 63* 18316+,5 1.)3%05 #!%..104 1()3%5) #!!0-54 -+, ,-345: 21354-).( ")+)5%&.)4 B1>-31@;2;>&-:!A5?#.5?<;5@E 5:/41? E1-> "-:0-@10'-06A?@91:@2-/@;> ;:B1>?5;:2-/@;>3-88;:?@;?=A->1211@ !!-:0?/-<1>1- &!&<1/5-8!-:0?/-<1>1-?<;>@?25180B131@-.813->01: &!-06A?@91:@2-/@;> $ $8-:@ -/@;>2>;9)(#!& E0>;F;:1>1-?=A->1211@ >>53-@5;:225/51:/E (:5@?5885:3(:5@?;>3-88;:? ")@; * ! &!+ ')(@; $ &! ,) )4-()0')4%53%0(7)06) 1/2%0-)4 ->E8 (?1>? ->E81?7@;< >-:0B1%1?,&!#$>1859)!#!#' 8:0?/</-8/ D8? %.'6.%5)%9006%.22.-)(#%5)3..18%0')#%0(45-/%5)( 15%.#%5)3!4) #! -5: 5%5)$-2 ';01@1>95:152<8-:@5:3?->1!;C";01>-@1;> 534C-@1>>1=A5>191:@<8-:@??111<@;2)-@1> %1?;A>/1?&<1/51?B-8A-@5;:!5?@4@@< CCC ?8;/5@E ;>3 A@585@51? 0;C:8;-0 ;A@0;;>/;: #%..104 15%.%0(4'%2)3)% #!0-54 63* 18316+,5 1.)3%05 #!%..104 1()3%5) #!!0-54 -+, ,-345: 21354-).( ")+)5%&.)4 B1>-31@;2;>&-:!A5?#.5?<;5@E 5:/41? E1-> "-:0-@10'-06A?@91:@2-/@;> ;:B1>?5;:2-/@;>3-88;:?@;?=A->1211@ !!-:0?/-<1>1-&!&<1/5-8!-:0?/-<1>1-?<;>@?25180B131@-.813->01: &!-06A?@91:@2-/@;> $ $8-:@ -/@;>2>;9)(#!& E0>;F;:1>1-?=A->1211@ >>53-@5;:225/51:/E (:5@?5885:3(:5@?;>3-88;:? ")@; * ! &!+ ')(@; $ &! ,) )4-()0')4%53%0(7)06) 1/2%0-)4 ->E8 (?1>? ->E81?7@;< >-:0B1%1?,&!#$>1859)!#!#'8:0?/</-8/ D8? %.'6.%5)%9006%.22.-)(#%5)3..18%0')#%0(45-/%5)( 15%.#%5)3!4) #! -5: 5%5)$-2 ';01@1>95:152<8-:@5:3?->1!;C";01>-@1;> 534C-@1>>1=A5>191:@<8-:@??111<@;2)-@1> %1?;A>/1?&<1/51?B-8A-@5;:!5?@4@@< CCC ?8;/5@E ;>3 A@585@51? 0;C:8;-0 ;A@0;;>/;: #%..104 15%.%0(4'%2)3)% #!0-54 63* 18316+,5 1.)3%05 #!%..104 1()3%5) #!!0-54 -+, ,-345: 21354-).( ")+)5%&.)4 B1>-31@;2;>&-:!A5?#.5?<;5@E 5:/41? E1-> "-:0-@10'-06A?@91:@2-/@;> ;:B1>?5;:2-/@;>3-88;:?@;?=A->1211@ !!-:0?/-<1>1- &!&<1/5-8!-:0?/-<1>1-?<;>@?25180B131@-.813->01: &!-06A?@91:@2-/@;> $ $8-:@ -/@;>2>;9)(#!& E0>;F;:1>1-?=A->1211@ >>53-@5;:225/51:/E (:5@?5885:3(:5@?;>3-88;:? ")@; * ! &!+ ')(@; $ &! ,) )4-()0')4%53%0(7)06) 1/2%0-)4 ->E8 (?1>? ->E81?7@;< >-:0B1%1?,&!#$>1859)!#!#'8:0?/</-8/ D8? %.'6.%5)%9006%.22.-)(#%5)3..18%0')#%0(45-/%5)( 15%.#%5)3!4) #! -5: 5%5)$-2 ';01@1>95:152<8-:@5:3?->1!;C";01>-@1;> 534C-@1>>1=A5>191:@<8-:@??111<@;2)-@1> %1?;A>/1?&<1/51?B-8A-@5;:!5?@4@@< CCC ?8;/5@E ;>3 A@585@51? 0;C:8;-0 ;A@0;;>/;: #%..104 15%.%0(4'%2)3)% #!0-54 63* 18316+,5 1.)3%05 #!%..104 1()3%5) #!!0-54 -+, ,-345: 21354-).( ")+)5%&.)4 B1>-31@;2;>&-:!A5?#.5?<;5@E 5:/41? E1-> "-:0-@10'-06A?@91:@2-/@;> ;:B1>?5;:2-/@;>3-88;:?@;?=A->1211@ !!-:0?/-<1>1-&!&<1/5-8!-:0?/-<1>1-?<;>@?25180B131@-.813->01: &!-06A?@91:@2-/@;> $ $8-:@ -/@;>2>;9)(#!& E0>;F;:1>1-?=A->1211@ >>53-@5;:225/51:/E (:5@?5885:3(:5@?;>3-88;:? ")@; * ! &!+ ')(@; $ &! ,) )4-()0')4%53%0(7)06) 1/2%0-)4 /.%'045#,22+)#4+/.,#. " ! " " 22+)#4+/.'3+)./4'3 22+)#4+/.&'3+).3*#,,%/-0,97+4*4*'+49/( #.5+3$+30/ .+(/2-'3+).2+4'2+# !#4'23/52%'3*#,,$'%+497#4'27+4*#3'0#2#4'-'4'2(/2'#%*,/4 *'3934'-3*#,,%/.3+34/(+.,+.'&2+0'-+44'23,/76/,5-'0/050 302#9+22+)#4+/.*'#&33500,+'&7+4*5.&'2)2/5.&0+0+.)#%*%+2%5+4 3*#,,$'#*9&2/:/.'$#3'&/.5.+(/2-'80/352'#.&0,#.47#4'2 2'15+2'-'.43 !#4'2+.)4+-'33*#,,$')/6'2.'&$9#.#54/-#4+%%/.42/,,'2#.& #7'#4*'2-/.+4/2+.)&'6+%'4*#47+,,2'&5%'7#4'2+.)$#3'&/. 7'#4*'2'6'.43#.&4'-0'2#452'3 2 # . & 6 ' . 5 ' /24* %#,' #2%* ! " !! *' '3+&'.%'3#42#.&6'.5' #.5+3$+30/#,+(/2.+# $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 36 ෘ $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 37 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH2 - 38 $WW D F K P H Q W PH2 - 39 Att a c h m e n t 3 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH2 - 40 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 41 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 42 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 43 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 44 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 45 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 46 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 47 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 48 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 49 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 50 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 51 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH2 - 52 &LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW 3DOP6WUHHW6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ VORFLW\RUJ )HEUXDU\ 5\DQ3HWHWLWDQG-RKQ%HOVKHU 0DUVK6WUHHW 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ 68%-(&7 $5& *UDQG$YHQXH Review of four new single-family residences in a previously- approved four-lot subdivision with an exemption from CEQA 'HDU0U3HWHWLWDQG0U%HOVKHU 7KH$UFKLWHFWXUDO5HYLHZ&RPPLVVLRQDWLWVPHHWLQJRI-DQXDU\FRQWLQXHG DFWLRQRQ\RXUSURMHFWWRDGDWHXQFHUWDLQZLWKWKHIROORZLQJGLUHFWLRQDOLWHPV Planning Division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ire Department 3URYLGHDPRQXPHQWVLJQSRVLWLRQHGWREHFOHDUO\YLVLEOHIURP*UDQGDYHQXHDQG VKRZLQJWKHDGGUHVVRIHDFKEXLOGLQJ ,I\RXKDYHDQ\TXHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFW0DUFXV&DUORQLDW 6LQFHUHO\ 3KLO'XQVPRUH$,&3 6HQLRU3ODQQHU FF &RXQW\RI6/2$VVHVVRU¶V2IILFH 6WHYH5LJRU $UULV6WXGLR$UFK -RKQVRQ$YHQXH 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ -RKQ:%HOVKHU75((7$/ FR%HOVKHU%HFNHU $VVRF 32%R[ 3LVPR%HDFK&$ $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 54 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 55 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 56 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 57 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 58 RESOLUTION NO. ARC-1006-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVING PLANS FOR FOUR NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS (NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION ON AUGUST 14, 2013), AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED APRIL 6, 2015 (323/353 GRAND AVENUE, R-1 ZONE, ARC 25-13) :+(5($6RQ$SULOWKH$UFKLWHFWXUDO5HYLHZ&RPPLVVLRQRIWKH&LW\RI6DQ /XLV2ELVSRFRQGXFWHGDSXEOLFKHDULQJLQWKH&RXQFLO&KDPEHURI&LW\+DOO 3DOP6WUHHW 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&DOLIRUQLDIRUWKHSXUSRVHRIGHVLJQUHYLHZIRUIRXUQHZVLQJOHIDPLO\ UHVLGHQFHVDQGDVVRFLDWHGVLWHLPSURYHPHQWV WKH³3URMHFW´ LQVWLWXWHGXQGHU$5&3% &RPSDQLHV ³$SSOLFDQW´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¶V]RQLQJ GHVLJQDWLRQDQGZLOOEHVXEMHFWWRFRQIRUPDQFHZLWKDOODSSOLFDEOHEXLOGLQJILUHDQGVDIHW\ FRGHV 7KDWFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKH&LW\¶V&RPPXQLW\'HVLJQ*XLGHOLQHVWKH3URMHFWLVFRPSDWLEOHLQ VFDOHVLWLQJGHWDLOLQJDQGRYHUDOOFKDUDFWHUZLWKEXLOGLQJVLQWKHQHLJKERUKRRG 7KDWFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKH&LW\¶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lanning Department 'HQVLW\IRUWKLVSURMHFWLVOLPLWHGWRIRXUEHGURRPUHVLGHQFHV$³&RQGLWLRQVRI8VHRI 6WUXFWXUH´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¶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¶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³,QGHPQLILHG&ODLPV´ 7KH&LW\VKDOOSURPSWO\QRWLI\WKHDSSOLFDQWRIDQ\ $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 61 5HVROXWLRQ1R$5& *UDQG$YHQXH$5& 3DJH ,QGHPQLILHG&ODLPXSRQEHLQJSUHVHQWHGZLWKWKH,QGHPQLILHG&ODLPDQG&LW\VKDOOIXOO\ FRRSHUDWHLQWKHGHIHQVHDJDLQVWDQ,QGHPQLILHG&ODLP 3ODQVVXEPLWWHGIRUDEXLOGLQJSHUPLWVKDOOLQFOXGHDPLQLPXPRIILYHVKRUWWHUPELF\FOH SDUNLQJVSDFHVVXEMHFWWRDSSURYDOE\WKH&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW'LUHFWRU Engineering Division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¶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¶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¶WEHVDYHG,IDSSURYHGIRUUHPRYDOFRPSHQVDWRU\WUHH SODQWLQJ V PD\EHUHTXLUHGWRWKHVDWLVIDFWLRQRIWKH&LW\$UERULVW 7KHEXLOGLQJSODQVXEPLWWDOVKDOOVKRZDOOH[LVWLQJDQGSURSRVHGWUHHV2IIVLWHWUHHVZLWK FDQRS\RUURRWV\VWHPVORFDWHGLQWKHDUHDRIWKHQHZFRQVWUXFWLRQVKDOOEHVKRZQIRU UHIHUHQFH7KHSODQVKDOOVKRZDOOWUHHVWRUHPDLQDQGVKDOOLQFOXGHDSSURSULDWHWUHH SUHVHUYDWLRQQRWHV 7KHILQDOODQGVFDSHSODQVKDOODJUHHZLWKWKHDUFKLWHFWXUDOVLWHSODQDQGHQJLQHHUHGJUDGLQJ DQGGUDLQDJHSODQ3ODQWLQJVSURSRVHGIRUGHWHQWLRQEDVLQDUHDVVKDOOEHHYDOXDWHGDQG DSSURYHGE\WKHODQGVFDSHGHVLJQHUDQGWKH&LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR 2QHJDOORQVWUHHWWUHHVKDOOEHUHTXLUHGIRUHDFKOLQHDUIHHWRIIURQWDJH7KH&LW\ $UERULVWVKDOODSSURYHWKHWUHHVSHFLHVSODQWLQJUHTXLUHPHQWVDQGZKHWKHUWKHVWUHHWWUHHV VKDOOEHSODQWHGLQWUHHZHOOVLQWKHVLGHZDONDUHDRUEHKLQGWKHEDFNRIZDONLQWKHIURQW \DUG 7UHHSURWHFWLRQPHDVXUHVVKDOOEHLPSOHPHQWHGWRWKHVDWLVIDFWLRQRIWKH&LW\$UERULVW7KH &LW\DUERULVWVKDOOUHYLHZDQGDSSURYHWKHSURSRVHGWUHHSURWHFWLRQPHDVXUHVSULRUWR FRPPHQFLQJZLWKDQ\GHPROLWLRQJUDGLQJRUFRQVWUXFWLRQ$Q\VDIHW\SUXQLQJRUFXWWLQJ RIVXEVWDQWLDOURRWVVKDOOEHDSSURYHGE\WKHFLW\DQGFRPSOHWHGE\DFLW\DSSURYHG DUERULVW Fire Department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tilities Department 6KHHW&GRHVQRWFXUUHQWO\VKRZWKHVHZHUODWHUDOVWKDWVHUYHHLWKHU/RWRU/RW6KHHW &GRHVQRWVKRZKRZZDWHUVHUYLFHZLOOEHH[WHQGHGIURPWKHPHWHUWRHLWKHU/RWRU/RW 3ODQVVXEPLWWHGIRUDEXLOGLQJSHUPLWVKDOOLQFOXGHDSODQWKDWGHOLQHDWHVWKHORFDWLRQRI WKHSURSHUW\¶VH[LVWLQJDQGSURSRVHGZDWHUPHWHU V ZDWHUVHUYLFHVDQGVHZHUODWHUDOVWR WKHSRLQWVRIFRQQHFWLRQDWWKH&LW\ZDWHUDQGVHZHUPDLQV 7KHSURSHUW\¶VH[LVWLQJVHZHUODWHUDOVWRWKHSRLQWRIFRQQHFWLRQDWWKH&LW\PDLQPXVWSDVV DYLGHRLQVSHFWLRQLQFOXGLQJUHSDLURUUHSODFHPHQWDVSDUWRIWKHSURMHFW7KH&&79 LQVSHFWLRQVKDOOEHVXEPLWWHGGXULQJWKH%XLOGLQJ3HUPLW5HYLHZ3URFHVVIRUUHYLHZDQG DSSURYDOE\WKH8WLOLWLHV'HSDUWPHQWSULRUWRLVVXDQFHRID%XLOGLQJ3HUPLW 3ULYDWHXWLOLW\HDVHPHQWVVKDOOEHSURYLGHGIRUZDWHUDQGVHZHULQIUDVWUXFWXUHWKDWLV SURSRVHGWRFURVVSURSHUW\OLQHV LQFOXGLQJZDWHUVHUYLFHDQGVHZHUODWHUDOWKDWFURVVHV/RW WRVHUYH/RWDQGWKDWFURVVHV/RWWRVHUYHORW Note: Code requirements provided to applicant separately. 2QPRWLRQE\&RPPLVVLRQHU$QGUHHQVHFRQGHGE\&RPPLVVLRQHU1HPFLNDQGRQWKH IROORZLQJUROOFDOOYRWH $<(6 &RPPUV$QGUHHQ1HPFLN5RRW(KGDLHDQG:\QQ 12(6 &RPPUV&XUWLVDQG6ROO 5()5$,1 1RQH $%6(17 1RQH 7KHIRUHJRLQJUHVROXWLRQZDVSDVVHGDQGDGRSWHGWKLVWKGD\RI$SULO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 3KLO'XQVPRUH6HFUHWDU\ $UFKLWHFWXUDO5HYLHZ&RPPLVVLRQ $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 64 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 65 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 66 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 67 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 68 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 69 $WWDFKPHQW PH2 - 70 Attachment 8 RESOLUTION NO. (2015Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO UPHOLDINGAN APPEAL (FILED BY LINDA WHITE AND KAREN ADLER) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION’S DESIGN APPROVAL; THEREBY DENYING THE DESIGNS OF FOUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED JUNE 2, 2015 (323/353 GRAND AVENUE, R-1 ZONE, FILE NO. 25-13) WHEREAS, on January 21, 2015, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo, California,for the purpose of design review for four new single-family residences and associated site improvements (the “Project”)instituted under ARC 25-13, PB Companies (“Applicant”) and continued the project to a date uncertain with five directional items for modifications to the Project; and WHEREAS,on April 6, 2015, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamberof City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, and granted design approval for the Project; and WHEREAS,on April 15, 2015, Linda White and Karen Adler filed an appeal of the Architectural Review Commission’s approval of the design of the Project; and WHEREAS, on June 2, 2015, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering the April 15, 2015 appeal of the Architectural Review Commission’saction; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of the Architectural Review Commissionhearing and actions, testimony of the applicant,interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1.Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings: 1.That the Project will be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity. 2.That the scale and mass of the proposed homes will have a negative impact on the existing neighborhood, inconsistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines. PH2 - 71 Resolution No. _______________ (2015 Series) Attachment 8 Page 2 3.That the proposed home designs are not compatible with the overall character of the neighborhood, inconsistent with the Community Design Guidelines. SECTION 2.Action. The City Council hereby denies the proposed project and therefore upholds the appeal (filed by Linda White and Karen Adler) of the Architectural Review Commission’s action. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of June 2015. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH2 - 72 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director Prepared By: Aaron Floyd, Deputy Director, Water Brigitte Elke, Utilities Business Manager Ron Munds, Utilities Services Manager SUBJECT: DROUGHT RESPONSE STRATEGY RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve a drought response strategy(Attachment 1) for the City of San Luis Obispo; 2. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 2) declaring a drought emergency; and 3. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 4) to defer new landscape installation or the use of modified landscape plans during the drought emergency; and 4. Introduce an ordinance (Attachment 3) amending Chapter 13.07 of the City’s Municipal Code to include two-day-a-week and time of day restrictions for outdoor watering; and 5. Conceptually approve an incentive program for high efficiency toilets and washing machines; and 6. Adopt a resolution establishing a permit fee for the use of the Corporation Yard non- potable groundwater well; and 7. Approve the augmentation of the 2015-16 proposed budget for Utilities Services by $179,000 for expenditures related to the drought response strategy. REPORT IN BRIEF In response to the Governor’s Executive Order B-29-15 and the mandatory reductions set by the State Water Resources Control Board on May 5, 2015, a drought response strategy has been developed. The initial program to meet the mandated requirements and respond to the local water conditions will: 1. Be focused on achieving voluntary compliance, as opposed to a mandatory rationing program; 2. Rely on active enforcement of the water waste prohibitions; 3. Limit outdoor watering to two days a week and only between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.; 4. Defer landscape planting or provide modified landscape plans for new development that significantly reduce water demand; 5. Implement and effective and engaging public information and education; and 6. Establish regulations on the use of the City’s corporation yard non-potable groundwater well. If voluntary measures are not achieving the state-mandated water use reductions, staff will return to City Council with a recommendation to implement mandatory water rationing as outlined in the City’s Urban Water Management Plan, Section 8: Water Shortage Contingency Plan. June 2, 2015 PH3 PH3 - 1 Drought Response Strategy Page 2 A key part of the strategy is City Council declaring a drought emergency (Attachment 2) per City’s Municipal Code Chapter 13.070.030 Council water conservation. This will allow the City to quickly respond and implement further reduction measures related to current and future drought conditions. Part of the drought emergency strategy includes reestablishing a high efficiency toilet and washing machine rebate program. The City proposes to create a $100,000 rebate fund and offer $100 rebates for property owners who retrofit their homes with high efficiency toilets and/or washing machines. It is also proposed to establish guidelines and a fee structure for use of the Corporation Yard groundwater well. The guidelines would include an eligibility requirement to use the well to properties only within the San Luis Valley Groundwater Basin. It is proposed that the fee for inside the City property owners would be $50.00 and $350.00 for outside the City property owners. DISCUSSION Background In response to the unprecedented drought conditions experienced statewide for the past four years, Governor Brown declared a drought emergency on January 17, 2014. As part of the response, the Governor directed the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) to draft water conservation regulations to respond to the emergency. In July 2014, the State Water Board adopted regulations prohibiting water waste and issued directives to reduce water use statewide. On March 17, 2015, the State Water Board extended the 2014 emergency regulations and added new measures in response to the continuing drought conditions. On April 1, 2015, the Governor issued Executive Order B-29-15 mandating increased enforcement against water waste and declared a statewide water use reduction goal of 25 percent. On May 5, 2015, the State Water Board adopted regulations that require specific water purveyors to reduce water use by 8 percent to 36 percent compared to their 2013 water usage in order to facilitate the statewide reduction of 25 percent. The amount of the mandated reduction is dependent on the water purveyor’s reduction in comparison to 2013. The City’s required reduction is 12 percent, which when achieved, would equate to citywide per capita water demand of 101 gallons per person per day. The City’s 2014 per capita water demand was 108 gallons per person per day. In addition to the state requirements, staff has been closely monitoring the City’s three primary water supplies (i.e. Whale Rock, Salinas and Nacimiento Reservoirs). Until April 2015, the City’s Water Projection Model, which is used to predict water storage capacity, incorporated climatic information from the 1986 to 1990 drought conditions (worst case drought on record). Using this data, the Water Resources Status Report published in October 2014 estimated the City had seven years of supply available. In December 2014, the water projection model indicated six years of supply. Although a few early season precipitation events provided measurable rainfall, the 2014-15 rainy season ended at about 50 percent of normal, following 2013-14 - the lowest rainfall year in PH3 - 2 Drought Response Strategy Page 3 recorded history. Because of the severity of the drought conditions, climatic data for 2012, 2013 and 2014 was analyzed to see if these conditions should be considered as the new “worst case scenario” used in the model. At the conclusion of the analysis, it was determined that the 2012- 14 time period was the new appropriate factors for determining the City’s available water resources under worst case drought conditions. The new information has been incorporated into the model and based on that analysis, indicates the City has approximately a 3.5 year supply of water (as of April 2015) if the community continues at its current consumption level of 108 gallons per person per day. An additional analysis of the data reveals that the City will have approximately a 4.5 year supply of water if the community successfully achieves water conservations goals mandated by the State. The primary conditions that influenced the model are: 1. The impacts of the Nacimiento pipeline being down for ten months; 2. The historic lack of rainfall in 2013 followed by a about 50 percent of normal rainfall in 2014 which severely impacted inflow and water storage in Whale Rock and Salinas Reservoirs; and 3. The above-average temperatures coupled with windy conditions further increased evaporation. It is important to note that the Water Projection Model has many assumptions built in, including the City’s 1% percent per year growth rate. Staff will continue to monitor the 2015 reservoir data and adjust the model accordingly as the next rainy season approaches. Drought Response Strategy The citizenry of San Luis Obispo has made water conservation an integral part of the community’s culture and policy context for managing its water resources. The community has previously demonstrated full commitment to reducing water use during drought. Attachment 1 outlines the recommended drought response strategy and incorporates the state’s mandated water use reductions and regulations. The initial program to meet the state-mandated requirements and local water conditions will: 1. Be focused on achieving voluntary compliance, as opposed to a mandatory rationing program; and 2. Rely on active enforcement of the water waste prohibitions; and 3. Limit outdoor watering to two days a week and only between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.; and 4. Defer new landscape planting for new development or require development to install landscaping that provides a significant reduction in water demand (e.g. a minimum of 50%) as compared to a conventional landscaping during normal water years; 5. Include aggressive public information and education; and 6. Establish regulations on the use of the City’s corporation yard non-potable groundwater well. PH3 - 3 Drought Response Strategy Page 4 If voluntary measures are not achieving the state-mandated water use reductions, staff will return to City Council with a recommendation to implement mandatory water rationing as outlined in the City’s Urban Water Management Plan, Section 8: Water Shortage Contingency Plan. A key part of the strategy is for the City Council to declare a drought emergency (Attachment 2) per the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 13.070.030 Council water conservation. This will allow the City Council to quickly respond and further implement regulatory requirements and future drought conditions as needed. Since the City will be potentially liable for fines up to $10,000 a day if it does meet the state- mandated water use reductions, staff will be closely monitoring the community’s month-to- month water use. Staff will assess water reduction trends and rapidly identify and take action to engage with water users that may need additional outreach and assistance. If, after engaging with water users to achieve the cutbacks voluntarily, the water use data shows the community is not voluntarily responding to the mandated cutbacks, staff will return to the City Council with a recommendation to implement a mandatory conservation and rationing program. The City has a three-stage Water Shortage Contingency Plan, adopted by City Council as part of the 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, which is based on the experiences from the last prolonged drought which lasted from 1987 to 1991. The plan calls for the City to enter into mandatory water use restrictions when three years of water supply remain available. The following describes the elements of the City’s Drought Response Strategy: 1. Deferral or Significantly Reducing Water Demand for New Development The state regulations adopted on May 5, 2015 ban the installation of all spray irrigation systems in newly built homes and buildings until the Governor’s Executive Order is rescinded. Drip and micro-spray system s are allowed. These regulations coupled with the recommendation to limit outdoor irrigation to two days a week and time of day to irrigate (Attachment 3) will severely restrict what can be planted and watered during the drought emergency period. Since new landscape installation will be limited by these factors, it is recommended that new development be given the option to either: a) Defer the installation of a new landscape that is required as part of a building permit, architectural review, use permit, subdivision or planned development. Applicants will be required to submit an interim plan designed to control dust/erosion and maintain the property aesthetics during the deferral period. The interim landscape will need to be replaced by permanent landscape within 90 days once the drought emergency is rescinded. A suitable guarantee (bond or other financial surety) will be required to ensure the landscape is installed at the appropriate time; or b) Provide an alternative landscape plan that can be irrigated within the limitations set by the City and the State (i.e. Irrigated two days a week; no overhead spray irrigation) and PH3 - 4 Drought Response Strategy Page 5 meet a performance requirement of reducing water demand as compared to a typical water budget during normal water years by a minimum of 50%. The alternative landscape plan allows for the installation of the landscape during the deferral period as a permanent alternative but must be approved by the City. If approved, the applicant is relieved from posting a guarantee. It is recommended in the Resolution that the deferral begin July 1, 2015 (Attachment 4). This will allow time for the Community Development Department to notify applicants of the new requirements and establish procedures. 2. Property Maintenance Standards during the Drought Emergency Concerns have been expressed regarding the enforcement of the Property Maintenance Standards during the drought emergency, specifically if a property owner is decreasing their irrigation to comply with the two day a week outdoor watering restrictions. One of the objectives of the Property Maintenance Standards is to prevent overgrown or dead vegetation from becoming a fire hazard and to maintain aesthetics and. A strict interpretation of the standards defines dead vegetation as a violation of the property maintenance requirements. It is important to understand that with a voluntary water conservation program and the ability to water two days a week, a property owner should be able to marginally maintain a landscape to keep both turf and other vegetation alive. If more stringent measures are necessary in the future, this issue may need to be revisited. City staff will actively work with property owners to ensure that a property is able to comply with the City’s water conservation requirements and adopted Property Maintenance Standards. No changes or deferrals to the Property Maintenance Standards are required at this time. 3. Water Savings Incentive Programs The City has previously had several different incentive/rebate programs supporting water conservation that ran from 1990 to 2011. The following is a recap of those programs: Program Year Savings/Year Low flow toilet/faucet/shower head (includes Building Offset Program) 1990-2007 1,483 acre feet High efficiency washing machine 2000-2011 14.11 acre feet High efficiency sprinkler heads 2007-2010 (not quantifiable) Weather based irrigation controllers 2007-2010 (not quantifiable) The reestablishment of the high efficiency toilet and washing machine rebate programs is proposed since both provide well-documented water savings, are easy to administer and have guidelines and procedures developed. It is recommended that the water savings incentive program be funded in fiscal year 2015-16 in the amount of $100,000 and the incentive amount be $100 for either the new toilet and/or new washer. This program will be incorporated into the Water Fund analysis which will be presented to the City Council for its consideration on June 16, 2015. PH3 - 5 Drought Response Strategy Page 6 There have been requests to provide turf replacement incentives. During a drought emergency, encouraging the installation of replacement landscaping will likely not yield the desired net water reduction objectives. Additionally, a recently released white paper on turf replacement programs commissioned by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (available as a Council Reading File) determined that these types of programs provide marginal water savings and the costs per water savings are expensive if compared to other incentive programs. Moreover, City staff feels that the limitations on outdoor irrigation will inherently incentivize individuals to seriously consider turf alternatives. For these reasons a turf replacement program is not recommended. 4. Corporation Yard Non-Potable Water Well The Corporation Yard well was established during the drought of 1987-1991 to serve as an alternative source of water for construction-related activities (prior to the City’s recycled water program). Over the years, the well, which was minimally monitored, has been used by both San Luis Obispo citizens and properties from outside the City for various purposes ranging from landscape irrigation to water for livestock. Because of the current extreme drought conditions, many property owners from outside the City limits have become reliant on the well for domestic non-potable water uses such as flushing toilets. On May 15, 2015, the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance that bans the exportation of water outside a groundwater basin. Though the new regulations do not directly apply to the City, it is recommended that City Council approve a program for use during this drought emergency that allows the use of the well for certain non-potable uses to property owners within the San Luis Valley Groundwater Basin with boundaries as defined by the Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118 (Attachment 5). By doing so, the water supplied by the well will stay within the groundwater basin of origin and be consistent with the regional policy framework that seeks to provide comprehensive management of water resources in the County of San Luis Obispo. The program’s general guidelines are as follows: 1. Eligible Water Users: Eligible users are property owners within the San Luis Valley Groundwater Basin (boundaries as defined by the Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118). 2. Allowed Water Uses: Since the water is non-potable, outside-the-City limits users can only use the water for essential domestic purposes such as toilet flushing, laundry, and livestock. The water cannot be used for agriculture, landscape, construction and/or for drinking water. Inside-the-City users can use the water for any non-potable purpose except construction. Landscape watering will be allowed inside the City limits. Recycled water will be used for all major construction and by permit only (separate permit and fee). PH3 - 6 Drought Response Strategy Page 7 3. Application Procedures: A user application summarizing the requirements will be filled out and verified by the Utilities Department for eligible users. A key to operate the well and a permit, which will need to be displayed while utilizing the well, will be issued to the approved user. 4. Fees: The annual fee (Attachment 6) for access to the well is $350 for outside-the-city limit users and $50 for inside-the-City users. The fee is based on the cost of administering the program and operating and maintaining the well. Annual Fee Inside the City Permit Fee $50.00 Outside the City $350.00 5. Enforcement: Failure to adhere to the guidelines of the program will result in revocation of the permit and forfeiture of access to the well. When the drought emergency is rescinded by the City Council, the well will no longer be accessible to the public. If traffic issues, safety, abuses, or other similar concerns related to the well occur, the use and operation of the well may be further regulated or shut down at the discretion of the Utilities Director. CONCURRENCES The Community Development Department concurs with the recommendations made in this report. FISCAL IMPACT The program responsible for the implementation of drought-related measures is Utilities Services. In order to fulfill the education components, the state-mandated enforcement measures, and other related activities, a temporary full-time employee was hired to assist the current team of three technicians with this unexpected workload. 2014-15 expenditures in the amount of $8,500 will be paid for by overall staffing savings in the Water Fund. For 2015-16, staff recommends that the position be funded until approximately November 2015 (aligned with the 2015-16 rainy season) at a cost of $19,000. Material and staff overtime to support 2015-16 outreach and education efforts will cost an additional $60,000 and $100,000 will be provided for the incentive program beginning July 1, 2015. Since the cost to support the drought strategy was not available when the preliminary 2015-17 Financial Plan budget went to print, staff recommends augmenting the proposed Utilities Service’s program budget by $179,000 using Water Fund unreserved working capital. If this item is approved, staff will recommend that the preliminary budget should be amended to reflect these costs during the enterprise fund reviews which will be held on June 16th. PH3 - 7 Drought Response Strategy Page 8 ALTERNATIVES 1. Drought Response Strategy. The Council could choose to add additional prohibitions or other strategies to enhance the overall approach and/or direct staff to implement a mandatory conservation program now as opposed to the voluntary approach recommended in this report. The City’s adopted Water Shortage Contingency Plan does not call for mandatory measures until there is a projected three year supply of water; based on the updated water projection model there is currently three and one half years of supply. 2. Deferral of New Landscape Planting. The Council could choose not to adopt the Resolution at this time and delay adoption until the Water Shortage Contingency Plan recommends mandatory conservation. Despite the voluntary nature of the water use reductions that are being recommended, the state-mandated water reductions reduce the watering days to a level that makes it difficult to establish landscape plantings. The landscape deferral program provides reasonable alternatives to new developments. 3. Water Saving Incentive Program. The Council could choose to either not approve or modify the fiscal component of the recommended incentive program. It could also choose to expand the program to include other incentives such as turf replacement. 4. Corporation Yard Well. The Council could chose to limit the use of the well to in-City users only, amend the amount of the fee or restrictions on use. It could choose to direct staff to shut down the use of the well immediately. ATTACHMENTS 1. Drought Response Strategy 2. Drought Declaration Resolution 3. Ordinance Amending Chapter 13.070.030 of the Municipal Code 4. Deferral of New Landscape Planting Resolution 5. San Luis Valley Groundwater Basin map 6. Resolution establishing a permit fee for the use of the Corporation Yard groundwater well AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE CUWCC White Paper - Turf Removal and Replacement – Lessons Learned T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-06-02\Drought Response Strategy PH3 - 8 Drought Response Strategy Current Situation In response to the unprecedented drought conditions experienced statewide for the past four years, Governor Brown declared a drought emergency on January 17, 2014. As part of the response, the Governor directed the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) to draft water conservation regulations to respond to the emergency. In July 2014, the State Water Board adopted regulations prohibiting water waste and issued directives to reduce water use statewide. On March 17, 2015, the State Water Board extended the 2014 emergency regulations and added new measures in response to the continuing drought conditions. On April 1, 2015, the Governor issued Executive Order B-29-15 mandating increased enforcement against water waste and declared a statewide water use reduction goal of 25 percent. On May 5, 2015, the State Water Board adopted regulations that require specific water purveyors to reduce water use by 8 percent to 36 percent compared to their 2013 water usage in order to facilitate the statewide reduction of 25 percent. The amount of the mandated reduction is dependent on the water purveyor’s reduction in comparison to 2013. The City’s required reduction is 12 percent, which when achieved, would equate to citywide per capita water demand of 101 gallons per person per day. The City’s 2014 per capita water demand was 108 gallons per person per day. In addition to the state requirements, staff has been closely monitoring the City’s three primary water supplies, Whale Rock, Salinas and Nacimiento Reservoirs. The City utilizes a Water Projection Model to predict the City’s water storage capacity. Until recently, the model incorporated climatic information from the 1986 to 1990 drought conditions (worst case drought on record). Using this data, the Water Resources Status Report published in October 2014 indicated the City had about seven years of supply available. In December 2014, the model showed six years of supply. Although early rainfall events were strong, the 2014-15 rainy season ended at about 50 percent of normal, following 2013-14 - the lowest rainfall year in recorded history. Because of the severity of the drought conditions, climatic data for 2012, 2013 and 2014 was analyzed to see if current conditions should be considered as the new “worst case scenario” used in the model. City staff determined that the 2012-14 time period was indeed the new appropriate parameter for determining the City’s available water resources. The new information has been incorporated into the model and, based on this analysis, the model indicates the City has approximately a 3.5 year supply of water (as of April 2015) if the community continues at its current consumption level of 108 gallons per person per day. The primary conditions that have influenced the model are: 1. The impacts of the Nacimiento pipeline being down for ten months; and 2. The historic lack of rainfall in 2013 followed by about 50 percent below normal in 2014 which severely impacted inflow and water storage; and 3. The above-average temperatures coupled with windy conditions which increased evaporation. PH3 - 9 Drought Response Strategy Attachment 1 Page 2 Staff will continue to monitor the 2015 reservoir data and adjust the model based on any changes in factors. Action Plan In response to the state-mandated water waste prohibitions and water use reductions and local water supply conditions the City will use the following strategies to reduce water use citywide. Drought Declaration City Council will be requested to declare a drought emergency consistent with Chapter 13.07.030 of the City’s Municipal Code in order to comply with the Governor’s Executive Order. This will allow the Council to implement measures as deemed appropriate to protect the City’s water supply. Water Use Prohibitions Since July 2014, the State Water Board has adopted and directed the enforcement of many water waste prohibitions statewide. Many of the prohibitions were already in the City’s Municipal Code. Community members and city personnel are important partners in preventing and identifying water waste. The Utilities Department’s Utilities Services section is responsible for the oversight and enforcement of the prohibitions. The following is a list of the water prohibitions: Using potable water to wash sidewalks and driveways; Allowing runoff when irrigating with potable water Using hoses with no shutoff nozzles to wash cars Using potable water in decorative water features that do not recirculate the water Irrigating outdoors during and within 48 hours following measurable rainfall Irrigation with potable water of ornamental turf on public street medians is prohibited Irrigation with potable water outside of newly constructed homes and buildings not delivered by drip or micro-spray is prohibited Limit outdoor irrigation to two days per week (recommended) Restaurants are prohibited from serving water to customers unless the customer requests it Hotels and motels must offer guests the option to not have linens and towels laundered daily, and prominently display this option in each guest room PH3 - 10 Drought Response Strategy Attachment 1 Page 3 Other City State Mandated Requirements • Notify customers about leaks that are within the customer's control; • Report on water use monthly by customer class; and • Report on compliance and enforcement Enforcement and Fines Primary enforcement of the prohibitions will done by the Utilities Services section, though the state regulations state that any peace officer or employee of a public agency charged with enforcing laws and authorized to do so by ordinance may issue a citation to a violator. In general, the philosophy on enforcement will be to gain compliance through assistance and education with fines being the last resort. The Enforcement Response process listed below will be followed: 1. Initial contact of water waste violation either by direct contact, telephone or written notice left at the property explaining the nature of the problem and the technical assistance available to resolve the issue. 2. If the violation continues, a formal written notice of violation will be issued explaining the nature of the violation and a time period in which the violation must be corrected. 3. If after the issuance of a formal written notice of violation is given, the problem continues, a fine will be assessed starting at $100 and escalating up to $500 for non- compliance. City Facilities and Operations City offices, parks and other facilities, unless served by recycled water, will be required to reduce potable water use reduction in alignment with the mandate. Parks and facilities with potable outdoor irrigation will be targeted for a higher percentage of water use reductions while offices and other facilities with mostly indoor water use will be provided with employee outreach materials explaining the water reduction mandates and tips on how to do their share to reduce. Other strategies include: • Working with large events to require porta-potties (closure of the bathroom facilities); examples of events would include Blues games at Sinsheimer Stadium and all events in Mission Plaza; and • Substantially decreasing the irrigation of non-essential turf areas around facilities like City Hall resulting in brown lawns; and • Water audits of City buildings to determine if there are additional water saving opportunities beyond what has been done in the past. Priority for water use will be given to: • Safety mainly as it relates to play fields • High use areas like Mission Plaza • Preserving trees in parks and other areas PH3 - 11 Drought Response Strategy Attachment 1 Page 4 An internal city drought team has been formed to monitor the City’s water use, inform employees on the progress being made and to make recommendations to enhance the City’s water conservation activities. The Council will receive updates and other pertinent information from the drought team regarding the effectiveness of the drought response plan on a regular basis (to be determined). Public Outreach and Education A key to successfully reaching the state mandated water use reduction is a comprehensive public outreach and education program. The strategy will use a combination of in-house and external resources to communicate the water conservation message. Examples of strategies are: • Expanded website presence with interactive tools and videos to help water users reduce use • Expanded social media presence • Event participation (Farmer’s Market, SLO Expo, etc.) • Newsletters and other printed material • Individual consultation with Utilities Services technicians • Traditional media (radio, television) • Coordination with special interest groups like the Chamber of Commerce, Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, etc. New Development New landscape associated with a planning or building application will be deferred until the drought emergency is rescinded by City Council, unless it is irrigated with recycled water or an alternative landscape plan that substantially reduces water use (i.e. 50% or greater) and is approved by the Community Development Director. Such landscaping shall be irrigated with only drip emitters, micro spray or equivalent water saving devices. The emphasis for this program will be on water efficient landscaping, however, if deferred, bonding or another financial surety will be required to be posted by building applicants to assure the landscape is installed after the drought emergency is rescinded. In addition, an interim landscape plan will be required to control dust/erosion and maintain property aesthetics for any deferments. Implementation of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan If, through the use of the above strategies, the community is not on track to meet the required water use reductions during the summer when there is the most potential to decrease water usage as compared to the same time period in 2013, implementation of the City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan will be necessary. The complete Water Shortage Contingency Plan is incorporated into the City’s approved Urban Water Management Plan. The implementation of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan mandatory measures occur when the Water Projection Model indicates there is a three year supply of water available, usually starting at Stage 1. Alignment with the State regulations will require the implementation of Stage 2 of the plan which has a reduction goal of 100 gpcd. The State mandate requires that the City reduce to 101 gpcd. The following is a summary of the water allocation based program that would need to be implemented: PH3 - 12 Drought Response Strategy Attachment 1 Page 5 Single Family Residential- A per capita allotment of 72 gpcd during Stage 1, 60 gpcd during Stage 2 and 50 gpcd during Stage 3 based on a three person household which will be assigned to each single family residence. If there are more than three people in the household, additional water would be allocated dependent on verification of the actual number of people in a household and will be based on the health and safety (50 gpcd) requirements previously identified for each additional person. Multi-family Residential- A per capita allotment based on a three person household will be assigned to each multi-family residence. If there are more than three people in the household, additional water would be allocated dependent on verification of the actual number of person in the household and will be based on the health and safety requirements previously identified. Commercial- Commercial customers will receive an allocation using a percent reduction methodology based on the average of the previous three years of water use. An optional commercial baseline standard allocation will also be available to commercial customers. Institutional- Institutional customers will receive an allocation using a percent reduction methodology based on the average of the previous three years of water use. Landscape Meters- Landscape only metered customers will receive an allocation using a percent reduction methodology based on the average of the previous three years of water use. Excessive Water Use Penalties- Customers exceeding their assigned allocation will pay 100% surcharge of the water portion of their water and sewer bill. If the customer exceeds the base allocation assigned to their account, a 200% surcharge will be assessed. PH3 - 13 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH3 - 14 Attachment 2 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DECLARING A LOCAL DROUGHT EMERGENCY WHEREAS, on January 17, 2014, Governor Edmund G. Brown issued the governor’s Proclamation No. 1-17-2014 declaring a State of Emergency to exist in California due to severe drought conditions; and WHEREAS, on April 26, 2014, the Governor issued an executive order to strengthen the state’s ability to manage water and habitat effectively in drought conditions and called on all Californians to redouble their efforts to conserve water; and WHEREAS, Water Code section 1058.5 grants the State Water Resources Control Board the authority to adopt emergency regulations in certain drought years in order to: “prevent the waste, unreasonable use, unreasonable method of use, or unreasonable method of diversion, of water, to promote water recycling or water conservation, to require curtailment of diversions when water is not available under the diverter’s priority of right, or in furtherance of any of the foregoing, to require reporting of diversion or use or the preparation of monitoring reports”; and WHEREAS, on July 15, 2014, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted California Code of Regulations, title 23, sections 863, 864 and 865 (the “Emergency Regulations”), which requires, among other things, that urban water suppliers implement all requirements and actions of the stage of its water shortage contingency plan that imposes mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation of ornamental landscapes or turf with potable water; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2015, the State Water Resources Control Board expanded and extended the Emergency Regulations in response to continued drought conditions; and WHEREAS, on April 1, 2015, the Governor issued an Executive Order B-29-15 which requires increased enforcement against water waste and mandates a 25% reduction in water use statewide; and WHEREAS, on May 5, 2015, in response to Executive Order B-29-15, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted regulations adding additional prohibitions on the use of potable water and mandating that the City reduce its water use by twelve percent (12%) as compared to 2013; and WHEREAS, Executive Order B-29-15 and the State Water Resources Control Board emergency regulations will remain in effect until February 28, 2016, unless extended due to continuing drought conditions; and WHEREAS, as an urban water supplier, as that term is defined in Water Code Section 10617, the City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) is subject to California Code of Regulations, title 23, section 865; and PH3 - 15 Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 2 WHEREAS, the City’s water supply is composed of surface water stored in the Whale Rock, Salinas, and Nacimiento reservoirs which are located outside of the City’s limits but within the County of San Luis Obispo. Water from these reservoirs is shared among different public agencies and other beneficial uses; and WHEREAS, like the rest of California, the County of San Luis Obispo is facing an unprecedented drought resulting in significantly decreased water levels within the City’s reservoirs; and WHEREAS, in an effort to further conserve water and to ensure adequate supplies exist within the City’s water supply system, on September 16, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10566 (2014 Series) limiting the outdoor irrigation of ornamental plants and turf to comply with the State’s mandates; and WHEREAS, despite the City’s water conservation efforts, the City’s water supply is in critical condition due to record dry conditions. Based on the City’s Water Projection Model, as of May 1, 2015, the City’s has a projected three and a half years water supply and can be lengthened to an estimated four and half years if the City is able to meet the State’s goal of a 12 percent per capita water use reduction; and WHEREAS, it is uncertain if drought conditions will continue through 2016 and beyond which makes it critically necessary to further manage water consumption during the ongoing drought to ensure that adequate water supplies are available in the long term in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, in order to comply with the Executive Order and Emergency Regulations, and to ensure the City has adequate water for public health and safety, by this Resolution, the City intends on declaring a local drought emergency and implement all requirements and actions required in the Executive Order B-29-15 and State Water Resources Control Board emergency regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, that for the reasons set forth herein, a local drought emergency now exists throughout the City of San Luis Obispo. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2015. PH3 - 16 Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 3 ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH3 - 17 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH3 - 18 Attachment 3 O _____ ORDINANCE NO. (2015 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING SECTION 13.07.030 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING RESTRICTIONS ON OUTDOOR IRRIGATION OF ORNAMENTAL LANDSCAPES OR TURF WITH POTABLE WATER WHEREAS, on January 17, 2014, Governor Edmund G. Brown issued the governor’s Proclamation No. 1-17-2014 declaring a State of Emergency to exist in California due to severe drought conditions; and WHEREAS, on April 26, 2014, the Governor issued an executive order to strengthen the state’s ability to manage water and habitat effectively in drought conditions and called on all Californians to redouble their efforts to conserve water; and WHEREAS, Water Code section 1058.5 grants the State Water Resources Control Board the authority to adopt emergency regulations in certain drought years in order to: “prevent the waste, unreasonable use, unreasonable method of use, or unreasonable method of diversion, of water, to promote water recycling or water conservation, to require curtailment of diversions when water is not available under the diverter’s priority of right, or in furtherance of any of the foregoing, to require reporting of diversion or use or the preparation of monitoring reports”; and WHEREAS, on July 15, 2014 the State Water Resources Control Board adopted California Code of Regulations, title 23, sections 863, 864 and 865 (the “Emergency Regulations”), which requires, among other things, that urban water suppliers implement all requirements and actions of the stage of its water shortage contingency plan that imposes mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation of ornamental landscapes or turf with potable water; and WHEREAS, in October 2014, the City limited outdoor irrigation to no more than three days a week in order to comply with the State’s water conservation regulations; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2015 the State Water Resources Control Board expanded and extended the Emergency Regulations in response to the continuing drought conditions; and WHEREAS, on April 1, 2015 the Governor issued an Executive Order B-29-15 which requires increased enforcement against water waste and mandates a 25% reduction in water use statewide; and WHEREAS, on May 5, 2015 in response to Executive Order B-29-15, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted regulations adding additional prohibitions and mandating that the City reduce its water use by 12% as compared to 2013; and WHEREAS, Executive Order B-29-15 and the State Water Resources Control Board emergency regulations will remain in effect until February 28, 2016 unless extended due to continuing drought conditions; and PH3 - 19 Ordinance No. ----- (2015 Series) Page 2 WHEREAS, as an urban water supplier, as that term is defined in Water Code Section 10617, the City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) is subject to California Code of Regulations, title 23, section 865; and WHEREAS, the City’s water supply is composed of surface water stored in the Whale Rock, Salinas, and Nacimiento reservoirs which are located outside of the City’s limits but within the County of San Luis Obispo. Water from these reservoirs is shared among different public agencies and other beneficial uses; and WHEREAS, like the rest of California, the County of San Luis Obispo is facing an unprecedented drought resulting in significantly decreased water levels within the City’s reservoirs; and WHEREAS, in an effort to further conserve water and to ensure adequate supplies exist within the City’s water supply system, on September 16, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10566 (2014 Series) limiting the outdoor irrigation of ornamental plants and turf to comply with the State’s mandates; and WHEREAS, despite the City’s water conservation efforts, the City’s water supply is in critical condition due to record dry conditions. Based on the City’s Water Projection Model, as of May 1, 2015, the City’s has a projected three and a half years water supply and can be lengthened to an estimated four and half years if the City is able to meet the State’s goal of a 12 percent per capita water use reduction; and WHEREAS, it is uncertain if drought conditions will continue through 2016 and beyond which makes it critically necessary to further manage water consumption during the ongoing drought to ensure that adequate water supplies are available in the long term in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, in order to comply with the Executive Order and Emergency Regulations, and to ensure the City has adequate water for public health and safety, by this Resolution, the City intends on further limiting the outdoor irrigation of ornamental plans and turf. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The Ordinance is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15307 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources). SECTION 2. Action. Section 13.070.030 (Council water conservation powers) of Chapter 13.070 the City of San Luis Obispo’s Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: 13.07.030 Council water conservation powers. PH3 - 20 Ordinance No. ----- (2015 Series) Page 3 A. When deemed necessary in the judgment of the city council to conserve water during critical water periods, the city council may by resolution declare an emergency condition and do any or all of the following which in its judgment is deemed advisable after publication of notice thereof in a newspaper of general circulation distributed in the city or after reasonable notice thereof is otherwise given by the city to users: 1. Limit irrigation within the city water service area to specified hours, or prohibit irrigation entirely within the service area or any portion or portions thereof; 2. Limit all customers inside the city water service area to specified maximum usages of water for each category of users; 3. Implement other water conservation measures as deemed appropriate. B. In order to comply with any mandatory actions required by the State Water Board or any other agency having jurisdiction over the waters of the State, the City Council may by resolution limit outdoor irrigation of ornamental landscapes or turf with potable water to three or two days a week in accordance with the following schedules: THREE-DAY A WEEK SCHEDULE Even numbered addresses: Sunday, Tuesdays and Thursdays Odd numbered addresses: Monday, Wednesdays and Fridays TWO-DAY A WEEK SCHEDULE Even numbered addresses: Tuesday and Friday Odd numbered addresses: Monday and Thursday C. In order to comply with any mandatory actions required by the State Water Board or any other agency having jurisdiction over the waters of the State, the City Council may by resolution limit outdoor irrigation of ornamental landscapes or turf with potable water between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Nothing in this Section 13.07.030.C shall limit the use of non-potable water (i.e. recycled or gray water systems) for outdoor irrigation of ornamental landscape or turf. SECTION 3. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the PH3 - 21 Ordinance No. ----- (2015 Series) Page 4 remaining portions of this ordinance, or any other provisions of the city’s rules and regulations. It is the city’s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable. Upon written request by a property owner, the Director of Utilities may grant exceptions to these restrictions for recently installed ornamental landscape or turf for the time it takes to establish the new plant material, new landscapes which act as erosion control, for new residential or commercial landscapes required as condition of a City planning approval, or for the operational needs of an institutional customer. SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the ____ day of ____________ 2015, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ____ day of 2015, on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH3 - 22 Attachment 4 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DEFERRING OR REQUIRING ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPE PLANTING DURING THE DECLARED DROUGHT EMERGENCY WHEREAS, on January 17, 2014, Governor Edmund G. Brown issued the governor’s Proclamation No. 1-17-2014 declaring a State of Emergency to exist in California due to severe drought conditions; and WHEREAS, on April 26, 2014, the Governor issued an executive order to strengthen the state’s ability to manage water and habitat effectively in drought conditions and called on all Californians to redouble their efforts to conserve water; and WHEREAS, Water Code section 1058.5 grants the State Water Resources Control Board the authority to adopt emergency regulations in certain drought years in order to: “prevent the waste, unreasonable use, unreasonable method of use, or unreasonable method of diversion, of water, to promote water recycling or water conservation, to require curtailment of diversions when water is not available under the diverter’s priority of right, or in furtherance of any of the foregoing, to require reporting of diversion or use or the preparation of monitoring reports”; and WHEREAS, on July 15, 2014 the State Water Resources Control Board adopted California Code of Regulations, title 23, sections 863, 864 and 865 (the “Emergency Regulations”), which requires, among other things, that urban water suppliers implement all requirements and actions of the stage of its water shortage contingency plan that imposes mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation of ornamental landscapes or turf with potable water; WHEREAS, on March 17, 2015 the State Water Resources Control Board expanded and extended the Emergency Regulations in response to the continuing drought conditions; and WHEREAS, on April 1, 2015 the Governor issued an Executive Order B-29-15 which requires increased enforcement against water waste and mandates a 25% reduction in water use statewide; and WHEREAS, on May 5, 2015 in response to Executive Order B-29-15, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted regulations adding additional prohibitions and mandating that the City reduce its water use by 12 percent as compared to 2013; and WHEREAS, Executive Order B-29-15 and the State Water Resources Control Board emergency regulations will remain in effect until February 28, 2016 unless extended due to continuing drought conditions; and WHEREAS, as an urban water supplier, as that term is defined in Water Code Section 10617, the City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) is subject to California Code of Regulations, title 23, section 865; and PH3 - 23 Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 2 WHEREAS, the City’s water supply is composed of surface water stored in the Whale Rock, Salinas, and Nacimiento reservoirs which are located outside of the City’s limits but within the County of San Luis Obispo. Water from these reservoirs is shared among different public agencies and other beneficial uses; and WHEREAS, like the rest of California, the County of San Luis Obispo is facing an unprecedented drought resulting in significantly decreased water levels within the City’s reservoirs; and WHEREAS, in an effort to further conserve water and to ensure adequate supplies exist within the City’s water supply system, on September 16, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10566 (2014 Series) limiting the outdoor irrigation of ornamental plants and turf to comply with the State’s mandates; and WHEREAS, despite the City’s water conservation efforts, the City’s water supply is in critical condition due to record dry conditions. Based on the City’s Water Projection Model, as of May 1, 2015, the City’s has a projected three and a half years water supply and can be lengthened to an estimated four and half years if the City is able to meet the State’s goal of a 12 percent per capita water use reduction; and WHEREAS, it is uncertain if drought conditions will continue through 2016 and beyond which makes it critically necessary to further manage water consumption during the ongoing drought to ensure that adequate water supplies are available in the long term in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, up to 30 percent of water used during the summer months is for landscape irrigation; and WHEREAS, newly planted landscapes use significantly more water during the establishment period than a mature landscape; and WHEREAS, in order to comply with the Executive Order and Emergency Regulations, and to ensure the City has adequate water for public health and safety, by this Resolution, the City intends on deferring or requiring alternate landscape for new landscape planting which require potable city water for irrigation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The Resolution is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15307 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources). SECTION 2. During the declared drought emergency, all new landscape planting located in City parks or on the grounds of City buildings which require potable city water for PH3 - 24 Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 3 irrigation shall be deferred and require a permanent alternative or interim landscape plan to be approved by the Community Development Director as set forth in Section 3a and 3b below. SECTION 3. During the City’s declared drought emergency, all new landscape planting in private development projects which require potable city water for irrigation shall be deferred and require a permanent alternative or interim landscape plan to be approved by the Community Development Director. a. Alternative (permanent) landscape plans. Alternative landscape plans which are drought tolerant may be allowed to be installed during the deferral period as a permanent alternative, as approved by the City Community Development Director. Such plans may include hardscape, artificial turf, mulch, and select drought tolerant plant species. Such landscaping shall be irrigated with only drip emitters, micro spray or equivalent water saving devices that substantially reduce water use and achieve a minimum of a 50% reduction in water demand as compared to landscapes installed during normal water years. b. Interim (temporary) landscape plans. Interim landscape plans designed to control dust/erosion and maintain property aesthetics may be allowed during the deferral period, as approved by the City Community Development Director. Interim landscape plans are to be a temporary installation which will be replaced by a permanent landscape planting plan approved with an entitlement (e.g. Architectural Review, Use Permit, Subdivision) or building permit. There shall be an appropriate guarantee, as outlined in the Policy on construction Security Deposits Document, that the permanent landscape planting plan will be completed within 90 days of the end of the drought emergency or other appropriate time as determined by the Community Development Director unless an alternative landscape plan is approved and installed as noted above. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2015. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Anthony Mejia PH3 - 25 Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 4 City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH3 - 26 SA N L U I S O B I S P O V A L L E Y G R O U N D W A T E R B A S I N Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS,NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (HongKong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community,Sources: Esri, DeLorme, USGS, NPS Legend SLO City Limit San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin Parcels Intersecting SLO GWB SAN LUIS OBISPO VALLEYGROUNDWATER BASIN PARCELS O01 2 30.5 Miles SLOGIS 20150428 Attachment 5 PH3 - 27 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PH3 - 28 Attachment 6 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ESTABLISHING A PERMIT FEE AND REGULATIONS FOR THE USE OF THE CORPORATION YARD NON- POTABLE WELL WHEREAS, as evidenced by Governor Edmund G. Brown’s various proclamations, California is in a state of emergency due to severe drought conditions; and WHEREAS, separate but related to the drought, the State of California has adopted legislation commonly referred to as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, which requires, among other thing, that a groundwater management agencies must be formed to manage the groundwater basins underlying the agency’s respective jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo’s (“City”) water supply is composed of surface water stored in the Whale Rock, Salinas, and Nacimiento reservoirs which are located outside of the City’s limits but within the County of San Luis Obispo. In addition to these surface water supplies, the City owns and operates a non-potable well located at the City’s Corporation Yard. The well draws groundwater from the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin which has been identified by the California Department of Water Resources as a medium priority basin as part of the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program (Water Code section 10920 et seq.); and WHEREAS, the original purpose of this well was for use at construction sites within the City; and WHEREAS, over time, water from the well has been used by individuals and commercial enterprises for a variety of purposes not regulated by the City; and WHEREAS, in recognition of the drought and the importance of the groundwater resources management, and to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, it is necessary for the City to regulate the use of the groundwater well at the City’s Corporation yard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The Resolution is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15307 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources). SECTION 2. During the City’s declared drought emergency, a permit issued by the City Utilities Department will be required prior to any person obtaining water from the non-potable groundwater well at the City’s Corporation yard. Water from this well may only be used for non- potable purposes for properties within the City of San Luis Obispo or those within the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin as defined in Bulletin 118 issued by the California Department of Water Resources. Guidelines for the allowable uses of the water, user eligibility PH3 - 29 Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 2 and application procedures consistent with this Resolution will be developed by the Utilities Director. The Utilities Director will have the authority to modify the guidelines, user eligibility and application procedures based on the severity of the drought conditions. If traffic issues, safety, abuses, or other similar concerns related to the well occur, the use and operation of the well may be further regulated or shut down at the discretion of the Utilities Director. SECTION 3. The City Council hereby adopts the following annual fees for use of the non-potable groundwater well at the City’s Corporation yard by user type: Property owner inside the City limits $50.00 Property owner outside the City limits but in the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin $350.00 SECTION 4. Failure to follow the guidelines or follow other applicable procedures for use of the water will result in revocation of the user permit and forfeiture of access to the well. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2015 . ____________________________________ Mayo r Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH3 - 30 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Mayor Jan Howell Marx Prepared By: Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources SUBJECT: APPOINTED OFFICIALS’ EVALUATIONS AND COMPENSATION RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt a resolution approving car allowance and one-time lump-sum payment to the City Manager. 2. Adopt a resolution adjusting the salary of the City Attorney. 3. Authorize the Mayor to execute amended contracts of employment with the City Manager and City Attorney. DISCUSSION Background In 1999 Council began following a structured process to annually evaluate the job performance of its two appointed officials, the City Manager and City Attorney. The process is facilitated by a consultant who collects input on the appointed officials’ performance in the areas of Council– City Manager or Council-City Attorney relationship, legal advocacy (City Attorney only), leadership, community relations, financial management (City Manager only), and progress to major goals. The consultant summarizes input for Council from the appointed officials’ direct reports. The consultant then interviews each Council member and drafts the performance evaluation documents prior to meeting with Council as a whole to finalize. Council also reviews and approves goals for each appointed official during this annual process. Appointed Officials’ goals are linked to Major City Goals established by Council as part of the City’s comprehensive financial planning process. The overall process takes approximately eight to twelve weeks to complete and provides appointed officials with constructive feedback. At the same time as they are conducting the performance evaluations Council considers appropriate compensation for the appointed officials. In 2013, Council amended the contract of the City Attorney removing emphasis from the Management Pay for Performance System used with unrepresented management and department head employees and placing emphasis on market comparisons for Council’s consideration of compensation. The same language is recommended for inclusion in the City Manager’s contract to more accurately reflect Council’s compensation considerations. This change recognizes that the appointed officials differ from other management employees in that they are hired by, and serve at the will of, the City Council. City Manager and City Attorney compensation is negotiated and agreed upon in Employment Contracts between the City and each appointed official. In determining the appropriate compensation, Council considers a variety of factors that include performance, market compensation data, recruitment and retention challenges, workload, accomplishments, etc. 06-02-2015 B2 B2 - 1 Appointed Officials’ Evaluations and Compensation Page 2 2015 Compensation Considerations Council met with the consultant in closed session on April 22, 2015, to discuss the appointed officials’ performance and compensation. Council considered the commendable performance of the City Manager and City Attorney, accomplishment of goals, Council’s desire to retain these highly qualified and experienced individuals, the current compensation of the City Manager and City Attorney, and market data for comparable positions. Council concluded adjustments to compensation were appropriate. The City Manager was hired in January 2010 and in 2011 all unrepresented management employees including the two appointed officials accepted a 6.8% total compensation reduction by paying the full 8% Member contribution to CalPERS. However, the City Manager also recommended Council accept a waiver of her negotiated car allowance and her ability to cash out unused administrative leave hours increasing her total compensation reduction to 10.3%. Since that time, no other increases or adjustments to her compensation have been made. Given this history, as well as performance, retention, and compensation movement in the market, Council determined providing a $450 per month car allowance and a one-time lump-sum incentive of $7,600 (less applicable taxes) was appropriate for the City Manager. The car allowance would be effective April 9, 2015 and the lump-sum incentive provided on the first regular payroll following adoption by Council. The City Attorney was also hired in January 2010 and in 2011 agreed to pay the full 8% Member contribution to CalPERS and eliminate her ability to cash out unused administrative leave. Council has adjusted the City Attorney’s salary in recent years given it has been well below the median of the comparison market. Council concluded a seven percent market equity adjustment was appropriate bringing her annual salary to $187,252 effective April 9, 2015. No other changes to the City Attorney’s compensation, or that of the City Manager, were requested or recommended at this time. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed compensation adjustments can be absorbed in the current budget and accommodated in the 2015-17 financial plan. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution – City Manager compensation adjustment 2. Amended City Manager Employment Contract – with markup 3. Amended City Manager Employment Contract – final 4. Resolution – City Attorney compensation adjustment 5. Amended City Attorney Employment Contract – with markup 6. Amended City Attorney Employment Contract - final T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-05-19\Appointed Officials Evaluations and Compensation (Irons) B2 - 2 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. (2015 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADJUSTING COMPENSATION FOR THE CITY MANAGER WHEREAS, on January 1, 2010 the City Council approved a contract of employment appointing Katie Lichtig to the position of City Manager; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a performance evaluation on April 23, 2015, in accordance with the Appointed Officials’ Performance Process as modified in December of 2011; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Effective April 9, 2015, the City Manager shall receive a monthly car allowance of $450. SECTION 2. Payable on the first regular payroll following adoption of this Resolution the City Manager shall receive a one-time lump-sum payment of $7,600. SECTION 3. All other compensation and benefits afforded to the City Manager under Management Compensation Resolution No. 10488 (2014 Series) and the City Manager Employment Agreement, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. The City Council shall evaluate the performance of the City Manager annually. On motion of Council Member, seconded by Council Member, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: B2 - 3 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 of 2 Resolution No. (2015 Series) Page 2 The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2nd day of June, 2015. ____________________________________ MAYOR JAN MARX ATTEST: _________________________________________ ANTHONY MEJIA, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________________ JON ANSOLABEHERE, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY B2 - 4 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 1 of 7 AMENDED CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT WITH KATIE E. LICHTIG CITY MANAGER THIS CONTRACT is amended as of this 6th 2nd day of DecemberJune, 20151 by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, State of California (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and KATIE E. LICHTIG, a contract employee (hereinafter referred to as " KATIE LICHTIG”); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Charter Section 703 provides that the SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL (hereinafter referred to as “COUNCIL”) is responsible for the appointment and removal of the CITY MANAGER, and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL, on behalf of the CITY acknowledges and accepts the responsibility for supervision of the CITY MANAGER; and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL is desirous of appointing a CITY MANAGER and wishes to set the terms and conditions of said employment; and WHEREAS, KATIE LICHTIG desires to accept the position of CITY MANAGER consistent with certain terms and conditions of said employment, as set forth in this CONTRACT. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree as follows: Section 1. Effective Date. A. The appointment of KATIE LICHTIG is effective January 19, 2010. B. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the COUNCIL to terminate the services of KATIE LICHTIG at any time, subject only to San Luis Obispo CITY Charter Section 709 and the provisions set forth in Section 13 of this Contract. C. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of KATIE LICHTIG to resign at any time from her position with the CITY, subject only to the provision set forth in Section 14 of this Contract. Section 2. Duties and Salary. A. CITY agrees to employ KATIE LICHTIG as full-time City Manager of the City to perform the functions and duties specified in the Charter and B2 - 5 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 2 of 7 Municipal Code and to perform such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the COUNCIL may from time to time assign. B. It is recognized KATIE LICHTIG is an exempt employee but is expected to engage in those hours of work that are necessary to fulfill the obligations of the City Manager’s position. The parties acknowledge KATIE LICHTIG will not regularly participate in a formal 9-80 work schedule as is provided to department heads and certain other City employees as part of the City’s Trip Reduction Incentive Program. However, KATIE LICHTIG is authorized, with appropriate notification to Council, to from time to time modify her regular work schedule in order to take time off with pay while ensuring appropriate coverage of her duties as City Manager. Leave pursuant to this provision shall not be used in lieu of vacation or administrative leave. C. COUNCIL agrees to pay KATIE LICHTIG, for her services rendered pursuant hereto, a starting annual base salary of $221,500 payable in installments at the same time as the other management employees of the CITY are paid. In addition, COUNCIL agrees to increase said base salary by the cost- of-living adjustment approved by the COUNCIL for all CITY management employees under the Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10036 (2008 Series) and any successors. D. Notwithstanding Section 2(C), KATIE LICHTIG agrees that she will not receive any across the board salary increases (e.g. “cost of living” increases) from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013 pursuant to the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series)). Section 3. Benefits. A. In addition to the salary set forth in Section 2 of this CONTRACT, KATIE LICHTIG shall be entitled to the same benefits as those offered by the CITY to the CITY MANAGER, in accordance with the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution, Resolution No.10315 ( 2011 Series), Resolution 8661 (1997 series) and successors. Notwithstanding the above, KATIE LICHTIG shall be entitled to the following leave benefits: An initial balance of 40 hours of sick leave and 40 hours of vacation leave; and a vacation leave accrual rate of 160 hours per year in light of her past public sector service. B. KATIE LICHTIG hereby agrees that her monthly car allowance as provided in Resolution 9440 (2003 Series) will be eliminated pursuant to the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series)). C. In addition to the benefits outlined above KATIE LICHTIG shall be entitled to a car allowance of $450 per month effective April 9, 2015 and a one- time lump-sum incentive payment of $7,600 payable on the next regular payroll following approval of her amended employment contract. B2 - 6 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 3 of 7 Section 4. Performance Evaluation. A. By April 30, 2010, COUNCIL and KATIE LICHTIG shall establish mutually agreeable written goals, performance objectives, and priorities for the performance period ending March 30, 2011. Further, Council shall conduct an “interim” evaluation by October 29, 2010. An annual formal Council evaluation will be conducted in March of 2011 in accordance with the City’s Appointed Official Evaluation Process. Consistent with the schedule outlined above, based on the Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, and subject to performance as assessed by the COUNCIL, the CITY MANAGER compensation shall be reviewed by COUNCIL in April 2011 consistent with the Management Pay-for- Performance System in place at that time. B. Each calendar year thereafter, COUNCIL shall review and evaluate the performance and compensation of KATIE LICHTIG in accordance with the adopted Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, adopted Management Pay-for- Performance System, or any successor systemsbest management practices, and informed by comparison agency data. Section 5. Outside Activities, Conduct and Behavior. A. KATIE LICHTIG shall not engage in teaching, consulting or other non-CITY connected business without the prior approval of COUNCIL. B. KATIE LICHTIG shall comply with all local and state requirements regarding conflicts-of-interest. Section 6. Dues and Subscriptions. COUNCIL agrees to budget for and to pay for professional dues and subscriptions of KATIE LICHTIG necessary for her continuation and full participation in national, regional, state, and local associations, and organizations necessary and desirable for her continued professional participation, growth, and advancement, and for the good of the CITY. Section 7. Professional Development. A. COUNCIL hereby agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of KATIE LICHTIG for professional and official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of KATIE LICHTIG and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for the CITY, including but not limited to the League of California Cities Annual Conference, International City/County Managers’ Association and such other national, regional, state, and local governmental organizations, groups and/or committees. B2 - 7 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 4 of 7 B. COUNCIL also agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of KATIE LICHTIG for short courses, institutes, and seminars that are necessary for her professional development and for the good of the CITY. C. Other professional development may be agreed upon from time to time between the COUNCIL and KATIE LICHTIG. Section 8. General Expenses. COUNCIL recognizes that certain expenses of a non-personal and job- affiliated nature are incurred by the CITY MANAGER, and hereby agrees to authorize the Finance Director to reimburse or to pay said general and reasonable expenses, consistent with CITY policies, upon receipt of duly executed expense or petty cash vouchers, receipts, statements or personal affidavits. Section 9. Relocation Assistance. A. The CITY shall pay or reimburse KATIE LICHTIG all reasonable relocation expenses incurred in moving her residence and family from Los Angeles County to the City of San Luis Obispo. These expenses shall be limited to the cost of packing, moving, and temporary storage of household furnishings and up to two house-hunting trips. B. The CITY shall reimburse KATIE LICHTIG a monthly temporary housing rental expense not to exceed $2,500 per month to assist her while relocating her personal residence to a new principal residence in San Luis Obispo. This allowance shall be made available only through July 31, 2010. C. The CITY shall make available a loan to KATIE LICHTIG, to assist with the purchase of a principal residence within the corporate limits of the City of San Luis Obispo CITY and KATIE LICHTIG shall execute such notes, deeds of trust, escrow instructions, agreements and other documents as the City Attorney may determine are reasonably necessary to effectuate this second mortgage assistance in a form mutually determined by the City Attorney and KATIE LICHTIG and executed by the Mayor on behalf of CITY. The maximum amount of such a loan shall not exceed $125,000. The interest rate shall be variable, adjusted annually, and tied to the City’s Local Agency Investment Fund rate. The term of the loan shall be for ten years. Payments shall be amortized over 30 years. The loan shall be structured to allow for interest-only payments with a balloon payment at the end of ten years. Rollover of existing equity in another residence shall not be required. Section 10. Indemnification. B2 - 8 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 5 of 7 In addition to that required under state and local law, CITY shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify KATIE LICHTIG against any claims, demands, causes of actions, losses, damages, expenses (including but not limited to attorney’s fees as may be authorized against public entities or officers consistent with state law) or liability of any kind whether stated in or arising from tort, professional liability or any other legal action or equitable theory, whether groundless or otherwise arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of KATIE LICHTIG’S duties as CITY MANAGER to the fullest extent permitted by law. CITY may compromise and settle any such claim or suit, and shall pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon. Section 11. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment. The COUNCIL, in consultation with KATIE LICHTIG, shall fix any such other terms and conditions of employment, as it may determine from time to time, relating to the performance of KATIE LICHTIG, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provisions of this CONTRACT, the CITY Charter or any other law. Section 12. No Reduction of Pay and/or Benefits. COUNCIL shall not at any time during the term of this CONTRACT, reduce the salary, compensation or other financial benefits of KATIE LICHTIG, except to the degree of such a reduction across-the-board for all employees of the CITY or KATIE LICHTIG provides written consent to the reduction. Notwithstanding the above, KATIE LICHTIG expressly agrees to the reduction of compensation, salary, and financial benefits as set forth in the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series)) Section 13. Termination and Severance Pay. A. In the event KATIE LICHTIG’S employment is terminated by the COUNCIL, or she resigns at the request of a majority of the COUNCIL during such time that she is otherwise willing and able to perform the duties of CITY MANAGER, the COUNCIL agrees to pay her a lump sum cash payment equal to nine (9) months compensation (salary and all appointed officials fringe benefits). Additionally, CITY shall extend to KATIE LICHTIG the right to continue and purchase at her expense health insurance pursuant to the terms and condition of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 (COBRA) or any successor legal requirement. KATIE LICHTIG is the City Manager for the purposes of the benefits under the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority of which the CITY is a member. Any associated severance benefit as a result of termination shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority’s Memorandum of Liability Coverage in effect at the time of termination. B2 - 9 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 6 of 7 B. In the event that KATIE LICHTIG is terminated for “good cause” the COUNCIL shall have no obligation to pay the lump sum severance payment mentioned above. For the purpose of this CONTRACT, “good cause” shall mean any of the following: (1) Malfeasance, dishonesty for personal gain, willful violation of law, corrupt misconduct, or conviction of any felony. (2) Conviction of a misdemeanor arising directly out of KATIE LICHTIG’s duties pursuant to this Agreement. (3) Willful abandonment of duties outlined in this Agreement. “Good cause” shall not mean a mere loss of support or confidence by a majority of the COUNCIL. C. Any termination of employment shall be done consistent with limitations established in the City Charter Section 709. Additionally, the CITY shall provide a minimum of 30 days prior written notice to KATIE LICHTIG of the intent to terminate this Agreement. Section 14. Resignation. In the event KATIE LICHTIG voluntarily resigns her position with the CITY, she shall give the COUNCIL at least two (2) months advance written notice. Section 15. General Provisions. A. The text herein shall constitute the entire CONTRACT between the parties. B. This CONTRACT shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of the parties. C. It is the intent of the COUNCIL that this CONTRACT and the appointment of KATIE LICHTIG as CITY MANAGER are in accordance with the requirements and provisions of the Charter. Wherever possible, the provisions of this CONTRACT shall be construed in a manner consistent with the Charter. If any provision of this CONTRACT conflicts with the Charter, the Charter shall control. D. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this CONTRACT is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this CONTRACT, or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and EMPLOYEE have executed this Contract on the day and year first set forth above. B2 - 10 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 7 of 7 _____________________________ _______________ KATIE E. LICHTIG DATE _____________________________ ________________ JAN MARX, MAYOR DATE ATTEST: ____________________________ ________________ ANTHONY MEJIA DATE CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ JON ANSOLABEHERE, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY B2 - 11 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 1 of 7 AMENDED CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT WITH KATIE E. LICHTIG CITY MANAGER THIS CONTRACT is amended as of this 2nd day of June, 2015 by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, State of California (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and KATIE E. LICHTIG, a contract employee (hereinafter referred to as " KATIE LICHTIG”); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Charter Section 703 provides that the SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL (hereinafter referred to as “COUNCIL”) is responsible for the appointment and removal of the CITY MANAGER, and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL, on behalf of the CITY acknowledges and accepts the responsibility for supervision of the CITY MANAGER; and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL is desirous of appointing a CITY MANAGER and wishes to set the terms and conditions of said employment; and WHEREAS, KATIE LICHTIG desires to accept the position of CITY MANAGER consistent with certain terms and conditions of said employment, as set forth in this CONTRACT. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree as follows: Section 1. Effective Date. A. The appointment of KATIE LICHTIG is effective January 19, 2010. B. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the COUNCIL to terminate the services of KATIE LICHTIG at any time, subject only to San Luis Obispo CITY Charter Section 709 and the provisions set forth in Section 13 of this Contract. C. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of KATIE LICHTIG to resign at any time from her position with the CITY, subject only to the provision set forth in Section 14 of this Contract. Section 2. Duties and Salary. A. CITY agrees to employ KATIE LICHTIG as full-time City Manager of the City to perform the functions and duties specified in the Charter and B2 - 12 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 2 of 7 Municipal Code and to perform such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the COUNCIL may from time to time assign. B. It is recognized KATIE LICHTIG is an exempt employee but is expected to engage in those hours of work that are necessary to fulfill the obligations of the City Manager’s position. The parties acknowledge KATIE LICHTIG will not regularly participate in a formal 9-80 work schedule as is provided to department heads and certain other City employees as part of the City’s Trip Reduction Incentive Program. However, KATIE LICHTIG is authorized, with appropriate notification to Council, to from time to time modify her regular work schedule in order to take time off with pay while ensuring appropriate coverage of her duties as City Manager. Leave pursuant to this provision shall not be used in lieu of vacation or administrative leave. C. COUNCIL agrees to pay KATIE LICHTIG, for her services rendered pursuant hereto, a starting annual base salary of $221,500 payable in installments at the same time as the other management employees of the CITY are paid. In addition, COUNCIL agrees to increase said base salary by the cost- of-living adjustment approved by the COUNCIL for all CITY management employees under the Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10036 (2008 Series) and any successors. D. Notwithstanding Section 2(C), KATIE LICHTIG agrees that she will not receive any across the board salary increases (e.g. “cost of living” increases) from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013 pursuant to the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series)). Section 3. Benefits. A. In addition to the salary set forth in Section 2 of this CONTRACT, KATIE LICHTIG shall be entitled to the same benefits as those offered by the CITY to the CITY MANAGER, in accordance with the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution, Resolution No.10315 ( 2011 Series), Resolution 8661 (1997 series) and successors. Notwithstanding the above, KATIE LICHTIG shall be entitled to the following leave benefits: An initial balance of 40 hours of sick leave and 40 hours of vacation leave; and a vacation leave accrual rate of 160 hours per year in light of her past public sector service. B.In addition to the benefits outlined above KATIE LICHTIG shall be entitled to a car allowance of $450 per month effective April 9, 2015 and a one- time lump-sum incentive payment of $7,600 payable on the next regular payroll following approval of her amended employment contract. Section 4. Performance Evaluation. A. By April 30, 2010, COUNCIL and KATIE LICHTIG shall establish mutually agreeable written goals, performance objectives, and priorities for the B2 - 13 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 3 of 7 performance period ending March 30, 2011. Further, Council shall conduct an “interim” evaluation by October 29, 2010. An annual formal Council evaluation will be conducted in March of 2011 in accordance with the City’s Appointed Official Evaluation Process. Consistent with the schedule outlined above, based on the Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, and subject to performance as assessed by the COUNCIL, the CITY MANAGER compensation shall be reviewed by COUNCIL in April 2011 consistent with the Management Pay-for- Performance System in place at that time. B. Each calendar year thereafter, COUNCIL shall review and evaluate the performance and compensation of KATIE LICHTIG in accordance with the adopted Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, best management practices, and informed by comparison agency data. Section 5. Outside Activities, Conduct and Behavior. A. KATIE LICHTIG shall not engage in teaching, consulting or other non-CITY connected business without the prior approval of COUNCIL. B. KATIE LICHTIG shall comply with all local and state requirements regarding conflicts-of-interest. Section 6. Dues and Subscriptions. COUNCIL agrees to budget for and to pay for professional dues and subscriptions of KATIE LICHTIG necessary for her continuation and full participation in national, regional, state, and local associations, and organizations necessary and desirable for her continued professional participation, growth, and advancement, and for the good of the CITY. Section 7. Professional Development. A. COUNCIL hereby agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of KATIE LICHTIG for professional and official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of KATIE LICHTIG and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for the CITY, including but not limited to the League of California Cities Annual Conference, International City/County Managers’ Association and such other national, regional, state, and local governmental organizations, groups and/or committees. B. COUNCIL also agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of KATIE LICHTIG for short courses, institutes, and seminars that are necessary for her professional development and for the good of the CITY. B2 - 14 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 4 of 7 C. Other professional development may be agreed upon from time to time between the COUNCIL and KATIE LICHTIG. Section 8. General Expenses. COUNCIL recognizes that certain expenses of a non-personal and job- affiliated nature are incurred by the CITY MANAGER, and hereby agrees to authorize the Finance Director to reimburse or to pay said general and reasonable expenses, consistent with CITY policies, upon receipt of duly executed expense or petty cash vouchers, receipts, statements or personal affidavits. Section 9. Relocation Assistance. A. The CITY shall pay or reimburse KATIE LICHTIG all reasonable relocation expenses incurred in moving her residence and family from Los Angeles County to the City of San Luis Obispo. These expenses shall be limited to the cost of packing, moving, and temporary storage of household furnishings and up to two house-hunting trips. B. The CITY shall reimburse KATIE LICHTIG a monthly temporary housing rental expense not to exceed $2,500 per month to assist her while relocating her personal residence to a new principal residence in San Luis Obispo. This allowance shall be made available only through July 31, 2010. C. The CITY shall make available a loan to KATIE LICHTIG, to assist with the purchase of a principal residence within the corporate limits of the City of San Luis Obispo CITY and KATIE LICHTIG shall execute such notes, deeds of trust, escrow instructions, agreements and other documents as the City Attorney may determine are reasonably necessary to effectuate this second mortgage assistance in a form mutually determined by the City Attorney and KATIE LICHTIG and executed by the Mayor on behalf of CITY. The maximum amount of such a loan shall not exceed $125,000. The interest rate shall be variable, adjusted annually, and tied to the City’s Local Agency Investment Fund rate. The term of the loan shall be for ten years. Payments shall be amortized over 30 years. The loan shall be structured to allow for interest-only payments with a balloon payment at the end of ten years. Rollover of existing equity in another residence shall not be required. Section 10. Indemnification. In addition to that required under state and local law, CITY shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify KATIE LICHTIG against any claims, demands, causes of actions, losses, damages, expenses (including but not limited to attorney’s fees as may be authorized against public entities or officers consistent with state law) or liability of any kind whether stated in or arising from tort, B2 - 15 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 5 of 7 professional liability or any other legal action or equitable theory, whether groundless or otherwise arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of KATIE LICHTIG’S duties as CITY MANAGER to the fullest extent permitted by law. CITY may compromise and settle any such claim or suit, and shall pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon. Section 11. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment. The COUNCIL, in consultation with KATIE LICHTIG, shall fix any such other terms and conditions of employment, as it may determine from time to time, relating to the performance of KATIE LICHTIG, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provisions of this CONTRACT, the CITY Charter or any other law. Section 12. No Reduction of Pay and/or Benefits. COUNCIL shall not at any time during the term of this CONTRACT, reduce the salary, compensation or other financial benefits of KATIE LICHTIG, except to the degree of such a reduction across-the-board for all employees of the CITY or KATIE LICHTIG provides written consent to the reduction. Notwithstanding the above, KATIE LICHTIG expressly agrees to the reduction of compensation, salary, and financial benefits as set forth in the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series)) Section 13. Termination and Severance Pay. A. In the event KATIE LICHTIG’S employment is terminated by the COUNCIL, or she resigns at the request of a majority of the COUNCIL during such time that she is otherwise willing and able to perform the duties of CITY MANAGER, the COUNCIL agrees to pay her a lump sum cash payment equal to nine (9) months compensation (salary and all appointed officials fringe benefits). Additionally, CITY shall extend to KATIE LICHTIG the right to continue and purchase at her expense health insurance pursuant to the terms and condition of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 (COBRA) or any successor legal requirement. KATIE LICHTIG is the City Manager for the purposes of the benefits under the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority of which the CITY is a member. Any associated severance benefit as a result of termination shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority’s Memorandum of Liability Coverage in effect at the time of termination. B. In the event that KATIE LICHTIG is terminated for “good cause” the COUNCIL shall have no obligation to pay the lump sum severance payment mentioned above. For the purpose of this CONTRACT, “good cause” shall mean any of the following: B2 - 16 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 6 of 7 (1) Malfeasance, dishonesty for personal gain, willful violation of law, corrupt misconduct, or conviction of any felony. (2) Conviction of a misdemeanor arising directly out of KATIE LICHTIG’s duties pursuant to this Agreement. (3) Willful abandonment of duties outlined in this Agreement. “Good cause” shall not mean a mere loss of support or confidence by a majority of the COUNCIL. C. Any termination of employment shall be done consistent with limitations established in the City Charter Section 709. Additionally, the CITY shall provide a minimum of 30 days prior written notice to KATIE LICHTIG of the intent to terminate this Agreement. Section 14. Resignation. In the event KATIE LICHTIG voluntarily resigns her position with the CITY, she shall give the COUNCIL at least two (2) months advance written notice. Section 15. General Provisions. A. The text herein shall constitute the entire CONTRACT between the parties. B. This CONTRACT shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of the parties. C. It is the intent of the COUNCIL that this CONTRACT and the appointment of KATIE LICHTIG as CITY MANAGER are in accordance with the requirements and provisions of the Charter. Wherever possible, the provisions of this CONTRACT shall be construed in a manner consistent with the Charter. If any provision of this CONTRACT conflicts with the Charter, the Charter shall control. D. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this CONTRACT is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this CONTRACT, or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and EMPLOYEE have executed this Contract on the day and year first set forth above. _____________________________ _______________ KATIE E. LICHTIG DATE B2 - 17 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 7 of 7 _____________________________ ________________ JAN MARX, MAYOR DATE ATTEST: ____________________________ ________________ ANTHONY MEJIA DATE CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ JON ANSOLABEHERE, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY B2 - 18 ATTACHMENT 4 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. (2015 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADJUSTING COMPENSATION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY WHEREAS, on January 1, 2010 the City Council approved a contract of employment appointing Christine Dietrick to the position of City Attorney; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a performance evaluation on April 23, 2015, in accordance with the Appointed Officials’ Performance Process as modified in December of 2011; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Effective April 9, 2015, the City Attorney’s salary shall be increased from $6,731 biweekly to $7,202 biweekly or $187,252 annually. SECTION 2. All other compensation and benefits afforded to the City Attorney under Management Compensation Resolution No. 10488 (2014 Series) and the City Attorney Employment Agreement, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. The City Council shall evaluate the performance of the City Attorney annually. On motion of Council Member, seconded by Council Member, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: B2 - 19 ATTACHMENT 4 Page 2 of 2 Resolution No. (2015 Series) Page 2 The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2nd day of June, 2015. ____________________________________ MAYOR JAN MARX ATTEST: _________________________________________ ANTHONY MEJIA, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________________ JON ANSOLABEHERE, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY B2 - 20 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 1 of 6 1 AMENDED CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT WITH J. CHRISTINE DIETRICK CITY ATTORNEY THIS CONTRACT is amended this 20th 2nd day of MayJune, 2014 2015 by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, State of California (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and J. CHRISTINE DIETRICK, a contract employee (hereinafter referred to as "CHRISTINE DIETRICK”); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Charter Section 701 provides that the SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL (hereinafter referred to as “COUNCIL”) is responsible for the appointment and removal of the CITY ATTORNEY, and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL, on behalf of the CITY acknowledges and accepts the responsibility for supervision of the CITY ATTORNEY; and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL is desirous of appointing a CITY ATTORNEY and wishes to set the terms and conditions of said employment; and WHEREAS, CHRISTINE DIETRICK desires to accept the position of CITY ATTORNEY consistent with certain terms and conditions of said employment, as set forth in this CONTRACT. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree as follows: Section 1. Effective Date. A. The appointment of CHRISTINE DIETRICK is effective January 1, 2010. B. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the COUNCIL to terminate the services of CHRISTINE DIETRICK at any time, subject only to San Luis Obispo CITY Charter Section 709 and the provisions set forth in Section 12 of this Contract. C. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of CHRISTINE DIETRICK to resign at any time from her position with the CITY, subject only to the provision set forth in Section 13 of this Contract. Formatted: Superscript B2 - 21 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 2 of 6 2 Section 2. Duties and Salary. A. CITY agrees to employ CHRISTINE DIETRICK as full-time CITY ATTORNEY of the City to perform the functions and duties specified in the Charter and Municipal Code and to perform such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the COUNCIL may from time to time assign. B. COUNCIL agrees to pay CHRISTINE DIETRICK, for her services rendered pursuant hereto, an annual base salary of $175,006$187,252 payable in installments at the same time as the other management employees of the CITY are paid. In addition, COUNCIL agrees to increase said base salary by the cost-of-living adjustment approved by the COUNCIL for all CITY management employees under the Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10036 (2008 Series) and any successors. C. Notwithstanding Section 2(B), CHRISTINE DIETRICK agrees that she will not receive any across the board salary increases (e.g. “cost of living” increases) from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013 pursuant to the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution, Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series). Section 3. Benefits. In addition to the salary set forth in Section 2 of this CONTRACT, CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall be entitled to a car allowance of $250 per month, a City contribution of 3.5% of salary to a 401(a) supplemental retirement plan and the same benefits as those offered by the CITY to the CITY ATTORNEY, in accordance with the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution, Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series) and all other benefits afforded Management Employees not in conflict with this Employment Contract pursuant to the Management Compensation Resolution, Resolution No. 10488 (2014 Series). Section 4. Performance Evaluation. A. By April 30, 2010, COUNCIL and CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall establish mutually agreeable written goals, performance objectives, and priorities for the performance period ending March 30, 2011. Further, Council shall conduct an “interim” evaluation by October 29, 2010. An annual formal Council evaluation will be conducted in March of 2011 in accordance with the City’s Appointed Official Evaluation Process. Consistent with the schedule outlined above, based on the Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, and subject to performance as assessed by the COUNCIL, the CITY ATTORNEY compensation shall be reviewed by COUNCIL in April 2011 consistent with the Management Pay-for-Performance System in place at that time. B2 - 22 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 3 of 6 3 B. Each calendar year thereafter, COUNCIL shall review and evaluate the performance and compensation of CHRISTINE DIETRICK in accordance with the adopted Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, best management practices, and informed by comparison agency data. Section 5. Outside Activities, Conduct and Behavior. A. CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall not engage in teaching, consulting or other non-CITY connected business without the prior approval of COUNCIL. B. CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall comply with all local and state requirements regarding conflicts-of-interest. Section 6. Dues and Subscriptions. COUNCIL agrees to budget for and to pay for professional dues and subscriptions of CHRISTINE DIETRICK necessary for her continuation and full participation in national, regional, state, and local associations, and organizations necessary and desirable for her continued professional participation, growth, and advancement, and for the good of the CITY. Section 7. Professional Development. A. COUNCIL hereby agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of CHRISTINE DIETRICK for professional and official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of CHRISTINE DIETRICK and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for the CITY, including but not limited to the League of California Cities Annual Conference, League of California Cities City Attorneys Department Conference, and such other national, regional, state, and local governmental organizations, groups and/or committees. B. COUNCIL also agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of CHRISTINE DIETRICK for short courses, institutes, and seminars that are necessary for her professional development and for the good of the CITY. C. Other professional development may be agreed upon from time to time between the COUNCIL and CHRISTINE DIETRICK. Section 8. General Expenses. COUNCIL recognizes that certain expenses of a non-personal and job- affiliated nature are incurred by the CITY ATTORNEY, and hereby agrees to authorize the Finance Director to reimburse or to pay said general and reasonable expenses, consistent with CITY policies, upon receipt of duly B2 - 23 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 4 of 6 4 executed expense or petty cash vouchers, receipts, statements or personal affidavits. Section 9. Indemnification. In addition to that required under state and local law, CITY shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify CHRISTINE DIETRICK against any claims, demands, causes of actions, losses, damages, expenses (including but not limited to attorney’s fees as may be authorized against public entities or officers consistent with state law) or liability of any kind whether stated in or arising from tort, professional liability or any other legal action or equitable theory, whether groundless or otherwise arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of CHRISTINE DIETRICK’S duties as CITY ATTORNEY to the fullest extent permitted by law. CITY may compromise and settle any such claim or suit, and shall pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon. Section 10. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment. The COUNCIL, in consultation with CHRISTINE DIETRICK, shall fix any such other terms and conditions of employment, as it may determine from time to time, relating to the performance of CHRISTINE DIETRICK, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provisions of this CONTRACT, the CITY Charter or any other law. Section 11. No Reduction of Pay and/or Benefits. COUNCIL shall not at any time during the term of this CONTRACT, reduce the salary, compensation or other financial benefits of CHRISTINE DIETRICK, except to the degree of such a reduction across-the-board for all employees of the CITY or CHRISTINE DIETRICK provides written consent to the reduction. Notwithstanding the above, CHRISTINE DIETRICK expressly agrees to the reduction of compensation, salary, and financial benefits as set forth in the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series). Section 12. Termination and Severance Pay. A. In the event CHRISTINE DIETRICK’S employment is terminated by the COUNCIL, or she resigns at the request of a majority of the COUNCIL during such time that she is otherwise willing and able to perform the duties of CITY ATTORNEY, the COUNCIL agrees to pay her a lump sum cash payment equal to nine (9) months compensation (salary and all appointed officials fringe benefits). Additionally, CITY shall extend to CHRISTINE DIETRICK the right to continue and purchase at her expense health insurance pursuant to the terms and condition of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 B2 - 24 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 5 of 6 5 (COBRA) or any successor legal requirement. CHRISTINE DIETRICK is the CITY ATTORNEY for the purposes of the benefits under the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority of which the CITY is a member. Any associated severance benefit as a result of termination shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority’s Memorandum of Liability Coverage in effect at the time of termination. B. In the event that CHRISTINE DIETRICK is terminated for “good cause” the COUNCIL shall have no obligation to pay the lump sum severance payment mentioned above. For the purpose of this CONTRACT, “good cause” shall mean any of the following: (1) Malfeasance, dishonesty for personal gain, willful violation of law, corrupt misconduct, or conviction of any felony. (2) Conviction of a misdemeanor arising directly out of CHRISTINE DIETRICK’s duties pursuant to this Agreement. (3) Willful abandonment of duties outlined in this Agreement. “Good cause” shall not mean a mere loss of support or confidence by a majority of the COUNCIL. C. Any termination of employment shall be done consistent with limitations established in the City Charter Section 709. Additionally, the CITY shall provide a minimum of 30 days prior written notice to CHRISTINE DIETRICK of the intent to terminate this Agreement. Section 13. Resignation. In the event CHRISTINE DIETRICK voluntarily resigns her position with the CITY, she shall give the COUNCIL at least two (2) months advance written notice. Section 14. General Provisions. A. The text herein shall constitute the entire CONTRACT between the parties. B. This CONTRACT shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of the parties. C. It is the intent of the COUNCIL that this CONTRACT and the appointment of CHRISTINE DIETRICK as CITY ATTORNEY are in accordance with the requirements and provisions of the Charter. Wherever possible, the provisions of this CONTRACT shall be construed in a manner consistent with the Charter. If any provision of this CONTRACT conflicts with the Charter, the Charter shall control. B2 - 25 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 6 of 6 6 D. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this CONTRACT is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this CONTRACT, or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and EMPLOYEE have executed this Contract on the day and year first set forth above. _____________________________ _______________ J. CHRISTINE DIETRICK DATE _____________________________ ________________ JAN MARX, MAYOR DATE ATTEST: ____________________________ ________________ ANTHONY MEJIA, CITY CLERK DATE APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ JON ANSOLABEHERE, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY B2 - 26 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 1 of 6 1 AMENDED CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT WITH J. CHRISTINE DIETRICK CITY ATTORNEY THIS CONTRACT is amended this 2nd day of June, 2015 by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, State of California (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and J. CHRISTINE DIETRICK, a contract employee (hereinafter referred to as "CHRISTINE DIETRICK”); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Charter Section 701 provides that the SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL (hereinafter referred to as “COUNCIL”) is responsible for the appointment and removal of the CITY ATTORNEY, and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL, on behalf of the CITY acknowledges and accepts the responsibility for supervision of the CITY ATTORNEY; and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL is desirous of appointing a CITY ATTORNEY and wishes to set the terms and conditions of said employment; and WHEREAS, CHRISTINE DIETRICK desires to accept the position of CITY ATTORNEY consistent with certain terms and conditions of said employment, as set forth in this CONTRACT. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree as follows: Section 1. Effective Date. A. The appointment of CHRISTINE DIETRICK is effective January 1, 2010. B. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the COUNCIL to terminate the services of CHRISTINE DIETRICK at any time, subject only to San Luis Obispo CITY Charter Section 709 and the provisions set forth in Section 12 of this Contract. C. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of CHRISTINE DIETRICK to resign at any time from her position with the CITY, subject only to the provision set forth in Section 13 of this Contract. B2 - 27 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 2 of 6 2 Section 2. Duties and Salary. A. CITY agrees to employ CHRISTINE DIETRICK as full-time CITY ATTORNEY of the City to perform the functions and duties specified in the Charter and Municipal Code and to perform such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the COUNCIL may from time to time assign. B. COUNCIL agrees to pay CHRISTINE DIETRICK, for her services rendered pursuant hereto, an annual base salary of $187,252 payable in installments at the same time as the other management employees of the CITY are paid. In addition, COUNCIL agrees to increase said base salary by the cost- of-living adjustment approved by the COUNCIL for all CITY management employees under the Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10036 (2008 Series) and any successors. C. Notwithstanding Section 2(B), CHRISTINE DIETRICK agrees that she will not receive any across the board salary increases (e.g. “cost of living” increases) from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013 pursuant to the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution, Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series). Section 3. Benefits. In addition to the salary set forth in Section 2 of this CONTRACT, CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall be entitled to a car allowance of $250 per month, a City contribution of 3.5% of salary to a 401(a) supplemental retirement plan and the same benefits as those offered by the CITY to the CITY ATTORNEY, in accordance with the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution, Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series) and all other benefits afforded Management Employees not in conflict with this Employment Contract pursuant to the Management Compensation Resolution, Resolution No. 10488 (2014 Series). Section 4. Performance Evaluation. A. By April 30, 2010, COUNCIL and CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall establish mutually agreeable written goals, performance objectives, and priorities for the performance period ending March 30, 2011. Further, Council shall conduct an “interim” evaluation by October 29, 2010. An annual formal Council evaluation will be conducted in March of 2011 in accordance with the City’s Appointed Official Evaluation Process. Consistent with the schedule outlined above, based on the Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, and subject to performance as assessed by the COUNCIL, the CITY ATTORNEY compensation shall be reviewed by COUNCIL in April 2011 consistent with the Management Pay-for-Performance System in place at that time. B2 - 28 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 3 of 6 3 B. Each calendar year thereafter, COUNCIL shall review and evaluate the performance and compensation of CHRISTINE DIETRICK in accordance with the adopted Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, best management practices, and informed by comparison agency data. Section 5. Outside Activities, Conduct and Behavior. A. CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall not engage in teaching, consulting or other non-CITY connected business without the prior approval of COUNCIL. B. CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall comply with all local and state requirements regarding conflicts-of-interest. Section 6. Dues and Subscriptions. COUNCIL agrees to budget for and to pay for professional dues and subscriptions of CHRISTINE DIETRICK necessary for her continuation and full participation in national, regional, state, and local associations, and organizations necessary and desirable for her continued professional participation, growth, and advancement, and for the good of the CITY. Section 7. Professional Development. A. COUNCIL hereby agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of CHRISTINE DIETRICK for professional and official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of CHRISTINE DIETRICK and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for the CITY, including but not limited to the League of California Cities Annual Conference, League of California Cities City Attorneys Department Conference, and such other national, regional, state, and local governmental organizations, groups and/or committees. B. COUNCIL also agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of CHRISTINE DIETRICK for short courses, institutes, and seminars that are necessary for her professional development and for the good of the CITY. C. Other professional development may be agreed upon from time to time between the COUNCIL and CHRISTINE DIETRICK. Section 8. General Expenses. COUNCIL recognizes that certain expenses of a non-personal and job- affiliated nature are incurred by the CITY ATTORNEY, and hereby agrees to authorize the Finance Director to reimburse or to pay said general and reasonable expenses, consistent with CITY policies, upon receipt of duly B2 - 29 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 4 of 6 4 executed expense or petty cash vouchers, receipts, statements or personal affidavits. Section 9. Indemnification. In addition to that required under state and local law, CITY shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify CHRISTINE DIETRICK against any claims, demands, causes of actions, losses, damages, expenses (including but not limited to attorney’s fees as may be authorized against public entities or officers consistent with state law) or liability of any kind whether stated in or arising from tort, professional liability or any other legal action or equitable theory, whether groundless or otherwise arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of CHRISTINE DIETRICK’S duties as CITY ATTORNEY to the fullest extent permitted by law. CITY may compromise and settle any such claim or suit, and shall pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon. Section 10. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment. The COUNCIL, in consultation with CHRISTINE DIETRICK, shall fix any such other terms and conditions of employment, as it may determine from time to time, relating to the performance of CHRISTINE DIETRICK, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provisions of this CONTRACT, the CITY Charter or any other law. Section 11. No Reduction of Pay and/or Benefits. COUNCIL shall not at any time during the term of this CONTRACT, reduce the salary, compensation or other financial benefits of CHRISTINE DIETRICK, except to the degree of such a reduction across-the-board for all employees of the CITY or CHRISTINE DIETRICK provides written consent to the reduction. Notwithstanding the above, CHRISTINE DIETRICK expressly agrees to the reduction of compensation, salary, and financial benefits as set forth in the Reduction in Management Compensation Resolution (Resolution No. 10315 (2011 Series). Section 12. Termination and Severance Pay. A. In the event CHRISTINE DIETRICK’S employment is terminated by the COUNCIL, or she resigns at the request of a majority of the COUNCIL during such time that she is otherwise willing and able to perform the duties of CITY ATTORNEY, the COUNCIL agrees to pay her a lump sum cash payment equal to nine (9) months compensation (salary and all appointed officials fringe benefits). Additionally, CITY shall extend to CHRISTINE DIETRICK the right to continue and purchase at her expense health insurance pursuant to the terms and condition of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 B2 - 30 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 5 of 6 5 (COBRA) or any successor legal requirement. CHRISTINE DIETRICK is the CITY ATTORNEY for the purposes of the benefits under the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority of which the CITY is a member. Any associated severance benefit as a result of termination shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority’s Memorandum of Liability Coverage in effect at the time of termination. B. In the event that CHRISTINE DIETRICK is terminated for “good cause” the COUNCIL shall have no obligation to pay the lump sum severance payment mentioned above. For the purpose of this CONTRACT, “good cause” shall mean any of the following: (1) Malfeasance, dishonesty for personal gain, willful violation of law, corrupt misconduct, or conviction of any felony. (2) Conviction of a misdemeanor arising directly out of CHRISTINE DIETRICK’s duties pursuant to this Agreement. (3) Willful abandonment of duties outlined in this Agreement. “Good cause” shall not mean a mere loss of support or confidence by a majority of the COUNCIL. C. Any termination of employment shall be done consistent with limitations established in the City Charter Section 709. Additionally, the CITY shall provide a minimum of 30 days prior written notice to CHRISTINE DIETRICK of the intent to terminate this Agreement. Section 13. Resignation. In the event CHRISTINE DIETRICK voluntarily resigns her position with the CITY, she shall give the COUNCIL at least two (2) months advance written notice. Section 14. General Provisions. A. The text herein shall constitute the entire CONTRACT between the parties. B. This CONTRACT shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of the parties. C. It is the intent of the COUNCIL that this CONTRACT and the appointment of CHRISTINE DIETRICK as CITY ATTORNEY are in accordance with the requirements and provisions of the Charter. Wherever possible, the provisions of this CONTRACT shall be construed in a manner consistent with the Charter. If any provision of this CONTRACT conflicts with the Charter, the Charter shall control. B2 - 31 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 6 of 6 6 D. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this CONTRACT is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this CONTRACT, or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and EMPLOYEE have executed this Contract on the day and year first set forth above. _____________________________ _______________ J. CHRISTINE DIETRICK DATE _____________________________ ________________ JAN MARX, MAYOR DATE ATTEST: ____________________________ ________________ ANTHONY MEJIA, CITY CLERK DATE APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ JON ANSOLABEHERE, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY B2 - 32