HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 5, 2004ROLL CALL:
AGENDA FI0❑
Arcadia City Council
and
Redevelopment Agency
Meeting
October 5, 2004
6:00 p.m.
Council Chambers Conference Room
City Council/Agency Members: Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo
and Kovacic
TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO
ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (NON- PUBLIC
HEARINGNIVE -MINUTE TIME LIMIT PER PERSON)
1. CLOSED SESSION
a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) to confer with legal
counsel regarding potential litigation — one (1) case
b. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) to confer with legal
counsel regarding potential litigation — one (1) case
7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Council Members/Agency Members: Chandler, Marshall, Segal,
Wuo and Kovacic
2. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING
AGENDAITEMS
MOTION: Read all Ordinances and Resolutions by title only and waive reading in
full
TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO
ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (NON- PUBLIC
HEARING/FIVE- MINUTE TIME LIMIT PER PERSON)
LASER IMAGED
Gary A. Kovacic, Mayor . John Wuo, Mayor Pro lempore . Roger Chandler, Gail A. Marshall, Mickey Segal, Council Members
William R. Kelly, City Manager
Jim Barrows, City Clerk
❑EI❑
WELCOME TO YOUR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Thank you for attending an Arcadia City Council meeting. The following information is provided to make the
meeting a more meaningful and understandable event.
The City of Arcadia is governed by a five - member City Council, which also serves as the Redevelopment Agency.
Every even - numbered year, either two or three Council Members are elected at large to serve four -year terms. The
City Council elects, from its membership, a Mayor to serve as the presiding officer for a one -year period.
The City Manager is employed by the City Council to carry out its policies and to serve as the Chief Executive
Officer of the City and the Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS are held on the first and third Tuesdays of the month at 7:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers located at 240 W. Huntington Drive. Meetings are broadcast live on cable channel 20
and replayed at various times in the following weeks. From time to time, special meetings are scheduled for
specific purposes. The City Council follows a regular order of business, as provided in the agenda for each
meeting. The agenda is prepared and made available to the public 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Full
agenda packages are available for review prior to the meeting in the City Clerk's Office at City Hall and at the
Arcadia Public Library.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION is invited at all City Council meetings. At each regular meeting, time is reserved
for those in the audience who wish to address the City Council on any matter. There is a five- minute time limit
per person. Please be aware that, pursuant to the provisions of the Brown Act, the City Council is prohibited
from taking action on any issue not listed on the agenda, unless an emergency exists requiring City Council action
or an urgent need for action arises after the agenda is published.
Time is also reserved for individuals wishing to address the City Council about a scheduled "Public Hearing"
item. With respect to Public Hearings, persons addressing the City Council should limit their remarks to the
matter under consideration.
CONSENT CALENDAR items are considered to be routine in nature and may be enacted by one motion. There
is no separate discussion on these items unless a Council Member so requests.
An ORDINANCE is a City law which can only be amended or repealed by adoption of another Ordinance. A
proposed Ordinance requires two readings —an introduction and an adoption —at separate City Council meetings.
Ordinances become effective 30 days after adoption.
A RESOLUTION is an official statement of City Council policy, directs certain administrative or legal action,
or embodies a public City Council statement. A Resolution is adopted the same night it is proposed. Once
adopted, it remains City Council policy unless changed by a subsequent Resolution.
In compliance with the AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, if you need special assistance to
parti�}pate in attit4joutic {{1 meeting, please contact the City Manager's Office at (626) 574 -5401 at least three
ju (3) working days beferefthd meeting or time when special services are needed. This notification will help City
staff in making reasonable arrangements to provide you with access to the meeting.
3. MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS
City Council Reports / Announcements /Statements/Future Agenda Items
4. CONSENT — REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
a. Minutes of the September 21, 2004 regular meeting
Recommendation: Approve
CONSENT — CITY COUNCIL
b. Minutes of the September 21, 2004 regular meeting
Recommendation: Approve
C. Acceptance of grant funds for the purchase of equipment and training
Recommendation: Approve
d. Cooperative Agreement for the East Raymond Basin Water Resources
Plan
Recommendation: Authorize the City Manger to enter into a cooperative
agreement between the City of Arcadia, Los Angeles County Flood
Control District and the City of Sierra Madre for the East Raymond Basin
Water Resources Plan
5. CITY MANAGER
a. Resolution No. 6448 supporting Proposition lA
Recommendation: Adopt
b. Resolution No. 6449 in support of the Los Angeles County Public Saferi
and Homeland Security Sales Tax (Measure A)
Recommendation: Adopt
C. Analysis of Proposition 63
Recommendation: Receive the report and provide direction
d. Analysis of propositions on the Statewide General Election ballot
Recommendation: Receive the report and provide direction
e. Boundary reorganization between the City of Arcadia and the' City of
El Monte
Recommendation: Approve annexation in concept
2
f. Landscape Maintenance Services
Recommendation: Award a one -year contract extension to CLS
Landscape Management, Incorporated for landscape maintenance services
at city facilities in the amount of
(1) $467,653.00 and appropriate $17,699.00 from the General Fund,
or;
(2) $491,437.00 and appropriate $41,483 from the General Fund for
landscape services, including 210 Freeway on and off ramp
maintenance
ADJOURN the City Council/Redevelopment Agency to October 19, 2004 at 6:00 p.m.,
Council Chambers Conference Room
3
B ANNOTATED
COUNCIL AGENDA — CITY OF ARCADIA
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2004
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
ACTION
1. a.
CLOSED SESSION
Pursuant to Government Code 54956.9c to confer with legal counsel regarding
No reportable action.
potential litigation — one (1) case.
1.1b.
CLOSED SESSTION
Pursuant to Government Code 54956.9c to confer with legal counsel regarding
No reportable action.
potential litigation — one (1) case.
MOTION — ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS TO BE READ BY TITLE
ONLY
It was moved by Council Member Chandler and seconded by Council Member
Marshall then carried without objection that Ordinances and Resolutions be read
Approved
by title only and that the reading in full be waived.
Without objection
4.a.
CONSENT AGENDA ( ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY):
Request for approval of the minutes of the September 21, 2004 Regular
Approved
Meeting:
5 -0
CONSENT AGENDA (COUNCIL):
Approved
6. b.
Request for approval of the minutes of the September 21, 2004 Regular
5 -0
Meeting.
6. c.
Accept a grant award in the amount of $128,305.17 on behalf of the City of
Arcadia for the Fiscal Year 2004 State Homeland Security Program grant;
appropriate $128,305. 17 to a Homeland Security Fund for implementation of
Approved
the Fiscal Year State Homeland Security Program; and authorize the City
5 -0
Manager to execute any necessary form and /or documents necessary to
implement this grant. '
6. d.
Authorize the City Manager to enter into a cooperative agreement between the
City of Arcadia, Los Angeles County Flood Control District and City of Sierra.
Approved
Madre for the East Raymond Basic Water Resources Plan.
5 -0
5.a.
CITY MANAGER:
Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arcadia California supporting
Approved .
Proposition 1A.
5 -0
S.b.
Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California in
support of the Las Angeles County Public Safety and Homeland Security Sales
No action taken on
Tax.
this item.
S.C.
Receive report and provide direction to staff on further action to be taken
regarding Proposition 63.
No action taken on
this item.
Page 1 0, 2 LASER IMAGED
Page 2 of 2
5.d.
Receive the report and provide direction to staff on further action to be taken
Note and file the
regarding the propositions that will appear on the November 2, 2004
report.
Statewide, ballot.
5 -0
5.e.
Approve in concept the request for a boundary reorganization to permit
approximately 5.19 acres of land in the City of Arcadia to be annexed into the
Table this item for
City of El Monte.
three (3) months.
41
Segal "no,
5.f.
ward a one (1) year contract extension in the amount for $491,4737 to CLS
ndscape Management Inc., for Landscape. Maintenance Services at City
Approved
acilities including the 210 Freeway On 7 Off ramp maintenance and
4 -0
appropriate $41,483 from the General Fund to cover the additional landscape
. Kovacic "recused"
maintenance work and authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a
ontract extension in a form approved by the City Attorney.
Page 2 of 2
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA and the ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2004
MINUTES
Audio and video tape copies of the City Council /Redevelopment Agency proceedings
are on file in the office of the City Clerk
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC OOMMENf
L
a
b.
REGULAR MEETING
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
2.
46:0153
The City Council and Arcadia Redevelopment Agency met in a Regular Meeting on
Tuesday, October 5, 2004, 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber Conference Room
pursuant to the previously adjourned Regular Meeting.
PRESENT: Council /Agency Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic
ABSENT: None.
TIME RESERVED FOR AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
CLOSED SESSION
Pursuant to Government Code 54956.9 to confer with legal counsel regarding potential
litigation — one (1) case.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9c to confer with legal counsel regarding
potential litigation — one (1) case.
The Regular Meeting of the City Council and Arcadia Redevelopment Agency was
reconvened in the City Council Chamber at 7:00 p.m.
Reverend Thomas Shriver, Emmanuel Assembly of God
Carol Gardner, Library Services Manager
PRESENT: Council /Agency Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic
ABSENT: None.
REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Steve Deitsch, City Attorney, noted that there was no reportable action taken by the
Council.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
None.
MOTION - ORD. & It was moved by Council Member Chandler and seconded by Council Member Marshall
RES. READ BY TITLE carried without objection that Ordinances and Resolutions be read by title only and that
ONLY the reading in full be waived.
LASER IMAGED
,10/05/04
46:0154
TIME RESERVED FOR AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
Betty Harris, 143 Santa Anita Terrace, appeared to speak in favor of Proposition 63.
3. MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS
COUNCIL MEMBER . Council Member Marshall reminded the public to check their fire alarms and batteries;
MARSHALL she noted that she would be participating in the upcoming Irwindale Speedway's
Mayor's Cup race; she finished with a quote from Alfred de Musset: "How glorious it is -
and also how painful - to be an exception.
COUNCIL MEMBER Council Member Segal congratulated the Arcadia Educational Foundation regarding
SEGAL their fundraiser event at the recently opened AMC theatre and noted that $20,000 was
raised to benefit Arcadia schools; he also congratulated the City and School District for
the new football field at Arcadia High School.
COUNCIL MEMBER Council Member Chandler requested that the election of representatives to the San
CHANDLER Gabriel Valley Water District be placed on a future agenda.
COUNCIL MEMBER Council Member Wuo echoed the comments of Council Members Marshall and Segal.
WUO
CITY CLERK City Clerk Jim Barrows thanked the City and the Westfield Mall owners for their efforts
BARROWS on the new mall expansion; he reminded the public to be cautious while driving around
Arcadia schools.
MAYOR KOVACIC Mayor Kovacic noted that the American Automobile Association was the City's first
sponsor of the Fourth of July event in 2005; he thanked the Association's President
Tom McKiernan, Jr. for all of his support.
4. CONSENT AGENDA — REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
The Consent Agenda items were read as follows by the Executive Director:
a. MINUTES Request for approval of the minutes of the September 21, 2004 Regular Meeting.
(Redev. Agency)
MOTION - CONSENT It was moved by Agency Member Wuo and seconded by Agency Member Segal, then
AGENDA carried on roll call vote to approve item 4.a. on the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency
consent calendar.
ROLL CALL AYES: Agency Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic
NOES: None
CONSENT AGENDA — CITY COUNCIL
The Consent Agenda items were read as follows by the City Manager:
b. Request for approval of the minutes of the September 21, 2004 Regular Meeting.
C. Accept the grant award in the amount of $128,305.17 on behalf of the City of Arcadia
for the Fiscal Year 2004 State Homeland Security Program; appropriate $128,305.17 to
a Homeland Security Fund for implementation of the Fiscal Year State Homeland
Security Program; and authorize the City Manager to execute any necessary forms
and /or documents necessary to implement this grant.
10/05/04
2
46:0155
d. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a cooperative agreement between the City of
Arcadia, Los Angeles County Flood Control District and City of Sierra Madre for the East
Raymond Basin Water Resources Plan.
MOTION - It was moved by Council Member Wuo and seconded by Council Member Segal, then
CONSENT AGENDA carried on roll call vote to approve items 4. b through 4. d. on the City Council consent
calendar.
ROLL CALL AYES: Council Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic
NOES: None
S. CITY MANAGER
a. Bill Kelly, City Manager, presented the staff report. He noted that Proposition 1A is a
California constitutional amendment on the November 2004 statewide ballot that will
end the practice of the State taking funds originally committed to local government to
pay for State purposes; staff recommends that the City Council publicly support the
Proposition by adopting Resolution No. 6448.
Mayor Kovacic noted the Council's policy on endorsing initiatives in which they will only
endorse or oppose positions if the issue has a direct impact on the City of Arcadia and
if there is a unanimous vote of the Council.
MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Chandler and seconded by Council Member
Marshall to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California
supporting Proposition 1A on the November 2004 ballot.
ROLL CALL AYES: Council Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic
NOES: None
b. Mr. Kelly presented the staff report. He noted that the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors approved placing an initiative on the November 2, 2004 ballot that would
authorize an increase of one -half percent in the County sales tax rate for the purpose
of providing supplemental funding for law enforcement and homeland security; he
further noted that based upon the current formula for distribution, it is anticipated that
the City of Arcadia would receive approximately $2.8 million dollars per year for law
enforcement purposes.
Council Member Wuo commented that he was in opposition to the initiative.
Council Member Chandler noted that he was in support of the initiative.
Mayor Kovacic, noting that there was not a unanimous vote of the Council, declared
that there would be no formal action taken on this matter.
C. Mr. Kelly presented the staff report. He noted that at the September 21, 2004 City
Council meeting, several individuals appeared before the Council and asked the City to
endorse Proposition 63. Staff was directed to review the initiative and prepare a report
analyzing the measure; a summary of the key points of the initiative were provided;
staff noted that the League of California Cities has taken a "neutral" position on the
proposition.
Council Member Marshall noted that she has great compassion for those who have
mental illness, however, she has concerns with the drafting of the legislation; she
further noted that she would not vote to either support or endorse the legislation.
10/05/04
46:0156
Mayor Kovacic noted that the legislation does have a local impact, however, he
recommended that the City Council should not go on record to oppose this legislation;
Noting neither unanimous support or opposition to this item, he declared that the
Council would not take any action on the matter.
d. Mr. Kelly presented the staff report. On September 21, 2004, the City directed
staff to prepare a report outlining the impacts of the various propositions that will
appear on the statewide ballot for the November 2, 2004 election. Sixteen (16)
propositions qualified for the statewide ballot and he briefly provided a summary of
each.
MOTION It was moved by Council Member Chandler and seconded by Council Member Segal to
note and file the report.
ROLL CALL AYES: Council Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic
NOES: None.
e. Don Penman, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director presented the
staff report. He noted that the Development Services Department has received a
request from Western Pacific Development to annex to the City of El Monte a 5+ acre
parcel fronting on Durfee Avenue currently located in the City of Arcadia; he noted that
the site is currently undeveloped, but is used for outdoor storage, the applicant is
proposing to develop the site with single - family detached homes in the City of El
Monte. El Monte has approved the concept of the boundary reorganization
(annexation) and prior to proceeding with the formal process for boundary
reorganization through the Local Agency Formation commission, El Monte is requesting
the Arcadia City Council to support the proposed reorganization; staff noted that the
proposed use by the City of El Monte would constitute the best land use for this parcel.
Council Member Marshall noted that she does not support de- annexing Arcadia land to
another City.
Council Member Chandler noted that he was in opposition to de- annexing Arcadia land
to another City and that he would not support this item.
Council Member Segal noted that he was in support of staff's recommendation as the
City of El Monte would be. the appropriate entity to provide service to the new
residential community proposed by the owner /developer.
Mayor Kovacic noted that if the land remains Arcadia property there might be problems
with residential service delivery by the City of Arcadia.
Council Member Wuo noted that he would like to table this matter for three (3) months
until further analysis could be done on the impacts the annexation would have on the
City of Arcadia.
MOTION It was moved by Council Member Wuo and seconded by Council Member Chandler to
table this item for three (3) months.
ROLL CALL AYES: Council Members Chandler, Marshall, Wuo and Kovacic
NOES: Segal
f. Mayor Kovacic abstained from participating in the consideration of this item noting that
his employer represents the proposed contractor on this item in an eminent domain
action in another city and county; he noted that the connection between his
10/05/04
46:0157
employment and his vote on this item could create an appearance of a conflict of
interest. He then proceeded to leave the Council Chamber for the remainder of Council
deliberation and action on this item.
Mayor Pro Tempore Wuo presided over the remainder of this item.
Mr. Kelly presented the staff report. He noted that the item deals with the award of
contract for the City's landscape maintenance services; CLS Management, Inc. has
been providing the maintenance for the City's public facilities for approximately three
(3) years and has asked for an extension of the contract; he noted that staff is pleased
with the quality and responsiveness of the contractor and that staff recommends
extending the contract; CLS also made a proposal in the amount $41,000 to maintain
the two additional landscaped City facilities and pick up the initial clean up and on-
going maintenance of the on -off ramps at Michillinda, Baldwin, and Santa Anita.
In response to a question from Council Member Marshall, Mr. Kelly noted that staff is
preparing conceptual landscape design for the on -off ramps in question and that the
matter will come back before the Council in approximately three (3) to six (6) months.
MOTION It was moved by Council Member Marshall and seconded by Council Member Segal to
award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $491,437 to CLS Landscape
Management, Inc. for landscape maintenance services at city facilities including the
210 Freeway on & off ramp maintenance and appropriate $41,483 from the General
Fund to cover the additional landscape maintenance work.
ROLL CALL AYES: Council Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo
NOES: None.
RECUSED: Kovacic
ADJOURNMENT Noting no additional business, at 8:20 p.m. the City Council /Redevelopment Agency
(to October 21, 2004, adjourned its Regular Meeting in memory of June Wagner to October 21, 2004 at 6:00
6:00 p.m.) p.m. in the Council Chamber for the Council's next Regular Meeting.
by:
James Barrows, City Clerk
�/�&
Vida Tolman, Chief Deputy City Clerk
10/05/04
STAFF REPORT
Fire Department
DATE: October 5, 2004
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: David R. Lugo, Jr., Fire Chief
By: Heather McDowell, Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Grant Funds for the Purchase of Equipment and Training Expenses
Approved in the FY04 State Homeland Security Program Grant and to Appropriate
$128,305.17 to a Homeland Security Fund.
Recommendation: Approve
SUMMARY
•On April 21, 2004, the Fire Department submitted a grant application for the FY04 State
Homeland Security Program grant This application was submitted on behalf of the City of
Arcadia and included the needs of Law Enforcement, Public Works, Fire Services and the
jurisdiction at large. State approval was received on August 10, 2004.
The Fire Department is requesting that the City Council authorize staff to accept the grant award
and appropriate $128,305.17 to a Homeland Security Fund to implement the State Homeland
Security Program grant.
BACKGROUND
The threat of chemical and biological terrorism has become a pressing public safety concern that
no community is immune. Acts of terrorism transcend all geographic and demographic
boundaries. These acts, which are also known as Weapons of Mass Destruction ( "WMD "), have
created an urgent need to provide protection for first responders. Because of this need, the
Office of Homeland Security has dedicated funds toward the enhancement of domestic
preparedness programs for first responders.
The goal of the FY04 State Homeland Security Program grant is to provide funds to enhance the
capability of State and local units of government to prevent, deter, respond to, and recover from
incidents of terrorism involving the use of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and
explosive (CBRNE) weapons and cyber attacks.
• Our police and fire resources may respond to acts of terrorism within the City of Arcadia and
may be requested, through the Master Mutual Aid system, to respond and assist in neighboring
communities. Personnel must be equipped with proper equipment and training to respond to
these types of situations.
LASER IMAGED �-,�
Mayor and City Council
October 5, 2004
Page 2
The City of Arcadia Fire Department submitted an application for this grant program during the •
FY01 Program and received $36,892 for respiratory protection. The City was awarded $16,135
in the FY02 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program for personal protective equipment
and chemical detection equipment. During the FY03 (Part I) grant, the City was awarded
$158,760 for personal protective equipment, detection equipment, medical supplies, and CBRNE
Search and Rescue equipment. The City also submitted an application for the FY03 (Part II)
State Homeland Security Grant Program and was awarded $93,895.20 for medical supplies,
personal protective equipment, CBRNE logistical support equipment, and physical security
enhancement equipment. The award for the FY04 State Homeland Security Program grant
complements these other acquisitions and supports the City's disaster preparedness program.
The FY04 State Homeland Security Program grant requires the sub -grantee to purchase and
obtain the equipment, in order to obtain grant funds. The total amount of grant funds awarded as
a result of this grant is $128,305.17. The equipment approved' includes personal protective
equipment, training materials, backfill and overtime for training, communications equipment,
and crisis management software.
Adequate funding does not exist in the City's Equipment Replacement Plan to purchase the
awarded items, and therefore, staff requests that $128,305.17 be appropriated to a Homeland
Security Fund to implement the State Homeland Security Program. •
FISCAL IMPACT.
Funds expended for these acquisitions will be returned to the City through grant reimbursement.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve
(1) the acceptance of the grant award in the amount of $128,305.17 on behalf of the
City of Arcadia for the FY04 State Homeland Security Program grant,
(2) to appropriate $128;305.17 to a Homeland Security Fund for implementation of the
FY04 State Homeland Security Program; and
(3) to authorize the City Manager to execute any necessary forms and/or documents
necessary to implement this grant.
DLhm
Approved: •
William R. Kelly, City Manager
03DAMI MCCO 1
0
STAFF REPORT
Public Works Services Department
October 5, 2004
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Direc r
Prepared by: Tom Tait, Field Services Marra er
SUBJECT:
Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to enter into a cooperative
agreement between the City of Arcadia, Los Angeles County Flood
Control District and City of Sierra Madre for the East Raymond Basin
Water Resources Plan
SUMMARY
On May 4, 2004, the City Council authorized the City Manager to enter into a
Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Geoscience Support Services, Inc. for the
•East Raymond Basin Water Resources Plan (ERBWRP). The cities of Arcadia and
Sierra Madre were granted federal funding by the EPA for the East Raymond Basin
Water Resources Plan (ERBWRP) that would identify programs and projects that would
increase water supply reliability and quality in the event of a major earthquake and
outline a strategy to best manage the City's water operations in this basin.
A cooperative agreement addresses the County's intent to collaborate with the cities of
Arcadia and Sierra Madre and summarizes the project and responsibilities for each
agency. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter
into a cooperative agreement between the cities of Arcadia and Sierra Madre and Los
Angeles County Flood Control District for the East Raymond Basin Water Resources
Plan (ERBWRP). To accommodate the EPA's request for one lead agency for all
grant matters pertaining to our Water Infrastructure Program, the City of Arcadia has
been and will continue to be the designated lead agency.
DISCUSSION
The cities of Arcadia and Sierra Madre, along with the Los Angeles County Department
Of Public Works and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) have conducted
numerous studies in the East Raymond Basin and its watersheds. These projects have
specifically focused on water system reliability, infrastructure rehabilitation and
restoration of the Santa Anita Dams and spreading facilities. The studies indicate a
potential to increase the groundwater supply resources for the cities of Arcadia and
•
Sierra Madre and thus increase water supply reliability, most importantly following a
seismic event.
LASER IMAGED �
Mayor and City Council
•October 5, 2004
Page 2
The East Raymond Basin is located in the eastern portion of the Raymond Basin, also
referred to as the Santa Anita Sub -area of the Raymond Basin. The cities of Arcadia
and Sierra Madre are the only two municipalities who have wells and groundwater rights
in this Basin Sub -area. Ground water in the Basin is recharged primarily through
percolation of surface water in washes, creed beds, spreading basins and mountain
front recharge.
The 2003 -04 Capital Improvement Program includes funding for the East Raymond
Basin Water Resources Plan (ERBWRP). This Plan will consist of comprehensive data
collection and assessment of existing documents and data generated from previous
studies, geologic investigations, water rights research and development of the
ERBWRP. In order to develop conceptual programs and project alternatives to
enhance ground water replenishment, a number of specific basin management aspects
will also be evaluated. Other methods of ground water replenishment feasibility will
also be evaluated and an initial environmental assessment and economic base study
will be conducted.
On May 4, 2004, the City Council authorized the City Manager to enter into a
Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Geoscience Support Services, Inc. for the
East Raymond Water Resources Plan (ERBWRP). Accordingly, the Los Angeles
• County Flood Control District, who owns and operates the Santa Anita Dams and
spreading grounds, has agreed to join with the two cities in the development of a Water
Resources Plan for this portion of the Basin. They have also agreed to pay the City of
Arcadia one third (1/3) of the'required local match, which is $56,250, or the equivalent
of in -kind services in collaboration with the cities of Arcadia and Sierra Madre. To
accommodate the EPA's request for one lead agency for all grant matters pertaining to
our Water Infrastructure Program, the City of Arcadia has been and will continue to be
the designated lead agency.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
This project is categorically exempt per Section 15302 from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
FISCAL IMPACT
$375,000 is budgeted in the 2003 -04 Capital Improvement Program for this Project.
This program is partially funded through grant funds subject to reimbursement from the
United States Environmental Protection Agency of up to 55% of the program cost or
$206,250. The City of Arcadia, the City of Sierra Madre and the County of Los Angeles
Department of Public Works will equally share in providing the match dollars or the
remainder of the Project's budget totaling $168,750 or $56,250 for each entity.
0
Mayor and City Council
October 5, 2004
• Page 3
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a cooperative agreement between
the City of Arcadia, Los Angeles County Flood Control District and City of
Sierra Madre for the East Raymond Basin Water Resources Plan
PM:Tf:dw
•
40
Approved By:
William R. Kelly, City Manager
iV
a
Il►�?dti3►1
DATE:
October 5, 2004
STAFF REPORT
Office of the City Manager
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: William R.'Kelly,, City Manager WW
By Linda Garcia, Communications, Marketing and
Special Projects Manager'
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 6448 SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 1A
Recommendation: Adopt
SUMMARY
Proposition 1A is a California constitutional ` "amendment on the November 2004
statewide ballot that will end the practice of the State taking funds originally committed
•to local government to pay for State purposes. Staff recommends that the City Council
publicly support the Proposition by adopting Resolution No. 6448.
BACKGROUND
In an effort to protect local revenues from further raids by the State of California, a
coalition of local governments formed and put together Proposition 65 for the November
2004 ballot. Since Proposition 65 was submitted, a` new and better measure to
safeguard cities - Proposition 1A - was placed on the ballot. The same group of people
who were behind Proposition 65 are now supporting Proposition 1A because it is a
better, more flexible approach to protect funding for essential local services.
DISCUSSION
For twelve years, in both good economic times and bad, the State Legislature has
shifted more than $46 billion'in property taxes from cities, counties, special districts and
redevelopment agencies 'to' the State to help pay for State responsibilities. (Arcadia
alone has lost over $5 million in the last several years.) The State has also loaned itself
local money over the objections of city governments, leaving local communities
struggling to fund their services. 'These ongoing "shifts" by the State of local property
tax money and other funding dedicated to local governments have seriously reduced
resources available for municipal public services, including public safety, public health,
• emergency medical, roads, parks, library and recreation programs, transportation and
other essential local services.
LASER IMAGED
s0\.
Mayor and City Council - Resolution 6448
October 5, 2004
Page 2
Cities are the'level of government closest to people; they the-services we all
use on a daily basis, ahe services that keep us safe, and healthy and that keep, our
communities a place we want to call home. Cities work hard to manage their finances
in a responsible manner and to create an environment that generates the revenue
needed to support the services their residents need and want. Continually losing
money to the State puts cities,,in jeopardy,of..not being able to function properly in the
future. It also reduces local control and eats away at;the concept of residents, elected
officials and City staff working together to create a community of which they can be
proud.
The passage of Proposition '1A would:
➢ Restrict the State Legislature's ability to take and use local government funding.
➢ Protect funding for local government services by prohibiting the State from
lowering the existing city, county and special district's share of sales taxes,
property taxes. and vehicle licensee fee, revenues.
R Require the State.Ao reimburse local government for. the cost of programs and
services that the State forces local government to provide.
➢ Provide flexibility in the event of a State budget emergency. Proposition 1A
allows the State to borrow local government revenue if the funds are needed in a
fiscal emergency.
The passage of Proposition 1A does not:
Raise taxes.
➢ Reduce funding for schools or any other State programs or services.
Increase funding to local governments.
➢ Prevent the State from borrowing local funds -in a time of fiscal emergency, nor
does it shut the door to future reforms of the State -local fiscal. relationship.
Proposition 1A is supported by the Governor, Democrat and Republican legislators,
local governments, public safety officials, healthcare advocates, labor groups and
community leaders.
-�i
•
0
r
Mayor and City Council - Resolution 6448
October 5, 2004
• Page 3
FISCAL IMPACT
Adopting a resolution in support of Proposition 1A does not have a fiscal impact on the
City of Arcadia. Should the Proposition be passed in November and subsequently
implemented; it will have a positive financial impact on Arcadia and other cities because
we will no longer lose money to the State that was originally committed to local
government.
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 6448 supporting
Proposition 1A onthe November 2004 California "Statewide Ballot.
Attachment: Resolution No. 6448
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. 6448
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA,
SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 1A
WHEREAS, the State. government currently seizes more than $5.2 billion
annually in local property tax funds statewide from cities, counties and special districts,
costing local government agencies more than $40 billion in lost revenues over the last
12 years; and
WHEREAS, these ongoing shifts and raids by the State of local property tax
funds and other funding dedicated to local governments have seriously reduced
resources available for municipal public services, including public safety, public health,
emergency medical, roads, parks, library and recreation programs, transportation and
other essential local services; and
WHEREAS, these funding raids put pressure on local governments to increase
fees and taxes to maintain basic local service levels; and
WHEREAS, the drain of local resources has continued even during periods when
the State has had a budget surplus; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 1A is a historic measure that will appear on the
November 2004 statewide ballot that would limit the State's ability to take and use local
government funding; and
WHEREAS, by protecting local government funding, Proposition 1A would
protect essential local services; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 1A will not raise taxes and, in fact, will help reduce
pressure for local fee and tax increases by limiting State raids of local government
funding; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 1A does not reduce funding for schools or any other
State program or service and is written to allow flexibility in the event of a State budget
emergency; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 1A is supported by a bipartisan, diverse coalition that
includes the Governor, Democrat and Republican legislative leaders, local government
officials, public safety representatives, healthcare, business, labor and community
leaders.
LASER IMAGED
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby expresses strong support for Proposition
1A, the statewide ballot measure that will prevent the State from further taking local
government revenues in future years without voter /city approval; and
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Passed, approved and adopted this Stn day of October 2004.
/SS GARY Ao K®VACIC
Mayor of the City of Arcadia
ATTEST:
5 I '
City Clerk of the City of Arcadia
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
�� � ��e�
City Attorney
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS:
CITY OF ARCADIA )
I, JAMES H. BARROWS, City Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certifies
that the foregoing Resolution No. 6448 was passed and adopted by the City Council of
the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular
meeting of said Council held on the 5th day of October, 2004 and that said Resolution
was adopted by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Member Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
"4V RIA E5 H. BARROWS
City Clerk of the City of Arcadia
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
STAFF REPORT
Police Depgtment
October 5, 2004
Mayor and City Council
David Hinig, Chief of Policeo�/
SUMMARY
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved placing an initiative on
• the November 2, 2004, ballot that would authorize an increase of one -half
percent in the County sales tax rate for the purpose of providing supplemental
funding for law enforcement and homeland security.
The majority of revenues received from the sales tax increase would be
distributed to all cities within the County on a per capita basis. Additionally,
smaller percentages of the revenues are designated for the District Attorney's
Office, Countywide radio interoperability, County Jail operations, and the Public
Defender's Office.
Based upon the current formula for distribution, it is anticipated that the City of
Arcadia would receive approximately $2.8 million dollars per year for law
enforcement purposes.
As a result of several years of budget problems facing the State of California,
many counties and cities found themselves experiencing severe service
cutbacks as funds normally distributed to local government were being withheld
by the State as it attempted to deal with its own shortfalls. Because of the
"trickle down" effect of these actions, local government was forced to shoulder
the burden of service reductions. . In Los Angeles County, the Sheriffs
Department was placed in the position of releasing thousands of inmates from
• the jail system prior to them serving their full sentences. Additionally, staff
reductions created a situation where Sheriff Baca postulated that overall public
LASER IMAGED
Sb-
safety was being placed at risk. No police agencies within the County added
• peace officers, even though the demands upon policing services were
increasing. Equally notable was the fact that although homeland security was at
the forefront of regional planning, there were no personnel resources added to
deal with the concept.
In early 2004, Sheriff Lee Baca drafted a proposed ballot initiative that would
raise the sales tax in Los Angeles County by one -half percent for the purpose of
funding additional law enforcement officers and homeland security measures.
The initiative fell short of gathering enough signatures to qualify for the ballot in
its original form, however in July 2004, the Board of Supervisors began to review
the proposal. The Board of Supervisors reformulated the initiative, adding
provisions for distributing funds to the District Attorney, Public Defender, County
Jail operations, and countywide radio interoperability.
By a 4 -1 vote, the Board of Supervisors placed the initiative on the November 2,
2004, ballot as "Measure A." The measure increases the sales tax in Los Angles
County by one -half percent and specifically designates that the revenue is to be
directed to law enforcement and homeland security. The formula for distribution
is primarily on a per capita basis, with small percentages denoted for the entities
listed above. Because the _measure is intended to enhance law enforcement
below the allocations made in fiscal year 2002 -2003 budgets. There are also
provisions for audits, an expenditure oversight committee, and "maintenance of
effort" reviews that are intended to monitor fund distribution and application at
the local levels. In the event that the fiscal climate improves and it is determined
that the tax is no longer needed, the Board of Supervisors can repeal the
increase, however to protect communities from the adverse impact of an
immediate cessation of revenue, there is a three year "wind -down" provision.
In its current configuration, it is estimated that revenue to the City of Arcadia
would be approximately $2.8 million per year. The executive staff of the Police
Department has reviewed how these funds might be applied to the agency and
believes that the increased funding .would allow for implementation of the
recommendations made in the Police Department's Strategic Plan of 2002. Most
of those recommendations were placed on hold due to the'fiscal constraints the
City has experienced. Additionally, the funds would allow for the continuance of
several programs that are currently supported by federal grants when those
grants expire in the near future. If the initiative passes, the City will not recognize
additional revenue until the beginning of the next. fiscal year: The Department
believes that it is premature to make any long -term plans or invest significant
staff time in defining potential application of these funds prior to the election;
however, we are fully prepared to provide recommendations to the City Manager
and City Council by the end of the calendar year in the event the measure does
• secure voter approval.
f
Presently, 31 cities have adopted resolutions in support of Measure A. The
measure also has the support of the Chief Administrative Officer of Los Angeles
County and the City of Los Angeles.
FISCAL IMPACT
Because this revenue source is specifically dependent upon the volume of
taxable sales occurring in the County, the exact amount of revenue may vary.
However, based upon past data, Measure A has the potential to generate
approximately $2.8 million dollars annually for Arcadia that would be applied to
law enforcement needs in the community.
CONCLUSION
The fiscal climate in the State of California is still clouded with uncertainty, but
what is clear is that the State will not resolve issues of local funding in the
foreseeable future. The County of Los Angeles has taken a bold step in opting
to increase its tax revenues, specifically for the purpose of enhancing public
safety. It is indeed a rare occasion when the voters have an opportunity to
decide what level of safety they are willing to support by voting to tax themselves
in the manner proscribed in Measure A. Public safety is not simply a local issue,
we are affected by events occurring in every community in our region and crime
crosses over city boundaries on a daily basis. Passage of Measure A is a huge
step forward in promoting public safety. The Police Department feels that
• Measure A should be endorsed by the City Council
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 6449 of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California,
in support of the Los Angeles County Public Safety and Homeland Security
Sales Tax.
Approved:
WT�A
William R. Kelly, City Manager
11
WHEREAS, the plan would generate approximately $500 million annually;
and would be dedicated to law enforcement, homeland security, and local anti-
terrorism efforts throughout Los Angeles County; and
WHEREAS, five percent of the revenue will be allocated to the Sheriff of
Los Angeles County, who performs countywide duties required by law, including
jail services, court security, investigations, judicial protection, and coordination of
Emergency/Disaster Operations for the County; and
WHEREAS, the remaining revenue shall be distributed to the
unincorporated area and every city within Los Angeles County, and shall augment
law enforcement, homeland security, and local anti- terrorism efforts, with a
minimum allocation of $500,000 to each jurisdiction, with the remaining funds
equally distributed based on population percentage; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arcadia would receive approximately $2.8 million
annually under the proposed formula.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City of Arcadia supports the passage of the Los
Angeles County Public Safety and Homeland. Security Sales Tax Initiative.
2
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
Passed, approved and adopted this day of 2004.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
3
Mayor of the City of Arcadia
4
Office STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 5 2004
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: William R. Kelly, City Mana erU4)M
Linda Garcia, Communications, arke ing &Special Projects Manage
By: Oliver Chi, Communications & Marketing Specialist II oac-t-=
SUBJECT: Analysis Of Proposition 63
Recommendation: Receive this report and provide direction to staff
on further action to be taken regarding Proposition 63.
SUMMARY
•At the September 21,2004 City Council Meeting, several individuals appeared before
the Council and asked the City to endorse Proposition 63,`which is officially known as
"The Mental Health Services Expansion, Funding. Tax On Personal Incomes Above $1
Million. Initiative Statute." Staff was directed to review the initiative and prepare a
report analyzing the measure.
DISCUSSION
Currently; it is City Council policy to only take action on a specific proposition and /or
piece of legislation when the issues addressed by a measure have a direct impact on
Arcadia. Furthermore, the City will only endorse those proposals which have the full
backing of the entire Council
Proposition 63 Summary
If approved, Proposition 63 would:
Impose an additional 1 % tax on all taxpayers' taxable personal income above $1
million, to provide a dedicated funding source for the expansion of mental health
services and programs.
• Prohibit the state from decreasing funding levels for mental health services below
current levels.
LASER fmA' i=D
pc- ,
Analysis Of Proposition 63
October 5, 2004
Page 2
■- Provide funds to counties to expand services and develop programs and
.integrated service plans for mentally ill children, adults and seniors.
■ Require the state to develop mental health service programs including
prevention, early intervention, education and training programs.
■ Create a commission to approve certain county mental health programs and
expenditures.
Additionally, according to the California Legislative Analyst's Office ,(LAO), Proposition
63 would create additional state revenues of about $275 million in Fiscal Year 2004 -05
(partial year), $750 million in 2005 -06 and $800 million in 2006 -07.
Proposition 63 Overview
J
County Mental Health Services
Counties are the primary providers of mental health care in California communities for
those who lack private coverage by providing a range of psychiatric, counseling, .
hospitalization and other treatment programs for..patients. In addition, some counties
arrange other types of assistance such as housing„ substance, abuse treatment and
employment services to help their clients.
County mental health services are paid for with a mix of local, state and federal funds.
As part of a prior transfer of mental health program responsibilities from the state to
counties, some state revenues are automatically set aside for the support of county
mental health programs and thus are not provided through the annual state budget act.
Other state support for county. mental health programs is provided through the annual
state budget act and thus is subject to change by actions of the. Legislature and
Governor.
State Personal Income Tax System
California's personal income tax was established in 1935 and is the state's single
largest revenue source, generating an estimated $39 billion in revenues for the support
of state government in 2004 -05. The tax is levied on both residents and nonresidents,,
with the latter paying taxes on income derived only from California sources. Tax rates
range from 1.% to 9.3 %, depending on a taxpayer's income level.
Proposition 63 Proposal
This measure would establish a surcharge of 1% on the portion of a taxpayer's taxable
income that exceeds $1 million. The surcharge would be levied on all such tax filers •
r - y
:S L;fiIV. -
• Analysis Of Proposition 63
October 5, 2004
Page 3
beginning January 1, 2005. The LAO estimates that between 25,000 — 30,000
California` taxpayers would be subject to paying the additional tax.
Under this proposition, beginning in 2004-05, the State Controller would be required to
transfer specified amounts of state funding on a monthly basis into a new state fund
called the Mental Health Services Fund. The amounts transferred to the new fund
would be based on an estimate of the revenues to be received from the tax, with the
amounts deposited into`the fund later adjusted to reflect the revenues actually received.
The revenues`raised would be used to create new county mental health programs and
to expand some existing programs: These funds would not be provided through the
annual state budget act, and the amounts would not be subject to change by actions of
the Legislature and Governor.
Specifically, the additional funds could be used for the following activities:
■ Children's System of Care'
• ■ Adult System of Care
■ Prevention & Early Intervention
• "Wraparound" Services for Families
• "Innovation" Programs
■ Mental Health Workforce: Education & Training
• Capital Facilities & Technology
■ Oversight & Administration
The proposition specifically states that any revenues generated from the tax must be
used to expand mental health services and cannot be used for any other purposes.
Fiscal Effects Of'Pr000sition 63
The LAO projects that the tax surcharge would generate new state revenues of
approximately $275 million in 2004 -05, $750 million in 2005 -06, $800 million in 2006 -07,
and probably increasing amounts annually thereafter (the impact in 2004 -05 is a partial -
year effect generated by increased taxpayer withholding and calculated by the LAO).
40
Analysis Of Proposition 63
October 5, 2004
Page 4
The proposition also prohibits. the state from reducing.financial support for mental health
programs below the 2003 -04 level; in addition to restricting certain other changes'from
being made. Such restrictions could prevent the Legislature and the Governor from
taking certain actions in the future to reduce state expenditure for.mental health
services
The California State Attorney General's office has stated that the expansion of county
mental health services provided under-this proposition, could result,in the receipt of
additional federal funds for community mental health services under the Medi -Cal
Program. However, the amount of the additional federal,funds that might be received is
unknown and would depend on how.the state and counties implement,various
programs. The LAO has estimated that the amount could potentially exceed $100
million annually on a statewide basis.
Various state and national studies have indicated that, mental health programs similar to
some of those expanded by this measure may generate savings to state and local
governments that partly offset their additional cost. However, the extent of these
potential savings is difficult to quantify and cannot be projected with any accuracy.
Other Considerations
Proposition 63 does raise several policy concerns for the Council to consider. The
initiative perpetuates the trend of "ballot box budgeting," by taking two very specific
policy issues — a) the appropriate level of taxation, and b) the appropriate levels of
service — and having the voters make those decisions.
In addition, by prohibiting the state from decreasing funding for mental health services,
below the 2003 -04 level, Proposition 63 creates a situation whereby the Legislature and
the Governor lose a degree of flexibility with regard to prioritizing spending levels for
various other state programs.
The League of California Cities has taken a "neutral" position on Proposition 63.
As these issues are discussed, please keep in mind that it is current Council policy to
take action on only those measures which have a direct impact on Arcadia. In addition,
the City will only endorse legislation that has the support of the entire Council.
•
r1
U
•
• Analysis of Proposition 63
October 5, 2004
Page 5
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact on the City of Arcadia should Proposition 63 be
approved.
RECOMMENDATION
Receive this report and provide direction to staff on further action to be taken
regarding Proposition 63.
•
40
Office STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 5, 2004
TO: Mayor & City Council
PROM: William R. Kelly, City Manager � �T
Linda Garcia, Communications, Marketing & Special Projects Managerio
By: Oliver Chi, Communications & Marketing Specialist II 0-c'
SUBJECT: Analysis Of Propositions On The Statewide General Election Ballot
Recommendation: Receive this report and provide direction to staff
on further action to be taken regarding the propositions that will
appear on the November 2, 2004, statewide ballot.
SUMMARY
• On September 21, 2004, the City Council directed staff to prepare a report outlining the
impacts of the various propositions that will appear on the statewide ballot for the
November 2, 2004 election.
Sixteen propositions have qualified for the statewide ballot during the November
election. The measures include:
Proposition 1A
Protection Of Local Government Revenues
Please see the staff report analyzing Proposition 1A.
Proposition 59
Public Records, Open Meetings. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.
If approved, Proposition 59 would:
•
LASER IMAGED 5 4.
l` p
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 2
■ Add to the State Constitution the requirement that meetings of public bodies and •
writings of public officials and agencies be open to public scrutiny, by mandating
the following:
o Provide the right of public access to meetings of government bodies and
writings of government officials.
• Provide that statutes and rules furthering public access shall be broadly
construed (or narrowly construed if limiting' access).
• Require future statutes and rules limiting public access to contain findings
which justify the necessity of those limitations.
• Preserve constitutional rights, including rights of privacy, due process and
equal.protection.
• Expressly preserve existing constitutional and statutory limitations
restricting access to certain meetings and records of government bodies
and officials including law enforcement and prosecution records.. .
Although California has a number of statutes that address the issue of public access to
government information (i.e., 'The California Public Records Act," 'The Legislative Open
Records Act," "The Ralph "M Brown Act," "The Bagley -Keene Open Meeting Act," and
"The Grunsky- Burton Open Meeting Act'), currently, the State Constitution does not.
It is interesting to note that the measure would exempt the California State Legislature's
records and meetings from its provisions.
The League of California Cities has come out in support of Proposition 59.
Impact On Arcadia: None.
Proposition 60
Election Rights Of Political Parties. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.
If approved, Proposition 60 would:
■ Require that all political parties participating in a primary election be able to
advance their top vote - getting candidate to the general election.
In essence, Proposition 60 would write into the State Constitution the maintenance of
the current statewide election system.
•
03DA101932AJ
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 3
• This measure conflicts with Proposition 62, which advocates an "open primary' election
system whereby the top two vote - getters in the primary — regardless of party
identification — advance to the general election.
The State Constitution provides that if the provisions of two approved propositions are in
conflict, only the provisions of the measure with the higher number of "yes" votes at the
statewide election take'effect.
The League of California Cities has taken a neutral position on Proposition 60.
Impact On Arcadia: None.
Proposition 60A
Surplus Property. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.
If approved, Proposition 60A would:
■ Dedicate proceeds from the sale of surplus state property purchased with
General Fund monies to the payment of principal and interest on the Economic
• Recovery Bonds (Proposition 57) approved in March 2004. Once these bonds
are fully repaid, proceeds from surplus property sales would be deposited in the
General Fund.
The League of California Cities has not taken a position on Proposition 60A.
Impact On Arcadia: None.
Proposition 61
Children's Hospital Projects. Grant Program. Bond Act. Initiative Statue.
If approved, Proposition 61 would:
• Authorize $750 million in general obligation bonds, to be repaid from the state's
General Fund, for grants to eligible children's ftspitals for construction,
expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing and equipping needs.
Set aside 20% of bond funds for grants to specified University of California
general acute care hospitals
40
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 4
•
■ Set aside 80% of bond funds for grants to general acute care hospitals that focus
on children with illnesses such as leukemia, heart defects, sickle cell anemia and
cystic fibrosis. In addition, grant funding would be made available to those
organizations that provide comprehensive services to a high volume of children
eligible for government programs. '
Proposition 61 would cost the state about $1.5 billion over 30 years,to pay off both the
principal ($750 million) and the interest ($756 million) cost of the bond. Debt service
payments of about $50 million will be made each year.
The League of California Cities has taken no position on Proposition 61.
Impact On Arcadia: None.
Proposition 62
Elections. Primaries: Initiative Constitutional Amendment And Statute,
If approved, Proposition 62 would:
■ "Require primary elections where all voters may vote for any state or federal •
candidate, regardless of how a voter or candidate is registered.
■ Exempt presidential nominations and elections of party central committees.
■ List only the two primary- election candidates receiving the most votes for an
office on the general election ballot, without regard to party status.
• Declare that in special primary elections, the candidate receiving the majority
vote is elected.
• Require apolitical party's consent for identification of candidates' party
registration on the ballot and in other official election publications.
This measure conflicts with Proposition 60 by advocating for an "open primary' election
system whereby the top two vote - getters in the primary — regardless of party
identification — advance to the general election.
Proposition 60, on the other hand, would amend the State Constitution to maintain the
current statewide election system.
The State Constitution provides that if the provisions of two approved propositions are in
conflict, only the provisions of the measure with the higher number of "yes" votes at the •
statewide election take effect.
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 5
• The League of California Cities has taken a neutral position on Proposition 62.
Impact On Arcadia: None.
Proposition 63
The Mental Health Services Expansion, Funding. Tax On Personal Incomes
Above $1 Million. Initiative Statute.
Please see the staff report analyzing Proposition 63.
Proposition 64
Limits On Private Enforcement Of Unfair Business Competition Laws. Initiative
Statue.
If approved, Proposition 64 would:
• Only allow an individual to sue via private enforcement of unfair business
competition laws if that individual was actually injured by, and suffered
• financial /property loss because of, an unfair business practice.
• Require private representative claims to comply with procedural requirements
applicable to class action lawsuits.
• Authorize only the California Attorney General or local government prosecutors
to sue on behalf of the general public to enforce unfair business competition
laws.
• Limit the use of monetary penalties recovered by the Attorney General or local
government prosecutors for enforcement of consumer protection laws.
Under current state law, a person initiating a lawsuit under the unfair competition law is
not required to show that he /she suffered injury or lost money or property, and also
does not have to meet the requirements for class action lawsuits.
Proposition 64 seeks to restrict those who can bring unfair competition lawsuits, and
also requires that lawsuits brought on behalf of others be class action lawsuits. The
measure would also limit the use of civil penalty revenues.
The League of California Cities has taken a neutral position on Proposition 64.
• Impact On Arcadia: None.
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 6
•
Proposition 65
Local Government Funds, Revenues. State Mandates. initiative Constitutional
Amendment.
Proposition 65 was the initial measure submitted by a coalition of local government
entities in order to protect local revenues from state raids and mandates.
Since Proposition 65 was submitted, an agreement between local, governments,
Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature was struck up'in the form of Proposition
1A. As a result, local government entities are now opposing Proposition 65 and
supporting PropositionlA.
The League of California Cities has come out in opposition to Proposition 65, instead
supporting Proposition 1A:
Impact On Arcadia: Proposition 65 would limit state authority over local finances,
resulting in higher and more stable revenues for the.City of
Arcadia. The measure would also lower resources for state
programs.
Proposition 66
Limitations On "Three Strikes" Law. Sex Crimes. Punishment Initiative Statute.
If approved, Proposition 66 would:
■ Amend the "Three Strikes" law to require increased sentences only when the
most current conviction is for specified violent and /or serious felony.
■ Redefine violent and serious felony. Under this measure, selected felonies
would no longer be considered violent or serious offenses, including:
o Non - residential arson resulting in no significant injuries.
o Unintentional infliction of significant personal injury while committing a
felony offense.
o Threats to commit criminal acts that would result in significant personal
injury.
o Participation in felonies committed by a criminal street gang.
o Conspiracy to commit assault. •
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 7
• o Interfering with a trial witness without the use of force or threats, and not in
the furtherance of a conspiracy.
o Burglary of an unoccupied residence.
o Attempted burglary.
Require each "strike" to be tried separately. Under current law, a defendant can
receive multiple strikes" in a single trial. This measure would require that eligible
offenses be brought and tried in separate trials in order for each of them to be
counted as a strike.
■ Increase punishment for specified sex crimes against children.
The League of California Cities has taken no position on Proposition 66.
Impact On Arcadia: None.
Proposition 67
• Emergency Medical Services. Funding. Telephone Surcharge. Initiative
Constitutional Amendment And Statute.
If approved, Proposition 67 would:
■ Add an additional 3% to existing surcharge rates on telephone use within
California.
Limit the added 3% surcharge collected on residential telephone service to 50
cents per month. This monthly cap does not apply to cell phones or business
telephone lines.
Use the increased revenue to provide funding to physicians for uncompensated
emergency care; hospitals for emergency services; community clinics for
uncompensated care; emergency personnel training /equipment; and emergency
telephone system improvements.
Under Proposition 67, revenues from the increased surcharge would be deposited into s
new 911 Emergency and Trauma Care Fund established by the measure. Most of the
additional revenues generated would be used to reimburse physicians and hospitals for
uncompensated emergency and trauma care.
•
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 8
The League of California Cities has taken a neutral position on Proposition-67. •
Impact On Arcadia: None.
Proposition 68
Non - Tribal Commercial Gambling Expansion. Tribal Gaming Compact
Amendments: Revenues, Tax Exemptions. Initiative Constitutional Amendment
And Statute.
If approved, Proposition 68 would:
■ Set up two possible scenarios regarding new state gambling revenues.
o The first scenario would occur only if all Indian tribes with compacts agree
to specified revisions to their existing compacts.
o The second scenario would be triggered if the tribes do not agree to the
revisions. In this case, 5 existing racetracks and 11 existing card rooms
would be allowed to operate slot machines.
■ Scenario 1 •
o Authorize the Govemor to negotiate tribal compact amendments requiring:
• Indian tribes pay 25% of slot machine /gaming device revenues to
the Gaming Revenue Trust Fund (a state fund established by the
measure).
Indian tribes comply with certain state laws (including those
governing environmental protection, gambling regulation and
political campaign contributions).
Indian tribes to accept state court jurisdiction.
■ Scenario 2
o If compacted tribes do not unanimously accept the required amendments
within 90 days of the measure passing, the measure would authorize
sixteen specified non -tribal racetracks and gambling establishments to
operate 30,000 slot machines /gaming devices, with racetracks and
cardrooms subject to the following requirements:
0
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 9
• Pay 30% of slot machine /gaming device revenue to the Gaming
Revenue Trust Fund.
• Pay 2% of slot machine /gaming device revenue to the cities in
which the gambling facilities are located.
• Pay 1 % of slot machine /gaming'device revenue to the counties in
which the gambling facilities are located.
• The.five racetracks also would'be required to pay annually an
additional 20% of slot machine /gaming device revenue to a fund
administered by the California Horse Racing Board and used to
benefit the horse racing industry.
■ Payments into the Gaming Revenue Trust Fund would first be used for the
following purposes:
o Up to 1% of the funds could be used for administrative costs.
o $3 million annually for "responsible gambling" programs.
• o Supplemental payments to tribes that do no operate slot machines or
operate fewer than 350 slot machines.
Any remaining funds in the Gaming Revenue Trust Fund would be distributed to
local governments throughout the state as follows:
o 50% would be allocated to counties to provide services for abused and
foster care children.
o 35% would go to local governments, based on population, for additional
sheriffs and police officers.
o 15% would go to local governments, based on population, for additional
firefighters.
The measure also specifies that these funds cannot replace funds already being used
for the same purpose.
It has been estimated that increased gambling revenues could potentially amount to
over $1 billion annually.
• Proposition 70 also contains provisions affecting the number of slot machines
authorized in the state. That measure would allow tribes entering a new or amended
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 10
compact to expand the types of games authorized at casinos. It would also eliminate •
the existing limits on the number of slot machines and facilities a tribe can operate. In
exchange for the exclusive right of these types of gambling, tribes would pay the state a
percentage of their net income from gambling activities.
The State Constitution provides that if the provisions of two approved propositions are in
conflict, only the provisions of the measure with the higher number of "yes" votes at the
statewide election will take effect.
The League of California Cities has come out in opposition to Proposition 68.
Impact On Arcadia: Proposition 68 would increase local government revenues for
funding child protective, police and firefighting services.
Additionally, if Indian tribes do not agree to revise their compacts
within the time required by the measure and gambling is
expanded to include I I card rooms and 5 racetracks, the cities in
which these establishments are located would collectively stand
to receive payments in the high tens of millions of dollars each
year. For the City of Arcadia, the passage of Proposition 68
would result in a dramatic increase in revenue of several million
dollars per year for both public safety and general City programs.
However, the exact amount of the revenue increase is unknown •
at this time.
Proposition 69
DNA Samples. Collection. Database. Funding. Initiative Statute.
If approved, Proposition 69 would:
■ Require the collection of DNA samples from all felons, and from adults and
juveniles arrested for, or charged with, specified crimes.
• Require that all of the above referenced DNA samples collected be submitted to
a state DNA database.
• Authorizes local law enforcement laboratories to perform analyses for state
databases and maintain local databases of DNA samples.
• Specifies procedures for confidentiality and removing samples from the
database.
• Imposes additional monetary penalties on certain fineslforfeitures to fund the
program. •
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 11
• Designates the California Department of Justice to implement the program,
subject to available monies.
■ Authorizes a $7 million loan from the Legislature for initial implementation of the
program.
Under Proposition 69 .local costs to collect DNA samples are, likely more than fully
offset by additional revenues from the increase in monetary penalties for certain
fines /forfeitures. Additionally, other revenues will -become available for DNA= related
activities.
The League.of California Cities has taken no position on Proposition 69.
Impact On Arcadia: None.
Proposition 70
Tribal Gaming Compacts. Exclusive Gaming Rights. Contributions To State.
Initiative Constitutional Amendment And Statute.
• If approved, Proposition 70 would:
■ Require the Governor to amend an existing Indian tribe's compact, or enter into a
new compact with any tribe, within 30 days of a tribe's request.
■ Require any amended or new compact to remain in -effect for 99 years'.
■ Grant exclusive tribal gaming rights, with no limit or regulation on the types of
machines, gambling games or facilities on Indian land.
■ Require tribes to contribute a percentage of net gaming income; based on the
prevailing state corporation tax rate (currently 8.84 %) to the state. Contributions
are in lieu of any other fees, taxes or levies.
■ Allow tribes to stop. makingthese payments to the state if Indian tribes lose their
exclusive right to conduct certain types of gambling in California.
■ Continue to require off - reservation impact assessments and public
notice /comment opportunities before significant expansion or construction of
gaming facilities begin. However, tribes would not be subject to the requirement
for more extensive environmental reviews and negotiations with local
governments as stipulated in the most recent 2004 compact negotiated by 5
• tribes with Governor Schwarzenegger.
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5,2004
Page 12
•
■ Likely reduce tribal payments to local governments, potentially totaling_ in the
millions of dollars annually.
■ Not require tribes to negotiate with localgovernments concerning community
impacts of gambling and /or expansion activities.
Proposition 70 would increase the number of slot. nachines operated on Indianlands;
likely lower,payments to the state; provide fewer regulations for tribes wishing to expand,
gambling operations; and would lock in agreements for 99 years. i
Proposition 68, which is also on the ballot, contains provisions affecting the number of
slot machines authorized in the state. That-measure would allow 16 card rooms and
racetracks to operate slot machines if tribes do not agree to make specified payments to
the state and abide by certain state laws.
The State Constitution provides that if the provisions of two approved propositions are in
conflict, only the provisions of the measure with the higher number of yes votes at -the;
statewide election take' effect.
The League of California Cities has come out in opposition to Proposition 70.
Impact On Arcadia: None. •
Proposition 71
Stem Cell Research. Funding. Bonds. Initiative Constitutional Amendment And
Statute.
If approved, Proposition 71 would:
■ Authorize the issuance of $3 billion imgeneral obligation bonds, subject to an
annual limit of $350 million; -to establish and finance the .'!California Institute for
Regenerative Medicine" (Institute).
■ Appropriate monies from the state General Fund to pay for the bonds.
• Utilize the Institute to regulate stem cell research and provide funding, through
grants and loans, for such research and research facilities.
• Establishes the constitutional right to conduct stem cell research in California.
• Prohibit the Institute from funding human reproductive cloning research.
■ Establish an oversight committee to govern the Institute. 40
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 13
• Provide a loan from the state General Fund up of up to $3 million for the
Institute's initial implementation and administration costs.
Proposition 71 would cost the state about $6 billion over 30 years to pay off both the
principal ($3 billion) and interest ($3 billion) on the bonds, with payments averaging
about $200 million per year.
The League of California Cities has taken no position on Proposition 71.
Impact On Arcadia: None.
Proposition 72
Health Care Coverage Requirements. Referendum.
If approved, Proposition 72 would:
■ Provide for individual and dependent health care coverage for employees
working for large and medium employers, subject to specific requirements.
• Require that employers pay at least 80% of coverage costs, with a maximum
employee contribution of 20 %.
■ Requires employers to pay for health coverage or pay a fee to the medical
insurance board that purchases primarily private health coverage.
■ Apply to employers with 200 or more employees beginning on 1/1/2006.
■ Apply to employers with 50 to 199 employees beginning on 1/1/2007.
■ Apply to employers with 20 to 49 employees if tax credit enacted.
In 2003, the Legislature approved, and former Governor Davis signed, Senate Bill 2 to
expand health insurance coverage beginning in 2006 for employees of certain
employers, and in some cases, their dependents.
The new law would have gone into effect January 1, 2004. However, Proposition 72, a
referendum on this new law, subsequently qualified for the statewide ballot. As a result,
SB 2 was put "on hold" and will take effect only if the voters approve Proposition 72.
The League of California Cities has taken a neutral position on Proposition 72.
• Impact On Arcadia: None.
Analysis Of Propositions On Statewide Ballot
October 5, 2004
Page 14
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with receiving this report.
RECOMMENDATION
Receive this report and provide direction to staff on further action to be taken
regarding the propositions that will appear an the November 2, 2004, statewide
ballot.
•
•
0
October 5, 2004
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Don Penman, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director
By: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator
SUBJECT:
Approve annexation in concept
SUMMARY
The Development Services Department has received a request from Western Pacific
•Development to annex to the City of El Monte a 5+ acre parcel fronting on Durfee Avenue
currently located in the City of Arcadia (see attached map).
The site is currently undeveloped, but is used for outdoor storage. The" applicant is
proposing to develop the site with single - family detached homes in the City of El Monte.
El Monte has approved the concept of.the boundary reorganization (annexation), but prior
to proceeding with the formal process for boundary reorganization through LAFCO (the
Local Agency Formation Commission), El Monte would like some assurance from the
Arcadia City Council that the City supports the proposed reorganization.
It is the Development Services Department's opinion that the proposed boundary
reorganization is appropriate because of the location and surrounding development, and
would recommend that the City Council approve in concept this request.
BACKGROUND
Approximately two years ago, Western Pacific Development & Construction (applicant)
contacted the City with a proposal to develop an approximate 3 acre parcel of property
located in Arcadia on the east side of Durtee Avenue, south of Clark Avenue with medium
density residential. Since Western Pacific Development's initial contact with the City, the
project site has been increased to 5.19 acres.
LASER IMAGED
10
The property is zoned M -1 (light industrial) and the General Plan for the area is
"Industrial." Property to the north along Clark Street is located in Arcadia and developed
with industrial uses.. In addition, there is an equestrian trail access along the north and
east of the property. -
Property to the east is a quarry operation located in the City of Irwindale. Properties to
the west and south are located in the City of El Monte and developed with single - family
residences. Property to the southeast of the site is the Arcadia Reclamation site (old
Rodeffer Quarry) located in Arcadia. The Arcadia City boundary is adjacent to the
easterly side of Durfee Avenue. All of Durfee Avenue is within the City of El Monte
jurisdiction.
DISCUSSION
During the initial meetings, the Development Services Department advised Western
Pacific that it was not likely that staff would support residential development in this area of
the City of Arcadia. It was mentioned residential development within this area would be
inconsistent with the Arcadia General Plan designation of industrial, as well as the M -1
zoning and the typical industrial development to the north along Clark Street.
Western Pacific presented the idea of annexing the property into the City of El Monte
because Durfee Avenue is in the City of El Monte as are the residential properties to the
west and south of the subject site. After discussion with other Arcadia city departments,
staff advised Western Pacific that this idea might be considered, if the City of El Monte
agreed to the idea. However, it was noted that there would have to -remain some type of
direct connection between the Arcadia City limits along Clark Street and the Arcadia
Reclamation site located in Arcadia to the southeast of the subject property.
Since the applicant's initial proposal, Arcadia and El Monte staff have met regarding this
possible boundary reorganization (annexation). Because of the immediate proximity of
homes along Durfee Avenue in the City of El Monte, both cities agree that the annexation
of this area into El Monte seems appropriate. Conversely, developing residential in this
area of Arcadia would be inconsistent with the Arcadia General Plan, the zoning and the
typical industrial development to the north along Clark Street. On the other hand,
industrial development of this strip along Durfee Avenue could also be considered
disruptive and inappropriate especially adjacent to the residential neighborhood. in El
Monte.
Annexing the property into the City of El Monte could resolve the potential impacts of
industrial buildings being constructed adjacent to residential property. Because of the
location of this property, both Arcadia and El Monte City staff agree that this site is more.
suitable in El Monte. Future residential development, in this area would be more
compatible with the single - family residential development to the south and west located in
El Monte than industrial uses.
r1
LJ
•
Durfee Reorganization •
Q "[Dl�tMI R�iAJ Page 2
October 5, 2004
In August 2003, the Development Services Department circulated a memo to Police, Fire.
•and Public Works Services regarding the. potential "detachment/annexation" of the
property on Durfee Avenue. The departments noted that there were "no strong" reasons
to oppose such an action. However, it was noted that because this property abuts
"Industrially zoned property in Arcadia and Irwindale to the east and north, future property
owners should be made aware of potential noise and proximity issues prior to purchasing
a home in this area "so that neither Arcadia or El Monte police are burdened by nuisance
complaints related to such industrial uses."
The Development Services Department has commented in correspondence to the City of
El Monte regarding the possible annexation of this property that in theory "Arcadia would
support a residential project compatible with the surrounding neighborhood along Durfee
Avenue." It was noted, however, that the equestrian easement should be maintained
across the property to provide access from Durfee Avenue to the horse trail located north .
of the Arcadia Reclamation site.
Applicant's Proposal
As indicated, the proposed area of the boundary reorganization is 5.19 acres. The
applicant is proposing to construct a planned residential development with a maximum of
34 dwelling units on the subject property (approximately 6.6 dwelling units per acre). At
this time, the plan is tentative and modifications to the plan will be made as necessary by
the City of El Monte as the project progresses.
• The annexation would result in the easterly portion of the area adjacent to the City of
Irwindale remaining within the City of Arcadia. The narrowest portion of this strip within
Arcadia would be a minimum of 30' -0" and would provide a connection between Clark
Street and the Arcadia Reclamation site. A portion of this area is comprised of slopes for
the adjoining quarry. The horse trail would be relocated to the northerly boundary of the
parcel and along the easterly boundary to provide access to the horse riders in the area.
This trail proceeds east between Irwindale and Arcadia north of the Arcadia Reclamation
site.
LAFCO
LAFCO (Local Agency Formation Commission) is the regulatory agency responsible for
reviewing and approving jurisdictional boundary changes. A routine application that is
non - controversial typically takes approximately 3 to 4 months to process after a complete
application is submitted to the LAFCO office.
It is anticipated that the application for the boundary reorganization would be initiated by
the landowner although an agency, in this case the City of El Monte, may also initiate a
petition.
• Durfee Reorganization
Page 3
October 5, 2004
Prior to annexation to a city, the property must be pre -zoned and pre- general planned. In
addition the applicant may be required to submit information for an environmental •
assessment.
In order to-proceed with the boundary reorganization, Western Pacific Development &
Construction is requesting that the City Council approve the concept of the boundary
reorganization to the City of El Monte.
If the Council approves this concept, Western Pacific will proceed with the appropriate
pre - General Plan and pre- Zoning of the property with the City.of El Monte. Once that has
been completed and the appropriate resolutions adopted, the applicant may proceed with
filing for boundary reorganization with LAFCO.
FISCAL IMPACT
One of the conditions staff would recommend is that the applicant pay any costs to the
City of Arcadia that might be incurred as a result of this de- annexation. From a revenue
standpoint, because the properties involved in the annexation from the City of Arcadia to
the City of El Monte are essentially unimproved and many have been under the same
ownership for many years, current property tax receipts to the City of Arcadia are minimal
(approximately $1,000).
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve in concept the request for a boundary reorganization •
to permit approximately 5.19 acres of land in the City of Arcadia to be annexed into
the City of El Monte.
Approved:
William R. Kelly, City Manager
cc: Maps of the proposed boundary reorganization
Durfee Reorganization •
Page 4
October 5, 2004
°RAT99-' STAFF REPORT
Public Works Services Department
October 5, 2004
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Director
Prepared by: Gary F. Lewis, General Services an ger
Clement L. Flores, Maintenance Contracts Officer
Subject: Award of Contract-Landscape_ Maintenance Services
Recommendation: Award a one -year contract extension to CLS Landscape
Management Inc. for landscape maintenance services at city facilities in the
amount of
1. $467,653 and appropriate $17,699 from the General Fund —OR-
2. $491,437 and appropriate $41,483 from the General Fund for lands-
cape services including 210 Freeway On & Off ramp maintenance
SUMMARY
On November 21, 2000, the City Council awarded a one (1) year Agreement with optional
contract extensions to CLS Landscape Management Inc, (CLS) for landscape maintenance
services at City facilities. CLS is reaching the end of their third contract extension and has
submitted a written offer to extend the existing contract an additional one (1) year in accordance
with the existing agreement.
The contractor's offer of extension includes a 3% cost of living increase of $12,749, and $4,950
for two (2) change orders for additional work and modifications to the contract. The new
contract total including the two (2) change orders for the next year would be $467,653. The
change orders include the following areas:
•; Increase in area for lawn and planter maintenance at the new Police Department
New median on Baldwin Ave. between Duarte Road and Naomi Ave.
At staffs request, CLS also submitted a proposal for Freeway on & off -ramp maintenance at
Santa Anita, Baldwin, and Michillinda Avenues (see attached maps). This work includes routine
debris and weed removal and placement of wood chips as necessary in each of these areas.
The annual cost for this work is proposed at $21,840 plus a one -time cleanup fee of $1,944.
Based on the,excellent service provided by CLS during the last year, staff recommends that the
City Council award a one (1) year contract extension to CLS Landscape Management Inc. for
routine scheduled landscape maintenance services throughout the City and extraordinary
maintenance in the amount of:
• 1) $467,653 and appropriate $17,699 from the General Fund —OR-
2) $491,437 and appropriate $41,483 from the General Fund for landscape services
including 210 Freeway On & Off ramp maintenance
LASER IMAGED �'
Mayor and City Council
October 5, 2004
Page 2
Both amounts also include $25,000 for extraordinary maintenance needed annually for
unplanned repairs, accidents and weather related damage.
DISCUSSION
The Public Works Services Department is responsible for the maintenance of all City owned
landscaped areas. These public properties typically include medians, parkways, parks, water
facilities, parking districts,, and City owned facilities (e.g., Civic Center, Library, Community
Center, etc).
On November 21, 2000, the City Council awarded the Landscape Maintenance Contract with
optional annual extensions to CLS Landscape Management Inc. (CLS) for routine, day -to -day,
maintenance and care of all landscaped areas on City property.
The contract also provides for extraordinary maintenance on a time and material basis,
whenever landscape is damaged from a traffic accident, vandalism, storms, or for services not
specified in the Agreement. These services may also include the replacement of old plant
material, minor upgrades to irrigation systems, and other improvements that will enhance the
look of the landscaping. Based on past experience with this type of work,.staff has concluded
that approximately $25,000 is needed each year for extraordinary maintenance.
•
CLS has submitted a written offer to extend last years $449,954 contract (including $25,000 for
extraordinary repair work) for an additional one (1) year in accordance with the. existing
Agreement with a 3% cost -of- living adjustment of $12,479. All other conditions of the •
Agreement are to remain the same with the exception of the change orders issued to reflect
additional work at the Police Department and on Baldwin Avenue.
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
The cost to maintain 33,000 additional square feet of landscaping $ 4,360
consisting of lawn and planter area at the new police facility.
New median on Baldwin Ave. between Duarte Rd. and Naomi Ave. $ 586
TOTAL CITY FACILITY CHANGE ORDERS $ 41950
Extending the existing Agreement will ensure a continued quality maintenance service of
landscape maintenance at City facilities throughout the next year. Staff recommends that the
City Council award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $467,653 to CLS
Landscape Management Inc. for Landscape Maintenance services at City facilities.
In response to staffs request, CLS also submitted a proposal for weekly litter /debris and weed
removal on the 210 freeway off ramps at Santa Anita, Baldwin, and Michillinda Avenue. As part
of the agreement CLS has agreed to provide and spread wood chips /mulch in bare areas as
necessary to enhance the appearance' of the dirt areas. The State of California Transportation
Department, (Caltrans) provides minimal maintenance to these areas. Staff has made
numerous' unsuccessful requests to improve the maintenance frequency. To improve the
landscape maintenance frequency and general appearance of the freeway'on /off - ramps, staff
requested the additional proposal for City Councils consideration. Should the City Council
approve this work, including two (2) other change orders, the total annual cost for the landscape
maintenancecontract for the next year would be $491,437.
MOO fl32AJ
•
Mayor and City Council
October 5, 2004
Page 3
• FISCAL IMPACT
$449,954 has been budgeted in the 2004 -2005 Operating Budget for this contract. To
accomplish next years landscaping, staff recommends that the City Council authorize an
additional appropriation of
a) $17,699 from the General Fund to cover the 3% cost of living adjustment to the
contract and two (2) contract change orders -OR-
b) $41,483 from the General Fund to cover the 3% cost of living adjustment to the
contract and two (2) contract change orders, plus the addition of the 210 Freeway On
& Off ramp maintenance
RECOMMENDATION
Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $467,653 to CLS
Landscape Management Inc., for Landscape Maintenance Services at City
Facilities & appropriate $17,699 from the General Fund to cover the cost of living
adjustment and additional landscape maintenance work.
m
2. Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $491,437 to CLS
Landscape Management Inc., for Landscape Maintenance Services at City
• Facilities including the 210 Freeway On & Off ramp maintenance & appropriate
$41,483 from the General Fund to cover the additional landscape maintenance
work.
►Umv
3. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract extension in a
form approved by the City Attorney.
PM:GL:MA:dw
Attachments
•
Approved by:—'-"�
William R. Kelly, City Manager
I
Rf J'Ie, I I V.
1:7 1 o I
I al'
i I
ov lt4
TIM,
M v71 I P=T
AIAMM MR
all P�ill
xr,
ply,
je
0
15-
KEW.,
a
41, 1, "1 A I
MUM
lrl
Nil,
111. p,
a
41, 1, "1 A I
MUM