HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 01-06 CC AGENDA PKTAGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING
NATIONAL CITY CITY COUNCIL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CIVIC CENTER
1243 NATIONAL CITY BOULEVARD
REGULAR MEETING - TUESDAY — JANUARY 6, 2004 - 6:00 P.M.
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
PLEASE COMPLETE A REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM PRIOR TO THE
COMMENCEMENT OF THE MEETING AND SUBMIT IT TO
THE CITY CLERK
IT IS THE INTENTION OF YOUR CITY COUNCIL TO BE RECEPTIVE TO YOUR
CONCERNS IN THIS COMMUNITY. YOUR PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL
GOVERNMENT WILL ASSURE A RESPONSIBLE AND EFFICIENT CITY OF
NATIONAL CITY. WE INVITE YOU TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE CITY
MANAGER ANY MATTER THAT YOU DESIRE THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.
WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENCE AND WISH YOU TO KNOW THAT WE
APPRECIATE YOUR INVOLVEMENT.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND INVOCATION BY MAYOR NICK
INZUNZA
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 16,
2003.
PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (Three -Minute Time Limit)
NOTE: Pursuant to State Law, items requiring Council action must be brought back on
a subsequent Council agenda unless they are of a demonstrated emergency or urgent
nature.
COPIES OF THE. CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDAS AND MINUTES
MAY BE OBTAINED THROUGH OUR WEBSITE AT www.ci.national-city.ca.us
COUNCIL AGENDA
1/6/04 PAGE 2
PUBLIC HEARING
1. A Public Hearing to consider the extension of an Interim Ordinance adopted
pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 as an urgency measure enacting a
moratorium on the establishment of check cashing businesses and payday
advance businesses in National City; approval of report describing measures taken
to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of the Ordinance. (City
Attorney) *Refer to Item #9
CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar: Consent calendar items involve matters which are of a routine or
noncontroversial nature. All consent calendar items are adopted by approval of a single
motion by the City Council. Prior to such approval, any item may be removed from the
consent portion of the agenda and separately considered, upon request of a
Councilmember, a staff member, or a member of the public.
2. Approval of a motion to waive reading of the text of all Ordinances considered at
this meeting and provides that such Ordinances shall be introduced and/or
adopted after a reading of the title only. (City Clerk).
3. Resolution No. 2004-1
Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the Mayor to
execute an Agreement with Maximus to provide the City with cost of services fee
analysis. (Building & Safety)
4. Resolution No. 2004-2
Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City giving notice of intention
to vacate the 15 foot northerly portion of 15th Street between National City
Boulevard and Kimball Park. (Case File No. SC-2003-2) (Planning)
COUNCIL AGENDA
1/6/04 PAGE 3
CONSENT CALENDAR (Cont.)
5. WARRANT REGISTER NO. 24 (Finance)
Ratification of Demands in the amount of $899,019.32.
6. WARRANT REGISTER NO. 25 (Finance)
Ratification of Demands in the amount of $588,889.82.
NON CONSENT RESOLUTION
7. Resolution No. 2004-3
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City denying a Conditional
Use Permit for a church at 833 East 8th Street. (Applicant: Octaviano Cabrera —
Misiones El Shadai) (Case File No. CUP-2003-18) (Planning)
ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION
8. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City rescinding and
amending certain time limits with respect to the Redevelopment Plan for the
National City Redevelopment Project pursuant to Senate Bills 211 and 1045 as
codified in Health and Safety Code Sections 33333.2 and 33333.6(e)(2)
(Community Development Commission)
9. An Interim Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adopted
pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 as an urgency measure extending a
moratorium on the establishment of check cashing businesses and payday
advance businesses in National City. (City Attorney) *Refer to Item #1
COUNCIL AGENDA
1/6/04 PAGE 4
ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION (Cont.)\
10. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City amending the National
City Municipal Code by amending Chapter 10.19 pertaining to the seizure and
forfeiture of public nuisance vehicles. (City Attorney)
NEW BUSINESS
11. Request by the National City Chamber of Commerce to serve alcohol at their
annual dinner. (Public Works)
12. Temporary Use Permit — San Diego Academy — RV parking during construction.
(Building & Safety)
13. Report on latest shifts in State VLF funding. (City Manager)
STAFF
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
ADJOURNMENT
Next Regular City Council Meeting — Tuesday — January 20, 2004 - 6:00 p.m. —
Council Chambers, Civic Center
TAPE RECORDINGS OF EACH CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ARE AVAILABLE FOR SALE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
EETING DATE January 6, 2004
*Refer to Item #9
1
AGENDA ITEM NO.
(-ITEM TITLE A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE EXTENSION OF AN INTERIM ORDINANCE ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858 AS AN URGENCY MEASURE ENACTING A MORATORIUM
ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CHECK CASHING BUSINESSES AND PAYDAY ADVANCE BUSINESSES IN
NATIONAL CITY; APPROVAL OF REPORT DESCRIBING MEASURES TAKEN TO ALLEVIATE THE CONDITION
WHICH LED TO THE ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE
PREPARED BY
EXPLANATION
At the December 2 City Council meeting, the City Council enacted Ordinance No. 2003-2232, an
urgency interim ordinance imposing a 45 day moratorium on the development of check cashing and
payday advance businesses in the city. The matter appeared on the December 16, 2003 Council agenda
as a public hearing and ordinance, with the latter being continued to the meeting of January 6, 2004.
The Government Code provides that an urgency moratorium ordinance expires 45 days after its
effective date. Accordingly, Ordinance No. 2003-2232 will expire on January 14, 2004. The Government
Code also provides that after a public hearing, an urgency moratorium ordinance may be extended by 10
months and 15 days. This public hearing will satisfy the requirements of the Government Code.
Lastly, the Government Code requires that prior to expiration of Ordinance No. 2003-2232, the
City Council shall issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led
to the adoption of the ordinance. A report meeting these requirements is submitted as part of this agenda
item for City Council approval.
An urgency ordinance to extend the moratorium by 10 months and 15 days is a companion item
on this agenda.
George H. Eiser, Ill
(Ext. 4221)
DEPARTMENT City Attorney
CEnvironmental Review N/A
Not a project under CEQA
Financial Statement
N/A
Approved By:
Finance Director
Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Hold public hearing.
Approve report
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS ( Listed Below )
Report on Check Cashing/Pay Day Advance Businesses
Proposed ordinance
Resolution No.
A-200 (9 99)
REPORT ON CHECK CASHING/PAYDAY ADVANCE BUSINESSES
Since the adoption of the urgency ordinance on December 2, 2003, the City has taken the
following actions:
1. Reviewed existing development regulations. It has been determined that the
City's General Plan contains no direct references to check cashing or payday
advance businesses. The use "Check Cashing Service" is listed under Use
Group 27, Offices and Studios, in the City's Land Use Code and is thus a
permitted use in all of the City's commercial zones except for CA
(Commercial Automotive). It is a conditional use in the IC (Institutional
Civic) and IP (Institutional Private) zones and is prohibited in all other zones.
In a zone where it is a permitted use, the only requirement would be for the
applicant to obtain a City business license. Discretionary review would be
possible in several limited situations. A check cashing business for instance
could be proposed as part of a new shopping center. The shopping center
itself would require a conditional use permit, allowing conditions to be
applied, which could further regulate all known uses proposed for the center.
Additionally, a planned development permit would be required if a new
building was being constructed to accommodate a check cashing business on a
property containing a planned development overlay zone.
2. Inventoried existing check cashing businesses in National City. The City's
Finance Depaitnient researched business license records and determined that
there are ten existing check cashing businesses in the City. It is interesting to
note that eight of these businesses are located on two streets in the City, Plaza
Boulevard and Highland Avenue.
3. Reviewed pending permit applications. The various City departments
reviewed their various pending applications to determine if any would
facilitate a check cashing/payday advance business. The remodeling of the
former Taco Bell at the southwest corner of 16th and Highland was identified.
It appears that a proposed shopping center at the northwest corner of Plaza
Boulevard and Highland Avenue is also affected.
Given their proliferation in the City, there may be a need to adopt additional land use
controls regarding this type of business. The Land Use Code could be amended to
require a Conditional Use Permit prior to the establishment of a check cashing/payday
advance business. This would allow case -by -case review of each proposal as well as the
placement of operating conditions and design controls on each one. A number of specific
plans are currently being prepared for several areas of National City. These specific
plans could include additional regulations for check cashing/payday advance businesses
within the plan boundaries. In addition, separation requirements, such as are used for
various types of businesses selling alcoholic beverages could be established.
ORDINANCE NO. 2003 —
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858
AS AN URGENCY MEASURE EXTENDING A MORATORIUM
ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CHECK CASHING BUSINESSES
AND PAYDAY ADVANCE BUSINESSES IN NATIONAL CITY
WHEREAS, National City, acting through its Community Development
Commission ("CDC"), has been very proactive over the years in efforts to revitalize the City
through redevelopment activities; and
WHEREAS, the CDC Board has created a redevelopment project area of
approximately 2,000 acres in the community; and
WHEREAS, in addition to various projects within the redevelopment project area,
the CDC Board is considering the submittal of zoning and specific plan proposals for approval
by the City, including the Downtown Project in the vicinity of 8u1 Street and National City
Boulevard, the Filipino Village Project along a portion of Plaza Boulevard, and the Mexican
Village Project along a portion of Highland Avenue; and
WHEREAS, a common element of the zoning and specific plan proposals is the
encouragement of projects within specified areas which would promote a certain atmosphere
and cohesiveness of land uses within those areas; and
WHEREAS, National City has in recent years experienced a proliferation of
businesses engaged primarily in the cashing of checks for a fee, herein referred to as "check
cashing businesses" and in advancing cash to customers in advance of payday for a fee, herein
referred to as "payday advance businesses"; and
WHEREAS, such businesses are in conflict with the contemplated
redevelopment, zoning and specific plan proposals described hereinabove and which the City
will be considering in the immediate future; and
WHEREAS, additional check cashing businesses and payday advance
businesses are proposed to be newly established or relocated within the City; and
WHEREAS, existing land use controls do not adequately address the potential
adverse effects of the proliferation of check cashing business and payday advance businesses
in the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is a current and immediate threat to
the public health, safety and welfare by the continued proliferation of check cashing business
and payday advance businesses, and that the continued issuance of building permits,
certificates of occupancy and other entitlements for use by check cashing businesses and
payday advance businesses would result in a threat to the public health, safety and welfare; and
WHEREAS, on December 2, 2003, the City Council adopted, as an urgency
interim ordinance, Ordinance No. 2003-2232, enacting a moratorium for 45 days on the
establishment of check cashing businesses and payday advance businesses in the City; and
WHEREAS, on January 6, 2004, the City Council held a public hearing, at which
time oral and documentary evidence was heard, to. consider adopting an urgency ordinance to
extend the 45 day moratorium established by Ordinance No. 2003-2232 for an additional period
of 10 months and 15 days.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds it essential to protect the health, safety and
welfare of the citizens of the City of National City to extend the moratorium established by
Ordinance No. 2003-2232 for a period of 10 months and 15 days on the establishment,
development or approval of check cashing business and payday advance businesses; and
WHEREAS, the City Council intends to adopt, after appropriate study, zoning
regulations governing check cashing businesses and payday advance businesses throughout
National City as soon as practicable, and directs the Planning Commission of this City to
commence studies and procedures necessary for the adoption of such regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of National City does ordain as
follows:
Section 1. For a period of 10 months and 15 days from the effective date of
this Ordinance, no building permit, certificate of occupancy, nor entitlement for use shall be
issued for and no construction shall take place relating to a check cashing business or payday
advance business, and no building permit, certificate of occupancy, nor entitlement for use shall
be issued for and no construction shall take place relating to the establishment, development, or
approval of any check cashing business or payday advance businesses.
Section 2. The City Council hereby directs the Planning Commission to
commence studies and procedures necessary for the adoption of regulations governing check
cashing business and payday advance businesses.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall not apply to projects where prior to
December 2, 2003, a building permit has been issued and substantial physical work has begun
in reliance on that permit.
Section 4. This Ordinance is adopted as an urgency ordinance necessary for
the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare within the meaning of the
Government Code and shall take effect immediately.
Section 5. If any portion of this Ordinance is found to be invalid, it is the
intention of the City Council that the remaining valid provisions of the Ordinance be severed
from the invalid provisions and remain in full force and effect.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th day of January, 2004.
ATTEST:
Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk
Nick Inzunza, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, III
City Attorney
2
Item #2
1/6/04
City of National City
Office of the City Clerk
1243 National City Blvd., National City, CA 91950-4397
Michael R. Dalla — City Clerk
(619)336-4226 (619) 336-4229
To: Honorable Mayor and Council
From: Michael Dalla, City Clerk
Subject: Ordinance Introduction and Adoption
It is recommended that the City Council approve the following motion as part, of
the Consent Calendar:
"That the City Council waive reading of the text of all Ordinances
considered at this meeting and provide that such Ordinances shall
be introduced and/or adopted after a reading of only the title".
mrd
MEETING DATE January 6, 2004
City of National City, California
NCIL A EA STATE E T
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
ITE TITLE A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH MAXIMUS TO
PROVIDE THE CITY WITH COST OF SERVICES/USER FEE ANALYSIS
Kathleen Trees 4213
PREPARED BY ticalte...-rld4 DEPARTMENT
EXPLANATION
Building & Safety
To avoid large user fee increases, the City Council has previously recommended more frequent, modest user
fee increases to keep pace with inflation. The last City user fee review was conducted in 2001. Due to
increases in labor, materials and supplies, some of the current user fees are not sufficient to cover the cost of
City services. In addition, new services have been added in which the fees have not been established.
In the past, the City staff in each department has calculated their cost of services. In recent years, however,
cities have been challenged in the courts on their development fees. With this in mind, staff decided to
contract with a consultant that is an expert in calculating fees that can be defended in the courts. Several
proposals were received and MAXIMUS was chosen based on their experience and superior method of
calculating building department fees.
See attached Executive Summary and proposal prepared by MAXIMUS for more information.
Environmental Review ✓ N/A
Financial Statement
$47,000 to be paid out of Unreserved Fund Balance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS ( Listed Below )
Resolution
Contract
Executive Summary
Resolution No. 2004-1
A-200 (9/80)
RESOLUTION NO. 2004 — 1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT WITH MAXIMUS TO PROVIDE THE
CITY WITH COST OF SERVICES FEE ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, the City desires to employ a consultant to provide a cost of
services/user fee analysis; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that Maximus is a program management
and operations consultant and is qualified by experience and ability to perform the services
desired by the City, and Maximus is willing to perform such services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
National City hereby authorizes the Mayor to execute on behalf of the City an Agreement with
Maximus to provide a cost of services/user fee analysis. Said Agreement is on file in the office of
the City Clerk.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th day of January, 2004.
Nick Inzunza, Mayor
ATTEST:
Michael Dalla, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, III
City Attorney
AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
AND
MAXIMUS
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 6th day of January, 2004, by and
between the CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, a municipal corporation (the "CITY"), and
MAXIMUS (the "CONTRACTOR").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the CITY desires to employ a CONTRACTOR to provide a
cost of services/user fee analysis.
WHEREAS, the CITY has determined that the CONTRACTOR is a
corporation and is qualified by experience and ability to perform the services desired by
the CITY, and the CONTRACTOR is willing to perform such services.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO DO MUTUALLY AGREE
AS FOLLOWS:
1. ENGAGEMENT OF CONTRACTOR. The CITY hereby agrees to
engage the CONTRACTOR and the CONTRACTOR hereby agrees to perform the
services hereinafter set forth in accordance with all terms and conditions contained
herein.
The CONTRACTOR represents that all services required hereunder will
be performed directly by the CONTRACTOR or under direct supervision of the
CONTRACTOR.
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES. The CONTRACTOR will perform services
as set forth in the attached Exhibit 1 Section A - F.
The CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for all research and reviews
related to the work and shall not rely on personnel of the CITY for such services, except
as authorized in advance by the CITY. The CONTRACTOR shall appear at meetings
cited in Exhibit 1 to keep staff and City Council advised of the progress on the project.
The CITY may unilaterally, or upon request from the CONTRACTOR, from time
to time reduce or increase the Scope of Services to be performed by the
CONTRACTOR under this Agreement. Upon doing so, the CITY and the
CONTRACTOR agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a
corresponding reduction or increase in the compensation associated with said change
in services, not to exceed a factor of 15% from the base amount.
Revised August 2003
3. PROJECT COORDINATION AND SUPERVISION.
Kathleen Trees hereby is designated as the Project Coordinator for the CITY and will
monitor the progress and execution of this Agreement. The CONTRACTOR shall
assign a single Project Director to provide supervision and have overall responsibility for
the progress and execution of this Agreement for the CONTRACTOR. Richard Pearl
thereby is designated as the Project Director for the CONTRACTOR.
4. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT. The compensation for the
CONTRACTOR shall be based on monthly billings covering actual work performed.
Billings shall include labor classifications, respective rates, hours worked and also
materials, if any. The total cost for all work described in Exhibit 1 shall not exceed the
schedule given in Exhibit 1 Section G (the Base amount) without prior written
authorization from the Project Coordinator. Monthly invoices will be processed for
payment and remitted within thirty (30) days from receipt of invoice, provided that work
is accomplished consistent with Exhibit 1 as determined by the CITY.
The CONTRACTOR shall maintain all books, documents, papers,
employee time sheets, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to costs
incurred and in -kind services provided and shall make such materials available at its
office at all reasonable times during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years
from the date of final payment under this Agreement, for inspection by the CITY and for
furnishing of copies to the CITY, if requested.
5. LENGTH OF AGREEMENT. Completion dates or time durations
for specific portions of the Project are set forth in Exhibit 1 Section H.
6. DISPOSITION AND OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. The
Memoranda, Reports, Maps, Drawings, Plans, Specifications and other documents
prepared by the CONTRACTOR for this Project, whether paper or electronic, shall
become the property of the CITY for use with respect to this Project, and shall be
turned over to the CITY upon completion of the Project, or any phase thereof, as
contemplated by this Agreement.
Contemporaneously with the transfer of documents, the CONTRACTOR
hereby assigns to the CITY and CONTRACTOR thereby expressly waives and
disclaims, any copyright in, and the right to reproduce, all written material, drawings,
plans, specifications or other work prepared under this agreement, except upon the
CITY's prior authorization regarding reproduction, which authorization shall not be
unreasonably withheld. The CONTRACTOR shall, upon request of the CITY, execute
any further document(s) necessary to further effectuate this waiver and disclaimer.
The CONTRACTOR agrees that the CITY may use, reuse, alter,
reproduce, modify, assign, transfer, or in any other way, medium, or method utilize the
CONTRACTOR's written work product for the CITY's purposes, and the
CONTRACTOR expressly waives and discl4ips any residual rights granted to it by Civil
Code Sections 980 through 989 relating to ihtellectual property and artistic works.
2 Revised August 2003
Any modification or reuse by the CITY of documents, drawings or
specifications prepared by the CONTRACTOR shall relieve the CONTRACTOR from
liability under Section 14 but only with respect to the effect of the modification or reuse
by the CITY, or for any liability to the CITY should the documents be used by the CITY
for some project other than what was expressly agreed upon within the Scope of this
project, unless otherwise mutually agreed.
7. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Both parties hereto in the
performance of this Agreement will be acting in an independent capacity and not as
agents, employees, partners or joint venturers with one another. Neither the
CONTRACTOR nor the CONTRACTOR'S employees are employee of the CITY and
are not entitled to any of the rights, benefits, or privileges of the CITY's employees,
including but not limited to retirement, medical, unemployment, or workers'
compensation insurance.
This Agreement contemplates the personal services of the
CONTRACTOR and the CONTRACTOR's employees, and it is recognized by the
parties that a substantial inducement to the CITY for entering into this Agreement was,
and is, the professional reputation and competence of the CONTRACTOR and its
employees. Neither this Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned by the
CONTRACTOR without the prior written consent of the CITY. Nothing herein contained
is intended to prevent the CONTRACTOR from employing or hiring as many
employees, or subcontractors, as the CONTRACTOR may deem necessary for the
proper and efficient performance of this Agreement. All agreements by CONTRACTOR
with its subcontractor(s) shall require the subcontractor to adhere to the applicable
terms of this Agreement.
8. CONTROL. Neither the CITY nor its officers, agents or employees
shall have any control over the conduct of the CONTRACTOR or any of the
CONTRACTOR's employees except as herein set forth, and the CONTRACTOR
expressly agrees not to represent that the CONTRACTOR or the CONTRACTOR's
agents, servants, or employees are in any manner agents, servants or employees of
the CITY, it being understood that the CONTRACTOR, its agents, servants, and
employees are as to the CITY wholly independent contractors and that the CONTRAC-
TOR's obligations to the CITY are solely such as are prescribed by this Agreement.
9. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW. The CONTRACTOR, in
the performance of the services to be provided herein, shall comply with all applicable
State and Federal statutes and regulations, and all applicable ordinances, rules and
regulations of the City of National City, whether now in force or subsequently enacted.
The CONTRACTOR, and each of its subcontractors, shall obtain and maintain a current
City of National City business license prior to and during performance of any work
pursuant to this Agreement.
10. LICENSES, PERMITS, ETC. The CONTRACTOR represents and
covenants that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatever
nature that are legally required to practice its profession. The CONTRACTOR
3 Revised August 2003
represents and covenants that the CONTRACTOR shall, at its sole cost and expense,
keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, any license, permit, or
approval which is legally required for the CONTRACTOR to practice its profession.
11. STANDARD OF CARE.
A. The CONTRACTOR, in performing any services under this
Agreement, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the CONTRACTOR'S trade or profession currently
practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. The CONTRACTOR shall
take all special precautions necessary to protect the CONTRACTOR's employees and
members of the public from risk of harm arising out of the nature of the work and/or the
conditions of the work site.
B. Unless disclosed in writing prior to the date of this
agreement, the CONTRACTOR warrants to the CITY that it is not now, nor has it for the
five (5) years preceding, been debarred by a governmental agency or involved in
debarment, arbitration or litigation proceedings concerning the CONTRACTOR's
professional performance or the furnishing of materials or services relating thereto.
C. The CONTRACTOR is responsible for identifying any unique
products, treatments, processes or materials whose availability is critical to the success
of the project the CONTRACTOR has been retained to perform, within the time
requirements of the CITY, or, when no time is specified, then within a commercially
reasonable time. Accordingly, unless the CONTRACTOR has notified the CITY
otherwise, the CONTRACTOR warrants that all products, materials, processes or
treatments identified in the project documents prepared for the CITY are reasonably
commercially available. Any failure by the CONTRACTOR to use due diligence under
this sub -paragraph will render the CONTRACTOR liable to the CITY for any increased
costs that result from the CITY's later inability to obtain the specified items or any
reasonable substitute within a price range that allows for project completion in the time
frame specified or, when not specified, then within a commercially reasonable time.
12. NON-DISCRIMINATION PROVISIONS. The CONTRACTOR shall
not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of age,
race, color, ancestry, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin,
physical handicap, or medical condition. The CONTRACTOR will take positive action to
insure that applicants are employed without regard to their age, race, color, ancestry,
religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, physical handicap, or
medical condition. Such action shall include but not be limited to the following:
employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising,
layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for
training, including apprenticeship. The CONTRACTOR agrees to post in conspicuous
places available to employees and applicants for employment any notices provided by
the CITY setting forth the provisions of this non-discrimination clause.
13. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. The CITY may from time to time
communicate to the CONTRACTOR certain confidential information to enable the
CONTRACTOR to effectively perform the services to be provided herein. The
CONTRACTOR shall treat all such information as confidential and shall not disclose
4 Revised August 2003
any part thereof without the prior written consent of the CITY. The CONTRACTOR
shall limit the use and circulation of such information, even within its own organization,
to the extent necessary to perform the services to be provided herein. The foregoing
obligation of this Section 13, however, shall not apply to any part of the information that
(i) has been disclosed in publicly available sources of information; (ii) is, through no
fault of the CONTRACTOR, hereafter disclosed in publicly available sources of
information; (iii) is already in the possession of the CONTRACTOR without any
obligation of confidentiality; or (iv) has been or is hereafter rightfully disclosed to the
CONTRACTOR by a third party, but only to the extent that the use or disclosure thereof
has been or is rightfully authorized by that third party.
The CONTRACTOR shall not disclose any reports, recommendations,
conclusions or other results of the services or the existence of the subject matter of this
Agreement without the prior written consent of the CITY. In its performance hereunder,
the CONTRACTOR shall comply with all legal obligations it may now or hereafter have
respecting the information or other property of any other person, firm or corporation.
CONTRACTOR shall be liable to CITY for any damages caused by
breach of this condition, pursuant to the provisions of Section 14.
14. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS. The CONTRACTOR
shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of National City, its officers and
employees, against and from any damages and liability directly caused by the negligent
actions or willful misconduct of the CONTRACTOR, its employees or agents. The
CONTRACTOR shall not be responsible for any damages or liability resulting, in whole
or part, from the negligence or willful misconduct of the CITY or any third party.
15. WORKERS' COMPENSATION. The CONTRACTOR shall comply
with all of the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Insurance and Safety Acts of
the State of California, the applicable provisions of Division 4 and 5 of the California
Government Code and all amendments thereto; and all similar state or Federal acts or
laws applicable; and shall indemnify, and hold harmless the CITY and its officers, and
employees from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions,
proceedings and judgments of every nature and description, including reasonable
attorney's fees and defense costs presented, brought or recovered against the CITY or
its officers, employees, or volunteers, for or on account of any liability under any of said
acts which may be incurred by reason of any work to be performed by the
CONTRACTOR under this Agreement.
16. INSURANCE. The CONTRACTOR, at its sole cost and expense,
shall purchase and maintain, and shall require its subcontractors, when applicable, to
purchase and maintain throughout the term of this agreement, the following insurance
policies:
❑ A. If checked, Professional Liability Insurance (errors and omissions)
with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence.
B. Automobile insurance , .overing all bodily injury and property
damage incurred during the performance of this Agreement, with a minimum coverage
5 Revised August 2003
of $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident. Such automobile insurance shall
include non -owned vehicles.
C. Comprehensive general liability insurance, with minimum limits of
$1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence, covering all bodily injury and property
damage arising out of its operation under this Agreement.
D. Workers' compensation insurance covering all of CONSULTANT's
employees.
E. The aforesaid policies shall constitute primary insurance as to the
CITY, its officers, employees, and volunteers, so that any other policies held by the
CITY shall not contribute to any loss under said insurance. Said policies shall provide
for thirty (30) days prior written notice to the CITY of cancellation or material change.
F. Said policies, except for the professional liability and worker's
compensation policies, shall name the CITY and its officers, agents and employees as
additional insureds.
G. If required insurance coverage is provided on a "claims made"
rather than "occurrence" form, the CONTRACTOR shall maintain such insurance
coverage for three years after expiration of the term (and any extensions) of this Agree-
ment.
H. Any aggregate insurance limits must apply solely to this Agree-
ment.
I. Insurance shall be written with only California admitted companies
which hold a current policy holder's alphabetic and financial size category rating of not
less than A-VII according to the current Best's Key Rating Guide, or a company equal
financial stability that is approved by the City's Risk Manager.
J. This Agreement shall not take effect until certificate(s) or other
sufficient proof that these insurance provisions have been complied with, are filed with
and approved by the CITY's Risk Manager. If the CONTRACTOR does not keep all of
such insurance policies in full force and effect at all times during the terms of this
Agreement, the CITY may elect to treat the failure to maintain the requisite insurance
as a breach of this Agreement and terminate the Agreement as provided herein.
17. LEGAL FEES. If any party brings a suit or action against the other
party arising from any breach of any of the covenants or agreements or any
inaccuracies in any of the representations and warranties on the part of the other party
arising out of this Agreement, then in that event, the prevailing party in such action or
dispute, whether by final judgment or out -of -court settlement, shall be entitled to have
and recover of and from the other party all costs and expenses of suit, including
attorneys' fees.
For purposes of determining who is to be considered the prevailing party,
it is stipulated that attorney's fees incurred in the prosecution or defense of the action or
suit shall not be considered in determining the amount of the judgment or award.
Attorney's fees to the prevailing party if other than the CITY shall, in addition, be limited
to the amount of attorney's fees incurred by the CITY in its prosecution or defense of
the action, irrespective of the actual amount of attorney's fees incurred by the prevailing
party.
6 Revised August 2003
18. MEDIATION/ARBITRATION. If a dispute arises out of or relates
to this Agreement, or the breach thereof, the parties agree first to try, in good faith, to
settle the dispute by mediation in San Diego, California, in accordance with the
Commercial Mediation Rules of the American Arbitration Association (the "AAA") before
resorting to arbitration. The costs of mediation shall be borne equally by the parties.
Any controversy or claim arising out of, or relating to, this Agreement, or breach thereof,
which is not resolved by mediation shall be settled by arbitration in San Diego,
California, in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the AAA then
existing. Any award rendered shall be final and conclusive upon the parties, and a
judgment thereon may be entered in any court having jurisdiction over the subject
matter of the controversy. The expenses of the arbitration shall be borne equally by the
parties to the arbitration, provided that each party shall pay for and bear the costs of its
own experts, evidence and attorneys' fees, except that the arbitrator may assess such
expenses or any part thereof against a specified party as part of the arbitration award.
19. TERMINATION. A. This Agreement may be terminated with or
without cause by the CITY. Termination without cause shall be effective only upon 60-
day's written notice to the CONTRACTOR. During said 60-day period the
CONTRACTOR shall perform all services in accordance with this Agreement.
B. This Agreement may also be terminated immediately by the CITY
for cause in the event of a material breach of this Agreement, misrepresentation by the
CONTRACTOR in connection with the formation of this Agreement or the performance
of services, or the failure to perform services as directed by the CITY.
C. Termination with or without cause shall be effected by delivery of
written Notice of Termination to the CONTRACTOR as provided for herein.
D. In the event of termination, all finished or unfinished Memoranda
Reports, Maps, Drawings, Plans, Specifications and other documents prepared by the
CONTRACTOR, whether paper or electronic, shall immediately become the property of
and be delivered to the CITY, and the CONTRACTOR shall be entitled to receive just
and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents
and other materials up to the effective date of the Notice of Termination, not to exceed
the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused the CITY by the
CONTRACTOR's breach, if any. Thereafter, ownership of said written material shall
vest in the CITY all rights set forth in Section 6.
E. The CITY further reserves the right to immediately terminate this
Agreement upon: (1) the filing of a petition in bankruptcy affecting the CONTRACTOR;
(2) a reorganization of the CONTRACTOR for the benefit of creditors; or (3) a business
reorganization, change in business name or change in business status of the
CONTRACTOR.
20. NOTICES. All notices or other communications required or
permitted hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered; or sent by
overnight mail (Federal Express or the like); or sent by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, return receipt requested; or sent by ordinary mail, postage prepaid; or
telegraphed or cabled; or delivered or sent by telex, telecopy, facsimile or fax; and shall
be deemed received upon the earlier of (i) if personally delivered, the date of delivery to
the address of the person to receive such notice, (ii) if sent by overnight mail, the
7 Revised August 2003
business day following its deposit in such overnight mail facility, (iii) if mailed by
registered, certified or ordinary mail, five (5) days (ten (10) days if the address is
outside the State of California) after the date of deposit in a post office, mailbox, mail
chute, or other like facility regularly maintained by the United States Postal Service, (iv)
if given by telegraph or cable, when delivered to the telegraph company with charges
prepaid, or (v) if given by telex, telecopy, facsimile or fax, when sent. Any notice,
request, demand, direction or other communication delivered or sent as specified above
shall be directed to the following persons:
To the CITY:
Kathleen Trees, Director
Building & Safety Department
City of National City
1243 National City Boulevard
National. City, CA 91950-4301
To the CONTRACTOR: Richard Pearl, Vice President
MAXIMUS
4320 Auburn Boulevard, Suite 2000
Sacramento, CA 95831
Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner
specified in this Section. Rejection or other refusal to accept or the inability to deliver
because of changed address of which no notice was given shall be deemed to
constitute receipt of the notice, demand, request or communication sent. Any notice,
request, demand, direction or other communication sent by cable, telex, telecopy,
facsimile or fax must be confirmed within forty-eight (48) hours by letter mailed or
delivered as specified in this Section.
21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND POLITICAL REFORM ACT
OBLIGATIONS. During the term of this Agreement, the CONTRACTOR shall not
perform services of any kind for any person or entity whose interests conflict in any way
with those of the City of National City. The CONTRACTOR also agrees not to specify
any product, treatment, process or material for the project in which the CONTRACTOR
has a material financial interest, either direct or indirect, without first notifying the CITY
of that fact. The CONTRACTOR shall at all times comply with the terms of the Political
Reform Act and the National City Conflict of Interest Code. The CONTRACTOR shall
immediately disqualify itself and shall not use its official position to influence in any way
any matter coming before the CITY in which the CONTRACTOR has a financial interest
as defined in Government Code Section 87103. The CONTRACTOR represents that it
has no knowledge of any financial interests that would require it to disqualify itself from
any matter on which it might perform services for the CITY.
❑ If checked, the CONTRACTOR shall comply with all of the
reporting requirements of the Political Reform Act and the National City Conflict of
Interest Code. Specifically, the CONTRACTOR shall file a Statement of Economic
Interests with the City Clerk of the City 6r "'National City in a timely manner on forms
which the CONTRACTOR shall obtain from the City Clerk.
8 Revised August 2003
The CONTRACTOR shall be strictly liable to the CITY for all damages,
costs or expenses the CITY may suffer by virtue of any violation of this Paragraph 21 by
the CONTRACTOR.
22. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
A. Computation of Time Periods. If any date or time period provided
for in this Agreement is or ends on a Saturday, Sunday or federal, state or legal holiday,
then such date shall automatically be extended until 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time of the next
day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or federal, state or legal holiday.
B. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which, together, shall
constitute but one and the same instrument.
C. Captions. Any captions to, or headings of, the sections or
subsections of this Agreement are solely for the convenience of the parties hereto, are
not a part of this Agreement, and shall not be used for the interpretation or
determination of the validity of this Agreement or any provision hereof.
D. No Obligations to Third Parties. Except as otherwise expressly
provided herein, the execution and delivery of this Agreement shall not be deemed to
confer any rights upon, or obligate any of the parties hereto, to any person or entity
other than the parties hereto.
E. Exhibits and Schedules. The Exhibits and Schedules attached
hereto are hereby incorporated herein by this reference for all purposes.
F. Amendment to this Agreement. The terms of this Agreement may
not be modified or amended except by an instrument in writing executed by each of the
parties hereto.
G. Waiver. The waiver or failure to enforce any provision of this
Agreement shall not operate as a waiver of any future breach of any such provision or
any other provision hereof.
H. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
I. Entire Agreement. This Agreement supersedes any prior agree-
ments, negotiations and communications, oral or written, and contains the entire
agreement between the parties as to the subject matter hereof. No subsequent
agreement, representation, or promise made by either party hereto, or by or to an
employee, officer, agent or representative of any party hereto shall be of any effect
unless it is in writing and executed by the party to be bound thereby.
J. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon
and shall inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
K. Construction. The parties acknowledge and agree that (i) each
party is of equal bargaining strength, (ii) each party has actively participated in the
drafting, preparation and negotiation of this Agreement, (iii) each such party has
consulted with or has had the opportunity to consult with its own, independent counsel
and such other professional advisors as such party has deemed appropriate, relative to
any and all ,matters contemplated under this Agreement, (iv) each party and such
parry's counsel and advisors have reviewed,Ythis Agreement, (v) each party has agreed
to enter into this Agreement following such review and the rendering of such advice,
9 Revised August 2003
and (vi) any rule or construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against
the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement, or any portions
hereof, or any amendments hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
Agreement on the date and year first above written.
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
(Two signatures required for a corporation)
By: By:
Nick Inzunza, Mayor (Name)
(Title)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, III
City Attorney
10
Revised August 2003
Ms. Kathleen Trees
Building Official
City of National City
1243 National City Blvd
National City, CA 91950
Dear Ms. Trees:
IMUS
HELPING GOVERNMENT SERVE THE PEOPLE
December 12, 2003
I am pleased to present this proposal for a cost of services/user fee analysis to the city of
National City. In the current fiscal climate it is very important that local governments
have a complete understanding of their cost to provide services to their citizens. This
knowledge will allow the city council to knowledgeably set user fee cost recovery levels.
This proposal includes a complete cost allocation plan and user fee analysis. The cost
plan is important as it establishes the overhead component for the fee structure. It also
provides for cost recapture against state and federal grant programs: SB 90, CDBG, etc.
The user fee component includes our NEXUS building fee methodology, a structure re-
cently adopted by the city of San Diego.
MAXIMUS fees studies provide our clients with user fee information that speaks to both
current fees, and potential new fees. Perhaps most importantly, with our decades of ex-
perience, we have been extremely successful in helping our clients implement the studies,
a true test of a consulting engagement.
A distinct advantage in engaging our firm to provide the proposed cost of service studies
is our ability to couple local expertise with national resources. Our California team has
been on the cutting edge in delivering new and effective management tools to local gov-
ernment: performance -based management analysis, revenue alternative strategies, and
most recently a legally defensible building and safety fee structure.
The city is a current client of our firm, and we appreciate the valued relationship over the
past years. We are available to meet with you and the city manager at your convenience to
modify the following proposal to meet any specific needs of the city. I will send under
separate cover a hard copy of this proposal, and an example of a cost plan -fee study.
Very truly yours,
Richard Pearl
Senior Vice President
4320 AUBURN BLVD., SUITE 2000 SACRAMENTO, CA 95841 1916.485.8102 916.485.0111 FAX I WWW.MAXIMUS.COM
('ost of Serrice Proposal
City of National City
SECTION I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAXIMUS is pleased to present this proposal to the city of National City. MAXIMUS is
the nation's, and California's leading provider of cost and revenue services to local gov-
ernment. We have gained our position of leadership through "Delivery of a Superior
Product at a Fair Price, for Today's Project... and Tomorrow's Service." We understand
the importance of this project to the city, and will do everything in our power to provide a
sound document, one that will be accepted by the organization and the community as bal-
anced, realistic, and valuable.
Fee Study Benefits:
1. Ensure fairness
& equity
2. Legal support
3. Knowledge for
management
decisions
Based on our years of user fee services to local governments, we have
come to recognize and understand the myriad motivations for cities to
engage in a study of their costs, both indirect and service -related (fees).
Among the many reasons are the desire to maximize revenues, ensure
fairness and equity, protect the city from litigation, and a general goal of
understanding the true cost of services to make quality management
decisions. By virtue of this study, the city of National City is being pro-
active in its review and analysis of existing and potential fees. The results of this study
will allow the city to better understand the true cost of providing city services, so it can
ensure appropriate fee levels and desired cost recovery.
We understand that the city's existing fee structure has not been modified for some time.
This situation normally results in several important circumstances related to revenue col-
lection and maximization:
■ The increased cost of providing services over time, without a corresponding increase
in fees, typically causes under -recovery of costs. Over a significant period of time,
fee -related services tend to exceed the growth of the general CPI and other common
inflationary factors (although these factors may be applicable over the short-term).
• As time passes, the processes involved with city service delivery change, which re-
sults in outdated cost distribution to the fee -related services.
• Contributions to service delivery by other departments, offices, and programs, tend to
change, and the cost associated with those contributions becomes unknown or is omit-
ted in the fee determinations.
▪ Finally, outdated methodologies or assumptions may also cause the city to inadver-
tently overcharge for certain types of services (building and safety fees are most
common). This situation contravenes the traditional government concept of charging
only up to the full cost of the service provided. State law and official opinions are
quite clear that a governmental jurisdiction cannot charge more than the reasonable
cost of providing the service.
2
Cost of Service Proposal Ciry of National Ciiv
The factors described above will cause a fee schedule to become obsolete and prevent a
jurisdiction from realizing its true revenue potential.
MAXIMUS has been providing local governments with cost of service
analysis for over 25 years. We have worked with all 58 California
counties and over 200 California cities and special districts. Since
1983, we have performed over 100 user fee studies.
We are excited for the potential opportunity to serve the city of National
City. The detailed cost information resulting from the study can help
management make more informed and beneficial decisions regarding specific programs
and services. Furthermore, refined fees based on the actual cost of providing the services
can help citizens better understand and appreciate the fees they pay to their government.
Benefits Of The Study
Local governments are funded from a variety of sources, the primary sources being taxes,
subventions, fees, special charges, fines, and grants. As the traditional provider of basic
services, cities are constantly struggling with securing sufficient funding to pay for the
services expected/demanded/sought after by the citizenry. Many local government ser-
vices are "global" in nature (e.g., police and fire protection, open space, etc.). Other ser-
vices benefit a particular segment of the population, most often providing a direct mone-
tary benefit to the recipient. It is in this latter group that subsidy and recovery issues are
brought to the fore. Given the "sum -sufficient" nature of government financing, un-
recovered monies must be offset by a decrease in available funding for other public good
activities.
Users of services -
where they get a
specific advantage -
should pay for the
cost of that service
It is generally accepted that recovery of costs should be in direct proportion
to the individual/specific gain for services. This means that if a developer
wants to rezone farm land for a housing development, the city may not
want to charge that business a fee less than full cost, since to do otherwise
would require a subsidy for other services that must be made up by the
general citizenry who doesn't share in the particular benefit. Where new
development causes an increase in infrastructure requirements, that increase should logi-
cally be shared pro rata with the existing area proportionate to the degree that the new de-
velopment benefits from the infrastructure. Conversely, a recreation program could logi-
cally be heavily subsidized from the general tax base in order to promote the overall well
being of the general public, or to achieve specific socio-economic objectives.
The goal of the cost of service study is to create an empirical basis to
fairly and equitably allocate costs to the users of specific services. Once
this is accomplished, the next step is to determine the rate of recov-
ery/subsidy, which is a decision reserved for the legislative body — in this
To subsidize, or not to
subsidize: that is the
question...or is it bet-
ter to suffer the slings
c& arrows of outra-
geous revenue short-
falls
3
Cost of Service Propo.so! City of Notional City
case the city council. It is they who have to balance fiscal resources and service delivery.
An experienced consulting firm can provide not only the numerical data, but can add per-
spective and offer experience with other jurisdictions to the deliberations.
In addition to the equity issues noted above, a cost of service study will assure the city
that it is in compliance with state law. Legally (state constitution, various statutes, the at-
torney general), a governmental jurisdiction cannot charge more for a service than it costs
to provide that service. By determining the full cost of each fee, the city council can be
comfortable in the fact that if it wishes not to subsidize an activity, the full cost fee it sets
will be in compliance with the provisions of the law.
Finally, a cost of service analysis invariably has the effect of increasing revenue to the
general fund. As experts in cost determination, a goal of the study is to maximize poten-
tial revenue...within the bounds of proper and defensible accounting treatments
A. GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS
The Cost Services Division of MAXIMUS originally known as David
M. Griffith and Associates, Ltd., (DMG) was founded in 1976. In May
1998, DMG merged with MAXIMUS, Inc. and the combined firm is
now recognized as the nation's leading consulting organization pro-
viding a broad range of management, financial, operational, and human
resource consulting services to local and state governments. Our clients include over 2,000
governments, universities, and other public sector and not -for -profit organizations.
Consultants of MAXIMUS have been called upon to examine virtually every facet of local
government operations. Major public sector services offered by our firm include:
■ Cost allocation and indirect overhead rates
• Cost of Service analysis (activity -based costing, fee for service, user fee, etc.)
• GASB 34 Implementation
■ Revenue enhancement (impact fee analysis, TOT audits, revenue maximization)
■ Operations improvement and performance measurement
■ Fleet management consulting
• Franchise fee/transient occupancy tax audits
• State Controller's Report preparation
• State mandated cost recovery.
The Cost Services Division's Western Region is headquartered in Sacramento, California,
with additional offices in Oakland, Irvine, Seattle, and Denver. There are forty-five pro-
fessionals in the Region. Our goal is to provide the best possible service in order to meet
the city's needs while maintaining the professional integrity of the product. We built our
cost of service practice on the foundation that we continue to be the most knowledgeable
and technically advanced company that pro, ides these services. We not only have exten-
4
Cost of Servier' Proposal Cite of National City
sive experience in cost plan, user fee, and development impact fee studies, but also have
been leaders in the development of software specific to these applications. We believe that
we set the standard in activity based cost analysis for local agencies.
MAXIMUS is unquestionably a large firm. The size and breadth of our firm is advanta-
geous to our clients because of our capability to provide virtually seamless consulting ser-
vice covering many disciplines. The firm, however, has never forgotten its roots or the
reasons for its continued growth, which is based on individualized service, quickly and
professionally provided.
B. STAFFING
With the highly experienced team MAXIMUS brings to this project, city staff require-
ments are held to a minimum. Obviously, however, there is information only city staff
can provide. Another necessary commitment is the review and critique of data, assump-
tions, and recommendations. While we cannot project a certain number of hour's com-
mitment, we can assure the city it will not be burdensome. The city should anticipate 3-5
hours for any one person associated with the data collections. Senior staff will most likely
require more hours due to project and data review.
C. DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS
MAXIMUS will provide the city of National City with the following:
➢ User Fee Study — a study documenting all current and potential fee activities for
the following city cost centers: Building, Engineering, Planning, Code Enforce-
ment, police, fire, and recreation.
➢ Fee Schedule — a consolidated schedule of all fees derived from the fee study,
with our recommendations for fee adjustments.
➢ Comparison — A comparison of the city of National City's fees to other surround-
ing jurisdictions. Please note that the comparison will be general in nature since it
is very difficult to "line-up" direct "apples -to -apples" fee comparisons (cities call
the same service by different names, or group fees, etc. We will, however, be able
to provide a range for comparison analysis.
5
Cost of Service Proposal Citt of National Ow
SECTION II
USER FEE STUDY PROPOSAL
A. USER FEE ANALYSIS - SCOPE
MAXIMUS will identify and calculate the full cost of all fees, both current and potential,
in the planning, building & safety, engineering, police, and fire operations. At the con-
clusion of the above analysis we will then prepare a report of our findings and present fee
recovery recommendations. The report will include current fees and recovery levels as a
percentage of full costs, full costs, recommended fees, and remaining subsidy. Finally, we
will assist the city with a fee implementation strategy.
We will create a central services cost allocation plan to determine overhead costs to cre-
ate full cost values within each operation, as well as to charge any appropriate state or
federal grants.
User Fee Analysis
User fee studies:
current & potential fee
recovery areas; ad-
dresses equity issues
The purpose of a user fee study is to determine the full cost of services
offered by the agency for which user fees are currently being charged or
could be charged. The full cost is then compared to current revenues to
determine the amount of subsidy (or occasionally, overcharge). With this
knowledge decisions can be made concerning appropriate fee ad-
justments. MAXIMUS can assist in understanding economic issues such as elasticity of
demand and will provide information on what others are charging. However, in the final
analysis, the actual decision to increase or decrease fees is a local decision.
The underlying rational to charge full cost for user fees is simply this: the city is provid-
ing a distinct service or product to a business or individual who is gaining a monetary,
emotional, or recreational benefit. Equity says that others who do not participate in that
benefit should not subsidize individuals or businesses. For example, why should a long-
term resident living downtown contribute towards a subsidy to a developer opening up a
new subdivision on the edge of town?
Historically, subsidy issues were not stressed since there were alternative tax avenues
available to fund government services. This is no longer the case. We recognize,
however, that there are circumstances and programs, which probably justify a subsidy, i.e.
youth, senior, and disadvantaged recreation programs, certain classifications of code
enforcement, library services, etc. With this in mind, MAXIMUS has developed a
6
Cost of Service Proposal City of National City
service/benefiting agent matrix to help place the subsidy issue in proper context. The
matrix with typical fee issues is first shown in conceptual form then in detail for selected
fees. Please note that the table includes only fee -oriented activities.
MAXIMUS believes that construction of the matrix is important in generating acceptance
of fee for service cost recovery levels by the city council and community/business groups.
Through this visual perspective the rationale for cost recovery becomes clear and
defensible.
Following the matrix generic presentation is a display of how a jurisdiction's specific fees
could be placed into the general matrix.
(TABLE FOLLOWS)
7
Cost of Sc',,ice Proposal
Cite of National City
PUBLIC POLICY'MATRIX
w
Primarily the
comm. w/ some
inldivl . benefit
W W
TYPE OF SVC.
Primarily the
indiv. w/ some
comm. benefit
W
Individual
Benefit
Public
TAX V. FEES
i
Public/Private
Private/Public
Private
100"/0 Taxes
Mostly taxes &
some fees
Mostly fees &
some taxes
100"/o Fees
8
Cost of Service Proposal City of National Cite
DEPARTMENT/FEE
FEE:
PUBLIC POLICY FEE
MATRIX:
Priv/Individua Mostly Private/ Mostly Public/ Public
Oriented: Some Public: Some Private: Oriented:
CURR. FULL RECM % RECM % RECM 0/n RECM %
FEE COST FEE Subs. FEE Subs. FEE Subs. FEE Subs.
PLANNING
Conditional Use Permit 1,500 2,500 2,500 0%
Lot Line Adjustment 850 1,250 1,250 0%
Tentative Map 2,500 4,000 4,000 0%
Design Review 500 1,000 800 20%
Environ. Impact Review 3,000 6,000 6,000 0%
Appeal 25 800 100 90%
General Plan Update 0 125,000 0 100%
CODE ENFORCEMENT
Apartments (>4) 0 1,500 1,500 0%
Private Residences 0 300 200 33%
Restaurants 750 1,000 1,000 0%
ENGINEERING
Street Cut 35 90 90 0%
Tentative Map 850 1,225 1,225 0%
Public Right of Way 0 600 300 50%
Plan Check 1,000 1,400 1,400 0%
RECREATION
Adult Sports
Tennis 2 5 4 20%
Dance Classes 30 40 35 13%
Trips 30 60 40 33%
Youth/Seniors
Tennis 2 5 3 40%
Trips 20 40 25 37%
Golf 10 30 25 17%
9
Cost of Service Proposal City of National Cit}'
Our fee analysis for the planning, engineering, and code enforcement operations is based
on a standard -cost methodology, including all direct and indirect costs. The fees are de-
termined based on a build-up of hours and resultant cost derived from each appropriate
worker's input into the service area. Specifically, each staff member is asked how much
time he/she spends on each service area. Costs per hour for salary costs are developed and
augmented by all appropriate support costs. This format has been used in nearly 100 user
fee studies and is totally accepted by city staffs and community groups.
Building & Safety Fees
Our approach for building and safety fees are somewhat different, due to
both historical precedent and current legal actions. Prior to 2000, all of our
finn's user fee analysis of building departments were constructed on a cost -
revenue match -up basis, i.e. the calculation would be at the gross service
level (industrial, commercial, residential, alterations plan checking and/or
inspection services). We then would recommend that the UBC and trades
tables be adjusted based on the revenue/cost percentage variance. This method was used
in the absence of a more definitive model acceptable to the building industry.
For the past several years, many California jurisdictions have been facing a controversy in
building and safety fee setting. In the early 1990's, a special interest group began com-
bating local governments over what was termed "excessive fees." The challengers/critics
of local government fees have asserted that the traditional UBC and valuation rate tables
traditionally used by building and safety departments to set fees could not be statistically
supported, which results in fees unrelated to actual cost.
NEXUS: legally
defensible, cost
based
In response to the needs of local government and to help them protect
themselves from successful fee challenges, MAXIMUS developed a new
fee analysis model for building and safety fees. This new model, NEXUS,
has similarities to our standard fee analysis model, but we tailored it to
address the particular nature of this operation. Essentially, we create a cost per square
foot of occupancy -type, based on time spent per activity. We address miscellaneous fees
in the same fashion. We believe this meets the standard called for in the Attorney
General's opinion 92-506, which stated that full cost recovery is appropriate as long as
there is a "nexus" or linkage between the services provided and the fees charged. The
resulting schedule is easy to understand by the community and easy to administer by the
building department. All of our new clients are accepting the NEXUS methodology for
their fee studies.
More recently, we have added a revenue and staffing forecasting module to the program
which, when estimated activity unit volume can be projected generates future staffing
levels and revenue. This can be important in budget preparation.
The NEXUS model has been implemented in: San Diego (city), Chico, Vallejo, Belmont,
Malibu, and is in the process of being apted or developed for: Orange County, Napa
10
Cost. of S'erviee Proposal Cite of Nalfonal Cil'
County, Butte County, and the cities of Lancaster, Livermore, Banning, Benica, Santa
Maria, Woodland, Hercules, and Ventura.
B. OVERVIEW OF OUR APPROACH
There are five aspects of our approach, which we believe are most significant.
1. Interactive Work Program- The MAXIMUS approach is to work closely with man-
agement and staff to produce an analysis of cost of services and revenues that is thor-
oughly understood and verified by city staff. To this end, we repeatedly review our
analysis and findings with staff, elicit their input, and draw upon their intimate
knowledge of city operations. This is not to say that there may not be a divergence
of opinion at the recommendation stage. Our goal, however, is to provide the client
with the best information and statistics possible. Final implementation decisions, of
course, remain with management and city council.
2. Experienced Team - MAXIMUS has been in existence nationally since 1975 and in •
California since 1979. Its Western Region management team has decades of
California experience. Most all MAXIMUS consultants have more than five years of
experience in achieving the goals the City wishes to accomplish with this project.
3. Proven Methodology - MAXIMUS has produced thousands of cost plans for all
sizes of cities and counties. We are the recognized experts in this field, both locally
and nationally. We have produced nearly 100 user fee studies in California, and an
equal number in other states. Our systems have been time -tested. Of critical
importance, however, is that our consultants are proven in their particular fields of
experience. We get the job done, to our client's complete satisfaction.
4. Computerized Support - MAXIMUS will utilize its user fee model (MAXFEE),
which has been developed specifically to determine the full costs of governmental
services.
5. Realistic Pricing - MAXIMUS's strategy has always been to provide exceptional
service at a fair price. We are in the California marketplace for the long-term. A
client well served will return for future engagements.
11
Cost of Service Proposal City of National City
C. WORK PLAN
MAXIMUS will initially calculate a cost allocation plan for overhead cost determination.
We will then separate all costs and revenues within the various fee -related departments,
and other appropriate functions into tax -based and fee -based groupings. Within the latter,
we will then identify and calculate the full cost of all existing fees within the departments
under study. Additionally, we will calculate the full cost of potential fees for these de-
partments based on experience gained from previous engagements.
At the conclusion of the above analysis we will prepare a report of our findings and pre-
sent fee recovery recommendations. The report will include current fees, recovery levels
as a percentage of full costs, full costs, recommended fees, and remaining subsidy. We
can provide a fee schedule and plan, as well as assist the city with an implementation
strategy.
The following section describes the specific tasks that will be performed in order to ac-
complish the goals of this study.
Specific Tasks to Be Performed
Task 1: Project Initiation
In our first task we will carry out those activities required to begin the engagement in a
manner that will ensure timely and successful project completion. The specific activities
include the following:
Meet with the Finance Director and other appropriate city representatives to discuss the
goals, objectives, and overall scope of the engagement. Our designated Project Manager
will represent MAXIMUS in this initial meeting. It is important that individuals who will
be most directly concerned with the ultimate engagement results represent the city.
Based upon this meeting, we will finalize the scope of the engagement. Any significant
variations will be documented in writing and provided to the city.
Task 2: Develop Schedule of Service Areas to Be Analyzed
MAXIMUS will develop a schedule of current and potential fee -for -service activities.
Our experience in working with many other cities will aid in identifying potential fee ser-
vices.
Task 3: Develop Direct Service Costs
12
Cost of S'errier Proposal City of National City
For each fee -for -service activity (or a non -revenue producing service for which a fee
could be imposed), MAXIMUS will develop the direct costs of providing the service.
Direct costs generally include the salaries and benefits of those individuals actually per-
forming the service and any services and supplies that can be directly attributable to the
service. To the extent possible, we identify as many costs as possible as direct and treat
the appropriate remaining costs as indirect. Based upon our extensive experience, we
know that most supervisory and service and supply costs will be treated as indirect costs.
In any case, a hallmark of our approach is a fully substantiated cost analysis.
For building -related fees, we will identify service costs based on the NEXUS model. In
this instance, we would identify productive hourly costs on an occupancy basis (residen-
tial dwelling, restaurant, retail store, commercial high rise, etc.) and calculate the total
cost on a square footage basis. This methodology would replace the UBC rate tables as a
charging mechanism. We believe this methodology produces a stronger nexus between
permit/plan check fees and costs.
While NEXUS is not a required format, i.e. a revenue/cost match up approach could be
taken, it is less defensible and would need to be updated more frequently to adhere to the
Attorney General's Opinion 92-506. All of our recent user fee study clients have opted for
NEXUS. If the city wishes to use the revenue -cost match up, we will, of course, use that
approach.
Task 4: Distribute Deparbnent/Projram Overhead Costs
MAXIMUS will distribute indirect costs to each service or activity. In general, these costs
reflect supervision occurring at the department/division/program level and associated ser-
vices and supplies. Our approach to this distribution depends on the complexity of the
governmental unit being analyzed.
Task 5: Match Service Revenue with Service Costs
We will match the total cost of each service with the fee revenue received from each ser-
vice. In its basic form, the resulting table illustrates the total tax subsidy or the revenue
surplus generated by each service. This table provides a departure point for use in fee
discussions.
Task 6: Review Cost, Revenue, And Subsidies With Departments
The cost, revenue, and subsidy analyses developed by MAXIMUS are based on informa-
tion supplied by city departments. In Task 6, we return to each department to review the
preliminary results. We believe this to be an extremely important step, as it is the de-
partments that must ultimately be comfortable with our cost analysis and methods. Based
upon the departmental reviews, we make appropriate changes.
13
Cost ofSerriee Proposol
City of Notional City
Task 7: Review Cost And Revenue Relationship With City Management
v
Once we reach consensus with departments that the analysis portrays reality, we will re-
view results with management. Cities usually find it desirable to eliminate subsidies, but
there are issues to consider before making fee adjustments:
• It may not be politically feasible to raise a particular fee.
• It may not be legal to raise a particular fee.
• An undesirable social consequence may result from raising a particular fee (e.g., a
group may be excluded from a desired service).
• An undesirable economic consequence may result (e.g., a fee increase may result in
less revenue due to decreasing demand).
Based upon these discussions and our experience, we will formulate appropriate recom-
mendations.
Task 8: Revise Analysis/Recommendations
Based on our discussions with senior management, we will make appropriate revisions to
the study and/or analysis.
Task 9: Develop Implementation Strategy
A principal objective of the firm's approach to all of our engagements is to facilitate posi-
tive change. We will work with senior staff to develop an appropriate and effective im-
plementation strategy that will reflect the city of National City's needs. We will also
work with the city to address on -going maintenance of the study results.
Task 10: Prepare and Provide Draft Report
The project report will be presented to department heads in draft form. This step offers
an opportunity to discuss individual recommendations in detail. Based upon these dis-
cussions, we will modify the draft report as required and submit it in final form.
Task 11: Present Final Report
The product from the proposed engagement is often controversial. We believe it is ex-
tremely important that all parties fully understand the basis for and rationale behind the
project findings and recommendations. To this end, we are committed to providing all in-
terested parties with an understanding of our approach and results. This typically re-
quires:
14
Cost of -Service Proposal Cirt' of National Cite
■ A presentation to management with less emphasis on detailed methodology, and
greater emphasis on the impact of recommendations and implementation strategies.
■ Engagement presentations to the city council to provide an overview of the project
and its findings and to answer any questions concerning the project.
Task 12: Project Close Out
At the end of the project, we will perform those activities necessary to ensure successful
project completion, including:
■ Answer remaining questions and explain outstanding issues, and
■ Discuss update requirements and strategies.
Work plan Flexibility
Tasks 1-12 discussed above summarize the activities necessary to accomplish most cost
plan and fee study projects. However, we remain flexible throughout the engagement,
which allows us to modify this approach to meet the unique circumstances experienced
by each client. Consequently, if this work plan does not specifically meet your needs, we
will work with you to revise our approach to fully accomplish the goals of this project.
15
Cost of Bernice Proposal Cii% of National City,
D. PREVIOUS COST PLAN/USER FEE EXPERIENCE
Following is a list of our California cost plan and user fee studies:
Cost and Fee Studies - Cities
Alameda Hercules
Anaheim Hermosa Beach
Beverly Hills Lancaster
Brisbane La Quinta
Burbank Livermore
Camarillo Lompoc
Campbell Long Beach
Carlsbad Menlo Park
Culver City Millbrae
Cupertino Mountain View
Dana Point Oakland
Emeryville Oceanside
Fairfield Ontario
Fresno Palm Springs
Hayward Palmdale
Mission Viejo San Jacinto
Escondido Irvine
Blythe Indian Wells
Butte
Napa
Orange
Pasadena
Petaluma
Port Hueneme
R. Cucamonga
Redding
Redlands
Redondo Beach
Redwood City
Rialto
Ridgecrest
Riverside
Sacramento
San Fernando
San Francisco
San Jose
Vista
San Mateo
San Carlos
User Fee Studies - Counties
Lassen
Santa Cruz
Nevada
Tuolumne
Santa Barbara
Santa Clara
Santa Monica
Santa Paula
South Gate
So. San Fran.
Stockton
Suisun City
National City
Union City
Vacaville
Ventura
Watsonville
Visalia
Woodland
Whittier
Temecula
Thousand Oaks
Shasta
Yuba
E. REFERENCES
Our firm currently has more cities and counties under contract in the United States to pro-
vide cost plan services than all other firms combined. We believe we have achieved this
position of leadership through:
• Comprehensive responsibility for establishing an indirect cost recovery
system
• Guaranteed approval of our plans by federal and state representatives
• Thorough knowledge of regulations pertaining to cost recovery and working
relationships developed in govemmer t at all levels.
16
Cost of Service Proposal City of National City
Any of our clients in California or elsewhere may be contacted concerning our services.
Specific governmental references are listed below:
City of Chico:
Mr. Tony Baptiste
Community Dev. Dir.
(530) 895-4872
City of San Diego
Mr. Dan Culp
Sr. Management Analyst
1222 First Avenue, MS401
San Diego, CA 92101
(619) 446-5261
City of Fresno
Ms. Ruth Quinto
Controller
(559) 498-4757
City of Vallejo
Mr. Wm. Miller
Asst. Finance Director
555 Santa Clara Ave.
Vallejo, CA 94590
(707) 648-4343
Concerning our knowledge of building fee structure and current litigation, please contact
Mr. Jeff Dunn, partner, Best, Best & Krieger, LLC. (949) 260-0962.
F. STAFFING
The preparation of central service cost allocation plans and comprehensive user fee studies
is a primary MAXIMUS service to local government. MAXIMUS is able to assign a team of
knowledgeable, experienced consultants to the engagement.
Specific areas of expertise of our proposed project team include:
® Governmental cost accounting
® Knowledge of governmental service delivery within each of the departments to be
analyzed
® User fee service structure and service type in other California city governments
® Development of presentations for City Councils and the general public.
Our project organization and project team members are described below.
Richard Pearl - Sr. Vice President, Western Region
Mr. Pearl will be the Project Director for the engagement, responsible for overall project
management and official presentations. Mr. Pearl has been with the firm for 27 years and
has participated in scores of user fee studies and hundreds of cost allocation plan analysis
over the years. He is an expert on cost of service and revenue enhancement opportunities.
17
Cost of -Service Proposal Cite of -National Coy
PROJECT MANAGER - The project manager is responsible for the day-to-day
supervision of the engagement. The project manager will participate directly in
departmental interviews, fee identification, cost development and report preparation. The
project manager will be responsible for apprising the City of progress on an on -going basis.
Our Project Manager is Mr. Chad Wohlford. Mr. Wohlford has over 12 years of
professional analytical, management, and consulting experience in state, local, and federal
government finance and operations.
As a MAXIMUS consultant, Mr. Wohlford has managed various revenue projects, gov-
ernment cost allocation plans, government process improvement projects, and govern-
ment performance measurement projects. He has developed and analyzed costs for spe-
cific government programs, gathered and analyzed utilization data, studied operations,
and developed methodologies to appropriately allocate costs among programs. Examples
of his past and current California clients include the counties of Napa, Butte, Sacramento,
Merced, Orange, San Mateo County, and San Diego; the cities of San Diego, Chico, Plea-
santon, Santa Rosa, Hawthorne, Pasadena, La Palma, El Segundo, Santa Clara, San Lean-
dro, and Clovis; the State of California, Port of San Francisco, Irvine, South Bay Re-
gional Communications Authority, and Rincon Valley Fire Protection District.
As Senior Administrative Analyst for the Sacramento County Department of Heath and
Human Services, Mr. Wohlford served as the principal budget and contracts administrator
and administrative analyst.
Analytical Staff - MAXIMUS will utilize additional consultant and senior consultant
staff in data gathering and information processing. Potential staff include: Mike Adams,
Dawn Steele, and Nicole Kissam).
G. PROJECT COST AND SCHEDULE
1. Proposed Cost
MAXIMUS will complete the proposed tasks and deliverable products (cost plan and
user fee study for the planning, building, engineering, police, fire, and recreation depart-
ments) for a fixed fee of $45,000 plus a maximum of $2,000 in expenses.
MAXIMUS always conducts user fee studies under a "fixed fee" arrangement. In this
manner, our clients know the entire cost of the project prior to the commencement of the
engagement. Furthermore, this approach eliminates the perception or potential perception
that our determination of costs and fees was influenced by possible increases to our own
bottom line (as could be the case of a contingency fee basis). This approach enhances the
credibility of the study outcomes (new fees) with the city departments, your customers/fee
payers, and the general citizenry.
18
Cost of Service Proposal City of National City
All of the services we propose to the city of National City are included in our proposed
price, including consultant labor, expenses, travel, and associated project costs. Unless
the city requests additional services or materially changes the scope of the project, our
price will not change. If the city requests additional services, we will mutually agree
upon the associated project cost before beginning work on the additional tasks. In short,
we will not perform additional work or charge additional fees without the city's permis-
sion.
H. COST NOTES
With the current economic constraints placed on our clients, we have taken special efforts
to present the most cost/effective pricing plan possible. Our proposal price assumes that
the study will not require more than two revisions to any component analysis, i.e. an
original run and two subsequent re -runs to fine tune the analysis. It also assumes that we
will not we devote more than 32 hours of professional time to this project after delivery
of our final draft report for further editing, research, meetings or work of any kind related
to this project. Should we need to devote time in excess of 32 hours after delivery of the
draft, we would charge our additional services at the rates noted below.
It is very rare for us to charge a client for additional services. This provision is an incen-
tive to the city to bring the project to the implementation phase and a protection for our
firm's promise to live within a fixed fee. Actual time spent after delivery of the draft is
unlikely to exceed 24 hours.
MAXIMUS current professional service rates are: vice president - $220/hour; Director -
$175/hour; manager - $125/hour; senior consultant - $105/hour; consultant - $85/hour
1. Project Payment Schedule
The city would be invoiced based on the following deliverable completion:
Milestone
% of Total Cost
Draft cost of service analysis
(data)
60%
Draft fee report
20%
Final fee/operations analysis
10%
Completion of all services
10%
TOTAL
100%
2. Project Schedule
19
Cosi of S'ernire Proposal City of National City
The city of National City proposed cost of services study constitutes a complex set of op-
erations. A MAXIMUS cost of services study typically entails several iterations (reviews)
by staff until both staff and MAXIMUS -professionals are confident that the numbers pre-
sented represent the actual cost of providing the services. In our experience, and with
good city cooperation, the process will take approximately two and one half to three
months to complete the factual data process, (i.e. delivery of the "full cost" numbers).
The next phase, acceptance of the draft and final report, and presentation to the city coun-
cil, can take another one to three months, depending on local timing.
CONCLUSION
We are excited for the potential opportunity to serve the city of National City. Our com-
pany motto is "Helping Government Serve the People." Based on our experience with
other cities and counties throughout the West, we believe that the city and its citizens
would reap many benefits from this study. The detailed cost information resulting from
the study can help management make more informed and beneficial decisions regarding
specific programs and services. Furthermore, refined fees based on the actual cost of
providing the services can help citizens better understand and appreciate the fees they pay
to their government.
20
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
FETING DATE January 6, 7004
AGENDA ITEM NO.
4
(-ITEM TITLE RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL GIVING NOTICE OF INTENT TO VACATE THE
15 FOOT WIDE NORTHERLY PORTION OF 15TH STREET BETWEEN NATIONAL CITY BOULEVARD
AND KIMBALL PARK (APPLICANT: CITY OF NATIONAL CITY) (CASE FILE NO.: SC-2003-2)
PREPARED BY
EXPLANATION
14P DEPARTMENT
Roger G. Post, 336-4310 Planning
The area of street to be vacated is the 15 foot wide unpaved northerly portion of 15th Street between National
City Boulevard and Kimball Park in the Commercial Medium Zone (CM) and Civic Institutional -Open Space
Zone (IC -OS). The 4,950 square foot area, which is 330 feet long and 15 feet wide, will be primarily used for
parking and landscaping area as part of the new library site.
Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item at their December 16, 2003 meeting, and
recommends approval of the street vacation. The next step in the process is Council adoption of a resolution
setting a public hearing.
I
i
Environmental Review
(-Financial Statement
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
X WA Categorical Exemption
Approved By:
Finance Director
Account No.
Staff concurs with the decision of the Planning Commission and recommends that the attached
resolution be adopted to schedule a public hearing for this street vacation request.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the street vacation.
Vote: Ayes- Carrillo, Saludares, Alvarado, Flores, Baca, Martinelli, Reynolds, Pruitt
ATTACHMENTS (Listed Below 1
1. Resolution
2. Location Map
Absent: Graham
Resolution No, 2004-2
A 200 (9,991
RESOLUTION NO. 2004 — 2
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
GIVING NOTICE OF INTENTION TO VACATE THE
15 FOOT WIDE NORTHERLY PORTION OF 15TH STREET
BETWEEN NATIONAL CITY BOULEVARD AND KIMBALL PARK
CASE FILE NO. SC-2003-2
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of National City, California, hereby
declares its intention to vacate, pursuant to the provisions of Part of Division 9 of the Streets
and Highways Code of California, a portion of 15`h Street between National City Boulevard and
Kimball Park in the City of National City, more particularly described in Exhibit "A", attached
hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
National City, that the time for hearing any and all persons interested in or objecting to the
proposed vacation is hereby set for 6:00 p.m., in the
City Council Chambers in the Civic Center in the City of National City, California.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Engineer of the City of National City,
California is hereby directed to post notice of the passage of this Resolution and the time and
place of hearing in accordance with law.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th day of January, 2004.
Nick lnzunza, Mayor
ATTEST:
Michael Dalla, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, Ill
City Attorney
IC -OS
KIMBALL PARK
ED VACATION AREA
AREA OF PROPOSED
STREET VACATION
LOCATION MAP
Proposed vacation of the northerly 15 feet
of 15th Street between National City Boulevard and Kimball Park
SC-2003-2
NATIONAL CITY PLANNING
DRN. DATE:
12/3/03
INITIAL
HEARING:
12/15/03
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
AEETING DATE January 6, 2004
5
AGENDA ITEM NO.
(—ITEM TITLE WARRANT REGISTER #24
PREPARED BY R. Palazo DEPARTMENT Finance
Marylou Matienzo
EXPLANATION 619-336-4330
Ratification of Warrant Register #24 per Government Section Code 37208.
Environmental Review
N/A
Financial Statement
Not applicable.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
I recommend ratification of these warrants for a total of $ 899,019.32.
Approved By:
Finance Director
Account No.
BOARD I COMMISSION RE
MMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS ( Listed Below }
1. Warrant Register #24
2. Workers Comp Warrant Register dated 12/03/03
3. Payroll Warrant Register dated 12/03/03
Resolution No.
A-200 (9:99)
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
EETING DATE January 6, 2004
AGENDA ITEM NO.
6
ITEM TITLE WARRANT REGISTER #25
PREPARED BY R. Palazo
EXPLANATION
DEPARTMENT
Finance
Marylou Matienzo
619-336-4330
Ratification of Warrant Register #25 per Government Section Code 37208.
Environmental Review N/A
Financial Statement
Not applicable.
Approved By:
Finance Director
Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
I recommend ratification of these warrants for a total of $ 588,889.82.
BOARD I COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS ( Listed Below )
1. Warrant Register #25
2. Workers Comp Warrant Register dated 12/10/03
Resolution No.
A-200 l9; 99)
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
�,aEETING DATE January 6, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.
7
(ITEM TITLE RESOLUTION DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CHURCH AT 833 E.
8'" STREET. APPLICANT: OCTAVIANO CABRERA-MISIONES EL SHADAI. CASE FILE NO. CUP-
2003-18.
PREPARED BY
Roger Post 336-4310 Planning
DEPARTMENT
EXT.
EXPLANATION
The City Council voted to deny this item at the December 16, 2003 public hearing. The attached
resolution is needed to follow through on the action.
Environmental Review
(Financial Statement
N/A
N/ACategorical Exemption MIS Approval
Approved By:
Finance Director
Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution.
BOARD ICOM ISS10 EC ME DAT10
N/A
ATTACHMENTS ( Listed Below )
I 1. Resolution
2. Location Map
Resolution No. 2004-3
A-200 (Rev. 7/03)
RESOLUTION NO. 2004 — 3
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A CHURCH AT 833 EAST 8TH STREET.
APPLICANT: OCTAVIANO CABRERA — MISIONES EL SHADAI
CASE FILE NO. CUP-2003-18
WHEREAS, the appeal to the City Council of the Planning Commission's denial of a
Conditional Use Permit application (CUP-2003-18) for a church at 833 East 8th Street was considered
by the City Council of the City of National City at a public hearing held on December 16, 2003, at which
time oral and documentary evidence was presented; and,
WHEREAS, at said public hearing the City Council considered the staff report contained
in Case File No. CUP-2003-18 which is maintained by the City, and incorporated herein by reference;
and,
WHEREAS, this action is taken pursuant to all applicable procedures required by State
and City law; and,
WHEREAS, the action recited herein is found to be essential for the preservation of
public health, safety and general welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City,
California, that the testimony and evidence presented to the City Council at the public hearing held on
December 16, 2003 fail toupport findings, required by the Municipal Code for granting any conditional
use permit that the propoield use will not have an adverse effect on adjacent or abutting properties, and
that the proposed use is deemed essential and desirable to the public convenience or welfare.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City, California,
that the testimony and evidence presented to the Planning Commission at the public hearing held on
December 16, 2003; support the following findings
1. That the proposed use will have an adverse effect on adjacent or abutting
properties, since church functions and gatherings often generate impacts such as
noise and traffic which would affect nearby residential property.
2. That the proposed use is not deemed essential and desirable to the public
convenience or welfare, since the General Plan encourages commercial and
complementary use on the property, and the church will not compliment adjacent
business uses.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby denies conditional use permit
application no. CUP-2003-18.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective and final on
the day following the City Council meeting where the resolution is adopted. The time within which
judicial review of this decision may be sought is governed by the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1094.6.
Resolution No. 2004 — 3
January 6, 2004
Page Two
PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th day of January, 2004.
Nick Inzunza, Mayor
ATTEST:
Michael Daila, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, III
City Attomey
PROJECT LOCATION : 1-10 ZONE BOUNDARY
Proposed church at 833 E. 8th Street
NATIONAL CITY PLANNING
DRN. DATE:
10/8/03
INITIAL
HEARING:
10/20/03
2ETING DATE
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT SECOND READING
January 6, 2004
AGENDA ITEM NO.
8
ITEM TITLE AN ORDINANCE RESCINDING AND AMENDING CERTAIN TIME LIMITS WITH RESPECT TO
THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PURSUANT TO
SENATE BILLS 211 AND 1045 AS CODIFIED IN HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTIONS 33333.6(e)(2) AND
33333.6(e)(2)
PREPARED BY
EXPLANATION
Eric Crockett
(Ext. 4276)
DEPARTMENT CDC
Please see attached memorandum.
Environmental Review X N/A
Financial Statement
N/A
Approved By:
Finance Director
Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt ordinance.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS U.Listed Below) Resolution No,
Staff Report
Proposed ordinance
A-200 t9 00,
ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
RESCINDING AND AMENDING CERTAIN TIME LIMITS WITH RESPECT TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PURSUANT TO SENATE BILLS 211 AND 1045 AS CODIFIED IN HEALTH AND
SAFETY CODE SECTIONS 33333.2 AND 33333.6(e)(2)
INTRODUCTION
Approval of the ordinance would: 1) rescind the Redevelopment Plan's time limit to incur debt in
all but the 1995 Added Area of the Project Area pursuant to the authority granted by SB 211,
and 2) extend by one year the duration of the Redevelopment Plan and time limit to collect tax
increment revenue pursuant to SB 1045 in all constituent areas of the Redevelopment Plan.
The one-year extension of the Redevelopment Plan granted by SB 1045 is intended by the
Legislature to offset the impacts of the 2003-04 shift to the Educational Revenue Augmentation
Fund (ERAF) mandated as part of the 2003 State Budget.
BACKGROUND
Since 1994, redevelopment plans have been mandated to include specific time limits on
incurring debt, the duration of the plan's effectiveness, and collecting tax increment revenue. In
National City, these limits are based on when the various constituent areas of the National City
Redevelopment Project Area were established.
The California Community Redevelopment Law provides that redevelopment agencies may only
receive tax increment revenue if it has bond, loan or other debt incurred. The time limit to incur
debt is the later of 20 years from the date the redevelopment project was first adopted; or
January 1, 2004 if Project Areas were established prior to January 1, 1984. For most
constituent areas of the Project Area (E.J. Christman #1, South Bay Town and Country, Center
City, E.J. Christman #2, and Downtown) the time limit to incur debt expires on January 1, 2004.
For the Downtown Amended constituent area, this period runs until April 16, 2005, and for the
1995 Added Area (Harbor District) the time limit to incur debt runs until July 18, 2015.
To enable redevelopment agencies the authority to more effectively carryout their
redevelopment programs, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 211 in 2001 which in part provides
agencies the ability to incur debt at any time over the duration of the redevelopment plan,
specifically by rescinding the time limit to incur debt. Incurring debt is critical to the
implementation of a redevelopment program, since tax increment financing is the most common
way to fund project implementation. Once an agency has reached the time limit to incur debt, it
can no longer issue new bonds, execute new financial commitments with developers or property
owners, or finance other redevelopment activities. Essentially, the agency is left with the
function of paying off remaining debt and ceasing implementation.
PROPOSAL
In that'National City has an acute need for redevelopment in the future, the CDC should
exercise its authority to rescind the time limit to incur debt as permitted by SB 211. Proposed is
an ordinance that amends the Redevelopment Plan accordingly. As an area created after 1994,
only the 1995 Added Area (Harbor District) is not eligible for this rescission of the time limit.
The proposed ordinance also extends by one year the duration of the redevelopment plan and
the time frame to collect tax increment revenue for all constituent areas of the Project Area
(including the 1995 Added Area). Senate Bill 1045 which in part calls for the shifting of monies
from all redevelopment agencies to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in 2003-04
provides redevelopment agencies the ability to extend their plans by one year to offset this
impact.
Pursuant to Sections 33333.2 and 33333.6(e)(2) of the Redevelopment Law (as enacted by SB
211 and SB 1045), the amending ordinance may be considered by the City Council without
undertaking the typical redevelopment plan amendment process that involves extensive public
notice, environmental review, and other documentation.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the proposed ordinance be approved.
-2-
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
RESCINDING AND AMENDING CERTAIN TIME LIMITS
WITH RESPECT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PURSUANT TO SENATE BILLS 211 AND 1045 AS CODIFIED IN
HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTIONS 33333.2 AND 33333.6(e)(2)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of National City ("City Council") has
adopted and subsequently amended the Redevelopment Plan for the National City
Redevelopment Project ("Redevelopment Plan"), on November 18, 1969 by Ordinance No.
1233, on June 24, 1975 by Ordinance No. 1471, on April 13, 1976 by Ordinance No. 1505, on
December 13, 1977 by Ordinance No. 1610 and subsequently amended on December 1, 1981
by Ordinance No. 1762, on May 22, 1984 by Ordinance No. 1821, on April 16, 1985 by
Ordinance No. 1851, on June 18, 1991 by Ordinance No. 91-2013, on November 22, 1994 by
Ordinance No. 2086, and on June 18, 1995 by Ordinance No. 95-2095, all of which are
incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, Section 33333.6(e)(2)(A) of the Health and Safety Code was
amended by SB 211 to provide that the legislative body may amend a redevelopment plan to
rescind the time limit to incur debt for any project area adopted, or area added to a project area,
prior to January 1, 2004; and
WHEREAS, Sections 33333.2 and 33333.6(e)(2)(C) of the Health and Safety
Code was amended by SB 1045 to provide that when an agency is required to make a payment
to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund during fiscal year 2003-04 pursuant to Section
33681.9, the legislative body may amend the redevelopment plan to extend by one year the
time limit of the effectiveness of the plan and the time limit to repay indebtedness; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission of the City of National
City desires to amend the Redevelopment Plan pursuant to the authority granted in Sections
33333.2, and 33333.6(e)(2)(A) and (C) to provide the authority to fund redevelopment activities
within the National City Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area"); and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is essential to protect the public health,
safety and welfare to immediately rescind time limits on indebtedness in certain constituent
areas of the Redevelopment Plan, to extend the time limits on the effectiveness of the
Redevelopment Plan for each constituent area of the Plan, and to extend the time limits on the
collection of tax increment for each constituent area of the Redevelopment Plan, in order to
effectively carry out redevelopment programs which are necessary to eliminate blight in the
community.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of National City does ordain as
follows:
Section 1. The time limits on establishing indebtedness as set forth in Section 802 of
the Redevelopment Plan for the National City Redevelopment Project applicable to the E.J.
Christman #1, South Bay Town and Country, Center City, E.J. Christman #2, Downtown, and
Downtown Amended constituent areas of the Project Area are hereby rescinded as amended by
this Ordinance.
Section 2. The time limits on the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan for each
constituent area (E.J. Christman#1, South Bay Town and Country, Center City, E.J. Christman
#2, Downtown, Downtown Amended, and 1995 Added Area/Harbor District), as set forth in
Section 1100 of the Redevelopment Plan, are hereby extended by one year as amended by this
Ordinance.
Section 3. The time limits on the collection of tax increment revenue for each
constituent area (E.J. Christman #1, South Bay Town and Country, Center City, E.J. Christman
#2, Downtown, Downtown Amended, and 1995 Added Area/Harbor District), as set forth in
Section 802 of the Redevelopment Plan, are hereby extended by one year as amended by this
Ordinance.
Section 4. Except as amended hereby, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect
according to its terms.
Section 5. All required proceedings and considerations precedent to the adoption of
this Ordinance have been regularly taken in accordance with applicable law.
Section 6. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction,
such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and adopted this Ordinance
and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more section, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
PASSED and
ATTEST:
PTED this day of , 200.
Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
p , ..
J .S�i,¢"f at.
George H. Eiser, Ill
City Attorney
Nick Inzunza, Mayor
-2-
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
EETING DATE January 6, 2004
SECOND READING
*REFER TO ITEM #1
9
AGENDA ITEM Nb
(-ITEM TITLE AN INTERIM ORDINANCE ADOPTED PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
65858 AS AN URGENCY MEASURE EXTENDING A MORATORIUM ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
CHECK CASHING BUSINESSES AND PAYDAY ADVANCE BUSINESSES IN NATIONAL CITY
George H. Eiser, Ill City Attorney
PREPARED BY (Ext. 4221) DEPARTMENT
EXPLANATION
At the December 2 City Council meeting, the City Council enacted Ordinance No. 2003-
2232, an urgency interim ordinance imposing a 45 day moratorium on the development of
check cashing and payday advance businesses in the city. The matter appeared on the
December 16, 2003 Council agenda as a public hearing and ordinance, with the latter being
continued to the meeting of January 6, 2004.
The Government Code provides that an urgency moratorium ordinance expires 45 days
after its effective date. Accordingly, Ordinance No. 2003-2232 will expire on January 14, 2004.
The Government Code also provides that after a public hearing, an urgency moratorium
ordinance may be extended by 10 months and 15 days. A public hearing on extending the
moratorium is a companion item on this agenda.
It adopted, the proposed ordinance would extend the moratorium by 10 months and 15
days.
CEnvironmental Review N/A
Financial Statement
N/A
Not a project under CEQA
Approved By:
Finance Director
Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt ordinance.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
N/A
(-ATTACHMENTS ( Listed Below )
Proposed ordinance
Resolution No.
A -zoo c9 93?
ORDINANCE NO. 2003 —
AN ippTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858
AS AN URGENCY MEASURE EXTENDING A MORATORIUM
ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CHECK CASHING BUSINESSES
AND PAYDAY ADVANCE BUSINESSES IN NATIONAL CITY
WHEREAS, National City, acting through its Community Development
Commission ("CDC"), has been very proactive over the years in efforts to revitalize the City
through redevelopment activities; and
WHEREAS, the CDC Board has created a redevelopment project area of
approximately 2,000 acres in the community; and
WHEREAS, in addition to various projects within the redevelopment project area,
the CDC Board is considering the submittal of zoning and specific plan proposals for approval
by the City, including the Downtown Project in the vicinity of 8 Street and National City
Boulevard, the Filipino Village Project along a portion of Plaza Boulevard, and the Mexican
Village Project along a portion of Highland Avenue; and
WHEREAS, a common element of the zoning and specific plan proposals is the
encouragement of projects within specified areas which would promote a certain atmosphere
and cohesiveness of land uses within those areas; and
WHEREA rational City has in recent years experienced a proliferation of
businesses engaged primly in the cashing of checks for a fee, herein referred to as "check
cashing businesses" and in advancing cash to customers in advance of payday for a fee, herein
referred to as "payday advance businesses"; and
WHEREAS, such businesses are in conflict with the contemplated
redevelopment, zoning and specific plan proposals described hereinabove and which the City
will be considering in the immediate future; and
WHEREAS, additional check cashing businesses and payday advance
businesses are proposed to be newly established or relocated within the City; and
WHEREAS, existing land use controls do not adequately address the potential
adverse effects of the proliferation of check cashing business and payday advance businesses
in the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is a current and immediate threat to
the public health, safety and welfare by the continued proliferation of check cashing business
and payday advance businesses, and that the continued issuance of building permits,
certificates of occupancy and other entitlements for use by check cashing businesses and
payday advance businesses would result in a threat to the public health, safety and welfare; and
WHEREAS, on December 2, 2003, the City Council adopted, as an urgency
interim ordinance, Ordinance No. 2003-2232, enacting a moratorium for 45 days on the
establishment of check cashing businesses and payday advance businesses in the City; and
WHEREAS, on January 6, 2004, the City Council held a public hearing, at which
time oral and documentary evidence was heard, to consider adopting an urgency ordinance to
extend the 45 day moratorium established by Ordinance No. 2003-2232 for an additional period
of 10 months and 15 days.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds it essential to protect the health, safety and
welfare of the citizens of the City of National City to extend the moratorium established by
Ordinance No. 2003-2232 for a period of 10 months and 15 days on the establishment,
development or approval of check cashing business and payday advance businesses; and
WHEREAS, the City Council intends to adopt, after appropriate study, zoning
regulations governing check cashing businesses and payday advance businesses throughout
National City as soon as practicable, and directs the Planning Commission of this City to
commence studies and procedures necessary for the adoption of such regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of National City does ordain as
follows:
Section 1. For a period of 10 months and 15 days from the effective date of
this Ordinance, no building permit, certificate of occupancy, nor entitlement for use shall be
issued for and no construction shall take place relating to a check cashing business or payday
advance business, and no building permit, certificate of occupancy, nor entitlement for use shall
be issued for and no construction shall take place relating to the establishment, development, or
approval of any check cashing business or payday advance businesses.
Section 2. The City Council hereby directs the Planning Commission to
commence studies and procedures necessary for the adoption of regulations governing check
cashing business and payday advance businesses.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall not apply to projects where prior to
December 2, 2003, a building permit has been issued and substantial physical work has begun
in reliance on that permit.
Section 4. This Ordinance is adopted as an urgency ordinance necessary for
the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare within the meaning of the
Government Code and shall take effect immediately.
Section 5. If any portion of this Ordinance is found to be invalid, it is the
intention of the City Council that the remaining valid provisions of the Ordinance be severed
from the invalid provisions and remain in full force and effect.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th day of January, 2004.
ATTEST:
Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk
Nick lnzunza, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, III
City Attorney
2
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
EETING DATE hnY 6, 2004
SECOND READING
AGENDA ITEM NO.
10
ITEM TITLE
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10.19 OF THE NCMC PERTAINING TO
THE SEIZURE AND FORFEITURE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE VEHICLES
PREPARED BY
EXPLANATION
Rudolf Hradeckyn A
ext. 4222 C�(/W
DEPARTMENT
City Attorney p 14
This ordinance incorporates changes to allow for the forfeiture of vehicles and equipment
used in illegal dumping, as requested by the City Council. It also upgrades our existing ordinance
on forfeiture of public nuisance vehicles used for prostitution and illegal drug transactions. This
version also includes provisions for ordering impoundment and/or forfeiture of heavy equipment
used for illegal grading and excavation. Vehicles that will therefore be subject to impoundment
and/or forfeiture will include cars, pickup trucks, dump trucks, or construction equipment used in
the violation.
( Environmental Review X N/A
Financial Statement
There is no cost to the City.
Approved By:
Finance Director
Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt ordinance.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS (Listed Below) Resolution No.
Strike -out of revisions
Ordinance .
A-200 t9 991
ORDINANCE NO. 2003 —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
AMENDING THE NATIONAL CITY MUNICIPAL CODE
BY AMENDING CHAPTER 10.19 PERTAINING TO THE
SEIZURE AND FORFEITURE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE VEHICLES
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of National City that the
National City Municipal Code is amended as follows:
Section 1. That Title 10 is amended by amending Chapter 10.19 to read as follows:
Chapter 10.19
SEIZURE AND FORFEITURE OF
PUBLIC NUISANCE VEHICLES
Sections:
10.19.010 Public nuisance vehicles
10.19.015 Definitions
10.19.020 Declaration by court or city attorney
10.19.030 Right, title and interest in vehicle
10.19.040 Seizure
10.19.050 Receipts
10.19.060 Evidence
10.19.070 Forfeiture
10.19.080 Interest claim
10.19.090 Sale of vehicles
10.19.100 Recovery of monetary loss or costs of abatement
10.19.010 Public nuisance vehicles. A. Any vehicle described below in subsection
B is hereby declared to be a public nuisance, and that vehicle shall be enjoined and abated as
provided in this chapter. Any person and his or her servant, agent or employee who owns,
leases, conducts or maintains any vehicle (hereinafter referred to as "vehicle") used for any of
the purposes or acts set forth in this section is guilty of and responsible for maintaining a public
nuisance.
B. The following are declared public nuisance vehicles:
1. Any vehicle used to solicit or to agree to engage in or to engage in an act
of prostitution; or
2. Any vehicle used to attempt to procure another person for the purposes of
prostitution or to procure another person for the purposes of prostitution; or
3. Any vehicle used to cause, induce, persuade or encourage, by promises,
threats, violence, or by any device or scheme, another person to become a prostitute; or
4. Any vehicle used to illegally sell, transfer or acquire or attempt to illegally
sell, transfer or acquire any controlled substance; or
5. Any vehicle that is used for purposes of illegal dumping, illegal grading or
illegal excavation on public or private property.
10.19.015 Definitions. Within this chapter, the following meanings shall apply:
A. "Bulky item"' Means any discarded furniture, home or industrial appliance or any
abandoned vehicle or a part of an abandoned vehicle.
B. "Controlled substance" means a drug, substance or immediate precursor that is
listed in any schedule in California Health and Safety Code Sections 11054, 11055, 11056,
11057 or 11058.
C. "Driver" means any person who drives or is in physical control of a vehicle
defined in this section.
D. "Hazardous waste" means any waste as defined in California Health and Safety
Code Section 25117.
E. "Illegal dumping" means the willful throwing, dropping, placing or depositing of a
bulky item, hazardous waste or solid waste on public or private property not designated for that
dumping or disposal purpose. "Illegal dumping" does not include the discarding, dropping, or
scattering of small quantities of waste matter ordinarily carried on or about the person, including,
but not limited to, beverage containers and closures, packaging, wrappers, wastepaper,
newspapers, and magazines and including waste matter that escapes or is allowed to escape
from a container, receptacle, or package.
F "Illegal excavation" or "illegal grading" refers to the moving of earth on or removal
of earth from private or public property without a permit required by law or the National City
Municipal Code.
G. "Prostitution" means engaging in lewd or sexual conduct for money or other
consideration.
H. "Solid waste" means all putrescible and non-putrescible solid, semisolid and
liquid wastes, including garbage, trash, refuse, paper, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes,
demolition and construction wastes, dewatered, treated or chemically fixed sewage sludge that
is not hazardous waste, Wiatiure, vegetable or animal solid and semisolid wastes, and other
discarded solid and semisolid wastes. Solid waste does not include hazardous waste.
"Vehicle", for purposes of this chapter, means any transportation device that is
equipped with a motor, that is pulled by a transportation device with a motor, or requires the
driver to have in his or her immediate possession a valid driver's license for the appropriate
class of vehicle being driven without regard to whether it is required to be registered with the
California Department of Motor Vehicles or the motor vehicle department of another jurisdiction.
It includes, without limitation, automobiles, pickup trucks, dump trucks, tractor -trailers, earth
movers, earth graders and bulldozers.
10.19.020 Declaration by court or City Attorney. Upon proof that a vehicle was used
for any of the purposes set forth in Section 10.19.010, the court upon application, or the city
attorney upon compliance with the applicable sections of this chapter, may declare the vehicle a
public nuisance and order that the vehicle be forfeited, sold, and the proceeds distributed as set
forth in Section 10.19.100.
10.19.030 Right, title and interest in vehicle. All right, title and interest in any vehicle
described in Section 10.19.010 shall vest in the city upon commission of an act giving rise to the
public nuisance declared under this chapter.
10.19.040 Seizure. A. Vehicles subject to forfeiture under this chapter may be
seized by any peace officer or code compliance officer upon process issued by any court having
jurisdiction over the vehicle.
B. Seizure without process may be made when any of the following situations exist:
1. The seizure is incident to an arrest with or without a warrant, or a search
under a search warrant; or
2
2. There is probable cause to believe that the vehicle was used in violation
of this chapter.
10.19.050 Receipts. Receipts for vehicles seized pursuant to this chapter shall be
delivered to any person from whose possession the vehicle was seized, in accordance with
Section 1412 of the Penal Code.
10.19.060 Evidence. Any vehicle seized pursuant to Section 10.19.050B, where
appropriate, may be held for evidence. The city attorney shall have the authority to institute and
maintain proceedings pursuant to the authority conferred by this chapter. The seizure and
impoundment of a public nuisance vehicle as evidence neither requires nor precludes forfeiture
proceedings under this chapter.
10.19.070 Forfeiture. A. Except as provided in subsection G of this section, if the
city attorney determines that a vehicle described in Section 10.19.010 is subject to forfeiture, the
city attorney shall file a petition for forfeiture with the Superior Court of San Diego County.
B. A petition for forfeiture under this subdivision shall be filed as soon as
practicable, but in any case, within one year following the seizure of the vehicle which is subject
to forfeiture.
C. The city attorney shall cause a notice of the seizure and of the intended forfeiture
proceedings, as well as a notice stating that any interested party may file a verified claim with
the Superior Court of San Diego County, to be served by personal delivery or by registered mail
upon any person who has an interest in the seized vehicle. Whenever a notice is delivered
pursuant to this section, it shall be accompanied by a claim form as described in Section
10.19.090 and directions for the filing and service of a claim.
D. An investiga'•n shall be made by the National City police department as to any
claimant to a vehicle who = ht, title, interest or lien is of record in the California Department of
Motor Vehicles or other jurisdiction of vehicle registration. The National City police department
shall send a notice within two business days following the seizure for a post -seizure hearing to
determine the validity of the seizure to each legal and/or registered owner of a vehicle at his or
her address appearing in the records of the appropriate state motor vehicle registry. The
post -seizure hearing shall be conducted within two business days of the request for the hearing.
The City may authorize its own officer or employee to conduct the hearing if the hearing officer
is not the same person who directed the seizure of the vehicle. Failure of the potential claimant
to request or attend a scheduled hearing within the appropriate time frame shall satisfy the
post -seizure requirement. If the vehicle is not subject to registration or is not registered, notice
shall be provided to any person or entity with an apparent interest, such as may appear by
inscribed or painted legend appearing on the vehicle; if no legend is apparent, a notice shall
instead be published in a newspaper of general circulation describing the vehicle and an advice
regarding the seizure and potential forfeiture. Failure to provide notice when no apparent
indicator of ownership is available, or failure to receive notice when indication is available, shall
not invalidate any proceeding under this chapter.
E. All notices shall set forth the time within which a claim of interest in the vehicle
seized or subject to forfeiture is required to be filed pursuant to Section 10.19.090.
F. With respect to vehicles described in Section 10.19.010 for which forfeiture is
contested, the city shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the
vehicle was used as set forth in Section 10.19.010.
G. The city attorney, pursuant to this subsection, may order the forfeiture of vehicles
seized under this chapter. The city attorney shall provide notice of the proceedings under this
subsection, including:
3
1. A description of the vehicle;
2. The date and place of seizure; =_
3. The violation of law alleged with respect to forfeiture of the vehicle;
4. The instructions for filing and serving a claim with the city attorney
pursuant to Section 10.19.090 and time limits for filing a claim.
H. If no claims are timely filed, the city attorney shall prepare a written declaration of
forfeiture of the vehicle to the city and dispose of the vehicle in accordance with Section
10.19.100. A written declaration of forfeiture signed by the city attorney under this section shall
be deemed to provide good and sufficient title to the forfeited vehicle. The city attorney ordering
forfeiture pursuant to this section shall provide a copy of the declaration of forfeiture to any
person who received notice of the forfeiture proceedings.
If a claim is timely filed, then the city attorney shall file a petition for forfeiture with
the Superior Court pursuant to this section within thirty days of the receipt of the claim.
J. Forfeiture proceedings shall not be applicable to any vehicle that was reported
stolen prior to the act proscribed in section 10.19.010, unless it shall appear that the report was
false, that the identity of the registered owner cannot be reasonably ascertained or that the
registered owner failed to redeem the vehicle within sixty (60) days after seizure. Otherwise,
the registered owner of a stolen vehicle may claim the vehicle upon payment of tow, storage
and release charges, provided that the vehicle is not subject to any other holds prescribed by
the Vehicle Code for traffic, parking or current registration violations.
10.19.080 Interest claim. A. Any person claiming an interest in the vehicle seized
pursuant to Section 10.19.010 must, within ten days from the date of the notice of seizure, file
with the city attorney a claim, verified in accordance with Section 446 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, stating his or her interest in the vehicle.
B. 1. If a verified claim is filed, the forfeiture proceeding shall be set fd . aring
on a day not less than thirty days after receipt of the claim.
2. The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply to proceedings
under this chapter unless otherwise inconsistent with the provisions or procedures set forth in
this chapter. However, in proceedings under this chapter, there shall be no joinder of actions,
no coordination of actions except for forfeiture proceedings, nor cross -complaints, and the
issues shall be limited strictly to the questions related to this chapter.
C. In lieu of forfeiture, an interested party may pay the fair market value of the
vehicle seized to the agency or official prosecuting the forfeiture proceeding, and reclaim the
vehicle.
10.19.090 Sale of vehicles. In all cases where vehicles seized pursuant to this
chapter are forfeited to the city, the vehicles shall be sold, unless cash is paid as settlement in
lieu of forfeiture of the vehicle, and the proceeds of sale or settlement shall be distributed and
appropriated as follows:
A. To the Office of the City Attorney and the Police Department or other local law
enforcement agency for all expenditures incurred in connection with the publication of the
notices set forth in Section 10.19.080, and the sale of the vehicle, including expenditures for any
necessary repairs, storage or transportation of any vehicle seized under this chapter;
B. To any bona fide innocent purchaser, conditional sales vendor, mortgagee or
lien holder of the vehicle, if any, up to the amount of his or her interest in the vehicle, when the
court or city attorney declaring the forfeiture orders a distribution to that person or entity;
C. The remaining funds shall be distributed as follows:
1. Fifty percent to the local law enforcement entities that participated in the
seizure, distributed to reflect the proportionate Nntribution of each agency,
4
2. Fifty percent to the city's nuisance abatement fund, in accordance with
Section 1.36.190 of this code.
D. All funds distributed to each local law enforcement agency pursuant to
subsection C of this section shall not supplant any funds that would, in the absence of this
subdivision, be made available to support the law enforcement and prosecutorial efforts of those
agencies. For the purposes of this section, local governmental entity means any city, county, or
city and county in this state.
10.19.100 Recovery of monetary loss or costs of abatement. Nothing in this chapter
shall preclude an owner of a vehicle from recovering damages for the actual amount of loss
from any person or entity who committed the act or acts giving rise to the seizure or forfeiture of
the vehicle, nor shall forfeiture of that vehicle preclude the city from seeking restitution from all
responsible parties for the actual costs of abatement of the underlying public nuisance for which
the subject vehicle was used.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2003.
ATTEST:
Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, Ill
City Attorney
5
Nick lnzunza, Mayor
Chapter 10.19
SEIZURE AND FORFEITURE OF
PUBLIC NUISANCE VEHICLES
10.19.010 Public nuisance vehicles. Any vehicle defined below js declared to
bee public nuisance, and /hat vehicle shall be enjoined and abated as provided in this
chapter. Any person or his or her servant, agent or employee who owns, leases,
conducts or maintains any vehicle (hereinafter referred to as ,'vehicle"), used for any of
the purposes or acts set forth in this section is guilty of and responsible for maintaining
a public nuisance
Formatted: Header, Line spadng:
singte
Deleted: used to solicit or facilitate
an act of prostitution, or to acquire or
to acquire any controlled
%distance,
Deleted: the
Dolotml: the property
- Deleted: (Ord. 2218 § 1, 2003)
,1.. Any vehicle used to solicit or to agree to engage in or to engage in an-s. Not
act of prostitution; or,
)2. Any vehicle used to attempt to procure another person for the purposes
of prostitution or to procure another person for the purposes of prostitution; or,
,3. Any vehicle used to cause, induce, persuade or encourage, by
promises, threats, violence, or by any device or scheme, another person to become a
prostitute: or,
4. Any vehicle used to illegally sell, transfer or acquire or attempt to
illegally sell, transfer or acquire any controlled substance; or,
5. Any vehicle that is used for purposes of illegal dumping. illegal grading
or illegal excavation on public or private property.
10.19.Q20 Definitions. Within this chapter, the following meanings shall apply:
A. "Bulky item" means any discarded furniture, home or industrial appliance
or any abandonedvehicle or a part of an abandoned vehicle. ss
B. "Controlled substance" means a drug, substance or immediate precursor
that is listed in any schedule in California Health and Safety Code Sections 11054,
11055, 11056. 11057 or 11058.
C., "Driver" means any person who drives or is in physical control of a vehicle
defined in this section.
• D. "Hazardous waste" means any waste as defined in California Health and
Safety Code Section 25117.
E. "Illegal dumping" means the willful throwing, dropping, placing or
depositing of a bulky item, hazardous waste or solid waste on public or private property
not designated for that dumping or disposal purpose. 'Illegal dumping" does not include
the discarding, drooping, or scattering of small quantities of waste matter ordinarily
carried on or about the person, including, but not limited to, beverage containers and
closures, packaging, wrappers, wastepaper, newspapers, and magazines and including
waste matter that escapes or is allowed to escape from a container, receptacle, or
package.
F "Illegal excavation" or "illegal grading" refers to the moving of earth on or -
removal of earth from private or public property without a permit required by law or the
National City Municipal Code.
a :Prostitution" means engaging in lewd or sexual conduct for money or
other consideration.
Bold
Formatted: Justified, Indent Fast
Rue: 0.99"
Formatted: Font Not Bold
Formatted: Font Not Bold
Formatted: Font Not Bold
1
Formatted: justified, Indent: First
line 0.51"
Deleted: 15
{ Formatted: Font Not Bold
fFormatted: Font Not Bold
Formatted: Font Not Bold
: Font: Not Bold
- Fonnatted: Font: Not Bold
Formafted: Font: Plot Bold
Formatted: Justified, Indent: Left
0.04", First line: 0.48"
{ Formatted: Font Not Bold
Dekted:
Formatted: Footer
(0,
Ft, "Solid waste" means all putrescible and non-putrescible solid, semisolid—.
and liquid wastes, including garbage, trash, refuse, paper, rubbish, ashes, industrial
wastes, demolition and construcfion wastes, dewatered, treated or chemically fixed
sewage sludge, which is not hardous waste, manure, vegetable or animal solid and
semisolid wastes, and other discarded solid and semisolid wastes. Solid waste does
not include hazardous waste.
I. :"Vehicle", for purposes of this chapter, means any transportation device
that is equipped with a motor, ,that is pulled by a transportation device with a motor, or
requires the driver to have in his or her immediate possession a valid driver's license for
the appropriate class of vehicle being driven without regard to whether it is required to
be registered with the California Department of Motor Vehicles or the motor vehicle
department of another jurisdiction. It includes, without limitation, automobiles •'cku
trucks, dump trucks, tractor -trailers, earth movers earth graders and bulldozers at
10.194030 Declaration by court or City Attorney, Upon proof that a vehicle
was used for any of the purposes set forth in Section 10.19.010, the court upon
application, or the city attorney upon compliance with the applicable sections of this
chapter, may declare the vehicle a public nuisance and order that the vehicle be
forfeited, sold, and the proceeds distributed as set forth in Section 10.19.10p. (Ord.
2218 § 1, 2003)
10.19.040, Ripht. title and interest in vehicle_ All right, title and interest in any
vehicle described in Section 10.19.010 shall vest in the city upon commission of an act
giving rise to the public nuisance declared under this chapter. (Ord. 2218 § 1, 2003)
10.19.050 Seizure. A. Vehicles subject to forfeiture under this chapter may
be seized by any peace officer or code compliance officer upon process issued by any
court having jurisdiction over thevehicle,
B. Seizure without press may be madeyvhen, any of the following situations
exist:
1. The seizur` s incident to an arrest with or without a warrant, or a
search under a search warrant or.
2. There is probable cause to believe that the ,vehicle was used in
violation of this chapter. (Ord. 2218 § 1, 2003)
10.19.060, Receipts. Receipts for vehicles seized pursuant to this chapter
shall be delivered to any person from whose possession the vehicle was seized, in
accordance with Section 1412 of the Penal Code. (Ord. 2218 § 1, 2003)
10.19.070. Evidence. ,Any vehicle seized pursuant to Section 10.19.0 ,0B,
where appropriate, may be held for evidence. The city attorney shall have the authority
to institute and maintain proceedings pursuant to the authority conferred by this chapter.,,
The seizure and impoundment of a public nuisance vehicle as evidence neither requires
nor precludes forfeiture proceedings under this chapter.
1
Formatted: Header, Line spacing:
single
l Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Justified, Indent First
line: 0.51'
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Deleted: or
Deleted: or any otter type of
trareportation device
Deleted: requires the driver to have
in his or her immediate pruzfAgion a
valid drivers license for the
appropriate clan of vehicle being
driven.
Nelatedorieted:
020
lieleted: property
Deleted: property
Deleted: 9
Deleted: 030
Deleted: property
. Deleted:.
Deleted: property
Deleted: 040
{ Deleted: property
Deleted:.
Deleted: N
{ Deleted: property
{ Deleted: OD
,l Deleted: 9¶
Formatted: Footer
10.19.080,T_ Forfeiture. A. Except as provided in subsection G of this section, if -._-
the city attorney determines that a vehicle described in Section 10.19.010 is subject to
forfeiture, the city attorney shall file a petition for forfeiture with the Superior Court of
San Diego County.
B. A petition for forfeiture under this subdivision shall be filed as soon as
practicable, but in any case, within one year,followina the seizure of the ey hicle which is { Deleted: of
subject to forfeiture. { Deleted: property
Formatted: Header, line spacing:
single
{ Deleted: MO
C. The city attorney shall cause a notice of the seizure and of the intended
forfeiture proceedings, as well as a notice stating that any interested party may file a
verified claim with the Superior Court of San Diego County, to be served by personal
delivery or by registered mail upon any person who has an interest in the seized
vehicle. Whenever a notice is delivered pursuant to this section, it shall be accompanied
by a claim form as described in Section 10.19.010 and directions for the filing and ._-
service of a daim.
D. An investigation shall be made by the National City police department as
to any claimant to a vehicle whose right, title, interest or lien is of record in the California
Department of Motor Vehicles or,other turisdiction of vehicle registration, The tonal
City police department ,shall send a notice within two business days following the
seizure for a post -seizure hearing to determine the validity of the seizure to.each legal
andlor registered owner of a vehicle at his or her address appearing in the records of
the appropriate state motor vehicle registry. , The post -seizure hearing _ shall _ be `•.'.
conducted within two business days of the request for the hearing. The public agency `•'',
may authorize its own officer or employee to conduct the hearing if the hearing officer is
not the same person who directed the seizure of the vehicle. Failure of the potential
claimant to request or attend a scheduled hearing within the appropriate time frame
shall satisfy the post -seizure requirement. If the vehicle is not subiectto registration or is
not registered, notice shall be provided to any person or entity with an apparent interest,
such as may appear by inscribed or painted legend appearing on the vehicle; if no
legend is apparent, a notice shall instead be published in a newspaper of general
circulation describing the vehicle and an advice regarding the seizure and potential
forfeiture. Failure to provide notice when no apparent.indicator of ownershigiis available. -_
or failure to receive notice when indication ik available, shall not invalidate any
proceeding under this chapter.
E. All notices shall set forth the time within which a claim of interest in the
,vehicle seized or subject to forfeiture is required to be filed pursuant to Section
10.19.0�0.
F. With respect to vehicles described in Section 10.19.010 for which
forfeiture js contested, the city shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of
the evidence that the vehicle was used as set forth in Section 10.19.010.
G. The city attorney, pursuant to this subsection, may order the forfeiture of
vehicles seized under this chapter. The city attorney shall provide notice of the
proceedings under this subsection, including:
1. A description of the vehicle;
2. The date and place of seizure;
3. The violation of law alleged with respect to forfeiture of the vehicle;
I Y @
3
Deleted: 8
- Deleted: appropriate federal agency
Deleted:
Deleted: If the
Deleted: the
Deleted:Inds that any person, other
than the registered owner, is the legal
owner thereof, and such ownership
did not arise subsequent to the date
and time of arrest or notification of the
forfeiture proceedings or seizure of
the vehicle, t
Deleted: forthwith
Deleted: the
Deleted: appearing on the records of
the Department of Motor Vehicles or
appropriate federal agency.
Deleted: indicium
{ Deleted: is are
Inserted: is are available, shall not
invalidate any pmceedinmg under this
chapter.
{ Deleted:4
'{Deleted:property —
Deleted: 8
Deleted: is sought and as to which
Tolfetrse
Deleted: property
Delved: ep ..
Formatted: rooter
f-
4. The instructions for filing and serving a claim with the city attorney
pursuant to Section 10.19.0O0 and time limits for filing a claim.
H. If no claims are timely filed, the city attorney shall prepare a written
declaration of forfeiture of the vehicle to the city and dispose of the vehicle in
accordance with Section 10.19.1(j0. A written declaration of forfeiture signed by the city
attorney under this section shall be deemed to provide good and sufficient title to the
forfeited vehicle, The city attorney ordering forfeiture pursuant to this section shall
provide a copy of the declaration of forfeiture to any person who received notice of the
forfeiture proceedings.
I. If a claim is timely filed, then the city attorney shall file a petition for
forfeiture with the Superior Court pursuant to this section within thirty days of the receipt
of the claim. (Ord. 2218 § 1, 2003)
J. Forfeiture proceedings shall not be applicable to any vehicle that was
reported stolen prior to the act proscribed in section 10.19.010, unless it shall appear
that the report was false, that the identity of the registered owner cannot be reasonably
ascertained or that the registered owner failed to redeem the vehicle within sixty (60)
days after seizure. Otherwise, the registered owner of a stolen vehicle may claim the
vehicle upon payment of tow, storage and release charges, provided that the vehicle is
not subject to any other holds prescribed by the Vehicle Code for traffic, parking or
current registration violations.
10.19.09g Interest claim. A. Any person claiming an interest in the vehicle
seized pursuant to Section 10.19.010 must, within ten days from the date of the notice
of seizure, file with the city attorney a claim, verified in accordance with Section 446 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, stating his or her interest in the vehicle,,
B. 1. If a verified claim is filed, the forfeiture proceeding shall be set for
hearing on a day not less than thirty days After receipt of the claim,,
2. The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply to
proceedings under this chapter unless otherwise inconsistent with the provisions or
procedures set forth in this chapter. However, in proceedings under this chapter, there
shall be no joinder of actions, no coordination of actions ;xcept for forfeiture /
proceedings, nor cross -complaints, and the issues shall be limited strictly to the
questions related to this chapter.
C. In lieu of forfeiture, an interested party may pay the fair market value of
the vehicle seized to the agency or official prosecuting the forfeiture proceeding and
reclaim the vehicle,, (Ord. 2218 § 1, 2003)
10.19.10g_ Sale of vehicles. In all cases where vehicles seized pursuant to r
this chapter are forfeited to the city, the vehicles shall be sold, unless cash is paid as
settlement in lieu of forfeiture of the vehicle, and the proceeds of sale or settlement shall
be distributed and appropriated as follows:
A_ To the city attorney and the local law enforcement agency for all
expenditures incurred in connection with the publication of the notices set forth in
Section 10.19.040, and the sale of the vehicle, including expenditures for any necessary
repairs, storage or transportation of any vehicle seized under this chapter;
(x e
9
Formatted: Header, Line spacing:
single
Deleted: 8
Deleted: property
{ Deleted: 9
)
{ Deleted: property
Deleted:.
{ Deleted: Q
Deleted: property
Deleted:.
Deleted: therefrom
Deleted:
{ Deleted: ,
Deleted:.
Deleted: A.
Deleted: .
Deleted: To any bona fide innocent
purchaser, conditional sales vendor,
mortgagee or lien holder of the
property, it any, up to the amount of
he or her interest in the property,
when the court or city attorney
declaring the forfeiture orders a
distribution to that person or entity;
Deleted: If
Deleted: A
Inserted: A
Deleted: 8 ..
Deleted:._
_. ..
Deleted: 7
Deleted:51f
('Formatted: Footer
B. To any bona fide innocent purchaser, conditional sales vendor,
mortgagee or lien holder of the vehicle, if any, up to the amount of his or her interest in
the vehicle, when the court or city attorney declaring the forfeiture orders a distribution
to that person or entity',
C. The remaining funds shall be distributed as follows:
1. Fifty percent to the local law enforcement entities that participated
in the seizure, distributed to reflect the proportionate contribution of each agency,
2. Fifty percent to the city's, nuisance abatement fund, in accordance
with Section 1.36.190 of this code.
D. All funds distributed to ,each local law enforcement agency pursuant to
subsection C of this section shall not supplant any funds that would, in the absence of
this subdivision, be made available to support the law enforcement and prosecutorial
efforts of those agencies. For the purposes of this section, local governmental entity
means any city, county, or city and county in this state. (Ord. 2218 § 1, 2003),
10.19.11p Recovery of monetary loss or costs of abatement. Nothinq,in this -
chapter shall shall preclude an owner of a vehicle from recovering damages for the actual',
amount of loss from any person or entity who committed the act or acts giving rise to the
seizure or forfeiture of the vehicle, nor shall forfeiture of that vehicle preclude the city
from seeking restitution from all responsible parties for the actual costs of abatement of
the underlying public nuisance for which the subject vehicle was used, pursuant to
chapters 1.36 and 1.41 of this coder
/0
Formatted: Header, Lire spacing:
single
- Deleted: ctys
{ Deleted: the
Deleted: $
Deleted: 0
Inserted: 00 - Recovery of monetary
loss or costs of abatement. Nothing
in this chapter that preclude an
owner of a vehicle from recovering
damages for the actual amount of
lass from any person a entty who
committed the act or acts giving rise
to the seizure or forfeiture of the
vehicle. na that forreture of that
vehicle preclude the city from seeldng
restitution from at responsible parties
for the actual costs of abatement of
the underlying public nuisance for
witch the subject vehicle was used,
pursuant to chapters 1.36 and 1.41 of
this code.g
Remitted: Indent First lire: 0.5"
Deleted: ¶
(Deleted: e _
( Deleted: 5$
Formatted: rooter
EETING DATE
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
January 6, 2004
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11
/ITEM TITLE
REQUEST BY THE NATIONAL CITY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO SERVE ALCOHOL AT THEIR
ANNUAL DINNER
PREPARED BY Stephen Kirkpatrick DEPARTMENT Public Works
336-4580
EXPLANATION
The National City Chamber of Commerce has requested the use of the Martin Luther King, Jr.
Community Center to hold their annual dinner for approximately 300 people on Saturday February 7,
2004. As the Chamber of Commerce is a service organization, they are allowed to use the Community
Center at no cost. However, this is being brought to the City Council for permission to serve alcohol at
the dinner.
Environmental Review
N/A
Financial Statement
N/A
Approved BY:
Finance Director
Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Council decision on whether tl e Charpber of Commerce is allowed to serve alcohol.
BOARD / COMMISSION COMMENDATION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS (. Listed Below) Resolution No.
1. Application for use of the Community Center
2. Letter dated December 5, 2004 from the National City Chamber of Commerce
A-200 (9 99)
901 National City Boulevard
National City, CA 91950-3203
Business: 619 477-9339
Fax: 619 477-5018
E-mail: thechamber@nationalcitychamber.org
Web site: www.nationalcitychamber.org
December 5, 2003
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of National City
1243 National City Boulevard
National City, CA 91950
Dear Mayor and Council:
The National City Chamber of Commerce would like to hold our Annual Dinner
and Installation of Officers at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Building on
Saturday evening, February 7, 2004. We anticipate a crowd of around 300.
The Community Building is reserved and we are requesting that you WAIVTHE
RENTAL AND CUSTODIAL FEES. We also request permission to crave
alcoholic beverages at the reception and with the dinner. The Caterer will obtain
the liquor permit.
Your consideration of this request will be appreciated.
Sincerely,
Edith Hughes
Chief Executive Officer
APPLICATION FOR USE OF THE
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. COMMUNITY CENTER
Type omm of Function:
Date Requested:
Decorating Time:
Function Time:
Clean up Time:
Use of Kitchen:
TO ALL APPLICANTS: It is strongly recommended that the applicant requesting use of the
facility attend the City Council meeting when the items going to be discussed in order to answer
any questions posed by the City Council. Please refer to the attached copy of "Rules and
Regulations".
Name of Organization:
Business Address:
Name of Applicant:
Address:
National City Chamber of Commerce
901. National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950
Edith Hughes, C.E.O.
1104 Manchester Street, National City, CA 91950
Telephone Number: day (61 477-9339 evening gl 9)
Chamber of Commerce Annual Dinner
475-6124
Saturday, February 7, 2004
10 'a.m.
6 p.m.
9 p.m.
(am/pm) to 5 p.m. (am/pm)
(am/pm) to 9 p.m. (am/pm)
11 p.m.
(am/pm)
(am/pm) to
no X yes If yes, Time: 10 a . m . (am/pm) to 9 p.m. (am/pm)
300
Number of Participants:
Will Admission be charged?
yes If yes, Amount`> . 0 0 _Will this be a fund raising event? no
Will alcohol be served? yes
f'oi- dinner bycaterer
If yes, ABC Permit. Submitted? yes
Certificate of Insurance attached? `es
Special configuration of tables or chairs required? yes
Special equipment required? P . A . If yes, attach list.
If yes, attach sketch. to come
Copy of Rules & Regulations provided? Yes Initials Certificate of Insurance attached?
How many times in the last two years have you used the Community Center? 12 If applicable,
how much did you pay for building and/or custodial fees? 0
I CERTIFY THAT I HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THE RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. COMMUNITY CENTER, AND l`AGREE FOR MY ORGANIZATION TO
CONFORM TO ALL OF ITS PROVISIONS.
Applicant recognizes and understands that use of the City's facility may create a possessory interest
subject to property taxation and that Applicant maybe subject to the payment of property taxes levied
on such interest. Applicant further agrees to pay any and all property taxes, if any assessed during
the use of the City's facility pursuant to Sections 107 and 107.6 of the Revenue and Taxation Code
against Applicant's possessory interest in the CC' ''s facil" y.
CP-x fit; few fo2��C.��
ignature of Applicant ! at
rev.02/03
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY .
PUBLIC PROPERTY USE HOLD HARMLESS
AND INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT
Persons requesting use of City property, facilities or personnel are required to provide a minimum of
$1,000,000 combined single limit insurance for bodily injury and property damage which includes the
City, its officials, agents and employees named as additional insured and to sign the Hold Harmless
Agreement. Certificate of Insurance must be attached to this permit.
Organization National City Chamber of Commerce
Edith Hughes, C.E.O.
Person in charge of activity
Address 901 National City Blvd., N.C. Telephone (61 9 )
City facilities a`/&iStitiSkiff r9te�'"''�'�ty Center
Date(s) of use Saturday, February 7, 2004
HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT
477-9339
As a condition of the issuance of a temporary use permit to conduct its activities on public or private
property, the undersigned hereby agree(s) to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of
National City and its officers, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, demands,
costs, losses, liability or damages. for any personal injury, death or property damage, or both, or any
litigation and other liability, including attorneys fees and the costs of litigation, arising out of or related
to the use of public property or the activity taken under the permit by the permittee or its agents,
employees or contractors.
Signature of Applican
�tPare�i
Offic I Title
Certificate cf Insurance Approved by
Name and Title
Date
rev. 02/03
IEETING DATE
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
January 6, 2004
AGENDA ITEM NO. 12
(-ITEM TITLE
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT — SAN DIEGO ACADEMY — RV PARKING
DURING CONSTRUCTION
PREPARED BY K hleen Trees, Director 31P4FMENT
EXPLANATION
Building and Safety
At the December 2, 2003 Council meeting, the City Council voted to continue this item for 30
days so Councilmen Parra and Natividad could work with the applicant to find a suitable location
for the RV parking. The applicant has amended his application to be more specific.
This is a request from San Diego Academy to provide RV parking from January 20, 2004 to
February 4, 2004 for 18 RVs for volunteers while they work on the school under construction at
2800 E 4"'. The RV's would be parked on the school property directly behind the construction in
the area of the future playground.
A waiver of the $188 T.U.P application fee is requested, the applicant and event qualify for a
wavier of fees pursuant to City Council Policy No. 704.
Environmental Review X N/A
Financial Statement
Approved By
Finance Director
The City has incurred $188 in costs in processing the T.U.P. application through various City
Departments. Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
N/A
Approve the Application for a Temporary Use Permit subject to compliance with all conditions
of approval and grant the waiver of fees.
BOARD I COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS { Listed Below )
Resolution No.
Application For A Temporary Use Permit with recommended conditions of approval
A-200 (9. 99)
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
and
Recommended Conditions of Approval
SPONSORING ORGANIZATION:
EVENT:
DATE OF EVENT:
TIME:
APPROVALS:
PLANNING
FIRE
CITY ATTORNEY
POLICE
ENGINEERING
SPECIFIC Conditions of Approval:
Fire
San Diego Academy
Temporary RV Parking
January 20, 2004 to February 4, 2004
N/A
YES [ x ] NO [ ]
YES [x] NO [ ]
YES [ x ] NO [ ]
YES [ x ] NO [ ]
YES [ x ] NO [ ]
SEE CONDITIONS [ x ]
SEE CONDITIONS [ x ]
SEE CONDITIONS [ ]
SEE CONDITIONS [ x ]
SEE CONDITIONS [ ]
1. Fire access to be maintained at all times.
2. Access to be maintained at all time to all Fire Department connections and appliances,
(fire hydrants, sprinkler system connections, etc.)
3. 2A:10BC fire extinguishers required throughout the RVk Parking area. Fire
extinguisher's locations to be plainly marked, and to to exceed a travel distance of
seventy-five feet.
4. Site map reflecting parking configuration and number of RV's to be parked in the are is
required.
Planning
1. The maximum number of RV's should be specified.
Police
1. Do not block driveways.
2. Make sure that emergency personnel have sufficient access into the property.
J`
0
p
I
I
I
p
I
I
I
I
I
I
H
I
I
SCALE: 1" = 60'
II I
I 1 .
=1 i i -�,
1 ® I�.� -il-T.-�....__-___.
SPE
1
_ MK j, (I j
1 Li ,\. I .
n.. Li4I!!CS!,f5{
Type of Application:
X Construction Trailer _ Temporary Office or Classroom Trailer
_ Contractor Storage Yard Condo or Model Home Sales Office
Phot g hic ,Filming (No street closures or special effects)
X RA) • *rl��� P .
Location:
Z So0 E 4144 Sired" , n!a /t044
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPT
RECEIVED
DEC 1 5 2003
NATIONAL CITY, CALIF:
MCA 4(gsv
If this application is for filming please complete the following:
Date(s): From to
Month/Day/Year
Actual Event Hours: am/pm to am/pm
Setup/assembly/construction Date:
Start time:
Please describe the scope of your setup/assembly work (specific details):
Dismantle Date:
Completion Time: am/pm
1i
a 1
Applicant Organization: s dR 12 o a�mi/S ou as -a/ a( erNla •niki'p+tlC.Q
Chief Officer of Organization (Name) /'!�/A/t`!E ZOI.I I-1t FEQ
Applicant (Name): an )(Faro 04.4 ®dee,rtt /
Address: a700 E'2S (JJ1 /Ya !roda ! (iYi (4- gf 9SU
Daytime Phone: (?J) Z67-1550 Evening Phone: (J Fax: (0?) z67- ied62.
Please provide a DETAILED DESCRIPTION of your event. Include details regarding any
components of your event such as the use of vehicles, animals, rides or any other pertinent
inform� ion about the event /
e. art< cur -e&.rt L 6ui Idtnl a re facent •± sc. d( aI •�� rnc� t'a44' o
►/o4lto/ r la%Irers wht, co .P - 3i1 -t4 2lrfpr�a
/ kt%Gttv-fr
`-gj a i- ► a T r$ Ptic k2Gynti—A ,C ,�`/"/ _
s dlwtucc r,,
lo 44(.11, +"-PIDhuklrt./ ti i
Please complete if this application is for filming.
Please describe your procedures for Crowd Control:
0774--
_ YES _ NO Have you hired any Professional Security organization to handle security
arrangements for this event? If YES, please list:
Security Organization:
Security Organization Address:
Security Director (Name): Phone:
YES _ NO Is this a night event? If YES, please state how the event and surrounding area
will be illuminated to ensure safety of the participants and spectators:
2
Non-profit organizations, which meet the criteria on page v of the instructions, will
be considered for a waiver. If you would like to request a waiver of the
processing fees, please complete the questionnaire below.
1. Is the event for which the TUP is sought sponsored by a non-profit
organization?
x Yes (proceed to Question 2)
No (Please sign the form and submit it with the TUP
Application)
2. Please state the name and type of organization sponsoring the event
for which the TUP is sought and then proceed to Question 3.
Name of the sponsoring organization San Diego Academy
Type of Organization religious, non-profit organization
(Service Club, Church, Social Service Agency, etc.)
3. Will the event generate net income or proceeds t the sponsoring
organization?
Yes (Please proceed to Question 4)
xx No (Please sign the form and submit it with the TUP
Application)
4. Will the proceeds provide a direct financial benefit to an individual
who resides in or is employed in the city, and who is in dire financial
need due to health reasons or a death in the family?
Yes (Please provide an explanation and details.
xx No (Please proceed to Question 5)
5
5. Will the proceeds provide a direct financial benefit to city
government such as the generation of sales tax?
Yes (Please provide an explanation and details.
No (Please proceed to Question 6)
6. Will the proceeds provide a direct financial benefit to a service club,
social services agency, or other secular non-profit organization
located within the city such as Kiwanis, Rotary, Lions, Boys and
Girls Club?
Yes (Please provide an explanation and details.
_ No (Please proceed to Question 7)
7. Will the proceeds provide a direct financial benefit to an
organization, which has been the direct recipient of Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding?
Yes Year funds were received:
Funds were used to:
�c.
Signature
No (P lease sign the form and submit it with the TUP
Application)
1 l /-710
Dat
6
ITEM #13
1/6/04
REPORT ON LATEST SHIFTS IN STATE
VLF FUNDING
(CITY MANAGER)
MEMORANDUM
City Manager's Office - National City
DATE: December 30, 2003
TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Park Morse, ACM
RE: STATE SHIFTS IN VEHICLE LICENSE FEE (VLF) AND SALES TAX
FUNDING
CC:
In what has become one of the most complex shell games, the State is again
trying to solve its budget problems with revenue belonging to local government.
Worst case, what is at stake for National City is a loss of $2,471,710 in VLF
payments this fiscal year and another potential unknown amount in a creative
dollar -grab referred to as the "triple -flip."
The ultimate impact of either the VLF or the triple -flip has already been mitigated
to some extent and may continue to be. However, one thing the last months
have shown us again is that budget debates and deals in Sacramento are short-
lived, ever changing and enormously creative. None of these are characteristics
that help us manage our resources or deliver services.
This review attempts to give you our best analysis of what has gone on so far
and its impact on the City. The caution is that the political and legal environment
in Sacramento is so intense that what I tell you probably has a half-life of a few
days before things shift again. The Legislature is currently in recess and will
reconvene on January 5. The Governor's proposed FY 04-05 budget is due to
the Legislature on January 10. The January 10 date will be important to us as
we try and see how the Governor proposes to deal with local government finance
and the State's own financial issues. Current estimates of the State's beginning
budget deficit this coming July range from $12-14B.
The VLF Issue:
Of the two issues (VLF and sales tax), let me start with VLF. The attached table
reviews the actions taken by the State over the last six months.
file: VLFUpdate121503_a.doc
Vehicle License Fee (VLF) Impact Analysis
National City
City Manager's Office
12-30-03
1.
State Controller VLF
Estimate for FY 03-04 for
Even though the State reduced the VLF on vehicle owners by 2/3 several years ago,
the revenue loss to cities was made up by the so-called "backfill" from the State.
Therefore there was no reduction in VLF to National City.
$ 3,355,86
2.
Backfill Gap Problem
"Realignment"
On June 19, 2003, then Governor Davis, facing worsening budget problems, "pulled the
trigger" and restored the 2/3 of the VLF that vehicle owners had once paid. This
caused an increase on fees the public paid and set off the political firestorm we all know
about. With the rates going back up there would be no need for the State to backfill
cities so the State eliminated backfill from their FY 03-04 budget. The catch was that
the VLF rates were designed to go back up on October 1, not on July 1. With the State
eliminating backfill effective July 1, 2003, and the revenue from the new fee levels not
starting until October 1, a 90-day "gap" was created. The value of this "gap" is being
treated as a loan from cities to the State with the State promising repayment to the
cities in August of 2006. It is, nevertheless a loss until repayment is made.
3.
VLF
As part of the State FY 03-04 budget, certain County health and social service
programs were shifted. To fund these shifts the State once again borrowed from cities
VLF portions and, in essence, added to the loan outlined above in #2.
;; ;
4.
Trigger Repeal
On November 17, 2003, new Gov. Schwarzenegger declared that the State's pulling of
the VLF trigger on June 19, 2003, was done in error. This set off several
consequences: (1) DMV then ruled that all the vehicle owners whom had already paid
their vehicle registrations prior to October 1, had paid in error at a higher than legal rate
and that they were all due refunds; (2) that since there was not enough revenue in
State VLF coffers to pay these refunds, DMV elected to withhold the equivalent amount
of the refund from cities so that the State can pay it's refund obligation, and; (3) Since
the trigger (sending rates back up) was pulled in error, the State had to reduce the VLF
rates down to the prior .65% not to the full rate of 2%. Included in the number to the
right are the effects of each of these 3 actions.
5.
Total Estimated Loss to
National City by 6-30-04
6.
Total Estimated Net VLF
Revenue to National City
by 6-30-04
$ 884,154
or 26.346% of
what the State
owes us
file: vlfupdate121503.doc
The State Controller estimates our FY 03-04 VLF revenue at $3,355,864. (For
budgeting purposes we use a slightly more conservative figure of $3,100,000.)
VLF is an enormously important revenue source to us and makes up 11% of our
total General Fund revenue. Since the State first reduced VLF fees a few years
ago, the State has been "backfilling" cities to make up the revenue difference. To
balance its current budget, the State "pulled the trigger" this last summer and
restored VLF rates to former levels AND eliminated the backfill payments.
This made some sense from the standpoint that once the new VLF fees were in
place, the State no longer needed to provide backfill payments because fees
would be fully funded. What didn't make sense was that the State used two
different dates. They cut off the backfill payments to cities on July 1, but did not
restore the VLF fees until October 1, 2003. Very creative but it did leave us with
what has become known as a "gap;" the period between July and October.
As part of its budget adoption, the State said that the amount of the "gap" would
be treated as a loan by cities to the State and would be repaid to cities come
August of 2006. This loan represents a loss to the City until it is repaid and we
calculate its value at $582,871 this fiscal year. In addition, the State shifted
some county programs around and essentially borrowed another $161,885 in
VLF monies from us, again to be repaid in 2006. In view of the State's late
adoption of their budget, neither of these losses was contemplated as we
balanced our FY 03-04 budget and, together, the loss to date this year is worth
$744,756.
Next came the big hit. On his first day in office Governor Schwarzenegger
issued an order saying that the State had erred when the former Governor
"pulled the VLF trigger' and restored the higher former VLF rates to car owners.
The effect of the new Governor's order was to restore the former low rates that
were in effect prior to Governor Davis' action. Remembering that the State
budget was adopted with no backfill in it, the practical effect of Governor
Schwarzenegger's order is to eliminate $1,726,955 in City revenue yet this fiscal
year (again, not budgeted).
The combination of these actions produced an unbudgeted reduction in General
Fund operating revenues of $2,471,710 for the current fiscal year. For reference,
that is about a 74% reduction from the State Controller's estimate of what
National City should have received this fiscal year. To place the State's actions
in people terms, the $2,471,710 is approximately equal to twenty-eight National
City police officers.
At the point when Governor Schwarzenegger repealed the VLF increase on
November 19, our wild ride was just beginning. At the same time as the repeal,
the Governor called the Legislature back into special session to deal with
pending budget issues and the need to backfill cities for the VLF revenue that
had just been lost under his repeal order. The Legislature did act on the budget
package (mentioned later in this review) but adjourned for the Holidays without
taking action on the need to backfill cities despite the fact that bills were pending
that would have structured the backfill.
On December 18 the Governor acted again this time declaring a "deficiency" in
the State budget and ordering the resumption of State VLF backfill payments to
cities. Now things become very unclear and quite complicated. Questions
abound: Under what authority did the Governor act? What amount will he
backfill? Does the Legislature also need to act? Where will the money come
from?
Over the last week or two a picture emerges something along these lines. The
Governor wants to make cities whole for the cut we suffered in VLF backfill due
to the trigger repeal (item # 4 on the previous chart). This sounds like a complete
restoration of the projected $1,726,955 loss. (The other two components of VLF
loss, namely the "loan" to the State, would continue and we would not see
reimbursement until 2006.)
It appears as if the Legislature must act on the Governor's deficiency order
sometime in March. Presumably this means that we'll have another fight as
March grows nearer. One Sacramento observer commented that we almost
have to look at VLF revenue as month -to -month, given how Sacramento is
approaching the solutions.
The Sales Tax Issue:
When the Governor called the Legislature into special session they did
accomplish one thing, although with smoke and mirrors. They adopted a series
of budget measures that would: (1) present a $15B bond to voters in March of
2004, to help finance the existing deficit; (2) set a spending limit for the State,
and; (3) create a formal reserve fund for the State.
From the cities' perspective, the key to the bond issue is how they choose to
finance it. The Legislature chose to pay for the debt service on the $15B in
bonds by means of the so-called "triple -flip." This is where we get drawn back in.
The triple -flip would transfer'/< cent of the sales tax currently going to cities and
1/
instead send it to retire the new bonds. The cities would receive an equivalent
amount of property tax revenue that is currently going to schools. Finally, the
schools would be made whole for their property tax loss by the State's general
fund. How the State's general fund comes up with the money to pay the schools
is anybody's guess. This, then, is the triple -flip. This would go on until the bonds
were paid off which we are told would be nine years.
Our specific concern here on the triple -flip is how the property tax backfill to us
would really work. Is it dollar for dollar? When does it kick -in? And, most
importantly, we have one growth curve in sales tax and a very different one in
property tax. How are we made whole when an accelerating sales tax growth
rate is replaced by a far flatter property tax growth rate? Is growth factored into
the State's formula at all?
Litigation:
Much here involves the State stepping over the line and taking more and more
local government revenues. In the case of VLF they lower the rates but make no
provision to make us whole even though VLF is a dedicated local revenue
source. In the case of sales tax they are playing with the so-called Bradley -
Burns sales tax distribution formula for, I believe, the first time ever. Dangerous
place to let the State play unabated.
These actions have placed cities, already raw from a long history of State takings
of local monies, in a much more protective attack role. In the past few weeks we
have seen Los Angeles, San Diego County, the City of Cerritos and others
announce that they are ready to begin litigation against the State for these
actions. I expect we may be asked to join such efforts as we move through
January.
The Politics:
The rhetoric in Sacramento is intense right now. Many, many, cities were
pushed over the brink when the Legislature made the political decision to adjourn
for the Holiday without taking specific action on two pending VLF backfill bills.
Several efforts were undertaken by members of the Legislature friendly to cities
(one was Shirley Horton) to try and get the backfill bills heard before recess and
each effort was denied on what appears to be a partisan vote.
It was very apparent the Democratic majority wanted to see Governor
Schwarzenegger's January 10, budget proposal first (and, therein, the cuts he
was proposing) and they were determined to hold relief to the cities hostage until
then. Senate President Pro Tern Burton has been the most vocal in his
opposition to helping cities. It is said that he appealed personally to legislative
membership NOT to entertain VLF backfill bills in an effort, I believe, to put
pressure on the Governor.
Then we have Senator Burton's famous comments that cities are a bunch of
crybabies and that if we need more revenue, local mayors and councilmembers
should raise taxes. Interesting thought except that he was part of the gang that
stole our money in the first place and, but for his actions this would not be an
immediate issue to us. He is also quoted as saying that he plans on taking more
local government revenue from cities during the next round of State budget
deliberations.
Conclusions:
There are no answers yet. We are in a lull right now until the Legislature gets
back on January 5. Then the roller coaster will get started again. The partisan
nature of the debate, the complexity and the constantly changing proposals has
made this a very frustrating public policy debate. In reality, I cannot tell you with
certainty how the City's finances stand today. Too much is in flux and will be for
months.
Of the issues reviewed in this report, I believe we can withstand the losses
without service reductions, as we understand them today that are attributable to
the "loan," at least for the remainder of this fiscal year. (Items 2 & 3 on the table
earlier in this report. Total of $744,756.) Whether we can withstand the "loan"
for FY 04-05 and 05-06 (when repayment is "scheduled") is another matter.
If the Legislature does not affirm Governor Schwarzenegger's deficiency
appropriation by March and immediately move to concur with the local
government backfill plan then we have potentially catastrophic issues to deal
with. This aspect (Item 4 on the table, $1,726,955) is not something we manage
without serious impact on services and reserves. In the meantime we are told
that Governor Schwarzenegger's order should restore the flow of VLF revenue to
cities beginning in early January. Whether this happens, the amount of the
payments and for how long are all critical questions that will have us spending
much time listening and reading. We will continue to keep you updated.